Classicism and Early Twentieth Century American Football Stadia

Thomas M. Shelby

Main entrance, Ohio Stadium (1922)

Paper for ARCH 8822 American Academic Architecture

Spring 2009

1

Classicism and Early Twentieth Century American Football Stadia

Thomas M. Shelby

Stadium, as both a word and a building, has become a ubiquitous part of our

society. We all know what the word suggests, and we all know what a stadium looks

like. Or do we truly know what a stadium looks like (i.e. the façade), other than just

images of a cavernous space filled with tiers of seats? A stadium can, and does, reflect

either collegiate or civic pride, establishes identity, and serves as a focal point in the

landscape, again whether it is urban or on campus, as they are usually the largest

structures around. And because of their cost, their size and elaboration reflects the

community’s relative wealth, and expresses the importance of sport within society. Few

other civic monuments have the power to evoke such collective memories. Thus the

history of the stadium is a unique and interesting one, encompassing architecture,

engineering, history, classical studies, and sociology. This paper explores the emergence

of this old building type in America, suited for modern American needs, during the first

few decades of the 20th century, and focuses particularly on the examples that drew upon

classical antecedents to show the richness of the designs of what is often considered

simply a utilitarian structure.

The Stadium as a New Building Type in Early 20th Century America

During the 19th century most grandstands, bleacher stands, and ballparks were

built of wood, making them easily susceptible to fire, and consequently, spectator deaths.

At the turn of the 20th century though the idea of permanent grandstands was coming to

the fore, and in 1903, Harvard University built the first steel and concrete stadium in the

country. Over the next three decades the football stadium appeared on university

2

campuses and cities throughout the country at a rapid pace. But it was only with the

convergence of several factors that would make the American football stadium possible.

The basics are outlined here, the details and remainder of the story are for another paper.

The first of these factors is structural. The development of steel, refinement of

Portland cement, and the use of reinforced concrete, the same factors that made the

skyscraper possible, also made the large-scale stadium possible. The second factor is the

codification of sports such as baseball and football (thanks in part to the importation of

lawn grasses) and their ever-increasing popularity among the masses and college students

and alumni. Baseball, a uniquely American game, developed over the course of the 19th

century. Many of the early ballparks recalled America’s agrarian roots, and were given

such pastoral names as Polo Grounds, Fenway Park, and Ebbets Field. Due to the unique

nature of the game, ballparks had to be built in a corresponding configuration (often

called “boomerang”), and were inserted within a congested urban environment. The first

permanent ballpark was Shibe Park in Philadelphia, completed in 1909. It was also the

first ballpark, and one of the few, to be finished in a high style—in this case an elegant

Beaux-Arts façade—rather than the more spartan and utilitarian designs that

characterized many ballparks. It was not until the completion of Yankee Stadium in 1923

that the word “stadium” began to be used in association with baseball.1

The game of football emerged during the latter part of the 19th century. Initially

resembling something more akin to soccer, the first intercollegiate football game

occurred between Rutgers and Princeton on 6 November 1869. From this beginning,

more schools began playing each other in football, mostly Ivy League schools. By the

1 Benjamin G. Rader, American Sports: From the Age of Folk Games to the Age of Televised Sports (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2004), Chapter 10, passim.

3

Shibe Park, Philadelphia (1909).

Yankee Stadium, New York City (1923).

4

1880s football was being played by schools in the Midwest and South and by the 1890s

the Southwest and West Coast. Bitter rivalries developed, as did the pageantry with

marching bands, tailgate parties, bonfires, cheerleaders, fight songs, and mascots.

Wooden grandstands were built to accommodate the increasing number of spectators,

which came to include not only students but alumni and the local townspeople. Wealthy

alumni and benefactors contributed to their schools, and for that matter, intercollegiate

athletics became profitable. As stated earlier, Harvard became the first university to erect

a permanent stadium. Interestingly, the timing of this construction had profound

implications on the history of the game itself. At the time it was a very violent game, and

serious injuries, and even deaths, occurred. In 1905 there were eighteen fatalities and

159 serious injuries, and President Theodore Roosevelt threatened to shut down the game

unless changes were made. Among the game’s leaders was Walter Camp, a Yale man,

who suggested to significantly widen the field of play. Charles Eliot, president of

Harvard, objected, having just spent a large sum of money to construct a new stadium. If

this suggestion had been adopted, Harvard’s new stadium would have been obsolete

within three years. As an alternative, Eliot allied himself with John Heisman, who had

been trying to get the forward pass instituted, and Navy coach Paul Dashiell, forming a

coalition that, in 1906, instituted the forward pass. Thus the game was dramatically

changed, and the structure of the gridiron was established. Other schools then followed

Harvard’s lead, and a boon of stadia construction continued into the early 1930s.2

2 Richard Whittingham, Rites of Autumn: The Story of College Football (New York: The Free Press, 2001), xii; David J. Warner, “Football History 101: How the Stadium Shaped the Game” electronic document, http://ncaafb.beta.fanhouse.com/2006/10/21/football-history-101-how-the-stadium-shaped-the-game/, accessed January 8, 2009.

5

The Search for Precedents The need for a permanent setting or venue for American spectator sports

presented a new problem for architects-one that would involve the resurrection of an

ancient building type. What would architects reference as a precedent to solve their

contemporary needs? Large-scale sporting venues can certainly be considered one of the

great historic building types, with their greatest expression and articulation among the

stadia and hippodromes of ancient Greece and the amphitheaters and circuses of ancient

Rome. Not until the early 20th century would these building types again become so

pervasive and emblematic of a society. Thus these building from the ancient Classical

world would serve as the prototypes for the modern stadia being designed and developed

in America and Europe, but following a distinct path from the other. In America the

stylistic choice was also a given, since Beaux-Arts Classicism was the prevailing taste.

Thus both form and style would be derived from antiquity, the foundations of Western

Civilization, and coming not long after the 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition (Harvard

Stadium was built in 1903), the symbolic link was clear. Although it is beyond the scope

of this paper to trace the development of these ancient building types, it is nonetheless

informative to briefly review and note the salient points regarding these antecedents.

Ancient Greece

Three building types found in ancient Greece, used for housing large numbers of

spectators for an event, consists of the theatre, stadia, and the hippodrome. Although not

utilized for the staging of heroic sporting events and spectacles, theatres nonetheless

would greatly influence the design of 20th century stadia. Greek theatres consisted of two

parts: the orchestra, the flat, often circular, area where the drama was staged, and the

6

auditorium (the theatron), a natural slope for spectators. During the 4th century B.C.

Greek theatres appear to have assumed their more definitive form of stone benches that

rose in tiers upon a hillside and accessed by stairways that radiated from the orchestra.

For larger theatres, horizontal passages were provided for additional ease of access. In

plan, the auditorium was semi-circular, and in some cases seating banks, drawn on a

slightly greater radius, extended beyond either end. The hillside upon which the theatre

was situated had been modified through excavation, embankments, and retaining walls as

needed. Theatres were found in most Greek cities; perhaps the greatest, in terms of

design perfection, is at Epidaurus. Attributed to Polykleitos (the Younger), it was built in

the late 4th century and can seat some 14,000 spectators. The Theater of Dionysos

Eleutherios, located against the south side of the Acropolis, was built by Lykcurgos circa.

338-326 B.C., and can seat some 17,500.3

Athletics and sporting competitions played a major role in ancient Greek society,

with its discipline and sacrifice considered as training, especially for war. Central to

ancient Greek athletics was the physical struggle of an individual over an opponent, thus

sporting competitions did not include team sports. Victory ensured glory to the athlete’s

family, and later, state. It appears that these earliest athletic competitions were associated

with religious rites and, by the 5th century B.C., festivals, held in honor of a hero or a

god, as they were held within or immediately adjacent (and connected) to a sanctuary.

By the Late Classical and Hellenistic period it seems that the religious association

decreased in importance and the events were moved outside of sanctuary precincts to

accommodate the increasing number of spectators. Athletic contests such as the various

3 Richard Allan Tomlinson, “Theatres” in The Oxford Companion to Classical Civilization, ed. Simon Hornblower and Antony Spawforth (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998), 709-710; Peter Levi, Atlas of Ancient Greece (New York: Facts on File, Inc., 1984), 146-149, 164-165.

7

footraces, boxing, wrestling, and the pentathlon were held within a building type called

the stadion, while equestrian events such as chariot racing was held in the hippodrome.

The four major games, the Olympian (venue: Olympia), Pythian (venue: Delphi),

Nemean (venue: Nemea), and Isthmian (venue: Corinth), would eventually give rise to

the modern Olympic games.4

Just as the Greek theatre consisted of two parts that came to be referred to entirely

as the theatre, so too does the Greek stadium. The dromos refers to the flat racecourse

(either with or without provisions for spectators), whereas the stadion, loosely translated

as “the standing place”, refers to the embanked area for spectators; eventually the stadium

would refer to both parts. One of the earliest structures defined as a stadion was found

within the sanctuary of Poseidon at Isthmia, consisting simply of a starting gate and an

artificial embankment to one side. Another Archaic stadion has been defined at Olympia

as well. By the 5th century B.C. well-defined stadia have been documented at Isthmia,

Halieis, and Olympia, and it appears that by that time the basic structural form had been

established, with artificial embankments to either one or both sides of the dromos, the

ends of which were defined by stone starting lines, and holes for turning posts. A stone

curb and water channel separated the dromos from the spectators, who stood during the

games; seats were only provided for judges and important officials. The ends of the

stadion could be either open or enclosed, and in the case of the latter could be either

4 Stephen J. Instone, “Athletics” in The Oxford Companion to Classical Civilization, ed. Simon Hornblower and Antony Spawforth (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998), 97-98; Levi, Atlas of Ancient Greece, 88-89; David Gilman Romano, Athletics and Mathematics in Archaic Corinth: The Origins of the Greek Stadion (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1993), Introduction, passim.

8

curved or squared. In general, Greek stadia were in the form of a rectangle, measuring

approximately 200 yards long by 25 to 40 yards wide.5

The stadion at the venerated site of Olympia is, of course, the most well known of

these. Located in the northwestern Peloponnese, Olympia was a religious sanctuary, at

the center of which was the sanctuary of Zeus (the Altis) containing the Temple of Zeus

and the Temple of Hera, and the site of the greatest of the four crown competitions

(Olympics, Pythian, Isthmian, and Nemean) and their festivals, reflecting the intimate

connection between religion and athletics.. The Olympia stadion one sees today, built

around 340 B.C., is the third such structure built at the site; it is located just outside of the

sacred precinct (the other two were partially located within it). A sloped, earthen

embankment, contained by retaining walls, surrounds the dromos on all four sides,

forming a long rectangle, and a vaulted passageway, a later 2nd century B.C. addition,

leads from the northwest corner of the dromos, underneath the stands, to the sacred

precinct between the north end of the Echo Stoa and the Treasury Terrace, marked by a

gate of Corinthian columns. Estimated capacity of the third stadion (Olympia III) is

approximately 43,000.6

In addition to the crown competitions, whose prizes were prestige and an olive

branch crown, there were other organized games throughout ancient Greece that awarded

money or other prizes. The best known of these were the Panathenaia, held in Athens,

which like many other Panhellenic contests, grew in popularity in the 6th century B.C.

By the late 4th century, new and larger athletic facilities were needed, and among these

5 Romano, Introduction: passim; H.A. Harris, Sport in Greece and Rome (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1972), 18. 6 Stephen G. Miller, Ancient Greek Athletics (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004), 87-95; Romano, 22.

9

new projects was the Panathenaic Stadium. Built by Lycurgos, who was responsible for

many monuments of Athens, all of which were to reinforce the glory of Periclean Athens,

the stadium originally had embankments for some 50,000 spectators. The size of this

construction reflects, along with its associated vaulted tunnel and dressing rooms and

other facilities, the proto-Hellenistic and Hellenistic trend towards larger and more

elaborate facilities. In use for hundreds of years and a great civic structure (in terms of

both size and for Athenian identity), the stadium was refinished completely in white

marble, including the seats, by Herodes Atticus, a wealthy Athenian patron, between

A.D. 140 and 144. In the 1890s it was the subject of excavations by German

archaeologists, and completely restored for the 1896 Olympic Games, inaugurating the

modern Olympic movement. The stadium as it stands today is configured in the shape of

a U with a curved end and straight sides. This stadium, or rather the reconstructed

Olympic Stadium, would become an influential precedent for American stadia.7

Equestrian events such as chariot racing were staged in the hippodrome,

presumably longer than a stadion; unfortunately, we have little information regarding the

hippodrome, such as length and the general arrangement for spectators, as much of the

evidence, both archaeological and from the literature, is fragmentary. There would be a

starting gate, described by the 2nd century A.D. traveler Pausanias as being staggered and

not uniform, and a turn post. There was no central dividing wall to separate the two

directions, and it is well known from the literature that head-on crashes were common.8

7 Miller, 137; Donald G. Kyle, Sport and Spectacle in the Ancient World (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2007), 168-170. 8 Miller, 75-82.

10

Olympia III Stadion, Olympia, Greece (c. 340 B.C.).

Panathenaic Stadium, Athens, Greece (late 4th century B.C., late 2nd century A.D., 1896).

11

Ancient Rome

Although the earliest structural types for spectacles were initiated in Greece, the

stadion, as well as the theatre and hippodrome, continued to be developed by the

Romans, and it was here that these structures reached the apex of design and engineering

in the ancient world and became a monumental expression of their society.

Roman theatres are generally a continuation of the Greek and Hellenistic types,

though instead of utilizing natural topography the Roman examples were built above

ground. The stage and orchestra were also more elaborate, with a high backdrop, and the

area underneath the seating contained vaulted passageways, and the exterior was treated

with a series of tiered arches with order treatments.9

However, a much larger structure was needed for the staging of Roman

spectacles, such as gladiatorial contests. This was solved by simply joining two theatres

together, in essence, forming an amphitheatre. Generally elliptical in plan, though round

examples are known, the amphitheatre is thought to have first developed in the Campania

region. An alternative possibility lies in the Hellenistic world of Greece, where a

possible antecedent, an approximately oval arena surrounded by embankments for

wooden benches, has been identified at Corinth. Few of the early amphitheatres have

been identified, largely due to their obliteration by later constructions. One of the earliest

dated examples is the one at Pompeii, built c.70 B.C. Unlike most of its later

counterparts, the Pompeian amphitheatre is partially below grade, and has no substructure

underneath the arena floor. Its exterior consists of a shallow, blind arcade, with staircases

that allow access to the upper tiers of seats, and several tunnels through the solid earth

substructure of the seating (the cavea) provide access to an annular passageway from 9 Tomlinson, “Theatres” in The Oxford Companion to Classical Civilization, 710.

12

which staircases accessed the lower tiers of seats. Seating capacity is estimated at around

20,000.10

The amphitheatre became a common building type throughout the empire, from

northern Africa to Spain, Gaul, and central Europe, though it was utilized markedly less

in the eastern part of the empire, where Hellenistic theatres were often used for the

purposes of Roman spectacle. Some of the better preserved examples include the ones at

Nimes, Arles, Verona, El Djem, Lepcis Magna, and Merida. The greatest example of this

building type, of course, is the Flavian Amphitheatre, better known as the Colosseum, in

Rome. Much has been written on the Colosseum; it has been the subject of many

travelers, artists, and explorer’s accounts, images, and drawings since the Renaissance.

