Civil Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
i cult to posit. h e drachma was devalued considerably during the course of the
4th cent BC, and the devaluation of modern currencies during the course of the
20th cent has been beyond belief. However the question can be rolled up some-
what. At the beginning of the 20th century the ancient drachma was worth much
less than the pound sterling. At the end of the 20th century the ancient drachma
was worth more than the pound sterling. Accordingly at an interim period the
purchasing power of the two currencies was comparable. h is was the case at a
period within living memory immediately at er the 2nd World War, when £1 st.
was a good day's wage for a good day's work and a pay packet of £7-£10 St. per
week was very acceptable (cf the architects' salary on various 5th-4th cent BC
monumental building projects of 1 dr
per diem
). h e sums mentioned in drachma
in the following remarks, accordingly, can be thought of as in pounds sterling of
the mid 20th century.
A monumental ashlar building project of the 5th-4th cent BC might vary in
total value from e.g. ca 150,000 dr (the Temple of Asklepios at Epidauros) to
ca 3,000,000 dr for the Parthenon at Athens (cf Müller-Wiener, p. 38). Construc-
tion and ancilliary works (e.g. quarrying, transport and the supply of miscellaneous
materials) were divided up into something like, say 50-100 job lots and held out
to tender by the commissioners, the individual contracts being worth say a few
hundred drachme to a few thousand drachme. h us the building commissioners
retained executive control of the project throughout (or hoped so to do!) and did
not become dependent on the calibre of a single contractor. (At any time there were
probably something like 20 or so independent contractors at work on the site.)
h ese contracts were taken up variously by superior crat smen discharging the
work mainly by their own labour or by entrepreneurs (contractors) running some
sort of a business and discharging the work through their employees. In either case
the commissioner required the contractor to provide everything necessary for car-
rying out his contract. h is picture was that which obtained notably in contracts for
setting and i nishing ashlar masonry. However as indicated such work depended
not only on tools of trade etc., but what might be called site installations,
viz
block
and tackle clean lit ing devices together with scaf olding of various descriptions.
h e lively question is who was responsible for supplying this equipment. h e
project commissioner or the contractor? h e epigraphic records do not resolve
this question in so many words, but they give some indications.
In the i rst place it is unlikely that small contractors, working more or less as
individual building tradesmen, would carry a stock of capital equipment; however
the entrepreneur-contractor well might. h us it could seem that some contractors,
at least, would depend on these installations being available on site. Secondly the
epigraphic records on occasion include items specifying the supply and bringing
on to site of lit ing tackle (pulleys) and scaf olding (e.g. at the Temple of Asklepios
Evidence
in build-
ing con-
tracts
