ROMAN URBAN TOPOGRAPHY in Britain and the western Empire

More documents

Recommendations

Info

ather unpleasant finished surface (Fig 21). In the 2nd century this gave way to the brown or grey volcanic tuff from nearby Nuceria. Tuff was much favoured in central Italy before the time of Caesar and Augustus because it was readily available and had the dual advantages of being easy to cut in the quarry and then hardening on exposure to the air. The main snags were that it did not have the same aesthetic appeal as the hard white stones and that some varieties, especially the yellow tuff from the Campi Phlegraei, north of Naples, suffered badly in due course from the effects of weathering. Eventually, even in central Italy, the hard white stones became normal for masonry that was to remain visible, while tuff was often retained in foundations and other hidden parts. Standard work, for instance the porticoes of the Pompeian forum (Fig 22), was executed in limestone, especially the so-called lapis Tiburtinus (travertine) quarried near Tivoli, while for the more lavish buildings, especially temples, and for carved decorative detail architects used white marble. The situation in Roman Britain has been partially examined by various writers, notably by Williams (1971) for the south and east of the province. Much of the masonry was cut in the most accessible varieties of limestone, but other materials were used locally; for example, red sandstone at Chester and greensand in parts of Kent, Sussex, and Norfolk, and in London. Williams points out that the regions where greensand was employed outside its native area were those which could be served by boar from a possible source or depot on the Medway, a theory which is supported by the presence of building stone of Kentish origin in the cargo of the Blackfriars boat. Rarely in Britain does stone seem to have been used far from its source; exceptions were made only where the stone was of good quality and the building project of a prestigious nature. For example, if Williams is correct, Ham Hill stone from Somerset was brought to Colchester for use in the Temple of Claudius. The most highlyrenowned material in Britain, the so-called Purbeck marble from Dorset, occurs only in shallow strata and was therefore confined to small-scale work, such as inscription slabs, ornamental pieces, and veneer; the largest items in its repertory are carved capitals. The techniques of handling and working good-quality building stone varied little throughout antiquity, or 19 Ling: The mechanics of the building trade indeed in more recent times before the advent of mechanization. Quarrying is the first stage. Remains of various quarries, both Greek and Roman, show that normally the workers would cut into a face, proceeding from top to bottom, so that for any given block only two main faces, the rear and the underside, had to be freed from the living rock. This was a natural way of economizing on labour. At the same time care had to be taken to avoid fault-lines, the devastating effects of which are attested by numerous half-finished and abandoned pieces, both architectural and sculptural. But, provided that all was well, a roughly rectangular block would generally be procured. This was done by cutting grooves or, alternatively, by drilling a series of parallel holes along the proposed edges, then using chisels and wedges to split the stone. The next stage was transport. Some preliminary dressing of the blocks could be undertaken by masons in the quarry and certain elements, notably columns, were even roughly shaped, as can be seen from the numerous half-finished columns in the quarries of Carystus, but all pieces were transported in an unfinished state to avoid damage. Many examples of quarry blocks have been found at Ostia, where they were doubtless awaiting transfer from sea- to river-craft on their voyage to the marble-yards of Rome; among them is a cipollino columnshaft with a raised band at the end to protect the main part from contact with the ground, and a series of blocks with a curious arrangement of different-sized steps and offsets. These bear no relation to any intended architectural role and are best explained as a device to convert an irregular shape, perhaps dictated by fault-lines in the quarry, into one which could be more easily stored and at the same time more easily measured for accounting purposes. Transport, as the Ostian finds demonstrate, would be conducted as far as possible by water; but there was always an overland component, sometimes a long and difficult one, between the quarries and the nearest river or port. This was inevitably the most expensive and time-consuming part of the journey. Small blocks were presumably carried by ox-cart, but such methods were cumbersome and the axles would have been hard put to stand the strain, especially as the surfaces can rarely have been smooth; one has only to read Carl Humann’s graphic account of his
Ling: The mechanics of the building trade Fig 25 Reconstruction of Roman derricks, based on (above) the painting from Stabiae (cf Fig 24) and (below) a relief from Capua (Drawn by R Lea, after Adam & Varène 1980) 20
Page 1 and 2: No 59 ROMAN URBAN TOPOGRAPHY in Bri
Page 3 and 4: Copyright © 1985 Authors and Counc
Page 5 and 6: Illustrations Fig 1 Miletus Fig 2 C
Page 7 and 8: Introduction: the study of Classica
Page 9 and 10: Introduction and the land divided i
Page 11 and 12: Introduction Fig 3 Timgad: the colo
Page 13 and 14: Introduction Fig 6 Lepcis Magna: th
Page 15 and 16: Introduction xvi
Page 17 and 18: Cunliffe: Aspects of urbanization i
Page 19 and 20: Cunliffe: Aspects of urbanization i
Page 21 and 22: PART II THE PLANNING AND BUILDING O
Page 23 and 24: Dilke: Ground survey and measuremen
Page 29 and 30: The mechanics of the building trade
Page 31 and 32: Ling: The mechanics of the building
Page 33: Ling: The mechanics of the building
Page 43 and 44: Who paid for public buildings in Ro
Page 45 and 46: Duncan--ones: Who paid for public b
Page 47 and 48: Duncan-Jones: Who paid for public b
Page 49 and 50: Civic Pride: a factor in Roman town
Page 51 and 52: Frere: Civic Pride: a factor in Rom
Page 53 and 54: Reece: Roman towns and their plans
Page 55 and 56: Reece: Roman towns and their plans
Page 57 and 58: Wacher: The functions of urban buil
Page 59 and 60: Casey: The Roman housing market leg
Page 61 and 62: Casey: The Roman housing market Evi
Page 63 and 64: Casey: The Roman housing market Rom
Page 65 and 66: Drinkwater: Urbanization in the thr
Page 71 and 72: Forum and Capitolium in the early E
Page 73 and 74: Todd: Forum and Capitolium in the e
Page 75 and 76: The quick and the dead: suburbs, ce
Page 77 and 78: Esmonde Cleary: The quick and the d
Page 85 and 86:
Todd: Forum and Capitolium in the e
Page 87 and 88:
Salway: Geography and the growth of
Page 89 and 90:
Colchester: the mechanics of laying
Page 91 and 92:
Crummy: Colchester: the mechanics o
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
New streets for old : the topograph
Page 103 and 104:
Jones: New streets for old: the top
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
London in the 1st and early 2nd cen
Page 111 and 112:
Perring: London in the 1st and earl
Page 113 and 114:
Perring: London in the 1st and earl
Page 115 and 116:
Marsden: London in the 3rd and 4th
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Barker: Aspects of the topography o
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Fig 81 Wroxeter: the area of excava
Page 133 and 134:
probably from Viroconium, the robbi
Page 135 and 136:
Forum Iuhi (Cividale) (Italy) 61a f
show all

ROMAN URBAN TOPOGRAPHY in Britain and the western Empire

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?