Raffaello Sanzio (Urbino 1483 – Rome 1520) or Giovanni de’ Ricamatori, called Giovanni da Udine (Udine 1487-Rome 1561)
Recto: Studies of a Foliate Dragon, a Panther, Two Putti, and a Cornice; verso: Landscape of the Tiber Valley
Pen and brown ink, 210 x 268 mm, 8 1/4 x 10 9/16 in.; Inscribed, verso, in pen and brown ink: “palombara.”
Agnes Etherington Art Centre, Queen’s University, Kingston ON (via Duke Roberto Ferretti)
Giovanni da Udine today has a prominent historical position which remains in harmony with Vasari’s account of him. As one of Raphael’s most brilliant pupils, he appropriated for himself the design of grottesche, grand decorations in fresco and stucco intended to recreate the spirit and detail of Roman works first rediscovered towards the close of the fifteenth century. Raphael’s mentor Pintoricchio was one of the first to study the decorated vaults of Nero’s Domus Aurea, and Raphael followed his example, working above all in collaboration with Giovanni, his pupil from Friuli, who came to him from Giorgione’s workshop. While the scholarship of the past fifteen years has reaffirmed Raphael’s close control and contribution of original designs in the vast projects of his final years, his receptiveness to the talents of his pupils is equally clear. Giovanni da Udine, above all, played a major role in Raphael’s decorations all’antica and brought to them not only a studious mind, which could absorb the many ancient exempla which were coming to light at the time, but a sensitive eye for nature, trained by Giorgione, without which the birds, animals, and plants of the grottesche would never have come to life as works of art. Vasari specifically observes that the truth of Giovanni’s observation of nature and the vigor of his brushwork in fresco account for the extraordinary quality of his work. Giovanni’s few surviving drawings, hardly more than thirty, are the basic evidence of his working process.
The present drawing is sufficiently like Raphael’s late pen sheets to suggest his hand, and this attribution is supported by some, in particular Paul Johannides. However, the drawings on the recto of this work are parallel in function, style, and technique to a double-sided sheet in Munich by Giovanni da Udine. This is the key sheet for the attribution of pen drawings to the artist because of style and the old inscription “Ricamator” on the verso. The use of broad, plastic pen strokes for some figures, and precise, wiry lines of even thickness for others is typical of Giovanni’s pen style. The vigorous modelling of the putti’s calves and thighs in the present drawing is exactly like the Munich sheet. While this rendition of anatomy takes its point of departure from Raphael and is very close to drawings like the studies for the Loggia of Psyche (1517-19) in Oxford and Cologne, it lacks Raphael’s classical proportions and shows more of an interest in robust modelling and energetic movement. It is in fact a drawing by Giovanni from the same period, one which supports Vasari’s view that, among Raphael’s pupils, Giovanni was one of the most gifted, endowed with an extraordinary ability to reproduce the style of the master. This drawing is evidence that this ability was not based so much on mimetic talent, but on a thorough understanding of Raphael’s technique, which he used according to his own inclinations.
Nicole Dacos has suggested that the studies on this sheet are most probably related to the Vatican Logge, on which Raphael and his assistants were at work from 1516 to 1519, that is, during the same period as the Loggia of Psyche. The close resemblance of the draughtsmanship to Raphael’s indicates that the drawing was executed while Giovanni was still in his workshop. The foliate Dragon and its acanthus scroll, the panther, and the putti are all typical of the figural vocabulary of the Vatican Logge. It is most interesting that Giovanni’s drawing now in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, one of three works by him in American collections, contains studies for both projects. Today it is generally thought that Raphael played a larger personal role in the Farnesina and left more of the direction and design of the Vatican Logge to his most mature pupils, Giulio Romano and Giovanni da Udine.
The combination of figural, architectural, and decorative motifs after the antique is also like the Munich drawing and characteristic of Giovanni’s working method. The delicate landscape on the verso, however, is unique among the drawings of Raphael and his school. It was clearly drawn from life at a specific location, which is identified by the inscription “palombara.” Giovanni made this topographical view facing eastwards over the Tiber Valley, where he could observe the town of Palombara Sabina in the distance behind the series of sharp bends in the river, which recedes into the background. The foreground is occupied (and marked) by the triangular sail of a boat at the lower left corner. The artist from his bird’s eye viewpoint has encompassed a vast space, much like Leonardo’s pioneering view of the Arno Valley. Both of these drawings almost contain as much topographical information as maps, but in Giovanni’s the receding river performs a structural function in the composition, imparting it with unity of design. This early landscape drawn from nature would have been executed only some eight years after Fra Bartolommeo’s trip to Venice in 1508, on which he drew a number of the landscapes in the Gaburri album. While the Frate drew views from nature for their own sake, he manipulated some of them with the intention of using them in the background of paintings. Giovanni da Udine’s purpose was the same. In the Vatican logge landscape played a major role in the decorative scheme. In this Giovanni overtly followed the precedent of the Roman fresco decorations which he studied together with Raphael, but he had also the example of his first teacher, Giorgione.
Raphael himself looked to Giorgione as early as 1512, when he executed his extraordinary view of Foligno in the altarpiece now in the Vatican Museums, Raphael was much absorbed by Venetian technique at this time. It has been generally thought that the intermediary was another pupil of Giorgione, Sebastiano del Piombo, but it is also possible that it was Giovanni da Udine. The present drawing, while it appears to belong to the Vatican Logge, a project which began in 1516, has significant implications for Raphael’s assimilation of Venetian landscape some four years before. The sheet as a whole tells us as much about Raphael as about Giovanni da Udine, although its vital movement, nervous penwork, and plein-air landscape are imbued with his personality. Whether one attributes it to Giovanni da Udine or to Raphael himself, it is an artifact of the close affinity between master and pupil.
Giorgio Vasari, Le Vite, ed. Milanesi, Milan, 1906, VI, pp. 549-564.
Giorgio Vasari, Le Vite, VI, pp. 550, 563.
 See Nicole Dacos and Caterina Furlan, Giovanni da Udine 1487-1561, Udine, 1987, 3 vols, I, pp. 239-257. The splendid nature studies in watercolor and gouache, which show Giovanni working in the tradition of Pisanello and other students of nature from northern Italy, were somewhat insecurely attached to his name by seventeenth century inscriptions. In 1987 Dominique Cordellier related a drawing in the Metropolitan Museum of Art to specific details in Giovanni’s known finished works and therefore established his authorship of the nature studies as a certainty. See note 6 below and La Revue du Louvre et des Musées de France, 5/6 (1994), p. 93, for Cordellier’s discussion of a nature study formerly with Michael Miller Lucy Vivante Fine Arts and now at the Louvre.
 See Paul Joannides’ letter of 10 October 1996:
When 1 saw your drawing a year or so ago, I thought that it came close to Raphael. The vigorous pen work of the putti on the recto is very like his and the types of the putti seem inseparable from those devised by Raphael for the Psyche Loggia — that the upper putto teems to be carrying something would reinforce this link. The security with which the putti are constructed also suggests Raphael. The foliate decoration on the left is harder in execution than is usual in Raphael’s pen sketches, but he does seem to have drawn in harder pen styles at times during the last years of his life (few pen drawings survive for the final half-decade) and It seems to me more like Raphael than either of the other obvious candidates, Giulio Romano or Penni. It might have been made in preparation for stucco or even marble — rather than painted decoration, for it seems to call for execution in low relief.
As far as 1 remember it, the landscape sketch on the verso also makes reasonable sense as Raphael: although there is little with which to compare it, the lightly indicated landscapes behind some of his Virgin and Child compositions are compatible.
When Michael told mc that several scholars had opted for Giovanni da Udine for your sheet — which, given the subject, is obviously a perfectly reasonable suggestion · I was a little surprised, but I assumed that they knew more about Giovanni than I, and didn’t think further about the matter. Looking at the drawing — or rather the photo again now, I do not know with which pen drawings by Giovanni yours is being compared, but that In Munich seems to me considerably softer and less structural. So. my opinion, for what it’s worth and with all due caution, is that what you have is a Raphael drawing of c. 1517/18 — I find I difficult to think of anyon else who could have been responsible for the head and arms of the upper putto: they are extraordinarily confident.
München, Staatliche Graphische Sammlung, Inv. n. 2520. I wish to thank John Shearman for first suggesting the attribution to Giovanni da Udine. It has been confirmed by Nicole Dacos, Konrad Oberhuber, Dominique Cordellier, and Carmen Bambach Cappel.
Dacos and Furlan, 1987, I, p. 244, no. 10.
Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, P II 655; Wallraf-Richartz Museum, Cologne, Inv. Z 1984; Eckhardt Knab, Erwin Mitsch, Konrad Oberhuber, Raphael, Die Zeichnungen, Stuttgart, 1983, p. 610, nos. 542, 543.
Giorgio Vasari, Le Vite, VI, p. 550
One must note that the putti have both a monumental and a schematic quality which is characteristic of Giovanni’s mature work, most notably his painted windows in the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana Delciana, for which he received the commission from Michelangelo in 1526. See Renzo U. Montini and Riccardo Averini, Palazzo Baldassini e l’arte di Giovani da Udine, Rome, 1957, pl. XV. Nonetheless it is impossible to disassociate the Raphaelesque draughtsmanship of this sheet from Giovanni’s work in the studio.
Metropolitan Museum of Art 80.3.302. William M. Griswold and Linda Wolk Simon, Sixteenth Century Drawings in New York Collections, exh. cat., New York, 1993, pp. 62f.., no. 57.
Or perhaps a tributary of the Tiber closer to Palombara. One cannot verify this without visiting the location.
These organizational conventions are, not surprisingly, fundamental to the later landscape decorations added to the Logge at the middle of the century by Pope Julius III. See Bernice F. Davidson, “The Landscapes of the Vatican Logge from the Reign of Pope Julius III,” The Art Bulletin, LXV (1983), pp. 587-602. See p. 599 for the difference between the small landscapes of Raphael’s project and the later cycle, but also a comment one their possible influence on them; also see p. 595 for Giovanni da Udine’s possible authorship of two lost bird-scenes added after Raphael’s work, but before Julius’.
Louise S. Richards, “Three Early Italian Drawings,” Bulletin of the Cleveland Museum of Art, 49 (1962), pp. 172-75; Chris Fischer, Fra Bartolommeo, Master Draughtsman of the High Renaissance, exh. cat., Rotterdam, 1990, pp. 375-400.
Raffaello in Vaticano, exh. cat., Rome, 1984, p. 213.
Giorgio Vasari, Le Vite, ed. Milanesi, Milan, 1906, VI, pp. 551, 554.
His preparatory drawing of the Virgin for this altarpiece, in fact, is his only drawing on Venetian blue paper. See Konrad Oberhuber, Raffaello, Milan, 1982, p. 108; Carlo Pietrangeli, in Raffaello in Vaticano, pp. 267ff. Sebastiano came to Rome in the entourage of Agostino Chigi in 1511, a convincing date in respect to the Madonna of Foligno. We do not know when Giovanni came to Rome. He was introduced to Raphael by letters from Domenico Grimani to Raphael’s friend from Urbino, Baldassare Castiglione. (Vasari, Le Vite, ed. Milanesi, Milan, 1906, VI, p. 550)The landscape in the Madonna of Foligno is such a literal recreation of Giorgione’s style that it was once thought that Sebastiano del Piombo, Dosso Dossi, or Battista Dossi actually painted it. Today almost everyone accepts it as Raphael’s, a virtuosic hommage to the great Venetian innovator, whose work he only seems to have known at second hand. If one were to revive this question, Giovanni da Udine might be a plausible name to consider.
Piero Buonaccorsi, called Perino del Vaga (Florence 1501-Rome 1547)
Recto: Study for a Scene in the Sala di Psiche in Castel S. Angelo: the Marriage of Psyche
Verso: Figure Studies
Recto: Pen and brown ink, brush and brown wash; verso: pen and brown ink 120 x 250 mm. 4 5/8 x 9 15/16 in.
This is a compositional study for The Marriage of Psyche, a scene in the Sala di Psiche in the apartments Perino and his assistants decorated for Pope Paul III between 1543 and 1548. This was Perino’s last major project, and he died before its completion. Even before his death in 1547, much of the execution of the frescoes was delegated to Perino’s gifted staff, which included the young Pellegrino Tibaldi and Marco Pino. A study by Perino in the Cleveland Museum of Art for The Battle with Poros in the Sala Paolina — a scene painted by Marco Pino with fundamental changes — shows that Perino exercised the primary authority in design even when an assistant carried out the finished work. In the case of The Marriage of Psyche the fresco follows Perino’s drawing more faithfully, but lacks the brilliant freedom and expressive energy of the drawing. Similar compositional studies, which also match closely the dimensions of the present sheet, for other scenes in the Sala di Amore e Psiche are preserved in the Albertina (inv. nos. 13560 and 13561).
The scene is Psyche’s marriage procession, as told in Apulieus, Metamorphoses, IV.33-35. An oracle commanded her father, the king “in a certain city,” to marry her to a monster in a “funereal wedding.” After much lament the king and queen prepared the ceremony, and Psyche was brought to a steep rock for the creature to take her. Perino followed closely the composition in the cycle of engravings by the Master of the Die, which, accompanied by Italian quatrains, summarized Apuleius’ narrative. Nonetheless he exercised certain freedoms. He transferred the scene from the rural setting of the print to an urban venue, which allowed him to surround the figures with architectural inventions — a solution that smoothed the transition between the narrative scenes and Perino’s overall decorative scheme. Perino also greatly enhanced the expressive power and rhythmical movement of the scene in comparison with the engraving. With his figural design and expressive linearism, he has poignantly expressed the solemn music of the mournful procession.
Bibliography: Michael Miller, “Two Studies by Perino del Vaga for Castel Sant’Angelo,” Festschrift Konrad Oberhuber, Milan, 2000, pp. 99-107; Boorsch, Suzanne., and John. Marciari. Master Drawings From the Yale University Art Gallery, New Haven, 2006, pp. 66-68.
Related Literature: Exhibition catalogue, Gli affreschi di Paolo III a Castel Sant’Angelo 1543-1548 Progetto ed Esecuzione, Rome, 1981, vol 1, p. 157, fig. 90; vol. 2, pp. 87ff.
Francesco di Simone Ferrucci (Fiesole 1437 – Florence 1493)
Madonna and Child
Pen and brown ink, brush and brown wash on tan laid paper, 261 x 105 mm, 10 1/4 x 4 5/32 in. Watermark: Key.
National Galleries of Scotland
This monumental study of the Madonna and Child in a niche closely resembles a group of sketchbook pages now divided among the British Museum, the Musée Condé in Chantilly, the Kupferstichkabinett Berlin, Hamburg, and the Metropolitan Museum of Art. The pen technique is strikingly similar, as well as the typology of the drapery folds and the faces, hands, and feet. Aside from the more finished figures on both sides of the Metropolitan sheet, the most telling resemblances occur in the eyes, face, and limbs of the seated boy on the verso of Chantilly fol. 8. The use of wash in this drawing is analogous to that in Francesco’s drawings in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London.
The present drawing is more finished than the sketchbook pages and larger in scale, and it is therefore likely to have been made as a ricordo of a sculpture or perhaps a study for a finished work. Both types of drawing would show close attention to details of contour and surface, as in this sheet. While the sophisticated Ghirlandaiesque cross-hatching of this drawing is not found in the sketchbook pages, it is a specialized technique more appropriate for a finished drawing. In this hatching the graceful curves and hooks of the pen strokes recall Schogauer’s engravings, which were well known and much admired in late fifteenth century Florence.
The close morphological resemblances between this drawing and Francesco’s half-length marble relief in the Art Gallery of New South Wales confirms its close association with the work of Francesco di Simone.
Caroline Lanfranc de Panthou in her discussion of the eight sketchbook pages at Chantilly gives a comprehensive summary of the problems surrounding the attribution. There she convincingly asserts that Francesco di Simone Ferrucci should be accepted as the author of the drawings without reservation, not because of the circumstantial arguments of earlier scholars, but because of the connection established by Sirèn between a drawing in Stockholm and Francesco’s tomb for Alessandro Tartagni (1479-80) in the Church of San Domenico at Bologna, his only signed work.
Vasari mentions Francesco di Simone in his life of Verrochio as a pupil of the master. Since they were almost the same age, he has been described as more of an assistant. The Tartagni monument suggests that his style may already have been substantially formed by Desiderio da Settignano before he came under the influence of Verocchio. A sketchbook page attributed to Verrocchio in the National Gallery of Scotland is functionally parallel to many of the Francesco di Simone sketchbook pages with a large, more finished figure surrounded by smaller, freer sketches in the margins. The present drawing may have occupied such a position on a page before it was trimmed, although the curved lines behind the proper right shoulder of the Virgin, surely original, show that the artist indicated a niche around the figures.
Provenance: Sir. J. C. Robinson (Lugt 1433); John Malcolm of Poltalloch; The Hon. A. E. Gathorne-Hardy; Geoffrey Gathorne-Hardy; The Hon. Robert Gathorne-Hardy, his sale, London, Sotheby’s, 24 November 1976, lot 3 (as Sienese School).
Exhibited: London, P. & D. Colnaghi and the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, Loan Exhibition of Drawings by Old Master from the Collection of Mr. Geoffrey Gathorne-Hardy, 1971-72, no. 11 (as unkown).
Literature: Descriptive Catalogue of Drawings by the Old Masters in the Possession of the Hon. A. E. Gathorne-Hardy, 1902, p. 27, no. 47 (as unkown); Bernard Berenson, I disegni dei pittori fiorentini, Milan, 1961, vol. II, no. 2737 (as Giovanni Antonio Sogliani); Bernard Berenson, The Drawings of the Florentine Painters, 1938, vol. II, no. 2737; Bernard Berenson, The Drawings of the Florentine Painters, 1903, vol. II, no. 2737
Related Literature: Dessins italiens du musée Condé à Chantilly, I, Autour du Pérugin, Filippino Lippi, et Michel-Ange, exh. cat. Chantilly, 1995; pp. 48-73; Annamaria Petrioli Tofani, Il disegno fiorentino del tempo di Lorenzo il Magnifico, exh. cat. Florence, Uffizi, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe, 8 April-5 July 1992, pp. 240-243, nos. 12.1-12.3; Jacob Bean with the assistance of Lawrence Turcic, 15th and 16th Century Italian Drawings in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 1982, pp. 93f., no. 82; Peter Ward-Jackson, Italian Drawings, Volume One, 14th-16th Century, Victoria and Albert Museum Catalogues, London, 1979, pp. 13-15, nos. 2-4; Emmanuelle Brugerolles, De Michel-Ange à Géricault, Dessins de la Donation Armand-Valton, exh. cat., Paris, 1982, pp. 86ff., no. 43; Otto Kurz, “A Group of Florentine Drawings for an Altar,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, XVIII (1955), pp. 35-53; A. E. Popham and Philip Pouncey, Italian Drawings in the Department of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum, The Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries, London, 1950, pp. 38-40, nos. 56 and 57, Plates LIV-LVII.
George Goldner has kindly confirmed the attribution on the basis of the Metropolitan sheet. See related literature for references to the other drawings.
 Caroline Lanfranc de Panthou, in Dessins italiens du musée Condé à Chantilly, I, Autour du Pérugin, Filippino Lippi, et Michel-Ange, exh. cat. Chantilly, 1995; pp. 59ff., ill.
Peter Ward-Jackson, Victoria and Albert Museum Catalogues, Italian Drawings, Volume One, 14th-16th Century, London, 1979, pp. 13ff., nos. 2-4.
Osvald Sirèn, “Florentine Drawings in Stockholm,” Critica d’arte, VIII (1949-50), pp. 274f.; Chantilly, 1995; p. 48f.
Giorgio Vasari, Le Vite de’ più eccellenti pittori scultori ed architettori, ed. Milanesi, Florence, 1906 (1981), vol. III, p. 371.
Exh. cat. Chantilly, 1995; p. 49.
 Hugh Macandrew, Old master drawings from the National Gallery of Scotland. exh. cat. Washington, D. C., 1990, p. ??. no. ?
Giorgione (Castelfranco 1477/1478 – 1510) or Giulio Campagnola (1482 – after 1514)
Jupiter and Ganymede above an Extensive Landscape, c. 1500
pen and brown ink on laid paper, indented with a stylus
overall: 150 x 117 mm (5 7/8 x 4 5/8 in.)
The Mantegnesque parallel hatchings associate this drawing with Padua, but the figural style is distinct from his own of that of his workshop. It is also unlike Parentino’s, Zoppo’s, or any of the followers of Squarcione.
This is one of the earliest surviving drawings after a famous relief, now in the Louvre, which shows the suovetaurilia, a sacrifice performed by the Romans at a variety of occasions for purificatory or apotropaic purposes.
While the relief is an elegant, if poorly preserved, example of Julio-Claudian sculpture the drawing gives it an archaic character that reflects the vision of mid-to late fifteenth century northern Italy. We may assume that the draughtsman may have made a rough drawing on paper in Rome, where the relief was at the time. Then he subsequently made this fair copy, which was meticulously pricked for transfer.
Provenance: Francesco Calzolari; Conte Ludovico Moscardo (Lugt 2990); with Matthiesen; with P. & D. Colnaghi, cat. Old Master Drawings, April-May 1966, no. 3; The Paul and Helen Bernat Collection (stamp, l.r.); sale, New York, Christie’s, 11 January 1994, no. 255 (ill.)
Exhibitions: Boston, Museum of Fine Arts, n. d.
Related literature: P. P. Bober, Drawings after the Antique by Amico Aspertini. Sketchbooks in the British Museum, London, 1957pp. 46f.; P. P. Bober and R. Rubinstein, Renaissance Artists and Antique Sculpture, Oxford, 1986, no. 190, Pauly-Wissowa, RE, Suppl. V, s.v. Hostia, 2
Inv. MA 1096
Pauly-Wissowa, R E, Suppl. V, s.v. Hostia.
Heinrich Schwemminger (Vienna 1803-1884) and Ferdinand Schubert (Vienna 1824-1853)
Various media and sizes
I have been pleased to offer these drawings from an album of Nazarene and Biedermeier drawings and watercolors, compiled by the Viennese artist Heinrich Schwemminger as a memento of his long career. All sheets are listed below with their present location. Those with Michael Miller, Williamstown, or Lucy Vivante, Rome, are still available for purchase. Please inquire for prices.
Heinrich Schwemminger, born into a family of decorative artists, established a reputation as a painter of portraits and narrative scenes. He studied in Vienna (at the Akademie der bildenden Künste), committed himself to history painting in 1823, where he was awarded the Gundel Prize in 1829 and the Reichel Prize in 1833. In the early 1830s he went to Munich, where he befriended Moritz von Schwind and worked in his circle. 1837 he went to Rome on a government stipend and remained there until 1842. The following year he became Kustos at the Vienna Academy, and, in 1849, Professor. Between 1857 and 1874 he was Leiter (Director). As Kustos he won recognition for his reinstallation of the collection, and in 1866 he published a catalogue (Verzeichnis der Gemälde-Sammlung der k. k. Akademie der bildenden Künste in Wien).
Learned in the classical and Italian masters and a strong draughtsman, his development followed lines similar to Joseph Führich’s. The early work of both artists showed the influence of their Nazarene models, Overbeck, Koch, Cornelius, and Scheffer von Leonhardshoff. Führich retained his allegiance to the style of the early nineteenth century, but Schwemminger’s optical propensities led him more towards realism. In this way he became a typical and outstanding proponent of the Biedermeier style in Vienna.
A relation by marriage of Franz Schubert, Schwemminger was a fixture in the artistic world of mid-century Vienna. His drawings in the album represent the typical Nazarene and Biedermeier thematic material which occupied him: illustrations of German legend (The Nibelungenlied: fol. 11v, 12r, 27v B; and loose sheet) and poetry [Schiller’s Die Kraniche des Ibykus (fol. 14v, 15v, 18r), and Uhland’s Des Sänger’s Fluch (23r A & B). The numerous drawings from his seven years in Rome show many of the principle preoccupations of the resident German artists: studies of Italian peasants and their costumes, copies of masterworks of the Italian Renaissance, academic studies of models in poses inspired by Renaissance models, etc. Schwemminger worked on murals in the Vienna State Opera and the chapel of the regional insane asylum (Landesirrenanstalt) in Vienna. He also prepared lithographs for Rudolph Weigel’s Die Werke der Meister in ihren Handzeichnungen (Leipzig, 1865).
Ferdinand Schubert (Vienna, 1824-1853), the nephew of both the composer and Schwemminger, became a painter and a student of his uncle. He accompanied Schwemminger to Rome, where the two collaborated on a monumental eight foot tall oil of David Giving Thanks for his Victory over Goliath, which was awarded the Reichel Prize in 1842 and was acquired by the Pennsylvania Academy of Art, where it remained until the deaccessioning of all European works in the 1990s. The album contains several drawings by both artists for the painting. The album also includes a sensitive study by Ferdinand for his oil illustrating Goethe’s Der Fischer, (fol. 27v) now in the Kunsthaus Zürich. His uncle Franz had previously set the poem to music.
Three of the drawings for this painting are still available (July 1, 2012). Click here to see them
To survey the entire album and to see further unsold drawings, click here.
Österreichisches Biographisches Lexikon 1815-1950 Online-Edition und Österreichisches Biographisches Lexikon ab 1815 (2. überarbeitete Auflage – online, © 2003-2011), s.v. Heinrich Schwemminger, Ferdinand Schubert
Ursula Mayr-Harting, “Three Drawings by Heinrich Schwemminger” (1803-1884), The Ashmolean, 31, Christmas 1996, pp. 13ff.
Friedrich von Boetticher, Malerwerke Des Neunzehnten Jahrhunderts, Beitrag Zur Kunstgeschichte, Dresden: F. v. Boetticher, 1891.
Several of these drawings are now in major museum collections in Great Britain and the United States, among the the Ashmolean Museum, the British Museum, the Milwaukee Museum of Art, the Yale University Art Gallery, and the Cummer Museum in Jacksonville, Florida.
South German, 15th Century
Saint George and the Dragon.
Metalpoint on gray prepared paper.
Worcester Art Museum
An early study after a 15th century polychrome gilt linden wood sculpture of St. George and the Dragon in the Metropolitan Museum of Art.
Giuseppe Cades (Rome 1750 – 1799)
Recto: The Coronation of the Virgin; verso: Two Angels Holding a Candelabrum
Recto: Black chalk underdrawing, pen and brown ink on cream laid paper; verso: black chalk; inscribed on recto, in pen, in lower left:“di Cades”; 297 x 444 mm.; 297 x 444 mm; 11-3/4 x 17-1/2 inches
Private Collection, New York/Connecticut.
Provenance: Private collection, France
Exhibited: Drawn to Drama: Italian Works on Paper, 1500-1800, Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute, Williamstown, Massachusetts, October 12, 2008 – January 4, 2009
Bibliography: Maria Teresa Caracciolo, Giuseppe Cades 1750 – 1799 et la Rome de sons temps, Paris, 1992, no. 162 (ill., recto only); Michael Miller, “Drawn to Drama: Italian Works on Paper, 1500-1800,” review in The Berkshire Review an International Journal for the Arts, 12/1//2008,(ill., recto only)
John Whetten Ehninger (New York 1827-Saratoga Springs 1889), Six Drawings illustrating William Cowper’s “The Diverting History of John Gilpin”. Pen and grey ink on cream stiff wove paper, approx. 7 5/8 x 10 5/8 in. 1857.
Metropolitan Museum of Art.
Gherardo Cibo (Genoa 1512-Rocca Contrada 1600)
Recto: Farm with Trees in a Hilly Landscape
Verso: Tracing of the same Landscape
Pen and brown ink: 144 x 210mm, 5 5/8 x 8 3 16 in. Inscribed in pen at upper right: “concia d. Mra fior d. lisa. de. q. . 7. d. 9.re 1567:” at lower left in pen: 34.
Gherardo Cibo, born into the Genoese papal family in 1512, gave up a career in diplomacy and the Church to pursue a private life of study. He retired to the remote hill town of Rocca Contrada (now Arcevia) in the Marches, where his mother and sister, a nun, lived, and spent the remainder of his long life studying botany. His work was most distinguished and was well known to the leading botanists of his time through correspondence, but soon after his death he lapsed into obscurity.
His work was rediscovered only at the beginning of this century when a scholar identified an herbarium in the Biblioteca Angelica in Rome as his work. This contains almost two thousand specimens of dried plants in five volumes. Some further discussion ensued, but little more was known about Cibo until recently, when two astonishingly beautiful manuscripts, with plant studies in watercolor and gouache, were rediscovered in the British Library.
Drawings like the present sheet have been known in collections and the art market for some time, but they were not recognized as a consistent group until Bolten published them in 1969 as the work of Messer Ulisse Severino da Cingoli, whose name is inscribed on an album of these drawings. Twenty years later Nesselrath established that Messer Ulisse was the name of a correspondent of Cibo’s, to whom he had addressed a volume of his own landscape drawings. This finally connected these landscapes with Cibo and explained why and how they were made.
Cibo not only studied the structure and form of his specimens with great precision, he studied their environment as well. In the albums in the British Library he strove to show the localities where the plants grew, as well as the season and climactic conditions in which they throve. He used an elaborate combination of pigments to render this, most of which were extracted from his own specimens.
The present drawing was executed in the field as part of the background of one of these plant studies. His annotation at the upper left indicates that it was connected to a dried (“concia”) cornflower (centaurea cyana), which he had gathered on the spot. He traced the drawing to the verso in order to reverse it, if his finished rendering required it, a practice he followed in other drawings.
Cibo first learned to draw landscapes when he visited Flanders on a diplomatic mission as a young man. His early work shows his Flemish beginnings. Cibo’s mature work, like the present drawing, shows an absence of Flemish conventions, a more direct, Italianate vision, and a disciplined, economical hand, which is nonetheless graceful and fluid.
Provenance: Gherardo Cibo, sketchbook inscribed “Libero 24,” dated 24 October 1567.
Exhibited: London, P. & D. Colnaghi & Co., Exhibition of Old Master Drawings, June – July 1971, cat. no. 6, plate III, as Messer Ulisse Severino da Cingoli.
Related bibliography: Jaap Bolten, “Messer Ulisse Severino da Cingoli, a Bypath in the History of Art,” Master Drawings, vol. 7, no. 2 (1969) 123-47; Arnold Nesselrath, Gherardo Cibo, alias Ulisse Severino da Cingoli, exh. cat., San Severino Marche, 1989.
E. Celani, “Sopra un erbario di Gherardo Cibo conservato nella R. Biblioteca Angelica di Roma,” Malpighia, XVI (1902) 181-226.
London British Library, ms. Add. 22332 and 22333; see. Lucia Tongiorgi Tomasi, “Gherardo Cibo: visions of landscape and the botanical sciences in a sixteenth-century artist,” Journal of Garden History, Vol. 9, no. 4 (1989) 201.
Jaap Bolten, “Messer Ulisse Severino da Cingoli, a Bypath in the History of Art,” Master Drawings, vol. 7, no. 2 (1969) 123-47.
Expanded, the inscription says: “concia del maggiore fior di lisa. die quinta..7(?) di novembre 1567,” i.e. “curing of the greater cornflower on the fifth day 7(?) of November 1567.” Cibo almost invariably made such annotations on his landscape drawings.
Nesselrath, 1989, pp. 24f, figs. 13, 14.
Henri Lerambert (French, c. 1550-1609)
Modello for Scene 5 of the Tapestry Series of Coriolanus: Coriolanus Vows Eternal Hatred to Rome
Pen and brown ink, brush and brown wash, heightened with white, over black chalk indications, squared for transfer at upper right; 376 x 435 mm., 14 13/16 x 17 1/8 in.
Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York
This sheet is a modello for a scene in one of the most important tapestry cycles produced in France in the early seventeenth century, The Story of Coriolanus. The series, which consisted of seventeen tapestries, was produced in the Louvre atelier by Marc de Comans and François de la Planche. It was recorded at Fontainebleau in 1606. A complete set exists to today in the Mobilier National.
The Inventory of the Royal Mobilier of 1663 and Félibien (1705) attributed the cartoons for the cycle to Henri Lerambert, who was peintre pour les tapissiers du roi. The question has been raised whether Lerambert was the author of the original drawings or whether, as a mere technician, he was only the painter of the cartoons. Two drawings for other scenes in the cycle, the “Accusation of Coriolanus” and “Coriolanus Put to Death by the Volscians,” are preserved in the Bibliothèque Nationale. The latter bears an inscription attributing the drawing to Antoine Caron. Neither drawing shows any specific similarities with Caron’s style as a draughtsman, but they are clearly by the same hand as the present drawing. All three show convincing resemblances to a set of drawings in the Bibliothèque Nationale which depict the Life of Christ for a tapestry series in the church of Saint Merri in Paris (1584), which was also woven after cartoons by Lerambert. Again, five of the drawings for the Story of Artemisia, for which Lerambert is thought to have worked in the same capacity, appear to be by the same hand. Since these drawings reflect a distinct personality unlike the major artists who designed tapistries for the royal workshop, like Caron or Dubreuil, their common link to the documented cartoons of Lerambert are the most tangible evidence of their authorship. Laurent Guyot, Lerambert’s brother-in-law and successor as peintre pour les tapissiers du roi, has also been proposed.
Interest in the legendary Roman hero, Coriolanus, was stimulated in the late sixteenth century by the publication in1559 of Amyot’s famous translation into French of Plutarch’s Lives. Sir Thomas North based his English translation on Amyot rather than the original Greek, and this new accessibility of Plutarch led not only to the royal tapestries, but to Shakespeare’s tragedy of 1608 as well. The courageous but arrogant Coriolanus, after being condemned by a Roman jury, took refuge with the Volscians, who were enemies of his native city. He took command of their army against Rome, but his mother and wife approached him at Volsci and persuaded him to desist. For this the Volscians put him to death. The present scene, the fifth in the series, shows Coriolanus cursing his judges and vowing eternal hatred to Rome.
Provenance: New York, William Doyle Galleries, sale 26 January 1994, no. 4
Related Literature: Sylvie Béguin, ed., L’Écôle de Fontainebleau, Paris, 1972, pp. 364ff.; Roger-Armand Weigert, French Tapestry, Newton, pp. 102ff. A. S. Cavallo, “The History of Coriolanus as Represented in Tapestries,” Bulletin of the Brooklyn Museum of Art, 17 (1955), pp. 7ff.; Heinrich Goebel, Wandteppiche II, Die romanischen Länder, band I, Leipzig, 1928, pp. 67ff.; M. Fenaille, État général des Tapisseries de la Manifacture de Gobelins depuis son Origine jusqu’à nos jours, 1600-1900, vol. I, Les Ateliers parisiens au dix-septième siècle, 1601-1662, Paris, 1923, 213ff.
Drawing of a Bronze Statue of Galatea.
Département des arts graphiques, Musée du Louvre, Paris
Thomas Blanchet (Paris 1614-Lyon 1689)
The Finding of Moses
Traces of black chalk, pen and brown ink, brush and grey wash, heightened with white on buff paper, 233 x 316 mm., layed down. Inscribed on the recto of the old mount at lower left in graphite: “pousin,” at the right: “Z,” and above this, in ink: “P 131.” On the verso of the old mount, in different inks” “N. Pousin,” “BP 38;” in graphite: “N. 15, 125, 205/308 [?],” Thomas Blanchet P.D. [=Peter Dreyer];” in blue pencil, “14.”
The Pierpont Morgan Library, New York
The nervous pen line and the abstract description of figures and drapery, and, above all, the concentration on the figures’ ponderation and gesture, are characteristic of Blanchet. One could compare the drawing for the Abbaye de Dames de St. Pierre in Lyon (Galactéros-de Boissier, no. D. 12), or D. 35 for a funeral monument, and D 96, The Death of Dido, all in Stockholm. The placement of small figures arranged in a tight group within an expansive classical landscape is also typical, particularly of the work he did during his years in Rome (1647-53). One may compare his Time and Truth or Christ and the Woman of Canaan, versions of which are in the collections of Alfred S. Karlsen, Beverly Hills, and of Michel Descours, Lyon (Galactéros-de Boissier, no. P. 154; P 72 and 73).
The present drawing is close to another drawing of the subject, signed (?) “Thomas Blanchet in. et fecit Lugduni” in the Louvre (Inv. 23 792, Galactéros-de Boissier no. D. 48). This is a preparatory study for a painting, also in the Louvre, representing The Finding of Moses (P. 56), which “pourrait appartenir à la période charnière entre Rome et Lyon” (Galactéros-de Boissier, p. 340). The project should have been executed in Lyon according to the inscription on the drawing. The composition of both the drawing and the painting differ from this sheet in the reversal of the figure group and the larger scale of the figures in relation to the landscape. Galactéros-de Boissier has observed that Blanchet abandoned the diminutive scale of figures in relation to a grand landscape, just when he went to Lyon from Rome. The present drawing, then, is likely to be an earlier treatment of the Finding of Moses, in which he still retained his earlier manner. The basic grouping of the figures is sufficiently close to the Louvre version, however, so that it remains plausible that the present drawing was part of the same project.
This drawing is particularly close to Poussin and reveals knowledge of his painting of the same subject, now in the Louvre (Inv. 7275; A. Blunt, The Paintings of Nicolas Poussin: a Critical Catalogue, London, 1967, no. 12) or drawings preparatory for it, such as the sheet in the Kupferstichkabinett, Berlin, KdZ 24128 (see M. Winner in Vom späten Mittelalter bis zu Jacques Louis David: Neuerworbene und neubestimmte Zeichnungen in Berliner Kupferstichkabinett, Berlin 1973, p. 90, no. 154).
Provenance: Nikos Dhikéos, Lyon, stamped at lower right (not in Lugt)
Related bibliography: Jennifer Montagu, “Thomas Blanchet: some Drawings in the Nationalmuseum, Stockholm,” GB-A LXVI, 1158-1159 (1965), pp. 105-114; Lucie Galactéros-de Boissier, “Dessins de Thomas Blanchet dans les collections publiques françaises,” La Revue du Louvre et des Musées de France XXV, 5-6, (1975), pp. 323-331; Lucie Galactéros-de Boissier, Thomas Blanchet (1614-1689), Paris, 1991.
Jan Asselijn (Dieppe before 1615-Amsterdam 1652)
View of the Temple of the Sybil at Tivoli
Pen and grey ink, brush and grey wash; 165 x 251mm., 6 1/4 x 9 15/16 in.
In technique and style this sheet belongs to a group of drawings, consisting largely of views of Italian landscape and ruins, which has been associated with the Dutch Romanist artists, above all Jan Asselijn, Thomas Wijck (Beverwijck bei Haarlem 1616-Haarlem 1677) and Willem Schellinks (Amsterdam, 1627 [?]-1678 Amsterdam). The distinction between their hands is still not fully established. However, the work of Anne Charlotte Steland-Stief and others over the past three decades has clarified the problem somewhat. The generational difference between the agitated, almost romantic, work of Schellinks and the work of Asselijn is more obvious than that of Wijck, who was closer to Asselijn in age. In this drawing one must focus on the differences between Wijck and Asselijn.
Steland has isolated a group of eleven drawings which are preparatory studies for three sets of prints by Gabriel Pérelle (Hollstein, I, Jan Asselijn, pp. 43ff, 5-32; Steland, 1989, pp. 204ff.). Her premise is that the closer a drawing resembles this group in technique, style and paper, the more certain its attribution to Asselijn. However, one must remember that they are finished modelli for the prints. Some are even incised for transfer to the plate. The present sheet, in any case, matches them closely in many features. Secure drawings by Asselijn show a crisp, sharp outline of architectural forms, even if the actual outlines are discontinuous, and are accented by scallops and zig-zags. Within this structure Asselijn enlivens his light and shade with subtle washes and vigorously contoured strokes of the brush.
The forms of Wijck in contrast are more open. While his pen and brush follow many of the same routines as Asselijn’s, their effect is more fluid and atmospheric. The edges of walls and roofs, for example, are defined with the same meandering fine pen line, but the line does not convey the crisp intersection of planes as in Asselijn. It is dissolved in the bath of light and functions more as an enlivening rhythm within the sensuous washes. A characteristic example is the contrast between Wijck’s signed pen and brown wash drawing of an Italian courtyard in the Pierpont Morgan Library (acc. no. 1969.8) with Asselijn’s View of the Colosseum in Brussels (Steland, no. 39, fig. 5; Kat. 1913, no. 90), or another View of the Colosseum in the Teyler’s Museum, Haarlem (Steland no. 72, fig. 23; Kat. 1904, P. 93), both studies for Pérelle’s prints and therefore securely attributed. The present sheet appears much closer to Asselijn than to Wijck. It is somewhat looser than Asselijn’s highly finished Aqueduct at Frascati (executed for Pérelle) in the Morgan Library (Acc. no. 1969.8), but it seems more astringent than Wijck’s most characteristic sheets. It matches exactly Asselijn’s more relaxed drawings for Pérelle, like the View of the Temple of Hadrian’s Villa in the Rijksprentenkabinett (Steland no. 5, fig. 16; Inv. no. 1969:14A).
Furthermore the paper, which is cool white, rather lightweight, with narrowly spaced laid lines, resembles that of the secure Amsterdam sheet mentioned above The watermark on the present drawing may also be close to the “Krone mit Lilienwappen” on the Amsterdam drawing as well as on another View of the Temple of the Sybil in the Gabinetto nazionale delle stampe in Rome (Steland no. 136, fig. 18; N. 503 ). One other drawing of strikingly similar handling is worth noting: the study of the Arco degli Argentarii in the Museum Boijmans-van Beuningen (Steland, no. 141, fig. 44; Inv. no. J. Asselyn 4; Kat. 1869, no. 39).
The present drawing has been examined by Marijn Schapelhouman, Martin Royalton-Kisch, and (in photographs) Anne Charlotte Steland and George Keyes. While the latter are inclined towards Wijck, Schapelhouman attributes the drawing confidently to Asselijn.
Two other views of the Temple of the Sybil attributed to Asselijn exist in the Hessisches Landesmuseum in Darmstadt (Steland 50, 51, figs. 20, 21; Inv. no. AE 603, 604).
Related Literature: Anne Charlotte Steland, Jan Asselijn (Diss. Freiburg im Breisgau 1965), Amsterdam 1971
_________________, Die Zeichnungen de Jan Asslijn, Friedingen 1989
_________________, “Zum Zeichnerischen Werk des Jan Asselijn – Neue Funde in Forchungsperspektiven,” Oud Holland, 94 (1980) 213ff.
_________________, “Zu Willem Schellinks Entwicklung als Zeichner,” Niederdeutsche Beiträge zur Kunstgeschichte, 25 (1986).
On the temple of the Sybil at Tivoli, see Delbrück, Hellenistische Bauten in Latium, II, 11ff.
Felice Stampfle, Rubens and Rembrandt in their Century, Flemish and Dutch Drawings of the 17th Century from the Pierpont Morgan Library, New York, 1979, pp. 122f. no. 94 (ill.).
Study for a Ceiling Decoration: Allegory of Night
Pen and brown ink, brush and gray wash over black chalk on buff laid paper. 218 x 321 mm., 8 9/16 x 12 5/8 in.
In style this drawing of an Allegory of Night in an oval format is related to Steidl’s powerful youthful penmanship at its very best, in particular his drawings for Karthaus-Prüll. Over traces of a black chalk, Steidl worked in pen and a very dark brown ink and grey washes, adding and, in the end, correcting some details with lead white heightening, which stands out brilliantly from the buff paper ground. The drawing is trimmed to the borderline but a piece of paper outside the oval and with the signature “Melchior Steidl f: I” is still attached.
Night is represented as a sleeping young woman sitting in clouds before the sphere of the full moon. At the left, she is accompanied by two owls, beneath her are another owl and two sleeping putti, and at the right is another sleeping person, whose head is bitten by a huge dog. Another woman, seen from her back and half naked in the lower right quarter of the composition is pulling a curtain spangled with stars and serving as a backdrop behind the moon; behind all this spreads the night sky with more stars. At the very bottom of the composition, a bat is concealed by white heightening.
Ripa, in his description of Night and her four phases, mentions two children and a bat (prima parte), but the children are in Night’s arms, and one has crooked feet, while the other wears a wreath with poppies. Other representations by Steidl follow Ripa in certain notable details. For example, in another drawing (Strasser 15) he shows Night clad in a mantle decorated with stars and holding a globe as in Ripa’s seconda parte, but the iconographic features of the present drawing are particularly complex and typical of Steidl’s own invention. In a fresco of 1691 in Schloss Harmating, Oberbayern, the subject, inclusive of the moon figuring almost as a halo, is borrowed from Pietro Testa The dark drapery studded with stars behind the figural group, however, seems to be Steidl’s own. It is still present in his ceiling in Augsburg where the allegory is mounted on a chariot.
The closest iconographic parallel, however, is found in the ceiling of the summer refectory, now the Kaisersaal, in Kremsmünster, Oberösterreich, an extremely important early work, paid for in 1696. The fresco shows Apollo-Helios drawing along the zodiac toward the left, where Night awakes at the arrival of Phosphorus. No longer sleeping, she sits in clouds in front of the large white sphere of the full moon before the backdrop of a star studded drapery in whose darkness a number of people are still asleep while owls and bats are flying in front of a night sky.
The close iconographic relation between our representation and the ceiling in Kremsmünster is matched by stylistic parallels: proportions, facial types, hands, fingers, and feet are virtually the same. A sleeping man in the fresco wears the same cap as the figure bitten by the dog in the drawing and rests his head in a similar way on his arms and the half-naked female figure seen from her back in the drawing is virtually identical with a woman at the lower left end of the representation in Kremsmünster. Very similar figures are found elsewhere in the Kaisersaal decoration: within the quadratura framing in the woman at the right of the Allegory of Winter, or the man with Bacchus’s leopard at the right of the Allegory of Autumn. The drawing should therefore be dated to near 1696, three years earlier than his work at the gates of Regensburg.
It is by no means certain that the present drawing is preparatory for Kremsmünster, because of the substantial differences between it and the final work, yet it seems thinkable that there might be such a connection. Steidl started his work on ceilings on a large scale in the church of the monastery of Sankt Florian, Austria (1690-96), where he represented, in the vaults of the travées of the nave, surrounded by extensive quadratura painting, scenes from the life of the patron saint in oval compositions, seen only slightly di sotto in su just as the figure of Night in our drawing. He might have thought, in the beginning, to fill the long shape of the Kremsmünster Kaisersaal (25.50 x 13.50 m) with two ovals representing day and Night within a more complex quadratura decoration, before uniting them before an illusionistic sky in a single representation and employing the entire ceiling following the model of Italian masters of the 17th century.
Related Literature: Viktoria Meinecke-Berg, Die Fresken des Melchior Steidl, diss. München, Munich 1971; Josef Strasser, Melchior Steidl (1657-1727): Die Zeichnungen, exh. cat. Salzburg, 1999.
 Viktoria Meinecke-Berg, Die Fresken des Melchior Steidl, diss. München, Munich 1971, Kat. II; Falk Bechler et al., in Hermann Bauer, Bernhard Rupprecht, Corpus der Barocken Deckenmslereien in Deutschland, Band 2, Freistaat Bayern Regeirungsbezirk Oberbayern. Die Landkreeise Bad Tölz Wolframshausen, Garmish-Partenkirchen, Miesbach, München München, 1981, pp. 187-190 (illustrated).
 Bartsch 38; Bellini 32, Cropper 79.
 Meinecke, Kat. III The two scenes in Kat. II, identified by Meinecke as Jupiter and Juno and Mars and Venus, are taken from Pietro da Cortona’s decoration of the Palazzo Pamphilij in Piazza Navona, Rome. They represent in fact scenes from Vergil’s Aeneid: Juno asking Aeolus to destroy the fleet of Aeneas and V;enus receiving the Arms of Aeneas from Vulcan.
 Meinecke Kat. III
Giovanni de’ Ricamatori, called Giovanni da Udine (Udine 1487-Rome 1561)
Recto & verso: Studies of Rock Doves.
Brush and brown wash, bodycolor, and gouache.
206 x 196 mm., 8 1/8 x 7 11/16 in.
Département des arts graphiques, Musée du Louvre, Paris