Skip to main content
10 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jan 12, 2014 at 3:10 history edited Pieter Geerkens
edited tags
Oct 13, 2013 at 21:26 answer added BrianB timeline score: -3
Aug 22, 2013 at 6:10 comment added Lennart Regebro Some reasoning on this: Since Augustus thought that a limit of 70 feet was necessary, that must reasonably have meant that they were building to 80 feet or more before that, and with 85 feet there is plenty of space to build ten floors if you don't have the requirement of having a lot of headroom. So there could have been some Insula that reached 10 stories, yes, but the height seems to have quickly been limited to lower, probably because some of the higher ones collapsed.
Aug 22, 2013 at 4:23 answer added Pieter Geerkens timeline score: 11
Aug 21, 2013 at 9:11 history tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackHistory/status/370110795793072128
Aug 21, 2013 at 6:54 history edited Aarão Xisto Salazar CC BY-SA 3.0
added 95 characters in body; added 81 characters in body; added 24 characters in body
Aug 21, 2013 at 6:49 history edited Aarão Xisto Salazar CC BY-SA 3.0
added 1 characters in body; added 3 characters in body
Aug 21, 2013 at 5:22 comment added jwenting the divergence may be explainable by the age of sources for the statements. It's conceivable (even likely) that as materials science improved, the Romans learned to build taller. Geographical differences also play a part. As to how high they could build, during my classical literature and history classes we read Roman sources (long forgotten by me which) that mentioned 5-7 floor high buildings made of concrete, but again that's a moment in time and space.
Aug 21, 2013 at 3:59 comment added Samuel Russell This question would be improved by citing here, on stackexchange the sources the encyclopaedia uses for those two claims.
Aug 20, 2013 at 23:38 history asked Aarão Xisto Salazar CC BY-SA 3.0