eli5 why ancient historical buildings haven’t been kept up? Why are buildings like the Parthenon and the Colosseum in such disrepair? Greece and Rome/Italy have existed the entire time?
In: 508
Because maintaining massive stone structures is *expensive*, and often nobody owns these buildings, and lacks the means to make the upkeep a paying proposition. When times are bad, and money scarce, people’s romantic attachment to history very quickly goes by the board.
Having plenty is a relatively new thing. Having the resources to “waste” on preservation of monuments means you’re a very wealthy and successful society. Rome from 400-1400 was anything but prosperous. The city was basically completely abandoned for 100 years starting in the mid 500’s. Seriously the city went from 1.4 million people in the year 0, to less than 20,000 by the mid 500’s. The Catholic Church went to a lot of trouble of propping the city up again in the 700’s, and it did okay through the 700’s -1100’s. But then the church moved it’s headquarters to France for a while and the city basically fell apart again. In the 1400’s the church went back to Rome and has been there ever since. But there were a lot of *centuries* there that the city was very neglected.
Some monuments have been intentionally destroyed due to war or ideological differences. The ancient city of Palmyra was destroyed by ISIS back in 2018 because of, as I understand it, the existence of the city being an icon of western ideology. The library of Alexandria fell to the same fate some 2000 years ago. And as others have pointed out the acropolis was used as a base during a war and a mortar shell hit it.
For the Colosseum (Flavian Amphitheater) and many other structures it was because the buildings were no longer necessary, and the materials used in their construction could be better used elsewhere. Many cathedrals and other public works were created using the stones of ancient buildings. If you look closely at the Colosseum, you’ll see thousands of little holes. These are from people who harvested the iron clamps the Romans used to hold bricks together.
Having plenty is a relatively new thing. Having the resources to “waste” on preservation of monuments means you’re a very wealthy and successful society. Rome from 400-1400 was anything but prosperous. The city was basically completely abandoned for 100 years starting in the mid 500’s. Seriously the city went from 1.4 million people in the year 0, to less than 20,000 by the mid 500’s. The Catholic Church went to a lot of trouble of propping the city up again in the 700’s, and it did okay through the 700’s -1100’s. But then the church moved it’s headquarters to France for a while and the city basically fell apart again. In the 1400’s the church went back to Rome and has been there ever since. But there were a lot of *centuries* there that the city was very neglected.
Some monuments have been intentionally destroyed due to war or ideological differences. The ancient city of Palmyra was destroyed by ISIS back in 2018 because of, as I understand it, the existence of the city being an icon of western ideology. The library of Alexandria fell to the same fate some 2000 years ago. And as others have pointed out the acropolis was used as a base during a war and a mortar shell hit it.
Because maintaining massive stone structures is *expensive*, and often nobody owns these buildings, and lacks the means to make the upkeep a paying proposition. When times are bad, and money scarce, people’s romantic attachment to history very quickly goes by the board.
I had the same question about concentration camps. Then I had a chance to visit Dachau during the MLK holiday as I went to Germany for a Nato conference, but due to the holiday me and my DET SGT and I had a whole day to ourselves. So we went.
Dachau, after WWII ended, was used as a refugee camp. We bombed the absolute shit out of Germany during WWII, and most of the populace was experiencing disease and famine (hence why so many camp prisoners died. The Germans literally couldn’t feed their own citizens.) So after the Marshall plan rebuilt West Germany, their primary focus was on rebuilding their military. This is in the 1960s/70s, so the big fear was the Soviet Union pouring tank divisions into West Germany. So they neglected it.
Today, the camp is a mostly recreation of what it was like. The original buildings are long gone. They’ve built reproductions, but everyone back in 1946 had bigger concerns then preserving a camp. I get it now.
So for the answer to why did the Parthenon fall into disrepair, I bet they had bigger problems to deal with.
Because maintaining massive stone structures is *expensive*, and often nobody owns these buildings, and lacks the means to make the upkeep a paying proposition. When times are bad, and money scarce, people’s romantic attachment to history very quickly goes by the board.
For the Colosseum (Flavian Amphitheater) and many other structures it was because the buildings were no longer necessary, and the materials used in their construction could be better used elsewhere. Many cathedrals and other public works were created using the stones of ancient buildings. If you look closely at the Colosseum, you’ll see thousands of little holes. These are from people who harvested the iron clamps the Romans used to hold bricks together.
For the Colosseum (Flavian Amphitheater) and many other structures it was because the buildings were no longer necessary, and the materials used in their construction could be better used elsewhere. Many cathedrals and other public works were created using the stones of ancient buildings. If you look closely at the Colosseum, you’ll see thousands of little holes. These are from people who harvested the iron clamps the Romans used to hold bricks together.
[removed]
Latest Answers