146

FrontCover and Figure 1. Studies for the

Sistine Chapel Ceiling: TheNude Figure
next to the ProphetDaniel. Black and red
chalk, 34.3 x 24.3 cm.Michelangelo
Buonarroti,Caprese (Casentino) 1475
Rome 1564. Gift inmemory of Henry G.
Dalton by his nephews George S.
Kendrick and Harry D. Kendrick. CMA
40.465. Corpus 147 recto.

*;n :
;?????
?:(?
*, ?
?
7e;?
?/
-:R
i;:
4-?!
?T?
?:
*
Ep,, ??
i
;

?:

*-

?c
.;:
?::
?':
?

"

-ii

g :???

?'.?
r

rr;

'Y*?y
?;:?r.??*r?c'
?1??'?

i C' ?i?j?F?i"
?i.??
I?

?*
??
??
"Ij?
IPE?Z8%bB1E?;?IB??a;'
?.?E???,i?i?j?ast?li?i?:i?e?f?k?:'?
.
i?
:

:I:

:.??..

?6??

.?? L? *??

USPS075-960),

Cleveland

Museum

??:::
'Lr?s
?n?7 ??::
' -??
,
?-?
j:,?:?

?i:

jf I

_:i

?:

s????.?? I:
c

?????
????'?._
I

--r?---sl?:?z?i?;'?hYJ?uulRsqrrr?L:,??ln?
-r?
-???'?
''

:: ???,

*'?i.
(ISSN0009-8841,

-6'1"?
.r ?:r-::

:i i :L:I;;r

;%?

of Art

.r

?.?

..

*
t

.:. .
tC
'*i

Volume 77, Number 5, May, 1990.

Publishedmonthly, except Juneand
August, by The Cleveland Museum of Art.
Subscriptions: $25.00 per year. Single
copies: $2.50. Copyright 1990 by The

'*i

bI'

i,

The Bulletin of The Cleveland Museum

1?:

d '?:'*"?t??i

?:

.I?il'?

Back cover: Verso of Figure 1, see

Figure 3.

:r&'F??

?w??\

:?
;?

. .rli

?5::?
..
1?
:?'.rt..v

:-?-?i.l1.

?; ??i

i??

??:v?
;-?P

.,.?..?c??:

''

r?

?;?ae?
:?6?*
.?.*r ??r?-?j?? ?e

?F?a? Y?

.? - ?5?1"?
??

of Art. Postmaster

send address changes to CMA

Bulletin,
11150 EastBoulevard, Cleveland, Ohio
44106-1797. Second-class postage paid
at Cleveland, Ohio. Editor, JoZuppan.
ProductionManager, Emily S. Rosen.
Photographer,Howard T. Agriesti.
Designer, Thomas Barnard.

??

.,;?

?? .:,r:

?,.

)?'

??
I

.f.??
??:'''.c?;

i -,
..r

??-- ir
??"

;?'
??

j;rit??? ..
..?:s.?,??.?:i??:::-?
?.??.?

??:

Yi??C?.
I?,,-?.-

:L1

?:'3??
-1

* ?:??:;i

"

.1 ??C,
i- ?c

P .,*

1?

I .?

?:
:? i

'i ?;
?c?.?'??''c
''
e(:?
(?-;?I??.'?
...
??i?a
f'*;i?!?8?
?i
"':i.

.. r??
?'? rr
,1??:??

??.;?-r

??

.I
r

A Michelangelo Drawing

Volume 77, Number 5

WWI4

Figure 2. The Sistine Chapel Ceiling: The

Nude

Figure

next

to the Prophet

Daniel.

Fresco.Michelangelo Buonarroti.The
Vatican

Palace.

In1987 a group of drawings in theMuseum collection was exam

inedwith infraredreflectography on an experimental basis. Little
used on drawings, this technique iscommonly employed in examin
ing paintings to study the lower layersof paint and to discover any
underdrawing. An object, whether painting or drawing, is illumi
nated by a light source rich in infrared rays (forexample, the sun or
incandescent light)and viewed with a device that filtersout all
frequencies of lightbelow the infrared-in this case, a specially
equipped video camera and monitor. The drawings were chosen on
the probability of their having concealed underdrawing or subse
quent reworking. Ironically, although some of themost obvious
examples yielded no new information,other less likely candidates
provided surprising results.Michelangelo's study for the ceiling
fresco in the Sistine Chapel, chosen because one scholar thought that
ithad been reworked by a restorer,proved to be one of themost
interestingcases, especially for the light it throws on the artist's use
of various media.
The recto of this double-sided drawing (Figure 1)1depicts the torso
of the nude youth to the rightof the prophet Daniel on the Sistine
ceiling (Figure2) as well as a loose sketch of a turbaned head. The
verso (Figure3) bears various studies of figures including the foot of
the figure on the recto.2The torso on the rectowas executed in red
chalk over a black chalk underdrawing,while the other studies are
in red chalk with, on the verso, white heightening, which is today
virtually invisible.Although itspresence has been noted before, the
black chalk is neithermentioned by Charles De Tolnay in his Corpus
ofMichelangelo's drawings, nor is itvisible in his "facsimile"
reproduction.3Using infraredreflectography, however, ithas been
possible to obtain a clear view of the entire underdrawing (see
Figures 5, 6). The white heightening of the verso has not previously
been noted. Furthermore, analysis with energy dispersive x-ray
flourescence has shown thatwhite leadwas applied generally to the
surface of both recto and verso.4 These observations are more fully
described and interpretedbelow, in the context ofMichelangelo's
working method (see also BruceMiller's following Technical Note).
Understanding the function of thematerials in relation to the artist's
goals sheds lighton the authenticity of the Cleveland drawing as
well as on itsplace within Buonarroti's planning and execution of
the vast ceiling.

147

??

148

.*-*:

"

r:
.?;
5:d

si

; ;?Ti'lI

?.?-?
r; "?.: 1
:
I;".?i.-$'.:
:
???
.?-

'??;

??:

.?
t.,..

''
.'?L-?

i:

i:??

`"

-,I
?:i.?:
I??:
??r

.;:ff:'?iFg?g?-,?:
,i ?. :IF??tIIE?t???
-.'.?.??:?:???:?-?~?j?'?i;?

; j?.?'I??F?s?P???.,??
???CIAlg?a?ri'
I ? '?L?I???.PW;??IL?;";"?ili
I.it'
.:;.i
??z :?
-"?:,:??:?.:r??I;;i
:???'if'???.?;'.:5?,
ii?.
1..:
. "
iI?-"'
:?i,*?r: a?
:f."
''2.
,?'*
'
" ?d?ril;lT
.?*.?.
".
;? .
?
.'...:r
?iY,??:
?':?
X*i'?:
?.:?
-1?? : .?:?
? ':g.?
.:..*
:r:I
-?.:;f?
":
tP??i
"'..'.?.
??
!?.??,,?,
??,;:. *i::r:?
;i?C:?l
?r'???i?'l
.?:
t'?'?
""?r.;'?:
??.?ua?i.?
;il??
??:?

--I-?

.*i .i:w
.i ?
'',:?li?...
..?;.
:???
.?
;;!;?''-?
?I1;...
fe I??
.?'?''

-?
;:??,?
t
.??:?1
??

p?
?,I

1??

..

i(:.i-?

- -n
;.- i ;;
I.

.?n??
s? ,'?''i "

?::r;
"???
? ?::???
-?
:':??
;?--r
:CC:I?I?''. ?,?i-?.I?.:
'?'?;:?I
?'?
: ??1?
.?,v?;.???
.-? .-*?:*
;
r

?:.?
?-E
;-??.I
.e
..?.'

??Sif;
??
:'I
.ii.,

I
r
:c?.

?:?::

1.

;; '" ''l.t:i?

????:?
?::
r?''*-?;?II j- L

2:?itl '?:Cf ;:II

-i
- ???1.??

?3:*:?-:?

.l.z

.r

::
c?

??

:r:r:

1'?i..

??;:.
?..

.????

'?
r?

;:I; ?; ?

?I?

:1?

r??

Ei??

I ;
Ic?.1?
.?;.. r.;.1??;*.
'* .1.??.'*
??a?;-??;'?:
?.?-?;
r; ?i?i?:?;???b;Eut?41r?'Si?P
eCYL?YL".??WBlg?APlksa*%r?i3ilE??tij?:,:
-??'?T
*r?
.,;yP??
?? 1.?.??.':**E?,?EIY"Y?ICg?E?Al?pF?II
-?r
?er,:ik??tssrra?itarorcr?IRas;ka*r?:l?f?r??r- ?. -?
?:?

'??i?????
1?,,
*L
:.')?'??.??!

:
??
;; ? ??: '?r
i

i.

ri'

?i
?,?
??t? ..;?..
'n'

:;??
?,

????

L.'*.

?i?lllt?HRY???*i?lC?slP??CL~?c'?47?J?;??
:??'kl-''
-?
r:?::
?.r :
1
:r~*?i;r
?r
ii!? 1 ..Ti?3
'C'?'?
:' 3?
:.?;?'?',"YCYIYI?Gb?u?lllll?
?P
1?-?4?---9--?LI?j?
srU93qll?s??P?n?j?F7C171J:
I?.??CII
L:
?..
*??.
.1 ;'-3? ,: ?.??;'''

Figure 3. Figure Studies. Red chalk with

40.465.
tracesof white heightening. CMA
Corpus 147 verso. See Figure 1.

The recently published findings acquired during the cleaning of

the Sistine vault offer a radically clearer understanding ofMich
elangelo's methods over the course of the four-year project.5 his
diverse solutions to the complex problems posed by the task attest to
his resourcefulness in carrying out his preparatory studies.While the
technical data obtained during the restorationof the Sistine ceiling
illuminate the attribution and the function of the Cleveland drawing,
the astonishing visual resultsof the cleaning further stimulate us to
seeing the sheet-one ofMichelangelo's most impressive-afresh.

The attribution of theCleveland drawing has been rather less

controversial than thatof many other drawings given toMich
elangelo. Although it isgenerally accepted today, ithas occasionally
been questioned, so it is perhaps prudent to rehearse the attribution
of the sheet.6
After

the Mariette

sales

in 1775 and

1776,

the Cleveland

drawing

passed intoobscurity. Itreappeared in the collection of Dr. Alexan

der von

Frey of Timisoara

when

sold at auction

in Paris

in 1933.7

This gave the drawing the controversial aura of a rediscovery.

Bernard Berenson, in the second edition of his Drawings of the
Florentine Painters (1938), readily accepted iton the basis of its
stylistic similarity to the study for the LibyanSibyl in theMetropoli
tanMuseum (see Figure 11).8The first to doubt theCleveland
drawing

in print was De Tolnay

in his 1945

volume

on the Sistine

ceiling.9 He considered it to be a copy after the nude on the ceiling

by the same hand as a group of drawings

in the Teylers Museum

in

Haarlem. The rejection of these drawings as being byMichelangelo

goes back toAlbert ErichBrinckmann,' who based his opinion not
only on their style but also on his suspicions about the collection of
Queen Christina of Sweden, which formed the core of the Teyler
holdings. De Tolnay laterchanged his mind and included all the
doubted drawings in the firstvolume of his 1975 Corpus as auto
graphworks."
FrederickHartt also questioned the drawing but latermodified his
opinion.12 From the evidence of a photograph he had concluded that
parts of the torso on the recto had been worked

over by a restorer.

He especially noted "meticulous, engraver-like crosshatching,

particularly in the torso and the left leg." In the recent technical
examination, however, observation with a microscope showed the
red chalk in these areas to be consistent in the color, size, and
textureof the particles. No evidence of retouching by a second hand
was found.
Edmund Pillsbury in 1971 took his point of departure fromDe
Tolnay's early doubts. Since the drawing shows no significant
differences from the fresco and even reproduces the exact fall of the
lighton the figure, he believed itwas likely to be a copy after the
fresco. Furthermore he put a name to the copyist who executed the
Cleveland and the Teyler ignudi, that of Alessandro Allori (Florence
1535-Florence 1607), on the basis of their similarity to two black
chalk male

nudes

in the Uffizi

(Figure 4).13

149

150

Figure

4. Nude

Male

Figure,

Turned

to the

Right. Black chalk, with tracesof white

heightening on colored paper, 41.4 x 31.9
cm. Alessandro Allori, Florence 1535
Florence 1607. Florence, Uffizi, no.
10297 F.

Although Allori has captured the spirit and themanner of Mich

elangelo quite successfully in these drawings, themode of observing
and constructing the figure is fundamentally different from the
Cleveland sheet.Michelangelo observed each contour and each
limb as a separate entity and connected them (orconstructed them)
into a unified whole. This is characteristic of the classical style as it
had developed in the firstdecade of the sixteenth century.14Allori's
contours flow into each other with an ornamental rhythm,cadenced
by occasional exaggerations of anatomical detail. Although his
observation of the figure is almost clinically precise, his linearism
shows themaniera of the latterpart of the sixteenth century. The
modeling in the Cleveland drawing is achieved primarilywith the
disciplined parallel and crossed hatching thatMichelangelo learned
in theworkshop of Domenico Ghirlandaio. Allori employs a less
assertive, more supple modeling with splayed strokes that follow the
contour of the form, as if theywere providing the accompaniment
for the rhythmic contour line.Michelangelo's interplayand occa
sional conflict of line and surface are absent inAllori's drawings,
which ultimately lack the tension and spiritual energy that give
Michelangelo's work itsunique power.
Allori's drawings also differ fromBuonarroti's inmethod and
purpose. Allori, in the spiritof his generation, which came to
maturity in the 1560s, was an assiduous copyist and imitatorof
Michelangelo, but carried out his emulations as exercises aimed at a
self-conscious perfection of his personal maniera. Whether he
copied a work ofMichelangelo or drew from life in imitationof him
the intentionwas clearly different from that of his model: while in
these studies for the Sistine Chapel Michelangelo was working out a
concept thatwas to be directly applied in the finishedwork, the
Allori nudes are removed from such a use. He was concerned rather
with accurate observation of human form, the study of anatomy, and
the assimilation ofMichelangelo's style. Ifone compares Allori's
figure studies with his compositional studies,'5 or his studies from life
executed for a painting,16 the difference of purpose and method
becomes obvious. The academic methods of Allori and his contem
porarieswere in fact founded on Buonarroti's, but they had been
systematized through the process of deliberate imitation.
The issues of style, quality, and function all support the general
opinion that theCleveland drawing and those inHaarlem and New
York are autograph preparatory studies for the Sistine ceiling and not
copies after the frescoes or of lost drawings byMichelangelo.

Figure 5 Infraredreflectogrammontage:
Studies for the Sistine Chapel Ceiling: The
" X X-'Daniel.
Nude Figure next to the Prophet
|X |
_

.._

?.
*

?-

151

:. .. .......

1.?.
. .,.,.
.......=.

...~.

. ,, . . ,. .. ~..
.. ~

,,,.,....,

:?::?'~?.:i'_,

...-.

m_

..

..

? ..

Themost important
resultof the technicalexaminationis theclear
imageobtainedby infrared
reflectography
ofMichelangelo'sblack
chalkunderdrawing
(Figure
5),which isvisibleto thenakedeye
onlyas a slighttracehereand there,mostlyhiddenby the red-chalk
outlines.This redchalkbecomesalmostentirelyinvisibleinthe
and theunderdrawing
isexposedforstudyvirtuallyas
reflectograms,
if itwere an independent
drawing(Figure
5).

152

of details
Figure 6. Infrared reflectograms
of Figure 1 showing
how each significant
contour
is drawn with a continuous
line
that begins and ends at the structurally
correct point of the anatomy
(CMA40.465).

!'

''
*~ ~~~~~~~'J
~

,. .??.-i
tI'- A.

'???.: :

.;'i.:.i~r
.i-.,,
,,~

.;? ~

.13:

...
F.w;~.^...;)~.'.
,.~:

.'..,

..*?
'.~.

, l,

?..,..,.:~..;_

.
. . ' ~,

..i
~!:;~'~":~

~tje_

CM

1 12

i i i i I i
-*"'?
'
"

i i
~

i . i , i I , i i i i
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

f~~

,
.~::'

..-

,...

''.''.
;.r..r
~?..?rri?~~
~
~
~
?~' .....

,,~:'~.~-~.

J;4

.i

.....
~~~~~
!.,~

....
f--~,~

Ii

"'

..

' '~',
'

_~

.f*

- . .~,|~~~~~~~~~~~~
. )~?:" ,a
~~~~~
.'iew
...sr.;'.x*
~
'~,-

>

f lIlf.1
CM
_

e4

.,

St;

5,t'
t~~~~

*s+4
r

.
?i'
"':.'..:;'

{;X

~.

...,..

~,,s

',.;.
>i . '. -. .i
~ ::
~~~~~

:;

;i,

~,e

Jr

.
;~:..
*S": :
-..

'

Cbe:..
..
*

. ?:

@;Nete~

wl*;t~.

....

The underdrawing encloses the entire figure, an indication that the

imagewas put on the paper as a complete entity. The continuity of
the individual strokes indicates that the underdrawingwas com
pleted in a single, probably brief, session. Itdid not "grow on the
page" with many additions and alterations in themanner of prelimi
nary sketches, which are intended to record inventions from the
artist's imagination or of immediate studies from life.The line is
assured and shows no trace of pentimenti. Each significant contour is
drawn with a continuous line that begins and ends at the structurally
correct point of the anatomy (Figure6). This reflects an analytical
method of rendering the figure, based on a scientific study of anat
omy.17The construction of the figure on the sheet is additive,
produced through the aggregation of the individual lines, but the
resulting image is a unified concept of the form.
The clarity and decisiveness of the underdrawing show that it is
based on a preliminary study, a sketch probably like the two sheets
in theCasa Buonarroti containing studies for ignudi (Figures7, 8).
Because the black chalk line isquite consistent in texture and in
thickness (1mm) and because of the lack of pentimenti, it is there

..
..*'>
en.

Flrece Cas Buoarot 75 Fandec for

Figure 7. Studies for a Cornice
Chapel
Black chalk (except for figure left
Ceiling.
is in "carboncino
of center which
nero")

Corpus
on the Sistine
Nude 145
~
Figure recto.

ia

and pen and ink (some passages),

41.4 x 27.1 cm. Michelangelo
Buonarroti.
75 F recto.
Florence, Casa Buonarroti
Corpus

145 recto.

aaL';:-...

'

:
*.." ,

Figure 8. Study for Two Nude Figures on

the Sistine Chapel Ceiling.
"Carboncino
nero" (figure seated on block), and black
chalk (figure below and to the left),
30.1 x 21.2 cm. Michelangelo
Buonarroti.
Florence, Casa Buonarroti
146 recto.
Corpus

33 F recto.

153

154

Figure 9. Infraredreflectogram showing

consistency of textureand thickness of the
line (CMA
40.465).

"'!

.
I

,lrE ?

iCM

.''"

'.;'.,.
j

/~' .,,>

...,,.

'',.....~

;"

l,

2.

'
I;m

fore likely to have been traced (Figure 9).18 The precision and
on the other hand, suggest that the surface
subtlety of the modeling,
was drawn from a clay or wax model,
a device Michelangelo
and
other artists used frequently for paintings as well as sculpture.'9
in fact carried their use further than any of his prede
Michelangelo
and it is clear that such bozzetti would have proven espe
to him inworking out the varied and difficult poses of
useful
cially
the Sistine ignudi. In the present case, then, Michelangelo
hypotheti
as follows:
cally proceeded
cessors,

1. He

invented

the attitude

and gesture

in pen
or black
ink or
sketches
and ink
black chalk.
chalk.
sketches
in
pen and

of the figure

in quick

'

c~~~~~~~.

10. Sketches of Figures for the

around God the Father in the
"Spiritelli"
"Creation of Adam";
Right Hand of God
the Father; Right Knee of the Nude
Figure
above the Persian Sibyl, Small Sketches
for Nude
Probably
Figures. Stylus,
"carboncino
nero," and red chalk, 26.5 x
19.8 cm. Michelangelo
Buonarroti.
A 20 verso.
Haarlem,
Teylers Museum
Figure

verso.
135 verso.
Corpus
Corpus 135

2. He developed the idea further in free drawings, most likely in

black chalk, using a livingmodel, inorder to establish more pre
cisely the structureof the figure and the force of itsgesture. In this
way he produced his finished study,which was presumably squared
for transferand enlarged to the cartoon.
3. He prepared a bozzetto in terracottaor wax inorder to study
the surfacemodeling.
4. He returned to his finished drawing and traced itwith black
chalk, inorder to preserve itsexact proportions. Then he drew the
bozzetto in red chalk over his black chalk tracing. In thisway he
produced a fully developed renderingof the surface of the figure that
he could copy directly on to the plaster. It is unlikely that his full
size cartoon, which in the ignudi he transferredby means of pounc
ing,was fullymodeled. This function of the drawing is therefore
analogous to the so-called "auxiliary cartoons" thatRaphael (1483
1520) used in the very final stage of preparation.20
In theCleveland drawingMichelangelo has focused his attention
on the attitude of the torso and themain limbs.The extremities-the
head, the hands, the feet, and the rightcalf-are either only vaguely
indicated or not at all. The left foot isworked out in detail on the
verso in red chalk with white heightening. From the tension of the
muscles, itappears that the footwas drawn from life, like the other
studies on the verso. The coarser handling of the chalk and the
presence of pentimenti support this. The directness and lively
expression of the figure at the lower rightcan only have been
observed from life.The torso, then, and the extremities were studied
separately, and with a quite differentmethod: one from a series of
preliminary drawings and a bozzetto, the other from life.21This
composite method enabled him to produce a figure thatwas both
precisely structuredand modeled as well as spontaneous in gesture.
One of themost notable features of the Cleveland drawing is the
skillwith which Michelangelo manipulated the primarymedium, red
chalk. On the verso the outlines of red chalk alone have a plastic
value achieved through the variation of the thickness and density of
the stroke.Overlapping strokes and pentimenti express this quality
even further.This is entirely in the spiritof his rapid sketches of first
ideas and figures from life like those on the verso of a sheet in the
TeylersMuseum (Figure 10). By contrast, the recto of theCleveland
drawing shows a more uniform and precise outline. Itsmodeling
function is subdued in favor of the rich shading of the surface by a
network of parallel and diagonally crossed hatching. Here the color
and luminosity of themedium aremore expressive than in the
sketches on the verso.22Michelangelo accented the structurallymost

.'

155

156
LibyanSibyl. Red chalk, 28.8 x 21.3 cm. ':,
Michelangelo Buonarroti.New York,

?'~.......

in his PreparatoryStudies for the Libyan Sibyl in theMetropolitan

Metropolitan

Museum of Art
ingrecto.

(Figure 1.23 Ifone compares thismethod ofhatch

Corpushwork on the ceiling, now visible after the

importantconcavities by moistening the chalk to produce a denser

and more saturated tone-a technique he exploited even more fully
restoration it is clear that they are identical as ifMichelangelo use

this red chalk technique as a rehearsal for his rushed performance on

thewet plaster The preparation thatMichelangelo imposed on
himself as revealed by drawings like those inNew York and Cleve
land explains his extraordinary
his lack of previous experience.

skill in painting

in fresco

in spite of

The use of red chalk in the Cleveland

seen in the context of
drawing,
his development
before the age of thirty-five, appears to be essen
tially an adaptation of the pen and ink technique he had learned as a
Ghirlandaio's
Itbears little relation
pupil in Domenico
workshop.24
to his own earlier work in red chalk and none to the more painterly
Florentine artists who favored the
technique of contemporary
like Andrea del Sarto (1486-1530),
Sodoma
(1477-1549),
medium,
or Fra Bartolommeo
151 7).25 It is entirely remote from
(ca. 1474-ca.
the oldest tradition in the medium,
the sfumato technique
invented
inMilan.26
by Leonardo and continued
by his followers

byLeonardo
andcontinued
byhisfollowers
inMilan.26

It isgenerally agreed thatBuonarroti firstbegan to use red chalk

extensively while he was atwork on the Sistine vault. He may have
used itearlier, but the drawings that have been thought to represent
this early activity are uncertain in their attribution. Even ifall of
themwere genuine, no consistent pattern emerges. On his very early
pen studies the red chalk sketches of body fragments are only
tentative experiments (Figure 12).27More extensive are the copies
afterGiotto (1266-1337) andMasaccio (1401 ?-1428) that, although
not certain, aremost probably hiswork. On a sheet in the Casa
Buonarroti28he used red chalk over a stylus underdrawing. Both
there and in his copy of figures inGiotto's frescoes in the Bardi
Chapel,29 his use of red chalk as a linearmedium shows consider
able awkwardness. The use of short parallel strokes to represent
surface texture and the action of light and shade ismore successful
than in his earlier efforts, but much less precise than his work in pen
and ink.The copy ofMasaccio's Expulsion of Adam and Eve (Figure
13), attributed toMichelangelo by KonradOberhuber and accepted
by De Tolnay, shows a more advanced
chalk on the verso relate to the studies

style: the male nudes in red

for the Battle of Cascina of

a:Id~

Figure 12. Copy of St. Peter in the

Two
"Tribute Money"
of Masaccio;
Studies of an Arm. Pen and two shades of
brown
ink, red chalk (the arm studies),
and gray wash added
later, 31.5 x 19.7
cm. Michelangelo
Buonarroti. Munich,
Inv. no. 2191
Graphische
Sammlung.
recto. Corpus 4 recto.

Figure

13. Copy after Masaccio's

of Adam and Eve from
Red chalk, possibly
heightened
32.5 x 18.5 cm. Michelangelo

"Expulsion
Paradise."
with white,

Buonarroti.
Paris, Louvre,
recto. Corpus 68 recto.

Inv. no. 3897

157

158

:??v- ' '

.i'
Sll
l '. , .~

?;
3??

in the earlier drawing he has relied on parallel

O3f5Oi4?,.?1503-1504.30 As

'.

hatching and stumping for surface values. The contour lines are more
assured and plastic than in earlier drawings, but they show many
less exact in their rendering than
and are considerably
pentimenti

-.
?-

^thedrawings he executed inother media during this period. Exacti

>XF^iB'HKt

tude both

in outline

and modeling

are in fact the primary character

istics of his early draftsmanship in pen and ink, and it is clear that
before the second phase of his work on the Sistine Chapel ceiling,

hadno ideaof thepotentialutilityof redchalkfor

^Michelangelo
il^^^^^l^^
^
_-|^H|.^^1^|:?

;.

achieving these ends.3"

The disciplined pen technique thatwas current inDomenico
Ghirlandaio's workshop became the foundation forMichelangelo's

;.

(Figure 14-15).32 During

draftsmanship

?:? ......was

.-:::'

:?

with

~?::?~^,?.

penstrokes

structurally

4
-::. -

t-

^trolled

'??'~"'y.:.'.
........
-7

Figure 14. Study of theMuse Calliope

fromHadrian's Villa. Pen and brown
and gray

ink, 22.9

x 12.8

cm.

Italian

x 19.4

of varying length, which often corresponded

to
segments of the form. Then, a firmly con

system of parallel and crossed hatching described the surface

.;
(?),

..
'

cm. DomenicoGhirlandaio,

John L.Severance Fund.'

~~.workshop.
.f.
Figure 15. The Funeral of St. Stephen
after Era Filippo Lippi. Pen and brown
Florence

1449-Florence

1494,

it

significant

early 16th century. Gift of Robert Hays

Gries. CMA
39.653.
,.

25.1

of his career,

and the action of light on it.Michelangelo

rarely used wash, and
inwhich
white heightening
only sparingly.33 In these pen drawings

.......

.....

the first phase

by far his most prevalent medium. Precise contours were laid in

ink,.

or his...

CMA47.70.

ai._~I
;?.`~??

i.';i

159

Figure 16. YouthfulMale Nude Seen from

the Front inContrapposto. Pen and brown
inkover black chalk, 24.8 x 95 cm.
Michelangelo Buonarroti. Paris, Louvre,
Inv.no. 712 recto.Corpus 42 recto.

1~-

.??,

are almost
an underdrawing
almost totally
pentimentiare
avoided, an
aa
pentimenti
totally avoided,
underdrawing with
within
or
was
a
as
charcoal
often
used
black
chalk,
preliminary
stylus,
sketch. Since chalk and charcoal were easily erased with a feather or
aa piece
have almost
almost totally
from many
of bread,
bread, they
many
from
piece of
they have
totally disappeared
disappeared
examination
of
the
sheets.
Cleveland
Indeed, microscopic
sheets.Indeed,
examination
of theClevelanddrawing
microscopic
drawing
of black
black chalk
chalk scattered
scattered generally
showed sparse
the
showed
sparse particles
of
among the
particles
generally among
asa plastic
stylus,
orne was effective for producingsed
relimderin
blackchalk alk,
erasure. The
sort of
recto-an
fibers of
of the
the recto--an
indication of
of this
this sort
of erasure.
The under
under
fibers
indication
of the structureh and charcoal
were easily erased
wofthemuscular
feather or
a male
in the
in a
is still
Louvre (Figure
still visible
visible in
male nude
nude in
the Louvre
16),
drawing
(Figure 16),
drawing is
how the
the pen
corrected and
and refined
refined the
the chalk
chalk
which
illustrates how
which
illustrates
pen corrected
which
has
drawing,
many pentimenti.
pentimenti.
drawing, which hasmany
Blackchalkalonewas effectiveforproducinga plasticrendering

of the structureof a form.On a sheet of studies of themusculature of

160

Figure

1 7. Study

of the Musculature

of a

Raised Right Arm. Black chalk, pen and

brown ink,22.5 x 31.5 cm.Michelangelo
Buonarroti.Vienna, Albertina, Sc. R. 167,
Inv.no. 132 (Stix131). Corpus 14 recto.

:I.: ::

an arm in theAlbertina (Figure17),Michelangelo provided himself

with a clear map of the overall structureof the arm in black chalk.
Using pen and ink, he then studied the appearance of themuscles
under the skin. In these the precise Ghirlandaiesque hatching gives
an exact and detailed representation of the surface contours.
Michelangelo continued this practice during his work on the
Sistine ceiling, firstwith pen and ink, then, after the hiatus of 1510
1511, with red chalk. In the Cleveland drawingMichelangelo's use
of themedium isderived more from his pen style than from the few
sporadic early efforts in red chalk. The fine crosshatching functions
in the same way in red chalk as in ink. In this drawing and in the
Figure 18. Nude Seen from the Back;,
Two Putti; LeftLeg; Two Autograph Poetic
Fragments.Black chalk, pen and brown
ink,31.5 x 27.8 cm.Michelangelo
Buonarroti. London, BritishMuseum, Inv.
no. 1859-6-25-564 verso (Wilde 5 verso).
Corpus 46 verso.

'.'

.
r~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
?

?..'.?.;:

: :i:':~~:'~i:~d:i?
~ ::...~::

C, .

....
====================

Figure 19. Study of aMale Nude Turned

to the Left; Detail

of a Left Arm

Two Details of Legs for the "Battleof

Cascina."

Black

chalk,

40.4

161

and

x 26 cm.

.
.;.-:

Michelangelo Buonarroti.Haarlem,
TeylersMuseum, Irv.A 19 recto.Corpus

05'

Ba'.le
Vela

50 recto.

;T~~

