Hubbry Logo
CryptoporticusCryptoporticusMain
Open search
Cryptoporticus
Community hub
Cryptoporticus
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Cryptoporticus
Cryptoporticus
Cryptoporticus
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Cryptoporticus of Emperor Nero at Domus Transitoria, Palatine Hill

In Ancient Roman architecture a cryptoporticus (from Latin crypta and porticus) is a covered corridor or passageway.[1] The usual English is "cryptoportico". The cryptoportico is a semi-subterranean gallery whose vaulting supports portico structures aboveground and which is lit from openings at the tops of its arches.

On sloping sites the open side of a cryptoporticus is often partially at ground level and supports a structure such as a forum or Roman villa, in which case it served as basis villae. It is often vaulted and lit by openings in the vault. In the letters of Pliny the Younger,[2] the term is used as a synonym of crypt. The shade and semi-excavated site of a cryptoportico provided cool and moderated temperatures useful for storage of perishables, while it offered a level and slightly raised podium for the superstructure.

Examples

[edit]
The cryptoporticus of Arles
Cryptoportico in the Roman forum at Reims, built in the third century AD
Cryptoporticus (Aosta)

Coimbra

[edit]

The cryptoporticus of Coimbra, the old Roman city of Aeminium, was built to create an artificial platform over which the city's forum could be built. Later, the Bishop's Palace (still standing today as Machado de Castro National Museum) was built using the platform created by the structure thus preserving it in perfect condition.

Arles

[edit]

The cryptoporticus of Arles, dating from the 1st century BC was built as foundation for the forum, which has since been replaced by the Chapel of the Jesuit College and the city hall. Three double, parallel tunnels arranged in the form of a U are supported by fifty piers. Masons' marks on the stonework indicate that it was built by Greeks, probably from Marseille. Similar structures in Narbonne, Reims, and Bavay were used as granaries. The cryptoporticus at Arles is, however, too damp for prolonged storage and may have served as a barracks for public slaves. The cryptoporticus of Arles is listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site, together with other Roman buildings of the city, as part of the Arles, Roman and Romanesque Monuments group.

Reims

[edit]

The cryptoporticus of Reims, formerly enclosing three sides of the forum, is of Gallo-Roman origin and was probably built during the 3rd century. Today, only its Eastern part remains, but this is unusually well preserved for a Gallo-Roman structure.

Other places

[edit]

Other well-known examples include the cryptoporticus of Hadrian's Villa and that of the House of the Cryptoporticus in Pompeii. A well-preserved cryptoporticus is also located at the Papal Summer Residence in Castel Gandolfo, Italy. In Rome, a cryptoporticus is located in the Catacomb of Priscilla, a remnant from a large Roman villa.

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Cryptoporticus

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A cryptoporticus (from Latin crypto- meaning "hidden" and porticus meaning "") is a semi-subterranean, vaulted gallery or covered passageway in , typically constructed with barrel vaults and small openings for light and ventilation, serving as structural support for overlying buildings on uneven terrain while providing cool, shaded spaces for circulation, storage, or private access. Emerging in the late around the BCE, cryptoporticus became a hallmark of Imperial-era luxury villas and public complexes, as described by as enclosed walkways regulating air and light to distinguish them from open-air porticos. These features often formed U-shaped layouts in forums for foundational leveling and utility, or linear designs in elite residences to separate leisure areas from service zones, reflecting the Roman elite's emulation of Hellenistic grandeur in private architecture. Notable examples include the Cryptoporticus of Arles in , built circa 30–20 BCE under as a foundational support for the city's forum, featuring three interconnected vaulted galleries up to 90 meters long and designated a since 1981. In Pompeii, the House of the Cryptoporticus (Regio I, Insula VI.2) exemplifies domestic use, with its covered corridor dating to the CE providing shaded leisure spaces amid Second Style wall paintings. The well-preserved Cryptoporticus of , constructed in the 3rd century CE around the Gallo-Roman forum of , highlights later provincial adaptations for storage and reinforcement. Larger imperial instances appear in at Tivoli and the Palatine palaces in , underscoring the cryptoporticus's role in facilitating discreet movement and environmental control in monumental settings.