Perhaps no other structure has come to be so emblematic, now as it was then, of the

power and majesty of the Roman Empire. Thus little more can be said here other than a

few points to keep in mind for comparison with American stadia. For one, it is

immediately recognizable and symbolic to both its citizenry and to visitors alike. It

represented a significant outlay of capital by the empire, and it represented some of the

most innovative and advanced engineering by the Romans. There are three tiers of

seating (four if counting the uppermost level corresponding to the exterior attic level),

with excellent sight lines, underneath which is a complex series of radiating and annular

groin vaulted passages, stairwells, and portals, providing a sophisticated pattern of access

and egress. Seating sections were numbered and corresponded to an external entrance,

further ensuring orderly circulation. After all, seating capacity is estimated to be at least

45,000. Fountains of water, as well as lavatories, were provided for spectators.

10 D.L. Bomgardner, The Story of the Roman Amphitheatre (New York: Routledge, 2000), Chapter Two, passim.

13

General view of the amphitheatre at Pompeii (c. 70 B.C.).

Exterior façade of the amphitheatre at Pompeii (c. 70 B.C.).

Plan of seating (top) and substructure (bottom), Pompeii amphitheatre (c.70 B.C.).

14

Plan, sections, and cut-away views of the Flavian Amphitheatre (A.D. 80) (from Bomgardner, Story of the Roman Amphitheatre, 2000, p. 7, Figure 1.3).

15

Underneath the Colosseum is a complex substructure level, accessed by tunnels to the

outside and lifts that traveled up into the arena itself. On the exterior façade, a series of

arcades rises in three levels, each with a different order treatment (Tuscan/Doric, Ionic,

and Corinthian), and an attic level with Corinthian pilasters.11

Equestrian events, like in Greece, were held in a separate, specially built structure

called a circus. Long and narrow, with a dividing wall (spina) down the center to prevent

head-on collisions between chariots, the circus could hold many more spectators than an

amphitheatre, largely due to the long length of the racetrack. They were U shaped, with

the starting gates arranged at the open end of the plan. Seating was arranged along the

full length of the circus, and like the amphitheatre, was built up on a system of vaulted

passageways and spaces. As with other structures built for spectacle, there were reserved

seats for important patrons. The largest circus is the Circus Maximus in Rome, at some

600 meters long and a capacity of 250,000, and is known to date at least to the 4th century

B.C.12

Establishing a new American precedent- The Influential Big Three and other early Stadia

Of the dozens of football stadia built on university campuses across the country

(and later, for municipal governments), during the first three decades of the 20th century,

most can trace their source form to one of three stadia. The Harvard U was the first, built

in 1903, followed by the Yale Bowl in 1914, and finally the revolutionary design of the

Ohio Stadium in 1922. All three would have a profound effect on stadium design for

11 Bomgardner, Chapter 1, passim; Kyle, 319-323; Mortimer Wheeler, Roman Art and Architecture (New York: Thames and Hudson, 1964), 116-122. 12 Wheeler, 122; William L. MacDonald, The Architecture of the Roman Empire-Volume II: An Urban Appraisal (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982), 117.

16

decades, until modernism, and new engineering techniques that made domes and

retractable roofs possible, took over stadium design.

The Harvard Stadium

By the turn of the 20th century, football had become one of the most popular

sports in America. Like most other grandstands around the country, for both football and

baseball, the Harvard stands were temporary structures of wood. The Harvard bleachers

were destroyed by fire in 1903, and, inspired by the alumni of the class of 1879; the

university replaced them with the first steel and concrete stadium built in the United

States. Built in four and a half months, the stadium was widely criticized for a variety of

aesthetic, engineering, and functional reasons, and was even described as “the biggest

single chunk of concrete in the world” by Robert Campbell, an architectural critic for the

Boston Globe and a Harvard alumnus.13

Criticisms notwithstanding, the Harvard Stadium established the potential for

permanent stadia for university football programs as well as baseball teams in America.

The idea for the stadium originated with Ira Nelson Hollis, a professor of mechanical

engineering and chairman of the athletic committee. Engineers for the stadium were

Lewis J. Johnson, an assistant professor of civil engineering who sketched the original

design, and J.R. Worcester, and the architectural treatment was handled by Charles F.

McKim and G.B. de Gersdorff (of Mckim, Mead, and White). Total cost was 310,000

dollars.14

13 Robert C. Trumpbour, The New Cathedrals: Politics and Media in the History of Stadium Construction (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 2007), 15-16; Craig Lambert, “First and 100: Harvard Stadium, with its storied past, is football’s Edifice Rex” in Harvard Magazine (Sept.-Oct. 2003), 45. 14Lambert, 45, 50; Lewis J. Johnson, “The Design of the Steel-Concrete Work of the Harvard Stadium” in Association of Engineering Societies (32[6], June 1904), passim; The Harvard Stadium is listed in the McKim, Mead, and White building list as having been underway or planning in 1899, with McKim as designer for the external shell and colonnade. This was the period when McKim was heavily involved with

17

In plan, the stadium is configured in the shape of a U, and draws heavily upon the

Olympic Stadium in Athens, recently excavated and restored for the 1896 Olympic

Games. In fact, both the Harvard Stadium and the Olympic Stadium in Athens were of

the same length: 575 feet. However, the exterior façade draws upon Roman precedents,

such as a small circus, consisting of a two tiered system of arches, the whole of which

projects a heavy, aqueduct-like appearance. Initial seating capacity was estimated at

23,000. On either end of the U are two simple towers, the upper portions of which were

added, along with an encircling Doric colonnade along the top of the stadium, in 1909

and 1910, which, along with wooden seats added above the running track, brought

seating capacity to 40,000. This Doric colonnade was clearly part of the original design,

based on drawings published in 1904. This also added a third level to the exterior façade,

but instead consisted of smaller, more widely spaced arches, the whole of which is

surmounted by a great cornice.15

In addition to a football gridiron (called Soldier’s Field), there is a quarter mile

track. In what was to become a common theme among these early stadia, prospects of

additional athletic facilities, such as handball courts and a rifle range, were noted as being

possible for the space underneath the seats. Seemingly, the university was aiming to

utilize such an expensive building for more than just a few days out of the year. The

curved end of the stadium, based on the arc of a true circle, was used for theatrical

productions and pageants, much like a Greek theatre. There are two sets of portals, an

upper and lower, the lower set accessed from the ground surface, and the upper set

commissions and planning at Harvard, his building for the School of Architecture, Robinson Hall, had only recently been completed. Leland M. Roth, The Architecture of McKim, Mead, and White, 1870-1920: A Building List (New York: Garland Publishing Inc., 1978), 70. 15 Lambert, 50. Lambert also gives the length as 576 feet; Johnson, 32.

18

Harvard Stadium (1903).

Harvard Stadium as it stands today.

19

Harvard Stadium (1903), from The American Architect, August 1920.

Harvard Stadium, elevations and sections, from Association of Engineering Societies, June 1904.

20

accessed by a promenade that corresponds to the second level of exterior arches. This

promenade is accessed by four sets of stairs: one in each of the two end towers, and one

each where the straight side joins the curved portion of the stadium. In 1920, Howard D.

Smith, architect of the new stadium at Ohio State University, visited a number of stadia

to study the various positive and negative aspects of each. These visits were reported in a

series of articles in The American Architect later that same year. Of the drawbacks noted,

the track is too close to the high (9 ft) stadium wall, impeding sightlines for track events,

and that the upper portal becomes congested as crowds exit the stadium; the single lower

portal was sufficient.16

The Yale Bowl

Following the example of Harvard, Syracuse University erected a stadium in

1908. Though smaller than the one at Harvard, the Syracuse Stadium was entirely Gothic

in styling, with medieval “towers” adjacent the major entrance and a grandstand at one

end outlined with Gothic arches. It followed the plan of the Harvard Stadium--straight

side with curved end and open on the other as in a U. By 1914 however, Harvard’s

biggest football rivals-Yale and Princeton-began construction on their football stadia.

Like Syracuse, the Princeton Stadium was finished in a Gothic style, specifically Tudor,

and is a more sophisticated design. It too is U-shaped, but the closed end is not circular

but flattened into a three-centered curve. A monumental arched entrance, flanked by

hexagonal towers and crennelated parapets, is at the base of the U, and the exterior façade

is composed of a series of what are essentially stilted Tudor arches. It was designed by

H.L. Hardenbergh of New York, and engineering by Purdy and Henderson, also of New

16 Howard Dwight Smith, “Report on Trip to Princeton, College of City of New York, Yale and Harvard for the Purpose of Inspecting the Stadia at those Universities: Part IV” in The American Architect and Building News (118[2330], August 18, 1920), 221-224.

21

York.. Both the Syracuse and Princeton stadia are unusual in that they both employ a

decidedly classical building form and clad it with a medieval style, presenting a contrast,

or even clash, to the critical eye.17

More importantly, however, was what would come to be called the Yale Bowl

influenced stadium design even more so than the Harvard Stadium, and rather than taking

its cue from ancient Greece, as Harvard did, the Yale Bowl is decidedly Roman. Unlike

the preceding stadia, the Yale Bowl was built for football only; there is no track or any

facilities under the seats. Able to seat 61,000 spectators, the bowl was partially

excavated, thus the lower half of the bowl is subgrade, with thirty tunnels providing

access to the portals, and the seats above are built upon an embankment. In plan, the

bowl takes the form of an ellipse, taking the general form of ancient Roman

amphitheatres. Architectural embellishment is minimal, limited to single arches with

decorated tympana of the portal tunnels, often with carved bulldogs, and a tripartite

arched main entrance, reminiscent of a Roman triumphal arch; otherwise grassy earth

consists of the bowl’s outward appearance. Charles A. Ferry was the engineer, and Donn

Barber served as architect. More an engineering marvel (the concrete operations were

staggering) than an architectural masterpiece, the Yale Bowl would come to serve as the

basic plan for most of the succeeding stadia built in America. Just as the ancient Romans

17 “The New Stadium for Syracuse University” in Architects and Builders Magazine (9[7], April 1908), 310-317; “Design and Construction Features of the Palmer Memorial Stadium, Princeton, N.J.” in Engineering and Contracting (43[21], May 26, 1915), 472-475; H.D. Smith, “Report on Trip to Princeton, College of City of New York, Yale and Harvard for the Purpose of Inspecting the Stadia at those Universities: Part I” in The American Architect and Building News (118[2326], July 21, 1920), 94-96. Apparently the Princeton Stadium was poorly built, as there were no expansion joints, and the concrete was improperly mixed and within a few years was showing signs of deterioration.

22

Main entrances to (l) Princeton Stadium (1914) and (r) Syracuse Stadium (1908).

Postcard view of the Yale Bowl (1914).

Cross section of the Yale Bowl, from Engineering Record, March 1914.

23

Yale Bowl, plan, from Engineering Record, March 1914.

Postcard View of the Ohio Stadium, Ohio State University (1922).

24

had come to realize, the ellipse provided ideal sightlines for spectators and tended to

“equalize” in a sense the seating.18

That same year Mississippi State built a small stadium, with slightly curved sides

and open ends, apparently taking its cue from the Yale Bowl but much reduced in size

and in segments. The following year Cornell built a small concrete stadium, able to seat

9,000; the City College of New York also built a stadium that year, though it was

significantly smaller, seating 7,000, and consisting of only one long side and half of the

curved end. Like at Harvard, the stadium had a Doric colonnade along its crest and

terminating in simple square towers. In 1917 the University of Wisconsin built the initial

section, able to seat 10,000, of what would be a larger bowl stadium.19

The Ohio Stadium

The arrival of the Roaring ‘20s signaled a new era in stadium construction,

unprecedented in number and scale since ancient Rome. For instance, five stadia, both

football and baseball, had been built in the United States by 1913, twenty had been built

or were underway in 1920, and in 1923 there were twenty, with two more under

construction. These stadia were not only university structures or ballparks, but the

municipal multi-purpose stadium, a new concept that developed with civic center

planning in vogue, would come into the scene.20

18 “Yale Stadium to Seat 61,000 Spectators” in Engineering Record (69[13], March 28, 1914), 369-372; ““Yale “Bowl” Construction Finished in Time for Harvard Game To-Day” in Engineering Record (70[21] November 21, 1914), 556-558; H.D. Smith, “Report on Trip to Princeton, College of City of New York, Yale and Harvard for the Purpose of Inspecting the Stadia at those Universities: Part III” in The American Architect and Building News (118[2328], August 4, 1920), 160-164. 19 Roger Weber, “A short history of college football stadia” electronic document available at SportsLibrary.net; Gavin Hadden, “The Cornell Crescent” in The Architectural Record (57[3], March 1925), 193; H.D. Smith, “Report on Trip to Princeton, College of City of New York, Yale and Harvard for the Purpose of Inspecting the Stadia at those Universities: Part II” in The American Architect and Building News (118[2327], July 28, 1920), 124-126. 20 Roi L. Morin, “Stadia-Part I” in The American Architect (124[2431], October 24, 1923), 365.

25

The Ohio Stadium at Ohio State University, designed by Howard Dwight Smith,

would become one of the most revolutionary stadium designs in history. The Ohio

Stadium is revolutionary in that it “corrects” the disadvantages of the open and closed

types of stadia, namely those of Harvard and Yale, respectively. An open stadium such as

at Harvard allows for better air movement and an additional quarter mile track with 220

yard straight-aways for dashes, though the straight sided seating gave poor visibility. The

closed stadium, such as at Yale, with its curved seating, brings the spectators closer to the

field and allows for better vision, though at the expense of the additional track and

ventilation. The Ohio Stadium is of a “horseshoe” type which is both open on one end

and has curved side seating, allowing ideal vision for all spectators as well as bringing

them closer to the field. It was noted that this type also made for greater compositional

unity. It was also revolutionary for its engineering, being the first stadium in history to

have an upper deck, which allowed for a greater number of spectators to be closer to the

field, one of the first large scale uses of the revolutionary technique of using slurry walls

for the foundations, and to have sophisticated planning for vertical crowd movement

along ramps, stairs, and promenades. Finally, it was stylistically an elegant design,

skillfully incorporating a monumental neo-classicism into a building type resurrected by

American architects and on a scale unrealized in the ancient world. It was a good

engineering structure possessing architecture.21

The idea for a new stadium began in 1916, following a successful football season

and the realization that Ohio Field could not handle the increasing demand for football

tickets. In 1918 plans and preparations were underway, and financing would come from

21 Charles St. J. Chubb, “The Ohio Stadium, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio” in The American Architect (130[2504], September 5, 1926), 203-212.

