Michelangelo, Carrara, and the Marble for the Cardinal's Pietà

Author(s): Michael Hirst

Source: The Burlington Magazine, Vol. 127, No. 984 (Mar., 1985), pp. 152+154-156+159
Published by: Burlington Magazine Publications Ltd.
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/882039
Accessed: 30-04-2020 14:53 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Burlington Magazine Publications Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to The Burlington Magazine

This content downloaded from 129.125.19.61 on Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:53:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Shorter Notices

Michelangelo, Carrara, and the marble

for the Cardinal's Pieta
BY MICHAEL HIRST

MICHELANGELO'S journeys to Carrara and its neighbourhood

preclude furtherto and even more costly set-backs; it established
seek marble for his sculptural and architectural projects
a patternare
for athe artist for several decades to come.
remarkable feature of his biography.* Travel of this When
kind did
on this
thejourney take place? The formal contract for the
part of sculptors was certainly no novelty by the end
Pieta, of the
published by Gotti and Milanesi, was drawn up in Rome
fifteenth century; but Michelangelo's stays in Carrara num-
on 27th August 1498.4 But a letter from the cardinal, addressed
bered nearly a dozen and the length of time he spent
to thethere was
Anziani of Lucca, the government body most concerned
probably without precedent.1 with diplomatic correspondence, dated 18th November 1497,
So far as is known, the first such journey he made wasthat
suggests occa-
the artist set out for Carrara many months before
the Bilhires
sioned by the commission from Cardinal Jean de contract familiar
to to us was made; the letter requests the
carve the marble Pieta now in St Peter's. It involved the artist Lucca authorities to help the artist in his task of quarrying and
travelling, therefore, not from neighbouring Florence, but fromtransporting marble and 'Michele Angelo di Ludovico statuario
Rome. It is probable that Michelangelo failed to find anywhere fiorentino' is referred to as the bearer of the letter.s
in Rome a block of the scale he needed for a monumental group Subsequently, Karl Frey rejected this date for Michelangelo's
of two figures; it is easy to forget that the length of the Pieth blockjourney and argued for one around the middle or end of March
is approximately that of the blocks for the Medici chapel Alle- 1498. He based his view on the evidence of letters which show
gories. But even if appropriate stone was available, other consid-that the delivery of the marble for the cardinal in Rome had
erations may have actuated the trip back to the north. We now been held up at Carrara in April 1498. The first of these letters
know that the block employed for the Bacchus undertaken in was published by Gotti and Milanesi; written on behalf of the
1496 for Cardinal Raffaele Riario was bought in Rome, sooncardinal to the Florentine Signoria, it requests that the latter
after the artist arrived there, for the sum of ten ducats; Mi- should intervene with Alberico Malaspina, Marquis of Massa,
chelangelo's first Roman work was made, in other words, from to get the marble sent on its way.6 To this letter Frey himself
material to hand.2 And even a cursory inspection of the Bacchus added two others of about a week later, one from the Signoria
will reveal how unsatisfactory the quality of that materialto the Marquis, the other a reply from the Signoria to the
proved to be. For the group shows many imperfections, marble cardinal in Rome.7 The cardinal's letter speaks of the man in
faults which cannot be attributed to its outdoor exposure incharge of the operation being held up, 'esser impedito a Carrara uno
Gallo's garden, of a kind which the artist always strove to avoid. nostro'. Frey evidently believed 'uno nostro' to be Michelangelo
A dark vein runs right across the backs of the god and his himself and the conclusion he drew from it, that the sculptor was
companion; the almost violent descriptiveness of the head im- at Carrara later than had previously been believed, was ac-
presses despite the flaw which runs down the right side of the cepted by Tolnay.8 And this dating we encounter in many of the
face (Fig.34). Whatever the source of the block for the Bacchus recent handbooks on the sculpture of the period, although a
may have been, the material did not answer the exacting stan- slightly cryptic and not readily available demonstration that is
dard which Michelangelo set, in the later words of one of his own is erroneous was published by Giovanni Poggi in 1942.9
stonecutters; 'bianco et senza vene, machie et peli alcuni'. Documentation which may have been known to Poggi but
There is other evidence of Michelangelo's difficulties finding which has never been published shows that Michelangelo did
the right material in this early period of his first Roman stay. make his journey in the autumn of 1497; it also shows that -
Just after he had finished the Bacchus in July 1497, he bought as Poggi demonstrably knew - Michelangelo was in Florence
another block for five ducats, which proved a complete failure in late December of that year.1o Evidence for the dating of the
and had to be replaced; the artist, frugal throughout his life, journey is provided by payments made to Michelangelo by his
lamented the waste of money in a letter to his father: 'ebi buttati bankers in Rome, Baldassare and Giovanni Balducci. These are
via que' denari'.3 The journey to Carrara in search of a block forto be found in one of their surviving account books of 1496-98
the French cardinal's project may have been undertaken toin the Florentine Archivio di Stato,"1 the book in which we also

*I should like to thank Gino Corti for aid in checking the transcription ofP1.
theCXVIII. For comments on the contract, see my Appendix B.
account entries published in Appendix A. 5 GOTTI, op. cit., II, pp.33-34, and MILANEsI, op. cit., p.613 note.
1 For a valuable study of Carrara and the marble trade, see C. KLAPISCH-ZUBER'S
6 GOTTI, op. cit., II, p.34, and MILANEsI, op. cit., p. 613 note.
highly informative 'Les maitres du marbre: Carrare 1300-1600', Paris [1969]. How-7 K. FREY: Michelagniolo Buonarroti, Quellen und Forschungen ..., I, Berlin [1907],
ever, I know of no detailed study of which trecento and quattrocento sculptors p.140.
regularly sought their raw materials personally, rather than relying on 8the For FREY's reasoning, see op. cit., pp. 117-18; TOLNAY's acceptance is in his The
judgment and labour of others to supply their stone for them. Early in the Youth of Michelangelo, Princeton [1943], pp.146-47.
fifteenth century, it seems that Niccolo di Pietro Lamberti was regarded 9asFor a POGGI's correction of Frey, see his 'Note Michelangiolesche', published in
specialist in assessing marble at Carrara. Michelangelo Buonarroti nel IV Centenario del 'Giudizio Universale,' Florence [ 1942],
2 For the date of the Bacchus, the cost of the block, and Riario's responsibilitypp. 113ff. and esp. pp.119-20.
for
the commission, see my article 'Michelangelo in Rome: an altarpiece and the 10 POGGI, loc. cit., p. 120. POGGI's brief remarks raise the question of how well he
"Bacchus"', THE BURLINGTON MAGAZINE, CXXIII [1981], pp.581 and 590-93. knew the material contained in this and other Balducci account books; that he
The documents seem to leave no doubt that it is the block for the Bacchus to had consulted some of them is clear from laconic references in his La Madonna
which Michelangelo refers in his letter to his father of 2nd July, 1496;disee Bruges
II di Michelangiolo, Florence [1954]. I think it likely that Poggi studied
them
Carteggio di Michelangelo, ed. P. BAROCCHI and R. RISTORI, Florence, I [1965], p.1.at a date later than that of his compilation of notes for the edition of
II Carteggio ..., I, p.4. I return to this letter in the text below. Michelangelo's letters which he never achieved, notes incorporated in II
4See A. GOTTI: Vita di Michelangelo Buonarroti, Florence [1875], II, p.33Carteggio...
and I, pp.353ff., where there is no indication of his familiarity with them.
G. MILANESI: Le Lettere di Michelangelo Buonarroti..., Florence [1875], pp.613ff.
"1I have discussed the r6le of the Balducci in Michelangelo's early Roman
careerein my 1981 article cited in note 2 above; see esp. p.581 and Appendix C,
For a more recent transcription, see Michelangelo, Mostra di disegni, manoscritti
pp.590-93. For this account book, see my appendix A below.
documenti, Florence [1964], pp. 102-03, and for the appearance of the document,

154

This content downloaded from 129.125.19.61 on Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:53:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SHORTER NOTICES

encounter Cardinal Riario's payments for

bursement of eightthe
monthsBacchus. Decisive
later was still related to the abortive
are two payments made to him project
on 18th November
of 1497. Whatever the explanation, 1497.
it seems thatOne
Mi-
is for the purchase of the horse for the trip
chelangelo's to Piero
relations with Carrara,
lasted longerwhich
than we might we
learn was a dapple grey: ' A michelangelo
infer frombonarroti ducati
his later deprecation dodici
of his patron. d'oro
Further research
a karlini 3 per uno chavallo leardomay per andare
yet prove a charrara...'12
what the circumstantial The
evidence suggests, that
second is cash for the expenses of it was Piero
the who had commissioned
journey itself: the now
'ElostadiHercules from
detto,
ducati cinque d'oro in oro larghi, in moneta, per
the young artist spendere
in Florence before hisper la
own fall in via...'
1494. 13
These monies were handed to the artist, We have seentherefore,
that it was the evidenceon the
relating to the very
hold-up
day on which the cardinal's letter offor the
the marble whichAnziani attoLucca
led Frey and others conclude thatwas
Mi-
composed. chelangelo was in Carrara early in the spring of 1498. In the
The next relevant item in the Balducci libro is of 29th Decem- light of the Balducci account entries, we can see that he was
ber 1497 and this shows that the artist is in Florence. On that there earlier. To identify the 'uno nostro' with the artist would, in
day he is recorded as having been paid twenty ducats in cash by consequence, require that Michelangelo almost immediately left
Francesco Strozzi and a further one hundred and thirty are Rome after he had returned and set off again for the north. The
being credited for him with the Buonvisi bank at Lucca.14 new evidence does not exclude a second trip but the hypothesis
Benedetto Buonvisi, together with his brothers, ran the out- seems redundant. I believe that the 'uno nostro' referred to in the
standing banking house there; Benedetto reappears later in Mi- letter of April 1498 is the man charged with the task of loading
chelangelo's financial affairs, and the Buonvisi also acted as the marble and overseeing its journey, someone of a much hum-
bankers for the Florentine Opera del Duomo, making payments bler capacity than the artist. He may well have been the 'Simone
for marble on the Opera's behalf at Carrara.15 marinaio' whom the Balducci accounts identify as the man
Had Michelangelo already been to Carrara to find his mar- charged with the transportation of the marble - the 'nolito
ble? The accounts do not tell us. We may reasonably assume de'marmi'.22 What provoked the hold-up? I suspect that the
that he had wished to pass Christmas with his father Lodovico. cause was the export duty, the gabella, levied by Marchese Al-
On 9th February 1498, he is paid an inconspicuous sum for a berico Malaspina on marble exported from his territory. This
harness and a bridle for the horse of a cart at Carrara, the carretto gabella was a permanent source of difficulty encountered by all
of the kind employed for transporting marble, whose name led involved in the marble trade in the area.23 And a hint that it was
to the terminology of carrata as a means of quantifying loads of the gabella which was causing the trouble is conveyed in the
marble: 'E addi 9 karlini 16 a MO Michelangelo per una soprasella e cardinal's letter from Rome on 7th April; he requests the passage
uno strachale a Charrara per lo chavallo della charretta...'. 16 of the material 'mediante el conveniente prezo da pagarsi per dicto
The payment seems to suggest that by early February the nostro'. 24
stage of transporting the block from the foot of the quarries to Michelangelo's marble finally arrived in Rome in the middle
the sea had been reached. We know that Michelangelo was back of June 1498. On 19th June, he drew six ducats to pay for the
in Rome by 10th March 1498.17 And in that month there is
unloading - no doubt at the Ripa: '...portb michelagnolo per fare
renewed activity in his Rome account.18 One of these items is scharichare e marmi'.25 Throughout June and July he continued
of particular interest, a repayment of thirty ducats to no less a to draw money to meet the transportation bills. We learn that
figure than the exiled Piero de' Medici: 'E adi 26 [of March] the hiring of the boat which brought the marble (probably from
ducati trenta... volse per rendere a Piero de' Medici.. ..19 Avenza) cost him thirty-five ducats.26 As late as 22nd August,
Regrettably, the circumstances of this repayment elude us. money is still being paid out to his father, Lodovico, to pay
Piero had commissioned a work in marble from Michelangelo in 'maestro Michele scharpellino' for work he had performed at Car-
Rome in the previous summer, immediately after the com- rara; it was probably this scarpellino, one in a long line of trusted
pletion of the Bacchus. We learn this from the artist's letter to his
Tuscan assistants of the sculptor, who had roughhewn the block
father of 19th August 1497, in which he laments having bought (or blocks) at the quarry. 7 On 30th August, Michelangelo
a faulty block.20 A careful reading of this letter suggests, I drew ten ducats to pay for the moving of the marble to his
believe, that it was the flawed marble which had been bought workshop, 'per fare portare e marmi a chasa'.28
for Piero's commission, and that its replacement had also been Three days previously, on 27th August, the artist had paid
for Piero. Michelangelo complains that Piero has let him down into his account fifty ducats he had received from his patron, the
and that he is now working on the (substitute) block on his own Cardinal of St Denis.29 Again, we meet with a striking congruity
account: 'e questo lavoro per mio piacere'.21 Perhaps this reim- of dates, for 27th August was the day on which the formal 1498

