Rome: beware, this must-see monument is now subject to a fee!

Culture Minister Gennaro Sangiuliano took the decision, describing it as common sense. The Pantheon is the most visited cultural site in Italy, so being free represents a loss of revenue for the country. The minister justified the decision by explaining that most of the money would be used to maintain the monument. However, he did not say that more resources would be allocated to this upkeep. As a reminder, tourism in Italy accounted for 13.2% of its GDP in 2019. Earnings fell sharply in 2020 and subsequently with the pandemic, so it seems logical to want to compensate for these losses.

Tourists interviewed by AFP do not seem to see it in the same light. Some said they would not visit the interior if they had to pay admission. Others even exclaim that it's a disgrace. One thing's for sure, charging admission to such a monument makes culture less inclusive. Many tourists will be content to admire the Pantheon from the outside, while those who can afford it will be able to learn more about its history and architecture while enjoying the magnificent dome.

However, despite being in the minority, many tourists agree with the government's decision, saying that they understand the logic behind the idea that such a monument should be preserved and restored. What's more, the €5 charge is still relatively affordable compared with other monuments around the world. For example, it costs at least ten euros to climb the Eiffel Tower, the third most visited monument in France.

Entrance to the Pantheon will continue to be free for residents of Rome, although they will have to justify this. The proceeds will benefit the city and its residents. These revenues will be shared between the Ministry of Culture and the Diocese of Rome on a 70/30 basis.

But Romans won't be the only ones to benefit from this free admission, as minors and those accompanying school groups, teachers and supervisors will not have to pay to enter the Pantheon. This is good news, because the price of admission could have discouraged schools from taking their pupils there, which would have been a real barrier to access to culture.