Head of a Cherub, study
Artist/Maker
DatesMade: Made probably 17th century
Material / Technique
Dimensionsh x w: Mått 35 x 29 cm h x w x d: Ram 54 x 50 x 7 cm
Inventory numberNM 8
AcqusitionTransferred 1866 from Kongl. Museum (Martelli 1804)
Other titlesTitle (sv): Kerubhuvud Title (en): Head of a Cherub, study
DescriptionCatalogue raisonné: Description in Italian Paintings: Three Centuries of Collecting, Nationalmuseum, Stockholm, 2015, cat.no. 45: FORMER INV. NOS.: 224 (M. 1796–97); 134 (F. 1798); 212 (M. 1804). TECHNICAL NOTES: The support is a single sheet of paper. It is lined on a sparsely woven, plain-weave linen fabric (10 x 10 threads/cm2) and mounted with staples on a Martelli strainer. The support is probably cropped. It is likely that this was done in Italy before the painting was shipped to Sweden. The paint layer is applied with clearly visible brushstrokes on the yellow imprimatura. Documented restorations: 1970: Deformations of the paper and canvas reduced. Corrections of the surface. Conservation 2012: Removal of dark yellow varnish and old retouches. Retouching and new varnish. PROVENANCE: Martelli 1804. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sander 1872–76, III, p. 111, no. 212 (as Correggio); NM Cat. 1958, p. (as anonymous); NM Cat. 1990, p. 418 (as anonymous). Martelli considered the present work a masterpiece and in the earliest inventories of his collection it is tentatively attributed to Correggio (1489–1534).¹ This attribution can perhaps be related to the fact that in the 17th and 18th centuries Correggio was highly admired for his depiction of putti, especially the ones found in the foreground of the Madonna of St George (1530), praised for example by Guido Reni.² The heads of Correggio’s putti are however not similar to the present study for the cherub, and the attribution should be confidently rebutted, both on stylistic and technical grounds. For example, the proportions of the face in the present study are different from the proportions of the faces of Correggio’s cherubs and putti in general, where the forehead often seems to be much accentuated. Although the oil study cannot be attributed to Correggio, we can still in part agree with Martelli’s assessment and, although not from the 16th century, it was in all probability painted in the early 17th century. The seemingly spontaneous yet skillful brushstrokes, the palette of colours accentuated by distinctive pink highlights, the proportions of the rounded, realistically depicted, cherubic face, the presence and liveliness of the gaze, are characteristics which instead could point to an artist such as Federico Barocci. Interestingly, in a document dating from 1799, Nicola Martelli describes the study in detail with words very similar to those used in 17th century neo-classical art theory to describe the feeling induced by the works of Barocci, for example in Bellori’s Vite (1672) and Giovanni Baglione’s Vite (1642).³ Holding the present work in highest esteem, Martelli praises the “motion” and “softness” of the artist’s brushstrokes as well as the “grace” of his finish.⁴ Characteristics which taken together are close in meaning to the term vaghezza; a least in the way Castiglione uses this particular adjective to describe Barocci’s work.⁵ Martelli goes on to discuss the work in terms of a master’s definitive and exemplary study of a cherub that would be studied and used by his followers and admirers, even two centuries later. Particularly, he mentions his friend, the artist Pompeo Batoni (1708–1787), as voicing great admiration; supposedly Batoni had claimed that artists of his day had tried, but failed, to emulate the masterpiece. Martelli states that the study for the cherub was painted on paper; a fact that has been recently confirmed.⁶ The paper was later laid down on canvas, mounted on a stretcher frame and subsequently treated with heavy varnish on several occasions. Of course Barocci was one of few artists of the 16th and early 17th centuries who painted head studies in this original and highly finished manner. ⁷ In this practice he also had few forerunners or contemporary peers; an example of the former was Domenico Beccafumi (1486–1551) and of the latter Jacopo Bassano (1510–1592). This fact, coupled with the colouristic expressiveness of the work, makes an attribution to Barocci or at least to his circle quite tempting. There is however characteristics of the work that refute this; despite the spontaneity of its execution and the quick and easy brushstrokes, the pastose application of paint seems thicker and more forceful, compared with, for example, corresponding studies for heads by Barocci. In 1957 the painting was attributed by William Suida to Daniele Crespi.⁸ Suida’s attribution seems quite sound and does to some extent corroborate Martelli’s high regard for the work as well as substantiate certain claims one can make concerning the content of the Martelli Collection as a whole. Daniele Crespi is known to have produced head studies in oil on paper; there is for example a fine study of a head of a woman in the Biblioteca Ambrosiana, Milan.⁹ There are also a few known head studies in oil by one of Crespi’s masters, Giulio Cesare Procaccini, from which he could have picked up this particular working practice.¹⁰ Suida probably based his attribution purely on stylistic grounds, however; in all likelihood noticing the similarities between the present work and the heads of the cherubs in for example Crespi’s painting of the Last Supper, Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan, and the heads of various cherubs, seraphim and other angels in his frescoes in the Certosa di Garegnano and in the altarpiece of the Resurrection in the Certosa di Pavia. The same flowing reddish-brown locks and well-proportioned faces are repeated again and again in Crespi’s depictions of the angels, which are always rendered with seemingly swift and forceful brushstrokes. The way Crespi contrasts the thick and wild curls of the hair, distinctly highlighted with thick brushstrokes of white, and the soft skin of the face of the cherub, is particularly striking in the present work as well as in his previously known paintings of angels. Also, the specific curve of the mouth and the lively, cheerful gaze of the cherub of the oil study, are especially similar to the corresponding facial characteristics of the cherubs of the Certosa di Pavia Resurrection. Interestingly, there is another painting of the head of a cherub, or at least of a child, in the Martelli Collection which was attributed to the “Scuola Lombarda” by Corvi and Tofanelli and which although of much lesser quality (NMDrh 449*), could be linked to the present painting.¹¹ This painting, presumably a study as well, was painted on the type of coarse linen-canvas that is quite common for several of the lesser works in the Martelli Collection. Taking into account the frequent usage of the same type of linen-canvas for these poorer works, one cannot rule out the possibility that there was active organized copying taking place, if not under Martelli’s own supervision, perhaps at least in some connection to his collection, as indeed he himself claimed.¹² Perhaps the child’s head attributed to the Scuola Lombarda could be counted amongst those failed studies supposedly produced in imitation of the present work? Despite the qualitative difference, indeed in comparison the former seems almost a travesty of the latter, there is nevertheless some shared characteristics between the two paintings; for example, somewhat of the proportions of the features of the face and the general colour scheme. What motivated the attribution of the lesser work to the Lombard School is not altogether clear; rather than being based purely on stylistic grounds, there was in all likelihood some information that has now been lost concerning this particular painting’s provenance and its correlation to other paintings of the Lombard School in the Martelli Collection, perhaps even to the present painting. One should be cautious in attributing the present work to Crespi; there is sound argument for the attribution, both on stylistic and technical grounds, and the work should probably be placed in the early 17th century and in the Lombard School, but an attribution to the circle of Crespi and his master Procaccini would perhaps be closer to the mark. dp 1 NM Archives, Kongl. Museum, F:1, Catalogue du Cabinet de Martelli (à Rome). 2 Ekserdijan 1997, pp. 188–189, note 67; Popham 1957, pp. 84–85, note 2: citation from Scanelli 1657, p. 294; Lingo 2008, pp. 148–157. 3 Baglione 1642; Bellori 1672. 4 NM Archives, Kongl. Museum, F:1, Catalogue du Cabinet de Martelli (à Rome). For the description in whole, see Appendix 1. 5 Lingo 2008, see especially chapter 5: “What’s in a word? Vaghezza in the language of criticism”, pp. 125–143. Lingo describes how the term vaghezza, close in meaning to grazia – grace – represents a fusing of motion, virtuous desire, charm and beauty. He cites Philip Sohm: “the power and malleabilty of vaghezza lay in the perception of its relation to two distinct verbs – vagare, to wander, and vagheggiare … which can be translated ‘to gaze fondly’ but which also implies a strong sensual, even sexual desire”. 6 NM Archives, Kongl. Museum, F:1, Catalogue du Cabinet de Martelli (à Rome). 7 Barocci’s contemporary Annibale Carracci (1560–1609) also painted head studies in oil on paper but these were solely done from life. The Carracci head studies date mainly from 1585–1590 and Rudolf Wittkower suggests that the influence for these studies came from Venitian artists. Donald Posner claims that Annibale Carracci must have been influenced by Jacopo Bassano’s (1510–1592) chalk and pastel portrait drawings. In some respects, Bassano may also have influenced Barocci; indeed, one of Barocci’s pastel head studies has occasionally been attributed to Bassano. However, there are no known head studies in oil on paper by Bassano. See: Wittkower 1952, p. 14; Posner 1971, Vol. II, p. 25, no. 53, pl. 53; Ongpin 2003, cat. no. 13; Habert and Loisel Legrand 1998, p. 94, cat. no. 31: the pastel study that Habert attributes to Bassano is, however, retained in Emiliani 2008, vol. II, pp. 144–145, cat. no. 54.15. 8 Suida of course was particularly familiar with the work of Daniele Crespi, not the least through his own collection. The Suida-Manning Collection, today part of the collections of the Blanton Museum of Art, Austin, Texas, contains some of the artists finest works outside of Italy. NM Archives, Kongl. Museums arkiv, D:17 “Konceptkatalog över måleri- antik- och skulptursamlingen 1861”. 9 Longhi 1966, pp. 25‒29. 10 Ibid.; Ward Nielson 2004, pp. 9–10. 11 This particular work (NMDrh 449) is not pictured or listed at the end of the catalogue. For further information about works marked with an asterisk (*), see “Guide to the Catalogue”, pp. 15–17. 12 Catalogue written by Nicola Martelli, marked “Received without letter 3 July 1799” and received on 31 July 1799”, NM Archives, Kongl. Museum, F:1. For the description in full, see Appendix 1. [End]
Motif categoryReligion/Mythology
Collection
TechniquePainting
Object category
Keyword
External links