The Case for Mantegna as Printmaker

Author(s): Keith Christiansen

Source: The Burlington Magazine , Sep., 1993, Vol. 135, No. 1086 (Sep., 1993), pp. 604-612
Published by: (PUB) Burlington Magazine Publications Ltd.

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/885852

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

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

This content downloaded from

84.204.8.138 on Wed, 14 Sep 2022 09:16:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 KEITH CHRISTIANSEN

The case for Mantegna as printmake

fragmentary
VASARI was not among Mantegna's great admirers.* Con- impression from the Metropolit
ditioned as he was by those twin ideals of hors
facility and - testified to a remarkable range o
catalogue)
experimentation
grazia, he could not help finding Mantegna's manner dry (Figs. 1 and 2).4 For those wh
and laboured and his treatment of drapery somewhat
exhibition in London, where paintings, drawings
wereconsider-
crude.' Yet there was no denying Mantegna's very arranged thematically and chronologicall
able contributions to the history of Italianbeart, andnoting
worth in that at the Metropolitan the pr
concluding his biography of the artist in theshown separately, and that the seven prints trad
1550 edition
attributed
of the Vite he noted that Mantegna 'bequeathed to painting to Mantegna were isolated from th
the difficulty of foreshortening figures seen fromascribed
below to
- a him in the catalogue. This had the eff
difficult and fanciful invention; and the manner phasising the issues of authorship, chronology an
of copper
engraving, truly a most singular convenience; intention that are the focus of this article, whic
by which
the whole world has seen not only the Bacchanal, perhaps be theread as a postscript to the catalogue
Battle of the Sea Monsters, the Deposition from the Cross,
the Entombment, the Resurection with Longinus York
Theshowing.,
first
and St point is that when seen together in
Andrew - works by the said Mantegna - but the gallery the seven engravings did, indeed, seem t
manners
of all other subsequent artists'.2 For him,real group. What, in their still fundamental study
Mantegna's
mastery of engraving was as much a part of Levenson, Oberhuber, and Sheehan described as a
the artist's
ingenio as his mastery of those other difficultiesdevelopment
of art, such from the 'delicate, tonal style' of th
ment
as foreshortening and perspective. Of course, (cat.no.39) to a 'vigorous, linear manner,
Mantegna
did not invent copper engraving, and in his 1568the individual
edition shading lines begin to express plas
well could
Vasari hastened to correct this error. Still, there as chiaroscuro',
be culminating in the Battle
no more eloquent testimony to the prestige the godsgroup
(no.79)
ofand the Virgin of humility (no.48), w
engravings associated with Mantegna enjoyed, firmed.6 Just as importantly, the subjects could b
and there
embracethey
could be no greater justification for the prominence the range of Mantegna's output - a
were accorded in the Mantegna exhibitionnarrative,held at thea devotional theme, an iconic composit
Royal Academy and the Metropolitan Museum ceived di sotto in su", and two mythological narra
last year.3
Vasari's testimony should also remind us thatemulate the artistic language of classical sarc
the modern
tendency to divide the study of the fine arts was, indeed,
by media hasdifficult to avoid feeling that the e
little validity for the renaissance. were actually conceived by Mantegna as a man
his art in
This article is the direct result of my involvement - one
the that addressed an audience reared, a
Mantegna exhibition and the unique opportunity patron Ludovico Gonzaga, on Alberti's ideas i
it afforded
Pictura. The point may seem egregious, but I bel
to study these works on a daily basis. It cannot sufficiently
be emphasised how important the occasion was for an
central to a understanding of the genesis and n
clearer understanding of the engravings, forthese remarkable
the late im- works. It is in the engravin
Entombment,
pressions commonly encountered in print cabinets give the Bacchanals and the Battle of the
but a pale reflection of the tonal richness andwith theirof
subtlety emphasis on expression and dramat
that Mantegna most fully and effectively exploite
execution of the rare, fine examples. At the Metropolitan
three fine impressions of the Entombment - the recommendations
unique first for an historia. As Michael Baxandall
has noted,
state from the Albertina and two of the second state in (that
the Entombment the figure of StJohn functions
from the National Gallery, Washington and as anaAlbertian
second, choric figure, setting the emotional tone

*I should like to acknowledge my indebtedness to many thought-provoking obviously has a bearing on any evaluation of the prints as well as the range of
conversations with Suzanne Boorsch over the period of our involvement in the effects the artist was experimenting with.
Mantegna exhibition. Andrea Bayer, David Ekserdjian and Giovanni Agosti 5The following, partial list of reviews of the exhibition should be noted here:
kindly read and commented on the manuscript. M. WARNER, in the Times Literay Supplement [7th February 1992], pp.14-15;
G. VASARI: Le vite de'pid eccellenti architetti, pittori . ., 1550, ed. L. BELLOSI and A. KUNZ, in the Neue Ziiricher Zeitung [8th-9th February 1992], pp.65-66; R. LIGHT-
A. ROSSI, Turin [1986], p.493: 'Et ancora ch'egli avesse il modo del panneggiar suo BOWN, in Apollo, CXXV [1992], pp.185-89; H.R. TREVOR-ROPER in The New York
crudetto e sottile, a la maniera alquanto secca, e' vi sono perb cose con molto artificio e con Review of Books [28th May 1992], pp.3-4 (less a review than an overview of
molta bonti da lui lavorate e ben condotte'. Mantegna); M. HIRST, inTHE BURLINGTON MAGAZINE, CXXXIV [1992], pp.318-
2VASARI, ed.cit. above, p.496, my translation. 21; D. ROSAND, in The New Republic [22ndJune 1992], pp.29-32; A. HAVUM, in Art
3See Andrea Mantegna, exh.cat. Royal Academy of Arts, London and The in America [June 1992], pp.68-78, 125; w. STEDMAN SHEARD, in the Art Journal,
Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York [1992]. The American edition corrects LI [1992], pp.85-93; c. GILBERT, in The New Criterion [October 1992], pp.47-52;
minor errors in the British edition and incorporates additional colour plates; it c. CERI VIA: 'Un'esposizione per Andrea Mantegna', Civilta mantovana, XXVII
is the edition cited here, and the numbers in parentheses throughout the text [1992], pp.189-94; L. VENTURA: 'Discorrendo di Mantegna. Luci ed ombre
refer to it. degli studi nell'anno della mostra di Londra e New York', loc.cit., pp.198-201;
4In the Washington impression an almost grainy ink creates heavy lines em- G. GOLDNER, in Master Drawings, XXXI, no.2 [1993]; P. EMISON: 'Andrea Mantegna,
phasising contours and contrasts of value, while in the Metropolitan impression a Printmaker?! A Controversy', Print Collectors' Newsletter, XXIII [1992], pp.41-
the inking gives a marvellously tonal effect. Without a detailed, line by line 66. Only the reviews ofRosand, Stedman Sheard and Emison deal at any length
comparison, one might be led to believe that these two impressions were actually with the engravings, but see also the comments of A. GENTILI: 'Mantegna,
different states. A. HIND (Early Italian Engraving, A Critical Catalogue with Complete l'incisione e la Discesa al Limbo', Civiltd mantovana, XXVII [1992]; pp.53-75,
Reproduction of all the Prints Described, London [1948], V, pp.4-5), commented on whose article is in part a response to the exhibition.
such variations in printing, but his observation is worth repeating, since it 6J. LEVENSON, K. OBERHUBER and J.L. SHEEHAN: Early Italian Engravings from the
National Gallery ofArt, exh.cat., Washington [1973], p.168.

