As previously discussed in last week’s post about Ancient Rome, architecture
has the ability to express ideas of authority and power. This can, in turn,
function as a means to control the behavior of both residents and visitors of a
particular space. This week, I will examine two architectural sites in a
discussion of the architecture of conquest.
Thamugadi (located in Timgad, Algeria; dated100 CE) was an ancient Roman
city. Founded by the Emporer Trajan, it began as a military colony to serve as
a guard against invaders in the nearby Aures Mountains. Thamugadi began as a
perfectly square city, planned to accommodate 15, 000 residents in total.
However, in it’s first 300 years the city nearly quadrupled in size, leading to
extensions of the outer borders.
Thamugadi Source: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showth read.php?t=835906 |
The location of Thamugadi is of high importance; it sits on a high plateau north of the Aures Mountains on a crucial junction allowing the Romans to control a main mountain pass, providing access to and from the Sahara. In addition to location, structural components of the city make it an interesting military case study. Thamugadi is an exceptional example of Roman “grid structuring” in city planning. Unlike the Ancient Roman Forum, Thamugadi manipulates its landscape to create a “grid designed” city (streets intersection at right angles, etc). This type of city planning allowed for better control of traffic through the city. It also represents a very socialized and structured space in which a social hierarchy determines where one might live (the most wealthy and powerful would live in the middle of the city while the less fortunate lived on the outskirts).
Trajan's Arch in Thamugadi Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/44022 144@N05/4294968266/ |
Extensions to the original city plan meant sacrificing the fortification of the city’s outermost walls; however, even on appearance alone Thamugadi was very intimidating. High walls suggested a military presence, while Trajan’s arch (typical of Roman architecture) sat at the entry to the complex and boasted authority.
Thamugadi’s grid like structure is echoed in Pikillacta (located in Peru).
Presumably another military outpost (very little is known about Pikillacta),
many architectural techniques are used to support the likely function of the
site. High, fortified walls (up to 4 meters thick) suggest the need for
defense, while narrow alleyways (between the high walls) must have been highly
imposing and intimidating to those walking through. The ideology of Pikillacta
is very transparent (in the sense that everyone should know their role within
the structure). Like Thamugadi, a sort of social hierarchy would have played
out within Pikillacta, which would have facilitated engagements between the
Wari people. Unlike Thamugadi, Pikillacta was not designed for comfortable
living; it would likely have ben used strictly for military purposes (the rough
textured stonework further supports this).
Pikillacta Source: http://goingtomachupicchu.com/tours/south -valley-circuit-en.html |
Little is known of Pikillacta due to its lack of written records. However, through a comparison to Thamugadi, the purpose of the site can be theorized through examination of the remaining ruins. This week, I have learned more about how architecture can influence behavior in different contexts as well as how “city planning” can add considerable military strength and intimidation to a site.
Cusco
Online. “The Pikillacta Ruins.” Accessed January 29, 2013. http://www.cuscoonline.com/english/cuscossurroundings/cusco050.shtml
Encyclopedia
Britannica. “Thamugadi.” Accessed January 28, 2013. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/589953/Thamugadi
Lonely
Planet. “Timgad.” Accessed January 28, 2013. http://www.lonelyplanet.com/algeria/timgad/sights/archaeological-site/timgad
Roth,
Leland M. Understanding Architecture: Its
Elements, History, and Meaning. Colorado: Westview Press, 2007.