Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and I hope everybody can hear me.
I'm all wired up and I'll do my best to be audible.
And I think it gives you something more jolly to look out from the beginning.
It may be heresy to say so, especially after his richly merited triumph.
Their smolan last year. But when one looks at Rafael's paintings as opposed to his drawings, he runs the risk of making it look all too easy.
I am reasonably confident that he never made it to the city of the Dreamings bars in which we find ourselves.
But his paintings have all the effortless superiority, which is used to be said is the trademark of a Bailly old man.
Above the waterline, to mix my metaphors, he may seem to be a swan gliding across the millpond calm surface of a lake.
However, when we look at his drawings, as we are about to, we understand that he was a swan who was paddling frantically below the waterline.
The stance of Dellis in Your Toura is one of a suite of rooms on the third floor of the Vatican Palace,
which served as the PRIVAT, although also at times public apartments of Pope Julius.
The second, as has often been pointed out,
it is a happy chance that Julius could not bear the thought of living in the far
more extensive living quarters on the floor below now called the Borgia Apartments,
which had been inhabited and decorated by his hated predecessor, Pope Alexander the Sick.
Instead, he moved upstairs and evidently set in motion a plan to have the stand say, as they have come to be known, decorated by a team of painters.
This way of ensuring considerable expanses of walls and ceilings base were covered
at some speed by artists in competition with each other was entirely routine.
Its principal advantages were that it speeded up the process and that it pitted the artists against one another in the context of the Vatican.
It would have come particularly naturally,
since that was the way the walls of the Sistine Chapel had been decorated under Julius's uncle Sixtus the Fourth.
The beginnings of this collaborative rivalry are preserved in the form of the ceiling
of the stance of Dell in Chenda later one of the rooms which was frescoed by Perugino.
And in those parts of the ceiling of the stance, Adella senior toura frescoed by Saddam that remain.
But more generally, the entire plan was subverted by the incomparable genius of Rafil.
The project is not very fully documented, but the first payment to him date from January fifty nine,
which suggests he began to work on the Stampfer in fifty eight.
And everything indicates that the decoration was completed around the end of fifteen eleven.
The original function of the stance Adela's in Your Toura,
which literally translates as the room of the signature and is so called because at a later date under Paul the Third,
it housed the court of the papal signature. The original function used to be much debated in the scholarly literature,
but it has in effect been established by John Schirman that it was Pope Julius the Seconds Library.
He wasn't a big reader, by the way. There isn't a lot of room for books.
This, in turn, explains the basic organisation of its decoration mediaeval and Renaissance libraries.
In accordance with university faculties were divided into four categories theology or religion.
Which is what you see here, and poetry, which we might think of more generally as literature,
which you see in the form of a preparation and the finished fresco philosophy,
which included everything we would call science and jurisprudence or law.
The first three walls have all acquired names. The dispute or disputation on the holy sacrament, the Parnassus and the School of Athens.
In consequence, the sealing of the Stanford Atlas in your Torah is dominated by four Randle's
representing each of these categories between which are predominantly narrative scenes,
which involve a combination of the flanking abstractions.
Thus, to give a specific example. And I'm sorry, it's upside down in this slide.
The scene of the fall of Man. That scene is between theology and justice in the same spirit.
Each of these themes on the first three walls to be painted involves an assembly of individuals who
collectively bring to life the abstract concept up above the fourth wall that devoted to justice.
And I'll just jump back from microsecond is different in character.
It's upper zone is devoted to the three cardinal virtues, while the two narratives seems flanking the window in its lower part respectively.
Encapsulate civil and canon or church law.
As a rule, and not least for practical reasons to do with dripping paint,
it was customary to begin frescoed decorations from the top and to work downwards.
In a sense, this does indeed appear to be what happened in the stands.
Della Senya Toura, where sodomy seems to have been at work on the ceiling before Raffel was involved in the project.
On the other hand, and for all that, there is much debate concerning where Rafaelle began to paint.
