BULLETIN - Oberlin College

BULLETIN 

ALLEN MEMORIAL ART MUSEUM 

OBERLIN COLLEGE XXXI,2, 1973 44

A L L E N M E M O R I A L A R T M U S E U M 

BULLETIN 

VOLUME XXXI, NUMBER 2 1973-74 

Contents 

Works by Master MZ in the Oberlin Collection 

by Erika S. Griinewald - - - - - - - 67 

Et nos cedamus Amori: A Drawing by Gregorio de Ferarri 

for the Palazzo Balbi-Senarega in Genoa 

by Marv Nevvcome . . . . . . . 

Notes on Franz von Rohden and his 

Christ Disputing with the Doctors in the Temple 

by Richard E. Spear - - - - - - - 92 

A hate Draiving by Gavarni 

Notes 

by Chloe Hamilton Young - - - - - - 106 

Friends of the Museum - - - - - - -109 

Oberlin Friends of Art - - - - - - - 111 

Membership Information Oberlin Friends of Art - - 113 

Published two times a year by the Allen Art Museum, Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio. 

$6.00 a year, this issue $3.00; mailed free to members of the Oberlin Friends of Art. 

Printed by the Press of the Times, Oberlin, Ohio.

Works by Master MZ in the Oberlin Collection 1 

Very little is known about the engraver who 

initialled his plates with the monogram MZ. 

Not open to conjecture is the fact that he was 

active in the infancy of the sixteenth century, 

for six of his twenty-two extant engravings are 

further distinguished by the addition of dates 

spanning the period 1500-1503. All else is speculative. 

Because of the affinity of this engraver's 

works with the Nuremberg School and Diirer 

in particular, attempts to identify him with artists 

mentioned in documents have centered in the 

territory of the present-day Bavaria; but none 

of these proposals has been entirely successful. 

Although Joachim von Sandrart (1675) offered 

the name Martin Zink as his solution, the most 

plausible and perhaps probable thesis was advanced 

by Friedrich Hofmann, who identified 

the Master MZ with Martin Zaisinger, a gold- 

1 This article is based on a thesis The Master MZ presented 

to the Faculty of the Oberlin College Art Department 

in the spring of 1972 in partial fulfillment 

of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts. 

The author would like to thank Professor Dr. Karl 

Arndt of the University of Gottingen for having read 

this article in manuscript form and for having suggested 

several revisions. 

The dissertation of Angelika Lenz, Der Meister MZ, 

ein Miinchner Kupferstecher der friihen Diirerzeit, 

University of Munich, 1972, came to my attention 

after this article had already been submitted. Dr. 

Lenz likewise sees close similarities between Diirer 

and the Master MZ, but she does not establish a clear 

chronology among the latter's prints. In chapter 1 

("Forschungsbericht") Dr. Lenz has compiled an excellent 

resume of the previous research on the Master 

MZ. 

2 Friedrich H. Hofmann, "Der gotische Tanzsaal in der 

'Neuveste'," Beitrage zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte, 

smith mentioned in Munich in 1508 and active 

in the ducal mint there from 1520 onward. 2 

Frankenberger 3 seconded this proposal, further 

linking Zaisinger to the engraver of a reliquary 

in the Monastery of Andechs and adding that 

Zaisinger was employed in 1508 by the Abbey 

of Altotting. Frankenberger also discovered that 

in 1574, at the advanced age of seventy-seven, 

Zaisinger executed a seal for the ducal court. 

It is impossible, however, for this Zaisinger to 

have created either the engravings dated 1500- 

1503 or the reliquary of 1508; in 1500 he would 

have been a mere three years old and only 

eleven in 1508. It might be argued that father 

and son of identical name and profession were 

active in Munich; if the father executed the 

engravings and the reliquary, the son could still 

have been active in 1574. 4 

I, Augsburg, 1924, pp. 120 ff. 

3 M. Frankenberger, Die Altmiinchner Goldschmiede 

und ihre Kunst, Munich, 1912, pp. 38 ff. 

4 The attempts to localize the Master MZ have focused 

primarily on Munich. It seems unjustified, however, 

to disregard the striking affinities between his work 

and that of Diirer, an affinity which extends not only 

to the latter's engravings but to his drawings as well. 

In view of this fact, Nuremberg should also be taken 

into consideration as the possible place of origin for 

the Master MZ. The Munich theory is appealing, 

especially as Martin Zaisinger is well documented 

there; but since he is consistently and without exception 

referred to as a goldsmith, it must remain a 

theory. This dilemma was already stated by Max 

Lehrs, Geschichte und kritischer Katcdog des deutschen, 

niederlandischen und franzosischen Kupferstichs 

im XV. ]ahrhundert, Vienna, 1932, VIII, pp. 

330 ff. 

67

1. Master MZ, The Grand Ball, Oberlin 

2. Master MZ, The Grand Tournament, Oberlin

A chronology can rarely be established on 

the basis of technique alone, but in the case of 

the Master MZ an excellent opportunity is provided 

to demonstrate Erwin Panofskv's thesis 

that the slow and painful process of acquiring 

skill in the use of a burin is reflected in the art 

of the engraver. "Burin work is not a matter 

of unhampered self-expression but requires disciplined 

dexterity like fencing, tennis. . . . An 

artist gains proficiency not by alternate unexpected 

relapses and inspired anticipations but 

'learns' step by step, and each new feat once 

acquired is not easily forgotten." 5 The case of 

the Master MZ is aided by the circumstance that 

six of his twenty-two prints have dates engraved 

into them as well. A chronology can be based 

on certain irreversible stylistic progressions as 

well as technical developments. 

If the works are regarded in their entirety, 

three stylistic categories become discernible and 

each category is marked by the elimination or 

minimization of the stylistic weaknesses in the 

previous one. It is possible to see these groups 

as stages in a more or less progressive line, as 

in each case several prints cluster around one 

that is dated; indeed, the mechanism for establishing 

a convincing chronology results from determining 

the distinguishing characteristics of 

the dated works and using these as guidelines 

5 Erwin Panofsky, The Life and Art of Alhrecht Diirer, 

Princeton, 1955, p. 68. 

6 The Grand Ball (acc. no. 68.123, formerly Collection 

of the Chicago Art Institute, Lugt 32b, and Max 

Kade Collection, Lugt 1561a; and gift of the Max 

Kade Foundation) measures 221 x 311 mm, and the 

considerably cropped Grand Tournament (acc. no. 

47.20, formerly Collection Dudley P. Allen and Cleveland 

Museum of Art, gift of Mrs. Malcolm L. Mc- 

Bride) measures 203 x 294 mm. In the lower right corner 

of the latter print has been added, in ink, the name 

"Matheus Zagel." Both Oberlin impressions are good 

though not superior ones with a few stains and tears, 

and on antique laid paper. The former print shows 

the watermark of the Arms of Cleves, which Lehrs 

to categorize the remaining prints. Yet, as the 

entire available time-span is highly restricted 

(1500-1503), it would be presumptuous to argue 

for a chronology in which the prints are in strict 

linear progression. What is most surprising is 

that these dates should seem to mark the entire 

chronological range of MZ's graphic work. 

One print or two might possibly be placed 

outside either one of these dates, but as no 

extant print is fundamentally either more crude 

than those dated 1500 or more sophisticated than 

that engraved in 1503, we must accept the probability 

that 1500-1503 indeed covers his entire 

period of graphic activity. 

The Allen Memorial Art Museum has been 

fortunate in acquiring six of the Master MZ's 

prints, three of which are dated. Two of these 

prints fall into the earliest category, one into the 

second, and three into the last, making it possible 

to examine MZ's chronology on the basis of 

this Museum's collection. 

The Grand Ball (Lehrs 17, fig. 1) and the 

Grand Tournament (Lehrs 18, fig. 2) are both 

dated 1500 and are of approximately the same 

size. 6 They may well have originally constituted 

a pair, possibly two aspects of a festive celebration 

in Munich at the court of Duke Albert IV. 

With these two prints (and a third, the Woman 

with the Oivl, Lehrs 19, likewise dated 1500 but 

lists only for later impressions; the latter has what 

appears to be a foolscap watermark. Hofmann (see 

note 2) argues, with questionable success, that these 

two prints represent the interior and exterior of the 

Neuveste, built ca. 1385 on the site of the existing 

Residence of Munich, and of which not a stone remains. 

Both he and Max Lehrs subscribe to the theory 

that the couple playing cards in the alcove of the 

former print are Duke Albert IV and his Duchess 

Kunigunde. This is one argument advanced for setding 

the Master MZ in Munich. On the other hand, 

this could also be a matter of an individual commission 

to a visiting artist. On a preparatory drawing for 

the Grand Tournament see K. T. Parker in Old 

Master Drawings, II, 1927-28, p. 43 and pi. 48. 

69

not in the Oberlin collection) begins what is 

known of MZ's oeuvre. They are distinctly 

genre-like representations, each bustling with 

an activity not restricted to the subject matter 

itself. A horror vacui seems to pervade them, 

and this sensation is aided by the severely tilted 

plane and an archaic sense of space. (This latter 

is restricted to the stacking of figures and 

does not include the street views which are 

drawn in tolerable perspective.) Figures, not 

executed in appropriate proportion to each other, 

fill the entire space fairly evenly, and those areas 

that might have been utilized to offer relieving 

contrast have been stuffed with scores of architectural 

details, observers, or, failing that, with 

stippling and layers of parallel lines. The result 

presents the eye with a uniform evenness 

which is reenforced by the artist's still insensitive 

burin. Lines are given equal emphasis, 

equal width, equal direction. Shading and modelling 

suffer from the lack of a unified system. 

Where the artist intended the effect of a shadow 

falling on the ground, a non-descript hatching 

adheres to the shoes and dresses. Where he 

wished to indicate a depression in the fabric, he 

filled it with lines; raised and rounded surfaces 

are left white and bare, with a resulting loss of 

continuity in the modelling and the abrupt 

termination of three-dimensional shape in a hard 

edge-line that flattens whatever his hatchings 

have strenuously gained. 

Yet deficiencies in technique do not deprive 

the prints of their charm. The figures may be 

stilted, akin to action studies that communicate 

little with one another, but the Master MZ 

must always retain a high place in the art of 

the beginning sixteenth century because of his 

7 The Beheading of St. Catherine (acc. no. 68.122, 

307 x 225 mm, formerly Collections Claghorn, Lugt 

555c, and Kade, Lugt 1561a; and gift of the Max 

Kade Foundation) is also on antique laid paper with 

a City Gate watermark and is in good condition except 

for a few stains. Unfortunately, this is a rather 

light impression and no longer offers the richer con- 

70 

sensitive eye for incidental and intimate details 

which lend atmosphere and create the feeling 

that one has just opened the door on a scene in 

progress. In the Grand Tournament, one knight 

is portrayed falling half-way between the horse 

and hard ground; another, perhaps wounded, is 

being lifted to his feet by his squire; still another 

fights to curb his charger. The jester is delicately 

balanced with one foot up in the air as he stoops 

to pick up his baton while on the run. In the 

Grand Ball, a dog sleeps undisturbed in the 

midst of promenading couples, and an air of 

friendly competition between the Duke and 

Duchess is masterly portrayed in the faces, the 

score-keeping on the table and most particularly 

in the gestures of the hands. 

With the Beheading of St. Catherine (Lehrs 

9, fig. 3) the Master MZ shifted his interest to 

an open landscape and a religious subject. 7 Although 

this print is not dated, it shares some 

characteristics with Solomon Worshipping Idols 

(Lehrs 1, fig. 4, dated 1501, not in the Oberlin 

collection). 8 The progress in technical ability 

from the first two prints to these of his second 

group is phenomenal, considering the short interval 

involved. The archaic tilted plane has 

given way to an intricate landscape of overlapping 

wedges which, though still not totally unified 

in perspective, have dropped down to allow 

a wide strip of sky. MZ's greatest visual difficulties 

in the Beheading of St. Catherine result 

from his having applied two different scales of 

proportion, one for the figures and another for 

the castles and landscape; each would be acceptable 

by itself, but when superimposed, the 

right-hand castle becomes dwarfed to the size 

of a doll-house. The grouping of the figures 

trasts and finer details characteristic of earlier impressions 

such as are still present in the Oberlin 

Embrace. 

s The impression of Solomon Worshipping Idols here 

reproduced is in the National Gallery of Art, Rosenwald 

Collection (acc. no. B-15990) and is illustrated 

here with their kind permission.

t / 

1'c 

-T I 

. •>• '.fern • " • • ; i'k 

3. Master MZ, The Beheading of St. Catherine, Oberlin 

4. Master MZ, Solomon Worshipping Idols, 

National Gallery of Art, Rosenwald Collection 

5. Master MZ, The Embrace, Oberlin

has at the same time become more cohesive. 

Instead of being sprinkled evenly from left to 

right, top to bottom, as in the first two works 

discussed, the main persons are placed along 

a line that recedes slightly on a diagonal from 

left to right. The executioners, St. Catherine 

and the kneeling angels are connected to each 

other through a series of parallel lines, gestures, 

glances, and the cloth the angels spread between 

them. The figures themselves have gained 

greater rotundity by virtue of a quieter, more 

controlled cross-hatching system that is beginning 

to follow the in-and-out flow of material. 

This system at once creates a simpler impression 

and moves away from the exaggerated tube-folds 

which previously clothed nearly every male figure. 

St. Catherine's dress has retained the complex 

crinkles of MZ's earlier work, but the garment 

now corresponds to a more convincing 

anatomical form beneath. 

Purely iconic scenes play a small part in the 

Master MZ's art. Repeatedly he returned to a 

narrative scene and brief moments of action, 

even in religious figurations in which traditional 

depiction would seem to preclude all activity. 

This is achieved by his choosing a moment in 

the Saint's life which just precedes the one 

traditionally portrayed, thereby creating an anticipation 

and sense of time antipathetic to an 

icon. In his portrayal of St. Catherine, neither 

Catherine's vision of Christ and the Virgin nor 

her mystical marriage with Christ is in any 

manner implied. Instead, the wheel has burst 

asunder and her tormentors lie sprawled on the 

ground, but this touch is relegated to the background. 

In the foreground, wearing a crown 

to signify her royal birth, Catherine is about to 

be beheaded—the ultimate and unfailing form 

of martyrdom. Behind her is Maximin II, distinguished 

by his scepter and, like his companion, 

garbed in a turban to indicate his "ori- 

9 George Ferguson, Signs and Symbols in Christian 

Art, New York, 1961, pp. 110 ff. 

72 

ental" origin (he selected Alexandria as his 

capital and had designated Catherine as his 

bride). 9 Despite the "continuous narrative"— 

note Maximin once again near the broken wheel 

—the momentary is stressed; the executioner is 

just starting to unsheath his weapon and anticipation 

is shown on the faces of man and angel 

alike. 

In Solomcm Worshipping Idols (Lehrs, fig. 4) 

MZ progressed even further towards simplicity 

and a unification of the figures with their background. 

This is attempted by setting the characters, 

now reduced to two, within an architectural 

structure fitted with several windows, 

through which MZ's complex and detailed 

landscape can be viewed. As this cuts down 

markedly the amount of visible landscape and 

since the figures are so few, the chances for 

disproportion are automatically reduced. But 

this difficulty is still to be noticed in the manner 

in which the figures are cramped in their space. 

If the woman were to stand erect, her head 

would hit the ceiling, and the actual size of 

Solomon, if he were likewise to straighten up, 

is not quite clear since the form of his limbs is 

barely definable beneath his garments; to judge 

from the size of his head and arms, he is no 

taller than his companion and possibly shorter. 

The lines of the chamber clearly are not in 

one-point perspective, but only approximated. 

Altogether, MZ was still battling with the same 

problems here as in the Beheading of St. Catherine. 

Despite the difference in the quality of 

the impressions (the Solomon being so much 

richer), it is possible to see the same method 

and inefficiencies in depicting the garments 

around the knees of the kneeling St. Catherine 

and Solomon, although in the latter MZ attempted 

to camouflage or alleviate the hardness 

and flatness of the edge by draping a fold across 

the front of the knee. The garments of Solo-

mon's companion and those of St. Catherine 

and the angels are highly crumpled, complex, 

and exhibit the same thin, narrow and dented 

folds, created by similar types of hatching and 

scratching; these folds are mostly subject to 

disciplined arrangement but on occasion are still 

haphazardly placed. The landscape and room 

in Solomon Worshipping Idols are given nearly 

equal weight with the figures so that this engraving 

appears almost as full and busy as the 

Beheading of St. Catherine. But in the print of 

1501, MZ did introduce a change that would 

influence the remainder of his work. He began 

to reduce the importance of the surroundings 

and stress the activity of a small number of 

central figures. 

In Solomon Worshipping Idols MZ bridged 

the gap between the Beheading of St. Catherine 

and his latest engravings. The remaining three 

prints belong to the third phase of the master's 

oeuvre, but now it is more difficult to speak of 

a dramatic change in quality. Instead, there 

appears a slow but continuous flow in his 

stylistic development. It seems safe to argue that 

The Embrace (Lehrs 16, fig. 5), dated 1503, is 

later than either St. Christopher (Lehrs 3, fig. 

6) or Phyllis and Aristotle (Lehrs 22, fig. 7). 10 

Gone in all three are most major awkwardnesses 

in perspective and landscape as well as the 

horror vacui. Instead, one or two figures dominate 

the front plane, and such glimpses of 

landscape as may be seen around them have 

been reduced to a clump of trees, an edifice and 

the faint outline of hills. Although the drapery 

10 The Embrace (acc. no. 68.124, 149 x 100 mm, formerly 

Collections Eissler, Lugt 805b, Seasongood, 

Kade, Lugt 1561a; and gift of the Max Kade Foundation) 

and the St. Christopher (acc. no. 49.18, 187 x 

129 mm, formerly Collections Ackermann, Lugt 791, 

Hermann Weber, Lugt 1383, and Count York von 

Wartenburg, Lugt 2669, purchased from R. Zinser 

with the R. T. Miller, Jr., Fund) are both on antique 

laid paper, and each has a partial watermark which is 

not fully distinguishable (possibly Bull's Head in the 

has not always been greatly simplified, it has 

been given a new fullness to correspond to the 

artist's growth in understanding the volume of 

the limbs beneath. Furthermore, along with the 

changes in composition, considerable advances 

have been made in MZ's comprehension of 

shadow and light. In Phyllis and Aristotle this 

has created hard, metallic folds, but in the Embrace 

light has been manipulated to shed a soft 

atmosphere throughout the room. 

The Embrace is perhaps the most charming 

of all the Master MZ's work. He has not only 

reached the pinnacle of his technical capabilities, 

but he has also created a scene both tender 

and graceful. The view through the window 

is marred by nothing; the tall, spindly fir-tree 

that haunts the artist in all his landscapes 

stands for the first time in proper relationship 

to the castle, and sufficient height has been 

given to the sky. The true distinction of this 

print lies in the artist's having placed the dominating 

activity completely to one side and yet 

having retained a balanced visual image, thereby 

giving the chamber interior as much importance 

as the couple. The vertical window strut lies as 

far to the right of center as the couple does to the 

left, and is echoed by the floral design on the 

foot of the table. Almost in line with these is 

the peak of the fold in the girl's wide train. The 

vanishing point for the entire architectural structure 

of the room lies a scant millimeter to the 

left of the center of the window strut. As the 

dark mass, density and size of the couple draw 

the eye to the left, all the lines in the picture 

former case; the watermark of the Oberlin impression 

of the St. Christopher, which is listed by Lehrs as being 

in the York von Wartenburg Collection, is given 

as a small coat of arms by him). Both are good impressions 

and in good condition. Phyllis and Aristotle 

(acc. no. 68.125, 170 x 129 mm, Max Kade Collection, 

Lugt 1561a; and gift of the Max Kade Foundation) 

is the only print not on antique laid paper and 

has no watermark. It, too, is a good impression but 

has several tears along the edges. 

73

guide it unobtrusively but just as firmly off to 

the right. One certainly cannot accuse the 

artist of a lack of sophistication. The treatment 

of light has been brought to a sensitive climax 

in the strong contrast between the wall and the 

lighted opening, and the more diffused lighting 

of the opposite wall. Sensibly, the interior of 

the closet is dimly shaded, and the couple casts 

a single shadow. The dress of the girl is likewise 

well modelled as it falls in graceful yet 

weighty folds. The anatomy of her upper arm 

and shoulder as they merge into the neck is not 

flawless, yet it cannot detract from the delicacy 

of her fingers as they fall on her lover's tunic 

during their tender embrace. Nor can it be 

denied that her face is daintier and more carefully 

modelled than any that have preceded her. 

Several features which occur more frequently 

in Netherlandish than in German art are 

found in this engraving. The scene is framed 

with a rounded arch at the very front edge of 

the picture. In the room is a towel on a rack 

and a canopy over the table; on the wall in a 

frame is a bull's-eye mirror of the type often 

seen in Netherlandish art, and in it, as in Evckian 

paintings, the young couple is reflected very 

faintly. (However, the candelabrum's halflength 

woman holding antlers is more German 

and might be worth a study in itself.) 

By now it should not be difficult to place St. 

Christopher and Phyllis and Artistotle together 

and slightly before the Embrace. They all share 

the same general characteristics concerning the 

relationship of anatomy to garment, perspective 

and proportion, and an intimacy of the central 

figures. But in the first two prints there remains 

a certain hardness of texture and edges, as in St. 

Christopher's legs. Phvllis's face and shoulders 

are more leathern and confused in modelling 

than those of the embraced young girl. And in 

both, the size of the principal figures is exag- 

11 For a complete discussion see Jane Campbell Hutchison, 

"The Housebook Master and the Folly of the 

74 

gerated to the disadvantage of the landscape 

and surroundings. This represents the completely 

opposite end of the scale from the earliest 

prints filled with tiny figures in expansive 

spaces. Only in the Embrace do figures and 

environment really enter a balanced union. 

The legend of Phyllis and Aristotle tells of the 

fall of Aristotle caused by a woman. The philosopher 

had declared himself impervious to the 

wiles and charms of women and had chided his 

pupil, Alexander the Great, for seeking their 

company to the detriment of his government. 

One member of the thus maligned sex gained 

revenge by employing all her charms, even to 

the extent of exposing her legs, to so arouse 

Aristotle's passions that he promised to perform 

any deed she demanded in return for her favors. 

The lady desired to ride upon the duped man's 

back; Alexander arrived upon the scene just in 

time to witness his tutor in full compliance. 

The source of this tale and of our particular 

representation is by no means entirely clear. 

Two major versions exist, one of which may 

serve to help locate our master in southwest 

Germany. 11 In the earliest version, written between 

1229 and 1240, a cleric, Jacques de Vitry, 

gave vent to what Miss Hutchison calls "his 

rabid [feelings] about the dangers of reading 

classical philosophy." A second version, by a 

thirteenth century Norman poet, Henry d'Andely, 

and a subsequent middle High German 

poem introduce the woman as Alexander's mistress, 

not his wife, transfer the scene to a garden, 

and add the touch of Aristotle being saddled 

and bridled. The ultimate source for our engraving 

turns out to be a fifteenth century 

German 'Fastnachtsspiel,' Ain Spil von Maister 

Aristotiles, generally based on the thirteenth 

century versions, but which includes Aristotle, 

a nameless king, his beautiful wife, and a 

scribe as well. In the last scene of the play 

Wise Men," Art Bulletin, XLVIII, 1966, pp. 73 ff.

6. Master MZ, St. Christopher, Oberlin 

7. Master MZ, Phyllis and Aristotle, Oberlin 

8. Albrecht Diirer, St. Catherine, pen drawing, 

Wallraf-Richartz-Museum

there appear not only Aristotle and Phyllis, 

but also the king and the scribe. This is the 

only extant version which calls for the presence 

of tu?o witnesses. "The fact that the king in 

this play is anonymous explains why neither of 

the two men in the print has been characterized 

as Alexander the Great—one is regal but too old 

to be Alexander, and the other, though young 

enough, appears insufficiently regal." 12 Although 

Miss Hutchison was referring specifically to the 

Master of the Housebook, it is immediately apparent 

that the same applies to our print, although 

the elder spectator has been supplied 

with the ubiquitous Oriental turban. This, plus 

the bridle, not called for in the play, seem to indicate 

a certain fusion of the 'Fastnachtsspiel' 

with the Middle High German version. For reasons 

of dialect the play has been placed in Southwest 

Germany, in the vicinity of Ulm and Biberach. 

13 Starting with the Master of the Housebook, 

the representation of this legend was 

usually grouped with three others: Samson and 

Delilah, Solomon Worshipping Idols, and Virgil 

in the Basket, the religious, anti-feminist attitude 

common to all four requiring no further comment. 

The fact that Phyllis and Aristotle and 

Solomon Worshipping Idols by the Master MZ 

are of the same size might give a clue to the 

subject of two or more prints by him which 

were originally planned or remain to be discovered. 

In retrospect it is now possible to assign 

certain characteristics to each of the three 

groups of prints into which the Master MZ's 

work falls. The earliest, most archaic prints, 

12 Ibid., 77. 

13 Ernstotto Graf Solms-Laubach, "Der Meister MZ - 

Jerg Ratgeb?", Wallraf-Richartz-Jahrbuch, XXXIV, 

1972, pp. 77 ff., advances an hypothesis placing the 

Master MZ in the area of the Middle Rhine. Although 

his arguments for identifying the Master MZ with 

Jerg Ratgeb are not convincing, the hypothesis that the 

former was active in the Middle Rhine area — or 

76 

The Grand Ball and The Grand Tournament, 

show an incohesive scattering of elements across 

the entire print and a confusion in handling the 

basic qualities attainable in burin-work and in 

light and shadow. Progressing to the next phase, 

MZ concerned himself with creating better perspective, 

a complex yet coherent landscape, and 

convincingly integrating his characters with their 

environment. At the same time he gave his 

attention to three-dimensional effects and systematized 

modelling, but it is really in his last 

period that he reaped the benefits of his technical 

endeavors. Here the newly discovered simplicity 

permitted the engraver to concentrate on finding 

an appropriate balance between his few figures 

and their surroundings represented in satisfactory 

perspective. 

It is not possible in this article to investigate 

the intimate relationship that exists between the 

Master MZ and Diirer. Were this merely a 

matter of a general affinity with Diirer's prints 

no special conclusions could be drawn, for it was 

common for prints to travel widely. But because 

the similarity extends to drawings by Diirer as 

well, the possibility of the Master MZ's having 

had personal contact with that master must be 

considered. Diirer's drawing of St. Catherine 

(Winkler 73, fig. 8), 14 for instance, should be 

compared with St. Catherine in MZ's engraving 

(fig. 3). MZ's Saint is unusual in her separation 

from the rest of the figures, and the relationship 

between her and the executioner is rather ambiguous. 

Whereas depictions of executions most 

frequently have saints facing the outward plane 

of the work or bending before the impending 

perhaps in the vicinity of Ulm and Biberach — deserves 

further study. 

14 This drawing is executed in pen and grey and brown 

ink; it measures 234 x 201 mm. It now belongs to 

the Wallraf-Richartz-Museum in Cologne and is reproduced 

here with their kind permission. Friedrich 

Winkler (Die Zeichnungen Albrecht Diirers, Berlin, 

1936, no. 73) dates it approximately 1496.

low, this St. Catherine kneels away from us 

and the executioner as well, extending her hand 

as if in calm conversation with an unseen partner. 

Yet when we realize that the figure originates 

in Diirer's drawing in which St. Catherine 

kneels before Christ and extends her hand 

towards the child, MZ's strange pose becomes 

understandable. The upper part of the garments 

of the two saints differ, Diirer's being Venetian, 

whereas MZ's are Southern German, yet the 

fall of the heavy skirts and the definition of the 

knee (and especially the extended foot) are analogous. 

Both artists portray the heavy gowns 

initially in long, rope-like folds which then 

break shallowly, eventually to curve into deeper 

pockets over the limbs. (This treatment has 

been further applied to the garments of MZ's 

attending angels, but with less success.) The 

priority of Diirer over MZ is further illustrated 

by the fact that the type of the headdresses 

worn in the two prints is unique for MZ but 

common with Diirer. 

MZ's special relationship to Diirer is only 

one of many problems still facing those who try 

to establish the true scope of that master's artistic 

range. Great is the need to determine which 

other influences played a role in his art; identifying 

these would help solve the questions concerning 

the Master MZ's place of origin and suggest 

other media in which he might have worked. 

(The possibility that he originally was a goldsmith 

seems small considering the technical crudeness 

of his earliest plates.) It seems evident that 

in many ways he expanded the subject matter of 

printmaking of his time, and the amazing speed 

with which he developed his style is another novel 

feature which calls for further study. 

Erika S. Griinewald 

Gottingen 

77

Et nos cedamus Amori: A Drawing by Gregorio de Ferrari 

for the Palazzo Balbi-Senarega in Genoa 

"Look how the loves delight in their spoils; look 

how, in childish triumph, they wear the weapons 

of the gods on their sturdy shoulders; the tambourine 

and thyrse of Bacchus, the thunderbolt of Zeus, the 

shield of Ares and his plumed helmet, the quiver 

of Phoebus well stocked with arrows, the trident of 

the sea-god, and the club from the strong hands of 

Heracles. What shall men's strength avail when 

Love has stormed heaven and Cypris has despoiled 

the immortal of their arms!" 1 

The argument of Love's supremacy over gods 

and men is put forward in the long narrow Gallery 

in the Palazzo Balbi-Senarega in Genoa 

(figs. 1, 2). 2 Planned as a showcase for the most 

prized paintings in the Balbi collection, the Gallery 

is approximately 15 meters long, 4 meters 

wide and 9 meters high, with its upper wall area 

1 Taken from Secundus (The Greek Anthology, trans. 

W. R. Paton, London, 1918, V, No. 214); cited by 

C. Dempsey, " 'Et Nos Cedamus Amori': Observations 

on the Farnese Gallery," Art Bulletin, L, 1968, 

p. 367, n. 33. 

2 Sources that cite the theme of the frescoes in the 

Gallery are: Ratti (R. Soprani and C. G. Ratti, Vite 

de' Pittori, Scultori, ed Architetti, II, Genoa, 1768, 

p. 113), "Signori Balbi ha ornata tutta la spaziosa 

galleria con varie rappresentazioni di Virtu, e di 

Deita;" Ratti (C. G. Ratti, lnstruzione di quanto puo 

vedersi di piu hello in Genova, Genoa, 1780, p. 194), 

"diversi trionfi d'Amore;" and Alizeri (F. Alizeri, 

Guida Artistica per la Citta di Genova, II, Part I, 

Genoa, 1847, p. 81), "le vittorie d'Amore, invenzioni 

liete e spiritose che arricchi ne' lati con figure di Virtu 

e deita favolose." The frescoes which have been restored 

since World War II are now accessible, as the 

"Galleria" has become the reading room of the Art 

78 

and ceiling vault frescoed with a Triumph of 

Love by the Genoese artist, Gregorio de Ferrari 

(Portomaurizio 1647-Genoa 1726). 3 Forming an 

oval frame around the rim of the ceiling are 

various heroic episodes demonstrating Love's 

dominion over the gods. Humbled by Love is 

the mighty Hercules who has forsaken his duties 

and surrendered his club and lionskin to Iola, as 

well as Mars and Venus unveiled in a golden 

net, Deianira carried away by Nessus the Centaur, 

and Jupiter disguised as a satyr seizing Io while 

the earth was covered with a dark cloud. The 

finale, depicting Love triumphantly riding his 

chariot drawn by four white horses amid the 

clamor of amorini, is performed on the fresco 

spanning the crown of the vault. Throughout the 

entire decoration, gaiety and merriment reign, and 

History department of the University of Genoa. I am 

most grateful to Richard Spear for kindly lending me 

his extensive notes on the subject matter and decoration 

of the Gallery. 

3 The best modern bibliographical sources for Gregorio 

de Ferrari are: Y. De Masi, La vita e Vopera di Gregorio 

de Ferrari, Genoa, 1945 (unpublished thesis); A. 

Griseri, "Per un Profilo di Gregorio de Ferrari," Paragone, 

67, 1955, pp. 22-46; E. Gavazza, "Contributo a 

Gregorio de Ferrari," Arte Antica e Moderna, VI, 24, 

1963, pp. 326-36; L. Puccio, "Sensibilita settecentesca 

di Gregorio de Ferrari," Bollettino Ligustico, 

XIX, 1967, pp. 101-18; E. Gavazza, La Pittura 

a Genova, II, Genoa, 1971, pp. 288-90. Two didactic 

exhibitions of his work were held in the Palazzo Rosso 

in Genoa: Disegni di Gregorio de Ferrari, 1963, and 

Dipinti di Gregorio de Ferrari, 1965. Additional articles 

concerning Gregorio are listed in M. Newcome, 

Genoese Baroque Drawings, Binghamton, 1972, p. 35.

a figure, as a god of silence with finger pressed to 

his lips, peers down over the oval rim as if to 

subdue the spectator's amusement at the sight of 

the normally austere gods being mocked. 

The theme of a Triumph of Love is introduced 

by the happy couple on the lunette over the 

window in the center of the far end wall (fig. 4). 

Facing the spectator entering the Gallery, the 

lunette bears the inscription "Omnia Vincit Amor" 

and below, "E[t n]os Cedam[us] Amori," 4 while 

its counterpart (above the entrance door at the 

opposite end of the room) depicts an abduction 

inscribed "Et Rapit et Rapitur," and below, 

"Utrinqfue] Triumphus Amoris" (fig. 3). 5 Both 

lunettes are framed and set off from the wall 

decoration by a similar pair of wreathed satyrs 

atop vases of fruit. This suggests that the two 

lunettes may be read as a unit, perhaps representing 

the steadfast virtue of Cephalus and 

Procris and the abduction of Thetis to the Bridal 

Chamber of Peleus, or the happy union of Demeter 

and the Rape of Persephone by Hades. 

On entering the room, one is impressed by 

the great poetic beauty of the decoration on the 

left side wall. Recently found, and now at Oberlin, 

is a large drawing for this section of the 

work (figs. 5, 6). 6 This is unquestionably a preparatory 

drawing by Gregorio, and a portion on the 

right is squared for transfer. Allowing us to perceive 

the artist's working methods for developing 

* Taken from Virgil's Eclogues, X, line 69 (P. Vergili 

Maronis Opera, trans. F. A. Hirtzel, Oxford, 1900): 

"Omnia vincit Amor: et nos cedamus Amori," Love 

conquers all things, let us too surrender to love. 

5 I have heen unable to identify this reference. Modern 

restoration of the frescoes has erased some of the inscription, 

such as the A from "Amori" and made 

"Rapit" to read as "Papit." The meaning of this 

inscription is ambiguous as "Utrinq" could refer to 

Love either triumphing over the seduced and seducer 

("et rapit et rapitur"), or Love triumphing from both 

sides of the room. 

6 Acc. no. 73.78; brown pen and ink with brown wash, 

the project, the highly finished drawing plainly 

illustrates Gregorio's frequent practice of carefully 

diagraming his large decorative frescoes so 

that figures seldom needed to be changed or altered 

but merely elaborated upon when painted. 

Accordingly, there are a number of minor changes 

in the fresco that improve upon the figures and 

interpretation seen in the drawing. Reading the 

wall from left to right, a change exists in the pose 

of the satyr whose arms are reversed in the fresco 

so as to frame the lunette. Both the drawing and 

fresco begin with the story of Pvramus and Thisbe, 

depicting Pvramus killing himself on his sword 

under the mulberry tree after having seen the 

lion-mauled bloody veil of Thisbe (a putto on the 

right holds the veil before Pvramus, and Thisbe 

is hiding in the background trees). Minor adjustments 

in imagery continue in the fresco. The 

golden marriage crown of stars is shifted slightly 

to the right directly above Ariadne's head in the 

fresco, and the satyr who peers down at the viewer 

is turned to the left, becoming a young reveller 

with his finger to his lips. The animal beside 

him is identified in the fresco as a ram and, as 

a symbol of sexual excess, has been transferred to 

the right next to Bacchus. Close to the seated 

virtue in the center is Mercury, as well as a putto 

who symbolically bears reeds to the pine-wreathed 

Pan seen holding pipes in the fresco. In the distance 

is the reclining Neptune with trident. Only 

heightened with white, on light buff paper, 40 x 155 

cm. (15% x 60 in.); a portion of the right sheet is 

squared for transfer in black chalk; General Acquisitions 

Fund and Friends of Art Endowment Fund; 

acquired from Ferdinando Peretti, London. Sold at 

auction in Amsterdam as three sheets attributed to 

"Italian School, 18th century." Mounted together in 

London, it was correctly attributed to Gregorio de 

Ferrari by Yvonne Tan Bunzl. The drawing was 

published by this writer (see note 3; cat. no. 94) who 

inadvertendy identified the Gallery and the drawing 

with Gregorio's frescoes for The Triumph of Hercules 

which occupy another room in the Palazzo Balbi- 

Senarega. 

79

1. Gregorio de Ferrari, gallery ceiling, Palazzo Balbi-Senarega, Genoa 

3. Gregorio de Ferrari, gallery entrance wall, Palazzo Balbi-Senarega, 

Genoa

4. Gregorio de Ferrari, gallery end wall, 

Palazzo Balbi-Senarega, Genoa

slight modifications occur between the drawing 

and fresco in this decorative portion which shows 

two pairs of fighting putti, possibly Eros and 

Anteros, Love and Love reciprocated. The drawing 

and fresco end identically with the ballet-like 

Rape of Deianira by the centaur Nessus, and with 

two cupids flying toward them from the quaclratura. 

The thought and care that went into the preparatory 

drawing for the project is emphasized by 

the division of the composition into thirds marked 

by flower basins, — a pattern appearing in the 

fresco on both sides of the room — and by the 

shrubbery framing both ends of the oval decoration 

in the drawing. In contrast to this careful 

balance and distribution of figures and movement, 

the ceiling vault erupts, and its array of putti, 

garlands, Sphinx, demons, Love Triumphant and 

horses are awkwardly compressed into the narrow 

center space. The ceiling fresco even tends to 

crowd out some of the figures along the rim. It 

is interesting to note that the only part of the 

drawing not transferred into fresco is the trees on 

the right which are squared for transfer in the 

drawing. Perhaps X radiographs could provide 

evidence of the missing trees, as that area in the 

fresco is filled with what looks like a covering 

mask of bulbous clouds. Except for this attempt 

to silhouette and clarify by means of clouds the 

figures of Deianira and Nessus from the vault, 

coherence between the upper wall and the ceiling 

vault is solely in terms of subject matter. This separation 

is clear in the Oberlin drawing, which 

while showing half of the spatial width of the 

vault, is concerned only with imagery relevant to 

the rim decoration, i.e., the putti holding Ariadne's 

82 

Griseri (pp. 28-29, n. 9) suspected the collaboration of 

Gregorio with Sighizzi in the Balbi-Senarega, and 

drew attention to it by referring to a drawing by 

Gregorio of an Allegorical Figure (Palazzo Rosso, 

2116) relating to a "Bust of Virtue" seen in the quad- 

crown (Corona Borealis), and the grape arbor of 

Bacchus. The absence of the ceiling figures from 

the highly finished Oberlin drawing makes it 

quite possible to hypothesize that the decorative 

surround was painted separately and that the 

ceiling complex which lacks the unity and gracefulness 

of the rim design was added later. 

Not only does the Oberlin drawing depict 

most of the figures as they appear on the left wall, 

but it also relates well with the extremely decorative 

architectural framework of the Gallery. The 

flaming torches on the capitals, the mask cartouches, 

the intricate swags on cornices, and the 

putti framing the medallion in the center are 

meticulously rendered in preparation for how they 

will appear in the fresco. Consequently, the gold 

gilt cornices, capitals, swags and putti in stucco 

relief, the cartouches in grisaille, and the pilasters 

and wall entablature tinted green blend into and 

enhance the gaiety and glitter of the composition. 

Although most discussions of Gregorio's work 

have been limited to his lyrical Correggesque 

paintings, it comes as no surprise to find that he 

designed his own quadratura settings. It has been 

suspected that he was responsible for the design 

of the entire ornament in the Gallery, but until 

the emergence of the Oberlin drawing it was 

uncertain whether Sighizzi had planned the quadratura 

as he is cited to have done for Gregorio in 

two other rooms in the Balbi-Senarega (figs. 10, 

ll). 7 Gregorio's interest in architectural perspective, 

however, was common knowledge, and he 

is listed by Ratti and Alizeri as having designed 

the quadratura (executed by a pupil, Francesco 

Costa) for his paintings in the church of SS. 

Giacomo e Filippo (now destroyed). 8 Relevant 

ratura of The Triumph of Hercules room. For information 

concerning Gregorio's other rooms, see Ratti 

(.Instruzione, pp. 184-94) and Alizeri (pp. 69-85). 

8 Soprani-Ratti, p. 115; Alizeri, II, part II, pp. 1044-45.

to the subject of these paintings are two drawings 9 

which compare well to the figure style and precisely 

rendered architectural decoration of the 

Oberlin drawing. There are, in fact, numerous 

architectural drawings by Gregorio in the Palazzo 

Rosso that depict equally careful diagrams for 

decorative projects. In particular, the drawing of 

Apollo and Daphne (fig. 7), which Gavazza tentatively 

associated with Gregorio's c. 1690 work in 

Turin, 10 corresponds with the diagonal twisting 

figure style, mythological subject matter, medium, 

and ornamental precision of the Oberlin drawing. 

The Oberlin drawing by corresponding closely 

with the fresco heightens our visual perception 

of Gregorio's style. The needle-fine pen line 

and flowing brown washes define all of the basic 

parts with a spontaneous touch in happy alliance 

with the exuberance and joy of life of Love 

Triumphant. The ease with which the artist 

handles multiple figures in graceful arabesque 

movements is spectacular, particularly when it 

delicately yet so surely fixes the figures as they 

appear in the final version in fresco. Passages 

are highlighted with white paint, and Gregorio 

so skillfully manipulated the figures against the 

buff paper that few changes in light and shade 

or in imagery were necessary to make in the 

fresco. However, his lively skill for creating rich 

pictorial effects was criticized by Ratti who noted 

that Gregorio "in pushing himself to convey to 

his figures a rigorous foreshortening and a Correggesque 

movement, ended up for the most part 

disordered and incorrect. He was excessively 

abundant with floating clothes to adorn his 

figures and sometimes confused in his composi- 

9 Assumption of the Virgin, 17 x 21 3 A in., Palazzo 

Rosso, 2130 (repr: Gavazza, pp. 330, n. 19, fig. 135a); 

Presentation in the Temple, 20 3 A x 16V4 in., Metropolitan 

Museum, 55.628.8 (repr: J. Bean, Master 

Drawings, 11, no. 3, 1973, pi. 41). 

10 Apollo and Daphne, 468 x 310 mm., brown pen 

and wash, heightened with white, on buff paper, 

Palazzo Rosso, 2141 (repr: O. Grosso, Decoratori 

tion and grouping." 11 Admittedly it is difficult 

to discern where or how draperies develop or 

where the arms and hands are for some of the 

figures in the Oberlin drawing. With the exception 

of cases in which architectural decoration 

is concerned, Gregorio's interest seems not 

to be in actual proportions tightly rendered, but 

in giving a dramatic rhythmic spirit to the figures 

and compositions since his frescoes often had to 

be viewed from a distance. Yet, Gregorio's 

elongated figures which twist in spiral movements 

delightfully blending into each other are 

figures also important in themselves. This is 

evidenced by the small figure of Pyramus seen 

on the verso of the left sheet of the Oberlin 

drawing (fig. 8). Discovered when the drawing 

was recently restored at the Fogg Museum, the 

figure has a softness, fluidity and foreshortening 

typical of Gregorio's translation of Correggio's 

style. Short rapid brushstrokes exquisitely define 

the swaying figure of Pyramus, and delicate 

nuances of wash accentuate his movement against 

a background of needlepoint-like foliage. From 

out of the coloristic contrast of lightly applied 

washes and pen lines not only emerge the "disordered" 

Pyramus, but also the gesturing putto 

beside him and images relevant to the veilbearer. 

Quite possibly this small compact drawing was 

done prior to the recto, as the blurred form in 

the lower right and the light profile suggest that 

two different positions were tried before settling 

on the pose and diagonal placement of the veilbearer 

to Pyramus as seen on the recto. 

The Roman way was considered equal to if 

not better than the Genoese, and typically the 

Genovesi, Rome, 1921, pi. XXII; Gavazza, 1963, pp. 

329-30, n. 17, fig. 136a). This protorococo figure 

style had an impact on the work of his son, Lorenzo 

de Ferrari, and comparison can be made with Lorenzo's 

version of the subject seen on the verso of a 

drawing in the Metropolitan Museum (1971.50). 

11 Soprani-Ratti, p. 111. 

83

5., 6. Gregorio de Ferrari, drawing for gallery ceiling, Palazzo Balbi-Senarega, Oberlin

grandiose theme chosen for the Gallery drew 

upon a tradition coming from Raphael and Annibale 

Carracci as seen in the Farnesina and 

Farnese palaces in Rome. 12 Although Gregorio's 

ceiling is in contrast to the earlier treatments of 

a Triumph of Love which separate the theme 

into pairs of deities in a number of intricate 

quadri riportati, a Roman manner prevails. As 

Gregorio is not known to have ever visited Rome, 

the credit for this lies with prints after Carracci, 

with the Genoese decorative tradition stemming 

from Cambiaso, and with the many Genoese artists 

working in Rome who absorbed and transmitted 

images, usually from the school of Maratti, to 

Genoa. 13 Few of Gregorio's frescoes show such 

a deliberate attempt to identify and differentiate 

the various gods, or to have such an elaborate 

mythological scheme of decoration. The impact 

of G. A. Carlone on Gregorio cannot be minimized, 

and his decoration surrounding the vault 

in the Sala Verde in the Palazzo Altieri in Rome 

(c. 1674; repeated with variations in 1691-92 in 

the Palazzo Rosso in Genoa) has a complex intertwining 

ornament of gods, fruit, medallions 

and caryatids similar in concept to the Gallery. 

12 For a discussion of the Farnese ceiling, see Dempsey 

(1968, pp. 363-74) and D. Posner, Annibale Carracci, 

London, 1971, pp. 93-108. 

13 The exodus to Rome began in the second half of the 

Seicento with Gaulli, who was joined by Gio. A. 

Carlone in 1674-77. Later, Mulinaretto was a pupil 

of Gaulli's in Rome from 1676-84, and Domenico 

Parodi, Marchelli, R. Badaracco and P. G. Piola were 

studying in Rome in the late 1680's and 90's. 

14 The artistic exchanges of ideas between Genoa and 

Parma are discussed by Giovanni Godi in Dipinti e 

Disegni Genovesi dal 500 al 700, Soragna, 1973; also 

M. Newcome, "Appunti sulla Mostra a Soragna," 

Arte Illustrata, 57, 1974. 

15 Soprani-Ratti, p. 110. So well drawn were his copies 

of Correggio's work that some were bought by Mengs. 

Gregorio's copy of Correggio's Duomo cupola is now 

86 

While the heavy decorative format and intricate 

mocking theme for the Gallery can be 

seen as indications of the influence of Roman 

sources, the lyric spirit of the frescoes takes its 

cue from Correggio. Artistic connections in the 

Seicento were as numerous between Genoa and 

Parma as between Genoa and Rome, and much 

of the lively character of Genoese painting owes 

a debt to the lyrical quality of the paintings by 

Correggio and Parmigianino. 14 Gregorio's trip to 

Parma in c. 1669-74 to study Correggio's frescoes 

reinforced his schooling in the 1660's in Fiasella's 

studio where he could have seen and been stimulated 

by the work of Puget and Filippo Parodi. 

Soprani-Ratti noted that Gregorio, on seeing 

Correggio's paintings, was enthralled, and so attracted 

to them that he imitated Correggio with 

"indicibile accuratezza." 13 Indeed, the many 

swaying foreshortened figures and the masterful 

control over light and shade on the Balbi- 

Senarega ceiling pay homage to this master. 

That the Balbi family favored a spirited Correggesque 

style is apparent not only in the 

paintings attributed to Correggio that hung on 

the Gallery walls, 16 but also in the type of dec- 

in the Accademia Ligustica in Genoa (repr: P. Torriti, 

La Quadreria della Accademia Ligustica, Genoa, 1966, 

pi. LXXIV). 

10 Alizeri, pp. 81-84. In the Gallery were many paintings, 

among them Correggio's Marriage of S. Catherine, 

and a small S. George. Earlier, Ratti (Instruzione, pp. 

192-94) included a S. Francis of Assist by Annibale 

Carracci. Other paintings attributed to great masters 

were listed such as: Adoration of the Magi by G. C. 

Procaccini; two portraits of soldiers, one by Van Dyck, 

the other by Allori; Marriage of S. Catherine by Parmigianino; 

a Nativity, Romulus and Remus, and 

Voyage of Abraham by Castiglione; two half length 

Philosophers by Ribera; a Holy Family by Van Dyck, 

Temptation of S. Anthony by Breughel; a Crucifixion 

by Memling, a Communion of S. Jerome by Filippo 

Lippi, as well as paintings by Reni, Scorza and 

Rubens.

7. Gregorio de Ferrari, Apollo and Daphne, 

Palazzo Rosso, Genoa 

Gregorio de Ferrari, verso of drawing for gallery ceiling, 

Palazzo Balbi-Senarega, Oberlin 

9. Valerio Castello, Triumph of Love, small gallery ceiling, Palazzo Balbi-Senarega, Genoa

10. Gregorio de Ferrari, Triumph of Hercules, first salon, Palazzo Balbi-Senarega, Genoa

11. Gregorio de Ferrari, Aurora and Cephalus, third salon, Palazzo Balbi-Senarega, Genoa

oration commissioned for the adjoining rooms. 

Perhaps the most direct source for the decorative 

vocabulary of The Triumph of Love can be 

found in the smaller "Gallery" in the next room 

(fig. 9). Frescoed by Valerio Castello, this fourth 

salon is decorated with numerous mythological 

figures amassed over the vault and end walls. 

Painted with great enthusiasm and abandon, the 

Correggesque figures of Valerio can be considered 

precursors to Gregorio, and as such, Valerio's 

room depicting gods and virtues becomes a pendant 

to the more formalized Triumph of Love. 

So capably did Valerio fresco the narrow room 

with many colorful figures that the Balbi family 

commissioned him to paint the ceilings of three 

other rooms in the palace. 17 The time was in the 

late 1650's at the end of Valerio's career when 

Piola was working with him. In keeping with 

the Correggesque character of the Balbi-Senarega 

decoration, Piola and his school thereafter painted 

a room (adjoining Valerio's Abundance, Peace 

and Aurora) with figures of Jupiter in the ceiling 

(now destroyed) surrounded by allegorical images 

of the liberal arts, and a room on the floor below 

with a Triumph of Hercules. Later, Gregorio 

painted his own version of a Triumph of Hercules 

on the ceiling of the first salon where four 

long narrow canvases of the sea gods had been 

designed by his teacher, Fiasella, to band the 

room like a frieze (fig. 10). The next room, the 

second salon, was occupied by Valerio's Leda 

17 

C. Manzitti, Valerio Castello, Genoa, 1972, pp. 266- 

83. 

18 

Soprani-Ratti, p. 114. 

19 

Ibid. For color illustrations and details o£ these frescoes, 

see A. Griseri, "Gregorio de Ferrari," 1 Maestri 

del Colore, 135, Milan, 1966. 

20 

Flying Angel, Suida-Manning collection (repr: Robert 

and Bertina Suida Manning, Genoese Masters, Dayton 

Art Institute, 1962-63, cat. 81). Other drawings 

for S. Croce e S. Camillo are cited in Newcome (see 

90 

and the Swan, and completing the rooms on this 

floor of the Balbi-Senarega was Gregorio's least 

exuberant fresco, Aurora and Cephalus in the 

third salon (fig. 11). 

Unfortunately, none of Gregorio's work in 

the Balbi-Senarega is dated or documented, but 

stylistically the Gallery can be placed in the 

late 1680's and early 90's. Some of the architectural 

drawings done between 1684-90 when 

Gregorio was working on the Riviera, in Turin 

and in Genoa have already been discussed in 

relationship to the figure style and decoration 

of the Oberlin study. Their relevance to the 

Oberlin drawing is increased on noting that during 

this period Gregorio painted a number of 

large frescoes which involved mythological images 

also taken from Ovid's Metamorphoses. 

Among the regal ceilings showing mythological 

figures (Palazzi Granello, Rosso, Gropallo, 

Cambiaso-Fossatello and three rooms in Turin 

painted around 1690 for the Duke of Savoy), 18 

the frescoes in the Villa Gropallo a Zerbino relate 

best to those in the Gallery. The Oberlin drawing 

and the Gallery frescoes probably date around 

the time of the Gropallo decorations 19 (which 

were painted shortly after the French bombing 

of Genoa in 1684), prior to Gregorio's late style. 

His work gradually became more distorted, and 

reflecting this stylistic change is a drawing of a 

Flying Angel (for the ceiling of S. Croce e S. 

Camillo, c. 1715-20) 20 which, though retaining 

note 3), cat. no. 99-100. These drawings account for 

the last years of his graphic activity when Soprani- 

Ratti noted (pp. 116-17) that Gregorio "ceased doing 

frescoes, occuping himself solely in painting little 

oils . . . From his sketches one can see that he had 

already lost the use of his hands ... At the very end, 

he turned to the exercise of modeling figures which 

he then used to cast in plaster, macerated paper and 

coloritele which he gave as gifts to his friends ... In 

one form or another, he worked continually until he 

was 82."

the pose of Pyramus, shows greater elongations 

in the arms and legs and an increased emphasis 

on abstract decorative shading. 

Obviously the Oberlin drawing represents 

the period when Gregorio was at the height of 

his career, enjoying enormous success and popularity. 

Outstanding for its size and beauty, 

the drawing exemplifies the poetic charm, 

color and rhythmic movement of the best of 

Genoese baroque ceiling decoration at the end 

of the Seicento. The importance of the Oberlin 

drawing increases with the realization that it is 

one of the few to relate closely to an existing 

fresco, and in this case a fresco whose "Roman" 

subject, The Triumph of Love, served to further 

the vigor and vibrancy of Gregorio's mature style. 

Inspired by elements from Cambiaso, Correggio, 

Castello and Carracci, the extremely lyrical and 

spirited composition of the Oberlin drawing for 

the decorative program in the Gallery of the 

Palazzo Balbi-Senarega sets the mood for the gay, 

witty, graceful, rococo spirit of the 18th century. 

Mary Newcome 

University Art Gallery 

Binghamton, New York 

91

1. Franz von Rohden, Christ Disputing with the Doctors in the Temple (1869), Oberlin

Notes oil Franz von Rohden and his 

Christ Disputing with the Doctors in the Temple 

Individual artists in the workshops of nineteenth-century 

painters tend to be little studied. 

The numerous personalities who worked in Rome 

with Friedrich Overbeck (1789-1869), a major 

figure in the Nazarene movement, are no exception. 

Whether one cites the Spaniard Federigo 

de Madrazo, the Pole Eduard Brzozowski, or the 

Italians Francesco Sozzi, Stefano Pozzi, and Enrico 

Casolani, we deal with generally unfamiliar 

names. 1 Not surprisingly, Overbeck also taught 

young artists of German origin, whose families 

had migrated to Rome. Most notable among this 

group is Franz von Rohden, son of the Kassel 

landscape artist Martin von Rohden who was 

born in 1778 and lived in Rome, with occasional 

interruptions, from 1795 until his death there 

in 1868. 

Oberlin's recent acquisition of Franz von 

Rohden's Christ Disputing with the Doctors in 

the Temple (fig. I) 2 prompted an investigation 

of what could be uncovered in the literature 

about this painter; 3 in addition, three unpublished 

works in situ in Rome were photographed, 

but as will be sufficiently clear from the nature 

1 Only Casolani, for instance, is even mentioned by 

name in Keith Andrews, The Nazarenes, Oxford, 

1964 (Franz von Rohden is not cited in the book). 

See Margaret Howitt and Franz Binder, Friedrich 

Overbeck, sein Leben und Schaffen, Freiburg, 1886, 

for brief references to these artists. 

2 Acc. no. 73.7, Mrs. F. F. Prentiss Fund; 159 x 136 

cm.; acquired from the Marchese Paolo Sersale, Rome 

(said formerly to have been in the Naples trade). 

3 The main article is basically devoted to the father and 

of these brief notes, Franz von Rohden still 

awaits serious study. 

Martin von Rohden's son, Franz (fig. 7), 4 

was born in Rome on February 25, 1817, seven 

years after Overbeck, Pforr, Vogel, and Hottinger 

had arrived in the Eternal City and settled in 

the monastery of San Isidoro. (It was during the 

previous year, 1809, that the Lucas-Bund, the 

Brotherhood of St. Luke, or the Nazarenes, was 

formed in Vienna.) Franz remained in Rome 

during his early childhood, first leaving in 1827 

with his family for Kassel. There he studied 

art in the Academy for four years, returning to 

Rome in 1831. The known facts about his subsequent 

life in the city are meagre. After studying 

two years with the eminent Romantic artist 

Joseph Anton Koch, he entered Overbeck's studio 

at the age of eighteen. In 1846 he married, and 

a son, Alberto, who became a porcelain painter, 

was born in 1850. Franz became a member of 

the Virtuosi al Pantheon in 1885. He died in 

Rome on December 28, 1903. 

In his article "Die beiden Rohden," Hans 

Mackowsky illustrates a few portraits and draw- 

and only partly to the son: Hans Mackowsky, "Die 

beiden Rohden," ]ahrbuch fiir Kunstwissenschaft, 

1924-25, pp. 47-62 (pp. 58 ff. on Franz). For further 

biographical and bibliographical notes, see Thieme- 

Becker, XXVIII, p. 522. One finds occasional mention 

of Franz in Howitt and Binder, Friedrich Overbeck, 

sein Leben und Schaffen. 

This drawing is reproduced from Mackowsky's illustration 

(fig. 16), where the inscription is only partly 

legible, but apparently states that it was made in "82," 

i.e., when the artist was 65 years old. 

93

2. Franz von Rohden, The Holy Family, Bayerische Staatsgemaldesammlungen, Munich

3. Franz von Rohden, St. Bonaventure with the Virgin and Angels (1875), 

S. Maria in Aracoeli, Rome

ings by Franz, completely neglecting (actually 

apologizing for) his primary role as a painter of 

religious art. In fact, Franz was intimately involved 

with the Nazarene group, assisting Overbeck 

with underpainting and preparation of cartoons. 

5 The Nazarenes' profound study of Renaissance 

painting (but less their interest in medieval 

art) and their own cycles of neo-Quattrocento 

murals deeply affected von Rohden. Unfortunately, 

Franz' frescoes for the Roman church of 

S. Alfonso dei Liguori, painted during a period 

(1855) when he was assisting Overbeck, are destroyed, 

seemingly without photographic record.® 

To my knowledge, only one of the Roman altarpieces 

is dated, that of 1875 in the Aracoeli. A 

signed Holy Family in Munich predates 1846, 

when it was acquired from the artist. Two other 

commissions for Roman churches can be assigned 

to the 1880's on historical grounds. Within this 

flimsy matrix one must place Oberlin's Christ 

Disputing with the Doctors in the Temple—for 

even though it is signed and dated, the crucial 

third digit is badly damaged and must be interpreted 

with some notion of Franz' stylistic development. 

The Holy Family in Munich (fig. 2) 7 can be 

assigned with certainty to the period 1835-46, 

i.e., to the years from the young artist's entry into 

Overbeck's studio to the date of the museum's 

acquisition of the picture. That time span can 

be narrowed further, for it is improbable that it 

5 His personal involvement in Overbeck's commission 

for stained glass designs for a Carmelite convent at 

Le Mans (1854) is documented; see Paul Hagen, 

Friedrich Overbecks handschriftlicher Nachlass in der 

Liibeckischen Stadtbibliotliek, Liibeck, 1926, p. 23 

(IV, 34). 

G I am informed by the priests of the church that the 

frescoes were replaced by mosaics, unrelated to Franz's 

designs, in the 1960's, and that no photographs are 

known to exist of them. 

7 Neue Pinakothek, Bayerische Staatsgemaldesammlungen, 

inv. no. WAF 821; 96 x 68 cm. 

96 

predates 1840, when von Rohden was still in his 

early twenties. What is more, the very strong 

influence from Overbeck's art (which alone 

would lead one to place the Munich canvas early 

in von Rohden's career) also points to the earlier 

'40's, since Overbeck's Abraham Expelling Hagar 

and Ishmael, 1839-41 (Schloss Blumendorf bei 

Oldesloe, Freifrau v. Jenisch) 8 and The Triumph 

of Religion in the Arts, 1840 (fig. 6, Frankfurt), 

provide the best parallels. In his Holy Family, 

Franz von Rohden celebrates the extreme tenderness, 

piety, and clarity of classic Renaissance art, 

much as Overbeck had done, by reviving principles 

of central Italian painting of ca. 1495-1505. 

While the composition itself could be compared 

to works designed by artists in Raphael's studio 

late in the master's life (for example, Penni's 

Madonna del Divino Amore, Naples, or Giulio 

Romano's Madonna della Rosa, Madonna della 

Perla, and Madonna of the Oak, all Madrid), 

the utter innocence of the figures, the simplicity 

of their fabrics, and the planar, geometric aspect 

of the background find closest analogies in Perugino, 

early Raphael, and Lo Spagna. (Although 

I do not suggest direct influence, the mood of 

the Munich picture also brings to mind Sassoferrato, 

a true Nazarene avant la lettre.) 

When we turn to the next fixed point in von 

Rohden's career, St. Bonaventure xvith the Virgin 

and Angels (fig. 3), 9 signed F de Rohden 10 

and dated 1875, a marked change is apparent. 

Figures are tightly compacted; they partake more 

8 For an illustration of this painting, see Kurt Earl 

Eberlein and Karl Georg Heise, Die Malerei der 

deutschen Romantiker und Nazarener, im besonderen 

Overbecks und seines Kreises, Munich, 1928, pi. 16. 

9 The only dimension I have been able to take is the 

width, 143 cm. (sight size). 

10 The F, de, and R are in ligature, as is customary. 

Having become Romanized, Franz changed von to de 

and was known both as Francesco and Cecco to his 

contemporaries.

4. Franz von Rohden, Sacred Heart Altar-piece, 

S. Cuore al Castro Pretorio, Rome

5. Franz von Rohden, St. Francis with Sts. Peter of Alcantara and Pascal Baylon, S. Antonio di Padova, Rome

fully in a common unifying activity, emotional 

expression is varied, and the porcelain-like fragility 

of the Holy Family gives way to bulkier, 

more assertive mass. A comparison of the Virgin 

in each painting is instructive, showing a transformation, 

if the parallel is not taken literally, 

from a Perugino or Francia Madonna to one by 

Fra Bartolommeo or Albertinelli. The "deliberate 

primitiveness" of the Munich picture (to 

borrow a phrase from Novotny 11 ) yields to greater 

sophistication. Added vigor and intensified naturalism 

characterize the Roman altarpiece, which 

relies exclusively on figures. Landscape, an essential 

ingredient of Nazarene art, is absent. 

Over the course of some thirty-five years von 

Rohden has moved away from Overbeck's style 

and rejected two recurring features of Nazarene 

painting—a mood of remoteness or isolation, and 

figures of absolute innocence. 

Von Rohden's largest picture is the colossal 

altarpiece (fig. 4) painted for the Roman church 

of the S. Cuore al Castro Pretorio, the cornerstone 

of which was laid in 1879. Financial difficulties 

delayed work on the building (a fundraising 

lottery was held in 1884), and its inauguration 

took place only in 1887. 12 While I have 

not determined exactly when von Rohden received 

the commission for the principal altar or 

completed the work, it undoubtedly belongs to 

the 1880's. It portrays Christ with the image of 

the Sacred Heart and angels in the upper section, 

and St. Francis de Sales and St. Margherita 

Maria Alacoque in the medallions below. 

Raphael's Sistine Madonna (Dresden) was a 

primary source, but whether one considers the 

picture in toto or close up, it is equally evident 

that von Rohden's true inspirational attachment 

11 Fritz Novotny, Painting and Sculpture in Europe, 

1780 to 1880, Baltimore, 1960, p. 67. 

12 For the history of the church, see L. Castano, La 

Basilica del S. Cuore al Castro Pretorio, Rome, 1961 

(Le chiese di Roma illustrate, no. 62). 

13 See Benedetto Pesci, S. Antonio a via Merulana, 

Rome, 1964 (Le chiese di Roma illustrate, no. 80). 

to Renaissance art has waned. The picture instead 

lends itself to (and indeed does generate) 

those small chromo-lithos that are stacked on 

prie-dieu. Something of the extraordinarily fine 

technique and rich coloration that distinguish 

von Rohden's earlier pictures remains; but at the 

same time one has the feeling that his art begins 

to approach commercial Catholic imagery—in its 

reliance on strictly traditional compositions and 

intensely sweet, passive figures. There is a decline 

in the quality of drawing as well, particularly 

in the two saints below, if they really 

are from von Rohden's hand rather than an 

assistant's. 

Contemporary with the Sacro Cuore altarpiece 

is St. Francis with Sts. Peter of Alcantara 

and Pascal Baylon (fig. 5), painted for S. Antonio 

di Padova in Rome, a church which was consecrated 

in the same year as S. Cuore al Castro 

Pretorio, 1887 (the first stone had been laid only 

three years earlier). 13 Here von Rohden's failing 

talent is painfully evident—assuming that the 

traditional attribution of this picture to him 

really is correct. The two other Roman commissions 

have subtle passages of shimmering 

coiileurs changeantes. They are paintings one 

notices, whether one likes them or not. The 

altarpiece at S. Antonio has little to redeem it, 

for gestures are awkward, the coloring is drab, 

and there is virtually no"invention" to consider. 14 

Christ Disputing with the Doctors in the 

Temple (fig. 1) is signed F de Rohden (the first 

four letters in ligature) and dated 18_9 (fig. 8). 

A very recent restoration of the lower right 

corner (since removed) had produced a date of 

1809, an obvious impossibility because Franz was 

The date 1886 is given in Thieme-Becker for this 

painting, but I am not familiar with the source of that 

information. 

14 It should be stressed that the painting is not signed 

and that I have not been able to confirm in the documents 

the traditional attribution of this picture to von 

Rohden. 

99

orn in 1817. However, only two other alternatives 

remain, for the third digit includes a round 

shape that is consonant with the circle of the 

final 9: either it read 1869 or 1899. Ironically, 

surface loss is exactly in the areas above and below 

the damaged digit, so it is arguable that 

either a stem curved upward, or that a tail 

dropped down, which leaves unresolved a problem 

that encompasses no less than thirty years. 

Fortunately, considerations of style are more 

helpful. The composition of the Oberlin painting, 

the figure types, the fine technique and 

varied palette, and particularly the landscape 

background support the conclusion that the date 

must read as 1869, that is, after the Munich Holy 

Family and shortly before the Aracoeli altarpiece. 

The rigorous symmetry of both the figural 

grouping and the architecture in Christ Disputing 

with the Doctors in the Temple is derived 

from late Quattrocento and early Cinquecento 

prototypes, such as Perugino's Vision of St. 

Bernard (Munich), one of numerous examples 

of what Freedberg terms late-Quattrocento classicism. 

15 But while the Oberlin picture shares 

with Perugino's art the perspectival clarity of 

Piero della Francesca's heritage, it partakes more 

fully in the spirit of early Raphael, particularly 

his Marriage of the Virgin of 1504 (fig. 9). 

Raphael's painting, completed just before his 

arrival in Florence, provided von Rohden with 

a centralized design that is weighted in the middle 

with one frontal figure, who in turn is 

flanked by wedge-shaped groups of observers. 

The psychological and compositional connections 

between figures in von Rohden's painting 

are more active than in Raphael's, and in this 

regard the Oberlin picture reflects an awareness 

of Raphael's figures in his later School of Athens. 

The perspectival backdrop of von Rohden's scene 

also brings to mind Raphael's great Vatican 

fresco; but when we reach the farther distance, 

15 S. J. Freedberg, Painting of the High Renaissance in 

Rome and Florence, Cambridge, Mass., 1961, I, pp. 

25-26. 

100 

then the Marriage of the Virgin reasserts itself, 

for the curious palace structure on a stepped 

foundation is derived from the famous temple 

in Raphael's work of 1504. 

The gentle Christ of von Rohden's picture 

is dressed in a pale violet robe. He is surrounded 

by garments of deep red, blue, yellow, of green 

with coppery shadows, and of striking shades of 

purple. These color areas tend to be large and 

generally unbroken, emphasizing the strength of 

the individual disputants, whose contrasting emotions 

and closely-studied physiognomies significantly 

contribute to the originality of the work. 

Behind the skeptical, brooding doctors at the 

left and the sympathetic parents at the right, 

opens a light, tranquil landscape. This passage, 

together with the predominant Raphaelite tenor, 

firmly unites the Oberlin painting with von 

Rohden's Holy Family and in turn with Overbeck's 

art. The unyielding flatness of planes, the 

austerity of geometric units, and the pearl-grey 

buildings before clear violet-blue mountains, 

place Christ Disputing with the Doctors in the 

Temple fully in the Nazarene tradition. The 

linear delicacy of Mary's transparent veil, the 

painstaking detail of facial features, and the 

idealization of fabric design are equally indicative 

of von Rohden's earlier career. The Munich 

Holy Family embodies all of these elements, 

while the Aracoeli painting (1875) shares most 

of them but concurrently points the way to the 

altarpieces of the '80's. It is highly unlikely on 

stylistic grounds that Christ Disputing with the 

Doctors in the Temple postdates these latter pictures, 

and hence the alternative reading of the 

date, 1899, can be ruled out. 

The story of the twelve-year-old Christ disputing 

with a group of doctors in the temple is 

recounted in Luke 2:41 ff. Von Rohden follows 

a well-established tradition by placing Christ,

6. Friedrich Overbeck, Triumph of Religion in the Arts (1840), Stadelsches Kunstinstitut, Frankfurt

elevated on a seat, between groups of figures, 

although frequently the elders alone make up 

the two groups. Here they are contrasted with 

the family of Christ, whose presence, however, 

is not unusual. The two narrative episodes of 

Luke 2:41 ff. — Christ "sitting among the teachers, 

listening to them and asking them questions" 

and amazing them with his answers, and Mary's 

plea, "Son, why have you treated us so? Behold, 

your father and I have been looking for you 

anxiously"—often were conflated. Especially in 

the later Middle Ages as Marian iconography 

became more popular, the second incident was 

stressed. In fact, her searching for and discovery 

of Jesus were, respectively, part of the Seven 

Sorrows of the Blessed Virgin and the Five 

Joyful Mysteries. 16 

In von Rohden's painting, Christ holds a 

book, which in this situation means the Old 

Testament (in distinction to scrolls, which would 

signify other Jewish writings). 17 The open book 

is inscribed in Hebrew with lines from Daniel 

9:24, 18 an unusual but not inappropriate textual 

passage in the context of this subject. Daniel 

was one of the prophets most frequently 

equated with Christ by theologians, and his punishment 

of the wicked elders who spied on the 

chaste Susanna was one manifestation of his 

youthful wisdom. The verse inscribed in the 

book in the Oberlin picture deals with the prophecy 

of the seventy weeks (the Archangel Gabriel 

appeared to Daniel and explained to him the 

meaning of the seventy years referred to in Jere- 

16 For a resume on the iconographic tradition of Christ 

Disputing with the Doctors in the Temple, see Karl 

Kiinstle, Ikonographie der christlichen Kunst, I, Freiburg, 

1928, pp. 373-75, and Gertrude Schiller, Iconography 

of Christian Art, Greenwich, Conn., 1971, 

I, pp. 124-25. Luini's conception of the story (ill. in 

Kiinstle, I, p. 376, fig. 176) is closely related to von 

Rohden's. An extensive list of representations of the 

subject is found in A. Pigler, Barockthemen, Budapest 

and Berlin, 1956, I, pp. 260-66. 

17 See Schiller, I, p. 124, regarding this distinction. 

102 

miah 25:11 and 29:10). Whether it had a specific 

meaning for von Rohden or for his patron 

cannot be determined, but that it is a quotation 

from the later portion of Daniel is quite understandable, 

for the visions related there represent 

Daniel as a divinely-inspired youth who foretells 

the ultimate Messianic Kingdom. The particular 

verse in question contains passages that refer to 

the cleansing and rededication of the temple and, 

by typological extension, to the new temple of 

Christianity. What is more, the specific quotation 

incorporated into the painting, "and to seal 

up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the 

A4ost Holy," was interpreted by Christian scholars 

(including both Luther and Calvin) as an 

allusion to the Messiah, even though it properly 

means a place rather than a person; and the 

subsequent verses (9:25-26) were read by the 

Christian Fathers as referring to the abolition of 

the Old Order or the Jewish cult. 19 

Italian Renaissance art basically inspired the 

Oberlin picture, but a second major Nazarene 

source, late Gothic German art, is present as 

well. This latter influence primarily meant Diirer 

and his followers, and it is in the closely-studied, 

individualized heads of the doctors that the 

"Germanness" of the work is most apparent. Appropriately 

enough, Diirer's Christ Disputing 

with the Doctors in the Temple of 1506 (Lugano, 

Thyssen Collection) first comes to mind as a 

prototype, since it is there that the "Medieval" 

hero of the Nazarenes painted his most remark- 

18 Professors Stephen Kayser and Nathan Greenberg 

kindly provided assistance with the Hebrew text 

which reads, in translation, "Seventy weeks are determined 

. . . and to seal up the vision and prophecy, 

and to anoint the Most Holy." The entire middle 

portion of the verse is omitted. 

19 For an excellent discussion of these verses and further 

bibliography, see James A. Montgomery, A Critical 

and Exegetical Commentary on The Book of Daniel 

(The International Critical Commentary, XXI), New 

York, 1927, pp. 372-77 and 390-401.

7. Franz von Rohden, Self-Portrait (1882), 

drawing, location unknown 

8. Franz von Rohden, detail of signature and date of Christ Disputing with the 

Doctors in the Temple, Oberlin

9. Raphael, Marriage of the Virgin (1504), Brera, Milan (photo Alinari)

able heads of men. A number of Diirer's drawings 

could be cited, too, or we may recall his 

Portrait of Hieronymus Holzschuher of 1526 

(Berlin), particularly when one studies the intensely 

fixed gaze and knit brow of the doctor 

at Christ's right. Franz von Rohden's drawings, 

including his Self-Portrait (fig. 7)—which almost 

could be a "study" for one of the doctors, were 

it not thirteen years later—are eminently Northern 

in style, and his published portrait paintings 

fully partake in the Nazarene revival of the art 

of Holbein's generation. 20 

Finally, we may pose the obvious but challenging 

question, just how does Christ Disputing 

xvith the Doctors in the Temple differ from a 

Renaissance picture, despite its strict revival nature? 

I believe the answer hinges on two main 

elements of style. First, the picture strikes anyone 

familiar with the history of art as being 

eclectic. Early Raphael is the overriding influence, 

but as we have noted, von Rohden 

concurrently gives away his awareness of later 

Raphael, Diirer, and their circles. Almost any 

single element can be said to find analogies in 

Renaissance pictures, but nowhere until the 

nineteenth century does one encounter this type 

of melange. In other words, it is the total image 

and not just particulars that is Nazarene. 

Students of style will also recognize that 

every passage of the Oberlin painting is reflective 

of contemporaneous artistic trends. This is 

the second main reason that Christ Disputing 

with the Doctors in the Temple unmistakably is 

a product of the nineteenth century. The Apollonian 

face of Christ, to cite an example, is both 

sweeter and more classically idealized than in 

paintings of ca. 1500, so von Rohden inescapably 

pays homage to artists from Guido Reni to 

Raphael Mengs and Greuze. The super-refine- 

20 See the illustrations in Mackowsky, "Die beiden Rohden," 

figs. 15-18 (drawings) and figs. 13-14 (portrait 

paintings). 

ment of the surface of the canvas is nineteenth 

century in character; like handwriting, Renaissance 

brushwork is distinguishable from that 

three centuries later in date. When one considers 

the landscape, it becomes equally clear 

that von Rohden's painting is relatively modern. 

The quasi-cubic modulation of buildings and 

the simplicity of the distant mountains, or to 

put it another way, the analytical reduction of 

forms, tells us that the painter in question 

shares certain preoccupations with artists like 

Corot (his Roman work) and Ingres, and even 

more with a landscapist such as Joseph Anton 

Koch. 

These qualities of the Oberlin painting clarify 

von Rohden's relationships to Renaissance art 

and to his own generation, and they reveal why 

Nazarene art is one manifestation of Romanticism: 

the strong revival motivation of this art, 

from its subjects to its sources, is one important 

aspect of the Romantic movement. Neither the 

Nazarenes nor their English equivalent, the pre- 

Raphaelites, can be said to have belonged to the 

European vanguard, because they were not 

artists whose ideas and practices opened the most 

important new vistas for others. Their firm 

dedication to an intensive study of art, nature, 

and religion nevertheless produced a wholly new 

amalgam, one with particularly compatible components. 

The life of this hybrid was destined 

to be relatively short, just because it greatly 

depended upon religious faith. It was a style 

born in the hearts of a small group of men, and 

it basically died with them. Christ Disputing 

with the Doctors in the Temple is a rare example 

of successful Nazarene painting from the second 

generation. It testifies to the strength of Overbeck's 

inspiration as a teacher—and to Franz von 

Rohden's thorough mastery of Nazarene content 

and form. 

Richard E. Spear 

105

1. Paul Gavarni, he Garde Ckampetre, Oberlin

A Late Drawing by Gavarni 

Paul Gavarni, born Guillaume-Sulpice Chevalier 

in Paris in 1804, is too often remembered 

for his early, modish illustrations for fashion 

plates and costume designs, where figures are 

tightly drawn and awkwardly placed on a field 

of white. But indeed, at his best, in Masques 

et Visages, the lithographic series collected and 

published in the daily journal, Paris, in 1852-53, 

and in the watercolors made during the last 

years of his life at Auteuil, with their few deft 

pen lines and large areas of wash accented with 

white, he matches, even rivals his contemporary 

Daumier in productivity, ability and wit. In his 

total oeuvre of some 8000 works (of which approximately 

2700 were published lithographs), 

Gavarni touched on many aspects of life and 

society: the world of fashion, theater, literature, 

music, politics — always people, many times women 

— their foibles and activities described with 

elegant irony. 

The brilliant pen drawing by Gavarni recently 

acquired by the Allen Art Museum (fig. 

1) probably dates from the last decade of the 

artist's activity, the fifties or early sixties. 1 The 

subject, a garde champetre, that strange mixture 

of the constabulary and military that roamed 

the French countryside in tricornered hat, sword 

and tunic, was used four times by Gavarni in 

1 Acc. no. 73.14, 28 x 20.8 cm. Signed in brown ink 

lower right, "Gavarni." Anonymous gift. 

2 See Armelhault and Bocher, L'Oeuvre de Gavarni, 

Paris, 1873, nos. 897, 900, 1931, 2287. 

3 Hotel Drouot, Paris, 19 March, 1943, no. 31, brought 

2,500 francs. 

his lithographic work, 2 three times in 1839-42 

and once in 1857. In two of the four prints the 

figure stands alone; in the others the guard's 

attention has been captured by a peasant girl. 

(Is there, out of our composition on the left, 

some like attraction on which our stalwart 

guardian rivets his eyes, diverted from his habitual 

duty of catching poachers?) 

The drawing is made with pen and brown 

ink, with slight touches of red ink, on buff-toned 

white paper. Areas in the sky, and on the head 

and face of the figure, have been left the white 

of the paper. On first glance these sections look 

as if they have been heightened with white, and 

the drawing was so described when it appeared 

in a sale in Paris in 1943, 3 and more recently 

in an exhibition catalogue in New York. 4 The 

quick, incisive pen work is brilliantly varied: 

long, parallel hatchings, shorter, thicker strokes, 

made with great deftness and freedom. Some of 

the lines are light and fine, some fuller and set 

down with considerable pressure. The touches 

of red on the eyes, nose and cheek, give a dashing, 

if somewhat bibulous accent to the drawing. 

A late date is suggested by a comparison with 

two drawings of ca. 1859, and I860, 5 and with 

the last of the four garde champetre lithographs 

(fig. 2), published as no. 4 in 1857 in a series of 

4 "French Master Drawings," H. E. Feist, N.Y., 23 

Sept.-8 Nov., 1972, no. 38. 

5 Illustrated in P.-A. Lemoisne, Gavarni, Paris, 1928, 

II, pp. 229, 232. 

107

twelve, called Les Parisiens. In the print Gavarni 

employs the same rapid, broken contour, builds 

up shade by parallel, or contiguous hatchings, 

and establishes a space for his large single figure 

by a cursory, though controlled handling of the 

landscape. There are differences in technique; 

he has sometimes used the soft crayon to create 

a wash effect in the print. There is no wash 

in the drawing, other than the toning of the 

paper. But generally, in the lithographs of the 

fifties Gavarni's drawing style is as summary 

and as sure as his pen and ink drawings of that 

decade, given differences one would expect to 

encounter between pen and lithographic crayon. 

Both gardiens are cast from the same mouldthat 

of country bumpkin pressed quickly into 

semi-military service. The figure in the drawing 

has been issued an additional item of military 

apparel, the belt over his tunic, and cuts a 

slightly more dashing figure than his printed 

and more dejected brother. 6 The sheets—drawing 

and print (design size)—are of identical proportions, 

the drawing approximately one centimeter 

larger in both dimensions. The technique of 

the drawing, and its size, suggest that it was a 

first idea for some print, if not for this particular 

one. 

In the Oberlin drawing, Gavarni's draughtsmanship 

has become so sure, his observation so 

acute, that we should not be surprised to learn 

that among the effects of the consummate 

draughtsman, Degas, were found a collection of 

more than 2000 Gavarni lithographs. 7 

Chloe Hamilton Young 

6 A contemporary writer describes the garde-champetre 

with a wit comparable to Gavarni's: see F. Coquille, 

"Le Garde Champetre," in Le Prisme, Album des 

Franfais, L. Curmer, ed., Paris, 1841, IX, pp. 242-49. 

7 Lemoisne II, p. 224 n. 2. Oberlin owns 425 prints 

by Gavarni — 194 from the I. T. Frary Collection of 

19th century lithographs given to the Museum in 

1944, 230 donated by Eugene Garbaty in 1951, and 

one purchased through the Carnegie fund in 1931. 

108 

Will, , 1% Kills .tills L«.i*rt «UX niiti Ms 

2. Paul Gavarni, Le Garde Champetre, 

Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris

Friends of the Museum 

BENEFACTORS : contributions or bequests of $100,000 or more 

*MARY A. AINSWORTH *R. T. MILLER, JR. 

*MR. AND *MRS. JOSEPH BISSETT 'CHARLES F. OLNEY 

* CHARLES M. HALL *MRS. F. F. PRENTISS 

MAX KADE FOUNDATION MRS. GALEN ROUSH 

THE SAMUEL H. KRESS FOUNDATION 

PATRONS : contributions or bequests of $10,000 or more 

DR. ALFRED R. BADER 

*GENEVIEVE BRANDT 

PARKS AND CHRISTIE CAMPBELL 

ESTATE OF SIR JACOB EPSTEIN 

'MRS. ELISABETH LOTTE FRANZOS 

*CHARLES L. FREER 

*EUGENE GARBATY 

*MELVIN GUTMAN 

IVAN B. HART 

*MRS. A. AUGUST HEALY 

BARONESS REN6 DE KERCHOVE 

LLOYD H. LANGSTON 

* ROBERT LEHMAN 

DONORS : contributions or bequests of $1,000 or more 

ADELE R. LEVY FUND 

SHERWOOD F. MORAN 

*MR. AND MRS. HAIG M. PRINCE 

*AD REINHARDT 

MRS. EDNA G. REIZENSTEIN 

PAUL ROSENBERG AND CO. 

NORBERT SCHIMMEL 

MR. AND MRS. GUSTAV SCHINDLER 

PAUL F. WALTER 

"MR. AND MRS. CLARENCE WARD 

TOM WESSELMANN 

DOROTHY HALL ALEXANDER ADELE BROWN 

*MR. AND MRS. R. M. WOODBURY 

FREDERICK B. ARTZ JOHN J. BURLING 

WALTER BAREISS MR. AND MRS. H. HALL CLOVIS 

MRS. RAYMOND M. BARKER TOUIS E. DANIELS 

* JUDGE MADISON W. BEACOM MR. AND MRS. THOMAS F. DERNBURG 

MRS. MARCELLA LOUIS BRENNER DR. R. C. DICKENMAN 

MRS. DUDLEY BLOSSOM DONALD DROLL 

MRS. ALBERT BROD ROBERT E. EISNER 

* Deceased 

109

MR. AND MRS. ANDR£ EMMERICH 

MR. AND MRS. ARTHUR ERLANGER 

MRS. DONALD W. EVANS 

*FREDERIC NORTON FINNEY 

*MRS. THELMA CHRYSLER FOY 

MRS. BERNICE CHRYSLER GARBISCH 

J. PAUL GETTY 

SAM GILLIAM 

WILLARD B. GOLOVIN 

N. N. GOODMAN, JR. 

BERNARD GREBANIER 

WINSTON GUEST 

THE HONORABLE MRS. M. D. GUINNESS 

MRS. JOHN HADDEN 

ELLEN H. JOHNSON 

'HOMER H. JOHNSON 

MR. AND MRS. OWEN T. JONES 

DR. GEORGE KATZ 

DAVID KLUGER 

MRS. KATHERINE KUH 

*H. H. KUNG 

DOUGLAS H. LANGSTON 

DR. J. D. LANGSTON 

DR. RICHARD W. LEVY 

ROBERT M. LIGHT 

MRS. JOSEPH LILIENTHAL 

MR. PHILIP LILIENTHAL 

JACK LINSKY 

*C. T. Loo 

*DR. A. I. LUDLOW 

DR. ELLIOT MARGLES 

MRS. SEABURY MASTICK 

* MRS. MALCOLM L. MCBRIDE 

MRS. CHARLES W. MCCANDLESS 

* Deceased 

110 

*MARY L. MCCLURE 

*MRS. ANDREW B. MELDRUM 

*MRS. GERRISH MILLIKEN 

MRS. MARTA ABBA MILLIKIN 

*MRS. CHARLES E. MONROE 

E. JAN NADELMAN 

MRS. ANNALEE NEWMAN 

CLAES OLDENBURG 

JOHN G. D. PAUL 

^EDWARD S. PECK, JR. 

LEONA PRASSE 

OSWALD D. REICH 

MR. AND *MRS. GEORGE B. ROBERTS 

THEODORE SCHEMPP 

MR. AND MRS. GEORGES SELIGMANN 

*A. AND *E. SLLBERMAN 

HELENA SIMKHOVITCH 

MRS. KATHERINE B. SPENCER 

*MR. NATE B. SPINGOLD 

WOLFGANG STECHOW 

JOHN N. STERN 

*DR. AND *MRS. BRUCE SWIFT 

MR. AND MRS. HARRY L. TEPPER 

MRS. HELEN B. TOLLES 

MRS. ANN TRYON 

W. R. VALENTINER ESTATE 

EDWIN C. VOGEL 

JEAN VOLKMER 

"LUCIEN T. WARNER 

*PARRISH-WATSON AND CO. 

MRS. FRED R. WHITE 

'ME. AND *MRS. JOHN YOUNG-HUNTER 

RICHARD H. ZINSER 

MR. AND MRS. TESSIM ZORACH

Oberlin Friends of Art 

IN MEMORIAM MEMBERSHIPS 

Arietta M. Abbott 

Jacob Franklin Alderfer 

J. E. Artz 

Charles K. Barry 

Genevieve Brandt 

E. Louise Brownback 

Mrs. Katherine L. Lewis Bushnell 

Howard C. Carter 

Cyrus Alonzo Clark 

George Draper Coons 

LIFE MEMBERS 

Werner Abegg 

Mr. and Mrs. David L. Anderson 

Frederick B. Artz 

Mr. and Mrs. John S. Atkins 

Mr. and Mrs. Carl Bacon 

Alfred Bader 

Mrs. Harry E. Barnard 

Mr. and Mrs. Theodore Bates 

Mr. and Mrs. Andrew Bongiorno 

Mr. and Mrs. Edward William Carter 

Mr. and Mrs. Ford E. Curtis 

Mrs. Robert W. Dobbins 

Ross Edman 

Mrs. Barbara Meyer Elesh 

Mrs. Sarah G. Epstein 

Philip E. Foster 

Carl R. Gerber 

Mr. and Mrs. Saul R. Gilford 

Erwin N. Griswold 

Mr. and Mrs. Tim Hill 

Mr. and Mrs. Joseph H. Hirshhorn 

FAMILY MEMBERS, 1973-74 

Dr. and Mrs. Robert R. Crawford 

Mr. and Mrs. Paul J. Donley 

Betty and Marvin Flaks 

Ann L. Fuller 

Mr. and Mrs. Dewey Ganzel 

Mrs. Maud Baird Coons 

Edith Dickson 

Mrs. Amelia Hegman Doolittle 

Antoinette Beard Harroun 

Meinhard and Gertrud Jacoby 

Florence Jenney 

Dr. Louis C. Johnson 

Dr. Frances E. Killoren 

Mrs. Hazel B. King 

Mary Smith McRae 

Mrs. Irvin E. Houck 

Mr. and Mrs. Robert E. Irwin 

Ellen H. Johnson 

Mr. and Mrs. Owen T. Jones 

Philip L. Kelser 

Mrs. Anne H. Kendzior 

Mr. and Mrs. C. W. Kinney, Jr. 

Mr. and Mrs. Ben W. Lewis 

Mrs. Charles W. McCandless 

Mrs. Elizabeth R. Murphy 

Mrs. E. Earl Newsom 

Mr. Charles Parkhurst 

Mrs. Cassie Spencer Payne 

Mr. and Mrs. Carl A. Peterson 

Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth A. Preston 

Louise S. Richards 

Miss Derwent Riding 

Mrs. Galen Roush 

James Albert Saalfield 

Miss Margaret Schauffler 

Janos Scholz 

Mr. and Mrs. Alvin Gelman 

Adele and Harvey Gittler 

Dr. and Mrs. Gorden W. Hasse 

Mr. and Mrs. Lawrence P. Johnson 

Mr. and Mrs. Charles B. King 

Fannie Bixler Murphy 

Julia Patton 

Ira L. Porter 

Richard L. Ripin 

Raymond H. Stetson 

Mrs. Henry Stanton Storrs 

Henry Stanton Storrs 

Jessie Tazewell 

Giovanni Terzano 

Helen Ward 

Mrs. George H. Seefeld 

Mrs. Alan B. Sheldon 

Mrs. Alfred W. Sherman 

Miss Constance Sherman 

Alice H. Simpson 

Miss Geraldine N. Smith 

Mrs. Pierre R. Smith 

Richard and Athena Spear 

Mrs. Katherine B. Spencer 

Mr. and Mrs. Wolfgang Stechow 

John N. Stern 

Mrs. Hermann H. Thornton 

Mr. and Mrs. Franklin B. Toker 

Frank C. Van Cleef 

Mrs. Clarence Ward 

Guy S. Wells 

Mr. and Mrs. Robert W. Wheeler 

Mr. and Mrs. Dudley A. Wood 

Barbara Wriston 

Mr. and Mrs. David P. Young 

Dr. and Mrs. Edward Lees 

Bill and Vee Long 

Mr. and Mrs. Eric Nord 

Mr. and Mrs. Joseph R. Reichard 

Mr. and Mrs. Chester Shaver 

111

SUSTAINING MEMBERS, 1973-74 

Mr. and Mrs. Paul B. Arnold 

Mr. and Mrs. Leland N. Beardsley 

Mr. and Mrs. W. H. Bromund 

Jere and Katerina Bruner 

Dr. and Mrs. Daniel K. Butler 

Parks and Christie Campbell 

Mr. and Mrs. Terry S. Carlton 

Ralph T. Coe 

Mrs. Stella M. Dickerman 

Mrs. F. Reed Dickerson 

Mrs. Marian C. Donnelly 

Mr. and Mrs. Richard Dunn 

Mrs. Flora H. Durling 

Ronald L. Dzierbicki 

Mr. and Mrs. Louis E. Emsheimer 

Samuel Feigenbaum 

Ronald and Freyda Feldman 

Mrs. Mary Fixx 

Dr. C. W. Gettig 

Mr. and Mrs. Samuel Goldberg 

Mr. and Mrs. W. H. Hamilton 

Mr. and Mrs. Craig Harbison 

Andrew and Marjorie Hoover 

Phyllis and Nicholas Jones 

112 

Professor and Mrs. William E. Kennick 

Kathleen and John Lamb 

Mr. and Mrs. David Landman 

Mr. and Mrs. George Lanyi 

Rensselaer W. Lee 

Professor and Mrs. John D. Lewis 

Betty Lind 

Richard P. Lothrop 

Donald M. Love 

Ronald Malmstrom 

Charles T. Murphy 

Dr. J. Herbert Nichols 

Sadayoshi Omoto 

John and Audrey Pearson 

Mr. and Mrs. Donald Reich 

Abraham and Daphne Rosenzweig 

Theodore Schempp 

Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth W. Severens 

Laura Thrower 

Harold Tower 

Mr. and Mrs. Don P. Van Dyke 

Mr. and Mrs. Warren F. Walker 

Katharine J. Watson 

Newton and Gloria Werner 

James W. White 

James W. Wickendon 

Mrs. Jane F. Wilkinson 

Mr. and Mrs. Robert Williams 

Earl N. Witzler 

Wendy and Joseph Wood 

Mr. and Mrs. James Worcester 

Winnie and Milton Yinger 

In addition to the above members, 

there are: 

49 annual members 

244 student members

Oberlin Friends of Art 

Privileges of Membership 

An original print by a known artist, made exclusively for the Oberlin Friends of Art 

in a signed and numbered edition and available to all life members and others whose 

annual contribution is $25 or more (for students, $15 or more). 

A copy of each issue of the Bulletin 

Free admission to film and concert series 

Free enrollment in children's Saturday art classes (for family and life members only — 

children ages 6-12) 

Invitations to exhibition openings, gallery talks, Baldwin lecture and visiting artist 

series 

An annual members' acquisition party, during which members purchase by vote works 

for the museum collection 

A preview of the biennial Purchase Show, offering members first choice of works of 

art at 10% discount 

A discount on museum catalogues and Christmas cards 

Categories of Membership 

In Memoriam 

Life 

Family (annud) 

Sustaining (annual) 

Member (annual) 

Student (annual) 

$150.00 

$150.00 

$ 30.00 

$ 15.00-25.00 

$ 7.50 

$ 4.00-15.00 

A sustaining or life membership gives privi ileges to husband and wife, and a family 

membership includes all children. 

Membership contributions are tax deductible (less $8.00, for tangible benefits received). 

113

STAFF OF THE MUSEUM 

Richard E. Spear, Director 

Katharine J. Watson, Curator of Art before 1800 

Jean Kondo, Assistant to the Curator 

Gail Feigenbaum, Graduate Assistant to the Curator 

INTERMUSEUM CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION 

Floyd A. Kinnee, Museum Technician 

Margery M. Williams, Librarian 

Doris B. Moore, Administrative Secretary 

Arthur Fowls, Head Custodian 

Marigene H. Butler, Director Barbara Beardsley, Assistant Conservator 

Richard D. Buck, Head of Training Program Ruth Spitler, Secretary 

Delbert Spurlock, Chief Conservator 

MUSEUM PURCHASE COMMITTEE 

Richard E. Spear, Chairman 

Paul B. Arnold 

Frederick B. Artz 

Laurine Bongiorno 

Richard D. Buck 

Marigene H. Butler 

Ellsworth C. Carlson 

Craig S. Harbison 

Ellen H. Johnson 

Thalia Gouma Peterson 

EDITOR OF THE BULLETIN 

Wolfgang Stechow 

PHOTOGRAPHER 

Robert Stillwell 

PUBLICATIONS 

The Bulletin, the catalogue of the 

painting and sculpture collection, 

photographs, postcards, slides, and 

color reproductions are on sale at 

the Museum. 

Daphne Rosenzweig 

Kenneth W. Severens 

Athena Tacha Spear 

Wolfgang Stechow 

Kathleen Stone 

Mary Sturgeon 

Katharine J. Watson 

Forbes Whiteside 

Chloe H. Young (absent) 

MUSEUM HOURS 

School Year: 

Monday through Fridav 

10:00 - 12:00 A.M. (side gate) 

1:30-4:30 and 7:00-9:00 P.M. 

Saturday 

10:00-12:00 A.M. (side gate) 

2:00- 5:30 P.M. 

Sundav 

2:00-5:30 P.M. 

Summer: 

Monday through Fridav 

10:00- 12:00 A.M. 

2:00 -4:00 P.M. 

Saturday and Sunday 

1:00-5 :00 P.M.

BULLETIN - Oberlin College

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?