the reigns of the Gordians throw little light on the subject. According to Shaw there is one giving a representation of an amphitheatre not hitherto accounted for by medallists. But there is another well-known coin of this era with a somewhat similar representation of an amphitheatre, which undoubtedly refers to the repairing or completing the Flavian amphitheatre at Rome during the reign of Gordian III. The inscription Munificentia Gordiani Aug. is conclusive. In both coins the amphitheatre is shown with three stories of arcades surmounted by an attic, a colossus on one side and a portico on the other. It is quite possible that one coin was struck at Rome, and the other in the mint at Carthage, but they both refer to the edifice at Rome, and the colossus represented is none other than the so-called Colossus of Nero. The comparative silence of Latin authors, and of Arab writers of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, such as El-Bekri and Edrisi, on any matter relating to Thysdrus, renders a solution of this question somewhat difficult. Justus Lipsius, the author of Admiranda, sive de Magnitudine Romana, written in 1630, gives a list of all the known amphitheatres, but makes no mention of the one at Thysdrus. The Jesuit father, Josephe Gius, who wrote an elaborate description of Arles and other similar edifices, is quite silent on the point, and the Marquis Scipio Maffei,1 when comparing the amphitheatre at Verona with those at Rome and Capua, boldly asserts that these were the only amphitheatres ever built by the Romans. The rest, including those whose remains may still be seen at Arles, Nîmes, Pompeii, and Pola (not mentioning Thysdrus), he describes as theatres, and not intended for gladiatorial exhibitions. Shaw, who travelled through Barbary 1730-38,2 was the first to draw attention to this great monument at Thysdrus, and Bruce, some thirty years later, was probably the first traveller who made a drawing of it. Gibbon the historian gives no clue as to its origin, and accepts the statements of Capitolinus as the groundwork for this period of Roman history. Our own encyclopædias are also silent, and 1 Marquis Francesco Scipione Maffei, A compleat History of the Ancient Amphitheatres. London 1730. 8vo. Another writer on the subject was Justus Lipsius, Admiranda, sive de Magnitudine Romana, Lib. IV. Editio ultima, Antverpiæ. MDCXXX. No mention is made of Thysdrus. 2 Shaw, p. 206. some of them ignore the monument altogether. There is little doubt, however, that many inscribed stones, removed from the amphitheatre from time to time, are built into the walls of Arab huts in the adjacent village of El-Djem, and that a systematic exploration of the site of the ancient town would bring to light some record of the building of this gigantic structure. For the present we must be content with traditional history, and assume (there is reasonable ground for the assumption) that the building was planned and nearly completed under the Gordian dynasty. The coming celebration of the tenth centenary of the foundation of Rome, for which the Gordians were preparing, would promote the building of amphitheatres and the completion of those that were in progress, not only in Rome, but in every province of the Empire. Capitolinus tells us plainly that the preparations of Gordian III. were on the most extensive scale, and that his munificence in encouraging the games of the arena was not surpassed by any one of the Roman Emperors. Like the aqueduct of Carthage, this monument at Thysdrus is a standing testimony to the force of imperial will, and to the strength and determination so conspicuous in the Roman character. It mattered little to the Emperor whether stone or marble were at hand or transport of materials difficult. In the quarries at Sullectum, some twenty miles distant, stone of excellent quality was abundant, and to all appearances this stone and no other was used. What were the appliances for conveying tens of thousands of huge blocks of chiselled stone so long a distance, or how many thousands of forced labourers were employed on the work, we have no means of knowing. It is sufficient for us to regard with amazement the audacity of an undertaking which, in the present day and in the actual condition of the country, would be stamped with impossibility Like all the other great amphitheatres of the Empire, the divisions and arrangements of the one at Thysdrus present no distinctive features, having externally the usual open arcades, each presenting a complete Order. In this one the first and third are of Corinthian Order, and the second Composite. Whether the attic was Corinthian or not we have no means of judging, as only a portion of the inner wall of the top story remains. There were two principal entrances, one of which is entirely destroyed. The interior has suffered more than the exterior, owing partly to its having been used as a fortress, but principally to the wantonness of Arabs, who have been accustomed for centuries to regard the entire edifice as a very cheap and convenient stone quarry. When El-Bekri saw the amphitheatre in the eleventh century, he described the interior as being arranged in steps from top to bottom, and as late as Bruce's visit some portions of the seats and inclines must have been intact. There is every reason to suppose that the structure was never completed. The short rule of the Gordians, scarcely extending over six years, with whose memory it was intimately associated, was followed by a line of Emperors who had no interest in this obscure town in Africa, so far from the coast. This fact might help to account for so great a monument having been left unfinished. As for the structure itself, there are many indications that it was built with great rapidity with a view to its being used for some special occasion. Nearly every stone has a triangular-shaped lewis-hole on the external face, showing that the raising of the blocks into position was of more consideration than the appearance of the work. Again, the archstones are not all carefully cut to suit the extrados of the arches, and several of the modillions which adorn the cornices of the three stories are left uncut. There are indications of an intention to carve the keystones of the bottom arcade, but only two of them have been worked (perhaps by way of experiment), one representing the head of a lion and the other the bust of a female, the dressing of the head being in the fashion of the period. The three tiers of arcades appear to have been completed, with the exception perhaps of the cornice, but there is no indication whatever of any of the facing blocks of the attic story having been fixed in position. There is one peculiarity about the structure which is very noticeable. Nearly every course of masonry is of the same height, being within a fraction of 20 inches, the length of the stones averaging 38 inches. In each Order the entablatures are similar, the architrave, frieze, and cornice being each one stone in height. The bases of the engaged columns are in one stone, and the surbases also. The superficial area of this amphitheatre is almost identical with that of the incomplete amphitheatre at Verona, which ranks with that at Capua as one of the largest of provincial edifices |