{"id":19048,"date":"2017-02-10T08:00:29","date_gmt":"2017-02-10T07:00:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.ferrovial.com\/blog\/en\/?p=19048"},"modified":"2025-12-12T11:24:17","modified_gmt":"2025-12-12T10:24:17","slug":"the-evolution-of-architecture-through-theatres","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.ferrovial.com\/blog\/en\/2017\/02\/the-evolution-of-architecture-through-theatres\/","title":{"rendered":"The evolution of theatre which accompanied (and drove) the evolution of architecture"},"content":{"rendered":"

All too often, rusty subjects<\/em> try to make certain historical heritage their own, sweeping all knowledge into their own coffers. \u201cThis is architecture<\/em>\u201d or \u201cThis is culture<\/em>\u201d is, today, an altogether too simplistic way of classifying the beauty we conserve from the past<\/strong>, as if it had been created with tags.<\/p>\n

Nothing could be further from the truth. Today we will talk about theatres<\/strong>, their evolution over the course of history – the evolution of architecture<\/strong> – and what they say about the architecture of their time. Because these two subjects \u2013 theatre and architecture \u2013, have had more links between them and have needed each other more than we might initially believe.<\/p>\n

Greek theatre: the gods have something to say<\/h2>\n

Theatres were for many centuries the best example of mass culture<\/strong>. In ancient times they were the equivalent of our television or streaming<\/em>. The first theatres did not put on performances for a few, but rather transmitted the words of the gods (who were very prolific in Greek times) to the more people the better.<\/p>\n

\"View<\/a>

View of the orchestra (circular plan at the bottom of the slope) of the Theatre of Epidaurus from the upper seating area. Source: Gonzalo Serrano Espada<\/p><\/div>\n

Initially there was a lack of spaces where large numbers of people could listen to the words in the chants, and so very soon large flat or cone-shaped esplanades<\/strong> started to appear, where you could sit and watch the performances. For some time they were not very different from the circles or semicircles formed when you sit on the ground at a camp, for example, but it soon became obvious that these spaces were not enough to hold all the spectators.<\/p>\n

\"Plane<\/a>

Plans of various types of Greek temples. Narrow and with walls everywhere, it was fairly complicated to represent plays inside. Source: Bojan Jankoloski<\/p><\/div>\n

An alternative option could have been the temples, but the limited space available between all the walls and columns these had \u2013 as a result of a not-too-advanced construction technique and limited knowledge regarding the behaviour of the materials used \u2013 meant that slabs of stone were soon being placed over the esplanades. Using the slopes to make seating, it was not long before the Greek theatre<\/strong> emerged.<\/p>\n

\"Plan<\/a>

Plan of the Theatre of Epidaurus (shown in the photograph above). Source: Laboratorio Artau<\/p><\/div>\n

Despite the simplicity of their design, they already had components which are still recognisable today, such as rows of seats (koilon<\/em>), inner walkways (scale<\/em> for the vertical ones and diapsoma<\/em> for horizontal circular ones), stage (orchestra<\/em>) and decorative elements (sken\u00e9<\/em>). However, a direct equivalent for certain of these components is somewhat difficult to establish given how theatre has evolved over time.<\/p>\n

For example, Greek decorative elements were little more than a narrow building several storeys in height, from which were hung cloths or simple atrezzos<\/em>, a far cry from modern productions where the stage undergoes veritable transformations. Moreover, the orchestra<\/em> area was initially for both the instruments and the actors themselves.<\/p>\n

The Roman theatre: people also voice opinions (though not much)<\/h2>\n

The Roman theatre<\/strong> hardly added to or removed any of the elements used by the Greeks, probably because their architectural technology had not evolved sufficiently to stand out from them. What they did do was separate the orchestra<\/em>, which became a pit, from the proscaenium<\/em>, which would become the stage.<\/p>\n