26

both profits from athletics, namely football, and from public subscriptions through a

capital campaign, which would give subscribers, both the public and from students,

preferences for tickets. Ground was broken in August 1921, within an expansive pasture

along the fringe of campus and next to the Olentangy River. Estimated construction costs

were projected at 930,000 dollars, but the final, total cost came to approximately

$1,500,000. The most expensive structure built to that point on a university campus

made clear that big-time football would become a permanent fixture of intercollegiate

athletics.22

A narrative of back-history to the stadium, and indeed information on the

increasing popularity of the so called “mass athletics” at Ohio State, a description of the

design process, design problems and how they were solved, and the nuances of the

stadium design itself, was provided by the architect in a lengthy article in the November

1920 Architectural Record. In this article, Smith states that the three aspects of the Ohio

Stadium that set it apart from previous stadia were the upper deck, the curved sides with

open end, and the extensive use of the space beneath the seats, mostly for additional

athletic facilities, including more track courses, locker rooms, team and training rooms,

and other support facilities. These three features would become standard design practice

in most subsequent stadia. Seating capacity was just over 62,000 and expandable to

80,000 by utilizing the aisles, making it one of the largest stadiums constructed since

ancient Rome; however, this claim would soon fall with the opening of Chicago’s Soldier

Field and the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum.23

22 “Ohio Stadium: The Beginning” at “Birth of Ohio Stadium” electronic document, http://www.wosu.org/archive/horseshoe/index.htm, accessed March 28, 2009. 23 Howard Dwight Smith, “The Ohio Stadium at Ohio State University” in The Architectural Record (48[5], November 1920), 385-406; Chubb, 391.

27

The innovative engineering and other design nuances could fill a very lengthy

paper, but for the current paper the style of the stadium is of particular interest. The style

used for the Ohio Stadium depends on “monumental simplicity and classic severity” to

“express the ideals for which it is built” and influenced by historic precedent.24 That is to

say, a monumental classicism directly linked to ancient imperial Rome. We are fortunate

that an in-depth study of the classical precedents and sources for the Ohio Stadium

survives in the form of a thesis for the Bachelor of Architecture degree, undertaken by

Arthur Francis Deam at the Ohio State University in 1921. The chair of the committee,

who approved the thesis, was the architect himself-Howard Dwight Smith. At this point

some brief words about the architect is in order. Born in Dayton, Ohio in 1886, he

graduated from Ohio State in 1907 with the degree of Civil Engineer in Architecture. He

then studied architecture at Columbia University, from which he graduated in 1910;

while at Columbia he received a Perkins traveling fellowship in architecture. Following

graduation, he worked in the office of John Russell Pope, the well known American

architect, until he returned to Ohio State in 1918 to become a professor of architecture,

though briefly, as he entered practice in Columbus in 1921, where he became a major

regional architect and occasionally represented the office of Pope for local projects. In

1929 he returned to teaching at Ohio State and served as the campus architect until his

retirement in 1956. It was during the period 1919 to 1922 that Smith designed and

supervised the construction of the Ohio Stadium. Further cementing the acclaim of the

24 Smith, “The Ohio Stadium”, 400.

28

Ohio Stadium design, he received the Gold Medal at the annual convention of the

American Institute of Architects for 1921.25

In regards to the classical influence, the focus of much of the design is on the

great monumental entrance located at the base of the “horseshoe.” Composed of a great

semicircular entrance with a coffered semi-dome, measuring 100 feet high and 72 feet in

diameter, suggests niches of the ancient Roman baths or a cutaway of the Pantheon in

Rome. To the rear of the semicircular space are three stilted arches, and a continuous

band of swags or festoons ring the base of the semi-dome. Flanking the semicircular

space are two towers, with a stilted blind arch, and above the band of festoons that

continue across the entire composition, are single rectangular openings with Tuscan

columns and an entablature. Much of the exterior façade of the stadium is given over to

stilted arches, suggesting an aqueduct-like appearance, and above an attic story of

engaged pilasters directly based on the attic story of the Colosseum in Rome.

Terminating the ends of the open “horseshoe” are towers, similar to those adjacent the

great entrance, and are said to be loosely based on the Tower of the Winds in Athens and

the Mausoleum of Halikarnassos. In order to maintain simplicity and monumentality, the

Tuscan Order was utilized due to its lack of ornamentation. Other classical devices used

throughout the stadium are rosettes, consoles, festoons, grilles, fretwork, and groined

vaults for the ground level passages. A major concern was how to tie the entire building

25 “Ohio Stadium: The Men behind the Stadium” at “Birth of Ohio Stadium” electronic document, http://www.wosu.org/archive/horseshoe/index.htm, accessed March 28, 2009.; Arthur Francis Deam, The Influence of Classical Architecture in the Design of the Ohio Stadium, Bachelor of Architecture Thesis, The Ohio State University, 1921.

29

Rendering, main entrance, Ohio Stadium, from The Architectural Record, November 1920.

Elevation renderings, Ohio Stadium, from The Architectural Record, November 1920.

30

Partial exterior elevation rendering, Stadium, from The Architectural Record, November 1920.

Perspective rendering , tower, Ohio Stadium, from The Architectural Record, November 1920.

31

Plan rendering, Ohio Stadium, from The Architectural Record, November 1920.

32

Details of main entrance, Ohio Stadium, from The American Architect, November 1926.

33

ower details, Ohio Stadium, from The American Architect, November 1926.

T

34

Plan, Ohio Stadium, from The Architectural Record, November 1920.

35

Cross Section, Ohio Stadium, from The Architectural Record, November 1920.

Plans and section of tower, Ohio Stadium, from The Architectural Record, November 1920.

36

together visually, which was achieved through the fascia band of the upper deck, meant

to emulate the sweeping and unbroken cornices of the Colosseum.26

The Proliferation of the Stadium in the 1920s

As stated earlier, the Ohio Stadium was immensely influential in the area of

stadium design. The 1920s was one of the great periods of stadium construction, with

dozens of these facilities constructed across the country. Similar in design to Ohio, but

apparently the “horseshoe” or “bow-sided” design was arrived at independently, the

stadium for the University of Washington was designed by Carl F. Gould in 1920-21.

Half sunk into the earth, the upper portion of the façade consists of an arcade, with twin

towers flanking the main entrance. Another stadium built at the same time, with curved

sides but with an open corner (to allow for the straightaway track), was Stanford Stadium,

which opened in 1921. Other stadia of note from this same period include the Rose Bowl

in Pasadena, and the Memorial Stadium at the University of California, both based on the

elliptical Yale Bowl; the University of Nebraska, based on Ohio but much simpler in

detailing; and the University of Kansas in 1921 and the University of Pennsylvania in

1922, both following the U plan of Harvard’s stadium. Franklin Field at the University

of Pennsylvania, designed by the noted Philadelphia firm of Day and Klauder, presented

some design challenges due to the small nature of the site and the disparate architectural

styles of the surrounding buildings (which included the acclaimed University Museum).

Finished in a warm red brick that blends with its environs and an Italian Renaissance

style, with broad Roman arches and stone trim, terra cotta (presumably) cartouches and

consoles at the recessed, semicircular main entrances at the corners of the closed end,

Franklin Field is an elegant design. Seating capacity was 40,000, and in 1925 a small 26 Deam, passim; Smith, “The Ohio Stadium”, 400-403.