It is generally agreed that he started with at least one of the walls and only returned the ceiling at a later point.
It will nevertheless be more convenient in the present context to start with the ceiling before proceeding to the walls.
The question of the ceilings placement within the chronology of the decoration is best left until later,
but should be linked to the kinds of drawings that are associated with the various walls.
For as will emerge more fully in due course. One of the most striking features of the drawings for the stanza is the way in
which Raffel employed different preparatory methods for the individual walls.
The surviving drawings for the ceiling of the stance of Dallas Senator are relatively few in number,
but they involve considerable number of the relevant frescoes and also revealed
the range of techniques media Raffaelle employed in the stance and more generally.
Starting with the round dolls, there are designs for three out of four of them,
one of which is only known in the form of copy, which I will not be discussing.
The first, which you see here, is a study in pen and ink in the Ashmolean for the thing, for the figure of theology,
which broadly corresponds to the finished work, but in which there are numerous differences.
The alignment of the head and body is essentially the same, but the legs are differently disposed.
The arms spread wide from the body and the book rests on the fingers lap instead of being held in her left hand.
This is clearly an early idea in which the handling is bold and confident with few changes of mind.
But it is telling that the left leg has not really been sketched in at all.
A second study for a Randall carefully squared sheet executed in black chalk over extensive stihler, some drawing in the Royal Library.
Windsor is for the figure of poetry. It is one of the most spectacularly beautiful of all Rafael's drawings and possesses an Infernus that touch
an ecstatic characterisation of the figure that were not carried through into the fresco in formal terms,
too. There are changes. The tilt of the woman's head is more extreme in the drawing, Allar is differently positioned.
But above all, her upper half, with the exception of her left forearm, is draped.
Nudity is found elsewhere in the stanza, both on the ceiling and on the walls.
But it may nevertheless have been deemed inappropriate for this context, and it is hard not to regret the modification.
A third drawing for one of the rounds is a sheet in Lille, executed in black, chalk heightened with white,
which gives the impression of being a definitive study for the puto holding a tabula Santa to the
proper left of the figure of theology when it is actually compared to the poetry in the fresco.
However, a host of minor differences emerge. The head in the drawing is in a purer profile.
The left hand is more fully visible. The figure is nude, not draped, and the distribution of light and shade is far more dramatically contrasted.
It seems unlikely, on the other hand,
that even as meticulous an artist as Rafil would have felt the need to make another study after this one and before the cartoon.
And finally, mention should be made of a very rawly executed clar to fragment in the British Museum,
which is the head of the POTO holding the tablet inscribed flutter in the fresco representing poetry,
which underlines Rafael's capacity for boldness as well as finace.
Turning to the intermediate rectangular seems the simplest of the preliminary
drawings is a sheet in the Albertina for the figure generally identified as well,
Ramaiah executed in Pen and Browning. It is much more controlled than the study for theology discussed previously.
And yet at the same time, utterly sure-footed, it comes impressively close to the final resolution.
The only significant differences being in the tipping of the axes of the celestial
sphere and in the possession of the dramatically distinct gesticulating left arm,
the sole detail which Rafel restarted on the largest Gayl on this sheet, but which he evidently felt required.
Still further tweaking.
The most visually arresting of the rectangular seams on the ceiling shows the judgement of Solomon and is the focus of a group of drawings.
It seems logical to suppose that the earliest of these drawings is a sheet executed in metal point on grey green prepared paper in the Ashmolean.
The main study shows all the actors in the scene there in the nude and the numerous
changes of mind confirm one sense that it must have been executed at speed,
as does the meandering framing line, which separates it from a notably more tentative second attempt at the X Kouchner.
That's the second attempt.
The only details which assist with the identification of the subject of the sword being brandished by the soldier and the beardless at this stage,
King Solomon's Crown. This study was presumably followed by a double sided sheet in the other Tina,
where the handling of the recto in pen over black chalk is almost identically engraver.
