Explore Collections
You are here:
CollectionsOnline
/
Folio 25 recto and flap (Ashby 39): Colosseum
Browse
Reference number
SM volume 115/39
Purpose
Folio 25 recto and flap (Ashby 39): Colosseum
Aspect
Longitudinal cross section combined with perspectival elevation
Scale
To an approximate scale of 1:250
Inscribed
[Drawing] [measurements]; 35 [early seventeenth-century hand]; 39 [modern hand]; [Mount] Section of the Colisseum [in pencil]; 39
Signed and dated
- c.1513/14
Datable to c.1513/14
Medium and dimensions
[Drawing] Pen and brown ink and grey-brown wash over stylus lines and compass pricks; on a folded double sheet of laid paper (233x336mm); stitching holes down centre, rounded corners at left and right, left half inlaid and right half folded to cover it (sheet mounted back-to-front with respect to original foliation, window on verso of mount)
[Mount] Frame lines, in pen and dark brown ink, 10mm apart
Hand
Bernardo della Volpaia
Watermark
[Drawing] Anchor in circle topped with six-pointed star (variant 2; straddling central fold) [Mount] Fleur-de-lys in circle surmounted with crown (variant 2; cut by bottom edge of window)
Notes
This is one of four sectional drawings of the Colosseum that form a coherent group (25r and flap/Ashby 39, 25 verso of flap/Ashby 39A, 25v/Ashby 40 and 26r/Ashby 41), much like the plans at the start of the codex (Fols 2r–v and 3r–v/Ashby 1, 2, 3 and 4). It is also the most sophisticated of them in combining a section with a high-level view of the arena, which is not shown in any of the other drawings (although see Cat. Fol. 25 verso of flap/Ashby 39A). As a consequence of showing so much of the monument, it runs across a double-page spread, at the centre of one of the original compilation’s gatherings, with the sectional drawing towards the left and the arena to the right. The drawing thus differs from the others in the group, which largely are just schematic sectional cuts through the building.
The sectional part of the drawing is not a true section in the strictest sense since it combines information about staircases located in three adjacent wedges of the amphitheatre’s plan. One staircase starts at the inner of the two external annular corridors and rises up to a landing on a mezzanine where it moves into an adjacent wedge and turns back on itself rising to the next level. While the lower flight of this set of stairs is depicted as a simple section, the upper flight that lies behind the sectional cut is shown as a perspectival view, glimpsed through the mezzanine arch. A second staircase, which occupies a third wedge, rises from the central annular corridor moving away from the arena. It is far steeper than the other staircase, which occupied two wedges, and it reaches the next level in a single flight. The drawing complements and to some extent ‘explains’ the information provided on a successive drawing (Fol. 25 verso of flap/Ashby 39A), eliminating several errors: in this larger drawing, the staircases that rise from the ground to the first level are all shown with resting platforms halfway along their lengths in a way that conforms with the surviving remains, thus differing from the other drawing, and there is also a greater coherence in the way that the stairs relate to the arena seating.
The perspectival part of the drawing shows the spaces lying behind the section, including the arena, the seating of the cavea and the various annular corridors. These spaces are represented from a high viewpoint, allowing the viewer to gain a sense of the relationship between the different parts of the structure, as well as showing such details as the pilaster articulation of the outer two annular corridors and the foot of one of the internal staircases in the central annular corridor that rises up toward the exterior. The perspectival view of the cavea, unlike the section, which is based on what could be seen, is a hypothetical reconstruction of the seating, which by the time the drawing was made had been mostly stripped out. It shows the way in which the stairs led to and from the arena, reconstructing the openings and their positions in conformity with the plans seen earlier in the codex. The seating is shown as being interrupted by sets of steps that run down from doors at the third level right down to the arena. Of the two flights depicted the one closer to the left is the more finished, showing two steps for every seat, while the one to its right makes the steps as tall as the seats. Above the seating is a wall at the third level with window and door openings, much of which survives. In addition, the drawing shows one of the vents designed to light the central annular corridor (3 in diagram) piercing through a row of the seating. The wall at the back of the seating was initially drawn incorrectly but was then corrected through careful observation. At first it was shown with windows (w) and doors (d) in a regular sequence (3w, d, 3w, d, 3w, d, 3w, d, 3w, d), but this was then corrected to an irregular one (3w, d, 3w, d, 4w, d, 5w, d, w), this all confirmed by later surveys such as that of Cresy and Taylor (1821–22, 2, pl. 124–26). Above this, the drawing is left largely blank apart from some faint curving lines that follow the structure’s shape, and this would appear to follow the procedure, adopted widely in the codex, of not misrepresenting antiquities by introducing fanciful reconstruction. Such a procedure might appear to conflict with the re-imagining the seating, but it does not do so significantly. The building would have had enough surviving seating to enable a sufficiently reliable reconstruction.
