Raphael's ' dei garofani' Rediscovered Author(s): Nicholas Penny Source: The Burlington Magazine, Vol. 134, No. 1067, (Feb., 1992), pp. 67-81 Published by: The Burlington Magazine Publications, Ltd. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/884991 Accessed: 28/04/2008 07:07

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bmpl.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We enable the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

http://www.jstor.org NICHOLAS PENNY

Raphael's 'Madonna dei garofani' rediscovered*

THERE are numerous versions of Raphael's Madonna dei by a defect in the preparation of the gesso ground, across garofani (the ). Many of them are ob- the right leg and belly, and especially in the thigh, of the viously copies and in this century none has been generally infant Christ and there are numerous pin-sized losses here.3 acknowledged as an original work by Raphael. Yet most There has been some blistering in the dark background scholars agree that such an original must have existed. areas beside Christ's head and belly and there are half a Moreover the very abundance of the copies (see Appendix) dozen small losses here and a few elsewhere, all evident in testifies to the composition's fame. The version which was the photograph of the painting taken when it was being probably most esteemed in the first half of the last century cleaned (Fig.4). is that in the collection of the Duke of Northumberland The medium is almost certain to be predominantly oil, (Fig.3). In August last year the Duke generously agreed although the painting's small size and excellent preservation to its being taken to the , London for close prevented any sample being taken to verify this. The examination. The subtlety and assurance of the modelling narrow strips of painted surface concealed by the frame and the delicacy and solidity of the handling, qualities dif- show that the green of the curtains was originally more ficult to discern when the painting hung in the corridor at brilliant and that the tone of the blue sky has very slightly Alnwick Castle, became more apparent in the conservation altered. Other versions and prints support the conjecture studio, and the evidence revealed by both X-radiography that the blue robe over the Virgin's left shoulder was once and, above all, infra-red reflectography, which will be more easily distinguished from the dark background and presented in this article, dispelled any residual doubts that the contrast was clearer between the edge of the that the original painting had been rediscovered. It was curtain above the top of her head and the wall behind. In clear too, and clearer still after the picture was cleaned by the distant landscape the horizon line continuing under Herbert Lank in October and November 1991, that it the rock to the left of the tower is now visible - a revision, had survived in exceptionally good condition. or at least a procedure, improbable for a copyist.4 Slight The Alnwick Castle Madonna dei garofani is painted on a alterations to the outline of the cheek and chin of Christ panel 8 mm. thick. The back (Fig.2), which has been are also visible. The surprising touch of pale blue in the polished, exhibits the very close grain of a fruitwood such Virgin's robe beside her right hand may not have been as cherry (used by Raphael as a support for the Transfigur- intended to be so apparent.5 Shell gold was used for the ation). ' A border varying from 6 mm. (at left of the lower, haloes, which are now inconspicuous; their chief lines are and right of the upper, edge) to 1 mm. (on the sides no longer complete. Close examination reveals a few sup- towards the top) has been left unpainted but is covered plementary discontinuous concentric lines in the Virgin's with the gesso ground. Such a border is unusual in Raphael's halo. small panel paintings only in its irregularity.2 There is a The Madonnadei garofani must have been painted shortly vertical split approximately in the centre of the lower half before Raphael left for , probably in 1507 of the panel, passing through the back of the Virgin's or 1508. The Large CowperMadonna of 1508 (Fig.6) seems hand and through the lower leg of the infant Christ, and to develop the composition in reverse, with the figures to either side of this there are several finer and shorter enlarged, varied in action and given an outdoor setting.6 vertical cracks. The paint has been disturbed, probably The date 1508 is also found on a painting at Wilton, per-

*The painting will be the subject of a special display at The National Gallery Roman agency 'della antichita e pittura', perhaps licensing the export. It has been between 12th February and 29th March. This has been sponsored by Hiscox wrongly supposed that identical seals on the canvas of Bellini's Feast of the Gods Syndicates Ltd, underwriters,and Blackwall Green Ltd, brokers,both of Lloyds were applied soon after acquisition of the painting by the Camuccini in the late of London, who have also supported the cost of the colour plate illustrating this eighteenth century; see D. BULLand j. PLESTERS:: Conservation, article. The Duke of Northumberland has generously agreed to the painting Examination, and Interpretation,Washington [1990], p.21. on loan at The remaining National Gallery until March 1993. 2The lack of register between painted image and support might suggest that the The author is grateful to the Duke of Northumberland, the Duchess of painting was not made on an easel. The border of the Dream of a Knight is widest Northumberlandand Lady Victoria Cuthbertfor their hospitalityand encourage- along the lower edge - averaging 0.25 cm. - and finer elsewhere. That of the ment. Caroline Armitage helped to organise the preliminary investigation of Garvagh Madonna is 1 cm. along the lower edge and 0.25 cm. elsewhere. Borders the at The painting National Gallery. Colin Shrimpton, archivist at Alnwick are often excluded from reproductions of Raphael's paintings, but see H. VON with the of the Castle, helped investigation family papers. Examination of the SONNENBURG: Raphael in der Alten Pinakothek, [1983], frontispiece (for the painting in The National Gallery was made possible by the Chief Restorer, Canigiani Madonna) and fig. 74 (for the Esterhdzy Madonna). Martin I Wyld. am indebted to discussions with him, with Jill Dunkerton and 3This is a problem also in parts of Raphael's Ansidei Madonna and in The with Herbert Lank. I am most grateful to Rachel Billinge who constructed the National Gallery's Portraitofayoung man by Botticelli - for which seeJ. DUNKERTON, infra-red reflectogrammosaics with great care and skill, and tojaynie Anderson S. FOISTER, D. GORDON and N. PENNY: Giotto to Diirer, London and New Haven who shared her knowledge of the Camuccini collection. [1991], p.164, fig.215. ' The size and condition of the panel prevented any sample of the wood being 4This, perhaps the single most visible piece of evidence for the autograph status taken for It is that analysis. possible the wood was polished in the early nineteenth of the painting, was surprisingly not mentioned by Cavalcaselle (see note 44 century to eradicate evidence of the owner prior to its acquisition by Vincenzo below). Camuccini. A circle in lightly incised the wood is intersected by left and right 5Herbert Lank has suggested to me that Raphael had reserved an area here for edges, perhaps reflecting a plan for a tondo which was subsequently abandoned. the flowers. The three all in identical are found on all seals, wax, the paintings at Alnwick 6D.A. BROWN:Raphael and America, Washington [1983], pp.157-58. I am grateful which came from the Camuccini collection. One of these is the seal of Vincenzo, to Dr Brown for discussing with me the relationship between the Madonna dei another that of and perhaps Pietro, the third (with the Colosseum) of an official garofani and the Large CowperMadonna and the relationship of both with Leonardo. 67 RAPHAEL'S 'MADONNA DEI GAROFANI'

haps reflecting a composition by Raphael or by a close fol- lower, which reverses the Madonnadei garofani and alters the nature of the interior setting (Fig.5).7 Telling comparisons can be made with Raphael's Belle jardinierein the Louvre also of 1507 - for the head of Christ with the Borghese Entombmentalso of 1507 for the landscape and architec- ture- and, perhaps most strikingly, with the St Catherine, generally dated 1508- for the Virgin's hair, eyebrows and mouth (Figs.8 and 10). It is unlikely that Raphael executed the painting in Rome because the pose of Christ was bor- rowed by Fra Bartolommeo (Fig.9) in a drawing used for several works, the first of which seems to be a Holy Family, signed by his partner Albertinelli and dated 1509.8 Many of the paintings made by Raphael in Florence during this period were inspired by the work of Leonardo and some may even be considered as variants on a familiar model by that artist. The Madonnadei garofani returns to an early painting by Leonardo, the Benois Madonna (Fig.l), gen- erally dated to the late 1470s. This composition seems to have been easily accessible to artists: several other paint- ings, most of them Florentine, are derived from it.9 The theme of the Virgin holding a bunch of flowers in one hand and showing one stem to the Child seated in her lap is taken from the Benois Madonna. Raphael's Virgin presents a carnation, or pink, to her son, as in another of Leonardo's early paintings, the Madonnawith a carnationin the Alte Pinakothek in Munich. This flower was not un- common in betrothal portraiture of this period as an em- blem of true love and could also be regarded as symbolic of healing and divine protection.'0 While the composition of the Madonna dei garofani also derives from the Benois Madonna, the three hands in the centre of the picture form a much less tight and intricate pattern and the Virgin's hands are both more open and less twisted, assuming the 1. Vinci. Panel transferred to Benois Madonna, by Leonardo da canvas, relatively stiff positions which Raphael gave two or more 48 by 31 cm. (Hermitage, Leningrad). years earlier to the personification of Pleasure in the Dream of a knight (Fig. 11) but, characteristically, reversed. The Virgin's hair is less densely braided and knotted. The drapery of her sleeve has a plasticity which owes much to Leonardo, with a similar bunching in the upper arm, a stiffened opening to the outer sleeve at the elbow, and a large fold in the robe below, turned back to reveal the lining; but in every case the forms are less broken and there is a contrast with tighter and smoother areas of drapery. Most notable of all the differences is the placing of the in- fant Christ further from the Virgin so that he is no longer

7I am grateful to the Earl of Pembroke for letting me examine this painting closely at Wilton. The inscription in gold on the border of the Virgin's dress reads 'RAPHAELLO VRBINAS MOVIII' (presumably for MDVIII). This seems to be the composition engraved (in reverse) byJ. Morin. 'Ihis in turn was the model for a line engraving by Landon. In SIDNEY 16TH EARL OF PEMBROKE: A Catalogueof thePaintings and Drawings in theCollection at WiltonHouse, London and New York [1968], p.85, it is described correctly as seventeenth century. ''he sixteenth-century original (if there was one) oddly combines a figure group of Raphael's Florentine period with the sort of dark interior and large curtain favoured by in the 1520s. 8'1he drawing also served as a model for Fra Bartolommeo'sown works, most notably the Pala del Gran Consiglio. See c. FISCHER: Disegnidi Fra Bartolommeoe della sua scuola,Florence [1986], no.58, Fig.76. T'he connexion between this drawing and Raphael's Madonnadei garofaniwas kindly pointed out to me by David Ekserdjian:it seems never to have been noticed in print. 9E.g. Christie's New York, 18th January 1983, lot 31; Colonna Gallery, Rome ('R': 'Codicillo alla Madonna Benois', Critica d'Arte [Oct.-Dec. 1985], pp.80-82); Sotheby's, London, 6th May 1964, lot 23 (as Lorenzo di Credi). A notable example not of luscan origin is the painting attributed to the Maitre du Saint Sang- Sotheby's, London, 18thJune 1952, lot 104. 'ISee E. WOLFFHARDT: 'Beitrage zu Pflanzensymbolik',Zeitschrift fur Kunstwissen- 2. Back of the panel of Fig.3. schaft,VII [1954], pp. 177-96. 68 RAPHAEI'S 'MADONNA DEI GAROFANI'

_r00;0 V 502~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-e., u. ?; :

-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~",

,:ii

I I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~il 31

? F~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

, f"R'*Xy*'ja"f;;4si:,fT" 7 I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i ]1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ===_z=~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~? 3.M((1tlZ(lio((!(lli )yRtl)l.(l.I )(7-)2.1)llt , tI) 2 (m.(lu( f orllml(rlnd( Il\iol,Allw( aslc Nrtu }-( lsll; l lsll o h N;t OIXl (

7I,~~~ _

l.Aa(,ot///aideiuaro/hni', by Rap)ha(q. 1507-01. 1Panti, 29 by 23 cm. (Dukcof'Northumberland colIcction, AInwick Castlc, Northumberland' o)n loan to the NationalGallcry, ,,o_dn).

69 RAPHAEL S 'MADONNA DEI GAROFANI'

4. 4. Photograph of Fig.3 during cleaning.

6. Large CowuperMadonna, by Raphael. 1508. Pancl, 68 by 46 cm. (National Gallcry of'Art, Washington, D.C.).

-. , II -- 4I - "or\ 5. Madonna and child. Italian, scventccnth-ccntury? Pancl, 31.7 by 22.6 cm. 7. Studics of thc Madonna and Child, by Raphacl. 1508. 'cn and ink with (Wilton House, Wiltshire). red chalk on paper, 26 hy 19.2 cm. (Albcrtina, ).

7() RAPHAEL S 'MADONNA DEI GAROFANI'

10. 10. Detail of St Catherine,by Raphael. 1507-08. Panel, 71.5 by 55.7 cm. (whole). (National Gallery, London).

8. 8. )etail of Fig.3.

9. Madonna and (hild, by Fra Bartolommco. Black chalk with white 11. Detail of Dream ofa knight, by Raphael. c. 1504. Panel, 17.1 by 17.1 cm. h ightnlling oll tiln(td )papr, 33.9 by 23.1 cm. (Uffizi, Florcncc). (whole). (National Gallery, London). 71 RAPHAEL S 'MADONNA DEI GAROFANI' united with his mother in a single serpentine sequence of forms. Raphael provides a securer support for the group by extending the Virgin's right thigh and placing a cushion between her and the child. Format must have been a factor here, for Leonardo continues the lines of the arched top of the panel in his composition, which Raphael had no need to do. T'he Virgin's transparent veil, with the thread of high- light on its edge as it floats over her shoulder, is one of the most captivating passages in the Madonna dei garofani. 1Theremay originally have been an equivalent in Leonardo's Benois Madonna as there certainly are in other works by him. Another similarity is the Virgin's open mouth, some- thing Leonardo may have adopted from Florentine sculp- ture. In the Large Cowper Madonna the Virgin's mouth is closed while that of the child is open. Raphael's pre- occupation in 1507-08 with parted lips, which may well have begun with the Madonnadei garofani, is evident in the Entombment,the Canigiani Madonna, in Munich and the St Catherine.'The colouring of the Madonna dei garofani may also owe something to that of the Benois Madonna, in which the yellow of the Virgin's sleeve and of the lining of her robe contrast with a slatey grey, and with pale ultramarine blue and deep moss green. Certainly the striking golden yellow used by Raphael for the lining of the Virgin's robe is close to that found in several of Leonardo's works, most notably in both the and London versions of the Virginof the rocks. 1There are no drawings by Raphael which can be regarded with certainty as preparatory for the Madonna dei garofani, ! but a sheet in the Albertina (Fig.7) can be connected with i it. The study on the right is similar in composition, as is the higher of the two pen studies on the left, but in reverse. It is possible that this drawing was made after the painting and represents the germ of the idea for the Large Cowper Madonna: proposals for, or recollections of, at least four 12. other Madonna compositions by Raphael are found on the " same sheet. Perhaps the composition of the Madonna dei garofaniwas not worked out in the usual way in preparatory drawings, for dependence upon an idea of Leonardo's could mean there was less planning to do. If so, we would expect that the underdrawing of the painting would itself resemble a preparatory drawing. That is precisely what the .r infra-red vidicon reveals an underdrawing (Figs.12-13, 15, 20-21) more similar to Raphael's drawings on paper than any other so far published, and one which reveals no evidence of transfer in the form of either dotted lines or slow, careful outlines. Nor are there traces of incised stylus lines. The medium of the underdrawing has not been identified but the fineness of the lines and the difficulty of detecting them in infra-red photographs (as distinct from

''hcse are: the (.olonna Madonna (top left group in red chalk), perhaps the Casa Tempi Madonna (in reverse - top right group in red chalk), the Holy Family with the palm (pcn and ink group lower right), the Bridgewater Madonna (pen and ink group on the verso). Sec P. JOANNIDES: The Drawings qf Raphael, Oxford [1983], p. 177, no. 181, and E. KNAB, E. MITSCH and K. OBERHUBER: Raphael. Die .Zeichnungen, Stuttgart [1983], p.571, nos.162-63. It should be noted that the group which may represent the germ of the idea for the Large Cowper Madonna is no less close to a composition recorded in another pen drawing in the Albertina (Fischel 150, JOANNIDES, op.cit. no. 168) which in turn is close to a wash drawing in the Louvre of the Virgin and Child in a landscape (Fischel 144, JOANNIDES, op.cit. no. 167) and served as a composition used by other artists. 13. 72 RAPHAEL'S 'MADONNA DEI GAROFANI'

14.

A"?

/4/,,,,,NE) 1e W; /

12. 1nFra-red rcflcc( graplh ofI'adetail of'Fig.3.

13. 1 ii t1a-redrcf I( tograph of'a detail oftFig.3.

14. I ntira-rcd reflectograph o'a detail of'the Small (,%wperMadonna, by Raphael. c. 1505. Panel, 58 by 43 cm. (whole). (National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.).

15. Inifra-red refleetograph ofa detail of Fig.3. 15. 73 RAPHAEL S 'MADONNA DEI GAROFANI'

16. GarvaghMadonna, by Raphael. 1508-09. Panel, 38.7 by 32.7 cm. (National Gallery, London).

16. 17. Infra-redr(flc(tograph of a detail of Fig. 16. the vidicon) suggests that it is in metalpoint rather than both works is the way that the line of the brow of Christ is chalk. '2 swept round from nose to temple in a double curve. Another Notable among the remarkably free and exploratory example of this is the line which defines the curvature of passages of drawing which have been revealed is that of Christ's chest in the Madonna dei garofani, which may be the extended right foot of the Christ Child (Fig.21): ana- compared with those circling the back of Christ in the tomically implausible but wholly characteristic, it is defined Small CowperMadonna (National Gallery, Washington). with rapid loops like those with which the active body of In the search for further comparative data, the Garvagh the infant Christ is depicted on the sheet in the Albertina. Madonna (Fig. 16), as a painting of comparable size and Numerous revisions are revealed in the drawing. The character (although a year or so later in date), was exam- outline of a forked tree trunk can be seen alongside the ined on the vidicon. The head of Christ is here modelled rock to the left of the tower (Fig. 13). A different style of in the same schematic way as the head of Christ in the dress was contemplated, with a brooch fastening at the Madonna dei garofani, with intersecting curves in the lips, Virgin's right shoulder. The hair was to have been more simplified nostrils, and lines for the eyebrows which extend distinctly and elaborately plaited with three or four plaits to define the curvature of the skull (Fig. 18). The diagonal above the ear (Fig.12). The repeated lines seeking ideal shading in the head is similar as well. A broader style of grace rather than anatomical truth in the Virgin's breast shading is used for the drapery beside Christ's right foot are particularly impressive, and it is highly typical of and the ledge below (Fig. 19), just as it is beside his right Raphael that he should have continued the segmental foot in the Madonna dei garofani (Fig.21). Christ's feet are curve of some of these lines through the Virgin's sleeve drawn with the same rapid loops used to isolate a circular (Fig. 15). heel or an oval toe. Another especially noteworthy feature The underdrawing is close in style to that of the Small of the underdrawing of the GarvaghMadonna is the use of Cowper Madonna (Fig. 14), a work of probably a year or ovals to define the knuckles of the curling infantile fingers two earlier, although in that drawing there is evidence of (Fig. 17). On the vidicon screen this is visible in Christ's 13 transfer in some parts. The two most telling similarities hands in the Madonnadei garofani, though too faintly to be are the probing repetitions of outlines and the evenly seen clearly in reproduction, and it is also apparent in the spaced hatched lines, both diagonal and horizontal. There index finger of the left hand of St Caltherineand in the too we find the segmental curves of the Virgin's breast raised hand of the angel to the left of the CanigianiMadonna. 4 continued through her arm. Also apparent is the use of A comparison between the X-radiograph of the Madonna what might be called a structural contour. Remarkable in dei garofani (Fig.22) and that of the Garvagh Madonna

'2'l'hc drawing in metalpoint which makes the most telling comparison is that Studies in the History of Art, National Gallery of Washington, Vol.XVII for the Iloly Family with the palm in the Louvre (Fischel 138, JOANNIDES, op.cit. [1986], pp. 139-47, esp. 143-44. I have abIove,no. 155). '4For the Canigiani angel see SONNENBER(,, op).i. at note 2 ablove, Fig.67. ':K.M. MERRILL: 'Examination and 'Ireatment of the , hy not noticed this device in Raphael's drawings on papl)r. Raphael at T'he National Gallcry of Art', in j. BECK, ed.: Raphael beJfre Rome, 74 RAPHAEL S 'MADONNA DEI GAROFANI'

18. Infra-redreflectograph of a detail of Fig. 16.

20. Infra-redreflectograph of a detail of Fig.3.

19. 1nlra-redr(ele(ctograph ol a detail ol fig. b. 21. Infra-redreflectograph of a detail of Fig.3.

