DES KUNSTHISTORISCHEN 2019 LXI / 1 MITTEILUNGEN INSTITUTES IN FLORENZ IN FLORENZ INSTITUTES DES KUNSTHISTORISCHEN MITTEILUNGEN HEFT LXI. BAND —2019 1 LXI. BAND — 2019 MITTEILUNGEN DES KUNSTHISTORISCHEN HEFT 1 INSTITUTES IN FLORENZ

Inhalt | Contenuto

Redaktionskomitee | Comitato di redazione Aufsätze Saggi Alessandro Nova, Gerhard Wolf, Samuel Vitali _ _ Redakteur | Redattore Samuel Vitali _ 3_ Daniela Bohde Editing und Herstellung | Editing e impaginazione Mary Magdalene at the Foot of the Cross. Iconography Ortensia Martinez Fucini and the Semantics of Place Kunsthistorisches Institut in Florenz Max-Planck-Institut Via G. Giusti 44, I-50121 Firenze Tel. 055.2491147, Fax 055.2491155 _ 45 _ Jonathan Foote [email protected] – [email protected] Tracing ’s at San Lorenzo www.khi.fi.it/publikationen/mitteilungen modani Die Redaktion dankt den Peer Reviewers dieses Heftes für ihre Unterstützung | La redazione ringrazia i peer reviewers per la loro collaborazione a questo numero. _ 75 _ Teodoro De Giorgio L’invenzione dell’iconografia . Dai prodromi medievali Graphik | Progetto grafico in visceribus Christi RovaiWeber design, Firenze della devozione cordicolare alla rappresentazione moderna delle viscere di Cristo Produktion | Produzione Centro Di edizioni, Firenze

Die erscheinen jährlich in drei Heften und könnenMitteilungen im Abonnement oder in Einzelheften bezogen _ 105 _ Margherita Tabanelli werden durch | Le escono con cadenza Echi normanni nel Palazzo Imperiale di Poznań. Guglielmo II quadrimestrale e possonoMitteilungen essere ordinate in abbonamento o singolarmente presso: e l’arte normanno-sveva, tra storiografia e prassi architettonica Centro Di edizioni, Via dei Renai 20r I-50125 Firenze, Tel. 055.2342666, [email protected]; www.centrodi.it. Miszellen Appunti _ _ Preis | Prezzo Einzelheft | Fascicolo singolo: € 30 (plus Porto | più costi di spedizione) Jahresabonnement | Abbonamento annuale: _ 135 _ Rahel Meier € 90 (Italia); € 120 (Ausland | estero) Wie kommt der Florentiner Dom in den Kapitelsaal der Dominikaner

Die Mitglieder des Vereins zur Förderung des von ? Kunsthistorischen Instituts in Florenz (Max-Planck- Institut) e. V. erhalten die Zeitschrift kostenlos. I membri del Verein zur Förderung des Kunsthistorischen Instituts in Florenz (Max-Planck-Institut) e. V. ricevono la rivista gratuitamente.

Adresse des Vereins | Indirizzo del Verein: c/o Schuhmann Rechtsanwälte Ludwigstraße 8 D-80539 München [email protected]; www.khi.fi.it/foerderverein

Die alten Jahrgänge der sind für Subskribenten online abrufbar über JSTORMitteilungen (www.jstor.org ). Le precedenti annate delle sono accessibili online su JSTOR (www.jstor.org)Mitteilungen per gli abbonati al servizio. ____ 1 Michelangelo Buonarroti, profile studies for the . , , inv. 10 Ar TRACING MICHELANGELO’S AT SAN LORENZOMODA NI

Jonathan Foote

Introduction an illuminating set of surviving , the natural or In an often cited passage, praises full-scaled template drawings mademodani by Michelangelo Michelangelo for introducing novel cornices and for use by the San Lorenzo stone carvers to guide column base profiles at San Lorenzo, having finally details and ornaments.2 Comprised of eight paper “rotti i lacci e le catene” of Vitruvius, antiquity and and one large folio containing tracings, common use. “La quale licenzia”, he writes, “ha dato allmodani in the care of the Casa Buonarroti, modanithese drawings grande animo, a quelli che ànno veduto il far suo, di offer valuable, previously unacknowledged clues into mettersi a imitarlo, e nuove fantasie si sono vedute Michelangelo’s unusual approach to conceiving archi- poi, alla grottesca più tosto che a ragione o regola, tectural profiles and details.3 a’ loro ornamenti”.1 Widely studied since Vasari in Following a re-examination of these documents, terms of formal invention, Michelangelo’s extraordi- new assertions can be made about how Michelangelo nary implementation of architectural profiles seems generated his via a complex taxonomy of physi- to have had a close relationship with his working cal operations,modani whereby he used the themselves methods and techniques. To examine this, we turn to to produce new, altered . He reliedmodani on techniques modani

1 Giorgio Vasari, as “scale 1:1”, obscure the pre-modern significance of these types of Le vite de’ più eccellenti pittori, scultori e architettori nelle reda- , ed. by Rosanna Bettarini/Paola Barocchi, Florence drawings. zioni del 1550 e 1568 1966–1997, VI, p. 55. 3 The examined set encompasses: CB 61 A (Charles de Tolnay, Corpus 2 The vocabulary of terms used to indicate drawings of life-size or , Novara 1975–1980, no. 203); CB 59 A ( , dei disegni di Michelangelo ibidem natural scale is discussed later in the essay. Typical modern terms, such no. 204); CB 92 A ( , no. 525); CB 53 A ( , no. 534); AB, ibidem ibidem

| 45 such as flipping and sliding to enable creative nego- E perché dal furor dello artefice sono in poco tempo tiations based on substitution, reversal, and stretch- con penna o con altro disegnatoio o carbone espressi ing, effectively utilizing them as paper tracing devices. solo per tentare l’animo di quel che gli sovviene, perciò Not incidentally, such processes were also at the root si chiamano schizzi.5 of Michelangelo’s exceptional approach to the antique lexicon, where conventions of module and moulding Then, he states, the sketches go through a period sequences were a source of figural deformation and of refinement, where “vengono poi rilevati in buona dismemberment rather than rote implementation. forma i disegni”, and finally, “misuratili con le seste o A number of now memorable sheets have fascinat- a oc[c]hio, si ringrandiscono da le misure piccole nelle ed generations of scholars in trying to understand maggiori, secondo l’opera che si ha da fare”.6 What this process; one of these is CB 10 Ar (Fig. 1), where becomes interesting is how the overturn this Michelangelo engages in a quick-witted mutation of strict mode of working, particularlymodani in the hands of an attic column base into a face profile. Normally, Michelangelo. A close examination of the documents the examination of Michelangelo’s profile generating will show precisely this: just as the encroach on process begins with his , or perhaps the built the technical domains normally associatedmodani with more work, but in this case newschizzi findings become available tentative stages in the project, i.e. , the imagina- when starting with the . The practice of making tive operations of are adoptedschizzi to some degree and Michelangelo’smodani idiosyncratic approach to from those of theschizzare . Recognizing the status of themodani profile line have only been tangentially connected; paper as a commonmodani support for both profile sketches however, in positing a stronger link between the two, and construction-ready templates, allow Mi- remarkable findings emerge.4 chelangelo to disrupt Vasari’s normativemodani definitions To help introduce this connection, it is worth re- and, almost literally, sketch in stone. Embraced be- calling that Vasari recounted a strict directionality tween a kind of chiasmus, where they are both from early ideas of the spirit, called “schizzi”, and and at the same time, but also neither, the modelli those that would be measured in compass and rule for take disegnion a critical capacity in Michelangelo’s concepmodani- implementation by others: tion of and innovation in the architectural profile.7

Gli schizzi, de’ quali si è favellato di sopra, chiamiamo Michelangelo’s modani noi una prima sorte di disegni che si fanno per trova- The extant encompass a period spanning modani re il modo delle attitudini et il primo componimento from 1523 to 1534, referencing the Medici Chapel dell’opra; e sono fatti in forma di una ma[c]chia e ac- and at San Lorenzo (Fig. 2).8 Mi- cennati solamente da noi in una sola bozza del tutto. chelangelo’s from this period represent, in fact, modani

XIII, fol. 157 ( , no. 536); CB 60 A ( , no. 527); AB, XIII, 6 , pp. 117f. ibidem ibidem Ibidem fol. 134 ( , no. 538); AB, XIII, fol. 127 ( , no. 539); AB, I, 7 The tension between drawings and models is captured in the etymol- ibidem ibidem 59, fol. 151 ( , no. 540). ogy of . Sharing a common root with , the variations on the ibidem modano modello 4 The specific meaning and interpretations of Michelangelo’s are term – , , – are all distinguished by the characteristic licenza modino modeno modono not taken up here. Rather, what is investigated is the physical processes use of ‘n’. A is described as a derivative of the Latin with modano modulus that are in support of such an approach. For an overview of the term in the the addition of a suffix derived from the Latin word , or grape- pampinus sixteenth century, see Alina Payne, leaf, suggesting a kind of ‘leaf-model’. See Giacomo Devoto, The Architectural Treatise in the Italian Re- Avviamento , Cambridge 2010 , Florence 1967, “modine” and naissance: Architectural Invention, Ornament, and Literary Culture alla etimologia italiana: dizionario etimologico s.v. (11999), pp. 15–33. “modano”, p. 271. 5 Vasari (note 1), I, p. 117. 8 On a general history of San Lorenzo during the time of Michelange-

46 | JONATHAN FOOTE | ____ 2 Michelangelo Buonarroti, San Lorenzo modani (shown in relative size). Florence, Casa Buonarroti, inv. 61 Ar; 59 Ar; 92 Av; 53 Ar; AB, XIII, fol. 157v; 60 Ar; AB, XIII, fol. 127v; AB, XIII, fol. 134r; AB, I, 59, fol. 151r the most complete set of surviving cinquecento . a few actual, surviving . Among these, one may Certainly, the paucity of surviving documentsmodani from count three from Bartolomeomodani Ammannati intended the period reflects their dual status as construction for San Giovannino in Florence and one , or tools, consumed in the building process, and media as it was called in the Veneto, from Palladio’smodano assa- for conceiving ornaments and profiles at the archi- gomasistant Giovanni Giacomo for San Giorgio Maggiore tect’s drawing board. In surveying other for in Venice. 10 A host of related drawings remain from comparisons, much textual evidence remains,modani testify- the period, including never-cut and drawings ing to their prolific use by architects as early as Leon of column bases and profiles renderedmodani in Battista Alberti and Giuliano da Sangallo.9 For visual , or natural scale. In particular, a nearlyla two-meterpropria for- comparison, one must rely in the end, however, on only profilema survives from Antonio da Sangallo il Giovane

lo, consult Andrea Felici, are referenced as templates for guiding bell-making again in Francesco di Michelangelo a San Lorenzo (1515–1534): il linguaggio , Florence 2015, pp. 27–45. Giorgio, but extensively in Biringuccio’s of 1540. architettonico del Cinquecento fiorentino De la pirotechnia 9 As a starting point, see Richard Goldthwaite, 10 On the Venetian use of , see Ennio Concina, The Building of Renaissance sagome Pietre, parole, sto- , Baltimore 2006 (11980), pp. 377f. , Venice 1988, Florence: An Economic and Social History ria: glossario della costruzione nelle fonti veneziane (secoli XV–XVIII) are mentioned in Filarete’s as well as in Fran- pp. 129f., and Howard Burns, “Building and Construction in Palladio’s Modani Trattato di architettura cesco di Giorgio’s , and they appear in the Vicenza”, in: , conference proceedings Tours Trattato di architettura civile e militare Les chantiers de la Renaissance fifteenth-century construction records of Santa Maria del Fiore. 1983/84, ed. by Jean Guillaume, Paris 1991, pp. 191–226: 206f. Modani

| TRACING MICHELANGELO’S MODANI | 47 for the monumental order of Saint Peter, described tractual role played between stone carvers and on the sheet by the architect as a “modano” but never patrons.16 Thismodani is all in addition to their more conven- cut.11 Drawings in , which grew out of tional and well-known role as communication devices the culturela propria of formameasuring and drawing between the architect and the on-site . ancient ruins, may be found periodically during the What arises from the fragmentaryscarpellini evidence of the period, notably in Giuliano da Sangallo’s Codex Bar- period is a clear suspicion that Michelangelo utilized berini.12 Why so many of Michelangelo’s sur- his in a unique way. Although frequently cit- vived intact compared to those of his contemporariesmodani ed andmodani published in relation to the built work, the may have something to do with the fact that nearly San Lorenzo have yet to receive a comprehen- all of them contain some other identifiable autograph sive assessment.modani Up until recently, the primary con- writing or sketches. cern of these documents has been two-fold: on the As paper object-models open to a variety of uses, one hand, as factual support for building chronolo- the assume a deeply complex role. Ammannati, gies, related to as-built conditions; and on the other, for example,modani apparently thought them suitable for in- as documents containing circumstantial markings, clusion into a written treatise that he was preparing drawings or notes, such as employment rosters, work- but never finished.13 Equally notable are figures such shop tallies, and poetic fragments. Early scholars as Alberti and Palladio, who relished in the acute abil- dated the drawings and discussed them in terms of ity of to embody the architect’s authority on a Michelangelo’s autograph, and by the time Charles de remotemodani building project. Both architects sent to Tolnay completed the in their patrons as evidence of their prowess in handlingmodani 1980, scholarship wasCorpus generally dei disegni settled di Michelangeloin regard to the antique lexicon. Alberti apparently enclosed a few most of the drawings’ attributions and provenance, in a letter to his patron Lodovico Gonzaga, stating, although there were a few exceptions.17 More recent “E modoni de Sancto Sebastiano, Sancto Laurentio, analyses have reached deeper into these findings, la logia, sono facti, credo non vi dispiaceranno.”14 focused increasingly on how to interpret the And letters from Palladio frequently enclosed , within a rising interest into Michelangelo’s workingmodani not only for builders, but also for the specificsagome atten- methods. tion of building patrons.15 Examples throughout the Tracy Cooper was the first to systematically draw quattro- and cinquecento attest to the binding con- our attention to the substance of beyond their modani

11 GDSU, inv. 7976 A. 15 Palladio sent to the building patrons of San Petronio in Bo- sagome 12 In the Codex Barberini, see fols. 27r, 36r, 42v, in: logna (Giangiorgio Zorzi, , Venice 1967, Il libro di Giuliano Le chiese e i ponti di Andrea Palladio , ed. by Christian Hülsen, p. 115, doc. 25) and the duomo of Montagnana ( , p. 82, doc. 3). da Sangallo: codice Vaticano Barberiniano Latino 4424 ibidem Vatican City 1984. 16 See, for example, a contract for Santa Maria delle Carceri in Prato 13 Tracy Cooper, “I Modani: Template Drawings”, in: specifying that the work of the Lorenzo di Salvadore shall be The Renaissance: scarpellino , exh. cat. Venice “facta in modono dicti oratorii facto Iulianum de Sangallo” (Piero Mor- From Brunelleschi to Michelangelo. The Representation of Architecture 1994, ed. by Henry A. Millon/Vittorio Magnago Lampugnani, Milan selli/Gino Corti, La Chiesa di Santa Maria delle Carceri in Prato: contributo di 1994, pp. 494–500. Ammannati’s intention to publish a treatise with the , Florence 1982, p. 133). Lorenzo de’ Medici e Giuliano da Sangallo alla progettazione included has been disputed by Michael Kiene, , 17 Pivotal investigations by scholars on the before 1980 is exten- modani modani Milan 1995, pp. 217f. Ammannati’s are collected in: , sive and cannot be comprehensively listed here. A few key reference works modani La Città Ideale GDSU, inv. 3462 A. It remains unclear how the would have been include: Henry Thode, , modani Michelangelo: Kritische Untersuchungen über seine Werke implemented in the published form of the treatise. Berlin 1908–1913; Karl Frey, , Die Handzeichnungen Michelagniolos Buonarroti 14 Letter dated 27 February 1460, in: Willelmo Braghirolli, “Leone Berlin 1909–1911; Paola Barocchi, Michelangelo e la sua scuola: i disegni dell’Ar- Battista Alberti a Mantova: documenti e notizie inedite”, in: , Florence 1964; , ed. by Paolo Archivio Storico chivio Buonarroti: testo e tavole Michelangiolo architetto , s. 3., IX (1869), 1, pp. 3–31: 8. Portoghesi/Bruno Zevi, Turin 1964; de Tolnay (note 3). Italiano

48 | JONATHAN FOOTE | capacity as practical construction templates, propos- suggest that cutting the paper constituted a creative ing that they might even be included under the prod- act within itself.21 Following this, Cammy Brothers ucts of , as defined by Vasari.18 In addition to and Alina Payne acknowledged the in-process agen- being practicaldisegno devices for communication, she wrote, cy of Michelangelo’s template drawings, and Mauro were also theoretical demonstrations. Their Mussolin wrote that Michelangelo’s should be inclusionmodani in the sixteenth-century treatises of Barto- understood within his larger oeuvre modaniof architectural lomeo Ammannati and Galeazzo Alessi signalled an and figural models as instruments of artistic process evolution of the practice of template drawing, which and control.22 Christof Thoenes asserted that the was now integrated into the discipline of profiling de- of Michelangelo were continuations of the pro- tails, or .19 A few years afterward, William modanicess of ideation, a demonstration that at no point in E. Wallacemodanatura offered an informative reconstruction of Michelangelo’s process did the creative process stop template use at San Lorenzo, with much important and execution begin.23 Other recent scholarship with work done to illuminate connections between Mi- a similar emphasis on drawing and working methods chelangelo and the -to-day work of the assistants includes studies by Caroline Elam and Silvia Catitti.24 actually executing the stone work.20 The relationship of Michelangelo’s details and draw- In some ways, Wallace’s work, published in the ing practices to his larger planning process, a question early 1990s, coincided with a subtle shift in emphasis to which we shall return, has recently been investigat- around the documents, with a new emphasis being ed by Golo Maurer and Stefan W. Krieg.25 placed on a close scrutiny of Michelangelo’s working Current scholarship on the has generally methods. Over the last decade, several edited volumes accepted the early suggestions bymodani Cooper and others, and exhibition catalogues have been published that and it has sought a deeper understanding of Miche- include detailed discussions about many of the ex- langelo’s creative process through a closer analysis of tant . Paul Joannides was among the first to his drawing practices.26 This has led to an increased modani

18 Cooper (note 13), p. 494. 23 Christof Thoenes, “Michelangelo e architettura”, in: Michelangelo ar- 19 Alessi’s 1565 treatise work, the , includes not only draw- , exh. cat. 2009/10, ed. by Mauro Mussolin/Clara Libro dei misteri chitetto a Roma ings in natural scale but also several as part of his collection of draw- Altavista, Cinisello Balsamo 2009, pp. 25–37: 28f.; , “Michelangelo modani idem ings for the Sacro Monte of Varallo. See Galeazzo Alessi, und Architektur”, in: , confe- Libro dei misteri: Michelangelo e il linguaggio dei disegni di architettura rence proceedings Florence 2009, ed. by Golo Maurer/Alessandro Nova, progetto di pianificazione urbanistica, architettonica e figurativa del Sacro Monte di Varallo , ed. by Stefania Stefani Perrone, Bologna 1974. Venice 2012, pp. 15–29. in Valsesia (1565–1569) 20 William E. Wallace, “Drawings from the Fabbrica of San Lorenzo 24 Caroline Elam, “Funzione, tipo e ricezione dei disegni di architettura during the Tenure of Michelangelo”, in: , conference di Michelangelo”, in: (note 22), pp. 42– Michelangelo Drawings Michelangelo e il disegno di architettura proceedings Washington, D.C., 1988, ed. by Craig Hugh Smyth/Ann 73; , “The Significance of the Profile in Michelangelo’s Architectural eadem Gilkerson, Hanover 1992, pp. 117–141; , Drawing”, in: (note 23), pp. 85–99; Silvia et al. idem Michelangelo at San Lorenzo: Michelangelo e il linguaggio dei disegni , Cambridge 1994. Catitti, “Michelangelo e il disegno architettonico come strumento proget- The Genius as Entrepreneur 21 Paul Joannides, in: Adolescente tuale ed esecutivo: il caso della Biblioteca Laurenziana”, , pp. 53–67. L’ dell’Ermitage e la Sagrestia Nuova di Mi- ibidem , exh. cat. Florence/St. Petersburg 2000, ed. by Sergej Androsov/ 25 Golo Maurer, chelangelo Michelangelo: Die Architekturzeichnungen. Entwurfsprozess und Umberto Baldini, Florence 2000, pp. 132–134, nos. 22f. , Regensburg 2004; , “Fatiche su carta: Michelangelo di- et al. Planungspraxis idem 22 Cammy Brothers, , segnatore di architettura”, in: (note 23), Michelangelo, Drawing, and the Invention of Architecture Michelangelo e il linguaggio dei disegni New Haven 2008, pp. 165–187; Alina Payne, “The Sculptor-Archi- pp. 32–51; Stefan W. Krieg, “Das Architekturdetail bei Michelangelo: et al. tect’s Drawing and Exchanges Between the Arts”, in: Studien zu seiner Entwicklung bis 1534”, in: , Michelangelo, Römisches Jahrbuch der Bibliotheca , exh. cat. Boston 2014, ed. by , XXXIII (1999/2000), pp. 101–258. Cellini: Sculptors’ Drawings from Renaissance Hertziana Michael W. Cole, London 2014, pp. 56–73: 69f.; Mauro Mussolin, “For- 26 Exceptions to these prevailing assessments should be noted. Gustina me : i modelli architettonici nella progettazione di Michelangelo”, Scaglia, “Drawings of Michelangelo’s Designs for the Laurentian Library in fieri in: , exh. cat. Vicenza/Florence 2006/07, and the Medici Chapel Altar, and of a Peruzzi Doorframe”, in: Michelangelo e il disegno di architettura Quaderni ed. by Caroline Elam, Venice 2006, pp. 95–111. , 13/14 (1995), pp. 59–73, asserted that Mi- di storia dell’architettura e restauro

| TRACING MICHELANGELO’S MODANI | 49 importance placed on the artist’s use of paper as a pass and rule, most notably Ammannati and Anto- support medium, both in developing ideas in architec- nio da Sangallo il Giovane, Michelangelo’s are ture but also across his oeuvre. Vitale Zanchettin and curiously lacking consistent evidence of havingmodani been Mauro Mussolin have made important revelations by constructed with geometrical tools. Scholars have not, approaching the paper sheet as both an object, able for the most part, addressed this condition, although to be flipped and carried, and also as a medium it- it has been generally assumed that the profiles were self that reliably preserves valuable clues.27 Likewise, drawn free-hand.30 However, a close examination of but with a different emphasis, Leonard Barkan has the multiple marks and pricks on the leads to a foregrounded the role of paper in his analysis of Mi- more complex assessment whereby Michelangelomodani ab- chelangelo’s use and re-use of sheets, raising questions stained from compass and rule but employed other about the role of juxtaposition and fragmentation in modes of drawing construction, principally tracing. his creative process.28 The focus on the active and in- It becomes apparent that for Michelangelo the strumental role of paper adds to the interest in re- were not only devices for commutating to on-sitemodani cent years on the artist’s working premises between , they were also employed by the artist himselfscar- and architecture, as specifically examined inpellini a process of determining, inventing, and selecting by Payne, Brothers, and Thoenes.29 stone profiles. Taking these trends as a point of departure, the In exploring how the were actively utilized, present essay offers new supporting evidence on the each will be analysedmodani with an emphasis on the in-process nature of Michelangelo’s . Recogniz- specificmodano drawing features observed, particularly on the ing, as have others, that they demonstratemodani how the line edge conditions. Taken together, these clues build a between ideation and realization is blurred, the fol- strong case for evaluating the active involvement of lowing analysis looks within the facture of the draw- the in Michelangelo’s approach to making ar- ings itself – circumstantial marks, cuts, and drawing chitecturalmodani profiles. materials – to plausibly speculate on Michelangelo’s -making practices. What seems evident is that Suspicion for Tracing: CB 53 A, 61 A, and 59 A anmodani examination of Michelangelo’s offers new The analysis relies on the practice of tracing as a readings into the artist’s unconventionalmodani approach to meeting ground between the line-based profile draw- the antique lexicon. The most poignant finding in- ing and the object-based qualities of a cut . volves the known condition that most of Michelan- The tracing assessment begins by recalling thatmodano Mi- gelo’s do not exhibit signs of proportioning or chelangelo actually produced tracings of his own constructionmodani lines. Unlike surviving templates by his that are well documented and widely accepted contemporaries who both make ample use of the com- asmodani autograph. In a sheet for several details in macigno

chelangelo’s were certainly drawn by others who were more trained 28 Leonard Barkan, , Princeton, N.J., 2011, modani Michelangelo: A Life on Paper et al. in technical drawing and possibly even cut by others. Thoenes 2009 pp. 287–304. (note 23), p. 28, raises tentative doubts about their authorship; see also 29 Payne (note 22); Brothers (note 22), pp. 84–97; Thoenes 2009 2012 (note 23), p. 17. (note 23), pp. 25f. See also Pietro C. Marani, “Riconsiderando il rapporto idem 27 Vitale Zanchettin, “Michelangelo e il disegno per la costruzione in tra scultura e architettura in Michelangelo”, in: L’ultimo Michelangelo: disegni pietra: ragioni e metodi nella rappresentazione in proiezione ortogonale”, in: , exh. cat. Milan 2011, ed. by Alessandro e rime attorno alla Pietà Rondanini (note 23), pp. 100–117; Mauro Mussolin, Rovetta, Cinisello Balsamo 2011, pp. 62–69. Michelangelo e il linguaggio dei disegni “In controluce: alcune osservazioni sull’uso della carta nei disegni architet- 30 See, for example, Cammy Brothers, in: Michelangelo e il disegno di architet- tonici di Michelangelo in Casa Buonarroti”, , pp. 287–311: 300–302. (note 22), pp. 164f., no. 3, and pp. 187f., no. 13. ibidem tura

50 | JONATHAN FOOTE | ____ 3 Michelangelo Buonarroti, modani tracings for the Laurentian Library. Florence, Casa Buonarroti, inv. 53 Ar for the Laurentian Library, CB 53 A (Fig. 3),31 the delle porte della libreria date a∙ccechone”. The ac- artist seems to have traced his own paper templates cepted interpretation of this sheet is that the lines before sending them to the construction site. The represent a series of tracings performed on now-lost line work consists of profiles in followed paper at a moment before they were sent to modani by lines in ink traced more or lesspietra over nera top of them the San Lorenzo .32 In addition to the con- scarpellini on both the recto and verso. Adjacent to one of the firmed autograph, a number of other clues support most prominent profiles on the recto, Michelange- this reading. To begin, a surviving ‘negative’ or ‘cut- lo wrote in ink: “la copia de’ modani della cornice off’ drawing, AB, XIII, 134 (Fig. 4), is a near per-

31 De Tolnay (note 3), no. 534. Recent bibliography includes: Marcella pp. 126–128, no. 32; (note 24), p. 62; Mussolin (note 27), p. 301; eadem Marongiu, in: , exh. Felici (note 8), pp. 241f. For the bibliography prior to 1994, see Cooper Michelangelo: grafia e biografia. Disegni e autografi del maestro cat. Rome/Biel 2002, ed. by Lucilla Bardeschi Ciulich/Pina Ragionieri, (note 13), p. 496. Florence 2002, p. 55, no. 22; Silvia Catitti, in: 32 Elam 2006 (note 24), p. 62; Wallace 1994 (note 20), p. 173; Cooper Michelangelo architetto a San , exh. cat., ed. by Pietro Ruschi, Florence 2007, (note 13), pp. 495f. Lorenzo: quattro problemi aperti

| TRACING MICHELANGELO’S MODANI | 51 ____ 4 Michelangelo Buonarroti, ‘negative’ modano of the scaglione of the Laurentian Library. Florence, Casa Buonarroti, Archivio Buonarroti, XIII, fol. 134r fect match with one of the tracings on CB 53 A (“gli not meet, and there is some slippage of the drawing scaglioni”, to the right on the recto). Just as revealing, tool around the outside of curves. all five of the profiles traced on recto and verso bear If tracing is evident in CB 53 A, there is a pos- a close resemblance to the as-built conditions of the sibility that the other exhibit similar visual portal.33 And finally, this does not appear to be an evidence. The practice modaniof tracing, in fact, plausibly isolated practice, as similar tracings may be accounts for several curious circumstances generally detected in several sheets for themodani Palazzo della Zecca related to the . The general eschewal of compass in Rome, attributed to Giovanni Battista da Sangal- and rule, for example,modani is more convincingly explained lo, one of which is reproduced here (Fig. 5).34 More by the use of the themselves as paper tracing circumstantial but important for later analyses, the tools than by the modaniassumption that they were drawn line work reveals conditions that are consistent with free-hand. And tracing also suggests a possible ex- an act of tracing, e.g. the lines at the corners often do planation for the multiple drawing materials present

33 As first observed by Rudolf Wittkower, “Michelangelo’s Biblioteca Micaela Antonucci, “Un’opera di Antonio da Sangallo il Giovane tra ar- Laurenziana”, in: , XVI (1934), pp. 123–218: 186–189. chitettura e città: la facciata della Zecca in Banchi a Roma”, in: The Art Bulletin Römische 34 Sangallo’s involvement in the Palazzo della Zecca is discussed in , XLVI (2004), pp. 201–244. historische Mitteilungen

52 | JONATHAN FOOTE | along many of the profile edges, as well as the curious and coordinated use of both recto and verso, both well-observed but generally unexplained conditions. The hypothesis that Michelangelo traced his own begins with an analysis of a pair of , CB 61modani A and CB 59 A (Figs. 6a, b, 7a, b).35 Thesemodani near- ly identical drawings were likely made during the sec- ond building campaign at the Medici Chapel, dated to circa 1533, just before Michelangelo left Florence for Rome. They are associated with the never realized double tomb of the Magnifici, an elaborate all-marble construction for the brothers Lorenzo and Giuliano de’ Medici. These two are often published to- gether because of their nearlymodani matching size and pro- file shape. Recent scholarship has even shown that they were probably transported and folded together at one time.36 The watermark on CB 61 A indicates that the pa- per is of Florentine origin, perhaps from one of the then-active paper making workshops near the and the Piazza San Firenze, a short walk ____ from Michelangelo’s workshop on Via Mozza.37 It 5 Giovanni Battista da Sangallo, modani tracings also shows that the paper originated from a for the Palazzo della Zecca, Rome. Florence, foglio reale Gallerie degli , Gabinetto dei Disegni (610 × 440 mm), a size frequently purchased by Mi- e delle Stampe, inv. U 1332 A chelangelo and used for other as well.38 Aside modani from the cut profile edge, the most prominent charac- the template to its corresponding detail on the build- teristic appears on CB 59 Ar (Fig. 7a), where a neatly ing site appears to be common and may also be seen drafted note in Michelangelo’s hand reads “el moda- in both Ammannati’s and Antonio da Sangallo il no delle colonne della sepultura doppia di sagrestia”, Giovane’s surviving .39 thus indicating its intended use for the columns of Upon close inspection,modani no prick marks indicating the un-built Medici tomb. The practice of indexing the use of a compass can be found on either . modano

35 De Tolnay (note 3), nos. 203 and 204, respectively. Recent biblio- quet, , Paris 1907, no. 3387 or 3394. This watermark, or Les Filigranes […] graphy includes: Joannides (note 21); Maurer 2004 (note 25), pp. 181–183; a similar one, is shared with two other , CB 53 A and AB, XIII, 127. modani Cammy Brothers, in: (note 22), pp. 187f., On the technical aspects of Michelangelo’s paper selections, see Mussolin Michelangelo e il disegno di architettura no. 13; Mussolin (note 27), pp. 300f.; Pietro Ruschi, in: (note 27), pp. 295f.; Ariane de La Chapelle, “Michel-Ange: le choix de ses Michelangelo architetto (note 31), p. 84, no. 28; Brothers (note 22), pp. 60–62; Pie- papiers”, in: , ed. by Paul Joannides, Paris 2003 a San Lorenzo Michel-Ange, élèves et copistes tro Ruschi, , exh. cat. Milan ( , VI), pp. 402–422. Michelangelo architetto nei disegni della Casa Buonarroti Musée du Louvre: inventaire général des dessins italiens 2011, Cinisello Balsamo 2011, p. 71; Payne (note 22), p. 69; Felici (note 8), 38 The buying of was frequently recorded in Michelangelo’s fogli reali p. 241. For the bibliography prior to 1994, see Cooper (note 13), pp. 497f. workshop expenses. See, for example, , ed. by Lucilla I ricordi di Michelangelo 36 Mussolin (note 27), pp. 300f. Bardeschi Ciulich/Paola Barocchi, Florence 1970, pp. 133f., nos. CXXIII 37 The watermark is “Hat C”, as referenced in Jane Roberts, and CXXIV. A Dictionary , Milan 1988, p. 22, and in Charles-Moïse Bri- 39 On a cornice for San Giovannino (GDSU, inv. 3463 A), Amman- of Michelangelo’s Watermarks modano

| TRACING MICHELANGELO’S MODANI | 53 ____ 6a, b Michelangelo Buonarroti, modano for the tomb of the Magnifici, recto and verso. Florence, Casa Buonarroti, inv. 61 A

54 | JONATHAN FOOTE | ____ 7a, b Michelangelo Buonarroti, modano for the tomb of the Magnifici, recto and verso. Florence, Casa Buonarroti, inv. 59 A

| TRACING MICHELANGELO’S MODANI | 55 The close match between CB 61 A and CB 59 A, on CB 59 Av (Fig. 7b), particularly around coupled with the apparent lack of such marks, indi- thepietra nera profile, point to such a tracing from the cates that these two templates are quite possibly re- right-facingtondino CB 61 Av (Fig. 6b). This creates lated through direct tracing. The analysis begins on a new profilemodano edge that was then cut, verso side up, CB 61 Av (Fig. 6a), where one observes several lines in eliminating much of the remaining evidence of the that have been marked using a straight edge tracing. After cutting, CB 59 A was flipped back over andpietra anera rule, representing some of the few ruled lines with the profile facing left, and on this side of the found on any of Michelangelo’s .40 Since they sheet (CB 59 Ar) Michelangelo notes its final destina- run parallel with the edges of themodani folio, these lines tion for the carpenters and the carvers. Now there are were probably the first on the sheet, certainly before two, nearly identical templates. No more evidence of it was cut, as indicated by their alignment with the tracing, compass construction, or other lines appears watermark. The artist probably began the profile con- alongside the artist’s neatly drafted note. struction with a series of datum lines generated from Why flip CB 59 A after it has been cut? Simply internal relations, such as module and scale, or exter- speaking, as some scholars have suggested, this was nal alignments, a practice that is discussed at length a intended to guide work while Michelangelo toward the end of the essay. Once having drawn these, preparedmodano to leave for Rome in 1534.42 Compared with he delineated a profile edge in , facing left his other , it certainly has an air of finality to and mostly in free-hand, relatingpietra precisely nera to the pro- it, makingmodani it very probable that CB 59 A was made portioning lines previously drawn with the aid of a for the who had the task of copying it onto a straight edge. CB 61 Av is eventually cut along one more rigidscarpellini substrate.43 By flipping and neatly labelling of several closely sketched profiles in , using it, no sketch marks or other are visible, and, scissors.41 Residue of ink along the edgepietra suggests nera that perhaps more importantly, itpentimenti faces left, Michelange- Michelangelo also inked the line before cutting. lo’s preferred orientation for nearly all of his profile As evidenced by sketched lines just to the inside studies and finished . Recall, for example, that of the cut line on the verso of CB 61 A (Fig. 6b), the on CB 53 A (Fig. 3),modani the sheet with the traced pro- was certainly flipped over after it had been cut, files for the Laurentian Library, all of the were sincemodano the precise alignment of the lines with traced from the left-facing position beforemodani being sent the cut edge indicates that they mustpietra have nera been drawn to Ceccone. Additionally, the overwhelming majority at some time after the drawing had been cut. At this of Michelangelo’s profile sketches and studies face the point, with the profile facing right, one may speculate left edge of the sheet, as in the previously introduced that the sheet could have been traced. Small marks in CB 10 Ar (Fig. 1), with examples found on nearly a

nati wrote “La Cornice ch[e] va sopra i pilastri di San giovanino de medici”; commented on a letter written by Benvenuto Cellini on Michelangelo’s Antonio da Sangallo il Giovane’s for Saint Peter (GDSU, inv. 6976 A) extensive use of models, including his paper , “tagliate in su’ profili modano modani is inscribed “modano della basa gra[n]de / di s.to pietro de pilastri”. apunto con le forbici” (Benedetto Varchi/Vincenzio Borghini, Pittura e 40 Michelangelo’s drawing material for this type of line is referred , ed. by Paola Barocchi, Livorno 1998, p. 93). Celli- scultura nel Cinquecento herein as , following the most recent conventions. Alternatively, ni’s original letter was published by Benedetto Varchi in his pietra nera Lezzione della throughout the , de Tolnay refers to this drawing material as “lapis of 1546, republished in , ed. by Corpus maggioranza delle arti Scritti d’arte del Cinquecento nero”. A or would have indicated a hard, mineral-based Paola Barocchi, Milan 1971–1977, I, pp. 519–522: 521). pietra nera lapis nero stone, as described in Filippo Baldinucci, 42 Ruschi 2007 (note 35). Vocabolario toscano dell’arte del dise- , Florence 1681, p. 79. On Michelangelo’s drawing materials, see 43 Paper were subject to transfer onto a more rigid medium before gno […] modani Elam 2006 (note 24), pp. 53–55. being suitable for use on the construction site. Michelangelo’s favoured 41 Michelangelo’s use of scissors is testified by Vincenzio Borghini, who material for this was tin, one of the most common, as evidenced by mul-

56 | JONATHAN FOOTE | dozen more.44 And on several of his copies of profiles recto, deposited along nearly the entire edge, after the Codex Coner, a connection discussed later, particularlypietra neravisible on the lower and the uppermost he deliberately reversed what were originally drawn as (Fig. 10). Like the previousovolo two , the right-facing profiles.45 marksgola diritta indicate that this has been activelymodani utilized on both sides, a practice modanothat is encouraged by the act of Traced Edges: AB, XIII, 127, and AB, XIII, 134 cutting, which immediately collapses the recto and ver- Although CB 61 A and CB 59 A are related in a so into a single, shared line. This opened the possibility way that would be consistent with tracing, evidence of to work both sides in relation to each other. tracing in the form of discernible marks or drawing The presence of on both sides might also residue is still inconclusive. In order to substantiate be evidence of a manipulationpietra nera process whereby a ‘fam- the tracing hypothesis, one ought to detect support- ily’ of emerges, consisting, as it were, of ‘parents’ ing evidence in the other . Next we examine and ‘offspring’.modani This relies on the assumption that AB, XIII, 127 (Fig. 8a, b), modania cornice profile that has the extant probably represent only a fraction been related by Tolnay to the portal of the Lauren- of Michelangelo’smodani actual production, with clues on tian Library.46 Scholars have generally followed this the remaining drawings that point to now lost draw- opinion, which is based on the relation of the profile ings which came before (parents) or after (offspring). to the tracings on CB 53 A, which are assuredly relat- In general, as has been stated, rarely survived ed to the library portal. A brief examination of the beyond the realization of the projectmodani because of their absolute measurements of the profile and not only the dual status as both drawing and construction imple- profile shape, however, opens the door for a possible ment. Following this line of reasoning, the marks on connection of this profile to the Medici Chapel. The the verso of AB, XIII, 127, suggest that it might have also displays a number of incidental marks and been traced from a now lost parent; one that, like workshopmodano tallies, all added after the cut, including a CB 61 A, had established some overall measures or re- poetry fragment on the recto for a poem written to lationships through ruled lines. Once cut, the Tommaso de’ Cavalieri.47 The watermark is “Hat C”, was available to be flipped, and this helps explainmodano the the mark also found on CB 53 A and CB 61 A. along the paper edge of the recto, which could In closely examining this for evidence of havepietra onlynera been the result of tracing, to produce either a tracing, one notes several curiousmodano marks along the cut workshop record or a now lost offspring.48 edges of both the recto and verso. Of particular inter- The use of bears further discussion. It est are: on the verso, a curved mark in on the has been seen alreadypietra nera on CB 53 A and on the pair upper termination of the (Fig. 9),pietra andnera on the CB 61 A/CB 59 A, in particular as an underlay for an gola diritta tiple references in his ; (note 38), p. 119, no. CXVI, p. 122, 45 For example, see Brothers (note 22), pp. 64f., who refers to CB 1 Ar Ricordi I ricordi no. CXVII, p. 125, no. CXIX, pp. 128f., 133, no. CXXIII. (de Tolnay [note 3], no. 518r). 44 Some prominent examples of left-facing profiles may be observed in: 46 De Tolnay (note 3), IV, p. 61, no. 539, with bibliography prior to

CB 7 Ar (de Tolnay [note 3], no. 530r), CB 9 Ar ( , no. 202r), CB 10 Ar 1980. Recent bibliography includes: Barkan (note 28), p. 61; Wallace ibidem ( , no. 201r), Haarlem, Teyler Museum, inv. A 34v ( , no. 250v), 1994 (note 20), pp. 173–175. ibidem ibidem CB 93 Av ( , no. 275v), CB 62 Ar–v ( , no. 532r–v), CB 63 Ar ( 47 The related poem is ; see ibidem ibidem ibi- Sento d’un foco un freddo aspetto acceso Die Dichtun- , no. 533r), CB 74 Av ( , no. 463v), CB 84 Av ( , no. 614v), AB, , ed. by Karl Frey, Berlin 1897, pp. 127, 413f., dem ibidem ibidem gen des Michelagniolo Buonarroti XIII, 149 ( , no. 531v), and British Museum, inv. 1859-9-15-508r–v no. CIX.18. ibidem ( , no. 528r–v). Mussolin (note 27), pp. 301–303, proposes a corre- 48 One cannot exclude the possibility that the template was traced at ibidem spondence between CB 61 A and CB 59 A based partly on the predomi- a much later date in connection with the collecting or archiving of the nance of left-facing profiles in Michelangelo’s works. . However, this is not observed as such on any other and, modano modani

| TRACING MICHELANGELO’S MODANI | 57 ____ 8a, b Michelangelo Buonarroti, modano for the Laurentian Library, recto and verso. Florence, Casa Buonarroti, Archivio Buonarroti, XIII, fol. 127

______9, 10 Michelangelo Buonarroti, details of 11 Michelangelo Buonarroti, detail of modano modano for the Laurentian Library. Florence, for the scaglione of the Laurentian Library. Casa Buonarroti, Archivio Buonarroti, XIII, Florence, Casa Buonarroti, Archivio Buonarroti, fol. 127v and 127r XIII, fol. 134v

58 | JONATHAN FOOTE | ____ 12a, b Michelangelo Buonarroti, modano for the Laurentian Library (?), recto and verso. Florence, Casa Buonarroti, inv. 60 Ar–v inked line. It is likely that , which, unlike ink, tion of the ‘positive’ that, while recorded on would not smear, was the pietramost nera common tracing tool. CB 53 A, has long sincemodano been lost. Evidence of along the template edges may also be observedpietra innera AB, XIII, 134r (Fig. 4), intro- Cutting, Flipping, Sliding: CB 60 A, duced earlier as the so-called ‘negative’ or cut-off of AB, XIII, 157, and CB 53 A a now lost for the steps in the library portal.49 As has been pointed out by others, cutting paper On the versomodano (Fig. 11), there is a deposit of was itself a creative act in the production of Miche- that is strongly suspicious for having resultedpietra from nera a langelo’s .50 A re-examination of the evidence on traced drawing template – residue from the produc- the next modani , CB 60 A (Fig. 12a, b),51 brings new modano based on the abundance of related evidence presented in this essay, one which see (note 47), p. 79, no. LXXV. This remnant is one Die Dichtungen may ease such a suspicion. of two ‘negative’ off-cuts remaining from San Lorenzo, the other being 49 De Tolnay (note 3), IV, pp. 60f., no. 538 (with bibliography prior to AB I, 59, 151. 1980). Wallace 1994 (note 20), p. 174. The association with the library 50 Joannides (note 21); Krieg (note 25), p. 231. portal derives from its near match when placed adjacent to the profile 51 De Tolnay (note 3), no. 537. Recent bibliography includes: Thoenes line traced on CB 53 A. On the recto, added after the cutting occurred, 2009 (note 23), p. 28; 2012 (note 23), p. 19; Cammy Brothers, idem Michelangelo drafted lines to the sonnet , for “Designing What You Cannot Draw: Michelangelo and the Lauren- Non so, se s’è la desiata luce

| TRACING MICHELANGELO’S MODANI | 59 complexities to this contention, particularly when employed by sculptors and masons when working viewed in light of the tracing hypothesis. Identified directly with the material.53 Although ap- again with the portal of the Laurentian Library,52 ev- pears regularly in the artist’s oeuvre, as Elampietra hasrossa not- idence on this raises for the first time the pos- ed it is rarely used together with .54 While sibility that it hasmodano been traced and cut multiple times. there does not appear to be a clearpietra explanation nera for Normally it is assumed that, although the scissor cut the presence of both drawing materials on the profile might deviate from the drawn profile line, the draw- edge of CB 60 A, it is a reminder of the temporal ing operations followed a strict progression from first and physical interconnectedness between Michelan- establishing a drawn line and then making a final cut gelo’s , the work of the , and the spaces line. Evidence on CB 60 A points to the probability of carvingmodani and construction. scarpellini , for example, that Michelangelo disrupted this sequence, repeatedly played a small but significantPietra role rossain the on-site wall drawing and cutting the same profile edge. drawings in the apse of the Medici Chapel (Fig. 14), To discuss this, several clues are worth noting: on possibly a result of its expediency in the midst of an the recto (Fig. 13), at least three drawing materials active worksite.55 And is notably detected in can be detected along the cut profile edge, , another , AB, I, pietra59, 151rrossa (Fig. 2, lower right), , and ink, indicating an extremelypietra complex nera which hasmodano been utilized as an expedient support for handlingpietra rossa of the sheet. Also on the recto, a vertical, tracking days worked by the San Lorenzo .56 ruled line in acts as a possible registration In attempting to synthesize these clues,scarpellini one must mark (Fig. 12a).pietra One rossa observes a short workshop list, work backward from what is presented to us in its probably not an autograph, and a quick sketch in current state. As was pointed out, the inked line on for a profile. Moving to the verso (Fig. 12b),pietra the the verso most closely conforms to the cut line, de- sheetrossa is blank except for a continuous line in ink that viating only at the soffit. At the same time, the recto hugs the profile edge, breaking away slightly along the contains multiple marks in , , and soffit. Considered together, these marks indicate that ink, appearing periodically,pietra but neranot pietracontinuously, rossa both sides were actively utilized, just as in the other along the profile edge. In order to produce such a co- . The presence of at least three different draw- incidence of profile marks on recto and verso, the cut ingmodani materials along the profile edge of the recto begs line must have been at play, but how? Since the final explanation. The use of has already been cut appears to have been made while holding the ver- explored as both a tracingpietra tool neraand a preparation for so side up, the only possible explanation for drawing an ink line, and it points toward the existence of a materials on the recto is that the profile edge was now-lost parent . Even more curious, however, cut or trimmed multiple times. This may be clearly is the introductionmodano of , the traditional tool understood by comparing the treatment of the inked pietra rossa tian Library”, in: (note 23), pp. 153– ci, Florence”, in: , CLIII (2011), pp. 156–162: 161. Michelangelo e il linguaggio dei disegni The Burlington Magazine 167: 163. For bibliography prior to 1994, see Cooper (note 13), See also Michael Hirst, , New Haven 1988, Michelangelo and His Drawings pp. 497f. pp. 5–8. 52 De Tolnay (note 3), IV, p. 60, no. 537, tied it to the library portal 54 Elam 2006 (note 24), pp. 50–55. profiles recorded on CB 53 A. Although this connection has been generally 55 Among the natural scale drawings of the windows for the Laurentian accepted, scholarship has not been settled on this question. An alternative Library, rendered principally in , a number of architectural details carbone association with the Medici Chapel is possible. appear in . On the technical analysis of the wall drawing materi- pietra rossa 53 The use of (or ) by sculptors and masons has been als, see Paolo Dal Poggetto, pietra rossa matita rossa Michelangelo: la ‘stanza segreta’. I disegni murali nella explored by Zanchettin (note 27), p. 110, and , “A New Drawing and , Florence 2012, p. 35. idem Sagrestia Nuova di San Lorenzo a New Date for Michelangelo’s ‘Finestre Inginocchiate’ at Palazzo Medi- 56 De Tolnay (note 3), no. 540r, a ‘negative’ modano for a marble volute

60 | JONATHAN FOOTE | line along the soffit, where on the verso there is an inked line offset 2 mm from the cut edge. On the recto no such ink line may be observed, which sug- gests that the was first cut from the recto side, flipped, and modanore-cut from the verso side, following a modified ink line. Such a procedure would have effectively removed any evidence of the ink profile from the recto, which is why only small fragments appear. A similar relationship between recto and ver- so may be seen in the , where ink residue on the verso does not correspondgola diritta with an ink line on the recto. If multiple cuttings were indeed involved, it becomes more convincing that Michelangelo used the scissors almost like a chisel on the block of stone, re-enacting the famous conceptual imperative “per forza di levare”, with paper acting as a surrogate ma- terial for stone. While the multiplicity of operations on CB 60 A appears without any temporal framework (the marks and cuts may have happened in immediate succession or days or months apart), another suggests that ____ modano the traced line may be a product of rapid tracing and 13 Michelangelo Buonarroti, detail of modano for the Laurentian Library (?). repositioning, performed within a matter of seconds. Florence, Casa Buonarroti, inv. 60 Ar This possibility appears on AB, XIII, 157 (Fig. 15a, b), where there is an unusually large amount of paper area relative to the small profile cut made along the cor- There is possible evidence of tracing. On the ner.57 A poetry fragment is drafted by Michelangelo lower corner of the verso, there are three profiles on the recto, datable to 1532, probably after the cut.58 recorded in succession and labelled herein as A, B, Speculations about the intended location for the pro- and C (Fig. 16): profile A in is hardly no- file line remain inconclusive.59 On the verso, one ob- ticeable but may be detected pietraunderneath nera the inked serves multiple profile sketches, where large areas of profile, particularly in the upper ; a second, smudged ink appear over the profile work.60 traced profile in ink (B) largely followscavetto the pietra nera in the Medici Chapel. The list of assistants has been explored by Wallace Cinisello Balsamo 2010, p. 72, no. 24 (with mirrored reproduction). 1994 (note 20), pp. 132f. 58 The fragment was identified by Frey ( [note 47], p. 226), Die Dichtungen 57 De Tolnay (note 3), IV, p. 60, no. 536 (with bibliography prior to as belonging to the poem . Che fie doppo molt’anni di chostei 1980). The watermark is Briquet (note 37), no. 5641; cfr. also Roberts 59 De Tolnay (note 3), IV, p. 60, no. 536, assigned this to the modano (note 37), p. 18. Selected bibliography includes: Laurentian Library, citing the similarity to profiles in CB 53 A. Although Disegni di fortificazioni , exh. cat., ed. by Pietro Marani, Florence 1984, the profile shape suggests a relationship, a comparison based on absolute da Leonardo a Michelangelo p. 76; Giulio Carlo Argan/Bruno Contardi, , Milan measures throws this association into doubt. Michelangelo architetto 1990, pp. 186–195; Brothers (note 22), p. 170; Pina Ragionieri, in: 60 Recent scholarship has suggested that this was cut with the La modano , exh. recto side up, flipped over, and re-worked by a second hand (Ragionieri, vita di Michelangelo: carte, poesie, lettere e disegni autografi. Grafia e biografia cat. Naples 2010, ed. by Lucilla Bardeschi Ciulich/Pina Ragionieri, [note 57]).

| TRACING MICHELANGELO’S MODANI | 61 ____ 14 Michelangelo Buonarroti, profile studies on wall of apse. Florence, San Lorenzo, Medici Chapel

line below it; and a third profile (C) appears in the times used in his letter writing or poetry to cancel or form of the cut profile edge. Judging from the qual- cross out previous writing. ity of the line work and the use of , pro- A possible explanation of the ink smudge lies in file A is possibly the result of tracingpietra and nerasuggests a the use of a parent . By this explanation, in the modano now-lost parent template. Profile B is consistent with rapidity of the work, the ink constituting profile C had similar factures found in other , e.g. CB 53 A, not yet dried and was smudged by the removal of the AB, XIII, 127, and CB 60 A. Themodani smudged ink marks parent template. The evidence of the lost parent, i.e. are quite curious and merit further speculation, par- the ink line that would have been traced to the left of ticularly in light of evidence observed previously in the cut line, has been removed through cutting. Sever- other . Although Michelangelo made periodic al clues in the smudged area attest to this conclusion: use of modaniink wash, incidental ink smudging appears to most of the smudge originates from profile C, mean- be rare, particularly in such a relatively large area. ing that in order for something to induce the smearing, Ink bleeding, where a line expands slightly due to an the object must have started its smudging beginning to over-inked quill, a rapid sketch, or absorbent paper is the left of the profile cut; secondly, the smear appears more common, as is occasional smearing due to the ‘tooled’, in that the smudges run in relatively the same hand sliding across wet ink. Ink smearing is some- direction, covering a wider area than may be account-

62 | JONATHAN FOOTE | ____ 15a, b Michelangelo Buonarroti, modano for an unknown location at San Lorenzo, recto and verso. Florence, Casa Buonarroti, Archivio Buonarroti, XIII, fol. 157

______16 Michelangelo Buonarroti, detail 17 Overlay of of modano for an unknown location profiles from the at San Lorenzo. Florence, Casa Buonarroti, recto and verso Archivio Buonarroti, XIII, fol. 157v of CB 53 A

| TRACING MICHELANGELO’S MODANI | 63 ed for by positing a simple hand smudge. Michelan- development of architectural details.63 Here, the ques- gelo was right handed, so he might have grabbed the tion of natural scale and how Michelangelo bridged parent template on the non-inked edge (the right) and between the sketch-like condition of his and dragged it across a freshly inked profile (C).61 the requirements for measured drawings neededmodani for That transposing or sliding seems to be construction becomes critical. Understanding Mi- a common technique emerges frommodani another exam- chelangelo’s use of as simultaneously sketches ple as well. Beginning with a simple overlay of two and construction-readymodani documents relies on return- profiles in CB 53 A, the template tracings previous- ing to the pre-modern notion of or ly discussed for the Laurentian Library (Fig. 17), it , terms used by quattro-la vera and grandezza cinquecentola can be observed how the sliding technique was used architectspropria forma to describe a detail drawn in the same size to ‘stretch’ the soffit through a simple shift of the as it appears in actuality. The values embedded in template while in the act of tracing. In comparing these terms, with words like and , indi- two profiles, profile B from the recto and profile A cate that this scale enjoyed a specialvera statusnaturale compared from the verso, one can see an otherwise identical to others, and perhaps it is more correctly defined profile sequence and shape with the exception of the not as a scale at all. A modern term such as ‘scale soffit length. The implication is that Michelangelo, 1:1’ confuses this critical, pre-modern difference, as- using the same template, traced the upper portion suming an apparent equivalence between scale, as a but shifted and slightly rotated the template approx- relative proportion linked to objective measure, and imately 17 mm to the right before tracing the lower size, as that which is correlated to life experience. portion.62 Two small gaps in the ink line defining This obscures the possibility to imagine and plan the soffit on profile B are consistent with a neces- architecture in life-size without actually measuring sary pause of the drawing tool in order to shift the it (interestingly enough, this would never be ques- template. Profile B, on the recto, ultimately conforms tioned in sculptural modelling). As such, Michelan- most closely to the built work. gelo plans the profiles he were working within the actualmodani size of the architecture –as if that is, “Nuove fantasie”: CB 92 A without any size reduction, while at the same time The active role of in altering construc- eschewing the tools normally necessary for such a tion-ready details givesmodani new insights into Miche- procedure, such as compass and rule.64 This creates langelo’s so-called “giudizio dell’occhio” in the some doubt as to whether these could have modani

61 Most scholars agree that Michelangelo’s drawings evidence a pre- 62 The opposite is, of course, possible: he might have traced first from dominance of right-handedness. See Hugo Chapman, the bottom and then shifted the template 17 mm to the left. Evidence is Michelangelo Draw- , exh. cat. Haarlem/London 2005/06, London inconclusive on the direction of the tracings. ings: Closer to the Master 2005, p. 304, note 106, or Mussolin (note 27), p. 303, who suggests 63 For Michelangelo’s notion of the “giudizio dell’occhio”, indispensa- that Michelangelo’s right-handedness accounts for the predominance of ble is the analysis by Summers, , Michelangelo and the Language of Art his left-facing profiles. wrote in his autobiog- Princeton, N.J., 1981, pp. 352–363 and pp. 368–379. raphy that, although Michelangelo was naturally left-handed, he never 64 Another good example of this occurs on the Medici Chapel wall did anything with his left hand, except matters requiring force (Giorgio drawings (Fig. 14), where several sketches in red chalk were made in Vasari, , ed. by Gaetano Mi- life-size, but without the aid of a compass or rule. See the discussion Le vite de’ più eccellenti pittori scultori ed architettori lanesi, Florence 1906, IV, p. 552). Perhaps most convincingly, Miche- by the author in: “In medias res: Michelangelo’s Mural Drawings at langelo sketches himself during the painting of the Sistine ceiling with San Lorenzo”, in: , ed. by Paul Em- Confabulations: Storytelling in Architecture the paint brush in his right hand; see AB, XIII, 111 (de Tolnay [note 3], mons/Marcia Feuerstein/Carolina Dayer, London/New York 2017, no. 174v). pp. 185–192.

64 | JONATHAN FOOTE | been used for construction at all or whether there It is clear that Michelangelo’s were something must have been some intervening drawing, as Scaglia between open-ended, creative processes,modani such as sketch- has argued.65 In returning to the values embedded ing, and formal modes of communicating directly with in , however, one discovers that Mi- stone carvers to guide measured constructions.68 This chelangelola propria implemented forma specific practices to ensure in-between condition leads to a realization that free that the sketch-like could be used directly as explorations in the profile line, normally interpreted drawings sufficientlymodani measured for construction pur- through free-hand sketching, could be enacted directly poses. Maurer offered one possible explanation for through natural scale, construction-ready templates – how life-size drawings could be used for construc- drawings typically understood as fixed, final or, at the tion, observing that the column base profiles in one very least, near the end of the design process. This con- of the , CB 92 A discussed below (Fig. 18a, b), stitutes a reversal of Vasari’s programme of drawing correspondmodani to a fixed overall height of precisely one- types – i.e., from sketch to finished drawing –, where third (19,5 cm), even as the specific the physical operations enabled by the , such as profilebraccio sequences fiorentino and relative proportions remain flipping, tracing, and sliding, establishmodano an imaginative planned from “rein optischen Gesichtspunkten”.66 mode of determining and selecting new and ingenious To this one may add the aforementioned for profiles. Rather than acting merely as formal devices the tomb of the Magnifici, CB 61 Ar (Fig. 6a),modano where to bridge between Michelangelo and the , the a pair of faintly ruled lines between the top of the collapse this distance altogether. scarpellini plinth and the centre line of the determine modaniOne that has yet to be considered, a measured framework from whichtondino to build a more CB 92 A (Fig. 18a,modano b), offers the most convincing ex- freely determined profile. Between these measured ample to illuminate this fertile space of experimen- lines Michelangelo could work ‘by eye’, so to speak, tation.69 Here, the operations enabled by the as a life-sized sketch, while at the same time imag- and the imagining of “nuove fantasie” convergemodani in ining a measured and predictable fit with the future an extraordinary fashion. As will be shown, the construction.67 Such measures would then telegraph concurrence on the same sheet of sketched profiles throughout the tracing process, ensuring some and a cut profile edge demonstrates an inexorable fidelity with proportionsmodani or fit. link between the agency of paper, natural scale de-

65 Scaglia (note 26) claims there must have been an intervening, profes- 68 This claim echoes Payne (note 22), p. 69, who writes that “in their sionally trained draftsperson who would have translated Michelangelo’s ‘objecthood’ the generated design and were not merely working modani drawings into a format more directly useable by the stone carvers. Scaglia’s drawings”. analysis, however, is heavily biased, since it is based on the typical project 69 De Tolnay (note 3), no. 525. Selected bibliography includes: Da- delivery methods of modern practice. There is no concrete evidence that vid Hemsoll, “The Laurentian Library and Michelangelo’s Architec- Michelangelo’s drawings would need to be re-drawn by others in order to tural Method”, in: , LXVI Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes be suitable for construction. (2003), pp. 29–62: 51; Maurer 2004 (note 25), pp. 180f.; Elam 2006 66 Maurer 2004 (note 25), pp. 179–181. Maurer also points out the (note 24), p. 60; Cammy Brothers, “Figura e architettura nei disegni di use of other geometric frameworks that might have guided the generation Michelangelo”, in: (note 22), pp. 80– Michelangelo e il disegno di architettura of profiles, such as the diagonal sketched by Michelangelo through a 93: 86; Silvia Catitti, “Michelangelo e la monumentalità nel ricetto: cornice section of the tomb of Julius II on CB 74 Av (de Tolnay [note 3], progetto, esecuzione e interpretazione”, in: Michelangelo architetto a San no. 463v). (note 31), pp. 91–103: 90f.; , , pp. 132–134, no. 36; Lorenzo eadem ibidem 67 Such a practice may have been honed already in the autodidactic Brothers (note 22), pp. 54, 57, 168f.; Thoenes 2009 (note 23), p. 30; copying of the Codex Coner, where Michelangelo copied the profiles Thoenes 2012 (note 23), pp. 19–21; Catitti (note 24), pp. 53–55; but did not include Volpaia’s carefully scripted dimensions; cf. Brothers Alessandro Nova, “Il ruolo del legno nell’architettura di Michelan- (note 22), p. 60. gelo”, in: (note 23), pp. 169–177: 169; Michelangelo e il linguaggio dei disegni

| TRACING MICHELANGELO’S MODANI | 65 ____ 18a, b Michelangelo Buonarroti, modano for the Laurentian Library, recto and verso. Florence, Casa Buonarroti, inv. 92 A tail drawing, and Michelangelo’s unusual approach Unlike Michelangelo’s other , CB 92 A is to the antique lexicon. Building on what has been unique for its density of drawings,modani both figural and learned from the previous in terms of tracing architectural, and palimpsest-like condition. It offers and cutting, what emergesmodani from an examination of one of the artist’s most poignant documents for his CB 92 A is a noticeable reciprocity between Miche- methods of producing imaginative profiles. CB 92 A langelo’s template-tracing operations and his sketch- contains, between the recto and verso, over twenty ing techniques. Remarkably, not only does free-hand unique drawings, mostly relating to the Library ves- sketching provide a conceptual basis for freeing the tibule.70 It provides some of the most informative from compass and rule, the , and their sketches of Michelangelo’s intended design for the modanioperations, help establish a frameworkmodani for develop- free standing stair, a source of some controversy since ing his profile sketching. the stairway was built much later and without his

Howard Burns, “Michelangelo e Palladio”, , pp. 270–283: 274; 70 The drapery and figural studies are generally considered by scholars ibidem Payne (note 22), p. 70. For the bibliography prior to 1994, see Cooper to be from the hand of an assistant; see Silvia Catitti, in: Michelangelo architet- (note 13), pp. 495f. (note 31), pp. 132–134, no. 36. to a San Lorenzo

66 | JONATHAN FOOTE | immediate supervision. As such, it is the most wide- ly published and most thoroughly studied of all his . Yet, it is also the one least likely to be discussed inmodani terms of its cut edge. In spite of being prolifically reproduced since Wittkower’s ground-breaking study on the Laurentian Library in 1934, the focus has been largely on the stair sketches, with only a few scholars having explored the significance of it as a .71 The examination of CB 92 A begins on themodano verso (Fig. 18b), where there is a left-facing profile study for the Library vestibule, rendered heavily in and overlaid with a second profile in ink pietrawash orrossa .72 This profile, a variation on an attic base,lavata can di bebistro identified most closely with the lower order columns, although the columns as built rely on the substitution of a small double , called , a condition that may be faintlytondino detected in thebastoncino profile underneath. The deliberate and heavypietra use rossa of merits a closer scrutiny.73 Also called lavata ,di it bistro was a brownish-black materi- al derived fromfuliggine burning organic materials such as wood and has been occasionally utilized by artists for its dark, smoke-like effect when used in wash or ____ watercolour.74 This leads to a much more opaque 19 Overlay of profiles from the recto and verso and penetrating wash than iron gall ink, Michelan- of CB 92 A, detail gelo’s normal wash material.75 The rare and surely deliberate use of such a material may be linked to rendered profile in bleeds through the the observed condition of CB 92 A, where the wash paper and thus provideslavata adi guide bistro to trace a new pro- profile telegraphs through the thickness of the paper. file, facing right, on the other side of the sheet. From An overlay of the recto and verso (Fig. 19) reveals the recto, it can be seen that the right facing profile that this was certainly done as a purposeful act of takes its upper moulding sequence – , scotia, transposing the profile shape on the recto: the heavily – directly from the verso. toro ton- dino

71 The few exceptions are: Cooper (note 13), pp. 495f., who claims that here for two reasons: the greater ability of the material to penetrate the CB 92 A records “the creative phase of template production”; Thoenes paper fibres, as may be seen on the other side, and the propensity of lavata 2009 (note 23), p. 30; Maurer 2004 (note 25), pp. 180f. to develop cracks, which are also detected here. di bistro 72 There is some confusion about recto and verso on CB 92 A, no doubt 74 Francesco Milizia, , Bologna 1826– Opere complete risguardanti le belle arti a reflection of the various scholarly emphases over the years. I defer here to 1828, III, p. 41. Also found in Baldinucci (note 40), p. 61. the conventions of de Tolnay (note 3), IV, pp. 53f., no. 525. 75 Ornella Signorini Paolini, “Gli inchiostri”, in: Restauro e conservazione 73 Scholars disagree as to whether the wash material on CB 92 A is , exh. cat., Florence 1981, pp. 49–57. On the unique delle opere d’arte su carta or the more rare (or ) . De Tolnay ability of bistre to penetrate paper fibres, see Annamaria Petrioli Tofani, lavatura d’inchiostro lavatura lavata di bistro (note 3), IV, p. 53, no. 525, identifies it as , and I follow him “I materiali e le tecniche”, , pp. 73–113: 93. lavata di bistro ibidem

| TRACING MICHELANGELO’S MODANI | 67 The transposition of the profile sketch to the As stated already, Michelangelo chose to trace only other side of the sheet not only copies the profile, the upper portion, leaving the lower profile free to it also reverses it, producing one of Michelangelo’s take on new associations. Following this, there is a few right-facing profiles. It is an obvious parallel remarkable transformation of that lower portion into to flipping a , an operation demonstrated in a study for an entirely different moulding, one where several modano, such as CB 61 A and CB 59 A, the the remaining part of the profile on the verso is nearly identicalmodani pair for the tomb of the Magnifici, abandoned in favour of a new sequence – plinth- - or CB 60 A, where it was utilized as an essential - – now on the recto. This, in fact, wouldtoro method to perform multiple cuttings on the profile becometondino cimbia the basis for the studies of the , or base edge. By cutting, Michelangelo flattened the double- moulding for the Library vestibule. Takingzoccolo this as faced nature of paper but simultaneously expanded a new starting point and moving to the upper left it beyond its two surfaces into a full-bodied of the sheet, an entirely new series of profiles is in- .76 The advantage of ‘opening up’ the thicknessmod- troduced to study this condition. Returning to his ofello the paper relies on the imaginative potency of customary practice of drawing left-facing profiles, introducing ambiguities between right and left, and Michelangelo retains the moulding sequence just front and back. The turning over of the is discovered in the flip but subsequently introduces a thus a highly productive activity for Michelangelomodano systematic study of three new profiles related to the to explore new profiles and render them open for vestibule base moulding. Bound by their shared lower new associations, a practice poignantly observed portion, the three profiles exhibit, in rapid succession in his autodidactic profile copies from the Codex from right to left, different solutions for their upper Coner. As has been pointed out, in several places portions. Michelangelo initiates a direct reversal of profiles Having transposed the profile with a flip of the with respect to Volpaia’s originals.77 The act of mir- sheet, the successive, adjacent studies rely on a for- roring most certainly aids in the release of the pro- mal operation of substitution, one that is ultimate- file from its strict, antique genealogy as recorded by ly an anatomical procedure of dismembering and Volpaia. Also founded on the creative power of the assembly. The attic base is first dismembered and flip, as discussed by Hirst, is Michelangelo’s famous then partially reassembled into the vestibule base rendering of , where the suffering, recumbent moulding. But this is not just an abstract operation Titan is wittilyTityus transformed into a study for the res- of pure caprice; rather, it relies on the use of the pa- urrection of Christ through a transposition between per sheet transformed into a manipulative object, recto and verso.78 and thus, clear parallels can be drawn with the use of The use of mirroring or flipping as a dislocation the . One advantage with tracing is that tactic can be demonstrated clearly by following what theymodani enable substitutions and dislocations,modani as profiles happened to the just discussed attic profile after it may be partially traced and then utilized with oth- was transposed through the thickness of the sheet. er templates to produce new combinations. This is

76 Carmen Bambach has shown how Michelangelo’s own use of the [note 3], no. 518r). See also Wolfgang Lotz, “Zu Kopien term almost invariably referred to representational objects made nach dem Codex Coner”, in: modello Stil und Überlieferung in der Kunst des Abendlan- in wood or clay (Carmen C. Bambach, reply to Michael Hirst, “A , conference proceedings Bonn 1964, Berlin 1967, II, pp. 12–19. For des Note on the Word ”, in: , LXXIV [1992], pp. 172f.: a comparison of Michelangelo’s profiles in the Laurentian Library to Modello The Art Bulletin 173). those in the Codex Coner, see Krieg (note 25), pp. 150–156. 77 See Brothers (note 22), pp. 64f., who refers to CB 1 Ar (de Tolnay 78 Hirst (note 53), p. 113, and more recently Brothers (note 22), p. 26.

68 | JONATHAN FOOTE | certainly supported by the close link between and the control and assembly of the actual modani ,79 a process that involves the joining oflavoro many di individualquadro stones together into a single work, again with conceptual underpinnings in anatomy.80 In oth- er words, complex profile sequences would out of ne- cessity be assembled using multiple stones and thus would require multiple . Interestingly enough,modani the accounts document- ing the delivery of at San Lorenzo include a detailed record ofmacigno the arrival of the building stones related to these very profiles, allowing for a deeper look into this link.81 Among a record of blocks comprising the basement and main story, a distinction is made between the “imbasimento”, or base block, and the “scaglione”, which compris- es the upper block of the base moulding assembly. In fact, there is a joint in the actual construction that divides the upper and lower blocks between the termination of the and the initialization of the upper (Fig. cimbia 20). Looking back, this divi- toro sion appears at precisely the same point as it does ____ in Michelangelo’s profile sequences on CB 92 Ar, 20 Study of joint location in the zoccolo of the Laurentian Library vestibule after building survey where the lower portion of the sketched profiles by Giuseppe Ignazio Rossi, La Libreria Mediceo- matches the even as the upper portion, Laurenziana, architettura di Michelagnolo the , exhibitsimbasimento an array of different possible Buonarruoti, Florence 1749, pl. IV profiles.scaglione It seems possible, given this evidence, that the substitution operations were not only variations Aside from their origin in the attic base profile on antique sequences, studied in new ways, but were on the verso, the three closely spaced sketches on the also specifically tied to the problem of creating a upper left of CB 92 Ar (Fig. 18a) merit further ex- unified monolithic construction with the necessary planation. Indeed, they follow a somewhat charac- use of smaller blocks. One wonders, as well, if these teristic approach by Michelangelo to inventing and profile substitutions were not being executed in the considering architectural profiles. Generally speak- exact moment when the stones were being carved ing, as is evidenced on several other sheets, he often and installed. iterated sketched profiles, progressing systematically

79 The term refers to smooth architectural carvings, prelate”, where he states that “le membra dell’architettura dipendono lavoro di quadro such as cornices and architraves. An ornamented cornice would fall dalle membra dell’uomo” ( , ed. by Paola Baroc- Il carteggio di Michelangelo into the category of ; see the distinction made in Vasari chi/Renzo Ristori, Florence 1965–1983, V, p. 123). lavoro d’intaglio (note 1), I, pp. 55f. 81 These accounts are collected in the so-called and are a Libretto II 80 That Michelangelo thought of architecture as an anatomical oper- daily report of stone deliveries for the Laurentian Library vestibule from ation of assembly can be read into his so-called “letter to an unknown 11 December 1525 until 2 August 1526. See (note 38), pp. 202– I ricordi

| TRACING MICHELANGELO’S MODANI | 69 from left to right, quickly testing new profile com- of the in-situ construction.83 One wonders, then, why binations or physiognomies and keeping them in to even cut the edge in the first place, since at first close proximity to heighten possible associations and glance the likelihood of this going into the juxtapositions. Often these appear as free-floating hands of the seems slim.modano However, as it has profiles, as on a sheet for the Laurentian Library been shown, scarpellinione may not necessarily conclude that in the British Museum, inv. 1859-9-15-508v,82 but such a carefully sketched profile is to be excluded they also may relate more closely with a horizontal from use by the masons, nor that it might have had movement that follows the datum lines of the profile other creative uses. Clearly, the line between ide- in relief, as in CB 9 Ar (Fig. 21) or in the ation and execution is significantly blurred, a fact profiles discussed already in the wall drawingspietra ofrossa the that is magnified by the use of the scissors as a kind Medici Chapel (Fig. 14). The linking of the profile of sketching tool, a practice observed also on other to its relief condition produces a sophisticated mor- and occasionally commented upon by scholars phological instrument for systematically examining sincemodani the early 1990s.84 On CB 92 Av (Fig. 18b), this moulding substitutions or more localized deforma- can be seen where, on top of the line in , tions or compressions. As has been shown, in tracing a second line in ink acts as a cutting guidepietra for rossa the Michelangelo introduced an elastic approach scissors for most of the profile length. The exception tomodani the profile line that was partially enabled by the occurs at the scotia, where the scissors follow the sliding and nudging of the paper template across the instead of the ink, an indication that Michepie- sheet. This appears unequivocally in the ink smears tralangelo rossa was not merely following a pre-determined on AB, XIII, 157, but it could have been utilized in line but continued to see disruptive potential in the the more subtle stretches and bumps on the profile use of the scissors themselves. edge found on CB 60 A as well. Not incidentally, then, Michelangelo’s sketching practices as demon- Concluding Remarks strated on CB 92 Ar also relate to the conceptu- The dialectic movement of operations al framework activated by his paper , which at all stages of the design process modanieffectively negate he slid horizontally across the sheet inmodani a process of their function as solely formalized documents for shuffling, swapping, or stretching. theoretical or practical demonstration. In the hands One profile that has yet to be examined on of Michelangelo, they can be read more precisely as CB 92 A is the actual cut edge itself. Rendered on documents of displacement that enable an imagina- the verso heavily on both the edge and in relief using tive immersion into the sequencing and shaping of , it also relates to the base moulding of the profiles . In this way, there is a convincing vestibule.pietra rossa The use of is possibly a clue that and fascinatingall’antica symmetry between the operations in- links it with the profilepietra of rossa the column base drawn in scribed within the and those associated with the same material, the one underneath the prominent his profile sketches,modani the normal starting point when profile in , also on the verso. As observed discussing his approach to the profile. The taxonomy by Maurer,lavata both di bistroprofiles appear to be scaled 1:1, as of template operations – flipping, substitution, trans- can be shown by comparing their measures to those lation, and transposition – provides new insight into

211, no. CXCII. Wallace 1994 (note 20), pp. 160–165, discusses and 83 Maurer 2004 (note 25), pp. 180f. analyzes these deliveries. 84 Of note here are Payne (note 22), p. 69, Joannides (note 21), and 82 De Tolnay (note 3), no. 528v. Brothers (note 35).

70 | JONATHAN FOOTE | the artist’s enigmatic approach to the antique lexicon; one that has long been acknowledged, in various ways, since Vasari.85 The remarkable use of paper to generate new offspring may be consideredmodani a kind of occultation, wheremodani formal reference devices such as Vitruvian conventions or antique precedent are deliberately ousted through a witty use of paper. Unlike constructing a drawing with compass and rule, in which the measured lines and arcs are always visi- ble, the act of tracing copies an outline while simul- taneously concealing what is underneath. While this may be considered a formal limitation of the tracing procedure, it could also be viewed as an imaginative device for dislocation, in which the paper object itself is used as an instrument of invention. In many ways this follows, conceptually speaking, Michelangelo’s use of the Codex Coner, where the normally rote pro- cedure of copying was overturned to realize a creative surplus through flipping and omission.86 The show that the conventional operations of architecture,modani as described by Vasari, were treated by Michelangelo in a thoroughly unique, chiastic way: ____ a first sketch may be a drawing for construction, but 21 Michelangelo Buonarroti, it can also be the other way around, where a construc- profile studies for the Medici Chapel. Florence, Casa Buonarroti, inv. 9 Ar tion tool (i.e., a ) serves in a way that would be consistent withmodano a sketch. We have just seen in CB 92 A how a rapidly determined profile in onto the building site as some kind of in-situ model.87 , drawn with no apparent aid from compasspietra or rule, ros- At the same time, so-called finished were still issa converted instantly into a natural-scale, construc- active in ongoing design considerations,modani as was seen tion-ready tool with the cut of the scissors. The ero- in CB 53 A, the sheet of traced , where the sof- sion of these distinctions may rely on the importance fit width was extended in the verymodani act of recording a of the scissors themselves as a tool of invention, or finished profile.88 they may rest on a desire to create a parent template, These revelations add complexity to enduring yet ready to be traced onto a new sheet. They might point open questions surrounding Michelangelo’s so-called simply to the goal of bringing the drawing directly “licenzia”, and they advance the importance of paper

85 Caroline Elam has provided a recent assessment in her article “The 87 Michelangelo made frequent use of models at San Lorenzo, often Significance of the Profile in Michelangelo’s Architectural Drawing”, in: in-situ. One of the most famous was the natural-scale wooden model (note 23), pp. 85–99. of the ducal tomb for the Medici Chapel. See Wallace 1994 (note 20), Michelangelo e il linguaggio dei disegni 86 For the standard practice of tracing in the cinquecento, devoid of crea- p. 88. tive potential, see Carmen C. Bambach, 88 Also relevant is the observation that the upper present on the Drawing and Painting in the Italian Renais- cavetto , Cambridge 1999, pp. 127–137. CB 53 A tracings has been omitted in the finished stone work. sance Workshop: Theory and Practice, 1300–1600 modani

| TRACING MICHELANGELO’S MODANI | 71 as a critical support medium for his approach. Un- more robust understanding of the importance placed like in his sculpture, the was invaria- by previous scholars on the role of the scissors, as a bly carried out by the handslavoro of diassistants, quadro leading to reciprocal act of removal borrowed from sculpture, in a great demand on the part of the intervening doc- the invention of new profiles.93 It seems plausible that uments – – to act as surrogate building ma- removing paper, sometimes in multiple passes, had a terials.89 Certainly,modani Michelangelo capitalized on one metonymical relationship with removing stone, and of the key aspects of , namely that the in this way the assume an absolutely critical relief conditions are lavoroimagined di quadro and communicated role, not only in communication,modani but in conceiving the through a sectional cut, perpendicular to the façade. work. Making multiple cuts along the edges of paper This meant adjustments to a flat cornice had would certainly be consistent with Michelan- immediate spatial consequences, since it mightmodano guide gelo’smodani sculpting practices, where, in approaching the several of stone work. The ability of paper to block from one side only rather than the four-sided extend beyondbraccia its surfaces has already been explored approach typically enacted by sculptors, he could leave through the analysis of the translocation of profiles material available for adjustments in the work as it in CB 92 A. Paper supports a similar expansion when emerged.94 Michelangelo imagines the particular task of working The free movement of , both locally on the through the hands of others in the . This drawing board as well as moremodani broadly on the build- is not a question of formalizing communicationslavoro di quadro with ing site or between different projects, helps connect the the , where the line of the artist’s authority is animating and physiognomic approach to the profile solidified,scarpellini although this is also a consequence.90 Rath- line more convincingly with familiar sculptural oper- er, it is a matter of Michelangelo himself reaching into ations. The manoeuvring of paper templates follows a the paper and extending his hands as closely as possi- concerted attempt by the artist to arrive at a properly ble into the actual carving.91 tempered profile edge that satisfies the . Central to this, of course, is Michelangelo’s forma- The incremental flipping, sliding, and giudiziocutting dell’occhio allowed tive connection between material and conceptual sub- for a practical approach to making small adjustments, traction, his idea of working “per via di levare”.92 By a preoccupation related to sketching, but perhaps also translating it into an object capable of being flipped to techniques borrowed from painting in .95 and carried about, the paper collapse the relief What is more, the enact the physical movementsbuon condition of stone into a line-basedmodani profile. The two of the body itself inmodani making profiles, through scissors activities extend and contain each other, which is the but also in sliding and flipping, creating a convincing source of their imaginative potency. This leads to a link between the gestural quality of his architectur-

89 As is well-documented, Michelangelo made copious use of assistants Desire: Michelangelo and the as an Architectural Premise”, forza di levare in his figural work, although contracts record Michelangelo’s hand as a de- in: , ed. by Matthew The Material Imagination: Reveries on Architecture and Matter mand from patrons in certain parts of the work. See, for example, Mindrup, London 2015, pp. 29–45. Le Lettere , ed. by Gaetano Milanesi, Florence 1875, pp. 671f., 93 Thoenes 2009 (note 23), p. 30, writes of CB 92 A that Michelangelo di Michelangelo Buonarroti no. XXXIII. The was probably rarely, if ever, undertaken by puts it “davanti a sé come se dovesse lavorarlo con lo scalpello”. lavoro di quadro Michelangelo. Ornamented architectural carvings, as in the Medici Chap- 94 These practices are discussed by Paula Carabell, “Image and Identity el, were executed by (Wallace 1994 [note 20], p. 120). in the Unfinished Works of Michelangelo”, in: , 32 (1997), pp. 83– intagliatori RES 90 A forthcoming essay by the author in a book edited by Cara Rachele 105: 96–101. and Dario Donetti explores the role of in this respect. 95 As Bambach (note 86), pp. 262f., has discussed, Michelangelo first modani 91 This builds on the claims of Thoenes 2009 (note 23), p. 30. incised his cartoons in the wet plaster and subsequently deviated from 92 This has been examined in a separate essay by the author, “Extracting them as he worked.

72 | JONATHAN FOOTE | al profiles and the gestural movements embedded in Abbreviations making . This connection seems important, as modani AB Florence, Archivio Buonarroti Michelangelo himself commented on the limitations CB Florence, Casa Buonarroti of measured proportions in understanding the human GDSU Florence, Gallerie degli Uffizi, Gabinetto body. Speaking through his biographer Ascanio Con- dei Disegni e delle Stampe divi, the artist famously criticized the human bodies drawn by Albrecht Dürer in his : “Alberto non trattaVier se nonBücher delle von misuremensch- elicher varietà Proportion dei corpi, di che certa regola dar non si può, Abstract formando le figure ritte come pali, quel che più impor- This paper opens an inquiry into Michelangelo’s unusual, tava, degli atti e gesti umani non ne dice parola.”96 yet highly ordered exercise of the classical vocabulary through These lines into theoretical ideas have been taken a close examination of his natural scale paper for San Lorenzo. Following a re-examination of thesemodani documents, up by others at great length. Rather than expanding new assertions are made about how Michelangelo generated the boundaries into complex terms, such as the his via a complex taxonomy of physical operations, forza therebymodani using the themselves as paper tracing devices to and , this paper connects them modani indi levarea concrete giudizio way backdell’occhio to the , the somewhat produce new, altered . In doing so, he relied on techniques modani such as flipping, transposition,modani and sliding to enable a creative hermetic documents for the building site that actually manipulation of the antique lexicon based on substitution, conceal fascinating findings. As has been discussed in reversal, and stretching. Up until now, the practice of making various places throughout, this essay should be read and Michelangelo’s idiosyncratic approach to the profile modani as a strengthening of several existing lines of scholar- line have not been directly connected. However, in positing a ship that have been developing since the early 1990s, stronger link, remarkable findings emerge. What arises from the present analysis is that his , as paper object-models, when analysis into Michelangelo’s working methods encroach on the technical domainmodani normally associated with assumed an increasing importance. By offering new sketching, while, at the same time, the sketching process mimics close readings of the physical conditions of Michelan- the physical operations of template usage, such as flipping and substitution. A re-assessment of the leads to a new gelo’s , emerging ideas about the artist’s drawing modani process,modani the criticality of the medium of paper, and understanding of their central role in the artist’s unconventional development of the architectural profile. the significance of the building site are supported and reinforced. Previous assertions, such as the criticality of the scissors and the witty planning ‘by eye’, emerge as having even greater validity. At the same time, hith- Photo Credits erto observed drawing factures on the take on new significances when placed into a coherentmodani narra- Casa Buonarroti, Florence: Figs. 1–4, 6–13, 15, 16, 18, 21. – tive of paper manipulations. Gallerie degli Uffizi, Gabinetto dei Disegni e delle Stampe, Florence: Fig. 5. – Author: Figs. 14, 17, 19, 20.

96 , , ed. by Paolo Michelangelo: la vita raccolta dal suo discepolo d’Ancona, Milan 1928, p. 176.

| TRACING MICHELANGELO’S MODANI | 73 Umschlagbild | Copertina:

Michelangelo Buonarroti, für die Biblioteca Laurenziana | modano per la Biblioteca Laurenziana modanoFlorenz, Casa Buonarroti, Inv. 92 Ar | Firenze, Casa Buonarroti, inv. 92 Ar (Abb. 18a, S. 66 | fig. 18a, p. 66)

ISSN 0342-1201

Stampa: Gruppo TCT, Firenze luglio 2019