Definition and Terminology

Etymology

The term cryptoporticus is a compound Latin word formed from , denoting a hidden or underground vault or passage, and porticus, referring to a covered walkway, , or . This etymology reflects the structure's essential character as a concealed , often semi-subterranean or enclosed to provide shaded circulation within Roman estates. The first attestation of the specific term appears in Roman literature during the 1st century CE, notably in the letters of , who employs it to describe enclosed walkways in his villas at Tuscum and that regulate light and airflow. The prefix element crypta derives from the Greek kryptḗ (κρυπτή), meaning a hidden or secret place, underscoring the Hellenistic borrowings in Roman architectural vocabulary amid the cultural exchanges of the late and early . Earlier Greek precedents for the concept include references to kryptòs perípātos (κρυπτὸς περίπατος), a hidden walkway, attested as early as the 3rd century BCE in Callixenus of , as cited by . Although Marcus Pollio, in his treatise (c. 30–15 BCE), does not use the compound term cryptoporticus, he describes analogous concealed porticos and vaults (cryptae) in suburban villas designed for protection from weather and enhanced privacy. Terminological variations occur in epigraphic evidence from Roman provinces, where crypta alone frequently denotes similar hidden galleries or arcades, as seen in inscriptions related to public and private structures in Italy and beyond. Later authors, such as in the 5th century CE, continue to employ cryptoporticus, preserving its specialized usage amid evolving provincial adaptations.

Architectural Definition

A cryptoporticus is a covered corridor or passageway in , typically semi-subterranean or partially embedded into a hillside, featuring a vaulted and one or more sides equipped with narrow slits, windows, or arches to admit light and air while maintaining enclosure. This structure is integrated into larger architectural complexes, such as villas or fortifications, serving as a transitional space that connects different levels or areas. The term derives from the Latin crypta (meaning hidden or underground) and porticus (meaning or covered walkway). Key distinguishing traits of the cryptoporticus include its partial burial, which facilitates natural temperature regulation by shielding occupants from extreme heat, cold, and direct sunlight, while the openings ensure ventilation and illumination without full exposure. These corridors are often planned in L-shaped or rectangular configurations to follow the or layout of the site, often spanning 20–150 meters in length and measuring 3–6 meters in width to accommodate traffic or small processions. Unlike an open , which consists of exposed colonnades providing shade but no , or a full , which is a completely underground chamber lacking ventilation slits, the cryptoporticus strikes a balance between seclusion, protection, and environmental control. Variations in cryptoporticus design include single-level passages versus multi-level arrangements, where upper levels might support terraces or porticos above, and adaptations for sloped terrains that allow the structure to level out uneven ground while creating habitable spaces below. These forms could be fully vaulted for or partially open on one side, depending on the site's needs, but always prioritizing the core function of moderated climate and circulation.