(Fig.23) shows many features in common, especially if deigarofani and the Infant Baptist in the GarvaghMadonna. allowance is made for differences in density and sharpness The X-ray and infra-red images of both paintings reveal of image produced by the support (the GarvaghMadonna is the many slight but significant refinements to the outlines painted on a thicker panel, probably of poplar). While of forms characteristic of Raphael's paintings. Among the the drapery folds of the GarvaghMadonna are more freely more easily detected adjustments to the GarvaghMadonna and broadly brushed in unsurprisingly, given its later are those to the back of the Virgin's neck as it curves into date and slightly larger size -the painting of the flesh, her shoulder and to the forehead and upper arm of the particularly the flesh of the children, produces a strongly Baptist. Similarly, in the Madonna dei garofani slight alter- three-dimensional image in both X-rays. In each, the ations can be seen in, for example, the forehead and cheek placing of the densest highlights is most strikingly similar of the Christ Child and along his right shin. The opaque in the outstretched arms of the Christ Child. Equally and somewhat blurred image of the Virgin's head in the distinctive are the solid touches of lead white to emphasise X-radiograph of the Madonna dei garofani indicates that the whites of the eyes of the Christ Child in the Madonna the position of her whole face has been shifted slightly, 75 RAPHAEL S 'MAI)ONNA DEI GAROFANI

22. X-radiograph of'Fig.3. probably at a fairly early stage in the paint application, so This collection had long been one of the sights of Rome, that it is now further in profile. The greater thickness of but in 1851, when it was moved to a notable sixteenth- the paint may account for the difficulty in detecting much century palace, Palazzo Cesi, it became more conspicuous underdrawing in this area.15 still.'7 It had been formed by Pietro Camuccini (1760- This technical evidence may be compelling, but the high 1833), the copyist, picture restorer and dealer, together quality of the painting is also obvious enough. Its neglect, with his younger brother, Vincenzo (1771-1844), the however, is only recent. The Madonna dei garofani was leading neo-classical painter in Rome. Pietro's activities bought by Algernon, fourth Duke of Northumberland as a dealer have been described elsewhere.18 He worked (1793-1865) in 1853, together with the Camuccini Col- much in collaboration with Alexander Day, supplying the lection. The whole collection, consisting of 74 paintings, latter, for instance, with both the Garvagh Madonna and cost 125,000 Roman scudi (/27,589 8s. 6d), independent the St Catherinein 1800. Vincenzo was made a member of of the bribes which the Duke paid to facilitate its export. 16 the Accademia di San Luca in 1802, and its Princeps in

'"'lTh two paragraphs on the X-radiographs have been supplied by Jill D.C.' written in a very florid hand and sumptuously bound is also at Alnwick Dunkerton. Castle. The Palace, now the headquartersof' the Tribunale Supremo Militare, 'lThecdetails of this transaction are contained in a letter in the Alnwick Castle faces the Via della Maschera d'Oro and Via degli Acquasparta. Fedcrigo Cesi Archives to the 1)uke of 19th September 1853 from the German agent Emil had opened the Accademia dei Lincei here and established Rome's first boltanic Braun. It will lbepublished IbyJaynieAnderson in: 'The Provenance of Bellini's garden. It had once been famous for the murals on its lficades by l'olidoro and Feast of the Cods and a new/old interpretation', Studiesin the Historyof Art, Maturino. Vol.46, National Gallery of Art, Washington, forthcoming (1992). I am grateful '8For the Camuccini as dealers, see ANDERSON,loc.cit. at note 16 above. More to Dr Anderson for letting me see a copy of this article in advance of publication. generally, sec the entries by A. BOVERO,in DiziionarioBiogrq/ico degli Italiani, 1'71.BARBERI: Catalogo ragionato della Galleria Camuccini in Roma,c.1851, a bound XVII, Rome [1974], pp.627-30, and VincenzoCamuccini (1771-1844), Bozzettie manuscript in a clerical hand in the Alnwick Castle Archives (another copy in Disegni,ed. G.P. DE ANGELIS,exh.cat. Rome, Galleria Nazionale d'Arte Moderna the archive of the Camuccini heirs at Cantalupo), fols.2r-4. A translation 'by [19781, pp. 104-05. 76 RAPHAEL'S 'MADONNA DEI GAROFANI' _ -?C lr --

23. X-radiogra,phofl'Fig. 16. 3- 1 L L1

1806; he was appointed head of the mosaic workshop of minded.'9 The collection may indeed have originated St Peter's in 1803 and Ispettoredelle pubblichepitture (i.e., with Pietro's realisation, soon after 1800, that he could curator and conservator of major paintings of the city) by afford to keep some of his stock, perhaps on account of the Pius VII in 1814, was created Baron by Pius VIII in 1830, success of his younger brother as an artist. and arranged the Vatican Pinacoteca both for him and for The gems of the collection were Raphael's Madonnadei Gregory XVI. These high offices must have made it easier garofani,'s Feastof theGods, now in Washing- for his brother to get away with irregular exports. ton, Claude's Sunsetlandscape, Guido Reni's Crucifixion(both It was Vincenzo's son, Giovanni Battista, who sold the still at Alnwick) and Guercino's Esther before Ahasuerus collection (and purchased the estate of Cantalupo with (now in the University of Michigan Museum of Art, Ann the proceeds). There is no reason to doubt that the two Arbor). The manuscript catalogue explicitly states that brothers had hoped to preserve it, even though they never the Raphael was bought by Vincenzo rather than his ceased to engage in the art trade. However, the manuscript brother, which is true of no other work in the collection, catalogue by Tito Barberi, evidently composed for visitors and also that it was bought in Paris, whereas the others to Palazzo Cesi, presents their motives for collecting as a with recorded provenances came from Roman palaces commitment to the Italian heritage. When Pietro's art (most notably, the Barberini, Aldobrandini, Borghese, dealing is taken into account, this seems implausibly high- Sannessi and Braschi). In September 1825, when the

19BARBERI, MS. cited at note 17 above, fol.2r: 'In mezzoa questouniversale sconvolgi- de'miglioriantichi dipinti, cooperarano che per noi nontutti perduti n'andassero; e riunendo mentoi nostriartisti quasi stranieri a quantosi succedevaloro dintorno lavoravano indefessi alcunedelle opere le piu rare,che facile la revoluzioneavrebbe disperse, fondarono questa per l'arte e per la gloria; ed oltre a questoi fratelli Camuccini,acquistando alcuni galleria...' 77 RAPHAEL'S 'MADONNA DEI GAROFANI'

Camuccini were obliged to list their best paintings, the Madonna dei garofani was not included.20 This could be because the painting had been exported from France and so was not considered to be Roman cultural property, but more probably indicates that the Camuccini did not yet possess it. Vincenzo's only recorded visit to Paris was in 1810, but I suspect that the painting was acquired there by Vincenzo or on his behalf not long before the end of 1828, in which year a very precise engraving (Fig.24) by a Maltese protege of the Camuccini, Giovanni Farrugia, was published in Milan with the information in the legend that 'I'originaledella slessagrandezza esisle in Romanella galleria del celeberrimopillore Sig. Cav.re Camuccini'.It was also in Milan, in the following year, that the painting was first described in print, as an 'operasimilmenle de' primi anni di Raffaello,sparsa d'infinila soavila'.2' The painting's reputation in Rome in 1840 may be gauged from the IdeesIlaliennes, ostensibly by the enameller Abraham Constantin but partly ghosted by Stendhal, in which it is praised in the highest terms and its status as an original work held to be beyond doubt. It is described there as the 'gloire' of the Camuccini collection, before even the Bellini.22 A document in the archive at Alnwick makes it clear how highly esteemed the painting was in about 1850. This is a list of Camuccini's paintings with , , . ._, . '/, // .'.. /," ', / /./ ,' . sterling prices or valuations compiled in Rome, presumably by an agent of the Duke. The Raphael (at [2500), the Claude (at ?1500) and the Guercino (at [1000) were the . I . A- ..... --/ .` =f L( ( ___7 t I = -- t I I most valued - with the Bellini, to which 24. Madonna deigarf/ani, by Giovanni Farrugia after Raphael. 1828. highly together Engraving, 29.4 by 23.4 cm. (image). (British Museum, London). no figure seems then to have been attached.23 The acquisition of the Madonnadei garofani by Vincenzo must surely reflect the special devotion that he felt for Raphael -as witnessed by several copies after Raphael in the collection.24 'Sommo dipinlore e sommo conoscitoredelle memoriede'maestri dell'arle sua', was how Longhena described Vincenzo in 1829. He was citing Vincenzo's support for the theory that Raphael did not die from amorous excess but from a chill caught in St Peter's.25 Four years later, in September 1833, Raphael's bones were uncovered in the Pantheon. Vincenzo made a careful drawing. He had initiated the excavation in his capacity as Princeps of the Accademia di San Luca. It refuted the controversial claim made by the Keeper of

20Ibid., fols.27v-29v: 'Vincenzo Camucciniricomperatolo in Parigi, la restitui alla Italia ed a Roma, collocandolofra i migliori quadridella propriagalleria'. For the inventory of 1825 which Jean-Baptiste Wicar, a friend of the Camuccini, was also obliged to make see F. BEAUCAMP: Le peintre lillois 7ean-Bapliste Wicar, Lille [1939], II, pp.567-68. 21'. LONGHENA: Isloria della vita e delle opere di Ra/faello Sanzio da Urbino del Quatremerede Quincy voltata in Italiano, corretta, illuslrata ed ampliata . . . Milan [18291, p.12. 22A. CONSTIAN'IIN:Idees italiennes sur quelques tableaux celebres; Florence [1840], pp.152,237. 23Alnwick Castle Archives, Add. MSS (1973), F 76a. 24The copies were: a on tile allegedly hy Giulio Romano after Raphael's portrait of Guiliano de'Medici, noted as impressive by Waagen (not now it seems at Alnwick); a full-size oil painting of St Peter conducted from prison from Raphael's frescoin the Stanza of Heliodorus, probablyeighteenth century, but claimed by the Camuccini as the work of Poussin (still at Alnwick) and a full-size oil painting of the Holy Family in said to be by Giulio (also still at Alnwick) - see BARBERI,op.cit. at note 17 above, fols.9r and 27r-v. Peruginesque MI)lI,c''I\/ MFVS ,411Mf I F'1 EGO J I, c,. , shutters believed by the Camuccini to be by Raphael should be mentioned in ;t,irluil Prd - , . u t ,l Rl ' Ir mtt ^.....C'. R ;.. iFt .'.ibp nk* . a

Papal Antiquities, Carlo Fea, that Raphael had been buried in S. Maria Sopra Minerva - a gratifying conclusion, since Fea had been striving to disgrace the Camuccini for the way they had exported works of art from Rome. 26 From whom Vincenzo Camuccini purchased the Madonna dei garofani is not known, and that it would not be disclosed may well have been a condition of the sale. How Camuccini knew about it, however, is not difficult to guess. The painting had been reproduced as an enamel plaque for the Royal Porcelain factory at Sevres (Fig.26). This was the work of the celebrated enamellist Victoire Jaquotot, the third in a series of copies after Raphael for which she was especially admired. She began her copy - the same - size as the original in January 1817 and the first version was fired in May, the second in June.27 That this was made from the Alnwick painting seems very likely from the close similarity between them. But there are in fact numerous minor differences: some of these, such as the slight variations in the veil on the Virgin's right shoulder or the size of the flower heads, are unsurprising, but others - most notably the greater number of flowers in the Virgin's left hand, the 'correction' of the anatomy of the Virgin's left hand and of Christ's foot, and the simplification of the - landscape are unexpected in so exact a copyist. Jaquotot has also embellished the neckline of the Virgin's dress with ornament in gold. This would be typical of Raphael, but there is no hint of it in Farrugia's print, and no trace of it on the and it would be for painting, surprising Raphael alter 1817. Enamel to use as a for 26. Madonnadeigarofani, by VictoireJaquotot Raphael. yellow ground gold.28 plaque, 31.4 by 26.6 cm. (sight). (Musee National de Ceramique, Sevres). The enamel was shown privately by the enamellist to amaleursin November 1817, exhibited publicly at the Louvre heirs of the Oddi family in 1636 by a Frenchman.3' The on 1st January 1818 to great acclaim, and then shown date may well reflect precise documentation supplied by again in the artist's studio. It was included in the Salon of the vendor, but the further claim that it had been made 1819 with a note that it had been given by the King to for 'Maddalena Degli Oddi, Monaca in ' must be Madame.29 Anne Lajoix, who has kindly communicated regarded with scepticism. It is not entirely impossible that to me her research on this plaque, notes that the suggestion this story came from the Oddi family itself,32 but since that it should be reproduced in enamel came from Madame Maddalena is mentioned by Vasari as patron of Raphael's Jaquotot herself in a letter to the factory's administrator, Coronationof the Virgin (now in the Vatican) it was not a Alexandre Brongniart, on 17th January 1817. She wrote very daring step to propose her as the patron of another that she could arrange for the loan of a Raphael 'qui work of slightly later date.33 Barberi also quotes from a n'exisle pas au Musee' and is 'connu en France que pas des letter which had been appropriated by Cardinal Borgia, gravures',but she kept the identity of the owner secret.30 in which Raphael wrote concerning work he had to Although Barberi's manuscript catalogue does not dis- finish for Maddalena. No such reference exists and there close from whom Vincenzo Camuccini bought the painting seems to be a confusion with Raphael's famous letter to in Paris, it does assert that it had been acquired from the his uncle dated 21st April 1508, which was owned by

