Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Roman Roads (2017)

sashamaps.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 166 posts

Re: Roman Roads (2017)

#61

Post by wonger_ »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #28
madcaptenor wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually refer to his list of 20 simple, distinct colors ( https://sashamaps.net/docs/resources/20-colors/ ) which he came up with for this map, pretty frequently. It's a nice palette.

An easy trick is to rotate hue with a spacing of 1.618. That guarantees maximum separation with no near collisions for any number of hues.

So cool! The same "golden angle" is behind plant leaf spacing, for minimal overlap / maximum exposure to sunlight.

https://gofiguremath.org/natures-favorite-math/the-golden-ra...

Re: Roman Roads (2017)

#62

Post by PhasmaFelis »

behnamoh wrote: post #10

Sometimes I wonder if we've regressed in terms of attention to quality. Here in the US, I see lots of potholes on the streets and sidewalks. Meanwhile, the ancient cobblestone roads are still functional to this day.

I've done some research on this.

For one thing, cobblestone roads wouldn't last so long under the weight and shear forces of modern vehicles. Y'know when Wile E. Coyote skids to a stop so hard that the road under him wrinkles up like a rug? A loaded semi truck braking hard can actually make asphalt do that, just as an example of the kind of forces involved.

For another, cobbles that are even a little bit wet become slippery deathtraps at even moderate driving speeds. Even when they're dry, highway speeds are going to be very uncomfortably bumpy. Hard on people and hardware both.

Basically, a good driving road requires a surface that is extremely smooth but also somewhat tacky, and that really limits what other properties it can have. You can't build something like that out of durable stone.

Re: Roman Roads (2017)

#63

Post by delichon »

rrr_oh_man wrote: post #34

Funny thing is they did have something like this already: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabula_Peutingeriana (Check out one of the full size scans in the links)

The subway map is great for seeing the shape of the network, but this one is better at showing the geographical constraints that shaped the network.

Re: Roman Roads (2017)

#64

Post by reaperducer »

xandrius wrote: post #52
wongarsu wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About 30km/18 miles per day is a common value used in Europe. On a single day you can easily do twice that if you don't carry too much and are used to walking long distances, but it would be difficult to sustain. Also the number allows for time to set up camp (and tear it down in the morning), prepare meals, etc.

Saying that 60km "can be easily done" is quite a stretch. After 30-40km, even on flat, most people wouldn't do it easily at all. And I walk about 10km daily in one session and often do 30+km hikes.

When I was in elementary school, we would do charity walks every year to raise money for the poor. They were 20 miles.

It took us all day, but if a bunch of kids between fourth and eighth grades and their nun teachers can do it, I'm surprised how many adults on this web site think it's too far.

Re: Roman Roads (2017)

#65

Post by ffgjgf1 »

ardit33 wrote: post #50

The Roman Empire was very advanced for the time, and it left such a huge imprint on the civilization even centuries, and thousands of years after it. The organization was a different scale. Fun fact: Some of the most famous battles in England in the middle ages, such as battle of Hasting, were basically 5k - 9k soldiers in each side. That's just one and a half Roman legion. Rome, could field 12 legions at a time, and…

To be fair England was a complete backwater in Roman times, just like much of Europe away from the Mediterranean. IIRC by the 1000s Germany, France and Britain had already well surpassed their Roman population peaks, Italy on the other hand took another 500 years or so.

Re: Roman Roads (2017)

#67

Post by eschulz »

Phenomenit wrote: post #37
eschulz wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Horses would often be swapped out at stations when a wealthy person would have to travel very quickly across a long distance. Maybe this is an average since the speed with which horsemen could travel would depend on the rate at which they exchanged their horses. In an extreme example from the year 9 BC, the future emperor Tiberius traveled on the Roman Roads 330 miles (531 km) between northern Italy and modern day Ma…

So he rode really fast, reckless and sleep deprived to his brother who’d been injured in a horse riding accident?

haha hadn't thought about that, although the Roman Roads could be considered to be a safe highways as opposed to the dangerous paths in Germania.

If one of the main characters in The Fast and the Furious gets hurt in a street race, would not his teammates race to him as fast as they could?

Re: Roman Roads (2017)

#68

Post by marssaxman »

bluGill wrote: post #17
behnamoh wrote: post #10

Sometimes I wonder if we've regressed in terms of attention to quality. Here in the US, I see lots of potholes on the streets and sidewalks. Meanwhile, the ancient cobblestone roads are still functional to this day.

Potholes are not regression. They are a good cost effect response. We can build roads that won't have potholes, but at vastly more cost, it is better in the long run to build roads as we do and then fix potholes every year. Cobblestones also get potholes and the like when subject to heavy car traffic.

The neighbors on my block share a gravel alleyway, which develops enormous potholes over time. The city does not maintain it, so we all chip in every couple of years to have it re-graded. One of our neighbors, who happens to own a few expensive sports cars, wants us to have the alley paved with asphalt instead: but it will take twenty years of regrading before the project would break even.

Re: Roman Roads (2017)

#70

Post by ffgjgf1 »

gtmitchell wrote: post #53
behnamoh wrote: post #10

Sometimes I wonder if we've regressed in terms of attention to quality. Here in the US, I see lots of potholes on the streets and sidewalks. Meanwhile, the ancient cobblestone roads are still functional to this day.

Rome had the advantage of access to essentially unlimited forced labor in order to build and maintain their infrastructure. Modern engineering is absolutely superior to Roman engineering, but we do have to contend with budget constraints, at least in part because we're not using slavery to build our roads.

Also the types of roads the Romans were building wouldn’t be particularly useful or pleasant to use.
Post reply on HN