After providing a retrospective view on how concrete construction has come to be interpreted as a marker of Romanitas (i.e., Roman identity and self-image) in both specialist and popular discourse, the chapter looks more closely to ancient literary representations of the technology in order to explore how building techniques could become caught up in political debates about elite self-presentation. Bringing the relationship between patrons and builders to the fore, the discussion concentrates on processes of identity construction in the domestic sphere, as reflected in the writings of Cato and Vitruvius, and explore their relation to public architecture.

Based on a thorough reassessment of the list of canonical temples, political buildings, and utilitarian structures upon which the conventional dating framework is founded, this chapter presents new excavation data to downdate the introduction of the building technique to the mid-2nd century BCE. The discussion of contemporary evidence from elite houses in the monumental core of Rome reveals recurring technological practices, thus providing the missing link to reconstruct the socioeconomic context of innovation and the role of private contractors

Drawing together the evidence gathered in the previous chapters, the concluding discussion concentrates on the historical implications of the revised chronology. Highlighting the existence of simultaneous developments in both core and periphery, the chapter offers a reassessment of the agency of indigenous communities and of their independent contributions to the development of Roman building methods and architecture. Taking the political and economic integration of Late Republican Italy into account, it also suggests a new model for the diffusion of the technology, acknowledging how elite networks may have influenced the mobility of skilled craftsmen and, therefore, technological transfer.

The chapter surveys the evidence from colonial sites that were founded or resettled in the early part of the 2nd century BCE, concentrating on the well-documented cases of Cosa, Luna, Puteoli, and Aquileia. The discussion emphasizes how the physical aspect of colonial settlements developed beyond the initial foundation through the continued interaction between colonists of different backgrounds and locals, often combining the efficient management of labor resources with the broader need to build new communal identities.

The chapter expands the analysis by comparing and contrasting urban and rural patterns across different environmental zones of the Roman Campagna, focusing specifically on the role of villa architecture. Whereas in the tuff region closer to Rome concrete construction lagged behind the early phase of the technique in the metropolis, the limestone architecture in the territory of neighboring Tibur shows a more complex pattern, reflecting how the diffusion of monumental rural residence in areas with easier access to both key ingredients for high-quality mortars, volcanic ash and lime, could have triggered technological change.

The chapter analyzes the relationship between building techniques and urbanization processes in Pre-Roman Pompeii, revealing the correlation between social status and the ability and drive to innovate in the field of domestic architecture, and reconstructing the pace at which the technology was extended to public building. The evidence from Capua and Cumae, two major urban sites that were incorporated under a Roman praefectura just after the Second Punic War, provides important parallels to contextualize the Pompeian pattern within the regional phenomenon and to measure the impact (or lack thereof) of direct Roman political influence.

The cult of Castor and Pollux in Rome possessed extraordinary resonance and longevity: they were first worshipped in a public cult in the city soon after the ousting of the kings and the foundation of the Republic in the early fifth century bc. A thousand years later, in the late fifth century ad, Pope Gelasius I complained about their continued popularity, for the people of Rome refused to stop worshipping the brother gods.1