by Mark Dyal
In Rome, it never occurred to me to ask the Ultras why they liked soccer. I never even asked myself why I like it, which for me, as an American male raised in a family of athletes of American football and baseball, was far less likely than Italian males who grew up playing the game. Later, however, when the research demanded an answer to the question, I contacted Federico of Antichi Valori. Predictably, he was stumped when I asked why he liked soccer. He had no answer, as if I asked him why he liked oxygen. When I explained what Markovits and Hellerman proposed, he seemed mildly interested but ultimately just said, ‘it makes sense.’ However, when I told him about Guttman’s portrayal of Roman spectators, he was dumbfounded that he ‘had never known this deep connection between [the Ultras] and the Romans.’ He asked for Guttman’s sources so that he could find them in Latin, excitedly telling me ‘Rome amazes me almost every day, even after thirty-seven years.’ Sociological theory was one thing, in other words, but Rome, and an Ultra’s connection to Rome, was something else entirely.
Sorel distinguishes between the ‘mere observation of facts’ and the ‘inner reason of things’ which is found in the myths that motivate ‘the will to act’.252 Romanità is attached to the latter. These types of myths, Sorel argues, are strong enough to safeguard utopias that have no just reason to survive, such as the French Republic.253 Interestingly, Sorel also explains that myths are even capable of guarding against the ‘invasion of ideas and morals’ of the ‘hostile’ bourgeois class.254 Romanità is certainly used by the Ultras as a bulwark against the bourgeois form of life.
Through Federico I was introduced to other former members of Antichi Valori. As I explained in Chapter One, Antichi Valori are amongst the most dedicated of the Ultras — they are neither completely Left nor Right but are dedicated instead to Rome. Unlike the imposing and rather menacing skinheads and ideologues of Boys Roma and Padroni di Casa, to be re-visited below, the four former leaders of Antichi Valori are ‘clean-cut’ professionals and students. Their backgrounds are similar: they are well educated (each having achieved the baccalaureato, or bachelor’s degree), have steady jobs, steady girlfriends or wives, and live at home or nearby their working parents. They spend as many hours together as possible during the week, often dining out or going to bars to play calcio balilla (table soccer). On summer weekends, they go to the beaches near Rome, where table soccer is also widely played. In August, they travel abroad or in Trentino.
What separates these young men from others (outside the Ultras phenomenon) is Romanità. Integral to each of the activities that they undertake together is a sense of pride in being Roman and a sense of duty or responsibility to ‘defend her honor.’ I knew from the history of Antichi Valori that they were extremely steeped in the history of Rome, but through passing time with them away from the stadium I learned just how deeply being an Ultra and living according to its mentalità` can impact one’s life.
For instance, discussing Romanità with Federico and Fabrizio (another of the founders of the group) in a Monteverde bar the day after AS Roma won the 2006–7 Coppa Italia, Fabrizio made it clear that it was only Romanità that made them different. I had begun by suggesting that willingness to fight was quite important in placing distance between them and non-Ultras. He explained to me that fighting was not a random exercise for the Ultras. Sure, he said, there are some who are ‘fatto da ferro’ (made of iron) and just enjoy fighting but a true Ultra does not fight without cause (for more on this see Chapter Four).
‘We only fight because of Romanità,’ he said. ‘Fight as Ultras?’ I asked. ‘Yes, fight as Ultras,’ he replied. Federico interjected something I found most interesting. ‘We are sons of a vecchia mentalità [old/ancient worldview],’ he said. ‘Fighting is a big part of being an Ultra because we seek a glory that is not provided by the modern world. Instead, we seek an old glory, one made with virtu` [virtue like Nietzsche described virtue free of ‘priggish morality’]; a virtue that leads to the strength necessary to do difficult things.’255 Again, Federico, as had Etore (of AS Roma Ultras) and Manuele (of Fedayn) invoked a Romanità that was prone to violence, a vision distinctly at odds with the Rome of neoliberal Italy.
Because of its unique history, Romanità is perfectly suited to sustain the Ultra mentalità. As a fascist discourse, Romanità was replete with a model of glory and tradition that made both of these a function of aggression and conquest. The Terza Roma (Third Rome) of Mussolini was to be an imperial Rome, beginning with colonies in Libya, Ethiopia, and Eritrea. This Rome was an ideal to be made real by way of controlling the Mediterranean, or Mare Nostrum.
