Timgad vs Pikillacta

For this week’s blog post I will be looking to compare two incredible examples of colonial architecture, and evaluate them on their use of space and place, as well as the cultural and social impacts of the architecture on the area. The two places I will be looking at are the Roman colonial center of Timgad and the Wari military center of Pikillacta. As each of these centers were built on the frontiers of their respective empires, a strong analysis should be able to tell us how they are similar, and in what ways they differ.

To begin, the Roman colonial center if Timgad is located on the Northern Slopes of the Aures Mountains, in modern day Algeria. Timgad was known for being a military settlement at the time of its founding by Trajan. Timgad is now important today because it is mostly recognized for the grid pattern planning characterized by large square blocks with 90 degree intersections. This is significant because when I was looking at the area on Google Maps, it appears extremely planned which is extremely different from how Rome was organized, which was mostly organic. Timgad itself consists of 144 blocks, evenly divided into four main areas, but the Forum and the theatre take up 11 and 6 blocks respectively. This area looks fascinating as when developed it looks like it was created to manipulate the landscape. I believe they did this for a few reasons. One, with greater organization it would control the flow of people and be more mathematically precise in organization. Also, the grid pattern is important because the emperor would live in the middle which shows how this space represents a hierarchal structure. As you move out from the middle, the class of people declines. By seeing how much room these places occupied, it shows the importance that size and space played in this area. In addition, with precise grid like divisions, it shows me the importance that organization and structure played into the social and political values of the area. This is vital socially, because as a person in a town you want to maintain the appearance of who you are and keep the cultural dynamics of the area constant. Finally, another observation I made when looking at Google Maps is that the walls in Timgad seemed smaller than the ones in Pikillacta. This suggests to me that the area had walls as a mechanism for defense, but due to the smaller walls, it was not the only purpose. Also the smaller walls allow for a more open concept which is a different use of space.

 

After viewing the important features that Timgad had to offer, I looked at the Wari military center of Pikillacta. Pikillacta is located in the Lucre Basin of Peru at the east end of the valley of Cuzco. When Pikillacta was developed it was designed to appear different from above as it was seen from the ground. From an aerial view Pikillacta looks as if it is built on a flat landscape, but in reality from a ground view is built on a slope with nearly a 100 meter elevation difference in certain parts. When looking at the form of the structures, Pikillacta places a large emphasis on the grid pattern as well, and uses rectangles and squares to determine how they allocate space. Pikillacta is often described as bellicose and regimented. From the very large walls dividing the area into a grid pattern, it is easy to see that this area was a military outpost. Based on my observations again, it looks as if it was built on a hierarchy of space, having only specific ways to get to the middle where the elite lived. I am starting to see a need in military structure to build the mass tight and in control grids, for organization but also strategic defense. The terrain is also very uneven which would make for better defense. I believe that this use of space and architectural design is used for intimidation, defense, power, and attractive organization. Finally, due to its transparent structure, you are forced to walk through it in certain ways which could lead to one thinking that is was also designed for administrative purposes.

As you can see from the comparison of the two places, they are similar in the respect that they are both military centers, they both have a grid pattern that shows a hierarchal use of space, they both have walls for defense, and they both manipulate the land in which they are upon to create a symmetric land use that is appealing yet strategic socially, politically, and from a military aspect. The differences between the two are that in Pikillacta the walls are very large suggesting that this was a major military base and that the use of space is more condense and tight in formation, while in Timgad the walls are smaller which allows for the space to seem more open in concept. Therefore, I have found after another exploration on Google Maps the similarities and differences that exist between Timgad and Pikillacta.