The archæology of Rome, Part 7

by John Henry Parker

The excavations of 1874 and 1875[170] very much astonished the people in Rome, and more especially the English visitors, who had been long accustomed to consider the area and the arena to be the same thing; they were amazed to see the whole of the area undermined with walls[171]. The walls that were first seen are for the most part brick walls of the fifth century, and the inscription[172] found there in 1814 records that they had been repaired by Lampadius, prefect, A.D. 442. This was after they had been much damaged by an earthquake. Another inscription records repairs of the arena and the podium by Basilius, prefect and consul, A.D. 508, after another earthquake. A long subterranean passage[173] at a considerable depth, leads out at the south-east end in the direction of the church of S. Clement; this passage passes under a number of square-topped arches or doorways, and has rather the appearance of having been a state entrance at the time that the level of the street was as low as that passage, that is, before the filling-up of the foss-ways, which began in the second century. On each side of this passage is a long narrow vaulted chamber parallel to it, under the corridor, and in the pavement of each of these chambers is a series of six round holes lined with hard copper or bronze, for a pivot to work in; they are somewhat worn, and in a straight line one behind the other. The most probable use for these was for a windlass or capstan to be worked in each, and by these means to drag along the vessels in the canals before mentioned, as extending down the centre of this colossal building.

It has also been mentioned that a very ancient wooden frame, calculated for the keel of a vessel to slide upon, remained on the ground in 1875, just within the passage at the south-east end of the building, as if the vessels used in the sham fights could be placed out of sight in the lofty central passage. This is said by those accustomed to dockyards to have all the appearance of a dry dock, or a cradle for vessels to stand upon[174]. We read of the vessels being divided into two nations or sides, there were probably six on each side, and each nation occupied one of the canals. It is probable that the surface between the two canals on either side of this central passage, just under the level of the arena (which was twenty-one feet above the brick floor), was flooded with two or three feet in water, but the keels of the vessels were in the canals. On either side of the passages before mentioned[175] are remains of other walls of tufa, with vertical grooves in them, as if for lifts; the brick walls, between those of tufa, have been introduced at a later period, and in these instances the grooves are not opposite each other. This shews that great alterations have been going on at different periods in these subterranean works, some of which are earlier than the existing building, and others considerably later[176]. In one place, near the south-east entrance, the two old stone walls, with the vertical grooves, remain in their original places facing each other, so that lifts might work up and down in them.

Architects had long wondered where the builders could possibly have obtained such an immense mass of materials in so short a time, it was therefore evidently natural that they should make use of anything that served their purpose. It appears that in some parts the galleries for the spectators of the old Naumachia were thus made use of as they stood, without actually rebuilding them. The great tufa blocks of the second wall of Rome were also used as old materials for the substructure of the great stone arcades; but the builders, who had to add the upper gallery, were afraid to trust the soft tufa to carry so great a weight[177], and therefore built piers of travertine about four feet wide[178]. These piers to support the upper gallery go right through the walls of all the lower galleries, from the top to the bottom of the building (as has been said on p. [12]).

The architectural details of the Colosseum are much admired by architects; the cornice-mouldings of the lower storey are good examples of the style of the latter part of the first century[179]. The supply of water for the naval fights must have been from the Aqueducts; the water was brought from the Cœlian in a shallow channel, carried upon a lofty double colonnade, or arcade[180]. It has been mentioned[181] that there are slight remains of three reservoirs to receive it, which can be traced by remains of the particular cement used only for the aqueducts[182]. The continuations of the shallow channel along the corridors can be seen in many places, and are shewn in the photographs[183].

In the upper storey of the third century, on the exterior, the corbels for the masts to rest upon, and the holes in the cornice for them to pass through, have been mentioned[184]. On the interior of this wall, now that it has been stripped of plaster, and the wooden gallery that had been built up against it has been destroyed, we see clearly how hastily it has been built of old materials[185]. In other parts it has been cased with modern brickwork, but the corbels for fastening the masts on the inside are preserved[186].

The Evidence of the Construction, and Comparison.

It is well known that the first principle of the modern science of archæology is comparison. To compare small remains of one place with more perfect remains of the same kind, and as far as may be, of the same period, in other places. By these means, what has been destroyed in one is frequently supplied by the corresponding part in another. This is remarkably the case with regard to the amphitheatres, which are very numerous; there was one to every Roman town of importance, and such large buildings have almost invariably left remains visible[187]. It appears nearly certain that the Colosseum in Rome was the earliest, and that this was the type generally followed more or less closely by the others. This was a gradual development, and not merely one original design; the magnificent front and stone corridors of the Flavian emperors, which constitute what is usually considered to be the amphitheatre, were in fact built round a theatre previously existing[188]; that the names of theatre or amphitheatre were used indifferently is implied in many instances, and is distinctly shewn by an inscription found in the Colosseum itself, and preserved on the spot, in which it is called theatrum, and not amphitheatrum[189]. The theatre, or amphitheatre, round which the corridors were built, has been shewn to have been in parts of the time of Nero[190], and other parts earlier, most probably the work of Scaurus in the time of Sylla[191]. This colossal building was finished and consecrated by Titus in the year 80[192].

Capua.

The great amphitheatre at Capua is almost of the same size as the Colosseum in Rome, and a remarkably exact copy of it; some say that it was called by the same name, but this is rather doubtful, as persons who have resided at Capua for years say they have never heard it so called; the name is not of much importance: the plan and arrangements are identical, and although the superstructure has been almost entirely destroyed, the substructures at Capua are far more perfect than in Rome; and here we have the mouth of an aqueduct perfect in these substructures, and remains of canals for water, with the very massive walls to support them, exactly as in Rome. The great drain to carry off the water also remains, but on rather a different plan; instead of being carried under a low arch at the end of the great central passage, as in Rome, the water is conveyed into a large and deep well in the centre of the building, with four small channels running into it, beside the great central opening. From this well there is a large and deep drain leading to the river. There are the same dens for wild beasts under the podium, and in the pavement the same sockets for pivots to work in, to pull up the cages, or pegmata, or lifts. The arena, instead of being a boarded floor, is of brick, carried on vaults, with numerous square apertures for the trap-doors. The central passage is vaulted at the two ends, but open in the greater part. Round each of the openings there is a deep groove, as if a wooden cover had been fitted tightly over each and made water-tight, so that the surface of the arena might be flooded for naval fights; but there is reason to believe that only rowing-boats, drawing little water, were used in this instance, and not galleys.