“March on Rome, the insurrection by which Benito Mussolini came to power in Italy in late October 1922. The March marked the beginning of fascist rule and meant the doom of the preceding parliamentary regimes of socialists and liberals.”
"The March on Rome (Italian: Marcia su Roma) was an organized mass demonstration in October 1922, which resulted in Benito Mussolini’s National Fascist Party (Partito Nazionale Fascista, or PNF) acceding to power in the Kingdom of Italy (Regno d’Italia). "
I don’t know if “the march on Rome” means “the march on the streets of Rome”?
You’ve got the right idea.
If you read the “Action” description in the Wikipedia article, you get your answer: “Armed fascist troops gathered outside Rome before marching into the city.”
Generally, we think of “on” as one thing being “over top of” something else. The march on the streets of Rome, i.e., the troops marching over top of the streets of Rome.
A march “on” a city generally means that a large, organized group is marching into the city, namely toward the seat of government, to attack, overthrow and/or protest the government. I suppose the word “on” is used because the focus of the march is to set upon (attack) the seat of government (the buildings where the center of government is located). They’re not just marching into the city or on the streets of the city; one could say that they are marching “over top of” the grounds and floors where the seat of government is located, or figuratively, the government itself.
Generally, ‘the city’ refers not only to the city itself, but to the city government, but because Rome is the capital of the entire country, Rome refers not only to the city itself or to the city government (the city of Rome has a mayor), but to the national government. The March on Rome was not only a march on the city but a march on the government of Italy.
I cannot help remembering another “alternative fact” in the US.
(The above excerpt is from Wikipedia.)
In this context “on” means to go that place with a purpose, especially a challenge.
For example:
Mussolini marched on Rome.
Martin Luther King and other civil rights activists marched ON Selma (Albama).
In this famous “I Have a Dream Speech” in 1963, King had marched ON Washington, DC to ask for reform.
In another context:
When I am finsihed learning Spanish, I plan to use LingQ to take ON Russian or French.
Usually it would be “March to Rome.” But there’s an element of aggression here rather than just direction, so “on” is used in an analogy to the phrase “attack on Rome.”
Thank you for your comment.
Now I understand that marching is not a peaceful one. Marching on the castle means attacking the castle, and “March on Rome” means “Attack on Rome”.
It’s broader than that. It need not be violent, even if it is in this particular case.
Are you saying that marching is not necessarily related to armed troops?
Thank you for your explanation.
LILinquist gave this example above.
Martin Luther King and other civil rights activists marched ON Selma (Albama).
In this famous “I Have a Dream Speech” in 1963, King had marched ON Washington, DC to ask for reform.
To “march” certainly refers to soldiers originally, but here it is used in an extended sense of any group of individuals going to a place with intention to attack, protest, complain etc,