[6]: 136–45  This was to accommodate both the new building material and the growing demands of urbanisation in Rome through the creation of opus reticulatum, a method more uniform and accessible to unskilled labourers.

[1]: 136–7  The need for quicker and easier techniques led to a decline in popularity allowing for the rise of brickwork as a more convenient alternative, especially after the Great Fire of 64 CE.

[3][6]: 138–9  [notes 2] The uniform shape of the stones allowed for easy assemblage which Rome used to delegate work to unpaid labour with little training to construct architecture using the facing.

[4]: 264  However, Fikret Yegül and Diane Favro do suggest they were always intended to be covered with a decorative veneer which would then be patterned and painted even replicating expensive marble.

[1]: 141–3  With Roman craftsmen developing an interest to show uncovered polychromatic colouring at the start of the Augustan period where diverse usage of building materials emerged.

[1]: 135  Such benefits allowed for opus caementicium by the first century BCE to be capitalised upon by Roman magistrates for urban development for lower costs and efficiency.

[2]: 77–82 [3] Craftsmen during the Augustan period refined their skills using opus reticulatum incorporating polychromatic colouring into their work to enhance the aesthetic appearance of facing.

[4]: 277–80 The popularity of reticulate work eventually waned during the early imperial period especially after the Great Fire of 64 CE which brought about many architectural changes.

[4]: 264 Opus reticulatum’s downfall was caused by the technique's weaknesses and the increased pressures from Rome to further streamline the construction process while maintaining their image.

[4]: 259  The technique and tuff related constructions also suffered from erosion as most stones were exposed to the elements which were liable to absorb moisture and condensation.

[2]: 88 Such issues led to the rise of opus testaeceum, a facing using brick which was seen as more effective because it fulfilled Rome's priorities of efficiency and ease or assembly.

Opus reticulatum is important in contributing to the understanding of Rome's urbanisation and their need to streamline the process of construction because of the socio-economic evolution it underwent from the third century BCE.

Vitruvius's De Architectura also provides importance to opus reticulatum by offering an opinion from a Roman architect about the facing and its reception.

[4]: 252  Vitruvius also criticises reticulate work for being easier to crack at the joints but scholars like Frank Sear tend to chalk up the comment up to his conservatism.

[2]: 77–8 [3] As Vitruvius tends to be reluctant to acknowledge architectural advancements especially regarding concrete notably trabeated structures were evolving during the Late Republic but were left unmentioned in De Architectura.

[1]: 137–8  Reticulate work can also be used for the basis of scholarly debate in particular Edmund Thomas's discussion on the date of the ‘Villa Claudia’ at Anguillara Sabazia.