Historical Context

Origins in Pre-Roman Architecture

The concept of the cryptoporticus drew early influences from Greek architectural practices in the 6th to 4th centuries BCE, where stoas—long colonnaded walkways—provided sheltered circulation within sanctuaries. These structures, often open on one side but roofed for protection from the elements, facilitated processions and gatherings in sacred spaces. At the Sanctuary of Apollo in , multiple stoas were erected during the 5th century BCE as porticos enclosing the , allowing pilgrims to navigate the terraced site while viewing votive offerings and temples. Etruscan funerary from the 7th to 4th centuries BCE featured extensive rock-cut passages and galleries in , such as tumuli and necropolises with dromoi—extended approach corridors leading to burial chambers—often carved into or . The Regolini Galassi Tomb at , dating to circa 650 BCE, includes a rectangular chamber (approximately 24 feet by 4 feet 3 inches) accessed via an antechamber corridor over 31 feet long, with corbelled roofing. Rock-cut at included multi-level galleries with loculi for inhumations. In the Hellenistic , vaulted corridors emerged in around the BCE, adapting Greek principles to more enclosed, subterranean forms for practical and ceremonial needs, influencing later Roman designs. At Pergamon's , a healing center founded under the Attalid dynasty in the 2nd century BCE, a 70-meter-long vaulted conduit linked the main to treatment areas, facilitating patient processions and isolation for therapeutic rituals while blending shelter with seclusion. Among Italic cultures, pre-Roman adaptations of subterranean techniques appear in defensive contexts of the 4th to 3rd centuries BCE. Archaeological surveys of Samnite sites reveal enclosures amid rugged terrain, reflecting early experimentation with buried structures for utility. A key early Roman example is the Sanctuary of Hercules Victor at Tivoli, where a vaulted (28 feet wide) pierces the northern terrace, providing covered circulation beneath the temple platform in the late 2nd century BCE (120–82 BCE).

Development During the Roman Empire

During the Republican era, spanning the 2nd and 1st centuries BCE, the cryptoporticus began its initial integration into Roman villas as a variation of the more common open porticus, drawing from Hellenistic architectural influences to enhance circulation and shaded walkways in domestic settings. Early examples appeared in late Republican villas near the Bay of , where semi-covered galleries supported terraced layouts on sloping terrains, marking a transitional phase from public colonnades to private luxury features. Textual references, though sparse, align with descriptions by ancient authors like , who later elaborated on such structures in villa contexts, suggesting their roots in Republican experimentation. The Imperial period, from the BCE to the CE, saw the cryptoporticus evolve into a standardized element of Roman architecture, particularly under ' reign, when it became integral to culture and urban planning as a covered corridor for climate regulation and spatial organization. Construction peaked during the reigns of emperors like in the CE, with vaulted designs incorporating light wells and air vents to create cool, enclosed passages up to several hundred meters long, as evidenced in villas. provided key contemporary accounts in his Epistulae (2.17, 5.6, 9.36), defining the cryptoporticus as an enclosed walkway distinct from open porticos, emphasizing its role in luxurious domestic environments. As Roman conquests expanded the , the cryptoporticus proliferated in provinces through the 1st to 3rd centuries CE, with adaptations to local terrains influencing its form and placement. In , it was commonly employed in urban centers like and from the CE onward, often built into hillsides for structural support and cool storage, reflecting Roman engineering's response to the region's varied and . Similarly, in , structures such as the cryptoporticus at Valeria served as vaulted passages in forums and villas, tailored to Mediterranean slopes and integrated into provincial urban layouts by the 2nd century CE. Following the 3rd century CE, the use of cryptoporticus declined amid broader economic instability, the Crisis of the Third Century, and barbarian invasions, which shifted priorities toward defensive fortifications over luxurious villa expansions. The term and feature became rare in textual and archaeological records after , with no longer serving as a hallmark of elite . Last major examples appeared in fortified structures during the late Empire, underscoring the transition to more utilitarian designs.

