P 1 : KsF
0521551331 c 01 CUNY 160 /Joannides 052155 133 1 January 10 , 2007 22 : 22
62 WHOLLY OR PARTIALLY AUTOGRAPH SHEETS CATALOGUE 1of comparable complexity of arrangement (Paris, Lou-
vre, Inv. RF 4112 recto/J 17 /Corpus 25 ; pen and ink,
392 × 284 mm; Inv. 685 recto/J 16 /Corpus 26 ; pen and
ink, 325 × 261 mm) are probably of c.15 0 6, contempo-
rary with theDoni Tondo.Thus, the undoubted relation
to Leonardo’s interests does not enjoin a specific dating.
In the compiler’s view the recto drawing could have been
made at any time between15 0 2and15 0 6.
One of Michelangelo’s preoccupations here was in the
expressive organisation of drapery, comparable with that
seen in the BrugesMadonna, underway c.15 0 4. Although
it is difficult to be certain, the figures seem first to have
been outlined, although not modelled, in the nude, and
draperies were then stretched across them. Notable too in
this drawing is the simplification of the heads to bean-like
shapes, and the employment of a wandering, partly bro-
ken, line to evoke the figures’ elaborate head coverings.
The Child’s pose is particularly complicated, with His
right arm raised and bent across behind His head, and His
left arm raised to clasp His right shoulder. But, surpris-
ingly in such a group, He is not the centre of attention.
Perched on the Virgin’s right hip, supported by her right
hand and the sling that passes over her left shoulder, He is
the object of neither the Virgin’s nor Saint Anne’s gaze.
The action’s focus is the Virgin’s outstretched left arm and
hand: reaching for something held under Saint Anne’s left
arm. Her pose, unexpectedly, bears a close resemblance to
asketch probably for a Sistineignudo, found on the verso
of a study for theBattle of Cascinain the British Museum
(W 6 verso/Corpus 52 ;red chalk, 420 × 285 mm).
Despite its relatively precarious balance and the sense
of impending movement that it conveys – the weight on
Saint Anne’s right leg must be intolerable – this draw-
ing may well have been conceived for a sculptural group,
such as that executed c.151 0byAndrea Sansovino for
the Roman church of San Agostino or that executed
around a decade later for the Florentine church of Orsan-
michele by Francesco da Sangallo, the son of Michelan-
gelo’s old friend Giuliano da Sangallo, who was close to
Michelangelo at that time and who had some access to
drawings by him. The inclusion of Saint Anne with the
Virgin and Child had a long tradition in Florence, where
the Virgin’s mother was particularly venerated: It was on
her day, July 26 , that in134 3the tyrant Duke of Athens
was expelled from the city.
For the verso drawings see Cat. 2.History
(Casa Buonarroti) This provenance, given by Parker with
a?,isprobably incorrect. There is no evidence that
Pierre Crozat – according to Woodburn, the earliestidentified owner of this sheet – acquired drawings from
Casa Buonarroti, although, given the fact that leakages
occurred, it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that
he acquired drawings that had once been there. How-
ever, given the nature of the recto inscription and the
truncated numbering on the verso, the more proba-
ble sequence is theBona RotiCollector; The Irregular
Numbering Collector; Joachim Sandrart; Pieter Spier-
ing Van Silfvercroon; Queen Christina; Dezzio Azzolini;
Livio Odescalchi, Duke of Bracciano; Pierre Crozat;
Pierre-Jean Mariette (no stamp, but his ownership is
attested by Woodburn); Marquis de Lagoy (no stamp);
Thomas Dimsdale (L. 2226 ;atthe lower left of the verso;
badly damaged and, apparently, cutaway and then re-
attached); Samuel Woodburn; Sir Thomas Lawrence
(L. 2445 ); Samuel Woodburn.References
The recto was etched in facsimile at an unknown date by
the Marquis de Lagoy. Lawrence Inventory, 1830 ,M.A.
Buonaroti Case 3 , Drawer 3 [ 1830 - 105 ] (“The Virgin,
Child and Saint. Elizabeth, on the reverse various inter-
esting studies. Fine pen.”). Woodburn, 1836 b,no. 31 (“A
veryspirited pen drawing of singular composition.”).
Woodburn,184 2,no. 18 (As 1836 .). Fisher, 1852 ,p. 6 ,
no. 33 (Recto.). Woodburn, 1853 ,no. 5 (Recto repro-
duced.). Fisher, 1865 ,p. 20 ,no. XXIIIX. Robinson,187 0,
no. 22 (Michel Angelo. Recto and verso, c.15 0 4.). Fisher,
187 2,I,p. 18 , pl. 23 (As 1852 .). Black, 1875 ,p. 213 ,no. 22.
Gotti, 1875 , II, p. 223. Fisher,187 9,p. 5 ,no. 14 (Prob-
ably the first idea of a marble group.). Berenson, 1903 ,
I, pp. 211 – 12 ,no. 1561 (Recto: the type and drapery of
the Virgin recall the RomePieta`; perhaps registers hearsay
about Leonardo’s cartoon rather than direct knowledge, if
so, early15 0 1.Also looks forward to theMedici Madonna.
Ve r so: related to [Cat. 2 ]ofc.15 0 5; “the model or the
type which Granacci, Franciabigio, Bacchiacca and even
Andrea and Pontormo used, or rather imitated.”). Colvin,
1904 , II, no. 9 A(Recto: “This is eminently a sculp-
tor’s drawing. The artist has conceived the general idea
of a group of the three figures thus seated and has sat
down pen in hand to block it into some kind of shape
while it was still half vague in his mind. As he works he
feels the forms as it were imperfectly emerging from the
marble; and with rough impetuous hatchings in whatever
direction expresses his feelings best, tries an arrangement
for the light and shade of his main masses, for the inclina-
tions of the heads and leading positions of the limbs, and
two or three principal motives for the action and reaction
of limbs against drapery. The sketch is of first-rate interest,
both for its intrinsic quality and from the fact that it shows