The Ultras have been more influenced by this form of Romanità than the Liberal nationalist form explained by Fugo. For AS Roma’s Ultras, Italy matters very little, except as a terrain of Roman conquest. From Rome, the Ultras are able to feel themselves heir to a culture and a system of traits (such as those described by Evola — see above).
Returning to Federico’s statement that the Ultras were ‘sons of an old worldview,’ it must not be understated how Romanità in this form acts to motivate behaviors. Even as the Ultras’ love for Rome is often made known through creative acts such as choreographies and articles in fanzines, these are but the outward manifestations of a mentalità that coincides with the list of Roman traits given by Evola. Those traits were designed to celebrate a virile form of life that has been destroyed by the ‘effeminacy of modernity,’ and they are made natural to the Ultras through the Roman qualities appreciated by Evola and even Mussolini.
Choreographies and banners arise from the same energies and desires as do the fights and acts of aggression or disrespect derided by the Italian press. Maurizio of Padroni di Casa explained this best. ‘We are men who remember well the words of the Duce. For us Rome is the reference point of a victorious life, the myth that gives us hope for a life that is strong and wise [he is paraphrasing a Mussolini speech popular among Roman Fascists for its discussion of Rome as the vision of a Fascist Italy]. It would be impossible, then, to live in fear of fights or of the police. Our Rome is that of the true Romans.’ In upholding aggression, honor, discipline, and the idea of glory through violence, the Ultras feel themselves upholding the true spirit of Rome.
One sees here a process similar to the theatrical politics analyzed by Kertzer. Theatrical and cultish politics, he explained, are functioning in modern societies just as they did in what were assumed to be ‘traditional’ societies. These political forms are based on ritual practices and liturgies that attach great meaning to action. They are also based on mythical or ideational discourses, like Romanità, which ‘give meaning to the world around us’ and provide the fabric of order in the face of chaos. Far from lulling their audiences to sleep, these discourses and narratives transform ideas into a lived reality.256 Or, as Mussolini said, ‘for us ideas are not abstractions but physical forces. When the idea seeks to become reified in the world it does so through manifestations that are nervous, muscular, and physical’.257
Returning to Sorel, who was one of Mussolini’s main intellectual influences, the value of an idea or myth is singular — in its ability to motivate action.258 The provocation of thought is a function of which both knowledge and myth are capable. However, it is the domain of the latter to provoke action in the form of violence.259 And, because of the bourgeois aversion to violence, when one acts violently (more clearly in a revolutionarily violent way), one is able to move beyond the form of life defined by liberalism. In thinking this way, Sorel revealed the influence of Nietzsche, whose own Übermensch was to be born from a thorough rejection of modernity and its values.
Romanità as Inhibitor of Universal Altruism
Romanità is useful for the Ultras as a discourse that limits the scope of altrusitic inclusiveness. It is apparent that the Ultras celebration of themselves as Romans is done at the expense of feelings of inclusiveness with others. Although many scholars, and what Luca of Boys Roma called ‘giornalisti morali’ (journalists of morality), lament th
e Italian tendency to identify with narrow altruistic scopes (hence the concept campanilismo), the Ultras understand this part of their mentalità to be entirely positive.
Luca, a thirty-three-year-old member of both Boys Roma and Forza Nuova (the neo-Fascist party led by Roberto Fiore) works for Ryanair, a low-cost airline with routes between Ireland and the continent. As such he speaks English with great enthusiasm, smiling while discussing topics that would make others grimace. He learned English at La Sapienza University (neither of his parents speak anything but the Roman dialect) and enjoys reading certain titles in English literature. His favorites? ‘[Burgess’] A Clockwork Orange, [Easton-Ellis’] American Psycho, and [Palahniuk’s] Fight Club.’
