About ancient ruins- missing blocks and stone?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Newai
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Blocks
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the reasons for the missing blocks and stones in ancient ruins, exploring the historical practices of scavenging and repurposing building materials. It touches on various contexts, including archaeological observations and historical practices in Europe.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Historical

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that missing walls of marble and stone in ancient ruins were largely scavenged for use in new buildings or ground up for lime or cement.
  • Another participant notes that some well-preserved sites may not have been worth scavenging due to their distance from settlements or later habitation by nomadic groups.
  • A participant reflects on the typicality of scavenging as a way of life in historical contexts, indicating that abandoned buildings were often repurposed quickly.
  • One contribution highlights that the value of finished dressed building stone made scavenging a common practice, especially when nearby ruins contained usable materials.
  • Another participant describes how ruins in cities were often inhabited until they collapsed, leading to makeshift living arrangements, drawing parallels to modern refugee camps.
  • A historical perspective is provided regarding the dissolution of monasteries in 16th century England, where landowners were encouraged to reuse building materials to prevent reoccupation.
  • It is mentioned that the Colosseum in Rome was repurposed for building churches, and later, the nobility's use of the same stone led to a declaration of its sanctity by the church.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the reasons for the missing materials, with some agreeing on the practice of scavenging while others provide differing historical contexts and implications. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the primary reasons for the absence of materials in various locations.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific historical practices and regional differences in the treatment of ruins, indicating that the discussion is influenced by local conditions and historical events. There are assumptions about the motivations behind scavenging that are not fully explored.

Newai
Messages
33
Reaction score
1
Do I have this right?

When looking at images of ancient ruins, such as at http://www.mccullagh.org/photo/1ds-4/roman-city-ruins-dougga, I was left wondering where the debris has gone to. What I gather from reading various articles is that these missing walls of marble and stone were largely scavenged. So, people carted away the fallen walls to make their own buildings, or ground them up for lime or cement? Is this the main reason why ancient ruins are so empty?
 
Science news on Phys.org
Yes,
That site is amazingly well preserved, probably too far from the nearest settlement to be worth moving the stone, or the area was later inhabitted by nomads who didn't need it.

In europe any building that was abandoned got turned into barns, field walls and lime within a generation. Often the only thing that is left is a filled in ditch where the foundations were.
 
Within a generation? Wow. I take it that scavenging was a very typical way of life back then.

This had actually been a nagging thought for years. Finally got around to asking. Thank you.
 
Depends where you are.
Finished dressed building stone is a very expensive commodity, if you need a new house and there is a building in the next field with lots of of blocks just waiting...

Often in cities the ruins were lived in until the roof collapsed, then divided up into shacks with lean-to and temporary sheets, just like a modern refugee camp or shanty town. Roofs, especially stone vaulted roofs, are difficult to repair if civilisation has just collapsed.

There is also often a political factor, when the monasteries were dissolved in 16C england the land owners were 'encouraged' to reuse the building materials in order to prevent them being reoccupied in the future. A lot of castles suffered the same fate after the civil war.

In Rome the colliseum was used to build most of Romes early churches, then when the nobility started to use the same stone for their villas the church decided that it was a holy site because of christian matyrs and stopped the practice.
 

Similar threads

Seaport 2.5 Miles Above Sea Level(?)
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
10K