Through examining the semiotic of spatiality implied in the making of Rome as a fascist capital, this proposal is consistent with two of the sessions of the congress (n. 2, Semiotic and History, and n. 3 Semiotic of Spatiality). Spatiality and borders of the capital city, as well as architecture, will be assumed as semiotic tools through which the italian fascist regime, since its beginning and until 1935, would inscribe in the physical space its conception of society as hierarchy. As Loman suggested, we hypothesize the way in which the capital city and its territory have been modified, as a semiotic meta-description of a cultural universe: a « modelling self-description » of the italian cultural identity whose fulcrum were fascism and the Duce. In fact, fascism manipulated the “cultural memory” (in Lotman's terminology) expressed by the historical urban space, trying to selectively pick-up those elements of Italian history that served to legitimize the regime’s existence. Moreover, the modern city was planned and organized as a reproduction of the ancient images (and values) of the Roman Empire. At the same time, planning implied also control over people: as a radical novelty in the Italian history, fascism created the so-called borgate, rather poor and isolated extra-urban settlements, for that part of population considered at the lowest level of the social scale: migrants from the countryside, very poor people, political opponents, and « morally deteriorated families » which, almost confined into borgate, became invisible. Considering together spatial practices of segregation of marginal population, and the medical classification of children in early school, it is possible to understand how deeply and continuously fascist institutions tried to impose to the city a structural model transforming it in a « diagrammatic sign», a cartography of hierarchical relations. Based on archival research of documents and books of the ‘20ies and ‘30ies of XX century, this contribution aims at demonstrating the functioning of fascism as a semiotic machine producing signs, texts and practices of control and hierarchy: a semiotic system - which we can define nor “disciplinary”, nor « bio-political », to borrow Foucault’s terminology - but a unique and original mix of them whose symbolic effectiveness was based on an inter-semiotic translation (according to the Jakobson’s definition) between urban space, political discourses, and body images and forms.