604

This content downloaded from

84.204.8.138 on Wed, 14 Sep 2022 09:16:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 MANTEGNA AS A PRINTMAKER

for the viewer, while the scuttling clouds provide a more

naturalistic explanation for the movement of the draperies
than does Alberti's recommended personification of the
west wind (to a similar end, in the Bacchanal with a wine vat,
no.74, the fluttering ribbons fastening the inscribed tablet
to the branch of an apple tree function as a sort of weather-
cock).7 For Alberti, these details of windswept drapery
and of hair that 'twist around as if to tie itself in a knot'

(as in the Battle of the sea gods), were desirable not only
because they were inherently pleasing, but because they
directly pertained to the artist's task of giving visible form
to 'the movements of the mind' - what he referred to as

the affectiones or affezione (II, 43): the affetti.8 In the Risen

Christ between St Andrew and Longinus (no.45) we find those
effects of foreshortening that so impressed Vasari and, in
the words of Giovanni Santi, 'inganan l'ochio e l'arte fan
gioire'.9 And in the Battle of the sea gods we very likely have
an allegory of artistic envy- an invenzione of exactly the
sort Alberti recommended.10 In short, the prints Vasari
singled out as a conspicuous aspect of Mantegna's legacy
really do provide a summary of the artist's ambitions and
achievement. It hardly seems surprising that, with his
strong sense of artistic identity, Mantegna should have
turned to the nascent art of engraving to publicise himself,
or that his involvement was a temporary one and the sub-
jects treated so purposefully selected."
What I would propose is that the seven engravings
traditionally ascribed to Mantegna be viewed not as the
products of a peculiar excursus by a painter into a secondary
medium, but a coherent and focused project, the germ of
1. Entombment (detail), by Andrea Mantegna. H.2, engraving, 29.9 by 42.2 cm.
which lies in those model-books and albums that were
(whole). (The National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.).
produced in the workshops of Pisanello, Jacopo Bellini,
Squarcione, and Marco Zoppo (we know, in fact, that
Mantegna had managed to procure just such a model-
book with drawings after ancient sculpture, especially
battles of centaurs, before October 1476).I2 As is pointed
out in the catalogue, Mantegna's engravings were widely
mined by artists in a fashion consistent with this function.13

7M. BAXANDALL: Giotto and the Orators, London [1971], pp.127-34, still provides
the best argument for the importance of the De Pictura for Mantegna's engravings.
'The comments of j. GREENSTEIN (Mantegna and Painting as Historical Narrative,
New York [1992], pp.44-52) on Alberti's notion of the afetti should be read
with extreme caution, since they are based on a very debateable interpretation
of Alberti's text.

9For Santi's text, with its long panegyric on Mantegna, see C. GILBERT: L'Arte
del Quattrocento nelle testimonianze coeve, Florence and Vienna [ 1988], p.120.
'0See M. JACOBSEN: 'The Meaning of Mantegna's Battle of Sea Monsters', Art
Bulletin, LXIV [1982], pp.623-29.
" Ribera presents an analogy for this short-term involvement with printmaking
by a painter.
"2See C. BROWN: 'Gleanings from the Gonzaga Documents in Mantua: Gian
Cristoforo Romano and Andrea Mantegna', Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen
Institutes in Florenz, XVII [ 1973], pp.158-59.
13See pp.39-42, notes 16-17, and pp.45, 213-14, cat.no.45 (where, however, a
notice of Gerolamo Casio in 1506 lamenting the death of 'quello [che] intaglio il
Christo. . .' is incorrectly taken as a reference to Mantegna and his print of
Christ between St Andrew and Longinus: as Suzanne Boorsch reminds me, the
object in question is more likely to be a carved gem than an engraving). See also
the examples cited in HIND, op.cit. at note 4 above, and LEVENSON, OBERHUBER
and SHEEHAN, op.cit. at note 6 above, in the relevant catalogue entries. A
particularly interesting case is presented by the studies after the Entombment in
the so-called Venetian Sketchbook created in the circle of Raphael in the early
years of the sixteenth century: see s. FERINO PAGDEN: Disegni umbri del Rinascimento
da Perugino a Raffaello, exh.cat., Uffizi, Florence [1982], p.196. C. LLOYD ('A
Short Footnote to Raphael Studies', THE BURLINGTON MAGAZINE, CXIX [1977],
pp.113-14) has demonstrated that Raphael turned not only to Mantegna's
Entombment for his painting in the Villa Borghese but to the Bacchanal with
2. Entombment (detail), by Andrea Mantegna. H.2 (fragmentary), engraving.
Silenus, thus suggesting a full study of Mantegna's prints - something we would
expect, given his father's high opinion of the Paduan artist. (The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York).

