I was thinking about Rome and there is one place that’s a 17th century church, on top of 14th century monastery on top of a 1st century apartment. And if you go to the Forum section it’s visibly below the surface of the current city.
For the fact that the city has been active for thousands of years, how do things end up getting buried? Does that mean the elevation of the city is higher now than it was in 0 AD?
Well, for the city of Rome in particular, a contributing factor was how total and devastating and prolonged its collapse was. It had a million people at the height of the Empire - by the end of the 5th century AD, around 20,000. Such a total population collapse led to much of the city quite literally being grown over.
In general, it’s low building standards and poor waste disposal in the past. Structures were often unstable - collapsing, being destroyed by fire, natural disaster, or demolished by rampaging soldiers.
After such events, “Get rid of the rubble” is often a low priority, and the rubble ends up partly buried by soil buildup - and then the next person who builds there can’t just toss the rubble in the street, and porting it out of the city is a LOT of trouble before pickup trucks - so they just literally build on the rubble. Then, as that happens, the sediment tends to ‘even out’ over time, thus increasing the elevation ever so slightly.
A thousand years (or two thousand, for that matter) of this can positively bury buildings - even the ones which are sturdy, simply by their neighbors being knocked down and the foundation/local elevation raised, bit by bit. Even if you never build over the structure in question, it will eventually become buried by the ground level slowly increasing around it by all of its neighbors which ARE getting demolished and rebuilt.
https://ancientromelive.org/layers-of-rome/
Yes. Also, the date system goes from 1 BC/BCE to 1 AD/CE with no 0. It’s weird, yeah.