Natalia Uvarova

Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia

The development of engravings from the Renaissance to the Mannerism and the early Baroque era is a pressing question, which remains significantly underresearched by art historians. In the report this subject is studied in multiple aspects: technique, art achievements and the use of engraving as a way to reproduce and duplicate other art objects.
By examining the works of Dürer and Goltzius, we can clearly see the changes that happened during two centuries and also features that Mannerism retained without changing since Renaissance. In the report a number of works by both masters are analyzed, characteristic features are identified, their technique and visual imagery are analyzed. Albrecht Dürer was a prominent artist of his time, practically the father of Renaissance engravings, who introduced new methods of composition and expression of space and depth. Hendrick Goltzius is the master of Mannerism, a prominent draftsman and engraver. He used both the methods developed by his predecessors, as well as his contemporaries, and both were adapted to fit his vision. Both masters attached importance to the technique and experimented with different ones, but their most important works are copper engravings, i.e. chalcography, often considered the most difficult technique of all.
Despite being seemingly narrow, the topic is not only important for the history of graphics and paintings, but for the history of art, because engraving in the 16th to 17th century Europe is the most significant tool to duplicate and spread visual information, which therefore had influence on all other forms of art.

 PDF

Paulina Fedotova

Lomonosov Moscow State University; Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts, Russia

The decorative designs of the Italian Renaissance reached Britain in the second half of the 16th century, particularly through published prints of Continental artists. English watchmakers and chasers frequently turned to mainland art and used it as a source. Especially important moment of the English watchmaking evolution was the fact, that in London original and distinctive horo­logical tradition had already existed for a very long time, since the very beginning of the 16th century. In addition to the phenomenon of the origin of the British horology, the very important matter is the fact that an early English watch signed, for example, by a Dutch immigrant, may well have German and French constitutional overtones.
Hence, the problem of the formation and development of the new ornamental system is linked to a subject of the evolution of the English decorative tradition and its interaction with artistic currents of the Continental Europe during the period.
Besides, being one of the greatest horological and casemaking centers, Britain will influence profoundly the development of world watchmaking in the following years and will take a crucial place in the history of horology. The unique artistic approach of British makers and decorators will not master the Renaissance tradition, but will adopt it and change within the limits of their own artistic system influencing deeply the decorative designs of horological centers outside England.
Watch, being an object of a special value, becomes an obligatory attribute of power and luxury. At the same time watch is an essential part of costume, which means that watch as an accessory formed an appearance of the man of those days and determined main fashion tendencies of the 16th–17th centuries.
The main purposes of the paper are to reveal the influence of the artistic tradition of the Italian Renaissance on independently formed ornamental designs of English watchmakers, to mark main characteristics and attributes of the center in the context of European art and to determine the influence of the English art school on the evolutionary processes in the field of horology. Moreover, the paper is to exa­mine a special culturalogical emphasis of watch during the period in question.

 PDF

Alessandro Cosma

Sapienza University of Rome, Italy

Arriving in Malta in 1660, Mattia Preti progressively become the official painter of the Knights of St. John, and changed radically their very way of understanding and using the images. From this point of view, the scenes of martyrdom represent a privileged field of investigation: for the members of the Order, in fact, this particular images are not only the result of specific devotions, but the representation of something that can be really experienced by the knights and that often summarize their aspirations and hopes.
New documents and — for the first time — the reading of these paintings in the context in which they were produced and in relation with the history of their patrons will clarify the extraordinary and often unique iconographies used by Mattia Preti and, moreover, provide new grounds for establishing their chronology.
The paper will then address the following topics:
• The works made by Preti for the Langue of Italy, his first reference point on the island, offering a comparative reading of two paintings dedicated to St. Catherine, one made for the Church of the Langue and one for their Chapel in St. John Cathedral. The analysis will unveil the devotional project promoted by the Langue in relation to the relic of the saint, and define a new, more reliable, chronology for the paintings.
• The two lunettes in the Chapel of the Langue of Aragon dedicated to the martyrdom of St. Stephen. Starting from some new documents and from the results of the recent restoration, a new reading of the paintings can now include them in the original commission by Grand Master Martin de Redin (1657–1660) related to his — failed — project of crusade.
• The unknown role played by the two Grand Masters Raphael (1660–1663) and Nicolas Cotoner (1663–1680) in guiding the choice of subjects for the paintings in the Chapel of St. James, a prelude to the great celebration of their role in the history of the Order painted by Preti in the vault of the cathedral and, above all, in the Allegory of the Order on the counterfacade.

 PDF

Natalia Makhnovskaya

Chelyabinsk State Museum of Fine Arts, Russia

Battle Scene (oil on canvas, 43 × 58 cm) became an addition to the collection of Chelyabinsk State Museum of Fine Arts arriving from the State History Museum in 1960 as a painting of an unknown western school artist of the 18th century. Earlier the painting was kept in the collection of countess Chernysheva-Bezobrazova in Yaropolets estate. Later I. V. Linnik (verbally) attributed the painting to the Flemish school of the 17th century. These were the only known details about the painting until recently.
In the course of the research, we managed to find an image of a painting by Jan van Huchtenburgh (1647–1733) entitled The Battle at Ramillies between the French and the Allied Powers, 23 May 1706 dated 1706–1710 from the collection of Rijksmuseum (Amsterdam), whose theme, composition, details of depicting the horses and horsemen combined with other works by this artist make for straightforward attribution of the Chelyabinsk piece to this painter’s authorship.
Jan van Huchtenburg, Dutch painter of battle scenes, engraver and art trader, was born in 1647 in Ha­arlem, died in 1733 in Amsterdam. He was an apprentice of Thomas Wijck. He had a brother artist Jacob van Huchtenburg. He was in the service of Prince Eugene of Savoy. He painted ten big battles between 1697 and 1717 depicting victories of Eugene of Savoy. He was influenced by Van der Meulen and Philips Wouwerman.
The works of brothers Huchtenburg are rare in Russian collections. The Hermitage Museum keeps a painting of Jan van Huchtenburgh with a question mark beside the name, since the painting was priorly attributed to Pieter Wouwerman.
Presumably the painting in Chelyabinsk belongs to a series of battle scenes The War of the Spanish Succession of 1701–1714 along with The Battle of Ramillies.
Rather skillfully executed although poorly preserved this painting always provoked curiosity of researchers. Various technical studies — macro photography, microscopic inspection, infrared photo­graphy — ultimately resulted in discovery of the artist’s signature.
Dutch experts Bernard Vermet (RKD) and Pieter Roelofs (Rijksmuseum) agreed with our conclusions as to attribution of this piece of art to Jan van Huchtenburgh or his circle. Quentin Buvelot, expert in battle painting from Mauritshuis, believes that the discovered signature belongs to Jan van Huchtenburgh.

 PDF