Northern Renaissance Drawings and Underdrawings: A Proposed Method of Study

Author(s): Maryan W. Ainsworth

Source: Master Drawings, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Spring, 1989), pp. 5-38
Published by: Master Drawings Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1553916
Accessed: 16-12-2015 10:04 UTC

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

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

Master Drawings Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Master Drawings.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Northern RenaissanceDrawings
and Underdrawings:
A Proposed
Method
MaryanW.Ainsworth
W hat little has come down to us of Northern Renais-
sance drawings hardly correspondsto what was created
at the time. Nor can we assume that the portion that
remains is truly representativeof what was originally
produced. The most obvious indicationof this loss is the
paucity of drawings attributedto even the most cele-
bratedartistsof the time -Roger van der Weyden, Hans
Memling, and Hugo van der Goes are representedby
only a few sheetseach, and some of theircontemporaries
lack any securely attributeddrawings.
The relatively small number of surviving sheets as
compared to ItalianRenaissanceexamples is due to sev-
eral factors: to loss, to the fact that drawings of this
period apparentlywere not collected as they were later
on, and, perhaps, to the particularworkshop methods
employed by these artists. As a result of the dearth of
Northern Renaissancedrawings, what does remain has
often been misunderstoodinsofaras authorship,date or
purpose is concerned.
What has been significantly lacking in discussions of
drawings connoisseurship issues of this period is the
infusion of new material for the consideration of the
problems at hand. The connoisseurshipof drawings can
now be informed by criticalanalysisof informationnot
previously available,thatis, informationwhich provides
a freshlook not only at what the artistmade but how he
reachedthat final result.
This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
of Study
The fact that underdrawingsin Northern Renaissance
paintings may be examined by means of the technique
of infraredreflectographyis by now well known.1 Un-
derdrawingsreveal exactly what the artistfound neces-
sary to establishas preparatoryguidelines for his paint-
ing, and it is principallyas a key to the understandingof
this aspect of an artist's working procedure that they
have been studied. However, there is a growing aware-
ness of the significanceof this new information for the
connoisseurshipof drawings. This development is due
to severalfactors. Firstof all, the body of underdrawing
documents (that is, infraredreflectogramassemblies)is
now substantialand rapidlyincreasing,making available
comparativematerialfor the considerationof drawings
questions.2Secondly,a new method of assemblinginfra-
red reflectogramsby computer has provided documents
of higher quality and greateraccuracy,revealingthe un-
derdrawingfree of the tonal and geometric distortions
inherent in the infraredvidicon system and eliminating
the patchworkphoto montage effect that often interferes
with the evaluation and appreciationof the underdraw-
ing.3
Due to the availabilityof this new material,connois-
seurship of drawings need not be solely dependent on
stylistic comparisons with other drawings or with an
artist'spaintings. Questions of authenticity,authorship,
and date, as well as the considerationof an artist'swork-
[5]
ing methods, may now be more fully investigatedin the shop?What was the division of labor?What was the role
light of information provided by underdrawings. Be- of models? How were underdrawingsused?These con-
causeof the relativelysmallnumber of surviving North- siderationsare fundamentalto the history of art.
ern Renaissance drawings and the large number of Given the considerablelack of data-visual and tex-
questions about them, a researchmethod that takes un- tual-many issues relatingto patternsof artisticpractice
derdrawings into consideration is of enormous value. have not been dealtwith. In the period underdiscussion,
This articleattempts to outline some ways in which the no particularpremiumwas placedon originalityin terms
study of drawings and underdrawingstogether demon- of composition or motifs for paintings. Traditionalrep-
stratestheir interrelationshipand clarifiesthe form and resentationswere apparentlypreferred,and standardized
function of each stage as part of the artist's working workshop procedures upheld the solidly-based craft
procedure. tradition rather than encouraging innovative ap-
The differencesbetween drawings on paper and un- proaches. As a result, it has sometimes been difficult to
derdrawingsare, of course, self-evident. Though they define individual style. Underdrawing information
may havebeen made aspreparatorystudiesfor paintings, helps us to distinguish singular performance from
drawings are not physically and functionally linked to habitualstudio practicesmore directly and specifically.
the subsequentlaying on of paint layersas is the case for An artist'spreliminarysketcheson the groundedpanel
underdrawings.In addition, drawings and underdraw- often recordthe most spontaneousand personalexpres-
ings vary in theirsupport, and canbe differentfrom each sion of his endeavor. The lively drawing of the male
other in size, medium, and function. In other words, it heads in Joos van Cleve's CrucifixionTriptych(New
is not possible to adopt an investigatorymethod whose York, The MetropolitanMuseum of Art) with curlicue
basic premise is the equivalenceof all drawings and un- lines for hairand beardsis modified in the paintedlayers
derdrawings. to a less animated form.4 Memling's characteristically
However, given the fact that there are few indepen- free sketch for the figures and landscapein the Marriage
dent drawings of this period and that the vast majority of St. Catherine(New York, The MetropolitanMuseum
areworking drawings (thatis, studiespreparatoryfor or of Art) could hardly have been anticipatedjudging by
after a painting and sketches from life), the similarities the meticulously renderedsurfacein paint.5
between drawingsand underdrawingsoutweigh the dif-
ferences, validating an approachthat compares the two
as elements of the working procedure of an artist. In
fact, there is good reason to suggest that in many cases
the artist's working drawing was executed directly on
the prepared panel, in lieu of a series of preparatory
drawings on paper. The physical evidence of many un-
derdrawings which are either fully worked up, ex-
tremely loosely sketched or alteredeither in the under-
drawing stage or in the painted layers alone, supports
this notion.
Aside from the visual ways in which underdrawings
compensatefor the lack of surviving drawingson paper,
they also provide information that is not otherwise
documented about the purpose and function of draw-
ings. What type of materialsdid these artistsuse, how
did they preparethem, what were their sources?What
technical procedures did they employ as part of their
working methods?What were the practicesof the work-

[6]

This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Figure 1 PETRUS CHRISTUS.
The Lamentation.
Brussels,MuseesRoyauxdesBeaux-Arts.
The specific form of underdrawingsvariesfrom artist
to artist and even within one artist'sworks. The range
encompasses summary compositional sketches as well
as fully worked-up renderingswhich detail the volume
of forms and the system of shading. However, some
generalizationsmay be stated, foremost among them
that underdrawingsof the Northern Renaissanceparallel
and broadenour understandingof the form anddevelop-
ment of drawings on paper. In their drawing conven-
tions, handling of the chosen drawing tool, and often
use of the same medium, underdrawingsmirror draw-
_- ings. For example, in his underdrawingfor The Lamen-
*
Mk --dw
tation,a large-scalepaintingin Brussels (MuseesRoyaux
des Beaux-Arts;Fig. I), PetrusChristustreatedthe pre-
Higure 2 PETRUS CHRISTUS.
Detail of Fig. i, showing underdrawingof Mary liminarydesign on the panel (Fig. 2) as if it were a metal-
Magdalen's drapery.Infraredreflectogram point drawing in small scale on paper.6 He drew a
assembly. finished underdrawingwith extreme precisionand deli-
Photo:New York,The Metropolitan
Museumof Art, Paintings cacy establishing the zones of shadow in the drapery
Conservation
Department. with fine, feathery parallel strokes applied closely to-
gether. The underdrawingcalls to mind contemporary
Figure 3 Circle of JAN VAN EYCK. silverpointrenderings,such as The Adorationof theMagi
(left)The Adorationof the Magi. (Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum; Fig. 3), which has some-
Amsterdam,
Rijksmuseum. times been attributed to Christus.7 Though there are

[7]

This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
differencesin scaleand medium between the two designs
(instead of the metalpoint, which apparentlywas not
used on panels, Christus used the point of the brush or
pen and a black pigment), they aim in similar ways to
accomplish the same effect.
The notion that underdrawings reflect the graphic
conventions of contemporarydrawingscanalso be dem-
onstratedby later examples. The preliminarydesign in
brush, some pen and a black pigment by the Antwerp
Mannerist, the Master of 1518, for The Marriageof the
Virgin(SaintLouis Art Museum; Figs. 4, 5), exhibits the
precision of a woodcut.8 In its graphic style, the under-
drawing depends upon observation of Direr's prints in
its tapering, elasticlines, parallelhatching used in a uni-
fied zone of middle value, and crosshatching used to
model and shade at the same time. But perhapsjust as
influential as Durer's graphic style is the fact that the
Master of 1518 worked in Antwerp preciselywhen that
city was the leading center for printmakingin Europe.
The visual approximation of drawings and under-
drawings of the Northern Renaissance allows one to
pursue the question of function, a matteryet unresolved
for numerous extant drawings. It is possible in certain
. 9
Figure 4 MASTER OF I518.
The Marriageof theVirgin.
The SaintLouisArt Museum.
[8]
This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
cases, for example, to clarifywhether a drawingon paper
was made in preparationfor or copied after a composi-
tion. Within the works of one artistthere is sometimes
evidence from underdrawingswhich gives clues about
the variety and type of drawings on paper that are no
longer extant, or for that matter, the role seemingly
played by some underdrawings in superseding draw-
ings. In addition, when a number of works by the same
artistis studied, the issue of the relationshipof drawing
medium to function can be explored. Finally,the infor-
mation provided by underdrawingsallows us to recon-
sider questions of attributionfor the drawings from this
period. In the following discussion I would like to dem-
onstrate this use of underdrawing information as a
means of clarifying the form and function of Northern
Renaissancedrawings.
Seldom do we encounterexamples of drawings from
this period that can be proven primafacieto be prepara-
tory for paintings. For some time the only unquestion-
able example of such a relationship has been Jan van
Eyck's Portraitof CardinalAlbergati(the drawing in the
Dresden Kupferstichkabinettandthe paintingin Vienna,
KunsthistorischesMuseum).9 The notes in the margins
of the Dresden drawing referto the colors andthe system
of shading to be employed in the painted version of the
portrait.Clearly,Van Eyck reliedon the working draw-
ing as he proceeded with the painting, for the under-
drawing expresses the form only summarily through
contour lines in brush and a black pigment.10
On the basis of new visual evidence provided by un-
derdrawings, the function of other early drawings on
paper can now be reconsidered.One of only a handful
of generallyacceptedsilverpointdrawingsby Roger van
der Weyden, the Headof the Virginin the Louvre, is said
to recorda lost painting by Roger.'l Whetheror not this
is the case, the drawingnow canbe shown to haveserved
as a study for paintingscoming from Roger'sworkshop.
A Virginand Child in the Saint Louis Art Museum of
about 1470-75 attributedto Roger's workshop shows
in the underdrawingof the Virgin'shead the exact details
of the mantle in the Louvre drawing, except in reverse;
this preliminary design was altered in the upper paint
layers where the headdressis pushed fartherback on the
head.12
Until the recentrecoveryof the underdrawingbeneath
GerardDavid's Arrestof the UnjustJudge Sisamnes(Justice
of Cambysespanels, Bruges, Groeningemuseum), it was
This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
not possible to state conclusively whether the drapery
study in pen and brown ink over black chalk (Frankfurt,
StadelschesKunstinstitut)was made preparatoryto the
painting of King Cambyses or copied afterit.13Since the
configuration of drapery in the underdrawing copies
that of the drawing and is subsequently changed in the
paintedlayers, the drawing on papernow can be proven
to be the preparatorysketch for the draperydesign in the
underdrawing.14
Another drawing by David, a silverpoint study of a
woman (Paris,Musee du Louvre, Cabinet des Dessins;
Fig. 6), was formerly considered French, partly due to
the floral pattern around the head in the background,
and the tender feminine type, which combines a certain
casualness and intelligence-traits Leprieur considered
French.15The recentstudy by infraredreflectographyof
David's securely documented VirginAmong Virginsof
1509 (Rouen, Musee des Beaux-Arts) has revealedthat
the backgroundhas darkenedconsiderablyor was over-
painted, obscuring the millesfleurstapestryhanging be-
hind the assembled Virgin and saints.16The pose, the
system of lighting and, of course, the flowered back-
ground in the Louvre drawing are quite similar to the
portrait of David's wife, Cornelia Cnoop, at the right
~i~48.
if ' Figure5 MASTER OF 1518.
S wlE'
5Detail of Fig. 4, showing underdrawingofJoseph,
the Priest, and Mary. Infraredreflectogram
I^IS ~ assembly.
V^lgff?\ ~ Photo:Courtesyof Molly Faries,Universityof Indiana.
[9]

Figure6 GERARD DAVID.
Seated Young Girl.
Paris,Mus6edu Louvre,Departement
desArts Graphiques.
backgroundof the painting (Fig. 7). That the two heads
representthe same sitter may be debated;however, it is
quite likely that the drawing was made as a study with
the Rouen painting in mind.
Later in the sixteenth century, the increasednumber
of surviving drawings from various preparatorystages
allows for a more thorough examinationof the question
of working procedure. As Faries has shown with her
comparative study of drawings, underdrawings, and
paintingsbyJan van Scoreland his workshop, in the case
of the Stoningof St. Stephenand ChristBlessinga Child,
both the drawings and underdrawingsfor each compo-
sition correspondin design, demonstratingthat they be-
long to a mid-stagepreliminaryto the paintingprocess.17
Though these examples show instanceswhere the un-
[ 10]
This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
derdrawings confirm the preparatory nature of the
drawing, therearealso cases where underdrawinginfor-
mation reveals the opposite-that the related drawing
can not have been preparatoryfor the associatedpaint-
ing. Jerome Bosch's Ship of Foolsand The Death of the
Miser(both in Paris,Musee du Louvre, Cabinetdes Des-
sins), previously thought to be preliminarydesigns for
the paintingsin the Louvre and National Gallery,Wash-
ington are, instead, copies afterthe paintings.'8The un-
derdrawings of the paintings reveal that the drawings
mirror not the preliminarystages, but the final form of
the subsequently adjustedpaintedlayers.
Even in the case of drawings used as cartoons for
known paintings, a direct correlationbetween the two
cannot be assumed. The FrickCollection's Portraitof Sir
ThomasMore by Hans Holbein the Younger was not
produced from the prickeddrawing of the same sitterin
Windsor Castle.19Infrared reflectography has shown
that the design of the pricking in the drawing does not
match the specific arrangementof pounced dots under-
lying the paintedlayerson the panel. The drawing, then,
must have been used to duplicate the design for other
drawings or another,no longer extant painting.20
In the examples cited some relationship between a
specific drawing and paintingwas alreadyapparent;evi-
dence from the underdrawingsimply provided the in-
formation necessaryto elucidatethe exact natureof the
relationship.What about the more common occurrence
where thereis not a one-to-one correspondencebetween
drawing and painting?In these cases, the particularform
of an underdrawingmay point to the previous existence
of certain kinds of preparatory drawings on paper.
Though these no longer exist we are able to reconstruct
this body of missing sheets by indications found in the
underdrawingsthemselves.
The use and reuse of certainmotifs, stock figures or
entire compositions in more than one painting indicates
their transferthrough drawings. Underdrawings reveal
the exact form of the originalbut now missing drawing
employed-whether it was a pricked cartoon, traced
drawing or freehandcopy of a preexisting design. This
record of transferis frequentlyfound beneath paintings
of the SouthernNetherlandsamong the works of artists
like Joos van Cleve, Adriaen Isenbrandt, and Gerard
David. A comprehensivestudy of this materialwill lend
furtherinsight into the particularworking methods em- i ? I
.f..e
.;~~p -4a1--
i.4s
ployed in the Renaissanceatelier.21
If multiple examples of a particularreplicatedimage .$i,,
,?-
can be studied, new information may emerge regarding
workshop proceduresand the longevity of popularim-
ages. For example, the fact that an early sixteenth-cen-
tury copy of Dieric Bouts' MaterDolorosain The Met-
ropolitan Museum of Art has a pounced underdrawing
is not, per se, so surprising, since many copies of this
very popularimage were produced.22Whatis significant
is that though small adjustments were made in the
painted layers, the pounced design preciselyfollows the
lines of the brush underdrawingof the prototype of the
MaterDolorosa(now in the Chicago Art Institute), in-
cluding detailsof the tearsof the weeping Virgin and the
exact folds of the wimple.23In other words, a pricked
cartoon made from the prototype was still circulatingin
south Netherlandishworkshops some forty to fifty years
after the death of Bouts. The demand of the art market
no doubt insured the longevity of this best-selling
image. Figure7 GERARD DAVID.
Underdrawings are not only indicative of missing
VirginAmongVirgins,detailshowing
drawings;they appearin certaincasesto havesuperseded underdrawingof CorneliaCnoop(?).Infrared
the working drawingon paper.The paucityof surviving reflectogram
assembly.
compositional sketches from the fifteenth and early six- Photo:New York,The Metropolitan
Museumof Art, Paintings
teenth centuries in northern Europe is baffling. Even Conservation
Department.

given the formulaic nature of repeateddevotional and

narrativethemes it is hard to explain the dearth of this
material, though it does appear in greater abundance
from the mid-sixteenth century on. This has led some
to suggest that Netherlandishartistsproducedthe neces-
sary working drawing directly on the grounded panel
without the benefit of preliminarysketches on paper.24
Some artists, such as the Master of St. Gudule, pro-
duced fully worked-up renderingsof the compositional
details, including the system of lighting to be employed.
In the Portraitof a Man (London, National Gallery;Fig.
8), the Master of St. Gudule made adjustmentsin the
paintedlayers, alteringthe preliminaryunderdrawingin
pen (in the placement of figures outside the church, in
architecturaldetails, and in the costume of the sitter;Fig.
9) without redrawingany details.25
Not always so meticulously rendered, these under-
drawings may also show the more spontaneous, sketch-
like character of an artist's designs. Gerard David
worked out the detailsof his VirginandChildwithMusical
Angels(The PhiladelphiaMuseum of Art; Figs. Io, I)
very directly, apparentlyassuming that he would em-
ploy greater accuracy and make final decisions about
form in the paintedlayers.26The freehandnatureof the
sketch (probably in black chalk) and the alterationsof
form are traits of a working drawing. It is the type of
renderingexpected on paper,not on panel. In these and
so many other cases where preliminarydrawingson pa-
per havenot survived or, perhaps,were never produced,
underdrawingsreveala previously undocumented stage
of production-the conception or stage of invention.
The state of finish and complexity of some early
sixteenth-century underdrawings raises yet another
question. Were underdrawingsmeant to substitute for
drawings in cases where a presentation drawing or a
vidimus was required?The startlingresemblanceof cer-

[11]

This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 N

< ~~~~~~~i
.

.. t @ ........ '
'

-
'*p,
.,....,.

I -- . L.-' - *

'
7t:
:
.. . 'f^

. '"

r.
!e
IS??ld
.

Ii:
9
'C '?

1' ?.??
1.-.- r?

?,
I,- I

f
ii a i3

r .
i
r

I -i

Figure 8 MASTER OF ST. GUDULE.

Portraitof a Man.
London,The NationalGallery(Reproduced
by courtesyof the Trustees).

This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 .-.

1%,
j I;
L-,

*1

'M^SS*
~
S8f^'
L.

w
hht..-, .K'.
J

I s w ;-
..41

- Al
1;
.
0
", il? \\5.s
\'f1' I

I"
-
--

Figure 9 MASTER OF ST. GUDULE.

Underdrawing of Fig. 8. Infraredreflectogramassembly.

Photo:New York,The Metropolitan
Museumof Art, PaintingsConservation
Department.

This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 I

.'

.
I
i,
i
V.- , - 1

hI

L ;I,

S : I
r -J

.7

,A \
.S a -
* . .

"
?F'
~.~''j '
l~rA6"

\
I
I,
t

1
on::
.
OP - v -
-I
'

_ -
i . I I II . --- --I
rw.-Tl ...- ------ M
-
mm mwwmw ".7, . , ",
q.4K.11111M

Figure 10 GERARD DAVID.

Virgin and Child with Musical Angels.
ThePhiladelphia
Museum of Art, TheJohnG.JohnsonCollection.

This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Figure 11 GERARD DAVID.
'
Detail of Fig. Io, showing underdrawingof ./
. .
Virgin and Child. Infraredreflectogramassembly. ?. . .,: -.
/ > -
Photo:New York,The MetropolitanMuseumof Art, '<4, . :.
PaintingsConservation
Department.

This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Figure12 HANS SCHAUFELEIN.
The Visitation.
VaduzCastle,Collectionsof thePrinceof Liechtenstein.
tain early sixteenth-century underdrawings to chiar-
oscuro drawings in their modeling-specifically in the
replacementof or additionto zones of hatchingby broad
areasof washes--suggests such a function. Among the
practitionersof these wash underdrawingsareLucasvan
Leyden, Jan Gossaert, Dirck Vellert, Pieter Coecke van
Aelst, and Bernart van Orley in the Netherlands and
Germanand Swiss artistssuch as ErhardAltdorfer,Hans
Schaufelein, and Niklaus Manuel Deutsch.27 Though
these wash underdrawingssometimes serve as an under-
modeling for the painted layers, this is not always the
case, and the fact remainsthatthe visual effect duplicates
and was probably borrowed from chiaroscuro draw-
ings.28The underdrawing,then, would have resembled
and possibly served as a kind of full-scalemodellofor the
[ 16 ]
This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Figure 13 HANS SCHAUFELEIN.
Detailof Fig. 12, showingunderdrawing
of Mary
andElizabeth.Infraredreflectogram
assembly.
Photo:New York,The MetropolitanMuseumof Art,
PaintingsConservation
Department.
review of the patron(see, for example the wash additions
in The Visitation by Hans Schiufelein; Figs. 12, 13).
Chiaroscuro underdrawingswere observed by con-
temporary critics, not all of whom understood or ap-
preciated the effort of these artists. Paolo Pino com-
plained of this in regard to Giovanni Bellini whose
chiaroscuropreparationof panelpaintingshe considered
a waste of time, since it would be covered with color
anyway.29Vasari, Malvasia, and Pacheco also mention
the practice, though again in referenceto southern art-
ists.30 Chiaroscuro underdrawing in northern art is
newly observed through infraredreflectographyand has
yet to be fully explained.Furtherstudy of theseexamples
will help to answer the unresolved question of whether
this type of underdrawing served as a vidimus or
whether it simply reflectsthe developing interestin the
sixteenth century for finished-looking drawings.31
The use of underdrawingsfor scholarship has even
greaterpotential than has been illustratedso far by indi-
vidual cases. At the center of this approachis the redis-
covery of how the artist worked, a matter which has
far-reachingimplications beyond questions of attribu-
tion, dating, and authenticity. Of importance here are
the materialsfrom which the underdrawingswere made
and the consequence this had on the form certainartists
chose. Studiedfrom the point of view of many examples
by one artist, the functions underdrawings served are
shown to have been complex and sometimes unex-
pected. Patterns of artistic practice are beginning to
emerge from the newly revealedpreparatorystage: in-
formation about workshop procedures,the longevity of
certain models and evidence of how they were trans-
ferred, and the identificationof stylistic traits and how
these were alteredor maintainedin the drawing, under-
drawing, and painting. In general,all of this information
helps to establishthe usual skills and habits proper to a
given time and place. In turn, this encourages the de-
velopment of a more specificterminology for describing
art of a particularchronological and geographicalcate-
gory. A brief discussion of some of the findings emerg-
ing from comprehensive studies of the works of Hans
Holbein the Younger and Gerard David serve here to
illustratehow the investigationof underdrawingscan be
used to addressthese broaderissues.32
The exquisite drawingsby Hans Holbein the Younger
in Windsor Castle have long been consideredsimply as
the artist'srecordingsof the likenessesof English royalty
and nobility for use in the production of painted ver-
sions. However, that the drawings were actuallyused as
patternsor cartoonsin the transferof the exact contours
of featuresof the portraitshas only been demonstrated
recently.33 By recovering the underdrawing in the
painted portraits, infrared reflectographyhas revealed
that the contour lines in brush and black pigment on the
panel match those lines reinforcedwith metalpoint on
the surfaceof the relateddrawings. Holbein must have
made use of an interleafingcarbon-coatedsheet (as de-
scribedby Armenini and Vasari),which would have left
a fugitive carbonblack line on the panel to be gone over
or "fixed" with the brush and black pigmnent.34 This
This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
short-handmethod of exactly reproducingthe essential
features of the drawing on the grounded panel can be
understoodalso as a time-saving device. It allowed Hol-
bein to concentratehis efforts where he excelled, in the
exquisite refinement of the brushwork used to develop
the life-like modeling of faces and the varied texturesof
the costumes.
The Portraitof Simon George(Frankfurt,Stadelsches
Kunstinstitut;Fig. 14) differs from the relateddrawing
in Windsor Castle (Fig. 5) in the greaterfullness of the
beard and in the more fully worked-out details of the
hat, costume and, of course, the addition of the hand
holding the pink. However, a photostat overlay of the
drawing on the painting shows a very close correspon-
dence between the two images in the contour of the head
and featuresof the face. The underdrawingof the paint-
ing is an extremely controlledlinearcontour drawing in
pen at the eyes, nose, ear, and in the shirt (Fig. I6). A
comparison of the drawing with the underdrawing
shows that in certain details, as 'in the opening of the
shirt, the drawing and the underdrawingare closer to
each other than the drawing and the painting.
The exact correspondenceof the major featuresof the
portraitin the drawing and the underdrawingstrongly
suggests a transferof the essential lines of one to the
other. Typical of Holbein's second English period, the
Windsor Castle drawing is in black and colored chalks,
and black ink applied with pen and brush on pink pre-
pared paper. In addition, there are metalpoint lines
mostly visible in the costume of the sitter.Any additional
metalpointlines that may exist in the featuresof the face
are now obscured by the subsequent strengthening of
these contours in pen and ink.35In any event, what is
clearis that those contours of the costume that areshared
by the drawingandunderdrawingandnot by the painted
version are the same ones gone over by the metalpoint
in order to produce the transferredlines.
The researchon Holbein portraiturehas also shown
that the Windsor Castle drawings were not used exclu-
sively by Holbein, but also by others, documenting by
physical evidence of the underdrawingthe activity of a
workshop. Though the UnknownGentlemanwithGloves
(New York, The MetropolitanMuseum of Art; Fig. 17)
can not be consideredto have been painted by Holbein
(the wooden, lifeless characterof the renderingin paint
[ 17]
 't

indicates a workshop product), the Windsor Castle

drawing is certainly by his hand (Fig. I8). The main
contours of the drawing have been gone over and match
those contours in the underdrawing (Fig. 19) in brush
and ink, in the featuresof the face, collar outlines, and
here and therein the hat, hair,and clothing. Again prob-
ably depending on an interleafig carbon-coatedsheet,
the reinforcedlines guaranteedthe transferof Holbein's
design from one support to the other. (Evidence of the
use of an interleafing carbon-coated sheet is strongly
suggested by blackenedlines on the back of the drawing,
which areconfinedto contoursreinforcedon the front.)

Figure14 HANS HOLBEIN THE YOUNGER.

Portraitof SimonGeorge.
Kunstinstitut.
Frankfurt,Stadelsches

i:
IF

*i
.
i
i
Y'C' I?

-a
Lk: '?t
;?
i
t.

.r C
I
r
'S

ii??

...

i,~~
m/a'~~~
Figure15 HANS HOLBEIN THE YOUNGER. Figure16 HANS HOLBEIN THE YOUNGER.
Portraitof SimonGeorge. Detailof Fig. 4, showingunderdrawing
of head.
WindsorCastle,RoyalLibrary(Reproduced
by Gracious
Infraredreflectogramassembly.
Permissionof H. M. the Queen). Photo:New York,The MetropolitanMuseumof Art,
PaintingsConservation
Department.

This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Figure 17 Workshopof HANS HOLBEIN THE YOUNGER.
Unknown Gentleman with Gloves.
New York,The Metropolitan
Museumof Art.

J!:; .-OIW .: 1;
:
,-t

.4" "VI.
i
j-1

I
I

Figure
Figure 19
19 HANS
HANS HOLBEIN
HOLBEIN THE
THE YOUNGER.
YOUNGER.

Figure 18 HANS HOLBEIN THE YOUNGER. Detail of Fig. 17, showing underdrawingof head.
Man with Gloves. Infraredreflectogramcomputer assembly.
by Gracious
WindsorCastle,RoyalLibrary(Reproduced Photo:New York,The MetropolitanMuseumof Art,
of H. M. the Queen).
Permission PaintingsConservation
Department.

[ 19 ]

This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 '. _
' A

*i' gI aA-

Ls-<

r
i

. : I

_ SiL
-il*

h'

Figure 20 GERARD DAVID.

The Coronation of the Virgin.
Pasadena,The NortonSimonFoundation.

This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 4

Figure 21 GERARD DAVID.

Detailof Fig. 20, showingunderdrawing
of Two
MaleFigures.Infraredreflectogramassembly.
Photo:New York,The MetropolitanMuseumof Art, Figure 22 GERARD DAVID.

PaintingsConservation
Department. Detailof Fig. 20, showingunderdrawing of
Virginand Child. Infrared
reflectogram
assembly.
There are examples, of course, where the surviving Photo:New York,The MetropolitanMuseumof Art,
drawings of an artistcannot be linked directlyto known PaintingsConservation
Department.
paintings. As a result, the underdrawingsare an impor-
tant source of information about the function drawings
served in a particularartist'sworks. An investigationof through the full investigation of underdrawingsin the
this issue through the underdrawings of numerous undisputed works of an artist that the working proce-
paintingshelps, in turn, to clarifythe purpose and func- dure, and thereby the function of drawings in that pro-
tion of any extant preparatorydrawings on paper. It is cess, may be reconstructed.

[21]

This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 i i

/'-

8' |s _,S . W .

c ~ ,;*..... ' . '?e

@,~-:}~ . , <:

Figure 23 GERARD DAVID. Figure 24 GERARDDAVID.

Detail of Fig. 20, showing underdrawingof head
of Virgin. Infraredreflectogramassembly.
Photo:New York,The MetropolitanMuseumof Art,
PaintingsConservation
Department.
The works of Gerard David (Bruges, ca. I460-1 523)
vary in medium and size from the diminutive scale of
illuminated manuscript pages to near life-size panel
paintings. In addition, thereis a small group of drawings
that Winkler identified as mostly belonging to one
sketchbook.36The relative diversity encounteredin the
works and careerof David, though not unusual for the
period, has led to confusion about attributions,chronol-
ogy, and the extent to which one canpropose the partici-
pation of workshop assistants.37
There arethreedocumented paintingsamong David's
works: the two panels forming theJusticeof Cambyses,
dated 1498 on one of the paintings, and The Virgin
Among Virgins,which David donated to the Convent of
Head of a Woman.
Kunsthalle.
Hamburg,Hamburger
Sion in 1509. Though the customary modusoperandiis to
begin the investigation of an artist by analyzing the
documented works, it must be realizedthat such works
are not always the most representative.It is necessary,
therefore,to study a greatnumber of works by the artist
and to consider his working procedure taking into ac-
count evidence from drawings, underdrawings, and
paintings. Once the history of the production of the
work of art is established and each working stage is
delineated,more informed attributionsmay be made.
For an understandingof GerardDavid's working pro-
cedure, the underdrawingfound in his Coronationof the
Virgin(Pasadena,Norton Simon Foundation;Figs. 20
and 21-23) is of paramount importance.38 The use of
two different underdrawing media provides a link to
David's drawings on paper. Here the underdrawingre-

[22 ]

This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Figure 25 GERARD DAVID.
Portraitof an Ecclesiastic.
London,The NationalGallery(Reproduced
by courtesyof the
Trustees).
veals both a sketch-like handling in black chalk for the
preliminary(and in severalplaces, altered)design of the
draperiesof the Virgin and Child (Fig. 22), and a more
fixed drawing in brush for the two figures at the left. In
the Virgin's face (Fig. 23), David exhibits great control
and finesse in the handling of the point of the brush
which served a dual purpose-to indicate the lighting
effects and the volume of forms in a very specific way
with the same strokes of parallelhatching. He does this
masterfullyby simply varying the length and curve of
his stroke. The purpose, technique, and style of the un-
derdrawingin the Virgin's face is extremely similar to
that of the brush and ink (over traces of black chalk)
This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Figure 26 GERARDDAVID.
Detailof Fig. 25, showingunderdrawing
of head.
Infraredreflectogram assembly.
computer
Photo:New York,The MetropolitanMuseumof Art,
PaintingsConservation
Department.
drawing in Hamburg of a saint or the Virgin (Fig. 24).39
Though an exact paintedparallelfor the Hamburg draw-
ing is missing, the drawing probablywas a carefulstudy
of lighting and volume of form in preparationfor a
figure of the Virgin or of a female saintin one of David's
paintingsor was perhapsintendedfor use as a workshop
model. In this instance, then, the study of the under-
drawing and the drawing together helps to clarify the
purpose of both.
Also noteworthy in the underdrawingof the Virgin's
head is the inception of the use of the underdrawingas
undermodeling. This is apparentin the shadow indica-
tions beneaththe nose and at the mouth (underthe lower
lip) where David pulled a light scumble over the dark
brushstroke,thereby creatinga shadow areawith great
economy of means. Underdrawing begins to function
as undermodeling in David's mature works.
In contrastto the sketchyblackchalk(?)underdrawing
of the draperyof the Virgin (Fig. 22), the underdrawing
of the two figures at the left of the painting is in brush
and a black pigment and is extremely refined and
finished-looking in its rendering of the details of the
[23]
 Figure 27 GERARD DAVID.
The Flayingof Sisamnes.
Bruges,Groeningemuseum.
volume and shading of draperies (Fig. 2I). This may
suggest that the specific configuration of drapery was
previously studied in a drawing on paper or in another
painting. In its meticulous modeling of form through
even, parallelhatching, it recallsthe draperystudy in pen
and ink of King Cambyses for the Arrestof the Unjust
Judge Sisamnes.40In drawing and underdrawing alike,
then, David finalizedthe plan for the modeling of drap-
ery forms through pen and brush, perhapsin the paint-
ing as he did in the drawing over a preliminarysketchin
black chalk.41
The function of other drawings attributedto David
becomes all the more clearwhen it is possible to study a
great deal of comparativematerialin the form of under-
drawings by the master.In the course of this research,it
has become apparentthat the artistused metalpoint for
his drawingsafterlife or afterother well-known compo-
sitions (such as the study sheet now in the National
Galleryof Canada,Ottawa of headsfromJanvan Eyck's
GhentAltarpiece).42 Benesch noted that David used the
[24]
This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
? ~ .... _
'~ f
,
4I. -t-T -1 --Z:M._ .-.,. -
. aaS .
metalpoint with greaterfreedom than had his predeces-
sors, freely sketching and revising his strokes on the
grounded paper.43
For his freehand drawings on panel, David simply
substituted black chalk(?) for the metalpoint as his
sketchingtool. As I havediscussedpreviouslyelsewhere,
this similarity is evident in a comparison of the metal-
point study of the head of a man (on the reverseside of
the Frankfurtdraperystudy alreadymentioned) and the
black chalkunderdrawingof the same headin the crowd
of onlookers in the Flaying of Sisamnes.44David used
each medium to study the attitude and particularlythe
fall of light on the face. Both areobserved identicallyin
drawing and underdrawing, perhaps suggesting that
David alreadyhad the man's placement in the painting
in mind when he made the preliminary sketch. In a
further example, the Portraitof an Ecclesiastic(London,
National Gallery), David again worked out the shading
of the head with the same delicate strokes as he did in
his metalpoint studies of heads on paper(Figs. 25, 26).45

Figure 28 GERARDDAVID.
Detailof Fig. 27, showingunderdrawing of Man
at lowerleft. Infraredreflectogram
assembly.
Photo:New York,The MetropolitanMuseumof Art,
PaintingsConservation
Department.
With an understandingof David's method of recording
portraitheads, it is not unlikely thata preliminarymetal-
point study of the ecclesiasticonce existed.
The few studies on paper which David made with a
preliminary sketch in black chalk and a more detailed
rendering with pen or point of the brush and ink are
specific studies for the volume of forms and lighting
system to be employed in certainmotifs. The technique
is paralleledby thatnow observedin David's underdraw-
ings. In the case of some artistslike GerardDavid, the
medium and techniqueof the drawings and underdraw-
ings indicate the function they served.
In David'sJusticeof Cambysespanels underdrawingin
both black chalk and in brush and a black pigment is to
This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
be found. Though, as mentioned, there are two surviv-
ing drawings on paperthat can be linked to these works
(the Frankfurtdrawing, recto and verso), the numerous
alterationsin the underdrawingas well as in the painted
layersattestto a design that continued to evolve directly
on the panel. The kneeling man at the lower left in the
Flaying scene, for example, was first sketched in a dry
medium (probably black chalk), indicating a shorter
tunic than was finally painted and a change in position
of the left leg (Figs. 27, 28). The details of the lighting
system and volume of forms for this figure were more
fully describedin brush and a black pigment. Elsewhere
in the paintings, when David revised his ideas about
major forms (such as in the position of the three figures
at the lower right of the Arrest of the UnjustJudge
Sisamnes),46he redrew them with his sketching tool,
probably black chalk. The number of alterationsat the
lowermost level of the painting-that is, in the under-
drawing-suggest that the working drawing for David
is most evident on the panel and, to a large extent, re-
placed preparatorydrawings on paper.47
David donated The VirginAmong Virgins(Fig. 29) to
the Bruges Convent of Sion in 1509. He included por-
traits of himself and his wife in this tightly cropped
composition, which is bold in every way, even unprec-
edented in northern art. The use of the underdrawing
can be seen to further develop what we have observed
in paintings already discussed, but with some striking
and startlingnew features.
As we saw before with the underdrawingof the Vir-
gin's draperyin the Norton Simon painting (Fig. 22),
David worked out the rough indicationof the placement
of figures and their drapery with his sketching tool,
probably black chalk. Furtherrefinement of this rough
sketch is done with the brush; but what is new in The
VirginamongVirginsis the greaterrole this brush under-
drawing plays as undermodeling. In the featuresof the
faces and in the hands, David quickly indicatedzones of
shadow with carefullyplaced strokes of the brush. The
two angels in the painting exhibit both the free, sketch-
like underdrawing in their draperies and the broader
brushstrokes used as undermodeling in the faces and
hands (Figs. 30, 3 ).
This use of underdrawingto achievethe undermodel-
ing of broader zones is apparentas well in the drapery
[ 25 ]
 1
0
' 0
' L
-..'.- -~ i
?.
Wl....._ ~r.~-,-.~..
~.,w~... ,

~
I..
r*

Figure 29 GERARD DAVID.

The Virgin Among Virgins.

Rouen,MuseedesBeaux-Arts.

rr

n, ...
i ,. i. ~ '

?sI K

.. :'

mA:.

Figure 30 GERARD DAVID. Figure 31 GERARD DAVID.

Detail of Fig. 29, showing underdrawingof Angel Detail of Fig. 29, showing underdrawingof Angel
at left. Infraredreflectogramassembly. at right. Infraredreflectogramassembly.
Photo:New York,The MetropolitanMuseumof Art, Photo:New York,The MetropolitanMuseumof Art,
PaintingsConservation
Department. PaintingsConservation
Department.

This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Figure 33 GERARD DAVID.
Detail of Fig. 29, showing underdrawingof St.
Godelieve. Infraredreflectogramassembly.
Photo:New York,The MetropolitanMuseumof Art,
PaintingsConservation
Department.

Figure 32 GERARD DAVID.

Detail of Fig. 29, showing underdrawingof St.

Catherine. Infraredreflectogramassembly.
Photo:New York,The MetropolitanMuseumof Art,
PaintingsConservation
Department.

Figure 34 GERARD DAVID.

Detail of Fig. 29, showing underdrawingof
GerardDavid. Infraredreflectogramassembly.
Photo:New York,The MetropolitanMuseumof Art,
PaintingsConservation
Department.

This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 ?

? .;7
7_
x~- 4?" .;

~-- 1' p..

of ":

a.M.. LI
* .~
I~ f
IK;. L ,.; , -l t

v '. , ? . .-
9e

.1
/ a
A
a /,
j
I-

-.-. ..

li.c

. .7f

n-
I7

T ..

IA? * r

. :- .
'--_ - r * w;
'^
^I

_w'"'
_b_'A-^^- iJ -

-i

Figure 35 GERARD DAVID.

The Adoration of the Magi.
London,The NationalGallery(Reproduced
by courtesyof the Trustees).

This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 .r

Figure 36 GERARD DAVID.

Detail of Fig. 35, showing under-
drawing of Balthasar. Infrared
reflectogram computer assembly.
Photo:New York,The Metropolitan
Museumof Art, PaintingsConservation
Department.

This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
of St. Catherine (Figs. 29, 32). The deepest folds of the review of some troubling attributions within David's
draperyareindicatedwith broad darkstrokeswhich are works. Two paintingsin the National Gallery,London,
just beneath the glazes on the surface of the painting. The Adorationof theMagi and The Lamentation (Figs. 35,
Here and there parallelhatching denotes the extension 38), have been considered to have been part the same
of
of these shaded areas. In addition to these methods of altarpieceand to be by the same artist.49Yet there are
building up the dark areas,there are also zones of much differencesapparentin the handling of the two, notably
broader shadows beneath the surface of the painting in the relativelywooden appearanceof TheLamentation,
which can be describedas a kind of wash drawing. a difference some have attributed to the fact that The
The dramatic,theatricallighting of the scene necessi- Adorationis in betterstateof preservation.A comparison
tated the carefulworking out of the fall of light across of the underdrawingsshows furtherdifferencesbetween
the faces of the saints from one side of the composition the two and provides compelling evidence for the iden-
to the other. This underdrawingappears to have been tification of the master's hand in one panel, as distin-
done with a dry brush, very broadly worked in. Espe- guished from his workshop in the other.
cially striking is the undermodeling in the head of St. In The Adoration,the characteristicrough preliminary
Godelieve (Figs. 29, 33). The undermodeling of the sketch in black chalk is found most clearly in the sub-
heads is softened or made sharperin its formation de- sidiary figures to the far right of the composition (Fig.
pending on the fall of light in the composition. Such 36). As is typical of David, there is a more detailedren-
underdrawing used as undermodeling has not been dering in brush of the draperies,while the faces of the
noted in northern paintings prior to an example dis-
cussed by Jan Piet Filedt Kok, in his study of Lucasvan
Leyden's LastJudgment altarpiece of I526-27.48 How-
ever, David's work was delivered in 1509, raising the
questionof whether the influenceof wash or chiaroscuro
drawings appeared earlier than previously thought.
David's first-hand knowledge of Italianmodels in this
regardmust be carefullyconsidered.
Before leaving the painting, we ought to look at
another unusual feature. Infraredreflectographyreveals
that the underdrawingis the most detailedin the head of
the artist himself. The brush or pen underdrawing
explicitly indicatesdetailsof the featuresof the face, hair,
and a carefulhatching along the side of the face to show
the most sharply defined chiaroscuromodeling of any
of the faces of the painting (Figs. 29, 34). This effect is
echoed by the shadow behind David's head, a feature
obscured by the darkening of the paint of the back-
ground over time, but now revealedby infraredreflec-
tography.With the new informationat hand, The Virgin
amongVirginscomes more clearly into focus as David's
most dramatic,stage-likepresentationin which he took
Figure37 Workshopof GERARDDAVID.
care to spotlight his own image among those of the
of Mary
Detailof Fig. 38, showingunderdrawing
saints, Virgin, and Child.
Magdalene.Infrared reflectogram
computer
Now having observed some of the hallmarks of assembly.
David's working proceduresin a few of his undisputed Photo:New York,The MetropolitanMuseumof Art,
paintings, one can apply the new information in the PaintingsConservation
Department.

[30]

This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 * -

" _
\ S. -"
i i t * '
".
e. '. T

- .r - ,.

?'7 .

.~~ I

/ ? f U~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1
#k -. I
I

a I ;~~~~~ '

-N.

Figure 38 Workshop of GERARD DAVID.

The Lamentation.
London,The NationalGallery(Reproduced
by courtesyof the
Trustees).

This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Figure39 GERARD DAVID.
Detail of Fig. 40, showing underdrawingof head.
Infraredreflectogramcomputer assembly.
Photo:New York,The MetropolitanMuseumof Art,
PaintingsConservation
Department.
central figures show the use of brush underdrawingas
undermodeling in shadow areasat the nose and mouth
(as in the face of Balthasar).
TheLamentation, on the other hand, revealsan entirely
[32]
This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
tentativeand weak brush underdrawing,barelydescrip-
tive of form, whose schematicrenderingbelies the hand
of the master (Fig. 37). Instead, it probably reflectsthe
summary and lifeless recordingby a workshop assistant
of a composition already worked out, presumably by
the master,in anotherpainting or drawing. This under-
drawing proposes linear solutions to volumetric prob-
lems and provides no guide for any system of lighting.
Furthermore, there is no indication of underdrawing
used as undermodelingas in the head of Balthasarin The
Adoration.Thus, both the form and function peculiarto
David's underdrawingsarelackinghere. The less refined
quality of the handling of paint on the surface of The
Lamentation is foreshadowed in the preliminarystage.
Up to this point, we have been dealing with paintings
that are in relatively good condition. This aspect of a
painting--its state or condition--is sometimes misread
or altogetherneglected. How to explain the remnantsof
an artist'sintention remainsthe art historian'sdilemma.
When considered, remarks about such paintings are
often so thoroughly qualifiedthat they are renderedin-
consequential. Access to the underdrawing provides
helpful information from the point of view of the initial
stages of the painting. For unlike drawings and paint-
ings, the underdrawing is rarely exposed to the same
conditions which cause adverse changes in state.
Von Bodenhausen,Valentiner,Conway, andFriedlan-
der were split in their assessments of the Head of Christ
in the PhiladelphiaMuseum of Art (Fig. 40), Friedlander
noting that the head had been substantiallyrestored.50
Thus the painting has been relegatedto storage where it
resides in anonymity. The underdrawing of the head
(Fig. 39) and hands, however, is absolutelycharacteristic
of David's style as it was observed in the modeling of
the Virgin's head in the Norton Simon painting (Fig. 23)
and as can be seen in drawings attributedto David.
As is typical of David's drawings, the subject is lit
from the left side, throwing the right side into shadow.
In the painting, David has substitutedblackchalkunder-
drawingfor the delicatebrushandink strokes(overblack
chalk) in preparatorydrawings like the Hamburg Head
of a Woman(Fig. 24). He has furtherdefined the deepest
shadow areasat the base of the nose and at the mouth
by reinforcing the chalk lines with brush and ink, an
applicationwhich also served as undermodeling.
 Though less recognizable as a painting by Gerard
David on the surface, at least we can say, on the basis of
the underdrawing,that this was his work. Regardedin
a more generalway, this possibility of comparing draw-
ings to underdrawingsallows us to reconsiderthe pro-
posed attributionsto David of drawingson paperas well
as to define more clearlythe specificfunctionthese draw-
ings served.
Though it has only been possible to discuss the larger
studies of Holbein and David in brief, I hope that the
point of the proposed method is clear. The study of
underdrawingsas partof an artist'sworking procedures
clarifiestheir form and function, enabling as a resultthe
greaterelucidation of the artist'sdrawings on paper. In
the case of Holbein's portraiture,the information from
This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
the underdrawings explains the exact purpose of the
metalpoint additionsto the relatedportraitdrawings on
paper and demonstrates that, in addition to recording
the likeness of the sitter, these drawings were used
specificallyas patternsor cartoons. For David, the vari-
ation in the medium, form, and purpose of his drawings
on paper is elucidated by the consideration of similar
featuresin the artist'sunderdrawings.
The study of underdrawingsin an artist'soeuvrehas
yet broaderramificationsfor an areaof connoisseurship
that is as yet largely uncharted. Can underdrawingsbe
helpfulin answeringquestionsof attributionfor the large
number of drawings that have long been housed in the
storage boxes marked "anonymous"?
We rely heavily on the scanty remainsof sketchbooks
- ;
_^'-fllRK TheJohn G.
G.Johnson
~~~~TheJohn Collection.
Johnson
Collection.
[ 33 ]
to define for us the diversity of style, medium, form,
and function possible in one artist'sdrawings. Often, if
the extant sheets do not representfamiliartypes of draw-
ings, we discount them from the artist'sproduction, or
defer comment on the issue. Yet, from the occasional
complete sketchbook or large surviving oeuvre,we en-
counter an extraordinaryvariety in drawings. For the
Masterof the Drapery Studiesor Coburg Roundels, for
example, the case is made from about i 50 extant sheets
that the substantialvariations in the drawing style are
due to differences in the drawings' purpose and
technique.51This working hypothesis can now be tested
through the input of information from underdrawings
in a given artist'spaintings. In general, consistency in
approachandhandling, despitethe variationin medium,
may be consideredas hallmarksof the artist'sstyle.
Though comparisonsof an artist'shandlingof various
media (whether drawings are compared with under-
drawings, or prints with underdrawings) have been
made in certaincases (Rogervan der Weyden, Masterof
the Housebook, Lucas van Leyden, GerardDavid, Jan
van Scorel, Jerome Bosch, etc.),52 new attributions
based on underdrawingshave, so far, only been tenta-
tively suggested.53If underdrawingsare fully worked
up, giving complete information about the individual
characteristicsof that master'sstyle, then it is sometimes
possible to reevaluateattributionsof anonymous draw-
ings on paper. This is an areaof drawings connoisseur-
ship thatis currentlyevolving, sincein most cases,exam-
ples that would help to describe the range in an artist's
drawing style are still to be uncovered. However, the
tentativeattributionsof some earlyNetherlandishdraw-
ings have been suggested on the basis of their compari-
son with underdrawings by known masters. Among
these area few sheets which have been attributedtoJoos
van Cleve, the Master of 5I8, and GerardDavid.54
With future examination these proposed attributions
may be revised and others suggested. In addition to as-
signing names to currently anonymous drawings on
paper, there is also the possibility of checking the attri-
butions that have been suggested for other drawings.
Usually based on evidence of similarityof figure style,
compositionalmotifs, or detailsof renderingin draperies
or facialfeatures,these attributionshavelackedthe assur-
anceof comparisonsof handlingin graphicdetails-that
is, the specific methods of modeling of the figures and
[34]
This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
the qualityof line.Judgmentsconcerningthe authorship
of drawingsin this period may now be supportedby the
additional information coming from underdrawings,
which suppliesdatanot only aboutformalcharacteristics
of an artist'sdrawing style, but also about his working
procedures.
Though underdrawings are recovered by scientific
means, the results are not per se an objective body of
data; underdrawings, like the paintings formed from
them, must be interpretedby the art historianwho has
been trainedto readand understandthem. In the context
of a study of numerous examples, the results can be
helpful for questions of attributionand chronology and
for the identificationof the prototype versus its replicas
or the relativeposition of a work within a seriesof similar
compositions. Beyond this, the methodology proposed
here gives us insight into the artist'sown considerations
during the creative process. It reveals what became
uniquely the artist'sown vision or imprint on popular
and often repeatedthemes.
I submit that the clues to a better understandingof
both surviving drawingsand paintingsof the period are
found in underdrawingsof paintings. What must not be
forgotten in the study of Northern Renaissanceartis the
superstructureof the craft tradition. One stage of pro-
duction prepared for the next and each stage had a
specificpurpose. Though the underdrawingmay be seen
as the most spontaneous and personal statement of the
artist, it is also the one most clearly indicative of func-
tion. It servesprimarilyto preparethe design foundation
for the upper painted layers. Its very form provides the
clues needed to reconstructboth what came beforeit and
what would come after it. That is, underdrawings
should not be interpretedas isolated works of art. They
are part of a process, a stage in the working procedures
of artists.
Some underdrawingshave the finish and qualitiesthat
we admirein independentdrawings. In these cases, we
may come to appreciateunderdrawingsas works of art
in their own right. However, through the recoveryof a
large number of underdrawings, we realize that they
vary as much as their counterpartson paper and range
from summarysketches,to tracedor pounceddrawings,
to individualdraperyor figure studies, to compositional
notions, to finished drawings.
Underdrawings are a vital, yet infrequently used
source of information for the consideration of drawings
connoisseurship problems. My purpose has been to es-
tablish their relevance and to encourage an approach that
aims to study Northern Renaissance drawings and un-
derdrawings within the context of the artist's working
procedure. At the very least, this new method is mean-
ingful for the understanding of a particular artist's work.
Considered in a broad sense, it gives clues about the
interdependent nature of the artist's work within the
larger context of his contemporaries.
AUTHOR'S NOTE: ForJohnBrealey,mentor andfriend, whose
vision and inspirationprovided the impetus for this research.
1. Infraredreflectographyis a video system responsive to the
rangeof infraredlight between 900 and 2,000 nanometers.
It can penetratemost pigments to revealunderdrawingsin
carbon black in the subsurfacelayersof the painting. The
infraredreflectogramassembly,the visual document of the
underdrawing,is recordedphotographicallyfrom a moni-
tor screenor, through more recentdevelopments, by com-
puter from the digitized infraredsignal (see note 3 below).
The literatureon this subjectis vast. For a general discus-
sion of the technique and its interpretive value for art-
historical research and for the basic bibliography, see
Maryan Wynn Ainsworth and Molly Faries, "Northern
RenaissancePaintings:The Discovery of Invention," Saint
LouisArt MuseumBulletin,n.s., 18, i, 1986. An updated
bibliographyis assembledperiodicallyand publishedin Le
dessinsous-jacent dansla peinture,ed. by H. Verougstraete-
MarcqandR. Van Schoute, Louvain-la-Neuve, Colloques
I-VI (1979-87); see especially, Colloque VI, 1987, for a
compiled bibliography for the years 1979 to I985. This
method of investigationis being used by the authorin the
PaintingsConservation Department of The Metropolitan
Museum of Art, New York for an ongoing study of early
Netherlandish, French, and German paintings. The re-
search is made possible by the generous support of the
Rowland Foundation. I am grateful to Diana Church for
printing the illustrationsfor this article.
2. The generationof new materialis fosteredby the biennial
colloquium held on underdrawingsin Louvain-la-Neuve,
Belgium andby variousongoing researchprojectsdirected
by Prof. J. R. J. van Asperen de Boer of the University of
Groeningen (who developed the use of infraredreflectog-
raphyfor the study of paintings), Prof. Molly Fariesof the
University of Indiana at Bloomington, and the author.
Infraredreflectographyequipment is used in most major
American and European museums, though documenta-
tion of underdrawingsis not always carriedout.
3. For discussions of the new computer method, see: G.
Wechsung, R. Evans,J. Walker,M. Ainsworth,J. Brealey,
and G. Carriveau,"The Use of Digital Image Processing
This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
in Constructing Infrared Reflectogram Assemblies,"
A.I.C. Proceedings, May 1987, pp. 163-67 and Wechsung
et al., "Assembly of InfraredReflectograms by Digital
Image Processing Using a PortableData-Collecting Sys-
tem," I.C.O.M. Proceedings, September 1987, vol. I, pp.
107-109. The computerassembliesillustratedin this article
are Figs. 19, 26, 36, 37, 39, and cover.
4. Concerning the underdrawings of Joos van Cleve, see
M. Ainsworth, "Underdrawingsin PaintingsbyJoos van
Cleve in The Metropolitan Museum of Art," Le dessin
sous-jacent.... Colloque IV, 1982, pp. 161-67.
5. This painting was examined by the author at The Met-
ropolitanMuseum. Most of our informationabout Mem-
ling's underdrawingscomes from infraredphotographs,
for example, as publishedin variousvolumes of collections
included in Les Primitifsflamands.Corpusde la peinturedes
anciensPays-Basmeridionaux au XVe siecle,Brussels and in
C. Perier-d'Ieteren,Colyn de Coteret la techniquepicturale
despeintresflamandsduXVe siecle,Brussels, 1985, pp. 29-30
and figs. 3 I-35. An as yet unpublished study on Mem-
ling's technique has been carriedout by D. Hollanders-
Favartat the Universite Catholique de Louvain.
6. This painting was studied by the author and R. Kasl in
September 1987 through the kind permission of Henri
Pauwels, FrancoisRoberts-Jones,and Willy Laureyssens.
Friedlander'sstatement that Roger van der Weyden used
metalpointfor underdrawingswas latercorrectedin n. I I,
p. 99 of EarlyNetherlandish Painting,Rogervan derWeyden
and the Masterof Fle'malle(comments and notes by N.
Veronee-Verhaegen,trans. H. Norden), Brussels, 1967.
Here it mentions Corremans'findings that early Flemish
paintersmade preparatorydrawings on their panels with
brush and bone black. We now know that there is greater
variety in the materialsof underdrawings, an areayet in
need of furtherresearch.
7. See K. G. Boon, Netherlandish
Drawingsof theFifteenthand
Sixteenth Centuries, The Hague, 1978, pp. 1-2.
8. See Ainsworth andFaries,1986, pp. 30-3 7 for a full discus-
sion of the underdrawingin this work.
9. For illustrationsof both paintingand drawing, see E. Dha-
nens, HubertandJan van Eyck, New York, n.d., pp. 283,
285.
10. The underdrawing of Van Eyck's CardinalAlbergatiwas
studiedand photographicallydocumented in May I984 by
the author and C. Ishikawathrough the kind permission
of Karl Schitz and GeraldKaspar.
11. F Lugt, Muse'edu Louvre,Inventairege'neraldes dessinsdes
Ecolesdu Nord:MaitresdesanciensPays-Basnes avant1550,
Paris, 1968, p. 8.
12. Ainsworth and Faries, 1986, pp. 12-13. The underdraw-
[35]
 ings of Roger van der Weyden are under investigationby
a group of researchersheaded by J. R. J. van Asperen de
Boer and R. van Schoute. Preliminaryfindings have been
discussed in Colloquia III-V of Le dessinsous-jacent.. .
I981-85.
13. The varying opinions concerning the possible function of
the drawing arestatedinJ. Mundy, "APreparatorySketch
for GerardDavid'sJusticeof CambysesPanelsin Bruges,"
Burlington Magazine, CXXII, 1980, pp. 122-25.
14. M. Ainsworth, "GerardDavid's Drawings for the Justice
of Cambyses,Once Again," BurlingtonMagazine,CXXX,
I988, pp. 528-30.
15. Lugt, 1968, pp. 19-20; P. Leprieur, "De quelques dessins
nouveaux au Musee du Louvre," Revue de l'artancienet
moderne, 28, I9I0, pp. 161-75, esp. pp. I73-74.
16. The underdrawing on The Virgin Among Virginswas
studiedand photographicallydocumented in May 1986 by
the author and K. Crawford through the kind permission
of FrancoisBergot.
17. M. Faries, "Underdrawingsin the Workshop Production
ofJan van Scorel- A Study with InfraredReflectography,"
Nederlands KunsthistorischJaarboek,26, 1975, pp. 142-46,
figs. 32-33 and "Two Additional Panels from Jan van
Scorel's Workshop: Comments About Authorship," Le
Dessin Sous-Jacent . . . , Colloque IV, 1982, pp. 123-25,
129.
18. J. P. FiledtKok, "Underdrawingand Drawing in the Work
of Hieronymous Bosch: A ProvisionalSurvey in Connec-
tion with the Paintingsby Him in Rotterdam,"Simiolus,
6, 1972-73, pp. 159-62 andJ. Hand and M. Wolff, Early
NetherlandishPainting.The Collections
of theNationalGallery
Art.
of Washington,
SystematicCatalogue, D.C., 1986, pp.
17-21.
19. A direct link between the drawing and the painting was
expressed by E. Fahy, The FrickCollection:An Illustrated
Catalogue, I, Paintings, New York, 1968, pp. 228-33.
K. T. Parker(The DrawingsofHans Holbeinin theCollection
of H. M. theKingat Windsor Castle,London, 1945)thought
that another drawing of Sir Thomas More, which is not
prickedfor transfer,cat. no. 2, was the one associatedwith
the Frickpainting.
20. The underdrawingof the Portraitof Sir ThomasMorewas
studied and documented photographicallyby the author
in 1985 through the kind permission of Everett Fahy and
Edgar Munhall. It became partof a largerresearchproject
involving some thirty-five portraitsby Holbein and his
followers, the results of which will be published in the
Burlington Magazine later in 1989. See note 32 below.
21. This phenomenon is discussed by C. Perier-d'Ieteren,
[36 ]
This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
"Dessin au poncif et dessin perfore, leur utilisation dans
les anciens Pays-Bas au XVe siecle," Bulletin van het
Koninklijk Instituutvoorhet Kunstpatrimonium,19, 1982-83,
pp. 74-94 and Perier-d'Ieteren, 1985, pp. 37-42 (esp. n.
86 for additionalbibliography);more recentinvestigations
have shown that some of Perier-d'Ieteren'sobservations,
particularlyin regardto the works of GerardDavid, must
be corrected;see M. Ainsworth, "GerardDavid's Annun-
ciation panels at The Metropolitan Museum of Art,"
unpublished I.C.O.M. paper, Copenhagen, 1984 and
"Reassessingthe Form and Function of Gerard David's
Drawings and Underdrawings,"Le dessinsous-jacent ...,
Colloque VII, 1987 (forthcoming, September 1989); K.
Arndt, "GerardDavids Anbetung der K6nige nach Hugo
van der Goes, Ein Beitrag zur Kopienkritik,"Munchner
Jahrbuch der bildendenKunst, 3rd series, 12, 1961, pp. 153-
75. See also S. Goddard, The Masterof FrankfurtandHis
Shop (diss. Iowa, 1983), Ann Arbor, I984, p. 127 and
"BrocadePatternsin the Shop of the Masterof Frankfurt:
An Accessory to StylisticAnalysis,"ArtBulletin,67, 1985,
pp. 401-17; and a forthcoming publicationfrom a disser-
tation byJ. Wilson, "AdriaenIsenbrantReconsidered.The
Making and Marketing of Art in Sixteenth-Century
Bruges," Ph.D. diss., Johns Hopkins University, 1983.
The September 1989 colloquium on Le dessinsous-jacent
dansla peinture(in Louvain-la Neuve, Belgium) was de-
voted to the subject of copies.
22. This painting is half of a diptych that also includes Christ,
The Man of Sorrows (7I. I 56-1 57). Both are illustrated in
vol. III, p. 334 of K. Baetjer, EuropeanPaintingsin The
MetropolitanMuseumof Art, A SummaryCatalogue,New
York, 1980.
23. The Chicago paintingwas studiedanddocumentedphoto-
graphically by the author after it arrived in New York
from the Van der Elst Collection in Belgium inJune 1982.
The Chicago MaterDolorosacanbe datedto the mid-i 47os
at the end of Bouts' life. Dendrochronological dating by
PeterKlein (University of Hamburg) of the Metropolitan
Museum copy places the likely date of production around
1525 (personal communication to the author, March
I989).
24. SeeJ. Taubert,"ZurkunstwissenschaftlichenAuswertung
von naturwissenschaftlichenGemaldeuntersuchungen,"
Ph.D. diss., Philipps-Universitat,Marburg, 1956, pp. 21-
23; andJ. P. FiledtKok, "Underdrawingand Other Tech-
nicalAspects in the Paintingsof Lucasvan Leyden,"Neder-
lands KunsthistorischJaarboek,29, 1978, pp. 1-2. See also
R. Grosshans, Bilderim Blickpunkt.
Jacobvan Utrecht.Der
Alter von 1513, Berlin-Dahlem, 1982, pp. 51-72; and M.
Faries, B. Heller, and D. Levine, "The Recently Discov-
ered Underdrawings of the Master of Saint Ursula
Legend's Triptychof the Nativity," Bulletinof the Detroit
Institute of Arts, 62, no. 4, 1987, pp. 4-I9.
25. The National Galleryportraitwas studiedanddocumented
photographicallyby the author and C. Ishikawa in Sep-
tember, 1984 through the kind permission of Alistair
Smith and Martin Wyld.
26. This painting in Philadelphiais part of a larger,on-going
study and forthcoming publication by the author on the
working techniquesof GerardDavid (see note 32 below).
It was studiedand documented both photographicallyand
by computer by the author and C. Ishikawain 1984 and
laterwith K. Crawfordand G. Hamilton in 1987 and 1989
through the kind permission of Joseph Rishel and
Marigene Butler.
27. Molly Farieshas found wash underdrawingsin the works
of Pieter Coecke van Aelst and, among the Germans,
ErhardAltdorfer.Publishedexamples arefew, but include:
Filedt Kok on Lucas van Leyden's LastJudgmentTriptych,
1978, pp. 65-99 (especiallypp. 97-99); Emil Bosshard on
"Die Unterzeichnung der Gemalde von Niklaus Manuel
Deutsch," in Maltechnik,3,July 1983, pp. 158-68; and the
present author on Schaufeleinin "Schaufeleinas Painter
and GraphicArtist in The Visitation,"Metropolitan
Museum
Journal, 22, 1987, pp. 135-40.
28. Some have suggested that wash underdrawingswere de-
rived from techniques in glass painting where hatching,
etching, and wash indications of shadow were employed
side by side (seeJ. R. J. van Asperen de Boer, M. Faries,
andJ. P. Filedt Kok, "PaintingTechniqueand Workshop
Practice in Northern Netherlandish Art of the Sixteenth
Century,"in KunstvoordeBeeldenstorm, exh. cat., Amster-
dam, Rijksmuseum, 1986, pp. io6-I6, esp. p. I I). The
origin of this phenomenon in underdrawingsis difficultto
pinpoint, since modeling with washes in drawings as well
as the use of tone blocks for chiaroscuroprints were also
in evidence at the beginning of the sixteenth century.
29. P. Pino, Dialogodi Pittura,ed. R. and A. Pallucchini,Ven-
ice, 1946, f. i6.
30. See the discussion in M. P. Merrifield, OriginalTreatises
on
the Art of Painting,introduction and glossary by S. M.
Alexander, New York, 1967, p. ccxcv.
31. On the appreciationof finished or autonomous drawings
in the sixteenth century, seeJ. Held, "The Early Appreci-
ation of Drawings," Latin AmericanArt, and the Baroque
Periodin Europe.Studiesin Western Art. Actsof the Twentieth
InternationalCongressof theHistoryof Art, vol. 3, Princeton,
1963, p. 79; and W. W. Robinson and M. Wolff, "The
Function of Drawings in the Netherlandsin the Sixteenth
Century,"in The Age of Bruegel:Netherlandish Drawingsin
the SixteenthCentury,exh. cat. withJ. 0. Hand, andJ. R.
Judson, Washington, D.C., I986, esp. pp. 34-39.
32. The author's study of the relationshipbetween Holbein's
portrait drawings and paintings is forthcoming in the
This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BurlingtonMagazine as "'. . . paternes for phiosionea-
myes . . .' Holbein's Portraiture Reconsidered." The
manuscript on the investigation of over eighty panels at-
tributed to GerardDavid and his followers is in prepara-
tion; the book will be published by The Metropolitan
Museum of Art. Preliminaryfindings concerning the re-
searchon David have been discussedin severalpublic lec-
tures and in the following articles: Ainsworth, 1985;
Ainsworth, 1988; and Ainsworth, September 1989.
33. This notion, tentativelysuggested by K. T. Parkerin vari-
ous of the entries in his catalogue of the Windsor Castle
Holbeins, was reiteratedby S. Foisterin Drawingby Hol-
beinfromthe Royal LibraryWindsorCastle, London, 1983
pp. 2 I-25. However, it was only through the recovery of
the underdrawingson the paintedportraitsthatthe specific
relationshipbetween the drawingsand the paintingscould
be ascertained.
34. G. Vasari, Vasarion Technique... (trans.L. S. Maclehose,
ed. G. B. Brown), New York, 1960, p. 215, 231 and
G. B. Armenini, On the TruePreceptsof theArt of Painting,
ed. and trans. E. J. Olszewski, New York, 1977, pp. 147-
48.
35. A debate about the authorshipof the pen or brush and ink
reinforcementson many of the Holbein drawingsfollowed
PaulGanz'sstatementthatnone of them were by Holbein's
own hand (Handzeichnungen H. Holbeinsd. J.: Kritischer
Katalog,Berlin, 1937, p. XX). More recently, Christian
Miiller has argued convincingly that each case should be
consideredindividually (HansHolbeind.J. Zeichnungen aus
demKupferstichkabinett derOffentlichen
Kunstsammlung Basel,
exh. cat., Basel, Offentliche Kunstsammlung, I988; see
cat. no. 48 for pen additionsby Holbein as opposed to cat.
no. 27 where these lines are considered as later applica-
tions).
36. F. Winkler, "Das SkizzenbuchGerardDavids," Pantheon,
3, I929, pp. 271-75.
37. The major monographic literatureon Gerard David is:
W. H. J. Weale, GerardDavid: PainterandIlluminator,Lon-
don, 1895; E. von Bodenhausen, GerardDavid und seine
Schule, Munich, 1905; M. J. Friedlander,Early Nether-
landishPainting,HansMemlincandGerardDavid (comments
and notes by N. Veronee-Verhaegen,trans. H. Norden),
VIb, Brussels, I97I; and several dissertations, E. J.
Mundy, "GerardDavid Studies," Ph.D. diss., Princeton
University, 1980; D. G. Scillia, "GerardDavid and Manu-
script Illumination of the Lowlands," Ph.D. diss., Case
Western Reserve University, 1975; H. J. van Miegroet,
"Gerard David: Patronage and Artistic Preeminence at
Bruges," Ph.D. diss., SantaBarbaraUniversity, I988.
38. The painting was studied and documented photographi-
cally by the author in 1984 by kind permission of Tessa
Helfet andJeanne McKee.
[ 37
39. I was able to study the techniqueof the Hamburg drawing
during the time of the exhibition, The Age of Bruegel,at
The Pierpont Morgan Library,New York, through the
kindness of William Robinson, PatriciaReyes, and Eck-
hard Schaar.John Hand discusses this seldom-mentioned
drawing in Age of Bruegel,pp. 132-33.
40. See discussion on p. 9 and Ainsworth, 1988, pp. 528-29.
41. This, of course, is a well-known practicedescribedin Cen-
nini'sLibrodell'Arte.See C. Cennini, TheCraftsman's Hand-
book,trans. D. Thompson, Jr., New York, 1960, p. 75.
42. John Hand discusses this drawing in Age of Bruegel,pp.
130-31.
43. 0. Benesch, "Die grossen flamischenMaler als Zeichner,"
Jahrbuchderkunsthistorischen in Wien,53, 1957,
Sammlungen
pp. I2-I3.
44. See Ainsworth, 1988, p. 530.
45. The painting was studied by the author with C. Ishikawa
and R. Kasl. It was documented both photographically
and by computer in 1984 and 1987 through the kind per-
mission of Alistair Smith and Martin Wyld.
46. This alterationis also visible in the x-radiograph, which
was publishedby R. H. Marijnissenand G. van de Voorde,
"The X-rays of Gerard David's Legendof Cambysesand
Sisamnes,"in Mededelingen vandeKoninklijkeAcademievoor
Wetenschappen, Letterenen SchoneKunstenvan Belgie, 47,
I986, I, pp. 67-70.
47. The numerous changes in the panels of theJusticeof Cam-
bysesand some details about David's working procedures
were discussedby the authorat the 1987 colloquium (VII)
of Le dessinsous-jacent
dansla peinture;this paper was pub-
lished in the proceedings of the colloquium in September
of 1989.
48. See Filedt Kok, 1978, pp. 65-99; see also notes 27 and 28.
[38]
This content downloaded from 84.88.136.149 on Wed, 16 Dec 2015 10:04:01 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
49. Von Bodenhausen, however, said that the composition of
the Lamentation is David's while the execution is not (see
Von Bodenhausen, I905, Igof., no. 4I). M. Davies, Les
Primitifsflamands. Corpusde la peinturedesanciensPays-Bas
meridionaux au XV siecle, The NationalGallery,Antwerp,
1953, vol. I, pp. 88-96, esp. pp. 89-90.
50. E. von Bodenhausen and W. Valentiner, "Zum Werk
Gerard Davids," Zeitschriftfr bildendeKunst, 22, May
191 , p. 189;M. Conway, The VanEycksandtheirFollowers,
London, I92I p. 288; Friedlander, I97I, p. I05, no. 200.
51. C. Andersson, "Excursus: The Master of the Coburg
Roundels," in Froma MightyFortress,Prints,Drawings,and
Books in the Age of Luther,1483-1546,exh. cat. with C.
Talbot, Detroit, 1983, pp. 388-93, esp. pp. 389-90. See
also Filedt Kok, 1978, pp. I48-49.
52. See M. Comblen-Sonkes, "Rogier van der Weyden des-
sinateur.Comparison de ses dessins automones et du des-
sin sous-jacent de ses tableaux,"Bulletin,InstitutRoyaldu
PatrimoinesArtistiques, 15, 1976-77, pp. 130-40;J. P. Filedt
Kok, LivelierthanLife, theMasterof theAmsterdam
Cabinet
ortheHousebookMaster,exh. cat., Rijksmuseum, Amster-
dam, 1985, esp. pp. 295-302; Filedt Kok, 1978, p. 17;
FiledtKok, 1972/73, no. 3/4, pp. 133-62; Faries, I975 and
1982; M. Faries,"Some Remarkson the Inter-relationships
Between Underdrawings, Drawings, and Prints," in Le
dessinsous-jacent
..., Colloque V, 1985, pp. 144-58; and
Ainsworth, see 1988 and September 1989.
53. Ainsworth, 1982; Ainsworth, 1985; "New Insights into
Joos van Cleve as a Draughtsman,"EssaysinNorthernEuro-
peanArtPresented toEgbertHaverkamp-Begemann on hisSix-
tiethBirthday,ed. A.-M. Logan, et al., Doornspijk, 1983,
pp. 15-17; and with M. Faries, 1986, pp. 30-37.
54. Ibid.