37

upper deck was added. The University of California stadium was an elegant classical

design by John Galen Howard, partially set within a canyon at the edge of campus and

said to be loosely based on the Colosseum, though the parallels are rather vague. In 1924

the Georgia School of Technology (later Georgia Institute of Technology) built

permanent stands at Grant Field (along with semi-permanent east stands built by students

in 1913) in the form of a U, that is, with straight sides. The external façade along North

Avenue and Techwood Drive featured blind arches with Italian Renaissance motifs and

finished in white stucco.27

Although a number of stadia were built at this time, in varying degrees of stylistic

and design sophistication, one of the most classicizing of university stadia (other than the

Ohio Stadium) was for the University of Illinois. Named the Memorial Stadium, a

common practice at the time to honor the fallen of World War I, it was built during the

period 1921 through 1924. Designed by the prominent Chicago firm of Holabird and

Roche, the stadium is in the plan of a U, with the two long sides rising in two tiers and

the enclosed end consisting of a curved embankment for temporary seating. At either end

of the permanent stands are tower pavilions, finished in brick and stone trim with

Classical details of a balustrade, consoles, engaged columns and an entablature, circular

stone panels, and urns at the roofline. These corner pavilions contain ramps which

provide access to all levels of the stadium, including the promenade and portal system,

memorial colonnade, and the upper deck. This memorial colonnade, located atop the 27 Smith, “The Ohio Stadium”, 394, 396; “Construction Work Starts on Huge Seattle Stadium” in The American Architect (117[2322], June 23, 1920), 806-807; Weber, np; Roi L. Morin, “Stadia-Part I” in The American Architect (124[2431], October 24, 1923), 366-373; Roi L. Morin, “Stadia-Part IV” in The American Architect (126[2453], August 27, 1924), 197-205; “The Franklin Field Stadium, University of Pennsylvania” in The Architectural Forum (39, August 1923), 73-74; Warren Edward Drury III, The Architectural Development of Georgia Tech. Unpublished Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, 1984, 137-141; Sally B. Woodridge, John Galen Howard and the University of California (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002), 155-157.

38

lower tier of seats, is of the Doric order and extends between the two towers along the

exterior façade. A series of eight arched entrances with classical detailing are along the

first level; otherwise the façade is a great expanse of brick, unlike some of the other

stadium examples that employ a monumental arcade along the full length of its exterior.

Seating capacity was 60,000, but with temporary seating in both ends capacity could be

extended to 100,000. Just as with their design for the Grant Park Stadium (Soldier Field),

the plans had to be scaled back due to the projected costs from the initial, monumental

designs. In the first plan, a 200 foot campanile was included, and in another conception,

both ends would be enclosed within a semicircle of permanent seating, surmounted by a

great colonnade with a single tower. Along the exterior of one side façade would have

been a huge fountain and reflecting pool. Like the Ohio Stadium, the Illinois structure

embodied the new and innovative engineering of the period with the skillful application

of a monumental classical style, resulting in a sophisticated and imposing design.28

Stadium building continued at a fast pace for both universities as well as

municipal government on into the late 1920s, with such notable stadia such as Michigan

Stadium (1927), and a slew of stadia in the Pac10 and the SEC. In the latter conference

such famous stadia as Samford Stadium at the University of Georgia and Denny Stadium

at the University of Alabama opened in 1929. Reflective of changing tastes in style,

Denny Stadium at Alabama was finished in an Art Deco style. During that decade there

were also experimentations with form, most exemplified with the Cornell Crescent, built

in 1925. Designed by Gavin Hadden, a civil engineer based in New York, the Cornell

Crescent was built on only one side of the gridiron and features a curved silhouette,

28 Robert Bruegmann, Holabird and Roche, Holabird and Root: An Illustrated Catalog of Works, Volume II, 1911-1927 (New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1991), 216-220.

39

Franklin Field, University of Pennsylvania, 1923, from Myron Serby, The Stadium, 1931.

Corner entrance, Franklin Field, University of Pennsylvania, from The American Architect, October 1923.

40

Grant Field, Georgia School of Technolog (1924).

Postcard view of Stanford Stadium (1921).

41

Memorial Stadium, University of Illinois (1924).

Memorial Stadium, University of Illinois (1924), from Robert Bruegmann, Holabird and Roche, Holabird and Root: An Illustrated Catalog of Works, Volume II, 1911-1927 (New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1991).

42

Perspective rendering, Cornell Crescent (1925), from The Architectural Record, March 1925).

Colonnade, Cornell Crescent (1925), from The Architectural Record, March 1925.

43

Brown University Stadium (1925), from The American Architect, February 1926.

Façade, Brown University Stadium (1925), from The American Architect, February 1926.

44

forming a crescent or partial semicircle. On either end are temple-like structures,

between which is a single Tuscan colonnade. The exterior façade consists of large

Roman arches with square openings along the attic level, which corresponds to the

colonnade.29 In addition to variations of form, well known architects became involved

with stadium design. For example, the Brown University stadium was designed by Gavin

Hadden, in consultation with the acclaimed French architect Paul Cret, who taught at the

University of Pennsylvania. Similar in concept to the Cornell Crescent, the Brown

University Stadium assumes a partial octagonal silhouette, largely dictated by the unusual

plot configuration. Here the colonnade is dispensed with, and instead two towers, simple

in their detailing, crown the dual summits of the stadium. The exterior façade,

presumably by architect Cret, contains five great arches, a series of decorative grilles, and

a central cartouche, the whole of which is flanked by Renaissance inspired towers.30

The Multipurpose Municipal Stadium Following World War I there was a trend in American cities to plan “civic

centers” of public buildings (i.e. library, auditorium, museum, city hall, etc.) as an

integral and coherent part of the city. In addition, the prosperity of the 1920s led to civic

improvements in many cities, and soon the stadium emerged as a monumental and

symbolic reflection of a particular city’s ideals and goals and how the citizenry viewed

themselves. Surprisingly, a driving force behind this (in addition to the increasing

popularity of sports) was pageantry, associated with military might and patriotic duty,

29 The curvilinear design is described by the architect as incidental, being arrived at through practical logic by “the combination of the circular curve in plan with the logarithmic curve in cross-section. Geometrically, this curve may be approximately defined as the intersection of a logarithmic horizontal cylindrical surface with a circular vertical cylindrical surface.” Gavin Hadden, “The Cornell Crescent” in The Architectural Record (57[3], March 1925), 195. 30 Gavin Hadden and Paul Cret, “The Brown University Stadium” in The American Architect (129[2491], February 20, 1926), 285-288; Gavin Hadden, “The Cornell Crescent”, 193-203.

45

which had become a part of the American mindset during the world war; in addition,

numerous monuments and memorials were erected. In response to these factors, the City

of Chicago announced an architectural competition for a new stadium on the lakefront, to

be located adjacent the Field Museum of Natural History. Central to the specifications

was the need to accommodate a number of different types of events, and the multipurpose

municipal stadium was born.

Chicago’s Soldier Field

Planning for a multipurpose stadium, to be located in Grant Park along the

lakefront, began by the park board in 1919, and invitations for an architectural

competition were extended to six Chicago architectural firms; details of the competition

program and the submissions were published in the American Architect in two parts in

February 1920. All of the submissions were classical in style, largely dictated by the

adjacent Field Museum of Natural History, so as to present aesthetic unity. The firm of

Holabird and Roche was selected as having the best design, and it was clearly the most

grandiose and monumental of the six competition entries. It was to be U shaped, with the

open end on axis to the main façade of the Field Museum, directly to the north.31 Along

the top of the straight sides were to be a massive double colonnade with end porticoes

and at the center of the curved south end was to be an immense obelisk and circular base,

the purpose of which was to memorialize fallen soldiers of World War I. The stadium

was to be enormous, one of the largest in the country, seating 60,000 in the permanent

stands and another 40,000 along the terraces and temporary seating areas. The

multipurpose use of the stadium is made clear in the competition program, which outlines

31 Actually the stadium is slightly off axis or canted due to the Illinois Central Railroad rail yard to the southwest of the stadium site, necessitating this slight bending of the axis, but the bend is quite minor and only noticeable is aerial views.

46

that the stadium “be so arranged that large numbers of people may view processions,

pageants, military maneuvers, concerts, outdoor dramatics, athletic contests, track meets,

horse shows, fairs, winter sports, ice carnivals, etc., etc.” and the spaces beneath the

stands given over to office suites, storage rooms, restrooms, locker rooms, loading docks,

locker rooms and dressing rooms for the theatre portion, and even stables. Large spaces

for exhibition halls were also included in the plans.32

After several modifications to the plans, seating arrangements, and downscaling

of the obelisk memorial, apparently substantial enough for Holabird and Roche to change

the commission number, construction began in 1922 and was partially completed and in

use in 1924, and finished entirely in 1926 with the completion of the curved south end,

when it was dedicated at the Army-Navy football game as Soldier Field (it was

previously known as the Municipal Grant Park Stadium). The most striking aspect of the

completed design is the imposing Doric colonnades atop the east and west stands which

terminate in porticoes. These colonnades, of cast concrete so as to resemble block

masonry, with their entablatures and frieze of metopes and triglyphs, pediments and

acroteria, rise some 100 feet above the playing field, and provide striking views of Lake

Michigan, the Field Museum, and the city; it was truly a monumental public space. The

exterior façade is more austere, solid and punctuated by groupings of four rectangular

windows between slightly projecting entryways with classical inspired door surrounds;

staircases ascend to the colonnades. The stadium was published in the Architectural

Forum in February 1925, and in this article the architects relate that the

Doric columns of the colonnade closely follow those of the portico in the temple of Athena, commonly called the Parthenon. Exhibition halls under the stands are

32 “Competition for a Stadium on the Lake Front, Chicago-Part I” in The American Architect (117[2304], February 18, 1920), 206-207.

47

Competition perspective rendering, Grant Park Stadium (Soldier Field), from Robert Bruegmann, Holabird and Roche, Holabird and Root: An Illustrated Catalog of Works, Volume II, 1911-1927 (New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1991).

Soldier Field as built (1924), from Robert Holabird and Roche, Holabird and Root: An Illustrated Catalog of Works, Volume II, 1911-1927 (New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1991).

48

Competition plan rendering, from Robert Holabird and Roche, Holabird and Root: An Illustrated Catalog of Works, Volume II, 1911-1927 (New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1991).

49

Exterior detail, Soldier Field, from Robert Holabird and Roche, Holabird and Root: An Illustrated Catalog of Works, Volume II, 1911-1927 (New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1991).

50

Colonnade detail, Soldier Field, from Robert Holabird and Roche, Holabird and Root: An Illustrated Catalog of Works, Volume II, 1911-1927 (New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1991).

51

Section, Soldier Field, from Robert Holabird and Roche, Holabird and Root: An Illustrated Catalog of Works, Volume II, 1911-1927 (New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1991).

Section, Soldier Field, from Robert Holabird and Roche, Holabird and Root: An Illustrated Catalog of Works, Volume II, 1911-1927 (New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1991).

Soldier Field on dedication day, 1926, from Robert Holabird and Roche, Holabird and Root: An Illustrated Catalog of Works, Volume II, 1911-1927 (New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1991).

52

Competition elevation renderings, Grant Park Stadium, from The American Architect, February 1920.

53

Soldier Field, from Architectural Forum, February 1925.

54

Detail, Soldier Field, from Architectural Forum, February 1925.

55

copied after some of the hypostyle halls in Greek temples, the Ionic columns and the doors having been modeled from examples in the Erechtheion. All details throughout the structure are adapted from authoritative Classic Greek sources.33

They further relate that the space beneath the east and west stands were constructed free

of columns, leaving some 125,000 square feet of exhibition space available in three large

halls. It was both an engineering and architectural marvel; unfortunately, the main

criticisms of the stadium is its relatively low profile (dictated in the competition program)

which meant many seats were farther from the field and this ruled out an upper deck.

Thus sight lines can be relatively poor, and designing a facility for many different events

meant that it would be less than ideal for a single use event such as football.

Nonetheless, Soldier Field endures as a Chicago landmark, and has been recently

expanded and modified into a sleek modern stadium while still retaining the colonnades

and exterior finish.34

Other Municipal Stadia

Planned and built at the same time as Soldier Field in Chicago, the Los Angeles

Memorial Colosseum was based on the elliptical Yale plan, and its immense size

reflected the wider-ranging needs of a municipality rather than a university. No numbers

regarding initial seating capacity could be located; however it was noted in a period

write-up that it sat just less than the capacity of the Yale Bowl. Finished in concrete, the

stadium is a frank expression of its building material, molded into the forms of arches,

support columns, and recessed panels. Detailing is kept to a minimum, and aesthetic

focus centers on the great peristyle gateway, with its larger, central arch and the smaller

flanking arches, at the open end of the structure. It was designed by John and Donald B.

33 “The Grant Park Stadium, Chicago” in The Architectural Forum (42, February 1925), 79. 34 “The Grant Park Stadium, Chicago”, 79; Bruegmann, 141-149.

56

Perspective rendering, Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum (1923), from The American Architect, May 1924.

Entrance detail, Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum, from The American Architect, May 1924.

57

Parkinson, and could accommodate track meets, football, and baseball games. Opened in

1923, the stadium was greatly enlarged, by the same architects, for the 1932 Olympics.

Seating capacity of the expanded structure was 105,000, and hosted the Olympic Games

again in 1984.35

Two municipal stadiums that followed the design scheme of the Ohio Stadium

were the Terra Haute Stadium, completed in 1926, and Legion Field in Birmingham,

completed in 1927. At the Birmingham stadium, designed by prominent local architect

D.O. Whilldin, only the west stands were built, with remaining sections to come later.

Although constructed in a piece-meal fashion over several decades, the vision of how

Legion Field was to look when completed survives in the form of a small rendering,

which clearly shows Legion Field as a horseshoe shaped stadium, open on one end to

allow for ventilation and for additional track and with curved seating banks for ideal

sightlines. On the south end of the stadium, or at the base of the horseshoe, was a

monumental gateway that featured massive stone quoins, a flagpole above the lintel, and

“LEGION FIELD” inscribed at the to On either side along the arms of the horseshoe, was

a twenty seven bay brick arcade, and above each arch was a festoon panel cast in

concrete and a shield., the ends of which terminated in a brick pavilion. An elevation of

the monumental south entrance, which rises above the level of the surrounding structure,

shows deeply channeled brickwork or ashlar masonry framing a massive Ionic distyle in

35 Roi L. Morin, “Stadia-Part III” in The American Architect (125[2445], May 7, 1924), 427-434; John and Donald B. Parkinson, “Olympic Stadium in Los Angeles” in The Architectural Record (70, December 1931), 419-424.

58

Perspective rendering, Legion Field (1927), from Birmingham Park and Recreation Board.

Proposed main entrance, Legion Field (1927), from The Birmingham News.

59

antis portico with entablature, and egg-and-dart molding. Above is the inscription field

with a large cartouche containing a lion’s head. 36

Concluding Remarks The history of the stadium is a discontinuous one. First emerging deep in antiquity and

developing in the ancient Greek world out of the need for a setting for athletic contests

and spectators, the stadium became one of the larger civic monuments and central to

cities that hosted the myriad of games, which was such a central aspect of Greek society.

Further elaborated by the Romans, with advances in planning and engineering, the

amphitheatre became the setting for spectacles. A major facet of everyday life, the

amphitheatre was a necessary expense, and was found in most Roman cities and colonies.

They continued to be used, even after the coming of Christianity (ironic as the Colosseum

was the site of so many martyrdoms), until finally falling out of use in the 6th century

A.D. It would not be until 1896 that such a large outlay of capital would build a structure

of that scale, and specifically, for the purpose of sport and spectacle for the masses.

With the revival of the Olympic Games, the increasing popularity of team sports

such as baseball and football, as well as a variety of other things converging at the end of

the 19th century, the stadium was resurrected and reinterpreted for the modern world. In

the field of engineering, stadium construction required multiple solutions, made possible

by advances with steel and reinforced concrete. In architecture, there was a stylistic

choice, and architects in Europe and America took widely differing paths. In America

classicism was the prevailing taste, and in Europe, modernism was taking hold. For that

matter, the early decades of stadium construction was argued back and forth between

36 Thomas M. Shelby, From Beaux-Arts to Modernism: The Alabama Architecture of D.O. Whilldin, 1881-1970. M.A. Thesis, the University of Alabama, 2006; Thomas M. Shelby, D.O. Whilldin-Alabama Architect. Birmingham: Birmingham Historical Society, 2009.

60

architects and engineers as to who should design these things. It was soon apparent to

both professions that both were needed for such undertakings.

For the sociologist or anthropologist, the stadium represents a part of cultural

identity, and reflects the position of sports and spectacle in our society. They represent

civic and collegiate pride, and evoke collective memories that bridge social and racial

barriers. It is emotive nostalgia. In many cases they represent national pride; nowhere is

this more apparent than with the Olympic stadia that have been built over the last century,

many now considered major architectural landmarks. Politics has always been entwined

with the stadium, sometimes less subtle, other times, as in the case with those built in

Nazi Germany or Fascist Italy, a bit more subtle. They are a part of our consciousness,

whether we like it or not, and a part of our landscape. Yet as objects of study, in these

and many other fields where such inquiry would be fruitful, the stadium, and much of

sports for that matter, has been largely deemed as not important; it is the “other.” Indeed,

for many years leading up to the mid-1920s, architectural journals indexed stadia and the

like under the “other” or “miscellaneous” heading. Only with the rapid proliferation of

the stadium in the 1920s is it accorded its own heading. In contemporary accounts of the

stadium, which of course focus on the cutting edge designs of today, the history of this

form is glossed over, oversimplified, and rather matter of fact. By far the most beneficial

sources of information regarding these early types were the primary sources, the

architects and the engineering journals of the day, which would recount how particular

things were solved, correspondence between professionals about certain topics, and

images of structures and facades long since covered by later additions and forgotten by

the spectator. Stadia history is actually more complex than one would think, and bridges

61

many different fields of study. Perhaps more investigation should be done, and the story

told.

62

References Cited

Bomgardner, D.L. The Story of the Roman Amphitheatre. New York: Routledge, 2000. Bruegmann, Robert. Holabird and Roche, Holabird and Root: An Illustrated Catalog of Works, Volume II, 1911-1927. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1991. Chubb, Charles St. J. “The Ohio Stadium, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.” American Architect 130(2504), September 5, 1926: 203-212. Deam, Arthur Francis. The Influence of Classical Architecture in the Design of the Ohio Stadium. Bachelor of Architecture Thesis, Ohio State University, 1921. Drury III, Warren Edward. The Architectural Development of Georgia Tech. Unpublished Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, 1984. Hadden, Gavin. “The Cornell Crescent.” Architectural Record 57(3), March 1925: 193-203. _____ and Paul Cret. “The Brown University Stadium.” The American Architect 129(2491), February 20, 1926: 285-288. Harris, H.A. Sport in Greece and Rome. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1972. Hornblower, Simon and Antony Spawforth (ed.). The Oxford Companion to Classical Civilization. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998. Johnson, Lewis J. “The Design of the Steel-Concrete Work of the Harvard Stadium.” Association of Engineering Societies 32(6), June 1904: 293-325. Kyle, Donald G. Sport and Spectacle in the Ancient World. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2007. Lambert, Craig. “First and 100: Harvard Stadium, with its storied past, is football’s Edifice Rex.” Harvard Magazine (Sept.-Oct. 2003): 42-53. Levi, Peter. Atlas of Ancient Greece. New York: Facts on File, Inc., 1984. MacDonald, William L. The Architecture of the Roman Empire-Volume II: An Urban Appraisal. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982. Miller, Stephen G. Ancient Greek Athletics. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004. Roi L. Morin. “Stadia-Part III.” The American Architect 125(2445), May 7, 1924: 427-434.

63

_____. “Stadia-Part I.” The American Architect 124(2431), October 24, 1923: 365-373. _____. “Stadia-Part IV.” The American Architect 126(2453), August 27, 1924: 197-205. John and Donald B. Parkinson. “Olympic Stadium in Los Angeles.” The Architectural Record 70(December 1931): 419-424. Rader, Benjamin G. American Sports: From the Age of Folk Games to the Age of Televised Sports. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2004. Romano, David Gilman. Athletics and Mathematics in Archaic Corinth: The Origins of the Greek Stadion. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1993. Roth, Leland M. The Architecture of McKim, Mead, and White, 1870-1920: A Building List. New York: Garland Publishing Inc., 1978. Shelby, Thomas M. From Beaux-Arts to Modernism: The Alabama Architecture of D.O. Whilldin, 1881-1970. M.A. Thesis, the University of Alabama, 2006. _____. D.O. Whilldin-Alabama Architect. Birmingham: Birmingham Historical Society, 2009. Smith, Howard Dwight. “Report on Trip to Princeton, College of City of New York, Yale and Harvard for the Purpose of Inspecting the Stadia at those Universities: Part I.” The American Architect and Building News 118(2326), July 21, 1920: 94-96. _____. “Report on Trip to Princeton, College of City of New York, Yale and Harvard for the Purpose of Inspecting the Stadia at those Universities: Part II.” The American Architect and Building News 118(2327), July 28, 1920: 124-126. _____. “Report on Trip to Princeton, College of City of New York, Yale and Harvard for the Purpose of Inspecting the Stadia at those Universities: Part III.” The American Architect and Building News 118(2328), August 4, 1920: 160-164. _____. “Report on Trip to Princeton, College of City of New York, Yale and Harvard for the Purpose of Inspecting the Stadia at those Universities: Part IV.” The American Architect and Building News 118(2330), August 18, 1920: 221-224. _____. “The Ohio Stadium at Ohio State University.” The Architectural Record 48(5), November 1920: 385-406. Trumpbour, Robert C. The New Cathedrals: Politics and Media in the History of Stadium Construction. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 2007.

64

Warner, David J. “Football History 101: How the Stadium Shaped the Game.” electronic document, http://ncaafb.beta.fanhouse.com/2006/10/21/football-history-101-how-the-stadium-shaped-the-game/, accessed January 8, 2009. Weber, Roger. “The short history of college football stadia.” electronic document available at SportsLibrary.net, nd. Wheeler, Mortimer. Roman Art and Architecture. New York: Thames and Hudson, 1964. Whittingham, Richard. Rites of Autumn: The Story of College Football. New York: The Free Press, 2001. Woodbridge, Sally B. John Galen Howard and the University of California. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002. “Birth of Ohio Stadium.” electronic document, http://www.wosu.org/archive/horseshoe/index.htm, accessed March 28, 2009. “Competition for a Stadium on the Lake Front, Chicago-Part I.” The American Architect 117(2304), February 18, 1920: 205-212. “Competition for a Stadium on the Lake Front, Chicago-Part II.” The American Architect 117(2305), February 1920: 241-251, 274. “Construction Work Starts on Huge Seattle Stadium.” The American Architect 117(2322), June 23, 1920: 806-807. “Design and Construction Features of the Palmer Memorial Stadium, Princeton, N.J.” Engineering and Contracting 43(21), May 26, 1915: 472-475. “The Franklin Field Stadium, University of Pennsylvania.” Architectural Forum 39(August 1923): 73-74. “The Grant Park Stadium, Chicago.” Architectural Forum 42(February 1925): 79-80. “The New Stadium for Syracuse University.” Architects and Builders Magazine 9(7), April 1908: 310-317. “Yale Stadium to Seat 61,000 Spectators.” Engineering Record 69(13), March 28, 1914: 369-372. ““Yale “Bowl” Construction Finished in Time for Harvard Game To-Day.” Engineering Record 70(21), November 21, 1914: 556-558.

65