\"Roman<\/a>

Roman theatre in Bosra (Syria). (1) Scaenae frons (2) Columnatio (3) Proscaenium (4) Pulpitum (5) Orchestra (6) Cavea (7) Aditus maximus (8) Vomitoria (9) Praecinctio (10) Tribunal (11) Basilica (see Roman theatre\/structure). Source: Joris.<\/p><\/div>\n

A better understanding of physical acoustics brought about slight changes in the slope and in the separations, making theatres slightly bigger. As the doctrine of the gods waned in importance and gave rise to mythology (and later human stories), the stage started to fill up with columns, until there were two or three rows (seen more clearly in the photograph in front of the scaenae frons<\/em>).<\/p>\n

Towards the end of the Roman period, performances at theatres were more about human stories<\/strong> than divine ones. Tragedies, comedies, satire, political critique, mime, farce.<\/strong>.. Theatrical culture became ever richer over the centuries as walls became thicker and constructions more permanent.<\/p>\n

But then the lights went out on European culture\u2026<\/p>\n

Oriental theatre: listening to the flexibility of nature<\/h2>\n

Luckily, the spark of knowledge was still burning bright in another part of the world, while the Mediterranean suffered the devastation of religious wars. As opposed to the Greek gods, these Gods with a capital G were not brothers and sisters, and their followers fought in battles which drove back culture at the swish of a sword.<\/p>\n

In India (Hinduism), in Japan (Zionism) and in China (Buddhism), this culture manifested itself with songs, dance and mime. This is not to say their peoples did not subsequently go out and fight neighbouring villages, but such was their respect for the performing arts that they were always maintained as part of their culture.<\/p>\n

\"Theatre<\/a>

N\u014d Japanese theatres, elevated for better visibility. Sources: cheevatravel.<\/p><\/div>\n

Almost all oriental theatres have the same quadrilateral shape, about six to seven metres wide, ever since the first Chinese theatres of the 2nd century BC. The pictures show the n\u014d (noh) <\/em>Japanese theatre from the 14th century, easily recognisable by the decorated back wall and the four wooden pillars making up the stage.<\/p>\n

\"No<\/a>

The n\u014d theatre showing the positioning of the musicians. Sources: nipponsai.org and Wikipedia<\/p><\/div>\n

Given the close ties oriental peoples had to nature, most of the theatres (and practically all buildings) were made of wood and other plant materials<\/strong>. The flexibility and mechanical behaviour of these materials allowed them to shape stages in ways that neither the Greeks nor the Romans were able to do, although it also meant that they have not survived the passage of the centuries quite so well.<\/p>\n

The scenic arts contained in these small temples, unlike in the West, did not require sophisticated decorative elements other than the costumes themselves. Even today, the mahanataka<\/em>, dutangada <\/em>and kathakali<\/em> Hindu disciplines, kunqu<\/em> and the Chinese theatre of shadows,<\/a> or the Japanese N\u014d<\/em> <\/a>and kabuki<\/em> <\/a>seem minimalistic to Western eyes inasmuch as architectural and structural elements are concerned, with the skills of the actors being the only feature required.<\/p>\n

Medieval theatre: the theatre of the guerrillas<\/em><\/h2>\n

It is interesting to see how theatre the world over took a great leap forward into the 14th century<\/strong> (including most of the oriental styles mentioned in the previous paragraph and medieval theatre in Europe), yet how these styles and the architecture <\/em>of theatres began to differ over time. In Europe, in fact, architecture and theatre moved apart in the dark centuries of the middle ages.<\/p>\n

\"Shadow<\/a>

Representation of Karag\u00f6z and Hacivat shadow plays, precursor of puppet theatre (14th century in Turkey), and a modern representation.<\/p><\/div>\n

In a historical context of Church feudalism<\/a> in which the arts were deemed profane, science necromancy and culture undesirable, there was little space for theatre and other non-religious arts. And so theatre split into two main categories:<\/p>\n