Venuta la sera, mi ritorno a casa ed entro nel mio scrittoio; e in sull’uscio mi spoglio quella veste cotidiana, piena di fango e di loto, e mi metto panni reali e curiali; e rivestito condecentemente, entro nelle antique corti delli antiqui huomini, dove, da loro ricevuto amorevolmente, mi pasco di quel cibo che solum è mio e ch’io nacqui per lui; dove io non mi vergogno parlare con loro e domandarli della ragione delle loro azioni; e quelli per loro humanità mi rispondono; e non sento per quattro hore di tempo alcuna noia, sdimentico ogni affanno, non temo la povertà, non mi sbigottisce la morte:
tutto mi transferisco in loro.
Niccolò Machiavelli, Lettera a Francesco Vettori, 1513
- 1 As is often the case in ethnographies that deal with highly personal topics, the research required (...)
1In this article, I will describe specific experiences of love and care that are triggered by relationships with humans and archaeological remains1. My aim is to highlight a widespread trend in Italy through particular cases drawn from everyday life and archaeological practices. To achieve this, I will use research material collected from 2016 to the present day during two ethnographic studies focused on tactical, personal, and unexpected uses of archaeological knowledge, as well as the various ways of shaping intimate relationships around the urban area of Rome and the Lazio region (Cozza 2021, 2022, 2023). Differing from the significant ethnographic studies on archaeological practices (Goodwin 1994; Yarrow 2003; Edgeworth 2006, 2013), which aimed at understanding the workings of the archaeological discipline and profession itself and their ways of producing knowledge, as well as their material effects (Hamilakis 2011), in this article, I have attempted to interpret the tactical (De Certeau 2001), unexpected, and creative uses of archaeological practice and the meaning it could have in a specific context like that of Italy, with a particular common sense, a precise sociocultural stratification, and a rather distinctive concept of ontology, tradition, and heritage.
2Starting with an exploration of romantic love and its connection to the contemporary political climate of Italy – a context that paradoxically is emically perceived as cold, modernized, and non-romantic – this article originates from the intention to describe the reasons for a strong and recurring resort to romantic discourse observed both during the research among young adult archaeologists and during fieldwork on intimate relationships. Despite the significant differences between the two investigations, I will show how the pursuit of love and the discovery of an archaeological find give rise to an experience of mutual attachment and durability that underpins the blueprint of a future that isn’t solitary.
3Although in official Italian archaeological discourse there is often a perception of ruins as fragile objects that indeed require urgent conservation (Barbanera 2009; De Silvey 2017; Schnapp 2018; Harrison et al. 2020), the intimate rhetoric gathered on the excavation site instead reveals a notably different perception of material remains, positioning them as global-distinctive elements possessing power and a remarkable quality of durability. For this reason, I argue that traditional romantic love and affection for archaeological objects are based on relationships that demonstrate the capacity to withstand the test of time, compelling individuals to seek symbolic and material connections that share a similar resilience. In essence, these love relationships are alluring, and individuals yearn to connect with them because they embody an identity and a sense of endurance that can shape how these Italian middle-class young-adult face future challenges (Appadurai 2013).
4Applying Ernesto de Martino’s perspective (1948), which portrays the human condition as a constant struggle against adversity through collective efforts, romantic discourse provides the symbolic and material framework for confronting the realm of unpredictability, encompassing both the risk of not existing in the world and the inability to actively participate in it. Working with the concept of the end of the world and the symbolic systems necessary to overcome the inefficacy of human actions, De Martino’s interpretive framework aligns well with the study of the generation that witnessed the decline of the Fordist model and the optimistic future as the natural fulfillment of human endeavors (Mancuso 2017; De Martino 2023).
5Being chosen and cared for by human or non-human entities is not solely about feeling loved, but primarily a method to concretely navigate a moment of uncertainty faced by the Italian generations born since the 1990s (Colombo et al. 2018; Colombo, Rebughini 2019; Pitti, Tuorto 2021). This generation is significantly influenced by the lifestyles and expectations of past generations, particularly those grown during the miracolo economico (Kohli 2007; Crainz 2005). Consequently, when individuals in their thirties discuss their present and future, they frequently depict a series of frustrating experiences due to the structural impediments that undermine their daily lives. The pathways they pursue to achieve results become blocked and lack credibility, prompting them to choose love and its tangible manifestations as a means to overcome this situation. However, these experiences of romantic love have some drawbacks. Drawing from a bottom-up point of view, in this article I will show how in their quest for transcendental experience romantic lovers lose the most significant part of their political power.
6The content of this article is the result of two multi-sited research conducted over a five-year period, from 2016 to 2023, in the urban area of Rome and in some areas of the southern Lazio. Between 2016 and 2020, my Ph.D. research in cultural anthropology, conducted at the Sapienza University of Rome’s Department of History, Cultures, and Religions, focused on professional archaeological practices and involved immersive participant observation with archaeologists of various ages, primarily those born around 1990. Additionally, my exploration of intimate relationships, love, and care developed serendipitously – in some cases with the same subjects as the research on archaeological practices – and, in certain instances, expanded through a snowball approach, which allowed me to engage with a wider range of adult and young interlocutors from 2018 to the present day. My fieldwork took place both outside and inside excavation sites, within university classrooms, as well as in clubs and during entertaining events. I interacted with individuals among my age group with similar hopes and difficulties during their daily life experiences. The strong similarities between me and my interlocutors have allowed me to grasp the depth of certain issues, and in many cases, I have felt that I was perceived as the spokesperson for a complaint against a set of suffering and unmet expectations, which I have sought to objectify and analyze anthropologically here and elsewhere.
7To gain a firsthand understanding of archaeological sensibilities, I participated in excavation activities through various university internships and with archaeological excavation companies. This approach allowed me to fully immerse myself in the daily life of archaeologists and engage with enthusiasts, students, and professionals in the field. It also provided me with the opportunity to partake in what Edgeworth refers to as the “acts of discovery” (2006, 2012). Subsequently, as mentioned elsewhere (Cozza 2022), I critically analyzed these dialogues and experiences using recordings, handwritten notes, diaries, photographs, and messages captured on my smartphone (Olivier De Sardan 1995; Piasere 2002).
8The two ethnographic inquiries have often intertwined the topics explored and the interlocutors listened. In fact, the idea of investigating the connection between these two domains arose directly from the field. While discussing excavation-related themes and the associated “archaeological passion”, references to the “madness of love” (amore pazzo), coupled with a somewhat implicitly predatory notion of excavation, led many rhetorics to draw comparisons between archaeology and romantic passions, making analogies between the artifact/loved one and the archaeologist/lover. The fact that love is experienced primarily on an individual level does not deter anthropological analysis, as literature shows how people feel emotions and interpret experiences through immersion in materiality as well as socially learned symbols and habits (Bourdieu 1972; Bateson 1980; Rosaldo 1980; Latour 1993; Ingold 2000, 2013; Piasere 2002; Pussetti 2010).
9During the fieldwork, in many instances, the theme of romantic love has been useful in shedding light on unexpected traits of the archaeological experience, just as excavation rhetoric has often drawn upon romantic topoi. Many authors have demonstrated that love constitutes a fundamental, biocultural, and universally shared human experience that should be considered a collection of historically shaped discursive expressions influenced by conflicting ideologies and localized socioeconomic factors (Jankowiak 1995; Karandashev 2017). Undoubtedly, the specific ideology of love and marriage that developed in the West has globalized and become dominant in conjunction with a broader modernization process (Hirsch, Wardlow 2006; Faier 2007; Padilla et al. 2007). This includes the rise of individualism, the influence of capitalist markets and consumerism, and the promotion of progressive gender relations (Giddens 1992; Illouz 2011; Jamieson 2011). These factors have importantly affected numerous localized contexts and traditions, shaping specific experiences of love, beginning with the universal human need that Lindholm (2006: 17) defined as “the existential desire to escape the limits of the given” and that following Ernesto de Martino (1948, 1962, 2023) could be defined as “de-historification”.
10Following the suggestions of many scholars to ethnographically describe the complexities and limitations of each love experience, this article does not aim to exhaust the vast topic of romantic love. Instead, it seeks to frame the issues of love and archaeology by examining the socio-cultural conditions of these research interlocutors, who are young adults from the middle class, experiencing a specific Italian common sense. Starting the analysis from the experiences of individuals who more or less explicitly identify as part of the middle class is not solely motivated by the characteristics of the research interlocutors. Instead, it stems from the need to capture the perspective of a majority (perhaps more symbolic than material) that, due to its “young-middle” position (Armano et al. 2017; Colombo et al. 2018; Colombo, Rebughini 2019; Pitti, Tuorto 2021), faces the daily challenge of crafting an “authentic local” lifestyle in harmony with global influences, enabling these individuals to differentiate themselves from people of various ages and social strata, both higher and lower (Bourdieu 1979; La Wita 1988; Liechty 2003; Maira, Soep 2005).
11This middle position is achieved or maintained through a set of ambiguous and fluctuating practices and beliefs: it’s neither fully modern nor strictly traditional, not exclusively young nor entirely old. This contrasts with the “others” who are consistently placed at the two extremes of the continuum. In alignment with middle-class trends worldwide that integrate and reinterpret long-established traditions, moral values, prestige-based reasoning, and various forms of cultural capital (Bausinger 2008), alongside contemporary symbolic resources drawn from the realms of consumption and media representations (Appadurai 1996; Tsing 2005; Vereni 2008; Dei 2018), the individuals from the Italian middle class with whom I conducted my fieldwork – not only the archaeologists – nurture a distinct range of cultural practices deeply rooted in a specific conception of Italian identity. This is closely associated with the perceived unparalleled greatness of its cultural heritage and romantic traditions (Cozza 2021). It’s a kind of Italian identity construction that conceives the Italian nation as the world’s cultural “superpower” (una superpotenza della cultura), thanks to the superiority of its classical past, the refinement of its archaeological and monumental heritage, and the authenticity of its traditions, which deems noteworthy only those elements perceived as the product of an archaic and ancestral past (Greenland 2021). As I will show later, in the field of love relationships, this past-oriented vision compels individuals to reconsider traditional relationships with a strongly idealized perspective, which, therefore, never entirely breaks free from those models of romantic love characterized by a patriarchal structure.
12Examining the case studies in this article within this framework will contribute to a better interpretation of the cultural thickness of people’s connection with elements of the past (both artifacts and romantic relationships), as well as their specific orientations toward their own ontological beliefs (Candea 2013). Following the middle-class fluctuation mentioned above, on the one hand, they demonstrate a conception of archaeological research and intimate relationships accepting the principles of scientific rationalism and the most «modern» forms of emancipated intimacy. On the other hand, they show a tendency to nurture various forms of transcendental beliefs grounded in Italian traditions, particularly regarding the intentionality of artifacts, the idea that these objects can express emotions, and the belief that the ineffable nature of the love experience should be considered a throbbing reality.
13However, central questions arise to which, as an anthropologist, I aim to respond using the case studies from my fieldwork: why does this fluctuation tend towards a romanticized direction in an environment that paradoxically seems to label contemporary love as “fiction”? Why does love become a significant element in a context like Italian archaeology, traditionally associated with an objectivist, and even a scientistic, framework (Barbanera 2015; Cozza 2021; Greenland 2021)? Why do these young people, who identify as “modern”, implicitly rely on the realm of magic and in the existence of love? With this article, I aim to show that the ease with which the subjects of my research resort to love discourse and its widespread prevalence must be linked precisely to the particular situation in which these Italian young adults find themselves. It is a situation in which Cartesian rationality coexists with the traditional world of magic because the latter can compensate for the shortcomings of the former to the extent that magic can be the confidence boost they rely on in times of serious crisis (de Martino 1948, 1962, 2023; Simonicca 2006; Mancuso 2017).
14Seen from a perspective attentive to the cultural intimacy of archaeological practices and love construction (Herzfeld 2005), romanticization goes beyond the rhetorical process of class-aesthetization to become the learning ground for an experience of transcendence in which «a protected regime of existence is instituted that, on the one hand, shelters from chaotic eruptions of the unconscious, and on the other, veils what is happening and allows one to “be in history as if he weren’t in it”» (de Martino 2001: 94-95).
15To describe the strong similarities between the rhetoric of the initial contact with archaeological artifacts and that of human encounters, in this section, I will refer to a series of interlocutors whose stories I have chosen due to the significant amount of time spent together, their “middle” socio-cultural position expressed by tastes, habits, and consumption skills (Bourdieu 1979; La Wita 1988; Liechty 2003), their references to Italian cultural superpower (Greenland 2021), and because the accounts articulated by them – albeit with gender-constructions differences (Pompili, Amendola 2018) – constantly referred to romanticism and the idea of being chosen.
16The case of Flavio is one of the most exemplifying, as this 28-year-old archaeology student allowed me to spend time with him in university classrooms and excavations, as well as in clubs with his friends and in his hometown on the northeastern outskirts of Rome. He even allowed me to follow (as a friend) a series of unfortunate romantic experiences until the culmination of a «serious romantic relationship» that changed him «for the better» (personal communication, 29 October 2021). Significantly, when I asked Flavio to share details about the ancient Roman city that once stood right next to his apartment building, he provided the most pertinent information and then suggested that if a more extensive archaeological survey had been conducted, undoubtedly some captivating artifacts might have been discovered. To emphasize his point playfully, Flavio used Roman slang to humorously say: «They would have found Nero waving hello to you» (Nerone che te fa ciao co’ la manina, Personal communication, 5 July 2017). Beyond the jest, what is noteworthy about Flavio’s metaphor is that it anthropomorphizes potential discoveries, attributing them agency that actively contributes to fostering a warm connection. Through his use of Roman slang and an exceedingly informal mode of expression, Flavio’s practices reconstruct an affable relationship between significant figures from the past and their counterparts in the contemporary era. In this process, the former, thanks to their noble classical heritage, contribute to elevating the somewhat peripheral status of Flavio’s small town. In fact, as Flavio explains to me, «there’s a myth that today we are living in the best possible world, that we’ve reached the peak of human civilization. But it’s not true. That’s the beauty of history and archaeology. There are more stories, endless paths you can take... then what do you do? [The archaeologists] take you to the center of Rome, and you don’t like it? Rome is the foundation of everything (che fai? Te portano ar centro de Roma e che nun te piace? Roma è la base di tutto, Interview 12 November 2017). Flavio’s rhetorics gain even more strength when one considers the fact that when he expresses them – summer and fall of 2017 – this young adult is recovering from some unsuccessful attempts at courtship. Whether it’s an archaeological discovery or the realization of a romantic dream, both experiences are based on a love connection that is hindered by some obstacles that condemn human beings and archaeological remains to a solitary status of lack and imperfection.
17The rhetoric of love realization is also evident in Claudia’s experience. Claudia, a 33-year-old contract archaeologist engaged in rescue excavations, recounts her encounter with a Late Antique burial settlement on the eastern outskirts of Rome. Reflecting on her experiences during the excavation, Claudia shares a sense of kinship with the individuals of late antiquity interred there, individuals whose lives her archaeological inquiries had intersected «people in Late Antiquity are exactly like us… unlucky (sfigate) like us… They were unable to experience the splendor of the ancient world» (Personal communication 22 February 2018). She describes the meticulous excavation and documentation processes, and the tender care she experiences while removing the soil and liberating the remains from their centuries-old confinement. For Claudia, this represents her way of nurturing a bond with these remains, reflecting her appreciation for her work: «It’s like going to the Verano Cemetery […] the fact that less time has passed doesn’t mean that you shouldn't behave with respect and feel their suffering. […] It’s as if they were giving you a mission» (Interview, 28 November 2017). This feeling of friendly coexistence is heightened by how the remains were discovered, which could be interpreted as resulting from the intentionality of the findings. Since the discovery happened in that location, with that precise individual, at that specific time, during that definite work shift, and not diversely, Claudia seems to recognize the possibility of an incidental founding but carefully leans toward the intentional option that implies abductive reasoning (Gell 1998). In fact, no Western rational evidence can prove that the objects did not want to be found; actually, Claudia’s feelings go in the opposite and more romantic direction. She clarifies that she did not disrupt the eternal rest of these individuals; rather, she feels that they were seeking someone who would remember them. Claudia explains, «I think these people hoped to be remembered by someone, and the fact that this someone is me makes me proud of my discipline and moves me... I wish that in thousands of years, the same could happen to me» (Interview 28 November 2017). When discussing the burial of a woman with meager grave goods, Claudia adds, «I am a romantic person... sometimes I feel as if she chose me due to my attributes: I am a precarious, humble woman, much like her. Thus, she is enabling me to carry on with my work and life» (Interview 18 December 2017).
18In other words, Claudia’s sense of being romantic places her in an intermediate realm between the scientific paradigm of her profession, which emphasizes a specific notion of coincidence, and the transcendental worldview where archaeological discoveries possess anthropomorphic agency. Significantly, this “suspension” of the Cartesian mechanism allows Claudia to create a protected experience (de Martino 1948, 1962, 2023), shielding her from the risks of job precariousness and undervaluation of both her professional and gender identity (Candea 2013). Claudia’s rhetoric shows that the connection between the archaeologist and the discovery is not merely a coincidence but a matter of intentionality, significance, and romanticization.
19During my research on intimacy construction, I documented several analogous ways of narrating the initial encounter between human lovers. For example, the case of Fabio and Livia, a couple in their 30s, both holding precarious jobs, with master’s degrees in humanistic studies, and struggling to afford an apartment in the non-peripheral neighborhood of Casal Bruciato in Rome. The stories recounting the first meeting of these middle-class young adults consistently involve meaningful events that led to their union: unexpected news that prompted Livia to join some friends at the same event attended by Fabio, Fabio’s last-minute decision to attend that event rather than another, and the specific spatial arrangement that facilitated their encounter. Based on these factors, the two individuals frequently assert that their coming together was a matter of fate (era scritto nel destino, personal communication 17 January 2023).
