Beskrivning: Se beskrivning i den engelska versionen.

Res. Katalogtext: 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]

Kerubhuvud