© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.
The chief and perhaps only antiquarian in Spain
Pompeo Leoni and his collection in Madrid
The collection of Pompeo Leoni (c.1533–1608) became a requisite attraction for illustrious visitors to the Spanish court. Leoni was Philip II's sculptor, but his possessions marked him as an aristocrat and a man of learning. Here, the contents of Leoni's collection, its display and dispersal are brought to light through an analysis of two extensive inventories and related correspondence, published here for the first time. Leoni's possessions and their display are compared with the collections of other artists and of humanists, aristocrats and the Crown. His collection provides an unusually well-documented case-study to demonstrate the importance of collecting in elevating social status in Early Modern Europe.
1 ‘Rubens s’étend ensuite sur le degrée auquel Léonard de Vinci possédait l'anatomie. Il rapporte en detail toutes les études et toutes les dessins que Léonard avait faits et que Rubens avait vus parmi les curiosités d'un nommé Pompéo Léoni, que étoit d'Arezzo. Il continue par l'anatomie des chevaux et par les observations que Léonard avoit faites sur la phisionomie, dont Rubens avoit pareillement vû les dessins e il finit par la méthode dont le peintre mesuroit le corps humain'. R. de Piles, Abrégé de la vie des peintres (Paris, 1699), p. 168.
2 ‘Fui a casa del Leoni convitato da lui per mostrarmi molte cose curiose che ha cosí di pittura e di scultura, come in material di medaglie per esser lui il primo et forse solo antiquario di questi paesi ... assai buone pitture uscite di Roma d'huomini celebri et tre libri di disegni di mano di Michelangelo.’ Entry number 592 in the Medici Archive Project's database, ‘Documentary Sources for the Arts and Humanities’. (Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Mediceo del Principato 4937, fol. 36, 31 January 1606.) Originally published by Edward Goldberg in ‘Artistic relations between the Medici and Spain 1587–1631, part 1’, Burlington Magazine 138 (1996), p. 113, no. 61.
3 Goldberg, op. cit. (note 2), p. 113, noted that in their correspondence, Tuscans frequently criticized Spaniards' lack of knowledge of art.
4 F. Calvo Serraller (ed.), Vincente Carducho: Diálogos de la pintura su defensa, origen, esencia, definícion, modos, y diferencias (Madrid, 1979), pp. 436–7. Carducho was supposed to inventory the paintings in Pompeo's collection, as the first page of the 1609 document indicates. The painter Fabrizio Castello replaced him.
5 Girolamo Borsieri (ed.), La nobiltá di Milano di Paolo Morigia (Milan, 1619), p. 67.
6 For Leone's collection, see A. Brusconi and U. Nebbia, La casa di Leone Leoni detta degli Omenoni (Milan, 1913); M. S. Tronca, ‘La collezione d'arte di Leone Leoni’, Tesi di laurea, Universitá degli Studi di Pisa (1976–7); M. Mezzatesta, ‘Imperial Themes in the Sculpture of Leone Leoni’, Ph.D. dissertation, New York University (1980); N. Leopold, ‘Artists’ Homes in Sixteenth-Century Italy', Ph.D. dissertation, Johns Hopkins University (1980); M. S. Tronca, ‘La collezione di Leone Leoni e le sue implicazioni culturali’, in M. L. Gatti Perer (ed.), Leone Leoni tra Lombardia e Spagna, Atti del convegno internazionale, Menaggio 25–26 settembre 1993 (Milan, 1995), pp. 31–8; K. Helmstutler, ‘"To Demonstrate the Greatness of His Spirit": Leone Leoni and the Casa degli Omenoni’, Ph.D. dissertation, Rutgers University (2000); and K. Helmstutler Di Dio, ‘Leone Leoni's art collection: the 1609 inventory’, Burlington Magazine 145 (2003), pp. 572–8.
7 Pompeo's will reads, ‘encargo y mando al dicho Micael Angel [Leoni] que tenga cuenta de guardar y sustentar todas las dichas cosas del dicho mi oficio y arte, teniendolas siempre sin disminuillas ni enaxenallas, para que se sustente mi memoria y la del dicho Señor Caballero Leoni, mi padre’. F. J. Zarco Cuevas, ‘Testamento de Pompeyo Leoni, Escultor de Carlos V y de Felipe II, otorgado en Madrid a 8 de octubre de 1608’, Revista española de arte 2 (1932–3), p. 71, no. 22.
8 The inventories will be referred to throughout the text as ‘1609’ (Archivo Histórico de Protocolos, Madrid (AHPM). Protocolo no. 2.662, fols. 1338–84) and ‘1613’ (Archivo Histórico de Protocolos. Protocolo no. 2.661, fols. 617–86).
9 For Leone Leoni's artistic production, see E. Plon, Les maîtres italiens au service de la maison d'Autriche. Leone Leoni sculpteur de Charles Quint et Pompeo Leoni sculpteur de Philippe II (Paris, 1887); Mezzatesta, op. cit. (note 6); and M. L. Gatti Perer (ed.), Leone Leoni tra Lombardia e Spagna, Atti del convegno internazionale, Menaggio 25–26 settembre 1993 (Milan, 1995); and J. Urrea (ed.), Los Leoni (1509–1608). Escultores del renacimento italiano al servicio de la corte de España, exh. cat., Museo Nacional del Prado (Madrid, 1994).
10 For Pompeo Leoni, see Plon, op. cit. (note 9) and B. Proske, Pompeo Leoni. Work in Marble and Alabaster in Relation to Spanish Sculpture (New York, 1956).
11 For the Imperial portraits by the Leoni, see Rosario Coppel Aréizaga, Museo del Prado. Catálogo de la escultura de época moderna: Siglos xvi-xviii (Madrid, 1998).
12 The medals of Honorato Juan (Museo Arqueológico, Madrid), Prince Don Carlos (Lázaro Galdiano, Madrid) and Diego de Lerma (Museo Arqueológico, Madrid) date from this period. For Pompeo's production of medals, see A. R. G. de Ceballos, ‘Forma, clientela, y iconografía en las medallas de Leone y Pompeo Leoni’, and M. Cano, ‘Leone y Pompeo Leoni, medallistas de la casa de Austria’, in Urrea, op. cit. (note 9), pp. 77–85 and pp. 163–201, respectively.
13 On 13 December 1567, Pompeo bought a house, with the help of his mother, in the parish of San Andrés (AHPM, 170). Margarita Estella Marcos, ‘Algo más sobre Pompeyo Leoni’, Archivo Español de Arte 66 (1993), pp. 138–9. According to C. Pérez Pastor, ‘Noticias y documentos relativos a la historia y literatura españolas’, Memorias de la Real Academia Española 2 (1914), no. 20.95, on 29 July 1574, Pompeo bought a house on the Carrera de San Francisco and an adjoining property with a garden and a stable. The house was identified on Texeira's map of 1656 of the city of Madrid in the exhibition catalogue, J. Vidaurre Jofre, El Madrid de Velázquez y Calderón. Villa y Corte en el siglo xvii. ii. El Plano de Texeria: Lugares, Nombres y Sociedad (Madrid, 2000), pl. 18, no. 622.
14 See I. Cadiñanos Bardeci, ‘Pompeyo Leoni y los arcos de la entrada triunfal de doña Ana de Austria’, Academia. Boletín de la Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando 86 (1998), pp. 179–91.
15 For the decoration of the Escorial, see R. Mulcahy, The Decoration of the Royal Basilica of El Escorial (New York, 1994).
16 Leone left the statue incomplete at his death on 22 July 1590.
17 See V. Tovar Martín, ‘La entrada triunfal en Madrid de doña Margarita de Austria, 24 octubre de 1599’, Archivio Español de Arte 244 (1988), pp. 385–403.
19 P. Venturelli, ‘"E per tal variar natura é bella". Arti decorative a Milano tra Leonardo e Lomazzo’, in Rabisch. Il grottesco nell'arte del Cinquecento. L'Accademia della Val di Blenio, Lomazzo, e l'ambiente Milanese (Milan, 1998), pp. 77–88. In the registers of the goldsmiths of Milan, Leoni conceded the segno della cadena, the workshop mark that had been his up to that point, to Cesare Lampugnano.
20 For Leoni's work in precious stones, see P. Venturelli, ‘Un documento inedito per un'opera in cristallo: Pompeo Leoni e Michele Scala’, Arte Lombarda 124 (1998), p. 66. See also C. Daviller, Recherches sur l'orfèvrerie en Espagne au Moyen Age et à la renaissance (Paris, 1879), p. 218; and F. Checa Cremades, Felipe II. Mecenas de las artes (Madrid, 1993), p. 171. The medal of Concordia in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, is an example of his work in agate. For this medal, see P. Venturelli, Gioelli e gioielleri milanesi. Storia, arte, moda (1540–1630) (Milan, 1996), p. 57; and M.L. Tárraga Baldó, ‘Ágata de la Concordia’, in Urrea, op. cit. (note 9), p. 134, no. 23.
21 I thank Rosemarie Mulcahy for clarifying this for me. Mulcahy suggests that Ginesa may have been a relative of Cesare and Giulio Vala who assisted Pompeo on the production of the Escorial bronzes in Milan.
22 See Zarco Cuevas, op. cit. (note 7).
23 Previous studies of Leoni's collection have offered new identifications of objects from the collection, but have not fully considered the collection's importance in Madrid, or identified which objects came from Leone's collection nor explained the dispersal of the collection in the second decade of the seventeenth century. This oversight is in part due to the fact that the two known inventories of the collection (dated 1609 and 1613) were unpublished prior to the present study (they were first cited in Pérez, op. cit. (note 13), nos. 125.635 and 143.732).
The Marqués of Saltillo, ‘La herencia de Pompeyo Leoni’, Boletín de la Sociedad Española de Escursiones 42 (1934), pp. 103–21, consulted a copy used in legal proceedings between Pompeo the Younger and the heirs in Milan. It is located in the Archivo Histórico Nacional, Madrid, Consejo Legado no. 30.963, fols. 240v–325r. Saltillo did not transcribe the document in full. Moreover, a comparison with the original inventory in the AHPM, reveals numerous differences from Saltillo's version. Attributions, fuller or different descriptions and works of art that were not included by Saltillo appear in the original. What is more, Saltillo's version omits the information given in the original document concerning the allocation of the objects in the house.
More recently, M. Burke (‘Private Collections of Italian Art in Seventeenth-Century Spain’, Ph.D. dissertation, New York University, 1984) consulted the original 1609 appraisal and was apparently unaware of Saltillo's publication. Burke included a transcription of only those paintings given attributions in the appendix of his dissertation but did not discuss in detail the collection as a whole. In his recent publication co-edited with Peter Cherry, Collections of Paintings in Madrid, 1601–1755. Documents for the History of Collecting, Spanish Inventories, i, Getty Provenance Index (Los Angeles, 1997), the inventory of Leoni's collection was not included.
Gabriele Finaldi, ‘The Conversion of St Paul and other works by Parmigianino in Pompeo Leoni's collection’, Burlington Magazine 136 (1994), pp. 110–12, remarked on the discrepancies between Saltillo's document and the original. He also signalled the existence of the 1613 inventory. In addition, Finaldi identified four of the paintings in the collection by or after Parmigianino.
Studies on Leonardo da Vinci's notebooks and drawings inevitably call attention to Leoni's ownership of the majority of Leonardo's production on paper. Among them are K. Clark and C. Pedretti, The Drawings of Leonardo da Vinci in the Collection of Her Majesty The Queen at Windsor Castle (London, 1968), vol. I, p. x; S. Elliot, ‘The Pompeo Leoni volume of Leonardo's drawings at Windsor’, Burlington Magazine 98 (1956), pp. 11–17; C. Pedretti, ‘The history of the manuscripts’, supplement to J. P. Richter, The Literary Works of Leonardo da Vinci (Oxford, 1977), vol. II, pp. 393–402; C. Pedretti, ‘The Burlington House cartoon’, Burlington Magazine 60 (1968), p. 22; and C. Pedretti, Leonardo: A Study in Chronology and Style (London, 1973), p. 134; L. Reti, Leonardo da Vinci. I Codici di Madrid (Florence, 1974), vol. III, p. 15; A. Marinoni, Leonardo da Vinci. Il Codice Trivulziano (Milan, 1980), p. viii; and, most recently, N. García Tapia, ‘Los codices de Leonardo en España’, Boletín del Seminario de Estudios de Arte y Arqueología 63 (1997), pp. 372–95; and C. Pedretti, Il Codice Atlantico della Biblioteca Ambrosiana di Milano. Leonardo da Vinci nella trascrizione critica di Augusto Marinoni (Florence, 2000).
P. B. Conti, ‘Obras en crystal de roca de Michele Scala, propriedad de Pompeo Leoni’, Archivo Español de Arte 67 (1994), pp. 85–6, located documentary evidence concerning a rock-crystal cup and a vase in the form of a boat produced by Michele Scala and listed in the 1613 inventory. The two objects are listed on fol. 630r. P. Venturelli, op. cit. [Un documento] (note 13), pp. 65–7, questioned Conti's evidence.
N. Sánchez Esteban, ‘El legado de Pompeo Leoni: su biblioteca y los manuscritos de Leonardo’, in Perer, op. cit. (note 9), pp. 105–12, discussed the content of Leoni's book collection and transcribed the list of books included in the 1613 inventory.
Finally, Margarita Estella Marcos (‘Algo más sobre Pompeyo Leoni’, Archivo Español de Arte 66 (1993), pp. 133–49; ‘Los Leoni, escultores entre Italia y España’, in Urrea, op. cit. (note 9), pp. 29–62; and ‘El mecenazgo de la Reina María de Hungría en el campo de la escultura’, in M. J. Redondo Cantera and M. A. Zalama (eds.), Carlos V y las artes. Promoción artística y familia imperial (Valladolid, 2000), pp. 283–321) has published various notices from the inventories in her articles on Leoni's collection. In addition to identifying some of the objects in the collection, she was the first to attempt an analysis of both the 1609 and 1613 documents in order to affirm the collection's overall importance for Spanish art and collecting.
Though these scholarly studies have augmented our general knowledge of Pompeo Leoni's collection, only inventories in their entirety allow us fully to understand the motives, tastes and extent of a collection. The unavailability of complete inventories impedes a comprehensive study of a collector, his aims and tastes in collecting, the placement and mode of display of objects. Therefore, the accessibility of the 1609 and 1613 inventories (see Supplementary Material) allows insights into the overall scope of Pompeo Leoni's collection, and, in general, they enrich our understanding of seventeenth-century collecting and taste.
24 For the inventory process, see Burke and Cherry, op. cit. (note 23), pp. 188–90.
25 For Antón de Morales, see E. Bénézit (ed.), Dictionnaire critique et documentaire des peintres, sculpteurs, dessinateurs, et graveurs de tous les temps et de tous les pays (Paris, 1966), vol. VI, p. 205; U. Thieme and F. Becker (eds.), Allgemeines Lexikon der Bildenden Künstler (Leipzig, 1940), vol. XXV, p. 116. For Alonso Vallejo, see Thieme and Becker, vol. XXXIV, p. 79; and Proske, op. cit. (note 10), pp. 36–8. For Bernardino del Acqua (or Veneziano), see Benezit, vol. I, p. 22, and J. A. Céan Bermúdez, Diccionario Histórico de Bellas Artes (Madrid, 1800), vol. I, pp. 4–5. For Fabrizio Castello, see Thieme and Becker, vol. VI, p. 150, and Céan-Bermúdez, vol. I, pp. 275–7.
26 Burke and Cherry, op. cit. (note 23), p. 189, remarked upon the difficulty in translating values in seventeenth-century appraisals into modern day currencies, due to the instability of the Spanish economy during that period. To give some idea of the value of a real, Burke and Cherry noted that an unskilled worker in the 1620s made about one real a day and, therefore, that a painting appraised at 1,000 reales was ‘an extremely valuable asset’.
27 1609, 1351v. This could also refer to a copy after Michelangelo.
28 For example, many of the objects found in the aposento primero and in the sala grande in 1609 are found in the sala grande or in the attic in 1613. The paintings listed in the bedroom in the 1609 inventory are found in the attic in 1613.
29 1609, 1339r–v. 1613, 654v. The wooden figures of St John and Christ are not listed in the corridor in 1613.
See Estella, op. cit. [El mecenazgo] (note 23), pp. 302–4. Estella associates the head of the horse with Leone's unrealized project for an equestrian monument of Charles V. It could, however, also be a cast from the Marcus Aurelius monument. A full-length cast of the Marcus Aurelius monument was once in the courtyard of the Casa degli Omenoni. See Helmstutler, op. cit. (note 6), pp. 264–5.
30 1609, 1343r–6r. 1613, 617v–22r.
31 The table is described in 1613, 622r. Eleven marble portrait busts were placed on top of it. For furniture of this period, see M. Paz Aguiló Alonso, El mueble en España. Siglos xvi-xvii (Madrid, 1993).
32 1609, 1341r–2v. The wooden statue of St Francis is in the attic in 1613 (663v). The reliefs from Trajan's Column are not named in the 1613 inventory.
35 1613, 644v. One of these was a document in which Leone Leoni transferred to Pompeo his privilege of striking money at the Imperial mint in Milan.
37 In 1613, this room is called the aposento chico. In addition to some of the paintings listed in 1609 there are a few plaster casts, three swords, a pistol, religious paintings, two prints (one a Last Judgment and one a Madonna and Christ), a print of the city of Antwerp and another feather picture (651r–2v). The Danaë and Io are discussed below.
39 The kitchen is inventoried in 1613, 655r–v. Only the ante-room to the kitchen is inventoried in 1609.
41 In 1613 the portraits of the Leoni family are listed in the attic.
43 Some of these may be listed among the items in the desban in the 1613 inventory, 664v.
44 The contents of the aposento primero are listed in 1609, 1349r–83v.
45 In 1613, these items were in the aposento del desban. The Christ figure with its Calvary is in the sala grande in 1613.
46 The presence of several pieces of bronze, pietra dura, a wooden mannequin and descriptions of the statues as ‘repaired’ or ‘to be repaired’ suggest that this room may have been Pompeo's studio. Estella, op. cit. (note 13), p. 142, identified the studio in the sala grande. However, the room with sculptures for the pedestal project for the Cathedral of Toledo contains numerous tools for working in stone and metal and thus could also be proposed as Pompeo's working space (1609, 1383v, and 1613, 673r–7r). Another possibility, and I think the more likely, is that many things were brought to this room after Pompeo's death from a studio that was separate from the house. Considering the dust, fumes and danger of fire that a studio inside the house would have posed, it is unlikely that Pompeo would have worked in this room, surrounded by his most prized possessions.
47 1609, 1351v. Estella, op. cit. [El mecenazgo] (note 23), p. 304, discussed the crucifix attributed in the inventory as an authentic work by Buonarotti, possibly obtained by Leone. While that possibility is very attractive, it cannot be excluded that the Michelangelo referred to is instead Michelangelo Leoni. This same attribution problem is valid for almost all the works assigned to Michelangelo in these inventories.
49 In 1613 the collection of animal species is found in the sala grande (623r).
51 1613, 645r and 626v, respectively. The carafe may either be from the New World or from India. This type of object was produced in both locales by this date.
54 1609, 1343v. This Descent could be the same as (or one part of) the feather triptych of the Passion in the later inventory.
57 1609, 1368r. Saltillo recorded it as having 174 folios (Saltillo, op. cit. (note 23), p. 112). This error has repeated in subsequent literature on the Vinciniana in Leoni's collection.
58 The book of 268 folios is found on 1368r–72v. The book of 323 prints is listed from 1373r–v.
García, op. cit. (note 23), suggested that the book of 268 folios might have been taken to Windsor along with that of 234 folios. He cites the reference in the inventory of the 268-paged book to coloured fruit drawings and associated them with drawings of the same description in Windsor. Manuscript B, one of the fifteen libretti that Pompeo owned, also has coloured drawings of fruit. Pedretti and Richter, op. cit. (note 23), vol. II, p. 401.
60 García, op. cit. (note 23), pp. 372–95.
61 1609, 1374v–5v. The drawings for the ephemera appear on 1609, 1374v, and 1613, 636v and 676r. There are drawings related to his projects for the Oratorio of Ibarra, Ciempozuelos, the retable for the Merced, and the tomb of the Count of Villalonga.
62 This suggests that Polidoro's frieze may have served as a source for the reliefs or figures for the pedestal Pompeo was creating for the Cathedral of Toledo.
63 1609, 1338v. In addition to the items listed here, an unknown quantity of unspecified models were valued at 1,027 reales. In 1613, there is another grouping of unspecified models in the aposento de los relieves, 658v.
66 For Leone's acquisition of Leonardo's statuette (or a copy of it) and its presence in the collection, see G. P. Lomazzo, Trattato dell’arte della pittura scultura et architettura (Milan, 1584), reprinted in P. Barocchi, Scritti d’arte del Cinquecento (Milan and Naples, 1971–7), vol. II, p. 155; M. A. Agghazy, Leonardo's Equestrian Statuette (Budapest, 1989); and Estella, op. cit. [El mecenazgo] (note 23), pp. 310–11.
68 Many of these are found in the ante-rooms and the bedroom in 1609.
69 For the studio space, see note 46.
70 1609, 1383v, and 1613, 673r–7r.
71 For the status of the artist in Renaissance Italy, see, among others, R. Wittkower, ‘Individualism in art and artists: a Renaissance problem’, Journal of the History of Ideas 22 (1961), pp. 291–302; E. Panofsky, ‘Artist, sculptor, genius in the Renaissance’, Six Essays (New York, 1962), pp. 123–82; A. Martindale, The Rise of the Artist in the Middle Ages and Early Renaissance (London, 1972); B. Cole, The Renaissance Artist at Work from Pisano to Titian (London, 1983); M. Warnke, The Court Artist (Cambridge, 1993); J. Woods-Marsden, Renaissance Self-Portraits. The Visual Construction of the Identity and the Social Status of the Artist (New Haven and London, 1998); and F. Ames Lewis, The Intellectual Life of the Early Renaissance Artist (New Haven, 2000).
72 For artists’ homes in the sixteenth century, see Leopold, op. cit. (note 6), and E. Hüttinger (ed.), Case di artista. Dal rinascimento a oggi (Turin, 1992). Other important sixteenth-century houses and collections are those of Giorgio Vasari and Alessandro Vittoria. See C. Monbeig Goguel, ‘Vasari's attitude toward collecting’, pp. 111–36; C. Gilbert, ‘The Vasari art collection’, pp. 137–42; and A. Cecchi, ‘Giorgio Vasari's collection of paintings: its provenance and its fate’, pp. 147–60, all in Philip Jacks (ed.), Vasari's Florence: Artists and Literati at the Medicean Court (Cambridge and New York, 1998); V. Avery, ‘Alessandro Vittoria collezionista’, in A. Bacchi, L. Camerlengo and M. Leithe-Jasper (eds.), ‘La bellissima maniera’. Alessandro Vittoria e la scultura veneta del Cinquecento, exh. cat., Castello del Buonconsiglio (Trento, 1999), pp. 141–51; and V. Avery, ‘The house of Alessandro Vittoria reconstructed’, Sculpture Journal 5 (2001), pp. 7–32. Other sixteenth-century artists’ collections of note include those of Sodoma, the Sangallo family, Valerio Belli, and Giulio Romano. Italian artists’ collections continued to grow in prestige and importance during the seventeenth century. Notable seventeenth-century Italian artists’ collections include those of Martino Longhi, Filippo Napoletano, Cesare Baglione and Tiburzio Passarotti. See C. De Benedictis, Per la storia del collezionsimo italiano. Fonti e documenti (Florence, 1995), pp. 28–32.
73 See Helmstutler, op. cit. (note 6), pp. 85–106.
75 For Leone's collection of casts, see: F. Haskell and N. Penny, Taste and the Antique. The Lure of Classical Sculpture 1500–1900 (New Haven and London, 1981), pp. 5–6; and B. Boucher, ‘Leone Leoni and Primaticcio's moulds of antique sculpture’, Burlington Magazine 72 (1981), pp. 23–26.
76 Leone's contemporaries recognized the importance of his collection in elevating artists’ status. Vasari recorded: ‘Il quale Leone, per mostrare la grandezza del suo animo, il bello ingegno che ha avuto dalla natura, ed il favore della fortuna, ha con molta spesa condotto di bellissima architettura un casotto nella contrada de’ Moroni, pieno in modo di capricciose invenzioni, che non c’é forse un altro simile in tutto Milano ... Dalla porta principale, mediante un andito, si entra in un cortile, dove nel mezzo sopra quattro colonne é il cavallo con la statua di Marco Aurelio, formato di gesso da quello proprio che é in Campidoglio ... Oltre al quel cavallo, come in altro luogo s’é detto, ha in quella sua bella e comodissima abitazione formata di gesso quant’opere lodate di scultura o di getto ha potuto avere, o moderne o antiche’. G. Milanesi (ed.), Le vite de’più eccellenti pittori, scultori, ed architetti di Giorgio Vasari (Milan, 1906), vol. VII, pp. 540–41. Elsewhere in the Vite (vol. VII, p. 35), Vasari described Leone's house as ‘ornatissima e tutta piena di statue antiche e moderne, e di figure di gesso formate da cose rare’. Girolamo Borsieri wrote, ‘La prima galleria, che qui fosse fatta fu quella di Leone Aretino coniatore di sí rara eccellenza, che meritò di esser creato Cavalliero, prima che solessero conferirsi à gli artefici i cavallerati. Non fu galleria di una stanza sola, ma di molte, anzi di una compiuta casa’. Morigia-Borsieri, op. cit. (note 5), p. 67.
77 For the certificate of his knighthood, see C. Dell’Acqua, ‘Del luogo di nascita di Leone Leoni e del monumento mediceo da lui eseguito in Milano’, Archivio storico dell’arte 2 (1889), pp. 73–81. The petition for Aretine citizenship and nobility is published in K. Helmstutler Di Dio, ‘Leone Aretino: new documentary evidence of Leone Leoni's birthplace and early training’, Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz 2/3 (1998/2000), pp. 645–52.
I have found two documents in which Pompeo is referred to as a cavagliere. The first is that published in (Supplementary Material Appendix i, document i), in which Ferrante Gonzaga calls him cavallerino. The second is an undated letter from Pompeo to Sallustio Tarugi concerning a chapel project for the Conde de Chinchón. Pompeo signed the letter ‘il cavall.o Pompeo Leoni’. The letter, which I shall publish in a forthcoming article on the chapel project, is in the Archivio di Stato, Florence, Mediceo del Principato 5031, fol. 322.
78 Leone's will was published by Mezzatesta, op. cit. (note 6), pp. 397–404.
79 For the status of the artist in Spain, see J. Gállego, El pintor de artesano a artista (Granada, 1976); and J. J. Martín González, El artista en la sociedad española del siglo xvii (Madrid, 1984).
80 Checa, op. cit. (note 20), p. 190. D. de Villalta, De las statuas antiguas (1590); V. Carducho, Diálogos de la pintura su defensa, origen, esencia, definícion, modos, y diferencias (1633); F. Pacheco, Arte de la pintura (1649); Martínez, Discursos practicables del nobilísmo del arte de la pintura (c.1670).
81 The wealth Trezzo accumulated thanks to the salary granted him as the King's sculptor, allowed him to own a house near the Monastery of Carmen and other properties. His house in Madrid was decorated with religious paintings, portraits, plaster casts, a few ancient sculptures, a bronze statuette, some reliefs and numerous precious objects, jewels, medals and cameos (some of which may be of his own production). He also had a sizeable collection of books on philosophy, religion, mathematics and antiquity, as well as works by Dante, Vasari, Erasmus and Marcus Aurelius. The inventory of Trezzo's sculptures will be published in K. Helmstutler Di Dio, ‘Sculpture in Spanish collections from Philip II to Philip IV’, in Collecting Sculpture in Early Modern Europe. Studies in the History of Art, Center for Advanced Studies in the Visual Arts, National Gallery of Art (Washington, forthcoming 2007).
The Florentine-born Vincente Carducho owned a house on the prestigious Calle de Atocha and was one of the few artists to possess a notable collection of paintings. An inventory of his studio lists paintings by Titian, Giorgione and Tintoretto. He had a library of over 300 volumes, including theoretical treatises on the arts, religious and historical writings and literary texts. In addition to Leoni's collection, Carducho also noted the status and collections of Gaci and Crescenzi in his Diálogos. Carducho recorded that Crescenzi owned paintings and drawings, and models of his design for the Pantheon at the Escorial. Concerning Gaci's home, Carducho wrote that one could see things ‘by his hand’ such as models of fountains, portraits in wax and an equestrian statuette. See M. Crawford Volk, Vincencio Carducho and Seventeenth-Century Castilian Painting (New York and London, 1977). For the location of artists’ houses in the seventeenth century, see Vidaurre, op. cit. (note 13).
82 Berruguete spent a considerable amount of time in Italy (from 1508 to 1516) and upon his return to Spain he was named ‘Pintor del Rey’ to Charles I (the future Emperor Charles V). He was granted the titles of Lord of Villatoquite and Lord of Ventosa de la Cuesta and was rewarded with the position of Escribano del crimen (scribe to the criminal section) of the Royal Chancellery. In Villatoquite, he built a country home; in Ventosa de la Cuesta he was given an honourable burial in the parish church. Berruguete also owned an important house in Valladolid and several vineyards. See J. J. Martín González, ‘Consideraciones sobre la vida y la obra de Alonso Berruguete’, Boletín del Seminario de Estudios de Arte y Arqueología 28 (1961), pp. 11–30.
Though Juan de Herrera visited Italy only once and as a soldier, he was well versed in Italian style. He became a renowned intellectual, versed in mathematics, philosophy and science, and was esteemed by Philip II. The titles granted to him by the King, including ayuda de la furriera, the King's architect, and Aposentador Mayor de Palacio (chamberlain), permitted him unrestricted access to the King and allowed him to accumulate a sizeable fortune. His wealth and his property holdings in Maliaño afforded him the life of a courtier. His house was decorated with some art objects and scientific instruments and an impressive book collection. For Herrera's status, see C. Wilkinson-Zerner, Juan de Herrera Architect to Philip II of Spain (New Haven and London, 1993), pp. 1–13. For the inventory of Herrera's possessions, see L. Cervera Vera, Inventario de los bienes de Juan de Herrera (Valencia, 1977).
Velázquez's struggle for status is famous and demonstrates that the obstacles faced by Spanish artists continued well into the seventeenth century. Velázquez actively sought out fame, wealth and prestige and was rewarded with several titles during his career. He travelled to Italy on two occasions (1629–30 and again in 1649–51) where he studied Italian art, sought out antiquities and other art objects for the royal collections and witnessed at first-hand the high status enjoyed by Italian artists.
Velázquez's appointments included yearly stipends that allowed him to accumulate wealth and he lived honourably in accommodation granted by the King. An inventory of his apartment reveals the lavish furnishings he possessed. He owned forty-four paintings by important artists such as Titian and Van Dyck, twenty-eight tapestries, ebony and marble furniture, curiosities from India, plaster casts of ancient sculptures, jewels, medals and preciosos such as a clock decorated with diamonds. He also had an important book collection that comprised texts on architecture, perspective, astrology, religion, geography, mythology and mathematics. For Velázquez's possessions, see F. J. Sánchez Cantón, ‘Cómo vivía Velázquez. Inventario descubierto por D. F. Rodríguez Marín’, Archivo Español de Arte 15 (1942), pp. 69–91; E. Harris, Velázquez (Oxford, 1982); J. Brown, Velázquez. Painter and Courtier (New Haven, 1986); and J. M. Pita Andrade, J. M. Martín García, and A. Aterido Fernández (eds.), Corpus velazqueño. Documentos y textos (Madrid, 2000).
84 Burke and Cherry, op. cit. (note 23), p. 43.
85 See S. Schroth, ‘The Private Picture Collection of the Duke of Lerma’, Ph.D. dissertation, New York University (1990).
86 Burke and Cherry, op. cit. (note 23), p. 17.
87 See A. Delaforce, ‘The collection of Antonio Pérez, Secretary of State to Philip II’, Burlington Magazine 124 (1982), pp. 742–52.
89 For Spanish taste and Italian painting, see A. Bustamente García, ‘Datos sobre el gusto español del siglo xvi’, Archivo Español de Arte 68 (1995), pp. 304–8; E. Goldberg, ‘Circa 1600: Spanish values and Tuscan painting’, Renaissance Quarterly 51 (1998), pp. 912–33; Goldberg, op. cit. (note 2) and ibid., ‘Artistic relations between the Medici and Spain 1587–1631, part ii’, Burlington Magazine 138 (1996), pp. 529–40; C. Guana, ‘Giudizi e polemiche intorno a Caravaggio e Tiziano nei trattati d‘arte spagnoli del xvii secolo: Carducho, Pacheco e la tradizione artistica italiana’, Ricerche di storia dell’arte 64 (1998), pp. 57–78; and M. Falomir Faus (ed.), Los Bassano en la España del siglo de oro, exh. cat., Museo del Prado (Madrid, 2001).
90 Burke and Cherry, op. cit. (note 23), p. 64.
93 Since Spain had no tradition of bronze or marble sculpture production, sculptors, like Pompeo Leoni, Jacopo Nizzola da Trezzo and others, were brought from Italy. (This is, in fact, one of the reasons Leoni enjoyed such high status in Spain.) Thus, modern sculptures were not as easily available as they were in Italy. Secondly, paintings were easy to ship by land or sea and therefore much less expensive to import than most forms of sculpture. The most important and costly of these objects were marble and stone sculptures, which were worth thousands of reales when they arrived in Spain. Thirdly, because of the generally reduced costs of commissioning paintings (at the very least in terms of the costs of the materials) compared to sculptures, paintings were more often sent from Italy as state gifts and were more often commissioned or requested by Spanish patrons for their collections. As a result, the ownership of paintings was common even among individuals of lesser means and the ownership of ancient and modern sculptures (whether originals or plaster casts) became a signifier of the owner's wealth, political connections and erudition. For a discussion of sculpture in Spanish collections of the Early Modern period, see Helmstutler Di Dio, op. cit. (note 81).
94 Diego de Villalta in his Tratado de las antigüedades de la memorable Peña de Martos. Donde al principio se trata de las estatuas Antiguas. Con particular mençion de algunos bultos y figures de nuestros Reyes de España, con dibujos en sepia o tinta de estatuas antiguas y modernas de los reyes españoles desde Don Rodrigo a Felipe II of 1591, wrote that it took ‘... mucho cuidado, costa y diligencia’ to collect sculpture. As quoted by M. Morán Turina, ‘Salvar la memoria de las piedras’, La Vision del Mundo Clásico en el Arte Español (Madrid, 1993), p. 196.
95 Inventories of collections usually omit the gardens and facades because they were considered permanent fixtures, like architecture. Because of this, discussions of Spanish collections of sculpture have tended to exclude the sculpture in their gardens. Yet another problem in assessing Spanish taste for sculpture is that chapels and oratories in homes are often not considered in inventories.
96 Sculpture was especially sent from Florence. E. Goldberg surmised that ‘by the last years of the reign of Philip II, an assumption seems to have arisen among Spanish collectors that Florence was the natural home for sculpture while Venice was the natural home of painting’ (Goldberg, op. cit. (note 2), p. 535). Princes and members of the nobility sent gifts of art objects to Spain in hopes of securing the King's favour. They were sent to members of the royal family, ministers, courtiers and their wives and to ladies-in-waiting. The Tuscan court, in particular, took advantage of the esteemed reputation of Florentine artists and craftsmen, sending numerous gifts to Madrid. For examples of this practice, in addition to the articles cited by Goldberg, op. cit. (note 89), see R. Mulcahy, Philip II of Spain. Patron of the Arts (Dublin, 2004), pp. 91–114; and R. Coppel Aréizaga, ‘Giambologna y los crucifijos enviados a España’, Goya 301–2 (2004), pp. 201–14.
97 Another great noble collection was that of Marqués del Carpio y de Heliche (1629–87), who was ambassador to Rome in 1672–83 and viceroy of Naples from 1683 until his death. See B. Cacciotti, ‘La collezione del vii Marchese del Carpio tra Roma e Madrid’, Bolletino d’Arte 86–7 (1994), pp. 133–96.
98 For collections of scholars in Spain during this period, see, for example, R. Lightbown, ‘Some notes on Spanish Baroque collectors’, in O. Impey and A. MacGregor (eds.), The Origins of Museums (Oxford, 1985), pp. 147–58; Morán, op. cit. (note 94); J. Beltrán Fortes, ‘La escultura clásica en el coleccionismo erudito de Andalucía (siglos xvii-xviii)’, and G. Mora, ‘La escultura clasica y los estudios sobre la Antigüedad en España en el siglo xvi. Colecciones, tratados, y libros de diseños’ in Pilar Silva Marota et al., El coleccionismo de escultura clásica en España (Madrid, 2001), pp. 115–41 and pp. 143–71, respectively; and V. Lleó Cañal, ‘Los usos de la Antigüedad: colecciones arqueológicas en la España del Renacimiento’, Reales Sitios 156 (2003), pp. 31–43.
99 The impact exerted by his collection on local artists has yet to be examined. The utility of the casts was recognized by Federico Borromeo who bought many of them for his painting academy in Milan, as discussed below.
100 These items are listed on 1609, 1341r, 1378r, 1380r; and 1613, 630r, 630v, 631v, 636r, 644r, 645r–v.
101 Conti, op. cit. (note 23) argued that Leoni transported rock-crystal objects made by Michele della Scala to Spain.
103 For the Wunderkammer tradition, see J. von Schlosser, Die Kunst- und Wunderkammern der Spätrenaissance. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des Sammelwesens (Leipzig, 1908); K. Pomian, ‘La culture de la curiosité’, Scienze, credenze occulte, livelli di cultura (Florence, 1982); essays in Impey and MacGregor, op. cit. (note 98); and P. Findlen, Possessing Nature: Museums, Collecting, and Scientific Culture in Early Modern Italy (Berkeley, 1994).
104 See J. M. Morán and F. Checa Cremades, El coleccionismo en España. De la cámara de maravillas a la galleria de pinturas (Madrid, 1985).
106 Morán and Checa, op. cit. (note 104), p. 135, cite examples in the collections of Diego Hurtado de Mendoza, Juan Fernández, the Count of Ficallo and the Inquisitor Gascó.
107 I thank Rosemarie Mulcahy for bringing Turriano's hydraulic devices to my attention.
108 See J. A. García Diego, Los relojes y autómatas de Juanelo Turriano (Valencia, 1982).
109 Morán and Checa, op. cit. (note 104), p. 208.
111 See Morán and Checa, op. cit. (note 104).
112 Morán and Checa, op. cit. (note 104), pp. 132–3.
113 See D. Heikamp, Mexico and the Medici (Florence, 1972); and idem, ‘Il Nuovo Mondo’, Magnificenza alla corte dei Medici. Arte a Firenze alla fine del Cinquecento (Milan, 1997), pp. 399–402.
114 Quotation from inventory of 1611. Morán and Checa, op. cit. (note 104), p. 221.
115 The following paintings are cited in 1609 and do not appear in the 1613 inventory: Taddeo Zuccari, Entombment (1343r); Raphael, two paintings of the Madonna and Child (1343v); Muziano, St Antonio (1343v); Parmigianino, Holy Family (1344r), Frans Floris, Portrait of a Woman (1347v), El Greco, Christ, Bergomasco, cartoon of Perseus (1346r) and a small Madonna and Child attributed to Raphael (1346r). Titian's Magdalene cannot be precisely identified in 1613 as four of them are listed and none bear attributions (two on 618r, one on 618v and one on 621v). The numerous portraits by Alonso Sánchez Coello, Sofonisba Anguissola, Fabrizio Castello and Antonis Mor (1344v, 1345r, 1346r, etc.) cannot be identified in the 1613 inventory, but they may be among the many portraits lacking attributions. Conversely, in the 1613 inventory there is a portrait attributed to Leonardo da Vinci, a painting attributed to Bassano, a Marriage of Psyche attributed to Michelangelo (or Michelangelo Leoni), a drawing attributed to Parmigianino and many more framed drawings that do no appear in the 1609 appraisal.
116 Pérez, op. cit. (note 23), no. 126.640, cited: ‘Escritura por la cual Andres de Marmol, a cuyo cargo estan los bienes de Pompeo Leoni, entrega con poder del dr. Bautista Leoni, ausente, hijo de Pompeo, las llaves de todo ello al otro hijo Miguel Angel, pintor y escultor de Su Maj. para que este pueda utilizar en servicio del Rey y suyo las pinturas modelos etc. que hasta hoy has estado encerrados. Madrid, 11 febrero 1600. B. D’Avila (1607–11), fol. 256’.
117 AHPM, vol. mmdlxxviii, fols. 274v–5v (B. D’Avila, notary).
118 In the same document, Michelangelo recognizes his late father's wish to maintain Pedro Leoni, natural son of Pompeo and Mariana de Sotomayor, with 2,100 ducados and 2 ducados per day. This money was to be recuperated from Marcos Fucares and brothers. AHPM, vol. MMDLXXVIII, fols. 273r–4r (B. D’Avila, notary).
119 A copy of Parmigianino's Mystic Marriage of St Catherine is now in the Wellington Museum. Finaldi traced it as far back as c.1755 in the Spanish royal collections: Finaldi, op. cit. (note 23), p. 111. In the entry on Luini's Decollation of St John the Baptist in Museo del Prado. Catálogo de las pinturas (Madrid, 1996), p. 203, no. 243, it was noted that Pompeo owned a painting by Luini of the same subject. Estella, op. cit. (note 13), p. 143.
120 They cannot be easily identified in the 1609 or 1613 inventories, but could be among the books of drawings lacking attributions. For these notebooks and their provenance, see Reti, op. cit. (note 23) and García, op. cit. (note 23).
121 Carducho wrote, ‘... Quando estuvo aqui el Príncipe de Gales que procuró quanto pudo recoger las pinturas y dibujos originales que pudo aver, no dexandolos por ningun dinero, y fueron grande parte del residuo de las almonedas del Conte de Villamediana y de Pompeo Leoni (personas que con particular desvelo se preciaron de juntar las mejoras cosas que pudieron)’. Carducho-Serraller, op. cit. (note 4), pp. 436–7.
122 AHPM, vol. MMDLXXVIII, fol. 465r (B. D’Avila, notary).
123 Another item was sold to Justino de Chaves. The payment is recorded on 29 October 1610. He paid Andrés de Marmól 800 reales for a stone slab. AHPM, vol. MMDLXXVIII, fol. 484r (B. D’Avila, notary).
124 ‘Llevose una ímagen en lámina de una tercia de mano del Corezo que la truxo Pompeo Leoni de Italia y despues fue de don Andrés Velázquez a quien el Príncipe de Gales dio dos mil escudos por ella y no sela quiso dar más al fin despues la huvo por otra mano y por otro precio.’ Carducho-Serraller, op. cit. (note 4), p. 437. In his dissertation, M. Burke (op. cit. (note 23), p. 27) tentatively postulated that the Correggio mentioned by Carducho is Correggio's Madonna of the Basket in the National Gallery, London.
125 In Van der Doort's inventory of Charles I's collection, the bust of Faustina is described as ‘brought by the King out of Spaine, and bought of the superior spye there’. O. Millar, ‘Abraham van der Doort's Catalogue of the Collection of Charles I’, Walpole Society 37 (1958–60), p. 73. It was first associated with Pompeo's collection by Finaldi, op. cit. (note 23), p. 111, no. 7.
126 On 4 August 1609, Juan de Ibarra petitioned, on Michelangelo's behalf, that Marcos Fucares and brothers restitute 500 ducados owed from Pompeo Leoni's estate to Michelangelo so that he could use the money to go to Milan and finish his father's commissions for the Pardo. AHPM, vol. MMDLXXVIII, fols. 313r–v (B. D’Avila, notary). Cited in M. Agullò y Cobo, Documentos sobre escultores, entalladores, y ensambladores de los siglos xvi al xviii (Valladolid, 1978), p. 94.
127 See Helmstutler Di Dio, op. cit. (note 6).
128 These are found in the 1615 inventory of the collection in Milan and in documents concerning the sale of the collection discussed below. The painting described as depicting Mars and Venus may instead be a copy of Titian's Actaeon and Diana, which appears in the Madrid inventories (1609, 1343r, and 1613, 619v). The two portraits of Leone and Pompeo found in the Madrid inventories (1609, 1347v, and 1613, 664r) may be listed in the 1615 inventory. The drawings and book by Leonardo are found in the inventory and in the correspondence published here in (see Appendix i, Supplementary Material). Federico Borromeo bought a painting of St Francis by Michelangelo Leoni. In addition, several paintings and sculptures in the inventory assigned to ‘Michelangelo’ are probably by Michelangelo Leoni.
129 As noted above, García, op. cit. (note 23), has suggested that two of the manuscripts that appear in the Madrid inventory of 1609 were joined together to form the approximately 400 folios of the Codex Atlanticus. There is a libro de gran mano composed of 206 folios, bound in calfskin and gilded and estimated at 3,246 reales. The following item inventoried was a book of 202 folios, bound in calfskin and gilded and valued at 1,743 reales.
130 An important painting is described in the 1609 inventory of the collection in Milan as ‘L’Andromeda di mano de Ticiano senza cornice grande scudi vinticinque’. The entry in the 1615 inventory reads: ‘Andromeda di Ticiano tutta guasta 40’. In the Madrid inventory of 1609, fol. 1347r; and in 1613, fol. 651v.
131 For the provenance of the Wallace Andromeda and hypotheses concerning its presence in the Leoni collections in Milan and Madrid, see Helmstutler Di Dio, op. cit. (note 6).
132 Another possibility is that the painting in the Casa degli Omenoni may have been a copy, perhaps suggested by its being ‘without a frame’ in 1609 and ‘in poor condition’ in 1615, and the painting recorded in Leoni's home in Madrid was the original.
133 The Io is listed in 1609, 1345v, and valued at 550 reales. It is listed again in 1613, 619v. There are two paintings of the Danaë in the inventories. One is described as a copy by Alonso Sánchez Coello and valued at 600 reales (1609, 1345v). It appears again in 1613, 621r. The subject of the other is erroneously identified as a Venus though it describes Danaë's lover in a cloud of gold (1609, 1347r, and 1613, 651v). It is described in both inventories as being in poor condition.
The Danaë and Io were commissioned from Correggio by Federico Gonzaga and given to Charles V as gifts. The Emperor took them to Spain, but Gian Paolo Lomazzo already named them among Leone Leoni's belongings in Milan in 1584. R. P. Ciardi (ed.), Scritti sulle arti di Gian Paolo Lomazzo (Florence, 1973–4), vol. II, p. 187. Philip II had given them as gifts to the Leoni. Pompeo probably brought them to Milan when he came in 1582. He must have taken them back to Spain after his visit to Italy in 1594.
134 The Imperial collections held Correggio's Danaë, Io, Ganymede and Leda. The Io is now in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna. The Danaë is in the Borghese Gallery, Rome. For the subsequent provenance of these paintings, see C. Gould, The Paintings of Correggio (London, 1976), pp. 270–1 and 275–6.
135 The correspondence between Rudolph II, Khevenhüller and Pompeo concerning these paintings was first discussed by L. Ulrichs, ‘Beiträge zur Geschichte der Kunstbestrebungen und Sammlungen Kaiser Rudolf II’, Zeitschrift für Bildende Kunst 5 (1870), pp. 81–5. The correspondence was published by H. von Voltelini, ‘Urkunden und Regesten aus dem K.u.K. Haus-, Hof-, und Staats-Archiv in Wien’, Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhöchsten Kaiserhauses 15 (1894), pt. 2, pp. clxvi–clxxviii, nos. 12494, 12495, 12504, 12542 and 12599; and idem, ‘Urkunden und Regesten aus dem K.u.K. Haus-, Hof-, und Staats-Archiv in Wien’, Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhöchsten Kaiserhauses 19 (1898), pt. 2, pp. xxi–xlii, nos. 16224–7, 16231–2.
Gould, op. cit. (note 134), pp. 270–1 and 275–6, cited this same series of correspondence as proof that Pompeo sold the paintings in 1601. However, that is not at all evident in these letters. On the contrary, based on this correspondence, it appears that an agreement may never have been met. From Khevenhüller's last letter it is evident that Pompeo was very reluctant to sell the paintings and unwilling to lower his price even for the Emperor. There is no indication that he changed his mind.
136 ‘Postscripta. Was ich mit Pompeo Leoni uber seine zwei gemel, peid von Antonio Correggio henden, das ain von ainer Danaë und das ander von ainer Yo, tractiert, werden eur kais. maj. aus dem peischlus allergenedigist vernemen; habbe alle mögliche weg praucht, ihn zur pillikeit zu pringen, hat aber unter 800 ducaten keineswegs habben wollen. Es ist ain feintlich shwerer mieder und interessierter man. Ich pin, warheit zu sagen, etwas unlustig uber seine termines worden. Was nun eur kais. maj. weiter hieruber allergenedigst verordnen werden, sole wie in allem andern gehorsamist nachgelebt werden’. Von Voltelini, op. cit. [Urkunden und Regesten] (note 135), no. 16232.
137 W. Köhler, ‘Aktenstücke zur Geschichte der Wiener Kunstkammer in der Herzöglichen Bibliothek zu Wolfenbüttel’, Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhöchsten Kaiserhauses 26 (1906–7), nos. 19446–55, pp. i–xx. In Inventory G (c.1610–19), no. 19446, p. viii, no. 54: ein guldener rechen nach dem Coreggio. Also attributed to Correggio in Inventory G: a Venus and Cupid (no. 52), a painting of a nude woman (ein nakhets weibsbild, no. 25) and a painting of a nude boy with a flying eagle (ein nackhets khindlin mit eim fliegenden adler, no. 26). One could speculate that the ‘Venus and Cupid’ was the Danaë and that the ‘nude woman’ was the Io. The third painting is clearly the Ganymede.
In the Prague inventory of 1607–11, there are no paintings attributed to Correggio or depicting Danaë or Io. R. Bauer and H. Haupt, ‘Die Kunstkammer Kaiser Rudolfs II. in Prag ein inventar aus den Jahren 1607–1611’, Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien 72 (1976).
138 H. von Voltelini, ‘Urkunden und Regesten aus dem K.u.K. Haus-, Hof-, und Staats-Archiv in Wien’, Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des Allerhöchsten Kaiserhauses 20 (1899), reg. 17408, pp. lxv–cxxii.
139 According to Urlichs op. cit. (note 135), p. 84.
140 See Rudolf Distelberger, ‘The Habsburg collections in Vienna’, in Impey and MacGregor, op. cit. (note 98), pp. 39–46.
141 The list was published by R. Cianchi, ‘Un acquisto mancato’, La Nazione 24 (November 1967), p. 3. It was further discussed Pedretti-Richter, op. cit. (note 23), p. 393, and in A. Vezzosi (ed.) Leonardo e il leonardismo a Napoli e a Roma (Florence, 1983), pp. 84–5. It is republished here in Supplementary material, Appendix i, no. 6, along with the letter with which it was originially sent (no. 4).
142 See Supplementary Material, Appendix i, no. 7.
143 See Supplementary Material, Appendix i, no. 8.
144 See Supplementary Material, Appendix i, no. 9.
145 Pedretti-Richter, op. cit. (note 23), vol. II, p. 397, cited a letter from Altoviti which reads: ‘Il Leoni Aretino no ho fatto ancora domanda alcuna del suo libro di disegni del Vinci, quale ho fatto vedere al Cantagallina che dice esser cosa molto triviale e da non curarsene molto e particolarmente per Sua Altezza che ha, et é dovere che abbia, cose squisite, e non ordinarie soggiungendo il Cantagallina che dei medesimi disegni ne sono infinite alla stampa. Vedde ancora le pitture e concorse che non ci fusse cosa degna per tanto principe, si che se non mi viene altr’ordine io non tratteró piú cosa alcuna’. Pedretti did not cite the volume and folio number of this letter. I was unable to locate it in the Mediceo del Principato or Miscellanea Medicea in the Archivio di Stato, Florence.
146 See Supplementary Material, Appendix i, no. 10.
147 Pompeyo and Pedro Leoni, Pompeo's natural sons, denounced Vittoria and Polidoro Calchi for having sold objects from the collection. See Tronca, ‘La collezione’, op. cit. (note 6), p. 32.
148 This letter was published by A. Rovetta, ‘Leone Leoni, Federico Borromeo e l'Ambrosiana’, in Perer, op. cit. (note 9), p. 45. Arconati bequeathed the notebook and libretti to the Ambrosiana in 1637.
149 Federico Borromeo, Musaeum (Milan, 1625), pp. 37–8. See also Boucher, op. cit. (note 75); and Dell’Acqua, op. cit. (note 77), p. 330.
In the letter cited above, Borromeo instructed Besozzi not to buy the religious paintings, as they were sure to be too expensive. Instead, he tells him to buy secretly the ‘lascivious and profane’ paintings, as he will have a painter change them into sacred subjects. Therefore, it is possible that some of the religious paintings in the Ambrosiana were originally mythological paintings from the Leoni collection.
151 The Apollo Belvedere is listed in 1609, 1339r, and 1613, 654r. Identified by Estella, ‘El mecenazgo’, op. cit. (note 23), p. 303. The current location of these casts is unknown.
152 The Pietà and Laocoön are still in the Biblioteca Ambrosiana. The Hercules Farnese was donated to the Scuola Beato Angelico, Milan, by the Ambrosiana.
153 Rovetta, op. cit. (note 149), p. 49.
155 Michelangelo's Risen Christ (1609, 1339r; 1613, 654v); Pompeo's Crucifix (1613, 654v, and perhaps 1609, 1339r, though it is described as wood that has been covered in white and is valued at 1,200 reales) and reliefs from Trajan's Column (1609, 1341v).
156 The ‘one of a standing Leda and a swan that plays with her as he comes out of a marsh with certain cupids in the grass’ may be identified as the cartoon for Leda (now lost). The other ‘of our Lady with a small putto and St John and St Anne both done in chiaroscuro and natural’ is the cartoon now known as the Burlington House Cartoon (Pedretti, op. cit. [The Burlington House Cartoon] (note 23), p. 22). The third drawing included in the 1614 list was described as ‘a saint done from nature, shown from the bust upwards, in black pencil, with a view of palaces’. Pedretti suggested that Arconati acquired it as well. He proposed that it was the portrait of ‘the duchess of Bourgogne, who was Lodovico XII's wife, in a garden with a beautiful prospective’ that Arconati offered, along with the Burlington House Cartoon, to Cardinal Barberini in 1639.
Another Milanese collector, Count Orazio Archinti bought one of the remaining libretti, now known as manuscript K, and donated it to the Ambrosiana in 1674. Pedretti-Richter, op. cit. (note 23), p. 396.
Address for correspondence Dr Kelley Helmstutler Di Dio, University of Vermont, 407 Williams Hall, 72 University Place, Burlington, VT 05405, USA. kelley.didio{at}uvm.edu