New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Meet the 1,900-year-old latrine helping explain how Roman concrete grew stronger with age

An ancient sample shows calcite threading through this material’s cracks and pores, offering possible lessons for making modern concrete last longer

A man in a blue shirt stands in an ancient Roman communal latrine.

A researcher examines the concrete wall of a communal latrine at Hadrian’s Villa in Tivoli, Italy. Because the site was never restored, its concrete offered scientists a rare, largely undisturbed record of how the material changed after it was poured.

Paulo J. M. Monteiro/U.C. Berkeley

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Twenty-seven kilometers east of Rome sit the remains of a communal latrine whose concrete has endured for nearly 2,000 years. It has outlasted the empire that poured it, centuries of weathering and even Italy’s third straight failure to qualify for the World Cup.

It’s an impressive run for a bathroom—especially a communal one.

Now this humble latrine, part of the sprawling second-century-C.E. site of Emperor Hadrian’s Villa in Tivoli, is helping scientists chip away at one of engineering’s favorite mysteries: why some ancient Roman concrete has endured for millennia. A study published this week in Science Advances offers the clearest picture yet of how the material continued to change—and strengthen—long after it was poured.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Researchers have long credited Roman concrete’s remarkable durability to an ingenious bit of ancient chemistry. Builders mixed lime with volcanic ash, setting off mineral reactions that persisted as the concrete aged. “You can kind of think of it as the Romans using volcanoes to improve their concrete, where we use high temperature cement kilns instead,” says Maria Juenger, who studies cement and concrete materials at the University of Texas at Austin and was not involved in the research.

In 2023 researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and elsewhere proposed that the bright white chunks scattered throughout Roman concrete—known as lime clasts and long dismissed as evidence of incomplete mixing—could help explain the material’s self-healing properties. When cracks form, water dissolves calcium-rich material from the clasts, and this material then recrystallizes as calcium carbonate, sealing the fracture.

Studying that chemistry in ancient concrete requires a sample that nobody has patched or restored along the way—a rare commodity at ruins tended by generations of conservators.

The researchers had one particular advantage.

“Nobody restores a latrine,” says Paulo J. M. Monteiro, a civil engineer at the University of California, Berkeley, and senior author of the new study. “So the material sat undisturbed for 19 centuries, quietly running an experiment no one alive could start.”

Monteiro and his colleagues, led by Xiaohong Zhu of Beijing University of Technology, used high-resolution x-ray imaging, electron microscopy and chemical analyses to map the carbonate minerals inside the ancient concrete at scales down to tens of nanometers. The process by which concrete gains this material over time is called carbonation: carbon dioxide from the air seeps into concrete and reacts with calcium-rich compounds, leaving behind calcite, a hard crystalline mineral. The team’s scans revealed calcite woven through the ancient material, filling its pores and binding its components together.

A microscopic scan and two blue three-dimensional reconstructions of an ancient Roman concrete fragment show a tangled, porous calcite network about 20 microns across.

An x-ray scan (left) and three-dimensional reconstructions (center and right) show the internal structure of an ancient Roman concrete fragment, just 20 microns across. The weblike network is predominantly composed of calcite.

Cropped from Fig. 6D in ”Mineralized Carbonates Contribute to the Millennial Durability of Roman Concrete,” by Xiaohong Zhu et al., in Science Advances, Vol. 12, No. 28. Published online July 8, 2026 (CC BY 4.0)

“Calcite had been suspected as an important binding phase in inland Roman concrete before,” Monteiro says. “What is new is that we can now see how it binds.”

The study, in effect, hands carbonates a promotion.

“It strengthens the idea that carbonates are more dynamic in these systems and play a fundamental role, not a marginal one,” says Admir Masic, an M.I.T. materials scientist and senior author of the 2023 lime clast study.

Whether those insights can improve modern concrete is less straightforward.

“The elephant in the room is steel,” Juenger says. Unlike ancient Roman concrete, most modern concrete is reinforced with steel bars. Fresh concrete is alkaline enough to shield the metal from rust, but carbonation gradually lowers its pH and weakens that protection. “The same reaction that quietly strengthened Roman concrete is a slow threat to ours,” Monteiro says.

At the same time, engineers are increasingly interested in controlled carbonation, which can lock carbon dioxide into mineral form—no small thing for an industry in which the manufacture of its key ingredient, cement, accounts for around 8 percent of global carbon emissions. The new paper’s authors caution against expecting quick climate wins from a reaction that took centuries at Hadrian’s Villa. “Modern engineers therefore face a delicate balancing act between durability and sustainability,” Monteiro says. “We hope our techniques can help optimize that balance.”

Back in Tivoli, the latrine’s long-running experiment continues.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe