The Autumn of Sofonisba: a study of the artist’s later œuvre and legacy
Alice Spadini | s4865774 University of Groningen | Faculty of Arts MA Art History Thesis - Second Draft 16 June 2022 Supervisor: Dr. Saskia Cohen Second reader: Dr. Jan L. de Jong
Table of Contents
Introduction………..3 Part 1 -Sofonisba 1580-1625: biography and artistic production
1.1 The Later Years: Genoa and Sicily………8 1.2 Genoa and Cambiaso………...19 Part 2 -Sofonisba’s artistic connections and legacy
2.1 Artistic Connections and Exchanges, 1580-1625………37 2.2 The in uence of Sofonisba in her Genoese years………49 Conclusion………..………...63
Bibliography………..………
Images………..………
Introduction
Sofonisba Anguissola (c.1532-1625) was born in Cremona, the oldest of seven siblings in a relatively poor noble family. Educated in the arts from a young age, Sofonisba garnered a widespread reputation for her portraiture and in 1559 was called to work as lady-in-waiting to the Queen Isabel de Valois in the Spanish court of King Philip II, where she also painted royal portraits and taught painting lessons. Throughout her life, Sofonisba enjoyed the sizable wealth and reputation granted by her artistry, even being included in the second edition of Giorgio Vasari’s Le Vite, and was widely revered for the prestige of working in the Spanish court. The following thesis was prompted by the ndings of my eld review on Sofonisba, as an attempt to understand its shortcomings and respond to them with my research.
At almost every phase of Sofonisba’s lengthy career, the circumstances of her artistic production allowed for major issues in the correct attribution of her paintings. For this reason, the slow and uncertain process of reconstructing Sofonisba’s oeuvre has been the main point of concern for art historians in the eld since the late nineteenth century. Throughout the rst half of the twentieth century, contributions in the eld were primarily concerned with stylistic analysis and reattributions, as the focus was still very much centred on reconnecting Sofonisba to her works. Nonetheless, as interest in Sofonisba’s paintings grew, so did the concern with the life she led, speci cally the people she interacted with. Letters exchanged with Michelangelo and rst-hand documentation of Van Dyck’s visit in 1624 were published for the rst time, revealing the far-reaching renown of Sofonisba’s talent and reputation. However, it seems as though the discussion of her connection to these prominent gures served to either highlight the admirable characters of the men she interacted with, or was used as proof that Sofonisba was in fact deserving of her impressive reputation. Vasari’s writings on Sofonisba are discussed in a similar way. His exceptional praise of the artist is used as evidence of Sofonisba’s talent, as if the study of her life and work needed to be validated by the words of a prominent and reputable gure such as Vasari.
The second half of the twentieth century brought about a signi cant series of developments in the eld, developments that can be generally split into two branches of scholarship. The rst, primarily
undertaken by European art historians, is the traditional current of scholarship focused on biographical, technical and stylistic studies with the aim of building Sofonisba’s oeuvre. The second, smaller current was led by American female art historians informed by feminism, and examines the work of women artists such as Sofonisba as exceptions in the male dominated art culture, interpreting her works primarily in the context of her gender. Although the frequency of publications informed by feminism steadily grew from the 1950s onwards, the traditional branch of scholarship was still substantially larger and more widespread. Even so, the 1970s brought about a sizeable feminist wave of mostly American art historical scholarship. With these publications, Sofonisba resurfaced as a prominent gure in women’s art history, and special focus was given to the impact her exceptional success had on future generations of women artists. At the same time, scholars also began to address the nature of the praise Sofonisba received from her contemporaries, discussing the disparity between the multitude of comments on her fascinating biography and the very few on her artistic qualities. A crucial development brought about in the 1970s was this new approach to the sixteenth-seventeenth century writings on Sofonisba, prompting future scholars to question what could be learned about the experience of Renaissance women artists through the language employed in art-critical writings, and how these texts enforced the idea of women artists as exceptions in a male-dominated art culture.
In 1985, an exhibition took place in Cremona titled “I Campi: Cultura Artistica Cremonese del Cinquecento.” Although Sofonisba appeared in the exhibition alongside a long list of other artists, her inclusion signi ed an important stepping stone in resurfacing Sofonisba as a prominent gure of Renaissance art production in Cremona. In fact, this exhibition was later credited with being the inspiration for Sofonisba’s rst monographic exhibition in 1994. The next year saw the publication of Sofonisba e le sue sorelle by Flavio Caroli, an Italian art historian and critic. As the rst modern monograph on Sofonisba, it discussed biographical matters and provided detailed stylistic analysis of her paintings as well as those of her sisters, primarily Lucia, and was the rst to address the attribution problems that surface when the two artists are compared. Titles such as Sofonisba e le sue sorelle which place Sofonisba in comparison or relation to other gures are fairly common in the eld. Even the most recent exhibition on Sofonisba presents the artist in parallel to another Renaissance woman painter,
Lavinia Fontana. Meanwhile, the gure of Sofonisba was being revived in Spain thanks to the contributions of the Spanish art historian María Kusche, responsible for an extensive range of publications that represented a signi cant qualitative leap in the eld, bringing to light unseen documentation from Sofonisba’s stay at the Habsburg court and revealing more reattributions of the paintings produced in this period.
A large portion of the research carried out by Kusche was published in the 1994 exhibition catalogue titled “Sofonisba e le sue sorelle”, held in Cremona, Vienna and Washington between 1994 and 1995. The catalogue for this exhibition represents the most comprehensive and signi cant collection of essays on Sofonisba to date, with contributions by a long list of dominant voices in the eld, including Flavio Caroli, Mina Gregori and Rossana Sacchi. This was the rst monographic exhibition on Sofonisba and also the rst major publication to discuss Sofonisba’s oeuvre at all stages of her life, presenting biographical information, addressing her connections and training in Cremona, assessing the work she produced in the context of the Spanish court and, nally, presenting a comprehensive account of the period of the artist’s life from 1573, with her move to Sicily, to her death in 1625.
2019 was a prominent year in the eld of Sofonisba Anguissola, with the publication of a signi cant monograph as well as two exhibitions, one of which took place in Brazil, bringing the gure of Sofonisba to this region of the world for the rst time. The other exhibition was held at the Museo del Prado in Madrid, and was titled “A Tale of Two Women Painters: Sofonisba Anguissola and Lavinia Fontana.” Placing two Renaissance women painters who had never met side by side, the exhibition addressed the parallels and subsequent divergences in their paths, but more importantly how they both navigated the social stereotypes assigned to women involved in artistic practice. In the same year, American art historian Michael Wayne Cole published the second of Sofonisba’s monographs in English, titled Sofonisba’s Lesson: A Renaissance Artist and Her Work. In its comprehensive account and discussion of Sofonisba’s life, this monograph implicitly brought together the two currents of art historical scholarship outlined previously, touching upon feminist discourse as well as the more traditional matters of attribution, critical reception and stylistic analysis.
A recurring topic of discussion in the eld is that of inventio versus imitatio, or the distinction between producing original images and copying the designs of other masters. Throughout the literature, Sofonisba’s artistic production has often been characterised as lacking inventio, all the while recognizing the artist’s pro ciency in imitatio. While the two are not mutually exclusive, Sofonisba’s excellence in copying the designs and even stylistic qualities of those around her has often been interpreted as a lack of inventive abilities. A common interpretation has therefore been that Sofonisba’s mimetic abilities in painting were developed as a result of her scarce originality. The research and stylistic analysis explained throughout this thesis intend to challenge this way of discussing Sofonisba’s artistry, reframing the question of inventio versus imitatio around the circumstances in which Sofonisba was expected to operate, which perhaps favoured imitation over original creation.
Furthermore, the eld of Sofonisba still seems to be missing an accurate and profound study of the more stylistic and iconographic characteristics of her paintings of her later period in Genoa, or a precise de nition of the formal aspects of her production during this time. Publications concerned with studying Sofonisba’s technique and manner represent a much smaller portion of the scholarship compared to most of her contemporaries, and the same goes for studies of her in uences. Instead, once issues of attribution were mostly resolved, modern scholarship has focused primarily on Sofonisba’s experience as a woman painter in the Renaissance and how she navigated a male-dominated society. It would be problematic to discuss Sofonisba and her work without considering the exceptional circumstances she found herself in, incontestably arising from her gender, yet there is more to discover and examine in her work than its condition of being made by a woman, with all that it entails. A glaring shortcoming in the scholarship so far has been the lack of reconstruction of her later oeuvre, from her move to Genoa in 1580 until her death. With the exception of Rossana Sacchi’s contribution to the 1994 catalogue, this period of Sofonisba’s life has been broadly overlooked with regards to her oeuvre as well as details of her biography.
A primary concern for this thesis is to study this later period in terms of biographical information as well as the formal and technical qualities of Sofonisba’s production. Furthermore, the
research presented here aims to investigate why this later period has generally been discounted in the scholarship, especially when compared to the earlier stages of the artist’s œuvre. Details about Sofonisba’s activities and endeavours throughout these later years have been discussed somewhat, although little attention has been brought to her artistic production and, more importantly, to Sofonisba’s place within the Genoese art scene she found herself in. Therefore, my thesis research poses and aims to answer the following questions: what was Sofonisba’s position in the Genoese art world?
Did she exert any in uence on the artists already based there? What can the study of her later period tell us about her artistic legacy?
Rather than approaching Sofonisba’s artistic and personal contacts in relation to how they helped her achieve success, the following thesis intends to investigate the artistic networks Sofonisba was involved in during her time in Genoa, examining the possible in uence of these relationships of artistic exchange on Sofonisba’s manner, as well as the impact her own work may have had on the artistry of those around her. This research aims to explore how these complex systems of artistic exchange may have functioned and the role Sofonisba may have played within them, questioning the extent to which her own artistic production from these years could be considered in uential on the Genoese art scene.
To begin with, a biographical overview of Sofonisba’s life and activities from 1580 to 1625 will be given, to aid our understanding of her artistic production during the same years. Then, stylistic analysis of her work from this period will be carried out, investigating how this new cultural environment and the artists she encountered may have a ected her artistic production. Comparative stylistic analysis will be used to determine whether this impact may be measured in visible adaptations in her manner and technique. The artworks discussed in this rst half of the thesis were selected based on the certainty of their attribution to Sofonisba, so as to provide an overview of her Genoese production as currently accepted by historians. The second half of this thesis considers the artistic network of Sofonisba during her years in Genoa with regards to the position she held for the younger Genoese artists she came in contact with. Approaching an advanced age, the later part of Sofonisba’s stay in Genoa was less occupied by the artist’s own artistic endeavours, and early biographies report
Sofonisba’s increased involvement with younger Genoese artists on the grounds of artistic exchange and mentorship. Using archival documentation and seventeenth-eighteenth century biographies, this section will investigate the circle of artists Sofonisba may have been in contact with on a personal and artistic level during her time in Genoa. Then, through comparative stylistic analysis, the works produced by the identi ed artists in her circle will be examined in relation to the work of Sofonisba, with the intention of searching for possible evidence of stylistic in uence. With this second half of my research, I examine whether this stage of Sofonisba’s life and œuvre was in fact in uential for the painting practices of younger Genoese artists, and therefore question whether this period of the artist’s life would be more deserving of scholarly attention.
Overall, the aim of this thesis is to shed light on this overlooked period of Sofonisba’s life and oeuvre, both in terms of her biographical information and her artistic production. While this research was carried out with the hopes of gaining an understanding of why this period has been neglected in the eld, it also makes the case for further study and investigation of this period in future scholarship, as there is still much to uncover about the nal years of Sofonisba’s fascinating life and career.
1.1 The Later Years: Genoa and Sicily
In order to gain a deeper understanding of Sofonisba’s later artistic output, it is rst important to consider the activities and major events that took place in the artist’s life. This would provide the
context for the interpretation of the work produced in that period, allowing for a greater awareness of its signi cance and relevance. So far, the eld of Sofonisba has focused primarily on the artist’s early years and training in Cremona, as well as the years spent in Spain, exploring the minute details of the artist’s biographical timeline and the endeavours that occupied her time. It is understandable that these periods be placed at the centre of scholarly focus, as they have been recognized as the most proli c and impactful stages of Sofonisba’s œuvre, and therefore deserve considerable attention. On the other hand, Sofonisba’s later period, speci cally after her move to Genoa in 1580 until her death in 1625, has generally been overlooked in the scholarship so far. This disparity in the eld begs the question of whether Sofonisba’s later period was in fact inconsequential, and whether this lack of attention is therefore justi ed. The contributions made by Spanish art historian María Kusche and Italian art historian Rossana Sacchi have allowed for a fairly broad understanding of these later years, although many uncertainties still remain regarding Sofonisba’s artistic production, as well as details of the endeavours, artistic and not, that Sofonisba was concerned with throughout these years. The following is an overview of the various events and preoccupations that occupied Sofonisba’s life from 1580 until her death in 1625, compiled largely thanks to the writings of contemporary biographers, as well as the original documentation provided by Sacchi in the “Regesto dei Documenti” chapter of the 1994 exhibition catalogue Sofonisba e le sue sorelle, a fundamental contribution in reconstructing the artist’s later biography.
Sofonisba before 1580
Sofonisba’s life before 1580 was spent building a distinguished reputation and achieving international renown as a portrait painter, earned primarily thanks to the fourteen years spent at the service of King Philip II. In Cremona, Sofonisba was trained in the arts from a young age alongside several sisters, and her talent for portraiture was recognized early on by the likes of Michelangelo and Bernardino Campi, with whom she completed an apprenticeship at the age of fourteen. After being called to serve at the Spanish court of King Philip II in 1559, Sofonisba took on many roles, o cially serving as lady-in-waiting to Queen Isabel de Valois, while also painting an extensive array of royal
portraits and providing painting lessons for several Infantas, as well as for the Queen herself.1By the year 1580, Sofonisba’s successes both in and out of the Spanish court had earned her levels of fame and respect rather remarkable for a Renaissance woman involved in the arts. The year 1580 marks the beginning of Sofonisba’s later period for one main reason: during this year Sofonisba and her newly-wed husband Orazio Lomellini moved from Sicily to Genoa, where the artist would spend the following thirty- ve years of her life.2 Although Genoa was not Sofonisba’s nal destination - the couple moved back to Palermo in 1615 - it represented her last truly active years of painting. Upon return to Sicily, in fact, Sofonisba’s advanced age and ensuing blindness largely brought an end to her period of artistic production, with only a few exceptions.3
The circumstances of Sofonisba’s move to Genoa can be explained by backtracking a few years, to the death of her rst husband, Fabrizio Moncada, in 1578. Don Fabrizio de Moncada, prince of Paternò and viceroy of Sicily, remains a relatively unknown character to this day, although research on his genealogy has shown that he came from a family of signi cant wealth and social standing in Sicily.4 Sofonisba was married to Moncada in 1573 as the result of an arranged marriage under the supervision of the Spanish King Philip II who, in return for her many years of loyal service at the court, desired to nd a be tting partner for Sofonisba.5During the fth year of the Anguissola-Moncada marriage, in April of 1578, Moncada made his way to King Philip II to see after some issues regarding his inheritance, given that he had no children and was therefore heirless. Unfortunately, Moncada embarked on one of two Sicilian galleys that were raided by Algerian pirates, and was killed not far from the coast of Capri.6 Not only did his death leave Sofonisba prematurely widowed and
6Cesare Magni, Il Tramonto Del Feudo Lombardo (Milano, 1937), 154.
5Kusche, “Sofonisba Anguissola maestra de las Infantas y dama de Doña Juana y Doña Ana de Austria,” in Retratos y Retratadores, 225-7.
4Giovanni Agostino della Lengueglia, “Notarile, I versamento 7064, 25 febbraio 1573, notaio Antonino di Michele,” in Ritratti Della Prosapia et Heroi Moncadi Nella Sicilia, vol. 1 (Valenza, 1657). Retrieved from the Archivio di Stato, Catania by Rossana Sacchi and published in “Regesto dei Documenti,” Sofonisba e le sue sorelle, 1994.
3Raffaele Soprani, “Soffonisba Angosciola Lomellina, Pittrice Da Cremona,” in Le Vite de Pittori, Scoltori, et Architetti Genovesi. E de’ Forastieri, Che in Genoua Operarono Con Alcuni Ritratti Degli Stessi (Genova, 1674), 310, https://archive.org/details/levitedepittoris00sopr/page/n1/mode/1up.
2Rossana Sacchi, “Tra La Sicilia e Genova: Sofonisba Anguissola Moncada e Poi Lomellini,” in Sofonisba Anguissola E Le Sue Sorelle, ed. Paolo Buffa (Milano: Leonardo Arte, 1994), 159.
1María Kusche, “Al servicio de la Reina Isabel de Valois, las obras de este periodo 1559-1568,” in Retratos y Retratadores: Alonso Sánchez Coello y Sus Competidores Sofonisba Anguissola, Jorge De La Rúa y Rolán Moys (Madrid: Fundación Arte Hispánico, 2003), 197-9.
grief-stricken, it also presented considerable nancial obstacles, as the surviving Moncada family refused to return Sofonisba’s dowry. The dowry included jewels and precious objects received in Spain, not to mention her nancial capital and the annual earnings from the Spanish court. This was the beginning of a legal battle that lasted over fteen years, representing a large portion of the artist’s preoccupations during the last period of her life, while also occupying the majority of written documents and records available on this period.7
To face this multitude of nancial and bureaucratic obstacles, Sofonisba called on her younger brother, Asdrubale, to come to her aid. Asdrubale arrived in Sicily the 13th of November, 1578, and was made sole legal representative of Sofonisba.8Now in the company of her brother, Sofonisba had the indispensable legal support and warranty of a male gure, and could therefore begin planning her move away from Sicily. Spanish historian and biographer Pedro Pablo de Ribera wrote in his Le Glorie from 1609 that, at this point, the Spanish court once again reached out to Sofonisba. According to de Ribera, Sofonisba received an invitation to return to the Spanish court, but she declined the move, given the many years already spent at their service.9 Grieving the loss of her husband, Sofonisba’s intention was instead to return to Cremona to a quiet, tranquil life in the company of her remaining family, enjoying the rewards of a life spent at the service of the Spanish royal court and the successes earned as a revered painter.
The move to Genoa and relations with the Spanish court
Despite her plans to retire in Cremona, Sofonisba’s life took an unexpected turn while on the boat bringing her to Pisa. There, she met Orazio Lomellini, Genoese merchant and captain of the
9Pedro Pablo de Ribera, “Di Sofonisma nobile Cremonesa, Musica, Letterata, e sopratutto rarissima Pittrice,” in Le Glorie immortali de’ trionfi, et heroiche imprese d’ottocento quarantacinque donne illustri antiche, e moderne, dotate di conditioni, e scienze segnalate ... Tra le quali vi sono molte versate in santità, virginità, penitanza, digiuni, vigilie, ... Sonoui alquante inuentrici di varie scienze, e mestieri all’vso humano neces (Evangelista Deuchino, 1609), 316, http://archive.org/details/bub_gb_D-WwdVBBKSkC. Writing on the years following Moncada’s death:
“(...) indi a poco venne auuertita, che le Maestà del Re, e della Regina accennauano volontà, che tornasse in Spagna al Reale loro seruigio: ma essa, che di già v’hauea passato molti anni di seruitù, assentire non volle all’inuito, rosluendo di tornare in Lombardia.”
8Sacchi, “Regesto Dei Documenti,” 384. Notary act of 13 November, 1578, retrieved by Sacchi from the Archivio di Stato, Catania.
7Rossana Sacchi, “Regesto Dei Documenti,” in Sofonisba Anguissola E Le Sue Sorelle, ed. Paolo Buffa (Milano:
Leonardo Arte, 1994), 378. The notary act of 26 May, 1573 lists the contents of the Moncada-Anguissola dowry.
ship.10 The circumstances of their meeting and relationship remain rather enigmatic, although letters sent to Francesco de’ Medici, at the time Duke of Tuscany, and to her brother Asdrubale and King Philip II, demonstrate that they were married almost immediately following their arrival in Pisa. The letter to the Duke was sent on the 27th of December 1579, announcing that the marriage had already taken place.11 Sofonisba and Lomellini most likely left Pisa in the summer of 1580, settling in Lomellini’s hometown of Genoa for the following thirty- ve years. Lomellini belonged to a fairly esteemed family of merchant-bankers in Genoa and worked his entire life as captain of ships and galleys, often travelling to and from Sicily for business, while also working as a merchant like the rest of his family.12 In Genoa, Sofonisba became the lady of her own palazzo, and was integrated into the rather large family network of the Lomellinis, a welcome yet drastic change from her years spent in Spain surrounded by courtiers.13 The exact location where Sofonisba and Orazio settled is still unknown, although it can be imagined that their palazzo may have resembled the large palace complexes of the Strada Nuova, built throughout the second half of the sixteenth century for rich aristocratic families such as the Lomellinis. By the turn of the century, Strada Nuova had become an artistic laboratory for the expression of aristocratic families’ wealth and power in Genoa, providing work for local artists in the decoration of its buildings.14 A couple of these palazzi were owned by the Lomellini family, so it can be imagined that Sofonisba and Orazio may have resided in one of them, integrating themselves within the Genoese aristocratic community.
Unfortunately, despite Orazio’s modest fortune, Sofonisba’s nancial worries did not come to an end in Genoa. The restitution of the Moncada dowry was delayed several years and, in order to keep up with the couple’s living costs, Sofonisba was forced to fall into a sizable debt with another Genoese
14Gianni Bozzo, “Il contesto urbano, storico e artistico di Strada Nuova,” Associazione Palazzo Lomellino di Strada Nuova, accessed June 7, 2022.
https://www.palazzolomellino.org/index.php/palazzo/strada-nuova?jjj=1654591761788.
13Ilya Sandra Perlingieri, “The Return of an Illustrious Daughter,” in Sofonisba Anguissola: The First Great Woman Artist of the Renaissance (New York: Rizzoli, 1992), 174.
12Sacchi, “Tra La Sicilia e Genova: Sofonisba Anguissola Moncada e Poi Lomellini,” 159.
11Sacchi, “Regesto Dei Documenti,” 384. Letter from Sofonisba to Francesco I de’ Medici, in which Sofonisba excuses the delay in announcing her marriage by writing: “(...) però come li matrimoni prima se fano in Cielo et poi in terra, la lettera de Vostra Altezza Serenissima me capitò tardi (...)”
10Soprani, 309; Vincenzo Lancetti, “Anguisciola, Sofonisba, Elena, Lucia, Minerva, Europa, Ed Anna Maria,” in Biografia Cremonese, vol. I (Milano: G. Borsani, 1819), 257,
https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=jGU-AAAAYAAJ&pg=GBS.PA246&hl=en.
merchant, Fabrizio Bargagli.15 Written records from these years document the growing debt between Lomellini-Bargagli, although it can be assumed that Sofonisba’s ties with Spanish court o cials and nobility may have eased the brunt of these
preoccupations. In fact, Sofonisba’s respected name and reputation meant that the years spent in Genoa were certainly not all centred around the couple’s nancial challenges. Throughout these years, Sofonisba not only continued to paint, but also maintained close contact with members of the Spanish court, even receiving visits from certain eminent gures from time to time. Of these, the most momentous were the visits from Empress María in 1581, Infanta Catalina Micaela’s visit to Savona in 1585, as well as Infanta Isabella Clara Eugenia’s visit to Genoa in 1599.16 On these occasions, Sofonisba would have had the possibility to converse and interact with these royal women, not only because of the continuing relationship held with the Spanish court, but also thanks to Sofonisba’s ability to conduct herself within the protocols and expectations of royal ceremonies and environments, a talent that must have distinguished her among the merchant-class citizens of Genoa. De Ribera
recounts the events of Empress María’s visit in 1581 and her close interaction with Sofonisba in his Le Glorie of 1609.17 De Ribera writes that Sofonisba gifted the Empress with a small painting of the
17De Ribera, Le Glorie immortali, 316. “Nel cui tempo avenne que la Maestà dell’Imperatrice passò in questa città, andò in Spagna, a cui andò essa Signora a farle riverenza, presentandole un quadretto della Madonna, fatto con ogni eccellenza desiderabile, il che gradì sopramodo l’Emperatrice, facendole favori in pubblico e privato strordinarij (...)”
16Kusche, “La vida en Génova,” in Retratos y Retratadores, 242-271.
15Ibid., 160.
Virgin and most likely painted a portrait of the Empress as well, although to this day only a copy of this portrait has been found.18 Notarial documents following the visit suggest that, somewhere amid the conversations the two women must have had, Sofonisba may have asked the Empress for support in handling her nancial troubles. In fact, not long after Empress María’s return to Spain, Sofonisba began receiving help from the Spanish court in the form of nancial support and backing.19 Furthermore, in 1583, ve years after the death of Moncada, King Philip II nally sent Sofonisba the money he had promised as an aid to her tragic loss, proving the court’s renewed interest in Sofonisba’s comfort and wellbeing even years after her departure from Spain.20
In 1599, Infanta Isabella Clara Eugenia stopped by Genoa on the way to her wedding with Archduke Albert of Austria, and asked Sofonisba to paint her marriage portrait.21Several scholars have identi ed this portrait as the painting currently hanging in the Spanish Embassy in Paris (Fig. 1),22 although this attribution of the painting remains uncertain, given the lack of scholarly consensus on the matter.23 Over twenty- ve years had passed since Sofonisba’s departure from the court, yet her personal ties with the Spanish royals persisted. It is therefore implied that throughout the many years of distance, the women must have corresponded through letters, despite these not being available to us currently.
23For example, American art historian Michael Wayne Cole has asserted that there are no works from this period to be used as a basis for comparison, therefore the attribution cannot be made certain. “Painting and the Education of Daughters,” in Sofonisba’s Lesson: A Renaissance Artist and Her Work (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2019), 150.
22Sofonisba Anguissola (attributed to), Portrait of Infanta Isabella Clara Eugenia, 1599, oil on canvas, 194 x 109 cm, Spanish Embassy, Paris.
21Bartolomeo de Soresina Vidoni, “Sofonisba Angussola,” in La Pittura Cremonese (Milano: Società Tipog. de’
Classici Italiani, 1824), 107, https://archive.org/details/gri_33125010713010/page/118/mode/1up. “La Infanta Clara Eugenia, fatta sposa dell’Arciduca Alberto, diede, passando per Genova, segni d’affezione chiarissimi
all’Angussola, per la dolce memoria che teneva dei servigi e delle virtù di lei, e si fece da essa ritrarre.”
20Sacchi, “Regesto dei Documenti,” 387. January 1583: Letter from the Spanish court, Philip II sends Sofonisba 500 scudi to ease the troubles caused by the death of her first husband, Moncada. Retrieved by Sacchi from the Archivio di Stato, Palermo.
19Sacchi, “Regesto dei Documenti,” 387. A letter from 16 May, 1581 documents the order by the viceroy of Sicily, Marco Antonio Colonna, to pay a pension directly to Sofonisba, that had been previously shared with Moncada.
Retrieved by Sacchi from the Archivio di Stato, Palermo.
18Kusche, “La vida en Génova,” in Retratos y Retratadores, 243-4.
Painting in Genoa
In between the concerns regarding her nancial troubles, Sofonisba also continued painting, stopping her practice only when her declining vision could no longer allow it. The paintings produced in this period will be discussed and analysed in more detail further on, although it is rst important to acknowledge this new environment Sofonisba found herself in, as Genoa presented an entirely new set of social connections and artistic in uences. Unfortunately, one of the greatest gaps in the currently known documents pertains exactly to this period in Genoa, around the early 1580s. As shown above, testimonials primarily record her continued dealings with the Spanish court, as well as a few mentions of her artistic production, with very little written about the exact activities or pursuits that occupied Sofonisba’s time. However, stylistic clues in the paintings from this period suggest that Sofonisba came into close contact with various Genoese artists, especially the Castello family and artists in the circle of Luca Cambiaso (1527-1585).24 Luca Cambiaso was the leading painter in Genoa during the second half of the sixteenth century, holding a distinguished reputation within the Genoese art scene for his religious paintings of both small and large formats. Cambiaso's work and artistry guided the practices of the surrounding Genoese artists of the time, representing the essence of Genoese painting in the late 1500s.
Anguissola-Lomellini a airs and contacts
Notary documents from the thirty- ve years spent in Genoa prove that, during this time, Sofonisba and Orazio’s relations with Sicily remained very much intact.25This was mostly due to the ongoing legal dispute concerning Sofonisba’s dowry and the debt she owed to Fabrizio Bargagli, which required regular visits to Palermo. Orazio would also travel to Sicily once or twice a year for business, as his profession often involved working from the port of Palermo, as well as to upkeep the many
25Sacchi’s “Regesto dei Documenti” compiled all the known documents from this period, mostly consisting of notarial acts, many of which were performed in Palermo.
24Sacchi, “Tra La Sicilia e Genova: Sofonisba Anguissola Moncada e Poi Lomellini,” 162.
properties owned there.26However, modern scholarship has investigated possible ulterior motives for Sofonisba and Orazio’s continued connection to Sicily. In the 1994 exhibition catalogue Sofonisba e le sue sorelle, Rossana Sacchi suggested that Sofonisba and Orazio may have been involved in the construction of the San Giorgio dei Genovesi church in Palermo (Fig. 2), which began in 1576 under the supervision of Italian architect Giorgio di Faccio. Sacchi mentions that there are documents proving Orazio’s presence in Palermo in 1608, at the time occupied with transactions concerning the inheritance left by Andrea Lomellini, one of the founders of the church. The document Sacchi cites, however, seems to be missing from the “Regesto dei Documenti” included in the same 1994 publication.27Furthermore, in the catalogue of a 1969 exhibition dedicated to the restored paintings in the San Giorgio dei Genovesi church, it was theorised that Sofonisba’s work may have been the inspiration for some of the commissioned chapels
in San Giorgio, speci cally those by Jacopo Palma il Giovane, although this hypothesis has yet to be con rmed.28 Overall, although far away, Sofonisba’s connections and interests in Sicily were maintained throughout her years in Genoa, until the couple made their way back to the island in 1615.
Sofonisba also remained in contact with her family in Cremona, despite living far away and possibly never returning there physically. The
correspondence was mainly upheld with her younger brother Asdrubale, who seems to have travelled to Genoa on at least one occasion. In fact, a notarial act attests to Asdrubale’s presence in Genoa on the
28Dante Bernini, ed., Mostra Dei Dipinti Restaurati Della Chiesa Di San Giorgio Dei Genovesi Di Palermo (Palermo, 1969), 3-23.
27Sacchi, “Tra La Sicilia e Genova: Sofonisba Anguissola Moncada e Poi Lomellini,” 167. Here, Sacchi’s citation specifies to refer to the Regesto included in the same publication, specifically the entry dating to the 14th of June, 1608. However, there is no entry for this date in the Regesto, most likely an accidental omission.
26Sacchi, “Tra La Sicilia e Genova: Sofonisba Anguissola Moncada e Poi Lomellini,” 168; Christopher Brown, Van Dyck (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1982), 82.
3rd of July, 1591, although it is highly likely that the siblings met each other on more occasions.29We do not know of any visit to Cremona after Sofonisba’s move to Genoa, as it has not been told in any early biographies or documented in any recorded testimonies found thus far. However, this does not exclude the possibility that the artist may have returned to her native city at some point during the last 45 years of her life.
The last decade in Sicily
Sofonisba and Orazio’s nal move to Sicily is documented as taking place around 1615. The couple bought a house in a neighbourhood called Seralcàdii, where it is presumed that Sofonisba spent the last decade of her life in quiet tranquillity.30 The move was motivated by Orazio’s business endeavours, which had grown exponentially throughout the previous years and increasingly required his presence on the island, as well as by the two annual pensions that were paid regularly in Palermo.
These two factors together most likely encouraged Sofonisba’s last move, at the ripe age of eighty-three.
Not much is known about this nal period of Sofonisba’s life, as her near blindness had brought her artistic production entirely to a close, and her old age most likely limited her activities around Palermo. The most signi cant source of insight into these last years is available thanks to the sketches and notes of Antoon Van Dyck (1599-1641), who visited the artist in her Sicilian home during the summer of 1624, just over a year before the Cremonese’s passing.31Van Dyck’s description and sketch of Sofonisba (Fig. 3) in the nal year of her life provide a fascinating look into the character and personality of this artist, whose everlasting passion for art was evident even during her
31Antoon Van Dyck, “Italian Sketchbook, 1621-1627,” manuscript (British Museum, London), 113. The visit is also chronicled in most contemporary biographies, including Soprani’s Le Vite, 305.
30Sacchi, “Regesto dei Documenti,” 400. A bill of sale dating to the 27th of November, 1615 records that Sofonisba and Orazio bought a “domus magna” from Francesca Spinelli.
29Sacchi, “Regesto dei Documenti,” 390.
ninety-second year of life. Speci cally, Van Dyck recounted how the artist’s memory was still impressively lucid, telling him stories about the life she led. He stated that the greatest pain su ered by Sofonisba was not her near blindness itself, but the fact that it stopped her from painting, which was her ultimate passion. Despite her lack of
eyesight, however, Van Dyck wrote that during his visit Sofonisba was very intent on observing and critiquing paintings and drawings, bringing them close to her nose until they could be discerned by her eyes.32In previous scholarship, Van Dyck’s visit has generally been treated as the only moment of Sofonisba’s later period worth discussing, as the interaction with an artist of his stature inevitably served to heighten Sofonisba’s achievements and prove the reputation earned throughout her life. Contemporary testimonies such as Vasari’s biography often implied that his visit was the product of his great admiration for Sofonisba, although it can also be explained in more practical terms. In 1623, Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia arrived in
Palermo as the new viceroy. Emanuele Filiberto was the son of the Spanish Infanta Catalina Micaela, whose portraits had been painted several times by Sofonisba. It can be assumed that, with Emanuele
32The exact quote, as written in Van Dyck’s sketchbook: “Rittratto della Sig.ra Sofonisma Anguissola pittricia, fatto dal vivo in Palermo l’anno 1624 li 12 di Julio: l’eta’ di essa 96 havendo ancora la memoria et il servello
prontissimo, cortesissima et sebene per la veciaia la’ mancava la vista, hebbe con tutto cio gusto de mettere gli quadri avanti ad essa et con gran stenta mettendo il naso sopra il quadro, venne a discernere qualche poca et piglio gran piacere ancora in quel modo, facende il ritratto de essa, me diede diversi advertimenti non devendo pigliar il lume troppo alto, accio che le ombre nelle ruge della vecchiaia non diventassero troppo grande, et molti altri buoni discorsi come ancora conto parte della vita di essa per la quale se conobbe che era pittora de natura et miraculosa et la pena magiore che hebbe era per mancamento di vista non poter più dipingere: la mano era ancora ferma senza tremula nessuna.”
Filiberto’s arrival, the court found a renewed interest in the work of Sofonisba and, through the Savoia family, also caught the attention of Van Dyck, who had arrived in Italy only two years prior. In the summer of 1624, in fact, Emanuele Filiberto had requested for his portrait to be painted by Van Dyck, who then travelled to Sicily.33It is therefore wrong to assume that Van Dyck’s trip to Sicily was entirely motivated by his admiration of Sofonisba, although from the writings left behind by the artist it is clear that there was a signi cant level of respect and recognition for the almost-centenarian painter.
Sofonisba Anguissola died in Palermo on the 16th of November, 1625, at the age of 93, and was buried in the aforementioned church of San
Giorgio dei Genovesi.34 This overview of the artist’s life and activities from 1580 onwards serves as a foundation for the understanding of Sofonisba’s artistic production from this period, especially in relation to the circumstances in which her work was produced and the in uences she encountered. In the next chapter, this biographical context will aid in the investigation of Sofonisba’s position within the Genoese art world from 1580 onwards, while also exploring how this new environment may have been re ected in Sofonisba’s own artistic output.
34Seven years after Sofonisba’s death, Orazio Lomellini had the following inscription made on her tombstone in the San Giorgio dei Genovesi church: “SOPHONISBAE UXORI AB ANGUISSOLAE / COMBITUS DUCENTI
ORIGINE [M] / NOBILITATE FORMA EXTRAORDINARIISQUE / NATURA DOTIBUS IN ILLUSTRES MUNDI MULIE / RES RELATAE AC IN EXPRIMENDIS HOMINUM / IMAGINIBUS ADEO INSIGNI / UT PARE[M]
AETATIS SUAE / NEMINE HABUISSE SIT AESTIMATA / HORATIUS LOMELLINUS / INGENTI AFFECTUS MAERORE DECUS / HOC EXTREMUM ET SI TANTAE MULIERI EXIGUUM / MORTALIBUS VERO MAXIMU[M] DICAVIT 1632.”
33Gregory Martin, “Van Dyck in Sicily,” The Burlington Magazine 154, no. 1309 (April 2012): 292.
1.2 Genoa and Cambiaso
Upon her arrival in Genoa, Sofonisba Anguissola was met with a cultural and artistic landscape that di ered greatly from the environment she had become accustomed to during her years in Sicily. By the time Sofonisba arrived in Genoa in 1580, the Genoese art scene had undergone a rather drastic transformation. In the rst half of the sixteenth century, the booming artistic production in Northern Italy largely favoured the Tuscan and Lombard regions. These areas essentially dominated creative innovation, leaving little space for Ligurian art to make its own, distinctive mark.35 For a while, Ligurian art primarily followed the artistic example set by these regions, that is until the emergence of Luca Cambiaso. The gure of Cambiaso brought a period of renewal to the Genoese artistic landscape,
35Bertina Suida Manning, “Introduction,” in Genoese Masters: Cambiaso to Magnasco 1550-1750 (Dayton, Ohio:
Dayton Art Institute, 1962), 6.
paving the way for the outstanding artistic burgeoning of Ligurian pictorial art over the course of the following two centuries.36 The following chapter will be focused on examining the gure of Luca Cambiaso and his role within the Genoese art scene of the second half of the sixteenth century. From there, stylistic comparisons will be made between Cambiaso’s paintings and those by Sofonisba during her time in Genoa, in order to gain a better understanding of the in uence Cambiaso and his oeuvre may have had on the Cremonese artist.
Luca Cambiaso (1527-1585)
Born in Moneglia in 1527, Luca Cambiaso began his artistic career under the supervision and training of his father Giovanni, also a painter, with whom he painted large fresco decorations in a somewhat Michelangelesque style, prioritising foreshortening and the depiction of movement over the perspectival planes and structures his contemporaries were concerned with.37 Soon enough, Luca outgrew the teachings of his father and began producing work re ective of his inventive abilities as designer and draughtsman, most famously in the frescoes and extravagant decorations painted in churches and palazzi around the city in the 1550s.38 Cambiaso’s mastery and inventiveness allowed him to establish himself rather quickly as the leading artistic personality not only in Genoa, but in all of Liguria.39 Cambiaso is, in fact, considered to be the rst major Genoese artistic gure, founding a style of fresco decoration that provided the basis for the development and ourishing of Ligurian painting of the late sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The artist spent just over thirty years working in Genoa and neighbouring areas, during which he painted several monumental frescos which he was so renowned for, while also expressing the extent of his imaginative qualities in the thousands of drawings he left behind.40In these years, between 1550 and 1580, Cambiaso also produced a number of easel paintings, all greatly appreciated by the Genoese artists working around him, who admired the
40Suida Manning, “Introduction,” 11.
39Pietro Torriti, “Luca Cambiaso,” in La Pittura a Genova e in Liguria dagli inizi al Cinquecento I (Genoa: 1970), 209.
38Manning, “Catalogue,” par. Cambiaso Luca, “Luchetto da Genova.”
37Lauro Magnani, “Luca Cambiaso: Idea, Practice, Ideology,” in Luca Cambiaso 1527-1585 (Milano: Silvana Editoriale, 2006), 27.
36Bertina Suida Manning, “Catalogue,” in Genoese Masters: Cambiaso to Magnasco 1550-1750 (Dayton, Ohio:
Dayton Art Institute, 1962).
beauty and elegance of his innovative creations. Initially, Cambiaso did not fully adhere to the Mannerist tendencies popular in Genoa at the time. Instead, his early style has been considered an expression of a more pure Neo-Renaissance in his frescoes, concerned with carrying forward the precepts established by Raphael and Michelangelo. Later on, under the in uence of artists like Perino del Vaga (1501-1547) and Domenico Beccafumi (1486-1551), Cambiaso’s line became more uid and free, his chiaroscuro became softer, and the immediacy of gesture became apparent in the signs of his brushstroke.
Cambiaso’s legacy goes beyond the wealth of artworks he produced and left behind. In fact, it is particularly evident in the work of artists who came in contact with his paintings and whose production was unmistakably in uenced thereafter. As the leading artistic gure in Genoa at the time, and one of the rst Genoeses to introduce a new style of painting, Luca Cambiaso was seen as somewhat of an artistic genius by his peers.41 Perhaps also for this reason, the style proposed by Cambiaso managed to captivate an entire generation of indigenous artists who, up until that point, had primarily followed the models and examples of the great masters coming from outside of Liguria.
Educated under the model of Cambiaso, this group of artists eventually developed into something resembling a ‘school’, led and de ned by the ideas and standards set by Luca Cambiaso.42Thanks to his ability to stand out and establish himself among the vagueness of Genoa’s pre-existing art scene, Luca Cambiaso managed to give a de nition to the Genoese regional art manner in its own right.
The question to be asked now is: what did all of this innovation and development mean for Sofonisba, a woman approaching her fties with an esteemed reputation as a court painter and several decades of experience preceding her? Considering that the circumstances of Sofonisba’s career - particularly the condition of being a woman - had most often limited her painting practice to portraiture, her arrival onto the Genoese art scene presented several novelties. First of all, Sofonisba was confronted for the rst time with the culture of the Counter-Reformation.43In response to Protestant reformers destroying images of saints, the Catholic church wished to rea rm the importance of art,
43Rossana Sacchi, ‘Tra La Sicilia e Genova: Sofonisba Anguissola Moncada e Poi Lomellini’, 162. In Sicily, in fact, the religious and artistic climate only began to shift after Sofonisba’s departure.
42Ibid., 12.
41Ibid.
particularly works depicting the Virgin Mary. Works of art were considered increasingly instrumental in conveying Catholic theology and, as such, were required to t a series of guidelines when treating religious subjects.44 Many designs and themes proposed by artists were met with strong opposition from the Church, for example, depictions of “carnal desire” were inadmissible, as well as iconography believed to convey veiled messages, while explicit images of Christ’s su ering were encouraged. The Counter-Reformation bestowed a heavy weight on the power of religious art and, particularly in the case of painting, largely controlled the production of its artists. On top of this, the art scene Sofonisba stumbled upon in Genoa was almost entirely dependent on the stylistic choices and tendencies of one man: Luca Cambiaso. If we consider Sofonisba’s artistic production from its beginnings in Cremona to the period spent working at the royal court of Philip II, it is clear to see Sofonisba’s exceptional ability in adapting to the style and techniques expected from her, either by her commissioners or the cultural context she found herself in (Fig. 5 and 6).45
45Sofonisba Anguissola, Bernardino Campi painting Sofonisba Anguissola, ca. 1559, oil on canvas, 111 x 110 cm, Pinacoteca Nazionale di Siena. This painting displays Sofonisba’s outstanding ability to imitate the manner of her tutor, Bernardino Campi, in painting her own portrait; Sofonisba Anguissola, Philip II, 1573, oil on canvas, 88 x 72 cm, Museo del Prado, Madrid. One of numerous royal portraits painted in Spain, this painting demonstrates how Sofonisba was able to conform to the stylistic norms and protocols of the Spanish court.
44Carlo Borromeo (1538-1584), a leading figure of the Catholic reform, published the treatise Instructiones fabricae et supellectilis ecclesiasticae in 1577, in which the subjects of proper church layout, design, and furnishings were discussed.
While modern critics have often described this as a lack of originality and personal style, Sofonisba’s mimetic abilities in painting could also be seen as an important display of the artist’s ingenuity, indeed allowing her to manoeuvre within the restraints imposed on her by a male-dominated industry. In fact, the uctuations and variability of her manner and technique should instead be framed around the expectations and limitations Sofonisba would have experienced as a female painter in the sixteenth century. Sofonisba’s dexterity in conforming to the stylistic standards and models of her surroundings made it possible for her to successfully sustain her career as a painter, establishing herself within art markets with varied demands. This also applies to Sofonisba’s move to Genoa. In her Genoese period, Sofonisba seems to have adopted the models and manner of the young Genoese artistic environment she encountered, taking a fairly drastic turn towards the Cambiasesque model. While it has been argued that this shift was caused by Sofonisba’s personal admiration of Cambiaso, it can also be read as a further demonstration of Sofonisba’s readiness to establish herself within the Genoese market, at the time held captive by the works of Cambiaso.
One of the most evident demonstrations of this change is seen in Sofonisba’s choice of subject matter. As mentioned, in Spain, Sofonisba’s painting practice was almost exclusively concerned with portraiture, mostly for the reason that this was what the court required of her. Sofonisba’s move to Genoa quite suddenly persuaded her to shift her practice to religious paintings, which was the most common subject matter depicted by Genoese painters of the time.46 In fact, of all the paintings produced after her move to Genoa until her death of which we are currently aware, the only instances when Sofonisba returned to portraiture were on the occasion of a Spanish royal coming to visit, as discussed in the previous chapter. In the paintings Sofonisba made throughout these years, however, we see that the artist maintained certain aspects of her early training in Cremona. In these early years of her career Sofonisba’s choice of subject matter had most often fallen on domestic scenes, depicting her sisters and other family members in more private and intimate environments, for example in the renowned The Chess Game from 1555. It seems as though, even after several decades of painting under
46Massimo Bartoletti and Franco Boggero, “The Aftermath of Cambiaso’s Style,” in Luca Cambiaso, 1527-1585, ed. Jonathan Bober (Milano: Silvana Editoriale, 2007), 113-132.
a wide variety of circumstances, Sofonisba maintained her penchant for domestic scenes intended for private spaces. In fact, while Cambiaso and his Genoese followers often painted religious paintings for churches, Sofonisba, as far as we know, never pursued paintings intended for public devotion. It is important to note once again, however, that the prevalence of domestic scenes for private devotion throughout Sofonisba’s career may be due to the conditions within which a female painter like herself would have been allowed to operate. Nevertheless, scholars believe that the subject matter of Sofonisba’s Genoese period, and the absence of artworks for public devotion, stem from Sofonisba’s own preference. This is because, under seemingly the same circumstances, Sofonisba’s sister Europa for instance did in fact paint a few altarpieces, meaning that this option may have been available to Sofonisba as well, but the artist simply did not pursue it.47The paintings Sofonisba did pursue were intended to be hung in the private rooms or even bedrooms of one’s home, depicting religious gures in similar environments of intimacy and comfort. The paintings that will be discussed in this chapter are examples of this new, Genoese period, during which Sofonisba directed her production to religious scenes for private devotion, nevertheless maintaining her a nity for an art depicting intimate and familiar settings.
Once again, however, it is quite evident that this choice of subject matter, too, was in uenced by the artists working around her, primarily by Cambiaso. Although Cambiaso was initially more renowned for his large-scale fresco decorations in churches, his religious easel paintings were also widely admired, and it is almost certain that Sofonisba would have been aware of these paintings and most likely have seen them in person.48Scholars have asserted that, while absorbing and adopting the tendencies of the Genoese painters, Sofonisba’s choice to limit her subject matter re ects a degree of loyalty to her artistic beginnings in Cremona, painting domestic scenes with her sisters under the guidance of Bernardino Campi.
48Ibid.
47Sacchi, “Tra La Sicilia e Genova: Sofonisba Anguissola Moncada e Poi Lomellini,” 162.
Mystic Marriage of Saint Catherine (1588)
As mentioned in the previous chapter, it has not yet been con rmed that Sofonisba and Luca Cambiaso did in fact meet during her years in Genoa, although many scholars believe this to be highly likely.49Luca Cambiaso left Genoa in 1583, as he was called to paint fresco decorations at the church of El Escorial in Spain by none other than King Philip II.50If we consider the strong ties Sofonisba had with the Spanish court, it is perhaps not a coincidence that, after Sofonisba’s move to Genoa, a number of Genoese artists were called by Philip II to work on the Escorial. It has been suggested in the literature that Sofonisba may have indeed played a role in connecting the Spanish court with the painters she became acquainted with in Genoa, serving as a powerful intermediary within a broader artistic network.51
Even if Sofonisba and Cambiaso had not met in person, Cambiaso’s artistry had largely formed the model of what was to be asked of Genoese artists, signi cantly in uencing the practices of any painter eager to establish themselves within the market, for example Sofonisba. In 1588, ve years after Cambiaso’s departure from Genoa, Sofonisba produced a painting that is assumed to be a copy of Cambiaso. While Cambiaso’s painting is undated (Fig. 7),52scholars have assumed that it was produced prior to Sofonisba’s version, although there was no concrete evidence of this. Sofonisba’s Mystic Marriage of Saint Catherine from 1588 was painted with oil on canvas, and is currently held in the Museo de Bella Artes de Bilbao (Fig. 8).53
The painting depicts the event referred to as the mystic marriage of Saint Catherine of Alexandria. Saint Catherine was a gure from the fourth century who allegedly underwent a mystic marriage to the Christ child. Cambiaso and Sofonisba’s paintings follow the account of the story by Jacobus de Voragine in The Golden Legend, a medieval hagiographic compendium which, after the
53Sofonisba Anguissola, Mystic Marriage of Saint Catherine, 1588, oil on canvas, 94 x 70 cm, Museo de Bellas Artes de Bilbao, Bilbao.
52Luca Cambiaso, Mystic Marriage of Saint Catherine, ca. XVI century, oil on canvas, 153 x 119 cm, private collection.
51Perlingieri, “The Return of an Illustrious Daughter,” 178.; Kusche, “La Vida en Génova,” 270.
50Suida Manning, “Catalogue”.
49Two of the major contributors to the field, Rossana Sacchi and María Kusche, treat their meeting almost as factual.
Sacchi, “Tra La Sicilia e Genova: Sofonisba Anguissola Moncada e Poi Lomellini,” 162.; María Kusche, ‘La Vida En Génova. Los Retratos de La Emperatriz y de Las Infantas 1580 - c.1615’, in Retratos y Retratadores: Alonso Sánchez Coello y Sus Competidores Sofonisba Anguissola, Jorge De La Rúa y Rolán Moys (Madrid: Fundación Arte Hispánico, 2003), 270.
Council of Trent, was questioned as tales and depictions of Christian saints were being modi ed.54 Saint Catherine of Alexandria was one of the most popular gures in Europe, mostly for her status as princess and her martyrdom. The event of her marriage to the Christ child was depicted by many artists throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, further popularising her gure and her story. Generally, the infant Christ is depicted as being around one or two years of age, sitting in his mother’s lap and gently placing a wedding ring onto the young princess’ nger. Another common element of these paintings was also the inclusion of other saints or angels in the background, that would serve as witnesses of the event, in which Saint Catherine becomes the celestial wife of Christ.55
Sofonisba’s painting was recently displayed in the Museo del Prado exhibition of 2019. Thanks to the contributions by Leticia Ruiz Gómez published in the exhibition catalogue and the x-radiograph carried out for the occasion, we now have deeper insights into the production of this painting and the
55Ibid.
54 Leticia Ruiz Gómez, A Tale of Two Women Painters (Madrid: Museo Nacional del Prado, 2019), 198.
stylistic choices it expresses. Sofonisba’s version
indeed seems to have been copied from Cambiaso, a conclusion that is reached by observing the relative size of the gures in Sofonisba and Cambiaso’s paintings. The composition remains almost identical in Sofonisba’s version, the only exception being a slight addition of space in the foreground, at the feet of the group, which makes the gures appear relatively smaller in the pictorial space. This could be symptomatic of it being a copy of Cambiaso’s version. In fact, when copying an existing painting, it is commonly observed that the components of a scene are painted smaller in relation to the overall composition when compared to the original, a characteristic that is noticeable in Sofonisba’s version of the Mystic Marriage. Aside from the composition, Sofonisba’s painting displays a very close adherence to Cambiaso’s original, although a closer comparison of the two allows for a distinction between both hands.
In both paintings, the Child leans gracefully onto Mary’s leg, and their faces are both depicted in pro le, painted in a way that demonstrates their close family resemblance, also seen in their limbs and the delicate, elongated way they are portrayed. The central area of the painting is dedicated to the primary event of the story, in which the Christ Child places the ring on Saint Catherine’s gure. The viewer’s attention is further drawn to this scene thanks to Mary’s own gaze, which is lovingly xed onto the event taking place. In the execution, however, Sofonisba seems to pay greater attention to detail, seen in the re nement of the Child’s curls, the shiny ornaments in Saint Catherine’s hair, as well as the decorations and embellishments added to the clothing of all three gures. While this may be due to the state of conservation of Cambiaso’s painting, Sofonisba’s colour palette appears brighter and more vibrant, with more neutral skin tones and softer shadows, especially when compared to the darker contours around the eyes of Cambiaso’s gures. The shadows in Cambiaso’s version are more stark, and the highlights more apparent and di used, giving an almost glowing e ect to the gures.
The light in Sofonisba’s painting, on the other hand, appears more uniform throughout the scene, with a slightly attening e ect on the gures, who are brightly lit against a dark background. The hand of Sofonisba is also recognisable in the execution of the faces, which are more oval and somewhat softer than Cambiaso’s geometricized construction. This is particularly evident in the face of Saint Catherine, whose downturned gaze takes on an almost triangular shape in Cambiaso’s painting. Sofonisba’s Saint Catherine has a less severe bone structure than Cambiaso’s, with eyes that are not as deep-set and a stronger chin that rounds out the contours of the face. In the application of paint, Cambiaso appears more loose and free, giving a more blurred e ect to the painting overall, and a somewhat softer quality to the scene. Sofonisba’s attention to detail, on the other hand, was executed with more precise and calculated brushstrokes, resulting in a somewhat more rigid atmosphere.
The x-radiograph that was carried out on occasion of the Prado exhibition revealed that Sofonisba did not make any substantial changes or pentimenti while painting this image, aside from a few small modi cations to the Child’s feet and the space in the foreground.56 This is indeed an indication that Sofonisba did in fact work from an earlier model that she used as a copying reference,
56Ibid.
which allowed her to paint each element with considerable certainty. In order to con rm that Sofonisba’s painting was a copy, a necessary next step would be to examine Cambiaso’s painting in the same way, revealing what was done di erently in his version, and perhaps clarifying which of the two paintings was indeed the original.
The fact that Sofonisba chose to create a painting almost entirely following an example by Cambiaso reinforces our understanding of Cambiaso’s in uence on the Cremonese during her years in Genoa. The inspiration Sofonisba drew from the works of Cambiaso, however, was not expressed only in the form of near-exact copies such as the Mystic Marriage of Saint Catherine, but was also re ected in several other religious paintings she produced during these years, after Cambiaso’s departure to Spain. The next painting by Sofonisba that will be examined is the Holy Family with Saint Anne and Saint John the Baptist, painted in 1592. This painting is particularly indicative of Sofonisba’s stylistic development after moving to Genoa, especially when considering it in parallel to Cambiaso’s renowned Madonna della Candela.
Cambiaso’s Madonna della Candela (1570-75) and Sofonisba’s Holy Family with Saint Anne and Saint John the Baptist (1592)
The Madonna della Candela (Fig. 9), painted some time between 1570 and 1575, is one of Cambiaso’s most celebrated and famous paintings from this mature period of his career.57It belongs to a portion of Cambiaso’s oeuvre characterised by the creation of a number of nocturnes, or scenes set in dark interiors, with few candles or lamps providing the source of light. This period of Cambiaso’s production also sees a greater focus on themes concerning the childhood of Christ, often painting scenes such as the adoration of the shepherds and sacred families.58In the Madonna della Candela, members of the Holy Family are huddled in a compact group, in a modest and cramped interior. The Virgin is shown breastfeeding the Christ Child, while Saint Anne seems to pause her spinning and the young Saint John the Baptist greets the Mother and Child reverently from the right of the scene. In the
58Magnani, 376.
57Luca Cambiaso, Madonna della Candela, 1570-5, oil on canvas, 104 x 109 cm, Palazzo Bianco, Genoa.; Sacchi,
“Catalogo,” 336.
background, more secluded from the rest of the group, Saint Joseph is depicted behind Mary, barely visible and with his back to the gures in the foreground. The painting is composed of a variety of di erent elements and forms, all crammed into this crowded scene that we, as viewers, witness from a fairly close distance. The range of colours is relatively small, a characteristic that accentuates the night-time e ect of the scene, in which the gures are illuminated by a lit candle at the top right corner of the canvas, as well as a smaller light source in the top left corner, seemingly a replace. The choice to implement this particular lighting e ect was in line with Cambiaso’s interest in the spiritualism of the Counter-Reformation, by which the chosen subject matter is depicted in a dark interior so as to guide the viewer into an intimate and meditative contemplation of the sacred scene. Part of the purpose of a night scene such as the one in Madonna della Candela was indeed to remind the spectator of an other-worldly sensory experience, executed through the subtle illumination of the gures, who emerge from the darkness that surrounds them.59This choice of lighting also results in stark contrasts between light and shadow that emphasise the anatomy of the subjects depicted, as the highlights and shadows divide the canvas into geometrical forms, contouring the faces and bodies of the holy characters.
Cambiaso's stylistic choices throughout this period, often referred to by scholars as “nocturnalism”, also include the restriction of chromatic range, limiting the painting to an almost monochromatic palette, in which the most prevalent colours are tones of black, white and brown.60
Sofonisba’s Holy Family with Saint Anne and Saint John the Baptist (Fig. 10),61painted seven years after Cambiaso’s death, is perhaps the most evident display of Cambiaso’s in uence on Sofonisba throughout her years in Genoa. In this painting, Sofonisba portrays the same characters as in Cambiaso’s Madonna della Candela, only slightly rearranging them within a similar setting. This painting is a demonstration of Sofonisba’s interest in attempting the advanced lighting e ects mastered by Cambiaso in his series of nocturnes, displaying Sofonisba’s own technical ability while, at the same time, rea rming her preference for intimate, domestic scenes of sacred gures. With this painting, Sofonisba exhibits her remarkable ability to adapt her artistic practice to external in uences. While
61Sofonisba Anguissola, Holy Family with Saint Anne and Saint John the Baptist, 1592, oil on canvas, 125.7 x 110.5 cm, Lowe Art Museum, Coral Gables, Florida.
60Ibid.
59Ibid.
certain elements appear quite evidently inspired by Cambiaso’s Madonna della Candela, Sofonisba’s painting demonstrates a substantial degree of her own invention, particularly with regards to the
composition.
Observing the two paintings side by side allows for a better understanding of the extent of Cambiaso’s in uence on Sofonisba when creating this painting. In terms of composition, Sofonisba depicts both the Virgin and Saint Anne with their heads bowed, gazing lovingly at the Infant Child, while in Cambiaso’s version Saint Anne is turned away from the Madonna and Child, looking at the
