What do you think?
Rate this book
Roman Pompeii: Space and Society
In this fully revised and updated edition of Roman Pompeii, Dr. Laurence looks at the latest archaeological and literary evidence relating to the city of Pompeii from the viewpoint of architect, geographer and social scientist. Enhancing our general understanding of the Roman world, this new edition includes new chapters that reveal how the young learnt the culture of the city and to investigate the role of property development and real estate in Pompeii's growth. Showing how Pompeii has undergone considerable urban development, Dr. Laurence emphasizes the relationship between the fabric of the city and the society that produced it. Local activities are located in both time and space and Pompeii's cultural identity is defined. This book is invaluable for students and scholars in the fields of archaeology and ancient history, as well as being rewarding reading for the many people who visit Pompeii.
172 pages, Paperback
First published October 24, 1994
31 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
June 22, 2018
This book is over 20 years old now and that is clearly reflected in the writing. I usually love everything to do with Pompeii ever since I had a skeleton dumped in front of me during a 1st year archaeology tutorial. However, I found this book frustrating. If I had read Wallace-Hadrill as a reference one more time I might have screamed. Sure, the guy is great, publishes widely and makes wonderful documentaries, but this publication seemed to rely heavily on his thoughts and the research felt less original because of it.
I found some of the methodology frustrating. It is easy to use statistics to say what you want. In this instance, some of the streets were too long to compare as desired so they were chopped up into smaller sections to make it easier for correlation with less long streets....way to skew your results to fit your agenda. For all the things created by the author to illustrate and compare the random or non-random distribution of various building types and architectural features, a basic chi-squared analysis would have spat out the required data in a far more objective manner.
I have a problem when archaeologists or historians say things like 'those requiring formality and distraction from the street wanted to live in this street within easy reach of the forum' p101. I'm sorry, but even with all the spatial evidence and analysis in the world, how do we know what people nearly 2000 years ago wanted or felt? We don't. We can infer the possibility of intent based on evidence, but that is all in my opinion.
The author also has that terrible academic habit of dressing things up so they sound smart, but aren't really saying much at all. For instance, in the final chapter they state, 'in the end we must say that the Roman city consisted of the social actions of its inhabitants and visitors in space and time.' Translation...people moved through the city about their daily business. Insightful.
So this publication fell rather flat for me primarily because I could see the potential for it to say so much more.
I found some of the methodology frustrating. It is easy to use statistics to say what you want. In this instance, some of the streets were too long to compare as desired so they were chopped up into smaller sections to make it easier for correlation with less long streets....way to skew your results to fit your agenda. For all the things created by the author to illustrate and compare the random or non-random distribution of various building types and architectural features, a basic chi-squared analysis would have spat out the required data in a far more objective manner.
I have a problem when archaeologists or historians say things like 'those requiring formality and distraction from the street wanted to live in this street within easy reach of the forum' p101. I'm sorry, but even with all the spatial evidence and analysis in the world, how do we know what people nearly 2000 years ago wanted or felt? We don't. We can infer the possibility of intent based on evidence, but that is all in my opinion.
The author also has that terrible academic habit of dressing things up so they sound smart, but aren't really saying much at all. For instance, in the final chapter they state, 'in the end we must say that the Roman city consisted of the social actions of its inhabitants and visitors in space and time.' Translation...people moved through the city about their daily business. Insightful.
So this publication fell rather flat for me primarily because I could see the potential for it to say so much more.
February 23, 2019
Very glad I read this. Really helpful in thinking about how the physical layout of Pompeii relates to the social use of the space.
October 3, 2015
An Important Book For Understanding Ancient Cities
While this book is about ancient Pompeii, the methodology it uses for understanding how the city of Pompeii functioned as a Roman urban center is groundbreaking. Her conclusions are an important addition to howl view not only Pompeii, but also Roman urban centers in the first century C. E.. Understanding how the space of the city worked and how people moved through it sheds tremendous light on what an ancient Roman City was.
While this book is about ancient Pompeii, the methodology it uses for understanding how the city of Pompeii functioned as a Roman urban center is groundbreaking. Her conclusions are an important addition to howl view not only Pompeii, but also Roman urban centers in the first century C. E.. Understanding how the space of the city worked and how people moved through it sheds tremendous light on what an ancient Roman City was.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews