Early Italian Paintings in Washington and PhiladelphiaAuthor(s): Everett FahySource: The Burlington Magazine, Vol. 148, No. 1241 (Aug., 2006), pp. 537-540Published by: The Burlington Magazine Publications Ltd.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20074524 .

Accessed: 21/12/2014 16:24

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

The Burlington Magazine Publications Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend accessto The Burlington Magazine.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Sun, 21 Dec 2014 16:24:12 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Early Italian paintings in Washington and Philadelphia by EVERETT FAHY, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York

with the publication ofItalian Paintings of the Fifteenth Century, the National Gallery of Art in Washington has reached the mid

point of its so-called systematic catalogue.1 The present volume, the

fifteenth in a series which began in 1986 with the early Nether landish school, is a leviathan just shy of eight hundred pages, and

weighing almost five kilograms. Replacing about half of Fern Rust

Shapley's catalogue of all the Gallery's ItaUan paintings, pubUshed in

1979, its 156 entries contain a mass of information about the pic

tures, but only eight substantive changes of attributions. In order to

keep the book from becoming even more ungainly, a few works by

fifteenth-century painters such as Lorenzo Monaco and Piero di

Cosimo will be pubUshed in the future and three of the dozen paint ings by or attributed to Giovanni Bellini have been withheld for the volume on sixteenth-century ItaUan pictures. As with some of the

previous volumes in the series, the Gallery has called in outside

speciaUsts - in this case, Mikl?s Boskovits, who contributed sixty

four entries, primarily for the Tuscan school, and Joseph Manca, who catalogued ten EmiUan pictures. David Alan Brown and other members of the Gallery's staff worked on the rest.

The almost simultaneous pubUcation of Carl Brandon Strehlke's

catalogue of the early ItaUan paintings in the Philadelphia Museum of Art2 invites comparison, especially as both books have similar formats and deal with paintings by some of the same artists. About

three-quarters as large, the Philadelphia catalogue consists of nine

ty-four entries on thirteenth-, fourteenth- and early fifteenth-cen

tury pictures. Like the Washington catalogue, it provides short

biographies of the artists, notes on condition, the known prove

nances, discussions of subject-matter and attribution, exhaustive

bibUographic references, good full-page colour plates of all the cat

alogued pictures, copious black-and-white illustrations of related

works (some, of the paintings after cleaning and before inpainting), several reproductions of X-radiographs and infra-red reflectograms as well as a few photographic reconstructions of dismembered altar

pieces. In addition, the Philadelphia catalogue has a useful appendix of 103 macro-photographs of punch marks.

One of the pleasures of reading both catalogues is to see how

differendy Boskovits and Strehlke discuss similar works by Fra

AngeUco, MasoHno, Masaccio and PeselUno ?

Boskovits tending to

emphasise the artists' biographies and styUstic developments, Strehlke

spending more time on their technique as a result of his repeated

physical examination of the pictures. Strehlke tends to be more dis cursive: rather than merely Usting the names and dates of previous

owners, for example, he quotes from letters from Bernard Berenson,

Roger Fry, Herbert Home and other experts, giving a Uvely imme

diacy to the provenances. The difference in emphasis is best seen

in their respective entries on the deUghtful predella panels in

Philadelphia (pi.36) and Washington (p.346) from Benozzo Goz zoU's Purification altarpiece for S. Marco, Florence (Figs.22 and 23). Boskovits's subde reading of the differences between MasoUno's

two altarpieces of the Annunciation in Washington (pp.466 and 472) and Strehlke's summing-up of his years of study of the double-sided

panel in Philadelphia (pls.44a and b) from Masaccio's and MasoUno's S. Maria Maggiore altarpiece are fundamental contributions to the

study of early Renaissance art.

The big difference between the catalogues, of course, is the

quaUty of the paintings, some of those in Philadelphia being mediocre at best. The bulk of them were collected by John G.John son (1841-1917), a corporation lawyer who numbered among his

cUents Henry Clay Frick, H.O. Havemeyer and Pierpont Morgan, wealthy collectors who, unUke Johnson, spent prodigious sums on

works of art. Fry once observed that Johnson 'loved the acquisition of pictures almost to excess', assembling a collection of over

one thousand paintings, 'varying from supreme masterpieces ... down to works which could scarcely claim attention on aesthetic

grounds'.3 Thus not one but four Madonnas by the hack known as

the Pseudo-Pier Francesco Fiorentino keep company in Philadel

phia with beautiful paintings by Fra AngeUco, Domenico di Barto

lo, Pietro Lorenzetti and Giovanni di Paolo. Johnson bequeathed his

22. The feast of Herod and the beheading of St John the Baptist, by Benozzo GozzoU.

1461-62. Tempera on panel, 23.8 by 34.5 cm. (National Gallery of Art, Washington).

23. Purification of the Virgin, by Benozzo GozzoU. 1461?62. Tempera on panel, 24.6 by 36.6 cm. (Philadelphia Museum of Art).

1 Italian Paintings of the Fifteenth Century in the National Gallery of Art, Washington. By Mikl?s Boskovits and David Alan Brown, with contributions by Robert Echols, Gretchen A. Hirschauer, Eleonora Luciano, Rosamond E. Mack, Joseph Manca and

J. RusseU Sale. 798 pp. incl. 148 col. pis. + 189 b. & w. ills. (National Gallery of Art,

Washington, 2003), $85. ISBN 0-89468-305-5. 2 Italian Paintings, 1250-1450, in the John G.Johnson Collection and the Philadelphia

Museum of Art. By Carl Brandon Strehlke. 568 pp. incl. 136 col. pis. + 620 b. & w.

ills. (Philadelphia Museum of Art in association with Pennsylvania State University,

University Park, 2004), $95 (HB). ISBN 0-87633-183-5; $45 (PB). ISBN

0-87633-184-3; ISBN 0-271-02537-9 (Perm State). 3 R[oger] F[ry] : 'Mr. John G. Johnson, of Philadelphia', the burlington magazine

30 (1917), pp.203-04.

THE BURLINGTON MAGAZINE CXLVIII AUGUST 200? 537

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Sun, 21 Dec 2014 16:24:12 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

EARLY ITALIAN PAINTINGS IN WASHINGTON AND PHILADELPHIA

collection to the city of Philadelphia with the stipulation that it remain in his house; in 1933 it was deposited in the Museum and to this day it is discretely set off from the Museum's permanent collection.

The paintings in Washington, which rank with those of the great museums in BerUn, London, Paris and New York, were mainly collected by three of Johnson's fellow Pennsylvanians: Andrew

Mellon (1855-1937) of Pittsburgh; Samuel Kress (1863-1955) of

Cherryville, a village near Alientown; and Peter Widener (1834?

1915) of Philadelphia. Mellon's bequest includes two of the subUme

paintings that he bought in 1931 from the Soviet government: Perugino's GoUtzyn triptych and Botticelli's Adoration of the Magi (which Boskovits surprisingly dates about 1478/80, before the artist left Florence to paint in the Sistine Chapel, despite the panel's

Roman provenance and its citation of one of the Dioscuri). Mellon

also bequeathed twenty other early ItaUan pictures acquired in the 1930s, seventeen of them from Duveen Brothers, quite a few

heavily repainted. Between 1939 and 1961 the Kress Foundation

gave the Gallery an astonishing galaxy of pictures ?

the present volume includes 102 Kress pictures, ranging from AngeUco to

Zoppo ?

many of them purchased from Alessandro Contini-Bona

cossi, who acquired most of them at auction in London rather than

from ItaUan sources. The ten Widener pictures catalogued here

were donated to the Gallery in 1942 by Peter Widener's son, Joseph (1872?1943), a notable collector in his own right (he purchased

BelHni's Feast of the gods and Mantegna'sjwdii/z and Holofemes)A Peter Widener began to collect, indiscriminately, in the late 1890s; not for

another decade did he set his sights higher with the acquisition of

Perugino's presumed portrait of Lorenzo di Credi (long thought to be Credi's self-portrait; p.557), the Neroccio de' Landi portrait

(p.531) and the parade shield painted by Andrea del Castagno (p.3). The Philadelphia Museum and National Gallery have added to their

holdings through purchase only two pictures each: Philadelphia bought a large thirteenth-century Umbrian crucifix (pi.50) in 1952 and the Pietro Lorenzetti spandrels (pis.3 9b and c) in 1985; in 1965

Washington bought Ercole de' Roberti's Wife of Hasdrubal and her children (p.607) and in 1967 Leonardo da Vinci's Ginevra dey Bend

(p.357). To the taste of these donors must be added that of Berenson, who

profoundly influenced early twentieth-century American collectors

of ItaUan art. He, and his formidable wife, Mary, befriended John son and the Wideners, advising them on purchases, and, in the case

of Peter Widener, 'purifying' his collection of copies and inferior works. Berenson compiled the ground-breaking catalogue of John son's ItaUan paintings, pubUshed in 1913, and co-authored the foUo

catalogue of the Wideners' Italian and Spanish pictures, privately

printed in 1916. Although Berenson never met Mellon, the former's

long afHUation with Duveen shaped Mellon's collection. Addition

ally, Berenson worked closely with David Finley, Mellon's trusted

lawyer and the first director of the Gallery. Beginning in 1937, Berenson advised Kress, whose foundation sponsored the pubUca tion in the 1950s of the seven-volume edition of Berenson's Lists,

and through John Walker, a Berenson prot?g?, the Gallery's chief curator and later its second director, Berenson's biases had an impact on the selection of which Kress pictures remained in Washington and which were distributed among regional museums.

In both catalogues a section titled 'Technical Notes' summarises

careful observations made in the laboratory, those for Washington

compiled by the individual authors using reports of the Gallery's conservation and scientific staff, those for Philadelphia written by Strehlke based on 'conversations' with Mark Tucker, the Museum's

chief paintings conservator. 'The painting is not well preserved' is

a frequent refrain among the Washington entries, and for some

readers it will come as a shock to see how damaged many of the

paintings are. Masaccio's ruined Madonna of humility (p.45 8) in the Mellon Collection is reproduced in its stripped state in a full-page colour plate; other appalUngly damaged pictures, such as Fra AngeU co's Madonna of humility (p.9) and Antonello da Messina's Madonna and Child (p.36), both also in the Mellon Collection, in small black and-white photographs (in the Philadelphia catalogue the photo graphs of paintings after cleaning and before restoration are larger and more revealing). The Gallery was not always so forthcoming. Under Walker Uttle restoration was performed in Washington; he

preferred to have the pictures put into what he called 'gallery con

dition' before they reached Washington. Consequently, the record

of past treatment is sketchy. The poUcy changed during the 1970s;

brief remarks on condition appear for the first time in Fern Rusk

Shapley's catalogue. The 'Technical Notes' sometimes raise more questions than they

answer. The conservators in Washington are suspicious about the

unusually thin panel and curiously constructed engaged frame of the Madonna and Child (p.691) catalogued here as by Marco Zoppo or an imitator. Purchased by Sir John Charles Robinson in Bologna in 1880, the painting certainly looks authentic, and it is hard to imag ine that anyone would wish to forge a Zoppo, never a household

name. Domenico Veneziano's Madonna and Child (p.251; Figs.24 and 25) in the Kress Collection poses a different problem: during the

early 1990s the Gallery's conservators removed the Christ Child's

loin cloth, convinced that it was a restorer's addition, but Boskovits

supposes 'that it was added soon after the work's execution, and per

haps by the hand of the master himself. Apparently a technical

analysis has never been made of the famous Cook tondo of the Ado ration of the Magi (p.21), which Boskovits, following the Gallery's official designation, attributes to Fra AngeUco and Fra FiUppo Lippi, dating it 'c. 1440/1445/or 145 5/1460'. If we knew how the layers of

paint overlap, perhaps we could tell how it was executed. Personal

ly, I suspect that Fra FiUppo Lippi and the young Benozzo GozzoU, not Fra AngeUco, painted it when they collaborated in the late 1450s on the decoration of the chapel in the Medici Palace.

In Philadelphia, notices of restoration date from Johnson's time to the present, although, as is often the case with restorers' written

reports, exacdy what was done is hard to determine. In the early days

Johnson employed the dealer Ludovico de Spiridon and later the pro fessional restorer Pasquale Farina. He even allowed Roger Fry to work on some of his pictures (most famously, Jan van Eyck's

Stigmatisation of St Francis; of the paintings in this catalogue, Fry treat ed a small Madonna (pl.73) by Sano di Pietro before shipping it from London to Philadelphia in 1905). Many of the Kress pictures now in

Washington were cradled by Stephen Pichetto between 1928 and 1941, whereas few of the panels in Philadelphia have been thinned, and Strehlke pubUshes the backs of some of them in colour. Aside from labels and inscriptions, the decoration painted on the backs can

provide precious information; the gilded stars on the back of Niccol? di Pietro Gerini's Scourging of four crowned martyrs (pl.28; Fig.26) enabled Strehlke to identify it as part of a previously unrecorded tabernacle for the church of Orsanmichele in Florence.

4 Joseph Widener purchased the Mantegna in or shortly after 1921, yet the catalogue

reports that it belonged to the 'Estate of Peter A.B. Widener', who died in 1915. 5 In E. Fahy: L'Archivio storico fotogr?fico di Stefano Bardini, Florence 2000, p.43, no.336, I accepted it as a FiUppino Lippi, but I am now persuaded by Boskovits's

arguments. I should also point out that my opinions have changed on four other pic

tures for which I am cited in the Washington catalogue: p.32: Prompted by Longhi's idea that the Entombment of Christ in the Kress Collection was begun by Fra AngeU co and completed by Jacopo del SeUaio, I proposed that it was entirely by SeUaio in

my review of F. Rust Shapley's Paintings from the Samuel H. Kress Collection: Italian

schools, XIII-XVcentury in The Art Bulletin 56 (1974), p.285.1 now beUeve Boskovits

538 AUGUST 2OO6 CXLVIII THE BURLINGTON MAGAZINE

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Sun, 21 Dec 2014 16:24:12 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

EARLY ITALIAN PAINTINGS IN WASHINGTON AND PHILADELPHIA

24- Madonna and Child,

by Domenico Veneziano. c. 1445-50. Tempera on

panel, 83 by 57 cm.

(National Gallery of Art,

Washington). Photograph taken before cleaning.

25- Fig.24 after

cleaning.

An unusual feature of the Washington catalogue is the Ust, printed at the beginning of the book, often of Boskovits's attributions that the Gallery rejects. It brings back memories of the early decades of the Gallery when attributions never changed, presumably so as not

to offend donors. As Brown explains in the introduction, five of the

disputed attributions are inconsequential ? mere quibbUng over

whether or not poorly preserved pictures such as Botticelli's early Madonna and Child with two angels (p. 146), or secondary parts of

larger ensembles such as the St Apollonia (p.579) from Piero della Francesca's S. Agostino polyptych, are whoUy autograph. About the

five other attributions there are grounds for reasonable people to

disagree; on balance, I agree with Boskovits. Surely he is right to

give the Liechtenstein Portrait of a youth (p. 166) to the young Botti celli rather than FiUppino Lippi,5 and to catalogue the famous Tor

rigiani Portrait of a man (p. 5 8 8) as attributed to Piero del Pollaiuolo rather than to Castagno. Boskovits tentatively catalogues the Drey fus Profile portrait of a boy (p.226) as 'Attributed to Francesco del

Cossa', which is preferable to 'North ItaUan Fifteenth Century', the

official designation. 'Abraded condition' is cited as the Gallery's rea

son for not accepting as a Masaccio the Portrait of a young man (p.45 3) in the Mellon Collection, but 'lacunae in the pictorial surface' do not inhibit the Gallery from accepting as a Masaccio the Madonna of humility (p.458), also in the MeUon Collection. Perhaps Boskovits's most audacious suggestion is that the Madonna and Child enthroned between Sts Paul and Peter (p.513), universally attributed to Domeni

co di Bartolo, is a fairly early work, dating from about 1460, by Mat teo di Giovanni. While the Gallery rejects these attributions, I

disagree with the official attribution to Botticelli of the Corsini

Madonna and Child (p. 152), yet another poorly preserved picture in the Mellon Collection. Boskovits accepts it as a BotticelU dating from about 1470 or a Uttle later. I cannot reconcile its lassitude with the nervous tension of the Fortitude in the Uffizi, Botticelli's first documented work, executed in 1470. For me the traditional attri

bution to FiUppino Lippi remains vaUd. Brown writes well on the Lombard, Umbrian and Venetian

pictures. About the supposed symboUsm of the wildUfe in Giovan ni BelUni's St Jerome reading (p. 70), he voices a commendable scep ticism (but in the entry for the latter, how disconcerting to see the Utde NiccoUni Christ on the Cross in the Cassa di Risparmio, Prato, reproduced next to the Uffizi's monumental Contini-Bonacossi St

Jerome reading, as if they were the same size). He hedges his bets on the attribution of the exquisite Judith with the head of Holqfemes (p.435) from the Widener CoUection, cataloguing it as 'Andrea

Mantegna or FoUower (Possibly GiuUo Campagnola) . . .

1495/1500'. Surely it is an autograph work, very Ukely the painting for which Lorenzo de' Medici thanked Mantegna in 1481 in his only surviving letter to an artist. In the entry on Francesco di Giorgio's

Nativity (p.278), reintegrated from fragments in the MetropoUtan Museum of Art, New York, and the National Gallery, Brown

argues convincingly against the existence of the Fiduciario di Francesco, an amanuensis of sorts, hypothetically responsible for

executing paintings for the busy architect, painter and sculptor. As

might be expected, Brown deUvers a masterly account of Leonar

do's Ginevra de' Bend. As for the Utde Leonardesque Dreyfus Madonna and Child (p.422), Brown leaves it as a Lorenzo di Credi of

1475/80, using as one of his arguments the conservators' observation

is right to catalogue it as 'Attributed to Fra AngeUco'. p. 139: In a letter to the Gallery in 19901 proposed that the Timken Adoration of the shepherds is by the Master of Signa; since then I recognised it as a work by the Master of the Johnson Tabernacle, a fol lower of Bicci di Lorenzo, active in the 1450s (for whom, see Strehlke in the

Philadelphia catalogue, pp.284?87). p.261 and p.265, note 10: I agree with Joseph

Manca that the Madonna and Child with angels is Ferrarese, and I have abandoned my hypothetical Master of the Camb? Madonna, p. 565 and p. 568, note 7: I am quoted as giving the St Jerome in the wilderness, catalogued by Brown as by a foUower of Perug ino, to the Pisan FoUower of Pinturicchio. It now looks to me Uke a work by Andrea

d'Assisi, ca?ed Ingegno.

THE BURLINGTON MAGAZINE - CXLVIII AUGUST 2006 539

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Sun, 21 Dec 2014 16:24:12 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

EARLY ITALIAN PAINTINGS IN WASHINGTON AND PHILADELPHIA

26. Scourging of four crowned martyrs,

by Niccol? di Pietro * Gerini. c. 13 85-90.

Tempera on panel, 60 by 43 cm. (Philadel phia Museum of Art).

that there are no fingerprints in the paint surface, a debatable reason for rejecting what is probably Leonardo's earUest surviving painting. Credi, as we know from his youthful version of the Benois Madonna in Dresden, never handled paint so deUcately.

In both catalogues the works of the Osservanza Master and Sano

di Pietro are treated separately, although Boskovits makes a strong case for identifying the master as the young Sano (p.479), and Strehlke agrees that there are 'weU-reasoned arguments that the

artists are the same person'. Strehlke's tentative identification of the

Pseudo-Pier Francesco Fiorentino as the painter Piero di Lorenzo di Pratese has gained support in recent studies.6 Piero di Lorenzo di Pratese formed a partnership with PeselUno in 1453, and, after

Pesellino's death in 1457, maintained the workshop they shared until his own death in 1487. Although no documented work by Piero di Lorenzo di Pratese has come to Ught, the few facts known about his life coincide with the nature of the Pseudo-Pier Francesco Fiorentino's sizeable output of repetitious Madonnas based on

PeselUno's and Fra FiUppo Lippi's designs (hence the designation the painter receives in the Washington catalogue: 'Follower of Fra

FiUppo Lippi and PeselUno'; p.416). Chiara Lachi's suggestion that Piero di Lorenzo di Pratese might be the Master of the CasteUo

Nativity must be abandoned.7 In his discussion of the CasteUo Mas ter's Adoration of the Christ Child (p.46) in the Johnson CoUection ?

the painting that prompted Berenson's r?int?gration of the master's

uvre - Strehlke repeats Charles Dempsey's hypothesis that the master's eponymous work was the lNostra Donna con tabemacolo

alVantico in the chapel of the Medici viUa at CasteUo Usted in the

1503 inventory of the property of Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco de' Medici and the heirs of his brother, Giovanni.8 But as aU frame aficionados know, the phrase Habemacolo alVantico9 denotes a rectan

gular frame in the antique-revival style, not a Gothic colmo, or

tabernacle with a mixtiUnear arched top Uke the frame of the Castel lo Nativity (Accademia, Florence). The painting described in the

inventory probably resembled the rectangular Adoration by the CasteUo Master in the Johnson CoUection.

The authors of the Washington catalogue have not been served

weU by their editors: for example, the table of contents omits an

entry (the St Jerome in the wilderness (p.444) attributed to a foUower of Mantegna), and throughout the book the name of the Florentine church of S. Trinita is speUed with an accent on the last syUable.

Most surprisingly, the catalogue lacks an index of accession num

bers. The highly inconsistent general index includes some donors but not others; the same is true for art historians, dealers, former

owners and restorers. Moreover, the authorship of some works of

art has changed: the Annalena and CamaldoU Adorations, men

tioned in the text as works by Fra FiUppo Lippi, become BotticelUs in the index. For previous owners, subjects, coats of arms and

seals, locations of related works and the Gallery's old inventory

numbers, readers must consult the exceUent indices in Shapley's

catalogue. The indices in the Philadelphia catalogue are impeccable. Further comments foUow:

Washington p.xiv: Andrew MeUon's daughter, the GaUery's principal donor of purchase funds,

was Ailsa, not Alisa, Bruce.

p.40, note 19: AntoneUo da Messina's Madonna and Child with two angels was not

bought from 'the Bardini CoUection, Florence' by the ItaUan government. The

painting never belonged to the art dealer Stefano Bardini: it was purchased along with another panel by AntoneUo from the same polyptych and the MarteUi coat

of arms attributed to DonateUo (together with the MarteUi Palace and its contents) to satisfy the w?l of Bardini's son, Ugo, which stipulated that his entire estate be sold and the proceeds be used to purchase one or at most two extraordinary works of art to be presented to the Uffizi or the BargeUo; see C. Acidini and A. Paoluc

ci, eds.: AntoneUo agli Uffizi. Un acquisto dello Stato per il riscatto dell'eredit? Bardini, Florence 2002, p.7.

p.66, note 13: Dal Pozzo should read Dal Pozzolo and BuonconsigUo BonconsigUo. p.98: The Madonna by Francesco BenagUo that Boskovits cites as being in the

Louvre belongs to the Mus?e Jacquemart-Andr?, Paris.

p.141, note 5: The abbreviated citation 'Maestro di San Miniato 1988' refers to a book edited by Gigetta Dalli RegoU, which is not in the bibUography.

p. 142: The Girolamo Casio, referred to as a 'Bolognese artist', was the Bolognese poet. p.266: The provenance Usts the portrait of Matteo OUvieri (?) as passing from Bardi

ni (without parentheses, which elsewhere indicate the art trade) to '(probably Luigi BelUni)'; it should read 'probably Ugo Bardini', Stefano Bardini's son, who

occasionaUy sold works from his father's estate.

p.277, note 25: This note does not refer to anything; perhaps it survives from an

earUer draft of the entry.

p.346: One of the wax seals on the back of Benozzo GozzoU's Feast of Herod, which also appears on the back of BotticeUi's Giuliano de' Medid in the National GaUery of Art, is that of Grand Duke Ferdinando I de' Medici, who, curiously, is not Usted in the provenance.

p.517, notes 13 and 16: 'Pietro di Giovanni' should read 'Giovanni di Pietro'; 'Bur richi' should read 'Buricchi'.

p.554: The basiUca of S. Maria degU AngeU is not in Perugia but on the plain below

Assisi, and the fresco in it of the Crudfixion is by Perugino's most talented student, Andrea d'Assisi, caUed Ingegno, the author of the Peruginesque polyptych of 1491 in the ViUa Albani, Rome.

p.713: The exhibition Domenico Ghirlandaio. Restauro e storia, Usted as having taken

place in 1983 in Fiesole, was held in FigUne Valdamo; the catalogue was pubUshed in Fiesole.

Philadelphia p. 106: Since the works attributed to Dalmasio appear to date from the 13 30s and none

of them can be connected with documents for the apparendy younger artist Dal masio di Jacopo degU Scannabecchi (active 1342-73), it is preferable to caU the

painter the Pseudo-Dalmasio.

p.306, fig.53.6: Master of Sant'Elsino; Helsinus was not a saint.

p.464, fig.93.2: The painting in the ?lustration is the Nativity by Lippo d'Andrea in the Pinacoteca Vaticana (inv. no. 194 [82]), not the painting of the same subject attributed to Bartolomeo di Tommaso, also in the Pinacoteca Vaticana (inv. no.40242 [194]).

6 See M. Hohnes: 'Copying Practices and Marketing Strategies in a Fifteenth-Cen

tury Florentine Painter's Workshop', in SJ. CampbeU and SJ. Milner, eds.: Artistic

Exchange and Cultural Translation in the Italian Renaissance City, Cambridge 2004,

pp.38?74; L. Syson: review of Fra Camevale: un artista rinasdmentale da FiUppo Lippi a

Piero delta Francesca in the burlington magazine 147 (2005), p. 138, note 6.

7 C. Lachi: H Maestro d?lia Nativit? di CasteUo, Florence 1995, pp.21-24. 8 C. Dempsey: 'A Hypothesis Concerning the "CasteUo Nativity" and a Scruple about the Date of BotticelU's "Primavera"', in K. Bergdolt and G. Bonsanti, eds.:

Opere e giomi. Studi su mille anni di arte europea dedicati a Max Seidel, Venice 2001,

p.351.

540 AUGUST 2006 CXLVIII THE BURLINGTON MAGAZINE

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Sun, 21 Dec 2014 16:24:12 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions