David Spurr of Brunswick is professor emeritus at the University of Geneva and teaches architectural history at the Midcoast Senior College.

At a dinner for wealthy donors last October, Donald Trump unveiled his plans for a triumphal arch to be built on the western shore of the Potomac River, across the Arlington Memorial Bridge from the Lincoln Memorial. As a monument to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the United States, the arch would be built 250 feet high, making it by far the largest triumphal arch in the world.

But the scale and placement of Trump’s proposed monument, as well as the symbolic meaning of the triumphal arch, are things that deserve to be questioned.

What kind of triumph does a triumphal arch celebrate?

The model that Trump has displayed has been compared to the Arc de Triomphe in Paris. But with its single arch and four Corinthian columns placed across the façade, Trump’s arch resembles nothing so much as the Arch of Titus in Rome.

That monument was constructed in 81 A.D. to commemorate the defeat of the first Jewish revolt against Roman rule in Judea. Roman soldiers sacked Jerusalem and destroyed the second temple. A relief on the inner wall of the Arch of Titus depicts Roman soldiers in a triumphal procession through Rome. They carry the spoils of war, including the temple menorah.

For centuries, the Arch of Titus continued to function as a monument to antisemitism. In the
16th century, Pope Paul IV required the Jews of Rome to swear an Oath of Submission while standing under the arch. In response to such measures, Roman Jews have traditionally observed an informal ban on walking under the arch.

With this history, the Arch of Titus may not be the best model for a celebration of America’s semiquincentennial. But are there better models?

With the fall of the Roman empire, the construction of triumphal arches passed out of fashion for centuries, to become popular again only in the last 200 years or so. Invariably, they were built to celebrate imperial conquest.

The Arc de Triomphe celebrates the Napoleonic campaigns, which subjugated much of
Europe to France’s imperial rule. In the 20th century, triumphal arches were favored by
fascist and authoritarian regimes. Madrid’s Arco de la Victoria was built by Francisco Franco
to commemorate an early victory of his forces over the republican resistance in 1936.

For the capital of the Thousand Year Reich in Berlin, Adolf Hitler planned an arch based on
the design of the Paris monument, but 330 feet tall. It was to stand over a wide “Avenue of
Splendors” marking a north-south axis in the city’s center.

The strategic location envisioned for Hitler’s arch sets a disturbing precedent for the
placement of Trump’s triumphal arch. As planned, the arch would stand directly on the axis
between the Lincoln Memorial and the Robert E. Lee Memorial at Arlington House,
overlooking the National Cemetery.

This orientation is highly symbolic for the American republic. The Arlington cemetery was established in 1864 to bury 16,000 soldiers, Union and Confederate, who had fallen in the Civil War. In a symbolic gesture to reunite the two sides, the Lincoln Memorial was placed both on the east-west axis with the Capitol Building, and on a second axis with the cemetery and Lee Memorial to the southwest.

Given its intended height, the Trump triumphal arch would dwarf both the Lincoln and the
Lee memorials, and would loom over the grave of John F. Kennedy, also on that axis.

Imperial conquest and authoritarian rule have never been among America’s core values. Nor
do we need a monument to mere vainglory. Before permitting Trump’s arch to be built,
Americans need to reflect on what exactly our country means to us, and how best to
commemorate its history with wisdom and dignity.