Despite all odds, rome’s public transportation system works pretty well. Certainly it’s over-crowded and under-organized — there’s no crowd control and the schedules on which buses run is barely discernable — but, if you know the basics, it’s quite easy to get around.
What can be tricky about the system is determining the most efficient way to move from place to place. Most often, the process of getting from point A to point B is done more quickly if one is willing to ride three or four buses rather than holding out for the single direct line. This is especially true if one is trying to get from one end of the city to another, say from the Gallery of Modern Art on the north side of Villa Borghese to Viale Trastevere or vice versa.
In theory, there’s a tram that runs this route — the number 3. But, it’s route is so long and circuitous that it takes almost a lifetime to get from one end of the line to another. Residents of Rome joke that one should take a picnic on the line 3 as you’re likely to get hungry in route. We also think of the number 3 as the ultimate tour tram as it takes riders past the Circus Maximus, around the Colosseum, past St. John Lateran and Porta Maggiore, through the ugly underbelly of the city in the area around Stazione Tiburtina, before snaking its way through the Parioli neighborhood — and all at a snail’s pace. Ride the number 3 and you’ve seen it all.
If, that is, the number three is running. Which, it hasn’t for years. At least not in its tram form. For many many months now, it’s been transformed into a bus, which is a bit of a relief, because the bus moves more quickly than the tram. We haven’t known why magic number 3 tram disappeared, and have assumed it’s due to roadworks and modifications to the tram tracks.
Today, however, we’ve awakened to discover one of the reasons for the tram’s long absence. It seems that in the process of installing an layer of anti-vibration material below and around the tracks in the Testaccio neighborhood, archaeologists and road workers discovered an entire city laying just below street level.
The newspaper La Repubblica reports the discovery of a myriad of materials: walls dating to the imperial period as well a later wall that may have been built in the 5th century AD; tombs containing skeletal remains that may be of the high medieval period; warehouse pavements; buildings for grain storage that were originally connected to the nearby Roman port; deposits of amphorae; and pieces of a mosaic pavement that seem to have embellished an ancient Roman house.
The amazing thing about these discoveries is that they were made only inches below the surface of the modern day road (see top photo). Did anyone know they were there? There were clues. Alessandra Capodiferro, head of archaeology in the Aventine area, says that photographs taken in at the turn of the century, show that in the early 20th century, houses in the area incorporated the remains of ancient Roman buildings into their fabric. Later development in the area rendered all such remains invisible, however.
Furthermore, from the 1800s to the present day, the road now under excavation has been an important thoroughfare, hosting first a horse-drawn omnibus and later cars, buses, and the number 3 tram. Thus, for more than a century, the newly uncovered remains have been sealed under a layer of pavement and forgotten.
The superintendency of archaeology plans to continue excavations, digging under one tram track at a time in order that public transportation can continue to pass along the road. They’re hoping that the dig will shed light on the ancient and early Medieval city, for, as archaeologist Paola Quaranta explained to La Repubblica, “This street along the slopes of the Aventine was one of the most ancient, one of the first in Rome to run to the sea and to the salt basins at Ostia. It retained its importance in the Imperial period, when warehouses and offices connected with the Tiber port grew up in the area. And, even into the 5th and 6th centuries, this road was important because it led to the basilica of San Paolo.”