2' 'For an acc(ount of the excavation with full bibliography see v. GOLZIO: Raffaello 29Expositiondes Manufacturees royales, 1818, no. 11. References to private nei documenti,Vatican 11936, reprinted 1971], pp. 120-21. For Fca see ANDERSON, studio shows are taken fromJaquotot's correspondencewith Brongniartas cited loc.cil. at note 16 above, with relfernces to the unpublished D. Phil. thesis of at note 27 above, T24, communicated by Anne Lajoix. JEAN-LOUIS PASCAL (GRIENER: The Function(f Beauty: The 'Philosophes' and the Social `0Jaquotot's correspondence with Brongniart is cited at note 27 abov, '124, Dimension Artin late France,Oxlbrd, 1989, pp.217-41. communicated by Anne Lajoix. Madame Lajoix suspects from her knowledge of eighteenth-century - 27Mus(e National de Ceramique, Sevres. Inventory no.16 855. References to of Jaquotot's circle that the owner might have been a 'Lord Seymour' a the firings inJaq(uotot'sletters to Brongniart and in Brongniart'snotes (Manu- relative of the Marquess of Hertford (more than one of whom could have been f1actureNationale de Sevres,Archives, Pb. 4 and Pb. liasse 1) kindly communicated so styled in Paris). to me by Anne Lajoix. I am grateful to Mme Fiy-Hallc, Conservatcur of the 3''Questapiccola tavola perfettamente conservata fu da Rqafaellecondotta nella sua seconda Mus6e de Ceramique, for letting me examine the plaque. Measurements of manieraper MaddalenaDegli Oddi, Monacain Ierugia . . . innanzil'anno 1636 un details within painting and plaque show no diflerences in size, which suggests franceseacquistb esso dipinto dagli eredi della Degli Oddi,e lo portbseco in Francia.. .' thatJaq(uotottook a tracing. Her colours are close to Raphael's, departing most (BARBERI, MS. cited at note 17 above, fol.27v). in the subtle grey of the Virgin's dress. "''2hat the Degli Oddi family were in touch with Camuccini'scircle is suggested 2 It should be noted that the deviations from Raphael'sdesign do not correspond by the fact that LONGHENA(op.cit. at note 21 above, p1.720)records that they to those in any painted version known to me. 'Ihey are greater than one would owned a drawing by Raphael of the selling of Joseph (presumably preparatory expect fromJaqruotot'scopy of the Bellejardiniere,but that painting, being in the for the narrativeon the seventh vault of the Vatican Loggia). 33 Louvre, was more easily available for comparison. Jaquotot made ten enamel For Maddalena di Guido degli Oddi and her patronage, see A. LU(:HS: 'A note copies after Raphael between 1813 and 1840; see A. LAJOIX: 'Pcinturc ct por- on Raphael's Perugian patrons', 'HE BURLIN(GTON MA(AZINE, CXXV [1983], celaine: substituer a la toile une plaque de poreelaine', La Revuede la Ceramiqueet pp.29-30. du Verre,XXI [March-April 1985], pp.9-13, p.13 note 15; also Raphaelet l'art Franfais,exh.cat., Grand Palais, Paris [19831, pp.259-61, nos.387-90 (entries by E. FON'IANS). 79 RAPHAEL'S 'MADONNA DEI GAROFANI'

Cardinal Stefano Borgia in 1827 when it was etched in But of the Madonna dei garofani, he noted that, 'of all the facsimile. 34 numerous specimens of the picture I have seen, none Barberi concluded by observing that it was unsurprising appear to me so well entitled to be attributed to his hand that so many engravings should have been made of the as this'.38 painting 'di bulinofrancese',given the picture's long stay in More influential than Waagen, however, was Passavant's France. The earliest engraving seems to have been made catalogue raisonne of 1860 in which the painting was in in the late-sixteenth century. It is very rare.35 listed as still in the Camuccini collection. He placed it first Many subsequent ones were French, the first being that by among the copies which he knew, judging it as 'certainement Jean Couvay (Fig.25). It is not certain that it was made un ouvragede l'ecoledu maitre', delicate in execution, cold in from the Alnwick painting. Some of the differences - the colour and with very disagreeable retouchings.39 The fact expression of the child, the shape of the knot in the curtain, that Passavant was ignorant of the painting's change of the distinctiveness of the plaits in the Virgin's hair and of ownership suggests that he was dependent upon reports a path in the landscape - can easily be explained by crude made by others for his account of its condition. In his drawing or careless study of subordinate areas. On the edition of 1858 he had not mentioned the painting at all other hand, the larger format showing the whole arch of and he could hardly have inspected it between 1858 and the window, while a natural enough alteration, does fea- 1860 without realising that it belonged to the Duke of ture in copies which may well have been available to the Northumberland. engraver. One other early engraving is parasitic upon The Duke himself died in 1865, just before the last Couvay and at least two others are, in turn, parasitic essential item of the new interiors he created for Alnwick upon this.36 One further, negative, piece of evidence which Castle, the damasks made to Montiroli's designs by the may be adduced in this connexion is that Mariette, listing Milanese firm of Osnago, arrived.40 The Raphael would the engravings of the composition, made no note as to the by then have been ready to hang: Montiroli's full-size original painting's whereabouts, as he did in other cases drawing for its boxwood frame, which was to be carved in when it was known to him.37 the Duke's school of woodcarvers, had been sent before The paintings's critical fortune subsequent to its arrival the end of 1862 (Fig.27).41 The Guideto the Castle published in England is more easily traced. In 1854, the great German in the year of the Duke's death records that the painting scholar Gustav Waagen, compiling his Galleriesand Cabinets was hung, together with other small devotional works from of Art in Great Britain as a 'supplemental volume' to his the Camuccini collection, in the Duchess's private sitting three-volume Treasuresof Art in GreatBritain, visited Alnwick room- 'not shown to general visitors', but certainly avail- Castle where work had begun on opulent -style able to any scholar who requested permission to study interiors under the direction of the Italian architect, Gio- it.42 vanni Montiroli. He wrote about the paintings as if they Eugene Miintz in his monograph of 1881 trusted Pas- were already there, for he had studied them in Rome and savant and declared that the composition was known only the Duke had let him view them again in Northumberland in old copies.43 Crowe and Cavalcaselle in their two- House where they were in store. Waagen was not in awe volume book on Raphael of the following year believed of Camuccini's attributions: he was not convinced that that the best surviving version was that belonging to Count the beautiful pair of shutters painted with Sts Magdalen Luigi Spada in Lucca (see Appendix). Cavalcaselle had and Catherine in a landscape was by Raphael, as Camuccini certainly studied both this painting and that at Alnwick believed, suggesting instead an attribution to Lo Spagna. but his notes on the latter seem to have been confused with

34'in una lettera,quale a Perugiaquasi aforza tolseil Card.Borgia, scriveva, "avere da 74 for Alnwick, p.466 for Lo Spagna and Raphael. The shutters are likely to be terminareun quadroper DonnaMaddalena Degli Oddi,donna potente che poteva ad esso by Perugino. A misprint in Waagen is responsible for the much-repeated error procurarede'lavori"'. BARBERI, MS cited at note 17 above, fol.27v. The etched that the Camuccini collection was acquired in 1856. facsimile dated 1827 is included in LONGHENA,op.cit. at note 21 above, opposite 39J.D. PASSAVANT: Raphael d'Urbin et son pere , Paris [1860], II, p.526. In his letter Raphael referred to a Madonna for 'la Prefetessa',i.e. pp.62-64. Giovanna Feltria della Rovere, not Maddalena degli Oddi. 40Alnwick Castle Archives, Box 798, Montiroli correspondence 1855-67. The 35RaphaelInvenit: Stampe da Rajfaellonelle collezionidell' institutonazionale per la fabric was ordered on 17th August 1864. A bill for it is dated 14th February grafica,Rome [1985], p. 184,III, i. 1865. It is still in place at Alnwick Castle. The maker was Ambrogio Osnago of 36 The most notable, but not the only, copy of which this is true is that in the Via S. Radegonda. This file of correspondence also includes a touching letter Museo Tosio-Martinengo, Brescia- see the Appendix, below. Couvay's engrav- from Elisa Chiaiso, Montiroli's widow, of 1st March 1893 mentioning the ing is likely to date from 1670. That signed '7. BoulangerSculp .. . E. PoillyEx.' is fourth Duke's death and the damasks. in reverse and probably based on Couvay but with variations in the bunch of 41 Montiroli charged f6 for the full size drawing (accounts presented 28th June flowersin the Virgin's left (previouslyher right) hand. This in turn was repeated 1865 in Montiroli correspondence cited above). He refers in a letter of 22nd in a print by E. Heinzelmann but with a bird's eye view of a convent in place of December 1862 to the frame for the 'Raphael' shutters which should be in 'busso the landscape. Alvise Povelato's engraving dated 1780 must be derived from comee stattofatto per l'altracornice della Madonna dei Garofali'. The earliest reference Jean Boulanger's, for it repeats the form of the tower and idiosyncrasiesof this I have found to frame designs by Montiroli is 1861. The Tuscan carver Bulletti drapery style, but it is reversed back to the original direction. For the engraving who had superintended the Alnwick woodcarving studio (established in 1855 byJ. Morin often said to be of the Madonnadei Garofanisee note 7 above. Among above the hunting stables and employing 24 men in the late 1850s) returned to other prints of the composition, that by A.F. Semmler was probably taken from Italy in 1860; the frames are largely the work of John Brown his chief assistant, Faruggia (Fig.22). I am grateful to Nicholas Turner for his help in examining later employed as curator of the paintings at Alnwick. prints after Raphael in the Department of Prints and Drawings of the British 42C.H. HARTSHORNE (A Guideto AlnwickCastle, London and Alnwick [1865], Museum, especially those in the corpus assembled to illustrate Ruland's The pp.69-70) mentions that the Giotto, now regarded as by Giovanni da Rimini, ['orks of Raphael Santi da Urbino as representedin the Raphael Collection in the Royal was in the same room, along with a small 'Correggio' and 'Salviati', but his list Library at [Vindsor Castle formed by His Royal Highness the Prince Consort 1853-1861 is not complete. In fact, another small painting at Alnwick is framed as a and completedby Her Majesty Queen Victoria (1876). pendant to the Raphael - a fine, sixteenth-century version on panel of Michel- 37'Tables des Ocuvres de Raphael Sanctio d'Urbin gravees par les maistres angelo's Silenzio, with the name Sebastiano del Piombo carved on the frame was not of modernes . . .', reproduced in facsimile in P.-J. MARIETTE: Les Grands Peintres, I (more recently it has been attributed to Venusti). This painting part (Ecoles d'Italie), Paris [1969], p.139, nos.38 and 39. The previous entry, for the the Camuccini collection and was perhaps acquired by the Duke soon after he Holy Family with a rose, is annotated as after a painting in the 'Cabinet de M. Le bought the fragments of Sebastiano's Visitationfrom the Rev. Davenport Bromley Duc d'Orleans'; this annotation is erroneously connected with the Madonna dei in 1853. garofani in the exh.cat. cited at note 28 above, p. 199, no.268. 43E. MuNTZ: Raphael, sa vie, son ouvre et son temps, London [1882], p.200. 38G. WAAGEN: Galleries and Cabinets of Art in Great Britain, London [1857], pp.465- 80 RAPHAEL S 'MADONNA DEI GAROFANI' Appendix

Old copies of the 'Madonna dei garofani'

This list (which is arranged alphabetically by place) does not claim to be exhaustive, but it is more complete than any pre- viously published. Many items I have only seen as photographs (most of those in the Witt library and in the dossier of the Department of Paintings in the Louvre). In some cases I have not even seen photographs, and some paintings may well be listed twice. I have not included drawn copies (of which a careful and fine example in black chalk is in the Musee de Lyon) nor the versionson a large scale with numerousvariations by Sassoferrato,of which one example is in the Detroit Institute of Art, and another was in the Haeglin Collection in Basle (during the 1920s in private collection in Paris and perhaps identical with lot 5 at Versailles, Palais des Congres, 19th Nov- ember 1979). I have made much use of the lists in PASSAVANT cited at note 39 above, s. DE RICCI:Catalogue des Peintures,Musee du Louvre, Paris [1913], no.1513B, and elsewhere. My im- pression after compiling this is that a dozen or more good copies, some of them on copper, were probably made from the original in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth century before its export from Italy.

27. Frame for the Madonnadeigarofani. Boxwood with some matt gilding, Altena, ''homee collection 1930s (as Sassoferrato); , Jaffe collection designed by Giovanni Montiroli, probably carved byJohn Brown, c. 1861. (sold Lepke, October 1912); Bilbao, Urquijo collection (exhibited Seville 1930); 45.7 by 40.3 cm. (outside measurements). (Alnwick Castle, Northumberland). Brescia, Museo 'l'osio-Martinengo, inv. 128 (an early copy and of high quality, those on the former.44 In case wrote that the the composition somewhat extended at the top; see Raphaelloe Brescia: echi e any they presenze, cxh.cat., Brescia [1986], p.38); Buenos Aires, Museo Nacional de Alnwick version was 'only a little inferior' to that in Lucca, Bellas Artes; Chalons-sur-Marne, Mus6e, inv.899-11-235; Craches, Notre- and 'probably by a Florentine assistant of Raphael'. They Dame de La Creche (in reverse, with different colours, perhaps from a print); added the reflection that when a Dijon, Mus6e des Beaux-Arts (copper, traditionally attributed to Garofalo); Raphael may already, Falkirk, Forbes Collection, Callendar House, sold 1963; Florence, Dr Adolf young painter in Florence and Perugia, have 'thought it Gottschewski (1920s), published in A. ROSENBERG: Raffael, Klassiker der Kunst, pardonable to stock his painting-room with school-pieces 4th ed. with additional notes by G. GRONAU, Stuttgart [1909], p.201; Geneva, which, if himself and issued with the of Duval collection see Paris; London, Samuel collection sold Christie's, 25th designed by stamp March 1927, lot 25; Loreto, Casa Santa, 'Ireasury; Lucca, Count Francesco his workshop, were not always marked with the true impress Spada (by 1840s, still in that collection when reproduced in ROSENBERG, loc.cit. of his hand', proposing that the design for the Madonna dei above, under Florence; said to have been with the French Gallery, New York was an of such a and by 1938 in South America; Liitzschena (near Leipzig), Speck-Sternburg garofani 'early specimen' practice.45 collection (by 1840s - previously Setta collection, Pisa and Fries collection, Raphael's drawings were certainly used early in his career Vienna); Lulworth, Dorset, Weld collection (formerly Blundell collection, by other artists, but these seem to have been independent probably purchased late-eighteenth century); Macerata, Pinacoteca; Milan, artists rather than subordinate ones and the authors were Foresti sale, 1913; New York, Mrs Drury Cooper (purchased through Mortimer Brandt for 60,000 dollars at the American Art Association auction at Anderson - surely projecting back to Florence in 1507-08 the circum- Galleries on 20th April 1939 previously in the collection of Felix Lachovski in stances of Raphael's later years in Rome. This may have Paris who purchased it from Marie Orloff, a Russian emigre in 1922; in this to Berenson the attribution of the to version the dress is pink; it was said to have been certified by both Venturi and suggested painting Fischel); New York, PJ. Higgs Gallery, 1928; New York, Christie's 11th Giulio Romano, a proposal published in 1897.46 It seems January 1989, lot 29a (as after Leonardo); New Zealand, Private collection; to have been soon after this that the painting was removed Nice, Private collection (published in Combat [18th February 1957]); Paris, to a corridor. Thus the of some of Lachovski collection (see New York, Mrs Drury Cooper above); Paris, Private judgments scholars, collection (copper); Paris, sale of collection of Francois Duval of Geneva, 12th whom had not seen the painting, contributed to make it May 1846 (see CONSTANTIN,op.cit. at note 22 above for a reference to this version); less likely that their successors would see it. The name of Paris, Musee du Louvre, R.F. 341 (acquired 1882, see s. BEGUIN: Les Peinturesde au Paris Lise Graf however, remained carved on the frame. Raphael Louvre, [1984], p.76); Paris, Gallery, 1981; Paris, Raphael, special sale of version in the collection of the industrialist Lughen-Leroy, Drouot, NationalGallery, London 25th March 1909 (puffed by L. KLOTZ in L'Eclair [17th, 20th, 24th and 30th Dec- ember 1908]; the painting was reputedly bought by M. de Roussainville in 1686 with its authenticity certified by Largilliere); Perugia, Borbone-Sorbello collec- 44Cavalcasell's annotated drawingsof the compositionand detailsof the Madonna tion (from the 1850s to at least the 1950s, copper); Rome, Galleria Nazionale, deigarofani are in the Biblioteca Marciana, Venice, cod. It. IV. 2033 (12274), Palazzo Barberini; Rome, Palazzo Albani, l'orlonia collection; Stockholm, no.20. Photographs of them were kindly transmitted to me by Donata Levi. Bystroem collection, 1850s; Stockholm, Norberg collection (a canvas, in the Cavalcaselle noted the 'conservazioneperfetta'. From the context this must be the Bukowskisale, Stockholm, 9th- 12th November 1966, lot 173;perhaps previously Alnwick painting but the drawing records areas of paint loss which correspond Bystroem collection); Urbino, Casa Giovannini, c.1900; Urbino, Budassi col- with those revealed in old photographs of the version in Lucca. He was puzzled lection 1958 (perhaps previously Casa Giovannini); Wiirzburg, Froelich col- by the support ('parequercia ... olivo'), found much of the painting 'bello'but a lection, 1840s; Wiirzburg, Martin V. Wagner Museum (perhaps previously few details such as the Virgin's ear and hands defective. Froelich collection); Zagreb, Strossmayer Gallery, inv.386 (published by 45J.A. CRO)WE and G.B. CAVALCASELLE: Raphael, his life and works, I, London G. GAMULIN: 'Una copia della Madonna del garofano', Commentari,IX, fasc. 3 [1882], pp.343-44. ''his view was shared by o. FISCHEL:Raphael, London [1948], [July-Sept. 1958], pp.160-61); Zurich, private collection (published by I, p. 127. G. GRONAU, W. SUIDA, G. FIOCCO: 'Interessante Probleme II: Nochmals zur 4"B. BERENSON: The CentralItalian Paintersof the Renaissance,London and New "Madonna mit der Nelke'", Belvedere,XII [1934-35], p.105, with the claim York [1897], p. 146. 'lhe attribution is retained in the second impressionof 1899 that this painting is intermediate between Leonardo's Benois Madonnaand but was later dropped. Raphael's painting). 81