~~~~~.?:.}~i~;..
:s~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~,:..,..~.
..,_,~:11}:i/:
.

others related to it,Michelangelo

and flesh

in red chalk with

learned to representmusculature

the same accuracy

and control

he had

longmastered in pen and ink.

This is evident when one compares the Cleveland drawing with
the studies of nude male figures for the Battle of Cascina. Inhis
design of the Battle of Cascina (1504-1505) Buonarroti had only just
begun to use black chalk as amedium for figure studies. A sheet in
the BritishMuseum (Figure 18) shows how effective he found black
chalk for providing a rapid initial indication of the contours, struc
ture,movement, and deliberation. The more fully developed nudes
in the TeylersMuseum (Figures19, 20), towhich theCleveland
drawing has been compared, show how he exploited itsplastic
qualities to create pregnant contour lineswhich in themselves give
the figure solidity and roundness. He then indicated the surface,
predominantly with parallel hatching combined with some cross
hatching and stumping. The effect is powerful, but less refined than
his laterwork in red chalk. At this point in his development he still
needed pen and ink to render anatomical details with the accuracy
he required, as in the black chalk studyworked over with pen and

..
162

Figure 20. Study of aMale Nude;

.,..~~,

,.

'""'~"''
'~;~i'"...~
~~bi?:ti;.:s
`~'/:~';~

Museum
brown ink in the Ashmolean
(Figure 21) or the more
in the British Museum.34
elaborate
figure, heightened with white,
This progression
from a first idea and intermediary stages in black
in pen and ink is
chalk to a finished study of surface qualities
the method Michelangelo
took with him to Rome when he
basically
began work on the Sistine Chapel ceiling. On a sheet in the British
Museum
(Figure 22) he used pen and ink over a rough study in black
chalk to delineate
the drapery of the Erythraean Sibyl. Relying on the
old workshop
tradition of studying drapery folds by drawing artfully
used his meticu
arranged draperies soaked in gesso, Michelangelo
to render the folds and the light and shade on
lous pen technique
their surface with confident precision.
The most important factor in the relationship between Mich
fulsome work in red chalk and its spare, but eloquent
elangelo's
in black chalk is the fact that this underdrawing
is
underdrawing
most likely a tracing. Several examples
of tracing exist among his
recto was traced from another
the Cleveland
early drawings. While
were
traced from the recto of the
sheet, other surviving drawings
same sheet-a
common method
for reversing a figure, as an artist

samesheetn-a
common
methodforreversing
a figure,
asanartist

163
Back. Black chalk, pen and brown ink,
26 x 17 cm.Michelangelo Buonarroti.
Oxford, Ashmolean Museum. Parker296
rectal.Corpus 41 recto.

Thus, a sheet in the Louvre,35 dated by De

on its recto two pen drawings of antique
has
1504-1505,
verso
On
the
traced the principal figure in
sculptures.
Michelangelo
black chalk. The quality of the line resembles exactly the under
nude as it appears in the infrared reflecto
drawing of the Cleveland
is
The
line
5).
gram (Figure
notably more regular in density and
freehand chalk drawings but is
thickness than inMichelangelo's
Note how in both drawings
and
nonetheless
expressive.
energetic
the lines indicating the shoulder muscles
imply the roundness of the
force leads the eye around the form
neck and head. Their directional
out his design.

worked

....yfo.~
Figure~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
2.!, ':.,.,..:.-?:.
to
Tolnay

....~..:?:
~~

...

a figure in
in the
creates the ilusio
behind
it
round wih
with spae
illusion of
of afigue
and
space beh.~;~
iv- ceatesthe
he rond
~.~~ ,..'~"-.~~;~

22. Drapery
Study for the
Erythraean Sibyl on the Sistine Chapel
ink
Ceiling. Black chalk, pen and brown
over brush and brown wash,
38.4 x 26
cm. Michelangelo
Buonarroti.
London,
Inv. no. 1887-5-2-118
British Museum,
154 recto.
recto (Wilde 10 recto). Corpus
Figure

Tonyt

....~~~~~~~s
~
'.:.
'
,''dT.'~:'~:[,,~
:
'
":~:i. *!6>

....
:'~"';~'~

s-

I"."?'.." :

.... :
-:.

{ ..

.
*_

'
'f

wokdoths

ein hsaseti
teLur~s
ae yD

o t et topndainso niu
5410,hs
f

scuptre.n
te ero

ichlageo
racdheprncialfiuri

' ,

' . : ',
. ;'....:.'.'' ,;. t .'.?

164

? 'i '?,

. -

'.,
,

. S

.C

i'."
': '''

>'7
"

'
" -'

'"

...

'~:' i; ~..
'?,'"

. ..
'"

'.

' .'

'.'. -'.'

' . ,

Figure 23. YouthfulMale Nude Seen from

the Front inContrapposto. Pen and brown
ink over

black

chalk,

24.8

x 95 cm.

Michelangelo Buonarroti. Paris, Louvre,

Inv.no. 712 verso. Corpus 42 verso. See
also Figure 16 (Corpus42 recto).

24. A Seated

on the recto with

executed

pen and brown

ink over a black chalk

underdrawing, has been traced on the verso in red chalk (Figure

23).36 Finally, the drawing in the BritishMuseum for one of the

ABOVE RIGHT:
Figure

and not only between the viewer and the image plane. This mode of
perceiving mass and space-typical of Tuscan artists and especially
itself even in a tracing. In the
of the sculptorMichelangelo-asserts
Louvredrawing discussed above (Figure 16) the nude male figure

Nude

Man.

Pen and

brown and grayish-brown inkwith some

grayish-brownwash, heightened with
white, 42.1 x 28.7 cm. Michelangelo
Buonarroti.London, BritishMuseum, Inv.
no. 1887-5-2-116 recto (Wilde 6 recto).
Corpus 52 recto.

bathers

in the Battle of Cascina37

has also been

traced to the verso

in

black chalk (Figures24, 25).38As in theCleveland drawingMich

elangelo has omitted the support on which the figure sits, as well as
the indication of background shadow. These are also likely indica
tions of tracing.Tracing provided an efficient means by which Mich
elangelo could progress from one stage of his conceptual work to
another, using a wax
outline of the earlier

or terracotta bozzetto,
idea as a foundation.

while

retaining

the

In hisworking drawingsMichelangelo always focused on the

solution

of a specific

problem

at hand. This accounts

for the diversity

among his preparatory sheets for the Sistine ceiling. As he progressed

through the project, we see not only a stylistic evolution parallel to
that visible

in the ceiling

itself, but also

radical changes

in his

methods of seeing and representingwhat he has seen or invented.

The most strikingof these is his sudden heavy reliance on red chalk
during the lastphase of the project.

165

Figure25. Tracingof aMale Nude from

Drawings

of Legs; Seated

no.

1887-5-2-116

Corpus 52 verso.

,Bh M

verso

Michelangelo

used

red chalk very

little and

Woman.

Charcoal (tracing),red chalk (other

figures),42 x 28.5 cm. Michelangelo

Buon . L

As already mentioned,

(Wilde

in the Sistine Chapel, which brought him

the lunettes.
halfway through the project, excluding

two years of his work

6 verso).

approximately

ofwork,from
theinterruption
ometime
August1510toan
during

he visited Florence and Bolo

date in 1511, during which
gna, he gained his mastery of red chalk. The most logical explana
suitable material
that
tion is that he acquired a supply of especially
was
used. When
he
less friable than the chalk he had previously
it virtually replaced pen and ink
returned to his work on the ceiling,
as a medium
for figure studies.
uncertain

of the ceiling and the develop

Briefly reviewing the chronology
as the work progressed
aids in
methods
ment of Michelangelo's
on
had
h
is
the
effect
this
medium
style.9 Pope Julius
understanding
an interest in having Buonarroti paint the ceiling of
II first expressed
the Sistine Chapel as early as May 1506. At the end of that year the
artist began work on a bronze statue of the Pope at Bologna, which
was finished
in February of 1508. Soon afterward Julius called Mich
to begin the ceiling; they signed a contract
inMay.
to
Rome
elangelo
scaffolding was constructed.
By
During June and July the necessary
assistants
were
hired
and the pigments had arrived
five
September
did
from Florence,
although it is generally
thoughatt thatMichelangelo
InAugust
1510 the scaffolding
not begin to paint until January 1509.
for the first half of the ceiling was removed and the work so far

accomplished was viewed for the first time. The pope promptly set

166
Buonarroti.The Vatican Palace.

_;.1. ~
~
~ ~
26. The Ssthe hope of obtaining
funds.

Figure

CrahCreation of Eve (Figure26)

'S

..

This is confirmed by the radical change

out for Bologna, where he immersed himself inmilitary operations,

Michelangelowithoutmoneyor instructions.
Duringthe
leaving

ensuing months Michelangelo made a series of trips to Bologna in

as faras the
Itisgenerallyagreedthatworkhadprogressed
instyleappearinginthenextnarrative
panel,theCreationofAdam
In
half
of
the
the
second
27).41
ceilingthe thirty-five-year-old
(Figure

Michelangelo began to paint largerscale and more massively

proportioned human forms.The construction of compositional space
Creation

Michelangelo
ofAdam.as,Frescoc.

Buonarroti.

The Vatican

Palace.

.~

'

Figure 28. Project for theDecorative

Scheme of theSistine Chapel Ceiling;
Studies of Arms and Hands. Pen and .i
brown inkover stylus or metalpoint
(decorative study), black chalk (the arms
and hands), 27.5 x 38.6 cm.Michelangelo :i:
Buonarroti.London, BritishMuseum, Inv.
no. 1859-6-25-567 recto (Wilde 7 r).
Corpus 119 recto.
;_

167

i
:

t
1.

'

: .;

"!

6;\
i.';5
, A<: 'J',

:.

nE

*.

r-

narratives gave way to amore frontalobservation of the figures: the

more solid forms penetrate more tangibly the space surrounding
them.Also, the figures acquire greater erectness within their space
and a stronger presence as individual entities. The Cleveland draw
ing provides a characteristic example ofMichelangelo's new vision.
On the finished ceiling the contrast between his earlier and later
styles ismade clear in a comparison of the Fall ofMan with the
Creation of the Sun,Moon, and Planets.
Michelangelo's use of drawings likewise changed during the
course of thework, most radically during the hiatus of 1510-1 511. In
the earliest studies for the ceiling he used pen and ink to carry out
Figure 29. Study for theDecorative
Scheme of the Sistine Chapel Ceiling;
Study of aMale Torso;Studies for a Left
Arm. Pen and brown ink (decorative
study), black chalk (the arms), 25 x 36 cm.
Michelangelo Buonarroti.Detroit, The
Detroit Instituteof Arts, Inv.no. 27.2 recto.
Corpus 120 recto.

Arm. and
Pen

bron

::?

ink

f~~~~~~~~i,...'
(decoratie

:'~
??~'.'.','.,
'.?~-:..
~.:?~,/,.~:,:,,

."i'~-":
,.':.'''..;'..-."'.,'"
.
:~~~-,~
, ,~',.~,,',,..':'.,~':..',
?
"

.'

...::,?;-...'.,'L
.'..
.':

:....
;.,
.:.:.:y:.,
~.:,'.-,,"':. '~' ,:.',..- '~.~..'

.'".

.~t,'..-"~~~'

~' ' " " "~}';?:';::t"'

Study
of
aMale
To
rso;Studies
for
aLeft
'%---"~y
/ 'i~::'""k"
......
"~'":
:'~:~';:~I'"'"711':"
'~'""'

,~

168

Figure 30. Sketch for Adam

from Paradise."
"Expulsion
nero," 26.2 x approximately

i.:'.; ?*?~

in the

~~~~~~~

"Carboncino
19.2 cm.

Buonarroti.
Florence,
Michelangelo
131
45 F. recto. Corpus
Buonarroti

.??.?.:
.?t

Casa
recto.

...i

:['
':~i

Figure
Sketch for
forAdam
in the
the
in
Figure 31
3l. Sketch
Adam
"Expulsion fromParadise." Black chalk,

'~%~~,;~: ~'~~.~
A
.

from
chalk, "'
Paradise."
Black
"Expulsion
39.6 x 25 cm. Michelangelo
approx. 39.6
x
25
cm.
Michelangelo
approx.
64I ?
Buonarroti 64
Casa Buonarroti
Buonarroti. Florence,
Florence,Casa
'
Buonarroti.
132recto.
Corpus
F.recto.
F. recto. Corpus 132 recto.

:'i~

'

~~

?:

!;

!Iii

?B;

?.ti~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~,.

Figure 32. Study forAdam in the'

"Creation

ofAdam."

Red chalk,

19 x 25.7

cm.Michelangelo Buonarroti. London,

BritishMuseum, Inv.no. 1926-10-9-1
(Wilde 11 recto).Corpus 134 recto.

c op

.
..

'-W.

,,..~
.,~,..
.
.....,,..".,
.eesr
:cs
.
................
..fij yo
his ideas for the general decorative scheme as well as for the compo
sition of individual scenes (Figures 28, 29). He also used the familiar
Ghirlandaiesque
hatching to study surfaces and light, as he had done
since his youth. This was necessary because
the black chalk Mich
used for figure studies did not lend itself to the fine rendi
elangelo
tion of surface detail. In his black chalk drawings he almost exclu
of
sively relied on coarse parallel hatching and dense accumulations
to render light and shade.42 The energetic, multiple
contour
material
lines lead the eye forcefully around the form and suggest its solidity
and roundness, but the surface remains summary. The studies for the
before
figure of Adam in the Fall of Man (Figures 30, 31), completed
the interruption of work in 1510, show primarily an interest in
structure, gesture, and movement,
although the study in the middle
of Figure 30 shows a more refined rendering of surface with faint
parallel strokes. From the early phase of the ceiling the pose of entire
in pen and ink, while black chalk was used
figures was established
either for quick preliminary
sketches or for studies of figural details.
Only with the red chalk study for the Creation of Adam (Figure 32)
do we find a fully plastic realization of the body's surface. Here
was able to use a combination
of parallel and crossed
Michelangelo
to achieve a richly varied image
hatching, stumping, and moistening
of the action of light on flesh and the underlying muscle. The
structure of the body appears

through

the surface

rather than being

169

170

Figure 34. Study for the Nude Figure to

the Left above the Persian Sibyl on the
Sistine Chapel Ceiling.
Red chalk
with white,
27.1 x 19 cm.
heightened
Buonarroti.
Haarlem,
Teylers Museum,
A 27.
Inv. no.
27. Corpus
136 recto
recto
Inv.
o. .A
Corpus 136

Buonarroti. Vienna,
Michelangelo
Sc. R. 155,
155, nv. . no. 120
Albertina,
144 recto.
142). Corpus

(Stix

142).Corpus144 recto.

indicated in themore literal, schematic manner of the earlier draw

ings in black chalk. He developed the figure outward from the center
of the torso, generally not leaving room on the page for extremities.43
This shows a radical change inMichelangelo's method of conceiv
ing the human figure.The great red chalk studies for the ignudi
surrounding the Congregation of theWaters in the TeylersMuseum
(Figure33), theAlbertina (Figure34), and Cleveland (Figures 1, 3)
are absolutely consistent with the BritishMuseum Study forAdam
(Figure32) and with one another. These four drawings are primary
documents of themajor transition inMichelangelo's style that
occurred during the course of 1510-1511. A comparison of any of
these drawings with the BritishMuseum pen study for the Erythraean
Sibyl demonstrates the vast change in hismethods and well as his
sense of form and space.
Michael Miller
Assistant Curator, Prints and Drawings

1. CMA
40.465 Recto: Studies for the
Sistine Chapel Ceiling: TheNude Figure
next to the ProphetDaniel, black and red
chalk; verso: Figure Studies, red chalk
with traces of white heightening, 34.3 x
24.3 cm.Michelangelo Buonarroti,
Caprese (Casentino) 1475-Rome 1564.
Gift

in memory

of Henry

G. Dalton

by his

nephews George S. Kendrick and Harry

D. Kendrick. Provenance: Pierre-Jean
Mariette, Paris (Lugt1852); Dr. Alexander
von Frey,Timisoara, Romania; Henry G.
Dalton, Cleveland, Ohio.
Published: BernardBerenson, The
of the Florentine
Painters, 2d
Drawings
1938), 2: 213, no.
ed., 3 vols. (Chicago,
1599AA; 3: figs. 606, 616; A. M. Frank

furter,"MasterDrawings of the Renais

sance," Art News 37 (1939): 97-100,
185; Henry S. Francis, "A Drawing

180
in Red

Chalk byMichelangelo," CMA

Bulletin 30
(1943): 25-26; Henry S. Francis, "A
Drawing inRed Chalk byMichelangelo,"
Art Quarterly 6 (1943): 60, repr.;Art
News

Photograph credits: Figure 2, Musei

Vaticani, Archivio Fotografico;Figures 4,
7, 8, 21,

30, and 31, courtesy

of the

Corpus Photographicum of Drawings, nos.

10297, 51777, 8430, 43369, 51771, and
51795; Figures 10, 19, and 33, copyright
TeylersMuseum; Figure 12, Staatliche
Graphische Sammlung; Figure 17, Fonds
Albertina

aus dem Bildarchiv

d. uist

Nationalbibliothek; Figures 18, 22, 24,

25, 28, and 32, copyright theTrustees of
the BritishMuseum; Figure 29, copyright
The Detroit Instituteof Arts 1989.

42

(1943):

9 repr.; Charles

De

Tolnay,Michelangelo, 5 vols. (Princeton,

1945), 2:211, no. 19A;William M.
Milliken, The Cleveland Museum of Art
(New York, 1958), p. 36; L.Dussler, Die
Zeichnungen des Michelangelo (Berlin,
1959), p. 208, no. 387; P. Barocchi,
Michelangelo e la sua Scuola (Florence,
1962); C. Gould, TheNational Gallery
Catalogues:

The Sixteenth

Italian

Century

Schools (London,1962), p. 93, no. 790;

C. Seymour, Jr.,Michelangelo: The
Sistine Chapel Ceiling (New York, 1972),
p. 60, fig. 120; "Michelangelo," in Italian
Renaissance Encyclopedia, ed. C. B.
Avery (New York, 1972), p. 641 repr.;
FrederickHartt,Michelangelo's Drawings
(New York, 1972), p. 82, no. 79, p. 86,
"A Design
no. 104; Edward J.Olszewski,
CMA
for the Sistine Chapel Ceiling,"
Bulletin 63 (1976): 12-26; Charles De

Tolnay, Corpus dei disegni diMich

elangelo

(Novara,

1975),

p. 112, no. 147

(hereafter referredto as Corpus).

Exhibited:Providence, 1967: Seven
Centuries

of Italian Art, Museum

of Art,

Rhode IslandSchool of Design, p. 12; The

Museum
of Art, 1971: Florence
and the Arts, cat. by Edmund Pillsbury,
no. 58; The Cleveland
Museum
of Art,
1979: The Draftsman's
Eye, cat. by
no. 55.
Edward J.Olszewski,

Cleveland

2. The figure at the top righthas been

related to the bearer to the leftof Christ in
Michelangelo's Entombment in the Na
tionalGallery inLondon, but differences
in the position of the arms and head make
thisquestionable. Given the di sotto in su
perspective of the head, it ismore likely
that that figure and the one below itwere
ideas for ignudi thatMichelangelo chose
not to use in the finishedwork.
3. Corpus, p. 112, no. 147. The black
chalk, however, was noted by Hartt (pp.
86 f., no. 104). Ithas not been possible to
inspect personally all the drawings dis
cussed here. In these cases Ihave given
the designation used in the collection
catalogues, except in the case of theCasa
Buonarroti, forwhich none exists. This is
especially problematic in the case of what
Michelangelo calls "carboncino nero,"
which may prove to be either charcoal or
a soft black chalk on closer inspection. To
emphasize this Iuse the term carboncino
nero ratherthan itsEnglish equivalent,
charcoal.
4. JosephMeder, TheMastery of Draw
ing, trans.and rev.Winslow Ames, 2 vols.
(New York, 1978), 1:433: "Where the
supportwas not lightenough for the
desired effect, or where a mistake was
made, white leadwas a corrective."
White leadwas an indispensible ingre
dient inprepared grounds, but the present
sheet shows no sign of such a preparation.
Either the bindingmedium is too sparse to
be easily detectible, orMichelangelo
rubbed the lead directly onto the sheet.
The latterprocedure isperfectly plausible,
but

Ihave

had no success

in locating

documentation for itor an unambiguous

parallel instanceof itsuse.
5. FabrizioMancinelli, "La technique de
Michel-Ange et les problems de la
Chapelle Sixtine," Revue de I'Art81
(1988): 9 ff.
6. See Olszewski, 1976, pp. 12-26, for a
discussion of the problem and a defence
of the attribution toMichelangelo.
7. Sale: Paris,Galerie Charpentier, June
13-14, 1933, lot 7, repr.pl. II.
8. Berenson,

1938,

3: 213,

no.

1599A.

9. De Tolnay, 1945, 2: 211, no. 20A, fig.

245.

171

172

10.Albert ErichBrinckmann,
Michelangelo Zeichnungen (Munich,
1925), pp. 59 f., 63, nos. 84, 85, 94.
11. See his 1975

Corpus

forza piu finiti, e dalla

51, 136.

50,

12. FrederickHartt, letter to Louise S.

Richards,April 15, 1964, curatorial files,
Cleveland; see also Hartt, 1972, pp. 86 f.,
no.

104

13. Pillsbury, 1971, no. 58; Simona

LecchiniGiovannoni, Mostra di disegni di
Alessandro Allori, exh. cat. (Florence:
Gabinetto disegni e stampe degli Uffizi,
1970),

no.

18 (fig. 13), no. 19

(fig. 14).

14. S. J. Freedberg,Painting of theHigh

Renaissance

in Rome

and Florence

(Cambridge,Mass., 1961), passim; idem,

Painting in Italy, 1500-1600 (Harmonds
worth, 1970), pp. 1-113.
15. E.g.,Giovannoni, 1970, nos. 22, 25,
40.
16.

Ibid., nos. 39, 56, 66, 76, 79, 82.

17.Cf. JamesElkins, "Michelangelo and

Form: His Knowledge
and
the Human
7 (June
Art History
Use of Anatomy,"
1984): 176 ff.
18. The partial erasure
have contributed

may

chalk
the

of the black
to this. With

microscope, particles of black chalkwere

all over the sheet, as if they had
observed
been spread with a feather or a lump of
erasers available
bread, the most common

toMichelangelo.
19. FilippoBaldinucci, Vocabulario
toscano dell'arte del disegno (Florence,
1975; orig. publ. 1681), s.v.: "Bozza f... Si
dice ad alcuni piccoli modelli, o quadri,
che conducono gli Artefici, per poi farli
maggiori nell'opera, quasi principio di
o sia di pittura,

lavoro,

di scultura,

architetti,

pittori

e scultori,

innanzi che
"Usano ancora molti maestri,
fare un
la storia nel cartone,
facciano
in terra in su un piano, con situar
modello
li sbatti
tonde tutte le figure, per vedere
cioe I'ombre che da un lume si
menti,
causano
alle figure, che sono
addosso

quell'ombra toltadal sole, ilquale piu

crudamente
per

collection

si spiccano

associated

with

the school

of

Leonardo (CMA
63.576); seeWilliam D.
Wixom,"A Wax Bozzetto Close to
Bulletin 58 (April
Leonardoda Vinci," CMA
1971): 115-122.
20. Oskar Fischel, "Raphael'sAuxiliary
Cartoons," BurlingtonMagazine 71
(1937):

f.; J.A. Gere

167

and Nicholas

Turner,Drawings by Raphael, exh. cat.

(London:The BritishMuseum, 1983), pp.
44, 218ff.
21. Michelangelo also resorted to this
method
Museum

ed.

G. Milanesi, 9 vols. (Florence, 1906),

"Introduzione:della pittura," 1: 176:

piano

carta

per il rilievo: ilche dimostra il tutto pib

bello e maggiormente finito." See also his
"Introduzione: della scultura," 1: 152 f.;
LudwigGoldscheider, A Survey of
Michelangelo's Models inWax and Clay
(London, 1962); IrvingLavin,"Bozzetti
andModelli: Notes on Sculptural
Procedure from the EarlyRenaissance
throughBernini," Stil und Uberlieferung
inder Kunst des Abendlandes, Akten des
21. InternationalenKongresses fur
Kuntsgeschichte inBonn 1964, 3 vols.
(Berlin,1967), 3:93 ff.; FrederickHartt,
David by theHand ofMichelangelo (New
York, 1987), pp. 57 ff., 130 ff.For the
combined use of drawings and three
dimensional bozzetti, see the remarksof
the present author inDie Sammlung
Woodner, Albertina (Vienna, 1986);
Meisterzeichnungen aus sechs Jahr
hunderten (Munich, 1986), pp. 48 f.;
Dibujos Colleccibn Woodner, Fundacion
Amigos del Museo del Prado (Madrid,
1986),with furtherreferences.There is an
excellent example in theCleveland

in some

studies

for the Battle

of

Cascina (forexample, Corpus 50r, Teylers

altro."Giorgio Vasari, Le Vite de' pii

eccellenti

I'ombreche percuotono addosso all'una e

I'altrafigura;onde ne vengon icartoni e
l'opera, per queste fatiche, di perfezione e

che il lume fa in terra nel

I'ombra della le figura. E di qui

ritraendo il tuttodell'opra, hanno fatto

A 19r) of 1501-1505,

but in a

less systematic and developed manner.

Brinckmann (1925) considered it to be
one of the grounds for rejecting theTeyler
drawings,

as a sign that the clumsy

copyist, towhom he attributes the

drawings,

his sheet!

could

not fit the entire

figure on

22. The plastic contour lines typical of the

verso appear on the rectoonly under the
proper rightarm of the figure.
23. The drawing (Corpus 156r;MMA
24.197.2), while similar to theCleveland
drawing in appearence and function,
shows no signs of an underdrawing in
black chalk or stylus.

31.While the idea for the head of Jonah,

one of the latest figureson the Sistine
ceiling, was clearly derived from the Doni
Tondo, the exact positions of the head

24. Note Condivi's well-known anecdote

about the twenty-one-year-oldMichel
angelo inRome. A nobleman asked
Michelangelo for a sample of his drafts
manship: "Ma egli non avendo che
mostrare, prese una penna (perciocche in
quel tempo [1496] il lapisnon era in uso)
e con tal leggiadragli dipinse una mano
che ne rest stupefatto."Ascanio Condivi,
Vita diMichelangiolo (Florence, 1944),
p. 25. Meder interpretsthe term lapisas
"lapis amatita," or red chalk, since black

are directly related to Jonah.The head in

the drawing is in the same position as the
Madonna, the reverseof Jonah,but as De
Tolnay pointed outMichelangelo studied
Jonahwith his head facing both to the

chalk was

in use at that time.

already

JosephMeder, Die Handzeichnung: Ihre

Technik und Entwicklung, 2d ed. (Vienna,
1923), pp. 12 f.Condivi's belief that red
chalk was

not

in use

in 1496 must

be

qualified by the fact that drawings in red

chalk
1489.

exist from as early

by Leonardo
in any case
Red chalk was

as

uncommon before the end of the first

decade of the sixteenth century.
25. Cf. Anna Maria

Petrioli

Tofani

and

Graham Smyth, Sixteenth-Century Tuscan

Drawings from theUffizi (New York and
Oxford,

1988). Contrast

nos.

1, 4, 5, and

13 with Michelangelo's work.

26. Meder,

1923,

1v, Casa

Buonarroti

36 F.

29. Corpus 89v, Haarlem, Teylers

Museum,
30. Corpus

Inv. A 25v.
158, Casa

Buonarroti

the open mouth

in a red chalk

of the doni Madonna

Used

for Jonah on

the Sistine Chapel Ceiling (Florence,Casa

Buonarroti

1 FG recto, Corpus

right and to the left on a sheet

158 recto),

in the

Oxford sketchbook (Corpus 170r,Oxford,

Ashmolean Museum, Parker303r; cf.
Corpus, pp. 117 f., entry on no. 158).
Therefore the red chalk drawing could
relate toMichelangelo's earlier con
ception of Jonah,with his head still in the
position of thatof theDoni Madonna.
32. Cf.Martha Dunkelman, "Michel
angelo's EarliestDrawing Style," Drawing
1, 6 (March-Arpil1980): 121-127, in
which she rightly refutes the established
cliche thatMichelangelo's drawing style
was derived from themarks of a toothed
chisel on marble.
33. Corpus 2 and 52 are virtually unique
examples of the latteramongMichel
angelo's early drawings. Cleveland
possesses two examples of theGhir
landaioworkshop pen technique.One is
a study of theMuse Calliope discovered
at Hadrian's
Villa between
1493 and
1503.
Its style is related to that of an

pp. 122 f.

27. Corpus 3r, Louvre, Inv.no. 706r, and

Corpus 4r,Munich, Graphische Samm
lung, Inv.no. 2191 (see Figure 12).
28. Corpus

and

drawing, Study of a Head in the Position

1 Fr.

album of Roman antiquities known as the

Codex Escurialensis (CMA
39.653 Study of
the Muse

Calliope

from Hadrian's

Villa,

pen and brown and gray ink,22.9 x 12.8

cm. Italian [?],early 16th century.Gift of
Robert Hays Gries. See Figure 14). The
other is a copy of an earlier composition
47.70 The Funeralof
by Filippo Lippi (CMA
St. Stephen after FraFilippo Lippi, pen
and brown

ink, 25.1

x 19.4

cm.

Domenico Ghirlandaio [Florence1449

Florence 1494] or hisworkshop. John L.
Severance Fund. See Figure 15).This
sheet has been attributed to Filippo
himself by Pouncey, but the pen

173

174

technique and the calligraphic handling

of the drapery ismore characteristic of
Domenico Ghirlandaio and his followers.
See Henry S. Francis, "A Fifteenth
Bulletin 35
Century ItalianDrawing," CMA
(January1948): 15 ff.,where the drawing
is in fact attributed to theworkshop of
Ghirlandaio. Itcould well have been
executed by Domenico himself, as a
comparisonwith his study forSt. Francis'
Apparition atAries (Rome,Gabinetto
Nazionale delle Stampe, no. FC 130495r)
suggests.An outline copy of the same
figures from theCarmine drawn by
Michelangelo inCorpus 1r is also linked
stylistically to theCleveland Ghirlandaio
sheet (Folkestone Public Library, repro
duced by Tolnay, Corpus 1, p. 21). A
copy of a quattrocento composition dated
byWilde to 1520 (Corpus97v; Johannes
Wilde, Michelangelo and His Studio:
ItalianDrawings in theDepartment of
in the British Mu

Prints and Drawings

seum [London,1975; orig. publ. 1953],

no. 29v; hereafter cited asWilde) is
likewise related toGhirlandaiesque style
and technique.
34. Corpus 52r, BritishMuseum, Inv.no.
1887-5-2-116r (Wilde 6r).Compare
49r,

Corpus

Firenze,

Casa

Buonarroti

73Fr.

and His Drawings

35. Corpus 20, Paris, Louvre, Inv.no.

688v.
36.Michelangelo also traced the recto
using

would explain the presence of studies for

the ceiling on the verso. The comparative
weakness of these studiesmay reflect
Michelangelo's tentativemanagement of
the less familiarmaterial.Wilde points out
that a comparison of the extended leg at
the leftwith a study for theCrucifixion of
Haman (Corpus 163r,Wilde 13r),one of
the latest scenes on the ceiling, shows
Michelangelo's progress during the pro
ject. The legs are in fact so close thatone
must conclude thatHaman's left leg is
actually derived from the study on Corpus
52v (see Figure 25).
39. On the chronology of the ceiling, see
De Tolnay, 1945, pp. 105 ff., 188 ff.;G.
Vasari, La Vita diMichelangelo nelle
redazioni del 1550 e del 1568, ed. Paola
Barocchi, 5 vols. (Milanand Naples,
1962), 2: 426 ff., n. 335; J.Wilde, "The
Decoration of the Sistine Chapel,"
Proceedings of the BritishAcademy 44
(1958): 61-81; J.Schulz, Art Bulletin 45
(1963): 162-163; S. J.Freedberg, 1961,
1:110; idem, 1970, pp. 23, 468 f., n. 17;
Michael Hirst, "IIModo delle Attitudini,
Michelangelo's Oxford Sketchbook for
theCeiling," The Sistine Chapel:
Michelangelo Rediscovered (London,
1986), pp. 208 ff.; idem,Michelangelo

pen and

ink on the back of a letter

dated November 26, 1510 (Florence,

Archivio Buonarroti, vol. 9, fol. 506v;
Corpus 43v).
37. Corpus 52r.
38. The

red chalk

drawings

on

the verso

(British
Museum, Inv.no. 1887-5-2-116
verso [Wilde 6 v], Corpus 52v) are pro
blematic. Berenson and De Tolnay con
sidered them to be thework of a pupil,
butWilde accepted them and dated them
to 1508-1509, the period when Buonarroti
began working on the Sistine ceiling. The
concept of the seated figurewith the trunk
turned inextreme contrapposto isdirectly
related to thatof the ignudi. It is logical
thatMichelangelo would turnback to this
as the
bather in the Battle of Cascina
in the early
for his nudes
foundation

phases of his design of the ceiling. This

(New Haven

and

London, 1988), pp. 35 ff.

40. Mancinelli,

1988,

41. Buonarroti

began

p. 10, n. 1.
his work

at the end

wall opposite the altar and therefore

with

began

the end of the narrative

and

worked toward the beginning.

42. Cf. Corpus 119r, 120, 121, Rotterdam,
Museum Boymans-Van Beuningen, Inv.
no.

I, 513,

and

122r, Casa

Buonarroti,

8F.

43. This is a valid inference, even though

this, like many

of the sheets

related

to the

Sistine ceiling, has been trimmedby later

owners.