Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DrSkull" data-source="post: 4349494" data-attributes="member: 3718">I'm thinking about Roman remains I've seen, and here are a few points:The Pantheon is in near pristine condition after nearly 2000 years, but it has been in constant use.The Colosseum is still impressive, although a little worse for wear.At Pompeii, Herculaneum and Ostia, there are building walls and roads in excellent condition.I think that stone and brick buildings, left on their own, can last a very long time.&nbsp; I wouldn't be surprised at 5000 years, not too astounded at 10,000.The key is whether they are left alone or not.&nbsp; The reason that the Colosseum does not look as good as the Pantheon is that the Pantheon was made into a chuirch.&nbsp;&nbsp; It's not that the church did tons of maintenance to it, but rather they prevented locals from prying off chunks of it to make new buildings or to render the limestone into fertilizer.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DrSkull, post: 4349494, member: 3718"] I'm thinking about Roman remains I've seen, and here are a few points: The Pantheon is in near pristine condition after nearly 2000 years, but it has been in constant use. The Colosseum is still impressive, although a little worse for wear. At Pompeii, Herculaneum and Ostia, there are building walls and roads in excellent condition. I think that stone and brick buildings, left on their own, can last a very long time. I wouldn't be surprised at 5000 years, not too astounded at 10,000. The key is whether they are left alone or not. The reason that the Colosseum does not look as good as the Pantheon is that the Pantheon was made into a chuirch. It's not that the church did tons of maintenance to it, but rather they prevented locals from prying off chunks of it to make new buildings or to render the limestone into fertilizer. [/QUOTE]

Verification