Civil Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
in form with early Neolithic hand modelled bricks (e.g. the hog backed form) is
obvious and it has been suggested that some later plano-convex bricks may have
been substantially hand modelled.
h e line of descent of plano-convex brick goes back to i eld stones of this form
and this demonstrates its advantages in construction. It naturally of its own accord
falls into an interlocking pattern when set together—the herring bone bond. h is
assemblage of bricks set on end and leaning obliquely one against the other can
be contained and compartmentalised by bricks laid horizontally on their l at beds.
In short they are to some degree self bonding which facilitates and speeds up their
assemblage (P. Delougaz,
Plano Convex Bricks
).
Given that both
Riemchen
and plano-convex bricks made for simplicity and
speed of construction, it is an obvious question to rationalise their predominance
during the early stage of Mesopotamian building and their abandonment and
displacement by other brick forms in later periods.
It has been proposed that the rapid urban development during the third mil-
lennium BC severely taxed building resources to keep up with the demand, so
that procedure was geared in the i rst instance to rapid construction. And this
was certainly promoted by
Riemchen
and plano-convex brick masonry (v Sauvage,
pp. 109-13).
Equally the subsequent lapse and disappearance of
Riemchen
and plano-convex
brick masonry has been put down to the fact that later development and system-
atisation of the building industry caught up with the demand, and emphasis then
shit ed to solidity and durability of brick construction, which was served by more
intricate bonding of square and rectangular bricks (Sauvage, p. 123). h is overall
idea is a reasonable one.
If
Riemchen
and plano-convex bricks be regarded as in some measure a carry
over from the Neolithic brick tradition, then speaking broadly the 2nd Millennium
BC saw in the establishment of fully developed Mesopotamian brick masonry. h is
involved the use of both rectangular bricks and square bricks, as also the increas-
ingly generalised occurrence of burnt bricks in both public and private building.
During this period brick bonding became very advanced—it was varied, intricate
and ef ective, and brick layers of the time were masters of their trade. As a norm
in one passage of masonry bricks of more than one format were utilised set both
on bed and on side and as headers and stretchers. h ese permutations and com-
binations af orded striking aspectual patterns together with the most diversii ed
breaking of joint within the structure.
It is of some interest to comment on this highly developed bonding in terms of
traditional modern brick bonding. In their fundamental outlook the two are quite
opposed—and Mesopotamian brickwork is none the worse for that. Traditional
modern bonding seeks to obtain structural strength by the utmost possible uni-
Brick
forms,
historical
develop-
ment
339, 340
347
345, 346
334-337
