718. Roman Bridges by Colin O'Connor

PONS AEMILIUS BUT NOW CALLED PONTE ROTTO

718.  Roman Bridges by Colin O’Connor.  This is a book well worth reading.  He begins:

The Romans did not invent bridges or roads but were the first to develop a system.  Bridges and roads go together for obvious reasons.  

A bridge is valued for reasons of its beauty, function, social reasons as it promotes trade, communication.  It also helps to create towns, cities. For the Romans bridges also possess religious significance.  Ancus Marcius, the fourth king of Rome, caused the construction of the Pons Sublicius.  Its construction and care were placed under the care of a priest, pontifex.  Pontifex means bridge builder.  Romans were animists and believed that rivers possessed a divinity and this divinity required permission to be crossed.

Romans avoided steep grades, often following river valleys.  They minimized river crossings and stayed on one side until a crossing was necessary or one road met another at right angles near a river.

O’Connor periodically covers briefly Roman history and then juxtaposes that history with road and bridge construction up to that time.

Rome commanded the Tiber River as it empties into the Mediterranean Sea.  To the north is Etruria which consisted of a league of 12 cities from the Tiber R. to the Arno River (in modern Florence).  To the south was/is Latium.  The people there had the same language as Rome.  This area stretches from the Tiber to the Pomptine Marshes and the Lepini Mts. just beyond Cape Circeo.

Rome grew under the Etruscan leaders it had.  In 530 BC the Cloaca Maxima was built this was a large open drain which made the area now called forum useable.  It was covered in the 4th century BC.  Tarquin (called the Proud by the Romans) was booted by the Romans in 510 BC.  He was not happy about this and went to Caere.  There he convinced Porsenna, the king of Clusium to help him regain his throne.

When Porsenna marched on Rome his ability to cross the river was hindered by the famous stand of Publius Horatius Cocles and his two friends, Spurius Larcius and Titus Herminius on the Pons Sublicius.  It is likely that inspite of the courage of Horatius, Porsenna occupied Rome.  But in 506 BC at the Battle of Aricia, the Latins defeated the Etruscans and at this point the Latin League was formed.  In 493 BC Rome and the Latin League combined.  In 360 there were some members of the league unhappy and this war, Rome won.

In 479 BC Rome attacked Fidenae in Etruria and failed.  But since Fidenae was critical for the security of Rome, it was taken in 426 BC.  In 405 BC Rome attacked Veii, the last Etruscan stronghold at Rome’s doorstep and took it in 396 BC.  

Rome’s advance into the south (remember the Latin League) involved them in three wars against the Samnians.  

The 1st Samnite War lasted from 343 to 341 BC.  The Sabellian tribe was absorbed.  The reason for this war was, as so many in which Rome was involved, the request of a nearby city.  The war began when Capua sought help from Rome against the Samnites.  Rome helped but the war was indecisive.  The 2nd Samnite war was fought 326 to 304 BC.  Rome was defeated at the Caudine Forks which is between Capua and Beneventum and at Lautulae.  At this point Capua joined the Samnites but Rome retook Capua in 314 BC.  In 304 BC the Samnites asked for peace.  3rd Samnite War was fought in 298 BC.  Lucania asked Rome for help.  The Samnites formed an army and it arrived north of Rome where the Romans defeated it at Sentinum.  Roman power stretched from Ancona on the Adriatic Sea to the Gulf of Tarentum.

Tarentum was concerned about the advance of Rome and formed an alliance with Pyrrhus, the King of Epirus in Greece.  The war lasted from 280 to 275 BC.  At Beneventum, the Romans won a major victory to win the war.  

Back to bridges.

The Romans built the Via Appia from Rome to Terracina on the Tyrrhenian coast, then to Minturnae, then to Capua and finally all the way to Brundisium on the heal of Italy.  In 314 the Romans retook Capua toward the end of the 2nd Samnite War.  So the Via is strategic for Roman security.  But it quickly became a trade route.  There is disagreement on when the road was paved but O’Connor is convinced that it was a substantial road from the beginning.  The road through the Pomptine Marshes was frequently flooded, parts of the road required boat transport.  Years later at Terracina, Trajan built a rock cut path for the Via Appia, visible today.  The road went through the pass at Lautulae (where the Romans were defeated) and crossed the Liris River (Garigliano)  The Romans established a colony at Brundisium in 244, thus the road was probably completed to that point by 264 BC.  From Beneventum there is a northern route along the Adriatic and this may be the Via Minturnae mentioned by Cicero.  These roads secured the area both for the Romans and for the inhabitants.  These also provided a means of trade and communication. The area south of Rome was secure.

The Via Annia joined Capua to Rhegium.  Parallel to Annia is Via Domitiana (imperial road) giving access to Puteloli (Pozzuoli).  This area had the valuable ash which Romans added to concrete to allow the concrete to dry in wet environment.  In the same area is Via Herculia.  It is a late road.

The Via Salaria began at the Pons Sulpicius and followed the Tiber.  This road was important as a trade route.  The Via Latina is connected with the fight against the Aequi for the pass at Algidus.  A battle was fought there in 431 BC.  This is the battle at which Cincinnatus, elected dictator in an emergency, was victorious.  The Via Valeria was built in 307 BC to Carsioli and a colony established in 303 BC.  The Via Clodia went north at Satrum to help control the area.  Via America went north to Horta in 240 BC.  The Via Cassia went north to Florentia (Florence). The Via Aurelia went north along the coast on the west side of Italy.  The initial road was constructed by Caius Claudius Cotta in 241 BC. Eventually this road was extended all the way to Spain.  The area north of Rome was secure.

More history.  In 276 BC Rome had control from Eturia to Brundisium.  Messana on the tip facing of Sicily facing Italy was attacked by Hiero, the King of Syracuse.  Messana asked Rome for help.  Thus the 1st Punic War, for there was a strong Carthaginian presence in Sicily.  Rome had naval victories at Mylae in 260 BC and at Ecnomus in 256 BC.  Rome invade Africa in 256 BC.  It was here that Marcus Atilius Regulus was captured and displayed such courage.  But Rome won the war and Sicily was seeded to Rome.  Soon after Sardinia and Corsica were acquired.  

In the north.  Gauls crossed the Alpes into Italy, advanced south and defeated the Romans at Allia River in 390 BC.  After a ransom was paid (all this was was a plundering expedition), the Gauls withdrew.  In the 3rd Samnite War the Samnites were aided by people in the area of Sentinum north of Rome. Thus at the end of the 1st Punic War the Gauls again invade Italy and made it all the way to Telemon on the Adriatic coast just below Ravenna.  The Romans drove them back and began establishing colonies along the Po River.  By 220 BC Placentia, Cremona, Luna and Genoa had been established.

Roads.  Thus the Via Flaminia.  This road left Rome at Pons Mulvius.  It was built by Flaminus when Censor in 220 BC.  The road was extended to Ariminum on the Adriatic.  There is a Roman tunnel through the Furlo Pass. 

History-  In Spain Saguntum asked for an alliance with Rome.  Granted.  The 2nd Punic War commenced when Hannibal besieged the city.  Hannibal initially victorious in Italy, his reinforcements were defeated at the Metaurus River (Romans would have been helped by the Via Flaminia).  The Romans were also successful in Spain and Africa.  The war was over in 202 BC.  After this war the Gaull in northern Italy attacked colonies in northern Italy.  2 armies were sent and were victorious.  

Romans added new roads.  Via Annia (two by that name)  which went from Aquilia to Bologna.  Via Postumia went from Genoa to Verona.  Via Popilia went from Ariminum to Ravenna.

In the beginning the sea was the easy route to Gaul.  The Romans had a long, valuable alliance with Massilia.  The rivers were used as trade and convenience up the Rhone.  But after Arausio October 6, 105 BC where the Romans were defeated by the Gauls.   The Romans won at Vercellae and Aquae Sextiae soon after.  There were and had been for far more than a hundred years major problems with Gauls.  So the Romans took the whole of far southern France.  A network of roads were built.

In Spain a network of roads for strategic reasons and commerce- there were mineral deposits of gold, silver, copper, mercury and iron in Spain.

Northwest Africa saw the construction of roads for defense, commerce and agriculture.

In AD 43 Britain was invaded.  A web of roads was built.  

Builders of roads

In the Republic the roads were built by 12 consuls, 6 censors and 2 praetors.  Appius and others may have done more than just say build the road.  There are two reasons for this:  the highest ranks of Roman elective service required training and experience as of 180 BC.  Some expectations surely exited previous to this. The lowest office was that of Quaestor.  Minimum age was 25.  Next Curule Aedile at an age of 36.  The Praetor required an age of 39 and the consulship 42.  Before these offices were pursued, the Romans had a habit of expecting those on the move to serve as assistants to general, governors and office holders.

There is another reason that people such as Appius knew more than just how to say build the road.  Marcus Vipsanius Agippa, 2nd in command to Augustus, supervised the construction of a fleet, equipment, was responsible for two aqueducts, the cleaning of the cloaca maxima (for this he actually boarded a row boat and personally looked at the cloaca and the Pons Agrippae.  He had a map made of the entire empire with details of cities, roads, terrain.  The ruins of his bridge can be seen 160 meters northwest of Ponte Sisto in Rome. Agrippa’s interests show that he was more than an administrator.  Sextus Julius Frontinus wrote on surveying, the art of war, military science, farming, boundaries, roads, colonies and aqueducts. This last survives, De Aquis.  He was consul, general, writer and governor.  In the De Aquis he states that he had a habit of learning everything he could about whatever he was assigned. Pliny the Younger, when he was governor in Bithynia in northern Turkey went on site to the springs for an aqueduct to figure out a problem.  When younger, he was in charge of the drains and Tiber in Rome.

The Curator Viarum, caretaker of roads, was an important position.  Apparently it was not a political payoff position.  In most cases this position followed the Praetorship.  Engineers (fabri) often came from the army.  These people would have had a great deal of experience.

Labor was supplied by soldier, slaves, free citizens.  There was a huge carpenter association in Rome called the collegium fabrum tignuariorum.  

So O’Connor’s point seems to be that many people in positions of building knew a fair amount about the job before they took on the position.  (I know from reading Cicero’s letters, for example that he clearly knew a great deal about architecture and construction.)

Roman Technology

There are designer constraints:  ability to shape the material, transport and handle.  Roman tools:  hammer, axe, adze, pick, drill, file.  For these a hardened iron was essential.  The old view that the Romans only borrowed and had poor regard for practical skills are buried by the evidence presented by O’Connor.  He shows that there was no shortage of ideas, skills and principles as evidenced by what they built.  He interestingly works backwards to prove this, since no manuals survive.  

Romans lacked extensive mechanical power, hard metals.  And for the Romans employment was a major concern.  And not having a modern capitalist system, they did not want to eliminate workers.  A large cash of tools was found in Scotland and huge numbers of nails of all sizes. These indicate the existence of some kind of assembly line set up.

They possessed great skill in ship building.  Frames were held together by wooden pegs.  Planks held in place by pegs.  Planks were mounted edge to edge, not overlapping, with biscuit wedges.  The wooden pegs holding the planks were pierced by bronze spikes to make a very tight fit.  It is clear that the spikes were made in bulk.  So his point is that there must have been some kind of production system in place to do this.  He also gives high marks for such ship construction.

The Romans knew of the male screw but not of the female nut.

To give a comparison O’Connor mentions that in 1586 the obelisk of Nero’s Circus was moved 240 meters by Fontana. It weighed 310 tons. It took five months and was considered a great feat.  The Romans had moved this obelisk down the Nile River, across the Mediterranean and by land to Rome.  By the way the ancients made rope to the same standards as modern rope.  

There is a crane carved on the tomb of Haterius.  It is in the Vatican Lateran Museum.

In the construction of bridges there was need for a reach of 15 to 18 meters from pier to pier.  The Romans as the tomb shows and the bridge makes clear had the equipment to move large rock the distance and also possessed the pile drivers necessary to create a means to install piers in the middle of a river.  Oak piles have been found with iron tips embeded in rivers.  The Romans some how learned of pozzolana (a tufa, volcanic rock) which allows concrete to harden in wet areas.  It also made Roman concrete very hard, even by modern standards.

Tufa with lava, white limestone and other elements is called peperino.  Travertine is a form of limestone.  It is easily damaged by fire but as bridge material, no problem.  The Pons Mulvius is made from it (109BC).

There are 91 bridges in Italy.  32 use Travertine, 29 use limestone, 23 use tufa, 7 use a conglomerate.  The Romans apparently figured out that the hardest stone did not make the best material for bridges.  Does this make sense?  It will.

A stone with a high proportion of very small pores is less durable than stone with large pores.  Large pores allow space for trapped moisture to expand and contract without doing damage.  The saws used by the Romans to cut limestone, etc. was used well into modern times.  Sand was washed into a cut by water flow.  The different styles of stone laying indicates a knowledge about the material and an ability to adapt different methods to different needs.

Concrete.

Calcium carbonate (lime) is burnt.  Burnt lime is calcium oxide.  When water is added to it it is calcium hydroxide.  This reacts with carbon dioxide in the air to form calcium carbonate.  Add pozzolana and it hardens in water.  Pozzolana causes the lime to be taken up and this adds strength.  The Romans had little idea of the chemistry but knew the results.

The Romans kept aggregate separate from the concrete mix.  These were mixed together at the site.  The Romans liked to lay brick molds, a wall in which to place the concrete.  These were made simultaneously to make sure that the wall which served a s a mold (and pleasant visible surface if so desired) bonded.

In vaulting and such timber was used to form the molds.  In bridges exposed concrete is not used.  The durability of Roman concrete is famous and in some cases it is better than modern concrete. But the physical structure and pore size count more than simple strength.  Roman concrete contains air holes which help to reduce internal pressure due to freezing and thawing.  Crystals which absorb salts also do less damage.

Romans used timber for centering, scaffolding, cranes and for final structures they did build many bridges out of wood and for good reason as we shall see). Romans were well aware of the qualities of different woods.  Vitruvius lists twenty different kinds of timber.  The strongest was ash (fraxinus).

The surveying tools were the groma.  It allowed a straight line to be followed or right angle.  There was a leveling device, chordates and the dipotra which was more elaborate.  Typically aqueducts dropped 1 foot for 500 feet.  Try to imagine the problems of maintaining this over up even terrain with rivers, ravines and mountains.  The Romans also had a hodometer.  A carriage with 4 wheels, each wheel four feet in diameter.  400 revolutions of the wheel caused a drum to rotate 1 time.  A stone in the drum fell out into a bronze container.  The noise would indicate one Roman mile (5,000 feet).

Computations.

Did Romans produce drawings?  Yes.  The tools to do so survive.  The Abacus makes it clear that the Romans could add, subtract, multiply and divide by simple numbers.

Masonry Bridges.

Pons Mulvius- the Via Flaminia begins here.  It has 6 spans.  Spans 2 and 3 are faced with Travertine.  Livy mentions this bridge (27.51.2).  M. Aemilius Scaurus restored it in 109 BC.  There are flood openings in the middle of some piers to relieve the strain during floods.  

Pons Fabricius was built in 62 BC.

Ponte Rotto was built in 179 BC.  Marcus Fulvius Nobilior and M. Aemilius Lepidus were the Censors.  The original one had a timber deck.  The stone arches now visible were added by Scipio and Mummius in 142 BC  (This is the Scipio which captured Carthage in the 3rd Punic.)

The oldest bridge is the Pons Sublicius.  600 BC.  It was made out of wood.  One was still there is AD 400.  No longer exists.  Evidently it was maintained as a wooden bridge for centuries.  It was located near Forum Boarium, down stream from the Pons Aemilius.

Ponte del Diavolo.  One arch rib remains.  It connected to Via Latina which connected Cassinum with Interamna Lirenas.  Near Arpinum it crossed the Liris via Ponte Marmone (This is the bridge near Cicero’s home).

Ponte di Sperlonga is unusual.  Built 1st century BC. 

Past Minturnae Via Appia heads to Sessa Aurunca.  And there in a farmer's field is Pons Aurunca, 1 kilometer west of town.  Follow right bank of the stream down from a minor road which leads to route 7.  Access is along old Via Appia. 

Via Flaminia has more bridges than any other road.  But it is sad to see how many bridges were destroyed during World War II.

Gaul- roads came later here.  Water ways had provided means of commerce and travel.

Spain perhaps the greatest of all Roman bridges is here- Alcantara over the Tagus River is spectacular.  Merida may be the longest, Puente Romano, 3,000 feet plus.

