To an approximate scale of 1:90

.SVPRA. MO[N]TEM. AUREO. VBI. S. P[ETRUS] .CRUC[IF]/ ISSVS. .FVIT. (‘On top of the Golden Mountain [i.e. Montorio] where St Peter was crucified’); [measurements]

• c.1513/14
  Datable to c.1513/14

Pen and brown ink and grey-brown and brown wash over stylus lines and compass pricks

Bernardo della Volpaia

Bramante’s Tempietto, one of the most renowned of Renaissance buildings even in its own day, is located in a cloister attached to Rome’s church of San Pietro in Montorio (consecrated in 1500). It stands on what was believed by many to have been the site where St Peter, prince of the apostles and first pope, was crucified (see Freiburg 2014, pp. 42–45; Cantatore 2017b, pp. 67–69). Included among them, as the caption (in all’antica capitals) attests, was the author of this drawing, Bernardo della Volpaia, and such a conviction suggests that the building could have been conceived in some sense as a martyrium, that is to say a memorial with the primary purpose of marking the place of St Peter’s death. Precisely when the building was constructed is a matter of contention. Many writers (e.g. Frommel 2013/14; Freiburg 2014, pp. 137–44) hold that it was begun in 1502, which is the date inscribed on a stone plaque later embedded in the altar of the remodelled crypt, and that it was completed probably soon afterwards. Others, however, maintain that the date refers only to the crypt, which is of wider dimensions than the structure above, and that the Tempietto itself belonged to a revised or new project, designed during the pontificate of Pope Julius II (reg. 1503–13), perhaps around 1510, making it one of Bramante’s later works (Howard 1992; Hemsoll 2019b, pp. 149–52).

Dating from 1513/14, the Coner plan is among the earliest representations of the structure’s layout. It is generally accurate in corresponding to the early state of the structure before changes were made both soon after construction and during the seventeenth century (Cantatore 2017c). It shows the buildings with a circular peristyle of sixteen columns and respondent pilasters arranged around a circular core pierced with four doors opening into semi-circular alcoves on the principal axes, with external niches and window apertures in between and, on the inside, a circuit of eight pilasters in bays of alternating width. As shown in the plan, the four doors are of different size and design, the principal one at the bottom being wider than the others and having a portal surround, the one at the rear – next in width – being just cut through the wall, and the two at the sides – narrower still – being shown with attached jambs. They all appear to lead into the upper space, but this is misleading. The rear door provided access to a flight of steps (shown in early drawings in Rome and Kassel) that originally descended into the crypt from immediately behind an altar and altarpiece (as reconstructed in Schuller 2017, p. 253). That neither stairs nor altar are shown here is perhaps explained by the difficulty of representing such a complex arrangement.

Certain other features in the drawing do not correspond to the structure as built. The building is shown as having two rather than three steps that encircle the structure’s podium; the lowest of the three small steps leading up to the main entrance is omitted, as are all those in front of the side portals. Even more significant is that the cylindrical wall is shown as being considerably thicker than it is in reality, which allows the alcoves to be fully semi-circular rather than segmental. In fact, the wall is specified as being 1 braccio 46 minutes (1.03m) in width when measured from the internal to the external pilaster faces, which is much greater than its actual width (0.7m), while the internal diameter is then made correspondingly smaller, having a specified measurement of 6 braccia 48 minutes (3.97m) to the pilaster faces, this being significantly less than the actual width (4.45m). The intercolumniation in front of the main entrance is, in addition, shown as being marginally wider than the others.

The main dimensional discrepancies are perhaps best explained if the Coner plan is a record not of the Tempietto as built but of an early project drawing in which the building was proportioned rather differently. The plan can be interestingly compared with another of very early date that is probably by Giuliano da Sangallo and is in the Codex Barberini. While the two may seem to be independent of each other, since the latter is turned through 45 degrees in respect to the built alignment – the eventual windows being interpreted as doors and the alcoves left blind, they both show the building with a wall thickness that exceeds its actual wall thickness by precisely the same amount. The Coner plan then differs in this respect from later plans showing a reduced wall thickness and an increased interior diameter, such as two in Rome usually dated to after 1518, which in this and various other respects are closer to the building as finally realised. Why such a change may have been made may have been born from a need to make the internal diameter closer to that of the crypt beneath, and from a wish to make it better suited to a coherent overall proportional system (for which see Wilson Jones 1990).

The plan forms part of a sequence in the codex mainly given over to buildings of circular or centralised layout, which includes the Round Temple by the Tiber and the so-called Temple of Vesta at Tivoli (both on Fol. 14v/Ashby 24), the latter specifically compared to the Tempietto by Andrea Fulvio in 1527 (Fulvio 1527, fol. 27v (Freiburg 2014, p. 74). Having the plan on the same page as the circular Carceri Vecchie may well be largely fortuitous although they were apparently executed at around the same time (see Drawing 1). The two designs are similar in having pilasters framing an external circuit of niches alternating with rectangular openings, and the drawings are also much the same size.

OTHER IMAGES MENTIONED: [?Giuliano da Sangallo] Rome, BAV, Barb. lat. 4424 (Codex Barberini), fol. 39r (Hülsen 1910, 1, p. 56; Borsi 1985, pp. 201–02); [Anon.] Rome, ICG, Vol. 2510, fols 33r and 42r [plans of main storey] (Günther 1988, pp. 351–52 and pl. 70a and 75b; and fols 33v and 42r [crypt] (Günther 1988, pp. 351–52 and pl. 70b and 75b); [Anon.] Kassel, Schloss Wilhelmshöhe, Graphische Sammlung, Kassel Codex, fol. 21r [plan of main storey and crypt] (Günther 1988, p. 372 and pl. 118b)

OTHER DRAWINGS IN CODEX CONER OF SAME SUBJECT: Fol. 21r/Ashby 33; Fol. 22r/Ashby 34; Fol. 40r/Ashby 65

Ashby 1904, p. 21
De Angelis d’Ossat 1951, pp. 94–98
Bruschi 1969, pp. 998–99
Günther 1973, 180–1
Burns 1984, p. 422
Nesselrath 1986, pp. 91, 146
Günther 1988, pp. 336–38

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