‘Almost too perfect,’ I say. ‘Yes, it is,’ he says, ‘knowing [English] allows me to know the subtleties of what is being said. For example, all three books understand that the prohibition against violence is just a [bourgeois] moral phenomenon.’ Returning to the point, I asked, ‘just like the prohibition against Romanità and extreme rivalry in soccer?’ ‘Exactly!’ he replied. ‘Why would anyone have a problem with our love of Rome? Only if they feared being excluded.’ I asked him to explain. ‘There are many people who believe that the world belongs to them del tutto [full stop] and that anywhere people build a wall against them is a sign of ignorance.’ ‘And not pride or protection,’ I interject. ‘We are not allowed pride. Our pride is what you [Americans] call racism.’
Having befriended a handful of Forzanovisti (members of Forza Nuova) and many Rightist Ultras, I was prepared for his understanding of the cultural politics of neo-liberal globalization. However, for the first time I asked, ‘do you find more Romanità in Forza Nuova or Boys Roma?’ Without hesitation he replied, ‘In the Ultras there is far more Romanità. Fascists are mostly nationalists — they want a pure Italy while [AS Roma’s] Ultras want a pure stadium or a Roman life that, for us, is much deeper than the American life.’ We spoke for a few more minutes on the topic but finally he said something monumental. ‘At Boys Roma, we talk about the Coliseum and how it was built. Do you know where the money came from to build it?’ he asked before continuing. ‘Discover this and you will know why it is beloved by “true Romans.” [The Coliseum was built by the Flavian imperial dynasty with riches taken from the sacked city of Jerusalem. As such it is perhaps the ultimate symbol of Rome being enriched at the expense of its enemies.] Anyway, with the Fascists we do not discuss this so much. Fascism is important because without political struggle we are only consumers. But the Ultras are important because I am Roman,’ he said, touching his heart.
Many Ultras share an active love, piety, and fidelity toward Rome. It’s past and present, every wall, porta (door/gate), via (street), vicolo (small street), and piazza are venerated and revered. To be considered a ‘figlio della Lupa’ (son of the she-wolf) is an honor that many celebrate like a working title.260 It is not conferred upon them, but something they feel. For some groups that are well versed in the history, culture, and traditions of the city, like Antichi Valori, to be figlio dell Lupa, un vero Romano (a true Roma), or un legionario (legionnaire), was a particularly extreme mark of distinction — almost liminal. A young Ultra called a ‘true Roman’ by a group leader was in essence being called legitimate and someone to be respected and regarded.
In this way, Romanità may be understood as a positive force. If it acts as a bulwark against the outside world, it is doing so to protect valued traditions. If it stems the influence of foreign peoples, it does so to prohibit cultural degeneration. Thus, for AS Roma’s Ultras, Romanità is a title for their mode of altruism. This is why the Ultra consider so much at stake when they protest against Calcio Moderno or a Roma omologata (Rome standardized, or brought within the sphere of globalization/multiculturalism). Their community is composed of and defined by their commitment to understanding Rome as the greatest accomplishment in human history.
Fabrizio, a longtime Ultra who has been in both Monteverde and Tradizione Distinzione Roma, lives in Monteverde. I saw him every morning at the Pulcini pastry shop, a neighborhood institution. Fabrizio sells small machinery to farmers just outside Rome. As such, his job takes him in the opposite direction of the many commuters who come into Rome’s center for work. I wouldn’t have it any other way. I can’t stand to be around the tourists who take our city to be a big playground or some kind of joke,’ he told me. The first week that we lived in Rome, my wife and I entered Pulcini during the morning rush. Fabrizio was there and made a nasty comment about tourists invading even their neighborhood. He muttered ‘pieces of shit’ in our direction as he left.
It took another three months for us to go back to Pulcini. When we did, however, it was every morning; often enough for us to be considered locals by the owners and other regulars. We were embraced by the local pharmacist, herbalist, shoe store owner, sunglass store owner, and so on. Eventually word reached Fabrizio that I was someone he should meet. After a cagey introduction by Luca, Pulcini’s manager, Fabrizio and I met and talked every morning for one year. He admitted to being hostile to my presence in Monteverde and to assuming I was ‘just some tourist who was coming to treat [his] city as a toilet.’ His aversion to tourists and tourism allowed me to work this aspect of localism into our discussions on the Ultras. ‘Tourism,’ he told me, ‘is the most vulgar thing a person can do. These people come to Rome knowing nothing and they leave knowing nothing.’
