P 1 : KsF
0521551331 c 01 -p 2 CUNY 160 /Joannides 052155 133 1 January 11 , 2007 10 : 5
190 WHOLLY OR PARTIALLY AUTOGRAPH SHEETS CATALOGUE 34drawing, Louvre Inv. 718 /J 9 /Corpus 47 .). Gantner, 1920 ,
p. 6 (Recto: for Sistine ceiling.). Panofsky, 1921 – 2 , col.
36 (Not for Sistine; early153 0s.). Popp, 1922 ,pp.15 9– 62
(Two episodes, theAttack of the Serpentsand theAppeal
to the Brazen Serpent; studies for frescoes in the lunettes
above the ducal tombs, developed from military scenes
initially planned for these spaces. The man supported by
two others in the centre of the lower scene developed
from BM W 5 recto/Corpus 46. All the drawings dat-
able c.153 0. The upper scene developed from Cats. 4
and 5 .Itwas originally planned to include military fig-
ures – i.e., the dukes – in these scenes, but that project
changed after153 0.). Zoff, 1923 , pl. 67 .Brinckmann,
1925 ,no. 45 (c. 1532 ;twocompositions; Popp’s hypothesis
apparently accepted.). Baumgart, 1937 ,p. 9 (For a fresco
in the New Sacristy.). Berenson, 1938 ,I,pp.34 9– 50 ,
no.15 6 4(Rejects Popp’s hypothesis about the New Sac-
risty but she “may possibly be right about the dating”;
therefore, perhaps not for Sistine. Motif of two men lifting
another similar to BM W 5 recto/Corpus 46 .). Delacre,
1938 ,pp. 246 – 8 (Not for Sistine; debatable whether BM
W 5 recto/Corpus 46 and Louvre Inv. 718 /J 9 /Corpus 47
related. Uffizi 606 Eofhigh quality.). De Tolnay, 1943 ,
p. 136 (Perhaps for lunettes of New Sacristy.). De Tolnay,
1948 ,pp. 49 , 218 ,no. 107 (c.153 0.For New Sacristy.
Upper scene planned for lunette above Lorenzo, lower
one for that above Giuliano.). Goldscheider, 1951 ,no. 91
(Popp’s suggestion “stimulating but cannot be proved”;
“manner in which a mass of human figures...is com-
bined to form an entity of movement, was...entirely new
in Renaissance art... incunabulum of new manner, sub-
sequently developed by El Greco as far as...theOpening
of the Fifth Sealand by Rubens in hisFall of the Damned,” c.
1533 ). De Tolnay, 1951 ,p. 292 (Attack of serpent and the
healing by theBrazen Serpent,c.153 0– 2 .). Wilde, 1953 a,
pp. 11 , 28 , 67 (c.15 2 8.). Wilde, 1953 exh., no. 98 (No
evidence of the purpose for which it was drawn.). Parker,
1956 ,no. 318 (Datable c.15 2 8– 30. Upper group shows
attack, lower group the cure. “Little doubt that...they
wereconceived...as one, andthat together they were
to form the left-hand portion of a larger composition,
having presumably the cross with the brazen serpent in
the centre, and a right-hand portion adjoining it to cor-
respond with the present one. The fact that the scale
of the figures in the lower [nearer] group is somewhat
larger than in the upper [more distant] one is signifi-
cant.” The link with figures in BM W 5 recto/Corpus 46
“may be accidental.” No connection with Sistine com-
position. Popp’s theory “remains at best a specious con-
jecture, hinging, moreover, on the assumption, proba-
bly incorrect, that the two groups were conceived asseparate units.” Verso: a male thorax partly dissected at
shoulders and neck.). Dussler, 1959 ,no. 195 (Two sepa-
rate scenes.153 0– 2. Purpose unknown; Popp’s hypothesis
implausible.). Berenson, 1961 ,no.15 6 4(As 1903 / 1938 .).
Barocchi, 1964 a,p. 215 (CB 37 FbyMiniinpart derived
from this.). Barocchi, 1964 c,no. 25 (Recto: links back
toCascinaand forward toResurrectiondrawings.). Brug-
noli, 1964 ,no. 36 (From Michelangelo’s last years in
Florence; reprise of figural motifs fromCascina;Popp’s
hypothesis unproven.). Berti, 1965 ,pp. 450 , 463 (c.153 0.
Choral, dramatic quality.). Goldscheider, 1965 ,no. 88 (As
1951 .). Hartt, 1971 ,no. 257 (Recto:15 2 0– 5 ?. For the
lunettes above the ducal tombs; perhaps refers to “Luther-
ans attacking the faithful with poisonous doctrine.”);
no. 412 (Verso:15 4 5?. Close in style to [Cat. 49 ]. Study for
the impenitent thief ?.). Gere and Turner, 1975 ,no. 105
(“[A]round153 0...purpose unknown.”). Keller, 1975 ,
nos. 32 – 3 (c.153 0– 2. Subject, shown at two moments,
prefigures the Crucifixion; probably intended for the
lunettes above the ducal tombs, with? BM W 52 /Corpus
46 for the lunette above the Magnifici tomb.). De
Tolnay, 1975 , fig. 231 (As 1951 , “possibly for lunettes in
the New Sacristy.”). Keller, 1976 , fig. 165 (As 1975 .). De
Tolnay, 1976 , Corpus II, no. 266 (Recto: as 1948 ;
reprise of motifs fromCascinanoteworthy. Verso: c.153 0.).
Pignatti, 1977 ,no. 21 (Two episodes represented; survey
of opinion on purpose and dating; emphasis on extraor-
dinary quality.). De Tolnay and Brizio, 1980 ,no. 65 (As
1975 ,but omits “possibly.”). Joannides, 1981 b,p. 683
(Recalls motifs in Leonardesque manner fromCascina
studies.). De Vecchi, 1984 ,p. 121 (Cites Popp.). Hirst,
1986 a,p. 44 (Reappearance of motif of a man being lifted
bytwo others from Louvre Inv. 718 recto/J 9 /Corpus 47 .).
Per rig, 1991 ,pp. 31 – 2 , 47 , fig. 29 (Recto: copy; work-
shop of Clovio. Verso: workshop of Clovio.). Joannides,
1996 a,pp. 161 – 2 (Implausible as a project for a New Sac-
risty lunette; perhaps a preliminary sketch for a Presenta-
tion Drawing.). Zentai, 1998 ,pp. 64 – 8 (The appearance
of copies after different sections of the present drawing
together with copies after lost or surviving drawings by
Michelangelo for the Medici tombs on the sheets by or
after Raffaello da Montelupo in the Uffizi, Dusseldorf, ̈
Dresden [formerly], and Lille reinforces Popp’s hypothe-
sis that the scenes of theBrazen Serpentwere planned for
the lunettes of the New Sacristy.). Perrig, 1999 ,pp. 233 – 4 ,
277 (As 1991 ;from Farnese Collection. Identifiable with
a drawing described in Clovio’s posthumous inventory,
fol. 385 v “Due Gruppi di Figurine piccole di Michelan-
gelo Fatti da Don Giulio.” This reference is missing
from the publication of the inventory by Steinmann and
Wittkower, 1927 ,pp. 433 – 4 .).