And where the only finished elements of the kneeling mother and the soldier who has studied one and a half times,
he's shown far more frontally than in the previous studies. But his attitude is still completely different from the deal scoring's bad pose.
He will ultimately adopt. In contrast, the supplicate tree mother is unchanged in the frasca.
As mentioned already, the chronological sequence in which the walls were painted has been the object of considerable debate.
For Saari, who was the first writer to give a reasonably comprehensive account of the stance of Delphinium.
Torah specifically states that Rafeal began by painting the School of Athens even before the ceiling.
He then proceeded to consider that the ceiling and the other walls.
But there's no indication of the order in which he discusses the remaining walls is intended to reflect the sequence in which they were executed.
Moreover, nothing about the way in which the sari analyses the room and its decoration suggests that he was especially well informed about it.
And it has frequently been observed that his reference to the presence of evangelist's in the School of
Athens proves that he was relying upon reproductive prints as opposed to his memory of the actual frescoes.
It was Geovani Pietro Belorussia whose description was published posthumously in sixteen ninety six,
who first proposed that Raffaelle began with the dispute, a view which has been very widely accepted.
He argued on the basis of style,
contending that the go background in the upper zone of the dispute that revealed Rafael's dependence on earlier modes of decoration.
Recently, a number of scholars have endorsed the Sari's belief that Raffaelle began with the School of Athens and attempts have
been made to support this hypothesis with the aid technical findings arising from the restoration work in the stance.
Although it has not been claimed that this amounts to proof, what has been lacking, however,
in these revisionist accounts is any engagement with the evidence afforded by the drawings.
It is true that one might in theory accept that the drawings for one wall preceded those
for another and still argue that the respective walls executed in the reverse order.
But this mode of working would be highly unusual and as will emerge in due course.
There is some evidence in this particular case to suggest the contrary.
But Laurie may have confined himself to the frescoes. But subsequent scholarship does not.
And it has been widely accepted that the style of the drawings does indeed support his intuition.
In fact.
It would be no exaggeration to contend that this is an object lesson in the value of studying drawings to help determine the chronology of paintings.
There are more extant drawings for the disparate than for all the other walls of the stance of the senator to put together,
which may suggest the Raffel felt the need to take particular trouble over it, but could, of course, simply be an accident of survival.
Most of the drawings are focussed upon individual figures in small groups,
but it makes sense to begin by examining those sheets, which are concerned with the composition as a whole.
The earliest, but also the most informative of these,
which you see is a drawing in Penland Wash over black chalk under drawing heightened with white in the Royal Library at Windsor Castle.
The design comprises only the left half of the composition, and the presumption must be that the right half is intended to mirror it.
And it represents a logical progression from Raffles.
Only previous work in Fresco. The Trinity with saints of around fifteen five in the Church of Sanseverino in Perugia,
which was completed down below by Perugino after Rafael's death.
Be that as it may, the general disposition of the figure groups is clearly established and demonstrates at this stage
in the evolution of the design must have been preceded by a number of now lost exploratory ideas.
Reading from the top downwards and implying subsequent studies and the finished work as guides,
it becomes possible to identify most of the figure groups. The top part of the heavenly zone contains the figure of Christ and the Wrangel,
raising his right hand and benediction, seemingly with God, the father above him.
This area of the chief is almost indecipherable. Christ is flanked on his proper right by the figure of the Virgin leaning inwards.
Then she and her turn is joined by two additional figures who are to be identified as saints or prophets, evidently.
She was to have been balanced by John the Baptist and to further figures on the other side.
Immediately below Christ as a seated figure with a short beard who must be Saint Peter and
who was to have been paired with Saint Paul marginally lower down and over to the side,
two seated bearded figures with books with their counterparts on the other side.
Plainly, the four evangelists, the remaining inhabitants of the celestial zone are various flying angels moving on to the terrestrial zone.
The extreme left margin of the composition is occupied by an architectural structure,
seemingly a kind of PED demented logic, which has two child angels on top of its tablature,
who appear to be attaching a coat of arms topped by the papal tiara to its most prominent column in front of this structure.
There is a male figure partially draped in a windswept mantle, standing on a cloud and pointing dramatically upwards.
Similar figure. By this stage, Earthbound is retained in the final fresco in roughly the same location.
But in neither context is it all clear whom he is intended to represent.
The remaining figures in this lower zone consist of two seated ecclesiastical who must
be two of the four doctors of the Latin church and ten miscellaneous bystanders.
The middle of the composition seems to have been closed off by a low balustrade,
and there is no evidence that Rafeal planned to include an altar at this juncture.
The next stage in the evolution of the composition is enshrined in a pair of a pair of drawings,
one in the smolan and the other in Shanthi, which may well originally have been the two halves of a single sheet.
They concentrate exclusively on the main fingers and deliberately ignore their setting,
but give every indication of representing a markedly more developed conception.
The major difference in the upper zone is in the definite inclusion at the top of the hovering.
God, the father admittedly cropped,
but he is there and in the incomparably more animated and characterised treatment of the evangelists in the lower zone.
The concentration of the attendance figures upon the books of the central doctors is far more apparent in here to the heads and more individualised.
This conception of the earthly zone is all but identically repeated or anticipated in a much sketchier blakroc drawing at Windsor,
where the head gear of three of the four doctors is represented and confirms that the only one with the beard is Saint Jerome,
who is both shielding his eyes, who is shown or is shielding his eyes from the heavenly radiance.
In the event, both the respective positions and the attitudes of the doctors were to change.
But typically Rafil was loath to waste and general idea.
In essence, the frontal doctor on the left is reused for the seated figure of Pythagoras and for the group around him in the school of Athens.
And this connexion is a powerful argument in favour of the chronology proposed here.
If the School of Athens really was complete before the drawings for the dispute, then it is hard to explain why Rafil, the most inventive of artists,
should have experimented with a visual solution which he would surely have recognised
as being unacceptably repetitious in such close proximity to the facing wall.
A fascinating pen drawing in the Louv now split into two connected fragments,
proves that Raffaelle made studies from Poe's new marvels that this unexpectedly early stage of the conception.
It shows both the seated doctors on the left side of the composition surrounded by standing figures
and must record a slightly different moment in the evolution of this part of the composition.
From any of the other surviving studies, a number of related sheets.
The bottom left half of the design come much closer to the final arrangement.
Two of them. One which you see in colour and the original.
And the other in black and white. A copy basically represent the same grouping of figures with any very minor variations.
The most important difference between them being that in the copy, Jerome is shown with a beard.
In addition, the original is also less cropped at the right margin,
which means that the chalice with the consecrated host on the altar and the dive of the Holy Spirit in an Tonda above it, a much more fully visible.
I hope you can see that the chalice with the highest and that's the dive at this stage to.
Raffaelle made nude studies of the various groups of figures,
the most ambitious of these is a sheet executed in pan over black chalk drawing partially incised for transfer in Frankfurt.
It includes no fewer than 17 nude figures, seemingly with nudes covering their hair,
but must presumably have been confected from a series of studies for individuals and groups and can be divided into five or six discrete sections.
I don't think you should assume we got sort of rugby. Fifteen into his studio all in one day.
Confirmation of the presumption that it's groups assembled is provided by the existence in
the British Museum of the drawing you see on the left are more freely handled pens study.
For the most prominent figure of all we've seen from the rear in the event this figure was not used for the disparate but the ever economical,
Rafeal adapted his pose, admittedly in reverse.
His wife flipped the Frankfurt drawing for the figure, crowning a polo in the flag of mass.
Yes, on the fault. This seems the opportune moment to repeat the observation made in connexion with Michelangelo's drawings for the
Sistine Chapel ceiling to the effect that for all that such life drawings are routinely referred to as Sonus studies,
it seems extremely unlikely that the models were actual apprentices.
It is true that the exceptional muscular development of Michelangelo's nudes makes their otherness flagrantly apparent.
But even raffles, a new day here seem more than averagely well proportioned.
A very substantial feat in the Alvare teen bottom, left in pan and washed over black chalk heightened with white,
must represent the definitive composition or drawing for this section of the fresco, since it is almost identical to the final solution.
The only difference of note concern is the absence of the balustrade in the foreground and the bald man leaning upon it,
together with the related figures eyeing his book,
which would seem to suggest that any studies for them were executed at a very late stage in the planning of the work.
Moving on to the individual figures,
it seems logical to start with the more exploratory studies in pen and then move on to the more finished ones in black chalk.
The most impressive pen and drawings for the dispute, two double sided sheets.
One in Montpellier, which you see here, and the other in Munich.
The former comprises studies for the man in pink wearing a kind of turban who leans over the balustrade in the
right foreground on the rector was Bringelly hatched and crosshatch complete study shows him with two options.
The right arm, while the Vasso concentrates on the head, which is repeated twice and the strong, muscular hands.
Rafael paid particular attention to the definition of the tendons of the neck, but ended up rather blurring this area in the fresco.
Similarly, for all the confidence with which the left hand is rendered leaning on the banister on both sides of the sheet,
it ended up being dramatically raised. The Munich drawing, which is perhaps slightly drier than the one in more Polier, could also more effortlessly.
Sure-footed has what may legitimately be described as a final study for the figure of St. Ambrose on the Recto and on the Vasseur,
which I'm not showing you. Very resolved Gattoni study of a youth kneeling in prayer,
which nevertheless cannot be directly associated with any figure in the various
evolutions of the dispute or any of the other frescoes in this Tunstall's Centre tour.
Instantly, its existence should serve as a reminder of the fact that the surviving drawings, for instance, Dallas in the Torah,
as for almost all projects of the period, truly do represent the tip of what was once an iceberg to drapery studies,
both in the Ashmolean, four figures below on Earth, on the left side of the composition, one in Pan and above all,
Wash, and the other in exploratory black chalk underline quite how various Rafeal could be.
And it's chalk on the right. Obviously the letters, the latter sheets, Vasso.
Features a tentative preliminary idea for the same figure, combined with a study for one of the muses in The Parnassus,
who is already conceived of in this pose in the engraving, which,
as I'll explain more fully in a minute, represents an earlier stage in the evolution of the idea.
This drawing, in effect, proves that both the dispute and the Parnassus were being planned at the same time.
Two studies, four fingers and lives in the upper zone are executed in black chalk.
The first is a study in the smolan for the figure of St. Paul, although his identity in the drawing is far from obvious.
The exposed left arm is surprising and the representation of any apostle.
While the absence of the sword with which he was martyred means the figure is effectively without an identifying attribute.
Conversely, the pensive characterisation,
which is even more apparent in the drawing where he supports his chin on his right hand and fingers, his long beard is entirely absent.
For Paul. Intriguingly, Raffel experimented with a number of different solutions for the head of the St.
As you can see, yet none of them is especially close to the fresco.
In contrast, the connexion between the study in the Ft. C.
And the figure of Adam is entirely uncomplicated. This is one of the freshest of all raffles, life drawings in the bottom corner.
There is a schematic diagram of part of the vault of the stanza,
which would appear to confirm the fact that the planning of the dispute preceded the painting of the ceiling.
The final drawing I have time to consider for many have had to be admitted is a cartoon fragment for the head,
upper torso and right hand of God, the father in the Louv.
It is typical of Rafael's perfectionism that his actual gesture was to be modified in the fresco.
Having considered all the drawings related to the disparate that the time has now come to turn to the works iconography,
when it comes to the subject matter of the fresco, it is necessary to begin with.
For Sari, his account of the dispute is twofold.
