Edit- After reading most of the comments the general consensus is listed below:
1. The unique composite matrix of the concrete used gives it a self-healing property. When cracks form in the concrete, it will naturally seal them.
2. The Pantheon was a very significant structure which led to meticulous maintenance and restorations
3. The Romans didn’t have modern engineering. So they didn’t know exactly how strong they’d have to build the Pantheon to make it last. Their solution was to overbuild the hell out of it.
4. Survivorship bias. There were thousands of buildings constructed by the Romans but very few remain which are the ones we marvel at.
​
In: 564
The Romans built *lots* of buildings. Some of those were important to them, so they repaired them when they needed it. Buildings like the Pantheon (literally “temple of all gods”) and the Coliseum were maintained regularly. Other buildings were not, but we don’t see those today, because they wore out and were demolished for materials to build other stuff.
The Romans made really good concrete, and that helped, but the biggest thing is the regular maintenance. We could probably keep a building in pretty good shape for thousands of years if we wanted to. I would imagine the US Capitol and the White House will be in pretty good shape 2000 years from now, if the US still uses them as important government buildings. Other buildings, like any random house, will not be in such good shape.
Latest Answers