605

This content downloaded from

84.204.8.138 on Wed, 14 Sep 2022 09:16:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 MANTEGNA AS A PRINTMAKER

For the provincial Matteo Cesi, working in Belluno in the

1480s, the Risen Christ between Longinus and St Andrew provided
a means of updating two altar-pieces (both in the former
Bode Museum, Berlin). About the same time, in the late
1480s, the young Cima da Conegliano made repeated
reference to the same engraving for the poses of Sts Peter
and John the Baptist in his polyptych at Olera, of St Roch
in the altar-piece in the Brera, Milan, and of St John the
Baptist in the altar-piece at Conegliano of 1492-93.14
Mantegna's engraving also lies behind Michele da Verona's
frescoed figure of St Andrew in the church of S. Anastasia
in Verona. For the brilliantly gifted Ercole de' Roberti,
working between 1478 and 1486 in the Garganelli Chapel
w
in S. Petronio in Bologna, Mantegna's Entombment was an
obvious starting point for his Crucifixion (destroyed, but
known both through a compositional drawing in the Kupfer-
stichkabinett, Berlin, illustrated in the catalogue, p.39
and a later copy of the fresco itself); the engraving served
the same purpose for Agostino de'Fonduli's terracotta
Pieta of 1483 in S. Satiro, Milan. 15 Perhaps a decade or so
later Riccio looked to the Entombment and the Risen Christ
for motifs for a bronze plaquette, just as he turned to
Mantegna's Battle of the sea gods in the creation of a bronze
3. Virgin and Child with St
statuette of a triton and nereid and for the decoration of century. Enamelled glass
of Art, New York).
the Paschal Candlestick in the Santo, Padua. 16
Typical of the various compositional uses to which these
homage
prints were put is the transformation of the Bacchanal with (the pain
lection).
a wine vat into a miniature of the Entombment by the Veronese
miniaturist Francesco dai Libri around 1480 (Courtauld
Mantegna's engravings may never have achieved the
Collection, London), and the reappearance of figures ubiquity
from of Marcantonio Raimondi's prints after Raphael,
the Battle of the sea gods in the terracotta frieze onbutthe
by the early sixteenth century the shelves of many a
Palazzo Mozzanica in Lodi (usually dated around 1488 humanist's study were decorated with a version in bronze
and sometimes ascribed to Agostino de'Fonduli).7 Diirer,
of one of the sea monsters in the Battle of the sea gods, while
by contrast, looked to the Battle of the sea gods anda the
private oratory might contain, among its decorations, a
Bacchanal with Silenus as a lexicon of the classical style in plaque of the Emtombment (Museo Civico, Padua);
maiolica
his well-known drawn copies of 1494. At the turn ofabout thethe same time the Virgin of Humility was adapted as
the enamelled decoration of a glass flask (Fig.3).18 The
century, in a devotional painting in the Museo del Castel-
vecchio, Verona, Domenico Morone repeated the affectiveinspiration Raphael, Rubens and Rembrandt drew from
pose of the Virgin of humility, which also served Moretto as
the engravings is well known.
a point of reference for his Madonna and Child with saints As
in these and other examples attest, the engravings,
the National Gallery, London, of 1540. We may not withbe
the possible exception of the Virgin of Humility, must
surprised that long after he had left Mantegna'shave shopbeen in circulation by about 1480.19 Indeed, if the
Francesco Caroto turned to the Entombment for one of the drawings in the Louvre (RF 28.918) and British Museum
predella scenes of his altar-piece in S. Giorgio in Braida,
(1854-6-28-62) copying motifs from the Entombment are by
Marco Zoppo - as has been argued - then we may say
Verona, but its direct translation by a Bolognese artist of
the generation of Francia into a painting with an extensive
with some confidence that Mantegna's prints had already
landscape background must be considered an exceptional begun their peregrinations by 1478, when Zoppo died.20

14P. HUMFREY: Cima da Conegliano, Cambridge [1983], pp.117, 127, 139, 159,
notes three further possible references by Cima to this print as well as one to
Mantegna's engraving of the Entombment.
'See G. PACCAGNINI: Andrea Mantegna, exh.cat., Mantua [1961], p.195; LEVEN-
SON, OBERHUBER and SHEEHAN, op.cit. at note 6 above, p.170; and S. BANDERA
BISTOLETTI: 'La Piet& di Agostino de'Fonduli in S. Satiro nell'occasione del suo
restauro', Arte lombarda, 86-7 [1988], pp.71-82. Paccagnini also reproduces a
polychrome wood relief repeating Mantegna's composition.
'6L. PLANIsCIG: Andrea Riccio, Vienna [1927], pp.288-92, masterfully analyses the
features of the plaquette, which combines quotations from Mantegna's two
prints with others from a well-known bronze plaque in the Kunsthistorisches
Museum, Vienna (for which see note 39 below). For the bronze statuette and
Paschal Candlestick, see ibid., pp.263-72.
17See E. ARSLAN: 'La scultura nella seconda meta del quattrocento', in Storia di
Milano, Milan [1956], VI, p.713. Giovanni Agosti kindly reminds me that the
frieze on the Palazzo Landi, Piacenza is also pertinent. It can be dated by
documents to 1484: see G. FIORI: 'Le sconosciute opere piacentine di Guiniforte
Solari e di Gian Pietro da Rho: I Portali di S. Francesco e del palazzo Landi',
Archivio Storico Lombardo, 5-6 [1966-67], pp.131-33.
'8"The sea monsters originated from the workshop of Severo da Ravenna as a
popular variant of his statuette of Nepture on a sea-monster, the finest version of
which is in the Frick Art Museum, New York. The 1542 inventory of Isabella
d'Este's collection cites one such statuette of Neptune. For the plaque, see
PLANISCIG, op.cit. at note 16 above, p.292. The enamelled roundel in the Metro-
politan, probably from a glass flask, is unpublished. It is worth noting that a
number of prints after Mantegna's designs, above all those of the Triumphs,
enjoyed equal celebrity.
'9David Landau's assertion in the catalogue (pp.53-54), that Mantegna's prints
were hard to come by seems contradicted by their widespread circulation.
Diirer surely made copies after Mantegna's engravings, as he did after other
Italian prints, in an effort to master the elements of renaissance style, not
because he could not afford them.
20The British Museum sheet was first ascribed to Zoppo by Popham and
Pouncey and is accepted as his work in both E. RUHMER: Marco Zoppo, Vicenza
[1966], p.76, and L. ARMSTRONG: The Paintings and Drawings of Marco Zoppo, New
York [1976], p.416. The Louvre drawing is discussed only by Riihmer, p.72.

606

This content downloaded from

84.204.8.138 on Wed, 14 Sep 2022 09:16:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 MANTEGNA AS A PRINTMAKER

A dating in the 1470s would make the 1476 notice of

Mantegna's temporary possession of a model book with
drawings whose subjects were directly relevant to his own
antique-inspired engravings particularly meaningful. No
less so is the demonstrated dependence of the figure of
Neptune in the Battle of the sea gods on the Felix gem,
acquired by Cardinal Francesco Gonzaga after the death
of Pope Paul II in 1471.21 This dating would also lend
further credibility to the postulated connexion of the Risen
Christ between Longinus and St Andrew to the foundation of
Alberti's church of S. Andrea, Mantua, in 1472 - the en-
graving at once commemorating that event and raising
the humble pilgrim's print to an object suitable for culti-
vated, Albertian tastes.22 The association of the print with
Mantua's most famous church would also explain how it
was that the figure of the risen Christ in the engraving
came to serve as the compositional model for one of the
frescoed roundels in the portico of S. Andrea (the tondo of
the facade contains the now illegible frescoes of St Andrew
and Longinus, dated 1488). And, of course, a dating of
the engravings prior to 1480 gives even greater resonance
to the well-known and variously interpreted letter of the
painter-engraver Simone da Reggio to Ludovico Gonzaga
in 1475 relating to some plates he was remaking for the
Mantuan painter Zoan Andrea.
Whatever precise meaning we may attach to Mantegna's
violent reaction to Simone's activity, it is clear that by
1475 prints were being made in Mantua, and that they
were being made by someone who described himself as
4. Bacchanal with a wine vat (detail), by Andrea Mantegna. H.4, engraving,
'pictore e taliatore de bolino' and 29.9
whom
by 43.7 cm. (TheLudovico,
Metropolitan Museum of Art,inNew hisYork).
letter of safe conduct, described more simply as a 'pictore':
in other words, by a painter-engraver such as Mantegna
himself was later reputed to be.23One We of themay
main issues
alsoraisedbetter
in the catalogue to the
appreciate Mantegna's expressionexhibition
of relief was the question
thatofhe authorship:
stillthat is, who
had the plates ('le stampe') at hand to
actually cut replace an image
these seven engravings (that they were designed
given as a present by Francesco Gonzaga by Mantegnain has never been doubted). Suzanne Boorsch's
1491.24
The success of the engravings was provocative
immediate.thesis that Mantegna
Not employed
only a professional
did they acquire an unparalleled status printmaker toamong artists
engrave his designs - an ideaas
first raised by
paradigms of the new humanist style Erica Tietze-Conrat
Mantegna in 194327
had - has thus far elicited sur-
forged
in Padua and refined in Mantua, they prisingly little response
were much among reviewers, as though the
sought
after by amateurs, a fact demonstrated question were
by either
theof little importance or were best left
imitations
and copies obviously created in response to print specialists.28
to this Yet,demand.
the central position of these
In every sense of the word these engravings engravings in the history of printmaking makes the issue
are landmarks
in the history of printmaking, andfar itfrom
is academic.
hardly Nor surprising
does it seem to me that one has to
that six of those currently assigned to Mantegna be a specialist to appreciate thatarethe technical innovations
mentioned in the 1550 edition of Vasari's Vite25 and five and experimental character of the prints presuppose an
in Scardeone's 1560 biography of Mantegna;26 nor that artist of the first order. Nothing could be further from
Baccio Baldini's workmanlike translation of Botticelli's
Vasari should also have ascribed the invention of engraving
to Mantegna. designs for the Divina Commedia.

21 See M. VICKERS: 'The Felix Gem in Oxford and Mantegna's Triumphal Pro-ascribed to him. It is assumed that the Entombment he mentions is the
tentatively
gramme', Gazette des Beaux-Arts, CI [1983], pp.97-102; and C. BROWN: horizontal
'Cardinalversion and not the vertical one (no.29) based on Mantegna's design.
26SCARDEONE
Francesco Gonzaga's collection of Antique Intaglios and Cameos: Questions of (De Antiquitate Patavii, Basel [1560], reprinted in KRISTELLER,
provenance, identification and dispersal', Gazette des Beaux-Arts, CI [1983],
op.cit. at note 24 above, pp.502-03) does not mention the Risen Christ, but he
pp.102-04. includes the Deposition from the Cross as well as the Triumphs, '& alia permulta'. He
22See LEVENSON, OBERHUBER and SHEEHAN, op.cit. at note 6 above, pp.178-80. then declares that although these prints were held in highest esteem but hard to
E. LINCOLN: 'Mantegna's Culture of Line', Art History, 16 [1993], pp.53-54, come by in his day, he owned nine, each different.
relates the print to the celebration of the Feast of the Blood in Mantua but goes 27E. TIETZE-CONRAT: 'Was Mantegna an Engraver?', Gazette des Beaux-Arts, 6th
on to make the implausible suggestion that the di sotto in si" viewpoint somehow ser., XXIV [1943], pp.375-81.
relates to the high placement of the two vases containing the relics. Much more 28An exception to this are the reviews of ROSAND, EMISON and STEDMAN-SHEARD,
interesting is her reminder that the first book printed in Mantua in 1472, an cited at note 5 above. Stedman-Sheard more or less follows Boorsch, as, appar-
edition of the Decameron, was intended to help offset the costs of S. Andrea. ently, does LINCOLN (loc.cit. at note 22 above, pp.37, 43, 49-52), who seems to me
23See the Appendix below. to accept too readily a tidy division between craftsman and painter while at the
24The relevant letters are in P.O. KRISTELLER: Andrea Mantegna, Berlin [1902], same time not sufficiently recognising that before the technical and stylistic
pp.550-51, docs.l112-14. innovations of Mantegna's engravings could be imitated, they had to be created
25Vasari also mentions the Deposition from the Cross, an engraving which is - obviously by an artist of the highest order. I wrongly underplayed the issue in
certainly based on a design of Mantegna's and in the catalogue (no.32) was my own catalogue essay, p.75.

