To an approximate scale of 1:150

.OBELLICVS./.CAESARIS. [‘Obelisk of Caesar’); [measurements]
[Inscribed on monument] DIVO. CAESARI [the first two words of CIL, 6, 882]
[Inscribed on monument but positioned in drawing beside it] DIVO. CAESARI. DI/ VI. IVLII. F. AV/ GVSTO. K./ TI. CAESARI. DI/ VI. AUGUSTI. F./ AUGUSTO. K. SACRUM.
(= CIL, 6, 882: DIVO. CAESARI. DI/ VI. IVLII. F(ILIO). AV/GVSTO./ TI(BERIO). CAESARI. DI/ VI. AUGUSTI. F(ILIO)./ AUGUSTO./ .SACRUM.)

• c.1513/14
  Datable to c.1513/14

Pen and brown ink and grey-brown wash

Bernardo della Volpaia

At the time it was recorded in this drawing, the Vatican obelisk stood on the southern side of St Peter’s, and in the same position it had occupied in antiquity, when it was erected on the spina of the Circus of Nero (see Alföldy 1990). In 1586, it was famously transported, under the direction of Domenico Fontana (Fontana 1590), to its present position at the centre of the piazza in front of St Peter’s, which was around when the bronze globe originally at the top (believed in the middle ages to contain the ashes of Julius Caesar) was presented to the Capitoline Museum (Helbig 1963–72, 2, pp. 383–84).

Topographical views, such as one from the 1530s associated with Maarten van Heemskerck, show the obelisk’s pedestal to have then been partly buried. Some early drawings, including one by Giuliano da Sangallo in the Codex Barberini (fol. 70r), depict the obelisk frontally, but a second there (fol. 8r) represents it in part-perspective like in the Coner depiction, albeit with the right rather than the left side visible and with an invented lower pedestal and steps. The obelisk, however, is represented (except for the part-truncated pedestal) in much the same way as in the Coner depiction in a copy drawing by Baldassare Peruzzi. Care was again taken in the Coner drawing to record the full inscription, which had been recently published by Francesco Albertini (Albertini 1510, 2, chapter 14, fol. Riii v).

The fact that the obelisk is shown with its left side visible, rather than right side, which is normal practice in the codex, would suggest that the drawing was based on a previous representation. The delineation of the pedestal, which runs into the base of the column next to it, indicates that it was executed after the neighbouring drawing.

OTHER IMAGES MENTIONED: [Giuliano da Sangallo] Rome, BAV, Barb. lat. 4424 (Codex Barberini), fols 8r and 70r (Hülsen 1910, pp. 16 and 72; Borsi 1985, pp. 71–75 and 239–43); [Baldassare Peruzzi] Florence, GDSU, 478 Ar+631 Av (Bartoli 1914–22, 6, pp. 58–59; Wurm 1984, pl. 456); [Circle of Maarten van Heemskerck] Berlin, Kupferstichkabinett, inv. 79 D 2a (Heemskerck Album II), fol. 22v (Hülsen–Egger 1913–16, 2, p. 18)

Ashby 1904, p. 39
Census, ID 44845

Drawing

Digitisation of the Codex Coner has been made possible through the generosity of the Census of Antique Works of Art and Architecture Known in the Renaissance, Berlin.

If you have any further information about this object, please contact us: drawings@soane.org.uk