There is a brief mention in connexion with the representation of theology on the vault
where he refers to and I quote the scene where the holy doctors are ordaining the mass.
And then there is the full dress description. This combines a brief summary of the subject, and I quote again, God,
the father sending down the Holy Spirit over the mall and particularly over an endless
number of saints who are below writing the mass and engaged in disputation about the host,
which is on the altar. And then he gives a not entirely reliable account of the person now of the scene.
In Blueberry's version, when it comes to the overall meaning of the fresco, he's less detailed.
But arguably more trustworthy than the salary. Simply stated that altogether,
these figures compose a most holy Senate of theologians and fathers who are followers of the first four doctors of the Holy Church,
and they are all contemplating the high mystery of the Eucharistic transubstantiation.
The emphasis here is on contemplation as opposed to disputation,
which seemed convincing and upon the importance of the consecrated host upon the altar,
whose anti Pandian, incidentally, is adorned with Julius's name.
The implications of such a reading for the notion of their having been a defined, iconographic old programme ab initio,
given the fact that both the altar and the host are absent from the early project drawings uplay,
the evidence of the preparatory drawings strongly supports the notion that the second of the wall frescoes to have been
executed with the palm masses and furthermore suggests that it was being projected before the dispute was actually executed.
In addition to the Double-Sided Smolan drawing already referred to the main argument in favour of this
sequence of events is in the form of two records of preliminary ideas for the whole composition.
The aforementioned engraving by Marcantonio write Monday, which you see here.
And an anonymous workshop copy drawing in the smolan in which the figures are studded and nude,
as in the drawing in Frankfurt for the left half of the disk.
These to help chronicle the evolution of this concept in both.
There is a figure at the right march in with both arms held horizontally who is shown gesticulating to his right.
And you see him there with a companion and they're sort of like a detailed autograph drawing.
That's the first case, number two, that from an.
Where he is not at all present and detailed.
So here it is, detail the detailed autograph drawing in pen from the same figure in the British Museum,
which you see here, confirms that the invention was indeed Rafael's.
This figure did not survive into the fresco of the Parnassus. But a variant of his sideways pointing gesture was employed in reverse for
the attitude of the bearded ecclesiastic next to Saint Jerome in the dispute.
Since it seems hard to believe that Rafa would have wanted an all but identical
attitude to feature in the Parnassus after having used it in the dispute.
It seems more reasonable to suppose that the early schemes for the Parnassus preceded the execution of the fresco.
The dispute is also worth asking for all that the connexion is more generic.
Whether Rafael would have wanted flying pooty in both the dispute and the Parnassus,
the ones brandishing the Gospels in the form were evidently not part of his original conception.
While the ones with just remind you of them, the ones with Laura reads in Mark continued print did not survive in the final version of the latter.
The basic conception of the Parnassus. Which from the outset copes in such a masterful fashion with the extreme inconvenience.
The window in its middle portrays Apollo, the nine muses,
and a number of Lorrel crowned and often identifiable poets on the mound was already established
and the now lost drawing Mark Marcantonio must have had at his disposal to engrave a print.
Famously inscribed with the misleading legend Rafael Pink's It Inverted Karner, Rafael painted this in the Vatican.
Well, he nearly painted this. He actually painted something else.
Be that as it may, the differences between this prince and the fresco are nevertheless fascinating,
not least because they once again reveal the extent to which Rafael was determined to improve upon a solution
that lesser artists would have been more than happy with the removal of the five flying Putih is the subtraction,
most of the other modifications and not least the alterations.
To the bottom right corner of the design involved additions.
On the left, the poses of the surviving figures tend to remain essentially unchanged.
But one extra poet is joined. Respectively, the foreground group and the group with Dante and Homer up above.
Dante and Homer. More significantly, a very prominent and wholly new figure of Sappho holding her Barbie dolls,
but also a scroll with her name to avoid any possible confusion with the Muses.
No doubt, rests illusionist Akeley on the painted window, embracing over to the right.
