P 1 : KsF
0521551331 c 01 b CUNY 160 /Joannides 052155 133 1 January 11 , 2007 6 : 36
132 WHOLLY OR PARTIALLY AUTOGRAPH SHEETS CATALOGUES 20–21made in preparation for theBearded Slave,butthe forms
are not sufficiently close to any of the fourprigioninow
in the Accademia in Florence for a precise connection to
be affirmed.
In15 2 0, following the cancellation of the San Lorenzo
fac ̧ade project, Michelangelo was again diverted from the
Julius Tomb to work on the New Sacristy for Cardinal
Giulio dei Medici, but he may have continued carving
theprigioniwhile awaiting deliveries of marble for that
project, especially in 1522 – 3 , during the pontificate of
Adrian VI, when little was done on the New Sacristy.
The geometrical sketch on the recto, difficult to
interpret with confidence, might represent an abbrevi-
ated triglyph. Michelangelo considered the inclusion of
triglyphs in an early design for the Magnifici Tomb,
which survives in a copy by Raffaello da Montelupo in
Florence (Uffizi 607 E; pen and ink, 200 × 136 mm), itself
much replicated (see Cat. 34 ). The original of the design
copied by Raffaello must have been made by Michelan-
gelo in151 9– 20 , and he may then have taken up a sheet
drawn on a little earlier to sketch out architectural fea-
tures. Alternatively, assuming that he was simultaneously
working on theprigioni,itmight be possible to date the
recto drawing also to this moment.History
TheBona RotiCollector?; The Irregular Numbering
Collector; Sir Joshua Reynolds (L. 2364 ); Sir Thomas
Lawrence (no stamp); Samuel Woodburn.References
Lawrence Inventory, 1830 ,M.A.Buonaroti, Case 3 ,
Drawer 3 [ 1830 – 91 ] (“Anatomical Studies in red chalk.”).
Woodburn,184 2,no. 79 (“Anatomical study of a leg
etc...–very fine.”). Robinson,187 0,no. 8 (Michel
Angelo. “[A]pparently of the early period of the master
circa AD15 0 0.”). Black, 1875 ,p. 213 ,no. 8. Berenson,
1903 ,I,p. 184 ,no.155 0(Recto: “possibly for the man
sustaining the expiring youth in the Deluge.” Verso: “for
the figure clinging to the tree.”). Thode, 1908 ,I,pp. 247 ,
258 (Recto: perhaps, but not certainly, for father carry-
ing son in theFlood.Verso: forignudoright aboveEsa-
ias.). K. Frey, 1909 – 11 ,no. 193 (Recto: link with Sistine
Flood.); no. 194 (Verso: as recto.). Thode, 1913 ,no. 392
(As 1908 ,but less sure of these identifications.). Beren-
son, 1938 ,I,p. 199 ,no.155 0(As 1903 .). Wilde, 1953 exh.,
no. 121 (c.15 2 0,probably made in connection with the
Bearded Slave.). Parker, 1956 ,no.31 4(Studies probably
connect withBearded Slaveof c.15 2 0.). Dussler, 1959 ,
no.34 0(Michelangelo?. Early15 2 0s.). Berenson, 1961 ,
no.155 0(As 1903 / 1938 .). Hartt, 1971 ,no. 294 (Recto:15 2 7– 39 : for theBearded Captive.); no. 295 (Verso:15 2 7–
30 :probably for theYouthful Captive.). Gere and Turner,
1975 ,no. 35 (c.15 2 0,probably made in connexion with
theBearded Slave.). De Tolnay, 1976 , Corpus II, no. 295
(Recto: probably forBearded Slave.Verso: Hartt’s view
cited.).CATALOGUE 21Return of the Holy Family from Egypt?
184 6. 309 ;R. 76. Lloyd, 1977 ,A 66 CDimensions: 650 × 535 mmMedium
Apparently in a thin wash of brown oil on a lead-white
ground prepared interra verde,onpanel (Robinson gives
the support as chestnut wood.)Description
The group, advancing frontally with perhaps a slight tack
to the viewer’s left, consists of two adults and two children,
all represented nude save for the female figure who is given
the outline of a costume. A form at the upper right is not
decipherable with any confidence but might be the head
of an animal such as a donkey.Discussion
This panel has provoked a good deal of discussion, and
the situation in 1977 is thoroughly and clearly laid out in
Christopher Lloyd’s catalogue of that date, from which
much of what follows depends.
The subject of the panel has not been much disputed.
Berenson did hint at the possibility that it might be pagan,
but did not pursue this idea with any conviction, and there
seems to be little doubt that the central figure is the Virgin
and that the children are Christ and St. John. Although
de Tolnay suggested that the male figure on the left might
be the prophet Isaiah, there is no good reason for seeing
him as anyone other than Joseph, the only mature man
who might be permitted to touch the Christ Child while
simultaneously, it would seem, placing a protective arm
behind the Virgin.
The design is clearly Michelangelesque and, as all stu-
dents of Michelangelo have noted, relates most obvi-
ously to hisEpifaniacartoon of c. 1553 , made for his
pupil Ascanio Condivi, and now in the British Museum
(W 75 /Corpus38 9;black chalk, 2327 × 1656 mm). As a
consequence, and perhaps also influenced by their shared