Architectural Features

Design and Layout

Cryptoporticus structures typically consisted of longitudinal corridors running parallel to building facades, often semi-subterranean or at ground level, to facilitate circulation while maintaining enclosure. These corridors were commonly vaulted with barrel vaults for , though cross vaults appeared in more complex configurations to distribute loads effectively. In luxury villas, such as Villa A at , these passages measured around 30 meters in length, 4 meters in width, and 4 meters in height, forming enclosed walkways that contrasted with open porticos. Integration with surrounding architecture emphasized seamless connectivity, particularly with peristyles and terraces, to enhance spatial flow in villa complexes. For instance, in the at , a cryptoporticus ran adjacent to the peristylium garden's 280-meter-long colonnaded porticus, providing covered access while framing views of landscaped areas. Similarly, at Villa Arianna, a cryptoporticus linked gardens to porticos, opening onto colonnaded spaces for a cohesive layout. Engineering principles addressed terrain challenges through slope adaptation, often employing stepped foundations to level upper structures on inclined sites. The Settefinestre villa in exemplifies this, where cryptoporticuses elevated the main storey on a hillside peak, creating terraced platforms that unified the building with the landscape. Lighting was incorporated via windows or embrasures positioned high in the walls to admit air and daylight while minimizing moisture accumulation, as described in Pliny the Younger's accounts of regulated environmental control. In Villa Arianna, conical and funnel-shaped openings further optimized ventilation without compromising enclosure. Scale varied significantly, from modest extensions of about 50 meters in private villas to expansive networks exceeding 1 kilometer in imperial complexes like , where over 30 buildings were linked by underground passages. Aesthetic considerations aligned cryptoporticus with symmetry, positioning them to offer axial views from interiors toward gardens or horizons, as seen in the parallel arrangements at Villa A, which unified decorative schemes across connected spaces.

Construction Materials and Techniques

Cryptoportici were primarily constructed using opus caementicium, the Roman concrete composed of , , and aggregates such as crushed stone or fragments, particularly for their characteristic barrel vaults that provided structural support and enclosure. This concrete was often faced with opus reticulatum, a network of small, pyramid-shaped blocks set diagonally into the core to create a net-like pattern for aesthetic and bonding purposes, or with in later imperial examples to enhance durability and alignment. Walls typically employed local stones like or , which were readily available and cut into blocks for load-bearing foundations and retaining structures, minimizing transportation costs while adapting to site-specific geology. Construction techniques emphasized precision in semi-buried placement, beginning with excavation into hillsides or level terrains to create recessed galleries, often supported by robust retaining walls of coursed stone to prevent soil collapse and ensure stability. Vaults were formed using temporary wooden formwork or centering, upon which layers of opus caementicium were poured in successive horizontal courses, allowing the material to cure progressively without excessive pressure on the supports. Waterproofing was achieved through the inherent hydraulic properties of pozzolana mortar, a volcanic ash additive that enabled the concrete to set underwater or in damp conditions, often applied as a final rendering to protect against moisture ingress in subterranean environments. Regional variations reflected local resources and engineering adaptations; in Hispania, Iberian granite was frequently used for walls and facings due to its abundance and compressive strength, as seen in provincial forums and villas. In Gaul, Gallic limestone provided a softer yet workable alternative for similar structures, allowing for intricate carving while maintaining structural integrity in temperate climates. These choices contributed to durability, particularly seismic resistance, facilitated by the flexible layering of opus caementicium—alternating mortar and aggregate courses that absorbed shocks without brittle failure, a technique evident in surviving examples from earthquake-prone regions.

Functions and Significance

Practical and Domestic Uses

Cryptoporticus served essential roles in regulation within Roman villas, functioning as covered corridors that provided shade and shelter from intense Mediterranean and occasional rains, thereby enhancing occupant comfort in regions characterized by hot, dry summers and mild winters. Their semi-subterranean or vaulted construction allowed for through regulated airflow and light, creating consistently cool environments suitable for year-round use. In terms of circulation and access, these structures acted as private pathways linking different wings of a , enabling discreet movement between residential, service, and utility areas without traversing public spaces. Socially, cryptoporticus provided leisurely promenades for villa owners and guests, promoting relaxation and conversation in a serene, controlled atmosphere.

Defensive and Symbolic Roles

Symbolically, the cryptoporticus represented elite status and architectural ingenuity in villa design, embodying Roman mastery over the and . By excavating and vaulting underground spaces to support upper terraces or porticos, owners demonstrated technical prowess and , transforming challenging into controlled, environments. Such features symbolized civilization's triumph over , with the cool, shaded galleries evoking a harmonious blend of human engineering and natural elements. Associations with underworld motifs appear in literary and artistic contexts, where the subterranean nature of cryptoportici evoked chthonic realms and rebirth symbolism, as seen in serpent imagery linked to Roman religious . In elite residences, these passages underscored themes of hidden power and transition, mirroring narratives in Virgilian poetry of descent and renewal. Culturally, cryptoportici linked to mystery cults, particularly Dionysian rites, as evidenced in the near Pompeii, where the structure provided foundational support for the villa containing initiation spaces adorned with frescoes depicting ritual scenes of ecstasy and transformation. These underground galleries fostered secretive ceremonies, aligning with the esoteric practices of imported Eastern cults. In imperial contexts, they served propagandistic purposes, portraying emperors as omnipresent protectors; Nero's cryptoporticus, connecting the to palaces, enabled unseen traversal of the city, reinforcing the ruler's divine vigilance and control. Similarly, Domitian's cryptoporticus at allowed private imperial processions, symbolizing safeguarded authority amid potential threats. In the colony of Augusta Praetoria (modern ), founded in 25 BCE, the forum's cryptoporticus provided structural support while leveling terrain for the complex.

Notable Examples

In the

In the , cryptoporticus structures are prominent in elite Roman villas, illustrating the evolution from Republican-era designs to more complex Imperial layouts that emphasized , circulation, and environmental control. These features, often vaulted corridors supporting elevated terraces, facilitated sheltered movement and storage while integrating with the villa's architectural hierarchy. A key Republican example is the at Pompeii, constructed in the early 2nd century BCE and remodeled around 80–70 BCE. The villa's cryptoporticus functions as a covered corridor supporting an embankment, providing private access to servile areas such as the kitchen and bakery, and serving as storage space with blind arcades. This structure, part of a larger complex spanning approximately 16,000 square feet with over 70 rooms, was preserved intact by the eruption of in 79 CE. Excavations of the villa began in 1909 under Amedeo Maiuri and continued through the 1920s and 1930s, building on the broader Pompeii digs initiated in the ; these efforts uncovered the cryptoporticus's role in linking the residential pars urbana to agricultural zones. Unique aspects include its integration with the villa's panoramic terrace and proximity to renowned Dionysian frescoes in adjacent rooms, highlighting artistic and functional cohesion in late Republican elite residences. Transitioning to the Imperial period, at Tivoli represents a pinnacle of cryptoporticus sophistication, built between 118 and 134 CE as Emperor Hadrian's expansive retreat covering over 120 hectares. The site's cryptoporticus forms an extensive underground network spanning nearly 5 kilometers, connecting pavilions such as the Small and Great Thermae baths through vaulted passages that include multi-level elements for structural support and mobility. These corridors, constructed with and featuring light-regulating apertures, enabled discreet circulation across the villa's diverse architectural zones influenced by Greek and Egyptian styles. Archaeological investigations trace back to the , with initial explorations by Cardinal Pietro Francesco d'Este and systematic 19th-century work, augmented by modern digital surveys using since the early to map phases and connections. This network exemplifies the Republican-to-Imperial shift, transforming simpler corridors into integral systems for leisure and administration in imperial complexes. Together, these sites underscore the cryptoporticus's role in adapting Hellenistic precedents to Italian topography, prioritizing shaded privacy in elite settings from the late Republic onward.

