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

How are Rome's monuments still standing?

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 218 posts

Re: How are Rome's monuments still standing?

#81

Post by bsder »

pmontra wrote: post #70
bsder wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Did the Romans really know that using certain volcanic rocks would make their concrete structures last longer? Or did they mostly just use whatever aggregate was convenient and the structures that have survived are the ones that used the right rocks? Why not both? How do you think you discover that certain things work better than others? Humans are clever in any time. For example, the Pantheon has a very specific p…

The Pantheon is maintained but the Colosseum is not and it shows. The interior of the Colosseum is a pile of rocks. However there is a plan to restore the floor https://www.stirworld.com/see-news-rome-announces-plans-for-...

The Colosseum was also built with lead rebar for earthquake resistance. And that lead rebar was extracted and stolen over the years because the lead was valuable.

Taking the rebar out of a building tends to make it a touch less durable.

Re: How are Rome's monuments still standing?

#83

Post by WalterBright »

SQueeeeeL wrote: post #30
WalterBright wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rome lasted for many centuries, so I imagine they were familiar with what worked and what didn't.

Jonathan Blow makes a bunch of great points about our simplified view of ancient people, versus the reality of their complex achievements which could only be brought about by lots of ingenuity and iterations. https://youtu.be/pW-SOdj4Kkk

The lack of writing probably impaired things greatly. I know the Romans had writing. But did they ever write manuals? It was not like Gutenberg's printing press, which put progress on a steep upward trend.

Re: How are Rome's monuments still standing?

#84

Post by ajsnigrutin »

HPsquared wrote: post #64
rurp wrote: post #57

Tangentially related to this, one of my hobbies is to explore old long abandoned ghost towns and mining camps in the Southwest US. It is really impressive how well many of these structures have held up in harsh climates. One of my favorite parts is seeing how repairs were improvised in the wilderness using whatever supplies happened to be available. The standard approach to trash back then was to throw it in a pile n…

A lot of the old glass bottles were designed to be used again and again.

Aren't modern bottles designed for that too? Atleast here, you return them to the store, get some money back, and they wash and refill them

Re: How are Rome's monuments still standing?

#85

Post by literallyaduck »

i_have_an_idea wrote: post #56
noyeastguy wrote: post #53

I wonder if there will come a time when society decides it's better to fix ruins such as the Colosseum and the pyramids instead of letting them just rot away.

What would be the practical purpose of "fixing" something like the pyramids? Vs. just preserving them as-is.

You know, for grain storage, and for the ancient aliens to communicate through crystal power, or a flooded Bass Pro shop.

Re: How are Rome's monuments still standing?

#86

Post by pengaru »

lizknope wrote: post #76
throwaway0a5e wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how you can call the climate "harsh" with a straight face since it never rarely get moist enough for long enough for water and bacteria to do much to wood and masonry. There's a reason you pretty much never see 100yr old unmaintained wood and masonry structures in New England, midwest, the PNW, etc.

Yeah, the water is far worse than the sunlight. Airlines and the military parks aircraft in the desert for storage because with a little bit of prep work at the beginning the aircraft will stay in good shape. Constant rain would be far worse.

The thing is desert structures still have to deal with water ingress.

It does rain, and when it rains it's often a blowy monsoon of doom, assaulting desiccated wood structures which more often than not have developed some leaks from the year-round wind/sandstorm/thermal/UV abuse and complacency promoted by deceptively always-dry conditions.

And when lumber that has been dry and 120F+ for half a year abruptly gets soaked in water, its dimensions quickly change in non-uniform ways; it twists, bends, splits, and softens. If any of this moistened wood juice finds its way down into the ground, subterranean termites discover the food source in a veritable food desert. I think you can guess what follows.

Re: How are Rome's monuments still standing?

#87

Post by lillecarl »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #84
HPsquared wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of the old glass bottles were designed to be used again and again.

Aren't modern bottles designed for that too? Atleast here, you return them to the store, get some money back, and they wash and refill them

In Sweden we sort them by colored or translucent, they'll be smashed and reheated to be made into brand new bottles. Haven't seen used bottles in quite awhile, not sure if it's good or bad.

Re: How are Rome's monuments still standing?

#88

Post by CubsFan1060 »

pmontra wrote: post #70
bsder wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Did the Romans really know that using certain volcanic rocks would make their concrete structures last longer? Or did they mostly just use whatever aggregate was convenient and the structures that have survived are the ones that used the right rocks? Why not both? How do you think you discover that certain things work better than others? Humans are clever in any time. For example, the Pantheon has a very specific p…

The Pantheon is maintained but the Colosseum is not and it shows. The interior of the Colosseum is a pile of rocks. However there is a plan to restore the floor https://www.stirworld.com/see-news-rome-announces-plans-for-...

It is very interesting. Certainly there are holes where people have stolen iron. But more importantly, the materials in the Colosseum are massively pillaged by christians for use in other buildings.

The Pantheon was turned into a church, and thus was off limits. In Rome they call it "recycling".

An interesting article: https://engineeringrome.org/ancient-structures-in-rome-the-c...

Re: How are Rome's monuments still standing?

#89

Post by marginalia_nu »

It's struck me, reading roman authors, that they were considerably more obsessed with building a legacy than we are. Not just getting powerful or famous in life, but entering the history books, to become big name like Scipio Africanus.

May be that it comes with living in an "eternal" city that's been the same as long as anyone can remember, with generations coming and going and most human activity washed away like sand castles on the shores of oblivion. Making some form of lasting mark seems almost urgent when you look at it from that perspective.

Re: How are Rome's monuments still standing?

#90

Post by Isamu »

roca wrote: post #26

Did the Romans really know that using certain volcanic rocks would make their concrete structures last longer? Or did they mostly just use whatever aggregate was convenient and the structures that have survived are the ones that used the right rocks? The latter sounds more plausible to me. Of course we can still learn valuable lessons from these surviving structures.

Using volcanic rock in concrete was done to lighten vaults and domes, e.g. the Pantheon. This is distinct from using volcanic ash in the concrete mix which was essential for the long lasting strength.

Arguably Roman concrete was discovered by accident when someone mixed a batch of lime plaster using the volcanic ash around Pozzuoli instead of regular sand.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pozzolan

Post reply on HN