Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Finalpaperassignment Finaldraft - Sam Mitchell
Finalpaperassignment Finaldraft - Sam Mitchell
ARCH 423
Prof. Williams
05/06/2021
The chapter on Roman theater design in Vitruvius’ “De Architectura” is among the
strictest and most detailed of all its chapters, apart from the chapter describing temples. As a
result of the specificity of the rules and requirements outlined by Vitruvius, it is difficult to find
examples of ancient Roman theaters that adhere to his design methods. The proportions and the
layout of a Roman theater are the most identifiable aspects to determine the extent to which the
building follows Vitruvian principles. In the case of the Theater of Marcellus, by analyzing
archeological remains, reviewing scholarly texts pertaining to the theater typology, and cross-
referencing buildings of the same period and style, it is possible to determine how well it adheres
to the instructions of Vitruvius. In the following text I will explain how the architect of the
Theater of Marcellus in Rome designed the theater to synthesize the initial steps written in “De
Architectura” as well as fill in the gaps of the description so the building could serve as the
The Theater of Marcellus was only the second permanent theater to be built in Rome.
Prior to the construction of the first permanent theater, the Theater of Pompey, in 55 BCE, 1
theaters in Rome could only use wood construction and were modeled after Greek theaters.
Following the construction of this theater celebrating Pompey, Emperor Julius Caesar, who was
1
Sear, "Vitruvius and Roman Theater Design", 249.
a political rival of Pompey, began the commission for what would become the Theater of
Augustus. Within that period is when the design of the theater would have been completed and
by 13 BCE the theater was fully built 2. The namesake of the theater was Augustus’ nephew who
died before the theater was completed in 23 BCE. Many years after the Theater of Marcellus was
completed, two theaters were constructed out in the provinces of Rome in modern day France.
Both the Theater of Orange and the Theater of Arles were constructed sometime in the 1st
century CE and each provide evidence of the possible configuration of the missing details of the
Theater of Marcellus.
writing on how to plan and build a Roman theater. Vitruvius describes his process by starting
with the central portion of the plan of the theater known as the orchestra. By drawing a circle
containing four equilateral and equidistant triangles with corners aligned to the perimeter of the
circle (See Figure 2). The lines and points are created to orient the different locations of the
various features of the cavea and scaenae frons to this circular datum. The royal doors (valva
regia), guest rooms (hospitalia), and triangular rotating prisms (periaktoi), whose different faces
2
Davison, “Vitruvius on the Theater in Republican Rome”, 143.
represent the various changes in setting of a play, all align with the points facing the stage. The
line bisecting the circle marks where the edge of the stage platform and the seating area within
the orchestra reserved for senators. The points of the triangles on the other side of the bisecting
the circle which forms the orchestra, and the height of the stage should be the same as the cavea.
Understanding how Vitruvius explains the plan of a Roman theater as well is essential to the
argument of this paper, as well as the lack of information on some of the more detailed aspects of
the theater.
First, we must analyze the remains of the original Theater of Marcellus and how certain
features of the plan indicate were placed as Vitruvius describes. The plan of the theater follows
specific geometric guides employed by Vitruvius starting with the orchestra. The orchestra
serves as the center of the theater both in appearance as it sits between the cavea and the scaena
as well as in that the spatial design of the plan uses the orchestra as sort of grounding point for
the proportions of certain features 3. As can be seen in Figure 3 the stage is also twice the length
3
Millette, “Space, Imagination and Vitruvius in Archaeological [Re]Construction: Reconsidering a Modus
Operandi”, 14
of the diameter of the orchestra. From here we can begin to infer that the designer began to make
The additus maximi are two hallways that extend to the right and left of the scaena out
from the sides of the orchestra. Their positioning serves as the first concrete indicator of
Vitruvian planning because the end that opens into the substructure is still intact. According to
the article, “Vitruvius and Roman Theater Design” by Frank Sear, we know that these hallways
are oriented on the side of the line bisecting the orchestra that is nearer to the cavea. This is as
prescribed by Vitruvius and can be seen in Figure 2. The details of the substructure itself are not
clearly defined by Vitruvius in his writing. We can infer that the substructure of the cavea was
planned as Vitruvius intended because the additus maximi connect the discreet spaces such as the
pathways between cunei back to the open space of the theater. Any design decisions regarding
the inner workings of this substructure would have been up to the designer’s discretion because
The interior of the theater is comprised of six cavea which were divided in such a way
that the senators and wealthy classes sat closest to the stage with the lower classes sitting further
back and higher up in the stands. The seats themselves also reflect this division of classes with
The layout of the individual cunei of the cavea also illustrate how the orchestra organizes
the features of the theater. While the cavea are mostly missing, their foundations are still intact.