I spoke to him about tourism’s impact on the Greek island of Skyros, which has seen tourism become the basis for what is presented as ‘traditional’ in style of housing and products sold as artisanal and has upset the traditional hierarchical relations with the land. To combat this, the local population of the island began to treat tourism as a necessary evil, whereas before tourists were treated as guests and ‘part of the family’.261 ‘Rome has always been a tourist destination, even for the ancients. So, it is hard to know what is ours and what is just a facade created to make tourists happy. The historic center [of Rome] is largely of the latter variety for us. We [he began speaking for Monteverde] want to walk our streets and hear our language, not the hysterical cackling of Americans and Germans.’ I asked him about the monetary influence of tourism in Rome, and the way the city caters to tourism. ‘When drunken Poles swim in the Trevi [fountain], or American students destroy Trastevere, the city is enslaved by them.’
‘There is nothing else for the Romans to do but open a shop or work in a restaurant selling horrible food to people who know no better,’ he continued. ‘Is this the equivalent of what happened on Skyros?’ I asked. ‘It must be,’ he responded, ‘as we would never eat pizza for lunch or drink cappuccino in the evening. Yet, this is what passes for our food now. At least,’ he added, ‘the [Roman] Forum is still ours. It is too abstract for the tourists so they do not spoil it for us. The rest of the center they can have, as it is just a shopping district now. All the history and Romanità have been stripped away.’
Fabrizio’s comments were clearly examples of tourism creating distance between the local populations of tourist destinations and the tourists who visit them. For an Ultra, though, this distance acted to increase the sense that Rome was under siege. Tourists have a high impact on the lives of locals, from overcrowding infrastructure to higher prices for food and housing, and Fabrizio lumped them in with immigrants as well.262 ‘The economy can fail. I will have no problems when it does. What I worry about, and what Monteverde worried about, was the destruction of culture under the weight of these people,’ he told me. I asked if he thought Roman culture was not strong enough to withstand a few immigrants and a lot of tourists. ‘Fair enough,’ he said, ‘I should have more faith in my culture. It is just that we have seen so much of it change. Romans used to be proud but happy, even my parents were like this until recently. Now, we are proud and angry. We are defensive because we see that in a few more generations, the city might be more immigrant than Roman and more commercial than cultural. We’ve already lost political autonomy [b
ecause of the European Union] and the right to keep our city ours.’
I asked about his parents’ influence on his activities in Monteverde. ‘They loved Monteverde,’ he responded enthusiastically, ‘for we were doing something they wanted to do but could not because of responsibilities. Truly, we were never violent; we just kept our neighborhood as we wanted it. Now, had there been tourists we would have spilled blood!’ Fabrizio’s parents, he went on, were part of a generation that saw Rome flourish as a tourist destination and that likewise flourished itself. However, his parents, like other Ultras’ parents I encountered, became disillusioned with the price of the changes tourism brought. Especially given Monteverde’s proximity to Trastevere, his parents often lamented that small restaurants and Roman butchers had closed shop to make way for ‘Indians selling postcards and gaudy t-shirts.’ Their desperation fed Fabrizio’s passion for the Ultras, which he, like many others, saw as a way to connect with something Roman that was not tainted by the bourgeois form of life and to keep soccer from befalling the same fate as the tourist areas of the city.
The parents’ desperation points as well to a process of ‘cultural dispossession,’ wherein the economic and political system is aligned with foreign interests that ultimately eliminate the options for local people to live in a locally meaningful way.263 The sense of dispossession is strong among Romans, as Herzfeld (2009) has also discovered. Whereas the celebration of self-hood amongst Europeans is often unacknowledged before it is irrevocably under attack,264 there are other possibilities — most notably the experiences of post-colonial peoples who actually achieved peoplehood as a result of a struggle for cultural survival.265 Romans resemble the latter, in some ways, having long been keenly aware of not only their patrimony but also how their inheritance entitles them to feelings of distinction.266 There is a birthright to Rome that Romans often feel is undermined by the city also being a world capital. Instead of turning their backs on the intellectual and material heritage that comes to define being Roman, the many Ultras I met embrace it to the point of rejecting what Rome may mean to anyone else.