20The narratives of other individuals I listened regarding the use of dating apps follow a similar rhetorical pattern. They frequently caution that these apps are not an efficient means of finding «true love» (il vero amore), but rather a tool for casual dating (Cozza 2022). A 33-year-old man remarks, «To find true love, you don’t have to actively search for it. It will manifest itself naturally, and you should be able to recognize it» (Personal communication 1 May 2022). A 28-year-old woman who recently deleted her Tinder account tells me that she abandoned dating apps in pursuit of something more «spontaneous» and «authentic» (Personal communication 7 April 2019). By this, she means an experience that is entirely beyond the control of those who undergo it.
21Once again, examining the context in which these romantic phrases are made allows the full grasping of their experiential seriousness. I am referring to the «generational attitude» of young adult Italians described by many scholars (Maira, Soep 2005; Colombo et al. 2018; Colombo, Rebughini 2019; Pitti, Tuorto 2021), individuals who have grown up in a rapidly changing globalized world (Appadurai 1996, 2013; Tsing 2005), within the specific Italian context where the daily experiences of job insecurity, neoliberal precariousness, the fragmented nature of professional careers, and the challenge of achieving economic autonomy are considered “natural” elements of ordinary life (Armano et al. 2017; Mollona et al. 2021).
22As evidenced by their pursuit of «spontaneous» and «authentic» love, which emphasizes subjectivities lacking the agency to operate effectively in the world – since «true love» can never be actively sought or constructed in contemporary times – these young adults express an “active resignation” that addresses life difficulties and their inability to change their circumstances by investing all their efforts in the realm of love construction, particularly their love for traditions and objects of the past. This romantic preference should also be interpreted in light of the conversations I had with my interlocutors in their 20s and 30s, in which the comparison between their life path and that of previous generations is a recurring rhetorical element and a source of bitterness (Cozza 2021). Here, class advancement or achieving “socially mandatory” life goals, such as securing income, starting a family, buying a house, and accomplishing a career, makes younger generations feel like «losers» (la generazione dei perdenti, personal communication, 20 April 2019). Even though they did not benefit from the economic boom of the 1960s and 1970s – a period referred to as the “miraculous” economic growth in Italy – their value systems have been deeply influenced by the implicit Keynesianism and Fordism of their parents and grandparents, who apparently often don’t miss the chance to complain about the lack of self-realization of the new generations.
23Starting from a disadvantaged position of transition between that of adults and that of middle-class young people, and fluctuating between working-class and elite statuses, through this process of romanticization, the generation of young adults can thus make a decisive distinction, accrediting itself – at least rhetorically – as an authoritative custodian of a tradition (romantic) and an (archaeological) heritage, gaining a helpful cultural capital. In addition to this, it is necessary to mention that this behavior is constantly fueled by the State and the rhetoric that positions heritage experts – especially archaeologists – as custodians of the «marble bones of the body of the nation» (Hamilakis 2007: 121). Here emerges a highly distinctive notion of Italianness and its connotation as a beacon of Western culture, especially due to its Roman component. As shown by Fiona Greenland (2021), as already hinted at in Flavio’s words regarding the magnificence of the Eternal City, and as demonstrated by a series of phrases and concepts ingrained in common understanding as well as in the paradigms of many heritage disciplines, it is the construction of Italian identity that sets this country’s heritage apart from all others in terms of nobility and majesty. Describing the unparalleled density of Italian historical stratification, the richness of its roots, the genius of its figures, as well as the incomparable aesthetic sensibility that allegedly characterizes “true Italians”, beyond the supremacist agendas that such common sense may intersect with, in this article, I would rather focus on the peculiar “archaeological cultural intimacy” that this seems to nourish (Herzfeld 2005). In fact, while the official heritage discourse extols the efforts of the archaeological enterprise dedicated to the preservation of ruins and artifacts perceived as fragile, inert, and constantly endangered by the forces of change, during my participant observation of excavation practices, I witnessed the emergence of an opposing view of artifacts and ruins, which endow them with durability, animacy, and anthropomorphic agency (Gell 1998). Due to the ambiguity of archaeological remains, which perpetually oscillate between death and life, between oblivion and memory, between decay and rebirth (Barbanera 2009; De Silvey 2017; Schnapp 2018; Harrison et al. 2020), the participant observation of excavation practices unveils the dynamism of this phenomenon (Yarrow 2003; Edgeworth 2006, 2013; Englehardt, Rieger 2017).
24As already shown by the cases of Flavio and Claudia in which the remains «come out» for greetings, and as shown by the actions of a veteran archaeologist who, during the initial days of excavation in an area near the Colosseum, tells novices to «don’t have fear», to «be as aggressive as hunting dogs», and to use the trowel with greater force to better «bite the layer» (mordere lo strato, Personal communications, 20 June 2017); within the stratigraphy, the artifact appears as if “imprisoned” and “frozen” until it suddenly «bursts forth» (salta fuori) into the hands of its discoverer (Cozza 2023), radiating the distinctive vitality of objects that traverse time without turning to dust, allowing the present’s people to connect with a glorious past (especially the Roman). From the emic viewpoint, the encounter between the artifact and its discoverer is described as the convergence of two entities that come to life, finding a purpose for their existence in an encounter that completes each other, much like two lovers who describe their union as the beginning of a «new life» (una nuova vita, Personal communication 29 October 2021).
25Similar to how my archaeology interlocutors find a way to legitimize their present experiences and practices through their connection with an ancient past, according to my interlocutors in the intimacy constructions research, the concept of “authentic romantic love” is rooted in tradition and is often expressed by “extraordinary individuals” who have never experienced a breakup. For this reason, many interlocutors seek in their parents’ and grandparents’ romantic relationships, as well as in ancient archaeological traces, a type of love as strong as, and incomparable to, the fragility of their contemporary experiences. This is the case of 30-year-old Francesco, who says he wishes for himself the same kind of relationship he saw with his grandparents: «a couple united for more than 50 years and still walked hand in hand» (Personal communication 16 February 2022). On the same page, the case of the 25yo archaeologist who identified a feeling of «real love» coming from the traces of an ancient oil lamp that made light for a thousand years ago family (Interview 18 December 2017).
26These bonds are robust, stable, and profound, as both individuals and objects within these romantic relationships exemplify the essence of durability and their sense of belonging to the foundational tradition of Italianness. These relationships encapsulate a formidable ability to endure the passage of time, adverse events, and their associated challenges, while also representing the most distinctive features of Italian cultural superpower. In other words, these subjects and objects are tangible living proof that it is possible to overcome the risk of not being in the world; being attached to them, whether human or not, offers the chance to benefit from their magical power.
27Thus, if all these ways of romanticizing a relationship refer to that human longing for transcendence described by Lindholm (1995: 67), that is, «a search for ways to escape the burden of loneliness while avoiding confrontation with a cold and indifferent cosmos»; and if such tendencies, as De Martino (1948, 1962, 2023) wrote, bring out a strong need to feel that there is a ready-made plan in which people are not left alone, then the main problem of these people must be the lack of the power to design a life that goes in the expected direction. Recognizing that an artifact or a lover was not found by chance and that a relationship can fight many adversities, first offers a symbolic shelter to the people who work in an environment that is frequently ill-competitive. Second, frames self-experience in a collective path such as the one provided by the centuries-old romantic discourse with its vast symbolism and its concrete materiality that make the dwelling world fulfilled with the presence of love and care (Ingold 2000, 2013). Using the words of de Martino (2023), Romantic love makes the universe a familiar and appropriate backdrop, a hidden and ever-available index of possible operational paths because these experiences refer to the common human need to be pushed ahead, not to feel alone, and to walk on a trustworthy way accompanied by the cultural work of human beings who make each participant to a common history. Since lovers’ promises “always last forever”, in a climate of great uncertainty about life goals and future achievements, this experience of romantic love can offer a set of foreshadowed and enduring possibilities. Especially because romantic love’s language is secular but closely linked to the domain of the sacred (Lindholm 1995, 2006; Miller 1998), this fits perfectly with the needs of the young Italian middle class, generally composed of non-believers who identify their heritage in the Catholic tradition and are searching for social and cultural affirmation.
28In the previous pages, I showed how the framework of romanticization provides both symbolic and material support for coping with a precarious reality in which middle-class models of self-realization necessitate a connection with Italian cultural heritage and tradition. Now, from a material culture study point of view, I will explore how these love relationships work and what are the political consequences of this romantic choice. A good starting point for this discussion is the issue of the reality of love and, consequently, the relationship that this domain has with the rhetorical dimension as much as with the material one. In fact, as a discourse that is true insofar as it reflects the patterns of conduct, values, and aspirations of the people who employ it and personally bear its consequences, the concept of romantic discourse does not simplistically pertain to the linguistic realm but extends to the various ways of constructing and embodying knowledge, encompassing both the physical and symbolic dimensions (Bourdieu 1972; Bateson 1980; Rosaldo 1980; Latour 1993; Ingold 2000, 2013; Pussetti 2010).
29Just as Candea’s research among biologists paves the way for a more complex view of human believing, suspending and critically reworking ontologies and criteria of reality, similarly, the belief that a subject can comprehend the romantic intentions, goals, and desires of other selves – both human and non-human – enables those subjects to act in the world both scientifically and romantically, thus recreating a specific experience of ordinary life enriched with love (Kohn 2007; Candea 2013). Acting «as if» objects are in love with us means approaching and perceiving their reality, imbued with a romantic experience based on assumptions different from those of the “non-romantic” viewpoint that depicts the world in a cold, mechanistic way. The latter vision, proposed by Western-Scientific ontology, whose point of departure is that of an individualist mind detached from the world, fails to capture the richness of human experiences when they are engaged in a specific environment that requires particular relations, skills, and feelings (de Martino 1948; Ingold 2000, 2013).
30In this regard, accepting the common view that portrays love as an exceedingly unrealistic, fanciful, and idealized reality means applying the parameters of Western abstract reasoning while, at the same time, refraining from understanding the strong implications carried by these “simple metaphors”. Taking love seriously through the adoption of a critical ethnocentrism, on the other hand, can enrich the description of the human experience (de Martino 1948). It can also shed new light on why love is often depicted in such a pessimistic manner and the rather impressive prevalence of this perception in the common sense of my interlocutors, the same people who find expressions of love in archaeological findings and certain traditional romantic relationships.
31Why these ambivalences? Why do these people always seek love elsewhere? What are the implications of this search for love in the traditional domain? To answer all these questions, one must begin with the peculiar situation of “middleness” of these Italian young adults, coupled with their particular lack of political and symbolic power conferred by their transitional social position (Pitti, Tuorto 2021). This compels them to focus their attention on imaginaries that bear the seal of Italian archaeological tradition as well as Italian romantic tradition, without renouncing to show their global-modern belonging (Appadurai 1996; Liechty 2003; Bausinger 2008; Vereni 2008; Dei 2018). In the field of intimate relationship construction, the “Italianness” of my interlocutors can be identified in the process of negotiation and indigenization that has given rise to a model of romantic relationship that intermingles local traditions centered around hetero-male domination with feminist claims of equality (Appadurai 1996; Padilla et al. 2007). The Italian love that emerges from such negotiation – further idealized during the experience of the lockdowns for the Covid-19 pandemic (Colombo, Rebughini 2021) – is a love still deeply rooted in the idea of the family as a refuge and protection from the assaults of the external world. In the narratives of my interlocutors, the reference to these themes is continuous, and grandparents, even more than parents, represent the strongest bastion. This makes practices that would otherwise be considered limiting, such as jealousy, paternalistic protectiveness, and certain forms of reactionary traditionalism, acceptable and captivating.
32It’s a trend illustrated by the case of Francesca, a freelance journalist in her early thirties, who told me how she appreciated the fact that on their first date, «the male» (il maschio) offered her flowers and dinner without undermining her sense of being a strong and independent woman (una donna che sa il fatto suo). According to her, these gestures increase her sense of femininity (mi fa sentire sicura […] attraente e apprezzata), reconnecting her experiences with those of her parents who, despite the years and occasional arguments (normali litigate tra marito e moglie), «still behave as they did on their first date» (Personal communication, 23 November 2019). On the one hand, the construction of intimacy follows a model in which both partners benefit substantially from the relationship while maintaining a fairly balanced distribution of power, ensuring control over their choices (Giddens 1992; Grilli 2019). On the other hand, as previously mentioned, these individuals’ practices and dialogues reveal a more authentic and captivating relationship inherent in traditional Italian romantic love, significantly shaped by hegemonic masculinity and emphasized femininity. In fact, according to them, the models of equal love proposed by gender critique are considered «fake love» (amore finto) since they do not encompass the yearning that has characterized romantic discourse since the beginning of its cultural history. From the mouths of my interlocutors, the experience of a balanced romantic relationship, characterized by people who engage in discussion before making a decision and consider the consequences of each action, is seen as displaying a certain coldness (freddezza). Francesca’s statement that «in love, you can’t be calculative» (l’amore non si può fare con la calcolatrice) aligns with the idea that real love has the unstoppable power to be both irrational and stubborn, as well as to make feminine and masculine gender models sexually attractive («once’s passion», la passionalità di una volta, Personal communication 14 February 2020).
33The result of this fluctuating behavior is a recurring reference to the intricate relationship between love, troubles, and lunacy. For instance, I observe situations where the expression of masculine jealousy is interpreted as positive, paternalistic, and protective behavior, often infused with allure. Similarly, there is a tendency to sexualize maternal attributes, placing women in a passive role. This perspective arises from the notion that their grievances hold little significance due to the portrayal of maternal love as “unconditional” (Miller 1998). Consequently, women's perspectives and complaints often take a backseat. Male partners are often discouraged from modifying their behavior or attempting to empathize, as women are perceived as inherently more sensitive. Subsequently, the «girlish craziness» fulfills the masculine narcissistic need to be desired (pazzia femminile, Personal communication 12 January 2019). In short, these experiences of “real love” show the common characteristic of allowing the partners to emphasize traditional gender expectations, leading them to be objectified into the stereotyped model of hegemonic masculinity or emphasized femininity (Connell, Messerschmidt 2005; Pompili, Amendola 2018). Therefore, when an individual professes to be consumed by love, they are essentially admitting a lack of personal agency, reducing themselves to subjects bordering on objects – akin to what one might term a “love slave”. Conversely, when an object manifests affection, it surprisingly adopts numerous attributes of the subject, embodying the choices, protections, and even dominion typical of human agency (Gell 1998).
34In the Italian archaeological excavations in which I have participated, both private and academic, the latter it’s not a rare case since job precariousness and exploitation are sadly common experiences. In fact, I collected many voices about accepting poorly paid jobs «just to stay in the trench», having the chance to do, after many unpleasant life experiences, the possibility to make a dream come true. In sum, when a 30yo archaeologist explains that he feels «condemned to be an archaeologist» (l’archeologia è la mia condanna, Personal communication 3 December 2017), and that he does not consider any other job since contact with artifacts it’s the only way to ease life pain, this archaeologist is actually stating that he became the object of an unrefusable love as much as dominating.
35Especially about the remains of the ancient Roman era, the need to keep in touch with the heritage is heightened by the feeling of greatness that is not comparable with the architectural, technological, artistic, and political inventions of the contemporary time. It is a trend heightened by the global celebrity of the Italian heritage, the strong heritage conservation laws, and Nation-State politics that suddenly make vain, dangerous, and degrading the more significant part of the proposals who want to make possible uses of the heritage that differs from the institutional use (Harrison et al. 2020; Greenland 2021). In sum, although these two processes in which objects acquire subjectivity and subjectivity acquire objectivities move in pretty opposite directions, they both show the capacity to make human behavior objectified, that is to say, still, without the agency to shape present time and design the future, almost completely absorbed in a mythical-ritual trap. I am referring to an everyday life experience that is “really” addressable only through recourse to elements from elsewhere that might be traditional or archaeological but not the result of personal agency.
36In this paper, I gave voice to the sentimental experiences of people of the 90s living around Rome who could be defined as precarious young adults and middle-class people. Archaeologists and non-archaeologists – both deeply entrenched in notions of Italian tradition and durability – I took their discourse about love seriously, trying to understand its meaning and how it relates to ways of inhabiting the world. I have shown that in the life experiences of this transitional generation, caught between precariousness and the triumphalist narrative of their parents’ and grandparents’ generations, which consequently prevents them from being masters of their own destiny, romantic discourse can be an effective way to avoid complete annihilation by the universe and its uncontrollable forces. At the same time, it can also serve as an effective means to attain a distinctive identity legitimized by the force of Italian tradition and heritage.
37As Lindholm (1996, 2006) and de Martino (1948, 1962) pointed out, instead of facing a cold and indifferent cosmos, people can use love-caring relationships to dwell in a stable, comprehensible, and trustworthy world because of the century-long cultural history of love and because of the material concreteness of the agents that dwell the world. Agents who embody the particular ability to withstand the wave of time's adversities and combat the danger of being unknown and lost within the identity-thirsty globalized reality. But all that glitters is not gold because, on the one hand, through the experience of love and its cultural framework, people can cope with the unpredictable context of ordinary lives, especially in the domains of professional and emotional self-realization. On the other hand, the Romantic discourse portrays people as powerless to objectively change their life situation and deal with the lack of future possibilities, just as the extensive reference to tradition makes the present time arid and renders any innovative action ineffective. As argued by de Martino (2023), relying on the transcendental and tradition for lack of other possibilities can be anything but romantic. Tradition turns easily into domination. So, these people use the discourse of love to shape a reality that, while offering the overcoming of uncertainty, has trapped them in the passive and objectified role of romantic lovers.