Turkey

There is an arch in a theater with voussoirs stepped at mid length, perhaps to deal with earthquakes.  This technique may have been used in bridges.  But it certainly shows Roman attention to various variables.  There is a bridge at Kahta, one of the largest spans at 34.2 meter.  The largest surviving is Pont St. Martin at 35.6 meter.

Timber Bridges

Very common.  There was plenty of lumber.  There was technology to cut and work wood.  Quick to build.  Besides Romans built wooden structures to hold stones in place as stone bridge was built.  Columns in Rome show wooden bridges.  In Great Britain there were numerous.  For sure wooden bridges were built first when a road was first constructed.  Are there other reasons for wooden bridges? Romans did not build bridges out of stone near seas.  

The columns of Trajan and Aurelius make clear that the Roman army owed as much to the spade as to the sword.  The carving accurately reflect bridges and physical evidence has been found.  The mason for the columns clearly copied from sketch books to display the bridges.

It is possible that Apollodorus may have used trusses on his bridge across the Danube, perhaps the greatest bridge the Romans ever built and that out of wood.  Timber girder bridges are found on the columns.  There is precedent.  Caesar built a timber bridge across the Rhine in 10 days.  It may have been 260 meters long. Apollodorus' bridge- one pier remains.  It crossed the Danube.  Dio Cassius says that there were 20 piers 150 ft high, 60 ft wide and 170 feet apart.  It was about 3,600 feet long.  

Via Appia at Minturnae crosses the Liris (Garigliano ).  Here was the Pons Tirenus.  It was built in 295 BC.  It was known to exist in AD 548.  The Romans used wood where stone was not suitable.

More evidence of application of rules for construction:

The Romans used inverted syphon when bridge height required exceeded 45.7 meter.  Such a height made a bridge impractacle.

Romans used two kinds of aqueduct designs.  One- used numerous arches with short spans for long stretches across gentle valleys.  Two- large spans across large rivers to reduce number of spans.

Rules for bridge design.  This was difficult for me, I did not understand the math.  But did try to get the implications.

The rules appear only by studying the bridges.  

Abutments (end of bridges) constructed first.

Then the foundation for the piers.

Then the piers.

The arch ribs consist of springing voussoirs with radial joints. and keystone.  The underside of the arch rib is called intrados and the upper is called extrados.  The space between the one extrados and the next is the spandrel.  This was filled in either with dirt of concrete.  The weight of the spandrel pushes down and sideways.  The arch pushes inward.  Thus there is a balance.  The end pieces must be wider to help control the end arches.

Virtuvius says 3 types of foundations:

1.  Build directly on the surface on solid material.

2.  Timber piles driven into soft earth

3.  Foundation on water with forms made of beams driven into the water.  Water is pumped out and the space filled with concrete or masonry.

Piers could have vaults piercing in order to deal with floods.  Triangles pointed up stream to break the force of water. The thickness of the piers is 1/3 of the span distance.  Sometimes it is 1/2 and a few 1/5.  The Romans clearly understood the relation between the two.

Arch design.

Arch consists of arch rib, spandrel and material in the spandrel.  Ratio of rib thickness to span is important.  Ranges from 1/10 to 1/20.  This is a wide range.  How does this indicates that Romans had a sense of arch design?  If a span is 50 ft or less, most bridges are 1/10.  

A voussoir with a width of 3 1/2 feet by 5 ft by 5 ft would weigh 9,438 lbs.  This is near the limit of what a crane could handle.  But the keystone of the Ponte Manlio is is 20,328 lbs.  So there must have been special cranes developed for unusual situations.

O’Connor demolishes the idea that segmented arches came to Europe from the Chinese.  In China there is a bridge built in AD 600 which is segmented.  There are far too many segmented bridges in Europe from the Roman period to allow this.  Prime example is Apollodorus bridge across the Danube.  It clearly is segmented.

Roman Ribs.

Different types.

Most common- stretcher bonds with staggered rows.

Arch construction.

Cane could reach 11.5 meter.  First bridge was usually of wood.  This allowed materials and equipment to be moved about.

My observation- it is clear that Romans mastered the problem of form and function.  For those aspects of a bridge which add texture with its shadowing and appeal are directly related to the function and construction of the bridge.

Falsework (the wooden framework which held stone in place until ready to take on the weight of the bridge) supports are often found part way up the springing voussoirs because these could be constructed without support.  Many place survive on bridges where protruding stone was used to support falsework or the holes into which supports for falsework was placed.  Thus the spandrel may have been filled before arch rib was completed.  It may have added strength.  Falsework could maintain huge pressure, so when it was removed, there must have been a way to do so without causing pressure on the stone about in uneven ways.  It is important to remember with cranes that two may have worked on opposite ends of an arch.

Analysis of an arch.

O’Connor here gives mathematical explanation for ability of Roman arches to function.  It was beyond me.

Conclusion.

The Romans probably built thousands of bridges.  Their achievement is measured by shear numbers, extent (all over Europe, Asia, Africa) technology.  It is good to remember that spans achieved by the Romans were not exceeded until 1755.  “The most successful, extensive and lasting of all human, material achievements”.

Temple of Portunus

                                         Temple of Portunus in the Forum Boarium, perhaps
                                         the only surviving building in Rome seen by Cicero.

667. The Gardens of Pompeii by Jashemski.- summary

667.  The Gardens of Pompeii by Jashemski.  Author presents this as response to crisis of modern cities.  What did the Pompeians do with land use?  Here is her answer- the whole book.  Main roads in Pompeii- Via di Nola, Via Stabiana, Via Mercurio.  Study of gardens is key to understanding the people of this city.  4 crops per year. City faces south and more so west.  Sun hits year around.  Late morning the breezes begin.  Subside early afternoon and pick up again late evening.  I/2 kilometer from sea in ancient times.  Pompeii is located on a spur of lava.

600 sheep died when volcano erupted in one herd.When facing Mt Vesuvius the Lattar Mts are behind you.
In the basilica- trials, banking, market took place.  Measurement standards are next to temple of Apollo- the Romans used the samnite stone- altered to meet their own system.

The palaestra and amphitheater are at opposite end to keep crowds down for busy forum area
Much of life was outdoors.  As Via dell Abbondanza moves toward amphitheater- the street widens to form a mini piazza.  The area was probably roofed over.  Most streets were narrow for a reason- shade, break the cold winds.

Heavily traveled streets had porticos.What to do when it rains?- at first, the cisterns were closed and the initial water drained into the streets- this cleaned the streets- hence need for stepping stones.  When roof had been clean and water was clean coming off of the roof- the cistern was opened and filled the cistern.

The streets were safe at night- there are places for night lights in niches in the walls along the street.  No house was more then a 15 minute walk from the forum.  Streets leading to forum were blocked at forum entrance site- this was the people's area.  Before the amphitheater was built, gladiator fights were in forum, musical entertainments and bullfights.  In the forum were portable and frequent street stands..

A proper tour of Pompeii should begin at train station.- point out shops, awnings- these would have been much like those of ancient Pompeii- this is my idea.
At crossroads thought out the city were fountains and shrines.  Hawkers everywhere in the forum.  Gossip exchanged at fountains.

Facilities for entertainment and recreation far exceed those of any modern town of comparable size.  eg- amphitheater capacity held 3 times as many people as what lived in Pompeii.  One theater- the larger one- held 5,000 people- that is almost the entire population of the city.  3 large open air swimming pools, 3 baths.  This gives an idea of how large the population was in surrounding areas.

Wool was a big business here:
12 officinae lanifricariae
11 fullonicae
6 officinae tinctoriae
4 officiniae coatiliariae
6 tertrinae
partly due to Feb 5 62 earthquake- many old house had been converted to shops- the wealthy were moving to the suburbs
Outside the Porta di Stabia- huge tannery
35 pistoria
shops with stepped shelves were wine shops
dolia- vases buried ion counter held lentils, nuts, cereals
at portas di nucera- large lamp factory

Garden- not from Greeks- Roman had strong interest in gardens for a very long time. Part of early Italic home.  House of the Surgeon- 300-400 BC the oldest.  Pompeians relied on well water and cisterns until Augustus had an aqueduct built.  To emphasize above point- Greeks had a peristyle- but it was a paved floor- Romans put a garden in it.  Some houses were huge- House of Pansa- whole city block, another old Samnite house.

Jashemski discovered gardens, parks, vineyards, orchards, vegetable plots inside the city.  There are 450 plus house gardens alone.  Plants were something that all Romans enjoyed.  House of Polybius- first house excavated with new methods.  Large trees accompanied by informal plantings, props for trees heavy with produce, ladder founder for harvest.  Peristyle gardens had formal plantings.  Trees in the corners, if large enough  even when a house was converted to commercial use- the gardens remained.  Plants were for appearance, attraction of animals and food.   

In the house of D. Octavius Quartius- aedicula behind biclinium had telemon statue- a support which held up the fountain.

edge of stream at upper level had sculpture- lions, hound attacking a hare, little boy clasping a serpent, tiny herm, tiny sphinx, a head of a river god.
between pillars- Polyhymnia, Mnemosyne.

Below water jet fountain- is a nymphaeum-  there was a small seated puttee holding a comic mask. east edge of garden had 44 amphorae unbroken- for wine?

small houses had gardens too.
Horace mentions "nursing trees amid your varied columns"

aqueduct waters allowed fountains and pools- these caused gardens to become more formal

the rose, lily and violets were the most popular

old style had larges trees, shrubs and plants- new gardens had fountains, statues- these required curtains to control heat.

Garden paintings were not highly regarded.  So many left to decay.  Garden painting were often visible from the front door.

Paintings heavily used by poor people to make garden area look bigger.  Romans were very fond of herbs.

Bones of a donkey found in house- during eruption it may have run inside for shelter.- there it died.

Clients made calls on patrons at daybreak.  There are seats outside many houses where clients waited their turn.  In antiquity, the houses of the wealthy were open to the public in many ways.

To archeologists the house of the poor held no interest.  Until Jashemski.
House of Venus Marina has many interesting paintings.

There is evidence that the owner of this house loved gardens more than living quarters- after earthquake-which was very severe- garden area were repaired first. 

Painted garden scenes were a continuation of the real garden- e.g a painted fountain pours water into a real gutter.
Large wild animals were made to look part of a garden.

These paintings reflect wide range of response to nature- beauty, awe, gander, ferocity, beauty of movement.

Paradeisos on huge estates were mimicked by paintings by those who could not afford the real thing.

Animals are often same pose in different houses- artists brought sketch books to sell their skill.

Garden paintings are common in tombs.

Even in room where gardens are not possible there are paintings of gardens.

A painting survey showed- all have fences, fountains, birds and plants.

Sacro-idyllic paintings were popular- and villa landscapes- these apparently were developed by Romans- a fellow named Spurius Studius.  Garden paintings reflect Roman love of gardens.

In the winter the family was by the hearth, in summer- outside.  Breakfast and lunch were small affairs- cena was at 3 PM- in the garden.  Mattresses, pillows were used.  Triclinium was often under an arbor or tent- children sat in the open U.

House of Silver Wedding- Samnite.  Dining areas looked on to a vegetable garden- this what Romans liked.  A garden of this house would have had: onions, lettuce, beets, artichokes, cauliflower, peas, beans, herbs and flowers for decoration.  Fruit and nut trees in corners.

Cena:  gustus- eggs, asparagus, rocket leeks
    mensa prima- kid meatballs
    menus secunda- fruit, wine

some triclinium designed as fountains when not in use- this made it easy to irrigate the garden

Candelabras allowed night dining.

Houses of the poor mimicked those of more well to do- vegetable gardens, herbs, fruit trees

Music, reading, comedy part of entertainment, lyre performance.
The cypher may reflect a nod to Apollo or the tibia to Dionysus.

Theater comedies like our musical comedies. Sometimes a book was read aloud- some houses are designed with stage overlooking the garden- look for elevated areas.  Mothers worked in the garden.

Pliny often thought and worked in and then dedicated books in his garden.  Children played- some had fences to keep children away from the pool.

Child's song:
Bucc, bucca quot sunt hic
rex eris, si recte facies.

Pets were very common and there were guard dogs.  Cats kept for mice, turtles to eat insects.  These are used today.

These gardens attracted ducks, pigeons, herons, turtle doves, warblers, swallows, robins, egrets, peacocks.  Peacocks may also have served as watch dogs.

Songs birds kept in cages for songs.

There was a commercial aviary behind the temple of Apollo.

Elaborate paintings of animals, fish, deer gave feeling of what owner of large estate experienced.

Sundials in the garden.  One in the Triangular Forum.  Three types- spherical, conical and planar.  Spherical was most popular.

Evidence of niches for night lights and niches outside in the street. 

Religion in the garden:

sacellum, aedes, templum, sacrarium- words used for places where lares were kept.  Lararium was a much later word.  These shrines were quickly rebuilt after the earthquake.

One lararium shows onions, for which Pompeii was famous, being loaded.  In these shrines were kept the Penates/Lares- rarely found- they took these with them.  Lares were originally dieties of the fields and of dead ancestors.  These were prayed to everyday at meal time with wine, incense, garlands.  Hooks for garlands are often found near the hearth.  Expensive offerings avoided- garlands often made of circlets of flowers.  Prayers are often for good crops and wine. A figure with a toga over his head is the genius of the Pater Familias.

Offerings:  cereals, salt, wine, little cakes, figs, dates, almonds, pine cones, eggs. Thus it makes sense that these are often shown in paintings in bowls.  Dates were imported.  Date trees in Pompeii did not produce fruit.  Incense was also imported.

Only occasionally are animals sacrifices shown- this may hint that the house was sight of deity worship.  These sacrifices probably took place in the garden.

The Caupona of Euxinus (I.xi.10-11)
The lararium painting is in the Thermopolium.   One altar appears to have been provided for guests of the hotel.  Any god could be worshiped at the altar.

Hercules was worshiped at this garden-  (II. viii.6) this is just west of the Great Palaestra- there was a statue of Herc near this shrine.  He was worshiped by the Samnites which took on Italic traits which was connected with Ares which was connected with worship of Ceres at the Villa of the Mysteries. Herc was special to shop keepers hopping for success and health- thus doctors and production thus vines. According to Martial three gods primary at Pompeii- Venus, Herc and Bacchus.  Thus it is difficult to determine when divinities depicted were works of art or sacred- perhaps Pompeians did not distinguish.

Venus was an Italian garden goddess.  Mars too was a garden deity of Samnite extraction who protected crops.  There portable altars.  There more images of Venus than any other.  Venus is called Venus fiscia- from greek it means related to nature. Diana was another garden goddess worshiped by the Samnites in groves.  I like these Samnites: great warriors and lovers of gardens- nice combo.

It is difficult to identify plants for painters used same foliage for different plants- one must look at the flower.

Sacred trees common- altars placed near by.  Hung fillets, cymbals, ribbons and chaplets- Cybele was popular

Isis was worshiped at House of the Moralist, III. iv. 2-3
Zeus Sabazius was worshiped in a garden.  Isis near theater when entering the Triangular forum to the left down the street.  Isis universal mother who created all things with an offer of eternal life.  The Isis temple is in a garden setting.

Doric temple in Triangular forum was public worship for a garden deity.

Tomb gardens had wells, cooking areas, and gardens.  Triclinium tomb same side as exedra tomb but at other end before house of Diomede.  Martial and others mention tomb gardens designed to give pleasure to the deceased and the living.

Gardens often landscaped with sundial(live well while there is time), sautés, parks, pools, fountains, homes for caretakers, shaded triclinium, $ was provided for upkeep and purchase of flowers, veggies and fruit trees.  Pompeians frequently visited tombs- so do modern Pompeians.  Possible ustrina at Porta Ercolano tomb street where road divides.  Tombs near Pompeii found by accident show tomb gardens along road side.  Was a low mound of dirt which turned out to be an ustrina- shows that ustrina, gardens and tomb could be combined.  Eumachia's tomb is outside Porta di Nocera.  Tombs paintings reveal garden scenes.

Villa of Mosaics columns may be a tomb garden (These columns are now in the museum in Naples, they are beautiful).  Street frontage is roofed niche for weary travelers, inscription inside is blank- behind to the right is the tomb and pergola behind supported by four mosaic columns now in Naples museum.

Triangular Forum has doric temple- 5 deities worshiped here, carrara fountain, nearby here is base for statue of Marcus Claudius Marcellus- nephew of Augustus.  The east portico was for a promenade.  Vitruvius recommends such near a theater and temple for discussion and health.  The view of the bay from here is stunning.  The area was probably planted.