The drawing is evidently related to a section of the Colosseum by Giuliano da Sangallo that appears in his Codex Barberini– a depiction accompanying an outline plan dependent upon the survey of the building undertaken in 1513 (see Cat. Fol. 2r/Ashby 2). It shares with the Barberini depiction the fundamental idea of representing the staircases from three of the amphitheatre’s wedges, but it is not identical. It differs by correcting the arrangement of the staircases which, at the lowest level, have resting platforms halfway up, these absent from the Barberini drawing, a detail on which few Renaissance drawings agree. Platforms are shown on all the flights in the zone between the two outer annular corridors in the Codex Mellon; they are seen in the same zone only on the flights at the lowest level in an illustration by Sebastiano Serlio first published in 1540 and in an anonymous drawing in Vienna; and they are indicated only on the steep stairs leading away from the arena in a drawing by Palladio. The Coner drawing also corresponds quite closely with the Barberini depiction in its dimensions, both being measured in braccia, but there are still significant differences. The central annular corridor is given in the Codex Coner as 6⅚ braccia in width but in the Codex Barberini as 7⅚ braccia in width, a change that affects the other larger dimensions given. The cavea, from the external wall of the building to the edge of the arena, is measured as 87 braccia in the Codex Coner (when various individual dimensions are added together) but as 88 braccia in the Codex Barberini (as specified in an annotation). These differences led Arnold Nesselrath to argue that the Coner drawing was not directly dependent on the Barberini depiction and that both copied elements of a lost original (Nesselrath 1992, p, 148). It is equally possible, however, to see the Coner drawing as a critique of the Barberini depiction, ‘correcting’ mistakes on the basis of a more careful attention to newly established measurements deriving from the rigorous survey of the building carried out in 1513.
In combining a section with an aerial view of the cavea, the Coner drawing depends on a long and very well-established tradition. Is was already being followed in a drawing by Francesco di Giorgio (of c.1480), but it was greatly developed in its sophistication subsequently, assuming definitive form in a drawing by Giuliano da Sangallo in his Taccuino Senese. This, however, shows the cavea from a far lower viewpoint than the Coner drawing, resulting in the upper ranges of the building dipping instead of rising towards the centre, and it provided the basic format for the later depiction in the Mellon Codex and in a drawing by Andrea Palladio. The Coner drawing was copied by Amico Aspertini.
The nineteenth-century inscription on the mount ‘Section of the Colisseum’ identifies the drawing’s subject – and that of the drawing on the back of the flap (Fol. 25 verso of flap/Ashby 39A) – as this is not otherwise specified.
RELATED IMAGES: [Giuliano da Sangallo] Rome, BAV, Barb. lat. 4424 (Codex Barberini), fol. 68r (Hülsen 1910, 1, p. 71; Borsi 1985, pp. 254–59); [Amico Aspertini] London, BM, Aspertini Sketchbook II, fol. 39v (Bober 1957, p. 89)
OTHER IMAGES MENTIONED: [Francesco di Giorgio Martini] Turin, Biblioteca Reale, Codex Saluzziano 148, fol. 71r (Maltese 1967, 1, p. 275); [Giuliano da Sangallo], Siena, BCS, S.IV.8, fol. 5v (Borsi 1985, 254-59); [Giuliano da Sangallo] Rome, BAV, Barb. lat. 4424 (Codex Barberini), fol. 68r; [Domenico Aimo (Il Varignana), attr.] New York, Morgan Library, Codex Mellon, fols. 39v-40r; [Anon. Italian B] Vienna, Albertina, inv. Egger no 23v (Egger 1903, p. 20; Valori 1985, p. 68); Serlio 1619, p. lxvii; [Palladio] London, RIBA, VIII, 17r (Zorzi 1959, p. 96)
OTHER DRAWINGS IN CODEX CONER OF SAME SUBJECT: Fol. 2r/Ashby 2; Fol. 2v/Ashby 3; Fol. 3r/Ashby 4; Fol. 3v/Ashby 5; Fol. 25 verso of flap/Ashby 39A; Fol. 25v/Ashby 40; Fol. 26r/Ashby 41; Fol. 66r/Ashby 113; Fol. 66v/Ashby 114; Fol. 83v/Ashby 137
The sectional part of the drawing is not a true section in the strictest sense since it combines information about staircases located in three adjacent wedges of the amphitheatre’s plan. One staircase starts at the inner of the two external annular corridors and rises up to a landing on a mezzanine where it moves into an adjacent wedge and turns back on itself rising to the next level. While the lower flight of this set of stairs is depicted as a simple section, the upper flight that lies behind the sectional cut is shown as a perspectival view, glimpsed through the mezzanine arch. A second staircase, which occupies a third wedge, rises from the central annular corridor moving away from the arena. It is far steeper than the other staircase, which occupied two wedges, and it reaches the next level in a single flight. The drawing complements and to some extent ‘explains’ the information provided on a successive drawing (Fol. 25 verso of flap/Ashby 39A), eliminating several errors: in this larger drawing, the staircases that rise from the ground to the first level are all shown with resting platforms halfway along their lengths in a way that conforms with the surviving remains, thus differing from the other drawing, and there is also a greater coherence in the way that the stairs relate to the arena seating.
The perspectival part of the drawing shows the spaces lying behind the section, including the arena, the seating of the cavea and the various annular corridors. These spaces are represented from a high viewpoint, allowing the viewer to gain a sense of the relationship between the different parts of the structure, as well as showing such details as the pilaster articulation of the outer two annular corridors and the foot of one of the internal staircases in the central annular corridor that rises up toward the exterior. The perspectival view of the cavea, unlike the section, which is based on what could be seen, is a hypothetical reconstruction of the seating, which by the time the drawing was made had been mostly stripped out. It shows the way in which the stairs led to and from the arena, reconstructing the openings and their positions in conformity with the plans seen earlier in the codex. The seating is shown as being interrupted by sets of steps that run down from doors at the third level right down to the arena. Of the two flights depicted the one closer to the left is the more finished, showing two steps for every seat, while the one to its right makes the steps as tall as the seats. Above the seating is a wall at the third level with window and door openings, much of which survives. In addition, the drawing shows one of the vents designed to light the central annular corridor (3 in diagram) piercing through a row of the seating. The wall at the back of the seating was initially drawn incorrectly but was then corrected through careful observation. At first it was shown with windows (w) and doors (d) in a regular sequence (3w, d, 3w, d, 3w, d, 3w, d, 3w, d), but this was then corrected to an irregular one (3w, d, 3w, d, 4w, d, 5w, d, w), this all confirmed by later surveys such as that of Cresy and Taylor (1821–22, 2, pl. 124–26). Above this, the drawing is left largely blank apart from some faint curving lines that follow the structure’s shape, and this would appear to follow the procedure, adopted widely in the codex, of not misrepresenting antiquities by introducing fanciful reconstruction. Such a procedure might appear to conflict with the re-imagining the seating, but it does not do so significantly. The building would have had enough surviving seating to enable a sufficiently reliable reconstruction.
The drawing is evidently related to a section of the Colosseum by Giuliano da Sangallo that appears in his Codex Barberini– a depiction accompanying an outline plan dependent upon the survey of the building undertaken in 1513 (see Cat. Fol. 2r/Ashby 2). It shares with the Barberini depiction the fundamental idea of representing the staircases from three of the amphitheatre’s wedges, but it is not identical. It differs by correcting the arrangement of the staircases which, at the lowest level, have resting platforms halfway up, these absent from the Barberini drawing, a detail on which few Renaissance drawings agree. Platforms are shown on all the flights in the zone between the two outer annular corridors in the Codex Mellon; they are seen in the same zone only on the flights at the lowest level in an illustration by Sebastiano Serlio first published in 1540 and in an anonymous drawing in Vienna; and they are indicated only on the steep stairs leading away from the arena in a drawing by Palladio. The Coner drawing also corresponds quite closely with the Barberini depiction in its dimensions, both being measured in braccia, but there are still significant differences. The central annular corridor is given in the Codex Coner as 6⅚ braccia in width but in the Codex Barberini as 7⅚ braccia in width, a change that affects the other larger dimensions given. The cavea, from the external wall of the building to the edge of the arena, is measured as 87 braccia in the Codex Coner (when various individual dimensions are added together) but as 88 braccia in the Codex Barberini (as specified in an annotation). These differences led Arnold Nesselrath to argue that the Coner drawing was not directly dependent on the Barberini depiction and that both copied elements of a lost original (Nesselrath 1992, p, 148). It is equally possible, however, to see the Coner drawing as a critique of the Barberini depiction, ‘correcting’ mistakes on the basis of a more careful attention to newly established measurements deriving from the rigorous survey of the building carried out in 1513.
In combining a section with an aerial view of the cavea, the Coner drawing depends on a long and very well-established tradition. Is was already being followed in a drawing by Francesco di Giorgio (of c.1480), but it was greatly developed in its sophistication subsequently, assuming definitive form in a drawing by Giuliano da Sangallo in his Taccuino Senese. This, however, shows the cavea from a far lower viewpoint than the Coner drawing, resulting in the upper ranges of the building dipping instead of rising towards the centre, and it provided the basic format for the later depiction in the Mellon Codex and in a drawing by Andrea Palladio. The Coner drawing was copied by Amico Aspertini.
The nineteenth-century inscription on the mount ‘Section of the Colisseum’ identifies the drawing’s subject – and that of the drawing on the back of the flap (Fol. 25 verso of flap/Ashby 39A) – as this is not otherwise specified.
RELATED IMAGES: [Giuliano da Sangallo] Rome, BAV, Barb. lat. 4424 (Codex Barberini), fol. 68r (Hülsen 1910, 1, p. 71; Borsi 1985, pp. 254–59); [Amico Aspertini] London, BM, Aspertini Sketchbook II, fol. 39v (Bober 1957, p. 89)
OTHER IMAGES MENTIONED: [Francesco di Giorgio Martini] Turin, Biblioteca Reale, Codex Saluzziano 148, fol. 71r (Maltese 1967, 1, p. 275); [Giuliano da Sangallo], Siena, BCS, S.IV.8, fol. 5v (Borsi 1985, 254-59); [Giuliano da Sangallo] Rome, BAV, Barb. lat. 4424 (Codex Barberini), fol. 68r; [Domenico Aimo (Il Varignana), attr.] New York, Morgan Library, Codex Mellon, fols. 39v-40r; [Anon. Italian B] Vienna, Albertina, inv. Egger no 23v (Egger 1903, p. 20; Valori 1985, p. 68); Serlio 1619, p. lxvii; [Palladio] London, RIBA, VIII, 17r (Zorzi 1959, p. 96)
OTHER DRAWINGS IN CODEX CONER OF SAME SUBJECT: Fol. 2r/Ashby 2; Fol. 2v/Ashby 3; Fol. 3r/Ashby 4; Fol. 3v/Ashby 5; Fol. 25 verso of flap/Ashby 39A; Fol. 25v/Ashby 40; Fol. 26r/Ashby 41; Fol. 66r/Ashby 113; Fol. 66v/Ashby 114; Fol. 83v/Ashby 137
Literature
Ashby 1904, p. 30
Günther 1988, p. 337
Nesselrath 1992, pp. 147–50
Census, ID 43742
Günther 1988, p. 337
Nesselrath 1992, pp. 147–50
Census, ID 43742
Level
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