12 Appendix A, Document 2. Is Appendix A, Documents 6, 7, and 8.

13 Appendix A, Document 3. 19 Appendix A, Document 7.
14 Appendix A, Document 4. For a comment about this transaction, see Appen- 20 See the text above and note 3.
dix B.
21 1 hope to discuss this and other issues further in a more extensive study of
1 For this last fact, see II Carteggio ..., I, p.368 note 2. Benedetto himself seems Michelangelo's early life.
to have died c. 1516, and it was for the family chapel in San Frediano in Lucca 22 Appendix A, Documents 9, 12, and 13.
that Francia painted the altar-piece now in the London National Gallery; see 23 For this 'dogana di marmi', see the discussion in KLAPISCH-ZUBER, op. cit. at note
M. DAVIES: The Earlier Italian Schools, London [1961], pp.200-03, M. LUZZATI in 1 above, esp. pp.94-103.
Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani, XV, Rome [1972], pp.307-09, and M. TAZ- 24 GOTTI, op. cit. at note 4 above, II, p.34 and MILANESI, op. cit. at note 4 above,
ARTES in Ricerche di storia dell'arte, XVII [1982], p.48. p.613 note.
16 Appendix A, Document 5. For a discussion of the carretti employed to trans- 25 Appendix A, Document 10. An anxiety provoked by the delay in the embark-
port marble from the foot of the mountains to the sea, see KLAPISCH-ZUBER, op. ation of the marble at Carrara must have been that it would arrive at the mouth
cit. at note I above, pp.71-72, esp. note 48. of the Tiber when the river level would be too low to allow its access by water
17 We know this from a letter of that day, written from Rome to Michelangelo's to Rome. This obstacle does not seem to have been encountered, although it was
brother, Buonarroto, in Florence. The writer, long believed to be Michelangelo a frequent hazard. There is evidence that the winter of 1497-98 had been a hard
himself concealing his identity, was identified as Piero d'Argiento by POGGI, loc. one; see the graphic remark of Piero d'Argiento in the letter of 13th January,
cit. at note 9 above, pp. 114ff. The text shows that on 10th March, the artist had
1498, referred to in note 17 above: '... sappi che a questi giorni ci k nevichato insino
only just got back (suggesting that he had been at Carrara after his December al chulo e siamo stati per afoghare....' (POGGI, loc. cit. at note 9 above, p. 117).
1497 stay in Florence). Another, earlier letter of Piero d'Argiento written from 26Appendix A, Document 13.
Rome on 13th January 1498 (modern style), again addressed to Buonarroto, 27 Appendix A, Document 14.
complains that Michelangelo has never written to his Roman friends (including 28 Appendix A, Document 16.
Gallo) since his departure-yet further evidence that Michelangelo had left 29Appendix A, Document 15. I retain the not quite accurate title of the docu-
Rome in the previous autumn (published by Poggi, loc. cit., p.117). ments.

155

This content downloaded from 129.125.19.61 on Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:53:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SHORTER NOTICES

contract was drawn up, prescribingwhich

the has 'Vergene
been reckoned to Maria
be much more than the usual
vestita con rates
for the period.33 ducats followed on
Christo morto in braccio...'.3o Twenty-five
29th October 'per parte del lavoro fa aoperation
The whole sua Reverendissima
must have been a novelty in Mi-
Signoria...'., with another credit of twenty-five
chelangelo's life, a presage, atducats
the age of on 21st of many
twenty-four,
December.31 After that date, the accounts, similar experiences soin far as IBut
the future. am aware,
this example of the im-
are missing. portation of fine Carrara marble into Rome was a novelty for
There can be no doubt that Michelangelo received the large others too, creating a new standard for both fellow artists like
sum of four hundred and fifty ducats for the work, as promised Andrea Sansovino and for patrons like Pope Julius II.34 The
in the contract. Yet, as we can now see, his expenses had been block selected for the French cardinal's Pieta, while in some
substantial. The sums shown as disbursed in my Appendix can- areas not absolutely free of those peli which so much preoccupied
not be comprehensive; nevertheless, we can note that thirty-one the artist (slight signs are visible in Fig.35), nevertheless was of
ducats were spent on the nolito, the transportation, and a further a quality unmatched in late fifteenth century Rome (see Fig.36).
thirty-five on the hiring of the boat. Unfortunately, we do not To a degree perhaps unprecedented in the city since antiquity,
know, in the absence of a contract with 'Simone marinaio', how the beauty of the invenzione was now matched by the perfection
much the artist was being asked to pay per carrata for his trans- of the raw material from which it was fashioned, a perfection
portation, so that no simple calculation of how much marble which would not easily be forgotten. Almost exactly twenty-six
was involved is possible. We cannot fail to notice that the doc- years after the contract for the Pietac was drawn up, one of
uments refer to the plural, marmi, and it may be that ancillary Michelangelo's stone cutters at Carrara would write to him, on
pieces of marble were required for the physical setting of the 13th August 1524, to tell him that, in pursuit of marble for
Pieta in its chapel.32 A few years later, in 1505, the artist was tombs of the Medici in Florence, his colleague had excavated a
paying 1.8 ducats the carrata for getting his marble to Rome, block 'che hk bello, et hallo cavato sotto alla Pieta chefaceste a Roma'.35

30 See MILANESI, op. cit. at note 4 above, p.613 and Michelangelo, Mostre ...,
Pope Julius II's tomb, in November 1505. At just about the same time, Andrea
[1964], pp.102-03. For other remarks, see my Appendix B.
Sansovino also went to Carrara, in order to obtain marble for the tombs in the
31 Appendix A, Documents 17 and 18.
choir of Santa Maria del Popolo; Julius II's safe conduct was issued at Ostia on
32 This seems likely, but we do not know the way in which the Pieta was set up
16th October 1505 (see B. FELICIANGELI: 'Salvacondotti pontificii per Andrea
in the cardinal's chapel.
Sansovino e Giuliano da San Gallo', in Rassegna bibliografica dell'arte Italiana,
33 KLAPISCH-ZUBER, op. cit. at note 1 above, p.208, note 128.
XVIII, [1915], pp.115-17.
34 As rightly emphasised by KLAPISCH-ZUBER, ibid., pp.220-21. Michelangelo
3511 Carteggio..., Florence, III [1973], p.98.
would himself be back in Carrara, involved with sending marble to Rome for

Appendix A
Printed below are all the entries in the account book of the Balducci for
1496-98 relevant for the story of the project; the first one I have already fol.136v
9. A michelagnuolo
published in the article cited in note 2. This libro is described in the archive bonarroti in
(Florence, Archivio di Stato, Archivio del R. Arcispedale di Santa Maria Nuova, CarteKarlini volse per dare a simo
di Lemmo Balducci) as a libro di Creditori e Debitori, but Richard Goldthwaite has marmi duc.- 75
kindly pointed out to me that the character of the entries suggest rather that it
is a quaderno di cassa, with entries much less complete than those to be found in
10. E addi 19 [giugn
a Creditori e Debitori ledger. I have arranged the sequence of entries chro-
per fare scharichare e marmi duc.6
nologically.
A.S.F. Santa Maria Nuova, Balducci Libro no.2.
1497 11. E addi 20 [giugno] duchati 26 d'oro larghi e Kar
de'marmi duc.26---65
fol.50v
1. E adi... di novembre fiorini 133 '/3 di Reno recho ebbe dal chardinale di san
fol. 143r
dionigi --- duc.....
12. Addi 26 di lugl(i)o (1498) a Michelagnolo Karlini 40 a Simone marinaio per
fol.97v parte di nolito de'marmi ----duc.4 di K
2. E addi 18 di novembre
A michelagnolo bonarroti ducate dodici d'oro a karlini 3 per uno chavallo
13. E addi 28 [luglio] duchati 41 d'oro larghi e karlini 9 /3
leardo per andare a charrara duc. 12- 22 per resto di duchati 45 d'oro larghi e karlini 9, cioe duch
barcheta di marmi e duchati 10 karlini 9 per resto a
3. E adi detto ducati cinque d'oro in oro larghi, in moneta,charrara
per spendere per laduc.41. K.9/3
via -duc.5- 12 /2

4. E addi 29 di 14. E adi

diciembre 22 detto
ducati 150[agosto
d'oro1
di firenze, in ducatiFrancesco
20 d'oro Strozi a Lodo
larghi, e d
a Piero Chorsini e Scharpellino
compagni per resto di
setaiuoli,
Benedetto Bonvisi duc. 154-15
fol. 149r
1498
15. Adi 27 d'aghosto [1498
san dionigi duc.61- 50
fol.1 15r
5. E addi 9 [febraio] karlini 16 a MO Michelagnolo per una soprasella e uno
strachale a Charrara per lo chavallo della charretta duc. 1--45 16. Anne auto adi 30 d'aghosto du
per ducato, per fare portare e marmi a chasa duc. 10
fol.97v
6. E adii 22 di marzo 1498 ducati dua d'oro larghi, in moneta, port6 contanti, fol. 160r
per spendere --duc.2-- 5 17. Adi 29 d'ottobre [1498] Da michelagnolo bonarroti duchati vinticinque
d'oro in oro larghi, autj da Reverendissimo Cardinale di san dionigi per parte
7. E adi 26 [marzo] ducati trenta, a karlini
del lavoro fa12 a suaper ducato,
Reverendissima volse
Signoria duc.25perd'ororender
larghi.
Piero de' Medici duc.30

8. Anne dati ducati 100 18. E addi 21 dilarghi

d'oro dicembre [1498] duchati vinticinque d'oro in oro
e fiorini larghi auti da
1331/3
questo 150 duc.202- 70 Reverendissimo Cardinale di San dionigi, e n'ebbe 1" schrita- uc.25

156

This content downloaded from 129.125.19.61 on Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:53:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SHORTER NOTICES

Appendix B: A note on the contract for the Pietai Michelangelo receiving when in Florence in late Dec
The contract for the Pietal, familiar since its initial
partly publication
in credit atin 1875,
Lucca was
(Appendix A, No.3); this mus
drawn up nine months after Michelangelo had he mostout
set neededfrom
it. Rome to look for
his material. There can be little doubt that this formal agreement
The contract of August
of 1498 is drawn 1498
up in Jacopo Gallo's own hand and the copy
must have been preceded by an earlier one in 1497, prior
which to
survives in the artist's
the Archivio departure
Buonarroti is not notarised. Also, it is written in
and to his spending such substantial sums on the the project. A may
vernacular. This clause in the
have been 1498
at Michelangelo's own wish, expressing his
contract seems to confirm this, for earlier agreements about
preference. In view the estimates
of differing project are
of Michelangelo's Latinity, it is inter-
cancelled: '. .. intendendosi per questa scripta essere cassa
esting et annullata
to note ogni
that Frediani altra
found on a scripta
document at Carrara a comment added
di mano mia o vero di mano del dicto Michelangelo, et by questa
the notarysolo
which habia efecta.'
read as follows: Another
Hoe scripto in vulghare questo contracto perche
point can be made. This 1498 contract stipulates that one
lo excelente hundred
homo and
MO Michelangiolo nonfifty
po soferiregold
che qui da noi d'Italia s'habia a scrivere
ducats are to be paid to the sculptor as prepayment: non'Imprimis promette
chomo se parla per tractare de cosedarli
publiche'ducati
(C. FREDIANI: Ragionamento storico su
centocinquanta d'oro in oro papali innanti che comenzi l'opera.'
le diverse It seems
gite chefece to Michelangelo
a Carrara me probable Buonarroti, Massa [1837], pp.36-37).
that this prepayment sum is the one hundred and fifty ducats which we find

Pietro Negroni as a draughtsman

BY DAVID JAFFE

(Fig.37)6 is undoubtedly a drawing by Negroni. The drawing

THIS note attributes two drawings to Pietro Negroni, a Southern exhibits the same physiognomical features and even a com-
Italian painter active in Naples, and indicates how their discov- positional rhythm similar to that of the Adoration of the Magi. The
ery may shed some light on a hitherto obscure area of Italian recurrence of fluffy curls of hair and meandering linear contours
renaissance draughtsmanship. confirms the attribution, as does the consistent use of light as a
Cinquecento Neapolitan painting is a little-explored field. linear decorative element. The delicate handling of the drawing
The pioneering research of Bologna and Previtali has described can be paralleled in Negroni's other paintings, for instance in
the important contributions of immigrant artists like Polidoro the monochrome mask on a shield in his Way to Calvary of 1553.7
da Caravaggio, Giorgio Vasari and the Spaniard, Francesco Unfortunately, the dreamy fragility of Negroni's panels is lost in
Ruviale.' Later, the arrival of another Caravaggio and another
black and white reproductions which, by stripping the paintings
Spaniard, Ribera, was similarly to reorientate seicento Nea-of their fairy-tale palette, reduce them to awkward caricatures.
politan art. Yet sixteenth-century Naples never produced aThe attractive drawing published here may convey a more
painter of the stature of Luca Giordano, who successfully chal- accurate impression of Negroni's achievement. Finally, the
lenged the northern artistic centres. Understandably, therefore, drawing has many parallels with the early works of Siciolante,
the regional characteristics of southern Italian painting have and is thus an additional piece of evidence for reconstructing the
been little studied, and very little is known about the drawingselusive features of southern Italian drawing.
of artists in Naples. A coherent group of southern Italian draw-
A drawing of Doubting Thomas (Fig.39), possibly derived from
ings has been established only for a provincial painter, Girolamo
the well-known version of that subject by Salviati, also has
Siciolante da Sermoneta.2 To understand the regional roots of
claims to be from Negroni's hand.8 The nervously fanned fingers
the Golden Age of Neapolitan painting minor local paintersare more summarily executed and the chalky white contours
must be examined. One such figure is Pietro Negroni, active in prevent the wash from dissolving the forms; a more mature
Southern Italy from 1539 to 1560.3 Nobilis Petrus de negrone deexposition of equivalent features may be found in The mystic
neapoli pictor as he is described in a contemporary account, hasmarriage of St Catherine. Negroni could have been alerted to
left a rich legacy of documented paintings.4
Salviati's design by other artists' copies or engravings, but a trip
Negroni's eccentric pictorial personality may be discerned in to Rome cannot be ruled out.9
his early painting Adoration of the Magi (Fig.38), signed and
Identification of these aspects of Negroni's drawing style may
dated 1541.5 The schematic disc-shaped faces with their accen-
lead to further clarifications of Neapolitan painting. Certainly
tuated eyelids are more exaggerated even than those in Polidoro
the family resemblances between the graphic work of Negroni
da Caravaggio's late paintings. Negroni's idiosyncratically me-
and Siciolante support Baglione's claim that the latter worked
andering drapery folds defy any gravitational logic. The turgid
under Leonardo da Pistoia in Naples before initiating his Ro-
musculature, agitated forms, splayed fingers and boneless anat-man career.10
omy are all consistent features of Pietro Negroni's paintings.
A study in the Uffizi of The mystic marriage of St Catherine

1F. BOLOGNA: Ruviale Spagnuolo a la pittura Napoletana del Cinquecento, Naples
[1959]. G. PREVITALI: La Pittura del cinquecento a Napoli e nel Vicereame, Turin
[1978].
2 R. BRUNO: 'Girolamo Siciolante - Revisioni e verifiche ricostruttive, I-IV',
Critica d'Arte 130 [1973], pp.55-71, 133 [1974], pp.66-80, 135 [1979], pp.71-80,
136 [1974], pp.31-46.
3 For Negroni see M. DI DARIO GUIDA: Arte in Calabria, exh. cat., Cosenza [1976],
pp.86-91 and Figs.l11-31, and G. PREVITALI, op. cit., pp.37-40.
4DI DARIO, op. cit., p.90, cites this document of 4th June 1539 published in
G. FILANGIERI: Documenti per la storia, le arti e le industrie della provincie napoletane,
Naples, Vol.IV [1888] pp.273-74 and Vol.VI [1891] p.214. Negroni's earliest
dated painting, the Adoration of 1540, is published in F. PETRELLI: 'Pietro Ne-
groni', Paragone, 389 [1982] pp.63-70, Fig.41.
5Formerly Naples, Santa Maria Donna Romita, now in deposit at the
Capodimonte Museum.
6 Uffizi, 13507F (as Perino del Vaga), 33.5 by 20.6 cm. Black ink with white
highlights on blue paper. The mount has an attribution to the ambience of
Polidoro da Caravaggio by Mario di Giampaolo, who has since arrived at the
same attribution to Negroni (oral communication).
' Florence, Palazzo Portinari Salviati (Banca Toscana). PREVITALI, op. cit. at
note 1 above, Fig.61.
'Windsor 5067. See A. POPHAM, and j. WILDE, The Italian drawings of the XV and
XVI Centuries in the collection of His Majesty the King at Windsor Castle, London
[1949], No.1182, p.372 (as North Italian School). 338 by 232 cm. Pen and
brown ink on a blue ground with a grey wash heightened with white. Philip
Pouncey kindly drew my attention to this drawing, which he had attributed to
Negroni. He rightly considers the other Windsor drawings (Popham & Wilde
1180, 1181) in the group, which BOLOGNA, op. cit., pp.77, 78 understandably
assigned to Negroni and Candisco, to be copies.
9Salviati's painting was sent to Lyon, but a copy in S. Giovanni Decollato,
Rome, and Coste's engraving are evidence that the invention was well known.
In fact, Negroni's drawing is closer to Salviati's studies, for instance Louvre 1644
(c. MONBEIG-GOGUEL Vasari et son temps, Paris [1972], No.145 ill. p. 123), raising
the possibility that Salviati's assistant, Francesco Ruviale, a former resident at
Naples, was the intermediary.
10 G. BAGLIONE: Vite de' piui eccellenti pittori scultori et architetti. Dal Pontificato di
Gregorio XIII del 1572. Rome [1652], p.24. It is conceivable that Uffizi 289S
(1140E) and Uffizi 371S will prove to be from the same Neapolitan circle of
painters.

159

This content downloaded from 129.125.19.61 on Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:53:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
34. Detail from Bacchus, by Michelangelo. (Bargello, Florence). 35. Detail from the Pieta, by Michelangelo. (St Peter's, Rome).

36. Detail from the Pietd, by Michelangelo. (St Peter's, Rome).

This content downloaded from 129.125.19.61 on Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:53:28 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms