P 1 : KsF
0521551335 c 04 -p 5 CUNY 160 /Joannides 052155 133 1 January 11 , 2007 11 : 34
34 6 COPIES OF SCULPTURES CATALOGUES 84–85figure, not the original. It treats the figure as a relief. It
seems to be by a Florentine artist of the later cinque-
cento, perhaps, as the watermark would permit, work-
ing in the decade15 8 0– 90 .Itwas drawn broadly, with
the sharp lines that define the contours of the owl set
below the left knee and of the crescent moon inNight’s
head added after the main forms had been established.
There are some similarities with the simplified and dra-
matic chalk style of Boscoli, much influenced by Rosso
with its abruptly juxtaposed planes of light and shade,
butitlacks the airy openness that characterises Boscoli’s
drawings, and Dr. Julian Brooks (personal communica-
tion) does not believe it to be his.
Tothe compiler, a more likely candidate is Ludovico
Cardi, il Cigoli (15 6 9– 1613 ). A red chalk study (California,
C.Wright Collection in 1999 ) for, probably, the fig-
ure of Christ in hisWed ding Feast at Canain the Pina-
coteca Nazionale in Bologna, published by M. Chappell
in Wright, 1999 ,no. 4 ,isvery similar in handling to
the present drawing and shares with it applied outlin-
ing, employed to bring the contours into sharper focus.
Cigoli was certainly deeply interested in Michelangelo’s
work, even though his paintings and drawings rarely dis-
play its influence. Cigoli demonstrated his thoughts about
Michelangelo’s architecture, at least, in a drawing for the
fac ̧ade of St. Peter’s in the Uffizi 2636 A, alongside which
he commented upon the purpose of the bell-towers.
Cigoli was a close friend of Galileo, himself an uncondi-
tional admirer of Michelangelo, and also became a friend
of Michelangelo the Younger.
It is tempting to hypothesise that this drawing is that
described by Woodburn in his letter to Lawrence of
1 February 1823 as a study for theLeda.History
Parker gives the provenance as Casa Buonarroti?, but
this was no doubt caused by a confusion with no. 35 in
Woodburn’s exhibition of 1836 –adrawing in red chalk
with similar dimensions – which could not have been
included in the184 2prospectus because it had been sold
to William II of Holland in 1839.
A possible candidate – but not a certain one – for 1836 -
35 is a drawing that entered the British Museum with the
Collection of Henry Vaughan in 1900 (W 102 ;red chalk,
34 0× 262 mm) with a provenance recorded as from Casa
Buonarroti and Jean-Baptiste Wicar, although this was
doubted by Wilde. The dimensions are a little smaller
than those given by Woodburn, but the sheet might have
been trimmed between 1836 and 1900 , which would also
explain the absence of Lawrence’s stamp. If this drawing,
first attributed to Francesco Salviati by Professor MichaelHirst and now generally accepted as his, was that sold
to William in 1839 , then it would have been lot 120 in
William’s posthumous sale, at which it was purchased by
Brondgeest. It would presumably have been passed by him
to Woodburn and would have re-appeared in the latter’s
posthumous sale of186 0as lot 142 ,acquired by Enson.
That the present drawing has no direct relation with
Michelangelo and was certainly made after his death
suggests either that the provenance did not include
Casa Buonarroti or, if it did, that it was one of those
drawings that entered the Buonarroti collection in the
early seventeenth century; the fact that Cigoli was a
friend of Michelangelo the Younger might well be
significant.
Casa Buonarroti?; Jean-Baptiste Wicar; Samuel Wood-
burn; Sir Thomas Lawrence (L. 2445 ); Samuel Wood-
burn.References
Woodburn,184 2,no. 12 (‘An elegant drawing... red
chalk....Size 1434 inches by 1013 inches. From the Col-
lection of the Chev. Wicar.”). Robinson,187 0,no. 47
(Copy from Michel Angelo. “This masterly shaded draw-
ing was evidently made from the finished statue...not
long after the execution of the marble.”). Thode, 1913 ,
p. 210 (Copy.). Parker, 1956 ,no. 354 (Handling reminis-
cent of Rosso; of the first half of the sixteenth century.
“Whether the differences in the left arm are merely due
to license on the part of the copyist or whether they have
some further significance is a moot point.”). Rosenberg,
2000 ,NZ 15 (Italian, first half of the sixteenth century,
probably after a reduction.).CATALOGUE 85ludovico carbacci( 1555 – 1619 )?
Evening
184 6. 100 ;R. 46 ;P.II 355Dimensions:38 6× 248 mm, areas of loss, made upMedium
Red and black chalk.Condition
The support is lined. There is uneven pulp. The sheet has
major toned infills (particularly at the lower left edge and
just below the half-way line at the right edge), major tear
repairs, a minor surface scratch, a small hole, abrasions,