Navigare necesse est: Lighthouses from Antiquity to the Middle Ages: History, architecture, iconography and archaeological remains 9781407305721, 9781407336329

Table of contents :
Cover Page
Title Page
Copyright
PREFACE
PREFAZIONE
CHAPTER 1: Navigational aids before the construction of the Alexandria lighthouse (Pharos)
CHAPTER 2: The Pharus at Alexandria and other lighthouses: the sources
CHAPTER 3: Devolpment of the lighthouse: architecture, materials and costruction techniques
CHAPTER 4: Iconography, iconology and reliability of the images
CHAPTER 5: Illumination systems and visibility distances
CHAPTER 6: Late Lighthouses and the devolpment of Coastal Towers
CHAPTER 7: The first medieval lighthouses: Genua, Portus Pisanus, Corduan
CONCLUSION
INTRODUCTION TO THE CATALOGUE ENTRIES
CATALOGUE OF LIGHTHOUSES IN THE ANCIENT WORLD
CAPITOLO 1: I sistemi di segnalazione prima dellacostruzione del Faro di Alessandria
CAPITOLO 2: Il faro di Alessandria e i fari propriamente detti: le fonti
CAPITOLO 3: La nascita del faro: architettura, materiali e tecniche costruttive
CAPITOLO 4: Iconografia, iconologia e attendibilita’ delle immagini
CAPITOLO 5: Il sistema di illuminazione e la portata luminosa
CAPITOLO 6: La decadenza del faro e la nascita delle torri costiere: alcuni esempi
CAPITOLO 7: I primi fari medioevali: Genua, Portus Pisanus, Corduan
CATALOGO DEI FARI DEL MONDO ANTICO
Bibliography
CATALOGO DELLE IMMAGINI / CATALOGUE OF THE IMAGES

Citation preview

BAR S2096 2010

Navigare necesse est il Faro tra mondo antico e Medio Evo

Navigare necesse est Lighthouses from Antiquity to the Middle Ages History, architecture, iconography and archaeological remains

GIARDINA

Baldassarre Giardina

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST

B A R

BAR International Series 2096 2010

Navigare necesse est Lighthouses from Antiquity to the Middle Ages History, architecture, iconography and archaeological remains

Baldassarre Giardina

BAR International Series 2096 2010

ISBN 9781407305721 paperback ISBN 9781407336329 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407305721 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

BAR

PUBLISHING

CONTENTS PREFACE

.......................................................................................................................................................... ii

CHAPTER 1

NAVIGATIONAL AIDS BEFORE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ALEXANDRIA LIGHTHOUSE (PHAROS) ............................................................................................................. 1

CHAPTER 2

THE PHARUS AT ALEXANDRIA AND OTHER LIGHTHOUSES: THE SOURCES ........... 12

CHAPTER 3

DEVELOPMENT OF THE LIGHTHOUSE: ARCHITECTURE, MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES ...................................................................................... 23

CHAPTER 4

ICONOGRAPHY, ICONOLOGY AND RELIABILITY OF THE IMAGES ............................... 28

CHAPTER 5

ILLUMINATION SYSTEMS AND VISIBILITY DISTANCES ................................................... 35

CHAPTER 6

LATE LIGHTHOUSES AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF COASTAL TOWERS ....................... 39

CHAPTER 7

THE FIRST MEDIEVAL LIGHTHOUSES: GENUA, PORTUS PISANUS, CORDUAN ........... 42

CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................................................................ 48 CATALOGUE ......................................................................................................................................................... 51 BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................................................... 211 PLATES

....................................................................................................................................................... 229

INDEX

....................................................................................................................................................... 346

INDICE DEI CAPITOLI PRFAZIONE ......................................................................................................................................................... iii CAPITOLO 1 I SISTEMI DI SEGNALAZIONE PRIMA DEL FARO DI ALESSANDRIA .............................. 121 CAPITOLO 2 IL FARO DI ALESSANDRIA E I FARI PROPRIAMENTE DETTI: LE FONTI ....................... 128 CAPITOLO 3 LA NASCITA DEL FARO: ARCHITETTURA, MATERIALI E TECNICHE COSTRUTTIVE ............................................................................................................................ 138 CAPITOLO 4 ICONOGRAFIA, ICONOLOGIA E ATTENDIBILITA’ DELLE IMMAGINI........................... 140 CAPITOLO 5 IL SISTEMA DI ILLUMINAZIONE E LA PORTATA LUMINOSA.......................................... 143 CAPITOLO 6 LA DECADENZA DEL FARO E LA NASCITA DELLE TORRI COSTIERE .......................... 145 CAPITOLO 7 I PRIMI FARI MEDIEVALI: GENUA, PORTUS PISANUS, CORDUAN ................................ 147 CONCLUSIONI....................................................................................................................................................... 148 BIBLIOGRAFIA ..................................................................................................................................................... 151 TAVOLE

....................................................................................................................................................... 229

INDICI

....................................................................................................................................................... 346

i

PREFACE Mention lighthouses and instantly we call up an image of those we have seen, standing isolated on promontories or rocks, or those depicted in paintings and old photographs, or described in novels and glimpsed in films. Images of lighthouses usually show them in remote spots, rising amidst the foaming waves, a ship nearby seeking rescue or facing shipwreck in the fearful storm. Baldassarre Giardina’s book is the fruit of many years of research carried out with exemplary scholarship, care, tenacity and scrupulous rigour. Since the late nineteenth and the early twentieth century and the historical and archaeological studies of E. Allard, L.A. Veitmeyer and He. Thiersch, little work has been done on the subject of lighthouses. No up-to-date or systematic scholarly research has been produced until now. Drawing on the rich accumulation of existing research, Giardina has in addition brought together evidence from historical and literary sources from the ancient, medieval and modern periods. Together with this, he has researched new evidence, data and scientific discoveries. From these different sources he has assembled and interpreted countless scraps of information, placing them together in a framework so as to shed light on hitherto unpublished aspects of these structures, identifying their archaeological and typological characteristics. He offers hypotheses as to their shape, influences and models as they evolved from prehistory into the medieval period. The history of lighthouses that Giardina has produced is a summation of thousands of transformations dictated by practice and the evolution of prototypes that followed. Every epoch left its mark, modifications and additions. With this book, Giardina has given us a systematic exploration of the subject, its results arranged in such a way as to demonstrate the earliest form of these structures and their evolution in time. He provides us, in addition to a rich vein of scientific information, with a book that is admirably easy to use, making it a valuable tool for amateur enthusiasts as well as for scholars. Where literary and epigraphic sources are scares, they have been supplemented with evidence from antique and medieval depictions and from the author’s visits to the sites themselves, in search of the remaining archaeological clues. The lighthouses of Miseno, Capri, Taposiris Magna, La Coruña and Dover are here, of course, but so too are other structures, apparently superseded or ruined by changes in human needs or the ravages of time. In these buildings, even a tiny irregularity in the masonry, when related to other such evidence, becomes an important element in the interpretation and reconstruction of the original structure. In this way, Giardina has succeeded in tracing the evolution of different typologies in different locations and periods: beacons on headlands, temples illuminated by night, lookout and signalling towers and then the first true lighthouse towers. Then came the Alexandria Lighthouse on the island of Pharos that, with one giant step, impressed its architectural form and practical utility upon the ancient world. This journey, as described by Giardina, begins at the time of the Trojan Wars and travels through the Hellenistic and Roman periods when a system of harbour lighthouses and trading routes was being rationalised and the potential of different cities and the need for navigation began to be exploited. Representations of lighthouses in antiquity, especially on coins, indicates clearly how this system had become widespread throughout the ancient world, guaranteeing safe moorings and waterways. The Late Republican and Imperial period is the richest in data and represents the most original part of Giardina’s book. His desire to see his research published in a volume such as this stems not only from an understanding of the practical importance of these extraordinary aids to navigation - aids that are still used today – but also from his praiseworthy sense of civic responsibility that urges us to care for and value this wonderful heritage preserved for us by the chance of time. Prof. Lorenzo Quilici Head of Ancient Italian Topography University of Bologna, Italy

ii

PREFAZIONE

Il faro! quali immagini di esso subito riporta nella fantasia questo argomento, che ci ripropone subito le torri realmente osservate sui promontori o isolate sugli scogli, o quelle figurate su quadri e vecchie fotografie, o che ci riporta il ricordo della lettura di romanzi o visionate nei films: immagini più spesso isolate, tra lo spumeggiare delle onde, tra navi guidate alla salvezza o terribili naufragi. La ricerca sui fari presentata da Baldassarre Giardina giunge a pubblicazione dopo anni di ricerche e di studi, che sono stati perseguiti con esemplare consapevolezza, costanza, tenacia e appassionato rigore. L'argomento era rimasto indietro negli studi storico-archeologici, risalendo questi essenzialmente ai lavori, pur esemplari, di E. Allard, L.A. Veitmeyer e He. Thiersch, scritti tra la fine dell'Ottocento e l'inizio del Novecento: mancava una ricerca aggiornata e una conoscenza così sistematica e spesso diretta su una tale classe di monumenti. Baldassarre Giardina, non solo facendo tesoro di quei lontani pregressi, ha affrontato sistematicamente l'indagine, con la raccolta dei dati storici e di documentazione letteraria antichi, medievali e moderni; ma ha affrontato direttamente la ricerca con la raccolta personale delle informazioni, dei dati e dei riscontri scientifici: così che dalla loro somma ha saputo assemblare e interpretare tanti brandelli in un quadro complessivo, mettendone anche in luce aspetti inediti e riuscendo a precisare caratteristiche architettoniche e tipologie, formulando ipotesi sulla loro forma, scuole e modelli, evolutisi dalla preistoria all'età medievale. La storia dei fari che qui viene ricostruita, è costituita dalla somma di mille e mille trasformazioni dettate dalla pratica e dall'evolversi delle esperienze che su di esse sono succedute, e ogni epoca ha lasciato il suo segno, modificando e aggiungendo. Egli ha offerto, con questo libro, su di un argomento esplorato sistematicamente e i cui risultati sono stati uniti in modo organico, quanto conoscibile per ricavare la forma antica di tali strutture e la loro evoluzione nel tempo. Una tale preziosa opera, inoltre, unisce a una capillare e ricca raccolta di informazioni scientifiche, il pregio di una facile lettura: la pubblicazione rappresenta pertanto uno strumento prezioso a disposizione sia dello studioso che dell'appassionato. Là dove risultavano poche le fonti letterarie ed epigrafiche, hanno supplito la documentazione che si è recuperata sulle figurazioni, antiche e medievali, e soprattutto direttamente dai luoghi, nella ricerca di quanto ne era superstite. Il faro di Miseno, di Capri, di Taposiris Magna, di La Coruña, di Dover, certo: ma anche dove la rovina del tempo o la continuità di vita sembrava aver distrutto o fagocitato quanto man mano nei secoli era divenuto vecchio e inutile, ecco che una piccola piega muraria del monumento diruto o trasformato, correlata ad altre, è potuto divenire un elemento importante per la ricostruzione. Si è potuto così trarre un quadro articolato dell'evolversi delle tipologie nei diversi luoghi e periodi: fuochi di promontorio, templi illuminati la notte, torri di avvistamento e di segnalazione, prime vere torri faree; poi il Faro di Alessandria, che con un balzo da gigante ha imposto il suo modello architettonico e di utilità pratica. Una corsa, questa presentata da Giardina, che parte, possiamo dire, dalla guerra di Troia, giungendo all'età ellenistica e poi romana, quando il sistema dei fari nella collocazione dei porti e nella disposizione delle rotte si organizza razionalmente, con evidenti capacità di sfruttare le potenzialità dei luoghi e le necessità del navigare. La ricerca dei modelli figurati antichi, specie quelli attestati dalla documentazione numismatica, fa ben capire come il sistema si fosse largamente e normalmente diffuso in tutto il mondo antico, con la sicurezza degli approdi e delle vie d'acqua. Il periodo tardo repubblicano e imperiale è il più ricco di dati e costituisce anche la parte più originale del lavoro. La pubblicazione, voluta con pervicacia dall'autore, rappresenta il cosciente desiderio non solo di definire il sorgere e l'imporsi pratico di questo straordinario strumento per la navigazione, che si è protratto fino ai nostri tempi, ma è il grido di una coscienza civile che chiama alla tutela e alla valorizzazione di un patrimonio straordinario, che la fortuna dei secoli ha permesso di conservare: una sensibilità e una consapevolezza che danno altro merito all'autore. Prof. Lorenzo Quilici Cattedra di Topografia dell’Italia Antica, Università degli Studi di Bologna, Italia

iii

Ricostruzion ne del porto e del faro di Cartagine C seccondo Golvin n Recon nstruction of port p and ligh hthouse of Caarthage

iv

v

vi

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES

CHAPTER 1 Navigational aids before the construction of the Alexandria lighthouse (Pharos)

In the Iron Age, in the Italian peninsula at least, the most developed port areas were to be found in the Po Delta and the Veneto-Friuli area. Most important of these were, in the Po region, Adria, noted as early as the seventh century BC for its trade in Greek pottery, and, in the Veneto-Friuli region, Altino.3 It has been shown that, as early as the Neolithic period, it would have been possible to travel distances of over 100 km, not necessarily by hugging the coastline but by following the route of migrating birds, the direction of the sea currents and, in all probability, precise astronomical indications.4 This practice was perfected by the Phoenicians of whom Pliny said siderum observationem in navigando Phoenices (invenerunt). We learn from Strabo that they travelled by night as well as day and that, in order to do this, they observed the sky, paying particular attention to Ursa Minor (also known as the Phoenician Star), the stars of which always appear on the horizon and remain visible all night long.5 By contrast, Homer’s Odysseus – so presumably Greek sailors in general – navigated using Ursa Major; so too did the Romans as we learn from Virgil’s Georgics.6 As for the Punic period, no specific mention is made of lighthouses by famous travellers like Hanno and Himilco in their accounts of their voyages.

It is not easy to give an accurate picture of the signalling systems existing in the ancient world before the third century BC when the Alexandrine tower was built on the island of Pharos in Egypt, the name of the island being adopted generally to refer to lighthouses built elsewhere. The peoples of the Mediterranean had exploited the possibilities for trade and cultural exchange offered by the sea since the Mesolithic period (in the case of Italy, at least). The southern-most part of the peninsula had contacts with the opposite shores of the Adriatic (Croatia, Albania) and there were frequent exchanges with the countries and cities lying to the east (Corfu, northwestern Greece). During the Neolithic period, these exchanges not only intensified but also spread geographically, as we know from the many pottery finds that bear witness to frequent contacts between the Abruzzzi and Dalmatia, to give a single example. In the Bronze Age, it appears that traffic flowed from the eastern Aegean, ‘colonising’ Italy.1 Although the evidence of the pottery finds is indicative of trading in the Bronze Age (to the Baltic coast in pursuit of amber, into the flat land of the Po Valley, exchanges between the shores of Romagna and those of Istria and Dalmatia and more extensive westward voyages of the peoples of the Aegean and Mycene, it is not so easy to reconstruct how the people of this period travelled over the seas, or to know whether they had any kind of aids to help them find shelter and anchorage in case of storms or other emergencies.

In the fourth century BC the strategist Aeneas Tacticus dedicates an entire chapter of his treatise How to Survive Under Siege to communication signals using fire and their correct operation. He asserts that it is a matter of urgency to fix the meaning of the signals so that those in charge will not be in any doubt about the identity of approaching forces, continuing:

Πολεμο³mta o¹m wq jaà ÑccÅr ômtym t´m pokelÊym, pq´tom lÁm tÀ ×postekkËlema Ñj t±r pËkeyr jatÀ c±m Œ jatÀ hÀkattam ÑpÊ tima pq°nim pqÄr toÅr ÜpolÁmomtar letÀ sussÉlym ÐpostÈkkeshai jaà Ùleqim´m jaà mujteqim´m, êma l Ðcm´si pokelÊym aÕto²r ÑpivaimolÈmym Ñi vÊkioi é pokÁlioÊ eÓsim7

In the Neolithic period, ships generally remained close to the coast, travelling short distances between the shelter of natural harbours and the islands (such as the Tremiti and the islands off the coast of Croatia). Settlements in this period were established on promontories jutting out into the sea or on coastal lagoons. Inhabited areas, protected on the land side by fortifications, were also established on high ground so that they could be more easily defended in a period when society had moved from an agricultural to a warrior economy.

Secondly, he says, it is necessary to send observers who are able to recognise the different signals without confusing them8. Before concluding this brief digression on a system that early twentieth-century German scholars aptly named Feuertelegraphie, we must examine how the

Although we know something about the type of ships used in the Prehistoric period, very little is known about navigational and signalling systems. It seems likely that, from the Neolithic period, quite long voyages were made, but only in daylight, with ships taking shelter, as we have said, in natural harbours such the islands. It is known that in the Bronze Age, amber – only found in the Baltic area – was much sought after, implying voyages as far as most of northern Europe with the exception of Britain. Between the fourteenth and thirteenth centuries BC, more frequent contact was established with the Adriatic coast and the Dalmatian peninsula.2 1 2

3

BONOMI 2001, pp. 140-141. MEDAS 1993, p. 11. 5 Plin. Nat. Hist. VII, 209; Strab. XXVI, 23-24; for Phoenician astronomical navigation see MEDAS 1998, pp. 147-173. It has been estimated that short-haul coastal navigation generally took place in the daytime, covering distances of 25-30 nautical miles; see BARTOLONI 1988, p. 84. 6 Verg. Georg. I, 137; JANNI 1996, p. 67. 7 Aen. Tat. IV, 5: “In time of war, therefore, with the enemy at the gate, it is of the greatest importance that the troops sent out of the city to carry out some mission on land or at sea be provided with signals for day and night times agreed with those remaining so that the latter, if enemies arrive, will be able to know if they are dealing with friends or enemies” Trans. C.Higgit, ed. ETS, Pisa 1990.See also FORBES 1966, p. 176. 8 Aen. Tat. IV, 6; 12 4

CAZZELLA 2001, pp. 38-48. BIETTI SESTIERI 2001, pp. 49-51.

1

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA same subject is dealt with in more detail by a number of other authors.9

Polybius states that the following procedure should be followed:

Polybius10, referring to Aeneas Tacticus’s treatise, asserts that signals using fire in the period before that in which he is writing had proved to be completely useless since they were inefficiently used and poorly interpreted. The solutions proposed by Aeneas Tacticus represented, in Polybius’s opinion, a very slight improvement in the use of signals. Here, however, we encounter a problem of interpretation since the Greek historian discusses a series of procedures and regulations that are not mentioned in Tacticus’s text. He says, for example, that it is necessary to obtain similar sized terracotta containers, three cubits deep and one cubit wide. Corks are prepared, slightly smaller in size than the mouths of the containers. Small sticks, cut into equal parts, each of three fingers, are pushed into the cork. Easily recognisable signs are incised on each side; on each side, in fact, the main and most common eventualities of war will be written, such as, that the enemy is arriving by ship or on horseback, etc.... Next, holes should be pierced in each of the containers, each one of a similar size so that the same amount of water can run out. The containers are then filled with water and the corks and sticks placed on them and, at the same time, the water allowed to flow through the holes. As the water flows out, the corks will sink and the sticks disappear into the containers. If everything works, once the containers have been conveyed to the place where it is planned to observe the signals made by fire, should one of the things inscribed on the stick occur, a torch will be raised and held aloft until another is raised in turn by those people with whom the first group are in contact. When both torches can clearly be seen simultaneously, they are lowered and water is allowed to run through the holes in the container. When, as the cork and stick sink, the message that it was wished to announce comes level with the edge of the container then, at this point, the torch is raised again. The holes are immediately plugged and the observers check to see which of the inscriptions on the stick is level with the edge. This will be the message, but it is dependent on everything happening at the same speed at each end.11

tÄ t´m stoiweÊym pk±hor Øn±r de² kalbÇmomtar dieke²m eÓr pÁme cqÇllata. keÊxei dÁ tÄ tekeuta²om Ømà stoiweÊz: to³to d'oÕ bkÇptei pqÄr t±m wqeÊam. letÀ dÁ ta³ta pkate²a paqesjeuÇshai pÁmte toÅr lÈkkomtar ×podidËmai tÂm puqseÊam ÐkkÉkoir ØjatÁqour jaÊ cqÇxai t´m leq´m Øn±r eÓr èjastom kate²om, jàpeita sumhÈshai pqÄr aÜtoÅr diËti to³r lÁm pqÍtour Ðqe² puqsoÅr Û lÁkkym sglaÊmeim °la jaà dÌo jaà leme² lÁwqir àm Û áteqor ÐmtaÊqg. to³to d`ástai wÇqim to³ diÀ taÌtgr t±r puqseÊar Øauto²r ÐmholokocÂsashai diËti pqosÁwousi. jahaiqehÁmtym dÁ toÌtym (Û) sglaÊm´m Ðqe² lÁm to³r pqÍtour Ñj t´m eÕymÌlym, diasav´m tÄ pkate²om po²om sjope²m, o½om Ñam lÁm tÄ pq´tom, èm, àm dÁ tÄ deÌteqom, dÌo, jaÊ jatÀ kËcom oìty:to³r dÁ eutÁqour Ñj t´m deni´m jatÀ tÄm aÕtÄm kÄcom, po²om deÂsei cqÇlla t´m Ñj to³ pkateÃou cqÀveim a¹ tÄm ÐpodewÄlemom tÂm puqseÊam12 Since description that follows would divert us too much from the subject in hand, a brief summary of Polybius’ idea must suffice. According to Polybius, once the two groups have separated, each must be provided with a διοπτήρ, a word that can be translated as ‘dioptre’ or ‘level’. It appears to have had two small tubes (rather like a pair of binoculars) mounted in such a way as to enable the observer to see what was going on to the left and the right. Naturally, once it has been decided to send information, a phrase with the smallest possible number of letters should be chosen in order to reduce the time taken to compose or read the message. At this point, torches would initiate communication. If, for example, the message was that a hundred Cretans were arriving, Polybius says that two torches would be raised on the left hand side to indicate to the observer that the initial letter (K) was in the second section of the alphabet on the second tablet. Then five torches would need to be raised on the right-hand side to indicate that the desired letter was the fifth in the second section. The person receiving the signal would then write down the letter. Clearly, many torches would have been required, given that a double signal was needed for every letter. It would have been necessary to become well acquainted with any of these systems to avoid making mistakes in time of war. Polybius comments that everything is complicated at first

Polybius objects that Aeneas Tacticus’ system is inefficient because it is not always able to foresee what may happen, nor is it possible to write in detail on the stick the number of approaching soldiers or ships. Without this essential information, Polybius maintains, it will be difficult to understand how to send help or in what quantities. A more effective method was that thought up by Cleoxenus and Democleitus (both thought to have been active in the Hellenistic era but about whom nothing is known) and improved in the period when Polybius was writing, possibly by the author himself. In his long and complex description of the correct way to use fire for signalling (in Chapter X, paragraph 45),

12 Pol. X, 45, 7: “Taking the total number of letters of the alphabet, in order, they should be divided into five groups, each of five letters. The last group will be short of one letter, but this will not upset the system. Next, the two sides who wish to exchange fire signals should prepare five tablets and write on each tablet, in order, one of the groups of letters, and then agree between them that the side that wishes to send a signal will raise the first torches, two together, and will wait until the other side raise theirs in turn. This will allow them to communicate in turn, by signalling with the torches, that they are aware of the other side. After these torches have been lowered, the side sending the signal will raise the first torches on the left, in order to establish which tablet should be looked at (for example, if it is the first, one, if it is the second, two, and so on). The second torches will be raised on the right-hand side according to the same criterion, conveying which letter of those on the tablet should be written down by the group receiving the signal.” Trans. C.Higgit, ed. Bur, Milan 2002.

9

VEITMEYER 1900, pp. 1-9. Pol. X, 42-45 Pol. X, 44-45. This is a paraphrase of the translation by M.Mari, ed. Bur, Milan 2002. 10 11

2

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES until one gets used to it.13 The five tablets described by Polybius would have been arranged as follows: 1 a-e 2 f-j 3 k-o 4 p-u 5 v-y An interesting drawing by Hermann Diels (fig. 1) shows Polybius’s system in use.

Fig. 1: Polybios’ Feuertelegraphie by DIELS 1965, fig. 34 The misunderstandings mentioned by Aeneas Tacticus and Polybius probably derive from the legend of Nauplius who, during the Trojan Wars, sought to avenge the death of his son Palamedes by using torches to lure the enemy’s ships onto the rocks of the Sigeo promontory at the mouth of the Hellespont, where there appears to have been a lighthouse-like structure.14

Fig. 2 a: Above, Rome, Musei Capitolini, Tabula Capitolina showing the lighthouse on the Sigeo promontory (photo B. Giardina). b: Under Reconstruction of the lighthouse by VEITMEYER 1900, fig. 1 “While the Carthaginians were laying waste to Sicily, in order to obtain quickly what they needed from Libya, they constructed two clepsidras water of equal size and drew on each of them similar circles with the same inscription. In one band the need for ships was recorded, in the other the need for supplies. After they had inscribed all the circles in this way, they kept one clepsidra in Sicily and sent the other to Carthage with the order that, whenever they saw a burning signal raised by them, they should look to see which band was meant when the second signal was shown. Reading the inscription in that band, they were to send as quickly as possible that which was requested in the inscription. In this way, the Carthaginians had a very quick system for obtaining whatever was needed for the war”16

This story is also mentioned by the poet Leschetes who was active in the seventh century BC and author of the Little Iliad. Some scholars have interpreted the structure that appears on the Tabula Capitolina as being the same as that which Philostratus depicted on the Tabula Iliaca, and they describe it as a ‘lighthouse’ (fig. 2 a-b). It appears to be a rectangular shaped structure with a sloping gable, very similar to an altar. This type of signal using fire was still used in the time of Plutarch who, in his Life of Pericles,15 speaks of v´ta pÌqsym. To conclude this brief survey of the precursors of lighthouses, we need to jump forward chronologically speaking. In the second century AD, a lawyer under Marcus Aurelius by the name of Polyaenus wrote another treatise on strategy, Stratagemata. Here, the author describes a signalling system using fire first practised by the Carthaginians:

A communication system using fire had already been described by Homer in the Iliad. He relates that, when cities were besieged, it was the custom to send messages with smoke during the day and with fire during the night. In Book XVIII, dedicated to the making of arms, Homer compares the radiance that leaps from the golden cloud placed by Athena over Achilles’ head to that produced by the signals effected during the siege of the city:

Ýr d’ëte japmÄr ÓÍm Ñn çsteor aÓhÁq’ êjgtai, tgkËhem Ñj mÉsou, tÂm dÉÞoi ÐlvilÇwymtai, oê te pamglÈqoi stuceq© jqÊmomtai „AqgÞ

13

For more on this subject, see Pol. X, 46-47 and DIELS 1965, p. 85. Diels rightly points out that the message suggested by Polybius, “a hundred Cretans are arriving” would have involved some 173 torches and taken at least an hour to send. See also: FORBES 1966, p. 177. 14 Philostr., Eroico, 46-47. 15 Plut. Pericles, 7.

16

3

Polyain. VI, 16, Trans. E.Bianco, Ed. Dell’Orso, Turin 1997.

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA time of the Peloponnese War, was unprotected, the Spartans lost their nerve, retreating towards the Salamis promontory where there were three guard ships and a fort, all situated there to prevent anything sailing in or out of Megara, the city shetering behind the promontory. The attack was then successful but only briefly because, as Thucydides says:

÷steor Ñj svetÈqou˙ çla d’Òekiz jatadÌmti puqsoÊ te vkecÈhousim ÑpÉtqiloi, ÜxËse d’aÕc cÊcmetai Ðþssousa peqijtiËmessim ÓdÁhai, aã jÈm pyr sÅm mgousÃm çqey Ðkjt±qer êjymomtai˙ ír Ðp’’Awikk±or jevak±r sÈkar aÓhÁq êjame:17 Similarly, in Book XIX, the gleam of Achilles’ shield is compared to that of fire that shines in the night to guide sailors:

’Er dÁ tÀr ’AhÉmar vqujtoÊ te Šqomto pokÈlioi23

Ýr d’ût’÷m Ñj pËmtoio sÈkar maÌt\si vamÉ\ jaiolÈmoio puqËr, tË te jaÊetai ÜxËh’ôqesvi stahl© Ñm oÓopËkz:toÅr d’oÕj ÑhÈkomtar ðeakkai pËmtom Ñp’ÓwhuËemta vÊkym ÐpÇmeushe vÈqousim: ær ×p’’Awikk±or sÇjeor sÈkar aÓhÈq’êjame18

Another similar episode can be found in the battle between the Plataeans and the Peloponnesians, where fire signals were used to trick the enemy:

vqujtoÊ te ®qomto Ñr tÀr hÉbar pokÈlioi: paqam²swom dÁ jaà oÚ Ñj t±r pËkeyr Pkatai±r ÐpÄ to³ teÊwour vqujtoÅr pokkoÅr pqËteqom paqeseuaslÈmour Ñr aÕtÄ to³to, ëpyr Ðsav± tÀ sgle²a t±r vqujtyqÊar to²r pokÈlioir ¨ jaÊ l bogho²em24

In both passages, Homer uses the word puqËr, a term clearly derived from the verb puqseÌy meaning “I light”, “I burn” but, in the second instance, also “I make signals with fire”.19 The word puqËr leads to many ambiguities in translation. It is also used in an extended sense by Greek authors to mean the “fire of the sun”, or the “fire of love”, or simply a “flame”.20 Here, however, Homer is referring expressly to signals made with fire communicated in the night, performing the same function as later lighthouses.

Aeschylus, writing sometime between the sixth and fifth centuries BC, used both words interchangeably in his tragedy Agamemnon. In the prologue, Agamemnon says to Clytemnestra that if he were successful in destroying Ilium, he would send a signal δια πορσου,25 using fire. A little further on Clytemnestra, who is waiting for the agreed signal, uses the same word. Shortly after that, she uses another term, vqÌjtor:

In another context in the Odyssey,21 Homer uses instead the verb puqpokÈy to mean “I light, I tend the fire ” when describing how, after voyaging for nine days and nine nights, finally, on the tenth day Odysseus sees his native land appearing. Although he refers again to the practice of using fire to make signals for sailors, it is the only case where neither the verb puqseÌy nor the noun puqËr are used, although they are almost invariably used by later Greek writers when talking of signals made with fire.

ØjÀr dÁ vqujto³ v´r Ñp’EÕqÊpou ™oÀr LesspÊou vÌkani sglaÊmei lokËm26 Another playwright, Euripides, also active in the fifth century BC, refers to this system of beacons in his tragedy The Phoenician Women:

’Epeà d’ûr ÐveÊhg puqsÄr ír Tuqsgmij±r sÇkpiccor Òj s±la voimÊou lÇwgr27

jaÊ dÉ puqpokÈomtar ÑkeÌssolem ÑccÅr ÑËmtar22

In the fourth century AD, Vegetius recommended this system of signals for military communication between allies:

The only exceptions are found in two writers of the fifth century BC, the playwright Euripides and the historian Thucydides, who both use the noun vqujtËr from the verb vqÌcy, “I toast”. Thucydides describes Knemos and Brasidas’s attempted attack on the port of Piraeus. Although the port, at the

similiter si diuisae sint copiae, per noctem flaminis, per die fumo significant sociis 28

17 Hom. Il. XVIII, 207-214: “Imagine how the pyre of a burning town tower to heaven and be seen for miles from the island under attack, while all day long outside their town, in brutal combat, pikemen suffer the war god’s winnowing; at sundown flare on flare is lit, the signal fires shoot up for other islanders to see, that some relieving force in ships may come: just so the baleful radiance from Achilles lit the sky”. Trans. R. Fitzgerald, OUP 1974. 18 Hom. Il. XIX, 375-380 : “As when at sea to men on shipboard comes the shining of a camp-fire on a mountain in a lone sheep-fold, while the gusts of night-wind take them, loath to go, far from their friends over the teeming sea: just so Achilles’ finely modelled shield sent light into the heavens”. Trans. R. Fitzgerald, OUP 1974. 19 ROCCI 1943 p.1632, Xen. Ag. An. VII,8,15. 20 Rispectively, Op. Hal. 4,353; Pind. I. 3,61 and Teoc. XXIII,7; lastly Bakchyl. XII, 82; Sen. An. 7,8,15. 21 Hom. Od. X, 30. 22 Hom. Od. X, 30: “...and [we] had actually come near enough to see the people tending their fires”. Trans. E.V. Rieu, Penguin Classics, 1946. This ed.1966.

23 Thuk. II, 94 “...beacons were lit to warn Athens of an enemy attack”. Trans. R. Warner, Penguin Classics, 1954. This ed.1975. 24 Thuk. III, 22: “...fire signals of an enemy attack were made to Thebes; but the Plataeans in the town also displayed a number of fire signals from their own walls, having them all ready made for this very purpose, so as to make the enemy’s signals unintelligible, to stop help coming from Thebes. trans. R. Warner, Penguin Classics, 1954. This ed.1975 25 Aischyl. Ag.9; 281-282, 288-289. ed. UTET, Torino 1987 ed G. and M. Morani. This system was called Feuerpost by twentieth-century German scholars and was still being used in 1813 by Metternich. 26 Aischyl. Ag. 291-292: “...and his faggots’ flame swept the wide distance to Euripus’ channel, where its burning word was blazoned to the Messapian guards.” Trans. P. Vellacott, Penguin Classics, 1956. 27 Eur. Phoen. 1737-1378: “Soon as the Tuscan trumpet blew, the signal for the bloody fray, like the torch that falls....”. Trans. E. P. Coleridge eBooks@Adelaide 2004 28 Veg. mil. III, 5, 12: “similarly if the troops have been scattered, communication with allies can be had at night time with flares and in the daytime with smoke…”, (Trans. C.HIggit).

4

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES Thus we see that, up to this point, the authors of Antiquity do not refer specifically to what we would today call lighthouses, or at least how they might have been after the construction of the tower at Alexandria. Herodotus, although a much-travelled man, makes no mention of such things. In his Histories composed in the fifth century, we find only references to beacons of the kind that we have already seen, the one exception being the Tower of Perseus:

’apÄ PeqsÈor jakeolÈmgr sjopi±r kÈcomter…29 As Thucydides made clear, these beacons were used not so much to guide sailors as to inform or make something known: ταυτα οι ̉Ελληνες οι επ ̉ Αρτεμισίω στρατοπεδευόμενοι πυνθάνονται δια πυρσων εκ Σκιαθου αμα δε πυρσοισι δια νήσον εδόκεε βασιλέι δηλώσειν εόντι εν Σάρδισι ότι έχοι ̉ Αθήνας30

Fig. 3 a: the clay model of a signalling tower found in Carthage by MEDAS 2000, fig. 10, p. 24 The windows on the lower levels would have been used as openings through which to transmit the light source, while those on the upper levels would have been for the rooms used by the keepers of the tower. According to Phoenician-Punic experts, towers of this type were erected in Sicily and Africa,34 so that the former could remain constantly in contact with the port of Carthage,35 where there must very likely have been a lighthouse or signalling tower. No trace of such a construction has been found, however, nor any image. It is conceivable that the Admiral’s Tower situated in the harbour near the navalia had a function of this kind.

31

In Livy ,however, we find reference to certain towers, dating from the time of the Punic wars, that were undoubtedly intended to be specula. Hannibal had one in Adrumeto, its semicircular shape identified from aerial photographs taken in 1964 (No.2).32 The most welldocumented system of optical signalling in the Phoenician-Punic area remains, however, that mentioned by Polyaenus in his Stratagems of War (fig. 2a). This system has recently been reassessed in relation to a votive stone 33 dating from the fourth century BC. Cylindrical in shape, it is marked on three different levels with what look like window-openings, leading scholars to suggest that it is a model of a signalling tower (fig. 3a).

In the last century, near Coltellazzo Hill at Nora, Sardinia, Patroni discovered the remains of a Punic tower (No. 49) that was certainly used as a lighthouse. The present Torre del Coltellazzo stands some 100m from the site of the earlier tower of which nothing remains today. It has been possible to date the latter to a pre-Roman period, thanks to a layer of infill near which a large number of objects were uncovered, including a pin in obsidian from the Chalcolithic period, pottery from the Eneolithic Age, a Punic lamp and numerous fragments of pottery from Campania, dating from the fourth century BC.36

29

Hdt. II, 15, 2-4: “who say that only the Delta is Egypt, and that its seaboard reaches from the so-called Watchtower of Perseus to the saltpans at Pelusium…”. This mysterious tower, described by Herodotus as being on the coast near the Canopic tributary, is sited by Strab. XVII, 1, 18 near the Bolbitine tributary. ALLARD 1979, p. 507 suggests that the tower was a lighthouse near Aboukir, and it is the case that, of the various meanings of the word σκοπη, one is specula or lookout.ed] 30 Hdt. VII, 183: “...the Greeks stationed at Artemisium learnt what had happened by fire-signals from Sciathus”; Hdt. IX, 3: “Mardonius [...] wish[ed] to inform the king at Sardis, by fire-signals along the islands, that he was master of [Athens].” Trans. George Rawlinson 1942 31 Liv.XXII.19: Livy speaks of the many towers standing on high places in Spain. This may partly explain why, a few centuries later, in the time of Trajan, the legend was born that the Roman lighthouse at Brigantium (List No. 73), near present-day La Coruña, in Galicia, had already existed in Phoenician times. 32 FOUCHER 1964, pp. 81-82. My thanks to Prof. Piero Bartoloni, department of Phoenician-Punic Archaeology at the University of Sassari, which whom I have over a period of three years been privileged to collaborate on the excavations at Monte Sirai near S.Antioco (Sardinia), for his generousity and the valuable information – including bibliographical – on the use lighthouses in the Phoenician-Punic period. 33 For an example from the Roman world, see the famous bronze votive lighthouse from Libarna, now in the depositaries of the Museo di Antichità in Turin (fig. 17); MEDAS 2000, p. 24.

The most important discovery of a lighthouse, pre-dating that at Alexandria and belonging to the Phoenician world, has been that found near Monte Nandore in Sicily. Here, Bejor37 has recently revealed the remains of one of the watch towers mentioned by Livy. The place name of this spot, deriving from the Arabic ndur meaning 34

MEDAS 2000, pp. 19-20. In fact, even if there were a relay tower on the island of Pantelleria, it would be impossible to communicate over a distance as great as that from Sicily to Africa without at least a third relay tower and an intermediate point. 35 For a brief history of the Punic ports of Mozia and Carthage, and a discussion of the propblem of the cothon mentioned by ancient sources, see MONTEVECCHI, 1996, pp. 159-161 and the abovementioned work by MEDAS 2000, pp. 26-29. 36 PESCE 1972, p. 105, fig. 93. 37 For the relevant article, see Quaderni della Soprintendenza di Cagliari e Oristano.

5

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA lighthouse,38 points to the primary function of the tower as a speculum. In the 1970s, Fonquerle put forward one method by which people in ancient times tried to illuminate the night. He compared a particular amphora dating from the second century BC found in the sunken ship discovered by the River Hérault near the port of Agde in southern France (fig. 3b) with a thirteenthdynasty (1600 BC) Theban painting. The amphora had a large circular opening in the centre (10cm in diameter) and five other triangular-shaped openings. According to Fonquerle, this was a container designed to light the ship in the dark: the triangular holes would have been marking lights, while the large central hole would have produced the maximum amount of illumination with which to guide the sailor through the darkness and, I would suggest, through fog and mist. The flame would most likely have been fuelled by a sponge soaked in oil (fig. 4).39 In practice, such a system would have been entirely ineffective since it would have illuminated only a few metres of water beyond the prow of the ship and would have been quite unable to give forewarning of rocks or other obstacles.

Fig. 4 Reconstruction of the amphora-light on an Egyptian ship by CAGIANO DE AZEVEDO 1978, fig. 9 Navigating at night with lights is known to have been practised as long ago as the seventh century BC. We learn from Diodorus Siculus and Livy that it was employed by Scipio during the Second Punic War: lumina in nauibus singola rostratae.40 In Etruscan times, ports were designed to be places where ships could find safe harbour. Possessing no navigation instruments, the Etruscans preferred to voyage in daylight, using the coastline and depth of seabed. The rare times when they were obliged to sail at night, they followed the Phoenician in using the stars to guide their ships.41 We know the names of some of the ports used by the Etruscans (Pyrgi, Graviscae, Alsium, Algae, Regae…), as well as Phoenician-Punic centres (Olbia, Tharros, Karalis, Bithia, Sulcis, Motia, Lilibeo, Drepana…) and those of Magna Graecia (Pythecusa, Cuma, Neapolis, Poseidonia,Velia…) but little is known about the buildings found in them. It has been shown that the Etruscans tended to construct sanctuaries outside the city proper and near the port. The poet, Rutilius Namazianus42 from Gaul, tells us how they did not build lighthouses like those of the Romans but, instead, high towers within the extra-urban sanctuaries with the dual role of lighthouse and fortress. He cites the example of Populonia (fig. 5).

Fig. 3b Above, the amphora-light found on the sunken ship in the Hérault River; below, the famous Theban painting showing ships sailing with amphora-lights, from CAGIANO DE AZEVEDO 1978, figs. 7-8.

40

Diod. XX, 75; Liv. XXIX, 25. PETTENA 2002, p. 34. Rut. Nam. 405-410. Marine archaeologists would be needed to investigate the lighthouse or lighthouses at Pyrgi, see ENEI 2008.

38

41

I am once more indebted to Prof. Piero Bartoloni for this valuable information 39 FONQUERLE 1973, p. 67.

42

6

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES

Fig. 5 The tower of the castle at Populonia as it appears today (photo B. Giardina)

Fig. 6 Columbia, University of Missouri, Museum of Art and Archaeology, Italo-Geometric clay oinochoe with ships and fish (700-675 BC) in ETRUSCHI 2000, p. 97. The dove sits on the main mast.

Namaziano’s theory would seem to be supported by the name of the famous Etruscan sanctuary of Pyrgi.43 Derived from the Greek PÌqcoi, meaning ‘towers’ – and often used to mean ‘lighthouse towers’ – it seems to imply the presence of one or more lighthouses within the sanctuary. It has been suggested not long ago that the Etruscans learned how to navigate by the stars from the Phoenicians but that they had worked out a system for those nights when it was impossible to see the stars because of mist. Many depictions of marine subjects in the Etruscan period show a dove on the prow of the ship, a method that had already been tried out by Gilgamesh in the east when seeking to orient himself after Utnapishtim’s flood and one which the Etruscans were to make their own (fig. 6).44

Interestingly, all Greek sea voyages set out from the Pillars of Hercules and, therefore, from the port of Gadir (Latin Gades, now Cádiz) that, as early as the Phoenician period, must have been suitable to accommodate ships over long periods. Travellers leaving from this port include Coleus of Samos, the Pseudo-Scylax of Carianda, Pytheas of Marseille and, before them, Himilcon, Hanno and other Phoenician-Punic explorers.46 It is not impossible that these Pillars of Hercules, two great rocks within the Straits of Gibraltar, functioned as ‘lighthouses’ insofar as these great rocks, visible from both the European and the African side of the Straits, provided a clear reference point by day for sailors (fig. 7). It should not be forgotten that another landmark in this region, on the Gadir side, was the Phoenician Temple of MelkartHeracles. This may have been illuminated at night, guiding sailors and providing a secure reference point when it was too dark to see the Pillars of Hercules.

Before the construction of the lighthouse at Alexandria in the third century BC, the Greek too had another method for navigating at night. They would suspend fires from the columns of sanctuaries, as can be seen in a famous mosaic in Palestine depicting a brightly illuminated column near the port of Piraeus outside Athens (Plate 57, fig. 112). Contemporary sources reveal that the Greeks were accustomed to keep their temples lit at nighttimes, as in the Temple of Athena on Punta Campanella (No. 52), in the temple perhaps dedicated to Poseidon at Trezene and in the Ionic temple dedicated to Poseidon Asphaleios on the promontory of Castellammare di Velia.45

Fig. 7 The Pillars of Hercules in the Straits of Gibraltar in LALLAMAND 1956 43

For Etruscan ports generally and Pyrgi in particular, see: COLONNA 2000, pp. 251-336. 44 SANDARS 1986, p. 145; LUZÒN NOGUÈ/COÌN CUENCA 1986, pp. 6570. 45 SCHMIEDT 1975, pp. 62, 68, 75. GRECO 1996, p. 184, reminds us that a round tower found at Velia was incorrectly identified as a lighthouse.

46 For a summary of Greek exploration see FIORE 1950; an essential study of contact between the Greeks and the Etruscans is GRAS 1985, pp. 393-681.

7

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Avienus, author of the Ora Maritima composed in the fourth century AD, begins his work with the city of Gadir and the Pillars of Hercules:

the ancient costructions known as nuraghe were possibly used by Phoenician as lighthouses through fires on its top, as it seems happened at Nuraghe Cala del Vino by Alghero.50

Hic Gadir urbs est, dicta Tartessus prius. Hic sunt columnae pertinacis Herculis, Abila atque Calpe (laeva dicti caespitis, Libyae propinqua est alia): duro perstrepunt Septentrione, sed loco certae tenent47

For the sake of completeness, in considering how people navigated in ancient times and what reference points they used before the construction of lighthouses, we should finally consider the matter of the Colossi. Like the Pillars of Hercules, The Colossi were gigantic figures marking the entrance to a port, visible at night by the lights shining on the temples. These enormous statues, acting as landmarks for sailors, include the Colossus of Portus Raphti and the Colossus of Rhodes. The first of these represents a woman (headless and armless) dressed in a chiton and sitting on a rectangular stone throne (fig. 9).

It may be that some of the particularly large menhirs, erected close to the shores of stormy Finisterre in modern Brittany, performed the function of markers indicating approaching land. One such is that at Locmariaquer, known to the Romans as the Column of the North, but already lying on the ground in Imperial times (fig. 8).

Although only 2.35m high, the statue stood on a base that added another 2m which in turn stood on a hilltop at the entrance to the wide port. Since, even as late as the nineteenth century, it was thought that the port of Raphti was the entrance to the port of Athens, it is easy to see how the statue must have functioned as both a monumental entrance and a landmark.51 In an Itinerarium Maritimum, composed some time after 1571, we read that “the island of Rafti can be recognised by its large marble statue, holding a pair of scissors in its hand and standing 30m out to sea”.52 Other travellers, like Perry, reported that there was a light on the head of the statue so that the statue acted as a lighthouse.53 The tradition that the statue had been used as a lighthouse in ancient times led the English traveller J. C. Hobhouse to write in 1809/10 that at the entrance to the port there was a rocky island on which a colossal statue could be clearly seen and which had once functioned as a “Pharos”54 (this is the word he uses).

Fig. 8 Locmariaquer (France, Brittany, Quiberon peninsula): the fallen menhir known to the Romans as the Column of the North (photo B. Giardina) Recent studies have led to the suggestion that the surviving column on the promontory of Reggio Calabria might be all that is left of an ancient temple dedicated to Poseidon and that, once it had been ruined, might have been used by sailors as a reference point. It stands on an elevated piece of ground on the hill where a lookout tower was built on the same spot in the fifteenth century, while the present-day lighthouse was constructed in the twentieth century, giving rise to the name of the hill, Punta del Faro (Lighthouse Point).48 It is quite possible that the column was used in Roman times as a lighthouse, particularly since Strabo refers to it as puqcÊom ti, little tower.49 Recently, some scholars thought that in Sardinia

Fig. 9 The Colossus of Raphti in VERMEULE 1962, Plate 25a

47

“There the city of Gadir, once known as Tartesso. There the columns of the undaunted Hercules, Abila and Calpe, one on the left shore of the straits, the other close to Libya: they howl from the violence of the north wind, but they stand firm and unmoving”, (Trans. C.HIggit), Strab. III, 5, 4. 48 MERCURI 1998, p. 559. I am indebted to Prof. Michel Gras for this valuable reference. 49 Strab. V, 6. The Greek term πυργός often indicates a lighthouse; the word πυργίον appears to have the same meaning. It is known that, before the construction of the monumental lighthouse at Alexandria, sailors took as their reference points promontories, temples on top of

promontories, colossi, high mountains usch as Etna, etc., cfr. MEDAS 2004, pp. 71-80. 50 MURONI-PIANU 2008, pp. 1819-1829. 51 VERMEULE 1962, p. 66. 52 Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Cod. Medic. Palat. 54. 53 VERMEULE 1962, p. 67. 54 HOBHOUSE 1809/10, p. 348.

8

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES Since this is not the main theme of this work, I refer the reader to the vast literature on this subject, confining myself merely to a brief description of the other very famous colossus, that on the island of Rhodes. It stood where today we see the fort of St Nicholas, at the entrance to the port of Rhodes. It was reported in ancient sources that the colossus was more than 30m high and so great was the amazement at this work created by Chares of Lindos in the third century BC that it was counted one of the seven wonders of the ancient world. Although the colossus was not longer upright in his time, Pliny, for example, describes it thus: Ante omnes autem in admiratione fuit Solis colossus Rhodi, quem fecerat Chares Lindius, Lysippi supra dicti discepulus. LXX cubitorum altitudinis fuit hoc simulacrum, post LXVI annum terrae motu prostratum, sed iacens quoque miraculo est. Pauci pollicem eius amplecuntur, maiores sunt digiti quam pleraeque statuae. Vasti specus hiant defractis membris ; spectantur intus magnae molis saxa, quorum pondere stabiliverat eum constutuens. Duodecim annis tradunt effectum CCC talentis, quae contigerant ex apparatu regis Demetrii relicto morae taedio obessa Rhodo55

Fig. 10 The colossus of Rhodes in a famous print by Maarten van Heemskerck in HOEPFNER 2003, fig. 21 It seems highly unlikely, in fact, that a statue of the tutelary god of the island, Helios, could never have been made high enough to allow ships to pass between the legs. If a torch had really been positioned 30m above the ground to act as a lighthouse, someone would have been required to keep it alight by means of a stair up to that level. An external stair would have been impossible for aesthetic reasons and an internal stair very hard to create, not least because it would have threatened the stability of the statue. Although, like the Colossus of Porto Raphti, such an immense object, indicating the entrance to the port and acting as a landmark for it, was of great significance, we can conclude that the Colossus of Rhodes was never a lighthouse even if Lucian, in the Icaromenippo, says:

Without venturing into the much-disputed matter of dating (the statue was probably made in 292 BC, the same year as the famous verses in the Antologia Palatina dedicated to the creation of the Colossus), it is now generally accepted that the image of the colossus handed down from the Renaissance (and later centuries) – as a lighthouse – is entirely false (fig. 10).56

jaÊ eê ce l tÄm ‚QodÊym jokossÄm ÑhesÇlgm jaà tÄm Ñpà t¨ VÇqz pÌqcom, e¾ óhi, pamteke´r ðm le Ù c± diÈkahe57 The true appearance of the statue would seem to have been similar in every way to a small replica found in the jurist Ulpian’s seaside villa at Santa Marinella, near Civitavecchia (fig. 11 a, b). The statue in Parian marble represents the standing figure of Apollo-Helios. The god is shown naked with a quiver on a strap across his shoulder. His missing right arm must have been raised up, while the left arm is hanging down. The weight on the body is supported on one leg, the other extending slightly behind. It is believed to be a replica of the Colossus of Rhodes, placed at the entrance to his house by the Roman aristocrat.

55 Plin. XXXIV, 41-42.: “But calling for admiration before all others was the colossal Statue of the Sun at Rhodes made by Chares of Lindus, the pupil of Lysippus mentioned above. This statue was 70 cubits high; and, 66 years after its erection, was overthrown by an earthquake, but even lying on the ground it is a marvel. Few people can make their arms meet round the thumb of the figure, and the fingers are larger than most statues; and where the limbs have been broken off enormous cavities yawn, while inside are seen great masses of rock with the weight of which the artist steadied it when he erected it. It is recorded that it took twelve years to complete and cost 300 talents, money realized from the engines of war belonging to King Demetrius which he had abandoned when he got tired of the protracted siege of Rhodes”. Trans. H. Rackham, Harvard, 1952/1995. 56 The construction of the statue came about after the unsuccessful siege by Demetrius of Pharos in 304 BC, the year in which building work began that was to continue for twelve years. Thus the statue was completed in 292 BC by Chares of Linods, but in 232 BC it collapsed as a result of an earthquake. The statue could still be seen, lying on the ground, broken off from the knees, until 672 AD when the Arabs who took possession of Rhodes sold the remains to a Jew who, according to legend, took them to Syria on the backs of 900 camels. This story appears in Constantine Porphyrogenitos, De Administrando Imperio, 20-21. For the history of the statue, see also MAYRON 1973, pp. 62 ff., MORENO 1973-74, pp. 453-466.

Hoepfener’s recent study58has suggested that the Colossus should be interpreted as Helios surveying the 57 Lucian. Quomodo istoria inscribenda sit, 46 [24], 12-13: “If I had not caught sight of the Colossus of Rhodes and the Pharus tower, I assure you I should never have made out the Earth at all....” Trad. V.Longo. ed. UTET, Turin 1986. 58 HOEPFENER 2003. The Works of Lucian of Samosata tr. by H. W. Fowler and F. G. Fowler, Oxford: The Clarendon Press 1905.

9

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

Fig 11a, b: Left Civitavecchia, Museo Archeologico Nazionale, statue found at Santa Marinella in Ulpian’s villa (photo B. Giardina). Under, reconstruction of the statue by HOEPFENER 2003, fig. 109. was Wenamon, living at the time of Ramses XI, who solved the problem by calling on the assistance of the inhabitants of Lebanon where the main Phoenician ports were to be found (Tyre, Sidon, Beirut). From Lebanon came the cedar wood, with which the Egyptians began to build stronger ships suitable for sailing in the open sea. The wood was traded in exchange for papyrus, a plant that was not available in Lebanon. The Egyptians cannot have foreseen that by the time of the Ptolemaic Dynasty in the third century BC, not only would they have become skilled sailors but would also possess the most important commercial and military port ever known. With the birth of the great metropolis and trading centre of Alexandra came that of the first true lighthouse of the ancient world.

horizon (fig. 11c), welcoming mariners into the port of Rhodes and watching to see whether approaching ships brought friends or enemies. The Colossus is mentioned in the fourth century AD by an anonymous geographer, author of Expositio totius mundi et gentium.59 “At the foot of the city [Rhodes], to the east, is the port, very beautiful and secure...on the other side is a fine fortress...the said fortress being followed by another pier, more than one thousand paces long and which stands in the sea some way in front of the port. And on the said point is an impregnable fortress, called the Tower of St Nicholas, that from every side attacks any ship that would penetrate the port... and above the said port on one side there was a foot and on the other where today there is the church of St Anthony, was the other great colossus that was at Rhodes...and one can still see certain things. This Colossus was a copper statue, fifty feet in height...and it was on account of the said statue that the people of Rhodes were called Colossesi...” Bonsignore di Francesco, Viaggio di Gierusalemme, 1497, Magl. XIII, 93; f. 34v, f.35v. Over the centuries, many nations cast an expansionist eye towards Egypt. The Egyptians, by contrast, were not known for their skill in navigation, relying on others as in the case of the famous voyage made by Hatshepsut to Punt. They confined themselves to sailing on the Nile and that chiefly for fishing rather than conquest. An exception 59

Anonymous, IV century, Descrizione del mondo e delle sue genti, LXIII, ed. Salerno, Rome 2005.

10

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES

Fig. 11c: Above, reconstruction of the Colossus of Rhodes, by HOEPFENER 2003, fig. 106

11

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Calabria raised a column in the form of a tower in the Straits of Messina opposite the so-called Torre di Peloro that is very likely the ancient lighthouse on Capo Peloro, standing on the point that Homer called “Lighthouse Point” (Pl. 58, figs 114, 115).65 In Book IV of the Geographica, he descrbes how Marius had created a navigable canal, necessary since the mouth of the river Rhône was frequently blocked by alluvial deposits. Having recovered the greater part of the waterway, he gave it to the inhabitants of Massalia, modern Marseilles, who had helped him in the war against the Ambrones and Toÿgeni.66 After describing how the people of Massalia had very successfully exploited this canal for their economic benefit by imposing a toll on anyone coming up or going down the canal at a point near a tower, Strabo tells us that visibility there was very poor, to the point that, in bad weather, the tower could not be seen even from near by:

CHAPTER 2 The Pharus at Alexandria and other lighthouses: the sources Chronologically speaking, the first mention of a lighthouse in the sources refers to the tower at Alexandria, constructed in 280 BC on the island of Pharus in Egypt. Writing in the first century BC, at the time of the civil war with Pompey, Caesar describes the famous lighthouse in De bello civili: Pharus est in insula turris magna altitudine, mirificis operibus extructa; quae nomen ab insula cepit. haec insula obiectndera Alexandriae portum efficit...60 All the sources, whether Greek or Latin take the Alexandria pharos as their first point of reference, either to describe the structure of a lighthouse or simply to let the reader know that the writer had personally seen a structure that was already considered to be one of the wonders of the world. Another first century BC writer, the Latin poet Tibullus, uses the Alexandria pharus to stand for the Egyptian people as a whole:

Lassaki´tai pÌqcour ÐmÈstgsam sgle²a, ÑnoijeioÌlemoi pÇmta tqËpom tÂm wÍqm:jaà d jaà t±r ’EvesÊar ’AqtÈlidor j×mta³ha ÚdqÌsamto ÚeqËm, wyqÊom ÐpokabËmter ä poie² m±som tÀ stËlata to³ potalo³ 67 These landmark towers, erected specifically to assist navigation in bad weather, must have been nothing other than lighthouses. Placed, according to Strabo, on the strait of the Fossae Marianae, probably the modern Fos sur Mer (No. 68), one has been identified at Roque d’Odor (Martigues).68

turba debeat in Pharia 61 Lighthouses (or towers with a similar function) are frequently mentioned in the writings of the Greek geographer Strabo,62 active during the latter part of the rule of Augustus and the early years of Tiberius. In Book III of his Geographica, he compares the function of the so-called Cepio Tower,63 in the port known as Menesteo in Spain (the exact site of which is as yet not known exactly, but which must have been in the mouth of the Betis-Guadalquivir river), to that of the famous monument at Alexandria:

In Book Seven, Strabo refers to the so-called Tower of Neoptolemus near present-day Dniester:

’Emta³ha dè pou jaà tÄ lamte²om to³ LemehÈyr ÑstÊ, jaÃ Û to³ JaipÊymor údqutai pÌqcor Ñpà pÈtqar ÐlvijkÌstou, haulasÊyr jatesjeuaslÈmor, íspeq Û VÇqor, t±r t´m pkoÞfolÁmym sytgqÊar wÇqim 64

65 Strab. III, 5,5. On the basis of the present geography, I believe that the column set up by the people of Rhegium (Reggio) is the former lighthouse of Reggio Calabria, while the Tower of Pelorus corresponds to the former lighthouse at Messina (No. 47). In De Chorographia, the geographer Pomponius Mela (Mela, II, 113 mentions a lighthouse at Brindisi), active in the first century AD. He confines himself to saying that at the time of writing the island of Pharos was connected to Alexandria by a bridge, whereas in Homer’s time it was surrounded by sea (Mela, III, 104-105, ed. Stereotypa, Stuttgart 1968). Hom. Od. IV, 354-359: the poet describes how the “sea-girt” island of Pharos was situated a whole day’s sail from Egypt, and where there was a safe harbour. Some writers (HELMUT-WOLF 1983, pp. 63 ss.) have suggested that this Pharos was not the one on which Sostratus of Cnidos built his tower, but a small peninsula not far from Messina and, more specifically, Capo Peloro, but perhaps it is unlikely that Homer would have failed to mention any similar kind of construction. We know from eighteenth-century drawings and a medallion of Sestus Pompeus that there had been a lighthouse there (LEGER 1979, p. 506, DICTIONNAIRE 1906, p. 431). There remains the problem of the name and the fact that it is reasonable to suppose that in that area, overlooked by the terrifying Scylla and Charybdis, there was once a structure designed to help sailors keep control of their ships in such a dangerous spot. 66 Strab. IV, 1,8. It has been suggested by F.Trotta that the Toÿgeni may have been the Teutons. 67 Strab. IV, 1, 8: “Wherefore the Massiliotes set up towers as beacons, because they were in every way making the country their own; and, in truth, they also established a temple of the Ephesian Artemis there, after first enclosing a piece of land which is made an island by the mouths of the river”. Trans. B. Thayer, Loeb Classical Library edition (internet). 68 FERRI 2000, p. 260.

A little further on in the same work, he writes that it was an ancient custom to erect a column to mark the border of a territory. Thus it was that the inhabitants of Reggio 60

Caes. Civ. III, 112: “The Pharos is a tower on an island, of prodigious height, built with amazing works, and takes its name from the island. This island lying over against Alexandria, forms a harbor”. Trans. Wikipedia, based on W. A. McDevitte and W. S. Bohn (1869). In the continuation of the paragraph, Caesar relates how, despite the resistance of the occupants of Pharos, he was able to take cotrol of the island and set up a garrison. The conquest of “Ptolemaic Pharos” is also related in Prop. II, 1,30 61 Tib. I, 3: “the loveliest of the Pharian band” Trans Project Gutenberg EBook 2003. 62 Strab. XVII, 1, 6; 9. 63 Mela mentions it briefly. 64 Strab. III, 1,9: “Hereabouts is the oracle of Menestheus [Athenian hero mentioned in Hom. Il. II, 2, 552ff. **n.d.a.], and also the tower of Caepio [built in 108 BC by Q. Servilius Caepio, **n.d.a.], which is situated upon a rock that is washed on all sides by the waves, and, like the Pharos tower, is a marvellous structure built for the sake of the safety of mariners”. Trans. B. Thayer, Loeb Classical Library edition (internet).

12

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES

’Epà dÁ t© stËlati to³ TÌqa pÌqcor ÑstÃ69

utuntur. Inde primo conspectis hostium nauibus datum Hasdrubali est, tumultusque prius in terra et castris quam ad mare et ad naues ortus...74 Pharos, quondam diei navigatione distans ab Aegypto, nunc e turri nocturnis ignibus cursum navium regens 75

In Book XIII70 Strabo refers to the so-called towers of Hero and Abydos. Standing some thirty stadia apart in the ports of the same name, they are inevitably connected to the legend of the tragic lovers, Hero and Leander.71 The story tells of a pair of young lovers separated by the waves of a stormy sea. Leander lives in Abydos but loves Hero, priestess of Aphrodite in Sestos. They manage to meet many times until one day when a storm whips up the sea, making it seem impossible for Leander to swim across. Hero has an idea that will allow her lover to swim safely through the night and have no difficulty in finding her. She will stand day and night at a window in a tower on the seashore with a torch in her hand to guide Leander through the darkness. Unfortunately, as Leander had foreseen the bad weather causes the torch to blow out and the young man drowns.

it will have been noted that, before the date of this quotation from Pliny, lighthouses were called turris and not pharos, this term at the time referring uniquely to the island on which the tower at Alexandria was built. In Book XXXVI, in the chapter on marble, Pliny the Elder compares the lighthouses at Ostia and Ravenna with the wondrous construction by the architect Sostratus di Cnidos. Writing in the first century AD, the Latin author tells us how Ptolemy Philadelphus allowed the architect to inscribe his own name on the famous tower: Magnificatur et alia turris a rege facta in insula Pharo portum optinente Alexandriae, quam constitisse DCCC talentis tradunt, magno animo, ne quid omittamus, Ptolomei regis, quo in ea permiserit Sostrati Cnidi architecti structura ipsa nomen inscribi.Usus eius nocturno navium cursu ignes ostendere ad praenuntianda vada portusque introitum, quales iam compluribus locis flagrant, sicut Ostiae ac Ravennae. Periculum in continuatione ignium, ne sidus existimetur, quoniam e longinoquo similis flammarum aspectus est. Hic idem architectus primus omnium pensilem ambulationem Cnidi fecisse traditur 76

diÄ jaà eÕpetÁsteqom Ñj t±r Sgsto³ diaÊqousi paqakenÇlemoi lijqÄm Ñpà tÄm t±r ‚Gqo³r pÌqcom jÐje²hem ÐviÈmter tÀ pko²a sulpqÇttomtor to³ Ro³ pqÄr tÂm peqaÊysim:to²r d’Ñn ’AbÌdou peqaioulÈmoir paqakejtÁom ÑstÊm eÓr tÐmamtÊa ÔjtÍ pou stadÊour Ñpà pÌqcom timÀ jat’ÐmtijqÅ t±r Sgsto³...72 In Book XVII, on Africa, Strabo talks of the Alexandria lighthouse: έστι δε και αυτο το της νησιδος άκρον πέτρα περίκλυστος, έχουσα πύργον θαυμαστως κατεσκευσμένον λευκου λίθου πολυώροφον, ομώνυμον τη νήσω˙τουτον δ α ̉ νέθηκε Σώσρατος Κνίδιος, φίλος των βασιλέων, της των πλοιθομένων σωτηρίας χάριν, ώς φησιν η επιγραφη 73

Pliny’s description of the Alexandria lighthouse is one of the longest, an indication of the scarcity of written documentation available to us. Not only does Pliny mention the name of the architect of the lighthouse, he also provides two very significant pieces of information: the very high cost of the construction and the problem of keeping a continuous flame burning in the lighthouse and the possibility that the the flame might be confused with

Living at the same period, between the first century BC and the first century AD, the Latin historian Livy describes in Book XXIII of his Ab Urbe condita how, in Spain, it was customary to erect signal towers in high places: Multas est locis altis positas turres Hispania habet, quibus et speculis et propugnaculis aduersus latrones

74 Liv. XXII, 19, 7: “In Spain there are several towers placed in high situations, which they employ both as watch-towers and as places of defence against pirates. From them first, a view of the ships of the enemy having been obtained, the signal was given to Hasdrubal; and a tumult arose in the camp and on land sooner than on the ships and at sea”. Trans. D. Spillan and Cyrus Edmonds, The Project Gutenberg eBook. Another similar reference can be found in Liv. XIX, 23, 3. 75 Plin. Nat.. V, 34: “Pharos [...] in former times was one day's sail from the mainland of Egypt, at the present day it directs ships in their course by means of the fires which are lighted at night on the tower there”. Trans. ed. H.C. Hamilton and W. Falconer, Perseus (internet). 76 Plin. nat. XXXVI, 83: “Another wonderous monument is the tower built by a king on the island of Pharos, which stands before the port of Alexandria; it is said to have cost 800 talents, and King Ptolemy, with exquisite magnaminity, agreed that it was not just to prevent the architect Sostratos of Cnidos from inscribing his own name on the building. The aim of this tower is to provide a light for ships at night so that they can see the shallows and the entrance to the port; now they are to be found everywhere, as at Ostia and Ravenna. They have the disadvantage that their ininterrupted light may be mistaken for a star, since from a distance the appearance is identical”.(Trans C. Higgitt.) Other mentions can be found in Plin. nat. V, 131 when, speaking of Africa in general and Alexandria in particular, Pliny states that, before the construction of the lighthouse, the island of the same name lay a day’s sail away from Egypt; navigation, at the time when Pliny was writing, was regulated by the light of fires showing from the tower.

69

Strab. VII, 3, 16: “At the mouth of the Tyras is what is called the Tower of Neoptolemus”. Trans. ed. H.C. Hamilton and W. Falconer, Perseus (internet). The tower appears to have been discovered in 1850 at the end of the west shore of the lake, according to Forbiger. More recent research places it on the ancient site of Bugaz to the north end of the mouth of the Dniestr estuary, cfr. HIND 1984, p. 78. 70 1 Strab. XIII,,22. 71 For versions of this legend, see also below Ovid (first century AD) and Musaeus (sixth century AD). 72 Strab. XIII, 1, 22: “It is therefore easier to cross over from Sestus, first coasting a short distance to the Tower of Hero and then letting the ships make the passage across by the help of the current. But those who cross over from Abydus must first follow the coast in the opposite direction about eight stadia to a tower opposite”. Trans. ed. H.C. Hamilton and W. Falconer, Perseus (internet). 73 Strab. XVII, 1,8: “And likewise the extremity of the isle is a rock, which is washed all round by the sea and has upon it a tower that is admirably constructed of white marble with many stories and bears the same name as the island. This was an offering made by Sostratus of Cnidus, a friend of the king’s, for the safety of mariners, as the inscription says”. Trans. B. Thayer, Loeb Classical Library edition (internet). Strabo mentions the lighthouse again later in XVII 1.9.

13

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA the light of a star, a problem only resolved in the nineteen century with the invention of the intermittent beam.

mujtà pËqqyhem ÛqlÊfoimto pqÄr tÂm duswÈqeiam to³ jatÇpkou 80

We find another highly significant remark, suggesting that signal towers may have already existed in the Punic world, in Book II of the Elder Pliny’s Naturalis Historia which deals with cosmology. He writes that, even though it is a constant phenomenon, it is not night and day simultaneously in all parts of the world. It can happen that, when it is night in Rome, it is day in Asia, and so on, since the intervention of the globe brings about night and its exposure, day. This phenomenon is easy to ascertain, says Pliny:

The same author compares the tower named Phasael by Herod, in honour of his brother, to the tower at Alexandria. Probably one of the lighthouses of Caesarea Maritima, this one was forty cubits in width and breadth and ninety cubits high:

...in Africa Hispaniaque turrium Hannibalis, in Asia vero propter piraticos terrores simili specularum in praesidio excitato, in quis praenuntios ignes sexta hora diei accensos saepe conpertum est tertia noctis a tergo ultimis visos 77

Still in the first century AD, Ovid dedicates Epistulae XVIII and XIX of his Heroides to the ill-fated lovers Hero and Leander, whose story is recounted above. It is not surprising that the presence, in a tower on the shore, of a flaming torch to guide Leander as he swam in the darkness gave further impetus to the legend of the presence of a lighthouse, erected for such an occasion and the same Hero’s Tower mentioned in Strabo.

Û dÁ deÌteqor pÌqcor, ëm ÖmËlasem ÐpÄ tÐdekvo³ VasÇkgom...tÄ lÁm sw±la paqeœjei t© jatÀ tÂm VÇqom ÑjpuqseÌomti to²r Ñpà ’AkenamdqeÊar pkÈousi, t¨ peqiow¨ dÁ pokÅ leÊfym ¶m: 81

We saw above how Pliny was concerned that the constant flame of the lighthouse might be confused with the light of a star. His contempory, Lucan, speaking of the light from the tower in Alexandria in his Bellum Civile, says:

Leander says to Hero:

Septima nox zephyro numquam laxante rudentis ostendit Phariis Aegyptia litora flammis 78

Lumina quin etiam summa vigililantia turre aut videt aut acies nostra videre putat 82

It would seem then that the light coming from these marine signal towers was significantly powerful, to the extent that the poet Statius (45-96 AD) could go so far as to compare the beam from the lighthouse at Capri to that of the moon:

Ut procul adspexi lumen « Meus ignis in illo est ; illa meum » dixi « litora lumen habent » ... Cetera nox et nos et turris conscia novit quodque mihi lumen per vada monstrat iter 83 Hearing this, Hero answers:

...Teleboumque domos, trepidis ubi dulcia nautis lumina noctivagae tollit Pharus emula lunae...79 In his Bellum Iudaicum, the historian Josephus (first century AD) describes the wonderful monument at Alexandria, commenting on the strength of the light and the size of the port it protected:

protinus in summa vigilantia lumine turre ponimus, adsuetae signa notamque viae 84 80 Ios. Bel. Iud. IV, 10, 612-614: “The haven also of Alexandria is not entered by the mariners without difficulty, even in times of peace; for the passage inward is narrow, and full of rocks that lie under the water, which oblige the mariners to turn from a straight direction: its left side is blocked up by works made by men's hands on both sides; on its right side lies the island called Pharus, which is situated just before the entrance, and supports a very great tower, that affords the sight of a fire to such as sail within three hundred stadia of it, that ships may cast anchor a great way off in the night time, by reason of the difficulty of sailing nearer”. Based on trans. by W. Whiston, Project Gutenberg (internet). In Book V, 169-170 of the same work, the poet compares a tower commissioned by Herod to that which “dall’isola di Faro fa luce ai naviganti diretti ad Alessandria”, adding, however, that Herod’s Tower was even bigger. The most significant thing the historian tells us is is that the Alexandria lighthouse’s light could be seen at a distance of at least three hundred Alexandrian stadia, just over 50 km. 81 Ios. Bel. Iud. V, 4, 166-170.: The second tower, which [Herod] named from his brother Phasaelus [...] the appearance of it resembled the tower of Pharus, which exhibited a fire to such as sailed to Alexandria, but was much larger than it in compass. Trans. Project Gutenberg (internet). 82 Ov. her. XVIII, 31-32: “My eyes too behold, or seem to behold, upon the tower's top, the watchful light that is to guide my course”. Trans. R. Ehwald, Perseus (internet). 83 Ov. her. XVIII, 85-86: “ ‘My flame (cried I) is there; these shores point out the darling light’.”; “Ourselves, the night, the tower, and that shining light which guided my way through the uncertain deep, were conscious of the rest”. Trans. R. Ehwald, Perseus (internet). 84 Ov. her. XIX, 35-36: “Forthwith we plant the watchful light upon the tower's top, the known guide and mark of your watery way...”. Trans. R. Ehwald, Perseus (internet).

duspqËsitor dÁ kilÂm mausà jaà jat’eÓqmgm ’AkenamdqeÊar:stemËr te cÀq eãspkour jaà pÈtqair ÜvÇkoir tÄm Ñp’eÕhÅ jalptËlemor dqËlom. jaà tÄ lÁm ÐqisteqÄm aÕto³ lÈqor pÈvqajtai weiqojlÉtoir sjÈkeim, Ñm deni§ dÁ Ù pqosacoqeuolÈmg VÇqor m±sor pËjeitai, pÌqcom ÐmÈwousa lÈcistom ÑjpuqseÌomta to²r jatapkÈousim Ñpà tqiajosÊour stadÊour, Ýr Ñm 77

Plin. nat. II, 73: “...in Africa and in Spain, the towers of Hannibal; in Asia, similar defensive watchtowers were set up from fear of pirates and thus it was noticed more than once that the warning fires lit at the sixth house of the day were seen at the third hour of the night by those who found themselves at the most distant point”. (Trans C. Higgitt.) He is clearly describing the optical telegraph stations mentioned by Polyaenus. 78 Lucan. IX 1004-1005: “The West wind never slackened the cordage of the ships until the seventh night revealed the coast of Egypt by the flame of Pharos”. Trans. J. D. Duff, Internet Archive. 79 Stat. Silvae, III, 100-101: “...or the dwelling place of the Teleboi, whose lighthouse, rival of the wandering moon, gives out from on high its light so dear to fearful sailors...”. (Trans. C. Higgitt) The poet attributes the foundation of the island of Capri to the legendary Teleboi people from the coast of Arcanana.

14

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES In his Argonautica composed in the first century AD, Valerius Flaccus comments on how, for sailors, the lighthouse at Ostia represented safety:

Although he gives no detailed description of the building, the existence of the lighthouse is also alluded to by Dionysius of Halicarnassus.89 Returning to Svetonius, we find references to two other famous lighthouses: that at Gesoriacum, present-day Boulogne-sur-mer in France (Pas de Calais), destroyed in an earthquake in the seventeenth century and of which there only survive some drawings; and that at Tiberius’s villa in Capri at the eastern tip of the island near presentday Santa Maria del Soccorso. Already in existence in the time of Augustus, only the foundations remain of this lighthouse which collapsed shortly before the death of Emperor Tiberius whose residence was on Capri. The first of these two lighthouses, built under Caligula to celebrate a short-lived victory over the Bretons, is described as follows:

non ita Tyrrhenus stupet Ionisque magister, qui iam te, Tiberine, tuens clarumque serena arce pharon praeceps subito nusquam ostia, nusquam Ausoniam videt, at saevas accedere Syrtes 85 This lighthouse is mentioned again a century later by Svetonius in his famous biographies of the Roman emperors. Commissioned by Claudius who also built the port (which served as the port of Rome before the construction of Trajan’s port near present-day Fiumicino),86 the massive lighthouse at Ostia was built on the wreck of Caligula’s ship that was sunk after bringing to Rome the great obelisk that stands today in the centre of St Peter’s Square outside the Vatican. This lighthouse was so famous that it was widely depicted both in the Roman period (one only has to think of the Square of the Corporations at Ostia or the many coins bearing its image), and in more modern times (it was represented, for example, on a beautiful tapestry of 1583, now in the Vatican Museums). It is described by Svetonius as follows:

...et in indicium uictoriae altissimam turrem excitauit, ex qua ut Pharo noctibus ad regendos nauium cursus ignes emicarent...90 Writing of the second, Svetonius laments the collapse of the Capri lighthouse, saying: Et antes paucos quam obiret dies, turris Phari terrae motu Capreis concidi 91

Portum Ostiae extruit circumducto dextra sinistraque brachio et ad introitum profundo iam solo mole obiecta; quam quo stabilius fundaret, nauem ante demersit, qua magnus obeliscus ex Aegypto fuerat aduectus, congestique pilis superposuit altissimam turrem in exemplum Alexandrini Phari, ut ad nocturnos ignes cursum nauigia dirigerent 87

Another writer of the second century AD, Arrian, famous for his biography of Alexander the Great, puts forward a proposal in his Anabasis for an enormous sanctuary dedicated to Hephaestion in Alexandria, the city famed for its lighthouse-tower, seeming to suggest that it was the work of Alexander, whereas it is well known that it was built for Ptolemy Philadelphus:

The same lighthouse is mentioned by the satirical poet Juvenal, living during the reigns of Nerva and Trajan. In Satire XII we read:

jaà Ñm t¨ mÉsz t¨ VÇqz, êma Û pÌqcor ÑstÃm Û Ñm t¨ mÉsz , lecÈhei te lÈcistom jaà pokutekeÊZ ÑjpqepÈstatom. jaà ëpyr ÑpijqatÉs\ Ñpijake²shai ÐpÄ ‚GvaistÊymor92

tandem intrat positas inclusa per aequora moles Tyrrenamque pharon porrectaque bracchia rursum quae pelago occurrunt medio longesque relinqunt Italiam (non sic igitur mirabere portus quos natura dedit)...88

Speaking of the lighthouse at Alexandria, the second century AD writer, Lucian, says in his treatise Quomodo istoria inscribenda that the architect Sostratus of Cnidos devised a stratagem by which his name would, in the course of time, be the only one remaining visible on the tower while that of the king, Ptolemy Philadelphus, would disappear. According to Lucian, when he had completed the building, he carved his name into the stone itself. This he covered with plaster, inscribing onto it the

85

Val. Fl. VII, 83-86: “Not so thunderstruck stands the Ionian and Tyrrhenian skipper, when, as he gazes towards Tiber and the lighthouse clearly sighted ‘neath a summer sky, suddenly driven headlong he sees nowhere the river-mouth, nowhere Ausonia, but the fierce Syrtes drawing nigh”. Trans. J. H. Mozley, Classical E-Texts (internet). 86 For the history and evolution of the port of Claudius and Trajan as well as a more detailed account of the history and a description of each individual lighthouse referred to, see later chapters. 87 Suet. Claud. XX: “He formed the harbour at Ostia, by carrying out circular piers on the right and on the left, with a mole protecting, in deep water, the entrance of the port. To secure the foundation of this mole, he sunk the vessel in which the great obelisk had been brought from Egypt; and built upon piles a very lofty tower, in imitation of the Pharos at Alexandria, on which lights were burnt to direct mariners in the night”. Trans. A. Thomson, revised and corrected T.Forester, Project Gutenberg Ebook. 88 Iuv., XII, 75-80.: “And now at length the ship comes within the moles built out to enclose the sea. She passes the Tyrrhenian Pharos, and those arms which stretch out and meet again in mid-ocean, leaving Italy far behind – a port more wondrous far than those of Nature's making”. Trans. G. G. Ramsay, Tertullian Project (internet).

89

[**Book/author/page ref] “The river is never obstructed with silt and at the mouth it does not merge into the marshy areas but, remaining always in its own riverbed carries ships to the sea where it emerges alongside the lighthouse”. (Trans C. Higgitt.) 90 Suet. Cal. XLVI: “As a monument of his success, he raised a lofty tower, upon which, as at Pharos, he ordered lights to be burnt in the night-time, for the direction of ships at sea”. Trans. A. Thomson, revised and corrected T.Forester, Project Gutenberg Ebook. 91 Suet. Tib. LXXIV: “A few days before he died, the Pharos at Capri was thrown down by an earthquake”. Trans. A. Thomson, revised and corrected T.Forester, Project Gutenberg Ebook. 92 Arr. an. VII, 23, 7: “... sanctuaries for the hero Hephaestion in the Egyptian Alexandria, one in the city itself and another in the island of Pharos, where the tower is situated”. Trans. E. J. Chinnock, 1893, Alexander Sources (internet).

15

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA name of the king of the time (Ptolemy Philadelphus, n.d.a.), knowing that before long the letters would fall off with the plaster revealing the words “Sostratus, son of Cnidos, to the Saviour Gods, on behalf of those who sail at sea”.93 A little earlier, Lucian describes Sostratus’s work as magnificent, following Josephus in asserting the brightness of the tower’s lantern which had saved many sailors from shipwreck on the rocks of the coast of Paraetonium, the presentday region of Berech, on the border between Egypt and Libya:

create a work of art second only to that of Alexandria. This interpretation is supported by the fact that there were many lighthouses that pass without mention. We know that lighthouses and maritime signal towers (lanterns) existed in almost all parts of the Roman Empire. It would appear then that only those of particular importance or unusual features were picked out for mention. The lighthouse at Ostia was also that of the capital, that at Gesoriacum was notable for its height and the fact that it had been built to commemorate a victory – albeit one that was short-lived – and the light from the tower on Capri was so strong that it rivalled the light of the moon. We can assume that the reason why Svetonius, in his life of Claudius, did not mention the two lighthouses built by the emperor in the port of Dubris (Dover), one of which was so strong that it can still be seen today within the walls of a Norman fort, was because they were clearly lacking in grandeur and unworthy to be recorded for later generations. Sometimes the sources do not speak specfically of lighthouses, referring instead to an area as pharia, an indication that there was a lighthouse in the vicinity.98

OójodolÉsar cÀq tÄm Ñpà t¨ VÇqz pÌqcom, lÈcistom jaà jÇkkistom ñqcym ×pÇmtym, Ýr puqseÌoito Ðp’aÕto³ to²r mautikolÁmoir Ñpà pokÅ t±r l jatavÈqoimto eÓr tÂm hakÇttgr jaà PaqaitomÊam, pacwÇkeptom, ír vasim, o¹sam jaà ðvujtom, eó tir ÑlpÈsoi eÓr tÀ ñqlata˙ …94 In his work Icaromenippo, Lucian says that, if it had not been for the beams coming from the lighthouse at Alexandria and the Colossus of Rhodes, he would not have been able to recognise the earth:

jaà eó ce l tÄm ‚QodÊym jokossÄm ÑhesÇlgm jaà tÄm Ñpà t¨ VÇqz pÅqcom, e¹ êshi, pamtek´r ðm le Ù c± diÈkahe 95

A good description of of the structure of a lighthouse is provided at this same period by the historian Herodian (170-240 AD), author of a Roman History from Marcus Aurelius to Gordian III. In Book IV of this work, he describes the rituals of funeral ceremonies, referring particularly to the funeral of Septimus Severus. He tells us that the bed on which the emperor was laid was raised up and carried out of the city to the Field of Mars where there stood a construction with a square base, shaped like a military tent and made entirely of large wooden beams and filled entirely with firewood. Its exterior was decorated with large cloths woven with gold thread, ivory sculptures and paintings of various kinds.99 This description calls to mind the constructions set up on promontories in archaic times to send signals to sailors.

Writing in the third century AD, the Roman historian and geographer Solinus, author of a Collectanea Rerum memorabilium, did not neglect to mention how Caesar had established the colony of Pharus, whose nightly light guided sailors: Est et Pharos, colonia a Caesare dictatore deducta, e qua fascibus accensis nocturna dirigitur navigatio 96 The lighthouse at Ostia was still standing in the third century AD, the object of the admiration of Cassius Dio, who, writing about the work carried out by Claudius in the port at Ostia, says: ...jaÃ

m±som Ñm aÕt¨ pÌqcom te vqujtyqÊam ñwomta jatestÉsato 97

But Heriodian goes on to say something even more interesting: on top of the construction described stood another, similar in shape and ornamentation but smaller and with various openings ressembling doors, followed by a third and a fourth in gradually diminishing sizes and finally a last, very small, one. In other words, it is a kind of stepped construction, growing smaller as it goes up, access to which could be gained through the little doors at the base.

Ñp’ÑjeÊm\

As will have been observed, the lighthouse at Alexandria was frequently taken as an example for other lighthouse towers, almost as if to say that the stated intention was to 93

Lukian. Quomodo historia inscribenda sit, 62. Lukian. Quomodo historia inscribenda sit , 63: “...the Cnidian architect, when he built the tower in Pharos, where the fire is kindled to prevent mariners from running on the dangerous rocks of Parætonia, that most noble and most beautiful of all works; he carved his own name on a part of the rock on the inside, then covered it over with mortar, and inscribed on it the name of the reigning sovereign”.Ed. H. Morley, trans. T. Francklin, Project Gutenberg Ebook. 95 Lukian. Icaromenippos, 46 [24], 12-13: “if it had not been for the Rhodian Colossus, and the tower of Pharos, I should not have known where the earth stood”. Ed. H. Morley, trans. T. Francklin, Project Gutenberg Ebook. 96 Solin. 32, 43: “...and there is Pharus, the colony conquered by the dictator Caesar, through whose bands [of light] guide nocturnal navigation”. Trans. C. Higgitt after B.Giardina. The capture of Pharos is also mentioned in the fifth century AD in Oros. VI, 15, 33. 97 Cass. Dio. LX, 11, 4: “....in the midst of which [the sea] he raised an island and placed on it a tower with a beacon light”. Trans. after B. Thayer, Loeb Classical Library edition (internet). 94

A concluding sentence is, for us, the one of most significance:

ÐpeijÇsai tir àm tÄ sw±la to³ jatesjeuÇslator vqujtyqÊor, à to²r kilÈsim ÑpijeÊlema mÌjtyq diÀ

98

For example, in the third-fourth century AD, Dion. Per. 115-116, speaking of the Ismaric sea: “ ...ma³tai dÁ pqÍtgm VaqÊgm ðka jijkÉsjousim...”, “the sailors call the first sea Pharius…”, trans. C. Higgitt. 99 Herodian. IV, 2.6-8.

16

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES

to³ puqÄr Ñr Ðsvake²r jatacycÀr tÀr ma³r weiqacyce²:vÇqour te aÕtÀ oÚ pokkoà jako³sim 100

e trar vantaggio da’ naufragj, quando, guidati da que’ falƒi ƒegni, vanno a romperli in que’ ƒcogli. Ora però, ƒoggiunge lo ƒteƒƒo Autore, la Torre è mezzo in rovina; nè ci suol metterci alcun Fanale104

In the fourth century AD, the historian Ammianus Marcellinus refers again to the lighthouse at Alexandria but, whereas Arrian attributed it to Alexander the Great, Amminanus asserts categorically that it was the work of Cleopatra:

In a letter to Anastasius, bishop of Alexandria, in the fourth century AD, St Basil mentions a high tower at Alexandria, the function of which was more as a watch tower than a lighthouse:

Hoc litus cum fallacibus et insidiosis accessibus affligeret antheac navigantes discriminibus plurimis, excogitavit in portu Cleopatra turrium excelsam, quae Pharos a loco ipso cognominatur, praelucendi navibus nocturna suggerens ministeria... 101

...jaà Ûq§r pÇmtyr tÀ Øjastawo³, o½om Ðv’Üxgk±r timÄr sjopi°r t±r to³ mo³ heyqÊar: 105 As far as the height of Alexandria’s wondrous lighthouse tower was concerned, it was still found astonishing in the fourth century by Ausonius, teacher and lawyer of Burdìgala (Bordeaux), who compared the view that one could see from it to that seen from a mountain top:

His misunderstanding is due to the fact that the lighthouse was seriously damaged during the civil war in Alexandria and was subsequently restored by Cleopatra. We also know from Julius Capitolinus, one of the authors of the Historia Augusta, that the tower was once more restored by Antoninus Pius.102 Dionysius of Byzantium, a geographer of the second or, more likely, fourth century AD gives a detailed account in his treatise De Bosphori navigatione of a “famous” lighthouse standing at the mouth of the river Crishorreas, that flowed into the Thracian Bosphorus. This may have been the lighthouse mentioned by the famous traveller Castorius, located by Peutinger near Chrysopolis (Üsküdar) on the Anatolian peninsular across the strait from Constantinopole.103 The original text is lost, but a translation exists by Pietro Gilles quoted by Montfaucon:

compensa celsi bona naturalia montis...ostentans altam, Pharos ut Memphitica, turrim 106 Lastly, in this survey of fourth century authors, comes Synesius of Cirene who speaks in a letter (“Shipwreck”) describing a voyage from Alexandria to Cyrene107 of a certain harbour called Azarium in Cyrenaica near to which there is a cape called Formica del Faro. It is evident that must have been a tower here. Other evidence on the significance of Pharos can be found in a number of fifth-century poems. One example of these is found in the work of Sidonius Apollinaris. Later bishop of Arvernia (now Clermont-Ferrand), Sidonius was born in Lyons, and thus a member of the Gallo-Roman nobility. In one of his panegyrics he says:

Sopra la cima della collina, ƒcrive eſſo, appiè della quale corre il Criƒorrheas corgeƒi la Torre Timea di maraviglioƒa altezza, dalla quale ƒcopreſi un largo tratto di mare, fabbricata per guida di coloro, che navigano, accendendo fuochi nella cima di eƒƒa, che fervono di ƒcorta alle navi; coƒa tanto più neceſſaria quanto che entrambe le ƒponde di queƒto Mare non han Porti, e che le ancore non poƒƒono ƒigerƒi, e rimaner ferme nel fondo. Ma i Barbari circonvicini accendono altri fuochi ne’ luoghi più alti delle ƒpiagge, per ingannare i marinaj

104

Dion. Byzan. in Petr. Gill. de Bofsh. Thrac. lib. 2 cap. 21 in MONTFAUCON 1749, pp. VIII-IX: “On the top of the hill, he writes, at the foot of which flows the Crishorreas, one can see the Tower of Timaeus, of an admirable height and from which one can see a wide expanse of sea, erected for those that sail the seas, lighting fires on its summit in order to guide the ships; something that is made all the more necessary by the fact that the shores of this sea are without ports and anchors cannot be attached firmly to the seabed. But the Barbarians in the surrounding area light other fires in high places overlooking the beaches to deceive the sailors and derive benefit from their shipwrecks when, guided by these false signals, they run onto the rocks. Now however, the author adds, the Tower is partly ruined and no one will place a light in it”. Trans. C. Higgitt; RENARD 1867, p. 6. The story is very similar to that of Nauplius and Palamedes. 105 St Basil, LXXXII: “And you see [...] looking from some tall watch tower....”, ed. H. Wace, Trans. P. Schaff, Christian Classics Etherial Library (internet). 106 Auson. Book X Mosella, 330: “....makes up the natural advantage of a mountain’s height.[...].displaying like Memphian Pharos, its lofty tower”. Trans H. G. Evelyn-White, Internet Archive. 107 Synes. epist. IV, 1-3. There has been much discussion about the port mentioned by Synesius. Some scholars believe it is the same place as that mentioned in Hdt. IV, 157. If that is correct, it would be Wadi-elChalig, not far from Bomba (al-Bumbah), in Marmarica. In that case, the ship would have sailed some 700km from Alexandria with about another 80km to go to reach Apollonia, the port of Cyrene,so this would be a lighthouse standing somewhere between these two places but not the lighthouse at Apollonia. We can hypothesise that there was a port between Tobruk and Derna. Similarly, it is not clear what lighthouse is meant by Formica del Faro, though it might possibly be that referred to by Ptol. IV, 4,15 in the sea off Cyrenaica.

100 Herodian. IV, 8: “The building may be compared in shape to the lighthouses along the coast which by the light of their fires bring to safety ships in distress at night. The common name for such a lighthouse is Pharos”. Trans. E. C. Echols (Herodian of Antioch's History of the Roman Empire, 1961 Berkeley and Los Angeles), put online by R. Pearse (Tertullian.Org). The mosaic of the navicularii lignarii (station no. 3) in the Square of the Corporations at Ostia Antica provides a perfect illustration of Herodian’s words. 101 Amm. XXII, 16, 9: “The shore is shifty and dangerous; and as in former times it exposed sailors to many dangers, Cleopatra erected a lofty tower in the harbour, which was named Pharos, from the spot on which it was built, and which afforded light to vessels by night.” Trans. Charles Duke Yonge, Tertullian Project (internet). 102 H.A. VIII, 8, 3. According to some scholars, including Daremberg and Saglio, the lighthouse restored by Antoninus was in fact the lighthouse at Caieta (Gaeta), although there is no mention this in the sources. This conclusion may have been arrived at because Julius Capitolinus mentions immediately after speaking of Alexandria that Antoninus had also restored the port of Gaeta. 103 BOSIO 1983, p. 114.

17

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA faucibus artatis pandit utrumque latus 111

...Vidit te frangere Leucas, trux Auguste, Pharon, dum classicus Actia miles stagna quatit profugisque bibax Antonius armis incestam uacuat patrio Ptolemaida regno 108

The appearance of the port of Civitavecchia is also known through the eighteenth- and nineteenth-century prints by Arnaldo Massarelli.112 It had two curving moles embracing a sizeable harbour, the water amphitheatre described by Namazianus. At the end of each of the two moles was a tower. These may have been the turres geminae mentioned by the poet, but the artist shows them on an artifical island that can probably be understood as the so-called Trajan outer walls, on which stood another tower and the lighthouse.113

In the fifth century, Orosius, author of Historiarum adversus paganos libri septem, states that the lighthouse at Brigantium, still in use today at La Coruña in Galicia, was the only work worthy of note made by pagans: Secundus angulus circium intendit; ubi Brigantia Gallaeciae civitas sita altissimam pharum et inter pauca memorandi operis ad speculam Britannia erigit 109

Also dating from the Byzantine period is the so-called Anthologia Palatina. This vast collection of Greek epigrams in fifteen books is based on three collections of works by poets from 70 BC to 40 BC and from the sixth century AD. In Book IX of this collection, two anonymous writers mention two different lighthouses, one at Smyrna and the other at Alexandria:

The fifth-century Gallic poet, Rutilius Namazianus, author of a short poem with the title De Redito suo that seeks to extoll the past glories of Roman power, undertook a sea voyage through the areas newly devastated by the Visigoths. The journey, from Rome to Gaul, was made by sea on account of the collapsed bridges and destroyed roads. He inevitably called in at many ports and, of the ancient city of Populonia, he writes:

-TÊr tËsom ñqcom ñmteune; tÊr Ù pËkir é tÄ cÈqar tÊ; -’AlbqËsior LukaseÅr tÄm vÇqom ÐmhÌpator. 114

LgjÈti deilaÊmomter ÐveccÈa mujtÄr ÛlÊwkgm eÓr ÑlÁ haqsakÈyr pkÍete, pomtopËqoi: p°sim ÐkyolÈmoir tgkaucÈa dakÄm ÐmÇpty, t´m ’Asjkgpiad´m lmglosÌmgm jalÇtym115

proxima securum reserat Populonia litus, qua naturalem ducit in arva sinum. non illic positas extollit in aethera moles lumine nocturno conspicienda Pharos; sed speculam validae rupis sortita vetustas, qua fluctus domitos arduus urget apex, castellum geminos hominum fundavit in usus, praesidium terris indiciumque fretis 110

Pìqcor ÑcÆ maÌt\sim ÐkyolÈmoisim ÐqÉcym eÓlÊ PoseidÇymor ÐpemhÈa puqsÄm ÐmÇptym 116 Another author in the Anthologia Palatina, Antipatro di Tessalonica, repeats the story of Hero and Leander:

It would appear then that, at Populonia, perhaps as early as the Etruscan period, there was a castle on the shore that had the dual function of coastal watch tower and lighthouse. The same author also mentions twin towers at the entrance to the port of Centumcellae (Civitavecchia):

O¾tor Û KeiÇmdqoio diÇpkoor, o¾tor Û pËmtou poqhlÄr Û l loÌmz t© vikÈomti baqÌr: ta³h’ ‚Gqo³r tÀ pÇqoihem ÑpaÌkia, to³to tÄ pÌqcou keÊxamom: Û pqodËtgr ¿d’ÑpÈjeito kÌwmor117 111 Rut. Nam., 236-242: “ Towards Centocelle we changed tack before a strong wind: our ships found moorings in a calm anchorage. There, there is an amphitheatre of water surrounded by moles, an artifical island protects the narrow entrances; two twin towers rise up on the island which extends in both directions so as to allow ships to approach from both sides through the narrow canals. Trans. C. Higgitt. 112 See No. 61. 113 DOLGETTA-CARUSO 2001 p. 3-4 114 Anth. Pal. IX 671: “Who made such a work? What was his task? What his father land?/Of Ambrosius is the lighthouse, Milasean proconsul”. Trans. C. Higgitt after ed. Einaudi, Turin 1980. “Milasean” is the adjective from Milasa, in Caria, and so the lighthouse must be that at Smyrna. 115 Anth. Pal. IX 675: “No longer dreading the rayless night-mist, sail towards me, confidently, O seafarers; for all wanderers I light my farshining torch, memorial of the labours of the Asclepiada”. Trans. C. Higgitt after ed. Einaudi Turin 1980. Here again, it is the lighthouse at Smyrna speaking. 116 Anth. Pal. IX 674: “I am a tower, I bring aid to wandering sailors, by lighting the rescuing fire of the god Poseidon”. Trans C. Higgitt after ed. Einaudi, Turin 1980. We know that this refers to the lighthouse at Alexandria because the famous monument was rebuilt, possibly under Anastasius, by an eminent patrician with the title of “father of the emperor”. 117 Anth. Pal. VII. 666: “This is the crossing of Leander, this the strait that was fatal not only to the lover. Here is the house of Hero and the tower – what remains of it. Here she placed the deceitful lamp”. Trans. C. Higgitt after ed. Einaudi, Turin 1979. From Antipater’s brief

ad Centumcellae defleximus Austro: tranquilla puppes in statione sedent. molibus aequoreum concluditur amphiteatrum, angustosque aditus insula facta tegit; attollit geminas turres bifidoque meatu 108

Sidon. VII 93-95 : “Lefkada saw you, o ferocious Augustus, destroy the the power of Pharos, when the soldiers of your fleet brought havoc to the waters of Azio and, because of the defeat of his army, Antonius, the drunkard, stole the incestuous Ptolemy [Cleopatra] from the kingdom of her fathers”. Trans. C. Higgitt after A.Loyen , ed. Les Belles Lettres, Paris 1960. 109 Oros. I, 2, 71: “The second corner looks to the north-west: here stands Brigantia, a city in Galicia, where an observatory rises up looking towards Britannia, a very high lighthouse, one of the few manmade works worthy of note”. Trans. C. Higgitt after A.Bertalucci, ed. Valla, Verona 1976. 110 Rut. Nam. 400-709: “Extending near the branch of Populonia is its secure beach that describes a beautiful natural bay in the hinterland. No massive lighthouse rising up to the sky with its nocturnal lamp has been built, but, many years ago, people found a large rock that could serve as a lookout place, where the turreted top of the hill against which the tamed waves broke, was situated on the foundations of a castle with the dual function for them as a land defence and as a lighthouse”. Trans. C. Higgitt.

18

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES In the sixth century, the scholar Musaeus wrote a poem devoted to the tragic story of the young lovers. He gives the following advice to travellers passing through Sestos:

centurian Julius Curtius, while there are no phrases speaking specifically about lighthouses, there is a reference to a light that is mentioned as being about twenty stadia from the coast of the island of Malta. This may correspond to the tower known today as St Paul’s Bay Tower and it may have been used as a lighthouse.121 This is clearly the site of San Pawl Milqi, near where St Paul’s villa and other buildings from the Roman period including a tower and two cisterns have been discovered.122

....sÅ d’eó pote je²hi peqÉseir, dÊfeË loÊ tima pÌqcom, ëp\ potÁ SgstiÀr ‚GqÆ êstato, kÌwmom ñwousa, jaÃ

ÙcelËmeue KeÇmdqz118

A remarkable reference to a lighthouse, known as the Zeuxippo lighthouse, built by Emperor Justinian II (565578) near the western shore of Constantinople is found in the work of John of Ephesus (sixth century AD).119 This gigantic construction with an internal stair allowing access up to the lantern, had an inscription boasting of its height and the efforts of the builders in carrying it out. On his deathbed, Justinian decreed that the work should be completed, a task that fell to his his wife Sophia and his successor Tiberius. Tiberius being unwilling to take it on, it was Sophia who finished work on the huge edifice. As was traditional with lighthouses, she planned to place a statue of Justininan on the uppermost level floor in recognition of his initiation of the project. Tiberius declared himself opposed to this, so Sophia told him to see to the matter himself. The infuriated Tiberius, seeing that the bricks used to make the lighthouse were the same as those used in the imperial palace, decided to demolish the lighthouse use the bricks to enlarge the palace.

Avienus’ Ora Maritima (fourth century AD) is a valuable document providing information about the size and suitibility of ports, but it never specifically mentions lighthouses, even if we can conjecture that in every wellequipped port there was one or more lighthouse-like structures.123It seems probable, too, from Avienus’ words that many of the ports had fallen into disuse, which is why he often takes as reference points not towers but temples standing on the tops of rocky spurs or mountain peaks, accurately recording when they are visible and when constantly obscured by clouds. Examples are Monte Argentario near Gadir (Cadiz), the peak of which was alway lit up by the sun, or the mountain consacrated to Zephir near the River Tartessos close to the island of Petanio, identifiabile as one of the peaks of the Algarve Sierra, the peak of which, called Zeferide, was always immersed in cloud.124 Another important document, revised between the fifth and sixth century AD, is the Itinerarium Maritimum125 that, as well as listing various voyages including the journey from Corinth to Carthage via Sicily and the coastal route from Rome to Arelate (Arles), helpfully provides a list of ports and their names although without giving a detailed description. An anonymous author writing in around 600/700 AD, was responsible for the Ravenna Cosmography, divided into five books and seemingly based in a fourth-century map; unfortunately, the distances of the voyages are not provided126.

Passing references to the lighthouse at Alexandria continued to appear in learned writings in the sixth and seventh centuries. In the Etymologiarum sive Originum, Bishop Isidore of Seville (sixth-seventh century) says: Farum turris est maxima quam Graeci ac Latini in commune ex ipsius rei usu farum appellaverunt, eo quod flammarum indicio longe videatur a navigantibus, qualem Ptolomaeus iuxta Alexandriam construisse octingentis talentis traditur 120 Itineraries, medieval and modern sources and studies

In the Middle Ages, Konrad Peutinger, a patrician from Ausgburg, produced what is today known as the Tabula Peutingeriana.127 This work, based on a Roman original of the fifth century AD, is very useful (but sometimes misleading) for its descriptions of various monuments including the lighthouses at Ostia, Alexandria, Fossa Marianae, Brigantium, Chrysopolis and possibly also Constantinopole and Aquileia).128

The sea voyages in Phoenicia and Greece made by Pytheas of Marseille, the Pseudo-Scylax of Carianda, Hanno the Carthaginian and others have already been alluded to, as has the curious fact that lighthouses are never explicitly mentioned. It is possible that whenever the word puqcoÊ was used in geographical spots appropriate for lighthouses, the meaning may have embraced that of ‘lighthouse’. In the account of the journey of St Paul (first century AD) given by the

There are a large number of medieval navigation manuals, reworkings of older Greek works where we find

comment, it would appear that, at the time he was writing, Hero’s Tower at Sestos in Asia Minor was already ruined. 118 Mus. 23-25: “..if ever you pass that way, seek out the Tower of Sestos where Hero held up her lamp to guide Leander...”, Trans. C. Higgitt after G. Paduano, ed. Marsilio, Venezia 1994. 119 John of Ephesus, Eccles. Hist. III, 24 in Mango 1986 pp. 125-126 120 Isid. orig., XV, ii, 37-40: “The greatest was the tower of Pharos which is why both the Greeks and the Romans called those buildings that had the same function by the same name, “pharos”. The signal of its flame, it appears, could be seen from afar by sailors, and it is said that, to build it near Alexandria, Ptolemy spent eight hundred talents”. Trans. C. Higgitt.

121

FRANK 1961, pp. 87; 127. See further BRUNO 2004, pp. 122-130. Many sources speak of the well-furnished ports in Malta and the surrounding islands. It is likely, therefore, that there were one or more lighthouse towers in the vicinity. 123 For the Ora Maritima see ANTONELLI 1998; for the Itinerarium Antonini, referring chiefly to military camps, see CALZOLARI 1996. 124 Avienus, Ora Maritima, 199-222. 125 CUNTZ, 1929. 126 PINDER-PARTHEY 1860, pp. 447-556. 127 MILLER 1962, BOSIO 1983. 128 BOSIO 1983 is still essential reading on this subject. 122

19

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA are able to withstand the effects of the sea thanks to a powder that becmes solid on contact with water.135

the words PÌqcom or jÇbo dÁ VÇqo, particularly in Greece, Turkey and Africa.129 Dating from the tenth century AD is the famous Navigatio Sancti Brendani Abbatis written by an anonymous author and describing the voyage of the Irish abbot, St Brendan. In Chapter XXI he speaks of a mythical pillar of great height standing in the sea, wrapped round with a net, as a symbol of the support and axis of the world.130 The first three books of Guidonis’s Liber Guidonis de varii historiis, dating from around 1109, draws on a number of itineraries around the Mediterranean from Roman times. Another writer who provides valuable information is the Arab traveller alIdrisi. His Kitab Rudjdjar or Tabula Rogeriana131 of c. 1180 contains first-hand descriptions of both Italy and Spain. In 1187, Abū al-Haggāg Yūsuf Ibn Muhammad alBalawi al-Andalusī, travelling to Alexandria, was to leave one of the most detailed descriptions of the city’s famous lighthouse and one that was to be the basis of subsequent hypothetical reconstructions.132 A large number of eleventh- and twelfth-century Arab travellers have left detailed information about lighthouses they saw. One of these is al-Qazwīnī (1203-1283) who speaks of the lighthouse at Cadiz (see No. 71) which he describes as a cube-shaped block of marble surmounted by a similar block, a third its size. On top of this was a triangular pyramid on the point of which was a statue of a bearded man wearing a gilded cloak. His left hand pointed towards the Pillars of Hercules – the Straits of Gibraltar – and in the right hand was a key. This description has been lifted almost unchanged from an account by his predecessor al-Zuhrī, the only difference being that the right hand held a stick rather than a key.133

Flavio Biondo’s fifteenth-century Italia Illustrata 136 is still useful today for its information about the port area serving Rome. In the same century, Pius II Piccolomini, pope from 1458 to 1464, while on an archaeological trip, described the ruins of the port of Ostia, noting that amongst other things to be seen was the famous lighthouse built by Claudius.137 A mid-fifteenth-century Descrittione d’Italia by the Bolognese author Leandro Alberti and tapestries woven with geographical maps are now in the Vatican Museums in Rome, in the room that leads from Raphael’s Stanze to the Sistine Chapel. Another essential work, particularly in relation to Ostia, of the same century is Pirro Ligorio’s Libro delle Antichità di Roma. Dating from the end of the fifteenth century, valuable information has been left by the Venetian traveller Gioseppe Rosaccio,138 with details of the voyage from Venice to Constantinopole illustrated with maps, the last of which marks the lighthouse at Scutari (Leander’s Tower). The list of itineraries and navigation manuals dating from the fifteenth to the nineteenth century is too long for detailed description. One that particularly deserves mention, however, is Filppo Geraci’s seventeenth-century navigation guide for Scily, where the Roman lighthouse at Messina has been replaced by the Lanterna San Ranieri. His description of the latter is, however, not very different from other descriptions of lighthouses found in ancient and medieval writers: “...and then comes the Lantern which contains a constantly lit light, and which is of great usefulness to sailors, and for which reason the said lantern is built entirely of carved stone at great expense...”.139 One thinks immediately of Pliny’s description of the utility and great cost of the lighthouse at Alexandria.

Gerald of Wales or Giraldus Cambrense’s mid-twelfthcentury Description of Ireland (Topographia Hiberniae /Topography of Ireland”) does not mention any lighthouses but does talk of the miraculous inextinguishable fire at Kildare kept constantly alight by Brigid and her nuns.134

Studies of lighthouses A fundamental work on lighthouses, that may be considered as the first monograph, is Bernardo di Montfaucon’s Dissertazione sopra il Faro di Alessandria, sopra gli altri Fari fabbricati dopo, e particolarmente fopra quello di Bologna in Francia, rovinato già ott’anni circa, published in 1749. It contains many inaccuracies, including the theory that the form of the lighthouse at Alexandria was based on the Tower of Babel, which is to say a stepped, circular structure, probably based in the engravings of 1580 by Philippe Galle. Nevertheless, this work is an essential point of departure for anyone investigating the history of lighthouses. More recent studies include Les Phares, published in 1867, by Leon Renard, librarian in the archives of the French navy.140 Useful for an initial

From the twelfth century, the lighthouse at Alexandria was one of the most favoured destinations for Arab travellers who often described it. The famous Arab traveller Ibn Battūta has left us a splendid description, although in 1326 when he was writing the tower had already fallen into ruins (No. 8). A fascinating mention is found in Chapter 30 of Magister Gregorius’ twefthcentury De mirabilibus urbis Romae where the Alexandria lighthouse is described as having its foundations in the sea resting on four crystal hooks that

129

DELATTE 1947, pp. 212; 233; 304. PERCIVALDI 2008, p. 206. 131 AMARI-SCHIAPPARELLI 1883. 132 EMPEREUR 1998 p. 104. 133 See ARIOLI 1989, p. 181 134 CATALDI 2002, pp. 71-72. It is obvious that this is not a lighthouse, but Giraldus is clear that, thanks to the efforts of the nuns, the flame was always visible, even in the day, making his description an imporant point of reference. 130

135

MIGLIO 1999, p.113. The paragraph on Alexandria has no connection with Rome, unless it is intended to suggest a comparision between the lighthouse at Ostia and that in Alexandria. 136 FLAVIO 1558. 137 CIALDI 1877, p. 310. 138 ROSACCIO 1598. 139 PEDONE 1987, p. 63 140 RENARD 1867.

20

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES survey of the subject, this work nevertheless contains many inaccuracies as well as statements unsuppored by references.

arrival. Thiersch expanded on the subject in 1915 in his article ‘Griechische Leuchtfeuer’, pubished in the Annuario dell’Istituto Germanico in Rome.149 This long article is particularly useful when read in conjunction with Veitmeyer’s study. There are no more monographs devoted exclusively to lighthouses; subsequent studies of engineering in Antiquity or marine archaeology devote not more than a few sentences to the subject. It was not until the 1940s and 50s that a number of authors dedicated short chapters to lighthouses and descriptions of ports. In 1959, an interesting article by Sandro Stucchi appeared in the journal Aquileia Nostra with the title ‘Fari, Campanili e Mausolei’, an article that to some extent continues the work done by Thiersch.150 A long dissertation on lighthouses, including those in the Roman provinciae, was partially tackled in 1968 in Maria Bollini’s Antichità Classiarie.151 It was not until 1979 that the first discussion of an icongraphic nature appeared. This was Michel Reddé’s article ‘La Représentation de Phares à l’époque romaine’ published in the journal of the Ecole Français, Mélanges.152 In the first half of the 1980s there was a flurry of monographs on the history of lighthouses, with particular reference ot those still in existence today. I will confine myself here to mentioning only the study by Camillo Manfredini and Antonio Walter Pescara153 of Italian lighthouses which appeared in 1985. A good article, ‘Les Phares antiques’, by Robert Bedon appeared in 1988 in the journal Archeologia,154 but it is not more than a few pages long.

Dating from 1887, we have Cialdi’s Cenni storici141 which discusses a large number of lighthouses from that at Alexandria to the nineteenth-century Bell Rock in Scotland. Also dating from the nineteenth century is the work of H.Maionica and Pietro Kandler. Paying particular attention to Augustus’ Tenth Region, Venetia and Histria, the former’s research concentrates on Aquileia while the latter, who was the imperial cartographer under the Hapsburgs, investigated both Aquileia and Trieste.142 Since there are many writers and travellers such as these, all equally deserving of mention, the reader is asked to refer to the relevant lists for each lighthouse. In 1899, E. Allard published Les Phares, a long dissertation on lighthouses in Antiquity. Today it can be found included in the 1979 reedition of the work of the French engineer by Alfred Leger, Les Travaux Publics, les Mines et la Métallurgie aux temps des Romains, la tradition romain jusqu’a nos jours,143 where there is a whole chapter on lighthouses and well as another one on ports. Other essential studies dating from the late nineteenth century are H.Nissen’s Italienische Landeskunde144 and Julius Beloch’s Campanien, Geschichte und Topographie des antiken Neapel und seinen Umgebung,145 the latter dealing particularly with Campania. A study that cannot be omitted from mention is that from the beginning of the twentieth century (1900) by the German engineer L.A.Veitmeyer, Leuchtfeuer und Leuchtapparate.146 Veitmeyer describes not only lighthouses of Antiquity but also the building techniques used at that time. The Dictionnaire des antiquités grecques et romaines d’apres les textes et les monuments147 by C. Daremberg, E. Saglio, E. Pottier and G. Lafaye, published in 1906, has been very useful. In 1909, the eminent German scholar Hermann Thiersch, published Pharos, Antike, Islam und Occident, a work that today can be regarded as the most important monograph on the famous lighthouse at Alexandria and which came about as a result of a journey to Egypt made with his father in 1893 with an excursion to Alexandria to visit the old lighthouse at Abousir.148 Not only does Thiersch provide an in-depth analysis of the lighthouse, his reconstruction of which is still regarded today as the most convincing, he also considers its evolution in the fortress of Qait-bay and the influence exercised by its architecture on other buildings of the same type, on minarets and on bell towers. This work can still be seen today as an essential point of departure and

Other good studies are that of 1998 by Günter Grimm, Alexandria, die erste Königstadt der hellenistichen Welt,155 althugh he devotes no more than a short chapter to the lighthouse at Alexandria, and the monograph by Jean-Yves Empereuer, Le phare d’Alexandrie, la Merveille retrouvée,156 also published in 1998. Most recently, there is the work published in 1999 by Marina Pensa, Moli, Fari e Pescatori.157 This study is, however, mainly concerned with the iconographic aspect of the subject, following on from her earlier article ‘Alcune considerazioni sulle immagini di porti nella documentazione numismatica’ published in the Rivista Italiana di Numismatica. Finally, mention should be made of the long article ‘Fari del litorale e torri costiere: il linguaggio semaforico’, by Celeste Spinelli, published in 1996 in Adriatico, Genti e Civiltà,158 where much is included about lighthouses both old (nineeteenth-century) and new. Thus, it can be seen that, since 1900, or at least since the work of Veitmeyer, there has been no proper monograph on the subject of lighthouses in Antiquity. Since that date, only relatively short articles have

141

149

142

150

CIALDI 1877. BUORA 2000; an interesting discovery mentioned in this work is on p. 45 where Maionica discusses some metal mirrors (ustori) found in the area near the river Natisone. For Kandler see ZORZON 1989. 143 ALLARD 1979. 144 NISSEN 1883-1902. 145 BELOCH 1890. 146 VEITMEYER 1900. 147 DICTIONNAIRE 1906. 148 THIERSCH 1909.

THIERSCH 1915. STUCCHI 1959, pp. 15-29 BOLLINI 1968. 152 REDDE’ 1979, pp.845-872. 153 MANFREDINI-PESCARA 1985. 154 BEDON 1988, pp. 54-68. 155 GRIMM 1998 p.42. 156 EMPEREUER 1999. 157 PENSA 1998, PENSA 1999. 158 SPINELLI 1996, pp. 569-603. 151

21

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA depth but without going into much detail.166 Mariotti167 and others have long been interested in lighthouses, but relegate the history of these extraordinary sea giants to second place. Here too, the list of names would be very long so the reader is asked to refer to the bibliography and relevant lists.

appeared, many of which are more concerned not so much with the architecture and functioning of lighthouses as with the iconographic aspect. An exception is the fine work by Douglas B.Hague and Rosemary Christie of 1975, Lighthouses, their Archaeology, History and Architecture, where a number of ancient lighthouses are discussed, often in relation to that at Dover, and possible sites are suggested where Roman lighthouses may have existed, including Merinum, near Vieste or Zara.159 A number of monographs have apppeared, by contrast, that deal with single lighthouses, particularly that at Alexandria. Hauschild160 and Hütter161 have written on the Tower of Hercules at Brigantium, while the young scholar Stefano Franzot published his Aquileia ed altri porti romani in 1999,162 a work dedicated almost exclusively to, the Tenth Region, Venetia et Histria. It is clear that a new look at a subject as fascinating as the use of lighthouses in Antiquity is overdue. Although excellent, the studies by Thiersch e Veitmeyer are now, as has been indicated, out-of-date, particularly since some lighthouse structures, including, for example, that at Forum Iulii (Fréjus), that they were able to examine while still partially standing are today in a much worse state. Some are no longer accessible, being in military zones, while some representations of lighthouses are today no longer visible or have been moved. In the last three years, I have attempted a reevalation of the extant material, initially as part of my Tesi di Specializzazione in Archeologia carried out under the scientific supervision of Professor Lorenzo Quilici with the title Il Faro nel mondo antico: testimonianze letterarie, iconografiche ed archeologiche (2005) and then with the publication of two articles, the first of which, ‘Il faro nel mondo antico: aggiornamenti e nuovi dati’ appeared in Orizzonti, the second, ‘La rappresentazione del faro nelle emissioni numismatiche del mondo antico’, in the Rivista Italiana di Numismatica, both in 2007. After a brief historical introduction, in her beautiful book Luci del Mediterraneo, i fari di Calabria e Sicilia of 2002 Francesca Fatta analyses one by one all the lighthouses still in existence on the coasts of Sicily and Calabria, making use also of drawings, surveys and old maps.163 In 1999, Ebbe Almquvist et al published Lighthouses of the World: A History of Where Land Meets Sea, a schematic but interesting book both from the historical and the technical point of view.164 2005 saw the publication of a very interesting book by Cristiana Bartolomei with the title L’architettura dei fari italiani.165 Her discussion of on the architecture of modern Italian lighthouses includes a brief description, based more on Reniassance theories than historical sources, of ancient lighthouses. In the same year, a very similar book, by Enrica Simonetti, appeared called Luci ed eclissi sul mare, Fari d’Italia. This examines the history of lighthouses in a little more

Illustrated with photographs, often taken in situ, the present book, Navigare necesse est. Il faro tra mondo antico e Medioevo: storia, architettura, iconografia ed evidenze archeologiche was born as a result of reseach initiated for my doctoral thesis. It aspires to be the most definitive and complete corpus of the lighthouses of the ancient world known to us from literary documents, iconographic images and archaeological evidence.

Ostia, Baths of the Lighthouse, mosaic depicting a lighthouse, in BOLLINI 1968, fig. 17

159

HAGUE/CHRISTIE 1975. HÜTTER-HAUSCHILD 1991. HÜTTER 1973. 162 FRANZOT 1999. 163 FATTA 2002. 164 ALMQVIST/CEDERBERG/HILLBERG/THUNMAN 1999. 165 BARTOLOMEI 2005. 160 161

166 167

22

SIMONETTI 2005. MARIOTTI 2006, COSI/REPOSSI 2008.

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES also ‘minaret’ (literally ‘place of light’), the word being derived from the verb nāra meaning “to make light”.172

CHAPTER 3 Devolpment of the lighthouse: architecture, materials and costruction techniques

Architecture: even before the architectural form had been perfected, towers had been constructed, leading us to suppose that where the sources speak of a πύργος, standing in a strategic position by the sea or a river, it must have referred to a lighthouse, signal tower or something very similar. It would have soon become apparent that the beam from structures of only modest dimensions could not be seen from very far away. Thus it was that Sostratus of Cnidos invented the design of a structure with floors that become smaller as they go up, the last level always being cylindrical and topped by a cupola on which a statue could be placed. This final level was supported by columns and open on all sides so that the light of the lantern could be seen from any direction. It is not definitely known whether use was made of the specchi ustori invented by Archimedes, but it is unlikely that the light produced by the combustible material (wood, bitumen, oil or animal and vegetable fibres) placed in the centre of the top storey was increased by the use of a series of mirrors placed around the fire and rotated by slaves. If such a system was employed, however, more than one attendant would have been required on the top floor. Epigraphical evidence is scare, although an inscription from Alexandria (No. 8) seems innovative in assigning the responsibility for the building to a single person.173

Origins: Although, architecturally speaking, the lighthouse at Alexandria can be described as the first genuine lighthouse, it is difficult – contrary to the generally held view – to pinpoint an exact date for the birth of such structures. The Alexandria lighthouse possessed all the attributes of a modern lighthouse: living accommodation for soldiers and the keeper of the lighthouse, a height great enough to allow it to be seen from a distance even by day, and internal stairs enabling people and animals to climb up to the level of the lantern. Its architectural form appears to have been the model for the succeeding structures that took the same name, pharos. It would appear, however, that the towers at Jelsa-Tor in Croatia (No. 32), Thasos in Greece (No. 28) and Nora in Sardinia (No. 49), dating from a good three centuries earlier, had a similar function. It is reasonable to suppose that they represent the link between the beacon fires lit on mountain tops described by Homer and those edifices given the name of pharos. If we are to credit what Philostratus recounts about Palamedes in his Heroicus,168 it seems also that the first lighthouses (simple beacons lit on promontories) came about with the opposite intention of later lighthouses: not to guide sailors into to harbour but rather to deceive them, luring them to their deaths, just as the Plataese did during the Peloponnesian War.169

The lighthouse at Alexandria had one rectangular storey, one octagonal and one cylindrical. It appears that this sequence was always respected if the lighthouse-towers commissioned by Herod at Caesarea Maritima (No. 10), the lighthouse-tomb of Taposiris Magna (No. 7), Chrysopolis (No. 24) and that built by Tiberius for his Villa Iovis on Capri (No. 53) fully reflected the original at Alexandria. We know that Caligula, on the other hand, celebrated his so-called victory over the Bretons by erecting a tower, the Gesoriacum (No. 75), that was, except for its function, entirely different from that in Alexandria. Caligula’s tower was, however, to be the inspiration for later towers including that built by Claudius at Dubris (No. 76). It had twelve octagonal storeys diminishing in size as they went up, ending in a final cylindrical storey, while the later versions were similar but with only eight storeys. The tradition of placing a statue – generally held have been of Posiedon – seems to have fallen into disuse with time. A possible explanation would be that the extra weight of such an ornament on such a high structure, combined with the difficulty in maintaining a sculpture constantly exposed

Etymology and semantics: The term VaqËr first appears in Egypt in the third century BC during the Ptolemaic period and comes from that of the island connected to Alexandria by the Heptastadion. Before this date, lighthouse-towers were called PuqcoÊ, from the root pÌq- meaning ‘fire’. It would seem reasonable to suppose that toponyms such as Pyrranhum (No. 35) refer to the existence at one time of a lighthouse or beacon in that spot. This type of tower became known in Latin as pharus from the second century AD when Statius compares the light from the lighthouse at Capri to that of the moon. Before that time, the term used was turris. Caesar writes: Pharus est in insula turris magna altitudine, while Pliny says turris a rege facta in insula Pharo. In late Antiquity there is a slight change in the word, from pharus to farus, as can be seen in the writings of Isidore of Seville.170 In Hebrew migdal is “a house standing in the middle of a public highway or a kind of tower, three sides of which are in the sea while one is on the dry land. Some compare it to the column-tower of Alexandria in Egypt and the Greeks call it pharon”.171 Lastly, in Arabic manāra means ‘tower’, ‘lighthouse’ and 168

Philostr. Imag. 47. The legend of Nauplio, son of Posiedon, is also found in Apollod. II, 1. 169 Tuc. XXI, 7 where fires were lit on the walls of Thebes and, at the same time, those of Platea to confuse the enemy. 170 Stat. silv. III, 100-101; Caes. civ. III, 112, Plin. nat. XXXVI, 83; Isid. orig. XV, ii, 37-40. 171 SPERBER 1986, p. 148, «Magdala» in Der Kleine Pauly, III, Iuppiter bis Nasidienus, Stuttgart 1949.

172

I am grateful to my friend and colleague Giuseppe Mandalà for assistance with the Arabic terms. It is perhaps because of this semantic link [that, from the early twentieth century, the theory that minarets were constructed on the ruins of ancient Roman lighthouses. 173 C.I.L. VI, 8582, ILS 1576, FRANZOT 1999, p. 71 mentions specifically an procurator fari Alexandriae ad Aegyptum.

23

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

Fig. 12: From left to right, details of the windows of the Messana lighthouses on coins from the time of Sestus Pompeus; Nèa Paphos in the relief now in the Museo della Città; Dubris according to the drawing by Wheeler; Ostia in the Torlonia relief.

Fig. 13: From left to right, the cupola of the lighthouse of Colonna Traiana, on a coin from Laodicea in Syria, in the fresco from the Casa dei Vettii in Pompeii showing the tower of Sextus and in a mosaic from the time of Claudian with an imaginary harbour scene. Torres (No. 74). There is also evidence of lighthouses with round plans in some areas, though these seem to have been more towers than true lighthouses, although with lanterns for signalling, examples being Centumcellae (No. 61) or Vada Sabatia (Bergeggi, No. 66). More typical of true lighthouses was the form with storeys consisting of diminishing cylinders, a type common in the middle east: Apamea in Syria (No. 12), Laodicea ad Mare (No. 13), Heraclea Pontica (No. 25), Aigai (No. 15), Perga (No. 16), Side (No. 17), Caesarea Germanica (No. 26), Abydos (No. 23), and, in Italy, Messana (No. 47) and Panormus (No. 48). River mouths are almost always provided with lighthouse-towers with the combined function of customs house and guide for ships in foggy weather; those studied so far stand in lagoon areas: Fos-sur-mer in the Bouches du Rhône (No. 68), Canale S.Felice, Cà Ballarin and Lio Piccolo in the

to sea breezes and salt corrosion, would have been seen to pose a threat to the stability of the whole construction. The answer may have been to discontinue the addition of such statues or, in some cases, to place the statue on a pedestal near the lighthouse, as happened at Ostia (No. 60), or on a triumphal arch near the mole as may have been the arrangement at Ancona (No. 45) or Puteoli (No. 55). The octagonal form for lighthouses seems to have been typical not only of those in cities that were Celtic in origin (Narbo Martius, Dubris, Gesoriacum) but also on the islands, as, for example, Igilum (No. 63) and Dianum Artemisium (No. 62). If contemporary images are to be trusted, however, there seems also to have been a rectangular form that was found in several parts of the ancient world: Leptis Magna (No. 4), Sabratha (No. 3), Cosa (No. 64), Ariminum (No. 44), Capo Atheneum (No. 52), Magdala (No. 11), Brigantium (No. 73), Campa 24

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES Venetian Lagoon (No. 40), Baro Zavalea in the Commacchio valleys (No. 42) and Torre di Caligo in the Jesolo valleys (No. 39). They are all constructed with sesquipedal blocks and have the same square plan. It appears from contemporary representations in the figurative arts or from the meagre archaeological evidence still surviving that the lighthouses of Antiquity always had windows, either rectangular or with semicircular arches (fig. 12). The lighthouse built at Dubris (Dover) by Claudius is the only example of archaeological evidence where the original Roman architecture has been preserved almost intact. It is likely that, in Roman times, most lighthouse windows were similarly arched and that, as in the case of the upper windows at Dover, they were converted into loopholes that were more suitable for the guns of the period.

Another example from the figurative arts is a silver plate, now in the museum in St Petersburg, showing cupids building a lighthouse-like tomb for a dead animal. Here the construction has a sloping roof (fig 14).174

On the other hand, coins from Panormus dating from the Republican period (fig. 15) show a lighthouse that appears to have a top storey that is square with battlements similar to those on defensive towers of the Phoenician period. Quite a different and very strange top section is depicted for the Gallic lighthouse of Narbo Martius in the mosaic in the Square of the Corporations at Ostia (fig. 16). Whatever the shape of the roof, however, it was often, as we have seen, surmounted by a statue. While the identity of the figure is uncertain, it is known that it was always of a standing male figure with a patera and an object variously interpreted as a trident, a lance or an oar. Scholars have suggested, on the basis of images on coins from Alexandria (No. 8, Pl. 10, figs 19, 20 a, b), that the statue represented the deified Ptolemy, Zeus Soter or Poseidon. Of these, the most appropriate would seem to be Poseidon, the god of the sea with his trident. Evidence to support this hypothesis can be found in a glass intaglio from Alexandria showing Poseidon standing alongside the lighthouse with a model of it in his hand (Pl. 12, fig. 23b). In the Republican period, an image of Sextus Pompey as Neptune was placed on the lighthouse tower at Messina (Pl. 57, fig. 113 a). It should be borne in mind that the statues erected on the tops of these buildings would have suffered greatly from the effects of marine erosion and so were frequently restored or replaced, the subjects chosen sometimes reflecting the period and ruler of the day. An example from the Justinian period is the lighthouse depicted in a mosaic from Qasr-el-Libya (Pl. 12, fig. 24) where the figure is Christ or Helios. During the Arab domination of Egypt, the Alexandria lighthouse had a statue of a native man holding a sceptre in his hand (Pl. 11, fig. 21b). It is curious that, given that the first figure to be associated with a tower that was to take on the function of a lighthouse was the priestess Hero, no one thought of depicting a torch, an attribute that, as we shall see below, came to personify the lighthouse.

Fig. 14: St Petersburg Museum, reproduction of the centre of a silver dish showing cupids building a lighthouse, in STUCCHI 1959, fig. 11

Thus it would seem that Roman lighthouses were all similar in form but not identical, having a number of storeys (a minimum of two and a maximum of twelve) that decreased in size as they went up, being cylindrical, octagonal, round or parallelepiped in form. Ex-votos, from Cosa and Libarna for example, show that, while the forms could vary, the top storey was invariably cylindrical (and on which stood a male statue with a patera and an attribute of some kind). There was often an external stair giving access to the tower, rasing its level by a few metres (fig. 17). The lower section of the lighthouse often consisted of a cistern that would have supplied water to those who looked after the lighthouse, examples being Canale S.Felice (No. 40), Miseno (No. 54) and Patara (No. 21) The base of the tower was also provided with pilae that allowed water to pass beneath the building without compromising its stability, as can clearly be seen in the case of the lighthouse at Dover (fig. 18).

It remains unclear how the topmost level of a lighthouse was completed. In many representations, the cylindrical storey containing the lantern is frequently finished off with a cupola (figs 12, 13). It is likely that it was precisely the cylindrical shape of this final level that dictated the cupola-shaped top that almost all the lighthouses in the ancient world seem to have had. Knowing that often there was a statue of the upright figure of a divinity or a deified sovereign on the summit of these buildings, it might be assumed that a strong base would be needed to support its weight. In fact, a cupola seems to offer a rather less solid plinth than a square or rectangular block of building material. It is, perhaps, for this reason that no statues from the tops of lighthouses have been preserved and they are only known from their depiction in the figurative arts.

174

STUCCHI 1959, pp. 27-29.

25

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

Fig. 15 The top of the Panormus lighthouse

Fig. 16 The prism-shaped roof of the Narbo Martius lighthouse

Fig. 17: Turin, Museo di Antichità, depositi, ex-voto in the shape of a lighthouse from Libarna, in S. Finocchi (ed.), Libarna, Alexandria 1987, Pl. XXV

Fig. 18: Dover (Kent, England): the pilae of Claudius’s lighthouse (photo B. Giardina) Construction materials: While these latter buildings were often carried out with sesquipedal bricks, use was also frequently made of opus reticolatum and opus vittatum as in the case of the Forum Iulii (No. 67) where the use of caementicium can clearly be seen, particularly in the ruins on the island of Lion de mer. Opus reticolatum is commonly used but the masonry techniques vary according to the type of stone used. The consistency of Istrian stone, for example, used in the Carso and also exported to Ravenna (No. 43) and Baro

The only known description of the interior of a lighthouse is that of Flavius Josephus who describes how, in the towers of Caesarea Maritima, there were magnificent rooms providing accommodation and other spaces intended for rain water (cisterns, in other words) as well as broad spiral staircases giving access to the tower.175

175

Ios. Bell. Iud. V, 4, 156-158.

26

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES Zavalea (No. 42), means that it cannot be finely worked. Buildings made of this stone are thus monolithic and undecorated, an example being the old tower of Duino Castle (No. 36). In areas of Gallia Narbonensis much use is made of local island stone, as in the case of the island of Sainte-Lucie, Port-la-Nouvelle, near Narbonne (No. 69), where the stone is very hard and difficult to work. The local stone in Spain is similar, resulting in the austere towers of Brigantium (No. 73) and Campa Torres (No. 74). We know from Suetonius that for the Tour d’Ordre (No. 75), Caligula used tufa as well as various types of coloured marble. In his chapter on marble, Pliney the Elder specifically mentions the lighthouse at Alexandria. Given the lack of precise descriptions in ancient sources, however, it is not always clear what building materials were used, particularly since the few archaeological remains have often been restored or entirely rebuilt in successive periods. Ostia, Square of the Corporations, Roman lighthouse with three storeys decreasing in size towards the top, door and windows (photo B.Giardina).

27

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA that of a tower with four levels that become smaller as they ascend. From the top, cylindrical, level, the light of the lantern shines out. The lowest storey has an arched doorway, while the intermediate storeys have windows of a similar shape to the door (fig. 20, b). The depiction of a lighthouse does not, however, always have a symbolic meaning; it is often a merely topographical device indicating that a ship is arriving into port. An example is the tomb of a praepositus cammellorum (fig. 23), an official whose task it was to receive and dispatch to Rome the wild animals required for the games in the amphitheatre. This is one of those burial monuments dating from the Imperial period where much store was set by the occupation in life and the “social image” of the deceased.180

CHAPTER 4 Iconography, iconology and reliability of the images The first problem that arises in an analysis of this type is that, representations of lighthouses, while maintaining some common characteristics, change significantly depending on period and the geographical area. A little known example is that of the five little lighthouse-shaped lamps excavated at Gorsium (Hungary).176 They take the form of four-storied towers that become narrower towards the top. The final storey, as might be expected, is a cylindrical cupola (fig. 19a). The shape of the windows in the sides of the lamp is not a reliable guide to lighthouse windows because here they are of a size suitable for allowing the light from the lamp’s burning fuel to shine through. These models evoke the function of a lighthouse without seeking to create a faithful reproduction of one. This iconography is also encountered on lamps of a more traditional form (fig. 19b). According to Radan, these are not models for lighthouses, as has been suggested by other scholars,177 but ex-votos to be placed in the tomb of a dead person with the clear message of hope that the lighthouse will light the way for the deceased even in the afterlife, guiding him or her with its beacon into the harbour of salvation. There are numerous representations where a lighthouse is associated with the hereafter and the navigatio vitae, including on the many sarcophagi on the Isola Sacra at Ostia (Pl. 77, fig. 153; Pl. 79, fig. 156). This theme was particularly popular in paleochrisitian art, a good example being the sarcophagus from Firmia Victora, now in the Museo Pio Clementino at the Vatican Museums (fig. 20a). In the fourth century AD, the date of the Firma sarcophagus, Gregory of Nyssa, in his De Vita Moysis, specifically compares the light of God to that from a lighthouse, guiding the soul into the port of salvation.178 It is likely that the artists making these sarcophagi wished to fuse together the literal meaning of the deceased’s life and the allegorical idea of the arrival in a safe harbour. Interestingly, while the iconography of the lighthouse becomes widespread in the early second century AD, with the passing of time the human figures included become increasingly unimportant, leaving only the image of the building. In the second century AD, we see ships, lighthouse, cargo and figures (fig. 23);179 in the third century, ships, lighthouse and cargo (fig. 21); in the fourth century, ship and lighthouse (fig. 20a). Several examples of graffiti have been found, often by chance, as in the case of the sketch of what is probably the lighthouse at Ostia scratched onto a slab of travertine found alongside the Ostia motorway. Here the shape is

Fig. 19 a, b, c: From top, one of the five lighthouseshaped lamps (inv. 65.105.7) from Gorsium, in RADAN 1974, fig. 1; Berlin, Seminar für Christliche Archäologie und Kirchliche Kunst an der Universität, lamp depicting a lighthouse, in STUHLFAUTH 1938 fig. 15; drawing of a lamp showing a ship arriving in port, in THIERSCH 1909, fig. 10

176

RADAN 1974, pp. 149-157. RADAN 1974, p. 154. In my opinion, these closely resemble the votive model found in Carthage, see p. 5. 178 Greg. Nyss. I, 13. 179 KAMPEN 1977-1978, pp. 221-231; ENSOLA-LA ROCCA 2001, p. 481, the author of the entry, Barbara Mazzei, stresses the accurate depiction of the details that gives the scene a realistic feel that is at odds with the symbolic symmetry of the composition as a whole. 177

180

28

ZANKER 2002, pp. 133-156.

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES

Fig. 22 a, b: Above, drawing of a lighthouse incised in a tile found in London, in DE LA BÉYODRE 19 p. 12, fig. 1a; below, Rome, Lateran (lost?): drawing of a sarcophagus showing cupids conveying the dead person to the port of salvation, represented by a lighthouse, in THIERSCH 1909, fig. 13. Fig. 20 a, b: Above, Vatican, Musei Vaticani, Lapidario Cristiano, sarcophagus from Firmia Victora (fourth century AD) showing the journey of the dead woman towards the port of salvation (photo B. Giardina); Below, graffito of a slab of travertine showing the Ostia lighthouse, in STUHLFAUTH 1938, fig. 3 Fig. 23: Rome, Villa Medici, marble relief (second century AD) showing the arrival in port of a ship with a cargo of lions in cages. The lighthouse is on the right, in PAVOLINI 2005, fig. 27. An exception to the otherwise consistent iconography of lighthouses is the famous relief dating from the last quarter of the third century AD in the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek in Copenhagen (fig. 24). This shows a distressing scene of ships sailing near a lighthouse. On the left-hand side is a two-storied tower; on the lower floor there seems to be a soldier while on the upper terrace there are two men who seem to be signalling to the ships. The action is continuous: judging from the features of the people on the tower, two of the ships are setting out from an eastern port, but the stormy sea and strong wind have caused one of the crew to fall into the water. The three other sailors still in the boat are throwing down a lifeboat, the drowning man swims towards it and

Fig. 21: Rome, Prestato Catacombs, Museo Cristiano, sarcophagus in white marble (third century AD) with a lighthouse and two honorary ships (photo B. Giardina). The relief was found in the catacombs of the Via Appia Pignatelli reused as a door of a loculo.

29

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA is pulled up by the crew who are meantime “going about” in order to enter the harbour, possibly Ostia, which is marked by the presence of the lighthouse.

with lighthouse-like design but quite different functions for lighthouses. This was true of those coins that showed a funeral pyre (Pl. 33, fig. 66), the shape of which Herodian183 in the fourth century AD compared to lighthouses, or the towers in the famous mosaic from Civitas Classis which some scholars have interpreted as lighthouse-towers (Pl. 50, fig. 98c).184

Another possible interpretation is that the drowning man is swimming between the three boats in order to reach the lifeboat that the first ship, the only one to notice that he had fallen over board, has thrown into the water.

Using such visual evidence alone, there was a tendency to identify a large number of structures as lighthouses, in the absence of confirmation from written sources. It was thought that the base of the campanile of the church of Santa Maria in Porto Fuori, near Classe (Ravenna), was the remains of the ancient Roman lighthouse, despite the fact that excavations confirmed that the structure dated from no earlier than the twelfth century AD (Pl. 52, figs 102, 103).185 Another good example is that of the Lantern of Augustus at Forum Iulii, the present-day Fréjus in Provence, which, as can be seen from the name, was long thought to be the port lighthouse and provided the inspiration for an eighteenth-century painting by the Provençal painter Constantin who gave it the title Le phare romain de Fréjus (Pl. 88, fig. 175, Pl. 89, fig. 176).

Perhaps the most convincing hypothesis, however, is that put forward by Lionel Casson (fig. 29): we are in the new port of Ostia where the wind is strong and the waves high. A boy rowing in a small boat falls into the water before the very eyes of his parents (or more likely coastguards, I would suggest) who are up a tower at the end of the mole. Two ships hasten to the boy’s rescue but the ship in front is in grave danger of colliding with another ship that is entering the port. The ships have reefed in their sails – an indication of the strength of the wind. Because of the danger of collision, one of the three ships is forced to abandon attempts at rescue. In this dramatic situation, some of the figures have begun to pray while the two captains are doing everything they can to avoid the third ship. We do not know if the ships managed to avoid a collision but the presence of the boy’s remains inside the sarcophagus is evidence that he drowned.181 This version of events is so convincing as to incline one to think that it really happened rather than being merely an allegory of the sailor who, after a life of turmoil, has only now found shelter and peace in the safety of the harbour of the next life.182

Fig. 24: Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, sarcophagus, perhaps from Ostia, with scene of shipwreck, photo in MEDAS 2000, fig.83

As will have been seen, whether the intention is to represent the deceased’s social status or his or her voyage to the haven of salvation (one does not, of course, exclude the other), the structure of the lighthouse invariably has clear pointers allowing us to identify the city in question. Ostia, for example, has a four-storied lighthouse, arched doorways and lacks the stair that would raise the building above the sea. Depictions on coins make such identifications even clearer. Given the limited surface area available, the artist must include details that make clear which city is intended. The lighthouse at Alexandria, for example, is always shown with its corner Tritons, an architectural feature apparently unique to this lighthouse (fig. 25).

Fig. 25: Coins from the periods of Domitian and Antoninus Pius showing the Tritons on the corners of the Alexandria lighthouse, in HANDLER 1971, figs 1 and 2.

Coins from Apamea in Syria show a lighthouse surprisingly similar to that depicted in the mosaic in the Triclinium in the same town (Pl. 19, fig. 38, Pl. 20, fig. 39). Nevertheless, as has been seen in the case of the statue shown standing on top of the structure, the iconography is not always definitive in the interpretation of ancient lighthouses. Quite the reverse: several times, especially in the past, scholars have mistaken structures

Another example of a supposed lighthouse is the Tour Magne in Nîmes. This was in fact a funerary monument to the Enobarbus family, converted into a telegraph station in the nineteenth century (fig. 26 a, b).

181

CASSON 2004, pp. 283-285. ENSOLI-LA ROCCA 2001, p. 480; Marina Sapelli, author of the catalogue entry, is of the opinion that it relates to an individual who died at sea or a port official who is one of the figures depicted on the terrace. Given the presence of the lifeboat, together with the interpretation of the work that I have outlined, while I agree with Spinelli that the event depicted is likely to be a real one, I do not agree with her version.

182

183

Herodian. IV, 8. For this, see BOVINI 1951, pp. 57-62.and entry 43 of the catalogue. 185 MAZZOTTI 1991, pp. 53-56. 184

30

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES Here again we see how the form of the lighthouse has close connections with funerary monuments in its function of a building that guides. We should not be surprised, then, to find funerary monuments bearing a strong resemblance to maritime lighthouses throughout the regiones and provinciae, as, for example, in the famous “Canocchia” of Santa Maria in Capua Vetere186 (fig. 27a).

asserting that ports of trade originated in the East and are very ancient. He writes:

Particularly in the early twentieth century, scholars and archaeologists attempted – unsuccessfully – to attribute ancient lighthouses to those city ports that they felt must undoubtedly have had some kind of monumental structure. One example is Piraeus, the port of Athens, where the so called Tomb of Temistocles (fig. 27b), now under water, was long held to be the Greek lighthouse. In all probability, it formed part of the city walls.187 A very different iconography from that of the lighthouse is associated with its personification in the figure of Pharus. This is known only from a mosaic in Mérida (second-third century AD) where he is shown as a male figure standing on a conical support and holding up a large burning torch. An inscription identifies him as the lighthouse that marks the entry to the port (fig. 28).188 Given the rather early dating of the mosaic, I would be disinclined to follow Quet in identifying Pharus as the Alexandria lighthouse. It can be seen, rather, as an allegory of human life and those things necessary to it: the air with its major winds; the earth with its major rivers (including, significantly, the Nile) and ports. These can be reached only by the light of Pharus who guides the sailor safely into harbour, be it that of the city or of the afterlife.189 Political and commercial iconology. As well as all these allegorical and status establishing images, there are others, already touched on, that have a more overtly political and commercial character: these are the images that appear on coins.

Fig. 26 a, b: Above, the Tour Magne at Nîmes; below, the same tower adapted as a lighthouse in the nineteenth century, in PINON 1991, p. 81

The economy of a city port was, of course, based on commerce. Its coinage naturally reflects this economic power with images of the city and, in an even more solid, way of its lighthouse. The true symbol of sea trading, the use of this image underlines the fact that this strong city has an efficient port, capable of receiving the biggest of ships.190 The Roman world invariably saw the world from a western standpoint view and was therefore better acquainted with those provinciae. It is perhaps for this reason that it was above all the eastern city ports that “publicised” themselves by placing images of a lighthouse on their coins (Table 1). The Hungarian economic historian Polanyi may well have been correct in

“trading between primitive communities consisted of expeditions with the exchange of gifts or a strictlyregulated cerimonial meeting of leaders on the beach, thus assuring the need for security when transporting merchandise over long distances in unpatrolled areas. In the desert, the mountains or on the high seas, robbery and piracy were accepted as normal hazards; on land, a traveller risked being taken hostage or robbed; the coasts posed threats both from the sea and from the hinterland.”191

186

STUCCHI 1959, pp. 18-30. GARLAND 1987, pp. 147-148. 188 QUET 1987, pp. 789-798. 189 For the mosaic see also BLANCO-FREIJERO 1971 pp. 151-178; BLANCO-FREIJERO 1976, pp. 183-198. 190 GIARDINA 2007, pp. 145-146. 187

191 POLANYI 1968, pp. 229-234 where is it suggested that the first port of trade was the Babylonian kar babilonese, a river port very different from the Greek emporium where a number of activites related to trade were carried on.

31

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

Fig. 28: Mosaic from Mérida (second-third century AD) with the personification of Pharus, in QUET 1987, fig. 2 Western cities Ostia Messana Panormus Gesoriacum (?)

Fig. 27 a, b: Above, Santa Maria in Capua Vetere, Roman funerary monument known as “La Canocchia” (photo B.Giardina); below, Athens, the so-called Tomb of Temistocles, in GARLAND 1987, p. 148

Eastern cities Alexandreia Caesarea Maritima Leptis Magna (?) Laodicea ad Mare Apameia di Siria Heraclea Pontica Caesarea Germanica Perga Aegae Istros Corinthus

Table 1: Coins bearing images of lighthouses. Evidence from ancient sources and archaeology points to another value associated with the lighthouse and linked to a phenomenon that can be defined as ‘political topography’. By this I do not mean so much the lighthouses were placed in strategic positions at the entrance to the port – the obvious place to look for them – but the buildings that were intended to be seen by the traveller newly arrived in the city in all their splendour, illuminated in the night by the light of the lighthouse. Suetonius creates a kind of allegorical connection between the collapse of the lighthouse at Capri and the death of Tiberius who had built it in the grounds of his Villa Iovis. But the same writer also records how Tiberius’s successor, Caligula, wishing to demonstrate his power after a ‘victory’ over the Bretons, built an

There could have been no better object than a lighthouse, functioning also as a watchtower, to reassure the merchant that his goods were in no danger and would safely reach port. We should not be surprised that important cities like Miseno, Ravenna, Leptis Magna or Forum Iulii are missing from the list. These were military rather than commercial ports, where it was more important that the port be well defended than provided with all the auxiliary services required by traders – temples dedicated to their divinities or shops where they could buy souvenirs such as the Bégram vase or the ex-voto from Libarna (fig. 17). 32

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES

Fig 29: From the top, sketch of a sarcophagus at one time in the gardens of the Vatican, showing Poseidon with a upturned rudder near a lighthouse, in THIERSCH 1909, fig. 15; reconstruction of the ship closest to the Ostia lighthouse on the Ny Carlsberg Glyptothek sarcophagus, in VEITMEYER 1900, fig.22; reconstruction of the movements of the three ships from the same sarcophagus, in CASSON 2004, fig.6

Not only the emperors but also the kings of the Roman provinces sought to demonstrate their power with the construction of one or more lighthouses. Their primary function, in addition to providing a guiding light for sailors, was to illuminate the royal palace, thus emphasising its importance. The lighthouse towers constructed by Herod Atticus at Caesarea Maritima and mentioned by Flavius Josephus are a case in point.193

enormous lighthouse on the Channel coast taking as his model not the form but the function of the lighthouse at Alexandria, as Claudius was similarly to do later at the port of Ostia. 192 While the light from these lighthouses helped guide sailors manoeuvring at night, it was also a constant reminder of the military and urban feats accomplished by the emperors who had had them set up. 192

Suet. Tib. LXXIV, 5-6 ; Suet. Cal. XLVI, 6-8; Suet. Claud. XX, 2224.

193

33

Ios. Bell. Iud. V, 4, 156-170.

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Here the political value of the towers was even more explicit in that they were given the names of Herod’s relatives and friends (Phasael, Mariamme, Hippicus). Flavius Josephus not only comments that the tower of Phasael was the largest of all, with a design based on the Alexandria lighthouse, but, most importantly, says that it was taller than the famous Egyptian tower, thereby demonstrating the power and wealth of the local king. It should not be forgotten that Arrian, speaking of the honours that Alexander the Great wishes to bestow Ephestion, records that Ammon suggested the city of Alexandria as a suitable place to establish a sanctuary. Arrian mentions that Alexandria was a city famed for its lighthouse although, of course, it had not yet been built at the time of which he is speaking.194 As early as the third century AD, the Alexandria lighthouse too had a weighty political value. Ptolemy had chosen it to be his tomb and decreed that the first thing a ship would see would be his statue and that of his wife, represented as the gods Osiris and Isis together with the inscription recording that the construction of the lighthouse had been commanded by him. The importance of having one’s name on such a tower, almost as if it were a modern advertising logo, is clearly illustrated by the trick said to have been played by Sostratus of Cnidos, the famous architect of the lighthouse. According to Lucian, Sostratus inscribed the king’s name in the plaster cladding, inscribing his own underneath, knowing that in time the plaster would fall off leaving just the name of the architect. Pliny the Elder, on the other hand, recounts this as an example of Ptolemy’s magnanimity.195 In the Trajan period too, architects showed that the construction of a lighthouse was their own work by leaving inscriptions in the stonework, as in the case of Brigantium (No. 73) or Campa Torres (No. 74), recording their name or, in the case of the lighthouse at Smyrna, in which they are praised.196

194

Arr. An. VII, 23, 7. Lukian. Quomodo historia inscribenda sit, XXV, 62-63; Plin. nat. XXXVI, 18. 196 C.I.L., II, 2559=5639; C.I.L., II, 2703, Anth. Pal., IX, 671. All the architects whose names we know also give the name of their birth place: Cnido, Aeminum, Mileto. 195

34

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES Fuels. Wood was widely used to fuel the fires that provided the light source in the lantern. In addition, other fuels could be tar, resin, animal and vegetable fibres, olive oil and, possibly, bitumen.203 Archaeological finds on the Isle Sainte Lucie near Narbonne would suggest that oil was kept in dolia.204 Usually, the abovementioned materials were placed in braziers on the top storey of the lighthouse tower where there had also to be space for extra supplies of fuel and to dispose of the ashes from the fire. Probably only one person was in charge of the fire,205 as can be seen in a mosaic from Rimini (fig. 30a). Others would have been employed to guard supplies and receive those arriving with animals and carrying further supplies of fuel up to the top of the lighthouse. In addition, there would have been someone to supply food, as can be seen in a mosaic from Apamea (fig.309b), and a “commander” to help pilot sailors into the port, as can be seen on coins from Laodicea ad Mare (fig. 30c).

CHAPTER 5 Illumination systems and visibility distances If the torches used in the signalling system invented by Aeneas Tacticus, perfected by Polyaenus and revived by Polybius were placed at a distance of 10m from each other, the maximum distance of visibility would have been 10km.197 Although this system was never officially adopted, it was employed over a long period. As early as time of the Sejanus revolt, Tiberius used speculabundus ex altissima rupe identidem signa.198 Later, as was seen above, the Carthaginians constructed watch towers (speculae) on high places suitable for observation. Hamilcar, for example, chose Eircte, probably the site now known as Monte Pellegrino near Palermo, since Polybius describes it as being between Erice and Palermo.199 These towers could be found in all parts of the ancient world, particularly in border areas, their importance being significantly more military than navigational.200 The idea of creating smoke signals during daylight may have given rise to the legend of Medea who promised to send news to her friends using smoke during the day and fire at night, from a point high above the sea.201 From the Roman period, if not earlier, the custom was established of placing fixed beacons on the tops of lookout towers, thus transforming them into lighthouses that could guide sailors. In this, they were drawing on the Etruscan and Greek idea of placing fires near the altars of their sanctuaries in places such as Pyrgi and Cape Sounion. Although it is not known for certain whether the Alexandria lighthouse was used at nighttime in the Hellenistic period, I would personally think that it was, there being no reason to assume the contrary. If the idea of providing lights to guide sailors by placing fires on hills or speculae was already known, it would seem logical to suppose that the same system was used on a structure built for this specific purpose. It should be remembered, furthermore, that Sostratus’s inscription conferms that the lighthouse was active at night. The only reference to the extent of the beam from the Alexandria lighthouse is found in the writings of Flavius Josephus:202 300 stadia or approximately 48km. Even if we halve this distance (Flavius Josephus is very likely to have exaggerated it in order to make the tower seem more imposing), the distance would still be an impressive 20km. Standing 40km from the Alexandria lighthouse was that of Taposiris Magna on Lake Mareotis; if, therefore, the beams from both the lighthouses were visible at a distance of 20km, it would appear that the two beams would have met midway allowing sailors to see both the coast of Alexandria and islands in the lake.

How was the light from the lantern projected in such a way as to allow it to be visible from a distance? In the absence of firm evidence, it must be supposed that a series of specchi ustori was placed around the braziers to magnify the light.206 While, unfortunately, no structures of this kind have been uncovered by archaeologists, we can get an idea from braziers found at the medieval St Agnes lighthouse on the Scilly Isles off the coast of Cornwall. Made of iron, a metal that is highly resistant to the heat of a fire, produced at that time with coal (fig. 31), these round braziers consisted of two superimposed rings. The upper ring had bars so as to allow air to circulate through the fire. The lower ring had one small door through which to remove the ash and cinders. Portable braziers were commonly used in northern Europe until the early Middle Ages. These were stoked up on the ground outside and then hoisted up207 to the top of the lighthouse in the same way that fuel was hoisted up to the storey with the lantern so as to avoid using the internal stair and to save time (fig. 32 a,b). The open colonade of the cylindrical top level of the lighthouse allowed the beam to shine through in all directions although it has not yet been shown conclusively that specchi ustori were used in ancient times.

203

VEITMEYER 1900, p. 67; SINGER ET ALII 1956, p. 523. Bitumen produces a less intense light compared with oil, cfr. FORBES, I, 1966, p. 84; FORBES VI 1966, p. 183. Until the early twentieth century, the light was fuelled by animal oil from spermaceti (purified wax from sperm whales), or, sometimes, olive oil, rape seed oil or linseed oil. Mineral oil was also used, the latter giving a brighter light, cfr. CATTOLICA-LURIA, I, 1916, p. 15. 204 GAYROUD 1981, p. 530. 205 SPINELLI 1996, p. 576. 206 KÖSTER 1923, p. 199. 207 SPINELLI 1996, pp. 577-579, it was not until 1818 that the lighthouse at Punta Salvare, near Trieste, began to use gas.

197

FORBES VI 1966, p. 180. Suet. Tib. LXV, 17. 199 Pol. I, 56,1. 200 Caes. civ. III, 65 during the siege of Dyrrachium. Curiously, in Frontin. strat. 3, 12, in the chapter dealing with sending and receiving signals, there is no mention of either fire signals or watch towers, for which see GICHON 1974, pp. 513-543; SOUTHERN 1990, pp. 232-242. 201 Diod. 46, 36; 65, 18. 202 Ios. Bell. Iud. IV, 10, 612-614. 198

35

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

Fig. 30 a,b,c: Above, detail of the Apamea mosaic with a lighthouse employee fishing, in GIULIANI 1994, fig. 4. Below, b, detail of the Rimini mosaic with a man attending to the brazier (photo B.Giardina); c, detail of a Laodicean coin showing a man directing shipping, in GIARDINA 2007, fig. 16d

Fig. 31: Left, the St. Agnes lighthouse in an seventeenth-century drawing, in VEITMEYER 1900, fig. 55; right, a iron brazier for burning coal from the St. Agnes lighthouse, Scilly Isles; right, lighthouse with portable brazier, in HAGUE-CHRISTIE 1977, p. 142

36

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES

Fig. 32 a, b: Left, lighthouse with portable brazier, in SPINELLI 1996, fig. 7; right, system designed to speed up the raising of fuel at the seventeenth-century Dungeness lighthouse, in VEIYMEYER 1900, fig. 54 length of the beam of the main lighthouse must have been inferior to that of lighthouses placed on promontories, such as Brigantium (No. 73), the only lighthouse dating from antiquity and which is visible from a distance of 23km.

Topography of lighthouses: it is clear that the length of the beam of a lighthouse depended partly on the geographical and territorial position of the building. The light from lighthouse that Caligula had built at Gesoriacum, for example, or from Claudius’s lighthouse at Dubris, must have visible from at least 20km, so that both would have been visible at the midpoint in the North Sea, an area well known for its rainy weather. The towerlighthouses in lake or marshy areas, such as Baro Zavalea (No. 42), Equilum (Torre di Caligo, No. 39), Canale S.Felice (No. 40), Fossa Marianae (Roque d’Odor, No. 68) or Narbonne (Tour de Vauban and the others, No. 69) must have had a very powerful light that could pierce the mist that, even today, affects those regions for the greater part of the year. The lighthouse at Alexandria was different in many ways (No. 8) since in addition to the light there were other features that made the building very visible. It was exceptionally tall, it had a statue on its summit and, most notably, it had Tritons with buccinae on each of the corners. Thanks to a mechanism not yet fully understood, these brass instruments gave out a sound not dissimilar to the hooter that modern cruise ships sound when entering harbour.

Lighthouses were erected on altars, precisely because their elevated position allowed them to be seen from a distance. Their beams could reach various places in the surrounding area and represented not only an excellent aid to navigation but also an excellent lookout point. Two good examples are:

Capri (No. 53)

Duino (No. 36)

The small tower-lighthouses of Thasos (No. 28) had a another function; they did not so much indicate the entrance to the port as, more importantly, the rocky outcrops of Cap de Pyrgos that were highly dangerous when sailing at night. The tower-lighthouses on islands like Vada Sabatia-Bergeggi (No. 66) and Lion de merForum Iulii (No. 67) performed the same function.

Isole Pontine Tarracina Caieta Misenum Puteoli

Neapolis Herculaneum Pompeii Paestum Vesuvio

Baia di Sistiana Liburnia Tergeste Illyricum Gradus Aquileia (Miramare, TR) (mastio di Duino) Medieval sites in bold

Before concluding this chapter, something should be said about the system of “triangulation” that can be observed in the siting of lighthouses. An analysis of the various available examples seems to suggest that, at least in the Roman period, lighthouses were arranged in various strategic places in such a way as to form triangles. Among the groups that I have identified are: AquileiaTergeste-Pyrranheum; Brigantium/CampaTorresGesoriacum-Dubris; Misenum-Caprae-Atheneum; Alexandria-Paphos-Caesarea Maritima; Cosa-

Since lighthouses needed to indicate dangers to shipping (islands, shallows, rocks), they were often sited, from the Claudian period onwards (and even more markedly in the Trajan period) on the outer walls, as in the case of Ostia (No. 60) or Centumcellae (No. 61). In these examples, since there were several tower-lighthouses together, the 37

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Centumcellae-Ostia and Ariminum-Ravenna-Adria. If such arrangements are more than coincidental, it should be possible to find traces of other lighthouses in places where there is no record of such constructions in the Roman period (or, at least, where the records are unverifiable). If, for example, there are two Roman lighthouses, at Circeii and Tarracina, then we could expect to find a third at Caieta.208 This proposition is closely linked to what has gone before because, if the idea of a system of triangulation is accepted, the length of a lighthouse’s beam will be regulated, as far as possible, by the distances from the other two lighthouses. It is hard to believe that, after the lighthouse of Ariminum (No. 44), there would have been no further lighthouses until that at Messana (No. 47) near Torre Faro, or that the entire coast of the Abruzzi, Puglia and Calabria had no signalling arrangements. One only has to think of the city of Ortona, already referred to by Strabo as the port of the Fretanii, and a port of major importance in the the Byzantine period.209 As far as Daunia is concerned, Sipontum210 and Egnatia were very important ports. I have already discussed Brundusium (No. 46) and other possible lighthouses in the Salento region, but the list could be extended to include the Messinese foothills. Clues can be found in place names, but all too often the many different building campaigns of a building have destroyed the evidence of the past so that it is hard to know whether the placename comes from a real event or from a folk myth as in the case of the church of Santa Maria del Faro (St Mary of the Lighthouse) at Marechiaro, near Posillipo, Naples (fig. 33).

Fig. 32: The Church of Santa Maria del Faro, Marechiaro (photo B.Giardina)

208 This is an area that merits further research. Space constraints do not permit me to expand on it here but I shall return to it elsewhere. 209 Strab. V, 4, 2. It is unlikely that such an important port, particularly for communications with the other side of the Adriatic, would not have had the apposite infrastructure. Scholars do not agree on the subject of the lighthouse at Ancona, the only one identified from iconographic evidence between Ariminum e Messana. For the Adriatic regions of central Italy, see STAFFA 2005, pp. 109-182. 210 Strab. VI, 3, 9 mentions a navigable river between Salaria and Sipuntum and the great lagoon, now disappeared, that served the corn trade of the Daunan city.

38

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES methods had changed too: since the fifth century AD merchant ships had been replaced by dromons; in the seventh century AD, square sails were abandoned in favour of lanteen sails. So too was navigation by the stars replaced by the use of the compass and lighthouses by coastal towers.

CHAPTER 6 Late Lighthouses and the devolpment of Coastal Towers ¶m dÁ jaà maÌstahla pokkawËhi peiqatijÀ jaÊ vqujtÍqia teteiwislÈma, jaà stËkoi pqosÁpiptom oÕ pkgqylÇtom lËmom eÕamdqÊair oÕdÁ tÈwmair jubeqmgt´m oÕdÁ tÇwesi me´m jaà jouvËtgsim ÑngsjglÈmoi pqÄr tÄ oÓje²om ñqcom, ÐkkÀ to³ vobeqo³ l°kkom aÕt´m tÄ ÑpÊvhomom ÑkÌpei jaà ÜpeqÉvamom 211

It was in this period that a number of church campaniles were converted into coastal towers (figs 31 b,c,d), or vice versa, as in the case of Caorle in Friuli (fig. 34c). It is this fact that may have led Thiersch - followed by Bovini and Stucchi215 to form his famous theory that church bell towers derived their form from Roman lighthouses.

So wrote Plutarch about piracy in Roman times. There followed a period of when there was a move towards the development of coastal or watch towers rather than lighthouses. In the third century AD, pirates on the Breton and British, taking advantage of the Romans’ well-known inability to sail along the northern coasts of Europe, began to attack a series of coastal cities. The Romans’ reaction was to construct a series of coastal towers, solid enough to act almost as forts – especially at Dover – in those ports harbouring the Classis Britannica. Despite this, the Saxon pirates had an easy time until at least the seventh century AD (enjoying the cooperation of populations who spoke the same language and who sought an end to Roman domination, so leaving the field open for the Vikings).212 Between the ninth and eleventh century AD the threat of piracy once more became pressing and the Italian states all began building another series of towers, initially intended mainly for signalling. The function of these was similar but opposite to that of lighthouses: while a lighthouse, using smoke by day and flames by night, guided friendly ships into harbour, the coastal towers, using the same techniques, had a protective role, warning of enemy ships and preventing them from entering port to attack the cities. As early as 800 AD, it is known that Ibrahim, ruler of the Islamic empire, planned a dense system of towers by means of which, in the course of one night, Ceuta could communicate with Alexandria.213 In 808 AD, Pope Leo III sent a letter to Charlemagne asking for his help in defending the Roman coast from the Saracens.214 When the Normans invaded southern Italy, many networks of towers were constructed, with Swabians and Angiovins being among the first to make use of them. It was in the ninth century, too, that the invention of the compass by the Arabs had the effect of reducing reliance on lighthouses which gradually fell into disuse in favour of constructions that combined the triple functions of lighthouse, lookout tower and fortress. Navigation

This is not to say, however, that lighthouses disappeared all together. The reverse was true as we see in a curious twelfth century AD relief set into the stonework of the Tower of Pisa (fig. 35): here, two medieval merchant ships are sailing towards a lighthouse that exactly resembles that found on the Roman sarcophagi from Ostia, a tower with three storeys growing smaller towards the top, the last being cylindrical and housing the lantern. In the fourteenth century, many ancient Roman lighthouses in the Adriatic area were reused as coastal towers (it is strange, in fact, that the Romans had not built any of the latter, especially in the Marche and the lower Adriatic) while further coastal towers were constructed ex-novo.216 When Otranto was occupied by the Turks in 1480, a sixteenth-century chronicle from Brindisi records that the universities had to pay for guardie deputate alle mura et campanile de la cità e cavallai per lo sospetto de infedeli (guards to protect the city walls and horsemen against the threat of infidels).217 This being an expensive requirement, it was decided that someone should be employed to acquire an old, disused tower (often a Roman lighthouse) or to build one. He was given the title of capitano di torre, and he was supported by the cavallari whose task it was to look after the other towers in the locality. This captain was sometimes an employee of a university, sometimes self-employed, in which latter case, he could levy dues. It was also his task to maintain the tower, with financial assistance from the stateimposed taxes.218 No region could afford to be without such towers. In Tuscany, the coastal towers imitated the form not of Roman lighthouses but of Longobard guardhouses. Here they also had the special function of housing the horses and cavalleri that patrolled the coast. It was not long, however, before the Grand Duchy too had to acquire a network of towers. The closeness of the Tuscan towers to one another was striking, with one every 3km, or only 500m where the coast was particularly rocky. The system of towers lying to the north extended up to Genoa via the Val di Magra and from there to France. The southern

211 Plutarchos vitae parallelae, Pompeios, XXIV, 4-8: “In several places there were secure moorings for the Corsair ships, fortified places suitable for making signals, assault groups that, not only for the bravery of the crews, size of the boats, speed and lightness of the ships, were particularly suited to their task, but offended with their excessive magnificence more than they inspired fear”. Trans. C. Higgitt after E.Luppino Manes, A.Marcone, ed. BUR, Milano 2006. 212 TANGHERONI 1996, pp. 33-36; 105-110. This is not the appropriate place to list the various conquests that proved harmful to the Romans, but one is the fall of Narbona to the Arabs in 759 AD. 213 LEONARDI 1991, p. 9; for piracy CAVAZZUTI 1997, pp. 197-214. 214 DE ROSSI 1984, p. 9.

215

THIERSCH 1909, pp. 97-174; STUCCHI 1959, pp. 16-30; BOVINI 1974, pp. 71-86. 216 MAURO 1989. 217 COSI 1992, p. 12. 218 PAIANO-CAZZATO 2000, p. 134; for the later period and the area around the Amafi Coast RUSSO 2002.

39

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

4ig. 33 a, b, c, d: From left to right: Caorle, cathedral campanile, Ravenna, campanile of the church of Sant’Agata Maggiore (photo B.Giardina), Bolzano, medieval watchtower known as the Torre Druso (photo B. Giardina), Raqqah minaret, in STUCCHI 1959, fig. 5

where flags, standards and everything needed for signalling (including fuel) was stored. Elsewhere in Europe, beginning in the twelfth century, the little studied phenomenon of fortress-churches was emerging. England, faced with the threat of Viking pirates, built churches with bell towers that looked more like coastal watchtowers, as in the case of St.Mary’s at Bessingham in Norfolk, built around 1100. In Croatia, from the time of the Tartar invasion of 1242 many such fortress-churches were constructed, often on the coast and clearly intended as lookout towers, as with the church of Sveti Nicholas at Prahulje (fig. 36) near Nin, once called Aenona. This site, 20km from Zadar, had already been inhabited since Neolithic and became a municipium under the Liburnians. In medieval times it was a bishopric. The first church, built around the ninth century AD, stood on an artificial promontory created to enhance its defensive character. During the Turkish invasions, the quadrilobed cupola of the building was transformed into a lookout tower. Defensive walls were added, as they seem to have been in many places on the Dalmatian coast.220

Fig. 35: Pisa, Leaning Tower, twelfth century relief with ships and lighthouse, in TANGHERONI 1996, fig. 11 section extended from the border with coast of Lazio through Civitavecchia and down to the Kingdom of Naples.219 Although differing in shape, cylindrical (Torre dello Ziro in Amalfi), square (Torre Matilde in Viareggio), polygonal (Marzocco lighthouse-tower at Livorno), they all had (just as the ancient lighthouses did) a cistern to gather rainwater and provide running water for the ground floor, a stairway ascending to the top

219

NALDINI-TADDEI 2003, p. 176; it is not possible to calculate the distance between Roman lighthouses.

220

40

SEKULIC-GVOZDANOVIC 1995, pp. 63-64.

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES

Fig. 37: Ansedonia, coastal tower built over a Roman villa (photo B.Giardina)

Fig. 36: Prahuljie (Nin), Croatia, Church of Sveti Nicholas (photo B.Giardina) In 1600, the use of coastal towers was so widespread that, since all the ancient Roman lighthouses had been reused, it was decided to make use of other constructions dating from Roman times but originally intended for other purposes, examples being the Pisco Montano at Terracina221 or the Tour Magne at Nîmes. It would be impossible to list here all the adapted buildings and new Saracen towers by now commonly found in most cityports of Italy. The reader is referred instead to the already existing extensive bibliography on coastal towers region by region (figs 37, 38).

Fig. 38: Promontorio del Circeo, Lago di Paola, Torre Paola (photo B.Giardina)

221

DE ROSSI 1984, p. 207.

41

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

CHAPTER 7 The first medieval lighthouses: Genua, Portus Pisanus, Corduan From what has been said so far and judging from the thirteenth-century relief on the Leaning Tower, it would seem that, until the twelfth century, no new lighthouses were built, the old ones being still in use (or returned to use like that at Gesoriacum, restored by Charlemagne in 810 AD). What did change were the ships and ways of navigation. It is no accident that, from the thirteenth century onwards, the iconography of lighthouses changes completely. There can be no doubt that this was because of the construction of the Lanterna in Genoa, the first medieval lighthouse that we know of. Its appearance is more that of a defensive tower than that of a Roman lighthouse. An earlier tower was built in 1139 on the promontory of San Benigno, always known as ‘Lighthouse Head’, because from that position signals made using fires used to be sent to ships at sea.222 The Lanterna is only mentioned after 1329.223 In 1371, a drawing of it appeared on the cover of the Manuale dei Salvatori di Porto e Molo (fig. 39), but when, in 1507, Genoa came under the domination of Louis XII, the French king built a fortress in the same spot, known as Briglia. The Genoese besieged the fortress and demolished the upper part of the Lanterna. Eventually reconstructed in 1543, the missing part was added, resulting in a tower 100m high (fig. 40). Manfredini and Pescara have some interesting things to say about the length of the beam. Normally, bundles of brisca (Genoese dialect for ‘broom’) were burned in special griselle (metal braziers), then, later, oil lamps. Twelve to eighteen lamps were lit at a time, until 1500, from which time as many as thirty burned together, consuming 12 barrels of olive oil in a year.224

Fig 40: Genoa, The Lanterna (photo B. Giardina) Another lighthouse built in Italy in medieval times is that situated on the small island of Meloria (fig. 44) near Livorno. Constructed by the Pisans around 1157/58 and destroyed by the Florentines in 1163, it was rebuilt in around 1304.225 Surrounding this was a whole series of coastal towers and lighthouses recalling the place name “Triturrita” already mentioned by Rutilius Namazianus in the fifth century AD in reference to the area around Portus Pisanus. Of these towers, the most remarkable was that called the Torre del Magnale, one of the towers that stood at the entrance to the port. The home of the captain, nothing of it remains today but a ruin near the Porto Nuovo at Livorno (fig.41). The construction of the first lighthouse on Meloria is attributed to Niccola Bonanno, who designed a tower similar to a small fortress. Clearly visible from a distance, it would have indicated the treacherous shallows posing a danger to shipping in that area.226 As Giovanni Villani relates in his Cronica,227 it was in 1290 that the Genoese besieged Porto Pisano in the Guelf League’s dispute with Pisa, an event that led to the destruction of the light. The complex system of towers and lights at Portus Pisanus is well depicted in a thirteenth-century bas relief in white Apuan marble found buried within the walls of the Palazzo del Comune in Genoa (fig.43). The two towers supporting the chain that closed the harbour mouth are clearly visible, the Meloria tower standing alone on a rock and the Livorno lighthouse, later destroyed. Today on the shallows around Meloria there are two lighthouses, one replacing the one destroyed at the battle of Meloria and then replaced in 1709 by Cosimo III De’ Medici with a large new tower, the other being entirely modern.228

Fig. 39: The Lanterna at Genoa on the cover of the manuscript of the Manuale dei Salvatori di Porto e Molo (1371) da MANFREDINI-PESCARA 1985, p. 74

225

VEITMEYER 1900, p. 33; GUARNIERI 1967, pp. 56-60. GUARNIERI 1967, p. 117. Villani, Cronica, VII XIX, 49; VIII XCII, 46 ed. Guanda 1990. 228 GUARNIERI 1967, p. 117.

222

226

Strab. V, 3 describes Genoa as the emporium of the Ligurians. 223 VEITMEYER 1900, p. 34; MANFREDINI-PESCARA 1985, p. 74. 224 MANFREDINI-PESCARA 1985, p. 74.

227

42

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES

Fig. 41: Remains of the Torre Fornicis, linked by a chain to the Torre del Magnale, in GUARNIREI 1967, pp. 58, 65

Fig. 42: The first lighthouse on Meloria built by the Pisans in 1157 and its 1304 reconstruction, in GUARNIREI 1967, pp. 118, 119 It is interesting to note that, as late as the fifteenth century, monumental lighthouses such as that at Livorno, filled erudite scholars with amazement. One of these, Francesco Petrarch, wrote in his Itinerarium Syriacum that near the castle praevalida turris est, cuius in vertice pernox flamma navigantibus tuti ltoris signum preaebet.229

It is also interesting to see that, unlike Greek and Roman authors who generally speak only of the flamma, by which the tower can be recognised from a distance, here it is specifically stated that this is a signum, a signal for all types of shipping. This is, in other words, a proper lighthouse and not a watch tower adapted when needed to a lighthouse.

229

Francisci Petrarchae, Itinerarium Syriacum. In quo quicquid per Europam, vel Asiam peregrinis Hirosolymitanis memorabile occurrit, diligentissime describitur. Basilare, per Sebastianum Henricpetri, MDLIII.

43

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

Fig. 43: Genua, Museo di Sant’Agostino. Twelfth-century bas relief formerly in the Palazzo del Comune in Genoa and depicting Portus Pisanus, in TANGHERONI 2003, No. 103

Fig. 44: Livorno, Meloria, the two lighthouses as they appear today, in TANGHERONI 2003, p. 143; left the Medici fanale at Livorno before its destruction in 1944, in NUDI 1959, fig. 49 and today after restoration (photo B.Giardina)

44

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES Thus we see that lighthouse building was back in fashion, but it did not follow precisely the Roman model. Now the function of a lighthouse was not merely to provide a guiding light for sailors at night time now it functioned as an almost impregnable fortress, thanks to its geographical position, as an observation tower and, as sometimes happened, particularly in northern Europe, a possible alternative to the church bell tower. This was the story of Claudius’s lighthouse in Dover (references to a phararius or lighthouse keeper are found from 1201) which owes its survival to the present day to the fact that it was converted in Norman times into the bell tower of the church of St. Mary in Castro. The oldest lighthouse-bell tower of this type seems to have been that at Hook Point, near Waterford on the southern coast of Ireland, a building that is still in use today. Built around 1170, the lighthouse was used by Augustinian monks who were granted an allowance in exchange for keeping the fire burning in the lighthouse.230

guiding Leander across the Bosphorus. The flame of the lantern was fuelled with wood and olive oil (or sometimes animal oil), magnified by reflection in a series of mirrors placed around a metal brazier, providing a 360° beam thanks to the cylindrical shape and colonnaded sides of the top floor of the lighthouse. The maximum distance from which the beam was visible, that of the Alexandria lighthouse (and also the only one for which we have such information), can be translated into modern measurements as about 20km. Early medieval lighthouses often made use of the remains of Roman lighthouse structure, as in the case of that at Gesoriacum in Pas-de-Calais. There were, however, many lighthouses that functioned simultaneously as lighthouse, observation tower and fortress, some of the observation towers being subsequently transformed into bell towers, as in the case of Caorle or some of the Norman towers in Great Britain (fig. 46). These lighthouses often took on the appearance of fortress-towers, as in the case of the Lanterna in Genoa or the Meloria lighthouse. In the fourteenth century, much more complex structures began to be built with - in addition to living quarters for the lighthouse keeper, soldiers and others – even a chapel, as in the case of Corduan, built by the Black Prince to provide a better port for the city of Bordeaux which, since the twelfth century, had become an important trading place for the wine trade with England. In 1582, when Bordeaux was one of the most important cities in France, a new building was begun for Henri III under the guidance of the architect Louis de Foix. His design was for a three-storey lighthouse with a kitchen and rooms for the keepers. Work was interrupted by war and, after twelve years, only part of the first floor had been built. In view of the huge cost of this enormous construction, Henri’s successor, Henri IV decided to complete the work by transforming Corduan into the first and only ‘royal lighthouse’: on the ground floor was a large hall, the King’s Apartment, while on the second floor was a palatine chapel with ten rows of windows. Lastly, there was a 2.20m stair and then a smaller stair leading up to the lantern floor. The “king’s lighthouse” was finally commissioned in 1611, after which time it was used without interruption by the royal family until the death of Louis XVI.233 The fire in the lantern may have been produced in the same way as in Roman times, or the “moveable brazier” may have been used, employing pulleys that also served to hoist fuel up to the lantern storey without having to use the stairs. In 1645, however, the lantern was destroyed and the lighthouse became ruinous until it was once again renovated in 1780, when some of its earlier Baroque magnificence, overlying the original structure, was restored to it (fig. 45b).

Similar to Hook Point, and still visible today, is the lighthouse-bell tower of St Catherine’s Oratory, built in 1314 on the Isle of Wight (fig. 47). Continuing in approximate order of date, the lighthouse at Corduan in the mouth of the Gironde, not far from present-day Bordeaux, was probably suggested as early as the ninth century AD by Charlemagne231 but seemingly not carried out until the fourteenth century AD when the Black Prince Edward of Woodstock commanded the construction of an enormous lighthouse to improve navigation on the river and so increase the already thriving trade in wine between nearby Bordeaux and England. This first lighthouse was replaced in 1582 by another carried out by the architect Louis de Foix for Henri III. This was a three-storeyed tower with a kitchen and living quarters for the keeper who fuelled the flame with fish oil. This building fell into disuse and was not restored until Henri’s successor, Henri IV who transformed the tower into a thing of great elegance: a first floor known as the ‘royal apartment’, a second floor used as a chapel and a series of external and internal stairs leading up to the lantern. Overall, the height of the tower was 40m. This work was destined to continue right up to the end of the nineteenth century, resulting in several major changes. What we see today at Corduan is both similar and very different from what Charlemagne in the ninth AD and Henri III in the sixteenth century might have hoped for (fig. 45).232 Known through literary sources, images and archaeological evidence, the number of medieval lighthouses is too great to allow for a complete list here. I shall confine myself to summarising the main differences of development from Roman to medieval lighthouses. Roman lighthouses were built on high places or at harbour mouths with the chief function of guiding sailors safely into port, just as Hero sought to do with her torch 230

SCHNALL 1999, p. 8/9. VEITMEYER 1900, pp. 29-31. 232 For the history of Corduan, DREYER-FICHOU 2005, pp. 247-250. 231

233

45

DREYER-FICHOU 2005, pp. 247-249.

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

Fig. 46: Dover, Norman watch tower transformed into a bell tower (photo B. Giardina) Fig. 45a: Left, the lighthouse of Corduan as designed by the architect Louis de Foix, in VEITMEYER 1900, fig. 27, the small tower on the left may be the first medieval lighthouse

Fig. 47 The lighthouse-bell tower of St.Catherine’s Oratory on the Isle of Wight, in SCHNALL 1999, p. 8/9

Fig. 45b: The lighthouse at Corduan today, in DREYER-FICHOU 2005, p. 247 46

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES As in Italy, where the emergence of marine republics in Venice, Pisa, Genoa and Amalfi had resulted in the provision of well-equipped ports with lighthouses that were both functional and monumental, so too northern Europe in the cities of the Hanseatic League in northern Germany, and of the Confederation of the Cinques Ports signed between France and Great Britain. As early as 1312, Venice had a small light signal in the area between the Lido and S.Erasmo. The first city in northern Europe to have a strategic lighthouse was Lübeck, at Traveműnde (Figg. 48, 49) where it opened onto the sea. A light signal in that area is mentioned in a letter written by Emperor Frederick II, although the official commissioning of the lighthouse is attributed to Count Johann von Holstein in 1320.234

Fig. 49 The lighthouse at Traveműnde today (photo B. Giardina)

Fig. 48: The Lübeck lighthouse at Traveműnde, in VEITMEYER 1900, fig. 32 The return to classical models in all types of architecture during the Renaissance naturally included ports and lighthouses. Once again, architects looked to Imperial Rome for inspiration, adding to this innovative solutions of their own (fig. 46). From the fifteenth century (for example, for the ports of the Hanseatic League235 in Germany or the Cinque Ports in France and England) the increase in trading and new technologies in the field of shipping gave rise to a new interest in port design.236 I shall conclude by referring to the ideas of Leon Battista Alberti who, in describing how a port should be designed, recommends that they have, for their defence, high towers, provided with crenulations and lanterns, situated laterally at the entrance to the harbour and that this should be created near a promontory giving shelter from the wind and acting as a landmark for ships by day.237

Fig. 50: Drawing of a Renaissance port with lighthouse on the ante wall, in SIMONCINI I 1993, fig. 25

Thus the famous Latin motto was as true in the fifteenth century (and perhaps even more so) as it was in Roman times: NAVIGARE NECESSE EST 234

VEITMEYER 1900, pp. 35-37. VEITMEYER 1900, pp. 35-39. SIMONCINI I 1993. 237 ALBERTI 1565, pp. 142-144. 235 236

47

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA people staffing a lighthouse, from slaves to liberti, from phararius to procuratores, from merchants to retired sailors.238

CONCLUSION It is impossible to give a precise date for the construction of the first lighthouses. Indeed, perhaps when the Greek and Phoenician sources – and particularly the journeys of the great navigators, including Hanno the Carthaginian, Himilcon, the Pseudo-Scylax and Pytheas of Marseille speak of puqcoê (towers) in topographical positions suitable for lighthouses they are speaking of something quite different from a lighthouse.

Having analysed all the data available, problems remain: why is it that it is so rarely, and with such brief descriptions, that these buildings are mentioned? Why are there so few remaining from Roman times when there are so many from medieval and Renaissance times? A possible answer to the first question is that, given that the lighthouse with the largest number of descriptions (both quantitavely and chronologically speaking) is the lighthouse at Alexandria, it believe the sources stopped mentioning these structures when their construction had become obligatory for all ports. Thus, in the first century AD, Pliny the Elder states that there are lighthouses like that at Alexandria everywhere, including at Ostia and Ravenna. From this period on, lighthouses are only mentioned if they are in any way architecturally unusual (the turres geminae at Centumcellae) or if they are connected with notable historical events or held to be particularly splendid (the lighthouse at Brigantium, the only human work worthy of note, according to Orosius). As for their poor state of preservation, I believe this is due to rivalry with Alexandria. Reading between the lines, Flavius Josephus, writing of Caesarea Mariitma, seems to suggest that every architect was required to exceed the Alexandrine lighthouse. As a result, the imposing mole out of which some lighthouses were constructed, combined with the instability of the land on which the ports were built, led to the collapse of the buildings after the silting up of the harbour, examples that spring immediately to mind being Ostia and Ravenna.239 Elsewhere, as in the case of Alexandria (earthquake), Patara (tsunami) or Gesoriacum (collapse of the cliff on which it was built), it was natural events that contributed to the collapse of the building. Where the archaic and classical sources fail us, other useful sources of information are the itineraria, both picta (Vasi di Vicarello, Vasi di Piombino, Tabula Peutingeriana) or purely literally (the Pseudo-Scylax, Pitheas of Marseille, Hanno the Carthaginian, Itinerarium Antonini, Ora Maritima).

We do known, however, that, strictly speaking, the first lighthouse (both from the point of view of architecture and function) dates from the third century BC. It was built in Egypt, near Alexandria, on the island of Pharos from which it took its name. Started by Ptolemy I Soter and completed by his son and successor, Ptolemy Philadelphus. The lighthouse was in use day and night from the day it was completed, as we find confirmed by an epigram by the contemporary writer Poseidippus who writes that the building as constructed to lighten the way for sailors at night. Scholars have not as yet found the answer to the important question of when it was that the beam from a lighthouse ceased to be fixed and became intermittent. Pliny the Elder complained that sailors might mistake the fixed light from a lighthouse for a star. I do not believe that there was any method of avoiding this problem before the introduction of the Fresnel lens in 1800. If, however, the beam was reflected off ‘burning’ mirrors that rotated around a central fire, there must have been moments when the fuel was running low, rendering the light less bright if not intermittent. The length of the beam (perhaps up to 20-25km) depended on the position of the lighthouse (on a hilltop, at the mouth of a harbour, etc) and on the height of the building (the higher it was, the further its beam extended). The job of rotating the mirrors may have been assigned to slaves while liberti would have been responsible for collecting fuel and bringing food to the lighthouse keepers. Alternatively, they might have been in charge of the building as at Alexandria. In the case of military ports, such as that at Leptis Magna, there would also have been a sizeable number of soldiers who would have slept inside the building itself. Other rooms at the bottom of the building may have been designated as shops for souvenir sellers. In the customs-lighthouses, like those of Baro Zavalea, Torre Caligo and Roque d’Odor, living quarters would have provided comfortable accommodation for the officers in charge of collecting the tolls levied on those wishing to take their ships from one canal (fossa) to another. It is likely there would have been a small number of soldiers in such tollhouses, ensuring that no one stole the takings, as well as employees responsible for taking and controlling the money. To these employees could be added a few men whose job it was to tend to the flame in the lantern (likely to have been slaves, as mentioned above) and naval veterans with the task of guiding ships safely into harbour. One such appears to be shown, on a coin from Laodicea ad Mare, standing on the first floor of a lighthouse and communicating with the proreta. Thus it appears that there was a considerable crowd of

It will have been seen from what precedes that the architecture of lighthouses changes depending on time and place of construction. The earliest archaic lighthouse 238 Comments on the people present in a lighthouse are based on inscriptions and images. We do not know for certain, however, although it is difficult to imagine that, especially in the early years, there would not have been needed quite a large number of people to assist in the best functioning of the lighthouse. 239 While for Ravenna the lighthouse built by Augustus has not yet been found. Its mole must certainly have been impressive given that the lighthouse had to guard the Adriatic. Recent geo-archaeological investigations seems to have discovered the small island on which Claudius constructed his lighthouse, as well as moles of various dimensions ranging from 16 and -12 under the natural sand dunes. The building materials discovered include blocks of basalt and tufa. For further technical details we await the publication of the Proceedings of the Portus Conference held at the British School at Rome 3-5 March 2008. I am indebted to Prof.ssa Antonia Arnoldus-Huyzendveld of the University of Siena for this information.

48

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES Hostilia in Venetia et Histria would have been without such towers.

towers (sixth century BC) have a round (Thasos) or square plan (Jelsa-Tor). A more complex form emerges in the Hellenistic period with the lighthouse at Alexandria (square base, an octagonal second storey and a cylindrical top storey), and then develops into a variety of different forms, such as the twelve octagonal storeys of the lighthouse at Gesoriacum or the solid tower at Brigantium (although this appears to have been cylindrical in archaic times). Some typologies appear to copy one another locally with, for example, the towers at Brigantium and Ara Sistiana being very similar, as are the lighthouses at Dubris and Georiacum. It is important to distinguish between lighthouses, tower-lighthouses and lanterns. I have shown above how the theory that in every well-developed port there could only be one lighthouse no longer holds good. At Leptis Magna we find not only the lighthouse proper but also, at the other end of the mole, the slightly smaller Lantern tower (fig. 51). At Centumcellae the true lighthouse stood on the ante wall, while at the ends of the moles were four towerlighthouses, two (the turres geminae) with similar functions to that of the central lighthouse and two acting as lanterns. These four structures were in communication with the main lighthouse, particularly when situated at the harbour mouth (although probably also when placed on a hill top, as at Apamea in Syria), and helped guide sailors into port. The number of lighthouses and auxiliary towers must have varied according the difficulties presented by the location such as a particularly rocky coast (Salona, Dyrrachium), high cliffs (Seleucia, Apamea), islands or ante walls (Ostia) or shallows (Meloria).

An interesting feature of many lighthouses is that there was often a cistern at the foot or close by (Torrione del Canale S.Felice, Dyrrachium, Patara), presumably to supply drinking water for the people working in the lighthouse. Turning to representations of lighthouses on sarcophagi, while in the Late Antique period and early Middle Ages they are used to symbolise the arrival of the dead person into the port of salvation, not infrequently in the Roman period they represented instead his social status, indicating with a representation of a lighthouse that, in life, he had worked in a city port of some significance , had died at sea (as in the case of the famous sarcophagus in the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek) or symbolised the journey to the afterlife. The political significance of these structures is shown by their frequent use – in addition to their function as guiding lights for the sea and the harbour – to illuminate an imperial villa, as at Caprae and Caesarea Maritima. Indicative too is the choice of costly building materials such as Istrian stone or red marble from Verona. The ports that were not sufficiently rich to use such materials, or those that wanted to save money, used local stone, as in the case of the lighthouse at Narbo Martius, constructed in stone from the nearby island of S.Lucia. In addition to, and connected with, their political significance was their propagandistic and commercial value. It was for this reason that many city ports used an image of their port on their coinage, thus obtaining the maximum publicity for their well-appointed port and their importance as a trading centre (Apamea in Syria, Laodicea ad Mare, Perge, Panormus being just a few of the many examples). The question of the distance of the beam from these lighthouses may never be resolved unless we discover an inscription with this information. While it has been estimated that the maximum distance may have been 23-25km, it would have depended also on the fuel used, the situation of the building (on a hill, in the harbour mouth) and on its height. Further underwater and land excavations in port areas may reveal other Phoenician, Punic, Greek or Roman lighthouses that must certainly have once existed at navigational crossroads such as Athens, Thessalonica, Melita, Tharros, Abruzzo, Calabria or Corsica.

LIGHTHOUSE

Fig. 51: Reconstruction of the port of Leptis Magna according to REDDÈ-GOLVIN 2005, p. 84 The tower-lighthouses constructed for river ports were rather different. The most imposing, used also for collecting tolls, must have been placed at a predetermined distance from one another. It is likely that there was one at every spot where a canal changed name (for example, fossa Augusta, fossa Popiliola, fossa Clodia, fossa Traiana). An integrated system of light signals must have been created in the river ports of regio X and Transpadana where fog and bad weather were frequent. It is probable also that there were more structures than those known today (at Baro Zavalea, Torre Caligo, Torrione del Canale S.Felice), and it is inconceivable that ports as important as Industria in Transpadana or

49

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA INTRODUCTION ENTRIES

TO

THE

CATALOGUE

Each in the catalogue sets the port in its historical and geographical context (sources and excavations, both past and present); next the development of the port and the creation of its lighthouse (or lighthouses) is analysed in detail. The sites are referred to by their Latin names with the name of the relevant Roman province. Present-day names and countries are given in brackets. To ensure a more complete corpus of lighthouses, other, briefer, entries are included for sites that have been very recently investigated (Patara, Durrës, Canale S.Felice). These have come to my attention thanks to the generosity of those involved or through articles appearing on the internet though as yet not published in the academic journals. I have also included lighthouses known through legends that give us reason to think that archaeological evidence survived in a particular port, an example being the campanile at Adria is said to have been built on the foundations of a lighthouses from the Hellenistic period. It is for these reasons that, at the bottom of each entry, I have added comments that will assist the reader in interpreting the data, highlighting unresolved problems and pointing to areas where more research is needed. Fig. 52: Venice, church of San Marco, pala d’oro, main altar, Paolo Veneziano, San Marco at Alexandria, with the Alexandria lighthouse in the background, in HAHNLOSER-POLACCO 1994, Plate LXXXIX

For many of the sites listed, site information has been given, making it possible to check on the latest situation and find local bibliographies not always obtainable in Italian libraries.

50

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES

CATALOGUE OF LIGHTHOUSES THE ANCIENT WORLD No. 1. IOL-CAESAREA (Cherchell, Province: Mauretania Caesariensis

once the arsenal and the horrea is thought to have been due to an earthquake.247 Today archaeological investigation has been complicated by the construction of a new port which has built over buildings from the Roman period. The average depth of the harbour has been calculated variously between 3.20 and 2.50m, the latter being the most likely. A third harbour has also been identified: immediately to the east of the original dyke discovered and described by Cagnat,248 it was a large dock. Towards the sea to the north-west, another jetty is thought to have defended the port. Lack of evidence means that it is impossible to know if these different harbours were contemporary and hence to say which of them was the commercial port.

IN

Algeria)

Originally a Phoenician emporium, the city of Iol had close links with the port of Carthage although enjoying some measure of autonomy.240 The name is thought to derive from that of a Phoenician divinity. As we read in Suetonius,241 it was Juba II, eager to create a new Rome in Africa, who changed the name of the city to Caesarea. As well as 7 km of walls, Juba planned numerous buildings worthy to rival those of the imperial capital: two temples, a large forum (to which was added another, completed only in the time of Septimus Severus), a theatre and what was probably the largest amphitheatre in the Roman world (4082 m2), built at a time before the Colosseum in Rome even existed. It may have been on account of this impressive array of buildings that Caesarea became, under Claudius, the capital of Caeasariensis with the title of Colonia Claudia Caesarea242 (the city had already been elevated to the role of capital of Mauretania by King Bocchus).Further developments in the time of Severus were to make the city a notable attraction often commented on by visitors of the day.243 Overrun by the Vandals, conquered by the Byzantines and, later, destroyed by the Arabs, it was frequently prone to earthquakes, although these were not so severe as to prevent habitation.

While assumptions about the architecture around the harbour are, even today, unsure, more precise conclusions can be drawn from the excavations carried out on the island. Towards the sea, at the foot of the rocky island of Joinville (Plate. 1, fig. 1), various substructures in opus reticulatum have been identified, with brick walls thought to belong to the apse of a temple erected in the time of Juba II. On the top of the island, immediately behind this apse, is a large octagonal-shaped monument, 18m across with stones placed edgeways at the corners. It has been convincingly argued that this is the remains of a lighthouse (Plate 1, fig. 2). Cut stones placed edgeways on an octagonal base can be seen arranged in parallel one on top of the other from west to east, without taking account of the orientation of the walls that they were intended to support. Rising from each of the eight corners are further constructions, still in the same material, but this time carefully worked on all faces. The best preserved of these corners measure 2.51m externally in both direction and 1.85m on the internal face. The thickness of the wall is 1.62m. Although irregular, the structure is very carefully made, with the corners, in particular, cut in individual blocks both internally and externally, with no sign of a join. Two these solid corner foundations survive on two courses above the foundations, with a third of three courses giving a total height of 1.40m. Between these courses the sides of the octagon are connected by walls in opus incaertum, 2.32m in length and only 1.23m thick. Perhaps it was Juba II himself who wished to provide his port with a monumental lighthouse to rival that which had been constructed at the nearby city of Alexandria by the Ptolemys, a family with which Juba had close connections. The construction must, however, have been much smaller than that in Alexandria, the estimated height being between 30 and 34m.249 Although unable to imitate its Hellenistic predecessor, the lighthouse at Caesarea may well have imitated its architecture: a tower rising in decreasing storeys – octagonal in this case – with only the last storey being cylindrical. It is likely that, as in Alexandria, the structure was surmounted by a statue, some scholars suggesting the statue of Isis now in

The port and the lighthouse The port lay to the north of the western baths. As at Alexandria (no. 8), the lighthouse stood on an artificial island, linked to the mainland and to the trading port.244 In Roman times, present-day Cherchell had two ports, one military and one commercial. A small island just off the coast of the town was divided, providing a natural protection for the two harbours.245 Between the island, later called Joinville Island, and the coast, there was also the large commercial port, sheltered by the naturally occurring rocks. Despite this, the harbour was a prey to the winds from the open sea. The much smaller military port was well protected. It communicated with the commercial port by way of a very narrow (10-15 m) channel. A sea wall to the west protected it from the waves. The foundations of the walls were still visible in 1843.246 Smaller than the commercial port and lying to the north of the island, the military port was roughly hexagonal in shape. All around the port stood monuments that have been described by Shaw who saw them partly submerged under the sea. The destruction of what was 240 See BARTOLONI 1988, pp. 92-100 for the history and routes of sea traders in the Phoenician-Punic world. 241 Suet. Aug. 60. The author asserts that all the kings allied to Augustus founded many cities dedicated to him and called Caesarea. 242 C.I.L., VI, 3262; VIII, 9400. 243 “Caesarea (1)” in Der Neue Pauly, 2, Stuttgart 1997; p. 924 244 LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN 1963, pp. 178-180. 245 REDDÉ 1986, pp. 244-245. 246 RAVOISIE 1846, III, pl. XXIV. REDDÉ 1986, p. 246.

247

GSELL 1901, pp. 11-12; GSELL 1952, pp. 117-118. CAGNAT 1912, pp. 315-318. All the details of this lighthouse can be found in GRENIER 1959, pp. 215-229.

248 249

51

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA the Museum of Antiquities in Cherchell. This was not, however, found on the island, nor even nearby on the mainland.250 Constructions dating from Phoenician times to the west of the lighthouse would suggest that here stood, at an earlier date, a structure with a similar function built by the Phoenicians, but there is no definite proof of this.

tower (Plate 2, fig. 3), some 30m high, can still be seen. It may have been built on the site of the old lighthouse of the Phoenician, then Roman, city. During the thirteenth century, eight doors were added to the fortress and one of these, to the east, opened directly onto the sea.253 Archaeological excavations at the northernmost end of the coast, carried out in the early 1960s by Louis Foucher, revealed the remains of a semicircular tower that may have served as a watch tower and lighthouse as early as the Phoenician period.

Comment The structure of the lighthouse, the remains of which can be seen near the modern lighthouse in the island of Joinville, seems to be influenced by that of its predecessor at Alexandria. The only feature that we can be sure about, however, is the octagonal base, made of cut stone placed edgeways. Much less certain is the hypothesis that the statue of Isis in the Museum of Antiquities at Cherchell was the statue placed on the top of the building with its possibly cylindrical top floor.

A lighthouse, or a specola, in that spot would have been extremely useful, not so much to mark the port entrance as to guide sailors safely along the north coast with its exposure to strong north-easterly winds. In the Roman period, when it may have been a requirement for the tower to have been manned at all times, drinking water was supplied, through a system of lead piping, traces of which can still be seen in the masonry. Foucher has reservations about the existence of an inner harbour, the term cothon being applied only to an outer harbour protected by two dykes. He and Torr have argued that a cothon is an artificial manmade harbour, and this is only partly true of Adrumeto: the harbour was closed by two moles (the remains of a quay with metal bollards have been found) and by the dyke. The harbour was defended by towers: in addition to the one on the dyke, another two have been identified, their foundations coming to light as the result of a bomb explosion in 1889.254

If, however, we assume that the apsed building behind the lighthouse was the imperial palace of Juba II or a monumental building in his honour, then it is possible to say that, as elsewhere, the light from the flame in the lantern had the dual role of guiding sailors and drawing the attention of these travellers to the magnificence of Juba’s monumental city. No. 2 HADRUMETUM (Sūsa, Sousse, Tunisia) Province: Numidia Situated on the eastern coast of present-day Tunisia, the Phoenician colony of Adrumeto may have been established as early as the ninth century BC. Famous above all as Hannibal’s general quarters shortly before his attack on Scipio, the city continued to be a thriving independent centre in the Roman period. Elevated to the rank of colonia by Trajan (Colonia Concordia Ulpia Traiana Augusta Frugifera Hadrumentina), the city possessed wealthy villas, numerous cisterns and a fine port designed particularly for military needs. Archaeological investigation has been limited by the existence of the modern city on the foundations of the old one. Capital of Byzacena under Diocletian, it was conquered by Justinian and renamed Iustinianopolis.251

Comment The port of Adrumeto already had in Phoenician times three towers used as specula along its north coast where navigation was difficult on account of the north-easterly winds. The large arsenal, marked by a high lighthouse, may have been constructed as early as the second century AD when Trajan elevated the city to the status of Roman colonia. The watchtower that today dominates the fortress was erected after the Arab conquest. We know from Livy that the Phoenicians were conversant with the use of signals and that Hasdrubal used them in Spain and possibly Hannibal in Adrumeto.255 These conclusions are, however, merely conjectural, being based on the meagre archaeological evidence surviving from the ancient site, now covered by the modern city.

The port and the lighthouse The quality of the port, or cothon, of the city had already been remarked on by Caesar during the Alexandrian War.252 According to a description in Arabic by al-Bakri, the city’s arsenal lay in the area chosen in the ninth century AD by the emir, Ziyadat Allah (817-838 AD), as a departure point for the troops setting off to conquer Sicily. The site was subsequently occupied by the present fortress (qasba). In 859 AD a two-storied signal tower known as Khalaf al-Fata was built on the top of the qasba, which was situated not far from the coast. This

No. 3 SABRATHA (Sabratha, Libya) Province: Tripolitania

250

253

251

254

Lying some 70km from present-day Tripoli, the site of ancient city of Sabratha is just outside the centre of the modern town. Called Abrotonon by the Greeks, it was originally a Phoenician port in Numidia, possibly founded by colon from Tyre. The commercial importance of this emporium where the main goods traded were ivory, leather, precious fabrics and oil, can be deduced

GAUCKLER 1895, p. 61, 137, pl. XIV, 3. “Hadrumetum” in Der Neue Pauly, 5, Stuttgart, p. 64. 252 Bell.Afr., 62, 63.

“Susa” in EI, Rome 2005, p. 555. FOUCHER 1964, pp. 82-83. 255 Liv. XXII, 19,5.

52

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES from the presence of the Statio Sabratensium in the Square of the Corporations at Ostia, the port of Rome with which all the Tripolitan trading centres had frequent dealings. After the fall of Carthage in 146 BC, the city became increasingly important. In 46 BC, it was conquered by the Romans and transformed into a colonia, forming part of Tripolis, along with the cities of Oea (Tripoli) and Leptis Magna. In the third century AD, it became a bishopric. For the following two centuries, it was embroiled in the Donatist debate. In the mid-fifth century it was conquered by the Vandals and, despite the economic recovery resulting from the Byzantine conquest, in 642/3 AD it fell into the hands of the Arabs and was finally destroyed by Berbers in the eighth century.256

would have been to make it difficult for unwanted intruders to gain access to the port; the function of the second, dating back to the Phoenician era, was to guide sailors through the tricky and very narrow entrance to the harbour.259 No. 4 LEPTIS MAGNA (Homs, Lebdah, Libya) Province: Tripolitania Founded by the Phoenicians in the western coast of the Gulf of Sirte, 130km east of Oea (Tripoli), Leptis Magna was conquered by the Romans during the war against Jugurta. Claudius elevated it to the status of municipium, and it became a colonia during the Trajan era. It increased considerably in size during the reign of Septimus Severus who was born there in 146 AD. After a steep decline between the third and fourth centuries AD, it was finally destroyed by the Arabs in 644 AD.260

The port and the lighthouse The port of Sabratha is likely to have been situated in a wide inlet, naturally protected from the north-westerly winds by a low reef and from the north-easterly winds by a long sand bar. Artificially enlarged in Roman times, entrance was gained through by a narrow arm of water extending between the reef and the shore (Plate 2; fig. 4).257

The port and the lighthouse Situated with its back to a promontory, this Phoenician port did not require significant amounts of upkeep since it was formed naturally by the Wadi Lebdah (near the mouth of which the Phoenicians also built their city) that.as it flowed into the sea after the rains, carved an inlet in the sandy shore. Reefs, acting like breakwaters, protected the natural harbour.261

Remains of a wall have been identified in the area known locally as Marsa Sabratha, later a fishing port for the Egyptians and Tunisians and close to the former Paternò Moncada villa. The wall is made of paralleliped blocks of sandstone, perfectly aligned on the eastern face but irregular on the western face. The length of these blocks varies from 1 to 1.7m and the height is about 0.35m. This wall seems to relate to other blocks of stone found to the north-west of the sand bar protecting Marsa Sabratha from the mistral wind and, according to Di Vita, can be identified as the remains of a lighthouse-tower dating from pre-Roman times (Plate 3; fig. 5).

It seems odd that sources such as the Stadiasmus Maris Magni, dating from the time of Septimus Severus, when the city was at the peak of its prosperity, express surprise at the absence of a useful port in this Libyan emporium. The only explanation can be that, as early as the late third century AD, the port had silted up. A clumsy attempt to tackle the problem of the harbour had already been carried out by one of Nero’s engineers who, in a measure designed to protect the ships, created a pier that would close off the western end of the inlet thus blocking the river where it flowed into the sea and causing an accumulation of sandy silt.262 Septimus Severus constructed a new harbour (Plate 3, fig. 6), protected by the extant eastern and northern moles (but raising them higher to withstand storms). Severus’s harbour was open on the side where the current that prevented sand accumulating arrived. It was sheltered from the wind and indicated by a lighthouse... On the other side there was a square signal tower (fig. 51), still partly standing.263 The emperor had failed to reckon with the strength of the current, however, for, instead of removing the sand, it carried down so much sand that it completely filled the harbour. It may, however, have been reinstated in the Justinian period.

The foundations of the tower are immersed in the sea, but it is possible to see part of the first course of sandstone blocks, almost petrified by the seawater. Probably constructed in opus punicum, the structure has a roughly rectangular form, measuring 2.95m on the north and south sides and 2.55m on the east and west sides.258 Comment The structure described as a lighthouse-tower was identified by Di Vita in the 1960s but his discovery has only recently been published. A new investigation of the site to consider the use to which the construction was put would be timely. Considering the position in which it stands, it would have been highly suitable as a lighthouse.

Today the sea has destroyed most of the lighthouse leaving only the base (Plate 4; fig. 7), a square platform

I think Di Vita is right to suggest a connection between the wall and the lighthouse. The function of the former

259

DI VITA 2004, p. 1787. “Leptis Magna” in Der Neue Pauly, 7, Stuttgart, pp. 76-79. 261 ROMANELLI 1961, p. 91; WARD PERKINS 1993. 262 For a description of the Roman port, see BARTOCCINI 1958. 263 BARTOCCINI 1952-1953, pp. 27-37.

256

260

“Sabratha” in Der Kleine Pauly, Műnchen 1972, pp. 1485-1486; DI VITA 1999, pp. 146-163. 257 DI VITA 2004, pp. 1771-1787. 258 DI VITA 2004, p. 1784.

53

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA standing to a height of 21.20m.264 The lighthouse probably had three storeys. Traces of a base and a 6.50mlong section of two vaults with a radius of more than 2m, constructed in blocks and standing on the aforementioned platform. Excavated in the 1920s and 30s by Bartoccini, our understanding of the lighthouse is helped by his still useful axonometric and photographic reconstruction (Plate 4; fig. 8): “the threshold is a simple flat surface without raised edges and with no trace of holes for hinges…one enters the lighthouse through this corridor or small atrium” .265 A series of corridors led out of the atrium, one of them giving access to the stair led to a sloping floor of the building directly connected with the lantern storey. The discovery of a few fragments of cornice similar to those on the first floor and the symmetry of the whole building inclined Bartoccini to conclude that the second floor, now unfortunately collapsed, was also ornamented with two large arched windows which would have constituted the front of the barrel vault of the highest part of the corridor. Of the central part of the lighthouse there remains only a wall, almost 3m thick, with a niche in front and two other walls running parallel to the first, creating a series of corridors, covered with a barrel vault, that opened on the east wall of the lighthouse with two large windows, at least 4.5m high. While the internal walls are constructed in a rough opus incertum faced with small, badly cut and roughly finished blocks, the cladding of the walls of the corridors are made with more regular terracotta tiles, with the addition of the occasional tile in red clay. While it is possible to make some conjectures about the second floor, even though it has largely collapsed, there is nothing at all to be said about the lighthouse’s third storey, no trace of it remaining. During the excavations of the area, Bartoccini found a number of blocks similar to those used in the two surviving floors, but slightly less thick. He concluded that they came from the third storey of the lighthouse which had been made of the same stone. Although there is no evidence confirming it, we can suppose that the top structure that would have held the lantern was cylindrical in form and possibly surmounted by a statue such as that on the lighthouse at Alexandria and as there probably was at Ostia and on many subsequent lighthouses. Architectural fragments found at the site, carved with marine objects such as, for example, an architrave depicting two dolphins with cornucopias and sea plants, must have decorated the exterior of the lighthouse.266 Scholars have come up suggestions about the existence and form of a third storey, basing their conjectures partly on the image of the lighthouse carved in bass relief on the four-faced Arch of Septimus Severus in Leptis Magna267 in the background of a scene showing a procession (Plate 5; fig. 9). Since the 1930s, this building has been generally agreed to be the Leptis lighthouse, although there are dissenting voices such as

that of Francesca Ghedini.268 Noting that there is no sign a flame at the top of the structure, she cites Reddé’s study269 that showed that only 9 out of 49 depictions of lighthouses do not include a flame on the summit. Missing too are symbols of the sea. I do not believe, however, that these are sufficient reasons for not interpreting the building shown on the arch as the city’s lighthouse. Ghedini goes on to demonstrate that all those images omitting the flame are to be found on works of lesser importance (graffiti, coins, small bronzes and Itineraria picta). This explanation is not entirely convincing, given that only a very small number of the many representations of lighthouses in the ancient world have come down to us. I would accept, however, that the structure of the building shows a number of differences from traditional representations. This is perhaps mainly because of the frontal depiction of the building and its rather stylised form. The similarity between representations of lighthouses, mausoleums and triumphal monuments is well known. Example of the last two are the Tour Magne in Nîmes (figs 26 a b), a construction that was long thought to have been a lighthouse and used as such in the nineteenth century, and the Trophée des Alpes at Turbie in Provence. Ghedini rejects the idea that the Leptis carving shows a funerary monument (despite the fact that Herodian,270 speaking specifically about Septimus Severus, tells us how similar in appearance the funerary pyres of the third century AD were to lighthouses), opting for the explanation of triumphal monument. She does not exclude, however, that the building might have been used as a lighthouse as well. The key to understanding what this tower with its several storeys, doors and windows might be can perhaps be found by identifying the scene depicted. A passage in Ammianus Marcellinus,271 relating how Julian crossed a river branching off the Euphrates and flowing towards Ctesiphon, mentions a tower situated not far from the river in modum phari. Ghedini suggests that this is the building depicted on the arch at Leptis near the river Naarmalcha, across which a navigable canal was constructed by Trajan and later restored by Severus during his Parthian campaign.272 Intriguing as it is, Ghedini’s theory seems somewhat contrived. It would seem more logical to identify the building with the lighthouse at Leptis, an instantly recognisable symbol of Septimus Severus’s birthplace, including it as a symbol of the commercial and military role of the port of Leptis among the carvings on the triumphal arch celebrating the might of his imperial family. As to whether this same building was later used as a mausoleum for the Severus family, it is quite possible, since there are many other cases of lighthouses being used as burial places, two 268

GHEDINI 1984, pp. 74-87. I am indebted to Professor Francesca Ghedini for her help. She has changed her view, however, and now thinks that this is the Leptis lighthouse. She is still puzzled as to why the lighthouse should be appear is an imperial parade. In my opinion there is nothing strange about this if one understands the lighthouse of the city port as a symbol of the importance of the city’s trade and thus as a political advertisement. 269 REDDÉ 1979, pp. 845-872. 270 Herodian. IV, 8. 271 Amm. XXIV, II, 7. 272 GHEDINI 1984, p. 76.

264

CASSON 1971, p. 368. BARTOCCINI 1958, pp. 59-61. 266 BARTOCCINI 1958, p. 64. 267 BARTOCCINI 1931, p.111. For an interpretation of the scene on the arch, see also TOWSEND 1938 , pp. 512-524. 265

54

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES obvious examples being Taposiris Magna (no. 7) and Thasos (no. 28). Turning to the theory that it was a triumphal lighthouse raised by Severus to celebrate his victories in the Parthian campaign, just as that at Gesoriacum was for Caligula, it is true that the structure of such triumphal monuments is often similar to that of lighthouses, but it is also the case that these constructions were rarely used as lighthouse towers in the Roman period.273 A final indication that the building can be interpreted as a lighthouse is the top storey that appears to be smaller than the second floor and possibly cylindrical in form – the same shape as the storey that normally contained the lantern. The scene depicted can thus be interpreted as the triumphant return of Severus from his campaigning celebrated in the port of his city, the most characteristic element of which was its lighthouse.274

Benghazi would appear to date from around the fourth century BC. Its most flourishing period seems, however, to have been in the third to fourth centuries AD, evidence of which is a bronze coin from the period of Constantine. The port and the lighthouse A long and solid mole, constructed out of walls of dressed blocks in-filled with rubble, leads towards the sea terminating in a solid structure thought to have been the harbour lighthouse (Plate 6; fig. 11). Further west, towards Benghazi, at El Ougla, archaeologists have identified another port where the sand has been moved by storms, revealing the remains of a solid and powerful stone structure with a slanting base strong enough to withstand the waves breaking over it. This has been interpreted as a tower or, more likely, another lighthouse ancillary to the one at Phycous. Nearby, the presence of two circular basins covered with cocciopesto, perhaps for the production of garum lends weight to the argument that this was an auxiliary building for the provision of food for those maintaining the lighthouse. Here too, the date of construction would appear to be third-fourth century AD.

Comment The lighthouse at Leptis Magna must already have been in existence in the Phoenician period, but the base that can be seen today is what remains from the restoration or construction undertaken by Septimus Severus whose intentions were well known to be to make his birth place a rival to Rome, not least in terms of its buildings. In the third century AD, earthquakes had already caused the lighthouse at Alexandria to collapse and to be restored several times and, furthermore, the commercial importance of the port at Alexandria could not compete with the military importance of Leptis. It is likely that the Leptis lighthouse had a similar appearance to that at Alexandria (Plate 5, fig. 10), which is to say, a tower of several storeys decreasing in size as they ascend, the last one being cylindrical and containing the lantern. There may have been a statue on the top of an emperor carrying a patera and lance. There is no doubt that there were stairs leading up to the top of the building, and inhabitable rooms used by for the soldiers guarding the military port. The complicated layout of the corridors inside the lighthouse may have been designed to make the building accessible only to those authorised to enter it.

No. 6 APOLLONIA (Marsa Susa, Libya) Province: Cyrenaica Founded in 631 BC by colonii from Thera, this city was only 15km from Cirene for which it was the port.276 It acquired the name Apollonia (derived from Apollo, the patron god of Cirene) around the end of the second century BC. It is not situated right on the sea but lies some 20km inland. Although it was a flourishing city in Roman times, its heyday was to be in the late empire. In 359 AD its name was changed to Sozousa; in the fifth century AD it became the capital of Lybia Superior. The port and the lighthouse The port (Plate 6, fig. 12) consists of two contiguous bays, protected on the sea side by series of rocky islands connected to the shore by spits of sand. The western bay has a narrow passage to the north-west, while the eastern bay opens towards the east. The two harbours are linked by an internal canal.277

No. 5 PHYKOUS (Hamama, Libya) Province: Cyrenaica This site was very recently excavated under the direction of Prof. Sebastiano Tusa of the Soprintendenza del Mare di Palermo, Ias di Palermo, Università Suor Orsola Benincasa of Naples in collaboration with the Department of Antiquities of Libya. The following description is based on the internet site www.archaeogate.it for 18-022008, the day the discovery was made public, and on an article that recently appeared in Archeo.275

Although the word cothon has been used of this port, it is misleading because there was never a Phoenician presence here. The port of Apollonia has the typical Greek arrangement of two entrances placed so as to avoid problems created by north-easterly winds. Around the mid-second century BC, the simple harbour at Apollonia was converted into a military port with fortifications278and living quarters. Remains of these

From the ceramic finds (Attic and Campana) and remaining walls, the port identified to the east of 273 Picard, for example, asserts that the Trophée des Alpes at La Turbie in France was also used as a lighthouse, see. PICARD 1957, p. 300. The height of the monument makes this unlikely, however, because such a high signal tower would be difficult to see from a ship. 274 BARTOCCINI 1931, p. 111. 275 MARIMPIETRI 2008, pp. 12-13.

276

“Apollonia di Cirenaica” in EAA, Rome 1958, p. 483. For a recent study of the topography of Apollonia and its port see LARONDE-SINTÈS 1998, pp. 301-310. 278 For the excavations at Apollonia see GRIFFITH PEDLEY 1967, pp. 141-147; BACHIELLI 1998, p. 228. 277

55

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA monument.287 The tower alone measures 30m.288 Constructed in local limestone, it has three storeys: a square base, an octagonal second storey and a cylindrical third storey where the lantern must have been. It is, in other words, a perfect replica of the Alexandria lighthouse. Small wooden steps once led from the square base to a narrow stair on the north side of the octagon. This became a spiral staircase at the cylindrical level and gave access to the top of the tower. Since the monument was built over a funerary chamber in the middle of a necropolis, there are those who have argued that the tower had a merely decorative function.289 It would seem unlikely, however, that the unknown architect of the tower at Abusir would have bothered to built connecting stairways over three floors if the building was not used as a lighthouse. These stairways were clearly used by the lighthouse keepers to gain access to the top of the tower to light the fire that would guide sailors returning from Cirenaica across Lake Mareotis, the shores of which were, among other things, quite rocky, making docking difficult. It must be conceded that this tower has no windows of the kind of shown in depictions of lighthouses on coins and in mosaics, but in old photographs taken before the early twentieth-century restoration there are signs of at least one window at the first floor level (Plate 8, fig. 15). The argument, put forward by Fawzi el Fakharani, that the use of a lighthouse would not be required by a lake is contradicted by the continued use of lighthouses around the most important Italian lakes (and elsewhere) to guide those ships at night.290

structures have been discovered on the coast. This function became less important in Roman times but, from the first century AD, it became an important trading port with a flourishing economy and many new buildings. The remains of a round lighthouse have been identified on the eastern-most island (Plate 7, fig. 13).279 More research and excavations on this site are needed since at present nothing more is known about this lighthouse, although we can guess that it took the usual form of a series of decreasing storeys concluding in a cylindrical-shaped storey housing the lantern. No. 7 TAPOSIRIS MAGNA (Abusir, Egypt) Province: Aegyptus Taposiris (Plate 7, fig. 14a), now called Abusir, lies 45km to the west of Alexandria. Its old name is derived from a word meaning “tomb of Osiris”. According to the sources, it was here that Seth scattered the dismembered parts of his murdered brother.280 The city was founded earlier than the Hellenistic period and we read in Callisthenes that Alexander the Great called in here on his voyage to Siwat,281 The city’s heyday was, however, in the Ptolemaic period. Taposiris lies between the Mediterranean, to the north, and Lake Mareotis, now called Maryut, to the south. The port and the lighthouse The port gave onto both the sea and the lake.282 Strabo asserts,283 however, that in his day (first century BC – first century AD) the city was not situated by the water which would suggest that the port lay more in the direction of Lake Mareotis that of the Mediterranean. The city benefited from having a direct link to the Nile, through the Canopic branch, and to the Red Sea, through Darius’s canal. The Mediterranean could easily be reached by land. The size of the lake port suggests that the city played a pivotal role in trade between Egypt and Libya.284 As well as being a commercial port, it is quite possible that Taposiris was also a military port where warships could take shelter. The city is mentioned again in the second century AD by the geographer Claudius Ptolemaeus and is listed on Tabula Peutingeriana (segment VII). Of the ruins still visible in situ the only identified constructions are the Temple of Osiris (dating from the fourth century BC and of which very little remains, but which was used later by pilgrims travelling to Mecca),285 and the lighthouse, the form of which took its inspiration from the lighthouse at nearby Alexandria. It was built (or, at least, completed) in the Ptolemaic times (third century BC).286 The tower at Taposiris (Plate 7, fig. 14b) stands 127m high including the base and consists of three unequal storeys over a funerary

Further evidence of the use of the tower as a lighthouse is found in a graffito on the inner walls of the tomb (Plate 8, fig. 16a. Very similar to those still visible at Ostia Antica, it shows the Taposiris lighthouse, with its name alongside inscribed in Greek.291 Even though the graffito was already in poor condition in the early twentieth century, the upper part of the tower could clearly be seen with its six battlements and five small windows. Thiersch, commented on the presence of the word Philon, used twice in the graffito, and suggested that the biggest difference between the Taposiris lighthouse and that at Alexandria lay in the dimensions of the bottom storey. This, for the lighthouse at Taposiris, would appear to be much lower that that at Alexandria, the reason being that the light from the fire at the top had less need for height.292 The Taposiris lighthouse would have guided sailors arriving from Lake Mareotis, whereas the light from the Alexandria lighthouse would have needed to be visible by ships arriving from the Mediterranean. The use of the lunate sigma is characteristic of the third century BC and the reference to the lighthouse at Alexandria that, at the time of its construction was the only one to be

279

287

MUCKELROY 1981, p. 174; REDDÉ-GOLVIN 2005, p. 32. EMPEREUR (2) 1998, p. 224. 281 Pseudo-Callistene, Rom. Alex., 31. 282 VIVIAN 2002, p. 269. 283 Strab. XVII, 1,14; 1, 16. 284 BARD 1998, p. 60 285 VIVIAN 2002, p.270. 286 EMPEREUR (1) 1998, p. 42.

BARD 1998, p. 60 EMPEREUR (1) 1998, p.226. 289 STUCCHI 1959, p. 23 states that Adriani definitely favours the idea of the funerary finction of such a building, whereas Thiersch was convinced it was a lighthouse. See ADRIANI 1952, pp.137-139. 290 EL FAKHARANI 1974, p. 258. 291 THIERSCH 1909, p.50; BEDON 1988, p.58. 292 THIERSCH 1909, p. 51.

280

288

56

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES called Pharos, gives further weight to the theory that the unknown architect of the tomb-lighthouse at Taposiris used as a model the famous lighthouse at Alexandria. The use of the lighthouse as a symbol of the safe arrival into the haven of salvation, to become so important in Christian times, was already gaining currency. As the lighthouse at Alexandria guided the sailor safely to land, so that at Taposiris guided the soul of the person buried there into the next world, to a safe arrival in the harbour of salvation.293 It is tempting to think that this replica of the Alexandria lighthouse was chosen as a burial place by its architect, Sostratus of Cnidos, building himself a tomb imitating the monument to which he owed his fame.

for the war against Licinius297 and it remained important until the Byzantine period.

No. 8 ALEXANDREIA Province: Aegyptus

‘EkkÉmym syt±qa, VÇqou sjopËm, º ðma Pqyte³, SÍsqator ñstgsem DenivÇmour JmÊdior: oÕ cÀq Ñm AÚcÌptz sjopaà oìqeor o½ Ñpà mÉsym, ÐkkÀ walaà wgk maÌkowor ÑjtÈtatai. To³ wÇqim eÕhe²Çm te jaà ëqhiom aÚheqa tÈlemeim pÌqcor ëd’×pkÇtym vaÊmet’ÐpÄ stadÊym âlati, pammÌwior dÁ ho´r Ñm jÌlati maÕtgr ëxetai Ñj joquv±r p³q lÁca jaiËlemom, jaà jem Ñp’aÕtÄ dqÇloi TaÌqou JÈqar, oÕd’çm ÐlÇqtoi Syt±qor, PqyteÕ, FgmÄr Û t¨de pkÈym300

(Iskenderjieh,

According to an epigram by the third-century BC poet, Poseidippus of Pella,298 the construction of the extraordinary lighthouse tower, commissioned by Ptolemy I Soter (305-283BC) and probably completed around 279BC during the reign of his son and successor, Ptolemy II Philadelphus (283-246BC), was entrusted to the famous architect Sostratus of Cnidos.299 He positioned the lighthouse, dedicated by him to sailors and the Saviour gods, on the north-eastern tip of the island of Pharos:

Egypt)

Alexandria, in Lower Egypt, may have been founded by Alexander the Great in 332 BC during his brief stay in Egypt with the intention of assuring Greek domination over the Nile. Standing on the tongue of land separating Lake Mareotis (Maryut) from the Mediterranean, it was constructed according to a grid plan. The city flourished under the Ptolemys who beautified it with imposing buildings including the famous lighthouse commissioned by Ptolemy I Soter but only carried out in the reign of his son, Ptolemy Philadelphus. It was conquered in 642 AD by Arab forces led by Amr ibn al-As but the city continued to be an important port, becoming very wealthy through the imposition of a tax on every commercial transaction and on every shop in the city. Written sources say that, after the conquest, the Arabs built a mosque within the lighthouse. Alexandria commercial success reached a peak in the Mamluk period when all goods coming from the Red Sea and going to the Mediterranean had to pass through its port. In 1477, Sultan Qaitbey built the fort bearing his name on the ruins of the lighthouse.294

Strabo301 tells us that the architect used a white stone in the construction of his tower. Pliny302 briefly mentions the lighthouse in his chapter on marble, which would lead one to suppose that the white stone mentioned by Strabo must have been marble. Recently, however, it has been suggested by Grimm303 that the stone was a limestone. In 1994, the French archaeologist Empereur, director of the submarine excavations at Alexandria, suggested that people have been too quick to give credence to Pliny’s words, while paying too little attention to Strabo. His view, based partly on finds made during his submarine excavations, is that the lighthouse was built of a local limestone, while the large carved blocks, for which limestone is unsuitable, were of granite from Aswan.304 A

The port and the lighthouse

297

Zos. II, 22. WEIL 1879 pp. 28-33; BERNARD 1966, p.102; GUTZWILLER 2005, pp. 105-107. Poseidippos’s evidence is the oldest source to have survived. The papyrus was found in 1879 near the Serapeum at Memphis, see GIORGETTI 1977, pp. 246-252; THOMPSON 1987, pp. 105121. 299 According to BARBAGLI 2003, p. 110, Sostratus was not the architect of the lighthouse but an important figure at the Ptolemaic court. It was he who financed and dedicated the building. Barbagli argues this on the basis of the fact that only Strab. XVII, 1,6 speaks of Sostratus as the architect whereas the other sources descruibe him as “author”. I take the contrary view and believe that not only did he provide at least some of the funds but also personally designed and built the lighthouse. 300 Poseippos, Epigramm, 115, “This tower that watches over Pharos or Proteus, Lord of these lands, was erected by Sostraus, Cnidus, son of Dexiphanes for the safety of the Greeks. In Egypt there are no mountain peaks, as on the islands: but on the low-lying land near the water’s edge there is a shore where the ships come to find moorings. For this reason, this tower rises tall and straight into the air, visible on the unapproachable rocks by day; by night the sailor travelling on the sea will see shining from the top of the tower a great flame and, if he directs himself towards it, he will surely speed straight to the Bull’s horm and the help of Zeus the Saviour will not fail him, or that of kindly Proteus”. (Trans. C. Higgitt). 301 Strab. XVII, 1,8 p. 15. 302 Plin. nat. XXXVI, 83 p. 16. 303 GRIMM 1998, p. 43. 304 EMPEREUR 1998, pp. 40-64.

Running through the port (Plate 9, fig. 17), begun by Alexander the Great or, more likely, by Demetrius Phalereus, was a long bridge or dyke, the Heptastadion, connecting the city to the island of Pharos on which the tower of the same name was erected.

298

This dyke, inspired perhaps by that at the Phoenician colonia of Tyre, divided the western harbour (Eunostos) from the eastern harbour (Great Harbour).295 The island of Pharos and its great tower dominated the Great Harbour, the latter being greatly enlarged during the third century BC to allow safe access to even the biggest ships. This harbour also had a temple dedicated either to Aphrodite or, more probably, to Isis Pharia, protecting goddess of sailors.296 The port was active, for military purposes at least, in 324AD when it supplied some ships

293

See Ch. 5. “Alexandreia” in Der Neue Pauly, Stuttgart 1997, pp. 463-664. ALLARD 1979 pp. 500-503 ; REDDÉ 1986, pp.241-244. 296 GRIMM 1998, pp. 42-3. 294 295

57

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA sailors to be careful.310 In a later epigram, Poseidippus tells us that, thanks to the intervention of Queen Arsinoe, sailors can voyage safely since even during a storm the sea will be made smooth.311

similar alternation of these two types of stone can also be found in the Mamluk Qaitbey fortress (1477-1479, Plate 9, fig. 18), built on the ruins of the lighthouse. It seems unlikely that a ruler of the Ptolemaic period would have allowed an architect to inscribe his own name on a building of such importance without also adding that of his sovereign. Empereur suggests that the dedication to Zeus the Saviour, mentioned in Posidippus, refers to the figure of Ptolemy. In dedicating the lighthouse tower to Zeus, it was Sostratus’s intention to dedicate it indirectly to Ptolemy. On the other hand, there is the story told by Lucian,305 of how the architect inscribed the letters of the name of the sovereign in plaster (or perhaps the limestone mentioned by Grimm) knowing that, with the passage of time, these would flake off, exposing what the ingenious architect had written beneath the word Ptolemy: his own name, Sostratus.306

Representations of the lighthouse appear for the first time on coins minted during the reign of Domitian (81-96AD) (Plate 10, fig. 19).312 At this period, it is depicted as a two-storied construction consisting of a conical tower surmounted by a statue of a naked, beardless man and, on the lower storey, two Tritons blowing buccinae. The lighthouse continues to be represented in a similar way on coins from the periods of Trajan (98-117AD) and Hadrian (117-138AD), but its iconography changes during the reign of Antoninus Pius (138-161AD).313 Here, the tower is shown in the more familiar form of a building of three storeys in diminishing sizes with a statue on the top. Next to the building is the figure of Isis Pharia,314 the protecting goddess of sailors, holding a billowing sail (Plate 10, fig. 20a). There is a further iconographical change during the reign of Commodius (180-192AD),315 the figure of Isis being substituted by a ship that approaches the lighthouse tower with billowing sails (Plate 10, fig. 20b). The lighthouse in this case still appears as a three-storied building: the lowest level (estimated by Thiersch as 57m high), where the entrance door is shown, is square, the next is octagonal with Tritons on the sides (34m high) while the third is a little conical tower (7m high) for the lantern. On the cupola of the building is shown a bronze statue of a naked man, possibly beardless. He holds some objects in his hands, but what they are it is difficult to say (see the discussion below). The famous Greek mathematician and physicist Archimedes (287-212BC) is thought to have made a parabolic mirror, ustore, with which, using the cone theory developed by Euclid in the fourth century BC, the light from the tower could be projected over the sea even by day.316 If we are to believe Flavius Josephus,317 the

Meanwhile, Pliny, in the chapter mentioned above, makes further interesting comments about the lighthouse. The building of the lighthouse cost Ptolemy the enormous sum of 800 talenti (the equivalent of 20,800 kg of silver).307 He also says that the light from the lighthouse was so strong that, since it was not intermittent, there was a risk that sailors might mistake it for a star. There was a similar problem with later lighthouse towers modelled on that at Alexandria, including those at Ostia and Ravenna. As for the precise date of the inauguration mentioned by Poseidippus, the sources disagree. According to the Suda, an iconographic lexicon dating from the Byzantine period (tenth century AD), the date was 297 BC, whereas the church historian Eusebius (fourth century AD)308 gives both 283 and 282BC. The historian Ammianus Marcellinus (fourth century AD),309 asserts incorrectly that the tower was built for and in the reign of Cleopatra VII. The famous queen did, however, have a connection with the lighthouse since she ordered its restoration after the occupation of the island by some of Julius Caesar’s troops. Interestingly, a little further on in the same papyrus bearing his epigram on the Alexandria lighthouse, Poseidippus states that Admiral Callicrates built a temple to Arsinoe Cipride between the tip of the island of Pharos and the mouth of Canopus, easily visible from a distance to sailors even in rough seas (the poet’s actual words are “above the waves”) at the point where the winds from Africa are strongest. It is possible that it acted as a “lighthouse” in daylight hours when the lights of the tower had not been lit, or that it stood as a sign to warn sailors that the winds at that point (especially the westerly zephyrus that blows from Sicily) were particularly strong. This temple was built much later than the lighthouse, perhaps because it had become clear that another type of signal was necessary at that spot to warn

310

Poseidippos, Epigramm., 116, ed. Oscar Mondadori, Milan 2008. The temple was built in honour of the sister and wife of Ptolemy Philadelphus (this relationship reinforcing their assimilation with Isis and Osiris just as happened with Ptolemy I Soter and Berenice) who died in 270BC, which is to say at least twenty years after the construction of the lighthouse. 311 Poseidippos, Epigramm., 119, ed. Oscar Mondadori, Milan 2008. 312 BMC, ALEXANDRIA, p. 41, no. 343. 313 THIERSCH 1909 pp.6-8, GRIMM 1998, p.46. 314 It is almost certain that there was still, in Roman times, a temple dedicated to Isis next to the famous tower. The figure of Isis Pharia also appears on other coins from the Alexandrine mint; EMPEREUR 1998, p. 87. 315 THIERSCH 1909, p.10. 316 For the dimensions of the different storeys of the lighthouse and the reference to Archimedes, see THIERSCH 1909. Regarding the height, the Arab traveller Edrisi gives the total height of the building as 166 m. It is likely, however, that this is an exaggeration due to his wonder at the sight of such a magnificent construction. The same applies to other authors who suggest that the the beam could been seen from a distance of 150 km, see LEGER 1979, pp. 501-503. The presence of a rotating concave mirror on the lantern is confirmed by the thireteenth-century Arab writer, Abdul Feddal, although we cannot believe everything he says – for example that the lighthouse was a cylindrical building of eight storeys. It is possible that when he saw the lighthouse it had already been converted into a minaret when it was incorporated into the sultan’s fortress a century later. See: THIERSCH 1909, p. 52; MANFREDINI- PESCARA 1985, p. 9.

305

Lukian. Quomodo istoria inscribenda sit, 62. BERNARD 1966, pp. 103-104. 307 GRIMM 1998 p. 43. 308 Eus. Chron. ed. Schòene, p.118. For the two quotations, see also GRIMM 1998 p. 45. 309 Amm. XXII 16,9. 306

58

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES that of a modern ship’s hooter. Veitmeyer,325 whose important study was published posthumously in 1900, notes that no Greek author mentions a fire on the top of a lighthouse before the first century AD. Since he died in 1899, however, it is possible that he may not have had a chance to study the aforementioned epigram by Poseidippus (discovered in 1879) that mentions a light on the top of the tower. This could only have been produced with flames.

light cast a beam of 300 stadia (about 53km) with a height of 180m. According to Russo,318 for reasons which we shall see below, the height could not be more than 100m, the distance of maximum visibility in a straight line. One thing we can be fairly certain about, given also the cylindrical shape of the area containing the lantern, is that the lantern or parabolic mirror rotated. There would have been no point in projecting a fixed light that would have been of no help to sailors arriving from a different direction.319 Early sources, accounts by Arab travellers, and reconstructions dating from the twentieth century suggest that the overall maximum height was somewhere between 125 and 166m. Recent studies, however, have inclined towards a lower height of 100m. It is true that a higher building would have been less useful since a light projected from a higher point would not have been seen by sailors. Finally, we have evidence from the twelfth century AD (between 1115 and 1117), written by Arab traveller Abu al-Haggag,320 that there was a flight of steps (Plate 11, fig. 21a), 15m ASL,321 giving access to the door on the first floor. All this corresponds, more or less, with Thiersch’s early twentieth-century reconstruction. His dimensions, however, are slightly different from those given in the descriptions by Arab travellers, with a first floor of 51m, a second floor of 34m and the third of 26m. These differences are not of great significance and Thiersch’s reconstruction(Plate 11, fig. 22a still has plausibility today as well as the recent reconstruction by Hairy (Plate 11, fig. 22b).322 Evidence for the existence of the Tritons on the corners of the second storey, for example, whether two or four in number, has now been proven. Using a mechanism that is as yet not fully understood, we know that the arrival of a ship in harbour323 was greeted by the sounding of the Tritons’ buccinae,324 a sound that must have been not dissimilar to

Continuing the work of Thiersch, Forbes,326 in the midnineteen-sixties, suggested that the tower at Alexandria did not become a proper lighthouse until some time between 45 and 61AD. Neither scholar, however, takes account of the sources, preceding Pliny’s account, that mention a light from the lighthouse, and particularly Poseidippus.327 If we accept that a signalling system was working in Alexandria, along the lines described by Polyaenus and Polybius,328 before the Roman periods, there would seem to be no reason for such an imposing structure. Secondly, it would seem impossible for the tower to emit a light without the use of fire. The only satisfactory answer to these contradictions would seem to me to be the hypothesis that, in its early days, the lighthouse did not have a permanent fire, making use instead of an ustore mirror as mentioned above. Alternatively, and perhaps more probably, perhaps a mirror of this type was used only during daylight hours, when a fire would not have been necessary. If this was the case, however, it would have been very difficult (as well as very expensive) to project a light for a distance of almost 60km at night, and particularly in bad weather, without the use of fire. Such a fire would have been fuelled by pitch, vegetable (or animal) oil and wood,329 materials that were convenient because highly combustible. Before a brief examination of the architecture of the interior of the lighthouse, one other problem relating to the exterior remains: that of the male nude statue on the top of the cylindrical top storey. Who does it represent? What does he hold in his hand? Before going any further, we should recall that the Alexandria lighthouse underwent a number of transformations over the

317

Ios. bell. Iud., IV, 10,5. RUSSO 2001, p. 141, n. 81. He arrives at this distance by calculating as follows: “the distance of the horizon from a height h is √2Rh, where R is the radius of the Earth”. Since I am not a mathematician and hence not able to enter into the merits of this calculation, I confine myself to offering the author’s results, leaving it to experts in the field to evaluate them. Rounding up the height to 100m, taking into account the difference in sea level, and giving the distance the value of 15m, gives a value of 49.5m, or 312 stadia, for the distance, a figure that fits well with the words of Flavius Josephus. 319 RUSSO 2001, pp. 142-143. 320 EMPEREUR 1998, pp. 104-105; VRETTOS 2001. 321 KÖSTER 1923, p. 199. This is probably based on the description by the Arab traveller Abdoul Haggag; BERNARD 1966, p. 106-107. Here again, Russo does not agree, giving a height for the ramp of only 5 m. For other Arab descriptions of the Alexandira lighthouse, see PALACIOS 1933, pp. 241-292. 322 Thiersch’s excellent reconstruction is based mainly on his personal inspection of the lighthouse-tower of Taposiris Magna (No. 7), near Abousir, 40km from Alexandria. Still partly visible today, it is held to be the first replica of the Alexandria lighthouse. 323 GRIMM 1998, p. 43. 324 VEITMEYER 1900, p. 15; THIERSCH 1909, p. 3; NEUBURGER 1919, p. 249; the latter all based themselves on the words of Flavius Josephus and Solinus. For a discussion of these sources, see Chapter 2. However, we know that, in Italy and France, as late as the early twentieth century, the light of a lighthouse was made using the Carcel system, as established by Dumas and Regnault: the intensity of light of a lamp with a nozzle of a diameter of 18mm burns 42gr colza oil per hour with a flame 40m high. In other words, vegetable oil was still being used. See on this subject: CATTOLICA-LURIA 1916, pp. 14-18. 318

325

VEITMEYER 1900, p. 10 confirms that neither Caesar nor Strabo mention the fire specifically. Pliny, in the mid-first century AD, was the first Latin author to refer to it, albeit briefly. This is why the theory has been put forward that, at first, there was a mirror ustore or reflector that reflected not a flame but the light of the sun or the moon. This is, in my view, unlikely since the lighthouse would then have been unable to emit a beam on days when there was rain or fog. 326 FORBES 1966, p. 183. 327 This is not the place to revisit all the sources mentioning the light from the Alexandria lighthouse. The reader is referred to the Chapter on sources, bearing in mind that they generally talk about the light or signal rather than the fire. Veitmeyer sought to disprove the view that the lighthouse was originally built as a fortress rather than a lighthouse tower. Without going into details, I think it important to note that, especially in the first and last years of its existence, the lighthouse had multiple uses: lighthouse, lookout tower and fortress. 328 For the length of lighthouse beams, see Chapter 5, pp. 35-38. 329 KÖSTER 1923 , p. 199; THIERSCH 1909, pp. 3-4.

59

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA deified Ptolemy and Berenice.336 In the 1960s,337 the statue was thought to represent Ptolemy I, whose lighthouse it was. It is interesting to note, however, that, on coins from the time of Domitian to that of Commodus, the iconography of the statue does not change. For this reason, I think it improbable that the statue on the top of the lighthouse was a Ptolemy, unless in divine form, and this hypothesis I have already excluded. It is inconceivable that an emperor like Augustus, for example, would have allowed the figure of an oriental sovereign on top of a monument to lord it over a city conquered for Rome. Similarly, after spending who knows how much money on the restoration of the lighthouse, Antoninus Pius would not have been best pleased to find a Ptolemy receiving the credit. The fact that they may have left the two colossal statues of a deified Ptolemy and wife, in recognition of the preceding dynasty, is less surprising given that they were less recognisable as Hellenistic sovereigns, although allies of the Romans. In 1937, a glass vase was discovered at Begram, to the north of Kabul, Afghanistan, bearing an image of the lighthouse at Alexandria. Here the statue on the top is rather bigger than on a coin (Plate 12, fig. 23a). The structure of the lighthouse has been simplified to a two-storey tower, but the presence of the Tritons shows that it is intended to be the monument in Alexandria.338 The vase, dating from the second century BC, is probably a souvenir 339 bought by a Greek tourist in Alexandria. The statue of the top of the lighthouse could be identified as Poseidon in that the object he is carrying looks like an oar.340 Picard,341 by contrast, interprets the figure as a heroic Ptolemy with a lance. Picard’s argument is based on the fact that the male figure appears to be beardless and representations of a beardless Poseidon are very rare in the Hellenistic period. Gabriel suggests that it represents something similar to the colossal figure of Helios, inspired perhaps by the Colossus of Rhodes, while Seyrig,342 after considering the idea of an oar, argues that the object can be interpreted as a rudder, meaning that the divinity is Tyche Poliade.343

centuries, and these were not just architectural but also iconographic.330 One possible theory is that the figure of Ptolemy II stood on the top of the lighthouse. Recent finds by marine archaeologists, reported by Jean Yves Empereur,331 have included the colossal figure of a Ptolemy, dressed as a pharaoh and making a pair with the equally colossal statue of Isis discovered in 1962.332 The latter figure was more than seven metres high although broken at the knees.333 On the basis of these two finds, it has been suggested that the two colossal statues represent Ptolemy II and his wife as divinities. Unfortunately, there is no inscription proving that this is true and the statues might equally well represent Ptolemy I and Berenice. Either way, the political intention is clear: the image of the deified royal couple is placed at the entrance to the city (in front of the lighthouse, therefore) as an incarnation of the dynasty that had set up such a costly monument. Thiersch,334 writing in the early twentieth century, interpreted the statue on the top of the monument as representing Poseidon with his trident. This would seem logical, given the connection between the lighthouse and the sea. Sostratus’s dedication to the “Saviour gods” has, however, led more recent scholars335to suggest the Dioscuri, protecting gods of sailors and the sea, as dedicatees. This hypothesis seems highly unlikely, for reasons both of space and safety. It would, in my opinion, have been difficult to erect a pair of statues on the top of the lighthouse and the extra weight would have posed a serious threat to the otherwise famously solid structure. If a statue of the Dioscuri was indeed there, it would have been wiser to place it inside the building, Since Poseidippus’s epigram is dedicated to Zeus the Saviour, some scholars have concluded that the statue represents Zeus with a thunder bolt in his hand (or a long torch) or perhaps a deified Ptolemy shown in the form of Zeus or Serapis. This latter hypothesis would seem to be contradicted by Empereur’s more convincing theory that statues of the deified couple were set up at the foot of the building. It seems unlikely that the images would be repeated at the top of the lighthouse. A more fruitful line of enquiry has been initiated by Hairy who suggests that Poseidippus’s dedication to the saviour gods refers to the

A glass intaglio (Plate 12, fig. 23b) of the first century BC shows the statue of a male nude holding a kind of lance in his left hand and a round object, possibly a patera, in the right.344 On one side of the building stands

330 While the architectural changes may have been due to natural factors (earth- and seaquakes that occurred up to the date of its disappearance in the fourteenth century AD), iconographic changes depended mainly on the ruler of the time. The political programme in Alexandria also changed with the ruler, with that of the Hellenistic sovereign Ptolemy being very different from that of the Roman emperor Augustus. The programme of Antoninus Pius, to whom, according to the sources, we owe a systematic reconstruction of the monument, was different again, as were the iconographic programmes of the Byzantine Theodosius and, lastly, the Persian Khosrau II. 331 EMPEREUR 1998, pp. 88-93. 332 On the Ptolemaic period sculptures found in the sea around Alexandria, see GODDIO-CLAUSS 2006, pp. 54-57; 164-171. 333 BARBAGLI 2003, p. 217. 334 THIERSCH 1909, p. 3. 335 MANFREDINI-PESCARA 1985, p. 8. While this source cannot be claimed to be reliable, it is an example of how, until recently, the Dioscuri were thought to be the subject of the statue on the top of the tower.

336

HAIRY 2005, p. 31. An archaeologist and also an architect, Hairy’s view that the lighouse also had a funerary function is based not only on its similarity to the famous lighthouse-tomb at Taposiris, but also, and most importantly, on the use of pink granite, normally used for constructions of a funerary type dedicated to Osiris. 337 CASSON 1964, p. 180. 338 PICARD 1976, pp. 68-71. 339 Souvenirs of this kind were common in the ancient world. They were not unlike the little Leaning Towers of Pisa or Eiffel Towers that can be found everywhere today. For the ancient world, we only have to think of the lighthouse-shaped lamp found in Libarna, now in the reserve collection of the Museo di Antichità in Turin, CARDUCCI 1949, p. 68. 340 EMPEREUR 1998, p. 50. 341 PICARD 1976, p. 70. 342 SEYRIG 1941 p. 262, n. 2. 343 For both quotations, see PICARD 1976, pp. 74-95. In my view, the statue represents a male figure nor a female one and so cannot be of Tyche Poliade. 344 EMPEREUR 1998, p. 50.

60

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES Giorgetti suggests is a sundial,349 used with a symbolic intent, with the Sun representing Christ and Time, indicated by the sundial, as Salvation. We should not make too much of this, however, since the scene showing the lighthouse is only one of the many scenes making up the Libyan mosaic. Furthermore, the claim that the figure represents Christ on a pagan monument where there are no other Christian themes is disputable. The Alexandria lighthouse was restored during the reign of Anastasius. A statue of Poseidon probably stood on the top of it, as suggested by an epigram in the Anthologia Palatina:

the figure of Isis Pharia adjusting a wind-filled sail while, on the other side, stands Poseidon with a trident, the object being depicted very differently from the lance held by the statue on the top of the building and so not likely to be confused with it. These two figures of divinities could also refer to the likely presence of two temples nearby dedicated to the same divinities. It this is the case, it might have seemed strange to represent one of the two a second time on the top of the house. Consequently, this could add weight to the theory of a Zeus or a Helios. While Helios could well be associated with a light “as bright as the sun” that the lighthouse was able to create even in the nightime, we should not forget that Poseidippus’s dedication, contemporary with the building, was to the father of the gods, Zeus the Saviour. Other explanations might be that the artist who carved the intaglio may only have seen the lighthouse from a distance and mistaken Zeus’s thunder bolt for a lance; alternatively, he may never have seen the building and only had a second-hand verbal description to work from. Three further pieces of documentary evidence are of relevance. The first is a text from the fifth century AD that mentions the restoration of the lighthouse by someone by the name of Ammonios during the reign of the Byzantine emperor Anastasius I. This document refers specifically to a statue of Poseidon.345 The second piece of evidence is the Justinian mosaic (Plate 12, fig. 24) from Gasr Elbia (Qasr-el-Libya)346 dating from 539AD, that is to say from the sixth century by which time Egypt had been completely Christianised. This mosaic shows the lighthouse at Alexandria, clearly identified as such with an inscription, as a structure of two storeys, both of which are square and turreted. One side of the second storey is a spherical cupola over which stands a cylindrical object held by a beardless male figure whose head is surrounded by rays. Since the date of the mosaic is Justinian and hence Christian, rather than seeing this figure as Helios it might be more accurate to interpret it as Christ-Helios.347 It seems clear that the mosaic shows the Alexandria lighthouse as a fortified place, emphasising the theme, found from the earliest Christian times, of the lighthouse as a divine symbol of a light that attracts and comforts.348 It has been suggested that this same idea accounts for the fact that church towers and mosque minarets were often built on the foundations of ancient lighthouses or sought to imitate them (Chapter 6).

I am a tower, I bring aid to wandering sailors, by lighting the rescuing fire of the god Poseidon350 The last iconographic evidence I would like to examine is a Byzantine mosaic from around 1200. Today in the Cappella Zen in the Baptistery of St Mark’s in Venice (Plate 13, fig. 25), it shows the journey made by the evangelist St Mark to Alexandria. Next to the saint’s we see the lighthouse of Alexandria, once more with its three storeys but lacking a statue on the cupola. It seems that, even after its collapse, the lighthouse at Alexandria continued to attract the attention of visitors and be identified with the city as a whole. As late as the fourteenth century, a scene on the famous Pala d’Oro in the Basilica of St Mark’s in Venice painted by Paolo Veneziano shows little more than the lighthouse to indicate that St Mark has arrived safely at Alexandria (fig. 52). It is worth noting that on the Tabula Peutingeriana351 (Plate 13, fig. 26) the lighthouse is shown as a building with three storeys, two square and one cylindrical. A flame burns on the top, but there is no statue. The image here is more schematic than those found on coins even from the reign of Commodius.352 On the coins we see a tower with storeys that decrease in size towards the top is clearly visible, together with both the Tritons on the corners and the statue on the top. Neither of these latter elements appears on the famous Roman map. A variety of accounts by Arab travellers followed, often with drawings of the lighthouse, almost always without a statue on the top. In the summer of 1303, a violent earthquake caused the lighthouse to collapse. The Mamluk sultan Qaitbey decided at this time to build his fortress on the spot, the structure embracing what was left of the tower,353 although Ibn Battŭta was to write in 1326 that he had personally seen one of the facades of the ruined lighthouse.354 During the Renaissance, when the Alexandria lighthouse was included as one of the Seven

Giorgetti interprets the figure as Christ, adding that he is pointing his sword “at a baffling roundish object” which

349

GOODCHILD 1961, pp. 218-223. Anth. Pal., 674. Trans C. Higgitt after ed. Einaudi, Turin 1980 351 The Tabula Peutingeriana dates from the twelfth-thirteenth century, and is thought to be based on an original of the third-second century BC. It must have been expanded in the fourth century AD since the city of Costantinopole appears. 352 For representations of lighthouses on coins see GIARDINA 2007, pp. 145-160. 353 See on this subect the aforementioned works by THIERSCH 1909 and EMPEREUR 1998 a, b. 354 ANOUAR TAHER 1998, p. 55.

345

350

EMPEREUR 1998, p. 50. Since we are dealing with a restoration, it is possible that the unknown author of the text was someone who had been directly involved in the work, in which case he wuld have personally seen the statue and the information would be exact. The period in question is, of course, quite late and it is possible that the statue had been changed in the interim. 346 For a full discussion of the mosaic see: GIORGETTI 1977, pp. 254261. 347 GUARDUCCI 1975, pp. 659-686, Plates I-II. 348 GIORGETTI 1977 p. 254.

61

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Wonders of the Ancient World, a mythical version of the building was born as a vast circular tower with as many as eleven storeys (Plate 14, fig. 27). The tower became gradually narrower towards the top, culminating in an enormous fire. In the eighteenth century, Montfaucon355 tells us that the lighthouse at Alexandria was exactly like the Tower of Babel (Plate 14, fig. 28), consisting of eight towers, stacked up one on top of the other.

structure there was a room for the guard. It is worth looking in detail at his words: “During this journey I went to see the lighthouse, one side of which I found to be in ruins. It is square in construction and rises high towards the sky. The door is raised above the ground and has in front of it another building of the same height. Planks of wood between the two structures enable access to the door of the lighthouse, which, when the planks are removed, is otherwise inaccessible. Inside the door, there is a room where the lighthouse keeper is, and there are many other rooms in the rest of the building. The passage through which one enters is nine palms wide, the wall itself ten palms thick. The width of the lighthouse on each of its four sides is 140 palms. It stands on a high hill and lies one parasanga from the city on a tongue of land surrounded on three sides by the sea that comes right up to the city walls. Thus one can only reach the lighthouse by land from the city... I went again to visit the lighthouse on my return to the Maghreb in the year 750 (1349), and found it entirely ruined, so that it was not possible to enter it or even go up to the door. Malik an-Nasir, on who God have mercy, had begun the construction of a new and similar lighthouse in front of this one, but death prevented him from completing the task”360

Two problems, less well-known but no less important, remain to be discussed and these I will deal with briefly. It is almost certain that there was a spiral staircase inside the lighthouse rising up two floors to the lantern. It was accessible to animals as well as humans and very similar to the stairway in the “Round Tower” (1637-1642)356 in Copenhagen.357 Other internal arrangements are likely to have included storage rooms and additional rooms to accommodate soldiers and others involved in managing the lighthouse.358 It is unlikely that an imposing building such as the Alexandria lighthouse would have been left unoccupied. As well as soldiers, others inside the building would have included government officials, slaves or liberti supplying provisions brought in through the outside ramp leading to the door on the first floor, and one or two people whose task it was to keep the light shining by day and by night. There is no trace of all these “workers” apart from a mention of a certain freed slave, Marcus Aurelius Filetus, administrator of the lighthouse, on a funerary inscription of the second or third century AD, found in Rome and now in the Museo Archeologico Nazionale in Naples, that reads as follows:

Comment Ptolemy Philadelphus erected two colossal statues in front of the lighthouse to the royal couple, or the couple preceding them, in the deified form of Osiris and Isis. The overall height of the building, until recently though to have been between 130 and 165, has been recalculated to have been between 100 and 110m including the height of the stepped ramp on the exterior. The third floor may have collapsed sometime between the fifth and the seventh centuries AD,361 but it is more likely that it did not collapse, since it would have caused the other two floors to collapse too. Perhaps the third floor was simply removed at that time (evidence for which might be the mosaic at Gasr Elbia) and then built up again at a later date, possibly even in the thirteenth century, if the mosaic in the Zen Chapel in the Baptistery of St Mark’s in Venice is to be relied on. According to Thiersch’s reconstruction, the third storey had certainly gone sometime around the end of the thirteenth century. On 8 August 1303 (a bad month for earthquakes, not least that at Pompeii in 79AD!) the lighthouse finally collapsed, the remains being subsumed into the minaret of Sultan QaitBey’s fort constructed on the island of Pharos. Having looked at the evidence, I am inclined to interpret the statue on the top of the building as Poseidon with a trident and patera. The fact that on coins the statue is shown without a beard may be because the details of a

D(is) M(anibus) M(arcus) Aur(elius), Aug(usti) lib(ertus), Philetus, pr(a)epositus unctor(um) et procur(ator) lighthouses Alexan driae ad Aegyptum, sibi et Phileto f(ilio) et Tyche coniugi sui et lib(ertis) lib(ertabusque) poster(is)q(ue) eorum 359 Given the date, it is possible that this refers to a title that was instated at the time of the restorations carried out by Antoninus Pius, but it is more likely that this office had existed since Hellenistic times and that the funerary inscription happens to be the only one that has survived. In his description of his journey to the lighthouse in 1326, by which date according to the sources the tower would have already collapsed, Ibn Battŭta tells us that inside the 355 356

DI MONTFAUCON 1749, p. V. MANETTI 1990, p. 37: “the Round

Tower in Kǿbmagergade was built by Christian IV as an astronomical observatory for Copenhagen University, so like the lighthouse it was used for observation”. 357 KÖSTER 1923, p. 199. 358 GRIMM 1998, p. 43. 359 CIL. VI, 8582; ILS 1576. FRANZOT 1999, p. 71: “To the Manesgods, Marcus Aurelius Philetus, libertus of Augustus, overseerer of the calaphatii [i.e. men who waterproofed the ships] and administaror of the lighthouse of Alexandria in Egypt, (has dedicated) to himself and to his son Philetus and to Tyche his wife and to the liberti, both male and female, and to their descendents” (Trad. FRANZOT 1999).

360

GABRIELI 1951, pp. 8-9. The other lighthouse that the Arab author mentions is probably that at Taposiris Magna (perhaps a restoration), situated on the other side from Alexandria near Lake Mareotis. 361 Most authors agree that the third storey of the famous Alexandria monument collapsed at this time, although, if the top storey collapsed, the whole monument would have collapsed. It seems more likely that a deliberate decisision was taken to remove it.

62

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES statue placed so high up may not have been clearly visible. At the time of the Roman conquest of Egypt (31BC)362 the statue on the top, possibly corroded by the salt sea air despite its lofty position, is likely to have been in need of restoration. It is possible that the statue was transformed at that time into a deified emperor by simply changing the head. Nevertheless, I would argue that the statue represents Poseidon. It was probably in the Christian period, and perhaps after the restoration carried out by Anastasius I between the end of the fifth century AD and the beginning of the sixth, that the statue, once again in need of restoration, was replaced with one of Helios, a figure easily linked to that of Christ, as he appears in the Justinian mosaic at Gasr Elbia. It was then finally removed in the thirteenth century.

which must have been a watering place with many storage buildings for incense. When the trade in incense collapsed in the seventh century AD, it is likely that the port of present-day Bi’r ‘Ali was abandoned.365 The port and the lighthouse The ancient port was on the Yemeni coast of the Indian Ocean on a peninsula lying between two bays, 3km south-west of modern Bi’r ‘Ali. The harbour ended in a steep rocky outcrop known as Husn-al-Ghùrâb, Fortress of the Ravens (Plate 15, fig. 30).366 It was unlikely to have had a mole or quay but was well organised for the shelter and mooring of ships, partly because of its fortress-lighthouse situated on the Husn-al-Ghùrâb.367

The Tritons placed symmetrically on the outer walls of the second storey and shown blowing their horns, were not merely decorative: they marked the entrance to the port of Alexandria for arriving ships. The light from the lighthouse, beamed from the cylindrical and colonnaded third storey of the building, was, according to Flavius Josephus, visible fro a distance of more than 50km and was almost 100m high. In early times it may have been produced with a concave rotating mirror with a hole in the centre. This was placed on the lantern so that it could then project the light emitted by the fire. The fire was fuelled with pitch and oil or vegetable oil, a system that was to continue to be used until the beginning of the twentieth century. Inside the lighthouse, which is likely to have been ornamented with statues including representations of the Dioscuri, were living quarters for the soldiers, liberti and slaves carrying out a variety of tasks including, possibly, at the foot of the lighthouse, a shop where souvenirs were sold, similar to the Begram vase or the bronze lamp from Libarna (though the image on the latter looks more like the lighthouse at Gesoriacum). Support for these suggestions seems to be provided by the very recent discovery under the water of the Eunostos harbour of what archaeologists have interpreted as the base of the Alexandria lighthouse.363

Here, archaeologists have discovered the remains of four cisterns and a solid construction that was connected with the lighthouse and, in all probability, linked to at least one of the cisterns. Finds here date from between the first and the fourth centuries AD; it is possible, therefore, that this lighthouse was constructed no earlier than the first century AD. Before that, we must presume that the inhabitants used fire as a simple signalling system. The building was probably a temple dedicated to a local god, so is likely to have resembled those outlying Etruscan sanctuaries that we know were also used as lighthouses with fires that were lit on the altars, as happened in Pyrgi, for example.368 The sanctuary consisted of a square threestoried building. The fire that would have guided sailors must have been lit on the top storey. No. 10 CAESAREA MARITIMA Maritima, Israel) Province: Iudaea

(Caesarea

The site of Caesarea Maritima (Plate 16, fig. 31) lies on the coast of present-day Palestine, 40km from Tel Aviv. Founded by the Phoenicians in the fourth century, it was already known in the Hellenistic period as Strato’s Tower.369 It is mentioned by this name in the archival papyri of the Egyptian general Zeno (219BC), steward to Apollonius and Ptolemy II’s treasurer. After the Ptolemaic period, the city was ruled by the Seleucids after the conquest by Antiochus II in 218BC. Pompey took it over for a short period, installing the Hellenistic tyrant Zoilus as governor. It then passed to Anthony who gave it to Cleopatra.370 Finally, after Anthony’s defeat at Actium in 12BC, the city became part of the Roman Empire and was granted by Augustus to Herod the Great (40-4BC) who called it Caesarea in Augustus’s

No. 9 QÂNI (Bi’r ‘Ali, Yemen) Province: Arabia Felix The ancient city of Qâni, known today as Bi’r ‘Ali, lies on the coast of the Gulf of Aden, 20km west of alMulakala. From the earliest days of its foundation, it was known as one of the main centres of the region supplying incense. There are two main sources relating to this site: the famous first century AD Periplus of the Erythraean Sea by an anonymous author, which mentions the two great ports of Muzi and Qâni; and a group of southern Arabian sources dating from the third or fourth century AD.364 The city is divided into a lower area (Plate 15, fig. 29), an almost rectangular tell, and an upper city, a sort of citadel. Unusually, no trace of city walls has been found here. Little is known about the early history of the site

365

LIVIADOTTI 2000, p. 71. SEDOV 2000. p. 235. 367 DAVIDDE-PETRIAGGI 2000, p. 241. 368 BEDON 1988, p. 54; COLONNA 2000, pp. 251-336. 369 Strato, known in Phoenician as ‘Abd-Ashtart, was the king of Sidon, the city taking its name from him. The place name Torre gives further wieght to the thoery that there was a signal tower in the port as early as the Phoenician period and modelled on those at Carthage and Adrumento; for a history of the city see “Caesarea, 2” in Der Neue Pauly, 2, Stuttgart 1997, pp. 924-925. 370 FREEDMAN 1975, pp. 9-12. 366

362

BECHERT 1999, p. 43. HAIRY 2005, pp. 27-36. CASSON 1989, DAVIDDE 1997, pp. 351-355. For the inscriptions, see BOWERSOCK 1993, pp. 3-8. 363 364

63

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA honour.371 The city was the base for Roman operations during the war in Judaea and it was here, in 69AD, that Vespasiano was acclaimed emperor.372 The following year, he rewarded the city by making it a colonia.373 After various vicissitudes, in 639AD Caesarea was conquered by the Arabs. In 1101, the Genoese fleet under Baldwin laid siege to the city, an event that resulted in the death of hundreds of men. In 1187, the city was conquered by Saldin and, in 1251, reconquered by the French and fortified with city walls on the order of Louis XI. In 1265, the Mamluk sultan Baybars destroyed the city so as to deprive the Crusades of this highly useful foothold in the Holy Land. Caesarea only recovered in the nineteenth century when Bosnian refugees were settled there, leaving the site in 1848. Reconstruction work on the city only began in 1940 with the founding there of the Sdot Yam kibbutz.

Taking them in order, the most likely candidate for the lighthouse of Caesarea Maritima is the Druseion.381 Although it does not mention that any one of the three towers was used as a lighthouse, Flavius Josephus’s description suggests that Drusus’s Tower was the highest and the most beautiful, and it is for this reason that Vann has presumed that it was this one that served as a lighthouse for the city. In the late 1980s, Hoelfelder382 produced an interesting reconstruction of Herod’s port with its lighthouse (Plate 16, fig. 32): two towers, lower than that of Drusus, were arranged in parallel at the entrance to the port. On them were columns bearing statues. Behind the tower dedicated to Tiberius was that honouring Drusus, inspired by lighthouse at Alexandria and acting a both lighthouse and fortress. It had a solid base out of which rose three storeys, the first being square, the second round and the third, with the lantern, cylindrical. Above this was a statue of a man. In 1990, during an intense period of excavation in the K2 area of the harbour at Caesarea, a violent storm caused more than a metre’s depth of sand to be washed away, revealing the north corner of a long and solid rock (Plate 16, fig. 31) that was probably the core of the town known as the Druseion, and which lay exactly to the south of the towers mentioned by Flavius Josephus. What can be seen now as the base of the tower took the form of a wellconserved platform of concrete, in which can still be seen numerous pieces of horizontally placed wood that must have helped reinforce it.383

The port and the lighthouse (or lighthouses) Caesarea374 was to be the most important port in Judea, of which it became capital in 44AD, losing this status only in the seventh century AD (c.640). Flavius Josephus has fortunately left us a long and fairly precise description,375 in which he says that this imposing port was even larger than Piraeus, the port of Athens. Herod challenged the elements by lowering limestone blocks into the sea to provide underwater foundations. On these he erected a large wall, half of which acted as a breakwater and the remaining part as a base for the stone wall that surrounded the harbour and on which stood a series of towers. The highest of these towers was an exact replica of the lighthouse at Alexandria and was called Druseion in honour of the deified Drusus, Tiberius’s brother.376 The harbour mouth, flanked on either side by three colossal statues standing on columns, opened to the north to provide protection from the bora wind. Next to the port were buildings in white stone including a temple dedicated to Augustus and Rome. 377

There were many suggestions at the beginning of the twentieth century about the tower’s function: a building for overseeing trade, a solid defence tower at the entrance to the port, or a lighthouse. Flavius Josephus, it may be remembered, describes three towers called Miriamne, Hippicus and Phasael. The name of the Drusus Tower was taken from that of the emperor, an indication of how important the building was and its possible triple function of fortress, trading regulator and lighthouse. Vann, while accepting the interpretation of the structure exposed by the winter storm of 1990, seems convinced, on the basis of Hohlfelder’s theory, that in front of twin towers used as coastal watchtowers, there was another one, taller, bigger and more beautiful. The only function of this tower was that of a lighthouse, identifiable with the Tower of Drusus mentioned in Josephus. Raban and Holum,384 on the other hand, maintain that the lighthouse did not stand at the entrance to the harbour but on a hill where Strato’s Tower must once have been according to the name of that spot.385 This view gives further weight to

Drusus’s tower must have resembled the lighthouse at Alexandria not only from the architectural point of view but also in function, having a dual role as fortress and lighthouse.378 It is notable that guard towers and watchtowers were to be found all over the area of present-day Palestine, especially around Malatha.379 Geza Alföldy380 has recently suggested, on the basis of a famous inscription relating to Pontius Pilate to which we shall return shortly, that there may have been a second lighthouse in Herod’s capital.

381

VANN 1992, pp. 123-139. HOLFELDER 1987, pp. 262-3. The reconstruction was accepted until 1999, when Alföldy first put forward his ideas. 383 VANN 1992, p. 134. The site of the find was named K2 to differentiate it from site K, where a pair of matching towers had already been discovered. 384 RABAN-HOLUM 1996, p. 85. 385 The authors add that, although the lighthouses at Alexandria, Ostia and Leptis Magna stood at the mouth of the port, such a position made them rather vulnerable, whereas, if they had stood on the top of a hill, they might have performed their function more effectively and have been better protected. However, as many scholars have correctly noted, a lighthouse was not used only to guide sailors but also as a warehouse

371

382

For the first excavations of the city see CALDERINI 1959; ADAMESTANU ET ALII 1965. 372 CALDERINI 1959, p. 11. 373 Tac. Ann. II, 78. 374 For the port, see RABAN 1992, pp. 7-18; OLESON-BRANTON 1992, pp. 49-67. 375 Ios. bell. Iud., V. 4, 3, 75. LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN 1963, pp.180-181. 376 VIERECK 1975, p. 268. 377 JANNI 1996, p. 350. 378 LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN 1963, p. 268. 379 GICHON 1974, pp. 527-542. 380 ALFÖLDY 1999, pp.85-108; ALFÖLDY 2002, pp. 132-148.

64

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES the theory that the port already had lighthouse in Phoenician times. There are plenty of other examples of ports with a similar history as the one suggested by Raban and Holum. The practice of erecting lighthouses on hilltops or other high places dates from very early times, as illustrated by the famous fresco from Stabia (Plate 70, fig. 139) showing a port, possibly in the Phlegrea area.386 Here, by contrast, we are dealing with the first century BC when the custom of erecting a lighthouse at the entrance to the harbour had already been common practice for at least two centuries, the port of Alexandria being an example. The 300m harbour wall constructed by Herod, a kind of ante wall such as Trajan was to make for the harbour at Centumcellae, had been designed specifically to protect the lighthouse from the violence of the waves. Before the very recent theories advanced by Geza Alföldy,387 there was much speculation about the appearance of the tower. The models proposed were either a Druseion on the lines of the Alexandria tower, which is to say Hellenistic in style, or one similar to the lighthouses at Ostia and Dover, which were Claudian in design. It is probable that all three towers built by Herod were topped with columns bearing statues, perhaps relatives of Herod or of the Roman emperor.388 With his recent articles on the subject, the German scholar Alföldy389 has called into question all the previously held ideas about the port of Caesarea. He examines the famous but damaged inscription relating to Pontius Pilate, governor of Judea under Tiberius from 26 to 36AD:

The inscription was found near the theatre, in other words, about 1km from Herod’s port. It clearly has something to do with the emperor Tiberius. It might refer to a temple near the theatre dedicated to him or it could refer to some public action carried out by the emperor. Some experts in Christian history have restored the missing first word of the inscription a the Latin munus, deducing from this that Pontius Pilate, governor of Judea, instituted ludii gladiatori in honour of Tiberius in the theatre at Caesarea Maritima. As Alföldy correctly comments in his most recent work on this subject,391 the ludii did not take place in a theatre but in an amphitheatre, one of which it known to have existed in Caesarea. Leaving aside the matter of epigraphical metre, for which the reader is referred to Alföldy’s article, we come to Alföldy’s conclusions: convinced, like Hohlfelder and Vann, that the Druseion was a lighthouse, he suggests that, during the period of Herod’s rule, there was another smaller light source at the entrance to the harbour,392 known as the Tibereium but left unfinished when Tiberius retired to Rhodes. After the death of Herod, Pontius Pilate reconstructed the building, making it more monumental and adding “twin towers”, following in the footsteps of former imperial ideology in remembering the two faithful brothers, Drusus and Tiberius, who, deified, would call to mind the most famous brothers of mythology, the Dioscuri Castor and Pollux. As already seen in the case of Alexandria, these divinities were protectors of sailors and so very relevant for a lighthouse. Thus it would seem that, in the first century AD, Caesarea Maritima had two coastal towers (Hippicus and Miriamne) and two lighthouses (the Druseion and the Tibereium).393 The inscription 394 celebrates, therefore, the newly built (or restored) lighthouse known as the Tibereium, a sub-station of the Druseion. Anyone arriving into Herod’s city would first of all have seen the lighthouses of Drusus and Tiberius,

[---]S TIBERIÉVM [---PO]NTIVS . PILATVS [---? PRAEF]ECTVS IVDAE[A]AND[---] É[---]390 for the loading and unloading of merchandise. Furthermore, wood and animal and vegetable materials were need to fuel the lantern, so the lighthouse needed to be sited somewhere convenient, unlike those in archaic times. We should not forget also the iconological value of having a building that could illuminate Herod’s imperial palace in the darkness. I am most grateful to Prof. Chris Brandon for our discussion of this subject at the Conference on Marine Archaeology in Ports held in Trieste in November 2007. He told me that the K2 area is no longer thought to be the site of the Caesarea lighthouse. It appears to have been further within the port. We await the publication of the archaeological reports for details. 386 MARTA 1990, fig. 568 supposed it was Neapolis’ harbour. No lighthouse’s evidence in known for that harbour, although we can imagine there was one. Some scholars are sure that in roman Naples there were three harboursd, so, the lighthouse should be searched in the neighbourood of the town , see NAPOLI 1959, pp. 118-134). It has been supposed that a roman lighthouse was collocated near Villa Imperiale marittima in Posillipo, see. GÜNTHER 1913, p. 166;.GIANFROTTA 1998, pp. 165-6 thinks that rhe fresco is referred to Misenum hrabour, and this theory was confirmed by Gianfrotta himsekf at the Meeting “I porti del Mediterraneo in età classica” at Rome october 2004 see. GIANFROTTA 2006, p. 11. 387 I am much indebted to Prof. Geza Alföldy, eminent epigrapher at the University of Heidelberg, for information on his theories about the Herodian lighthouses. According to Alföldy, the lighthouses at Caesarea imitated not so much the exterior structure of their famous predecessor at Alexandria as its monumentality. 388 Although we have no way of knowing for sure, it is possible that on the Miriamne tower stood the stauue of Herod’s wife, on the Phasael tower that of his brother and on the Druseion, the deified Drusus. 389 ALFÖLDY 1999, pp.85-108; ALFÖLDY 2002, pp. 132-148. 390 ALFÖLDY 1999, p. 86.

391

ALFÖLDY 2002, pp. 139 ff. See this work also for bibliographical information, especially on the criticisms of Alföldy’s ideas from G. Labbè. 392 It is possible that Herod constructed a port similar to that built by Septimus Severus at Leptis Magna (No. 4), with a monumental lighthouse on the western side of the mole and a smaller signalling tower near the east mole. 393 Herod seems to have a predilection for calling buildings by names linked with his family and with imperial Rome. In addition to the buildings mentioned here, parts of his palace were called Caesareum, in honour of Augustus, and Agrippeum, in honour of Agrippa, while a Herodeum was inhis own honour. Pilate may have fulfilled Herod’s intentions in enlarging the the fourth-century BC Druseion, giving the name of Drusus’s brother to a new lighthouse tower that was possibly more beautiful and more powerful than its predecessor (probably fallen into disuse by the time of Tiberius). Combined with the former, it could have been dedicated both to the emperors of Rome and to the Dioscuri. We should not forget that, in Rome in six AD, the temple of Castor and Pollux was built. Tiberius wanted to appear in the dedication of the temple together with his brother Drusus who was by now dead. Thus there are precidents for this type of double name, and it was repeated in the tenth century AD on the Temple of Concord in Rome. 394 The inscription was thought to have been the base of an altar or a pedestal of a statue of Tiberius (Branton); for bibilographical information, see the article by ALFÖLDY 1999. As for the objections that Flavius Josephus does not mention Tiberius’s lighthouse, the author view is that, since Josephus based himself on the writings of Nicolaus of Damascus, it is likely that he had not seen the completed Tibereium or it was perhaps already ruined.

65

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA the new Dioscuri. These guided sailors but also allowed the imperial palace behind to be seen in all its majesty. The inscription refers, then, to a monument made for the benefit of sailors in honour of Tiberius. Alföldy restores the lines as follows:

members of the Julio-Claudian dynasty, Drusus and Tiberius, who referred in turn to the Dioscuri, protectors of sailors. On top of all the towers, statues commemorated the important figures in these two families; Pontius Pilate sought to add himself to their number by setting up the well-known inscription on the lighthouse dedicated to Tiberius. This same inscription was also a nearby reminder of the already famous inscription on the most monumental lighthouse of Antiquity, that at Alexandria. The appearance of the latter was recalled, if not by the Druseion and the Tibereium, then certainly by the Phasael Tower, as we read in Flavius Josephus. At Caesarea, we see, over a period spanning the end of the first century BC and the beginning of the first century AD, a two-fold celebration of brothers: Drusus and Tiberius and Herod and Phasael.

[Nautì]s Tiberèium [-Po]ntius Pilatus [praef]ectus Iudae[a]and [ref]è[cit] 395 As for the shape of the Tibereium, it must have been similar to the Druseion and perhaps modelled on the lighthouse at Alexandria (no. 8), which had an inscription on it by the architect Sostratus of Cnidos dedicated to the τοις πλοιθομενοιζ. Alföldy’s rereading has met much opposition from those who believe that the inscription contains a reference to gladiatorial games.396

No. 11 MAGDALA (Migdal, Tarichea, Israel) Province: Arabia Felix

In 1960, an interesting find was made in the harbour mouth. This is a lead token (Plate 17, fig.33) stamped with a depiction of a port not dissimilar to that described by Flavius Josephus. It shows the entrance to a harbour (seen perhaps from the sea) with two towers, on the tops of which there appear to be statues. These could, however, be interpreted as human figures maintaining the towers or the signals.

Also known as Tarichea,398 Magdala, near Lake Tiberius (Plate 18, fig. 35), was from the first century BC to become one of the most important Hellenistic centres in Gallilee.399 In 52/51BC it came under Roman control and given by Nero to Julius Marcus Agrippa. Titus promoted it to the status of military centre in 67AD.400 The name of the city is connected with that of Mary Magdelaine and Christ. It was the main settlement of the Jewish people until the fourth century AD.

The token dates from the second century AD, although some scholars have argued an earlier date of the second century BC, and might have been struck by Herod to mark the inauguration of the port that coincided with the visit of Agrippa to the provincia of Iudaea. The letters KA appear on the token, perhaps referring to the regnal year (21) or, more probably, to the Greek initials of Kα(ισάρεια).397 From the second century AD onwards, the port was used increasingly infrequently, becoming so dilapidated that, in 500AD during the Byzantine domination of Anastasius over what remained of the old lighthouse in the westernmost corner of the mole (Plate 17, fig. 34), Construction was started on a long defensive wall, running 150m southwards. The weight of this wall may, over time, have brought about the collapse of the lighthouse, its submerged foundations being those discovered in the k2 area mentioned earlier.

The port and the lighthouse In the summer of 1990, the Israel Department Of Antiquities carried out underwater investigations around the site of ancient Magdala. They found a structure from the Roman period made of dressed basalt stones, daggers, fragments of capitals and a bronze mirror. All these objects were found in the proximity of a massive and broad stone outcrop on the coast and known to archaeologists as the Rock of Ants.401 30m from the shore, this rock was used in the past as an island. In other words, this was a lake harbour, similar to that at Taposiris Magna (no. 7) on Lake Mareotis. The excavations revealed round cavities in the rock of the same diameter as the sections of columns lying at the base of the rock.

Comment From what precedes, it can be seen that the entire port at Caesarea was designed to celebrate the empire through the names of its buildings, starting with the name of the port itself that alluded to Caesar Augustus. The towers that defended it bore the names of Herod’s relatives, while the city’s lighthouses were dedicated to two

These discoveries led the Israeli archaeologists to the conclusion that the structure had been a sacred site (an altar or temple), a nilometer (a structure used to mark the sea level) or, most probably, a lighthouse,402 for which 398

Strab., 16, 2, 45; “Magdala” in Der Kleine Pauly, Stuttgart 1969, pp. 872-874. Ios., Bell. Iud. 3, 359-360. 400 Ios., Bell. Iud. 1, 181; ant. 14, 120; Suet., Tit. 4; for the city see “Magdala” in Der Neue Pauly, 7, Stuttgart-Weimar 1999, p. 656. 401 GALILI-DAHARI-HARVIT 1993, pp. 76-77. 402 The bronze mirror could, therefore, have been interpreted as an ustore mirror for use with light signals, while the rocks referred to were columns that supported the structure with the aid of the basalt blocks of dressed stone blocks.

395

399

ALFÖLDY 1999, p. 106. This because it was found near the theatre. But, as already said, the theatre is only 1km from the port and the strong currents that caused the harbour to slit up might also have washed away the inscription of the by-then ruined Tiberius lighthouse, carrying it for one kilometre and leaving it near the theatre. 397 For interpretations of this token see RINGEL 1988, p. 71; PENSA 1998, p. 139; GIARDINA 2007, pp. 145-160 396

66

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES they supplied a hypothetical reconstruction (Plate 18, fig. 36). In Aramaic, the place name Magdala means “Tower of the fishermen”; the city was famous for its fishing industry. The modern name, Migdal, can also be translated as “tower”, leading one to suppose that such a structure did once exist here403 though there are no sources to confirm this.

cannot have been easy to live in places where there was nothing but a signal tower and a few public buildings. In addition to the lighthouse, there is only a temple and a third figure who may be the priest of the temple or, more likely, another person connected with the lighthouse. The lighthouse is shown as a building standing on a small promontory, tower-like in shape with three storeys hat become smaller as they ascend. The lowest storey is polygonal and has an arched doorway. The other two floors seem to be cylindrical or circular. The building seems to have been reproduced in enough detail to show the brickwork.

No. 12 APAMEA DI SYRIA (Hama, Qalat al-Mudīq, Syria) Province: Syria Inhabited since Neolithic times (Plate 19, fig. 37), in 286BC a group of Macedonian soldiers settled on the banks of the Orontes in the city of Fornax, subsequently called Pella. Becoming an important trading centre under the Seleucids, Seleucus I changed its name to Apamea after his wife. Fortified by Antiochus IX, it was conquered by Pompey in 64BC. A bishopric from the first century AD, during the following century it was embellished with beautiful porticoes, still visible today. In the third century AD, it became the winter camp for the soldiers involved in the expeditions of Caracalla, Severus Alexander and Gordian III. It was spared by Khosrau I of Persia in 540AD but sacked and razed by Adaarmne in 573. In 613 it was retaken by Khosrau II but finally destroyed by earthquakes. Today the area of the ancient acropolis is occupied by the village of Qalat alMudīq.404

No. 13 LAODICEA AD MARE (Lattakia, Syria) Province: Syria We know little about Laodicea before the second century BC, when it was minting coins along with the cities of Antioch, Apamea and Seleucia with which it formed a tetrapolis. Founded by Seleucus I in northern Syria, the city was named after the founder’s mother. Under Pompey, it became part of the Roman provincia of Syria. On the death of Caesar, it was besieged by Cassius, then freed by Anthony as a reward for its loyalty.406 The military base for Lucius Vero during the Parthian wars, it was destroyed by Pescennius Niger during the power struggle between him and Septimus Severus who selected it as the Syrian metropolis.407 Already favoured by Theodosius, under Justinian it became the capital of the new kingdom of Theodoriad.408

The port and the lighthouse Little is known about the ancient port of Apamea and there are very few images survive showing the lighthouse. One piece of evidence is a reproduction of a medal with a design based on that of a coin from the Augustan period from the collection belonging to Marshall Estrées (Plate 19, fig. 38b).405 It was recognised in the nineteenth century that the reverse showed the city’s lighthouse, while the inscription Colonia Augusta Apamea appeared on the exergue (Plate 19, fig. 38a). A solid cylindrical tower with storeys that decrease in size towards the top is depicted standing on a rocky promontory. Evidence for the fact that the lighthouse was constructed on raised spot – a habit that was common in the east where high places were often turned to account – is found also in a mosaic of the imperial period, found in the so-called House of the Triclinium (Plate 20, fig. 39). Once again, the tower is shown with three storeys with a large doorway in the centre of the first floor. As well as the lighthouse, another interesting feature is the presence of a figure of a person talking to another person on a ship and receiving a fish from him. This may be another indication that lighthouses were lived in by the people who maintained them who, obviously needed to be fed. It

The port and the lighthouse Lying to the west of the city, the ancient port was famous particularly for its wine trade with nearby Alexandria. Today there is little to be seen that is not covered by the modern town of Lattakia. The city’s lighthouse is known from the many coins produced over a time span from the reign of Domitian to the period of Septimus Severus, the latter being responsible for important improvements to the port. The coins struck in the Domitian period (Plate 20, fig. 40 a, b), now in the British Museum in London, can be dated to 86/87AD. The obverse shows a bust of a beardless Dionysius, his head turned to the left and crowned with a vine tendril. The god can be recognised by his usual attribute of a thyrsus. The reverse shows the lighthouse of Laodicea: on the first coin (a) we see a cylindrical tower with a staircase similar to that at Alexandria giving access to the lantern at the top. The representation seems to be a cross section, perhaps to show that there were inhabitable rooms inside. A small storey, also cylindrical, has a figure standing on it: from its rigid stance it looks more like a statue than one of the lighthouse keepers. The second coin (b) shows a cylindrical tower, with storeys that decrease in size towards the top, resting on a plinth

403

A lighthouse near Lake Tiberius that might, perhaps, have guided sailors arriving at Magdala to fish and to trade fish with nearby Caesarea Maritima (No. 10) or even Jerusalem. The situation resembles closely that of the lighthouse tower of Taposiris Magna (No. 7) on Lake Mareotis that guided sailors calling to collect fish for Ptolemaic Alexandria. 404 “Apameia,3” in Der Neue Pauly, 1, Stuttgart 1999, pp. 824-5. 405 ALLARD 1979, p. 158.

406

Strab., XVI, 750-752, App., V, 30. Malalas, Chron. 293, 4. “Laodikeia, 1” in Der Neue Pauly, 6, Stuttgart-Weimar 1999, p. 1131.

407 408

67

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA with two steps. On the top of the structure is a statue holding a patera and a lance.409 This representation is similar in several ways to one that appears in coins produced at the time of Sextus Pompey and representing the lighthouse at Messina (Plate 57, fig. 113a). Looking closely at coin b, it is possible to make out a door on the right-hand side which we can assume gave access to a stairway leading to the upper storey containing the lantern. Thus two coins, from the same period, seem to offer different versions of the same building, perhaps because it has been depicted from two different angles. See Chapter 4, however, for a discussion of the reliability of the iconography. The presence of Dionysius on the obverse is an indication of the commercial importance of the port of Laodicea and the wine that it exported in huge quantities to Alexandria, importing grain in exchange. The statue on the top of the lighthouse is likely to be Poseidon, although Seyrig has suggested Athena or even Dionysius.410

entirely artificial port constructed on the model of that at Caesarea Maritima. Foca, who visited the city in 1185, describes the port as being protected by two great towers recalling those at Caesarea described by Flavius Josephus named Herod and Phasael. The only tower for which we have a certain archaeological date is, however, the Roman defensive tower, reused in medieval times, that stands in the modern Emir Bechir Street.412 No. 14 SELEUCIA OF PIERIA (Silifke, Turkey) Province: Cilicia This port was founded in 301BC as a substitute for the by-then inadequate natural port of Al-Mina (Plate 22, fig. 43) in the mouth of the river Orontes. It is known chiefly for the fierce struggle between the Seleucids and the Ptolemaics. It was conquered in 246BC by Ptolemy Evergetes but captured from Ptolemy Philopator by Antiochus III. After various events and changes in power, in 138BC it was declared a holy and inviolable city and liberated shortly afterwards by Antochus VIII. Strabo praised its powerful fortifications and the Romans admired its resistance against Tigranes, which is why it was liberated in 63BC by Pompey the Great.413 It was within easy reach of the coast of Salento, it taking less than 30 days to reach the port of Brundisium,414 and of great strategic importance in the second century. Praised in many sources, it became the base for the new Classis Syriaca. The city and the port were the headquarters for expeditions by Lucius Vero, Septimus Severus, Caracalla then Diocletian, the latter making attempts to maintain the port area, as did also Constans II in 346AD, though y this time the city had fallen into decay. After the sacking in the fifth century AD by the Isauri, the earthquake of 526AD completed the destruction of the city. Justinian att empted to re-establish it, but the arrival of Khosrau I in 540AD and the Arab invasion of 638AD prevented it from becoming once more a strategic military base and port for Antioch.415

The disappearance of the figure of Dionysius from later coins is not surprising. From the time of Antoninus Pius the tutelary numen of the city was changed to Tyche, always represented as a richly-dressed woman. Dating from this period is a coin with Tyche on the reverse. Her elaborate hairdo includes a large jewel in the form of two bunches of grapes and a turreted crown that includes a representation of the city’s lighthouse (Plate 21, fig.41). The building is shown as being taller and slimmer than the earlier version, but is otherwise very similar. The plinth with its steps seems to be present but, for reasons of space, there is no statue on the top. Perhaps the statue had fallen off, because it is also missing from another coin where there, instead, the figure of a person in the intermediate storey. A final coin, dating from the period of Severus, shows on the obverse the bust of Septimus Severus, with a laurel wreath on his head and wearing armour, facing that of the young Caracalla. On the reverse is a ship in the stern of which sits the gubernator in his cabin and directing the manoeuvring of the ship with his hand. In the prow, the proreta seems to be giving orders to the crew (Plate 21, fig. 42). In the background is the lighthouse of the port, a tower with three cylindrical storeys. On the second floor a figure with an extended hand can clearly be seen. Reddé interprets this as a statue of an unknown subject, though it could equally well be, in my opinion, one of the lighthouse keepers guiding the proreta towards the correct entrance to the port, an ancient equivalent of our present-day coastguard. The left leg of the figure seems to be bent and moving forward.411 Some scholars have concluded that this coin represents not the port of Laodicea but that at Berytus. Although there may well have been a lighthouse in the city that is now Beirut, it seems unlikely that a coin from the local mint at Laodicea would bear the image of the port of another city. On the other hand, it is known that the city of Berytus had an

The port and the lighthouse The man-made port had an inner harbour with a diameter of about 400m. We know from Polybius that, like the port of Carthage, it had shipyards. He praises the fine buildings of the city, saying that it looks over the sea between Cilicia and Phoenicia, on the southern slopes of Mount Coryphaeus.416 The floods that gradually buried the port and distanced it from the sea have left it perfectly preserved. The mouth of the Burnaz stream, surrounded by fortified walls, provided the way out to the sea. The Flavians, worried that the sand from the river Orontes might silt up the port, set about constructing a new and longer channel to the port. 60m wide, it ran parallel with the brow of the hill for about half a kilometre. The outer 412

JONES HALL 2004, ch. 2; Johannes Phoca, Descriptio Terrae Sanctae 5 in P.G. 133.392; pp. 137-139. Strab. XVI, 2, 8. 414 Cic. ad Att. XI, 20,1. 415 See UGGERI 2007, pp. 143-176 for an excellent recent work on the history of the city, its architecture and its geography. 416 Pol. V, 58. 413

409

BMC, Syria, 1964, pl. XXIX, n. 11, p. 250. SEYRIG 1952, pp. 54-55. 411 REDDÉ 1979, p. 872; GIARDINA 2007, pp. 154-155. 410

68

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES harbour was protected by two long moles, the best preserved of which lies to the south. At the end of it are the foundations of a tower that may have been the lighthouse (Plate 22, fig. 44).417

when the layout of the city was improved and many new buildings put up. This activity continued into late antique times with the construction of basilicas, baths and palaces. As time passed, and perhaps because of wars and earthquakes, the city shrunk back into its original boundaries on the acropolis and was eventually abandoned entirely.421

No. 15 AEGAE-AIGAI (Ege, Turkey) Province: Misia Once a flourishing centre, this ancient site is 12km from the Gulf of Chandarli in the Misia region. Evidence of its importance are the remains of the stoa, a theatre and the Temple of Demeter. Little is known about the port. On the right bank of the river, standing alone, is a ruined doorway, almost seven metres high and with a diameter of more than 2.5m, all that remains of the facade of a building facing towards the west.418

The port and the lighthouse The lighthouse and the port of this city are known only from the evidence of a coin (Plate 24, fig. 48). Behind the image of a ship can be seen a roughly cylindrical tower from the top of which shines the light of a lantern.422 The poor state of the coin means that it is difficult to be sure whether the objects on the summit of the building are statues or not. Nothing more is known about this port and its buildings. Few of the scholars423 who have discussed the iconography of this coin have come to any conclusions: there are no topographical clues to assist in a reconstruction of the situation in Roman times, the presumed period of the coin.

The port and the lighthouse The port of ancient Aiscala (Plate 23, fig. 45) must have had a lighthouse but the only evidence we have of it is an image of it on a coin from Macrino (Plate 23, fig.46a). On the right-hand side a ship is depicted approaching the port lighthouse, the importance of which is emphasised by the inscription ma³aqwir. The building is shown as a solid cylindrical two-storied tower on the summit of which, but not in the centre, is a figure holding a lance. The function of the cylindrical structure visible to the left of the figure is not clear: it could be interpreted as a second, smaller storey intended to house the lantern but it might also be a second statue (or human figure). Unfortunately, the poor condition of the coin makes any further suggestions impossible. Reddé concludes that there was no statue on the top of the Ege lighthouse because he asserts that the fire of the lantern must have burned in the open air. He does not explain this conclusion, however.419 The theory that it is not a statue but someone guiding ships or working in the lighthouse seems unlikely since the figure appears to be standing at too high a point for any signals to be seen by ships and is too stiff to be a human. Another coin, from the period of Trajan Decius, follows the same iconography but, being in a better state of preservation, appears to show that the lighthouse was built of bricks (Plate 23, fig. 46b). No. 16 PERGA Pamphylia

(Murtana,

Turkey)

No. 17 SIDE (Selimye, Turkey) Province: Pamphylia According to Strabo, Side was founded on the Anatolian coast by the inhabitants of Kyme, a city falling within the territory of Smyrna (Plate 25, fig. 49). The first evidence for human occupation dates from the seventh century BC. It was conquered by Alexander the Great in the early third century BC, then by the Prolemys and the Seleucids. These events did nothing to harm the city’s primary importance as a trading centre, at least until the foundation of Attaleia (Antalya) by Attalus II (159138BC). Between the end of the second and the beginning of the third century BC it was incorporated into the Roman Empire and was well rewarded for its loyalty, prospering once more thanks partly to its port. From the fourth century AD onwards, with the gradual decline of the Roman Empire, Side too became less important and was eventually abandoned until, between the fifth and sixth century AD, it became a bishopric, regaining those territorial possessions it had previously lost.424

Province: The port and the lighthouse

Perga, one of the most important cities of Pamphylia, lay 18km to the west of Antalya (Adalia) (Plate 24, fig. 47). The city’s prosperity was based on trade, lying as it did on the route to Cilicia to which it was connected by way of the river Kestros (Aksu), only 7km away. In early times, the city stood on an acropolis, but it soon extended from here southwards down to the plain.420 Already flourishing in the Hellenistic period, Perga’s heyday was from the second century AD, during the Roman Empire,

The port of the city lay in the southernmost end of the peninsula. Its manmade shape resembled an irregular trident. It was sheltered from the southern winds by long walls while a dyke ran along the northern side. Next to this dyke was a second port of the same shape but with the advantage over the first one that, when the sea was rough, ships were able to enter through the harbour’s better protected mouth more easily.425

417

421

418

422

UGGERI 2007, p. 163. “Aigai” in Der Neue Pauly, 1, Stuttgart 1996, pp. 313-314. 419 IMHOOF-BLUMER 1901, p. 428, pl. XVI, fig. 19; REDDÉ 1979, p. 865 420 AKURGAL 1983, pp. 329-333.

“Perge, 2” in Der Kleine Pauly, XIX,1, Stuttgart 1996, p. 693. BMC, BITINIA, p. 122, n. 2; REDDÉ 1979, p. 865. 423 REDDÉ 1979, p. 865; PENSA 1998, p. 138. 424 Strab. XIV, 667; AKRUGAL 1983, p. 336. 425 MANSEL 1963, pp. 43-47.

69

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA As in the case of Perga, the possible existence of a lighthouse here is known only from numismatic evidence: a coin from the time of Gallienus.426 The port is shown very schematically as a round harbour (maybe, therefore, the inner harbour) in the centre of which is a trireme in which is a sailor raising the sail while the vessel approaches what might be the port lighthouse: a small but solid tower with two storeys decreasing in size towards the top, with a rectangular door and a large opening on the second floor that might be a window (Plate 25, fig. 50).

Caesarea Maritima and Alexandria, with which it must have had considerable contact. It would be scarcely surprising to find that a city trading with Alexandria, with the most famous lighthouse of all, had a well-equipped port and a lighthouse. In 15BC a violent earthquake severely damaged the Cypriot port leaving very little until Augustus, appreciating the importance of its position, restored it and renamed it Nea Paphos Augusta. Remains of foundations in dressed stone belonging to what was certainly a tower have been found on a rocky promontory now occupied by the church of Panaya Theoskepasti, close to what was once a breakwater. Archaeologists of the Cyprus Department of Antiquities are of the view that this is the most likely site of the ancient lighthouse of Paphos.430 Brick foundations of an octagonal structure have been found elsewhere, however, within the great Villa of Theseus, begun in the second century AD on a Hellenistic site in the western part of the place known as Maloutena. This hill would not, however, have been suitable for the construction of a lighthouse since the site receives the full force of a south-easterly wind that would have carried the smoke from the lantern straight towards a considerable area of the residential part of the city, obscuring the sailors’ view.431

No. 18 ATTALEIA (Antalya, Turkey) Province: Galatia Founded in 150BC by Attalo II, from whom it took its name, Attaleia was Sextus Pompey’s naval base in 48BC. It became a major trading port in the second century BC, overtaking nearby Perga in importance.427 The port and the lighthouse According to some scholars, the ruined Hidirlik Kulesi (Plate 26, fig. 51) is the remains of a Roman lighthouse. Others have maintained that it was a mausoleum of a Roman aristocrat. Given its situation on the coast, one interpretation does not necessarily exclude the other, as can be seen at Thasos (no. 28) and Taposiris Magna (no. 7). As we shall also see for Chrysopolis (no. 24), in Arabic the word Kulesi has the sense of “tower” not “mausoleum”. It would seem reasonable to conclude that, in one of its stages of development at least, it was used as a lighthouse. Today, it is a two-storey building becoming narrower towards the top. The solid lower section is square while the second floor is round. While the building itself is not particularly high, its elevated site gives credibility to the theory that it was once a lighthouse.

Today at Maloutena we see the medieval fortress, begun at the end of the fourteenth century by the Lusignan rulers and built to protect the port from the Saracens. It almost certainly replaces an earlier watchtower, but nothing that it has been possible to identify as a lighthouse. The fortress must have also had defensive towers, the ruins of which were initially interpreted by Dazewski as the remains of a possible Hellenistic-Roman lighthouse. Further investigation by marine archaeologists have shown, however, that they formed part of the fortress.432

No. 19 NEA PAPHOS (Nèa Paphos, Cyprus) Province: Cyprus

Near Phanari, where there was a lighthouse in the nineteenth century, there are further ruins of unknown architectural structures, as for example in the area of Fabrika in the old city.433 It is known that, in Hellenistic times, this area was an acropolis. In 1927, Peristianis discovered three rectangular constructions here. About 50m in size, he identified them as the remains of the propylon.434

Lying at the westernmost tip of the island of Cyprus (Plate 26, fig. 52), like Palaipaphos Nea Paphos was traditionally said to have been founded by the Mycenaeans, and more specifically by Agapenor and the Arcadians immediately after the Trojan War.428 There is no archaeological evidence to support this story, and we now know that the city was the capital of Cyprus from the time of Ptolemy until the fourth century AD.429

In 1938, a major discovery was made at Kato Paphos of a relief carved into a block of limestone of irregular size (0,13x0, 66x0,26 m) and very rough. Incised in the lower left hand corner are two lines of Latin (datable to the fourth century AD), while in the top corner is a tower (Plate 27, fig. 53). The two incisions seem to belong to different periods even though there is an uninterrupted

The port and the lighthouse The port (Plate 26, fig. 52) of the new city was established in the late first century BC and was of fundamental importance in view of its proximity to 426

BMC, Pamphylia, 1964, n. 112, p. 161 does not mention the lighthouse, For it, see PENSA 1998, p. 138, GIARDINA 2007, p. 154, fig. 15. 427 “Attaleia, 1” in Der Neue Pauly, Stuttgart-Weimar 1997, p. 226. 428 Strab. XIV, 6, 3; Paus., VIII, 5. 429 “Paphos” in Der Kleine Pauly, 4, Műnchen 1972, pp. 485-6.

430

LEONARD-TUCK-HOEHLFELDER 1995, p. 242. HOELFELDER 1995, p. 244. 432 DAZWESKI, 1981, p. 331. 433 HOELFELDER 1995, p. 238. 434 MLINARCZYK 1990; HOELFELDER 1995, p. 244. 431

70

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES line marking the border that coincides with the top of the tower and the beginning of the inscribed words, leading one to suppose that the latter were added at a later date.435

on the Italian coast, particularly Taranto. After a number of forays in the Hellenistic period, the Romans conquered it during the first century AD.437

Although it looks somewhat rectangular, the stylised appearance of the tower might suggest an octagonal shape. It has three storeys that decrease in size as they ascend, each storey being roughly half the size of the one below it. In the centre of the bottom floor is a large doorway flanked on either side by a square window. This may have given access to an internal stair leading to the upper floors, the windows of which can clearly be seen.

The port and the lighthouse Much of the port is under water although a few vestiges of a 190m-long mole extending in a line to the south-west remain in situ. As in some other examples, although the excavations here are very recent and the recording not fully completed, it was thought appropriate to include Kyme for the sake of completeness. Neither the description of the port nor even less that of the possible lighthouse should therefore be regarded as definitive. Even before the construction of the mole, the two water courses (particularly the Xanthos) that traverse the city and. above all, their mouths were able to ensure good anchorage for shipping. Vestiges remain at the end of the mole that could be interpreted as the foundations of a tower, and so perhaps of a lighthouse. An impressive platform in opus caementicium, surmounted by a further one in opus quadratum (Plate 27, fig. 54), has been discovered on the western side of the mole, towards the sea.438

Comment From the preceding evidence, it seems likely that there were two lighthouses at Nea Paphos, built at two different times and in two different places. The first, built in the Hellenistic period, must have been on the Fanari hill, where the nineteenth-century lighthouse was located. When this construction collapsed during the earthquake of 15BC, Augustus, eager to stress the Romanness of the city, chose to abandon the Hellenistic acropolis and devote his attentions tot he port at Maloutena. He built a lighthouse, perhaps similar to the one shown to him by Herod in the same year at Caesarea Maritima, at the harbour entrance, on the spot where the medieval fortress now stands. Built in the usual form of storeys of diminishing dimensions, to judge from the large number of windows – used also for artillery no doubt – the structure must have had at least three floors with several inhabitable rooms.

No. 21 PATARA (Patara, Turkey) Province: Lycia The city of Patras (Plate 28, fig. 55) is thought for etymological reasons to have been established by the Lycians. Described by Livy as the most important city in Lycia,439 unlike the other cities in the region it was situated almost at sea level on level ground.440 Livy441 makes it clear how, if the sea was calm and the winds favourable, navigation in the area was easy but how a change in the weather could put ships at risk in a port with an accidented seabed. This detail emphasises indirectly the need for a method to signal dangers – in other words, a lighthouse. Ships left here for Alexandria and Rhodes to trade. We know from an inscription that, to make the port safer, the legate Sextus Marcius Priscus constructed a lighthouse and an “ante-lighthouse”, more normally called signal tower.442

Some scholars have rejected the theory that the tower inscribed on the block of limestone is a lighthouse because the Latin words are a funerary inscription. This argument cannot be said to invalidate the lighthouse hypothesis: one only has to think of the many representations of the Ostia lighthouse found on the sarcophagi of Isola Sacra di Porto or the lighthouseshaped tombs at Taposiris Magna (no. 7) and Thasos (no. 28). It would be unthinkable for a port of such strategic importance midway between Alexandria and Caesarea Maritima (both with imposing lighthouses) to be without a monumental and functioning lighthouse. It is most likely to have been situated near the medieval fortress which replaced it after its collapse.

The port and the lighthouses The largest port of the region, it was situated in the centre of the town surrounded by many buildings from the imperial period. Recent archaeological excavations have uncovered the ruins of a large construction interpreted by Prof. Fahri Isik of the University of Akdeniz as the

No. 20 KYME (Aliaģa, Turkey) Province: Asia Kyme, situated not far from the present-day Turkish town of Aliaģa, was established on the Aeolic coast at a spot where the winds favoured landing. Founded after the Trojan War, thanks to its flourishing port it was already enjoying a flourishing trading economy as early as the ninth century BC. Described by Strabo436 as great and noble, it had close contacts with ports both to the east and 435 436

437 For the history of the city and the excavations, see ESPOSITO-FELICIGIANFROTTA-SCOGNAMIGLIO 2002, pp. 1-37. 438 ESPOSITO-FELICI-GIANFROTTA-SCOGNAMIGLIO 2002, p. 20. 439 Liv. XXXVII, 15. 440 EAA, pp. 275-276, does not agree that the large cistern near the building was once used by the llighthouse. Nevertheless, it should be remembered that, as we have seen, cisterns supplying water were often found near or at the base of lighthouses. HOHLFELDER-VANN 1998, p. 33 mention that beneath the waters of Aperlae are the foundations of a Roman lighthouse. 441 Liv. XXXVII; 16. 442 TAM II, 1, 131; IşIK-ECK-ENGELMANN 2008, p. 109.

HOELFELDER 1995, p. 239. Strab. XIII, III, 6.

71

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA remains of a monumental lighthouse443 that collapsed as a result of a tsunami.

exchanges with Ephesus. Conquered by the Turks in 1317, it was colonised by the west in 1344-1402.448

Begun in 2004 and concluded in 2008, the excavations have also brought to light a human skeleton that it has been suggested might be that of the lighthouse keeper (or one of his assistants) who was trapped between the stones of the building as it fell. A bronze inscription states that the building (Plate 28, fig. 56) was commissioned by Nero between 64 and 65AD.

The port and the lighthouse When Du Loir visited Smyrna in 1654, he reported that the remains of the ancient city, devastated by the Turks, had disappeared: “Little more than the foundations of the ancient walls remain…”.449 Nothing is known about the port although it must have has important links with Constantinople. Of the lighthouse nothing is known but an epigram from the Anthologia Palatina that gives an idea of the importance and monumentality of this building, dating from no later than the fourth century AD.

The inscription would have originally had letters in gilded bronze but these are now missing, perhaps as a result of the damnatio memoriae imposed on Nero in 68AD. The positions of the letters are still visible and the Greek words of the inscription easy to read:

-Τίς τόσον έργον έτευξε; τίς η πόλις η το γέρας τί; -Αμβρόσιος Μυλασευς τον φάρον ανθύπατος 450

MÈqym JkaÌd[i]or heo³ JkaudÊou uÓËr, ...tÄm vÇqom jatesjeÌasem pqÄ[r Ðs]vÇk[ei]am [t´]m pkoÞ[folÈmy]m...ñqcom444

The builder of the lighthouse would appear to have been a certain Ambrosius, a name that also appears in an inscription at the theatre in Ephesus. Louis Robert believes that they are the same person, which would mean that the epigram dates from the fourth century AD. Alan Cameron, on the other hand, is of the opinion that the author is Strato of Sardis, which would lead to the assumption that there was already a lighthouse at Smyrna in the first to second century AD.451 Smyrna suffered several earthquakes, so the most probably explanation is that the port lighthouse was restored more than once over the centuries, something that is confirmed in another epigram where the work of restoration is attributed to a man called Asclepiade:

It is also stated in the inscription that the construction of the lighthouse was undertaken by one of Nero’s legates, a landowner by the name of Sextus Marcius Priscus to whom, at the time of Vespasian, a statue was erected near the lighthouse. The base of the statue has been discovered (140cm high, 68cm deep and approx. 73cm wide) together with an inscription that mentions both the lighthouse and a ante-lighthouse of which nothing remains.445 The lighthouse stands on a rock and consists of a square podium (with sides of 20m) from which rise two cylindrical constructions. The outer cylinder has a diameter of 6m. Inside both cylinders was a spiral stair, 80-90cm wide, giving access to the lantern storey. The entrance to the lighthouse was on the west side and had a wooden door, of which a few blocks remain still in situ at the level of the foundations. It seems likely that looking westwards from the podium it would have been possible to see the harbour entrance, while to the south was the open sea.446

Μηκέτι δειμαίνοντες α ̉ φέγγεα νυκτος ̉ομίχλην εις ́εμε θαρσαλέως πλώετε, ποντοπροι ˙ πασιν α ̉ λωμένοις τηλαυγέα δαλον ̉ανάπτω, των ̉Άσκληπιαδων μνημοσύνην καμάτων452 No. 23 ABYDOS (Abydos, Macedonia) Province: Misia SESTOS (Sestos, Turkey) Province: Asia Founded on the Dardanelles Straits by the Lydian king Gige in the first half of the seventh century BC, in time Abydos became the most important centre on the Troad (Biga Peninsula) for the Spartans. With the peace of 387BC, it came under Persian rule. After the Wars of the Diadochi it then passed to the Seleucids in 281BC but was destroyed by Philip V in 200BC. Conquered by the Romans, it was given new walls by Antiochus III and from 188BC became part of the administration of Pergamon. It was to have great importance as a port,

No. 22 SMYRNA (Izmir, Turkey) Province: Asia Colonised by the Greeks from the ninth century BC and, as we read in Pausanias,447 part of the Ionic league, in Roman times the city was enlarged towards the east, remaining an important centre until a late date. Conquered by the Arabs in 654AD, it was then occupied by them until 672/3, a period when it had frequent trading 443

IşIK-ECK-ENGELMANN 2008, pp. 91-120.

448

“Smyrna” in Der Neue Pauly, 11, Stuttgart 2001, pp. 661-2. RŐTHLISBERGER 1959, p. 33. 450 Anth. Pal., IX, 671: “Who carried out such a work? What was his birthplace and what his task? The lighthouse is the work of Proconsul Ambrosius of Mylasa”, from F.M.Pontani, ed. Einaudi, Turin 1980. For the lighthouse at Smyrna see also BEDON 1988, p. 56, FEISSEL 1998, pp. 134-138. 451 FEISSEL 1998, pp. 134-135. 452 Anth. Pal. IX, 670: “No longer fearing the darkness of night, make your way towards me, o sailors: for all those who wander on the waves, I produce a fire that can be seen from afar, a reminder of the work of the Asclepiadi” (from trans. by B.Giardina). 449

444

IşIK-ECK-ENGELMANN 2008, p. 108: “Nero Claudius son of the divine Claudius....erected this lighthouse for the protection of sailors”. 445 IşIK-ECK-ENGELMANN 2008, pp. 108-109: the inscription states that the consul for Patara had erected a statue in honour of Vespasian’s legate Sextus Marcius Proscus commemorating the good things he had done in the eight years he was in charge of the province of Lycia and for the construction of the lighthouse and the ante-lighthouse for the safety of sailors. 446 IşIK-ECK-ENGELMANN 2008, p. 92. 447 Paus. VII, 7.

72

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES being the most sheltered in the Hellespont. In Byzantine times it became a bishopric.453

departure and the port of arrival need to be clearly lit in the way that only a lighthouse can do. As far as the structure of the Abydos tower, little can be deduced from the fresco at Pompeii. The structure at Sestos is clearer, the lighthouse appearing to have been a cylindrical tower with two storeys, the upper one being surmounted by a cupola with windows framed by Corinthian columns.

The ports and the lighthouses The towers of Sestos and Abydos mentioned in Strabo454 will always be linked with the legend of the unfortunate lovers Hero and Leander who were obliged to meet secretly without the knowledge of their warring families. To guide Leander in his dangerous nocturnal swim across the Dardanelles, Hero climbed up the tower in the port at Sestos with a lantern in her hand.455 The sequel is well known: the flame of the lantern was blown out by the wind and Leander drowned in the stormy waves. Going beyond the legend, it is clear that a visible light was necessary to guide sailors at this dangerous spot. Here, the figure of Hero replaces those more usually found on the top of lighthouses. There is no archaeological evidence but this lack is made up for by a number of iconographical representations. A coin from Abydos, minted during the reign of Commodius, shows a cylindrical tower on brickwork on the top of which stands Hero who holds in her extended right hand the torch that will guide Leander who is seen standing below the tower, depicted nothing less than a proper lighthouse (Plate 29, fig. 57). A lighthouse depicted as a simple cylindrical tower on which stands a person with a torch would seem to be a very archaic design for a coin of the third century AD: by this time the building of lighthouses was such a common thing that it aroused no special interest. It is clear that, here, the image on the coin looks back to a much older and popular iconography linked with the story of the unhappy lovers.

No. 24 CONSTANTINOPLE/CHRYSOPOLIS (Istanbul, Scutari, Turkey) Province: Asia Given its situation, the ancient city of Constantinople could scarcely fail to have played a major role on the trade routes of antiquity. Established on a trapezoidshaped promontory between the Golden Horn (into which many rivers flow) to the north, the Sea of Marmara to the south, called Propontis in antiquity, and the Bosphorus to the north-east, it had direct access to the Ponto Eusino (Black Sea). Byzantium, as the city was originally called, took its name from the founder, in the eighth century BC, the hero Byzas (son of the nymph Semestra, he married Phidaleia). The city’s foundation is also attributed to another hero, Antes, so that the name Byzantium might derive from a combination of the names of the two heroes. Conquered by the Persians in the late sixth century BC, it was later liberated and, in 478BC, became part of the Delio-Attic league. Rising up against Athens in the fifth century BC, it was conquered by Alcibiades in 408BC. Rebelling against Philip II, it joined the Hellenic league and then allied itself with the Romans against the Macedonians. In the third century AD it sided with Pescennius Niger. With is defeat, the city was punished by Septimus Severus, on regaining its freedom under Caracalla. In 323AD, Constantine renamed it Constantinople, choosing it as the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire. After a brief period of decline, Theodosius II restored it to splendour in the fifth century AD, constructing many new monuments. In 447AD, the greater part of these was destroyed in a violent earthquake and Theodosius was defeated by Attila. In the sixth century AD, the city was restored by Justinian, one of the monuments built by him being the basilica of Santa Sophia.458 Thanks to the port, the movements of the fleet could be overseen between the Aegean and the Ponto Eusino.459

The same type of structure also appears on a fresco in the Casa dei Vettii in Pompeii (Plate 29, fig. 58), although here the building is shown in more detail. A cylindrical tower with two storeys, it has a cupola on the top beneath which there is a large window out of which Hero is leaning, holding her torch.456 In the centre, we see Leander swimming through the waves. The stairs leading up to the floor where Hero can be clearly seen, while behind Leander can be seen his servant on a tower in front of which is another stair. It is clear that the fresco is depicting the two towers mentioned in Strabo. Lastly, a damaged relief (Plate 30, fig. 59) shows Leander approaching the lighthouse where we see Hero, richly dressed and holding the torch in her right hand.457 In this version, the round arch framing the figure of Hero is supported on two slim Corinthian columns.

The ports and lighthouses Constantinople had three ports,460 around one of which there grew up a city which appears as Chrysopolis in Sheet VII of the Tabula Peutingeriana and which today is called Uskűdar (Scutari). Here, the Tower di Leander (Plate 31, fig. 61b), mentioned at the end of the sixteenth century by the Venetian traveller Gioseppe Rosaccio (Plate 30, fig. 60),461 still functions today as not only a lighthouse but also a restaurant! (Plate 31, fig. 61a). Here

Comment Behind the legend of Hero and Leander as related by Strabo and Museus lies an important fact: to cross the Dardanelles from Abydos to Sestos both the port of

458 “Byzantion, Byzanz” in Der Neue Pauly, 2, Stuttgart-Weimar 19976, pp. 866-880. 459 REDDÉ 1986, pp. 257-258. GUILLAND, 1969, pp. 273 ff. 460 Dio. Byz. IX. 461 ROSACCIO 1549, p. 76 (anastatic reprint, ed. Della Laguna, Mariano del Friuli 1992).

453

“Abydos, 1” in Der Neue Pauly, 1, Stuttgart 1997, pp. 45-6. 454 Strab. XIII, I, 22. 455 Mus. 23-25. 456 PPM, V, Regio VI, II, Rome 1994, pp. 484-495. 457 VEITMEYER 1900, pp. 18-19; GIARDINA 2007, p. 149, fig. 6b.

73

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA too the name of the tower is linked to legend, but the story of Hero and Leander has become confused with an Arab story where the building is called Kiz Kulèsi (Maiden’s Tower): a sultan hid his daughter in this tower because a magician had warned him that she would die from a snake bite. One day, the girl was visited by the baker who brought her food. A snake came out of his basket and bit her, wounding her fatally.462

It is not surprising then to find that the interior of these houses was divided into three floors, two quite high and the third lower (Plate 32, fig. 64). The floor of the first storey is raised 4m above the base which is about 75cm above ground level. At the time when Schneider was writing, only the side sections of the barrel vault remained, this being of bricks and small fragments of brick. The central part had been significantly altered in Turkish times. It is likely that the entrance door, in the north facing wall, dates from even later. The back of the tower was constructed on a site just in front of the city walls where they run along the coast. It seems likely from its architecture and appearance that this is the defence tower being attacked during the capture of Constantinople shown in a medieval mosaic at the church of S. Giovanni Evangelista in Ravenna. The second storey had a pavement with hexagonal tiles suggesting, in the period when it functioned as a lighthouse, that the building had a number of inhabitable rooms providing accommodation for those involved in the maintenance of the tower.

The port that is of interest here was called the Boukoleon (Plate 31, fig. 62),463 It was situated on the site of the present Imperial Palace and near which there must doubtless have been – since Roman times – a lighthouse. In late antiquity, Constantine seems to have taken a page out of the books of Herod at Caesarea Maritima and Tiberius at Capri, both of whom had made use of the light from their lighthouses to “advertise” their respective imperial palaces. Known from the eighth century AD, the lighthouse stood on a raised piece of ground near which, once the building had been demolished, the church of Our Lady of the Lighthouse was built, the name saying it all.464 Today the church is no longer there but, in the early twentieth century, Thiersch put forward the view that the lighthouse, subsumed into the fabric of the church, stood at one end of a chain of light signals created to assist sailors plying the coasts of Asia and Europe to find the imperial palace and the city of Constantinople.465

The third floor was in poor condition but, in the 1960s, it was still possible to make out the remains of a stairway leading up to a circular platform that must, in ancient times, have housed the lantern.468 During the period of Byzantine rule, during the reign of Michael III (842867AD), a lighthouse is documented near the one-time church of Our Lady of the Lighthouse. Still visible near the Imperial Palace, it seems to have consisted of nothing more than a simple light signal positioned on a high terrace of the Palace.469

In addition to the Chrysopolis lighthouse at the entrance to the Bosphorus, another, smaller, signal tower must have stood on a spur of the Golden Horn near a place called Phane, probably identifiable with the modern district called Phanar in Istanbul, a toponym which may indicate the presence of a lighthouse.466

Comment Constantinople must have had a well-integrated signalling system, but the city’s main lighthouse, following that of Caesarea Maritima, still standing in Byzantine times, and clearly inspired by it, must have been situated near the Boukoleon harbour, close to the Imperial Palace. It had three floors, the second of which was provided with rooms in which soldiers and those working in the lighthouse could live. The third floor, accessible by means of a stair, housed the lantern and is likely to have been round or, more probably, cylindrical. We know nothing about the statue that stood on the top of the lighthouse: a possible subject might have been a deified Constantine. It seems that there may have been a platform of 4m in height, corresponding to the raised height found by Schneider in the interior of the first floor of the Turkish houses he examined. The structure disappeared in the medieval period when the Genoese built a lookout tower in its place, possibly the one represented in the mosaic at S. Giovanni Evangelista in Ravenna.470

Some scholars have suggested that the Column of Constantine (Plate 32, fig. 63), listed in the Tabula Peutingeriana, was the city’s lighthouse. This seems unlikely since the presence of this monument is very well documented and the structure too slim to have been a lighthouse.467 On the other hand, that is not to say that there might not have been a lighthouse in contact with the lighthouse at Chrysopolis mentioned above on the spot where the illustration on the Tabula Peutingeriana shows the Column of Constantine. While the ports of Neorion and Prosphorianon continued in operation over the years, Boukoleon gradually fell into decay, leaving today few traces of its presence. On the spot where the lighthouse once stood, and in place of the church mentioned above, the Turks built a tower onto which, at a later stage, private dwelling houses were added. According to Schneider, all three floors of the former lighthouse were used in the construction of the Turkish tower. 462

LUGANI 1979, p. 137. GUILLAND 1969, pp. 273-293. MŰLLER-WIENER 1977, p. 60, entry for Boukoleon-Hafen. 465 MACLAGAN 1968, p. 74. 466 TURQUE 1972, p. 238. 467 On the lighthouses in the Tabula Peutingeriana see LEVI 1967, pp. 125-127; BOSIO 1983; SALWAY 2001. 463 464

468

SCHNEIDER1967, pp. 8-29. BRYER-WINFIELD 1985, pp. 216-2; MÜLLER-WIENER 1977, p. 233. 470 FARIOLI CAMPANATI 1995, fig. 24. 469

74

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES have taken its name and who may have been its second founder. Surviving coins, the only evidence that can help us trace a brief history of the city, cover the period between Germanicus and Valerian.475

No. 25 HERACLEA PONTICA (Eregli, Syria) Province: Bithinia In 560BC, 2km from the river Lukos, near the small Archeron river, Megaran and Boeotian colonii founded the city of Heraclea in Bithinia on the Black Sea. An important political and trading centre since the fourth century BC, it was rich enough to have its own silver coins. It was governed by the tyrant Lysimachus, overthrew him but was again overrun the Third Mithridatic War in the first century BC. Under imperial Roman rule, it once again became strong enough to mint its own coins. The city was still well known in medieval times.471

The port and the lighthouse The city’s port has never been localised but its appearance and that of the buildings that adorned it are known from a coin minted during the reign of Pescennius Niger (Plate 34, fig. 67). It was round and had a statue of a man with a patera and a lance (possibly Poseidon). In front of the statue is a tower (the lighthouse) and a temple. The lighthouse is known only from this coin. It shows, on the left hand side, a building with a pyramid-shape roof that might be a horreum or part of the navalia. Next to the building and enclosed in a circle is a ship which is approaching the city’s lighthouse. The building is tall and slim and has three cylindrical floors, on the last of which stands a figure holding a sceptre, his head possibly surrounded by rays. This immediately suggests Helios, a figure so appropriate to the main function of a lighthouse: to light the way for sailors.476 The coin is very similar to another one which Thiersch identified as showing the port of Gesoriacum (no. 75): the harbour seems to be seen from a high viewpoint but we have no evidence from which to determine its structure. The presence at the bottom of a sacrificial bull is possibly linked to the visit of the emperor to the port.477 There is little more to be said about this structure other than that it demonstrates the importance – both commercial and strategic – of the port at Caesarea, even if its exact location is not yet certain.

The port and the lighthouse Thanks to the support of the colonies, particularly Chersonesus, this port continued to be used as late as medieval times, thus keeping trade with the Black Sea open.472 A port of such importance must certainly have had a lighthouse. The only examples of its appearance are found on a number of coins from the Late Empire. In all the examples (third century AD) the building at Heraclea is shown as a tower with four polygonal storeys decreasing in size as they ascend. The top floor is cylindrical in shape. An arched doorway opens into the lower storey near which it is possible to assume that there was a stairway leading to the top (Plate 33, fig. 65.)473 Imhoof-Blumer, Babelon and Reinach interpret this monument not as the Heraclea lighthouse but as a funerary pyre of the type described by Herodian.474

No. 27 ISTROS (Histria, Romania) Province: Moesia It seems most likely to me that the coins show the chief building of the port, a place that, thanks to the trade it engendered, gave the city its prosperity. The inscription on the coins does not use the word consecratio (nor yet the corresponding tern in Greek), something that is usually present on coins of this kind (Plate 33, fig. 66).

Inhabited from the last quarter of the seventh century BC, the city was founded by Greek colonii mainly from Miletus. Partly destroyed at the end of the sixth century BC as a result of Darius’s expedition, it revived around the fourth century. After the defeat of Mitridates in 72BC, it came under Roman domination and the rule of the proconsul of Macedonia, M. Terentius Varro Lucullus. At the beginning of the first I century BC, the new city of Histria was burnt down by the expedition led by the Geta king Burebista, but subsequently enjoyed its period of greatest prosperity in the second century AD. This came to an end with the destruction of the city by barbarians during the reign of Marcus Aurelius. Restored under the Severii, it suffered greatly as a result of an attack by the Goths in 250AD. It has a miraculous escape from the Avari in 587AD, but was finally abandoned in the seventh century AD following incursions by the Slavs.478

The coins that have survived come from the reigns of Geta, Gordian and Gallienus but the images they bear are all very similar. The architecture of the building seem to be constructed from large bricks. The upper part of the coins are hard to interpret, making it hard to know whether there was a fourth floor and/or a statue, though the latter is likely. No. 26 CAESAREA GERMANICA (Bulgaria?, Black Sea) Province: Bithinia Never mentioned by Strabo and never precisely located, it is thought, nevertheless, that this city was already in existence in the time of Germanicus from whom it may 471

“Herakleia, 7” in Der Neue Pauly, 5, Stuttgart-Weimar 1998, pp. 365-6. 472 For the Ponto Eusino see KING 2005, pp. 53-56 473 ROBERT 1970, pp. 25-253; GIARDINA 2007, pp. 152-153, fig. 11a. 474 WADDINGTON-BABELON-REINACH 1984, p. 370.

475

WADDINGTON-BABELON-REINACH 1908, pp. 280-282. For Helios see DICTIONNAIRE 1906, p.430; THIERSCH 1909, p. 21. PENSA 1998b, p. 133; GIARDINA 2007, pp. 153-154, fig. 13. 478 ISTROS 1996, pp.11-16. 476 477

75

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA present sea level on a promontory from which there is a 180° view.485

The port and the lighthouse We have no evidence for the existence of a lighthouse in the city port of Istros, but some scholars479 have suggested that the building depicted on a coin from the reign of Alexander Severus and Elagabalus might be one. Represented on the reverse (Plate 34, fig. 68), is the personification of a river, very likely the Ister (Danube) in front of a tall building interpreted as a lighthouse and there to emphasise the commercial importance, both maritime and river, of the port at the time of the late Severii.480 The structure is, however, monolithic and very slim and, in my opinion, more likely to be an obelisk or a fountain. If it is a lighthouse, it would be the only one of its kind, for representations of lighthouse generally vary very little.481

The second monument is the lighthouse-tomb of Akèrastos (Plate 36, fig. 71), standing 100m ASL. The nobleman who commissioned this monument had the following words inscribed on it: “This is the monument of Akèrastos, son of the Frasieridi; it has been placed by the sea, a protecting signal for ships and sailors. Greetings”.486 A third lighthouse has been identified at the entrance to the port of Thasos, a spot where navigation is notoriously difficult. This is the lighthouse-tomb of Evraiokastro. Still in existence in early medieval times, it was subsequently swallowed up within the apse of the Paleochristian basilica (Plate 35, fig. 70).487

No. 28 THASOS-PALEOKASTRO (Thassos, Greece) Province: Macedonia

Comment

The most northerly of the Greek islands (Plate 35, fig. 69), lying opposite the coast of Thrace, it was for many centuries the outpost for Greek incursions into the East. Founded according to legend by Thasos, son of Poseidon,482 the city was colonised by the Parians as early as the eighth century BC. In the fifth century BC it was a flourishing centre under Persian rule. Fought over by Sparta and Athens, it was definitively conquered by the Macedonians in 340BC. It continued undisturbed until 1429 when it was ceded by the Byzantine emperor to the Genoese Dorino Gattilusio, from whom it was captured by the Turks in 1456. It remained in Turkish hands until 1912.

It would seem than that the island of Thasos had at least three lighthouses, probably situated at those spots where navigation was most difficult. Once again, as in the cases of Taposiris Magna and Nèa Paphos, we see a structure associated with a tomb to an individual connected with the navy or who lost his lives at that spot because it was not well marked, as in the case of Akèrastos. The place name Cape Pyrgos, which literally translated means “Tower Point” or, more likely, “Lighthouse Cape”, is indicative. Architecturally speaking, it is constructed of large blocks of stone, similar to those used in Phoenician times for the tower-lighthouse at Nora. Its form does not conform to the usual typology being a squat round tower. Access to the top is likely to have been by an external stair (Plate 36, fig. 72).

The port and the lighthouse-towers The ancient military port is overlaid by the structures of the modern port.483 There must originally have been two lighthouses on the island but three structures, in three different places, are regarded as lighthouses today. One monument stands in the Phanari area (Plate 36, fig. 72) and is a circular tower, very similar to the Lazzaretto Tower in Civitavecchia (no. 61), with a diameter of approximately 3.5m. According to Bon, this was a lookout tower rather than a real lighthouse.484 Constructed from large blocks of grey marble from the coast, this building dates from the sixth century BC, or three centuries before the erection of the lighthouse at Alexandria, which would imply that lighthouse buildings were in existence before the time of Sostratus of Cnidos. The use of the word πυργος is significant and we find it appearing in one of the place names near one of these structures: Cape Pyrgos. It stands 8.23m above the

No. 29 CORINTHUS (Corinth, Greece) Province: Achaia Enjoying a favourable position on the route leading from Sparta to Athens, the city looks over two seas, a fact which explains it commercial importance even in archaic times. Pottery from Corinth could be found over a wide area until the fifth century BC when trade in Athenian pottery overtook it.488 The city was raised almost to the ground by the consul Mummius,489 successor to Metellus. It was restored by Julius Caesar. Later, Nero planned the construction of the Corinth Canal,490 a waterway that was to cut through the isthmus of the same name. This project was not realised until 1893 when it was carried out by the Hungarian general Tűrr. The city continued to prosper under Marcus Aurelius. It was destroyed in medieval times as a result of the many wars between the Normans

479

ROBERT 19, p. 99. PICK 1898, p. 518, PREDA-NUBAR 1973, p. 65, n. 719. 481 GIARDINA 2007, p. 156, fig. 18. 482 Apollod. III, 1. 483 For a history of the port and the finds of the marine archaeologists see ARCHONTIDOU-ARGYRI-SIMOSSI 1986, pp. 51-59. 484 BON 1930, p. 151, for the history of the city “Thasos” in Der Neue Pauly, 12/1, Stuttgart-Weimar 2002, pp 244-245. 480

485

KOZELY –KOZELJ 2001, p. 44. IG. XII 8, 683; GIARDINA 2005, p. 146. 487 KOZELJ -KOZELJ 1989, pp. 175-180. 488 WÄGNER 1955, pp. 67-70. 489 Paus. V, 10, 5. 490 Suet. Ner. XIX. 486

76

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES and the Turks, the most damaging of which was in 1147.491

close to the temple of Poseidon. Given the typological differences in the two coins described above, it seems possible that Corinth had two different lighthouses, one in the central port and the other outside the city.496

The ports and lighthouses The city had two ports, the Leuchaion to the west and the Cenchreae492 to the east. The latter was the most important one for the city and was situated on the city’s canal in the area between the Hellades and the Pelopponese linking Central Greece (Sterea Hellas) with the Pelepponese peninsula.

No. 30 DYRRACHIUM (Durrës, Albania) Province: Macedonia Founded in 626BC as the Greek city of Epidamnos by the inhabitants of Corinth and Corcyra (Corfu), it was conquered by the Romans who renamed it Dyrrachium.497 The city is known both for the battles here between Caesar and Pompey during the civil war,498 and for its favoured geographical position. Situated at the end of the Via Egnatia, it had, on the one hand, a privileged relationship with Thessalonica and Constantinople, and, on the other, with the opposite coast of the Adriatic – and particularly the port of Brundisium – with which it traded. Much damaged by earthquakes and, in more recent times, by war, today work is underway to restore not only the modern city but also the reminders of its glorious past which include one of the largest amphitheatres of Roman times.499

Only a few coins minted here show the city’s lighthouse. Dating from the time of Marcus Aurelius, the coins present two different typologies. One, also known from a drawing by Mionnet, depicts a cylindrical tower on a mole surmounted by a statue holding a patera and a lance (Plate 37, fig. 73). Next to the building are two equestrian statues. Bableon was categorical in identifying this building as a port lighthouse. Mionnet, on the other hand, asserted that it was the obelisk of a circus.493 In my view, the structure – and particularly its base – has too wide a circumference for an obelisk. As for the two figures on horseback, they are more likely to have been equestrian statues of Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Vero, similar to those that it is known were erected in many imperial ports, as, for example, at Puteoli. Although very damaged, another coin (Plate 37, fig. 74) depicted the lighthouse as a squat building with three storeys that decrease in size as they ascend. The first two storeys are square while the top one is cylindrical. The structure’s entrance door can clearly be seen at the base of the first storey, but the condition of the coin makes a more detailed analysis of the building impossible. What is evident, though, is that it is very different from the construction depicted on the first coin.

The port and the lighthouse The modern port has almost entirely obliterated the ancient one. Emergency excavations in July 2007, however, have uncovered near Rrugga Durresi a structure with a round plan approximately 5.8 in diameter which can perhaps be identified as the Roman lighthouse of Dyrrachium.500 The exterior of the building is made of large blocks of conglomerate with in-filling in opus caementicium,501 a technique frequently used in the construction of lighthouses. Above the circular plinth was another structure, square in form and made of bricks, measuring approximately 20x30x8 cm. The plinth is clad in four courses of large dressed blocks of natural conglomerate. In the opinion of Di Febo, the first circular plinth (more than 4m deep) is not the foundations of the tower but the bottom floor of its elevation. The director of the Durrës museum, Afrim Hoti, has dated the structure (Plate 38, fig. 76) to the third or second century BC, meaning that the supposed lighthouse would have been

At a later date, during the reign of Commodus (Plate 38, fig. 75a), the port lighthouse takes on the more familiar appearance known from other exemplars, such as the very first one analysed in this catalogue. It is shown as a cylindrical tower with three storeys that decrease in size as the ascend, on the top of which is the flame of the lantern. A ship on the left-hand side is making its way towards the lighthouse which has a monumental doorway in the centre of the first floor, a typology very similar to that which this same emperor, Commodus, had used for coins minted at Alexandria (Plate 38, fig. 75b).

496 Examples of ports with two or more lighthouses, quite common in the Greek and Roman world, are Thasos, Centumcellae and Caesarea Maritima. 497 Paus. VI, 6,19,8; Tuk. I, 24,4, Cic. fam. 14,1 498 Caes. civ. I, 25,2; 27,1; III, 5,2; 9,8; 11,2; 13, 1,3-5; 26,1-3; 30, 1; 41,3-5; 42,1; 44,1;53,1; 57,1; 58,1; 62; 3; 78,3; 79,4; 80,4; 100, 3. 499 “Dyrrachion” in Der Neue Pauly, 3, Stuttgart-Weimar 1997, p. 858; GUTTERIDGE ET ALII 2001, pp. 391-410. 500 DI FEBO 2007, pp. 3, 133. This is currently the only available publication on the lighthouse at Durrës; my thanks to Prof. Sara Santoro and Dr Roberta di Febo of the University of Parma for their help on this subject. Since the monument is still under excavation, the thesis is limited to a brief anaylsis of the structure, comparing it to other lighthouses, all of which have been fully treated by the author of the present work in his own doctoral thesis (GIARDINA 2004) and in various later articles (GIARDINA 2005, 2007). Prof. Kirigin, with whom I have been able to discuss the subject, is sure that there was a lighthouse on the small island between Albania and Puglia called Palagruza. Other similar structures must have been present in other important Albanian city ports, for example Apollonia. 501 DI FEBO 2007, p. 3.

Comment The Corinth lighthouse, identified by Bedon, Daremberg and Saglio in the port at Cenchreae,494 might, according to Engels495 have lain 2.5km further west in the Lechaion, 491

“Korinthos” in Der Neue Pauly, 6, Stuttgart-Weimar 1999, pp. 745752. 492 SCRANTON-SHAW-IBRAHIM 1978, pp. 21-24. 493 DICTIONNAIRE 1906, p. 430 494 DICTIONNAIRE 1906, p. 430; BEDON 1988, p. 57, remains of a structure identified as a lighthouse were discovered on the mole at Cenchreae in the 1970s, BRILL 1978, pp. 21-23. 495 ENGELS 1990, p. 12.

77

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA contemporary with or slightly later than the building of the lighthouse at Alexandria.

confirming the theory of the triangulation system outlined earlier (see Chapter 5).

Comment

THE LIGHTHOUSES HISTRIA

Since I have not personally seen this structure and was not involved in the excavations, my conclusions are of necessity very limited. We must wait for the publication of the Albanians’ archaeological report for a more detailed description of this building that may have been a lighthouse, something that is unlikely to have been lacking in a trading centre like Durrës.

OF

DALMATIA

AND

Descriptions of the architectural features of these provinces were scare even in antiquity. Authors from that time are more concerned with the bellicose temperament of the inhabitants of these regions who had involved Rome in a number of wars. The island must have already had in Greek times a number of lookout towers or proper lighthouses to assist sailors in finding their way about one of the most rugged coasts in Europe. The majority of towns that today made up the tourist centre of Istria and Dalmatia were once islands and their presence would have been marked with the appropriate structures. It would appear that Pyrranhum (Piran) owes its name to the Greek root pyr- meaning ‘fire’.502 Inhabited since Neolithic times, the region was conquered by Greeks from Paros who established themselves on the islands where they set up important trading centres. The main ports of the provincia of Illyricum, by contract, were on the mainland, the most important of which being Salona and Senia (Senj). Many other ports and landing stages lay along the coast: Aenona (Nin);503 Epidaurum (Cavtat), Iader (Zadar), and there were also a number of river harbours including Narona (Vid) and Scardona (Skradin).504 Some of the place names such as Pharos (Starigrad-Hvar) and Navalia (Novalja-Pag)505bear witness to the importance of the ports of this provincia.

Judging from the photographs and planimetric drawing that I have been able to inspect, the structure is quite unusual. Firstly, the design of a round base surmounted by a square is very strange, the normal arrangement being more likely to be a square base surmounted by a square storey and finishing off with a cylindrical storey. We shall never know if Di Febo’s theory that this is the second storey is correct, nor whether there was a lower square plinth at the base; the large dimension of the diameter would incline me to dismiss this latter possibility. There is a further problem: the structure is sited within a U-shaped porticoed courtyard (Plate 38, fig. 76), with cocciopesto paving and provided with a cistern quite close to the structure in question. As see earlier, the presence of a cistern close to a tower erected on a spot topographically suited to a lighthouse has been discussed more than once (Patara, Canale S.Felice in the Venice Lagoon, etc). However, the tower stands 450m from present-day coastline; Di Febo suggests that in Roman times it was more like 250m from the coast. But the strangest aspect of its position is that it is within a courtyard (assuming, of course, that the courtyard is contemporary with the structure). Those needing access to the tower would have found it very inconvenient to have had to first enter the courtyard and it would have been equally inconvenient for those entering with the animals carrying fuel to be taken up to the top of the tower. Even if we can assume that the lantern storey stood at least ten metres above the porticoed courtyard, the presence of the portico would have been confusing to an arriving sailor wondering whether what lay ahead was the light of a lighthouse or of a temple. If what was here was in fact an imperial palace, similar to that at Caesarea Maritima or Constantinople, it would seem more logical for the lighthouse to be sited outside the courtyard or built on as a terminal feature with the dual role of enhancing the beauty of the palace and lighting the way for navigators. The presence of cocciopesto paving, however, would suggest not so much an imperial palace as a horreum. While the possibility that this structure was a defensive tower belonging to the late antique defensive walls has been excluded, its true function will not be revealed without further excavations and research.

No. 31 NARONA (Vid-Metković, Croatia) Province: Dalmatia Narona grew up around the mouth of the river Naro (Neretva), a waterway that was an important means of communication between the Mediterranean and the interior of the Balkan region. It is known that, as early as the fourth century BC, there was a port with the name Narona on this spot, inhabited by Greeks and Illyrians.506 For most of the first century BC, the port was used by the Romans as a military base for their attacks on the Dalmatians, being probably more important than Salona at that time. In the late imperial period, the slow silting up of the river and a significant change in the river’s course led to the decline of the port in favour of the nearby and more prosperous port of Salona. In the seventh century AD, the city was destroyed by the Avars and the Slavs.507

502

FOSCAN 2003 p. 80. BRUSIČ 2006, pp. 33-45. 504 A fine collection of the city ports of Dalmatia is MATIJASIC 2001; CAMBI 2001, pp. 137-160. 505 RADIČ ROSSI 2004. 506 Mela 2, 57; Plin. Nat. 21, 40; Itin. Anton. 338,4, Tab. Peut. 6,4; for the history of the city «Narona» in Der Neue Pauly, 8, Stuttgart-Weimar 2000, pp. 715-716; for the port see also Theop., apud Strabonis Geographica, 317, where it is suggested that the river was navigable even for large ships. 507 RINALDI TUFI 1989, p. 83. 503

It would be satisfying if the excavations being carried out by Dr Branko Kirigin of the University of Split on the small island of Palagruža, lying precisely between Durrës and Brindisi, uncovered another lighthouse tower, thus 78

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES are no classical or medieval sources relating to these structures, but the traveller Richard Burton, who visited the site on 29 December 1874, quotes (in Italian) Luigi Maschele’s account of the previous year:

The port and the lighthouse Excavations carried out in the twentieth century in the small village of Vid, now lying 4km from the centre of Metković, revealed the remains of two cylindrical towers, relating possibly to the auxiliary structures of the Greek trading emporium, near the parish church of Sv. Vid (Plate 39, fig. 77a). Since the building is close to the river Neretva (Plate 39, fig. 77b), it seems likely that these towers were part of the port and would have had lights to guide ships at night time. Vestiges of the port itself have not yet been found but it is thought to have extended from the spot on the river bank known as Orepak as far as the site of the Roman forum which, in the Hellenistic period, had been an emporion.508 A monument in Narona that has long puzzled scholars and has also become famous among epigraphers is the Ereš tower (Plate 39, fig. 78). Situated in the upper part of the city, it has been found to be constructed on top of an earlier tower (dating back at least to Hellenic times, although recent research has suggested the second II century BC) that related to the city’s first emporium.509 Like the other towers investigated, this one did not function as a lighthouse, being part of the defences of the city walls, but would have been used as a watchtower.

“Due vetusti interessanti fabbricati trovansi nelle vicinanze di Gelsa, entrambi posti sopra eminenze a mezzogiorno della borgata ed alla distanza più o meno di un miglio da essa. Il più antico è posto a cavaliere d’un monte. Questo edifizio, o a dirsi meglio quest’avanzo di antico monumento, viene comunemente denominato Gor (si legga Tor) in lingua Slava. La fabbrica presenta un’opera di lavoro ciclopico and fra i tre generi di tali lavori quello che veniva costruito di massi regolari di forma quadrilunga già sovrapposti uno all’altro senza cemento”512 The tower (Plate 40, fig. 79) is rectangular, measuring 7.4 x 6.2m, and 6m high.513 It stands 235m ASL so cannot be classified as a lighthouse but, rather, a lookout tower. It was restored in 1912 but was damaged by bombing during the Second World War. It was restored again in 1974. The lighthouse proper stood on a hill 7.5km from this site, remains of it still visible in the Maslinovik tower (Plate 40, fig. 80). This building must have been more than 10m high while its position 67m above sea level would have made it visible from the coast. Reports from the excavations carried out near the tower describe it as square with a tiled roof. The lower part is in dressed stone and supports a beam that took the weight of the roof. Traces of an oven have also been found, providing evidence that the building had a room for one or more keepers who, by burning wood there could create smoke signals visible by ships approaching the coast. The tower at Tor would have been able to transmit a signal (positive or negative) to the tower at Maslinovik allowing the latter to provide appropriate signals for the ships, depending whether they were enemies or allies, visible out at sea.514

No. 32 PHAROS (Hvar-Jelsa, Croatia) Province: Dalmatia Inhabited since Neolithic times, the island of Pharos (modern Stari Grad) was captured by Greeks from Paros in the fourth century BC and used as a centre for trading with the area around the Black Sea and the island of Thasos. It is the broadest of the islands in the area and, apart from 1200ha of cultivated land, is rocky and pinecovered. The incomers settled in the northernmost part of the island on the bay of Vala, cut off by high mountains from the western side of the island where the modern city of Hvar is situated. The residence of the tyrant Demetrius of Pharos, the island bore his name during the period of Roman domination, becoming an important agricultural centre and assigned to the colonia of Salona.510

No. 33 SALONAE (Salona, Croatia) Province: Dalmatia The city of Salona was founded in the third century BC by Syracusan colonii from the island now known as Vis at the mouth of the river Salon (Jader), in a spot protected by a low peninsula (Plate 41, fig. 81). Siding with Caesar during his war against Pompey, it was

The signal tower and the lighthouse Some scholars have taken the view that when the geographer Mela511 writes of a certain Pharos (comparing it to Alexandria) he had in mind not, as it might seem from the text, a lighthouse in the port of Brindisi but the Croatian island of Pharos. While there is no way of knowing the truth, I am inclined to think it more probable that Mela was referring to Brindisi. However, in the area near Jelsa, we find a place name that is highly significant: Tor. This is a site on a hill where two towers dating from the Hellenistic period have been found. These were definitely signal towers and, I believe, lighthouses. There

512

BURTON 1976, p. 276: “Two interesting old ruins can be seen near Gelsa, both situated on high places to the south of the village and less than a mile from it. The older of the two straddles a small mountain. This building, or rather these remains of a building, is commonly known as Gor (read Tor – author’s note) in the Slavic language. The masonry is Cyclopean, and of the three types of this sort of masonry it is made up of regular rectangular quadrilateral blocks placed one on the other without cement”. Burton is not able to explain the function of this structure and assumes it to be the remains of an ancient temple, but it is clear that the site was chosen with defence and signalling in mind; “Pharos (2)” in Pauly’s Realencylcopädie, Stuttgart 1938, pp. 1862; PETRIĆ 1975, p. 247; GAFFNEY ET ALII 1997, p. 151. 513 GAFFNEY ET ALII 1997, p. 151. 514 For a history of these towers KIRIGIN 2003, pp. 24-25; 43-45; I am greatly indebited to Prof. Kirigin for information relating to the excavations on the island and about recent work on the island of Palagrûza where there was probably once a lighthouse.

508

CAMBI 2001, pp. 139-142. MARIN ET ALII 1999, p. 61. 510 Diod. Sic. XV, 5, 13; “Pharos (2)” in Pauly’s Realencyclopädie, Stuttgart 1938, pp. 1860-1862. 511 Mela II 114 see PARRONI 1984, p. 367; LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN 1923, p. 248. 509

79

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA rewarded with the title of Colonia Martia Iulia, a name that alluded to the warlike character of the inhabitants. It became the capita of Illyricus Superius under Augustus (10BC) and was the base for a military garrison, becoming one of the main ports of the Roman provinciae for incursions into Pannonia, Moesia and Dacia. It remained an important military base during Marcus Aurelius’s wars against the Marcomani and it was not until the fourth century AD than it began to be superseded by the nearby city of Aspalatos where Diocletian, who had abdicated in 395AD, chose to build his imposing palace, the remains of which still form the city walls in the centre of modern Split. Salona was a bishopric in the fifth century AD and two councils were held here. It was destroyed by the Avari during the seventh century AD, the population taking refuge in Diocletian’s Palace.515

refers to a lighthouse in the port of Salona or to the inhabitants of the city of Pharos (no. 32). LehmannHartleben, for example, understood it to refer to the control that the colonia of Salona exercised over the island of Pharos rather than to the presence of a lighthouse a Salona.519 Betz520 also claimed that the lighthouse represented in Scene LXXXII of Trajan’s Column, to which we shall return, was that in the nearby port of Scardona, implying that there was an integrated system of signals between Scardona, Salona and the island of Hvar (Plate 41, fig. 82). This hypothesis is anything but far-fetched given that the Croatian coast – and particularly in this area – is very rugged, necessitating a good system of signals to assist navigation. Scardona is mentioned in Pliny 521 as Liburniae finis et initium Dalmatiae. It is highly probably that a border area such as this would have had a lighthouse, but I do not believe that it is the one represented on Trajan’s Column.

The port and the lighthouse The port of Salona was 19km long and between three and six km wide. The lighthouse of the ancient city has never been found although several different sites have been suggested: Farlati believed that it should be sought in the ancient village of Vranjic and at Slano on the opposing coast, near the present-day chapel of St Caius. Here, however, the land is low lying and marshy. It is, nevertheless, in this marshy area that horrea from the Roman period have been identified.516 Ceci, taking a different view, was convinced that the lighthouse would have been on the rocky coast near the river Jader. There can be no doubt that, in a port as important as that of Salona, there must have been a lighthouse, possibly quite significant in size, and the various scholars who have tackled this subject agree that it is certain that there was such a structure here, citing as evidence an inscription now in the Archaeological Museum of Split:

No. 34 PARENTIUM (Poreč, Croatia) Regio X: Venetia et Histria Archaeological finds in both Poreč and the island of San Nicholas lying alongside it have provided evidence of inhabitation at least since the Bronze Age. First an Illyrian castellum, by the second century BC the Romans had already seen the city’s strategic importance, situated as it was between Tergeste and Pola and with its own port. Promoted to the status of colonia under Caligula, improvements included a forum, baths and temples, one of which we know from an inscription found at the site was dedicated to Neptune. The inscription also tells us that the Roman port lay in the site of the presentday fish market and not where the modern port is situated, the present site being more exposed to the scirocco wind. Although retaining its Roman grid plan (even today the main street is called Decumanus), the city became a diocese and became part of the kingdom of first Odoacer and then Theoderic, the period in which craftsmen from Ravenna executed the mosaics in the Euphrasian Basilica. In 539AD the port of Poreč became the Byzantine base for all naval expeditions against the Goths. After successfully resisting the attacks of the Wends, ancestors of the Slovenes, the city was encircled with walls constructed from much of the marble from the Roman forum. It was gradually settled by the Slavs. Conquered by Charlemagne in 788AD and reduced to slavery, it was saved by the agreement drawn up with Venice in the tenth century to combat piracy. The port continued to be so active and competitive that it was regarded with envy by the Genoese who saw it as a threat to their trade with the East. In 1354, the admiral Paganino Doria attacked and destroyed the city which did not recover until the fifteenth century when its maritime trade revived.522

L(ucio) Anicio, C(ai) f(ilio) Paetinati IIIvir(o) i(ure) d(icundo) Quinq(uennali, prae(fecto) ………………………… Prae(fecto) fabr(um) Praefectur(a) Phariac(a) Salonitan(a) IIIvir(o) i(ure) d(icundo) quinq(uennali) D(ecuriorum) D(ecreto) P(ublice) benemerito517 Betz518 took the view that this provided irrefutable proof that the port of Salona had a monumental lighthouse. Unfortunately, it is not clear whether the inscription 515

RINALDI TUFI 1989, p. 45. CAMBI 2001, p. 142. CECI 1962, p. 143. 518 BETZ 1943, pp. 128-129, the author asserts that the adjective pharicus refers exclusively to the lighthouse at Alexandria. He rightly compares it to Inscription C.I.L. VI 8582 that names a procurator phari Alexandriae ad Aegyptum: in this case, however, there reference to the lighthouse at Alexandria is explicit. In the present case, the word Salonitana is explicitly used, suggesting that the reference is to that city or, at least, to a city under its jurisdiction. 516 517

519

LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN 1963, p. 280; ALFÖLDY 1965, p. 107. BETZ 1943, p. 129. Plin. nat., III, 141. 522 ALBERI 2001, p. 1267. 520 521

80

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES all, a favourite place where numerous villas were built by the sea. Around the fourth century AD, the Romans settled permanently in the area around Pirano that became in due course a castrum in the fight against the Barbarians, as is recorded in a number of documents dating from the seventh century AD. It was in this same century that the sources first mention Pirano.527 A century later, the Franks succeeded the Byzantines, giving rise to much discontent among the locals who resented the increases in taxes. In the tenth century AD, it was the turn to the Slavs who, as time went by, came into the orbit of the Venetians.

The port and the lighthouse The Roman port of Poreč (situated in the northern shore of the peninsula, known today as Peschiera) has always had a important role, both militarily and commercially. It was protected by a dyke made of fragmented materials and which extended for some 200m from the presentday Hotel Riviera and then curved round towards the southeast towards the area where once the tower of Peschiera stood, dominating the north side of the coast.523 An important role was also assigned to the small island of St Nicholas. Lying opposite the city, it provided excellent moorings for ships of various sizes, sheltering them from the wind. Visible on a raised piece of land not far from the presentday landing stage are the remains of at least one of the medieval lighthouses of Poreč, the St Nicholas Tower (Plate 42, fig. 83, Plate 42, fig. 84b). The structure we see now, a cylindrical stone tower, dates from 1403 and is clearly a Roman-Byzantine lighthouse transformed into a lookout tower to give warning of pirates in the Venetian period while maintaining its role as a lighthouse.

The port and the lighthouse Nothing is known about the Roman port of Pyrranhum though it is likely to have been situated where today there stands the seventeenth century fortress near the church of San Clemente. In the nineteenth century a neo-Gothic lighthouse was built onto the small fort. We can hypothesise that it occupied the position of an earlier, presumably Greek, lighthouse (Plate 43, fig. 85b), but this is purely conjectural and unsupported by archaeological evidence. Nothing else can be added about this port, where the presence of a lighthouse is only presumed on the basis of its name, rather as in the case of Fiorenzuola di Focara in Italy.528

All the small islands surrounding Poreč (Plate 42, fig. 84a) were marked with light signals to help sailors. Of these, a good example is Tar, the port of which was called in Roman times Turris Nova, later renamed “Old Tower”. It stood on the eastern coast, well sheltered from the bora wind, between headlands, and still identified today with a powerful lantern.524 Here again, as is often the case for Histria and Dalmatia, there is no concrete evidence for a lighthouse dating from before the late medieval one. Placenames such as Tar, however, make it hard to believe that a strategic position such as that enjoyed by Poreč would not have had lighthouses, used both to help sailors enter the port and to confuse enemies with signals that draw them not towards the port entrance but onto the rocks or a sandbank.

Comment The idea that a coastline as difficult to navigate as that of Istria would not have any reference points is unthinkable. The lack of archaeological evidence discovered so far means that we should perhaps look elsewhere, to the many islands that run parallel to the coast. While Pirano may not have yielded tangible archaeological results, traces of medieval and renaissance lookout towers, that must undoubtedly have replaced earlier lighthouse-like constructions, have been found in places such as Podpeč, Kaštel and Poreč. The particular situation of this coast would have meant that there was a particular need for lookout towers: in Roman times when the threat came from the Illyrians, or during the period of Venetian domination, from the Turks.529 As far as the materials used to construct the presumed lighthouses is concerned, it would in all probability have been Istrian stone. Relatively unporous, this is a highly suitable stone for masonry, particularly in damp areas, and would have easily available in the imperial period, throughout the regio X.530

No. 35 PYRRANHUM (Piran, Slovenia) Regio X: Venetia et Histria Well known to Greek sailors of the fourth century BC, Pirano (Plate 43, fig. 85a) is today one of Slovenia’s few remaining corridors to the sea.525 The written sources have nothing to say about the origins of city, but its name has given rise to much learned speculation. Already referred to is the theory of a Greek etymology derived from the word for “fire” (from the root –πύρ), while another suggestion is that the name oft he village comes from the Celtic Bior-dun meaning “city on the hill”. In Greek times, the city would have acted as a “lighthouse” for sailors directed towards the colonia of Aegida, near presentday Koper (Capodistria).526 In 178BC, the Romans conquered Istria, including Pirano which became a port of call on the route towards Pula (Pola) and, above

527

Cosmograph.V. ALBERI 2001, p. 564; for the Slovenian coast MATIJASIC 2001, p. 171 with a bibliography; for Marinella di Focara ALFIERI 1986, pp. 235259. 529 For this tower see ALBERI 2001, pp. 407; 708-9. 530 ROSADA 1997, pp. 71-72. This is not to say that brick was never used. In the Decima Regio this was generally sesquipedal. On the defence of the city and ports see also CABANES 2000, p. 21; ZANINOVIĆ 2000, p. 44. 528

523

ALBERI 2001, pp. 1279; 1288. ALBERI 2992, p. 1319. FOSCAN 2003, p. 80. 526 PAHOR 1972, p. 1. 524 525

81

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Villaggio del Pescatore there is said to have been another tower, known as the Rocca di Attila or Tower di Pucino, also perhaps built over one of an earlier date to improve communication between the other towers of the area and then reused in the defensive walls of a later castle.539 Today, no trace of such a tower remains because of the parabolic antennae that have been built over its site.

No. 36 TIMAVUS-DUINO (San Giovanni di Duino, Duino, Friuli Venezia Giulia) Regio X: Venetia et Histria The river Timavo that flows between Venetia and Histria was already well known to authors in antiquity who thought that near its mouth was a port connected to a water cult. It was also reputed to have been the scene of one of the adventures of the Argonauts.531 Today, the mouth of the river is near San Giovanni di Duino, by the Villaggio del Pescatore. The Timavo was believed by classical authors to flow directly into the Istros (Danube).532 The area must have continued to prosper in Christian times since, between the fifth and sixth century AD a small Paleochristian basilica was built in the area where the church of S. Giovanni in Tuba now stands. The site was overrun in the seventh century AD by the Avari and in the tenth century by the Hungarians.533

At one time there was a lighthouse – or more accurately a lookout tower that also functioned as a lighthouse – at Duino and it was around this tower that the castle of the same name was constructed in the twelfth century (Plate 44, figs 87 a, b), not far from the site described above. The Roman origins of the tower are clear from an inscription – now unfortunately stolen – on the base dating from the time of Diocletian. The position of the tower high above the sea, with a beam that would have been visible as far away as Grado, Aquileia and the nearest parts of the Slovenian coast, points to the likelihood of its having been a lighthouse. This would have been very necessary in a region that, because of tidal variations, would in Roman times have presented considerable difficulties for sailors. Clearly visible on the exterior of the tower, constructed in Istrian stone, are a number of holes that must have been used to support external wooden steps giving access to the top in Roman times when the tower was used solely as a lighthouse. When the Swabians, having abandoned their old and small stronghold high above the sea, by now in ruins, began building the new castle of Duino in 1400, they restored the tower, possibly removing the external stair in favour of an internal one, and added battlements to the top for greater protection.540

Pliny describes the site as a small island with hot springs that increase and diminish with the variations of the tides. He situates it at the mouth of the river Timavo. This coincides with the place named mansio Fons Timavi on Segment IV, 5 of the Tabula Peutingeriana.534 The port also significant in that the Via Julia Augusta started here, linking Venetia with Noricum and the other countries of the north. It may have been for this reason that there was also a post station here, discovered within the Randaccio Aqueduct.535 The port and the lighthouse The port on the Timavo had, according to tradition, a lighthouse on the small island of Belforte that lay at the mouth of the river (Plate 43, fig. 86).536 The Venetians built a castle on the island in the thirteenth century. Almost two centuries later, in 1483, a certain Marin da Sanudo, overtaken by a sudden storm, was forced to take shelter near the ruins of a tower that must have been the same as the lookout tower built by the Venetians on the site of the ancient Roman lighthouse and which he calls Belguardo.537 Now called Sant’Antonio, today this island is almost entirely underwater and there is no trace of any lighthouse, although we can be sure that the site was a working port since a Roman ship, now in the National Archaeological Museum of Aquileia, was found in the vicinity. According to local historians, the lighthouse of legend was merely a tower built by the Venetians in 1240 to control merchandise crossing the river. Nothing remains of this tower which stood about 500m from the presentday Villaggio del Pescatore.538 In this same

A lighthouse in this position would have been very useful for anyone coming from the port on the Timavo wishing to round the cape towards the port of Sixtilianum (Sistiana) 541 and the existence of lighthouses in the past this area is known. It would appear then that, between Aquileia and Tergeste, there was a comprehensive network of light signals making it possible for ships to sail safely within the lagoon. No. 37 TERGESTE (Trieste, Friuli Venezia Giulia) Regio X: Venetia et Histria Strabo542 describes Tergeste (Plate 44, fig. 88) 543 as a military encampment 180 stadia from the city port of Aquileia. Tergeste owed its importance to the existence My thanks also to Prof. Rita Auriemma of the University of Salento for the invitation to the excellent and useful conference relating to the results of the Interreg Italia-Slovenia Project, linked to the exhibition on the Archeology of the Coastline. 539 FOSCAN-VECCHIET 2001, pp. 153-157, where the ruins of the tower are still visible in a 1960s photograph. The tenth century AD is a certain terminus post quem for the construction of the tower, the castle of Poziolum appearing for the first time in 921AD in an imperial proclamation made by Berengar I. 540 For a history of the two castles at Duino FOSCAN.VECCHIET 2001, pp. 135-152. 541 BRAVAR 1976, pp. 99-107. 542 Strab. V, 1,9. 543 “Tergeste” in Pauly’s Realencyclopädie, Suggart 1934, p. 722.

531

Verg. Aen. I, 245; Strab. V, 1, 8. Plin. nat. 3, 128; Mart. 4,25, 5.8; Strab. V, 1,9: “Timavus” in Der Neue Pauly, 12/1, Stuttgart-Weimar 2002, p. 582. 533 BOVINI 1973, pp. 25-29. 534 Plin. nat., II, 202, 229; Tab. Peut. IV, 5. 535 A recent work on Roman roads is QUILICI 2006, pp. 157-205. 536 For the port of Timavo: Strab. V, 1,8; Liv. XLI, 2, 1; Plin. nat. II, 103, 229. Pliny mentions an island that BRUSIN 1925, p. 9 identifed as the hill known as della Punta or Amarna. 537 DEGRASSI 1962, p. 824; FRANZOT 1999, p. 87. 538 My grateful thanks to Dr Bruno Bonetti for his help and to Signora Wanda of the Trattoria at Timavo for putting me in contact with him. 532

82

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES of a road between it and Aquileia. Another road connected it with the river port of Nauportus, near Emona. A third road led from Tergeste to the road station of Timavo from where it joined the road to Tarseatica.544 With the status of colonia under Augustus, the city was used mainly as a communication point for both inland and coastal Istria.

until the Longobards invaded Italy. They chose to develop nearby Grado instead, transforming it into a new city port.549 It should be borne in mind, however, that it is likely that the terrain now covered by the Grado lagoon was, in Roman times, an area of dry ground cut through by a wide river that flowed as far as the wharfs of the port of Aquileia. In Grado, in addition to a series of navigable canals, there was also a road on which stood a row of buildings that are likely to have been horrea.550

The port and the lighthouse The most important documents relating to the history of the Roman port of Tergeste date from the Renaissance. Pietro Coppo and Ireneo della Croce refer to the existence of a harbour with two arms which would correspond with the presentday moles, Fratelli Bandiera and Venezia. Della Croce also refers to another mole in the area which is now the Piazza Unità d’Italia.545 The most recent excavations have revealed that the city once had two ports: the main port, dating from the time of Trajan, situated within the Zucco moles, as had already been argued by Kandler, and a second one for smaller coastal traffic near the presentday Piazza Unità d’Italia. In addition to these, there was a quay with moorings in the area now covered by the Piazza del Rosario and Via di Risorgo, and dating from the Constantinian period.546 The lighthouse must have stood on the spot now occupied by the nineteenth century Lanterna, known as Lo Zucco and which Kandler describes as the remains of an octagonal tower of Istrian stone. The lighthouse was positioned in that part of the sinus tergestinus where the currents of the rivers Isonzo and Timavo met, a phenomenon that could give rise to turbulence in the sea. The restoration of the port of Trieste by Maria Theresa of Austria between 1744 and 1769 removed all traces of the presumed Roman lighthouse, the form of which may have been not unlike the tower we see today (Plate 45, fig. 89), a construction that could function at one and the same time as signal post and fortress.547 Its name may also be significant: “Zucco” is connected with word zuchi, used of the rocks that stick up out of the sea, and perhaps indicates the ruins referred to above.

The port and the lighthouse There is no specific mention of a lighthouse at Aquilea in any source, ancient or modern. Nevertheless, the situation of the city’s river port and the metropolis’s ever increasing commercial importance551in ancient times would lead one to presume that there was a signal tower at the mouth of the harbour canal. At the end of the nineteenth century,552 it was suggested that the highest tower illustrated in Segment III of the Tabula Peutingeriana (Plate 45, fig 90) was a depiction of the lighthouse at Aquileia. River navigation (see Chapter 1), at least in the spring and summer, offered much calmer sailing than did the sea. The advantages were limited however by the width of the waterways since, with very few exceptions, rivers could not accommodate large trading ships and journey times were longer. Aquileia formed part of a shipping system of lagoon canals connecting Ravenna to Altino, which was n turn connected to Aquilea.553 In the winter months, however, when the bora was blowing in all its violence and the rivers were wrapped in fog, it would have been impossible for the sailors of antiquity to navigate without the help of lighthouse towers to guide them through the waterways. Stucchi554 believes that Scene LXXXII of Trajan’s Column (Plate 55, fig. 108a) shows the Aquileia lighthouse, although these scene has also been interpreted as that at Zadar, Brindisi (no. 46) or Ancona (no. 45). It may have been simply because the lighthouse depicted on Trajan’s column is round that, when, a little time ago, a structure of a similar shape was discovered (Plate 46, fig. 91), identifiable as the base of a tower, it was hailed as the remains of the Aquileia lighthouse. Archaeologists have confirmed, however, that it was the base of one of the defensive towers built in late antiquity. It is a semicircular tower that protrudes towards the ante wall, built in the same technique, which perhaps explains why some scholars thought that it was a lighthouse dating from Roman times. Since another parallel tower was

No. 38 AQUILEIA/GRADUS (Aquileia/Grado, Friuli Venezia Giulia) Regio X: Venetia et Histria Strabo548 situates Aquileia 10km from Adria, a port that, at the time of the founding of Aquilea, had lost the supremacy it had enjoyed in Etruscan and Greek times. Originally settled by Gauls in 186BC, Aquilea was conquered by the Romans five years later and made a Latin colonia. Chosen as a military outpost in the campaigns against the Daci and the Marcomanni, it was always a prosperous city thanks to the presence of the river Natisone (once as much as 40m wide) where it was possible to develop an excellent fluvial port. Sacked by Attila in 452AD, it was the episcopal see of the Exarchate

549 “Aquileia,1” in Der Neue Pauly, 1, Stuttgart 1996, pp. 935-6; on Grado BROGIOLO-CAGNANA 2005, pp. 79-108. 550 REDDÉ 1986, p. 216 thinks that Grado was the military wing of the port of Aquileia; BROGIOLO-CAGNANA 2005, p. 91. 551 The port at Aquileia also accommodated the classis Venetum, a detatchment of the Ravenna fleet BOLLINI 1968, p. 57. 552 LEGER 1979, p. 508. 553 PANCIERA 1957, p. 48. 554 STUCCHI 1959, p. 15. Stucchi, however, does not discuss the matter of the lighthouse at Aquileia, merely comparing the circular lighthouse on Trajan’s Column with other circular lighthouses and buildings that may, according to Thiersch’s well-known theory, have been influence by the architecture of lighthouses.

544

Strab. VII, 31,4; Itin. Ant. 128; Itin. Ant. 273. COPPO 1830, pp. 26-44; DELLA CROCE 1698; BERTACCHI 1995, p. 120 also refers to the lighthouse. 546 MASELLI SCOTTI-VENTURA 2001, pp. 201-204. 547 PAGLIA 1997, pp. 34-42. 548 Strab. V, 1,8. 545

83

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA discovered at the same time, it is clear that we are dealing with a city gate. The idea that this tower, constructed in stone and brickwork was, in medieval times, a watch tower, can be dismissed.555

opening of the Cavallino or Caligo canal in 1632, the inhabitants moved to the area now known as Lido di Jesolo. The lighthouse-tower or Torre di Caligo

Comment Standing near the Sile-Piave river at the end of the Via Dragojesolo where it meets Via Salsi is a square tower of 2.5 x 2.5m (Plate 46, fig. 92). Built of Roman bricks reused, it is in a state of obvious neglect. Now known as the Torre del Piave Vecchio, from 1391 it was called the Turris Caligo (with a variant, Turris Caliginis, in 1405). The first of these names obviously alludes to the position of the tower on the Piave Vecchio; the second is derived, even more obviously, from the Venetian word caligo meaning “fog”. The name of the tower could then be translated as “tower of fog” or, even better,, “tower for fog”. At the other end of the Caligo canal, which starts from just by this tower, near Lio Maggiore, there was another similar tower, now unfortunately destroyed. Structures of this type were to be found in many parts of this area, examples being the Tor de Rodevol (now called Torre del Fine) and Turris Linguenciae, both on the Revedoli canal, the Torre dei Mossoni in the Piave Vecchia, the Torre di Dumorzo (Donzorzi) and the Torre del Mosto on the river Livenza, etc....557

The city of Aquilea is represented on the Tabula Peutingeriana as a hexagon. On either side are two tall towers with matching windows on the top storey. There is no sign of any opening in the lower part of the building that could be a door into a lighthouse. Since the tower on the left is slightly higher than that on the right, as well as standing closer tot the water’s edge, it has been suggested that Aquileia had a lighthouse tower (the taller one) near the sea and a signalling tower or lantern (the smaller one) lying further inland. In my view, neither of these towers is a lighthouse, their stylistic appearance being quite unlike any of the other images of lighthouses on the Tabula. All the lighthouses (Alexandria, Ostia, Constantinople, Chrysopolis, Brigantium) are shown as towers with several storeys that decease in size as they go up. A flame burns on the top of the buildings which always have several windows and an entrance doorway. These features are missing from the depiction of Aquileia. Despite this, I am convinced that there was a lighthouse at Aquileia, a city too important both strategically and commercially to have done without such a structure, designed to help sailors, particularly in times of fog or strong winds, to find their way. I did not believe the copyist of the Tabula was depicting the lighthouse at Aquileia and, if he did, he failed to realise it was a lighthouse and depicted it more like a defence tower.

We know that the Equilum tower still had the usual arrangement of three storeys in 1589, by which time the Venetians had transformed it into a post and toll station for traffic on the river Piave.558 Later converted into a chapel, traces remaining are a rudimental effigy of St Romuald and a number of crosses inscribed on the bricks. Until the time of the land reclamation in the Jesolo valleys, the tower had a roof with wooden beams and was inhabited, as we known from the blackened part of a fireplace in the area below the iron crucifix, towards Via Dragojesolo. Rather than being a reference to the smoke emerging the top of the tower (as if from a dragon’s mouth), which might seem a little far-fetched, this place name recalls, I believe, the dredging work carried out during the construction of the canals running down the side of the street and culminating in the Canale di Caligo.

Another explanation – and it is one that I find very convincing – is that there was a signalling tower at Aquileia of the type to be found at Baro Zavelea (no. 42). The lighthouse itself would have been at Grado, perhaps n the spot where the defensive square tower, belonging to the late antique city walls and discovered in 1992 during the excavations at the Hotel Fonzari, now stands.556 This would make Grado Aquileia’s naval base in the way that the Portus Reatinus (Caorle) was for Concordia Sagittaria.

The tower bears striking similarities to that at Baro Zavelea (no. 42), an area that was very similar to the Lido di Jesolo, not least from a metrological point of view (and also Fos-sur-Mer, No. 68), being frequently affected by fog for a good part of the year, a fact reflected in the unchanged fourteenth-century name of the tower.

No. 39 EQUILUM (Jesolo, Veneto) Regio X: Venetia et Histria Equilum on the river Piave was already a busy port in Roman times, trading in timber from Cadore. It receives regular mentions in the Middle Ages from 1223. Today the area of Torre Caligo no longer has the appearance of a town since it lacks a proper centre, which at one time included the chapel of San Romualdo, built on the remains of the Roman lighthouse tower. With the

No. 40 CANALE S.FELICE (Venetian Lagoon, Cà Ballarin, Veneto) Regio X:Venetia et Histria Until recently it was thought that the Romans never garrisoned any part of the Venetian Lagoon (Plate 47, fig. 557

DORIGO 1994, p. 52, pp. 89-90. According to DORIGO 1994, p. 175, this marked the border between the dioceses of Equilum and Torcello. It is no accident that, after using the tower as a lighthouse, signal tower and post station, the chapel dedicated to San Romualdo was built next to it and used until 500 years ago, according to local knowledge. I must thank the Lions in particular.

558 555 VILLA 2001, pp. 580-582, BUORA 2000, p. 59 notes that as early as the nineteenth century Maionica in his Fundkarte von Aquileia identified this building as a city gate. 556 BROGIOLO-CAGNANA 2005, pp. 103-104.

84

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES 93a). Today, the area is very rocky with a number of naturally-formed islands (Torcello, Murano, Burano). In Roman times these would have been part of the mainland but situated in the sea in the same way as other Istrian cities (Koper, Piran, Poreč, Zara…). The Lio Piccolo area, where a cistern dating from the second century AD has been discovered, was investigated in the 1990s, particularly around Cà Ballarin on the Canale San Felice, one of the largest natural canals in Venice’s North Lagoon.559

travellers taking the Via Popilia and Via Annia having to pass that way.567 The port and the lighthouse The construction of ports at Ariminum and Ravenna meant that Adria lost some of its former importance. Nevertheless, the emporium was very busy from at least the sixth century BC and frequented by the Celts, from the far north of Italy, and the Etruscans, thanks to good communication links by river, particularly the Po at Felsina (Bologna). There would certainly have been a lighthouse in such an important place but there is no archaeological evidence for this apart from the foundations of the campanile of the church of Santa Maria Assunta della Tomba (Plate 48, fig. 95), near which the ancient city must have been. A stone (Plate 48, fig. 96a) was placed in the campanile, recording that on this spot once stood the ancient Roman lighthouse of the Adriatic. This is no more than a legend, unfortunately, and the only indication that there might once have been a lighthouse here is topographical: if one looks from the spot once reached by the sea back towards the city, it is clear that the campanile at Adria occupies a perfect position for a lighthouse (Plate 48, fig. 96b).

The tower-lighthouse A square structure of sesquipedal bricks (Plate 47, fig. figs. 93b, 94: each side being about 8m560) bonded together with a mortar of lime and cocciopesto was found, submerged in 3-5m of water, on the north side of the Canale San Felice, 1km from the Treporti “Ricevitoria”. It is thought it was a tower-lighthouse, erected on the canal to assist navigation along the Fossa Popiliola, the man-made canal that ran across most of the Venetian lagoon (Plate 47, fig. 93b).561 On the basis of the analysis of the structure and walls of the latter, carried out in the 1980s, the date is probably first or second century AD.562 An interesting feature is that, at the base of the structure, there was a cistern.563 The tower can be compared to one discovered by Uggeri a Baro Zavelea (no. 42) and to the Torre di Caligo (no. 39). It was rebuilt in the Middle Ages with reused materials from the old tower-lighthouse dating from the time of Augustus.564

No. 42 BARO ZAVELEA (Argine Agosta, Emilia Romagna) Regio VIII: Aemilia The Romans made use of two main types of waterway: firstly, the naturally occurring waterways (lagoons and rivers)568 and, secondly, canals.569 Cisalpine Italy provided the Romans with a perfect natural network of waterways: the sheltered bay and lagoons between Aquileia and Ravenna not only enabled ships to reach the main ports of the peninsula, but also provided a direct route to Rome by way of the Via Flaminia.570 The Po was navigable for ships as far as Pavia, while smaller craft could get as far as Turin.571 The area of Trentino Alto Adige as far north as Bolzano could be reached by way of the river Adige from Verona.572

No. 41 HATRIA (Adria, Veneto) Regio X: Venetia et Histria Described by Strabo as illustrious, 565 today Adria lies a good 25km from the coast. In Antiquity, the sea was so close that it took its name, Adriatic, from the city. Pliny mentions the Septem Maria, branches of the river Po that linked the port of Adria to Ravenna and Chioggia by means of fossae, originally reclaimed by the Etruscans.566 Without spending too much time on the question of Adria’s origins - the sources do not agree – there is no doubt that its period of greatest glory was in the Greek period, when the Hellenic port superseded the Etruscan port of Spina in the fourth century BC. It became a Greek colonia in the time of Dionysius I of Syracuse. It continued to be an important city under Roman rule,

The many canals created in Antiquity, from Etruscan times onwards, were used to link parallel rivers. Known as fossae in Roman times, examples are the Fossa Augusta that connected the Padus Vetus (that had a course similar to that of the Nile Delta with seven branches between Altino and Ravenna, giving rise to the name Septem Maria) to the military port of Classe, near Ravenna; the Fossa Flavia (begun under Claudius whose name is remembered in that of the town of Chioggia)573 that connected Ravenna with Adria, Altino, Concordia and Aquileia, from where trade with the Illyrians was carried on; and, lastly, the Fossa Clodia and then

559

MEDAS-D’AGOSTINO 2007, pp. 40-44. UGGERI 2006, p. 148. 561 MARCHIORI 1990, p. 205; MEDAS-D’AGOSTINO 2006, p. 56, DORIGO 1994, p. 51, where other submerged structures are also discussed. These came to light after a dispute between the monks and nuns of two religious houses where mention is made of mergones, a word used to indicate submerged structures; MEDAS-D’AGOSTINO 2005, pp. 37-54. 562 CANAL 1998, p. 74, staz. 138. 563 My thanks to Prof. Stefano Medas of the University of Bologna, Trapani Campus, for information relating to these finds. 564 GARGIULLO-OKELY III 1993, p. 150, the walled structure covered an area of about 8m square; nearby a few fragments of amphorae and glassware were discovered, the first evidence of Roman settlements in the northern part of the Lagoon. 565 Strab. V, 1,7. 566 Plin. nat. III, 16, 120. 560

567

MAMBELLA 1986, pp. 235-245. ROUGE’ 1966, pp. 122-136; CHEVALLIER 1988, pp. 123-131. 569 For an exhaustive study of the canals, see: FERNÀNDEZ CASADO 1983, pp. 565-591. 570 UGGERI 1990, pp. 176-180. 571 CERA 1995, pp. 179 ff. 572 BASSI 1994, pp. 237-248. 573 MARCHIORI 1990, p. 204. 568

85

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Traiana, the presentday Fiumicino Canal, that linked the port of Ostia with Roma. The Romans did not confine these activities to Italy alone: we only have to think of Fos (no. 68) on the Rhône, a city created by Marius to further his war against the Teutons and whose port is marked on the Tabula Peutingeriana. Without dwelling at length on this subject, I think it is reasonable to suppose that, at the mouths of these canals, particularly in the Cisalpine region with its thick fogs, there would have been lighthouses to indicate the entrance to the fossa. Some scholars seem inclined to accept the theory that, in order to see better on the Po when it was foggy, the ships used the system proposed by Fonquerle where an amphora filled with burning fuel is placed at the prow of the ship to provide a beam of light.574 The tower found at Baro Zavalea should be considered in just this type of context. Unfortunately, almost all traces of this structure were destroyed in 1982.575

conditions. While there is nothing surprising about the rectangular structure, of which , as said above, we know only the base, leaving us to imagine that its storeys grew gradually smaller as they went up, culminating in a final cylindrical storey housing a lantern, the building technique, combining opus vitattum and brickwork, is unusual. As mentioned, it can usefully be compared with the towers of Canale S.Felice in the Venetian lagoon (no. 40) and Equilum (no. 39). No. 43 RAVENNA/CLASSIS (Ravenna/Classe, Emilia Romagna) Regio VIII: Aemilia The small settlement of Ravenna (Plate 49, fig. 98 a) emerged in very ancient times 8km from the Adriatic. Its port seems, in Etruscan times at least, to have been of secondary importance compared to the flourishing ports of Spina and Adria. In 227BC, however, during the Illyrian Wars, a fleet designed to protect the Adriatic was stationed at Ravenna578 and, in 89BC, Metellus, Silla’s consul, set up a fleet here to fight Marius’s army.579 From this time on, Ravenna became increasingly important. A turning point for the city and its port came in the time of Augustus, although Caesar before him had already understood the strategic importance of a port in this area.580 It was Augustus, though, who created a number of navigable canals to connect the city to the Po river. The most famous of these, as mentioned above, was the Fossa Augusta, the position of which can be traced in part along the Strada Agosta on the outskirts of Comacchio. Ravenna became the bulwark of the Adriatic, just as Miseno was for the Tyrrhenian, according to Suetonius.581 From then on, the history of the city was indissolubly linked to that of its port.582 In the sixth century AD, it was still able, according to Iordanes,583 to provide moorings for the 250 ships mentioned by Cassius Dio.584 The port area was not, however, in Ravenna proper but 4km away, in an area that took its name – probably not until quite late on – from that of the fleet, “Classe”.585 The port eventually declined and disappeared for reasons that were both natural and manmade. Some of the rivers that flowed into the port at Classe from the Apennines (particularly the Ronco and the Montone, quite close to Ravenna) threatened to silt up the harbour at Classe. It is known to have continued in use, however, until at least the fourth century AD and Procopius586 refers to a functioning port at Classe during the Gothic Wars. In 578, however, Faroaldo, duke of Spoleto,587 plundered and destroyed Classe, the port only being liberated in 584 thanks to the intervention of the Longobard Droctulf. Bishop Agnello (ninth century AD)

The tower-lighthouse In 1976, ploughing on the reclaimed land in the Valle di Mezzano, near Comacchio, to the west of the Strada Agosta, 100m to the south of the junction with Strada Fiume di Valle Pega, not far from the presentday Antiquarium at the Pieve di Santa Maria in Padovetere, uncovered a large number of sesquidpedal bricks, identified as the base (with sides of 7.42m) of a towerlighthouse from the period of Augustus.576 The remains, on a square platform enclosed within a double row of oak tree trunks, stood to a height of some two metres (Plate 49, fig. 97a).577 Other earlier finds in this area included many graves and a villa, close to Baro Zavalea. Unfortunately, in 1982, further agricultural work interfered with the ruins of the tower, of which nothing now remains to be seen. In 1983, the mayor of Comacchio, Antonio Feletti, suggested that a small slab of Istrian stone, found near the tower, was the base of a portcullis. A larger slab may have supported columns, while in the Antiquarium at the Pieve di Santa Maria in Padovetere are two carved column bases in white marble. The use of costly materials such as marble and, particularly, Istrian stone which is rarely found in the Po Valley area, has led to suggestions that here stood a building of particular importance. Similarly rare is the use of such stone in combination with brickwork. (Plate 49, fig. 97b). Uggeri further argues that the tower is a lighthouse on the basis of its position precisely at the spot where the Fossa Augusta entered the old Po, the Padus Vetus, the course of which is indicated in this area by the name “Canalazzo”. Affected for six months a year by fog, this area would certainly have needed some kind of lighthouse to guide sailors in these difficult weather

578

BOLLINI 1990, p. 298. BOVINI 1934, p.188; REDDÉ 1986, pp. 177-186. 580 FANTUZZI 1801, pp. 167, 352. 581 Suet. Aug. XLIX, 1-2. 582 On the history of Ravenna for the Roman period and Late Antiquity see, respectively, MANZELLI 2001, pp. 45-64; NOVARA 2001, pp. 251279. 583 Iord. Get., 29, 150. 584 Iord. Get., 29 specifically quotes Cass. Dio., LX, 33. 585 BOVINI 1934, p. 191. 586 Prok. VI, XXIX, 31. 587 Paul. fest., III, 13. 579

574

See Chapter 1. I would like to thank Prof. Giovanni Uggeri for all the information he provided about these towers. 576 UGGERI 1975-76, pp. 785, 11862. 577 UGGERI 2006, p. 148. 575

86

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES mentions “poor Ravenna, near destroyed Classe”,588 while, in the fourteenth century, Benvenuto da Imola describes the port as being “completely buried”.589 We know now, however, that this site is not where Augustus created his port. It appears that Classe was indeed established in Roman times, evidence of this including the remains of baths dating from the time of Hadrian beneath the basilica of San Severo, but that it was chiefly used for necropolises and other buildings are yet uncategorised.590 The hunt for the location of Augustus’s port (or ports) by scholars has proved from the outset to be a very complicated question. A harbour was created by Augustus where the valley waters collected to the south of the city, at the spot where the river Padenna combined with its tributaries, the Flumisello and the Lamisa, and met the sea.591 In the famous sixth-century AD mosaic (Plate 50, fig. 98c) in the church of S. Apollinare Nuovo,592 in Ravenna, the Civitas Classis, that ought to be connected to the city by what then remained of the Fossa Augusta, is show as separated from the city of Ravenna. Depicted are two towers at the entrance to the port which do not appear to be lighthouses. The site of the port, almost certainly to the south-east of the city,593 should be sought in the area around Classe, and not, as Rossi thought, near the presentday Candiano port.594 Another problem should be briefly mentioned, which is whether or not there was another port – perhaps only a commercial one – in addition to that at Classe? Documents from the twelfth century595mention the existence of a port called portus Caii Caesaris (Plate 49, fig. 98b). Although it refers to Augustus’s first name and not that of his adoptive father, it can perhaps be recognised as a inlet, already known in republican times, now partly covered by the railway station. Testi Rasponi quotes a passage from the Codex Pontificalis Ecclesiae Ravennatis that mentions a place, near the Mausoleum of Theoderic, therefore to the north-east of the city, called Ad Farum in campo Coriandri.596 Interpretations of its meaning vary. Mansuelli597believes it refers to an entirely commercial port, already in use in republican times and restored by Theoderic in the fifth century AD when the land where the station now stands was being reclaimed. It was at this time that the city, destined to be the capital of the Western Roman Empire, acquired many beautiful buildings, built by the Goth kings.598 The majority of scholars, by contrast, takes the view that the port near the Mausoleum of Theoderic, a place once occupied by a church called Santa Maria al Faro (St Mary’s by the Lighthouse) (Plate 50, fig. 99), was a new military base set up by Theoderic after the harbour at Classe had

completely silted up.599 My personal view is that it is very likely that the port near the Mausoleum originated in republican times, perhaps just as a small commercial harbour, but was then enlarged and given a monumental lighthouse, evidence for which has been found in recent excavations (Plate 51, fig. 100), in the Byzantine period, thus making it the equal of that other capital, that of the Eastern Roman Empire, Constantinople.600 The lighthouse Citing the mosaic of Civitas Classis (Plate 50, fig. 98c) as evidence, some scholars601 have argued that Ravenna’s port had two lighthouse-towers. However, even if they are right that the towers in the mosaic are indeed two lighthouses, it should be remembered that the mosaic relates to the city of Classe as it was in the Byzantine period whereas, as discussed earlier, it appears from present archaeological evidence that, in the Roman period, Classe was not sufficiently developed to have a port, and was certainly not important enough to have two lighthouses. These could, on the other hand, have been built at a later date. It is notable that the place name “Classe” does not appear in any documents from the Roman period and Pliny, writing of the lighthouse, mentions Ravenna rather than Classe.602 Pliny was, of course, prefect of Augustus’s other great fleet (Misenum), and must have had the opportunity to see the lighthouse at Ravenna personally. From his description, it appears to have been similar to the lighthouse at Alexandria. Pliny does not, however talk about the architecture of the tower in detail, merely comparing it with that at Alexandria, and regretting the fact that its light, being constant, can easily be mistaken for that of a star. Turning to the lighthouse at the Mausoleum of Theoderic (Plates 50, 51, figs 99-100), I agree with Bollini,603 who argues that the words ad Farum were used antonomastically to distinguish this tower, Byzantine in my view, from the lighthouse of the military port of Ravenna. After old dispute between the canons of Porto and the monastery of San Severo in 1199, a fourteenthcentury map by an anonymous cartographer shows the Classitellus on the course of the river Bidente facing Classe, while the Portus Gaii Caesaris stands before the basilica of San Severo, the semicircular shape of which also appears in a map of the eighteenth century made by Giuseppe Antonio Soratini.604 He would certainly have known some of the fantastical reconstructions of the appearance of the lighthouse and its position produced during the Renaissance. A good example is that by the

588

Agnell.Lib.Pont., San Severo, XI, 13, ed. Società Editrice, Ravenna 1988, trans. M.Pierpaoli 589 BOVINI 1934, p.194. 590 MAIOLI 2001, p. 220. 591 MAIOLI 2000, p. 67. 592 BOVINI 1951, pp. 57-62. 593 BOLLINI 1990, p. 307: at that point the Fossa Augusta met the lagoon. 594 UCCELLINI 1855, p. 160, entry for “Faro”. 595 LANCIANI 1878, pp. 9-10; ZAFFAGNINI 1970, pp. 39-93. 596 ESTI RASPONI 1924, pp. 113; 216. 597 REDDE’ 1986, p. 184, note 73. 598 MANZELLI 2001, p. 56.

599

FELLETTI-MAJ 1968-1969, pp. 85-120. UCCELLINI 1855, p. 160, entry for “Faro”. 601 The theory is also cited by Thiersch as a result of a letter that Corrado Ricci apparently sent to the author in 1907: THIERSCH 1909, p. 21; see also: LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN, 1963, p. 177; VIERECK 1975 p. 264. 602 Plin. nat. XXXVI, 12, 83. 603 BOLLINI 1990, p. 309. 604 FABBRI-NOVARA, 2003, pp. 624-627. All the cartographic sources mentioned in the article situate Augustus’s port near the present-day Porto Candiano. For the site of the port at Ravenna see the essential work by ZAFFAGNINI 1970, pp. 39-95 with bibliography. 600

87

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA sixteenth-century Paolo Armileo who shows the port at Classe as being circular with a monumental lighthouse, also round, in the centre. In the 1960, the port of Classe was localised in the area between the church of Santa Maria in Porto Fuori (Plate 51, fig. 101) and the basilica of San Severo. It is perhaps for this reason that a legend, commented on by Ricci among others,605 grew up among the people of the very small village of Porto Fuori, just outside Classe, that the base of the unusual-looking campanile of the church was that of Augustus’s Roman lighthouse (Plate 52, fig. 102). In 1678, Girolamo Fabri confirmed Rossi’s earlier theory, arguing that the church campanile was itself the Classe lighthouse.606 The mole (more than 30m high) and the form of the structure (the base alone measures 16x10m), situated as it is precisely in the area that Cortesi asserted in 1961 was the portus Caii Caesaris, lent weight to a legend that is still widely believed by the local inhabitants. It had, furthermore, a stone stairway in the cavity between the double walls, leading up to the top where there was a balcony around all four sides.

lighthouse, suggests that it was exactly like the lighthouse at Alexandria except for its base that was cylindrical rather than octagonal.611 Maria Bollini612 has recently identified the lighthouse at Ravenna with a tower depicted on a sixteenth-century fresco in the Sala Zodiaco at the Palazzo d’Arco in Mantua (Plate 52 fig. 103). It shows, next to a representation of the Porta Aurea, a tower with a cube-shaped lower section, consisting of two storeys with windows, and a narrower upper storey – rectangular or cylindrical – with loopholes. In fact, the image in the fresco appears to be entirely similar to the campanile of Santa Maria in Porto Fuori described above. The legend that the base of the church’s campanile had been a lighthouse was clearly well known in the sixteenth century. It would seem to be no accident then that next to the representation of what Bollini claims is a lighthouse there appears to be the facade of a church. Comment The only thing we know for certain is that we known nothing about the lighthouse at Ravenna except that it was modelled on that at Alexandria. Ravenna may have had two ports: one used exclusively for trading, in the area where the Mausoleum of Theoderic now stands, and without a lighthouse at least until the fifth century AD (when there was a desire to imitate that at Constantinople, a city with which this port had direct contacts); the other, created by Augustus, in the area between the church of Santa Maria in Porto Fuori and the basilica of San Severo, with the monumental lighthouse mentioned by Pliny. It is also certain that the campanile of the church of Santa Maria in Porto Fuori had nothing to do with the Augustan lighthouse built. There are two possible interpretations – both rather unconvincing - for the thirdcentury AD circular structure discovered under Via Marabina: either that it was the lighthouse of the newlyestablished late-antique city of Classe or that it was the Augustan lighthouse restored in the time of Severus. While there is, unfortunately, little to be said today about Ravenna’s lighthouse, it was considered, in its time, as magnificent as those at Ostia and Alexandria. There remains the question of why there is absolutely nothing left of such an imposing building. The likely explanation is that it must in time have sunk into the marshy ground around Classe which would have been unable to support the weight of such a large (and therefore heavy) lighthouse for long.613 A new building would have been essential to carry out the same functions but in a different position. This may have been near the Mausoleum of

Rather than the remains of a lighthouse, we may be dealing with the remnants of a coastal tower. It is known that it was turned into a defensive tower in 1292 by Lamberto da Polenta, while in the late sixteenth century it was a military outpost against the Turks.607 In 1904, Ricci had to revise his theory when it was discovered that the foundations of the bell tower dated from the fifteenth century. Mazzotti, the parish priest, had always been suspicious about the early date attributed to the tower. After his own investigations in 1938 and 1942, there was no more room for doubt: the walls of the church and the materials used for the campanile were found to be contemporary with one another, with nothing at all from the Roman period.608 On 5 November 1944 an Anglo-American bombing raid removed for ever – if indeed it had ever existed – any remnant of the lighthouse posited by the Ravenna historians.609 What does seem likely is that the place name Porto Fuori (Outer Port) seems to be intended to distinguish this port situated near the church and another in the city – probably that near the Mausoleum of Theoderic. In the 1960 a round structure was found under the presentday Via Marabina. Identified as a third-century AD lighthouse tower, it was not possible to investigate it further because of the opposition of local farmers.610 Allard, while not commenting on the position of the 605 For the various views see: RICCI 1878, p. 236; MAZZOTTI 1991, pp. 52-60.; LILLI 1998, pp. 25-41; FABBRI 2000, pp. 197-209. 606 FABRI 1678, pp. 189-190, 236-238. The author quotes Alighieri, Dante, Paradiso, XXI where he mentions the chiesa di Nostra Donna in sul lito Adriano (“church of Our Lady on the Adriatic shore”) in support of his theory. 607 BIANCHETTI 1997, pp. 31-32 and also in 1927 when Luigi Rava described it as one of the lighthouse towers of Ravenna. 608 MAZZOTTI 1991, pp. 52-60. 609 The present restoration of the church dates from the 1950s; my thanks to Don Bruno, currently the parish priest at the church of S.Maria in Porto Fuori, for permission to visit the interior of the campanile and for valuable bibliographical references. 610 CORTESI 1967, p. 87, pl. XXXIX.

611

ALLARD 1979, p. 504. BOLLINI 2003, pp. 43-56. 613 BOLLINI 1968, p. 72. 612

88

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES Theoderic614 or the presentday Rocca Brancaleone, to the north of the city.615

the amphitheatre and the presentday railway station. The mole, constructed in opus quadratum with large blocks of trachite stone joined together with lead hooks, must have had a lighthouse, constructed perhaps in the time of Augustus. Its appearance is known to us only from a midsecond-century AD mosaic found in the domus in Palazzo Diotallevi and now in the city museum (Plate 53, fig. 105a). The lighthouse is shown as a battlemented tower on the terrace of which a man is tending to a brazier used for signalling. We know that this is a proper port and not just a simple river moorings not only because there is a lighthouse but also because of the employee involved in tasks connected with a port. Other commentators,620 however, have interpreted another structure in the mosaic, rectangular and standing alone, as the lighthouse, the fire being fuelled in the brazier on its roof. The battlemented tower behind this building, would instead be a city tower, of the type seen in the Ravenna mosaics from Civitas Classis.621 The mosaic from the domus can be usefully compared to another famous Roman mosaic representing a ship entering port, now in the Antiquarium Comunale in Rome (Plate 54, fig. 106). This mosaic, from the Domus Claudiorum, shows a much more developed port than that of Ariminum, as we can tell from the size of the trading vessel entering the port. The lighthouse itself, recently identified as that of Alexandria or Ostia,622 is monumental in form and very different from the little lighthouse at Rimini.

No. 44 ARIMINUM (Rimini, Emilia Romagna) Regio VIII: Aemilia Tradition has it that the name of the city, from the name of the river Ariminus, now called Marecchia, was derived from an Etruscan ruler by the name of Arìmnestos (Plate 53, fig. 104). Strabo, however, describes the city as a colonia of the Umbrians.616 Sometime after the victory over the Italic tribes at Sentino in 268BC, the colonia of Ariminus was established under Roman law, evidently to serve as the defensive port for the Adriatic,617 being more suitable than the simpler landing stage at Sena Gallica, where the harbour was to small to be able to carry out all the functions of a port. At that time, a road, aligned with the cardus maximus, led directly from Arezzo to the harbour at of Rimini, a sign of the maritime importance of the earliest Roman port on the Adriatic, linking Cisalpine and Trans-Apennine Italy and the Tyrrhenian and Adriatic coasts. Although, in the third century BC, Rimini was the Roman’s stronghold in their attacks on the Illyrians, a gradual decline in its power began in the second century BC until, in 181, the colonia of Aquileia was founded, with its more suitable geographical position for taking on the pirates of the Dalmatian islands. The importance of Rimini’s port fell away almost entirely with the creation of the military port at Ravenna, constructed following the crisis at the port of Spina. From the period of Augustus onwards, Rimini was only a local and regional centre, with all the important duties being assigned to the port of Ravenna.618 After a period of relative prosperity under the Severii and Diocletian, Rimini collapsed completely between 549 and 553AD under the attacks of Witige’s Goths, not recovering until the advent of Sigismondo Pandolfo Malatesta in the twelfth century.

The only other piece of evidence for a Roman lighthouse at Ariminum comes from the memories of local historians and from the famous eighteenth-century painting by Pietro Santi depicting the ruined Torre d’Ausa (Plate 53, fig. 105b), a medieval coastal tower built, to guard the river of the same name, between the tenth and the eleventh century on the ruins of the ancient lighthouse.623 Santi’s painting shows the ruins of a medieval tower that looks astonishingly similar to the Torre Serpe,624 the thirteenth-century beacon in the port at Otranto and today symbol of the city.

The port and the lighthouse Very little is known about the archaeology of the prosperous port of Rimini although we know from numerous surviving inscriptions that, up to the Middle Ages, it was much used by sailors, carpenters and local artisans. Recently, it has been suggested that the ancient port at Rimini was not a river port, but had a dock sheltered by an outer wall, with the dyke being connected to the cardus maximus,619 Tonini, instead, puts forward the hypothesis that the harbour and the mole lay between

The local scholar Raffaele Adimari wrote in 1600:625

620 MORIGI 1998, p. 73. In my view, however, the lighthouse at Rimini is depicted very approximately for narrative reasons. Its function as a lighthouse is made clear while the reason for showing, at the same time, a man whose job it is to attend to the fire providing a signal for sailors is to stress that the port was well-equipped. 621 BOLLINI 1980, p. 292. 622 SALVETTI 2002, pp. 73-80. This could, in my view, be the Ostia lighthouse; at Alexandria there was no linking portico between the mole and the arch that could only be interpreted as a crude attempt at rendering the Heptastadion. If this is not the case, it is possible that the image is simply an imaginary one (following that at Gragnano, that may have shown the lighthouse at Miseno, but with a highly-developed lighthouse rather than a simple conical structure on which to place a signalling beacon) inspired by everyday life in the port. 623 GIORGETTI 1980, p. 109; TURKSNI 1992, p. 44. 624 Torre Serpe owes its name to a legend of a seasnake that climbed up the walls of the tower to drink the oil in the lantern. By putting out the flame, it allowed pirates to land without being seen, LEONARDI 1991, p. 145. 625 ADIMARI 1616, p. 66.

614 Between 850 and 977AD, Archbishop Giovanni established the “regular” monastery of Santa Maria in Palaciolo granting it the island of Palaciolo on which stood the Mausoleum of Theoderic with its connected church of Santa Maria ad Memoriam Regis and ad Farum, confirming that a lighthouse serving the city stood there: quod monasterium Regi set a Farum vocatur, see. BENERICETTI 2006, p. 7477. 615 For an up-to-date description of the topography of Ravenna and Classe, MAIOLI 2005, pp. 45-55. 616 Strab. V, 11. 617 For the port of Rimini: LEGER 1979, p. 465. 618 BRACCESI 2003, pp. 15-68. 619 MORIGI 1998, p. 67.

89

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Syracuse who settled here in the fourth century BC:631 Situated on the slopes of the Conero, the city is curved around the sea like an elbow.632 In imperial times and late antiquity, the city was centred around the temple of Venus Genitrix which stood on the Guasco hill. Archaeological excavations have also revealed the presence in this area of pre-Roman cultures.

It has always been the opinion of many people, that the Port could and should be made in this river Ausa, that passes below the city in order to avoid the difficulties that there are in the other one Although there is no mention of a lighthouse here, we see from these words that, if there had ever been one, it ought to have been in the port of Ausa. Luigi Tonini,626 a nineteenth-century historian from Rimini mentions a tower, locally known as the Torrazza or Torre d’Ausa, remains of which had survived almost until the time he was writing. The tower, which collapsed in 1807, was described in detail by a librarian by the name of Antonio Bianchi, whom Tonini quotes:

The port and the lighthouse In the first half of the third century BC, the port,633 by now mainly man-made, was overlooked by the temple of Aphrodite, replaced between the second and first centuries BC by a exostyle temple dedicated to Venus Genitrix. This in turn made way in the eleventh century AD for a Paleochristian basilica, on the ruins of which was built the cathedral of S. Ciriaco that we see today. In 184BC, the naval duumviri of the fleet of the upper and lower Adriatic were installed at Ancona during the war with Illyria. A hundred years later, Cinna prepared a fleet here to attack the dictator Silla. Occupied by Caesar in 49BC, Ancona already had important trading connections in the Hellenistic period with the whole of the Mediterranean and particularly with Illyria. The Dacian Wars prompted Trajan to built a new port to the west of the Greek one, the latter providing insufficient protection from the bora. The new harbour was protected by a manmade mole some 300m long on which was erected, in 115AD, a triumphal arch in honour of the emperor, and which is still visible today. Little or nothing is known about the lighthouse at Ancona, but it has been suggested634 that it is depicted in a famous scene on Trajan’s Column in Rome. The only plausible scenario is that it was constructed at the beginning of the second century AD when Trajan built the new mole, and that the site selected was on an arched reef that protruded from the old line of the shore, running from the foot of Monte Guasco to a point not far from the site of the archway.635 It is clear that in the first episode of the Second Dacian War, shown in Scene LXXIX (Plate 55, fig. 108 a, b) of Trajan’s Column, represents the emperor’s departure from the port of Ancona since the scene includes Trajan’s Arch636 and the temple of Venus over which were built

The tower was of brick and stood on a sea mole firmly bound together by a large amount of lead which ended with an acute angle, the outer two sides of which beyond the base of the tower were 5 Rimini feet. The tower was 6 feet on each side, and 7 high. After the collapse of the said tower the mole too was demolished, from where a large amount of marble was removed.... and so too of this monument, which certainly deserved to be preserved little more is left than the foundations, that they could not raise because of the water flowing in great quantities...from this tower to the city walls, certainly in ancient times..., a brick wall was raised...627 The remains of the wall mentioned by Bianchi was identified, in the late nineteenth century, near the modern railway stations, but nothing remains there today.628 Comment Rimini had two ports: a natural river landing stage at the mouth of the river Marecchia and a second man-made harbour, half-moon-shaped, at the mouth of a now disappeared river, the Ausa, near the presentday railway station. The lighthouse was probably situated here.629 It is likely to have been constructed in the time of Augustus and so its architecture would have been similar to that of other lighthouses discussed so far: a tower with storeys that decrease in size as they ascend, a rectangular base and two cylindrical-shaped storeys. Unfortunately, the mosaic from the domus of Palazzo Diotallevi gives us very little clue about its form and its precise site, while the eighteenth-century painting by Santi is even less helpful.

631

BRACCESI 1977, pp. 220-226; LUNI 2004, pp. 28-45. Strab. V, 24,1; Plin. nat. XIV, 67; Mela II, 4, 64. 633 For the port of Ancona: ANGELONI 1685, BEVILACQUA 1889; BRUZZO 1898; LEGER 1979, pp. 465-466, LILLI 1997, pp. 49-77, LUNI 2004, pp. 28-45. 634 THIERSCH 1909, p.25. 635 ALFIERI 1938, p. 40. At the end of the mole, not far from the Arch of Trajan, is the Coastguard building, constructed on the brick base of an ancient lantern, dating perhaps from the Renaissance. This in turn may perhaps have stood on Roman foundations. Even the local people, however, are not sure which lighthouse these foundations relate to. They use the name “Vecchio Faro” (Old Lighthouse) for the nineteenth century one standing on a green hill. For the Ancona lighthouses after the Roman one: CIALDI 1877, pp. 320-323: a lighthouse tower was erected by Benedict XIV, and another, cylindircal in form, was built to house a Fresnel lens in 1860, since the beam from the preceding lighthouse had too liited a horizon. 636 According to ROSSI 1971, p. 174, it is only at Ancona that we find a triumphal arch on the mole of the port. In saying this, he ignores what we know of the port at Pozzuoli from Bellori’s watercolour. The inscription, placed on the arch in 115AD, thanks the emperor for the efficency and safety he has brought to the port of Ancona. This last 632

No. 45 ANCONA (Ancona, Marche) Regio V: Picenum Established in early times, Ancona was fortunate in having a natural harbour (Plate 54, fig. 107) formed by a tongue of land running down into the sea from the Colle Guasco, creating a broad and secure inlet sheltered from the wind.630 It owes its place name Ankon to Greeks from 626

TONINI 1848, pp. 214-216. TONINI 1848, p. 21; TONINI 1864, p. 2. 628 MORIGI 1998, p. 72. 629 For the modern lighthouses of Romagna, see the curious article by GRAFFAGNINI, 1985, pp. 245-247. 630 For the city, past and present, of Ancona: SEBASTIANI 1996. 627

90

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES first the church of S. Lorenzo and, later, the present cathedral of S. Ciriaco. There can be no doubt that, at least in early times, the temple of Venus would have been used as an aid and “lighthouse” by sailors.637

centre of an exedra that is closed at the left-hand side by the tower of a lighthouse.

Depicted at the far right of Scene LXXXII is a cylindrical tower with three storeys and a sloping roof on a rectangular base with arcades, similar to that shown in a mosaic in the church of Santa Maria in Trastevere in Rome. Window openings can be seen in the two upper storeys. An attempt was made in the early 1970s to reconstruct the building shown on Trajan’s Column. It is generally agreed that it is a lighthouse, but attributed to different cities: Ancona638 Aquileia,639 Brindisi,640 the port from which Trajan set off, according to some scholars,641 or even Zara, the city where he arrived. Many of the authors who have studied lighthouses in detail have gone as far as to agree that the structure on Trajan’s column is a lighthouse, but they stop short of pronouncing on its position.642 As early as the 1930s, Nereo Alfieri writes that there is nothing surprising about seeing Ancona depicted in more than one of the scenes on Trajan’s Column since we know from the emperor’s warm clothing, the ships’ furled sails and the rough sea that Trajan must have accomplished his journey to Dalmatia in winter. He would, therefore, have stuck closely to the coastline, sailing around the upper arch of the Adriatic rather than using the normal direct route to the city of Zadar.643 Since coastal sailing is slower, it is possible to interpret the following scene of Trajan’s embarkation, complete with a depiction of a lighthouse, as relating again to Ancona. An oil painting in the Palazzo del Governo in Ancona (Plate 55, fig. 108 b) shows, at the bottom of an ancient medallion described by Angeloni,644 Trajan’s Arch in the

In my opinion, Scene LXXXII of Trajan’s Column shows the departure of the emperor from the port of Ancona, easily recognisable from the temple of Venus on Monte Guasco and Trajan’s Arch on the mole (Plate 55, figs. 108a, 109),645 the form of which, with only one arch, corresponds to that of the monument still visible today in the Marches port. When, after the Longobard conquest, Charlemagne gave the city to the pope, the port underwent several restorations. In the eighteenth century, first under Pope Clement XII and, after him, Benedict XIV, it is likely that the old and perhaps non-functioning (or even collapsed) cylindrical Roman lighthouse with its sloping roof was substituted b an new lighthouse. The beam of this one did not carry very far and it was therefore replaced by in the nineteenth century by a new structure, called the “Lanterna”. The coast guards’ building that now stands on this spot was built on the base of the “Lanterna”. (Plate 55, fig. 109; Plate 56, fig. 110).646 In confirmation of the theory that the building shown in Trajan’s Column is the Ancona lighthouse, I agree with Alfieri’s view that, because of the wintry weather, the emperor was obliged to take the slower coastal route that the artist of Trajan’s Column has sought to indicate with the use of a number of stylistic stratagems including, for example, the use of oars and not sails. Admittedly, there is a remarkable similarity between the lighthouse thought to be that of Aquileia on the Tabula Peutingeriana and the unknown lighthouse on Trajan’s Column, I think it unlikely that Trajan, immediately after executing his ambitious plans for the port at Ancona, opened specifically for the Dacian Wars, would have then decided to set out from,647 where, in any case, the port-canal, though capacious, could not accommodate large ships. The port of Ancona, by contrast, was much more spacious than that at Brindisi, which was above all too unfavourable in bad weather648 for the journey to Dacia.

Comment

phrase might refer to the installation of a lighthouse,perhaps even designed by Apollodorus of Damascus who built the arch and perhaps the bridge over the Danube, planned by Trajan. We know also that the emperor’s most trusted architect probably designed the ports at Ostia and Civitavecchia. 637 Also of this opinion is LILLI 1997, p. 58. 638 THIERSCH 1909, p. 24, fig. 34; DICTIONNAIRE 1906, entry for Pharos, p. 430, note 12; ALLARD 1979, pp. 505-506; KOEPPEL 1992, p. 66; SPINELLI 1996, p. 574. 639 STUCCHI 1959, pp. 16-30: Trajan’s Column is thought to show Trajan performing a sacrifice at the mouth of the river Timavo, thus the archis interpreted as part of the forum at Aquileia, to which the circular lighthouse would be relevant, the structure of which is very similar to the tower at Aquileia as shown on the Tabula Peutingeriana. This then might have been imitated in the bell-towers of the nearby churches of Ravenna. 640 BEDON 1988, p.57 accepts the hypothesis of the Ancona lighthouse. 641 DEGRASSI 1946-1947, pp. 167 ff. see. FRANZOT 1999, p. 53. 642 LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN 1963, p. 231, which excludes Ancona, however, because of the difference in the triumphal arch shown in the scene, whereas in LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN 1926, p. 229 a view is not expressed; BOLLINI 1968, pp. 68-74; REDDE’ 1979, pp. 859-860, the author was subsequently to accept that it shows Trajan leaving the port of Ancona, in REDDE’ 1986 pp. 218-220, with bibliography at Note 231; but there is no mention of the lighthouse. 643 ALFIERI 1938, p. 42, reaffirmed in ALFIERI 2000, p. 323, FRANZOT 1999, pp. 52-53 On leaving Ancona, Trajan is thought to have travelled along the Adriatic to Ravenna and then, crossing the sea, arrived at a city on the Dalmatian coast, probably Zara. This would make the lighthouse shown on Trajan’s Column the one at Zara. 644 ANGELONI 1685, pp. 92-110, figs 11, 48.

645 In response to those who have asserted that the arch in a city port shown on Trajan’s Column is different from that in Ancona which might not yet have been built, it has been rightly pointed out that Apollodorus’s plan was already known of in 113 and was carried out only two years later, see. ROSSI, 1971, p. 69. 646 For the military history of Ancona from the Renaissance to the First and Second World Wars and for archival data, see the very useful volume: DI CICCO 2002, with particular reference to the history of the lantern on pp. 72-78. The book has an excellent set of maps of great value in reconstructing the port. 647 Furthermore, if Trajan really did carry out his journey in winter and we know how difficult this was in view of the weather conditions at that season (in Aquileia, for example, it would have been constantly foggy); for this reason too, I am inclined to rejct the theory that Scene LXXXII of Trajan’s column shows the Aquileia lighthouse. 648 Ceas. civ., III, 25-28 relates how Anthony, travelling along the coast from Brindisi,was unable to meet Caesar on the other side of the Adriatic because of the bad weather. It is also interesting to see how Caesar emphasises that that stretch of coast was one of the least well guarded at that sailors were fearful of venturing too far from land.

91

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA No. 46 BRUNDISIUM (Brindisi, Puglia) Regio Apulia et Calabria

down.658 Thus the city had a natural ante wall provided by the five small islands just offshore, excellent protection against the strong Adriatic winds in the form of the rocky mountains around the port and, finally, a canal that, thanks to Caesar, made it possible to sail inland.

II:

Thanks to the strategic position of its port on the Ionian Sea, Brindisi, or Brentesion as Strabo calls it,649 was considered so important by the Romans that it became the first city in Iapigia to hold the title of municipium. The port 650 was to play a fundamental role during the civil wars over the conquest of the East, to which it provided an excellent bridge. Good links with the capital were guaranteed by the Via Appia and Via Egnazia. Space does not permit here a description of the many important buildings built to embellish the city by, particularly, Claudius and Trajan, but a brief description of the port, much praised by Latin writers, follows.651

Apart from the theories discussed above that the lighthouse on Trajan’s Column is the Brindisi lighthouse, very little or nothing is known about it. Given the strategic importance of the site, however, it seems likely that there would have been a lighthouse, and possibly one of considerable size given that the only Latin poet to mention it, Pomponius Mela, compares it to the lighthouse at Alexandria, perhaps, in my view, because it stood on a small island: ut Alexandriae ita Brundisio adiacens Pharos.659 We can hypothesise then that it was similar in its architecture to its famous predecessor in Alexandria with three storeys getting smaller towards the top. The last storey, housing the lantern, would have been cylindrical. The Romans may have built it on the island of Bara, given the island’s function as an ante wall, according to Roman tradition and with the same place name. This is one theory – unfortunately supported by no visual representation and only a passing mention in Mela – but there is another, and one that has given rise to much discussion. This theory is based on the presence of a Roman column, the only one still standing of two, at the entrance to the port. According to some scholars, columns like this, dating from the third century AD (Plate 56, fig. 111), were placed in this position by the Romans in the mid-sixth century BC to mark the end of the Appian Way or perhaps even of Italy. Alternatively, and more probably but also debatable, the two capitals of the columns were perhaps connected by a bronze cross bar, in the centre of which was a beacon clearly intended to act as a lighthouse, as in the Palestinian mosaic (Plate 57, fig. 112).660 This hypothesis might well be valid, but in an archaic period. Little attention has been paid to Mela’s words hither to,661 but they are worth consideration. He must personally have seen the Brindisi lighthouse standing on the island of Bara, since he immediately connected it in his mind with Alexandria’s tower on the island of Pharos.

The port and the lighthouse Like the port of Ancona, that at Brindisi too was originally formed by nature: five small islands, the biggest of which we know was called Bara,652 acted as a natural ante wall against wind and wave. On the land side of the islands there were two river mouths of unequal size that formed the entrance to the harbour, giving it an almost triangular shape, the rocks and hills providing natural defences.653 On the hills around the port were beautiful gardens and villas including the famous villa belonging to Virgil who, in the Aenead, sings the praises of the port of Brindisi.654 It had several natural bays that, according to Strabo,655 made the port at Brindisi more convenient that that at Taranto. The most accurate description of the port is found in Lucan:656 a narrow tract of land that closes in, enclosing the Adriatic as if with two curved horns. Some scholars have suggested that the name of the city is derived from this feature.657 Lucan goes on to praise the island of Bara that acted as a seawall, protecting the port from the violence of the waves that crashed against it, just as the rocky mountains guaranteed security to the port to the extent that a ship could be anchored there with nothing but a simple rope. To this already favourable situation could be added the fact that the waters of the outer harbour opened inland in two bays, known in antiquity as Delta and Luciana (today Fiume-Grande and Fiume-Piccolo), that continued, gradually narrowing, towards the city, forming a canal that was made navigable by Caesar. Its width of 430m allowed ships of considerable size to pass up and

Comment It is probable that the columns were joined by a bronze crossbar from which a beacon was hung. This system did not have the functions of a true lighthouse, although it signed the entrance to the port, serving the same purpose as the Lantern of Augustus at Forum Iulii in Gallia

649

Strab. VI, 3,6 says that Brentesion had many ports with only one entrance and so sheltered from the waves, a better situation than that at Taranto. 650 For the port at Brindisi: LEGER 1979, p. 465. 651 Plin. nat. II, 103 relates that a spring not far from the port provided an inexhaustible supply of water meaning that the harbours were always full and capable of receiving even the biggest of ships. 652 Fest. de verb. signif. III. 653 DI LEO 1970, pp. 2-8; LEGER 1979, p. 464. 654 Vergilius Aeneis, I, 231-234. 655 Strab. VI, 3, 1-9. 656 Lucan. II, 610-620 stresses that, were it not for the island that bore the violence of the sea, Brindisi could not have had a port. The port is also sheltered from the wind because nature has surrounded it with rocky mountains, allowing ships to have safe morrings with only a slender rope. 657 ASCOLI 1976, p. 7, note 4; Strab. VI, 3, 6.

658

1976, pp. 5-6. Mela II, 7, 13; DICTIONNAIRE 1906, p. 430. It is not clear if Mela is talking about the lighthouse at Brindisi or the island of Pharos in Dalmatia (see. PARRONI 1984, p. 367). The comparison with Alexandria, might in fact refer to a lighthouse built on an island, Bara in the case of Brindisi, Pharos in the case of Alexandria. 660 EAA, entry for Brindisi, Rome 1959, p. 173; DI LEO 1970, pp. 34 ff.: the columns were said to have been placed there by Brentus, son of Hercules. For the use of columns as lighthouses, see DE COETLOGON 1976, p. 75. 661 BEDON 1988, p. 57 is certain that this is the lighthouse at Brindisi. 659

92

ASCOLI

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES of Neptune and hence lord of the sea.667 Some scholars have, incorrectly, interpreted the circular building as a column, erected in honour of Pelorus and referred to by Strabo,668 or, alternatively, a column used as a signal at the entrance to the port as we have seen for Brindisi.669 This is unlikely since a column could not have the dimensions of what must have been the Messina lighthouse. The matter was, in any case, resolved in 2001 when the Forte degli Inglesi near Torre Faro, 12km from Messina, was demilitarised. Inside, archaeologists discovered the three steps of the Roman lighthouse depicted on the Pompey coins, thus establishing that the building in question did not stand where the presentday Lanterna San Ranieri now is in the port of Messina, but in Torre Faro. Square in form and 24m wide, the building has a stepped podium in concrete and brickwork, clad in a hydraulic-setting mortar, standing on a broad foundation platform, also made of concrete, supported underneath by a series of wooden piles670 (Plate 57, fig. 113b).This structure was found at the base of the Renaissance tower that many later writers took to be the remains of the ancient Roman Pelorus lighthouse. Writing in the fourteenth century, Claudio Mario Arezzo says:

Narbonensis (Plate 88, fig. 175). While the columns at Brindisi might have seemed very high to sailors approaching the city, they would not have been high enough for the light to be seen by ships on the far side of the five islands that sheltered but also hid the port of Brindisi. The capitals of the columns are ornamented with acanthus leaves, heads of divinities and, most importantly, eight Tritons, linking the columns indubitably with navigation. Not only are Tritons connected with the sea, but also with the lighthouse at Alexandria, the model for the proper lighthouse on the island acting as a ante wall for the port of Brindisi,662 perhaps in just the same way as the lighthouse of Vieste does today.663 No. 47 CAPO PELORO, TORRE FARO-MESSINA (Torre Faro, Messina, Sicily) Province: Sicily The origins of Messina, then called Zancle, date back at the eighth century BC or earlier when it was settled by a combination of Calcidean colonii and Cuman pirates. Situated at the mouth of the Straits of Messina, the port of Messina664was sickle-shaped. In around 491BC, Anaxilas defeated the Samians who had taken over from the Calcideans, seized Zancle and renamed it MesseneMessana in honour of his birthplace. Established as a Syracusan colonia by Dionysius, it was not occupied by the Romans until the third century BC.

Est in promontorio turris recens, non quod maris defendat angustias Sed procul venientibus, qua transeat, vadum ostendat 671 The Arab geographer Idrisi names Faro and Messina separately.672 In the tenth century AD, in the nearby area of Ganzirri Faro, a monastery dedicated to SS. Salvatore was founded that was to preserve the toponym in lingua phari, in an allusion to the Portus Tragecticus where there was a column used as a communication lighthouse with one in Rhegion, situated on the other side. As Strabo notes, it was an old custom to mark borders with towers and the examples he gives are Reggio and Messina.673

The port and the lighthouse Although not very large, the port of Messina, where Caesar had his fleet, still provides sheltered moorings, thanks to its natural protection from the Braccio San Ranieri.665 The port was badly damaged during the civil wars between Caesar and Pompey and, even more severely during the fighting between Octavian and Sextus Pompey. It is on two coins666 from the period of Sextus Pompey (42-36BC) that we find the only image of the Messina lighthouse (Plate 57, fig. 113a). The reverse of the coins shows Scilla, while the obverse has the lighthouse of Messina, a cylindrical tower on the top of which stands a statue of Neptune with a trident and a rudder, his foot resting on the prow of a ship. In front of the monument there is a warship with the military ensign of an eagle on the prow, a trident and a thyrsus. Scilla symbolises the Straits of Messina, while the lighthouse alludes to the port of the city. The statue of Neptune is a reference to Sextus Pompey who declared himself the son

667

HILL 1976, pp. 126-129, pl. XIII, fig. 79. PACE 1935, p. 429: while it is true that Strab. I, 1, 17 mentions a monument at Peloro, in Strab. III, 5, he talks specifically of a tower. Today at Capo Peloro there is a lighthouse marking the entrance to the Straits of Messina, erected in 1884, see FATTA 2002, p. 111, n.6. Eighteenth-century drawings show a building used as a lighthouse at Capo Peloro, see SWINIBURNE 1783-85. 669 WILSON 1990, p. 165. On the basis of the inscription AÈ 1895,23 (...portum et turres...curavit) FRANZOT 1999, pp. 67-68, maintains that the towers built by Pompey in the port of Lilibeo (modern Marsala) might have been used as lighthouses. The structure of the building appears to be too solid for a simple column. Strabo mentions this column as having a signalling function, and speaks of a column on the other side (Rhegium) that was used as a lighthouse, as mentioned also in UGGERI 1997-1998, p. 339, where there is a reference to the Portus Tragecticus in Fretum Siculum (Straits of Messina) for which see below. 670 BUCETI 2004, pp. 30-36; BACCI 2005, p. 271. 671 C.M.Aretio, De situ insulae Siciliae, Palermo 1737 in D.Puzzolo Sigillo, Etimologia and valore del nome “Faro” o “Faro di Messina”, Archivio Storico Messinese, Anno XXVI-XXVII, 1925-26, p. 21 see BUCETI 2004, p. 24. The tower of Pelorus is mentioned because it alerted sailors to the depth of the seabed in that area: There are numerous excellent sources here relating to Torre Faro and the Lanterna San Ranieri. 672 AMARI-SCHIAPARELLI, 1883, pp. 67-69: the distance from Messina to the lighthouse was twelve miles. 673 COTRONEO 1988; Strab.III, 5,4; VI, 6,1. 668

662 For other landing places in Puglia, the best of which are on the Gargano Peninsula, see VOLPE 1990, pp. 86-90. 663 ALIOTA ET ALII 1998. It is now known that the site of the ancient lighthouse of Uria Graganica was not where the present lighthouse stands. 664 For the port of Messina: LEGER 1979, p. 465, for the history of the city BACCI 2005, pp. 253-273. 665 STRAFFORELLO 1893, p. 402. 666 THIERSCH 1909, p. 22, where the cylindrical structure of the Messina lighthouse is compared with other structures accpeted as lighthouses in frescoes from Pompeii; FUCHS 1969, pp. 34-35, where it is suggested that this was a column erected by Pompey in commemoration of his sea victories; ALLARD 1979, p. 506; REDDE’ 1979, p. 865, fig. 6.5; BEDON 1988, p. 57; RRC, p. 520, no. 511/4 da BMCRR II, p. 56, no. 15.

93

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Comment

The port and the lighthouse

In view, particularly, of the presence of a statue of Neptune on the building represented on the coins from the period of Sextus Pompey’s, it is in my opinion safe to say that we are dealing with a lighthouse. The theory of the honorary column can be discarded, especially in view of the disproportionate thickness that would have been involved. Furthermore, a column erected in honour of Pelorus would have been of such significance that images of it would have been used to symbolise the city of Messina as a whole rather than just its lighthouse, as often happened in the case of coins produced in city ports.674 Lastly, the statue of Neptune refers explicitly to Sextus Pompey who we know from the sources675 claimed to be the son of the sea god in order to demonstrate his control of the sea.

The site of the ancient port has not yet been established precisely, but it though to have coincided with the foundation of Neapolis by the Romans immediately after the Second Punic War. Various hypotheses have been put forward (Oreto, Kalsa) but the most likely suggestion is that it was where later Castellamare grew up, with the mooring areas being in the areas between presentday Piazza Marina and the spur of Casalotto to Casa Professa.679 Once again, the lighthouse is known only from two coins from the time of Augustus680 (Plate 59, figs 116 a, b). They show a solid battlemented tower and city walls, both elements typical of Phoenician architecture. In 1727, Antonino Bova engraved a view of the port of Palermo showing Castellamare where there is a small tower that must, without doubt, have been a lighthouse.

As for dating, there is today no doubt that the Messina lighthouse stood on the spot where, in the Renaissance, the so-called Forte degli Inglesi (Plate 58, fig. 114 a, b) was constructed. Its historic use as a lighthouse was to fall into decline when, between the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the lighthouse known as the Lanterna di San Ranieri was built to act as a fortress and, from 1857, as a lighthouse.676 In the seventeenth century, Giuseppe Bonofiglio writes: “and therefore we can more safely affirm that the one [Lanterna San Ranieri], more useful than any other building, and the other Tower, that is the one of the Lighthouse, to have been erected in the time of the Roman empire”. A modern lighthouse was been built at Torre Faro. Although small in size, it sits on the top of the fort and is still in use today (Plate 58, fig. 115 a, b).

No. 49 NORA (Nora, Sardinia) Province: Sardinia The origins of Nora (Plate 60, fig. 118), possibly the first city to be established in Sardinia, remain obscure. Pausanias Periegeta (X, 17, 5) and Solinus (IV, 2) say that it was founded by the Iberians, guided by Norax, the son of Mercury and the nymph Erytheia, from whom the city’s name was derived. It is likely that the place was inhabited by Nuragic tribes because the root of the word nor*- nur*- is pre-Phoenician in origin, and it is not known if the area was already inhabited when the Phoenicians arrived.681 After the wars between Tyre and Babylon, it is known that Sardinia came under Carthaginian rule and Phoenicians and, later Carthaginians, settled there. Their domination continued until the third century BC when the Romans took over the island with, in 238BC, Nora as the governor’s capital governatorate. In 27BC, Sardinia became one of Augustus’s provinciae and Nora, perhaps in the late first century AD, became a municipium. Nora’s period of greatest glory was between the second and third centuries AD, due not least to its excellent port that supported intensive trade with Spain, Southern Gaul and Greece. In the fifth century AD, the city was badly in need of restoration. The increase in piracy and incursions by Vandals between 456 and 466AD led to the decline and eventual abandonment of the city. In the seventh century AD, the Anonymous Geographer of Ravenna confirms that by then Nora was only a praesidium without any inhabitants.682

No. 48 PAN(H)ORMOS (Palermo, Sicily) Province: Sicily Situated on the north coast of Sicily, the name reveals its potential as a port (όρμος=port). Silius Italicus677 called it fecunda Panhormos (Plate 59, fig. 117). Probably founded by the Phoenicians during their conquest of Sicily, it was later re-established by the Greeks who particularly appreciated its port. Fought over by the Carthaginians and the Romans during the Punic Wars, in 214BC it was the headquarters of a Roman legion and in 205BC the naval base for Scipio Africanus’s fleet. In the time of Augustus, we know from coins that the city was remodelled, once again with particular reference to the port area. Invaded by the Vandals in 440AD and by the Byzantines in 535AD, the city was then taken by the Arabs in 831AD and, from 1072, became part of the Norman kingdom.678 674 Val.Max. IX, 9-8 afferma igitur angusti aestuosi maris alto and tumulo speculatrix statua quam memoriae Pelori tam Punicae temeritatis ultra citraque navigantium oculis conlocatum indicium est, suggesting that there might have been a statue on the hill in honour of Pelorus that was used by sailors as a landmark rather than a lighthouse. 675 CARRO 1999, pp. 110-111. 676 FATTA 2002, p. 98, n. 54. 677 Sil.Ital. XIV, 261 678 “Panormus, 15” in Der Kleine Pauly, XVIII, 3, Stuttgart 1949, pp. 660-665.

679

PURPURA 2000, p. 243, I am grateful to Prof. Sebastiano Tusa of the Soprintendenza del Mare di Palermo for his assistance and for confirmation of the Castellamare theory. 680 PRICE-TRELL 1977, p. 42, fig. 67; PURPURA 1997 where there is also a discussion of the inscription of the curator portensis kalendarii, the official who commanded the port at Panormus and kept a log of shipping movements. The inscription was found in the San Cataldo area. LA DUCA 2000, pp. 199-203; GIARDINA 2007, p. 158. 681 TRONCHETTI 1986, p. 8. 682 For a history of Nora PESCE 1972.

94

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES Taramelli identified them as the ruins of ante walls and of a defensive tower.688 All recent reconstructions, including that of Golvin and Reddé, place the lighthouse on the island of Peddona, which is directly linked to the mainland as in the case of Alexandria. The tower too is an imitation of the Alexandria tower with its three storeys (Plate 61, fig. 120).

The port and the lighthouse Until recently, little precise information was known about the port at Nora, partly because the coastline has receded by some 90m. Aerial photographs have, however, identified moles that extend into the sea. In addition to this, recent investigations by Piero Bartoloni have found a slipway for the port of Nora in the Nora fishery (also called Stagnoni Efisio), a deep creek to the north-west of Capo di Pula and thus protected from the northern and western winds by the promontory.683 As for the lighthouse, thanks to an old photograph we know of a tower-lighthouse dating from Phoenician times (Plate 60, fig. 119), standing high up on the Coltellazzo where remains of Roman towers were also discovered, with the same warning and defensive functions as the modern tower that replaced the previous one, dating from Saracen times. The Coltellazzo tower-lighthouse, discovered by Patroni and almost disappeared by the time of Pesce, was very thick and solid, and built of large blocks of dressed stone. It need not have been more than 15m since it took advantage of the height of the Coltellazzo promontory. Too big and it would have collapsed after a short time. It may have been destroyed by pirates or Saracens, an event that would have prevented ships trading from entering the port and forced the inhabitants to leave the area.

No. 51 PUNTA LICOSA (San Marco, Santa Maria di Castellabate, Campania) Regio I: Latium et Campania The Cilento coast could, even in Greek times, boast of several important ports, particularly Paestum and Velia, in the area now embraced by the villages of San Marco and Santa Maria di Castellabate. Recently, remains of an unsuspected mole from the Roman period have been discovered (Plate 61, fig. 121). Strabo mentions the island of Licosa, , the name of which is derived from the siren Leucosia who drowned herself in the sea.689 The port and the temple-lighthouse The ancient port of San Marco has suffered much damage since the 1960s with the construction of a large hotel and a modern ante walls over on the Roman remains. The remaining moles are constructed in opus caementicium.690 In the bay off Paestum was the insula Leucosiae where, according to Aristotle,691 there was a temple dedicated to the Siren Leucosia. It may have served a dual function, acting also as a lighthouse for sailors. It appears that the temple was inhabited, and it is hard to imagine that these inhabitants were anything other than people assisting in the signalling work. Bradisism, the seismic phenomenon that has always affected the this area, caused the island and its temple to sink, though remains of the latter may identifiable among the structures recently investigated by marine archaeologists.692 The island near Ogliastra Marina that can be seen today (and it is no accident that there is a modern lighthouse on it) was once part of the mainland Punta Licosa. The island with the temple of Leucosia may be the presentday sandbank of Votalla, about a mile off the promontory. Clearly visible on the shore at Santa Maria di Castellabate are a series of holes where stone for the columns of the temple was quarried. Archaeological investigations are at an early stage and we await the publication of the detailed scientific reports that may shed more light on the temple and its possible role as a lighthouse.

No. 50 OLBIA (Olbia, Sardinia) Province: Sardinia Despite opposition from Hanno the Navigator, the city was conquered by the Romans in 259BC, reconquered by the Carthaginians, and then reverted to Roman rule under Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus in 238BC. The city and its port were still active in the fourth century AD, but from the eighth century AD it became prey to Islamic fleets.684 The port and the lighthouse Mentioned in by Ptolemy,685 the port, in an area corresponding to the gulf of Cugnana (Golfo Aranci), had been used since the earliest days of the city. Its position at the base of a deep estuary on the north-eastern coast of Sardinia meant that it was naturally protected from winds in the second and third quadrant.686 Pliny, basing himself on Greek sources, states that there were two islands, Callodes and Hera Lustra, just outside the port. In existence possibly before the period of the Carthaginian refoundation (fourth century IV) and certainly after the Roman conquest,687 the lighthouse must have been situated on an island, perhaps Peddona which was connected to the mainland like the island of Pharos was to Alexandria. In the late nineteenth century, a little beyond the island that Tamponi calls “Peddonedda” at a depth of about 4m, the foundations of a building of at least 7m on each side was found. He believed it was the remains of the Olbia lighthouse, while Panedda and

No. 52 CAPO ATENHEUM (Termini, Punta della Campanella Campania) Regio I: Latium et Campania In the presentday province of Massa Lubrense, at the point where the metalled road finishes at the small village 688

PANEDDA 1953, p.121 with bibliography. Strab. VI, 1,8. For more detailed information about the mole see BENINI 2002, pp. 39-51. 691 Aristot. mir. 103,32, the island of the Sirens is also mentioned in Strab. VI, 1,1. 692 GARGIULLO-OKELY II 1993, p. 93 689

683

690

BARTOLONI 1979, pp. 57-61; FINOCCHI 1999, pp. 167-192. MASTINO-SPANU-ZUCCA 2005, pp. 198-202. 685 Ptol. III, 3,4. 686 MASTINO-SPANU-ZUCCA 2005, p. 198. 687 Plin. nat. III, 6, 83. 684

95

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA of Termini, a steep path leads to the end of the promontory. Its name, Punta della Campanella (Bell Point) (Plate 62, fig. 122), refers to a legend connected with the Saracen incursions. The story goes that, after sacking Sorrento and stealing the bell from the church of Sant’Antonino, the Saracens sailed to this promontory where their ship suddenly stopped, preventing them from going any further. Thinking they had been grounded on a sandbank, the pirates threw the heaviest items of their cargo overboard, with the exception of the bell. The ship only moved off again when the bell too was thrown into the sea.693 The first sailors to arrive in this area were the Greeks, who called the promontory Cape Athens because, according to legend, Odysseus built a temple here dedicated to Athena, which would also have acted as a lighthouse.694 Investigation of this site (presently a military area) has never been easy, either for archaeologists or geographers, because of the confusing jumble of other constructions: a Roman villa, the fifteenth century Tower of Minerva, the battery placed here in the time of Murat aimed at Capri then occupied by the English and, last but not least, the modern lighthouse.

No. 53 CAPRAE (Capri, Campania) Regio I: Latium et Campania According to legend,698 Caprae was founded by the Teleboi, the first Greeks to settle in Italy. Because, however, of the geographical and political separation of the island into two parts, one larger (Anacapri) and the other smaller (Capri), the city remained unimportant. Belonging to Neapolis from 326BC, it became part of the imperial domain under Augustus who gave the more fertile island of Pythechusa (Ischia) to Naples in exchange. As is well known, the city (and its port) enjoyed its period of greatest prosperity during the time when Tiberius spent a prolonged period on the island. The most important antique remains visible today on Capri date from Tiberius’s reign. On his death, the city went into a decline, reviving only in 182AD when Commodius banished his wife and sister to the island.699 The port and the lighthouse Today, as in antiquity, the only harbour that can provide secure moorings for small boats is the Marina Grande on the northern coast of the island. Elsewhere the coastline is rocky with steep cliffs rising up from the sea.700 According to Tacitus, 701 the island is only three miles from Punta Campanella, the western-most tip of the Sorrento peninsula, where, as we have seen above, there was a lighthouse of which the foundations perhaps remain.

The temple-lighthouse The position of the temple, and consequently of the lighthouse, has been a matter of much debate. Although it is agreed that it stood in this area, it is not clear if it was at the top of the presentday Via Minerva or on the spot where the Tower of Minerva now stands, or a little below it, the last hypothesis seeming the most probably.695 Whatever the case, the temple stood high above the sea and was clearly intended to identify the promontory of Punta della Campanella and, by means of a lighthouse beam, the entrance to the port of neighbouring Capri. It would, therefore, have been in visual contact - from the time of Tiberius - with that at Villa Iovis. The templelighthouse appears on the Tabula Peutingeriana suggesting that it was destroyed and plundered in the Middle Ages during the Saracen incursions. It was at this time, in 1334, that Robert of Anjou had the Tower of Minerva built,696 retaining a memory of the ancient place name, in its Latinised form, and the temple of Athena (Plate 63, fig. 123). In the 1940s, Mingazzini and Pfister identified a round structure that they concluded might have been a signal tower or the lighthouse itself (Plate 63, fig. 124). Directly facing the lighthouse of Villa Iovis on the island of Capri (no. 53, Plate 63, fig. 125), it was about 2m in diameter and built on a rectangular base measuring 3.70 wide by 3m deep. Close to the foundations is a small cistern that must have been related to the lighthouse.697 Today the tower, encompassed by the villa, is inaccessible because part of the area is on private property and the other in a military zone.

It may have been for this reason that Tiberius decided to construct a monumental lighthouse, based on that at Alexandria, near his villa by the sea. It can been seen then that, in the Phlegrea area, there was an integrated system of signal posts702 consisting of the tower of the lighthouse on Capri, the lighthouse at Punta Campanella near Sorrento and the lighthouses (and specula) of the port at Miseno. We know from an inscription that there was a team of men (specularii) who ensured the efficient working of the signals.703 The tower of the Capri lighthouse (Plate 63, figs 125 a, b) survives up to a height of 16m. It stands on a rocky outcrop (319 ASL) on the ridge that connects the two parts of the island. The base is 12m square and made of brick. The significant height of the tower suggests that its primary use was for signalling or defence or perhaps, most likely, as a lighthouse whose main task was to shed light on the imperial palace. Near the north-west corner of the tower are numerous remains, including a pillar and the shoulder of an arch, that must be what is left of the access way to the first floor of the lighthouse. From this floor, a stairway would have led up to the storey or

693

SANTORO 1967, pp. 45-46. Although it does not mention use as a lighthouse, the site of the sanctuary is referred to in Strab. I, 22; Strab. V, 8, 247; Stat. Sil. V, 3, 165-166. 695 MINGAZZINI-PFISTER 1946, p. 52. 696 LEONARDI 1991, p. 76. 697 MINGAZZINI-PFISTER 1946, p. 146. 694

698

Verg. Aen. VII, 733. Cass. Dio. XXII, 4. 700 BELOCH 1989, pp. 318-322. 701 Tac. Ann. IV, 67. 702 BOLLINI 1968, p. 53. 703 MAIURI 1956, p. 24. 699

96

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES storeys above.704 The lighthouse must have been about 40m high, but its elevated position, compared by Statius to the moon, would, in my view, have made it unsuitable for navigational signalling, where a lighthouse at sea level is more usual. The primary function of the Capri tower would have been as a “military” speculum. Using such a system, Tiberius would have been able to communicate with the speculum at Miseno and others in the area (Plate 64, fig. 127) so as to have warning of the arrival of Sejanus with his fleet. It is no accident then to find that the tower was connected to the villa by a viaduct, of which there remains still in situ a pillar and part of a wood arch more than 2m wide. This was a shortcut so that there would be no delay in warning Tiberius of approaching enemies. Kause705 has pointed out, however, that construction of the Loggia Marina (which housed a proper speculum) would have obstructed communication between the Capri lighthouse and the Miseno speculum. In my view, the Specularium on Capri was simply yet another reinforcement of the signalling system (Plate 65, figs 128, 129). Examination of the large deposits of coal and ashes found in the vicinity of the lighthouse suggests that, despite its collapse after an earthquake as mentioned by Suetonius,706 the lighthouse, restored during the reign of Domitian,707 it continued in use until the seventeenth century.

just as the Alexandria lighthouse was. But the distance between the island of Pharos and the city is very much shorter than that between Capri and Puteoli. The situation cannot be compared, however, not least because the island of Pharos was linked to the port at Alexandria, while the lack of a lighthouse to assist ships entering the port at Puteoli would have meant that grain coming from Alexandria had to call at Capri from where it would have to be transported in a number of smaller craft into the port of Puleoli. This hypothesis seems unlikely. One also wonders whether such significant building enterprises would have been likely in a city that, after the death of Tiberius, suffered such a decline. No. 54 MISENUM (Miseno, Campania) Regio I: Latium et Campania In 37BC Augustus’s brilliant general Agrippa opened a waterway between the Gulf of Baia and the almost nonexistent Lake Lucrino and another from the lake to Lake Avernus, thus leading to the creation of the highly efficient and justly famous Portus Iulius (Plate 66, fig. 130), enclosed to the north by the mountains of Baia (modern Bacoli) that terminate in the promontory of Punta Pennata, to the west by Monte di Procida and to the south by the long, thin isthmus of Miliscola.710 It was then that Misenum,711 hitherto regarded as subservient to Baia, acquired its own autonomy, evidence of which can be found in the numerous inscriptions left by sailors of the fleet stationed there. The name of the port, coming from that of Odysseus’s friend Misenus who, according to legend, died here ,712 continued in use in Roman times when the port was divided into two with an external harbour (Misenum)713 and an internal one (Mar Morto): Baia and Misenum were connected by a wooden bridge, access to which was limited by means of two moles constructed by Agrippa that extended from the two shores of the port corresponding respectively with Capo Miseno and Punta Pennata.714

Comment Although possibly already in existence in the period of Augustus, it is thought that the tower of the lighthouse on Capri originated as a signal tower in contact with the one at Punta Campanella. Its function was to warn the emperor Tiberius in case Sejanus’s revolt materialised.708 In the last years of Tiberius’s life, the tower had a square base on which stood a circular floor from which led a stair that led to the top where the fire would have been lit. This stairway collapsed in an earthquake. It may have been decided to rebuild the tower during the reign of Domitian, but in a more monumental form and as a proper lighthouse. It was modelled on the lighthouse at Alexandria, with a third, cylindrical storey being built onto the remains of the second storey to house the lantern. A statue was placed on the top of this third storey. A recent theory asserts that the speculum was restored under Domitian and at the same time a lighthouse of the Alexandria type was built ex novo, the remains of which correspond to the present Torre del Faro.709 Krause argues that the Capri lighthouse was the main one for Puteoli because it was placed on an island

The port and the lighthouse The inlet formed by the port of Misenum was 2km long with a width, at its widest, of 500m and a depth of up to 14m. The Mare Morto formed the inner harbour, while the external harbour was situated on the site of the present-day port of Miseno. The two harbours were similar in size and connected by a wooden bridge where today there is a dividing dyke, partly because of the progressive silting up of the inner harbour.715 Agrippa, faced with the task of converting a commercial port into a military one (Portus Iulius), created two moles extending from the two shores of the port, making the southern mole longer with a double row of pilae harking back to Puteoli.716

704

MAIURI 1956, p. 53 thinks that the Capri lighthouse had only two storeys; recently, however, it has been suggested (KRAUSE 2005, pp. 251-258) that the lighthouse near Tiberius’s villa was modelled on that at Alexandria and so would have had three storeys, decreasing in size towatds the top. 705 KRAUSE 2005, p. 251. 706 Suet. Tib. LXXIV. 707 Stat. sil. III, 5, 100-101. where the light from the lighthouse at Capri is compared to the bright beam of the Moon. 708 MAIURI 1956, p. 24. In fact, we know that Tiberius had Sejanus put to death. 709 KRAUSE 2005, p. 48.

710

CHAPOT 1967, pp.64-68. For the port at: LEGER 1979, pp. 460-461. Strab. VI, 5-6. 713 VIERECK 1975, pp. 264-265. 714 BOLLINI 1968, p. 51. 715 BELOCH 1989, p. 225. 716 LEGER 1979, pp. 460-462; REDDÉ 1986, pp, 186-197. 711 712

97

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA To the east of Punta Pennata on the highest point of Punta del Poggio, at the end of Via Pennata in an area now known as “Grottone”, the remains of a square building, thought to have been a lighthouse (or perhaps just a speculum) have been discovered within the buildings of the Masseria Annunziata Primicerio (Plate 66, fig. 131). Visible from the island of Capri, where the large lighthouse attached to Tiberius’s Villa Iovis stood (Plate 63, fig. 125), the central section of this building consists of a large room with a low cupola surrounded by four smaller rooms, square in shape and with the same covering. There are traces of cocciopesto in all the rooms.717

Alexandria, with a large square base and built up with powerful and thick walls to underline its military role. The second storey would have been polygonal with windows that would have also and mainly served as a means of defence. The top storey would have been cylindrical, supported by columns, its conical roof being surmounted by a statue of a male figure, perhaps identifiable as Neptune (Plate 69, fig, 136). In 1764, Sarnelli identified the lighthouse of Misenum with the tomb of Ulysses’s friend, quoting Virgil: imponit fuaque arma viro, remumque, tubamque. Monte fub aerio, qui nunc Misenus ab illo Dicitur, aeternumque tenet per facula Nomen 721

This site overlooks the entire port of Miseno, part of the Mar Morto, the Procida canal and the Gulfs of Pozzuoli and Naples as far as Capri and Sorrento. It would seem, therefore, to be an ideal spot for a lighthouse and it is just such an arrangement that it is thought is shown in the famous Gragnano fresco (Tav. 70 fig. 139).718

The site of this structure, undoubtedly Roman in origin, seems more suited to an area where there might have been a villa rather than for the main lighthouse of the port of Misenum. Since the building is now enclosed within the fabric of the Masseria Annunziata, topographical investigation is difficult. Nevertheless, its position behind Punta Pennata and the rich decorative cladding described by Maiuri incline me to think that this was less likely to have been a military lighthouse that a speculum connected with the villa of a Roman aristocrat or some other important building.

Maiuri has suggested, though he is not categorical, that there was more likely to have been a speculum here than a lighthouse since a sailor arriving from the west would not have been able to see the structure, hidden as it would have been by the promontory. This is another argument supporting the theory that the whole of this area would have been covered by a system of interrelated lighthouses.719

Comment Considerable confusion has surrounded the matter of the location of the lighthouse at Miseno. While many commentators have read Maiuri, few have been to the spot in person, resulting in a misunderstanding of place names. The building discovered by Maiuri is on Punta del Poggio but at the end of Via Pennata, so that some writers have placed the lighthouse on Punta Pennata. Others have assumed that a building with lighthouse functions stood near the church of San Sossio, almost at the end of Via Sacello di Miseno and at the crossroads meeting Via del Faro (Lighthouse Road) (Plate 67, fig. 133). This theory is now rejected even if the position, just at the entrance to the mole, a pila of which remains, would certainly have been more useful than Punta del Poggio.

The remains of the tower occupy the highest point of the Punta del Poggio, surrounding a central nucleus consisting of a sqaure space surrounded by smaller sqaure and rectangualr spaces, covered by low vaults. The whole building is encircled by a thick wall that stands agains the central nucleus just described. Almost certainly covered by a low domed roof, the interior is clad in a rough opus reticolatum as is the exterior, although this is more carefully executed. Both can be attributed to restorations carried out in the first century AD. The internal walls and floors are covered with opus signinum, made with large fragments of tile. Since the extrados of the Grottone shows no sign of a circular drum, Maiuri concluded that a square tower, similar to that at Tiberius’s villa on Capri, stood on this base, giving a large, single tower, some 18-20m high, with tapering walls and with a room for signalling (Plate 67, fig. 132).720 A new reconstruction has been suggested recently, based on Maiuri data and on comparisons with other lighthouses. According to this, the building would have been a solid structure, based on the tower at

Since I have investigated this site, it may be appropriate to contribute my views to the discussion. There is another building that could have been the Miseno lighthouse: about half way down Via del Faro is a large dilapidated building incorporating – as so often in this area – parts of a previous building in opus reticolatum. Its situation is a perfect one for a lighthouse: sufficiently high, but clearly visible to anyone sailing near Punta Pennata and therefore near the entrance to the port (Plate 68, fig. 134). A ship entering port between Punta Pennata and Punta Terone

717 MAIURI 1949-50, pp. 259-; BORIELLO-D’AMBROSIO 1979, pp. 122123; MAIURI 1983, pp. 177-193. 718 GŰNTHER 1913, p. 166; GIANFROTTA 1998, pp. 164-165. 719 MAIURI 1983, p. 178: as well as relating this specola to the Piscina Mirabilis, for which it might have been the cistern, the author refers to the remains of a lighthouse at Capo Atheneum (No. 52) near the Tower of Minerva. They consist of a circular tower on a square base, just opposite the lighthouse of the Villa Iovis on Capri. Here too there is a nearby small cistern. 720 MAIURI 1983, p. 182.

721 SARNELLI 2002, p. 280, the same view being asserted in 1824 by PANVINI 1990, pp. 126-127, quoting from the Latin: “Aneas raised a grest mound as a tomb and set on it the hero’, the oars he rowed with and the trumpet he had blown, there near the airy top of Mount Misenus which bears his name now and for ever through all years to comes arms”, and the author goes on to say that, in Roman times, there was a lighthouse in that mountain.

98

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES would not have been able to see the supposed lighthouse on Punta del Poggio, as Maiuri himself admitted,722 whereas signals from a lighthouse in the Miseno promontory would have been clearly visible. In my view, there was a system for signalling as follows: a lantern near San Sossio, or more specifically on Punta Terone,723 another at the end of Punta Pennata and the lighthouse on the Miseno promontory, about half way up Via del Faro and just before the long tunnel that leads to the modern lighthouse. Supporting this view that there was a lighthouse on the Miseno promontory is a seventeenthcentury print by Capaccio showing a tower on the coast (which would certainly have been used as a lighthouse as well) on the highest part of the promontory (Plate 68, fig. 135). To this can be added the words of Scotti-Scajola at the time, in the late eighteenth century, when it was decided to restore the ancient ports of the region: “…it is a marine area and possesses four Ports, which are those of Baia, Miseno, Nitida and Pozzuoli, and two of the best fortresses in the Kingdom, which are those of Baia and Nitida, as well as the Miseno Towers…”. These “Miseno Towers”, at that time likely to have been coastal towers, must have carried out the function of lighthouses as well, just as they must have done in ancient times, given that mention is made of the good accommodation for ships and the unlikeliness of shipwreck in a region that was even better equipped than the capital.724 There is still the question of the glass bottle formed like a lighthouse now in Warsaw (Plate 69, fig. 137) and building it represents. It might be the Pozzuoli lighthouse, since it follows the description of the shore in that area and it is possible to imagine, following the painting by Gragnano, that, between the Caligolano mole and the beginning of the Baia area, there was once a small island on which was a lighthouse. Alternatively, perhaps it was the lighthouse not of Miseno but of Baia. Once past Puteoli, the first proper port encountered would have been the one at Baia that is today submerged. At this spot there was a large lighthouse. If it was in fact the lighthouse for the port of Miseno, then why did it have “Baia” written on it?

Perhaps because the one name stood for the two places, or perhaps because it was the main building in a linked system of signalling towers. It is impossible to give a definite answer to these questions, just as it is difficult to know whether Gragnano’s painting is of Puteoli, Baia, Miseno, as Gianfrotta has recently suggested, even Stabiae. NO. 55 PUTEOLI (Pozzuoli, Campania) Regio I: Latium et Campania Founded by the Sami in the sixth century BC and given the name Dicearchia, Puteoli lies on a western inlet in the Gulf of Naples. With the decline of Cuman hegemony, centred round the richest area of the inland region, the city developed an anchorage and a port that was to be of great importance to traders in antiquity. Conquered by the Romans in 338 BC and renamed Puteoli, it was to become the most significant maritime, commercial and military bulwark of the Second Punic War. As Rome did not have a proper port of its own, the port at Pozzuoli took over this role. Made a Roman colonia in 195 BC,725 the port’s decline was hastened in the second century AD when the port at Ostia, begun by Claudius in the mid-first century AD, inaugurated by Nero in 64 AD and completed by Trajan between 100 and 106 AD, was able to handle good from Alexandria and transfer them directly to the capital. Pozzuoli continued, however, to be the preferred port of call for merchants from the East. Theodosius, Arcadius and Honorius carried out important improvements in the port, including the completion of the ripa.726 The port and the lighthouse The city’s port, port of call for the grain ships that were sent annually from Rome to Alexandria,727 grew up on the rocky slope of the hill that protected it from the wind. It was enlarged several times according to need while a large merchant quarter lay along the coast north-west of the acropolis.728 Part of the port, with arches in opus reticulatum, can be seen emerging from the sea while those parts that are still below water are made of opus caementicium, using pozzolana with inserted pieces of tufa.

722

MAIURI 1983, p. 178: he also admits that there must have been more than one lighthouse at Misenus, since the one he recognises as a lighthouse would have been hidden from a sailor by the slopes of the promontory. This, in his view, is a further reason why it was decided in Tiberian times to boost the power of the light signals with the construction of the lighthouse at Villa Iovis. There is, in any case, no doubt that a lighthouse-like structure at Punta del Poggio could have made use of the relatively nearby large cistern, the Piscina Mirabile, and it would have been able to look down on the port of Miseno and the entire basin of the Mar Morto lake. Maiuri says that the structures communicating with the specola at Miseno would have been at Capo Ateneo, in the Marina Grande at Capri and on the island of Pandataria, now called Ventotene, in the area known as Montagnozzo, just at the mouth of the harbour which must have communicated with a lighthouse-signalling tower on the promontory of Punta Eolo in the villa where Julia and Agrippina were exiled. It has been suggested that it was precisely in the Montagnozzo area that these ruins might be the city’s lighthouse. Its isolated and dominating position give plausibility tothe theory, although the ruins might be those of a building belong to a much larger complex, see DE ROSSI 1998, p. 159. 723 SCOGNAMIGLIO 2006, p. 72 suggests that the lantern, by which he means the main lighthouse, should be sought under the sea in the Punta Terone area where aerial photography has shown that there are ancient moles. Preventative investigations have also revealed structures in cement with, nearby, shallows 3m deep and 15m across. 724 SCOTTI-SCAJOLA 1775, p. 192; BUCCARO 1993, p. 132.

We know from the sources that Caligula729 used boats to create a pontoon bridge that prolonged the mole towards Baia. The mole, built over a line of pilae (now collapsed) linked together by arches, was destroyed by a storm during the reign of Hadrian but restored by Antoninus Pius.730 It was in honour of the latter emperor that, in 139 725

MCKAY 1972, p. 139. ANNECCHINO 1949, pp. 134-145 lists the restorations carried out under Antoninus Pius in 139 AD, and titles received by Marcus Aurelius and Commodus in the city which was also the place chosen by Romulus Augustulus for his exile. 727 FRANZOT 1999, p. 46: corn was transported from Pozzuoli to the capital by boats small enough to travel up the Tiber. 728 LEGER 1979, pp. 462-463; AMALFITANO-CAMODECA-MEDRI 1990, p. 103. 729 Suet. Cal. 19. 730 C.I.L. X, 1640-41. 726

99

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA AD, a triumphal arch was erected.731 Although little remains, we know a lot about the topography of the port of Pozzuoli thanks to the archaeologists’ finds in several sites of glass vases bearing the image of the ports of Pozzuoli and Baia (Plate 70, fig. 138).732 The ruins of lesser moles, forming small harbours, are still partly visible. We know from Cicero 733 that the emporium itself was concentrated around the port side of the lower city, in an area where there were warehouses, temples for oriental visitors and the Ripa, one side of the port surround by a porticoed walkway. Gods known to have been worshipped here include, besides the cult of Serapis, Neptune and Hercules (the porticoes being dedicated to these two) and the Nymphs, titular goddesses of a temple situated in the port area.734 As early as the period of Augustus, attempts were made to link the port at Pozzuoli to Portus Iulius, while a project was planned by Nero, but not completed, to create a waterway, the Fossa Neronis, from to Portus Iulius to Rome.735 The port began to decline during the first century AD as the port created by Claudius at Ostia, intended as the port of Rome, grew in importance.736 Puteoli’s port737was not destroyed by barbarian invasions, however, but as a result of the effects of bradisism which swallowed up numerous buildings, forcing the inhabitants to abandon the area and move to the safety of the higher ground around the castle where the Greek colony had first settled.738 There is no documentary evidence for a lighthouse at Pozzuoli, but one may be represented by the “souvenir” glass vase, inscribed with the word Faros now in the National Museum in Warsaw.739

Miseno (No. 54).742 However, while Gragnano’s painting, shows a building on a rock that must without doubt have been used as a lighthouse, seventeenth century depictions by Bellori and descriptions by his contemporary Sarnelli, do not show or mention any lighthouse. Nevertheless, there must have been something of the sort and a possible explanation is that, although it was visible until Roman times, it was later incorporated into the castle so that, by the eighteenth century, there was not trace of it to be seen. Since we know that Antoninus Pius carried out a significant amount of restoration work in the port at Pozzuoli, and given that Julius Capitolinus refers to the restoration of a lighthouse by Antoninus,743 it has been suggested by some scholars that it was the Pozzuoli lighthouse that was restored and not, as others maintain, that at Alexandria. Turning to the Warsaw vase, if the lighthouse represented is that of Pozzuoli, it seems to resemble the architecture of the lighthouse portrayed on Trajan’s Column: a tower (though polygonal rather than circular) with a sloping roof, with a corresponding opening, below which is what is perhaps an entrance. Unfortunately, until the remains of the ancient lighthouse are discovered by marine archaeologists, there is little more that can be said about what must have been a monumental lighthouse, worthy of mention among the restorations carried out by Antoninus Pius in a port that, until the second century AD, can be regarded as the main port of Rome. NO. 56 PANDATARIA (Ventotene, Lazio) Regio I: Latium et Campania

If a lighthouse did exist, it may have stood where the castle now is, in the south-western corner of the upper town.740 The painting by Gragnano seems to suggest that it stood on a high place (Plate 70, fig. 139),741 although it is more likely that the lighthouse depicted is that at

Composed chiefly of tufa and volcanic stone, the history of this island begins in the Augustan period. Given its shape and size, the Romans did not build a series of villas, preferring instead to create a single large inhabited area that would be easily accessible by sea. As De Rossi has accurately commented, port, cardo and villa constituted a triple pivot for the island’s urban plan, something quite unique in the Roman world.744

731

BELOCH, 1989, pp. 153-155: the glass vases show two triumphal arches, one surmounted by four Tritons, the other by a statue of Neptune attended by four hippocamps. In the centre, two columns, similar to the ones at Brindisi, are topped by unidentified statues. The discovery of a bust of Isis by marine archaeolgists has led to the statue on the vase being interpreted as Isis Pharia, see GIANFROTTA 1998, pp. 167-169. 732 The glass vessel bearing the inscription Faros comes from Ostia and is now in the National Museum in Warsaw, see PENSA 1999, p. 100; FRANZOT 1999, p. 49. MAIURI 1983, pp. 184-185, however, accepts it as the Miseno lighthouse. 733 Cic. att. V, 2,2. 734 BELOCH 1989, p. 156. 735 GIARDINA 2004, pp. 331-335 with bibliography. 736 For a complete history of the port see: ANNECCHINO 1940, pp. 118ff. For the findings of the marine achaeologists, GIANFROTTA 1993, pp. 115-124. 737 BASS 1974, pp. 95-96; VIERECK 1975, pp. 260-261. 738 “Puteoli, 1” in Der Kleine Pauly, XXIII,2, Stuttgart 1959, pp. 20532054. 739 Dubois, by contrast, identifes the lighthouse in the Odemira vase as being that at Pozzuoli, immediately after the columns at the end of the mole, see SPANO 1931, pp. 351ff; FUJII 2001, pp. 73-76; BEDON 1988, p. 58, holds instead that the vase in the Warwaw Museum shows the lighthouse at Baia. 740 BELOCH 1989, p. 156; Dubois thinks that it would have been on the top of the castle mount, see MAIURI 1983, p. 184, note 18. 741 PENSA 1997, p. 692.

The port and the lighthouse From the port and the fishery, a tunnel through a bank of tufa led to the higher part of the island. The lighthouse must have been situated in a dominant position and it is no accident that, in the area called Montagnozzo (“little mountain”), remains of a single structure, interpreted as a 742 GÜNTHER 1913, thinks it is the lighthouse of the present-day village of Marechiaro, SINGER-HOLYMARD,-HALL-WILLIAMS 1956, p. 520 opt for the port of Pozzuoli, as does PENSA 1997, pp. 695, 708; GIANFROTTA 1998, p. 165, GIANFROTTA 2005, p. 10 interprets it as the port at Miseno. Lastly, Franzot interprets it as a bird’s-eye view of the portsof Pozzuoli, Baia and Miseno, FRANZOT 1999, p. 47, giving weight to Dubois’s theory. 743 H.A. VIII, 2-3, in the section mentioning Fari restitutio. Of the same view are ANNECCHINO 1940, p. 145; ALLARD 1979, p.504; BEDON 1988, pp. 57-58, although in this last work the author says, incorrectly, that the restoration of the lighthouse was carried out under Trajan in 139 AD, the first year of Antoninus Pius’s rule. 743 CHAPOT 1967, pp. 64-68. 744 DE ROSSI, p. 154.

100

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES Lugli752 not only asserts that this was the lighthouse at Terracina, he also believes that this restoration is shown in a bas-relief (now lost),753 that once decorated the entrance to the port there (Plate 72, fig. 142).

lighthouse serving the port, have been found in at the top of a hill.745 Further excavation and research will be needed before this can be confirmed. NO. 57 TARRACINA (Terracina, Lazio) Regio I: Latium et Campania

On the bas-relief, according to Lugli, appeared a magistrate on the right-hand side, sitting on the sella curulis and giving orders to an architect to begin work on the cutting through Pisco Montano and the restoration (or construction) of a tower, probably the lighthouse.754 The only thing that can be said about this tower is that it was square – at the bottom at least – as appears in a drawing by Luigi Canina (Plate 72, fig. 143).755 It seems likely that, in early times, sailors used as a landmark the temple of Jove Anxur. This stood high above the port and may have been illuminated at night to act as a lighthouse. Antoninus Pius’s restoration might equally well refer to a lighthouse at Caieta (Gaeta) about which nothing is known but which is likely to have formed part of a chain of signals in the area.

The city of Terracina lies near the Tyrrhenian Sea, at almost the southernmost tip of Lazio, in the centre of a vast inlet between the promontories of Anxur and Circeo (Plate 71, fig. 140). Closed off to the south by the Lepini Mountains that extend right down to the sea, Terracina may have been founded by the Volsci (to whom the city owes its old name of Anxur). It became a colonia maritima in 329 BC and may already have had a port at that date. Known to the Romans as Anxuras, the name Terracina was added, as we read in Livy.746 Using the Appian Way as the decumanus maximus, Trajan improved the route between Terracina and Torre del Pesce by undertaking the costly work of cutting through the Pisco Montano, so creating a road along the shore, below the mountains (Plate 71, fig. 141).747

NO. 58 CIRCEII (San Felice al Circeo, Lazio) Regio I: Latium et Campania

The port and the lighthouse Now known as San Felice, this Volsca settlement was called Circeii by the Romans who arrived in 393 BC. From that period there remains only a stretch of polygonal walls in the modern Via Rossi. A wall running from the city walls and up 200m connects the city to the Acropolis where a cistern has also been found. Known since the sixteenth century for its strong walls of opus poligonalis, Circeii has always been identified with San Felice al Circeo.756

Initially excavated out of the sand, the enclosed harbour was renovated and enlarged under the Flavian and Antonian dynasties, receiving new moles one extending east-west and the other north-south. Inserted into the latter was a semicircular arm, at the end of which was the small island intended for the lighthouse.748 Since the socalled Fiumicello di Terracina arising in Agro Pontino ran between them, the two moles could only be connected by a bridge, making the port one that was both a sea port and a river port.749

The port and the lighthouse Before the construction of the Fossa Neronis, Mount Circeo mountain fulfilled the essential role of protecting small ships seeking shelter here from the mistral and the westerly winds. The now-submerged port of Circeii has been identified from aerial photographs, lying a little to the north of the modern hotel Grotte di Neanderthal. Nearby are also some remains identified by Schmiedt757 as belonging perhaps to a fishery.

It is almost certain that there was no lighthouse here when the inhabitants of Terracina were using the small inlet between Piegarello and Pisco Montano as a harbour, and one that was rather too sandy. A lighthouse tower became a necessity when the Romans created a new port. Its ellipsoid shape meant that the dirty Pontine water carried down by the river Ufente no longer discharged into the sea.750 According to local tradition, Trajan was responsible for restoration of the harbour, which may explain the many similarities with the port at Centumcellae, and, most importantly, for the construction of an ante wall on which the lighthouse stood. A passage in Julius Capitolinus,751 however, attributes the restoration of the port to Antoninus Pius. As mentioned in the entry for Pozzuoli, the same passage mentions also a lighthouse that was restored, but it does not say where.

752 A deposit of sand known as the Montone (“big mountain”) near the edge of the quay at the port of Terracina is evidence of the dredging work carried out here in the Antonine period, see LUGLI 1926, p. 129, Plates I-II; LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN 1963, p. 204 thinks that it is a restoration to the lighthouse at Ostia; DE LA BLANCHÈRE 1983, p. 131 thinks it is the Terracina lighthouse; COARELLI 1987, pp. 132-133 thinks that the relief shows, in the centre, work going on at the lighthouse while on the left we see the cutting of the Pisco Montano. He stresses that, since the relief has been dated to the time of Trajan, the theory that it shows the restoration of the port and creation of the Pisco Montano seems to be confirmed. 753 The relief was discovered at Terracina in 1935 behind Piazza dell’Emiciclo and catalogged as Inv. 321008 at the Museo Nazionale Romano at Palazzo Massimo alle Terme in Rome. 754 COARELLI 1987, p. 132; Valle Pontina 1990, p. 46. 755 ZERI 1905, p. 308; GIULIANO 1985, p. DE LA BLANCHÈRE 1983, p. 107. 756 For the history of the site QUILICI-QUILICI GIGLI 2005, pp. 121-146. 757 SCHMIEDT 1972, pp. 120-132; QUILICI-QUILICI GIGLI 2005, pp. 130131.

745

DE ROSSI 1993, p. 53; DE ROSSI 1998, p. 159. Liv. IV, 58-59. 747 Liv. XXXIX, 44, 6. 748 For a history of Terracina see BIANCHINI 1994. 749 LEGER 1979, pp. 459-460; APOLLONJ GHETTI 1982, p. 35. 750 DE LA BLANCHÈRE 1983, p. 31: the mole was built on a solid reef with large blocks of stone stolen from the nearby mountains and thrown into the sea. The total perimeter was 1160 hectares. 751 H.A. VIII, 3. 746

101

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA The summit of Monte Circeo stands at 541m ASL. Here there was once a temple to Venus; now the modern lighthouse stands here (Plate 73, fig. 144). Remains of tesserae in opus reticolatum and pottery758 may be indications that there was an ancient lighthouse here, a position that would have allowed it to communicate easily with lighthouses at Ponza, Terracina and, particularly, Gaeta759.

blown up by illegal fishermen and its remains are now under water. The presence of a port and signal towers at Astura is also known from late documents such as a navigation agreement of 1166 between Genoa and Rome and a deed relating to the sale of Nettuno and Anzio to Clement VII in 1549 with the words cum turri ac port Asturae. It should be noted that the use of an ante wall with a main lighthouse together with signalling towers at the ends of the moles is typical of the period of Trajan. Centumcellae is an obvious example, although there may have been a similar arrangement at Claudius’s first century AD port at Ostia. It is possible that the by-now abandoned villa of Cicero was restored, its fishery and canal system made use of, and the whole converted into a port with the useful addition of two or three lighthouses.

NO. 59 ASTURA (Tower Astura, Lazio) Regio I: Latium et Campania Situated close to the mouth of the river Astura (Plate 73, fig. 145) it has not been established if there was ever a proper settlement here or only a succession of seaside villas, one of which is said to have belonged to Cicero. Nor is it clear whether Cicero’s villa, at least until 45 BC, was built over a preceding building in opus reticulata with irregular cubilia, possibly relating to a lighthouse that was then reused to illuminate the villa (Plate 74, fig. 146).760

NO. 60 ROME AND PORTUS AUGUSTI AT OSTIA (Rome and Ostia Antica, Lazio) Regio I: Latium et Campania Portus Tiberinus: Given the theme of this work, here is not the place to describe the many emporia serving Rome (Testaccio, Porta Trigemina...). I shall confine myself therefore to the port that originated on the banks of the river Tiber and which may have been inhabited near the Foro Boario from as early as the eighth century BC by traders from the Mediterranean and known as portus Tiberinus. All that remains today is the temple dedicated to the god Portunus (Plate 74, fig. 147).

In the 1960s a number of tombs of the alla cappuccina type (covered with standing tiles) and a cistern were discovered that must have been connected with the lighthouse at Cicero’s villa. Agricultural interventions and the conversion of the villa into a military camp have rendered further investigation virtually impossible. This port would appear, however, to provide an ideal gateway to nearby Anzio, a city that became important under Nero. The eastern mole at Astura is approximately 6m wide, the western mole is 10-12m wide, and the southeast-facing entrance was protected by an ante wall.761

Ostia: Before the Second Punic War, when Rome had to put together a proper navy fit for war and strong enough to defend itself against the Carthaginians, the role of port at Ostia763 was to guard the salt-pans and defend the coast against pirates. The need for ever greater supplies of food, hitherto sent from the port of Pozzuoli, meant that the capital needed a port able to accommodate the largest ships and not just the small vessels hauled by pairs of oxen. Interestingly, Strabo comments that Ostia had no port because of the alluvial deposits of the Tiber, a river fed into by many tributaries. Nevertheless, even in the time of Augustus, many ships lightened their loads so that they could moor here and then sail 190 stadia up river as far as Rome.764 Perhaps planned by Caesar765 and Augustus but never carried out, it was not until the time of Claudius that a navigable canal was created to link Ostia with Rome with the provision of an effective port.766 The story of how Claudius’s plans (Plate 75, figs 148, 149) were unenthusiastically greeted by the architects is well known. They complained about the huge expense and predicted that the port would quickly silt up with the large quantities of soil washed down by the Tiber. Despite their misgivings, Claudius’s port was created 3km from the mouth of the Tiber. The event was commemorated on many coins, but only when work was finally completed by Nero (Plate 76, fig. 150),767 when it

The port and the lighthouse Recent investigations have clarified the layout of the port area. Aerial photography has reveals that, in front of the entrance to the harbour, there is a submerged barrier some 60m long and 20m wide, identified as a breakwater constructed in rubble and not the foundations of a tower or lighthouse, despite the large quantities of loose stones.762 The right mole was built in such a way as to protect the harbour from winds in the third and fourth quadrants. At the end of the western mole, in the area known locally as “la Botte”, the remains of a small round (diameter 3m) building can be seen on the spot where one of the port lighthouses must have stood, matched by a twin lighthouse on the other mole and a third on the ante wall now called “Scoglio della Lanterna” (Lantern Rock) where there was, apparently, a round building. Unfortunately, like the ante wall itself, this building was 758

LUGLI 1928, p.24. QUILICI 2008, p. 311 has recently proposed that in Sperlonga, in the area called Belvedere, there was in roman time a lighthouse which could send signal to the one in Gaeta. 760 Ten arches designed to allow the water to pass beneath the structure without threatening its stability can still be seen in situ. Although in even worse condition, they are similar to those of the lighthouse at Dubris. Also still visible is a bridge with breakwaters that bears remarakable similarities to that described for Puteoli. 761 PICARRETTA 1977, p. 64. 762 FELICI 2006, p. 62. 759

763

For the origins see PASINI 1978. Strab. V, 3,5. 765 LEGER 1979, pp. 456-459; PAVOLINI 1991, p. 74. 766 Cass. Dio. LX, 11, 3. 767 For a complete study of coins from the time of Nero, and the coin in question, PERASSI 2002, pp. 11-34. 764

102

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES was named as Portus Augustus Ostiensis. It had two long curved moles, the outer one of which was almost 1km long and incorporated the foundations of the lighthouse. The inner mole (over 700m), with perhaps a temple and, almost certainly, warehouses, curved round the spacious harbour basin like a pair of pincers.768

Galleria delle Carte Geografiche in the Vatican Museums (Plate 77, fig. 152a). An island, acting as an ante wall is situated in front of Claudius’s harbour with the lighthouse standing on it. The lighthouse is shown as a four-storey tower, getting narrower as it goes up. In front of it is a pedestal on which is a statue of a man holding a patera and a lance.776 In fact, there are several literary documents dating from the sixteenth century that describe the ruins. Biondo Flavio writes that “we can still see today a good part of the base of this tower”, while Iacopo Gherardi adds that “the ancient walls of the city of Porto can still be seen, with many ruins and the tower of the lighthouse”. In 1614, Pius II repeats that “there still remain vestiges of the tower and these can be seen in the sea there…”.777 Once thought to be in the area where the Ostia Ship Museum now stands, more recent archaeological investigations situate it nearer the sea front. Traces of the mole thought to have supported the lighthouse were found under runway no. 1 at the Da Vinci di Fiumicino airport, but these results are still being analysed.778 Recent investigations on land, carried out on the basis of a photogrammatic mosaic dating from the early 1900s, have narrowed down the site of the lighthouse area to near the present-day Via delle Vongole. If this is correct; then this would mean that Claudius’s lighthouse was in line with the moles and not projecting out as an ante wall.779 Trajan’s lighthouse was constructed on the left of the canal leading into the port, but it is not possible to say if it stood on its own island, as Lugli asserts,780 or whether it was situated at the end of a mole connected to the dry land. Having dealt with the necessary but complicated matter of topography, we turn now to the question of the appearance of the lighthouse itself, information for which comes from the many surviving representations of it.781

When a storm sank more than two hundred cargo ships – an event mentioned by Tacitus 769 - Nero embarked on a plan for a navigable canal connecting Pozzuoli with Ostia.770 Known as the Fossa Neronis, it was never completed. In the second century AD, Trajan undertook further work in the port of Ostia, creating the large hexagonal harbour that can still be seen today. This was more enclosed and consequently more sheltered than Claudius’s harbour but preserved Claudius’s monumental lighthouse. A link was maintained between Trajan’s and Claudius’s ports – the latter still used as an anchorage771 – and hence with Rome was guaranteed by the improvements made to Claudius’s Fossa Traiana,772 the course of which is still partly extant, forming a section of the modern Fiumicino canal. The lighthouse Suetonius and Cassius Dio describe the lighthouse as standing on an island placed in the centre between the two moles. Pliny, on the other hand and perhaps erroneously, says that it was part of the mole, although distant from the shore.773 The same sources774 tell us how Claudius sank the ship used by Caligula to transport the Vatican obelisk from Egypt to use it as the foundations for the Ostia lighthouse erected on the outer mole of the port. Remains of what was though to be the lighthouse were discovered in the 1950s and a hypothetical reconstruction was drawn up, although it is no longer thought to be correct (Plate 76, fig. 151a).775

Coins: As we have already seen, a coin from the time of Nero shows the lighthouse as a two-storeyed tower growing narrower towards the top on which stands a male figure with a lance and patera. Under Trajan, more emphasis was placed on the hexagonal harbour than the lighthouse. This harbour still exists, thanks to the drainage work carried out by the Princes Torlonia whose villa is near the lake. The coins from the time of Anthony show Isis Pharìa, as at Alexandria (but sometimes the statue of the male figure), whereas coins from the reign of Commodus show the lighthouse as a very tall tower with four storeys(all circular) that decrease in size as they go up. The top storey is cylindrical and would have housed the lantern.

From the Renaissance onwards, the lighthouse at Ostia was the object of wonder and fascination for scholars who, faced with a lack of concrete evidence, came up with their own more or less fantastical versions of the port and its lighthouse. The most faithful representation is probably that on a sixteenth-century tapestry in the 768 For a complete history of the port at Ostia see ZERI 1905, pp. 264277; LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN 1963, pp. 182-189; TESTAGUZZA 1970, whose theories have been superceded; MEIGGS 1973; CHEVALLIER 1986; MANNUCCI 1992; GALLINA ZEVI-CLARIDGE 1996; SILENZI 1998; GIULIANI 2001, pp. 115-126; PAVOLINI 2005. 769 Tac. ann. XV, 18. 770 MEIGGS 1973, pp. 52-54. 771 BRUUN-GALLINA ZEVI 2002, p. 166. 772 C.I.L. XIV, 88. 773 GIULIANI 2001, pp. 116-118. 774 Suet. Claud. XX, 3; Plin. nat .XVI, 40, 201; Cass. Dio. LX, 11, 4-5 775 TESTAGUZZA 1970, pp. 121-123: “the construction consisted of three large cubes decreasing in size as they went up, plus a little terminal lantern-tower:...a first base cube articulated in a T shape...crossed by a central arched access ... here the internal staircase was initially helical...the intermediate cube had a square plan, above which may have been the statue of Claudius ... then the cylindrical drum, slightly tapering towards the top ... and finally, on the crown, the cylindrical tower with the brazier where the fire was lit”. CHEVALLIER 1986, p. 119, agrees with the theory that the statue of Claudius stood on top of the lighthouse.

776 SIMONCINI I 1993, pp. 53-56 where the interpretations of Antonio Labacco, Pirro Ligorio, Pellegrino Tibaldi and Giorgio Vasari are also considered, some of which might take us too far away from the subject in hand and so are not listed here. 777 FLAVIO 1558, p. 41; GHERARDI XXIII, 3; SYLVIUS 1614, 301; GIULIANI 2001, p. 123. 778 I am indebted to Prof. F.Castagnoli who stood in for Prof. C.F. Giuliani on the occasion of my visit to Porto di Traiano for information about the lighthouse and new excavations. 779 GIULIANI 2001, pp. 119-120. 780 LUGLI-G.FILIBECK 1935. 781 STUHLFAUTH 1938, pp. 139-163. I have attempted to select the most important of the many representations of this lighthouse.

103

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA it might be the lighthouse at Alexandria although not completely excluding the possibility of Ostia. On top of the cupola stands a male statue with a patera and a lance. The tower seems to be linked to the dry land by a porticoed construction that some scholars have erroneously identified as the Heptastadion. It is more likely to be the usual arched mole, such as the one at Pozzuoli. The mosaic shows, I believe, an imaginary scene of a typical port, with a lighthouse similar to the archetypical one at Alexandria but not to be identified with it. Another mosaic featuring a lighthouse can be seen set into the front of a sarcophagus at the Isola Sacra necropolis at Porto (Plate 79, fig. 156a). This also has a Greek inscription on it, indicating the eastern origins of the dead man.

Reliefs: The most famous relief showing the lighthouse at Ostia is indisputably the so-called “Torlonia Relief” (Plate 76, fig. 151b) in the private collections of the Museo Torlonia. Found in the mid-nineteenth century at Porto, it shows the lighthouse as the grandiose construction described by Juvenal,782 with a very high tower of four storeys that decrease in size towards the top which finishes with the flames of the lantern. Here the male statue stands on the third floor while an access door with arched top can be seen at the bottom. There are rectangular windows on all floors. A very similar view of the lighthouse is found on a sarcophagus now in the Museo Nazionale Romano (Plate 78, fig. 154b).783 A female divinity, perhaps the personification of Portus Romae,784 holds the lighthouse in her hand. Again, it is shown with four storeys but they are slimmer than on the Torlonia Relief. Finally, a symbolic double image of the lighthouses of Alexandria and Ostia, of three and four storeys respectively, now in the Galleria Lapidaria Vaticana, shows them in the hands of the Genii of each port (Plate 78, fig. 154a).785

Tabula Peutingeriana (Plate 79, fig. 157a): The depiction of the lighthouse here is very schematic and shows a vaguely polygonal tower with four storeys that get smaller as they ascent. On the top is a cupola probably containing the lantern. In Section IV of the Tabula is another lighthouse, built on a transverse dyke in the later period, perhaps to prevent the silting up to the mouth of Trajan’s port.788

Similar representations, but without the statue, can be found on the many sarcophagi in the Isola Sacra necropolis, Porto (Plate 77, fig. 153).

Comment

Mosaics: The mosaics at Ostia are unrivalled in terms of numbers of representations of lighthouses. The function of the Piazzale delle Corporazioni,786 constructed near the theatre between the periods of Augustus and Severus, is still not fully understood, but it has yielded numerous depictions of the Ostia lighthouse. Almost all the mosaics show the lighthouse of the relevant trading city. Those showing the Ostia lighthouse have a solid four-storeyed tower, each storey smaller than the one below it. The top floor, where the fire is burning, is cylindrical (Plate 78, fig. 155). Every storey has a semicircular opening but none of the images in the Piazzale delle Corporazioni shows the male statue with lance and patera.

Given the large number of images of the Ostia lighthouse,789 we can assume they are fairly accurate. It had four storeys that became gradually smaller as they ascended. Of these, three were polygonal while the top one, in which the lantern was placed, was cylindrical. The triumphal male statue, whether portraying a deified emperor or an actual divinity, was not on the top of the tower, as at Alexandria, but in front of it or on the upper surface of one of the intermediate storeys. The lack of a statue in all the mosaics from the Piazzale delle Corporazioni and on most of the sarcophagi would seem to support this hypothesis. Furthermore, it would have made such a high building – of four storeys – significantly unstable if a statue were to be placed on its summit. The only example where the statue appears on the top of the lighthouse is on the coin of Nero’s time mentioned above, and this representation is very approximate, showing only two of the four storeys.790 If we are to be sure of the lighthouse’s precise location, new evidence will have to be found by marine archaeologists. We can, at least, be fairly sure that, in the Trajan period at least, it stood on an island that acted as an ante wall. Its appearance is likely, in my view, to be similar to the reconstruction produced by Canina in the late nineteenth century791(Plate 80, fig. 158a). The

A famous mosaic from the house of Claudius Claudianus, now in the Antiquarium Comunale del Celio in Rome, shows a ship entering port with a lighthouse (Plate 54, fig. 106), interpreted variously as Alexandria or Ostia.787 Here the lighthouse appears as a solid tower with three decreasing storeys. The bottom storey, with a rectangular doorway, is polygonal in shape; the second floor, also with a rectangular door, is square; the top storey is cylindrical and surmounted by a conical roof recalling that on the lighthouse shown on Trajan’s Column. The top storey has four Tritons on the corners, suggesting that 782

Iuv. Sat. XII, 75-80. THIERSCH 1909, p. 17; GIULIANO 1985, pp. 46-48. 784 Portus is a masculine noun, but one of its meanings is mouth (of a river), the only feminine word to which it might refer, although in this specific case I think the allusion is intended to be to the port of the city of Rome. 785 THIERSCH 1909, p. 18; STUHULFAUTH 1938, pp. 145-146. 786 For the history and theories about the function of the Piazzale see: CALZA-NASH 1989, pp. 67-70. 787 THIERSCH 1909, p. 16; REDDÉ 1979, p.866; PENSA 1999 p. 109; SALVETTI 2002, pp. 67-88. 783

788

LUGLI-FILIBECK 1935, p. 41; LEVI 1967, pp. 125, 18 ff.; BOSIO 1983, p. 112. 789 For this subject see Chapter 5. 790 A lighthouse modelled on that at Alexandria would, in my opinion, have been more likely to have added, rather than subtracted, a storey from the height of its predecessor. 791 VEITMEYER 1900, p. 20, fig. 20; THIERSCH 1909, p.19; STUHLFAUTH 1938, pp. 145-146.

104

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES version recently put forward by Silenzi seems somewhat far-fetched (Plate 80, fig. 158b).792

moles was an innovation. There seem to have been navalia and a temple in the part now occupied by Forte Michelangelo, while the horrea would have been on the piece of land corresponding to the still-existing walls built by Urban VI. To the north, immediately after the Lazzareto mole, there was a small dock, still used today (Plate 81, fig. 160).800

NO. 61 CENTUMCELLAE (Civitavecchia, Lazio) Regio VIII: Etruria Centumcellae793was founded at the beginning of the second century AD by Trajan. Probably designed by his trusted architect Apollodorus of Damascus, by building a port here Trajan hoped to reduce the numbers of ships using the port at Ostia and avoid the problems with silt from the Tiber that Ostia was experiencing.794 In addition, since the port of Ostia guaranteed contacts with Campania, Sicily and Egypt, the latter of great importance for providing wheat, the port at Centumcellae was able to provide a direct link with trade with Gaul. After various vicissitudes, in 314 AD the city became a bishopric. As late as the fifth century AD, it was still an obligatory stop for those who, like Rutilius Namazianus, sought to reach Gaul. It passed to the Byzantines in the sixth century AD and was finally abandoned in 28 AD after the Saracen conquest. The city was given a long and new life by the papacy, the embellishment of the city being assigned to artists such as Michelangelo and Bramante. The Renaissance city, which preserved a considerable amount of Trajan’s work, was destroyed by bombs in the Second World Wars and totally rebuilt shortly afterwards.795 The Roman city grew up in the same area as where it is today, on the western slope of a low hill that descends down to the Trryheanian Sea.

The lighthouse may have followed the form of that at Ostia (and hence at Alexandria) in the middle of the ante wall,801 or perhaps it never existed (but this is debatable) and its role fulfilled by the two lighthouse-towers at the ends of the moles, one of which would have operated as a proper lighthouse while the other was a Lantern. This it what happened in the period of papal rule when to these two towers was added the fort.802 No trace of a lighthouse has remained on the site and we can only imagine what it might have looked like. There are, however, a few drawings 803 dating from the Renaissance up to our time that can give an idea of how it might have been. There is slightly more to go on in the case of the lighthouse towers, mentioned by Rutilius Namazianus (turres geminae),804 known as the Torre del Bicchiere and Torre del Lazzareto. Unfortunately, the first was completely destroyed by bombs in the Second World War but photographs from the 1940s show that its architecture was exactly similar to the tower on the western mole which is still partly standing. East Mole, Torre del Bicchiere (no longer visible): the name (“Glass Tower”) derives from the tower’s unusual shape, resembling a wine glass or an upturned bell. In its rebuilt form dating from papal times, it was still standing before the war and was used as a lighthouse and small fort. In photographs from that time (Plate 81, fig. 161) the tower, constructed in opus mixtum and opus reticulatum, is circular with a diameter of 16m. It has only one storey with an entrance door above which are loopholes used by the pontifical artillery.

The lighthouse and lighthouse-towers The first artificial port was made by the Romans, even if there appears to have been a small landing stage here for small ships in the pre-Roman period.796 Pliny the Younger has left a detailed description of the port.797 It had curved moles and a curvilinear ante wall at each end of which stood a lighthouse-tower (Plate 80, fig. 159), now gone. In front of the towers was a colossal statue of Neptune, the arm of which was found in the sea and is now exhibited at the Vatican Museums.798 The eastern mole and the ante wall, both constructed by throwing rocks into the sea and building up a quay on them, were 305m long; the western mole, by contrast, was constructed on piles of cement joined by arches that both supported the quay and allowed the sea currents to flow between them.799 In the centre of the ante wall there may have been a lighthouse similar to that at Ostia. The circular form of the lighthouse-towers on the ends of the

West Mole, Torre del Lazzareto (partly visible): the strange name derives from one of the buildings constructed near the tower, in this case the leper hospital (Lazzareto). Damaged by bombing during the war, the tower would have been very similar to its twin, the Torre del Bicchiere, in being round. It has a diameter of 20m and, in its present ruined form, a height of 11m. It would have originally been at least two metres higher, with three storeys (Plate 82, fig. 162). It has two doors, one on the 800

BASTIANELLI, 1954, pp.39-46. CARUSO 1991, p. 37. QUILICI 1993, p. 68; CIALDI 1877, pp. 310-311 thought that the Roman lighthouse had been built by Apollodorus of Damascus on the island of the ante wall, and he states that, as early as 1616, Paul V had restored the lighthouse that continued in use at Civitavecchia until bombed during the Second World War. The length of its beam seems to have been quite short until, in 1880, Pius IX had a Fresnel lens installed. Today it is used as a landing light for aeroplanes, but its architecture still seems to recall, also for practical reasons, that of Trajan’s lighthouse. 803 For the cartography of the port of Civitavecchia QUILICI 1993, pp. 64-67; QUILICI 2004, pp. 111-118. 804 Rut. Nam. I, 237-244.

792

801

SILENZI 1998, fig. 98. 793 For the history of the city see ZERI 1905, pp. 239-257; CORRENTI 1990, pp.209-214. 794 There is no reference to the city, in fact, until that in Pliny the Younger’s famous letter to Cornelianus. Neither Strabo nor Mela mention it when talking about the ports of Alsium, Gravisca and Pyrgi, see CALISSE 1936, p. 16. 795 CARUSO 1991, pp. 34-39 gives a short history of the Roman port. 796 ATTUONI 1958, p. 22; REDDÉ 1986, pp. 197-201. 797 Plin. epist. VI, XXXI, 15-17, ed. Della Normale 2008. 798 CARUSO 1991, p. 37. 799 For a complete description of the port of Centumcellae BARTOCCINI 1961; QUILICI 1993, pp. 63-79; QUILICI 2004, pp. 111-114.

802

105

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA eastern side facing the harbour, the other on the north side leading to the other buildings on the mole. This tower too has loopholes, added in pontifical times for use by the artillery (Plate 82, fig. 163). In the upper part, it is still possible to see the ancient tufa opus reticulatum as well as some windows constructed in the same technique. Brickwork from the papal period has been added. The interior of the tower had a diameter of 16m. It would certainly not have had vaults like those that can be today and which date from the restoration carried out during the Renaissance. Traces of the ancient stairs that would have led up to the upper storeys where the fires were can perhaps be related to the cavity between the tower and an ancient building reused – for some unknown function – in the Renaissance. It has been suggested that it was a garrison for artillerymen,805 but it must originally have been connected with the lighthouse.806

permanently established themselves here, and it is no accident that the Itinerarium Maritimum mentions a Domitiana Posititio, Incitaria, identifiable in an area between the present-day Porto Santo Stefano and the mouth of the Albegna.807 The ports and the lighthouse-tomb Even in antiquity, the island provided sailors with two harbours. The main port, to the east, was Cala dello Spalmatoio, a small fjord some three hundred metres deep, offering a safe haven sheltered from winds from every direction except the second quadrant. The second, Cala Maestra, opens westwards and is a narrow inlet with man-made port installations connected with the villa that was built here by the sea by the Enobarbi family. There is little that can be said about the ancient buildings at the port of Cala Spalmatoio, where ships from Porto S. Stefano still tie up, since they have been almost entirely obliterated by modern constructions. The survival of vestiges of a number of cisterns808 and some structures in opus reticulatum suggest that there may have been a lighthouse here, but this is no more than hypothesis.

Comment The port of Centumcellae, created to improve facilities at the port of Ostia and facilitate trading with Gaul, seems to have had four lighthouse-towers in Roman times. One of these may have been higher than the others, a solid building with a square base and four storeys decreasing in size towards the top, the last storey being cylindrical. It would have stood, like that at Ostia, at the end of the ante wall with, in front of it, a statue of Neptune, the arm of which is today in the Vatican Museums. Facing the lighthouse, the other tower was used in papal times as a lantern, and may have has the same function in the time of Trajan (an example of a similar arrangement being the port of Leptis Magna (No. 4) where there was a monumental lighthouse and a smaller signal tower. Of the other two towers, standing on the ends of the moles, only the Lazzareto tower remains. Their round shape is not unusual and, indeed, a similar lighthouse is shown in one of the mosaics from Piazzale delle Corporazioni at Ostia (Plate 83, fig. 164). The survival of one of the towers is explained by its reuse in Renaissance times and its modest size that was less liable to collapse. It represents a structure of major importance in the history of ancient lighthouses.

Thanks to investigations carried out in the early nineteenth century by Marie Louise, regent of the Kingdom of Etruria, we know rather more about the villa and the landing stage at Cala Maestra (Plate 83, fig. 165). As it appears now, the villa dates from the time of Nero. Approaching from the sea, it appears as a truncated pyramid standing high up on a cliff (Plate 84, fig. 166). The building has completely lost the opus reticoluatum still visible in the early twentieth century, revealing the opus incertum and a base of just over 10m. In view of its mausoleum-like shape, typical of the imperial period, and its topographical position, I would agree with Cavazzuti that this was a lantern-lighthouse. Following the example of Taposiris Magna (No. 7), however, I would suggest that it was also a lighthouse-tomb or funerary monument for one of the Enobarbi family, used at night to illuminate the little creek.809 NO. 63 IGILUM (Giglio Island, Tuscany o) Regio VII: Etruria

NO. 62 DIANUM-ARTEMISIUM (Giannutri Island, Tuscany) Regio VII: Etruria

Although the greater part of archaeological evidence about the constructions on the island was investigated by the Enobarbi family, finds by marine archaeologists off the northern coast near Punta Lazzareto suggest that the island was used as a port even in pre-Roman times. Nero built several imposing villas here, complete with harbours

Anyone wishing to sail to the emporia of Sardinia and Corsica from Portus Cosanus would have had to call in at this port. Artemisia is briefly referred to in the sources as the smallest island in the Tuscan Archipelago, with the exception of Gorgona. Although exposed to the wind, particularly the scirocco and libeccio, the island was a useful stopping place on the sea routes across the Tyrrhenian. In Roman times, the port of Giannutri, although less well set up than the nearby port on the island of Giglio, was the first landing place after Ostia on the routes to the larger islands. The Enobarbi family 805 806

807 PELLEGRINI 193 , pp. 609-623; VACCARINO FORESTO 1935, pp. 125153; GIANFROTTA 1989, pp. 321-322; RENDINI-GAMBOGI-POGGESI 1992, pp. 3-7; CIAMPOLTRINI-RENDINI 2004, pp.140-147. 808 For the Roman villa see particularly CAVAZZUTI 1998, pp. 121-124. 809 VACCARINO FORESTO 1935, pp. 133-136 mentions the discovery of some columns of Lunese marble that may relate to this building; BRONSON-UGGERI 1970, p. 207 have no hesitation in affirming that the construction at Monte Mario is an octagonal-shaped lighthouse, CAVAZZUTI 1998, p. 138.

BASTIANELLI 1954, pp. 39-40. For the lighthouse-towers: QUILICI 1993, pp. 68-76.

106

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES and fisheries, as we know from the structures in opus incertum still visible on the island.810

discovery of amphorae bearing seals relating to the Sestii’s fishery in the nearby Cosa lagoon where there was also a temple to Neptune. The dirty water and detritus from the lagoon were carried away by a system of canals, the most famous of which is the still visible Tagliata.817

The port and the lighthouse The Roman port, 179 braccia in length, lies beneath the modern mole at Giglio Porto (begun in 1796) and is therefore difficult to reconstruct. It is clear that, in its early period, the Roman port made use of the sheltered natural inlet with its beach and nearby river where it was also possible to haul boats. At a later date, the mole was built onto the extreme eastern end of the port to provide greater protection from adverse southern winds.811

At the end of the 1980s, research was done on an interesting ex-voto (Plate 85, fig. 168) in the shape of a tower from the temple of Vulci, not far from the port at Cosa.818 The ex-voto had always been interpreted as one of the buildings standing next to the temple of Vulci, near which it was discovered. It was not possible, however, to establish a link between the temple and the tower. Zancani Montuoro819 was the first to suggest that the little clay model portrayed the Cosa lighthouse. Unfortunately, it was not possible to identify its place in the port, but its existence is not disputed by Brown, a scholar who devoted so many years of work to a study of the port at Cosa.820 The Vulci model seems to show the most common type of lighthouse, being square with an arched entrance and rectangular window placed high up on the structure. The ex-voto with two more storeys, of which only the latter had significantly smaller dimensions compared to that of the model. The second storey looked almost like a loggia with two windows on each side, an arrangement of which we have no other examples. The top storey, roughly cylindrical, had an opening on each side through which shone the light of the lantern, In addition to an internal stair that must have led to the storey with the loggia, it is thought that there may also have been a flight of steps on the exterior from the top storey to the summit on which the fire would be lit.821

The lighthouse, by contrast, stood on the top of the cliff. Remains of it have been found in the area of Castellare del Port (owner, Santamaria), the place name making clear its function as a look-out tower for the port. Still visible is an octagonal base with steps leading up on the south-west side. A small fort was built over the ruins of the tower, thus destroying much of what remained of the ancient lighthouse812 but which must have been similar to that at Dubris (No. 76). NO. 64 PORTUS COSANUS (Cosa, Ansedonia, Tuscany) Regio VII: Etruria The Roman city of Cosa was established on a rocky promontory 114m ASL, 7 south-east of Orbetello.813 Historical references to the Roman colonia, mainly found in Livy, are few but it appears that the period of greatest prosperity was the second century BC. In the course of the next century, the inhabitants began to abandon the colonia in favour of the road station at Succosa, near the port.814 The city was inhabited once more in the medieval period until the population was forced to flee in 1329 by a Sienese army .815

Another object of great interest is an amphora found in the sea marked with the initials SES, meaning that it was connected with the Sestii, a family with property at Portus Cosanus. Immediately below the initials is a sketch that seems to show a lighthouse, a small tower with a fire on the top (Plate 85, fig. 169a), very similar to another rough sketch of a lighthouse discovered in the medieval tower in the port of Velia in Campania (Plate 85, fig. 169b). Archaeological evidence seems to have been identified at the end of the 1980s at a depth of 2.5m and called by McCann “Pier 5” (Plate 86, fig. 170). In his opinion, everything points to this being part of the base of the Cosa lighthouse, situated on a spot offering ships excellent protection from summer winds.

The port and the lighthouse Portus Cosanus (Plate 84, fig. 167), one of the first examples of a port constructed in opus caementicium, guaranteed contacts with the ports of Caieta in central Italy and Luna in southern Italy. It appears from the few remains in situ and in the sea that the mole was made by filling wooden moulds (arcae) with cement, onto the top of which were attached round wooden poles. This suggests a mole that was not made of joined pilae, as was the case with most of the ports analysed so far, but of free-standing pylons. so allowing the water to flow in and out of some of the natural inlets.816 At the end of the second century BC, the fishing port of Cosa was controlled by the Sestii family and used for the export of wine and garum. Evidence for this comes from the

817 For problems relating to the port, the laguna and the Tagliata see: MCCANN-LEWIS 1970, pp.201-211; BROWN 1980; MCCANNBOURGEOIS 1987. 818 STACCIOLI 1968, pp. 24-28, Plate XII. 819 ZANCANI MONTUORO 1979, pp. 5-29. 820 ZANCANI MONTUORO 1979, pp. 6-7: the identification with Cosa is also made because the temple of the Vulci was an exact copy of temple D situated on the arx at Cosa. 821 ZANCANI MONTUORO 1979, pp. 10-18.

810

For the history of the island see also ROANI VILLANI 1993 and RENDINI 1999, pp. 68-78. 811 CIAMPOLTRINI-RENDINI 2004, p. 139. 812 BRONSON-UGGERI 1970, p. 204. 813 Verg. Aen. X, 168; Strab. V, 2, 8; Plin. nat. III, 5 814 Liv. ann. II, 39, 2. 815 For the history of Portus Cosanus see: LENZI 1905, pp. 224-225. 816 FELICI-BADERI 1997, pp. 12-16.

107

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA NO. 66 PORTUS VADORUM-BERGEGGI (Isola di Bergeggi, Liguria) Regio IX: Liguria

Comment With regard to the hypothesis that the Vulci model portrays the Cosa lighthouse, there are, in my view, two possibilities. Either it is an ex-voto to Neptune asking the god to give the port of Cosa lighthouse (which it did not then have), or, as I think more probable, the ex-voto was, despite being found near a temple, a souvenir, like the vase from Begràm (Plate 12, fig. 23a), the pottery lamp from Libarna (cap. 3, fig. 17) or the lamp now in Alexandria, acquired on his travels by some pilgrim or soldier. When compared, these object show many similarities. The architecture of the lighthouse supports this hypothesis. The upper loggia is conjectural and should not be taken as a true representation. More convincing by far is the hypothesis that the underwater “Pier 5” was part of the foundations of the tower.

This island, Isola di Bergeggi (Plate 87, fig. 172), 10km from Savona, is no longer inhabited but has archaeological remains dating from the pre-Roman times to the Middle Ages. Also known as S. Eugenio, after a Carthaginian bishop who is erroneously believed to have been born and died here, the main function of the island in Roman times was to send signals to the nearby port of Vada Sabatia for those coming from Gaul. The port at Vada, developed in the second century BC on the furthest end on the coast of the via Aemilia Scauri, used the landing on the island of Bergeggi as a fishery, although archaeological inspections have not yet been carried out. When the port at Vada fell into disuse after the destruction wreaked by Ataulfo’s Goths, the then insula Liguriae was abandoned, later becoming a refuge for hermit monks. The Roman walls were not reused until a century later when a basilica – still partly visible - was built. In 1162 Pope Alexander III, pursued by Barbarossa, came here before attempting to escape to France.825

NO. 65 INDUSTRIA (Monteu da Po, Piedmont) Regio IX: Transpadana Originally a Ligurian village called Bodincomagus (meaning “market on the river” in Celtic), this city became a Roman colonia and was renamed Industria in 123 BC after Marcus Fulvius Flaccus’s victories in the region. He was also responsible for the entire Romanisation of Montferrat and of the Ligurians and Salluvii.822 The city was abandoned in Late Antiquity and the Isiac sanctuary possibly burned down.

The tower-lighthouse In order to send signals to the port of Vada Sabatia, the Romans built a round white tower on the island. Part of it is still visible today but difficult of access as it is on private land. At the end of the nineteenth century, D’Andrade obtained the following measurements: 7.5m high, 10.5m in diameter and 0.95m thick (Plate 88, fig. 171b).826

The port and the lighthouse Pliny823 includes Industria in his list of noble cities of Transpadana. This colonia was particularly rich and populated, not least because of its favourable position at the confluence of the rivers Dora Baltea and Po. Thanks to this strategic position, Industria became an important river hub with a port, as yet unlocated, and a famous Isiac sanctuary. It was able to import the supplies of metals that it needed for the production of its famed worked metal thanks to ships that were able to sail up the Dora Baltea. The Po gave it easy and direct links with the major river emporia of Regio X and thus also with the city ports of the Adriatic.

The circular lighthouse-tower (Plate 87, fig. 173), dated by Lamboglia827 to somewhere between the second and the fourth centuries AD, stands on a three-sided embankment. It is constructed of pieces of split local stone, slightly thinner than is usual for other RomanLigurian constructions of the third-second century III-II sec. These layers of masonry superimposed and offset appear to grow gradually smaller,828 following the typical pattern of lighthouse architecture. Access seems to have been by a wooden staircase on the exterior of the tower. Between the ninth and tenth centuries AD, a square coastal tower was erected on the ruins of the Roman lighthouse, probably to protect against Saracens.829

In the 1960s, an oval piece of blue glass paste was discovered, showing a female figure with a cornucopia leaning against a column or a lighthouse.824 If the building is taken to be a lighthouse, it is tempting to think that the artist wanted to suggest that, thanks to the lighthouse identifying the port of Industria, the city had become rich (hence the cornucopia). Only future excavations and research will be able to establish the exact site of the port (very probably somewhere very close to the confluence of the two rivers) and perhaps even its lighthouse.

NO. 67 FORUM IULII (Fréjus, Var, France) Provincia: Gallia Narbonensis While the Greeks of Marseille in Gallia Narbonensis used Athenopolis (Saint Tropez) and Heraclea Caccabaria (Cavalaire) as their ports, Forum Iulii (Plate 88, fig. 174) 825

For the history of the island see: FRONDONI 1987, pp. 403-406. RICCI 1998, pp. 18-31. I would like to thank Geom. Laura Garrello of the Comune di Bergeggi for kindly sending me a copy of this book, otherwsie difficult to obtain. I am grateful also to Dott.ssa Elena Taddeo for information about the island. SPADEA-MARTINO 2004, pp. 259-266. 826 D’ANDRADE 1899 see RICCI 1998, p. 18. 827 LAMBOGLIA 1939, p. 192. 828 POGGI 1905, pp. 64-65. 829 LAMBOGLIA 1998, p. 28.

822

GULLINI 1967; ZANDA 1993, pp. 29-46. Plin. nat. III, 49, 122. 824 GULLINI 1976, p. 381. 823

108

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES was the first port to be created by the Romans in the provincia of Gallia. After the destruction by Julius Caesar of Marseille in 49 BC, in about BC a new city was created, perhaps by Anthony, with a strategic role both by land and by sea. Forum Iulii, built on the western-most point of a sandstone ledge reaching a maximum height of 33.7m, became the commercial centre of the road leading from Spain to Aix-en-Provence passing through the valley of the Argens river. Octavian and Agrippa developed Caesar’s port into one of the many arsenals linked to the main ports around Rome. In 39 BC, the port had been the chief naval base in the fight against Sextus Pompeius. Despite this, the port fell into a decline from the time of Marcus Aurelius until it began to be used again in the Middle Ages until at least as late as the sixteenth century.830

as the lighthouse of the Roman city of Fréjus (Plate 89, fig. 176).835 The solid structure of the building, the fact that it has no openings, the absence of a stair giving access to the top to light the fires, together with its low height (10.5m) had already led nineteenth-century scholars to the conclusion that this was not a lighthouse, but merely a tower marking the entrance to the port.836 The Lanterne is very reminiscent of the tower on the Sigeus promontory on the Hellespont mentioned by the poet Leschetes in the Little Iliad and thought by Thiersch and Veitmeyer to be the first lighthouse in history (Chapter 1, fig. 1 a). In my view, however, this tower never existed except in the epics of the eighth century.837 Assuming that the Lanterne d’Auguste was not a lighthouse838 but merely an indication of the entrance to the port, there is the less straightforward question of the tower to the west of the Butte St.Antoine and lined up with it, opposite the Lanterne. This tower (Plate 89, figs 177 a,b) is in such a poor state of repair that there are fears for its survival. It stands to the west of the fortress to a height of 25m. Its position, higher up than not only the lantern but also the two smaller defensive towers of the Butte St.Antoine, has led to the belief that this was the true lighthouse of Fréjus, and known as such (Le Phare) to the local people. Texier has produced a fascinating reconstruction of the building (Plate 90, fig. 178).839

The port and the lighthouses The port was constructed by incorporating a nearby lagoon, a channel diverted from the Argens831 being used to carry away soil and debris that might cause the harbour to silt up. An irregular polygon, 22 hectares in length, was constructed to protect the port in addition to a powerful surrounding wall, still partly visible, and two artificial islands to act as fortresses, that to the north-east being called the Platte-forme and that to the south-west, the Butte St. Antoine. The entrance to the harbour (about 80m wide) was protected by two towers connected by a chain. One of these, the Lanterne d’Auguste still remains. The proper lighthouse stood out to sea opposite Saint Raphael on the small island of Lion de mer in the entrance to the port near the Butte St. Antoine and exactly in line with Lanterne d’Auguste.832 For a long time, the latter, situated at the entrance to the port of Fréjus was thought to be the lighthouse of the Roman city. Restored in the nineteenth century, it is now a curious-looking tower constructed on a solid base dating from Roman times. More square than semicircular, despite what some scholars have said, the second storey is hexagonal, topped by a prismatic roof (Plate 88, fig. 175).833 There must once have been a corresponding tower facing this one, similar in appearance and function.834 The idea that the tower was the lighthouse of the city’s port came about after study of a manuscript by the eighteenth-century geographer Anville, now in the National Library of Aixen-Provence, that refers to a drawing by the Provencal painter J.A.Constantin showing the Lanterne d’Auguste

The land around this tower is now mainly under cultivation and in private hands. According to Texier, the tower would have had two polygonal storeys with a third, cylindrical, one on top for the lantern. The top of the tower was reached by internal stairs reached through an arched door, 3m in diameter, that is still in a good state of preservation. (Plate 90, fig. 179).840 The presence of a number of holes on the exterior of the building suggests that there may have been an exterior stair similar to that at Brigantium (see No. 73, Plate 104, fig. 206b). The presence of a statue on top of the building, while typical of lighthouse architecture, is purely conjectural. The masonry of the building is in opus vittatum and brick, exactly like the lighthouse-tower at Baro Zavalea (No. 42) in the mouth of the Po and dating more or less from the same period.

835

AUBENAS 1974, pp. 494-499. LENTHERIC 1880, pp. 343-344; GÉBARA 1998, p. 56. 837 RENARD 1867, p. 5; LENTHERIC 1880, p. 344; VEITMEYER 1900 p. 6; THIERSCH 1909, p. 26. 838 Now that it has become clear that the Lanterne was not the lighthouse of Forum Iulii, and in view of the many studies on this subject, I refer only briefly to this building. For a complete account of the different interpretations see: AUBENAS 1974, pp. 498-508. 839 DICTIONNAIRE 1906, p. 432; THIERSCH 1909, p. 26, Abb. 38-39; SAUTEL-IMBERT 1929, p. 22; EAA, Rome 1960, p. 596; FÉVRIER 1963, p. 45; LEGER, 1979, p.506; BEDON 1988, p. 59; GÉBARA 1998, pp. 4243 states that the tower was thought for a long time to be a lighthouse but does not explicitly confirm this, interpreting the group of buildings of the Butte St.Antoine as a large residential area, possibly relating to the prefect of the fleet. 840 DONNADIEU 1928, pp. 24-26. 836

830

FÉVRIER 1959, p. 210. According to some views, this canal is the same as that used in the sixteenth century, still visible and known as the Canal des Moulins. More than 80m wide, it is 460m long; see BROGAN 1953, pp. 94-95; CHEVALLIER 1979, p. 24. The city is mentioned as Augustus’s navel base in Strab. IV, 1, 8; 1,9, 184; as claustra maris in Tac. ann. III, 49. For an account of the excavations: FÉVRIER 1979, pp. 6-17; LEGER 1979, pp. 468-474; REDDÉ 1986, pp. 171-177. 832 EAA, Rome 1960, pp. 747-748. Essential texts for the history of Fréjus and its port: AUBENAS 1974; TEXIER 1846; DONNADIEU 1927; FÉVRIER 1977; GÉBARA 1998. 833 LEHAMANN-HARTLEBEN 1963, p. 173. 834 RIVET 1988, p. 229. 831

109

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA There are those scholars who disagree, however. Formigé,841 for example, taking Constantin’s print for a depiction of the Butte St.Antoine, rejects Texier’s interpretation. Maria Bollini too, citing excavations carried out in the 1960s, rejects the idea that the third tower of the Butte St.Antoine was a lighthouse.842 She concludes that Fréjus did not have a lighthouse at all, a risky assertion in my view. Remains of a cement building, interpreted as the base of a lighthouse, have been found on the island known as Lion de mer, situated, as it happens, exactly opposite the tower called Le Phare, towards St. Raphael (Plate 91, figs 180, 181).843

immediately in front of that on the Butte St Antoine, then if the tower known as Le Phare possessed a lantern, then we would have another example of a monumental lighthouse positioned either at the end of the mole, as at Leptis Magna (No. 4) or, as in the case of Forum Iulii, on an island with, on the other side, a lantern, a building of slightly smaller dimensions. Another possible hypothesis might be similar to the arrangement at Centumcellae with a monumental lighthouse on an island (Lion de mer), acting as an ante wall, three lighthouse-towers, one of which was larger (the three towers of Butte St. Antoine, one of which, called Le Phare, being bigger) and two lanterns or, more likely, indications of the port entrance (the Lanterne d’Auguste and its matching tower now disappeared along the walls that protected the mole). It is clear that at Fréjus there has been considerable confusion, not least because of the names traditionally given to some of the city’s ancient and medieval buildings: here we have a signal tower called Le Phare and a marker for the port entrance called a Lanterne.

Comment It is inconceivable that the port of Fréjus, Augustus’s naval base, designed along the lines of Portus Iulius and the port at Ravenna, could have been without a lighthouse (and a monumental one at that) to help sailors find the port entrance. This was also marked by two small 10m high towers, one of which, the Lanterne d’Auguste, is still visible today. Near it are remains of the walls protecting the entrance channel. The first lighthouse, in opus vittatum and brick,844 stood on a man-made island known from its shape as Lion de mer.845 A later lighthouse, functioning perhaps as a lantern, stood on the fortress now known as the Butte St. Antoine after a nearby basilica dedicated to St Anthony. Many scholars now reject the view that this was a lighthouse, preferring the hypothesis that it was a large tower forming part of the city walls. It was protected by two small defensive towers of over 10m in height and, according to Texier’s reconstruction, had the typical features of the Alexandria lighthouse: a three storey tower getting smaller towards the top, the last storey of which was cylindrical and surmounted by a statue.846 Many scholars agree, however, that this building was used as a signal tower (or perhaps just as a defensive tower in the medieval period), put there to allow communication between the walls protecting the port and the entrance to the city proper. If, as it appears, the remains of the lighthouse seem clearly to be those on the island of Lion de mer, nevertheless, the cylindrical shape of the tower on Butte St. Antoine and the presence of holes suggesting an external stair leading up to the upper storeys together with an entrance door points to this being a lighthouse too. If the lighthouse had been the one on Lion de mer, this tower being situated

NO. 68 FOSSA MARIANAE-ARELATE (Fos-surMer; Arles, Bouches-du-Rhône, Provence, France) Provincia: Gallia Narbonensis Fossa Marianae: The entrance to the channel constructed by Marius between 105 and 102 BC during the wars against the Teutons and named after him, opened into the present-day harbour at Fos-sur-Mer. The port of Fossa Marianae, on the banks of the Rhône, served the city of Arles in much the same way as Ostia did Rome. It is perhaps no accident that on Section I.5 of the Tabula Peutingeriana (Plate 92, fig. 182b) we find the same wording.847 Strabo states that Marius made a gift of the manmade canal on the Rhône to the Massaliots who derived great benefit from it by imposing a toll on those sailing up and down it.848 He adds that access to the waterway was difficult because of the current, the alluvial deposits and the dip in the landscape that meant that, in bad weather, it was almost impossible to see the entrance. This comment is of great interest here because it is reported that the Massaliots built signal towers to aid navigation and these can only have been lighthouses. One of these towers seems to have been identified on the “island” of Roque d’Odor (Plates 92, 93, figs 183184).849 It should be noted, however, that no source 847

LEVI 1967, pp. 125-126. The fact that this camp, as is well known, also served as the port gives further weight to the view that the tower at Arleate was not the city’s lighthouse but, as mentioned earlier, a tower on the city walls. Some schlars, including Pascal Arnaud of the University of Marseille, have suggested that the inscription ostia is a mistake made by the copyist of the Tabula, which would explain why the illustration iloos very similar to that for Ostia. This raises the question, however, of why the lighthouse on the artificial island is not mentioned. Furthermore, it would be quite appropriate to use the Latin term ostium, meaning both “entry into the port” and “mouth of the river” for this site. Similarly, fossa can be translated as “navigable canal”, see FRANZOT 1999, pp. 26-27. For a history of Fossae Marianae: DESJARDIN 1876, pp. 199-214 where the author points out that the site was known in medieval times as Castellaz; CHEVALLIER 1982, pp. 26-27 ; DE IZARRA 1993, pp. 20-21. 848 Strab. IV, 1, 8; BOSIO 1983. 849 FERRI 2000, p. 260, note 82; for the excavations at Fos: EYDOUX 1961, pp. 201-220; the discovery of the tower of Roque d’Odor had

841

FORMIGE 1937, p. 104. A.A.V.V 1938, pp. 28-33. 842 BOLLINI 1968, pp. 46-49, on the lighthouses pp. 71-74. 843 AUBENAS 1974, pp. 536-538. 844 For the building techniques used in the Roman buildings of Fréjus see: FÉVRIER 1956, pp. 153-184. 845 Giradin, Villneuve and Senéquier de Grasse mention this island and the remains of the lighthouse that could still be seen in the nineteenth century, see AUBENAS 1974, pp. 596-598, however the subject is dealt with separately from that of the lighthouse of the Butte St. Antoine. 846 For the interpretation of the tower of the Butte St.Antoine as a lighthouse see also: CLÉBERT 1970, p.107; A.A.V.V 2001, p. 168. My thanks to Prof. Jean Houben who kindly send me by email details of the new interpretations and photographs of the lighthouse at Fréjus: it is no longer believed that the tower of the Butte St.Antoine was ever a lighthouse, although it may have been a signal tower. I am grateful to Prof. P.Arnaud of the University of Marseille for information and assistance.

110

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES earlier than the Itinerarium Antonini and the Tabula Peutingeriana mentions Fossa Marianae as a portus.850 Arelate: Caesar’s naval base in the conquest of Marseille,851 the city had two ports, a river port on the left bank and a sea port on the right bank. Corresponding to the latter, situated exactly in the present-day district of Trinquetaille near Place Jouvène, was what must have been a Roman lighthouse, referred to by Anne de Rulman in the seventeenth century as the Tour du Fabre 852 (Plate 93, fig. 185a ):”It is still possible to see an arch of Roman architecture, the only remaining one of the four that were once there. In ancient times beams of wood were placed on them to support torches with which to guide sailors”.853 At the end of the nineteenth century, Leger produced a reconstruction of the Tour d’Arles, showing it as a lighthouse with three storeys decreasing in size towards the top which finished with a cupola. Standing on a small hill, it was hexagonal with a solid cylindrical base (Plate 93, fig. 185b).854 Leger quoted a remark by Peirsec referring to the phare de Arles but this document has never been traced by French scholars. Constans, however, has found further confirmation in the form of a document written by the Abbé de Tersan where, annotating some drawings by Beaumensil, he mentions the Arles lighthouse, destroyed in 1489 and now, in his time, a ruin.855 Other writers describing the lighthouse include Jeahn Porréal, in the service of Charles VIII, who says that he has taken his description from the two previous mentioned authors. The building had three storeys including a base of large dressed stones, wider than the tower it supported. Thus the tower would have had two storeys, both hexagonal, with an arched window on each face. The first storey was decorated with Doric columns, the second with ionic columns and capitals,

with, on the top, a cupola where the lantern would have been housed.856 Comment After the destruction of Massalia by Julius Caesar in 49 BC, the Massaliots sought to raise funds to reconstruct an efficient port by imposing tolls on river traffic in the Rhône delta leading to the sea and river ports of Arelate. To do this, they built lighthouse-towers that were also toll stations (one of which was found at Roque d’Odor, though it now no longer exists) that regulated the water traffic and aided navigation in the marshy area between the estuaries of the Fos and the Stomalimne. In the third century AD, the city of Fos constructed its own port which seems to have been at its peak in the fourth century, as mentioned in the Tabula Peutingeriana and the Itinerarium Antonini .857 The situation regarding the lighthouse at Arles is less clear. There is no mention of one until the seventeenth century when a Protestant lawyer from Nîmes, Anne de Rulman, writing in 1686, asserted that the ruins of what was known as the Tour de Fabre could be seen at that time in Place Jouvène, and that this was nothing other than the ancient Roman lighthouse of Arelate. The Abbé de Tersan tells us, however, that this tower was already destroyed in 1489, contradicting Rulman’s remarks. The drawings mentioned by Leger, on which he based his reconstruction of the lighthouse (reminiscent of the mausolea at Glanum), have not been traced, causing some scholars to conclude that the document in question is a false one, or that there has been an error in the transcription of the document. NO. 69 NARBO MARTIUS (Narbonne, Golfe du Lyon, France) Provincia: Gallia Narbonensis

already been mentioned in BEDON 1988, p. 59, where there s also reference to a lighthouse, still intact in the seventeenth century and still visible at the beginning of the twentieth century in the lake at Vendres, used as the port for Besara (Béziers). For the history di Béziers see: CHEVALLIER 1979, p. 93. For an overview of the ports of the Narbonensis see: LEGER 1979, pp. 468-476. 850 DESJARDINS 1876, pp. 200-206 argues on the basis of this that the port at Fos developed in the early third century AD, reaching its period of greatest prosperity in the fourth century AD when there my have been an island between the Fos and the Stomalimne estuaries, where the Massalioti built a temple dedicated to Artemis Ephesia mentioned by Strabo who described the lighthouse;towers are being next to it, see Strab. IV, 1, 8. Desjardins’s theories seem to be confirmed by the fact that Solinus (Solin. II, 53) states that , in his day, much benefit was derived from navigation in the area around Fos. It seems likely, therefore, that, in the time of Augustus and Strabo, the canal served exclusively as a river toll. It would not have been until the third century AD that it began to be used as a proper portus, perhaps partly as a result of geological changes. 851 BROGAN 1953, p. 90. 852 Anne de Rulman, Bibliothéque Nationale, ms. Fr. 8649, fol. 213. 853 COSTANS 1921, p. 338 challenges Anne de Rulman’s (1626-1628) view that the name was a corruption of Tour du Phare, asserting that the tower, medieval in origin, was simply part of the city walls, its name being perhaps dervied from a fire that destroyed it. For a modern view of the city’s history HEIJMANS 2006. 854 RENARD 1881, pp. 10-11; BONNARD 1913, p. 134; COSTANS 1921, p. 339; LEGER 1979, p. 507: where mention is made of a round lighthouse surmounted by a cylindirical storey, smaller in diameter, topped by an elegant lantern, similar to the mausoleum of Saint-Remy at Glanum. 855 Abbé de Tersan, Bibliothéque Nationale, ms.fr. 6954, f05 46 verso and 47.

The first colonia in Gallia, this city was situated on the banks of the river Atax,858 now called the Aude, 18km from present-day Narbonne (Plate 94, fig. 186). Nothing now remains except the Canal de la Robine. The city played an important military role in the war against the Cimbri, in Pompey’s campaigns in Spain, in Julius Caesar’s conquest of Gallia and in the battle between Julius Caesar and Pompey in 49 BC. It became so fine a city that it was described by Martial as pulcherrima. In 145-50 AD, it was badly damaged by fire. Antonius Pius carried out restoration work but, in the meantime, the commercial importance of nearby Arelate had grown to such an extent that, in the third century AD, it took over from Narbonne. Badly damaged by Barbarian invasions in 276 AD, Narbonne saw a return to prosperity in the early fifth century and was, for a long period, fought over 856

CONSTANS 1921, pp. 339-341. Itin. Anton. 52, 298,3-299,4 in CALZOLARI 1996, p. 464. 858 Strab. IV, 1, 6. For the city: HELÉNA 1937; SOLIER 1979, pp. 36-50; for the port: GAYROUD 1981, pp. 522-530, CHEVALLIER 1982, pp. 6567; ROUGÉ 1966, pp. 155-156 asserted that the waterways were used solely for the sorting of goods that took place in the area of the étangs, but the materials were brought mainly overland. DE IZZARRA 1993, includes Narbonne on the list of lake ports on account of the navigation on the étangs. 857

111

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA by the Romans and the Visigoths, ending up in Visigoth hands in 462 AD.859

la Nouvelle lie together, divided only by the island of Ste. Lucie near Port-la-Nouvelle and the island of Saint Martin near Gruissan and only a spit of sand separates them from the Mediterranean. The tower, built of local stone from the island of Ste Lucie, is in a ruined state and stands among a small group of dilapidated houses. It seems to have two storeys, the first and bigger one is square, the second is octagonal. There was, no doubt, a cylindrical third storey from which the light of the lantern would have shone.865 The fact that the tower has collapsed is useful, however, from the point of view of architectural analysis since it shows the building in section. One is struck immediately by a barrel-vaulted ceiling (though this may be seventeenth-century work carried out by Vauban to shore up the tower) and the presence of windows at the top. On clear days, it is possible to see from the tower to the island of Saint Martin where there are structures rebuilt in the early or later medieval period that may stand on earlier constructions.

The port and the lighthouses: la Tour de Vauban and the other towers The Roman city, established on the Via Domitia (a few stretches of which have recently been discovered in Place Hotel de Ville) in 118 BC, was described by Strabo as the biggest trading port in the provincia.860 It must without doubt have had a lighthouse and some scholars have suggested that it is depicted in the famous mosaic of the Navicularii Narbonensis, in the Piazzale delle Corporazioni in Ostia (Plate 94, fig. 187).861 Remains of the quays of the inner harbour have been found at Port la Nautique, a few kilometres from the modern city. The first harbour must, however, have been situated in the area of the étangs (lakes) around present-day Port-laNouvelle, close to the industrial zone and the popular beach Plage de la Vieille Nouvelle. As time went by, the port situated where Port La Nautique now is increased in importance. Subsequently, when the course of the river Aude moved right away from the city, this port was in turn abandoned and the previous one was reinstated. Later, in the third century AD, this was replaced by a new port area situated between Saint-Martin near Gruissan and Grau de la Vieille Nouvelle, both of which look over the Étang de l’Ayrolle to the Mediterranean.862 Remains of a number of towers, altered in the post-Roman period, can be found near present-day Port de la-Nouvelle (Plate 95, fig. 189), in the medieval castle at Gruissan on the Grau de Grazel (Plate 96, fig. 191) and near the island of Saint Martin on the Grau de la Vieille Nouvelle and at Cap Romain..863

Comment In pre-Roman times, but not before the fourth century BC, the main port may have been situated on the island of Ste Lucie.866 Narbonne later had three ports and, probably, the same number of lighthouses or lighthousetowers. The central emporium was where Port La Nautique now is (4km from the modern city).867 The étangs on the Mediterranean continued to be used, however, and the Tour de Vauban and perhaps a tower, where today we can see the remains of a chapel dedicated to St Martin on the island of the same name, must once have been in communication. The site of the lighthouse at Port la Nautique has not been found, partly because the area is once more in use as a port. The Tour de Vauban, near the Etang de Ayrolles at Plage de la Vieille Nouvelle is likely to be the successor to the Roman lighthouse. Similarly, in all probability, there must have been another tower - to assist sailors in the difficult waters of the étangs and to warn them when they might run aground at low tide – on the present site of the ruined chapel of St Martin.

On the long stretch of sand called Plage de la Vieille Nouvelle, near Port- la-Nouvelle, 25km from Narbonne, is an area of lakes and the end of one of which (Grau de la Vieille Nouvelle) are the remains of a tower that was certainly used as a lighthouse and known as the Tour de Vauban (Plates 95, 96, figs 189, 190).864 What we see today, however, appears to belong to a seventeenthcentury structure although we known that Gruissan existed in medieval times and perhaps earlier.

NO. 70 CARTEIA (San Roque, Andalusia, Spain) Provincia: Baetica

Topographical investigation in this area is complex: the Étang de Gruissan, Grau de la Vieille Nouvelle and Grau

The first Phoenician settlement is known to have been on the left bank of the river Guadarranque, in an area known as Cerro del Prado and inhabited since the seventh or sixth century BC. The Phoenicians were followed by the Carthaginians who found this an ideal spot near to the

859

ATLAS 2001, p. 230. Strab. VI, 1,6. BROGAN 1953, pp. 88-89; BEDON-CHEVALLIER-PINON 1988, p. 315; ATLAS 2001, p. 232. Cic. Font. V, 12 describes the colonia of Narbo Martius as specula populi Romani. For the river ports of Gallia see: DE IZARRA 1993. 862 GAYRAUD 1981, fig. 63; GAYRAUD 1989, pp. 114; 132-133. 863 BEDON 1988, p. 59 mentions remains near Grau de la Vieille Nouvelle on the island of Saint Martin, near Gruissan, near Cap Romain, also asserting that the Tour de Barbarosse in the ancient castle of Gruissan was built on the foundations of a Roman building. 864 GUY 1955, p. 234. GAYROUD 1981, p. 530 discusses lighthouses and watchtowers on the site of the castle at Gruissan, at Cap Romain, at Vieux Chateau de Saint Martin, a small construction of 5x5m on the island of di Planasse and another of 8.30x2.30 at Saint Michel, on the Plateau de Caussagues, facing the island of Sainte Lucie and the Étang d’Aute, with a dolia warehouse for the production of wine. 860 861

865 Although the tower must have been altered in later centuries, its basic shape seems similar to that show in the mosaic at Piazzale delle Coroporazioni in Ostia; GUY 1955, p. 234 suggests that the Tour de Barbarosse at Gruissan (Plate 96, fig. 191) was a guardhouse that may also have been used as a lighthouse, structures that must certainly have existed at both Vieille Nouvelle and St. Michel, on the Plateau de Cassargues that dominates the western shore of the Étang Sigean, where it is possible to see a platform 8.30x2 30m in size on which were found two dolia and which must have supported a lighthouse. 866 GUY 1955, pp. 224; 236. 867 GUY 1955, pp. 214-236; GAYROUD 1981, p. 524.

112

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES present-day Straits of Gibraltar. Made a Roman colonia in 171 BC and often identified with Tartessos, the city remained more or less unchanged until a large Italic temple was built. This was followed by more development, including city walls and defensive towers, some of which may have been used as watchtowers or lighthouses (Plate 97, fig. 192).868

imply that the Roman port lay well away from the site of the modern city of Cadiz. The arsenal mentioned in historic sources refers to a well-developed port and not a mere positio. Matters are further complicated by indications in the itineraries. The Vicarello vases mention a place called Ad Portum, 24 miles from Gades; the Itinerarium Antonini states that Portus Gaditanus is 14 miles from the previous port of Ad Pontem; the Anonymous Geographer from Ravenna asserts that Portu lies between Gades and, to the north, Asta, a distance of 16 miles (Plate 98, fig. 194).872

The Lighthouse: the Cartagena tower Often confused with El Rocadillo, a defensive tower on the medieval city walls, this building, possibly that seen at the bottom of a print by Carter, is a rectangular tower with two storeys and an overall height of about 12m (Plate 97, fig. 193). It is made of dressed stone blocks and its sides are 6x7m. The lower storey is very solid while it appears from traces of an internal stair that the storey above seems to have lost a cylindrical upper section that would have housed the lantern.869 The height of the present structure is too low for it to have been a lighthouse and it seems probable that it was something more like the Lanterne d’Auguste at Fréjus. We can only assume that there was a proper lighthouse on top of the hill.

Sources referring to the lighthouse include many Arab texts and two depictions to which I shall return below. The Arab sources describing the famous Column of Hercules and providing the most detailed descriptions of what can be defined as the lighthouse at Gades, date from between the tenth and the thirteenth centuries AD. They often compare the building to the Tower of Hercules at Brigantium (No. 73) and, sometimes, to the lighthouse at Alexandria (No. 8). Al-Rāzī (ninth-tenth century AD), for example, compares the “pillar” that Hercules set up at Gades when he left Spain to that which he went on to erect in Galicia (the Tower of Hercules), thus revealing its use as a lighthouse.873

NO. 71 PORTUS GADITANUS-GADES (Cadiz, Andalusia, Spain) Provincia: Baetica

In the tenth century, El Mas’ūdī writes that the island of Gades is situated in the “Outer Sea” (Atlantic), off the coast of Spain, facing Sidonia, a city 12 miles from Gades. He is the first author to use the specific word “lighthouse” when describing an edifice that he calls one of the most wonderful in the world. On top of it, he says, there is a column and on the column a bronze statue, high enough to be seen from Simonia or even further.

Established as a colony of Tyre as early as 1101 BC, it was named Gadir (Plate 99, fig. 197) by the Phoenicians, meaning “castle” or “fortress”. This name may also relate to its geographical position on the Atlantic coast, just beyond the Pillars of Hercules. Many temples were built here, the oldest of which were those dedicated to Moloch (perhaps situated where the cathedral now is) and Melkàrt. The city became a Roman colonia in 206 BC, when it was called Gades and received Julius Caesar. It was soon a municipium and we know from censuses that, in the time of Augustus, large numbers of horsemen were based here. Trade with Pozzuoli and fishing in what is now the Algarve were destined to fall into decline and, by the fourth century AD, Avienus was describing Cadiz as a city that was poor, small and half destroyed.870

El Mas’ūdī goes on to say that behind this structure there are two more statues, standing on two little islands, one in front of the other and erected in honour of Hercules and placed there to prevent ships passing that way.874 In the twelfth century, while Al-Idrīsī confines himself to saying that the pillar at Gades can be compared only to the Tower at Brigantium, Al-Zuhrī is more expansive, describing the lighthouse as “curious”. He gives its height as 100 cubits and describes its appearance as follows: a square building, standing on a type of pumice stone, surrounded with red copper (or perhaps brass) columns. On top of this was a first storey and then a second, also square, a third smaller than the one below. On this stood a truncated four-faced pyramid. On top of the pyramid was a square of white marble supporting a statue of wondrous workmanship, its face looking towards the north-west and the arm stretched out northwards, the index finger pointing towards the mouth of the Gulf, known as the

The ports and the lighthouse The oldest of the ports was situated in the Caleta inlet between the small island of San Sebastian, where Phoenician Gadeira was situated, and the main island. In the Roman period it was replaced with Portus Gaditanus, mentioned several times in Strabo and possibly situated in the area of the present-day El Portal.871 This would 868 BLÀNQUEZ PÉREZ-DOLDÀN GÒMEZ-BENDALA GALÀN 2002, pp. 4976. 869 THOUVENOT 1940, p. 526, asserts that there were two other towers, one to the east of Gibraltar and one to the west, near Algeceiras, both now replaced by modern buildings. He also refers to the remains of a square tower with sides of about 3m to the south-east of Almeira, on the beach at Roquetas. 870 For a complete history of Gades see PEMÀN 1954. 871 Strab. III, 5, 3-11; SCHULTEN 1955, p.28, he disagrees with those scholars who believe that Portus Gaditanus was near the present-day Puerto Santa Maria.

872

RAMBAUD 1997, p. 75. LEVI-PROVENÇAL 1953, pp. 96-97. 874 GÀRCIA Y BELLIDO 1951, pp. 115-116, this description is of great interest, especially for the statues on the small island that might be the Pillars of Hercules that other itineraries such as the Tabula Peutingeriana locate near Portus Gaditanus. As far as the column on the tower is concerned, I believe this is due to a misunderstanding resulting from the possibily different form of the top storey (presumably cylindrical). 873

113

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Straits, leading out of the Great Sea and past Tanger on one side and Tarifa on the other. The right hand grasped a stick as if pointing to the sea. Al-Zuhrī tells us that though many people believed that this was a key, he has looked at it several times and does not agree. He also describes the demolition of the lighthouse and how it was used by the Muslims as a signal when entering and leaving the Straits. From Al-Zuhrī’s words we can deduce that, in the twelfth century at least, the lighthouse was made up of four octagonal storeys, the last one being cylindrical and surrounded by columns of a red colour. On top of the upper storey was a plinth supporting a male statue, his head turned to the north, one arm pointing to the north and the direction of the Straits of Gibraltar, the other holding a stick directed towards the sea. In the thirteenth century, Rodrigo Ximènez de Rada writes that the statue had keys in its hand to warn ships not to proceed beyond that point,875 while Dikr bilād al-Andalus repeats Al-Zuhrī words, comparing the building to the lighthouse at Brigantium (always called the Galicia lighthouse) and adding that the stick was 12 palms long and terminating in a kind of fruit. This would lend weight to the idea that the statue was of Hercules with his clue and perhaps the golden apples of the Hesperides. Mentions of the tower and statue of Hercules occur again in the sixteenth century where the tower is compared to the Tower of Hercules in Galicia but otherwise more or less repeating the twelfth-century descriptions.876

representation is a coat of arms (Plate 99, fig. 196), similar to others surviving in La Coruña, showing the tower at Gades. It is small in size and considerably squatter and more solid. On the top stands a person apparently brandishing an object that might be a stick and certainly is not the keys mentioned in some medieval sources. NO. 72 TURRIS CHIPIONIS (Sanlucar Barrameda, Andalusia, Spain) Provincia: Baetica

de

As will be discussed below, the exact position of this city has not been established. However, it must have been near the present-day city of Chipiona, whose name must derive from that of the tower mentioned by Strabo and Mela.877 The port and the lighthouse The port of Sanlucar was probably used in antiquity as a river port for Gades, reaching that city by means of the only navigable river in Spain, the Guadalquivir. Also mentioned by Ptolemy, the port is associated by Schulten with Castillo Dona Blanca, 4km from Portus Gaditanus, while the Caepio Tower may have been in Sanlucar de Barrameda.878 The lighthouse known as the Caepio Tower (Plate 100, fig. 198) was modelled on that at Alexandria. According to Strabo,879 it was built on a wave-battered rock at the mouth of the river Betis (Guadalquivir) in the port named after the temple raised there in honour of Menestheus and located, according to some views, near present-day Puerto S.Maria,880 by Cadiz, but more probably at what is now Sanlucar de Barramed,881 near Chipiona, the latter place name being clearly connected with that of the Caepio Tower. Possibly also from the Phoenician period are the Torres del Oeste (Plate 100, fig. 199) but, apart from the ancient place name Torre de Augusto, these ancient towers have been entirely replaced by the medieval castle that used the lighthouses as outlook and defensive towers.882

Of the visual sources, one is a charcoal drawing now in the museum in Cadiz (103, 5x82cm), dating from somewhere between the first and the third centuries AD. It was discovered in a Roman farm found near the old Teatro Andalucia and shows a building (Plate 98, fig. 195a) closely resembling the lighthouse at Alexandria as depicted in Renaissance times: an enormous cylindrical tower of twelve octagonal storeys (with an external stair visible on five storeys), getting narrower towards the top where, above a round storey, the light from the lantern can be seen. An arched doorway can clearly be seen. Near it, the presence of a small ship shows that the lighthouse stands close to the sea. The fact that the dimensions of this monument are so great need come as no surprise since the city was situated at a spot presenting serious dangers to shipping. Any construction placed here would have had to be imposing, visible even to those venturing beyond Finisterrae. Although some scholars have suggested that the form of the building derives from the Mesopotamian ziggurat and should therefore be associated with Phoenician Gadeira, it might simply be a primitive piece of Phoenician architecture adapted to suit Roman tastes. It should be pointed out that almost all the lighthouse buildings from the Atlantic coast to the English Channel have a similar octagonal form: Brigantium in its first incarnation (Plate 98, fig. 195b), the Tour d’Ordre at Gesoriacum (No. 75) and the Claudian lighthouse at Dover (No. 76). The second

NO. 73 (FLAVIUM) BRIGANTIUM (La Coruña, Galicia, Spain) Provincia: Tarraconensis This very ancient city (Plate 101, fig. 200) was founded, according to legend, by the chief of the Celtic Artabrii people, Breogan, a story that is recorded again in the twelfth century AD in the Book of Invasions, an Irish collection of epic battles. Here the lighthouse, called Breogan’s Tower, is described as a delightful and 877 Strab. III, 1,9; Mela III, 4 locates it on a rocky spur rather than on an island. 878 Ptol. II, 4,5; SCHULTEN 1955, pp. 286-287. 879 Strab. III, 1, 9; Mela, III, 1, 4. Standing on the coast opposite Salmedina today at Chipiona is a high lighthouse still known as Torre di Caepio, named after Quintus Servilius Caepio in 139 BC. For navigation on the Betis see: PARODI ALVAREZ, 2001, pp. 168-171. 880 KEAY 1988, p. 102. 881 TETTAMANCY GASTON 1991, p. 92. 882 MENÉDEZ PIDAL 1955, p. 586; BLANCO FERREIRO 1981, p. 80.

875 Rodrigo Ximènez de Rada, Historia de rebus Hispanie sive historia gohtica, I, VII, 1-6. 876 Space does not allow discussion of all the sources; the reader is referred to the useful article by ORDÒŇEZ AGULLA 1993, pp. 261-277.

114

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES comfortable house as well as an important lookout post.883 Although the city was known to the Romans in the time of Julius Caesar, its period of greatest prosperity seems to have been between from end of the first century and through the second century when the city, at that time called Flavium Brigantium, was awarded the title of municipium and when it is likely that work on the lighthouse began.884

There are no references to the lighthouse until the fifth century AD when Orosius writes that Spain, a triangularshaped country, has in its northwest corner the Galician city of Brigantium where there is a altissimum pharum et inter paucam memorandi operis ad speculum Britanniae891 (“a very high lighthouse, one of the few works made by pagans worthy of note, which stands as an observation point looking towards Britannia”). The lighthouse must, in fact, have been constructed in imperial times and would, I believe, have formed one point of a signalling triangle consisting of it and the two preceding lighthouses erected by Caligula at Gesoriacum and by Claudius at Dubris. Almost all scholars agree that the Brigantium lighthouse was built by Trajan.892 Discovered on the rocks 10.5m from the Tower is a dedication to Mars inscribed by an architect by the name of Quintus Sevius Lupus, native of a village near presentday Coimbra in Portugal. It says that he is the architect of the lighthouse, just as Sostratus wrote on the lighthouse at Alexandria:

The area was gradually abandoned from the mid-second century AD and was turned into a necropolis in the course of the fourth century AD.885 The port and the lighthouse: the Tower of Hercules Almost nothing definite can be said about the Roman port, since no remains have been found, even if it was described by Ptolemy as big.886 Analysising the wellknown inscription relating to Servius Lupus and the construction of the Tower of Hercules, Le Roux comes to the conclusion that, although the port of Brigantium had considerable commercial – rather than military – importance, it was nevertheless in communication with the military encampment in nearby A Cidadela.887 Brigantium, at least from Flavian times, took on the role of garrison for Britannia and guard in the Atlantic against attacks by pirates, thanks in part to its lighthouse. The present city has (and probably had at least since Roman times) two ports: the modern, semicircular one, and that at Orzàn, where the inlet seems to have been protected from the force of the waves by a wall that entirely surrounded it, as at the harbour at Tyre.888 A kilometre to the south of the Tower of Hercules, the bay of San Amaro, now used as a fishery, provided a landing stage for small craft, so it too should be considered as a possible first Roman port of Brigantium.

MARTI AUG SACR G SEVIUS LUPUS ARCHITECTUS AEMINENSIS LUSITANOS EX VO 893 The dedication is to Mars as protector of the reigning emperor, as is confirmed by the word Augusti. Despite his aristocratic Latinate name, the architect asserts that he is Portuguese, from Coimbra, or, to use the older forms, a Lusitanian from Aeminium. It is clear that the inscription is an ex-voto and not a funerary inscription. The only question that is unclear is whether Lupus was a professional architect or whether he simply chose to declare himself one on the accomplishment of his vow to Mars, suggesting something more military than civil.894 Perhaps Lupus, a Lusitanian soldier from Aeminium in the service of Augustus of Rome, caught in a storm while attempting to reach the port of Brigantium, called on Mars, the god of soldiers, to help him. Once safe, he fulfilled his vow to the god by building a lighthouse for the city to aid future sailors. The lighthouse was transformed into a fortress in the Middle Ages but, abandoned in the fourteenth century, it only became a lighthouse once more in 1861, a function it still performs today, after various interventions between 1686 and 1797. It retains, nevertheless, its original Roman appearance.895

Paradoxically, the best preserved Roman lighthouse in the ancient world is also the one least mentioned in sources from classical times. The so-called Tower of Hercules still stands in all its majesty on a promontory 57m ASL, dominating the sea on three sides (east, north and south), 2km to the north of the present-day city of La Coruña (Plate 101, fig. 201).889 According to legend, the lighthouse was built by Hercules himself (hence its name) over the head of the defeated Geryon, as a symbol of his victory.890

883

Mela, III, 1 on the Celtic presence in La Coruña, known as Portus Magnus Artabrorum; MARIOTTI 2006, pp. 57-58. 884 BENDALA GALAN 1993, pp. 237-239. 885 OCHOA-MORILLO-CERDÀN 1994, pp. 61-62. 886 Ptol. II, 6, on the story of the city OCHOA-MORILLO-CERDÀN 1994, pp. 59-62. 887 LE ROUX 1990, pp. 133-144. 888 TETTAMANCY GASTON 1991, p. 18, anastatic reprint of the book published by Tettamancy beween 1920 and 1931. My thanks to the Libreria Arenas at La Coruña for help in obtaining this text. 889 TRANOY 1981, pp. 242-243. 890 Amm. XV, 9. According to some authors, the lighthouse, destroyed a thousand years after its construction by Hercules, was restored by Augustus thus acquiring the name Torre de Augusto, see TETTAMANCY GASTON 1991, pp. 70-71.

891 Oros. I, 2, 71, and also in Cosmographia olim Aethici dicta 2, 33; RODRÍGUEZ ALMEIDA 2005, pp. 13-19. 892 CORNIDE 1986, pp. 10-14, a book that provides a useful collection of the post-fourth-century AD sources. 893 CIL., II, 2559=5639: “Dedicated to Mars Augustus. Gaius Sevius Lupus, architect, Lusitanian of Aeminium (Coimbra), in fulfilment of a vow”. 894 For interpretations of Lupus’s dedication see: LE ROUX 1990, pp. 133-144. 895 VEITMEYER 1900, p. 22; BEDON 1988, p. 59. Some local legends attribute the building of the lighthouse to the Cathaginians or, at a later date, to the Spanish monarchy, see CIALDI 1877, p. 309. Yet another legend, relating to that concerning the fight between Hercules and

115

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA A number of valuable visual representation of the building have survived. In 1086, an Asturian monk called Beato di Liébana included a geographical map with his commentary on the Apocalypse. It shows what is clearly the Tower of Hercules and is named as such with the words Gallecia and Faro (Plate 102, fig. 202). The building is shown as having a tall rectangular tower, built on a stepped plinth. In the middle of the lowest level is a disproportionate entrance door, while the top is finished off with a slightly pointed cupola. In the centre of the cupola is a small round opening out of which would have come the flames from the lantern. This is also shown in the Tabula Peutingeriana where it otherwise is made to resemble the lighthouse at Alexandria (Plate 102, fig. 203). Beato’s map depicts it in so different a way that, given that the word Asturias also appears on the map near the representation of the building, it is possible that this is the tower at Campa Torres (No. 74) near Gijon, so that the word Gallecia here refers to the geographical region and not the site of the building.

with six storeys and an external stair. On the top are the characteristic chimney pots, still visible today (Plate 105, fig. 208). At the end of the eighteenth century, Don Juan Cornide Saavedra carried out yet another reconstruction of the lighthouse, taking its Roman origins as his starting point. The result is a squat rectangular tower with six storeys connected by an external spiral stair, of which only the smallest and cylindrical top storey remains: a solid rectangular tower with six storeys, on the top of which was installed the strange nineteenth-century platform. Housing the lantern, it is the only storey that cannot be visited. A final attempt at a reconstruction of the Roman building was made by Buchwald (Tav. 104, fig. 206b) in the early twentieth century, a version that is still considered convincing. Here the tower is shown as slender but solid, tall and rectangular, with six storeys, each one of which has a window and an entrance door, where the stair leading to the summit of the lighthouse can be seen. At the top, the flame from the lantern is shown coming from a smaller, cylindrical storey (Plate 104, fig. 207). In 1785, the Real Consulado Maritimo de Galicia appointed the engineer and marine officer Eustachio Giannini in charge of restoration of the lighthouse. Its state of preservation since the seventeenth century was so bad that it was by now known as the Castelo Viejo. Since that time its appearance has not changed. Today the tower, a school for lighthouse keepers until 1854, appears unchanged apart from the removal of the external stair (Plate 103, fig. 204 a,b). Each storey still retains its pair of rectangular windows, some of which were blocked up during the eighteenthcentury restoration. Te open windows are those through which the external stair passed (Plate 106, fig. 210a).897 Everything visible on the exterior today belongs to the restoration carried out in the seventeenth century. Inside, by contrast, a good deal of the Roman building can still be seen (the rooms used by the lighthouse workers and a storeroom for fuel have been identified) and, in particular, Roman masonry in opus vittatum and opus quadratum (Plate 106, fig. 210b).

The wonderful tower was described in the sixteenth century by the canon Bartolomeo Molina. He praises the architecture of a spiral staircase that ran from the bottom to the top of the structure, allowing rapid access to the top.896 According to a sixteenth-century official document sent to Madrid in 1552 during the reign of Emperor Charles V, the lighthouse of Brigantium, complete with the inscription by Lupus, is depicted as a perfectly rectangular tower with six storeys, the last one of which is slightly smaller than the others. An external stairway leads from the entrance door to the top of the building, the effect at this stage being similar to the lantern in Genoa (Plate 103, fig. 204 a, b). In the seventeenth century, when, from being the fortress-lighthouse of the Spanish monarchs, it passed to the ownership of the city of La Coruña, it became the symbol of the city and appeared on the city’s coat of arms as a solid tower, more cylindrical than rectangular in shape, but still with its external stairway and large number of windows. The top was covered by a cupola (Plate 103, fig. 205a). A drawing dating from 1685 shows the lighthouse as a solid six-storeyed tower (the Roman structure), on top of which is a strange upper platform shaped like a cylinder and topped by a pyramidal roof flanked on either side by a chimney pot. At the bottom, the tower has two arched entrance doors and, a stairway leading from the first storey giving access to the upper storeys (Plate 103, fig. 205b). Dating from the eighteenth century is a town fountain with a figure of Neptune holding the usual trident in one hand and a large shield in the other. On the shield is a representation of the Tower of Hercules, still

Comment There is no mention of this lighthouse in important sources such as Strabo, Mela and Pliny, although they mention many other, and perhaps less important, lighthouses such as the Caepio Tower (Strabo). On the other hand, if the Tower of Hercules was built by Trajan in the second century AD, these authors would not have been alive to see it. Pliny, writing in the Flavian era, states that in his time the custom of building lighthouses modelled on that in Alexandria had become very widespread, quoting Ostia and Ravenna as two important examples, since both were military and naval stations of enormous importance. As leader of the fleet at Misenus, he must certainly have seen these two lighthouses personally. While the Tower of Hercules may seen today like a highly unusual monument, it would not have seemed so to the Romans of the second century AD and

Geryon, tells that the semi-god has a lover called Crunna who gave her name to the city, saying also that Julius Caear rstored the Tower di Hercules, now ruined, see DOCAMPO 1543, fol. 43, cap. 35. For the history of the city and its lighthouse see: HÜTTER 1973, pp. 5-30, a work that was reprinted in an amplified Spanish verson after the latest restoration carried out by the local council of La Coruña: HÜTTERHAUSCHILD 1991. 896 MOLINA 1551 see TETTAMANCY GASTON, 1991, p. 63: a stone stair seems unlikely, an, in any case, many sources speak of the presence, in ancient times, of a wooden staircase.

897 For a detailed anaylsis of all the iconographic sources mentioned see: HÜTTER-HAUSCHILD 1991 pp. 21 ff.

116

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES later, by which time such monuments could be seen all over the world. The situation in Late Antiquity would have been quite different; by now many of the Roman lighthouses had collapsed or been turned into fortresses or rebuilt as lower structures. The Tower of Hercules and the lighthouse at Alexandria, that still stood majestically looking out over the sea must have been regarded, even by a Christian like Orosius with little time for with the pagans, as something exceptional and worthy of admiration. As for the legend about Heracles/Hercules and the Phoenician origins of the lighthouse at Brigantium, these are likely to have been colourful exaggerations designed to emphasise the grandeur of the creation of Sevius Lupus, a Lusitanian soldier who, I believe, undertook at his own expense the construction of the Tower of Hercules in thanks for his survival and rescue from a storm near the port of Brigantium.

The port and the lighthouse Little is known for certain about the port at Campa Torres. The harbour may have originally made use of the natural inlet near which may also have been the Ara Sistiana (Plate 107, fig. 213), or the presumed base of the Turris Augusti, the name given to another lighthouse tower near present-day Touriňan, at the westernmost tip of Galicia, near Muxìa. The castrum lies to the west of the port of Gijòn (El Musel) and, in antiquity, must have made use of the river Aboňo, now completely underground.902 The Ara Sistiana was already known of in the sixteenth century. Now in the Tabularium of the archaeological site, it is a large block of marble (1.62m wide by 80cm high, 50cm thick and weighing 2250kg.) on which is the following inscription:

The dating of the tower to the time of Trajan may be rather too late, but I do not think it can be any earlier than the Julio-Claudian period. Aptly described by Orosius as specula Britanniae, the Tower of Hercules should be considered in the light of the lighthouse built by Caligula at Gesoriacum (Boulogne-sur-Mer) and those – of which , as we shall see, only one remains – built by Claudius at the port of Portus Dubrae (Dover) in Britannia. We are fortunate indeed that a monument such the Tower of Hercules has survived, where its Roman fabric is still evidence and which, with the exception of the upper platform added by the Real Consulado Maritimo in 1785, provides us with a rare example of lighthouse architecture in the Roman period (Plate 106, figs 211).

IMP CAESARI AVGUSTO DIVI F COS XIII IMP XX PONT MAX PATR PATRIAE TRIB POT XXXII CN CALPVURNVS CN F PISO LEG PR PR SACRVM 903 Fernàndez Ochoa and her team, who have been investigating this site for a long period, believe that wherever there was an ara sistiana, there was also a tower-lighthouse (Touriňan, La Coruňa and Campa Torres). It has been suggested therefore that the shape would have been similar to the only one of these towers to survive, that at La Coruňa: a solid rectangular tower with four storeys decreasing in size towards the top. The top storey, housing the lantern would have been cylindrical (Plate 108, figs 214, 215).

NO. 74 CAMPA TORRES (Gijón, Asturia, Spain) Provincia: Asturia The position of Cape Torres (Plate 107, fig. 212), 6km to the east of Gijòn, is what enabled this city in ancient times to become and to remain the main port of Asturia. Some scholars have suggested that this castrum is the Noega mentioned by Strabo,898 who situates it near an estuary created by the sea on the border between Asturis and Cantabria. Pliny and Mela mention an oppidum on the Asturian coast.899 We know that Campa Torres was a Roman city from a number of coins dating from the time of Augustus to Tiberius as well as from archaeological discoveries such as the Villa of Jove near the present church. Most interesting of all is the Ara Sistiana, an inscription on which refers to a large monument in honour of Augustus. Mela mentions a turrem Augusti900 which recent scholars have tried to link with Campa Torres, suggesting it was the base of a lighthouse.901

NO. 75 GESORIACUM (Boulogne-sur-Mer, Pas-deCalais, France) Provincia: Gallia Belgica Situated on the right bank of the Liane, an estuary of the Rhine, Gesoriacum (Plate 109, figs 216, 217) was an almost entirely Roman city, its most prosperous period being during the second century AD when Claudius installed his classis Britannica here, making Boulogne the departure point for all expeditions to Britain. Before the Julio-Claudian conquest, the city had the so-called Portus Itius, where Caesar landed.904 In the early imperial period, despite the fact that Rome was not at war, 902

OCHOA-CERDÀN 1994, pp. 93-94. DIEGO SANTOS 1959, pp. 47-52: “To the emperor Caesar Augustus, son of the Divine Caesar, three times consul, emperor with twenty imperial salutations, pontifex maximus, father of the country, thirty times invested with the tribunicia potestas (Cneo Calpurnius Piso, son of Cneo) dedicated this monument” (C.I.L. II, 2703). Since Piso had been governor of Hispania Citerior from 9 to 10 AD, we have an exact date for the imscription. 904 Caes. Gall. V, 2, 3; 5,1, since this port is some thirty stadia from England, it is possible that that this was a place nearer Calais than Boulogne, given that the distance is the same as that today between the ferry port of Calais and Dover. Caes. Gall. III; 8,1 says that the Venetii who lived in that area did not have many ports but that those they did have were entirely unknown to the Romans, the latter finding navigation in those regions very difficult, with strong winds and tidal extremes which the Gauls used to their own defensive advantage. 903

898

Strab. III, 4, 20, TROTTA 2000 too thinks that it might be Aviles or the port of San Juan de la Nieva. Plin. nat. IV, 3 and Mela III, 12-13 call it the oppidum of the Asturian coast. 899 Mela, III, 12-13 mentions three already well-known arae sistianae dedicated to Augustus. For the ara sistiana FERNÀNDEZ MIRANDA 1983, pp. 47-53; for the Asturian coast IGLESIAS GIL-MUŇIZ CASTRO 1992. 900 Mela III, 7. 901 HERNÀN DEL FRADE- FIGAREDO FERNÀNDEZ 2002, p. 127.

117

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Caligula ordered his German guard to cross the Rhein and simulate a war. He complained of the lack of enthusiasm shown by the people of Rome who, while their emperor was fighting the Barbarians, went off to their country houses. To celebrate his non-existent victory against an invisible enemy, he had a very high tower built on which fires wee to be lit at night to guide sailors .905 He had it erected on a high spot near the oldest of the city’s harbours, known as Gesoriacum (Ville Basse), near the inlet of Brèquercque. The city expanded in size, the outer areas being known as Bononia (Ville Haute). In Late Antiquity, by which time the population had become significantly larger, a third harbour, known as Portus Aepatiaci, was created in the St. Omer district of presentday Isques.906

is shown on a coin dating from 191 AD (Plate 109, fig. 217b). We know that the lighthouse was still in use during the reign of Commodus and that, in 811 AD the emperor Charlemagne was so impressed by the structure that he restored it, reinstating it lighthouse function.911 The tower had always had more military than trading importance, as is clear from its strategic position. Claudius, Caligula’s successor, would have left from the port at Gesoriacum for his expedition against the Bretons.912 Caligula’s lighthouse may be the tower represented in a famous relief now in the Laocoon Courtyard in the Vatican Museums. Although the cylindrical structure makes this theory seem likely, it is not possible to be certain if it is definitely the lighthouse at Gesoriacum (Plate 110, fig. 218b). When he conquered France in 1544, Henry VIII of England had the tower encircled with four bastions, thus transforming it into a fortress, giving the name of Old man, Vieil Homme, a transliteration of a presumed Celtic name, Alt Maen, which means “high stone” and not “old man”.913 In 1559, the city was retaken by the French who were able to rescue their most famous Roman monument. By now, however, the area around the Tour d’Ordre had become a stone quarry, providing material for the construction of the new Bononia. This made the land on which the tower had been built highly unstable. The English had changed the direction of the port with the addition of a manmade island that was designed to aid sailors.914 After a number of earlier attempts to fine anyone taking stone illegally from the area around the tower, Louis XIII issued an edict in 1618 abolishing the fine and giving official permission for stone to be taken. The ground became even more unstable with further quarrying and the lighthouse collapsed almost entirely on 20 January 1644, although a fire continued to burn on the ruins until the foundations and bottom storey too finally disappeared in 1681 (Plate 111, fig. 220). 915

The port and the lighthouse: the Tour d’Ordre Although Caligula’s lighthouse of 39 AD collapsed in the seventeenth century and is no longer visible today, it is commemorated in the name of a road, the Rue de la Tour d’Ordre (Plate 109, fig. 217a) and in the name of the radio-lighthouse on the hill where once Caligula’s tower dominated the Channel and the English coastline. The Roman port too is now completely invisible, hidden by the modern port, making reconstruction difficult. In the late third century AD, the whole area, port and inhabited city, was referred to as oppidum Bononiensis.907 Cassius Dio briefly mentions the tower, but the first document to give us a concrete description of the lighthouse is by Montfaucon in the eighteenth century.908 In Montfaucon’s time the lighthouse had already been a ruin for eighty years, but it is to him, nevertheless, that we owe our knowledge of famous drawing that has made it possible to reconstruct – albeit hypothetically – its original architectural appearance (Plate 110, fig. 218a). Rising to a height of 64m (most probably, with the tower alone being 34m high), the lighthouse stood on a promontory dominating the city and the two banks of the Laine. It was octagonal in plan with twelve storeys, gradually decreasing in size towards the top from a base with a diameter of 20m. Only the top storey was significantly small and different in form (the usual cylindrical storey for the lantern). Each storey had a projecting cornice of 0.5m, picked out in red and grey stone and eight arched openings. Indications that there was an internal stairway are found in the seventeenth century. This connected with three rooms on the lower storeys, two of which were storerooms for the fuel for the lantern fires, the other providing accommodation for the lighthouse keeper.909 The tower was also known as turris ardens, in reference to the fires lit on its summit, a name that was corrupted into French as Tour d’Ordre or Tour d’Orde.910 It has been suggested that it is this tower that

Comment With such a complete history and a fine drawing supplied by Joachim Duviert (1611) (Plate 109, fig. 216b), there is little to add to the story of this twelve-storey lighthouse. 62m high and 20m wide, until the seventeenth century it withstood the attacks both of the waves and the English.916 The view that it was an invention of Julius

911 For the history of the lighthouse at Boulogne see: EGGER 1863, pp. 410-421; D’ERCE 1966, pp. 90-96, for an archaeological study of the area SEILLER 1986, pp. 163-178; DELMAIRE 1994, no. 232; BROMWICH 2003, pp. 50-52. 912 DURUY 1882, p. 385; LEGER 1979, pp. 509-510. THIERSCH 1909, p. 21. 913 HISTOIRE 1900, p. 385, BROMWICH 2003, p. 52 who notes that the lighthouse was also named after St Patrick since according to legend the first guardian of the building was St Patrick’s father. 914 D’ERCE 1966, p. 93, fig. 2. 915 VEITMEYER 1900, pp. 22-24; D’ERCE 1966, pp. 92-95. 916 Recent studies relating to the drawing by Joachim Duviert (1611), now in the Bibliothéque Nationale, Cabinet des estampes, collection du maréchal d’Ulixes, VX 23, give a smaller diameter and a lower height of 38m. It appears that the base of the tower was still visible in the 1930s. Near the tower, in the first half of the eighteenth century, a small statue of a divinity (perhaps Horus-Arpocrate) was found, together with

905

Suet. Cal. XLV. For other French lighthouses see BONNARD 1913, p. 134; DREYER-FICHOU 2005. 906 BROGAN 1953, pp. 110-111; BOLLINI 1968, pp. 55, 72, for the history of the naval base SEILLER 1986, pp.163-183. 907 ATLAS 2001, p. 115. 908 DE MONTFAUCON 1749, pp. IX-XI. 909 D’ERCE 1966, p. 90. 910 RENARD 1867, p. 24.

118

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO MIDDLE AGES Caesar’s is certainly wrong.917 Leaving aside the fact that Caligula built the lighthouse in present-day Boulognesur-Mer following a non-existent victory, it should be recognised that not only did this Roman emperor make crossing the Channel easier for sailors, bit he also gave the western world a lighthouse that was archaeologically different from those known previously and an inspiration for many new lighthouses in this area, not least that built at Dover by Claudius (Plate 109, fig. 216b). The damnatio memoriae imposed on Caligula probably explains why, apart from Suetonius and Cassius Dio, no other classical authors mention this monument. While many of the portraits and other works connected with the emperor were destroyed, the lighthouse survived, demonstrating itself over the centuries to be infinitely more useful than the so-call “victory” over the enemy which it was built to commemorate, arousing the admiration of Charlemagne and Henry VIII, who added defensive walls around it. Although eighteenth-century depictions show the lighthouse at the foot of the cliff, in approximately the same position as the modern lighthouse, archaeological investigation has confirmed that the most likely site was in front of the church known as Calvaire des Marins, at the top end of Rue de la Tour d’Odre.918 Now standing on this spot is a gunpowder magazine dating from the Napoleonic period, now a tourist site and reconstructed to such an extent that there is no trace left of the ancient lighthouse (Plate 111, fig. 221). The theory, held by some scholars, that the lighthouse stood on the site of the modern radiolighthouse, behind the above-mentioned church, seems less likely, not least because otherwise it would have survived the collapse of the cliff. Furthermore, it is only from the top of this cliff, levelled off in Roman times to make room for the Tour d’Ordre, that it is possible to have an unimpeded view on all sides and as far as the coast of England. It is likely that, when building the lighthouses at Dover, Claudius chose the two high points called Eastern and Western Heights with the position of Caligula’s lighthouse in mind.

Claudius developed this site on the estuary of the river Dubris in the second century AD, using it as a second base for the classis Britannica. There is no doubt that it functioned as the port for Londinium (London) which , although a long way inland, has only a small port, most likely to have been situated near London Bridge and Thames Street (Plate 112, fig. 222).919 It was connected to Dover by an ancient trading route known as Watling Street, that passed through Rochester.920 Embarking at Gesoriacum, the headquarters of the classis Britannica, together with the Strasburg, Mainz and Cologne legions, Claudius most probably landed at Dover, although other possible ports would have been Portus Lemanae (modern Lympne) or Portus Rutupiae (Richborough).921 The tower at Shadwell and the Dover lighthouses As well as the port near London Bridge, Londinium had a series of watchtowers that were also used as lighthouses and customs posts controlling traffic on the Thames. One of these, dating from the mid-third century AD, was discovered 1.2km east of the city, at Shadwell. Set up on the orders of the commander of the classis Britannica, Carausius, to deal with the threat from pirates, the tower was rectangular, 8m by 2m. A large number of coins [bearing the image of Carausius and his successor Allectus were found inside the structure,922 a possible indication that the chief role of this watchtower was as a toll station. We known rather more about the port at Dover. Its two lighthouses stood on the two hills, the Eastern and Western Heights (Plate 113, fig. 225, Plate 114, fig. 226) a, b), situated on either side of the estuary of the river Douris. No trace remains, unfortunately, of the structure that stood on the Western Heights. Demolished in the eighteenth century, its foundations were buried under the military fortifications built in Napoleonic times (Plate 113, figs 224, 225).923 Nineteenth-century photographs and some drawings survive that show the Roman remains, known as the “Devil’s Drop” and, later, as the “Drop Redoubt” (Plate 112, fig. 223a).924 The second lighthouse has survived, however, incorporated into the fabric of the Norman Dover Castle. One wall of the church of St. Mary in Castro flanks the side of the castle, its name clearly referring to the Roman camp and classis

NO. 76 DUBRIS/PORTUS LONDINII (Dover,Kent/ London, England, Great Britain) Provincia: Britannia While archaeology has uncovered significant traces of houses in the area (for example the Roman Painted House), Duoris, on the Saxon Shore in Kent, does not appear to have been a city as such.

919

DU PLAT TAYLOR-CLEERE1978, p. 38; for a history of the port of Londinium see MILNE 1985, MILNE 2005, pp. 71-76. For references to the port of Dover in early sources: Itin. Anton., 473, 2, 473, 5; An.Rav. 428, 3. 920 For the trade route Dubris-Londinium and for an overview of the other English ports, see: DODI 1974 and JONES-MATTINGLY 1990, pp. 198-201; for the Channel crossing GRAINGE 2002, pp. 5-14. 921 RENARD 1867, pp. 28-30; DICTIONNAIRE 1906, pp. 431-432; EAA, entry for Dover, Rome 1994, p. 398. 922 PERRING 1991, pp. 110-111, for the signalling systems in Britannia SOUTHERN 1990, pp. 233-242. 923 PHILP 1981, p. 9. 924 COLLINGWOOD 1930, p. 63; BEDON 1988, p. 60, says that, at the time of writing, the other Dover lighthouse was still standing to a height of 3m.

some coins, one dating from the Caesarian period, see DELMAIRE 1994, 232, no. 113, fig. 9. 917 In 1839, Antoine Caboche, a glasier residing in Rue Tour d’Ordre 113, found some coins dating from the time of Julius Caesar to that of Claudius in the vicinity of the tower. Although a clear indication that the site was inhabited, it is not enough to prove that the tower was built by Caesar. It seems unlikely that, having referred to the lighthouse at Alexandria, he would not then refer in De bello Gallico - where there is nothing but a brief mention of Portus Itius (Caes. Civ. III, 112) - to a building that he had constructed himself; Montfaucon’s attribution in his Antiquité expliquée of the construction of the Tour d’Ordre to Caesar is quoted in D’ERCE 1966, p. 89 918 DELMAIRE 1994, p. 290, fig. 109.

119

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Britannica based here by Claudius and standing as a pair with the base in Gesoriacum with its Tour d’Ordre from which the Dover lighthouses could be seen.925 The remaining lighthouse (Tavv. 114-118, figs 226-231) consists of an octagonal tower, very similar to, but smaller, than Caligula’s tower. The overall height must have been no more than 25m, and it is perhaps because of its modest size and hence rather unimpressive appearance that Suetonius, so admiring of the lighthouses built by Tiberius on Capri and Caligula at Boulogne, makes no mention of it. Today it stands to a height of almost 19m, although the upper 5m are medieval. The Roman masonry is of stone interspersed with courses in brick and a cladding of green sandstone and tufa (Plate 116, fig. 230). Each ascending storey is 0.30m smaller than the one below, giving the tower a characteristic “telescope” appearance (Plate 116, fig. 231), similar to that of the Tour d’Ordre with its protruding cornices. Arched doorways and window openings can still be seen, the latter having curved tops of alternating pairs of bricks and blocks of tufa.926 Comment From a rough description dating from 1861, shortly before its destruction, it seems that the lighthouse on the Western Heights was hexagonal and similar in size to its twin on the Eastern Heights. It is tempting to think that there was a smaller lighthouse in the port of Londinium, but it is more probable that, in addition to the toll situated between London Bridge and the Tower of London, there was previously a guard tower that also acted as a marker for ships. The construction of the lighthouse at Dover, by contrast, was vital to Claudius’s invasion of Britannia. If, as seems likely, Claudius left from Gesoriacum, he would have found navigation in the dangerous currents of the Channel difficult. As he drew closer to Dover, a port known to Caesar but rejected in favour of Rochester, he would have been acutely aware for the need for a lighthouse here, to match that set up by his predecessor on the French coast. Settling on Dover for the second base for his classis Britannica,927 Claudius built not one but two lighthouses, one on each side of the estuary of the river Dubris. A guiding light for sailors seeking the safety of harbour would have been particularly necessary in these regions in bad weather. The octagonal structure of the Dover lighthouse may well have been intended to emulate Caligula’s tower, visible in Gesoriacum on the other side of the Channel. Despite the opinion of Montfaucon,928 there is no reason to doubt the Roman origins of this lighthouse. Writing at the end of the eighteenth century, he criticises the architecture of the tower for its un-Roman appearance, while at the same time, as Allard correctly points out, heaping praises on the very similar Tour d’Ordre in Boulogne, a tower he attributes to no less a person than Julius Caesar.929 925

CLAYTON 1976, fig. 21. COLLINGWOOD 1930, p. 61; TOYNBEE 1974, pp. 35-37; WHEELER 1929, pp. 29-46. 927 BOLLINI 1968, p. 55. 928 DE MONTFAUCON 1749, pp. IX-XI. 929 ALLARD 1979, pp. 510-511. 926

120

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO

CAPITOLO 1 I sistemi di segnalazione prima costruzione del Faro di Alessandria

Fenici a proposito dei quali Plinio affermava siderum observationem in navigando Phoenices (invenerunt). Strabone ci informa che questo popolo viaggiava anche di notte e, per farlo, doveva osservare il cielo con particolare riferimento all’Orsa Minore (chiamata anche Stella Fenicia), le cui stelle appaiono sempre all’orizzonte e rimangono visibili durante tutta la notte.5 I marinai greci, almeno stando a quanto Omero riferisce circa Odisseo, navigavano, invece, seguendo l’Orsa Maggiore, costellazione presa a punto di riferimento anche dai Romani come tramanda Virgilio nelle Georgiche.6 Per quanto riguarda il periodo punico, i peripli dei grandi navigatori, come quelli di Annone e Imilcone, non parlano mai espressamente di fari.

della

Arduo è il compito di tracciare un quadro preciso dei sistemi di segnalazione nel mondo antico precedenti al III secolo a.C., epoca della costruzione della torre alessandrina sull’isola di Faro in Egitto, struttura eponima delle successive costruzioni faree. La scoperta del mare come via di scambio culturale e materiale da parte dell’uomo risale al Mesolitico (almeno per quanto riguarda l’Italia). Infatti, la parte più meridionale della penisola dialoga con l’altra sponda dell’Adriatico (Croazia, Albania) e con i paesi e le città là situate si hanno frequenti scambi (Corfù, Grecia nord-occidentale). Nel corso del Neolitico questi scambi non solo si intensificano ma, addirittura, si estendono, come testimoniano i molti ritrovamenti ceramici che attestano un frequente scambio tra Abruzzo e Dalmazia, per citare un solo caso. Nell’età del Bronzo, sembra essere l’Egeo orientale a “colonizzare” la situazione italiana.1

Nel IV sec. a.C. lo stratega Enea Tattico, di cui conserviamo un trattato intitolato La difesa di una città assediata, dedica un intero capitolo della sua opera ai segnali con il fuoco ed al loro corretto uso. Egli sostiene che sia immediata la necessità di stabilire dei segnali grazie ai quali i responsabili non si ingannino più sull’identità di chi si avvicina e inoltre afferma:

Πολεμο³mta o¹m wq jaà ÑccÅr ômtym t´m pokelÊym, pq´tom lÁm tÀ ×postekkËlema Ñj t±r pËkeyr jatÀ c±m Œ jatÀ hÀkattam ÑpÊ tima pq°nim pqÄr toÅr ÜpolÁmomtar letÀ sussÉlym ÐpostÈkkeshai jaà Ùleqim´m jaà mujteqim´m, êma l Ðcm´si pokelÊym aÕto²r ÑpivaimolÈmym Ñi vÊkioi é pokÁlioÊ eÓsim:7

Se, in base ai ritrovamenti ceramici, è possibile, almeno indicativamente, risalire ai commerci che avvenivano nell’età del Bronzo (la ricerca dell’ambra nelle coste baltiche e il dialogo con la pianura padana tramite il Po, le grandi navigazioni egeo-micenee verso Occidente, gli scambi tra la costa romagnola e quella istriana e dalmata), non è altrettanto semplice ricostruire come gli uomini di queste epoche si muovessero in mare e se avessero qualche supporto per trovare riparo in qualche rada in caso di tempesta o di altra necessità.

In secondo luogo, dice lo stratega, bisogna inviare degli osservatori che sappiano riconoscere i segnali in maniera tale da non confonderli.8 Prima di concludere questa brevissima digressione su quel sistema che fu con adeguato termine chiamato Feuertelegraphie dagli studiosi tedeschi del primo Novecento del secolo scorso, occorre affrontare ancora alcuni autori che trattano nello specifico questo argomento.9

Nel Neolitico si navigava prevalentemente cabotando (ma non solo), sostando, anche frequentemente, negli approdi naturali e nelle isole (le Tremiti, le isole croate..). I luoghi prescelti come insediamenti in quest’epoca sono promontori sul mare o lagune costiere: inoltre sono presenti fortificazioni che chiudono i villaggi verso terra; le abitazioni di questi luoghi vengono invece posizionate su alture in modo da essere difendibili in un periodo in cui l’uomo è ormai passato da agricoltore a guerriero.

Polibio10 riprende il trattato di Enea Tattico affermando che le segnalazioni fatte col fuoco prima dell’epoca in cui scrive si erano rivelate del tutto inutili in quanto mal utilizzate e interpretate. Le soluzioni proposte da Enea Tattico furono per Polibio un modestissimo progresso nell’uso delle segnalazioni. Qui sorge però un problema filologico perché lo storiografo greco riporta tutta una serie di procedimenti e norme che non ci sono state tramandate dal testo di Tattico: è necessario munirsi di recipienti di terracotta di dimensioni uguali tra loro con una profondità di tre cubiti e la larghezza di un cubito. Vanno poi allestiti dei sugheri un po’ meno grandi delle bocche dei recipienti, al centro dei quali conficcare dei bastoncini suddivisi in parti uguali, ciascuna di tre dita, e, per ogni parte, vanno incisi segni facilmente riconoscibili: su ogni parte saranno infatti scritte le eventualità di guerra più note e comuni e, tra queste, ad esempio, il nemico arriva tramite imbarcazioni, o a cavallo, e così via. Fatto ciò, bisogna forare entrambi i recipienti in modo che i canaletti siano uguali e lascino scolare

Se possediamo sufficienti informazioni per quanto riguarda il tipo di imbarcazioni usate nella preistoria, è poco, invece, ciò che sappiamo sui sistemi di segnalazione e di orientamento. Possiamo presumere che, dall’età neolitica, si navigasse anche su lunghe distanze ma solo durante il giorno, cercando riparo presso approdi naturali come le isole, di cui si è detto. Nell’Età del Bronzo è noto il fenomeno della ricerca dell’ambra, la quale può essere trovata solo nelle regioni baltiche e presume quindi uno spostamento umano anche nella parte più settentrionale dell’Europa, con la sola esclusione dell’Inghilterra. Tra XIV e XIII secolo a.C. si intensificano anche i rapporti con le regioni carsiche e la penisola dalmata.2 Nell’Età del Ferro, almeno nella penisola italiana, le aree portuali più sviluppate sono quelle del Delta padano e dell’area veneto-friulana, tra le quali spiccano per la prima, Adria, che si distingue come emporio di smistamento di ceramica greca già dal VII secolo a.C., e, per la seconda, Altino.3 Si è calcolato che, già dal Neolitico, si potessero percorrere distanze che potevano superare i 100 km, forse non necessariamente cabotando, ma seguendo il flusso degli uccelli migratori, il corso delle correnti marine e, senza dubbio, avendo precisi riferimenti astronomici.4 Questa pratica fu perfezionata dai

5 Plin. Nat. Hist. VII, 209; Strab. XXVI, 23-24; per la navigazione astronomica da parte dei Fenici si rimanda a MEDAS 1998, pp. 147-173. Le navigazione di piccolo cabotaggio si svolgeva prevalentemente durante il giorno e copriva una distanza di 25-30 miglia nautiche stando ai dati forniti da BARTOLONI 1988, p. 84. 6 Verg. Georg. I, 137; JANNI 1996, p. 67. 7 Aen. Tat. IV, 5: “In tempo di guerra dunque, con il nemico alle porte, bisogna innanzitutto che le truppe inviate fuori dalla città a compiere qualche missione per terra o per mare, siano munite di segnali diurni e notturni convenuti con quelli che restano, in modo che questi ultimi, se si presentano loro dei nemici, siano in grado di riconoscere se si tratta di amici o nemici” Trad. M.Betalli, ed. ETS, Pisa 1990. Si veda anche FORBES 1966, p. 176. 8 Aen. Tat. IV, 6; 12. 9 VEITMEYER 1900, pp. 1-9. 10 Pol. X, 42-45.

1

CAZZELLA 2001, pp. 38-48. BIETTI SESTIERI 2001, pp. 49-51. BONOMI 2001, pp. 140-141. 4 MEDAS 1993, p. 11. 2 3

121

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA l’acqua nella stessa misura, poi andranno riempiti d’acqua e bisogna porre su di essi i sugheri e i bastoncini e, infine, lasciar scorrere contemporaneamente l’acqua dai canaletti. A questo punto i sugheri dovranno necessariamente scendere e i bastoncini scomparire nei recipienti in misura corrispondente allo scolare dell’acqua. Se tutto funziona, una volta portati i recipienti nel luogo dove si intende osservare le segnalazioni con il fuoco, nel caso accada una delle cose scritte sul bastoncino, bisognerà sollevare una torcia e attendere finché quelli con cui si è d’accordo non ne sollevino una a loro volta. Quando le torce saranno simultaneamente ben visibili le si abbasserà e si lascerà scorrere l’acqua dai canaletti. Quando con l’abbassamento del sughero e del bastoncino la cosa scritta che si desidera annunciare raggiungerà l’orlo, a quel punto si solleverà nuovamente la torcia mentre gli altri chiuderanno immediatamente il canaletto e controlleranno quale tra le cose scritte sul bastoncino è all’altezza dell’orlo. Quella sarà la cosa annunciata, ma sarà necessario che tutto si svolga alla medesima velocità da ambo le parti.11

afferma che, una volta separatisi, i due gruppi si sarebbero dovuti munire di una διοπτήρ, termine che si può tradurre o con “diottria” o anche con “livello”. La “diottria” doveva essere munita di due tubicini (si può pensare tranquillamente a una specie di binocolo) in modo da poter osservare attentamente cosa succedeva nello spazio sia a destra sia a sinistra. E’ logico che, una volta che si voglia comunicare un’informazione, si scelga la perifrasi che necessiti il minor numero di lettere da dovere impiegare, in modo tale da non perdere troppo tempo per leggere e costruire il messaggio. A quel punto si inizierà a comunicare con la torcia. Se, ad esempio, si fosse voluto comunicare l’arrivo di cento Cretesi, dice lo storico, essendo la K (la lettera iniziale) nella seconda sezione dell’alfabeto e nella seconda tavoletta, si sarebbero dovute sollevare due torce sulla sinistra, in maniera tale che l’osservatore capisse che bisognava esaminare la seconda tavoletta. A quel punto, sulla destra, se ne sarebbero dovute sollevare cinque, essendo la K la quinta lettera della seconda sezione; chi avesse ricevuto il segnale, avrebbe dovuto scrivere la lettera sulla tabella. Certo, sarebbero state necessarie molte torce, visto che ciascuna lettera avrebbe richiesto un doppio segnale. In tutti questi sistemi era logicamente necessario fare molta pratica, in modo da non commettere errori al momento della guerra; infatti, dice Polibio, tutto all’inizio è complicato finché non ci si abitua.13 Riporto per maggiore chiarezza le cinque tavolette ipotizzate da Polibio ed un interessante disegno di Hermann Diels secondo lo schema delle tavole di Polibio (fig.1):

Polibio lamenta la scarsa efficienza del sistema escogitato da Enea Tattico in quanto non è possibile prevedere sempre ciò che accadrà e, in misura ancora minore, scriverlo sempre sul bastoncino precisando quanti fanti o navi stiano giungendo. Senza questa fondamentale informazione, afferma lo storico, sarà difficile capire come e in che quantità inviare aiuti. Un metodo efficace fu quello escogitato da Cleosseno e Democlito (personaggi probabilmente di epoca ellenistica ma dei quali non si sa nulla) e perfezionato nell’epoca in cui Polibio scrive, forse da lui stesso. Polibio, nella lunga e complessa descrizione del giusto metodo dei segnali di fuoco, riportata nel X capitolo al paragrafo 45, afferma che bisogna comportarsi così:

1 a-e 2 f-j 3 k-o 4 p-u 5 v-y

tÄ t´m stoiweÊym pk±hor Øn±r de² kalbÇmomtar dieke²m eÓr pÁme cqÇllata. keÊxei dÁ tÄ tekeuta²om Ømà stoiweÊz: to³to d'oÕ bkÇptei pqÄr t±m wqeÊam. letÀ dÁ ta³ta pkate²a paqesjeuÇshai pÁmte toÅr lÈkkomtar ×podidËmai tÂm puqseÊam ÐkkÉkoir ØjatÁqour jaÊ cqÇxai t´m leq´m Øn±r eÓr èjastom kate²om, jàpeita sumhÈshai pqÄr aÜtoÅr diËti to³r lÁm pqÍtour Ðqe² puqsoÅr Û lÁkkym sglaÊmeim °la jaà dÌo jaà leme² lÁwqir àm Û áteqor ÐmtaÊqg. to³to d`ástai wÇqim to³ diÀ taÌtgr t±r puqseÊar Øauto²r ÐmholokocÂsashai diËti pqosÁwousi. jahaiqehÁmtym dÁ toÌtym (Û) sglaÊm´m Ðqe² lÁm to³r pqÍtour Ñj t´m eÕymÌlym, diasav´m tÄ pkate²om po²om sjope²m, o½om Ñam lÁm tÄ pq´tom, èm, àm dÁ tÄ deÌteqom, dÌo, jaÊ jatÀ kËcom oìty:to³r dÁ eutÁqour Ñj t´m deni´m jatÀ tÄm aÕtÄm kÄcom, po²om deÂsei cqÇlla t´m Ñj to³ pkateÃou cqÀveim a¹ tÄm ÐpodewÄlemom tÂm puqseÊam 12

I fraintendimenti di cui parlano Enea Tattico e Polibio derivano probabilmente dalla leggenda che riferisce di come, durante la guerra di Troia, per vendicare la morte del figlio Palamede, il padre utilizzò delle segnalazioni luminose da un promontorio per ingannare i nemici e fare schiantare le loro navi contro le rocce del promontorio Sigeo nell’Ellesponto, dove pare fosse stata collocata una struttura simile ad un faro.14 Questo racconto era stato riportato anche dal poeta arcaico Leschete, vissuto intorno al VII secolo a.C. e autore della “Piccola Iliade”. Alcuni studiosi hanno interpretato la struttura rappresentata sulla Tabula Capitolina come quella che Filostrato aveva illustrato nella Tabula Iliaca e le hanno dato l’appellativo di faro (fig. 2 a-b): si tratta di una struttura di forma rettangolare sormontata da un frontone a due spioventi, assai simile a un altare.

Visto che la successiva descrizione troppo si discosterebbe dall’argomento che si intende trattare in questa sede, ritengo opportuno riassumere brevemente l’idea di Polibio: lo storico

Questo tipo di segnali luminosi era ancora praticato all’epoca di Plutarco che, nella Vita di Pericle,15 parla infatti di v´ta pÌqsym. Per concludere questa breve introduzione sui segnali di fuoco come precursori dei fari sarà opportuno fare un salto in avanti, almeno dal punto di vista cronologico. Nel II sec. d.C. visse un personaggio, di nome Polieno, che esercitò l’avvocatura sotto Marco Aurelio. Anch’egli fu autore di un trattatello di strategia, intitolato Stratagemata. In esso è riportato un metodo di segnalazioni per mezzo del fuoco

11 Pol. X, 44-45 quanto descritto sopra è parafrasato, secondo la traduzione di M.Mari, ed. Bur, Milano 2002. 12 Pol. X, 45, 7: “Si deve prendere l’insieme dei caratteri dell’alfabeto, nel loro ordine, e suddividerlo in cinque gruppi di cinque lettere ciascuno. L’ultimo mancherà di un carattere, cosa che non ne danneggia l’uso. In seguito le due parti che intendono scambiarsi segnalazioni con il fuoco debbono preparare cinque tavolette e scrivere su ogni tavoletta, in ordine, uno dei gruppi di lettere, e poi concordare tra loro che chi intende fare dei segnali solleverà le prime torce, due insieme, e aspetterà finché l’altro non le solleverà a sua volta. Ciò servirà a comunicarsi a vicenda, segnalandolo col fuoco, che si sta prestando attenzione. Dopo che queste torce sono state abbassate, chi fa il segnale solleverà le prime sulla sinistra, facendo sapere quale tavoletta bisognerà considerare (ad esempio: se è la prima, una, se la seconda, due, e così via). Le seconde sulla destra, secondo lo stesso criterio, facendo sapere quale lettera tra quelle della tavoletta dovrà a sua volta scrivere chi riceve la segnalazione.” Trad. M.Mari, ed. Bur, Milano 2002.

13

Per un maggiore approfondimento si legga Pol. X, 46-47 e DIELS 1965, p. 85. Giustamente l’autore tedesco fa notare come per la frase proposta dallo storico “arrivano cento cretesi”, si sarebbero dovute impiegare qualcosa come 173 fiaccole, il che avrebbe comportato almeno un’ora di segnalazioni. Si veda inoltre: FORBES 1966, p. 177. 14 Philostr., Eroico, 46-47. 15 Plut. Pericle, 7.

122

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO sperimentato addirittura dai Cartaginesi. Riporto, di seguito, la traduzione di Elisabetta Bianco:

emessi di notte che svolgevano la medesima funzione di quella che eserciterà poi il faro.

“Mentre i Cartaginesi devastavano la Sicilia, per poter portare in fretta dalla Libia ciò che era loro necessario, costruirono due clessidre pari di grandezza e disegnarono su ciascuna dei cerchi uguali con la medesima iscrizione. Era registrata in una fascia la necessità di navi, in un’altra di imbarcazioni...Dopo aver iscritto così tutti i cerchi, tennero una clessidra in Sicilia e mandarono l’altra a Cartagine, con l’ordine, qualora vedessero alzare un segnale di fuoco da parte loro, di esaminare di quale fascia si trattasse quando fosse apparso il secondo segnale; leggendo la scritta riportata in quel punto, quanto più in fretta possibile dovevano mandare ciò che era indicato nella scritta. In questo modo i Cartaginesi avevano un rapidissimo sistema per trasportare quanto era loro necessario per la guerra” 16

Ma Omero, in un altro contesto dell’Odissea,21 utilizza invece il verbo puqpokÈy per dire “accendo, mantengo acceso il fuoco”; egli dice che dopo aver navigato per nove notti di seguito, alla decima finalmente appariva la terra natìa ma questo, nonostante si riferisca sempre all’uso di fare segnali tramite il fuoco ai naviganti, è l’unico caso in cui non viene utilizzato il verbo puqseÌy o il sostantivo puqËr, impiegati invece da tutti gli autori Greci a lui successivi, allorché dovranno parlare di segnalazioni per mezzo di fuoco.

jaÊ dÉ puqpokÈomtar ÑkeÌssolem ÑccÅr ÑËmtar 22 Uniche eccezioni sono date da due autori del V sec. a.C.: il tragediografo Euripide e lo storico Tucidide; entrambi utilizzano il sostantivo vqujtËr dal verbo vqÌcy“abbrustolisco”.

Il sistema delle segnalazioni luminose era già stato tramandato da Omero nell’Iliade: il poeta afferma che quando le città erano assediate si usava fare segnali con il fumo durante il giorno e con il fuoco durante la notte. Nel canto XVIII, dedicato alla fabbricazione delle armi, Omero paragona il bagliore sprigionatosi dalla nube d’oro che Atena ha posto sulla testa di Achille a quello prodotto dalle segnalazioni effettuate durante l’assedio delle città:

Nel caso di Tucidide si parla del tentativo di Cnemo e Brasida di attaccare il porto del Pireo. Dal momento che esso, all’epoca della guerra del Peloponneso, era sprovvisto di una flotta di guardia, gli attaccanti, spaventati dal loro stesso audace piano, ripiegarono verso il promontorio di Salamina ove erano tre navi di guardia e un forte, entrambi lì situati per impedire che qualcosa uscisse o entrasse da Megara, città sulla quale il promontorio si affacciava. L’assalto riuscì solo in un primo momento perché, dice lo storico greco:

Ýr d’ëte japmÄr ÓÍm Ñn çsteor aÓhÁq’ êjgtai, tgkËhem Ñj mÉsou, tÂm dÉÞoi ÐlvilÇwymtai, oê te pamglÈqoi stuceq© jqÊmomtai „AqgÞ ÷steor Ñj svetÈqou˙ çla d’Òekiz jatadÌmti puqsoÊ te vkecÈhousim ÑpÉtqiloi, ÜxËse d’aÕc cÊcmetai Ðþssousa peqijtiËmessim ÓdÁhai, aã jÈm pyr sÅm mgousÃm çqey Ðkjt±qer êjymomtai: ír Ðp’’Awikk±or jevak±r sÈkar aÓhÁq êjame:17

’Er dÁ tÀr ’AhÉmar vqujtoÊ te Šqomto pokÈlioi23 Un altro simile episodio lo si ritrova nello scontro tra Plateesi e Peloponnesi, dove i segnali di fuoco vengono utilizzati come mezzo di inganno:

Ancora, nel canto XIX il fulgore dello scudo di Achille verrà paragonato, ancora una volta, al fuoco che brilla nella notte e serve a guidare i naviganti:

vqujtoÊ te ®qomto Ñr tÀr hÉbar pokÈlioi: paqam²swom dÁ jaà oÚ Ñj t±r pËkeyr Pkatai±r ÐpÄ to³ teÊwour vqujtoÅr pokkoÅr pqËteqom paqeseuaslÈmour Ñr aÕtÄ to³to, ëpyr Ðsav± tÀ sgle²a t±r vqujtyqÊar to²r pokÈlioir ¨ jaÊ l bogho²em 24

Ýr d’ût’÷m Ñj pËmtoio sÈkar maÌt\si vamÉ\ jaiolÈmoio puqËr, tË te jaÊetai ÜxËh’ôqesvi stahl© Ñm oÓopËkz:toÅr d’oÕj ÑhÈkomtar ðeakkai pËmtom Ñp’ÓwhuËemta vÊkym ÐpÇmeushe vÈqousim: ær ×p’’Awikk±or sÇjeor sÈkar aÓhÈq’êjame18

Eschilo, che scrive tra VI e V sec. a.C., utilizzerà indistintamente i due termini nella tragedia Agamennone. Nel prologo, Agamennone dice a Clitemnestra che se fosse riuscito a distruggere Ilio lo avrebbe segnalato δια πορσο³25, tramite segnali di fuoco, e lo stesso ripete poco più avanti Clitemnestra che aspetta il detto segnale da Troia.26 Poco più avanti però, utilizza il termine vqÌjtor:

In entrambi i casi il poeta greco usa il termine puqËr, termine derivato evidentemente dal verbo puqseÌy, che significa “accendo”, “brucio”, ma, in seconda istanza, anche “do segnali con il fuoco”.19 Il termine puqËr si presta in traduzione a molte ambiguità. Esso è infatti utilizzato dagli autori greci anche in senso esteso per indicare il “fuoco del sole” o il “fuoco dell’amore”, o semplicemente la fiamma.20 Nel nostro caso, invece, Omero si riferisce espressamente ai segnali di fuoco

ØjÀr dÁ vqujto³ v´r Ñp’EÕqÊpou ™oÀr LesspÊou vÌkani sglaÊmei lokËm 27 21

Hom. Od. X, 30. Hom. Od. X, 30: “...e vedevamo gente, vicino, che fuochi accendeva”. Trad. M.Giammarco, ed. Newton, Roma 1997. 23 Thuk. II, 94 “...ma si alzarono dei fuochi che segnalarono ad Atene l’arrivo del nemico”. Trad. F.Ferrari, ed. Bur, Milano 1993. 24 Thuk. III, 22: “...e verso Tebe si alzarono fuochi per annunciare il nemico, ma anche i Plateesi dalla città avevano a loro volta innalzato molti fuochi sulle mura, fin da prima preparati a questo scopo, perché per i nemici fossero indistinti i segnali di fuoco e così non accorressero in aiuto.” Trad. F.Ferrari, ed. Bur Milano 1993. 25 Aischyl. Ag., 2 ed. UTET, Torino 1987 a cura di G. e M. Morani. 26 Aischyl. Ag.9; 281-282, 288-289. ed. UTET, Torino 1987 a cura di G. e M. Morani. Questo sistema è stato chiamato dagli studiosi tedeschi novecenteschi Feuerpost e venne utilizzato ancora nel 1813 da Metternich. 27 Aischyl. Ag. 291-292: “...poi da lontano la luce del falò arrivando presso le correnti dell’Euripo dà il segnale alle sentinelle del Messapio.” Trad. G. e M. Morani, ed. UTET, Torino 1987. 22

16

Polyain. VI, 16, Trad. E.Bianco, Ed. Dell’Orso, Torino 1997. Hom. Il. XVIII, 207-214: “Come quando da una città il fumo che s’alza giunge al cielo da lungi, da un’isola che i nemici circondano: tutto il giorno s’adoprano quelli in tremenda lotta dai loro bastioni, ma poi, col tramonto del sole, fitti ardono i fuochi ed alta la vampa si leva con impeto affinché dalle genti vicine sia vista, se possan venire su navi a difenderli dalla rovina, così dalla testa d’Achille al cielo giungeva il fulgore”. Trad. M.Giammarco, ed. Newton, Roma 1997. 18 Hom. Il. XIX, 375-380 : “Qual brilla ai marinai sul mare a volte il chiarore d’un fuoco che arde- in alto sui monti esso divampa in un ovile solingo- ma i turbini loro malgrado per il mare pescoso li traggono, dai loro cari lontano, tale giungeva al cielo il fulgor dello scudo bello e ben fatto d’Achille”. Trad. M.Giammarco, ed. Newton, Roma 1997. 19 ROCCI 1943 p.1632, Xen. Ag. An. VII,8,15. 20 Rispettivamente, Op. Hal. 4,353; Pind. I. 3,61 e Teoc. XXIII,7; infine Bakchyl. XII, 82; Sen. An. 7,8,15 17

123

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Un altro tragediografo, Euripide, ancora nel V a.C., accenna a questo tipo di segnali di fuoco nella tragedia Le Fenicie:

indicate, su tre differenti livelli, delle aperture-finestre, il che ha fatto supporre che ci si trovi di fronte a un modellino di torre semaforica (fig. 3a).

’Epeà d’ûr ÐveÊhg puqsÄr ír Tuqsgmij±r sÇkpiccor Òj s±la voimÊou lÇwgr28

Le finestre piccole del piano più alto erano per le vedette che ricevevano i segnali, quelle poste ai livelli inferiori sarebbero servite come aperture dalle quali trasmettere la fonte luminosa. Tali torri sarebbero state poste, in base alle parole degli studiosi del mondo fenicio-punico, in Sicilia e in Africa,35 in modo da permettere all’isola italiana di essere sempre in contatto con il porto di Cartagine,36 presso il quale, senza dubbio doveva sorgere un faro o una torre semaforica, ma del quale, tuttavia, non si è trovata alcuna traccia né riproduzione iconografica, anche se potremmo immaginare che tale ruolo fosse stato svolto dalla Torre dell’Ammiraglio, collocata immediatamente sopra i navalia.

Ancora nel IV secolo d.C., Vegezio consigliava questo tipo di segnalazioni nelle azioni militari agli alleati: similiter si diuisae sint copiae, per noctem flaminis, per die fumo significant sociis29 Dunque, sino ad ora si è visto come gli autori arcaici non facciano mai espressamente riferimento ai fari come noi oggi li intendiamo, o, comunque come sarebbero stati dopo la costruzione della torre di Alessandria. Erodoto, che pure fu un grande viaggiatore, non ne fa mai menzione: nelle Storie, composte nel V sec. a.C., si possono trovare solo riferimenti a segnali di fuoco come abbiamo visto sinora, con la sola eccezione della Torre di Perseo:

In Sardegna, a Nora, presso l’altura del Coltellazzo, furono scoperti dal Patroni, nel secolo scorso, avanzi di una torre punica (scheda 49) che, sicuramente, venne utilizzata come faro. L’attuale torre del Coltellazzo sorge circa a 100 m di distanza dalla precedente, della quale nulla più rimane. La datazione a un periodo preromano fu possibile grazie ad uno strato di riempimento presso il quale furono rinvenuti numerosi oggetti, da una punta in ossidiana di età eneolitica a cocci nuragici fino ad una lucerna punica e a numerosi frammenti di ceramica campana, databili IV a.C..37

’apÄ PeqsÈor jakeolÈmgr sjopi±r kÈcomter…30 Essi vengono utilizzati non tanto per guidare i naviganti quanto, come già aveva spiegato Tucidide, per informare, rendere noto:

ta³ta oÚ Ñp’ ‚AqtelisÊz stqatopedeuËlemoi pumhÇmomtai diÀ puqs´m Ñj SjiÇhou31

La più importante scoperta di faro precedente a quello di Alessandria e ascrivibile al mondo fenicio è però avvenuta in Sicilia, presso Monte Nandore, dove il Bejor38 ha recentemente scoperto gli avanzi di una delle torri di avvistamento di cui parla Livio. Il toponimo del luogo, inevitabilmente legato alla parola araba ndur, che significa faro,39 tradisce la primaria funzione di specola di questa torre.

Non bisogna, tuttavia, trascurare le parole di Livio32 che ci informa di alcune torri di epoca punica, che, senza dubbio, dovevano avere anche la funzione di specola. Una la possedeva anche Annibale ad Adrumeto (scheda 2).33 Tuttavia, il sistema di segnalazioni ottiche più accreditato per il mondo fenicio-punico rimane quello degli Stratagemmi di Polieno (fig. 1), recentemente riconsiderato anche in base ad un cippo votivo34 di forma cilindrica del IV a.C. nel quale sono

Un tentativo di modo per farsi luce nella notte fu ipotizzato dal Fonquerle agli inizi degli Anni Settanta del Novecento. Confrontando una particolare anfora trovata nel relitto rinvenuto lungo il fiume Herault presso il porto di Agde nella Francia meridionale databile al II secolo a.C. (fig. 3b in alto) con un dipinto tebano della XIII dinastia (1600 a.C.) (fig. 3b in basso). Il Fonquerle ipotizzò che l’anfora, dotata di un grande foro circolare al centro (del diametro di 10 cm) e altre cinque aperture a sezione triangolare non fosse altro che un contenitore per far luce alla nave nella notte: i fori triangolari avrebbero costituito le luci di posizione, mentre spettava al più grande foro centrale di produrre più luce possibile per guidare il navigante nella notte e, credo, in caso di nebbia: la fiamma era alimentata, con ogni probabilità, da una spugna imbevuta di olio (fig. 4).40 In realtà questo sistema era totalmente inutile perché avrebbe illuminato solo pochi metri d’acqua a breve distanza dalla prua della nave, ma mai avrebbe potuto segnalare un massiccio roccioso o la presenza di qualsivoglia altro ostacolo.

28 Eur. Phoen. 1377-1378: “Quando squillò la tromba tirrenica, segnale, come la torcia, della cruenta battaglia.... Trad. O.Musso, ed. UTET, Torino 2001. 29 Veg. mil. III, 5, 12: “similmente se le truppe sono state dislocate, si comunica con gli alleati di notte con il fuoco, di giorno con il fumo…”, trad. M.Formisano, ed, Bur 2003. 30 Hdt. II, 15, 2-4: “i quali affermano che solo il Delta è Egitto, dicendo che la parte costiera va dalla così detta Torre di Perseo fino alle Taricheie di Pelusio…”, trad. A.Izzo D’Acinni, ed. Bur 1984. Questa misteriosa torre, collocata da Erodoto sulla costa vicino alla bocca canonica, è collocata da Strab. XVII, 1, 18 presso la bocca bolbitinica. ALLARD 1979, p. 507 ritiene che la torre fosse un faro presso Aboukir, e, effettivamente tra i vari significati del termine σκοπη, c’è anche quello di specola o vedetta. 31 Hdt. VII, 183: “I Greci accampati presso l’Artemisio appresero questi avvenimenti da Sciato per mezzo di fuochi”; Hdt. IX, 3: “...perché con segnalazioni di fuochi di isola in isola pensava (Mardonio) di rendere noto al re, che era a Sardi, di avere in suo possesso Atene.” Trad. A.Izzo D’Accinni, ed. Bur, Milano 1984. 32 Liv. XXII, 19: Livio parla di molte torri poste in luoghi elevati in Spagna. Sarà forse anche per questo che, qualche secolo dopo, in epoca traianea, nacque la leggenda che il faro romano di Brigantium (scheda 73), presso l’odierna La Coruña, in Galizia, fosse stato realizzato già in epoca fenicia. 33 FOUCHER 1964, pp. 81-82. Ringrazio il sempre disponibile Prof. Piero Bartoloni, docente di Archeologia Fenicio-Punica all’Università di Sassari, con il quale ho avuto per tre anni l’onore di collaborare nello scavo di Monte Sirai presso S.Antioco (Sardegna), per le preziose informazioni sull’utilizzo del faro nel mondo fenicio-punico, anche a livello bibliografico. 34 Per un confronto con il mondo romano si pensi al celebre faro votivo in bronzo di Libarna, conservato nei depositi del Museo di Antichità di Torino (fig. 17); MEDAS 2000, p. 24.

35

MEDAS 2000, pp. 19-20. In realtà anche pensando di porre un ripetitore sull’isola di Pantelleria, risulta impossibile comunicare a così lunga distanza tra Sicilia ed Africa senza almeno un terzo ripetitore posto a livello intermedio. 36 Per una breve storia sui porti punici di Mozia e Cartagine, e al relativo problema del cothon di cui parlano le fonti antiche, rimando a MONTEVECCHI, 1996, pp. 159-161 e al già citato volume di MEDAS 2000, pp. 26-29. 37 PESCE 1972, p. 105, fig. 93. 38 Si veda il relativo articolo nei Quaderni della Soprintendenza di Cagliari e Oristano. 39 Ancora una volta desidero ringraziare il Prof. Piero Bartoloni per questa importantissima informazione. 40 FONQUERLE 1973, p. 67.

124

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO Questo tipo di navigazione è stato fatto risalire addirittura al VII secolo a.C. e verrà ancora utilizzato da Scipione durante la seconda guerra punica, come riferiscono Diodoro Siculo e Livio: lumina in nauibus singola rostratae.41

per i naviganti in quanto il marinaio che navigava di giorno aveva un chiaro punto di riferimento in questi colossi di pietra visibili sia dal lato europeo che da quello africano (fig. 7). Non bisogna dimenticare che in quella zona, nella parte gaditana, sorgeva anche il tempio fenicio di Melkart-Eracle che, forse, di notte era illuminato per guidare i naviganti ed essere sicuro punto di riferimento al posto delle colonne d’Ercole nelle ore notturne non più visibili.

Passando al mondo etrusco, i porti erano dei centri organizzati per il ricovero delle navi, ma questa popolazione preferiva navigare di giorno perché non possedevano strumenti per la navigazione ma si basavano prevalentemente sulla conformazione delle coste e sui fondali, e le rare volte che erano costretti a navigare di notte, alla maniera fenicia, osservavano le stelle.42 Conosciamo diversi nomi di aree portuali etrusche (Pyrgi, Graviscae, Alsium, Algae, Regae…), fenicio-puniche (Olbia, Tharros, Karalis, Bithia, Sulcis, Motia, Lilibeo, Drepana…) e magnogreche (Pythecusa, Cuma, Neapolis, Poseidonia,Velia…) ma pochissimo delle rispettive strutture portuali. Sappiamo che gli Etruschi, avevano l’abitudine di collocare i santuari extraurbani presso i porti delle città. Rutilio Namaziano43 riporta, infatti, come essi non usassero fari simili a quelli dei Romani ma alte torri poste nei santuari extraurbani con il duplice ruolo di faro e fortezza, e il poeta gallico cita espressamente il caso di Populonia (fig. 5). Resta emblematico il caso di Pyrgi,44 il cui nome deriva dal greco PÌqcoi, che significa “torri”, ma, spesso, è utilizzato per segnalare “torri faree”, il che darebbe adito a una rivalutazione della teoria di Namaziano e farebbe supporre la presenza di uno o più fari nel celebre santuario etrusco. Secondo ipotesi non troppo antiche, gli Etruschi avevano appreso dai Fenici il sistema della navigazione astronomica ma avevano escogitato un sistema in caso che nella notte fosse impossibile vedere le stelle a causa della foschia. In molte rappresentazioni marinaresche di epoca etrusca, troviamo una colomba posta sulla prua della nave, metodo che già era stato sperimentato da Gilgamesh per orientarsi durante il diluvio di Utnapishtim e che gli Etruschi avrebbero fatto proprio (fig. 6).45

Ancora Avieno, autore dell’Ora Maritima, composta nel IV secolo d.C., inizia la descrizione del suo racconto dalla città di Cadice e dalle Colonne d’Ercole: Hic Gadir urbs est, dicta Tartessus prius. Hic sunt columnae pertinacis Herculis, Abila atque Calpe (laeva dicti caespitis, Libyae propinqua est alia): duro perstrepunt Septentrione, sed loco certae tenent48 Forse anche alcuni menhir di notevoli dimensioni, che erano stati collocati presso le spiagge del selvaggio Finisterrae, nell’odierna Bretagna, potevano assolvere la funzione di segnacoli per avvistare la terra, come quello di Locmariaquer, noto ai Romani come Colonna del Nord, ma già crollato in età imperiale (fig. 8). Recenti studi ipotizzano che anche la colonna superstite sul promontorio di Reggio Calabria fosse il resto di un antico tempio dedicato a Poseidone e che, una volta ridotto a stato di rudere, fosse stato preso come punto di riferimento per i naviganti. La colonna è situata in un luogo elevato sulla collina e nello stesso sito venne edificata una torre di avvistamento nel XV secolo e il faro attuale nel XX secolo che ha dato il nome alla collina stessa nota come Punta del Faro.49 Non è da escludere che, in età romana, la colonna sia stata davvero utilizzata come faro dal momento che Strabone usa il termine puqcÊom ti, piccola torre.50

Ancora diverso è il caso della navigazione notturna dei Greci prima della costruzione del faro di Alessandria (III secolo a.C.): essi erano soliti porre fuochi sulle colonne dei santuari posti nei pressi dei porti, come testimonierebbe un noto mosaico di Palestrina che rappresenta una colonna illuminata a giorno presso il porto Pireo di Atene (Tav. 57, fig. 112). E’ noto dalle fonti che i Greci erano soliti illuminare i templi nelle ore notturne, come avveniva, presumilbilmente, per il tempio di Atena sulla Punta Campanella (scheda 52), nel tempio dedicato forse a Poseidone a Trezene e nel tempio ionico dedicato a Poseidon Asphaleios sul promontorio di Castellamare di Velia.46 E’ interessante notare, a proposito dei peripli greci, che tutti partono dalle Colonne d’Ercole e quindi dal porto di Cadice che già in età fenicia doveva essere attrezzato per permettere anche lunghe soste alle navi: da questo porto partirono Coleo di Samo, lo Pseudo-Scilace di Carianda, Pitea di Marsiglia e prima di loro Imilcone, Annone e gli atri esploratori fenicio-punici.47

Recentemente, è stato proposto un utilizzo dei nuraghi sardi in funzione di fari in epoca romana o precedente. La suggestione è forte e, immaginare che in Sardegna, ad eccezione di Olbia e Nora, un popolo di esperti navigatori come i Fenici non avesse alcun mezzo di segnalazione luminosa è difficile. L’autore ipotizza che, come avveniva per i fuochi posti sulla sommità dei templi greci, i nuraghi, almeno in epoca romana, venissero utilizzati a tale scopo e cita il Nuraghe del Mare e il Nuraghe di Cala del Vino nell’omonima cala nei pressi di Alghero.51 Resta da trattare un ultimo argomento, per completezza, su come gli antichi navigassero e quali punti di riferimento avessero prima della costruzione dei fari. I giganteschi segnacoli di entrata al porto, comunque segnalato di notte dalle luci che splendevano sui templi, enormi statue che servivano come punto di riferimento ai naviganti: qui ci limitiamo a citare il Colosso del Portus Raphti e il Colosso di Rodi. Il Colosso del

Non è da escludere che proprio le Colonne d’Ercole, due grandi massi posti lungo lo Stretto di Gibillterra, fungessero da “faro”

48 “Lì la città di Gadir, un tempo chiamata Tartesso. Lì le colonne del tenace Ercole, Abila e Calpe, l’una sulla sponda sinistra dello stretto, l’altra vicina alla Libia: strepitano per la violenza del vento di settentrione, ma mantengono saldo il loro posto”, trad. L. Antonelli, ed. Esedra, Padova 1998; Strab. III, 5, 4. 49 MERCURI 1998, p. 559. Ringrazio il Prof. Michel Gras che mi ha fornito questo prezioso dato bibliografico. 50 Strab. V, 6. Spesso il termine πυργός in greco indica un faro, la parola πυργίον ha evidentemente lo stesso significato. E’ noto che prima della costruzione del monumentale faro di Alessandria, i naviganti avessero l’abitudine di prendere come punti di riferimento i promontori, i templi posti in cima ad essi, i colossi, le montagne di grandi dimensioni come l’Etna e così via, cfr. MEDAS 2004, pp. 71-80.

41

Diod. XX, 75; Liv. XXIX, 25. PETTENA 2002, p. 34. 43 Rut. Nam. 405-410. Solo l’archeologia subacquea potrà trovare uno o più fari a Pyrgi, si veda ENEI 2008. 44 In generale sui porti etruschi e sul caso di Pyrgi si veda: COLONNA 2000, pp. 251-336. 45 SANDARS 1986, p. 145; LUZÒN NOGUÈ/COÌN CUENCA 1986, pp. 6570. 46 SCHMIEDT 1975, pp. 62, 68, 75. A Velia fu trovata una torre circolare identificata erroneamente come faro come ricorda GRECO 1996, p. 184. 47 Per una rassegna sull’esplorazioni greche si veda FIORE 1950, fondamentale testo per gli scambi tra Greci ed Etruschi rimane GRAS 1985, pp. 393-681. 42

51

125

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Portus Raphti in Attica, rappresenta una donna (acefala e senza braccia) che indossa un chitone ed è seduta su un trono rettangolare di pietra (fig. 9).

falsa della statua che, in quell’epoca, era considerata un faro (fig. 10).57 In realtà, è piuttosto evidente che una statua della divinità tutelare dell’isola, Helios, non avrebbe mai potuto essere rappresentata in quel modo, consentendo alle navi di passargli addirittura sotto le gambe; inoltre se veramente una fiaccola fosse stata posizionata a 30 m di altezza per fungere da faro, vi sarebbe stato bisogno di qualcuno che l’alimentasse e di una scala che conducesse a quel piano. Una scala esterna era impossibile per ragioni estetiche ed una interna di difficile realizzazione, anche perché avrebbe messo seriamente a rischio la stabilità della statua: dunque, il Colosso di Rodi non è mai stato un faro. Tuttavia, come per il Colosso del Porto Raphti non gli si può negare il compito di immenso segnacolo di entrata al porto e punto di riferimento per lo stesso se ancora Luciano, nell’Icaromenippo, afferma:

La statua era alta solo 2, 35 m e collocata su una base di altri 2 m che a sua volta si elevava su una collina all’entrata dell’ampio porto. Dal momento che ancora nell’Ottocento si considerava il porto Raphti come l’ingresso al porto di Atene si può immaginare che la statua fungesse da monumentale ingresso e come punto di riferimento.52 In un Itinerarium Maritimum, composto dopo il 1571 si legge: La conoscenza dell’isola di Rafti è una Statua grande di Marmo, che tiene in mano un paio di forbice, e si vede lontano m. 30 in mar .53 Altri viaggiatori, come il Perry, affermavano che sulla testa della statua era stata collocata una luce in modo da far funzionare la statua come faro.54

jaÊ eê ce l tÄm ‚QodÊym jokossÄm ÑhesÇlgm jaà tÄm Ñpà t¨ VÇqz pÌqcom, e¾ óhi, pamteke´r ðm le Ù c± diÈkahe 58

La tradizione che la statua fosse servita da faro nell’antichità arrivò al punto che nel 1809/10 il viaggiatore inglese J.C. Hobhouse scriveva che alla bocca del porto vi era un’isola rocciosa sulla quale si vedeva molto chiaramente una statua colossale che una volta serviva come “Pharos”55 (egli usa proprio questa parola).

Quanto alla reale iconografia della statua essa doveva presentarsi del tutto simile a una piccola replica trovata nella villa marittima del giurista Ulpiano a Santa Marinella, presso Civitavecchia (fig. 11 a, b). Si tratta di una statua, in marmo di Paro, raffigurante Apollo-Helios stante. La statua presenta il dio nudo con la sola faretra a tracolla, il braccio destro doveva tendere verso l’alto, quello sinistro invece, è indirizzato verso il basso, le gambe sono leggermente divaricate.

Non essendo questo il tema principale della mia trattazione rimando alla vasta letteratura in materia e mi limito a tracciare un breve quadro dell’altro celebre colosso, situato nell’isola di Rodi.

Probabilmente, si tratta di una replica del Colosso di Rodi che l’aristocratico romano aveva posto all’ingresso della sua villa. La corretta iconografia del Colosso, stando anche ai recenti studi dell’Hoepfener,59 doveva rappresentare Helios nell’atto di guardare all’orizzonte (fig. 11c) dando così il benvenuto nel porto di Rodi e controllando se le navi in arrivo erano amiche o nemiche. Il Colosso è ancora ricordato da un anonimo geografo del IV secolo d.C., autore della Descrizione del mondo e delle sue genti.60

Il Colosso era collocato dove oggi sorge il forte San Nicola all’ingresso del porto di Rodi: l’altezza del colosso, oltre 30 m, era nota già alle fonti antiche che si meravigliavano a tal punto dell’opera costruita da Carete di Lindo nel III a.C. da elencarla tra le sette meraviglie del mondo antico. Plinio, ad esempio, al cui tempo il Colosso era ormai crollato, lo descriveva così: Ante omnes autem in admiratione fuit Solis colossus Rhodi, quem fecerat Chares Lindius, Lysippi supra dicti discepulus. LXX cubitorum altitudinis fuit hoc simulacrum, post LXVI annum terrae motu prostratum, sed iacens quoque miraculo est. Pauci pollicem eius amplecuntur, maiores sunt digiti quam pleraeque statuae. Vasti specus hiant defractis membris ; spectantur intus magnae molis saxa, quorum pondere stabiliverat eum constutuens. Duodecim annis tradunt effectum CCC talentis, quae contigerant ex apparatu regis Demetrii relicto morae taedio obessa Rhodo 56

“A pie’ della città [Rodi n.d.r.], inter levante, è il porto, bellissimo et securo...dall’altra banda è una buona fortezza...seguita poi da detta fortezza un altro molo, lungo più che mille passi et entra in mare for del porto assai. Et in sulla punta di decto è una fortezza inexpugnabile, decta la Torre di San Nicolò, la quale da ogni banda batte tutti i navili che volessino sforzare il porto..et sopra decto porto da una banda era un pie’ et dall’altro dove hoggi è una chiesa di Sancto Antonio, era l’altro gran colosso che a Rodi era...et ancora si veghono certe cose. Questo Colosso era una statua di rame alta cinquanta piedi...et da detta statua e’ Rodiani furno detti Colossensi...” Bonsignore di Francesco, Viaggio di Gierusalemme, 1497, Magl. XIII, 93; f. 34v, f.35v.

Senza perdere troppo tempo nell’annoso problema della datazione della statua (probabilmente il 292 a.C., data a cui risalgono anche celebri versi che l’Antologia Palatina dedica alla costruzione del Colosso), è ormai noto che il Rinascimento e i secoli successivi ci hanno restituito un’ immagine del tutto

57

La costruzione della statua avvenne a seguito del fallito assedio di Demetrio di Faro, avvenuto nel 304 a.C., anno in cui iniziarono i lavori che si protrassero per dodici anni. La statua venne quindi ultimata nel 292 a.C. per opera di Carete di Lindo, ma nel 232 a.C. crollò in seguito ad un terremoto. La statua rimase visibile a terra, spezzata all’altezza delle ginocchia, sino a che nel 672 d.C. gli Arabi, impadronitisi di Rodi, vendettero i resti a un ebreo che la leggenda vuole abbia portato in Siria trasportandoli su 900 cammelli come attesta anche Costantinus Porphyrogenitos, De Administrando Imperio, 20-21. Sulla storia della statua si vedano anche MAYRON 1973, pp. 62 ss., MORENO 1973-74, pp. 453-466. 58 Lukian. Quomodo istoria inscribenda sit, 46 [24], 12-13: “...e se non avessi veduto il Colosso di Rodi e la torre di faro, tieni per certo che la terra non l’avrei affatto riconosciuta” Trad. V.Longo. ed. UTET, Torino 1986. 59 HOEPFENER 2003. 60 Anonimo di IV secolo, Descrizione del mondo e delle sue genti, LXIII, ed. Salerno, Roma 2005.

52

VERMEULE 1962, p. 66. Firenze, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Cod. Medic. Palat. 54. 54 VERMEULE 1962, p. 67. 55 HOBHOUSE 1809/10, p. 348. 56 Plin. XXXIV, 41-42.: “Ma il più ammirato di tutti era il Colosso del Sole che si trovava a Rodi opera di Carete di Lindo, discepolo del sopra citato Lisippo. Esso era alto 70 cubiti. Questa statua, caduta a terra dopo sessantasei anni a causa di un terremoto, anche se a terra costituisce uno spettacolo meraviglioso. Pochi possono abbracciare il suo pollice, e le sue dita sono più grandi che molte altre statue intere. Vaste cavità si aprono nelle membra spezzate; all’interno si possono osservare pietre di grande dimensione, del cui peso l’artista si era servito per consolidare il colosso durante la sua costruzione. Dicono che fu costruito in dodici anni e con una spesa di 300 talenti ricavati dalla vendita del materiale abbandonato dal re Demetrio allorché, stanco del suo prolungarsi, tolse l’assedio a Rodi”. Trad. A.Corso, R.Muggellesi, G.Rosati, Torino 1988. 53

126

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO Con il passare del tempo tutte le popolazioni riporranno le proprie mire espansionistiche verso l’Egitto, la cui popolazione non è mai stata esperta nell’arte del navigare tanto da doversi affidare ad altre popolazioni come per il famoso viaggio di Hatschepsut verso Punt. Gli Egizi navigavano esclusivamente lungo il corso del fiume Nilo e, per lo più, non per conquista ma per pesca: solo Wenamon, vissuto sotto Ramsete XI, capì il problema e si rivolse agli abitanti del Libano, dove erano collocati i maggiori scali portuali fenici (Tiro, Sidone, Beirut), paese dal quale arrivava il legno di cedro con cui gli Egizi iniziarono a costruire navi più resistenti anche per la navigazione marittima: il legno veniva scambiato con il papiro, pianta che in Libano non possedevano. Gli Egizi non sapevano però che nel III secolo a.C., sotto la dinastia dei Tolomei, non solo sarebbero divenuti abili naviganti ma avrebbero anche posseduto il principale porto commerciale e militare sino allora conosciuto: era ormai definitivamente nata la grande metropoli-emporio di Alessandria e con lei il primo vero faro del mondo antico.

127

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA racconta di come Mario avesse fatto tagliare un canale navigabile poiché la foce del fiume Rodano si otturava spesso a causa del deposito alluvionale. Dopo aver raccolto la maggior parte del corso del fiume ne fece dono agli abitanti di Massalia, l’odierna Marsiglia, che lo avevano aiutato nella guerra contro gli Ambroni e i Tougeni.67 Dopo aver raccontato di come i Massalioti trassero un enorme businness da questo canale ponendovi un dazio da pagare presso una torre sia per chi lo saliva, sia per chi lo discendeva, il geografo ci dice che, siccome le condizioni di visibilità erano comunque scarse, tanto che nei giorni di maltempo non si vedeva neanche da vicino:

CAPITOLO 2 Il faro di Alessandria e i fari propriamente detti: le fonti Procedendo in ordine cronologico, la prima menzione di un faro riscontrabile nelle fonti è dedicata alla torre di Alessandria, eretta nel 280 a.C. sull’isola di Faro in Egitto. Nel I secolo a.C., durante la guerra civile con Pompeo, Cesare descrive così il celebre faro nel De bello civili: Pharus est in insula turris magna altitudine, mirificis operibus extructa; quae nomen ab insula cepit. haec insula obiecta Alexandriae portum efficit...61

Lassaki´tai pÌqcour ÐmÈstgsam sgle²a, ÑnoijeioÌlemoi pÇmta tqËpom tÂm wÍqm:jaà d jaà t±r ’EvesÊar ’AqtÈlidor j×mta³ha ÚdqÌsamto ÚeqËm, wyqÊom ÐpokabËmter ä poie² m±som tÀ stËlata to³ potalo³ 68

E’ naturalmente al faro di Alessandria al quale tutte le fonti, latine e greche, si appellano, sia che vogliano descrivere la struttura di un faro, sia che vogliano semplicemente avvertire il lettore che hanno visto personalmente quella che già allora era considerata una delle meraviglie del mondo. Sempre nel I secolo a.C., il poeta elegiaco latino Tibullo richiamava il faro di Alessandria per alludere all’intero popolo egizio:

Queste torri di segnalazione, erette appositamente per permettere ai naviganti di vedere in condizioni di mal tempo, non possono che essere state dei fari. Di esse, situate a quanto dice il geografo sullo stretto della Fossa delle Marianae, probabilmente l’odierna Fos sur Mer (scheda 68), se ne è riconosciuta una a Roque d’Odor (Martigues).69

turba debeat in Pharia 62

Nel settimo libro si menziona invece la così detta Torre di Neottolemo nei pressi dell’odierna Dnjester:

Molteplici sono i fari (e le torri faree) menzionati da Strabone,63 vissuto a cavallo tra l’impero di Augusto ed i primi anni del regno di Tiberio. Nel III libro della Geografia, il geografo greco paragona la funzione della così detta Torre di Caepio,64 nel Porto detto di Menesteo in Spagna (non ancora localizzato esattamente ma da cercare alla foce del fiume BetisGuadalquivir), a quella del celebre monumento alessandrino:

’Epà dÁ t© stËlati to³ TÌqa pÌqcor ÑstÃ70 Nel XIII libro71 si parla invece della così detta Torre di Ero e di quella di Abido, distanti tra loro circa trenta stadi e situate nei rispettivi porti, inevitabilmente legate alla leggenda dei due sfortunati amanti Ero e Leandro.72 La leggenda, è opportuno ricordarla brevemente, parla di due giovani amanti il cui amore è però separato dai flutti di un mare burrascoso. Leandro vive ad Abido e brama di incontrare Ero, sacerdotessa di Afrodite, che invece abita a Sesto. Molte volte i due si incontrano finché una tempesta non rende il mare burrascoso. L’idea di attraversare il mare a nuoto di Leandro sembrerebbe dunque impraticabile.

’Emta³ha dè pou jaà tÄ lamte²om to³ LemehÈyr ÑstÊ, jaÃ Û to³ JaipÊymor údqutai pÌqcor Ñpà pÈtqar ÐlvijkÌstou, haulasÊyr jatesjeuaslÈmor, íspeq Û VÇqor, t±r t´m pkoÞfolÁmym sytgqÊar wÇqim 65 Poco più avanti, nello stesso libro, si afferma che era un antico costume porre una colonna come confine di un territorio; fu così che gli abitanti di Reggio Calabria issarono una colonna, sotto forma di torre, sullo Stretto e, in sua corrispondenza, costruirono la così detta Torre di Peloro, da interpretare come l’antico faro di Capo Peloro, in quel punto che Omero chiamava Punta del faro (Tav. 58, figg. 114, 115).66 Nel libro successivo si

ed. Stereotypa, Stuttgart 1968). Hom. Od. IV, 354-359: il poeta ci dice come di fronte all’Egitto vi fosse l’”ondeggiante” isola di Faro, distante un giorno intero dalla terra egizia, ma munita di un porto sicuro. Alcuni autori (HELMUT-WOLF 1983, pp. 63 ss.) hanno però pensato che questa Faro non fosse quella dove poi sorse la torre di Sostrato di Cnido, bensì una specie di piccola penisola in prossimità di Messina e, precisamente proprio Capo Peloro, ma forse è inverosimile che Omero non abbia menzionato alcun tipo di struttura ad esso assimilabile. Là sappiamo essere attestata la presenza di un faro già da disegni settecenteschi e da un medaglione di Sesto Pompeo (LEGER 1979, p. 506, DICTIONNAIRE 1906, p. 431). Resta il problema del nome ed il fatto che è assai ipotizzabile che in quella zona, presidiata dalle terribili Scilla e Cariddi, ci fosse una struttura in grado di aiutare i naviganti a non perdere il controllo della nave in un punto così pericoloso, come hanno dimostrato i recenti scavi al Forte degli Inglesi di Torre Faro. 67 Strab. IV, 1,8. Secondo il traduttore F.Trotta i Tougeni potrebbero essere i Teutoni. 68 Strab. IV, 1, 8: “Per questo motivo i Massalioti hanno eretto come segnali delle torri, per sancire in ogni modo il loro possesso sulla regione: tra l’altro hanno eretto anche qui un santuario di Artemide Efesia, prendendo possesso di quel terreno che le bocche del fiume rendono un’isola.” Trad. F.Rotta, ed. BUR, Milano 2000. 69 FERRI 2000, p. 260. 70 Strab. VII, 3, 10: “All’imbocco del Tira c’è la torre che chiamano di Neottolemo”, Trad. H.L.Jones, ed. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts 1968. La torre sarebbe stata scoperta nel 1850 al termine della costa ovest del lago, a quanto riporta il Forbiger. Indagini più recenti la localizzano nell’antico sito di Bugaz a nord della fine della bocca dell’estuario del Dniestr, cfr. HIND 1984, p. 78. 71 Strab. XIII, 1,22. 72 Sulla leggenda si vedano anche più avanti le fonti Ovidio (I secolo d.C.) e Museo (VI secolo d.C.).

61 Caes. Civ. III, 112: “Faro è una torre di grande altezza e di mirabile architettura costruita su un’isola; il nome è derivato dall’isola stessa. E proprio quest’isola, situata di fronte ad Alessandria, ne forma il porto”. Trad. F.Solinas, ed. Oscar Mondadori, Milano 1989. Nel prosieguo del paragrafo Cesare rende noto come nonostante la resistenza di coloro che occupavano Faro, egli riuscì comunque a impadronirsi dell’isola e a porvi un presidio. La conquista della “tolemaica Faro” è cantata anche in Prop. II, 1,30 62 Tib. I, 3: “...spiccando tra la folla egiziana.” Trad. F.Della Corte, ed. Mondadori, Milano 1980 63 Strab. XVII, 1, 6; 9. 64 Mela la cita solo fugacemente. 65 Strab. III, 1,9: “Da quelle parti si trova anche il santuario oracolare di Menesteo (eroe ateniese citato in Hom. Il. II, 2, 552 ss. n.d.a.), e su uno scoglio battuto dai flutti si eleva la Torre di Caepio (costruita nel 108 a.C. da Q. Servilius Caepio, n.d.a.), costruzione mirabile posta, come faro, a tutela dei naviganti”. Trad. F.Trotta, ed. BUR, Milano 2000. 66 Strab. III, 5,5. In base alla geografia attuale penso che la colonna dei Reggini sia l’antico faro di Reggio Calabria, mentre la Torre di Peloro corrisponda all’antico faro di Messina (scheda 47). Nel De Chorographia il geografo Pomponio Mela (Mela, II, 113 cita anche un faro a Brindisi), attivo nel I d.C. si limita ad affermare che quando egli scrive l’isola di Pharos è unita ad Alessandria tramite un ponte, mentre all’epoca in cui scriveva Omero era in mare aperto (Mela, III, 104-105,

128

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO Ero ha però un’idea: per permettere all’amante di nuotare di notte senza pericolo e farsi vedere da lui senza alcun dubbio, ella starà giorno e notte affacciata alla finestra di una torre sul mare con in mano una fiaccola per guidare Leandro nella notte. Purtroppo, come Leandro presagiva, a causa del brutto tempo, la torcia si spegne e Leandro trova la morte.

Magnificatur et alia turris a rege facta in insula Pharo portum optinente Alexandriae, quam constitisse DCCC talentis tradunt, magno animo, ne quid omittamus, Ptolomei regis, quo in ea permiserit Sostrati Cnidi architecti structura ipsa nomen inscribi. Usus eius nocturno navium cursu ignes ostendere ad praenuntianda vada portusque introitum, quales iam compluribus locis flagrant, sicut Ostiae ac Ravennae. Periculum in continuatione ignium, ne sidus existimetur, quoniam e longinoquo similis flammarum aspectus est. Hic idem architectus primus omnium pensilem ambulationem Cnidi fecisse traditur 77

diÄ jaà eÕpetÁsteqom Ñj t±r Sgsto³ diaÊqousi paqakenÇlemoi lijqÄm Ñpà tÄm t±r ‚Gqo³r pÌqcom jÐje²hem ÐviÈmter tÀ pko²a sulpqÇttomtor to³ Ro³ pqÄr tÂm peqaÊysim:to²r d’Ñn ’AbÌdou peqaioulÈmoir paqakejtÁom ÑstÊm eÓr tÐmamtÊa ÔjtÍ pou stadÊour Ñpà pÌqcom timÀ jat’ÐmtijqÅ t±r Sgsto³...73

Plinio ci fornisce una delle più lunghe descrizioni sul faro di Alessandria, e già questo la dice lunga sulla scarsezza di informazioni letterarie in nostro possesso. Plinio non solo cita il nome dell’architetto del faro di Alessandria, ma informa su due importantissimi particolari: l’elevatissimo costo della struttura e il problema del fuoco continuo emesso dal faro e quindi il connesso fraintendimento di tale fuoco per la luce di una stella, risolto solo nel XIX secolo con l’invenzione della luce intermittente.

Nel XVII libro, dedicato all’Africa, Strabone ci parla invece del faro di Alessandria: έστι δε και αυτο το της νησιδος άκρον πέτρα περίκλυστος, έχουσα πύργον θαυμαστως κατεσκευσμένον λευκου λίθου πολυώροφον, ομώνυμον τη νήσω˙τουτον δ ̉ανέθηκε Σώσρατος Κνίδιος, φίλος των βασιλέων, της των πλοιθομένων σωτηρίας χάριν, ώς φησιν η επιγραφη 74

Un’altra notizia importantissima che fa ipotizzare come le torri di segnalazione fossero già presenti nel mondo punico ce la fornisce lo stesso Plinio nel secondo libro della Naturalis Historia dedicato alla cosmologia. L’autore riporta che, pur trattandosi di un fenomeno costante, non c’è notte e giorno simultaneamente in tutto il mondo, e può capitare che quando a Roma è notte, in Asia sia giorno e così via, in quanto l’interporsi del globo porta la notte e la sua esposizione, il giorno. Questo fenomeno, dice Plinio, lo si è potuto facilmente osservare grazie alle:

Questo per quanto riguarda Strabone. Sempre a cavallo tra I secolo a.C. e I secolo d.C., vive lo storico latino Tito Livio che, nel XXIII libro della sua Ab Urbe condita, ci racconta di come in Spagna fosse abituale porre in luoghi elevati torri di segnalazione: Multas est locis altis positas turres Hispania habet, quibus et speculis et propugnaculis aduersus latrones utuntur. Inde primo conspectis hostium nauibus datum Hasdrubali est, tumultusque prius in terra et castris quam ad mare et ad naues ortus...75

...in Africa Hispaniaque turrium Hannibalis, in Asia vero propter piraticos terrores simili specularum in praesidio excitato, in quis praenuntios ignes sexta hora diei accensos saepe conpertum est tertia noctis a tergo ultimis visos 78

Pharos, quondam diei navigatione distans ab Aegypto, nunc e turri nocturnis ignibus cursum navium regens 76 Prima di questa citazione di Plinio si sarà notato come il faro fosse ancora chiamato turris e non pharos, termine che allora designava la sola isola sulla quale fu eretta la torre alessandrina.

Prima si è visto come Plinio lamentasse il fatto che l’eterna fiamma del faro potesse essere scambiata per la luce di una stella. Lucano, contemporaneo di Plinio, a proposito della luce emessa dalla torre di Alessandria, nel Bellum Civilis scrive così:

Nel XXXVI libro, nel capitolo dedicato al marmo, Plinio il Vecchio paragona i fari di Ostia e Ravenna alla mirabile costruzione dell’architetto Sostrato di Cnido. Inoltre, l’autore latino, attivo nel I secolo d.C., ci informa di come Tolomeo Filadelfo concesse all’architetto di poter incidere il proprio nome sulla celebre torre:

Septima nox zephyro numquam laxante rudentis ostendit Phariis Aegyptia litora flammis 79 77 Plin. nat. XXXVI, 83: “Altro monumento mirabile è la torre fatta da un re nell’isola di Faro, che copre il porto di Alessandria; si dice costasse 800 talenti, e il re Tolomeo permise con squisita magnanimitànon è giusto omettere la cosa- all’architetto Sostratos di Cnido di iscrivere il proprio nome nella costruzione. Lo scopo di questa torre è di far vedere alle navi, di notte, un fuoco per segnalare le secche e l’ingresso del porto; ormai ve ne sono dovunque, come a Ostia e a Ravenna. Hanno l’inconveniente che il fuoco ininterrotto può essere preso per una stella, poiché da lontano l’aspetto è identico”. Trad. S.Ferri, ed. BUR, Milano 2000. Altre citazioni si hanno in Plin. nat. V, 131 quando, parlando in generale dell’Africa, e specificatamente di Alessandria, Plinio afferma che prima della costruzione del faro, l’isola omonima era distante un giorno di navigazione dall’Egitto; navigazione che, al tempo in cui l’autore scrive, era regolata dai fuochi emessi dalla torre. 78 Plin. nat. II, 73: “...in Africa e in Spagna, le torri di Annibale; in Asia, simili osservatori di difesa furono istituiti sotto la spinta del terrore per i pirati, e così ci si accorse più volte che i fuochi d’allarme appiccati alla sesta ora del giorno erano scorti alla terza ora notturna da chi si trovava nel punto più arretrato”, ed. UTET, Torino 1982. Si tratta evidentemente delle stazioni di telegrafo ottico di cui parlava Polieno. 79 Lucan. IX 1004-1005: “La settima notte- mentre lo zefiro non consentiva mai che le gomene si allentassero- gli rivelò, con la luce di Faro, il lido egizio”. Trad. R.Badalì, ed. Garzanti, Milano 1999.

73

Strab. XIII, 1, 22: “Perciò è più facile attraversare da Sesto, prima costeggiando per una breve distanza la Torre di Ero e quindi noleggiando le navi rendere possibile il passaggio grazie all’aiuto della corrente. Ma coloro che vogliono attraversare il mare passando per Abido devono prima seguire la costa nella direzione opposta per circa otto stadi sino alla corrispondente Torre di Sesto...”. Trad. H.L.Jones, ed. LOEB, Cambridge, Massachusetts 1960. 74 Strab. XVII, 1,8: “La stessa estremità dell’isoletta è una scogliera flagellata dalle onde, dove si trova una torre, costruita mirabilmente in pietra bianca e a diversi piani, che porta lo stesso nome dell’isola. La innalzò Sostrato di Cnido, amico dei re, “a salvaguardia”- come recita l’iscrizione- “dei naviganti”. Trad. N.Biffi, ed. Del Sud, Modugno 1999. Strabone cita il faro anche più avanti nello stesso libro al capitolo 1,9. 75 Liv. XXII, 19, 7: “In Spagna ci sono molte torri poste in luoghi elevati, che servono come osservatori e baluardi contro i pirati. Di qui fu dapprima segnalato ad Asdrubale che si vedevano navi nemiche; sorse allora una gran confusione, prima in terra e negli alloggiamenti che in mare e sulle navi...”. Trad. B.Ceva, ed. Bur, Milano 1986. Altra citazione di questo tipo si ha in Liv. XIX, 23, 3. 76 Plin. Nat.. V, 34: “...Faro una volta era distante un giorno di navigazione dall’Egitto, ora un faro, collocato su di essa, regola di notte coi fuochi la rotta delle navi”. Trad. A.Barchiesi, R.Centi, M.Corsaro, A.Marcone,G.Ranucci, ed. Einaudi, Torino 1982.

129

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Si può dunque ben immaginare come la luce emessa da queste strutture di segnalazione marittima fosse davvero potente, tanto che il poeta Stazio (45-96 d.C.) paragona la luce emessa dal faro di Capri addirittura a quella della Luna:

illa meum » dixi « litora lumen habent » ... Cetera nox et nos et turris conscia novit quodque mihi lumen per vada monstrat iter 84 A queste cose Ero rispondeva così:

...Teleboumque domos, trepidis ubi dulcia nautis lumina noctivagae tollit Pharus emula lunae...80

protinus in summa vigilantia lumine turre ponimus, adsuetae signa notamque viae 85

Lo storico Flavio Giuseppe (I secolo d.C.) nel Bellum Iudaicum descrive il mirabile monumento alessandrino, la capacità della sua lanterna ed il porto che proteggeva:

Nelle Argonautica, composte anch’esse nel I secolo d.C., Valerio Flacco accennava invece a come il faro di Ostia apparisse come la salvezza ai naviganti:

duspqËsitor dÁ kilÂm mausà jaà jat’eÓqmgm ’AkenamdqeÊar:stemËr te cÀq eãspkour jaà pÈtqair ÜvÇkoir tÄm Ñp’eÕhÅ jalptËlemor dqËlom. jaà tÄ lÁm ÐqisteqÄm aÕto³ lÈqor pÈvqajtai weiqojlÉtoir sjÈkeim, Ñm deni§ dÁ Ù pqosacoqeuolÈmg VÇqor m±sor pËjeitai, pÌqcom ÐmÈwousa lÈcistom ÑjpuqseÌomta to²r jatapkÈousim Ñpà tqiajosÊour stadÊour, Ýr Ñm mujtà pËqqyhem ÛqlÊfoimto pqÄr tÂm duswÈqeiam to³ jatÇpkou

non ita Tyrrhenus stupet Ionisque magister, qui iam te, Tiberine, tuens clarumque serena arce pharon praeceps subito nusquam ostia, nusquam Ausoniam videt, at saevas accedere Syrtes 86 Un secolo più tardi, anche il biografo degli imperatori romani per eccellenza, Svetonio, ci parla di questo faro. Voluto da Claudio che costruì anche il porto nei pressi dell’odierna Fiumicino,87 il massiccio faro di Ostia fu costruito utilizzando i resti del relitto della nave di Caligola, affondata per questo dopo che aveva portato a Roma il grande obelisco che oggi si può ammirare al centro di Piazza San Pietro a Città del Vaticano. Ecco come Svetonio descrive il celeberrimo faro che tanto successo riscosse, anche a livello iconografico, sia in epoca romana (si pensi al Piazzale delle Corporazioni di Ostia e alle molte monete che lo raffigurano), sia in epoca moderna (esso fu, ad esempio, raffigurato in un bellissimo arazzo del 1583, conservato oggi ai Musei Vaticani):

81

Lo stesso Flavio Giuseppe paragona la Torre chiamata da Erode Phasael, in onore del fratello, al faro di Alessandria. Questa torre, probabilmente uno dei fari di Caesarea Maritima, era lunga e larga quaranta cubiti ed alta novanta:

Û dÁ deÌteqor pÌqcor,ëm ÖmËlasem ÐpÄ tÐdekvo³ VasÇkgom...tÄ lÁm sw±la paqeœjei t© jatÀ tÂm VÇqom ÑjpuqseÌomti to²r Ñpà ’AkenamdqeÊar pkÈousi, t¨ peqiow¨ dÁ pokÅ leÊfym ¶m: 82 Ancora nel I secolo d.C. Ovidio dedica le Epistulae XVIII e XIX delle Heroides allo sfortunato amore di Ero e Leandro, al quale si è già accennato in precedenza. E’ logico che la presenza di una fiaccola all’interno di una torre posta sul mare per guidare nella notte il natante Leandro abbia alimentato la leggenda della presenza di una torre farea, nata in tale occasione, la stessa torre di Ero di cui ci riferisce Strabone.

Portum Ostiae extruit circumducto dextra sinistraque brachio et ad introitum profundo iam solo mole obiecta; quam quo stabilius fundaret, nauem ante demersit, qua magnus obeliscus ex Aegypto fuerat aduectus, congestique pilis superposuit altissimam turrem in exemplum Alexandrini Phari, ut ad nocturnos ignes cursum nauigia dirigerent 88

Ecco cosa Leandro dice ad Ero:

A questo stesso faro accenna anche il poeta satirico Giovenale, vissuto a cavallo dei regni di Nerva e Traiano, nella XII Satira:

Lumina quin etiam summa vigilantia turre aut videt aut acies nostra videre putat 83

tandem intrat positas inclusa per aequora moles Tyrrenamque pharon porrectaque bracchia rursum quae pelago occurrunt medio longesque relinqunt

Ut procul adspexi lumen « Meus ignis in illo est ; 80

Stat. Silvae, III, 100-101: “...sia la residenza dei Teleboi, il cui faro, rivale dell’errante luna, emette dall’alto le sue luci care ai naviganti in trepidazione...”. Trad. A.Traglia, G.Aricò, ed. UTET, Torino ? Il poeta attribuisce la fondazione dell’isola di Capri al leggendario popolo dei Teleboi, provenienti dalla costa arcanana. 81 Ios. Bel. Iud. IV, 10, 612-614: “Il porto di Alessandria è difficilmente accessibile alle navi anche in tempo di pace perché ha l’ingresso stretto e tortuoso a causa di scogli sottomarini. Il suo fianco sinistro è protetto da moli artificiali, mentre sulla destra c’è l’isola chiamata Faro ove sorge una torre grandissima che fa luce ai naviganti in arrivo fino a trecento stadi di distanza, in modo che essi nella notte si fermino lontano per la difficoltà di entrare”. Trad. G.Vitucci, ed. Valla, Milano 1974. In V, 169-170 della stessa opera l’autore paragona una torre voluta da Erode a quella che “dall’isola di Faro fa luce ai naviganti diretti ad Alessandria”, ma, aggiunge, la torre di Erode era di dimensioni ancora maggiori. La notizia di maggiore rilievo che lo storico ci fornisce è la capacità del faro di Alessandria di far luce per almeno trecento stadi alessandrini, cioè poco più di 50 km. 82 Ios. Bel. Iud. V, 4, 166-170.: “La seconda torre che Erode chiamò Phasael come il fratello...nella forma rassomigliava alla torre che da un’isola di Faro fa luce ai naviganti diretti ad Alessandria, ma era di dimensioni molto maggiori”. Trad. G. Vitucci. ed. Valla, Milano 1974. 83 Ov. her. XVIII, 31-32: “Anzi il mio sguardo o vede, o crede di vedere, la luce che veglia sulla sommità della torre”, Trad. E.Salvadori, ed. Garzanti, Milano 1996.

84

Ov. her. XVIII, 85-86: “E come vidi la luce da lontano dissi: “lì c’è la mia fiamma, in quella riva c’è la mia luce”; “Il resto lo sa la notte, e noi, e la torre complice e la luce che mi indica la via tra i flutti”. Trad. E. Salvadori, ed. Garzanti, Milano 1996. 85 Ov. her. XIX, 35-36:”metto subito, sulla sommità della torre la luce di guardia, segnale e guida della via consueta...”, Trad. E.Salvadori, ed. Garzanti, Milano 1996. 86 Val. Fl. VII, 83-86: “E’ minore la sorpresa di un nocchiero sopra il Tirreno o lo Ionio quando ritiene di vedere il Tevere e il faro che già risplende nella notte serena, se all’improvviso vede che è sparita la foce, che è sparita l’Italia, che avanzano, ferocemente, le Sirti”. Trad. F.Cavaglia. ed. BUR, Milano 1999. 87 Per la storia e l’evoluzione del porto di Claudio e di Traiano si vedano i capitoli successivi, così come per una più ampia storia e descrizione di ogni singolo faro citato. 88 Suet. Claud. XX: “Costruì (sott: Claudio) il porto di Ostia, avendolo circondato con un braccio a destra e a sinistra, e facendo elevare un molo all’ingresso, in acque profonde. Per poter gettare delle fondamenta più stabili, affondò dapprima la nave con cui avevano portato dall’Egitto l’obelisco grande, e quindi infittivi i pilastri, vi costruì sopra un’altissima torre, prendendo ad esempio il faro di Alessandria, perché dirigesse con le sue luci notturne la rotta delle navi”. Trad. F.Dessì, ed. Bur, Milano 1982.

130

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO Italiam (non sic igitur mirabere portus quos natura dedit)...89

Salvatori, in favore dei naviganti”.94 Poco prima, però, anche il narratore greco descrive come superba l’opera dell’architetto e, ribadisce, come aveva già fatto Flavio Giuseppe, la grande capacità della lanterna della torre, che avrebbe risparmiato a molti naviganti l’impatto con gli scogli della costa di Paretonio, l’odierna regione del Berech, a cavallo tra Egitto e Libia:

Senza minimamente dilungarsi in una descrizione specifica dell’edificio l’esistenza del faro viene segnalata anche da Dionigi di Alicarnasso.90 Tornando a Svetonio, egli ci riferisce di altri due celebri fari: quello di Gesoriacum, l’odierna Boulogne-sur-mer, in Francia (Pas-de-Calais), distrutto da un terremoto nel XVII sec., del quale conserviamo solo alcuni disegni; e quello della villa di Tiberio a Capri, del quale restano le fondamenta, eretto già all’epoca di Augusto nella punta orientale dell’isola, verso l’attuale Santa Maria del Soccorso, e crollato poco prima della morte dell’imperatore Tiberio che, come noto, aveva a Capri la sua residenza. Il primo, voluto da Caligola, per celebrare un’effimera vittoria sui Bretoni è così descritto:

OójodolÉsar cÀq tÄm Ñpà t¨ VÇqz pÌqcom, lÈcistom jaà jÇkkistom ñqcym ×pÇmtym, Ýr puqseÌoito Ðp’aÕto³ to²r mautikolÁmoir Ñpà pokÅ t±r hakÇttgr jaà l jatavÈqoimto eÓr tÂm PaqaitomÊam, pacwÇkeptom, ír vasim, o¹sam jaà ðvujtom, eó tir ÑlpÈsoi eÓr tÀ ñqlata˙

…95

Lo stesso Luciano, nella piccola opera Icaromenippo, ci dice che se non fosse stato per le luci emesse dal faro di Alessandria e per la mole del Colosso di Rodi, non sarebbe stato in grado di riconoscere la terra:

...et in indicium uictoriae altissimam turrem excitauit, ex qua ut Pharo noctibus ad regendos nauium cursus ignes emicarent...91

jaà eó ce l tÄm ‚QodÊym jokossÄm ÑhesÇlgm jaà tÄm Ñpà t¨ VÇqz pÅqcom, e¹ êshi, pamtek´r ðm le Ù c± diÈkahe 96

Queste sono, invece, le parole, usate dal biografo per lamentare il crollo del faro campano:

Nel III secolo d.C., invece, lo storico e geografo romano Solino, autore di una Collectanea Rerum memorabilium, non dimenticò di ricordare come Cesare avesse dedotto la colonia di Faro, la cui luce notturna guidava i naviganti:

Et antes paucos quam obiret dies, turris Phari terrae motu Capreis concidi 92 Ancora nel II secolo d.C. Arriano, biografo per eccellenza di Alessandro Magno, nell’Anabasis, propone di costruire un enorme santuario di Efestione ad Alessandria, città celebre per la sua torre-faro, quasi facendo credere che essa sia stata concepita da Alessandro, mentre sappiamo bene che la sua costruzione fu intrapresa per volere di Tolomeo Filadelfo:

Est et Pharos, colonia a Caesare dictatore deducta, e qua fascibus accensis nocturna dirigitur navigatio 97 Nello stesso III secolo d.C., il faro di Ostia era ancora presente e fonte di ammirazione da parte di Cassio Dione che, a proposito dei lavori di Claudio nel porto ostiense, scriveva:

jaà Ñm t¨ mÉsz t¨ VÇqz, êma Û pÌqcor ÑstÃm Û Ñm t¨ mÉsz , lecÈhei te lÈcistom jaà pokutekeÊZ ÑjpqepÈstatom. jaà ëpyr ÑpijqatÉs\ Ñpijake²shai ÐpÄ ‚GvaistÊymor93

...jaà m±som Ñm aÕt¨ pÌqcom te Ñp’ÑjeÊm\ vqujtyqÊam ñwomta jatestÉsato 98

Luciano, autore del II secolo d.C., nel suo trattatello “Come si deve scrivere la storia” afferma, a proposito del faro di Alessandria, che l’architetto Sostrato di Cnido escogitò uno stratagemma per cui a lungo andare, l’unico nome che sarebbe rimasto sulla torre sarebbe stato il suo, mentre quello del re Tolomeo Filadelfo si sarebbe cancellato: egli, afferma, dopo aver realizzato l’opera, iscrisse il suo nome interamente sulle pietre, poi, dopo averlo ricoperto col gesso, incise il nome del re di allora (Tolomeo Filadelfo, n.d.a.), sapendo che in breve tempo le lettere sarebbero cadute con l’intonaco e sarebbe ricomparsa la scritta: “Sostrato, figlio di Cnido, agli Dèi

Si sarà notato come, per numerose torri faree, si sia presa ad esempio quella di Alessandria, quasi a voler dire che si è voluta creare un’opera d’arte seconda solo a quella. Sono, infatti, molti i fari non menzionati dalle fonti, segno questo che può essere interpretato così: ormai i fari e le torri di segnalazione marittima (lanterne) erano presenti in quasi tutto l’impero romano; dunque si segnalavano solo quelle di particolare importanza o con qualche peculiarità. Il faro di Ostia era anche quello della capitale, quello di Gesoriacum era mirabile per altezza ed era stato eretto per esaltare una vittoria inesistente, la torre di Capri emetteva una luce talmente forte da fare concorrenza alla Luna e così via... Perché, ad esempio, Svetonio, a proposito della vita di Claudio, non nomina i due fari da lui fatti costruire nel porto

89

94

Iuv., XII, 75-80.: “Finalmente la nave entra nei moli in mezzo ai flutti del mare, che ne vengono inclusi e lungo il faro tirreno, lungo le braccia stese all’indietro: queste si fanno incontro al mare fin dove è aperto e si lasciano addirittura lontana l’Italia, cosicché tu non potrai altrettanto ammirare i porti dati spontaneamente dalla natura...”. Trad. G.Viansino, ed. Oscar Mondadori, Milano 1990. 90 “Il fiume poi non è mai ostruito dall’insabbiamento marino ed alla foce non si dissolve in aree paludose ma, restando sempre in un unico alveo porta le navi fino al mare dove sbocca all’altezza del faro”. Trad. C.F.Giuliani, ed. 91 Suet. Cal. XLVI: “...per lasciare un ricordo di questa vittoria, fece innalzare una torre altissima, su cui ogni notte dovevano ardere dei fuochi come su quella di Faro, per illuminare la rotta ai naviganti...”. Trad. F.Dessì, ed. Bur, Milano 1982. 92 Suet. Tib. LXXIV: “Pochi giorni prima della sua morte, la torre del faro di Capri fu abbattuta da un terremoto...”. Trad. F. Dessì, ed. Bur, Milano 1982. 93 Arr. an. VII, 23, 7: “...un santuario ad Alessandria d’Egitto, proprio in città e sull’isola di Faro, dove c’è la torre...”. Trad. D.Ambaglio, ed. Bur, Milano 1998.

Lukian. Quomodo historia inscribenda sit, 62. Lukian. Quomodo historia inscribenda sit , 63.: “ Dopo aver costruito la torre dell’isola di Faro (sott: Sostrato di Cnido, n.d.a), l’opera più grande e bella di tutte perché facesse segnali luminosi per un vasto tratto di mare ai naviganti affinché non naufragassero contro Paretonia-luogo difficoltoso, dicono, e dal quale non si scampa se uno finisce contro gli scogli-dopo aver costruito dunque la torre, sulle pietre al di sotto incise il proprio nome, poi lo ricoprì con la calce e, nascostolo, fece incidere sopra il nome del re di allora”. Trad. F. Montanari, ed. Oscar Mondadori, Milano 2002. 96 Lukian. Icaromenippos, 46 [24], 12-13: “...e se non avessi veduto il Colosso di Rodi e la torre di Faro, tieni per certo che la terra non l’avrei affatto riconosciuta” Trad. V.Longo. ed. UTET, Torino 1986. 97 Solin. 32, 43: “...e poi c’è Faro, colonia conquistata dal dittatore Cesare, tramite i cui fasci (sott: di luce) dirige la navigazione notturna”. Trad. B.Giardina. La presa di Faro è ricordata ancora nel V d.C. in Oros. VI, 15, 33. 98 Cass. Dio. LX, 11, 4: “... nel mezzo del quale (sott: il mare) innalzò un’isola sulla quale pose una torre con una luce di segnalazione (= Faro)”. Trad. E.Cary, ed. LOEB, London 1961. 95

131

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA di Dubris (Dover), uno dei quali era talmente resistente da essere ancora oggi visibile all’interno di un fortino normanno? Perché, evidentemente, come detto, non avevano nulla di grandioso o di degno da essere riportato ai posteri.

Il fraintendimento dello storico è stato reso possibile dal fatto che il faro fu gravemente danneggiato durante la guerra civile alessandrina, e fu in un secondo momento, restaurato per volontà di Cleopatra. Sappiamo, inoltre, da Giulio Capitolino, tra gli scrittori della Historia Augusta, che la torre fu nuovamente restaurata da Antonino Pio.103 Dionigi di Bisanzio, geografo del II o, più probabilmente, del IV secolo d.C., parla dettagliatamente, nel suo trattato De Bosphori navigatione, di un “famoso” faro posto sull’imboccatura del fiume Crishorreas, che immetteva nel Bosforo tracio; potrebbe trattarsi del faro che il celebre viaggiatore Castorius segnala e che Peutinger disegna nella località di Chrysopolis (Üsküdar) nella penisola anatolica di fronte a Costantinopoli.104 Riporto di seguito la traduzione di Pietro Gilles citata da Montfaucon:

Talvolta, alcuni autori non parlano espressamente di fari, ma chiamano una regione pharia, il che farebbe supporre alla presenza di un faro nella località da essi citata.99 Una buona descrizione della struttura del faro fu data, nello stesso secolo, dallo storico Erodiano (170-240 d.C.), autore di una Storia romana da Marco Aurelio a Gordiano III. Nel IV libro di quest’opera egli narra di come si svolgessero le cerimonie funebri, accennando con particolare attenzione al momento della deposizione di Settimio Severo. Lo storiografo ci informa che il letto ove giaceva l’imperatore fu sollevato e portato fuori città, in Campo Marzio ove sorgeva una costruzione a base quadrata, in forma di tenda militare, fatta soltanto di grandi travi lignee e riempita interamente di legna da ardere. All’esterno era decorata con grandi drappi intessuti a fili d’oro, sculture in avorio e quadri di vario genere.100 Già questo ricorda molto i luoghi allestiti in epoca arcaica sui promontori per fare segnali ai naviganti.

Sopra la cima della collina, ƒcrive eſſo, appiè della quale corre il Criƒorrheas corgeƒi la Torre Timea di maraviglioƒa altezza, dalla quale ƒcopreſi un largo tratto di mare, fabbricata per guida di coloro, che navigano, accendendo fuochi nella cima di eƒƒa, che fervono di ƒcorta alle navi; coƒa tanto più neceſſaria quanto che entrambe le ƒponde di queƒto Mare non han Porti, e che le ancore non poƒƒono ƒigerƒi, e rimaner ferme nel fondo. Ma i Barbari circonvicini accendono altri fuochi ne’ luoghi più alti delle ƒpiagge, per ingannare i marinaj e trar vantaggio da’ naufragj, quando, guidati da que’ falƒi ƒegni, vanno a romperli in que’ ƒcogli. Ora però, ƒoggiunge lo ƒteƒƒo Autore, la Torre è mezzo in rovina; nè ci suol metterci alcun Fanale105

Ma Erodiano ci dice qualcosa di ancora più interessante: sull’edificio precedentemente trattato ne sorge un altro, simile per forma e ornamentazione, ma più piccolo e con varie aperture a forma di porta, quindi un terzo ed un quarto in ordine di grandezza decrescente, sino all’ultimo che è piccolissimo. Insomma, potremmo dire una specie di edificio a gradoni che si restringe verso l’alto, al quale si accede attraverso delle porticine poste nella sua base.

Nel IV secolo d.C. in una lettera al vescovo di Alessandria Atanasio, San Basilio menziona l’alta torre di Alessandria, la cui funzione era più quella di torre di avvistamento che di faro:

Ed ecco la frase che più ci interessa:

ÐpeijÇsai tir àm tÄ sw±la to³ jatesjeuÇslator vqujtyqÊor, à to²r kilÈsim ÑpijeÊlema mÌjtyq diÀ to³ puqÄr Ñr Ðsvake²r jatacycÀr tÀr ma³r weiqacyce²:vÇqour te aÕtÀ oÚ pokkoà jako³sim 101

...jaà Ûq§r pÇmtyr tÀ Øjastawo³, o½om Ðv’Üxgk±r timÄr sjopi°r t±r to³ mo³ heyqÊar: 106 Riguardo l’altezza della mirabile torre farea di Alessandria si sorprendeva ancora, nello stesso IV secolo, il maestro ed avvocato di Burdìgala-Bordeaux Ausonio, che paragonava la visuale che si poteva avere da essa addirittura a quella visibile da una montagna:

Nel IV secolo d.C., lo storico Ammiano Marcellino cita nuovamente il faro di Alessandria, ma se Arriano ne attribuiva l’invenzione ad Alessandro Magno, lo storico afferma addirittura che fu opera di Cleopatra: Hoc litus cum fallacibus et insidiosis accessibus affligeret antheac navigantes discriminibus plurimis, excogitavit in portu Cleopatra turrium excelsam, quae Pharos a loco ipso cognominatur, praelucendi navibus nocturna suggerens ministeria... 102

103 H.A. VIII, 8, 3. Per alcuni studiosi, tra cui Daremberg e Saglio, il faro restaurato da Antonino sarebbe invece stato quello di Caieta (Gaeta), del quale però non parla alcuna fonte. Tale supposizione potrebbe essere data dal fatto che Giulio Capitolino, subito dopo, attribuisce ad Antonino anche il restauro del porto di Gaeta. 104 BOSIO 1983, p. 114. 105 Dion. Byzan. in Petr. Gill. de Bofsh. Thrac. lib. 2 cap. 21 in DI MONTFAUCON 1749, pp. VIII-IX: “Sopra la cima della collina, scrive esso, ai piedi della quale corre il Crisorea, si scorge la Torre di Timeo, di ammirevole altezza, dalla quale si scopre un largo tratto di mare, fabbricata per coloro che navigano, accendendo fuochi sulla sua cima in modo da guidare le navi; cosa tanto più necessaria dal momento che le sponde di questo mare sono prive di porti e che le ancore non riescono a rimanere ferme sul fondo. Ma i Barbari della zona circostante accendono altri fuochi nei luoghi più alti delle spiagge, per ingannare i marinai e trarre profitto dai loro naufragi, quando, guidati da questi falsi segnali, incappano negli scogli. Ora però, aggiunge lo stesso autore, la Torre è in mezza rovina e non vi si vuole apporre alcun lume.” Trad. B.Giardina; RENARD 1867, p. 6. La storia somiglia molto alla leggenda di Palamede e Nauplio. 106 San Basilio, LXXXII: “...inoltre puoi sicuramente vedere dall’elevata torre di guardia...”, ed. LOEB, Cambridge, Massachusets 1942; Auson. 330 ed. LOEB, Cambridge, Massachusets 1948.

99 Ad esempio, nel III-IV d.C., Dion. Per. 115-116 a proposito del mare Ismarico: “ ...ma³tai dÁ pqÍtgm VaqÊgm ðka jijkÉsjousim...”, “i marinai chiamano il primo mare Fario…”, trad. E.Amato, Ed. Bompiani, Milano 2005. 100 Herodian. IV, 6-8. 101 Herodian. IV, 8: “La forma di tutto l’edificio potrebbe paragonarsi a quelle torri che sorgono presso i porti, e di notte, mediante un fuoco acceso, indicano alle navi la rotta più sicura; generalmente sono chiamate fari”. Trad. F.Cassola, ed. Sansoni, Firenze 1967. Il mosaico del Piazzale delle Corporazioni (statio n. 3) ad Ostia Antica, appartenente ai navicularii lignarii, sembra fatto apposta per le parole di Erodiano. 102 Amm. XXII, 16, 9: “La spiaggia con i suoi accessi insidiosi e ingannatori affliggeva di moltissimi pericoli i naviganti: fu Cleopatra a progettare di innalzare nel porto una torre altissima (detta faro dal luogo in cui sorge); fornisce alle navi il servizio di emettere luce di notte....” Trad. G.Viansino, ed. Oscar Mondadori, Milano 2001.

132

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO compensa celsi bona naturalia montis...ostentans altam, Pharos ut Memphitica, turrim 107

Dunque, a Populonia, forse già in epoca etrusca, sul litorale sorgeva un edificio con la doppia funzione di torre costiera e di faro. Lo stesso Rutilio Namaziano ci parla anche della presenza di due torri gemelle all’entrata del porto di Centumcellae (Civitavecchia):

Infine, per concludere la carrellata di autori di IV secolo, Sinesio di Cirene, nella Fortunosa navigazione da Alessandria a Cirene108 ci parla di un certo Porto Azario in Cirenaica presso il quale esiste un capo chiamato Formica del Faro presso il quale, evidentemente, era collocata una torre.

ad Centumcellae defleximus Austro: tranquilla puppes in statione sedent. molibus aequoreum concluditur amphiteatrum, angustosque aditus insula facta tegit; attollit geminas turres bifidoque meatu faucibus artatis pandit utrumque latus 112

Altre notizie sull’importanza della presa di Faro si hanno ancora in alcuni poemi del V secolo d.C. come, ad esempio, nel Panegirico di Avito di Sidonio Apollinare. Egli, nato a Lione e quindi rappresentante della nobiltà galloromana, prima di diventare vescovo della metropoli dell’Arvernia (l’odierna Clermont-Ferrand) scriveva così:

Il porto di Civitavecchia ci è noto anche da stampe settecentesche e ottocentesche di Arnaldo Massarelli.113 Esso si presentava con due moli ad arco di cerchio che delimitavano un ampio bacino e che, evidentemente, andrebbero riconosciuti nell’anfiteatro d’acqua di cui parla Namaziano. Alla testata di ciascuno di questi moli si ergeva una torre (si potrebbe pensare alle turres geminae di cui parla il poeta) ma egli le pone sull’isolotto artificiale, che, probabilmente, potremmo riconoscere nel così detto antemurale trainaeo, sul quale erano un’altra torre e il faro.114

...Vidit te frangere Leucas, trux Auguste, Pharon, dum classicus Actia miles stagna quatit profugisque bibax Antonius armis incestam uacuat patrio Ptolemaida regno 109 Nel V secolo d.C., Orosio, autore delle Historiarum adversus paganos, affermava che il faro di Brigantium, ancora funzionante nell’odierna La Coruña in Galizia, era l’unica opera degna di nota fatta dai pagani:

In epoca bizantina fu creata anche la così detta Anthologia Palatina, una vasta raccolta di epigrammi greci in quindici libri, fondata su tre raccolte comprendenti poeti del 70 a.C., del 40 a.C. e del VI secolo d.C.. Nel libro IX di questa raccolta due anonimi ci riferiscono di due diversi fari, quello di Smirne e quello di Alessandria:

Secundus angulus circium intendit; ubi Brigantia Gallaeciae civitas sita altissimam pharum et inter pauca memorandi operis ad speculam Britannia erigit 110

-TÊr tËsom ñqcom ñmteune; tÊr Ù pËkir é tÄ cÈqar tÊ; -’AlbqËsior LukaseÅr tÄm vÇqom ÐmhÌpator. 115

Nel V secolo d.C. il gallico Rutilio Namaziano, autore di un poemetto intitolato De Redito suo descriveva il viaggio svolto per tornare al suo paese nelle Gallie: un viaggio condotto da Roma, per mare, in quanto le vie terrestri erano state devastate dai Visigoti e le strade interrotte. Frequenti sono dunque le sue soste nei porti e, a proposito dell’antica città etrusca di Populonia, scrive:

LgjÈti deilaÊmomter ÐveccÈa mujtÄr ÛlÊwkgm eÓr ÑlÁ haqsakÈyr pkÍete, pomtopËqoi: p°sim ÐkyolÈmoir tgkaucÈa dakÄm ÐmÇpty, t´m ’Asjkgpiad´m lmglosÌmgm jalÇtym116 Pìqcor ÑcÆ maÌt\sim ÐkyolÈmoisim ÐqÉcym eÓlÊ PoseidÇymor ÐpemhÈa puqsÄm ÐmÇptym 117

proxima securum reserat Populonia litus, qua naturalem ducit in arva sinum. non illic positas extollit in aethera moles lumine nocturno conspicienda Pharos; sed speculam validae rupis sortita vetustas, qua fluctus domitos arduus urget apex, castellum geminos hominum fundavit in usus, praesidium terris indiciumque fretis 111

111 Rut. Nam. 400-709: “Vicino al braccio di Populonia si estende la sua sicura spiaggia che disegna una bella baia naturale nell’entroterra. Non è stato costruito un massiccio faro con una luce notturna che si eleva fino al cielo, ma gli uomini, molto tempo fa, trovarono un’ampia scogliera che servisse da avvistamento, dove la turrita cima della collina che infrange contro le conquistate onde, era situata sulle fondazioni di un castello con una doppia funzione per gli uomini: difesa della terra e faro”. Trad. di T.E.Page, Ed. LOEB, Harvard 1961. 112 Rut. Nam., 236-242: “ Verso Centocelle cambiammo bordata prima di un forte vento: le nostre navi trovano ormeggio nella calma rada. Là vi è un anfiteatro d’acqua circondato da moli, un’isola artificiale protegge le anguste entrate; su di essa si ergono due torri gemelle, l’isola si estende in ambo le direzioni così da permettere un doppio approccio con gli stretti canali”. Trad..E.Page, ed. LOEB,Cambridge, Massachusets, 1961. 113 Si veda la scheda 61. 114 DOLGETTA-CARUSO 2001 p. 3-4 115 Anth. Pal. IX 671: “Chi tale opera fece? Che carica aveva? Che patria?/D’Ambrosio è il faro, milaseo proconsole”. Trad. ed. Einaudi, Torino 1980. “Milaseo” starebbe per proveniente da Milasa, in Caria, si tratterebbe dunque del faro di Smirne. 116 Anth. Pal. IX 675: “Senza paura dell’ombra notturna ch’è muta di luce, verso di me fidenti navigate! Ardo per tutti gli erranti la torcia che brilla di luce e attesto ciò che gli Asclepiadi fecero” Trad. ed. Einaudi Torino 1980. Ancora una volta è il faro di Smirne a parlare in prima persona. 117 Anth. Pal. IX 674: “Sono una torre, ai vaganti marittimi reco soccorso, accendendo quel fuoco del dio Posidone che salva”. .Ed. Einaudi, Torino 1980. Sappiamo che si tratta del faro di Alessandria,

107

Auson. 330: “...lo stesso vantaggio della naturale altezza di una montagna lo fa...l’elevata torre della menfitica Faro”, Trad. H. G. E. Evelyn White, dall’ ed. LOEB, Cambridge, Massachusets 1948. 108 Synes. epist. IV, 1-3. Si è molto discusso sul porto del quale parla Sinesio. Secondo alcuni si tratta della stessa località nominata in Hdt. IV, 157. Se così fosse la località andrebbe identificata con Wadi-elChalig, non lontano da Bomba (al-Bumbah), in Marmarica. In questo caso, la nave avrebbe percorso circa 700 km da Alessandria e gliene mancherebbero circa 80 per arrivare ad Apollonia, porto di Cirene, dunque un faro collocato tra queste due località ma non quello di Apollonia. Forse si tratta di un porto attrezzato tra Tobruk e Derna. E a quale porto si riferisce con Formica del Faro? Forse a quello conosciuto da Ptol. IV, 4,15 nel mare della Cirenaica? 109 Sidon. VII 93-95 : “Leucade ti ha visto, feroce Augusto, distruggere la potenza di Faro, quando i soldati della tua flotta sconvolsero le acque di Azio e che, per la sconfitta della sua armata, Antonio, l’ubriacone spogliò l’incestuosa Tolemaide del regno dei suoi padri”. Trad. A.Loyen, ed. Les Belles Lettres, Paris 1960. 110 Oros. I, 2, 71: “Il secondo angolo è rivolto a nord-ovest: ivi sorge Brigantia, città della Galizia, che innalza, come un osservatorio in direzione della Britannia, un altissimo faro, una delle poche opere umane degne di nota”. Trad. A.Bertalucci, ed. Valla, Verona 1976.

133

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Un altro autore dell’Antologia Palatina, Antipatro di Tessalonica, ci riporta ancora una volta la leggenda di Ero e Leandro:

ancora ed al fatto di come mai vengano esplicitamente menzionati dei fari sia al fatto che qualora citino dei puqcoÊ collocati in situazioni topografiche adatte ai fari, non sia escluso che alludano proprio a quelle strutture. Anche nel racconto del viaggio di San Paolo (I secolo d.C.) narrato dal centurione Julius Curtius non abbiamo elementi per poter parlare espressamente di fari; eccezion fatta per quella luce che viene menzionata a circa 20 stadi dalla costa dell’isola di Malta e che forse corrisponde alla torre oggi conosciuta come Torre di San Paolo e che poteva avere una funzione farea.122 Si tratta evidentemente del sito di S.Paolo Milqi, presso il quale è stata riconosciuta la villa di San Paolo ma anche varie strutture di età romana tra le quali una torre e due cisterne.123

O¾tor Û KeiÇmdqoio diÇpkoor, o¾tor Û pËmtou poqhlÄr Û l loÌmz t© vikÈomti baqÌr: ta³h’ ‚Gqo³r tÀ pÇqoihem ÑpaÌkia, to³to tÄ pÌqcou keÊxamom: Û pqodËtgr ¿d’ÑpÈjeito kÌwmor118 Nel VI secolo d.C., l’erudito Museo creò un intero poemetto ripensando alla tragica storia dei due amanti . Ecco un consiglio ai viaggiatori che passano a Sesto: ....sÅ d’eó pote je²hi peqÉseir, dÊfeË loÊ tima pÌqcom, ëp\ potÁ SgstiÀr ‚GqÆ êstato, kÌwmom ñwousa, jaà ÙcelËmeue KeÇmdqz...119

L’Ora Maritima di Avieno (IV secolo d.C.) è un testo utilissimo per capire la grandezza e l’agibilità dei porti ma non cita mai espressamente fari, anche se possiamo immaginare che in ogni porto attrezzato vi fossero una o più strutture faree.124 Ancora più probabile, però, è immaginare dalle parole di Avieno che molti porti fossero ormai in rovina e che per questo motivo l’autore citi spesso come punti di riferimento per i naviganti non torri ma templi posti sulla sommità di speroni rocciosi o le alte vette delle montagne, precisando sempre quando esse siano visibili e quando, invece, siano sempre coperte dalle nubi: si pensi al monte Argentario presso Gadir, la cui vetta era sempre illuminata dal sole o alla montagna consacrata a Zefiro presso il fiume Tartesso vicino all’isola di Petanio, identificabile come una delle cime della Sierra dell’Algarve, la cui vetta, chiamata Zeferide, era sempre immersa nella nebbia.125 Un altro importante documento, rielaborato tra V e VI secolo d.C., è l’Itinerarium Maritimum126 che, oltre a diversi peripli, tra i quali il viaggio da Corinto a Cartagine passando per la Sicilia e la navigazione di cabotaggio da Roma ad Arelate, ha il merito di elencare una serie di porti con la loro qualifica, senza però fornirne una descrizione dettagliata. Intorno al 600/700 d.C. scrive l’Anonimo Ravennate,127 autore di una Cosmographia,128 divisa in cinque libri, che risulta basata su una mappa del IV secolo, in cui non vengono però riportate le distanze degli itinerari.

Davvero curiosa è la notizia riportata da Giovanni di Efeso (VI secolo d.C.) circa un faro costruito dall’imperatore Giustino II (565-578) presso la costa occidentale di Costantinopoli e chiamato faro di Zeuxippo.120 Questa gigantesca costruzione, dotata di scala interna per salire agevolmente al piano della lanterna, recava un’iscrizione che esaltava la sua altezza e la fatica che i costruttori avevano fatto per eigerla. In punto di morte Giustino disse che l’opera andava terminata e i due candidati per il lavoro erano il suo successore Tiberio e sua moglie Sofia. Toccò a quest’ultima, in seguito al rifiuto del primo, concludere la gigantesca costruzione: nella tradizione dei fari, Sofia propose di porre sopra l’ultimo piano una statua di Giustino, per rendergli merito dell’inizio della costruzione. Tiberio non volle, così Sofia a quel punto gli disse di arrangiarsi da solo; Tiberio, arrabbiato, vedendo che i mattoni usati per il faro erano gli stessi che avevano utilizzato nel Palazzo imperiale, decise di demolire il faro ed ampliare il palazzo. Infine, tra VI e VII secolo d.C., era ancora il faro di Alessandria a non avere ancora cessato di ritagliarsi almeno una piccola citazione negli scritti degli eruditi. Ad esempio, nel Etymologiarum sive Originum del vescovo Isidoro di Siviglia (VI-VII secolo d.C.) si afferma:

Konrad Peutinger, patrizio di Augusta, nel Medioevo rielaborò quella che noi oggi chiamiamo Tabula Peutingeriana,129 nata da un originale romano del V secolo d.C., utilissima (ma a volte anche ingannevole) per il riconoscimento di numerosi monumenti, tra cui anche i fari Ostia, Alessandria, Fossa Marianae, Brigantium, Chrysopolis e forse anche Costantinopoli ed Aquileia.130

Farum turris est maxima quam Graeci ac Latini in commune ex ipsius rei usu farum appellaverunt, eo quod flammarum indicio longe videatur a navigantibus, qualem Ptolomaeus iuxta Alexandriam construisse octingentis talentis traditur 121

Itineraria, fonti medievali, moderne e storia degli studi

Numerosissimi sono i portolani medievali che rielaborano più antichi portolani greci nei quali vengono riportate le parole PÌqcom o jÇbo dÁ VÇqo, specialmente in Grecia, Turchia ed Africa.131 Il X secolo d.C. vede la composizione della celebre Navigatio Sancti Brendani Abbatis, opera di un autore anonimo, che illustra la navigazione dell’abate irlandese. Al capitolo XXI

Ho già accennato ai peripli fenici e greci di Pitea di Marsiglia. Pseudo-Scilace di Carianda, di Annone Cartaginese ed altri poiché il celebre monumento fu riedificato forse sotto Anastasio da un patrizio noto col titolo di “padre dell’imperatore”. 118 Anth. Pal. VII. 666: “Questo il varco di Leandro, questo lo stretto che non solo all’amante greve fu. Ecco la casa di Ero, la torre-quanto ne resta. Posava, il lume traditore qui”. Trad. ed. Einaudi, Torino 1979. Dalle breve frasi di Antipatro, si deduce che quando egli scrive, la torre di Ero posta a Sesto in Asia Minore era ormai in rovina. 119 Mus. 23-25: “..se mai passerai di là cerca la torre di Sesto, dove Ero reggeva la lampada e guidava Leandro...”, Trad.G. Paduano, ed. Marsilio, Venezia 1994. 120 John of Ephesus, Eccles. Hist. III, 24 in Mango 1986 pp. 125-126 121 Isid. orig., XV, ii, 37-40: “La più grande fu la torre di Faro tanto che i Latini e i Greci allo stesso modo chiamarono faro quelli che avevano il medesimo uso di quella, il segno della cui fiamma, sembra, potesse essere vista da lontano dai naviganti, si dice che Tolomeo per costruirla presso Alessandria abbia speso ottocento talenti”. Trad. W.Lindsay, Tomus II, Oxford 1911.

122

FRANK 1961, pp. 87; 127. Per un maggiore approfondimento si veda BRUNO 2004, pp. 122130., molte fonti parlano dei porti ben attrezzati di Malta e delle isole vicine., è dunque possibile immaginare la presenza di una o più torri faree. 124 Sull’Ora Maritima si veda ANTONELLI 1998, sull’Itinerarium Antonini, il quale riporta più che altro accampamenti militari, si consulti CALZOLARI 1996. 125 Avienus, Ora Maritima, 199-222. 126 CUNTZ, 1929. 127 PINDER-PARTHEY 1860. 128 PINDER-PARTHEY 1860, pp. 447-556. 129 MILLER 1962, BOSIO 1983. 130 BOSIO 1983 risulta ancora il testo fondamentale in materia. 131 DELATTE 1947, pp. 212; 233; 304. 123

134

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO turno del viaggiatore veneto Gioseppe Rosaccio140 il quale fornisce preziose informazioni sulla navigazione da Venezia a Costantinopoli corredando il suo testo con cartine nell’ultima delle quali è visibile anche il faro di Scutari (Torre di Leandro). Lunga sarebbe la lista degli itineraria e dei portolani dal XV al XIX secolo; non è dunque questa la sede per trattarli nello specifico. Mi limiterò a citare il portolano di Sicilia di Filippo Geraci, scritto nel XVII secolo, nel quale il faro romano di Messina è ormai sostituito dalla Lanterna San Ranieri, la cui descrizione non è, tuttavia, dissimile da quella che gli autori antichi e medievali riportavano circa i fari: ...da poi viene la Lanterna quale tiene un luminoso fanale di servizio, e benefizio delli naviganti, perciò detta lanterna è fabricata tutta di pietra intagliata con costito di grandissima spesa....141 Non riportava Plinio circa il faro di Alessandria, l’utilità per i naviganti e la grande spesa?

si parla di una fantomatica colonna altissima posta in mezzo al mare ed avvolta da una rete, che altro non è che un simbolo del pilastro e asse del mondo.132 Infine, i primi tre libri del Liber Guidonis de varii historiis, compilato intorno al 1109 da Guidone che riporta alcuni itinerari e il periplo del Mediterraneo di epoca romana. Un altro viaggiatore che fornisce preziose indicazioni è l’arabo Edrisi, che scrive attorno al 1180 il Libro del Re Ruggero,133 descrivendo sia l’Italia che la Spagna che egli stesso aveva visitato. Nel 1187 Abû al-Haggâg Yûsuf Ibn Muhammad al-Balawi al-Andalusî, di passaggio ad Alessandria, fornirà una delle più dettagliate descrizioni del faro per eccellenza, che sarà di ispirazione per le successive ipotesi ricostruttive.134 Moltissimi sono i viaggiatori arabi che tra XI e XII secolo forniscono dettagliate informazioni su fari da loro avvistati: si pensi ad al-Qazwīnī (1203-1283) che menziona il faro di Cadice (vedi scheda 71) descritto come un blocco quadrato di marmo, sormontato da un analogo blocco minore di un terzo e su questo una piramide triangolare sulla punta della quale era la statua di un uomo barbuto con un mantello dorato e con la mano sinistra con l’indice puntato verso le Colonne d’Ercole, quindi lo Stretto di Gibilterra, e con una chiave nel braccio destro. Questa descrizione è stata quasi “copiata” dal suo predecessore al-Zuhrī, che solo identificava nel braccio destro della statua un bastone e non una chiave.135

Storia degli studi Indispensabile, quasi da considerare la prima monografia sui fari, è l’opera intitolata Dissertazione sopra il Faro di Alessandria, sopra gli altri Fari fabbricati dopo, e particolarmente fopra quello di Bologna in Francia, rovinato già ott’anni circa, pubblicata nel 1749 da Bernardo di Montfaucon. Certo, essa contiene molte inesattezze, come la teoria che il faro di Alessandria fosse costruito su modello della Torre di Babele, cioè una struttura circolare a gradoni, senza dubbio basata sulle incisioni del 1580 di Philippe Galle che così lo disegnava. Tuttavia, rimane un fondamentale punto di partenza per chi voglia affrontare questo argomento. Passando alla recente storia degli studi, incontriamo il bibliotecario francese dei depositi e delle carte della Marina, Leon Renard che nel 1867 scrisse un’opera intitolata Les Phares.142 In questa opera, tutto sommato utile per un primo inquadramento del problema, vi sono, tuttavia, numerose imprecisioni e informazioni appena accennate senza il conforto di una nota che le chiarisca.

A metà del XII secolo la Descrizione dell’Irlanda di Giraldo Cambrense non menziona alcun faro ma ci parla del miracoloso fuoco inestinguibile del Kildare perennemente tenuto acceso da Brigida e dalle monache.136 Il faro di Alessandria sin dal XII secolo fu tra le mete preferite dei viaggiatori arabi che, spesso, lo disegnarono. Nel 1326 il grande viaggiatore arabo Ibn Battûta ce ne lascia una splendida descrizione anche se quando scrive la torre è ormai in rovina (scheda 8). Interessantissimo notare che nel De mirabilius Urbis Romae del Magister Gregorius, sempre nel XII secolo, viene descritto al capitolo 30 il faro di Alessandria che si immagina avere le fondamenta in mare con quattro ganci di cristallo che resistono sott’acqua grazie a una polvere che immersa nell’acqua si solidifica.137

Nel 1887 è il Cialdi a fornire alcuni Cenni storici143 su numerosi fari da quello alessandrino all’ottocentesco di Bell-Rock in Scozia. Ancora dell’Ottocento sono le ricerche di H.Maionica e Pietro Kandler con particolare attenzione per la Decima Regio: il primo indagò a fondo Aquileia, il secondo sia la città menzionata sia Trieste, essendo il cartografo imperiale a seguito degli Asburgo.144

Nel Quattrocento l’opera Italia Illustrata di Flavio Biondo138 risulta, ancora oggi, di una certa utilità soprattutto per l’area portuale di Roma. Ancora nel XV secolo Papa Pio II Piccolomini, che regnò dal 1458 al 1464, durante un’escursione archeologica al porto di Ostia, descrisse le sue rovine affermando che, tra esse, era ancora visibile il famoso faro di Claudio.139 Procedendo, troviamo, alla metà del XV secolo, la Descrittione d’Italia del bolognese Leandro Alberti e le mappe geografiche sotto forma di arazzi, oggi conservati nei Musei Vaticani a Roma, nella sala che collega le Stanze di Raffaello alla Cappella Sistina. Sempre nel Cinquecento un’opera fondamentale, soprattutto per Ostia, è il Libro delle Antichità di Roma di Pirro Ligorio. Alla fine del Cinquecento è, invece, il

Tuttavia, come loro, si potrebbero citare numerosi scrittori e viaggiatori, per cui si preferisce rimandare alle schede specifiche di ogni faro. Nel 1899 E. Allard pubblica Les Phares, una lunga dissertazione sui fari dell’Antichità, oggi però inserita solo nella riedizione del 1979 ad opera dell’ingegnere francese Alfred Leger in Les Travaux Publics, les Mines et la Métallurgie aux temps des Romains, la tradition romaine jusqu’a nos jours,145 nella quale è dedicato ai fari un intero capitolo separato da quello dei porti. Sempre alla fine dell’Ottocento risalgono gli indispensabili lavori Italienische Landeskunde di He.Nissen146 e, soprattutto per la Campania, Campanien, Geschichte und Topographie des antiken Neapel

132

PERCIVALDI 2008, p. 206. AMARI-SCHIAPPARELLI 1883. 134 EMPEREUR 1998 p. 104. 135 Si veda ARIOLI 1989, p. 181 136 CATALDI 2002, pp. 71-72. E’ evidente che non si tratta di un faro, ma Giraldo precisa che grazie alla cura delle monache quel fuoco può essere sempre visto, anche al mattino. Esso rimane dunque un inequivocabile punto di riferimento. 137 MIGLIO 1999, p.113. Il paragrafo su Alessandria non ha alcuna connesione con Roma, se non si vuole forse immaginare un sottinteso paragone tra il faro di Ostia e quello alessandrino. 138 FLAVIO 1558. 139 CIALDI 1877, p. 310. 133

140

ROSACCIO 1598. PEDONE 1987, p. 63 142 RENARD 1867. 143 CIALDI 1877. 144 BUORA 2000; nel quale la nota più interessante a p. 45 Maionica menziona il ritrovamento di alcuni specchi metallici (ustori) nella zona del fiume Natisone. Per Kandler si veda ZORZON 1989. 145 ALLARD 1979. 146 NISSEN 1883-1902. 141

135

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA und seinen Umgebung di Julius Beloch.147 Lavoro imprescindibile per la nostra ricerca è quello dell’inizio del secolo scorso (1900) dell’ingegnere tedesco L.A.Veitmeyer: Leuchtfeuer und Leuchtapparate,148 nel quale oltre ai fari antichi viene descritta anche la tecnica costruttiva del suo tempo. Utilissimo risulta poi il Dictionnaire des Antiquiteès graecques et romaines d’après les textes et les monuments149 degli studiosi Ch. Daremberg, Edm. Saglio e Edm. Pottier, realizzato nel 1906. Nel 1909 il grande studioso tedesco Hermann Thiersch, sulla base di un viaggio fatto col padre nel 1893 in Egitto, con un’escursione ad Alessandria per visitare il vecchio faro di Abousir, pubblica nel 1909 quella che ancora oggi può essere vista come la più importante monografia sul celebre monumento alessandrino: Pharos, Antike, Islam und Occident.150 In questo lavoro non si analizza solo il faro, la cui ricostruzione di Thiersch è ancora oggi quella più accreditata, bensì si studia anche la sua evoluzione nel forte di Qait-bay, e l’influenza che la sua architettura ebbe su altri edifici del genere, sui minareti e sui campanili. Quest’opera rimane un punto di partenza e di arrivo fondamentale ancora oggi. Lo stesso autore approfondirà l’argomento nel 1915 nell’articolo Griechische Leuchtfeuer, pubblicato nell’Annuario dell’Istituto Germanico di Roma.151 Questo lungo articolo è molto utile soprattutto se letto insieme al volume di Veitmeyer. Non esisteranno più monografie sui fari in generale; in ogni opera che tratti di ingegneria antica o di archeologia marittima ai fari saranno dedicate solo poche righe. Questo almeno sino agli anni Quaranta e Cinquanta, quando alcuni autori dedicheranno all’argomento brevi capitoli, insieme alle descrizioni portuali. Nel 1959 Sandro Stucchi pubblica sulla rivista Aquileia Nostra un interessante articolo intitolato Fari, Campanili e Mausolei, che, almeno in parte, riprende le argomentazioni di Thiersch.152 Una lunga dissertazione sui fari, compresi quelli delle province, è parzialmente affrontata nel 1968 nel volume Antichità Classiarie di Maria Bollini.153 Bisognerà aspettare fino al 1979 per la prima trattazione di carattere iconografico, operata da Michel Reddè e pubblicata sui Melanges dell’Ecole Français, dal titolo La Représentation de Phares à l’époque romaine.154 Nella prima metà degli anni Ottanta nascono molteplici monografie sulla storia dei fari con particolare riferimento a quelli oggi esistenti. Qui mi limito a citare l’opera di Camillo Manfredini e Antonio Walter Pescara155 sui fari italiani del 1985. Un buon articolo, intitolato Les Phares antiques, fu pubblicato da Robert Bedon nel 1988 sulla rivista Archeologia,156 ma si tratta solo di poche pagine.

sulle immagini di porti nella documentazione numismatica, pubblicato sulla Rivista Italiana di Numismatica; infine va citato il lungo articolo Fari del litorale e torri costiere: il linguaggio semaforico, ad opera di Celeste Spinelli, pubblicato nel 1996 in Adriatico, Genti e Civiltà,160 nel quale peraltro si parla in abbondanza anche dei fari storici (ottocenteschi) e moderni. Si sarà dunque notato come dal 1900, ossia dal lavoro di Veitmeyer, manchi una vera e propria monografia sui fari dell’Antichità. Da allora sono stati pubblicati solo articoli, più o meno lunghi, molti dei quali riguardo al problema dell’architettura e del funzionamento dei fari, prediligendo il loro aspetto iconografico. Unica eccezione, nel 1975 il bel volume di Douglas B. Hague e Rosemary Christie, Lighthouses, their archaeology, history and architecture, nel quale vengono analizzati alcuni fari antichi, spesso in relazione a quello di Dover, e si suggeriscono luoghi che avrebbero potuto ospitare fari romani, come Merinum, nei pressi di Vieste, o Zara.161 Non sono invece mancate alcune monografie dedicate a singoli fari, soprattutto, penso a quello di Alessandria, ma anche al lavoro di Hauschild162 e di Hütter163 sulla Torre di Ercole di Brigantium, oppure l’opera Aquileia ed altri porti romani del giovane Stefano Franzot,164pubblicato nel 1999, ma dedicato quasi esclusivamente alla regio X Venetia et Histria. E’ dunque indispensabile un aggiornamento su un argomento così affascinante come quello dell’utilizzo del faro nel mondo antico. Infatti, come ho già detto, i lavori di Thiersch e Veitmeyer, seppur validissimi, risultano ormai datati, soprattutto perché alcune strutture faree, ad esempio quella di Forum Iulii (Fréjus), che loro vedevano ancora parzialmente conservate si sono molto deteriorate o sono sotto vincolo militare, alcune opere iconografiche non sono oggi più visibili o hanno cambiato di sede. In questi ultimi tre anni ho cercato di realizzare un approfondimento sulla materia, dapprima con la Tesi di Specializzazione in Archeologia realizzata sotto la direzione scientifica del Prof. Lorenzo Quilici e intitolata Il Faro nel mondo antico: testimonianze letterarie, iconografiche ed archeologiche (2005) poi con la pubblicazione di due articoli Il faro nel mondo antico: aggiornamenti e nuovi dati, uscito su Orizzonti e La rappresentazione del faro nelle emissioni numismatiche del mondo antico, pubblicato sulla Rivista Italiana di Numismatica, entrambi nel 2007. Nel 2002, Francesca Fatta con il bellissimo volume Luci del Mediterraneo, i fari di Calabria e Sicilia, dopo una breve introduzione storica, analizza uno per uno i fari attualmente esistenti sulle coste siciliane e calabresi anche grazie a disegni, rilievi e cartografia storica.165 Nel 2000, alcuni autori nordici, tra i quali Ebbe Almquvist, pubblicavano Fari dal mondo, quando la terra incontra il mare, schematico ma interessante libro sia da un punto di vista storico che tecnologico.166 Nel 2005, veniva pubblicato un libro assai interessante per l’architettura dei fari italiani moderni, con una breve descrizione, basata più su teorie rinascimentali che su fonti storiche, sui fari antichi. Il libro, ad opera di Cristiana Bartolomei, si chiama L’architettura dei fari italiani.167 Lo stesso anno, un lavoro assai simile, ad opera di Enrica Simonetti, Luci ed eclissi sul mare, Fari d’Italia, approfondiva un po’ di più la storia dei fari ma senza mai entrare in dettaglio.168 Da molti anni la Mariotti169 ed altri autori si

Altri buoni lavori sono quello del 1998 di Günter Grimm Alexandria, die erste Königstadt der hellenistichen Welt,157 che dedica però solo un capitoletto al faro di Alessandria e la monografia di Jean-Yves Empereuer, Le phare d’Alexandrie, la Meraville retrouvèe158 dello stesso anno. Concludo con il lavoro del 1999 di Marina Pensa, Moli, Fari e Pescatori,159 nel quale l’autrice si è però occupata prevalentemente dell’aspetto iconografico che aveva sviluppato da un suo precedente articolo intitolato Alcune considerazioni 147

BELOCH 1890. VEITMEYER 1900. 149 DICTIONNAIRE 1906. 150 THIERSCH 1909. 151 THIERSCH 1915. 152 STUCCHI 1959, pp. 15-29 153 BOLLINI 1968. 154 REDDÈ 1979, pp.845-872. 155 MANFREDINI-PESCARA 1985. 156 BEDON 1988, pp. 54-68. 157 GRIMM 1998 p.42. 158 EMPEREUER 1999. 159 PENSA 1998, PENSA 1999. 148

160

SPINELLI 1996, pp. 569-603. HAGUE/CHRISTIE 1975. HÜTTER-HAUSCHILD 1991. 163 HÜTTER 1973. 164 FRANZOT 1999. 165 FATTA 2002. 166 ALMQVIST/CEDERBERG/HILLBERG/THUNMAN 2000. 167 BARTOLOMEI 2005. 168 SIMONETTI 2005. 169 MARIOTTI 2006, COSI/REPOSSI 2008. 161 162

136

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO occupano di fari, ma sempre lasciando in secondo piano la storia di questi eccezionali giganti del mare. Anche in questo caso la lista sarebbe lunghissima e quindi rimando alla bibliografia di riferimento e alle specifiche schede. Dunque, questo lavoro, frutto delle mie ricerche di dottorato, dal titolo Navigare necesse est. Il faro tra mondo antico e Medioevo: storia, architettura, iconografia ed evidenze archeologiche vuole essere, grazie ad un completo catalogo corredato da un apparato fotografico, spesso realizzato in situ, la più completa possibile, allo stato degli studi attuali, rassegna dei fari del mondo antico a noi noti da testi letterari, rappresentazioni iconografiche o evidenze archeologiche.

137

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA supporre che ogni qual volta una fonte antica parli di un ðýñãïò collocato in posizione strategica sul mare o su un fiume possa far riferimento ad un faro o ad una torre semaforica o a qualcosa ad essi molto simile. Gli antichi si resero presto conto che strutture di dimensioni poco ragguardevoli non erano dotati di una portata luminosa di grandi dimensioni. Ecco allora che venne inventata da Sostrato di Cnido la forma a piani degradanti verso l’alto, l’ultimo dei quali sempre di forma cilindrica, chiuso da una cupola sulla quale innestare una statua, ma aperto su tutti i lati intervallati da colonne per permettere alla luce della lanterna di brillare a 360°. Non è sicuro se, effettivamente, furono utilizzati gli “specchi ustori” di cui Archimede era stato l’inventore, ma non è probabile che la luce prodotta dal materiale combustibile (legno, bitume, olio, fibre vegetali e animali) collocato al centro dell’ultimo piano, fosse riprodotto grazie all’ausilio di una serie di specchi, posti intorno ad esso e fatti girare da alcuni schiavi. Se così fosse però, sarebbe prevista la presenza all’ultimo piano di più di un guardiano. Le fonti epigrafiche ci hanno lasciato poche testimonianze, una delle quali ancora una volta appartenente ad Alessandria (scheda 8) che forse fu innovatrice anche nell’affidare ad una singola persona la cura dell’edificio.175

CAPITOLO 3 La nascita del faro: architettura, materiali e tecniche costruttive Origine: Al contrario di quanto si è sempre pensato, nonostante il faro di Alessandria, architettonicamente parlando, possa essere definito il primo vero e proprio faro della storia, la precisa data di nascita di queste strutture rimane difficile da identificare. Il faro di Alessandria, infatti, aveva tutto quello che un faro moderno richiede: stanze abitabili per i guardiani e i soldati, un’altezza notevole che gli permetteva di essere avvistato da lontano anche di giorno, scale interne che permettessero a uomini e animali di raggiungere il piano della lanterna e l’architettura che sarebbe stata di modello per i successivi fari che proprio da esso presero il nome. Tuttavia, le torri di Jelsa-Tor in Croazia (scheda 32), di Thasos in Grecia (scheda 28) e di Nora in Sardegna (scheda 49), ben tre secoli prima di questa struttura svolgevano le medesime funzioni e potremmo quasi immaginare questi edifici come l’anello di congiunzione tra i fuochi sulla sommità dei monti di cui parlava Omero e la costruzione dei fari tout-court. Addirittura, dando credito alle parole che Filostrato170 spende per Palamede nell’Eroico, sembra quasi che i primi fari (semplici fuochi accesi su promontori) siano nati con lo scopo contrario di quelli che seguirono, non per agevolare l’entrata in porto della nave ma per uccidere e ingannare, come fecero anche i Plateesi durante la guerra del Peloponneso.171

Il faro di Alessandria presentava un piano quadrato, uno ottagonale ed uno cilindrico ma questa sequenza fu sempre rispettata, se le torri-faro volute da Erode a Caesarea Maritima (scheda 10), la tomba-faro di Taposiris Magna (scheda 7), Chrysopolis (scheda 24) e quella di Tiberio per la sua Villa Iovis a Capri (scheda 53) rispettavano in pieno il modello alessandrino; già Caligola, peraltro, quando volle celebrare la sua fittizia vittoria sui Bretoni, creò a Gesoriacum (scheda 75) una torre in tutto differente (tranne che nella funzione) da quella alessandrina ma che sarà poi d’ispirazione per quelle successive, come quelle che Claudio realizzò a Dubris (scheda 76): la prima di dodici, le seconde di otto piani ottagonali degradanti verso l’alto, mantenendo l’ultimo piano cilindrico. Col passare del tempo però sembra perdersi l’abitudine di posizionare sulla sommità della torre una statua, di ancora difficile interpretazione ma che verosimilmente rappresentava Poseidone. E’ lecito pensare che il peso eccessivo di questo ornamento su strutture già di notevoli dimensioni e la cura che necessitava la scultura, di continuo esposta alle correnti marine e alla corrosione salina, mettendo a rischio la stabilità dell’intero edificio, abbia indotto gli antichi a eliminare questo decoro o, in certi casi, a sostituirlo con una statua posta su un piedistallo in prossimità del faro, come avvenne ad Ostia (scheda 60), oppure su un arco trionfale in prossimità del molo come è possibile immaginare ad Ancona (scheda 45) o Puteoli (scheda 55). La forma ottagonale dei fari oltre che delle città di origine celtica (Narbo Martius, Dubris, Gesoriacum) sembra essere tipica anche delle isole come dimostrano Igilum (scheda 63) e Dianum Artemisium (scheda 62), ma esiste anche una forma rettangolare che, se le immagini sono foriere di verità, è riscontrabile in più parti del mondo antico: Leptis Magna (scheda 4), Sabratha (scheda 3), Cosa (scheda 64), Ariminum (scheda 44), Capo Atheneum (scheda 52), Magdala (scheda 11), Brigantium (scheda 73), Campa Torres (scheda 74). In alcune parti è testimoniata anche la forma circolare che spesso più che da fari veri e propri è attribuita a torri-faro con funzioni anche di lanterna come quelle di Centumcellae (scheda 61) o Vada Sabatia (Bergeggi, scheda 66), mentre più tipica di alcuni fari è quella cilindrica, sempre restando a piani degradanti verso l’alto, molto diffusa nell’area medio-orientale: Apamea di Siria (scheda 12), Laodicea ad Mare (scheda 13), Heraclea Pontica (scheda 25), Aigai (scheda 15), Perga (scheda 16), Side (scheda

Etimologia e semantica: Il termine VaqËr nasce nel III secolo a.C. nell’Egitto tolemaico e prende il nome dall’omonima isola collegata ad Alessandria dall’Heptastadion; prima di quell’epoca le torri-faro erano chiamate PuqcoÊ, dalla radice pÌq- che vuol dire fuoco; ecco perché toponimi come Pyrranheum (scheda 35) fanno ipotizzare l’esistenza di un faro o di un fuoco di segnalazione. In latino, quel tipo di torre verrà chiamata pharus a partire dal II secolo d.C. quando Stazio paragonerà la luce emessa dal faro di Capri a quella della Luna mentre prima di quell’epoca si usava turris: Cesare riporta: Pharus est in insula turris magna altitudine, e ancora Plinio parla di turris a rege facta in insula Pharo. In età tardo antica il termine cambierà leggermente passando da pharus a farus, come attesta Isidoro di Siviglia.172 In ebraico (migdal) è “una casa che sta al centro di una via pubblica oppure una specie di torre, tre lati della quale sono in mare mentre uno è sulla terra ferma, alcuni la paragonano alla colonna-torre di Alessandria in Egitto e i Greci la chiamano pharon”.173 Infine, in arabo manāra significa “torre”, “faro” ed anche “minareto” (letteralmente “luogo della luce”), essendo collegato al verbo nāra che significa “fare luce”.174 Architettura: L’architettura non era, infatti, stata perfezionata ma già si era pensato di realizzare delle torri, il che lascerebbe 170 Philostr. Imag. 47. La leggenda di Nauplio, figlio di Posidone, è ricordata anche da Apollod. II, 1. 171 Tuc. XXI, 7 dove si creano dei fuochi sulle mura di Tebe e contemporaneamente su quelle di Platea per gettare confusione sui nemici. 172 Stat. silv. III, 100-101; Caes. civ. III, 112, Plin. nat. XXXVI, 83; Isid. orig. XV, ii, 37-40. 173 SPERBER 1986, p. 148, «Magdala» in Der Kleine Pauly, III, Iuppiter bis Nasidienus, Stuggart 1949. 174 Ringrazio l’amico Giuseppe Mandalà per le informazioni sulla terminologia araba. Sarà forse per questo collegamento semantico che già dai primi del Novecento si diffuse la teoria che i minareti furono costruiti su antichi fari romani, teoria per la quale rimando al capitolo sui “falsi fari”.

175 C.I.L. VI, 8582, ILS 1576, FRANZOT 1999, p. 71 cita espressamente un procurator fari Alexandriae ad Aegyptum.

138

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO 17), Caesarea Germanica (scheda 26), Abydos (scheda 23) e, in Italia, Messana (scheda 47) e Panormus (scheda 48). All’imbocco dei fiumi esistono quasi sempre delle torri-faro con la funzione di segnalazione per la nebbia e di stazione doganale e tutte quelle indagate sono poste in zone lagunari: Fossa Marianae alle Bocche del Rodano (scheda 68), il canale S.Felice di Cà Ballarin nella laguna veneziana (scheda 40), Baro Zavelea nelle valli comacchiesi (scheda 42) e Equilum nelle valli jesolane (scheda 39) presentano la medesima struttura a pianta quadrata in mattoni sesquipedali. Sia dalle rappresentazioni nelle arti figurative del mondo antico sia nelle scarse evidenze archeologiche in nostro possesso, il faro del mondo antico appare sempre dotato di finestre di forma rettangolare o semicircolare (fig. 12). Considerando che l’unica evidenza archeologica che abbia mantenuto quasi del tutto inalterata l’architettura romana è il faro che Claudio fece costruire a Dubris, possiamo immaginare che, nel mondo romano, le finestre avessero quella forma ad arco che, spesso, come avvenne nella parte superiore dello stesso faro britannico, nel Rinascimento venne trasformata in bocca di lupo assai più adatta alle artiglierie dell’epoca. Un dubbio ancora irrisolto è come terminasse l’ultimo piano del faro: in molte rappresentazioni il piano cilindrico che ospitava la lanterna è spesso chiuso da una cupola (figg. 12, 13). Probabilmente è proprio la forma cilindrica dell’ultimo piano a dettare la copertura a cupola che quasi tutti i fari del mondo antico sembrano avere posseduto. Inoltre, sapendo che, spesso, sulla sommità di questi edifici era la statua stante di una divinità o di un sovrano divinizzato, si può supporre che vi fosse necessità di un piano piuttosto solido per potere ospitare un simile monumento; tuttavia, la cupola sembra essere una piattaforma meno stabile che non un corpo di fabbrica quadrato o rettangolare; è forse per questa ragione che non si sono conservate statue poste sulla sommità dei fari, riconoscibili solo nelle arti figurative.

giustinianea sul faro del mosaico di Qasr-el-Libya (Tav. 12, fig. 24) è una figura riconosciuta come Cristo o Helios, mentre durante la dominazione araba dell’Egitto, sul faro di Alessandria verrà rappresentato un indigeno con in mano uno scettro (Tav. 11, fig. 21b). Tuttavia, se si pensa che la prima persona ad essere raffigurata sopra una torre che assumerà la funzione di faro fu la sacerdotessa Ero, sembra strano che nessuno abbia pensato ad una torcia, attributo che porta la personificazione del faro come vedremo in seguito. Dunque, i fari romani hanno tra loro una forma simile, ma non sempre uguale: più piani digradanti verso l’alto (da un minimo di 2 ad un massimo di 12) di forma cilindrica, ottagonale, circolare o parallelepipeda; gli ex-voto (Cosa, Libarna…) denotano che le forme cambiano pur mantenendo inalterato l’ultimo piano di forma cilindrica (sul quale insiste una statua maschile stante con patera e un attributo di difficile identificazione) e, spesso, una scala esterna di accesso alla torre che la sopraelevava di alcuni metri (fig.170). Infine, per quanto riguarda la parte inferiore del faro, spesso, questa è costituita da una cisterna che può permettere l’approvvigionamento idrico degli addetti al faro: Canale S.Felice (scheda 40), Miseno (scheda 54), Patara (scheda 21) sono solo alcuni esempi. La base della torre era sempre anche fornita delle pilae in modo da permettere il passaggio dell’acqua sotto l’edificio senza metterne a rischio la stabilità come dimostra il faro di Dover (fig. 18). L’unica descrizione che abbiamo dell’interno di un faro è data da Flavio Giuseppe che racconta come nelle torri di Caesarea Maritima vi fossero magnifiche stanze per l’abitazione e vani destinati a contenere l’acqua piovana (dunque cisterne) oltre ad ampie scale a chiocciola d’accesso.177 Materiale costruttivo: Se questi ultimi edifici sono spesso realizzati in mattoni sesquipedali, assai frequente è l’uso dell’opus reticolatum e vittatum come nel caso di Forum Iulii (scheda 67) dove è ben visibile, specialmente nel rudere sull’isolotto Lion de mer, l’impiego del caementicium. Il reticolatum è assai presente nella regione campana ma la tecnica muraria varia anche a seconda della pietra utilizzata: nelle zone carsiche la pietra d’Istria, importata tuttavia anche a Ravenna (scheda 43) e Baro Zavelea (scheda 42), non può essere finemente lavorata a causa della sua consistenza e quindi le strutture si presentano monolitiche e prive di decoro, come il mastio vecchio di Duino (scheda 36). In alcune zone della Gallia Narbonensis si privilegia la pietra dell’isola locale, come nel caso dell’isola di Santa Lucia di Port de la Nouvelle, presso Narbona (scheda 69), la cui pietra è assai dura e difficile da lavorare; in Spagna, invece, la pietra locale presenta la stessa consistenza e dunque le torri di Brigantium (scheda 73) e della Campa Torres (scheda 74) si presentano assai rigide. Da Svetonio sappiamo che Caligola per la Tour d’Ordre (scheda 75) usò il tufo oltre a vari tipi di marmo colorato, mentre Plinio il Vecchio accenna al faro di Alessandria proprio nel suo capitolo sul marmo. Tuttavia, non è sempre facile capire quale sia stato il materiale costruttivo in mancanza di precise descrizioni da parte di fonti antiche, dal momento che le poche evidenze archeologiche hanno, molto spesso, subito restauri o totali rinnovamenti in epoche successive.

Un altro esempio dato dall’arte figurativa è un piatto argenteo, conservato al Museo di San Pietroburgo, dove Eros e un Amorino sono intenti a costruire una tomba per un animale defunto, in questo caso il tetto è a spiovente. (fig 14).176 Tuttavia, nelle monete repubblicane di Panormus (fig. 15) il faro sembra essere dotato di un ultimo piano di forma quadrata con merlature che si rifanno alle torri difensive di epoca fenicia. Ancora diversa sembra essere la copertura dell’ultimo piano nei fari gallici, a partire dalla strana forma assegnata a quello di Narbo Martius nel mosaico del Piazzale delle Corporazioni di Ostia (fig. 16). Sopra il tetto, di qualsiasi forma esso fosse, spesso, come abbiamo visto, era una statua la cui identificazione è ancora incerta. La statua è sempre stante e raffigura una persona di sesso maschile con patera ed un oggetto interpretato come tridente, lancia o remo. Lo studio delle monete alessandrine (scheda 8, Tav. 10, figg. 19, 20 a,b) portò all’interpretazione che la statua rappresentasse Tolomeo divinizzato, Zeus Sotèr o Poseidone. L’idea che mi sembra più appropriata è quella di associare il faro alla figura di Poseidone, riconoscendo quindi nella statua il tridente del dio del mare. In aggiunta a questo, un intaglio vitreo proveniente dalla stessa Alessandria ci mostra proprio Poseidone accanto al faro mentre regge con la mano un modellino dell’edificio (Tav. 12, fig. 23b) inoltre, in età repubblicana, Sesto Pompeo si raffigura sopra la torre del faro di Messina proprio come Nettuno (Tav. 57, fig. 113 a). Non va trascurato che le statue poste in cima a questi monumenti subivano gravi danni a causa dell’erosione marina ed erano quindi spesso soggette a restauri e sostituzioni, anche in base a chi regnava in quel periodo: ad esempio, in età 176

177

STUCCHI 1959, pp. 27-29.

139

Ios. Bell. Iud. V, 4, 156-158.

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

CAPITOLO 4 Iconografia, iconologia e attendibilita’ delle immagini

dell’anfiteatro (fig. 23), uno dei tanti monumenti sepolcrali dell’età imperiale in cui il defunto vuole rendere noto ai cittadini quale fu il suo incarico in vita e dunque la sua “immagine sociale”.183

Il primo problema che si presenta in un’analisi di questo tipo è che a differenza delle epoche e dell’area geografica la rappresentazione dei fari cambia notevolmente, pur mantenendo alcune caratteristiche comuni. Un esempio poco conosciuto è dato dalle cinque lucerne a forma di faro ritrovate negli scavi di Gorsium (Ungheria):178 si tratta di torri a quattro piani digradanti verso l’alto, dei quali l’ultimo, come di consueto, presenta forma cilindrica chiusa da una cupola (fig. 19a). In questo caso non si può fare affidamento sulla forma delle finestre che si presentano ai lati dell’edificio perché il loro taglio è adatto ad emettere la luce del materiale combusto dalla lanterna, dunque quelle strutture vogliono essere solo evocative della funzione senza pretendere di riprodurre il vero e questa iconografia trova chiari confronti anche in lucerne di stampo più classico (fig. 19b).

Un unicum in questa costante iconografica è dato da un celebre rilievo datato all’ultimo quarto del III secolo d.C. e conservato alla Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek di Copenhagen (fig. 24) che rappresenta una travagliata scena di navigazione verso un faro. In esso troviamo sulla sinistra una torre a due piani: nel piano inferiore sembra essere un soldato, nella terrazza superiore sono due uomini che sembrano dare indicazioni alle imbarcazioni. La scena si presta ad essere letta in maniera continua: la nave salpa da un porto orientale, a giudicare dalle fattezze del personale sulla torre, ma il mare burrascoso e il forte vento provoca un naufragio e un membro dell’equipaggio cade in acqua, ecco quindi che gli altri tre marinai ancora sulla nave gettano in mare una scialuppa di salvataggio, egli nuota verso di essa e viene tirato su dall’equipaggio che nel frattempo sta compiendo una “strambata” per entrare correttamente nel porto attrezzato, forse Ostia, segnalato dalla presenza del faro.

Secondo il Radan non si tratta di modelli per fari, come qualcuno ha voluto ipotizzare,179 ma di ex-voto da mettere nella tomba del defunto con il chiaro significato di speranza che quel faro possa far luce al defunto anche nell’Aldilà, nel porto della salvezza dove sarà approdato proprio grazie alla luce di un faro. Sono numerosissime le rappresentazioni che associano il faro al mondo ultraterreno alludendo alla navigatio vitae (fig. 22b); basti pensare ai numerosi sarcofagi dell’Isola Sacra di Ostia (Tav. 77, fig. 153; Tav. 79, fig. 156), anche se sarà soprattutto l’arte paleocristiana180 a sfruttare questa tematica come dimostra il sarcofago di Firmia Victora, conservato al Museo Pio Clementino dei Musei Vaticani (fig. 20a). Nel IV secolo d.C., epoca a cui si data il sarcofago di Firma, Gregorio di Nissa, nel De Vita Moysis, paragona espressamente la luce divina a quella di un faro che guida l’anima nel porto della salvezza.181 Dunque, forse l’artista ha voluto fondere in questi sarcofagi sia l’aspetto reale della vita del defunto sia quello allegorico dell’arrivo nel porto sicuro. E’ interessante notare che l’iconografia si diffonde al principio del II secolo d.C. ma con il passare del tempo perdono d’importanza le persone per lasciare il posto alle sole immagini: nel II secolo d.C. troviamo le navi, il faro, il carico e le persone (fig. 23),182 nel III secolo d.C., le navi, il faro e il carico (fig. 21), nel IV secolo d.C. la nave e il faro (fig. 20a). Non sono rari anche i casi di graffiti, spesso trovati casualmente, come nel caso del probabile faro di Ostia scolpito su una lastra di travertino e trovato lungo la statale per Ostia: anche in questo caso la forma è quella di una torre a quattro piani digradanti verso l’alto, sull’ultimo dei quali, di forma cilindrica, brilla la luce della lanterna; al piano inferiore è presente una porta ad arco e nei piani intermedi alcune finestre della stessa forma (figg. 20 a, b). Tuttavia, non sempre vi è un significato simbolico dietro la rappresentazione di un faro che, spesso, può anche semplicemente essere un ausilio topografico per indicare che la nave sta giungendo in porto. E’ il caso dei praepositi cammellorum, ufficiali incaricati di ricevere ed inviare a Roma gli animali selvaggi impiegati nei giochi

Un’altra ipotesi è che il naufrago stia nuotando tra tre barche per raggiungere la scialuppa di salvataggio che la prima nave, l’unica accortasi dell’episodio, ha gettato in mare. Tuttavia, l’ipotesi più plausibile è stata fornita da Lionel Casson (fig. 29): siamo nel nuovo porto di Ostia, il vento è forte e le onde sono alte, un ragazzo cade da una piccola imbarcazione sulla quale stava remando; questo sotto gli occhi dei genitori saliti su una torre all’estremità del molo o, credo, più verosimilmente, di guardie costiere. Due navi si precipitano a salvare il ragazzo ma quella che arriva per prima corre il grave pericolo di entrare in collisione con una nave che sta entrando nel porto. La forza del vento è resa evidente dal fatto che entrambe le imbarcazioni hanno ridotto la velatura. Una delle tre navi, trovandosi in pericolo di collisione, è costretta a rinunciare al salvataggio del ragazzo. In questa situazione drammatica c’è chi si mette a pregare, mentre i due capitani sono costretti ad azioni eccezionali per evitare il contatto. Non sappiamo se le navi siano riuscite ad evitare la collisione, ma il ragazzo ha trovato la morte in mare come testimoniarono i suoi resti trovati all’interno del sarcofago.184 Ad ogni modo in questo caso l’evento è talmente realistico che sembra essere realmente successo ed è impossibile immaginare un solo significato allegorico di un marinaio che ha avuto una vita travagliata e ha trovato rifugio e serenità solo nel porto della salvezza ultraterrena.185 Come si sarà notato sia che si voglia rappresentare l’ “immagine sociale” o alludere al viaggio del defunto nel porto della salvezza (elementi non necessariamente scollegati tra loro), la struttura farea ha sempre chiari riferimenti che ci permettono di capire a quale città si voglia fare riferimento: Ostia presenta un faro a quattro piani, le porte ad arco e sembra essere sprovvista della scala che sopraeleva la struttura sul mare. Nel caso della numismatica questo elemento è ancora più evidente: infatti, avendo l’artista poco spazio a disposizione ha la necessità di rendere noto tramite alcuni particolari quale città egli voglia

178

RADAN 1974, pp. 149-157. RADAN 1974, p. 154. Personalmente, credo ricordino molto il modellino votivo trovato a Cartagine, vedi p. 124. 180 STUHLFAUTH 1938, pp. 142-154; SPINOLA 2000, p. 294, fig. 4, BISCONTI-GENTILI 2007, pp. 146-147. 181 Greg. Nyss. I, 13. 182 KAMPEN 1977-1978, pp. 221-231; ENSOLA-LA ROCCA 2001, p. 481, l’autrice della scheda Barbara Mazzei sottolinea la definizione accurata dei dettagli che dà alla composizione un tono realistico subito contraddetto dalla simmetria dello schema che rimanda al campo simbolico. 179

183

ZANKER 2002, pp. 133-156. CASSON 2004, pp. 283-285. 185 ENSOLI-LA ROCCA 2001, p. 480; Marina Sapelli, autrice della scheda del catalogo, crede che si tratti di un defunto che ha trovato la morte in mare o di un ufficiale di porto da riconoscere in uno dei personaggi sulla terrazza. Personalmente, sia per la presenza della scialuppa di salvataggio, sia per la lettura che io intendo dare all’opera, non mi trovo d’accordo con la Spinelli, mentre invece condivido si tratti di un episodio realmente accaduto. 184

140

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO raffigurare. Ad esempio, per il faro di Alessandria si rappresenteranno sempre i Tritoni angolari, caratteristica architettonica che solo quel faro sembra avere posseduto (fig. 25).

la Quet, ma piuttosto reputo l’opera come una grande allegoria della vita umana e degli strumenti ad essa necessaria: l’aria con i suoi principali venti, la terra con i suoi principali fiumi (non a caso è rappresentato il Nilo) e i suoi porti, raggiungibili solo tramite la luce di Pharus che guida sicuro il navigante sia che debba entrare nel porto della città o in quello ultraterreno.192 Iconologia politica e commerciale: Oltre a tutte queste rappresentazioni allegoriche e di status sociale, ve ne sono altre, come si è parzialmente già visto, più prettamente legate ad un carattere politico e commerciale: è il caso della numismatica.

La moneta di Apamea di Siria presenta un faro sorprendentemente simile a quello rappresentato nel mosaico della Casa del Triclinio della stessa città (Tav. 19, fig. 38; Tav. 20, fig. 39). Tuttavia, come si è visto nel caso della statua rappresentata sulla sommità dell’edificio, non sempre l’iconografia risulta fondamentale per interpretare l’architettura dei fari antichi. Anzi, spesso, specialmente in passato, alcuni studiosi hanno scambiato per fari strutture che avevano altre funzioni pur riprendendo l’architettura del faro. E’ il caso di monete con la rappresentazione della pira funeraria (Tav. 33, fig. 66) che lo stesso Erodiano186 nel IV secolo d.C. paragonava alla struttura dei fari, o delle torri del noto mosaico della Civitas Classis nelle quali alcuni hanno voluto riconoscere torri-faro (Tav. 50, fig. 98c).187

La zecca di una città portuale la cui economia si basi, come è evidente, soprattutto sul commercio non può che manifestare la sua potenza economica proprio tramite la rappresentazione del suo porto e, in maniera ancora più massiccia, del suo faro. Questo edificio è, infatti, l’autentico simbolo del sistema portuale e una sua rappresentazione allude al fatto che quella determinata città è dotata di un porto efficiente ed attrezzato per accogliere anche navi di grandi dimensioni.193 Il mondo romano ha sempre avuto una visione del mondo dal punto di vista occidentale ed era quindi portato a conoscere meglio le realtà di quella parte di provinciae, sarà forse per questo che sono soprattutto le città portuali orientali a “farsi pubblicità” tramite la rappresentazione del faro nelle monete (Tabella 1). Aveva quindi forse ragione lo storico dell’economia Polanyi quando affernava che i ports of trade sono nati in Oriente ed hanno antichissime origini, poiché, affermava l’economista ungherese:

Sulla base dell’interpretazione iconografica ci si illuse poi di trovarsi di fronte a numerose strutture interpretate come fari per ovviare alla mancanza del riscontro archeologico in base alle parole delle fonti. Nel caso di Ravenna si ipotizzò che il basamento del campanile della chiesa di Santa Maria in Porto Fuori, presso Classe, fosse l’avanzo dell’antico faro romano, nonostante gli scavi effettuati confermassero che la struttura non era precedente al XII secolo d.C. (Tav. 52, figg. 102, 103).188 Un altro caso emblematico è quello di Forum Iulii, l’odierna Frèjus in Provenza, dove la Lanterna d’Augusto come manifesta il suo stesso nome, è stata a lungo scambiata per il faro del porto, in base ad un dipinto settecentesco del pittore provenzale Constantin che l’aveva definita Le phare romain de Frèjus (Tav. 88, fig. 175, Tav. 89, fig. 176).

“gli scambi fra comunità primitive, si trattasse di spedizioni o di scambi di doni o di incontri sulle spiagge regolati da un cerimoniale, oppure di forme di scambi proprie dei capi, deve soddisfare l’esigenza di sicurezza nel trasportare le merci per lunghe distanze in aree non sorvegliate. Nel deserto, sui monti o in alto mare, la rapina e la pirateria sono forme di esistenza accettate; sulla terraferma, lo straniero rischia di essere preso in ostaggio o rapito; i litorali sono minacciati dal mare e dall’entroterra”194

Un altro esempio di “finto faro” è la Tour Magne di Nîmes, in realtà monumento funerario della famiglia degli Enobarbi, trasformato in faro telegrafo nel XIX secolo (fig. 26 a,b).

Dunque, quale opera meglio di un faro, talvolta utilizzato anche come torre di avvistamento, può guidare il commerciante tranquillo che la sua merce non corre alcun pericolo e che entrerà comodamente in un porto sicuro?

Ancora una volta si sottolinea come la forma del faro sia strettamente collegata anche all’ambito funerario in quanto edificio-guida, dunque non sorprende trovare strutture funerarie architettonicamente assai simili ai fari marittimi sparse un po’ in tutte le regiones e le provinciae, come ad esempio la celebre “Canocchia” di Santa Maria in Capua Vetere189 (fig. 27a).

Non sorprende che nell’elenco manchino città importanti del calibro di Miseno, Ravenna o Leptis Magna o Forum Iulii poiché in questi casi si tratta di porti militari e non commerciali dove è più importante che il porto sia ben difeso piuttosto che fornito di tutti i servizi ausiliari per i commercianti: templi dedicati alle loro divinità, negozi dove poter comprare souvenir come il vaso di Bégram (Tav. 12, fig. 23a) o l’ex-voto di Libarna (fig. 17).

Specialmente agli inizi del Novecento studiosi e archeologi cercarono invano di attribuire fari antichi a città portuali che non potevano non possederne uno monumentale: è il caso del Pireo di Atene, dove la così detta Tomba di Temistocle (fig. 27b), oggi sommersa, è stata a lungo ritenuta il faro greco della città ma che più verosimilmente era parte delle mura.190 Un’iconografia assai diversa del faro è quella della sua personificazione, Pharus, attestata unicamente nel mosaico di Mérida (II-III secolo d.C.), dove è rappresentato come un uomo stante su un supporto conico che regge una lunga torcia accesa ed è riconosciuto da un’iscrizione che lo indica come il faro che segna l’entrata al porto (fig. 28).191 Vista la datazione piuttosto alta del mosaico, io non credo si possa riconoscere in Pharus, il faro di Alessandria come ritiene

192 Sul mosaico si veda anche BLANCO-FREIJERO 1971 pp. 151-178; BLANCO-FREIJERO 1976, pp. 183-198. 193 GIARDINA 2007, pp. 145-146. 194 POLANYI 1968, pp. 229-234 dove si afferma che il primo port of trade è stato il kar babilonese, porto fluviale assai diverso dall’emporium greco dove vi erano molteplici attività legate al commercio.

186

Herodian. IV, 8. 187 Sulla questione BOVINI 1951, pp. 57-62 e la scheda 43 del catalogo. 188 MAZZOTTI 1991, pp. 53-56. 189 STUCCHI 1959, pp. 18-30. 190 GARLAND 1987, pp. 147-148. 191 QUET 1987, pp. 789-798.

141

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

Città Occidentali Ostia Messana Panormus Gesoriacum (?)

costruito quell’opera. La lotta per avere il proprio nome sulla torre, quasi fosse una moderna insegna pubblicitaria, è bene evidente nello stratagemma attribuito a Sostrato di Cnido, mirabile architetto cui fu affidata la costruzione che, come riferisce Luciano, avrebbe inciso il nome del re con la calce e sotto di esso il suo sapendo che con il tempo la calce sarebbe caduta lasciando sulla torre il solo nome dell’architetto fatto per il quale, invece, Plinio il Vecchio tributa grande magnanimità al Tolomeo.198 E ancora in epoca traianea gli architetti manifestavano come la creazione dei fari fosse opera loro lasciando incise nelle pietre iscrizioni come quella di Brigantium (scheda 73) o della Campa Torres (scheda 74) nelle quali si leggeva il loro nome o, come nel caso del faro di Smirne, nella quale venivano elogiati.199

Città orientali Alexandreia Caesarea Maritima Leptis Magna (?) Laodicea ad Mare Apameia di Siria Heraclea Pontica Caesarea Germanica Perga Aegae Istros Corinthus

Tabella 1: Emissioni numismatiche con la rappresentazione di un faro Un altro valore che assume il faro, ben testimoniato dalle fonti antiche e dalle evidenze archeologiche, è quello legato ad un fenomeno che mi piace definire “topografia politica”. Non intendo tanto siano i fari ad essere collocati in posizioni strategiche all’entrata del porto, luogo dove sembra evidente ricercarli, ma gli edifici che si vuole che il navigante appena arrivato in città veda in tutto il loro splendore essendo illuminati nella notte, proprio dalla luce dei fari. Svetonio crea una sorta di allegoria tra la caduta del faro di Capri e la morte di Tiberio che lo aveva costruito nella sua Villa Iovis. Ma lo stesso autore ricorda anche come il suo successore, Caligola, avesse voluto manifestare la propria potenza in seguito ad una “vittoria” sui Bretoni, innalzando sulla costa della Manica un altissimo faro prendendo esempio non nella forma ma nella funzione da quello di Alessandria, come fece successivamente Claudio nel porto di Ostia.195 La luce emessa da questi fari aiutava i naviganti a destreggiarsi nelle manovre notturne ma era anche perenne ricordo delle imprese, militari o urbanistiche, compiute dagli imperatori che ne avevano ordinato la costruzione. Non solo gli imperatori ma anche i re delle province romane vollero manifestare la loro potenza tramite la costruzione di uno o più fari la cui primaria funzione era quella di illuminare il Palazzo Imperiale che si manifestava in tutta la sua imponenza oltre a quella di far luce ai naviganti: è il caso delle torri-faro fatte costruire da Erode Attico a Caesarea Maritima, come riferisce Flavio Giuseppe.196 Nel caso di Caesarea il valore politico di queste torri è ancora più evidente dal momento che esse assumono addirittura il nome da parenti e amici di Erode (Phasael, Mariamme, Ippico). Inoltre Flavio Giuseppe fa notare non solo come la torre di Fasael fosse la più grande di tutte e traesse origine dall’architettura del faro di Alessandria, ma, soprattutto, come superasse in altezza la celebre torre della costa egizia, manifestando così la potenza e l’opulenza del re locale. Sarà opportuno ricordare che anche Arriano a proposito degli onori che Alessandro Magno doveva rendere ad Efestione, riferiva che Ammone suggeriva per il santuario da costruire in suo onore la città di Alessandria, ricordata per il suo faro che, tuttavia, a quell’epoca ancora non esisteva.197 Infatti, anche il faro di Alessandria già nel III secolo a.C. ha un valore politico molto intenso: Tolomeo lo aveva scelto anche come sua tomba e voleva che il navigante come prima cosa vedesse la statua sua e di sua moglie divinizzati come Osiride ed Iside e l’epigramma che attribuiva a lui la volontà di aver 198

Lukian. Quomodo historia inscribenda sit, XXV, 62-63; Plin. nat. XXXVI, 18. 199 C.I.L., II, 2559=5639; C.I.L., II, 2703, Anth. Pal., IX, 671, da notare che tutti gli architetti a noi noti precisano sempre il luogo di provenienza: Cnido, Aeminum, Mileto.

195

Suet. Tib. LXXIV, 5-6 ; Suet. Cal. XLVI, 6-8; Suet. Claud. XX, 2224. 196 Ios. Bell. Iud. V, 4, 156-170. 197 Arr. An. VII, 23, 7.

142

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO in base ad un ritrovamento effettuato nei pressi di Narbona, nell’isola di Santa Lucia, che l’olio venisse conservato in dolia.207 Di norma i materiali sopra elencati venivano collocati su bracieri, posti nell’ultimo piano delle torri faree, nei quali vi doveva essere anche lo spazio per la riserva del materiale combustibile ed un deposito per le ceneri residue. Probabilmente un’unica persona era addetta alla cura del fuoco,208 come testimonia il mosaico di Rimini (fig. 30b), mentre altri dovevano tenere d’occhio i depositi ed accogliere gli eventuali altri addetti che portavano per mezzo di animali, il materiale combustibile in cima al faro. Doveva esserci infine una persona incaricata di ritirare il cibo come si vede nel mosaico di Apamea (fig. 30a) e un “comandante” che aiutasse i naviganti nelle azioni di entrata in porto come si vede nelle monete di Laodicea ad Mare (fig. 30c).

CAPITOLO 5 Il sistema di illuminazione e la portata luminosa Il sistema di segnalazioni tramite segnali di fuoco, inventato da Enea Tattico, perfezionato da Polieno e riassunto da Polibio, se si ipotizza una distanza di 10 m tra una torcia e l’altra, può raggiungere una massima visibilità di 10 km.200 Questo sistema, pur non essendo mai ufficializzato, ebbe lunga vita dal momento che, già durante la rivolta di Seiano, Tiberio usava speculabundus ex altissima rupe identidem signa.201 In seguito, come abbiamo visto, i Punici crearono delle torri di avvistamento (speculae) e si posizionarono su alture che fossero adatte per lo stesso scopo, come fece Amilcare a Eircte, località che dovrebbe corrispondere al Monte Pellegrino di Palermo, visto che Polibio la colloca fra Erice e Palermo.202 Queste torri furono create ovunque nel mondo antico e, in special modo, nelle zone di confine e con uno spiccato valore militare più che di supporto alla navigazione.203 Infine, l’idea di creare segnali di fumo di giorno può aver creato la leggenda di Medea che promette di dare notizie alle sue amiche tramite segnali di questo tipo durante il giorno e di fuoco durante la notte, in posizione elevata sopra il mare.204 Almeno dall’epoca romana si creò l’abitudine di porre fuochi fissi sulla sommità delle torri di avvistamento trasformandole così in fari che potessero guidare i naviganti, sfruttando l’idea che era stata di Etruschi e Greci che ponevano fuochi presso gli altari dei loro santuari fossero essi a Pyrgi o a Capo Sounion. Non è, infatti, sicuro che il faro di Alessandria, in epoca ellenistica, fosse attivo anche di notte; personalmente credo di sì e non penso vi siano ragioni per dubitarne: se era già noto fare luce ai naviganti tramite fuochi posti su colline o specole perché non passare questo sistema ad una struttura nata appositamente per quell’uso? Inoltre, non va sottovalutato che l’iscrizione di Sostrato conferma che il faro fosse attivo anche di notte. Ad ogni modo, Flavio Giuseppe205 è l’unico che ci informi sulla portata luminosa del faro alessandrino: 300 stadi pari circa a 48 km. La notizia è molto interessante perché se riducessimo della metà questo dato (Flavio Giuseppe avrà quasi sicuramente esagerato per magnificare la potenza della torre) arriveremmo a 20 km: a 40 km dal faro di Alessandria è il faro di Taposiris Magna sul Lago Mareotide, dunque se calcoliamo che entrambe le torri producessero una luce visibile sino a 20 km di distanza, i due raggi di luce si sarebbero incontrati proprio a metà strada permettendo al navigante di avvistare sia la costa alessandrina sia le propaggini del lago.

Come era però possibile diffondere la luce della lanterna in modo che essa fosse visibile da una lunga distanza? La risposta non è facile possiamo soltanto supporre che attorno ai bracieri vi fosse una serie di “specchi ustori” la cui funzione era proprio questa.209 Purtroppo, l’archeologia classica non ha restituito nessuna struttura di questo tipo e dunque possiamo solo farci un’idea da quello ritrovato nel faro medioevale di St. Agnes, sulle isole Scilly (Cornovaglia), costruito in ferro, materiale che resisteva ottimamente al fuoco della fiamma, a quell’epoca prodotta da carbone (fig. 31): i bracieri erano di forma circolare e formati da due cerchi sovrapposti: quello superiore presentava il perimetro grigliato in modo da alimentare la fiamma tramite la circolazione dell’aria, quello inferiore presentava un solo sportello destinato alla pulizia delle ceneri e dei residui di combustione. Nell’Europa settentrionale fu a lungo diffuso anche il sistema del braciere mobile che veniva caricato a terra e quindi issato,210 metodo che avrà larga diffusione sin dall’epoca altomedioevale, utilizzando la stessa stessa tecnica con la quale si portava materiale combustibile al piano della lanterna se si voleva evitare la scala interna e accelerare i tempi (fig. 32 a,b). L’ultimo piano, di forma cilindrica e con un colonnato aperto, permetteva la diffusione della luce a 360°, ma non è ancora provato che in epoca antica fossero usati gli specchi ustori. Topografia dei fari: è evidente che la portata luminosa di un faro è regolata anche a seconda della posizione geografica e territoriale dell’edificio. Ad esempio, il faro che Caligola volle a Gesoriacum o quelli che Claudio costruì a Dubris dovevano avere una portata luminosa non inferiore ai 20 km, distanza che avrebbe permesso alle luci dei due fari di incontrarsi a metà strada nel Mare del Nord, zona oltretutto spesso soggetta a pioggia. Le torri-faro collocate in zone lagunari o stagnanti come quelle di Baro Zavelea (scheda 42), Equilum (Torre di Caligo, scheda 39), Canale S.Felice (scheda 40), Fossa Marianae (Roque d’Odor, scheda 68) o Narbona (Tour de Vauban e le altre, scheda 69) non potevano che avere una luce piuttosto potente che permettesse di vincere sulla nebbia, presente in quelle zone per buona parte dell’anno, come tuttora avviene. Già diverso era il caso di Alessandria (scheda 8) dove oltre alla luce vi erano diversi servizi ausiliari perché il faro fosse avvistato: un’eccezionale altezza, la statua collocata sulla sommità dell’edificio e, soprattutto, i Tritoni angolari che, tramite un meccanismo ancora poco chiaro, suonando la

Quale era il materiale combustibile? Il legno fu ampiamente utilizzato come materiale combustibile per la luce della lanterna, tuttavia a questo vanno aggiunti anche catrame, resina, fibre vegetali e animali, olio d’oliva e, forse, bitume.206 Sembra,

200

FORBES VI 1966, p. 180. Suet. Tib. LXV, 17. 202 Pol. I, 56,1. 203 Caes. civ. III, 65 durante l’assedio di Dyrrachium. E’ curioso che Frontin. strat. 3, 12 nel capitolo in cui tratta del dare e ricevere segnali non faccia alcuna menzione né dei segnali di fuoco né delle torri di avvistamento, sulle quali si vedano GICHON 1974, pp. 513-543; SOUTHERN 1990, pp. 232-242. 204 Diod. 46, 36; 65, 18. 205 Ios. Bell. Iud. IV, 10, 612-614. 206 VEITMEYER 1900, p. 67 ; SINGER ET ALII 1956, p. 523. Il bitume, tuttavia, produce una luce di minore densità rispetto all’olio, cfr. FORBES, I, 1966, p. 84; FORBES VI 1966, p. 183. Sino ai primi del Novecento la luce veniva prodotta tramite olio animale ricavato dallo spermaceti (bianco di balena purificato), ma veniva utilizzato anche l’olio d’oliva, olio di colza (semi di rapa) o semi di lino; infine si 201

utilizzò l’olio minerale che ha un potere luminoso superiore cfr. CATTOLICA-LURIA, I, 1916, p. 15. 207 GAYROUD 1981, p. 530. 208 SPINELLI 1996, p. 576. 209 KÖSTER 1923, p. 199. 210 SPINELLI 1996, pp. 577-579, solo nel 1818 il faro di Punta Salvatore, nei pressi di Trieste, inaugurerà l’illuminazione a gas.

143

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA da Strabone, e scalo di massima importanza in età bizantina.212 Per quanto riguarda la Daunia si potrebbe pensare sia all’importantissimo porto di Sipontum213 che a quello di Egnatia mentre su quello di Brundusium (scheda 46) e altri possibili fari del Salento ho già accennato, ma l’elenco si potrebbe estendere sino alle prime propaggini del messinese. Un aiuto, talvolta, viene dato dai toponimi, ma, spesso, le numerose fasi edilizie di un edificio hanno cancellato il suo passato e non si può più essere sicuri se quel toponimo sia derivato da un fatto realmente avvenuto oppure dalle credenze popolari come nel caso della chiesa di Santa Maria del Faro a Marechiaro, presso Posillipo, nel napoletano (fig. 33).

buccina avrebbero emesso un suono simile a quello che le odierne navi da crociera emettono quando entrano in porto. Diverso il compito delle piccole torri-faro di Thasos (scheda 28) che dovevano segnalare non solo l’entrata in porto quanto, soprattutto, le sporgenze rocciose di Cap de Pyrgos, assai rischiose per la navigazione notturna, funzione propria anche delle torri-faro poste su isolotti come quelle di Vada SabatiaBergeggi (scheda 66) e Lion de mer-Forum Iulii (scheda 67). Infatti, dovendo i fari segnalare pericoli (propaggini montuose, secche, scogli) alle imbarcazioni, essi vennero spesso collocati, a partire dall’età claudia (e in misura ancora maggiore in età traianea) su antemurali come nel caso di Ostia (scheda 60) o Centumcellae (scheda 61): in questi casi, essendoci l’ausilio di altre torri-faro, la portata luminosa del faro principale deve essere stata inferiore a quelli collocati su promontori come Brigantium (scheda 73), unico faro dell’antichità ancora attivo e capace di raggiungere i 23 km. Spesso i fari collocati su alture, proprio per la loro posizione elevata e la maggiore portata luminosa, erano in grado di raggiungere diverse località dei dintorni fornendo così non solo un ottimo ausilio alla navigazione ma anche un ottimo punto di avvistamento. Mi limito a citare due esempi:

Capri (scheda 53)

Duino (scheda 36)

Isole Pontine Tarracina Caieta Misenum Puteoli

Neapolis Herculaneum Pompei Paestum Vesuvio

Baia di Sistiana Liburnia Tergeste Illyricum Gradus Aquileia (Miramare, TR) (mastio di Duino)

In neretto luoghi medioevali Mi piace concludere questo capitolo con una nota sul sistema delle “triangolazioni”dei fari. Analizzando i vari esempi a mia disposizione, mi è parso di vedere che, almeno in età romana, i fari venissero collocati in alcuni punti strategici tali da formare delle specie di triangoli. Io ho riconosciuto i seguenti: AquileiaTergeste-Pyrranheum; Brigantium/Campa Torres-GesoriacumDubris; Misenum-Caprae-Atheneum; Alexandria-PaphosCaesarea Maritima; Cosa-Centumcellae-Ostia; AriminumRavenna-Adria per citare solo alcuni esempi. Se ciò fosse vero, dovremmo ricercare alcuni fari in luoghi per i quali non abbiamo alcuna notizia circa tali edifici di epoca romana (o per lo meno sono notizie non verificate), per cui se noi abbiamo due fari romani rispettivamente a Circeii e Tarracina, allora un terzo faro dovrebbe essere stato collocato a Caieta.211 Questo discorso è strettamente collegato con il precedente poiché, se si ammette un sistema di triangolazioni, la portata luminosa di ciascun faro sarà stata regolata, per quanto possibile, a seconda delle distanze con gli altri fari con i quali si doveva interagire. E’, infatti, impensabile che dopo il faro di Ariminum (scheda 44) non esistesse alcun faro sino a quello di Messana (scheda 47) presso Torre Faro; possibile che tutta la costa abruzzese, pugliese e calabra non avesse alcun dispositivo di segnalazione? Basti pensare alla città di Ortona, già definita porto dei Frentani

212 Strab. V, 4, 2. Non è possibile che un porto così importante, soprattutto per i rapporti con l’altra sponda dell’Adriatico, non fosse attrezzato con le adeguate infrastrutture. Sul faro di Ancona, unico riconosciuto solo iconograficamente tra Ariminum e Messana, non c’è accordo tra gli studiosi. Sulle regioni adriatiche dell’Italia centrale si veda STAFFA 2005, pp. 109-182. 213 Strab. VI, 3, 9 riferisce di un fiume navigabile tra Salaria e Sipuntum e della grande laguna, oggi scomparsa, che serviva alla città dauna per il commercio del grano.

211

Penso che questo sia un terreno su cui si possa impostare una futura ricerca ma che in questa sede renderebbe il discorso troppo lungo, pertanto rimando ad un’altra occasione tale mia interpretazione.

144

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO

CAPITOLO 6 La decadenza del faro e la nascita delle torri costiere: alcuni esempi

Caorle in Friuli (fig 34a), fu forse questa la ragione che spinse Thiersch a congetturare la celebre teoria per cui i campanili avrebbero derivato la loro forma dai fari romani cui seguìrono le risposte e le proposte di Bovini e Stucchi.218

¶m dÁ jaà maÌstahla pokkawËhi peiqatijÀ jaÊ vqujtÍqia teteiwislÈma, jaà stËkoi pqosÁpiptom oÕ pkgqylÇtom lËmom eÕamdqÊair oÕdÁ tÈwmair jubeqmgt´m oÕdÁ tÇwesi me´m jaà jouvËtgsim ÑngsjglÈmoi pqÄr tÄ oÓje²om ñqcom, ÐkkÀ to³ vobeqo³ l°kkom aÕt´m tÄ ÑpÊvhomom ÑkÌpei jaà ÜpeqÉvamom 214

Tuttavia non è che i fari scompaiano del tutto, come attesta un curioso rilievo del XII secolo d.C. incastonato nella Torre di Pisa (fig. 35): in esso due navi mercantili medioevali viaggiano verso un faro costruito esattamente come quello presente sui sarcofagi romani di Ostia, una torre a tre piani digradanti verso l’alto, dei quali l’ultimo di forma cilindrica permette di brillare alla luce della lanterna.

Con queste parole Plutarco illustrava la pirateria al tempo dei Romani, poi ci fu una stasi che permise lo svilupparsi più di fari, come abbiamo visto, che non di torri costiere o di avvistamento. Nel III secolo d.C., approfittando della nota incapacità dei Romani nel navigare lungo le coste settentrionali dell’Europa, i pirati della costa bretone e britannica inziarono una serie di incursioni nelle città della costa alle quali i Romani reagirono con la costruzione di torri costiere, quasi dei veri e propri fortini, specialmente a Dover, nei luoghi che furono della Classis Britannica. La pirateria sassone però ebbe vita facile almeno sino al VII secolo d.C. (essendo essi coadiuvati da popoli della stessa lingua che volevano eliminare la dominazione romana e che lasceranno il posto ai Vichinghi propriamente detti).215 Tra IX e XI secolo d.C. l’allarme pirati torna alla ribalta e tutti gli Stati italiani iniziano a costruire un’altra serie di torri, dapprima con una funzione prevalentemente di segnalazione, assai simile come pratica a quella dei fari ma finalizzata al contrario: se il faro, tramite segnali di fumo di giorno e fuochi di notte, permette alle navi amiche una corretta entrata in porto, le torri costiere, con gli stessi mezzi, cercavano di allontanare le navi nemiche in modo tale che non riuscissero ad entrare in porto per depredare le città. Già nell’800 d.C. si narra che Ibrahim, sovrano dell’impero islamico, avesse programmato un fitto sistema di torri che in una sola notte riusciva a mettere in comunicazione Ceuta con Alessandria.216 Nell’808 d.C. Papa Leone III inviò una lettera a Carlo Magno per richiedere il suo aiuto per difendere il litorale romano dai Saraceni.217 Quando i Normanni invasero il sud-Italia, si imposero molte di queste reti di torri [anche nella nostra penisola], Svevi e Angioini furono tra i primi che corsero subito ai ripari. Inoltre, proprio nel IX secolo d.C., l’invenzione della bussola da parte degli Arabi aveva non poco diminuito l’importanza dei fari, che via via andavano perdendo la propria funzione in favore di edifici che racchiudessero in sè la triplice funzione di faro, torre di avvistamento e fortezza: ormai il sistema di navigazione era cambiato: le navi mercantili già dal V secolo d.C. erano state sostituite dai dromoni, la vela quadrata era stata sostituita nel VII secolo d.C. con la vela latina, l’orientamento con le stelle dalla bussola e i fari dalle torri costiere.

Nel Trecento molti antichi fari romani della zona adriatica furono riutilizzati come torri costiere (risulta, infatti, strano che i Romani non ne avessero costruiti, specie nelle Marche e nel Basso Adriatico) e molte torri costiere vennero costruite exnovo.219 Quando nel 1480 Otranto fu occupata dai Turchi, una cronaca brindisina cinquecentesca scriveva che per le Università si aggiungeva il peso di pagare guardie deputate alle mura et campanile de la cità e cavallari per lo sospetto de infedeli.220 Essendo un’operazione economicamente gravosa, si decise che un privato acquistasse una vecchia torre in disuso (spesso un faro romano) oppure ne erigesse una per conto proprio, questi veniva chiamato capitano di torre e a lui si affiancavano i cavallari che dovevano prendersi cura delle torri circostanti. Il “capitano” poteva essere alle dipendenze di un’Università oppure, in caso fosse libero, poteva riscuotere dazi ma aveva anche il compito di manutenzione della torre, aiutato dallo Stato tramite alcuni sgravi fiscali.221 Nessuna regione potè fare a meno di costruire queste strutture. In Toscana, piuttosto che fari romani le torri costiere riprendevano la forma dei guardinghi longobardi: in questa zona poi le torri avevano anche la peculiare funzione di ricovero per i cavalli e i cavalleri che dovevano perlustrare la costa, ma ben presto anche il Granducato dovette armarsi di una rete di torri. La distanza tra le torri della Toscana era davvero breve, circa una ogni 3 km, solo 500 m in caso di costa frastagliata. Il sistema settentrionale di queste torri raggiungeva Genova dalla Val di Magra e di lì la Francia; quello meridionale partiva dal confine con la costa laziale e tramite Civitavecchia arrivava sino al Regno di Napoli.222 Seppure di forme diverse, cilindriche (Torre dello Ziro ad Amalfi), quadrate (Torre Matilde a Viareggio), poligonali (torre-faro del Marzocco a Livorno), tutte erano dotate (guarda caso come i fari antichi) di una cisterna per la raccolta delle acque piovane e l’approvvigionamento idrico al piano terreno, una scala che permettesse di raggiungere la sommità dove erano bandiere, stendardi e tutto il materiale (compreso quello combustibile) per le segnalazioni. Nel resto d’Europa già dal XII secolo si era creato il poco studiato fenomeno delle chiese-fortezza: l’Inghilterra doveva resistere alla pirateria vichinga e costruiva chiese con campanili più simili a torri costiere che non a torri campanarie. E’ questo il caso della chiesa di St.Mary a Bessingham nel Norfolk, costruita intorno al 1100. In Croazia, già a partire dall’invasione tartara del 1242 si iniziarono a costruire molte di queste chiesefortezza, spesso sul mare con la chiara funzione di torre di avvistamento, come avviene a Prahulje per Sveti Nicholas (fig.

E’ in questo periodo che alcuni campanili vengono adattati a torri costiere (figg. 34 b,c,d), e viceversa, come nel caso di 214

Plutarchos vitae parallelae, Pompeios, XXIV, 4-8: “In più luoghi vi erano approdi sicuri per le navi corsare, posti fortificati atti a dare segnalazioni, squadre di assalto che non solo per il valore degli equipaggi, la capacità dei nocchieri, la rapidità e la leggerezza delle imbarcazioni, erano particolarmente adatte al loro compito, ma offendevano per l’eccesso della loro magnificenza più di quanto non destassero timore”, trad. E.Luppino Manes, A.Marcone, ed. BUR, Milano 2006. 215 TANGHERONI 1996, pp. 33-36; 105-110. Non è questa la sede per elencare le varie conquiste fatte ai danni dei Romani tra le quali ricordiamo la caduta di Narbona in mano agli Arabi nel 759 d.C.. 216 LEONARDI 1991, p. 9; sulla pirateria CAVAZZUTI 1997, pp. 197-214. 217 DE ROSSI 1984, p. 9.

218

THIERSCH 1909, pp. 97-174; STUCCHI 1959, pp. 16-30; BOVINI 1974, pp. 71-86. 219 MAURO 1989. 220 COSI 1992, p. 12. 221 PAIANO-CAZZATO 2000, p. 134; sulle epoche successive e sulla zona della costiera amalfitana RUSSO 2002. 222 NALDINI-TADDEI 2003, p. 176; non è invece possibile quantificare la distanza tra i fari romani.

145

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA 36) nelle vicinanze di Nin, l’antica Aenona: il sito a 20 km da Zara fu abitato già dal Neolitico e divenne un municipium dei Liburni, per diventare in età medioevale un centro vescovile. La chiesa primitiva costruita intorno all’XI secolo d.C. fu collocata su un promontorio artificiale per esaltare le sue funzioni difensive: durante le invasioni turche la cupola quadrilobata dell’edificio fu trasformata in torre di avvistamento, cui seguì la costruzione di mura difensive e questo particolare fenomeno architettonico sembra trovare riscontri in tutta la costa dalmata.223 Nel 1600 l’uso delle torri costiere è talmente in voga che essendo ormai già stati riutilizzati tutti gli antichi fari romani, si decide di riutilizzare altre opere, realizzate in epoca romana, ma nate con altri scopi come il Pisco Montano di Terracina224 o la Tour Magne di Nĭmes. L’elenco sarebbe lungo sia per quanto riguarda gli adattamenti che per le torri saracene create ex-novo e diffuse quasi in ogni città portuale d’Italia, ragione per cui si rimanda alla larga bibliografia già esistente sulle torri costiere a seconda della regione (figg. 37, 38).

223 224

SEKULIC-GVOZDANOVIC 1995, pp. 63-64. DE ROSSI 1984, p. 207.

146

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO

CAPITOLO 7 I primi fari medioevali: Genua, Portus Pisanus, Corduan

poi distrutto. Oggi nelle secche della Meloria sono presenti due fari, l’uno erede di quello ricostruito dopo la battaglia della Meloria e sostituito nel 1709 da una grande torre voluta da Cosimo III De’ Medici, l’altro del tutto moderno.231

A giudicare da quanto affermato sino ad ora e dal rilievo duecentesco incastonato nella Torre di Pisa potremmo dire che fino al XII secolo non si costruiscono più nuovi fari ma si utilizzano i precedenti (come fece Carlo Magno riattivando il faro di Gesoriacum nell’810 d.C.) mentre a cambiare sono le imbarcazioni e il modo di navigare. Non è, infatti, un caso che dal XIII secolo d.C. in poi l’iconografia farea cambi completamente: ciò è dovuto senza alcuna ombra di dubbio alla costruzione della Lanterna di Genova, primo faro medioevale a noi noto e la cui architettura rimanda più a quella di una torre difensiva che non a quella dei fari romani. Una prima torre fu costruita nel 1139 sul promontorio di San Benigno, da sempre detto Capo di Faro, poiché da quella posizione già nell’Antichità si era soliti fare segnali di fuoco alle imbarcazioni;225 ma solo dal 1329 si potrà parlare di Lanterna.226 Nel 1371 viene scelta come copertina del Manuale dei Salvatori di Porto e Molo (fig. 39), ma quando nel 1507 Genova passa sotto il dominio di Luigi XII di Francia, questi le addossa una rocca che prende il nome di Briglia. Furono gli stessi abitanti della città di Genova ad assediare la rocca e a demolire la parte più alta della Lanterna che verrà ricostruita solo nel 1543 aggiungendo la parte mancante e portando la torre a 100 m di altezza (fig. 40). Interessante, per quanto riguarda la portata luminosa, quanto riportano Manfredini e Pescara i quali affermano che in principio si era soliti bruciare fascetti di brisca (che in dialetto genovese indica la ginestra) che ardeva in apposite griselle (bracieri in ferro), poi si passò alle lampade ad olio: in principio se ne accendevano contemporaneamente dalle dodici alle diciotto, poi dal 1500, fino a trenta tutte insieme, consumando così 12 barili di olio d’oliva all’anno.227

Sarà utile ricordare che ancora nel Quattrocento i fari monumentali, come quello di Livorno, stupivano i viaggiatori eruditi tra i quali Francesco Petrarca che, nell’Itinerarium Syriacum, affermava che presso il castello praevalida turris est, cuius in vertice pernox flamma navigantibus tuti litoris signum preaebet.232 Curioso notare come, rispetto agli autori greci e romani, non si evidenzi solo la flamma che permette di avvistare la torre da lontano ma si affermi esplicitamente che questo è un signum, un segnale per tutte le imbarcazioni, dunque questo è un vero e proprio faro e non una torre di avvistamento adeguata a faro a seconda delle necessità. Era dunque tornato di moda il costruire fari, cosa era cambiato dal tempo dei Romani? Ormai il faro non aveva la sola funzione di fare luce ai naviganti nella notte: era diventato una fortezza quasi inespugnabile, grazie alla sua collocazione geografica, una torre di avvistamento e, come avviene specie nel Nord Europa, una possibile alternativa al campanile di una chiesa. E’ successo con il faro di Claudio a Dover (dal 1201 si parla di un phararius, un custode del faro) convertito in epoca normanna a campanile della chiesa di St.Mary in Castro e per tal motivo conservatosi sino ai giorni nostri. In ordine di tempo, il più antico faro-campanile di questo tipo sembra essere stato quello di Hook Point, nei dintorni di Waterford sulla costa meridionale dell’Irlanda, edificio che ancora oggi è in funzione. Il faro, costruito circa nel 1170, fu utilizzato dagli Agostiniani che ricevevano sovvenzioni per mantenere accesa la luce del faro.233 Assai simile a questo, ed ancora oggi visibile, è il farocampanile costruito nel 1314 sull’isola di Wight per la chiesa di Santa Caterina (fig. 47).

Altro faro nato in Italia in epoca medioevale è quello situato sulla piccola isola della Meloria (fig.44) presso Livorno, eretto dai Pisani intorno al 1157/58 e distrutto dai Fiorentini nel 1163 per essere ricostruito intorno al 1304.228

Assai antico sembra essere stato stato il faro di Corduan all’imbocco della Gironda, non lontano dall’attuale città di Bordeaux, probabilmente richiesto già nel IX secolo d.C. da Carlo Magno234 ma realizzato con tutta probabilità solo nel XIV secolo d.C. quando il Principe Nero Edward di Woodstock ordinò di costruire un enorme faro per intensificare l’intenso commercio di vino che la vicina città di Bordeaux aveva con l’Inghilterra, facilitando così il trasporto fluviale. Questo primo faro venne sostituito nel 1582 da un altro realizzato dall’architetto Louis de Foix per volere di Enrico III (fig. 45a): una torre a tre piani con cucina e stanze abitabili per il guardiano, il cui fuoco era alimentato con olio di pesce, al piano terra viene collocato l’Appartamento del Re, una grande sala di accoglienza, al secondo piano una cappella palatina con dieci file di finestre, infine una scala di 2,20 m conduce al piano della lanterna, alla quale si accede da un’ulteriore scala più piccola. Tuttavia, la costruzione iniziata nel 1583 è destinata a non essere portata a termine per essere ripresa solo dal successore Enrico IV che trasformò la torre in una sfarzosa costruzione: un primo piano chiamato “appartamento reale”, un secondo piano con funzione di cappella, una serie di scale esterne ed interne che conducevano al piano della lanterna, il tutto per un’altezza di 40 m. Finalmente, nel 1611 il “faro del re” viene attivato e

A questa si aggiunsero tutta una serie di torri costiere e fari che rafforzarono il toponimo “Triturrita” che già Rutilio Namaziano nel V secolo d.C. aveva tributato alla zona attorno a Portus Pisanus. Tra queste torri la più notevole era quella detta del Magnale, una delle torri che davano l’accesso al porto era residenza del capitano, oggi nulla più che un rudere nei pressi del Porto Nuovo di Livorno (fig.41). La costruzione del primo faro della Meloria è ritenuta di Niccola Bonanno, il quale creò una torre simile a un fortilizio, ben visibile anche da lontano per indicare le insidiose secche che le imbarcazioni rischiavano di incontrare in quella zona.229 Fu nel 1290, come ricorda anche Giovanni Villani nella Cronica,230 che i Genovesi assediarono Porto Pisano nel contesto della Lega Guelfa contro Pisa, evento che portò all’atterramento del fanale. Il complesso sistema di torri e fanali di Portus Pisanus è ben riassunto in un bassorilievo duecentesco in marmo bianco apuano che era murato nel Palazzo del Comune di Genova (fig.43): si vedono bene le due torri chiuse da una catena che regolava l’accesso al porto, la torre della Meloria isolata su uno scoglio e il faro di Livorno,

231

GUARNIERI 1967, p. 117. Francisci Petrarchae, Itinerarium Syriacum. In quo quicquid per Europam, vel Asiam peregrinis Hirosolymitanis memorabile occurrit, diligentissime describitur. Basilare, per Sebastianum Henricpetri, MDLIII. 233 SCHNALL 1999, p. 8/9. 234 VEITMEYER 1900, pp. 29-31. 232

225

Strab. V, 3 definiva Genua emporio dei Liguri. 226 VEITMEYER 1900, p. 34; MANFREDINI-PESCARA 1985, p. 74. 227 MANFREDINI-PESCARA 1985, p. 74. 228 VEITMEYER 1900, p. 33; GUARNIERI 1967, pp. 56-60. 229 GUARNIERI 1967, p. 117. 230 Villani, Cronica, ed. Guanda.

147

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA sarà utilizzato ininterrottamente dalla dinstia reale fino alla morte di Liugi XVI.235 Ma i lavori non potranno proseguire fino alla fine dell’Ottocento cambiando più volte aspetto alla torre. Ciò che oggi possiamo ammirare a Corduan è simile ma molto lontano da quello che forse aveva pensato Carlo Magno nel IX secolo d.C. ed Enrico III nel XVI secolo (fig. 45 a. b).236

Tuttavia, già dal Quattrocento (basti pensare alle città della Lega Anseatica238in Germania o dei Cinque Ports in Francia e Inghilterra) l’incremento dei traffici commerciali e le nuove tecniche maturate nel campo della nautica avevano alimentato un forte interesse nel disegno dei porti.239 Mi piace concludere citando la teoria di Leon Battista Alberti che nel descrivere come si debbano costruire i porti auspica per la loro difesa alte torri disposte lateralmente e dotate di merlature e di lanterne all’imbocco del porto ma anche che esso sia costruito nei pressi di un promontorio che ripari le navi dal vento e costituisca, di giorno, un punto di riferimento per i naviganti.240

Elencare tutti i fari medioevali in nostro possesso, noti tramite le fonti letterarie, iconografiche e le evidenze archeologiche, significherebbe imbarcarsi in un lavoro infinito, per cui mi limito a riassumere i punti fondamentali del passaggio dai fari romani a quelli medioevali. I fari romani erano collocati presso alture o all’imbocco dei porti e avevano come primaria funzione quella di guidare i naviganti in una corretta entrata in porto così come Ero intendeva fare con la sua fiaccola guidando Leandro tra le acque del Bosforo. La fiamma della lanterna era prodotta tramite la combustione di legno e olio d’oliva (a volte olio animale) riflesso in una serie di specchi ustori collocati intorno ad un braciere in ferro e profusi a 360° grazie all’architettura cilindrica dell’ultimo piano del faro, aperto su ogni lato da un colonnato. La distanza massima raggiunta, quella del faro di Alessandria (anche l’unica segnalata), è identificabile, ridimensionando le parole delle fonti, a circa 20 km. I fari altomedioevali, spesso, riutilizzano strutture faree romane decadute, come nel caso del faro di Gesoriacum nel Pas-deCalais. Vi sono, tuttavia, numerosi fari che fungono al medesimo tempo da faro, torre di avvistamento e fortezza; alcune delle torri di avvistamento altomedioevali verranno trasformate in campanili, come nel caso di Caorle o di alcune torri normanne dell’isola britannica (fig. 46). Spesso, questi fari hanno l’aspetto di vere e proprie torri-fortezza, come nel caso della Lanterna di Genova e del faro della Meloria. La fiamma della lanterna potrà essere prodotta allo stesso modo che nell’epoca romana ma può anche essere impiegato il così detto braciere mobile, utilizzando carrucole usate anche per portare al piano della lanterna il materiale combustibile evitando le scale. Nel 1645, tuttavia, la lanterna viene distrutta e il faro cade in rovina sino ai nuovi lavori di restauro del 1780 che gli restituiranno parte di quella magnificenza barocca che aveva acquistato nei secoli lasciando la struttura immutata (fig. 45b).

Dunque, ancora nel Quattrocento (anzi forse ancora di più) era valido il noto motto romano: NAVIGARE NECESSE EST

CONCLUSIONI E PROBLEMI IRRISOLTI Non è possibile indicare con precisione assoluta una data che sancisca quando l’uomo abbia iniziato a costruire i primi fari. Infatti, non è escluso che le fonti greche e fenicie, specie i peripli dei grandi navigatori (Annone Cartaginese, Imilcone, Pseudo-Scilace, Pitea di Marsiglia per citarne solo alcuni,) quando parlano di puqcoÊ (torri) in posizioni topograficamente adatte a fari non stiano effettivamente parlando di strutture di quel tipo. E’ altrettanto vero che il primo faro propriamente detto (sia dal punto di vista dell’architettura sia della funzione) nasce nel III secolo a.C. in Egitto, presso Alessandria, sull’isola di Pharos, da cui prende nome, per volere di Tolomeo I Sotèr anche se ultimato dal figlio e successore Tolomeo Filadelfo. Il faro fu attivo anche di notte fin dalla sua costruzione e lo conferma l’epigramma di Posidippo, autore coevo alla costruzione del faro, nel quale viene ricordato che l’edificio è stato costruito per far luce nella notte ai naviganti. Piuttosto sarebbe più interessante chiedersi, ma non vi è risposta, quando la luce emessa dal faro smetta di essere fissa per diventare intermittente. Plinio il Vecchio lamentava, infatti, che in quel modo i naviganti potevano scambiare la luce del faro per quella di una stella. Non credo che si sia trovato un sistema per evitare la fissità della luce prima dell’introduzione della lente Fresnel nel 1800, tuttavia, se la luce veniva prodotta tramite specchi “ustori” che giravano attorno ad un fuoco, vi saranno stati anche momenti in cui il materiale combustibile terminava e quindi la luce se non intermittente avrebbe avuto una minore portata luminosa. La portata luminosa (forse con un’estensione massima di 20-25 km) dipendeva dalla collocazione del faro (collina, imboccatura del porto) e dall’altezza dell’edificio (tanto più è alto tanto più lontano arriva la sua luce). Il compito di far girare gli specchi era forse affidato a degli schiavi mentre dei liberti potevano essere addetti al recupero del materiale combustibile, del cibo per i custodi dell’edificio o potevano avere la responsabilità della struttura come nel caso di Alessandria. A questo personale andava aggiunto nel caso di fari di porti prettamente militari, come quello di Leptis Magna, un buon numero di soldati che avrebbero trovato alloggio all’interno della struttura stessa, inoltre, forse alcune stanze erano anche destinate ai venditori di souvenirs che avevano la loro bottega alla base dell’edificio portuale. Nei fari-dogana,

Se in Italia la nascita delle Repubbliche Marinare aveva fatto sì che Venezia, Pisa, Genova e Amalfi provvedessero ad attrezzare i propri porti con fari monumentali oltre che funzionali, lo stesso avveniva nel Nord Europa per le città che parteciparono alla Lega Anseatica nell’Europa Settentrionale e per quelle che aderirono alla lega de Les Cinques Ports, siglata tra Francia e Gran Bretagna. Venezia già nel 1312 aveva approntato un piccolo segnale luminoso nella zona tra Lido e S.Erasmo. La prima città del Nord Europa che invece aveva costruito un faro strategico fu Lubecca, nel suo sbocco al mare di Travenműnde (figg. 48, 49); di un segnale luminoso in quella zona si parlava già in una lettera dell’imperatore Federico II, anche se l’attivazione ufficiale del faro si deve al Conte Johann von Holstein nel 1320.237 Il ritorno al classico che colpisce tutti i generi architettonici del Rinascimento non può escludere porti e fari che, ancora una volta, prendono a modello gli esempi della Roma imperiale, pur con l’aggiunta di soluzioni innovative (fig. 50).

235

238

236

239

DREYER-FICHOU 2005, pp. 247-249. Sulla storia di Corduan, DREYER-FICHOU 2005, pp. 247-250. 237 VEITMEYER 1900, pp. 35-37.

VEITMEYER 1900, pp. 35-39. SIMONCINI I 1993. 240 ALBERTI 1565, pp. 142-144.

148

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO come Baro Zavelea, Torre Caligo e Roque d’Odor, stanze abitabili dovevano garantire un buon alloggio agli addetti al ritiro del pagamento del dazio, effettuato presso le suddette torri-faro per passare dalla navigazione di un canale (fossa) a quello successivo. In questi edifici è dunque lecito che vi fosse anche un esiguo numero di militari che controllassero che nessuno rubasse gli introiti e uno o più addetti per l’operazione del pagamento e il controllo dei soldi. A costoro si aggiungono alcuni personaggi il cui compito era quello di produrre la fiamma della lanterna (come detto, presumibilmente schiavi) e veterani della marina a cui era affidato il compito di guidare le navi nella corretta entrata in porto, come sembra evidente da un’attenta analisi della moneta di Laodicea ad Mare con il personaggio posto sul primo piano del faro che dialoga con il proreta. Quindi attorno al faro vi era una folta schiera di personaggi che facevano da staff, dagli schiavi ai liberti, dal phararius ai procuratores, dai commercianti ai marinai in pensione.241

Pitea di Marsiglia, Annone Cartaginese, Itinerarium Antonini, Ora Maritima). Da quanto analizzato si osserva anche che l’architettura del faro cambia a seconda del tempo e del luogo dov’è costruito. Si parte dalle prime torri-faro arcaiche (VI secolo a.C.) di forma perfettamente circolare (Thasos) oppure quadrata (Jelsa-Tor), per poi passare in età ellenstica alla complessa architettura del faro di Alessandria (base quadrata, secondo piano ottagonale ed ultimo cilindrico), per poi assumere le forme più diverse, come i dodici piani ottagonali del faro di Gesoriacum oppure la massiccia torre di Brigantium che però in età arcaica sembra avere avuto forma cilindrica. Alcune tipologie sembrano assomigliarsi a seconda della collocazione geografica. Assai simili sono le torri di Brigantium e dell’Ara Sistiana, così come similari sono i fari di Dubris e Gesoriacum. Sarà anche opportuno distinguere tra fari, torri-faro e lanterne. Credo di avere ormai dimostrato che la teoria per cui in ogni porto attrezzato non vi potesse essere che un solo faro sia ormai superata. A Leptis Magna abbiamo da un lato il faro vero e proprio e all’altra estremità del molo la torre della Lanterna (fig. 51), di dimensioni leggermente inferiori, a Centumcellae sull’antemurale era il faro vero e proprio mentre, alle estremità dei moli, vi erano addirittura quattro torri faro, due con funzioni analoghe a quelle del faro centrale (le turres geminae) e due con funzioni di Lanterne. Lanterne e torri-faro dialogavano con il faro principale, specialmente se posto all’imbocco del porto (ma probabilmente anche nel caso esso fosse in collina come ad Apamea di Siria) per aiutare il marinaio in una corretta entrata nel porto. Sicuramente il numero dei fari e delle torri ausiliarie variava anche a seconda delle difficoltà che la nave poteva incontrare: una costa particolarmente frastagliata (Salona, Dyrrachium), propaggini montuose (Seleucia, Apamea), isole o antemurali (Ostia), secche (Meloria) e così via.

Un problema che ci si può porre dopo aver analizzato tutti i dati a disposizione è come mai le fonti citino così raramente, e con scarne descrizioni, queste strutture e come mai ce ne siano rimaste così poche di età romana mentre abbondano quelle di origini medioevali o rinascimentali. Quanto alla prima domanda, visto che il faro che gode del maggior numero di descrizioni (sia a livello quantitativo che cronologico) è il faro di Alessandria, credo che le fonti abbiano smesso di menzionare queste strutture quando la loro costruzione era ormai d’obbligo per tutti i porti, e dunque nel I d.C., epoca in cui lo stesso Plinio il Vecchio afferma che di fari come quello di Alessandria ve ne sono ovunque, come a Ostia e a Ravenna. Da quell’epoca in poi i fari vengono menzionati solo se riportano alcune peculiarità architettoniche (le turres geminae di Centumcellae) o solo se legati a curiosi eventi storici o ritenuti di particolare pregio (il faro di Brigantium, unica opera umana degna di nota a detta di Orosio). Quanto al loro scarso stato di conservazione credo che ciò sia dovuto alla rivalità con Alessandria: ad ogni architetto, come sembra potersi dedurre dalle parole di Flavio Giuseppe circa Caesarea Maritima, era stato richiesto di superare in qualche modo il faro alessandrino. E proprio l’imponente mole con cui furono costruiti alcuni fari, legata all’instabilità del terreno dove furono edificati i porti, fece sì che questi crollassero a causa dell’insabbiamento del porto, come avvenne ad esempio, a Ostia e a Ravenna.242 Altre volte, come nel caso di Alessandria (terremoto), Patara (Tsunami) o di Gesoriacum (crollo della falesia su cui era costruito), sono stati eventi naturali a contribuire al crollo della struttura. Qualora le fonti arcaiche o classiche non ci vengano in aiuto possiamo ricorrere agli itineraria, siano essi picta (Vasi di Vicarello, Vasi di Piombino, Tabula Peutingeriana) o letterari (Periplo di Pseudo-Scilace,

Diversa era invece la natura delle torri-faro dei porti fluviali: le più imponenti, quelle che svolgevano anche funzione di dazio, dovevano essere a una determinata distanza le une dalle altre e, presumibilmente, ve ne sarebbe stata una ogni volta che il canale cambiava nome (fossa Augusta, fossa Popiliola, fossa Clodia, fossa Traiana per citarne solo alcune), mentre un fittissimo sistema di segnalazioni luminose doveva scorrere in quei porti fluviali della Regio X o della Transpadana che spesso presentavano nebbia o cattivo tempo. Dunque, anche in questo caso, sicuramente devono esserci state più strutture di quelle conosciute oggi (Baro Zavelea, Torre Caligo, Torrione del Canale S.Felice), ed è impossibile immaginare che porti di una certa rilevanza come Industria in Transpadana oppure Hostilia in Venetia et Histria ne fossero privi. Un dato molto interessante da notare è che spesso alla base o in prossimità del faro vi era una cisterna (Torrione del Canale S.Felice, Dyrrachium, Patara) con evidente scopo di garantire acqua potabile al personale del faro. Quanto alla rappresentazione dei fari sui sarcofagi, se sicuramente in età tardo antica e medioevale essi simboleggiavano l’arrivo del defunto nel porto della salvezza, spesso in età romana volevano essere la rappresentazione dello status sociale del defunto, che tramite la rappresentazione del faro dimostrava di aver lavorato in vita in un porto attrezzato di una certa importanza oppure di aver trovato la morte in mare (come nel celebre sarcofago della Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek) o simboleggiavano il viaggio del defunto nell’Aldilà.

241 Quanto detto circa il personale del faro lo si può dedurre da iscrizioni ed iconografie ma non è sicuro, anche se si può immaginare che, specialmente nei primi anni, a causa di una tecnologia ancora non raffinata, attorno al faro vi fosse una moltitudine di persone per permettere alla struttura di funzionare nel migliore dei modi. 242 Mentre per Ravenna siamo ancora lontani dal ritrovare il faro augusteo, la cui mole fu indubbiamente notevole visto che si trattava del faro che doveva difendere l’Adriatico, recenti indagini geoarcheologiche sembrano aver riportato in luce l’isolotto sul quale Claudio costruì il suo faro riemerso, insieme ai moli a quote variabili tra -16 e -12 m con copertura di sabbia dunare naturale. Il materiale trovato corrisponde a blocchi di basalto e tufo ma per maggiori dettagli tecnici bisognerà aspettare la pubblicazione degli Atti del Convegno su Portus che si è tenuto alla British School at Rome il 3-5 marzo 2008. Ringrazio infinitamente per questi dati la Prof.ssa Antonia Arnoldus-Huyzendveld dell’Università di Siena.

Il valore politico di queste strutture, è dimostrato dal fatto che spesso, come a Caprae o Caesarea Maritima, oltre al mare e all’entrata in porto, i fari avevano il compito di illuminare anche la villa imperiale. Indice di tale funzione è anche il materiale utilizzato, spesso di grande pregio come la pietra d’Istria o il

149

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA marmo rosso di Verona. I porti che non erano abbastanza ricchi da potersi permettere tali materiali oppure quelli che volevano risparmiare sulla costruzione si affidavano alla pietra locale, come nel caso del faro di Narbo Martius costruito con la pietra della vicina isola di S.Lucia. Oltre al valore politico, ma ad esso legato, è il notevole valore propagandistico e commerciale, ragione per la quale molte città portuali tendevano a rapprsentare il faro del loro porto in alcuni conii in modo da renderlo come la migliore pubblicità del loro porto attrezzato e quindi del loro primario ruolo in campo commerciale (Apamea di Siria, Laodicea ad Mare, Perge, Panormus sono solo alcuni esempi).

CONSULTAZIONE DELLE SCHEDE In ogni scheda del catalogo viene introdotta la città portuale tramite un suo inquadramento storico-geografico (fonti, scavi antichi e recenti) per poi passare ad analizzare nel dettaglio l’evoluzione del suo porto e la creazione del faro (o dei fari). Le città vengono indicate col toponimo latino e la corrispondente provincia romana. Tra parentesi sono indicati la denominazione e il paese attuali. Per una maggiore completezza dell’opera sono state realizzate anche schede piuttosto brevi in quanto frutto di scavi molto recenti (Patara, Durazzo, Canale S.Felice), a me noti grazie alla cortesia di alcuni Responsabili di scavo oppure per articoli comparsi su internet, mentre ancora mancano pubblicazioni scientifiche. Si è voluto anche segnalare fari noti per alcune leggende, che davano per certa la presenza di un’evidenza archeologica in quella determinata città portuale, come il campanile di Adria che dovrebbe poggiare su un faro di età ellenistica.

Un problema destinato a rimanere irrisolto credo sia la portata luminosa dei fari, a meno che non si scopra fortunosamente una qualche epigrafe nella quale sia indicata. Al di là delle supposizioni fatte, per cui la luce massima potesse raggiungere i 23-25 km di distanza, essa sarà dipesa molto anche dal materiale combustibile usato, dalla collocazione dell’edificio (collina, bocca di porto) e dalla sua altezza. Solo ulteriori scavi subacquei e terrestri in aree portuali antiche potranno rivelare la presenza di fari fenici, punici, greci o romani che certo non poterono mancare in luoghi nevralgici per la navigazione come Atene, Tessalonica, Melita, Tharros, in Abruzzo e in Calabria o nella Corsica, per citare solo alcuni casi.

Ecco perchè, in fondo ad ogni scheda, ho sentito l’obbligo di trarre alcune conclusioni che permettano al lettore di interpretare i dati proposti. Oltre alle conclusioni si è pensato di accennare anche ai problemi irrisolti e alle prospettive di ricerca. Per molti dei siti segnalati si è provveduto a un sopralluogo che ha permesso di verificare la situazione attuale e di reperire bibliografia locale non sempre presente nelle biblioteche italiane.

150

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO descritta da Cagnat,251 e verso il largo a nord-ovest, un’altra gettata avrebbe difeso il porto. In mancanza di prove è tuttavia, impossibile precisare se questi diversi bacini siano contemporanei e quindi stabilire quali di essi fosse il porto commerciale. Se le supposizioni sull’effettiva architettura del bacino portuale risultano, ancora oggi, di dubbia certezza, informazioni più precise vengono, invece, dagli scavi effettuati sull’isola. Verso il largo, ai piedi della roccia dell’isolotto Joinville (Tav. 1, fig. 1), sono state individuate diverse sostruzioni in opera reticolata con muri in laterizio identificati come pertinenti all’abside di un tempio eretto sotto Giuba II. In cima all’isolotto, subito dietro a quest’abside, un grande monumento di forma ottagonale largo 18 m con pietre di taglio agli angoli è stato riconosciuto con verosimiglianza come il resto di un faro (Tav. 1, fig. 2). Su una base ottagonale troviamo pietre di taglio poste parallelamente l’una sull’altra da ovest a est, senza tener conto dell’orientamento delle pareti che dovevano sostenere. Su ognuno degli otto angoli si elevano altrettanti elementi, sempre nello stesso materiale, ma questa volta dettagliatamente lavorati su tutte le facce. Di codesti lati quelli che sono conservati misurano esternamente 2,51 m da ambo le parti, contro 1,85 m all’interno. Lo spessore del muro è di 1,62 m. La struttura, seppur irregolare, è di esecuzione assolutamente accurata, e, in particolare, gli angoli all’esterno come all’interno si trovano tagliati a blocchi e non segnati da una giuntura. Due di questi massicci basamenti angolari sono conservati su due filari al di sopra delle fondamenta, un terzo su tre filari che presentano nel complesso un’altezza di 1,40 m. Tra questi filari i lati dell’ottagono sono occupati da muri di bloccaggio lunghi 2,32 m, spessi solamente 1,23 m. Forse fu proprio Giuba II a voler dotare il suo porto di un faro monumentale che potesse fare concorrenza a quello che era stato eretto nella vicina Alessandria dai Tolomei, famiglia a cui Giuba era molto legato. L’edificio doveva avere, tuttavia, un’altezza assai più esigua rispetto all’edificio alessandrino: questa è stata stimata, infatti, tra i 30 e i 34 m.252 Non potendo imitare l’altezza del suo precedente ellenistico, è lecito supporre che il faro di Caesarea abbia imitato quello di Alessandria almeno per quanto riguarda l’architettura: una torre a piani digradanti verso l’alto, in questo caso ottagonali, dei quali solo l’ultimo di forma cilindrica. E’ probabile che la struttura fosse, come ad Alessandria, sormontata da una statua che qualche studioso ha voluto identificare con quella di Iside, conservata al Museo di Antichità di Cherchell, ma che non fu trovata né sull’isolotto né in prossimità dello stesso.253 Costruzioni di epoca fenicia situate ad occidente del faro potrebbero fare supporre che in quella posizione sorgesse, più anticamente, una struttura con analoghe funzioni costruita dai Fenici, ma non vi è nessuna prova certa a riguardo.

CATALOGO DEI FARI DEL MONDO ANTICO SCHEDA 1-IOL-CAESAREA (Cherchell, Provincia: Mauretania Caesariensis

Marocco)

La città di Iol fu, in origine, un emporio punico legato al porto di Cartagine, seppur dotato di qualche autonomia.243 Il nome deriverebbe da quello di una divinità fenicia. Fu Giuba II che, come ricorda Svetonio,244 nell’intenzione di voler qui creare una nuova Roma, cambiò il nome della città in Caesarea. Oltre a mura lunghe 7 km, Giuba volle edificare numerosi edifici che potessero competere con quelli della capitale dell’impero: due templi, un grande foro (cui se ne aggiungerà un altro terminato solo da Settimio Severo), un teatro ed il più grande anfiteatro del mondo romano a noi noto (4082 m2), costruito quando a Roma non vi era ancora stata la creazione del Colosseo. Forse, fu anche in base a questo prodigioso impianto urbanistico che, sotto Claudio, Caesarea divenne capitale della Caeasariensis con il titolo di Colonia Claudia Caesarea245 (la città era già stata elevata al ruolo di capitale della Mauretania dal re Bocco). In età severiana vi saranno ulteriori accorgimenti per fare della città un polo di attrazione tali da sorprendere i visitatori di quell’epoca.246 Occupata dai Vandali, conquistata dai Bizantini e, successivamente, distrutta dagli Arabi fu spesso colpita da terremoti che non ne impedirono, tuttavia, l’abitabilità. Il porto e il faro Per quanto riguarda il porto, questo si estendeva a nord delle terme occidentali. Come ad Alessandria (scheda 8), il faro era collocato sopra un’isola artificiale, collegata alla terraferma e al porto mercantile.247 Infatti, sappiamo che l’odierna Cherchell, in epoca romana, era dotata di due porti, uno militare e uno commerciale. Per costruire entrambi si era diviso un piccolo isolotto che si estendeva di fronte alla città, formando così un riparo naturale.248 Tra quest’isola, in seguito chiamata isolotto Joinville, e la costa era anche il grande porto commerciale, riparato naturalmente da scogliere. In realtà il bacino portuale era molto esposto ai venti che venivano dal mare aperto. Il porto militare, molto più piccolo di quello mercantile, era difeso molto bene. Esso comunicava con il porto mercantile per un passaggio molto stretto tra i 10 e i 15 m. Ad ovest un muro di cinta lo difendeva dalle onde del mare. Le fondazioni delle mura esistevano ancora nel 1843.249 La forma del porto militare, situato a nord dell’isola, assomigliava a quella di un esagono piuttosto irregolare. Tutt’intorno al porto esistevano monumenti che lo studioso Shaw vide parzialmente sotto l’acqua e la cui distruzione viene attribuita ad un terremoto: si trattava dei resti dell’arsenale e degli horrea.250 Oggi le indagini archeologiche risultano piuttosto complesse perché la costruzione del porto moderno ha portato a coprire le antiche costruzioni di età romana. La profondità media del bacino è stata calcolata con una variazione che va da 3,20 a 2,50 m, dato più probabile. E’ stato anche identificato un terzo bacino: si tratta di una grande darsena immediatamente ad est della diga originale scoperta e

Conclusioni e problematiche La struttura del faro, del quale oggi si intravedono resti presso il faro odierno sull’isolotto Joinville, doveva riprendere quella del suo antecedente alessandrino; siamo, tuttavia, sicuri solo di un basamento ottagonale, lavorato in pietra di taglio. Assai dubbio e avventuroso è ipotizzare che la statua di Iside, conservata al Museo di Antichità di Cherchell, fosse la statua posta sulla sommità dell’edificio che doveva presentare una struttura cilindrica.

243

Per una storia ed un itinerario dei commerci marittimi nel mondo fenicio-punico si veda BARTOLONI 1988, pp. 92-100 244 Suet. Aug. 60. L’autore latino afferma che tutti i re alleati di Augusto fondarono in ogni dove molte città a lui dedicate, chiamandole Caesarea. 245 C.I.L., VI, 3262; VIII, 9400. 246 «Caesarea (1)» in Der Neue Pauly, 2, Stuggart 1997; p. 924 247 LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN 1963, pp. 178-180. 248 REDDÈ 1986, pp. 244-245. 249 RAVOISIÈ 1846, III, tav. XXIV. REDDÈ 1986, p. 246. 250 GSELL 1901, pp. 11-12; GSELL 1952, pp. 117-118.

Dunque, se ipotizziamo che l’edificio absidato alle spalle del faro fosse il palazzo imperiale di Giuba II o un edificio 251

CAGNAT 1912, pp. 315-318. Tutte le informazioni circa il faro si trovano in GRENIER 1959, pp. 215-229. 253 GAUCKLER 1895, p. 61, 137, tav. XIV, 3. 252

151

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA monumentale in suo onore, possiamo ritenere che, come in altre circostanze, la luce emessa dalla fiamma della lanterna servisse, allo stesso tempo, per far luce ai naviganti e per fare scorgere agli stessi, nella sua magnificenza, l’opera urbanistica di Giuba.

Conclusioni e problematiche Già in epoca fenicia il porto di Adrumeto era dotato di tre torri con funzioni di specole lungo la costa nord, dove i venti provenienti da nord-est rendevano piuttosto difficile la navigazione. Forse già dal II secolo d.C., quando Traiano elevò la città a colonia romana, si costruì un grande arsenale che aveva come punto di riferimento un grande faro sul quale, dopo la conquista araba, si innestò la torre di avvistamento che ancora oggi domina la fortezza. Sappiamo da Livio che non era nuovo ai Fenici l’uso di torri di segnalazioni, e che ne avevano Asdrubale in Spagna e forse Annibale nella stessa Adrumeto.258 Tutte queste conclusioni sono però frutto di mere supposizioni sulla base degli scarsi ritrovamenti archeologici, a causa della sovrapposizione della città moderna su quella antica.

SCHEDA 2 HADRUMETUM (Sūsa, Susse, Tunisia) Provincia: Numidia Forse già nel IX secolo a.C., sulla costa orientale dell’odierna Tunisia, nacque la colonia fenicia di Adrumeto. Pur essendo nota, soprattutto, per aver ospitato il quartier generale di Annibale, poco prima del suo attacco a Scipione, la città godette di buona autonomia anche in epoca romana. Elevata al rango di colonia sotto Traiano (Colonia Concordia Ulpia Traiana Augusta Frugifera Hadrumentina), la città fu dotata di ricche ville, numerose cisterne ed un buon quartiere portuale con funzioni spiccatamente militari. Le indagini archeologiche sono state condizionate dalla sovrapposizione della città moderna su quella antica. Divenuta capitale della Byzacena sotto Diocleziano, conquistata da Giustiniano, cambiò nome in Iustinianopolis.254

SCHEDA 3 SABRATHA (Sabratha, Libia) Provincia: Tripolitania Situata a circa 70 km dall’odierna Tripoli, l’antica Sabratha si colloca a breve distanza dal nucleo cittadino moderno. Chiamata Abrotonon dai Greci, nacque come porto fenicio della Numidia, fondato forse da coloni di Tiro. L’importanza mercantile dell’emporio, nel quale venivano scambiati, soprattutto, avorio, pelli, stoffe preziose ed olio, è testimoniata dalla presenza della Statio Sabratensium nel piazzale delle Corporazioni di Ostia, il porto di Roma con il quale tutti gli empori tripolitani avevano frequenti commerci. Divenuta ancora più importante dopo il 146 a.C., anno della distruzione di Cartagine, nel 46 a.C. la città venne conquistata dai Romani e fu trasformata in colonia, entrando a far parte della Tripolis, formata anche dalle città di Oea (Tripoli) e di Leptis Magna. Nel III secolo d.C. divenne sede episcopale e fu coinvolta, nei due secoli successivi, nel dibattito donatista. A metà del V secolo venne conquistata dai Vandali e, nonostante la sua ripresa economica grazie alla conquista bizantina, nel 642/3 d.C. cadde nelle mani degli Arabi e venne definitivamente distrutta dai Berberi nell’VIII secolo.259

Il porto e il faro Il porto della città, il cothon, era già stato notato per la sua efficacia da Cesare durante la guerra alessandrina.255 Secondo la descrizione araba di al-Bakri, l’arsenale della città doveva essere localizzato nella zona prescelta nel IX secolo d.C. dall’emiro Ziyadat Allah (817-838 d.C.) come punto di partenza delle truppe che dovevano conquistare la Sicilia, ovvero l’attuale fortezza (qasba). Nell’859 d.C. la qasba, non lontana dalla linea di costa, fu sormontata da una torre di segnalazione detta Khalaf al-Fata, a due piani sovrapposti. La torre (Tav. 2, fig. 3), alta circa 30 m, forse costruita su quello che era l’antico faro della città prima punica, poi romana, è ancora oggi esistente. Durante il XIII secolo si aprirono otto porte nella fortezza e una di queste, quella orientale, era messa direttamente in comunicazione con il mare.256 Secondo le indagini archeologiche, compiute nei primi anni Sessanta del secolo scorso da Louis Foucher, all’estremità nord della costa sarebbero stati individuati resti di una torre semicircolare che servì da torre di avvistamento e da faro, già in epoca fenicia.

Il porto e il faro In un’insenatura di grande respiro, naturalmente protetta dai venti di nord-ovest da una bassa scogliera e da quelli di nord-est grazie ad un’allungata lingua di sabbia, doveva trovare sede il porto di Sabratha, allargato artificialmente in età romana, con l’entrata in corrispondenza di uno stretto braccio di mare allungato tra la scogliera e la riva (Tav.2, fig. 4).260

Un faro, o una specola, in quella posizione si sarebbe rivelata assai utile non tanto per segnalare l’entrata in porto quanto per guidare i naviganti in un viaggio sicuro, essendo la costa nord molto esposta ai venti di nord-est. In epoca romana, essendo forse obbligatorio che del personale rimanesse sempre dentro la torre, questo era rifornito di acqua potabile tramite una canalizzazione di piombo, della quale è possibile vedere qualche traccia nella muratura. Il Foucher non è, tuttavia, convinto che sia mai esistito un porto interno, poiché il termine cothon fu riservato al porto esterno chiuso da due dighe. Infatti, sostengono Foucher e Torr, il cothon è un porto creato artificialmente dall’uomo, cosa che si verifica solo per metà in quello di Adrumeto: il porto era chiuso da due moli (è stato ritrovato il resto di una banchina con bitte in ferro) e dalla diga. Tutto l’insieme era difeso da torri: oltre a quella della diga, ne sono state individuate altre due, i cui basamenti vennero alla luce in seguito allo scoppio di una bomba nel 1889.257

Resti di un muro sono stati individuati nella zona localmente chiamata Marsa Sabratha, divenuto porto peschereccio di Egiziani e Tunisini, in prossimità dell’ex villa Paternò Moncada: si tratta di blocchi parallelepipedi di arenaria perfettamente allineati sulla faccia orientale, al contrario irregolari sulla faccia ovest. La lunghezza di questi blocchi varia da 1 a 1,7 m e l’altezza è di circa 0,35 m. Questo muro si collegherebbe ai resti di blocchi trovati a nord-ovest della lingua di terra che chiude Marsa Sabratha proteggendola dal maestrale e che, secondo Di Vita, sarebbero da identificare con i resti di una torre-faro di epoca pre-romana (Tav. 3, fig. 5).

254

258

255

259

Le fondamenta della torre sono, ancora oggi, sott’acqua; emerge invece un primo filare in blocchi di arenaria che il mare ha quasi solidificato. La struttura, verosimilmente costruita in opus punicum, presenta una forma vagamente rettangolare e misura

«Hadrumetum» in Der Neue Pauly, 5, Stuggart, p. 64. Bell.Afr., 62, 63. 256 «Susa» in EI, Roma 2005, p. 555. 257 FOUCHER 1964, pp. 82-83.

Liv. XXII, 19,5. «Sabratha» in Der Kleine Pauly, Műnchen 1972, pp. 1485-1486; DI VITA 1999, pp. 146-163. 260 DI VITA 2004, pp. 1771-1787.

152

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO 2,95 m sui lati nord e sud, mentre è di 2,55 m sui lati est e ovest.261

Oggi del faro, gradualmente distrutto dal mare, non rimane che il basamento (Tav. 4, fig. 7), una platea quadrata alta 21,20 m.267 Si trattava, probabilmente, di un edificio a tre piani; oggi si conservano tracce di una base e di un tratto di 6,50 m di due voltoni con raggio superiore ai 2 m, costruiti in blocchi ed impostati sulla platea, precedentemente citata. Il faro, scavato tra gli Anni Venti e Trenta del Novecento dal Bartoccini, è noto grazie ad un’ancora valida ricostruzione assonometrica e fotografica (Tav. 4, fig. 8): “la soglia si presenta come un semplice piano senza bordi rialzati e senza traccia di alloggiamento per i cardini…da questo corridoio o piccolo atrio si accede all’interno del faro”.268 All’interno dell’atrio si dipanava una serie di corridoi, da uno dei quali partivano delle scale che conducevano ad un piano inclinato dell’edificio direttamente collegato con il piano della lanterna. La scoperta di alcuni frammenti di cornice simili a quelle del primo piano hanno fatto supporre all’archeologo italiano, vista anche la simmetria di tutto l’edificio, che anche il secondo piano, purtroppo franato, si presentasse, come il primo, ornato da due grandi finestre ad arco, che dovevano costituire la fronte della botte della parte più alta del corridoio. Della parte centrale del faro rimane solo un muro di quasi 3 m di spessore con una nicchia sulla fronte ed altri due muri che corrono parallelamente ad esso, creando una serie di corridoi, coperti a botte, che si affacciavano sulla parete est del faro con due grandi finestre, alte almeno quattro metri e mezzo. Se i muri interni presentano una rustica opera a sacco con paramenti a piccoli blocchi mal tagliati e listati, con l’eccezione dell’utilizzo di qualche tegola di argilla rossa, i paramenti dell’interno dei corridoi fanno ricorso a più regolari tegoloni in cotto. Se possiamo dire qualcosa del secondo piano, quasi interamente franato, quasi nulla ci è possibile affermare circa il terzo dado del faro, del quale non vi è più traccia. Durante lo scavo della zona, il Bartoccini trovò dei blocchi simili a quelli con cui erano realizzati i due piani superstiti, ma di spessore leggermente inferiore. Ciò gli fece supporre che anche il terzo piano fosse realizzato con lo stesso materiale. Infine, la struttura che doveva ospitare la lanterna la si può immaginare di forma cilindrica e forse sormontata da una statua, come era quella del faro di Alessandria e come lo sarebbe stata quella di Ostia e di molti fari successivi; tuttavia non ci è dato nessun elemento per averne la certezza. Sono stati trovati alcuni elementi architettonici decorati con tema marittimo che di sicuro dovevano abbellire l’esterno del faro, come, ad esempio, un architrave nel cui riquadro figurano due delfini con cornucopie ed elementi di flora marina.269 La presenza e la forma del terzo dado è stata ipotizzata dagli studiosi anche sulla base dell’iconografia del faro di Leptis Magna, scolpito a bassorilievo sull’arco quadrifronte di Settimio Severo (nella stessa città di Leptis)270 dietro a funzionari imperiali (Tav.5, fig. 9). Questo edificio è stato interpretato, sin dagli anni Trenta del Novecento, come il faro di Leptis. Tuttavia alcuni studiosi, come Francesca Ghedini, hanno espresso la propria perplessità a riguardo.271 L’opposizione della Ghedini è dovuta alla mancata presenza della fiamma sulla sommità della struttura. La studiosa nota che, in base a uno studio compiuto dal Reddè,272 solo 9 su

Conclusioni e problematiche La struttura identificata come torre-faro venne scoperta dal Di Vita negli Anni Sessanta del Novecento ma ne è stata data notizia solo da pochi anni. Sarebbe, dunque, opportuna un’indagine sul posto per verificare l’effettiva funzione dell’edificio che, vista la posizione, bene si presterebbe ad essere identificato come un faro. Mi trovo d’accordo con il Di Vita nell’immaginare una connessione tra muro e faro: la funzione del primo era di impedire una facile entrata nel porto a chi non fosse ben accetto, la funzione del secondo, ascrivibile all’età punica, quella di guidare il navigante in una così difficile e stretta entrata in porto.262 SCHEDA 4 LEPTIS MAGNA (Homs, Lebdah, Libia) Provincia: Tripolitania Fondata dai Fenici sulla costa occidentale del Golfo della Sirte, 130 km ad est di Oea (Tripoli), venne conquistata dai Romani durante la guerra giugurtina. Claudio la elevò allo status di municipium, mentre divenne colonia sotto Traiano. E’ noto che ebbe notevole sviluppo urbanistico sotto Settimio Severo che vi era nato nel 146 d.C.. Dopo un forte declino tra III e IV secolo d.C., verrà definitivamente distrutta dagli Arabi nel 644 d.C..263 Il porto e il faro Il porto fenicio situato a ridosso di un promontorio non richiedeva grandi lavori di manutenzione in quanto si era formato naturalmente grazie allo Wadi Lebdah (presso il cui sbocco fu anche costruito l’insediamento punico) che, sfociando in mare dopo le piogge, aveva scavato un’insenatura nella spiaggia, protetta naturalmente da scogli con funzione di frangiflutti.264 Stupisce che fonti come lo Stadiasmus Maris Magni, contemporaneo all’età severiana, e quindi dell’epoca di massimo fulgore della città, si meraviglino dell’assenza di un porto efficiente nell’emporio libico. Questa mancanza può essere dettata solo dal fatto che, già alla fine del III secolo d.C., il porto si fosse insabbiato. Un maldestro tentativo di ovviare alle problematiche del porto era già stato compiuto da un ingegnere di Nerone il quale, volendo proteggere le navi, creò un “pennello” la cui funzione era quella di chiudere l’estremità occidentale dell’insenatura sbarrando così la via d’uscita in mare al Wadi, causando l’insabbiamento del porto.265 Settimio Severo costruì un nuovo bacino (Tav. 3, fig. 6), chiuso tra i moli preesistenti orientali e settentrionali (che furono anche rialzati per resistere alle tempeste). Il bacino severiano era aperto sul lato dal quale proveniva la corrente che impediva alla sabbia di depositarsi, protetto dai venti e segnalato da un faro. Dall’altro lato era una torre di segnalazione, di forma quadrata (fig. 51), ancor oggi in parte conservata.266 L’imperatore non aveva però calcolato la violenza della corrente che, anziché toglierla, portò con sé tanta sabbia da colmare definitivamente il porto che venne, forse, riedificato in età giustinianea.

267

CASSON 1971, p. 368. BARTOCCINI 1958, pp. 59-61. 269 BARTOCCINI 1958, p. 64. 270 BARTOCCINI 1931, p.111. Sull’interpretazione della scena raffigurata sull’arco si veda anche TOWSEND 1938 , pp. 512-524. 271 GHEDINI 1984, pp. 74-87. Tuttavia, la Prof.ssa Francesca Ghedini, che ringrazio per le indicazioni fornitemi, si è ricreduta ed afferma che si tratti del faro di Leptis ma rimane dubbiosa sul perchè in una parata imperiale vi dovesse essere rappresentato il faro. Io credo che non sia così strano se si immagina il faro della città portuale come simbolo della forte commercialità del luogo e quindi con un valore di promozione politica. 272 REDDÈ 1979, pp. 845-872. 268

261

DI VITA 2004, p. 1784. DI VITA 2004, p. 1787. 263 «Leptis Magna» in Der Neue Pauly, 7, pp. 76-79. 264 ROMANELLI 1961, p. 91; WARD PERKINS 1993. 265 Sulle vicende del porto romano si veda BARTOCCINI 1958. 266 BARTOCCINI 1952-1953, pp. 27-37. 262

153

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA 49 esemplari che abbiano come tema rappresentativo il faro non presentano la fiamma sulla sommità; inoltre mancano riferimenti al mondo marino. Non ritengo, tuttavia, questa ragione sufficiente per escludere l’identificazione dell’edificio dell’arco leptiano come il faro della città portuale. La Ghedini giustifica poi tutte quelle rappresentazioni faree che non abbiano la fiamma sulla sommità come facenti parte dell’arte minore (graffiti, monete, bronzetti e gli Itineraria picta). Anche questa soluzione non mi sembra condivisibile anche perché a noi è arrivata solo una minima parte delle numerose rappresentazioni faree del mondo antico. Mi trovo, tuttavia, d’accordo nel riconoscere che la struttura dell’edificio presenta qualche carattere differente rispetto alla rappresentazione tradizionale: credo però che ciò sia dovuto soprattutto alla realizzazione frontale dell’edificio, la cui forma appare piuttosto stilizzata. E’, invece, assai nota la somiglianza tra fari, mausolei e monumenti trionfali: per questi ultimi due basti pensare alla Tour Magne di Nîmes (figg. 26 a, b), a lungo scambiata per un faro e utilizzata in tal senso nel XIX secolo, o al trofeo della Turbie in Costa Azzurra. Escludendo che possa trattarsi di un monumento funerario, nonostante Erodiano,273 proprio a proposito di Settimio Severo, dica quanto i catasti funerari del III secolo d.C. siano simili come struttura ai fari, la Ghedini propende per la soluzione del trofeo, pure mai negando anche la funzione farea dell’edificio. Dunque, credo che la soluzione del dilemma stia piuttosto nell’identificare il significato della scena rappresentata, perché solo in questo modo si potrà ben capire a quale edificio alluda quella torre a più piani con porte e finestre. Leggendo un passo di Ammiano Marcellino274 che parla di come Giuliano avesse valicato un fiume che si diparte dal corso centrale dell’Eufrate e si dirige verso Ctesifonte, troviamo la citazione di una torre che si ergeva non lontano dal fiume in modum phari; in questa torre la Ghedini riconosce l’edificio rappresentato sull’arco di Leptis presso il fiume Naarmalcha, attraverso il quale era stato creato un canale navigabile da Traiano, poi ripristinato da Severo in occasione delle sue imprese partiche.275 Seppur intrigante, l’ipotesi della Ghedini mi pare piuttosto forzata. Ritengo, invece, più logico riconoscere nell’edificio il faro di Leptis, elemento di sicuro riconoscimento della città natale di Settimio Severo che nell’arco trionfale del foro avrà voluto esaltare il potere della sua famiglia imperiale e del monumento che più di tutti caratterizzava il ruolo commerciale e militare del porto di Leptis: il suo faro. Quanto ad una successiva funzione dello stesso edificio come mausoleo dei Severi è possibile, visto che numerosi sono i casi di fari poi utilizzati come sepolcri e Taposiris Magna (scheda 7) e Thasos (scheda 28) ne sono due esempi lampanti. Da verificare l’ipotesi che si tratti di un faro-trofeo voluto da Severo dopo le sue imprese partiche come Caligola lo aveva voluto a Gesoriacum; è indubbio che la struttura dei trofei sia spesso assimilabile a quella dei fari, ma è anche vero che raramente questi vennero utilizzati in epoca romana come torri faree.276 Ulteriore conferma di come il monumento possa essere interpretato come faro è l’ultimo piano che presenta dimensioni più piccole rispetto al secondo e una forma che sembra essere cilindrica, ovvero la stessa forma del piano che normalmente ospitava la lanterna. Io vedo la scena come il ritorno trionfale di Severo dalle sue imprese celebrato nel porto della sua città, il cui elemento più caratteristico era il faro.277

Conclusioni e problematiche Il faro di Leptis Magna doveva essere presente già in epoca punica, ma il basamento che oggi può essere visto dallo studioso è ciò che rimane del restauro o della costruzione voluta da Settimio Severo, le cui ben note intenzioni erano quelle di rendere la sua città natale competitiva con Roma anche dal punto di vista monumentale. Nel III secolo d.C. il faro di Alessandria era già crollato e più volte restaurato a causa di terremoti e inoltre l’importanza commerciale del porto alessandrino non poteva certo competere con quella militare di Leptis. Si può immaginare che il faro leptiano presentasse le medesime caratteristiche di quello alessandrino (Tav. 5, fig. 10): una torre a più piani digradanti verso l’alto di cui l’ultimo, cilindrico, avrebbe dovuto ospitare la lanterna; forse sulla sommità era una statua dell’imperatore con patera e lancia. Siamo sicuri della presenza di scale che dovevano condurre alla sommità e di stanze abitabili adibite per i soldati che dovevano presidiare il porto militare. L’articolato gioco di corridoi presenti all’interno del faro è forse dovuto al fatto che si cercò di rendere l’edificio accessibile solo a chi era autorizzato ad entrarvi. SCHEDA 5 PHYKOUS (Hamama, Libia) Provincia: Cyrenaica Trattandosi di un recentissimo scavo diretto dal Prof. Sebastiano Tusa della Soprintendenza del Mare di Palermo, Ias di Palermo, Università Suor Orsola Benincasa di Napoli in collaborazione con il Department of Antiquities of Lybia, i dati di seguito riportati fanno riferimento al sito internet www.archaeogate.it in data 18-02-2008, giorno di comunicazione della scoperta e al recente articolo pubblicato sulla rivista Archeo.278 Il porto localizzato ad est di Bengasi pare, in base ai ritrovamenti ceramici (ceramica attica e campana) e alle strutture murarie, sia stato fondato intorno al IV secolo a.C., anche se il suo periodo di maggiore splendore sembra corrispondere al III-IV secolo d.C. pieno come testimonia una moneta in bronzo di età costantiniana. Il porto e il faro Da un lungo e consistente molo, realizzato in paramenti di blocchi squadrati con riempimento interno incoerente, procedendo verso il mare si arriva ad una massiccia struttura che è stata interpretata come il faro del porto (Tav. 6, fig. 11). Più ad ovest, verso Bengasi, in località El Ougla, gli archeologi hanno individuato un’altra area portuale che, in seguito a mareggiate che hanno scosso la sabbia, ha rivelato i resti di una spessa e possente struttura muraria con basamento obliquo in grado di resistere alla forza delle onde che su essa si infrangevano e dunque interpretata come una torre, quindi, più probabilmente, come un altro faro di supporto al precedente. Vicina ad essa la presenza di due vasche circolari rivestite in cocciopesto e forse adatte alla produzione del garum avvalora l’ipotesi che essa potesse essere di ausilio alla nutrizione del personale del faro. Anche in questo caso la datazione sembra essere III-IV secolo d.C. SCHEDA 6 APOLLONIA (Marsa Susa, Libia) Provincia: Cyrenaica

273

Herodian. IV, 8. Amm. XXIV, II, 7. 275 GHEDINI 1984, p. 76. 276 Il Picard, ad esempio, sostiene che il Trofeo delle Alpi a la Turbie, in Francia, sia stato utilizzato anche come faro, cfr. PICARD 1957, p. 300. L’altezza del monumento annulla però questa ipotesi perché una torre di segnalazione posta così in alto sarebbe stata di difficile visibilità ai naviganti. 277 BARTOCCINI 1931, p. 111. 274

La città, fondata nel 631 a.C. dai coloni di Thèra manterrà sempre il ruolo di porto della vicina Cirene, tanto da non avere

278

154

MARIMPIETRI 2008, pp. 12-13.

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO altra denominazione all’infuori di Apollonia di Cirene,279 città che da essa dista solo 15 km. Il nome di Apollonia (derivante dal dio protettore di Cirene) le viene dato intorno alla fine del II secolo a.C. La città non è situata direttamente sul mare ma ad una ventina di chilometri dalla riva. Pur essendo assai fiorente anche in età romana, è nel basso impero che Apollonia vive il suo fulgore: nel 359 d.C. le viene cambiato il nome in Sozousa, mentre è nel V secolo d.C. che diventa capitale della Lybia Superior.

Grazie al lago, infatti, la città godeva di un collegamento diretto col Nilo tramite il ramo canopico e col Mar Rosso per merito del canale di Dario, mentre il Mediterraneo sarebbe stato facilmente raggiungibile anche via terra. Le dimensioni del porto lacustre fanno immaginare che la città dovesse svolgere un ruolo fondamentale nei commerci tra Egitto e Libia.287 Non è poi da escludere che, oltre a quella di porto commerciale, Taposiris svolgesse anche la funzione di porto militare, dove potevano riparare le navi da guerra. La città viene ancora ricordata nel II d.C. dal geografo Claudio Tolomeo, ed è ancora attestata sulla Tabula Peutingeriana (segmento VII). Delle rovine rimaste in situ sono note solo il tempio di Osiride (risalente al IV a.C. e del quale rimane ben poco, ma utilizzato anche dai pellegrini che si dirigevano alla Mecca),288 e il faro, costruito su ispirazione di quello della vicina Alessandria. L’epoca di costruzione (o meglio di realizzazione) è la piena età tolemaica (III a.C.).289 La torre di Taposiris (Tav. 7, fig. 14) si erge per tre piani diseguali su una costruzione funeraria per un’altezza complessiva di 127 m, se si considera anche la base su cui poggia;290 mentre la sola torre misura 30 m.291 Essa, costruita in pietra calcarea locale, si divide in tre piani: una base quadrangolare, un secondo piano ottagonale ed un terzo di forma cilindrica che doveva ospitare la lanterna; dunque una replica perfetta del faro di Alessandria. Dalla base quadrata piccoli gradini di legno si allacciavano ad una stretta scala sul lato nord dell’ottagono che diventava a spirale nel piano cilindrico, permettendo così di accedere alla sommità della torre. Essendo il monumento costruito su una camera funeraria al centro di una necropoli, molti hanno pensato che la torre non avesse alcuna funzione se non quella decorativa.292 Tuttavia, io penso che se la torre di Abousir non avesse avuto funzione di faro, lo sconosciuto architetto del monumento si sarebbe risparmiato di costruire scale collegate tra di loro su tre piani, la cui evidente funzione era quella di condurre l’addetto in cima alla torre per accendere il fuoco che doveva guidare i naviganti che tornavano dalla Cirenaica attraverso il Lago Mareotide, le cui sponde, tra l’altro, erano assai rocciose, il che faceva risultare difficile l’attracco delle navi. E’ altresì vero che nella nostra torre sono del tutto mancanti quelle finestre che spesso vediamo rappresentate qualora venga raffigurato un faro in monete e mosaici. Tuttavia, la torre è stata restaurata agli inizi del Novecento e, in foto di repertorio, si può osservare la presenza di almeno una finestra nel primo piano (Tav. 8, fig. 15). Personalmente, ritengo ingiustificate le obiezioni di Fawzi el Fakharani che riteneva inutile l’utilizzo di un faro in un lago quando, ancora oggi, presso i laghi più importanti vengono utilizzati anche più fari per guidare il navigante nella notte.293

Il porto e il faro L’approdo (Tav.6, fig. 12) è costituito da due baie contigue, chiuse, verso il largo, da una serie di isolotti rocciosi che sono collegati alla riva tramite lingue di sabbia. La baia occidentale presenta uno stretto passaggio in direzione nord-ovest, mentre quella orientale si apre verso est. Un canale interno collega i due porti.280 Nonostante si sia parlato anche di cothon, questo termine risulta improprio perché non vi è mai stata una presenza fenicia. Il porto di Apollonia si presenta come il tipico porto greco, munito di due accessi che consentono di ovviare ai problemi che possono creare i venti provenienti da nord-est. Intorno alla metà del II secolo a.C. il semplice approdo di Apollonia diventa un porto militare e, in quanto tale, fortificato281 e abitato, come testimoniano resti di abitazioni e di installazioni portuali trovati lungo la riva. In epoca romana questa funzione decade ma, a partire dal I secolo d.C., fiorisce come porto mercantile grazie alla sua intensa attività economica che trapela anche da una notevole attività urbanistica. Il faro, di forma circolare, è stato localizzato sull’isolotto orientale (Tav. 7, fig. 13).282 Nulla di più è dato sapere sui resti del faro (possiamo solo immaginare la solita forma a piani digradanti verso l’alto, dei quali l’ultimo di forma cilindrica per poter ospitare la lanterna) per i quali andrebbe condotta una ricerca sul luogo. SCHEDA 7 TAPOSIRIS MAGNA (Abousir, Egitto) Provincia: Aegyptus Taposiris, l’odierna Abousir, è situata 45 km ad ovest di Alessandria. Il suo nome antico deriverebbe dalla parola “tomba di Osiride”: secondo le fonti anche qui Seth avrebbe sparso alcuni resti del dilaniato fratello.283 Fu fondata ancora prima dell’età ellenistica; sappiamo, infatti, da Callistene che Alessandro Magno passò di qui nel suo viaggio verso Siwa,284 ma la città ebbe il suo splendore in epoca tolemaica. Taposiris è situata tra il Mar Mediterraneo, a nord, ed il lago Mareotide, l’odierno Mayrut, a sud.

Il porto si affacciava su entrambi gli specchi d’acqua.285 Tuttavia, Strabone286 afferma che, ai suoi tempi (I a.C.-I d.C.), la città non era sull’acqua; il che farebbe pensare che il porto fosse più in direzione del Lago Mareotide che del Mediterraneo.

Inoltre, nei muri all’interno della tomba, è stato trovato un graffito (Tav. 8, fig. 16a) del tutto simile a quelli che ancora oggi si possono vedere ad Ostia Antica, che rappresenta il faro di Taposiris, indicato come tale da un’iscrizione in greco.294 Nonostante il graffito già ai primi del Novecento fosse molto rovinato, rimaneva ben visibile la parte alta della torre che recava sei merletti in orizzontale e cinque finestrelle in verticale. Thiersch, inoltre, notava come per due volte nel graffito appaia il nome Philon e afferma che la più grande differenza tra il faro di Taposiris e quello di Alessandria sta

279

287

Il porto e il faro

«Apollonia di Cirenaica» in EAA, Roma 1958, p. 483. Per una recente indagine sulla topografia di Apollonia e del suo porto LARONDE-SINTÈS 1998, pp. 301-310. 281 Sugli scavi di Apollonia si veda GRIFFITH PEDLEY 1967, pp. 141147; BACHIELLI 1998, p. 228. 282 MUCKELROY 1981, p. 174; REDDÈ-GOLVIN 2005, p. 32. 283 EMPEREUR (2) 1998, p. 224. 284 Pseudo-Callistene, Rom. Alex., 31. 285 VIVIAN 2002, p. 269. 286 Strab. XVII, 1,14; 1, 16.

BARD 1998, p. 60 VIVIAN 2002, p.270. EMPEREUR (1) 1998, p. 42. 290 BARD 1998, p. 60 291 EMPEREUR (1) 1998, p.226. 292 STUCCHI 1959, p. 23 afferma che l’Adriani propende, invece, senza alcun dubbio, per la funzione funeraria di tale edificio, che Thiersch assicurava essere un faro cfr. ADRIANI 1952, pp.137-139. 293 EL FAKHARANI 1974, p. 258. 294 THIERSCH 1909, p.50 ; BEDON 1988, p.58.

280

288 289

155

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA per la guerra contro Licinio300 e continuerà ad esserlo sino all’epoca bizantina.

nelle dimensioni del piano inferiore. L’edificio presenterebbe una parte inferiore assai più bassa rispetto a quello alessandrino, perché il segnale di fuoco aveva meno necessità di essere posto molto in alto:295 il faro di Taposiris avrebbe dovuto guidare i naviganti che provenivano dal Lago Mareotide, mentre quello di Alessandria doveva raggiungere le lontane navi che provenivano dal Mediterraneo. Infine, l’uso della sigma lunata è caratteristico del III secolo a.C. e il richiamo al faro di Alessandria che, all’epoca della sua costruzione, era l’unico ad essere definito Pharos non fa altro che consolidare la tesi che l’ignoto architetto della tomba-faro di Taposiris abbia tratto ispirazione dal celebre modello alessandrino. Infatti, già in quest’epoca si diffonde l’uso di interpretare il faro come arrivo sicuro nel porto della salvezza, concetto che sarà ancora più forte in epoca cristiana: come il faro di Alessandria avrebbe guidato il navigante alla sicura terra così quello di Taposiris avrebbe dovuto guidare il defunto nell’Aldilà sino al suo arrivo nel porto della salvezza.296 Inoltre, la replica della struttura alessandrina potrebbe suggerire che Sostrato di Cnido, architetto di Alessandria, si fosse scelto come luogo di sepoltura una tomba da lui costruita ad imitazione del monumento per cui divenne famoso, ma è solo una suggestione. SCHEDA 8 ALEXANDREIA (Alessandria Iskenderijeh, Egitto) Provincia: Aegyptus

Secondo un epigramma di Posidippo di Pella,301 vissuto nel III secolo a.C., la costruzione della mirabile torre farea, voluta da Tolomeo I Soter (305-283 a.C.), probabilmente terminata intorno al 279 a.C., sotto il regno del figlio e successore Tolomeo II Filadelfo (283-246 a.C.), fu affidata all’ingegnoso architetto Sostrato di Cnido.302 Egli posizionò il faro, che dedicò ai naviganti e agli Dei Salvatori, sulla punta nord-est dell’isola di Pharos:

‘EkkÉmym syt±qa, VÇqou sjopËm, º ðma Pqyte³, SÍsqator ñstgsem DenivÇmour JmÊdior: oÕ cÀq Ñm AÚcÌptz sjopaà oìqeor o½ Ñpà mÉsym, ÐkkÀ walaà wgk maÌkowor ÑjtÈtatai. To³ wÇqim eÕhe²Çm te jaà ëqhiom aÚheqa tÈlemeim pÌqcor ëd’×pkÇtym vaÊmet’ÐpÄ stadÊym âlati, pammÌwior dÁ ho´r Ñm jÌlati maÕtgr ëxetai Ñj joquv±r p³q lÁca jaiËlemom, jaà jem Ñp’aÕtÄ dqÇloi TaÌqou JÈqar, oÕd’çm ÐlÇqtoi Syt±qor, PqyteÕ, FgmÄr Û t¨de pkÈym303 Sappiamo da Strabone304 che l’architetto utilizzò come materiale per la costruzione della torre una pietra bianca. Plinio305 dedica al faro una breve citazione nel capitolo sul marmo, il che farebbe supporre che la pietra bianca di cui parlava il geografo greco non possa che essere quel materiale: tuttavia, recentemente, è stato ipotizzato da Grimm306 che si trattasse di pietra calcarea. L’archeologo francese Empereur, dal 1994 a capo degli scavi subacquei della città di Alessandria, afferma che si è stati troppo affrettati a credere alle parole di Plinio e ci si è soffermati troppo poco su quelle di Strabone. Lo studioso francese, anche in base ai ritrovamenti avvenuti durante scavi subacquei da lui stesso effettuati, afferma che il faro sarebbe stato realizzato con una pietra calcarea locale, mentre per i blocchi intagliati di una certa dimensione, difficilmente realizzabili con quel materiale, si sarebbe fatto ricorso al granito di Assuan.307 Questa stessa alternanza di materiali si ritrova anche nella fortezza mammalucca del sultano

d’Egitto,

Alessandria, situata nel Basso Egitto, fu fondata forse da Alessandro Magno nel 332 a.C. durante il suo breve soggiorno in Egitto e servì per assicurare il dominio greco sul Nilo. La città, collocata sulla lingua di terra che separa il Lago Mareotide (Mayrut) dal Mediterraneo, fu costruita con schema ippodameo. L’apogeo della città avvenne sotto i Tolomei che l’abbellirono con imponenti edifici, tra i quali il celebre faro, voluto da Tolomeo I Sotèr ma realizzato solo dal figlio Tolomeo Filadelfo. Venne conquistata nel 642 d.C. dagli Arabi sotto la guida di Amr ibn al-As; non venne però meno il ruolo della città portuale che ricavava grande reddito prelevando denaro su ogni transizione commerciale e su ogni negozio della città. Le fonti scritte raccontano che, dopo la conquista, gli Arabi eressero una moschea all’interno del faro. La grande potenza commerciale di Alessandria ebbe il suo apogeo nel periodo mamelucco quando nel suo porto si concentravano tutti i prodotti provenienti dal Mar Rosso e diretti al Mediterraneo. Nel 1477 il sultano Qaitbey costruì l’omonimo forte su quel che rimaneva del faro.297

300

Zos. II, 22. WEIL 1879 pp. 28-33; BERNARD 1966, p.102 ; GUTZWILLER 2005, pp. 105-107. La testimonianza di Posidippo è la fonte più antica sino ad oggi in nostro possesso. Il papiro fu trovato nel 1879 nei pressi del Serapeum di Menfi, cfr. GIORGETTI 1977, pp. 246-252; THOMPSON 1987, pp. 105-121. 302 Secondo BARBAGLI 2003, p. 110, Sostrato non fu l’architetto del faro, ma un importante personaggio della corte tolemaica, il cui solo merito sarebbe stato quello di finanziare e dedicare l’opera; ciò è detto sulla base del fatto che solo Strab. XVII, 1,6 parla di lui come dell’architetto dell’opera mentre le altri fonti lo citano come “autore”. Io ritengo, viceversa, non solo che abbia provveduto, almeno in parte, a finanziare la costruzione del monumento, ma anche che sia stato lui, in prima persona a realizzare l’edificio. 303 Poseidippos, Epigramm, 115, ed. Oscar Mondadori 2008, tuttavia si preferisce riportare la prima traduzione effettuata da WEIL 1879, p. 28: “Per la salvezza dei Greci, questa torre che veglia su Faro o Proteo, Signore di questi luoghi, fu eretta da Sostrato, Cnido, figlio di Dexiphanes. In Egitto, non ci sono picchi di montagne, come nelle isole: ma in basso, vicino al bordo delle acque si estende la riva dove vengono a ormeggiarsi le navi. Per questa ragione svetta dritta e alta nell’aria questa torre che su rocce inabbordabili appariva durante il giorno; di notte il marinaio navigando con l’onda che lo sospinge, vedrà dal sommo della torre brillare una grande fiamma, e, senza dubbio, egli correrà dritto verso il corno del Toro e non mancherà del soccorso di Zeus Salvatore, o Proteo ospitale, dirigendosi da questa parte”. PICARD 1976. 304 Strab. XVII, 1,8 p. 15. 305 Plin. nat. XXXVI, 83 p. 16. 306 GRIMM 1998, p. 43. 307 EMPEREUR 1998, pp. 40-64. 301

Il porto e il faro Il porto (Tav. 9, fig. 17), concepito da Alessandro Magno o, più probabilmente, da Demetrio Falereo, presentava un lungo ponte, chiamato Heptastadion, che collegava la città all’isola di Faro sulla quale venne eretta l’omonima torre. La lunga diga, creata forse su modello di quella della colonia fenicia di Tiro, divideva il porto occidentale (Eunosto) da quello orientale (Grande Porto).298 L’isola di Faro con la sua torre dominava proprio il Grande Porto che, nel corso del III a.C., fu ampliato a tal punto da permettere l’accesso senza pericolo a navi di qualsiasi dimensioni e, nello stesso porto, era anche un tempio dedicato ad Afrodite o, più probabilmente, ad Isis Pharìa protettrice dei naviganti.299 Il porto, almeno militarmente, fu attivo sino al 324 d.C. quando fornì alcune navi

295

THIERSCH 1909, p. 51. Si veda a riguardo il cap. 4. 297 «Alexandreia» in Der Neue Pauly, Stuggart 1997, pp. 463-664. 298 ALLARD 1979 pp. 500-503 ; REDDÈ 1986, pp.241-244. 299 GRIMM 1998, pp. 42-3. 296

156

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO QaitBey (1477-1479, Tav. 9, fig. 18), costruita sulle rovine del faro. Ma come sia stato possibile che un sovrano di epoca tolemaica abbia potuto concedere ad un architetto di incidere il suo nome su un’opera così importante, senza obbligare quest’ultimo ad apporre sul monumento anche quello del sovrano? Empereur ha proposto di riconoscere nella dedica a Zeus Salvatore del citato papiro di Posidippo un richiamo alla figura di Tolomeo. Sostrato, dedicando la torre farea a Zeus Salvatore, l’avrebbe indirettamente dedicata a Tolomeo. Non bisogna trascurare però anche le parole di Luciano,308 il quale ci informa di come l’architetto incise le lettere che componevano il nome del sovrano in gesso (forse la pietra calcarea di cui parla Grimm) in modo tale che esse, col passare del tempo, si scrostassero per lasciare spazio a ciò che l’ingegnoso architetto aveva scritto sotto la parola Tolomeo: il suo stesso nome, Sostrato.309

Il faro iniziò ad essere celebrato iconograficamente solo nelle monete di conio domizianeo (81-96 d.C.) (Tav. 10, fig. 19).315 La sua iconografia, in quest’epoca, prevede una costruzione a due piani, nella quale una torre conica è sormontata da una statua maschile, nuda e imberbe, mentre, al piano inferiore sono rappresentati due Tritoni che suonano la buccina. L’iconografia monetale del faro rimarrà tale anche in epoca traianea (98-117 d.C.) ed adrianea (117-138 d.C.), mentre cambierà durante il regno di Antonino Pio (138-161 d.C.).316 La torre, ora, appare, come la conosciamo oggi: un edificio a tre piani, digradanti verso l’alto, in cima al quale è collocata la statua. Accanto all’edificio spicca la figura di Isis Pharìa,317 dea protettrice dei naviganti, nell’atto di tenere in mano una vela gonfia (Tav. 10, fig. 20a). Un ulteriore cambiamento iconografico si svilupperà con il regno di Commodo (180-192 d.C.),318 allorché la figura di Iside sarà sostituita da quella di una nave che si avvicina a gonfie vele alla torre farea (Tav. 10, fig. 20b). Anche in quest’ultimo caso il faro si presenta come un edificio a tre piani: quello inferiore (alto 57 m), ove era situata anche la porta d’ingresso, di forma quadrata, il secondo di forma ottagonale e con ai lati i Tritoni (alto 34 m), il terzo, una torretta di forma conica (alta 7 m), ospitava la lanterna. Sulla cupola dell’edificio era una statua bronzea maschile, nuda e forse imberbe, con in entrambe le mani oggetti di difficile interpretazione, ma su questo torneremo tra poco. Il celebre matematico e fisico greco Archimede (287-212 a.C.) avrebbe costruito uno specchio detto “ustore” o parabolico, grazie al quale, secondo la teoria delle coniche sviluppatasi nel IV a.C. in base ai lavori di Euclide, la luce della torre, anche di giorno, fosse in grado di essere proiettata sul mare.319 Detta luce, stando a quanto riporta Flavio Giuseppe,320 avrebbe raggiunto una distanza di 300 stadi (circa 53 km) per un’altezza di 180 m. Per Russo321 non si può pensare, per i motivi che vedremo tra poco, ad un valore superiore ai 100 m di altezza, distanza di massima visibilità in linea retta. Una riflessione sulla quale si può essere abbastanza sicuri, basandosi anche sulla forma cilindrica del settore che conteneva la lanterna, sta nel fatto che la lanterna o lo specchio parabolico, fossero girevoli. Sarebbe stato infatti inutile proiettare nell’orizzonte una luce fissa, di nessuna utilità per

Tornando a Plinio, nella stessa citazione, egli aggiunge preziose informazioni sul faro. Apprendiamo così che la costruzione del faro costò a Tolomeo la cifra esorbitante di 800 talenti (valore riconducibile a 20.800 kg di argento).310 Dalle parole del naturalista siamo informati anche di come la luce del faro fosse talmente potente che, non essendo essa intermittente, rischiasse di essere scambiata dai naviganti per quella di una stella. Lo stesso problema lo avrebbero avuto anche le successive torri faree costruite su modello di quella alessandrina, come ad esempio quelle di Ostia e di Ravenna. Quanto alla data precisa dell’inaugurazione le fonti sono discordanti: secondo il Suda, un lessico iconografico di epoca bizantina (X sec. d.C.), la data sarebbe il 297 a.C., mentre per lo scrittore ecclesiastico Eusebio (IV d.C.)311 si oscillerebbe tra il 283 ed il 282 a.C.. Addirittura lo storico Ammiano Marcellino (IV d.C.),312 erroneamente, affermava che la costruzione avvenne per volere e durante il regno di Cleopatra VII. Tuttavia, la famosa regina ha forse avuto a che fare con la torre farea solo in quanto ne ordinò un restauro, in seguito all’occupazione dell’isola da parte dell’esercito di Giulio Cesare. Interessante notare che nello stesso papiro che riportava l’epigramma del faro di Alessandria, dopo un breve spazio Posidippo affermava che tra la punta dell’isola di Faro e la foce di Canopo, ben visibile ai naviganti da lontano anche col mare grosso (letteralmente il poeta dice “sopra le onde”) laddove i venti dell’Africa si facevano più forti, era stato costruito dall’ammiraglio Callicrate il tempio di Arsinoe Cipride: si potrebbe pensare che esso fungesse da primo “faro” per le ore pomeridiane quando le luci della torre non erano ancora state accese, oppure che rimanesse come segnacolo di avvertenza che in quel punto i venti (soprattutto lo zefiro che arrivava dalla Sicilia) si facevano più intensi. Il tempio fu, infatti, costruito molto tempo dopo la realizzazione del faro; forse ci si era resi conto che in quel punto serviva un altro mezzo di segnalazione per evitare che il navigante non agisse con cautela.313 In un ulteriore epigramma, infatti, Posidippo avverte che grazie all’intervento di Arsinoe regina il navigante avrà serena navigazione poichè anche durante la tempesta il mare verrà spianato.314

315

BMC, ALEXANDRIA, p. 41, n° 343. THIERSCH 1909 pp.6-8, GRIMM 1998, p.46. 317 E’ quasi certo che, ancora in epoca romana, vi fosse, accanto alla celebre torre, un tempio in onore di Iside; la figura di Iside Pharia compare anche in alcuni conii della zecca alessandrina; EMPEREUR 1998, p. 87. 318 THIERSCH 1909, p.10. 319 Per le misure dei vari piani del faro e per la citazione su Archimede si consulti THIERSCH 1909. Quanto all’altezza, il viaggiatore arabo Edrisi aumenta l’altezza totale della costruzione a 166 m. E’ tuttavia probabile che egli, impressionato dalla magnificenza della costruzione, abbia esagerato. Lo stesso dicasi per quegli autori per i quali la luce avrebbe raggiunto i 150 km di distanza, notizia riportata anche da LEGER 1979, pp. 501-503. La presenza di uno specchio girevole concavo posto sulla lanterna è confermata dalle parole dell’arabo Abdul Feddal, autore del XIII d.C., al quale bisogna dare però il giusto peso. Si pensi, ad esempio, che egli riteneva il faro una costruzione cilindrica di otto piani. In questo caso è più che possibile che egli avesse visto il faro già nella sua forma di minareto, inglobato il secolo successivo nella fortezza del sultano. Si veda: THIERSCH 1909, p. 52; MANFREDINIPESCARA 1985, p. 9. 320 Ios. bell. Iud., IV, 10,5. 321 RUSSO 2001, p. 141, n. 81. Egli ottiene questa distanza in base alla regola che, citando lo stesso autore, “la distanza dell’orizzonte da un’altezza h è √2Rh, dove R è il raggio della Terra”. Non essendo il sottoscritto un matematico nè un fisico, e, quindi, non potendo entrare nel merito della questione, mi limito a riportare i risultati dell’autore, lasciando agli esperti del settore il compito di giudicare l’esattezza delle operazioni compiute da Russo. Arrotondando l’altezza del faro a 100 m, tenendo conto del dislivello sul mare, e attribuendo alla distanza il valore di 15 m, si ottiene per la distanza un valore di 49,5 m, ossia 312 stadi, misura dunque ben riconducibile alle parole di Flavio Giuseppe. 316

308

Lukian. Quomodo istoria inscribenda sit, 62. BERNARD 1966, pp. 103-104. 310 GRIMM 1998 p. 43. 311 Eus. Chron. ed. Schòene, p.118. Su entrambe le citazioni si consulti anche GRIMM 1998 p. 45. 312 Amm. XXII 16,9. 313 Poseidippos, Epigramm., 116, ed. Oscar Mondadori, Milano 2008, il tempio fu costruito in onore della sorella e moglie di Tolomeo II Filadelfo (questa parentela rinvigorisce la loro assimilazione con Iside e Osiride così come era avvenuto per Tolomeo I Sotèr e Berenice), morta nel 270 a.C., dunque almeno vent’anni dopo la costruzione del faro. 314 Poseidippos, Epigramm., 119, ed. Oscar Mondadori, Milano 2008. 309

157

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Posidippo.330 Supponiamo che prima dell’epoca romana il sistema di segnalazione funzionasse, ad Alessandria, secondo i sistemi descritti da Polieno e Polibio:331 che bisogno ci sarebbe stato di una costruzione così imponente per un tale sistema? Inoltre, in che modo la torre avrebbe potuto produrre il suo segnale luminoso, senza l’utilizzo del fuoco? Su tale problematica posso solo ipotizzare che all’inizio il faro non avesse un vero e proprio fuoco, ma che si servisse solo di quello specchio “ustore” di cui si è parlato in precedenza, oppure, cosa che ritengo più probabile, che il monumento alessandrino facesse uso di tale specchio solo di giorno, quando il fuoco non era necessario. Tuttavia, se così fosse, di notte, specialmente in caso di maltempo, non sarebbe stato facile, io credo, proiettare una luce ad una distanza di quasi 60 km senza ricorrere al fuoco (oltretutto assai dispendioso), prodotto bruciando pece, olio vegetale (o animale) e legno,332 materiali assai combustibili e dunque utilissimi a tale scopo.

tutti i naviganti che provenivano da una direzione diversa da quella della luce.322 Secondo le fonti, i racconti dei viaggiatori arabi e le ricostruzioni effettuate dai primi del Novecento fino ad oggi, l’altezza massima complessiva oscillerebbe tra i 125 e i 166 m; tuttavia di recente si è ridimensionata a 100 m. Infatti, un edificio più alto sarebbe stato scarsamente utile dal momento che una luce emessa ad un’altezza superiore sarebbe stata invisibile ai naviganti. Infine, secondo la testimonianza del XII d.C. (tra il 1115 e il 1117) del viaggiatore arabo, Abu alHaggag,323 una rampa di scale (Tav. 11, fig. 21a), sopraelevate di 15 m. s.l.m.,324 permetteva di accedere alla porta collocata al primo piano. Tutto ciò corrisponderebbe, in linea di massima, alla ricostruzione data da Thiersch agli inizi del Novecento. Egli, riporta però misure leggermente diverse rispetto a quelle fornite dalle descrizioni dei viaggiatori arabi: il primo piano sarebbe stato di 51 m, il secondo di 34 e il terzo di 26. Si tratta comunque di piccole differenze. La ricostruzione di Thiersch, infatti, può essere ancora oggi accettata come assai plausibile (Tav. 11, fig. 22a) tanto quanto la versione più moderna della Hairy (fig. 22b).325 Ad esempio, è ormai accertato che i Tritoni, fossero essi due o quattro, posti ai lati del secondo piano, all’arrivo delle navi, secondo un meccanismo non ancora del tutto chiaro, avrebbero emesso un suono simile a quello che oggi udiamo dalle navi che entrano in porto,326 suonando la buccina.327 Veitmeyer,328 la pubblicazione della cui fondamentale opera è avvenuta postuma nel 1900, afferma che nessun autore greco menziona il fuoco posto sulla sommità del faro prima del I secolo d.C.. Egli, però, essendo morto nel 1899, non avrà forse avuto il modo di studiare a fondo il citato epigramma di Posidippo (scoperto nel 1879), che menziona una luce posta sulla sommità della torre; essa non poteva che essere prodotta da un fuoco.

Torniamo ora all’architettura del faro. Prima di passare ad analizzare, brevemente, il suo interno, sarà opportuno fare luce su un ulteriore problema irrisolto dell’esterno: chi rappresenta quella figura maschile nuda posta sulla sommità del corpo cilindrico? E’ possibile definire con esattezza l’oggetto che tiene in mano? Prima di procedere alla discussione, bisognerà tener presente che il faro di Alessandria ha subìto, durante i secoli, diverse trasformazioni, oltre che dal punto di vista architettonico, credo, anche da quello iconografico.333 Senza dubbio l’ipotesi che in cima al faro vi fosse rappresentato Tolomeo II non è da scartare. Infatti, recenti ritrovamenti subacquei, dei quali riferisce Jean Yves Empereur,334 hanno riportato in luce la statua colossale di un Tolomeo, rappresentato come un faraone, che si va ad aggiungere all’altrettanto colossale statua di Iside trovata nel 1962.335 Quest’ultima si presentava rotta alle ginocchia per un’altezza di oltre sette metri.336 In base a questi ritrovamenti si è potuto ipotizzare che le due statue colossali rappresentassero Tolomeo II e la sua sposa divinizzati, ma, mancando un’iscrizione che sia in grado di renderci sicuri di tale attribuzione, si potrebbe pensare anche a Tolomeo I e Berenice. In entrambi i casi risulta comunque chiaro il significato politico di mettere, all’entrata in città (quindi davanti al faro) l’immagine della coppia regale divinizzata, come emblema della dinastia che aveva voluto

Riprendendo quanto detto dal Thiersch, Forbes,329 a metà degli anni Sessanta, affermava che la torre di Alessandria sarebbe divenuta un vero e proprio faro solo tra il 45 e il 61 d.C.. Entrambi, però, dimenticano tutte le fonti che hanno parlato del segnale luminoso del faro prima di Plinio, in primis

322

RUSSO 2001, pp. 142-143. EMPEREUR 1998, pp. 104-105; VRETTOS 2001. 324 KÖSTER 1923, p. 199. L’autore si basa probabilmente sulla descrizione fornita dall’arabo Abdoul Haggag; BERNARD 1966, p. 106107. Anche in questo caso Russo non è d’accordo e ridimensiona l’altezza della rampa sul mare a soli 5 m. Per le altre descrizioni arabe del faro di Alessandria si veda PALACIOS 1933, pp. 241-292. 325 L’ottima ricostruzione dello studioso tedesco è basata, soprattutto, sulla sua visita personale alla torre farea di Taposiris Magna (scheda 7), presso Abousir, situata a 40 km da Alessandria. Essa, in parte ancora oggi visibile, è, infatti, considerata la prima replica del faro di Alessandria. 326 GRIMM 1998, p. 43. 327 VEITMEYER 1900, p. 15; THIERSCH 1909, p. 3; NEUBURGER 1919, p. 249; questi ultimi si basano sulle parole di Flavio Giuseppe e Solino, si veda pertanto il cap. 2 sulle fonti. Tuttavia, sappiamo che, in Italia e in Francia, ancora agli inizi del Novecento, la luce dei fari era fornita tramite il sistema detto becco Carcel, stabilito da Dumas e Regnault: l’intensità luminosa di una lampada con becco del diametro di 18 mm brucia 42 gr. di olio di colza all’ora con una fiamma che raggiunge un’altezza di 40 m. Dunque ancora si usava olio vegetale. Si veda per dette informazioni: CATTOLICA-LURIA 1916, pp. 14-18. 328 VEITMEYER 1900, p. 10 afferma che anche Cesare e Strabone non menzionano propriamente il fuoco, e sarebbe stato Plinio, alla metà del I sec. d.C., il primo autore latino a fare un breve accenno al fuoco. E’ questa la ragione per cui si è ipotizzato una prima presenza di uno specchio ustore o riflettore che non riflettesse la luce del fuoco, bensì quella del Sole o della Luna. Questa teoria è, a mio avvio, poco plausibile, in quanto non penso che il faro avrebbe potuto permettersi di mandare uno scarso segnale luminoso nelle giornate di pioggia o nebbia. 329 FORBES 1966, p. 183. 323

330 Non si ha certo intenzione in questa sede di analizzare nuovamente tutte le fonti che citano il segnale luminoso del faro di Alessandria. Si rimanda quindi al capitolo sulle fonti, pur riconoscendo che esse parlano per lo più di luce o segnale luminoso che non propriamente di fuoco. Scopo del Veitmeyer era anche confutare quegli studiosi che affermavano che il faro fosse nato come fortezza e non come torre farea. Non entrando nei particolari, mi importa dire che il faro, specialmente nei primi e negli ultimi anni della sua vita, aveva molteplici funzioni: faro, torre di avvistamento e fortezza. 331 Si veda il capitolo sulla portata luminosa dei fari, cap. 5, pp. 143144. 332 KÖSTER 1923 , p. 199; THIERSCH 1909, pp. 3-4. 333 Se i cambiamenti dal punto di vista architettonico saranno stati dovuti soprattutto a fattori naturali (maremoti e terremoti che portarono sino alla sua scomparsa nel XIV sec. d.C.), le trasformazioni iconografiche sono dipese soprattutto dal regime regnante. Il programma politico alessandrino sarà cambiato anche in base al regnante di turno: quello del sovrano ellenistico Tolomeo non sarà certo stato uguale a quello dell’imperatore romano Augusto, il cui disegno politico si sarà differenziato, a sua volta, da quello di Antonino Pio, al quale, secondo le fonti, si deve una sistematica ricostruzione del monumento, fino ad arrivare ai programmi iconografici del bizantino Teodosio e, infine, del persiano Corsoe II. 334 EMPEREUR 1998, pp. 88-93. 335 Sulle sculture di epoca tolemaica trovate nelle acque alessandrine GODDIO-CLAUSS 2006, pp. 54-57; 164-171. 336 BARBAGLI 2003, p. 217.

158

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO realizzare quel dispendioso monumento. Agli inizi del Novecento Thiersch337 riconosceva nella statua alla sommità del monumento la figura di Poseidone che regge il tridente, il che risulterebbe estremamente logico essendo chiaro il collegamento tra il faro ed il mare. Tuttavia, la dedica di Sostrato agli “Dèi Salvatori” ha fatto spesso pensare, anche in tempi recenti,338 ai Dioscuri, dèi protettori del mare e dei naviganti. Ciò risulta però impensabile, anche per motivi di spazio. Sarebbe stato difficile e, credo, avrebbe messo seriamente a rischio la invece ben nota stabilità dell’edificio, porre una coppia di statue sulla sommità del faro. E’ forse più saggio ritenere che la statua dei Dioscuri potesse essere presente, ma all’interno dell’edificio. L’epigramma di Posidippo è dedicato a Zeus Salvatore, dunque alcuni studiosi hanno ipotizzato che la statua rappresentasse Zeus con in mano il fulmine (o una lunga torcia su cui brillava una fiaccola) oppure un Tolomeo divinizzato rappresentato come Zeus o Serapide. Credo di poter scartare quest’ultima ipotesi a favore della teoria dell’Empereur che immagina alla base dell’edificio le due state divinizzate della coppia reale. Una ripetizione in cima al faro, a mio avviso, non avrebbe avuto alcun senso. La Hairy (Tav. 11 fig. 22b) ha recentemente ipotizzato, e credo sia questa la strada da seguire, che la dedica di Posidippo agli Dèi Salvatori facesse riferimento a Tolomeo e Berenice divinizzati.339 Negli anni Sessanta del Novecento340 si riconosceva nella statua la figura di Tolomeo I, per così dire, titolare del faro. Andrà però notato che nelle rappresentazioni numismatiche, almeno, da Domiziano a Commodo l’iconografia della statua non cambia. Ritengo dunque improbabile che sulla sommità vi fosse rappresentato un Tolomeo, se non in forma divinizzata, il che ho escluso per i motivi detti. Come avrebbe un imperatore romano come Augusto, ad esempio, potuto tollerare che su un monumento di una città da lui conquistata troneggiasse la figura di un sovrano orientale? Sarebbe stato soddisfatto Antonino Pio, dopo aver speso chissà quanto denaro per restaurare il faro, che il merito fosse stato attribuito a un Tolomeo? E’ più probabile che essi, a ricordo della dinastia precedente, abbiano lasciato le due statue colossali di un Tolomeo e della sua sposa divinizzati, in quanto meno riconoscibili come sovrani ellenistici, seppur essi fossero stati alleati dei Romani.

identificare con Poseidone in quanto l’oggetto che porta sembra essere riconducibile ad un remo;343 tuttavia, per il Picard 344si tratterebbe di un Tolomeo eroizzato che regge una lancia. L’ipotesi del Picard si basa soprattutto sul fatto che la figura maschile sembrerebbe imberbe, e tale rappresentazione per Poseidone in epoca ellenistica è rarissima. Se per il Gabriel si poteva pensare a qualcosa di simile alla colossale statua di Helios, traendo forse ispirazione dal Colosso di Rodi, il Seyrig,345dopo aver pensato al remo, ha anche proposto che l’oggetto si possa anche interpretare come un timone e che quindi nella divinità andasse riconosciuta Tyche Poliade.346 Un intaglio in vetro (Tav. 12, fig. 23b) del I sec. a.C. mostra sulla sommità del faro la statua di un uomo nudo che tiene una specie di lancia nella sinistra e un oggetto circolare, forse una patera, nella mano destra.347 L’edificio presenta da un lato la figura di Isis Pharia nell’atto di reggere una vela gonfia, dall’altra Poseidone con un tridente, realizzato in maniera assai diversa dalla lancia della statua e quindi con esso difficilmente confondibile. Queste due figure di divinità potrebbero anche alludere alla assai probabile presenza di due templi ad essi dedicati nei pressi del faro. Se così fosse non avrebbe, forse, avuto molto senso che una delle due divinità fosse rappresentata nuovamente sulla sommità del faro. Pertanto, si potrebbe avvalorare l’ipotesi di Zeus o Helios. A mio avviso, se anche Helios potrebbe ben associarsi con la luce “quasi solare” che il faro era in grado di produrre anche di notte, la dedica di Posidippo, non dimentichiamolo, contemporaneo del faro, a Zeus Salvatore mi farebbe propendere per un’identificazione della statua con la massima divinità. Potrebbe anche darsi che l’autore dell’intaglio avesse visto il faro solo da lontano e abbia confuso il fulmine di Zeus con una lancia, oppure che non abbia mai visto l’edificio ed abbia travisato le parole di qualcuno che gli ha raccontato come era fatto, ma entrambe rimangono solo suggestioni. Restano tre documenti da analizzare. Il primo di essi è un testo del V sec. d.C. che menziona un restauro bizantino del faro, compiuto sotto il regno di Anastasio I, da un certo Ammonios, e parla esplicitamente della statua di Poseidone.348 Resta da analizzare il mosaico giustinianeo (Tav. 12, fig. 24) di Gasr Elbia (Qasr-elLibya)349 datato al 539 d.C., dunque al VI d.C., epoca in cui l’Egitto è ormai completamente cristianizzato. In esso vediamo il faro di Alessandria, ben riconoscibile grazie ad un’iscrizione che lo identifica, come un edificio a due piani, entrambi quadrati e merlati. Su di un lato in cima al secondo piano è una cupola sferica, sulla quale insiste un oggetto cilindrico tenuto in mano da una figura maschile imberbe nuda e col capo radiato. Oltre ad Helios, essendo in epoca giustinianea, e quindi cristiana, si potrebbe pensare ad una figura riconducibile a Cristo-Helios.350 Penso sia evidente che il mosaico riproduca l’aspetto del faro di Alessandria quasi trasformato in fortezza: il tema del faro appare, infatti, già nel primo Cristianesimo, come

Nel 1937 fu scoperto a Bègram, a nord di Kabùl, in Afghanistan, un vaso in vetro che riproduceva il faro di Alessandria, proponendo un’immagine un poco ingrandita della statua che era posta sulla sua sommità (Tav. 12, fig. 23a). In essa la struttura del faro è semplificata in una torre a due piani, ma la presenza dei Tritoni rende l’edificio riconducibile al monumento alessandrino.341 Si tratta probabilmente di un ricordo, si potrebbe definire un souvenir,342 databile al II sec. a.C., che un “turista” greco aveva acquistato ad Alessandria. In esso la statua posta sulla sommità del faro si potrebbe 337

THIERSCH 1909, p. 3. MANFREDINI-PESCARA 1985, p. 8. Certo non vuole questa essere una fonte attendibile, ma solo un esempio di come sino a qualche anno fa si pensasse ancora ai Dioscuri per il ruolo della statua posta alla sommità della torre. 339 HAIRY 2005, p. 31. L’archeologa e architetto francese propende per una funzione anche funeraria del faro non solo per la similitudine con il noto faro-sepolcro di Taposiris, ma anche e soprattutto per l’utilizzo del granito rosa, normalmente impiegato negli edifici a carattere funerario dedicati ad Osiride. 340 CASSON 1964, p. 180. 341 PICARD 1976, pp. 68-71. 342 Souvenirs di questo tipo erano molto frequenti nel mondo antico. Essi sono assimilabili a quegli oggetti come le piccole “torri di Pisa” o altre riproduzioni di simili monumenti che oggi invadono le città d’arte. Per il mondo antico si pensi anche alla lucerna in forma di faro, trovata a Libarna e oggi conservata nei depositi del Museo di Antichità di Torino, CARDUCCI 1949, p. 68. 338

343

EMPEREUR 1998, p. 50. PICARD 1976, p. 70. 345 SEYRIG 1941 p. 262, n. 2. 346 Per entrambe le citazioni si veda PICARD 1976, pp. 74-95 A mio avviso è evidente che la statua rappresentata è maschile e non femminile, risulta dunque errata l’interpretazione come Tyche Poliade. 347 EMPEREUR 1998, p. 50. 348 EMPEREUR 1998, p. 50. Visto che si tratta di un restauro è possibile che l’ignoto autore del testo fosse un funzionario che aveva assistito direttamente ai lavori. Egli avrebbe dunque avuto modo di vedere personalmente la statua, fornendo su essa precise informazioni,certo si parla di un periodo piuttosto tardo, ed essa potrebbe essere stata nel frattempo cambiata. 349 Per tutte le notizie inerenti a questo mosaico si veda: GIORGETTI 1977, pp. 254-261. 350 GUARDUCCI 1975, pp. 659-686, tavv. I-II. 344

159

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA simbolo divino di luce che attira e rassicura,351 motivo per cui si è pensato, più volte, che i campanili delle chiese e i minareti delle moschee fossero sorti su antichi fari o sul loro modello architettonico (capitolo 6).

meraviglie del mondo antico, nascerà il falso mito del faro di Alessandria, inteso come una spaventosa torre circolare che poteva avere sino ad undici piani (Tav. 14, fig. 27) che si assottigliavano sempre più sino al tremendo fuoco posto in cima ad esso. Nel XVIII secolo Montfaucon358 dirà che il faro di Alessandria era del tutto simile alla Torre di Babele (Tav. 14, fig. 28), divisa in otto torri, poste una sopra all’altra.

Il Giorgetti riconosce nella figura divina Cristo, con la spada puntata, egli dice, “su uno sconcertante oggetto rotondeggiante”, per il quale propone un orologio solare,352 inteso nel significato didascalico che vede nel Sole Cristo e nel Tempo, scandito dall’orologio, la Salvezza. Non bisogna, tuttavia, farsi prendere la mano considerando che il riquadro con la rappresentazione del faro è solo uno dei numerosi quadri che compongono il mosaico libico. Inoltre, la rappresentazione di Cristo su un monumento pagano sembra discutibile, anche perché tutti gli altri riquadri del mosaico non presentano temi cristiani.

Rimangono da affrontare due problemi, ma, non volendo sottrarre troppo spazio alla trattazione di altri fari, forse meno noti ma non meno importanti, vi si accennerà brevemente. Siamo quasi sicuri della presenza, all’interno del faro, di una scala tortile, accessibile anche agli animali, assai simile a quella della “Torre Tonda” (1637-1642)359 di Copenhagen,360 che avrebbe condotto, per due piani, alla piattaforma che ospitava la lanterna. Quanto all’arredo interno siamo sicuri che fossero presenti, oltre alla suddetta scala tortile, anche volte nonchè camere supplementari dove alloggiavano soldati, addetti al controllo e alla sicurezza e funzionari.361

Sotto il regno di Anastasio il faro di Alessandria venne restaurato e sulla sua sommità vi fu probabilmente una statua di Poseidone, come ricorda un epigramma dell’Antologia Palatina:

E’ infatti improbabile che una struttura così imponente come il faro di Alessandria potesse essere abbandonata a se stessa: oltre ai soldati, all’interno dell’edificio, saranno stati presenti alcuni funzionari amministrativi, schiavi o liberti addetti allo smistamento delle merci tramite la rampa posta all’esterno del primo piano e una o più persone, il cui compito era quello di far brillare il segnale luminoso giorno e notte. Di tutti questi “lavoratori” non vi è alcuna traccia, eccezion fatta per un tale Marco Aurelio Fileto, liberto, amministratore del faro, conosciuto tramite un’iscrizione funeraria, databile tra il II e il III sec. d.C., trovata a Roma e conservata al Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Napoli, che recita:

"Sono una torre, ai naviganti marittimi reco soccorso, accendendo quel fuoco del dio Poseidone che salva” 353 L’ultimo documento iconografico che intendo analizzare risale circa al 1200 ed è oggi conservato nella cappella Zen, sita nel Battistero della chiesa di San Marco a Venezia (Tav. 13, fig. 25). Si tratta di un mosaico bizantino che presenta il viaggio dell’evangelista San Marco ad Alessandria: accanto alla barca sulla quale è San Marco appare il faro di Alessandria, nuovamente a tre piani, ma privo di alcuna statua sulla cupola. Dunque, il faro di Alessandria, anche dopo il suo crollo, non cessò mai di attirare l’attenzione dei visitatori e di identificarsi con la stessa città se, ancora nel XIV secolo d.C., Paolo Veneziano nella celebre Pala di San Marco a Venezia per fare capire che il Santo è giunto nel porto della città si limita a rappresentarne il faro (fig. 52).

D(is) M(anibus) M(arcus) Aur(elius), Aug(usti) lib(ertus), Philetus, pr(a)epositus unctor(um) et procur(ator) fari Alexan driae ad Aegyptum, sibi et Phileto f(ilio) et Tyche coniugi sui et lib(ertis) lib(ertabusque) poster(is)q(ue) eorum 362

Sarà opportuno notare come sulla Tabula Peutingeriana354 (Tav. 13, fig. 26) il faro risulti un edificio a tre piani, due quadrati e l’ultimo di forma cilindrica, in cima al quale brilla il fuoco ma non vi è alcuna statua. Dunque, nella Tabula troviamo un edificio assai più schematico di quello che è rappresentato nelle emissioni numismatiche ancora durante il regno di Commodo:355 una torre a piani digradanti verso l’alto nella quale sono bene evidenti sia i Tritoni angolari che la statua sulla sommità, entrambi mancanti nella celebre mappa romana. Seguirono i più svariati resoconti dei viaggiatori arabi che ci hanno lasciato anche molti disegni del faro, quasi sempre privi di una statua in sommità. Nell’estate del 1303, in seguito ad un terribile terremoto, il faro crollò. Fu allora che il sultano mammalucco Qaitbey decise di realizzare la sua fortezza, inglobando in essa ciò che era rimasto della torre,356 anche se nel 1326 Ibn Battŭta dichiara di aver visto personalmente una facciata del faro diruta.357 Dal Rinascimento, quando anche il monumento alessandrino venne annoverato tra le sette

Vista la datazione si potrebbe pensare ad una qualifica avvenuta al tempo del restauro di Antonino Pio; ma è più probabile pensare che tale funzione esistesse sin dall’epoca ellenistica, e che l’iscrizione funeraria riportata sia la sola pervenutaci. Tuttavia, Ibn Battŭta, nella descrizione del suo viaggio al faro, avvenuta nel 1326, quando stando alle fonti la torre farea doveva essere ormai crollata, dice che al suo interno vi era una stanza per il custode. Per concludere, vediamo nel dettaglio la sua descrizione nella traduzione di Francesco Gabrieli: “Mi recai in questo viaggio a vedere il faro, di cui trovai uno dei lati in rovina. Si tratta di una costruzione quadrata, che si eleva alta verso il cielo. La porta è sopraelevata dal suolo, e ha di fronte un altro edifizio della stessa altezza; tra i due sono 358

MONTFAUCON 1749, p. V. MANETTI 1990, p. 37: “la Torre Rotonda, in Kǿbmagergade, fu eretta per volere di Cristiano IV per essere l’osservatorio astronomico dell’Università della capitale, dunque come il faro serviva per osservare”. 360 KÖSTER 1923, p. 199. 361 GRIMM 1998, p. 43. 362 CIL. VI, 8582; ILS 1576. FRANZOT 1999, p. 71: “Agli Dei Mani. Marco Aurelio Fileto, liberto d’Augusto, sovrintendente dei calafati (addetti all’impermeabilizzazione delle navi, n.d.a.) e amministratore del faro di Alessandria in Egitto, (ha dedicato) a sé e al figlio Fileto e a Tyche sua moglie e ai liberti e liberte e ai posteri loro” (Trad. FRANZOT 1999). 359

351

GIORGETTI 1977 p. 254. GOODCHILD 1961, pp. 218-223. 353 Anth. Pal., 674. 354 La Tabula Peutingeriana, come noto risale al XII-XIII secolo, e si baserebbe su un’originale del III-II a.C. poi rielaborato nel IV d.C., vista la presenza della città di Costantinopoli. 355 Sulla rappresentazione del faro nelle emissioni numismatiche GIARDINA 2007, pp. 145-160. 356 Si vedano a tal proposito le opere già citate di THIERSCH 1909 ed EMPEREUR 1998 a, b. 357 ANOUAR TAHER 1998, p. 55. 352

160

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO collocate delle tavole di legno per cui si accede alla porta del faro, il quale, ove vengano ritirate queste tavole, è inaccessibile. All’interno dell’entrata c’è un ambiente ove sta il custode del faro e nel resto dell’edifizio molti altri locali. Il passaggio per cui si entra è largo nove palmi, il muro stesso è largo dieci, e la larghezza del faro su ognuno dei quattro lati è di centoquaranta palmi. Sorge esso su un alto colle, e dista dalla città una parasanga, per una lingua di terra circondata per tre lati dal mare, il quale giunge alle mura della città. Così al Faro si può accedere solo per terra dalla città stessa...Mi recai ancora a visitare il faro al mio ritorno nel Maghrib l’anno 750 (1349), e lo trovai in piena rovina, tanto che non si poteva né più entrarvi né salire fino alla porta. Malik an-Nasir, che Iddio ne abbia misericordia, aveva intrapreso la costruzione di un altro faro uguale di fronte a questo, che la morte poi gli impedì di portare a termine”363

I Tritoni posti all’esterno del secondo piano, in posizione simmetrica, raffigurati nell’atto di suonare il corno, non erano solo decorativi, ma servivano a segnalare alle navi l’entrata del porto di Alessandria. Quanto alla luce emessa dal faro, posta nel terzo piano cilindrico dell’edificio, circondato da colonne e che, stando alle parole di Flavio Giuseppe, raggiungeva una distanza di oltre 50 km ed un’altezza di quasi 100 m, poteva essere in un primo tempo prodotta da uno specchio girevole concavo e con un foro al centro posto sulla lanterna, sul quale era proiettata la luce emessa dal fuoco. Il fuoco era ottenuto tramite la combustione di pece e olio vegetale o animale, secondo un sistema che perdurerà sino agli inizi del Novecento. Nell’interno, sicuramente ornato di statue, tra le quali non dovevano mancare quelle dei Dioscuri, erano presenti stanze abitabili per soldati, liberti e schiavi, addetti alle più svariate funzioni, tra cui forse, alla base, anche un locale dove si vendevano “ricordi” come il vaso di Bègram o la lucerna in bronzo di Libarna, che, tuttavia, sembra più simile al faro di Gesoriacum. In ausilio a queste interpretazioni sembra venire il recentissimo ritrovamento nelle acque del porto Eunostos di quello che gli archeologi hanno interpretato come il basamento del faro di Alessandria.366

Conclusioni e problematiche Tolomeo Filadelfo pose davanti al faro due colossali statue della coppia regale, regnante o precedente, divinizzata in forma di Osiride ed Iside. L’altezza complessiva dell’edificio, che sino a poco tempo fa era ritenuta tra i 130 e i 165 m, è stata ridimensionata tra i 100 e i 110 m, se si tiene conto anche dell’altezza della rampa di scala posta esternamente. Un crollo del terzo piano sembrerebbe attestato tra V e VII d.C.,364 ma è più ipotizzabile che il piano non sia crollato, altrimenti sarebbero caduti anche gli altri due. Forse il terzo piano è semplicemente stato eliminato in quel periodo (una testimonianza potrebbe essere il mosaico di Gasr Elbia) per poi essere nuovamente aggiunto in epoca più tarda, magari nel XIII secolo, se prendiamo per attendibile il mosaico della cappella Zen nel Battistero di San Marco a Venezia. Verso la fine del XIII sec. d.C., stando alle ricostruzioni di Thiersch, il terzo piano fu definitivamente eliminato. L’8 agosto del 1303 (mese fausto per i terremoti, si pensi anche a quello di Pompei del 79 d.C.!) il faro crollò definitivamente e ciò che ne rimase fu inglobato, sotto forma di minareto, dal sultano QaitBey nell’omonima fortezza costruita sull’isola di Faro. Quanto alla statua posta sulla sommità dell’edificio, penso, sulla base di quanto analizzato, che essa dovesse rappresentare Poseidone con tridente e patera. Il fatto che sulle monete la statua sia raffigurata imberbe, potrebbe essere dovuto al fatto che non era ben visibile ogni particolare di una statua posta ad una così elevata altezza. All’epoca della conquista romana dell’Egitto (31 a.C.)365 la statua posta in cima alla torre, forse anche corrosa dal clima marino, sebbene essa fosse ad un’altezza notevole, avrà necessitato di un restauro: la statua avrebbe potuto facilmente essere trasformata in un imperatore divinizzato con la semplice sostituzione della testa; tuttavia, io ritengo che sia rimasta una statua di Poseidone. Fu probabilmente in epoca cristiana, forse dopo i restauri di Anastasio I tra fine V e inizio VI d.C., che la statua, ancora una volta bisognosa di un restauro, fu forse sostituita con quella di un Helios, facilmente associabile alla figura di Cristo, come compare nel mosaico giustinianeo di Gasr Elbia per poi essere tolta definitivamente nel XIII secolo.

SCHEDA 9 QÂNI (Bi’r’Ali, Yemen) Provincia: Arabia Felix Sulla costa del golfo di Aden, 20 km a occidente di al-Mulakala, era l’antica città di Qâni, oggi Bi’r’Ali. Fin dalle sue origini il sito doveva essere considerato come uno dei principali centri di rifornimento di incenso della zona. Le principali fonti per il sito sono il Periplo del Mar Eritreo, celebre opera anonima del I secolo d.C., che cita i due grandi porti di Muzi e di Qâni, ed alcune fonti sudarabiche ascrivibili al III-IV d.C..367 L’area della città (Tav. 15, fig. 29) si divide tra bassa, un tell quasi rettangolare, e alta, una sorta di cittadella. Interessante notare che non sono state trovate tracce di mura intorno alla città. Poco si sa della primitiva storia del sito che, probabilmente, nel I secolo d.C. era un centro di rifornimento idrico con numerosi magazzini di deposito per l’incenso. Interrompendosi nel corso del VII secolo d.C. il commercio dell’incenso, ci sono buone ragioni di credere che il porto dell’odierna Bi’r’Ali sia stato abbandonato.368 Il porto e il faro L’antico porto si colloca sulla costa yemenita dell’Oceano Indiano su una penisola delimitata da due golfi, 3 km a sudovest della moderna Bi’r’Ali. Il porto terminava con un ripido massiccio roccioso chiamato Husn-al-Ghùrâb, Forte dei Corvi (Tav. 15, fig. 30).369 Il porto era, con ogni probabilità, sprovvisto di moli e di banchine e ben organizzato per il ricovero e l’ormeggio delle imbarcazioni anche grazie ad un forte-faro posto sul colle appena citato.370 Sulla vetta di Forte dei Corvi sono stati individuati i resti di quattro cisterne e di una massiccia costruzione, destinata a faro e, con ogni probabilità, collegata ad almeno una delle cisterne. I materiali trovati sono databili tra I e IV secolo d.C.; è quindi ipotizzabile che anche il nostro faro sia sorto non prima del I secolo della nostra era, laddove prima, presumibilmente, si effettuavano semplici segnalazioni con il fuoco. L’edificio era probabilmente un tempio dedicato ad una divinità locale, possiamo quindi ipotizzare un edificio simile a quei santuari

363 GABRIELI 1951, pp. 8-9. Trad. di F.Gabrieli. Probabilmente l’altro faro di cui parla l’autore arabo è quello di Taposiris Magna (si allude forse ad un restauro), situato dalla parte opposta rispetto ad Alessandria presso il Lago Mareotide. 364 La maggior parte degli autori sono concordi nel ritenere un crollo del terzo piano del celebre monumento alessandrino in quell’epoca tuttavia, se fosse crollato l’ultimo piano, sarebbe andato distrutto l’intero monumento; è dunque più ipotizzabile che si sia provveduto ad una diretta e voluta eliminazione. 365 BECHERT 1999, p. 43.

366

HAIRY 2005, pp. 27-36. CASSON 1989, DAVIDDE 1997, pp. 351-355. Per le iscrizioni BOWERSOCK 1993, pp. 3-8. 368 LIVIADOTTI 2000, p. 71. 369 SEDOV 2000. p. 235. 370 DAVIDDE-PETRIAGGI 2000, p. 241. 367

161

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA extraurbani etruschi che, come noto, avevano anche funzioni di faro tramite i fuochi che si accendevano sugli altari, come succedeva a Pyrgi.371 Il santuario era composto da tre piani di forma rettangolare e sull’ultimo doveva essere acceso il fuoco che sarebbe servito da faro ai naviganti. SCHEDA 10 CAESAREA MARITIMA Marittima, Palestina) Provincia: Iudaea

stata posta a nord. Contigue al porto erano delle costruzioni in pietra bianca tra le quali spiccava il tempio dedicato ad Augusto e Roma.380 La torre di Druso doveva assomigliare al faro di Alessandria non solo dal punto di vista architettonico, ma anche funzionale: forte e faro allo stesso tempo.381 E’ interessante notare come torri di guardia ed avvistamento fossero presenti in tutto il territorio dell’attuale Palestina, soprattutto nella zona di Malatha.382 Recentemente, invece, Geza Alföldy383 ha ipotizzato, in base ad una famosa epigrafe di Ponzio Pilato, di cui parleremo tra breve, l’esistenza di un secondo faro nella capitale erodiana.

(Cesarea

Situata sulla costa dell’odierna Palestina, a 40 km da Tel Aviv, la città (Tav. 16, fig. 31), fondata dai Fenici nel IV secolo a.C. era già nota, in età ellenistica, come Torre di Stratone.372 Con questo nome, infatti, si ritrova nei papiri dell’archivio del generale egiziano Zenone (219 a.C.), capo assistente di Apollonio, tesoriere di Tolomeo II. La città passò poi dai Tolomei ai Seleucidi, grazie alla conquista da parte di Antioco II nel 218 a.C.. Dopo il breve intervento di Pompeo che la fece governare dal tiranno ellenistico Zoilus, passò ad Antonio che la affidò a Cleopatra.373 Infine, dopo la sconfitta di quest’ultimo ad Azio, nel 12 a.C., divenuta città romana, fu affidata da Augusto ad Erode il Grande (40-4 a.C.) che, in suo onore, la chiamò Caesarea.374 La città fu la base delle operazioni romane durante la guerra giudaica ed è qui che, nel 69 d.C., Vespasiano, che l’anno successivo la elevò al rango di colonia,375 venne acclamato imperatore.376 Dopo alterne vicende, nel 639 d.C. Caesarea fu conquistata dagli Arabi. Nel 1101 la flotta genovese guidata da Baldovino sterminò centinaia di uomini cingendo d’assedio la città. Nel 1187 la città venne presa dal Saladino e nel 1251 riconquistata dai francesi e cinta di mura per volere di Luigi XI. Nel 1265 il sultano mamelucco Baybars distrusse la città per privare i crociati di un ottimo punto di penetrazione in Terrasanta. Caesarea si riprese solo nell’Ottocento quando nella città furono inviate famiglie bosniache che abbandonarono il sito nel 1848. I lavori nella città sarebbero ripresi solo nel 1940 grazie al kibbutz Sdot Yam.

Andando con ordine, è però il Druseion384 il più probabile candidato al ruolo di faro di Caesarea Maritima. Stando, infatti, alle descrizioni di Flavio Giuseppe, che però non parla mai di una funzione farea delle tre torri, la torre di Druso era quella più alta e più bella, ed è proprio in virtù di questa ragione che il Vann ha supposto che fosse essa a svolgere la funzione di faro della città. Sul finire degli Anni Ottanta del secolo scorso, Hoelfelder385 ha tentato una suggestiva ricostruzione del porto di Erode e del suo faro (Tav. 16, fig. 32): due torri, di dimensioni minori rispetto a quella di Druso, erano collocate parallelamente all’entrata del porto, su di esse, colonne sormontate da statue. Dietro a quella in onore di Tiberio era la torre di Druso, realizzata sul modello del faro di Alessandria con funzione di faro e fortezza. Essa presentava una massiccia base sulla quale insistevano tre piani, il primo quadrato, il secondo circolare e il terzo, quello della lanterna, cilindrico; al di sopra si innalzava una statua virile. Nel 1990, durante un’intensa campagna di scavo nell’area K2 del porto di Caesarea, una violenta tempesta ebbe il merito di rimuovere oltre un metro di sabbia dal porto, lasciando intravedere lo spigolo nord di un lungo e massiccio masso (circoletto nero, Tav. 16, fig. 31), probabilmente il corpo della torre nota come Druseion, esattamente a sud delle torri menzionate da Flavio Giuseppe. Quella che oggi appare come la base della torre si presentava come una ben conservata piattaforma di calcestruzzo, nella quale gli ancora numerosi legni collocati orizzontalmente dovevano costituire il sistema di rafforzamento.386

Il porto e il faro (o i fari) Il porto di Caesarea377 divenne il più importante di tutta la Giudea, della quale divenne capitale nel 44 d.C., titolo che perdette solo nel VII secolo d.C. (640 circa). Riguardo al porto siamo molto fortunati dal momento che possediamo una lunga e piuttosto precisa descrizione di Flavio Giuseppe,378 il quale affermava che l’imponente porto era addirittura più grande di quello del Pireo di Atene. Sfidando la natura, Erode calò in mare dei blocchi di pietra per costruire una sorta di fondazione sottomarina al di sopra della quale eresse una grande muraglia, metà della quale aveva funzione di frangiflutti e il resto serviva da base per il muro di pietra che correva intorno al porto e sul quale, a intervalli, erano state poste delle torri, la più alta delle quali, in tutto simile al faro di Alessandria, era stata chiamata Druseion, in onore del divo Druso, fratello di Tiberio.379 A causa del vento di bora l’imboccatura del porto, che presentava da ambo i lati tre statue colossali posizionate su colonne, era

Molte furono nei primi Anni Novanta del secolo scorso le proposte per trovare una funzione alla torre: un edificio che serviva a controllare il traffico mercantile, una massiccia torre di fortificazione all’entrata del porto, oppure un faro. Flavio Giuseppe, come ricordato, descrive tre torri, chiamate Meriamme, Ippico e Phasael. La torre di Druso è stata identificata con il nome dell’imperatore e questo tradisce l’importanza dell’edificio, la cui funzione poteva essere triplice: fortezza, magazzino per regolarizzare i commerci e faro. Il Vann, pur non sbilanciandosi sulla struttura che la tempesta invernale del 1990 ha restituito alla città erodiana, sembra essere convinto, avvalorando l’ipotesi dell’Hohlfelder, che davanti a due torri gemelle con funzione di torri costiere, ve ne fosse una più alta, più larga e più bella con la sola funzione di faro, identificabile con la torre di Druso di cui parla Giuseppe.

371

BEDON 1988, p. 54; COLONNA 2000, pp. 251-336. Stratone, in fenicio ‘Abd-Ashtart, era il re di Sidone e da lui la città prendeva nome. Il toponimo Torre avvalora l’ipotesi che già in epoca fenicia sorgesse nel suo porto una torre semaforica su modello di quelle di Cartagine e Adrumeto; per una storia della città «Caesarea, 2» in Der Neue Pauly, 2, Stuggart 1997, pp. 924-925. 373 FREEDMAN 1975, pp. 9-12. 374 Sui primi scavi della città si veda: CALDERINI 1959; ADAMESTANU ET ALII 1965. 375 Tac. Ann. II, 78. 376 CALDERINI 1959, p. 11. 377 Sul porto RABAN 1992, pp. 7-18; OLESON-BRANTON 1992, pp. 4967. 378 Ios. bell. Iud., V. 4, 3, 75. LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN 1963, pp.180-181. 379 VIERECK 1975, p. 268. 372

380

JANNI 1996, p. 350. LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN 1963, p. 268. GICHON 1974, pp. 527-542. 383 ALFÖLDY 1999, pp.85-108; ALFÖLDY 2002, pp. 132-148. 384 VANN 1992, pp. 123-139. 385 HOLFELDER 1987, pp. 262-3. La ricostruzione fu ritenuta assai valida sino al 1999, quando Alföldy propose, per la prima volta, la sua teoria. 386 VANN 1992, p. 134. Il sito del ritrovamento fu denominato area K2, differenziandolo dall’area K, dove si erano già localizzate due torri uguali tra loro. 381 382

162

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO Al contrario, Raban e Holum387 ritengono che il faro non dovesse essere posizionato all’entrata del porto, ma su una collina dove un tempo, stando al toponimo, doveva sorgere la Torre di Stratone.388 Con questa affermazione, i due studiosi avvalorano l’ipotesi che l’insediamento fosse provvisto di un faro già in epoca fenicia. Tuttavia, molti sono i casi che presentano una soluzione simile a quella proposta per Caesarea. La posizione di un faro su una collina o su una sommità è proprio di un uso assai arcaico, testimoniato, ad esempio, da un noto affresco di Stabia (Tav. 70, fig. 139) con scena portuale, forse raffigurante un porto di area flegrea.389 Qui, invece, si parla del I a.C. e l’uso di posizionare il faro all’entrata del porto era già in voga da almeno due secoli, come testimonia il porto alessandrino. Inoltre, la funzione della piccola penisola di 300 m costruita da Erode nel porto, era stata escogitata proprio per difendere il faro dalle violente azioni delle onde, creando una sorta di antemurale, come poi farà Traiano nel porto di Centumcellae. Sino alle recentissime proposte di Geza Alföldy,390 si è tentato di immaginare che forma avesse questa torre. Per fare questo si è modellato un Druseion tipo Alessandria, dunque una struttura di gusto ellenistico, e uno simile ai fari di Ostia e Dover, dunque pertinente all’età claudia. Sicuramente tutte e tre le torri costruite da Erode erano sormontate da colonne sulle quali erano statue, riconducibili forse alla famiglia dello stesso Erode e dell’Augusto di Roma imperiale.391 Veniamo ora ai più volte citati articoli di Alföldy392 che hanno dato in questi ultimi anni una svolta alle nostre conoscenze sulle strutture portuali di Caesarea. Lo studioso tedesco parte dalla famosa iscrizione di Ponzio Pilato, governatore di Giudea per Tiberio dal 26 al 36 d.C.. Questo è ciò che rimane del mutilo testo:

[---]S TIBERIÉVM [---PO]NTIVS . PILATVS [---? PRAEF]ECTVS IVDAE[A]E[---] É[---]393 L’epigrafe fu ritrovata nei pressi del teatro che, è bene dirlo, si trova a circa 1 km dal porto di Erode. E’ evidente che si tratta di qualcosa che ha a che fare con l’imperatore Tiberio. Dunque, ci si interroga se sia un tempio a lui dedicato nei pressi del teatro o se l’iscrizione faccia riferimento a un qualche atto pubblico realizzato dall’imperatore. Alcuni studiosi di storia cristiana hanno integrato la prima riga dell’iscrizione con il termine latino munus: si è dunque ipotizzato che Ponzio Pilato, governatore della Giudea, avesse istituto dei ludi gladiatorii in onore di Tiberio nel teatro di Caesarea Maritima. Tuttavia come, assai correttamente, ha notato lo stesso Alföldy nella sua più recente pubblicazione sull’argomento,394 i ludi non si svolgevano nel teatro ma nell’anfiteatro, del quale sappiamo Caesarea era provvista. Tralasciando le questioni di metrica epigrafica, per le quali rimando all’articolo di Alföldy, arriviamo alle conclusioni dell’epigrafista: convinto come Hohlfelder e Vann, che il Druseion fosse un faro, l’autore tedesco immagina che, in epoca erodiana, esistesse una più piccola fonte luminosa di entrata al porto,395 nota come Tibereium non terminata dopo che Tiberio esiliò volontariamente a Rodi. Alla morte di Erode, Ponzio Pilato ricostruì l’edificio, monumentalizzandolo, in modo da realizzare due “torri gemelle” sulla scia della passata ideologia imperiale che ricordassero due ottimi fratelli quali Druso e Tiberio, i quali, divinizzati, avrebbero ricordato i più celebri fratelli della mitologia classica, i Dioscuri Castore e Polluce. Queste divinità, come abbiamo già visto per Alessandria, proteggono i naviganti e sono quindi ben riconducibili ad una struttura farea. Dunque, nel I d.C., Caesarea Maritima avrebbe posseduto due torri costiere (quella di Ippico e Meriamme) e due fari (il Druseion e il Tibereium).396 Dunque l’iscrizione397 è la celebrazione della nuova costruzione (o del restauro) del faro noto come Tibereium, che altro non era che una depandance del Druseion: chi arrivava nella città di Erode, vedeva come prima

387

RABAN-HOLUM 1996, p. 85. Gli Autori aggiungono che, nonostante i fari di Alessandria, Ostia e Leptis Magna sorgessero all’imbocco del porto, quella posizione li rendeva piuttosto vulnerabili, mentre sulla sommità di un colle avrebbero forse svolto ancora meglio la loro funzione e sarebbero stati più protetti. Tuttavia, come notano molti studiosi e come ritengo logico, il faro non serviva solo per indicare la rotta ai naviganti, ma spesso aveva anche funzione di magazzino per carico e scarico merci. Inoltre, era necessario procacciarsi legno e tessuto animale e vegetale per far bruciare la lanterna. Dunque, esso non doveva essere collocato in posizioni disagevoli, come avveniva in epoca arcaica, e non va tralasciato il valore iconologico poiché la luce dell’edificio permetteva di vedere, anche di notte, il Palazzo Imperiale di Erode. Da un colloquio personale avvenuto al Convegno sull’Archeologia marittima dei porti, tenutosi a Trieste nel novembre 2007, ho avuto modo di scambiare alcune opinioni con il Prof. Chris Brandon, che ringrazio, il quale mi ha detto che la zona nota K2 non è più attestata come il faro di Caesarea che, invece, andrebbe ricercato più spostato verso l’interno del porto. Si dovranno dunque attendere le prossime pubblicazioni scientifiche per i nuovi dati acquisiti. 389 MARTA 1990, fig. 568. E’ stato supposto che si trattasse del porto di Neapolis, per il quale non abbiamo notizie di alcun faro, seppur esso non doveva mancare. Alcuni autori sostengono che Napoli fosse dotata di almeno tre porti e, quindi, il faro si potrebbe rintracciare anche nei dintorni della città (sulla questione del porto campano si veda NAPOLI 1959, pp. 118-134). E’ stato, infatti, anche proposto un faro collocato presso la Villa Imperiale marittima di Posillipo, cfr. GÜNTHER 1913, p. 166; GIANFROTTA 1998, pp. 165-6 pensa che l’affresco si riferisca al porto di Miseno, teoria confermata dallo stesso autore in occasione del Convegno “I porti del Mediterraneo in età classica” svoltosi a Roma nell’ottobre 2004 cfr. GIANFROTTA 2006, p. 11. 390 Ringrazio infinitamente il Prof. Geza Alföldy, illustre epigrafista dell’Università di Heidelberg, per alcuni preziosi chiarimenti sulle sue teorie circa i fari erodiani. Secondo Alföldy, i fari di Caesarea avevano preso dal loro illustre predecessore alessandrino, non tanto la struttura esterna quanto la monumentalità. 391 Si potrebbe ipotizzare che sulla torre di Meriemme vi fosse la statua della moglie di Erode, su quella di Phasael l’immagine del fratello e sul Druseion, Druso divinizzato; ma si tratta di pure congetture. 392 ALFÖLDY 1999, pp.85-108; ALFÖLDY 2002, pp. 132-148. 388

393

ALFÖLDY 1999, p. 86. ALFÖLDY 2002, pp. 139 ss. A tale volume si rimanda anche per tutti i riferimenti bibliografici, in special modo per le dure contestazioni ad Alföldy da parte di G. Labbè. 395 Si potrebbe, quindi, ipotizzare che Erode avesse costruito un porto simile a quello che Settimio Severo realizzerà a Leptis Magna (scheda 4), con il faro monumentale sul lato occidentale del molo, ed una torre semaforica di più piccole dimensioni situata presso il molo est. 396 Erode sembrava avere una predilezione per chiamare gli edifici con nomi legati alla sua famiglia e a Roma imperiale: oltre a quelli già ricordati, alcune parti del suo palazzo erano chiamate Caesareum, in onore di Augusto e Agrippeum, in onore di Agrippa, oltre ad un Herodeum, in onore di se stesso. Pilato ha forse proseguito le volontà di Erode che non ha fatto in tempo a vedere i lavori di ampliamento previsti per il Druseion del 4 a.C., intitolando al fratello di Druso una nuova torre farea forse ancora più bella e possente della precedente (che si potrebbe anche ipotizzare in disuso in età tiberiana) che, unita a quella, sarebbe stata allo stesso tempo una dedica agli imperatori di Roma e ai Dioscuri. Credo sia utile ricordare che nel 6 d.C., a Roma, venne eretto il tempio di Castore e Polluce e Tiberio volle apparire nella dedica del tempio insieme a suo fratello Druso, ormai morto. Dunque, vi sono già dei precedenti per questo tipo di binomio che si ripeterà anche nel 10 d.C. quando, sempre a Roma, verrà eretto il Tempio di Concordia. 397 L’epigrafe era stata anche interpretata come la base di un altare o di un piedistallo di una statua di Tiberio (Brandin); per i riferimenti bibliografici si veda il citato articolo di ALFÖLDY 1999. Quanto alle critiche mosse dal fatto che Flavio Giuseppe non menziona il faro di Tiberio, l’autore tedesco replica che, basandosi Giuseppe sugli scritti di Nikolaos da Damasco, è probabile che questi non abbia visto il Tibereium terminato o che esso fosse in rovina. 394

163

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA cosa i fari di Druso e Tiberio, novelli Dioscuri, che facevano luce ai naviganti ma lasciavano vedere in tutta la sua maestosità anche il palazzo imperiale collocato alle loro spalle. Dunque si tratta di un monumento realizzato per i naviganti in onore di Tiberio. Ecco allora che integrando la S della prima riga, Alföldy arriva alla seguente conclusione:

il cui aspetto era ricordato se non dal Druseion e dal Tibereium, sicuramente, dalla torre di Phasael, come ci dice Flavio Giuseppe. Dunque, si trattava di una doppia celebrazione di fratelli in un arco di tempo compreso tra la fine del I secolo a.C. e il principio del I secolo d.C.: Druso e Tiberio da un lato, Erode e Phasael dall’altro.

[Nautì]s Tiberèium [-Po]ntius Pilatus [praef]ectus Iudae[a]e [ref]è[cit] 398

SCHEDA 11 MAGDALA (Migdal, Tarichea, Israele) Provincia: Arabia Felix Nota anche con il nome di Tarichea,401 posizionata nei pressi del Lago di Tiberiade (Tav. 18, fig. 35), dal I secolo a.C. diventa uno dei principali centri ellenistici della Galilea.402 Nel 52/51 a.C. passa al dominio romano e viene ceduta da Nerone a Iulius Marcus Agrippa ed innalzata da Tito come centro militare nell’autunno del 67 d.C.403 Il nome della città è, come noto, legato a quello di Maria Maddalena e di Cristo. Fino al IV secolo d.C. rimarrà l’insediamento principale del popolo ebreo.

Quanto alla forma del Tibereium, essa doveva presentare la stessa architettura del Druseion, forse su modello del faro di Alessandria (scheda 8), sul quale era anche un’iscrizione dell’architetto Sostrato di Cnido dedicata ai το²ς πλοιθομενo²ιζ. La teoria dell’Alföldy è stata però duramente contestata da chi riteneva che l’epigrafe facesse riferimento a giochi gladiatori.399 Non si può, tuttavia, trascurare il ritrovamento avvenuto all’entrata del porto nel 1960 di una tessera plumbea (Tav. 17, fig.33) che riproduce una situazione portuale assai simile a quella raccontata da Flavio Giuseppe: in essa è rappresentata l’entrata di un porto (forse visto da una nave) con due torri sulla cima delle quali sembrano essere delle statue, anche se, a mio avviso, non si può escludere l’ipotesi che essi siano addetti alla manutenzione delle torri o alla segnalazione.

Il porto e il faro Nell’estate del 1990 l’Istituto di Antichità di Israele effettuò alcune prospezioni subacquee nell’area dell’antica Magdala che portarono al rinvenimento di una struttura di età romana con pietre squadrate in basalto, puntali, frammenti di capitelli e uno specchio di bronzo. Tutti gli oggetti menzionati erano disseminati in prossimità di una massiccia e larga rocca di pietra, situata sulla costa e chiamata dagli archeologi Rock of Ants (Rupe delle formiche).404 Questo “scoglio” era, in realtà, utilizzato in passato come un vero e proprio isolotto, distante 30 m dalla costa. Siamo dunque in presenza di un altro porto lacustre, simile a quello di Taposiris Magna (scheda 7) sul lago Mareotide. Durante gli scavi della roccia furono trovate delle nicchie di forma circolare dello stesso diametro dei rocchi di colonna trovati alla base della stessa.

La tessera si data al II secolo d.C. anche se altri studiosi la credono del 2.a.C. e quindi potrebbe essere stata coniata da Erode per l’inaugurazione del porto avvenuta in coincidenza con la visita di Agrippa nella provincia Iudaea. Sulla tessera sono le lettere KA che potrebbero far riferimento ad un anno di regno (21) o, più probabilmente, alle iniziali greche di Kα(ισάρεια).400 Ad ogni modo, dopo il II secolo d.C., il porto verrà utilizzato sempre meno e cadrà in rovina tanto che nel 500 d.C. durante il dominio bizantino di Anastasio su ciò che rimaneva del vecchio faro nell’angolo più occidentale del molo (Tav. 17, fig. 34) si iniziò la costruzione di un grande muro di difesa, lungo 150 m verso sud, la cui pesantezza con il passare del tempo forse fece crollare il faro, e le sue fondamenta andrebbero riconosciute in quella porzione sommersa k2 di cui si è parlato in precedenza.

In base a questa osservazione gli archeologi dell’Istituto di Antichità di Israele suggerirono di riconoscere la struttura come un luogo sacro (un altare o un tempio), un Nilometro (struttura utilizzata per segnalare il livello del mare) o, più probabilmente, un faro,405 e ne restituirono un’ipotetica ricostruzione (Tav. 18, fig. 36). Il toponimo Magdala in aramaico significa “Torre dei pescatori”; la città era famosa per la sua industria ittica e anche il toponimo moderno, Migdal, si traduce con la parola italiana “torre”: dunque nulla di più facile che il nome faccia riferimento a una struttura realmente esistita406 ma per la quale, però, non possediamo alcuna fonte come conferma.

Conclusioni e problematiche Alla luce di quanto detto, tutto il porto di Caesarea aveva una funzione di esaltazione imperiale tramite la toponomastica degli edifici; a partire dal nome del porto stesso, che richiamava Augusto, le torri che lo difendevano portavano il nome dei parenti di Erode, i fari della città erano dedicati a due membri della dinastia giulio-claudia, Druso e Tiberio, che, allo stesso tempo, venivano assimilati ai Dioscuri, protettori dei naviganti. Su tutte le torri, statue poste al di sopra di colonne ricordavano i più importanti personaggi di queste due famiglie; a loro Ponzio Pilato si volle aggiungere ponendo la nota iscrizione sul faro di Tiberio.

401

Strab., 16, 2, 45; «Magdala» in Der Kleine Pauly, Stuggart 1969, pp. 872-874. 402 Ios., Bell. Iud. 3, 359-360. 403 Ios., Bell. Iud. 1, 181; ant. 14, 120; Suet., Tit. 4; sulla città si veda «Magdala» in Der Neue Pauly, 7, Stuggart-Weimar 1999, p. 656. 404 GALILI-DAHARI-HARVIT 1993, pp. 76-77. 405 Dunque, lo specchio di bronzo potrebbe essere stato interpretato come lo specchio “ustore” da utilizzare per i segnali luminosi, mentre i rocchi si riferivano a colonne che sostenevano la struttura, grazie anche all’ausilio di quelle pietre squadrate in basalto che dovevano servire da rinforzo. 406 Un faro situato nei pressi del Lago Tiberiade che, forse, serviva per guidare quei naviganti che arrivavano a Magdala per pescare e rifornire di prodotti ittici la vicina Caesarea Maritima (scheda 10) o magari Gerusalemme. La situazione ricorda molto da vicino la torre farea di Taposiris Magna (scheda 7), situata sul Lago Mareotide, che guidava i naviganti che venivano a procacciare prodotti ittici per la tolemaica Alessandria.

Questa stessa iscrizione ricordava da vicino quella già notissima del più monumentale faro dell’Antichità, quello di Alessandria, 398

ALFÖLDY 1999, p. 106. Ciò in base al suo ritrovamento vicino al teatro. Ma, come detto, il teatro è solo ad 1 km dal porto, dunque, le violente correnti che hanno causato l’interramento del porto, potrebbero anche avere trasportato l’iscrizione dell’ormai crollato faro di Tiberio ad un chilometro di distanza, in prossimità del teatro. 400 Per le interpretazioni della tessera si veda RINGEL 1988, p. 71; PENSA 1998, p. 139; GIARDINA 2007, pp. 145-160 399

164

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO distrutta da Pescennio Nigro durante la contesa per il potere tra questi e Settimio Severo che la scelse come metropoli di Siria.410 Già nelle grazie di Teodosio, con Giustiniano divenne capitale del nuovo regno di Teodoriade.411

SCHEDA 12 APAMEA DI SIRIA (Hama, Qalat al-Mudīq, Siria) Provincia: Syria Abitata sin dal Neolitico (Tav. 19, fig. 37), nel 286 a.C. un gruppo di soldati macedoni si stabilì sulle sponde del fiume Oronte nella città di Fornace, poi detta Pella. Quando divenne un importante emporio seleucide, Seleuco I la chiamò Apamea in onore della moglie. Fortificata da Antioco IX fu conquistata da Pompeo nel 64 a.C.. Sede vescovile già dal I secolo d.C., nel secolo successivo fu adornata con bellissimi portici che ancora sopravvivono. Nel III secolo d.C. fu sede dei quartieri invernali militari delle spedizioni di Caracalla, Severo Alessandro e Gordiano III. Nel 540 d.C. venne risparmiata da Cosroe I di Persia ma saccheggiata e incendiata da Adaarmne nel 573 per poi essere riconquistata nel 613 da Cosroe II e definitivamente distrutta dai terremoti. Nell’area dell’antica acropoli sorge ora il villaggio di Qalat al-Mudīq.407

Il porto e il faro L’antico porto, collocato ad ovest della città, famoso soprattutto per il commercio del vino con la non lontana Alessandria, è scarsamente leggibile a causa della sovrapposizione del moderno abitato di Lattakia. Il faro della città è noto da numerose emissioni numismatiche che comprendono un arco cronologico che va dal regno di Domiziano sino all’età di Settimio Severo, figura alla quale sono da ricondurre ampi lavori di ristrutturazione del porto. Le monete coniate in età domizianea (Tav. 20, fig. 40 a, b), conservate al British Museum di Londra sono databili all’86/87 d.C. e presentano al dritto un busto di Dioniso, imberbe, con la testa rivolta a sinistra e coronata da un tralcio di vite; il dio è riconoscibile dal consueto attributo del tirso. Al rovescio è rappresentato il faro di Laodicea: nella prima (a) osserviamo una torre cilindrica dotata di scala su modello alessandrino per poter accedere alla sommità della lanterna. L’edificio sembra come essere rappresentato in sezione, forse per dimostrare che all’interno vi erano stanze abitabili. Un ultimo piccolo piano, anch’esso di forma cilindrica, presenta sulla sommità un personaggio: dalla rigida posizione sembra trattarsi più di una statua che di un addetto alla segnalazione. L’altra emissione (b) presenta una torre cilindrica, a piani digradanti verso l’alto che poggia su uno zoccolo a due gradini. Sulla sommità della struttura è una statua stante con patera e lancia.412 La struttura presenta più di un’analogia con quella rappresentata sulle monete di Sesto Pompeo e riconducibile al faro di Messina (Tav. 57, fig. 113a). Da un’attenta osservazione della stessa moneta si può notare una porta sul lato destro dalla quale possiamo supporre partisse una scala che permettesse di raggiungere il piano superiore che doveva ospitare la lanterna. Dunque, due emissioni della stessa epoca rappresentano lo stesso edificio in maniera differente: probabilmente l’edificio è visto da angolazioni diverse, ma per l’attendibilità delle immagini si rimanda al capitolo 4. La presenza di Dioniso al dritto manifesta senza dubbio l’importanza commerciale del porto di Laodicea che doveva esportare un’ingente quantità di vino ad Alessandria dalla quale invece riceveva il grano; la statua rappresentata sul faro credo possa essere identificata con Poseidone, anche se il Seyrig propende per Atena o Dioniso stesso.413

Il porto e il faro Ciò che sappiamo dell’antico porto di Apamea è assai poco. Scarse, infatti, sono anche le testimonianze iconografiche circa il faro del porto antico di Apamea: una è data dalla riproduzione di un medaglione che a sua volta riprendeva il disegno di una moneta di età augustea appartenuta al maresciallo Estrèes (fig. fig. 38b).408 Al rovescio, già nell’Ottocento, venne riconosciuto il faro della città in base all’iscrizione Colonia Augusta Apamea, nell’esergo della stessa (Tav. 19, fig. 38a): su un promontorio roccioso sorge una massiccia torre a piani digradanti verso l’alto, tutti di forma cilindrica. Il fatto che il faro fosse costruito su un’altura, cosa piuttosto tipica per il mondo orientale, che sfruttava i punti più elevati, è attestato anche da un mosaico di età imperiale, proveniente dalla così detta Casa del Triclinio (Tav. 20, fig. 39). Anche in questo caso la torre presenta tre piani con, al centro del primo piano, una grande porta di accesso. Oltre all’edificio portuale che a noi interessa, è possibile notare la presenza di un personaggio che dialoga con un altro su un’imbarcazione e da questi riceve un pesce. Questo potrebbe essere forse un ulteriore indizio per pensare che i fari fossero abitati da personale addetto alla manutenzione dell’edificio che, evidentemente, doveva anche nutrirsi. Non doveva, infatti, essere facile sopravvivere in luoghi dove altro non c’era che la torre semaforica e qualche edificio pubblico. Oltre al faro notiamo solo la presenza di un tempio e di un terzo personaggio che potrebbe essere il sacerdote dell’edificio religioso, oppure, più probabilmente, un altro addetto alla manutenzione del faro. Quanto al faro, esso si presenta come un edificio, collocato su un piccolo promontorio, a forma di torre a tre piani digradanti verso l’alto, il più basso dei quali, di forma poligonale, presenta una porta d’accesso ad arco. Gli altri due piani sembrano essere di forma cilindrica. L’edificio sembra riprodotto con tale precisione da poter riconoscere addirittura i mattoni in laterizio.

Non stupisce che nelle emissioni successive scompaia la figura di Dioniso. Infatti, dall’età di Antonino Pio cambia il numen tutelare della città che diventa Tyche, sempre rappresentata come una donna riccamente vestita. A questo periodo appartiene una moneta che presenta al rovescio Tyche la cui elaborata pettinatura prevede un pesante gioiello formato con due grappoli d’uva e la corona turrita nella quale è possibile anche riconoscere il faro della città (Tav. 21, fig.41). L’edificio si presenta più slanciato rispetto all’immagine precedente, seppur ad essa molto simile. Sembra essere mantenuto lo zoccolo a gradoni, mentre, per ragioni di spazio, non vi è statua sulla sommità. La statua potrebbe anche essere crollata poiché non la ritroviamo neanche in un altro esemplare dove è invece presente un personaggio ad un piano intermedio.

SCHEDA 13 LAODICEA AD MARE (Lattakia, Siria) Provincia: Syria Poco sappiamo della Laodicea precedente il II secolo a.C., epoca in cui batteva moneta insieme alle città di Antiochia, Apamea e Seleucia con le quali formava una tetrapoli. La città, fondata da Seleuco I nella Siria settentrionale e così chiamata in onore della madre, divenne parte della provincia romana di Siria con Pompeo, ma alla morte di Cesare assediata da Cassio, fu liberata da Antonio in virtù della lealtà cesariana.409 Base militare di Lucio Vero durante le guerre partiche, venne

410

Malalas, Chron. 293, 4. «Laodikeia, 1» in Der Neue Pauly, 6, Stuggart-Weimar 1999, p. 1131. 412 BMC, Syria, 1964, tav. XXIX, n. 11, p. 250. 413 SEYRIG 1952, pp. 54-55. 411

407

«Apameia,3» in Der Neue Pauly, 1, Stuggart 1999, pp. 824-5. ALLARD 1979, p. 158. 409 Strab., XVI, 750-752, App., V, 30. 408

165

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA E’, infatti, da segnalare un’ultima emissione numismatica, databile all’età severiana, che presenta al dritto il busto di Settimio Severo con il capo laureato e vestito con la lorica, affrontato da quello del giovane Caracalla. Al rovescio è rappresentata una nave sulla cui poppa si vede il gubernator, seduto in cabina, mentre dirige la manovra con l’ausilio dei gesti; sulla prua, invece, il proreta sembra dare ordini all’equipaggio (Tav. 21, fig. 42). In secondo piano è il faro del porto: la struttura si presenta come una torre a tre piani, tutti di forma cilindrica. Nel secondo piano è ben visibile un personaggio con una mano protesa in avanti che il Reddè interpreta come una statua di difficile identificazione, mentre credo si possa anche pensare ad un addetto del faro che aiuta il proreta nella corretta entrata in porto delle navi, una sorta di guardia costiera moderna; in questo caso addirittura il personaggio sembra avere la gamba sinistra piegata in avanti.414 Alcuni studiosi vedono in questa moneta la rappresentazione non del porto di Laodicea ma quello di Berytus. Per quanto la presenza di un faro nell’odierna Beirut fosse da ipotizzare, non vi sono ragioni per credere che una moneta della zecca cittadina abbia riprodotto il porto di un'altra città. Sappiamo, d’altro canto, che la città di Berytus aveva un porto costruito del tutto artificialmente su modello di quello di Caesarea Maritima: Foca, che visita la città nel 1185, descrive il porto come protetto da due grandi torri che richiamano quelle di Erode e Phasael di cui parla Flavio Giuseppe per Caesarea. Unica torre di cui però si ha un certo dato archeologico è la torre difensiva di età romana, riutilizzata in epoca medievale, collocata nell’odierna strada Emir Bechir.415

Cartagine, come suggeriscono le parole di Polibio che loda gli splendidi edifici della città che definisce “una città affacciata sul mare tra Cilicia e Fenicia, sulle falde meridionali del monte Corifeo”.419 Le alluvioni che contribuirono a interrare ed arretrare il porto ne hanno permesso la sua completa conservazione: la foce del torrente Burnaz, circondato da mura turrite, costituiva il canale di imbocco al mare. I Flavii, preoccupati che le sabbie del fiume Oronte potessero insabbiare il porto, provvidero a costruire un nuovo e più lungo canale di accesso al porto, largo 60 m e parallelo per circa mezzo chilometro al ciglio della collina. L’avamporto è protetto da due lunghi moli, il meglio conservato dei quali è quello meridionale, alla cui estremità sono le fondazioni di una torre che potrebbe essere il faro (Tav. 22, fig. 44).420 SCHEDA 15 AEGAE-AIGAI (Ege, Turchia) Provincia: Misia Situata oggi a 12 km dal golfo di Chandarli, nella Misia, fu centro fiorente nell’antichità: testimonianze sono i resti della stoà, di un teatro, del tempio di Demetra. Assai poco è dato sapere circa il porto della città. Sulla riva destra del fiume è isolata la rovina di una porta alta quasi sette metri con un diametro di oltre 2,50, pertinente alla facciata di un edificio volto a ovest.421 Il porto e il faro Il porto dell’antica Aiscala (Tav. 23, fig. 45) non poteva essere sprovvisto di un faro ma l’unica testimonianza è la sua rappresentazione in una moneta di Macrino (Tav. 23, fig.46a): sulla destra una nave si avvicina al faro del porto, la cui importanza è data anche dalla legenda ma³aqwir. L’edificio è rappresentato come una massiccia torre cilindrica a due piani sulla cui sommità si scorge una figura con una lancia posta, tuttavia, non al centro dell’edificio. La struttura cilindrica che emerge alla sinistra della statua è di difficile lettura: potrebbe essere interpretata come un secondo piano di dimensioni minori atto ad ospitare la lanterna ma non si può escludere al presenza di una seconda statua (o di un’altra figura umana) tuttavia, il pessimo stato di conservazione della moneta non permette di andare oltre a queste suggestioni. Il Reddè esclude la presenza di una statua sulla sommità del faro di Ege perché crede che la luce della lanterna avrebbe dovuto bruciare all’aria aperta, ma non fornisce spiegazioni per questa motivazione.422 L’ipotesi che non si tratti di una statua ma di un addetto alla navigazione o alla manutenzione dell’edificio penso non sia probabile dal momento che la figura mi sembra essere troppo in alto perché i suoi segnali potessero essere visti dalle navi e la posizione appare piuttosto rigida. Un’altra emissione numismatica, questa volta di Decio Traiano, riprende la precedente iconografia ma, essendo meglio conservata, sembra testimoniare che il faro fosse costruito in laterizio (Tav. 23, fig. 46b).

SCHEDA 14 SELEUCIA DI PIERIA (Silifke, Turchia) Provincia: Cilicia Nata per sostituire l’ormai inadatto porto naturale di Al-Mina (Tav. 22, fig. 43), alla foce del fiume Oronte, venne fondata nel 301 a.C. e la sua fama fu dovuta alle acerrime lotte tra Seleucidi e Tolomei. Fu, infatti, conquistata nel 246 a.C. da Tolomeo Evergete ma strappata a Tolomeo Filopatore da Antioco III, dopo alterne vicende e passaggi di consegna, nel 138 a.C. venne dichiarata città santa e inviolabile e liberata poco dopo da Antoco VIII. Strabone lodava le sue potenti fortificazioni e i romani apprezzarono la sua resistenza a Tigrane, ecco perchè venne liberata nel 63 a.C. da Pompeo Magno.416 Non lontana dalla costa salentina visto che in meno di 30 giorni si poteva raggiungere il porto di Brundisium,417 di notevole importanza strategica nel II secolo d.C., lodata da molte fonti, diventa sede della nuova Classis Syriaca. La città e il porto saranno la base di spedizioni di Lucio Vero, Settimio Severo, Caracalla e ancora di Diocleziano che cercò di mantenere viva l’area portuale, come tentò anche Costanzo II nel 346 d.C., epoca nella quale la città risultava in stato di abbandono. Dopo il saccheggio del V secolo d.C. da parte degli Isauri, il terremoto del 526 d.C. la distrusse definitivamente; Giustiniano tenterà di rifondarla ma l’avvento di Corsoe I nel 540 d.C. e l’invasione araba del 638 d.C. non le permisero di diventare nuovamente quel luogo strategico e militare con funzione di porto di Antiochia.418

SCHEDA 16 PERGA (Murtana, Turchia) Provincia: Pamphylia 18 km a oriente di Antalya (Adalia) si trovava una delle più importanti città della Pamphylia: Perga. (Tav. 24, fig. 47). La floridezza della città fu legata al commercio, essendo Perga sulla strada per la Cilicia alla quale era collegata per mezzo del fiume Kestros (Aksu), distante solo 7 km dalla città. Nel suo primo periodo di vita la città era arroccata su un’acropoli ma, in

Il porto e il faro Il porto, di natura artificiale, possedeva un bacino interno di circa 400 m di diametro dotato di neoria su modello del porto di 414

REDDÈ 1979, p. 872; GIARDINA 2007, pp. 154-155. JONES HALL 2004, cap. 2 ; Johannes Phoca, Descriptio Terrae Sanctae 5 in P.G. 133.392; pp. 137-139. 416 Strab. XVI, 2, 8. 417 Cic. ad Att. XI, 20,1. 418 Per un ottimo aggiornamento sulla storia della città, la sua urbanistica e geografia, UGGERI 2007, pp. 143-176. 415

419

Pol. V, 58. UGGERI 2007, p. 163. 421 «Aigai» in Der Neue Pauly, 1, Stuggart 1996, pp. 313-314. 422 IMHOOF-BLUMER 1901, p. 428, tav. XVI, fig. 19; REDDÈ 1979, p. 865 420

166

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO breve tempo, si estese anche in pianura verso sud.423 Già fiorente in età ellenistica, Perga ebbe il suo apogeo durante l’impero romano a partire dal II secolo d.C. in poi quando l’impianto della città fu regolarizzato e si costruirono numerosi edifici. L’attività edilizia continuò anche nella tarda antichità come testimoniano basiliche, terme e palazzi. Col passare del tempo, forse anche a causa di guerre e terremoti, la città si ritirò sull’acropoli dalla quale era nata per poi essere definitivamente abbandonata.424

molto schematicamente come un bacino rotondo (forse si tratta quindi del porto più interno) al cui centro è una trireme sulla quale si scorge un marinaio intento ad issare la vela mentre l’imbarcazione si avvicina a quello che potrebbe essere il faro del porto: una piccola ma massiccia torre a due piani digradanti verso l’alto, dotata di una porta rettangolare e di una grande apertura al secondo piano, interpretabile come una finestra (Tav. 25, fig. 50). SCHEDA 18 ATTALEIA (Antalya, Turchia) Provincia: Galatia

Il porto e il faro Il faro e il porto della città sono noti esclusivamente da un esemplare numismatico (Tav. 24, fig. 48). Dietro una nave si scorge una torre di vaga forma cilindrica sulla cui sommità brilla la luce della lanterna.425 Nutro qualche dubbio sull’interpretazione che i segni rappresentati sulla sommità dell’edificio siano delle statue dato che essi non sono ben leggibili a causa del cattivo stato di conservazione della moneta. Nulla più è dato sapere sul porto e sulle strutture portuali di questa città. La maggior parte degli studiosi426 che hanno affrontato l’iconografia di questa moneta non hanno fornito indicazioni precise a suo riguardo, inoltre manca qualsiasi riferimento topografico che aiuti a ricostruire la situazione in età romana, epoca a cui sembra appartenere l’esemplare.

Fondata nel 150 a.C. da Attalo II, dal quale prese il nome, fu stazione navale di Sesto Pompeo nel 48 a.C.; divenne nel corso del II secolo a.C. un importante porto commerciale, sostituendo quello della non lontana Perga.430 Il porto e il faro Hidirlik Kulesi (Tav. 26, fig. 51) è la rovina che secondo alcuni studiosi avrebbe funzionato da faro in età romana mentre secondo altri non era che il mausoleo di un aristocratico romano. Le due funzioni, vista anche la collocazione marittima dell’edificio, non necessariamente devono essere considerate separatamente: si pensi ai casi di Thasos (scheda 28) e Taposiris Magna (scheda 7). Il termine Kulesi, in arabo, come si vedrà anche per Chrysopolis (scheda 24), si traduce con torre e non con mausoleo e potremmo dunque immaginare che, almeno in una delle sue fasi edilizie, questo monumento abbia effettivamente funzionato come faro. Oggi si presenta come un edificio a due piani digradanti verso l’alto con una massiccia base rettangolare ed un secondo piano di forma circolare. L’edificio in se stesso non presenta dimensioni notevoli, ma la sua posizione elevata gli conferisce più credibilità per interpretarlo come un faro.

SCHEDA 17 SIDE (Selimye, Turchia) Provincia: Pamphylia Fondata secondo Strabone dagli abitanti di Kyme, città che gravitava nel territorio di Smirne (Tav. 25, fig. 49), le prime attestazioni di frequentazione umana sembrano appartenere al VII secolo a.C.. Situata lungo la costa anatolica, la città verrà conquistata da Alessandro Magno agli inizi del III secolo a.C., cui seguiranno le conquiste dei Tolomei e dei Seleucidi che le garantiranno, tuttavia, un ruolo di primaria importanza commerciale, almeno fino alla fondazione di Attaleia (Antalya) da parte di Attalo II (159-138 a.C.). Tra la fine del II e l’inizio del III secolo a.C. entrerà a far parte dell’Impero Romano che, vista la sua fedeltà, l’aiuterà a prosperare nuovamente soprattutto grazie al porto. Dal IV secolo d.C. in poi con la progressiva decadenza dell’Impero Romano, Side verrà dimezzata di grandezza e in seguito abbandonata sino a che, tra V e VI secolo d.C., diverrà diocesi riconquistando quei terreni che aveva perso in precedenza.427

SCHEDA 19 NEA PAPHOS (Nèa Paphos, Cipro) Provincia: Cyprus Posta all’estremità occidentale dell’isola di Cipro (Tav. 26, fig. 52a), la tradizione vuole che sia stata fondata, così come Palaipaphos, dai Micenei, e in particolare da Agapenore e dagli Arcadi all’indomani della guerra di Troia.431 Smentite tali origini dagli scavi archeologici, sappiamo che la città fu capitale dell’isola dal regno dei Tolomei fino al IV secolo d.C..432

Il porto e il faro Il porto e il faro Il porto della città era collocato nella parte più meridionale della penisola: la sua forma, artificiale, assomigliava a quella di un irregolare tridente. Lunghe mura riparavano il porto dai venti meridionali mentre una diga era stata posizionata nella parte più settentrionale dello stesso. Alla diga si allacciava un secondo porto, sempre con la medesima forma, con il vantaggio che, rispetto al primo, in caso di mare mosso le navi avrebbero potuto più facilmente entrare in porto grazie a un’entrata più riparata.428 Come nel caso di Perga il possibile faro della città è noto esclusivamente da una fonte numismatica, questa volta pertinente all’epoca di Gallieno.429 Il porto è rappresentato

Il porto (Tav. 26, fig. 52) della città nuova, fondato nel tardo I secolo a.C. aveva un’importanza fondamentale per la sua vicinanza a quelli di Caesarea Maritima e Alessandria con i quali doveva avere non pochi contatti. E’ dunque assai comprensibile che una città portuale che commerciava con la sede del più celebre faro dell’antichità fosse provvista di un porto ben attrezzato e dotato di faro. Nel 15 a.C. un violento terremoto devastò il porto cipriota del quale rimase ben poco fino a quando Augusto, che aveva ben capito l’importanza del porto, lo volle restaurare dando alla città il nome di Nea Paphos Augusta.

423

Quanto alla posizione topografica del faro della città sono da segnalare resti di fondamenta in pietra squadrata, senza dubbio pertinenti ad una torre, sul promontorio roccioso che è oggi occupato dalla chiesa di Panaya Theoskepasti, costruita in

AKURGAL 1983, pp. 329-333. «Perge,2» in Der Kleine Pauly, XIX,1, p. 693. 425 BMC, BITINIA, p. 122, n. 2; REDDÈ 1979, p. 865. 426 REDDÈ 1979, p. 865; PENSA 1998, p. 138. 427 Strab. XIV, 667; AKRUGAL 1983, p. 336. 428 MANSEL 1963, pp. 43-47. 429 BMC, Pamphylia, 1964, n. 112, p. 161 non accenna al faro; che è invece stato affrontato da PENSA 1998, p. 138, GIARDINA 2007, p. 154, fig. 15. 424

430

«Attaleia, 1» in Der Neue Pauly, Stuggart-Weimar 1997, p. 226. Strab. XIV, 6, 3; Paus., VIII, 5. 432 «Paphos» in Der Kleine Pauly, 4, Műnchen 1972, pp. 485-6. 431

167

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA prossimità dell’antico frangiflutti. Secondo gli archeologi del Dipartimento di Antichità di Cipro è questo il più probabile sito dell’antico faro di Paphos.433 Tuttavia fondamenta in laterizio di una struttura ottagonale sono state trovate anche all’interno della grande Villa di Teseo, costruita a partire dal II secolo d.C. su rovine ellenistiche nell’area occidentale del luogo noto come Maloutena. Questa collina non sarebbe però adatta alla costruzione di un faro poiché il sito è soggetto a un forte vento di sud-est che avrebbe portato il fumo prodotto dal fuoco della lanterna direttamente in città coprendo buona parte dell’area residenziale, impedendo così la corretta visuale ai naviganti.434

che Erode gli aveva mostrato lo stesso anno a Caesarea Maritima. La struttura, con il consueto andamento a piani digradanti verso l’alto, doveva presentarsi di almeno tre piani con numerose stanze abitabili, dato il numero delle finestre che, senza dubbio, dovevano servire anche per l’artiglieria. Alcuni studiosi hanno rifiutato l’ipotesi che la torre del blocco calcareo possa riferirsi a un faro in quanto associata a un dittico funerario. Credo che per avvalorare l’ipotesi farea basti citare le numerose rappresentazioni artistiche del faro di Ostia nei sarcofagi dell’Isola Sacra di Porto o anche le tombe-faro di Taposiris Magna (scheda 7) e di Thasos (scheda 28).

Proprio a Maloutena si trova oggi la fortezza medioevale, iniziata alla fine del Trecento dai Lusingano per proteggere il porto dai Saraceni, che ha sicuramente preso il posto di una precedente struttura di avvistamento che, tuttavia, non è possibile identificare come un faro. Il forte doveva essere provvisto anche di torri difensive, i cui ruderi erano stati interpretati, in un primo tempo, dal Dazweski come quelli del possibile faro ellenistico-romano ma che prospezioni subacquee hanno invece accertato come inerenti al forte.435

L’importanza strategica di un porto a metà strada tra Alessandria e Caesarea Maritima (entrambe dotate di fari monumentali) rende inimmaginabile l’assenza di un faro monumentale e funzionale, la cui probabile collocazione penso sia da ricercare nei pressi del forte medioevale che lo deve avere soppiantato dopo il suo crollo.

Presso Phanari, dove nell’Ottocento fu collocato un faro, si scorgono altri ruderi di strutture architettoniche di difficile interpretazione così come nella zona di Fabrika nella città antica.436 Sappiamo che questa zona fu sede, in età ellenistica, dell’acropoli della quale furono individuate tre costruzioni di forma rettangolare di circa 50 m, identificate nel 1927 dal Peristianis come i resti del propylon.437

SCHEDA 20 KYME (Aliaģa, Turchia) Provincia: Asia Non lontana dalla moderna città turca di Aliaģa, collocata immediatamente sul mare, esposta a venti favorevoli all’approdo, Kyme fu collocata sulla costa eolica. Fondata a seguito della guerra di Troia, già dal IX secolo a.C. la città manifesta il suo spiccato valore commerciale grazie al florido porto. Definita grande e nobile da Strabone439 mantiene contatti tanto con i porti orientali quanto con quelli della costa italiana, specialmente con Taranto. Dopo alcuni interventi in età ellenistica, i Romani se ne approriarono nel corso del I secolo d.C..440

Infine, nel 1938 si effettuò un’importante scoperta a Kato Paphos: un rilievo inciso sopra un blocco di pietra calcarea, irregolare nei lati (0,13x0,66x0,26 m) e assai grezzo. Nell’angolo sinistro inferiore è inciso un dittico in latino (databile al IV secolo d.C.), mentre nell’angolo superiore è possibile vedere una torre (Tav. 27, fig. 53). Le due incisioni sembrano appartenere ad altrettanti periodi anche se c’è un’ininterrotta linea di confine che coincide con la parte terminale della torre e l’apertura del dittico, ragione per cui si può immaginare che il dittico sia stato composto in un secondo tempo.438

Il porto e il faro Gran parte del porto risulta sommerso ma rimangono ancora in situ alcuni elementi di un molo lungo 190 m con andamento rettilineo sud-ovest. Anche in questo caso trattandosi di scavi recenti e in fase di eleborazione, si è preferito inserire la scheda per completezza ma essa e tantomeno la parte relativa al possibile faro non potrà essere esaustiva. Anche i due corsi d’acqua (soprattutto lo Xanthos) che corrono nella città e in particolar modo le loro foci potevano garantire, anche prima della creazione del molo, un buon punto dove ancorare le navi. Ciò che potrebbe essere interpretato come le fondamenta di una torre, e quindi forse del faro, si colloca alla testata del molo: infatti, sul lato occidentale verso il mare è stata trovata un’imponente platea in opus caementicium addossata ad una ulteriore in opera quadrata (Tav. 27, fig. 54).441

La torre, la cui forma architettonica stilizzata potrebbe anche far pensare ad un’ottagono anche se sembra più rettangolare, si presenta divisa in tre piani degradanti verso l’alto con ogni piano grande più o meno la metà di quello precedente. Al centro del piano inferiore è una grande porta fiancheggiata da due finestre quadrate, all’interno della quale possiamo immaginarci una scala che conducesse ai piani superiori dei quali sono ben visibili le finestre. Conclusioni e problematiche

SCHEDA 21 PATARA (Patara, Turchia) Provincia:Lycia Da quanto detto credo si possa affermare che Nea Paphos abbia avuto due fari, costruiti in due epoche diverse e in due distinte posizioni. In età ellenistica un primo faro deve essere stato costruito sulla collina di Fanari, dove fu collocato anche il faro ottocentesco. Crollato l’edificio a seguito del terremoto del 15 a.C., Augusto, per manifestare la romanità del luogo, volle abbandonare l’acropoli ellenistica e potenziare il porto di Maloutena, al cui imbocco, nella posizione dove oggi si trova il forte medioevale, volle costruire un faro, forse simile a quello

Soprattutto per ragioni etimologiche, si ritiene che la città sia stata fondata dai Lici. Definita da Livio la città più importante della Licia,442 Patara (Tav. 28, fig. 55) era posizionata quasi a livello del mare su un terreno pianeggiante, differenziandosi così dalle altre città della regione.443 Livio444 puntualizza come 439

Strab. XIII, III, 6. Per una storia della città e degli scavi ESPOSITO-FELICIGIANFROTTA-SCOGNAMIGLIO 2002, pp. 1-37. 441 ESPOSITO-FELICI-GIANFROTTA-SCOGNAMIGLIO 2002, p. 20. 442 Liv. XXXVII, 15. 443 EAA, pp. 275-276, qui viene smentito che la grande cisterna in prossimità dell’edificio fosse stata una volta adibita a faro. Tuttavia, va ricordato che, come abbiamo visto, spesso in prossimità o alla base dei fari erano cisterne per il rifornimento idrico. HOHLFELDER-VANN 1998, 440

433

LEONARD-TUCK-HOEHLFELDER 1995, p. 242. HOELFELDER 1995, p. 244. 435 DAZWESKI, 1981, p. 331. 436 HOELFELDER 1995, p. 238. 437 MLINARCZYK 1990; HOELFELDER 1995, p. 244. 438 HOELFELDER 1995, p. 239. 434

168

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO il mare fosse dapprima calmo e i venti favorevoli permettessero una buona navigazione ma anche come le condizioni metereologiche potessero repentinamente cambiare mettendo a rischio la navigazione in un porto con fondali poco sicuri, il che indirettamente prevede la presenza di un edificio atto a segnalare tali pericoli, dunque un faro. Le navi erano solite partire alla volta di Alessandria e Rodi per scambi commerciali; per rendere il porto ancora più sicuro il legato Sextus Marcius Priscus, come rende noto un’iscrizione, aveva costruito un faro e un antifaro, quello che solitamente chiamiamo torre semaforica.445

SCHEDA 22 SMYRNA (Izmir, Turchia) Provincia: Asia Colonizzata dai Greci a partire dal IX secolo a.C., associata alla lega ionica come ricorda Pausania,450 in età romana la città venne ampliata verso Oriente, rimanendo ancora un centro attivo in epoca tarda. Conquistata dagli Arabi nel 654 d.C. fu da loro occupata sino al 672/3, epoca in cui spesso commerciò con Efeso. Conquistata dai turchi nel 1317, fu colonizzata dagli occidentali nel 1344-1402.451 Il porto e il faro Quando nel 1654 il Du Loir visitò Smirne, i resti della città antica, devastata dai Turchi, erano ormai scomparsi: “Rimangono a mala pena le fondamenta delle antiche mura…”.452 Dunque, nulla ci è dato sapere del suo porto che dovette svolgere un’importante funzione di smistamento con quello di Costantinopoli. Quanto al faro possediamo solo un epigramma dell’Antologia Palatina che ci manifesta l’importanza e la monumentalità che dovette rappresentare questo edificio, almeno dal IV secolo d.C..

Il porto e i fari Il porto era il più grande della regione e occupava la zona centrale dell’abitato dove numerosi edifici di epoca imperiale si allineavano l’uno dietro l’altro. Recenti scavi archeologici hanno portato alla scoperta di imponenti resti interpretati come quelli di un monumentale faro, crollato a causa di uno tsunami, come afferma il Prof. Fahri Isik dell’Università di Akdeniz.446 Gli scavi, iniziati nel 2004 e terminati nel 2008, hanno portato alla luce anche uno scheletro umano che si è ipotizzato essere il guardiano del faro (ma potrebbe essere un semplice addetto) rimasto intrappolato tra le pietre dell’edificio al momento del crollo. L’edificio (Tav. 28, fig. 56), in base a un’iscrizione in bronzo, sarebbe stato voluto da Nerone tra 64 e 65 d.C.. L’iscrizione doveva presentare lettere in bronzo dorate, ma forse, in seguito alla damnatio memoriae che colpì Nerone nel 68 d.C., queste furono eliminate, tuttavia, la profondità permette di leggere ancora bene l’iscrizione in greco:

-Τίς τόσον έργον έτευξε; τίς η πόλις η το γέρας τί; -Αμβρόσιος Μυλασευς τον φάρον ανθύπατος 453 Dunque l’autore del faro sarebbe stato un tale Ambrosio, nome che ritroviamo anche in un’iscrizione del teatro di Efeso e che, secondo Louis Robert, è la medesima persona, e, quindi, l’epigramma si daterebbe al IV secolo d.C., mentre, per Alan Cameron l’autore è Stratone di Sardi, il che farebbe presupporre l’esistenza di un faro a Smirne già nel I-II secolo d.C..454 Smirne è stata vittima di diversi terremoti e dunque la cosa più probabile è che il faro del porto sia stato più volte restaurato nel corso dei secoli come testimonierebbe un altro epigramma dove il restauro dell’opera è attribuita a un certo Asclepiade:

MÈqym JkaÌd[i]or heo³ JkaudÊou uÓËr, ...tÄm vÇqom jatesjeÌasem pqÄ[r Ðs]vÇk[ei]am [t´]m pkoÞ[folÈmy]m...ñqcom447 Nell’iscrizione è anche specificato che la costruzione del faro è avvenuta per opera di un legato di Nerone in terre propretoriane di nome Sextus Marcius Priscus, al quale, in età vespasianea, venne anche eretta una statua presso il faro, della quale si è trovata la base (140 cm di altezza, 68 cm di profondità e circa 73 cm di larghezza) ed un’epigrafe che oltre al faro menzionava un antifaro, del quale nulla è conservato.448

Μηκέτι δειμαίνοντες ̉αφέγγεα νυκτος ̉ομίχλην εις ́εμε θαρσαλέως πλώετε, ποντοπροι ˙ πασιν ̉αλωμένοις τηλαυγέα δαλον α ̉ νάπτω, των ̉Άσκληπιαδων μνημοσύνην καμάτων455 SCHEDA 23 ABYDOS (Abido, Macedonia) Provincia: Misia SESTOS (Sesto, Turchia) Provincia: Asia

Il faro è costruito su uno scoglio e consta di un podio quadrangolare (20 m per lato) sul quale si elevano due corpi cilindrici. Il cilindro esterno presenta un diametro di 6 m. All’interno di entrambi i corpi cilindrici correva una scala a chiocciola, della larghezza di 80-90 cm, che permetteva di raggiungere il piano della lanterna. L’entrata al faro era sul lato ovest e presentava una porta di legno, della quale alcuni blocchi sono conservati ancora in situ al livello delle fondamenta. Ciò lascerebbe supporre che dal podio verso ovest si sarebbe vista l’entrata in porto, verso sud il mare aperto.449

Al limite meridionale del Medio Egitto, Abido era nota soprattutto per essere un notevole centro di culto del dio Osiride. La città conserva qualche monumento relativo ai sovrani della II Dinastia, anche se i resti più consistenti appartengono ai faraoni della XIX Dinastia, quali Sethos I e Ramesess II. Posizionata sullo Stretto dei Dardanelli dal re lido Gige nella prima metà del VII secolo a.C.; con il passare del tempo divenne il più importante punto di riferimento nella Troade per gli Spartani ma con la pace del 387 a.C. tornò in mano dei Persiani. In seguito alla guerra tra i diadochi venne infine assegnata nel 281 a.C. ai Seleucidi ma venne distrutta nel 200 a.C. da Filippo V. Conquistata dai Romani venne dotata di nuove mura da Antioco III e dal 188 a.C. farà parte

p. 33 menzionano che sotto le acque di Aperlae è il basamento di un faro romano. 444 Liv. XXXVII; 16. 445 TAM II, 1, 131; IşIK-ECK-ENGELMANN 2008, p. 109. 446

450

Paus. VII, 7. «Smyrna» in Der Neue Pauly, 11, Stuttggart 2001, pp. 661-2. 452 RŐTHLISBERGER 1959, p. 33. 453 Anth. Pal., IX, 671: “Chi realizzò una tale opera? Di che città era e che carica aveva? Il faro è opera del proconsole Ambrosio di Mylasa”, trad. F.M.Pontani, ed. Einaudi, Torino 1980. Sul faro di Smirne anche BEDON 1988, p. 56, FEISSEL 1998, pp. 134-138. 454 FEISSEL 1998, pp. 134-135. 455 Anth. Pal. IX, 670: “Senza più temere le scure tenebre della notte, fate rotta verso di me naviganti: per tutti coloro che errano sui flutti, produco un fuoco che si vede da molto lontano, ricordo dell’opera degli Asclepiadi” (trad. B.Giardina). 451

IşIK-ECK-ENGELMANN 2008, pp. 91-120.

447

IşIK-ECK-ENGELMANN 2008, p. 108: „Nerone Claudio figlio del Divo Claudio....eresse questo faro a protezione dei naviganti”. 448 IşIK-ECK-ENGELMANN 2008, pp. 108-109: nell’epigrafe era scritto che il consiglio di Patara aveva eretto una statua in favore del legato di Vespasiano Sextus Marcius Priscus per quanto di buono aveva fatto negli otto anni che era stato incaricato della provincia Lycia e per la costruzione del faro e dell’antifaro per la sicurezza dei naviganti. 449 IşIK-ECK-ENGELMANN 2008, p. 92.

169

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA dell’amministrazione di Pergamo e avrà una grande importanza portuale in quanto risulta essere il porto più riparato dell’Ellesponto. In età bizantina si segnala come sede episcopale.456

SCHEDA 24 COSTANTINOPOLI/CHRYSOPOLIS (Istanbul, Scutari, Turchia) Provincia: Asia La città, sorta su un promontorio trapezoidale tra Corno d’oro (zona che ospita molti corsi fluviali) a nord, Mar di Marmara a sud, antica zona della Propontide, Bosforo a nord-est, messo direttamente in comunicazione con il Ponto Eusino (Mar Nero), l’antica città di Costantinopoli non poteva non ritagliarsi un ruolo di una certa importanza nelle rotte commerciali dell’antichità. Bisanzio, come venne chiamata la città, fu fondata nell’VIII secolo a.C. dall’eroe Byzas (figlio della ninfa Semystra e marito di Phidaleia) da cui prese nome. Un altro eroe di nome Antes avrebbe fondato la città, dunque l’origine del nome Byzantium deriverebbe dall’unione di questi due eroi. Conquistata dai Persiani alla fine del VI secolo a.C., una volta liberata, nel 478 a.C. entrò a far parte della lega delio-attica. Ribellatasi ad Atene nel V secolo a.C., fu conquistata da Alcibiade nel 408 a.C.. Aderì alla lega ellenica ribellandosi a Filippo II e alleandosi con i Romani contro i Macedoni. Nel III secolo d.C. parteggiò per Pescennio Nigro, alla sconfitta del quale fu punita da Settimio Severo e riacquistò la libertà solo sotto Caracalla. Nel 323 d.C. Costantino la ribattezza Costantinopoli e la sceglie come capitale dell’Impero Romano d’Oriente. Dopo un breve periodo di decadenza, Teodosio II nel V secolo d.C. le restituisce floridezza dotandola di numerosi monumenti. Nel 447 d.C. un violento terremoto distrugge buona parte dei monumenti, mentre Teodosio viene vinto da Attila. Nel VI secolo d.C. la città rinasce nuovamente grazie all’opera di Giustiniano, cui si deve anche la costruzione della basilica di Santa Sofia.461 Il porto permetteva di controllare i movimenti della flotta tra Mar Egeo e Ponto Eusino.462

I porti e i fari Le torri di Sesto e Abido di cui parla Strabone457 non possono che essere collegate alla leggenda di Ero e Leandro, i due sfortunati amanti che, a causa dell’odio delle famiglie, furono obbligati a incontrarsi clandestinamente. Leandro è costretto a una perigliosa traversata notturna dello Stretto dei Dardanelli, per cui Ero sale sulla torre del porto di Sesto con una lanterna in mano per guidare il natante.458 Come noto, il fuoco della lanterna si spegne a causa del vento e Leandro trova la morte tra i flutti. Al di là della leggenda, era necessario un segnale luminoso che guidasse i naviganti in un punto così difficile per la navigazione: la figura di Ero si sostituisce alla consueta statua posta sulla sommità dei fari. Non è rimasta alcuna evidenza archeologica ma possediamo alcune rappresentazioni iconografiche che ci possono venire in aiuto. Anzitutto, una moneta di Abido, coniata sotto il regno di Commodo, che rappresenta una torre cilindrica in laterizio sulla quale si erge Ero che tende in avanti la mano destra che regge la fiaccola che deve guidare Leandro, il quale appare al di sotto della torre, vero e proprio faro (Tav. 29, fig. 57). Un faro rappresentato come una semplice torre cilindrica sulla quale è una persona con una fiaccola sembra essere molto arcaica per una moneta del III secolo d.C., epoca in cui, ormai, la costruzione dei fari era cosa talmente usuale da non destare più meraviglia in nessuno. La moneta riprende evidentemente l’iconografia legata ai due sfortunati amanti e nota fin da epoca remota.

I porti e i fari La stessa struttura, infatti, appare in un affresco della Casa dei Vettii a Pompei (Tav. 29, fig. 58), dove però l’edificio è definito con maggiore dettaglio: una torre cilindrica a due piani, chiusa da una cupola, al di sotto della quale è una grande finestra dalla quale sporge Ero con la fiaccola;459 al centro è Leandro che nuota tra i flutti. Non solo sono ben visibili le scale che permettono di accedere al piano della lanterna di Ero ma, dietro Leandro, notiamo il suo servo che appare sopra una torre, preceduta da una scala. Evidentemente l’affresco fa riferimento alle due torri di cui parla Strabone. Infine, un rilievo frammentario (Tav. 30, fig. 59) mostra Leandro mentre si avvicina al faro su cui è Ero, riccamente vestita, che regge la fiaccola con la mano destra.460 In questa rappresentazione l’arco a tutto sesto che incornicia la figura di Ero è sostenuto da due colonnine corinzie.

Costantinopoli presentava tre porti,463 uno dei quali forma una città nota con il nome di Chrysopolis dal segmento VIII della Tabula Peutingeriana e che oggi possiamo identificare con Uskűdar (Scutari) la cui Torre di Leandro (Tav. 31, fig. 61b), già segnalata alla fine del Cinquecento dal viaggiatore veneziano Gioseppe Rosaccio (Tav. 30, fig. 60),464 funge ancora oggi da faro, ma anche da ristorante (Tav. 31, fig. 61a)! Anche in questo caso il nome della torre è legato alla leggenda ma c’è stato un fraintendimento tra il mito di Ero e Leandro e una novella araba che ha assegnato all’edificio anche il nome di Kiz Kulèsi (Torre della Figlia): un sultano nascose la figlia in questa torre poiché un negromante lo aveva avvertito che essa sarebbe morta in seguito al morso di un serpente. Un giorno la ragazza ricevette la visita del fornaio che le portava da mangiare, ma dalla cesta uscì un serpente che la ferì mortalmente.465

Conclusioni e problematiche Quanto al porto che a noi interessa, il Boukoleon (Tav. 31, fig. 62),466 è quello che corrisponde al luogo dove sorge il Palazzo Imperiale, presso il quale, senza alcun dubbio, dovette essere un faro sin dall’età romana. In età tardo antica, credo che Costantino abbia seguito le orme di Erode a Cesarea Marittima e di Tiberio a Capri, i quali sfruttarono la luce del faro anche per “pubblicizzare” i rispettivi palazzi imperiali. Il faro, noto dall’VIII secolo d.C., era situato su un’altura presso la quale, una volta demolito l’edificio, venne costruita la chiesa di Nostra

La leggenda di Ero e Leandro raccontata da Strabone e Museo nasconde una grande verità e cioè che per compiere una traversata da Abido a Sesto passando lo Stretto dei Dardanelli è necessario che i due porti di partenza e di arrivo posseggano una buona illuminazione che solo un faro può fornire. Quanto alla struttura di Abido possiamo dire poco sulla base di quello che vediamo dall’affresco pompeiano; più chiara sembra risultare la situazione di Sesto, il cui faro doveva presentarsi come una torre cilindrica a due piani, dei quali l’ultimo chiuso da una cupola con finestre incorniciate da colonne si stile corinzio.

461

«Byzantion, Byzanz» in Der Neue Pauly, 2, Stuggart-Weimar 19976, pp. 866-880. 462 REDDE 1986, pp. 257-258. GUILLAND, 1969, pp. 273 ss. 463 Dio. Byz. IX. 464 ROSACCIO 1549, p. 76 (ristampa anastatica ed. Della Laguna, Mariano del Friuli 1992). 465 LUGANI 1979, p. 137. 466 GUILLAND 1969, pp. 273-293.

456

«Abydos, 1» in Der Neue Pauly, 1, Stuggart 1997, pp. 45-6. Strab. XIII, I, 22. 458 Mus. 23-25. 459 PPM, V, Regio VI, II, Roma 1994, pp. 484-495. 460 VEITMEYER 1900, pp. 18-19; GIARDINA 2007, p. 149, fig. 6b. 457

170

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO Signora al Faro, il cui toponimo risulta fin troppo evidente.467 Oggi la chiesa è scomparsa ma, già agli inizi del Novecento, il Thiersch riteneva che il faro, inglobato all’interno dell’edificio, fosse il punto terminale di un sistema di segnalazioni luminose create per aiutare i naviganti delle coste asiatiche ed europee a mettersi in contatto con il palazzo imperiale e la città di Costantinopoli.468

sembra essere stato costituito da un semplice segnale luminoso posizionato su un’alta terrazza del Palazzo.472 Conclusioni e problematiche Costantinopoli doveva possedere un fitto sistema di segnalazioni, ma il faro principale della città doveva essere collocato presso il porto Boukeleon, alle porte del Palazzo Imperiale, sul modello di quello di Caesarea Maritima, ancora esistente in epoca bizantina e al quale, evidentemente, si ispirava. La struttura comprendeva tre piani, dei quali il secondo adibito a stanze abitabili per i soldati e gli addetti alla funzionalità del faro e l’ultimo piano, raggiungibile per mezzo di una scala, ospitava la lanterna e doveva avere forma cilindrica. Nulla è dato sapere sulla statua che sormontava il faro: si potrebbe pensare a Costantino divinizzato ma si tratta di una pura suggestione. E’ possibile ipotizzare una piattaforma di 4 m di altezza che sarebbe da far corrispondere al rialzo studiato dallo Schneider all’interno del primo piano delle abitazioni turche da lui indagate. La struttura scomparirà in epoca medioevale quando i Genovesi costruiranno al suo posto una torre di avvistamento forse riconoscibile in quella rappresentata nel mosaico di S. Giovanni Evangelista a Ravenna.473

Oltre al faro di Chrysopolis all’entrata del Bosforo, del quale si è già trattato, un’altra torre semaforica di minori dimensioni doveva essere presente su una sporgenza del Corno d’Oro in prossimità di una località chiamata Phane, probabilmente identificabile con l’odierno quartiere Phanar di Istanbul, toponimo nato forse per la presenza di un faro.469 C’è chi ha voluto riconoscere nella Colonna di Costantino (Tav. 32, fig. 63) rappresentata sulla Tabula Peutingeriana il faro della città, ma la presenza di quel monumento è assai attestata e la struttura è troppo esile per poter essere riconosciuta come quella di un faro.470 Tuttavia, non è da escludere che nella posizione in cui la vignetta della Tabula Peutingeriana rappresenta la Colonna di Costantino, vi fosse un faro che scambiasse i segnali con quello di Chrysopolis di cui ho precedentemente trattato.

SCHEDA 25 HERACLEA PONTICA (Eregli, Siria) Provincia: Bithinia

Mentre i porti di Neorion e Prosphorianon continuarono a svolgere la loro funzione nel tempo, il Boukoleon scomparì progressivamente lasciando scarse tracce della sua presenza. Là dove doveva sorgere il faro venne instaurata, in epoca turca, al posto della chiesa più volte menzionata, una torre sulla quale, in un secondo momento, si inserirono alcune abitazioni private. Secondo lo Schneider tutti e tre i piani dell’antico faro della città furono utilizzati per la costruzione della torre turca.

Nel 560 a.C., a 2 km dal fiume Lukos, presso il piccolo fiume Acheronte, coloni megaresi e beoti fondano la città di Eraclea, collocata sul Mar Nero, in Bitinia. Centro dominante e commerciale del Ponto sin dal IV scolo a.C., tanto florida da poter coniare monete in argento, subì la tirannide di Lisimaco, si liberò ma venne nuovamente saccheggiata durante la terza guerra mitridatica nel I secolo a.C.. Sotto l’impero romano ebbe ancora il potere di battere moneta e il suo nome era ancora noto nel Medioevo.474

Non a caso l’interno di queste abitazioni era diviso in tre piani, due alti ed uno di dimensioni inferiori (Tav. 32, fig. 64). Il pavimento del primo piano risulta sopraelevato di 4 m sullo zoccolo, rialzato di circa 75 cm rispetto al terreno. Al tempo in cui scriveva lo Schneider si conservavano nella loro forma originaria solo le parti laterali della botte, costruita in mattoni e piccoli conci. La parte centrale è stata, infatti, notevolmente cambiata in epoca turca. Quanto alla porta d’ingresso, situata nella parete nord, si propone una datazione ancora più tarda. La parte posteriore della torre è stata costruita davanti alle mura che si affacciano sul mare, si può dunque ipotizzare per la sua architettura ed iconografia, che sia quella che vediamo nel mosaico medioevale rappresentante la torre di difesa assalita durante la presa di Costantinopoli a S. Giovanni Evangelista a Ravenna. Il secondo piano era rivestito da un pavimento con mattonelle esagonali ed è quindi stato supposto che la struttura possedesse alcuni appartamenti già all’epoca in cui la struttura fungeva da faro per poter ospitare gli addetti alla manutenzione della torre.

Il porto e il faro Il porto, grazie all’ausilio delle colonie dedotte, soprattutto Cheroneso continuò ad essere attivo anche in epoca medioevale assicurandosi così il commercio del Mar Nero.475 Un porto di tale importanza non poteva certo essere sprovvisto di un faro, la cui immagine è nota solo grazie ad esemplari numismatici di tarda età imperiale. In tutte le monete (III secolo d.C.) l’edificio di Eraclea si presenta come una torre a quattro piani poligonali digradanti verso l’alto, dei quali l’ultimo presenta una forma cilindrica. Nel piano inferiore si apre una porta ad arco presso la quale è possibile supporre una scala che conducesse alla sommità (Tav. 33, fig. 65).476 Imhoof-Blumer, Babelon e Reinach non riconoscono questo monumento come il faro di Eraclea ma piuttosto come una pira funeraria su modello di quella descritte da Erodiano.477

Il terzo piano si presentava molto rovinato ma, negli anni Sessanta, permetteva ancora di vedere il resto di una scala che conduceva a una piattaforma circolare che, in antico, doveva ospitare la lanterna.471 Anche per la fase bizantina della città, durante il regno di Michele III (842-867 d.C.), un faro è attestato presso l’ormai scomparsa Chiesa di Nostra Signora del Faro, ancora visibile nei pressi del Palazzo Imperiale ma che

A mio avviso è più probabile che si tratti della rappresentazione dell’edificio principale del porto che donava alla città una vita assai prospera grazie ai commerci. Inoltre nella legenda non è presente il termine consecratio (né un corrispondente termine greco), normalmente allegato a tale tipo di emissione (Tav. 33, fig. 66). 472

BRYER-WINFIELD 1985, pp. 216-2; MÜLLER-WIENER 1977, p. 233. FARIOLI CAMPANATI 1995, fig. 24. «Herakleia, 7» in Der Neue Pauly, 5, Stuggart-Weimar 1998, pp. 365-6. 475 Sui fatti relativi al Ponto Eusino si veda KING 2005, pp. 53-56 476 ROBERT 1970, pp. 25-253 ; GIARDINA 2007, pp. 152-153, fig. 11a. 477 WADDINGTON-BABELON-REINACH 1984, p. 370.

467

473

MŰLLER-WIENER 1977, p. 60, voce Boukoleon-Hafen. 468 MACLAGAN 1968, p. 74. 469 TURQUE 1972, p. 238. 470 Sui fari della Tabula Peutingeriana si vedano LEVI 1967, pp. 125127; BOSIO 1983; SALWAY 2001. 471 SCHNEIDER1967, pp. 8-29.

474

171

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Le monete a noi note appartengono ai regni di Geta, Gordiano e Gallieno ma si presentano del tutto simili tra loro. L’architettura del faro sembra essere costituita da grandi mattoni in laterizio; la scarsa leggibilità della parte superiore della moneta non consente di comprendere se sulla sommità dell’edificio vi fosse un quarto piano o, come probabile, una statua.

Il porto e il faro Nulla sappiamo sulla possibile esistenza di un faro nella città portuale di Istros, ma alcuni studiosi482 hanno voluto interpretare come tale un edificio rappresentato su una moneta di Alessandro Severo ed Elagabalo. Al rovescio (Tav. 34, fig. 68), è rappresentata la personificazione di un fiume, con ogni probabilità l’Ister (Danubio) davanti a un edificio di forma allungata, interpretato come un faro che manifestava l’importanza commerciale, marittima e fluviale, del porto all’epoca degli ultimi Severi.483 Tuttavia, questa struttura monolitica e assai sottile si presta, a mio avviso, a essere meglio interpretata come un obelisco o una fontana: esso rappresenterebbe, infatti, un unicum nella riproduzione numismatica dei fari, la cui rappresentazione non varia molto da un esemplare all’altro.484

SCHEDA 26 CAESAREA GERMANICA (Bulgaria?, Mar Nero) Provincia: Bithinia Mai menzionata da Strabone, mai esattamente localizzata, si ipotizza, tuttavia, esistesse già all’epoca di Germanico, dal quale prese forse anche il nome, e che forse fu il suo secondo fondatore. La produzione numismatica, unica testimonianza che ci possa parzialmente guidare nel tracciare una breve storia della città, va dall’epoca di Germanico sino a quella di Valeriano.478

SCHEDA 28 THASOS-PALEOKASTRO (Thassos, Grecia) Provincia: Macedonia

Il porto e il faro Il porto della città non è mai stato localizzato ma la sua forma e gli edifici che lo dovevano adornare sono noti da un esemplare numismatico, coniato durante il regno di Pescennio Nigro (Tav. 34, fig. 67): la forma dell’edificio è rotonda e in esso troviamo una statua maschile con patera e lancia (forse Poseidone), davanti alla quale è una torre (il faro) ed un tempio. Il faro è noto esclusivamente da questa moneta che presenta sul lato sinistro un edificio chiuso da un tetto piramidale che potrebbe far riferimento a un horreum o a parte dei navalia; accanto ad esso, racchiusa in un tondo è una nave che si avvicina al faro della città. L’edificio, assai slanciato, presenta tre piani di forma cilindrica, sull’ultimo dei quali è un personaggio con scettro, la cui testa sembra radiata. Immediato è il collegamento con Helios, la cui figura ben si lega alla principale funzione del faro: fare luce ai naviganti.479 Il tipo monetale è assai simile a quello nel quale Thiersch riconosceva il porto di Gesoriacum (scheda 75): il bacino portuale sembra essere visto da una posizione elevata ma non abbiamo nessun elemento per poterne chiarire le strutture. La presenza, in basso, del toro sacrificale è legata forse alla visita dell’imperatore al porto.480 Non molto altro si può dire su questa struttura che, ad ogni modo, manifesta l’importanza, anche strategica, del porto di Caesarea, la cui effettiva collocazione non è ancora certa.

La più settentrionale delle isole greche (Tav. 35, fig. 69), situata di fronte alla costa della Tracia, fu per secoli l’avamposto ellenico per le incursioni in Oriente. Fondata secondo la leggenda da Taso, figlio di Poseidone,485 la città venne colonizzata dai Parii già dall’VIII secolo a.C. ed era già fiorente nel V secolo a.C., quando era sotto i Persiani. Contesa tra Sparta e Atene, venne definitivamente conquistata dai Macedoni nel 340 a.C. La sua vita rimase invariata fino a che nel 1429 non venne ceduta dall’imperatore bizantino al genovese Dorino Gattilusio, al quale venne sottratta dai Turchi nel 1456 e nelle cui mani rimase sino al 1912. Il porto e le torri-faro L’antico porto militare è stato coperto dalle strutture di quello moderno.486 Due dovevano essere i fari dell’isola ma se ne conservano tre in altrettante zone. Un monumento è presente nella zona di Phanari (Tav. 36, fig. 72) e si presenta come una torre circolare, assai simile alla Torre del Lazzaretto di Civitavecchia (scheda 61), con un diametro di circa 3,50 m. Secondo il Bon non si è mai trattato di un vero e proprio faro ma di una torre di avvistamento.487 L’edificio, costruito con grandi blocchi di marmo grigio provenienti dalla costa è databile al VI secolo a.C., dunque ben tre secoli prima della costruzione del faro di Alessandria, cosa che farebbe supporre che strutture faree esistessero anche prima dell’opera di Sostrato di Cnido. Non a caso il termine πÌργος lo ritroviamo in uno dei toponimi dove è collocata una di queste strutture: Cap Pyrgos. Esso risulta collocato 8,23 m sopra l’attuale livello del mare su un promontorio che permette di avere una visuale di 360° .488

SCHEDA 27 ISTROS (Histria, Romania) Provincia: Moesia Abitata a partire dall’ultimo quarto del VII secolo a.C., la città venne fondata da coloni greci provenienti prevalentemente da Mileto. Danneggiata alla fine del VI secolo a.C. dalla spedizione di Dario, la città rinasce intorno al IV secolo per passare definitivamente, dopo la sconfitta di Mitridate nel 72 a.C., sotto il dominio romano alla guida del procuratore di Macedonia, M. Terentius Varro Lucullus. Al principio del I secolo a.C., la nuova Histria viene incendiata dalla spedizione del re geta Burebista, per poi avere il periodo di suo massimo splendore nel II secolo d.C., almeno fino alla distruzione della città durante il regno di Marco Aurelio a causa di un’incursione barbara. Rinata nuovamente sotto i Severi, ricade nel 250 d.C. in seguito ad un attacco da parte dei Goti che la lasciano agonizzante. Nonostante scampi miracolosamente all’attacco degli Avari del 587 d.C., la città verrà definitivamente abbandonata nel VII secolo d.C. a causa delle incursioni slave.481

Si tratta della tomba-faro di Akèrastos (Tav. 36, fig. 71), sopraelevata di 100 m s.l.m.. Il nobile che volle erigere questo monumento volle che sullo stesso fosse apposta questa scritta: “Questo è il monumento di Akèrastos, figlio dei Frasieridi; è stato posto sulla rada, segnale di protezione per le navi e i naviganti. Salute”.489

482

ROBERT 19, p. 99. PICK 1898, p. 518, PREDA-NUBAR 1973, p. 65, n. 719. GIARDINA 2007, p. 156, fig. 18. 485 Apollod. III, 1. 486 Per la storia del porto e delle scoperte archeologiche a livello subacqueo si veda ARCHONTIDOU-ARGYRI-SIMOSSI 1986, pp. 51-59. 487 BON 1930, p. 151, sulla storia della città «Thasos» in Der Neue Pauly, 12/1, Stuggart-Weimar 2002, pp 244-245. 488 KOZELY –KOZELJ 2001, p. 44. 489 IG. XII 8, 683; GIARDINA 2005, p. 146. 483 484

478

WADDINGTON-BABELON-REINACH 1908, pp. 280-282. Ad Helios pensano DICTIONNAIRE 1906, p.430; THIERSCH 1909, p. 21. 480 PENSA 1998b, p. 133; GIARDINA 2007, pp. 153-154, fig. 13. 481 ISTROS 1996, pp.11-16. 479

172

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO Un terzo faro è stato riconosciuto all’entrata del porto di Thasos, punto assai difficile per la navigazione. Si tratta della tomba-faro di Evraiokastro, che in epoca medioevale persisteva ancora e che è stata poi inglobata nell’abside della basilica paleocristiana (Tav. 35, fig. 70).490

di Marco Aurelio e Lucio Vero, su modello di quelle che sappiamo essere state presenti in molti porti dell’impero come, ad esempio, quello di Puteoli. In un’altra emissione, assai rovinata (Tav. 37, fig. 74), il faro appare come un tozzo edificio a tre piani degradanti verso l’alto, due di forma quadrata e l’ultimo cilindrico. E’ bene evidente la porta di ingresso all’edificio alla base del primo piano, ma lo stato di conservazione della moneta non permette una dettagliata analisi dell’edificio che, effettivamente, si presenta molto diverso da quello indagato in precedenza.

Conclusioni e problematiche Dunque, l’isola di Thasos era provvista di ben tre fari, probabilmente collocati nei punti che allora si ritenevano più difficili per la navigazione. Ancora una volta, come nel caso di Taposiris Magna e di Nèa Paphos, si nota che la struttura è associata alla tomba di un personaggio che, forse, era stato coinvolto nella marina o che aveva perduto la vita proprio perché quel punto non era ben segnalato, come nel caso di Akèrastos. Cap Pyrgos è un toponimo molto eloquente che potremmo tradurre letteralmente Punta della Torre, ma più probabilmente Capo del Faro. Quanto all’architettura essa si presenta con grandi blocchi di pietra, simili a quelli utilizzati in epoca punica per la torre-faro di Nora, ma di forma diversa rispetto alla consueta tipologia, una tozza torre circolare alla cui sommità si accedeva probabilmente per mezzo di una scala esterna (Tav. 36, fig. 72).

Successivamente, durante il regno di Commodo (Tav. 38, fig. 75a), il faro del porto assume connotazioni più simili a quelle a noi note tramite altri esemplari e al primo analizzato in questa scheda. L’edificio viene rappresentato come una torre cilindrica a tre piani digradanti verso l’alto su cui brilla la fiamma della lanterna: una nave è rappresentata sulla sinistra nell’atto di avvicinarsi al faro che presenta una porta monumentale al centro del primo piano, tipologia assai simile a quella che lo stesso Commodo aveva voluto per le monete alessandrine (Tav. 38, fig. 75b). Conclusioni e problematiche Il faro di Corinto, riconosciuto da Bedon, Daremberg e Saglio nel porto di Cenchreae,497 sarebbe da ricercare 2,5 km più ad ovest nel Lechaion secondo le indagini di Engels498 che vorrebbe l’edificio nelle vicinanze del tempio di Poseidone. Vista la diversità tipologica presente nei due esemplari numismatici si potrebbe supporre che Corinto fosse dotata di due distinti fari collocati rispettivamente nel porto centrale della città e in quello periferico.499

SCHEDA 29 CORINTHUS (Corinto, Grecia) Provincia: Achaia Situata in una posizione ottimale sulla strada che da Sparta conduce ad Atene, la città si affaccia su due mari imponendosi già in epoca arcaica come potenza commerciale. E’, infatti, nota la diffusione della ceramica corinzia che decadrà solo nel V secolo a.C. quando si diffonderà quella ateniese.491 La città fu quasi rasa al suolo dal console Mummio,492 successore di Metello. Giulio Cesare la fece rinascere e Nerone progettò il canale di Corinto493 che doveva tagliare l’omonimo istmo ma che venne realizzato solo nel 1893 per opera del generale ungherese Tűrr. La città fu assai florida anche sotto Marco Aurelio. Corinto verrà distrutta, in epoca medioevale, a causa di numerose guerre tra Normanni e Turchi, delle quali la più violenta avvenne nel 1147.494

SCHEDA 30 DYRRACHIUM Provincia: Macedonia

(Durazzo,

Albania)

Nata nel 626 a.C. come città greca degli abitanti di Corinto e Corcyra (Corfù) col nome di Epidamno; conquistata dai Romani, lo cambiò in Dyrrachium.500 La città è legata sia agli scontri tra Cesare e Pompeo durante la guerra civile,501 sia alla sua ottima posizione geografica al termine della via Egnatia che le consentiva di avere un rapporto privilegiato con Tessalonica e Costantinopoli, sia al fatto che si affacciava direttamente sul mare Adriatico, tramite il quale commerciava con l’altra sponda ed in particolare col porto di Brundisium. Devastata da terremoti e, assai più recentemente, dalla guerra, sta oggi tentando di risollevare anche le sorti del suo glorioso passato testimoniato da uno dei più grandi anfiteatri del mondo romano.502

I porti e i fari Due erano i porti della città, il Leuchaion, a ovest, e il Cenchreae,495 ad est. Quest’ultimo, porto principale della città, situato sul canale della stessa, occupava la zona tra l’Ellade e il Pelopponeso. Solo alcune monete della zecca cittadina ci permettono di identificare il faro della città. Le monete, coniate sotto il regno di Marco Aurelio, presentano due diverse tipologie. Una di queste, riprodotta anche da un disegno del Mionnet, individua sul molo una torre cilindrica su cui è una statua con patera e lancia (Tav. 37, fig. 73). A fianco dell’edificio due statue equestri. Bableon non aveva dubbi nel riconoscere in questo edificio il faro del porto, Mionnet sosteneva invece che si trattava dell’obelisco di un circo.496 A mio avviso la struttura, specialmente nella sua base, presenta una circonferenza troppo larga per potere essere identificata con un obelisco; quanto alle due figure a cavallo penso si possa pensare a due statue equestri

Il porto e il faro Il porto moderno ha quasi completamente obliterato quello antico, ma in seguito ad alcuni scavi di emergenza, nel luglio 2007 è emersa, presso rrugga Durresi, una struttura di pianta rotonda di circa 5,8 m di diametro che potrebbe essere

497 DICTIONNAIRE 1906, p. 430; BEDON 1988, p. 57, sul molo di Cenchrae furono individuati negli Anni Settanta resti di una struttura identificata come un faro, BRILL 1978, pp. 21-23. 498 ENGELS 1990, p. 12. 499 Esempi di porti dotati di due o più fari sono assai noti nel mondo greco-romano, basti pensare a Thasos, Centumcellae, Caesarea Maritima… 500 Paus. VI, 6,19,8; Tuk. I, 24,4, Cic. fam. 14,1 501 Caes. civ. I, 25,2; 27,1; III, 5,2; 9,8; 11,2; 13, 1,3-5; 26,1-3; 30, 1; 41,3-5; 42,1; 44,1;53,1; 57,1; 58,1; 62; 3; 78,3; 79,4; 80,4; 100, 3. 502 «Dyrrachion» in Der Neue Pauly, 3, Stuggart-Weimar 1997, p. 858; GUTTERIDGE ET ALII 2001, pp. 391-410.

490

KOZELJ -KOZELJ 1989, pp. 175-180. WÄGNER 1955, pp. 67-70. 492 Paus. V, 10, 5. 493 Suet. Ner. XIX. 494 «Korinthos» in Der Neue Pauly, 6, Stuggart-Weimar 1999, pp. 745752. 495 SCRANTON-SHAW-IBRAHIM 1978, pp. 21-24. 496 DICTIONNAIRE 1906, p. 430 491

173

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA identificata come il faro romano dell’antica Dyrrachium.503 Il paramento esterno di questa struttura presenta grandi blocchi di conglomerato e riempimento in opus caementicium,504 tecnica abbondantemente utilizzata per la costruzione di fari. Sopra il plinto di forma circolare si instaura un’ulteriore struttura di forma quadrata in laterizi che misura circa 20x30x8 cm. Il plinto è rivestito da 4 corsi di grandi blocchi squadrati di conglomerato naturale. Secondo la Di Febo il primo plinto circolare (oltre -4 m di profondità) non sarebbe la fondazione della torre ma la parte bassa del suo alzato. La struttura (Tav.38. fig.76), secondo il Direttore del Museo di Durazzo, Afrim Hoti, è da ascrivere al III-II secolo a.C., e, dunque, il possibile faro sarebbe contemporaneo o leggermente successivo alla costruzione del faro di Alessandria.

modo dato fastidio al navigante per capire se quella che vedeva di fronte a lui era la luce del faro o di un qualche tempio. Sarebbe più logico che, se in quella posizione vi fosse stato un palazzo imperiale, su modello di Caesarea Maritima o Costantinopoli, il faro fosse stato collocato all’esterno del cortile oppure come punto terminale di esso per esaltare la bellezza del palazzo imperiale (ma la presenza di una pavimentazione in cocciopesto farebbe pensare semmai ad un horreum e non certo a un palazzo imperiale) e allo stesso tempo far luce al navigante; ma solo possibili futuri scavi ed indagini potranno rivelare la vera funzione di questo edificio, che, ad ogni modo, è stato escluso potesse essere una torre difensiva della cerchia muraria tardo antica. Sarebbe molto bello se anche gli scavi che il Prof. Bruno Kirigin dell’Università di Spalato sta effettuando nella piccola isola di Palagrûza, situata proprio tra Durazzo e Brindisi, restituissero un’altra torre farea che andrebbe a ribadire quel sistema di triangolazioni di cui si è parlato in precedenza.

Conclusioni e problematiche Non avendo visto personalmente la struttura nè avendo partecipato allo scavo, le mie conclusioni non possono che essere molto limitate, e bisognerà attendere le pubblicazioni scientifiche degli accademici albanesi per sapere qualcosa di più su una struttura che certo non poteva mancare in un polo commerciale come Durazzo. La struttura, in base alle foto e alle planimetrie che mi è stato consentito analizzare, presenta delle caratteristiche molto particolari, anzitutto per la forma: immaginare una torre alla base circolare poi quadrata è piuttosto strano; delle due dovrebbe essere quadrata alla base per poi semmai proseguire con un piano quadrato e terminare infine con uno cilindrico. Non sarà mai dato sapere però se la Di Febo ha ragione e siamo in presenza del secondo piano, o se alla base vi è un ulteriore plinto di forma quadrata; tuttavia, le già notevoli dimensioni del diametro, mi porterebbero ad escludere questa possibilità. Altro problema: la struttura è collocata all’interno di un cortile porticato a forma di U (Tav. 38, fig. 76), pavimentato in cocciopesto e fornito di una cisterna collocata assai vicino alla struttura indagata. Come visto, la presenza di una cisterna posta in prossinità di una torre collocata topograficamente in un luogo strategico per un faro è stata più volte analizzata (Patara, Torre del canale S.Felice nella Laguna Veneziana e così via). Ma questa torre è oggi collocata a 450 m dall’attuale linea di costa e la Di Febo ipotizza che in età romana essa dovesse essere a 250 m dalla costa. Ma è molto strano che un faro venga collocato all’interno di un cortile porticato (sempre ammettendo che esso sia contemporaneo a questa struttura). Come poteva il personale accedere liberamente alla torre se doveva prima entrare nel cortile, sarebbe stato piuttosto scomodo per chi, con gli animali avrebbe dovuto portare in cima alla torre il materiale combustibile. Inoltre la presenza del portico, seppure possiamo supporre che il piano della lanterna fosse almeno una decina di metri sopraelevato sul cortile porticato, avrebbe in qualche

I FARI DELLA DALMATIA E DELL’HISTRIA Già nell’antichità le notizie circa le evidenze architettoniche di queste province erano assai scarse. Gli autori antichi, infatti, insistevano soprattutto sul temperamento furioso degli abitanti che aveva portato Roma a diversi scontri. Già in epoca greca, l’isola doveva essere dotata di torri di avvistamento o di veri e propri fari che aiutassero i naviganti a destreggiarsi in una delle coste più frastagliate dell’Europa. La maggior parte delle città che oggi costituiscono il polo turistico di Istria e Dalmazia erano un tempo delle isole e la loro presenza andava segnalata con apposite strutture. Addirittura Pyrranhum (Pirano) pare debba il suo nome proprio alla radice greca pyr- che vuol dire fuoco.505 Abitata sin dal Neolitico, la regione venne conquistata dai Greci di Paros che si stabilirono nelle isole creando importanti empori commerciali. I porti principali della provincia Illyricum erano invece sulla terraferma: Salona era il più importante insieme a Senia (Senj). Molti altri porti e approdi erano disseminati lungo la costa: Aenona (Nin)506 Epidaurum (Cavtat), Iader (Zara), ma non mancavano anche i porti fluviali come Narona (Vid) e Scardona (Skradin).507 Alcuni toponimi come Pharos (Starigrad-Hvar) e Navalia (Novalja-Pag)508 testimoniano l’importanza portuale della provincia. SCHEDA 31 NARONA Provincia:Dalmatia

(Vid-Metković,

Croazia)

Centro sorto alla foce del fiume Naro (Neretva), il cui corso era fondamentale per la comunicazione fra Mediterraneo e interno della regione balcanica, è’ noto che già nel IV secolo a.C. questo sito possedeva un porto di nome Narona nel quale erano Greci e Illiri.509 Durante tutto il corso del I secolo a.C. il porto venne scelto dai Romani come base militare contro i Dalmati e, in quel tempo, era forse più importante di Salona. In epoca tardo-imperiale il lento insabbiarsi del fiume e la sensibile variazione del suo corso fecero decadere il porto in favore di quello più florido della non lontana Salona. Nel VII secolo d.C. la città venne distrutta dagli Avari e dagli Slavi.510

503 DI FEBO 2007, pp. 3, 133. Questa è al momento l’unica pubblicazione disponibile per quanto riguarda il faro di Durazzo; ringrazio la Prof.ssa Sara Santoro dell’Università di Parma e la Dott.ssa Roberta Di Febo della stessa Università per alcuni chiarimenti in merito. In realtà, essendo il monumento ancora in corso di scavo, il testo si limita a una breve analisi della struttura confrontandola con altri fari, tutti già ampiamente trattati dal sottoscritto in altra sede (GIARDINA 2004) e in vari articoli successivi (GIARDINA 2005, 2007). Il Prof. Kirigin, con il quale ho avuto modo di parlare, è sicuro che nella piccola isola di Palagruza tra Albania e Puglia vi fosse un faro, ma sicuramente altre strutture dovevano trovarsi in altre importanti città portuali albanesi come ad esempio Apollonia. Recentissima è la pubblicazione HOTI/SANTORO 2008, della quale ho avuto notizia dal Prof.Afrim Hoti e dalla Prof.ssa Sara Santoro, che ringrazio, e che precisano che benchè l’interpretazione della struttura come faro sia solo un’ipotesi è stata accettata da tutti gli studiosi nei recenti convegni di Grenoble e La Coruña. 504 DI FEBO 2007, p. 3.

505

FOSCAN 2003 p. 80. BRUSIČ 2006, pp. 33-45. 507 Una bella rassegna delle città portuali dalmate MATIJASIC 2001; CAMBI 2001, pp. 137-160. 508 RADIČ ROSSI 2004. 509 Mela 2, 57; Plin. Nat. 21, 40; Itin. Anton. 338,4, Tab. Peut. 6,4; per le vicende storiche della città «Narona» in Der Neue Pauly, 8, StuggartWeimar 2000, pp. 715-716; del porto parla anche Theop., apud Strabonis Geographica, 317, il quale afferma che il fiume permette la navigazione anche a navi di grandi dimensioni. 510 RINALDI TUFI 1989, p. 83. 506

174

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO denominato Gor (si legga Tor) in lingua Slava. La fabbrica presenta un’opera di lavoro ciclopico e fra i tre generi di tali lavori quello che veniva costruito di massi regolari di forma quadrilunga già sovrapposti uno all’altro senza cemento”515

Il porto e il faro Il piccolo villaggio di Vid, oggi a 4 km dal centro di Metković, ha restituito durante gli scavi effettuati nel Novecento due torri cilindriche, ascrivibili forse alle strutture accessorie dell’emporio ellenico, presso la parrocchiale di Sv. Vid (Tav. 39, fig. 77a). Essendo l’edificio nelle immediate vicinanze del fiume Neretva (Tav. 39, fig. 77b), si può immaginare che esse facessero parte del porto e che avessero una funzione di segnale luminoso per guidare le navi nella notte; purtroppo di esse non rimane quasi più traccia. I resti del porto non sono, tuttavia, ancora stati trovati ma si immagina che esso sorgesse sulla riva del fiume nota con il nome di Orepak dalla punta sino all’area del foro romano che, in epoca ellenistica, aveva funzione di emporion.511 Un monumento di Narona che ha sempre destato la curiosità degli studiosi e che è divenuto assai famoso in campo epigrafico è la Torre di Ereš (Tav. 39, fig. 78). Collocata nella parte alta della città è ormai certo che essa si fosse instaurata su una torre precedente (di epoca almeno ellenistica, anche se recenti indagini ne sposterebbero la datazione al II secolo a.C.) da mettere in relazione con il primo emporio della città.512 Questa torre, tuttavia, come le altre indagate, non aveva funzione di faro ma faceva parte del sistema difensivo delle mura e quindi poteva fungere da torre di avvistamento.

La torre (Tav. 40, fig. 79) si presenta come un rettangolo di 7,4 x 6,2 m con un’altezza di 6:516 la sua posizione, 235 m s.l.m., non permette di classificarla come faro ma, piuttosto, come torre d’avvistamento. La torre è stata restaurata una prima volta nel 1912 ma, a seguito dei bombardamenti della Seconda Guerra Mondiale, ha subito un ulteriore restauro nel 1974. Il faro vero e proprio era collocato su una collina distante 7,5 km da questo sito e ne rimane ancora traccia nella torre di Maslinovik (Tav. 40, fig. 80). Questo edificio doveva essere alto più di 10 m ed essere visibile dalla costa grazie alla sua posizione sopraelevata sul livello del mare di 67 m. I dati dello scavo effettuato presso la torre l’hanno descritta come un quadrato, con un tetto di tegole. La parte più bassa è in pietra squadrata e supporta una trave che permetteva di sorreggere il tetto. Sono state trovate anche tracce di un forno che testimonia quindi come la struttura fosse dotata di una stanza per uno o più guardiani che tramite la combustione di legno in esso potevano emettere segnali di fumo alle navi che si avvicinavano alla costa. La torre di Tor avrebbe trasmesso un segnale (positivo o negativo) a quella di Maslinovik in modo tale che essa potesse fare gli appropriati segnali alle navi che vedeva in lontananza a seconda che fossero nemici o alleati.517

SCHEDA 32 PHAROS (Hvar-Jelsa, Croazia) Provincia: Dalmatia Abitata sino dal Neolitico, l’isola fu presa dai Greci di Paros nel IV secolo a.C. e utilizzata come luogo di scambio con l’area del Mar Nero e con l’isola di Thasos. L’isola di Pharos è la più larga della zona e, ad eccezione di 1200 ha coltivabili, si presenta rocciosa e ricoperta di pini. Gli abitanti di Paros si insediarono nella parte più settentrionale dell’isola nella baia di Vala, separata da alte montagne dalla parte più occidentale dell’isola dove è l’odierna città di Hvar. La greca Pharos corrisponde invece all’odierna Starigrad. Residenza del tiranno Demetrio di Faro, l’isola assunse il nome di Pharia sotto la dominazione romana, diventando un’importante sede agricola assegnata alla colonia di Salona.513

SCHEDA 33 SALONAE (Salona, Croazia) Provincia: Dalmatia Alla foce del fiume Salon (Jader), protetto da una bassa penisola, nel III secolo a.C. alcuni coloni siracusani provenienti dall’attuale isola di Vis, fondarono la città di Salona (Tav. 41, fig. 81). Essendosi schierata dalla parte di Cesare durante la guerra tra questi e Pompeo, ottenne il titolo di Colonia Martia Iulia che sottolineava il carattere combattivo dei suoi abitanti. Divenuta capitale dell’Illyricus Superius sotto Augusto (10 a.C.), fu sede anche di una guarnigione militare diventando uno dei principali porti delle province romane per le incursioni in Pannonia, Moesia e Dacia. Ancora importante sede militare durante le guerre di Marco Aurelio contro i Marcomanni, solo nel IV secolo d.C. iniziò a decadere in favore della vicina Aspalatos dove Diocleziano, che aveva abdicato nel 395 d.C., volle erigere il suo imponente palazzo che ancora oggi funge da mura al centro dell’attuale Spalato. La città divenne sede vescovile nel V secolo d.C. e ospitò due concilii. Salona verrà distrutta dagli Avari nel corso del VII secolo d.C., epoca in cui tutta la popolazione si rifugiò nel Palazzo di Diocleziano.518

La torre di segnalazione e il faro Alcuni studiosi hanno affermato che quando Mela514 nella sua opera parlava di Pharos (paragonandolo ad Alessandria) intendeva nominare l’isola croata e non un faro nel porto di Brindisi, come invece sembrerebbe emergere dal testo. Non sappiamo se ciò fosse vero, anche se ritengo più probabile che il geografo facesse allusione a Brindisi; tuttavia, nella zona di Jelsa, troviamo una località dal toponimo più che esaustivo: Tor. Si tratta di un sito collinare sul quale sono state trovate due torri di età ellenistica con la sicura funzione di torri di segnalazione e, credo, di fari. Non possediamo fonti classiche o medioevali che ci parlino di queste strutture ma abbiamo la testimonianza del viaggiatore Richard Burton che visitò il sito il 29 Dicembre 1874:

Il porto e il faro Il porto di Salona era lungo 19 km e largo dai tre ai sei. Il faro dell’antica Salona non è mai stato trovato e molti studiosi hanno tentato di identificarlo in zone assai diverse tra loro: il Farlati affermava che era da ricercare nell’antico villaggio di Vranjic e sulla costa prospiciente “Slano”, nei pressi dell’odierna cappella

“Due vetusti interessanti fabbricati trovansi nelle vicinanze di Gelsa, entrambi posti sopra eminenze a mezzogiorno della borgata ed alla distanza più o meno di un miglio da essa. Il più antico è posto a cavaliere d’un monte. Questo edifizio, o a dirsi meglio quest’avanzo di antico monumento, viene comunemente

515

BURTON 1976, p. 276. Burton non riesce a spiegarsi la funzione di questa struttura e immagina l’avanzo di un antico tempio, ma è evidente che la posizione è stata scelta con scopi difensivi e di segnalazione; «Pharos (2)» in Pauly’s Realencylcopädie, Stuggart 1938, pp. 1862; PETRIĆ 1975, p. 247; GAFFNEY ET ALII 1997, p. 151. 516 GAFFNEY ET ALII 1997, p. 151. 517 Per una storia delle torri qui descritte KIRIGIN 2003, pp. 24-25; 4345; desidero ringraziare il Prof. Kirigin per le informazioni circa gli scavi dell’isola e le comunicazioni circa i recenti interventi sull’isola di Palagrûza dove, probabilmente, un faro fu costruito. 518 RINALDI TUFI 1989, p. 45.

511

CAMBI 2001, pp. 139-142. MARIN ET ALII 1999, p. 61. 513 Diod. Sic. XV, 5, 13; «Pharos (2)» in Pauly’s Realencyclopädie, Stuggart 1938, pp. 1860-1862. 514 Mela II 114 cfr. PARRONI 1984, p. 367; LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN 1923, p. 248. 512

175

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA di S.Caio; ma qui il terreno si presenta basso e melmoso. Tuttavia, proprio in questa zona paludosa sono stati individuati gli horrea di età romana.519 Il Ceci, invece, era convinto che esso andasse ricercato sulla costa rocciosa nei pressi del fiume Jader. Io credo che senza dubbio in un porto importante come quello di Salona vi fosse la presenza di un faro, anche monumentale, e i vari studiosi che si sono cimentati con questo argomento hanno ritenuto che la presenza di un simile edificio fosse certa in base a un’iscrizione oggi conservata al Museo Archeologico di Spalato:

esposto allo scirocco. Pur mantenendo l’impianto urbanistico romano (ancora oggi la strada principale si chiama Decumanus), la città divenne Diocesi ed entrò a far parte del regno di Odoacre prima e Teoderico poi, epoca in cui le maestranze ravennati realizzarono i mosaici della Basilica Eufrasiana. Nel 539 d.C. il porto di Parenzo divenne la base bizantina di tutte le spedizioni navali contro i Goti. Dopo aver resistito agli attacchi dei Vendi, progenitori degli Sloveni, la città si cinse di mura utilizzando buona parte dei marmi del foro romano e subì un lento insediamento da parte degli Slavi. Conquistata da Carlo Magno nel 788 d.C., ridotta in schiavitù, venne salvata dall’accordo stipulato con Venezia nel X secolo per combattere la pirateria. Il suo porto rimase sempre attivissimo e concorrenziale tanto da suscitare l’invidia dei Genovesi che vedevano nel porto parentino un pericolo per i loro traffici con l’Oriente. Nel 1354 l’ammiraglio Paganino Doria assalì e devastò la città che si risolleverà solo nel XV secolo grazie all’intensificarsi dei suoi traffici marittimi.525

L(ucio) Anicio, C(ai) f(ilio) Paetinati IIIvir(o) i(ure) d(icundo) Quinq(uennali, prae(fecto) ………………………… Prae(fecto) fabr(um) Praefectur(a) Phariac(a) Salonitan(a) IIIvir(o) i(ure) d(icundo) quinq(uennali) D(ecuriorum) D(ecreto) P(ublice) benemerito520

Il porto e il faro Il porto romano di Parenzo (da localizzare sulla sponda settentrionale della penisola, oggi chiamato Peschiera) ha sempre avuto un ruolo di rilievo sia dal punto di vista militare sia commerciale. Il porto era riparato da una diga formata da materiale minuto che si estendeva per circa 200 m dall’attuale Hotel Riviera per poi curvare a sud-est verso la zona dove sorgeva la torre di Peschiera, che dominava il lato nord della costa.526

Il Betz521 era convinto che questo fosse il documento inequivocabile per cui il porto di Salona dovesse essere provvisto di un faro monumentale. Tuttavia, non è certo se questa iscrizione faccia riferimento a un faro nel porto di Salona oppure agli abitanti della città di Pharos (scheda 32): LehmannHartleben, ad esempio, riteneva che non si trattasse della possibile presenza di un faro a Salona ma del controllo che la colonia di Salona esercitava sull’isola di Pharos.522 Ancora il Betz523 affermava anche che il faro rappresentato nella LXXXII scena della Colonna Traiana, sul quale torneremo, fosse quello del vicino porto di Scardona: dunque avremmo un fitto sistema di segnalazioni tra Scardona, Salona e l’isola di Hvar (Tav. 41, fig. 82). L’ipotesi non è azzardata visto che, specialmente in quel tratto, la costa croata si fa molto frastagliata e necessita di opportune segnalazioni per la navigazione marittima. Scardona era menzionata da Plinio524 come Liburniae finis et initium Dalmatiae: dunque, per una zona di confine come questa, è del tutto ipotizzabile la presenza di un faro, che non credo tuttavia di poter identificare con quello rappresentato sulla Colonna Traiana.

Un ruolo importante lo ha però anche rivestito la piccola isola di San Niccolò, situata di fronte alla città e ottimo ricovero per navi di varia grandezza che potevano trovare riparo dal vento. In posizione elevata, non lontano dall’attuale approdo dell’isola, si scorge il rudere di almeno uno dei fari medioevali di Parenzo: la torre San Niccolò (Tav. 42, fig. 83; Tav. 42, fig. 84b). La struttura attuale, una torre cilindrica in pietra, risale al 1403 ed è evidentemente il faro di epoca romano-bizantina trasformato in torre di avvistamento contro i pirati in epoca veneziana, quando continuava comunque a svolgere la sua funzione di faro. Tutti i così detti “Scogli di Parenzo” (Tav. 42, fig. 84a) erano dotati di segnali luminosi per aiutare i naviganti. Basti menzionare l’emblematico caso di Torre (Tar) il cui porto, chiamato in epoca romana Turris Nova, poi ribattezzato Torre Vecchia, collocato sulla costa orientale, assai riparata dalla bora, tra Punta Grasso e Punta Dente, ancora oggi segnala una lanterna piuttosto potente.527 Anche in questo caso, come spesso succede per Histria e Dalmatia, nulla possiamo dire di concreto circa un faro di epoca precedente a quella basso-medioevale. Toponimi come Torre, tuttavia, rendono difficile non pensare che in una posizione strategica come quella che riveste Parenzo non vi fossero fari, utilizzati sia per aiutare i naviganti a entrare in porto sia per ostacolare i nemici attirandoli non verso l’entrata in porto ma verso uno scoglio dove si sarebbero scontrati o arenati.

SCHEDA 34 PARENTIUM (Parenzo, Croazia) Regio X: Venetia et Histria Sia Parenzo che la parallela isola di San Niccolò hanno restituito materiali che attestano la loro antropizzazione almeno all’età del Bronzo. Nata come castelliere illirico, i Romani già nel II secolo a.C. avevano bene inteso la posizione strategica della città, posta tra Tergeste e Pola e con un porto già attrezzato. Elevata al rango di colonia sotto Caligola, venne abbellita di foro, terme e templi dei quali uno era dedicato a Nettuno, come ricorda un’iscrizione trovata nel sito. Dall’iscrizione sappiamo che l’antico porto romano sorgeva dove è oggi l’attuale peschiera e non dov’ è quello attuale, assai

SCHEDA 35 PYRRANHUM (Pirano, Slovenia) Regio X: Venetia et Histria

519

CAMBI 2001, p. 142. CECI 1962, p. 143. 521 BETZ 1943, pp. 128-129, l’autore afferma che pharicus è un aggettivo che rimanda esclusivamente al faro di Alessandria e prende, correttamente, a paragone l’iscrizione C.I.L. VI 8582 che nomina un procurator phari Alexandriae ad Aegyptum: in questo caso, però, è esplicito il riferimento alla torre alessandrina. Nel nostro caso è esplicitamente citato l’appellativo Salonitana che quindi fa presupporre un riferimento alla città stessa o, al limite, a una città sotto la sua giurisdizione. 522 LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN 1963, p. 280; ALFÖLDY 1965, p. 107. 523 BETZ 1943, p. 129. 524 Plin. nat., III, 141. 520

Pirano (Tav. 43, fig. 85a) è oggi uno dei pochi sbocchi al mare della Slovenia ma era un porto già noto ai naviganti greci del IV secolo a.C..528 Le fonti scritte, tuttavia, tacciono le origini di Pirano il cui nome ha destato l’attenzione degli studiosi. Oltre 525

ALBERI 2001, p. 1267. ALBERI 2001, pp. 1279; 1288. ALBERI 2992, p. 1319. 528 FOSCAN 2003, p. 80. 526 527

176

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO stato anche teatro delle avventure degli Argonauti.534 La sua foce si trova oggi presso S. Giovanni di Duino, nei pressi del Villaggio del Pescatore. Gli autori classici pensavano che questo fiume si collegasse direttamente all’Istros (Danubio),535 e il territorio fu ancora florido in epoca cristiana, visto che tra V e VI secolo d.C. venne costruita una piccola basilica paleocristiana nell’area dove oggi sorge S. Giovanni in Tuba. La zona verrà però devastata nel VII secolo d.C. ad opera degli Avari e nel X secolo dagli Ungari.536

alla già citata teoria di un’etimologia greca legata al fuoco (in virtù della radice –πύρ), c’è chi sostiene che il villaggio derivi il proprio nome dal celtico Bior-dun che significa “città sul colle”. La città, in epoca greca, fungeva da “faro” per i naviganti che si dirigevano verso la colonia di Aegida, nei pressi dell’attuale Capodistria.529 Nel 178 a.C. i Romani conquistano l’Istria e quindi anche Pirano che diventa porto di scalo nella tratta verso Pula (Pola) e, soprattutto, luogo prediletto per la costruzione di numerose ville marittime. Intorno al IV secolo d.C. i Romani si stabiliscono definitivamente nella zona di Pirano che con il passare del tempo diventerà un castrum per le lotte contro i Barbari, come viene ricordato in alcuni documenti del VII secolo d.C., ed è in questo periodo che per la prima volta le fonti parlano di Pirano.530 Un secolo più tardi i Franchi succedevano ai Bizantini provocando grande malcontento nei locali che non gradivano l’appesantimento delle tasse, e, nel X secolo d.C., era la volta degli Slavi che, con il passare del tempo, entrarono nell’orbita di Venezia.

Plinio descrive il sito come una piccola isola con sorgenti calde che crescono e diminuiscono con le variazioni delle maree e la localizza davanti alle foci del fiume Timavo; dunque potremmo identificare il luogo con la mansio Fons Timavi indicata sul segmento IV, 5 della Tabula Peutingeriana.537 Il porto era anche assai importante in quanto da esso partiva la via Iulia Augusta che metteva in comunicazione la Venetia con il Noricum e gli altri paesi nordici. Sarà forse per questo che verrà costruita una stazione di posta, trovata all’interno dell’Acquedotto Randaccio.538

Il porto e il faro Nulla si sa del porto romano di Pyrranhum che si può immaginare sorgesse dove è oggi la fortezza secentesca nei pressi della chiesa di San Clemente. Nell’Ottocento venne annesso al fortino un faro in stile neogotico che si potrebbe supporre occupasse la posizione di uno precedente di epoca presumibilmente greca (Tav. 43, fig. 85b), ma resta una congettura priva di qualsiasi concretezza archeologica e pertanto soggetta a critiche. Nulla di più si può dire su questo porto, in cui la presenza di un faro può essere indicata esclusivamente dal suo toponimo, un po’ come avviene in Italia con Fiorenzuola di Focara.531

Il porto e il faro Su una piccola isola, denominata Belforte dinanzi alla foce del fiume, il porto del Timavo539 avrebbe posseduto un faro (Tav. 43, fig. 86 a,b), come riportato da un’antica tradizione: in questa stessa isola i Veneziani costruirono un castello nel XIII secolo. Quasi due secoli più tardi, nel 1483, tale Marin Sanudo, sorpreso da una burrasca, dovette rifugiarsi presso le rovine di un torrione che dovrebbe corrispondere ad una torre di avvistamento che i Veneziani costruirono sul sito dell’antico faro romano e che egli chiama Belguardo.540 Oggi l’isola, in realtà chiamata S.Antonio, è quasi del tutto ricoperta dall’acqua e non rimane alcuna traccia del faro, anche se siamo sicuri che il sito fosse un porto attivo grazie al ritrovamento di un’imbarcazione romana, oggi conservata al Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Aquileia, ma rinvenuta in quella zona. Il faro della leggenda, stando agli storici locali, altro non era che una torre costruita dai Veneziani nel 1240 per regolare i traffici del passaggio del fiume, ma di essa, collocata a circa 500 m dall’odierno Villaggio del Pescatore, non rimane alcuna traccia.541 Nello stesso Villaggio del Pescatore si ha notizia di una torre, conosciuta come rocca di Attila o Torre di Pucino, forse sorta anch’essa su una di epoca precedente per facilitare le comunicazioni con le altre torri della zona, poi riutilizzate per le mura difensive dei successivi castelli,542 ma oggi non ne rimane

Conclusioni e problematiche Non è pensabile che una costa come quella istriana non avesse alcun punto di riferimento per la navigazione che io credo, vista anche la scarsità di documentazione archeologica, vada ricercato nelle numerose isole che corrono parallele alla costa. Se Pirano non ha restituito evidenze archeologiche tangibili, località come Popecchio (Podpeč), Pietra Pelosa (Kaŝtel), Parenzo (Poreč) hanno rivelato negli ultimi decenni la presenza di torri di avvistamento di epoca medioevale e rinascimentale che non possono che essere sorte su precedenti costruzioni con funzioni faree. Le esigenze di quella costa prevedono una maggiore attenzione alle torri di avvistamento, che si parli di epoca romana, e quindi del pericolo illirico, o di dominazione veneziana e quindi di pericolo turco.532 Per quanto riguarda il materiale usato per la costruzione dei presunti fari, non si può che pensare alla “pietra d’Istria”, poco porosa e quindi assai adatta all’edilizia, specialmente in aree umide e che avrà, soprattutto in epoca imperiale, larga diffusione nella regio X.533

534

Verg. Aen. I, 245; Strab. V, 1, 8. Plin. nat. 3, 128; Mart. 4,25, 5.8; Strab. V, 1,9: «Timavus» in Der Neue Pauly, 12/1, Stuggart-Weimar 2002, p. 582. 536 BOVINI 1973, pp. 25-29. 537 Plin. nat., II, 202, 229; Tab. Peut. IV, 5. 538 Per un aggiornamento sulla rete stradale romana QUILICI 2006, pp. 157-205. 539 Sul porto del Timavo: Strab. V, 1,8; Liv. XLI, 2, 1; Plin. nat. II, 103, 229. Plinio parla di un’isola che BRUSIN 1925, p. 9 riconobbe nella collina detta della Punta o Amarna. 540 DEGRASSI 1962, p. 824; FRANZOT 1999, p. 87. 541 Ringrazio davvero moltissimo il Dott. Bruno Bonetti per le indicazioni fornitemi e la Sig.ra Wanda della Trattoria al Timavo per avermi messo in comunicazione con lui. Ringrazio anche la Prof.ssa Rita Auriemma dell’Università del Salento per l’invito al bellissimo ed utilissimo convegno circa i risultati sul progetto Interreg Italia-Slovenia, cui era legata la mostra sull’Archeologia dei paesaggi costieri, svoltosi a Trieste. 542 FOSCAN-VECCHIET 2001, pp. 153-157, dove sono anche visibili i ruderi della torre in foto d’epoca degli Anni Sessanta. Sicuramente un terminus post quem per la costruzione della torre è il X secolo d.C., comparendo il castello di Poziolum per la prima volta nel 921 d.C. nell’indizione imperiale emessa da Berengario I. 535

SCHEDA 36 TIMAVUS-DUINO (San Giovanni di Duino, Duino, Friuli Venezia Giulia) Regio X: Venetia et Histria Il fiume Timavo che corre tra Venetia ed Histria era già ben noto agli autori antichi che pensavano che presso la sua foce fosse un porto collegato a un culto delle acque, che sarebbe 529

PAHOR 1972, p. 1. Cosmograph.V. 531 ALBERI 2001, p. 564; sul litorale sloveno MATIJASIC 2001, p. 171 con bibliografia precedente; su Marinella di Focara ALFIERI 1986, pp. 235-259. 532 Su queste torri di veda ALBERI 2001, pp. 407; 708-9. 533 ROSADA 1997, pp. 71-72. Non è, tuttavia, escluso l’uso del laterizio che, nella Decima Regio, è per lo più sesquipedale. Sulla difesa di città e porti si veda anche CABANES 2000, p. 21; ZANINOVIĆ 2000, p. 44. 530

177

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA invece all’età costantiniana.549 Il faro sarebbe dunque da localizzare al posto della Lanterna ottocentesca nota come lo Zucco che il Kandler descriveva come il rudere di una torre ottagonale in pietra d’Istria. Il faro si ergeva in quella zona del sinus tergestinus dove le correnti dell’Isonzo e del Timavo si incontravano provocando possibili variazioni del mare. Il restauro del porto di Trieste ad opera di Maria Teresa d’Austria tra il 1744 e il 1769 eliminò definitivamente le antiche tracce del possibile faro romano che forse era modellato in maniera non dissimile a quello che ancora oggi possiamo ammirare (Tav. 45, fig. 89): un edificio che poteva assolvere allo stesso tempo funzioni di segnalazione e di fortezza.550 Non va trascurato il toponimo Zucco che allude ai sassi affioranti, detti zuchi, e forse pertinenti ai ruderi di cui si è parlato.

più traccia a causa delle antenne paraboliche che sono state costruite su di essa. Un faro, o meglio una torre di avvistamento con funzione farea, era presente a Duino e, attorno ad essa, a partire dal XII secolo sorgerà l’omonimo castello (Tav. 44, figg. 87 a, b), che si trova non lontano dal sito appena descritto. Le origini romane della torre sono confermate da un’iscrizione di Diocleziano posta nel suo basamento, ma oggi purtroppo trafugata; inoltre la sua posizione a picco sul mare con un raggio che le permette di arrivare a scorgere Grado, Aquileia e la prima parte costiera della Slovenia, conferma un suo possibile ruolo come faro in una zona che, in epoca romana, si presentava assai difficile per la navigazione a causa delle variazioni delle maree. All’esterno della torre, costruita in pietra d’Istria, sono ben visibili alcuni incavi che dovettero essere usati per applicare all’esterno una scala in legno per raggiungere la sommità in età romana, quando essa aveva la sola funzione di faro. Quando i Walsee nel 1400, abbandonata la vecchia e piccola rocca a picco sul mare, ormai in stato di rudere, iniziarono la costruzione del nuovo castello di Duino, restaurarono la torre, forse privandola della scala esterna a favore di una interna e, sicuramente, realizzando la merlatura in cima ad essa che consentiva anche una maggiore protezione.543

SCHEDA 38 AQUILEIA/GRADUS (Aquileia/Grado, Friuli Venezia Giulia) Regio X: Venetia et Histria Strabone551 colloca Aquileia a 10 km da Adria, porto che al tempo della nascita della città portuale aveva ormai perso la supremazia avuta in età etrusca e greca. Nata come insediamento gallico nel 186 a.C., venne conquistata dai Romani cinque anni dopo col diritto di colonia latina. Scelta come avamposto militare per le campagne contro i Daci e i Marcomanni, fu sempre florida grazie al fiume Natisone (allora largo sino a 40 m) che le permetteva di essere dotata di un ottimo porto fluviale. Devastata nel 452 d.C. da Attila, fu sede episcopale dell’Esarcato fino alla discesa in Italia dei Longobardi che, invece, privilegiarono la vicina Grado trasformandola nella nuova città portuale.552 Tuttavia, bisogna ricordare che in età romana è probabile che dove oggi sorge la laguna di Grado vi fosse una porzione di terraferma attraversata da un grande fiume che arrivava sino alle banchine del porto di Aquileia, a Grado, oltre ad una serie di canali navigabili. Vi era anche una via terrestre sulla quale si susseguivano una serie di edifici che potremmo interpretare come horrea.553

Un faro in questa posizione sarebbe stato utilissimo per chi, provenendo dal porto del Timavo, avesse doppiato il capo verso il porto di Sixtilianum (Sistiana) 544 per il quale, anche in passato, si è parlato della presenza di fari: dunque tra Aquileia e Tergeste vi sarebbe stata una fitta rete di segnali luminosi che consentivano alle navi un viaggio endolagunare assai tranquillo. SCHEDA 37 TERGESTE (Trieste, Friuli Venezia Giulia) Regio X: Venetia et Histria Strabone545 descriveva Tergeste (Tav. 44, fig. 88) 546come un accampamento militare distante 180 stadi dalla città portuale di Aquileia; era proprio la strada Aquileia-Tergeste a rendere importante questo centro che, tramite una seconda strada, comunicava assai bene anche con il porto fluviale di Nauportus, presso Emona. Una terza strada metteva in comunicazione Tergeste con la stazione di Timavo dalla quale si poteva prendere la strada per Tarseatica.547 Divenuta colonia sotto Augusto, la città venne comunque utilizzata prevalentemente come via di comunicazione con l’Istria sia costiera che interna.

Il porto e il faro Nessuna fonte, né antica né moderna, cita espressamente il faro di Aquileia. Tuttavia, la collocazione del porto fluviale della città e la sempre maggiore importanza commerciale di cui godette l’emporio aquileiese554 nell’antichità lasciano supporre la presenza di una torre semaforica all’imbocco del portocanale. Alla fine dell’Ottocento555 si propose che la torre più alta rappresentata nel segmento III della Tabula Peutingeriana (Tav. 45, fig 90) raffigurasse proprio il faro di Aquileia. La navigazione fluviale (vedi cap.1) offriva, almeno nei mesi primaverili ed estivi, un viaggio assai più tranquillo rispetto a quello per mare. Certo vi erano dei limiti: i fiumi, tranne rarissime eccezioni, non presentavano una larghezza tale da ospitare grandi mercantili, obbligando a una maggiore lentezza di viaggio.

Il porto e il faro Le maggiori fonti in nostro possesso per la storia del porto romano di Tergeste sono rinascimentali: Pietro Coppo ed Ireneo della Croce attestano l’esistenza di due bracci di uno stesso bacino corrispondenti agli attuali moli Fratelli Bandiera e Venezia e di un ulteriore molo, del quale riferisce solo Della Croce, nella zona dell’odierna Piazza Unità d’Italia.548 Gli scavi più recenti hanno dimostrato come la città fosse dotata di due porti: il principale, nato in età traianea e da localizzare nei moli dello Zucco, come già sosteneva il Kandler, e uno per la navigazione di minor cabotaggio presso l’odierna Piazza Unità d’Italia; a questi si aggiunge una banchina con ormeggi nella zona delle attuali Piazza del Rosario e via di Risorgo, ascrivibile

Aquileia faceva parte di un sistema portuale fatto di canali lagunari che univano Ravenna ad Altino, città con la quale era, a sua volta, collegata.556 Tuttavia, nei mesi invernali, quando la

549

MASELLI SCOTTI-VENTURA 2001, pp. 201-204. PAGLIA 1997, pp. 34-42. 551 Strab. V, 1,8. 552 «Aquileia,1» in Der Neue Pauly, 1, pp. 935-6; su Grado BROGIOLOCAGNANA 2005, pp. 79-108. 553 REDDÈ 1986, p. 216 crede che Grado fosse la propaggine militare del porto di Aquileia; BROGIOLO-CAGNANA 2005, p. 91. 554 Il porto di Aquileia ospitò anche la classis Venetum, distaccamento della flotta ravennate BOLLINI 1968, p. 57. 555 LEGER 1979, p. 508. 556 PANCIERA 1957, p. 48. 550

543

Per una storia dei due castelli di Duino FOSCAN/VECCHIET 2001, pp. 135-152. 544 BRAVAR 1976, pp. 99-107. 545 Strab. V, 1,9. 546 «Tergeste» in Pauly’s Realencyclopädie, Stuggart 1934, p. 722. 547 Strab. VII, 31,4; Itin. Ant. 128; Itin. Ant. 273. 548 COPPO 1830, pp. 26-44; DELLA CROCE 1698; BERTACCHI 1995, p. 120 riporta anche la notizia del faro.

178

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO Fonzari:559 dunque Grado sarebbe stata la base navale di Aquileia così come il Portus Reatinus (Caorle) lo era di Concordia Sagittaria.

bora soffiava con tutta la sua violenza e la nebbia avvolgeva i fiumi, come avrebbero potuto navigare gli antichi senza l’ausilio di torri faree che li guidassero in una sicura navigazione fluviale? Secondo lo Stucchi557 il faro di Aquileia sarebbe riprodotto nella scena LXXXII della Colonna Traiana (Tav. 55, fig. 108 a), a volte interpretato come il faro di Zara, di Brindisi (scheda 46) o di Ancona (scheda 45). Fu forse, proprio perché sulla Colonna trainaea il faro raffigurato presentava una forma circolare che, quando qualche tempo fa si rinvenne una struttura della stessa forma (Tav 46, fig. 91), identificabile come la base di una torre, ci si illuse di trovarsi di fronte ai resti del faro di Aquileia. Gli archeologi affermarono, però, che si trattava della base di uno dei torrioni di difesa costruiti nella tarda antichità: la torre semicircolare sporge verso l’antemurale che è costruito con la stessa tecnica; è forse questo che ha indotto gli studiosi a pensare che potesse trattarsi del faro di epoca romana. Dal momento che parallelamente ad essa ne fu rinvenuta un’altra della stessa forma, è evidente che ci si trova di fronte ad una porta urbica e quindi è escluso che questa torre, costruita in pietra e laterizio, abbia funzionato, in età medievale, da torre di avvistamento.558

SCHEDA 39 EQUILUM (Jesolo, Veneto) Regio X: Venetia et Histria Il sito di Equilum, lungo il Piave, fu già attivo in età romana per il trasporto del legname che proveniva dal Cadore, poi regolarmente attestato in età basso-medioevale a partire dal 1223. Oggi la zona di Torre Caligo ha ormai perso la parvenza di nucleo abitato, mancando di un luogo pubblico, quando un tempo era adibita a cappella di San Romualdo, costruita proprio sui ruderi della torre farea d’età romana. Nel 1632, con l’apertura del canale del Cavallino o di Caligo, i residenti si spostarono nella zona dell’attuale Lido di Jesolo. La torre-faro o Torre di Caligo Lungo il Sile-Piave, in stato di evidente abbandono, al termine della via Dragojesolo e al suo incrocio con via Salsi, si erge un quadrato di 2,50x2,50 m (Tav. 46, fig. 92), costruito con mattoni romani di risulta e noto come Torre del Piave Vecchio e, dal 1391, come Turris Caligo (con la variante Turris Caliginis del 1405). Il primo toponimo allude chiaramente alla localizzazione della torre sul Piave Vecchio; il secondo, ancora più evidente, rimanda al termine veneto caligo che vuol dire nebbia e dunque si potrebbe interpretare come la torre della nebbia o, ancora meglio, la torre per la nebbia. All’altro capo del Canale Caligo, che proprio da questa torre parte, presso Lio Maggiore, ve ne era un’altra simile, purtroppo distrutta. Strutture di questo tipo erano disseminate in tutta la zona: si ha notizia della Tor de Rodevol (oggi la località si chiama Torre del Fine) e della Turris Linguenciae, entrambe collocate sul canale Revedoli, la Torre dei Mossoni lungo la Piave Vecchia, la Torre di Dumorzo (Donzorzi) e la Torre del Mosto, sul fiume Livenza e così via.560

Conclusioni e problematiche Nella Tabula Peutingeriana la città è rappresentata come un esagono e, ai suoi lati, sono disegnate due alte torri con altrettante finestre parallele all’ultimo piano, ma non è presente nessuna apertura nella parte bassa dell’edificio che possa fungere da porta d’ingresso al faro. Notando che la torre di sinistra sembra essere leggermente più alta di quella di destra, oltre ad essere collocata in prossimità dell’acqua, si pensò che Aquileia fosse dotata di una torre farea (più alta) in prossimità del mare ed una torre semaforica o lanterna (più piccola) situata più nell’interno. A mio avviso, però, nessuna di queste torri corrisponde a un faro. La loro resa stilistica non corrisponde, infatti, in nulla alle altre immagini che troviamo nella Tabula. Tutti i fari (Alessandria, Ostia, Costantinopoli, Crisopoli, Brigantium) sono presentati come torri a più piani digradanti verso l’alto, sull’ultimo dei quali brilla la fiamma della lanterna e, comunque, risultano sempre dotate di molteplici finestre e di una porta d’accesso. Aquileia non sembra presentare nessuna di queste caratteristiche: né un’entrata alla base della torre né la fiamma della lanterna.

Tornando alla nostra torre, siamo certi che nel 1589, quando ormai i Veneziani l’avevano trasformata in una vera e propria stazione di posta e pedaggio per i traffici sul fiume Piave, la struttura aveva ancora tre piani (i tre piani che tornano in quasi tutte le strutture faree da me analizzate).561 Trasformata in cappella nel corso dei secoli, come ancora testimoniano la rudimentale effige di San Romualdo e le croci applicate sui mattoni, fino al tempo della Bonifica delle Valli jesolane la torre presentava una copertura con travi di legno ed era anche abitata, come testimonia la parte annerita dal carbone di un camino applicato nella zona sottostante la croce di ferro, in direzione della strada Dragojesolo, il cui toponimo più che a una memoria di fuochi emessi dalla torre (ipotesi suggestiva ma forse troppo fantasiosa) allude, a mio avviso, ai lavori di dragaggio per la costruzione dei canali che corrono lungo tutta la strada per terminare nel canale di Caligo.

Pur rimanendo convinto della presenza di un faro ad Aquileia, città troppo importante da un punto di vista tanto strategico quanto commerciale per potersi permettere di rinunciare a una simile struttura che aiutasse i marinai, specialmente in periodi di nebbia e bora, per una tranquilla navigazione; non penso però che il copista della Tabula abbia raffigurato il faro di Aquileia e, se lo ha fatto, non si è reso conto che si trattava di un faro e lo ha disegnato più simile a una torre di difesa. Non si può neanche escludere, anzi lo ritengo assai probabile, che ad Aquileia vi fosse una torre semaforica del tipo di quella di Baro Zavelea (scheda 42), mentre il faro vero e proprio fosse posizionato a Grado, magari nel luogo della torre quadrangolare con funzione difensiva, pertinente alla cerchia muraria tardo antica e scoperta nel 1992, durante gli scavi dell’Hotel

La torre trova notevoli confronti in quella di Baro Zavelea (scheda 42), la cui zona anche da un punto di vista meteorologico, assomiglia a quella della laguna di Jesolo (così come a quella di Fos sur mer, scheda 68), essendo colpita dalla nebbia per buona parte dell’anno, come il toponimo trecentesco della torre ancora oggi ricorda.

557

559

STUCCHI 1959, p. 15. Lo Stucchi, tuttavia, non si sofferma ad analizzare la questione del faro di Aquileia, ma si limita a confrontare il faro circolare della Colonna Traiana con altri fari ed edifici circolari che, secondo una nota teoria del Thiersch, avrebbero ereditato la propria architettura dai fari. 558 VILLA 2001, pp. 580-582, BUORA 2000, p. 59 riporta che già nell’Ottocento Maionica nella Fundkarte assegnava a quell’edificio il ruolo di porta urbica.

BROGIOLO-CAGNANA 2005, pp. 103-104. DORIGO 1994, p. 52, pp. 89-90. 561 Secondo DORIGO 1994, p. 175, qui correva il confine tra le giurisdizioni diocesane di Equilum e Torcello. Non a caso, dopo l’utilizzo della torre come faro, torre semaforica e stazione di posta, adiacente ad essa verrà costruita la cappella dedicata a San Romualdo e utilizzata sino a 500 anni fa, stando ai racconti dei locali, tra i quali ringrazio davvero i Sigg. Lion. 560

179

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA SCHEDA 40 CANALE S.FELICE (Laguna Veneziana, Cà Ballarin, Veneto) Regio X:Venetia et Histria

Il porto e il faro Destinato a decadere a causa della costruzione dei porti di Ariminum e Ravenna, l’emporio di Adria risulta attivissimo almeno a partire dal VI secolo a.C. e frequentato da Celti, provenienti dalle zone più settentrionali d’Italia, e da Etruschi in quanto ottimamente collegato per via fluviale, il Po appunto, a Felsina. Un faro non doveva certo mancare in un porto così importante ma non esiste nessuna traccia archeologica fatta eccezione per il basamento del campanile della chiesa di Santa Maria Assunta della Tomba (Tav.48, fig. 95), presso la quale si doveva estendere l’antico abitato. Nel campanile fu posta una lapide (Tav. 48, fig. 96a) che ricordava che lì sorgeva l’antico faro ellenico dell’Adriatico, ma tutto rimane a livello di leggenda e l’unico dato riscontrabile topograficamente è che, raggiungendo la zona dove una volta era il mare e guardando verso la città, il campanile di Adria aveva certo un’ottima posizione per poter fungere da faro (Tav. 48, fig. 96b).

Sino ad oggi si pensava che tutta la zona della Laguna veneziana (Tav. 47, fig. 93 a) non fosse mai stata presidiata dai Romani: essa si presenta oggi molto frastagliata con alcune isole (Torcello, Murano, Burano) che si sono formate naturalmente, ma in epoca romana dovevano essere terraferma e collegate al mare come avviene per molte città istriane (Capodistria, Pirano, Parenzo, Zara…). L’area del Lio Piccolo, dov’è stata rinvenuta una cisterna databile al II secolo d.C., è stata indagata alla fine degli Anni Novanta del secolo scorso nella zona di Cà Ballarin, lungo il Canale San Felice, uno dei più grandi canali naturali della laguna nord di Venezia.562 La torre-faro Una struttura quadrangolare(Tav. 47, figg. 93b, 94), in mattoni sesquipedali (di circa 8 m di lato563) cementati con malta di calce e cocciopesto, è stata rinvenuta sott’acqua, tra i 3 e i 5 m di profondità, lungo il lato nord del canale San Felice a 1 km dalla “Ricevitoria” di Treporti ed è stata interpretata come una torre-faro posta sul canale come ausilio per la navigazione lungo la Fossa Popiliola, il canale artificiale che attraversava quasi tutta la laguna veneziana.564 In base all’analisi della struttura e delle mura della stessa individuate già negli Anni Ottanta del Novecento, la datazione sarebbe intorno al I-II d.C..565 La cosa interessante è che la struttura alla base aveva una cisterna:566 la torre trova confronti in quella scoperta dall’Uggeri a Baro Zavelea (scheda 42) e la Torre de Caligo (scheda 39) e ricostruita nel Medioevo con materiale di recupero della vecchia torre-faro di età augustea.567

SCHEDA 42 BARO ZAVELEA (Argine Agosta, Emilia Romagna) Regio VIII: Aemilia Due erano i metodi principali con cui i Romani sfruttavano la rete idroviaria: le vie d’acqua naturali (lagune e fiumi) 571 e i canali.572 La Cisalpina offrì ai Romani una rete idroviaria naturale ottimale: l’arco lagunare che collegava Aquileia a Ravenna consentiva alle imbarcazioni non solo un buon collegamento con le maggiori città portuali della penisola, ma anche un diretto contatto con Roma, tramite la via Flaminia.573 Il Po era navigabile fino a Pavia per le navi, mentre i piccoli natanti potevano giungere sino a Torino.574 I collegamenti con l’attuale Trentino Alto Adige erano, invece, assicurati dal fiume Adige che da Verona arrivava a Bolzano.575

SCHEDA 41 HATRIA (Adria, Veneto) Regio X: Venetia et Histria

I numerosi canali realizzati nell’Antichità, sin dall’epoca etrusca, furono creati per collegare quei fiumi che presentavano un andamento parallelo, e, in epoca romana, essi prendono il nome di fossae. Ricordiamo la Fossa Augusta che collegava il Padus Vetus (che presentava un percorso simile a quello del Delta del Nilo a sette rami tra Altino e Ravenna, in virtù dei quali fu realizzato l’idronimo Septem Maria) al porto militare di Classe, presso Ravenna; la Fossa Flavia (iniziata già da Claudio, il cui ricordo rimane solo nel toponimo di Chioggia)576 che collegava Ravenna con Adria, Altino, Concordia e Aquileia, da cui partivano gli scambi commerciali con gli Illiri; e, infine, la Fossa Clodia e poi Traiana, l’attuale canale di Fiumicino, che collegava il porto di Ostia con Roma. Ma ciò non avvenne solo in Italia: si pensi a Fos (Scheda 68) sul Rodano, città voluta da Mario per la sua guerra contro i Teutoni, il cui porto è segnalato anche sulla Tabula Peutingeriana. Senza dilungarmi ulteriormente su questa problematica, credo risulti sensato pensare che all’imbocco di questi canali, specialmente nelle zone della Cisalpina, così colpite dalla nebbia, vi fosse la necessità di fari che indicassero l’ingresso della fossa. Alcuni studiosi sembrano dare credito all’ipotesi che, in caso di nebbia, per farsi luce sul Po, le imbarcazioni utilizzassero il sistema proposto dal Fonquerle che prevedeva un’anfora, posta presso la prua della nave, al cui interno venivano bruciati materiali combustibili che rendevano l’utilizzo dell’anfora simile a quello di un fanale.577 E’ proprio in quest’ottica che dobbiamo inserire

Il sito di Adria, che Strabone tramandava come città illustre,568 oggi dista ben 25 km dal mare ma nell’antichità era molto vicino ad esso, tanto da dare il nome al mare Adriatico. Plinio parlava dei Septem Maria, rami del Po che collegavano il porto di Adria a Ravenna e a Chioggia tramite fossae, bonificate in un primo momento dagli Etruschi.569 Senza soffermarsi troppo sulle sue origini, sulle quali le fonti sono discordanti, è indubbio che il periodo di massimo splendore si deve all’età greca, quando il porto ellenico rimpiazzerà quello etrusco di Spina nel IV secolo a.C.. La città divenne colonia greca di Dioniso I di Siracusa. Ancora sotto il dominio romano la città risulterà importante in quanto punto di passaggio obbligato per la via Popilia e la via Annia.570

562

MEDAS-D’AGOSTINO 2007, pp. 40-44. UGGERI 2006, p. 148. 564 MARCHIORI 1990, p. 205; MEDAS-D’AGOSTINO 2006, p. 56, DORIGO 1994, p. 51, dove si parla anche di altre strutture sommerse, venute in luce in seguito ad una lite tra i monaci e le monache di due monasteri che parlano di mergones, termine con il quale si indicano strutture sommerse; MEDAS-D’AGOSTINO 2005, pp. 37-54. 565 CANAL 1998, p. 74, staz. 138. 566 Ringrazio il Prof. Stefano Medas dell’Università di Bologna, sede distaccata di Trapani, per le informazioni relative ai ritrovamenti. 567 GARGIULLO-OKELY III 1993, p. 150, la struttura muraria era distribuita in un’area quadrata di circa 8 m di lato; presso di essa sono stati rinvenuti pochi frammenti di anfore e vetri, che risultano tuttavia la prima attestazione di una frequentazione romana nella zona settentrionale della Laguna. 568 Strab. V, 1,7. 569 Plin. nat. III, 16, 120. 570 MAMBELLA 1986, pp. 235-245. 563

571

ROUGÈ 1966, pp. 122-136; CHEVALLIER 1988, pp. 123-131. Per una rassegna davvero completa sui canali si veda: FERNÀNDEZ CASADO 1983, pp. 565-591. 573 UGGERI 1990, pp. 176-180. 574 CERA 1995, pp. 179 ss. 575 BASSI 1994, pp. 237-248. 576 MARCHIORI 1990, p. 204. 577 Si veda il capitolo 1. 572

180

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO il ritrovamento della torre di Baro Zavelea, i cui danneggiamenti del 1982 hanno però, purtroppo, disperso quasi ogni traccia.578

mezzo di alcuni canali navigabili, il più famoso dei quali era la già ricordata Fossa Augusta, il cui percorso è oggi parzialmente riscontrabile nella strada Agosta nei dintorni di Comacchio. Ravenna divenne così il baluardo dell’Adriatico così come Miseno lo era del Tirreno, stando a Svetonio.584 La storia della città fu, da allora, indissolubilmente legata a quella del suo porto,585 capace, ancora nel VI d.C. come ricorda Iordanes,586 di ospitare le 250 navi di cui parlava Cassio Dione.587 L’area portuale, però, non era ubicata in Ravenna, ma a 4 km da essa, in una zona che trasse, probabilmente solo in epoca tarda, il suo toponimo proprio dalla flotta che ospitava: Classe.588 Il porto era però destinato a scomparire per interventi sia naturali che artificiali: alcuni fiumi, scendendo dall’Appennino (su tutti il Ronco e il Montone assai vicino a Ravenna), minacciavano di insabbiare il porto di Classe che, tuttavia, durò almeno sino al VI d.C. Procopio589 accennava ancora a un funzionale porto a Classe durante le guerre gotiche; tuttavia, nel 578, Faroaldo, duca di Spoleto,590 depredò e distrusse Classe, la cui liberazione avvenne solo nel 584 grazie all’intervento del longobardo Droctulf. Il vescovo Agnello (IX d.C.) citava la “misera Ravenna, vicino alla distrutta Classe”,591 mentre, nel XIV secolo, Benvenuto da Imola affermava che il porto era “completamente interrito”.592 Tuttavia, oggi è ormai accertato che il sito non corrispondesse a quello realizzato da Augusto. Sembra, infatti, che in epoca romana Classe fosse sì edificata, come testimoniano anche i resti di un edificio termale di età adrianea sotto la basilica di S.Severo, ma occupata prevalentemente da necropoli ed edifici di difficile interpretazione.593 L’ubicazione del porto (o dei porti) di Augusto si è rivelata complicatissima sin da quando gli studiosi hanno iniziato a dedicarvisi. Esso era stato ricavato da Augusto dagli invasi naturali della valle a sud della città, proprio dove sfociava la vena lagunare del fiume Padenna che riceveva i suoi affluenti Flumisello e Lamisa.594 Nel noto mosaico del VI d.C. (Tav. 50, fig. 98c) della chiesa di S. Apollinare Nuovo,595 a Ravenna, la Civitas Classis, che pure doveva essere collegata alla città tramite forse ciò che avanzava della Fossa Augusta, è rappresentata come indipendente dalla città: in esso sono rappresentate due torri di entrata al porto che non sembrano avere avuto la funzione di fari. Il sito del porto, senza dubbio a sud-est della città,596 è sicuramente da ricercare nella zona di Classe, e non, come pensava il Rossi, presso l’attuale Porto Candiano.597 Mi limito qui a enunciare un secondo problema: esisteva un altro porto, magari solo commerciale, al di fuori di quello di Classe? Da alcuni atti del XII secolo598 sappiamo dell’esistenza di un porto chiamato portus Caii Caesaris (Tav. 49, fig. 98b) che, nonostante faccia riferimento al prenome di Augusto e non al suo padre adottivo, dovrebbe riconoscersi in quell’insenatura che, già in epoca repubblicana, occupava parte dell’attuale stazione ferroviaria. Il Testi Rasponi riporta un

La torre-faro Durante lavori di aratura nella bonificata Valle di Mezzano, presso Comacchio, ad ovest della strada Agosta, 100 m a sud dell’innesto di Strada Fiume di Valle Pega, non lontano dall’odierno Antiquarium della Pieve di Santa Maria in Padovetere, furono individuati nel 1976 numerosi mattoni sesquipedali, identificati come il basamento (7,42 m di lato) di una torre-faro di epoca augustea, 579conservato per circa due metri di altezza e poggiante su una piattaforma quadrata, contenuta da una duplice palificazione di tronchi di rovere (Tav. 49, fig. 97a).580 La zona aveva già restituito numerose sepolture e anche una villa, proprio nei pressi del Baro Zavelea. Nel 1982, purtroppo, durante nuovi lavori agricoli, furono manomesse le strutture della torre, la quale non è oggi più visibile. Nel 1983 il sindaco di Comacchio, Antonio Feletti, interpretava una piccola lastra in pietra d’Istria, trovata in prossimità della torre, come la base di una porta inferriata. Una lastra di dimensioni maggiori doveva sostenere colonne, delle quali l’Antiquarium di Santa Maria in Padovetere conserva due basi modanate in marmo bianco. L’utilizzo di materiali preziosi quali il marmo e, soprattutto, la pietra d’Istria, scarsamente impiegata in area padana, hanno fatto supporre che ci si trovasse di fronte a una struttura di particolare prestigio, anche in virtù del loro raro utilizzo insieme al laterizio (Tav. 49, fig. 97b). Uggeri interpretò la torre come faro anche in base alla sua ubicazione: esattamente il punto in cui la Fossa Augusta entrava nel vecchio Po, il Padus Vetus, il cui alveo è indicato nella zona con il nome di Canalazzo. Questa zona, colpita per metà dell’anno dalla nebbia, necessitava senza alcun dubbio di una struttura farea che aiutasse i naviganti a destreggiarsi in una così difficile situazione meteorologica. Se non stupisce la struttura rettangolare dell’edificio, del quale come detto conosciamo solo la base e possiamo quindi soltanto immaginare che digradasse verso l’alto presentando un ultimo piano cilindrico con la lanterna, sorprende, altresì, la tecnica costruttiva in opus vitattum e in laterizio. Un valido confronto, come accennato, è dato dalle torri del Canale S.Felice nella laguna veneziana (scheda 40) ed Equilum (scheda 39). SCHEDA 43 RAVENNA/CLASSIS Emilia Romagna) Regio VIII: Aemilia

(Ravenna,/Classe,

Il piccolo abitato di Ravenna (Tav. 49, fig. 98 a) nacque in tempi remotissimi a 8 km di distanza dal Mare Adriatico: il porto della città sembra essere stato, almeno in epoca etrusca, di second’ordine rispetto a quelli, invece floridissimi, di Spina e Adria. Ma già nel 227 a.C., durante le guerre illiriche, fu stanziata a Ravenna una flotta a protezione dell’Adriatico581e, nell’ 89 a.C., Metello, legato di Silla, vi installò una prima flotta per combattere l’esercito di Mario.582 Da allora Ravenna divenne sempre più importante, ma la svolta della città e del porto arrivò sotto Augusto, anche se pare comprensibile che già Cesare avesse capito l’importanza strategica di un porto in quella zona.583 Fu, infatti, Augusto ad unire la città col Po per

584

Suet. Aug. XLIX, 1-2. Sulle vicende storiche di Ravenna rispettivamente per l’epoca romana e tardo antica si veda: MANZELLI 2001, pp. 45-64; NOVARA 2001, pp. 251-279. 586 Iord. Get., 29, 150. 587 Iord. Get., 29 cita espressamente Cass. Dio., LX, 33. 588 BOVINI 1934, p. 191. 589 Prok. VI, XXIX, 31. 590 Paul. fest., III, 13. 591 Agnell.Lib.Pont., San Severo, XI, 13, ed. Società Editrice, Ravenna 1988, trad. M.Pierpaoli 592 BOVINI 1934, p.194. 593 MAIOLI 2001, p. 220. 594 MAIOLI 2000, p. 67. 595 BOVINI 1951, pp. 57-62. 596 BOLLINI 1990, p. 307: in quella zona la Fossa Augusta si innestava nella laguna. 597 UCCELLINI 1855, p. 160, voce Faro. 598 LANCIANI 1878, pp. 9-10; ZAFFAGNINI 1970, pp. 39-93. 585

578 Desidero ringraziare il Prof. Giovanni Uggeri per tutte le indicazioni fornitemi circa questa torre. 579 UGGERI 1975-76, pp. 785, 11862. 580 UGGERI 2006, p. 148. 581 BOLLINI 1990, p. 298. 582 BOVINI 1934, p.188; REDDÈ 1986, pp. 177-186. 583 FANTUZZI 1801, pp. 167, 352.

181

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Soratini.607 Egli avrà sicuramente visto le fantasiose interpretazioni della forma del faro e della sua ubicazione di epoca rinascimentale; ricordiamo per tutti quella di Paolo Armileo (XVI) che immaginava il porto di Classe di forma circolare con al centro un monumentale faro, anch’esso di forma circolare. Il porto di Classe venne localizzato negli Anni Sessanta nella zona tra la chiesa di Santa Maria in Porto Fuori (Tav. 51, fig. 101) e la basilica di San Severo. Sarà forse per questa ragione che negli abitanti del piccolissimo paese di Porto Fuori, a poca distanza da Classe, si diffuse la leggenda, avvalorata in un primo momento anche dal Ricci,608 che la base dell’inconsueto campanile della chiesa sarebbe stato l’avanzo del faro romano di epoca augustea (Tav. 52, fig. 102 a, b). Nel 1678, Girolamo Fabri avvalorava le parole del Rossi, sostenendo che il campanile della chiesa altro non era che il faro di Classe.609 La mole (oltre 30 m di altezza) e la forma della struttura (la sola base misura 16x10 m), situata proprio nella zona riconosciuta nel 1961 dal Cortesi come quella del portus Caii Caesaris, contribuì ad alimentare la leggenda che ancora oggi sussiste tra gli abitanti. Inoltre, nell’intercapedine dei doppi muri una scala, in sasso, conduceva alla sommità, sulla quale era una balconata che girava intorno ai quattro lati.

passo del Codex Pontificalis Ecclesiae Ravennatis in cui si parla di un luogo, presso il Mausoleo di Teoderico, quindi a nord-est della città, denominato Ad Farum in campo Coriandri.599 Le ipotesi sono discordanti e mi limito a segnalarle: il Mansuelli600 è convinto che si tratti di un porto esclusivamente commerciale, realizzato già in età repubblicana e restaurato da Teoderico nel V d.C. durante lavori di bonifica presso l’attuale stazione ferroviaria. In quel periodo, infatti, la città, destinata a divenire la capitale dell’Impero Romano d’Occidente, fu abbellita di numerosi edifici dai re goti.601 Ma, per la maggior parte degli studiosi, il porto presso il Mausoleo di Teoderico, luogo un tempo occupato dalla chiesa chiamata Santa Maria al Faro (Tav. 50, fig. 99 a, b), sarebbe stato una nuova base militare, instaurata da Teoderico in seguito all’ormai completo insabbiamento del porto di Classe.602 A mio avviso, è, invece, assai probabile che il porto presso il Mausoleo fosse nato, anche solo come un piccolo bacino commerciale, già in età repubblicana per essere poi ampliato e dotato di un faro monumentale, come i recenti scavi testimoniano (Tav. 51, fig. 100), solo in epoca bizantina per avere un eguale con l’altra capitale: Costantinopoli.603 Il faro

Forse più che di un avanzo di faro si sarebbe potuto trattare di un avanzo di torre costiera, visto che nel 1292 Lamberto da Polenta la trasformò in torre di difesa per poi diventare alla fine del Cinquecento un avamposto militare contro i Turchi.610 Nel 1904 il Ricci rettificava la sua ipotesi poiché si era scoperto che le fondamenta della torre campanaria risalivano al XV secolo. Il Mazzotti, parroco della chiesa, ha dubitato sempre che essa potesse avere origini così antiche. In seguito ad alcuni lavori da lui stesso eseguiti tra il 1938 e il 1942, si sciolse ogni dubbio dal momento che muri della chiesa e materiale costruttivo del campanile risultavano essere contemporanei: nulla vi era di epoca romana.611

Alcuni autori,604 in base al mosaico della Civitas Classis (Tav. 50, fig. 98c), reputano che il porto ravennate fosse dotato di due torri faree; tuttavia, se anche si vogliono riconoscere nelle torri del mosaico due fari, essi si riferiscono alla città di Classe in epoca bizantina mentre, come ricordato, in epoca romana, l’odierna zona archeologica di Classe non sembra essere stata in grado di ospitare un porto, e sicuramente non di un’importanza tale da possedere due fari, come potrebbe, invece, essere accaduto in epoca tarda. Il toponimo Classe, infatti, non si riscontra in nessuna fonte di epoca romana e lo stesso Plinio, a proposito del faro, parla di Ravenna e non di Classe.605 Lo stesso autore che, come noto fu prefetto dell’altra grande flotta augustea (quella di Miseno), deve senza dubbio avere avuto occasione di vedere personalmente il faro di Ravenna, che dalle sue parole si arguisce essere simile a quello di Alessandria. Tuttavia, il naturalista latino non parla esplicitamente dell’architettura della torre, limitandosi a paragonarla a quella alessandrina, ma lamenta solamente che la luce da essa prodotta, non essendo intermittente, può essere facilmente scambiata per quella di una stella.

Inoltre, il 5 Novembre 1944 le bombe scagliate sulla basilica da parte degli anglo-americani avrebbero per sempre eliminato, semmai vi fosse stato, quel supposto avanzo di faro che gli storici ravennati ipotizzavano.612 Ciò che pare evidente è che il toponimo Porto Fuori sembra voler distinguere il porto situato nella zona della chiesa da uno situato in città e, probabilmente, riferibile a quello presso il Mausoleo di Teoderico (Tav. 51, fig. 100). Negli anni Sessanta, inoltre, fu trovata, sotto l’attuale via Marabina, una struttura di forma circolare, identificata con una torre farea del III d.C., che non si poté però analizzare a causa dell’opposizione degli ortolani.613 Secondo Allard, il quale non si pronuncia sull’ubicazione del faro, esso si presentava del tutto simile a quello di Alessandria con la sola eccezione della base che anziché ottagonale era cilindrica.614 Recentemente, Maria

Per quanto riguarda il faro del Mausoleo di Teoderico (Tavv. 50, 51, figg. 99-100) mi trovo d’accordo con la Bollini,606 secondo la quale la denominazione ad Farum, servì per distinguere questa torre, a mio avviso di origine bizantina, dal faro per antonomasia, quello del porto militare di Ravenna. In una mappa del XIV secolo, in seguito ad un’antica disputa insorta tra la canonica di Porto e il monastero di S.Severo nel 1199, un anonimo autore localizzò, lungo il corso del Bidente, di fronte a Classe il Classitellus, mentre di fronte alla basilica di San Severo il Portus Gaii Caesaris, la cui forma semicircolare si ritrova anche una mappa del XVIII secolo di Giuseppe Antonio

607

FABBRI-NOVARA, 2003, pp. 624-627. Tutte le fonti cartografiche riportate dall’articolo ubicano il porto di Augusto presso l’attuale porto Candiano. Sull’ubicazione del porto di Ravenna si veda anche il fondamentale, ZAFFAGNINI 1970, pp. 39-95 con bibliografia precedente. 608 Sulle supposizioni degli studiosi si veda: RICCI 1878, p. 236; MAZZOTTI 1991, pp. 52-60.; LILLI 1998, pp. 25-41; FABBRI 2000, pp. 197-209. 609 FABRI 1678, pp. 189-190, 236-238. Per avvalorare la sua ipotesi, l’autore cita Alighieri, Dante, Paradiso, XXI dove si menziona la chiesa di Nostra Donna in sul lito Adriano. 610 BIANCHETTI 1997, pp. 31-32 e ancora nel 1927 Luigi Rava ne parlava come una delle torri faree di Ravenna. 611 MAZZOTTI 1991, pp. 52-60. 612 Il restauro attuale della chiesa corrisponde agli anni Cinquanta: ringrazio il parroco della chiesa di S.Maria in Porto Fuori, che mi ha permesso di visitare l’interno del campanile, oltre a fornirmi preziose indicazioni bibliografiche. 613 CORTESI 1967, p. 87, tav. XXXIX. 614 ALLARD 1979, p. 504.

599

ESTI RASPONI 1924, pp. 113; 216. REDDE’ 1986, p. 184, nota 73. 601 MANZELLI 2001, p. 56. 602 FELLETTI-MAJ 1968-1969, pp. 85-120. 603 UCCELLINI 1855, p. 160, voce Faro. 604 La teoria è riportata anche dal Thiersch in merito ad una lettera che Corrado Ricci avrebbe scritto all’autore tedesco nel 1907: THIERSCH 1909, p. 21; si veda inoltre: LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN, 1963, p. 177; VIERECK 1975 p. 264. 605 Plin. nat. XXXVI, 12, 83. 606 BOLLINI 1990, p. 309. 600

182

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO Bollini615 ha proposto di identificare il faro di Ravenna con la torre rappresentata in un affresco del XVI secolo nella sala dello Zodiaco del palazzo d’Arco di Mantova (Tav. 52 fig. 103): a fianco alla Porta Aurea è una torre con un corpo inferiore cubico costituito da due piani con finestre ed un corpo superiore, più snello, di forma rettangolare o cilindrica, munito di feritoie. In verità l’immagine proposta nell’affresco mantovano mi sembra del tutto simile a quella del campanile di Santa Maria in Porto Fuori appena trattato: è evidente che nel XVI secolo si era ormai diffusa la leggenda della base del campanile della chiesa come faro. Non a caso, affianco della struttura interpretata come faro sembra essere la facciata di una chiesa.

Arezzo all’invaso portuale di Rimini, a testimonianza dell’importanza marittima del primo porto romano sull’Adriatico che collegava Italia Cisappenninica, Transappenninica, Tirrenica e Adriatica. Se nel III a.C., Rimini era la roccaforte degli attacchi romani contro gli Illiri, il suo potere inizia a decadere progressivamente nel II a.C. sino a che, nel 181, viene fondata la colonia di Aquileia, la cui posizione geografica è più adatta a sfidare la potenza piratesca delle isole dalmate. L’importanza del porto decadrà, quasi del tutto, in concomitanza con la creazione del porto militare di Ravenna, nato in seguito alla crisi di quello di Spina per cui la città, dall’età augustea in poi, avrà rinomanza solo locale e regionale, poiché tutte le mansioni saranno affidate al porto ravennate.621 Dopo un periodo di relativa floridezza tra i Severi e Diocleziano, Rimini decadde completamente tra il 549 e il 553 d.C. quando subì l’attacco dei Goti di Vitige e non si risolleverà più sino all’avvento di Sigismondo Pandolfo Malatesta nel XII.

Conclusioni e problematiche L’unica cosa certa è che nulla sappiamo sul faro di Ravenna all’infuori che esso fosse stato realizzato su modello di quello alessandrino. Ravenna possedeva forse due porti, uno esclusivamente commerciale, nella zona in cui poi sorgerà il Mausoleo di Teoderico, privo di faro almeno sino al V d.C. (quando si vorrà imitare quello di Costantinopoli, città con la quale questo porto aveva un collegamento diretto), e un altro porto, quello augusteo, situato nella zona tra la chiesa di Santa Maria in Porto Fuori e la basilica di San Severo, dotato del monumentale faro di cui parla Plinio. Altra certezza è che il campanile della chiesa di Santa Maria in Porto Fuori nulla ha che spartire con il faro augusteo. Quanto alla struttura circolare del III d.C. trovata sotto via Marabina due sono le uniche ipotesi a livello portuale: o si tratta del faro della nascente città tardoantica di Classe oppure di un restauro, di epoca severiana, al faro augusteo, entrambe ipotesi poco credibili. Dunque, veramente poco è quello che si può dire del faro di Ravenna se non che la sua monumentalità suscitasse l’ammirazione degli antichi tanto quanto quelli di Ostia e di Alessandria. Infine, resta il problema del perché non si sia conservato assolutamente nulla di un faro così imponente: probabilmente il suolo paludoso della zona di Classe non ha retto il peso di un faro così grande (e quindi pesante) che deve essere sprofondato616 rendendo indispensabile un nuovo edificio con la medesima funzione ma con una diversa ubicazione, ovvero nella zona compresa tra il Mausoleo di Teoderico617 e l’attuale Rocca Brancaleone, a nord della città.618

Il porto e il faro A livello archeologico davvero poco si sa del fiorente porto di Rimini che, comunque sino al Medioevo, deve essere stato in larga parte sfruttato da marinai, carpentieri ed artigiani locali, come noto da numerosi testi epigrafici. Recentemente è stata proposta per l’antico porto di Rimini una fisionomia non fluviale ma a bacino con difesa foranea, con stretto rapporto tra diga e cardine massimo.622 Il Tonini, dal canto suo, proponeva l’invaso portuale ed il molo tra l’anfiteatro e l’attuale stazione ferroviaria. Il molo, costruito in opus quadratum con grossi blocchi di trachite legati tra loro da graffe di piombo, doveva, senza dubbio, essere dotato di un faro, eretto forse in età augustea, e sulla cui architettura ci viene in aiuto solo un mosaico della metà del II d.C. trovato nella domus di Palazzo Diotallevi e conservato al Museo della Città (Tav. 53, fig. 105a). Il faro di Rimini è rappresentato come una torre merlata sulla cui terrazza un addetto alimenta un braciere per le segnalazioni. La presenza di un vero e proprio porto e non di un semplice approdo fluviale è garantita non solo dal faro ma anche dalla rappresentazione di personale addetto alle funzioni portuali. Secondo altri,623 però, il faro sarebbe rappresentato dalla sola struttura rettangolare sulla cui sommità viene alimentato il fuoco del braciere, mentre la torre merlata, collocata dietro all’edificio, sarebbe da riferire a una torre cittadina, del tipo di quelle del mosaico ravennate della Civitas Classis.624 Un buon confronto per il mosaico della domus riminese può essere dato da un altro celebre mosaico romano rappresentante una nave che entra in porto, conservato presso l’Antiquarium Comunale di Roma (Tav. 54, fig. 106). Il mosaico, proveniente dalla Casa di Claudius Claudianus, rappresenta un porto assai più organizzato rispetto a quello di Ariminum, come dimostrano le dimensioni della nave oneraria che il porto poteva ospitare. Lo stesso faro, recentemente riconosciuto come quello di Alessandria, o quello di Ostia,625 presenta forme monumentali lontane dal piccolo faro riminese.

SCHEDA 44 ARIMINUM (Rimini, Emilia Romagna) Regio VIII: Aemilia La tradizione vuole che il nome della città, nato dall’idronimo Ariminus, fiume oggi noto come Marecchia, derivasse da un regolo etrusco chiamato Arìmnestos (Tav. 53, fig. 104), anche se Strabone definisce la città colonia degli Umbri.619 Qualche tempo dopo la vittoria sugli Italici a Sentino, nel 268 a.C., fu fondata la colonia di diritto latino di Ariminus con la chiara destinazione di porto di difesa dell’Adriatico620 a vantaggio del più semplice approdo di Sena Gallica, troppo piccolo per adempiere a funzioni prettamente portuali. A quell’epoca una strada, allineata al cardo maximus, portava direttamente da

621

BRACCESI 2003, pp. 15-68. MORIGI 1998, p. 67. MORIGI 1998, p. 73. A mio avviso, invece, il faro di Rimini è stato reso in maniera approssimativa per esigenze narrative: si voleva chiarire la funzione di faro e, allo stesso tempo, di porto attrezzato, tramite l’inserimento di un addetto col compito di alimentare il fuoco per le segnalazioni marittime. 624 BOLLINI 1980, p. 292. 625 SALVETTI 2002, pp. 73-80. A mio avviso il faro rappresentato potrebbe essere quello di Ostia; ad Alessandria, infatti, non esiste un portico di collegamento tra molo ed arco che potrebbe interpretarsi solo come una rozza resa dell’Heptastadion. In caso contrario non escludo che si tratti di una semplice rappresentazione immaginaria (su modello di quella del Gragnano, che rappresentava forse il faro di Miseno, ma 622

615

623

BOLLINI 2003, pp. 43-56. BOLLINI 1968, p. 72. 617 Tra l’850 e l’977 d.C., l’arcivescovo Giovanni costituisce il monastero regolare di Santa Maria in Palaciolo assegnandogli l’isola di Palaciolo dove era il Mausoleo di Teoderico con l’annessa chiesa di Santa Maria ad Memoriam Regis ed ad Farum, confermando che in quella zona era un faro della città: quod monasterium Regi set a Farum vocatur, cfr. BENERICETTI 2006, p. 74-77. 618 Per un aggiornamento sulla topografia di Ravenna e Classe, MAIOLI 2005, pp. 45-55. 619 Strab. V, 11. 620 Sul porto di Rimini: LEGER 1979, p. 465. 616

183

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA faro.632 Quanto all’architettura di quest’ultimo, costruito probabilmente in età augustea, credo dovesse presentarsi simile ai fari sino ad ora affrontati: una torre a piani digradanti verso l’alto con base rettangolare e due piani di forma cilindrica. Purtroppo né il mosaico della domus di Palazzo Diotallevi né, tanto meno, il dipinto settecentesco del Santi, ci aiutano ad essere certi della sua forma né della sua esatta ubicazione.

L’unica altra testimonianza di un faro romano ad Ariminum ci viene dalle memorie di eruditi locali e dal celebre dipinto settecentesco di Pietro Santi che rappresentava la Torre d’Ausa (Tav. 53, fig. 105b), torre costiera di epoca medioevale eretta a protezione del fiume omonimo sui resti dell’antico faro, tra X e XI secolo d.C., in un periodo successivo al suo decadimento.626 Il dipinto del Santi rappresenta il rudere di una torre medioevale incredibilmente somigliante a quella, ancora visibile, della Torre Serpe,627 nata come fanale del porto di Otranto nel XIII d.C. e oggi simbolo della città. Così scriveva nel 1600 l’erudito riminese Raffaele Adimari:628

SCHEDA 45 ANCONA (Ancona, Marche) Regio V:Picenum Ancona (Tav. 54, fig. 107) nacque come porto naturale in epoca antichissima grazie al prolungamento in mare del Colle Guasco che formava un’ampia e sicura insenatura, naturalmente protetta dai venti.633 Il toponimo Ankon deriva dalla lingua dei Greci di Siracusa che lì si stabilirono nel IV a.C..634 La città, infatti, situata alle pendici del Cònero forma una notevole curva sul mare, simile a un gomito.635 In età imperiale e tardo antica sarà il tempio di Venere Genitrice, instaurato sul colle Guasco, a fungere da centro della città, come testimoniato da scavi archeologici che hanno attestato la presenza in questi luoghi anche di culture pre-romane.

E ftato fempre parere di molti, che fi potria e doueria far il Porto in quefto fiume Aufa, che paffa fotto la Città per fuggir le già difficoltà, che fono nel’altro Pur non essendoci alcun accenno a un faro, è ben riscontrabile nelle parole del riminese che, semmai esso vi fosse stato, sarebbe stato il Porto d’Ausa ad ospitarlo. Luigi Tonini,629 storico riminese dell’Ottocento, parla di una torre, chiamata comunemente la Torrazza o Torre d’Ausa, le cui vestigia erano pervenute quasi sino al tempo in cui scrive. La torre, che sappiamo essere crollata nel 1807, fu dettagliatamente descritta da un bibliotecario, di nome Antonio Bianchi, del quale riferisce lo stesso Tonini:

Il porto e il faro Nella prima metà del III a.C. il porto,636 ormai in buona parte artificiale, era sovrastato dal tempio di Afrodite sul quale si impianterà, tra II e I a.C., un tempio esastilo dedicato a Venus Genitrix, che farà a sua volta posto nel IX d.C. ad una basilica paleocristiana, sulle cui rovine sorgerà l’attuale cattedrale di S.Ciriaco. E’ del 184 a.C. la notizia dell’istituzione in Ancona di duumviri navali della flotta dell’alto e del basso Adriatico durante la guerra contro l’Illiria, mentre, cento anni dopo, Cinna vi allestì una flotta per il suo attacco al dittatore Silla. Occupata da Cesare nel 49 a.C. ebbe, in realtà già in epoca ellenistica, fiorenti traffici commerciali con tutto il Mediterraneo e, soprattutto, con l’Illiria. A causa delle guerre daciche Traiano costruì un nuovo porto situato ad ovest rispetto a quello greco, ormai insufficiente per resistere alla bora, proteggendolo con un molo artificiale di circa 300 m, sul quale fu poi eretto, nel 115 d.C., un arco trionfale in suo onore, tutt’ora visibile. Poco o nulla si sa sul faro di Ancona, ma alcuni studiosi637 hanno creduto di vederlo rappresentato in una nota scena della Colonna Traiana a Roma. Unica cosa plausibile è che esso dovette essere realizzato, al principio del II d.C., quando Traiano creò il nuovo molo, poggiandolo su una scogliera a archi che sporgeva dalla linea antica della spiaggia, partendo ai piedi del Monte Guasco e arrivando poco lontano dal sito dove fu poi eretto l’arco.638 Siamo sicuri che il primo episodio della II guerra dacica nella scena LXXIX (Tav. 55, fig. 108 a) della

La torre era di mattoni, basata sopra un molo di marmi ben connessi con quantità grande di piombo, il quale terminava ad angolo acuto, i cui due lati esterni al di là della base della torre erano di 5 piedi riminesi. La torre aveva 6 piedi per ogni lato, ed era alta 7 larghezze. Dopo la caduta di detta torre fu demolito anche il molo, di dove fu ricavata una grande quantità di marmi...e così anche di questo monumento, che certamente meritava di essere conservato, non è rimasto poco più che le fondamenta, che non poterono levare in causa dell’acqua sempre sorgente in quantità...da questa torre fino alle mura della città, in tempi sicuramente bassi...,fu condotto un muro in laterizio...630 Il resto di muro citato dal Bianchi fu individuato, a fine Ottocento, nei pressi dell’attuale stazione ferroviaria, ma non è oggi visibile.631 Conclusioni e problematiche

632 Sugli odierni fari della Romagna si veda il curioso articolo di GRAFFAGNINI, 1985, pp. 245-247. 633 Sull’urbanistica, anche attuale, di Ancona: SEBASTIANI 1996. 634 BRACCESI 1977, pp. 220-226; LUNI 2004, pp. 28-45. 635 Strab. V, 24,1; Plin. nat. XIV, 67; Mela II, 4, 64. 636 Sul porto di Ancona: ANGELONI 1685, BEVILACQUA 1889; BRUZZO 1898; LEGER 1979, pp. 465-466, LILLI 1997, pp. 49-77, LUNI 2004, pp. 28-45. 637 THIERSCH 1909, p.25. 638 ALFIERI 1938, p. 40. Al termine del molo, non lontano da dove si erge l’arco di Traiano, oggi sorge l’edificio della Guardia Costiera sul basamento (in laterizio) di un’antica lanterna, forse di epoca rinascimentale, ma sorta, si potrebbe ipotizzare, sul luogo di quella romana. Gli anconetani stessi, tuttavia, mostrano di non sapere a quale faro il basamento si riferisca, interpretando come Vecchio Faro solo quello ottocentesco, che si erge in una verde collina. Sui fari di Ancona successivi a quello romano: CIALDI 1877, pp. 320-323: si sostituì una torre farea, eretta da Benedetto XIV, con un’altra di forma cilindrica, per porvi un faro lenticolare alla Fresnel, nel 1860, visto che la luce precedente aveva un orizzonte troppo limitato.

Rimini era dotata di due porti: un naturale approdo fluviale alla foce dell’attuale fiume Marecchia e uno artificiale, a forma di mezzaluna, alla foce dello scomparso fiume Ausa, nei pressi dell’odierna stazione ferroviaria, dove era probabilmente il

con un faro evoluto e non più una semplice struttura conica sulla quale porre il fuoco per le segnalazioni) ispirata alla vita portuale quotidiana. 626 GIORGETTI 1980, p. 109; TURCHINI 1992, p. 44. 627 Torre Serpe deriva il suo nome da una leggenda che vede una biscia di mare arrampicarsi lungo le pareti della torre per andare a bere l’olio della lanterna, spegnendo la fiamma e consentendo ai pirati lo sbarco a terra senza essere visti, LEONARDI 1991, p. 145. 628 ADIMARI 1616, p. 66. 629 TONINI 1848, pp. 214-216. 630 TONINI 1848, p. 21; TONINI 1864, p. 2. 631 MORIGI 1998, p. 72.

184

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO un antico medaglione, descritto dall’Angeloni,647 l’arco di Traiano al centro di un esedra che termina nella parte sinistra con la torre del faro.

Colonna Traiana rappresenti la partenza dell’imperatore dal porto da Ancona poiché, in esso, si vedono l’arco di Traiano639 e il tempio di Venere, su cui venne innalzata prima S.Lorenzo e, in seguito, l’attuale cattedrale di S.Ciriaco. Senza alcun dubbio, almeno in una prima fase il tempio di Venere sarà servito come ausilio e “faro” per la navigazione.640

Conclusioni e problematiche A mio avviso, nella LXXXII scena della Colonna di Traiano è rappresentata la partenza dell’imperatore dal porto di Ancona, ben riconoscibile dal tempio di Venere sul Monte Guasco e dell’Arco di Traiano sul molo (Tav. 55, figg. 108b, 109),648 la cui architettura a un solo fornice rimanda al monumento ancor oggi visibile nel porto marchigiano. Quando, dopo la conquista longobarda, Carlo Magno donò la città al papa, il porto subì numerosi interventi di restauro. Poi, nel Settecento, prima da parte di papa Clemente XII e, successivamente, per opera di Benedetto XIV si sostituì, probabilmente, il vecchio e forse non più funzionante (o addirittura crollato) faro romano di forma cilindrica con tetto a spiovente con un nuovo faro, il cui raggio di luce, però, non arrivava troppo lontano. Dunque, essa venne sostituita nell’Ottocento da una nuova struttura, denominata la Lanterna, sulla cui base sorge oggi l’edificio che ospita la Guardia Costiera (Tav. 55, fig. 109; Tav. 56, fig. 110).649 Ad avvalorare l’ipotesi che quello rappresentato sulla Colonna Traiana sia il faro di Ancona, mi trovo d’accordo con la teoria dell’Alfieri per cui, a causa della stagione invernale, l’imperatore dovette affidarsi alla lenta navigazione di cabotaggio che il maestro della Colonna Traiana cercò di rendere chiara tramite alcuni stratagemmi stilistici come, ad esempio, l’uso dei remi e non delle vele. Pur riconoscendo una notevole somiglianza tra il così interpretato faro di Aquileia della Tabula Peutingeriana e il misterioso faro della Colonna Traiana, escludo che Traiano, appena realizzato l’ambizioso progetto del porto di Ancona, inaugurato proprio per le guerre daciche, abbia deciso, per raggiungere la Dacia, di partire da Aquileia,650 il cui porto-canale, seppur capiente, non poteva ospitare navi di notevoli dimensioni come invece il porto anconetano, assai più comodo rispetto a quello di Brindisi, oltretutto disagevole in condizioni climatiche sfavorevoli.651

All’estrema destra della scena LXXXII è raffigurata una torre cilindrica a tre piani con tetto a spiovente, su base rettangolare ad arcate, simile a quello rappresentato in un mosaico della chiesa di Santa Maria in Trastevere, a Roma. Sugli ultimi due piani si aprono altrettante finestre. L’edificio rappresentato nella Colonna Traiana, la cui ricostruzione è stata tentata agli inizi degli anni Settanta, è da tutti gli studiosi interpretato come un faro, ma attribuito a città diverse: Ancona641 Aquileia,642 Brindisi,643 porto dal quale secondo alcuni studiosi644 sarebbe partito Traiano, né si esclude l’ipotesi del faro di Zara, città in cui l’imperatore sarebbe giunto. Molti degli autori che si sono occupati nello specifico di fari si limitano a confermare la presenza di una simile struttura nel rilievo traianeo, senza però pronunciarsi sull’ubicazione della stessa.645 Già negli anni Trenta del secolo scorso Nereo Alfieri propose che non vi era da stupirsi nel vedere raffigurata Ancona in più scene della Colonna Traiana in quanto l’imperatore, come testimoniano la veste molto pesante, le vele ammainate delle navi e la presenza delle onde, deve aver compiuto il viaggio verso la Dalmazia in inverno, affidandosi quindi alla navigazione di cabotaggio costeggiando l’arco superiore del mare Adriatico e non compiendo l’abituale tragitto che da Ancona portava alla città di Zara..646 Essendo la navigazione di cabotaggio piuttosto lenta, possiamo immaginare che la scena successiva dell’imbarco di Traiano, rappresentazione di faro inclusa, sia ancora pertinente ad Ancona. Rimane anche un dipinto a olio conservato nel Palazzo del Governo di Ancona (Tav. 55, fig. 108 b) che mostra, in base a 639

Secondo ROSSI 1971, p. 174, solo ad Ancona è presente un arco trionfale sul molo del porto, ma egli trascura le notizie che abbiamo circa il porto di Pozzuoli tramite l’acquerello del Bellori. L’iscrizione, posta sull’arco nel 115 d.C., ringrazia l’imperatore per avere fornito al porto di Ancona efficienza e sicurezza. Quest’ultima annotazione potrebbe far riferimento all’installazione di un faro, che si potrebbe fascinosamente pensare realizzato da Apollodoro di Damasco, già autore dell’arco e forse del ponte sul Danubio, progettato da Traiano. Sappiamo, infatti, che l’architetto di fiducia dell’imperatore aveva probabilmente realizzato i porti di Ostia e Civitavecchia. 640 Di questa opinione è anche LILLI 1997, p. 58. 641 THIERSCH 1909, p. 24, fig. 34; DICTIONNAIRE 1906, voce Pharos, p. 430, nota 12 ; ALLARD 1979, pp. 505-506; KOEPPEL 1992, p. 66 ; SPINELLI 1996, p. 574. 642 STUCCHI 1959, pp. 16-30: nella Colonna Traiana sarebbe rappresentato il sacrificio di Traiano presso la foce del Timavo, dunque l’arco è interpretato come parte del foro di Aquileia, cui sarebbe pertinente anche il faro circolare la cui struttura, assai simile alla torre di Aquileia della Tabula Peutingeriana, sarebbe poi stata imitata dai campanili delle non lontane chiese ravennati. 643 BEDON 1988, p.57 accetta l’ipotesi del faro anconetano. 644 DEGRASSI 1946-1947, pp. 167 ss. cfr. FRANZOT 1999, p. 53. 645 LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN 1963, p. 231, dove si esclude comunque Ancona per la diversità dell’arco trionfale rappresentato nella scena, mentre in LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN 1926, p. 229 non si era pronunciato; BOLLINI 1968, pp. 68-74; REDDÈ 1979, pp. 859-860, lo stesso autore riconoscerà in seguito la partenza di Traiano dal porto di Ancona, in REDDÈ 1986 pp. 218-220, con bibliografia contraria alla nota 231; ma non accenna al faro. 646 ALFIERI 1938, p. 42, concetto ribadito in ALFIERI 2000, p. 323. Secondo il Frohener (cfr. FRANZOT 1999, pp. 52-53) Traiano, partito da Ancona, avrebbe risalito l’Adriatico sino a Ravenna e, attraversato il mare, sarebbe giunto in una città dalmata, presumibilmente Zara. Si tratterebbe, infatti, del faro di Zara quello rappresentato sulla Colonna Traiana.

SCHEDA 46 BRUNDISIUM (Brindisi, Puglia) Regio II: Apulia et Calabria Brindisi o Brentesion come la chiama Strabone,652 grazie al suo strategico porto sullo Ionio, fu considerata tanto importante dai Romani da diventare la prima città della Iapigia a possedere il 647

ANGELONI 1685, pp. 92-110, figg. 11, 48. Come è stato giustamente notato contro chi sosteneva che l’arco della città marittima della Colonna Traiana era differente da quello di Ancona e forse non esisteva ancora, bisogna considerare che, comunque, nel 113 fosse già noto il progetto che Apollodoro realizzò solo due anni dopo, cfr. ROSSI, 1971, p. 69. 649 Sulla storia militare di Ancona dal Rinascimento alle Guerre Mondiali e per i dati di archivio risulta utilissimo: DI CICCO 2002, con particolare riferimento alla storia della lanterna alle pp. 72-78. Nel volume è presente una preziosa raccolta cartografica utilissima per la ricostruzione del porto. 650 Inoltre, se Traiano ha compiuto veramente il suo viaggio in inverno, si è visto nell’excursus sulla navigazione fluviale come essa presentasse notevoli difficoltà meteorologiche in quella stagione (ad Aquileia, poi, avrebbe regnato la nebbia); anche per questo motivo escluderei che nella LXXXII scena della Colonna Traiana sia rappresentato il faro di Aquileia. 651 Ceas. civ., III, 25-28 racconta l’imbarazzo di Antonio che, salpando proprio da Brindisi, non riusciva a raggiungere Cesare sull’altra sponda dell’Adriatico, a causa del maltempo. Interessante notare anche come Cesare sottolinei che quel tratto di costa era tra i meno controllati e che le persone avessero paura di spingersi troppo lontano dai porti. 652 Strab. VI, 3,6 affermava che Brentesion possedeva molti porti chiusi da una sola imboccatura e non battuti dai flutti, presentando così una situazione migliore di Taranto. 648

185

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA titolo di municipium. Il porto653 si rivelò fondamentale durante le guerre civili per la conquista dell’Oriente verso il quale era un ottimo ponte. Il collegamento con la capitale era garantito, come noto, dalle vie Appia ed Egnazia. Senza soffermarsi sugli importanti edifici di cui la città fu abbellita, soprattutto da Claudio e Traiano, descriviamo ora, brevemente, il porto tanto lodato dagli autori latini.654

architettonicamente simile al celebre precedente alessandrino, tre piani digradanti verso l’alto, dei quali l’ultimo cilindrico ospitava la lanterna, fosse stato costruito dai Romani sull’isola di Bara, vista la sua funzione di antemurale, secondo la tipica tradizione romana e lo stesso toponimo. Oltre a questa teoria, purtroppo non supportata da alcuna rappresentazione ma dalle sole parole del geografo latino che non si sofferma molto sull’argomento, ve ne è un’altra, assai discussa, che vede come protagonista una delle colonne romane, delle quali solo una è rimasta in piedi all’entrata del porto brindisino. Secondo alcuni, infatti, le colonne che sappiamo essere del III secolo d.C. (Tav. 56, fig. 111), erano state posizionate in quel luogo, a metà del VI a.C., dai Romani per delimitare la fine della via Appia o, addirittura, dell’Italia, mentre, secondo altri, ipotesi più probabile ma anch’essa assai confutabile, i due capitelli delle colonne sarebbero stati uniti da una traversa di bronzo, al cui centro era posizionato un fanale con la chiara funzione di faro, come nel mosaico prenestino (Tav. 57, fig. 112).663 Io credo possibile quest’ultima ipotesi in una fase arcaica del porto, ma penso non si possano tralasciare, come si è invece sinora fatto,664 le parole di Mela che nei suoi itinerari deve avere visto personalmente il faro di Brindisi sull’isola di Bara, inducendolo a metterlo a confronto con la torre alessandrina sull’isola di Pharos.

Il porto e il faro Come il porto di Ancona, anche quello brindisino fu, almeno in principio, formato dalla natura: cinque isolette, di cui una più grande che sappiamo essere chiamata Bara,655 fungevano da antemurale naturale contro i venti e le onde marine. Davanti a queste isole vi erano due bocche, di diseguali dimensioni, che formavano l’entrata del porto che assumeva quasi una forma triangolare, difesa naturalmente da scogli e colline.656 Sulle colline che circondavano il porto sorgevano bellissimi giardini e ville, tra cui quella celeberrima di Virgilio che, nell’Eneide, esalterà il porto di Brindisi.657 Il porto presentava numerosi seni naturali che, a detta di Strabone,658 rendevano il porto di Brindisi più agevole di quello di Taranto. Ma la descrizione più accurata del porto è fornita da Lucano:659 un angusto tratto di terra che si restringe racchiudendo l’Adriatico come tra due corna ricurve, e alcuni credono, infatti, che il toponimo derivi da questa morfologia.660 Il poeta latino prosegue esaltando l’isola di Bara che, con funzione di antemurale, proteggeva il porto dalla violenza delle onde che si infrangevano contro di essa, così come le montagne rocciose garantivano sicurezza al porto tanto che vi si poteva ancorare una nave anche legata a una semplice fune. A questa situazione, già felice, va aggiunto che le acque del porto esterno si internavano in due seni, noti anticamente con i nomi di Delta e Luciana (oggi Fiume-Grande e Fiume-Piccolo), andando sempre più restringendosi verso la città sino a formare un canale, reso navigabile da Cesare, la cui larghezza di 430 m permetteva il passaggio di navi anche di notevoli dimensioni.661 Dunque, la città possedeva un antemurale naturale nelle cinque isolette poste di fronte ad esso, un ottimo aiuto contro i venti che colpivano violentemente l’Adriatico, nelle montagne rocciose poste intorno al porto, fornendo la possibilità di essere navigata anche internamente grazie al canale cesariano.

Conclusioni e problematiche Le colonne erano probabilmente unite da una traversa di bronzo da cui pendeva un fanale ma non con la funzione di vero e proprio faro, bensì come segnacolo di entrata al porto e quindi con la medesima funzione della Lanterna di Augusto di Forum Iulii in Gallia Narbonensis (Tav. 88, fig. 175). Infatti, anche se le colonne brindisine viste dai naviganti che si avvicinavano alla città potevano apparire di grandi dimensioni, tuttavia non presentano un’altezza tale da poter far luce ai naviganti che si trovavano ancora dietro le cinque isole che proteggevano, ma anche nascondevano, il porto di Brindisi. Che le colonne fossero legate alla navigazione è garantito dai loro ornamenti che nei capitelli presentano foglie d’acanto, teste di divinità, e, soprattutto, otto Tritoni che bene si ricollegano al mare e al faro di Alessandria, sul cui modello un vero e proprio faro era costruito nell’isola che fungeva da antemurale del porto di Brindisi,665 forse proprio come oggi accade per il faro di Vieste.666

Escludendo le già citate opinioni che vedono il faro di Brindisi rappresentato nella Colonna Traiana, poco o nulla è quello che sappiamo dell’edificio. Vista, tuttavia, l’importanza strategica del luogo, possiamo solo immaginare che certamente non mancasse e fosse anche di dimensioni non indifferenti, dal momento che l’unico autore latino che lo nomina, Pomponio Mela, lo paragona al faro di Alessandria, a mio avviso poiché costruito su una piccola isola: ut Alexandriae ita Brundisio adiacens Pharos.662 Potremmo dunque immaginare che esso,

SCHEDA 47 CAPO PELORO, TORRE FARO-MESSINA (Torre Faro, Messina, Sicilia) Provincia: Sicilia Nato già nell’VIII a.C. dall’unione dei coloni calcidesi e dei pirati cumani con il nome di Zancle, il porto di Messina667 presentava la caratteristica forma di falce all’imbocco dell’omonimo stretto. Circa nel 491 a.C. Anaxilas, cacciati i Sami che avevano preso il posto dei Calcidesi, si appropriò di Zancle, ribattezzandola Messene-Messana in onore della sua

653

Sul porto di Brindisi: LEGER 1979, p. 465. Plin. nat. II, 103 riferisce che una fonte non lontana dal porto forniva acque ininterrotte ai naviganti, così che i fondali non erano mai bassi e potevano ospitare navi di qualsiasi dimensione. 655 Fest. de verb. signif. III. 656 DI LEO 1970, pp. 2-8; LEGER 1979, p. 464. 657 Vergilius Aeneis, I, 231-234. 658 Strab. VI, 3, 1-9. 659 Lucan. II, 610-620 sottolinea come, se non vi fosse un’isola che attirasse su di sé la violenza del mare, Brindisi non potrebbe essere dotata di un porto. Il porto è riparato dai venti anche perché la natura lo ha anche circondato da monti rocciosi che hanno così permesso alle imbarcazioni di rimanere attraccate anche grazie a una debole fune. 660 ASCOLI 1976, p. 7, nota 4; Strab. VI, 3, 6. 661 ASCOLI 1976, pp. 5-6. 662 Mela II, 7, 13; DICTIONNAIRE 1906, p. 430. Qui si pone il problema se Mela stia parlando del faro di Brindisi oppure se faccia riferimento 654

all’isola di Pharos in Dalmazia (cfr. PARRONI 1984, p. 367). Il paragone con Alessandria, infatti, potrebbe far riferimento a un faro costruito sopra un’isola, Bara nel caso di Brindisi, Pharos nel caso di Alessandria. 663 EAA, voce Brindisi, Roma 1959, p. 173; DI LEO 1970, pp. 34 ss: le colonne sarebbero state lì collocate da Brento, figlio di Ercole. Per l’utilizzo di colonne-faro si veda DE COETLOGON 1976, p. 75. 664 BEDON 1988, p. 57 è sicuro che si tratti del faro di Brindisi. 665 Per quanto riguarda gli altri approdi pugliesi, i migliori dei quali situati sul Gargano, si veda VOLPE 1990, pp. 86-90. 666 ALIOTA ET ALII 1998. E’, tuttavia, ormai certo che l’antico faro di Uria Graganica non sorgesse sul luogo dell’attuale. 667 Sul porto di Messina: LEGER 1979, p. 465, sulla storia della città BACCI 2005, pp. 253-273.

186

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO Sed procul venientibus, qua transeat, vadum ostendat 674

patria di origine. Ricostruita come colonia siracusana da Dionigi, venne occupata dai Romani solo a partire dal III a.C.

Il geografo arabo Edrisi nomina separatamente Faro e Messina.675 Nel IX secolo d.C., nella non lontana zona di Ganzirri Faro, sorgerà un monastero, dedicato al SS. Salvatore, che conserverà il toponimo in lingua phari, alludendo al Portus Tragecticus dove sorgeva una colonna che funzionava da faro di comunicazione con quella di Rhegium, sita sul lato opposto. Come afferma Strabone, infatti, era un antico costume quello di porre confini tramite l’utilizzo di torri e cita proprio l’esempio dei Reggini e dei Messinesi.676

Il porto e il faro Il porto di Messina, non amplissimo, ma ancor oggi sicuro poiché chiuso naturalmente dal Braccio San Ranieri,668 ospitò la flotta di Cesare, subendo gravi danni durante le guerre civili tra Cesare e Pompeo e, in misura ancora maggiore, durante le lotte tra Ottaviano e Sesto Pompeo. E’ proprio a due monete669di Sesto Pompeo (42-36 a.C.) che dobbiamo l’unica rappresentazione del faro di Messina (Tav. 57, fig. 113a). Nelle monete di Pompeo è rappresentato al rovescio Scilla mentre al dritto si erge il faro di Messina, una torre cilindrica sulla quale è una statua di Nettuno con tridente e timone, che poggia un piede sulla prua di una nave, mentre di fronte al monumento è una nave da guerra con l’insegna militare dell’aquila sulla prua, un tridente e il tirso. Scilla simboleggia lo Stretto di Messina, mentre il faro allude al porto della città e la statua di Nettuno al fatto che Sesto Pompeo si proclamava figlio di questa divinità e quindi signore dei mari.670 C’è però chi in questa rappresentazione pensa erroneamente all’edificio circolare rappresentato come ad una semplice colonna, eretta in onore di Peloro e ricordata da Strabone,671 o una colonna con funzione di segnacolo di entrata al porto come si è visto per Brindisi.672 Ciò è, tuttavia, inverosimile in quanto una colonna non può presentare uno spessore della grandezza di quello che sarà stato il faro di Messina. Inoltre, l’archeologia ci viene in aiuto in quanto nel 2001 è stato smilitarizzato il Forte degli Inglesi presso Torre Faro, a 12 km da Messina e, al suo interno, sono stati riscoperti i tre gradoni del faro romano rappresentati sulla moneta di Pompeo, chiarendo quindi che l’edificio rappresentato non sorgeva al posto dell’attuale lanterna San Ranieri nel porto di Messina, ma proprio a Torre Faro. La struttura, di forma quadrangolare, larga 24 m, è caratterizzata da un podio a gradoni in calcestruzzo e laterizio rivestiti di malta idraulica, impostata sopra un’ampia platea di fondazione, sempre in calcestruzzo, a sua volta gettata su una serie di palafitte di legno673 (Tav. 57, fig. 113b). Questa struttura è stata trovata alla base della torre rinascimentale che molti scrittori moderni definivano l’avanzo dell’antico faro romano di Peloro, ancora nel XIV secolo Claudio Mario Arezzo scriveva:

Conclusioni e problematiche Io ritengo, soprattutto per la presenza della statua di Nettuno sull’edificio nelle monete di Sesto Pompeo, che si debba pensare di essere di fronte a un faro, escludendo la possibilità della colonna onoraria, visto anche lo sproporzionato spessore che la stessa presenterebbe. E inoltre, la colonna in onore di Peloro sarebbe stata di una tale importanza da simboleggiare tramite la sua rappresentazione addirittura l’intera città di Messina più del suo faro, come invece spesso accadeva nelle emissioni monetali delle città portuali?677 Infine, la statua di Nettuno si riferisce esplicitamente a Sesto Pompeo che, dalle fonti,678 sappiamo pretendere essere il figlio di quel dio per manifestare il suo controllo sui mari. Da quanto detto circa i dati archeologici, non ci sono più dubbi che il faro di Messana sorgesse dove in epoca rinascimentale verrà costruito il cosiddetto Forte degli Inglesi (Tav. 58, fig. 114 a,b), la cui storica funzione farea decadrà quando, tra XV e XVI secolo, verrà costruito il faro noto come Lanterna di San Ranieri, con funzione di fortezza e attiva come faro dal 1857.679 Infatti, nel XVII secolo, Giuseppe Bonofiglio afferma: e perciò più sicuramente affermare possiamo l’una (Lanterna San Ranieri, n.d.a.) d’ogni altro publico concernente all’utile et l’altra Torre, cioè quella del Faro, essere state erette ne’ tempi dell’imperio romano. A Torre Faro sarà costruito un faro moderno, di esigue dimensioni collocato sopra il fortino ed ancora oggi in funzione (Tav. 58, fig. 115 a, b). SCHEDA 48 PAN(H)ORMOS (Palermo, Sicilia) Provincia: Sicilia

Est in promontorio turris recens, non quod maris defendat angustias

Posizionata sulla costa settentrionale della Sicilia, già nel nome richiama la sua potenzialità portuale (̉όρμος=porto) per la quale Silio Italico680 la chiamò fecunda Panhormos (Tav. 59, fig. 117). Probabilmente fondata dai Fenici nell’ambito della loro conquista siciliana, fu successivamente rifondata dai Greci che ancora di più valorizzarono la sua area portuale. Elemento di contesa tra Punici e Romani durante la guerra, nel 214 a.C. fu

668

STRAFFORELLO 1893, p. 402. THIERSCH 1909, p. 22, in cui si confronta la struttura cilindrica del faro di Messina analogamente a quella di alcune strutture riconosciute come fari in affreschi pompeiani; FUCHS 1969, pp. 34-35, dove si ritiene che si tratti di una colonna eretta da Pompeo in ricordo delle sue vittorie marittime; ALLARD 1979, p. 506 ; REDDE’ 1979, p. 865, fig. 6.5 ; BEDON 1988, p. 57; RRC, p. 520, n° 511/4° da BMCRR II, p. 56, n° 15. 670 HILL 1976, pp. 126-129, pl. XIII, fig. 79. 671 PACE 1935, p. 429: è vero che Strab. I, 1, 17 parla di un monumento a Peloro, ma Strab. III, 5, menziona espressamente una torre. Oggi a Capo Peloro è posizionato un faro che segna l’ingresso allo Stretto di Messina, realizzato nel 1884, cfr. FATTA 2002, p. 111, n.6. Ancora nel Settecento alcuni schizzi presentavano un edificio con funzione di faro posizionato a Capo Peloro, cfr. SWINIBURNE 1783-85. 672 WILSON 1990, p. 165. In base all’iscrizione AÈ 1895,23 (...portum et turres...curavit) FRANZOT 1999, pp. 67-68, ritiene che le torri costruite da Pompeo nel porto di Lilibeo (odierna Marsala) potessero avere la funzione di faro. Inoltre, la struttura dell’edificio mi pare troppo massiccia per una semplice colonna. Infine, Strabone parla di questa colonna con una chiara funzione di segnalazione tanto che ricorda la presenza dall’altro lato di una colonna (quella di Rhegium) con funzione farea, come viene ricordato anche in UGGERI 1997-1998, p. 339, dove si ricorda anche il Portus Tragecticus nel Fretum Siculum di cui si farà accenno poco più avanti in questa sede. 673 BUCETI 2004, pp. 30-36; BACCI 2005, p. 271. 669

674

C.M.Aretio, De situ insulae Siciliae, Palermo 1737 in D.Puzzolo Sigillo, Etimologia e valore del nome “Faro” o “Faro di Messina”, Archivio Storico Messinese, Anno XXVI-XXVII, 1925-26, p. 21 cfr. BUCETI 2004, p. 24, dunque la torre di Peloro è ricordata perché avverte i naviganti dei bassi fondali di quella zona: qui si può anche trovare un ottimo repertorio di fonti circa Torre Faro e la Lanterna San Ranieri. 675 AMARI-SCHIAPARELLI, 1883, pp. 67-69: da Messina al faro la distanza viene fissata in dodici miglia. 676 COTRONEO 1988; Strab.III, 5,4; VI, 6,1. 677 Val.Max. IX, 9-8 afferma igitur angusti aestuosi maris alto e tumulo speculatrix statua quam memoriae Pelori tam Punicae temeritatis ultra citraque navigantium oculis conlocatum indicium est, verrebbe quindi da pensare che su una collina fosse posta una statua in onore di Peloro che servisse come punto di riferimento ai naviganti e non come faro propriamente detto. 678 CARRO 1999, pp. 110-111. 679 FATTA 2002, p. 98, n. 54. 680 Sil.Ital. XIV, 261

187

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA sede di una legione romana e nel 205 a.C. base navale della flotta di Scipione l’Africano. In età augustea, come testimoniano gli esemplari numismatici, ci sarà un nuovo riassetto urbano della città, ancora una volta con particolare riferimento all’area portuale. Invasa dai Vandali nel 440 d.C. e dai Bizantini nel 535 d.C., sarà quindi preda degli Arabi nell’831 d.C. ed entrerà nell’orbita normanna a partire dal 1072.681

permesso di riscontrare dei moli che si protendono verso il mare. Oltre a questo, recentemente, le indagini di Piero Bartoloni hanno riconosciuto lo scalo portuale norense nella Peschiera di Nora (altrimenti detta Stagnoni Efisio), una cala assai profonda collocata a nord-ovest di Capo di Pula e quindi protetta dal promontorio dai venti settentrionali e occidentali.686 Per quanto riguarda il faro siamo a conoscenza, grazie a foto d’epoca, di una torre-faro di età punica (Tav. 60, fig. 119), posizionata sull’altura del Coltellazzo dove furono individuati anche avanzi di torri romane, con la stessa funzione e anche di difesa così come la moderna torre che ha sostituito quella di epoca saracena. La torre-faro del Coltellazzo, scoperta dal Patroni e quasi scomparsa al tempo del Pesce, si presentava molto spessa e massiccia, costruita in grandi blocchi di pietra squadrata. La sua altezza non doveva essere superiore ai 15 m poiché sfruttava l’altezza del promontorio del Coltellazzo e, se fosse stata troppo grande, sarebbe crollata in breve tempo. E’ possibile ipotizzare che sia stata distrutta dai pirati o dai Saraceni che, tramite la sua demolizione, avrebbero impedito l’ingresso al porto di Nora alle navi che trasportavano merce di scambio costringendo così gli abitanti a lasciare il sito.

Il porto e il faro Il porto antico non è ancora stato esattamente localizzato, ma si suppone che esso coincida con la fondazione di Neapolis, attuata dai Romani all’indomani della seconda guerra punica. Sono state fatte varie ipotesi (Oreto, Kalsa) ma quella forse più probabile è quella del sito dove poi sorse il Castellamare, localizzando le aree di ormeggio nelle zone oggi comprese fra Piazza Marina e lo sperone del Casalotto a Casa Professa.682 Il faro è noto esclusivamente, ancora una volta, da due esemplari di età augustea683 (Tav. 59, figg. 116 a, b) nei quali è rappresentato come una massiccia torre merlata e cinta di mura, entrambi elementi tipici dell’architettura fenicia. Ancora nel 1727, Antonino Bova incideva un‘immagine del porto di Palermo con in evidenza il Castellamare, cui è collegata una torretta con l’indubbia funzione di faro.

SCHEDA 50 OLBIA (Olbia, Sardegna) Provincia: Sardinia Nonostante l’opposizione di Annone Cartaginese, la città venne conquistata dai Romani nel 259 a.C.; riconquistata provvisoriamnte dai Punici, capitolò nuovamente a favore dei Romani di Tiberio Sempronio Gracco nel 238 a.C.. La città e il suo porto rimasero attivi ancora nel IV secolo d.C., ma a partire dall’VIII secolo d.C. diverrà facile preda delle flotte islamiche.687

SCHEDA 49 NORA (Nora, Sardegna) Provincia: Sardinia L’origine di Nora (Tav. 60, fig. 118) è ancora molto problematica: Pausania il Periegeta (X, 17, 5) e Solino (IV, 2), la dicono fondata dagli Iberi alla cui guida era Norace, figlio di Mercurio e della ninfa Eritea. Da questi la città, forse la prima fondata in Sardegna, avrebbe preso nome. Probabilmente il luogo era abitato da genti nuragiche perché la radice del nome nor*- nur*- è di origine prefenicia, ma non è sicuro che quando i Fenici arrivarono la zona non fosse già abitata.684 Sicuramente, dopo la lotta tra Tiro e Babilonia, la Sardegna entrò a far parte del dominio cartaginese e vi si stabilirono i Fenici e poi i Punici. Il loro dominio durò sino al III secolo a.C. quando i Romani si impadronirono dell’isola, e, nel 238 a.C., Nora diventò sede del governatorato. Nel 27 a.C. la Sardegna fu inclusa nelle province augustee e Nora, forse sul finire del I secolo d.C., diventò municipium. Tra II e III secolo d.C. Nora visse il suo massimo splendore anche grazie al suo ottimo porto che manteneva intensi traffici con Spagna, Gallia Meridionale e Grecia. Nel V secolo d.C. la città ebbe bisogno di numerosi restauri e l’intensificarsi della pirateria e delle incursioni vandale fra 456 e 466 d.C. provocarono la decadenza e l’abbandono della città. Nel VII secolo d.C. l’Anonimo Ravennate conferma che Nora ormai è solo un praesidium privo di abitanti.685

Il porto e il faro Il porto attestato da Tolomeo688 in una zona corrispondente al golfo di Cugnana (Golfo Aranci) fu in uso fin dagli albori della città, naturalmente protetta dai venti del secondo e terzo quadrante grazie alla sua collocazione alla base di una profonda rìas della costa nord-orientale della Sardegna.689 Plinio, sulla scorta di fonti greche, afferma che davanti al porto vi erano due isole, Callodes ed Hera Lustra. Proprio su un’isola, forse l’isola di Peddona, unita alla terraferma come era l’isola di Pharos ad Alessandria, doveva essere collocato il faro, forse già all’epoca della rifondazione cartaginese (IV a.C.) e sicuramente dopo la conquista romana.690 Poco più in là di quella che il Tamponi chiamava “Peddonedda”, circa a -4 m di profondità furono individuate, alla fine dell’Ottocento, le fondazioni di un edificio di almeno 7 m di lato che egli aveva interpretato come il faro di Olbia e che, al contrario, Panedda e Taramelli identificavano invece con resti di antemurali e di una torre difensiva.691 Tutte le recenti ricostruzioni, compresa quella del Golvin e del Reddè collocano il faro sull’isolotto di Peddona, direttamente collegato alla terraferma su modello alessandrino; la torre è stata riprodotta con tre piani (Tav. 61, fig. 120).

Il porto e il faro Fino a poco tempo fa non si avevano indicazioni precise circa il porto di Nora, anche in conseguenza dell’arretramento di circa 90 m della linea di costa; tuttavia, alcune fotografie aeree hanno

SCHEDA 51 PUNTA LICOSA (San Marco, Santa Maria di Castellabate, Campania) Regio I: Latium et Campania Nella portuosa area cilentana che vantava già importanti porti in età greca, Paestum e Velia su tutti, nell’area compresa tra gli odierni borghi di San Marco e Santa Maria di Castellabate, sono stati recentemente riscoperti i resti di un molo di età romana

681

«Panormus, 15» in Der Kleine Pauly, XVIII, 3, Stuggart 1949, pp. 660-665. 682 PURPURA 2000, p. 243, desidero ringraziare il Prof. Sebastiano Tusa della Soprintendenza del Mare di Palermo con il quale ho avuto occasione di confrontarmi e che ha suffragato l’ipotesi del Castellamare. 683 PRICE-TRELL 1977, p. 42, fig. 67; PURPURA 1997 dove si parla anche dell’epigrafe del curator portensis kalendarii, che comandava il porto di Panormus e gestiva i traffici navali grazie all’ausilio di un registro. L’epigrafe proviene dalla zona di San Cataldo. LA DUCA 2000, pp. 199203; GIARDINA 2007, p. 158. 684 TRONCHETTI 1986, p. 8. 685 Per una storia di Nora PESCE 1972.

686

BARTOLONI 1979, pp. 57-61; FINOCCHI 1999, pp. 167-192. MASTINO-SPANU-ZUCCA 2005, pp. 198-202. 688 Ptol. III, 3,4. 689 MASTINO-SPANU-ZUCCA 2005, p. 198. 690 Plin. nat. III, 6, 83. 691 PANEDDA 1953, p.121 con bibliografia precedente. 687

188

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO (Tav. 61, fig. 121), del quale si era dimenticata l’esistenza. Dell’isola di Licosa, il cui nome sarebbe derivato da una delle sirene dopo essere precipitata nel fondo del mare, parlava già Strabone.692

La collocazione del tempio, e di conseguenza del faro, è stata a lungo discussa, perché pur essendo sicuri che esso fosse collocato in quella zona ci si è interrogati se esso fosse in cima all’attuale via Minerva oppure proprio dove sorge la torre di Minerva o poco più sotto, come sembra più probabile.698 Dunque, il tempio si ergeva a picco sul mare col chiaro intento di segnalare il promontorio di Punta della Campanella e, tramite la luce di un faro, l’ingresso al porto della vicinissima Capri, dialogando quindi, dall’età tiberiana, con quello della Villa Iovis. Il tempio-faro risulta ancora segnalato nella Tabula Peutingeriana dunque dobbiamo supporre che sia stato distrutto e depredato nel Basso Medioevo durante le incursioni saracene: fu allora che Roberto d’Angiò, nel 1334, ordinò la costruzione della torre di Minerva699 che manteneva, seppur latinizzato, il toponimo antico in ricordo del tempio di Atena (Tav. 62, fig. 123). Mingazzini e Pfister, individuarono negli anni Quaranta del Novecento una struttura di forma circolare che ipotizzarono poter essere una torre di segnalazione o il faro stesso (Tav. 63, fig. 124): essa si presentava di circa 2 m di diametro impostata su una base rettangolare di 3,70 di fronte per 3 m di profondità. Essa era posizionata proprio di fronte al faro della Villa Iovis dell’isola di Capri (Tav. 63, fig. 125 a, b). La torre era inglobata nella villa, oggi inaccessibile perché la zona è da un lato proprietà privata e dall’altro zona militare, e il suo vano di fondazione è pertinente a una piccola cisterna che non poteva che essere collegata al faro.700

Il porto e il tempio faro L’antico porto di San Marco è stato a più riprese distrutto a partire dagli anni Sessanta del secolo scorso per far posto a un imponente albergo e al moderno antemurale che insistono sulle strutture romane. I moli conservati si presentano in opera cementizia.693 Di fronte al golfo di Paestum era situata l’insula Leucosiae dove, secondo Aristotele,694 sorgeva un tempio dedicato alla Sirena Leucosia, la cui funzione era forse anche quella di faro per i naviganti. Pare che il tempio fosse addirittura abitato, nel qual caso non possiamo pensare agli abitanti dell’edificio che come agli addetti alle segnalazioni. Il bradisismo che interessa da sempre tutta l’area campana sommerse l’isola e il suo tempio, i ruderi del quale sono forse da identificare con le strutture sommerse che le recenti indagini subacquee hanno riportato alla luce.695 L’isola che attualmente si vede nei pressi di Ogliastra Marina (non a caso su di essa è ora un faro moderno), era una volta parte integrante della Punta Licosa, mentre l’isola del tempio di Leucosia andrebbe forse riconosciuta nell’attuale secca di Votalla, collocata a circa un miglio dal promontorio. Sul litorale di Santa Maria di Castellabate sono ben visibili molti pozzetti che servivano come cave per la costruzione delle colonne del tempio. Le indagni archeologiche sono appena iniziate e si attendono pubblicazioni scientifiche dettagliate in grado di fare luce sul tempio e sul suo possibile ruolo di faro.

SCHEDA 53 CAPRAE (Capri, Campania) Regio I: Latium et Campania Fondata secondo la leggenda701 dai Teleboi, i primi Greci che si stabilirono in Italia, Caprae rimase, tuttavia, una città priva di importanza a causa della separazione, geografica e politica, dell’isola in una parte superiore (Anacapri) ed una inferiore (Capri). Proprietà di Neapolis dal 326 a.C., entrò a far parte del demanio imperiale grazie ad Augusto che donò ai partenopei la più fertile Pythechusa (Ischia). E’ noto che il periodo più florido della città (e del suo porto) è legato al prolungato soggiorno nell’isola di Tiberio, al cui regno appartengono i maggiori resti oggi visibili a Capri. Con la morte di Tiberio la città decadde per essere protagonista solo nel 182 d.C. quando Commodo relegherà nell’isola moglie e sorella.702

SCHEDA 52 CAPO ATENHEUM (Termini, Punta della Campanella, Campania) Regio I: Latium et Campania Nell’odierna zona di Massa Lubrense, proprio dove finisce la strada carrabile, nella frazione di Termini, un ripido sentiero conduce all’estremità del promontorio noto come Punta della Campanella (Tav. 62, fig. 122), per una leggenda legata alle incursioni saracene. La leggenda vuole che i Saraceni, dopo avere saccheggiato Sorrento e rubato la campana della chiesa di Sant’Antonino, una volta giunti in prossimità del promontorio non risucirono più a proseguire in quanto la nave si arrestò improvvisamente. I pirati, pensando di essersi imbattuti in un blocco di sabbia, liberarono la nave dai più pesanti carichi, ad eccezione della campana; la nave si sbloccò solo quando fu gettata in mare anch’essa.696 Furono i Greci i primi naviganti ad arrivare nella zona e chiamarono il promontorio Capo Ateneo, in quanto lì, racconta la leggenda, Odisseo edificò un tempio dedicato ad Atena che doveva svolgere anche funzioni di faro.697 Sia l’indagine archeologica quanto quella topografica (parzialmente possibile essendo la punta zona militare) non sono mai state facili in quanto la zona è stata stravolta da diverse costruzioni: la costruzione di una villa romana, la costruzione della quattrocentesca torre di Minerva, la batteria piazzata contro gli Inglesi di Capri ai tempi di Murat e, non ultima, la costruzione del faro moderno. Il tempio-faro

Il porto e il faro Oggi, come nell’antichità, l’unico porto che possa ospitare con sicurezza piccoli natanti è quello di Marina Grande, situato sulla costa settentrionale dell’isola; infatti le altre coste presentano numerose rocce che scendono a picco sul mare.703 L’isola, informa Tacito,704 è distante solo tre miglia dalla Punta Campanella, estremo capo della penisola sorrentina, dove abbiamo visto essere posizionato un faro, di cui restava forse il basamento. Sarà forse per questo motivo che Tiberio decise di realizzare un monumentale faro, costruito sul modello alessandrino, da posizionare nei pressi della sua villa a mare. Dunque, l’area flegrea presentava un fitto sistema di segnalazioni705 tramite la torre del faro di Capri, il faro di Punta Campanella presso Sorrento e i fari (e le specole) del porto misenate; sappiamo da

692

Strab. VI, 1,8. Per informazioni pià dettagliate circa il molo si veda BENINI 2002, pp. 39-51. 694 Aristot. mir. 103,32, l’isola delle Sirene è citata anche in Strab. VI, 1,1. 695 GARGIULLO-OKELY II 1993, p. 93 696 SANTORO 1967, pp. 45-46. 697 Pur non parlando mai di una specifica funzione di faro, la collocazione del santuario è assicurata da Strab. I, 22; Strab. V, 8, 247; Stat. Sil. V, 3, 165-166. 693

698

MINGAZZINI-PFISTER 1946, p. 52. LEONARDI 1991, p. 76. 700 MINGAZZINI-PFISTER 1946, p. 146. 701 Verg. Aen. VII, 733. 702 Cass. Dio. XXII, 4. 703 BELOCH 1989, pp. 318-322. 704 Tac. Ann. IV, 67. 705 BOLLINI 1968, p. 53. 699

189

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA un’epigrafe che vi era un corpo di addetti (specularii) al buon funzionamento di queste segnalazioni.706

un faro del tipo alessandrino, le cui vestigia corrisponderebbero all’attuale Torre del Faro.712 Krause, addirittura, ipotizza che il faro di Capri fosse il principale faro di Puteoli perché posto su di un isola come quello di Alessandria, ma la distanza tra l’isola di Pharos e la città è assai minore rispetto a quella tra Capri e Puteoli. Tuttavia, a mio avviso, la situazione è assai differente anche perché l’isola di Pharos era comunque collegata al porto di Alessandria e la mancanza di un faro che potesse indicare l’entrata in porto delle navi a Puteoli, avrebbe costretto il grano proveniente dal porto egiziano a fare scalo a Capri per poi essere trasportato su molte imbarcazioni di minore stazza nel porto puteolano, ma credo che questa sia un’ipotesi poco verosimile. Inoltre viene da chiedersi se un tale fervore edilizio fosse possibile in una città che, con la morte di Tiberio, subì un notevole calo di importanza.

La torre del faro di Capri (Tav. 63, figg. 125 a, b; Tav. 64 fig. 127) è conservata ancora per l’altezza di 16 m, ed è collocata sopra un’altura rocciosa (319 s.l.m.) che forma il crinale dei due versanti dell’isola. Il basamento (12 m di lato in laterizio) è di forma quadrata. L’elevata altitudine della torre farebbe però pensare più a una torre di segnalazione o di difesa oppure, ancora meglio, a un faro la cui luce servisse prevalentemente a illuminare il palazzo imperiale. Presso l’angolo nord-ovest della torre si trovano numerosi ruderi, tra i quali un pilastro e la spalla di un arco, che dovevano costituire la via di accesso al primo piano del faro, dal quale partiva una scala per accedere al piano o ai piani superiori.707 Il faro doveva raggiungere un’altezza di 40 m, ma la sua elevata posizione, come ricorda Stazio che paragona la torre alla Luna, mi sembra poco adatta alla segnalazione marittima, affidata, invece, ai fari collocati a livello del mare: la sua primaria funzione era quella di specola “militare”. Tramite essa, infatti, Tiberio avrebbe comunicato con la specola misenate e le altre sparse nel territorio (Tav. 64, fig. 126) in modo tale da essere avvertito se stesse sopraggiungendo Seiano con la sua flotta. Non a caso la torre era collegata alla villa da un viadotto, del quale rimangono ancora in situ un pilastro e parte di un arco in legno largo oltre 2 m, e questo non era altro che una scorciatoia per avvertire Tiberio in caso di incursioni nemiche. Tuttavia, secondo Krause,708 la costruzione della Loggia Marina (vera e propria specola) avrebbe ostacolato i collegamenti tra il faro e la specola misenate; a mio avviso invece lo Specularium caprese non era altro che un ennesimo ausilio alla segnalazione (Tav. 65, figg. 128, 129).

SCHEDA 54 BAIAE-MISENUM (Baia, Miseno, Campania) Regio I: Latium et Campania Nel 37 a.C. Agrippa, genio militare di Augusto, fece aprire un passaggio tra il Golfo di Baia e il quasi scomparso Lago Lucrino e un altro tra quest’ultimo e il Lago Averno: nacque così l’efficientissimo e celeberrimo Portus Iulius (Tav. 66, fig. 130), chiuso a nord dai monti di Baia (odierna Bacoli) che terminano con il promontorio di Punta Pennata, ad ovest dal Monte di Procida e a sud dal sottile e lungo istmo di Miliscola.713 Fu allora che Miseno,714 considerata una propaggine di Baia, acquistò una propria autonomia, riscontrabile nelle numerose iscrizioni di marinai della flotta lì stanziata. Il suo nome, derivato dalla leggenda che in quel luogo sarebbe morto Miseno, compagno di Odisseo,715 rimase anche in epoca romana quando si divise il porto in due bacini, uno esterno (porto di Miseno)716 ed uno interno (Mar Morto): Baia e Miseno erano collegate da un ponte di legno, il cui accesso venne limitato da Agrippa tramite la creazione di due moli che partivano dalle due rive del porto rispettivamente in corrispondenza di Capo Miseno e Punta Pennata.717

Sembra, in base agli esami sulle grandi quantità di carbone e ceneri trovate nei suoi pressi, che, nonostante il crollo a seguito del terremoto di cui parla Svetonio,709 il faro, restaurato sotto il regno di Domiziano,710 abbia continuato la sua attività sino al XVII secolo.

Il porto e il faro Conclusioni e problematiche L’insenatura formata dal porto di Miseno era lunga 2 km e larga nella sua massima ampiezza sino a 500 m, con una profondità che poteva raggiungere anche i 14 m. Il Mare Morto formava il porto interno, mentre quello esterno era sovrapponibile all’attuale porto di Miseno; essi erano della stessa ampiezza e tra loro collegati da un ponte in legno mentre oggi c’è una diga che li divide, anche a causa del progressivo insabbiarsi del Mare Morto.718 Agrippa, avendo avuto l’incarico di trasformare questo porto da commerciale in militare (Portus Iulius), fece costruire due moli collegati alle due rive del porto, allungando quello meridionale con una doppia serie di pilae che riprendevano il modello di Puteoli.719

Si pensa che la torre del faro di Capri, tuttavia forse già presente in epoca augustea, sia nata come una torre di segnalazione in contatto con quella di Punta Campanella, la cui funzione era quella di avvertire l’imperatore Tiberio nel caso la rivolta di Seiano si fosse sedata.711 Negli ultimi anni di vita di Tiberio la torre presentava un basamento quadrato su cui era un piano circolare dal quale partiva una scala che conduceva alla sommità per accendervi i fuochi, scala che crollò in seguito ad un terremoto. Forse sotto il regno di Domiziano si decise di erigerla nuovamente, ma in forme più monumentali e con una vera e propria funzione di faro e si prese a modello quello di Alessandria; sopra l’avanzo del secondo piano se ne costruì un altro, cilindrico, che ospitava la lanterna e sul tetto di quest’ultimo piano venne posizionata una statua. Una recente ipotesi vede, invece, un restauro della specola sotto il regno di Domiziano, durante il quale si sarebbe anche costruito ex novo

In vista dell’isola di Capri, dove era il grande faro collegato alla Villa Iovis di Tiberio (Tav.63, fig. 125), su una piattaforma ad est di Punta Pennata sull’altura di Punta del Poggio, in fondo a via Pennata, sono stati trovati i resti di un edificio di forma quadrata, interpretato come un faro (o una semplice specola), nella località oggi chiamata “Grottone” e inseriti all’interno della Masseria Annunziata Primicerio (Tav. 66, fig. 131): il

706

MAIURI 1956, p. 24. MAIURI 1956, p. 53 pensa che il faro caprese fosse dotato di solo due piani; recentemente, invece, è stato proposto (KRAUSE 2005, pp. 251258) che il faro della villa a mare di Tiberio fosse stato costruito, su modello di quello di Alessandria, e, quindi, con tre piani digradanti verso l’alto. 708 KRAUSE 2005, p. 251. 709 Suet. Tib. LXXIV. 710 Stat. sil. III, 5, 100-101. in cui si paragona la luce emessa dal faro di Capri a quella, potentissima, della Luna. 711 MAIURI 1956, p. 24. In realtà sappiamo che Tiberio riuscì a uccidere Seiano. 707

712

KRAUSE 2005, p. 48. CHAPOT 1967, pp.64-68. 714 Sul porto di Miseno: LEGER 1979, pp. 460-461. 715 Strab. VI, 5-6. 716 VIERECK 1975, pp. 264-265. 717 BOLLINI 1968, p. 51. 718 BELOCH 1989, p. 225. 719 LEGER 1979, pp. 460-462; REDDÈ 1986, pp, 186-197. 713

190

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO corpo centrale è formato da un grande ambiente a cupola ribassata, attorniato da quattro ambienti più piccoli di forma quadrangolare ma con la medesima copertura e in tutti gli ambienti vi sono tracce di cocciopesto.720 Da questo punto si domina tutto il porto di Miseno, parte del Mar Morto, il canale di Procida, i Golfi di Pozzuoli e Napoli fino a Capri e Sorrento: è quindi un luogo assai adatto per erigervi un faro e questa situazione è stata interpretata come quella dipinta nel celebre affresco di Gragnano (Tav. 70, fig. 139).721 Il Maiuri ha parlato di specola più che di faro (non escludendo comunque quest’ultima ipotesi) poiché il navigante che veniva da ponente non avrebbe potuto vedere questa struttura, coperta dalle pareti del promontorio, motivo per cui si è pensato a un sistema che comprendeva molti fari in tutta la zona flegrea.722

individuato dal Maiuri mi porterebbero ad escludere la funzione di faro militare a favore o di una specola della villa marittima di un aristocratico romano o di qualche altro ambiente sempre legato ad una residenza di prestigio. Conclusioni e problematiche Non va tralasciato di ricordare che c’è molta confusione circa il faro di Miseno. Spesso ci si è basati sulle parole di Maiuri ma, non facendo indagini sul campo, sono nate confusioni di carattere toponomastico: l’edificio scoperto dall’archeologo campano è localizzato su Punta del Poggio ma al termine di via Pennata, il che ha fatto scrivere anche che un faro era collocato su Punta Pennata. Altri ancora hanno affermato che un edificio con tale funzione fosse collocato nei pressi della chiesa di San Sossio, quasi al termine di via Sacello di Miseno all’incrocio con via del Faro (Tav. 67, fig. 133). Oggi tale affermazione è stata smentita anche se la posizione, proprio all’ingresso del molo, del quale rimane una pila, era certamente più efficace rispetto a quella di Punta del Poggio.

Tornando alla descrizione dell’edificio, esso, quasi sicuramente, era dotato di una cupola piuttosto bassa e l’interno si presenta rivestito in un incerto opus reticolatum, mentre l’esterno è realizzato nella stessa tecnica ma con un andamento più regolare e sono entrambi attribuibili a una ristrutturazione di I d.C.. Pareti e pavimenti sono ricoperti in signinum, realizzato con grosse scaglie di tegole impastate. Mancando nell’estradosso del Grottone qualsiasi traccia di un tamburo circolare, il Maiuri ha supposto che sul basamento si innalzasse una torre di sezione quadrata, analoga a quella della villa di Tiberio a Capri: un unico torrione, alto 18-20 m, a pareti rastremate e con una stanza di manovra per la segnalazione (Tav. 67, fig. 132).723 Recentemente si è tentata una ricostruzione del faro in base ai dati forniti dal Maiuri e ai confronti iconografici con gli altri fari; la struttura, assai massiccia, è costruita su modello della torre alessandrina: una massiccia base quadrata, sorretta da possenti mura per accentuarne il suo ruolo militare, un secondo piano poligonale dotato di alcune finestre che potevano essere utilizzate anche e soprattutto come sistema di difesa e un ultimo piano cilindrico, sorretto da colonne e sormontato da un tetto conico sul quale si erge una statua maschile, da identificare forse come Nettuno (Tav. 69, fig, 136). Il Sarnelli, nel 1764, identificava il faro di Miseno con la tomba del compagno di Ulisse cantata da Virgilio:

Non volendo essere da meno dei miei predecessori, e avendo compiuto diverse indagini sul campo, vorrei anch’io proporre un edificio che si sarebbe potuto prestare a faro di Miseno. Circa a metà di via del Faro si trova un grande edificio in stato di abbandono che ingloba, come molti altri della zona, parti di un edificio precedente in opus reticolatum. Tuttavia, la sua collocazione topografica risulterebbe ideale per un faro: in posizione elevata ma ben visibile per chi navigasse nei pressi di Punta Pennata e quindi dell’entrata in porto (Tav. 68, fig. 134). Il navigante che stesse entrando in porto tra Punta Pennata e Punta Terone non avrebbe potuto vedere il presunto faro di Punta del Poggio, come anche lo stesso Maiuri ammetteva,725 mentre, senza difficoltà, avrebbe potuto seguire le segnalazioni di un simile edificio collocato sul promontorio di Miseno. A mio avviso vi era un sistema di segnalazioni di questo tipo: una lanterna nei pressi di San Sossio, più precisamente su Punta Terone,726 una all’estremità di Punta Pennata e il faro sul promontorio di Miseno, circa a metà di via del Faro, poco prima del lungo tunnel che conduce al faro moderno. Ultimo indizio che mi spinge a pensare che un faro fosse collocato sul promontorio di Miseno proviene da una stampa seicentesca di Capaccio, dove è rappresentata una torre costiera (con indubbia funzione anche di faro) sulla sommità dello stesso (Tav. 68, fig. 135). A questo si aggiungano le parole di Scotti-Scajola quando,

imponit fuaque arma viro, remumque, tubamque. Monte fub aerio, qui nunc Misenus ab illo Dicitur, aeternumque tenet per facula Nomen 724

725

MAIURI 1983, p. 178: lo stesso grande archeologo campano ammetteva che a Miseno dovevano essere presenti più fari, poiché quello da lui riconosciuto come tale sarebbe risultato coperto al navigante dalle pareti del promontorio, ragione per cui, afferma, in epoca tiberiana, si decise di potenziare le segnalazioni luminose con la costruzione del faro della Villa Iovis. E’ tuttavia indubbio che una struttura farea a Punta del Poggio avrebbe potuto sfruttare la grande cisterna della poco distante Piscina Mirabile e avrebbe potuto dominare dall’alto il porto di Miseno e l’intero bacino del Mar Morto. Maiuri dice che le installazioni che avrebbero comunicato con la specola misenate erano da ricercare a Capo Ateneo, nella Marina Grande di Capri e sull’isola Pandataria, l’odierna Ventotene, nell’area nota come Montagnozzo, accanto alla bocca del porto che avrebbe dovuto comunicare con un faro-semaforo posto sul promontorio di Puna Eolo nella villa che ospitò Giulia ed Agrippina. Ed esattamente in località Montagnozzo è stato ipotizzato che questo rudere possa essere il faro della città, e la sua posizione isolata e dominante ne sembra un segno più che plausibile, anche se non si esclude che possa essere un edificio facente parte di un vasto complesso cfr. DE ROSSI 1998, p. 159. 726 SCOGNAMIGLIO 2006, p. 72 afferma che la lanterna, ma lui intende il faro principale, vada ricercata proprio sott’acqua nella zona di Punta Terone, zona che le fotografie aeree hanno rivelato essere dotata di moli antichi, come hanno testimoniato alcune ricognizioni preventive che hanno trovato strutture in cementizio e nelle cui vicinanze è una secca posta a 3 m di profondità e larga 15 m.

La collocazione dell’edificio, di indubbia origine romana, sembra, tuttavia, più pertinente ad un ambiente legato a una villa marittima che non al faro principale del porto di Miseno. Oggi, essendo la struttura inglobata nella Masseria Annunziata, le indagini topografiche sono quanto mai difficili ma la posizione dietro Punta Pennata e il ricco paramento decorativo 720 MAIURI 1949-50, pp. 259-; BORIELLO-D’AMBROSIO 1979, pp. 122123; MAIURI 1983, pp. 177-193. 721 GŰNTHER 1913, p. 166; GIANFROTTA 1998, pp. 164-165. 722 MAIURI 1983, p. 178: oltre a mettere in relazione questa specola con la Piscina Mirabilis, che le avrebbe fatto da cisterna, l’autore accenna a resti di un faro a Capo Ateneo (scheda 52), nella zona della Torre di Minerva, che si presenta come una torre circolare su basamento quadrato, situata proprio dirimpetto al faro della Villa Iovis di Capri, anch’essa in relazione con una piccola cisterna. 723 MAIURI 1983, p. 182. 724 SARNELLI 2002, p. 280, lo stesso ribadiva nel 1824 PANVINI 1990, pp. 126-127 che così trascriveva dal latino “fece ergere un’alta e sontuosa mole, e l’armi e il remo e la sonora tuba al monte appese, che d’Aerio il nome fino allor ebbe ed or da lui Miseno è detto, e si dirà mai sempre”, l’autore specifica poi che su quel monte in epoca romana era un faro.

191

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA nel tardo Settecento, si decise di ripristinare gli antichi porti flegrei: “…è luogo di marina e tiene sotto di sé quattro Porti, che sono quelli di Baia, di Miseno, di Nisida e di Pozzuoli, e due Fortezze delle migliori del Regno, quali sono quelle di Baia e Nisida, oltre le Torri di Miseno…”. Dunque, queste “Torri di Miseno”, in quel momento indubbiamente da interpretare come torri costiere, non potevano che svolgere anche la funzione di fari, come avrebbero dovuto fare in epoca antica, in quanto si parla di una maggiore ricettività delle navi e dell’impossibilità di naufragio delle stesse nella zona flegrea meglio attrezzata della capitale stessa.727 Infine, rimane il problema della rappresentazione del faro sulla fiaschetta vitrea di Varsavia (Tav. 69, fig. 137): all’edificio di quale porto si allude? Potrebbe essere il faro di Pozzuoli, visto che segue la descrizione della ripa puteolana e si potrebbe immaginare che tra il molo caligolano e l’inzio della zona baiana vi fosse un isolotto sul quale era un faro dando credito alla pittura di Gragnano. Oppure era il faro vero e proprio di Baia? Superata Puteoli, il primo porto attrezzato che si incontrava era quello oggi sommerso di Baia e lì vi era un grande faro. Ultima possibilità era il faro del porto di Miseno, ma perché allora la scritta Baia, forse perché funzionava per tutti e due, o perché era il principale di una fitta serie? A tutte queste domande è impossibile dare una risposta così come è difficile interpretare se la pittura di Gragnano si riferisca a Puteoli, Baia, Miseno, come ha recentemente ipotizzato Gianfrotta o, perché no, Stabiae? SCHEDA 55 PUTEOLI Latium et Campania

emerge dal mare è in opus reticulatum e laterizio, le parti sommerse si presentano invece in opus caementicium, cioè in pozzolana con inserti di tufo. Sappiamo dalle fonti che Caligola732 creò un ponte di barche che prolungò il molo verso Baia. Il molo, formato da una fila pilae (oggi crollate) collegate da archi, subì una mareggiata sotto il regno di Adriano e venne restaurato da Antonino Pio733 e fu in suo onore che, nel 139 d.C., si eresse un arco trionfale.734 Siamo così bene informati sulla topografia del porto di Pozzuoli, del quale ben poco rimane, grazie al rinvenimento, in varie zone, di vasi in vetro che riportavano l’immagine dei porti campani di Pozzuoli e Baia (Tav. 70, fig. 138).735 Ruderi di moli minori che formavano dei porticcioli sono in parte ancora visibili. Infine, l’emporium vero e proprio, come attesta Cicerone,736 si concentrava lungo la riva del porto, nella città bassa, luogo in cui erano i magazzini, i templi per i commercianti orientali e la Ripa, la riva del porto contornata da una banchina con portici. Nel porto sono attestati, oltre al culto di Serapide, quelli di Nettuno ed Ercole (ai quali erano anche dedicati i portici) e delle Ninfe, titolari di un tempio posto nel porto.737 Già dall’età augustea si tentò di collegare il porto puteolano al Portus Iulius sino ad arrivare al non realizzato tentativo della Fossa Neronis di Baia, ideata da Nerone.738 Il porto iniziò a decadere nel corso del I secolo d.C. in concomitanza con la creazione di quello di Claudio ad Ostia, destinato a divenire il porto di Roma.739 Il porto,740 tuttavia, non fu distrutto dalle invasioni barbariche ma subì la violenta azione del bradisisimo che ne interrò numerosi edifici, costringendo gli abitanti ad abbandonare la zona per spostarsi verso l’altura del castello, là dove era sorta la colonia greca.741 Nessuna fonte parla espressamente del faro di Pozzuoli, che però è forse rappresentato e riconosciuto dall’iscrizione Faros sul vaso “souvenir” conservato al Museo Nazionale di Varsavia.742

(Pozzuoli, Campania) Regio I:

La città, fondata dai Sami nel VI a.C. con il nome di Dicearchia, nell’insenatura occidentale del Golfo di Napoli, decaduta la vicina egemonia di Cuma, collegata alla più ricca zona del retroterra campano, fu dotata di una rada di approdo e di un porto destinato a diventare fondamentale per gli antichi commerci. Conquistata nel 338 a.C. dai Romani che la ribattezzarono Puteoli, diventò il più importante baluardo marittimo-commerciale-militare della seconda guerra punica. Mancando a Roma un vero e proprio porto, questa funzione venne affidata proprio al porto di Pozzuoli, colonia romana dal 195 a.C..728 La decadenza del porto di Puteoli fu definitiva nel II secolo d.C. quando ormai il porto di Ostia, iniziato da Claudio alla metà del I secolo d.C., inaugurato da Nerone nel 64 d.C. e portato a compimento da Traiano fra il 100 e il 106 d.C., aveva ormai portato direttamente nella capitale le merci provenienti dal porto alessandrino, anche se l’emporio campano rimase la meta prediletta dei mercanti orientali e, ancora, Teodosio, Arcadio e Onorio realizzarono importanti opere portuali come il completamento della ripa.729

L’edificio sarebbe da collocare forse al posto dell’attuale castello, nell’angolo sud-occidentale della città alta.743 Della sua collocazione presso un’altura si era supposto per la pittura di Gragnano (Tav. 70, fig. 139),744 nella quale sarebbe invece da

732

Suet. Cal. 19. C.I.L. X, 1640-41. 734 BELOCH, 1989, pp. 153-155: nei vasi vitrei sono presentati due archi trionfali, l’uno sormontato da quattro Tritoni, l’altro da una statua di Nettuno seguita da quattro ippocampi. Al centro due colonne, analoghe a quelle brindisine, sormontate da statue di difficile identificazione. Una di esse, in base anche al ritrovamento di un busto di Iside durante scavi subacquei, è stata interpretata come Isis Pharia cfr. GIANFROTTA 1998, pp. 167-169. 735 La fiasca vitrea con l’iscrizione Faros proviene invece da Ostia ed è conservata al Museo Nazionale di Varsavia cfr. PENSA 1999, p. 100; FRANZOT 1999, p. 49. MAIURI 1983, pp. 184-185, tuttavia, riconosce in esso il faro di Miseno. 736 Cic. att. V, 2,2. 737 BELOCH 1989, p. 156. 738 GIARDINA 2004, pp. 331-335 con bibliografia precedente. 739 Per una completa storia del porto si veda: ANNECCHINO 1940, pp. 118-. Per i ritrovamenti subacquei, GIANFROTTA 1993, pp. 115-124. 740 BASS 1974, pp. 95-96; VIERECK 1975, pp. 260-261. 741 «Puteoli, 1» in Der Kleine Pauly, XXIII,2, Stuggart 1959, pp. 20532054. 742 Il Dubois riconosceva, invece, nel vaso di Odemira il faro di Pozzuoli subito dopo le colonne, all’estremità del molo cfr. SPANO 1931, pp. 351-; FUJII 2001, pp. 73-76; BEDON 1988, p. 58, ritiene, invece, che nel vaso del Museo di Varsavia sia da riconoscere il faro di Baia. 743 BELOCH 1989, p. 156; secondo il Dubois sarebbe invece da collocare in cima all’altura del castello cfr. MAIURI 1983, p. 184, nota 18. 744 PENSA 1997, p. 692. 733

Il porto e il faro Il porto della città, scalo di arrivo della flotta granaria inviata annualmente da Roma ad Alessandria,730sorse sul costone roccioso della collina che lo proteggeva dai venti, e fu ampliato sempre più a seconda delle esigenze del momento; il grande quartiere commerciale era lungo il tratto della costa a nordovest dell’acropoli.731 La parte della costruzione ad archi che 727

SCOTTI-SCAJOLA 1775, p. 192; BUCCARO 1993, p. 132. MCKAY 1972, p. 139. ANNECCHINO 1949, pp. 134-145 ricorda anche i restauri ad opera di Antonino Pio nel 139 d.C., le titolature ricevute da Marco Aurelio e Commodo nella città che fu anche scelta da Romolo Augustolo per il suo esilio. 730 FRANZOT 1999, p. 46: da Pozzuoli il grano veniva trasportato nella capitale grazie a piccoli natanti in grado di risalire il Tevere. 731 LEGER 1979, pp. 462-463; AMALFITANO-CAMODECA-MEDRI 1990, p. 103. 728 729

192

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO riconoscere il faro di Miseno (scheda 54).745 Infatti, se nella pittura di Gragnano vediamo una struttura sopra una roccia che deve, senza dubbio, avere svolto la funzione di faro, nelle riproduzioni settecentesche del Bellori e nelle descrizioni del Sarnelli a lui coevo, non si vede né si cita alcun faro, struttura che non doveva e non poteva comunque mancare: l’unica possibilità è che esso fosse visibile sino all’età romana, poi sia stato inglobato nel castello e quindi nel Settecento se ne era ormai presa traccia. Tuttavia, dal momento che sappiamo essere state compiute da Antonino Pio numerose azioni di restauro nel porto puteolano, c’è chi ha supposto, in base alla notizia data da Giulio Capitolino del restauro di un faro da parte di questo imperatore,746 che Antonino avesse restaurato proprio il faro di Pozzuoli e non, come credono altri studiosi, quello di Alessandria.

SCHEDA 57 TARRACINA (Terracina, Lazio) Regio I: Latium et Campania Presso il Mare Tirreno, quasi all’estremo limite meridionale del Lazio, al centro di una vasta insenatura tra i promontori di Anxur e del Circeo, è la città di Terracina (Tav. 71, fig. 140), chiusa a mezzogiorno dai Monti Lepini che si spingono fino al mare. Fondata, forse, dai Volsci (cui si dovrebbe il nome Anxur), divenne colonia maritima nel 329 a.C. e probabilmente già in quest’epoca dotata di un porto. Dedotta dai Romani nel 329 a.C. con il nome di colonia Anxuras, a essa si aggiungerà il toponimo Tarracina, come ricorda Livio.749 Presa la via Appia come decumanus maximus, per rendere più agevole il passaggio tra Terracina e Torre del Pesce, Traiano iniziò i costosi lavori del taglio del Pisco Montano, creando una strada marittima ai piedi delle montagne (Tav. 71, fig. 141) .750

Infine, nel vaso di Varsavia il presunto faro di Pozzuoli sembra presentare un’architettura simile a quello rappresentato sulla Colonna Traiana: una torre (anche se non più circolare ma poligonale) con un tetto a spiovente, in corrispondenza del quale è un’apertura, sotto sembra invece essere presente una porta di accesso. Purtroppo, sino a che non verranno ritrovate, sott’acqua, le vestigia dell’antico faro, nulla di più saremo in grado di dire su quello che deve essere stato un faro monumentale se tanto meritevole di essere menzionato tra i restauri di Antonino Pio in un porto che sino al II d.C. potremmo definire il primo porto di Roma.

Il porto e il faro L’impianto portuale, inizialmente completamente scavato nella sabbia, racchiuso da un cerchio fu rinnovato e allargato grazie a interventi di epoca flavia ed antonina quando lo dotarono di un molo in direzione est-ovest e di uno, nord-sud, sul quale si inseriva un braccio semicircolare, alla cui estremità si ergeva l’isolotto destinato ad ospitare il faro.751 I due moli non potevano incontrarsi se non tramite l’ausilio di un ponte, dal momento che tra loro passava il così detto Fiumicello di Terracina, proveniente dall’Agro Pontino: dunque il porto era al tempo stesso marittimo e fluviale.752

SCHEDA 56 PANDATARIA (Ventotene, Lazio) Regio I: Latium et Campania

Quasi sicuramente un faro non era presente quando gli abitanti di Terracina utilizzavano come porto la piccola insenatura, peraltro piuttosto sabbiosa, che esisteva tra Piegarello e Pisco Montano, ma una torre farea si rese necessaria allorché i Romani realizzarono quell’impianto portuale, la cui forma elissoidale evitava di convogliare in mare le poco salubri acque pontine scaricate dal fiume Ufente.753 La tradizione locale attribuisce il restauro del bacino portuale a Traiano, anche per le molte analogie del porto con quello di Centumcellae e, soprattutto, per la costruzione di un antemurale su cui si ergeva il faro. Tuttavia un passo di Giulio Capitolino754 attribuisce il restauro del porto ad Antonino Pio. Come si è visto a proposito di Pozzuoli, nello stesso passo viene menzionato anche il restauro di un faro, ma non viene specificato di quale città si tratti. Lugli755 non solo ha ipotizzato che si trattasse del faro di Terracina, ma ha anche voluto vedere rappresentato questo restauro in un bassorilievo (oggi perduto),756 che doveva ornare l’ingresso del porto di Terracina (Tav. 72, fig. 142).

L’isola, principalmente costituita da tufo e pietra vulcanica, inziò la sua vita in età augustea. Vista la morfologia e le dimensioni a disposizione, i Romani non realizzarono una serie di ville ma idearono un unico grande ambiente che doveva essere raggiungibile facilmente via mare. Porto, cardo e villa, come giustamente fa notare il De Rossi, furono i tre cardini dell’urbanistica isolana, costituendo un unicum nel mondo romano.747 Il porto e il faro Dal porto e dalla peschiera, un tunnel scavato nel banco di tufo permetteva di raggiungere la parte alta dell’isola. Il faro doveva essere collocato in posizione dominante: non a caso in località Montagnozzo (il toponimo è evidente) fu localizzato un rudere isolato in posizione privilegiata che venne identificato come il faro dell’area portuale,748 ma solo ulteriori scavi ed indagini potranno darci delle risposte.

749

Liv. IV, 58-59. Liv. XXXIX, 44, 6. 751 Per una storia di Terracina si veda BIANCHINI 1994. 752 LEGER 1979, pp. 459-460; APOLLONJ GHETTI 1982, p. 35. 753 DE LA BLANCHÈRE 1983, p. 31: il molo era costruito su una salda scogliera realizzata con grossi blocchi rocciosi rubati dalle vicine montagne e gettati in mare. Il perimetro totale raggiungeva i 1160 ettari. 754 H.A. VIII, 3. 755 A margine della banchina del porto di Terracina un deposito di sabbia noto come “Montone” è testimonianza dei lavori di dragaggio del porto compiuti in epoca antonina, cfr. LUGLI 1926, p. 129, tavv. I-II; LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN 1963, p. 204 pensa che si tratti di un restauro al faro di Ostia; DE LA BLANCHÈRE 1983, p. 131 pensa al faro di Terracina; COARELLI 1987, pp. 132-133 pensa che il rilievo si riferisca al centro dei lavori per il faro e a sinistra al taglio del Pisco Montano. Lo studioso sottolinea anche che, essendo il rilievo datato all’età traianea, la tesi della sistemazione del porto e del Pisco Montano troverebbe conferma. 756 Il rilievo, trovato alle spalle di Piazza dell’Emiciclo, fu scoperto a Terracina nel 1935 e catalogato come Inv. 321008 presso il Museo Nazionale Romano di Palazzo Massimo alle Terme di Roma. 750

745

Per GÜNTHER 1913, si tratta del faro dell’attuale villaggio di Marechiaro, per SINGER-HOLYMARD,-HALL-WILLIAMS 1956, p. 520 si tratta del porto di Pozzuoli, così come per PENSA 1997, pp. 695, 708; GIANFROTTA 1998, p. 165, GIANFROTTA 2005, p. 10 vi vede il porto di Miseno. Franzot, infine, vi riconosce una veduta a volo di uccello dei porti di Pozzuoli, Baia e Miseno, FRANZOT 1999, p. 47, avvalorando così la citata ipotesi del Dubois. 746 H.A. VIII, 2-3, dove si parla di Fari restitutio. Di questa opinione è anche ANNECCHINO 1940, p. 145; ALLARD 1979, p.504; BEDON 1988, pp. 57-58, in quest’opera tuttavia si dice, erroneamente, che il restauro del faro avvenne ad opera di Traiano nel 139 d.C., primo anno dell’impero di Antonino Pio. 746 CHAPOT 1967, pp. 64-68. 747 DE ROSSI 1998, p. 154. 748 DE ROSSI 1993, p. 53; DE ROSSI 1998, p. 159.

193

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA In esso, riporta lo studioso, è raffigurato sulla destra un magistrato seduto sulla sella curulis che incarica un architetto di iniziare i lavori per il taglio del Pisco Montano e il restauro (o la costruzione) di una torre, probabilmente il faro,757 della quale però nulla possiamo dire se non che avesse forma quadrata, almeno nella base, come appare in un’interpretazione di Luigi Canina (Tav. 72, fig. 143).758 Si può immaginare che nei primi tempi i naviganti abbiano utilizzato come punto di riferimento per orientarsi il tempio di Giove Anxur, posto proprio sopra il porto e forse illuminato di notte proprio per fungere da faro. Il restauro di Antonino Pio potrebbe anche riferirsi al faro di Caieta (Gaeta) del quale non abbiamo notizie ma che non poteva mancare per dialogare con gli altri della zona.

Negli Anni Sessanta del secolo scorso furono scoperte anche tombe alla cappuccina ed una cisterna che doveva collegarsi al faro della villa di Cicerone. I lavori agricoli che si sono susseguiti nel corso degli anni e la destinazione della villa a stazione militare non hanno fatto che complicare gli studi che si rendono oggi pressoché impossibili. A mio avviso, comunque, questo porto doveva formare un ideale ingresso a quello della vicina Anzio, potenziato in epoca neroniana. Il molo orientale di Astura è largo circa 6 m, quello occidentale 10-12 m, e l’imboccatura orientata a sud-est era protetta da un antemurale.764

SCHEDA 58 CIRCEII (San Felice al Circeo, Lazio) Regio I : Latium et Campania

Recenti indagini hanno chiarito meglio la planimetria portuale: davanti alla bocca di porto, la fotografia aerea ha evidenziato una barriera sommersa di circa 60 m di lunghezza per 20 di larghezza, identificato come un frangionda in pietra persa e non, nonostante il notevole ammasso di pietrame, una fondazione pertinente a una torre o a un faro.765 Il molo destro fu costruito in modo da proteggere il bacino dai venti di terzo e quarto quadrante. Al termine del molo occidentale, nell’area chiamata dai locali “la Botte”, si intravedono i resti di un piccolo edificio di forma circolare (diametro 3 m) dove doveva essere collocato uno dei fari del porto che aveva i suoi gemelli nell’altro molo e sull’antemurale conosciuto anche come Scoglio della Lanterna, dove sembra sorgesse anche un edificio circolare, purtroppo, come l’antemurale stesso, bombardato dai pescatori di frodo e quindi oggi sommerso. Tuttavia, la presenza di un porto e di torri di segnalazione ad Astura è nota anche da fonti tarde come l’atto di navigazione del 1166 tra Genova e Roma e l’atto di vendita di Nettuno e Anzio a Clemente VII nel 1549 in cui si afferma cum turri ac porto Asturae. Va notato però che l’uso dell’antemurale con faro principale e torri semaforiche alle estremità dei moli è tipico dell’età traianea. Centumcellae ne è un evidente esempio, anche se si ipotizza un simile sistema anche per il porto di Claudio del I secolo d.C. a Ostia. Si può, quindi, forse pensare a un restauro alla ormai abbandonata villa di Cicerone della quale si sfruttò la peschiera e il sistema di canalizzazione per trasformarla in porto attrezzato con l’ausilio di fari.

Il porto e il faro

La moderna San Felice si identifica con la fondazione volsca di Circeii, dedotta dai Romani nel 393 a.C., della quale si conserva unicamente un tratto di mura poligonali nell’attuale via Rossi. Un muraglione che parte dalla cinta urbana e sale di 200 m collega la città all’Acropoli, dove è stata scoperta anche una cisterna. Nota fin dal Cinquecento per le sue possenti mura in opera poligonale, Circeii è sempre stata identificata con San Felice al Circeo.759 Il porto e il faro Prima della realizzazione della Fossa Neronis, il monte del Circeo ha svolto il ruolo fondamentale di protezione dai venti di maestrale e ponente alle piccole imbarcazioni che cercavano riparo nel suo porto. Grazie ad alcune fotografie aeree, è stato riconosciuto il porto sommerso di Circeii poco più a nord dell’attuale albergo Grotte di Neanderthal, nella cui zona alcuni resti attribuibili forse a peschiere erano già stati individuati dallo Schmiedt.760 A 541 m sl.m. è la sommità del Monte Circeo, dove si ergeva un tempio dedicato a Venere; oggi questo luogo è occupato dal faro moderno (Tav. 73, fig. 144). Un faro in questa posizione, cui forse sarebbero pertinenti avanzi di tessere in opus reticolatum e cocci,761 avrebbe potuto comunicare facilmente con quelli posizionati a Ponza, Terracina e, soprattutto, Gaeta762.

SCHEDA 60 ROMA E IL PORTUS AUGUSTI DI OSTIA (Roma/Ostia, Lazio) Regio I: Latium et Campania

SCHEDA 59 ASTURA (Torre Astura, Lazio) Regio I: Latium et Campania

Il portus Tiberinus: Eludendo dallo specifico argomento non tratterò dei molteplici empori di Roma (Testaccio, Porta Trigemina...), ma solo di quello nato sulle sponde del fiume Tevere e forse abitato sin dall’VIII a.C. da commercianti del Mediterraneo presso il Foro Boario, noto come portus Tiberinus, e del quale rimane oggi solo il tempio in onore del dio Portuno (Tav. 74, fig. 147).

Collocata nei pressi della foce del fiume Astura (Tav. 73, fig. 145) non è ancora stato accertato se la zona fosse un vero e proprio insediamento o solo un susseguirsi di ville marittime, tra le quali spicca quella detta di Cicerone. Non è nemmeno chiaro se la villa posseduta da Cicerone, almeno sino al 45 a.C., si impostasse su un precedente edificio in opera reticolata con cubilia irregolari, forse relativo a un faro che poi venne sfruttatato anche per segnalare la villa stessa (Tav. 74, fig. 146).763

Ostia: Prima della seconda guerra punica, quando Roma dovette creare una vera e propria marina da guerra in grado di competere con la potenza cartaginese, lo scalo di Ostia766 serviva solo a protezione delle saline e contro le incursioni piratesche. I numerosi approvvigionamenti annonari che giungevano nella capitale dal porto di Pozzuoli si facevano sempre più intensi e necessitavano di un porto capace di ospitare navi anche di grandi dimensioni, non più solo piccoli natanti trascinati da coppie di buoi con il noto sistema dell’alaggio. Infatti, è curioso notare come Strabone notasse che

757

COARELLI 1987, p. 132; VALLE PONTINA 1990, p. 46. ZERI 1905, p. 308; GIULIANO 1985; DE LA BLANCHÈRE 1983, p. 107. 759 Sulla storia del sito QUILICI-QUILICI GIGLI 2005, pp. 121-146. 760 SCHMIEDT 1972, pp. 120-132; QUILICI-QUILICI GIGLI 2005, pp. 130131. 761 LUGLI 1928, p.24. 762 Recente è l’ipotesi di QUILICI 2009, pp. di un possibile faro anche a Sperlonga nella zona chiamata Belvedere. 763 Si notano ancora in situ dieci arcate che consentivano all’acqua di passare sotto la struttura senza metterne a rischio la sua stabilità: le stesse, seppur ancora più sprofondate, trovano un confronto con quelle 758

del faro di Dubris. E’ ancora visibile anche il ponte dotato di frangiflutti che trova notevole riscontro con quello analizzato per Puteoli. 764 PICARRETTA 1977, p. 64. 765 FELICI 2006, p. 62. 766 Sulle origini si veda PASINI 1978.

194

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO Ostia fosse priva di porto a causa dei depositi alluvionali del Tevere, che veniva ingrossato dai suoi numerosi affluenti, anche se molte navi, alleggerendo il carico, già in età augustea, ormeggiavano in zona e poi navigavano il Tevere per 190 stadi sino a giungere a Roma.767 Fu solo con Claudio che si realizzò l’idea di quel canale navigabile, già forse ideato da Cesare768 e da Augusto ma mai realizzato, il cui scopo era quello di collegare Ostia a Roma tramite un porto efficiente.769 E’ noto come la progettazione del porto di Claudio (Tav. 75, figg. 148, 149) fu accolta in termini poco entusiastici dagli architetti che lamentavano una grande spesa e la forte possibilità dell’insabbiamento del porto a causa delle grandi quantità di terra portate dal Tevere. Ciononostante a 3 km dalla foce del Tevere venne realizzato il porto di Claudio, noto da numerose emissioni monetali, ma tutte da riferirsi al completamento dei lavori da parte di Nerone (Tav. 76, fig. 150 a),770 e identificato quindi come Portus Augustus Ostiensis: due lunghi moli ricurvi, di cui quello esterno, lungo quasi 1 km, incorporava le fondazioni per il faro, mentre quello a terra (oltre 700 m) ospitava forse un tempio e, sicuramente, dei magazzini, delimitavano a tenaglia l’ampia superficie del bacino (Tav. 76, fig. 150b).771 A causa di una tempesta che affondò oltre duecento navi da carico di cui riferisce Tacito,772 Nerone tentò di realizzare un canale navigabile, noto come Fossa Neronis (mai completato) che doveva congiungere Pozzuoli a Ostia.773 Nel II d.C. Traiano deciderà di intraprendere nuovi lavori al porto ostiense scavando il grande bacino esagonale ancora visibile, più interno e quindi più riparato rispetto a quello di Claudio, del quale conservava però il monumentale faro. Il collegamento tra il porto di Traiano e quello di Claudio, ancora attivo con funzione di rada774 e quindi a Roma, era garantito dal potenziamento della Fossa Traiana, già realizzata da Claudio,775 il cui percorso è ancora in parte visibile grazie all’attuale canale di Fiumicino.

Il faro di Ostia aveva creato, già nel Rinascimento, l’ammirazione e la fantasia dei dotti che, non trovando riscontro sul terreno, idearono vedute più o meno fantasiose del porto di Ostia e del suo faro. La più fedele rappresentazione è data, con ogni probabilità, dall’arazzo cinquecentesco esposto nella Galleria delle Carte Geografiche dei Musei Vaticani (Tav. 77, fig. 152a) in cui un isolotto, con funzione di antemurale e posto davanti al bacino di Claudio, ospita il faro di Ostia, realizzato come una torre di quattro piani degradanti verso l’alto, davanti alla quale è una statua maschile con patera e lancia, posta su un piedistallo.779 Non va trascurato che nel XVI secolo esistevano numerose testimonianze letterarie circa il rudere dell’antico faro. Biondo Flavio affermava di questa torre ne veggiamo insino ad hoggi una buona parte i piè, e Iacopo Gherardi aggiungeva si vedono ancora i muri vetustissimi della città di Porto, molto diruti e la torre del faro e, ancora nel 1614, Pio II ribadiva ancora rimangono vestigia della torre le quali si vedono là nel mare….780 Il faro si cercava una volta nella zona dove oggi sorge il Museo delle Navi di Ostia, mentre le nuove indagini archeologiche lo collocano in direzione del fronte spiaggia: tracce del molo che si suppose ospitare il faro furono rinvenute sotto la pista di atterraggio n.1 dell’Aeroporto Leonardo Da Vinci di Fiumicino, ma sono ancora in fase di studio.781 Recenti indagini sul terreno, effettuate sulla base di un mosaico fotogrammetrico dei primi del secolo scorso, hanno portato a riconoscere la zona del faro nei pressi dell’attuale via delle Vongole; ciò però situerebbe il faro di Claudio in linea con i moli e non aggettante con funzione di antemurale.782 Il faro traianeo venne costruito sulla sinistra del canale di ingresso al porto ma non è possibile dire se fosse isolato, come sostiene il Lugli,783 o legato alla testata di un molo collegato alla terraferma. Affrontate le necessarie ma assai complesse questioni topografiche, veniamo ora all’aspetto che il faro doveva avere, in base alle numerose rappresentazioni che di esso possediamo.784

Il faro Monete: Già abbiamo visto come nella moneta di Nerone il faro fosse schematicamente rappresentato come una torre a due piani degradanti verso l’alto su cui si ergeva una statua maschile con lancia e patera. In epoca traianea, più che al faro si dava importanza alla creazione di quel bacino esagonale, oggi conservato anche grazie ai lavori di drenaggio eseguiti dai Principi della famiglia Torlonia che ha la sua residenza nei pressi del lago. Nelle emissioni numismatiche di età antonina compare, come ad Alessandria, Isis Pharìa (ma altre volte anche la statua maschile), mentre, ancora durante il regno di Commodo, il faro si presenta come un’altissima torre a quattro piani degradanti verso l’alto (tutti di forma circolare) di cui l’ultimo, cilindrico, ospitava la lanterna.

Svetonio e Cassio Dione posizionano il faro su un isolotto posto al centro tra i due moli, mentre Plinio, forse erroneamente, sostiene che fosse tutt’uno con il molo, comunque distante dalla riva.776 E’ noto dalle stesse fonti777 come per le fondamenta del faro di Ostia, eretto sul molo esterno del porto, Claudio avesse utilizzato la nave affondata con cui Caligola trasportò l’obelisco del Circo Vaticano. I ritrovamenti del presunto relitto alla fine degli Anni Cinquanta del secolo scorso resero possibile un’ipotesi ricostruttiva del faro (oggi peraltro non più valida, Tav. 76, fig. 151a).778 767

Strab. V, 3,5. LEGER 1979, pp. 456-459; PAVOLINI 1991, p. 74. 769 Cass. Dio. LX, 11, 3. 770 Per una completa rassegna della monetazione neroniana e sulla moneta in questione PERASSI 2002, pp. 11-34. 771 Per una completa storia del porto di Ostia si vedano ZERI 1905, pp. 264-277; LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN 1963, pp. 182-189; TESTAGUZZA 1970, le cui teorie sul faro risultano però oggi superate; MEIGGS 1973; CHEVALLIER 1986; MANNUCCI 1992; GALLINA ZEVI-CLARIDGE 1996; SILENZI 1998; GIULIANI 2001, pp. 115-126; PAVOLINI 2005. 772 Tac. ann. XV, 18. 773 MEIGGS 1973, pp. 52-54. 774 BRUUN-GALLINA ZEVI 2002, p. 166. 775 C.I.L. XIV, 88. 776 GIULIANI 2001, pp. 116-118. 777 Suet. Claud. XX, 3; Plin. nat .XVI, 40, 201; Cass. Dio. LX, 11, 4-5 778 TESTAGUZZA 1970, pp. 121-123: “la costruzione si componeva di tre grossi dadi degradanti in altezza, oltre la torretta terminale-lanterna:...un primo dado di base articolato a forma di T...attraversato da un fornice centrale di accesso...qui prendeva inizio la scala interna elicoidale...seguiva un dado intermedio a pianta quadrata al di sopra del quale potrebbe collocarsi la statua di Claudio...quindi il fusto cilindrico, leggermente rastremantesi verso l’alto...infine, a coronamento, la 768

Rilievi: Senza dubbio il rilievo più famoso che riproduca il faro di Ostia è il così detto “Rilievo Torlonia” (Tav. 76, fig. 151b), ospitato nelle collezioni private dell’omonimo Museo. Trovato a torretta pure cilindrica portabraciere, dove si accendevano i fuochi”. CHEVALLIER 1986, p. 119, concorda sull’ipotesi che la statua di Claudio fosse collocata sulla sommità del faro. 779 SIMONCINI I 1993, pp. 53-56 in cui si analizzano anche le interpretazioni di Antonio Labacco, Pirro Ligorio, Pellegrino Tibaldi e Giorgio Vasari, elencare le cui teorie ci allontanerebbe dall’argomento. 780 FLAVIO 1558, p. 41; GHERARDI XXIII, 3; SYLVIUS 1614, 301; GIULIANI 2001, p. 123. 781 Ringrazio per le preziose informazioni sul faro e sui nuovi scavi di Ostia il Prof. F.Castagnoli che ha sostituito il Prof. C.F. Giuliani in occasione di una mia visita al Porto di Traiano. 782 GIULIANI 2001, pp. 119-120. 783 LUGLI-G.FILIBECK 1935. 784 STUHLFAUTH 1938, pp. 139-163. Essendo numerosissime le rappresentazioni di questo faro si tenterà di fare una scelta delle immagini più significative.

195

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA metà Ottocento a Porto, rappresentava il faro come quella grandiosa costruzione citata da Giovenale:785 un’altissima torre a quattro piani degradanti verso l’alto, sui quali brilla il fuoco della lanterna. La statua maschile è qui posizionata sul terzo piano, mentre la porta di accesso appare nel basamento con una forma semicircolare. Su ogni piano sono delle finestre di forma rettangolare. Una rappresentazione assai simile a questa è data da un sarcofago conservato al Museo Nazionale Romano (Tav. 78, fig. 154b)786 in cui appare una divinità femminile, forse la pesronificazione del Portus Romae,787 nella cui mano è il faro, ancora una volta rappresentato a quattro piani ma in forme più esili rispetto alle precedenti. Emblematica, infine, la doppia rappresentazione dei fari di Alessandria e Ostia, rispettivamente di tre e quattro piani, in mano ai rispettivi Genii del porto, esposta nella Galleria Lapidaria Vaticana (Tav. 78, fig. 154a).788

dell’Isola di Porto (Tav. 79, fig. 156 a) e in esso è anche un’iscrizione in greco che denuncia la provenienza orientale del defunto. Tabula Peutingeriana (Tav. 79, fig. 157 a): La raffigurazione del faro è molto schematica: una torre di forma vagamente poligonale con quattro piani degradanti verso l’alto, chiusi da una cupola che simboleggia probabilmente la lanterna. Nel segmento IV della Tabula è disegnato anche un altro faro, costruito su una diga trasversale in età tarda, forse per riparare all’insabbiamento dell’imboccatura del porto traianeo.791 Conclusioni e problematiche Tralasciando il problema dell’attendibilità delle rappresentazioni del faro di Ostia,792 date le innumerevoli repliche, siamo in grado di affermare che l’edificio era costituito da quattro piani degradanti verso l’alto, di cui tre di forma poligonale e l’ultimo, nel quale era posta la lanterna, di forma cilindrica. La statua maschile trionfale, sia essa stata di un imperatore divinizzato o di una divinità vera e propria, non si trovava, come ad Alessandria, sulla sommità della torre, bensì davanti ad essa o collocata sopra un piano intermedio. Possiamo azzardare questa ipotesi grazie alla mancanza della statua in tutti i mosaici del Piazzale delle Corporazioni e in numerosi sarcofagi (Tav. 79, figg. 156 b,c) e, riflettendo, anche in considerazione del fatto che l’erezione di una statua monumentale su un massiccio edificio di quattro piani avrebbe reso il faro notevolmente instabile. L’unico esempio in cui la statua è posizionata sulla sommità del faro è, infatti, il sesterzio neroniano, in cui però la torre è realizzata in maniera molto approssimativa, tanto da recare solo due dei quattro piani.793 Dunque penso che, al di là della questione sulla sua esatta collocazione topografica per la quale bisogna solo sperare in qualche ritrovamento sommerso, possiamo affermare che, almeno nella fase traianea, il faro era collocato su un’isola appositamente costruita in funzione di antemurale; mentre dal punto di vista architettonico penso sia ancora valida la restituzione grafica data dal Canina alla fine dell’Ottocento794 (Tav. 80, fig. 158a), mentre, recentemente, è stata proposta dal Silenzi una ricostruzione, a mio avviso, troppo fantasiosa (Tav. 80, fig. 158b).795

Allo stesso modo, ma senza statua, sembra essere rappresentato su numerosi sarcofagi della necropoli dell’Isola Sacra di Porto (Tav. 77, fig. 153). Mosaici: Questo è il campo in cui, in tema di rappresentazioni faree, Ostia non teme rivali. Il Piazzale delle Corporazioni,789 costruito presso il teatro tra l’età augustea e quella severiana, non ha ancora chiarito del tutto la sua funzionalità, ma ha restituito numerose immagini del faro ostiense. In quasi tutti i mosaici è rappresentato il faro della corrispondente città commerciale. In quelli dove è presente il faro di Ostia, esso è raffigurato come una massiccia torre a quattro piani degradanti verso l’alto, di cui l’ultimo, sul quale brucia il fuoco, è di forma cilindrica (Tav. 78, fig. 155). Ogni piano presenta un’apertura di forma semicircolare ma, in nessun caso, nei mosaici del piazzale delle Corporazioni è rappresentata la statua maschile con lancia e patera. Infine, un noto mosaico proveniente dalla casa di Claudius Claudianus e conservato presso l’Antiquarium Comunale di Roma sul Celio, presenta l’entrata di una nave in porto alla presenza di un faro (Tav. 54, fig. 106) che è stato interpretato sia come quello di Alessandria sia come quello di Ostia.790 Il faro si presenta come una massiccia torre a tre piani degradanti verso l’alto: il basamento, con porta di accesso rettangolare, è di forma poligonale; il secondo piano, anch’esso dotato di una porta di accesso rettangolare, è quadrato; l’ultimo piano è cilindrico e sormontato da un tetto conico che ricorda quello del faro rappresentato nella Colonna Traiana. L’ultimo piano presenta quattro Tritoni angolari che ricondurrebbero all’immaginario alessandrino ma che non è escluso fossero presenti in quello ostiense. La cupola è sormontata da una statua maschile con patera e lancia. La torre sembra collegata alla terraferma da un segmento porticato in cui qualcuno ha erroneamente riconosciuto l’Heptastadion; si tratta, invece, del consueto molo ad archi come a Pozzuoli. Credo, in effetti, che si tratti di una pittura di fantasia in cui si è rappresentata una tipica scena portuale con un faro costruito sul modello del capostipite alessandrino, ma non per questo da identificare con esso. Un altro mosaico con la rappresentazione di un faro è presente di fronte ad un sarcofago della necropoli sacra

SCHEDA 61 CENTUMCELLAE (Civitavecchia, Lazio) Regio VIII: Etruria Centumcellae796 nacque solo all’inizio del II d.C. per volere di Traiano che, con la costruzione del suo porto, affidata probabilmente al fido architetto Apollodoro di Damasco, intendeva ridurre gli intensi traffici del porto ostiense e ovviare ai problemi di insabbiamento che il Tevere recava a quel porto.797 Inoltre, come il porto di Ostia garantiva i contatti con la Campania, la Sicilia e l’Egitto dal quale proveniva il tanto atteso rifornimento granario, il porto di Centumcellae era, dal canto suo, il diretto intermediario per i traffici con la Gallia. 791

LUGLI-FILIBECK 1935, p. 41; LEVI 1967, pp. 125, 18 ss.; BOSIO 1983, p. 112. A tale proposito si veda il capitolo 4. 793 Un faro che si ispirava al modello alessandrino, credo, avrebbe aggiunto piuttosto che tolto un piano rispetto al suo precedente. 794 VEITMEYER 1900, p. 20, fig. 20; THIERSCH 1909, p.19; STUHLFAUTH 1938, pp. 145-146. 795 SILENZI 1998, fig. 98. 796 Sulla storia della città si veda ZERI 1905, pp. 239-257; CORRENTI 1990, pp.209-214. 797 La città non viene, infatti, menzionata prima della nota lettera a Corneliano di Plinio il Giovane: nè Strabone nè Mela la nominano quando parlano dei porti di Alsium, Gravisca e Pyrgi cfr. CALISSE 1936, p. 16. 792

785

Iuv. Sat. XII, 75-80. THIERSCH 1909, p. 17; GIULIANO 1985, pp. 46-48. 787 Portus è un vocabolo maschile, tuttavia, tra i suoi significati vi è anche quello di foce, unico termine femminile cui può fare riferimento, anche se immagino che in questo specifico caso si volesse alludere al porto della città di Roma. 788 THIERSCH 1909, p. 18; STUHULFAUTH 1938, pp. 145-146. 789 Sulla storia e le teorie relative alla funzione del Piazzale si veda: CALZA-NASH 1989, pp. 67-70. 790 THIERSCH 1909, p. 16; REDDE’ 1979, p.866 ; PENSA 1999 p. 109; SALVETTI 2002, pp. 67-88. 786

196

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO Dopo alterne vicende, nel 314 d.C., la città divenne sede vescovile e, ancora nel V d.C., era tappa obbligatoria per chi, come Rutilio Namaziano, intendesse raggiungere la Gallia. Passata ai Bizantini nel VI d.C. verrà definitivamente abbandonata nell’828 d.C. in seguito alla conquista saracena. Nel Rinascimento saranno i Papi a far rivivere alla città un glorioso periodo affidando l’assetto urbano ad artisti come Michelangelo e Bramante. La città rinascimentale in cui si conservava buona parte dell’impianto traianeo verrà distrutta dai bombardamenti della Seconda Guerra Mondiale e quasi totalmente ricostruita subito dopo.798 La città romana si estendeva, come l’attuale, sul versante occidentale di una breve altura digradante verso il mare Tirreno.

faro, delle quali parlava già Rutilio Namaziano (turres geminae),807 note come Torre del Bicchiere e Torre del Lazzareto. La prima, purtroppo, è andata totalmente distrutta dai bombardamenti della Seconda Guerra Mondiale, ma possediamo alcune foto d’epoca di poco precedenti che bene ci aiutano a comprenderne l’architettura, peraltro del tutto simile alla torre del molo di ponente, in parte ancora in piedi. Molo di levante, Torre del Bicchiere (scomparsa): il nome deriva dalla strana forma a campana rovesciata della torre che era ancora visibile prima della guerra nella sua ristrutturazione pontificia con funzione di faro e fortino. Nelle foto d’epoca (Tav. 81, fig. 161) la torre in opera mista e reticolata si presentava di forma circolare per un diametro di 16 m, elevata sul terreno per un solo piano munito di porta, sopra il quale si aprivano le finestre a bocca di lupo dalle quali partivano i proiettili dell’artiglieria pontificia.

Il faro e le torri-faro Il primo vero e proprio porto artificiale fu opera dei Romani, anche se pare attestata la presenza di un esiguo approdo per piccoli natanti già in epoca preromana.799 Del porto abbiamo precise notizie grazie a Plinio il Giovane.800 Il porto presentava dei moli arcuati ed un antemurale di forma curvilinea alle cui estremità erano due torri-faro (Tav. 80, fig. 159), oggi scomparse e davanti ad esse era una colossale statua di Nettuno, il cui braccio, trovato in mare, è oggi esposto ai Musei Vaticani.801 Il molo di levante e l’antemurale, entrambi costruiti gettando in acqua una scogliera sulla quale furono costruite le banchine, erano lunghi 305 m; il molo di ponente, invece, fu alzato su pile in calcestruzzo collegate da archi che, oltre a fungere da collegamento alla banchina, lasciavano scorrere sotto di essi le correnti marine.802 Al centro dell’antemurale sorgeva forse un faro simile a quello di Ostia, ma la novità era data dalla forma circolare delle torri-faro che si disponevano alle testate dei moli. Nella parte occupata attualmente dal Forte Michelangelo sembra fossero i navalia e un tempio, mentre nel lato di terra corrispondente all’attuale cinta di Urbano VII, si trovavavno gli horrea; infine, a nord, subito dopo il molo detto del Lazzareto, era una piccola darsena, ancora funzionante (Tav. 81, fig. 160).803

Molo di ponente, Torre del Lazzareto (in parte visibile): il curioso nome deriva dai progressivi edifici costruiti accanto ad essa, tra cui l’Ospedale. La torre, diruta a causa dei bombardamenti bellici, si presenta, come la sua gemella, di forma circolare per un diametro di 20 m ed un’altezza attuale di 11, cui ne andrebbero aggiunti un paio per come si presentava prima del bombardamento ed è costruita su tre piani (Tav. 82, fig. 162). La torre presenta due porte, una nella fronte orientale rivolta al bacino, l’altra, sul lato nord, che la metteva in comunicazione con gli altri edifici del molo. Anche in questa torre sono presenti finestre a bocca di lupo, create in età pontificia per ospitare i fucili dell’artiglieria (Tav. 82, fig. 163). Nella parte superiore è ancora visibile parte dell’antica messa in opera reticolata di tufo, cui farebbero riferimento anche alcune finestre realizzate con la stessa tecnica, cui si sommano gli interventi, in laterizio, pertinenti all’età pontificia. Infine, l’interno della torre presentava un diametro di 16 m e, sicuramente, non era coperto a volta come appare oggi in seguito al restauro rinascimentale. Le scale antiche che dovevano condurre ai piani superiori per accendere i fuochi andranno forse rintracciate nell’intercapedine che collega la torre a un edificio antico, anch’esso riutilizzato in epoca rinascimentale, del quale non sappiamo però la funzione, anche se è stato proposto come presidio per gli artiglieri,808 ma che sicuramente era da ricollegare al faro.809

Il faro poteva erigersi su modello di quello ostiense (e quindi anche alessandrino) al centro dell’antemurale,804 oppure non è mai esistito (ma la cosa mi sembra opinabile) e la sua funzione è stata svolta dalle torri-faro poste all’estremità delle quali una fungeva da vero e proprio faro, l’altra da Lanterna, come avverrà in epoca pontificia quando a quelle funzioni verrà aggiunta quella di fortino.805 Possiamo, tuttavia, solo immaginare questo edificio perchè nessuna traccia ne è rimasta sul terreno pur disponendo di alcuni preziosi disegni806 che dal Rinascimento sino ai nostri giorni ne hanno proposto un’interpretazione. Siamo leggermente più fortunati per le torri-

Conclusioni e problematiche Il porto di Centumcellae, destinato a migliorare i servizi del porto ostiense e ad assicurare i traffici con la Gallia, sembra essere stato dotato, in epoca romana, di quattro torri-faro, delle quali, forse, una era più alta e costruita all’estremità dell’antemurale su modello del faro di Ostia: edificio massiccio e a base quadrata con quattro piani degradanti verso l’alto con l’ultimo cilindrico. Davanti ad essa la statua di Nettuno, il cui braccio è esposto ai Musei Vaticani. Dalla parte opposta del faro, in età pontificia, l’altra torre fu destinata alla funzione di Lanterna, e stessa posizione sembra abbia ricoperto in epoca trainea: si può pensare al noto esempio del porto di Leptis Magna (scheda 4) in cui compaiono un faro monumentale e una torre semaforica di più piccole dimensioni.

798

CARUSO 1991, pp. 34-39 traccia una breve storia del porto romano. ATTUONI 1958, p. 22; REDDÈ 1986, pp. 197-201. 800 Plin. epist. VI, XXXI, 15-17, ed. Della Normale 2008. 801 CARUSO 1991, p. 37. 802 Per una completa descrizione del porto di Centumcellae BARTOCCINI 1961; QUILICI 1993, pp. 63-79; QUILICI 2004, pp. 111-114. 803 BASTIANELLI, 1954, pp.39-46. 804 CARUSO 1991, p. 37. 805 QUILICI 1993, p. 68; CIALDI 1877, pp. 310-311 credeva che il faro romano fosse stato costruito da Apollodoro di Damasco sull’isola dell’antemurale, e afferma che già dal 1616 Paolo V aveva fatto restaurare il faro che fu attivo a Civitavecchia fino ai bombardamenti della Seconda Guerra mondiale e la cui portata luminosa sarebbe stata assai esigua sino a che, nel 1880, Pio IX fece apporre nel faro la luce Fresnel. Oggi serve come faro di atterraggio, ma possiamo immaginare che l’architettura, anche per comodità, abbia ripreso quella del faro traianeo. 806 Sulla cartografia del porto di Civitavecchia QUILICI 1993, pp. 64-67; QUILICI 2004, pp. 111-118. 799

Quanto alle torri-faro poste alle testate dei moli e delle quali rimane solo quella detta del Lazzareto, la loro forma circolare non deve stupire, tanto più che un faro simile è rappresentato

807

Rut. Nam. I, 237-244. BASTIANELLI 1954, pp. 39-40. 809 Sulle torri-faro: QUILICI 1993, pp. 68-76. 808

197

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA anche in un mosaico del Piazzale delle Corporazioni di Ostia (Tav. 83, fig. 164). La sopravvivenza di una di queste torri, dovuta sia al riutilizzo rinascimentale che alle forme poco monumentali e quindi non a rischio di crollo, resta ancora oggi un documento eccezionale per i fari dell’Antichità.

monumentali dell’isola. Fu soprattutto Nerone a costruire sull’isola ville marittime imponenti dotate di porto e peschiera, come lasciano intendere le strutture in cementizio ancora presenti sull’isola.813 Il porto e il faro

SCHEDA 62 DIANUM-ARTEMISIUM (Isola di Giannutri, Toscana) Regio VII: Etruria

Il porto romano, lungo 179 braccia, rimane sotto il molo moderno di Giglio Porto (iniziato nel 1796) ed è quindi di difficile lettura. Sicuramente, in una prima fase, il porto romano sfruttò l’insenatura naturale protetta dai venti e dotata di spiaggia, consentendo anche le manovre di alaggio grazie a un percorso fluviale nei suoi pressi; in seguito, per ripararsi dai venti contari meridionali, si costruì il molo, collocandolo all’estremità orientale.814 Il faro era invece collocato sulla sommità e se ne sono trovati i resti in zona Castellare del Porto (proprietà Santamaria), il cui toponimo già allude alla destinazione di vedetta con funzione portuale. Si tratta di una base ottagonale con una gradinata di accesso a sud-ovest, sulla quale poi verrà instaurato un fortino che distruggerà in buona parte i resti dell’antico faro815 che potremmo immaginare simile a quello di Dubris (scheda 76).

Tappa obbligata per chi da Portus Cosanus volesse raggiungere gli empori della Sardinia e della Corsica, Artemisia è sempre stata fugacemente citata dalle fonti come la più piccola isola dell’Arcipelago Toscano, fatta eccezione per Gorgona. Nonostante la sua esposizione ai venti, in particolar modo scirocco e libeccio, l’isola permetteva una buona sosta nelle rotte tirreniche; in epoca romana il porto di Giannutri, seppur meno attrezzato del vicino porto del Giglio, era il primo approdo dopo Ostia nelle rotte dirette alle grandi isole. Furono gli Enobarbi a stabilirvisi in maniera più duratura e non a caso, ancora, l’Itinerarium Maritimum cita una Domitiana Posititio, Incitaria, riconoscibile in una zona tra l’attuale Porto Santo Stefano e le foci dell’Albegna.810

SCHEDA 64 PORTUS COSANUS (Cosa, Ansedonia, Toscana) Regio VII: Etruria

I porti e la tomba-faro Due sono i porti che l’isola ha offerto ai naviganti sin dall’antichità: quello principale, a est, era Cala dello Spalmatoio, piccolo fiordo di quasi trecento metri di profondità, offre un sicuro riparo da tutti i venti ad eccezione di quelli del secondo quadrante. Cala Maestra è invece il nome di quello che si apre a Occidente e che si presenta come una stretta insenatura con strutture portuali legate alla villa marittima che lì fu costruita dagli Enobarbi. Poco si può dire delle strutture portuali di Cala Spalmatoio, dove ancora oggi attraccano le navi provenienti da Porto S. Stefano, in quanto del tutto obliterate dalle costruzioni moderne: la presenza dei ruderi di alcune cisterne811 e strutture in opera reticolata potrebbe farci ipotizzare la prsenza di un faro, ma rimane una suggestione. Grazie alle indagini avviate a inizio Ottocento da Maria Luigia, reggente del Regno d’Etruria, siamo più informati circa la villa marittima e l’approdo di Cala Maestra (Tav. 83, fig. 165): la villa, nella fase attualmente visibile databile all’età neroniana, si presenta per chi viene dal mare con una struttura troncopiramidale che insiste sulla scogliera (Tav. 84, fig. 166). La struttura ha completamente perduto l’opus reticolatum visibile all’inizio del Novecento mettendo a nudo la tecnica cementizia e una base di poco più di 10 m. La forma tipica dei mausolei di età imperiale e la sua posizione topografica mi trovano d’accordo con l’interpretazione del Cavazzuti di una lanternafaro ma, su modello di Taposiris Magna (scheda 7), direi che si tratti di una tomba-faro ossia un monumento funerario di un Enobarbo utilizzato di notte per illuminare la piccola cala.812

Su un promontorio roccioso che si eleva a 114 m s.l.m., a 7 km a sud-est di Orbetello, nacque la città romana di Cosa.816 Scarse sono le notizie storiche sulla colonia romana, per lo più riportate da Livio, ma sembra che il periodo di maggiore prosperità sia da ascrivere al II a.C.; nel secolo seguente, infatti, gli abitanti abbandonarono progressivamente la colonia incrementando la stazione stradale di Succosa nei pressi del porto.817 La città venne nuovamente abitata in epoca medioevale sino a che, nel 1329, la popolazione non fu cacciata dal luogo da un esercito senese.818 Il porto e il faro Portus Cosanus (Tav. 84, fig. 167), uno dei primi esempi di porto costruito in opus caementicium, garantiva i contatti con i porti di Caieta nell’Italia Centrale e di Luna in quella Settentrionale. Dai pochi resti in situ e dalle indagini subacquee, il molo risulta costruito mediante gettate di cementizio in casseforme di legno (arcae), sulle quali si innestavano antenne di legno a sezione circolare: ciò farebbe supporre non un molo a pilae congiunte, come si è visto per la maggior parte dei porti sinora analizzati, ma a piloni indipendenti per agevolare il corso dell’acqua in alcune rientranze naturali.819 Alla fine del II secolo a.C. il porto-peschiera di Cosa era controllato dalla famiglia dei Sestii e serviva per l’esportazione di vino e garum; l’attribuzione a questa famiglia, che utilizzava come peschiera la vicina laguna di Cosa presso la quale era anche il tempio di Nettuno, è data dal rinvenimento di anfore con bolle a essa pertinenti. Le acque sporche e i detriti della laguna erano fatti defluire per mezzo di alcuni canali, il più famoso dei quali è l’ancora visibile Tagliata.820

SCHEDA 63 IGILUM (Isola del Giglio, Toscana) Regio VII: Etruria I ritrovamenti subacquei, avvenuti al largo della costa settentrionale presso Punta Lazzareto, hanno restituito l’immagine di un’attività portuale anche preromana, anche se è alla famiglia degli Enobarbi che si devono le maggiori evidenze

813 Sulla storia dell’isola anche ROANI VILLANI 1993 e RENDINI 1999, pp. 68-78. 814 CIAMPOLTRINI-RENDINI 2004, p. 139. 815 BRONSON-UGGERI 1970, p. 204. 816 Verg. Aen. X, 168; Strab. V, 2, 8; Plin. nat. III, 5 817 Liv. ann. II, 39, 2. 818 Sulla storia di Portus Cosanus si veda: LENZI 1905, pp. 224-225. 819 FELICI-BADERI 1997, pp. 12-16. 820 Per i problemi relativi al porto, alla laguna e alla Tagliata che ci allontanerebbero dall’argomento si veda: MCCANN-LEWIS 1970, pp.201-211; BROWN 1980; MCCANN-BOURGEOIS 1987.

810

PELLEGRINI 193 , pp. 609-623; VACCARINO FORESTO 1935, pp. 125153; GIANFROTTA 1989, pp. 321-322; RENDINI-GAMBOGI-POGGESI 1992, pp. 3-7; CIAMPOLTRINI-RENDINI 2004, pp.140-147. 811 Sulla villa romana si veda soprattutto CAVAZZUTI 1998, pp. 121-124. 812 VACCARINO FORESTO 1935, pp. 133-136 menziona il ritrovamento di alcune colonne in marmo lunense forse pertinenti a questo edificio; BRONSON-UGGERI 1970, p. 207 non hanno dubbi che la costruzione di Monte Mario sia un faro di forma ottagonale, CAVAZZUTI 1998, p. 138.

198

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO Alla fine degli Anni Ottanta del secolo scorso si riprese in esame un noto ex-voto (Tav. 85, fig. 168 a, b) in forma di torre proveniente dal tempio di Vulci, situato non lontano dal porto di Cosa.821

SCHEDA 65 INDUSTRIA (Monteu da Po, Piemonte) Regio IX: Transpadana Nata come villaggio ligure col nome di Bodincomagus (termine che in lingua celtica significa mercato sul fiume), la città divenne colonia romana con il nome di Industria nel 123 a.C. in seguito alle vittorie riportate da M. Fulvio Flacco, cui si deve l’intera romanizzazione del Monferrato, sui Liguri e sui Salluvii.825 La città verrà poi abbandonata in età tardo-antica e il santuario isiaco forse incendiato.

L’ex-voto era sempre stato interpretato come uno degli edifici che sorgevano accanto al tempio di Vulci, presso il quale esso era stato trovato, ma tuttavia non si riusciva a stabilire un nesso tra l’edificio sacro e la torre. La Zancani Montuoro822 fu la prima a proporre l’interpretazione del modellino fittile come la riproduzione del faro di Cosa. Purtroppo l’ubicazione nella realtà del porto cosano non fu possibile, ma non venne esclusa dal Brown che tanti anni di lavoro aveva dedicato allo studio del porto toscano.823 Si propone per il modello di Vulci la riproduzione del faro più comune: una torre quadrata con porta d’accesso ad arco e finestre rettangolari, tutte situate nella parte alta. L’ex-voto era sicuramente da integrare con altri due piani, dei quali solo l’ultimo presentava dimensioni notevolmente minori rispetto a quello conservato nel modellino. Il secondo piano si presentava quasi come un loggiato con due finestre per lato, per il quale non possediamo altri confronti. L’ultimo piano, di forma vagamente cilindrica, presentava un’apertura per lato dalla quale brillava la luce della lanterna. Oltre alla scala interna che doveva condurre al loggiato è stata ipotizzata una rampa di scale esterna, posizionata all’ultimo piano per raggiungere la sommità su cui accendere i fuochi.824

Il porto e il faro Plinio826annoverava Industria tra le città nobili della Transpadana. La colonia fu particolarmente ricca e frequentata anche grazie alla sua florida posizione alla confluenza tra la Dora Baltea e il Po. Fu proprio in virtù di questa posizione strategica che Industria divenne un importante nodo fluviale dotato di un porto, ancora non localizzato, e sede di un celebre santuario isiaco. Grazie alla navigabilità della Dora Baltea la città si riforniva dei metalli per la realizzazione della sua celebre toreutica, mentre tramite il Po aveva facile collegamento direttamente con i maggiori empori fluviali della Regio X e quindi anche con i centri portuali dell’Adriatico. Negli Anni Sessanta del Novecento venne ritrovata una pasta vitrea di forma ovale e di colore azzurro nella quale era rappresentata una figura femminile stante con cornucopia appoggiata a una colonna o a un faro.827 Se si interpretasse l’edificio rappresentato come un faro si potrebbe ipotizzare che l’artista avesse voluto dire che grazie al faro che segnalava il porto di Industria la città era diventata ricca (come testimonierebbe la cornucopia), ma solo scavi ed indagini future potranno chiarire dove fosse esattamente il porto (a mio avviso sicuramente nelle immediate vicinanze della confluenza dei due fiumi) ed eventualmente il suo faro.

Di notevole interesse iconografico è anche un’incisione sopra un’anfora trovata sott’acqua e recante il bollo SES, dunque in relazione con la famiglia dei Sestii che proprio nel Portus Cosanus aveva una proprietà. L’incisione, collocata subito sotto le tre lettere, sembra alludere a uno schematico faro, una piccola torre con il fuoco sulla sommità (Tav. 85, fig. 169a), assai simile ad un’altra schematica rappresentazione incisa di faro, individuata nella torretta medioevale del porto di Velia in Campania (Tav. 85, fig. 169b). L’evidenza archeologica sembra essere stata individuata alla fine degli Anni Ottanta del Novecento a due metri e mezzo di profondità e chiamata dalla McCann Pier 5 ovvero pilastro 5 (Tav. 86, fig. 170) che, a suo giudizio, presenta tutte le caratteristiche per poter essere identificato come parte della base del faro di Cosa: da qui si offriva un ottimo riparo alle navi dai venti estivi.

SCHEDA 66 PORTUS VADORUM-BERGEGGI (Isola di Bergeggi, Liguria) Regio IX: Liguria L’isola di Bergeggi (Tav. 86, fig. 171°, Tav. 77, fig. 172), situata a 10 km di distanza da Savona, è oggi disabitata ma conserva resti archeologici che vanno dall’età preromana sino al Medioevo. L’isola, nota anche con il nome di S.Eugenio, vescovo di Cartagine che un’erronea leggenda pensava fosse lì nato e morto, in epoca romana aveva, probabilmente, la funzione di segnalare il vicino porto di Vada Sabatia a chi proveniva dalla Gallia. Il porto di Vada, sorto nel II secolo a.C. nel punto terminale costiero della via Aemilia Scauri, utilizzava l’approdo dell’isola di Bergeggi, non ancora indagato dal punto di vista archeologico, come peschiera. Ma quando, in seguito alle devastazioni operate dai Goti di Ataulfo, il porto di Vada decadde, l’allora chiamata insula Liguriae venne abbandonata e le strutture murarie romane furono riutilizzate solo un secolo dopo quando nell’isola, divenuta il rifugio dei monaci eremiti, si costruì una basilica, ancora in parte visibile, che nel 1162 ospiterà Papa Alessandro III che, inseguito dal Barbarossa, tentava di raggiungere la Francia.828

Conclusioni e problematiche Circa l’ipotesi che il modellino di Vulci riproduca il faro di Cosa, a mio avviso, due sono le possibilità, o si tratta di un exvoto a Nettuno perchè il dio dotasse il porto di Cosa di un faro che all’epoca mancava, oppure, come credo più probabile, l’exvoto, pur trovato nelle vicinanze di un tempio, era un semplice ricordo che qualche devoto, magari un soldato, aveva preso durante un viaggio, alla stessa stregua del vaso di Begràm (Tav. 12, fig. 23a), della lucerna fittile di Libarna (cap. 3, fig. 17) o di quella conservata ad Alessandria, confrontando le quali si possono notare numerose analogie. A supportare questa ipotesi è l’architettura che il faro presenta. Infatti, la loggetta superiore è solo una congettura e non può essere presa per verità, mentre si potrebbe pensare all’ipotesi del sommerso pilone 5 come basamento della torre.

825

GULLINI 1967; ZANDA 1993, pp. 29-46. Plin. nat. III, 49, 122. 827 GULLINI 1976, p. 381. 828 Sulla storia dell’isola si veda: FRONDONI 1987, pp. 403-406. RICCI 1998, pp. 18-31. Colgo l’occasione per ringraziare il Geom. Laura Garrello del Comune di Bergeggi che mi ha gentilmente inviato una copia del volume, altrimenti difficilmente reperibile e la Dott.ssa Elena Taddeo per le informazioni riguardanti l’isola. SPADEA-MARTINO 2004, pp. 259-266. 826

821

STACCIOLI 1968, pp. 24-28, Tav. XII. ZANCANI MONTUORO 1979, pp. 5-29. 823 ZANCANI MONTUORO 1979, pp. 6-7: l’identificazione di ambito cosano è data anche dal fatto che il tempio di Vulci era un’esatta riproduzione del tempio D, situato sull’arx di Cosa. 824 ZANCANI MONTUORO 1979, pp. 10-18. 822

199

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA di fronte a Saint Raphael.835 Per lungo tempo la torre detta “Lanterna di Augusto”, situata all’entrata del porto di Fréjus, è stata ritenuta il faro della città romana. Essa, ancora visibile nel suo restauro ottocentesco, si presenta come una curiosa torre costruita su un massiccio basamento di epoca romana, di forma più quadrata che semicircolare, come dicono gli studiosi, sul quale si innesta un piano esagonale, chiuso da un tetto prismatico (Tav. 88, fig. 175).836 Dalla parte opposta doveva essere presente un’altra torre, uguale a questa, con la medesima funzione.837 L’attribuzione della torre come il faro del porto della città avvenne in seguito allo studio di un manoscritto di Anville, conservato alla Biblioteca Nazionale di Aix-enProvence, che riportava un disegno del pittore provenzale J.A.Constantin nel quale la Lanterna di Augusto era disegnata come il faro della città romana di Fréjus (Tav. 89, fig. 176).838

La torre-faro Per segnalare dunque il porto di Vada Sabatia, i Romani eressero sull’isola una bianca torre di forma circolare, in parte oggi ancora visibile (Tav. 86, fig. 171 b), ma purtroppo non visitabile per l’inagibilità dell’isola (si tratta di proprietà privata). Sul finire dell’Ottocento il D’Andrade ne rilevò le misure: 7,5 m di altezza, 10,5 m di diametro e 0,95 m di spessore.829 La torre-faro circolare (Tav. 87, fig. 173) datata tra II e IV d.C., sulla base dell’interpretazione del Lamboglia,830 poggia su un terrapieno di forma triangolare ed è costruita con piccoli blocchetti spaccati di pietra locale, leggermente più esili delle altre costruzioni romano-liguri di III-II sec. a.C.. Sembra, tuttavia, che questi strati di muratura sovrapposti a riseghe vadano via via restringendosi,831secondo la consueta architettura dei fari; l’accesso sembra garantito da scale di legno poste all’esterno della torre. Tra IX e X d.C., probabilmente in funzione anti-saracena, si erige sulle vestigia del faro romano, una torre costiera di forma quadrata.832

Tuttavia, la massiccia struttura dell’edificio, il fatto che essa non presenti alcuna apertura, l’assenza di una scala di accesso per raggiungere la sommità dove accendere i fuochi e l’esigua altezza di 10,50 m, fece supporre già a molti studiosi dell’Ottocento che essa non fosse un faro, ma un semplice segnacolo di entrata al porto.839 La Lanterna ricorda molto la torre sul promontorio di Sigeo sull’Ellesponto, di cui parla il poeta Leschete nella Piccola Iliade, e interpretata da Thiersch e Veitmeyer come il primo faro della storia (cap. 1, fig. 2 a,b), ma, a mio avviso, opera mai esistita se non nei canti epici di VIII a.C. .840

SCHEDA 67 FORUM IULII (Fréjus, Var, Francia) Provincia: Gallia Narbonensis Se Athenopolis (Saint Tropez) ed Heraclea Caccabaria (Cavalaire) furono i porti della Gallia Narbonese utilizzati dai Greci di Marsiglia, Forum Iulii (Tav. 88, fig. 174) fu il primo porto creato dai Romani nella provincia gallica. Dopo la distruzione di Marsiglia, avvenuta nel 49 a.C. da parte di Giulio Cesare, circa nel 42 a.C. fu creata, forse da Antonio, una città con un ruolo strategico sia marittimo che terrestre. Forum Iulii, costruita all’estremità occidentale di una piattaforma di arenaria, alta nel suo massimo punto 33,70 m, divenne il centro commerciale della strada che dalla Spagna giungeva ad Aix-enProvence, attraverso la valle del fiume Argens. Ottaviano e Agrippa resero il porto costruito da Cesare uno dei tanti arsenali in collegamento con i principali porti di Roma; tuttavia, dal regno di Marco Aurelio, il porto dell’odierna Frèjus, che nel 39 a.C. era stato la principale base navale per le lotte contro Sesto Pompeo, decadrà progressivamente per poi essere riutilizzato dal Medioevo ad almeno il XVI secolo.833

Se possiamo essere ormai sicuri che la “Lanterna di Augusto” non fosse un faro841 ma un semplice segnacolo di entrata al porto, qualche dubbio in più sorge riguardo alla torre più occidentale della Butte St.Antoine, che si trova allineata all’edificio di cui si è appena trattato, di fronte alla Lanterna. Questa torre (Tav. 89, figg. 177 a,b), il cui pessimo stato di conservazione fa temere per la sua sopravvivenza, si erge sul lato ovest della cittadella per un’altezza di 25 m. La sua posizione, più elevata non solo rispetto alla lanterna ma anche alle due più piccole torri difensive della Butte St.Antoine, l’hanno fatta per lungo tempo accreditare come il vero faro di Fréjus, tanto che gli abitanti la chiamarono Le Phare e Texier ne restituì una ricostruzione assai affascinante (Tav. 90, fig. 178).842 La torre, che oggi si erge in una zona in gran parte coltivata da privati, secondo il Texier, si doveva presentare come una torre a due piani di forma poligonale, mentre un terzo, di forma cilindrica, doveva ospitare la lanterna. La sommità della torre era raggiungibile tramite delle scale interne, cui si accedeva da una porta di accesso di forma semicircolare e di 3 m di

Il porto e i fari Il porto fu costruito mediante la sistemazione di una vicina laguna nella quale un canale di derivazione dell’Argens834 serviva di scarico per evitarne l’interramento. Per proteggere il porto, un poligono irregolare di 22 ettari, oltre a una possente cinta muraria in parte ancora visibile, si costruirono due isolotti artificiali con la funzione di cittadelle: a nord-est la Platte-forme e a sud-ovest la Butte St. Antoine. L’entrata al porto (larga circa 80 m) era protetta da due torri collegate tra loro da una catena, e di esse ne rimane una, nota come Lanterne d’Auguste. Il faro vero e proprio si trovava in fondo al porto, in corrispondenza della Butte St. Antoine, esattamente in linea con la Lanterna di Augusto, sull’isolotto Lion de mer, situato all’entrata del porto,

835 EAA, Roma 1960, pp. 747-748. Fondamentali per la storia di Fréjus e del suo porto: AUBENAS 1974; TEXIER 1846; DONNADIEU 1927; FÈVRIER 1977; GÉBARA 1998. 836 LEHAMANN-HARTLEBEN 1963, p. 173. 837 RIVET 1988, p. 229. 838 AUBENAS 1974, pp. 494-499. 839 LENTHERIC 1880, pp. 343-344 ; GÈBARA 1998, p. 56. 840 RENARD 1867, p. 5 ; LENTHERIC 1880, p. 344; VEITMEYER 1900 p. 6; THIERSCH 1909, p. 26. 841 Viste le molte opere che trattano l’argomento, ma essendo ormai chiarito che la Lanterna non era il faro di Forum Iulii, si è qui preferito riferire brevemente di questo edificio, tuttavia, per una completa storia delle interpretazioni si veda : AUBENAS 1974, pp. 498-508. 842 DICTIONNAIRE 1906, p. 432; THIERSCH 1909, p. 26, Abb. 38-39; SAUTEL-IMBERT 1929, p. 22; EAA, Roma 1960, p. 596; FÉVRIER 1963, p. 45; LEGER, 1979, p.506; BEDON 1988, p. 59 ; GÉBARA 1998, pp. 4243 afferma che la torre a lungo è stata ritenuta un faro ma non lo conferma esplicitamente, attribuendo al complesso della Butte St.Antoine il ruolo di un enorme complesso residenziale, pertinente forse al prefetto della flotta.

829

D’ANDRADE 1899 cfr. RICCI 1998, p. 18. LAMBOGLIA 1939, p. 192. 831 POGGI 1905, pp. 64-65. 832 LAMBOGLIA 1998, p. 28. 833 FÈVRIER 1959, p. 210. 834 Secondo alcuni studiosi questo canale sarebbe lo stesso utilizzato nel XVI secolo ed ancora oggi visbile con il nome di canal des Moulins. Esso, largo più di 80 m, copre una lunghezza di 460 m; cfr. BROGAN 1953, pp. 94-95; CHEVALLIER 1979, p. 24. La città come base navale di Augusto è citata da Strab. IV, 1, 8; 1,9, 184; come claustra maris in Tac. ann. III, 49. Per la storia degli scavi: FÈVRIER 1979, pp. 6-17; LEGER 1979, pp. 468-474; REDDÈ 1986, pp. 171-177. 830

200

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO diametro, ancora oggi ben conservata (Tav. 90, fig. 179).843 Tuttavia, la presenza di vari fori sulla parte esterna dell’edificio farebbe supporre anche a scale esterne sul tipo di Brigantium (vedi scheda 73, Tav. 104, fig. 206b). Possiamo solo congetturare, in base alla consueta architettura farea, che sulla sommità fosse posta una statua. La muratura dell’edificio si presenta in opus vittatum e laterizio, esattamente come la torre farea di Baro Zavelea (scheda 42) all’imbocco del Po e pertinente, più o meno, alla stessa epoca. Tuttavia non tutti sembrarono essere d’accordo: il Formigè,844 ad esempio, scambiando il dipinto di Constantin per una riproduzione della Butte St.Antoine, rifiutava l’interpretazione del Texier. In base ad alcuni scavi degli Anni Sessanta del secolo scorso, anche Maria Bollini rifiutava che la terza torre della Butte St.Antoine fosse un faro,845 arrivando alla conclusione che Frèjus non era dotata di un faro, ipotesi, a mio avviso, assai azzardata. In effetti, resti di un edificio in cementizio, interpretabili come il basamento di un faro romano, sono stati trovati sull’isolotto noto come Lion de mer, collocato guarda caso proprio di fronte alla torre detta Le Phare, in direzione di St. Raphael (Tav. 91, figg. 180, 181).846

stato quello di Lion de mer, essendo questa torre posta proprio di fronte a quella della Butte St Antoine, la torre nota come Le Phare fosse, in realtà la Lanterna: avremmo, quindi, un altro esempio di un faro monumentale posto o all’estremità del molo, come a Leptis Magna (scheda 4) o, come nel caso di Forum Iulii, sopra un’isola e, dalla parte opposta, una Lanterna, edificio di dimensioni leggermente inferiori. Tuttavia, si potrebbe anche ipotizzare un caso del tipo di Centumcellae: un faro monumentale su un’isola (Lion de mer) con funzione di antemurale, tre torri-faro, di cui una più grande di fronte ad esso (le tre torri della Butte St. Antoine, delle quali, quella detta Le Phare presentava dimensioni maggiori) e due lanterne o, più probabilmente, segnacoli d’entrata al porto (la Lanterna d’Augusto e il suo corrispondente oggi scomparso, lungo i muri che proteggevano il molo). Dunque, a Frèjus sembra esserci stata molta confusione anche in virtù dei nomi attribuiti dalla tradizione ad alcuni edifici di epoca antica e medioevale: una torre di segnalazione chiamata Le Phare e un segnacolo di entrata in porto chiamato Lanterna. SCHEDA 68 FOSSA MARIANAE-ARELATE (Fos- surmer/Arles, Bocche del Rodano, Provenza, Camargue/Provenza, Francia) Provincia : Gallia Narbonensis

Conclusioni e problematiche Il porto di Frèjus, base navale di Augusto, costruito su modello del Portus Iulius e di quello di Ravenna, non poteva certo non possedere un faro (esso doveva altresì essere monumentale) che aiutasse i naviganti a entrare nel porto, segnalato anche da due piccole torri di 10 m di altezza, di cui rimane ben visibile quella nota come “Lanterna di Augusto”, presso la quale sono ancora visbili i resti delle mura che proteggevano il canale di entrata. Il primo faro, in opus vittatum e laterizio,847 era collocato su un isolotto artificiale noto con il nome di Lion de mer848 per la sua conformazione geologica mentre un ultimo, forse con funzione di Lanterna, era sulla cittadella chiamata, in seguito alla costruzione di una basilica in onore di Sant’Antonio, Butte St. Antoine. Quest’ultimo, del quale molti autori dubitano della sua funzione farea e che oggi si pensa sia un torrione della cinta di mura, era protetto da due piccole torri difensive, di oltre 10 m di altezza e si presentava, secondo la ricostruzione del Texier, con la tipica architettura del modello alessandrino: una torre a tre piani degradanti verso l’alto, di cui l’ultimo, cilindrico, era sormontato da una statua.849 Molti studiosi concordano però nell’attribuire a questo edificio la funzione di torre di segnalazione (o anche solo torre di difesa, per di più medioevale) costruita per far comunicare le mura che proteggevano il porto con l’accesso della città. Anche se, ormai, le vestigia del faro paiono essere, indiscutibilmente quelle sull’isola Lion de mer, tuttavia, la forma cilindrica della torre della Butte St. Antoine, la presenza di fori che suggerirebbero una scala esterna che conducesse ai piani superiori e la porta di accesso di forma circolare mi fanno pensare che, se il faro fosse

Fossa Marianae: Nell’ odierno porto di Fos-sur-mer si deve riconoscere l’imboccatura del canale fatto costruire da Mario tra 105 e 102 a.C., durante le guerre contro i Teutoni e che da lui prese il nome. Il porto di Fossae Marianae, situato sulle rive del Rodano, svolse la funzione di vero e proprio porto di Arles, un po’come Ostia era per Roma. Non sarà forse un caso che nel segmento I, 5 della Tabula Peutingeriana (Tav. 92, fig. 182b) sia riportata, infatti, la stessa dicitura.850 Strabone, tuttavia, ci informa che Mario fece dono del canale artificiale sul Rodano ai Massalioti che ne trassero grande guadagno poichè posero un dazio a chi lo navigava.851 Il geografo greco di età augustea aggiunge che l’accesso al canale era difficoltoso per la corrente, il deposito alluvionale e per la depressione del paese che, nei giorni di maltempo, rendeva l’accesso a malapena visibile. La notizia ci interessa molto perchè viene riferito che, per agevolare la navigazione, i Massalioti eressero delle torri di segnalazione, nelle quali non possiamo che riconoscere dei fari. Una di queste torri sembra essere stata trovata nell’ ”isola” di Roque d’Odor (Tavv. 92, 93, figg. 182a, 183,184).852 Certo, non si può fare a meno di notare che nessuna fonte precedente

850

LEVI 1967, pp. 125-126. Il fatto che questo accampamento, come noto, abbia svolto la funzione di porto di Arles contribuisce ad avvalorare l’opinione che la torre di Arelate non fosse il faro della città ma, come detto, una torre della cinta muraria. C’è chi, come Pascal Arnaud dell’Università di Marsiglia, ritiene che la scritta ostia sia un errore del copiatore della Tabula, ragione per cui la vignetta è assai simile a quella di Ostia. Io mi domando, tuttavia, come mai allora non sia stato riportato anche il faro posto sull’isolotto artificiale. Inoltre, è giusto assegnare a questo porto il termine latino ostium che vuol dire “entrata in porto” e che indica anche le foci dei fiumi, così come fossa è traducibile con “canale navigabile”, cfr. FRANZOT 1999, pp. 26-27. Per una storia di Fossae Marianae: DESJARDIN 1876, pp. 199-214 dove si precisa che il sito, in età medioevale era noto con il nome di Castellaz; CHEVALLIER 1982, pp. 26-27 ; DE IZARRA 1993, pp. 20-21. 851 Strab. IV, 1, 8; BOSIO 1983. 852 FERRI 2000, p. 260, nota 82; sugli scavi di Fos: EYDOUX 1961, pp. 201-220; la segnalazione del ritrovamento della torre di Roque d’Odor è già segnalata da BEDON 1988, p. 59, dove viene menzionato anche un faro, ancora intatto nel XVII secolo e ancora visibile all’inizio del XX nello specchio d’acqua di Vendres, utilizzato come porto di Besara (Bèziers). Sulla storia di Bèziers si veda: CHEVALLIER 1979, p. 93. Per un primo inquadramento dei citati porti della Narbonensis si veda: LEGER 1979, pp. 468-476.

843

DONNADIEU 1928, pp. 24-26. FORMIGE’ 1937, p. 104. A.A.V.V 1938, pp. 28-33. BOLLINI 1968, pp. 46-49, sui fari pp. 71-74. 846 AUBENAS 1974, pp. 536-538. 847 Sulla tecnica muraria degli edifici romani di Fréjus si veda: FÈVRIER 1956, pp. 153-184. 848 Di quest’isolotto e delle vestigia del faro che ancora si vedevano nell’Ottocento parlano il Giradin, Villneuve e Senèquier de Grasse, cfr. AUBENAS 1974, pp. 596-598, tuttavia l’argomento viene trattato separatamente dal faro della Butte St. Antoine. 849 Sull’interpretazione della torre della Butte St.Antoine come faro si vedano anche: CLÈBERT 1970, p.107; A.A.V.V 2001, p. 168. Ringrazio il Prof. Jean Houben che, via mail, mi ha precisato le nuove interpretazioni e foto sul faro di Fréjus: ormai si rifiuta che la torre della Butte St.Antoine possa essere stato un faro, le si concede solo la possibilità di una torre di segnalazione. Ringrazio il Prof. P.Arnaud dell’Università di Marsiglia per le informazioni fornitemi. 844 845

201

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA all’Itinerarium Antonini e alla Tabula Peutingeriana citi Fossa Marianae come portus.853

aiutavano i naviganti a gestirsi in una zona assai paludosa, localizzata tra l’estuario di Fos e quello di Stomalimne. A partire dal III secolo d.C. la città di Fos creò un porto autonomo che avrebbe avuto il suo sviluppo nel secolo successivo come ricordano le menzioni della Tabula Peutingeriana e dell’Itinerarium Antonini.860 Più complessa è la questione del faro di Arles, mai menzionato dalle fonti sino all’età moderna, allorché nel 1686 un avvocato protestante di Nimes, Anne de Rulman, sosteneva che il rudere che si vedeva al suo tempo in Place Jovence, noto come Tour de Fabre, altro non era che l’antico faro romano di Arelate. Tuttavia il documento dell’abate di Tersan ci dice che questa torre era già distrutta nel 1489, il che contrasterebbe con le parole della Rulman. Nessuno poi ha tramandato i disegni di cui parla il Leger e sui quali sono state costruite le immagini del faro con una forma che rimanda ai mausolei di Glanum, il che ha fatto propendere alcuni studiosi per un errore nella trascrzione dei manoscritti o per un falso.

Arelate: La città, base navale di Cesare per la conquista di Marsiglia,854 presentava due porti, uno fluviale sulla riva sinistra, e uno marittimo sulla riva destra. Proprio in corrispondenza di quest’ultimo, esattamente nell’odierno quartiere Trinquetaille presso place Jouvène, doveva trovarsi un faro romano, menzionato come Tour du Fabre nel XVII secolo da Anne de Rulman855 (Tav. 93, fig. 185a): «On voit encore un arc d’architecture romaine qui seul est resté des quatre qu’il y en auoit. On posoit ancienement de (sic) poutres de bois dessus, pour supporter les flambeaux qui seruoint de guide aux nautonniers».856 Alla fine dell’Ottocento il Leger restituiva un’immagine della Tour d’Arles come un faro a tre piani digradanti verso l’alto chiuso da una cupola, posto su una piccola collina, di forma esagonale ma con una massiccia base cilindrica (Tav. 93, fig. 185b).857 Il Leger citava il manoscritto di Peirsec dove si parlava espressamente del phare de Arles ma che non è mai stato trovato dagli studiosi francesi; il Constans, tuttavia, ha trovato un riscontro in un manoscritto dell’abate di Tersan che, annotando alcuni disegni di Beaumensil, parla di un faro di Arles, distrutto nel 1489 e che al suo tempo è in rovina.858 Altri autori, tra i quali Jeahn Porréal, al servizio di Carlo VIII, fece una descrizione del faro che diceva aver tratto dai due autori menzionati in precedenza: un edificio di tre piani con un basamento in grosse pietre di taglio, più largo rispetto alla torre che sosteneva, quindi una torre a due piani, entrambi esagonali, ciascuna faccia con una finestra centinata: il primo piano era decorato con colonne doriche, il secondo con colonne e capitelli ionici, infine una cupola che doveva custodire la lanterna.859

SCHEDA 69 NARBO MARTIUS (Narbona, Golfe du Lyon, Francia) Provincia: Gallia Narbonensis La prima colonia della Gallia fu posizionata sulle rive dell’Atax,861 l’attuale fiume Aude, che oggi dista 18 km da Narbona (Tav. 94, fig. 186), e del quale attualmente rimane solo il canale Robine. La città svolse un importante ruolo militare nella guerra contro i Cimbri, nelle lotte di Pompeo in Spagna, nella conquista della Gallia da parte di Cesare fino allo scontro di questi con Pompeo nel 49 a.C.. La città diventa tanto opulenta da essere definita pulcherrima da Marziale862 ma subisce gravi danni per un incendio divampato nel 145-50 d.C. Sarà Antonio Pio a porre riparo ai danni ma, nel frattempo, era sempre più cresciuto il ruolo commerciale della non lontana Arelate che nel III secolo d.C. soppianterà definitivamente Narbona, città che, nel 276 d.C., subirà gravi danni a causa delle invasioni barbariche. Tornata florida agli albori del V secolo d.C. viene a lungo contesa tra Roma e i Visigoti, per finire in mano di questi ultimi nel 462 d.C..863

Conclusioni e problematiche Dopo la distruzione di Massalia da parte di Cesare nel 49 a.C., i Massalioti per procurarsi il denaro necessario per ricostruirsi un porto efficiente posero dei dazi sulla navigazione fluviale delle Bocche del Rodano che conducevano ai porti marittimi e fluviali di Arelate. Per fare questo crearono delle torri-farodogana (una delle quali trovata ma oggi distrutta a Roque d’Odor) che regolavano questi traffici e allo stesso tempo

Il porto e i fari: la Tour de Vauban e le altre torri La città romana, fondata sulla via Domitia (alcuni tratti della quale sono stati recentemente scoperti in Place Hotel de Ville) nel 118 a.C., fu definita da Strabone il più grande porto mercantile della provincia,864 e non doveva certo mancare di un faro che alcuni studiosi hanno interpretato come quello raffigurato nel mosaico dei Navicularii Narbonensis, nel Piazzale delle Corporazioni di Ostia (Tav. 94, fig. 187).865 Tratti delle banchine del porto interno della città sono state localizzate a Port la Nautique, a pochi chilometri dall’odierna città. Il primo porto della città dovette però essere nella zona degli stagni (etangs) dell’odierna Port de la Nouvelle (Tav. 95, fig. 188), a pochi passi dalla zona industriale, dove oggi è la frequentata Plage de la Vieille Nouvelle. Col passare del tempo,

853

DESJARDINS 1876, pp. 200-206 in base a questo sostiene che il porto di Fos si sia sviluppato al principio del III secolo d.C. per avere il suo apogeo nel IV secolo d.C.; perché in quell’epoca può esserci stata un’isola tra l’estuario di Fos e quello di Stomalimne, dove i Massalioti costruirono un tempio di Artemide Efesia di cui parla Strabone e a fianco al quale egli localizzava le torri-faro, cfr. Strab. IV, 1, 8. Il fatto che Solino (Solin. II, 53) confermi che al suo tempo la navigazione presso Fos fosse prospera sembra confermare le teorie del Desjardins. Dunque si dovrebbe immaginare che in età augustea, al tempo di Strabone, il canale fungesse esclusivamente da dogana per la navigazione fluviale mentre solo a partire dal III secolo d.C. avrebbe funzionato come vero e proprio portus, forse anche in seguito ad alcuni cambiamenti geologici. 854 BROGAN 1953, p. 90. 855 Anne de Rulman, Bibliothéque Nationale, ms. Fr. 8649, fol. 213. 856 COSTANS 1921, p. 338 confuta la teoria di Anne de Rulman (16261628), che pensava che il nome fosse una deformazione di Tour du Phare, sostenendo invece che la torre, di origine medioevale, altro non era che una torre di cinta, il cui nome forse derivava da un incendio che la rovinò. Per una moderna visione della storia della città HEIJMANS 2006. 857 RENARD 1881, pp. 10-11; BONNARD 1913, p. 134; COSTANS 1921, p. 339; LEGER 1979, p. 507 si parla di un faro circolare, sul quale è un piano cilindrico di più piccolo diametro, sormontato da un elegante lanternone, simile al mausoleo di Saint-Remy a Glanum. 858 Abbé de Tersan, Bibliothéque Nationale, ms.fr. 6954, f05 46 verso e 47. 859 CONSTANS 1921, pp. 339-341.

860

Itin. Anton. 52, 298,3-299,4 in CALZOLARI 1996, p. 464. Strab. IV, 1, 6. Sulla città: HELÈNA 1937; SOLIER 1979, pp. 36-50; sul porto: GAYROUD 1981, pp. 522-530, CHEVALLIER 1982, pp. 65-67; ROUGÈ 1966, pp. 155-156 sosteneva che le vie acquee erano usate solo per lo smistamento merci che avveniva nella zona degli stagni, ma il materiale veniva portato soprattutto via terra. DE IZZARRA 1993, inserisce Narbona nell’elenco dei porti lacustri a causa dela navigazione sugli stagni. 862 Mar. VII, 72. 863 ATLAS 2001, p. 230. 864 Strab. VI, 1,6. 865 BROGAN 1953, pp. 88-89; BEDON-CHEVALLIER-PINON 1988, p. 315; ATLAS 2001, p. 232. Cic. Font. V, 12 definisce la colonia di Narbo Martius: specula populi Romani. Sui porti fluviali della Gallia si veda: DE IZARRA 1993. 861

202

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO tuttavia, notevole importanza acquisterà il porto cittadino nella zona attuale di Port La Nautique, ma quando il fiume Aude si sarà del tutto allontanato dalla città, il port de la Nautique verrà abbandonato in favore del precedente, per poi, dal III secolo d.C. lasciare il posto a una nuova area portuale compresa tra Saint Martin di Gruissan e Grau de la Vieille Nouvelle, entrambi affacciati sull’etang de l’Ayrolle, in vista del Mediterraneo.866 Resti di alcune torri, rimaneggiate in epoca posteriore a quella romana, sono nei pressi dell’odierno Port de la Nouvelle (Tav. 95, fig. 189) nell’antico castello medioevale di Gruissan sul Grau de Grazel (Tav. 96, fig. 191) e presso l’isola di Saint Martin sul Grau de la Vieille Nouvelle e a Cap Romain.867

Narbona fu dotata di tre porti e, probabilmente, di altrettanti fari o torri-faro: l’emporio centrale era dove oggi è Port La Nautique (a 4 km dall’odierna città),871 mai smisero però di funzionare gli stagni che si affacciavano sul Meditrerraneo, dove la Tour de Vauban e forse una torre, dove oggi sono i resti di una cappella dedicata a Saint-Martin sull’omonima isola, dovevano comunicare. Il faro de la Nautique non è stato localizzato anche perché la zona viene ancora usata come porto della città; la torre di Vauban presso l’Etang de Ayrolles a Plage de la Vieille Nouvelle è senza dubbio l’erede del faro romano così come, con ogni probabilità, al posto dei ruderi dell’attuale cappella St. Martin, doveva essere un’altra torre che aiutasse le navi a districarsi nella difficile navigazione degli stagni e segnalasse la bassa marea per evitare alle stesse di arenarsi.

Sulla lunga distesa di sabbia di Plage de la Vieille Nouvelle, presso Port de la Nouvelle, a 25 km da Narbona, si trova una zona di stagni, all’estremità di uno dei quali (Grau de la Vieille Nouvelle) si trovano i resti di una torre con sicura funzione di faro conosciuta con il nome di Tour de Vauban (Tavv. 95, 96, figg. 189, 190).868 Ciò che oggi vediamo sembra, tuttavia, appartenere a una struttura secentesca, mentre è chiara l’origine almeno medioevale di Gruissan.

SCHEDA 70 CARTEIA (Cartagena/San Roque, Andalusia, Spagna) Provincia: Baetica Il primo insediamento fenicio è localizzato alla sinistra del fiume Guadarranque, nella zona denominata Cerro del Prado, abitata sin dal VII al IV secolo a.C.. Ai Fenici successero naturalmente i Punici che trovarono ottimale collocarsi in quella posizione così vicina all’odierno Stretto di Gibilterra. Divenuta colonia latina nel 171 a.C., spesso identificata con Tartesso, la città rimarrà pressoché identica sino a che non verrà costruito il grande tempio italico, cui seguirà la costruzione delle mura e delle torri difensive, alcune delle quali possono aver svolto la funzione di avvistamento o faro (Tav. 97, fig. 192).872

L’Etang de Gruissan, Grau de la Vieille Nouvelle, Grau de la Nouvelle si affacciano l’uno sull’altro divisi solo dall’isola di Ste. Lucie presso Port de la Nouvelle e dall’isola di Saint Martin presso Gruissan e solo una lingua di sabbia li divide dal Mediterraneo: dunque la ricerca topografica risulta assai complessa. La torre, realizzata in pietra locale dell’isola di Santa Lucia, in stato di crollo, abbandonata in mezzo a poche case dirute, è costruita in pietra locale e presenta, approssimativamente, due piani: il primo, più grande, è di forma quadrata, il secondo, di forma ottagonale, e, senza dubbio, doveva essercene un terzo di forma cilindrica per la luce della lanterna.869 Lo stato di crollo è, tuttavia, utile per un’analisi architettonica della torre perchè ce la mostra in sezione: si nota subito una copertura del soffitto con volta a botte (non è però escluso che sia un rimaneggiamento secentesco ad opera di Vauban per evitarne il crollo) e viene ribadita la presenza di finestre sulla sommità della torre. Dalla parte opposta della torre, solo nelle giornate limpide, è possibile scorgere l’isola di Saint Martin sulla quale vi sono strutture rimaneggiate in epoca altomedioevale o più tarda che potrebbero essere sorte su strutture precedenti.

Il Faro: la torre di Cartagena Spesso confusa con El Rocadillo, torre difensiva delle mura medioevali, questo edificio, forse quello che si vede rappresentato in basso nella stampa del Carter, si presenta come una torre rettangolare di due piani, per un’altezza complessiva di circa 12 m. L’edificio (Tav. 97, fig. 193), in pietra di taglio, misura 6x7 m di lato: il piano inferiore è massiccio mentre quello superiore sembra come mozzato della parte cilindrica che doveva ospitare la lanterna, come si deduce dalle tracce di una scala interna;873 l’altezza dell’edificio attuale è infatti troppo esigua per quella di un faro e si può immaginare che avesse una funzione più simile a quella della Lanterna di Augusto di Frèjus e che il faro vero e proprio fosse collocato in cima alla collina, ma sono solo supposizioni.

Conclusioni e problematiche

SCHEDA 71 PORTUS GADITANUS-GADES (Cadice, Andalusia, Spagna) Provincia: Baetica

In epoca preromana, ma dopo il IV secolo a.C., il porto principale era forse situato sull’isola di Santa Lucia,870 poi

Sorta come colonia di Tiro già nel 1101 a.C. venne chiamata dai Fenici Gadir (Tav. 99, fig. 197), ovvero castello, fortezza. Questo nome fu forse dovuto anche alla sua posizione geografica sulla costa atlantica, subito al di là delle Colonne d’Ercole. Ricca di templi, i più antichi dei quali erano quello dedicato a Moloch (forse dove sorge oggi la cattedrale) e quello di Melkàrt; divenuta colonia romana nel 206 a.C., cambiato il nome in Gades, fu ottima residenza per Cesare, divenne presto municipium e sappiamo dai censimenti ospitare all’epoca di Augusto un considerevole numero di cavalieri. Il commercio con Pozzuoli e lo sfruttamento delle peschiere dell’odierna Algarve erano destinate a diventare ben poca cosa visto che, nel

866

GAYRAUD 1981, fig. 63; GAYRAUD 1989, pp. 114; 132-133. BEDON 1988, p. 59 parla di vestigia presso il Grau de la Vieille Nouvelle nell’isola di Saint Martin, sobborgo di Gruissan, presso Cap Romain e sostiene che anche la Tour de Barbarosse nell’antico castello di Gruissan sia sorta su un edificio romano. 868 GUY 1955, p. 234. GAYROUD 1981, p. 530 parla di fari e torri di avvistamento al posto dell’antico castello di Gruissan, a Cap Romain, a Vieux Chateau de Saint Martin, una piccola costruzione di 5x5 m sull’isola di Planasse e una di 8, 30x2,30 a Saint Michel, sul plateau de Caussagues, situata di fronte all’isola di S. Lucia e l’etang d’Aute, con un magazzino di dolia per la produzione del vino. 869 Nonostante la torre debba essere stata rimaneggiata nei secoli successivi, la sua forma sembra poter ricondursi a quella rappresentata nel mosaico del Piazzale delle Coroporazioni di Ostia; GUY 1955, p. 234 considera la Torre Barbarossa di Gruissan (Tav. 96, fig. 191) un posto di guardia che forse fu usato anche come faro, strutture che erano sicuramente presenti alla Vieille Nouvelle ma anche a St. Michel, sul plateau de Cassargues che domina la riva occidentale dello stagno di Sigean, dove è visibile una piattaforma di 8,30x2,30 m nella quale sono stati trovati due dolia e che doveva supportare un faro. 870 GUY 1955, pp. 224; 236. 867

871

GUY 1955, pp. 214-236; GAYROUD 1981, p. 524. BLÀNQUEZ PÈREZ-DOLDÀN GÒMEZ-BENDALA GALÀN 2002, pp. 4976. 873 THOUVENOT 1940, p. 526, afferma che vi erano altre due torri, una a est di Gibilterra e una a ovest , nei pressi di Algeceiras, entrambe sostituite da costruzioni moderne. Infine, cita il resto di una torre quadrata di circa 3 m a sud-est di Almeira, nella spiaggia di Roquetas. 872

203

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA IV secolo d.C., Avieno già descriveva Cadice come una città povera, di scarse dimensioni e in rovina.874

a nord-ovest ed il braccio proteso a nord con le dita chiuse mentre con l’indice segnalava la bocca del Golfo che esce dal Gran Mare, chiamato Stretto e che si estende tra Tànger e Tarifa. La mano destra era chiusa e impugnava un bastone come per segnalare il mare: molti, dice la nostra fonte, pensavano fosse una chiave, “ma io che l’ho guardata più volte non l’ho mai creduto”. Al-Zuhrī ci informa anche della demolizione del faro e che esso venne utilizzato dai musulmani come segnale per entrare e uscire dallo Stretto. Dunque, rielaborando le parole della fonte si deduce che il faro era formato da quattro piani di forma ottagonale, l’ultimo dei quali cilindrico e chiuso da colonne di colore rosso. Sopra l’ultimo piano era un basamento che reggeva una statua maschile stante con la testa rivolta a nord e con le braccia, l’una protesa verso nord con l’indice che indicava la direzione dello Stretto di Gibilterra, l’altra con un bastone rivolto verso il mare; almeno questa era la situazione nel XII secolo. Nel XIII secolo Rodrigo Ximènez de Rada scriveva che la statua aveva in mano delle chiavi per segnalare alle navi di non oltrepassare quel punto,879 mentre Dikr bilād alAndalus ripeteva le stesse parole di Al-Zuhrī paragonando l’edificio al faro di Brigantium (sempre nominato come quello della Galizia) e aggiungendo che il bastone era lungo 12 palmi e che al termine era una specie di frutto, e questo potrebbe avvalorare l’idea che si trattasse della statua di Ercole con clava e forse con i frutti delle Esperidi. Ancora nel XVI secolo si parlava della torre e dell’idolo di Ercole paragonandolo alla Torre di Ercole in Galizia ma ripetendo sostanzialmente le stesse parole che si tramandavano dal XII secolo.880

I porti e il faro Il porto più antico fu collocato nell’insenatura La Caleta tra la piccola isola di S. Sebastian, dove si localizza la Gadeira fenicia, e la grande isola. In epoca romana fu rimpiazzato dal Portus Gaditanus, più volte menzionato da Strabone e forse da localizzare nella zona dell’odierno El Portal.875 Questo collocherebbe il porto romano in una zona assai lontana da quella occupata attualmente dalla città di Cadice, d’altronde l’arsenale di cui parlano le fonti antiche allude a un porto ben attrezzato e non a una semplice positio. Gli itinerari che lo menzionano non fanno che complicare le cose: nei Vasi di Vicarello compare una località Ad Portum, distante 24 miglia da Gades, nell’Itinerarium Antonini si dice che Portus Gaditanus è a 14 miglia dalla precedente stazione di Ad Pontem e l’Anonimo Ravennate afferma che Portus è situata tra Gades e, al nord, Asta, distanza che si riassume in 16 miglia (Tav. 98, fig. 194).876 Quanto al faro possediamo molti testi arabi e due fonti iconografiche sulle quali torneremo tra poco. Le fonti arabe che trattano della celebre colonna di Ercole, a fornire le più dettagliate descrizioni di quello che possiamo definire il faro di Gades, vanno dal X al XIII secolo d.C e, spesso, paragonano l’edificio alla Torre di Ercole di Brigantium (scheda 73) e, talvolta, al faro di Alessandria (Scheda 8). Ad esempio, Al-Rāzī (IX-X secolo d.C.) paragona la “colonna” che Ercole costruì a Gades quando partì dalla Spagna a quella che egli andò a edificare in Galizia (la Torre di Ercole), tradendo così la sua funzione farea.877

Veniamo ora alle fonti iconografiche: il disegno a carboncino conservato al Museo di Cadice (103,5x82 cm), databile I-III secolo d.C. e trovato in una fattoria romana scoperta presso l’antico Teatro Andalucia, ci mostra un edificio (Tav. 98, fig. 195a) molto simile a quello che l’iconografia rinascimentale ci ha lasciato per il faro di Alessandria: un’enorme torre cilindrica a 12 piani di forma ottagonale (su 5 livelli è presente una scalinata esterna), digradanti verso l’alto dove, sopra a un piano di forma cilindrica, brilla la luce della lanterna. Al piano terreno è ben visibile una porta ad arco presso la quale è una piccola imbarcazione che manifesta come l’edificio sia costruito in prossimità del mare. Il fatto che le dimensioni di questo monumento siano considerevoli non deve sorprendere in quanto la città si trovava collocata in un punto ritenuto pericolossissimo per la navigazione, dunque un edificio con quella collocazione geografica doveva essere imponente, visibile anche da chi si fosse avventurato oltre il Finisterrae. Nonostante secondo alcuni studiosi la forma dell’edificio rimandi agli zigurrat mesopotamici e sia quindi ascrivibile alla Gadeira fenicia, si potrebbe pensare a una primitiva architettura fenicia resa più congeniale poi agli standard romani (Tav. 99, fig. 197). Tuttavia, mi limito a fare presente che quasi tutti gli edifici farei dalla costa atlantica sino al Canale della Manica presentano la medesima forma ottagonale: Brigantium nella sua prima fase (Tav. 98, fig. 195b), la Tour d’Ordre di Gesoriacum (scheda 75) e il faro di Claudio a Dover (scheda 76). Il secondo contributo iconografico è uno stemma (Tav. 99, fig. 196), simile a quelli che ancora oggi si trovano a La Coruňa, che riproduce la torre di Gades, di dimensioni assai ridotte, ben più tozza e massiccia e con sulla sommità un personaggio che sembra brandire un oggetto simile a un bastone e sicuramente non alle chiavi delle quali parlano alcune fonti medioevali.

Nel X secolo El Mas’ūdī afferma che nel Mare Esterno, ai confini con la Spagna, si trova l’isola di Gades, situata davanti a Sidonia, città che da questa dista 12 miglia. Questo autore è il primo a usare esplicitamente la parola “faro”, edificio che definisce come uno dei più meravigliosi del mondo, sul quale si erge una colonna e su di essa una statua di bronzo, alta abbastanza da poter essere vista da Simonia e anche da più lontano. L’autore continua dicendo che dietro questo edificio ci sono altre due statue, poste su due isolotti l’uno di fronte all’altro, costruite in onore di Ercole e lì poste per vietare il passaggio alle navi.878 Se nel corso del XII secolo Al-Idrīsī si limita a dire che la colonna di Gades può essere paragonata solo alla Torre di Brigantium, assai più ricco di informazioni è Al-Zuhrī che definice il nostro faro “curioso”, ne fissa l’atezza a 100 cubiti e ne descrive così la forma: un edificio quadrato, edificato sopra una specie di pietra pomice, circondato da colonne di rame (o forse ottone) rosso, sulla cima del quale è un primo piano, poi un secondo sempre quadrato, dimezzato di circa 1/3 rispetto al primo e su questo si imposta una piramide tronca, a quattro facce. Sopra la piramide è un quadrato di marmo bianco sul quale si erge una statua di mirabile fattura con il viso rivolto 874

Per una completa storia di Gades si veda PEMÀN 1954. Strab. III, 5, 3-11; SCHULTEN 1955, p.28, egli nega come sostengono altri autori che Portus Gaditanus vada ricercato presso l’attuale Puerto Santa Maria. 876 RAMBAUD 1997, p. 75. 877 LEVI-PROVENÇAL 1953, pp. 96-97. 878 GÀRCIA Y BELLIDO 1951, pp. 115-116, la descrizione è interessantissima specialmente per le statue poste sugli isolotti che possiamo immaginare essere le Colonne d’Ercole che alcuni itinerari come la Tabula Peutingeriana segnalano proprio in prossimità di Portus Gaditanus. Quanto alla colonna sopra la torre io credo sia un fraintendimento dato dalla possibile diversa forma dell’ultimo piano (presumibilmente cilindrico). 875

879 Rodrigo Ximènez de Rada, Historia de rebus Hispanie sive historia gohtica, I, VII, 1-6. 880 Non potendomi soffermare su tutte le fonti rimando al fondamentale articolo di ORDÒŇEZ AGULLA 1993, pp. 261-277.

204

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO SCHEDA 72 TURRIS CHIPIONIS (Sanlucar Barrameda, Andalusia, Spagna) Provincia: Baetica

de

Il porto e il faro: la Torre di Ercole Sul porto romano non possiamo affermare praticamente nulla di certo, visto che non se ne è trovato alcun resto, anche se già Tolomeo lo definiva grande.890 In base all’analisi della nota iscrizione di Servius Lupus per la costruzione della Torre di Ercole, Le Roux ha pensato che, nonostante il porto di Brigantium avesse una valenza prettamente commerciale e non militare, esso fosse comunque in relazione con l’accampamento militare della vicina A Cidadela.891 Brigantium, almeno dall’età flavia, assunse il ruolo di controllo della guarnigione della Britannia e sentinella dell’Atlantico contro gli attacchi pirateschi, anche grazie al suo faro. La città possiede oggi (e così doveva essere almeno dall’epoca romana) due porti: quello attuale, di forma semicircolare, e quello di Orzàn, la cui burrascosa insenatura sembra essere stata protetta dai locali per mezzo di mura che la cingevano su modello del porto di Tiro.892 Un chilometro a sud della Torre di Ercole la baia di San Amaro, oggi utilizzata come peschiera, offriva possibilità di approdo a piccoli natanti, dunque anche questo luogo può essere candidato come sito del primo porto romano della città.

La collocazione esatta della città, come si vedrà in seguito, non è stata ancora identificata. Tuttavia essa non può che essere ricercata nei pressi della città odierna di Chipiona, il cui nome non può che derivare dalla torre citata da Strabone e da Mela.881 Il porto e il faro Il porto di Sanlucar nell’antichità venne, probabilmente, utilizzato come porto fluviale di Gades grazie all’unico fiume navigabile della Spagna, il Guadalquivir. Il porto, menzionato anche da Tolomeo, è riconosciuto dallo Schulten con Castillo Dona Blanca, situato a 4 km da Portus Gaditanus, mentre la Torre di Caepio sarebbe da ricercare in Sanlucar de Barrameda.882 Il faro detto Torre di Caepio (Tav. 100, fig. 198) fu costruito sul modello di quello di Alessandria e collocato, almeno a quanto dice Strabone,883 su uno scoglio battuto dai flutti all’imbocco del fiume Betis (Guadalquivir) nel porto di Menesteo, nome derivato dal santuario in suo onore, situato secondo alcuni, presso l’attuale Puerto S.Maria,884 vicino a Cadice, ma più probabilmente nell’odierna Sanlucar de Barrameda,885 città dalla quale poi sorgerà la città di Chipiona, il cui toponimo è indissolubilmente legato a quella torre. Alla stessa epoca fenicia risalgono forse le Torres de Oeste (Tav. 100, fig. 199) ma la cui antichità, a eccezione dell’antico toponimo Torri di Augusto, è stata totalmente rimpiazzata dal castello medioevale che ha utilizzato i fari come torri di avvistamento e difensive.886

Paradossalmente, il faro Romano meglio conservato del mondo antico è anche quello meno menzionato dalle fonti di età classica. La così detta Torre di Ercole si erge ancora in tutta la sua maestosità su un promontorio alto 57 m s.l.m. dominando il mare su tre coste (est, nord e sud), a 2 km a nord dell’odierna città di La Coruña (Tav. 101, fig. 201).893 Una leggenda vuole che il faro fosse stato costruito dallo stesso Ercole (dal quale prese il nome) che, decapitato Gerione, seppellì la sua testa e su di essà elevò la Torre, come simbolo della sua vittoria.894 Non possediamo, tuttavia, notizie del faro anteriori al V d.C., epoca in cui Orosio ci informa che la Spagna, di forma triangolare, presenta nell’angolo nord-ovest la città galiziana di Brigantium dove è un altissimum pharum et inter paucam memorandi operis ad speculum Britanniae;895 dunque un altissimo faro, una delle poche opere degne di nota realizzate dai pagani, posto come un osservatorio in direzione della Britannia. L’opera deve essere stata comunque costruita in epoca imperiale, e, credo, che andasse a formare quasi un triangolo semaforico con i due precedenti fari eretti da Caligola a Gesoriacum e da Claudio a Dubris. Quasi tutti gli studiosi concordano, tuttavia, nell’attribuire la costruzione dell’opera a Traiano.896 A 10,5 m di distanza dalla Torre si rinvenne, scritta su una roccia, la dedica a Marte da parte di un architetto di nome Quintus Sevius Lupus, originario di un paese vicino all’odierna Coimbra, in Portogallo, che si dichiarava architetto del faro così come Sostrato lo era stato per quello di Alessandria:

SCHEDA 73 (FLAVIUM) BRIGANTIUM (La Coruña, Galizia, Spagna) Provincia: Tarraconensis La città (Tav. 101, fig. 200) ha origini antichissime e, secondo una leggenda, fu fondata da un capo celtico degli Artabri di nome Breogan, episodio che viene riportato anche nel XII secolo d.C. nel Libro delle Invasioni, raccolta irlandese di episodi epici, nei quali il faro, chiamato Torre di Breogan, è definito una casa deliziosa e confortevole oltre ad essere un importante punto di avvistamento.887 Nonostante la città fosse nota ai Romani già in età cesariana, il suo massimo sviluppo deve aver ricoperto un periodo che va dalla fine del I a tutto il II d.C. quando la città, chiamata in quell’epoca Flavium Brigantium, si guadagnò il titolo di municipium e iniziò, con ogni probabilità, i lavori per la costruzione del faro.888 La zona di Brigantium subirà un progressivo abbandono a partire dalla metà del II secolo d.C. per poi essere trasformata in necropoli nel corso del IV secolo d.C..889

MARTI AUG SACR G SEVIUS 890

Ptol. II, 6, sulla storia della città OCHOA-MORILLO-CERDÀN 1994, pp. 59-62. 891 LE ROUX 1990, pp. 133-144. 892 TETTAMANCY GASTON 1991, p. 18, ristampa anastatica del volume pubblicato da Tettamancy tra il 1920 e il 1931, per il cui reperimento desidero ringraziare la Libreria Arenas di la Coruña. 893 TRANOY 1981, pp. 242-243. 894 Amm. XV, 9. Secondo alcuni autori il faro, distrutto dopo mille anni dalla sua costruzione da parte di Ercole, sarebbe stato fatto restaurare da Augusto e avrebbe preso il nome di Torre di Augusto, cfr. TETTAMANCY GASTON 1991, pp. 70-71. 895 Oros. I, 2, 71, la cui notizia è riportata anche in Cosmographia olim Aethici dicta 2, 33; RODRÍGUEZ ALMEIDA 2005, pp. 13-19. 896 CORNIDE 1986, pp. 10-14, opera alla quale rimando per una rassegna di tutte le fonti successive al IV d.C.

881

Strab. III, 1,9; Mela III, 4 la colloca su uno sperone roccioso e non su un’isola. 882 Ptol. II, 4,5; SCHULTEN 1955, pp. 286-287. 883 Strab. III, 1, 9; Mela, III, 1, 4. Oggi sulla costa di fronte a Salmedina, a Chipiona si eleva un alto faro che porta ancora il nome di Torre di Caepio, da Quintus Servilius Caepio nel 139 a.C.. Per la navigazione sul Betis si veda: PARODI ALVAREZ, 2001, pp. 168-171. 884 KEAY 1988, p. 102. 885 TETTAMANCY GASTON 1991, p. 92. 886 MENÈDEZ PIDAL 1955, p. 586 ; BLANCO FERREIRO 1981, p. 80. 887 Mela, III, 1 sulla presenza celtica a La Coruña, chiamata Portus Magnus Artabrorum; MARIOTTI 2006, pp. 57-58. 888 BENDALA GALAN 1993, pp. 237-239. 889 OCHOA-MORILLO-CERDÀN 1994, pp. 61-62.

205

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA LUPUS ARCHITECTUS AEMINENSIS LUSITANOS EX VO 897

Carlo V, spedito a Madrid nel 1552, il faro di Brigantium, con tanto d’iscrizione di Lupus, viene presentato come una torre di forma perfettamente rettangolare, a sei piani, di cui l’ultimo leggermente più piccolo. Dalla porta di accesso della torre parte una scala esterna che conduce alla sommità della stessa; l’edificio somiglia molto in questa fase alla lanterna di Genova (Tav. 103, fig. 204 a, b). Nel XVII secolo, quando da fortezzafaro dei re spagnoli passa nelle mani della città di La Coruña, diviene simbolo della città tanto da essere effigiato nello stemma ufficiale, come una massiccia torre più cilindrica che rettangolare, sempre dotata di una scala esterna e di molteplici finestre e chiusa in cima da una cupola (Tav. 103, fig. 205a). Nel 1685 un disegno propone il faro come una robusta torre a sei piani (l’edificio romano), su cui insiste una strana piattaforma superiore di forma cilindrica, chiusa da un tetto piramidale, affiancato da due comignoli; in basso la torre presenta due porte di accesso ad arco e, dal primo piano, la scala di accesso ai piani superiori (Tav. 104, fig. 206 a). Al XVIII secolo risale una fontana della città (Tav. 103, fig. 205 b) in cui Nettuno reca in una mano il consueto tridente e, nell’altra, un grande scudo in cui è rappresentata la Torre di Ercole, sempre a sei piani dotati di scala esterna, ma con in cima i caratteristici comignoli che ancora oggi si possono vedere (Tav. 105, fig. 208 a, b). Alla fine del Settecento Don Juan Cornide Saavedra tenta l’ennesima ricostruzione del faro, partendo dalle sue origini romane: una tozza torre rettangolare a sei piani tra loro collegati da una scala esterna a spirale, di cui solo l’ultimo più piccolo e di forma cilindrica, fino alla versione che ancora oggi vediamo: una massiccia torre rettangolare a sei piani, sulla cui sommità si instaura quella strana piattaforma ottocentesca, unico piano non visitabile, in cui è custodita la lanterna. L’ultimo tentativo di ricostruzione dell’edificio romano è stato tentato dal Buchwald (Tav. 104, fig. 206 b) agli inizi del Novecento ed è ancora ritenuto piuttosto valido: una slanciata, ma robusta e alta torre rettangolare a sei piani, in ciascuno dei quali sono intervallate una finestra ed una porta di accesso, nella quale passa la scala che conduce alla sommità del faro, dove un più piccolo piano cilindrico emette la fiamma della lanterna. Nel 1785, il Real Consulado Maritimo de Galicia affida all’ingegnere e ufficiale di marina Eustachio Giannini il restauro del faro il cui stato di abbandono seicentesco lo aveva fatto definire Castelo Viejo e da allora il suo aspetto non cambierà più. Oggi la torre, che ha ospitato una scuola per guardiani di fari sino al 1854, si presenta allo stesso modo con la sola eliminazione della scala esterna (Tav. 105, figg. 208, 209). Ancora oggi in ogni piano sono presenti due finestre rettangolari, delle quali quelle chiuse sono pertinenti al restauro settecentesco, mentre quelle aperte erano quelle in cui passava la scala esterna (Tav. 106, fig. 210a).901 Tutto ciò che attualmente si vede all’esterno è pertinente al restauro di XVII secolo, mentre, all’interno, sono ancora visibili buone porzioni dell’edificio romano (sono state riconosciute le stanze degli addetti alla lanterna e un magazzino per il combustibile) e, soprattutto, la tecnica muraria in opus vittatum ed opus quadratum (Tav. 106, fig. 210b).

La dedica a Marte va intesa nella valenza del dio come protettore dell’imperatore regnante, come conferma l’epiteto Augusti. Nonostante il gentilizio di origine latina, l’architetto si dichiara portoghese di Coimbra o, per dirla all’antica, lusitano di Aeminium. Infine, la stessa iscrizione chiarisce il suo valore di ex-voto e non una valenza funeraria. Unico dubbio è se Lupus sia stato architetto di professione o se si sia improvvisato tale, in seguito allo scioglimento di un voto fatto a Marte, il che ci farebbe pensare a una qualifica più militare che civile.898 Potremmo forse ipotizzare che Lupus, soldato lusitano di Aeminium al servizio dell’Augusto di Roma, colto da una tempesta mentre cercava di raggiungere il porto di Brigantium, abbia invocato l’aiuto di Marte, in quanto soldato, e, una volta salvo, abbia sciolto un voto fatto al dio della guerra costruendo il faro della città perchè agevolasse i naviganti. Il faro verrà poi trasformato in fortezza nel Medioevo e, abbandonato nel XIV secolo, riprenderà la sua funzione di faro, che ancora oggi ricopre, solo nel 1861, dopo aver subito diversi rimaneggiamenti tra 1686 e 1797, sempre però nel rispetto dell’originario edificio romano.899 Veniamo ora ad alcune preziose testimonianze iconografiche. Nel 1086 un monaco asturiano chiamato Beato di Lièbana scrive un commento all’Apocalisse inserendo anche una mappa geografica: in essa possiamo riconoscere la Torre di Ercole anche in virtù delle scritte Gallecia e Faro (Tav. 102, fig. 202). L’edificio si presenta come un’alta torre di corpo rettangolare, costruita su uno zoccolo a gradoni. Al centro in basso si riconosce una sproporzionata porta di accesso, mentre la sommità è chiusa da una cupola leggermente appuntita, al cui centro è una piccola apertura circolare dalla quale doveva uscire la fiamma emessa dalla lanterna, come mostra anche la Tabula Peutingeriana che, invece, l’assimila al faro di Alessandria (Tav. 102, fig. 203). La carta del Beato realizzava, invece, la torre in modo differente, tanto che, vista la presenza della scritta Asturias vicino all’edificio, potremmo ipotizzare che esso sia quello della Campa Torres (scheda 74) presso Gijon e che la scritta Gallecia indicasse i confini geografici e non la collocazione dell’edificio. Nel Cinquecento il canonico Bartolomeo Molina, descrivendo la meravigliosa torre, elogiava l’architettura di una scala di pietra a spirale che correva lungo tutto l’edificio, fornendo la possibiltà di raggiungere in modo rapido la sommità dell’edificio.900 Secondo un documento ufficiale cinquecentesco dell’imperatore 897

CIL., II, 2559=5639: “Consacrato a Marte Augusto. Gaius Sevius Lupus, architetto, lusitano di Aeminium (Coimbra), in seguito a un voto”. 898 Per le interpretazioni sulla dedica di Lupus si veda: LE ROUX 1990, pp. 133-144. 899 VEITMEYER 1900, p. 22; BEDON 1988, p. 59. Alcune leggende locali attribuiscono la costruzione del faro ai Cartaginesi o, in epoca più recente, ai re spagnoli cfr. CIALDI 1877, p. 309. Infine, un’altra leggenda che si ricollega a quella già citata di Ercole in lotta con Gerione, afferma che il semidio avesse un’amante di nome Crunna dalla quale la città prese nome e che Giulio Cesare restaurò la Torre di Ercole ormai in rovina, cfr. DOCAMPO 1543, fol. 43, cap. 35. Sulla storia della città e del suo faro si veda: HÜTTER 1973, pp. 5-30, la cui versione tradotta ed estesa in lingua spagnola si trova nel volume pubblicato dopo l’ultimo restauro ad opera del Comune della città galiziana: HÜTTER-HAUSCHILD 1991. 900 MOLINA 1551 cfr. TETTAMANCY GASTON, 1991, p. 63: una scala di pietra sembra improbabile, inoltre molte fonti parlano della presenza, in epoca antica, di una scala di legno.

Conclusioni e problematiche Seppure fonti importanti come Strabone, Mela e Plinio non nominino questo faro mentre fanno menzione di altri, forse anche meno importanti come la Torre di Caepio presso Cadice, tuttavia, è però altrettanto vero che, se la Torre di Ercole fu costruita da Traiano nel II d.C., gli autori citati non hanno potuto vederla. Plinio, in età flavia, afferma che alla sua epoca l’uso di costruire fari sul modello di quello di Alessandria era ormai diffusissimo, e cita Ostia e Ravenna solo per fare due casi

901 Per una dettagliata analisi di tutte le fonti iconografiche menzionate si veda: HÜTTER-HAUSCHILD 1991 pp. 21 ss.

206

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO emblematici, in quanto entrambi erano stazioni militari navali di estrema importanza e lui, che fu a capo della flotta di Miseno, deve sicuramente avere visto entrambi i fari di persona. Dunque, anche se la Torre di Ercole ci appare oggi un monumento eccezionale (Tav. 106, fig. 211), tale non deve essere apparso ai Romani nel II d.C. e nei secoli successivi, quando ormai in tutto il mondo era possibile vedere simili monumenti. Diversa, invece, la situazione nel mondo tardo antico quando, essendo molti dei fari romani ormai crollati o trasformati in fortezza o ricostruiti in dimensioni minori, la Torre di Ercole e il faro di Alessandria che ancora domavano le onde marine con la loro maestosità risultavano, anche agli occhi di un cristiano adirato con i pagani come Orosio, un monumento eccezionale di cui rendere merito ai Romani. Quanto alla leggenda di Eracle e all’origine fenicia del faro di Brigantium credo si possa pensare a fantasticherie dell’epoca che contribuivano ad alimentare la grandezza dell’opera di Sevius Lupus, un soldato lusitano che, a mio avviso, salvatosi da una tempesta e arrivato sano e salvo nel porto di Brigantium, intraprese a sue spese la costruzione della Torre di Ercole.

dell’attuale Touriňan, nella punta più occidentale della Galizia, presso l’odierna Muxìa. Il castrum è collocato a ovest del porto di Gijón (El Musel), e, nell’antichità, deve avere sfruttato il corso del fiume Aboňo, oggi completamente interrato.906 L’Ara Sistiana era nota già dal XVI secolo e, conservata nel Tabularium del sito archeologico, essa si presenta come un grande blocco di marmo (1,62 m di lunghezza per 80 cm di altezza, 50 cm di spessore ed un peso che raggiunge i 2250 kg.) e presenta la seguente iscrizione: IMP CAESARI AVGUSTO DIVI F COS XIII IMP XX PONT MAX PATR PATRIAE TRIB POT XXXII CN CALPVURNVS CN F PISO LEG PR PR SACRVM 907 L’equipe della Fernàndez Ochoa che da tempo scava nella zona crede che ad ogni ara sistiana corrisponda una torre-faro (quella di Touriňan, quella di La Coruňa e quella di Campa Torres). Si è dunque ipotizzato che anche la forma fosse simile a quella dell’unica torre rimasta, quella di La Coruňa: una massiccia torre rettangolare di quattro piani digradanti verso l’alto con il più piccolo di forma cilindrica per potere ospitare la luce della lanterna (Tav. 108, figg. 214, 215).

La datazione della torre all’epoca traianea è forse troppo avanzata, ma credo non si possa risalire più indietro dell’età giulio claudia: la Torre di Ercole, giustamente definita da Orosio specula Britanniae, si andava infatti a collegare al faro fatto costruire da Caligola a Gesoriacum (Boulogne sur la mer) e a quelli, di cui, come vedremo, rimane solo uno, realizzati da Claudio nel Portus Dubrae (Dover) in Britannia. Siamo fortunatissimi a possedere un monumento come la Torre di Ercole in cui possiamo ancora rintracciare materiale romano e che, con l’esclusione della piattaforma superiore aggiunta per volere del Real Consulado Maritimo nel 1785, ci restituisce un raro esempio di architettura farea di epoca romana (Tav. 104, fig. 207).

SCHEDA 75 GESORIACUM (Boulogne-sur-mer, Pas-deCalais, Francia) Provincia: Gallia Belgica La città (Tav. 109, figg. 216 a), collocata sulla riva destra del Liane, un estuario del Reno, fu quasi esclusivamente una città romana e divenne assai fiorente nel II d.C. quando Claudio vi pose la classis Britannica, destinando Boulogne a nuovo porto di partenza per tutte le spedizioni britanniche. Prima della conquista giulio-claudia, la città era dotata del così detto Portus Itius, dove sbarcò Cesare.908 Nella prima età imperiale, Caligola, pur non essendo Roma in guerra, diede ordine alle guardie germaniche di passare il Reno e simulò una guerra, lamentandosi della scarsa partecipazione del popolo romano che, mentre l’imperatore combatteva contro i Barbari, se ne stava in villeggiatura. Festeggiando una vittoria inesistente contro un nemico invisibile, fece erigere in ricordo di essa un’altissima torre sulla quale andavano accesi fuochi nella notte per guidare i naviganti909 e la posizionò su un’altura del più vecchio porto della città, detto Gesoriacum (Ville Basse), presso l’insenatura di Brèquercque. La città si estese poi nei sobborghi prendendo il nome di Bononia (Ville Haute). In età tardo antica, quando ormai la popolazione era molto cresciuta, si creò un

SCHEDA 74 CAMPA TORRES (Gijón, Asturia, Spagna) Provincia: Asturia Il Cabo Torres (Tav. 107, fig. 212), 6 km a est di Gijón, è la punta che rende la baia dell’omonima città il porto principale dell’Asturia sin dai tempi antichi. Alcuni autori pensano che si debba riconoscere in questio castrum la Noega citata da Strabone,902 che la pone presso un estuario formato dall’Oceano e ne fa zona di confine tra Asturi e Cantabri. Plinio e Mela parlano di un oppidum situato nella costa asturiana.903 La romanità di Campa Torres è data dal ritrovamento di alcuni esemplari numismatici che vanno da Augusto a Tiberio nonché da alcuni ritrovamenti archeologici come la Villa di Giove, nei pressi dell’attuale chiesa, ma su tutti è degna di nota l’epigrafe nota come Ara Sistiana, la quale parla di un grande monumento in onore di Augusto. Mela menziona una turrem Augusti,904 che si è recentemente tentato di ubicare a Campa Torres e ipotizzata come la base di un faro.905

906

OCHOA-CERDÀN 1994, pp. 93-94. DIEGO SANTOS 1959, pp. 47-52: “All’imperatore Cesare Augusto, figlio del Divino Cesare, tre volte console, imperatore con venti saluti imperiali, pontefice massimo, padre della patria, trenta volte investito con la tribunicia potestas (Cneo Calpurnio Pisone, figlio di Cneo) consacrò questo monumento” (C.I.L. II, 2703). Essendo stato Pisone governatore della Spagna Citeriore tra 9 e 10 d.C. abbiamo la datazione esatta dell’epigrafe. 908 Caes. Gall. V, 2, 3; 5,1, essendo questo porto distante circa trenta stadi dall’Inghilterra si potrebbe ipotizzare che si tratti di un sobborgo di Calais, più che di Boulogne, essendo la distanza la medesima che oggi corre tra il porto d’imbarco di Calais per Dover. Caes. Gall. III; 8,1 precisa poi che i Veneti che abitavano quella zona non possedevano molti porti ma che quelli che avevano erano completamente sconosciuti ai Romani, che trovavano assai difficile la navigazione in quelle zone, esposte ai venti e ai fenomeni delle maree che erano utilizzati dai Galli a scopo difensivo. 909 Suet. Cal. XLV. Sugli altri fari della Francia si vedano BONNARD 1913, p. 134; DREYER-FICHOU 2005. 907

Il porto e il faro Nulla è sicuro sul porto di Campa Torres che potrebbe anche avere sfruttato l’insenatura naturale presso la quale era forse l’Ara Sistiana (Tav. 107, fig. 213), ovvero la presunta base della Turris Augusti, nome attribuito a un’altra torre farea nella zona 902

Strab. III, 4, 20, anche se secondo TROTTA 2000 si potrebbe pensare ad Aviles o al porto di San Juan de la Nieva. Plin. nat. IV, 3 e Mela III, 12-13 la definiscono oppidum della costa asturiana. 903 Mela, III, 12-13 cita tre are sistiane consacrate ad Augusto e note già da tempo. Sull’ara sistiana FERNÀNDEZ MIRANDA 1983, pp. 47-53; sulla costa asturiana IGLESIAS GIL-MUŇIZ CASTRO 1992. 904 Mela III, 7. 905 HERNÀN DEL FRADE- FIGAREDO FERNÀNDEZ 2002, p. 127.

207

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA uomo”.917 Nel 1559 la città fu ripresa dai Francesi che erano riusciti a salvaguardare il loro più famoso monumento romano. Ormai, però, la zona della Tour d’Ordre era divenuta una cava per l’estrazione di pietre utili per edificare la nuova Bononia, rendendo così molto instabile il terreno sul quale la torre era stata costruita. Inoltre gli Inglesi avevano cambiato la direzione del porto tramite la creazione di un isolotto artificiale destinato a guidare i naviganti.918 Dopo i primi tentativi di punire con un’ammenda chi estraeva illegalmente le pietre dalla zona della torre, nel 1618 un editto di Luigi XIII aboliva questa ammenda rendendo la cosa ufficiale. Così, essendo il terreno sempre più instabile a causa delle continue estrazioni, il faro crollò irrimediabilmente il 20 Gennaio 1644, anche se sulle sue vestigia si continuerà ad alimentare un fuoco sino alla definitiva scomparsa delle fondamenta e del piano superiore, avvenuta nel 1681 (Tav. 111, fig. 220).919

terzo porto, noto come Portus Aepatiaci, situato nel sobborgo di St. Omer nell’odierna Isques.910 Il porto e il faro: la Tour d’Ordre Nonostante il faro di Caligola, voluto nel 39 d.C. e crollato nel XVII secolo, non sia più visibile, il suo ricordo rimane nella rue de la Tour d’Ordre (Tav. 109, fig. 217a) e nel nome del radiofaro posto sulla collina dove sorgeva la torre caligolana che domina la Manica in vista della costa inglese. Anche il porto romano è stato completamente nascosto da quello moderno, per cui risulta molto difficile fornirne un quadro. Dalla fine del III d.C. tutta la zona, porto e parte abitata venne designata con il nome di oppidum Bononiensis.911 Della torre fa brevi accenni Dione Cassio ma, senza dubbio, la prima fonte che ci dia una concreta descrizione del faro è il Montfaucon nel XVIII secolo.912 All’epoca in cui scriveva il Montfaucon, il faro era già caduto da ottant’anni, tuttavia è a lui che dobbiamo la divulgazione di quel famoso disegno che ancor oggi ci consente di ricostruire, almeno ipoteticamente, la sua originaria architettura (Tav. 110, fig. 218a). Il faro, alto 64 m (più probabilmente, la sola torre era alta 34 m), collocato su un promonorio che dominava tutta la città e le due rive del Liane, era di pianta ottagonale e presentava dodici piani che andavano via via restringendosi verso l’alto per un diametro di 20 m alla base. Solo l’ultimo piano era di dimensioni minori e presentava una forma diversa (la consueta forma cilindrica per la lanterna); su ogni piano sporgente di una cornice di 0,50 m, diversamente colorato tramite l’utilizzo di pietre differenti di colore rosso e grigio, vi erano otto aperture ad arco. A partire dal XVII secolo vi sono notizie di una scala interna che collegava tre camere (situate nei piani inferiori), delle quali due destinate a magazzini per raccogliere il combustibile per alimentare la fiamma della lanterna e una adibita a stanza del guardiano del faro.913 In virtù dei fuochi che si accendevano sulla sua sommità venne chiamato anche turris ardens, da cui poi derivò la corruzione francese Tour d’Ordre o Tour d’Orde.914 Una sua rappresentazione si è voluta riconoscere su una moneta datata 191 d.C. (Tav. 110, fig. 217b), ed è risaputo che il faro funzionasse ancora durante il regno di Commodo ed è noto che nell’811 d.C. l’imperatore Carlo Magno, colpito dalla maestosità dell’opera, lo restaurò nella sua qualità di faro.915 La torre aveva, del resto, sempre avuto una funzione più militare che commerciale, come dimostra la sua posizione strategica: sarà dal porto di Gesoriacum che Claudio, successore di Caligola, partirà per la sua missione contro i Bretoni.916 Il faro di Caligola potrebbe essere rappresentato in un celebre rilievo oggi conservato nel cortile del Laocoonte dei Musei Vaticani, ma non è possibile confermare se si tratti proprio del faro di Gesoriacum, benché la struttura cilindrica accrediti molto questa teoria (Tav. 110, fig. 218b). Nel 1544 il re d’Inghilterra Enrico VIII, conquistata la Francia, fece circondare la torre con quattro bastioni, trasformandola in fortezza e ribattezzandola Old man, Vieil Homme, traslitterazione di un presunto nome celtico, Alt Maen, che significa però “alta pietra” e non “vecchio

Conclusioni e problematiche Difficile poter aggiungere qualcosa alla storia di un faro di dodici piani, alto 62 m, largo 20 m, e che ha resistito agli attacchi delle onde dell’Oceano e degli Inglesi sino alla fine del XVII secolo e del quale Joachim Duviert (1611) ci ha restituito un bel disegno (Tav. 109, fig. 216 b).920 Sicuramente sbaglia chi lo ritiene un’invenzione di Giulio Cesare.921 Al di là del fatto che Caligola abbia eretto il faro dell’odierna Boulogne-sur-mer all’indomani di una vittoria inesistente, bisogna riconoscere all’imperatore romano che non solo egli rese più facile ai naviganti l’attraversamento del canale della Manica, ma che restituì al mondo occidentale un faro architettonicamente diverso da quelli sino ad allora noti e che sarà di ispirazione a molti fari di quella zona, a partire da quello di Claudio a Dover (Tav. 110, fig. 219). La mancanza di fonti classiche che ne parlino, eccetto Svetonio e Cassio Dione, è senza dubbio legata alla damnatio memoriae di Caligola per la quale furono eliminati molti dei suoi ritratti e delle sue opere ma non potè fare nulla contro l’utilità di un monumento che si è rivelato, nel corso dei secoli, più utile della ”vittoria” di guerra in memoria della quale fu costruito e che suscitò l’ammirazione anche di Carlo Magno e di Enrico VIII, che, addirittura, lo cinse di mura. Nonostante le fonti iconografiche settecentesche posizionino il faro ai piedi della falesia, nella zona dove più o meno sorge il faro moderno, l’archeologia ha ormai confermato che il sito più probabile fosse di fronte alla chiesa Calvaire des Marins, in cima alla rue de la Tour d’Odre,922 dunque probabilmente dove oggi è la polveriera di epoca napoleonica (Tav. 111, fig. 221), 917 HISTOIRE 1900, p. 385, BROMWICH 2003, p. 52 che ricorda anche come il faro fosse chiamato anche di S. Patrizio secondo la credenza che il primo custode dell’edificio fu il padre di S.Patrizio. 918 D’ERCE 1966, p. 93, fig. 2. 919 VEITMEYER 1900, pp. 22-24; D’ERCE 1966, pp. 92-95. 920 Secondo recenti studi in base al disegno di Joachim Duviert (1611), conservato alla Bibliothéque Nationale, Cabinet des estampes, collection du maréchal d’Ulixes, VX 23, si è diminuita l’altezza a 38 m e il diametro. Pare che la base della torre fosse ancora visibile negli Anni Trenta del Novecento; nei pressi della torre furono trovati, nella prima metà del Settecento, una statuetta di divinità (forse HorusArpocrate) e diverse monete, una delle quali dell’età cesariana, cfr. DELMAIRE 1994, 232, n° 113, fig. 9. 921 Nei dintorni della torre nel 1839 Antoine Caboche, vetraio residente in rue Tour d’Ordre 113, trovò alcune monete che andavano da Giulio Cesare a Claudio. il che, indubbia conferma di frequentazione del sito, è troppo poco per attribuire la costruzione della torre a Cesare, oltre al fatto che egli, avendo accennato al faro di Alessandria, non avrebbe omesso di fare menzione di una costruzione da lui realizzata nel De bello Gallico dove è solo presente un breve accenno al Portus Itius; Caes. Civ. III, 112; l’attribuzione della costruzione della Tour d’Ordre a Cesare da parte del Montfaucon nelle “Antiquitès expliquèe” è citata in D’ERCE 1966, p. 89 922 DELMAIRE 1994, p. 290, fig. 109.

910 BROGAN 1953, pp. 110-111; BOLLINI 1968, pp. 55, 72, sulla storia della base navale SEILLER 1986, pp.163-183. 911 ATLAS 2001, p. 115. 912 DE MONTFAUCON 1749, pp. IX-XI. 913 D’ERCE 1966, p. 90. 914 RENARD 1867, p. 24. 915 Sulla storia del faro di Boulogne si veda : EGGER 1863, pp. 410-421; D’ERCE 1966, pp. 90-96, per una ricerca archeologica della zona SEILLER 1986, pp. 163-178; DELMAIRE 1994, n° 232; BROMWICH 2003, pp. 50-52. 916 DURUY 1882, p. 385; LEGER 1979, pp. 509-510. THIERSCH 1909, p. 21.

208

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO musealizzata al punto tale da non aver lasciato più alcuna traccia dell’antico faro (Tav. 111, fig. 220), anche se c’è chi non esclude che fosse al posto del moderno radio-faro, collocato dietro la stessa chiesa, ma ciò è più improbabile anche perché altrimenti avrebbe resistito al crollo della falesia. Inoltre, solo dall’alto di questa falesia, tagliata in età romana per far far posto alla Tour d’Ordre, è possibile avere una visione ad ampio raggio che permette di scorgere anche la costa inglese. Probabilmente, il fatto che Claudio abbia scelto per i fari di Dover le due alture di Eastern e Western Heights può essere derivato dalla posizione del faro del suo predecessore.

allorché furono sepolte le sue rovine per costruire le fortificazioni militari di epoca napoleonica (Tav. 113, fig. 224,).927 Di esso rimangono solo alcune foto ottocentesche che ci hanno restituito le immagini delle fondazioni romane, note come “Devil’s Drop” (lacrima o goccia del Diavolo) e, successivamente, “Drop Redoubt” (goccia ridotta); possediamo, inoltre, alcuni disegni (Tav. 112, fig. 223b).928 E’ invece ancora visibile l’altro faro, oggi all’interno del castello normanno di Dover e sul quale poggia un muro della chiesa di St.Mary in Castro; anche in questo caso il toponimo è piuttosto evidente rimandando all’accampamento militare romano della Classis Britannica qui stanziata da Claudio e gemella di quella di Gesoriacum, stanziata quindi non lontano dalla Tour d’Ordre dalla quale era anche possibile vedere i fari di Dover.929 L’edificio (Tav. 113, fig. 225, Tav. 114 fig. 227, Tav. 115, figg. 228-229) si presenta come una torre ottagonale, proprio su modello della torre di Caligola, ma di minori dimensioni: tutto l’edificio doveva essere alto nel suo complesso non più di 25 m, ed è forse per questa esigua altezza e conseguente limitata imponenza che Svetonio, tanto attento ai fari di Tiberio a Capri e di Caligola a Boulogne, non ne fa menzione. Oggi si conserva per quasi 19 m di altezza, ma i 5 m superiori sono di epoca medioevale. La costruzione romana è in pietra intervallata da ricorsi di laterizi rivestiti da arenaria verde e tufo (Tav. 116, fig. 230). Un arretramento di 0,30 m su ogni piano le dona una caratteristica forma detta a “canocchiale” o “telescopio” (Tav. 116, fig. 231 a, b), come possedeva anche la torre del quartier generale della classis Britannica che, come abbiamo visto, presentava su ogni piano una cornice aggettante. Sono ancora visbili le porte ad arco e i vani delle finestre, coperti ad arco con l’alternanza di coppie di mattoni e blocchi di tufo .930

SCHEDA 76 DUBRIS-PORTUS LONDINII (Dover, Kent, Londra, Inghilterra, Gran Bretagna) Provincia: Britannia Anche se si sono trovati notevoli resti di abitazioni (Roman Painted House), non si può parlare di una vera e propria città per Dubris, situata sulla costa sassone (Saxon Shore) nel Kent. Questo luogo, situato sull’estuario del fiume Duoris, sin dal suo sviluppo nel II d.C. quando Claudio vi pose un ulteriore accampamento per la classis Britannica, rivestì indiscutibilmente il ruolo di porto di Londinium (Londra), città collocata più all’interno ma dotata di un piccolo porto, probabilmente situato nei pressi del London Bridge e Thames Street (Tav. 112, fig. 222),923 e collegato a Dover tramite una strada commerciale nota come Watling Street, che passava per Rochester.924 Per questo si pensa che fu a Dover che approdò Claudio, sbarcato dal porto di Gesoriacum, dove era il quartier generale della classis Britannica, insieme alle legioni di Strasburgo, Magonza e Colonia, mentre gli altri possibili porti sono quelli delle odierne città di Lympne (Portus Lemanae) e Richborough (Portus Rutupiae).925

Conclusioni e problematiche Secondo una rozza descrizione del 1861, poco prima della sua distruzione, il faro di Western Heights si doveva presentare esagonale e di dimensioni simili al suo gemello di Eastern Heights. Possiamo anche congetturare la presenza di un faro di esigue dimensioni nel porto di Londinium, ma è più verosimile che vi fosse una torre di guardia che svolgeva anche funzione di segnalazioni ai naviganti, oltre che di dazio, situata tra il London Bridge e la Tower of London che, volendo viaggiare con la fantasia, potremmo vedere quasi come la sua erede. Quanto al faro di Dover, la sua costruzione fu indispensabile per l’invasione romana della Britannia da parte di Claudio. E’ verosimile che Claudio, partito, come sembra, da Gesoriacum, non abbia navigato facilmente nell’impetuoso canale della Manica e, giunto in prossimità del porto di Dover, comunque già noto a Cesare, che però aveva privilegiato quello di Rochester, si sia reso conto della necessità di costruire un faro che facesse da gemello a quello costruito dal suo predecessore nel porto francese. Anzi egli, scelta Dover come seconda base della classis Britannica,931ne fece costruire due ai lati dell’estuario del fiume Dubris; non dimentichiamo inoltre che la zona britannica è spesso esposta al maltempo ed è quindi necessario avere una luce che possa guidare i naviganti all’entrata in porto. Forse per emulare la torre di Caligola, quella di Dover, che doveva essere visibile da Boulogne, fu dotata della stessa struttura ottagonale del faro di Gesoriacum. Non vi è motivo di dubitare dell’origine romana di questo faro,

La torre di guardia di Shadwell e i fari di Dubris Oltre al porto collocato nei pressi del London Bridge, Londinium (Tav. 112, fig. 222) aveva una serie di torri di avvistamento con funzione di faro e stazione doganale per controllare i traffici sul Tamigi; una di queste è venuta in luce circa 1,2 km a est della città, a Shadwell, ma è datata a metà del III secolo d.C.. Costruita per volere del generale Carausius che doveva far fronte ai problemi della pirateria, la struttura si presentava come un quadrato di 8 m, per una larghezza di 2 m; nella struttura si sono trovate molte monete di Carausius e del suo successore Allectus,926 che potrebbero testimoniare il principale ruolo della torre di guardia come luogo di dazio. Siamo più informati sulla situazione portuale di Dover: ai lati dell’estuario del fiume Douris: sulle colline di Eastern e Western Heights (Tav. 113, fig. 225, Tav. 114 fig. 226) erano collocati i due fari del porto. Purtroppo, di quello ubicato nella zona di Western Heights (Tav. 112, fig. 223 a), il cui toponimo rimanda peraltro ad una zona di altura, non vi è rimasta alcuna traccia e, infatti, l’edificio venne demolito nel XVIII secolo,

923 DU PLAT TAYLOR-CLEERE1978, p. 38; per una storia del porto di Londinium si vedano MILNE 1985, MILNE 2005, pp. 71-76. Per le menzioni del porto di Dover nelle fonti: Itin. Anton., 473, 2, 473, 5; An.Rav. 428, 3. 924 Per la strada commerciale Dubris-Londinium e per un inquadramento degli altri porti inglesi, si veda: DODI 1974 e JONES-MATTINGLY 1990, pp. 198-201; per la traversata della Manica GRAINGE 2002, pp. 5-14. 925 RENARD 1867, pp. 28-30; DICTIONNAIRE 1906, pp. 431-432 ; EAA, voce Dover, Roma 1994, p. 398. 926 PERRING 1991, pp. 110-111, sui sistemi di segnalazione in Britannia SOUTHERN 1990, pp. 233-242.

927

PHILP 1981, p. 9. COLLINGWOOD 1930, p. 63; BEDON 1988, p. 60, afferma che l’altro faro di Dover si conserva, all’epoca in cui scrive, per 3 m. 929 CLAYTON 1976, fig. 21. 930 COLLINGWOOD 1930, p. 61; TOYNBEE 1974, pp. 35-37; WHEELER 1929, pp. 29-46. 931 BOLLINI 1968, p. 55. 928

209

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA come fece il Montfaucon alla fine del Settecento,932 lamentando che presentava un’architettura poco adatta all’epoca romana dato che, come sottolineò giustamente l’Allard, lo stesso autore aveva abbondantemente lodato lo stesso tipo di architettura nella Tour d’Ordre di Boulogne che lui attribuiva addirittura a Giulio Cesare.933

932 933

MONTFAUCON 1749, pp. IX-XI. ALLARD 1979, pp. 510-511.

210

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

BIBLIOGRAFIA E ABBREVIAZIONI DELLE RIVISTE NON PREVISTE DA DER NEUE PAULY BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS OF JOURNALS AA= Archäologischer Anzeiger AAAd= Antichità Alto Adriatiche AION= Annali dell’Istituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli AJA= American Journal of Archaeology AM= Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Atenische Abteilung AntCl= Aniquité Classique AntK= Antike Kunst AqN= Aquileia Nostra ArchCl= Archeologia Classica ASRP= Archivio della Società Romana di Storia Patria ATTA= Atlante Tematico di Topografia AttiMGrecia= Atti e Memorie della Società Magna Grecia Atti Taranto= Atti dei Convegni di Studio sulla Magna Grecia BABesch= Bullettin Antieke Beschaving. Annual Papers on classical Archaeology BC= Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica di Roma BCH= Bullettin de Correspondance Hellènique BAS= Berytus, Archaeological Studies, XVIII, 1969, pp. 137-139 BonnJ= Bonner Jarhrbűcher BullInst= Bullettino di Corrispondenza Archeologica CIL= Corpus Inscritionum Latinarum DissPontAcc= Dissertazioni della Pontificia Accademia di Archeologia CRAI= Comptes rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres CUPUAM= Cuadernos de Prehistoria y Arqueologia, Universidad Autonoma de Madrid EAA= Enciclopedia dell’Arte Antica, classica e orientale EAAE= Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt EI= Enciclopedia Italiana FA= Fasti Archeologici FR= Felix Ravenna IGM= Istituto Geografico Militare (Firenze) IJNA= International Journal of Nautical Archaeology JdI= Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts JRA= Journal of Roman Archaeology JRS= Journal of Roman Studies MEFRA= Mèlanges de l’Ecole Française de Rom. Antiquité (dal 1971) MemAl = Memorie. Atti dell’Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. Classe di Scienze morali, storiche, filologiche MemPontAcc= Memorie della Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archeologia NAC= Quaderni Ticinesi NS= Notizie degli Scavi di Antichità QuadIstTopA= Quaderni dell’Istituto di Topografia Antica dell’Università di Roma RA= Revue Archéologique RAL= Rendiconti della Classe di Scienze morali, storiche, filologiche dell’Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei RaNap= Rendiconti dell’Accademia di Archeologia di Napoli RIASA= Rivista dell’Istituto Nazionale di Archeologia e Storia dell’Arte RIN= Rivista Italiana di Numismatica RM= Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts. Römische Abteilung RSL= Rivista di Studi Liguri StEtr= Studi Etruschi StRom= Studi Romani ZPE= Zeitschrift Papyrologie und Epigraphik Le altre riviste sono citate per esteso. Per gli autori classici e le altre riviste si sono usate le abbreviazioni in Der Neue Pauly, Enzyklopädie der Antike, herausgegeben von Hubert Cancik und Helmuth Schneider, Altertum, Band 1, A-Ari, Stuttggart

211

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Luciano (II d.C.) , “Come si deve scrivere la storia”, XXV, 63, Trad. F.Montanari, ed. Oscar Mondadori 2002 Faro di Alessandria Luciano (II d.C.), “Icaromenippo o l’uomo sopra le nubi”, XLVI, 12, ed. Utet 1986 faro di Alessandria, Colosso di Rodi Luciano (II d.C.), “La nave o le preghiere”, LXVI, 7 isola di Faro Mela (II d.C.), “De Choreografia”, III, 7, 14; 104-109, ed.Storia e Letteratura, Roma 1984 (= PARRONI 1984) faro di Alessandria e Brindisi Ovidio (I d.C.), “Eroidi”, ed. Garzanti 1996, a cura di E.Salvadori, epistole VIII e XIX Torre di Ero Plinio (I d.C.), “Storia Naturale”, II, 87, ed. Einaudi 1982, isola di Faro Plinio (I d.C.), “Storia Naturale”, V 34-XIII, 21; XXXVI, 82, ed.Einaudi 1988 faro di Alessandria,Ostia, Ravenna Polibio (II a.C.), “Storie”, X, 42, 43 ss., ed. a cura di D.Musti, Bur 2002 sulla telegrafia Posidippo (III a.C.), “Epigrammi”, 115, ed. Mondadori 2008, traduzione di S.Pozzi e F.Rampichini, faro di Alessandria Properzio (I a.C.) “Elegie” II, 1, 30, ed. a cura di P.Fedeli, L.Canali,R.Scarcia, ed. Bur 1995 isola di Faro Stazio (I d.C.), “Silvae”, III, 100-102, ed. Oscar Mondadori 2006, a cura di L.Canali e M.Pellegrini, Faro di Capri Strabone (I a.C.-I d.C.), “Geografia”, I, 1, 16 ss. ed. a cura di H.L.Jones, ed. Loeb 1940 Monumento a Peloro in Sicilia Strabone (I a.C.-I d.C.), “Geografia”, III, 1,9 Torre di Caepio in Spagna; III, 5, 5 Torre di Peloro, ed. a cura di H.L.Jones, ed. Loeb 1949 Strabone (I a.C.-I d.C.), “Geografia”, VII, 3, 16, ed. a cura di H.L.Jones, ed. Loeb 1947 Torre di Neottolemo a Dniester Strabone (I a.C.-I d.C.), “Geografia”, XIII, 1, 22, ed. a cura di H.L.Jones, ed. Loeb 1940 Torre di Ero a Sesto Strabone (I a.C.-I d.C.), “Geografia”, XVII, 1, 6 ss., ed. a cura di H.L.Jones, ed. Loeb 1949 faro di Alessandria Strabone, Iberia e Gallia= FERRI 2000= S.Ferri Milano 2000 torri dei Massalioti Svetonio (II d.C.), “Tiberio” LXXIII, ed. BUR 1989, traduzione di F.Dessì Faro di Capri Svetonio (II d.C.), “Caligola”, IV XLV ed. BUR 1989, traduzione di F.Dessì Faro di Gesoriacum Svetonio (II d.C.), “Claudio” XX ed. BUR 1989, traduzione di F.Dessì Faro di Ostia Teocrito (III a.C.), “Carmi”, XXIII, 7 il fuoco in senso metaforico, ed. a cura di O.Vox, Utet 1997 Tibullo (I a.C.), “Elegie” I, 3, 34 Faro di Alessandria Tucidide (V a.C.), “La guerra del Peloponneso” II, 94; III, 8;, ed. a cura di F.Ferrari, ed. Bur 1985 segnali di fuoco Valerio Flacco (I d.C.), “Argonautiche”, VII, 81 ed. BUR 1989, Traduzione F.Caviglia faro di Ostia Virgilio (I a.C.-I d.C.), “Eneide”, I, 231-234, ed. Paravia 1963, trad. Adriano Bacchielli spiagge della Libia

FONTI PRECLASSICHE E ARCAICHE Enea Tattico (IV a.C.), “La difesa di una città assediata”, IV, 1-; ed. a cura di M.Bettalli, Ets 1990 sulla telegrafia SANDARS 1986= L’epopea di Gilgameš, a cura di N.K. Sandars, Adelphi, Milano 1986 Leschete (VIII a.C.), “Piccola Iliade”; ed. Greek Epic Fragments from the seventh to the fifth Centuries BC, ed. Loeb, 2003 faro sul promontorio di Sigeo Omero (VIII a.C.), Iliade, XVIII, 206-214; 375-390, ed. a cura di M.Giammarco, ed. Newton Compton 1997 sulla telegrafia Omero (VIII a.C.), Odissea, X, 28-34, ed. a cura di M.Giammarco, ed. Newton Compton 1997 sulla telegrafia Poseidippo (III-II a.C.), Epigrammi, ed. a cura di S.Pozzi, F.Rampichini, ed. Oscar Mondadori 2008 faro di Alessandria, tempio di Arsinoe ad Alessandria, Colosso di Rodi FONTI CLASSICHE Anthologia Graeca Palatina, ed. Mondadori 1968, traduzione di S.Quasimodo Colosso di Rodi e faro di Smirne Appiano (II d.C.), “Illirico” isola di Faro (Hvar) Arriano, “Anabasi di Alessandro”, VII, 23, 3-7 traduzione e note di D.Ambaglio, ed. Bur, Milano 1998 Faro di Alessandria Bacchilide, (V a.C.), “Odi”, v. 82 ss. ed. a cura di N.Festa, ed. Barbera 1898: fuoco in senso metaforico Cesare (I a.C.), “La guerra civile”, ed. Mondadori 1989, a cura di F.Solinas,: presa dell’isola di Faro Cesare (I a.C.), “La guerra gallica”, III, 112 ed. Mondadori 1987, a cura di C.Carena Faro di Alessandria Cassio Dione (III d.C.), “Storia di Roma”, LX, 11, 4-5, ed. Loeb 1961, trad. E.Cary, Faro di Ostia Erodiano (III d.C.), “Storia dell’Impero Romano dopo Marco Aurelio”, IV 8 descrizione di un faro Erodoto (V a.C.), “Storie”, ed. Bur a cura di A. Izzo D’Accini, 1984, sulla telegrafia Erodoto (V a.C.), “Storie”, II, 15, 1-4; ed. Bur a cura di A. Izzo D’Accini, 1984, Torre di Perseo Eschilo (VI-V a.C.), “Agamennone”, v. 10 ss.; 228 ss., ed. a cura di G. e M. Morani, ed. Utet 1987, sulla telegrafia Euripide (V a.C.), “Le Fenicie”, v. 1377 ss., ed. a cura di O.Musso, ed. Utet 2001, sulla telegrafia Flavio Giuseppe (I d.C.), “La guerra giudaica” IV, 10, 612-614; V, 4-3, 156-158 ed. Valla 1974, a cura di G.Vitucci faro di Alessandria e Torri di Erode Giovenale (II d.C.), “Satire”, XII, 76-80, ed. Oscar Mondadori 1990, trad. G.Viansino faro di Alessandria faro di Ostia Livio (I a.C.-I d.C.), “Storia di Roma dalla sua fondazione”, XX, 23, a cura di B.Ceva, M.Scàndola, ed. Bur 1999, Torri di Annibale Lucano (I d.C.), “Farsaglia o la guerra civile”, II, 610620, porto di Brindisi; IX, 1005-1007, faro di Alessandria, ed. Garzanti 1999, trad. Renato Badalì

212

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE Vitruvio (I a.C.-I d.C.), “Architettura”, libro IX, ed. Einaudi costruzione di un porto

MIDDLE AGES

FONTI MEDIOEVALI DELATTE 1947= A.Delatte, Les portulans grecs, Liege 1947 PERCIVALDI 2008= Anonimo del X secolo, La navigazione di San Brandano, a cura di E.Percivaldi, Rimini 2008 (X d.C.) ABID MIZAL 1974= Al-Zuhrī, Kitab al-Dĵả‘rafiyya (ap. P.Martinez Montàvez), Perfil de Càdiz hispanoàrabe, Càdiz 1974, sec. XI faro di Cadice ARIOLI 1989= A.Arioli, Le isole mirabili, periplo arabo medievale, Torino 1989 (XI-XII d.C.) K.MILLER, Weltkarte des Arabers Idrisi vom Jahre 1154, Stuttggart 1981 CATALDI 2002= Agli estremi confini d’Occidente, descrizione dell’Irlanda di Giraldo Cambrense, a cura di M.Cataldi, Torino 2002 (XII d.C.) Johannes Phoca (XII d.C.), Descriptio Terrae Sanctae, P.G. 133.932 TESTI RASPONI 1924= A.Testi Rasponi, «Codex pontificalis ecclesiae Ravennatis», XXI; XXXVIII in L.MURATORI, Raccolta degli storici italiani, II, I-II, Bologna 1924, pp. 113; 216. Alighieri, Dante (sec. XIII), “Divina CommediaParadiso” (ed. Pasquini-Quaglio, Milano 1989), presunto faro di Classe a Porto Fuori MOLINA 1983= Dhikr bilād al-Andalus (L.Molina, ed.), Una descripciòn anonima de al-Andalus, Madrid 1983 sec. XIII faro di Cadice GABRIELI 1951=F. Gabrieli, I viaggi di Ibn Battuta, Firenze 1951 sec. XIV, faro di Alessandria

FONTI TARDO ANTICHE Ammiano Marcellino (IV d.C.), “Storie”, XXII, 16, 9, Iulianus 363, 7-8 ed. Utet 1973, a cura di A.Selem, Faro di Alessandria; Faro di Naarmalcha Costantinus Porphyrogenitos (VII d.C.), De Administrando Imperio, 20-21 Historia Augusta, Iulius Capitolinus, Antoninus Pius, 8, 3 ed. TEA, Torino 1983, a cura di P.Soverini faro di Alessandria Filostrato (III d.C. ) “Eroico”, I, 47, ed. Marsilio 1997, a cura di V.Rossi, fuochi sui monti per uccidere Giordane (V d.C.), Romana et Getica = Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Auctores Antiquissimi, 5, 1, Iordanis Romana et Getica, Recensuit Theodorus Mommsen, Műnchen 1982, porto di Classe Isidoro di Siviglia (VI-VII d.C.)= Isidoro, “Etimologia o origini”, a cura di A.Valestro Canale, ed. Utet, Torino 2006 faro di Alessandria Museo (VI d.C.)= MUSEO, Ero e Leandro, a cura di Guido Padano, Marsilio, Venezia 1994, Torre di Ero a Sesto Orosio (V d.C.)= OROSIO, Le storie contro i Pagani, a cura di Adolf Lippold, traduzione di Aldo Bartalucci, Fondazione Lorenzo Valla, Arnoldo Mondadori Editore, Verona 1976, liber VI Faro di Brigantium Pacatus (IV d.C.), Pacatus, “Panegirico di Teodosio” II, 33 faro di Alessandria Rutilio Namaziano (V d.C.) I, 237-244; 404, ed. H.Prior 1989 Centumcellae, Populonia Sidone Apollinare (V d.C.), “Panegirico d’Avitus” = SIDOINE APOLLINAIRE, I, Poemes, texte ètabli et traduit par Andrè Loyen, ed Belles Lettres, Paris 1960 faro di Alessandria Sinesio di Cirene, “Lettera al fratello e ad Olimpio/Dione/Iuliano” faro di Alessandria GÀRCIA Y BELLIDO 1951= El Mas’ūdī (ap. A.Gàrcia y Bellido), “Iocosae Gades. Pinceladas para un quadro sobre Càdiz en la Antiguedad” in Brah, CXXIX, 1951, pp. 115-116 faro di Gades MARTÌNEZ MONTÀVEZ 1974= Al-Zuhrī, Kitab al-Djả raiyya (ap. P. Martìnez Montàvez), Perfil del Càdiz hispanoàrabe, Càdiz 1974, pp. 60-61 sec. XII, faro di Gades Rodrigo Ximènez de Rada, Historia de rebus Hispanie sive historia gohtica, I, VII, 1-6 (ed. J.Fernàndez Valverde, Turnholti, 1987) faro di Gades LEVI-PROVENÇAL 1953= Al-Rāzī (ap. E.Levi-Provençal) «La description de l’Espagne d’Ahmad al- Rāzī» in Al-Andalus XVIII, 1953, pp. 69-97 faro di Gades Zon. Φάρος= Iohannis Zonarae, Lexicon ex Tribus Codicibus Manuscriptis, ninc primum edidit, observationibus illustravit et indicibus instruxit, Iohannes Augustus Henricus Tittman, Tomus Posterior, Amsterdam 1967

FONTI RINASCIMENTALI F.DOCAMPO 1543= F.Docampo, Crònica General de España, Zamora 1543, fol. 43, cap. 35, ed. Biblioteca del Estado de Baviera ROSACCIO 1549=G. ROSACCIO, Viaggio da Venetia a Costantinopoli per Mare, e per Terra & Inƒieme quello di Terra Santa, Venetia 1549 MOLINA 1551= B.Molina, Descripcìon del reyno de Galicia y de las cosas notables del con las armas y blasones des los linages de donde proceden señaladas casas en Castilla, Mondoñedo 1551 FLAVIO 1558= Biondo Flavio, Roma ristaurata et illustrata, Venezia 1558 (M.TRAMEZZINO, Roma ristaurata et Italia illustrata di Biondo da Forlì. Tradotta in buona lingua uolgare, Venetia 1558) ALBERTI 1565= L.B.Alberti, L’Architettura, tradotta in lingua fiorentina da Cosimo Batoli, Venetia, Franceschi, 1965 (ristampa dell’edizione del 1565) GHERARDI = Jacopo Gherardi (il Volterrano) in L.A.Muratori, Rerum Italicorum Scriptores, XIII, 3 SYLVIUS 1614= Aeneas Sylvius (Gobellinnus), Commentaria rerum memorabilium, Francoforte 1614 ADIMARI 1616= R.Adimari, Sito riminese, Brescia 1616 FABBRI 1678= G.Fabri, Ravenna ricercata, ovvero compendio storico delle cose più notabili dell’antica città di Ravenna, Bologna 1678 ANGELONI 1685= Angeloni, L’Historia Augusta da Cesare a Costantino….., 1685 213

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA EAA 1960= AA.VV., Enciclopedia dell’arte antica classica e orientale, Roma 1960 SPERBER 1986= D.Sperber, Nautica Talmudica, Leiden 1986

DELLA CROCE 1698= I. Della Croce, Historia antica e moderna sacra e profana della città di Trieste, Venetia 1698 FONTI MODERNE

BIBLIOGRAFIA GENERALE PEDONE 1987= S.Pedone, Il portolano di Sicilia di Filippo Geraci (sec. XVII), Palermo 1987 SARNELLI 2002= P.Sarnelli, La guida de’ forestieri di Pozzuoli, Bologna 2002 (ristampa anastatica Napoli 1734) MONTFAUCON 1749= R. P. BERNARDO DI MONTFAUCON, Dissertazione sopra il Faro di Alessandria, sopra gli altri Fari fabbricati dopo, e particolarmente fopra quello di Bologna in Francia, rovinato già ott’anni circa, Venezia 1749 SCOTTI-SCIAJOLA 1775=M.B.Scotti, A.Sciajola, Dissertazione corografica-storica delle due antiche distrutte città di Miseno e Cuma, Napoli 1775 SWINIBURNE 1783-85=H.Swiniburne, Travel in two Sicilies in the years 1777,1778,1779 and 1780, London 1783-85 FANTUZZI 1801= M.Fantuzzi, Monumenti Ravennati, II, Venezia 1801 HOBHOUSE 1809/10= J.C. Hobhouse (Lord Broughton), A Journey through Albania and Other Provinces of Turkey in Europe and Asia to Costantinople During the years 1809 and 1810, London 1813 (Philadelphia 1817) PANVINI 1990= P. Panvini, Il Forestiere alle antichità e curiosità di Pozzuoli, Cuma, Baia e Miseno, Napoli 1990 (ristampa anastatica Napoli 1824) COPPO 1830= P. Coppo, «Del sito dell’Istria» in Atr, 2, 1830 GOETHE, “Italienische Reise”, Faro di Fiumicino o Tor Boacciana in E.Pies “Goethe auf Reisen, Begegnungen mit Landschaften und Zeitgenossen”, Wuppertal (disegno di Joahnn G.Schütz) ZORZON 1989= P.Kandler, Albo storico topgrafico della città e del territorio di Trieste, a cura du Sergio Zorzon, Trieste 1989 (1840) LANCIANI 1878= F.Lanciani, «Sul porto militare di Classe presso Ravenna», in Giornale del Genio Civile, Roma 1878, pp. 9-10 RICCI 1878= C.Ricci, Guida di Ravenna, Ravenna 1878 WEIL 1879=H. WEIL, Un papyrus inèdit de la Bibliotheque de M. Ambroise Firmin-Didot, nouveaux fragments d’Euripide ed d’autres poets grecs, Paris 1879 AMARI-SCHIAPPARELLI 1883=M.Amari, C.Schiaparelli, L’Italia descritta nel «libro del Re Ruggero» compilato da Edrisi, Roma 1883 UCCELLINI 1855= P.Uccellini, Dizionario Storico di Ravenna e di altri luoghi della Romagna, Ravenna 1855, p. 160, voce Faro BUORA 2000= M.Buora, Introduzione e commento alla Fundkarte von Aquileia di H. Maionica, Quaderni Aquileiesi 5, Traduzione di Francesca Tesei, Trieste 2000 (1893) DICTIONNAIRE 1906= Mm.Ch. Daremberg, Edm. Saglio, Edm. Pottier, Dictionnaire des Antiquités grecques et romaines d’après textes et les monuments, Paris 1906

ABULAFIA 2003= D.Abulafia (edited by), The Mediterranean History, Singapore 2003 ADAMESTANU ET ALII 1965= A.A. V.V., Scavi di Caesarea Maritima, Milano 1965. ADRIANI 1952= A.Adriani, «Travaux de fouilles et de restaurations dans la region d’Abousir (Maréotis)» in Annuaire du Musée Gréco-Romain, III (1940-1950), Alexandrie 1952, pp. 129-139 AKURGAL 1983= E. Akurgal, Ancient Civilisations and Ruins of Turkey, Istanbul 1983 ALBERI 2001= D. Alberi, Istria, storia, arte, cultura, Trieste 2001 ALFIERI 1938=N.Alfieri, Topografia storica di Ancona Antica, Fabriano 1938 ALFIERI 1986= N.Alfieri, «Il promontorio di Focaia nei portolani e nelle carte nautiche medievali» in Gabicce, un paese sull’Adriatico tra Marche e Romagna, a cura di Nando Cecini, Amministrazione Comunale di Gabicce, 1986 ALFIERI 2000= N.Alfieri, «I porti e gli approdi» in G.PACI, Nereo Alfieri, Scritti di Topografia sulle Marche, Tivoli 2000, pp. 289-325 ALFÖLDY 1965= G. Alföldy, Bevölkerung und Gesellschaft der römischen Provinz Dalmatien, Budapest 1965 ALFŐLDY 1999=G. Alföldy, «Pontius Pilatus und das Tibereium von Caesarea Maritima» in Scripta Classica Israelica, XVIII, Jerusalem 1999, pp.85-108 ALFŐLDY 2002=G. Alföldy, «Caesarea Maritima» in Scripta Classica Israelica,XXI, Jerusalem 2002, pp. 132-148 ALIOTA ET ALII 1998= AA.VV., Uria Garganica e la grotta di Venere sull’isolotto del Faro di Vieste (III a.C.), in Atti del Convegno Internazionale di studi, Hotel Pizzomuno-Vieste (Fg), 17-18 ottobre 1987, Bari 1998 ALLARD 1979= E. Allard, «Phares» in A. Leger, Les Travaux Publics, les mines et la mètallurgie aux temps des Romains, la tradition jusqu’a nos jours, Nogent-le-Roi 1979, pp. 499-518 ALMQVIST/CEDERBERG/HILLBERG/THUNMAN 2000= Fari dal mondo, quando la terra incontra il mare, Madrid 2000 AMALFITANO-CAMODECA-MEDRI 1990= P.Amalfitano, G.Camodeca,M.Medri, I Campi Flegrei, un itinerario archeologico, Venezia 1990 AMARI-SCHIAPPARELLI 1883= M.Amari, C.Schiapparelli, L’Italia descritta nel “Libro del re Ruggero” compilata da Edrisi, Roma 1883 ANNECCHINO 1940= R.Annecchino, Storia di Pozzuoli e della zona flegrea, Pozzuoli 1940 ANOUAR TAHER 1998= M. Anouar Taher, «Alexandrie médioévale», in Etudes alexandrine 3, Paris 1998 APOLLONJ GHETTI= F.M.Apollonj Ghetti, Terracina, cardine del Lazio costiero, Roma 1982 214

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

BASSI 1994= C.Bassi, «I trasporti fluviali in Trentino Alto Adige durante l’età romana» in ATTA, 2, 1994, pp. 237-248 BASTIANELLI 1954= S.Bastianelli, Centumcellae (Civitavecchia), Castrum Novum (Torre Chiaruccia), Roma 1954 BECHERT 1999= T. Bechert, Die Provinzen des Römischen Reiches, Mainz am Rhein 1999 BEDON 1988= R. Bedon, «Les Phares Antiques», in Archeologia, Prèhistoire et Archaeologie, Paris 1988, pp. 54-66 BEDON-CHEVALLIER-PINON 1988= R.Bedon, R.Chevallier, P.Pinon, Architecture et urbanisme en gaule romaine, I, L’architecture et les villes en Gaule romaine, Paris 1988 BÉDOYRE 1991 = G.De la Bédoyre, The Buildings of roman Britain, London BELOCH 1989= J.Beloch, Campania, Napoli 1989 (ristampa anastatica curata e tradotta da C.Ferone, F. Pugliese Carratelli del volume J.BELOCH, Campanien. Geschichte und Topographie des antiken Neapel und seiner Umgebung, Breslau 1890) BENDALA GALAN 1993= M.Bendala Galan, La Ciudad Hispanorromana, Barcelona 1993 BENINI 2002= A.Benini, «Note sulla tecnica edilizia del molo romano di S.Marco di Castellabate in Cilento» in Archeologia Subaquea, Studi, ricerche, documenti, III, Roma 2002, pp. 39-55 BENERICETTI 2006= R.Benericetti, Le carte ravennati dei secoli ottavo e nono, Faenza 2006 BERNARD 1966= A. Bernard, Alexandrie, la grande, Paris 1966 BERTACCHI 1995= L. Bertacchi, «I porti romani dell’Istria e la loro economia» in AqN, LXVI, 1995, pp. 114-130 BERTI CERONI-SMURRA 2005= L. Berti Ceroni, R.Smurra, A sud-est di Ravenna: Cesarea e Classe fra Antichità e Medioevo, dalla ricerca scientifica alla fruizione turistica, San Donato Milanese 2005 BETZ 1943= A. Betz, «Die Leuchtturm-und Flottenstation Salonae» in Wiener Jahreshefte, XXV, 1943, pp. 128138 BEVILACQUA 1889= G.Bevilacqua, Sul porto e sull’arco di Traiano di Ancona, Ancona 1889 BIANCHETTI 1997= P.Bianchetti, Fra Ravenna e il mare, viaggi nella memoria di Porto Fuori, Ravenna 1997 BIANCHINI 1994= A.Bianchini, Storia di Terracina, Formia 1994 BIETTI SESTIERI 2001= A.M. Bietti Sestieri, «L’Adriatico fra l’Età del Bronzo e gli inizi dell’Età del Ferro (ca. 2200-900 a.C.)» in L’Archeologia dell’Adriatico dalla Preistoria al Medioevo, Atti del convegno internazionale, Ravenna,7-8-9 giugno 2001, Bologna 2003, pp. 49-64 BISCONTI-GENTILI 2007= F.Bisconti, G.Gentili (a cura di), La Rivoluzione dell’immagine, arte paleocristiana tra Roma e Bisanzio, Catalogo della mostra nelle Gallerie di Palazzo Leoni Montanari di Vicenza, Milano 2007 BLANCHET 1938= M.A.Blanchet «Le canal de dèrivation de l’Argens dans le Port de Fréjus à l’èpoque romaine» in Le Phare du port Paris 1938, pp. 5-28

ARCHONTIDOU-ARGYRI-SIMOSSI 1989= A. Archontidou, Argyri, A. Simossi, «The underwater excavation at the ancient port of Thasos, Greece» in IJNA, 18.1, 1989, pp. 51-59 ARICÒ 2005= N.Aricò, La Torre della Lanterna di Giovannangelo Montorsoli, Messina 2005 ASCOLI 1976= F.Ascoli, La storia di Brindisi, Bologna 1976 ATLAS 2001= A.A.V.V., Atlas des villes, bourgs, villages de France au passè romain, Paris 2001 ATTUONI 1958= P.Attuoni, Civitavecchia, il porto e la città, Roma 1958 AUBENAS 1974= J.A. Aubenas, Histoire de Fréjus, Forum Julii. Ses antiquités-son port, Fréjus 1881 (ed. Marseille 1974) ANTONELLI 1998= L.Antonelli, Il periplo nascosto, Padova 1998 BACCI 2005= G.M.Bacci, «Zancle-Messana» in Lo Stretto di Messina nell’antichità, Roma 2005, pp. 253-273 BACHIELLI 1999= L. Bachielli, «Cyrenaica» in Lybia, the lost cities of the Roman Empire, Cologne 1999, pp. 184-234. BALIL 1983= A. Balil, «Luce de posicion en la navegacion antigua y «anforiňas»» in Brigantium, 4, pp. 99-103. BARBAGLI 2003= D. Barbagli, Le Sette Meraviglie del mondo antico, Firenze 2003 BARD 1998= Encyclopedia of the archaeology of ancient Egypt (compiled ed edited by K.A. Bard), London and New York 1998 BARRECA 1986= F. Barreca, «I porti fenicio-punici della Sardegna» in Quaderni della Soprintendenza Archeologica di Cagliari e Oristano, 1, Ricerca sugli insediamenti fenici, Sardinian Coastal Study Project 1,1986, pp. 9-17 BARTOCCINI 1931= R.Bartoccini, «L’arco quadrifronte dei Severi a Lepcis (Leptis Magna)» in Africa Italiana, IV, Roma 1931 BARTOCCINI 1952-1953= R. Bartoccini, Il porto di Leptis Magna, relazione della prima campagna di scavo della missione archeologica italiana in Libia, Leptis Magna-Roma 1952-1953 BARTOCCINI 1958= R. Bartoccini, «Il porto romano di Leptis Magna» in Bollettino del Centro Studi sull’Architettura, Supplemento 13, Roma 1958, pp. BARTOCCINI 1961= R.Bartoccini, L’antico porto romano di Centumcellae, Civitavecchia 1961 BARTOLOMEI 2005= C.Bartolomei, L’archittettura dei fari italiani, Firenze 2005 BARTOLONI 1979= P.Bartoloni, «L’antico porto di Nora» in Antiqua, 13, 1979, pp. 57-61 BARTOLONI 1988 = P. Bartoloni, «Il commercio e l’industria» in I Fenici, Catalogo della Mostra a Palazzo Grassi, Venezia 1988, pp. 92-100 BARTOLONI 1988= P. Bartoloni, «Le navi e la navigazione» in I Fenici, Catalogo della Mostra a Palazzo Grassi, Venezia 1988 (ristampa 1997), pp. 84-91 BASS 1974= G.F.Bass, Navi e civiltà, archeologia marina, Milano 1974 215

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA BOVINI 1957= G.Bovini, «Miseno e Ravenna: parallelo critico delle fonti» in Carb, XIV, 1967, pp. 367-379. BOVINI 1974= G.Bovini, «Il problema della cronologia dei campanili cilindrici di Ravenna e quello della derivazione della loro forma» in Atti dell’Accademia delle Scienze dell’Istituto di Bologna, Classe di Scienze morali, Anno 68°, Rendiconti, LXII, 19731974, Bologna 1974, pp. 71-86 BOWERSOCK 1993=G.W. BOWERSOCK, «The New Greek Inscriptions from South Yemen» in J. S. LANGDON ET AL. (a cura di), ΤΟ ΕΛΛΕΝΙΚΟΝ, Studies in Honour of Speros Vryonis J.-vol. I: Hellenic Antiquity and Byzantium, Athina 1993, pp. 3-8 BRACCESI 1977= L.Braccesi, Grecità Adriatica, un capitolo sulla colonizzazione greca d’Occidente, Bologna 1977 BRACCESI 2003= L.Braccesi, «Ariminum, un profilo storico» in Rimini imperiale II-III secolo, Guida del Museo Archeologico di Rimini, Rimini 2003 BRAVAR 1976= G.Bravar, «Il castello di Duino» in AAAd, X, Studi Monfalconesi e Duinati, Udine 1976, pp. 97110 BRECCIA 1922= E. Breccia, Alexandria ad Aegyptum, Bergamo 1922 BROGAN 1953= O.Brogan, Roman Gaul, London 1953 BROGAN 1953= O.Brogan, Some gallo-roman towns, London 1953 BROGIOLO-CAGNANA 2005= G.P.Brogiolo, A.Cagnana, «Nuove ricerche sull’origine di Grado» in L’Adriatico dalla tarda antichità all’età carolingia (a cura di G.P.Brogiolo, P.Delogu), Firenze 2005 BROMWICH 2003= J.Bromwich, The roman remains of Northern and Eastern France, London 2003 BRONSON-UGGERI 1970= R.C.Bronson,G.Uggeri, «Isola del Giglio, Isola di Giannutri, Monte Argentario, Laguna di Orbetello (Notizia preliminare dei rinvenimenti del 1968)» in StEtr, XXXVIII, II, 1970, pp. 201-214 BROWN 1980= F.E.Brown, Cosa, the making of a roman town, Rexdale 1980 BRUNO 1973= V.J.Bruno, «An ancient roman port in the Arcipelago Toscano» in IJNA, II, 1973, pp. 65-379 BRUNO 2004= B.Bruno, L’arcipelago maltese in età romana e bizantina, attività economiche e scambi al centro del Mediterraneo, Bari 2004 BRUSIČ 2006= Z.Brusič, «Il porto liburnico di Aenona (Nin)» in Archeologia subacquea in Croazia, Studi e ricerche (a cura di Irena Radič Rossi), Venezia 2006 BRUSIN 1925= G.Brusin, «Duino-Timavo» in NS, Roma 1925, pp. 3-28 BRUUN-GALLINA ZEVI 2002= C.Bruun, A.Gallina Zevi, Ostia e Portus nelle loro relazioni con Roma, Roma 2002 BRUZZO 1898= G.Bruzzo, Il porto di Ancona, Bologna 1898 BRYER-WINFIELD 1985=A. Bryer, D. Winfield, The Bizantine Monuments of the Pontos, I, Washington 1985 BUCCARO 1993= A.Buccaro, «I porti flegrei e l’alternativa allo scalo napoletano dal XVI al CIX secolo» in Sopra i porti di mare, II, Il Regno di Napoli, a cura di G. Simoncini, Firenze 1993

BLANCO FERREIRO 1981= A.Blanco Ferreiro, La Antigüedad, Madrid 1981 BLANCO-FREIJERO 1971= A. Blanco Frejero, «El mosaico de Mérida con la alegoria del Saeculum Aureum» in Estudio sobre el mundo helenistico, Anales de la Universidad Hispalense, serie Filosofia y Letras, 8, Séville 1971, pp. 151-178 BLANCO-FREIJERO 1976= A.Blanco Frejiero, «Los mosaicos romanos de Mérida» in Augusta Emerita, Actas del simposio interbavional commemorativo del Bilmilenario de Mérida, Madrid 1976, pp. 183-198 BLÀNQUEZ PÈREZ-DOLDÀN GÒMEZ-BENDALA GALÀN 2002= J.Blànquez Pèrez, L.Doldàn Gòmez, M.Bendala Galàn, «La ciudad de Carteia en època pùnicorromana (San Roque, Cadiz)» in Estudios sobre las ciudades de la Bètica (eds. C. Gonzàles Romàn, A. Padilla Arroba),Granada 2002 BMC, Pamphylia, 1964= G.F.Hill, A Catalogue of the Greek Coins of Lykien, Pamphylia and Pisidia, Bologna 1964 (ristampa anatstatica) BMC, Syria, 1964= W. Wroth, A Catalogue of the Greek Coins of Galatia, Cappadocia and Syria, Bologna 1964 (ristampa anastatica) BOLLINI 1968=M.Bollini, Antichità Classiarie, Ravenna 1968 BOLLINI 1980= M.Bollini, «Il mosaico riminese» in Analisi di Rimini antica. Storia ed Archeologia per un Museo, Rimini 1980 BOLLINI 1990= M.Bollini, «La fondazione di Classe e la comunità classiaria» in Storia di Ravenna, I, Ravenna 1990, pp. BOLLINI 2003= M.Bollini, «Suggestioni iconografiche ravennati» in Ravenna, Studi e Ricerche, X, 2003, pp. 45-56 BON 1930= A. Bon, «Les ruines antiques dans l’ǐle de Thasos» in BCH, 54, 1930, pp. BONATO-BECCARI 2006= S. Bonato-Beccari, «Une luer dans la nuit Alexandrine» in Les Cahiers de science e vie, fèvrier 2006, pp. BONNARD 1913= L.Bonnard, La Navigation interieure de la Gaule a l’epoque gallo-romaine, Paris 1913 BONOMI 2001= «Recenti rinvenimenti archeologici nell’Alto Adriatico tra fine VII e IV a.C.: nuovi dati» in L’Archeologia dell’Adriatico dalla Preistoria al Medioevo, Atti del convegno internazionale, Ravenna,7-8.9 giugno 2001, Bologna 2003, pp. 140145 BÖRKER 1995= Börker, «Sebastos, der königliche Hafen des Herodes bei Caesarea Maritima», in In Poseidon Reich, Archäologie unter Wasser, Mainz am Rhein 1995, pp. 14-29 BOSIO 1983=L. Bosio, La Tabula Peutingeriana, Rimini 1983 BOUSSAC =M.F.Boussac, «Deux villes en Marèotide: Taposiris Magna et Plinthine» in Bullettin De la Sociètè française d’Egyptologie, 150, pp. 42-72. BOVINI 1934= G.Bovini, «Il porto di Ravenna» in FR, IV, XII, I (XLIII), Ravenna 1934, pp.186-195 BOVINI 1951= G.Bovini, «L’aspetto primitivo del mosaico teodoriciano raffigurante la «Civitas Classis» in S. Apollinare Nuovo» in FR, IV (LV), Ravenna 1951, pp. 57-62 216

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

CHAPOT 1967= V.Chapot, La Flotte de Misène, son histoire, son recrutement, son règime administratif, Roma 1967 CHEVALLIER 1979= R.Chevallier, Römische Provence, Feldmeilen 1979 CHEVALLIER 1982= R.Chevallier, Provincia, Paris 1982 CHEVALLIER 1986= R.Chevallier, Ostie Antique, ville et port, Paris 1986 CHEVALLIER 1988= R.Chevallier, Voyages et Dèplacements dans l’Empire Romain, Paris 1988 CIAMPOLTRINI-RENDINI 2004= G.Ciampoltrini, P.Rendini, «Il sistema portuale dell’ager cosanus e delle isole del Giglio e di Giannutri» in Le strutture dei porti e degli approdi antichi, II seminario, RomaOstia antica 2004, a cura di A.Gallina, R.Turchetti, Soneria Mannelli 2004, pp. 127-147 CLAYTON 1976= P.Clayton, Archaeological Sites of Britain, London 1976 CLEBERT 1970= J.P.Clèbert, Provence antique, l’èpoque gallo-romaine, Paris 1970 COARELLI 1987= F.Coarelli, I santuari del Lazio in età repubblicana, Roma 1987 COARELLI 1987=F.Coarelli, I santuari di Roma repubblicana, Roma 1987. COLLINGWOOD 1930= R.C. Collingwood, The Archaeology of Roman Britain, London 1930 COLONNA 2000= G. Colonna, «Il santuario di Pyrgi dalle origini misoteriche agli altorilievi frontali dei Sette e di Leucotea» in Scienze dell’Antichità, 10, 2000, pp. 251-336 CORNIDE 1986= Don J. Cornide, Historia de la Torre de Hercules, La Coruña 1986 (ristampa anastatica dell’opera Don Juan Cornide), Investigaciones sobre la fundacion y fabrica de la Torre llamada de Hercules, situada à l’entrada del puerto de La Coruña, Madrid 1791 CORRENTI 1990= F.Correnti, «Centumcellae, la villa, il porto, la città» in Caere e il suo territorio, da Agylla a Centumcellae, Roma 1990, pp. 209-214 CORTESI 1967= G.Cortesi, Il porto e la città di Classe, Faenza 1967 COSI 1992= G.Cosi, Torri Marittime di terra d’Otranto, Galatina 1992 COSI-REPOSSI 2008= F.Cosi, A.Repossi, Fari d’Europa, guida alla scoperta dei fari di Italia, Francia, Spagna e Croazia, Milano 2008 COSTANS 1921= L.A. Costans, Arles Antique, Paris 1921 COTRONEO 1988= G.Cotroneo, «Nota su Columna Regina» in Rivista Calabra di storia e geografia, V, 1988, pp. CUNTZ 1929= O.Cuntz, Imperatoris Antonini Augusti Provinciarum et Maritimum in Itineraria Romana, I, Lipsiae 1929 D’AGOSTINO-MEDAS 2005= M.D’Agostino, S.Medas, «La navigazione nella laguna di Venezia in epoca romana: nuove evidenze dall’archeologia subacquea» in Journal of Ancient Topography, Rivista di Topografia Antica, XV, 2005, pp. 37-54 D’ANDRADE 1899= A.D’Andrade, Relazione dell’Ufficio regionale per la conservazione dei monumenti del Piemonte e della Liguria, I, Torino 1899

BUCETI 2004= G.Buceti, Gialò, I misteri del Peloro, Messina 2004 BURTON 1876= R.F. Burton, «The long wall of Salona and the ruined cities of Pharia and Gelsa di Lesina» in Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 5, 1876, pp. 252-300 CAGIANO DE AZEVEDO 1978=M. Cagiano De Azevedo, «Le navi nella documentazione archeologica» in La navigazione mediterranea nell’Alto Medioevo, 14-20 aprile 1977, I, XXV, Spoleto 1978, pp. 413-.427. CAGNAT 1912= M. Cagnat, L’Armée romaine d’Afrique, Paris 1912 CALDERINI 1959= A.Calderini, Caesarea Maritima (Israele), rapporto preliminare della Ia campagna di scavo della missione archeologica italiana, Milano 1959 CALISSE 1936= C.Calisse, Storia di Civitavecchia, Firenze 1936 CALZA-NASH 1989= R.Calza, E.Nash, Ostia, Firenze 1989 CALZOLARI 1996= M.Calzolari, Introduzione allo studio della rete stradale dell’Italia romana: l’Itinerarium Maritimum, Roma 1996 CAMBI 2001= N.Cambi, «I porti della Dalmazia» in AAAd, XLVI, Strutture portuali e rotte marittime nell’Adriatico di età romana, Trieste-Roma 2001, pp. 137-160 CANAL 1998= E.Canal, Testimonianze archeologiche nella Laguna di Venezia, l’età antica, Mestre 1998 CARRO 1999= D.Carro, «Storia della marina di Roma. Testimonianze dall’Antichità» in Classica, Rivista Marittima, Supp. 12, Roma 1999 CARUSO 1991= I.Caruso, Civitavecchia e il suo Territorio, Roma 1991 CARUSO 2001= I.Caruso, Da Centumcellae a Civitavecchia, lo scavo archeologico nel Forte Michelangelo, Civitavecchia 2001 CASSON 1964=L. Casson, The ancient mariners, seafarers and seafighters of the Mediterrean in Ancient Times, New York 1964 CASSON 1971= L. Casson, Ship and Seamanship in the Ancient World, Princeton 1971 CASSON 1989= L. CASSON, The Peryplus Maris Eryitrei, Princeton 1989 CATTOLICA-LURIA 1916= P. L. Cattolica/A. Luria, Fari e Segnali Marittimi, nozioni sulla costruzione e funzione dei segnali, I, Torino 1916 CAVAZZUTI 1998= L.Cavazzuti, «I porti romani dell’isola di Giannutri» in ATTA, 7, Città e monumenti nell’Italia Antica, 1998, pp. 120-140 CAZZELLA 2001= A. Cazzella, «L’Adriatico nel Neolitico e nell’Eneolitico» in L’Archeologia dell’Adriatico dalla Preistoria al Medioevo, Atti del convegno internazionale, Ravenna,7-8-9 giugno 2001, Bologna 2003, pp.38-48 CECI 1962= E.Ceci, I monumenti pagani di Salona, Milano 1962 CERA 1995= G.Cera, «Scali portuali nel sistema idroviario padano in epoca romana» in ATTA, Supplemento I, 1995, pp. 179-192

217

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA DI VITA 2004=A. Di Vita, «Una clausura a Sabratha?» in L’Africa Romana, Atti del XV Convegno di studio, Tozeur, 11-15 dicembre 2002, III, a cura di Mustapha Khanoussi, Paola Ruggeri, Cinzia Vismara, Roma 2004, pp. 1771-1787 DIEGO SANTOS 1959= F. Diego Santos, Epigrafia romana de Asturias, Oviedo 1959 DIELS 1965= H.Diels, Antike Technik, Osnabrűck 1965 DODI 1974= L.Dodi, L’urbanistica romana in Britannia, Milano 1974 DONNADIEU 1927= A.Donnadieu, La Pompéi de la Provence, Fréjus, Forum Iulii, Paris 1927 DORIGO 1994= W.Dorigo, Venezie sepolte nella terra del Piave, duemila anni fra il dolce e il salso, Roma 1994 DREYER-FICHOU 2005= F.Dreyer, J-C. Fichou, L’Histoire de tous les Phares de France, Rennes 2005 DU PLAT TAYLOR-CLEERE 1978= J.Du Plat Taylor, H.Cleere, Roman shipping and trade: Britain and Rhine provinces, London 1978 DURUY 1882= V.Duruy, Histoire des Romains depuis les temps les plus recules jisqu’a l’invasion des Barbares, Paris 1882 EDWARDS 1933= K.M.Edwards, Corinth, Results of excavation conducted by The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, VI, Coins, 1896-1929, Cambridge, Massachussets 1933 EGGER 1863= M.Egger, «Notice sur la Tour d’Ordre a Boulogne-sur-mer» in RA, Quatrième Annèe, VII, Paris 1863, pp. 410-421 EL FAKHARAMI 1974= F. El Fakharami, «The “Lightouse” of Abusir in Egypt» in Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, 78, 1974, pp. 257-272 EMEPEREUR 1998 (3)= J.Y. Empereur, Alexandrie redécouverte, Paris 1998 EMPEREUR 1998 (1)= J.Y.Empereur, Le Phare d’Alexandrie, la merveille retrouvèe, Paris 1998 EMPEREUR 1998 (2)= J.Y. Empereur, Alexandrie redècouverte, Paris 1998 ENEI 2008= F.Enei, Pyrgi sommersa, Ricognizioni archeologiche subacquee nel porto dell’antica Caere, Santa Marinella 2008 ENGELS 1990=D.Engels, Roman Corinth, Chicago 1990 ENSOLA-LA ROCCA 2001= Aurea Roma, dalla città pagana alla città cristiana, a cura di S. Ensola e E. La Rocca, Roma 2001 ESPOSITO-FELICI-GIANFROTTA-SCOGNAMIGLIO 2002=E.Esposito, E.Felici, P.A.Gianfrotta, E.Scognamiglio, «Il porto di Kyme» in Archeologia Subacquea, Studi, ricerche, documenti, III, Roma 2002, pp. 1-37 EYDOUX 1961=H-P. Eydoux, Hommes et dieux de la Gaule, les récentes découvertes archéologiques, Paris 1961 FABBI-NOVARA 2003= F.Fabbi, P.Novara, «I porti a sud di Ravenna nell’antichità e nel medioevo: interpretazioni e progetto per una ricerca archeologica attraverso la cartografia» in L’Archeologia dell’Adriatico dalla Preistoria al Medioevo, Atti del convegno internazionale, Ravenna, 7-8-9 giugno 2001, Bologna 2003, pp.624-627

D’ERCE 1966= F.d’Erce, «La Tour de Caligula a Boulogne-sur-mer» in RA, I, 1966, pp. 89-96 DAVIDDE 1997= B. Davidde, «I porti dell’Arabia Felix: un nuovo campo di indagine per la ricerca archeologica subacquea» in Atti del Convegno Nazionale di Archeologia Subacquea, Anzio 30-31 maggio e 1 Giugno 1996, Bari 1997, pp. 351-355 DAVIDDE-PETRIAGGI=B. Davidde, R. Petriaggi «Ricerche archeologiche subacquee sul porto di Qâni» in Yemen, nel regno della regina di Saba, Milano 2000 DAZWESKI 1981=W.A. Dazweski, «Port glowny i pèrzystanie pomosnicze w Nea Paphos w swietle obserwacjii podwodnich (The main harbour and auxiliary anchorage of Nea Paphos in light of underwater observations)» in Menander, 6, 1981, pp. DE COETLOGON 1976= P.De Coetlogon Williams, «Roman harbours» in IJNA, 5.1, 1976, pp 75DE IZARRA 1993= F. De Izarra, Le Fleuve et Les Hommes en Gaule Romaine, Paris 1993 DE LA BLANCHERE 1983= R. De La Blanchère, Terracina, saggio di storia locale, Terracina 1983 (ristampa anastatica di Terracine, Essai d’Histoire locale, Paris 1884) DE ROBLES 2005= J.M. Blas De Roblès, Lybe grecque, romaine et Byzantine, Aix-en-Provnce 2005 DE ROSSI 1984= G.M. De Rossi, Le torri costiere del Lazio, Roma 1984 DE ROSSI 1993= G.M. De Rossi, Ventotene e Santo Stefano, Roma 1993 DE ROSSI 1998= G.M.De Rossi, «Ponza e Ventotene : analisi dello sviluppo topografico» in ATTA, La Forma della città e del territorio, esperienze, metodologie e risultati a confronto, Atti dell’Incontro di studio-S.Maria Capua Vetere, 27-28 novembre 1998, pp. 147-159 DEGRASSI 1962= A. Degrassi, Scritti di varia antichità, II, Roma 1962 DEGRASSI 1962= A.Degrassi, «I porti romani dell’Istria» in Scritti di varia antichità, II, Roma 1962, pp. 821870 DEGRASSI 1962=A.Degrassi, «La via seguita da Traiano nel 105 per recarsi in Dacia» in Scritti di Varia Antichità, raccolti da amici e allievi nel 75° compleanno dell’autore, XXII, Roma 1962, pp. 567576 DELMAIRE 1994= R.Delmaire, Carte Archeologique de la Gaule, Le Pas-de-Calais, 62/1, Paris 1994 DESJARDINS 1876=E.Desjardins, Géographie historique et administrative de la Gaule Romaine, I, Paris 1876 DI CICCO 2002=A.R.Di Cicco, Anxon, Sambuceto 2002 DI FEBO 2007= R. Di Febo, Un possibile faro antico a Durazzo. Analisi e confronti. Tesi di laurea della Dott.ssa Roberta Di Febo, realizzata presso l’Università degli Studi di Parma nell’anno accademico 2006-2007, con relatore Prof.ssa Sara Santoro, Correlatore Dott.ssa Barbara Sassi DI LEO 1970= A.Di Leo, Dell’antichissima città di Brindisi e suo celebre porto, Bologna 1970 DI VITA 1999=A. Di Vita, «Sabratha», in Lybia, the lost cities of the Roman Empire, Cologne 1999, pp. 146175 218

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

FORBES VI 1966= R. J. Forbes, Studies in Ancient Technology, VI, Leiden 1966 FORMIGE’ 1937= J.Formigè, «Le comblèment du port romaine de Fréjus (Var)», in Memoires de la Sociètè nationale de France, 8, X, Paris 1937 FORSTER 1938=E. M. Forster, Alexandria, a History and Guide, Alexandria 1938 FOSCAN 2003= L. Foscan, Porte e mura delle città, terre e castelli della Carsia e dell’Istria, Rovigno-Trieste 2003 FOSCAN-VECCHIET 2001= L.Foscan, E.Vecchiet, Le castellanie del mare e dell’altopiano triestino, Trieste 2001 FOUCHER 1964=L. Foucher, Hadrumetum, Paris 1964 FRANK 1961= B.Frank, Journal de route du centurion Julius Curtius (60-61 ap. J.-C.) dans le silage de Saint Paul, Paris 1961 FRANZOT 1999= S. Franzot, Aquileia e altri porti romani, Monfalcone 1999 FREEDMAN 1975= The joint expedition to Caesarea Maritima, I, studies in the history of Caesarea Maritima, (edit by D.N.Freedman), Missoula, Montana 1975 FRONDONI 1987= A.Frondoni, «Isola di Bergeggi» in Archeologia in Liguria III, 2, Scavi e scoperte 198286, dall’epoca romana al post-medioevo (a cura di P. Melli), Genova 1987, pp. 403-406 FUCHS 1969=G.Fuchs, Architektur darstellungen auf römischen Münzen der Republik und auf frühen Kaiserzeit, Berlin 1969 FUJII 2001= Y.Fujii, «An iconographical study of Baiae gruop flasks: are vaulted building fishponds or not?» in Annales du 15e Congrés de l’Association Internationale pour l’histoire du verre, New York 2001, pp. 73-77 GAFFNEY ET ALII 1997= V. Gaffney, B. Kirigin, M. Petrič, N.Vujonovič, Projekt Jadranski otoci, Arheološka baština otoka Hvara, Hvratska, Hvar 1997 GALILI-DAHARI-HARVIT 1993= E. Galili, U. Dahari, J.S Harvit, «Underwater surveys and rescue excavations along the Israeli coast» in IJNA, 22.1, London, New York, San Francisco 1993, pp. 61-77 GALLINA ZEVI-CLARIDGE 1996= A.Gallina Zevi, A.Claridge, Roman Ostia revisited, London 1996 GARGIULLO-OKELY II 1993= S.Gargiullo, E.Okely, Atlante archeologico dei mari, II, SardegnaCampania-Basilicata-Calabria, Roma 1993 GARGIULLO-OKELY III 1993= S.Gargiullo, E.Okely, Atlante archeologico dei mari, III, Sicilia,Puglia, Regioni Adriatiche, Roma 1993 GARLAND 1987= R.Garland, The Piraeus from the fifth to the first century B.C., London 1987 GAUCKLER 1895= P. Gauckler, Musèe de Cherchell, Paris 1895 GAYROUD 1981= M.Gayroud, Narbonne Antique, des origines à la fin du IIIe siècle, Paris 1981 GAYROUD 1989= M.Gayroud, «L’Aude romaine» in L’Aude de la Prehistoire à nos jours, ouvrage sous la direction de Jacques Crèmadeills, Saint-Jeand’Angèly 1989, pp. 96-146

FABBRI 2000= F.Fabbri, «La torre di S.Maria in Porto Fuori.» in M.MAURO, Mura, porti e torri di Ravenna, Ravenna 2000, pp. 197-209 FANTUZZI 1801= M.Fantuzzi, Monumenti Ravennati, II, Venezia 1801 FARIOLI CAMPANATI 1995=R. Farioli Campanati, I mosaici pavimentali della chiesa di S. Giovanni Evangelista in Ravenna, Ravenna 1995 FATTA 2002=F.Fatta, Luci del Mediterraneo, i Fari di Calabria e Sicilia, disegni, rilievi, carte storiche, Soveria Mannelli 2002 FEISSEL 1998= D.Feissel, «Gouverneurs et édifices dans épigrammes de Smyrne au Bas.Empire*» in REG, 111, 1998, pp. 125-144 FELLETTI-MAJ= B.M.Felletti-Maj, «Una carta di Ravenna romana e bizantina» in RendPontAcc., XLI, 19681969, pp. 85-120 FELICI 2006= E.Felici, «Ricerche sulle tecniche costruttive dei porti romani. Note preliminari sul porto di Astura (Latina)» in Journal of Ancient Topography, Rivista di Topografia Antica, Atti del V Congresso di topografia Antica, I porti del Mediterraneo in età classica (Roma, 5-6 ottobre 2004, Parte II), XVI, 2006, pp. 59-81 FELICI-BADERI 1997= E.Felici, G.Baderi, «Il porto romano di Cosa: appunti per l’interpretazione tecnica di un’opera marittima in cementizio» in Archeologia Subacquea, Studi, Ricerche, Documenti, II, Roma 1997, pp. 12-16 FERNANDEZ CASADO 1983=C.Fernandez Casado, Ingenieria Hidraulica Romana, Madrid 1983 FERNÀNDEZ MIRANDA 1983= M.Fernnàndez Miranda, Indigenismo y romanizacion en el Conventus Asturum, Oviedo 1983 FERNÀNDEZ OCHOA-MORILLO CERDÀN 1994= C.Fernàndez Ochoa, A.Morillo Cerdàn, De Brigantium a Oiasso, una aproximacion al estudio de los enclaves maritimos cantabricos en epoca romana, Madrid 1994 FEVRIER 1959= P.A.Fèvrier, «Plan ancien de Fréjus et d’Antibes» in Gallia, XVII, I, Paris 1959, pp. FEVRIER 1956= P.A.Fèvrier, «Les Appareils des Murs Romains de Fréjus» in RSL, XXII, , janvier-Mars, Bordighera 1956, pp. 153-184 FEVRIER 1963= P.A.Fèvrier, Forum Iulii (Fréjus), Cuneo 1963 FEVRIER 1977= P.A.Fèvrier, Fréjus (Forum Iulii) et la basse valle del’Argens, Cuneo 1977 FEVRIER 1979= P.A.Fèvrier, «Fréjus, una ville antique» in Archeologia, Prehistoire et Archeologie, 133, Paris 1979, pp. 6-17 FINOCCHI 1987= Libarna, a cura di S.Finocchi, Alessandria 1987 FINOCCHI 1999= S.Finocchi, «La laguna e l’antico porto di Nora» in Rivista di Studi Fenici, 27, 1999, 167-192 FIORE 1950= L. Franco, Le esplorazioni geografiche dei Greci, Firenze 1950 FONQUERLE 1973= D. Fonquerle, «Dècouverte d’un dispositif de signalation de la navigation antique» in Archèologia, trèsor des arts, 64, 1973, pp. 67-70. FORBES I 1966= R. J. Forbes, Studies in Ancient Technology, I, Leiden 1966 219

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA GIULIANI 2001= C.F.Giuliani, «I porti di Claudio e di Traiano» in Lezioni Fabio Facenna, conferenze di archeologia subacquea, Bari 2001, pp. 115-126 GIULIANO 1985= A.Giuliano, Museo Nazionale Romano, Le Sculture, I, 8, Roma 1985 GIUSTOLISI 1988=V.Giustiolisi, Panormus, I, Palermo 1988 GODDIO-CLAUSS 2006= F.Goddio-M.Clauss, Ägyptens versunkene Schätze, Műnchen-Berlin London-New York 2006 GOODCHILD 1961=R. G. Goodchild, «Helios on the Pharos» in The Antiquity Journal, 41, 1961, pp. 218223 GRAFFAGNINI 1985=A.Graffagnini, «La storia del Faro. I Fari della Romagna» in La Piè, 54, 6, NovembreDicembre, Forlì 1985, pp. 245-247 GRAINGE 2002= G.Grainge, The Roman Channel Crossing of A.D. 43, The constraints on Claudius’ naval strategy, Bar British Series 332, 2002 GRANDENIGO 1970= S.Grandenigo, Alle origini di Trieste, Trieste 1970 GRANDJEAN-SALVIAT 2000= Y.Grandjean, F. Salviat, Guide de Thasos, Athènes 2000 GRAS 1985= M.Gras, Trafics Tyrrhèniens archaїques, Rome 1985 GRECO 1982=, E.Greco, «Porti della Magna Grecia. Topografia e storia» in La Magna Grecia e il mare, Studi di Storia Marittima, Taranto 1996, pp. 175-188 GRENIER 1959= M.A.Grenier, «Les découvertes rècentes de Cherchell» in CRAI, 1959, pp. 215-229 GRIFFITH PEDLEY 1967=J. Griffith Pedley, «Excavation at Apollonia, Cyrenaica. Second Preliminary Report» in AJA, 71, 2, New York 1967, pp. 141-147 GRIMM 1998= G.Grimm, Alexandria, die erste Königstadt der hellenistischen Welt, Mainz am Rhein 1998 GSELL 1901= S.Gsell, Les monuments antiques de l’Algerie, Paris 1901 GSELL 1952= S.Gsell, Cherchell, antique Iol-Caesarea, Algeri 1952 GUARDUCCI 1975= M.Guarducci, «La più antica catechesi figurata: il grande musaico della basilica di Gasr Elbia in Cirenaica», in MemAl, serie VIII, XVIII, Roma 1975, pp. 659-686 GUARNIERI 1967= G.Guarnieri, Da Porto Pisano a Livorno città, attraverso le tappe della storia e della evoluzione geografica, Pisa 1967 GUILLAND 1969= R. Guilland, Etudes de Topographie de Constaninople Byzantine, Berlin-Amsterdam 1969 GÜNTHER 1913=R.T.Günther, Pausillypon, the imperial villa near Naples, with a description of the submerged foreshore and with observations on the tomb of Virgil and other roman antiquities on Posilipo, Oxford 1913 GUTTERIDGE ET ALII 2001= A.Gutteridge, A.Hoti, A.R.Hurst, «The walled town of Dyrrachium (Durrës): settlement and dynamics» in Journal of Roman Archaeology, 14,1, pp. 391-410 GUTZWILLER 2005= K. Gutzwiller, The new Posidippus, a hellenistic poetry book, Oxford 2005

GEBARA 1998= I.Bèraud, C.Gèbara, L.Rivet, Fréjus Antique, Paris 1998 GHEDINI 1984= F. Ghedini, «Il pannello nord-ovest dell’arco dei Severi a Leptis» in RdA, VIII, 1984, pp. 68-87 GIANFROTTA 1989= P.A.Gianfrotta, «Le vie di comunicazione» in Storia di Roma, IV, Caratteri e Morfologie (a cura di E.Gabba, A.Schiavone), Torino 1989 GIANFROTTA 1992= P.A.Gianfrotta, «Porti e approdi: dal Fiora al Bruna» in Relitti di storia, Grosseto, Cassero della Fortezza medicea, 13 luglio-30 settembre 1991, Firenze, Museo Archeologico, 20 ottobre-8 dicembre 1991, Rosignano Marittimo, Museo Civico, dicembre 1991-gennaio 1992, a cura di P.Rendini, pp. 60-69 GIANFROTTA 1993= P.A.Gianfrotta, «Puteoli sommersa» in Puteoli, a cura di Fausto Zevi, fotografie di Mimmo Jodice, Napoli 1993, pp. 115-124 GIANFROTTA 1998=P.A. Gianfrotta, «I porti dell’area flegrea» in Porti, Approdi, e linee di rotta nel Mediterraneo Antico, Atti del seminario di studi, Lecce 29-30 Novembre 1996, Galatina 1998, pp. 153176 GIANFROTTA 2005= P.A.Gianfrotta, «Note di topografia marina e marittima» in Atti del V Congresso di Topografia Antica, I porti del Mediterraneo in età classica (Roma, 5-6 ottobre 2004), I, Rivista di Topografia Antica, XV, 2005, Galatina 2006, pp. 7-36 GIARDINA 2004a= B.Giardina, «La Fossa Neronis tra Baia e Lucrino» in ATTA, 14, Roma 2004, pp. 331335 GIARDINA 2004b= B.Giardina, Il faro nel mondo antico: testimonianze letterarie, figurative ed archeologiche. Tesi di specializzazione in topografia antica del Dott. Baldassarre Giardina, realizzata nell’anno accademico 2003-2004, presso la Scuola della Specializzazione in Archeologia dell’Università di Bologna, relatore Prof. Lorenzo Quilici GIARDINA 2005=B.Giardina, «Il faro nel mondo antico: aggiornamenti e nuovi dati» in Orizzonti, 6, 2005, pp. 137-152 GIARDINA 2007= B.Giardina, «La rappresentazione del faro nelle emissioni numismatiche del mondo antico» in Rin, 108, 2007, pp. 145-168 GICHON 1974=M. Gichon, Towers on the limes Palestinae, forms, purpose, terminology and comparisons in Actes du IXe Congrès International d’Etudes sur les frontières romaines, Mamaïa, 6-13 septembre 1972, Köln-Wien 1974, pp. 513-543 GIORGETTI 1977= D. Giorgetti, «Il faro di Alessandria fra simbologia e realtà: dall’epigramma di Posidippo ai mosaici di Gasr Elbia», in RAL, XXXII, Roma 1977, pp. 245-269 GIORGETTI 1980= G.Giorgetti, «Geografia storica ariminese» in Analisi di Rimini antica. Storia ed Archeologia per un Museo, Rimini 1980 GIULIANI 1994= R. Giuliani, «Una nuova lucerna con scena di pesca su fondo di edifici dalla catacomba detta della Ex-Vigna sulla via Appia» in RendPontAcc, 44, pp. 215-224

220

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE GUY 1955= M.Guy, «Le ports antiques de Narbonne» in Rivista di Studi Liguri, XXI, 1, gennaio-marzo 1955, pp. 213-240 HAGUE-CHRISTIE 1977= D.B.Hague, R.Christie, Lighthouses, Their Architecture, History and Archaeology, Llandysul Dyfed 1977 HAIRY 2005= I. Hairy, «Alexandrie, nouvelles découvertes autour du Phare» in Les Dossiers d’Archeologie, Paris 2005, pp. 27-37 HANDLER 1971= S.Handler, «Architecture on the roman coins of Alexandria» in Journal of Archaeology, 75, 1, January 1971, pp. 57-74 HEIDENREICH-JOHANNES 1971=R.Heidenreich, H.Johannes, Das Grabmal Theoderichs zu Ravenna, Wiesbaden 1971 HEIJMANS 2006= M.Heijmans, J-M. Rouquette, C.Sintés, Arles Antique, Paris 200 HELENA 1937= P.Helena, Les origines de Narbonne, Toulouse-Paris 1937 HELMUT-WOLF 1983= A.u. H. Helmut-Wolf, Die wirkliche Reise des Odysseus, zur Rekonstruktion des Homerischen Weltbildes, Wien 1983 HERNÀN DEL FRADE- FIGAREDO FERNÀNDEZ 2002= H.J. Del Frade, R.Figaredo Fernandèz, Marinos, Puertos y Barcos en la antigua Asturias, Oviedo 2002 HILL 1976= G.F.Hill, Historical roman coins, Chicago 1976 HIND 1984= J.G.F.Hind, «Greek and Barbarian Peoples on the shores of the Black Sea» in Archaeological Reports, 30, 1983-1984, pp. 71-97 HISTOIRE 1900= AA.VV., Histoire de France illustrèe, I, des origines à 1610, Paris 1900 ( ?) HOEPFNER 2003= W. Hoepfner, Der Koloss von Rhodos, Mainz am Rhein 2003 HOHLFELDER 1987=R. L. Hohlfelder, «Caesarea Maritima» in National Geographic, 171, 2, February 1987, pp. 261-279 HOHLFELDER-VANN 1998= R.L.Hohlfelder, R.L.Vann, «Uncovering the maritime secrets of Aperlae, a coastal settlement of ancient Lycia» in New Eastern Archaeology, 61, 1, mars 1998, pp. 26-37 HÜTTER 1973= S.Hütter, «Der römische Leuchtturm von La Coruña» in Madrider Beiträge, Band 3, Mainz am Rhein 1973, pp. 5-30 HÜTTER-HAUSCHILD 1991= S.Hűtter, T.Hauschild, El Faro romano de La Coruña, Ayuntamiento de La Coruña 1991 IGLESIAS GIL-MUŇIZ CASTRO 1992= J.Iglesias Gil, J.A. Muňiz Castro, Las comunicaciones en la Cantabria romana, Santander 1992 IMHOOF-BLUMER 1901= F.Imhoof-Blumer, Kleinasiatische Münzen, Wien 1901 IŞIK-ECK-ENGELMANN = H.Iskan-Isik, W.Eck, H.Engelmann, «Der Leuchtturm von Patara und Sex. Marcius Priscus als Statthalter der Provinz Lycia von Nero bis Vespasian», in Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, 164, 2008, pp. 91-121 ISTROS 1996= AA.VV., Istros, les Grecs au pays des Gètes, prèsence archéologique française en terre romaine, Château des Allymes, 14 Juin-30 Novembre 1996, Lyon 1996 JANNI 1996= P. Janni, Il mare degli antichi, Bari 1996

MIDDLE AGES

JONES HALL 2004= L.Jones Hall, Roman Berytus, Beirut in Late Antiquity, London/New York 2004 JONES-MATTINGLY 1990= B.Jones, D.Mattingly An Atlas of Roman Britain, Frame and London 1990 KAMPEN 1977-1978= N.B.Kampen, «Meaning and social analysis of a late antique sarcophagus» in Babesch, 52-53-1977-1978, pp. 221-231 KEAY 1988= S.J.Keay, Roman Spain, London 1988 KING 2005=C. King, Storia del Mar Nero, Roma 2005 KIRIGIN 2003= B. Kirigin, Pharos, An Archaeological Guide, Stari Grad 2003 KLENGEL 1971= H.Klengel, Syria Antiqua, Leipzig 1971 KOEPPEL 1992= G.M.Koeppel, «Die historischer Reliefs der römischen Kaiserzeit IX» in Bonner Jahrbuch, 192, 1992, pp. 66-69 KŐSTER 1923=A. Köster, Das Antike Seewesen, Berlin 1923 KOZELJ-WURCH-KOZELJ 1989=T.Kozelj, M.WulchKozelj, «Phare de Thasos» in BCH, 113, 1989, pp. 161-181 KRAUSE 2005= C.Krause, Villa Jovis, l’edificio residenziale, Napoli 2005 LALLEMAND 1956= F.Lallemand, Journal de bord de Pythèas, Edition de Paris, Paris 1956 LAMBOGLIA 1939= N.Lamboglia, Liguria romana, Alassio 1939 LAMBOGLIA 1998= N.Lamboglia, I monumenti medioevali della Liguria del Ponente, Torino 1970 LANCIANI 1878= F.Lanciani, «Sul porto militare di Classe presso Ravenna», in Giornale del Genio Civile, Roma 1878, pp. 9-10 LARONDE-SINTÈS 1998= A.Larionde,C.Sintès, «Recherches rècentes dans le port d’Apollonia» in La Cirenaica in età antica, Atti del Convegno Internazionale di Studi, Macerata, 18-20 Maggio 1995, a cura di Enzo Catani e Silvia Maria Marengo, Macerata 1998, pp. 301-310. LE ROUX 1990= P. Le Roux, «Le Phare, l’architecte et le soldat: l’inscription rupestre de La Corogne (C.I.L., II, 2559 (*)» in Miscellanea Greca e Romana, XV, Roma 1990, pp. 133-144 LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN 1926= K.Lehmann-Hartleben, Trajanssäule, Berlin 1926 LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN1964=K.Lehmann-Hartleben, «Die antiken Hafenanlagen des Mittelmeeres» in Klio, 14, Aalen 1963 LENTHERIC 1880= C.Lentheric, La Provence Maritime, ancienne et moderne, Paris 1880 LENZI 1905= F.Lenzi, «I porti della Maremma Toscana» in Monografia Storica dei porti dell’Antichità, Roma 1905, pp. 224-225 LEONARDI 1991= P.Leonardi, Le torri costiere d'Italia, Firenze 1991 LEONARD-TUCK-HOEHLFELDER 1995= J.R.Leonard, S.L.Tuck, R.L.Hoehlfelder, «Evidence for a lighthouse at Nea Paphos?» in RDAC, Cyprus 1995, pp. 236-248 LESKY 1947= A.Lesky, Thalatta, der Weg der Griechen zum Meer, Wien 1947 LEVI 1967=A.Levi, M.Levi, Itineraria Picta, Roma 1967 LEVI 1978= A.Levi, M.Levi, La Tabula Peutingeriana, Bologna 1978 221

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA MARIN ET ALII 1999= E.Marin, M.Mayer, G.Paci, I.Rodà, Corpus Inscritionum Naronitanarum, I, Erešova Kula-Vid, Macerata-Split 1999 MARIOTTI 2006= A.L.Mariotti, Racconti di fari e altre storie di mare, Genova 2006 MARTINEZ MAGANTO 1990= J.Martinez Maganto, «Faros y luces de seňalacion en la navegacion antigua*» in CuPauam, 17, 1990, pp. 67-89 MASELLI SCOTTI 2001= F. Maselli Scotti, «Il porto romano di Aquileia: dati antichi e ritrovamenti recenti» in AAAd, XLVI, Strutture portuali e rotte marittime nell’Adriatico di età romana, Trieste-Roma 2001, pp. 211-242 MASELLI SCOTTI-VENTURA 2001= F. Maselli Scotti, P. Ventura, «Strutture portuali di Tergeste romana» in AAAd, XLVI, Strutture portuali e rotte marittime nell’Adriatico di età romana, Trieste-Roma 2001, pp. 201-209 MATIJAŠIĆ 2001= R.Matijašić, «I porti dell’Istria e della Liburnia» in AAAd, XLVI, Strutture portuali e rotte marittime nell’Adriatico di età romana, Trieste-Roma 2001, pp. 161-174 MAURO 1989= M.Mauro, Cento Torri delle Marche, Ancona 1989 MAXFIELD 1989= The Saxon Shore, a Handbook, edited by Valerie A. Maxfield, Univeristy of Exeter 1989 MAYRON 1973= H. Mayron, «The Colossus of Rhodes» in JHS, LXXVI, Nendeln/Lichtestein 1973, pp. 68-86 MASTINO-SPANU-ZUCCA 2005= A.Mastino, P.G.Spanu, R.Zucca, Mare Sardum, merci, mercati e scambi marittimi della Sardegna antica, Roma 2005 MAZZOTTI 1991= M.Mazzotti, La Chiesa di S. Maria in Porto Fuori, Ravenna 1991 MCCANN 1987= A.M.McCann, «The Portus Cosanus: a center of trade in Late Republic» in Rei Cretariae Romanae Futorum, XXV/XXVI, 1987, pp. 21-71 MCCANN-BOURGEOIS 1987= A.M.McCann, J.Bourgeois, The roman port and fishery of Cosa, a center of ancient trade, Princeton 1987 MCCANN-LEWIS 1970= A.M.McCann, C.J.D.Lewis, «The ancient porto of Cosa» in Archeology, 23, 1, January,1970, pp. 201-211 MCKAY 1972= A.McKay, Naples and coastal Campania, Ancient Campania, Volume II, Ontario 1972 MEDAS 1993= S. Medas, «La navigazione nella preistoria» in Archeologia della Navigazione, Riccione 1993, pp. 9-13 MEDAS 1998= S. Medas, «Siderum observationem in navigando Phoenices (invenerunt) (Plinio, N.H., VII, 209) Appunti di “navigazione astronomica” feniciopunica» in Rivista di Studi Fenici, XXVI,2, 1998, pp. 147-173 MEDAS 2000= S. Medas, La marineria cartaginese, Sassari 2000 MEDAS 2004= S.Medas, De Rebus Nauticis, l’arte della navigazione nel mondo antico, Roma 2004 MEDAS-D’AGOSTINO 2006= S.Medas, M. D’Agostino, «Lio Piccolo, i Romani in Laguna» in Archeologia Viva, XXV, Gennaio/Febbraio 2006, pp. 49-57 MEIGGS 1973= R.Meiggs, Roman Ostia, Oxford 1973

LILLI 1997= M.Lilli, «Il porto di Ancona in età romana, documentazione archeologica e dati d’archivio» in Journal of Ancient Topography, Rivista di Topografia Antica, VII, 1997, pp. 49-76 LILLI 1998= M.Lilli, «Attrezzature portuali di Ravenna» in ATTA, 7, 1998, pp. 25-41 LIVIADOTTI 2000= D.Barbagli, M. Liviadotti, A.De Malgret, P.Pruneti «Yemen, c’era una volta la regina di Saba» in Archeologia Viva, maggio/giugno 2000, pp. 59-79 (referenza fotografica) LUGANI 1959=V. Lugani, Turchia, Milano 1979 LUGLI 1926=G.Lugli, Anxur-Terracina, Forma Italiae, Roma 1926 LUGLI 1928= G.Lugli, Circeii, Forma Italiae, Roma 1928 LUGLI-FILIBECK 1935= G.Lugli, G.Filibeck, Il porto di Roma imperiale e l’Agro portuense, Roma 1935 LUNI 2004= M.Luni, «I porti di Ankon e Numana» in I Greci in Adriatico, Hesperìa 18, Roma 2004, pp. 2845 LUZÒN NOGUÈ-COÌN CUENCA 1986= J.M.Luzòn Noguè, L.M. Coìn Cuenca, «La navègacion pre-astronòmica en la Antigüedad: utilizaciòn de Pàjaros en la orientaciòn nàutica» in Lucentum, V, 1986, pp. 65-85 MACLAGAN 1968=M.MacLagan, The City of Constaninople, London 1968 MAIOLI 2000=M.G.Maioli, «Le fortificazioni di Classe» in M.MAURO, Mura, porte e torri di Ravenna, Ravenna 2000, pp. 66-69 MAIOLI 2001= M.G.Maioli, «Vie d’acqua e strutture portuali di Ravenna romana» in M.MAURO, Ravenna Romana, Ravenna 2001, pp. 219-224 MAIOLI 2005= M.G.Maioli, «La topografia di Ravenna e Classe in età romana» in M.MAURO, I porti antichi di Ravenna, I, Il porto romano e le flotte, Ravenna 2005, pp. 45-55 MAIURI 1949-50= A.Maiuri, «La specola misenate» in RANap, Napoli 1949-50, pp. 177-194 MAIURI 1983= A.Maiuri, «La specola misenate» in Itinerario flegreo, Napoli 1983, pp. 177-194 MAIURI 1997= A. Maiuri, Capri storia e monumenti, Roma 1997 (ristampa anastatica) MAMBELLA 1986= R. Mambella, «Analisi di alcuni problemi storici e topografici di Adria antica» in Padusa, XXII, 1986, pp. 235-249. MANETTI 1990= E. M. Manetti, Danimarca,Milano 1990 MANFREDINI-PESCARA 1985=C. Manfredini/A. W. Pescara, Il libro dei Fari Italiani, Milano MANNUCCI 1992= Il Parco Archeologico Naturalistico del Porto di Traiano, a cura di V.Mannucci, Roma 1992 MANSEL 1963= A.M. Mansel, Die Ruinen von Side, Berlin 1963 MANZELLI 2001=V.Manzelli, «La Forma Urbis di Ravenna in età romana» in M.MAURO, Ravenna Romana, Ravenna 2001, pp. 45-64 MARCHIORI 1990= A. Marchiori, «Sistemi portuali della Venetia romana» in AAAd, XXXVI, 1990, pp. 197226 MARIMPIETRI 2008= F.Marimpietri, «Fra le dune della Cirenaica» in Archeo, XXIV, 4 (278), pp.12-13

222

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

ORMEROD 1947= H.A.Ormerod, Piracy in the ancient world, an Essay in Mediterranean History, Chicago 1947 PACE 1935=B.Pace, Arte e Civiltà dell’Antica Sicilia, Milano, Genova, Roma, Napoli 1935 PAGLIA 1997= A.Paglia, La Lanterna, Trieste 1997 PAHOR 1972= M.Pahor, T.Mikeln, Piran, Portorož 1972 PAIANO-CAZZATO 2000= E.Paiano, M.Cazzato, Coste del Salento, Lavello 2000 PALACIOS 1933=A. Palacios, «Una descripciòn nueva del faro di Alejandria» in Al-Andalus, 1:2 (1933) pp. 241292 PANCIERA 1957= S.Panciera, Vita sociale ed economica di Aquileia, Aquileia 1957 PANEDDA 1953= D.Panedda, Olbia nel periodo punico e romano, Formae Italiae, Sardinia, Roma 1953 PANVINI 1990= P.Panvini, Il Forestiere alle antichità e curiosità naturali di Pozzuoli, Cuma, Baia e Miseno, Napoli 1990 (ristampa anastatica del volume del 1827) PARODI ALVAREZ 2001= M.J. Parodi Alvarez, Rìos y Lagunas de Hispania como vìas de cominicacìon, la navegacìon interior en la Hispania Romana, Ecija 2001 PARTHEY-PINDER 1848= G.Parthey-M.Pinder, Itinerarium Antonini Augusti et Hierosolymitanum, Berlin 1848 PARTHEY-PINDER 1860= M.Pinder-G.Parthey, Ravennatis anonymi cosmographia et Guidonis geographica, Berolini 1860 PASINI 1978= F.Pasini, Ostia antica, insule e classi sociali, Roma 1978 PAVOLINI 2005=C.Pavolini, La vita quotidiana a Ostia, Roma, Bari 1991 (ristampa del volume del 1986) PELLEGRINI 1900= G.Pellegrini, «Dicembre 1900, Isola di Giannutri-Antica Villa romana dei primi secoli dell’impero» in NS 1900, pp. 609-623 PEMAN 1954= C.Pemàn, Las fuentes literarias de la antigűedad y fundacion de Càdiz, Madrid 1954 PENSA 1997= M.Pensa, Immagini di città e porti: aspetti e problemi, Estratto da Corso di Cultura sull’arte ravennate e bizantina, XLIII, Ravenna 1997, pp. 689710 PENSA 1998= M.Pensa, «Alcune considerazioni sulle immagini dei porti nella documentazione numismatica» in Rin, 99, pp. 113-149 PENSA 1999= M.Pensa, Moli, Fari, Pescatori, Estratto da Rivista di Archeologia, XXIII, Roma 1999, pp. PERASSI 2002= Cl. Perassi,«Edifici e monumenti sulla monetazione di Nerone» in Latomus, 268, Neronia VI, Rome à l’époque nèronienne, Bruxelles 2002, pp. 1134 PERETTI 1979= A.Peretti, Il Periplo di Scilace, studio sul primo portolano del Mediterraneo, Giardini Editori e stampatori, Pisa 1979 PERRING 1991= D.Perring, Roman London, London 1991 PESCE 1972= G. Pesce, Nora, Cagliari 1972 PETRIĆ 1975= N. Petrić, «Archeološka Istraživanja Otoka Hvara» in Hvarski Zbornik, 3, 1975, pp. 243-268 PETTENA 2002= G.Pettena, Gli Etruschi e il mare, Torino 2002

MENÈDEZ PIDAL 1955= R.Mendez Pidal, Historia de España, II, España Romana (218 a. de J.C. – 414 de J.C.), Madrid 1955 MERCURI 1998= L. Mercuri, «Les Eubèens et la Colonne de Rhègion» in MEFRA, 110, 1998, pp. 551-569. MILNE 1985= G.MILNE, The port of Roman London, London 1985 MILNE 2005= G.Milne, «Port of Roman London» in Mar Exterior, El Occidente atlàntico en época romana, Congreso Internacional, Pisa, Santa Croc in Fossabanda, 6-9 noviembre 2003, Escuela Espaňola de Historia y Arquelogía en Roma-CSIC, Roma 2005, pp. 71-76 MINGAZZINI-PFISTER 1946= P.Mingazzini, F.Pfister, Forma Italiae, Regio I, Latium et Campania, Volumen Secundum, Surrentum, Firenze 1946 MLINARCZYK 1990= J.Mlinarczyk, Nea Paphos III: Nea Paphos in the Hellenistic Period, Warsaw 1990 MONTEVECCHI 1996= F. Montevecchi, Il potere marittimo e la civiltà del Mediterraneo Antico, Firenze 1996 MORENO 1973-74= P. Moreno, «Cronologia del Colosso di Rodi» in ArchCl, XV-XXVI, Roma 1973-74, pp.453-463 MORIGI 1998= A.Morigi, «Sul più antico porto di Rimini» in ATTA, 7, 1998 MUCKELROY 1981= K.Muckelroy, Archaeology under Water, an Atlas of the World’s Submerged Sites, New York-London 1981 MURONI-PIANU 2008= E.Muroni, G.Pianu, La Cala del Vino (Alghero). Problemi di navigazione antica in L'Africa Romana, le ricchezze dell'Africa: risorse, produzione, scambi a cura di J.Gonzalez, P.Ruggeri, C.Vismara, R.Zucca, III, 17, pp. 1819-1829. MŰLLER-WIENER 1977=W.Műller-Wiener, Bildlexicon zur Topographie Istanbuls, Tűbingen 1977, p. 60, voce Boukeleon-Hafen. N.BORIELLO, A.D’AMBROSIO 1979= N.Boriello, A.D’Ambrosio, Baiae-Misenum, Formae Italiae, Firenze 1979 NALDINI-TADDEI 2003= M.Naldini, D.Taddei, Torri, castelli, rocche, fortezze, guida a mille anni di architettura fortificata in Toscana, Firenze 2003 NAPOLI 1959=M. Napoli, Napoli greco-romana, Napoli 1959 NEUBURGER 1919=A. Neuburger, Die Technik des Altertums, Leipzig 1919 NISSEN 1883-1902= He. Nissen, Italienische Landeskunde, Berlin 1883-1902 NOVARA 2001= P.Novara, «La Ravenna tardo-imperiale» in M.MAURO, Ravenna Romana, Ravenna 2001, pp. 251-279 OLESON-BRANTON 1992= J.P.Oleson, G.Branton, «The Technology of King Herod’s Harbour» in Caesarea Papers, Straton’s Tower, Herod’s Harbour, and Roman and Byzantine Caesarea, Ann Arbor 1992, pp. 49-67 ORDÒŇEZ AGULLA 1990= S. Ordòňez Agulla, «El faro de Gades y las fuentes medievales» in II Congresso Peninsular de Història Antiga, Coimbra, 18 a 20 Outubro de 1990, Actas, Coimbra 1993, pp. 247-277 223

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA RABAN 1992= A.Raban, «In search of Straton Tower» in Caesarea Papers, Straton’s Tower, Herod’s Harbour, and Roman and Byzantine Caesarea, Ann Arbor 1992, pp. 7-18 RABAN-HOLUM 1996=A. Raban, K. G. Holum, Caesarea Maritima, a retrospective after two Millenium, Leiden, New York, Köln 1996 RADAN 1974= T.G. Radan, «Angaben zur Frage der sogenannten “Leuchttürme» in Alba Regia, XIII, 1972, 1974, pp. 149-157 RADIĆ ROSSI 2004= Skriveno Blago Novalje (a cura di Irena Radić Rossi), Zagreb 2004 RAMBAUD 1997= F.Rambaud, «Portus Gaditanus» in MM, 38, 1997, pp. 75-87 RAVOISIE’ 1946= D. Ravoisiè, Exploration scientifique de l’Algerie pendant les anneès 1845-1846, Paris 1846 REDDE’ 1979= M.Reddè, «La representation des phares à l’epoque romaine» in MEFRA, 91, 1979, pp. 845-872 REDDE’ 1986= M. Reddè, Mare Nostrum, les infrastructures, le dispositif et l’histoire de la marine militaire sous l’empire romain, Rome 1986 REDDE’-GOLVIN 2005= M. Reddè, J.C. Golvin, Voyages sur la Mèditerranèe romaine, Arles, Paris 2005 RENARD 1867= L. Renard, Les Phares, Paris 1867 RENDINI 1992= P.Rendini, «Itinerario archeologico» in Giannutri (a cura di R. Rosati), Roma 1992 RENDINI 1999= P.Rendini, «L’isola del Giglio e l’archeologia subacquea» in Atti della Scuola Normale di Pisa, pp. 68-78 RENDINI-GAMBOGI-POGGESI 1992 =P.Rendini, P.Gambogi, G.Poggesi «Le vicende storicoarcheologiche» in Giannutri, a cura di Rosati, Roma 1992 RENDINI-POGGESI 1998 = «Le secche della Meloria» in Memorie sommerse, archeologia subacquea in Toscana, a cura di P.Rendini, G.Poggesi, Amministrazione Provinciale di Grosseto, pp. 176183 RICCI 1998= R.Ricci, Bergeggi, un’isola davanti ad un’isola, Torino 1998 RINALDI TUFI 1989= S. Rinaldi Tufi, Dalmazia, Roma 1989 RINGEL 1988= J.Ringel, «Literary sources and Numismatic evidences of Maritime Activity in Caesarea during the Roman Period» in Mediterranean Cities: Historical Perspectives (a cura di Irad Malkin e Robert l. Hohlfelder), London 1988 RIVET 1988= A.L.F. Rivet, Gallia Narbonensis, Southern France in Roman Times, London 1988 ROANI VILLANI 1993= R.Roani Villani, Il Giglio fra Medici e Lorena, Pisa 1993 ROBERT 1980= L. Robert, A travers l'Asie Mineure : poetes et prosateurs, monnaies grecques, voyageurs et geographie, Ecole Française d’Athénes, 1980 ROBERT 1970=L.Robert, Etudes Anatoliennes, Recherches sur les inscriptiones grecques de l’Asie Mineure, Amsterdam 1970 RODRIGUEZ ALMEIDA 2005= E.Rodríguez Almeida, «Ad speculam Britanniae» in Mar Exterior, El Occidente atlàntico en época romana, Congreso Internacional, Pisa, Santa Croc in Fossabanda, 6-9 noviembre 2003,

PHILP 1981= B.Philp, The Excavation of the Roman Forts of the Classis Brotannica at Dover 1970-1977, Kent Archaeological Rescue Unit, CIB Head quarters, Dover Castle, Kent 1981 PICARD 1957= G.C. Picard, Les trophèes des Romains, Paris 1957 PICARD 1976= C. Picard, «Sur quelques reprèsentations nouvelles du Phare d’Alexandrie et sur l’origine alexandrine du paysages portuaires», in BCH, LXXVI-1952, Nendeln 1976, pp. 60-95. PICCARRETA 1977= F.Piccarreta, Astura, Forma Italiae, Regio I, XIII, Firenze 1977 PICK 1898= B.Pick, Die antiken Münzen NordGriechendlands. Dacien und Moesien, I, 1, Berlin 1898 PINON 1991= P.Pinon, La Gaule retrouvée, Paris 1991 POGGESI 1992= G.Poggesi, «L’Antichità» in Giannutri (a cura di R. Rosati), Roma 1992 POGGI 1905= V.Poggi, «Da Albenga a Voltri» in Monografia storica dei porti dell’Antichità, Roma 1905, pp. 64-65 POLANYI 1968= K.Polanyi, Economie primitive, arcaiche e moderne, ricerca storica e antropologia economica, Torino 1980 (traduzione di N. Negro dell’opera Primitive, Archaic and modern Economies, 1968) PREDA-NUBAR 1973= C.Preda, H.Nubar, Histria, III, Descoperirile monetare 1914-1970, Bucareşti 1973 PURPURA 1997= G.Purpura, «La marittimità in Sicilia» in Attività Marittime e rinvenimenti archeologici nella Sicilia romana. Atti del Convegno, Palermo 21 giugno 1996, Napoli 1997 PURPURA 2000= G. Purpura, «Palermo e il mare» in R. LA DUCA, Storia di Palermo, Palermo 2000 QUEIROLO 1982= C. Queirolo, La Sabazia romana e altomedievale, dell’antica Vado Sabazia, Savona 1982 (ristampa anastatica dell’opera Dell’antica Sabazia, cenni storici del sac. Cesare Queirolo, arciprete della chiesa parrocchiale di Vado, Savona 1865, con aggiunte di F.Ciciloit, 1982) QUET 1984= M-H. Quet, «Pharus*» in MEFRA,96, 19842, pp, 789-845 QUILCI 1993= L.Quilici, «Il porto di Civitavecchial’antica Centumcellae» in Eius Virtutis Studiosi, Classical and Postclassical Studies in Memory of Frank Edward Brown (1908-1988), Hannover and London 1993, pp. 63-79 QUILICI 2004= L.Quilici, «Per il restauro del faro del Lazzaretto a Civitavecchia» in Lezioni Fabio Faccenna, conferenze di archeologia subacquea, IIIV ciclo, a cura di Marta Giacobelli, Bari 2004, pp. 111-118 QUILICI 2006= L. Quilici, «La costruzione delle strade nell’Italia romana» in Ocnus, 14, 2006, pp. 157-206 QUILICI 2008= L.Quilici, Sperloncae, in ATTA QUILICI-QUILICI GIGLI 1972-1973= L. Quilici, S. Quilici Gigli, «Ricerche intorno a Melabron, la perlustrazione della penisola di Kormakiti» in RIASA, XIX-XX, 1972-1973, 1975, pp. 30-56 QUILICI-QUILICI GIGLI 2005= L.Quilici, «La cosiddetta acropoli del Circeo, per una lettura nel contesto topografico» in ATTA, 14, La Forma della città e del territorio-2, 2005, pp. 121-146 224

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

SEDOV 2000=A. V. SEDOV, «Qâni, un grande porto tra l’India e il Mediterraneo» in Yemen, nel paese della regina di Saba, Milano 2000, pp. 235-243 SEILLER 1986= C. Seiller, «Boulogne, base navale romaine» in A.Lottin, J-C. Hocquet, S.Lebecq, Les Hommes et la Mèr dans l’Europe du Nord-Ouest de l’Antiquitè à nos jours, Actes du colloque de Boulogne-sur-mer, 15-17 juin 1984, Revue du Nord, 1, Boulogne-sur-mer 1986, pp. 163-178 SEKULIC-GVOZDANOVIC 1995= S.Sekulić-Gvozdanović, Fortress Churches in Croatia, Zagreb 1995 SEYRIG 1941=H. Seyrig, «Antiquitès syriennes», in Syria, XXII, Paris 1941, pp. 54-56 SEYRIG 1952= H.Seyrig, «Le phare de Laodicèe» in Syria, 29, pp. 54-59 SILENZI 1998= M.Silenzi, Il Porto di Roma, Roma 1998 SIMONCINI I 1993= G.Simoncini (a cura di), Sopra i porti di mare, I, il trattato di Teofilo Gallaccini e la concezione architettonica dei porti dal Rinascimento alla Restaurazione, Firenze 1993 SIMONCINI II 1993= G. Simoncini (a cura di), Sopra i porti di mare, II, Il Regno di Napoli, Firenze 1993 SIMONETTI 2005= E.Simonetti, Luci ed eclissi sul mare, Fari d’Italia, Bologna 2005 SINGER ET ALII 1956= C.Singer, E.J.Holymard, A.R.Hall, T.I.Williams, A History of Technology, II, Oxford 1956 SOLIER 1979= Y .Solier, «Narbonne antique, va-t-elle renaître?» in Archeologia, Prehistoire et Archeologie, 133, Paris 1979, pp. 36-50 SOUTHERN 1990= P.Southern, «Signal versus Illumination on Roman Frontiers» in Britannia, a Journal of Roman-British and kindred Studies, XXI, 1990, pp. 233-242 SPADEA-MARTINO 2004= G.Spadea,G.Martino, «La Liguria marittima dopo la caduta dell’impero, il quadro delle ricerche archeologiche» in Rotte e porti del Mediterraneo dopo la caduta dell’impero romano d’Occidente, Continuità e innovazioni tecnologiche e funzionali, IV Seminario, Genova, 18-19 giugno 2004, a cura di L. De Maria, R.Turchetti, Soneria Manelli 2004, pp. SPANO 1931= G.Spano, «Ripa puteolana» in Memorie dell’Accademia di Archeologia, Lettere e Belle Arti di Napoli, Napoli 1931, pp. 351SPINELLI 1996= C.Spinelli, «Fari del litorale e torri costiere: il linguaggio semaforico» in Adriatico, Genti e Civiltà, Cesena 1996, pp. 569-603 SPINOLA 2000= G. Spinola, «Reparto arte paleocristiana (1990-1998)» in Bull. Monumenti, Musei e Gallerie Pontificie, XX, pp. 285-304 STACCIOLI 1968= R.A.Staccioli, Modelli di edifici etrusco-italici, i modelli votivi, Roma 1968 STAFFA 2005= A.R. Staffa, «Insediamento e circolazione nelle regioni adriatiche dell’Italia centrale fra VI e IX secolo» in L’Adriatico dalla tarda antichità all’età carolingia, a cura di G. Brogiolo e P.Delogu, Firenze 2005, pp. 109-182 STRAFFORELLO 1893= G.Strafforello, Geografia dell’Italia-Messina, Milano, Roma, Napoli 1893 STUCCHI 1959=S. Stucchi, «Fari, Campanili, Mausolei», in AqN, XXX, 1959, pp. 18-30

Escuela Espaňola de Historia y Arquelogía en RomaCSIC, Roma 2005, pp. 13-19 ROMANELLI 1961= P. Romanelli, Leptis Magna, Roma 1961 ROSSI 1971= L.Rossi, Trajan’s Column and the Dacian Wars, London 1971 RŐTHLISBERGER 1959= M.Rőthlisberger, Die Tűrkei, Reise durch ihre Geschichte, Bern 1959 ROUGE’ 1996= J.Rougé, Recherches sur l’organisation du commerce maritime en Mèditerranèe sous l’Empire Romain, Paris 1996 RUGOLOTTO 1994= R.Rugolotto, Jesolo, una storia, tante storie, 500 anni di presenza cristiana in un angolo di terra veneta, Venezia 1994 RUSSO 2001= L. Russo, La rivoluzione scientifica, il pensiero scientifico greco e la scienza moderna, Milano 2001 RUSSO 2002= F.Russo, Le torri vicereali anticorsare della costa d’Amalfi, immagini e suggestioni della guerra corsa, Amalfi 2002 RUSSO 2005= F.Russo, «La flotta militare occidentaleMiseno» in M.Mauro, I porti antichi di Ravenna, I, il porto romano e le flotte, pp. 57-65 SALIMBENE 2002= C.Salimbene, «La Tabula Capitolina*» in Bollettino dei Musei Comunali di Roma, XVI, 2002, pp. 5-33 SALVETTI 2002= C.Salvetti, «Claudius Claudianus clarissimus vir? Gli scavi per l’apertura di via Nazionale e il ritrovamento di mosaico con scena di porto» in BC, CIII, Roma 2002, pp. 67-88 SALWAY 2001=B.Salway, Travel and Geography in the Roman Empire, London-New York 2001. SANTORO 1967= L.Santoro, «Le torri costiere della Campania» in Napoli Mobilissima, storia di arti figurative, archeologia e urbanistica, VI, I-II, gennaio-aprile 1967, pp. 38-49 SARNELLI 2002= P.Sarnelli, La guida de’ forestieri di Pozzuoli, Bologna 2002 (ristampa anastatica al volume del 1834) SAUTEL-IMBERT 1929= J.Sautel-L.Imbert, La Provence Romaine, histoire-art-monuments, Avignon 1929 SCHMIEDT 1971= G. Schmiedt, Il livello antico del Mare Tirreno. Testimonianze dei resti archeologici, Firenze 1972 SCHMIEDT 1975= G. Schmiedt, Antichi porti d’Italia: gli scali fenicio-punici, i porti della Magna Grecia, L’Universo, 45, Firenze 1975 SCHNEIDER 1967=A.M.Schneider, Byzanz, Vorbereiten und Archäologie der Stadt, Amsterdam 1967 SCHULTEN 1955= A.Schulten, Iberische Landeskunde, Geographie des Antiken Spanien, 1, Strasbourg/Kehl 1955 SCOGNAMIGLIO 2006= E.Scognamiglio, «Archeologia subacquea a Miseno (Campi Flegrei)» in Archaeologia Marittima Mediterranea, An International Journal of Underwater Archaeology, 3, 2006, pp. 65-77 SCRANTON-SHAW-IBRAHIM 1978= R.Scranton, J.W.Shaw, L.Ibrahim, Kenchreai, the eastern port of Corinth, Leiden 1978 SEBASTIANI 1996= S.Sebastiani, Ancona, forma e urbanistica, Roma 1996 225

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Commerciale di Aquileia Romana, II, 1987, pp. 305354 UGGERI 1990= G. Uggeri, «Aspetti archeologici della navigazione interna nella Cisalpina» in AAAd, Aquileia e l’Arco Adriatico, 1990, pp. 175-196 UGGERI 1997-1998= G.Uggeri, «Itinerari e strade, rotte, porti e scali della Sicilia Tardoantica» in ΚΩΚΑΛΟΣ, Studi pubblicati dall’Istututo di Storia Antica dell’Università di Palermo, XLIII-XLIV, 1997-1998, I-I, Atti del IX Congresso Internazionale di Studi sulla Sicilia antica, pp. 299-364 UGGERI 2006= G. Uggeri, Carta Archeologica del Territorio Ferrarese (F.° 77 III S.E.), Comacchio, Galatina 2006, pp, 143-176 UGGERI 2007= G.Uggeri, «Seleucia di Pieria: il porto di Antiochia sull’Oronte» in Atti del V Congresso di Topografia Antica, I porti del Mediterraneo in età classica (Roma, 5-6 Ottobre 2004), II, Galatina 2006 VACCARINO FORESTO 1935= B.Vaccarino Foresto, «Regione VII (Etruria), Isola di Giannutri-Le ultime scoperte archeologiche (Tav. IX-X)» in Ns, XIII, 1935, pp. 127-154 VANN 1992=R. L. Vann, «The Drusion: a candidate for Herod’s lighthouse at Caesarea Maritima» in IJNA, 20.2, New York, London, San Francisco, 1992, pp. 123-139 VEITMEYER 1900= L.A. Veitmeyer, Leuchtfeuer und Leuchtapparate, Műnchen und Leipzig 1900 VERLAY ?= A. Verlay, Boulogne-sur-mer a travers les ages, ? VERMEULE 1962= C. Vermeule, «The Colossus of Porto Raphti» in Hesperia, 31, 1, 1962, pp. 62-81 VIERECK 1975= H. D. L.Viereck, Die römische Flotte, Herford 1975 VILLA 2004= L.Villa, «Aquileia tra Goti, Bizantini e Longobardi: spunti per un’analisi delle trasformazioni urbane nella transizione fra tarda antichità e alto medioevo» in AAAd, LIX, Aquileia dalle origini alla costituzione del ducato longobardo, Trieste 2004, pp. 561-632 VIVIAN 2002=C.Vivian, The western desert of Egypt, Il Cairo 2002 VOLPE 1990= G.Volpe, La Daunia nell’età della romanizzazione, paesaggio agrario, produzione, scambi, Bari 1990 VRETTOS 2005=T. Vrettos, Alexandria, city of the western mind, New York-London-Toronto-SingaporeSydney 2005 WADDINGTON-BABELON-REINACH 1908= W.H. Waddington, E. Babelon, TH. Reinach, Recueil Gèneral Monnaies Grecques de l’Asie Mineure, I, Bithynie (jusqu’à Juliopolis), Paris 1908 WADDINGTON-BABELON-REINACH 1984= W.H.Waddington, E.Babelon,Th. Reinach, Recueil general des monnaies grecques de l’Asie Mineure, I, Pont et Paphlagonie, Bologna 1984 WARD PERKINS 1993= J.B. Ward Perkins, The severan buildings of Lepcis Magna. An architectural survey, 1993 WEIGALL 1910= A.E.P. Weigall, A Guide to the Antiquities of Upper Egypt from Abydos to the Sudan Frontier, London 1910

STUHLFAUTH 1938= G.Stuhlfauth, «Der Leuchtturm von Ostia» in Mitteilungen des Deutsches Archäologischen Instituts, 53, München 1938, pp. 139-163 TABARRONI 1976= G. Tabarroni, «La rappresentazione del faro sulle monete di Alessandria» in NAC, 5, pp. 191-203 TAMBURELLO = I.Tamburello, Palermo dalla conquista romana all’età bizantina (253 a.C.-535 d.C. circa), un’indagine nel territorio urbano, TANGHERONI 1996= M.Tangheroni, Commercio e navigazione nel Medioevo, Bari 1996 TANGHERONI 2003= Pisa e il Mediterraneo, uomini, merci, idee dagli Etruschi ai Medici, Catalogo della Mostra, a cura di M. Tangheroni, Milano 2003 TESTAGUZZA 1970= O.Testaguzza, Portus, illustrazione dei porti di Claudio e di Traiano e della città di Porto a Fiumicino, Roma 1970 TETTAMANCY GASTON 1991= F.Tettamancy Gaston, La Torre de Hercules, impresiones acerca de este antiquisimo faro bajo su aspecto historìco y arqueològico La Coruña 1991 TEXIER 1846= Ch.Texier, Mèmoires sur la ville et le port de Fréjus in Mèmoirees prèsèntés par divers savants à l’Academie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, 2, Antiquitès de France, II, Paris 1846 THIERSCH 1909= H.Thiersch, Pharos, Antike und Islam, Leipzig und Berlin 1909 THIERSCH 1915= H.Thiersch, «Griechische Leuchtfeuer», in JDI, 30, 1915, pp. 214-237 THOMPSON 1987= D. J.Thompson, «Ptolomaios and the ‘Lighthouse’: greek culture in the Memphite Serapeum», in Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society, 213, Cambridge 1987, pp. 105121 THOUVENOT 1940= R. Thouvenot, Essai sur la Province de Bètique, Paris 1940 TONINI 1848=L.Tonini, Storia Civile e Sacra Riminese. Rimini avanti il principio dell’era volgare,I, Rimini 1848 TONINI 1864=L.Tonini, Il Porto di Rimini, Brevi memorie storiche, Bologna 1864 TOWSEND 1938=P.W.Towsend, «The significance of the arc of the Severi at Lepcis» in AJA, 42,4, pp. 512-524 TOYNBEE 1974= J.M.Toynbee, Roman Remains in Britain, London 1974 TRANOY 1981= A.Tranoy, La Galice Romaine, Recherches sur le nord-ouest de la pènisule ibèrique dans l’Antiquitè, Paris 1981 TRONCHETTI 1986= C.Tronchetti, Nora, Sassari 1986 TURCHINI 1992= A.Turchini, «La città, edifici pubblici e privati» in A.TURCHINI, Rimini Medievale, contributi per la storia della città, Rimini 1992, pp. 35-87 UCCELLINI 1855= P.Uccellini, Dizionario Storico di Ravenna e di altri luoghi della Romagna, Ravenna 1855, p. 160, voce Faro UGGERI 1975-1976= G. Uggeri, «Baro Zavela, near Comacchio: torre romana» in Fa, XXX-XXXI, pp. 795 ss., 11682 UGGERI 1987= G.Uggeri, «La navigazione interna della Cisalpina in età romana» in AAAd, Vita Sociale e 226

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE WEIL 1879= M, H.Weil, Un papyrus inèdit de la Bibliothèque de M. Ambroise Firmin-Didot, nouveaux fragments d’Euripide et d’autres poètes grecs, Paris 1879 WHEELER 1929= M.Wheeler, «The Roman Lighthouse at Dover» in Archeological Journal, LXXXVI, London 1929, pp. 29-46 WILSON 1990=R.J.A.Wilson, Sicily under the Roman Empire, Worminster 1990 ZAFFAGNINI 1970= L.Zaffagnini, «Il Portus Augusti e la viabilità terrestre della fascia costiera romagnola dall’epoca romana a quella bizantina», in FR, I (CI), 1970, pp. 39-93. ZANCANI MONTUORO 1979= P.Zancani Montuoro, «Il Faro di Cosa in un ex-voto a Vulci?» in RIASA, III, II, Roma 1979, pp. 5-29 ZANKER 2002= P.Zanker, Un’arte per l’impero. Funzione e intenzione delle immagini nel mondo romano, Milano 2002 ZERI 1905= A.Zeri, «I porti del litorale romano» in Monografia storica dei porti dell’antichità nella penisola italiana, Roma 1905, pp. 239-309 ZOPPI 1979= L.Zoppi, P.Zoppi, Progetto ed opere nel porto di Ancona dalle origini ad oggi, Ancona 1979

227

MIDDLE AGES

CATALOGO DELLE IMMAGINI CATALOGUE OF THE IMAGES

Ricostruzione del porto di Ravenna da REDDÈ-GOLVIN 2005, p. 124 Reconstruction of the Roman harbour of Ravenna

229

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 1 SCHEDA 1 IOL-CAESAREA (Cherchell, Marocco) Provincia: Mauretania

Fig. 1: Caesarea of Mauretania, map of the little island named Joinville, B= lighthouse Caesarea di Mauretania, piantina dell’isolotto Joinville da LASSUS 1959, fig. 4 B=faro

Fig. 2 Caesarea of Mauretania, basement of the roman lighthouse and foundation of turkish fort Caesarea di Mauretania, basamento del faro romano e fondamenta del forte turco da LASSUS 1959, fig. 2 230

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV. /PLATE 2 SCHEDA 2 HADRUMETUM (Sūsa, Tunisia) Provincia: Numidia

Fig. 3: Hadrumetum, The modern tower of the qasba, erected possibly at the same place of the ancient Roman lighthouse Hadrumetum (Susa), l’odierna torre della qasba, forse sorta sul luogo dell’antico faro romano da EAT 2005, Africa, fig. 934

SCHEDA 3 SABRATHA (Sabratha, Libia) Provincia: Tripolitania

Fig. 4 Sabratha, general map of the Roman city of Sabratha Sabratha, piantina generale da DI VITA 1999, p. 148 231

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 3

Fig. 5: Remains of the tower-lighthouse of Sabratha Resti della torre faro di Sabratha, da DI VITA 2004, fig. 19

SCHEDA 4 LEPTIS MAGNA (Homs, Lebdah, Libia) Provincia: Tripolitania

Fig. 6: The port of Leptis Magna, the arrow shows the location of the lighthouse Il porto di Leptis Magna da VIERECK 1975, fig. 185. La freccia indica la posizione del faro 232

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 4

Fig. 7: Leptis Magna, base of the Roman lighthouse Leptis Magna, basamento del faro romano da Di Vita 1999, p. 113

Fig. 8: Section and planimetry of the Roman lighthouse of Leptis Magna Assonometria e pianta del faro di Leptis Magna secondo BARTOCCINI 1958, tav. XXVII 233

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 5

Fig. 9: Leptis Magna, four-faced triumphal arch of the Severi; it is possible to recognize the Severian Roman lighthouse behind the Emperors Leptis Magna, arco quadrifronte dei Severi, dietro agli imperatori si nota quello che era forse il faro di Leptis in poca severiana da BARTOCCINI 1931

Fig. 10: Reconstruction of the Roman lighthouse of Leptis Magna by A. Capricci Ricostruzione del faro di Leptis secondo A. Capricci, da BARTOCCINI 1958, tav. XLI 234

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 6 SCHEDA 5 PHYKOUS (Hamama, Libia) Provincia: Cyrenaica

Fig. 11: Hamama, possible Roman lighthouse of Phykous Il probabile faro di Phykous da MARIMPIETRI 2005, p. 12

SCHEDA 6 APOLLONIA DI CYRENAICA (Marsa Susa, Libia) Provincia: Cyrenaica

Fig. 12: General plan of the port of Apollonia in Cyrenaica and location of its lighthouse (black arrow) Piantina del porto di Apollonia di Cyrenaica e localizzazione del suo faro da DE ROBLES 2005, p. 269 235

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 7

Fig. 13: Reconstruction of the Roman port of Apollonia in Cyrenaica Ricostruzione del porto di Apollonia da Reddè-Golvin 2005, p. 32

SCHEDA 7 TAPOSIRIS MAGNA (Abousir, Egitto) Provincia: Aegyptus

Fig. 14 : The lighthouse of Taposiris Magna is still visible near Abousir Il faro di Taposiris Magna, ancora in situ presso Abousir da EMPEREUR (1) 1998, p. 42 236

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 8

Fig. 15: The lighthouse-tomb of Taposiris Magna before the restoration La tomba-faro di Taposiris Magna prima del restauro da EL FAKHARANI 1974, fig. 2

a

b

Fig. 16 Left: The Greek inscription found in the lighthouse tomb of Taposiris which mentions the building as a lighthouse. Right: general plan of the lighthouse L’iscrizione greca trovata nella tomba-faro di Taposiris Magna che identifica la torre come faro da THIERSCH 1909, fig. 48, a destra la pianta del faro da ADRIANI 1952, fig. 63 237

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 9 SCHEDA 8 Alexandria (Iskerderijeh, Egitto) Provincia: Aegyptus

Fig. 17: General plan of Alexandria’s harbour and common location of its lighthouse Piantina del porto di Alessandria e consueta localizzazione del fari da ALEXANDRIE 1995, p. 6.

Fig. 18: The fort of the sultan QaitBey (1477), built on the island of Pharos Alessandria, il forte del sultano QaitBey (1477), costruito sull’isola di Pharos, da ABULAFIA 2003, p. 143 238

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 10

Fig. 19: The lighthouse of Alexandria on a coin of Domitian Il faro di Alessandria in un conio di età domizianea, da BMC, Alexandria, p. 41, n° 343

Fig. 20 a, b Left: the lighthouse of Alexandria in a coin of Antoninus Pius with the image of Isis Pharia in front of the building: in this case is very easy to see the Tritons at the corners, the statue on top of the building, and the stairs to enter in the building. Right: a coin of Commodus with the representation of the lighthouse A sinistra il faro di Alessandria in un conio di età antonina con Isis Pharia di fronte all’edificio: in questo caso sono visibili i Tritoni angolari, la statua che sormonta la lanterna e le scale di accesso all’edificio da TABARRONI 1976, p. 203, fig. 5a. A destra, moneta di Commodo con il faro di Alessandria da QUET 1987, fig. 8.

239

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 11

Fig. 21a, b: Arabian travellers’ drawings of the lighthouse of Alexandria Il faro di Alessandria nei disegni dei viaggiatori arabi da EMPEREUR (2) 1998, p. 58

Fig. 22 a, b: Reconstruction of the lighthouse of Alexandria by Hairy and Thiersch Ricostruzione del faro di Alessandria secondo Thiersch da GRIMM 1998, fig. 43a e da HAIRY 2005, p. 55 240

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 12

Fig. 23 a, b: Left, the lighthouse of Alexandria and its statue in a glass vessel found near Kabùl (Afghanistan). Right: engraving with the representation of the lighthouse of Alexandria, Isis Pharia and Poseidon with the miniature of the building A sinistra, il faro di Alessandria e la sua statua in un vaso vitreo trovato nei pressi di Kabùl (Afghanistan), da ABULAFIA 2003, p. 142; a destra intaglio vitreo con la rappresentazione del faro alessandrino, Isis Pharia e Poseidone con il modellino dell’edificio da EMPEREUR (2) 1998, p. 50.

Fig. 24: Mosaic from the period of Justinianus with the representation of the lighthouse of Alexandria, which was already a fortress Qasr-el-Lybia, mosaico di età giustinianea con la rappresentazione del faro di Alessandria, ormai trasformato in fortezza, da EMPEREUR (2) 1998, p. 50 241

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 13

Fig. 25: Saint Mark arriving in the harbour of Alexandria, as the inscription and the presence of the lighthouse make clear Venezia, cappella Zen del Battistero di San Marco, il Santo arriva nel porto di Alessandria, riconoscibile dall’iscrizione e dal faro, da EMPEREUR (2) 1998, p. 54

Fig. 26: The lighthouse of Alexandria on segment IX of Tabula Peutingeriana Il faro di Alessandria nel segmento IX della Tabula Peutingeriana da FRANZOT 1999, p. 72. 242

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 14

Fig. 27: The lighthouse of Alexandria in the Reinassance iconography (painting of Maarten van Heemskerck) Il faro di Alessandria secondo l’immaginario cinquecentesco di Maarten van Heemskerck da MANFREDINIPESCARA 1985, p. 8

Fig. 28: Left: Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, painting of Brueghel the Elder (1520-1569) with the Babel Tower. Right: Convent of Novacella, Brixen, Nicolas Schiel, fresco of the wonders’ well: the lighthouse of Alexandria A sinistra, Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Peter Brueghel il Vecchio (1520-1569), la torre di Babele da SCOLARI 1983, a destra, Convento di Novacella, Bressanone, Nicolas Schiel, Affresco del Pozzo delle Meraviglie: il Faro di Alessandria (1669) 243

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 15 SCHEDA 9 QÂNI (Bi’rAli, Yemen) Provincia: Arabia Felix

Fig. 29: Left: The port of Qâni. Right: The temple-lighthouse Il porto di Qâni da SEDOV 2000, p. 236 e il tempio-faro da LIVIADOTTI 2000, p. 71

Fig. 30: Qâni, the temple-lighthouse of the Raven Fort Qâni, il tempio-faro del Forte dei Corvi da LIVIADOTTI 2000, p. 71 244

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 16 SCHEDA 10 CAESAREA MARITIMA (Caesarea Maritima, Israele) Provincia: Iudaea

Fig. 31: The harbour of Caesarea Maritima, the circle shows the position of the lighthouse Il porto di Caesarea Maritima, nel circoletto, localizzazione del faro da BŐRKER 1995, p. 28

Fig. 32: Reconstruction of Caesarea Maritima’s harbour by Hoelfelder. The arrow shows the new proposal for the location of Herod’s lighthouse by Chris Brandon Ricostruzione del porto di Caesarea Maritima secondo Hoelfelder da REDDÈ-GOLVIN 2005, p. 29. La freccia indica la nuova localizzazione del faro di Erode secondo Chris Brandon 245

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 17

Fig. 33 Lead tessera found at the entrance of the harbour of Caesarea in 1960 Haifa, Municipal Museum, tessera plumbea trovata all’entrata del porto nel 1960 da BŐRKER 1995, p. 15

Fig. 34: The remains of Herod’s lighthouse in Byzantine times Ciò che rimaneva del faro di Erode in epoca bizantina secondo BŐRKER 1995, P. 27

246

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 18 SCHEDA 11 Magdala (Migdal, Palestina) Provincia: Arabia Felix

Fig. 35: The territory of ancient city of Magdala Il territorio dell’antica Magdala da http.www.biblewalks.com

Fig. 36: The Rock of Ants and its possible lighthouse Lo scoglio denominato “Rock of Ants” e il suo possibile faro da GALILI 1993, p. 76 247

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 19 SCHEDA 12 APAMEA DI SIRIA (Hama, Siria) Provincia: Syria

Fig. 37: Plan of the city of Apamea Piantina della città di Apamea da KLENGEL 1971, p. 107

Fig. 38 a,b: Left: Drawing (ca. 1700) of a coin of Augustean period with the representation of the lighthouse of Apamea. Right: Central image of a medal belong to marshal Estrèes A sinistra, riproduzione grafica settecentesca di una moneta di età augustea con il faro di Apamea. A destra, immagine centrale di un medaglione appartenuto al maresciallo Estrèes da VEITMEYER 1900, p. 19 248

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 20

Fig. 39 Apamea,Syria, House of the Triclinium. Mosaic with the representation of the Apamean lighthouse Apamea di Siria, casa del Triclinio, mosaico con la rappresentazione del faro della città da GIULIANI 1994, fig. 2

SCHEDA 13 LAODICEA AD MARE (Lattakia, Siria) Provincia: Syria

Fig. 40 a,b: London, British Museum: the lighthouse of Laodicea on two coins of the age of Domitian London, British Museum. Il faro di Laodicea in due emissioni di età domizianea da BMC, Syria, 1964, n. 112, p. 161.

249

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 21

Fig. 41 The lighthouse of Laodicea (arrow) on a coin of Septimius Severus Il faro di Laodicea (indicato dalla freccia) in un’emissione di età severa quando Tyche era il nume tutelare della città, da SEYRIG 1952, fig. 4

Fig. 42: The lighthouse of Laodicea on what seems to be a naval attachè, a sort of modern anchor watch Il faro di Laodicea sul quale sembra essere un addetto alla navigazione, una specie di guardia costiera moderna da SEYRIG 1952, fig. 6.

250

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 22 SCHEDA 14 SELEUCIA DI PERIA (Silifke, Turchia) Provincia: Cilicia

Fig. 43: : General plan of the city of Seleucia Piantina di Seleucia di Pieria da UGGERI 2007, fig. 2

Fig. 44: Seleucia of Pieria, quay of the Roman harbour Seleucia di Pieria, molo del porto da UGGERI 2007, fig. 16 251

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV. /PLATE23 SCHEDA 15 Aegae (Ege, Turchia) Provincia: Misia

Fig. 45: London, National Maritime Museum, historical plan of the ancient city of Ege London, National Maritime Museum, cartina storica del porto di Ege da www.nmmm.ac.uk

Fig. 46 a, b: Left, coin of Macrinus with the representation of the lighthouse of Ege; right, coin of Decius Traianus with the representaion of the lighthouse of Ege A sinistra, moneta di Macrino con la rappresentazione del faro di Ege da REDDÈ 1979, fig. 3; a destra, moneta di Decio Traiano con la rappresentazione del faro da IMHOOF-BLUMER 1901, fig. 19

252

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

TAV./PLATE 24 SCHEDA 16 PERGA (Murtana,Turchia) Provincia:Pamphylia

Fig. 47: General plan of Perga Piantina generale di Perga da AKRUGAL 1983, fig. 162

Fig. 48: The lighthouse of Perga on a Roman coin of Decius Traianus Il faro di Perga in un’emissione numismatica di Decio Traiano 253

MIDDLE AGES

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 25 SCHEDA 17 SIDE (Selimye, Turchia) Provincia: Pamphylia

Fig. 49: General plan of the ancient city of Side Piantina generale di Side da AKRUGAL 1983, fig. 165

Fig. 50: The lighthouse of Side on a coin of Gallienus Il faro di Side in un’emissione di Gallieno da PENSA 1998, p. 138

254

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 26 SCHEDA 18 ATTALEIA (Antalya, Turchia) Provincia: Galatia

Fig. 51: Mausoleum of an aristocratic Roman person or Roman lighthouse of the port of Attaleia Hidrilik Kulesi, mausoleo di un aristocratico romano o faro del porto di Attaleia, da Internet

SCHEDA 19 NEA PAPHOS (Nèa Paphos, Cipro) Provincia: Cyprus

Fig. 52 a, b: Left, the port of Nèa Paphos, right, recontruction of trade between Paphos, Alexandria and Caesarea Maritima A sinistra, il porto della città da LEONARD-TUCK-HOEHLFELDER 1995, fig. 1, a destra scambi commerciali tra Paphos, Caesarea Maritima e Alessandria, ricostruzione grafica di Baldassarre Giardina

255

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 27

Fig. 53: Nèa Paphos Museum, stone with the representation of the lighthouse Nèa Paphos Museum, pietra calcarea con la rappresentazione del faro da LEONARD-TUCK-HOEHLFELDER 1995, fig. 3

SCHEDA 20 KYME (Aliaga, Turchia) Provincia: Asia

Fig. 54: Kyme, part of the harbour in opus caementicium La gettata in opus caementicium di Kyme da ESPOSITO-FELICI-GIANFROTTA-SCOGNAMIGLIO 2002, fig. 26 256

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 28 SCHEDA 21 PATARA (Patara, Turchia) Provincia: Lycia

Fig. 55: Patara, general map (the arrow shows the lighthouse) Piantina di Patara (alla freccia corrisponde il faro) da IŞIK-ECK-ENGELMANN 2008, p. 121

Fig. 56: Patara, base of the Roman lighthouse Basamento del faro romano di Patara (courtesy of Prof. Lorenzo Quilici) 257

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 29 SCHEDA 23 ABYDOS/SESTUS (Abido, Macedonia/Sesto, Turchia) Provincia: Misia/Thracia

Fig. 57: Coin of Abidus (from the reign of Commodus) with the representation of the lighthouse of Sestus Moneta di Abido, coniata durante il regno di Commodo, con la rappresentazione della torre di Sesto sulla quale è Ero da PRICE-TRELL 1977, p. 29, fig. 36

Fig. 58: The lighthouses of Sestus and Abydos on a fresco from the House of Vettii in Pompeii I fari di Sesto e Abido in un affresco della Casa dei Vettii a Pompei da PPM V, pp. 482-485 fig. 25 258

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 30

Fig. 59: Relief with the representation of the legend of Hero and Leander Rilievo con la leggenda di Ero e Leandro da THIERSCH 1909, fig. 32

SCHEDA 24 COSTANTINOPOLI/CHRYSPOLIS (Istanbul/Uskűdar, Turchia) Provincia: Thracia

Fig. 60: The Leander’s Tower in Chrysopolis in a print of the Reinassance traveller Gioseppe Rosaccio La torre di Leandro a Chrysopolis in una stampa del viaggiatore conquecentesco Gioseppe Rosaccio da ROSACCIO 1579, p. 76 259

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 31

Fig. 61 a, b: Left, the Leander’s Tower today; right, the same tower in segment VIII of Tabula Peutingeriana A sinistra, la torre di Leandro oggi (courtesy of Federica Fabbri); a destra la stessa torre nel segmento VIII della Tabula Peutingeriana da LEVI 1978, p. 63

Fig. 62: The harbour of Constatinople and the location of the medieval lighthouse (circle) Il porto di Costantinopoli con la localizzazione del faro medievale (circoletto) da MŰLLER-WIENER 1977, fig. 258 260

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 32

Fig. 63: The harbour of Constantinople and the column (or the lighthouse) of Costantinus in segment VIII of the Tabula Peutingeriana Il porto di Costantinopoli con la colonna (o il faro) di Costantino nel segmento VIII della Tabula Peutingeriana da LEVI 1978, p. 63

Fig. 64: Section of the lighthouse of Costantinople Sezione del faro di Costantinopoli da SCHNEIDER 1967, p. 10 261

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 33 SCHEDA 25 HERACLEA PONTICA (Eregli, Siria) Provincia: Bithinia

Fig. 65: The lighthouse of Heraclea Pontica on a coin of Gallienus Il faro di Eraclea Pontica in un’emissione di Gallieno da BABELON-REINACH 1984, nn. 171, 226, 247

Fig. 66: Denarius of Marcus Aurelius with the representation of the funeral pile of the emperor Antoninus Pius in the style of Herodian. The same representation is in National Archaeological Museum in Aquileia Denario di Marco Aurelio rappresentante al rovescio la pira funeraria dell’imperatore Antonino Pio secondo la tradizione riportata anche da Erodiano da MASTROCINQUE 2006, p. 37, fig. 4, cfr. Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Aquileia 262

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 34 SCHEDA 26 CAESAREA GERMANICA (non localizzato) Provincia: Bithinia

Fig. 67: The lighthouse of Caesarea Germanica Il faro di Caesarea Germanica da PENSA 1988 cfr. BMC, Bithinia, p. 122, n. 2

SCHEDA 27 ISTROS (Histria, Romania) Provincia: Moesia

Fig. 68: Coin of Alexandrus Severus with the hypotetic representation of the lighthouse (maybe an obelisc) of Istros Moneta di Alessandro Severo con presunta rappresentazione del faro (più probabile un obelisco) di Istros da http://citygate.ancients.info/architecture5.htm

263

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 35 SCHEDA 28 THASOS-PALEOKASTRO (Taso, Grecia) Provincia: Macedonia

Fig. 69: Map of the island of Thasos Piantina dell’isola di Thasos da KOZELJ-WURCH-KOZELJ 1989, fig. 3

Fig. 70: The remains of the tower-lighthouse of Evraiokastro on the island of Thasos I resti della torre-faro di Evraiokastro nell’isola di Thasos a nord di Paleokastro da KOZELJ-WURCH-KOZELJ 1989, fig.19 264

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 36

Fig. 71: The tower-lighthouse of Akerastos in Thasos La torre-faro di Akerastos da KOZELJ-WURCH-KOZELJ 2001, fig. 104

Fig. 72: Reconstruction of the tower-lighthouse of Phanari by Tony Kozelj Ricostruzione della torre-faro di Phanari secondo Tony Kozelj da GRANDJEAN-SALVIAT 2000, fig. 106

265

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 37 SCHEDA 29 CORINTHUS (Corinto, Grecia) Provincia: Achaia

Fig. 73: Coin of Corinthus (reign of Marcus Aurelius) with the possible representation of the lighthouse of the city Moneta di Corinto, coniata sotto Marco Aurelio, con possibile rappresentazione della città da GIARDINA 2007, fig. 19a

Fig. 74: The lighthouse of Corinthus on a very badly preserved coin Il faro di Corinto in un esemplare assai rovinato da EDWARDS 1933, fig. 182

266

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 38

Fig. 75 a,b: Left, the lighthouse of Corinthus on a coin of Commodus, right the lighthouse of Alexandria on a coin of Commodus A sinistra, il faro di Corinto in un’emissione di Commodo da GIARDINA 2007, fig. 19b. A destra, il faro di Alessandria in un’emissione di Commodo da THIERSCH 1909, fig. 6

SCHEDA 30 DYRRACHIUM (Durazzo, Albania) Provincia: Macedonia

Fig. 76: Il supposto faro ellenistico di Durazzo (courtesy of Prof. Sara Santoro-Prof. Afrim Hoti)

267

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 39 SCHEDA 31 NARONA (Vid-Metković, Croazia) Provincia: Dalmatia

Fig. 77 a,b: Vid, the church of Sveti Vid and the Neretva river Vid, la chiesa di Sveti Vid e il fiume Neretva che scorre nei suoi pressi (foto B.Giardina)

Fig. 78: Left, the tower of Ereš as it is today; right, the west wall of the Hellenistic tower which partly “grows” on the tower of Ereš Vid, s sinistra la Torre Ereš come si presenta oggi, a destra muro ovest della torre ellenistica e sostruzione addossata alla Torre Ereš da MARIN ET ALII 1999, figg. 5, 14 268

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 40 SCHEDA 32 PHAROS (Hvar, Jelsa, Croazia) Provincia: Dalmatia

Fig. 79: Hvar, Muzej , old photo of the tower of Jelsa Hvar, Muzej, foto d’epoca della torre di Tor a Jelsa (foto B.Giardina)

Fig. 80: Hvar, Jelsa, the tower of Maslinovik Hvar, la torre di Maslinovik da KIRIGIN 2003, figg. 20, 21 269

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 41 SCHEDA 33 SALONAE (Salona, Croazia) Provincia: Dalmatia

Fig. 81: Map of the Dalmatian coast with the harbours of Aenona, Scardona, Salona, Pharos Piantina della costa dalmata con i porti di Aenona, Scardona, Salona e Pharos da RINALDI TUFI 1989, p. 5 (eleborazione B.Giardina)

Fig. 82: Left, segment IV of the Tabula Peutingeriana showing Dalmatian coast; right, the bay and the harbour of Scardona (Krk river Valley) today seen from the motorway A sinistra, segmento IV della Tabula Peutingeriana con la costa dalmata da CECI 1963, fig. 1. A destra, la baia e l’odierno porto di Scardona nella Valle del fiume Krk visti dall’autostrada (foto B.Giardina) 270

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 42 SCHEDA 34 PARENTIUM (Parenzo, Croazia) Regio X: Venetia et Histria

Fig. 83: Poreč, Saint Nicholas island, watchtower dated c. 1400, probably built on a previous lighthouse Parenzo, isola di San Niccolò, torre di avvistamento quattrocentesca costruita con tutta probabilità su un faro di epoca precedente (foto B.Giardina)

Fig. 84 a,b: Left, the so called Rocks of Poreč da Alberi 2001, fig. 377; right, San Niccolo’s watchtower A sinistra, i così detti “Scogli di Parenzo” da Alberi 2001, fig. 377, a destra, Parenzo, isola di San Niccolò, torre di avvistamento (foto B.Giardina) 271

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 43 SCHEDA 35 PYRRANHEUM (Pirano, Slovenia) Regio X: Venetia et Histria

Fig. 85 a, b: Left, view of Piran with its Neogothic lighthouse; right detail of the Neogothic lighthouse A sinistra, veduta di Pirano con il faro neogotico indicato dalla freccia; a destra, particolare del faro neogotico (foto B.Giardina)

SCHEDA 36 TIMAVUS/DUINO (San Giovanni di Duino, Friuli) Regio X: Venetia et Histria

Fig. 86 a, b: Left, detail of the drawing of Puschi with the localization of the lighthouse in the harbour of Timavus; right, drawing of Belforte’s lighthouse A sinistra, particolare dello schizzo del Puschi con localizzazione del faro del porto del Timavo, fotografia dell’autore di un pannello illustrativo alla mostra Archeologia dei paesaggi costieri, svoltasi a Trieste nel novembre 2007. A destra, disegno del faro di Belforte dalla Carta del venetiano territorio di Monfalcone, manoscritto anonimo non datato del XVII secolo da FOSCAN-VECCHIET 2001, p. 170 272

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 44

Fig. 87 a, b: Left, view of the castle of Duino, to its right are the remains of the old castle; right, the tower built on the Roman lighthouse of the age of Diocletian A sinistra, veduta aerea del castello di Duino, alla cui destra sono i ruderi del castello vecchio (da una cartolina); a destra, particolare della torre-mastio costruita sul faro romano dioclezianeo (foto B.Giardina)

SCHEDA 37 TERGESTE (Trieste, Friuli Venezia Giulia) Regio X: Venetia et Histria

Fig. 88: : A. Rieger’s print with the representation of the Roman harbour of Tergeste and its lighthouse Il porto di Tergeste romana ed il suo faro in una stampa di A.Rieger da GRANDENIGO 1970 (frontespizio) 273

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 45

Fig. 89: The lighthouse of Trieste, the so called Zucco, in the nearby Ireneo della Croce e Pietro Coppo recognized as the remains of the Roman lighthouse Il faro di Trieste, detto Lo Zucco, presso il quale Ireneo della Croce e Pietro Coppo citavano i ruderi del faro romano (foto B.Giardina)

SCHEDA 38 AQUILEIA/GRADUS (Aquileia/Grado, Friuli Venezia Giulia) Regio X: Venetia et Histria

Fig. 90: Segment III of the Tabula Peutingeriana with the harbour of Aquileia Segmento III della Tabula Peutingeriana con la vignetta di Aquileia, la freccia indica il presunto faro romano da FRANZOT 1999, p. 55

274

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 46

Fig. 91: Aquileia, base of a round tower, once interpreted as a lighthouse, belonged to the city gate Aquileia, basamento di torre circolare, un tempo interpretata come un faro e pertinente ad una porta urbica (foto B.Giardina)

SCHEDA 39 EQUILUM (Jesolo, Veneto) Regio X: Venetia et Histria

Fig. 92: Jesolo, the Caligo tower near the river Piave Vecchio Jesolo, la Torre di Caligo presso il Piave Vecchio (foto B.Giardina) 275

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 47 SCHEDA 40 CANALE S.FELICE (Laguna Veneziana) Regio X: Venetia et Histria

Fig. 93 a, b: Left, location of San Felice Canal. Right: drawing of the basement of the tower-lighthouse of San Felice Canal A sinistra, inquadramento cartografico della zona del Canale S.Felice da MEDAS-D’AGOSTINO 2007 fig. 4; a destra, schizzo del basamento del torrione del Canale S.Felice da CANAL 1998, staz. 138

Fig. 94: Base of the tower-lighthouse of San Felice Canal Basamento della torre-faro del Canale S.Felice nella Laguna Veneziana da MEDAS-D’AGOSTINO 2007, fig. 5 276

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 48 SCHEDA 41 HATRIA (Adria, Veneto) Regio X: Venetia et Histria

Fig. 95: Adria, base of the bell-tower of the church of Santa Maria Assunta della Tomba Adria, basamento del campanile della chiesa di Santa Maria Assunta della Tomba (foto B.Giardina)

Fig. 96 a, b: Left, stone with an inscription noting that the Roman lighthouse was at the same place of the modern bell-tower; right, the church viewed from river Po, the bell-tower is the highest building visible from everywhere A sinistra, lapide che ricorda come il faro romano di Adria fosse l’attuale campanile. A destra, veduta della chiesa dal Po con in evidenza il campanile che svetta su tutti gli edifici (foto B.Giardina) 277

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 49 SCHEDA 42 BARO ZAVELEA (Argine Agosta, Emilia Romagna) Regio VIII: Aemilia

Fig. 97 a, b: Baro Zavelea (Comacchio), base of Roman lighthouse Baro Zavelea, Valli del Mezzano (Comacchio), torre-faro di età augustea in laterizio da UGGERI 2006, tav. 5, sito 61

SCHEDA 43 RAVENNA/CLASSIS (Ravenna/Classe, Emilia Romagna) Regio VIII: Aemilia

Fig. 98 a, b: Left, the circle shows the location of the lighthouse of Ravenna. Right: reconstruction of the harbour of Ravenna with the location of the round tower of via Marabina (once thought to be the Roman lighthouse) A sinistra, il faro collocato al n. 71 da BERTI CERONI-SMURRA 2005, p. 64; a destra, ricostruzione del porto con l’ubicazione della torre rotonda trovata in via Marabina (un tempo interpretata come faro) secondo ZAFFAGNINI 1970, fig. 8 278

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 50

Fig. 98 c: Ravenna, church of Sant’Apollinare Nuovo: the Civitas Classis Ravenna, chiesa di Sant’Apollinare Nuovo: la Civitas Classis (foto B.Giardina)

Fig. 99 a, b: Left, Naples, National Museum, painting of Giovanni Bellini with the transfiguration of Christ, in the background the mausoleum of Teodericus and the square lighthouse. Right: Part of the dome of the church of Santa Maria del Faro where the Roman lighthouse was A sinistra, Napoli, Museo Nazionale, la Trasfigurazione di Cristo di Giovanni Bellini, sullo sfondo il mausoleo di Teoderico e il faro quadrato dello stesso da HEIDENREICH/JOHANNES 1971, fig. 88. A destra, la cupola del mausoleo con in evidenza la parte a cui era addossato il faro (foto B.Giardina) 279

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 51

Fig. 100: Ravenna, foundations of the medieval lighthouse Ravenna, basamento del faro medievale (foto B.Giardina)

Fig. 101: Watercolour by Coronelli with the reconstruction of the bell tower of the church of Santa Maria in Porto Fuori as the ancient Roman lighthouse of Classis Acquerello del Coronelli con la ricostruzione del campanile della chiesa di Santa Maria in Porto Fuori come l’antico faro romano di Classe da BIANCHETTI 1997, fig. 9 280

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV /PLATE 52

Fig. 102 a, b: Left, the bell tower of the church of Santa Maria in Porto Fuori before the restoration. Right: the bell tower of the church of Santa Maria in Porto Fuori today A sinistra, il campanile della chiesa di Santa Maria in Porto Fuori prima dei bombardamenti del 1944 da MAZZOTTI 1991, fig. 9. A destra, il campanile come si presenta oggi dopo i restauri degli Anni Cinquanta del Novecento (foto B.Giardina)

Fig. 103: Mantua, Palazzo d’Arco, 1500 fresco with the representation of the Porta Aurea and the hypothetic lighthouse of Ravenna (very similar to the bell tower of the church of Santa Maria in Porto Fuori). Actually, the fresco depicts the countryside of Rome Mantova, Palazzo d’Arco, particolare dell’affresco cinquecentesco con la rappresentazione della Porta Aurea e del presunto faro di Ravenna (assai simile al campanile della chiesa di Santa Maria in Porto Fuori) secondo BOLLINI 2005, fig. 1. In realtà l’affresco riguarda i dintorni di Roma.

281

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 53 SCHEDA 44 ARIMINUM (Rimini, Emilia Romagna) Regio VIII: Aemilia

Fig. 104: Arrigoni’s map of Ariminum (1617) Piantina di Ariminum, composta dall’Arrigoni nel 1617 con l’indicazione dell’antico muro del porto romano dove sorgeva il faro da MORIGI 1998, fig. 2

Fig. 105 a, b: Left, Rimini, Museo della Città, mosaic with the representation of the Roman lighthouse of the harbour. Right: Rimini, Biblioteca Gambalunga, Pietro Santi print with the medieval lighthouse, the so-called Torre d’Ausa, built perhaps on the remains of the Roman lighthouse, as it was before 1807 A sinistra, Rimini, Museo della Città. mosaico con la rappresentazione del faro romano del porto (foto B.Giardina). A destra, Rimini, Biblioteca Gambalunga, Pietro Santi, il faro d’epoca medievale, chiamato Torre d’Ausa, forse costruito sui ruderi del faro romano, in una stampa precedente al 1807, data del crollo dello stesso da MORIGI 1998, fig. 3 282

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 54

Fig. 106: Rome, Antiquarium Comunale, mosaic found in the domus of Claudius Claudianus (via Nazionale) with the representation of a ship sailing into the harbour and a lighthouse Roma, Antiquarium Comunale, mosaico proveniente dalla domus di Claudius Claudianus in via Nazionale con entrata in porto di una nave e faro da MEDAS 2004, fig. 75

SCHEDA 45 ANCONA (Ancona, Marche) Regio V: Picenum

Fig. 107: The harbour of Ancona on a sixteenth-century print by Claudio Duchesi Il porto di Ancona in una stampa cinquecentesca di Claudio Duchesi da ALFIERI 2000, fig. 7

283

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 55

Fig. 108 a, b: Left, reconstruction of the lighthouse on Trajan’s Column in Rome. Right: Ancona, Palazzo del Governo, the harbour and the Roman lighthouse of Ancona on a painting of Tornaghi and Giuliodori A sinistra, ricostruzione del faro della Colonna Traiana di Roma da LEGER 1979, fig. 7. A destra, Ancona, Palazzo del Governo, il porto e il faro romano di Ancona in un quadro a olio di Tornaghi e Giuliodori, da ZOPPI 1979, fig. 2

Fig. 109: Ancona, view of the modern harbour and location of the Cosat Guard (arrow) Ancona, veduta del porto attuale e localizzazione della Guardia Costiera (indicata dalla freccia) (foto B.Giardina)

284

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 56

Fig. 110: Ninteenth-century foundations of the old lighthouse (lanterna) probably built over Roman lighthouse Basamento ottocentesco della vecchia Lanterna, forse impostata sul faro romano (foto B.Giardina)

SCHEDA 46 BRUNDISIUM (Brindisi, Puglia) Regio II: Apulia et Calabria

Fig. 111: Brindisi, column at the entrance of the harbour. It was thought that the column was once used as a lighthouse by burning fires on its top Brindisi, colonna presso il porto che un tempo si pensava utilizzata come faro tramite fuochi applicati sulla sua sommità (foto B.Giardina)

285

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 57

Fig. 112: Column-lighthouse on a famous mosaic in Palestrina’s National Museum Colonna-faro nel noto mosaico di Palestrina da KŐSTER 1923, fig. 57

SCHEDA 47 CAPO PELORO, TORRE FARO-MESSINA (Torre Faro, Messina, Sicilia) Provincia: Sicilia

Fig. 113 a, b: Left, the tower-lighthouse of Messina on a coin of Sextus Pompeius. Right: Torre Faro, Messina, three big steps of the Roman lighthouse recently found inside the Forte degli Inglesi A sinistra, la torre-faro di Messina in un’emissione di Sesto Pompeo da RRC, p. 520, n° 511/4 da BMCRR II, p. 56, n° 15. A destra, Torre Faro, Messina, i tre gradoni del faro romano scoperti all’interno del Forte degli Inglesi (foto B.Giardina) 286

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 58

Fig. 114 a, b: Two versions of the lighthouse of Torre Faro, already transformed in fort. Left, drawing by Camillo Camillani (1584), right: drawing by Gustav Dirè (1860) Due versioni di Torre Faro, già trasformato in fortino. A sinistra, un disegno di Camillo Camillani dalla Descrittione dell’isola di Sicilia (1584). A destra, un disegno di Gustav Dorè (1860) da BUCETI 2004, pp. 25, 28

Fig. 115 a, b: Left, Torre Faro, Messina, the borbonic tower of Forte degli Inglesi. Right: the modern lighthouse on the top of the fort A sinistra, Torre Faro, Messina, la torre borbonica di Forte degli Inglesi, a destra, il faro moderno costruito sulla cima del fortino (foto B.Giardina)

287

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 59 SCHEDA 48 PAN(H)ORMOS (Palermo, Sicilia) Provincia: Sicilia

Fig. 116 a, b: Two coins of Augustean period with the representation of the lighthouse of Panormus Monete di età augustea con la rappresentazione del faro di Panormus da PRICE-TRELL 1977, p. 42, fig. 67

Fig. 117: Engraving of 1727 made by Antonino Mongitore with the representation of Castellamare of Palermo and its tower-lighthouse Incisione del 1727 effettuata da Antonino Mongitore con il porto di Castellamare di Palermo e la sua torre-faro da GIUSTOLISI 1988, fig. XLIII 288

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 60 SCHEDA 49 NORA (Nora, Sardegna) Provincia: Sardinia

Fig. 118: Left, map of Nora with the indication of the lighthouse as letter E. Right: Aereal view of Nora A sinistra, piantina di Nora con l’indicazione del faro alla lettera E da PESCE 1972, fig. 3. A destra, fotografia aerea di Nora da TRONCHETTI 1986, fig. 1

Fig. 119: Nora, the punic tower-lighthouse before its destruction La torre-faro punica di Nora prima della sua distruzione da PESCE 1972, fig. 93

289

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 61 SCHEDA 50 OLBIA (Olbia, Sardegna) Provincia: Sardinia

Fig. 120: Reconstruction of the Roman harbour of Olbia Ricostruzione del porto romano di Olbia e del suo faro secondo REDDÈ-GOLVIN 2005, p. 90

SCHEDA 51 PUNTA LICOSA (San Marco di Castellabate, Campania) Regio I: Latium et Campania

Fig. 121 a, b: Left, the promontory of Punta Licosa and the remains of the Roman quay which emerges from the sea. Right: old photo of Punta Licosa A sinistra, San Marco, promontorio di Punta Licosa e i resti del molo romano che affiorano dal mare (foto B.Giardina). A destra, foto d’epoca del 1900 da BENINI 2002, fig. 2

290

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 62 SCHEDA 52 CAPO ATHENEUM (Termini, Punta della Campanella, Campania) Regio I: Latium et Campania

Fig. 122: General map with the location of Punta Campanella Localizzazione geografica di Punta Campanella (cartina guida Kompass)

Fig 123: Punta della Campanella, Minerva’s Tower next to the modern lighthouse Punta della Campanella, la torre di Minerva e il faro moderno (foto B.Giardina) 291

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 63

Fig. 124: Punta della Campanella, location of the possible Roman lighthouse Punta della Campanella, localizzazione del probabile faro da MINGAZZINI-PFISTER 1946, fig. 34

SCHEDA 53 CAPRAE (Capri, Campania) Regio I: Latium et Campania

Fig. 125 a ,b: Capri, Villa Iovis, left, the lighthouse of Tiberius as it was in 1958. Right: the lighthouse as it is today Capri, Villa Iovis, a sinistra il faro di Tiberio come si presentava negli Anni Cinquanta del Novecento; a destra, il faro come si presenta oggi (foto B.Giardina) 292

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

TAV./PLATE 64

Fig. 126: Places reached by the light of the Capri’s lighthouse Programma segnaletico del faro di Tiberio da KRAUSE 2005, fig. 329

Fig. 127: Possible reconstruction of the lighthouse of Capri Possibile ricostruzione del faro di Capri da KRAUSE 2005, fig. 332 293

MIDDLE AGES

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 65

Fig. 128: The remains of the so-called Specularium or Loggia Marina I resti del così detto Specularium o Loggia Marina da KRAUSE 2005, fig. 335

Fig. 129: Capri, Villa Iovis, the remains of the so-called Specularium from N-E Capri, Villa Iovis, i resti dello Specularium visto da N-E da KRAUSE 2005, fig. 331

294

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 66 SCHEDA 54 BAIAE-MISENUM (Baia/Miseno, Campania) Regio I: Latium et Campania

Fig. 130: Map of Miseno and its harbour; L=Lantern F=Lighthouse Villa so called Faro= Masseria Annunziata Piantina di Miseno e del suo porto, L=Lanterna, F=Faro, Villa c.d. Faro= Masseria Annunziata (rielaborazione B.Giardina 2007)

Fig. 131: Miseno, Grottone site, external wall of the specola of Miseno inside the Masseria Annunziata (private property) Miseno, Località Grottone, muro esterno della specola misenate inserita nella Masseria Annunziata da BORIELLO 1980, fig. 250 295

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 67

Fig. 132: Plan of the lighthouse of Miseno Piantina del faro di Miseno da BORIELLO-D’AMBROSIO 1979, p. 122

Fig. 133: Miseno, church of San Sossio, built in opus reticulatum interpreted as a lighthouse and maybe used as fishpool Miseno, chiesa di San Sossio, edificio in opus reticolatum, interpretato come faro ma forse adibito a peschiera da Miseno, itinerario marino a cura dell’Associazione Misenum 296

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 68

Fig. 134: Capo Miseno, building with sections of opus reticolatum on via del Faro (Lighthouse Street), near the tunnel, possibly built on an ancient lighthouse Capo Miseno, edificio con inserti in opus reticolatum su Via del Faro, poco prima del tunnel, forse impostato sull’antico faro (foto B.Giardina)

Fig. 135: Capaccio, private property, seventeenth-century print showing the harbour of Miseno; on its promontory is a watchtower with the certain function of lighthouse. The street seems exactly the same as the one leading from San Sossio’s church to the promontory where I have located the building in opus reticolatum Capaccio, proprietà privata, stampa seicentesca con il porto di Miseno, sul cui promontorio è una torre con indubbia funzione anche di faro. La strada che conduce ad essa sembra essere proprio quella che parte dalla chiesa di San Sossio ed arriva circa a metà del promontorio dove ho individuato l’edificio in opus reticolatum da Miseno, itinerario marino a cura dell’Associazione Misenum 297

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 69

Fig. 136 Reconstruction of the Roman lighthouse of Miseno by Russo Ricostruzione del faro di Miseno secondo RUSSO 2005, p. 56

Fig. 137: Warsaw, Archaeological National Museum, detail of the flask found in Rome with the representation of a lighthouse, possibly Miseno, Baia or Pozzuoli Varsavia, Museo Archeologico Nazionale, particolare della fiaschetta vitrea con la rappresentazione di un faro, forse quello di Miseno, Baia o Pozzuoli da FUJII 2001, fig. 1

298

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 70 SCHEDA 55 PUTEOLI (Pozzuoli, Campania) Regio I: Latium et Campania

Fig. 138: Prague, Archaeological National Museum, flask with the representation of the harbour of Puteoli Praga, Museo Archeologico Nazionale, fiaschetta vitrea con la rappresentazione del porto di Puteoli da FRANZOT 1999, p. 48

Fig. 139: Naples, Museo Archeologico Nazionale, fresco from Gragnano (Stabia) with the representation of a harbour and a lighthouse, possibly Puteoli or Miseno Napoli, Museo Archeologico Nazionale, affresco da Gragnano (Stabia) con la rappresentazione di un porto e un faro interpretato come quello di Puteoli o Misenum da GIANFROTTA 1998, fig. 12 299

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 71 SCHEDA 57 ANXUR-TARRACINA (Terracina, Lazio) Regio I: Latium et Campania

Fig. 140: Plan of the harbour of Terracina Piantina del porto di Terracina (il fanale è indicato dalla freccia) da ZERI 1905, p. 301

Fig. 141: Terracina, the so-called Pisco Montano; on its top lies the temple of Iuppiter-Anxur Terracina, il Pisco Montano sovrastato dal tempio di Giove-Anxur (foto B.Giardina)

300

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 72

Fig. 142: Relief with the representation of the construction (or restoration) of a lighthouse (Terracina or Gaeta) or with the representation of the works during the cutting of the so-called Pisco Montano Rilievo con la costruzione o il restauro di un faro (Terracina o Gaeta) oppure con i lavori del taglio del Pisco Montano da LUGLI 1926, tav. fuori testo

Fig. 143: Terracina, Civic Archaeological Museum, drawing by Luigi Canina (19th century) depicting the harbour of Terracina and its lighthouse Terracina, Museo Civico Archeologico. Disegno di Luigi Canina (XIX secolo) con il porto di Terracina alla cui estremità spicca il faro (foto B.Giardina)

301

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 73 SCHEDA 58 CIRCEII (San Felice al Circeo, Lazio) Regio I: Latium et Campania

Fig. 144: Capo Circeo, the modern lighthouse which was built on the remains of the ancient one Capo Circeii, il faro moderno che si imposta sui resti di quello antico (foto B.Giardina)

SCHEDA 59 ASTURA (Torre Astura, Lazio) Regio I: Latium et Campania

Fig. 145: General plan of Astura, the modern lighthouse is marked by letter C Piantina della zona di Astura, il faro si localizza alla lettera C da PICCARRETA 1977, fig. 10

302

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 74

Fig. 146: Torre Astura, remains of Cicero’s Villa. On the villa was built a watchtower in Middle Ages and it was used as prison for Corradino di Svevia after the Tagliacozzo battle Torre Astura, resti della villa di Cicerone su cui fu costruita la torre di avvistamento in età medievale, fu prigione di Corradino di Svevia dopo la battaglia di Tagliacozzo (1268) (foto B.Giardina)

SCHEDA 60 ROMA E IL PORTUS AUGUSTI OSTIA (Roma/Ostia, Lazio) Regio I: Latium et Campania

Fig. 147: Rome, Foro Boario, temple of Portunus Roma, Foro Boario, tempio di Portunus (foto B.Giardina)

303

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 75

Fig. 148: Reconstruction of the harbours of Claudius and Trajan, the lighthouse was built on a little island Ricostruzione dei porti di Claudio e Traiano con in primo piano il faro su un isolotto (courtesy of Museo delle Navi di Ostia)

Fig. 149: Topography of the harbours of Ostia Topografia del porto di Ostia da MANNUCCI 1996, fig. 40 304

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 76

Fig. 150 a ,b: Left, Lyon, Museèe de la Civilisation Gallo-Romaine, coin of Nero (64 A.D., year of the inauguration of the new harbour). Right: remains of the possible lighthouse of Ostia A sinistra, Lyon, Musèe de la Civilisation Gallo-Romaine, moneta emessa da Nerone nel 64 d.C. in occasione dell’inaugurazione del nuovo porto di Ostia di GIARDINA 2007, fig. 7a. A destra, pilone rotondo del presunto faro di Ostia da TESTAGUZZA 1970, fig. 124

Fig. 151 a ,b: Left, reconstruction of the lighthouse of Ostia by Testaguzza. Right: Torlonia Museum, detail of the Torlonia relief with the lighthouse of Ostia (3rd century A.D.) A sinistra, ricostruzione del faro di Ostia secondo TESTAGUZZA 1970, p. 126. A destra, Roma, Museo Torlonia, particolare del rilievo omonimo con il faro di Ostia (III sec. d.C.) da VIERECK 1975, p. 302

305

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 77

Fig. 152 a, b: Left, State of Vatican, Rome, Musei Vaticani, Galleria delle Carte Geografiche: A. Danti, 1582 fresco depicting the hypothetical reconstruction of the Roman harbour of Ostia and its lighthouse (detail). Right: Rome, Palazzo Colonna, schematic figure of a lighthouse on a Roman sarcophagus A sinistra, Roma, Musei Vaticani, Galleria delle Carte Geografiche, A.Danti, affresco del 1582 che riproduce l’ipotetico porto romano di Ostia e il suo faro (particolare) da SILENZI 1998, fig. 158. A destra, Roma, Palazzo Colonna, raffigurazione schematica di un faro in un sarcofago romano da THIERSCH 1909, fig. 12

Fig. 153: Ostia, Archaeological National Museum, sarcophagus with the representation of a lighthouse from the Holy Necropolis of Portus Ostia, Museo Archeologico Nazionale, magazzini, sarcofago con rappresentazione di un faro dalla Necropoli Sacra di Porto da PAVOLINI 2005, fig. 31 306

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 78

Fig. 154 a, b: Left: State of Vatican, Rome, Galleria Lapidaria Vaticana, personifications of the lighthouses of Ostia and Alexandria. Right: Rome, Museo Nazionale Romano di Palazzo Massimo alle Terme, sarcophagus with the personification of Portus Romae A sinistra, Stato del Vaticano (Roma), Galleria Lapidaria Vaticana, personificazione dei fari di Ostia ed Alessandria da THIERSCH 1909 figg. 17a, 17b. A destra, Roma, Museo Nazionale Romano di Palazzo Massimo alle Terme, sarcofago con la personificazione di Portus Romae (foto B.Giardina)

Fig. 155 a ,b: Ostia, Piazzale delle Corporazioni, images of the lighthouse of Ostia Ostia, Piazzale delle Corporazioni, raffigurazioni del faro di Ostia (foto B.Giardina) 307

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV. / PLATE 79

Fig. 156 a, b, c: Above left, Holy Necropolis of Porto (Ostia), mosaic with the representation of the lighthouse of Ostia; right: Rome, Museo Nazionale Romano, funerary relief of Lollia with the representation of a lighthouse. Under, Rome, Museo Cristiano Lateranense, funerary relief from the cemeterium of Kyriaka. Sopra, a sinistra: necropoli Sacra di Porto (Ostia), mosaico con la rappresentazione del faro di Ostia (foto B.Giardina), a destra, Roma, Museo Nazionale Romano, lastra tombale di Lollia da STUHLFAUTH 1938, fig. 7. Sotto, Roma, Museo Cristiano Lateranense, lastra tombale dal Cimitero di Kyriaka da STUHLFAUTH 1938, fig. 5

Fig. 157 a,b: Left, Segment IV of Tabula Peutingeriana with the representation of Portus Romae. Right: Ostia, mosaic with the representation of a lighthouse A sinistra, segmento IV della Tabula Peutingeriana con il Portus Romae e i suoi fari da Levi 1978, p. 43. A destra, Ostia Antica, Piazzale delle Corporazioni, mosaico con faro (foto B.Giardina) 308

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 80

Fig. 158 a, b: Left, reconstruction of the lighthouse of Osta by Luigi Canina (19th cenrury); right, reconstruction of the lighthouse of Osta by Silenzi A sinistra, ricostruzione del faro di Ostia secondo Luigi Canina (XIX secolo) da THIERSCH 1909, fig. 19, a destra ricostruzione del faro di Ostia secondo SILENZI 1998, tavola fuori testo

SCHEDA 61 CENTUMCELLAE (Civitavecchia, Lazio) Regio VII: Etruria

Fig. 159: The harbour of Centumcellae on a seventeenth-century drawing, preserved in Rome’s State archives Il porto di Centumcellae in un disegno seicentesco conservato all’Archivio di Stato di Roma da QUILICI 2004, fig.1 309

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 81

Fig. 160: Ninteenth-century print by Arnaldo Massarelli with the representation of the harbour of Centumcellae Il porto di Centumcellae in una stampa ottocentesca di Arnaldo Massarelli da QUILICI 2001, p. 4

Fig. 161: The so-called Torre del Bicchiere (Glass Tower), another Roman lighthouse of Centumcellae before its destruction, on an old photo Una vecchia foto della Torre del Bicchiere, altro faro romano di Centumcellae, prima del suo bombardamento da QUILICI 1993, fig. 7 310

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 82

Fig. 162: The so-called Torre del Lazzareto (Lazareto’s Tower) on an old photo before its destruction Civitavecchia, la Torre del Lazzareto in una foto d’epoca precedente ai bombardamenti del 1941 da QUILICI 1993, fig. 9

Fig. 163: Civitavecchia, the Torre del Lazzareto, today Civitavecchia, la torre del Lazzareto oggi (foto B.Giardina) 311

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV. /PLATE 83

Fig. 164: Ostia, Piazzale delle Corporazioni, mosaic with the possible representation of one of the tower-lighthouses of Centumcellae Ostia, Piazzale delle Corporazioni, particolare di una delle possibili torri-faro di Centumcellae (foto B.Giardina)

SCHEDA 62 DIANUM-ARTEMISIUM (Isola di Giannutri, Toscana) Regio VII: Etruria

Fig. 165: Reconstruction of the landing-place of Cala Maestra; the arrow shows the possible small lighthouse Ricostruzione dell’approdo di Cala Maestra, il possibile faro è la piccola struttura indicata dalla freccia da CAVAZZUTI 1988, fig. 33

312

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 84

Fig. 166: Giannutri Island, Cala Maestra, small building interpreted as the lighthouse Isola di Giannutri, Cala Maestra, la struttura tronco-piramidale, forse interpretabile come una torre-faro dell’isola da CAVAZZUTI 1998, fig. 34

SCHEDA 64 PORTUS COSANUS (Cosa, Ansedonia, Toscana) Regio VII: Etruria

Fig. 167: Reconstruction of Portus Cosanus by McCann Ricostruzione del Portus Cosanus secondo McCann da GIANFROTTA 1991, fig. 45 313

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 85

Fig. 168 a, b: Left, Rome, Museo Nazionale di Villa Giulia, miniature model of the possible lighthouse of Cosa. Right: Alexandria, Museo Greco-Romaine, miniature model of Alexandria’s lighthouse A sinistra, Roma, Museo Nazionale di Villa Giulia da ZANCANI MONTUORO 1979, figg. 2, 17. A destra, Alessandria, Museo Greco Romano, modellino fittile del faro di Alessandria da ALEXANDRIE 1995, p. 26

Fig. 169 a ,b: From left to right: incision of a lighthouse above Sestii’s anphora found in Cosa; Velia, turist panel, reproduction of the graffito with the representation of a lighthouse found in the medieval tower A sinistra, incisione di un faro sopra l’anfora dei Sestii a Cosa da MCCANN 1989, figg. 16-17. A destra, Velia, pannello turistico, riproduzione del graffito con faro trovato nella torretta medievale 314

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 86

Fig. 170: Ansedonia (Cosa, Tuscany), the submerged pier 5; could have belonged to the Roman lighthouse of Cosa Ansedonia (Cosa), il sommerso pilone 5, forse pertinente alla base del faro di Cosa da MCCANN 1987, fig. 20

SCHEDA 66 PORTUS VADORUM (Isola di Bergeggi, Liguria) Regio IX: Liguria

Fig. 171 a, b: Left, map by D’Andradeof the archaeological remains on the island of Bergeggi. Right: detail of the Roman tower-lighthouse A sinistra pianta dei resti archeologici dell’isola di Bergeggi secondo D’Andrade (il faro è dentro al quadrato) da FRONDONI 1987, fig. 312. A destra, particolare della torre-faro da RICCI 1998, p. 18

315

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 87

Fig. 172: The island of Bergeggi L’isola di Bergeggi da RICCI 2000, p. 16

Fig. 173: Island of Bergeggi, detail of the Roman tower-lighthouse on which a medieval watchtower was built Isola di Bergeggi, particolare della torre circolare di epoca romana sulla quale venne costruita la torre costiera in epoca medievale da QUEIROLO 1982, p. 174

316

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 88 SCHEDA 67 FORUM IULII (Frèjus, Var, Francia) Provincia: Gallia Narbonensis

Fig. 174: General plan of the harbour of Forum Iulii and the possible lighthouse of Butte St. Antoine at n. 5 Il porto di Frèjus e il suo probabile faro della Butte St. Antoine al n. 5 da BERAUD-GÈBARA-RIVET 1998, p. 15

Fig. 175: Frèjus, the so-called Lanterne d’Auguste, a little sign of the entrance at the harbour Frèjus, la Lanterne d’Auguste, un piccolo segnacolo di entrata al porto (foto B.Giardina) 317

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 89

Fig. 176; Aix-en-Provence, Bibliothèque Mèjanes, drawing by J.A.Constantin named “The Roman lighthouse of Frèjus” Aix-en-Provence, Bibliothèque Mèjanes, Album de Saint Vincent. Est B 112-113, J.A.Costantin (1756-1846), Le phare romain de Frèjus da BLANCHET 1938, fig. 10

Fig, 177 a,b : Frèjus, the highest tower of Butte St. Antoine, nowadays named Le Phare (The Lighthouse); could have been the Roman lighthouse, viewed from East and West Frèjus, la torre più alta della Butte St. Antoine, tuttora chiamata Le Phare (forse l’antico faro romano) vista da Est e da Ovest (foto B.Giardina) 318

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 90

Fig. 178: Reconstruction of the highest tower of the Butte St. Antoine as a lighthouse by Texier Ricostruzione della torre più alta della Butte St. Antoine come faro di Forum Iulii da THIERSCh 1909, fig. 39

Fig. 179: Frèjus, entrance door to the stairway of the Butte St. Antoine Frèjus, porta di accesso alla rampa di scale della Butte St. Antoine (foto B.Giardina) 319

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 91

Fig. 180: Island of Lion de Mer (Saint Raphäel), Roman lighthouse Isola di Lion de Mer (Saint Raphäel), particolare con i ruderi del faro romano (foto B.Giardina)

Fig. 181: Island of Lion de Mer (Saint Raphäel), remailns of the base of the Roman lighthouse, maybe built to signal a shoal Isola di Lion de Mer (Saint Raphäel), particolare del basamento del possibile faro romano di Forum Iulii, costruito forse per segnalare una secca (foto C.Santamaria) 320

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 92 SCHEDA 68 FOSSA MARIANAE/ARELATE (Fos-sur-mer/Arles, Camargue/Bouches du Rhône, Francia) Provincia: Gallia Narbonensis

Fig. 182 a,b : Left, Arlès, Musèe d’Arlès, map with the site of Roque d’Odor. Right: Fos as shown on Tabula Peutingeriana A sinistra, Musèe de l‘Arles et de la Provence Antique, cartina con il sito de la Roque d’Odor (foto B.Giardina). A destra, la vignetta di Fos nella Tabula Peutingeriana

Fig. 183 : Map of Camargue with the location of the possible Roman lighthouse (arrow) Cartina della Camargue con localizzazione del faro romano (freccia), da EYDOUX 1961, fig. 40 321

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV. /PLATE 93

Fig. 184: Roque d’Odor, remains of the ancient lighthouse before its destruction for indutrial works Fos-sur-mer, Roque d’Odor, rovine dell’antico faro romano prima della sua distruzione a causa di lavori industriali da 30 ans d’archaeologie à Fos-sur-mer 1998

Fig. 185 a, b: Left, Arles, the so-called Tour de Fabre, now inside a modern palace. Right: Reconstruction of the ancient lighthouse of Arelate by Allard A sinistra, Arles, la Tour de Fabre (forse un antico faro) inglobata in un palazzo moderno (foto B.Giardina). A destra, ricostruzione dell’antico faro di Arelate secondo ALLARD 1979, tavola fuori testo 322

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 94 SCHEDA 69 NARBO MARTIUS (Narbona, Golfe du Lyon, Francia) Provincia: Gallia Narbonensis

Fig. 186: Location of Narbo Martius, extended version of the map Localizzazione di Narbo Martius, primo porto della Gallia Narbonensis, da GAYROUD 1989, p. 114, versione allargata per una migliore lettura dei siti

Fig. 187: Ostia, Piazzale delle Corporazioni, mosaic with the possible lighthouse of Narbonne Ostia, Piazzale delle Corporazioni, mosaico con il possibile faro di Narbona (foto B.Giardina) 323

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 95

Fig. 188: Marsh zone near Narbonne, Port de la Nouvelle and Gruissan Zona degli stagni di Narbona, Port de la Nouvelle e Gruissan da GAYROUD 1989, p. 114, cartina allargata

Fig. 189: Port de la Nouvelle (Narbonne), Plage de la Vielle Nouvelle, Tour de Vauban Port de la Nouvelle (Narbonne), Plage de la Vielle Nouvelle, Tour de Vauban (foto B.Giardina)

324

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 96

Fig. 190: Grau de la Veille Nouvelle, Plage de la Vieille Nouvelle, Tour de Vauban, barrel-shaped vault Grau de la Vieille Nouvelle, Plage de la Vieille Nouvelle, Tour de Vauban, particolare della volta a botte (foto B.Giardina)

Fig. 191: Gruissan, Barbarossa’s Tower of the medieval castle Gruissan, particolare della torre Barbarossa del castello medievale (foto B.Giardina) 325

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 97 SCHEDA 70 CARTEIA (Cartagena/San Roque, Andalusia, Spagna) Provincia: Baetica

Fig. 192: The ruins of the city of Carteia on a print by Francis Carter (1771) Le rovine della città di Carteia in una stampa di Francis Carter (1771) da BLÀMQUEZ-PÈREZ-DOLDÀN-GÒMEZBENDALA GALÀN 2002, foto 4

Fig. 193: San Roque, Cartagena Tower San Roque, Torre di Cartagena da THOUVENOT 1940, p. 76 326

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 98 SCHEDA 71 PORTUS GADITANUS (zona di Cadice, Andalusia, Spagna) Provincia: Baetica

Fig. 194: Possible locations for Portus Gaditanus which was located in the modern zone of El Portal by Rambaud Possibili collocazioni di Portus Gaditanus da RAMBAUD 1997, fig. 1, dove Portus Gaditanus è localizzato nella zona di El Portal

Fig. 195 a,b: Left, Cadiz, Museum, drawing of a lighthouse. Right: drawing of the original Torre de Herculès in Brigantium by E.Castello Bassoa A sinistra, Cadice, Museo, disegno con la rappresentazione di un faro a più piani, da Internet. A destra, la Torre di Ercole di Brigantium nel suo possibile primo aspetto secondo E.Castello Bassoa da TETTAMANCY-GASTON 1991, p. 61

327

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 99

Fig. 196: Shield of the city of Cadiz with its lighthouse Stemma con il faro di Cadice, da Internet

Fig. 197: Reconstruction of Portis Gaditanus through iconographical and literary sources Portus Gaditanus e il suo faro ricostruito secondo le fonti letterarie e iconografiche da Golvin 328

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 100 SCHEDA 72 TURRIS CHIPIONIS (Sanlucar de Barrameda, Andalusia, Spagna) Provincia: Baetica

Fig. 198: Puerto S. Maria (Chipiona), modern lighthouse, maybe built on the ancient Caepio’s Tower Puerto S.Maria (Chipiona), faro moderno forse costruito sull’antica Torre di Caepio da http://www.googleearth.es/foros.php?k=11013

Fig. 199: Pontevedra (Galice), Las Torres de Oeste (Western Towers) Pontevedra (Galizia), Las Torres de Oeste o di Augusto da TETTAMANCY-GASTON 1991, p. 117

329

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 101 SCHEDA 73 BRIGANTIUM (La Coruña, Galizia, Spagna) Provincia: Tarraconensis

Fig. 200: General map of the zone around the modern La Coruña Piantina dell’attuale zona de La Coruña da HUTTER-HAUSCHILD 1991, lamina 2

Fig. 201: La Coruña, Tower of Hercules surrounded by the Ocean. The postcard shows that the ancient lighthouse is still the symbol of the city La Coruña, la Torre di Ercole circondata dall’Oceano in una cartolina attuale che testimonia come l’edificio sia ancora il simbolo della città

330

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 102

Fig. 202: The lighthouse of Brigantium (or the lighthouse of the Campa Torres) on the map of the world made by Beato del Borgo de Osma in 1086 Il faro di Brigantium (o quello della Campa Torres) nella mappa del mondo realizzata dal Beato Burgo de Osma nel 1086 da HUTTER-HAUSCHILD 1991, fig. 22

Fig. 203: Segment 0 of the Tabula Peutingeriana with the lighthouse of Brigantium Segmento 0 della Tabula Peutingeriana con la rappresentazione del faro di Brigantium da PIDAL 1955, tavola fuori testo 331

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 103

Fig. 204 a, b: Left, drawing of the lighthouse of Brigantium from the manuscript of Cardinal del Hojo. The builidng is very similiar to the Lanterna in Genua (right) A sinistra, disegno dal manoscritto del canonico Cardinal del Hojo con il faro di Brigantium da TETTAMANCY-GASTON 1991, p. 72. La struttura è assai simile a quella della Lanterna di Genova (a destra) da SIMONETTI 2005, p. 30

Fig. 205 a, b: The Tower of Hercules represented in the city coat of arms (17th century) and in the Neptune Fountain shield La Torre di Ercole in uno stemma della città (XVII secolo) e nello scudo della fontana del Nettuno, posta al centro della città alla metà del XVIII secolo da HUTTER-HAUSCHILD 1991, fig. 23 332

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 104

Fig. 206 a, b: The Tower of Hercules in a 1685 drawing (left) and as it was imagined by Buchwald (right) La Torre di Ercole in un disegno del 1685 (a sinistra) e come la immaginava Buchwald (a destra) da HUTTERHAUSCHILD 1991, figg. 24, 36

Fig. 207: Evolution of the building from its origins to 1791 Evoluzione dell’edificio dalle origini al 1791 da HUTTER-HAUSCHILD 1991, fig. 25 333

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 105

Fig. 208: La Coruña, the Tower of Hercules as it is today La Coruña, la Torre di Ercole allo stato attuale (foto B.Giardina)

Fig. 209: La Coruña, the Tower of Hercules viwed from North-East La Coruña, la Torre di Ercole vista da Nord-Est (foto B.Giardina) 334

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 106

Fig. 210 a, b: La Coruña, left, the windows, through the opened ones were the stairs of the Roman lighthouse. Right: inside the lighthouse A sinistra, La Coruña, particolare delle finestre della Torre di Ercole, per quelle attualmente aperte passava la scala esterna di età romana. A sinistra, particolare dell’interno della Torre di Ercole (foto B.Giardina)

Fig. 211: La Coruña, the Tower of Hercules by night is still a good sign for sailors La Coruña, la Torre di Ercole di notte costituisce ancora un ottimo punto di riferimento per i naviganti delle coste atlantiche (foto B.Giardina) 335

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 107 SCHEDA 74 CAMPA TORRES (Gijòn, Asturia, Spagna) Provincia: Asturia

Fig. 212: Location of Gijòn and Cabo Torres Localizzazione di Gijòn e Cabo Torres da HERNÀN DEL FRADE-FIGAREDO FERNÀNDEZ 2002, p. 125

Fig. 213: Tabularium de la Campa Torres, Ara Sistiana Tabularium de la Campa Torres, l’Ara Sistiana da M.S. Marquès, La Nueva España, 5 de julio 2005 336

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

TAV./PLATE 108

Fig. 214: The “arae sistianae” and their lighthouses Le are sistiane della Spagna e i loro fari corrispondenti, da Internet

Fig. 215: Reconstruction of the lighthouse at Campa Torres Ricostruzione del faro della Campa Torres da Internet 337

MIDDLE AGES

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 109 SCHEDA 75 GESORIACUM (Boulogne-sur-mer, Pas-de-Calais, Francia) Provincia: Gallia Belgica

Fig. 216 a, b: Left, location of Gesoriacum, right, drawing of the lighthouse made buy Duviert A sinistra, inquadramento geografico di Gesoriacum da HISTOIRE 1900, p. 2. A destra disegno del faro effettuato da Duviert da DELMAIRE 1994, fig. 9

Fig. 217 a, b: Left, modern and ancient coastal line of Gesoriacum (the Tour d’Ordre) is showned by the arrow. Right: Coin of Commodus with the possible representation of the lighthouse of Gesoriacum A sinistra, situazione attuale e antica della linea di costa di Gesoriacum e localizzazione della Tour d’Ordre da BROMWICH 2003, fig. 8. A destra, moneta di Commodo con possibile rappresentazione del faro di Gesoriacum da GIARDINA 2007, fig. 9a 338

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 110

Fig. 218 a, b: Left, sixteenth-century drawing with the representation of the lighthouse of Gesoriacum made by Caligula and its walls built by Henry VIII. Right: State of Vatican (Rome), Musei Vaticani, Roman relief with the possible light house of Gesoriacum A sinistra, disegno rinascimentale con il faro di Gesoriacum voluto da Caligola e le sue mura fatte costruire da Enrico VIII da DURUY 1882, p. 385. A destra, Roma, Musei Vaticani, rilievo romano con il possibile faro da Gesoriacum (foto B.Giardina)

Fig. 219: The Tour d’Ordre by Beurain La Tour d’Ordre secondo Beaurain da HISTOIRE 1900, p. 31 ; D’ERCE 1966, figg. 1, 3

339

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 111

Fig. 220: Boulogme-sur-mer, Musèe de la Marine, representation of the remains of the Tour d’Ordre in the seventeenth Century Boulogne-sur-mer, Musèe de la Marine, i resti della Tour d’Ordre nel XVII secolo secondo un disegno originale da VERLEY p. 57

BRITANNIA

Fig. 221: Boulogne-sur-mer, Napoleonic gunpowder store built in the place of the Tour d’Ordre Boulogne-sur-mer, polveriera di epoca napoleonica costruita probabilmente sul sito della Tour d’Ordre (foto B.Giardina)

340

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 112 SCHEDA 76 DUBRIS/LONDINIUM (Dover/Londra, Gran Bretagna) Provincia: Britannia

Fig. 222: Map of Roman Londinium and its buildings Piantina di Londinium e dei suoi edifici da ROSS/CLARK 2008, p. 30

Fig. 223 a ,b: Left, Dover Museum, plan of Drop Redoubt with the location of the lighthouse of Western Heights. Right: Dover Painted House Museum, graphic interpretation of Dubris in 200 A.D with the two lighthouses of Eastern and Western Heights, on an eighteenth-century print A sinistra, Dover Museum, piantina di Droup Redoubt con localizzazione del faro di Western Heights (x) (foto B.Giardina). A destra, Dover Painted House Museum, riproduzione grafica di Dubris nel 200 d.C. con i suoi due fari, da una stampa settecentesca

341

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 113

Fig. 224: Dover, the Napoleonic fort which took the place of the Western Heights’ lighthouse Il fortino napoleonico che ha preso il posto del faro di Western Heights (foto B.Giardina)

Fig. 225: Dover, Western Heights hill (arrow) viewed from Eastern Heights’ lighthouse, which is now incorporated in the Norman castle Dover, Western Heights (indicato dalla freccia) visto dal faro di Eastern Heights, inglobato nel castello normanno (foto B.Giardina) 342

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 114

Fig. 226: Locations of the lighthouses of Western and Eastern Heights called West and East Localizzazione dei fari di Western e Eastern Heights nei tondi neri denominati West e East da PHILP 1981, fig. 2

Fig. 227: Dover Castle, view of the Roman lighthouse and the church of St. Mary in Castro from the Norman castle Dover Castle, veduta del faro romano e dalla chiesa di St. Mary in Castro dall’alto del castello normanno (foto B.Giardina) 343

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA

TAV./PLATE 115

Fig. 228: Dover, Roman lighthouse built by Claudius Dover Castle, il faro romano di Claudio (foto B.Giardina)

Fig. 229: Dover, interior of the Roman lighthouse Dover Castle, interno del faro di Claudio (foto B.Giardina) 344

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

TAV./PLATE 116

Fig. 230: Dover, walls of the lighthouse Dover Castle, particolari della tecnica muraria del faro di Claudio con inserti in laterizio e tufo (foto B.Giardina)

Fig. 231 a, b: Left, section of the Dover lighthouse by Wheeler. Right: Hypotetic reproduction of the lighthouse of Western Heights A sinistra, sezione del faro di Dover a Eastern Heights secondo WHEELER 1929. A destra, ricostruzione ipotetica del faro di Dover nel Roman Painted House Museum di Dover 345

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST: IL FARO TRA MONDO ANTICO E MEDIO EVO/LIGHTHOUSES FROM ANTIQUITY TO THE

MIDDLE AGES

INDEX Dianum Artemisium (No/Scheda 62): 21, 106, 138, 198 Dubris/Portus Londinii (No/Scheda 76): ii, iii, 1,2, 3, 16, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 37, 39, 45, 46, 49, 65, 102, 107, 114, 115-120, 122, 127, 132, 136, 138, 139, 143, 144, 145, 146, 149, 163, 194, 198, 204, 205, 207-210 Dyrrachium (No/Scheda 30): 35, 49, 77, 143, 149, 172, 173 Ege (No/Scheda 15): 24, 69, 138, 166 Equilum (No/Scheda 39): 37, 84, 40, 85, 139, 143, 179, 181 Forum Iulii/Frèjus (No/Scheda 67): 22, 26, 30, 32, 37, 92, 108-110, 136, 139, 141, 144, 186, 200-202 Fossa Marianae (No/Scheda 68): 19, 37, 110, 111, 134, 139, 143, 201, 202 Genova: 39, 42, 45, 47, 102, 116, 145, 147, 148, 194 205 Gesoriacum (No/Scheda 75): 15, 16, 23, 24, 32, 37, 42, 45, 48, 49, 55, 63, 75, 114, 115, 117-120, 131, 138, 142, 143, 144, 147, 148, 149, 154, 161, 172, 204-209 Gradus: 37, 83, 144, 178 Hadrumetum (No/Scheda 2): 5, 51, 52, 124, 152, 162 Hatria/Adria (No/Scheda 41): 1, 38, 50, 83, 85, 86, 87, 121144, 150, 178, 180 Heraclea Pontica (No/Scheda 25): 24, 32, 74, 75, 108, 138, 142, 171, 200 Igilum (No/Scheda 63): 24, 106, 138, 198 Industria (No/Scheda 65): 49, 108, 149, 199, 202 Iol-Caesarea (No/Scheda 1): 51, 151 Istros (No/Scheda 27): 32, 75, 76, 82, 142, 172, 177 Kyme (No/Scheda 20): 69, 71, 166, 168 Laodicea ad Mare (No/Scheda 13): 24, 32, 35, 36, 48, 49, 67, 68, 138, 142, 143, 149, 150, 165, 166 Leptis Magna (No/Scheda 4): 24, 32, 48, 49, 53-55, 64, 65, 106, 110, 138, 141, 142, 148, 149, 152-154, 163, 197, 201 Livorno/Meloria: 40, 42, 43, 44, 145, 147 Magdala (No/Scheda 11): 23, 24, 66, 67, 138, 164 Messina/Capo Peloro (No/Scheda 47): 12, 20, 25, 68, 93, 94, 128, 135, 139, 165, 186, 187 Misenum (No/Scheda 54): ii, iii, 25, 32, 37, 75, 86, 87, 89, 96-100, 139, 141, 144, 163, 181-183, 190-193, 207 Narbo Martius /Narbona (No/Scheda 69): 24, 25, 26, 27, 35, 37, 39, 49, 111, 112, 138, 139, 143, 145, 150, 202, 203 Narona (No/Scheda 31): 78, 79, 174, 175 Nea Paphos (No/Scheda 19): 24, 70, 71, 76, 167, 168, 173 Neoptolemus tower of/torre di Neottolemo: 12, 13, 127, 128 Nora (No/Scheda 49): 5, 23, 76, 94, 85, 124, 125, 138, 173, 188 Olbia (No/Scheda 50): 6, 95, 125, 188 Ostia/Roma (No/Scheda 60): 13, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 22, 24, 25-30, 32, 33, 37, 38, 39, 48, 49, 52, 54, 56, 57, 64, 65, 71, 84, 86, 88, 89, 91, 99, 100-106, 110, 112, 116, 129, 130-132, 134, 135, 138, 139, 140, 142, 144, 145, 149, 152, 153, 155, 157, 163, 168, 179, 180, 183, 185, 192-198, 201-203, 206 Otranto (Torre Serpe): 89 Pandataria (No/Scheda 56): 99. 100, 191, 192

Abydos (No/Scheda 23): 13, 24, 72, 73, 138, 129, 139, 169, 170 Alexandria/Alessandria (No/Scheda 8): 2, 7, 11, 13, 14, 18-29, 31, 32, 36, 40,41,43, 45, 51, 54-58, 60-74, 76,77, 82-86, 90, 93-95, 98,99, 101-106, 109-111, 114,116, 119-123, 125, 127, 130, 131, 133-142, 144, 145, 147-149. 151, 154, 155, 157, 159-167, 169-171, 173-175, 178, 180-182, 185, 188, 189, 192, 194, 196, 199, 201, 202, 205, 210-214 Alighieri, Dante: 88, 182 Ancona (No/Scheda 45): 24, 38, 83, 90, 91, 92, 138, 144, 178, 184, 185, 186 Apamea (No/Scheda 12): 24, 30, 35, 36, 49, 67, 138, 141, 143, 149, 150, 165, 166 Aperlae: 71, 169 Apollonia (No/Scheda 6): 17, 55, 77, 133, 154, 155, 174 Arelate (No/Scheda 68): 19, 110, 111, 134, 201, 202 Arimunum/Rimini (No/Scheda 44): 24, 35, 38, 85, 89, 90, 138, 143, 144, 180, 183, 184 Aquileia (No/Scheda 38): 19, 20, 22, 37, 82, 83, 84, 85, 89, 91, 134, 135, 136, 144, 177, 178, 179, 183, 185 Astura (No/Scheda 59): 102, 194 Attaleia (No/Scheda 18): 69, 70, 167, 168 Bergeggi (No/Scheda 66): 24, 37, 108, 138, 144, 199 Baro Zavelea (No/Scheda 42): 25, 26, 37, 48, 49, 84, 85, 86, 109, 139, 143, 148, 149, 179, 180, 181, 201 Brigantium/La Coruňa (No/Scheda 73): ii, iii, 5, 18, 19, 22, 24, 27, 34, 37, 48, 49, 84, 109, 113, 114- 117, 124, 133, 134, 136, 138, 139, 142, 144, 149, 179, 201, 204-207 Brundisium (No/Scheda 46): 68, 77, 92, 166, 173, 185 Campa Torres (No/Scheda 74): 27, 34, 116, 117, 138, 139, 142, 144, 206, 207 Capo Atheneum (No/Scheda 52): 7, 95, 96, 125, 189, 190 Caesarea Germanica (No/Scheda 26): 24, 32, 75, 138, 142, 172 Caesarea Maritima (No/Scheda 10): 14, 23, 26, 32, 33, 37, 49, 63, 64-68, 70, 71, 74, 77, 78, 130, 138, 139, 142, 144, 149, 162-164, 166, 167, 168, 171,173, 174 Canale S.Felice (No/Scheda 40): 24, 25, 37, 49, 50, 78, 84, 86, 139, 143, 149, 150, 174, 180 Carteia (No/Scheda 70): 112, 113, 203, 204 Carthage/Cartagine: iv, 3, 5, 19, 28, 51, 53, 63, 68, 124, 134, 140, 151, 152, 162, 166, 199 Centumcellae/Civitavecchia (No/Scheda 61): 9, 10, 18, 24, 37, 38, 40, 48, 49, 65, 76, 77, 91, 101, 102, 105, 106, 110, 126, 133, 138, 143, 144, 145, 149, 163, 172, 173, 185, 193, 194, 196, 197, 201 Chipiona (No/Scheda 72): 114, 205 Chryspolis (No/Scheda 24): 17, 19, 23, 70, 73, 74, 84, 132, 134, 138, 167, 169, 170, 171 Circeii (No/Scheda 58): 38, 101, 144, 194 Constantinople/Costantinopoli (No/Scheda 24): 18, 72, 73, 74, 76, 78, 84, 86, 88, 132, 134, 135, 160, 168, 169, 170, 171, 179, 182, 183 Corinth/Corinto (No/scheda 29): 19, 32, 73, 76, 77, 142, 173 Cosa/Portus Cosanus (No/Scheda 64): 24, 25, 37, 106, 107, 108, 122, 138, 139, 144, 198, 199 347

BALDASSARRE GIARDINA Panormos/Palermo (No/scheda 48): 35, 55, 93, 94, 143, 154, 187, 188 Parentium (No/Scheda 34): 80, 176, 177 Patara (No/Scheda 21): 25, 48, 49, 50, 71, 72, 78, 139, 149, 150, 168, 169, 174 Perga (No/Scheda 16): 24, 32, 69, 70, 138, 142, 166, 167 Pharos/Hvar (No/Scheda 32): 78, 79, 80, 174, 175, 176 Pireo: 4, 7, 31, 64, 123, 125, 141, 162 Pisa: 39, 40, 42, 43, 44, 47, 60, 145, 147, 148, 159 Phykous (No./Scheda 5): 55, 154 Portus Gaditanus/Gades (No/Scheda 71): 7, 113, 114, 203, 204, 205 Portus Raphti: 7-9, 125-127 Punta Licosa (No/Scheda 51): 95, 96, 188, 189 Puteoli/Pozzuoli (No/Scheda 55): 24, 37, 77, 90, 97-100, 102, 103, 104, 113, 138, 144, 173, 185, 190-194, 196, 203 Pyrranhum (No/Scheda 35): 23, 77, 81, 174, 176, 177 Qậni (No./Scheda 9): 63, 161 Ravenna /Classe (No/Scheda 43): 13, 19, 26, 30, 32, 38, 86, 87, 88, 89, 180, 181, 182, 183 Rodi: 16, 60, 65, 71, 125, 126, 131, 159 Sabratha (No/Scheda 3): 21, 52, 53, 138,152 Salona (No/Scheda 33): 49, 78, 79, 80, 149, 174, 175, 176 Seleucia di Pieria (No./Scheda 14): 49, 67, 68, 149, 165, 166 Side (No/Scheda 17): 24, 69, 70, 138, 165, 166 Smyrna (No/Scheda 22): 18, 34, 69, 72, 169 Taposiris Magna (No/Scheda 7): ii, iii, 23, 35, 55-57, 59, 60, 62, 66, 67, 70, 71, 72, 76, 106, 138, 143, 154156, 158, 159, 161, 164, 167, 168, 173, 198 Tarracina (No/Scheda 57): 37, 38, 41, 101, 102, 144, 146, 193, 194 Tergeste (No/Scheda 37): 37, 80. 82, 83, 144, 176, 178 Thasos (No/Scheda 28): 23, 37, 48, 54, 70, 71, 76, 77, 79, 138, 144, 149, 154, 167, 168, 172, 173, 175 Timavus (No/Scheda 36): 81, 82, 177 Zara: 21, 85, 91, 136, 146, 174, 179, 180, 185

348

BAR S2096 2010

Navigare necesse est il Faro tra mondo antico e Medio Evo

Navigare necesse est Lighthouses from Antiquity to the Middle Ages History, architecture, iconography and archaeological remains

GIARDINA

Baldassarre Giardina

NAVIGARE NECESSE EST

B A R

BAR International Series 2096 2010