From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Article milestones
Date Process Result
April 6, 2005 Peer review Reviewed
October 11, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
C-Class article C  Quality: C-Class
Checklist icon
 ???  Importance: not yet rated

Picture gallery in Today section[edit]

I read the article of the Colosseum this morning and chanced upon the gallery under the Today section of the article. The picture gallery contains repeated "Colosseum 2013" captions which I find confusing. Could someone help me out here? I want to arrange them in a gallery but there should be only one caption for all the images. Regards, Japanese Rail Fan (talk) 13:52, 22 February 2014 (UTC)Nuts and Butts fought in the Colosseum.

Section on Christians[edit]

A separate section on Christians is not really necessary as the main body of the text already states "In 1749, Pope Benedict XIV endorsed the view that the Colosseum was a sacred site where early Christians had been martyred. He forbade the use of the Colosseum as a quarry and consecrated the building to the Passion of Christ and installed Stations of the Cross, declaring it sanctified by the blood of the Christian martyrs who perished there (see Christians and the Colosseum). However there is no historical evidence to support Benedict's claim, nor is there even any evidence that anyone prior to the 16th century suggested this might be the case; the Catholic Encyclopedia concludes that there are no historical grounds for the supposition." An editor at some point added a section based on the Catholic Encyclopedia entry which was tagged for years as needed refs, so I added them, but now the section has been re-written with the addition of various legends stated as fact. There is no evidence that St Ignatius was torn to pieces by lions at the Coliseum, that is just a legend. I am putting it back to the version which is neutral in my opinion, although I will amend it to say that there is no evidence for or against Christians being executed there. I don't like that painting of lions about to pounce on Christians in the Colosseum either as I feel it perpetuates myths and I changed that also but don't feel strongly enough about that to fight about it.Smeat75 (talk) 03:26, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

User:Smeat75, hello! Thank you for taking the time to look at the section. I would like to discuss your recent edits. If you noticed, every reliable source that I added in the article has the original quote by the author, for you to see if the sentence is verifiable. Now, the former paragraphs never said that Ignatius was definitively martyred in the Colosseum; rather, they say that he likely was martyred there, giving Christians further inspiration to believe in the idea that many Christians were persecuted there. I agree that most Christians were not persecuted in the Colosseum, but as the sources point out, some were executed as common criminals. Your edits restore information that The Catholic Encyclopedia never state in the first place. I suppose that I should find the original quotes from that source to show you that the new revision is more accurate. Indeed, I spent quite some time going back to the source and revising that information. I will not object to your removal of that painting, as long as File:Ignatius of Antioch.jpg is used in its stead. I hope this helps and look forward to your comments. With regards, AnupamTalk 04:02, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
I just added the original quotes from Keith Hopkins, as well as The Catholic Encyclopedia, to the references added by the editor who wrote the information. If you feel that any of the sentences do not accurately reflect what is said in the sources (I have provided the original quotes for you to read), then you can suggest a revision of the sentence in question here. Thanks! Best, AnupamTalk 04:24, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I am not a registered Wikipedia editor, but i am the author of a source cited in the Christians and the Colosseum section. My book is quoted and cited concerning the cross that is erected at the Colosseum and the plaque. I was incorrect about the placement of the plaque; it is on the exterior of the building, not on the cross as the book seems to indicate. I will update this in the book's second edition, and provide a better translation of the plaque's wording. In the meantime, accuracy on Wikipedia would require removing this reference to the plaque. Thank you. Bryan Litfin — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:32, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Re: comments of Anupam above: the paraphrase from professor of ancient history at Cambridge University Keith Hopkins's book on the Coliseum needs to stay, it is an impeccable source, and says there is no evidence for (or against) execution of Christians at the Coliseum. The quote you added says "there seems little doubt that "some Christians" were executed there but you left out the "seems" and "doubt" so I have clarified that, to "it may be" that "some Christians" were executed there. The story about Ignatius being torn to lions, as the quote you added says ("ancient Christian records do not record" martyrdoms at the Coliseum), is not backed by any record whether Christian or pagan, therefore it is a legend without any evidence except that it became an oft-repeated tale.Smeat75 (talk) 17:41, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
I amended the Ignatius reference from "legend" to 'according to Iraneus" but he doesn't say anything about Ignatius being torn to lions at the Coliseum, only in Rome. There is a reference in there which talks about Trajan and Marcus Aurelius sending Christians to their deaths which is just not true but I will not remove it for the moment anyway.Smeat75 (talk) 19:01, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
User:Smeat75, I have taken a look at your changes and find them to be acceptable. I will make no changes to the version as you have it written now. All the best, AnupamTalk 02:50, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

In reading this section the other day, I was disturbed that the topic sentence of the section seemed to only mention one perspective. In an effort to remedy that, I have drafted a proposed re-write of this section. If there are no objections, I will proceed with the edit soon. (my proposed added footnotes are in parenthesis until I actually edit the article). I propose that this section of the article be amended as follows:

"The Colosseum is generally regarded by Christians as a site of the martyrdom of large numbers Saints as evidenced by tradition and Church history, ( ( ) ( On the other hand, some modern scholars believe that the majority of martyrdoms may have occurred at other venues within the city of Rome, rather than at the Colosseum, citing a lack of still-intact physical evidence or historical records. ( [38] [39] These scholars assert that "some Christians were executed as common criminals in the Colosseum—their crime being refusal to reverence the Roman gods"[40], but most Christian martyrs of the early Church were executed for their faith at the Circus Maximus. [41] According to St.Irenaeus (died about 202), St.Ignatius of Antioch was fed to the lions in Rome around 107 A.D, but St.Irenaeus says nothing about this happening at the Colosseum, although tradition ascribes it to that place.[42][43][44][45] Pope Pius V (1566–1572) is said to have recommended that pilgrims gather sand from the arena of the Colosseum to serve as a relic, on the grounds that it was impregnated with the blood of martyrs, although some of his contemporaries did not share his conviction.[48] A century later Fioravante Martinelli listed the Colosseum at the head of a list of places sacred to the martyrs in his 1653 book Roma ex ethnica sacra. It was only in the 16th and 17th centuries that the Colosseum came to be widely venerated as a Christian site.[49] In the Middle Ages, the Colosseum was not regarded as a monument, and was used as a what some modern sources label a "quarry,"[38] which is to say that stones from the Colosseum were taken for the building of other sacred sites ( This fact is used to support the idea that, at a time when sites associated with martyrs were highly venerated the Colosseum was not being treated as a sacred site[46],. It was not included in the itineraries compiled for the use of pilgrims nor in works such as the 12th century Mirabilia Urbis Romae ("Marvels of the City of Rome"), which claims the Circus Flaminius – but not the Colosseum – as the site of martyrdoms.[47] Part of the structure was inhabited by a Christian order, but it is not known whether this was for any particular religious reason.

The Christian Martyrs' Last Prayer, by Jean-Léon Gérôme (1883) Martinelli's book evidently had an effect on public opinion; in response to Cardinal Altieri's proposal some years later to turn the Colosseum into a bullring, Carlo Tomassi published a pamphlet in protest against what he regarded as an act of desecration. The ensuing controversy persuaded Pope Clement X to close the Colosseum's external arcades and declare it a sanctuary.[50] At the insistence of St. Leonard of Port Maurice, Pope Benedict XIV (1740–1758) forbade the reusing the stones of the Colosseum and erected Stations of the Cross around the arena, which remained until February 1874.[51] St. Benedict Joseph Labre spent the later years of his life within the walls of the Colosseum, living on alms, prior to his death in 1783.[51] Several 19th century popes funded repair and restoration work on the Colosseum, and it still retains its Christian connection today. a cross stands in the Colosseum, with a plaque, stating: . . ."

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Elpiniki (talkcontribs) 01:44, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Elpiniki I had the protection removed from this article. You are free to edit it now. Thanks for posting here before going to the article - that makes space for discussion if anyone has anything to say. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:24, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks so much!

I edited it to the best of my ability as I stated above. I am not an expert in HTML, so I apologize for any errors. But, I believe I retained all of the previously existing footnotes as well as adding my own.

Thanks so much for your help on this, Blue Rasberry!

Elpiniki (talk) 02:30, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 May 2014[edit]

The word 'alluvional' is exceedingly uncommon if not outright incorrect. 'alluvial' would be a great improvement. Muddlers (talk) 11:24, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi Muddlers, you make a good point so I've made the change as you suggested. Thanks for pointing it out. Nev1 (talk) 11:43, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 September 2014[edit] (talk) 07:49, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to any article. - Arjayay (talk) 11:40, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

New Section[edit]

Some one should write a section on the current uses of the Colosseum. I looked it up and did not find much.Book Jumper (talk) 20:31, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Why is this article protected?[edit]

It had some vandalism in 2010. Hardly a justification for it still to be protected over four years on. (talk) 20:13, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Nev1, you applied protection to this page in 2010. Can this page be unprotected now? Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 18:54, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
This article's protection is now removed. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:23, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
@Bluerasberry: I'm fine with trialling unprotection, and so far so good. For what it's worth in November 2010 there were 100 edits of which 84 were either vandalism/spam or reverts of said edits. That was the established pattern, so 'some vandalism' doesn't quite give the impression of the activity. Nev1 (talk) 13:16, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
Hmm... Looking at the article history. The article could need pending changes, where IP and new editor edits are reviewed, but does not restrict IP or new editor edits. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 09:05, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

The term LITERAL is used incorrectly[edit]

At the segment "in effect, placing it both literally and symbolically at the heart of Rome." there is a misuse of the world "Literal", for it seems that when the author wrote it he thought that when a building is constructed in the center of a geographical map, it is "literally" in the heart of the certain geographical map. It still isn't, the "heart" of Rome still is a metaphorical expression. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcosoldfox (talkcontribs) 19:55, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 June 2015[edit]

Maxforw (talk) 17:40, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: as that is a copyright photo. - Arjayay (talk) 20:11, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 July 2015[edit]

In the third paragraph under "Physical description" --> "Exterior" it is stated that "The arcades are framed by half-columns of the Tuscan, Ionic, and Corinthian orders, while the attic is decorated with Corinthian pilasters." However, as noted by Sebastiano Serlio in Tutte l'opere d'architettura et prospetiva the ground floor arcade is framed by columns of the (Roman) Doric order, not the Tuscan order (see page 158 of the translation by Vaughan Hart and Peter Hicks). Hence, I request that this sentence be changed to "The arcades are framed by half-columns of the Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian orders, while the attic is decorated with Corinthian pilasters."

N.B.: Serlio treats the Tuscan order separately, and hence his claim that these columns are of the Doric order does not reflect an issue of nomenclature ambiguity between the two orders. Andrew Auman (talk) 17:33, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Pictogram voting question.svg Question: The source in question is not visible to everyone because it is a book. Is there an online source confirming this? TrueCRaysball | #RaysUp 09:05, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

I think hardcopy references are valid. Also onlinr has the statement "Three of the arena’s stories are encircled by arcades framed by decorative half-columns in the Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian orders;"--Jcardazzi (talk) 18:28, 6 August 2015 (UTC)jcardazzi

Yes check.svg Done TrueCRaysball | #RaysUp 19:36, 6 August 2015 (UTC)


How were sanitation issues dealt with in ancient times? Modern stadiums rarely get this right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Which Hazel? (talkcontribs) 01:31, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 March 2016[edit]

1. At the third line it is stated that the Colosseum is "built of concrete and sand". Very wrong!! It is instead "made of travertine stone, tuff, bricks and Roman concrete." Check on [1] 2. The statement "The Colosseum today is now a major tourist attraction in Rome with thousands of tourists each year paying to view the interior arena" should be corrected: the visitors are MILLIONS every year (exactly 6.551.046 in 2015, as from the official Italian Ministry website [2] 3. The restoration mentioned " As of 2014 the restoration is estimated to be complete by 2016" is now finished [3] 4. I would also add among the external links a very complete website on the Colosseum: [4] Much info in this Wiki page seems to have been inspired, if not outright copied, from that website. 5. The Roman Colosseum - wrote by Fabrizio Ghilardi for Italy Travels licensed guide in Rome - [5] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panterina55 (talkcontribs) 14:44, 8 June 2016 (UTC)


Zoraidex52 (talk) 22:24, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.  B E C K Y S A Y L E 05:48, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 April 2016[edit] (talk) 19:59, 16 April 2016 (UTC) Add clarification that the "Vancouver Library" is in British Columbia. There is another Vancouver in Washington. They should not be confused with each other.

 Done  Stick to sources! Paine  19:10, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Not possible[edit]

I wanted to edit and make corrections. Why is this not possible? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:14BA:1AF4:1E00:19B1:65C4:75B9:881 (talk) 23:00, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

When you open the editing page there should be a pink box near the top of the page that explains this. Due to persistent vandalism, the Colosseum article has been protected, which means in this case that only autoconfirmed editors can make changes to it. Please check out the links in that pink box to find out what other options are, and welcome to Wikipedia!  Wikipedian Sign Language Paine  23:49, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Unskilled labour vs Roman builders[edit]

"Along with this free source of unskilled labor, teams of professional Roman builders, engineers, artists, painters and decorators undertook the more specialized tasks necessary for building the Colosseum."

What is the source of this asertion? The assumption here is that all of the slaves brought from Judea were unskilled, and that Romans provided the skill sets for the construction. However, Herod's Temple "...was one of the larger construction projects of the 1st century BCE. Josephus records that Herod was interested in perpetuating his name through building projects, that his construction programs were extensive and paid for by heavy taxes, but that his masterpiece was the Temple of Jerusalem." Construction technology, engineering principles, artistic styles, painting and decorative techniques were all well known and used in Judea, so the slave labour was not necessarily just for heavy lifting physical labour. Crock81 (talk) 23:36, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

"damage caused by ... stone-robbers"[edit]

... the article states. Some maybe, but. After the 1349 quake, the population had dwindled to ~17,000. But 'stone-robbers'??

"In the XIV century the Orsini and Colonna families were granted permission to remove stones and marble." Sometime after 1382, "the Arciconfraternita was granted the concession of the materials of the amphitheatre, a great source of profit.... In 1439 the Colosseum travertine was used to build the tribune of St. John's Lateran. It was then that the removal of marble, stones and bricks really started, and it lasted for generations. Many palaces and churches were built with stones taken from the Colosseum. It is reported (Lugli) that, in the year 1451-1452 alone, 2.522 cartloads were taken from the site to be used for buildings of the Vatican and for the walls of Rome." (Source) Some pretty upscale 'robbers'. Twang (talk) 23:17, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Upgrade data[edit]

I'm wondering how (if is possible) to upgrade the information in this section adding my recent scientific issue...

Thank you Farre1975 (talk) 16:33, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Colosseum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)