607

This content downloaded from

84.204.8.138 on Wed, 14 Sep 2022 09:16:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 MANTEGNA AS A PRINTMAKER

features more evident than in what seems to be the earliest

5. Virgin and Child enthroned with an angel, by Andrea
brown ink on paper, 19.7 by 14 cm. (The British
The burin is handled with the dexterity
a pen rather than the steady regularity
the engraver's tool:29 instead of the
furrows of a professional goldsmith/engraver,
wonderfully varied in thickness, the
features described with an almost gestural
modelling is achieved through a subtle
throws the forms into relief and confers on them a tonal
unity (see Figs.1, 2 and 4). As in Mantegna's most highlythe products of one or more talented technicians will
finished drawings, such as the Man lying on a stone slabbecome clear. In this respect, the comments of Kristeller
(no.43) or the Virgin and Child enthroned with an angel (Fig.5),
repeated strokes of the burin are used in an unorthodox In the catalogue it is argued that the production of the
way to create those dark contours by which Mantegna
habitually set off his figures, either drawn or painted (whatthat was transposed to the copper plate in successive sittings
Alberti would have called circonscrizione).
The lines have the richness generally associated with
the presence of a burr, but whether there is any true use aofsheet of carta lucida according to the recipe found in
drypoint seems to me a moot point. Nowhere are these
Cennino Cennini reveals just how efficient this system
of the prints, the Entombment. The subsequent prints show
an increasing understanding of the inherent properties of
the medium, sacrificing tonal subtlety to greater formal
clarity. Yet only in the Virgin of humility- now usually
thought to be the latest of the prints - can one speak of a
distinction between the graphic style of the engravings
and the finest of the highly finished drawings attributable
to Mantegna.
It is indicative of the exceptional status of the engravings
that a comparison of the Battle of the sea gods to the related
drawing at Chatsworth (no.81) - often accepted as a
preparatory study - reveals the engraving to be superior
(compare, for example, the exaggeratedly wizened features
of the figure of the hag or the somewhat tentative relation-
ship of the legs, neck and head of the frontally viewed sea
horse in the drawing to their counterparts in the en-
graving).30 Even with the exquisite, if faded and foxed,
drawing of the Risen Christ with Longinus and St Andrew
(no.44), which David Ekserdjian convincingly argues in
the catalogue is by Mantegna, the engraving introduces
further, minute refinements, particularly in the drapery of
Christ, and is in many respects the stronger work of art.
In none of the engravings is there a sacrifice of overall
effect to detailed presentation or a misunderstanding of
spatial relationships. By contrast, in the engravings ascribed
with greater or lesser plausibility to the anonymous 'Premier
Engraver' (about whose consistency as a personality I
have strong reservations), one finds all the hallmarks of
the copyist: deadeningly regular contours, generalised
modelling that flattens rather than models the forms, a
coarsening of expression,
Mantegna. and a frequent misunderstanding
Pen and light-
ofMuseum,
the relationship
London).of one part of anatomy to another (the
awkward relationship of the head, arm and drapery in the
Hercules and Antaeus - technically one of the master's finest
engravings and
- is afreedom
case in point).ofIt is, to my mind, incon-
ceivable thatassociated with
the artist who created the Silenus with a group
of sharp, evenly
children (no.84), in whichincised
the heavy, uninflected contours
and banal modelling the betray
lines theare copyist's hand, could
havefacial and anatomical
been responsible for the Bacchanals. The Virgin and
quality,
Child in the grotto (no.21) iswhile
no less deficient, and if we apply
to this hatching
heterogeneous that
corpusboth
the same critical standards
we do to the variously attributed drawings, their status as
and Hind still carry complete conviction.3'
engravings involved the use of a detailed drawing or cartoon
or sessions by means of tracing paper (carta lucida). Super-
ficially, this seems a plausible thesis, and the production of

2' . . a clear outline is supported by shading in open parallels and lighter connexion between his highly worked-up drawings and the style of his engravings.
return strokes laid obliquely between the parallel lines. The return stroke would
She then goes on to use as a point of departure for her discussion the drawings of
be natural to a draughtsman but not to an engraver, so that its use in engraving
St James led to execution and the studies of Christ at the column, which are compo-
shows a direct imitation of a draughtsman's manner. The seven platessitional
of sketches whose function is far removed from that of the more highly
undoubted authenticity, and a few of the remainder, show an even more
finished drawings and the engravings.
methodical use of the return stroke than most of the Florentine engravings,
3"The attribution of the drawing to Mantegna is defended by GOLDNER, 0loc.Cit.
and their scheme closely follows the linear system of Mantegna's own pen
at note 5 above.
drawings. . .': HIND, op.cit. at note 4 above, p.4. Curiously, LINCOLN (loc.cit. at note
31 HIND, op.cit. at note 4 above, p.5; KRISTELLER, op.cit. at note 24 above, pp.387-
22 above, pp.44-45) while accepting the notion that Mantegna's engravings 88.
are
meant in some way to simulate his drawings, denies that there is a demonstrable

608

This content downloaded from

84.204.8.138 on Wed, 14 Sep 2022 09:16:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 MANTEGNA AS A PRINTMAKER

6. Tracing of the drawing of the Risen Christ between St Andrew and Longinus in the Staatliche
superimposed over the related engraving by Andrea Mantegna in the Metropolitan Museum

would have been.32 However, the matter

(evidently can only
slightly out be
of register).
tested in one instance, and that is the drawing in Munich
itioning of the head of Christ does
of the Risen Christ between Longinus and St Andrew.
significantly fromAtthe
thedrawing. Yet
close of the exhibition I examined this drawing
which underwas
the drawing the manifestl
microscope and in good light, and being excised and glued it
made a tracing of down onto
(Fig.6). It should be stated at the on
outset that the
the sheet. drawing
This readjustment comp
is of the highest quality: nowhere are thepoint
sit viewing contours orthe most in
that is
internal hatching mechanical. The hand
design. of St
Were theAndrew
head to be re-po
holding the cross is of a marvellous subtlety,
conceived, and
the the facial
drawing would confor
features are described with consummate mastery.
print, and we Theto conclude
are bound
quality of the drawing is crucial
wasto an appraisal
done by a later of its
owner of the
status, for the tracing of it revealed that in
understand all but one
Mantegna's intention. O
respect it conforms to the engraving.
drawingThere is no sign
is either of
the cartoon from
the sorts of adjustment of design posited
made or in the catalogue
is based on a mechanical
on the misleading basis of superimposed
graving. Thetransparencies
quality of the drawi

tracing
32A sheet of carta lucida was kindly made for me paperJennings.
by Jeffrey and received ink
Apart readily.
from
a rather unpleasant fishy smell, the sample had all the properties of transparent

609

This content downloaded from

84.204.8.138 on Wed, 14 Sep 2022 09:16:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 MANTEGNA AS A PRINTMAKER

second thesis. By the same token, small - almost insignifi-

cant - variations of internal modelling argue strongly that
the engraving is a further, clarifying stage in the creative
process rather than a craftsman-like copy.33 These two
works provide the best gauge for understanding the relation-
ship between the various prints and their putative designs
by Mantegna.
What of the four engravings newly attributed to Man-
tegna by David Landau (nos.29, 32, 36, 67)? One of
them, the Descent from the Cross, was included by Vasari
and Scardeone among the engravings by Mantegna, and
another, the vertical Entombment, enjoyed a fame among
artists in the late fifteenth century almost as great as its
horizontal counterpart.34 The other two, the Flagellation
and the Descent into Limbo, are noble compositions, but
Hind recognised that they differ technically from the seven
key works, conforming to more conventional practice.35
We may, moreover, note those hallmarks of the copyist
mentioned above. In the Descent into Limbo, the tunnel-like
entrance to the underworld is treated in a perfunctory
fashion, obliterating any sense of depth (how are we to
understand that curiously abrupt shading at the right of
the cave opening?); the tail of the central demon is reduced
to a flat pattern; and Eve appears to have inadvertently
stepped on the foot of her companion. All of these awk-
wardnesses are resolved in the pen drawing in the Ecole
des Beaux-Arts, Paris (no.66) and the painting at Bristol
(no.69), and regardless of what one makes of those two
works, they surely argue against Mantegna having executed
the engraving.36 Similarly, in the Flagellation of Christ the
placement of the background figures on the squared pave-
ment is contradicted by their diminutive scale, and the
column at the right has no base but hangs suspended in
the air (this omission is hardly due to the unfinished state
of the engraving, since the squaring of the pavement is
complete in this section). This is simply inconceivable in a
work by Mantegna. (Even Giovan Antonio da Brescia, in
his copy of the engraving, realised that this omission was
unacceptable.)
The vertical Entombment and the Descent from the Cross
are superior as works of art, but far more conventional in
the handling of the burin when compared to the seven by
Mantegna, and there is, again, a notable flattening of
forms, as if the engraver had somehow lost sight of the
overall effect in his effort carefully (and somewhat mech-
7. Nudeputto, after a model by Andrea Mantegna. Bronze, with silvered eyes,
anically) to reproduce the details of his compositions. 20.5 cm. high. (The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York).
This is particularly evident in the left-hand seated woman

33Ekserdjian's attribution of the Munich drawing is accepted by both HIRST presentation drawing, such as those inJacopo Bellini's albums. Its draughtsman-
(loc.cit. at note 5 above, p.321: 'only severe fading of the sheet prevents unequivocal ship is not, therefore, strictly comparable to either pen and ink sketches or to a
endorsement'), and GOLDNER, loc.cit. at note 5 above. cartoon. What seems to me to weigh in its favour is the consistency and
34See the derivations I cite in the catalogue, p.42 note 16. The composition of economy with which the conception is realised - a consistency found in neither
the Entombment is reproduced on a maiolica plaque dated 1523 (Victoria and the print nor the painting and, I believe, uncharacteristic of a copy as well. A
Albert Museum, no.278). Much the most slavish use of the Deposition is in a fresco single viewing point is adopted for the whole scene, with the audaciously
in the ex-convent of the Poor Clares in Martinengo (Bergamo), for which see foreshortened demons viewed from below and the plateau from above (this
F. MAZZINI: Affreschi lombardi del Quattrocento, Milan [1965], pp.472-73, ills.231- effect is greatly compromised in both the print and the painting). The space of
33. Just how popular the composition of this print became may be judged by the plateau on which the action takes place is articulated with consummate
the fact that it is reproduced in a bronze plaquette (see, for example, E. MOLINIER: mastery, particularly obvious at the left, where the rise of the ledge has been
Les Plaquettes, Paris [1886], II, p.36). thought out with Mantegna's scrupulous care and the relation of the obliquely
35 Op.cit. at note 4 above, p.5. held cross and foreshortened piece of lumber effectively measure the depth of
36HIRST and GOLDNER (both cited at note 5 above) dismiss the Ecole des Beaux- Christ's stance. The details of the splintered door are treated with a concision
Arts drawing out of hand. 'Journeyman level' is how Hirst characterises it, a and logic found in neither the print nor the painting. I think it would be hard to
surprising judgement in view of James Byam Shaw's ascription of it to Bellini argue that the handling of the interior of the opening of the cave is by a minor
and Giles Robertson's cogent arguments in favour of Mantegna. It is on vellum, master or copyist; the scaly arm of the left hand demon is no less masterfully
and although in part unfinished, it has the character we might associate with a described.

610

This content downloaded from

84.204.8.138 on Wed, 14 Sep 2022 09:16:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 MANTEGNA AS A PRINTMAKER

in the Entombment and in the three standing

doubted thatfigures to the
the remarkable foundry
left of the cross in the Descent from the opportunities
ample Cross, where the for an artist inte
shoulders, arms, and heads lie on the
ing. same
This plane.
aspect But
of Mantegna's work w
perhaps most indicative is the way the the lights and
exhibition exceptdarks by Anthony Ra
have been so evenly distributed that the spatial
entry for theeffect bronze is bust of Manteg
greatly compromised. If the landscapeto haveand beenfigure castgroups
by Mantegna (a plas
of the vertical Entombment are compared to those in the
in the exhibition), and in a passing
horizontal Entombment, where tone and value
Landau.39 At are Newused to
York, a bronze st
define space and not simply to model form,
the same the distinction
pose (although reversed) as the infant on the
will be apparent. Moreover, the engraved line
extreme left of is strangely
the Bacchanal with a wine vat was added to
uninflected. Rather than transmitting the graphology
the exhibition of a that Mantegna
(Fig.7). Lomazzo records
drawn composition, the print gives the
used effect
modelled of
figurines to a careful
stage his compositions, and the
rendition of the minutely described forms
model ofputto,
of this bronze a painting.
of which the finest cast is in the
That many of the engravings associated with
Museum of Fine Mantegna
Arts, Houston, may well have been by
replicate paintings - even muralsMantegna
- hashimself.
frequently
A genericallybeen
Mantegnesque drawing
asserted, but it can really be sustained only in
in the Fondazione the
Horne case
(5858) of the figure from
studying
these two, in which an attempt seems to have
two different angles been
would seemmadeto certify the genesis of
to transcribe the terms of Mantegna's painted
the statuette and thecompositions
uses to which it was put.40 It seems
into black and white. It follows reasonable
that the drawings
that, like Pisanello before at
him, Mantegna should
Brescia, the British Museum andhave the Courtauld
turned to this medium -(nos.27,
which, like engraving, offered
26 and 35) that are related to the themes of these
the possibility engravings
of replication (something that had been a
are more likely to be studies for paintings.
concern of37
Donatello and was to fascinate other renaissance
In her essay Boorsch makes much of
artists theIf difficulty
as well). of that he also
it could be demonstrated
engraving and the improbability ofchased
an his own bronze
artist of statuettes,
Mantegna's then there would be no
stature taking the trouble to master
reasonthis time-consuming
to be surprised at his proficiency with the burin. It
and secondary medium. However, is, inthese
any event,concerns seem
indicative of his experimentation in other
not to have bothered sixteenth-century writers,
media that the bronze and
statuette, of whichitfour casts exist, is
should not be forgotten that among virtuallyScardeone's
contemporary with the sources
engravings.41 (Mantegna's
was a letter written by Girolamo Campagnola, a friend
bronze portrait is usually dated to theof1480s on the basis
Mantegna who sent his painter/engraver
of the apparent age son Giulio to
of the artist.)
Mantua in 1497 to work with the great man.
Of all the Butofbeyond
great artists the early renaissance, Mantegna
this circumstantial evidence, we know
was the that Mantegna
most self-possessed, had
and there is no reason to be
a keen interest in media other than painting.
surprised In Padua
that he should have seizedheon the medium of
had first-hand acquaintance with modelling in terracotta,
engraving to advertise his artistic stature. Indeed, when
the medium of the altar-piece in the Ovetari
we consider Chapel
his humanist that
friends and their use of the
Mantegna had made a bid to carry printing
out but presswhich,
to spread theirin fame
1449,- men such as Filippo
was assigned to his erstwhile partner Niccol6
Nuvolone, Pizzolo.38
whose speech delivered on His
the occasion of King
Christian
first project in Mantua had been the of Denmark'sof
designing arrival in Mantua in 1474 was
a chapel
for Ludovico, to which a drawing of a paschal
printed candlestick
that same year, or Felice Feliciano, who in 1475
(no.27v) may be related, and in 1483 he designed
collaborated vases
with the printer to of Ferrara and the
Severino
be made in silver. Nothing seems to haveyear
following come ofown
set up his his de-
press at Poiano in partnership
signs for the tomb of Barbara of Brandenburg
with Innocente Zileto42 and, later,
- it seems only natural that
for a statue of Virgil for IsabellaMantegna
d'Esteshould
beyond prelimi-
have appropriated engraving not only
nary drawings, but Giovanni Santi as a states
means of that Mantegna
reproducing his designs but as a way of
practised sculpture as well as painting, and
transmitting it cannot
his drawing style: asbe
an exemplum of his

37GOLDNER, loc.cit. at note 5 above, has reasonably queried whether the fore- Drawings, and their relation to the Engravings of Mantegna's School', Old
shortened figures on the recto of cat.26 have any necessary relation to the theme Master Drawings, IX [1936-37], p.59.
at all. GENTILI (loc.cit. at note 5 above, p.62) reasonably associates the engravings 4 The four casts are in the Museum of Fine Arts, Houston, the Metropolitan
with an extensive Passion series of which three paintings in the National Gallery, Museum of Art, the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, and the Museo Nazionale
London, record further compositions. di Capodimonte, Naples. The Naples cast is from the Farnese collection.
38The attribution of this remarkable work is still uncertain. Recently, G. GENTILINI
J. MONTAGU (review in THE BURLINGTON MAGAZINE, CVIII [1966], p.46) rightly
('Sulle prime tavole d'altare in terracotta dipinta e invetriata', Arte Cristiana,
emphasises the 'Mantegnesque pose and bodily structure' of the bronze and
LXXX [1992], pp.444-45, and 450 note 38) has urged considering Mantegnarejects both Pope-Hennessy's assertion that the statuette was Florentine and
as the author of the predella of the Adoration of the Magi. This idea has much to
recommend it.
Planiscig's contention that there was an antique prototype. For a recent summary
of the literature see D.A. COVI, in Italian Renaissance Sculpture in the Time of
39Landau's comment (p.48) concerns a bronze plaque of the Entombment in the
Donatello, exh.cat., Detroit and Fort Worth [1986], pp.211-12. Covi inexplicably
Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna (inv.no.Pl.6059), a work with a probable missed the fact that the related figure in the Bacchanal with a wine vat is virtually a
provenance from Mantua but more likely of Paduan than Mantuan origin: see mirror image, and the drawing in the Fondazione Horne a study based directly
M. LEITHE-JASPER: Renaissance Master Bronzesfrom the Collection of the Kunsthistorisches
on the statuette. If the similarities already noted by Montagu with Francesco
Museum Vienna, exh.cat., Washington, Los Angeles and Chicago [1986], pp.61- del Cossa's decorations in the Palazzo Schifanoia are accepted, then the model
64. See also the analysis in PLANISCIG, op.cit. at note 16 above, pp.290-92. The for the statuettes must pre-date 1470.
Vienna plaque was exhibited at New York alongside Mantegna's engraving, 42For Nuvolone's oration, see D. RHODEs: Studies in Early Italian Printing, London
and I do not think there could have been a clearer demonstration of its very [1982], p.147; for Feliciano, see C. MITCHELL: 'Felice Feliciano Antiquarius',
different, Donatellesque approach to narration. Proceedings of the British Academy, 47 [1961], pp.201-02.
40This connexion is recognised in j. BYAM SHAW: 'A Group of Mantegnesque

611

This content downloaded from

84.204.8.138 on Wed, 14 Sep 2022 09:16:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 MANTEGNA AS A PRINTMAKER " SIGNORELLI AND RAPHAEL

contact in Mantua was not Mantegna but Zoan Andrea, and that after havin
ingenio.43 Nor does there seem to me to exist a real basis for
paid the obligatory visit to Mantegna he turned to his old friend, who required
denying his insistence on wielding the burin
his assistance. himself.
Zoan, it seems, He
had owned some engraved plates ('stanpe') that had
was, after all, intolerant of mediocrity, whether
been stolen together intellectual
with drawings and medals. Simone offered to remake th
engravings. The fact that Simone offered to 'refarge le dite stanpe' makes it virtually
or technical. It is, indeed, difficult to believe that anyone
certain that plates, not prints were involved; it also indicates that Zoan was not
other than Mantegna could haveable
pushed the
to recut the plates recalcitrant
himself. (Had Simone made the first, stolen set that h
medium of copper-plate engraving into the
now offered 'remake'?)directions
This action so enraged he
Mantegna that he took violen
measures to forestall their production. There is an implication that Zoan
did, and although he was hardly the inventor of engraving,
activity - twice halted - somehow trespassed on Mantegna's interests, althoug
he may legitimately claim to have been
whether its
this was greatest
because Italian
Zoan was attempting to turn a profit by pirating
practitioner - the first in a long linedesigns,
Mantegna's of those painter-
as both Kristeller and Hind maintained, or becaus
Mantegna simply would not abide independent artistic activity in Mantu
engravers who redefined the making of prints.
cannot be said. There is no basis for the suggestion of Landau that Zoan Andre
had stolen some of Mantegna's own plates and that it was these Simone se
The Metropolitan Museum about
ofArt,
to copy.New
Nor can York
LIGHTBOWN's assertion that 'Mantegna was anxious to
recruit [Simone] to engrave his own designs and that he was furious when a
enemy succeeded in capturing his services' (Mantegna, Oxford [1986], p.237 be
sustained. All that Simone ever received from Mantegna during his four-month
43The analogy of Mantegna's engravings withstay
printing
were vague is effectively
promises of work and aargued by
show of friendship. The crucial point is
LINCOLN, op.cit. at note 22 above, pp.52-55.
that She also 1475
even before notes the analogy
printmaking to
was a going concern in Mantua in which
Pisanello's medals. Mantegna had a vested interest. It is also worth noting that Simone settled in
Verona to complete the plates, suggesting that prints by Simone do exist. No
without reason KRISTELLER (Andrea Mantegna, London [1901], p.391; very tenta-
tively followed by Hind) suggested that these were likely to be the four engraving
Appendix: Simone da Reggio's letter to Ludovico Gonzaga of 1475.Landau has attempted to reascribe to Mantegna - works Boorsch has, instead
included in her expanded list of engravings by the anonymous Premier Engraver
(for which, see below). Note should be made of JACOBSEN'S tentative suggestion
Simone's letter (printed in KRISTELLER, see note 24 above) has been used to bolster
so many conflicting views of Mantegna's involvement with printmakink that (loc.cit.
it at note 10 above, p.627, note 24) that Simone's letter may refer to a con-
tact
may be well to examine exactly what it does say. It establishes that Simone's mainwith Mantegna going back to the early 1460s.

TOM HENRY

Signorelli, Raphael and a 'mysterious' pri

in Oxford

ONE element on a drawing in the Ashmolean Museum, model posed in the manner of Michelangelo's David).2
The sheet is generally considered to date from early in
Oxford, has repeatedly been described as 'mysterious'.'
Raphael's
The recto of the sheet (Fig.9), a pen and ink study of a so-called Florentine period (c.1505-07), a date
group of four standing warriors, has been unanimouslyderived from the style of the group on the recto. The other
('mysterious') element on the sheet, inked-in on the verso
attributed to Raphael, and most critics have commented
on the relationship of the central figure to Dqnatello's also visible on the recto, is a pricked profile of a head.
but
St George from Orsanmichele, Florence (now in the MuseoThis pricked design was first discussed in the nineteenth
century by Sir Charles Robinson. Both he, and then Carl
Nazionale di Bargello). The verso (Fig.8) has other studies
Ruland, noticed the head and concluded that the figure
in pen and ink - two side views of a nude male .torso, one
concentrating on the right arm, and one of a knee- and a female.3 In 1919 Oskar Fischel proposed a connexion
was
standing male nude drawn in black chalk. These studies with Luca Signorelli's frescoes at Orvieto, suggesting that
have not been accepted as Raphael with the same enthusi-the pricked design 'reminds one of some of the profiles by
asm, but have found champions who consider them to be Signorelli in the Resurrection of the flesh' (Fig. 10).4 Sub-
youthful studies of a nude figure (the two torsos after sequently,
a in 1956, Karl Parker suggested a more precise

discussion (with an updated bibliography) is C.B. CAPPEL: 'A Substitute Cartoon

*This article would not have been possible without the assistance of Patricia
Robertson, Giusi Testa of the Soprintendenza per i Beni Ambientali Artisticifor Raphael's "Disputa"', Master Drawings, XXX [1992], pp.9-30.
Architettonici, e Storici di Umbria, the restorers of the Cooperativa C.B.C.2The
di studies on the verso were rejected by FISCHEL and PARKER (both loc.cit.
Roma, Catherine Whistler, Judith Chantry, Mira Hudson, Fabrizio Mancinelli above), but accepted implicitly by J.D. PASSAVANT (Raphael d'Urbin et son pare
and Arnold Nesselrath. Dugald McClellan kindly sent me a copy of his unpub- Giovanni Santi, Paris [1860], II, p.510, no.541) and by GERE and TURNER (0loc.Cit.
above, with a comparison to their no.38 on pp.60-61). A. FORLANI TEMPESTI
lished doctoral thesis (Melbourne University, 1992) which was otherwise unob-
(Raffaello: L'Opera, Le Fonti, La Fortuna, Novara [1968], II, p.337) was the first
tainable. I also appreciated the opportunities to discuss my findings with Claire
Van Cleave, Laurence B. Kanter and Michael Hirst. to propose the relationship to Michelangelo's David.
3j.c.
' See O. FISCHEL: Raffaels Zeichnungen, Berlin [1913-41] (cited in these notes asROBINSON: A Critical Account of the Drawings by Michael Angelo and Raffaello in
the University Galleries, Oxford, Oxford [1870], p.168, no.46; C. RULAND: The
FISCHEL), II, p.113, no.87; and K.T. PARKER: Catalogue of the Collection of Drawings
in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford [1956] (cited in these notes as PARKER), II,
Works of Raphael Santi da Urbino . . . in the Royal Library at Windsor Castle .
privately printed [1876], p.319, nos.xliii (recto) and xliv (verso).
pp.271-72, no.523. Together with j. GERE and N. TURNER (Drawings by Raphael
4Loc.cit. at note 1 above: 'Er erinnert an einige Profile Signorellis in der Auferstehung
from the Royal Library, the Ashmolean, the British Museum, Chatsworth and other English
Collections, exh.cat., British Museum, London [1983], p.67, no.46), both these der Seligen'.
scholars describe the pricking discussed below as 'mysterious'. The most recent

612

This content downloaded from

84.204.8.138 on Wed, 14 Sep 2022 09:16:37 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms