P 1 : KsF
0521551331 c 01 -p 3 CUNY 160 /Joannides 052155 133 1 January 11 , 2007 10 : 14
CATALOGUE 52 WHOLLY OR PARTIALLY AUTOGRAPH SHEETS 249which is generally considered to be a preparatory study
for the ground plan of the Sforza chapel. This drawing
presents problems of reading and orientation, but one area
of it, probably an altar-compartment but not inconceiv-
ably a crypt, does show a Greek cross with very shallow
arms, with columns at the corners that presumably sup-
port a vault. The present drawing might be related to
that.
It is not immediately apparent whether any of these
architectural forms is related to those on Cat. 53 verso.Verso
This drawing, for which Michelangelo has employed a
ruler with only the curves and the scroll drawn free-
hand, seems more likely to be the pedestal of a statue –
as suggested by the console or scroll in profile – than
a column base. The scroll, if that is what it is, would
presumably carry an inscription. The only free-standing
statue bases known to have been designed in Michelan-
gelo’s Roman period are that for the equestrian figure of
Marcus Aurelius on the Capitoline Hill and that for the
equestrian figure of Henri II, executed by Michelangelo’s
prot ́ege Daniele da Volterra at the master’s recommen- ́
dation – and in part under his supervision – from15 6 0
onwards. Surviving drawings demonstrate that Michelan-
gelo assisted Daniele both with the horse and with its
pedestal. Although the present drawing resembles more
closely the earlier project, it seems very unlikely that
it could be so early. Even the ruled lines are less firm
than one would expect from a Michelangelo drawing in
the153 0s. On balance, if the drawing is connected with
either of these projects, it seems more likely that it was
Daniele’s statue. Although it must be admitted that the
single drawing by Michelangelo securely made in prepa-
ration for the pedestal of Daniele’s statue (Amsterdam,
Rijksmuseum, Inv. 53 : 140 /Corpus 435 ;black chalk and
white body colour, 125 × 124 mm) bears no relation to
the present drawing, it is nevertheless worth noting that
the pedestal of the statue as it was finally erected in Paris,
as it is recorded in an engraving by Nicolas van Aelst, does
bear some relation to the present drawing and, moreover,
seems to have carried inscribed scrolls at the front and rear.History
The history of this sheet and of its companions, Cats. 51
and 53 , with which it was still mounted, together with
Cats. 73 and 101 , when it was catalogued by Robin-
son, is not fully clear. If this drawing together with Cats.
51 and 53 comprised the mounting of three drawings in
Ottley’s sale catalogue of 11 April 1804 as lot 273 , “One
ditto [leaf] containing three studies of figures, all in blackchalk, from the Buonarroti collection,” then they would
apparently have come from Casa Buonarroti, probably but
not certainly, via Wicar. However in Ottley’s sale begin-
ning 6 June 1814 , the only item corresponding to such
a mounting was lot 823 ,“Three on one leaf, studies in
black chalk – a figure on the back of one.” £ 6. 6. 0. And
lot 825 provides the information: “from the collection
of the Cicciaporci family of Florence to whom the con-
tents of the three above lots [i.e., including lot 823 ] for-
merly belonged.” This, therefore, would be a correction
of the earlier statement and should probably be trusted,
in which case the provenance prior to Ottley should
be Daniele da Volterra; Giacomo Rocca; The Cavaliere
d’Arpino; Filippo Cicciaporci; and Bartolommeo Cava-
ceppi. At Ottley’s 1814 sale, this mounting was purchased
byWilliam Roscoe; it reappeared at his sale of September
1816 as lot 59 :“Three, Studies of a Figure, in black chalk;
another figure on the reverse of one of them. From the
same Collection” (as the previous lot, i.e., Mr. Ottley’s).
It was acquired by Watson, a pseudonym of the London
bookseller William Carey, for 15 s., and presumably then
passed to Sir Thomas Lawrence (L. 2445 ) and Woodburn.
By the time of the184 2prospectus, to complicate matters,
this mounting, no. 36 , had acquired two further draw-
ings [Cats. 73 , 101 ], which were probably added to it by
Lawrence or, less likely, by Woodburn himself. In184 2
Woodburn gave the provenance for the whole ensem-
bleasthe Buonarroti family and the Chevalier Wicar. In
this he was followed by Parker and Robinson. However,
while this provenance probably is true of Cat. 73 ,itis
unlikely to be true, as we have seen, either of the trio
comprised by the present drawing and Cats. 51 and 53 ,or
of Cat. 101 .Itseems likely that Woodburn simply trans-
ferred the probable provenance of Cat. 73 to the whole
group.References
Ottley sale?, 11 April 1804 , lot 273 (“One ditto [i.e., leaf ]
containing three studies of figures, all in black chalk,
from the Buonarroti collection.”). Ottley sale, 6 June
1814 , etc., probably part of lot 823 (“Three on one leaf,
studies in black chalk – a figure on the back of one.”
[Lot 825 adds the information: “from the collection of
the Cicciaporci family of Florence to whom the con-
tents of the three above lots formerly belonged, men-
tioned in the preface to Condivi,Life of Michelangelo,
published in 1746 , page xviii. This collection was sold
and dispersed about 1765 , and with others purchased
of the Cav. Cavaceppi, 1792 – 3 ,bytheir present pro-
prietor.”]). Woodburn,184 2,no. 35 (“Five very fine
studies on one Mount, three of them in black chalk.”).