Is the amphitheater used in the same way in this kingdom as it was elsewhere?

We are told by the narrator of "The Lady, or the Tiger?" that the king in this story has adapted the amphitheater to a new purpose. The narrator puts it this way:

The arena of the king was built, not to give the people an opportunity of hearing the rhapsodies of dying gladiators, nor to enable them to view the inevitable conclusion of a conflict between religious opinions and hungry jaws, but for purposes far better adapted to widen and develop the mental energies of the people.

In other words, the narrator is comparing this amphitheater to those built by the Romans. The Roman amphitheaters or coliseums were famous as places people went to watch gladiators fight or Christians die by being fed to hungry lions. This story's king has a new idea. He turns his amphitheater into a hall of justice, where people are tried for their crimes by having to open one of two doors. If they are innocent, they are rewarded with a beautiful maiden to marry, if guilty, they are devoured by a hungry tiger.
In reality, though, this combination of spectacle and barbarism is not much different from what the Roman audiences saw.