Temple of Isis was excavated 1764- 1766.  Evidence of plants destroyed BUT a Herc painting shows a garden setting for Isis in front of the temple- there is an Ibis walking about.

The temple of Dionysus was found outside the city with triclinium very large for ceremonies and banquets- the triclinium was covered by a pergola.

The gladiator barracks  were originally used for a promenade and gardens for theaters goes if it rained or as promenade for other days.

I now know the difference between umbrella pine and plane tree- plane tree is very similar to Sycamore.  Silly me.

The Great Palaestra was a promenade, a school met here, doctors, there was a temple, exercise area, pool, shade trees

Public places had numerous gardens areas in and outside the city.

Gardens in restaurants, hotels and Inns.

copa is a hostess poem:  Dine among the vines covered arbors, babbling brooks, cool drink in crystal goblets, cheese, plums, chestnuts, apples, grapes and music of flute and lyre.

Only six insula lack an inn.  Most inns and restaurants are near city gates, forum and amphitheater. Those near Porta Ercolano:

VI. ii.4 damaged by bomb House of Sallust was converted to an inn.

Tombstone shows Copa bidding farewell to traveler identified by pointed hood and a mule.

Porta di Stabiana:
VIII.vii.1 stabula- slopping incline at curb.

Forum:
VII.xi.11-14 large hotel on a winding street, Stabian baths across the street. Could hold 50 guests, large garden, north wall had three triclinia- arbors, with roof of vines in arched niche.  Lararium, the garden was a produce garden- plants have been restored.

Amphitheater:
I.xi.12  Euxinus- identified by amphora which sat Euxinus- .  Found 34 root cavities and place where dog buried 9 bones.  Put a neat touch to the area- does it not?  Some wine came from this vineyard BUT as amphora indicate- imported wines too.
2 methods:  dolia above ground- supposedly better
dolia below ground
1 dolia = 100 gallons.  Here they may have eaten at tables

The vineyards near the amphitheater had triclinia in them.
II.viii.5- 2 masonry triclinia in atrium small bath, tin garden with 6 small triclinia- used a seats.  May have served as meeting places for guilds, book makers, librarians, fullers.

Shop/House gardens

these also had gardens- often this consumed larger area than rest of the house.  Usually a window allowed owner to keep eye on business while in the garden.  Some had fountains
On Vias di Stabiana VII.i.27 north of stabian baths, 2 latrines- one under the stairs, the other as one entered the shop.
VII.ix.27-40 reaches through the whole insula, a wool scouring plant, had a fountain, flower garden, large window allowed view of garden painting.
IX.ii.7 charming house rear of shop or by long corridor from the street. garden with a pool.
VII.iii.11-12 on Via di Nola- largest shop, impluvium, peristyle, lower and upper room

I.xx.5  lst insula to left as one enters Porta Nocera.  It opened to a wide street on north side of insula, phallus warred off evil- on wall at corner, broken pots at top discouraged thieves, numerous tree cavities found.  Large cistern indicates need for extra watering- thus veggies, also had irrigation channels.  Items found indicate that families spent much time here: weights, perfume bottles, lamp, tweezers, cooking equipment, doll dishes, tweezers used to extend the wick.

Bakery gardens:
IX.iii.20 bakery with garden, had a fountain and triclinium
VII.ii.22 most luxurious house of a baker, entrance at 20 and 41.

Garum gardens:
I.xii.8  2 large fig trees shaded workers, painting too.  One was planted near latrina for privacy.  Also fig leaves were used a toilet paper.

Fuller/wool garden:
VII.xii.22-24
VI.vii.20-21  Lucius Veranius Hypsaeus put fullory in the peristylium

There does not appear to be any business without a garden.

VII.vii.24 saw was still in the marble being cut, carved feet and herms found.

Large Vineyard

Once know as cattle market.  rows are 4 roman feet apart.
3/4 depressions around each pair of vine cavities- these used to hold water.  These depressions were distinct- one cavity for vine one for stake- just as her workers told her it would be- 2014 root cavities!!!!!! This investigation showed that layering was method of reproduction.  Entrance had no row to allow works to bring in tools, wagons etc.  One triclinium to right as entering.  Other location to left where paths intersect. Nails indicate that the rows were arbored.  Chestnut poles were used- these resist rot. and easy to work with. willow was used as rope- as is now. Coins found on path along north wall- stroll area?  A number of trees were located- same as modern system.  Following trees planted in todays vineyards:
walnut, filbert, pear, cherry, plum, fig, apple, apricot, sorb, olive.  Found a carbonized bean- veggies may have been grown between vines. vitis compluviata vine training was used. (Designed like a compluvium)
different varieties of grapes may have been planted allowing one worker to care for the whole vineyard.  Animal bones found- 2 cows were found in stall at house of Faun.  Triclinium were money makers for vinter, a wine shop at other end from amphitheater  located here.

Wine at Pompeii-  wine was main product, oil second.  Animal skins used for delivery door to door, shop to shop.  Lamps found in wine shops.  Painting shows shop keeper pouring sample tastes of wine- just like Sorrento today.  If they lacked a wine press, may have used neighbors or processed grapes with feet, if making a small batch.

1 dolium= 275 gallons= 40 amphorae.  A number of dolia have been found all over Pompeii.

I.xx.1. vineyard pressed by feet- considered superior top grape press- makes sense to me- this prevents bitter taste from being extracted via a press..  Grape juice was consumed. called must.  There is an underground storage cellar here.  Bottomless dolia were set above the cellar. One was for juice to be poured into vat below, the other to allow air to move about to prevent build up of carbon dioxide.  Columella's instructions- weave baskets to picks grapes., small hooks and sickle, dolia treated with pitch, all equipment washed, wine cellar cleansed and made fragrant with smell of herbs.  Prayers were offered to Liber who was later associated with Bacchus and Libera.  Hence paintings of lararium in gardens of a vineyard.

III.vii.a vineyard.  Arbor covered a triclinium, rows of vines, large trees, perhaps open areas for veggies, very few stakes, these were young vines, cistern for water, has been replanted, a popular tree would have supplied withes for tying up vines.

The Discovery of the Market/Orchard/Garden

I.xv.3.  House of Europa
Land slopes from the house. once was two houses.  upper level is much higher than lower.  Large tree cavities, vine cavities, cistern for water, 2 large veggie gardens, most vines were young, pile of clay for pottery, maybe used by clay lamp place nearby.  pile of crushed lava and lime for cement.  He had plans.  Hope he was able to carry them out at some other location.  Large pots found here with usually one hole in the bottom and 3 or so around the side- this helps conserve moisture and makes it easy to transport.  It is possible that these were exotic plants such as citrons which were shipped to Pompeii.  Also there are signs or markers indicating that a canopy was raised over these perhaps during frost time. Citron was used by Jews- perhaps for these people- or may via jews Pompeians found that they liked these too.  Holed pots also used for grafting purposes.  Hardy trees to which grafts were attached were grown in pots.

Dates do not grow in Pompeii.  Numerous carbonized nuts found at this place: filberts, grapes, almonds
The date must have come from gardeners lunch box- the front of the shop probably sold dates- imported and of course his own nuts and veggies.  This was the first garden vineyard found in the city and speaks volumes about land use in ancient cities.

The garden of the fugitive

I.xxi.2  triclinium on one side is shorter. had a pergola but destroyed in 62 earthquake.  arches under triclinium were for dishes and ware.  Large tree near the triclinium.  It has been suggested that instead of a vineyard that this was a rose garden- there is absence of stake for vines.

There is another small garden with a triclinium and niche for a lararium, other small niche may have held a lamp.  Maybe mom and day came here in the evening to relax in the quiet of the night and talk about their dreams and the beauty of the day.  Small olive trees found supported by pollen count. but since these grow large- maybe it was a nursery.

water- small garden had 2 sources. 1- water emptied from street via tile lined opening in the wall and underground channels for water distribution and a cistern.

Large Orchard
I.xxii  Regular rows sort of- maybe like Herman Stroh.  Three piles of soil hard to explain.  Perhaps 300 trees here.  Pompum to Romans was any fleshy fruit.
Triclinium in the middle of the garden shaded by 3 large trees. In front of the triclinium was an altar.  Soil packed ion path leading from house to altar and triclinium- went everyday.  2 dogs found- all sorts of animal bones.  Very high quality soil.  Pumice allows soil to hold much water.

Pollen tests done here but carbonized fruit found, yet pollen can not tolerate heat.  The lapilli which fell on Pompeii was cool. Carbonization can take place over years with low heat.  When supply of oxygen is cut off.  Wind blown pollen, insect transfer pollen- this was found in the garden- olive pollen.  Not grown now.  There was probably a variety of fruit trees.
I.vii.1  Felix fruit shop
Election notice on house- evidently grows promoted their own people to office probably to protect their interests

The Flower Industry

Flowers in demand for festivals, banquets, birthdays, weddings, games, funerals.  Often in the form of a garland for guests, the dead and gods.  At a sacrifice the priest assisted and the altar was decked in flowers. Many flower places provided garlands and wreathes. Vesta was patron goddess of bakers- at Vestalia many flowers were used.

Forum on market day had garlands from column to column.  Favorite flowers:  rose, lily(madonna lily), violet (sweet violet). Other flowers:  oleander, cyan's (bachelor buttons), amaranth (cockscomb), cyclamen, coltha, pot marigold (calendula officalis, salvia, ivy.

Roses were made to bloom early by watering with warm water.  Garlands were refreshed by dipping in water, portable flower booths set up in forum.

Thus makes sense that perfume trade in Pompeii was huge.
unguentarii- the ingredients they used:  juice, solids, oil, salt, resin/gum

VII.iv.25- oil press
VII.iv.5  near temple of Apollo- mural of oil being made.

Flowers used for honey and medicine it was a very big business.

II.viii.6 doghouse here, hoe here, first pollen found here. During excavations a light rain revealed a circular contours and a center point.  Root cavity did not survive- plants too small.  To supplement water- drain hole outside had a short sluece which led water to dolium inside the house.  Large trees with flower beds between and around.

Large nubbier of perfume bottles found here in small room nearby and broken bottles in the garden. Olive trees here- the oil was used in perfume production.

Modern plants similar to ancient:
cauliflower ready at end of Jan
then potatoes in 2 months
then flowers ready in 2 more months

Professional flower grower observed scavi- said it was a flower garden- just the way he did it.
Cult of Herc popular with merchants/traders perhaps this explains the altar for Herc.

Oplontis

begun 1 century BC.  So many villas in the area made it look like a continuous city.  Garden design reflects the rooms and the room design reflect the gardens

The Villa of Papyrus must have been a show place for quality art- the bronze ladies, Mercury, fauns in Naples are from here.  Rostovtzeff argues that the paintings of villas are real places.

Bronze raven in Naples is from San Marco vestibule
Villa de Pastore is between San Marco and Villa of Arriana

Conclusion:
"gardens intimately relates to many aspects of their lives- to their architecture, both political and domestic, painting, sculpture, aesthetic expression, horticulture, religion, work and recreation"

Some cut windows in their upstair room apartments to have a view of a neighbor's gardens
Older homes had large trees in peristyle- after aqueduct more formal gardens became popular with a pool as a focal point combined with plants, sculpture as reflection

656. Agricola by Tacitus- summary

656.  Agricola by Tacitus.  Gnaeus Julius Agricola was the father in law of Tacitus.  It is the story of a man who with great energy and ability lived in such a way to rise to great importance and eventually the consulship and governor of Briton.  He pacified the tribes and began the process of assimilation in a series of brilliant campaigns.  To rise to importance he carefully refused praise and kept his energy in check.  Seems to me that Tacitus was a man who had warmth for freedom of thought but embraced the political stability of the Empire, who saw the balance between the two completely dependent upon the disposition of the Princeps. This is the first time I have sensed conflict in Tacitus.  An active insightful brain trapped in a world whose order he appreciated but  whose imperial dominance he despised.  He also seems to burden himself with guilt for his submission to playing whatever part was demanded by the personality of the Princeps.

589. The Return of Sacred Architecture- Herbert Bangs.- Summary

589.  The Return of Sacred Architecture- Herbert Bangs.  Architecture has lost pre-eminence to technology and modern secular science.  What has gone wrong?  Sacred architecture is based on mathematics, harmony and geometric principles.
The problem lies in materialistic philosophy which counts as legit only what can be weighed and measured.  This is reality and the only reality to them.  Spiritual reality is dismissed such as the reality proposed by Plato.  The denial of spiritual reality means that a building is a utilitarian shelter.  Any ornament is superficial, for the utilitarian aspect of a building is the over riding factor.  In contrast ancient buildings were designed to give  insight into a higher reality.
The author suggests in the very beginning of his book that in the last century this other tradition (spiritual reality) and an advanced scientific revolution will destroy modern concept of architecture.
Bangs discusses several modern movements in architecture.  The Bauhaus approach embodied scientific materialism.  The head of the school was Le Corbusier.  He sought a clean break with Western tradition.  Steel, glass, concrete were his materials of choice.  No attempt to conceal the structural mass which keeps the building in place. This meant the elimination of everything except utilitarian function.  Ornaments were deleted, including molding and the pitched roof. He sought to build such that the structural supports were the expression of the interior and exterior.  He used large planes, simple surfaces.  Glass sheets allowed one interior section to be visible from another.
Mies van der Rohe’s dictum was- less is more.  It appears that these methods although they received rave reviews, left buildings which were dull and interestingly poorly functional.  So another architect- Venturi paraphrased Mies with- less is a bore.  But Venturi only restored use of architectural forms of the past as quaint pastiche.
Modern architecture had as its goal a desire to use science and technology for the benefit of society but the basis of architecture is amoral since there is no ethical basis.  (modern science seems to have the view that all thought and ideas are under its jurisdiction.)  Thus modern architecture only pursues novelty, amusement and excitement.  Consequently the design of buildings has become much more the personal expression of the architect.  Since there is no ethical basis for what is designed, what is designed and built is not based on the spiritual needs of society.  To put it another way these designs do not transcend the life of the architect for only he/she understands the design. (Let me put this from the point of view of a Classicist- the designer of the Pantheon created a building which was bold and different, yet any Roman, Greek, or for that matter any citizen/non-citizen of the Empire could enter the Pantheon and understand, feel comfortable and relate.)
The result is that architecture has become monotonous. Form no longer conveys meaning, except perhaps to select few.  If only a select few can grasp the meaning, if there is one, then design has also become selfish.
Commercial forces are also at work here too.  Build it as cheaply as possible.  Delete the ‘frills’.  Scientific architecture was created by people  who rejected various levels of being.  There is only one dimension to human life and that is what can be measured or counted.  We speak of housing units, not homes.  Some do not even know the difference any more.  For those, vocabulary does not hold much value or hope.
Many of the architects who have produced the concept we now have of architecture were once intrigued with fascism or fascists themselves.
Modern architecture does not recognize the roots of humans to the earth, sky, water, stars.  The purpose of life in their view is material; nothing lies beyond that.  The lead of this was Le Corbusier.  His ideal city was fully climate controlled.  There may be plenty of windows but ‘fresh air’ is supplied via air conditioning.  Bangs is convinced that this has been done intentionally to alienate people from the environment.  Only those near a window have a view- all others are even alienated from natural light.
Modern entrances have doorways which are not obvious and any sense of human scale is missing.
Science has become a detached observer of the natural world, cut off and alienated.
Modern architecture prefers repeating grids.  Schools (as in my high school) have been subjected to this.  Once such buildings were once expected to be beautiful- now they are to be only efficient.
It is interesting that houses designed by these people have been dismal failures.  In most cases virtually uninhabitable.
Part of the cause of all this are the architectural schools.  Students are taught that a building does not express anything beyond the physical form is presents. 
Students now sit at computers and design.  In a class setting each design is reviewed for 20 minutes.  What is sought is the unfamiliar, the different.  Little thought is given to how this design will play out in the real world.  This has also caused much conflict between architect and engineer.
Buckminster Fuller is a famous designer. Yet, his geodesic dome is a poor use of space but his interest was in making a structure maximized space with as little material as possible. Bangs also asserts that Fuller who would have said s himself was drawn by his subconscious to the inherent beauty in the dome.
The educational background of the students does not allow them to question or challenge their professors. Laws of proportion, harmony and form are neglected.  In the class room there is no discussion of the significance of the mathematics which lies behind the design, no discussion of the esoteric value or spiritual existence.
The problem is twofold. To these teachers history is a linear process. We can admire the past.  Yet, we figure that we have outgrown what these were meant to express.  Our buildings are based on a scientific materialism.  Part of the beauty of a building is the spiritual insight it possesses.
Imagine a simple diagram with God at the apex and purpose and meaning forming the rest of the triangle.  Deny this and buildings designed without this understanding are empty and meaningless.
One architect concluded that we must leave God and find our inspiration in human order.  But Bangs insists that human order without any spirituality is ephemeral.  Thus he says architecture reflects only the moment, the view of an architect who relates to no one but himself or a select few.  Such an architect can not transcend the moment to allow humans to develop a clearer perspective on themselves.
In my view it seems that architectural education is sorely lacking in liberal arts education.
That the universe is nothing but material has had great impact on architecture. Ancient architecture used material to express insight into a higher spirituality.  Thus design was meant to appeal to and be comprehensible to all. This ancient view has been abandoned.
The universe is that which can be apprehended by the senses, measured via instruments.  What is real is that which has weight, can be measured and occupies space.  To Darwin all existence is a vast and impersonal mechanism. Material lies behind all knowledge and reality.  There is no place for a supreme being, transcendental purpose of life or life after death.  (Looks as though Lucretius has finally triumphed.)  Love is subjective, unreal.
The Enlightenment was hostile to and suspicious of religious domination which (religious domination is the antecedent) did not tolerate diverse thought.  This attitude when joined to scientific world view denied the truth of any religion.
Western Christian nations have embraced the philosophic materialism, have achieved greatest wealth and power in human history.  Along with this religion has been increasingly irrelevant. By and large the intellectual elite are materialistic.
A devotion to pure reason denies intuition, denies a human purpose beyond the physical world around us, denies beauty.  All of this has lead to despair, depression.  Thus we are not semi-divine.  We have no purpose beyond ourselves.  Not much to look forward to.  The author calls it the “terror of the void.”
Bertram Russell is a famous philosopher.  His view of science states the gloom expressed above.  Yet he seems to take an arrogant and perverse pleasure in the telling for he is the messenger of the truth.  His wording also precludes any further search for the truth.  He uses such words as “beyond dispute, nearly certain.” (Cicero would demolish such an assertion.)
Yet the theory of aesthetics must be addressed by materialist philosophy- solution: there is the existence of a peculiar aesthetic sense- there is a mental faculty apparently which responds to beauty via experience of physical or mental pleasure.  Some view pleasure as the aesthetic part of the ego.  Freud said that art is an escape, a return to childhood misconception.  The argument is not very convincing, so the subject is ignored for the most part.  The possibility of intuitive insights is not investigated.  Material philosophy has all of the answers.  It seems to me that this system has resulted in the suppression of divergent ideas.  Science only needs science since they have all of the answers.  Oddly though this requires a circular argument- somewhat along the lines of fundamental religion.  This system of thought has made it difficult to discuss the appropriateness of art.  Interestingly art has become subjective.
Architecture used to be a means to use material to give a different way of understanding of the great mystery.
Bangs suggests that evidence for absence of creativity is the use of Classical Greek architecture in the 1840s.  Logic, reason, efficiency dominate now, once proportion and intuitive understanding.
(I wonder if this accounts for the decay of American cities).
Post modern architecture to compensate for this mess uses a splash of forms borrowed from past eras.
Yet, change is on the horizon. Reductive science prevails yet this system has been compromised by the discoveries made in 20th century physics.
The Other Tradition used symbols to offer an interpretation of reality.  This means that they relied upon the existence of Divinity and a transcendental purpose of life.  But this was attacked by the church which opposed any threat to its monopoly and ridiculed by science.  Bangs asserts that as science gained power and thwarted divergent thought, an interest in the supernatural has increased.
Carl Jung came up with the idea of subconscious.  He did not see science as a threat but as an area which has overstepped its bounds. 
The big change came toward the end of the 20th century.  The intellectual tools of modern science were used against science.  Material science has found itself in the interesting situation that the arguments of material science which cover all aspects of the universe use only thought from material science to explain itself.  The same thing which the church did when it was dominant.
New academic disciplines (history and sociology of science) have shown that acceptable scientific truths are grounded in the socioeconomic milieu in which it is placed. This means that social background has impact on conclusions scientists draw.
But the biggest blow came from theoretical physics in a new vision of nature of matter and structure of the cosmos. The Theory of Special Relativity by A. Einstein asserts that “concepts of time and space cannot be derived from direct perception of the senses.” Classical physics said that sensorial experience was consistent with the world which was being explored.
The General Theory of Relativity followed a fews years later.  In this it was clear that atoms are not spheres, but solar system like and sometimes waves and sometimes particles.  This has come to be called Quantum Physics.  The behavior of atoms can be described mathematically but not visually.  Matter and energy are interchangeable.  An objective description of nature is no longer possible.  The nature of reality is not reachable via conventional scientific investigation.
Thus Darwin’s theory is now under attack.  His views do not answer all of the questions.  There must be some element of purpose to the shaping of evolution of species.
The reductive approach (classical physics) has proven inadequate for biology, medicine, society and psychology.
There is a growing desire to use a holistic approach.  This will give broader view of the universe and introduce divergent views which will lead to better understanding of the cosmos.
New Physics is converging with the Other Tradition.  This I hope will give refreshing argument to the value of Liberal Arts.
In New Physics the universe is beginning to resemble a great thought, not a machine. This reminds me of Aristotle’s unmoved mover. 
Architecture needs to present a mystical vision.  Material must be used in such a way to transcend the world around us in order to have a more comprehensive and complete view of ourselves.  The difficulty lies in the fact that this vision can be grasped by the mind but words limit transmission to others.  I am reminded of the trances which Socrates used to experience, sometimes for 18 hours.
Symbol and shelter need to be reunited.  This will help us to return to the source of all this, to understand ourselves better, to grow in awareness of the “totality of our being.”
Jung helped to make connections concerning this.  He concluded that the conscious mind is the one which pays the bills and washes the laundry. But he also came to the conclusion that there is the personal unconscious and the collective unconscious mind.  He based this on his studies of individual people and various cultures.  The common views held by diverse cultures harken back to a collective experience of humanity.  He cited instinct as proof.  Instinct begs the question- whence came this?
Jung did not take the next step- the conscious mind needs to be trained to tap or allow the collective unconscious mind to do it work.  We sort give up conscious control and delve into collective unconscious mind.  He cites a fascinating self analysis by Mozart. 
“Intuition and insight can not be accounted for by logic and analytical thought alone. The key to artistic creativity is thus the practice of intuition and thought which we access at the source and then express in a material form the truth we thereby perceive.”
We need to learn to take what we know and let that connect with that part of our mind which has collective knowledge.
He discusses the archetype of metaphysical reality which must be taped in order to build what truly suits human needs.  This sounds very much to me like Plato’s theory of ideal forms.
The following are essential features a building needs to take into account: the cave.  It is the archetypical image of shelter.  It opens to the earth which is the mother of all.  Our first home as humans.  It may represent the womb.  This is the main reason that glass houses have been dismal failures. The clearing which presents a view of sky and light.  The garden which connects us with the fruit of the earth and the divine creator.  It is interesting that the Bible describes the Divinity as a gardner.
Modern architecture is hostile to gardens.  But I must add that the Romans were masters at cultivation of gardens.  In fact gardens and house design were one.  The professional gardener and architect worked together to design structures.
The last is water.  Its movement and sounds evoke the very essence of life.
Corollary to these are the four elements: earth, air, water and fire.  These need to be set in balance in order for the whole to be appreciated.
He makes the point that there needs to be a hierarchy.  This means that air ducts which may be very important serve say heating needs but do not meet the human need for insight to the meaning of life.
The material used to build must be selected with care and used appropriately.  Each material has a connection to our psyche.  The material used must have meaning to the overall feeling that the building wishes to project.
Rhythmical use of arithmetic and geometry in a building allows us to transcend the structure and take delight in its ideal form.
The pleasing play of golden ratios, the spiral of sunflower and its interplay with the Fibonacci numbers, the mystery of numbers allows us to see deeper into our own human intellect and enjoy more fully the world around on different levels of perception.
Mathematics and geometry help to show common bonds between music, nature and body design.  When we employ geometry, mathematics, arithmetic, the cave, clearing, water, garden in architecture, the relation between apparently divergent aspects of nature become more clear and the mystery of life more awesome and pleasurable.
A symbol is a synthesis, a representation of some aspect of thought on life that embodies a complex of associations in such a way that awareness is concentrated upon the particular force or function it represents.

608. Houses and Society in Pompeii and Herculaneum by Andrew Wallace-Hadrill- Summary

608.  Houses and Society in Pompeii and Herculaneum by Andrew Wallace-Hadrill.
I enjoyed this book so much.  The author gives so much needed insight on how to interpret house a person may see in Pompeii or Herculaneum.  But he goes so much further.  The author makes one realize that the often repeated comments about housing amongst the Romans are false and at best misleading.  It is false that Roman elite had nothing to do with commerce.  It is false that there was any form of zoning in an ancient Roman city.  Then at the end uses this to inform us that we have much of value to learn from the Romans.  It is not inconceivable that some aspects of Roman town design should be incorporated into our own.
In Roman houses there was only a vague distinction between that part of the house which was public and what was private.  There was no specific area for children.  Columns had a functional purpose but also set off area in a grand way for public use.  Seats were provided outside for clients who were waiting.  Doors of a Roman house were only closed during a period of mourning.  He makes it clear that social and business activity was intense, open to all and that people of various classes passed on the streets.  Romans routinely conducted business from their bedrooms.  Evidence for this comes from literature.
Houses in Rome reflect patterns present in Pompeii but not necessarily universal.  (This makes sense to me for various climates would dictate certain changes dictated by climate.
The sacred rooms in temples and the grand public rooms in reception areas for government use were adapted to private houses to highlight the importance of the person living there and highlight the importance of the room itself.  The elite used these to distinguish themselves fro the commoner.
Pinocotheca are/were public painting galleries located in sacred architecture.  Private houses imitated these and consequently these were meant to connect the owner with political power because it bestowed status.  Since the houses of the nobles were public in many ways, it makes sense that the two were mingled.  This also explains why doors were open as this allowed someone walking by to see the interior of the house and gaze at the gardens and rich decorations.  It displayed the importance of the owner but also allowed the commoner to be part of the total package.
Greek houses were exclusive and very private.  In fact privacy even extended to members of the house hold.  There special rooms for men and for women.  Such things were unheard of in a Roman house. Roman houses were open and inclusive.  Romans did not distinguish between work space from leisure space.  In the morning there was negotium, afternoon was otium.  The time of day determined private and public activity.
The atrium was later reduced in size and the reception room was around the peristylium.  This made the houses of the elite and anyone who received guests more accessible.

Houses were often subdivided and rented out.  This habit may not always be obvious now in the excavations, since wooden walls were used to divide the areas.  Vesuvius burnt these up. 
Population figures range now from 6,700 to 6,900 people in Pompeii.  The commonly quoted figure of 20,000 is almost assuredly incorrect.  Part of this is due to new methods used to understand how space in houses was used.  In addition it now known that a fair part of Pompeii had gardens, vineyards  within the city; for the most part evenly distributed. 
Where did Romans sleep?  Beds?  Mattresses?  No one knows for sure.  Niches suvive in rooms which indicate that a bed was located there.
Much diversity in shape and size of Roman houses.
A mistake that has been made in the past is to use the modern western house as a means to understand the patterns found at Pompeii.  This had led to misunderstandings concerning Roman use.  The presence of multiple doors indicates multiple uses.  Insulae on the scale of those at Ostia are not what are found in Pompeii.  There are insulae at Pompeii but much different from those at Ostia.
Large houses meant the possibility of a wide range of use.  Even exterior stairs are not a conclusive indication of how the house was used at that time.
Men and women slept together but there is little physical evidence for it.  The beds which have been found are twin size.  It may be that two beds were simply pushed together to form one large bed.  This is done by the hotel I stay in in Rome.
It is not known where children slept.  It may be that various seasons determined where the bedroom was.
It is interesting to note that the entrance to a house possesses an official nature but that to a shop is very open. 
Roman elite may have had large villas in the country but they also maintained a house in town.  The source of their power required this.  Patterns of Roman culture required that the elite in order to maintain their position had to connect with commoners on a consistent and intense basis.  Their connection with traders, rental of property, farms and their political ambitions formed a nexus.
Large houses with shops on the periphery goes back for centuries.  Scipio’s house which was behind the temple of Castor and Pollux in the Roman Forum had a butcher’s shop beside it.  There apparently no zoning in Roman towns/cities.  In fact the elite liked these house near political activity, commerce.  The bustle of city life was all about them.
An atrium with a narrow fauces goes back to the archaic period.  It helps to accentuate the grandeur of entrance.
Houses on the Sacra Via in the Roman Forum had shops in the front.  Part of the reason Wallace-Hadrill points this out is to show that just because a large house had shops in front doe not mean that the house has been sold to someone of lower status or that it has been debased as was once assumed.
Insula and domus are legal terms used to describe ownership, these are not architectural terms.

Roman elite did not distance themselves from commerce as used to be thought.
Shops three broad types:
1.  Shops with a wide opening:  retail and retail/production
2.  Horticulture: viticulture, floriculture and truck gardens
3.  ‘Industrial’:  bakers, fullers, dyers, metalworkers, lamp makers
The average size for a horticulture spot is 138 square meters.
At what point is a materfamilas spinning and weaving not domestic but manufacturing?  This is due to the fact that so little distinction existed between public and private as far as space is concerned.  Remember that private/ public was determined by time of day.
Sometimes house were adapted for other uses.  For example the impluvium could be and was converted into a basin for a fuller’s shop.
Economic activity was combined with reception activity.
The closer a house is to the main road, the more likely it is to have shops and commercial space.
We have much to learn from this system:  it avoids our pitfall of a gap between the rich and poor.  In antiquity these groups crossed paths frequently.
Luxury is difficult to define.  It is to a degree relative.  A society which has rapid diffusion of luxury items is highly mobile.  The spread of luxury from the late Republic on was astonishing. 
Some houses achieved elegance via floors, others from the murals and paints used to create them.  Some paint are very, very expensive.  Some paints are much cheaper.  Elegance and quality of art could be achieved with either BUT more expensive pigments allowed an elite to be separate from a commoner.
Some room are not painted because of the use they had.  Consequently it is a mistake to make assumptions about a room just because there are no decorations.  Some rooms he identifies as collegium- meeting areas.
The progressive spread of decoration reveals the rapid spread to the lower classes.  It may be that lower classes borrowing decorations from the upper classes forced the upper classes to increase the richness in their decorations, using more and more rare colors, greater elaboration of the art work itself and more and more rare marbles.
Houses in town borrowed themes and design from fabulous villas in the countryside.  This indicates that the common citizen visited these places too as they would that aristocrat’s house in town.  The openness of aristocrat’s houses promoted this.  Based on the decorations found in housing of the masses, it appears that these too received visitors, not just the rich.
From the late republic on and increasing thereafter, prosperity grew.  The Pax Roman was not a sham!  Everyone benefited.
All of the above generated a social and cultural revolution which apparently spread throughout the Empire.  Much more work needs to be done in this area.
This whole book makes me wonder how much Augustus and later emperors realized that the revolution was caused by their own actions.
The luxury evident in Pompeii is the language which ordinary people used to lay claim to being Roman. 
One of the surest signs of Romanization is the presence of hellenistic style in art.  It reveals the desire on the part of commoners to display portraits of themselves in a style similar to the elite.  Also the acquisition of art which reflect this style would set them off as sophisticated.  I am also reminded of that Roman inclination to combine different styles of art in order to make the piece be more expressive.  This too would have appealed to commoners.
Massive social contrasts are apparent in the gulf between the most magnificent mansion and the humblest tabernae or cenacula.  Yet the gulf is constantly bridged by contiguity and mutual dependence.  The Romans would have found Gated Communities a contradiction, incongruent and counterproductive.  Food for thought.
Classes were separated by social rituals not by physical environment.
The above is based on the Tabelae Herculanenses found in three houses in Herculaneum.  These houses faced the forum of Herculaneum, yet to be excavated.  These involve the legal affairs of:
L. Cominus Primus
Petronia Justa
L. Venidius Ennychus
These are documents which used wax tablets to record the information.  Petronia’s case involved her status, Cominus involved a property dispute and Venidius also involved a dispute about status.  These cases are complex but the most important aspect is that these people and those who were on the opposing sides lined up support from a wide range of social status.  To such a degree that it was clear that it was difficult to know who was someone of status and who was not.  This in document form reflects which is found in situ in archeological evidence- society was mobile, fluctuating and intermingled.