In Gaul and Hispania

In the Roman province of , cryptoporticus structures demonstrated practical adaptations to local urban needs, often supporting forums on uneven terrain while incorporating regional materials. A prominent example is the cryptoporticus in Arles, constructed around 25-10 BCE during the reign of as foundational support for the city's . This U-shaped subterranean gallery, measuring 8 meters wide with sides of 90 meters and 60 meters, featured stone arches dividing the space and remnants of ancient columns, providing stability for the overlying public square that included shops, a marketplace, and religious buildings. Built beneath what is now the town hall, it utilized local for its vaults, reflecting Gallic construction practices influenced by Italian prototypes. Further north in (ancient ), a cryptoporticus dating to the 1st-2nd centuries CE encircled the forum on three sides, completed by the 3rd century CE. Comprising two parallel passages 60 meters long and a connecting gallery 100 meters long, it employed barrel vaults likely constructed with , a material common in northern for its durability in damp conditions. The structure served dual purposes as a foundation for aboveground porticos and shops, while its interior offered shaded storage space for market goods, protecting perishables from summer heat. This design integrated seamlessly with the forum's commercial functions, showcasing how cryptoporticus in extended beyond elite villas to civic . In the Iberian province of , cryptoporticus examples highlighted adaptations to hilly landscapes, often leveling sites for forums or villas using local stone. The cryptoporticus of Aeminium (modern , ), built in the 1st or 2nd century CE, formed a two-story underground gallery to counteract the natural slope of the hill, creating an artificial platform for the overlying forum . Constructed with regional dolostone for its arched corridors, it supported administrative and religious buildings while providing cool storage areas, possibly for . This integration with the urban layout, including proximity to aqueducts channeling to nearby , exemplified provincial innovations on models, emphasizing functionality in rugged terrain during the 2nd-3rd centuries CE.

In Other Regions

In the eastern provinces of the , cryptoporticus structures facilitated urban connectivity and commerce, often linking elevated terraces to lower commercial zones near harbors. At in modern-day , a prominent example from the late 1st to early 2nd century CE underlies the terrace of the Temple within the State Agora complex. This elongated, vaulted corridor, measuring approximately 154 meters in length, featured integrated shops and was designed with openings for and ventilation, enabling sheltered passage between the forum and harbor areas to support trade activities in the city's thriving port economy. Further east and in , similar features adapted to local contexts emphasized both domestic luxury and defensive utility. In , , a 2nd-century CE cryptoporticus associated with a courtyard is renowned for its floor, depicting combat scenes between retiarii and secutores, which decorated the covered walkway of an elite residence or public annex. This structure provided shaded circulation and possibly storage, aligning with Roman provincial practices for climate control and privacy. During the Severan era (c. 193–211 CE), Leptis Magna's expanded fortifications incorporated gallery-like covered passages within the city walls, enhancing defensive mobility and protection from coastal weather while echoing core Roman functions of secure internal access. Post-Roman adaptations of the persisted in Byzantine territories, repurposing Roman infrastructure for enduring urban needs. In , , a late Roman cryptoporticus was transformed during the Byzantine period (c. 4th–15th centuries CE) into a major integral to the city's , its vaulted design ideal for containing and channeling water supplies beneath growing settlements. Such modifications highlight the feature's versatility in late antique and medieval contexts, maintaining roles in and defense within eastern fortifications. Non-Roman parallels to cryptoporticus-like elements appear in pre-Roman Celtic oppida of late (c. 3rd–1st centuries BCE), where storage pits supported fortified communities, though these lacked the monumental vaulting and multifunctional integration of Roman designs. Sites like the in featured underground storage pits for grain and goods, serving defensive hoarding needs in settlements prior to Roman expansion, thus representing indigenous European precedents rather than direct influences.

