Construction on Roman Public Buildings

The Marble Stoa at Hierapolis was a representative marble portico, which was funded by a local elite family in the middle of the 1st century AD. The aim of this paper is to assess the socio-economic dimensions of this building project by a tentative reconstruction of its logistics, schedule and labour force. Pre-industrial construction techniques and the management of building materials and human resources are put into perspective by the comparison with data derived from 19th century building manuals. The
construction effort is estimated in man-hours and man-days. Based on this estimate, a model for the organization of the building site, the most probable duration of the building project and the seasonal demands for unskilled and skilled workers are elaborated. This estimate is finally translated into hypothetical building costs by drawing upon the evidence for wages and prices under the early Empire. The results of this analysis do not only add to our understanding of wider socio-economic processes, but also to a more differentiated assessment of local euergetism in Roman Asia Minor.

This paper sets out the current state of our knowledge of the construction techniques documented in the colonia Augusta Firma Astigi (Écija, Seville) in the Roman and late antiquity periods, with a brief analysis of the known precedents from protohistory.

ABSTRACT IN ENGLISH FURTHER DOWN / 

RÉSUMÉ : cette étude tente d’expliquer et de contextualiser le lien, admis depuis longtemps mais jamais véritablement prouvé jusque là, entre la construction des temples votifs en ville de Rome et l’utilisation de la catégorie de butin appelée "manubiae".

La notion même de "manubiae" y est l’objet d’une tentative de définition (laquelle a cependant été mieux précisée depuis lors grâce aux travaux récents de Michel TARPIN), reposant en partie sur l’analyse de passages du "De lege agraria" de Cicéron. Des rapprochements sont proposés avec le traitement du butin dans la Grèce archaïque, où l’équipement de l’ennemi vaincu revenait soit au vainqueur, soit aux dieux, soit à la collectivité.

L’analyse détaillée des notices de Tite-Live relatives au vœu, à la locatio et à la dédicace de temples votifs, ainsi qu’une étude prosopographique des auteurs de ces constructions, permet d’obtenir une meilleure image des compétences respectives des magistrats et du Sénat dans ce domaine. Elle ouvre également des perspectives nouvelles pour la compréhension de la politique édilitaire des grands personnages de l’État romain jusqu’à César et au delà, y compris dans le domaine des constructions profanes, associées ou non à des triomphes. Le rôle des censeurs en matière de constructions publiques, religieuses ou non, est aussi abordé dans ce cadre.

En définitive, la construction de temples votifs, marques visibles et pérennes de l’appui apporté par les dieux aux généraux vainqueurs, permettait aux membres les plus éminents de la nobilitas patricio-plébéienne de justifier leur position sociale et leur pouvoir politique. Dans ce contexte, la motivation à remporter des victoires et à faire du butin pourrait avoir joué un rôle non négligeable dans la dynamique de l’impérialisme romain sous la République.

En appendice à cette étude, quelques cas particuliers d’interprétation plus délicate sont abordés, tels que l’aqueduc de l’Anio vetus construit par M’ Curius Dentatus ou l’aedes Herculis Musarum attribué à M. Fulvius Nobilior.


ABSTRACT :  This study attempts to explain and put into context the connection between the construction of votive temples in the city of Rome and the use of the kind of booty called "manubiae". Such a connection has been acknowledged for a long time but had never really been proven since then.

An attempt is made herein to define the very idea of "manubiae" (which has since, however, been better explained thanks to recent work of Michel TARPIN), based in part on an analysis of passages of Cicero's "De lege agraria". Similarities are suggested with the treatment of booty in Ancient Greece where the conquered enemy's equipment reverted either to the conqueror, or to the gods, or to the community.

A detailed analysis of Livy's notes relating to the vow, the "locatio" and the dedication of votive temples, as well as a prosopographic study of the authors of these constructions, gives us a better picture of the respective powers of the magistrates and of the Senate in this field. It also gives us new ways of understanding the building politics of important figures of the Roman State up to Caesar and beyond, including in the field of secular monuments, whether associated with conquests or not. The role of censors in the field of public buildings, whether religious ones or not, is also covered in it.

Finally, the construction of votive temples, visible and perennial signs of the support of the gods towards the conquering generals, allowed the most eminent members of the patrician-plebeian nobility to justify both their social status and their political power. In this context, the will to be victorious and procure booty may have played a non negligible role in the dynamics of Roman imperialism under the Republic.

In the appendix, a few particular cases of more complex interpretation are discussed, such as the "Anio vetus" aquaduct built by M’ Curius Dentatus or the "aedes Herculis Musarum" attributed to M. Fulvius Nobilior.

There is a rather dense network of Roman (indicated) amphitheatres in the Eastern Adriatic seaboard which testify to the civilizational level of individual Roman cities. However, a relatively small number of these Roman cities have been archeologically researched, and among them there is an even smaller number of preserved structures that inherited these inscriptions, which directly pertains to the aforementioned Roman amphitheatres.* Therefore, this work shall only encompass those epigraphic monuments which testified to public construction
in the deep past, based on the example of Eastern Adriatic Roman
amphitheatres (inscriptiones publicae). This epigraphic material has been thematically and topographically classified according to the relevant archaeological sites. This material will also be of exceptional importance to the chronological attribution of certain amphitheatre in the Eastern Adriatic seaboard. Nevertheless, indicated amphitheatres such as those in the Roman colonies of Iader and Aequum and the legion camp Tilurium will not be considered in this work, since there is no entirely firm basis for a precise dating of the structures because they are under-researched.** According to the data available to this author, thus far no inscriptions have been found in the area of the Pola amphitheatre from the era of Roman rule that would speak
to the architectural aspect of this structure.

Introduction
1. A Slice of Material History
1.1. The religious act of the foundation of Pella-on-the-Orontes
1.2. The (re)foundation of Apamea – the royal generosity of Seleucus and Apama
1.3. Apamea: prosperity and joy of suburban life
2. The mosaic as a new historical source for the history of Apamea
Conclusions
Beyond the devastation and tragedy of human lives precipitated by the conflict in Syria, priceless representations of ancient culture and history have likewise fallen victim to a seemingly never-ending maelstrom of destruction. Ancient monuments and art have either been destroyed, damaged, or lost as chaos persists in a region that has for thousands of years seen the footprint of a parade of civilizations. (...)
The scenes tell the story of the founding of Pella/Apamea and further development of this city on the Orontes river. Three main groups of scenes can be distinguished: (1) the foundation of Pella-on-the-Orontes by the legendary Archippos, (2) the (re)foundation of the city as Apamea-on-the-Orontes (earlier Pella-on-the-Orontes) by Seleucus I Nikator and the simultaneous financial generosity of his wife, Apama, for the development of the new Seleucid colony in 300 BC, and (3) the raising of the town fortifications around monumental public buildings and an illustration of the daily life of a joyous people living in the rich Apamean agglomeration and hinterland. Features of style date the panels to the 4th century AD.

Socioeconomic archaeologists and historians are often interested in the reconstruction of conjectures of past production and consumption, as such conjectures may provide us with better insights into the structure, scale and nature of the ancient economy and inform us about levels of prosperity. In this article the author has teamed up with this school of thought, and has constructed a conjecture of public constructions in Roman Italy for the period between 225 BC and AD 425. The reconstruction of this conjecture was essentially achieved by placing many (dated) occurrences of public constructions from a large dataset by Hélène Jouffroy (Jouffroy 1986) in a chronological order. Because of some methodological improvements such a thing could be done with far greater precision and much more data than in past assessments of the data by, amongst others, Hélène Jouffroy and Richard Duncan Jones (Duncan Jones 1974;1990). In addition the author discusses and counters various possible biases in both the data and his method and presents the reader with some interpretative concepts, most notably ‘the temporality of consumption’. Though a conjectural approach from its outset is economic, the author interprets his results not solely from an economic perspective but firstly from within the socio-cultural and political context of euergetism. In his article Frits Heinrich shows that the number of new public constructions in Italy reached its zenith during Augustus’ reign, while the enjoyment of the services public buildings offered may have been greatest during the reign of Antoninus Pius. He furthermore shows, as far as public constructions are concerned, that that which is usually referred to as the ‘third century crisis’ seems to commence as early as the second half of the second century A.D.

The industry related to the art and science of building, with its emergence at the onset of the Neolithic revolution, is effectively the fixed investment of a nation. It is a main source of employment for many workers. Such activities were a focal point in the Ancient Roman building industry. The Romans were well aware of the main difference between building and other manufacturing industries, namely, that the resultant product is assembled on site where it is to be used. They developed an awareness associated with the financial, organizational, and managerial difficulties involved. The following three issues will be considered in this article: the relevance of Roman philosophy of architectural education and its influence on politicians: how free was free labour and why?: and finally, to what extent were public buildings publicly funded? These issues were addressed by considering (1) the setting for Roman architectural practice, (2) architectural education and educational architecture, (3) public works and labour force, (4) public and private funds for public buildings and (5) public administration and architects' professional ethics regarding financial matters in the building industry.