What do you think?
Rate this book
Witness to Ancient History
A Monument to Dynasty and Death: The Story of Rome's Colosseum and the Emperors Who Built It
Early one morning in 80 CE, the Colosseum roared to life with the deafening cheers of tens of thousands of spectators as the emperor, Titus, inaugurated the new amphitheater with one hundred days of bloody spectacles. These games were much anticipated, for the new amphitheater had been under construction for a decade. Home to spectacles involving exotic beasts, elaborate executions of criminals, gladiatorial combats, and even--when flooded--small-scale naval battles, the building itself was also a marvel. Rising to a height of approximately 15 stories and occupying an area of 6 acres--more than four times the size of a modern football field--the Colosseum was the largest of all amphitheaters in the Roman Empire.
In A Monument to Dynasty and Death, Nathan T. Elkins tells the story of the Colosseum's construction under Vespasian, its dedication under Titus, and further enhancements added under Domitian. The Colosseum, Elkins argues, was far more than a lavish entertainment venue: it was an ideologically charged monument to the new dynasty, its aspirations, and its achievements.
A Monument to Dynasty and Death takes readers on a behind-the-scenes tour of the Colosseum from the subterranean tunnels, where elevators and cages transported gladiators and animals to the blood-soaked arena floor, to the imperial viewing box, to the amphitheater's decoration and amenities, such as fountains and an awning to shade spectators. Trained as an archaeologist, an art historian, and a historian of ancient Rome, Elkins deploys an interdisciplinary approach that draws on contemporary historical texts, inscriptions, archaeology, and visual evidence to convey the layered ideological messages communicated by the Colosseum. This engaging book is an excellent resource for classes on Roman art, architecture, history, civilization, and sport and spectacle.
In A Monument to Dynasty and Death, Nathan T. Elkins tells the story of the Colosseum's construction under Vespasian, its dedication under Titus, and further enhancements added under Domitian. The Colosseum, Elkins argues, was far more than a lavish entertainment venue: it was an ideologically charged monument to the new dynasty, its aspirations, and its achievements.
A Monument to Dynasty and Death takes readers on a behind-the-scenes tour of the Colosseum from the subterranean tunnels, where elevators and cages transported gladiators and animals to the blood-soaked arena floor, to the imperial viewing box, to the amphitheater's decoration and amenities, such as fountains and an awning to shade spectators. Trained as an archaeologist, an art historian, and a historian of ancient Rome, Elkins deploys an interdisciplinary approach that draws on contemporary historical texts, inscriptions, archaeology, and visual evidence to convey the layered ideological messages communicated by the Colosseum. This engaging book is an excellent resource for classes on Roman art, architecture, history, civilization, and sport and spectacle.
184 pages, Paperback
Published September 3, 2019
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
May 24, 2020
It’s not hard to see in a ruin in the middle of Rome a model of contemporary sports arenas, where hordes crowd into an entertainment space to soak up a spectacle, a sense of a community and food and drink of dubious merit. Nathan Elkins, of course, does not fall into the trap of reducing the Colosseum to a modern stadium, but he does show convincingly its importance in the reconstruction and restoration of stability to Rome in the latter third of the first century CE. It was at this time that Vespasian and his sons sought to re-establish dynastic rule in the wake of Nero and the civil war, even though they had no links to the Julio-Claudian dynasty.
Elkins build his case around three aspects of the Colosseum. First, that it was deeply of the City and in its construction the Flavians addressed aspects of the critique of the late Julio-Claudian rule – Caligula and Nero especially – that were seen to have offended against the legitimate political and spatial order of the city. In large part this is about the ‘restoration’ of a legitimate socio-spatial order.
Second, he demonstrates how the arena is part of a much bigger cluster of buildings that individually and collectively assert the Flavians as the legitimate heirs to the Julio-Claudian line even though there is no dynastic connection. Here there are many claims to aesthetic and design features that are shown as sustaining the Flavian/Julio-Claudian association. In part this is through the timing of aspects of the post civil war state building as well as iconography and the imagineering of a link.
Third there is the evidence from archaeology and from popular discourse. At this point he draws on links and overlaps with the aesthetic aspects of the claim making. The distinction here is that he asserts that much of the iconography – coins, sculpture and so forth – was state building by homage of the supporting classes. This is the most intriguing aspect of the case, that despite Domitian’s fall from grace as the last of Vespasian’s sons to be emperor, the Roman elite also built them up – perhaps as a quest for stability in the wake of the civil war and the year of the four emperors.
