Author(s): Nicholas Penny Source: The Burlington Magazine ...cima.ng-london.org.uk/documentation/files/N-6596/... · Garvagh Madonna is 1 cm. along the lower edge and 0.25 cm. elsewhere

http://www.jstor.org

Raphael's 'Madonna dei garofani' RediscoveredAuthor(s): Nicholas PennySource: The Burlington Magazine, Vol. 134, No. 1067, (Feb., 1992), pp. 67-81Published by: The Burlington Magazine Publications, Ltd.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/884991Accessed: 28/04/2008 07:07

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bmpl.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We enable the

scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that

promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

http://www.jstor.org/stable/884991?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bmpl

NICHOLAS PENNY

Raphael's 'Madonna dei garofani' rediscovered*

THERE are numerous versions of Raphael's Madonna dei garofani (the Madonna of the pinks). Many of them are ob- viously copies and in this century none has been generally acknowledged as an original work by Raphael. Yet most scholars agree that such an original must have existed. Moreover the very abundance of the copies (see Appendix) testifies to the composition's fame. The version which was probably most esteemed in the first half of the last century is that in the collection of the Duke of Northumberland (Fig.3). In August last year the Duke generously agreed to its being taken to the National Gallery, London for close examination. The subtlety and assurance of the modelling and the delicacy and solidity of the handling, qualities difficult to discern when the painting hung in the corridor at Alnwick Castle, became more apparent in the conservation studio, and the evidence revealed by both X-radiography and, above all, infra-red reflectography, which will be presented in this article, dispelled any residual doubts that the original painting had been rediscovered. It was clear too, and clearer still after the picture was cleaned by Herbert Lank in October and November 1991, that it had survived in exceptionally good condition.

The Alnwick Castle Madonna dei garofani is painted on a panel 8 mm. thick. The back (Fig.2), which has been polished, exhibits the very close grain of a fruitwood such as cherry (used by Raphael as a support for the Transfigur- ation). ' A border varying from 6 mm. (at left of the lower, and right of the upper, edge) to 1 mm. (on the sides towards the top) has been left unpainted but is covered with the gesso ground. Such a border is unusual in Raphael's small panel paintings only in its irregularity.2 There is a vertical split approximately in the centre of the lower half of the panel, passing through the back of the Virgin's hand and through the lower leg of the infant Christ, and to either side of this there are several finer and shorter vertical cracks. The paint has been disturbed, probably

*The painting will be the subject of a special display at The National Gallery between 12th February and 29th March. This has been sponsored by Hiscox Syndicates Ltd, underwriters, and Blackwall Green Ltd, brokers, both of Lloyds of London, who have also supported the cost of the colour plate illustrating this article. The Duke of Northumberland has generously agreed to the painting remaining on loan at The National Gallery until March 1993.

The author is grateful to the Duke of Northumberland, the Duchess of Northumberland and Lady Victoria Cuthbert for their hospitality and encourage- ment. Caroline Armitage helped to organise the preliminary investigation of the painting at The National Gallery. Colin Shrimpton, archivist at Alnwick Castle, helped with the investigation of the family papers. Examination of the painting in The National Gallery was made possible by the Chief Restorer, Martin Wyld. I am indebted to discussions with him, with Jill Dunkerton and with Herbert Lank. I am most grateful to Rachel Billinge who constructed the infra-red reflectogram mosaics with great care and skill, and tojaynie Anderson who shared her knowledge of the Camuccini collection. ' The size and condition of the panel prevented any sample of the wood being taken for analysis. It is possible that the wood was polished in the early nineteenth century to eradicate evidence of the owner prior to its acquisition by Vincenzo Camuccini. A circle lightly incised in the wood is intersected by left and right edges, perhaps reflecting a plan for a tondo which was subsequently abandoned. The three seals, all in identical wax, are found on all the paintings at Alnwick which came from the Camuccini collection. One of these is the seal of Vincenzo, another perhaps that of Pietro, and the third (with the Colosseum) of an official

by a defect in the preparation of the gesso ground, across the right leg and belly, and especially in the thigh, of the infant Christ and there are numerous pin-sized losses here.3 There has been some blistering in the dark background areas beside Christ's head and belly and there are half a dozen small losses here and a few elsewhere, all evident in the photograph of the painting taken when it was being cleaned (Fig.4).

The medium is almost certain to be predominantly oil, although the painting's small size and excellent preservation prevented any sample being taken to verify this. The narrow strips of painted surface concealed by the frame show that the green of the curtains was originally more brilliant and that the tone of the blue sky has very slightly altered. Other versions and prints support the conjecture that the blue robe over the Virgin's left shoulder was once more easily distinguished from the dark background and that the contrast was clearer between the edge of the curtain above the top of her head and the wall behind. In the distant landscape the horizon line continuing under the rock to the left of the tower is now visible - a revision, or at least a procedure, improbable for a copyist.4 Slight alterations to the outline of the cheek and chin of Christ are also visible. The surprising touch of pale blue in the Virgin's robe beside her right hand may not have been intended to be so apparent.5 Shell gold was used for the haloes, which are now inconspicuous; their chief lines are no longer complete. Close examination reveals a few sup- plementary discontinuous concentric lines in the Virgin's halo.

The Madonna dei garofani must have been painted shortly before Raphael left Florence for Rome, probably in 1507 or 1508. The Large Cowper Madonna of 1508 (Fig.6) seems to develop the composition in reverse, with the figures enlarged, varied in action and given an outdoor setting.6 The date 1508 is also found on a painting at Wilton, per-

Roman agency 'della antichita e pittura', perhaps licensing the export. It has been wrongly supposed that identical seals on the canvas of Bellini's Feast of the Gods were applied soon after acquisition of the painting by the Camuccini in the late eighteenth century; see D. BULL and j. PLESTERS: The Feast of the Gods: Conservation, Examination, and Interpretation, Washington [1990], p.21. 2The lack of register between painted image and support might suggest that the painting was not made on an easel. The border of the Dream of a Knight is widest along the lower edge - averaging 0.25 cm. - and finer elsewhere. That of the Garvagh Madonna is 1 cm. along the lower edge and 0.25 cm. elsewhere. Borders are often excluded from reproductions of Raphael's paintings, but see H. VON SONNENBURG: Raphael in der Alten Pinakothek, Munich [1983], frontispiece (for the Canigiani Madonna) and fig. 74 (for the Esterhdzy Madonna). 3This is a problem also in parts of Raphael's Ansidei Madonna and in The National Gallery's Portrait ofayoung man by Botticelli - for which seeJ. DUNKERTON, S. FOISTER, D. GORDON and N. PENNY: Giotto to Diirer, London and New Haven

[1991], p.164, fig.215. 4This, perhaps the single most visible piece of evidence for the autograph status of the painting, was surprisingly not mentioned by Cavalcaselle (see note 44 below). 5Herbert Lank has suggested to me that Raphael had reserved an area here for the flowers. 6D.A. BROWN: Raphael and America, Washington [1983], pp.157-58. I am grateful to Dr Brown for discussing with me the relationship between the Madonna dei garofani and the Large Cowper Madonna and the relationship of both with Leonardo.

67

RAPHAEL'S 'MADONNA DEI GAROFANI'

1. Benois Madonna, by Leonardo da Vinci. Panel transferred to canvas, 48 by 31 cm. (Hermitage, Leningrad).

haps reflecting a composition by Raphael or by a close fol- lower, which reverses the Madonna dei garofani and alters the nature of the interior setting (Fig.5).7 Telling comparisons can be made with Raphael's Belle jardiniere in the Louvre also of 1507 - for the head of Christ with the Borghese Entombment also of 1507 for the landscape and architec- ture- and, perhaps most strikingly, with the St Catherine, generally dated 1508- for the Virgin's hair, eyebrows and mouth (Figs.8 and 10). It is unlikely that Raphael executed the painting in Rome because the pose of Christ was bor- rowed by Fra Bartolommeo (Fig.9) in a drawing used for several works, the first of which seems to be a Holy Family, signed by his partner Albertinelli and dated 1509.8 Many of the paintings made by Raphael in Florence during this period were inspired by the work of Leonardo and some may even be considered as variants on a familiar model by that artist. The Madonna dei garofani returns to an early painting by Leonardo, the Benois Madonna (Fig.l), generally dated to the late 1470s. This composition seems to have been easily accessible to artists: several other paintings, most of them Florentine, are derived from it.9

The theme of the Virgin holding a bunch of flowers in one hand and showing one stem to the Child seated in her lap is taken from the Benois Madonna. Raphael's Virgin presents a carnation, or pink, to her son, as in another of Leonardo's early paintings, the Madonna with a carnation in the Alte Pinakothek in Munich. This flower was not un- common in betrothal portraiture of this period as an em- blem of true love and could also be regarded as symbolic of healing and divine protection.'0 While the composition of the Madonna dei garofani also derives from the Benois Madonna, the three hands in the centre of the picture form a much less tight and intricate pattern and the Virgin's hands are both more open and less twisted, assuming the relatively stiff positions which Raphael gave two or more years earlier to the personification of Pleasure in the Dream of a knight (Fig. 11) but, characteristically, reversed. The Virgin's hair is less densely braided and knotted. The drapery of her sleeve has a plasticity which owes much to Leonardo, with a similar bunching in the upper arm, a stiffened opening to the outer sleeve at the elbow, and a

large fold in the robe below, turned back to reveal the

lining; but in every case the forms are less broken and there is a contrast with tighter and smoother areas of drapery. Most notable of all the differences is the placing of the infant Christ further from the Virgin so that he is no longer

7I am grateful to the Earl of Pembroke for letting me examine this painting closely at Wilton. The inscription in gold on the border of the Virgin's dress reads 'RAPHAELLO VRBINAS MOVIII' (presumably for MDVIII). This seems to be the composition engraved (in reverse) byJ. Morin. 'Ihis in turn was the model for a line engraving by Landon. In SIDNEY 16TH EARL OF PEMBROKE: A

Catalogue of the Paintings and Drawings in the Collection at Wilton House, London and New York [1968], p.85, it is described correctly as seventeenth century. ''he sixteenth-century original (if there was one) oddly combines a figure group of Raphael's Florentine period with the sort of dark interior and large curtain favoured by Giulio Romano in the 1520s. 8'1he drawing also served as a model for Fra Bartolommeo's own works, most notably the Pala del Gran Consiglio. See c. FISCHER: Disegni di Fra Bartolommeo e della sua scuola, Florence [1986], no.58, Fig.76. T'he connexion between this drawing and Raphael's Madonna dei garofani was kindly pointed out to me by David Ekserdjian: it seems never to have been noticed in print. 9E.g. Christie's New York, 18th January 1983, lot 31; Colonna Gallery, Rome ('R': 'Codicillo alla Madonna Benois', Critica d'Arte [Oct.-Dec. 1985], pp.80-82); Sotheby's, London, 6th May 1964, lot 23 (as Lorenzo di Credi). A notable example not of luscan origin is the painting attributed to the Maitre du Saint Sang- Sotheby's, London, 18thJune 1952, lot 104. 'ISee E. WOLFFHARDT: 'Beitrage zu Pflanzensymbolik', Zeitschrift fur Kunstwissen- schaft, VII [1954], pp. 177-96. 2. Back of the panel of Fig.3.

68

RAPHAEI'S 'MADONNA DEI GAROFANI'

-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~",

,:ii

31

_r00;0 V 502~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- e., u. ?; :

7I,~~~ _

l.Aa(,ot///ai deiuaro/hni', by Rap)ha(q. 1507-01. 1Panti, 29 by 23 cm. (Dukc of'Northumberland colIcction, AInwick Castlc, Northumberland' o)n loan to the National Gallcry, ,,o_dn).

I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~il

? F~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

, T" 7 f"R'*Xy*'ja"f;;4si:,f I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i

]1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ===_z=~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~? 3.M((1tlZ( lio((!(lli )yRtl)l.(l.I )(7-)2.1)llt , tI) 2 (m.(lu( f orllml(rlnd( Il\iol,Allw( aslc Nrtu }-( lsll; l lsll o h

N;t OIXl (

RAPHAEL S 'MADONNA DEI GAROFANI'

4.

4. Photograph of Fig.3 during cleaning.

6. Large Cowuper Madonna, by Raphael. 1508. Pancl, 68 by 46 cm.

(National Gallcry of'Art, Washington, D.C.).

5. Madonna and child. Italian, scventccnth-ccntury? Pancl, 31.7 by 22.6 cm.

(Wilton House, Wiltshire).

7()

- . , II -- - I 4 " or\ 7. Studics of thc Madonna and Child, by Raphacl. 1508. 'cn and ink with red chalk on paper, 26 hy 19.2 cm. (Albcrtina, Vienna).


10.

10. Detail of St Catherine, by Raphael. 1507-08. Panel, 71.5 by 55.7 cm.

(whole). (National Gallery, London).

8. )etail of Fig.3.

9. Madonna and (hild, by Fra Bartolommco. Black chalk with white h ightnlling oll tiln(td )papr, 33.9 by 23.1 cm. (Uffizi, Florcncc).

11. Detail of Dream ofa knight, by Raphael. c. 1504. Panel, 17.1 by 17.1 cm.

(whole). (National Gallery, London).

71

8.


united with his mother in a single serpentine sequence of forms. Raphael provides a securer support for the group by extending the Virgin's right thigh and placing a cushion between her and the child. Format must have been a factor here, for Leonardo continues the lines of the arched top of the panel in his composition, which Raphael had no need to do.

T'he Virgin's transparent veil, with the thread of high- light on its edge as it floats over her shoulder, is one of the most captivating passages in the Madonna dei garofani. 1There may originally have been an equivalent in Leonardo's Benois Madonna as there certainly are in other works by him. Another similarity is the Virgin's open mouth, something Leonardo may have adopted from Florentine sculpture. In the Large Cowper Madonna the Virgin's mouth is closed while that of the child is open. Raphael's pre- occupation in 1507-08 with parted lips, which may well have begun with the Madonna dei garofani, is evident in the Entombment, the Canigiani Madonna, in Munich and the St Catherine. 'The colouring of the Madonna dei garofani may also owe something to that of the Benois Madonna, in which the yellow of the Virgin's sleeve and of the lining of her robe contrast with a slatey grey, and with pale ultramarine blue and deep moss green. Certainly the striking golden yellow used by Raphael for the lining of the Virgin's robe is close to that found in several of Leonardo's works, most notably in both the Paris and London versions of the Virgin of the rocks.

1There are no drawings by Raphael which can be regarded with certainty as preparatory for the Madonna dei garofani, but a sheet in the Albertina (Fig.7) can be connected with it. The study on the right is similar in composition, as is

i !

the higher of the two pen studies on the left, but in reverse. It is possible that this drawing was made after the painting and represents the germ of the idea for the Large Cowper Madonna: proposals for, or recollections of, at least four 12. other Madonna compositions by Raphael are found on the same sheet. " Perhaps the composition of the Madonna dei garofani was not worked out in the usual way in preparatory drawings, for dependence upon an idea of Leonardo's could mean there was less planning to do. If so, we would expect that the underdrawing of the painting would itself resemble a preparatory drawing. That is precisely what the .r infra-red vidicon reveals an underdrawing (Figs.12-13, 15, 20-21) more similar to Raphael's drawings on paper than any other so far published, and one which reveals no evidence of transfer in the form of either dotted lines or slow, careful outlines. Nor are there traces of incised stylus lines. The medium of the underdrawing has not been identified but the fineness of the lines and the difficulty of detecting them in infra-red photographs (as distinct from

''hcse are: the (.olonna Madonna (top left group in red chalk), perhaps the Casa Tempi Madonna (in reverse - top right group in red chalk), the Holy Family with the palm (pcn and ink group lower right), the Bridgewater Madonna (pen and ink group on the verso). Sec P. JOANNIDES: The Drawings qf Raphael, Oxford [1983], p. 177, no. 181, and E. KNAB, E. MITSCH and K. OBERHUBER: Raphael. Die .Zeichnungen, Stuttgart [1983], p.571, nos.162-63. It should be noted that the group which may represent the germ of the idea for the Large Cowper Madonna is no less close to a composition recorded in another pen drawing in the Albertina (Fischel 150, JOANNIDES, op.cit. no. 168) which in turn is close to a wash drawing in the Louvre of the Virgin and Child in a landscape (Fischel 144, JOANNIDES, op. cit. no. 167) and served as a composition used by other artists. 13.

72


14.

A"?

/4/,,,,,NE) 1e W; /

1 2. 1 nFra-red rcflcc( graplh ofI'a detail of'Fig.3.

13. 1 ii t1a-red rcf I( tograph of 'a detail oftFig.3.

14. I ntira-rcd reflectograph o'a detail of 'the Small (,%wper Madonna, by Raphael. c. 1505. Panel, 58 by 43 cm. (whole). (National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.).

15. Inifra-red refleetograph ofa detail of Fig.3. 15.

73


16.

the vidicon) suggests that it is in metalpoint rather than chalk. '2

Notable among the remarkably free and exploratory passages of drawing which have been revealed is that of the extended right foot of the Christ Child (Fig.21): ana-

tomically implausible but wholly characteristic, it is defined with rapid loops like those with which the active body of the infant Christ is depicted on the sheet in the Albertina. Numerous revisions are revealed in the drawing. The outline of a forked tree trunk can be seen alongside the rock to the left of the tower (Fig. 13). A different style of dress was contemplated, with a brooch fastening at the

Virgin's right shoulder. The hair was to have been more

distinctly and elaborately plaited with three or four plaits above the ear (Fig.12). The repeated lines seeking ideal

grace rather than anatomical truth in the Virgin's breast are particularly impressive, and it is highly typical of

Raphael that he should have continued the segmental curve of some of these lines through the Virgin's sleeve

(Fig. 15). The underdrawing is close in style to that of the Small

Cowper Madonna (Fig. 14), a work of probably a year or two earlier, although in that drawing there is evidence of transfer in some parts.

13 The two most telling similarities are the probing repetitions of outlines and the evenly spaced hatched lines, both diagonal and horizontal. There too we find the segmental curves of the Virgin's breast continued through her arm. Also apparent is the use of what might be called a structural contour. Remarkable in

'2'l'hc drawing in metalpoint which makes the most telling comparison is that for the Iloly Family with the palm in the Louvre (Fischel 138, JOANNIDES, op.cit.

abIove, no. 155). ':K.M. MERRILL: 'Examination and 'Ireatment of the Small Cowper Madonna, hy Raphael at T'he National Gallcry of Art', in j. BECK, ed.: Raphael beJfre Rome,

74

16. Garvagh Madonna, by Raphael. 1508-09. Panel, 38.7 by 32.7 cm. (National Gallery, London).

17. Infra-red r(flc(tograph of a detail of Fig. 16.

both works is the way that the line of the brow of Christ is

swept round from nose to temple in a double curve. Another

example of this is the line which defines the curvature of Christ's chest in the Madonna dei garofani, which may be

compared with those circling the back of Christ in the Small Cowper Madonna (National Gallery, Washington).

In the search for further comparative data, the Garvagh Madonna (Fig. 16), as a painting of comparable size and character (although a year or so later in date), was exam- ined on the vidicon. The head of Christ is here modelled in the same schematic way as the head of Christ in the Madonna dei garofani, with intersecting curves in the lips, simplified nostrils, and lines for the eyebrows which extend to define the curvature of the skull (Fig. 18). The diagonal shading in the head is similar as well. A broader style of

shading is used for the drapery beside Christ's right foot and the ledge below (Fig. 19), just as it is beside his right foot in the Madonna dei garofani (Fig.21). Christ's feet are drawn with the same rapid loops used to isolate a circular heel or an oval toe. Another especially noteworthy feature of the underdrawing of the Garvagh Madonna is the use of ovals to define the knuckles of the curling infantile fingers (Fig. 17). On the vidicon screen this is visible in Christ's hands in the Madonna dei garofani, though too faintly to be seen clearly in reproduction, and it is also apparent in the index finger of the left hand of St Caltherine and in the raised hand of the angel to the left of the Canigiani Madonna. 4

A comparison between the X-radiograph of the Madonna dei garofani (Fig.22) and that of the Garvagh Madonna

Studies in the History of Art, National Gallery of Washington, Vol.XVII

[1986], pp. 139-47, esp. 143-44. '4For the Canigiani angel see SONNENBER(,, op).i. at note 2 ablove, Fig.67. I have

not noticed this device in Raphael's drawings on papl)r.


18. Infra-red reflectograph of a detail of Fig. 16.

20. Infra-red reflectograph of a detail of Fig.3.

19. 1nlra-red r(ele(ctograph ol a detail ol fig. b.

(Fig.23) shows many features in common, especially if allowance is made for differences in density and sharpness of image produced by the support (the Garvagh Madonna is painted on a thicker panel, probably of poplar). While the drapery folds of the Garvagh Madonna are more freely and broadly brushed in unsurprisingly, given its later date and slightly larger size -the painting of the flesh, particularly the flesh of the children, produces a strongly three-dimensional image in both X-rays. In each, the placing of the densest highlights is most strikingly similar in the outstretched arms of the Christ Child. Equally distinctive are the solid touches of lead white to emphasise the whites of the eyes of the Christ Child in the Madonna

21. Infra-red reflectograph of a detail of Fig.3.

dei garofani and the Infant Baptist in the Garvagh Madonna. The X-ray and infra-red images of both paintings reveal

the many slight but significant refinements to the outlines of forms characteristic of Raphael's paintings. Among the more easily detected adjustments to the Garvagh Madonna are those to the back of the Virgin's neck as it curves into her shoulder and to the forehead and upper arm of the Baptist. Similarly, in the Madonna dei garofani slight alterations can be seen in, for example, the forehead and cheek of the Christ Child and along his right shin. The opaque and somewhat blurred image of the Virgin's head in the X-radiograph of the Madonna dei garofani indicates that the position of her whole face has been shifted slightly,

75

RAPHAEL S 'MAI)ONNA DEI GAROFANI

22. X-radiograph of'Fig.3.

probably at a fairly early stage in the paint application, so that it is now further in profile. The greater thickness of the paint may account for the difficulty in detecting much

underdrawing in this area.15 This technical evidence may be compelling, but the high

quality of the painting is also obvious enough. Its neglect, however, is only recent. The Madonna dei garofani was

bought by Algernon, fourth Duke of Northumberland (1793-1865) in 1853, together with the Camuccini Col- lection. The whole collection, consisting of 74 paintings, cost 125,000 Roman scudi (/27,589 8s. 6d), independent of the bribes which the Duke paid to facilitate its export. 16

'"'lTh two paragraphs on the X-radiographs have been supplied by Jill Dunkerton.

'lThec details of this transaction are contained in a letter in the Alnwick Castle Archives to the 1)uke of 19th September 1853 from the German agent Emil Braun. It will lbe published IbyJaynie Anderson in: 'The Provenance of Bellini's Feast of the Cods and a new/old interpretation', Studies in the History of Art, Vol.46, National Gallery of Art, Washington, forthcoming (1992). I am grateful to Dr Anderson for letting me see a copy of this article in advance of publication. 1'71. BARBERI: Catalogo ragionato della Galleria Camuccini in Roma, c.1851, a bound manuscript in a clerical hand in the Alnwick Castle Archives (another copy in the archive of the Camuccini heirs at Cantalupo), fols.2r-4. A translation 'by

76

This collection had long been one of the sights of Rome, but in 1851, when it was moved to a notable sixteenth-

century palace, Palazzo Cesi, it became more conspicuous still.'7 It had been formed by Pietro Camuccini (1760- 1833), the copyist, picture restorer and dealer, together with his younger brother, Vincenzo (1771-1844), the

leading neo-classical painter in Rome. Pietro's activities as a dealer have been described elsewhere.18 He worked much in collaboration with Alexander Day, supplying the latter, for instance, with both the Garvagh Madonna and the St Catherine in 1800. Vincenzo was made a member of the Accademia di San Luca in 1802, and its Princeps in

D.C.' written in a very florid hand and sumptuously bound is also at Alnwick Castle. The Palace, now the headquarters of' the Tribunale Supremo Militare, faces the Via della Maschera d'Oro and Via degli Acquasparta. Fedcrigo Cesi had opened the Accademia dei Lincei here and established Rome's first boltanic garden. It had once been famous for the murals on its lficades by l'olidoro and Maturino. '8For the Camuccini as dealers, see ANDERSON, loc.cit. at note 16 above. More generally, sec the entries by A. BOVERO, in Diziionario Biogrq/ico degli Italiani, XVII, Rome [1974], pp.627-30, and Vincenzo Camuccini (1771-1844), Bozzetti e Disegni, ed. G.P. DE ANGELIS, exh.cat. Rome, Galleria Nazionale d'Arte Moderna [19781, pp. 104-05.


23. X-radiogra,ph ofl'Fig. 16.

1806; he was appointed head of the mosaic workshop of St Peter's in 1803 and Ispettore delle pubbliche pitture (i.e., curator and conservator of major paintings of the city) by Pius VII in 1814, was created Baron by Pius VIII in 1830, and arranged the Vatican Pinacoteca both for him and for

Gregory XVI. These high offices must have made it easier for his brother to get away with irregular exports.

It was Vincenzo's son, Giovanni Battista, who sold the collection (and purchased the estate of Cantalupo with the proceeds). There is no reason to doubt that the two brothers had hoped to preserve it, even though they never ceased to engage in the art trade. However, the manuscript catalogue by Tito Barberi, evidently composed for visitors to Palazzo Cesi, presents their motives for collecting as a commitment to the Italian heritage. When Pietro's art

dealing is taken into account, this seems implausibly high-

19BARBERI, MS. cited at note 17 above, fol.2r: 'In mezzo a questo universale sconvolgi- mento i nostri artisti quasi stranieri a quanto si succedeva loro dintorno lavoravano indefessi per l'arte e per la gloria; ed oltre a questo i fratelli Camuccini, acquistando alcuni

minded.'9 The collection may indeed have originated with Pietro's realisation, soon after 1800, that he could afford to keep some of his stock, perhaps on account of the success of his younger brother as an artist.

The gems of the collection were Raphael's Madonna dei

garofani, Giovanni Bellini's Feast of the Gods, now in Washing- ton, Claude's Sunset landscape, Guido Reni's Crucifixion (both still at Alnwick) and Guercino's Esther before Ahasuerus

(now in the University of Michigan Museum of Art, Ann

Arbor). The manuscript catalogue explicitly states that the Raphael was bought by Vincenzo rather than his

brother, which is true of no other work in the collection, and also that it was bought in Paris, whereas the others with recorded provenances came from Roman palaces (most notably, the Barberini, Aldobrandini, Borghese, Sannessi and Braschi). In September 1825, when the

de'migliori antichi dipinti, cooperarano che per noi non tutti perduti n'andassero; e riunendo alcune delle opere le piu rare, che facile la revoluzione avrebbe disperse, fondarono questa galleria...'

77

_ -?C lr --

3- 1 L L1


'/, // , , , ' /," / . /./ ,' . . .'.. ._,

24. Madonna deigarf/ani, by Giovanni Farrugia after Raphael. 1828.

Engraving, 29.4 by 23.4 cm. (image). (British Museum, London).

MI)lI,c''I \/ MF VS ,411M f I F'1 EGO J I, , c,. ;t,irluil P rd , - ^.....C '. . u R ;.. t ,l ' Ir . iFt n k* Rl .'.ibp


Papal Antiquities, Carlo Fea, that Raphael had been buried in S. Maria Sopra Minerva - a gratifying conclusion, since Fea had been striving to disgrace the Camuccini for the way they had exported works of art from Rome. 26

From whom Vincenzo Camuccini purchased the Madonna dei garofani is not known, and that it would not be disclosed

may well have been a condition of the sale. How Camuccini knew about it, however, is not difficult to guess. The

painting had been reproduced as an enamel plaque for the Royal Porcelain factory at Sevres (Fig.26). This was the work of the celebrated enamellist Victoire Jaquotot, the third in a series of copies after Raphael for which she was especially admired. She began her copy - the same size as the original - in January 1817 and the first version was fired in May, the second in June.27 That this was made from the Alnwick painting seems very likely from the close similarity between them. But there are in fact numerous minor differences: some of these, such as the

slight variations in the veil on the Virgin's right shoulder or the size of the flower heads, are unsurprising, but others - most notably the greater number of flowers in the Virgin's left hand, the 'correction' of the anatomy of the Virgin's left hand and of Christ's foot, and the simplification of the

landscape - are unexpected in so exact a copyist. Jaquotot has also embellished the neckline of the Virgin's dress with ornament in gold. This would be typical of Raphael, but there is no hint of it in Farrugia's print, and no trace of it on the painting, and it would be surprising for Raphael to use yellow as a ground for gold.28

The enamel was shown privately by the enamellist to amaleurs in November 1817, exhibited publicly at the Louvre on 1st January 1818 to great acclaim, and then shown

again in the artist's studio. It was included in the Salon of 1819 with a note that it had been given by the King to Madame.29 Anne Lajoix, who has kindly communicated to me her research on this plaque, notes that the suggestion that it should be reproduced in enamel came from Madame

Jaquotot herself in a letter to the factory's administrator, Alexandre Brongniart, on 17th January 1817. She wrote that she could arrange for the loan of a Raphael 'qui n'exisle pas au Musee' and is 'connu en France que pas des

gravures', but she kept the identity of the owner secret.30

Although Barberi's manuscript catalogue does not dis- close from whom Vincenzo Camuccini bought the painting in Paris, it does assert that it had been acquired from the

2' 'For an acc(ount of the excavation with full bibliography see v. GOLZIO: Raffaello nei documenti, Vatican 11936, reprinted 1971], pp. 120-21. For Fca see ANDERSON, loc.cil. at note 16 above, with relfernces to the unpublished D. Phil. thesis of

JEAN-LOUIS PASCAL (GRIENER: The Function (f Beauty: The 'Philosophes' and the Social Dimension of Art in late eighteenth-century France, Oxlbrd, 1989, pp.217-41. 27Mus(e National de Ceramique, Sevres. Inventory no.16 855. References to the firings inJaq(uotot's letters to Brongniart and in Brongniart's notes (Manu- f1acture Nationale de Sevres, Archives, Pb. 4 and Pb. liasse 1) kindly communicated to me by Anne Lajoix. I am grateful to Mme Fiy-Hallc, Conservatcur of the Mus6e de Ceramique, for letting me examine the plaque. Measurements of details within painting and plaque show no diflerences in size, which suggests thatJaq(uotot took a tracing. Her colours are close to Raphael's, departing most in the subtle grey of the Virgin's dress. 2 It should be noted that the deviations from Raphael's design do not correspond to those in any painted version known to me. 'Ihey are greater than one would expect fromJaqruotot's copy of the Bellejardiniere, but that painting, being in the Louvre, was more easily available for comparison. Jaquotot made ten enamel copies after Raphael between 1813 and 1840; see A. LAJOIX: 'Pcinturc ct por- celaine: substituer a la toile une plaque de poreelaine', La Revue de la Ceramique et du Verre, XXI [March-April 1985], pp.9-13, p.13 note 15; also Raphael et l'art Franfais, exh.cat., Grand Palais, Paris [19831, pp.259-61, nos.387-90 (entries by E. FON'IANS).

26. Madonna deigarofani, by VictoireJaquotot alter Raphael. 1817. Enamel

plaque, 31.4 by 26.6 cm. (sight). (Musee National de Ceramique, Sevres).

heirs of the Oddi family in 1636 by a Frenchman.3' The date may well reflect precise documentation supplied by the vendor, but the further claim that it had been made for 'Maddalena Degli Oddi, Monaca in Perugia' must be

regarded with scepticism. It is not entirely impossible that this story came from the Oddi family itself,32 but since Maddalena is mentioned by Vasari as patron of Raphael's Coronation of the Virgin (now in the Vatican) it was not a

very daring step to propose her as the patron of another work of slightly later date.33 Barberi also quotes from a letter which had been appropriated by Cardinal Borgia, in which Raphael wrote concerning work he had to finish for Maddalena. No such reference exists and there seems to be a confusion with Raphael's famous letter to his uncle dated 21st April 1508, which was owned by

29Exposition des Manufacturees royales, 1818, no. 11. References to private studio shows are taken fromJaquotot's correspondence with Brongniart as cited at note 27 above, T24, communicated by Anne Lajoix. `0Jaquotot's correspondence with Brongniart is cited at note 27 abov, '124, communicated by Anne Lajoix. Madame Lajoix suspects from her knowledge of Jaquotot's circle that the owner might have been a 'Lord Seymour'

- a relative of the Marquess of Hertford (more than one of whom could have been so styled in Paris). 3''Questa piccola tavola perfettamente conservata fu da Rqafaelle condotta nella sua seconda maniera per Maddalena Degli Oddi, Monaca in Ierugia . . . innanzi l'anno 1636 un

francese acquistb esso dipinto dagli eredi della Degli Oddi, e lo portb seco in Francia .. .' (BARBERI, MS. cited at note 17 above, fol.27v). "''2hat the Degli Oddi family were in touch with Camuccini's circle is suggested by the fact that LONGHENA (op.cit. at note 21 above, p1.720) records that they owned a drawing by Raphael of the selling of Joseph (presumably preparatory for the narrative on the seventh vault of the Vatican Loggia). 33 For Maddalena di Guido degli Oddi and her patronage, see A. LU(:HS: 'A note on Raphael's Perugian patrons', 'HE BURLIN(GTON MA(AZINE, CXXV [1983],

pp.29-30.

79


Cardinal Stefano Borgia in 1827 when it was etched in facsimile. 34

Barberi concluded by observing that it was unsurprising that so many engravings should have been made of the painting 'di bulinofrancese', given the picture's long stay in France. The earliest engraving seems to have been made in Italy in the late-sixteenth century. It is very rare.35 Many subsequent ones were French, the first being that by Jean Couvay (Fig.25). It is not certain that it was made from the Alnwick painting. Some of the differences - the expression of the child, the shape of the knot in the curtain, the distinctiveness of the plaits in the Virgin's hair and of a path in the landscape - can easily be explained by crude drawing or careless study of subordinate areas. On the other hand, the larger format showing the whole arch of the window, while a natural enough alteration, does feature in copies which may well have been available to the engraver. One other early engraving is parasitic upon Couvay and at least two others are, in turn, parasitic upon this.36 One further, negative, piece of evidence which may be adduced in this connexion is that Mariette, listing the engravings of the composition, made no note as to the

original painting's whereabouts, as he did in other cases when it was known to him.37

The paintings's critical fortune subsequent to its arrival in England is more easily traced. In 1854, the great German scholar Gustav Waagen, compiling his Galleries and Cabinets of Art in Great Britain as a 'supplemental volume' to his three-volume Treasures of Art in Great Britain, visited Alnwick Castle where work had begun on opulent renaissance-style interiors under the direction of the Italian architect, Gio- vanni Montiroli. He wrote about the paintings as if they were already there, for he had studied them in Rome and the Duke had let him view them again in Northumberland House where they were in store. Waagen was not in awe of Camuccini's attributions: he was not convinced that the beautiful pair of shutters painted with Sts Magdalen and Catherine in a landscape was by Raphael, as Camuccini believed, suggesting instead an attribution to Lo Spagna.

34'in una lettera, quale a Perugia quasi aforza tolse il Card. Borgia, scriveva, "avere da terminare un quadro per Donna Maddalena Degli Oddi, donna potente che poteva ad esso procurare de'lavori"'. BARBERI, MS cited at note 17 above, fol.27v. The etched facsimile dated 1827 is included in LONGHENA, op.cit. at note 21 above, opposite p.526. In his letter Raphael referred to a Madonna for 'la Prefetessa', i.e. Giovanna Feltria della Rovere, not Maddalena degli Oddi. 35Raphael Invenit: Stampe da Rajfaello nelle collezioni dell' instituto nazionale per la grafica, Rome [1985], p. 184,III, i. 36 The most notable, but not the only, copy of which this is true is that in the Museo Tosio-Martinengo, Brescia - see the Appendix, below. Couvay's engraving is likely to date from 1670. That signed '7. Boulanger Sculp .. . E. Poilly Ex.' is in reverse and probably based on Couvay but with variations in the bunch of flowers in the Virgin's left (previously her right) hand. This in turn was repeated in a print by E. Heinzelmann but with a bird's eye view of a convent in place of the landscape. Alvise Povelato's engraving dated 1780 must be derived from Jean Boulanger's, for it repeats the form of the tower and idiosyncrasies of this drapery style, but it is reversed back to the original direction. For the engraving byJ. Morin often said to be of the Madonna dei Garofani see note 7 above. Among other prints of the composition, that by A.F. Semmler was probably taken from Faruggia (Fig.22). I am grateful to Nicholas Turner for his help in examining prints after Raphael in the Department of Prints and Drawings of the British Museum, especially those in the corpus assembled to illustrate Ruland's The ['orks of Raphael Santi da Urbino as represented in the Raphael Collection in the Royal Library at [Vindsor Castle formed by His Royal Highness the Prince Consort 1853-1861 and completed by Her Majesty Queen Victoria (1876). 37'Tables des Ocuvres de Raphael Sanctio d'Urbin gravees par les maistres modernes . . .', reproduced in facsimile in P.-J. MARIETTE: Les Grands Peintres, I

(Ecoles d'Italie), Paris [1969], p.139, nos.38 and 39. The previous entry, for the

Holy Family with a rose, is annotated as after a painting in the 'Cabinet de M. Le Duc d'Orleans'; this annotation is erroneously connected with the Madonna dei

garofani in the exh.cat. cited at note 28 above, p. 199, no.268. 38G. WAAGEN: Galleries and Cabinets of Art in Great Britain, London [1857], pp.465-

80

But of the Madonna dei garofani, he noted that, 'of all the numerous specimens of the picture I have seen, none appear to me so well entitled to be attributed to his hand as this'.38

More influential than Waagen, however, was Passavant's catalogue raisonne of 1860 in which the painting was listed as still in the Camuccini collection. He placed it first among the copies which he knew, judging it as 'certainement un ouvrage de l'ecole du maitre', delicate in execution, cold in colour and with very disagreeable retouchings.39 The fact that Passavant was ignorant of the painting's change of ownership suggests that he was dependent upon reports made by others for his account of its condition. In his edition of 1858 he had not mentioned the painting at all and he could hardly have inspected it between 1858 and 1860 without realising that it belonged to the Duke of Northumberland.

The Duke himself died in 1865, just before the last essential item of the new interiors he created for Alnwick Castle, the damasks made to Montiroli's designs by the Milanese firm of Osnago, arrived.40 The Raphael would by then have been ready to hang: Montiroli's full-size

drawing for its boxwood frame, which was to be carved in the Duke's school of woodcarvers, had been sent before the end of 1862 (Fig.27).41 The Guide to the Castle published in the year of the Duke's death records that the painting was hung, together with other small devotional works from the Camuccini collection, in the Duchess's private sitting room- 'not shown to general visitors', but certainly available to any scholar who requested permission to study it.42

Eugene Miintz in his monograph of 1881 trusted Pas- savant and declared that the composition was known only in old copies.43 Crowe and Cavalcaselle in their two- volume book on Raphael of the following year believed that the best surviving version was that belonging to Count

Luigi Spada in Lucca (see Appendix). Cavalcaselle had

certainly studied both this painting and that at Alnwick but his notes on the latter seem to have been confused with

74 for Alnwick, p.466 for Lo Spagna and Raphael. The shutters are likely to be by Perugino. A misprint in Waagen is responsible for the much-repeated error that the Camuccini collection was acquired in 1856. 39J.D. PASSAVANT: Raphael d'Urbin et son pere Giovanni Santi, Paris [1860], II, pp.62-64. 40Alnwick Castle Archives, Box 798, Montiroli correspondence 1855-67. The fabric was ordered on 17th August 1864. A bill for it is dated 14th February 1865. It is still in place at Alnwick Castle. The maker was Ambrogio Osnago of Via S. Radegonda. This file of correspondence also includes a touching letter from Elisa Chiaiso, Montiroli's widow, of 1st March 1893 mentioning the fourth Duke's death and the damasks. 41 Montiroli charged f6 for the full size drawing (accounts presented 28th June 1865 in Montiroli correspondence cited above). He refers in a letter of 22nd December 1862 to the frame for the 'Raphael' shutters which should be in 'busso come e statto fatto per l'altra cornice della Madonna dei Garofali'. The earliest reference I have found to frame designs by Montiroli is 1861. The Tuscan carver Bulletti who had superintended the Alnwick woodcarving studio (established in 1855 above the hunting stables and employing 24 men in the late 1850s) returned to Italy in 1860; the frames are largely the work of John Brown his chief assistant, later employed as curator of the paintings at Alnwick. 42C.H. HARTSHORNE (A Guide to Alnwick Castle, London and Alnwick [1865], pp.69-70) mentions that the Giotto, now regarded as by Giovanni da Rimini, was in the same room, along with a small 'Correggio' and 'Salviati', but his list is not complete. In fact, another small painting at Alnwick is framed as a

pendant to the Raphael - a fine, sixteenth-century version on panel of Michel-

angelo's Silenzio, with the name Sebastiano del Piombo carved on the frame

(more recently it has been attributed to Venusti). This painting was not part of the Camuccini collection and was perhaps acquired by the Duke soon after he

bought the fragments of Sebastiano's Visitation from the Rev. Davenport Bromley in 1853. 43E. MuNTZ: Raphael, sa vie, son ouvre et son temps, London [1882], p.200.


27. Frame for the Madonna deigarofani. Boxwood with some matt gilding, designed by Giovanni Montiroli, probably carved byJohn Brown, c. 1861. 45.7 by 40.3 cm. (outside measurements). (Alnwick Castle, Northumberland).

those on the former.44 In any case they wrote that the Alnwick version was 'only a little inferior' to that in Lucca, and 'probably by a Florentine assistant of Raphael'. They added the reflection that Raphael may already, when a young painter in Florence and Perugia, have 'thought it pardonable to stock his painting-room with school-pieces which, if designed by himself and issued with the stamp of his workshop, were not always marked with the true impress of his hand', proposing that the design for the Madonna dei garofani was an 'early specimen' of such a practice.45 Raphael's drawings were certainly used early in his career by other artists, but these seem to have been independent artists rather than subordinate ones and the authors were surely projecting back to Florence in 1507-08 the circum- stances of Raphael's later years in Rome. This may have suggested to Berenson the attribution of the painting to Giulio Romano, a proposal published in 1897.46 It seems to have been soon after this that the painting was removed to a corridor. Thus the judgments of scholars, some of whom had not seen the painting, contributed to make it less likely that their successors would see it. The name of Raphael, however, remained carved on the frame.

National Gallery, London

44 Cavalcasell's annotated drawings of the composition and details of the Madonna dei garofani are in the Biblioteca Marciana, Venice, cod. It. IV. 2033 (12274), no.20. Photographs of them were kindly transmitted to me by Donata Levi. Cavalcaselle noted the 'conservazione perfetta'. From the context this must be the Alnwick painting but the drawing records areas of paint loss which correspond with those revealed in old photographs of the version in Lucca. He was puzzled by the support ('pare quercia ... olivo'), found much of the painting 'bello' but a few details such as the Virgin's ear and hands defective. 45J.A. CRO)WE and G.B. CAVALCASELLE: Raphael, his life and works, I, London

[1882], pp.343-44. ''his view was shared by o. FISCHEL: Raphael, London [1948], I, p. 127. 4"B. BERENSON: The Central Italian Painters of the Renaissance, London and New York [1897], p. 146. 'lhe attribution is retained in the second impression of 1899 but was later dropped.

Appendix

Old copies of the 'Madonna dei garofani'

This list (which is arranged alphabetically by place) does not claim to be exhaustive, but it is more complete than any previously published. Many items I have only seen as photographs (most of those in the Witt library and in the dossier of the Department of Paintings in the Louvre). In some cases I have not even seen photographs, and some paintings may well be listed twice. I have not included drawn copies (of which a careful and fine example in black chalk is in the Musee de Lyon) nor the versions on a large scale with numerous variations by Sassoferrato, of which one example is in the Detroit Institute of Art, and another was in the Haeglin Collection in Basle (during the 1920s in private collection in Paris and perhaps identical with lot 5 at Versailles, Palais des Congres, 19th Nov- ember 1979). I have made much use of the lists in PASSAVANT cited at note 39 above, s. DE RICCI: Catalogue des Peintures, Musee du Louvre, Paris [1913], no.1513B, and elsewhere. My impression after compiling this is that a dozen or more good copies, some of them on copper, were probably made from the original in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth century before its export from Italy.

Altena, ''homee collection 1930s (as Sassoferrato); Berlin, Jaffe collection

(sold Lepke, October 1912); Bilbao, Urquijo collection (exhibited Seville 1930); Brescia, Museo 'l'osio-Martinengo, inv. 128 (an early copy and of high quality, the composition somewhat extended at the top; see Raphaelloe Brescia: echi e

presenze, cxh.cat., Brescia [1986], p.38); Buenos Aires, Museo Nacional de Bellas Artes; Chalons-sur-Marne, Mus6e, inv.899-11-235; Craches, Notre- Dame de La Creche (in reverse, with different colours, perhaps from a print); Dijon, Mus6e des Beaux-Arts (copper, traditionally attributed to Garofalo); Falkirk, Forbes Collection, Callendar House, sold 1963; Florence, Dr Adolf Gottschewski (1920s), published in A. ROSENBERG: Raffael, Klassiker der Kunst, 4th ed. with additional notes by G. GRONAU, Stuttgart [1909], p.201; Geneva, Duval collection see Paris; London, Samuel collection sold Christie's, 25th March 1927, lot 25; Loreto, Casa Santa, 'Ireasury; Lucca, Count Francesco

Spada (by 1840s, still in that collection when reproduced in ROSENBERG, loc.cit. above, under Florence; said to have been with the French Gallery, New York and by 1938 in South America; Liitzschena (near Leipzig), Speck-Sternburg collection (by 1840s - previously Setta collection, Pisa and Fries collection, Vienna); Lulworth, Dorset, Weld collection (formerly Blundell collection, probably purchased late-eighteenth century); Macerata, Pinacoteca; Milan, Foresti sale, 1913; New York, Mrs Drury Cooper (purchased through Mortimer Brandt for 60,000 dollars at the American Art Association auction at Anderson Galleries on 20th April 1939 - previously in the collection of Felix Lachovski in Paris who purchased it from Marie Orloff, a Russian emigre in 1922; in this version the dress is pink; it was said to have been certified by both Venturi and

Fischel); New York, PJ. Higgs Gallery, 1928; New York, Christie's 11th

January 1989, lot 29a (as after Leonardo); New Zealand, Private collection; Nice, Private collection (published in Combat [18th February 1957]); Paris, Lachovski collection (see New York, Mrs Drury Cooper above); Paris, Private collection (copper); Paris, sale of collection of Francois Duval of Geneva, 12th

May 1846 (see CONSTANTIN, op.cit. at note 22 above for a reference to this version); Paris, Musee du Louvre, R.F. 341 (acquired 1882, see s. BEGUIN: Les Peintures de

Raphael au Louvre, Paris [1984], p.76); Paris, Lise Graf Gallery, 1981; Paris, special sale of version in the collection of the industrialist Lughen-Leroy, Drouot, 25th March 1909 (puffed by L. KLOTZ in L'Eclair [17th, 20th, 24th and 30th Dec- ember 1908]; the painting was reputedly bought by M. de Roussainville in 1686 with its authenticity certified by Largilliere); Perugia, Borbone-Sorbello collection (from the 1850s to at least the 1950s, copper); Rome, Galleria Nazionale, Palazzo Barberini; Rome, Palazzo Albani, l'orlonia collection; Stockholm,

Bystroem collection, 1850s; Stockholm, Norberg collection (a canvas, in the Bukowski sale, Stockholm, 9th- 12th November 1966, lot 173; perhaps previously Bystroem collection); Urbino, Casa Giovannini, c.1900; Urbino, Budassi collection 1958 (perhaps previously Casa Giovannini); Wiirzburg, Froelich collection, 1840s; Wiirzburg, Martin V. Wagner Museum (perhaps previously Froelich collection); Zagreb, Strossmayer Gallery, inv.386 (published by G. GAMULIN: 'Una copia della Madonna del garofano', Commentari, IX, fasc. 3 [July-Sept. 1958], pp.160-61); Zurich, private collection (published by G. GRONAU, W. SUIDA, G. FIOCCO: 'Interessante Probleme II: Nochmals zur "Madonna mit der Nelke'", Belvedere, XII [1934-35], p.105, with the claim that this painting is intermediate between Leonardo's Benois Madonna and Raphael's painting).

81

Cover PageArticle Contentsp.67p.68p.69p.70p.71p.72p.73p.74p.75p.76p.77p.78p.79p.80p.81

Issue Table of ContentsThe Burlington Magazine, Vol. 134, No. 1067, Feb., 1992Front Matter [pp.i-xv]Raphael's 'Madonna dei garofani' Rediscovered [pp.67-81]Cigoli's 'Jael and Sisera' Rediscovered [pp.82-91]Bronzino's Household [pp.92-100]Shorter NoticesParmigianino and Mantegna's 'Triumph of Caesar' [pp.100-101]

Documents for the History of Collecting: 13Spanish Taste, Medici Politics and a Lost Chapter in the History of Cigoli's 'Ecce Homo' [pp.102-110]'First of All First Beginnings': Ruskin's Studies of Early Italian Paintings at Christ Church [pp.111-120]

Book Reviewsuntitled [p.121]untitled [pp.121-122]untitled [pp.122-123]untitled [pp.123-124]untitled [pp.124-125]untitled [pp.125-126]untitled [p.126]untitled [pp.126-127]untitled [pp.127-128]untitled [pp.128-129]

Publications Receiveduntitled [p.129]untitled [p.129]

Exhibition ReviewsAnglo-Saxon Art. London, British Museum [pp.129-131]Kamakura. London, British Museum [pp.131-133]Hokusai. London, Royal Academy [pp.133-134]Pre-Raphaelite Sculpture. Birmingham [pp.134-135]The Loves of the Gods. Paris, Philadelphia and Fort Worth [pp.135-137]Un Âge d'or des Arts Décoratifs at the Grand Palais. Paris [pp.138-139]Battistello Caracciolo and Neapolitan Painting. Naples [pp.139-141]Drawing's from Lille. Florence, Palazzo Pitti [pp.141-142]Brice Marden; Dan Graham. New York, Dia Center for the Arts [p.143]Goltzius's 'Sine Cerere et Libero friget Venus'. Philadelphia [pp.144-145]The Eight. Denver Art Museum [pp.145-146]1991 Carnegie International. Pittsburgh [pp.146-147]

Calendar [pp.148-152]Back Matter