The foundation for the theater is made up of a concrete ring that rests upon wooden supports to
keep it from sinking or shifting in the clay beneath. This foundation marks the diameter of the
semi-circular substructure which is around 364 feet across. “The foundation ring reaches to the
inner circumferential walkway, beyond which there are linear foundation walls up to the
orchestra. The plan view shows the types of dimension stone and concrete facings of the theatre”
(Jackson). We can infer that the manor in which the foundations of each portion of the cavea
extend out from the Orchestra is as Vitruvius intended because of the circle diagram explained
by him in chapter 6 of his 10 books on architecture with the points extending out into the
During this period in the Roman empire, the standardization of building typologies and
practices was intended to create a uniform style. By building temples, public baths, theaters and
that characteristics of other standardized theaters, such as at Arles and Orange, can provide
understanding of what the Theater of Marcellus would have looked like. Specifically, in terms of
the missing scaena and the various rooms and spaces housed behind it. Davison states that, “If
modern scholarship is correct in assuming that the Theater of Marcellus served as the model for
the theaters of Arles, Orange, and Cherchel, among others constructed during the last quarter of
the first century B.C., a plausible restoration of the Theater of Marcellus can be derived in
reverse from them” (143). This furthers the idea that the Theater of Marcellus was a sort of
template for later theaters built using Vitruvius’ books. By Davison’s logic, we can examine the
existing remains of the theaters of Arles and Orange as they are much better preserved than the
The Theater of Arles has a portion of the scaenae frons remaining. From it we can see the
placement of the valva regia and get an idea of what columns and other
stage illustrate how the instructions from Vitruvius were expanded upon
preserved Roman theaters. The structure of the cavea and scaena are
almost entirely intact, except for the columns themselves which were
most likely taken and used elsewhere. It still paints a much clearer picture Figure 5: Ground story
pathway of the substructure
of the missing features of the Theater of Marcellus than any other
remains. The area of the valva regia was comprised of paired columns that protruded from the
curved exedra that surrounds the door. Based on the height of the architraves carved into the wall
of the scaenae frons, the columns on either side of the valva regia extended higher than those of
4
Davison, “Vitruvius on the Theater in Republican Rome”, 148
the hospitalia on either side. There also remains a niche near the top of the scaenae frons above
the valva regia which housed a statue of Augustus. As the theaters of Arles and Orange are
considered twins, it is likely that such a statue was placed in Arles as well. This indicates their
ties to the Theater of Marcellus which was commissioned by Augustus and would have had
decorations honoring him as well as his nephew for which the theater was named.
As we know, the nature of the existing remains of the Theater of Marcellus makes it
difficult to determine how closely the design matches the instructions of Vitruvius. Vitruvius
himself stated that not every theater will be able to use the proportional
article, there were very few Roman theaters that applied the step-by-step
process of the laying out the plan of the theater. With this in mind, we
can infer meaning from the façade of the Theater of Marcellus and its
use of other Vitruvian principles. Vitruvius does not state any directions
Figure 6: Detail view of the
first two tiers of the on how to construct and decorate the substructure of the theater. This
substructure.
and other features of the building such as the materials, decorations, and functional elements are
still necessary. The design choices made by the architect of the Theater of Marcellus in these
unrepresented parts of the design point back to my original statement that the theater is the
The Façade that exists as part of the Palazzo Savelli still demonstrates the hierarchy of
Vitruvius’ orders. This staple of Roman architecture is adhered to by countless buildings across
the span of the empire, but in this instance, it may point to a timeline of events that help illustrate
the point that the buildings plan specifically aligns with Vitruvian principles. The theater reached
a height of over 100 feet comprised of three distinct tiers. The arcades that make up the façade of
each tier followed the ordering principles defined by Vitruvius with the Doric columns and
entablature at the base, Ionic above that, and we assume that the third would have Corinthian
columns before they were replaced. The third level is no longer there as it was destroyed during
one of its renovations over the centuries. The structure of the theater is comprised mostly of tuff
with some concrete facing in the opus reticulatem style 5. Behind the external arcade of engaged
columns there is a secondary arcade superimposed on the outer which can now be seen where the
The two most important features are the orders of the columns and the use of an arcuated
colonnade. Both are design choices that Vitruvius would have made
functional use for structures such as aqueducts. This points to the idea
Figure 7: External View of
that the substructure was intended to simply support the cavea of this substructure and other remains
from the site.
building intended for entertainment. Trabeated colonnades were reserved for buildings of
The plan of the Theater of Marcellus matches the process that Vitruvius describes for
how to construct a Roman theater and served as the manifestation of his instructions. With
written accounts of what portions of the theater looked like, scholars have pieced together
evidence to determine the most plausible configuration. The lower portions of the remains at the
5
Jackson, “Building Materials of The Theatre of Marcellus, Rome”
site of the theater demonstrate the theaters adherence to the Vitruvian method of planning a
Roman theater. There are also examples of theaters that were modeled after the Theater of
Marcellus, so a comparison of these subsequent theaters allows us to piece together the missing
details of the original, solidifying our understanding of the placement of certain features. Finally,
the features that are not described in Roman theater design by Vitruvius point towards the
intention of the designer of the theater to use Vitruvian principles. Based on these points and
supported by the evidence outlined above, one can conclude that the Theater of Marcellus, as it
stood originally in Rome, aligns with Vitruvius’ instructions and materialized his ideas into a