Home Stories from the Archives The Court of Fortifications, Water and Bricks

The Court of Fortifications, Water and Bricks

On 4 March 1946, an arson attack destroyed three quarters of the oldest archival series kept at the Naples Municipal Historical Archives: the one that Bartolommeo Capasso had ordered called the First Series or Ancient Section[1], since it contained the documents of the city’s administrations that followed one another from 1387 to 1805.

Documents of inestimable value from the Angevin and Aragonese periods have disappeared, papers produced during the two viceroyships are missing, better luck has been had by those from the Bourbon era.

The fund in best condition is the Water and Brick Court. Although it was mutilated compared to the original endowment of around three hundred archival units, forty-four searchable items divided between volumaes, registers and pamphlets escaped the fire.[2]

This fund collects the papers of one of the oldest Neapolitan institutions, one of the Deputations with jurisdiction[3] that administered the city of Naples in medieval and modern times. They were called Courts because they could exercise the use of force: they coercively enforced the provisions they issued and punished those who did not comply with obligations and prohibitions. For these reasons, the city courts have always played an important role in the archival series of the Municipal Historical Archives, so much so that Bartolommeo Capasso, in the planning phase of his work to reorganise the archive, proposed to dedicate the third part of his Catalogue raisonnéafter dealing with the Ancient Section and the Court of San Lorenzo and its dependencies[4]. The great Neapolitan archivist was not able to complete this project, and his work was continued by Raffaele Parisi[5], who departed considerably from the historical-archival approach used by his predecessor in the first two volumes of the catalogue. Parisi used the works and expertise of the Court of Fortifications, Water and Bricks as a pretext to craft an appreciable essay on Neapolitan history[6]. However, it remains a valuable product as it proposes and sometimes reproduces many documents of the Court of Fortifications that were destroyed in the fire of 1946.

A number of university professors have become aware of the importance of the Tribunal of Fortifications, Water and Bricks, directing not only students to it for the compilation of countless degree and doctoral theses, but also scholars of all sorts intrigued by the institutional characteristics of this ancient Deputation, and finally simple citizens in search of licences and concessions issued by the Tribunal around properties they owned.

The present contribution is intended to provide a useful tool for understanding this important institution that was responsible for the walls, waters and roads of Naples for about three centuries[7].

Available documentation

Of the surviving archival units, forty-three have a progressive original numbering, presumably from the 19th century, ranging from 1827 to 1870, and can be divided into five groups, four of which are homogeneous (the water government, the Conclusions, the Appointments, the Bills) and a miscellaneous one including Reports, Certifications, Letters and other documentation.

Part of the first group (volumes 1828-1834) are the surviving documents of the former Water Deputation, which was suppressed in 1631 to create the Court of Fortifications, Water and Bricks. The first two concern the construction of a section of the Carmignano aqueduct[8]the trunk of St. Benedict, the third volume lists the Concessions of Bronzes granted from 1633 to 1778, i.e. the concessions of connections to public waters requested by Neapolitan citizens, further information on these concessions can be found in the 1830 volume entitled Waters, concessions and othervolume 1831 deals with the administration of the Neapolitan mills that received water for their operation from the Carmignano aqueduct, the events of which are set out in greater detail in volumes 1833 and 1834.

To the second group belong 16 volumes relating to the Conclusions,[9] i.e. the decisions taken by the Tribunal from 1564 to 1805, among which the Index (volume 1850) is of considerable importance, allowing atargeted searches within the volumes from 1840 to 1848[10]of the others, only 1849 has a pandette.

From an administrative point of view, the five volumes of the Appuntamenti, [11], which can be placed in the third group, have the same characteristics and value; they cover the period 1702-1805 and also have an Index.

The six volumes that make up the fourth group contain the Banni, i.e. the notices with which the court made its decisions known to the citizens. Below is a banno of 1698 prohibiting stone cutters from indiscriminately digging underground in Naples, causing damage to the city walls and private homes.

Announcement by the Illustrious Messrs. Deputies of the Court of Fortification, Water and Bricks of this most faithful city [12] .

It has come to my notice that some master cutters, on the occasion of removing stones from the mountain near the church of S: Maria a Cappella, have planned to make some underground caves, with which they have taken to digging under the public ground of this most faithful city, not only to the serious detriment of the walls of this most faithful city, but also of the houses situated in the district of Pizzofalcone and this properly called Gugliarcone; and (being) our special care to improve as much as we can in the service of his Majesty God the Guardian and for the benefit of the Public, and wishing to provide an appropriate remedy for such inconveniences , citing the penalties incurred by the maker of the aforementioned grotto, it is hereby ordered and commanded, by the present banno, anni futuro tempore , to all and any kind of person of whatever rank and condition they may be, that from this day forth they do not dare under any colour or cause whatsoever, to cut, or cause to be cut, the aforesaid mounts of ducats 100 and 6 months in prison with other penalties reserved at the discretion of the Tribunal and also of the refectione of the damage that they may do and so inviolably shall be executed, in S. Lorenzo, July 1698.

Nine volumes belong to the last group, containing Letters, Certifications, Reports and Minutes drawn up by Court staff. There are also two potentially very valuable accompanying tools such as the Pandette of the original acts which, unfortunately, cannot be used to fulfil the task for which they were created, as most of the original deeds to which they refer have been destroyed, from them, however, it is possible to deduce every type of business that the Court of Fortifications, Water and Bricks dealt with.


The history of the Court has been reconstructed several times on the basis of classical sources[13] Neapolitan by scholars who have dealt with them in their research activities. Here we will trace a historical-administrative excursus, taking as reference two little-studied sources that are part of the heritage of the Municiapal Historical Archives: a pamphlet entitled The Instructiona for the Most Excellent Fortification Court, brickwork, ed acqua di questa fedelissima Città, by an anonymous author published by Gennaro Migliaccio in 1746, which is included in one of the miscellaneous collections of the Library of the Municipal Historical Archives[14], and a short history, also by an anonymous author, entitled Origine et stato del tribunale della forticatione, part of the 1837 volume of Conclusions[15]which is published in full in the appendix with the relevant transcript.

There is little common ground between these two narratives, [16], as they were written at different times with different objectives; the Origine et Stato seems aimed at creating a celebratory portrait of the Court, while the Instruction is very precise and punctiliously lists the functions and attributes of the Court and its employees.

Old brochures in the archives show that until the fire of 1946 there was an entire volume dedicated to the origins of the Tribunal of Fortifications. Once this has been destroyed, it becomes interesting to examine the account of its origins found in volume 1837, which opens with an apologetic-sounding reference to Augustus who ‘enlarged the walls of Naples’. From citation to citation, we come to modern times when the powers of fortification from rege became municipal: ‘in the year 1492 Ferdinand I delegated Antonio Latrocas Rational to the fortification’. From citation to citation, we come to modern times when the powers of fortification from rege became municipal: ‘in the year 1492 Ferdinand I delegated Antonio Latrocas Rational to the fortification’. In the Origine et Stato, the first nucleus of the deputies of the Fortification is listed[17] appointed in 1537 by the Viceroy Don Pedro de Toledo, who fulfilled their duty by ordering a further enlargement of the walls: ‘These knights and citizens made the walls from Carbonara to the pedamentina of Sant’Ermo. Once the walls were finished, there was an administrative reorganisation, which led to the dismemberment of the Tribunal of the Fortification, from which the Tribunal of the Brickworks was born by budding with the task of taking care of the streets of Naples. Finite le mura ci fu una riorganizzazione amministrativa, che portò ad uno smembramento del Tribunale della Fortificazione, da cui nacque per gemmazione il Tribunale della mattonata con l’incarico di occuparsi delle strade di Napoli.

Historical sources are rather discordant on the question of the composition of the Court of Fortifications, Water and Bricks. According to the Origine et stato after the reorganisation, its direction was entrusted to seven Deputies: five nobles and two from the People[18]. For Chiarini, on the other hand, the Court was governed by a noble Superintendent and eight Deputies (five nobles and three from the People)[19]while other sources place a varying number of deputies from different social backgrounds alongside the superintendent.

In my opinion, these divergences are of little significance, far more important are the competences of the Court, effectively enumerated in the opening passage of the Instruction:

The Court of Fortification, Bricks and Water takes care of the roads, the water and the public walls; it must repair, at its own expense, all the defective roads in the city and its boroughs: it must clean and repair, at its own expense, the Formale Reale della Volla, and all the aqueducts that bring water to the public fountains; it must keep the fountains themselves in order: He must contribute to the cleaning and adjustment of the filthy conduits, rebuild all the walls that support the public roads, all the maritime banks, the public cavalcades, and the houses given in custody to the Porters of the Most Excellent Squares; and finally he must take care that the roads and the public vacuums are not occupied by any works of the Particulars, and in the summertime he must make the aquata and the levelling for the service of the King our Lord.

We can therefore compare the Court of Fortifications, Water and Bricks to a modern Infrastructure and Public Works Department, [20], and as such, it needed funding sources and specialised personnel to carry out the activities listed in the Instruction.

The annuities of the court consisted of censi[21] and rents of places and shacks used for public sale. In addition, it received 15 ducats per year from the duty of the Fetta dei meloni; 41 ducats and 21 granas on the ducats that were paid on each tomolo of salt, 728.29 ducats from a financial annuity, as well as various transfers ordered by the squares that administered the City[22].

Among the employees of the court, two officials played a key role: the Mensario de las Estrellas and the Mensario de las Aguas. The former had the task of seeing to it that the work on the roads was carried out according to the regulations in force, using for this task the porters whose duties were quite varied, as can be seen from some of the Conclusions in volume 1847[23]:

that it is the duty of the gatekeepers to keep watch over any infringements in the quarters within their jurisdiction and those following the dispatch of the relevant licences; (4 March 1769) [24].

that it is the duty of the Porters to keep a constant watch over the quarters entrusted to them, keeping the Court informed of the situations found therein; (11 March 1783) [25].

that it is the duty of the Porters to see that the streets are kept clear of all occupation with rubbish and other materials; (11 March 1783) [26].

that their duty in the event that they notice breakthroughs, recalculations in the streets is to make the Monthly Deputy aware of them; (January 1795) [27].

The Mensario delle acque was in charge of everything related to water, from aqueducts to tufolature, it could also contract works for a value not exceeding one thousand ducats, for those of a higher value two Deputies were appointed as Commissioners. The Mensari dell’acqua also used porters employed by them, whose duties are highlighted in these passages:

that the porters Pasquale di Giovanni and Giuseppe Salvato, according to the usual order, attend to the iron and sulphurous water, checking that there are no inconveniences in the distribution of mineral water, (2 July 1771) [28].

that the Porters assigned to their respective quarters, make a separate note of all the tufts and dimples found therein so that the Court may order the remedy where necessary; (6 November 1775)[29].

The task of ‘recognising and appreciating[30] or measuring all the works authorised by the Court was entrusted to five Ordinary Engineers, also reporting directly to the Mensari, while the Water Mensari alone headed a nucleus consisting of Pozzari and Fontanari[31], who are in charge of distributing water and supervising the public fountains, and a ‘scorridore di formali, who is obliged to visit once a month the Chiavicone, which runs from Cesarea to the Fiatamone’.[32].

As for the accounts of the Tribunal, they were kept in order by a Secretary with the office of Rational “who must in each month account to the Tribunal itself for all the income, and outcome made by virtue of appointment”.[33]while the writings were entrusted to two Scrivani. The cases were patronised by a public prosecutor and two lawyers, who also provided legal advice.

After describing the staff, the Instruction closes by reviewing a series of legal regulations laid down by the court, which can be likened to today’s building regulations and those concerning the management of public land. Therefore, it does not mention a strategically decisive function for the control and defence of the city, which is mentioned in the Origine et stato: the control of the Torrioni from which the ancient walls originated and on which military posts were positioned. “He keeps the keys of the towers, and in particular [ente] that of Carmel above [ra]which he keeps pieces of artillery”.[34].

Both the Origine et stato and the Instruction are to be considered as simple accompanying tools. In order to understand and describe the Court of Fortifications, Water and Bricks, it is necessary to study the papers, which are exclusively kept in the Municipal Historical Archive. With these brief notes, it is hoped to have made it clear that we are dealing with one of the most important institutions that administered the city, so the study and dissemination of this documentation will add further pages to the history of Naples.


alisio g., Neapolitan Town Planning in the 18th century, Bari 1979.

amirante g., Education and defence, culture and production in Naples, in Public Construction in the Age of Enlightenment, Florence 2000.

brancaccio g., Il ‘governo’ del territorio nel Mezzogiorno moderno, Lanciano 1996.

buccaro a., Istituzioni e trasformazioni urbane nella Napoli dell’Ottocento, Naples 1985.

capaccio g. C., Il Forastiero, Naples 1634.

capasso b., On the Civil and Ecclesiastical Circumscription of the Population of the City of Naples from the End of the 13th Century to 1809, Naples 1882.

capasso b., Catalogue raisonné of the books, registers and writings in the Ancient Section or First Series of the Naples Municipal Archives, vol. I, Naples 1876.

capasso b., Catalogue raisonné of the books, registers and writings in the Ancient Section or First Series of the Naples Municipal Archives, vol. II. Naples 1899.

celano c., Notizie del bello, dell’antico e del curioso della città di Napoli, Naples 1962.

de rose a., The fountains of Naples, Napoli 1994.

de seta c., History of the city of Naples from its origins to the 18th century, Rome 1973.

di mauro l., The useless walls. The aggression of the Neapolitans against the walls in the 17th and 18th centuries, in The city and the walls, edited by C. De Seta – J. Le Goff, Rome 1989.

fiengo g., The Carmignano aqueduct and the development of Naples in the Baroque age, Florence 1990.

fiengo g., Building organisation and production in Naples at the advent of Charles of Bourbon, Naples 1983.

guiscardi r., History of the Naples City Hall, Naples 1862.

jacazzi d., Gaetano Barba Neapolitan architect, Naples 1995.

parisi r., Catalogue raisonné of the books, registers and writings in the Ancient Section or First Series of the Naples Municipal Archives, vol. III. Naples 1916.

parisi r., Catalogue raisonné of the books, registers and writings in the Ancient Section or First Series of the Naples Municipal Archives, vol. IV. Naples 1920.

pessolano m.r., Viceroyal Naples: defensive strategies, castles, urban structure, in Raccolta di scritti in memoria di Antonio Villani, vol. III, Naples 2002.

pessolano m.r., Naples in the 16th century: ‘alla moderna’ fortifications and the city of the Spaniards, «Restauro», 146, Napoli 1998.

ruffo v., Saggio sull’abbellimento di cui è capace la città di Napoli, Naples 1789.

strazzullo f., Town Planning in Naples from 500 to 700, Naples 1968.

strazzullo f., The Neapolitan guild of fabricators, pipernieri and cutters, Naples 1964.

summonte g. a., Historia della città e del Regno di Napoli, Naples 1603.

List of available volumes

Acque di Carmignano. Construction of the San Benedetto trunk17431828/1
Carmignano Aqueduct. Construction costs16291829/2
Waters. Reports of concessions, bronzing and other1633-17781830/3
Acque di Carmignano. Mills. Administrations1831/4
Waters. Concessions and other1649-18381832/5
Acque di Carmignano. Printed and Manuscript Memoirs1833/6
Carmignano Aqueduct. Replacements, nettings1728-18051834/7
Brick Court and water. Conclusions1564-15731835/8
Fortification Court. Conclusions1595-15981836/9
Fortification Court. Conclusions1610-16261837/10
Fortification Court. Conclusions1649-16551838/11
Fortification Court. Conclusions1676-16841839/12
Fortification Court. Conclusions1700-17091840/13
Fortification Court. Conclusions1710-17141841/14
Fortification Court. Conclusions1715-17211842/15
Fortification Court. Conclusions1722-17311843/16
Fortification Court. Conclusions1732-17421844/17
Fortification Court. Conclusions1743-17521845/18
Fortification Court. Conclusions1753-17681846/19
Fortification Court. Conclusions1769-17921847/20
Fortification Court. Conclusions1792-17961848/21
Fortification Court. Conclusions1797-18051849/22
Index of Conclusions1700-17961850/23
Index of Appointments1702-17961856/29
Calls for tenders and more1546-16861857/30
Book of Notices1797-18051861/34
Index of Banni and Dispatches1552-17591862/35
Reporting and certification1682-17301863/36
Representation registers17971865/38
Representation registers17981866/39
Pandetta of the original Acts1760-17961869/42
Pandetta of the original Acts1609-17961870/43
Fortification Court. Civil Trials1801-18082042/44

[1] B. Capasso, Catalogo ragionato dei libri registri e scritture esistenti nella Sezione Antica o Prima serie dell’Archivio municipale di Napoli, Naples, 1876.

[2] According to an inventory compiled in 1847 and reported by Capasso, the papers of the Fortification Branch were as follows: Notices (1552-1805); Conclusions (1595-1801); Diversorum (1608-1736); Dispatches (1601-1796); Notamentorum bandorum (1635-1686); Records of dispatches (1764-1805); Certificates (1628-1805); Appointments (1702-1805); Concessions (1609-1795); Representations (1797); Civil Trials (1617-1799); Criminal trials (1757); Tools (1649-1792); Falling houses (1767-1798); Pollena lava failures (1717); Permits (1797-1798); Original Acts (1699-1831); Accomodi di strade (1805); Acqua di Carmignano. Cfr. B. Capasso, op. cit., p. XXXIX.

[3] The other deputations with jurisdiction were: the Tribunal of Pecunia, the Tribunal of Vision and Audit, and the Tribunal of Health. Cfr. B. Capasso, op. cit., p. VI.

[4] Ibidem.

[5] Raffaele Parisi was a teacher at the Liceo Cirillo who was transferred to the Municipal Historical Archives to work with Capasso on the second part of the catalogue that came out in 1899. After Capasso’s death, the city council commissioned him to finish the catalogue. The two volumes of the third part were published in 1916 and 1920.

[6] Along the route of the ancient Neapolitan walls, Parisi has created a kind of encyclopaedic guide to the city in the style of the ancient guides for foreigners that had so much success in Neapolitan publishing.

[7] According to Summonte, the Tribunal of Fortifications was founded around the 14th century, in the time of Charles of Anjou, who commissioned 12 citizens, 6 from the Noble Squares and 6 from the People’s Square, to take charge of the extension of the city walls. Cfr. G. A. Summonte, Historia della città e Regno di Napoli, Napoli, 1603, libro I, pp. 220.

[8] In the first two decades of the 17th century, Neapolitan patrician Cesare Carmignano and mathematician Alessandro Ciminelli presented a project to bring the waters of the Faenza River to Naples. The project was approved by the Collateral Council and the Viceroy, and a contract was signed between the city and the two proposers on 22 May 1627. Cf. the notes by G.B. Chiarini in Notizie del bello, dell’antico e del curioso della città di Napoli raccolte dal canonico Carlo Celano, Naples 1970, reprinted in Italian. anast. of the 1856 edition, vol. II p. 406. The volumes in the archive contain handwritten and printed reports of the management of the Carmignano aqueduct and the legal disputes in which it was involved.

[9] They may be regarded as the decisions taken by the court on matters within its jurisdiction.

[10] Searches can be made by surname, by business, by location.

[11] Like the Conclusions, the Appointments can also be likened to decisions taken by a deliberative body, but originally they were only the notes taken on the business of a given body, to be followed by the conclusion or final decision.

[12] ASMUN, Municipality Section, First Series, Fortification Court, Water and Brickworks, no. 1858/31, f. 232.

[13] The bibliography from which it is possible to draw information on the Court of Fortifications, Water and Bricks is more than copious; here are just a few of the fundamental texts: ALISIO G., Neapolitan town planning in the 18th century, Bari 1979; BUCCARO A., Institutions and urban transformations in 19th-century Naples, Naples 1985; CAPACCIO G. C., Il Forastiero, Naples 1634; CAPASSO B., Catalogue raisonné of the books, registers and writings in the Ancient Section or First Series of the Naples Municipal Archives, vol. I-II. Napoli 1876-1899; DE ROSE A., The Fountains of Naples, Naples 1994; DE SETA C., History of the city of Naples from its origins to the 18th century, Rome 1973; DI MAURO L., The useless walls. The aggression of the Neapolitans against the walls in the 17th and 18th centuries, in The City and the Walls, edited by i C. De Seta – J. Le Goff, Rome 1989; FIENGO G., The Carmignano aqueduct and the development of Naples in the Baroque age, Florence 1990; FIENGO G., Building organisation and production in Naples at the advent of Charles of Bourbon, Naples 1983; GUISCARDI R., History of the Naples City Hall, Naples 1862; JACAZZI D., Gaetano Barba neapolitan architect, Naples 1995; PARISI R., Catalogue raisonné of the books, registers and writings in the Ancient Section or First Series of the Naples Municipal Archives, vol. III-IV, Napoli 1916-1920; RUFFO V., Essay on the embellishment of which the city of Naples is capable, Naples 1789; STRAZZULLO F., Urban Construction in Naples from 500 to 700, Naples 1968; SUMMONTE G. A., Historia della città e del Regno di Napoli, Naples 1603.

[14] ASMUN, Library, Miscellany. Location: MISC. 004.08/07

[15] ASMUN, Municipality Section, First Series, Fortification Court, Water and Brickworks, no. 1837/10, ff. 63-66.

[16] For the sake of expositive convenience, the account of the Origine et Stato of the Tribunal of Fortification will henceforth be referred to as Origine et stato, while the Instruction for the Most Excellent Tribunal of the Fortification, Brickworks, and Water of this Most Faithful City will simply be referred to as Instruction.

[17] ASMUN, Municipality Section, First Series, Fortification Court, Water and Brickworks, no. 1837/10, ff. 63, 63 a tergo.

[18] ASMUN, Municipality Section, First Series, Fortification Court, Water and Brickworks, no. 1837/10, f. 64.

[19] Cfr. the notes by G.B. Chiarini in op. cit., vol. II p. 426.

[20] Formally, the Tribunal of Fortifications, Water and Bricks was a Deputation dependent on the Tribunal of the Elected or of San Lorenzo, which can be considered the ‘Municipal Council’ of the medieval and modern eras. Its members were appointed by the notables of the groupings into which the city was divided, who represented the most important families of Naples. These gentlemen gathered in buildings called in the various epochs: Tocchi, Theatres, Plazas, Arcades, Seats. n the 18th century, there were six seats: Nido, Capuana, Montagna, Porto, Portanova and Popolo. The five noble seats appointed six knights, except for Nido, who appointed five. The latter in turn appointed the Elected who would represent their square for a year in the Tribunal of San Lorenzo. The seat of Montagna elected two delegates, as the old Sedile di Forcella was merged into it, but they could only cast one vote in deliberation. The People’s Elector was appointed by the twenty-nine street captains representing the twenty-nine octinas or contrade, i.e. the territorial divisions into which the city was divided. During the Viceroyalty period, the captains voted on six names and from them the Viceroy chose one he liked. From 1560 the Court of the Elect was presided over by a government-appointed Magistrate, the Grassiero or Prefect of the Annona. The Tribunal of San Lorenzo exercised its functions until 1799, when it was replaced by the institutions of the Neapolitan Republic. The following year, although Ferdinand IV returned to power, its definitive suppression was decreed.

[21] Benefits of a public or, more frequently, private nature encumbering both things (real censi) and persons (personal censi). “The censi, constituted with a special contract, were distinguished in riservativi and consegnativi. With the first type of contract […] the seller, by ceding a property in full ownership to others, reserved the right to an annual and perpetual annuity’. Cfr. Entry Censo, Encyclopaedia of Law and Economics, Novara, Garzanti, 1985, p. 233.

[22] The closest body to a modern-day city council was the Five and Six, an assembly composed of the Knights in charge of governing the five noble squares. Capuana, Montagna, Porto and Portauova elected six knights while Nido elected five, who held office for only one year and were in charge of governing their square. For certain issues, they made decisions that affected the entire city, in which case each square deliberated in its own seat and measures were taken when they were approved by four squares. When they met collegially at the Monastery of San Lorenzo, the People’s Square with the Elected and two other deputies also took part in the meetings, and even in those circumstances the voting was done by square and not by individual.

[23] The Conclusions quoted were taken from Milena Montalto’s dissertation, The Court of Fortifications, Water and Bricks: 1769-1796discussed in the 2001-2002 academic year at the Faculty of Literature and Philosophy of the Federico II University, Chair of History and Institutions of Southern Italy in the Middle Ages and Modern Age by Professor Guido D’Agostino.

[24] ASMUN, Municipality Section, First Series, Fortification Court, Water and Brickworks, no. 1847/20, f. 3.

[25] Ivi, f. 147 a tergo.

[26] Ibidem.

[27] Ivi, f. 218 a tergo.

[28] Ivi, f. 28

[29] Ivi, f. 90

[30] Cfr. Instruction for the Most Excellent Court of the Fortification, Bricks, and Water of this Most Faithful City, Naples, 1746, p. 9.

[31] The tasks of the Fontanari are well illustrated by this passage from theEducation: All the aforementioned Fontanari, each in his own district, must take care that the public fountains flow, and if they fail to do so, they must report to the Court within eight days, under penalty of failing to do so, and all the improvements to said fountains must be made at their own expense. Cfr. Ivi, p. 11.

[32] Ibidem.

[33] Ivi, p. 8.

[34] ASMUN, Municipality Section, First Series, Fortification Court, Water and Brickworks, no. 1837/10, f. 66 a tergo.