This claim: “Credited as the home of the first highrise apartment buildings, Shibam has become a symbol for the rise and resilience of middle eastern culture in the desolation of the surrounding desert.” appears to be false as Roman Insula reportedly reached over 9 stories high and predate these buildings: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insula_(building)#
Over 9 stories? Your source says: "The insulae could be up to six or seven stories high, and despite height restrictions in the Imperial era, a few reached eight or nine stories"
Insulae aren't necessarily sky-scrapers, though, right? They kind of build up on a larger composite base, and are a bit more massive - and lower in general - whereas the Shibam seem to have a smaller base, but taller reach, as a whole.
"High-rise apartments flourished in classical antiquity. Ancient Roman insulae there and in other imperial cities reached 10 and more storeys. Beginning with Augustus (r. 30 BCE-14 CE), several emperors attempted to establish limits of 20–25 m for multi-storey buildings, but met with only limited success." [Reference: Gregory S. Aldrete: "Daily Life in the Roman City: Rome, Pompeii and Ostia", 2004]
Reminds me of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Gimignano or the other Italian city-states like Florence. Same apparent dynamics, too: lots of insular clans creating little fortresses for their extended families while competing economically & socially inside the density of the city, always teetering on the edge of civil war.
When Gwern expands on a comment expect a book length article with everything remotely relevant cited and leaving nothing but a wasteland for future researchers.
It would be interesting to learn how the builders decided on these specific structures. I note a few attributes:
* Banked foundations.
* Small windows at the bottom, large windows at the top.
* Tall doors at the bottom.
Specifically, how did they gauge the thickness of the walls and the structural properties of the mud? Was the planning based on a published code that took into account the expected building materials? Did they have occupancy limits?
These are single-family dwellings, for an extended definition of "family". The top floor is a lounge for men, the bottom levels are kitchen and storage, while the middle levels are sleeping quarters segregated by sex. Part of the reason for the tower construction is to help cool the structure by pulling air through it.
Also, literal survivor bias: The buildings that weren't well made simply ceased to exist, and the ones still standing today are the ones that were well built, whether by design or accident.
Too bad the Yemen, home to the oldest cities in the world, is being completely destroyed in the civil war and seeing millions of cholera infections by now.
Apparently US is involved to fix relations with Saudis after the nuclear deal with Iran.
> The United States is selling the Saudi monarchy missiles and warplanes, assisting in the coalition’s targeting selection for aerial bombings and actively providing midair refueling for Saudi and United Arab Emirates jets that conduct indiscriminate airstrikes — the leading cause of civilian casualties. Meanwhile, the Saudi coalition is starving millions of Yemenis as a grotesque tactic of war.
Growing up in the NYC area I saw many 4 to 6 story apartments, built mostly before elevators became common and practical. The upper floors were considered undesirable due to all the stairs.
Edinburgh had residential buildings up to 14 or 15 stories in the 17th century - land inside the city wall was very limited and building outside the wall was unpopular due to the threat from England.
Although due to the geology of the place you can "cheat" this by building up a hill, it's not quite the same as building a freestanding 15 storey building. There are several places I know round the Bridges that have street level entrances four floors apart.
For ancient urban dwellers, though, you’d have to weigh the inconvenience of climbing stairs against the inconvenience of walking miles in from some notional suburb. Certainly in the case of Rome, there was really no option for most people.
I don’t think the article is. However, it’s still there (there’s only one insula left), and it’s more uniformly made up of tall buildings than anywhere in Rome likely was.
From this fine article: "Credited as the home of the first highrise apartment buildings, Shibam has become a symbol for the rise and resilience of middle eastern culture in the desolation of the surrounding desert."
There were 46,600 insulae in Rome at the time Shibam was built, and only 1790 private homes.
Plus its waaay too walkable! 60% of each lot should be disposed of with parking, plus a few percent on grass that the city will fine you for not watering.
The idea that the entire building isn't built directly on the street/sidewalk. For example, many cities have rules that the first few floors can be built to the lot line, but then anything taller needs to be "set back" a number of feet. In theory, this should allow for more light to reach the street, but it often results in buildings that look like wedding cakes and waste a huge amount of space.
#/media/File:Yemeni_Civil_War.svg){kind=link}