Sofonisba Anguissola's Bernardino Campi Painting

SOFONISBA ANGUISSOLA’S BERNARDINO CAMPI PAINTING SOFONISBA

ANGUISSOLA AND THE IDEAL CORTEGIANA

Claire E. Sandberg

Submitted to the

Faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences

of American University

in Partial Fulfillment of

the Requirements for the Degree of

Master of Arts

Art History

Chair:

Dr. Kim Butler Wingfield, Ph.D.

Dr. Andrea Pearson, Ph.D.

Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences

April 29, 2020 Date

2020

American University

Washington, D.C. 20016

Claire E. Sandberg

2020

SOFONISBA ANGUISSOLA’S BERNARDINO CAMPI PAINTING SOFONISBA

ANGUISSOLA AND THE IDEAL CORTEGIANA

Claire E. Sandberg

ABSTRACT

Italian Renaissance artist Sofonisba Anguissola is well-known for the array of self- portraits she painted during her early career. Through her self-portraits created between 1548 and

1559, Sofonisba constructed her identity as a virtuous young noblewoman and skilled artist. One key to Sofonisba’s portraiture was her adaptation of the ideas prescribed by humanist Baldassar

Castiglione in his famous text The Courtier in order to depict herself as the ideal female courtier.

Sofonisba’s courtly self-fashioning reached its pinnacle with her 1559 self-portrait Bernardino

Campi Painting Sofonisba Anguissola, which was among the last works Sofonisba completed before she was invited to join the Spanish court of Philip II as a lady-in-waiting-cum-painter.

This thesis examines the means by which Sofonisba strategically shaped her identity for a court position in her 1559 portrait. I argue she utilized accepted principles for 16th century noble portraiture and costuming, the secondary figure of her former painting teacher, and courtly wit as described by Castiglione, to portray herself as the ideal noblewoman and to firmly secure her position as the first professional female “noble artist” at court.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank all the people who made this thesis possible.

To my mother, Karon, who raised me with a love for art, and my father, Joel, and brother,

Derek, who support everything I do.

To my best friends, Rebecca and Justin, for sending me love and support from Chicago throughout this entire process.

To my cohort for listening to my frustrations and celebrating my triumphs.

To Dr. Kim Butler Wingfield for walking this journey with me and being an outstanding mentor. To Dr. Andrea Pearson, Dr. Joanne Allen, and Dr. Jordan Amirkhani for providing additional guidance and support.

To the College of Arts and Sciences for providing me with funding to travel to Madrid to see Sofonisba’s work in person.

To Dr. Mary Garrard, for paving the way and inspiring me to pursue what I love.

And of course, thank you to Sofonisba Anguissola for allowing me to tell her story and inspiring me to be brave.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ...... ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... iii

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ...... v

INTRODUCTION ...... 1

CHAPTER 1 THE IDEAL CORTEGIANA AND THE CREATION OF THE NOBLE ARTIST ...... 7

Amilcare Anguissola and Humanist Education ...... 9 The Noble Artist ...... 12 Castiglione’s Book of the Courtier ...... 21 The Self-Fashioning of the Cortegiana ...... 27 Conclusion ...... 36

CHAPTER 2 BERNARDINO CAMPI PAINTING SOFONISBA ANGUISSOLA AND THE CORTEGIANA’S WIT...... 38

The Innovative Double Portrait ...... 38 Noble Female Portraiture ...... 40 The Master and the Student ...... 47 The Cortegiana’s Wit ...... 49 The Restoration ...... 54 Timing and Purpose ...... 56 Conclusion ...... 61

CONCLUSION THE CORTEGIANA AT COURT ...... 63

ILLUSTRATIONS ...... 69

BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 70

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Illustration

Fig. 1: Sofonisba Anguissola, Bernardino Campi Painting Sofonisba Anguissola. 1559. Oil on canvas. Pinacoteca Nazionale, Siena...... 69

Fig. 2: Parmigianino, Self-Portrait in a Convex Mirror, 1523-24. Oil on convex panel. Kunsthistorische Museum, Vienna...... 69

Fig. 3: Sofonisba Anguissola, Self-Portrait. 1554. Oil on panel. Kunsthistorische Museum, Vienna...... 69

Fig. 4: Sofonisba Anguissola, Old Woman Studying the Alphabet with a Laughing Girl. 1550s. Chalk sketch. Uffizi Gallery, Florence...... 69

Fig. 5: Sofonisba Anguissola, Asdrubale Bitten by a Crayfish. 1554. Chalk sketch. Museo Nazionale di Capodimonte, Naples...... 69

Fig. 6: Sofonisba Anguissola, Self-Portriat. 1548. Chalk sketch. Uffizi Gallery, Florence...... 69

Fig. 7: Sofonisba Anguissola, Self-Portrait at the Easel. 1556. Oil on canvas. Lancut Castle, Poland...... 69

Fig. 8: Sofonisba Anguissola, The Chess Game. 1555. Oil on canvas. National Museum of Poznan, Poland...... 69

Fig. 9: Titian, Portrait of a Lady (La Bella). 1536-38. Oil on canvas. Pitti Palace, Florence. .... 69

Fig. 10: Bronzino, Portrait of Eleanor of Toledo and her Son Giovanni. 1545. Oil on canvas. Uffizi Gallery, Florence...... 69

Fig. 11: Bernardino Campi, Portrait of a Lady (Possibly Ippolita Gonzaga). 1553-54. Oil on canvas. Sotheby’s...... 69

Fig. 12: Sofonisba Anguissola, Self-Portrait. 1564. Oil on canvas. Chantilly, Musée Conde. ... 69

Fig. 13: Sofonisba Anguissola, Self-Portrait. 1610. Oil on canvas. Gottfired Keller Collection, Bern, Switzerland...... 69

INTRODUCTION

Artists’ self-portraits became increasingly popular during the Renaissance as artists began using portraits of themselves to display their talent, wealth, or intellect. These fascinating displays of self-fashioning garnered praise from patrons and artists alike. This attention, among contemporaneous and modern-day viewers, increased ten-fold for women artists, such as the

Cremonese painter Sofonisba Anguissola. A letter by Renaissance writer Annibale Caro to

Sofonisba’s father asserted that Caro took great pleasure in self-portraits by women artists because he could exhibit them as “two marvels;” one being the painting itself, the other the beautiful painter depicted.1 In this thesis, the self-portraits of Sofonisba Anguissola are considered through the lens of how she crafted her identity for public display. In her early portraits, Sofonisba presented herself as a virtuous, educated noblewoman by strategically using the prescribed expectations for noblewomen described by humanists. This self-fashioning helped

Sofonisba gain patrons and success during her early career and this thesis concludes that her fashioning ultimately helped her gain a place at the Spanish royal court as a lady-in-waiting.

One of the first professional women artists in the period, Sofonisba Anguissola came from a background different from many of her contemporaries and very different from the lives of the women artists who directly followed her. While most artists during this period came from an artisan background, Sofonisba came from nobility. Sofonisba Anguissola was the first child born to Amilcare Anguissola and his wife Bianca Ponzone in Cremona, Italy around 1532.2

1 Annibale Caro. “Letter from Annibale Caro to Amilcare Anguissola,” from Delle lettere famigliari, translated in Ilya Perlingieri, Sofonisba Anguissola: The First Great Woman Artist of the Renaissance. (New York: Rizzoli, 1992.): 105.

2 Maria Kusche, “Sofonisba Anguissola: Her Life and Work,” in Sofonisba Anguissola: Renaissance Woman. Ed. by Sylvia Ferino-Pagden and Maria Kusche. (Washington, D.C.: National Museum of Women in the Arts, 1995): 32. There has been speculation about Sofonisba’s exact birth year with scholars using dates between 1532 and 1535. I recognize the 1532 date which aligns with the apparent ages of Sofonisba in her various self-portraits as well as 1

Education, as discussed in this thesis, was an invaluable part of any young noble’s upbringing and Amilcare ensured his children received a diverse learning in the humanities and fine arts.

Following her formal art education with Bernardino Campi, Sofonisba continued to develop her talents and gained notoriety throughout Italy and Europe. This notoriety, facilitated by her self- fashioning in her portraiture, allowed Sofonisba the opportunity to gain a place at the Spanish royal court in Madrid in 1559.

This thesis builds upon the work of Sofonisba Anguissola scholars such as Fredrika H.

Jacobs, Cecilia Gamberini, and Mary Garrard, who in various respects considered her life and career in terms of her exceptional education or her unique position as a noblewoman. Jacobs investigated the gendered language used by early modern writers in order to understand the methods in which women artists were placed at a distinct disadvantage in the art world of the

16th century due to negative perceptions of their inherent femininity.3 She noted that the only artist who managed to escape this gendered criticism was Sofonisba Anguissola.4 The painter was frequently discussed using the positive terminology applied to male artists, such as her ability to give life to her painted figures.5 This may have been due in part to Sofonisba’s noble societal status. Jacobs considered how noblewomen during the Renaissance period were born with a distinct privilege not offered to other women. Quoting from Torquato Tasso’s 1582 text,

Discorso della virtù feminile e donnesca, Jacobs noted that “women ‘born of imperial and heroic

supports the possibility of her husband, Orazio Lomellino, commemorating her 100th birthday with an inscription on her tomb in 1632.

3 Fredrika H. Jacobs, Defining the Renaissance Virtuosa: Women Artists and the Language of Art History and Criticism. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997).

4 Jacobs 1997, 164.

5 Also see Fredricka H. Jacobs, “Women’s Capacity to Create: The Unusual Case of Sofonisba Anguissola”, Renaissance Quarterly, Vol. 47, No. 1 (Spring 1994): 74-101, for further discussions of how Sofonisba stood out due to her ability to “breathe life” into her portraits. 2

blood’…possess the masculine virtue of their glorious ancestors…These exceptional women are men by virtue of their birth.”6 For Jacobs, Sofonisba’s existence in the grey area between masculine and feminine due to her nobility allowed her to fully embody the idea of the virtuosa.

As Jacobs concluded, “a true virtuosa was endowed with masculine abilities.”7 Jacobs’s monograph is one of the few texts that considered Sofonisba’s success as an artist in terms of her nobility. This thesis builds upon Jacobs’s work by analyzing Anguissola’s strategic fashioning of her identity as a noble in her self-portraits, and its contextualizing in popular literature and writings from the Renaissance period.

Cecilia Gamberini offered another valuable assessment of Sofonisba’s nobility.8

Crucially, she considered the painter’s nobility vital for obtaining a position at a royal court and thereby becoming the ideal cortegiana. Gamberini traced the noble connections of the

Anguissola family and attributed their status to the appointment of Sofonisba to the court of

Philip II in Spain in 1559.9 Gamberini’s essay provide an important historical background for

Sofonisba’s nobility; this thesis further considers the value of Sofonisba’s artistic career in addition to her aristocratic connections in the lead up to and during her time in Spain.

These previous scholars have predominantly addressed Sofonisba’s life in two distinct periods: her early artistic education and pre-Spanish career and her Spanish and post-Spain career. This thesis aims to address the movement between these two periods, approximately between the years of 1555 and 1559. In so doing, it works to connect the discussions of

6 Jacobs 1997, 11.

7 Ibid, 159.

8 Cecilia Gamberini, “Sofonisba Anguissola at the Court of Philip II” in Women Artists in Early Modern Italy. Edited by Sheila Barker. (London: Harvey Miller Publishers, an imprint of Brepol Publishers, 2016.): 29-38.

9 Gamberini, 30-31. 3

humanism and her early education with an analysis of Sofonisba’s nobility and eventual placement at the Spanish court in her 1559 painting, Bernardino Campi Painting Sofonisba

Anguissola (fig.1).

The double portrait, Bernardino Campi Painting Sofonisba Anguissola is an oil painting on canvas and measures 111 x 110 cm. It depicts two figures, one male and one female, against a dark background. The bearded male is identified as an artist with a paintbrush and maulstick in hand and is in the midst of completing a portrait of the young woman. The man turns his head to glance out of the frame towards the viewer while the painted woman looks out from her position on the canvas within the painting. The woman is dressed in a rich red gown with delicate gold detailing and green gems appropriate for a woman of nobility. Her left hand is positioned at her hip with a pair of gloves clasped in her fingers. The man is dressed in a simple black smock with a white collar, which was the conventional attire for an artist in the 16th century.

Due to the unusual composition of this painting and the fact that little is known about its genesis, Bernardino Campi Painting Sofonisba Anguissola has been the topic of considerable scholarship.10 Most famously, Mary Garrard argued that the painting illustrated the complexity of women artists’ roles as both creators and subjects of art during the Renaissance.11 She asserted that Sofonisba’s double portrait collapsed the two roles to present Sofonisba as both subject and creator simultaneously.12 Garrard’s article considered the traditional idea of women in paintings

10 Mary D. Garrard “Here’s Looking at Me: Sofonisba Anguissola and the Problem of the Woman Artist.” Renaissance Quarterly 47, no. 3 (1994): 556-622; Anna Maria Guiducci et al. “Il ritratto di Bernardino Campi che ritrae Sofonisba Anguissola al restauro alla ricostruzione della genesi,” Poster presentation, XI Congresso Nazionale IGIIC, Lo Stato dell’Arte, Accademia dell Belle Arti, Bologna. October 10-12, 2013; Meghan Musloff. “Sofonisba Anguissola’s Double Portrait,” (MA Thesis, Michigan State University, 2003; Dena Woodall. “Sharing Space: Double Portraiture in Renaissance Italy,” (PhD Dissertation, Case Western Reserve University, 2008).

11 Garrard, 556-622.

12 Ibid, 556. 4

as the creation of male artists and the connected idea that women artists, like Sofonisba, were a creation of their male teachers.13 Garrard argued that Sofonisba purposely acknowledged and challenged that idea by making herself the focal point of the painting rather than Campi, and by insinuating that Campi was an inferior painter.14 While Campi created the image of her in the painting, it is Sofonisba who created the whole image and, in that way, possessed the highest agency and authority in the painting.15 This text is essential to the study of this painting and it would be remiss not to acknowledge its importance. The following analysis affirms Garrard’s proposals concerning Sofonisba’s motivations for including Campi in the painting, with a focus on themes of nobility, courtly self-fashioning, and wit as conceptual framing for the innovative work.

The first chapter of this thesis examines Sofonisba Anguissola’s early self-portraits and associates the fashioning of her identity with Baldassar Castiglione’s The Courtier. The chapter relates quotes from Castiglione’s text to Sofonisba’s strategic decisions. These include her choice of clothing, her posture, and her signature which all emphasize Castiglione’s requirement for women to maintain modesty and chastity. Castiglione’s text served as a guidebook for how courtiers were expected to behave at court; in adopting Castiglione’s requirements, Sofonisba fashioned a noble persona. This persona was crafted carefully and led to the eventual creation of her 1559 double portrait, Bernardino Campi Painting Sofonisba Anguissola.

In the second chapter, a close analysis of the double portrait reveals the ways in which

Sofonisba continued her use of Castiglione’s model for the cortegiana. The double portrait is

13 Garrard, 560. Garrard discussed the difference in the quality of the painting of Campi versus the quality of the portrait depicted as by Campi’s hand and argues that Sofonisba purposefully painted the portrait of herself at a lower quality to show Campi as the inferior artist.

14 Ibid, 562-64.

15 Ibid, 565. 5

considered to relate conceptually to Sofonisba’s earlier self-portraits while reflecting certain departures related to her focus on gaining a position at court. An analysis of the costuming and posture connects the painting to established principles for portraits of noblewomen while noting the importance of the second figure, her painting teacher, Bernardino Campi, in asserting her own identity. The chapter analyzes Sofonisba’s use of courtly wit, as described by Castiglione, to playfully critique Campi’s skill and reputation as her “creator.” It also addresses changes made in the composition of the painting which were revealed in recent cleanings and restorations and raises questions about the timing and ultimate purpose for the painting.

The paper concludes with a brief consideration of Sofonisba’s employment of self- fashioning to present an aspirational persona, reflecting the position she hoped to occupy in

Spain. The conclusion illustrates the manner in which Sofonisba’s courtly ideals displayed in the painting manifested themselves at the court of Philip II. In outlining the ways Sofonisba’s painting became reality, this thesis shows the manner in which Sofonisba’s self-awareness allowed her to carefully craft a public persona and thereby influence the way people perceived her. The deliberate shaping of identity extended beyond the canvas into Sofonisba’s life and contributed to her international success.

CHAPTER 1

THE IDEAL CORTEGIANA AND THE CREATION

OF THE NOBLE ARTIST

The 16th century saw a surge in the production of conduct literature dedicated to defining and advancing societal ideals, particularly for members of the noble class. Among such writings were Baldassar Castiglione’s The Courtier (1528), Ludovico Dolce’s Della institution delle donne (1545), and Giovanni della Casa’s Il Galateo (1558). These texts described the manner in which the elite were expected to dress and act, what type of education they should receive, what pastimes they should have, and what books they should read. The guidance provided by these writings was especially important for the education of aspirational courtiers. While most of this literature concerned young men, books (or sections thereof) that were dedicated to the formation of the female courtier, or cortegiana, were also produced. These texts were vital for the social education of young noble women, such as the Italian artist Sofonisba Anguissola and her younger sisters. They offered guidance about behaviors and expectations to emulate. These writings were foundational for the ways in which Sofonisba depicted her siblings and herself in her many early portraits. With evidence from Castiglione’s texts, this chapter demonstrates ways in which Sofonisba conceptualized the ideal female courtier in her early portraits to elevate both her social rank and the art of painting. In so doing, it builds upon prior scholarship concerning the relevance of nobility, and education, to her artistic identity.

In the second half of the 1550s, Sofonisba’s attention shifted to elevating her family through receiving an invitation to join a notable European court. Gaining a place at court was one of the few approaches individuals and their families could take to dramatically elevate their status in society. Although the Anguissolas descended from a long line of nobility, the family

was relatively impecunious and would have benefitted from the support and prestige that came with a court position.16 Following the advice of Castiglione and other humanists, Sofonisba’s father insured his children received a rich humanist education. This instruction would allow them to fit in with court society and embody the ideals established by Castiglione: learned in letters and humanities, conversant in Latin and Greek, versed in poets, orators and historians, and skilled in writing.17 Furthermore, in keeping with Castiglione’s recommendation that the courtier’s education include “knowledge of painting…since it is decorous and useful and was praised in those times when men were greater worth than now,”18 Amilcare Anguissola provided his daughters with an artistic education as well. With the relentless assistance of her ambitious father, Sofonisba Anguissola built upon earlier philosophical and artistic discussions of the superiority and nobility of painting. She worked to create a framework for the ideal noble artist, which would become an increasingly popular concept in the seventeenth century. Bringing together her education, the courtly expectations illustrated in Castiglione’s text, her extensive art education, and following the example of male court artists such as Mantegna, Leonardo da Vinci, and Raphael, Sofonisba Anguissola crafted an unprecedented artistic persona, that of the noble female artist.

16 Annibale Anguissola, Anguissola’s grandfather, was the captain of the bishopric of Cremona, Lord of Soncino, and was granted the title of patriziato. Amilcare, Anguissola’s father, was Annibale’s illegitimate son and Annibale legitimized him later in life to allow him to inherit his father’s noble title. Kusche, 32. Also see Gamberini, 30.

17 Baldassar Castiglione. The Book of the Courtier, ed. by Daniel Javitch. (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2002): 52.

18 Ibid, 60. 8

Amilcare Anguissola and Humanist Education

Sofonisba’s access to an education in the humanities and fine arts, facilitated by her father, prepared her for future success as a courtier and a painter. The dawn of the sixteenth century witnessed many families beginning to understand the importance of providing their children, including their daughters, with a robust education. This saw a push to ensure that women received a solid humanist training. The strongest supporters of such practices were in the smaller northern Italian courts, which heavily influenced the Anguissola family’s social circles in

Cremona and beyond. Due to their education in not only literature and art, but mathematics and astronomy, Northern Italian noblewomen emerged from their education as women less tightly tethered to their traditional roles as wives and mothers.19 The women in these courts were not only well-educated, but influential and powerful figures in society. One such woman was

Caterina Sforza, the illegitimate daughter of Galeazzo Maria Sforza. Raised in the court of

Milan, she went on to become the Countess of Forlí and Imola. Brave and well-educated, she infamously stopped a coup against her husband in Forlí and later held the citadel in Forlí against her enemies while her six children were held hostage.20 Other women who emerged from these courts were Isabella d’Este, well-known for her patronage of the arts, and her daughter,

Elisabetta Gonzaga, who was featured in Castiglione’s text.

These examples may have offered an important model for Sofonisba Anguissola and her five younger sisters to emulate. Growing up in Cremona outside Milan, the sisters were given an education that appears to have closely followed the prescriptions set by Castiglione in The

19 Norma Stuart. "Sofonisba Anguissola and Catharina De Hemessen: Two Exemplary Women Artists of the Renaissance." (PhD Dissertation, California State University, Long Beach, 2008): 12.

20 Joan Kelly-Gadol, “Did Women Have a Renaissance?” in The Book of the Courtier, ed. by Daniel Javitch. (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2002): 341.

Courtier. They were well-read in classic literature and familiar with Latin and perhaps Greek.21

Amilcare Anguissola’s stress on a proper schooling for his children was perhaps due to the fact that he did not receive a traditional noble education due to his illegitimate status.22 He and his wife ensured their children received a well-rounded humanist background, drawing on the example of Castiglione and other scholars such as Vittorino da Feltre and Marco Girolamo

Vida.23 Humanists during the first half of the sixteenth century stressed the importance of a proper education for young women. Cremonese humanist and poet Marco Girolamo Vida began instructing a gifted young woman, Partenia Gallerati, around the time of Sofonisba’s birth.24 In their shared intellectual circle in Cremona, Vida and Amilcare Anguissola may have discussed education and the tutoring of young women as written about in Vida’s Cremonensium Ortotiones

III adversus Papienses in controversia Principatus.25 Vida’s pedagogical opinions for young women would therefore have been well known in the Anguissola household; the sisters may have been acquainted with Vida himself. Vida’s ideas would about education would have complemented the young women’s study of Castiglione’s text as well. As the daughter of one of the most important families in Cremona, their mother Bianca Ponzone may have been properly

21 Sofonisba was familiar with Latin and conducted many of her correspondences in Latin, such as a letter sent to Philip II in 1583. Letter from Sofonisba Anguissola to Phillip II of Spain. 1583. EST. LEG. 1417.97. Archivo General de Simancas, Madrid, Spain.

22 Kusche, 32.

23 Vida J. Hull, “The Single Serpent: Family Pride and Female Education in a Portrait by Lucia Anguissola, a Woman Artist of the Renaissance.” Southeastern College Art Conference Review 16, no. 1 (2011): 16. Also see Kusche, 27.

24 Anguissola and Partenia Gallerati were often discussed in connection with one another as sources of great pride for Cremona, cited as “two of the most talented maidens of our city.” Joanne Woods-Marsden, Renaissance Self- Portraiture: The Visual Construction of Identity and the Social Status of the Artist. (New Haven: Yale University Press. 1998): 190.

25 Kusche, 27.

instructed in the humanities as well. She is remembered as not only a great beauty, but also as a strong and opinionated woman.26 Her outlook was likely as important as Amilcare’s and she was undoubtedly a part of the decision to provide their daughters with a solid and diverse education which included a rigorous fine arts training.27

A humanist education was vital for the success and creation of the ideal cortegiana, but

Amilcare Anguissola encouraged his daughters to receive training in the fine arts as well. In his text The Courtier, Baldassar Castiglione recommended cortegiane be knowledgeable about art and acquire some skills in drawing or painting as a hobby. Yet, the art education of the

Anguissola daughters went far beyond art as a pastime. Amilcare requested that the Cremonese artist, Bernardino Campi, instruct his eldest daughters, Sofonisba and Elena, in drawing and painting.28 After returning to Cremona following years training in Mantua and Venice, Campi was widely renowned and had been commissioned to paint several frescos at San Sigismondo, the church of which Amilcare Anguissola was superintendent.29 Recognizing the skill and renown of the local artist, Amilcare sent his daughters to Campi in 1545. The sisters resided in

Campi’s home as paying guests where he instructed them under the supervision of his wife,

Anna. As women at the time were not traditionally allowed in the artist’s formal studio, the artist’s home became their personal studio.

26 Ibid, 33.

27 Ibid, 33. While Amilcare’s friend Vida valued educated women, he berated Amilcare in a long letter for valuing Bianca’s opinion a bit too much as she had just as much control over the household as her husband did.

28 After returning to Cremona following years training in Mantua and Venice, Campi was widely renowned and had been commissioned to paint several frescos at San Sigismondo, the church of which Amilcare Anguissola was superintendent. Perlingieri, 42.

29 Ibid, 42.

The Noble Artist

Amilcare’s decision to encourage his daughters to pursue painting was grounded in

Renaissance debates about the nobility of the artist and the elevation of painting. The Anguissola family had been one of the most celebrated families in Northern Italy since the twelfth century and traced their lineage back to the liberation of Constantinople in 717.30 Annibale Anguissola,

Sofonisba’s grandfather, had been the captain of the bishopric of Cremona, Lord of Soncino, and was granted the title of patriziato. Amilcare was Annibale’s illegitimate son and was legitimized later in life to allow him to inherit his father’s noble title.31 Despite his nobility, Amilcare owned little property and his financial situation was often uncertain. He supported his growing family through various businesses such as selling books, medicine, and buying grain for the city of

Cremona.32 While noblemen and women were expected to have a great appreciation for art and to practice it in their free time, pursuing painting and art with fervor as a profession was considered inappropriate for people of the Anguissolas’ noble rank. Artists during this period were considered among the artisan class with metalworkers, wood carvers, and other trades. For centuries, becoming a professional artist had been considered beneath the status of a noble and would have been indecent for a young noblewoman. Castiglione remarked that the guests at the court of Urbino may seem surprised that he desired his ideal courtier to possess knowledge of drawing and painting, which they thought “may seem mechanical and ill-suited to a gentleman.”33 Other women artists during this period came from artist families and learned from

30 Gamberini, 29.

31 Ibid, 30.

32 Kusche, 32.

33 Castiglione, 57.

their fathers or brothers who passed along the family trade of painting. Sofonisba’s arts education outside of the home was extremely unusual for a young woman and more directly reflected the practice of sending young sons to artists’ workshops for apprenticeships. Looking to new philosophies and scholarly discussions about art that was emerging from Florence at the turn of the century, Amilcare and his daughter likely viewed painting as a noble pursuit and artists as worthy of noble status. In the 1585 biography of Sofonisba by Alessandro Lamo, the author notes that Amilcare “wished to oblige [his daughters’] noble pursuit [of painting]...with the intention that the nobility and worth of his two children should make the profession of painter noble and respected in this city.”34 He believed that the cultivated nobility of his children would endow painting with the same laudable nobility and elevate the practice along with them.

Amilcare had ambitions not only for his children, but also for the field of painting. He followed in the scholarly example of prominent artists and humanists before him.35

In the context of learning to cultivate a courtly identity, Castiglione had strong views on the role of painting and art in the courtier’s education. While the emphasis is on a courtier’s need

34 Alessandro Lamo, Discorso...intorno alla scoltura e pittura… (1584), Quoted in Kusche, 33.

35 The changing role of patronage and the expanding power of Italian courts and the papacy meant that artists began to act outside the guild structure which had existed for centuries.35 The renewed interest in ancient texts, such as Pliny the Elder’s writings on Greek painters and sculptors, offered Renaissance artists ancient examples of artists who were greatly celebrated as well as highly educated. In his discussion of painters, Castiglione references ancient precedents by noting that “Greece required boys of gentle birth to learn painting in school, as a decorous and necessary thing, and admitted it to first rank among the liberal arts.” (Castiglione, 57) In his 1500 notes on painting and poetry, Leonardo invigorated the debate about painting’s worthiness among the humanities by arguing for painting’s superiority over poetry which was well-accepted as an elevated liberal art. He proclaimed, “painting embraces all the forms of nature within itself,” which are universal while words, the tools of the poet, are not. (Leonardo da Vinci, “Chapter 19: How Painting Surpasses All the Works of Man on Account of the Subtle Speculations with Which it is Concerned”, The Book on Painting, 1500. Quoted in Claire J. Farago, Leonardo da Vinci’s Paragone. (New York: E.J. Brill. 1992): 213) He also argued against the classification of painting as a mechanical art. If society considered painting a mechanical art because “the hands figure what is found in the fantasia,” then poetry is too a mechanical art, as “you writers draw what you find in your ingegno manually with a pen.” (Leonardo, 213) Artists and scholars advocated for painting to be considered among the highly respected humanities, elevating it beyond that of the manual arts to the elite status of liberal art because of an artist’s use of imagination and invenzione. By promoting painting as a liberal art, artists endeavored to elevate their social status as well.

for an understanding and appreciation of art, Castiglione agreed “painting [is] more noble and more susceptible of artistry than sculpture.”36 In the course of the discussion about the nobility of painting, Castiglione was quick to warn against “praise [of] an artist and not an art.”37 Yet it is clear there was an established connection between the elevation of artists through the ennobling of painting. The belief in painting’s ability to capture beauty and nature and surpass poetry and all other arts was a strategy artists promoted in order to try to make painting officially a noble practice.

Encouraged by her father’s enthusiasm for her artistic career, Sofonisba began to see that the best way forward for herself, her family, and the field of painting was to bring together her two disparate identities. She aimed to unite the concept of the ideal courtier with that of the ideal artist to create a new precedent for the noble female artist. While her father spoke about his hopes for his children elevating the art of painting through their own nobility, Sofonisba also saw the way painting could be used to elevate her own status. And although achieving fame as a virtuous young woman opened her up to the risk of slander and rumor, Sofonisba once again relied on the example of Castiglione. The courtier, Castiglione argued, must “bring talent and art to support his own worth…for a fame that is thought to be the result from many judgements generates a certain firm belief in a man’s worth, which then, in minds always disposed and prepared in this way, is easily maintained and increased by actual performance.”38 While these quotes concern the ambitions for the male courtier, Sofonisba would have been familiar with them and may have adopted them for herself. By cultivating fame for herself through her art, she

36 Castiglione, 59.

37 Ibid, 58.

38 Ibid, 94.

could bring worth to the courts that she visited. Sofonisba strived to be the noble artist in terms of raising painting to a noble status, but also in terms of gaining herself a secure position as a high-class noblewoman who was a painter.

Once Sofonisba’s education under Bernardino Campi had finished, Amilcare Anguissola used Sofonisba’s self-portraits strategically for promoting his daughter extensively and networking on her behalf. He reached out to noble connections throughout Italy to encourage their patronage by sending along small self-portraits of Sofonisba, disseminating examples of the young artist’s work throughout Northern Italy.39 He surely knew self-portraiture was a popular means for artists to gain patrons, especially by characterizing themselves as educated and of high socioeconomic rank. One prominent example can be seen in the work of artist, Parmigianino. In his 1524 Self-Portrait in a Convex Mirror (fig. 2), Parmigianino depicted himself as a well- dressed young man in the midst of drawing his portrait from his own reflection. The painting was used as a presentation piece to showcase his technical skills when the young artist traveled to

Rome.40 Gifting a self-portrait allowed potential patrons to directly view how skilled the artist was at replicating nature by comparing the work with the living artist. It also allowed the artist to maintain more control over how they were perceived. The lavishly dressed young man in

Parmigianino’s portrait appeared wealthy, but he also emphasized his craft by distorting his hand in the mirror. As the hand was the key tool for the artist, emphasizing it was a valuable way for artists to display and honor their skill.41 Similar attention to the hand of the artist was given in

39 Kusche, 41-46; Sharlee Mullins Glenn, “Sofonisba Anguissola: History’s Forgotten Prodigy,” Women’s Studies Vol. 18 (1990): 297; Paola Tinagli, Women in Italian Renaissance Art: Gender, Representation, and Identity. (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1997): 114.

40 Woods-Marsden, 35.

41 Ibid, 35.

Sofonisba’s portraits as she carefully modeled her own hands to emphasize her talent to patrons.

In her 1554 Self-Portrait (fig.3), the young artist is depicted with a book against her chest. She holds the book, her thumb placed between the pages to display the text inside which bears the artist’s name and a proclamation that she made it. The proximity of her hand near the inscription and signature emphasized her hand as that of the creator of the painting. While Sofonisba likely never saw this work by Parmigianino, it is representative of the use of a self-portrait as a presentation piece to gain patronage and therefore was an important precedent.

As well as sending works to courts throughout Italy, Sofonisba began traveling extensively to build relationships with artists and potential patrons. Around the same time

Sofonisba arrived in Rome in 1554, two drawings by her hand were brought to the attention of

Michelangelo, Old Woman Studying the Alphabet (1550s, fig. 4) and Asdrubale Being Bitten by a Crab (1554, fig. 5).42 The latter sketch was in Michelangelo’s possession and was later passed on to his close friend, Tommaso Cavalieri. Cavalieri sent the sketch to the Duke of Tuscany

Cosimo I in 1562 along with a sketch by Michelangelo. Included with the sketches, Cavalieri sent along a letter which recounts that “Michelangelo who has seen a drawing done by

[Sofonisba’s] hand of a smiling girl, said that he would have liked to see a weeping boy, as a subject more difficult to draw. After he wrote to her about it, she sent him this drawing, which was a portrait of her brother, whom she has intentionally shown as weeping.”43 In his letter,

Cavalieri emphasized that Sofonisba’s drawings were not only beautiful, but she possessed

42 Perlingieri, 72; Charles de Tolnay, “Sofonisba Anguissola and her Relations with Michelangelo,” The Journal of the Walters Art Gallery, Vol. 4 (1941): 116.

43 Tommaso Cavalieri to Cosimo I, January 20, 1562. Quoted Perlingieri, 72; De Tolnay, 116; Jacobs 1994, 95.

invenzione, a quality previously only attributed to men.44 This rather sharp-witted response to

Michelangelo’s criticism shows Sofonisba’s deliberate use of humor in her artistic career.

Presented with a criticism, she playfully shot back by fulfilling Michelangelo’s request for a crying boy while also including another smiling/laughing girl. Garrard noted Sofonisba’s gendered wit, pushing against Michelangelo’s request for a male figure over a female figure.45

Rather than the tragic heroic tears Michelangelo may have imagined, Sofonisba drew a comic scene of a young boy in need of nothing more than some comfort and a bandage with the girl laughing at the boy’s misfortune.46 Whether these sketches were created while Sofonisba was in

Rome and visited Michelangelo or whether they were sent to him prior to her arrival is unknown.

Sofonisba had developed a relationship with Michelangelo who served as a mentor for her during her two years in Rome. He was quite impressed with the young artist as he stayed in contact with her and her father for several years after her departure. His artistic influence on her later works has also been noted by several art historians, particularly the development of her understanding of anatomy.47 Additionally, while working closely with Michelangelo, Sofonisba may have directly seen the ways artists could utilize their nobility in their careers. Michelangelo carefully cultivated an image of a noble background.48 Vasari even remarks in his biography of the Italian master that his mother was “said to be of the ancient and noble family of the Counts of

44 Kusche, 40; Jacobs 1997, 55; Leticia Ruiz Gómez, “A Tale of Two Woman Painters: Sofonisba Anguissola and Lavinia Fontana,” in A Tale of Two Women Artists: Sofonisba Anguissola and Lavinia Fontana, edited by Leticia Ruiz Gómez. (Madrid: Museo del Prado, 2019.): 22.

45 Garrard, 612.

46 Ibid, 613.

47 deTolnay, 117; Perlingieri, 73.

48 William E. Wallace, “Aristocrat of Artists,” in Michelangelo: The Artist, the Man, and His Times. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010): 36.

Canossa.”49 This emphasis on promoting nobility by the great artist may have influenced

Sofonisba when she met the artist in Rome around 1554. This was just a year after Michelangelo approved Ascanio Condivi to publish a new biography that included a lengthy introduction which outlined Michelangelo’s aristocratic heritage.50

In 1557, wanting to rekindle this connection for his daughter in Rome, Amilcare wrote to the aging Michelangelo to request his further mentorship for the young Sofonisba. In a letter addressed to Michelangelo on May 7, 1557, Amilcare kindly thanked Michelangelo for

“[introducing Sofonisba] to…the most honorable art of painting.”51 He requested the artist to

“talk to [Sofonisba] and encourage her” and asked that he “send her a sketch so that she can paint it in oil.”52 Sofonisba would then send these colored sketches back to Michelangelo for his approval, allowing him to continue to instruct her in painting even after she returned to Cremona.

Charles de Tolnay provided a brief overview of the two artist’s relationship, referencing the letters exchanged between Amilcare and Michelangelo and highlighting the important influence

Michelangelo had on the growing artist.53 This connection with Michelangelo continued until at least 1558. Amilcare sent the aging artist another letter in May 1558 to thank him for “his friendly letters” and express gratitude for his kindness to “examine, judge, and praise the paintings done by [his] daughter.”54 This kindness, de Tolnay argued, fit in well with the

49 Giorgio Vasari, “Life of Michelangelo Buonarroti: Painter, Sculptor, and Architect of Florence,” in Lives of the Most Eminent Painters, Sculptors & Architects, Vol. IX. Translated by Gaston du C. de Vere. (Project Gutenberg, 2010): 4.

50 Williams, 38.

51 Amilcare Anguissola to Michelangelo, May 7, 1556. Quoted in Perlingieri, 67.

52 Amilcare Anguissola to Michelangelo, May 7, 1557. Quoted in Perlingieri, 67.

53 De Tolnay, 144-119.

54 Amilcare Anguissola to Michelangelo, May 15, 1558. Quoted in Perlingieri, 67-68.

mentoring practices of Michelangelo, who also sent drawings such as the ones he sent to

Sofonisba to other important artists such as Sebastiano del Piombo, Benvenuto Cellini, and

Antonio Mini.55 Yet, Sofonisba must have shown exceptional skill and potential for

Michelangelo to remain in contact with her. Ilya Perlingieri reminded us that painting was customarily a male domain and Michelangelo would certainly not have kept in contact with a woman he thought was an amateur painter.56

Following Sofonisba’s time in Rome, Amilcare’s desire to find a court position for his daughter only increased. Her fame was growing, and she was gaining more attention from both artists and potential patrons.57 In March of 1556, Amilcare sent one of Sofonisba’s self-portraits to the Duke of Ferrara. In so doing, he hoped to establish a relationship and attempt to gain patronage or a place at the court for the twenty-four year old artist. Sofonisba was also received at the court of Mantua in February 1556 while visiting her younger sister Elena at the convent there. In response, Amilcare was quick to thank the duchess for the kindness shown to his daughter while she was there.58 From Mantua, Sofonisba likely continued on to Parma. There she met with and learned from the miniaturist Giulio Clovio and visited the court of Margaret of

Parma, the daughter of Emperor Charles V.59 In addition to Amilcare sending self-portraits to important patrons, Sofonisba’s travels to courts throughout Italy only added to her growing

55 De Tolnay, 118 56 Perlingieri, 69.

57 In a letter to Bernardino Campi in April 1554, the painter Francesco Salviati praised Anguissola’s talents and celebrated Campi for his contribution to her skill and artistic education. Perlingieri, 70. Also see, Woods-Marsden, 210; Garrard, 560; Jacobs, 154.

58 Amilcare Anguissola to Duchess of Mantua, 1 February 1556. Quoted in Sofonisba Anguissola e sue sorelle, edited by Paolo Buffa. (Cremona: Leonardo Arte, 1994): 363.

59 Kusche, 42.

notoriety. They also provided Sofonisba with substantial court relationships and a network of nobles who could verify her status as both the perfect cortegiana and a talented artist.

In 1558, Sofonisba left Cremona once again to travel to Milan where she likely stayed with a distant branch of her family. Caterina Anguissola, a member of the other branch of the

Anguissola family, married into the Gonzaga family and Sofonisba likely visited or resided with them while in Milan.60 While in Milan, Sofonisba painted many portraits and continued to gain popularity among patrons. She made one especially important connection while she was living in

Milan; she was asked to paint a portrait of the Duke of Alba. When Philip II of Spain was crowned king in 1556, he sent his trusted adviser, Fernando Alvarez de Toledo, the third Duke of

Alba, to act as governor in Milan in his absence. Sofonisba must have made a strong impression on the Duke while she painted his portrait and impressed him with her skill. He remembered her even after he left Milan to travel to France in 1559 to facilitate the marriage between Philip II and the young French princess, Elisabeth of Valois. When he was made responsible for recommending young women to join the Spanish court as part of the new queen’s household, he thought of the Italian artist he met in Milan.61 Elisabeth, or Isabel as she was known once she arrived in Madrid, had a great love for art and requested someone educate her in the fine arts.

Sofonisba displayed excellence as an artist who could provide the young queen with drawing and painting lessons but also advertised herself as the noble cortegiana who would be well suited to the royal court. Immediately following the proxy wedding between Elisabeth and Philip in June

1559, Sofonisba received her official summons to join the Spanish court in a letter from the royal

60 Gamberini, 32. While there is no direct evidence Anguissola stayed with Caterina Anguissola while in Milan, their familial relationship and the fact Caterina’s son, Ferrante Gonzaga, traveled with Anguissola to Spain displays a relationship between Anguissola and the Gonzaga family.

61 Perlingieri, 109; Stuart, 76.

Governor in Milan, the duke of Sessa.62 Preparations for her journey to Madrid were started in

August with a payment for her travel, although her father didn’t officially accept the position in a letter to Philip II until September. Sofonisba likely left for Madrid in late September or early

October to land in Madrid in time for the queen’s arrival.63 While scholars often state that

Sofonisba’s position at the Spanish court was one of court painter, her official appointment was actually as lady-in-waiting, or dama, to the new queen. It was her nobility and reputation as a cortegiana that officially gained her the position and granted her access to the court. Gamberini outlined the network of noble and courtly connections Sofonisba and the Anguissola family had cultivated, which paved the way for her eventual placement in Spain.64 While it was her artistic ability that gave her an advantage over other noblewomen, the years of networking with courts and crafting her identity as the ideal cortegiana helped secure her court appointment. Her status as an artist, while extremely influential on her gaining the position, was secondary. Sofonisba learned the appropriate behaviors and expectations for a cortegiana that gained her this honorable position through her humanist education and her certain familiarity with Baldassar

Castiglione’s The Courtier.

Castiglione’s Book of the Courtier

With the growing populations in urban areas as art and academic communities developed and the flourishing court culture in Europe, books created to instruct new and established individuals on proper behaviors and etiquette grew in popularity. These books became

62 Kusche, 48; Pamela Holmes Baldwin, “Sofonisba Anguissola in Spain: Portraiture as Art and Social Practice at a Renaissance Court,” (PhD Dissertation, Bryn Mawr College, 1995): 13.

63 Perlingieri, 114; Stuart, 79.

64 Gamberini, 29-32.

instruction manuals for how men and women, specifically of the upper noble classes, were expected to conduct themselves and were important additions to the education of a young noble person. One of the most important and widespread courtesy texts to emerge during this period was Baldassare Castiglione’s The Book of the Courtier published in 1528.65 While instructions for male courtiers’ behavior dominated this literature, Castiglione included a section in his book on the construction of the ideal cortegiana, or female courtier. The ideal cortegiana was a unique type of woman in society who emerged as women gained more political authority, financial power, and a more extensive education.66 Despite the presence of undoubtedly influential women in Italian society, the characters in Castiglione’s text preface their discussion of the ideal cortegiana with the note that none of them had ever known of a woman who lived up to the ideal female courtier the text describes.67 They believed they lacked a real-life example for the ideal

Court Lady, although they go on to cite several Italian women such as Isabella d’Este and her sister, Beatrice, the Duchess of Milan as exemplary cortegiane.68 Despite this, the group continues on to describe a hypothetical cortegiana with great specification in hopes of providing young women with a new set of ideals.

After spending the first two books of The Book of Courtier describing the ideal man at court, the guests at the court of the Duke of Urbino in Castiglione’s text established that “the

65 The Courtier was the most influential courtesy text during the 16th century that addressed courtly manners and morals, but other important etiquette texts published during the latter half of the century include Giovanni della Casa’s Il Galateo (1558) and Stefano Guazzo’s La Civil Conversazione (1574). While published after the majority of Anguissola’s self-portraits were made, the later texts reflect many of the same ideas addressed in Castiglione’s book and illustrate the widespread popularity of these ideals and beliefs.

66 Kelly-Gadol, 341-342.

67 Castiglione: 150.

68 Ibid, 175.

same rules apply to [the cortegiana] as to the Courtier.”69 These rules for guests at court pertained to everyone from the young courtiers to the Duke and Duchess; be poised and elegant, be “neat and tidy in [their] attire and observe a certain modest elegance,”70 and “ought to have regard for time and place.”71

Although the same rules apply to both male and female courtiers, the guests quickly noted that while all qualities are common for men and women, some were more necessary for men and others more necessary for women. It was in this interjection that Castiglione succinctly distinguishes between the ideal female and male courtier. It was agreed that a cortegiana must have;

“A certain pleasing affability...becoming above all else, whereby she will be able to entertain graciously every kind of man with agreeable and comely conversation suited to the time and place and to the station of the person with whom she speaks, joining to serene and modest manners, and to that comeliness that ought to inform all her actions, a quick vivacity of spirit whereby she will show herself a stranger to all boorishness; but with such a kind manner as to cause her to be thought no less chaste, prudent, and gentle than she is agreeable, witty and discreet; thus, she must observe a certain mean (difficult to achieve and, as it were, composed of contraries) and must strictly observe certain limits and not exceed them.”72

This quotation acknowledged the inherent difficulty of the woman described in Castiglione’s text; the ideal cortegiana was composed of stark contrasts. She was to be lively and entertaining, yet humble and chaste. She should be well-educated, “to have knowledge of letters, of music, of

69 Ibid, 149.

70 Ibid, 89.

71 Ibid, 149.

72 Ibid, 151.

painting, and know how to dance”73, but keep in mind it was thought unbecoming to proudly display your knowledge and skill. She must be witty and lively, but not too forward, nor should she be too coy or withdrawn. The expectations set out by Castiglione did not match with the real societal restrictions that still applied to these women. Joan Kelly-Gadol argued that despite the proclamation for equality between the courtier and the court lady by Castiglione, the reality for women during the Renaissance was more restrictive.74 Even the women characterized in

Castiglione’s text, such as Elisabetta Gonzaga, were in reality quite docile and restrained. He presented them as having little to add to the discussions in the book and leaving the talking to the men. The men described an unrealistic ideal that was directed towards their own interests rather than an obtainable goal that women in Renaissance society could actually achieve.75 It is unsurprising that the guests agreed they had never met a woman who fit the model of the ideal cortegiana: the ideal is composed of a seemingly impossible balance of opposites that no individual could achieve.

Throughout the entire discussion of the ideal lady at court, the characters in the book continuously returned to the most important values a woman should possess; virtue, grace, and chastity. Their virtue, wisdom, and goodness served as “a shield against the insolence and brutishness of presumptuous men” who may form negative opinions of the young woman.76 This virtue was to come with a sense of modesty, both in appearance and in behavior. A proper cortegiana was expected to dress herself appropriately and never wearing anything that made her

73 Ibid, 155. 74 Kelly-Gadol: 342.

75 Ibid, 343.

76 Ibid, 152.

appear “vain and frivolous.”77 This seems in direct contrast with the images of high-status women during this period who decorated themselves with rich brocades and elegant jewels.

Castiglione prescribed a woman’s attire to highlight her natural beauty with simple, but clean and well-maintained attire rather than luxury garments. In addition to their outward appearance, women were encouraged to pursue activities that were becoming of a woman. Proficiency in music and painting were expected, but she must do so with a “certain shyness” to maintain the gentleness that was expected for women in everything.78 This theme of gentleness and virtue carried through the rest of the book as the guests in the text turn to ancient and modern examples of women who they argue exemplify these ideals. The guests had already declared they had never known a woman who lived up to their expectations for the ideal cortegiana, but they provided contemporary models such as the “shining example of true goodness” Queen Isabella of Spain and the admirable Marchioness of Mantua, Isabella. 79 By recalling contemporary examples of women whom they view as embodying virtue, chastity, goodness, and wisdom,

Castiglione provided representations that young women during this period could look to and emulate. Above all, Castiglione argued a young noble woman must “devote all [her] strength to holding to this one virtue of chastity.”80 If a young woman had nothing else, no matter her class or status in society, she was expected to remain chaste.81

77 Ibid, 154.

78 Ibid, 154.

79 Ibid, 173.

80 Ibid, 176.

81 For further information on chastity in Early Modern Italy, see Kenneth Gouwens. "Female Virtue and the Embodiment of Beauty: Vittoria Colonna in Paolo Giovio’s Notable Men and Women." Renaissance Quarterly 68, no. 1 (2015): 33-97; Joan Gibson. "The Logic of Chastity: Women, Sex, and the History of Philosophy in the Early Modern Period." Hypatia 21, no. 4 (2006): 1-19; Juliana Schiesari. "In Praise of Virtuous Women? For a Genealogy of Gender Morals in Renaissance Italy." Annali D'Italianistica 7 (1989): 66-87. 25

In addition to the expectation that courtiers receive a strong humanist education, the liveliness expected at court came largely from wit and humor. Displaying wit and playful humor was a trait primarily suited to the court environment and jesting was considered a noble trait.82

The importance of wit and pleasantries is shown in the amount of time Castiglione dedicated to the topic. He devoted more than half of Book Two to the explanation of proper witticisms and pleasantries appropriate for the Courtier. It was a way for courtiers to not only entertain one another, but also showcase their education. A sharp wit was a sign of a well-educated individual who had a mastery of language and literature which allowed them to manipulate stories and moments into displays of humor.83 For women, it was important that their jesting maintained the pleasantness and sweetness required for the ideal female courtier. In their discussion of wit and pleasantries on the evening before their discussion of the ideal cortegiana, the guests debated the varying ways courtiers can display their wit through humorous stories, witty replies, and practical jokes. It is agreed that women can be more biting in their humor towards men than men towards women because a man’s words could ruin a woman’s reputation.84 Once again, women were obligated to develop a delicate balance to fulfill this ideal. Their humor and wit are to be biting but must not be too sharp for risk of losing the sweetness expected in the cortegiana.85

82 Ruth Kelso. Doctrine for the Lady of the Renaissance, (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1956): 225.

83 Castiglione, 116.

84 Ibid, 138.

85 Kelso, 225.

The Self-Fashioning of the Cortegiana

Sofonisba Anguissola understood her best chance of receiving a secure position at court was through the strategic use of Castiglione’s expectations for the cortegiana in her self- portraits. As noted above, self-portraits were one of the best ways for young artists to demonstrate their skill to potential patrons, and their small scale made the works easier to gift to patrons throughout Italy. This suited Sofonisba well, since portraiture was the primary focus of her artistic education under Campi. He encouraged and instructed them in sketching, prompting them to draw themselves and family members since they did not have access to the live models traditionally found in the male artist’s studio. Portraiture was the primary focus of their artistic education as it was considered the most acceptable form of art for young women.86 Portraits could be completed in the home and on a smaller scale than the grandiose works typically created by other well-known Renaissance artists. Yet, in his widely accepted treatise on painting,

Leon Battista Alberti praised portraiture especially for its “divine force which…makes absent men present.”87 Once thought to be a lower form of painting and therefore better suited for inferior artists, portraiture was gaining acceptance as a praiseworthy practice.

The first known self-portrait of Sofonisba is her 1548 Self-Portrait (fig. 6). In the drawing, the sixteen-year-old artist illustrated herself as an elegant, educated and modest young woman. The portrait suggests that even at this early age, Sofonisba understood the precarious position she placed herself in by pursuing a public artistic career. Emphasizing her modesty first and foremost, as advised by Castiglione88, was vital to staving off gossip and slander about her

86 Woods-Marsden, 193; Baldwin, 228-29.

87 Leon Battista Alberti, On Painting, trans. John R. Spencer (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1966): 63.

88 Ibid, 176.

virtue. In particular, in his description for the ideal cortegiana’s costume, Castiglione called for women’s clothing to conform to “a certain shyness.” 89 The lady “must use the good judgement to see which are the garments that enhance her grace and are most appropriate to the exercises in which she intends to engage.”90 The self-portrait adhered to this premise, for the drawing does not include much detail and the dress Sofonisba wore is simple, modest, and does not detract from her natural beauty. By placing the emphasis on her own beauty over the beauty of her clothing, Sofonisba aligned herself with Castiglione’s ideals. She must have considered this strategy successful, for the high neckline and long sleeves and obfuscation of her body from the viewer are features seen in all of Sofonisba’s self-portraits.

In addition to the modest clothing, Sofonisba at first chose to show herself in the act of reading rather than painting or drawing. By visually foregrounding her intellectual persona over her artistic ability, she aligned herself with Castiglione’s call for a Court Lady who has

“knowledge of many things.”91 A well-educated woman was a prized possession at the court because she could entertain the male courtiers with her knowledge and wit which she acquired through her learning. Reading was therefore also considered an appropriate task for a virtuous young noblewoman. Learning would shield her mind from corruptible forces, and reading was a private activity that would keep the virtuous young woman in the security of her own home.92

89 Castiglione, 154.

90 Ibid, 154.

91 Ibid, 152.

92 Juan Luis Vives. The Education of a Christian Woman: A Sixteenth-Century Manual, edited and translated by Charles Fantazzi. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000): 70. Juan Luis Vives’ etiquette text was published initially in Spain and may not have been known in Italy until decades later, but his discussions of the virtuous and educated young woman align with many of Castiglione’s arguments and illustrate a common ideal for women throughout Europe.

Illustrating herself as a woman in the midst of reading, Sofonisba referenced this desire for the well-educated and virtuous woman.

Sofonisba’s 1554 Self-Portrait (fig. 3) mirrored her early self-portrait but provides more detail and an important inscription referencing her chastity that demonstrated her as complying with ideals of femininity. Sofonisba was once again in a modest high-necked gown as prescribed by Castiglione, her hair was simply pulled back in a braid and she wore no jewelry. Although

Sofonisba’s noble status allowed her to own and wear luxurious gowns and jewels, she chose to depict herself simply with the emphasis on her face. This uncomplicated appearance once more suited Castiglione’s request for “garments that enhance her grace.”93 The specific attention on the young artist’s face, eyes, and hands emphasized her artistic identity much like Parmigianino did in his Self-Portrait in a Convex Mirror. As an artist, her eyes and hands were Sofonisba’s tools to create realistic works. A signature aspect of Sofonisba’s self-portraits were her large green eyes, which stared out at the viewer. This poised, yet assertive look gave the young artist authority and subjectivity, as she highlighted a reciprocated gaze with her eventual viewers.

While little of Sofonisba’s hand was shown in this self-portrait, the placement of her hand next to the artist’s signature also highlighted her ability to create life-like works. Sofonisba understood that portraiture, and the fame and worth that came with her skill, would be the best way for her to gain a position at court and favor with wealthy patrons. By emphasizing her ability to accurately capture her own appearance by her own hand, Sofonisba could demonstrate her skill by allowing viewers to directly compare the painting with the real subject. If she could accurately paint her own face, she would do the same for a wealthy noble patron. Learning from

The Courtier, Sofonisba understood that cultivating her fame was an important contribution as a

93 Castiglione, 154. 29

cortegiana and artist. Referencing her artistic abilities was a way for her to highlight the worth she could bring to the court. Therein lies the significance of the inscription Sofonisba placed on the page of the book she holds. She chose to show herself as the learned young woman once again, but this time placed her name in the book she is reading. The words written in the book read “SOPHONISBA ANGUISSOLA VIRGO SE IPSAM FECIT 1554.” This inscription accomplished two goals; Sofonisba reasserted her chastity and proclaimed her artistic abilities.

Sofonisba identified herself as “virgo,” the virgin or unmarried maiden. Mary Garrard discussed the way Sofonisba used this title for herself as protection against association with the wrong class of women.94 By defining herself as “virgo,” she was underlining her virginal status, but

Garrard also noted that during the Renaissance, the word “virgo” also carried the implication of independence and self-possession.95 She used this on several portraits she created during her early career. This served at once to protect herself from scandal and, in concert with her forthright self-imaging, to make a powerful claim for agency and subjectivity. In addition to her dual proclamation of chastity and authority, she made another assertion: I made this. She claimed authorship of the painting publicly. This subtly challenged Castiglione’s requirement for young women to avoid boasting, taking care not to “disgust [the male courtier] by indiscreet praise of herself.”96 Sofonisba attached her name to the work but goes beyond that to highlight her skill in the way a male artist would promote his abilities. Returning to Jacobs’s discussion of

Sofonisba’s ability to fulfill the role of virtuosa, Sofonisba carefully navigated the unclear line between feminine and masculine attributes due to her noble status.

94 Garrard, 580.

95 Ibid, 580.

96 Castiglione, 153.

Sofonisba’s portrait Self-Portrait at an Easel (1556, fig. 7) showed Sofonisba crafting a different identity than in her earlier works, for she represented herself in the act of painting.

While she employed the same conventions for her appearance (simple black dress, plain braid hairstyle, and no jewelry), Sofonisba created a drastically different kind of portrait. She was seated in front of an easel, proudly showing herself as a practicing artist with her brush poised to add another stroke of paint. Rather than glancing up from her book, like that seen in the two portraits discussed above, Sofonisba glanced at the viewer as she paused from painting a

Madonna and Child. This proud display of her artistic ability, in the middle of creating a work with the brush in her hand, pushed the inscription seen in her 1554 portrait even further. For the first time, she explicitly fashioned herself as a painter. In 1556, Sofonisba had returned from her time in Rome after working closely with well-established artists.

She defined herself as one of the skilled artists she encountered there, yet she also portrays herself wearing a simple, but elegant dress. This choice of costume may also visually connect Sofonisba to the usual attire for male artists and courtiers. Castiglione described the preferred clothing for the courtier as “more toward the grave and sober...[and] black is more pleasing in clothing than any other color.”97 This style of clothing was also the accepted garb for artists, as shown in the clothing worn by Bernardino Campi in Sofonisba’s double portrait. The black smock with white color was very similar to the dark gowns Sofonisba typically wore.

Garrard noted Sofonisba’s attire more closely resembles that of the noblemen and artists of the

1550s and argued that in choosing somber clothing for herself, Sofonisba adopted the signifiers of the male artist and courtier alike.98 By donning the clothing of the masculine artist and

97 Ibid, 89.

98 Garrard, 586.

courtier, she gained the signifiers of independence, maturity, and artistic talent.99 A key to

Sofonisba’s success as a painter, Garrard argued, was downplaying her femininity to find the precarious balance between “not-woman” and “only a woman.”100 Once again, Sofonisba found her success in navigating the gray area between masculine and feminine described by Jacobs.101

The clothing also added to Sofonisba’s engagement with Castiglione’s requirements for courtiers and their engagement with art. Castiglione believed courtiers should have “a knowledge of how to draw and an acquaintance with the art of painting itself.”102 Painting was a noble practice, in his opinion, suited to people of high status. While wearing a fine gown rather than a smock would seem to be better suited to the more proper practice of painting as a hobby, Leonardo cited an artist’s ability to wear fine clothing and keep it clean as a reason painting was noble and superior to sculpture.103 Sofonisba also exhibited sprezzatura, the act of painting was easy and does not require her to exert much effort or thought. Castiglione sought out this nonchalance in his courtier, requesting that the ideal man at court “practice in all things a certain sprezzatura, so as to conceal all art and make whatever is done or said appear to be without effort or almost without any thought about it.”104 Castiglione’s recommendation for a casual practice of painting, indeed, in all things, was even more appropriate for the cortegiana. He remarked that “even those [activities] that are becoming to a woman [should be] practiced in a measured way and

99 Ibid, 586.

100 Ibid, 588. 101 Jacobs, 11.

102 Castiglione, 57.

103 Francis Ames-Lewis, “The Social and Cultural Activities of the Early Renaissance Artist,” in The Intellectual Life of the Early Renaissance Artist. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000): 72.

104 Castiglione, 32. For further information on sprezzatura, see Paolo D’Angelo. Sprezzatura: Concealing the Effort of Art from Aristotle to Duchamp. Trans. By Sarin Marchetti. (New York: Columbia University Press, 2018); Lynn M. Louden, ""Sprezzatura" in Raphael and Castiglione." Art Journal 28, no. 1 (1968): 43-53.

with that gentile delicacy that we have said befits her.”105 Furthermore, Castiglione’s own views on painting supported this casual nature. In his initial description of the ideal courtier, he noted that in painting, “a single brushstroke made with ease and in such a manner that the hand seems to itself complete the line desired by the painter, without being directed by care or skill of any kind, clearly reveals that excellence of craftsmanship.”106 For him, the art most worthy of praise came from a hand that did not labor over each line, but rather seemed to paint itself, as the painting in Sofonisba’s self-portrait seems to do. She does not even look at the canvas as she paints; her hand seemed to move independently, without direction by the artist.

Self-portraits of painters at work were uncommon during the Renaissance period. The most common examples of images showing an artist in the act of drawing or painting were depictions of St. Luke painting the Virgin and Child. Similarities between depictions of St. Luke and Sofonisba led Joanne Woods-Marsden to conclude that Sofonisba consciously placed herself in the position of St. Luke, equating herself not only with a male artist, but also with the patron saint of artists.107 At the same time, Sofonisba made associations between herself and the Virgin

Mary. Sofonisba’s use of the label “virgo” was a direct reference to Virgin Mary; the artist and the Madonna in her painting also share physical similarities. They wore their hair in a similar fashion, the braid wrapped around their heads. The Virgin’s face in profile mirrored the half- turned head of Sofonisba, allowing us to only see half of their faces while the other half are in shadow. As Castiglione emphasized that chastity and virtue are the most important qualities for a young woman to possess, mirroring herself in the image of the most chaste and virtuous figure

105 Castiglione, 154.

106 Ibid, 35.

107 Woods-Marsden, 203.

was a way for Sofonisba to promote herself as an ideal cortegiana. 108 While Sofonisba makes a bold statement by publicly showing herself as a practicing artist, she maintained the strategic use of references to her piety and chastity through connections to saints and the Virgin.109

Sofonisba’s strategic portraiture went beyond her depictions of herself. Portraiture was a way to fashion identities and a reputation for her whole family; in constructing her family’s image, Sofonisba was also fashioning her own.110 Sofonisba’s painting of The Chess Game

(1555, fig. 8) portrayed the artist’s three younger sisters, Lucia, Minerva, and Europa, competing in a lively game. Through the choice of the elegant, yet modest clothing, the intellectual game of chess, and the inclusion of the watchful maid as their chaperone, Sofonisba created an image of three ideal female courtiers. In her analysis of the painting, Garrard concluded that Sofonisba presented the chess game and her sisters as an affirmation of female intelligence. Naomi Yevna analyzed the painting in terms of the relationship between the four sisters and built on Garrard’s discussion about the ways in which Sofonisba used chess to characterize her sisters and herself as highly educated young women.111 Castiglione viewed chess as a “pleasant and ingenious amusement,” but criticized chess in The Courtier because the game required too much study and learning.112 He argued the time spent on learning chess should be used to “learn some noble science or perform well anything of importance.”113 Sofonisba challenged Castiglione’s views

108 Castiglione, 174.

109 Musloff, 36 110 Garrard, 604.

111 Naomi Yevnah. "Playing the Game: Sisterly Relations in Sofonisba Anguissola's "The Chess Game"." In Sibling Relations and Gender in the Early Modern World. Edited by Naomi J. Miller and Naomi Yevnah. (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2006): 116-81. Also see Garrard, 556-622.

112 Castiglione, 93.

113 Ibid, 93.

with her painting. She used the inclusion of the chess board as a symbol of their education, showing that her sisters had the time and dedication to study and excel at the game. The game could also be seen as a symbol of the development of virtuous young women. Yevnah noted that the eldest, Lucia, is holding the powerful Queen game piece, while the youngest, Europa, holds a pawn. 114 Once the pawn crossed the board, it became a queen. Through a humanist education and metaphorically crossing the board, the younger sisters could become virtuous female courtiers as described by Castiglione. It is through the queen in the game of chess that Sofonisba also used the painting of her sisters as a way to display the wit of the cortegiana. Near the end of the 15th century, the rules of chess changed. The Queen piece exchanged rules with the Bishop so the Queen became more powerful on the board, which led many to call the new game “the queen’s game” or more critically, “scacchi alla rabiosa (madwoman’s chess).”115 The queen was the most powerful piece on the board, capable of moving an unlimited number of spaces in any direction. Shortly after the game changed, the Anguissola family’s acquaintance Marco

Girolamo Vida, wrote a powerful poem about the new rules. In the poem Scacchia Ludus, he mentioned the Queen’s new “vengeance,” but also her new ability to defend her king; “with noble courage and superior might, the dreadful Amazons sustain the fight” until “the female white slew with fatal haste the swarthy queen.”116 Vida recognized the newfound power of the queen, proclaiming her a “virgo” but also an Amazon in battle. Vida’s poem was published in

1527 and, through his friendship with their father, Sofonisba and her sisters would likely have

114 Yevnah, 175.

115 Patricia Simons. "(Check) Mating the Grand Masters: The Gendered, Sexualized Politics of Chess in Renaissance Italy." Oxford Art Journal 16, no. 1 (1993): 60. This change in the queen’s power in chess was in part due to the prominence of powerful queens in Europe, such as Isabel I of Castile in Spain.

116 Simons, 60.

been familiar with it. Drawing on Vida’s text and perhaps the debates surrounding the queen’s role in the game of chess, Sofonisba created an image of the Queen-Amazon-Virgin in reference to her sisters and herself. She playfully critiqued the idea of “madwoman’s chess” by transforming it into a symbol of virtue and education. She may have even adopted Vida’s choice of the word “virgo” as her own due to her familiarity with the popular poem.117 While

Castiglione criticized chess because he believes courtiers should focus their attention on more important contributions to society, Sofonisba twisted his criticism into a display of the education and virtue Castiglione promoted. By referencing the virgo queen, Sofonisba deliberately crafted her sisters’ identities, and her own, to memorialize the Anguissola daughters as highly educated, virtuous young women.

Conclusion

Throughout the entirety of the 1550s, Sofonisba engaged with the theme of the ideal cortegiana to prepare herself for courtly life and worked to embody the noble artist by elevating herself through the promotion of painting. The two roles of cortegiana and noble artist were closely connected. In order to elevate and ennoble painting and herself as an artist, Sofonisba had to embody the ideal female courtier and gain a place at court. While she had been thoroughly educated in the proper courtly behaviors, stepping into an official role at a royal court was a significant change for Sofonisba. Her portraiture reflected the ways in which she worked to construct a deliberate public identity as both cortegiana and artist. The self-fashioning seen in her early self-portraits, in which she depicted herself as the virtuous artist and noblewoman, took on another level of meaning since she wished to navigate courts in Italy and, eventually, abroad.

117 Garrard, 603. 36

Upon receiving her summons to Spain, Sofonisba understood that while her position at the

Spanish court was officially as a dama, her artistic abilities set her apart from the other ladies-in- waiting. She also recognized that her position in society was shifting. Prior to the request for her to come to Spain, Sofonisba traveled to Rome and Milan and worked in a professional manner as an artist. She accepted unofficial commissions, worked with other notable artists to develop her skills and attempted to make her art a profitable career. If her self-portraits revealed the ways in which she was fashioning her identity, her 1556 Self Portrait at the Easel reflected a young woman defining herself as an artist. How does an artist transition from actively depicting herself as a painter in the midst of working to the distanced subject of another artist’s painting in her

1559 Bernardino Campi Painting Sofonisba Anguissola? Sofonisba created the 1559 painting the year she accepted the Spanish court position and left for Madrid. What does this change in her self-portraiture reflect about how Sofonisba was fashioning herself in society as a noblewoman and an artist? In preparing for courtly life and eventually accepting a position, how did she find the delicate balance prescribed by Castiglione for the ideal behaviors for a cortegiana or dama while also balancing her unique role as an artist? What changes did Sofonisba make to her behavior and appearance to gain a new position? How did she use her painting to elevate her family’s position as well as elevating the art of painting? The following chapter analyzes

Sofonisba’s 1559 work, her most layered, complex and witty, and reflects on Sofonisba’s creation of herself as the ideal cortegiana to promote herself as a noble artist by referencing the ideals established by Castiglione.

CHAPTER 2

BERNARDINO CAMPI PAINTING SOFONISBA ANGUISSOLA

AND THE CORTEGIANA’S WIT

Chapter One established the essential role Sofonisba Anguissola’s self-portraits played in fashioning her identity, specifically in casting herself as the ideal cortegiana described by

Baldassar Castiglione. As noted, portraiture was the most efficient way for Sofonisba to publicize her artistic ability as well as her beauty and virtue. Her father assisted her by sharing these self-portraits with courts throughout Northern Italy, with the hope that they would help her gain a placement there. The mid- to late 1550s saw Sofonisba’s portraiture flourish and the sophistication of her self-fashioning only continued to grow. The pinnacle of this period is represented by Sofonisba’s 1559 self-portrait, Bernardino Campi Painting Sofonisba Anguissola

(fig. 1), which was among the last works Sofonisba completed before she departed for the

Spanish court. In this painting, Sofonisba utilized the accepted conventions for noble portraiture, which included costuming, a secondary figure, and wit to portray herself in a new way, arguably as part of a strategy to firmly secure her position as both an artist and a noble woman at court.

The Innovative Double Portrait

The first chapter examined the ways in which Sofonisba defined herself in self-portraits as Castiglione’s ideal cortegiana, but the 1559 self-portrait is distinct from the works that preceded it for a number of reasons. One noticeable difference from Sofonisba’s early works relates to the double portrait’s comparatively large size. The painting is 111 x 109 cm, approximately twice the size of Sofonisba’s other self-portraits.118 This dramatic increase in size

118 Anguissola’s 1554 Self-Portrait (fig. 3) is approximately 20 x 13 cm, and her Self-Portrait at the Easel (fig. 7) is 66 x 57 cm. 38

may have reflected an growth in the artist’s confidence in herself and in her abilities, but it also indicated that this painting functioned differently than her previous self-portraits.119 The small- scale works were better suited for transportation and travel since Amilcare sent his daughter’s self-portraits to various courts. The large size of Bernardino Campi Painting Sofonisba

Anguissola suggested the painting was created for a more specific purpose or person, and that it would be permanently displayed. The most dramatic difference between the double portrait and

Sofonisba’s earlier work was her approach to self-representation. In her early self-portraits,

Sofonisba wore similar clothing: a simple black dress with a white undershirt. Her hair was pulled back and she wore no jewelry. Garrard theorized that this sartorial simplicity was a way for Sofonisba to graft a measure of masculinity onto her self-conception, for she dressed herself in the common clothing worn by Castiglione’s courtier and male painters at the time.120 We can see the simple black smock and white undershirt in Sofonisba’s depiction of Campi in the double portrait. While it is possible that this simplified wardrobe in earlier works was an intentional choice to masculinize herself, Sofonisba did tend to reject established forms of female portraiture in her works by choosing more reserved attire.121 Yet Sofonisba broke from this trend in her double portrait by showcasing herself in more elegant and luxurious clothes and jewelry, albeit simple in materials and design. In comparison with her earlier portraits, Sofonisba moved from presenting herself as a masculinized artistic figure, as interpreted by Garrard, towards displaying

119 Musloff, 1.

120 Garrard, 584; Musloff, 41.

121 Jennifer Brynn Black, “Female Self-Portraiture in Early Modern Europe: Colonna, Anguissola, Whitney, and Peeters,” (PhD Dissertation, Boston University, 2004): 81. Laura York suggests this rejection of traditionally feminine motifs may have been an attempt to appear serious, pious, and intellectual to her patrons, Laura York, “The “Spirit of Caesar” and His Majesty’s Servant: The Self-Fashioning of Women Artists in Early Modern Europe,” Women’s Studies, Vol. 30. (2001): 515.

herself as the proper noblewoman.122 Previous interpretations of the double portrait have noted that Sofonisba is dressed similarly to Campi, adorned in her usual black gown with the white collar. However, recent cleaning and restoration revealed the black to be overpainting that was completed at a later time. 123 The rich burgundy and gold velvet fabric now shown in the painting reflects the original costuming. Sofonisba was exceptionally capable of painting sartorial nobility, as one can see in The Chess Game and her portrayal of her sisters’ luxurious courtly attire, yet she chose to wait to depict herself in similar clothing until 1559 in this double portrait.

In contrast to her numerous self-portraits, this double portrait stands out as an anomaly or perhaps, as suggested by Joanna Woods-Marsden, as an example of a clear progression in the artist’s career.124 In an increasingly bold series of steps, Sofonisba moved from identifying herself as a simply dressed sitter in a static pose towards a work in which she assumes the guise of the traditional feminine portrait type and identifies herself by her rich clothing and bearing as a noblewoman.

Noble Female Portraiture

Sofonisba’s compositional choices in the double portrait directly reflected popular conceptions for noble portraiture of women during the sixteenth century. The end of the 15th and beginning of the 16th centuries saw a new interest in portraits of women whose representations ascribed to contemporaneous standards of beauty. Growing out of the humanist interest in

Petrarch’s Laura, images of idealized women became a way for artists to achieve the goals of

122 Musloff, 41.

123 Guiducci et al, 2013.

124 Woods-Marsden, 203.

poetry through painting.125 A well-known example of this was Titian’s La Bella (fig. 9). The unknown woman was elegantly dressed in luxurious clothing and jewels and her pale complexion was accented with rosy pink cheeks. Turned at an angle, she glanced out at the viewer in a three-quarters pose. This image of the beautiful and luxuriously dressed woman eventually gave way to portraits of well-known noble women posed and dressed in similar ways.

Portraiture became increasingly popular, particularly for noblewomen, during the 16th century as a way of celebrating their status and important events in their lives.126 Portraits were a way for women to fashion their identities using family relationships and their political authority.127

Paintings such as Bronzino’s portrait of Eleanora of Toledo (fig. 10) depicted the aristocratic woman in a richly ornamented gown, in a three-quarter pose with her head turned slightly to look out towards the viewer, and a warm rosy tone in her cheeks. She posed with her son, Giovanni, to establish family lineage and show herself not only as the ideal beauty and the ideal woman, but also as the ideal mother. This representation of a poised and virtuous woman through elegant and regal posture, clothing, and gesture could be understood as a visual representation of the ideals set out by Castiglione.128 As humanism and texts such as Castiglione’s and other etiquette texts gained popularity, these representations became the way these women could display their education, virtue, and above all, wealth.129 Only the aristocratic and wealthy could afford to

125 Elizabeth Cropper, “On Beautiful Women, Parmigianino, Petrarchismo, and the Vernacular Style,” The Art Bulletin Vol. 58, No. 3. (1976): 374. Also see Elizabeth Cropper, “The Beauty of Woman: Problems in the Rhetoric of Renaissance Portraiture,” in Rewriting the Renaissance. Edited by Margaret W. Ferguson, Maureen Quilligan, and Nancy J. Vickers. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986): 175-190.

126 Tinagli, 84.

127 Ibid, 107.

128 Ibid, 106.

129 Wendy Summerfield, “In the Shadow of Mars: The Emergence of the Female Portrait Painter in Renaissance Italy,” MA Thesis, California State University Dominguez Hills, 2004: 84.

commission an artist to create these types of works and patrons could use these portraits to display their expensive clothing, jewelry, and home. Italian elites recognized these portraits’ abilities to reflect and even direct social order and, due to the influence these works could have, worked hard to ensure that these portraits were only available to the nobility and upper class.130

Sofonisba directly recalled the established principles for 16th century female noble portraits during this period in her painting with Campi. These types of portraits of noble women were meant to convey the influence and status of artists and sitters. Intimacy was avoided, the sitter was separated from the viewer, the personality of the sitter was unimportant, and the size, format, and style were are all suited towards public display of virtue, family, status, and beauty.131 Foregrounding her nobility related to Castiglione’s text, which insisted the ideal courtier be of noble birth; “Noble birth is like a bright lamp that makes manifest and visible deeds both good and bad…endowed by nature not only with talent and with beauty…but with that certain grace…which shall make [her] at first sight pleasing and lovable to all who see

[her].132 Sofonisba’s engagement with Castiglione and his concept of the ideal cortegiana encouraged her to highlight the importance of her nobility, for public opinion favored nobility. If this portrait was the key for gaining favor with potential patrons at court, she needed to provide the best first impression. This is one crucial factor that differentiates the portrait with Bernardino

Campi from Sofonisba’s earlier self-portraits. She was physically separated from the viewer by

Campi’s presence and her posture and expression in Campi’s painting were stiff. In addition, she doubled the distance by removing one more level of accessibility; the image of her was just

130 Baldwin, 134.

131 Tinagli, 107; Laurie Arlene Glenn, “Virtuous Ladies and Melancholic “Geniuses”: A Study of Gender-Based Creativity in Italy During the Early Modern Period,” (MA Thesis, University of Victoria, 1999): 168.

132 Castiglione, 21-22.

another image. Campi was more “real” than she was, increasing her passivity in the painting.133

Garrard suggested that on a superficial level this distancing may be seen as a deliberate relinquishing of authority to her former teacher, cancelling out her own pride and ambition by giving the credit to the male artist.134 At first it seemed Sofonisba visually removed her agency from the painting entirely, which resulted in Campi’s presence takes on greater significance than hers. His presence and action provided external validation of her rank and worth because he is commemorating her in a painting.135 In removing herself in this manner, Sofonisba emphasized her status rather than her personality and talent. However, Garrard convincingly argued, she remained the dominant presence in the painting due to her positioning in the center of the canvas and her larger scale compared to Campi.

In addition to her change in pose, Sofonisba reflected her nobility in the painting and set it apart from her earlier self-portraits with her clothing. Clothes in early modern Italy were used to express class distinctions, to differentiate on a sartorial spectrum those who held elite status from those who did not.136 Luxurious and heavily ornamented gowns, such as the one seen in

Bronzino’s portrait of Eleanora of Toledo, helped women to fashion their identities and claim privileged status. Women sought to celebrate their rank through these increasingly grand gowns, allowing them to flaunt their status in the city and clearly differentiate themselves from others.137

While Sofonisba’s dark red gown did not reach the level of extravagance seen in Eleanora’s

133 Garrard, 560.

134 Ibid, 560.

135 Ibid, 560.

136 Philippa Jackson, “Parading in Public: Patrician Women and Sumptuary Law in Renaissance Siena,” Urban History, Vol. 37, No. 3 (December 2010): 452.

137 Ibid, 453.

portrait, the red gown with delicate gold detailing was a clear attempt by Sofonisba to present herself as a wealthy noblewoman. The fabric has been described as velvet and was decorated with gold embroidery and dark green jewels. Gold textiles and embroidery were employed by the elite community for centuries as a sign of status and wealth. Gold thread was typically made during this period with gold leaf tightly wrapped around the thread, making gold embroidery incredibly expensive.138 The high-quality fabric also referenced Sofonisba’s aristocratic background as they could afford fine textiles.139 Clothing constructed of fabrics that were deeply dyed were typically an effective means of claiming elite status since the minerals required to make the dyes were expensive. Thus, crimson and scarlet fabrics were a sign of luxury.140 Her dress was also aligned with popular fashion during the period, another sign of wealth that she could afford to purchase a new gown in the latest style. The 16th century trends shifted towards a

French and Spanish style, causing the sleeves of women’s dresses to narrow and a slight puff was added at the shoulder, along with the addition of ruffles around the cuff and collar.141

Restorations of the painting undertaken in 1997 and 2002 necessitate a revision to previous conclusions about the significance of the color of the costume in which Sofonisba depicted herself: these interventions reveal that she chose to align herself with the ideal cortegiana, conceptualized by Castiglione, through sartorial means. Before the restoration, when

138 Kassia St. Clair, “Golden Threads: A Coda,” in The Golden Thread. (London: John Murray Publisher, 2018): 290.

139 Gómez, 21.

140 Carole Collier Frick. Dressing Renaissance Florence: Families, Fortunes, and Fine Clothing. (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002.): 170.

141 Carole Collier Frick, “Painting Personal Identity: The Costuming of Nobiledonne, Heroines, and Kings,” in Italian Women Artists: from Renaissance to Baroque, Edit by Stefania Biancani et al. 1st ed. (Milan: Skira, 2007): 65.

the blackness of Sofonisba’s garment was assumed to be original, Garrard and others had argued that Sofonisba made this choice to align with Campi’s artist’s smock, to masculinize and therefore elevate her persona as a female artist by connecting her to male artists and courtiers.142

It is now evident, however, that the rich red color of the gown and the gold detailing stands in contrast to the conservative clothing worn by Campi.143 Yet Sofonisba’s attire was still simplified compared to the brightly colored and ornamented gowns she dressed her sisters in for

The Chess Game. While presenting herself as closer to the expectation of a noble woman, her high status would have allowed her much more luxurious clothing under the 16th century sumptuary laws in Cremona.144 Garrard’s argument that Sofonisba still avoids the associations with vanity often ascribed to women by adopting more sober and masculine clothing is still viable.145 Sofonisba chose a modest and restrained version of noble attire in a darker fabric, following Castiglione’s prescriptions, to accentuate her identity as virtuous in addition to a noblewoman. In his discussion of the ideal lady at court, Castiglione called for her to “clothe herself in such a way as not to appear vain and frivolous…the garments [should] enhance her grace…in order to increase what is a gift of nature.”146 Castiglione’s prescription for the ideal female courtier contrasted with the reality of how noblewomen of the 16th century typically adorned themselves. In choosing a modest version of the typical noblewoman’s attire, Sofonisba may have been attempting to find a middle ground between the ideal and reality. By depicting

142 Garrard, 584; Woods Marsden, 201; Woodall, 313.

143 Prior to 1997, the painting had been substantially overpainted and the gown had been painted black to obscure damage to the work. This led many scholars to interpret the painting differently due to the black gown Anguissola appeared to be wearing. Baldwin, 116, Garrard, 583; Guiducci, 2013; Perlingieri, 49.

144 Garrard, 583.

145 Ibid, 584.

146 Castiglione, 154. 45

herself modestly in comparison to the more extravagant and luxurious clothing seen in other noble portraits, Sofonisba more closely aligned herself with Castiglione’s text and ideals for the cortegiana rather than the cultural image of the beautiful noble woman.

Sofonisba furthered her self-fashioning as a noble woman by adding in smaller details and accessories not seen in her previous portraits. She included a pair of simple silver drop earrings and in her left hand she held a pair of gloves. Due to the painting’s numerous restorations and the loose brushstrokes in this particular area, the details of Sofonisba’s earrings are difficult to make out, but they bear similarities to the earrings worn by Eleanora of Toledo in her portrait by Bronzino. The elongated pearl in Bronzino’s painting was mirrored in the shape of the drop earrings worn by Sofonisba. There were also similarities in the way Sofonisba and

Eleanora wore their hair and the netting around Sofonisba’s hair was reminiscent of Eleanora’s pearl decorated hairpiece. Sofonisba may have been familiar with the style of hairpieces as the pearls woven into her sisters’ hair in The Chess Game also shared similarities with Bronzino’s portrait. In addition to the jewelry, gloves were a common reference to nobility, for they denoted hands that were unfamiliar to manual labor, including the craft of painting.147 In a shift from her

1556 portrait, in which Sofonisba portrayed herself in the act of painting, here she traded in her artistic instruments for a pair of gloves to emphasize her nobility. Sofonisba’s self-portraits are among the first wide-spread examples of images of the woman artist. In crafting the image,

Sofonisba continued to stress the most crucial quality discussed in Castiglione’s Courtier: discreet modesty in all things.148 Even as the elegant noblewoman in her finery, Sofonisba simultaneously identified herself as a modest virtuosa.

147 Woods-Marsden, 208; Peter Stallybrass and Ann Rosalind Jones, “Fetishizing the Glove in Renaissance Europe,” Critical Inquiry, Vol. 28, No. 1 (2001): 118; Baldwin, 115.

148 Woods-Marsden, 201. 46

The Master and the Student

One of the most analyzed aspects of this painting is the unusual inclusion of the secondary figure, identified as Sofonisba’s first painting teacher Bernardino Campi. Art historians have tried to understand this painting due to the absence of a precedent for the unusual double portrait. While double portraits, such as marriage portraits or portraits of male friendships existed prior to this work, it was extremely unusual to have a portrait of a man and woman as acquaintances.149 Additionally, Sofonisba’s choice to obscure her role as the artist by showing

Campi as the painter is even further puzzling to the viewer. Sofonisba had a decade of self- portraits which proudly proclaim they were made by her own hand. What made the artist decide to include a secondary figure in the creator role and furthermore, why did she choose the secondary figure to be her painting teacher, Bernardino Campi? Scholars have offered several interpretations concerning Sofonisba’s choice to incorporate Campi into the image, but the present study will contribute to our understanding of the ways in which his presence reaffirmed her noble status and her identity as the ideal cortegiana.

Speculation about the date of the painting has led to questions about Sofonisba’s decision to include her former painting teacher in the double portrait, but the now accepted date of 1559 invites new theories and explanations for Sofonisba’s choice. Sofonisba’s formal education with

Bernardino Campi ended nearly a decade earlier, around 1550. What caused Sofonisba to return to her former master as a key subject in her painting? The depiction of Campi in the double portrait is the only known image of Bernardino Campi and previous scholars have assumed

Sofonisba painted the portrait from memory or from a now-lost image.150 Art historians have

149 Musloff, 26. It was thought that women were not as capable of friendship as men were and additionally, a friendship between a man and a woman may be viewed as inappropriate and leave the woman open to impropriety.

150 Garrard, 566. 47

dated the work to years throughout the 1550s, from as early as 1550 and as late as 1561.151 This dating led scholars to believe Sofonisba was still living in Cremona when she created the work, while Campi had left for Milan around 1550. The dating to 1559 allows for a new theory:

Sofonisba left for Milan in 1558 and lived there until her departure for Spain in the fall of 1559.

Campi was still living in Milan in 1559 and it is possible she may have visited with and drew or painted her former teacher from life.152 The pair had a close, even familial, relationship after

Sofonisba spent nearly three years living and learning from Campi. We know the pair remained in touch after her time studying with him due to a letter sent from Sofonisba to Campi in 1561.153

In the letter, Anguissola responded to a request from Campi for a painting and she cordially noted that she “recommends [herself] to [him] and kiss [his] hand and that of [his] dearest wife, whom [she] loves.”154 This close relationship between the two artists led scholars to understand the portrait as a tribute to Campi.155 While the tribute to her painting teacher may serve as one element of Sofonisba’s goal of the work, viewing the work as a representation of Sofonisba’s court ambitions provides a more complex interpretation of Campi’s presence. To contemporaneous viewers, the painting may have been interpreted as a great Italian artist painting a portrait of a young noblewoman. In one sense, Sofonisba affirmed her worth as a noblewoman by showing herself being painted by a famous artist.156 She also distanced herself

151 Perlingieri, 51. Perlingieri dates the work to 1550; Claire Hamlisch, “Toward an Understanding of Sofonisba Anguissola, (1532-1625), Cremonese Painter,” (M.A. Thesis, University of Michigan, August 1973), pp. 52-53. Hamlisch dates the painting to 1561; Most other scholars date the work to the latter half of the 1550s, including the Pinacoteca Nazionale Siena which dates the work to 1559.

152 Woods-Marsden, 208; Stuart, 47.

153 Woodall, 312; Letter from Bernardino Campi to Sofonisba Anguissola, Translated and printed in Perlingieri, 126.

154 Letter from Sofonisba Anguissola to Bernardino Campi. Translated and printed in Perlingieri, 126.

155 Black, 91; Chaney, 54; Laurie Glenn, 171.

156 Black, 92, Garrard, 560. 48

from the artistic practice by placing the paintbrush in Campi’s hand rather than her own. She placed a physical distance between herself as the artist and herself as the subject. Campi physically stood as a barrier between the two versions of herself; the artist outside the canvas painting the portrait and the subject represented on Campi’s canvas in the work. She was not technically even present in the painting, but only as an image created by someone else. In this way, she also concealed her own pride and ambition as an artist by giving authorship of her portrait to Campi.157

The Cortegiana’s Wit

Sofonisba’s choice to include Bernardino Campi in her double portrait was primarily a way to display her sharp wit. In Book Two of The Courtier, Castiglione called for the ideal courtier to “know how to sweeten and refresh the minds of his hearers, and move them discreetly to gaiety and laughter with amusing witticisms…so that he may continually give pleasure.”158

Sofonisba’s humor was best illustrated through the manipulation and criticism of the painting’s subject and creator. Mary Garrard revealed the ways in which Sofonisba understood and then challenged the social expectation of women in portraits as the object of the male artist’s creation.159 It was in her acknowledgement of this societal expectation that Sofonisba displayed her wit in this portrait. She did so in several ways. In the first viewing of the painting Campi appeared to be the active male character and Sofonisba was the passive female object, yet as

Garrard pointed out the roles are reversed since Sofonisba is the actual creator of the image.160

157 Garrard, 560.

158 Castiglione, 102.

159 Garrard, 556.

160 Garrard 562; Woodall, 313. 49

As Dena Woodall noted in her dissertation on double portraiture in Renaissance Italy, Sofonisba employed the Mannerist tool of teasing the viewer; she showed a painting (Campi) painting a portrait (Sofonisba), an artist (Sofonisba) painting a self-portrait (Sofonisba) and an artist

(Sofonisba) painting another artist (Campi) in the act of painting a work, which is her own self- portrait.161 For Castiglione, “the more clever and discreet [the] jokes are, the more they please and they more they are praised.”162 The complicated web of representation was a way for

Sofonisba to playfully critique the expectation of the male creator and the female subject. She used Castiglione’s call for the courtier’s wit as the means by which to advance this critique.

Perhaps the largest joke in Sofonisba’s painting was at the expense of Campi himself, for it challenges the expectation that a female artist is the creation of a male teacher by advancing an opposing premise. In a 1554 letter from the painter Francesco Salviati to Campi, Salviati praised

Sofonisba’s skills and abilities and directly attributed them to Campi, for she was his

“creation.”163 While it is not certain that Sofonisba was directly aware of Salviati’s letter, she would have been familiar with the concept of the male creator and the passive female creation.

Her portrait replicated the well-known myth of Pygmalion, who brought his beautiful creation to life with his skill and dedication to his subject.164 Playfully addressing Salviati’s letter, Sofonisba placed Campi literally in the midst of creating her on canvas. The portrait was not quite finished, and he put the final details on her gown before he completed his work.165 Yet Sofonisba also

161 Woodall, 313.

162 Castiglione, 132.

163 Garrard, 560.

164 Ibid, 560.

165 The unfinished quality of the painting has led to speculation that the painting as a whole is unfinished, but Anguissola was showing a painting in progress and purposefully left the portrait of herself with loose brushstrokes to capture the unfinished state. 50

critiqued this idea, for it is the invisible Sofonisba outside the canvas who created Campi in the painting. Sofonisba also showed a drastic difference in the style and skill of her two subjects.

Campi was painted in Sofonisba’s traditional style, the delicate modeling of his features and hands displayed her skill as a portraitist that received praise throughout her career for breathing life into her subjects.166 By contrast, Sofonisba rendered her image in the fictive painting by

Campi with less skill than she demonstrated in her representation of his figure and in her other portraits. The self-portraits prior to this painting show the young female artist as carefully rendered, with emphasis placed on her large green eyes and skillful hands. By contrast, Campi’s painting of Sofonisba was stiff and her left hand awkwardly held her gloves. Sofonisba may have been attempting to copy Campi’s own style, as the portrait of Sofonisba reflected similar compositional choices as those seen in Campi’s Portrait of a Lady (1553-4, Fig. 11). The woman in Campi’s 1553 painting stiffly held her gloves in her left hand at her side and her hands lacked the usual modeling seen in Sofonisba’s paintings. The woman also wore earrings comparable to the teardrop pearls Sofonisba appeared to be wearing and their hair was worn in a similar fashion. Sofonisba would have been familiar with Campi’s style and attempted to copy it in her painting. By comparing Sofonisba’s self-portraits with the image depicted by Campi’s hand, she was purposefully showing Campi as an inferior portraitist.167 Following in the guidance of

166 Jacobs 1994: 83; Woods-Marsden, 190.

167 Garrard, 564; Also see Michael Cole, Sofonisba’s Lessons: A Renaissance Artist and Her Work. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2020.) Scholars have questioned the attribution of the painting to Anguissola due to the inferior quality of the painting in comparison to her other works, but if Anguissola was intentionally trying to show the skill level of two different hands, it stands to reason that she would have purposely painting part of the work in a lower quality style to differentiate the two artists. In Cole’s 2020 text, he argued the portrait may be by Campi’s hand as a tribute to his famous student. He argued that it is odd that Sofonisba would return to her painting teacher as a subject and it makes more sense for her teacher to connect himself to his renowned student. For Cole, he did not believe Sofonisba would have had the self-awareness to create such an unusual portrait in which she shows “herself as though she were being regarded by a man” (Cole, 67). This comment disregards the level of intelligence and ingenuity possessed by Sofonisba, as illustrated throughout this paper.

Castiglione, the younger artist had made “every effort to resemble and, if that be possible, to transform [herself] into [her] master.”168 She had in fact surpassed him, both in skill and notoriety, and became the master. This tongue-in-cheek critique of her painting teacher, as

Garrard argued, recasted Sofonisba as the real Pygmalion who breathed life into Campi in the painting.169 Those who would see the double portrait would have quickly understood Sofonisba’s sharp wit to critique the way she was being cast as Campi’s creation. By 1559, Sofonisba had surpassed Campi’s regional fame and she had gained international acclaim that brought her to the

Spanish court by the end of the year. To cast her as Campi’s creation limited her abilities to what he could achieve when Sofonisba had already exceeded Campi’s capabilities by the time this painting was made.170 The double portrait, while presenting Sofonisba as the idealized noblewoman as described by Castiglione being painted by a well-known artist, also contained a courtier’s humor and wit as a way to reference her artistic abilities and success.

Sofonisba placed her nobility at the forefront of her portrait, but she also understood the importance of her artistic ability and inserted references to her talent as an artist. At this point in her career, Sofonisba would have understood that her nobility alone would never gain her a prestigious position at court. The Anguissolas were minor nobility and Sofonisba’s ambitions to gain a position at a court required something more. What set Sofonisba apart from the other minor noblewomen was her renowned artistic ability. By highlighting her skill and notoriety,

Sofonisba proclaimed the worth she could bring to her potential patron’s court. In the double portrait, she casted herself in the position of the poised noblewoman through clothing and

168 Castiglione, 31.

169 Garrard, 565

170 Jacobs, 156.

posture, but referencing her artistic fame was paramount to advertising herself as the ideal member at court. Even without a paintbrush in her hand, Sofonisba’s hand was highlighted with her inclusion of the gloves and the alignment of her hand along the central axis. As mentioned above, Sofonisba alluded to her abilities through her wit and humor by critiquing Campi and the concept of the male creator/female creation. She would have also recognized that through wit and intellectual humor, the portrait maintained focus on her in order to use it strategically to secure her court position. Visually, Sofonisba was the more prominent figure in the painting. She was significantly larger than Campi and she was positioned in the center of the canvas while

Campi was placed to the side of her.171 The viewer’s eye went directly to Sofonisba and seeing the work, contemporary viewers of the portrait would have recognized Sofonisba and made the connection between the young noblewoman depicted and their knowledge of the skilled young artist. Campi’s presence in the portrait became a way of validating and contrasting her artistic abilities. Sofonisba had mastered all the skills he taught her, had improved them to reach her current level of success, and her artistic worth had greatly surpassed his.172 By including herself as the physical subject and the ‘invisible’ artist, Sofonisba occupied two distinct spaces in society and gained artistic subjectivity.173 She firmly held the space of the noblewoman subject, claiming and advertising her nobility, as well as carefully and strategically claimed her role as the masterful portrait-maker behind the canvas.174

171 Garrard, 562.

172 Black, 93; Garrard, 564.

173 Garrard, 619.

174 Baldwin, 121

The Restoration

A recent restoration study has revealed important modifications to the composition and costuming of the double portrait which has received little attention from scholars. During a series of cleanings and restorations, The painting underwent infrared reflectography, radiography, and an x-ray to understand Sofonisba’s technical process with particular attention to changes in composition.175 One of the most perplexing aspects of scholarship surrounding Sofonisba’s double portrait is the position of her left hand, which has changed positions over the course of various restorations. Scholars over the last twenty-five years have made passing mention of it, but it has never received proper attention until the restoration study published by the Pinacoteca

Nazionale Siena in 2013.176

The restoration process revealed a significant change in the composition of Sofonisba’s portrait which showed the young artist carefully changed her appearance to better suit her desired public image. The painting arrived at the Pinacoteca Nazionale Siena around 1852, when it first appeared in the museum’s catalog.177 For the first fifty years in which it was in the museum’s collection, it was attributed to various Venetian artists before it was firmly attributed to

Sofonisba in 1909.178 The painting was in a relatively poor state when it first arrived even though it had undergone a restoration previously. In this first version of the painting, Sofonisba’s left arm was bent upwards with her hand resting over her heart and a bracelet on her wrist. With her hand in this position, it was hidden under Bernardino Campi’s hand. At some point during her

175 Guiducci, 2013.

176 Ibid.

177 Musloff, 7

178 Buffa, 216.

initial creation of the painting, Sofonisba changed the positioning of the forearm, so the arm was no longer bent upward, and her hand held a pair of gloves.179 During the earlier restoration,

Sofonisba’s correction was removed, and the restorer was presented with a three-armed figure.

The restorer chose to repaint Sofonisba’s dress in black to conceal the uncovered arm, masking the original color and design of her gown. The painting remained in this state until 1996, when the work was removed for cleaning and restoration. During this restoration, the black overpainting was removed and presented the three-armed figure once more. This restoration also revealed the original color of the gown, the gold detailing, the beading in Sofonisba’s hair, and the paintbrush in Campi’s hand. The conservator, presented with two hands done by Sofonisba, chose to keep both visible. It was during this period that the figure of Sofonisba was displayed with three arms, one left arm bent up under Campi’s hand and another left arm relaxed at her side holding gloves. This version of the restoration remained until 2002 when it was decided the three-armed figure was confusing to the viewer.180 After conducting x-ray testing, the conservators confirmed that Sofonisba changed the composition of the painting in the process of making the work. With this knowledge, they chose to re-cover the bent arm to return the painting to the state the artist intended as the final product. This 2002 restoration is the current state of the painting.

It is unclear what prompted Sofonisba to change the positioning of her arm in the process of painting, but she did so to prioritize her appearance as a noblewoman. It is possible the answer is simply because Campi’s hand was blocking hers and she chose to move the arm to eliminate the overlapping hands. Considering the complexity of Sofonisba’s social position, together with

179 Guiducci, 2013.

180 Ibid.

her ambition and intelligence, the change was surely more deliberate. The new arm position aligned the image with the established noble portraiture of the time, as discussed previously. The slightly bent arm bared similarities to the curved arm of Titian’s La Bella and Bronzino’s

Eleanora of Toledo. The change in arm position also allowed Sofonisba to include a pair of gloves in her hand, which directly referenced her noble status and also distanced her portrait from her career as an artist. As discussed above, gloves were used as a symbol of non-working hands. Lastly, the changed arm position physically separated Sofonisba from the act of painting.

The bent arm placed Sofonisba’s hand under Campi’s, which also placed her hand under

Campi’s paintbrush. Previous scholars who viewed the painting with the bent arm referenced the way Sofonisba’s hand appeared to be combined with Campi’s as if she is the one now instructing him and referenced her actual hand in the creation of the painting.181 By moving her arm away from the paintbrush and Campi’s hand, she distanced herself from the tool of her trade in favor of allowing the wit to serve as the primary reference to her artistic abilities.

Timing and Purpose

The painting is dated to 1559, but little is known about the circumstances which prompted Sofonisba to paint the double portrait at this time. There is no known documentation for the location for the work until 1628, when an inventory entry for the Gonzaga collection listed a painting of Sofonisba and a “M. Fermo.” M. Fermo may have referred to Fermo Ghisoni, a student of Giulio Romano who Sofonisba may have met during her stay in Mantua in 1556. A physiognomic study confirmed that the man in the portrait was not Ghisoni but rather Campi, whose features as rendered by Sofonisba closely resemble those of Campi in a now lost

181 Garrard, 562.

engraving and medal confirmed to represent Campi. 182 Sofonisba’s works were typically not created for an immediate market or patron, and there is no known patron for this painting. While she had a few public commissions, her early works were typically for sending as gifts or remained within the Anguissola home.183 Other than her self-portraits, Sofonisba’s early works were of her family. The paintings served many purposes for them, highlighting their status, achievements, and skills. Displaying them in their home allowed the family to fashion their identities, boast about themselves without appearing immodest, as well as remember and celebrate members of the family no longer in the home. Due to the lack of provenance for the painting for nearly a century, art historians are left to speculate as to why and for whom

Sofonisba made this work. The most common possibility is that the work commemorated the depicted individuals, perhaps with reference to a particular event or circumstance. In the buildup to moving to the Spanish court, Sofonisba may not have known if or when she would be able to return home to her family, making her imminent departure a logical moment for her to have made a commemorative painting for her family. The portrait’s large size made the work unlikely to have served as an intimate keepsake. Rather, Sofonisba likely intended it to be displayed in a home.184 The later inventory entry which placed the painting in the Gonzaga collection in the

17th century also established that the work remained in Italy.185 In her dissertation on the double portrait, Meghan Musloff speculated that the patron for the painting may have been someone who knew both Sofonisba and Campi.186 Musloff suggested it may have been created for

182 Musloff 12; Buffa, 216.

183 Garrard, 615.

184 Musloff, 2.

185 Buffa, 216.

186 Musloff, 31. 57

Sofonisba’s sister Elena, who also studied with Campi, but it is more generally accepted that the painting was created for Sofonisba’s immediate family. We know from Giorgio Vasari’s visit to the Anguissola home in the 1560s that the Anguissola home included many of Sofonisba’s works, including The Chess Game which Vasari commented on in his Lives of the Artists.187 The painting was a way for her immediate family to remember her after she left for the Spanish court and could publicly display her abilities and nobility for visitors to the Anguissola home. The painting also captured a monumental moment in Sofonisba’s life. Woods-Marsden argued the painting served as a reflection on Sofonisba’s major transition as she left behind her life in Italy and her early artistic career and looked forward towards her life as a dama and artist at the

Spanish court.188 This private setting for the painting may render the great wit and strategy of

Sofonisba’s painting useless as only those invited to the Anguissola home would have seen it, but we know Sofonisba’s witty Chess Game also remained in the family home. Without historical documentation, it is difficult to know the initial purpose and location of the painting, but the personal nature of the painting and the knowledge the Anguissolas kept many of their eldest daughter’s paintings makes it likely the portrait remained with her family.

One of the most difficult questions presented by this painting and its dating to 1559 is whether the painting had any direct connection to Sofonisba’s official summons to the Spanish court in the summer of 1559. Most scholars date the work to 1559, but the exact timing of when during 1559 she created the work remains unknown. The first official summons to the Spanish court arrived for Amilcare Anguissola around June 1559.189 Yet, the Anguissola family may

187 Vasari, “Lives of Benvenuto Garofalo and Girolamo da Carpi, Painters of Ferrara, and of Other Lombards,” 48.

188 Woods-Marsden, 209.

189 Kusche, 48.

have been developing plans for their eldest daughter to serve at the Spanish court as early as May

1558. In a letter to Michelangelo, Amilcare wrote that he hoped “that his divine majesty [Philip

II] grants a means of living to [Sofonisba], and to my other five daughters and only son.”190 It was also during 1558 and into 1559 that Sofonisba lived in Milan and interacted with the Duke of Alba. The Duke of Alba was placed in charge of organizing the retrieval of Philip II of

Spain’s new wife, Elisabeth of Valois,191 and choosing her entourage. He was sent to France to meet with the king’s new wife in June 1559 and after discovering her love for painting and drawing, the Duke of Alba may have thought of the talented young noblewoman he met in Milan months before.192 Upon receiving the summons from Philip II, Amilcare Anguissola’s decision to send his daughter so far from home weighed heavily on his mind as it took him at least two months to finally consent to the summons. It was not until about a month later that in a letter to the King of Spain on September 6th, 1559, Amilcare agreed to send his “dearest daughter” although it caused him “great sorrow and deep unhappiness that [she] will be so far away.”193

Amilcare understood, like his eldest daughter, that this summons was not solely the result of their nobility. It is unlikely a woman of minor nobility in Cremona would have arrived at the

Spanish court if it were not for her renowned artistic ability.194 In a second letter to Philip II,

Amilcare makes reference to his daughter’s “great talents [which] speak for themselves far better

190 Letter from Amilcare Anguissola to Michelangelo, May 15, 1558. Translated in Bea Porqueres, Sofonisba Anguissola, pintura (c. 1535-1625), (Madrid: Archivos Vola, 2018): 106.

191 Once she arrived in Spain, she adopted the Spanish version of her name and was known as Isabel of Valois.

192 Stuart, 76.

193 Letter from Amilcare Anguissola to King Philip II of Spain, September 6, 1559. Translated and printed in Kusche, 49.

194 Caroline P. Murphy, “Wife, Widow, Nun, and Court Lady: Women Patrons of the Renaissance and Baroque,” in Italian Women Artists: from Renaissance to Baroque: 25.

than any words I could use.”195 For Amilcare, the decade of advertising his daughter’s abilities and sending her works throughout northern Italy had paid off with a more prestigious offer than he could have imagined. Ultimately, arrangements were made in August 1559 for Sofonisba

Anguissola’s passage from Italy to Madrid.196 She left in early November 1559, accompanied by six servants and two gentlemen.197 Amilcare may have wished to accompany his daughter on the voyage, but notes in his September letter to the king that “due to his age and responsibility to his other children,” he was unable to travel with her.198 After riding from Milan to Genoa, then sailing from Genoa to Barcelona, and riding once more from Barcelona to Guadalajara,

Sofonisba arrived in Spain near the end of 1559 in time for the preparations for the official wedding celebration for Philip II and his new wife.199 The second half of Sofonisba’s year was preoccupied with preparations for her travel and arrival in Spain, so it is possible she knew of her imminent departure before she finished the painting. This may also account for her decision to modify the iconography, as described above. The absence of documentation for Sofonisba’s works make it difficult to estimate how long it took her to complete the painting, but the possibility of going to Spain was on her mind as early as 1558 as established by Amilcare’s letter

195 Letter from Amilcare Anguissola to King Philip II of Spain, October 14, 1559. Translated and printed in Kusche, 54.

196 Perlingieri, 114.

197 Kusche, 54; Gamberini, 32. One of the men who accompanied her may have been her distance cousin, Ferrante Gonzaga, who arrived in Spain around the same time as Anguissola.

198 Letter from Amilcare Anguissola to King Philip II of Spain, September 6, 1559. Translated and printed in Kusche, 49.

199 Kusche, 55; Baldwin, 13. Anguissola made quite the impression at the wedding celebration and caught the attention of many guests. In a letter from the envoy to the Duke of Mantua, he remarked that “Signore Ferrante Gonzaga was the first to dance; he asked the young Cremonese noblewoman who paints and who came here to stay with the queen, which opened the way for many who danced after them.” Letter from Girolamo Neri to the Duke of Mantua, February 1560. Translated and published in Kusche, 55.

to Michelangelo. She may have started the painting prior to knowing she was invited to the court, but with court ambitions in mind. She was accepted at the Spanish court as a noblewoman and would officially serve as a lady-in-waiting to the queen. Her role as an artist, while equally important to her acquiring the position, was secondary to her official role.200 The visual distance between herself and the tools of painting in the double portrait emphasized that and casted her visually in the portrait tradition of a noblewoman and lady-in-waiting.

Conclusion

Sofonisba Anguissola’s portrait has been a source of much scholarly inquiry, but it is clear, following Garrard’s pioneering analysis, that visually and contextually Bernardino Campi

Painting Sofonisba Anguissola is a more complex image than scholarship had acknowledged and required deeper analysis. Viewing the work in the historical context of Sofonisba’s court ambitions and her adoption of Castiglione’s ideal cortegiana, the painting can be better understood as a maturing of a young woman artist’s meditation on societal expectations for women and courtly behavior reflected in previous portraits. She reflected upon the accepted principles of noble portraiture for beautiful young women and casted herself as the young noblewoman painted by the great artist. Yet, she also challenged the conventions of female portraiture by asking the viewer to rethink the ideas of the creator and the creation using her courtly wit and humor. What may appear to be a strange but loving dedication and tribute to her former painting teacher is better understood as strategizing the visual presentation of an elite, educated, and talented young woman. Sofonisba understood her gender placed her at a

200 In all the writing about Anguissola during her time at the Spanish court, she was only ever referred to as a noblewoman or as a dama to the queen. In her later life, she continued to refer to herself as a lady-in-waiting to the Spanish Queen. She cited her previous relationship with the Spanish court to get out of paying tax upon arriving back in Italy and she also included a letter to Philip II in one of her last self-portraits in 1610. (Perlingieri, 171 and Perlingieri, 194.) 61

disadvantage within the traditional art world. She would never be able to follow the prescribed path for the young artist to achieve international fame. Instead of accepting what was expected of her, Sofonisba forged a new unprecedented path by defining herself as a noblewoman and an artist. This new path not only allowed Sofonisba to gain a reputation as a miraculous painter who could breathe life into her subjects, but also allowed her to keep her moral reputation intact by subscribing to Castiglione’s expectations. Her strategic self-portraits allowed Sofonisba to ennoble herself beyond the limits of her minor nobility and she became a model example for many young women artists who followed in her steps.201

201 In a letter written in 1579, Bolognese artist Lavinia Fontana expressed that she and another artist, Irene di Spilimbergo, had “set [their] hearts on learning how to paint” after seeing one of Anguissola’s portraits. Jacobs 1994, 76.

CONCLUSION

THE CORTEGIANA AT COURT

Sofonisba spent her entire career visualizing and depicting herself as the ideal lady at court. After years of constructing her courtly identity, she was presented with the opportunity to make her paintings a reality when she arrived at the Spanish court in 1559. During Sofonisba’s nearly twenty years in Madrid serving two queens, she cemented herself as a vital figure at court.

She was widely discussed by visitors to the court and became a close confidant for the young

Queen Isabel of Valois. The poised, educated, and talented young woman Sofonisba depicted in her portraits was the result of a great deal of self-awareness, reflection, and motivation. She understood the importance of a virtuous and polished public persona and fashioned herself into the ideal cortegiana both on canvas and in the real world.

The exact date of Sofonisba’s arrival in Spain is unclear, but a firsthand account mentioned Sofonisba prominently at the official wedding celebration for King Philip II and

Isabel of Valois in the beginning of 1560. Sofonisba made her official entrance to court at the wedding celebration where she made a lasting impression. In a letter from the Mantuan ambassador Girolamo Negri, he remarked that Sofonisba began the dancing at the grand ball accompanied by her relative, Ferrante Gonzaga. In the letter, Negri recounted that Gonzaga approached the “Cremonese woman who paints and who has come to stay with the Queen.”202

Not only did Sofonisba make a strong impression on her fellow courtiers, but she made a profound impression on her new patron, Philip II. Charmed by her confidence and grace, he honored her greatly and bowed before her in a gesture that was only to be reserved for the

202 Letter from Girolamo Negri to Duke Guglielmo Gonzaga of Mantua, 8 February 1560. Archivo di Stato di Mantova. Reproduced in Gamberini, 31.

Queen.203 At this very public event, Sofonisba established herself as an important fixture of the

Spanish court as both a graceful lady and a painter. In this way, she was bringing to life the elegant courtly woman she painted in her double portrait.

Sofonisba’s primary role in Spain was as a lady-in-waiting, or dama, for Isabel of Valois.

The traditional role of the dama at the Spanish court was to amuse and entertain the queen, attend to her and act as her chaperone, and contribute to the collective identity of the queen’s household.204 The damas shared a collective status, one which fashioned the queen’s own identity by acting as an extension of the queen and her household.205 They existed as a unit; they lived together, dined together, and attended all events together. They were given equal position and status, apart from one older woman known as the camerera mayor who monitored their comings and goings and was responsible for insuring the damas’ good behavior.206 Sofonisba embodied aspects of the ideal lady-in-waiting because of her education and artistic skill. Yet, the collective identity of the damas raised questions about how Sofonisba may have fit into the community of women. At the age of twenty-seven, she was much older than the queen and most of the other ladies, who traditionally came to serve at court around the age of fourteen or fifteen.

Sofonisba was also set apart from the other ladies because of her position as a painter. She was different from the other damas because she was given the job of providing the young queen with drawing and painting lessons.207 During these lessons, Sofonisba instructed Isabel in art and they

203 Gamberini, 32.

204 Baldwin, 45.

205 Nadine Akkerman and Birgit Houben, “Introduction,” in Politics of Female Households: Ladies-in-Waiting Across Early Modern Europe. (Leiden: BRILL, 2013): 22.

206 Ibid, 17-18.

207 Kusche, 55. 64

developed a unique friendship that would have also set the artist apart from the other ladies. The pair spent time together in these lessons and their relationship was more than that of a patron and her artist. They shared a connection as ladies of similar taste, intellect, and education as well as common language as Isabel’s mother was Italian.208 Sofonisba was considered “a great favorite of the queen” and the pair exchanged many gifts during their time together.209 Interestingly,

Isabel often gifted Sofonisba expensive gowns, textiles, and jewelry to insure that she appeared as wealthy and stylish as the other ladies at court.210 While it was common for Isabel to gift the artist small tokens of appreciation for her paintings, these gifts to help Sofonisba fit in with the wealthier ladies hints at the close nature of their friendship. There was a bond between the two, forged not only during their private art lessons, but through a friendship that meant everything to

Isabel. Ladies at court typically arrived in hopes of using their position to secure a proper marriage with a good family as the king and queen became responsible for arranging such marriages. When suitors approached the young queen to ask for the female painter’s hand in marriage, Isabel would not approve.211 This coincided with a period during which Isabel was quite ill and may have not wished to lose her dear friend while struggling with her health. After months of illness, Isabel miscarried and died of complications in October of 1568.212 Upon the death of her patron and friend, Sofonisba was quoted as being beyond distraught and proclaimed

208 Baldwin, 47.

209 Ibid, 46.

210 Stuart, 91.

211 Gamberini, 37.

212 Perlingieri, 141.

that “she no longer wanted to live.”213 After Isabel passed away, the other foreign-born damas were sent back to France as they no longer served a purpose at court without a queen, but

Sofonisba was asked to stay. Philip requested she stay at court and she was given responsibility for governing Isabel’s two daughters, the young Infantas Isabella Clara Eugenia and Catalina

Michaela.214 Not only had Sofonisba made a strong impression on her queen, but she had installed herself as an essential part of the court and the king requested she remain even after her official duty as dama was over.

Sofonisba Anguissola was given her opportunity at the Spanish court because she was different from traditional aristocratic women. It was her artistic ability that was emphasized in the letters her father sent in response to the offer of the position, highlighting her rare status as an artist and noblewoman. She was brought to court because she could serve as a portraitist and teacher for Isabel, but she could also be trusted to conduct herself in a manner appropriate for life at court.215 Yet, no documentation identified her as a painter and the existing documents only refer to her as a lady to the queen. Even in her own writing about herself, Sofonisba identified herself as a lady. In the rare case in which her artistic ability is mentioned, it is prefaced by her status as a lady first, such as in the case of the account of her at the wedding ceremony in which she is identified as the “Cremonese lady who paints.”216 All who interacted with Sofonisba at the

213 Gamberini, 37.

214 Perlingieri, 148.

215 Baldwin, 32.

216 Ibid, 43.

Spanish court saw her as a cortegiana. She was intelligent, witty, virtuous, and talented. She was a true lady worthy of a king’s praise and a queen’s affections.

After moving to the Spanish court, Sofonisba created fewer self-portraits as she was preoccupied with requests from the royal family. In the 1561 letter to Bernardino Campi,

Sofonisba apologized to her former teacher as she was unable to send him a portrait of King

Philip II as she was “busy doing a portrait of her Serene Highness, the King’s sister, for the

Pope.”217 She explained that “the queen wants a great part of [her] time in order for [her] to paint her portrait, and she does not have enough patience for [her] to paint others.”218 Whether the queen was so demanding of Sofonisba’s time or not, it is clear the queen requested Sofonisba’s talents often and left little time for work outside her royal commissions. One of the few self- portraits that Sofonisba made during her time in Spain (fig. 12) showed her dressed similarly to the way she appeared in the double portrait. She wore a similar white undershirt tied at the neck with a black velvet gown with silver “purl” embroidery.219 Her hair was styled in her typical braid, but jewels are placed throughout. This is a far cry from the simple black smock and plain hair that characterized her early self-portraits. She showed herself as the ideal noblewoman she crafted in her portrait with Bernardino Campi.

Following her time in Spain, Sofonisba continued to instruct artists who came to visit her in her home, including well-known artists such as Anthony van Dyke, and yet, maintained her role as a proper female noblewoman through her role as hostess and entertainer.220 In the later

217 Letter from Sofonisba Anguissola to Bernardino Campi, 21 October 1561. Printed in Perlingieri, 126.

218 Letter from Sofonisba Anguissola to Bernardino Campi, 21 October 1561. Printed in Perlingieri, 126.

219 Perlingieri, 139.

220 Ibid, 175.

self-portraits she painted, including the self-portrait she painted in 1610 at the age of 78 (fig. 14), she only ever fashioned herself as an accomplished lady. She continued to adopt the same simple black attire associated with the Spanish court and showed herself with the social attributes suited for a well-educated noble lady and not a painter. Her reputation as a skillful and knowledgeable artist remained throughout her long life. In 1624, when Sofonisba was visited by Flemish painter

Anthony van Dyck, he remarked that “her eyesight was weakened,” but she was “with a good memory, quick spirit and kind.”221 While visiting with Sofonisba, van Dyck sought out advice about painting and drawing from the aging artist and she enchanted him with stories of her time in Spain.

Through portraits over the course of her entire life, Sofonisba constructed an identity for herself. She adopted the ideals and tropes established by previous artists and writers to initially craft an ideal persona in her self-portraits and then went on to embody the identity she created.

She understood her place in society as a noblewoman. She worked meticulously to carve a path for herself that allowed her to elevate her status through art while always remaining the virtuous, witty, and intelligent cortegiana.

Her legacy as a painter was ensured by her dedication to painting and the arts late into her life. After Sofonisba passed away in 1625 at the age of 93, her beloved second husband placed an inscription on her tomb in San Giorgio dei Genovesi in Palermo that insisted upon his wife’s immense talent. It read,

“To Sofonisba, my wife, who is recorded among the illustrious women of the world, outstanding in portraying the images of man. Orazio Lomellino, in sorrow for the loss of his great love, in 1632, dedicated this little tribute to such a great woman.”222

221 Anthony Van Dyck, Italian Sketchbook, July 12, 1624, Translated and printed in Perlingieri, 204.

222 Perlingieri, 208. 68

ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig. 1: Sofonisba Anguissola, Bernardino Campi Painting Sofonisba Anguissola. 1559. Oil on canvas. Pinacoteca Nazionale, Siena.

Fig. 2: Parmigianino, Self-Portrait in a Convex Mirror, 1523-24. Oil on convex panel. Kunsthistorische Museum, Vienna.

Fig. 3: Sofonisba Anguissola, Self-Portrait. 1554. Oil on panel. Kunsthistorische Museum, Vienna.

Fig. 4: Sofonisba Anguissola, Old Woman Studying the Alphabet with a Laughing Girl. 1550s. Chalk sketch. Uffizi Gallery, Florence.

Fig. 5: Sofonisba Anguissola, Asdrubale Bitten by a Crayfish. 1554. Chalk sketch. Museo Nazionale di Capodimonte, Naples.

Fig. 6: Sofonisba Anguissola, Self-Portriat. 1548. Chalk sketch. Uffizi Gallery, Florence.

Fig. 7: Sofonisba Anguissola, Self-Portrait at the Easel. 1556. Oil on canvas. Lancut Castle, Poland.

Fig. 8: Sofonisba Anguissola, The Chess Game. 1555. Oil on canvas. National Museum of Poznan, Poland.

Fig. 9: Titian, Portrait of a Lady (La Bella). 1536-38. Oil on canvas. Pitti Palace, Florence.

Fig. 10: Bronzino, Portrait of Eleanor of Toledo and her Son Giovanni. 1545. Oil on canvas. Uffizi Gallery, Florence.

Fig. 11: Bernardino Campi, Portrait of a Lady (Possibly Ippolita Gonzaga). 1553-54. Oil on canvas. Sotheby’s.

Fig. 12: Sofonisba Anguissola, Self-Portrait. 1564. Oil on canvas. Chantilly, Musée Conde.

Fig. 13: Sofonisba Anguissola, Self-Portrait. 1610. Oil on canvas. Gottfired Keller Collection, Bern, Switzerland.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Archivo General de Simancas. Madrid, Spain.

Akkerman, Nadine and Houben, Birgit, Politics of Female Households: Ladies-in-Waiting Across Early Modern Europe. Leiden: BRILL, 2013.

Alberti, Leon Battista. On Painting, trans. John R. Spencer. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1966.

Ames-Lewis, Francis. The Intellectual Life of the Early Renaissance Artist. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000.

Baldwin, Pamela Holmes. “Sofonisba Anguissola in Spain: Portraiture as Art and Social Practice at a Renaissance Court,” PhD Dissertation, Bryn Mawr College, 1995.

Barker, Sheila. Women Artists in Early Modern Italy: Careers, Fame, and Collectors. Edited by Sheila Barker. London: Harvey Miller Publishers, an imprint of Brepol Publishers, 2016.

Biancani, Stefania., Frick, Carole Collier., and Nicholson, Elizabeth S. G. Italian Women Artists: from Renaissance to Baroque. 1st ed. Milano: Skira, 2007.

Black, Jennifer Brynn. “Female Self-Portraiture in Early Modern Europe: Colonna, Anguissola, Whitney, and Peeters,” PhD Dissertation, Boston University, 2004.

Buffa, Paolo. Sofonisba Anguissola e sue sorelle, edited by Paolo Buffa. Cremona: Leonardo Arte, 1994.

Castiglione, Baldassar. The Book of the Courtier, edited by Daniel Javitch. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2002.

Cole, Michael. Sofonisba’s Lessons: A Renaissance Artist and Her Work. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2020.

Cropper, Elizabeth. “On Beautiful Women, Parmigianino, Petrarchismo, and the Vernacular Style,” The Art Bulletin Vol. 58, No. 3. (1976): 374.

D’Angelo, Paolo. Sprezzatura: Concealing the Effort of Art from Aristotle to Duchamp. Trans. By Sarin Marchetti. New York: Columbia University Press, 2018. de Tolnay, Charles. “Sofonisba Anguissola and her Relations with Michelangelo,” The Journal of the Walters Art Gallery, Vol. 4 (1941): 114-119.

Farago, Claire J. Leonardo da Vinci’s Paragone. (New York: E.J. Brill. 1992)

Ferguson, Margaret W., Quilligan, Maureen and Vickers, Nancy J. Rewriting the Renaissance. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986.

Ferino-Pagden, Sylvia, Sofonisba Anguissola, and Maria Kusche. Sofonisba Anguissola: A Renaissance Woman. Washington, D.C: National Museum of Women in the Arts, 1995.

Frick, Carole Collier. Dressing Renaissance Florence: Families, Fortunes, and Fine Clothing. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002.

Garrard, Mary D. "Here's Looking at Me: Sofonisba Anguissola and the Problem of the Woman Artist." Renaissance Quarterly 47, no. 3 (1994): 556-622.

Gibson, Joan. "The Logic of Chastity: Women, Sex, and the History of Philosophy in the Early Modern Period." Hypatia 21, no. 4 (2006): 1-19.

Glenn, Laurie Arlene. “Virtuous Ladies and Melancholic “Geniuses”: A Study of Gender-Based Creativity in Italy During the Early Modern Period,” MA Thesis, University of Victoria, 1999.

Gómez, Leticia Ruiz. A Tale of Two Women Painters: Sofonisba Anguissola and Lavinia Fontana. Edited by Leticia Ruiz Gómez. Madrid: Museo Nacional del Prado, 2019.

Gouwens, Kenneth. "Female Virtue and the Embodiment of Beauty: Vittoria Colonna in Paolo Giovio’s Notable Men and Women." Renaissance Quarterly 68, no. 1 (2015): 33-97.

Guiducci, Anna Maria et al. “Il ritratto di Bernardino Campi che ritrae Sofonisba Anguissola al restauro alla ricostruzione della genesi,” Poster presentation, XI Congresso Nazionale IGIIC, Lo Stato dell’Arte, Accademia dell Belle Arti, Bologna. October 10-12, 2013.

Hamlisch, Claire. “Toward an Understanding of Sofonisba Anguissola, (1532-1625), Cremonese Painter,” M.A. Thesis, University of Michigan, 1973.

Hull, Vida J. “The Single Serpent: Family Pride and Female Education in a Portrait by Lucia Anguissola, a Woman Artist of the Renaissance.” Southeastern College Art Conference Review 16, no. 1 (2011): 11–22.

Jackson, Philippa. “Parading in Public: Patrician Women and Sumptuary Law in Renaissance Siena,” Urban History, Vol. 37, No. 3 (December 2010): 452-463.

Jacobs, Fredrika H. Defining the Renaissance Virtuosa: Women Artists and the Language of Art History and Criticism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.

------“Women’s Capacity to Create: The Unusual Case of Sofonisba Anguissola”, Renaissance Quarterly, Vol. 47, No. 1 (Spring 1994): 74-101.

Kelso, Ruth. Doctrine for the Lady of the Renaissance, Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1956.

Louden, Lynn M.""Sprezzatura" in Raphael and Castiglione." Art Journal 28, no. 1 (1968): 43- 53.

Mullins Glenn, Sharlee. “Sofonisba Anguissola: History’s Forgotten Prodigy,” Women’s Studies Vol. 18 (1990): 295-308.

Musloff, Meghan. “Sofonisba Anguissola’s Double Portrait,” (MA Thesis, Michigan State University, 2003.

Perlingieri, Ilya Sandra. Sofonisba Anguissola: The First Great Woman Artist of the Renaissance New York: Rizzoli, 1992.

Porqueres, Bea. Sofonisba Anguissola, pintura (c. 1535-1625). Madrid: Archivos Vola, 2018.

Schiesari, Juliana "In Praise of Virtuous Women? For a Genealogy of Gender Morals in Renaissance Italy." Annali D'Italianistica 7 (1989): 66-87.

Simons, Patricia. "(Check) Mating the Grand Masters: The Gendered, Sexualized Politics of Chess in Renaissance Italy." Oxford Art Journal 16, no. 1 (1993): 59-74.

St. Clair, Kassia. The Golden Thread. London: John Murray Publisher, 2018.

Stallybrass, Peter, and Ann Rosalind Jones, “Fetishizing the Glove in Renaissance Europe,” Critical Inquiry, Vol. 28, No. 1 (2001): 114-132.

Stuart, Norma. "Sofonisba Anguissola and Catharina De Hemessen: Two Exemplary Women Artists of the Renaissance." PhD Dissertation, California State University, Long Beach, 2008.

Summerfield, Wendy. “In The Shadow of Mars: The Emergence of the Female Portrait Painter in Renaissance Italy,” MA Thesis, California State University Dominguez Hills, 2004.

Tinagli, Paola. Women in Italian Renaissance Art: Gender, Representation, and Identity. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1997.

Vasari, Giorgio. Lives of the Most Eminent Painters, Sculptors & Architects, Vol. IX. Translated by Gaston du C. de Vere. Project Gutenberg, 2010.

Vives, Juan Luis. The Education of a Christian Woman: A Sixteenth-Century Manual, edited and translated by Charles Fantazzi. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.

Wallace, William E. Michelangelo: The Artist, the Man, and His Times. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.

Woodall, Dena. “Sharing Space: Double Portraiture in Renaissance Italy,” (PhD Dissertation, Case Western Reserve University, 2008

Woods-Marsden, Joanne. Renaissance Self-Portraiture: The Visual Construction of Identity and the Social Status of the Artist. New Haven: Yale University Press. 1998.

Yevnah, Naomi. "Playing the Game: Sisterly Relations in Sofonisba Anguissola's "The Chess Game"." In Sibling Relations and Gender in the Early Modern World. Edited by Naomi J. Miller and Naomi Yevneh. Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2006.

York, Laura. “The “Spirit of Caesar” and His Majesty’s Servant: The Self-Fashioning of Women Artists in Early Modern Europe,” Women’s Studies, Vol. 30. (2001): 499-520.