Pesquisando por: "Best New Artist" - Fotoarena - Agência de fotojornalismo

alb3673509 Mirror-Bearer. Culture: Maya. Dimensions: H. 14 1/8 x W. 9 x D. 9 in. (35.9 x 22.9 x 22.9 cm). Date: 6th century.This Mirror-Bearer figure is the best-preserved example of portable Maya wood sculpture and one of the highlights of the Early Classic period (ca. A.D. 250-550) Maya art. The artist created this figure out of a solid piece of hardwood from the genus Cordia, known locally as bocote. Research determined a radiocarbon age for the wood of 1425 years before present (± 120 years), or a range of A.D. 410 to 650. It was said to have come from the border region between Guatemala and Tabasco, Mexico. Most likely, to judge from its extraordinary preservation, the findspot must have been a dry cave or well-sealed funerary chamber. The damage on its left side is the result of some wear or decay in that context, perhaps from resting against a surface or being subjected to varying passage of air. The person, a male, wears an elaborate knee-length woven skirt with ties that cover his navel. The waistband of the skirt shows a braided and fringed design with circular rosettes on the hips and at the spine. The hem of the skirt displays a jagged starburst-like pattern bordered above by a twisted braid and below by flaring fringe. The square knot at the figure's stomach accentuates the realistic portrayal of the garment that sags between its slightly splayed knees. In addition, the Mirror-Bearer dons a shawl that goes around his neck and falls through his arms to connect to the rear rosette and is gathered in a bunch that sags away from the figure's back. Clearly defined notches in the skirt and under the arms would have held a removable plaque approximately 5 inches square, probably covered in a mosaic mirror of pyrite or obsidian. The plaque would have been inserted under the arms and then hooked into the skirt notches. In fact, the artist thinned the shawl under the figure's right arm by chiseling. This enabled a better "fit" for the plaque, which, at a roughly 60-degree angle, matched the pitch of the figure's face. The Mirror-Bearer wears a distinct hairstyle or headdress and is shown with a curled moustache. The eye sockets are carved out, possibly to hold eye inlays of shell and obsidian. He arches his back, his head slightly tilted upward, his upper arms parallel to the ground, and his feet, which, though eroded, are folded under his body. He is shown holding his fists tightly to his chest, clutched under an elaborate pectoral. The pectoral ornament depicts an anthropomorphic portrait, with a headdress, ear flares, and a wide collar of jade beads. The elaborate multi-tiered ear ornaments of the figure consist of a flare through the stretched lobe, with two other jade discs hanging below it, terminating in a graceful portrait of a jawless reptilian creature. Such luxurious jade jewelry would have only been reserved for a high member of the elite. Surviving reddish iron oxide pigment on the surface indicates that he would have been brightly painted and vivid in effect. Although the artist seems to have depicted this individual at a small scale but with normal bodily proportions at approximately 1/3 scale, he is most likely a royal court dwarf, as seen in many palace scenes. The unusual facial hair, bulbous forehead, and profile are consistent with Maya artists' depictions of individuals with achondroplasia or other types of genetic dwarfism. In Maya art, dwarves represented a type of antithetical beauty in contrast to the graceful Maize God. They were also very special in the eyes of Mesoamerican societies; they had divinatory powers and were sought after as entertainers in royal courts.The mirror-bearer to the ruler was an important role, sometimes filled by a woman, but more often by courtly dwarves. Their primary function was to reflect the image of Maya lords and ladies as those dignitaries preened in self-regard. Many of these mirror plaques have been found in Mexico and Central America, especially from the Classic Maya and Teotihuacan cultures. They are usually rectangular or circular ranging from 7 to 30 cm. in diameter. Mirrors are also known as objects for divination in Mesoamerica. The mirrors themselves were planes of luminous reflection, conceived as portals. The semi-permanence of a mirror held by a stone or wooden character implies that a mirror needed to be aimed at the ruler at all times when he was on the throne.There may be a connection with the wooden Mirror-Bearer and K'awiil, the Maya god of lightning, who is closely associated with mirrors or highly polished stones in artistic representations. When excavators at Tikal, Guatemala encountered a tomb they labeled Burial 195, it was flooded with sediment, allowing them to detect voids in the mud. When injected with plaster, the voids revealed small wooden deity figures covered in blue-green stucco from which the wood had rotted away. These wooden K'awiils are seen as holding a square elements in front of them, much like the Mirror-Bearer. Only two other wooden mirror-bearers are known. The first, in the Princeton University Art Museum (y1990-71), is of similar scale to the Met's figure. The bearer is shown with standard bodily proportions but bears traces of an abnormal hairstyle and raised bump representations of scarification on the chin. Probably a youthful courtier, for young men also did much service to kings, he is adorned with a plain loincloth tied in the back and also exhibits vestiges of red pigment and stucco on the weathered surface. The only archaeologically excavated example of a wooden mirror-bearer comes from the site of Becan, Campeche, Mexico. It was recovered from a disturbed funerary chamber within the elevated tiers of Structure IX, the largest pyramid at the site. Along with the wooden sculpture, excavators found a conch shell (Strombus sp.), a frame with mosaic tesserae of hematite, three obsidian blades and fifteen Early Classic ceramic vessels. The wood was also identified as of the genus Cordia, perhaps chosen for its sturdiness but light weight relative to denser woods. Carved from one piece, the bearer is a standing male dwarf, leaning forward with his chin slightly raised and his arms held bent at the side of his body, which was originally covered in red pigment. There is other evidence that the Mirror-Bearer of the Metropolitan Museum would have been placed in the center of scenes of feasting, tribute, or other rituals. A wooden mirror-bearer may appear on a cylinder vessel in the National Gallery of Australia, Canberra (NGA 82.2292), originally made in the mid-8th century at the Ik' kingdom of the area of Lake Petén Itza, Petén, Guatemala. The central figure is a portly king surrounded by his attendants, musicians, and even a hunchback and a dwarf drinking out of a large bowl. The key figure of this composition is the small dwarf holding the mirror: this is possibly an object of wood. It has a markedly differential color and scale that contrast with that of the nearby drinking dwarf, and resemble more closely that of the wooden mirror bearers from the Metropolitan. Though painted roughly two centuries after the creation of the Metropolitan's Mirror-Bearer, this object appears in the company of other courtiers. Thus there was continuity through generations of portraying a wooden object in a group of humans as an equal participant in courtly life, gesturing and interacting with the king. James Doyle, 2016. Museum: Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, USA.

alb3602771 Aubrey Beardsley. Artist: Frederick H. Evans (British, London 1853-1943 London). Dimensions: 13.6 x 9.7 cm (5 3/8 x 3 13/16 in.); 12.3 x 9.5 cm (4 13/16 x 3 3/4 in.). Date: ca. 1894.A major figure in British Pictorialism and a driving force of its influential society The Linked Ring, Frederick Evans is best known for his moving interpretations of medieval cathedrals rendered with unmatched subtlety in platinum prints. Until 1898, Evans owned a bookshop in London where, according to George Bernard Shaw, he was the ideal bookseller, chatting his customers into buying what he thought was right for them. In 1889, Evans befriended the seventeen-year-old Aubrey Beardsley, a clerk in an insurance company who, too poor to make purchases, browsed in the bookshop during lunch hours. Eventually, Evans recommended Beardsley to the publisher John M. Dent as the illustrator for a new edition of Thomas Malory's "Le Morte d'Arthur." It was to be Beardsley's first commission and the beginning of his meteoric rise to fame.Evans probably made these two portraits of Beardsley (1872-1898) in 1894, at the time the young artist was achieving notoriety for his scandalous illustrations of Oscar Wilde's "Salomé" and "The Yellow Book," two publications that captured the irreverent, decadent mood of the European fin de siècle. A lanky, stooped youth who suffered from tuberculosis and would die of the disease at the age of twenty-five, Beardsley, conscious of his awkward physique, cultivated the image of the dandy. Evans is reported to have spent hours studying Beardsley, wondering how best to approach his subject, when the artist, growing tired, finally relaxed into more natural poses. In the platinum print on the left, Evans captured the inward-looking artist lost in the contemplation of his imaginary world, his beaked profile cupped in the long fingers of his sensitive hands. In contrast, in the photogravure on the right, Beardsley peers out from under his smoothly combed fringe as if scrutinizing himself in an unseen mirror. Evans presented the portraits mounted as a diptych in a folder. Produced in an edition of twenty, the sets were probably issued as a commemorative tribute following the artist's death on March 16, 1898. Museum: Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, USA. Author: FREDERICK H. EVANS.

alb3664110 Design for the Tomb of Pope Julius II della Rovere. Artist: Michelangelo Buonarroti (Italian, Caprese 1475-1564 Rome). Dimensions: 20-1/16 x 12-9/16 in. (51 x 31.9 cm). Date: 1505-6.By 1505, eight years before his death, Pope Julius II della Rovere (reigned 1503-1513) had apparently already began contemplating plans to erect a grandiose tomb for himself in the new Saint Peter's Basilica being constructed according to Bramante's design, and entrusted Michelangelo with the sculptural project. In March-April 1505, Michelangelo probably began the first drawings for the tomb project which according to a first (lost) contract, was to cost 10,000 ducats, was to be finished in five years, and was to be sited in Saint Peter's at a location that was to be determined. Some of these intentions are already alluded to indirectly in Michelangelo's letter from Florence to his friend, the architect Giuliano da Sangallo in Rome, on May 2, 1506, for it was Giuliano who had encouraged the Pope in his choice of Michelangelo as the sculptor of the funerary program, amidst the heated artistic jealousies of the papal court. As described in Ascanio Condivi's biography of Michelangelo (Rome, 1553), the tomb of Julius II was to have been a three-story freestanding monument and may have included as many as forty-seven large figures carved of Carrara marble, but Michelangelo's project was interrupted by other papal commissions, chiefly the frescoes on the Sistine Ceiling (executed from 1508 to 1512), with which the early drawings for the Julius Tomb share considerable similarities of style. Following the pope's death on February 21, 1513, Michelangelo signed a second contract for a reduced version of the tomb to be finished in seven years. For a number of reasons, the Metropolitan Museum's drawing with its subtly pictorial illusionism of the architecture appears to reflect the first version of the Julius Tomb project, around 1505-6, as was convincingly argued by Michael Hirst in 1988, rather than that of the various designs produced after 1513, as has frequently been maintained in the literature. It is of much more subdued design and scale than the recto of the comparably large, nearly ruined drawing in the Kupferstichkabinett (inv. KdZ 15305), Berlin, which is the design most likely reflecting the contract of May 1513 for the Tomb of Pope Julius II. But the damaged autograph drawing by Michelangelo in Berlin is best understood through the faithful if awkward copy after it by Jacomo Rocchetti, preserved in the same collection (Kupferstichkabinett inv. KdZ 15306, Berlin; Fig. 1). To the present author's eye, the appearance of Rocchetti's design is that of a very clean copy-drawing, in which the underdrawing was the result of a "calco" method of transfer from Michelangelo's sheet (Kupferstichkabinett inv. KdZ 15305 recto); in a process much like a carbon-paper copy, the original by Michelangelo was placed on top of a sheet with a black-chalk-rubbed verso and another blank sheet underneath (Rocchetti's surface), and the outlines of the original were then incised with a stylus through the two layers of paper. Tellingly, the deriving copy is inscribed on the bottom of the sheet: "questo disegno é di Michelangelo buonarota hauuto da M[aestro] Iacomo rocchetti" (this design is by Michelangelo Buonarroti derived by Maestro Iacomo Rocchetti). The Berlin design by Michelangelo (as understood from Rocchetti's clean copy) is also more subdued in design than what is seen of the lower part of the monument in the drawing at the Uffizi (inv. 608 E recto), Florence, once owned by Pierre-Jean Mariette and which is perhaps a somewhat earlier version of the design than the Berlin drawings while being from the same 1513 campaign.The diagrammatic clarity of form and precise construction of architectural elements in the large Metropolitan Museum sheet are typical of modelli (demonstration drawings), produced for presentation of the design to a patron or to be used for the execution of the design by members of the workshop. As may be deduced from the Metropolitan drawing, the massive tomb ensemble was to be a three-sided structure attached to a wall, and in a daring departure from tradition, Michelangelo designed the pope's effigy to be seen frontally, and within the tall arched niche, angels raise the dead pope toward the Virgin and Child. A quick outline sketch in pen and brown ink for the Pope's raised effigy, seen in a side view facing left (Casa Buonarroti inv. 43A verso, Florence; Fig. 3), best allows one to envision the design of this main figure in elevation, as it were, in the 1505-6 monument. The upper part of the wall tomb with its monumental niche, or cappelletta, as it is called in the Julius Tomb documents, is of approximately the same design, though squatter than in the Berlin drawings and the architectural detailing is in a style closer to that of the Quattrocento. Also similar to the solution evident in the Berlin drawings are the motifs of the Virgin and Child in the mandorla (anticipating the design of Raphael's Sistine Madonna, Gemäldegalerie, Dresden, of 1513), with the dead pope in frontal view being supported over the sarcophagus by angels. But eliminated from the Berlin drawings are the figures of the youths with hirsute hair and somewhat whimsical expression who flank and face the niche in the Metropolitan sheet -- that on the left with an aspergillum and bucket of holy water, that on the right with a censer; in the Berlin sheets, these flanking figures are idealized and more schematic, while looking outward. The lower part of the Metropolitan drawing, however, most radically differs from the designs in the Uffizi and Berlin sheets. It omits the classicizing figures of the slaves and herm pilasters seen in the latter, and the nearly square relief at center offers an inventive portrayal of the Gathering of Manna (Exodus 16:11 - 36; Numbers 11:7 - 9), with acorns falling from an oak tree, in allusion to the heraldic device of the Della Rovere family (in Italian, "rovere" means oak). The Della Rovere acorns abound elsewhere in the design, filling a footed cup between two reclining river gods at lower center, and they decorate the finials of the thrones of the sibyl and prophet on the second storey of the monument. Allegorial figures of Charity and Faith stand within the niches to the left and right on the lower storey. The projection of the tomb from the wall is indicated by statues of standing figures seen in profile at extreme left and right, and the ensemble portrayed in the Metropolitan Museum drawing would have rested on a stepped base, as is seen in the Uffizi and Berlin designs, but which in this case is cropped by the lower border of the sheet.The early date of the Metropolitan sheet in 1505-6 is confirmed by the style of the figures, similar to those in the small pen-and-ink jottings on the sheet connected with the Battle of Cascina (Uffizi inv. 233 F, Florence); as well as further by the discovery in 1990, of the fragmentary designs for the Julius Tomb, on the versos of two corresponding portions of the same sheet now in the Musée du Louvre, Paris, and of which the recto of one sheet depicts a nude seen from the back for the Battle of Cascina, began in 1504. "The tragedy of the tomb," as Condivi called Michelangelo's forty-year ordeal in producing the Tomb of Julius II, did not end until 1545, when the present, much scaled-down structure was installed in San Pietro in Vincoli in Rome, far away from the papal majesty of Saint Peter's Basilica (Fig. 2); the most in-depth study of the related drawings for the Julius monument is by Claudia Echinger Maurach. The gradual reinstatement of the large, carefully rendered Metropolitan Museum drawing in the Michelangelo literature is due to Michael Hirst in 1976, who published the first detailed analysis of it, also advocating for the authorship of Michelangelo himself; the Metropolitan Museum of Art had acquired the drawing fourteen years earlier, as a work by the school of Michelangelo. While the attribution to Michelangelo has met mostly with approval since 1976, it was not endorsed by Charles de Tolnay in his Corpus (1975-80), who considered it a copy, with a style of outline-drawing too calligraphic, too soft, and less dynamic than Michelangelo's autograph studies, and the drawing was also more recently rejected by Frank Zöllner, Christof Thoenes, and Thomas Pöpper in 2008, without offering any reasoning. Hirst's opinion in 1976 was that the Metropolitan sheet dated more or less to the time of the Berlin design (Kupferstichkabinett inv. KdZ 15305), but in a revised opinion in 1988, proposed instead the Metropolitan drawing as Michelangelo's original project of 1505 for the Julius Tomb. Michelangelo's designs for the Tomb of Julius II offered meaningful visual sources (perhaps even normative ones) for artists of the following generation, as is seen, for example, in the design produced by Antonio da Sangallo "The Younger" for the Tomb of Pope Clement VII. Both drawings served as modelli, or demonstration drawings, perhaps for the patron, being precisely executed over a comprehensive construction with the stylus, compass, and ruler. While Michelangelo's working drawing is in good overall condition, the design has been roughly silhouetted and mounted onto a larger sheet, and the drawing surface seems sufficiently abraded for the underdrawing to have disappeared in several passages; the sheet also exhibits minor accretions, a horizontal crease at center, and some brown stains.Carmen C. Bambach (2009, revised in 2014). Museum: Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, USA.

alb3611912 Saint Anthony the Abbot in the Wilderness. Artist: Osservanza Master (Italian, Siena, active second quarter 15th century). Dimensions: Overall 18 3/4 x 13 5/8 in. (47.6 x 34.6 cm); painted surface 18 1/2 x 13 1/4 in. (47 x 33.7 cm). Date: ca. 1435.This panel is part of a cycle of scenes depicting the life of the hermit Saint Anthony Abbot. The painter's penchant for original and descriptive narrative detail appears in the treatment of the desert landscape and its fauna (symbols of the saint's temptations) beneath the luminous sky at dusk. A pot of gold in the lower left corner (which has been scraped away) symbolized the seductive worldly goods that the stalwart saint resists. The series of eight panels were likely arranged vertically, surrounding a central painted or sculpted image of Saint Anthony. The complex was probably commissioned for a member of the Sienese Martinozzi family (whose arms appear on one of the panels) for an Augustinian foundation, either in Siena or perhaps in the Marches region, where several branches of this family were located. This panel is the sixth in a series of eight that includes Saint Anthony at Mass (Gemäldegalerie, SMPK, Berlin); Saint Anthony Distributing His Wealth and Saint Anthony Blessed by an Old Hermit (both National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.); Saint Anthony Tempted by the Devil in the Guise of a Woman and Saint Anthony Beaten by Devils (both Yale University Art Gallery, New Haven); and Journey and Meeting of Saint Anthony with Saint Paul the Hermit and Funeral of Saint Anthony (both National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.).The enigmatic Osservanza Master has variously been identified as Sassetta and also as the young Sano di Pietro, based on close stylistic affinities with these other Sienese artists. It is also possible that the paintings attributed to the Osservanza Master, including the altarpiece from which this panel originated, are the product of a collaborative workshop to which these artists belonged. Museum: Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, USA.

alb3659959 Saint Jerome in the Wilderness. Artist: Probably by Antonio Rossellino (Italian, Settignano 1427-ca. 1479 Florence). Culture: Italian, Florence. Dimensions: Overall (confirmed): 16 5/8 × 15 1/4 × 2 7/8 in., 31 lb. (42.2 × 38.7 × 7.3 cm, 14.0615kg). Date: ca. 1470.The Metropolitan displays in its galleries an important group of quattrocento reliefs of the Madonna and Child by such Italian Renaissance masters as Antonio Rossellino (see acc. no. 14.40.675) and Benedetto da Maiano (see acc. no. 41.190.137). Until Saint Jerome in the Wilderness entered the collection, however, the Museum had no example of a classic narrative relief. Beginning in 1424, when Lorenzo Ghiberti's first set of bronze doors for the Baptistery was set in place, narrative reliefs held signal importance in Florentine art. (It was Ghiberti who invented the device, echoed here, of showing the foreground spilling over the frame in the reliefs for his second set of Baptistery doors, the "Gates of Paradise.")[1] Small reliefs like this marble were often made for private devotions in a family chapel. The 1553 inventory of the Palazzo della Signoria, Florence, for example, mentions a low relief of Saint Jerome,[2] which could have been this one, although it is usually associated with a work by Desiderio da Settignano in the National Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C.[3] The subject is unsurprising: images of this gaunt ascetic abounded in the 1470s, as is attested by paintings attributed to Andrea del Verrocchio (Palazzo Pitti, Florence) and by Leonardo da Vinci (Pinacoteca, Vatican).Widely read during the Renaissance, Jerome's letters vividly describe his physical and spiritual trials in the desert outside Bethlehem, where, he tells us, he would "set up my oratory, and make that spot a place of torture for my unhappy flesh."[ 4] Furthermore, the best-selling compilation of saints' lives, Jacobus de Voragine's Golden Legend, relates charming stories of his relationships with animals, which are often woven into depictions of the present scene. We learn that he befriended a lion; the lion teamed up with a donkey to carry wood to Jerome's monastery; and some camel-driving merchants stole the donkey. These tales account for the lion, lioness, and camel in the relief. It is, in fact, a virtual bestiary: the stag, for instance, may be explained by the following passage from the Song of Solomon, "Behold, he cometh leaping upon the mountains, skipping upon the hills. My beloved is like a roe or a young hart," which is often interpreted in Renaissance exegesis as a reference to Christ, whose cross rises above the animal here. Other creatures -- a squirrel and a dragon -- also carried symbolic meaning in contemporary writings.[5]The references to religious and secular literature made this a stirring image in fifteenth-century Florence, yet it is the airy landscape that draws the viewer into the scene and encourages him or her to linger over its delightful details. Jerome and the animals inhabit a mountainous region that conjures atmosphere and depth within the compact limits of the relief. Twin peaks curve toward the saint as if sheltering him within the hollow at their base. As Jerome kneels on the rocky stage in the foreground, the lions stand or sit on ledges receding to the left; in the distance a trader and his camel disappear behind a crag. Jutting from an outcrop, the crucifix separates Jerome from the right side of the pictorial space, where beasts and foliage hint at a passage behind the peaks. Using a mountainous landscape to separate a composition into discrete areas was pioneered by Ghiberti in the Baptistery reliefs and by such artists as Domenico Veneziano in painting. Borrowing that formal device, the sculptor of this relief carved the marble intuitively, suggesting recession into depth rather than constructing it through the rules of one-point perspective. Careful observations of striated rock, different varieties of leaves, and wispy clouds breathe life into this natural world.The style of the work closely resembles that of a set of reliefs in Faenza Cathedral. Giorgio Vasari credited them to Benedetto da Maiano, but many later scholars have attributed them to Benedetto's master, Antonio Rossellino. [6] In 1985, however, Gary M. Radke returned the attribution to Benedetto, finding that they forecast another, slightly later set of reliefs by him in the chapel of Santa Fina, San Gimignano.7 Radke pointed out that in the Faenza reliefs the manner in which the foreground figure is related to the mountains, the use of foliage to fill out the middle ground, and the placement of animals in the background are all aspects of Benedetto's sensibility as well as Rossellino's. Even Mario Scalini, a scholar who attributes the Museum's relief to Rossellino, dates it to the 1470s by relating it to Benedetto's Stigmatization of Saint Francis in the church of Santa Croce, Florence.[8] And because it is clearly dependent on Rossellino's sculptural formulas, our relief was not surprisingly identified as his work when it was auctioned in New York in 1918.[9] Radke's arguments for Benedetto's authorship of the Faenza reliefs -- citing Benedetto's keen interest in narrative and his blocky figures and rich surface ornamentation -- are attractive, but the eminent scholar Francesco Caglioti continues to believe that Rossellino and his workshop were responsible.[10] Clearly, whoever carved the Faenza reliefs also carved the Museum's Saint Jerome in the Wilderness.Although we have no written record of its authorship, this relief's renown in the Renaissance is confirmed by the existence of two copies. A glazed terracotta of about 1510 attributed to Luca della Robbia the Younger (1475 - 1548) in the Casa Buonarroti, Florence, is clearly based on the composition, which the artist clarified through color, thereby losing atmospheric perspective.[11] There are a few changes in the details, but the basic form and the dimensions are the same. In another version (Victoria and Albert Museum, London), also attributed to Luca della Robbia the Younger, a bearded Jerome has been turned into a contemplative saint reading a book, not mortifying himself with a rock.[12] Rather, his arms are spread wide in adoration of Christ. This different interpretation may have been more appealing in a less fervently religious period than the 1470s, but the survival of the composition speaks for the fame of the relief long after its original conception.[Ian Wardropper. European Sculpture, 1400-1900, in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York, 2011, no. 5, pp. 23-25.]Footnotes:[1] See Andrew Butterfield. "Art and Innovation in Ghiberti's Gates of Paradise." In The Gates of Paradise: Lorenzo Ghiberti's Renaissance Masterpiece, pp. 16-41. Exh. cat. edited by Gary M. Radke, with Contributions by Andrew Butterfield et al. High Museum of Art, Atlanta; Art Institute of Chicago; The Metropolitan Museum of Art; 2007-8. Atlanta and New Haven, 2007, pp. 23 - 26.[2] "quadro marmoreo in rilievo schiacciato che rappresenta S. Girolamo"; quoted in Ida Cardellini. Desiderio da Settignano. Studi e documenti di storia dell'arte 3. Milan, 1962, p. 244.[3] Rudolph Wittkower. "Desiderio da Settignano's 'St. Jerome in the Desert.'" In Idea and Image: Studies in the Italian Renaissance, pp. 137-49. London, 1978, pp. 145 - 46.[4] Saint Jerome. Select Letters of St. Jerome. Translated by F.A. Wright. Cambridge, Mass., 1933, letter no. 12, pp. 66 - 69.[5] Song of Solomon 2: 8 - 9. For a general study of the symbolic meaning of animals in the Renaissance, see Herbert Friedmann. A Bestiary for Saint Jerome: Animal Symbolism in European Religious Art. Washington, D.C., 1980.[6] Giancarlo Gentilini. I Della Robbia: La scultura invetriata nel Rinascimento. 2 vols. Florence, 1992, p. 361.[7] Gary M. Radke. "The Sources and Composition of Benedetto da Maiano's San Savino Monument in Faenza." Studies in the History of Art (National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.) 18, 1985, pp. 7-27.[8] Mario Scalini in Un tesoro rilevato: Capolavori dalla Collezione Carle De Carlo. Exh. cat. edited by Mario Scalini and Angelo Tartuferi. Galleria dell'Accademia, Florence; 2001. Florence, 2001, p. 57, no. 18[9] See The Beautiful Art Treasures and Antiquities, The Property of Signor Stefano Bardini, sale cat., at American Art Galleries, New York, April 23 - 27, 1918, no. 420.[10] Francesco Caglioti. Donatello e i Medici: Storia del "David" e della "Giuditta." 2 vols. Florence, 2000, vol. 1, p. 133, n. 133, vol. 2, fig. 329.[11] Alfredo Bellandi in I Della Robbiae l'arte nuova della scultura invetriata. Exh. cat. edited by Giancarlo Gentilini. Basilica di Sant'Alessandro, Fiesole; 1998. Florence, 1998, pp. 291 - 92, no. iv.1.[12] Ibid., pp. 292 - 93, no. iv.2. Museum: Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, USA.