Dear colleagues
I am an independent researcher, and seeking human and economic resources for anthropometric research of built heritage, according to my thesis and using the products developed.
Since the thesis shows a new paradigm and gets generalizable results, it should be a transversal area of concern (architecture, art history, history of science, archeology, historiography, anthropology, ...)
FR
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Francisco_Javier_Roldan-Medina
I have been interested in finding the origins of re-built ruins in Italy mainly Roman brick materials re-use.
Dear Virginia,
That is a very difficult subject. First we should know all sizes of Roman brick (which I assume there were many) by studying Roman remains or buildings. You can also make archeometry studies, but that's not my line of research.
Thank you for your response. Yes it would take some extensive surveying and measurement which I started at Bath, England.
The measure in the past was shrouded in secrecy. No construction drawings, and the texts are unclear. Science has always assumed that a system of fractional units was used. But it's true?
My research is totally anti-academic, because my premise is that the diagonal scale was also used.
I think the dual scale (diagonal-side) was universal, so any historic building can be studied. Only good survey are needed.
The module is obtained by CAD from the general plan of a building, and should be the same for every detail. Each building has its own module, which coincides or not with the official value. It can not generalize from the study of a single work. Typically the official value has been changed several times throughout history at each site. In complex areas should identify the different values used.
With the module or modules detected, you can build ruler very useful for field work.
I'm looking for other scientists who want to corroborate this premise and can provide funding. In principle, any historic field of study with many measurements is feasible.
My knowledge of classical architecture is sketchy at best. I pretty much assumed that the buildings were constructed by following the gut feeling of what looked pleasant to the eye, summed up in the Golden Mean.
Although there probably was some kind of standardization in that part of Roman architecture that did not involve expressing the glory of the empire and the power of gods and caesars. Insulae appartment blocks, aquaducts and other basic stuff.
Dear Harald,
There are many people with your vision of classical architecture. It is thought that the buildings were constructed by following the gut feeling of what looked pleasant to the eye, summed up in the Golden Mean.
This classic myth indicates the ignorance that exists about the system of proportions of classical architecture.
It was not a feeling, but projected and planned every detail by strict compliance with a geometric law, which does not use the Golden Mean.
The proportion used was the diagonal-side of a square, the root of two, √2, value 1.4142 ...
This is much more common and practical, and yet nobody name it. It is called Sacred Proportion or Silver Ratio, and his figure is the octagon. Do you know it?
Precisely I seek brave researchers to rid science of false myths about anthropometric measure, like the Golden Mean in classical architecture.
Regards
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publication