References

  1. https://www.showcaves.com/english/explain/Subterranea/Cryptoporticus.html
  2. https://www.academia.edu/1213968/Porticus_and_cryptoporticus_in_Roman_luxury_villas_architectural_design_and_cultural_implications
  3. https://www.arles-guide.com/cryptoporticus
  4. https://research.ncl.ac.uk/expandedinteriors/projectinformation/houseofthecryptoporticuspompeii/
  5. https://www.historyhit.com/locations/the-cryptoporticus/
  6. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299877747_Porticus_and_cryptoporticus_in_luxury_villa_architecture
  7. https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Vitruvius/6*.html
  8. https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0059:entry%3Dcrypta
  9. https://webhelper.brown.edu/joukowsky/courses/greekpast/4743.html
  10. https://tsubook.files.wordpress.com/2020/09/etruscan-and-early-roman-architecture.pdf
  11. https://www.turkeytraveltours.com/destination/pergamon
  12. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/roman-villa-in-the-mediterranean-basin/roman-villas-on-or-near-the-bay-of-naples-and-maritime-villas/F6B5890E878757C8DA911C6F095F5C00
  13. https://www.academia.edu/124039903/Gallia_Aquitania_and_Gallia_Lugdunensis
  14. https://www.archaeospain.com/valeriaarchaeology.html
  15. https://human.libretexts.org/Courses/Harrisburg_Area_Community_College/History_101%253A_World_History_I_%28Malick_and_Gurian%29/07%253A_The_Roman_World_from_753_BCE_to_500_BCE/7.10%253A_The_Third-Century_Crisis_and_Late_Antiquity
  16. https://www.academia.edu/44855097/Urban_defences_in_late_Roman_Gaul_civic_monuments_or_state_installations
  17. https://archive.org/download/romanarchitectur0000rivo/romanarchitectur0000rivo.pdf
  18. https://traj.openlibhums.org/article/3882/galley/5499/download/
  19. https://www.romeguidetour.it/rome-stories-blog/villa-adriana-cryptoportici-hadrian-villa-underground-architectures/
  20. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352409X17307745
  21. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/innovative-vaulting-in-the-architecture-of-the-roman-empire/barrel-vaults-of-brick/580E6F303051893CA0525C6EB28E95E1
  22. http://www.romanaqueducts.info/picturedictionary/pd_onderwerpen/constructionmaterials.htm
  23. https://www.academia.edu/3448806/_Preliminary_Report_on_the_Excavation_of_a_Cryptoporticus_and_Market_Building_at_Alexandria_Troas_
  24. http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/166153/1/caharvey_1.pdf
  25. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232960637_Pozzolanic_Cementum_of_the_Ancient_Constructions_in_Campi_Flegrei_Area
  26. https://ilamdocs.org/blob/532-1-3550-4-10-20170809_1.pdf?fieldname=attachment&classname=Document&record=3611
  27. https://oyc.yale.edu/history-art/hsar-252/lecture-21
  28. https://www.iitk.ac.in/nicee/wcee/article/11_548.PDF
  29. https://smarthistory.org/the-villa/
  30. https://dokumen.pub/roman-villas-in-central-italy-a-social-and-economic-history-900416037x-9789004160378.html
  31. https://www.ostia-antica.org/fulltext/orr/orr-1972.pdf
  32. https://chs.harvard.edu/chapter/chapter-3-rome-and-the-reinvention-of-paradise/
  33. https://www.britannica.com/technology/cryptoporticus
  34. https://www.walksinsiderome.com/blog/demystifying-domitian-romes-most-misunderstood-emperor/
  35. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzqjVrHNmRI
  36. https://www.pompei.it/excavations/villa-mysteri.htm
  37. https://seepompeii.com/en/luoghi/the-villa-of-the-mysteries-of-pompeii/
  38. https://archaeology.org/issues/march-april-2014/features/pompeii-saving-the-villa-of-the-mysteries/
  39. https://www.academia.edu/2644000/Giorgio_VERDIANI_Graziano_CORSARO_Cryptoporticus_a_hidden_system_under_the_skin_of_the_ancient_town
  40. https://archiv.chnt.at/cryptoporticus-a-hidden-system-under-the-skin-of-the-ancient-town/
  41. https://www.francethisway.com/places/arles-cryptoporticoes.php
  42. https://www.showcaves.com/english/fr/subterranea/ReimsCryptoporticus.html
  43. https://www.centerofportugal.com/poi/the-cryptoportico-of-aeminium
  44. https://www.visionpubl.com/en/cities/ephesus/square-temple-domitian/
  45. https://turkisharchaeonews.net/object/domitian-square-ephesus
  46. https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/63744
  47. https://www.thebyzantinelegacy.com/thessaloniki
  48. https://www.penn.museum/sites/expedition/the-celts-and-urbanization/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.