Book Review
Frank Sear
Roman Theatres: An Architectural Study
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006, xxxix + 465 pp., 25 tables, 451 plans, 34 figures, 144 plates. 7 maps, £ 226.00 / $399.00
ISBN: 978-0-19-814469-4
PDF version
The ancient theater played a fundamental role in the Roman cultural-historical landscape. Yet in spite of the many technical studies that have focused on architectural design tenets, clear links between architectural and cultural meaning have remained relatively elusive. Frank Sear’s book, however, represents a significant step in bridging the gap between built form and social realities. In this light, it is a welcome addition to the research literature. Not since Margarete Bieber’s publication on The History of the Greek and Roman Theater (Princeton, 1939) has there been such an important work on the subject. Even Paola Ciancio and Giuseppina Pisani Sartorio’s three-volume Teatri greci e romani (Rome, 1994), with an essay by Sear, does not offer such a broad discussion of the subject. Sear has clearly spent considerable time assembling the components of his book and has in turn generated a research tool that can best be described as the most important book on the Roman theater to date.
The book is organized into two main sections: the first is made up of individual chapters on specific theater-related topics. These include “Theatres and Audience,” “Finance and Building,” “Roman Theatre Design,” “Theatres and Related Buildings,” “Republican Theatres in Italy,” “The Theatres of Rome,” “The Cavea and the Orchestra,” “The Scene Building,” and “Provincial Theatres.” The essays build upon intensive, detailed work by Sear, also incorporating the efforts of others and offering fresh perspectives on each theme. The second section comprises a detailed catalogue, divided into eight broad present-day geographic regions, further divided by Augustan regions for Italy, and by province for other areas. The catalogue reflects the state of the research up to 1996 and often beyond, providing updated plans for most theaters.
Thus the book contains detailed essay discussions, design elucidations, as well as technical descriptions in its catalogue. The whole is presented in clear language, with the themes of most of the individual chapters presenting subject matter that directly links architecture and society: the discussion of seating placement in the first chapter, for example, reveals a great deal about who comprised different groups and where these were allowed to sit. This is significant in terms of social status, rank and rights, and how each was connected to the theater. Similarly, in the second chapter, Sear reminds the reader of the high priority the theater had in public finances. And the discussion of the monument type in Rome in the sixth chapter renders a better picture of daily life in the city. In the chapters where architecture per se remains the focus, Sear reiterates some of the main theories he has previously advanced, synthesizing much of the work that has been done over the past decades, all the while providing fresh perspectives and conclusions.
Sear’s account, though, ignores some potentially useful authorities. For example, Edmond Frézouls, whose outline of the important differences between the theaters of Gaul and other geographic areas is key to understanding theaters that do not necessarily fit within the “pure” definition of the type. Related to the use of authorities, the book offers little comparative discussion: the essays present themes without, for the most part, questioning any of the previous theories, and one is left to accept (or reject) Sear’s arguments without much opportunity for balanced assessment. In the catalogue, a clearer link to Vitruvius and the De Architectura may have been useful for making connections between Republican times and the “origins” of the theater; while the latter is discussed in the third chapter, a comment in the catalogue on adherence of theater design to Vitruvius’s principles could also have been relevant to researchers.
Indeed, the catalogue is important. Here we find summarized in a single place comments on location, dimensions, state of the remains, architectural design details, and a bibliography for the vast majority of the monument type. For any researcher, this will serve as an ideal starting point for a variety of investigations. At the most basic level, for instance, it is easy to envision a new way of comparing each cavea using the catalogue. The catalogue entries, however, are at times too compressed. Comments on the state of explorations and excavations in progress, for example, might have been useful for the reader. And while the catalogue is extremely well researched, one sometimes has difficulty navigating the myriad sections that are not as well integrated as they could have been. This difficulty seems more related to decisions of the book designer (bold face or capitalized headings, for instance) than to Sear’s content, and might have been avoided with a more sensitive coordination of content and its presentation by the publisher.
The organizational difficulties just pointed out should not be seen as a scholarly shortfall. This book is at once a starting point and synthesis. With its approach to looking at built form as a method of understanding social mores and with its comprehensive scope, it has the potential to trigger new methodologies and inspire new interest in classical (architectural) studies.
In short, this is the most useful book on the Roman theater that has emerged in several decades. Some readers might possibly prefer more essays on specific related topics, but this is not the author’s purpose; other readers might possibly look for a more in-depth discussion within the catalogue, but neither is this the author’s intent. One only wishes that some additional detail could have been provided in the catalogue (which Sear, a detail-oriented scholar, certainly must have collected), thereby connecting the chapter essays more closely to the catalogue entries. Ultimately, though, Sear has provided us with a solid, straightforward and honest tool which will certainly facilitate further advances in the field.
Daniel M. Millette
School of Architecture, University of British Columbia
