Neapolis, or "new city" (in ancient Greek Νεάπολις), was founded, without fear of wandering, by the Cumans. This foundation responsibility is unanimously asserted by Strabone, Velleio Patercolo, Scimno di Chio, Lutazio and Tito Livio. Authors who on one hand fall into a Cumana perspective, depending on Cumane sources, Patercolo, Strabone and Pseudo-Scymno, and on the other fall within a Neapolitan perspective, depending on Neapolitan, Livio and Lutazio sources [2].
Archaeological findings indicate that the Neapolis plateau was widely visited at least from the mid-6th century BC [16] and that the "New City" should be traced back to the end of the same [15] [3].
The foundation of Neapolis is part of the climate of stasis in force in Cuma for the whole parable of Aristodemus [15]. The result of the staseis is perhaps, in the first place, the destruction of Parthenope mentioned by Lutatius [17]: it is probable that the settlement from then on served as a refuge for the "losing" factions. [3] The decisive moment corresponds to the establishment of Aristodemus' Tirranid, after the battle of Aricia in 520 BC. The tradition recalls the forced expulsion of the oligarchs who found refuge in Capua. It is likely that on this occasion they have decided to make room for the Nea Polis. [3] In any case it is certain that the foundation or rather the refoundation (urbem restisse) [18] of the city took place at the hands of oligarchs moved by the desire to give life to a "second Cuma", completely resembling the city from which they came; for example, the continuation of cults such as that of Demeter and the faithful re-organization of the organization in friars sufficiently confirm this. [3]
Neapolis, a unique case in the Greek world, was established in the same territory as the mother country. Indeed the territory was divided, to the north the large landowners and to the south this settlement that was born with a remarkable mercantile vocation encouraged by the port. [19]
The city extended into the plateau between the current churches of Sant'Aniello in Caponapoli (p.zza Cavour), of the SS. Apostoli (San Lorenzo) and of Santa Maria Egiziaca (Forcella). A study by the Federico II University of Naples in 2019, published in the Journal of Historical Geography [20], shows that the layout and proportions of the urban structure of Neapolis were chosen so that the city could be recognized as the city of Elio and Partenope. The rigid orthogonal layout of the streets was realized as a microcosm that referred to the Pythagorean cosmology based on the harmony of the golden section that placed the sun at the center of a harmonic universe of ten concentric spheres. [21]
Neapolis was not born therefore integrating and consequently developing the old city as it happened for example in the case of Constantinople, but arose at about three kilometers away for logistical reasons (the place where Parthenope rose did not allow to give breath to the urban space [22] ) but also due to economic and commercial factors due to the needs of the time: Neapolis was in fact born entirely projected towards the Sarno valley. [2] In this historical period the city was composed of two separate "bodies" but constituting a single urban reality.
