Those ancient stone arch bridges are remarkably durable, and can survive with very little maintenance. Many large stone bridges and aqueducts were built with no mortar whatsoever, and everything held together strictly through gravity. That requires quite a bit of skill with the stone cutting, though, in order for the weight to be distributed properly. And it makes them extremely costly and time-consuming to build. Wikipedia says the bridge pictured here took 30+ years to build, and that’s after the original bridge built here collapsed a few years after being built.
I don’t think there’s much upkeep cost tbh. I’d have to check but there are structures from roman times that I can assure you they weren’t maintained for around a thousand years
How do structures like that survive so long? The maintenance burden must be insane
Those ancient stone arch bridges are remarkably durable, and can survive with very little maintenance. Many large stone bridges and aqueducts were built with no mortar whatsoever, and everything held together strictly through gravity. That requires quite a bit of skill with the stone cutting, though, in order for the weight to be distributed properly. And it makes them extremely costly and time-consuming to build. Wikipedia says the bridge pictured here took 30+ years to build, and that’s after the original bridge built here collapsed a few years after being built.
The white lattice-pattern in this case seems to suggest mortar?
I don’t think there’s much upkeep cost tbh. I’d have to check but there are structures from roman times that I can assure you they weren’t maintained for around a thousand years