Seite - 106 - in The Power of Urban Water - Studies in premodern urbanism

106 DylanK. Rogers PlaceandMemory Perception of space by the five senses is important to formmemories. Experiencing the built environment is a dynamic interaction that requires movement. Considering how ancient Ro- mansviewedandphysically interactedwith religious structures,Richard Jenkyns suggests that humanshave a sixth sense: our perception of spatial experience.1 Indeed, it is our physicality that informsusofwhat is aroundus andwhatweare encountering. Theact ofwalking inand aroundaspaceallowsus toconsiderall five senses, as thisphysicalmovement ‘playsacentral role in our relationshipwith theworld aroundus; it is essential to our experience of place, to thewayweseeandthink,andtoourassumptionsabout identity’.2 In thisvein,modernscholar- shiphas recently turned toconsidering the roleof sensoryperception inunderstandingancient Roman life, society, andculture.3 In our perception andunderstandings of our surroundings,we can truly understandplace andthematerialworldaroundus.Byengagingallof thesenses,weareable tocreatea ‘sensory envelope,’ inwhichweseek ‘to identify theareaaroundagiven locationwhereallof thesenses are engaged, thus framing and bounding vignettes and narratives’.4 Sensory experiences are then tied to notions of place –which can be defined loosely as the area thatwe perceive and experiencewithourbodies.5 Places, then, are the repositories ofmemories.Modern scholarshiphas offered a variety of paradigms toconceptualizememory in theRomanworld, includingpopular,monumental, cul- tural, andcollectivememories.6Nomatterhowonemightconceiveofhowto readamonument or text,whatbeliesmemory is its universal nature, in that all humansmakememories. Experi- ence and culture are inextricably tied, especially in how one interacts with a monument to creatememory.Aspeopleencountera space, theywillnotonly formtheirownmemoriesabout their experience in that space, but also remember historical ormythical associations of those monuments. InapassageofCicero’sDefinibus,MarcusPiso, reflectingonavisit toPlato’sAcade- mystates: Is it inborn in us or produced by some trick that whenwe see the places in whichwe have heard that famous menperformedgreatdeeds,wearemoremoved thanbyhearingor reading their exploits? […]Sogreat apower of suggestion resides in places that it is nowonder theArt ofMemory is basedon it.7 Piso stresses the nature of seeing and interactingwith amonument,which, in turn, brings up its ownmemories. For example,whenancient Romanswent to theRomanForumand saw the Lacus Iuturnae, theywould thinkof anumberof associations, suchas Iuturna, theeponymous nymph of the spring, but also the mythical figures of Castor and Pollux who watered their horses at that spot, aswewill explore below. Indeed, this iswhat canbepart of ‘metaphysical topography’, in that each of the places in the forumwould have been tied tomeaning for a Romanaudience.8 Finally,memorieshave theability tohelp construct a shared identity for agroup. The rela- tionshipbetweenapersonand theplace that architectureoccupieshasbeenarticulatedas the following: 1 Jenkyns 2013, 1. 2 O’Sullivan 2011, 3. 3 For example, see the editedvolumeofBetts 2017. 4 Frieman–Gillings 2007, 10. 5 Strang 2006, 149;Hamilakis 2013, 409. 6 For example, see the essays in Galinsky 2014; Galinsky 2017; for critical remarks on the ‘mnemotic turn’ of modern scholarship in theRomanworld, seeGrigoropoulos et al. 2017. 7 Cic. fin. 5, 2 (translationbyVasaly 1993);Vasaly 1993, 29; Edwards 1996, 29;Hopkins 2012, 88f. 8 For the concept of ‘metaphysical topography’, seeVasaly 1993, 41.