Benito Mussolini and Boris Johnson: Modern Roman Leaders?
In what way used Benito Mussolini and Boris Johnson Roman History in their political discourse? Analysis of political speeches and articles between 1914-1923 and 2006-2016.
Master thesis in European Studies: Identity& Integration Graduate School for Humanities
Universiteit van Amsterdam Author: Féline van der Linde Student number UvA: 10654623
Main supervisor: Dhr. Dr. A.J. Drace- Francis Second supervisor: Dhr. Mr. Drs. J.J.C.M. Wirken July 2017
Table of content:
Abstract p. 4
Preface p. 5
Introduction p. 6-8
Methodology p. 9
1. The Use of History p. 10-15
2. Benito Mussolini p. 16- 29
2.1 Mussolini’s biography p. 16-18
2.2 Mussolini and the rise of the Fascist power p. 18-19
2.3 Mussolini’s road to leadership p. 19-20
2.4 The myth of romanità p. 20-25
2.5 Mussolini and his empire p. 25-26
2.6 The Roman Empire in Mussolini political speeches p. 26-29
3. Boris Johnson p. 30-36
3.1 Johnson’s biography p. 30-31
3.2 Johnson’s personality p. 31- 32
3.3 Johnson and the EU p. 32-33
3.4 Johnson and The Dream of Rome p. 33-36
4. Mussolini and Johnson: comparison and contrast p. 37-44
4.1 The idea of Mare Nostrum p. 37-39
4.3 National identity p. 41-44
Conclusion p. 45-47
Abstract:
Keywords: Benito Mussolini, Boris Johnson, Roman history, ‘myth of romanità’, political discourse.
This Master thesis has the aim to compare the use of Roman History used by Benito Mussolini and Boris Johnson in their political discourse in the periods between 1914-1923 and 2006-2016. These two political leaders have not yet been compared, however they have interesting visions regarding the use of Roman History in their political discourse. Politicians have always used history in multiple ways. They not only often make history, but also read or write it, for example through memoirs. In addition, classicists have become increasingly interested in the ways in which classical antiquity has been used for political ends. In this thesis the two politicians will be compared by how they have used ancient Rome in their political discourse. There have been multiple articles published about Mussolini and his myth of romanità. This myth refers to the idea of a heritage from ancient Rome, which was an important foundation of Mussolini’s fascism. In the case study of Benito Mussolini the use of Roman history, his myth of romanità, will be analysed in Mussolini’s political discourse, through some of his speeches from the book Mussolini as revealed in his political speeches (November 1914- August 1923).
Also Boris Johnson referred to Roman history. In his book The Dream of Rome he argues how the Roman Empire brought political and cultural unity in Europe and explains how modern Europe fails to continue to do this. Both politicians have started their career as journalists and as a result a focus on their use of media regarding the Roman past will be central in this thesis.
Acknowledgements:
During the many holidays I spent with my family as a child in Italy the great interest in the then very strange Italian language and beautiful culture started to develop. This interest continued growing during my life and by the time I reached the age where I had to choose the right study, I came across the department of European Studies at the University of
Amsterdam. The great opportunity to follow the compulsory courses, but also courses of your own interest in the study programme was one of the reasons for me to apply. As a result, I followed an Italian course during my Bachelor European Studies and thanks to the great enthusiasm of professor Maria Urban I continued with following her course “Italian History and Culture after 1800” and spent my Erasmus + semester in Rome, where I studied at the Università degli Studi Roma Tre.
This semester was not only a personal level a fantastic experience. It also gave me the opportunity to follow courses such as Roman History. After coming back, my Bachelor was completed with a thesis about Giuseppe Garibaldi, where I researched his anti- hero status in satirical newspapers. After finishing my Bachelor I wanted to continue with European Studies and started the Masters European Studies: Identity and Integration. After a few months, the search for a topic for my Master thesis was started. Soon it became clear that I wanted to continue with my interest for Italy, especially with the history of the Roman Empire. I found it interesting to research to what extend we still have remains of the Romans in our society. Not only on an archaeological level, but also the fact that our law system is based on the Roman law and the many comparisons that have been made between Europe and the Roman Empire. With the help of professor Alex Drace- Francis the relation between Benito
Mussolini and Boris Johnson and their use of Roman history was quickly made and became the basis for this thesis. Especially, the relation with Johnson was from the beginning interesting, because of his personality and the recent Brexit.
On a final note I want to thank my parents, Pieter and Diane, for always supporting me to make my own decisions. The special support, which they gave me when I wanted to go to Rome for six months, meant a lot and thanks to them, I turned into the person I am today. In addition, thank you Alex for helping and providing me with very useful comments and guiding me to the right directions during this thesis process, which wasn’t always easy.
Introduction:
“Politicians use history in many ways. They make history, as actors; they often write history, as diarists and in memoirs; some even read and study history, and their claims to scholarly expertise on the subject give a degree of intellectual authority and respect”.1 They use the past to show the historical significance and their commitment to the national history. However, for a long time only the writers of history were the ones that claimed on applying history to the present. The statement that “the effect of history, unlike other disciplines, facilitates an understanding of, and an orientation in, the historically determined present and therefore is a crucial element in the intellectual make- up of any culture” is not new.2 It represents history as an aid to self- understanding and is often accompanied with a link of the historical knowledge to the present, because history cannot provide “formulas for acting in the present or planning for the future”.3 Though, the general attitude is that history can provide us with practical lessons for dealing with the future. If we look at statements of representatives of historicism from the early 19th century, we can trace a great trust in the course of history or a
consciousness of history linked as a series of crisis combined with the idea that history can provide us lessons for the future and how to deal with the present. Jakob Burckhardt
supported this view by saying that: “We want experience to teach us not so much to be clever (for the next occasion!) as to be wise (forever!)”.4
In this tradition Benito Mussolini founded his fascism. It has been stated that the idea of a heritage from ancient Rome, or romanità, was the foundation of fascism. Classicists have become increasingly interested in the way classical antiquity has been used for political ends.5 Several attempts have been made to research the Fascist ideal of romanità, or “romanness”, which was the idea to refer to the Roman History. The idea of romanità has been analysed in the works of classicists, historians and archaeologists of the Fascist period. In addition, the idea of romanità was a topic in popular culture for example in cinema and theatre. Mussolini and his Fascism is one of the clearest examples of the use of history for Mussolini’s own
1 Anna Clark, “Politicians using History”, Australian Journal of Politics& History, Vol. 56 (2010), 120.
2 Karl- Georg Faber, “The use of history in the political debate”, History and Theory, Vol. 17 (1978), 36.
3 Ibid. 4 Ibid. 37.
5 Jan Nelis, “Constructing Fascist Identity: Benito Mussolini and the myth of Romanità”, Classical
political ends. Mussolini started to learn Latin in 1906 and mentioned the Roman Empire in one of his first articles he published as a journalist in Il Pensiero Romagnolo.
His view on ancient Rome has changed multiple times, for example after the First World War when he stated that the fall of the Roman Empire was the result of the influences of the Christians and Jews. However, in order to consolidate his power Mussolini referred to the Roman Empire as an example for national force and regeneration. A more recent example of the use of the Roman past can be found with the British Minister of Foreign Affairs, Boris Johnson. He started his career as a journalist at the Times in 1987. During the early days of his career he developed himself as a controversial figure in the British media. Supporters of Johnson have praised him because of his entertaining and humorous personality. However, he has often been criticized for being too elitist, dishonest and for his use of racist language, for example when he made a remark about Barack Obama’s background in 2016.6 In 2006 Johnson published his book The Dream of Rome, where he discusses how the Roman Empire brought political and cultural unity in Europe and relates this to how the European Union fails to continue this political and cultural unity. Due to his background in classics (Johnson studied Classics at Oxford), he showed a great interest in classical antiquity and in combination with his unique personality he gained popularity. In 2016 he led the ‘Vote Leave’ campaign, because he thought that Britain could not make progress when it would stay in the EU. He relates this to the times where Britain flourished during the Roman past.
It would thus be interesting to compare both political leaders and see to what extend they the use of the history of the Roman Empire was present in their political discourse and to what extend they differ from each other. In the first chapter the use of history by politicians will be discussed. In addition, the use of the Roman past in the fascist regime and in Britain will be discussed. Then the case study about Benito Mussolini will follow. Firstly, a biography will be discussed in order to make clear why Mussolini was interested in the Roman Empire. The foundation of fascism has often been described as the myth of romanità, or romanness. Mussolini saw the use of the past, in this case Roman antiquity, as an important reference in order for a better future for Italy. Political speeches regarding the use of Roman History of Mussolini will be analysed. In the third chapter the case study of Boris Johnson will be discussed. Johnson has been the British Minister of Foreign Affairs since July 2016 and 6 Ashley Cowburn, “Boris Johnson accused of ‘dog whistle racism’ over controversial Barack Obama Kenya remarks”, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-barack-obama-kenya-remarks-accused-dog-whistle-racism-john-mcdonnell-labour-a6996286.html, consulted on 14-06-2017.
gained popularity because of his humorous and ‘clownish’ personality, which became clear through his articles published in the Times and the Daily Telegraph. He saw the future of Britain outside the EU in order to bring Britain back to the times when it thrived. In his book The Dream of Rome Johnson gives examples of features of the Roman Empire and compares these with the EU. In his opinion the EU, and as a result Britain, is in decay. In order to thrive again, Europe needs to look back to the Roman past and how they were able to conquer a large part of the world for so long. In the last chapter, the use of the Roman past by both political leaders will be compared and their contrast will be highlighted.
In the conclusion, the different uses of the Roman Empire by both political leaders will be outlined, followed by their differences. The use of Roman History made sure that the people in uncertain times were able to recall to better times or as we will see in the case of Johnson as a way to highlight what is wrong with the society. The use of the Roman past by the two political leaders will show their significance and their meaning for the future.
Methodology:
In this thesis the political leaders Benito Mussolini and Boris Johnson will be compared. The reason for this comparison is that both political leaders have used Roman history, but they have not yet been compared with each other and their contrast in the use of Roman history has not been made clear yet. It is therefore an unusual but interesting comparison, not only because they have not been compared yet, but also the fact that they have both referred to the Roman history in different time periods will give an interesting contrast. In order to execute the research of this thesis the political speeches of Benito Mussolini and the book and articles written by Boris Johnson will be analysed, in order to compare and highlight the difference in their use of the Roman history.
The primary literature in this thesis consists primarily two books of the political leaders Benito Mussolini and Boris Johnson and will form the basis of this research. The books Mussolini as Revealed in his Political Speeches 1914-1923 written by Barone Bernardo Quaranta di San Severino and The Dream of Rome by Boris Johnson will form the basis of the research, because they both indicate the use of Roman History used by the political leaders. The secondary literature for the part about Benito Mussolini will for example consist for example out of the work of Jan Nelis. He has published several articles and a book where he explained the concept of romanità under Italian fascism, such as “Constructing fascist identity: Benito Mussolini and the myth of romanità”. With the work of Jan Nelis and the examples of the political speeches by Mussolini the use of the Roman History in the political discourse of Mussolini will be analysed. Then a parallel will be drawn to Boris Johnson’s use of the Roman past. Johnson is the Minister of Foreign Affairs in Britain and is well known for his ‘entertaining and humorous’ personality that also appeaers in his articles he wrote at the beginning of his career as a journalist. He has a background in classics and has compared the EU and the Roman Empire in his articles and in his book The Dream of Rome. It is therefore interesting to research both political leaders to investigate a different use of Roman history by different leaders in different times and to test the existing literature regarding the use of Roman history. This will be more difficult to apply on Boris Johnson, because of the lack of scientific literature regarding Johnson. However, the articles and his book The Dream of Rome will make the comparison all the more interesting.
1: The Use of History
“As a rule, it is the writers of history who insist on calling history to consciousness and applying its lessons to the present, to ‘life’.”7 The historical research into the past has been seen as a contribution that can be useful for the survival of the society. The effect of history is that “it can facilitate ‘an understanding of, and an orientation in, the historically determined present’ and therefore ‘is a crucial element in the intellectual make up of any culture’ is usually accompanied by the qualification that history cannot provide ‘formulas for acting in the present or planning for the future’”.8 When we look back to the statements made by representatives of history, already in the early 19th century the consciousness of history is explained as a series of crises that can provide practical lessons for the future or can gives us instructions to deal with the present. In addition, Faber states that: “it is obvious enough that the political uses to which history has been put ever since the rise of historicism have rarely corresponded to the terms of this description: that is, history as indispensible for “life” but at the same time inapplicable for political problems”.9
The use of history is thus debatable. In general, it could be stated that the use history can be a tool for the future. However, others claim that it cannot contribute to the future.
A few decades ago several sociologists, political scientists, peace researchers and even historians thought that history or historical methods could not be used as an analytical tool for understanding international development. Social scientists believed that history as a discipline was too descriptive and although it provided facts, they thought it did not have a role in the analysis. They were more interested in ‘what one clerk wrote to the other’.10 From the 1960s social history began to gain a strong position and started to dominate the research scene in history in the 1970s and 1980s. Social history made historical perspectives visible and a more methodological and theoretical approach gave the subject a new orientation. In his article “Improving the use of history by the international humanitarian sector” John Nicholas Borton 7 Karl- Georg Faber, “The Use of History in Political Debate”, History and Theory, Vol. 17 (1978), 36.
8 Ibid. 9 Ibid. 37.
10 Kim Salomon, “What is the Use of International History?”, Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 30 (1993), 375.
uses the model of Davey et al. to identify the three mutual reinforcing ways in which the international humanitarian sector could benefit from a greater historical perspective. The first way was that a fuller awareness of the challenges that humanitarian action has faced in the past, the mistakes as well as the successes, will help reflecting the challenges the society is facing today, and that it will help in the development of more appropriate responses.
Secondly, a greater attention to the past will create a more critical perspective on process of operational and organisational changes and the evolution of new norms. And a stronger connection with history “will help those that make up the system to more accurately perceive its origins and identity in a broader global perspective”.11 Borton states that when there is a better understanding of history and recognition of the past, the international sector will have a better foundation to cooperate and understand each other.
Parliamentarians, political journalists and political advisors made several use of their
historical knowledge. Not only to comment on the recent events, but also ‘instrumentally and normatively’ for the realization of political goals. And what we are witnessing nowadays in the planning of history instruction by educational authorities, according to Faber, is the exactly opposite of historicist priorities. As a consequence, history becomes reduced to source material that can be used to give answers to social and political problems. Thus most
researchers have stated that history is mostly used to give possible answers for the future. In particular for politicians, or employers working in the political field it is used and has been used as a tool to cope with problems that the society is facing.
As for the fascism and the fascist regime itself, it had initially little time for interest in history according to Mark Mazower. “Not only was it focussed upon the eventual seizure of power, but it was not ever, unlike Communism, a movement that valorised historical analysis in the way that came so naturally to Party intellectuals in the Italian Communist Party (PCI) and elsewhere”.12 The initial incentives of fascism came from futurism and they were explicitly anti- historical in the early days of fascism. Beginning a revolution meant thus starting a war. For many early fascists, fascism could therefore not include history. “Naturally, with time, power and expansion into government, that changed: not even Fascism could afford to ignore
11 John Nicholas Borton, “Improving the Use of History by the International Humanitarian Sector”,
European Review of History, Vol. 23 (2016), 194.
12 Mark Mazower, “Fascism and Democracy Today: What Use is the Study of History in the Current Crisis?”, European Law Journal, Vol. 22 (2016), 377.
the need to construct a genealogy for itself.”13 This could be seen in the investment in archaeology, ancient history and the distribution of the new concept ‘romanità’ via a state sponsored heritage industry. This became clear at the 1932 Exhibition of the Fascist Revolution. The propagated view of fascism that was presented was supposed to bring the country back from the total chaos in 1919-1920 and not as a realisation of the pre 1914 Risorgimento history. In the beginning it did not have much relation with the use of history. However, as we will see in the next chapter, this changed when Mussolini introduced the new phenomena ‘romanità’, where the use of history develops in a very specific way and focuses on the Roman ancient history.
The Romans were in Great Britain from 43 till 410 AD. In present day Great Britain there are still some features visible in Britain society, for example the English language, which is seen as an imperial language. Nowadays, Romanness and the Roman History in Britain are often seen as something elitist. In Britain highly educated and well- mannered people are often called elitist and this is often associated with the history of the Roman Empire. In 2015 a research has been published about breaking the ‘class’ ceiling. There has been a long
perception that Britain’s traditionally high- status professional arenas, such as law, medicine, engineering, and journalism, remain “stubbornly elitist and recruit largely those who have been privately educated or who hail from privileged class backgrounds”.14 Even a historical study of surnames among Oxford graduates and the holders of top positions since the 13th century shows that social status in Britain is something that can be inherited, rather than something that can be achieved by hard- working. In addition, David Cameron noted in a speech that: “You only have to look at the make up of the high- levels of parliament, the judiciary, the army, the media. It’s not diverse; there’s not as much social mobility as there needs to be”.15 In addition, over recent decades there has been an increasing academic and political interest in the impact of higher education on social mobility and the entry to elite occupations.16 Different studies show that there is a distinction between the ‘traditional’ professions, for example law, medicine and finance, which of which are dominated by the children of higher managers. Professionals and technical, more IT related professions appear 13 Ibid.
14 Sam Friedman, Daniel Laurison, Andrew Miles, “Breaking the ‘class’ ceiling? Social mobility into Britain’s occupations”, Sociological Review, Vol. 63 (2015), 2.
15 Ibid.
16 Paul Wakeling, Mike Savage, “Entry to elite positions and the stratification of higher education in Britain”, Sociological Review, Vol. 63 (2015), 290.
to be often occupied by children from lower social classes.17 In the same study they find that even if people are able to mobilize upwards, they are not able to obtain the same economical, cultural and social capital as those from privileged backgrounds. According to the Coalition Government (2015) the social mobility is the principal goal of the current social policy. Thus, in Britain social mobility is still a barrier and is something that is still unequal.
Moreover, people who have studied at elite schools and universities are often people who have studied classics and they are often seen as elitist. In the article ‘Is the Study of Greek and Latin Classics Elitist?’ written by Edith Hall, a professor in Classics at King’s College in London, raised the question if classical education is elitist. “In the early 18th century, the subject- matter called ‘The Classics’ was adopted as the bedrock of elite school and university curricula”.18 The continuation of the association of the British class system with classical education has its effect on the British culture according to Edith Hall. It is sometimes very hard to get access to the Latin language at state schools, and as for the Greek language, that is even harder to find at a state school. In the opinion of Hall the Latin and Greek language can play a transformative role in society. She talks about the reasons of Tom Paine why ‘classical education’ is important. Paine is one of Britain’s original radical thinkers and is no ‘kneejerk’ opponent of the study of antiquity. However, he does have four reasons why classical
education is in favour in ruling class- pedagogy. The first one is that he objects to the position of classism in relation to human progress. Secondly, he objects to the content of classism: “classical culture was produced by and for the ancient elite in a hierarchical society, and therefore he questioned its appropriateness for general education in a society moving towards greater egalitarianism”.19 Thirdly, he questioned the actual practice of elite pedagogy.
He urged that the amount of money spent on the time that is required to master the ancient languages could better be spent on learning about the modern world. These objections show that Paine saw Classics as atavistic and backward looking. In contrast are the opinions of Edith Hall and Mary Beard. Both are professors in Classics and have written about the question if Classics are elitist.
17 Sam Friedman, Daniel Laurison, Andrew Miles, “Breaking the ‘class’ ceiling? Social mobility into Britain’s occupations”, Sociological Review, Vol. 63 (2015), 2.
18 Edith Hall, “Is the Study of Greek and Latin Classics Elitist?”,
http://www.arlt.co.uk/latintest/JCT/29/Hall,%20E.%20(2014).%20Is%20the%20Study%20of %20Greek%20and%20Latin%20Classics%20Elitist.%20JCT%2029,%208-10.pdf , 8. 19 Ibid.
According to Edith Hall studying ancient Greece and Rome is not inevitably elitist: “Of Tom Paine’s four arguments, the most important is that learning languages as if they are living tongues, in which poetry as well as prose must be fluently composed, can easily become a waste of educational valuable time”.20 However, Paine has not claimed that learning about the history, and therefore ancient times, was not constructive. He thought that the Greeks and Romans provided useful comparands from which we could learn. Hall concludes that Pain probably wanted us to use Classics as a ‘rear- view window’. In this way, Classics becomes a useful aid to understand us, our position in time and human history. Hall agrees with this and therefore recommends that we should not rule out the rear- view window out, because if we use it systematically it can offer us an all- round vision, which we will need to survive.21 The article of Edith Hall highlights thus the importance that learning about the Roman history could help in order to deal with the present. In line with this reasoning is the work of Mary Beard, professor in Classics at Cambridge University. She has published several essays and reviews concerning the relation between classical education and elites. She has devoted her career to study the distant past, Classics. She is interested in the past, but moreover in the persistence of the past and why the Classics are so important for the western imagination. She asks herself questions like how the ancient world is relevant to the modern world? In an article in The Guardian Beard says about Roman History that:
The problem with Roman History is that it’s just irredeemably blokeish. It’s conquests, and if it’s not conquests, then it’s engineering, and if it’s not engineering then it’s Roman military tactics. You don’t see the child miners or the slaves, and you don’t think: ‘how the hell would you get that column from Egypt to Rome?’22
Roman History is according to Mary Beard important: “To ignore the Romans is not just to turn a blind eye to the distant eye. Rome still helps to define the way we understand our world and think about ourselves, from high theory to low comedy. After 2,000 years, it continues to underpin Western culture and politics, what we write and how we see the world, and our place
20 Edith Hall, “Is the Study of Greek and Latin Elitist?”, http://www.arlt.co.uk/latintest/JCT/29/Hall, %20E.%20(2014).%20Is%20the%20Study%20of%20Greek%20and%20Latin%20Classics%20Elitist. %20JCT%2029,%208-10.pdf , 9.
21 Ibid. 10
22 Zoe Williams, ‘Mary Beard: “The role of the academic is to make everything less simple”’, https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/23/mary-beard-the-role-of-the-academic-is-to-make-everything-less-simple , consulted on 01-06-2017.
in it”.23 The link between politics and the use of Roman History is thus important. Already two hundred and fifty years ago Edward Gibbon wrote The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire that was the start for the study of the Roman History in the English speaking world. New ways of looking at the past were invented to look at old evidence. The historians started to research the Roman History with different priorities, from gender identity to food supply. The Roman History has always been rewritten and in some ways we know more about ancient Rome than the Romans themselves. According to Mary Beard Roman History is a work in progress.24
In the next two chapters the two politicians Benito Mussolini and Boris Johnson will be introduced. Their history and how they have become the political leaders they were and are will be discussed. In addition, the first reasons and examples of how they have used Roman History and what kind of impact the use of the Roman History had on their political power.
23 Mary Beard, “The glory of Rome”, http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/mary-beard-the-glory-of-rome , consulted on 01-06-2017.
24 Mary Beard, “The glory of Rome”, http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/mary-beard-the-glory-of-rome , consulted on 01-06-2017.
2: Benito Mussolini
I have never, with closed eyes, accepted the thoughts of others when they were estimating events and realities either in the normal course of things or when the situation appeared exceptional. I have searched, to be sure, with a spirit of analysis the whole ancient and modern history of my country. I have drawn parallels because I wanted to explore to the depths, on the basis of historical fact, the profound sources of our national life of our character, and to compare our capacities with those of other people.25
2.1 Mussolini’s biography
Benito Mussolini was born on 29 July 1883 near Dovia, which is nowadays Predappio Nuova. His father, Alessandro Mussolini, was the local blacksmith. He was a self- educated, forceful character who had been depicted as a revolutionary anarchist in his early years and had idealistic interest in politics. He was part of the local council as a Socialist and personally knew many of Italy’s left- wing leaders. His character was unpredictable, exactly the opposite of that of his wife, Rosa Maltoni. She was the local primary school teacher and was a serious, responsible and devoted Catholic. However, she suffered from ‘nerves’. The father of Benito encouraged his children to read books, such as Les Misérables, and The Prince of
Machiavelli. In short, the Mussolini’s were a relatively rich and well-educated family, with two incomes and three children, though money was short sometimes.26 Benito continued to go to school until he was 18, which was very unusual in the rural areas back then. Already during his years at primary school Benito caused for trouble: “He organised a successful strike against the food, and was eventually expelled from the boarding wing, again for threatening a fellow- pupil with a knife”.27 Benito followed his mother’s footsteps and became in 1901 a qualified schoolteacher. In 1902 he found his first job as a teacher. However, Benito found his 25 Kenneth Scott, “Mussolini and Roman Empire”, The Classical Journal, Vol. 27 (1932), 645. 26 Martin Clark, Mussolini, (Harlow: Pearson Education Limited, 2005), 8-9
life boring and borrowed fifty lire from his mother to take a train to Switzerland. “A strange choice for a 19- year- old seeking adventure, particularly as he already detested both
democracy and the bourgeoisie”.28 He stayed in Switzerland and just across the border with France until November 1904. After that he found his true vocation, namely as a journalist and agitator. In Lausanne he started to work for L’Avvenire del Lavoratore, where he also made passionate speeches for the Italian immigrant workers in Switzerland, especially during strikes and protest demonstrations. “He became a brilliant and daring orator, specialising in anticlerical themes.”29 In January 1905 Mussolini joined the 10th regiment of Bersaglieri, stationed at Verona. After his military service (until September 1906) he was more anti- militarist and anti- monarchist than ever, though it was stated that Mussolini was a good soldier, just like he was to become a good journalist, orator and politician. After September 1909 his ‘Wanderjahre’ were over and he settled in Forlì, Italy, where his father had set up a restaurant. Here Benito’s real career as a journalist and political orator started. Forlì turned out to be a good environment for his political ends, because it was a combative province. In the local politics, confrontations between the Republicans, mostly small landowners, and Socialists, who were mostly landless labourers, were often the case. This type of environment was ideal for Mussolini, who already attracted large crowds to his meetings and rapidly became the undisputed leader of the Socialists: “Mussolini’s rise from provincial obscurity to Socialist power was rapid but explicable”.30 In September 1911 strikes broke out in Forlì, when Italy went into war with Turkey over Libya. Mussolini and the local Republican leader Pietro Nenni were both arrested for causing violence outbreaks. This gave Mussolini time to read German and French classics; moreover it was an opportunity for more self- publicity. When he was released Mussolini had become an anti- war hero and a Socialist hero, well known far beyond Forlì. By the age of 29 Mussolini controlled the Socialist party’s main propaganda and he had become a key figure in national politics. He was the: “the proud Romagnolo, the blacksmith’s son, the half- starved bohemian emigrant who had know hard manual work and travelled the world, the heroic leader unjustly imprisoned, the passionate lover, above all the self- educated intellectual fluent in foreign tongues”.31
28 Martin Clark, Mussolini, (Harlow: Pearson Education Limited, 2005), 11. 29 Ibid.
30 Ibid. 17. 31 Ibid.
In 1912 he moved with his wife Rachel and daughter Edda to Milan and became an editor for the newspaper the Avanti!. Although he had never worked for a national daily newspaper before he rapidly evolved himself as one of the foremost Italian journalists of the pre- war era. Mussolini did not appreciate the escalation of the international crisis. After Franz Ferdinand was murdered he continued to focus on the domestic repercussions of the Red Week in Italy. In august 1914, when the hostilities increased, Mussolini favoured for Italy’s neutrality in the conflict. He was one of the most outspoken persons against the war. However, he started to doubt about the neutral position of Italy in the war, because France and Britain wanted to interfere against Germany and Austria. The governments of these countries had treated him badly during his time in Switzerland and in Trent so he became more and more interested in an Italian intervention in the conflict.32 His change of position towards the conflict was announced by Mussolini in the Avanti!, where he called not interfering “immobilizing” and a “backward- looking” position. However, this change of position was not supported by the Socialist party and this led to his resignation at the newspaper Avanti!. His Socialist-
followers called him a “traitor”, “sell- out” and “assassin” due to his changed position about starting to interfere in the war. After his resignation he became the editor and owner of a new pro- war daily newspaper, Il Popolo d’Italia. In order to create this newspaper he accepted money from wealthy landowners from Bologna and a group of industrialists that would profit from Italy’s intervention in the war. As a consequence, Mussolini had burned its bridges with the Socialist movement. Mussolini’s political views began to change in the following years after he broke with the Socialist movement. As a result his popularity decreased and it seemed that his ‘fifteen minutes of fame’ were over.33
2.2 Mussolini and the rise of the Fascist Power:
The end of World War One did not resulted in a quick return to the ‘good old days’. The war had a major impact on the Italian economy. The sudden return to peace in Italy led to
domestic setbacks. The Italians saw that political and social change was an inevitable result of the war. Therefore the political debate was dominated by demands for constitutional reform, land needed to return to the peasants, workers needed to be controlled and factories and 32 Anthony L. Cardoza, Benito Mussolini: the first fascist, (New York: Pearson/ Longman cop., 2006), 45-46.
governmental regulation were needed for the industry. The foreign policy failures and worrying economical conditions in Italy had social consequences:
High unemployment and inflation triggered not only extraordinary resurgence of strikes and labour demonstrations, but also more chaotic and explosive forms of social protest. For Mussolini these conditions seemed to be the moment for his own political success with his ‘demagogic talents as a journalist and rabble- rouser’.34
However, Mussolini faced some difficulties and he would later state that the end of the war has left him “lost and searching for a road”.35
2.3 Mussolini’s road to leadership:
Mussolini combined a political strategy that mixed radicalism and super patriotism to attract industrial workers, peasants, and veterans who returned from the war. The Fascio, the basis of the original Fascist movement, was not so much focussed on the ideological coherence. Mussolini wanted the movement to express and embody not a precise political project but more a state of mind, that would create a pervasive mood of post- war discontent and
undirected revolt. In addition, the early Fascists promised a violent rather than a political talk. Fascism was supposed to be: “an organization not for propaganda but for battle”.36 His
experience in journalism played a large role in his development as a future leader. In 1922 Mussolini became the prime minister of the coalition cabinet and turned against all his coalition partners (the socialists, liberals and Catholics). Denis Mack Smith, a scholar that published several works on Mussolini, stated that: “it can be claimed that journalism and public relation were the most essential of all professional activities under fascism”.37 Journalism and the public relations were important to the fascist regime because they both needed to be controlled in order to enhance the power of the regime. Power over journalism and public relations resulted in the ability to control the opinions and to influence people on a mass level through propaganda. In July 1923 Mussolini was able to get almost the whole 34 Anthony L. Cardoza, Benito Mussolini: the first fascist, (New York: Pearson/Longman cop., 2006), 65.
35 Ibid. 36 Ibid. 67.
37 Benjamin Barron, Senior Honours Thesis in History, “A Mysterious revival of Roman Passion: Mussolini’s Ambiguous and Opportunistic Conception of Romanità”,
https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/bitstream/handle/10822/555514/BarronBenjaminThesis.pdf;s equence=2, 9.
Italian press under his control. As a result, the fascist government was entitled to warn or censor any publications that incited the people “to class hatred or to disobedience of the laws and orders of the authorities”.38 The somewhat vague language of the declaration enabled Mussolini to interfere in almost every journalistic activity if he wanted to.
In the 1920s Mussolini was already “in reality a masterful political tactician, skilled in the arts of popular journalism and in the manipulation of propaganda and political symbols”.39
Mussolini was a ‘child of his time’ and after World War 1 scepticism among the people arose, that not only influenced people’s view of the present, but also from the past. “A need for simplified history, for simple stories, was voiced”.40 According to Cofrancesco: “The ideals [of romanità propaganda], which are put to the front, can only successfully mask profane interests if they at least partly succeed in giving a response to certain needs, fears,
preoccupations that live in the social body”.41
Due to Mussolini’s education and interest in Classics and his ability to become a popular orator and leader of the fascist regime, his preference for the use of the past increased. He felt the need in the society for a recall to the past and the strong Roman past was the ideal
reference for the people, in order for Italy to move forward.
2.4 The Myth of Romanità:
The glorification of the Roman past was quite often used throughout Italy and even in other European states, even before Mussolini was born. Though, “the idea of a heritage from Rome, or romanità, was central to Italian Fascism”.42 The aim in Jan Nelis’ article ‘Constructing Fascist Identity: Benito Mussolini and the Myth of Romanità’ is to show how ‘Il Duce’ created a personal, but at the same time public and political discourse on Roman antiquity. Mussolini had little knowledge of the Latin language. He started to learn the language around 1906. In a letter from December the 17th Mussolini said that his teacher thought he would be 38 Benjamin Barron, Senior Honours Thesis in History, “A Mysterious revival of Roman Passion: Mussolini’s Ambiguous and Opportunistic Conception of Romanità”,
https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/bitstream/handle/10822/555514/BarronBenjaminThesis.pdf;s equence=2, 10.
39 Jan Nelis, “Constructing Fascist Identity: Benito Mussolini and the Myth of Romanità”, Classical
World, Vol. 100 (2007), 395.
40 Ibid. 396. 41 Ibid. 397. 42 Ibid. 391.
“tasting” Vergil in a couple of months.43 Later on Mussolini even called himself “Il Duce”, which created a constant reminder with Roman antiquity. Duce means commander in Italian and derives from the Latin word Dux. Mussolini first mentions Rome in a series of articles published in November and December 1908 in Il Pensiero Romagnolo and was in the beginning fairly negative. Mussolini states that the fall of the Roman Empire was a result of the negative influence of Christianity and the Jews. In the beginning of his career Mussolini preoccupation with the fall of Rome remains constant. For example in 1911 in his “Il Trentino veduto da un socialista” he writes: “It is not the change in political forms, from republican to monarchic, which indicates the beginning of Rome’s decadence, but the corruption of dominant races in too much and too frequent contact with inferior peoples”.44
After World War 1 Mussolini’s view on Roman antiquity changed. He used the collapse of the Roman Empire mostly negative, however during the consolidation of his power Mussolini used Rome as an ideal of national force and regeneration. He portrayed Rome as the safe haven in which Christianity was harboured, Rome onde Christo è romano (Rome of which Christ is Roman). In addition, right before his March on Rome on 22th of March 1922 he directed in a speech to the “Fiumans”, an echo of the Risorgimental motto Roma o morte (Rome or death). According to Mussolini, Rome has become Italy and Italy has become Rome.45
The Roman Empire played thus not only a negative, but also a positive role as a historical example for Mussolini. He did not clearly referred to romanità, but more as a collection of ideals until just before the March on Rome on the 22th October of 1922. From that moment on his objective was to gain power by evoking a spiritualized, powerful, and creative ancient Rome. The very first ‘Roman treatment’ by Mussolini appears in a written text in 1919. Mussolini defines here dignity as Romanness: “more worthy, we would nearly dare say more Roman”. From this moment Rome and therefore the Roman Empire becomes a universal idea, worthy of Italy.46 As a result, quite suddenly Rome became one of the central ideas in Fascist nationalism, self-perception and style. Mussolini even gave Rome its own birthday on the 21st of April, the same date when Rome was founded by Romulus in 753 BC:
43 Jan Nelis, “Constructing Fascist Identity: Benito Mussolini and the Myth of Romanità”, Classical
World, Vol. 100 (2007), 391.
44 Ibid. 398. 45 Ibid. 399. 46 Ibid. 402.
If the socialists have May 1, if the populari have May 15, if other parties of other colours have their days, we fascists will have one: the Birthday of Rome, April 21. On that day, we, in spirit of that city which has given us two civilizations to the world, and will gave a third, will recognize ourselves, and the regional legions will parade in our order, which is not military and not even German, but simply Roman….47
The relation between Italian Fascism and the myth of romanità appears to be uncomplicated. From its early days as a radical movement the Fascists deployed a language that related to the Roman past.48 However, this relation was in the early days of fascism contradicted, because of on the one hand there was an admiration for the values of the Roman Empire and on the other hand there was a disdain for the city’s recent state of political and moral decadence.
The Fascist movement that Mussolini founded from 1919 paid a large tribute to the Roman past, to start with its name and the official emblem. The first name of the regime was Fasci di Combattimento, this recalled to the Roman faces, which was “a symbol made up of a bundle of wooden rods with a protruding axe that was carried by a special group of official protectors of the magistrates in ancient Rome (lictores) as a sign of unity, sovereign authority, and military might.”49 Thus the reference to the word faces had two important functions for Mussolini. The first one was that it was derived from political and military traditions of the Roman Empire and secondly its ‘physiognomy’ as a new revolutionary and political movement that could identify left radicalism and hyper- nationalism. In addition, the early driving forces of the Fascist street activism were called the squadri. Again, this was a direct reference to the Roman past.
Studies about the romanità also highlight the importance of the bimillennary of Augustus in 1937-1938. The first emperor of Rome, Augustus, was seen as the founder of the Roman Empire and a peace bringer. In the early 1930s, the fascist authorities took the decision to celebrate the 2000- year anniversary of Augustus’ birth. The celebrations underlined the fascism’s identification with romanità and Mussolini’s tendency to link with the Roman Empire.50 Already, before the celebration of Augustus’ birth, the regime had showed its love 47 Jan Nelis, “Constructing Fascist Identity: Benito Mussolini and the Myth of Romanità”, Classical
World, Vol. 100 (2007), 402.
48 Artiotle Kallis, The Third Rome 1922-1943: The Making of the Fascist Capital, (Palgrave
Macmillan 2014), 73.
49 Ibid.
50 Aristotle Kallis, “Framing’ Romanità: The Celebrations for the Billemenario Augusteo and the Augusteo Area- Pacis Project”, Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. 46 (2011), 809.
of anniversary celebrations. The billemenario of Vergil had already been extravagantly celebrated in 1930, followed by the celebration of Horace in 1935. However, the celebration of Augustus gave opportunities for a symbolic interpretation between the Roman past and the Fascist present. The celebration also offered a genuine opportunity to recast the ‘third Rome’ (the Roma di Mussolini) as the cradle and continuous ‘beacon of a universal civilization’.51 The celebration had multiple intentions. It was not only a message for Italy, but also a message for other countries and it was an attempt to connect the Fascist discourse of a national rebirth to an updated ‘myth of Rome’ “steeped in the city’s privileged imperial (ancient) and spiritual (medieval) legacy”.52 Thus the decision to celebrate the birth of Augusts had a major political significance for the Fascist authorities. In addition, the exhibition Mostra della Rivoluzione Fascista was for the first time organized in 1932, ten years after the March on Rome. Again here was the goal was to link fascism and imperial Rome. However, the Augustan exposition was not much more than propaganda. Mussolini himself never really stressed the importance of the first emperor of Rome. From his writings, it could be concluded that not Augustus, but Julius Caesar was more important to him. The object of Mussolini’s admiration was clearly Julius Caesar. He mentioned him over and over again: “The murder of Caesar was a disgrace for humanity.... I love Casear. He was the only one who united in himself the will of the warrior and the genius of the wise man”.53 And “for us, Julius Ceasar was stabbed yesterday. It is characteristic of the Italian people that
everything is eternal and everything is actual.”54 In addition, in 1933 Mussolini depicted not Augustus, but Caesar as the founder of the Roman Empire. In the same year, fascism became firmly installed and Mussolini started to talk about: “Caesarian times, dominated as they are by exceptional personalities that assume in themselves the forces of the state, for the good of the people,…”55
The connection between Fascism and the myth of romanità was in close connection with the city of Rome. Romanità mapped the city of Rome as a symbolic space that was at the same time a reality. The connection between symbolic and reality was not a coincidence. Mussolini often referred to Theodor Mommsen. Mommsen said: “that one cannot stay in Rome without 51 Ibid. 810.
52 Ibid.
53 Jan Nelis, “Constructing Fascist Identity: Benito Mussolini and the Myth of Romanità”, Classical
World, Vol. 100 (2007), 406.
54 Aristotle Kallis, The Third Rome 1922-1943: The Making of the Fascist Capital, (Palgrave Macmillan 2014), 75.
a universal idea”.56 What is striking to note is that there was a great contrast within the fascist regime for the adoration for the city of Rome. Mussolini had dubious feelings about the city at first:
A parasitical city of bedsits, of shoe- shines, of prostitutes, of priests and bureaucrats, Rome- city without proletariat worthy of its name- is not the centre of national political life but rather the centre and the hearth of infection of our national political life.
Enough, then, with the stupid superstitious belief that everything, everything, everything must be concentrated in Rome: in this huge vampire of a city that sucks the best blood of the nation.57
This changed barely a month before the March on Rome in 1922 when he said: “Rome has always performed an essential function of the highest order in the history of the Italian Nation…”58
The relation between Fascism and the myth of romanità was far more complex and ambiguous than has been explained. Kallis highlights this and states that there were
intellectual currents inside the early Fascist movement that rejected the use of the past as a matrix for imagining and experiencing the present. Not the least, as an example for the future. When Mussolini started to revive the spirit of the romanità, this was not just a celebration of ‘dead stone’s’, but it was an experience that involved ‘living souls’. Recalling to the Roman past was according to Mussolini a vibrant image and was supposed to be experienced not as something that ‘has been’, but more as a construction for the future.59
Thus in the beginning of the fascist regime the ‘the myth of romanità’ did not meant much. However, thanks to Mussolini the myth became one of the foundations of the regime and a tool for the people to identify with in uncertain times and a way to use the past for current situations in society, which will be clear after a few of Mussolini’s speeches will be discussed.
2.5 Mussolini and his empire:
56 Aristotle Kallis, The Third Rome 1922-1943: The Making of the Fascist Capital, (Palgrave Macmillan 2014), 76.
57 Ibid. 20. 58 Ibid. 21. 59 Ibid.
Mussolini referred to the clearly imperial note of the Roman Empire from the beginning of his career. He argued that Italy had to return to the sea. The idea of a Mare nostrum, was at the core of Fascism and of Italy’s destiny.60 This becomes clear in a speech of Mussolini at the Università per Stranier at Perugia, where he talks about the life cycle of ancient Rome that is seen as an almost living entity, which grew along the sea. The speech called ‘Roma antica sul mare’ is concluded with the statement: “We can thus affirm that Roma was also powerful at sea and that this power was the result of long sacrifices, of unbreakable tenaciousness, of a firm will. These virtues were valid yesterday, will be tomorrow and always”.61 The foreign policy of Fascism was in January 1921 a “peaceful expansionism”. However, this positive position changed rapidly into a more aggressive and radical one. A more military dimension to the foreign policy was added and imperialism became very important. Although, this is not directly mentioned, one of the aims of fascism becomes creating an empire. An empire that not only territorial was; according to Mussolini it can also be political, economic and spiritual. Mussolini’s imperialism did not became territorial until the second half of the nineteen thirties, when he send Italian armies to conquer Ethiopia. From that moment Fascist Italy would create its own empire as the fulfilment of the ‘civilizing mission’. Though Italy already tried to expand its empire before Mussolini came into power, for example under the lead of Francesco Crispi Italian colonialism was promoted in the 1800s.
The destiny of Italy, according to Mussolini, lay on the African continent: “Italy can become the dominant nation of the Mediterranean basin and discharge on the African banks the surplus of its population and energies”.62 The military occupation of Ethiopia was the first phase of a broader campaign to control the Mediterranean and the Middle East. Mussolini tried to change the Italian society, culture and people in a ‘fascist’ way, which was necessary after the sufferings of the war. The foreign policy of Mussolini was created with the intention to create more ‘spazio vitale’, or more living space. This would allow the Italians to expand and profit from the economical benefits from the colonial resources. The Italian colonies of Libya, Eritrea and Italian Somalia were at that time “pure sand boxes” and did not gave Italy the economical benefits they wanted. The supposedly rich Ethiopia could have solved the poor Italian economy, the unemployment problem and more important the validity of the fascist regime.63 The strong will to conquer Ethiopia justified the idea of staying in war against Great Britain, which was the strongest enemy that Mussolini faced in the strategic 60 Jan Nelis, “Constructing Fascist Identity: Benito Mussolini and the Myth of Romanità”, Classical
World, Vol. 100 (2007), 398-399.
61 Ibid. 400. 62 Ibid. 398-399.
plan in the Mediterranean and the Middle East. Mussolini kept the European leaders satisfied and received free access to Ethiopia in return for the preservation of the status quo in the Mediterranean and the Middle East.
However, the success of the occupation of the African continent was limited. Italians that went to Ethiopia came there too make quick profits and had no intention to settle there permanently. They were intolerant of any rules, including those of racial segregation. The result was a clash between Ethiopians and Italians, who were not interested in the long- term projects of colonialism and the government that imposed its own model of colonial order.64
2.6 The Roman Empire in Mussolini’s political speeches:
Bernardo Quaranta di San Severino begins his book Mussolini as Revealed in his political speeches 1914-1923 with a speech of The Quadrumvirate. In Roman ancient times the quadrumvirate was an elective post assigned to four citizens, elected by the Senate with jurisdiction power. However, the quadrumvirate in Fascistic times was a group of four that led the March on Rome in 1922 under Mussolini. All of them, Emilio De Bono, Michele Bianchi, Cesare Maria De Vecchi and Italo Balbo, were political active in the Fascist party of
Mussolini. The speech ended with: “May nothing disturb the glory of these days through which we have just passed- days of superb passion and Roman greatness”.65 In this speech we can already see two references to the Roman past, namely the quadrumvirate and the Roman greatness that fascism wanted to achieve.
Already in the early days when Mussolini was in power he stressed romanità in his political discourse. In a response to the first anniversary of the March on Rome Mussolini said that within the crowd and the Italian people as a whole, he felt a “mysterious revival of Roman passion”.66 This indicates that within his first year of power Mussolini deliberately attempted to not only highlight the importance of the Roman ancestors, but also gave the 63 Francesco Marino, Desertation, “Military Operations in the Italian East Africa 1935-1941:
Conquest and Defeat”, Marine Corps University, United States Defense Technical Information Center, 2009, 3.
64 Ibid.
65 Barone Bernardo Quaranta di San Severino, Mussolini as Revealed in his political speeches
(November 1914- August 1923), (New York: Howard Fertig, 1976), 21.
66 Benjamin Barron, Senior Honours Thesis in History, “A Mysterious revival of Roman Passion: Mussolini’s Ambiguous and Opportunistic Conception of Romanità”,
https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/bitstream/handle/10822/555514/BarronBenjaminThesis.pdf;s equence=2, page 17.
people the perspective that one day they could be the resurrection of the great Roman race, with Mussolini as the great leader.
On the birthday of Rome (21st of April) in 1922 Mussolini delivered one of his most popular speeches called the ‘Past and the Future’. He presents a Fascist ancient Rome, that was more an idea than a past, and more a highly abstract feeling than a history: “Everywhere and always Rome of the past was the theme”.67 When he later addressed the Fascists on Sicily he
mentions the power of Italy: “My journey means the strengthening of the Italian power which has descended from Ancient Rome” and at Trieste he does the same by saying: “Fascism’s revived consciousness of the ancient glories of Italy, of the Roman Empire… continuation of this tradition by… the Fascisti struggle for a New Imperial Rome”.68 The power and future of Italy was supposed to be reached by looking back to the ancient Roman Empire. The city of Rome has probably the most precious and symbolic meaning in this for Benito Mussolini, because in both the New Imperial Italy and the ancient empire Rome is the capital. He expressed his respect and reverence for the city by saying:
I have given particular attention to the Capital. Rome is a universal city, dear to the hearts of Italians and of the whole world. It was great in the time of the Roman Empire and has conserved a universal light. It was the historical seat and the centre of diffusion of Christianity. Rome is first of all a city with the aura of destiny and history. It is the capital of new Italy. It is the seat of Christianity. It has taught and will continue to teach law and art to the whole world.69
In addition, Mussolini dedicated a part in his speech to Rome, while he was in Trieste: Rome is the name, which filled history for twenty centuries. Rome gave the lead to universal civilisation, traced the roads and assigned the boundaries; Rome gave the world the laws of its immutable rights. But if this was the universal task of Rome in ancient times, we have now another universal task. Our destiny cannot become universal unless it is transplanted to the pagan ground of Rome.
67 Kenneth Scott, “Mussolini and the Roman Empire”, The Classical Journal, Vol. 27 (1932), 646. 68 Ibid. 646.
Thus it is clear that Rome and the ancient Roman Empire have both an important function in Mussolini’s discourse. Mussolini also gave great attention to the militaristic part of the Roman Empire. On the 29 of March in 1923 he said that: “Those who have performed their duty do not grumble, do not curse, but accept their sacrifice with Roman simplicity and austerity”.70 His speech was for blind ex- soldiers and praised them for the duty they had done and the prize they had to pay. They paid their prize like Romans.
Also the real meaning of what it means to be Roman was a way for Mussolini to identify the city and the people with the ‘ancient’ Romans. On October 22 1932 Mussolini gave a speech in Turin where he stated that Turin was Roman. He defined what was meant with being Roman: “Turin is a Roman City, not only because it was built by Julius Caesar, but is Roman because of its tenacity; it is Roman because of the value it has shown throughout the centuries in sieges and memorable battles; it is Roman because it gave flame and blood to the
unification of the fatherland”.71.
In other speeches of Mussolini the importance of Rome is highlighted, because it is one of the few spiritual cities in the world. Rome must therefore be free from animosity, because
between the seven hills pregnant with history, occurred one of the greatest spiritual miracles which ever took place, namely the transformation of an Eastern religion. “And we want to make Rome the city of our ideals, a city cleaned and purified of all those elements which corrupt and defile her; we wish to make Rome the throbbing heart, the living spirit of the Italy of which we dream”.72 Though, Rome must not be confused with the Romans. This because in Rome and other cities there are the so- called ‘fugitives of Fascism’, who successfully arouse harmful anti- Fascist feelings in the country: “But if Mazzini and Garibaldi tried three times to arrive at Rome, and if Garibaldi gave his “red shirts” the tragic and inexorable alternative of “Rome or death”, this meant that, to the best men of the Risorgimento, Rome already had an essential function of the first importance to perform in the new history of the Italian nation.”73
70 Barone Bernardo Quaranta di San Severino, Mussolini as Revealed in his political speeches
(November 1914- August 1923), (New York: Howard Fertig, 1976),..
71 Benjamin Barron, Senior Honours Thesis in History, “A Mysterious revival of Roman Passion: Mussolini’s Ambiguous and Opportunistic Conception of
Romanità”,https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/bitstream/handle/10822/555514/BarronBenjamin Thesis.pdf;sequence=2, page 17-18.
72 Barone Bernardo Quaranta di San Severino, Mussolini as Revealed in his political speeches
(November 1914- August 1923), (New York: Howard Fertig, 1976), 145.
73 Barone Bernardo Quaranta di San Severino, Mussolini as Revealed in his political speeches
Thus Benito Mussolini had developed due to his background in journalism the ability and qualities to became the Fascist leader of Italy in the 1920s. In the beginning, fascism was focussed on the future and not specifically on the past. This changed when Mussolini came into power. From the beginning he stressed the importance of the Roman past, because it was for the people something to identify with in the after war period. The use of ‘romanità’ became one of the most important features of fascism. In the examples given from the speeches from Mussolini we could have seen how important it became to refer to the city of Rome and the Romans. By comparing the Italian people with the Romans he emphasized how important the Romans were and how the people could be important again if they would identify themselves with the Romans. Also Mussolini emphasized the militaristic spirit of the Romans. If the people fought like Romans then a revival of the Roman Empire would occur and better times for Italy would follow.
In the next chapter Boris Johnson will be discussed and his romanness will be introduced by discussing his book The Dream of Rome.
3: Boris Johnson
Boris Johnson was born in 1964 in New York and became a well-known British politician, historian, writer and journalist. From 2008 till 2016 he was the mayor of London and from 2016 he became the minister of foreign affairs of Britain and the Commonwealth.
Boris Johnson is the great grandson of the Turkish journalist, Ali Kemal. His great
grandparents moved to Great Britain in 1910, when the First World War started. The Ottoman Empire fought on the side of Germany and Austria and Ali Kemal decided to adopt the British nationality and took the name Johnson, which was the last name of his British wife.
Johnson studied Classics at the Balliol College of the University of Oxford. During his study he became the president of the Oxford Union and was involved in various drinking clubs of the university, where he was associated with the “Hooray Henry” mentality.74 After finishing his study he started his career as a journalist at the Times in 1987. However, the editor
Charles Wilson sacked Johnson for inventing a quote about the historian Colin Lucas. After the Times, he started to work for The Daily Telegraph in 1987 and was appointed to Brussels to cover European issues. There he wrote: “niche- writing humorous, Eurosceptic articles, which were received well by Telegraph readers”.75 Already, at this point in his career Johnson was criticised by colleagues for writing untrue stories and making them up in order to
discredit the European Commission. Though Johnson was criticized, his articles had a powerful influence on British politics, with the result that tension within the Conservative Party and the Euro- sceptic attitude increased.
In 2001 the political career of Johnson started, when he was elected as a MP for Henley on Thames. In succession, he was appointed as a shadow minister of arts in 2004 and in 2005 he was given the position of shadow minister of education. Though, Boris Johnson had a few marital affairs though, it was not enough for David Cameron to sack him.
Eventually he resigned himself from the position as shadow minister of education in order to run for mayor of London as a Conservative candidate. He was able to beat Kevin Livingstone and Johnson became the new mayor of London from 2008 till 2016. His position as the mayor of London had the result that he gained popularity. During his time as the mayor of London he created a strong political identity and was not afraid to criticize his own party. He was linked with the leadership of the Conservative Party, however he often denied this. On 13 July 2016, Theresa May assign Boris Johnson as the Minister of Foreign Affairs. This appointment 74 Author unknown, “Boris Johnson Biography”, http://www.biographyonline.net/politicians/boris-johnson.html , consulted on 02-06-2017.
resulted in criticism by some journalists and foreign politicians, because of his history of controversial statements about other countries and their leaders. For example the Minister of Foreign Affairs of France, Jean- Marc Ayrault stated after the assignment of Johnson that: “I am not at all worried about Boris Johnson, but… during his campaign he lied a lot to the British people and now it is he who has its back against the wall”.76
3.2 Johnson’s personality
As mentioned before, during his time as politician and as the mayor of London he became a distinctive political figure. He created a high profile in the media through many television appearances. Supporters of Johnson have described him as an entertaining humorous, political figure that is able to attract people beyond the traditional Conservative voters. However, people from left and right- wing parties have also criticized him. They accused him of elitism, dishonesty, and laziness and for the use of racist language. Boris Johnson’s behaviour has often been described as ‘clownish’.
He has spent most of his political career: “affecting a benign, clownish image of an upper- class English aristocratic eccentric. With his flopping blond hair, self-
deprecating wit, irreverent style and penchant for flamboyant rhetoric and acerbic put- downs, Johnson stands out as a colourful character in what has become and otherwise depressingly grey sea of Westminster politicians who talk more like management consultants rather than national leaders.77
According to Matthew Jamison he has established himself as the supreme anti- Establishment superhero, ready for a battle against the Establishment. However, Boris Johnson is as
Establishment as they come. He is the product of Eton and Oxford. In addition, he was a member of the notoriously elite ‘Bullingdon Club’, which is an exclusive but unofficial dining club in Oxford. With a father who was a former employee of the World Bank and the
European Commission Boris Johnson is fairly an elite politician. Johnson personality had the result that he became an outstanding figure and in combination with his elitist and classical background he was able to use the Roman past for his political convictions.
76 Matthew Jamison, “Boris Johnson: The dangerous clown”,
https://www.strategic-culture.org/pview/2016/10/23/boris-johnson-dangerous-clown.html, consulted on 27-05-2017. 77 Ibid.
3.3 Boris Johnson and the EU:
Boris Johnson became the centre of attention when he in 2016 denied explaining why he supported the Brexit campaign. In February 2016 he endorsed the ‘Vote Leave’ campaign and became a key figure in this campaign. Johnson saw the future of Britain outside the EU. In his opinion the project, the EU, has morphed and grown in a way that the project turned
unrecognisable. With the new countries entering the EU, he claimed that Britain as a result has often been overruled. The process that Johnson sees is that of legal colonisation, which means that the EU infiltrates in every area of public policy. Moreover, the EU acquires supremacy in every field that it touches upon.78 According to Johnson the Remain campaign has nothing to offer for Britain and Europe: “If we vote Remain we stay locked in the back of the car, driven by the someone with an imperfect command of English, and going a direction we don’t want to go”.79 If Britain remains it will be subjected to an increasingly anti-
democratic system that is now responsible for 60 per cent of the law that goes through
Westminster and if it stays it will do nothing against the elites in Brussels.80 This is interesting to notice, considering the fact that Johnson also praises the political and cultural unity the Romans have brought to Europe. Although, the Romans were an example figure for the European Union nowadays and we still have remnants of the Roman Empire, for example our law system. It is not enough for Johnson to led Great Britain stay in the EU. Because of the failing of the EU it should therefore leave the EU in order to thrive again, like during Roman times. By referring to the Roman past a way of dealing with the present is found by Johnson, and in his case a good reason to lead Great Britain out the EU. The further use of the Roman past used in the book of Boris Johnson will be discussed in the section below.
3.4 Boris Johnson and The Dream of Rome
In Johnson’s The Dream of Rome he states that the Romans have successfully created a universal sense of Romanness. However, the British have failed to create anything like a 78 Boris Johnson, “Please Vote Leave on Thursday, because we’ll never get this chance again”, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/19/please-vote-leave-on-thursday-because-well-never-get-this-chance/, consulted 28-05-2017.
79 Ibid. 80 Ibid.
