Form and Function of the Colosseum

Form and Function of the Colosseum

Colosseum is an example of a building in which its form and function

are inextricably linked. To prove this, let us take a look at some of

the orders, the wall-like structure and the vaults of the Colosseum as

part of its form and functions.

With reference to the Illustration Book Colour Plate 19,28,72,75,76

and 78, and Block 2 The Colosseum Figure 6.1 and 6.2, the Colosseum

evidently uses five orders: ‘Doric’, ‘Tuscan’, ‘Ionic’, ‘Corinthian’

and ‘Composite’. The function of these orders is to provide a

framework for the divisions of the whole building. A different order

is used for different levels, portraying the subtlety of the building.

Both ‘Doric’ and ‘Tuscan’ orders give an appearance of sturdiness to a

building while ‘Ionic’, ‘Corinthian’ and ‘Composite’ orders tend to

make a building appear rich and elegant.

In studying the ground plans on Plate 56(a), we can see that the

Colosseum stands up by it wall-like structures, consisting of walls

and pillars arranged in a pattern that spreads out from the centre of

the arena. As shown on Plate 29, these walls were made thick enough to

serve its function, which is to support the many tons of concrete used

in the structure and also accommodate the weight of fifty thousand

spectators of the Colosseum.

Apart from these load-bearing walls, the real strength of the

Colosseum was the vaults, which functions as to roofs to the spaces

between each radiating wall as referred to Illustration Book Colour

Plate 42 and 77. The Romans, being very experienced in constructing

vaults and domes, built vaults for the Colosseum that were remarkably

str...

... middle of paper ...

...of the most important virtue of

man. For someone who had committed crime, there is no other way of

coming out of crime except proving in the arena that he is brave. This

virtue was so significant that a criminal gladiator may be granted his

life back and may receive a crown if he ever comes back alive and

victorious, regardless of what crime he had committed. Statius is

another writer who admires the bravery, majesty and strength of a

dying animal more than having any compassion towards it at all and

Hopkins finds that bravery and victory of the aggressor matters more

to the Romans than suffering of the vanquished.

With all the related references and opinions that have been presented,

it is thus clear to us as to why the Romans, as Thomas Wiedemann says,

“did not see what went on the amphitheatre as something wicked”