Elkins therefore shows how the Colosseum and the games it provided for was important in re-establishing the stability of the Roman state, but also how its use continued to sustain the Flavians. Crucially, he does so not only through the archaeological evidence but also the social history of the games – focusing on the 100 days of games that inaugurated the arena and marked Vespasian’s deification.
This, then, is a rich and layered text locating the Colosseum both in Roman statecraft and history but also in Roman social history as a site to help sustain the state and its socio-cultural world. The problem is that Elkins is working with very restricted sources for his social history, meaning that he builds his case of sparse evidence with a tendency to repeat cases and examples (he has only a few verified or highly plausible instances to work with). When taking account of this alongside the reliance on the archaeological evidence the case becomes, at times, a bit like a technical report, although that is likely to be largely unavoidable. All in all that makes it well worth a look.
Elkins build his case around three aspects of the Colosseum. First, that it was deeply of the City and in its construction the Flavians addressed aspects of the critique of the late Julio-Claudian rule – Caligula and Nero especially – that were seen to have offended against the legitimate political and spatial order of the city. In large part this is about the ‘restoration’ of a legitimate socio-spatial order.
Second, he demonstrates how the arena is part of a much bigger cluster of buildings that individually and collectively assert the Flavians as the legitimate heirs to the Julio-Claudian line even though there is no dynastic connection. Here there are many claims to aesthetic and design features that are shown as sustaining the Flavian/Julio-Claudian association. In part this is through the timing of aspects of the post civil war state building as well as iconography and the imagineering of a link.
Third there is the evidence from archaeology and from popular discourse. At this point he draws on links and overlaps with the aesthetic aspects of the claim making. The distinction here is that he asserts that much of the iconography – coins, sculpture and so forth – was state building by homage of the supporting classes. This is the most intriguing aspect of the case, that despite Domitian’s fall from grace as the last of Vespasian’s sons to be emperor, the Roman elite also built them up – perhaps as a quest for stability in the wake of the civil war and the year of the four emperors.
Elkins therefore shows how the Colosseum and the games it provided for was important in re-establishing the stability of the Roman state, but also how its use continued to sustain the Flavians. Crucially, he does so not only through the archaeological evidence but also the social history of the games – focusing on the 100 days of games that inaugurated the arena and marked Vespasian’s deification.
This, then, is a rich and layered text locating the Colosseum both in Roman statecraft and history but also in Roman social history as a site to help sustain the state and its socio-cultural world. The problem is that Elkins is working with very restricted sources for his social history, meaning that he builds his case of sparse evidence with a tendency to repeat cases and examples (he has only a few verified or highly plausible instances to work with). When taking account of this alongside the reliance on the archaeological evidence the case becomes, at times, a bit like a technical report, although that is likely to be largely unavoidable. All in all that makes it well worth a look.
July 11, 2021
This book seemed learned, but I mostly found it dull: Elkins focuses heavily on architectural details. Nevertheless I did learn something about the goal of the Colosseum and how it functioned.
It was built during the reigns of Titus and Vespasian, on territory that had been used for Nero's palace. Their goal was partially to erase the memory of Nero, but also to showcase the glory of the Flavian dynasty. In addition, by placing statutes of Augustus and Claudius in the area (and even building a temple to the latter) the Flavian emperors sought to associate themselves with those revered emperors of the past, much as today's politicians might seek to claim the mantle of Reagan or Roosevelt.
I also learned about what happened at the Colosseum: although it is most infamous for the brutal punishments meted out to convicted criminals there (usually at midday while less bloodthirsty viewers were at lunch), most of the morning was devoted to animal-related spectacles, and afternoons were devoted to gladiator fights (which rarely involved fatalities, because gladiators were expensive to train and a dead gladiator was a waste of someone's money). As the Roman Empire grew poorer in later centuries, the spectacles became less and less spectacular.
It was built during the reigns of Titus and Vespasian, on territory that had been used for Nero's palace. Their goal was partially to erase the memory of Nero, but also to showcase the glory of the Flavian dynasty. In addition, by placing statutes of Augustus and Claudius in the area (and even building a temple to the latter) the Flavian emperors sought to associate themselves with those revered emperors of the past, much as today's politicians might seek to claim the mantle of Reagan or Roosevelt.
I also learned about what happened at the Colosseum: although it is most infamous for the brutal punishments meted out to convicted criminals there (usually at midday while less bloodthirsty viewers were at lunch), most of the morning was devoted to animal-related spectacles, and afternoons were devoted to gladiator fights (which rarely involved fatalities, because gladiators were expensive to train and a dead gladiator was a waste of someone's money). As the Roman Empire grew poorer in later centuries, the spectacles became less and less spectacular.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews