LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS

ACCADEMIA NAZIONALE DEI LINCEI ATTI DEI CONVEGNI LINCEI 347 INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: PAINTING TECHNIQUE IN THE LIGHT OF RESTORATIONS AND SCIENTIFIC STUDIES (Rome, 29-30 November 2019) Edited by Antonio Sgamellotti and Brunetto Giovanni Brunetti ROMA 2022 BARDI EDIZIONI EDITORE COMMERCIALE © by Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei Si ringrazia la «Associazione Amici della Accademia dei Lincei» per la collaborazione offerta alla edizione del presente volume ISSN: 0391-805X ISBN: 978-88-218-1229-3 FINITO DI STAMPARE NEL MESE DI FEBBRAIO 2023 Antica Tipografia dal 1876 srl – Corso del Rinascimento 24, 00186 Roma Azienda con Sistema Qualità certificato ISO 9001 - ISO 14001 - ISO 45001 INDICE Comitato Scientifico ................................................................ Pag. 5 Comitato Ordinatore................................................................ » 5 Programma .................................................................................. » 7 G. Parisi, R. Antonelli – Preface ............................................. » 9 The Organizing Committee – Introductory notes...................... » 11 C. Bambach – Leonardo and his circle: disegno and the education of painters ......................................................................... » 17 V. Delieuvin – I “ritratti” nella bottega di Leonardo. il caso della Madonna dei fusi ............................................................ » 79 C. Frosinini – Leonardo da Vinci fra i Pollaiuolo e Verrocchio: apprendistato, affiancamento o dualità? .................................. » 93 A. González Mozo – La copia della Mona Lisa del Museo del Prado .................................................................................. » 111 C. Pasquali – Tre dipinti di un maestro leonardesco ................. » 121 C. Beccaria – Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio (1467-1516) e Marco D’Oggiono (1475 ca.-1524 ca.): casi di studio ........... » 139 M. Ciatti – Il restauro dell’Adorazione dei Magi di Leonardo: il progetto e i risultati .............................................................. » 163 B. Jatta – Leonardo’s St. Jerome in the Vatican Museums ....... » 187 R. Bellucci – L’Adorazione dei Magi e i tempi di Leonardo ... » 197 M. Menu – The experience of art: Leonardo da Vinci ............... » 231 M.T. Fiorio – On the “mistione de’ colori”: recipes for painters in Leonardo’s writings ............................................................. » 249 B.H. Berrie, J.K. Delaney, K.A. Dooley and L.D. Glinsman – Leonardo da Vinci’s Ginevra de’ Benci: technical findings in light of the artist’s notes on painting .................... » 267 J. Czop – The Lady with an ermine: known and unknown ........ Pag. 295 A. Galli, P. Petraroia, L.M. Bonizzoni, M. Caccia, R. Fontana, M. Gargano, N. Gherardo Ludwig, G. Poldi, V. Villa, M. Martini – Luini in a new light. An interdisciplinary project .......................................................................... » 323 M. Palazzo – Nuovi studi sulla tecnica di pittura murale di Leonardo Da Vinci: l’Ultima cena e la Sala delle Asse a Milano .. » 335 P.C. Marani – New perspectives in the studies on Leonardo and his circle ............................................................................ » 359 Comitato Scientifico: Roberto Antonelli Gigetta Dalli Regoli Paolo Galluzzi Lamberto Maffei Antonio Paolucci Giorgio Parisi Alberto Quadrio Curzio Antonio Sgamellotti Lucia Tomasi Tongiorgi Alessandro Zuccari Comitato Ordinatore: Antonio Sgamellotti (Coordinatore) Bruno Brunetti (INSTM, Università di Perugia) Claudio Seccaroni (ENEA, Roma) Virginia Lapenta (Villa Farnesina, Secret.) ACCADEMIA NAZIONALE DEI LINCEI INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: PAINTING TECHNIQUE IN THE LIGHT OF RESTORATIONS AND SCIENTIFIC STUDIES Rome, 29 - 30 November 2019 PROGRAMME Friday, 29 November 9:30-10:00 Giorgio PARISI, Roberto ANTONELLI (Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Rome): Welcome address Antonio PAOLUCCI, Antonio SGAMELLOTTI (Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei): Introduction to the Symposium Chair: Gilberto CORBELLINI (CNR, Roma) 10:00-10:30 Carmen BAMBACH (The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York): Leonardo and his circle 10:30-11:00 Vincent DELIEUVIN (Musée du Louvre, Paris): Copying the master. The case of Saint John the Baptist 11:00-11:30 Coffee break 11:30-12:00 Cecilia FROSININI (Opificio delle Pietre Dure, Firenze): Leonardo and Verrocchio: apprenticeship, mentoring or duality? 12:00-12:30 Ana GONZÁLEZ MOZO (Museo del Prado, Madrid): The “Gioconda” of Museo del Prado 12:30-13:00 Cinzia PASQUALI (Arcanes, Paris): Three paintings by a Leonardesque master 13:00-13:30 Carlotta BECCARIA (Restauro Sas, Milano): Boltraffio and Marco d’Oggiono: case studies Chair: Alessandro ZUCCARI (Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Rome) Chair: Cristina ACIDINI (Accademia delle Arti del Disegno, Firenze) 15:00-15:30 Marco CIATTI (Opificio delle Pietre Dure, Firenze): The restoration of the “Adorazione dei Magi” by Leonardo: project, results (and some considerations on communication) 15:30-16:00 Barbara JATTA (Musei Vaticani, Roma): “San Girolamo” at the Musei Vaticani 16:00-16:30 Roberto BELLUCCI (Opificio delle Pietre Dure, Firenze): The underdrawing in Leonardo’s paintings 16:30-17:00 Coffee break 17:00-17:30 Michel MENU (Centre de Recherche et de Restauration des Musées de France, Paris): Leonardo da Vinci: the experience of art. Multispectral and multiscale analysis of the Louvre paintings 17:30-18:00 Marika SPRING (The National Gallery, London): Leonardo's “Virgin of the Rocks” in the National Gallery, London: new discoveries from macro XRF scanning and hyperspectral imaging 18:00-18:30 Maria T. FIORIO (Ente Raccolta Vinciana, Milano): On the “mistione de’ colori”: recipes for painters in Leonardo’s writings 18:30-19:00 Gigetta DALLI REGOLI, Lucia TOMASI TONGIORGI (Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Rome): Discussion Chair: Bruno BRUNETTI (INSTM, Università di Perugia) Saturday, 30 November Chair: Giorgio BONSANTI (Accademia delle Arti del Disegno, Firenze) 9:30-10:00 Barbara BERRIE (National Gallery of Art, Washington DC): “Portrait of Ginevra de’ Benci” at the National Gallery of Washington 10:00-10:30 Janusz CZOP (National Institute for Museums and Public Collections, Warsaw): “The Lady with an Ermine”: known and unknown 10:30-11:15 Pietro PETRAROIA (Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milano) - Anna GALLI (CNR-IBFM and Università di Milano Bicocca): Luini in a new light 11:15-11:45 Coffee break 11:45-12:15 Michela PALAZZO (Museo del Cenacolo Vinciano, Milano): New studies on the technique of mural painting by Leonardo da Vinci: the “Last Supper” and the “Sala delle Asse” in Milan 12:15-12:45 Pietro C. MARANI (Politecnico di Milano): New perspectives in the studies on Leonardo and his circle Chair: Claudio SECCARONI (ENEA, Roma) 12:45-13:15 Marco LEONA (The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York): Discussion 13:15-13:30 Antonio SGAMELLOTTI (Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Rome): Closure 15:00 Visit to the Exhibition at Villa Farnesina: Leonardo a Roma. Influenze ed Eredità _____________________________________________ Scientific Committee Roberto Antonelli, Gigetta Dalli Regoli, Paolo Galluzzi, Lamberto Maffei, Antonio Paolucci, Giorgio Parisi, Alberto Quadrio Curzio, Antonio Sgamellotti, Lucia Tomasi Tongiorgi, Alessandro Zuccari (Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei) Organizing Committee Antonio Sgamellotti (Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Coord.), Bruno Brunetti (INSTM, Università di Perugia), Claudio Seccaroni (ENEA, Roma), Virginia Lapenta (Villa Farnesina, Secret.) The Symposium is organized in collaboration with Fondazione «Guido Donegani» Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei CNR - Dipartimento di Scienze Umane e Sociali Patrimonio Culturale and with the contribution of Bruker Nano GmbH ROMA - PALAZZO CORSINI - VIA DELLA LUNGARA, 10 La partecipazione al convegno è libera, fino ad esaurimento dei posti disponibili. Si prega di segnalare la presenza Segreteria del convegno: piemontese@lincei.it - www.lincei.it Fino alle ore 10 è possibile l’accesso da Lungotevere della Farnesina, 10 Carmen C. Bambach (*) LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS (**) In 1550 and 1568, Giorgio Vasari had defined Leonardo as the leading figure of the Third Style, or “maniera moderna,” praising his “vigor and mastery of drawing” (“gagliardezza e bravezza del disegno”) and his sense of “perfect design and divine grace” (“disegno perfetto e grazia divina”) (1). Vasari added a theoretical discourse on disegno to the introduction of his Vite de’ piu eccellenti pittori, scultori e architettori, in the corrected second edition, published in Florence by Giunti in 1568 (2). There, he argued at length that disegno – in its meaning of both drawing and abstract design – provided the foundation of all the visual arts, and he considered its mastery a critical category in assessing the excellence of an artist. The influence, intellectual ambition, and grandiloquence of these passages have created the impression in the modern literature that Vasari deserves the lion’s share of the credit for these philosophical ideas. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. Author’s note: Heartfelt thanks to Antonio Sgamellotti for inviting me to contribute this essay. I am indebted to don Alberto Rocca, Direttore della Pinacoteca Ambrosiana, for his warm support of my research, and to Benedetta Spadaccini for our conversations on the drawings of the Leonardeschi. Although my work on the Leonardeschi has grown into its own, it would not have been possible without the ground-breaking publications by Giulio Bora (see Bora 1987a; Bora 1987b; Bora 1989; Bora 1991; Bora 1998a; Bora 1998b; Bora 1998c; Bora 2003a; Bora 2003b; Bora 2007), David Alan Brown (Brown 1990; Brown 1991; Brown 1998a; Brown 1998b), Maria Teresa Fiorio (see Fiorio 1998a; Fiorio 1998b; Fiorio 1998c; Fiorio 1998d; Fiorio 1998e; Fiorio 2000), and Pietro C. Marani (Marani 1987; Marani 1998a; Marani 1998b; Marani 1998c; Marani 1998d; Marani 2000a; Marani 2000b; Marani 2001a; Marani 2003a; Marani 2003b), as well as Marani and Fiorio 2015. (1) Vasari 1966-87, vol. 4, p. 8. (2) Vasari 1966-87, vol. 1, pp. 111-13. (*) (**) 18 CARMEN C. BAMBACH Leonardo’s earliest writings about disegno in philosophical terms, however, had anticipated Vasari’s by more than three-quarters of a century (3). Leonardo considered a command of design and drawing techniques to be essential for a painter’s practice, and dedicated much effort to teaching them. His manuscript notes intended for the unfinished Libro di pittura, written between 1481/82 and 1519, contain numerous, if very scattered, original contributions on the theory and practice of disegno (4). He may have begun drafting notes and diagrams for the Libro by 1478-83, as I have suggested (5). An understanding of these notes seems essential for a larger scholarly assessment of the painters in Leonardo’s circle in Florence and Milan. However, the fact that Leonardo’s writings remained unpublished and fragmentary, rather than in treatise-like narration, undoubtedly slowed the dissemination of his ideas in his lifetime and early posterity. Arguably, this was not the case with Vasari. He had met Leonardo’s erstwhile pupil and artistic heir, Giovan Francesco Melzi, in Milan between 6 and 10 May 1566, one year before Melzi’s death, and he had had direct access to Leonardo’s ideas, unlike many Cinquecento contemporaries (6). In his revised 1568 edition of Leonardo’s Vita, the Aretine biographer alluded to Melzi’s possession of Leonardo’s anatomical sketchbooks, Vasari commented that an unnamed Milanese painter had come to Florence to seek his advice in publishing some of Leonardo’s manuscripts, “which were written with the left hand, in the opposite direction, and which discuss painting and the methods of drawing and of coloring” (7). My purpose in this essay is to reconstruct Leonardo’s fragmentary notes about disegno in their rich complexity and explore these writings in the larger context of his theories, practices, and teaching. As will become clear, however, Leonardo’s theoretical writings about disegno at times lack a consistent vocabulary and an overall unity of thought, especially in relationship to painting practices. This is not solely due to the incomplete state of his manuscript notes, Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 4-8, vol. 4, p. 40 (n. 41), on Vasari’s conception of disegno in relationship to that of Leonardo. (4) Bambach 2015, pp. 50-61. (5) I have proposed this early dating for Leonardo’s notes on painting based on his fragmentary texts and diagrams on the theory of light and shadow in the two related fragmentary drawings of Saint Sebastian (Hamburg, Hamburger Kunsthalle 21489 and Paris, art market, formerly Tajan); discussed and illustrated with transcriptions in Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 306-311, figs. 3.121-3.124. (6) For the dates of Vasari in Milan, see Frey and Frey 1923–30 / 1982, vol. 2, pp. 246, 271. For Melzi’s death in 1567, see Sacchi 2017, and here note 22. (7) Vasari 1966-87, vol. 4, p. 28: “Come anche sono nelle mani di […], pittor milanese, alcuni scritti di Lionardo, pur di caratteri scritti con la mancina a rovescio, che trattano della pittura e de’ modi del disegno e colorire. Costui non è molto che venne a Fiorenza a vedermi desiderando stampar questa opera, e la condusse a Roma per dargli esito, né so poi che di ciò sia seguìto”. (3) LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 19 or to the long arc of time (almost three decades) during which he compiled his materials. In my view, the tensions between Leonardo’s innovative and his traditional ideas remained unresolved. Also remaining unresolved were the tensions between Leonardo’s ideal of a painter with a wide-ranging imagination and the creative constraints he imposed on his pupils with his theoretical formulas; between his inspired advice for artistic spontaneity in sketching and his strong belief in the diligent technical execution of drawings and paintings. Significant evidence emerges in considering Leonardo’s personal character as a teacher, and in analyzing the different responses to his ideas about disegno among artists working in Florence and in Milan during the late fifteenth- and early sixteenth centuries (8). Such considerations can help us explain, for instance, why certain drawing types such as quick sketches abound in Leonardo’s own corpus of drawings and in that of artists working in Tuscany from the early 1480s onward, but seem largely absent in the extant graphic oeuvre of artists in his Milanese circle until about 1515-20. No less importantly, Leonardo’s early activity as a teacher of disegno during his first Milanese period coincided with his detailed first campaign of notes for the Libro di pittura in the Paris MS A, of ca. 1490-92. Leonardo most likely modeled several of his pedagogic theories and practices on his own personal experience in Andrea del Verrocchio’s multi-faceted and extremely active bottega. This is an important fact, in both a material and a larger conceptual sense. At a fundamental level, for instance, the visual evidence shows the continuities of some physiognomic types in the drawings by Verrocchio, Leonardo, and Marco d’Oggiono. Dating to about 1488-92, Leonardo’s Uffizi red chalk study of an old man with nutcracker-like facial features, and a youth of Apollonian beauty (Fig. 1) (9), elaborates on the physiognomic type of Verrocchio’s male dancer (Fig. 2). The latter drawing of the dancer in gray metalpoint, partially reworked in darker metalpoint (possibly oxidized silverpoint), on cream prepared paper is part of a series of eight sheets of homogeneous technique at the Uffizi (10). In turn, in Milan during the 1490s, Marco d’Oggiono’s carefully rendered For the larger ideas and detailed evidence, see Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 491-583, “The painter-philosopher: Leonardo’s legacy as a teacher and an artist”. (9) Florence, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi 423 E; Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 470-71, vol. 4, p. 190, note 645, fig. 4.130. Other comparisons of Verrocchio’s physiognomic types in Leonardo’s art are the head of Bartolomeo Colleoni and Leonardo’s profile drawing of a man, New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 10.45.1 (Rogers Fund, 1909). See ibid., vol. 4, pp. 455-72, figs. 4.114-4.115 and 4.125 to 4.129, for this larger context of Leonardo’s grotesques and their roots in Verrocchio and Florentine Quattrocento art and culture. (10) Florence, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi 2323 F; Lorenza Melli in Butterfield et al. 2019, pp. 282-91, fig. 1, and nos. 45-46 on the series, with new technical findings. (8) 20 CARMEN C. BAMBACH Fig. 1 – Leonardo, Old man and youth in bust-length, profile view. Florence, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi (Inv. 423 E). Fig. 2 – Andrea del Verrocchio, Old man dancing. Florence, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi (Inv. 2323 F). study (Fig. 3) (11), executed in a different technique of silverpoint on grayish blue prepared paper, with lead white gouache highlights (quite oxidized), adopts Leonardo’s physiognomic model of the grotesque old man with a surprising fidelity. Seen from a larger, social-biographical perspective, in the circles of Verrocchio and Leonardo we find a preference for apprenticeships and collaborations of long duration among the artists whom they trained in their botteghe. Leonardo stayed with Verrocchio first as an apprentice and then as a collaborator for more than a decade, from around 1465 until at least 1476, if not later (12). Leonardo had become a “dipintore,” a matriculated profes(11) Milan, Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana F 274 inf. 11. See Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 509-10, 514, figs. 13.22 and 13.23, firmly attributing this drawing to Marco d’Oggiono, in which the technique of drawing in silverpoint is identical to the securely accepted study of a torso by this artist (Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana F 263 inf. 37), illustrated here as Fig. 16. (12) Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 86-87, dates Leonardo’s entrance in Verrocchio’s bottega ca. 1465, approximately when his grandfather Antonio da Vinci died, and when the artist’s father, ser Piero da Vinci, married his second wife, Francesca di ser Giuliano Lanfredini. By 1465, if not before, ser Piero was also rendering notarial services to Verrocchio. The two documents of 1476, accusing Leonardo of sodomy, respectively state: “Lionardo di ser Piero LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 21 Fig. 3 – Marco d’Oggiono, Bust-length study of an old “nutcracker” man in profile view. Milan, Veneranda Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana (Inv. F 274 inf. 11). sional painter in Florence in 1472 (13). In the 1460s and 1470s in Florence, the rival sculptor-painters, Verrocchio and Antonio del Pollaiuolo, had been the leading masters of disegno, able to teach profoundly innovative drawing techniques (14). Although Leonardo wrote in his Codex Forster III, of ca. 1493, “sad is the pupil who does not surpass his master” (“trissto e quel dissciepolo che / no nava[n]za il suo maestro” (15)), he acknowledged the valid traditions of his predecessors, and recalled Verrocchio’s technological da Vinci, sta con Andrea del Verrochio” and “Leonardo ser Pieri de Vincio manet cum Andrea del Verrochio”; Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Ufficiali di notte e conservatori dell’onestà dei monasteri, filza 18, secondo registro, fol. 41v (9 April 1476), fol. 51r (7 June 1476); Villata 1999, pp. 8-10, nos. 7, 8; Vanna Arrighi in Arrighi, Bellinazzi, and Villata 2005, p. 126, no. III.13. (13) Leonardo’s enrollment as “dipintore” in 1472; Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Accademia del Disegno, Libro Rosso A, 1472–1520, vol. 2, fol. 93v: “A[nno] D[omini] MCCCCLXXII. / Lyonardo di s[er] Piero da Vinci dipintore, de’ dare per tutto giugnio 1472... ”; Vanna Arrighi and Anna Bellinazzi in Arrighi, Bellinazzi, and Villata 2005, p. 124, no. III.11. (14) Cfr. Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 158-63, figs. 2.70-2.73, on Pollaiuolo and Verrocchio as maestri del disegno; Wright 2005, pp. 151-89, 505-14, nos. 1-33, with a summary of Pollaiuolo’s design practices. (15) London, Victoria and Albert Museum, National Library of Design, Codex Forster III, fol. 66v (sheet marked in pen and brown ink “23”). Leonardo wrote the note in red chalk, beginning at the fourth line. The signature in this notebook is bound upside down. 22 CARMEN C. BAMBACH prowess as late as 1514-15 (16). Therefore, in drafting the text for his projected Libro di pittura, Leonardo endorsed the time-honored system of apprenticeship in a master’s bottega to educate young artists. Nearly a century before, Cennino Cennini’s Libro dell’arte (MS, ca. 1400, written while the Tuscan author served a prison sentence in Padua), had expressed a sentiment with which Leonardo would have agreed wholeheartedly, given his long permanence in Verrocchio’s workshop: “as early as you can, begin by putting yourself under the guide of a master to learn, and as late as you can, leave the master” (“quanto più tosto puoi, incomincia a metterti sotto la guida del maestro a imparare; e quanto più tardo puoi, dal maestro ti parti”) (17). Verrocchio’s bottega had been a laboratory for new artistic ideas and for the exploration of innovative drawing techniques. For probably similar reasons, the first generation of painters in Leonardo’s Milanese circle during the 1490s, Marco d’Oggiono (ca. 1465/70-ca. 1530), Giovan Antonio Boltraffio (1467-1516), and Gian Giacomo Caprotti da Oreno (“Salaì,” or “Sala[d]ino”; ca. 1480-1524), seem to have remained close to Leonardo for a very long time (18). By 1490-91, though over twenty years old and advanced in their careers, Boltraffio and Marco d’Oggiono were still receiving training in Leonardo’s studio (19). Marco d’Oggiono had already opened his own bottega by 1487, and had taken an apprentice, Protasio Crivelli (20). “Salaì,” who arrived in Leonardo’s household as a beautiful, ten-year-old boy in 1490, stayed in the master’s circle until 1519 (21). From 1506/8 onward, as we know today, the most valuable member in Leonardo’s household was the attractive Milanese nobleman Giovan Francesco Melzi (ca. 1493-1567), who stayed with Leonardo until his death on 2 May 1519, graduating from pupil to helper and collaborator in the master’s notes (22). The inLeonardo recalled Verrocchio’s engineering feat in completing Brunelleschi’s lantern on 27 May 1471, with the installation of the palla grande, in stating about the ignia in the Paris MS G, fol. 84v, in the portion of the manuscript which dates to 1514-15: “ricordati delle salda/ture co[n] che si saldo la pal/la dj s[an]c[t]a maria del fiore”. (17) Cennini 1995, p. 6. Cennino states twice that he was apprenticed to Taddeo Gaddi for twelve years, and that Taddeo Gaddi had stayed in Giotto’s workshop for twenty-four years (ibid., pp. 4-5, 78). (18) Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 321, 346, 359-63, 477-82, vol. 2, pp. 250. 280-82, vol. 3, pp. 362, 492-518, 533-38. (19) They are mentioned in Leonardo’s memorandum, Bibliothèque de l’Institut de France, Paris MS C, fol. 15v. (20) Shell 1995, pp. 189-90; Shell 1998c, p. 163, on Marco d’Oggiono’s apprentice, Protasio Crivelli in 1487. (21) Vasari 1966-87, vol. 4, p. 28: “Prese in Milano Salaì Milanese per suo creato, il qual era vaghissimo di grazia e di bellezza, avendo begli capegli ricci et inanllati, de’ quali Lionardo si dislettò molto, et a lui insegnò molte cose dell’arte”. (22) Vasari 1966-87, vol. 4, p. 28: “... messer Francesco da Melzo gentiluomo–Milanese, che nel tempo di Lionado era bellissimo fanciullo e molto amato da lui, così come oggi è bello e (16) LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 23 exhaustibly patient Melzi came to regard Leonardo as “mio ottimo quanto padre” (as excellent to me as a father) (23). Leonardo’s Paris MS A, of ca. 1490-92, describes the course of learning for a painter’s apprentice. Exercises in drawing provided the basic skills: ø Il giovane debe prima i[n]parare prospettiua / poi le mjsure donj cosa / poi dj mano dj bo[n] maestro . p[er] suefarsi a bone me[n]bra / poi dj naturale p[er] cho[n]fermarsi le ragionj delle cose i[n]parate / poi vedere 1o te[n]po dj mano dj djuersi maestri / poi . fare . abito all mettere i[n] praticha e op[er]are larte (24). The youth must first learn perspective; then the measures of each thing; then [learn] from the hand of a good master, to accustom himself to good limbs; then [learn] from nature, to confirm for himself the reason of the things learned; then [learn] to look at things done by various masters for some time; then make a habit of putting [these principles] into practice and operation in art (25). Here, Leonardo was recommending training methods which were relatively traditional by the third quarter of the Quattrocento, and certainly in Verrocchio’s bottega, where pupils acquired the skills of perspective, anatomy, proportion, copying, and drawing from life and sculptural models, putting also theories into practice (26). Many early Florentine drawings depicting workshop assistants show gentile vecchio”. The date of Giovan Francesco Melzi’s death as occurring between October and December 1567 is due to the archival discovery by Rossana Sacchi, who also published his last will and testament dated 27 May 1565; ASMi, Notarile 14133, under this date, drafted by the notary Pietro Maria Rancate (Sacchi 2017). (23) Quoted, Melzi’s letter of 1 June 1519, informing Leonardo’s litigious half-brothers of the great master’s death on 2 May. Bambach 2019 discusses and illustrates throughout its four volumes the various subjects touching on Giovan Francesco Melzi: his family, his works and new attributions, his relationship and collaborations with Leonardo, his collection and curation of Leonardo’s drawings and manuscripts, his classification marks on Leonardo’s sheets, his copies and his retouching of Leonardo’s drawings, the problems of connoisseurship in distinguishing his authorship from Leonardo’s. See, for instance, ibid., vol. 1, pp. 3-6, 21-36, 39-47, 55, 59-63, 66, 70-74, 82, 89-91, 140, 166, 170, 193, 284, 362-63, 386, 417, 427-29, 435, 442-43, 451-59, 463-70, vol. 2, pp. 1-6, 68-141, 21213, 219-34, 260, 300-2, 305, 373, 379, 387-88, 391-94, 410-15, 430, 456, 461, 473, 477-79, vol. 3, pp. 3-5, 23, 31, 36, 46, 53-55, 65, 72, 81, 86, 94-97, 127, 134-36, 141-44, 146-48, 161, 182, 200, 210, 244, 249, 270-72, 280-88, 290, 307, 317-18, 330-36, 344-62, 366, 398, 404-9, 417-25, 431, 448-49, 452-89, 492, 499, 519-33, 566-67, 574-80, 585-89, 591-95, 602-6, 622-24, 630-31. See ibid., vol. 4, pp. 585-65, index: under Leonardo, Leoni, and Melzi, for complete lists of citations for Melzi. (24) Bibliothèque de l’Institut de France, Paris MS A (inv. no. 2185), fol. 17v, at the top of the page in pen and brown ink. See Melzi’s transcription in Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, fol. 31r, “parte secunda” (as in Vecce 1995, p. 169, no. 47 [in critical transcription]): “Quello che debbe prima imparar il giovane. / Il giovane debbe prima imparar prospettiva; puoi le misure d’ogni cosa; poi di mano di bon maestro, per asuefarsi a bone membra; poi da naturale, per confermarsi la ragione delle cose imparate; poi veder un tempo, di mane di diversi maestri; poi fare abito a metter in pratica et operare l’arte”. (25) The different English translation in Venerella 1999-2007, Paris MS A, p. 268, slightly recasts the meaning of Leonardo’s original phrasing. (26) My statements here summarize a detailed analysis in Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 81-193. 24 CARMEN C. BAMBACH Fig. 4 – Circle of Domenico Veneziano, Study of workshop apprentices at leisure. Paris, Musée du Louvre, Département des Art Graphiques (Inv. 2688 recto). youngsters (garzoni) absorbed in their sketchbooks, like the third boy at right in the Louvre sheet of 1440-50 by an artist in the circle of Domenico Veneziano (Fig. 4) (27). A great number of garzoni studies emanated from the bottega of Maso Finiguerra (28). The autograph study by Maso in the Uffizi (Fig. 5) dates to ca. 1460-64, close to the time when Leonardo would have entered Verrocchio’s workshop (29). It portrays the seated apprentice drawing into a pocket-size sketchbook, and has the inscription at the bottom of the paper: “Vo esere uno buono disegnatore . e . vo[rrei di]/ventare uno buono archittetore” (“I would like to be a good draftsman, and I would like to become a good architect”). A conceptual gulf exists, however, between Leonardo’s quoted passage in the Paris MSA and the recipe-like account of how apprentices learned to draw in Cennino’s Libro dell’arte around 1400 (30). In another page of the same Paris MS A, Leonardo elaborated: ø p[r]ecettj dj pictura / Il pictore . debbe . p[r]ima . suefare . la mano . chol ritrarre . djsegnj . dj mano . dj bo[n] maesstri / e ffatto . detta . suefatjone . Paris, Musée du Louvre, Département des Art Graphiques 2688r. London, British Museum 1895,0915.440r. (29) Florence, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi 115 F; Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 84-90, on Maso Finiguerra’s drawings and my proposed date when Leonardo began his apprenticeship in Verrocchio’s bottega around 1465. (30) Cennini 1995, pp. 3-34, on the course of learning the rudiments of disegno and preparing the materials for drawing. (27) (28) LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 25 Fig. 5 – Maso Finiguerra, Study of a seated apprentice drawing. Florence, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi (Inv. 115 F). chol givdjtio del suo p[r]ecettore . debbe dj poj suefarsi . chol ritrarre / chose dj rilevo bone . cho[n] quelle regole che djsotto . si djra.” (31) The painter must first become accustomed to exercise the hand by copying the drawings by the hand of good masters; and having acquired this habit with the guidance of his preceptor, he must then become accustomed to portraying [i.e., drawing] things in good relief, with those rules that will be told below. Immediately below this block of text, Leonardo added the description “on portraying from relief” (“ø del ritrarre . dj rilievo”), in which he explained that the artist must position his eye at the same height as the eye of the person being portrayed (32). Drawing from life and nature (or “ritrare di naturale,” to quote Leonardo’s words) was the crucial animating step in his own creative process, and became an important part of his pedagogic method. Leonardo’s first genera- (31) Bibliothèque de l’Institut de France, Paris MS A (inv. no. 2185), fol. 10r. For the larger context, see Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 81-91, 93-113, 136-93, vol. 3, pp. 491-518. (32) Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, fol. 34r, repeats the advice about the acquisition of habits of drawing (“ø p[r]ecettj dj pictura / Il pictore . debbe . p[r] ima . suefare . la mano . chol ritrarre . djsegnj . dj mano . dj bo[n] maesstri), but rather than offering Leonardo’s rule “on portraying from relief,” inserted a passage about “quick compositional sketching” (“Precetti / il bozzar delle storie sia pronto”). See Vecce 1995, p. 175, no. 63 (in critical transcription). 26 CARMEN C. BAMBACH tion of Milanese pupils were drawing studies of the head, facial expression, and gesture, as he was writing in the 1490s about the “motions of the mind” (variously called, “moti dell’animo,” “passioni dell’anima,” and “moti mentali”) in his notes for the Libro di pittura (33). Leonardo’s Paris MS A, of ca. 1490-92, recommends to young painters: ø come nellop[er]e dj[n]porta[n]tia lomo no[n] si de fidare ta[n]/to della sua memoria che no[n] degnj ritrare dj naturale / […] sicche p[er]queste e altre ragione chessi potrebbo[n] djre . ate[n]deraj . prima . chol djsegnjo / a dare chon djmostratiua forma allochio . lainte[n]tione . ella i[n]uentione fatta i[n] prima / nella tua imaginatiua . dj poi alleua[n]do e . pone[n]do ta[n]to che tuttj sadjsfaccia / nella tua imaginatiua (34). ø How for important works one should not rely so much on one’s memory that one deigns not to study from life … Therefore, for this and other reasons that could be mentioned, in drawing you will first endeavor to give the eye a demonstrable form of the intention, and of the invention first conceived in your imagination, and then you go on adding and subtracting elements until it all satisfies your imagination (35). A carefully observed life study from Leonardo’s early Milanese period is the exquisite young woman in bust-length in Turin (Fig. 6), of ca. 1483-85, drawn in silverpoint and traces of leadpoint, brush and lead white gouache highlights, on pale pinkish-buff-beige prepared paper (36). In using the Turin drawing for the painting, Leonardo abandoned the naturalism of the figure, as he created the highly idealized face of the angel in the Louvre version of the Virgin of the Rocks. He entirely transformed a “ritratto dal naturale” in a (33) Pietro C. Marani in Marani and Fiorio 2015, pp. 223-33. See Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 323-28, 426-35, vol. 2, pp. 17-18, 56-59, discussing Leonardo’s concept of the “motions of the mind,” and the probable influence of a pre-1494 printed edition of Fra Jacopo Canfora da Genoa’s Dell’Immortalità de l’anima elegantissimo dialogo volgare ornamentissimo, which was in Leonardo’s library. See the reference in Milan, Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 559r: “deimortalita danjma”; and Codex Madrid II (Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional de España MS 8936), fol. 2v: “della imortalita dellanima”. A printed edition of this treatise in the volgare was first published in Rome by Johannes Philippus de Lignamine in 1472, and in Milan by Antonius Zarotus on 20 March 1475. Other editions of this treatise in the volgare were printed in 1477, 1478, 1494, 1497 (Milan), 1498 (Venice, Brescia). The edition issued in Venice on 12 April 1494 was in a handy pocket-size format in octavo. See Bambach 2019, vol. 4, pp. 11, 16, 17, 25 (Appendix IV, section 8, no. 37, section 9, no.94. (34) Bibliothèque de l’Institut de France, Paris MS A (inv. no. 2185), fol. 26r. Melzi in Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, fol. 38v, reports the passage unchanged. See Vecce 1995, p. 182, no. 76 (in critical transcription). (35) Here again, the different English translation, Venerella 1999-2007, Paris MS A, p. 303, slightly recasts the meaning of Leonardo’s original phrasing. (36) Turin, Biblioteca Reale Dis. Ital. 1/19r, 15572 DC; Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 349-58, vol. 4, pp. 57, notes 187-92; Vincent Delieuvin in Delieuvin and Frank 2019, pp. 135-38, 407, no. 55. LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 27 Fig. 6 – Leonardo, Bust-lenght study of a young woman from life, seen in three-quarter view from behind. Turin, Biblioteca Reale (Inv. Dis. Ital. 1/19r, 15572 DC recto). gradual process of “levando e ponendo”, and integrated a methodical study of facial and bodily proportions into the process of permutation. In sharp contrast to the more artisanal conception of drawing in the earlier Quattrocento, Leonardo argued that disegno was a divinely inspired force, beyond the powers of Nature, which was the essence of the creative act. A lost note of ca. 1492 for the Libro di pittura, only preserved in Melzi’s Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, conveys the depth of Leonardo’s overall philosophy with remarkable concision: Due sono le parti principali nelle quali si divide la pittura, cioè lineamenti, che circondano le figure de’ corpi finti, li quali lineamenti si dimanda disegno. La 28 CARMEN C. BAMBACH seconda è detta ombra. Ma questo disegno è di tanta eccellenzia, che non solo ricerca l’opere di natura, ma infinite più che quelle che fa natura. Questo commanda allo scultore terminare con scienza li suoi simulacri, et a tutte l’arti manuali, ancora che fussino infinite, insegna il loro perfetto fine. E per questo concluderemo non solamente esser scienzia, ma una deità essere con debito nome ricordata, la qual deità ripete tutte l’opere evidenti fatte dal sommo iddio (37). There are two principal parts into which painting is divided; that is the outlines, which surround the shapes of solid bodies and such outlines require drawing. The second part is what is called shading. But the concept of design and drawing is of such excellence that it not only investigates the works of Nature, but [it] also [suggests] infinitely more than those [works] made by Nature. Disegno requires the sculptor to render all the shadows with science, and teaches all the manual arts, even if they are infinite, a perfect purpose. On account of this, we should conclude that disegno is not only a science but a deity that should be duly accorded that title. This deity reflects all the visible works of almighty God (38). As I have suggested, these are the very notions that Vasari would embrace more expansively in his famous discourse on disegno in the 1568 edition of the Vite (39). As we know, the Lombard humanist and physician, Paolo Giovio (14861552), wrote the most reliable early biography of Leonardo, entitled Leonardi Vincii vita (MS, ca. 1525-28), but it is brief and remained unpublished until 1781 (40). Giovio also cited Leonardo in his Dialogi de viris et foeminis aetate nostra florentibus (MS, ca. 1528-29, revised ca. 1533-34) (41). We can supplement this evidence with Vasari’s corrected 1568 edition of Leonardo’s Vita, the most extensive biography of the artist in the Cinquecento. Giovio’s friendship with Vasari deepened in 1532, and by 1546, he had become one of the editorial advisers for the first edition of Vasari’s Vite, published by Lorenzo Torrentino in 1550 (42). Giovio had known Leonardo personally, unlike Vasari and other early biographers. The Lombard author probably met Leonardo in 1510-11 in Milan, if not before, and their interaction resumed when they were both in Rome in (37) Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, fol. 50r-v; Vecce 1995, p. 202, no. 133 (in critical transcription); passage discussed in Bambach 2019, vol. 1, p. 6. (38) As translated in Bambach 2019, vol. 1, p. 6. (39) Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 4-8, regarding Vasari 1966-87, vol. 1, p. 111. (40) Barocchi 1971-77, vol. 1, pp. 3-23; Vecce 1998, pp. 349-57, and passim; Giovio / Maffei 1999, pp. 233-45; B. Agosti 2008, pp. 4 (for the birthdate of Giovio), 34-96, Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 13, 21-28, 481-83, vol. 2, pp. 244-45, 293, 364, vol. 3, pp. 321, 344, 498-500, 544, vol. 4, pp. 45-46, notes 144-151, on Paolo Giovio and Leonardo. On Paolo Giovio as a thinker, see especially Zimmermann 1995; Zimmermann 2001. (41) B. Agosti 2008, p. 43, on the dating of Giovio’s Dialogi de viris et foeminis aetate nostra florentibus. (42) On Paolo Giovio becoming Vasari’s friend (1532), and his rapport and editorial work on Vasari’s Vite (1546 and later), see Rubin 1995; and B. Agosti 2008, pp. 34-97. LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 29 1513-16, while Leonardo served Giuliano de’ Medici, and Giovio cultivated the Medici, especially cardinal Giulio de’ Medici (the future pope Clement VII), and taught moral philosophy at the Archiginnasio (or Studio romano) (43). Giovio’s discourse on “imitatio” in the Dialogi de viris et foeminis aetate nostra florentibus (MS, ca. 1528-29, revised ca. 1533-34) highlights the importance of emulating the models of grammar, vocabulary, and style of ancient Latin authors for a classical education. Students were to read wisely and assiduously for an effective education in letters and rhetoric, and deliberately refrain from writing in Latin before reaching an age of intellectual maturity: “Care must be taken with eager and keen minds, lest like featherless nestling birds they try to fly too fast with wings not quite dry” (“Adhibenda enim est cura cupidis et alacribus ingeniis, ne ut implumes aviculae non plane siccatis alis festinantius provolent”) (44). Giovio’s important literary model was Quintilian’s Institutio oratoria, with its Book X on the training of eloquence by means of “imitation.” To validate his methods, the Lombard humanist invoked the authority of the sister arts, and referred to Leonardo’s method of educating his “dearest pupils”: … sicuti in dispari, sed non omnino dissimili facultate, carioribus discipulis praecipere erat solitus Leonardus Vincius, qui picturam aetate nostra, veterum eius artis arcana solertissime detegendo, ad amplissimam dignitatem provexit: illis namque intra vigesimum, ut diximus, aetatis annum penicillis et coloribus penitus interdicebat, quum iuberet ut plumbeo graphio tantum vacarent, priscorum operum egregia monumenta diligenter excerpendo, et simplicissimis tractibus imitando naturae vim et corporum lineamenta, quae sub tanta motuum varietate oculis nostris efferuntur (45). … as in a different, but not so dissimilar art, Leonardo da Vinci used to prescribe to his dearest disciples, [he] who in our time elevated painting to its highest dignity, revealing, with industry and sagacity, the secrets of the ancients. Until they were twenty years old, as we have said, he [Leonardo] would forbid them entirely the use of brushes and of colors, instead making them practice [drawing] only with the leadpoint stylus [ut plumbeo graphio] by selecting and-portraying with diligence the famous examples of old master works, and by imitating with very simple strokes the power of nature and the contours of bodies that appear to our eyes with such a variety of movements. Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 13, 21-28, 481-83, vol. 2, pp. 50, 244-45, 293, 364, vol. 3, pp. 321, 344, 491-93, 498-500, 544, vol. 4, pp. 45-46, notes 144-151. (44) Giovio, Dialogi, quoted from Vecce 1998, pp. 353-54. Cfr. Barocchi 1971-77, vol. 1, pp. 20-21; Giovio / Maffei 1999, pp. 216-18, with an Italian translation. (45) Giovio, Dialogi, quoted from Vecce 1998, pp. 353-54. Cfr. Barocchi 1971-77, vol. 1, p. 21; Giovio / Maffei 1999, p. 216; B. Agosti 2008, pp. 59. (43) 30 CARMEN C. BAMBACH Giovio’s example of Leonardo’s teaching methods in a larger discussion about the imitation of models was apt, given that in the intended Libro di pittura, Leonardo emphasized that pupils copy the drawings of a good master. Leonardo trained the first generation of Milanese pupils in the 1490s to emulate his style with a nearly formulaic precision, and while they could attain great technical skill, they did not possess Leonardo’s brilliant imagination, improvisational rapidity as a draftsman, and rhetorical ability to compose a good figural arrangement. The first generation of Leonardeschi often replicated the master’s figural tricks, facial types, and the devices of chiaroscuro and sfumato. Leonardo’s pedagogic emphasis on drawing technique and the imitation of models produced a general homogeneity of style in the work by the early Leonardeschi, and tended to suppress their individual artistic identity. Year after year of drawing in the same technique cemented this uniformity of style, which renders the questions of authorship particularly fraught for the modern art historian. One must study the originals of paintings and drawings carefully, side by side, to refine attributions. Exhibitions therefore provide important opportunities for comparisons. In the Musée du Louvre’s exhibition, Léonard de Vinci, in 2019-20, a wall displaying seven paintings of portraits and figures in bust-length allowed the specialist art historian to recognize quite clearly (probably for the first time, and beyond what the accompanying catalogue discussed), the basic differences of painting style and technique between Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio and Marco d’Oggiono, the two major painters trained by Leonardo in the 1490s (46). The sensuously built-up, pictorially rich palette of Boltraffio (at times Venetian in its colorism) contrasts with Marco’s very thin, enamel-like application of pigments and ashen, nearly grayish green tonality of flesh areas. Boltraffio’s style was painterly (“malerisch”), to resort to a Wölfflinian category. Not surprisingly, as a mature draftsman, once released from Leonardo’s clutch, Boltraffio began to explore the possibilities of drawing in colored chalks, whereas Marco’s style remained essentially graphic in its descriptive precision of forms. In the quoted passage from Giovio’s Dialogi de viris et foeminis, the Latin wording, “ut plumbeo graphio” emulates the vocabulary of classical authors, such as Ovid and Suetonius, who termed the implement for writing on wax tablets a graphium (47). Cennino’s Libro dell’arte of ca. 1400 calls this instrument a “stile di piombo,” or leadpoint drawing stylus, and describes various techniques of metalpoint drawing on color-prepared paper. In correlating the evidence of Giovio’s passage in the Dialogi de viris et foeminis, with that from the large surviving corpus of metalpoint drawings by Leonardesque artists, we (46) (47) Cfr. Delieuvin and Frank 2019, pp. 160-67, 410-11, nos. 65-71. G. Agosti 2001, p. 39, about the comparison to the classical authors. LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 31 can see that Giovio’s description, written in the late 1520s, was anachronistic. It applied primarily to Leonardo’s teaching methods for an early generation of Milanese pupils, roughly between 1490 and 1500. Metalpoint drawing techniques had remained unchanged since the midto-late Trecento (48). During the following century, Florentine artists such as Fra Filippo Lippi, Domenico del Ghirlandaio, Leonardo, Lorenzo di Credi, and Filippino Lippi became virtuosic practitioners of metalpoint drawing. It is this Tuscan tradition of technique and practice which Leonardo imported to Milan in 1482. Cennino’s Libro dell’arte provides the detailed recipes, and advised apprentices to exercise drawing in metalpoint for an entire year (49). To draw on color-prepared papers was “to find the beginning and the gateway to painting” (“trovare il principio e la porta del colorire”), as Cennino put it (50). By the late 1480s, Leonardo began to favor prepared paper with a middle tone, much darker than that he used in the above-mentioned Turin life study in silverpoint (Fig. 6). With this later technique, his drawn figures, accented with white gouache highlights, could appear sculpted, in “rilievo” (relief), against the colored middle tone of the paper, prepared either blue for metalpoint, or red ochre for drawing in red chalk. The latter was the more pictorial “red-onred” drawing technique that Leonardo developed in the 1490s. Lombard artists would use the “red-on-red” drawing tecnique throughout the Cinquecento. Leonardo explained, as recorded in Melzi’s Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270: I pittori per ritrarre le cose di rilievo, debbono tingere le superficie delle carte di mezzana oscurità e poi dare l’ombre più oscure, e ultimo i lumi principali in piccolo loco, li quali son quelli che in piccola distanza sono li primi che si perdono all’ occhio (51). To portray things in relief, painters should tint the surface of the papers with an intermediate dark tone, and then add the darkest shadows, and lastly the principal highlights in small places, which in the distance are the first to disappear to the eye. In his own creative process, however, Leonardo only employed the medium of metalpoint drawing on blue and gray-blue prepared papers (with and without brown ink reworkings and white gouache highlights) until about 1490-92. The Windsor preliminary studies relating to the design of (48) Cennini 1995, p. 13: “...–i stili di piombo; cioè, fatto lo stile due parti piombo e una parte stagno, ben battuto a martellino”. See Taddeo Gaddi’s drawing of the Presentation of the Virgin in the Temple, 1340-60, for an early metalpoint ddrawing on green prepared paper; Musée du Louvre, Département des Arts Graphiques 1222r. (49) Cennini 1995, p. 14: “... praticato che hai in su questo essercizio un anno”.. (50) Cennini 1995, p. 15. (51) Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, fol. 69v: “Modo per ritrarre di rilevo e preparare la carta per questo”; Vecce 1995, p. 234, no. 219 (in critical transcription). 32 CARMEN C. BAMBACH the equestrian monument for Francesco Sforza are among his last examples (52). By this time, he had also stopped drawing in metalpoint on papers prepared with grayish, brownish, pale violet, and pinkish buff colors. Metalpoint on blue and gray-blue prepared papers, however, became Leonardo’s chromatic choice in teaching drawing to his pupils in the 1490s. Drawing in metalpoint on prepared paper is a slow process, requiring patience and skill, as artists had been aware since Cennino’s time, if not before. Leonardo undoubtedly found the medium of metalpoint useful in educating his Milanese pupils in the technique of drawing, with “diligenza” (diligence and care) and “pulitezza” (cleanliness). The young Leonardo and Lorenzo di Credi, who had also been trained in Verrocchio’s bottega, had absorbed the notion of diligenza in drawing as second nature. Both these artists had produced exquisitely refined such drawings in the 1470s and early 1480s. We may also cite two drawings by Verrocchio of the 1470s, which display luminous, softly atmospheric techniques, but in different media and figural scale. He drew the delicate study of a boy in the Fitzwilliam in silverpoint, and reworked it in brush and brown wash, pen and brown ink, and lead white gouache highlights, on cream-color prepared paper (53). For his monumental head of a young woman in the British Museum, Verrocchio used charcoal, which he partly oiled to darken the tone, and highlighted the design in brush and lead white gouache, on paper lightly prepared with buff-cream color (54). Verrocchio’s superb control of light effects in drawing betrays his training as a goldsmith, and evokes the virtuosic treatment of surface and detail seen in his metal sculptures. The preferred tip for the metal styli was silver (but tin, copper, lead, and gold also served), usually with alloys (lead, tin, or brass) in diverse quantities (55). The paper was brushed with a liquid or semi-liquid coat of color preparation: a mixture of calcined, pulverized poultry bones, dissolved in water, tempered with animal glue and ground lead white and colors from (52) See the drawings connected with the design of the Sforza Horse in the Biblioteca Reale di Torino, Dis. Ital. 1/24 (15580 DC) and in Windsor, Royal Library nos. RCIN 912357r, RCIN 912358r, RCIN 912290r, RCIN 912319r, RCIN 912320r, RCIN 912321; discussed and illustrated in Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 369-411. (53) Cambridge, University of Cambridge, Fitzwilliam Museum 2930; Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 159-65, fig. 2.76; C. C. Bambach in Caglioti and De Marchi 2019, pp. 224-25, no. 7.8; Lorenza Melli in Butterfield et al. 2019, pp. 250-53, no. 37. (54) The complex medium of this drawing as verified by Raman analysis and magnification in Ambers, Higgitt, and Saunders 2010, pp. 44-45. See London, British Museum 1895,0915.785r; Chapman and Faietti 2010, pp. 182-85, no. 40; Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 102-106, fig. 2.17; Lorenza Melli in Butterfield et al. 2019, pp. 254-59, no. 38. (55) Cennini 1995, pp. 9-10, 14. LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 33 mineral or vegetal sources (indigo, for blue hues), as Cennino described (56). The drawing media in Boltraffio’s study of a female head in profile at the Metropolitan Museum of Art (Fig. 7), done in the typical 1490s technique of the Leonardeschi, were determined to be silverpoint and leadpoint, highlighted with lead white gouache, on blue (indigo) prepared paper, which has faded to pale blue-gray (57). Analysis with X-ray fluorescence (XRF) reveals that ten out of thirteen drawings in metalpoint by Leonardesque artists in the Ambrosiana were executed with silver stili with a high content of copper (evident in diverse proportions), which accounts for the golden hue of the lines, and X-ray fluorescence (XRF) combined with microscopic examination confirms the blue pigment in the preparation on the paper to be indigo with other elements (58). As is true of these sheets, the hues of the prepared grounds have faded or discolored over time. While blue-gray prepared grounds predominate in the drawings of the 1490s by the Leonardeschi, there are also exceptions. Boltraffio’s pale reddish preparation in the Ambrosiana study of a youth is an unicum in his oeuvre (59). Also unusual is the vibrant red-ochre colored ground (with a high content of vermillion) in the study of two expressive heads by Francesco Galli “Napoletano,” which is in the same institution and which is executed in a freer, almost painterly technique of silverpoint, with lead white gouache highlights (60). Metalpoint drawing is a difficult medium, as lines are not easily erased, despite Cennino’s advice to rub off mistakes with a small piece of the soft inside of bread, “togli una poca midolla di pane e fregavela su per la carta.” (61) Cennino counseled beginning with easy forms and light, barely evident strokes, then gradually strengthening these, “crescendo i tuo’ tratti a poco a poco.” (62) The fine point of the stylus meets some resistance on the paper at each stroke, and the shading of forms requires building up tone with parallel-hatching by going over and over those passages, “più volte ritornando per fare le ombre,” Cennini 1995, pp. 8-10, 17-24. Boltraffio’s drawing, New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 19.76.3 (Frederick C. Hewitt Fund, 1917). I thank Marco Leona, Head of the Department of Scientific Research at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, and his staff. Media tested by X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy (XRF) for elemental analysis, and fiber optics reflectance spectroscopy (FORS) for unravelling the presence of indigo on 1 October 2019. (58) Poldi 2019-20, pp. 108-16. (59) Boltraffio’s Study of a youth, Milan, Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana F 274 inf. 13; Spadaccini 2019-20, p. 50, fig. 35. (60) Francesco Galli “Napoletano”, Study of two heads, Milan, Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana F 274 inf. 12; Spadaccini 2019-20, pp. 74-75, figs. 58-60, including imaging of the drawing in ultraviolet fluorescence and infrared reflectography (IRR) which clarifies the stages of the artist’s drawing; Poldi 2019-20, pp. 105-106, 108, figs. 96-99. (61) Cennini 1995, p. 14. (62) Cennini 1995, p. 10. (56) (57) 34 CARMEN C. BAMBACH Fig. 7 – Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio, Study of a woman’s head in profile view. New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art (Inv. 19.76.3 (Frederick C. Hewitt Fund, 1917). as the Libro dell’arte recommends (63). For the female bust with a pearl necklace, the Maestro della Pala Sforzesca first produced a light, carefully rendered underdrawing (probably in black chalk), which is best evident in infrared reflectography (IRR), and then elaborated the forms densely in silverpoint (Fig. 8) (64). This portrait-like study of a woman, with an intense gaze, fine nose, and fleshy neck, was probably observed from life. As one may expect, the scientific examination shows the (faded) blue color preparation on the paper to be indigo, with elements of calcium, phosphorus, and lead (65). The recent imaging in ultraviolet (UV) fluorescence of a long-neglected sheet at the Ambrosiana, Cennini 1995, p. 10. Milan, Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana F 263 inf. 77; Spadaccini 2019-20, pp. 5355, fig. 38; Poldi 2019-20, pp. 111-12, fig. 106. On the drawings corpus by the Maestro della Pala Sforzesca, see Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 500-505, vol. 4, p. 399, notes 52-59, with previous literature and review of the proposed identity of this anonymous artist. (65) Poldi 2019-20, p. 112. (63) (64) LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 35 Fig. 8 – Maestro della Pala Sforzesca, Bust-lenght study of a woman with bead necklace. Milan, Veneranda Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana (Inv. F 263 inf. 77). Fig. 9 – Maestro della Pala Sforzesca, imaging in ultraviolet (UV) fluorescence, Bustlenght study of a woman in frontal view. Milan, Veneranda Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana (Inv. F 263 inf. 63. Photo: Gianluca Poldi, Segrate). which portrays a woman’s head in frontal view, and which is barely visible in normal light, revealed it to be a powerfully sculptural autograph drawing by the Maestro della Pala Sforzesca, executed in silverpoint with strong reworking in pen and ink (Fig. 9) (66). A stylistic hallmark in the Maestro’s metalpoint drawings is the oftenpiercing gaze of his figures. We may also cite, for instance, the two studies, respectively in the Ambrosiana and the Louvre, which relate to the altarpiece in the Pinacoteca di Brera, commissioned in 1494-98 by Ludovico Sforza “Il Moro” for Sant’Ambrogio ad Nemus (Figs. 10, 11) (67). The Maestro drew the portrait of Ercole Massimiliano Sforza as a boy in bust-length, possibly from (66) I thank Gianluca Poldi (Segrate) for this photograph. Milan, Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana F 263 inf. 63; Spadaccini 2019-20, pp. 58-63, fig. 44-47; Poldi 2019-20, pp. 112-13, fig. 109a-b, with further technical imaging. (67) Portrait of Ercole Massimiliano Sforza as a boy, Milan, Veneranda Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana F 290 inf. 13; Bambach 2019, vol. 3, p. 502, fig. 13.8; Spadaccini 2019-20, p. 51; Poldi 2019-20, pp. 111-12. Study of a man in bust-length, three-quarter view, Paris, Musée du Louvre, Département des Art Graphiques 2416; Bambach 2019, vol. 3, p. 502, fig. 13.9. 36 CARMEN C. BAMBACH Fig. 10 – Maestro della Pala Sforzesca, Bust-lenght portrait of Ercole Massimiliano Sforza as a boy. Milan, Veneranda Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana (Inv. F 290 Inf. 13). Fig. 11 – Maestro della Pala Sforzesca, Bust-lenght study of a man in three-quarter view. Paris, Musée du Louvre, Département des Art Graphiques (Inv. 2416). life, as this silverpoint study reveals many light, exploratory reinforcement lines around the final contours, despite the precisely descriptive manner of drawing. The artist then emphasized the final contours of the profile by repeatedly going over them with much pressure of the hand, almost excavating the strokes, which is another characteristic of the Maestro’s drawings. The outlines in the portrait drawing of Ercole Massimiliano are pricked for the transfer of the design, probably through a substitute cartoon; the holes reveal no spolvero dust (Fig. 10) (68). The pricked holes on the facial profile are minute and especially close together, since the design of the boy’s likeness (a state portrait) was probably also reproduced a few times by a semi-mechanical means, either by tracings or substitute cartoons. The head is in the same size as that of the kneeling Massimiliano at left in the Sforza altarpiece (Pala Sforzesca) and that of the boy in the now ruined underpainted effigy in Giovanni Donato Montorfano’s Crucifixion, seen at left in the mural composition (69). Mapping of the Ambrosiana drawing with X-ray fluorescence (XRF) reveals traces of iron and Poldi 2019-20, pp. 111-12. Bambach 1999b (a book dedicated to cartoons and full-scale design practices), especially pp. 110-12, 413-14, notes 168-72. I am indebted to Pietro C. Marani, who in November 1996, spent much time with me discussing this detail of the portrait painted a secco in Montor(68) (69) LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 37 zinc in the pricked holes produced from the verso (70). The sheet in the Louvre (Fig. 11) represents the male model with naturalistic, highly individualized features, and a vulnerable facial expression. For the final painting in the Pinacoteca di Brera, the Maestro idealized his head, also rendering it more sculptural and monumental, to accord with the solemnity of a bishop saint. The rare preparatory composition of the Madonna and Child in the British Museum stands out in the Maestro’s corpus of drawings, which mostly consists of heads and bust-length studies (71). The British Museum drawing in silverpoint served to prepare the design for the main figural group in the painting now in the Sarah Campbell Blaffer Foundation in Houston, Texas (72). The Maestro’s laborious drawing technique in the British Museum study, with its gentle modelling of the forms in silverpoint and an abundant application of lead white gouache highlights, overcomes the clearly awkward anatomy of the holy mother and infant. As the British Museum and Houston panel illustrate, the arrangement of figures in a composition usually proved the weak point in the drawings and paintings by the first generation of Leonardeschi. Since the medium of metalpoint produces a limited darkness of tone, Leonardo often reworked the modeling and outlines of such drawings vigorously in pen and brown ink to deepen the tone and make corrections to the design. The Maestro della Pala Sforzesca and other Leonardesque artists of his generation also sometimes reworked their metalpoint drawings in pen and ink (73). Of Leonardo’s pupils, Boltraffio studiously mastered the metalpoint technique on blue-gray prepared paper and produced refined works in this genre. His silverpoint study of a woman’s head in the Clark (Fig. 12), drawn fano’s fresco, in situ in front of this monument. The Sforza portraits added a secco to the fresco are attributed to Leonardo in Marani 2000, p. 339, no. 20 (catalogue of paintings). (70) Mapping with X-ray fluorescence (XRF), Poldi 2019-20, p. 112. (71) London, British Museum 1861,0810.1; see Hugo Chapman in the online catalogue, https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/P_1861-0810-1; illustrated and discussed in Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 502-503, fig. 13.10. (72) The painting (Houston, Texas, Sarah Campbell Blaffer Foundation BF 1983.3) is illustrated and discussed in Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 502-503, fig. 13.11. (73) For examples of metalpoint drawings, reworked in pen and ink, on bluish gray prepared paper by the Maestro della Pala Sforzesca, see the Head of a man in three-quarter view (Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana F 263 inf. 79), and the head of an old man in profile with a hat (Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana F 263 inf. 85); discussed by Spadaccini 2019-20, pp. 53-57, 111-12, figs. 39-41, 107, 108a-c; Poldi 2019-20, fig. 107; both publications with technical findings and photography in ultraviolet fluorescence. Spadaccini has rightfully identified the sheet (F 263 inf. 79) as an autograph drawing by Maestro (rather than by an imitator). 38 CARMEN C. BAMBACH Fig. 12 – Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio, Head of a young woman in nearly frontal view. Williamstown, MA, Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute (Inv. 1955.1470). on pale blue prepared paper of a grayish-green hue, is of elegiac beauty (74). The artist’s luminous technique, of delicately shaded interior forms with fine, intermeshed strokes of parallel-hatching, creates continuous tone with nearly sfumato effects. His technique in the Clark study is all the more remarkable considering that metalpoint is an unforgiving, linear medium. In many of Boltraffio’s metalpoint sheets of the 1490s, the idealized, languor- Williamstown, MA, Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute 1955.1470); Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 505-12, fig. 13.20. (74) LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 39 ous loveliness of the faces and the device of the abstracted, inward-looking gaze emulate Leonardo’s physical types of the 1480s and 1490s. Boltraffio’s figural drawings demonstrate his grasp of anatomy and reveal a subtler understanding of Leonardo’s theory of the “moti dell’animo,” than the sheets by the Maestro della Pala Sforzesca. Datable to the last years of the 1490s, Boltraffio’s bust-length study in Turin of a youth in the guise of Bacchus, although damaged and heavily restored, is of great expressive power and achieves a monumentality that was new in this closely Leonardesque phase (75). Boltraffio’s careful drapery study in Berlin for the Madonna Litta, of ca. 1490, works up only the portions of the costume on the figure (the rest is left in reserve); the painting is either by him or Marco d’Oggiono, but executed under the direct supervision of Leonardo (76). In the Berlin sheet, Boltraffio’s delicate handling of the drawing media of silverpoint, with lead white gouache highlights, on blue prepared paper seems exercise-like in its graphic precision, and contrasts with the more self-confident style of his study of fluttering drapery in the British Museum (77). Boltraffio developed this ambitious design over a preliminary, black-chalk underdrawing (obtained by tracing from another sheet), which he then built up in silverpoint, with lead white gouache highlights, on blue prepared paper. The British Museum study served for the sharply foreshortened figure of the risen Christ in the Resurrection with Saints Leonard and Lucy (Berlin, Staatliche Museen, Gemäldegalerie). Imaging of the sheet in ultraviolet-induced luminescence reveals the artist had begun a different design of drapery on the lower portion of the paper, which he then covered with a new coat of blue preparation, in order to draw the monumental drapery study for the risen Christ (75) Turin, Biblioteca Reale Dis. Ital. 1/33, 15587; illustrated and discussed in Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 508, 512-13, fig. 13.21. The problematic restorations have affected the aesthetic appearance of this drawing. On the design surface, some integrations of parallel hatching were done in blueish watercolor by a later hand, and on the ground, the discolorations and losses were inpainted in purple by restorers. (76) For the drawing, see Berlin, Staatliche Museen, Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Kupferstichkabinett KdZ 4090; Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 306--307, fig. 13.16. The Madonna Litta was attributed to Marco d’Oggiono by David Alan Brown (Brown 1990, pp. 5-12, 20, note 45; Brown 1991), with which I have agreed (Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 210, 345, vol. 3, pp. 506, 508. 548, vol. 4, pp. 144-45, note 68). The Madonna Litta has been given to Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio in Fiorio 2000, pp. 81-83, no. A3; Marani 2003, pp. 165–67, fig. 166; Zöllner 2003, p. 227, no. XIV. Tatiana Kustodieva in Syson with Keith 2011, pp. 222–25, no. 57, argued unconvincingly for Leonardo’s authorship. (77) On this drapery study (British Museum 1895,0915.485), cfr. C. C. Bambach in Viatte and Forcione 2003, no. 120 (Boltraffio); Ambers, Higgitt, and Saunders 2010, pp. 46-47; Hugo Chapman in Chapman and Faietti 2010, pp. 248-49, no. 71 (Boltraffio), with the new findings from scientific investigation; Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 506-507, fig. 13.16. 40 CARMEN C. BAMBACH on top (78). In this final layer, Boltraffio refined the angular folds of the billowing drapery with a luminous, crystalline perfection of modelling, and with almost seamlessly blended lines of shading, while leaving the figure of Christ in reserve, only as mechanical outlines in black chalk. Boltraffio’s choice for the design of the draperies “a modo volante,” to quote Leonardo, bestows a graceful motion on the figure, as the master prescribed in the Libro di pittura. Leonardo’s other suggestive passages recorded in the unfinished parte quarta of the Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, advise “on draperies twirling in flight or in repose” (“de’ panni volanti o stabili”) (79). The Resurrection with Saints Leonardo and Lucy was the main panel of an altarpiece, commissioned on 14 June 1491 by the Griffi family from Boltraffio and Marco d’Oggiono, who had by then commenced a joint partnership (80). Their altarpiece was destined for the Oratorio di San Leonardo (later Oratorio di Santa Liberata), adjacent to the destroyed church of San Giovanni sul Muro in Milan, which had been built in 1482 by Leonardo Griffi, archbishop of Benevento, the deceased brother of the patrons of the painting. The distinctly different drawing and painting styles of the two artists suggest that, in the division of labor in their partnership, Boltraffio (rather than Marco d’Oggiono) assumed the role of designer and produced the preliminary drawings. Leonardo’s original writings on the theory of draperies date to the same time as these drawings, but his autograph notes are lost, except for three blocks of text in the Paris MS A, of ca. 1490-92 (81). Melzi’s Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270 records them with the headings “De’ panni e modo di vestir le figure con grazia e degli abiti e nature de’ panni” in the unfinished parte quarta (82). The main principles of Leonardo’s theory were the decorum of the clothed figure, the study of draperies from nature (“i panni si debbon ritrarre di naturale”), and the fact that the draperies to be portrayed by the painter must seem inhabited by the body, suggesting in his words, a “corpo vestito” and “panni abitati” (83). This sense of the body underneath the draperies is palpable in Boltraffio’s British Museum study, but the painting of the figure in the Berlin picture is by Marco d’Oggiono. Hugo Chapman in Chapman and Faietti 2010, pp. 248-49, no. 71, fig. 2. Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, fols. 167r, 168r-v; Vecce 1995, pp. 354, 356, nos. 531, 535 (in critical transcription). (80) Shell and Sironi 1989; Shell 1995, pp. 126-28, plate 9, on the documents and the partnership of Boltraffio and Marco d’Oggiono. (81) Bibliothèque de l’Institut de France, Paris MS A (inv. no. 2185), fols. 4r, 17v, 18r. (82) Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, fols. 167r-171r; Vecce 1995, pp. 354-60, nos. 529-60 (in critical transcription). (83) Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, fol. 167r-v; Vecce 1995, pp. 354-55, no. 532 (in critical transcription). (78) (79) LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 41 Leonardo’s theory of draperies evolved from his earlier practices in Verrocchio’s bottega. As Vasari’s Vita describes, the young Leonardo studied draperies “di naturale,” from real cloth wetted in clay slip and arranged on sculpted clay models (“modegli di figure di terra”), which he then drew and painted on fine linen (“tela sottilissima di lino”) (84). This was a sculptors’ practice, and undoubtedly one employed by Verrocchio as well (85). In his treatise on architecture of 1461/62-64, the Florentine sculptor, Antonio Averlino (“Il Filarete”), wrote a section on disegno, which describes the practice of drawing draperies “di naturale,” but recommending the use of a small wood mannequin (“figuretta di legname”), instead of one made of clay (86). Leonardo’s most theoretical early drapery study on “tela sottilissima di lino,” probably painted while he was still in Verrocchio’s bottega, or soon thereafter, is that in Paris, at the Frits Lugt Collection-Fondation Custodia (Fig. 13), datable to ca. 1475-80 (87). As in his other drapery studies, cloth is depicted on cloth, with brush, brown ink wash, gray tempera, and lead white gouache, on gray-brown prepared linen, but here the white highlights in tempera become the true protagonists of the design. The color on the preparation of the linen is a paler brown (hence different from the darker gray-green color of most of the other early drapery studies by Leonardo), and the overall design is also more luminous. The diligenza in the technical execution of this drapery study is extraordinary, with exquisitely blended brush strokes in the modeling. The gracefully complex play of the draperies becomes the dramatic device that at once reveals and obscures the model’s forms and its contrapposto pose, all in Leonardo’s recommended manner (88). Vasari 1966-87, vol. 4, p. 17; Bambach 2004. I have attributed four drapery studies painted on linen to Verrocchio himself. They are in Paris, Musée du Louvre, Département des Arts Graphiques RF 1082; Florence, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi 437 E; Rennes, Musée des Beaux-Arts 794.1.2507; and presently in a private collection in the United States (ex-Marquis J. L. de Ganay; Sotheby’s sale, Monaco, 1 December 1989, lot 73; Sotheby’s sale, London, 9 July 2014, lot 28). This last drapery study is partly retouched, especially in the lower portion of design area. Verrocchio’s drapery drawings can be differentiated from those attributable to the young Leonardo by the simpler, angular folds in the falling cloth and by bolder, more schematic transitions of tone in the modeling. See Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 174-89, figs. 2.95-2.98, vol. 4, pp. 104-106 (especially notes 404-416); C. C. Bambach in Caglioti and De Marchi 2019, pp. 272-73, no. 9.5. (86) Other early written sources in Bambach 2004. Filarete’s observations on disegno appear in books XXII to XXIV of his Trattato di architettura (Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale di Firenze, MS Magliabechianus II, I, 140, fols. 173v-186r). The passage on drawing after draperies cast on wood mannequins appears on fol. 184r-v; transcribed text in Filarete 1972, vol. 2, pp. 676-77. (87) Paris, Fondation Custodia-Collection Frits Lugt 6632; Bambach 2019, vol. 1, p. 187, fig. 2.94; C. C. Bambach in Caglioti and De Marchi 2019, pp. 284-85, no. 9. 10. (88) Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, fol. 171r; Vecce 1995, p. 360, no. 544 (in critical transcription). (84) (85) 42 CARMEN C. BAMBACH Fig. 13 – Leonardo, Drapery study for a seated figure in three-quarter view. Frits Lugt Collection-Fondation Custodia (Inv. 6632). Recalling Leonardo’s magnificent drapery study in the Frits Lugt Collection-Fondation Custodia, Marco d’Oggiono achieved a tonal and chromatic richness in his Berlin drapery study for the Strasbourg Visitation, of ca. 1520-25 (Fig. 14) (89). The Berlin Visitation study exhibits a complex combination of dry and wet media of black, blue-gray, and white tempera, over a design layer in black chalk, on buff paper, partly prepared with pale (89) Berlin, Staatliche Museen, Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Kupferstichkabinett KdZ 5103. LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 43 Fig. 14 – Marco d’Oggiono, Drapery study for the Virgin in the Strasbourg Visitation. Berlin, Staatliche Museen, Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Kupferstichkabinett (Inv. KdZ 5103). yellow ocher. Although neither Marco’s painting nor his study on paper are successful as designs per se, his willingness to experiment with drawing media in the Berlin sheet is a response to Leonardo’s mature pictorial techniques, as we see in the Windsor drapery study of ca. 1510-13, for the Louvre Virgin and Child with Saint Anne (90). There, the great master drew Windsor, Royal Library RCIN 912530r; illustrated and discussed in Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 58-65, fig. 9.34. (90) 44 CARMEN C. BAMBACH in soft black chalk, brush with brown and gray wash, highlighted with brush and lead white gouache, on beige paper. Another fundamental bequest from Verrocchio’s bottega had been the study of anatomy. His extant autograph works (whether sculptures, paintings, or drawings) reveal his virtuosic mastery of the human form. Verrocchio’s terracotta of a sleeping recumbent male nude in Berlin renders the pose with a highly naturalistic, physiomechanical understanding of the lean muscular body, and in my view, this sculpture probably served as a model for teaching anatomy in the workshop (91). A similarly sophisticated sense of anatomical physiomechanics characterizes Verrocchio’s Uffizi drawing, in which the nude man strikes a rhetorical standing pose closely observed from a living model in the studio (Fig.15) (92). Leonardo’s insistence on the study of anatomy is evident in his precepts about figure drawing in the Libro di pittura, as recorded in detail in the Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270. Marco d’Oggiono’s subtle drawing of a torso in the Ambrosiana (Fig. 16) (93), executed in metalpoint on gray-blue prepared paper, was probably observed from life. This preliminary study, for Saint Sebastian in the Sant’Eufemia polyptych of the 1490s, is roughly contemporary with some of Leonardo’s notes on figure drawing and anatomy for the Libro di pittura. Especially when seen in relationship with the corpus of drawings by his Milanese pupils of the 1490s, Leonardo’s pedagogic recommendations in the intended Libro di pittura raise questions about what might have been his larger intentions in insisting on the diligenza of drawing and the importance of disegno, as the foundation of painting. By imposing years of laborious drawing practices, he could instill rules about proportion and anatomy, while hoping to eradicate sloppiness and bad habits in his pupils. As Leonardo reasoned in his notes for the Libro di pittura: “many are the men who have the desire and love for disegno, but not the disposition, and this is evident in children, who lack diligence and never finish their things with shading” (“molti sono gli omini ch’hanno desiderio et amore al disegno, Berlin, Staatliche Museen, Skulpturensammlung und Museum für Byzantinische Kunst 112; cfr. Neville Rowley in Caglioti and De Marchi 2019, pp. 190-91, no. 6.3; Butterfield et al. 2019, pp. 162-67, no. 15. (92) Florence, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi 258 E, a sheet which has been attributed with good reason to Verrocchio (Lorenza Melli in Butterfield et al. 2019, pp. 292-94, no. 47). Less convincing is her attribution to Verrocchio of another study after the male nude in Hamburg, Hamburger Kunsthalle, Kupferstichkabinett 21354; ibid., pp. 295-97, no. 48. (93) Milan, Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana F 263 inf. 37; Spadaccini 2019-20, pp. 4647, figs. 29, 30, pointing out also Marco d’Oggiono’s precise copy in red chalk of this drawing also in the Ambrosiana (F. 271 inf. 38). (91) LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 45 Fig. 15 – Andrea del Verrocchio, Study of a male nude from life. Florence, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi (Inv. 258 E). Fig. 16 – Marco d’Oggiono, Study of a male torso probably from life. Milan, Veneranda Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana (Inv. F 263 inf. 37). ma non disposizione, e questo fia conosciuto nelli putti, li quali sono sanza deligenzia, e mai finiscano con ombre le loro cose”) (94). I would argue that Leonardo’s concept of diligenza formed part of a deliberate attempt to professionalize the practices of drawing among Milanese painters in the 1480s and 1490s. The scenario of Lombard drawing and painting during the second half of the Quattrocento became complex upon Leonardo’s arrival in Milan in 1482, and Bramante’s presence in the city since at least October 1481 (95). The existing Lombard tradition of naturalism had been freer of theoretical discipline and pursued pictorial values which were entirely different from the Florentine tradition of disegno, rilievo, and sculptural monumentality. We can deduce from the scant corpus of surviving drawings that earlier Milanese artists had not been prolific draftsmen on (94) Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, fol. 31v (Vecce 1995, pp. 170-71, no. 51 [in critical transcription]): “Noticia del giovane disposto alla pittura”. A draft of this note appears in Leonardo’s Paris MS G, fol. 25r, of ca. 1510-11. (95) Bambach 2019, vol. 2, pp. 44-51. 46 CARMEN C. BAMBACH paper, and had often lacked the effortless facility of disegno and technical training in figural drawing of their Central-Italian counterparts. In contrast, the extant late fifteenth-century drawings by the Leonardeschi are disproportionately numerous, compared to that by the older generation of Lombard artists. Vincenzo Foppa’s Berlin compositional cartoon, The Justice of Trajan of ca. 1462-64, done in pen and brown ink, with pricked outlines, is a rare drawing by a non-Leonardesco of the older generation in Milan (96). Bramante’s and Leonardo’s friend and work associate, though brilliantly independent in his artistic language, Bartolomeo Suardi “Il Bramantino” (ca. 1465-1530) was a virtuosic disegnatore of brush drawings, but his extant corpus numbers a little over a dozen sheets. Bramantino’s boldly expressive Uffizi composition study for the Martyrdom of Saint Sebastian, of ca. 1495-1505 (Fig. 17), employs a broad brush-technique of highly pictorial effects with brown washes and lead white gouache, over black chalk, on light brown paper (97). Changes were afoot in the professional organization of painters and the art market in late Quattrocento Milan, on the eve of Leonardo’s arrival in the city in 1482 (98). The Milanese arti (guilds), as professional corporations, had not possessed the political power of their Florentine counterparts, including the Arte dei medici e speziali to which painters belonged in the Tuscan city. During 1481, a legal restructuring of the Milanese painters’ confraternity of Saint Luke, or Scuola di San Luca (which had existed since 1438 (99)), had apparently been underway. New statutes were being drafted in order to reconstitute the scuola as an Universitas pictorum, a legally defined guild of painters, or università (100). Although some relevant documents have not survived, an important extant legal document, a notarial act dated 2 February 1481, names the procurators (procuratores or sindicos) who were to present the new (lost) statutes to the Ufficio di Provvisione and ultimately to the Duke of Milan, who at the time was Gian Galeazzo Sforza, but in whose name Ludovico “Il Moro” had reigned as regent since 1480 (101). As the 1481 Berlin, Kupferstichkabinett KdZ 5132. Florence, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi 15733 F; Chapman and Faietti 2010, pp. 252-53, no. 73; Bambach 2011, pp. 417-19 (fig. 52); G. Agosti, Stoppa, and Tanzi 2012; Bambach 2013, pp. 255-57 (fig. 1). (98) Though not about Leonardo, see Shell 1993; Shell 1995, pp. 17-57, 161-99, regarding these changes in the professional status and organization of Milanese painters. (99) Shell 1993. (100) Shell 1995, pp. 17-57, for the documentary context. (101) Archivio di Stato di Milano, Notarile, notaio Benino Cairati, filza 2183 (2 February 1481); discussed and transcribed in Shell 1993, especially pp. 89-91, no. 3; Shell 1995, pp. 20, 203-205, no. 3. As Shell notes, the surviving regulations for the università of woodworkers (mag(96) (97) LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 47 Fig. 17 – Bramantino, Martyrdom of Saint Sebastian. Florence, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi (Inv. 15733 F). notarial act reveals, the large body of corporate members (scolari) had been represented by forty-nine named painters at a previous organizational meeting. On their behalf, the eight procurators sought to ratify the statutes of the Universitas pictorum, in order to secure from the state of Milan an official concession of the right to meet and transact business (102). The Lombard author Giovan Paolo Lomazzo’s Rime of 1587 listed the two generations of Leonardo’s most famous pupils in Milan: “Eran Marco d’Ugion, Boltraffio e Pietro / Con Salaì, e il Melzo Gian Francesco” (103) .Here, “Pietro” refers to the painter Giovan Pietro Rizzoli “Giampietrino” (ca. 1480/85-1553), who, like Boltraffio, Marco d’Oggiono, and Salaì, also passed through Leonardo’s studio as an apprentice in the 1490s (104). The Milanese sculptor Agostino Busti “Bambaia” (1483-1548) may have been associated with the master in some role, as well. He is probably to be identified as “Il Fanfoia” who accompanied Leonardo to Rome on 24 September istri a lignamine) may provide a sense of the character and contents of the lost statutes of the Universitas pictorum. (102) Shell 1993; Shell 1995, pp. 20-21. (103) Giovanni Paolo Lomazzo, Rime, Milan, 1587, p. 369 (“libro quinto”). (104) Cfr. Marani 1998c; Rinaldi 2013. 48 CARMEN C. BAMBACH 1513, along with Melzi, Salaì, and Lorenzo (del Faina), as the master recorded in his Paris MS E (fol. 1r) (105). While we know these Leonardeschi by name, the great master also trained numerous apprentices and disciples at different stages of their careers, who remain today anonymous as artists. Paolo Giovio’s Leonardi Vincii vita speaks of “a large crowd of young men” (“tanta adolescentium turba”), who passed through the master’s studio (106). Vasari’s 1568 Vita of Leonardo also mentioned the artist’s bustling household in Milan: “he constantly kept servants” (“del continuo tenne servitori”) (107). Documents independently confirm that Leonardo already had pupils in the late 1470s, and during the time of his painting the Adoration of the Magi altarpiece for San Donato a Scopeto in Florence (108). However, Leonardo was particularly active as a teacher during his two long periods of residence in Milan, in 1482-99 and in 1506-13. Leonardo’s notations in his Milanese-period notebooks of the 1490s suggest his disciples included servants, childapprentices aspiring to become painters (“putti pittori”), workshop assistants (“aiuti” or “garzoni”), and professional painters either seeking further training or collaborating with him (“maestri”) (109). Sculptors and craftsmen also probably sought lessons in disegno from Leonardo, and account for some names Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 318, 556, vol. 4, pp. 359-60, note 26. The identification was first made in D’Adda 1876, p. 488, note 1, but was not noticed until G. Agosti 1990, pp. 11518, by which time it entered the Leonardo literature. Bambach 2019, vol. 2, pp. 358, 362, 475, fig. 8.113, identifies Lorenzo del Faina with the “Lorenzo” mentioned in Leonardo’s Paris MS E (fol. 1r) and the “Lorenzo” in the Turin Codex on the Flight of Birds (fol. 18v), who arrived as a seventeen year-old in Leonardo’s household in April 1505. Lorenzo del Faina appears in the Battle of Anghiari document of 31 December 1505, together with Tomaso di Giovanni Masini, as assistant “dipintori” (see notes 139 and 140 in this essay). (106) Giovio, Leonardi Vincii vita, quoted from Vecce 1998, p. 355. Cfr. Barocchi 197177, vol. 1, p. 9; Giovio / Maffei 1999, pp. 233-35; B. Agosti 2008, p. 58. (107) Vasari 1966-87, vol. 4, p. 18; discussed in Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 313-14, vol. 4, p. 138, notes 3-6. (108) A letter of 4 February 1479 suggests one of Leonardo’s earliest known pupils was a certain “Paulo de Leonardo de Vinci da Fiorenze”. See Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Mediceo avanti il Principato, filza 37, fol. 49r, 4 February 1479; transcribed in Villata 1999b, pp. 11-12, no. 12; discussed in Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 283-85, vol. 4, pp. 130-31, note 308. Documents of 21 March and 3 April 1481 refer to an apprentice living in Leonardo’s house, a “giovane” without name, who delivered a summons from the tribunal of the Mercanzia to Leonardo regarding his unpaid debt. See Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Mercanzia, 7265, “Sentenza del Tribunale della Mercanzia,” fols. 121r, and unpaginated (21 March and 3 April 1481); discussed and illustrated by Lorenz Böninger in Arrighi, Bellinazzi, and Villata 2005, p. 132, no. III.19; Bambach 2019, vol. 1, p. 284, notes 310-11. (109) For example, Bibliothèque de l’Institut de France, Paris MS A (inv. no. 2185), fol. 28r, of ca. 1490-92; Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, fol. 31r: “quale regola si de’ dare a’ putti pittori”. See Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 313-21. Compare selected extracts in Richter 1883/1970, vol. 2, pp. 340-88, nos. 1356-1564. (105) LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 49 mentioned in the notes of the 1490s. But nothing is known about the artistic personality of such individuals, even though their names often recur in Leonardo’s notes, including, among many others, Arrigo, Bartolomeo, Fazio, Gianmaria, Benedetto, Gerardo, Giulio, Ioditti, and Galeazzo (110). Contracts regulated a boy’s apprenticeship in a Milanese master’s bottega, and aggrieved parties on either side were legally entitled to file complaints to the Scuola di San Luca, or Universitas pictorum, if they provided concrete details (111). Milanese fifteenth-century apprenticeship contracts show that masters almost invariably provided apprentices with room and board, looked after their hygiene, covered their minor expenses, and sometimes bought them clothing (112). Therefore, Leonardo’s dated notes of careful accounting about apprentices and assistants (with names, wages, and days of work) in his Milaneseperiod manuscripts seem to have been more purposeful than incidental, and very likely served him as reminders in conforming with guild regulations (113). The summary of facts in Leonardo’s memorandum in the Paris MS H1 (fol. 41r) notes the date 14 March 1494, when Galeazzo arrived to live in the master’s household, and the precise financial terms of the boy’s apprenticeship, information which could aid Leonardo in drafting a standard, guild-compliant contract or other legal document (114). As convened with Galeazzo’s father, since the boy was presumably under-age, the father paid 2 (gold) fiorini to Leonardo, who in turn agreed to pay the boy a small allowance of 5 lire monthly for his incidental expenses. The detailed entries in Leonardo’s memorandum about Salaì in the Paris MS C (fol. 15v), of 1490-91, describe that the child, then ten years old, arrived to live with the master on 22 July 1490, and itemize the petty crimes and misbehavior that could be legally punishable; the accounting in (110) Arrigo (“arigo”) turns up in the Codex Forster II, fol. 24v, and in Codex Atlanticus, fols. 571b-r and 773r (formerly, fol. 214v-b [214 r-b +214v-c] and fol. 284r). Dated 1 April 1499, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 773r, mentions Arrigo (15 lire) with Salaì (20 lire), as well as Fazio (2 lire) and Bartolomeo (4 lire). See Calvi 1925/1982, pp. 129-30, referring to the Codex Atlanticus sheets by their old numeration. Marinoni 2000, vol. 2, p. 1125, vol. 3, p. 1488. For Gianmaria, Benedetto, Gerardo, and Bartolomeo, see Codex Atlanticus, fol. 713r. For Ioditti, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 189r. (111) Shell 1995, pp. 59-100, 218-39, nos. 28, 30-59 (transcribed documents), on contracts and the system of apprenticeships in Milan. (112) Shell 1995, pp. 65, 218-39, nos. 28, 30-59 (transcribed documents). (113) This is the convincing suggestion in Budd 2009 (based on Shell 1993; Shell 1995), which I previously underestimated. (114) Bibliothèque de l’Institut de France, Paris MS H1 (fol. 41r): “adj 14 dj marzo 1494 / venne galeazzo asstare con mecho / cho[n] pacto dj dare 5 lire il mese / p[er] le sue spese . paga[n]do ognj 14 / dj de mesi . – / dettemi suo padre f[iorini] 2 dj re[no]”). Immediately below these accounts, Leonardo later squeezed in a further memorandum in pen and ink: “adj . 14 dj luglo . ebbi da galeazo fio/rinj 2 . dj reno”. 50 CARMEN C. BAMBACH the entries, each with a precise date, could later help in drafting a formal complaint to the guild (115). Salaì stole money from Leonardo soon after his arrival, when the master ordered clothes to be made for him. The memorandum records Salaì’s other thefts of money, and that he stole the drawing silver styli (“graffi dargie[n]to”), belonging to two senior assistants also working with Leonardo, who are identifiable as Marco d’Oggiono and Boltraffio. The memorandum lists the faults of Salaì’s character according to Leonardo: “thief, liar, obstinate pig-head, glutton” (“ladro, bugiardo, ostinato, ghiotto”). In the 1490s in Milan, Leonardo’s studio often accommodated several pupils and assistants working at once. An undated note of this period (Codex Atlanticus, fol. 713r) lists eight young men with their respective monthly salaries (116). Two of these apprentices are recognizable, Giampietrino and Salaì. Their stipends of 3 ducati were the same as that of a certain “Bartolomeo” (possibly identifiable as Bramantino), who was, like them, an apprentice, while the other five men, each being paid 4 ducati (equivalent to 16 lire), must have been actual workshop assistants (aiuti) or associates laboring for the master. It is probable that the “Francesco” being paid this higher amount of 4 ducati is Francesco Galli “Napoletano” (ca. 1470-1501), who was a close contemporary of Marco d’Oggiono, (115) Bibliothèque de l’Institut de France, Paris MS C, fol. 15v: “adj . 23 . daprile . 1.4.9.0 chomj[n]ciaj . questo . lib[r]o e richomj[n]ciaj . il cavallo / [a marginal list at right of text] ladro / bugiardo / ostinato / ghiotto [the main text follows] Iachomo vene a stare . comecho il dj della madalena [22 July] nel mille 490 . deta danj 10 / Il secho[n]do dj lj feci tagliare 2 chamicie 1o paro dj chalze . e vn givbone e qua[n]do mj posi i djnari al lato p[er] pagare dette chose luj mj rubo lire 4 / detti djnari della scharsella e maj fu possibile farli ele chonfessare benchio navessi vera ciertezza / Il dj seguente andaj a ciena chon iachomo andrea e detto iachomo . cieno p[er] 2 e fece male p[er] 4 in pocho rupe 3 amole / verso il ujno e dopo questo vene aciena doue me[.] Ite[n] a dj 7 sette[n]bre rubo uno graffio dj valuta dj 22 soldj a marcho che staua con mecho[.] Il quale era [crossed out: di va/luta dj] lire 1a / darge[n]to e ttolseglielo del suo studjolo e poi che detto marcho [crossed out: gliele be] nebe assaj ciero lo tro[vo] na/schosto inella chassa dj detto iachomo [. . .] Ite[n] anchora a dj 2 daprile lasscia[n]do gia[n] a[n]tonjo 1o graffio dargie[n]to sop[r]a uno suo djsegnjo / esso iachomo gliele rubo il qualera dj ualuta dj soldj 24”. Cfr. Budd 2009, convincingly noting the possibility that Salaì’s transgressions could be reported to the guild, although there is also much with which I disagree. (116) Milan, Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 713r (formerly, fol. 264r-b) along the right border, which has severe losses of the paper, and is partly legible: “[france]sco 4 / [...]do 4 / [g]anmaria 4 / benedetto 4 / gianpietro 3 /–salaj 3 / bartolomeo 3 / girardo 4”. Based on the dated mentions of Benedetto’s and Ioditti’s stated monthly salaries of 4 ducati in Codex Atlanticus, fol. 189r (formerly, fol. 68r-a), we can deduce that the sums in fol. 713r were also monthly salaries and in ducati. Regarding fol. 713r, therefore, five of these men, Francesco, […]do, Gianmaria, Benedetto, and Girardo were being paid 4 [ducati] each, while three of the men Gianpietro (Giampietrino), Salaì, and Bartolomeo were being paid 3 [ducati] each. Cfr. Marinoni 2000, vol. 1, pp. 248-49, vol. 2, p. 1394, with a full, modernized transcription of text. LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 51 Boltraffio, and Salaì (117). Another memorandum in the Codex Atlanticus (fol. 189r), about “Benedetto” and “Ioditti,” appears as a small insertion on a sheet packed with numbers from Leonardo’s calculations of their wages (118). For each youth, Leonardo’s notes explicitly detail the amount as “meritato” (earned), and the still pending salary, all of which helps us understand that 4 ducati was a typical monthly salary for Leonardo’s Milanese assistants in the 1490s. In 1495-96, Leonardo and his workshop were decorating the camerini of the Castello di Porta Giovia (now Castello Sforzesco) with murals. As a document of June 1496 records, a “certo scandalo” by an unnamed artist (almost certainly, Leonardo) caused him to remove himself from the premises, interrupting his work (119). As reconstructed by Gerolamo Calvi, two intrinsically related sheets in the Codex Atlanticus (fols. 914a-r and fol. 867r) of ca. 1496 represent Leonardo’s drafts for the same letter addressed to Ludovico Sforza “Il Moro,” begging to be paid his salary, soon after the interruption of the project in the camerini (120). In one petition Leonardo alluded to his “due . maesstri . i quali . continovo stettono . a mjo . salario e sspe[se]” (“two masters, whose salary and expenses were continuously on me”) (121). His other plea states: “o tenvto . 6 . boche 36 mesi . he o avto 50 ducati” (I have maintained six persons in thirty-six months and have had 50 ducats”) (122). The six dependents probably included apprentices and the assistant “maestri”. (117) Milan, Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 713r, the identification of “[france]sco 4,” is usually overlooked. I am now convinced this is indeed a reference to Francesco Galli Napoletano, as Franco Moro proposed some time ago. On Francesco Galli “Napoletano,” see Frangi 1991; Fiorio 1998c; Moro 1998 (identifying him as the Maestro della Pala Sforzesca); now updated online http://www.francomoro.it/ita.old /visualizza_pubblicazione.php. (118) Milan, Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 189r (formerly, fol. 68r-a). See Marinoni 2000, vol. 1, pp. 248-49, with a full, modernized transcription of text, and analyzing the arithmetic of Leonardo’s calculations of the two men’s wages. Cfr. Richter 1883/1970, vol. 2, p. 365, no. 1466. (119) Archivio di Stato di Milano, Autografi, cartaceo, fasc.16 (letter of 8 June 1496, Bartolomeo Calco to Ludovico Sforza). On this project, see Calvi 1925 / 1982, pp. 116-20; Villata 1999, pp. 93-95, nos. 108-10 (documents); Edoardo Villata in Marani 2000a, p. 346, nos. 20-23 (documents); Fiorio 2005; Bambach 2019, vol. 1, p. 320, vol. 4, pp. 142-43, notes 49-50. I have changed my mind and am now inclined to accept that it is Leonardo and his “certo scandalo” who are the subject of these documents. (120) Calvi 1925 / 1982, pp. 116-19 (especially note 20), referring to these sheets by their old numeration as fols. 335v-a and 315v-a. (121) Milan, Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 914a-r (formerly, fol. 335v-a); Calvi 1925 / 1982, pp. 117-18; Marinoni 2000, vol. 3, p. 1699, with a full, modernized transcription of text. (122) Milan, Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 867r (formerly, fol. 315v-a); Calvi 1925 / 1982, pp. 117-18; Marinoni 2000, vol. 3, pp. 1619-20, with a full, modernized transcription of text. 52 CARMEN C. BAMBACH Leonardo’s habit of maintaining artists in his circle in Milan and Florence as pupils and assistants reveals a remarkable continuity of practice. For the spirit of collaborative work had been a modus operandi in Verrocchio’s bottega, where making paintings, sculptures, and drawings during the 1460s and 1470s was often a communal activity (123). In my view, the two complementary exhibitions on Verrocchio, in Florence and Washington in 2019, raised several questions of attribution, and these underscore the climate of communal work that existed in the great sculptor-painter’s dynamic workshop (124). The San Salvi altarpiece of the Baptism of Christ, now in the Uffizi, painted ca. 1470-1475 by Verrocchio, Leonardo, and perhaps other assistants, is a celebrated instance of teamwork (125). A more complex example is the commission of the Pistoia altarpiece (“Madonna di Piazza”) to Verrocchio. It was executed in his bottega between 1478 and 1485, but entailed a delegation of labor in the production of drawings, as well as of the painting itself, thus causing intense scholarly debate about the authorship of the parts (126). The refined Louvre study for Saint John the Baptist at left in the main panel of the enthroned Madonna is unmistakably by Lorenzo di Credi (127). Leonardo’s early life drawing of a male nude in Windsor, done in silverpoint, highlighted with lead white gouache on blue prepared paper, also relates to the design of the Baptist (128). Bearing notes in Verrocchio’s hand, as comparisons to his script in the catasto of 1481 confirms, the sheet in Edinburgh is among the rare survivals of a sketchbook page from the (123) For the practices of collaboration in Verrocchio’s bottega, see Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 82-193, vol. 4, pp. 78-109 (with bibliography in the notes). For the practices of collaboration in Leonardo’s studio in Milan, see ibid., vol. 1, pp. 313-21, 359-63, vol. 3, pp. 97-101, vol. 4, pp. 137-45, 157-60. (124) Verrocchio. Il Maestro di Leonardo, Florence, Palazzo Strozzi and Bargello (Caglioti and De Marchi 2019); Verrocchio: Sculptor and Painter of Renaissance Florence, Washington, National Gallery of Art (Butterfield et al. 2019). (125) Natali 1998; Natali 1999; Antonio Natali in Galluzzi 2006, pp. 81-83, no. 1.A.b; Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 130-34, fig. 2.44, 2.45. (126) Cfr. different opinions about the attribution of the Pistoia altarpiece and the predella panels in Brown 1998, pp. 151-56, figs. 144, 147-48; Kanter 2018; Andrea De Marchi in Caglioti and De Marchi 2019, pp. 52-57, figs. 10a, 10b; Marco Campigli in Caglioti and De Marchi 2019, pp. 252-55, nos. 8.10a-c; Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 140-42, fig. 2.56. Although inexplicably attributed to Leonardo, the painted fragment on linen in a private collection is a later copy after the head of Saint Donato in the Pistoia altarpiece (contra Andrea De Marchi in Caglioti and De Marchi 2019, pp. 52-53, figs. 5b, 6b, 244-47, no. 8.7). (127) Paris, Musée du Louvre, Département des Arts Graphiques RF 455; Bambach 2003, pp. 260-62, no. 7; Bambach 2019, vol.1, pp. 143 (fig. 2.55), 147-48; but see Marco Campigli in Caglioti and De Marchi 2019, pp. 248-51, no. 8.8. (128) Windsor, Royal Library RCIN 912572; Brown 1998a, pp. 153-54, fig. 145; Bambach 2019, vol.1, pp. 142-47, fig. 2.54. LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 53 workshop. It integrates sketches by both Verrocchio and Lorenzo di Credi, as I first discussed in 2003 (129). The verso of this Edinburgh sheet reveals a wide variety of sketches, notes, and doodles, along with a large-scale study after a three-dimensional model which partly served to design Saint Donato in the Pistoia altarpiece. A rare, fragile sheet in the Louvre sheds light of a different kind on the role of drawing in Verrocchio’s bottega (130). Much as is the case with the Edinburgh drawing, the recto of the Louvre sheet portrays a variety of content, layered with figures in different body scales and degrees of finish, including doodles, lettering, and notes of accounting. This sheet, which clearly passed among several hands in Verrocchio’s bottega, includes at right, next to the large Virgin’s elbow, scribbled accounts by Leonardo in his habitual right-to-left script: “nicholo / di michele / debbe . . .”. Evidence of other forms of sharing drawings emerges in three sheets by the right-handed Verrocchio, which also include passages of slight lefthanded parallel hatching, probably done by Leonardo, as the lines course from lower right to upper left, or from upper left to lower right (131). Leonardo comfortably employed assistants, and partnered with other artists of independent status (“maestri” or “magistri”) for certain types of projects (132). An important example is the National Gallery version of the Virgin of the Rocks (London), in which the visual evidence suggests the collaboration of assistants in painting the lesser passages of the altarpiece (133). On 25 April 1483, the scolari of the confraternity of the Immaculate Conception at San Francesco Grande contracted the altarpiece, which would contain the Virgin of the Rocks as its main panel, to magister Leonardo and to the half-brothers, Evangelista and Giovanni Ambrogio de’ Predis, who were all presumably in partnership (134). (129) Edinburgh, National Gallery of Scotland 642; Bambach 2003, pp. 263-66, no. 8. See also Marco Campigli in Caglioti and De Marchi 2019, pp. 248-51, no. 8.9; Lorenza Melli in Butterfield 2019, pp. 260-65, no. 39; Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 140-50, figs. 2.57, 2.58. (130) Paris, Musée du Louvre, Département des Arts Graphiques RF 453r; Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 283-84, fig. 2.59. (131) The three drawings by Verrocchio, with left-handed passages probably done by Leonardo, are in Oxford (Christ Church Gallery 0005 [JBS 15]) and in Florence (Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi nos. 130 E and 212 E). Detailed discussion, with illustrations, in Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 96-106, 130-36, and figs. 2.7, 2.8, 2.15, 2.46, 2.47. (132) Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 313-14, 320-21. (133) On the disputed attribution of the National Gallery Virgin of the Rocks, cfr. Marani 2003; Zöllner 2003, p. 229, no. XVI; Syson with Keith 2011, pp. 161-75; Hope 2012 (rejecting entirely Leonardo’s hand); Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 97-101, vol. 4, pp. 327-28 (notes 6268), with opinion as stated here in the text. (134) Archivio di Stato di Milano, Cimeli, cartaceo 1, fasc. 41, 42 (25 April 1483); Villata 1999, pp. 19-34, no. 23; Edoardo Villata in Marani 2000a, pp. 343-44, no. 14; Vanna Arrighi and Edoardo Villata in Arrighi, Bellinazzi, and Villata 2005, pp. 141-42, no. IV.25. 54 CARMEN C. BAMBACH In 1505, in Florence, Leonardo involved Raffaello d’Antonio di Biagio, “Ferrando Spagnuolo” (who is most probably Fernando Yáñez de la Almedina, rather than Fernando Llanos, who by 1494/95 was already a magister (135)), Tomaso Giovanni Masini, and Lorenzo del Faina as assistants for the intended Battle of Anghiari mural in the Sala del Gran Consiglio of the Palazzo della Signoria, which was to compete with Michelangelo’s Battle of Cascina (136). The detailed extant documents about the Battle of Anghiari in the Archivio di Stato of Florence suggest a pyramid of labor among Leonardo’s assistants. The master turned to the actual painting of the mural in the Sala del Gran Consiglio by the end of April 1505, and the entries for the payment cycle dated 30 April of that year include his salary for three months, as well as the wages for his three assistants, of whom two are called “dipintori” (matriculated painters), Raffaello d’Antonio di Biagio and “Ferrando Spagnuolo,” while the third assistant is identified as a grinder of colors, or “garzone,” Tomaso di Giovanni Masini (“che macina e colorj”) (137). The accounts of 31 August 1505 feature a joint payment to “Ferrando Spagnuolo,” who as a dipintore was being compensated “for painting with Leonardo da Vinci at the Great Council Hall” (“per dipignere con Lionardo da Vinci nella Sala del consiglio”), and to Ferrando’s garzone, Tomaso di Giovanni Masini, once more “for grinding colors” (“per macin- (135) The precise identity of “Ferrando Spagnuolo” in the Battle of Anghiari documents has been debated. The possibilities can be narrowed down to the two Spanish painters, who later worked in a deeply Leonardesque vein and who bear similar surnames, being documented in 1506 and 1507 as collaborators in painting jointly the retablo mayor (high altarpiece) of Valencia cathedral. They are Fernando Llanos and Fernando Yáñez de la Almedina (the more skilled artist), the two “Ferrandi,” as they are called in the literature. The evidence favors Fernando Yáñez de la Almedina (ca. 1475-1537), whom Leonardo may have known in Milan by the mid-1490s. As proposed in Calvi 1925 / 1982, p. 116 (note 18), “Ferrando Spagnuolo” is probably to be identified with Leonardo’s mention in the Paris MS H, fol. 94r (=H2, fol. 46r: “fera[n]do”), in a memorandum of ca. 1494, listing the names of people and objects. According to Calvi, this memorandum is nearly contemporary with the citation of a “magistro Ferrando d’ignoto casato” in an untraced letter of 1495 addressed to Ludovico Sforza “Il Moro” about work in progress in the camerini of the Castello di Porta Giovia (now Castello Sforzesco), where Leonardo was at work. (136) Bambach 1999a; Bambach 2019, vol. 2, pp. 329-421, on the Battle of Anghiari cartoon and failed mural; ibid., pp. 359-64, on the division of labor in the project. (137) Payments of 30 April 1505: Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Repubblica, operai di palazzo, filza 10, fols. 77v, 79r, 80r. Cfr. Frey 1909, pp. 134-35, nos. 220, 222, 223, 229; Bambach 2019, vol. 2, pp. 361-62, vol. 4, p. 275 (notes 153-162). The “Tomaso” recorded in Leonardo’s household accounts for July and August 1504 (Codex Atlanticus, fol. 196r), along with Salaì, is very probably the same as the assistant grinder of colors to Ferrando Spagnuolo in the Anghiari document. The extent to which this young man, Tomaso di Giovanni Masini, may be identified with the mysterious “Zoroastro da Peretola,” as proposed by Brescia and Tomìo 1999; and Tomìo 2001, is in my view questionable. LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 55 are e colorj”) (138). The document of 31 December 1505 names Lorenzo del Faina and Tomaso di Giovanni Masini, who were both now called “dipintorj” (the two previous documents had listed Masini as a garzone), engaged in buying and grinding colors (“per colorj et macinatura di colori”) (139). Leonardo’s Turin Codex on the Flight of Birds (fol. 18v) mentions the arrival of the seventeen year-old “Lorenzo” in the master’s household in April 1505 – he must be Lorenzo del Faina, as I have suggested (140). During the last decade of his life, Leonardo felt especially at ease in relying on Melzi as a trusted assistant in note-taking and sketching, because he had methodically trained Melzi in his style, techniques, and iconographic models (141). Melzi’s earliest extant exercise drawing in the great master’s studio is his signed Ambrosiana sheet of 1510, depicting a bald man of Leonardesque facial features, seen in profile view facing right, which he probably copied from a sculptural model in relief (Fig. 18) (142). Melzi began with an underdrawing in black chalk (evident with greater clarity in infrared reflectography, IRR, which allows one to separate this design layer from the overlayer in red chalk; Fig. 19), and he then entirely reworked in a red chalk of slight orange color, achieving a dense depth of modeling (143). Melzi applied the red chalk with forceful strokes, often pressing the tip of the chalk hard on the paper in outlining the forms, and more gently articulated the interior modeling with (right-handed) strokes of parallel-hatching, then rubbing together seamlessly the lines of shading. He also wetted the red chalk to darken the tone in selected passages. Melzi inscribed the Ambrosiana sheet in pen and brown ink at the top: “1510 . adi 14 Augusto . . . p[rim]a cauata de releuo / Francescho da melzo de anni 17,” and then at lower left: “anni 19 / fr. Melzo”). These two inscriptions correspond to Melzi’s reworking of the Ambrosiana drawing in two separate campaigns, the first of which when he was seventeen years old probably corresponds to (138) Payments of 31 August 1505: Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Repubblica, operai di palazzo, filza 10, fol. 80v. Cfr. Frey 1909, p. 135, no. 230; Bambach 2019, vol. 2, pp. 361-62. (139) Payments of 31 December 1505: Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Repubblica, operai di palazzo, filza 10, fol. 84r. Cfr. Frey 1909, p. 135, no. 237; Bambach 2019, vol. 2, pp. 361-62. (140) Bambach 2019, vol. 2, pp. 358, 362, 475, fig. 8.113. (141) For discussion and illustrated examples of Melzi’s assistance in Leonardo’s work, see Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 96-97, 330-33, 350-51, 413-26, 470-84, 519-33, 591-96, 603606 (see especially figs. 10.9, 11.11, 11.16, 11.31, 12.15-12.16, 12.58-12.60, 13.31-13.32, and 13.48-13.49). (142) Milan, Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana F 274 inf. 8; Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 9697 (fig. 10.9), 520-23, vol. 3, p. 327 (note 55), 404 (notes 134-141). (143) This is the important contribution by Benedetta Spadaccini. I thank Gianluca Poldi (Segrate) for the photograph in infrared reflectography here published. See Spadaccini 2019-20, pp. 78-84, figs. 84-85; Poldi 2019-20, pp. 96-97, figs. 79a-b, for the recent findings and imaging in infrared reflectography (IRR) and ultraviolet (UV) fluorescence. 56 CARMEN C. BAMBACH Fig. 18 – Giovan Francesco Melzi, Head of a bald man in profile view, signed and dated 14 August 1510. Milan, Veneranda Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana (Inv. F 274 Inf. 8). Fig. 19 – Giovan Francesco Melzi, imaging in infrared reflectography (IRR), Head of a bald man in profile view, signed and dated 14 August 1510. Milan, Veneranda Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana (Inv. F 274 Inf. 8. Photo: Gianluca Poldi, Segrate). the extensive (somewhat timidly drawn) design layer in black chalk, while he probably did the second phase of more forceful elaboration in red chalk when he was nineteen (144). That Leonardo educated Melzi as an artist by having him copy his original drawings with assiduous discipline is confirmed by the numerous examples in which both Leonardo’s originals and Melzi’s copies survive (145). Melzi probably began stepping into his role as the helper and right-handed scribe in Leonardo’s notetaking soon after he entered the master’s household. Dated December 1511, Leonardo’s Windsor landscape drawing in a “red-on-red” technique depicts the fires set by the Swiss mercenaries in the (144) My interpretation of Melzi’s inscriptions on the sheet (Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana F 274 inf. 8) builds on observations in Spadaccini 2019-20, pp. 83-84. (145) Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 520-33, discussing and illustrating numerous cases of Melzi’s copies and “clean replacement copies” after Leonardo’s autograph drawings. LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 57 countryside around Desio (Lombardy) and bears Melzi’s inscriptions in pen and brown ink (146). These inscriptions copy over Leonardo’s faded texts in red chalk, although we do not know when the pupil added these notes. Melzi’s notes on Leonardo’s sheets, exploring the topography around Romorantin and describing the deluge, date between ca. 1515 and ca. 1518, and vividly illustrate how Melzi assisted his master late in life (147). Leonardo may still have been active as a teacher of disegno two years before his death in France. The diary entry of 10 October 1517 by Antonio de Beatis notes the artist’s paralyzed hand, and comments: “although he could no longer paint with the sweetness of style that he used to have, he can serve only to draw and teach others” (“bench[e] il p[refa]to m[esse]r Lunardo no[n] possa colorir[e] co[n] quella dulceza che solea. pur serue ad far[e] disegnj et insignar[e] ad altrj”) (148). From an aesthetic point of view, one of Leonardo’s greatest artistic contributions as a draftsman was his use of color and variety of media. In his studies of ca. 1495-98 for the apostles in the Cenacolo at Santa Maria delle Grazie, Leonardo favored the pictorial media of red and black chalk, which he rubbed, or stumped, to create seamless sfumato (149). He sometimes also added ink and white gouache highlights to the chalk studies to intensify the luminosity and relief of forms (150). The master also experimented with striking chromatic effects, obtained by drawing in red chalk on reddish ochre prepared paper (the “red-on-red” technique) (151). His recipes for fabricating Windsor, Royal Library RCIN 912416r; discussed and illustrated in Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 283-88, fig. 10.164. (147) The sheets concerning the topography around Romorantin are in the Codex Arundel (London, British Library MS Arundel 263), fols. 263v-270r and fol. 920r; and the sheets on the deluge are in the Codex Atlanticus, fols. 208r and 215r; discussed and illustrated in Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 417-26, 470-72, figs. 12.15, 12.16, 12.58, 12.60. (148) Biblioteca Nazionale di Napoli Vittorio Emanuele III, MS X.F.28, Itinerario di Monsignor R.[everendissi]mo et Ill.[ustrissimo] cardinal de Aragona mio sig.[no]re ... per me dom. Antonio de Beatis (diary entry, 10 October 1517), fols. 76v-77r, Vincenzo Boni in Arrighi, Bellinazzi, and Villata 2005, pp. 240-42, no. IX.112 (illustrated); discussed in Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 397-99, vol. 4, p. 372, note 1 (text fully transcribed, with bibliography). (149) The examples include Leonardo’s study for the apostle Philip in the Last Supper, in grayish black chalk (Windsor, Royal Library RCIN 912551r); and his study for the clasped hands of the apostle John, also in grayish black chalk (Windsor, Royal Library RCIN 912543r). (150) An example of this technique is Leonardo’s drapery study of a sleeve on an arm and hand, probably for the apostle Peter in the Last Supper, in grayish black chalk, with pen and brown ink outlines, highlighted with brush and white gouache (Windsor, Royal Library RCIN 912546r). (151) Examples are Leonardo’s study probably for the apostle Bartholomew, in red chalk, on red ocher prepared paper (Windsor, Royal Library RCIN 912548r); and the study for Judas, in which the facial profile appears to have been reinforced by Giovan Francesco Melzi, in red chalk, on red ocher prepared paper (Windsor, Royal Library RCIN 912547r). (146) 58 CARMEN C. BAMBACH colored chalks (pastels) in the Codex Forster II2 (fol. 159r) and Codex Madrid I (fol. 191r), date ca. 1493/94 to 1497, hence from the time he worked on the drawings for the Last Supper as well (152). Leonardo’s so-called Ligny memorandum in the Codex Atlanticus (fol. 669r), which may date to ca. 1494-95 or 1499-1500, alludes to this “method of coloring in dry pigments,” crediting it specifically to his friend, the French painter and bon vivant, Jean Perréal (“piglia da g[i]an dj paris il modo decolorire / asseccho”) (153). After 1500, Leonardesque artists increasingly absorbed Leonardo’s style of pictorial drawing in red chalk, black chalk, and pastels. The fragile, large-scale study in natural-colored chalks and pastels in the Pinacoteca di Brera (Fig. 20) is an important copy after the head of Christ in Leonardo’s Last Supper (154). Although this extremely damaged and restored drawing at the Brera has often been published as an autograph work, or as partly by Leonardo, this attribution seems incorrect, since the drawing is self-evidently executed with right-handed, diagonal parallel hatching, especially in the layer of underdrawing in charcoal of the design. The two series of fullscale copies in natural-colored chalks and pastels after the individual figures of Christ and the apostles in the Cenacolo, although of debated attribution and dating, further attest that the moment of Leonardo’s graphic discoveries in the 1490s became especially important for Lombard draftsmen in the Cinquecento (155). Boltraffio’s drawn oeuvre offers the crucially significant link in the propagation of Leonardo’s use of color and techniques of rendering in chalk with Bambach 2010; Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 443-55, 472-81. Bambach 2010; Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 477, 480. (154) Milan, Pinacoteca di Brera, Reg. Cron. 862. See Bambach 2010, pp. 194-97, 204 (n. 59), fig. 18 (as “follower of Leonardo da Vinci”); Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 477-79, vol. 3, pp. 533-35, vol. 4, p. 192 (note 702), p. 407 (note 182), discussing the drawing as by a “righthanded artist in the circle of Leonardo (with extensive reworking by later restorers), copy after Leonardo’s head of Christ in the Last Supper, ca. 1500-16”. The medium of red, yellow ocher, brown, ivory-hue chalk is over an original underdrawing in grayish black chalk with hatching entirely by a right-handed artist, on severely discolored light brown-gray paper. The paper was likely blue before fading and is prepared with a lead white chalk and cream-color ground; stains, abrasions, and numerous losses on the original paper surface, glued onto secondary paper support; extensively retouched to harmonize losses of design with red chalk, pastel (?), waxy black chalk, on hair at right with brush and brown wash. (155) Of these controversial full-scale copies in pastels after Leonardo’s Last Supper, one group is preserved mainly in the Cabinet des Estampes et des Dessins in Strasbourg, while the other group of pastels (of which eleven are presently known, and which was once in Weimar) is today divided mainly between the Ackland Art Museum of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the National Gallery of Victoria at Melbourne, and several private collections. I attribute the Strasbourg series to Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio. Cfr. Wolk-Simon 2011; Bambach 2019, vol. 4, p. 407, note 187 (with previous bibliography); Delieuvin and Frank, pp. 219-12, 416-17, no. 115. (152) (153) LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 59 sfumato effects in Lombardy and Central Italy (156). Boltraffio’s delicately modeled Uffizi study, in charcoal and lead white chalk for the Virgin at center in the Casio altarpiece, is firmly datable to ca. 1500 (157). In contrast to the airiness of this Uffizi drawing, Boltraffio’s bold, life-size portrait of a young woman in the Ambrosiana (Fig. 21) (158) manifests a flesh-and-blood conception of the figure, with a great sculptural presence. Clearly an autonomous work in and of itself, rather than a preparatory study, this monumental drawing is executed in natural-colored chalks and pastels, over a charcoal underdrawing, on paper of foglio imperiale size (52.7 × 39.8 cm). The artist applied a dry layer of lead white chalk on the paper before drawing to heighten the forms and the brightness of the colors. Boltraffio’s powerful drawing technique here seems worlds apart from his earliest drawings in metalpoint on blue-gray prepared paper, that we have discussed. The Ambrosiana drawing is in my opinion a late work of ca. 1510-16, given its luminous, coloristic handling of the chalks, which Boltraffio achieved with a waxy binder that recalls Leonardo’s recipe in the Codex Forster II2 (fol. 159r). Boltraffio’s monumental autonomous drawings in natural-colored chalks and pastels heralded a Lombard tradition of similarly life-size works in colored chalks. We may cite, for instance, Andrea Solario’s bearded man in bust-length, datable to 1515-16, as I have proposed (159); and Bernardino Luini’s portrait of a woman with a fan, who may or may not be Ippolita Sforza Bentivoglio, datable to 1520-25 (160). Bernardino Luini was an early collector of Leonardo’s drawings, and his studies in soft black chalk reflect his emulation of the great master’s techniques of sfumato from first-hand observation (161). Solario, a highly individualistic draftsman, experimented with rich combinations of dry, viscous, and liquid media (black chalk, with Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 533-44. Florence, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi 17184 F; Fiorio 2000, pp. 54, 112, 120, 152, no. B12; Alessandro Nova in Faietti, Melli, and Nova, pp. 159-66, figs. 2, 4-6; Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 536-38, fig. 13.52. (158) Milan, Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana F 290 inf. 7; Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 53944, fig. 13.58; Spadaccini 2019-20, pp. 68-72, fig. 53; Poldi 2019-20, pp. 117-22, figs. 115-16, for scientific findings and photography. See also in the same museum, the other monumental drawings by Boltraffio, executed in natural-colored chalks and pastels: the bust-length portrait of a young man (F 290 Inf. 8); and the two very abraded male portraits (nos. F 262 inf. 33 and F 262 inf. 34); as well as the female head (F 262 inf. 45). (159) New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 06.1051.9; Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 53944, fig. 13.59, vol. 4, p. 408, notes 201, 204-208. (160) Vienna, Graphische Sammlung Albertina 59 (SR 71; B 405); Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 538-544, fig. 13.60, vol. 4, p. 408, notes 199, 200. (161) For example, among others, Bernardino Luini owned Leonardo’s cartoon of the Virgin and Child with Saints Anne and Infant John the Baptist (London, National Gallery 6337); Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 36-38, 538, 594-96. (156) (157) 60 CARMEN C. BAMBACH Fig. 20 – Anonymous right-handed artist in the circle of Leonardo (with extensive reworking by later restorers), copy after Leonardo’s Head of Christ in the Last Supper. Milan, Pinacoteca Nazionale di Brera (Inv. 280 [Reg. Cron. 862]). Fig. 21 – Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio, Bust-length study of a young woman in frontal view. Milan, Veneranda Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana (Inv. F 290 inf. 7). pen and ink, washes, and lead white gouache) in his compositional studies, as seen in his Venice Assumption of the Virgin, of 1524 (162). The technical bravura of these early sixteenth-century Lombard artists kept alive the interest in Leonardo’s color and sfumato drawing techniques, disseminating them more widely in the Italian peninsula. Leonardo, however, was especially aware that a laborious diligenza in finishing drawings dried up the freshness of ideas in a design. His teaching methods and insistence on diligenza accorded with an approach to drawing and painting which he himself began to escape early in his own creative life, valuing too much the spontaneous moments of surrender to the suggestiveness of forms before the mind’s eye. Between 1490 and 1510, Leonardo wrote at least seven fragments of text about the use of sketchbooks and the importance of quick sketching, a fact which reveals his persistent preoccupation with the subject. These notes about sketching constitute Leonardo’s most original contribution to the theory of disegno. Although the majority Venice, Gallerie dell’Accademia, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe 165. See Bora 1998c, pp. 102-5, figs. 4.15, 4.16; Bora 2003b, pp. 331-32, fig. 111. (162) LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 61 of these writings on sketching date to Leonardo’s years in Milan, they do not seem to reflect what he was actually teaching his pupils at the time. Three descriptions occur in the Paris MS A, of ca. 1490-92 (163), and one is in the Codex Atlanticus, also of this date (164). Two notes appear only recorded in Melzi’s Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, based on lost passages by the great master dating from after 1500, and which can likely be pin-pointed to ca. 1505-10 (165). The seventh note about quick sketching is also preserved in the Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, but a careful textual analysis demonstrates it to be a conflation of text written by the master at two different times. It combines the most famous autograph passage in the Paris MS A, of ca. 1490-92, and a lost, much later addition of phrasing by Leonardo that is probably from ca. 1505-10 (166). In the Paris MS A, of ca. 1490-92, Leonardo prescribed the use of small portable sketchbooks (“piccioli libretti”) for recording figures in everyday activities, with abbreviated strokes (“con brevi segni”), which could later serve as a repertory of ideas for poses and gestures (167). The medium of the “piccioli libretti” appears to have been metalpoint on paper prepared with color, which is durable and does not smear. According to Leonardo the work in sketchbooks taught painters how to create well-integrated figures in a “storia,” or narrative composition. While some artists working in Florence used sketchbooks abundantly to draw in silverpoint between the 1490s and 1504, this was not a common practice among the Leonardeschi of the 1490s in Milan (168). Also in the Paris MS A, of ca. 1490-92, Leonardo advised to sketch compositions quickly (“il bozzare delle storie sia pronto”), with a shorthand notation for the figures and their limbs (169). In a contemporary pasBibliothèque de l’Institut de France, Paris MS A (inv. no. 2185), fols. 8v, 22v, 27v. Milan, Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 430r. (165) Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, fols. 60v, 61v-62r. (166) Cfr. Bibliothèque de l’Institut de France, Paris MS A (inv. no. 2185), fol. 22v, and Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, fol. 35v. (167) Bibliothèque de l’Institut de France, Paris MS A (inv. no. 2185), fol. 27v: “ø dello i[n] parare bene acho[n]pore / insieme . lefigure nelle storie. . ”. Melzi transcribed this note quite precisely in Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, fols. 58v-59r; Vecce 1995, pp. 216-17, no. 173 (in critical transcription). (168) For examples by Filippino Lippi, see the sheets in Florence, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi nos. 299 E, 302 E, 303 E, 128 E, 1256 E, 145 E, 185 E, 1258 E; Oxford, Christ Church JBS 35; Lille, Palais des Beaux-Arts Pl. 78. For examples by Perugino and his bottega, see the sheets in Düsseldorf, Stiftung Kunstpalast FP 8; Oxford, Ashmolean Museum of Art and Archaeology WA.1846.3; Stockholm, Nationalmuseum NM H 286/1863; New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 1975.1.393. (169) Bibliothèque de l’Institut de France, Paris MS A (inv. no. 2185), fol. 8v: “ø precetti dj pittura / il bozare delle storie sia . pronto . el me[n]brifichare . no[n] sia tropo . finjto / sia cho[n] tento . solame[n]te asitj desse me[n]b[r]a equalj poi abell agio piace[n]doti / lepotraj . finjre”. (163) (164) 62 CARMEN C. BAMBACH sage in the Codex Atlanticus (fol. 430r), he warned against the belaboring of compositions, for many painters ruined a design by reworking the figures and limbs with excessive finish (170). A lost original note of about 1505-10, only preserved in Melzi’s Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270 (fol. 60v), describes Leonardo’s conceptiom of sketches at the time of his work on the Battle of Anghiari cartoon, or soon after. It mentions men in combat, and refers to the men’s poses in terms of “the flexing and extending of their limbs” (“piegamenti e distendime[n]/ti delle lor membra”). This text therefore also coincides in time with Leonardo’s drawings on the physiomechanical anatomy of the male body in motion, of ca. 1506-9, which was part of his research for the Libro di pittura (171). An early editorial scribe, very likely Melzi himself, emended the heading in Leonardo’s precept with an addition in tiny letters, so as to clarify the content (here underlined): “Del compore delle storie in p.[rim]a bozza” (“On composing the narrative compositions in a first draft) (172). However, the text introduces a different vocabulary for the process of sketching, “porre le figure disgrossatamente,” with an awkward phrasing: Lo studio de componitori delle istorie debbe essere de porre / le figure disgrossatamente cioe bozzate e prima saper/le ben fare per tutti li uersi e piegamenti e distendime[n]/ti delle lor membra (173). The study by the composers of narrative compositions must consist of articulating the figures in a rough-hewn manner, that is sketchily, and they must first know how to represent well all the [figures’] angles of view, all the flexing and extending of their limbs. By this point, the mature Leonardo felt that a “prima bozza,” or rough sketch, required an anatomical knowledge of the figure in different movements, poses, and variety of angles of view, before the next stage of drawing carefully observed studies. Milan, Biblioteca Pinacoteca Ambrosiana, Codex Atlanticus, fol. 430r: “del co[n]pore storie / del no[n] riguardare . le me[n]b[r]a . delle figuri . nelle storie–// come moltj fano . che p[er] fare le figure . i[n]tere guastano / i chonponjme[n]tj”. Discussed in Bambach 2015; Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 429-35; vol. 2, pp. 389-91. (171) For example, see Leonardo’s Paris MS K, fols. 101v-102r, 109v-110r, and the anatomical sheets (Windsor, Royal Library nos. RCIN 912623, RCIN 912625, RCIN 912640, RCIN 912636r, and RCIN 912639); discussed and illustrated in Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 145-60, figs. 10.44-10.45, 10.50-10.51, 10.54-10.56. (172) Bambach 2015; Bambach 2019, vol. 2, pp. 386-90. Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, fol. 60v ; Vecce 1995, pp. 219-20, no. 181 (in critical transcription): “Lo studio de componitori delle istorie debbe essere de porre / le figure disgrossatamente cioe bozzate e prima saper/le ben fare ...”. (173) Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, fol. 60v ; Vecce 1995, pp. 219-20, no. 181 (in critical transcription). (170) LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 63 The Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270 (fols. 61v-62r) also preserves another important text from ca. 1505-10, in a section entitled by Melzi, “b. Precetti del componere / le istorie / A.” (174). Here, Leonardo exhorted painters to explore ideas for pictorial compositions by producing “componimenti inculti” (rough sketches), in imitation of the methods of poets, who, in drafting verses, write first ideas in messy script, with much canceled text (175). Leonardo’s most celebrated description, however, is in the Paris MS A, of ca. 1490-92, which conceptualizes the invention of subject matter and quick sketches, in relationship to the creative imagination. The passage alludes to the accidental shapes, such as walls spotted with stains, or stones of various patterns, which could arouse the painter’s eye and mind to new inventions for figural compositions (176). When Melzi transcribed this passage later in the Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, he added content from other lost notes by the master, mentioning that the suggestive forms of ashes, clouds, and mud, could also inspire the eye and mind to new pictorial inventions (177). In practice, however, Leonardo expected painters to go much beyond this initial semi-conscious state of imagining forms by studying figures and details carefully from nature. In a pre-Freudian world, Leonardo had attempted to verbalize the role of the conscious, semi-conscious, and unconscious mind in the artistic impulse, and acknowledged the power of the human imagination. The Paris MS A, of ca. 1490-92, alludes to the image-creation that can occur in the semiconscious mind: “on studying until the time when you wake up, or before you fall asleep in bed in the dark” (“dello studjare insino qua[n]do ti destj / o na[n]zi tadorme[n]ti ne lletto allo schuro”) (178). Leonardo also pondered in (174) As Pedretti 1964 first recognized, the “A” is Melzi’s editorial cross-reference in collating content from Leonardo’s lost “Libro A,” and dated it ca. 1505-10. (175) Bambach 2019, vol. 1, p. 435, on the “componimento inculto”. See Melzi’s transcription in Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, fol. 61v: “b. Precetti del componere / le istorie / A. / ... Pero tu, componitore delle istorie non membrifficare con termi/nati lineamenti le membrifficationi d’esse istorie ...”. Cfr. Vecce 1995, pp. 221-22, no. 189 (in critical transcription). (176) Bibliothèque de l’Institut de France, Paris MS A (inv. no. 2185), fol. 22v ø Modo daume[n]tare e destare / lo [n]giegnjo a varie i[n]ue[n]tionj / no[n] restero] p[e]ro dj mettere i[n]fra questi p[re]ciettj 1a nova i[n]ue[n]tione dj spechula/tione ...”. (177) In recording the new text, based on other notes by Leonardo, Melzi wrote an emphatic capital “N,” to mark the point where the text based on the Paris MS A stops, and the new text begins. See Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Codex Urbinas Latinus 1270, fol. 35v. The diplomatic transcription stays closer to Leonardo’s probable orthography: “Non isprezzare questo mio parere nel quale ti si ricorda che no[n] / ti sia graue il fermarti alcuna uolta a’ uedere nelle machie / de muri o’ nella cenere del foco o’ nuuoli o’ fanghi o’ altri si/mili lochi ...”; Vecce 1995, pp. 177-78, no. 66 (in critical transcription). (178) Bibliothèque de l’Institut de France, Paris MS A (inv. no. 2185), fol. 26r. ø dello studjare insino qua[n]do ti destj / o na[n]zi tadorme[n]ti ne lletto allo schuro...”. 64 CARMEN C. BAMBACH the Codex Arundel, of ca. 1504-5: “why does the eye see a thing more clearly in dreams, than with the imagination while awake?” (“e certa la cosa / p[er] che vede ^piv certa la cosa^ lochio ne sognj / che colla imaginatione sta[n] do dessto”) (179). The notes for the intended Libro di pittura recommend other exercises for developing the painter’s creative imagination and analytical-visual memory, namely, the ars memorativa of Aristotelian thought, with which Leonardo was familiar through some books in his library by 1503-5 (180). Leonardo applied the principles of suggestiveness as a sustained artistic method. He understood that the process of rapid sketching with the pen, stylus, or chalk could lead to a brainstorm of ideas on the paper (181). In the spontaneous flow of the “bozzare pronto,” or the “porre le figure disgrossatamente,” the artist could search and invent the life-like movements and gestures to communicate the “atti mentali” (intentions of the mind) of the figures in a storia. Echoing Leonardo, if with a different vocabulary, the 1568 edition of Vasari’s Vite defined such compositional sketches, “as an initial kind of drawings, made to find the manner of the poses and the first composition of the work; they are done in the shape of a stain” (“schizzi, . . . una prima sorte di disegni che si fanno per trovare il modo delle attitudini et il primo componimento dell’opera; e sono fatti in forma di una ma[c]chia)” (182). Although Leonardo’s concept of the sketch was prominent in his theoretical writings and drawings, it apparently had no place in his teaching methods. We find general visual corroboration of this in the fact that compositional bozze, or sketches, seem absent from the extant corpus of drawings by the Leonardeschi, before 1510-15. Marco d’Oggiono’s two very awkward compositions in Venice, drawn in pen and brown ink, brush and brown wash, ironically reprise the figural arrangements in two of Leonar- London, British Library MS Arundel 263, fol. 278v. Especially Codex Madrid II (Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional de España MS 8936), fol. 2v: “della memoria lochale”. I identified this elusive book as the anonymously authored treatise in the vernacular on memory, rules, and memorization exercises, Ars memorativa: Memoria locale e modo de habituare tante cosse quanto l’homo vora, published in Pavia by Giovanni Andrea Bosco, Michele and Bernardino Garaldi around 22 October 1494. An exemplar is in the Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale di Firenze, MS Magl. L.6.23; Bambach 2019, vol. 4, p. 23, no. 74. For the background, see “On Memory,” Aristotle / Barnes 1995, vol. 1, pp. 714-20 (especially p. 716). (181) Leonardo produced famous “brainstorm” sketches for the compositions of the Battle of Anghiari, the kneeling Leda and the Swan, and the Virgin and Child with Saint Anne. For the sheet combining sketches for the Battle of Anghiari and the Leda and the Swan, see Windsor, Royal Library RCIN 912337; for the Virgin and Child with Saint Anne, see Los Angeles, J. Paul Getty Museum 86.GG.725; Venice, Gallerie dell’Accademia, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe 230; Paris, Musée du Louvre, Département des Arts Graphiques RF 460; and London, British Museum 1875,0612.17. See Bambach 2019b. (182) Vasari 1966-87, vol. 1, p. 117. (179) (180) LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 65 do’s most dazzling early sketches for an Adoration of the Christ Child (183). Cesare da Sesto, whose first recorded work at the Vatican Palace dates to February 1508, absorbed the sketching practices of Raphael and his bottega in Rome, and frequently produced this type of drawing, as we see in his British Museum sheet of sketches and doodles, which rework the composition of Raphael’s Alba Madonna (Fig. 22), and in many leaves from his dismembered Morgan Sketchbook of ca. 1510-14 (184). The practices of quick sketching became more diffused in Lombardy in the 1520s, but were relatively common from the 1530s onward (185). In contrast, Leonardo’s vibrant sheets of the “Madonna of the Cat” supply evidence that he had been doing brain-storm sketches for figural compositions since the late 1470s and early 1480s in Florence (Fig. 23) (186). Artists working in Florence, such as Filippino Lippi, Raphael, and Fra Bartolomeo, were especially receptive to Leonardo, and incorporated the “bozzare pronto” in their design practices early on in their respective careers (187). The kind of sketching that Leonardo recommended to painters required a quick imagination and an intrinsic knowledge of the figure, to recreate it in fast shorthand notation, not to mention great manual dexterity and years of continuous practice. Few artists could really rise to the level of Leonardo’s brilliant sheet of sketches for the Virgin Adoring the Christ Child (Fig. 24), of ca. 1482-85, which develops four alternative ideas for the composition of an altarpiece, along with separate motifs of the holy infants, “con brevi segni.” (188). Ancient and Renaissance art theorists had endeavored to express that painting necessitated an equilibrium between the spontaneity and the dili(183) For Marco d’Oggiono’s drawings, see Venice, Gallerie dell’Accademia, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe 158, The angel and infant Saint John the Baptist adoring the Christ Child with the Virgin and Saint Joseph, ca. 1508-10. Venice, Gallerie dell’Accademia, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe 343, The Virgin and four saints adoring the Christ Child, ca. 1515. Both drawings are illustrated and discussed in Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 517, 544-47, figs. 13.26, 13.27. Leonardo’s sketches for the Adoration of the Christ Child are Venice, Gallerie dell’Accademia Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe nos. 256r and 259r; and Bayonne, Musée Bonnat AI 658, NI 1776. (184) See London, British Museum 1862,1011.196 (illustrated as Fig. 22); New York, Morgan Library and Museum, acc. nos. II, 27-61 (leaves) and II, 62-67 (fragments); Elen 1995, pp. 289-91, no. 49, for an important catalogue entry on Cesare da Sesto’s Morgan Sketchbook. See Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 544-47, figs. 13.63, 13. 64, for a discussion of Cesare da Sesto’s contribution. (185) Bambach 2019, vol. 3, pp. 544-45, for this general chronology. (186) See for example the sheets in London, British Museum nos. 1856,0621.1, 1860,0616.98, and 1857,0110.1 (illustrated as Fig. 23). (187) Bambach 2015, especially figs. 6, 7, 11-13, for examples and practices of quick sketching by these artists. (188) New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 17.142.1 (illustrated as Fig. 23); Bambach 2003, pp. 366-70, no. 45; Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 281-83 (fig. 3.92), pp. 129-30, notes 290-306. 66 CARMEN C. BAMBACH Fig. 22 – Cesare da Sesto, Virgin and Child; Seated nude woman; Standing nude man; Doodles and numbers. London, British Museum (Inv. 1862,1011.196). gence of technical execution in painting. Leonardo grappled with this tension in his own work as a painter for much of his career. Of the “modern” authors, he knew the essence of Leon Battista Alberti’s theories on painting; two of Alberti’s writings were also in his possession by ca. 1503-5 (189). Book III of Alberti’s Della Pittura of 1435-36 advised “prestezza di fare, congiunta con diligenza” (quickness combined with diligence) (190), and dis- (189) See Leonardo’s book list, “richordo de lib[ri] chio lasscio s[err]atj nel cassone,” Codex Madrid II (Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional de España MS 8936), fol. 3r: “vn lib[r]o damjsura dj ba[ttist]a albertj” and “batista alberti inarchitettura”. (190) Alberti / Sinisgalli 2006, p. 267. LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 67 Fig. 23 – Leonardo, sketches for the Madonna of the Cat (verso). London, British Museum (Inv. 1856,0621.1). Fig. 24 – Leonardo, designs for altarpieces of the Virgin Adoring the Christ Child. New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund, 1917 (Inv. 17.142.1). couraged the “troppo pulito” (over polished) (191). Leonardo’s notes about the theory of quick sketching for the Libro di pittura represent an entirely new manner of conceptualizing the design process of the “storia.” (192). But his belief in the importance of the “componimento inculto” and the “bozzare pronto” also produced a tug of war in his own creative process, between the quasi-divine “furore” of inspiration and his scientific perfectionism in painting, which prompted him to study nature, optical effects, perspective, color, and atmosphere. His distractions, as well as his meticulous artistic methods, for instance, stymied his design process and execution in paint of the Uffizi Adoration of the Magi, the Vatican Saint Jerome in the Wilderness, and the Battle of Anghiari (193). He produced innumerable sketches and preliminary drawings for both the Adoration of the Magi and the Battle of Anghiari. Alberti / Sinisgalli 2006, p. 269. Bambach 2015, pp. 50-61; Bambach 2016. See also Gombrich 1966 / 2000, pp. 5863; Kemp 2003, pp. 141-54; Pedretti 2004. (193) The enormous topic of the “non finito” in Leonardo’s work is covered in much detail in Bambach 2016; Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 25-26 (questions of temperament), 242-63 (the Adoration of the Magi), 322-37 (the Vatican Saint Jerome; habits of work in progress and the non finito), vol. 2, pp. 356-58 (distractions: glorious and otherwise), 371-98 (the design process of the Battle of Anghiari), vol. 3, pp. 1-5 (Leonardo’s late thought on infinities and continuous quantities). (191) (192) 68 CARMEN C. BAMBACH The ability to compose pictures is what most eluded Leonardo’s immediate Milanese followers. The spark of the creative imagination – the “fantasia” – could ultimately not be taught. As we have seen, in his lost notes on painting of 1490-92, Leonardo had struggled to describe the painter’s creative impulse by likening it to the divine mind. He believed, like the Aristotelian natural philosophers of his time, in a “prime mover” of all things (inanimate and animate), a supernatural force, which he called the “moto spirituale.” (194). This invisible vital force, which operated according to a universal set of laws, gave the impulse to all physical action. We may return to Paolo Giovio, who wrote short, unpublished biographies of Michelangelo and Raphael (MS, ca. 1525-28). Like that of Leonardo, Giovio intended to append these biographies to his Dialogi de viris et foeminis aetate nostra florentibus. With his three biographies, the refined Lombard author and Latinist sought to reframe the modern history of the visual arts in emulation of the literary canon of his time, elevating Leonardo, Michelangelo, and Raphael as the “tre corone” (three crowns), much as Dante, Petrarch, and Boccaccio had continued to reign in Italian literature into his time (195). For our purposes, the comparison of Giovio’s observations about the three great Italian Renaissance masters – Leonardo, Michelangelo, and Raphael – helps crystallize the artistic personality of Leonardo as a teacher. Giovio’s Leonardi Vincii vita remarked on Leonardo’s personal affability, brilliance, and generosity, noting also the extraordinary beauty of his face: “fui ingenio valde comi, nitido, liberale, vultu autem longe venustissimo.” (196). But Giovio concluded with the acerbic statement that was lapidary for the centuries, “Leonardo died in France, at the age of sixtyseven, and the mourning of his friends was all the greater, because, among such a crowd of young men, through which his studio [officina] blossomed to the fullest, he left no pupil of fame behind [nullum celebrem discipulum reliquerit].” (197). Modern art historians have mostly agreed with this indictment, that Leonardo lacked a legacy of talented disciples. Bambach 2019, vol. 1, pp. 426-29. I agree with B. Agosti 2008, p. 49, about Giovio’s probable intention of projecting the literary canon of the “tre corone” to the three greats of the visual arts, Leonardo, Michelangelo, and Raphael. (196) Giovio, Leonardi Vincii vita, quoted from Vecce 1998, p. 357. Cfr. Barocchi 1971-77, vol. 1, p. 9; Giovio / Maffei 1999, pp. 233-35. (197) My translation is somewhat free to accommodate English syntax. See Giovio, Leonardi Vincii vita: “Sexagesimum et septimum agens annum in Gallia vita functus est, eo maiore amicorum luctu, quod in tanta adolescentium turba, qua maxime officina eius florebat, nullum celebrem discipulum reliquerit”. Quoted from Vecce 1998, p. 355. Cfr. Barocchi 1971-77, vol. 1, p. 9; Giovio / Maffei 1999, pp. 233-35; B. Agosti 2008, pp. 53-59. (194) (195) LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 69 Michelangelo, among Leonardo’s contemporaries, certainly spawned no star pupils, although painters in his circle imitated his figural vocabulary. Vasari’s 1568 Vita of Michelangelo exalts his long, Herculean career as the culmination of the three arts (painting, sculpture, and architecture), because of his supreme mastery of disegno, but circumspectly narrates the details of his private life and character. Written forty years earlier, however, Giovio’s brief Michaelis Angeli vita had been more candid, while praising Michelangelo’s achievements as a painter: Caeterum tanti ingenii vir natura adeo agrestis ac ferus extitit, ut supra incredibiles domesticae vitae sordes succesores in arte posteris inviderit (198). On the other hand, in contrast to such an exalted genius a character so wild and rude informed his domestic [private] life with incredible meanness, and deprived posterity of disciples to continue his art. Giovio’s Raphaelis Urbinatis vita pronounced Raphael, “tertium in pictura locum” (in third place in painting) to Leonardo and Michelangelo, and commented that “at Raphael’s death [in 1520], various artists vied to inherit art, with almost equal renown” (199). Of the trinity of great CentralItalian painters, Raphael proved to be the exception in having advanced the artistic careers of Giulio Romano, Giovan Francesco Penni (“Il Fattore”), Giovanni da Udine, Pellegrino da Modena, Polidoro da Caravaggio, Perino del Vaga, and others who had been his young workshop assistants. One may argue that, as a teacher, Leonardo had emphasized discipline, theoretical rules, and the diligenza of refined technical execution, because his Milanese disciples intended to become, or were already, professional painters, who showed artistic competence. In contrast, Michelangelo essentially taught drawing to amateurs, endowed with only rudimentary artistic skill, if any. Some were servants (“servitori”), who worked in the master’s household and studio, performing menial labor in exchange for drawing lessons, such as Pietro Urbano (Pietro d’Annibale de’ Rossi) from 1505/6 to 1521; Antonio di Bernardo Mini from 1523 to 1531; and Francesco d’Amadore) from 1531 to 1555 (200). Some of Michelangelo’s pupils were beautiful, young noblemen of romantic interest, for whom the master (198) Giovio, Michaelis Angeli vita: “Caeterum tanti ingenii vir natura adeo agrestis ac ferus extitit, ut supra incredibiles domesticae vitae sordes succesores in arte posteris inviderit”. Quoted from Giovio / Maffei 1999, pp. 246-50. Cfr. Barocchi 1971-77, vol. 1, p. 12; B. Agosti 2008, pp. 60-66. (199) Giovio, Raphaelis Urbinatis vita; quoted from Giovio / Maffei 1999, p. 261. Cfr. Barocchi 1971-77, vol. 1, p. 13; B. Agosti 2008, pp. 68-74. (200) On Michelangelo’s teaching and servants Pietro Urbano, Bambach 2017, pp. 24, 10212, 130, 164-65; Antonio Mini, ibid., pp. 27, 130-35, 142-47, 161-68, 203, 258; and Urbino, ibid., pp. 151-52, 165, 203, 213-16, 230-31, 257. 70 CARMEN C. BAMBACH produced drawings as gifts, and taught disegno as part of their education, such as Andrea di Rinieri Quaratesi (1512-1585) and Tommaso de’ Cavalieri (ca. 1513/14-1587) (201). Gherardo di Domenico Perini (1503-1564), for whom Michelangelo produced drawings of “teste divine,” may have been another young aristocratic pupil (202). Several sheets contain Michelangelo’s autograph studies on one side of the paper, and crude pupil sketches on the other side (203). While there may have been truth in Paolo Giovio’s harsh judgment in the late 1520s that Leonardo left no disciples of importance for the history of art, we can see that the paintings and drawings by the first generation of Leonardeschi do not adequately serve as the full yardstick for measuring Leonardo’s pedagogic legacy. His ultimate gift to posterity as a teacher were his notes for the Libro di pittura, in which he articulated a theory of disegno and painting, with many accessible, practical principles for a beginner to learn these arts. In a sense, Leonardo “democratized” disegno. The dissemination of his theoretical ideas quickened with the production of manuscript copies of his notes on painting, and the printed editions in French and Italian of his intended treatise, issued almost contemporaneously with the respective titles of Traité de la peinture and Trattato della Pittura (Paris, 1651) (204). Thanks to these influential events, Leonardo can indeed be considered the intellectual architect of the ideas and practices which continue to shape art schools and academies around the world today. (201) Bambach 2017, pp. 135-47, on Andrea Quaratesi; ibid., pp. 146-265; Marongiu 2017, pp. 287-89, on Tommaso de’ Cavalieri. (202) Bambach 2017, pp. 135-42, on Gherardo Perini. (203) Bambach 2017, pp. 130-50. For example, see the verso of the so-called Zenobia (Uffizi 598 E); the verso of the Fall of Phaeton (Windsor, Royal Library RCIN 912766). See also the large sheets in Oxford, Ashmolean Museum of Art and Archaeology 1846.69; KP II 323; and in Frankfurt, Städel 392. They offer other types of examples, in which the pupils essentially copied sketches in chalk by Michelangelo and doodled side by side with his models; ibid., pp. 130-34, 300, nos. 109-112. (204) Of an immense bibliography on the subject, cfr. especially Steinitz 1958; Steinitz 1960; Steinitz 1962; Pedretti 1995, pp. 11-81; Sparti 2003; Barone 2013; Farago, Bell, and Vecce 2018, Barone 2018. LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 71 Bibliography (Selective) Acidini, Bellucci, and Frosinini 2014 = Acidini, Cristina, Roberto Bellucci, and Cecilia Frosinini. “New Hypotheses on the Madonna of the Yarnwinder Series / Nouvelles hypothèses concernent la série des Madone au Fuseau.” In Menu 2014, pp. 114-25. B. Agosti 2008 = Agosti, Barbara. Paolo Giovio: uno storico lombardo nella cultura artistica del Cinquecento. Florence, 2008. G. Agosti 1990 = Agosti, Giovanni. Bambaia e il classicismo lombardo. Turin, 1990. G. Agosti 2001 = Agosti, Giovanni. Disegni del Rinascimento in Valpadana. Exh. cat., Florence, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi. Florence, 2001. G. Agosti, Stoppa, and Tanzi 2012 = Agosti, Giovanni, Jacopo Stoppa, and Marco Tanzi. Bramantino a Milano. Exh. cat., Milan, Castello Sforzesco, 2012. Alberti / Sinisgalli 2006 = Sinisgalli, Rocco. Il nuovo “De pictura” di Leon Battista Alberti / The New “De pictura” of Leon Battista Alberti (Collana di Studi sul Rinascimento / Studies in Renaissance Art and Culture). Rome, 2006. Aristotle / Barnes 1995 = Barnes, Jonathan, ed. The Complete Work of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation. Princeton Bollinger Series LXXI.2, 2 vols. Princeton, 1995. Arrighi, Bellinazzi, and Villata 2005 = Arrighi, Vanna, Anna Bellinazzi, and Edoardo Villata. Leonardo da Vinci: la vera immagine: documenti e testimonianze sulla vita e sull’opera. Exh. cat., Archivio di Stato di Firenze. Florence and Milan, 2005. Bambach 1999a = Bambach, Carmen C. “The Purchases of Cartoon Paper for Leonardo’s Battle of Anghiari and Michelangelo’s Battle of Cascina.” In I Tatti Studies: Essays in the Renaissance [Villa I Tatti, The Harvard University Center for Italian Renaissance Studies, Florence] 8 (1999), pp. 105-33. Bambach 1999b = Bambach, Carmen C. Drawing and Painting in the Italian Renaissance Workshop: Theory and Practice, 1300-1600. Cambridge and New York, 1999. Bambach 2003 = Bambach, Carmen C., ed. Leonardo da Vinci, Master Draftsman. Exh. cat., New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2003. Bambach 2004 = Bambach, Carmen C. “Leonardo and Drapery Studies on ‘Tela Sottilissima di Lino.’” In Apollo 159, no. 503 (January 2004), pp. 44-55. Bambach 2010 = Bambach, Carmen C. “Leonardo’s Notes on Pastel Drawing.” In Faietti, Melli, and Nova 2010, pp. 177-204. Bambach 2011 = Bambach, Carmen C. “Review of Italian Drawings from Fra Angelico to Leonardo.” In The Burlington Magazine, vol. 153 (June 2011), pp. 417-19. Bambach 2012 = Bambach, Carmen C. “Seeking the Universal Painter” (Review of exhibition, Leonardo, Painter at the Court of Milan, National Gallery, London). In Apollo, 175, no. 595 (Feb. 2012), pp. 82-85. Bambach 2013 = Bambach, Carmen C. “Il Volume XXXIV di «Raccolta Vinciana»”. In Raccolta vinciana 35 (2013), pp. 253-78. 72 CARMEN C. BAMBACH Bambach 2014 = Bambach, Carmen C. “La ‘virtù’ dei disegni del giovane Michelangelo.” In Michelangelo 1564/2014, exh. cat., ed. Cristina Acidini. Rome, Musei Capitolini, 2014, pp. 52-65. Bambach 2015 = Bambach, Carmen C. “‘Porre le figure disgrossatamente’: gli schizzi di Leonardo e l’immaginazione creativa.” English language edition: “‘Porre le figure disgrossatamente’: the Sketches of Leonardo and the creative imagination.” In Marani and Fiorio 2015, pp. 50-61. Bambach 2016 = Bambach, Carmen C. “Leonardo, Michelangelo, and Notions of the Unfinished in Art.” In Unfinished: Thoughts Left Visible, exh. cat. ed. Kelly Baum, Andrea Bayer, Sheena Wagstaff. New York, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2016, pp. 30-41, 261-65, 296-97, 302, nos. 8-10. Bambach 2017 = Bambach, Carmen C. Michelangelo Divine Draftsman and Designer. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 2017. Bambach 2019a = Bambach, Carmen C. Leonardo da Vinci Rediscovered. 4 vols. 1: The Making of an Artist 1452-1500. 2: The Maturing of a Genius 14851506. 3: The Late Years 1506-1519. 4: Scholarly Apparatus to Volumes One, Two, and Three. New Haven and London, 2019. Bambach 2019b = Bambach, Carmen C. “Chapter 4: Leonardo’s Saint Anne Types and the Dating of the National Gallery Cartoon.” In Leonardo in Britain: Collections and Historical Reception, ed. Juliana Barone and Susanna AveryQuash. Florence, 2019, pp. 59-71. Barocchi 1971-77 = Barocchi, Paola. Scritti d’arte del Cinquecento. 3 vols. Milan and Naples, 1971-77. Barone 2013 = Barone, Juliana. Leonardo nella Francia del XVII secolo: eredità paradossali (Lettura vinciana, 52: Vinci, Biblioteca Leonardiana, 21 April 2012). Florence, 2013. Barone 2018 = Barone, Juliana. “Seventeenth-Century Transformations: Cassiano dal Pozzo’s Manuscript Copy of the Abridged Libro di Pittura.” In Farago, Bell, and Vecce 2018, vol. 1, pp. 263-99. Bora 1987a = Bora, Giulio. “I leonardeschi e il ruolo del disegno.” In Palazzo Reale 1987, pp. 11-19. Bora 1987b = Bora, Giulio. “Per un catalogo dei disegni dei leonardeschi lombardi: indicazioni e problemi di metodo.” In Raccolta vinciana, no. 22 (1987), pp. 139-82. Bora 1989 = Bora, Giulio. “Da Leonardo all’Accademia della Val di Bregno: Giovan Paolo [Gianpaolo] Lomazzo, Aurelio Luini e i disegni degli accademici.” Raccolta vinciana, no. 23 (1989), pp. 73-101. Bora 1991 = Bora, Giulio. “I disegni dei leonardeschi e il collezionismo milanese: consistenza, fortuna, dispersione.” In Fiorio and Marani 1991, pp. 206-17. Bora 1998a = Bora, Giulio. “Bernardino Luini.” In Legacy of Leonardo 1998, pp. 325-70. Bora 1998b = Bora, Giulio. “Giovanni Agostino da Lodi.” In Legacy of Leonardo 1998, pp. 251-74. Bora 1998c = Bora, Giulio. “The Leonardesque Circle and Drawing.” In Legacy of Leonardo 1998, pp. 92-120. LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 73 Bora 2003a = Bora, Giulio. “Girolamo Figino, ‘stimato valente pittore e accurato miniatore,’ e il dibattito a Milano sulle ‘regole dell’arte’ fra il sesto e il settimo decennio del Cinquecento.” In Raccolta vinciana, no. 30 (2003), pp. 268-325. Bora 2003b = Bora, Giulio. “Les leonardesques: Léonard de Vinci et les ‘leonardesques’ lombards: les difficultés d’une conquete du naturel.” In Viatte and Forcione 2003, pp. 310-34. Bora 2007 = Bora, Giulio. “Dalla regola alla natura: Leonardo e la costruzione del corpo.” In Marani and Fiorio 2007, pp. 29-39. Brescia and Tomìo 1999 = Brescia, Licia, and Luca Tomìo. “Tommaso di Giovanni Masini da Peretola detto Zoroastro: documenti, fonti, ipotesi per la biografia del priscus magus allievo di Leonardo da Vinci.” In Raccolta vinciana, no. 28 (1999), pp. 63-77. Brown 1990 = Brown, David Alan. Madonna Litta (Lettura vinciana, 29: Vinci, Biblioteca Leonardiana, 15 April 1989). Florence, 1990. Brown 1991 = Brown, David Alan. “The Master of the Madonna Litta.” In Fiorio and Marani 1991, pp. 25-34. Brown 1998a = Brown, David Alan. “Andrea Solario.” In Legacy of Leonardo 1998, pp. 231–50. Brown 1998b = Brown, David Alan. Leonardo da Vinci: Origins of a Genius. New Haven and London, 1998. Budd 2009 = Budd, Denise. «Leonardo da Vinci and workshop practice: the role of the dated notation.» In Aurora, The Journal of the History of Art, vol. 10 (annual 2009), pp. 13-39. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A218027917/ AONE?u=nysl_oweb&sid=googleScholar&xid=716df90f. Accessed 8 Dec. 2021. Butterfield et al. 2019 = Verrocchio: Sculptor and Painter of Renaissance Florence. Exh. cat., ed. Andrew Butterfield, with essays by John Delaney, Charles Dempsey, Gretchen Hirschauer, Alison Luchs, Lorenza Melli, Dylan Smith, and Elizabeth Walmsley. Washington, (DC), National Gallery of Art. Washington, Princeton, and Oxford, 2019. Caglioti and De Marchi 2019 = Caglioti, Francesco and Andrea De Marchi, eds. Verrocchio Il Maestro di Leonardo. Exh. cat., Florence, Palazzo Strozzi and Museo Nazionale del Bargello, 2019. Calvi 1925 / 1982 = Calvi, Gerolamo. I manoscritti di Leonardo da Vinci dal punto di vista cronologico, storico e biografico First ed. 1925; revised ed., with an introductory essay by Augusto Marinoni. Busto Arsizio, 1982. Cennini 1995 = Cennini, Cennino d’Andrea. Il Libro dell’arte, ed. Licisco Magagnato and Franco Brunello. Vicenza, 1982. Second revised ed. Vicenza, 1995. Chapman and Faietti 2010 = Chapman, Hugo, and Marzia Faietti, eds. Fra Angelico to Leonardo: Italian Renaissance Drawings. Exh. cat., London, British Museum, 2010. Cordellier 1994 = Cordellier, Dominique. “Les dessins de Fernando Yáñez de la Almedina.” In Hommage à Michel Laclotte: Etudes sur la peinture du MoyenAge et de la Renaissance. Milan, 1994, pp. 415-29. D’Adda 1876 = D’Adda, Girolamo. “Art et industrie au XVIe siècle: le tombeau de Gaston de Foix.” In Gazette des beaux-arts, ser. 2, 18, no. 14 (1876), pp. 442-50. 74 CARMEN C. BAMBACH Delieuvin and Frank 2019 = Delieuvin, Vincent and Louis Frank. Léonard de Vinci. Exh. cat., Paris, Musée du Louvre, 2019. Dwyer Modestini 2014 = Dwyer Modestini, Diane. “The Salvator Mundi by Leonardo da Vinci Rediscovered: History, Technique and Condition / Le Salvator Mundi peint par Léonard de Vinci redecouvert. Histoire, technique et etat.” In Menu 2014, pp. 139-52. Elen 1995 = Elen, Albert J. Italian Late Medieval and Renaissance Drawing Books from Giovannino de’ Grassi to Palma Giovane: A Codicological Approach. Leiden, 1995. Faietti, Melli, and Nova 2010 = Faietti, Marzia, Lorenza Melli, and Alessandro Nova, eds. Le tecniche del disegno rinascimentale: dai materiali allo stile: Atti del convegno internazionale, Firenze, 22-23 settembre 2008. Special number, Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorisches Institutes in Florenz, 52, nos. 2/3 (2010). Farago, Bell, and Vecce 2018 = Farago, Claire, Carlo Vecce, and Janice Bell. The Fabrication of Leonardo da Vinci’s “Trattato della pittura”: With a scholarly edition of the “Editio Princeps” (1651) and an annotated English translation. 2 vols. Leiden and Boston, 2018. Filarete 1972 = Filarete, [Antonio Averlino]. Antonio Averlino detto Il Filarete: Trattato di architettura, ed. Anna Maria Finoli and Liliana Grassi. 2 vols. Milan, 1972. Fiorio 1998a = Fiorio, Maria Teresa. “The Many Faces of Leonardismo.” In Legacy of Leonardo 1998, pp. 38-63. Fiorio 1998b = Fiorio, Maria Teresa. “Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio.” In Legacy of Leonardo 1998, pp. 131-62. Fiorio 1998c = Fiorio, Maria Teresa. “Francesco Napoletano (and the Pseudo Francesco Napoletano).” In Legacy of Leonardo 1998, pp. 199-210. Fiorio 1998d = Fiorio, Maria Teresa. “Bernardino de’ Conti.” In Legacy of Leonardo 1998, pp. 211-30. Fiorio 1998e = Fiorio, Maria Teresa. “Cesare Magni.” In Legacy of Leonardo 1998, pp. 385-96. Fiorio 2000 = Fiorio, Maria Teresa. Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio: un pittore milanese nel lume di Leonardo. Milan and Rome, 2000. Fiorio 2005 = Fiorio, Maria Teresa. Il Castello Sforzesco di Milano. Milan, 2005. Frangi 1991 = Frangi, Francesco. “Qualche considerazione su un leonardesco eccentrico: Francesco Napoletano.” In Fiorio and Marani 1991, pp. 71-86. Frey 1909 = Frey, Carl. “Studien zu Michelangiolo Buonarroti and zur Kunst seiner Zeit.” In Jahrbuch der Koniglich Preussischen Kunstsammlungen Berlin 30 (1909), pp. 103-80. Frey and Frey 1923-30 / 1982 = Frey, Carl and Herman-Walther Frey. Der Literarische Nachlass Giorgio Vasaris. Herausgegeben und Mitkritischem Apparate Versehen …, 2 vols. Munich, 1923-30. Reprinted Hildesheim and New York, 1982. Frey 1940 / 1982 = Frey, Herman-Walther. Der literarische Nachlass Giorgio Vasaris: Dritter Band: Neue Briefe von Giorgio Vasari. Munich, 1940. Reprinted Hildesheim and New York, 1982. Galluzzi 2006 = Galluzzi, Paolo, ed. La mente di Leonardo: nel laboratorio del genio universale. Exh. cat., Florence, Galleria degli Uffizi. Florence and Milan, 2006. LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 75 Giovio / Maffei 1999 = Giovio, Paolo. Scritti sulle arti: lessico ed ecfrasi (Strumenti e testi, 5). Ed. Sonia Maffei. Pisa, 1999. Gombrich 1966 / 2000 = Gombrich, E[rnst]. H. Gombrich on the Renaissance, 4 vols., London, 2000, vol. 1 (reprint of Norm and Form [1966], “Leonardo’s Method for Working Out Compositions”), pp. 58-63. Hope 2012 = Hope, Charles. “The Wrong Leonardo?” [Review of the exhibition Syson with Keith 2011]. New York Review of Books, 9 February 2012. Ibáñez Martínez 1999 = Ibáñez Martínez, Pedro Miguel. Fernando Yáñez de Almedina (La incognita Yáñez; Ediciones de la Universidad de Castilla-la Mancha). Cuenca, 1999. Janson 1961 = Janson, H. W. “‘The Image Made by Chance’ in Renaissance Thought.” In De Artibus Opuscula XL: Essays in Honor of Erwin Panofsky, New York, 1961, pp. 254-66. Kanter 2018 = Kanter, Laurence B. Leonardo: Discoveries from Verrocchio’s Studio: Early Paintings and New Attributions. Exh. cat., New Haven, Yale University Art Gallery. New Haven and London, 2018. Kemp 1992 = Kemp, Martin, ed. Leonardo da Vinci: The Mystery of the “Madonna of the Yarnwinder.” Exh. cat., Edinburgh, National Gallery of Scotland, 1992. Kemp 2003 = Kemp, Martin. “Drawing the Boundaries.” In Bambach 2003, pp. 141-54. Legacy of Leonardo 1998 = Bora, Giulio; Maria Teresa Fiorio; Pietro C. Marani; with contributions by David Alan Brown and Marco Carminati. The Legacy of Leonardo: Painters in Lombardy, 1490–1530. Trans. Ivor Neil Coward. Milan, 1998 [Italian ed. I leonardeschi: l’eredità di Leonardo in Lombardia [1998]. Lomazzo 1973-75 = Lomazzo, Giovanni Paolo [Gian Paolo; Gianpaolo]. Scritti sulle arti, ed. Roberto Paolo Ciardi. 2 vols. Florence, 1973-75. Vol. 1: Libro dei Sogni (MS, ca. 1565-70); Idea del tempio della pittura (Milan, 1590). Vol. 2: Trattato dell’arte della pittura, scoltura et archittetura (Milan, 1584). Marani 1987 = Marani, Pietro C. Leonardo e i leonardeschi a Brera. Florence, 1987. Marani 1998a = Marani, Pietro C. “The Question of Leonardo’s Bottega: Practices and the Transmission of Leonardo’s Ideas on Art and Painting.” In Legacy of Leonardo 1998, pp. 8-37. Marani 1998b = Marani, Pietro C. “Master of the Pala Sforzesca.” In Legacy of Leonardo 1998, pp. 179-98. Marani 1998c = Marani, Pietro C. “Giovan Pietro Rizzoli, called Giampietrino.” In Legacy of Leonardo 1998, pp. 275-300. Marani 1998d = Marani, Pietro C. “Francesco Melzi.” In Legacy of Leonardo 1998, pp. 371-84. Marani 2000a = Marani, Pietro C. Leonardo da Vinci: The Complete Paintings. With an Appendix of documents Transcribed by Edoardo Villata. New York, 2000. French and Italian eds. Léonard de Vinci: une carrière de peintre, Paris, 1999; Leonardo: una carriera di pittore, Milan, 1999. Citations here are to the English edition. Marani 2000b = Marani, Pietro C. “I leonardeschi in Lombardia nei primi tre decenni del Cinquecento.” In II Cinquecento lombardo: da Leonardo a Caravaggio. Exh. cat., Milan, Palazzo Reale, pp. 495-509. 76 CARMEN C. BAMBACH Marani 2001a = Marani, Pietro C, ed. Il genio e le passioni: Leonardo e il Cenacolo: precedenti, innovazioni, riflessi di un capolavoro. Exh. cat., Milan, Palazzo Reale. Milan and Florence, 2001. Marani 2001b = Marani, Pietro C. “I disegni di Leonardo.” In Marani 2001a, pp. 102-53. Marani 2003a = Marani, Pietro C. “Leonardo’s Drawings in Milan and their Influence on the Graphic Work of Milanese Artists.” In Bambach 2003, pp. 155-90. Marani 2003b = Marani, Pietro C. La Vergine delle Rocce della National Gallery di Londra: maestro e bottega di fronte al modello: “Se tu, pittore, te ingegnerai di piacer alli primi pittori, tu farai bene la tua pittura … “ (Lettura vinciana, 42: Vinci, Biblioteca Leonardiana, 13 April 2002). Florence, 2003. Marani 2008 = Marani, Pietro C. I disegni di Leonardo da Vinci e della sua cerchia nelle collezioni pubbliche in Francia. Florence, 2008. Marani and Fiorio 2015 = Marani, Pietro C., and Maria Teresa Fiorio, eds. Leonardo da Vinci: 1452–1519. Il disegno del mondo. Exh. cat., Milan, Palazzo Reale. Milan, 2015. [English ed., Leonardo da Vinci: 1452–1519. The Design of the World] Citations here are to the Italian edition. Marinoni 2000 = Marinoni, Augusto. Leonardo da Vinci: Il Codice Atlantico della Biblioteca Ambrosiana di Milano. 3 vols. Florence, 2000. Marongiu 2017 = Marongiu, Marcella. “Tommaso de’ Cavalieri.” In Bambach 2017, pp. 287-89. Menu 2014 = Menu, Michel, ed. Leonardo da Vinci’s Technical Practice: Paintings, Drawings and Influence / La Pratique technique de Léonard de Vinci: Peintures, dessins et influence. Paris, 2014. Moro 1998 = Moro, Franco. “Francesco Napoletano ossia il Maestro della ‘Pala Sforzesca.’” In “Tutte le opere non son per istancarmi”: Raccolta di scritti per i settant’anni di Carlo Pedretti, ed. Fabio Frosini. Rome, 1998, pp. 279-98. Natali 1998 = Natali, Antonio, ed. Lo sguardo degli angeli: Verrocchio, Leonardo e il ‘Battesimo di Cristo.’ Cinisello Balsamo (Milan), 1998. Natali 1999 = Natali, Antonio. “Lo sguardo degli angeli: tragitto indiziario per il Battesimo di Cristo di Verrocchio e Leonardo.” In Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz 42, nos. 2–3 ([1998] 1999), pp. 252-73. Palazzo Reale 1987 = Bora, Giulio, Luisa Cogliati Arano, Maria Teresa Fiorio, and Pietro C. Marani. Disegni e dipinti leonardeschi dalle collezioni milanesi. Exh. cat., Milan, Palazzo Reale, 1987. Pedretti 1964 = Pedretti, Carlo. Leonardo da Vinci on Painting: A Lost Book (Libro A), Reassembled from the Codex Vaticanus Urbinas 1270 and from the Codex Leicester. Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1964. Pedretti 1995 = Pedretti, Carlo. “Introduzione.” In Vecce 1995, pp. 11-81. Pedretti 2004 = Pedretti, Carlo. Le macchie di Leonardo: “perché dale cose confuse l’ingegno si desta a nove invenzioni” (Lettura vinciana, 44, Vinci, Biblioteca Leonardiana, 17 April 2004), Florence, 2004. Poldi 2019-20 = Poldi, Gianluca. “Le tecniche del disegno tra Leonardo e leonardeschi. Un approccio scientifico. Appendice 1. Le metodologie diagnostiche impiegate per lo studio dei disegni.” In Spadaccinini 2019-20, pp. 93-129. LEONARDO AND HIS CIRCLE: DISEGNO AND THE EDUCATION OF PAINTERS 77 Richter 1883 / 1970 = Richter, Jean Paul. The Literary Works of Leonardo da Vinci Compiled and Edited from the Original Manuscripts. First ed., London, 1883. Second ed., Oxford, 1939. Third ed., London, 1970. 2 vols. Rinaldi 2013 = Rinaldi, Furio. “I disegni di Giampietrino: note di tecnica e funzione.” In Raccolta vinciana, no. 13 (2013), pp. 203-32. Sacchi 2017 = Sacchi, Rossana. “Per la biografia (e la geografia) di Francesco Melzi”. In ACME – Annali della Facoltà di Studi Umanistici dell’Università degli Studi di Milano 70, no. 2 (2017), pp. 145-61. Shell 1993 = Shell, Janice. “The Scuola di San Luca, or Universitas Pictorum, in Renaissance Milan.” In Arte Lombarda, nuova serie, no. 104 (1993), pp. 78-99. Shell 1995 = Shell, Janice. Pittori in bottega: Milano nel Rinascimento. Turin, 1995. Shell 1998a = Shell, Janice. “Leonardo and the Lombard Traditionalists.” In Legacy of Leonardo 1998, pp. 64-91. Shell 1998b = Shell, Janice. “Ambrogio de Predis.” In Legacy of Leonardo 1998, pp. 123-30. Shell 1998c = Shell, Janice. “Marco d’Oggiono.” In Legacy of Leonardo 1998, pp. 163-78. Shell 1998d = Shell, Janice. “Gian Giacomo Caprotti, detto Salai.” In Legacy of Leonardo 1998, pp. 397-406. Shell and Sironi 1989 = Shell, Janice, and Grazioso Sironi. “Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio and Marco d’Oggiono: The Berlin Resurrection of Christ with Saints Leonardo and Lucy.” In Raccolta vinciana, no. 23 (1989), pp. 119-54. Snow-Smith 1982 = Snow-Smith, Joanne. The Salvator Mundi of Leonardo da Vinci. Seattle (WA), 1982. Spadaccinini 2019-20 = Spadaccini, Benedetta. Leonardo da Vinci e il suo lascito: gli artisti e le tecniche. Exh. cat., Milan, Pinacoteca Ambrosiana, 2019-20. Sparti 2003 = Sparti, Donatella Livia. “Cassiano dal Pozzo, Poussin and the Making and Publication of Leonardo’s Trattato”. In Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, vol. 66 (2003), pp. 143-88. Steinitz 1958 = Steinitz, Kate. Leonardo da Vinci’s ‘Trattato della pittura’ (Treatise on Painting): A Bibliography of the Printed Editions, 1651–1956. Copenhagen, 1958. Steinitz 1960 = Steinitz, Kate. “Bibliography Never Ends”. In Raccolta vinciana, no. 18 (1960), pp. 97-111. Steinitz 1962 = Steinitz, Kate. “Trattato Studies, II: Second Supplement to ‘Leonardo da Vinci’s Trattato della Pittura …”. In Raccolta vinciana, no. 19 (1962), pp. 223-54. Summers 1981 = Summers, David. Michelangelo and the Language of Art, Princeton, 1981. Tomìo 2001 = Tomìo, Luca. “Leonardo, Zoroastro, Bramantino e le concezioni astrologiche, magiche e alchemiche del Rinascimento.” In Raccolta vinciana, no. 24 (2001), pp. 235-83. Vasari 1966-87 = Vasari, Giorgio. Le vite de’ più eccellenti pittori, scultori e architettori nelle redazioni del 1550 e 1568. Ed. Rosanna Bettarini and Paola Barocchi. 6 vols. Florence, 1966-87. 78 CARMEN C. BAMBACH Vecce 1995 = Vecce, Carlo, ed. Libro di pittura (Codice Urbinate lat. 1270 nella Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana; edizione in facsimile del Codice Urbinate lat. 1270 nella Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana) (Commissione Nazionale Vinciana). 2 vols. Florence, 1995. Vecce 1998 = Vecce, Carlo. Leonardo. Rome (first ed.), 1998. Venerella 1999-2007 = Venerella, John, trans. and ed. The Manuscripts of Leonardo da Vinci in the Institut de France (Ente Raccolta Vinciana). Milan, 19992007 [See in the alphabetical order of the manuscripts: Paris MS A (1999), Paris MS B (2003), Paris MS C (2001), Paris MS D (2007), Paris MS E (2002), Paris MS F (2002), Paris MS G (2002), Paris MS H (2003), Paris MS I (2000), Paris MS K (2004), Paris MS L (2001), and Paris MS M (2001). Viatte and Forcione 2003 = Viatte, Françoise, and Varena Forcione, eds. Léonard de Vinci: dessins et manuscrits. Exh. cat., Paris, Musée du Louvre, 2003. Villata 1999b = Villata, Edoardo, ed. Leonardo da Vinci: i documenti e le testimonianze contemporanee (Ente Raccolta Vinciana). Milan, 1999. Wright 2005 = Wright, Alison. The Pollaiuolo Brothers: The Arts of Florence and Rome. New Haven and London, 2005. Zimmermann 1995 = Zimmermann, T. C. Price. Paolo Giovio: The Historian and the Crisis of Sixteenth-Century Italy. Princeton, 1995. Zimmermann 2001 = Zimmermann, T. C. Price. “Giovio, Paolo.” In Dizionario biografico degli Italiani. vol. 56. Rome, 2001, pp. 430-40. Zöllner 2011 = Zöllner, Frank. Leonardo da Vinci, 1452-1519. 2 vols. 1: The Complete Paintings. 2: The Graphic Work. Cologne, 2011. Zöllner and Nathan 2003 = Zöllner, Frank and Johannes Nathan. “The Graphic Work.” In Zöllner 2003, pp. 252-679. Zwijnenberg 1999 = Zwijnenberg, Robert. The Writings and Drawings of Leonardo da Vinci: Order and Chaos in Early Modern Thought. English trans. Caroline A. van Eck, Cambridge, 1999.