Comments: 6
SeductiveByatch [2008-01-09 02:11:40 +0000 UTC]
Those classic Roman arches, are they walkways on the second and third stories?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
SilverEagleOwl In reply to SeductiveByatch [2008-01-09 14:35:21 +0000 UTC]
I think so. In some of the other pictures you can see they weren't wide enough for much else. There were larger spaces in the upper floors where people could gather (soldiers getting their assignments, maybe, or people meeting for business, who knows?).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
SeductiveByatch In reply to SilverEagleOwl [2008-01-10 00:29:13 +0000 UTC]
So they seem to be more for patrolling? and maybe the arches for archers?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
SilverEagleOwl In reply to SeductiveByatch [2008-01-10 14:00:41 +0000 UTC]
That's my guess.... Plus arches provide better structural stability, so the Romans were able to build larger and taller buildings without the need for massive columns. London still uses some of the arched undergound sewers and aqueducts originally built by Romans.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
SeductiveByatch In reply to SilverEagleOwl [2008-01-10 20:54:06 +0000 UTC]
So do many other cities, it is so cool to have such ancient history still in use, just goes to show when you do it right , it lasts.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1