In contrast, one of the muses is now seen from behind, and all the attendant poets have changed both their poses and their appearances.
Last but not least, the attitude of the central figure of Apollo has changed utterly.
And he is playing modern viall as opposed to an ancient lyre.
Turning to the copy drawing in Smolin. It is apparent that it must represent an intermediate stage between the other two conceptions,
although in some details the fresco reverts to a solution found in the print and then temporarily rejected.
The other general observation to make about this drawing is that it excludes the outer margins and the upper part of the scheme.
Which means that certain peripheral figures are missing from it and that it is impossible to pass judgement on the presence or absence of the Putih.
He might still have wanted to include them, but they'd been, as it were, over the top.
Out of sight here. It's left half differs from the print in only one significant respect,
namely ensuring the scribe taking dictation from blind Homer, turning his head away from the poet.
Sorry towards. In the middle, Apollo is already playing his Vayle and is in his final attitude while on the right.
The music scene from the back. But the gesticulating man in the foreground is retained.
In considering the more detailed drawings for individual figures and groups,
it is as a rule possible to associate them with one of the three stages in the evolution of the composition.
Although it should be added that the stylistic uniformity of these drawings suggests that very little time needed elapsed between the various stages.
The fact that the study for the figure of the gesticulating man relates to the stage recorded in Marcantonio as print has already been established.
But this is something of an exception rather than the rule.
That was that. The magnificently taught life study in Pan for the figure of Apollo, which shows him naked except for his underpants,
is for the second conception and includes a detailed, separate study of his foreshortened musical instrument.
Similarly, the drapery study in Penn for Dante holding a book cannot be linked with the print where these details are not included.
There are two parent studies for the drapery of Homer.
One is closer to the print in showing a mantel over his right shoulder and arm, as well as drapery bunching on the ground.
The disposition of the drapery patterns in the other is closer to the fresco.
Two of the muses represent fascinating transitional cases in both studies.
There are elements from both the print and the fresco,
as it's particularly obvious with the one on the right here where the turn of the head relates to the print.
But the elaboration of the drapery relates to the fresco.
Other studies are uncomplicated, for figures were not present or are wholly differently characterised in the first two stages.
The drapery study in the British Museum. The poet at bottom.
Right in the frescoes. Case in point. And there is a supplementary drawing which you see on the right and pan over black chalk under drawing in Lille,
which studies his feet on the right foot of the poet beside him.
Likewise, there is a preliminary opinion study for the bearded head of the poet leaning on the tree in the left foreground.
That poet in red and white. And in this drawing, he's together with what turned out to be definitive studies for the heads of Hammer and Dumped.
And this study must relate. The fresco's since only there is he bearded.
You see him beardless in the print. It was followed by a second and more evolved head study,
this time in Silver Point and by another metal point sheet on pink prepared paper on the left here.
Whose technique looks forward to many of the studies for the school vs.
Last, but by no means least, a pair of gorgeous heads studied in black chalk for two of the muses.
They are both what are now known as auxiliary cartoons, which means that they were based upon the now last cartoon for the whole fresco,
but gave Raffaelle a final opportunity to restudy these particular heads separately.
When it comes to School of Athens, the grand total of extant drawings is significantly fewer,
but amongst them are a number of the most ravishing sheets Rafael ever executed.
The fresco depicts an assembly of ancient philosophers in the magnificent classical building, which is presided over by statues of Apollo and Minerva.
In the centre are Plato holding a copy of the TIMSS, who has the features of Leonardo da Vinci and Aristotle with his ethics.
But they are not the only ones who are identifiable. The half kneeling figure at bottom left his Pythagoras with his musical scale,
was balanced on the right by a John Mutter, who must presumably be Euclid.
Beside him are two figures respectively, holding a terrestrial and a celestial globe.
Evidently, Ptolemy and Zoroaster, not far from Plato into his proper right is Socrates expounding a point in his argument.
While the figure reclining on the stairs is Diogenes with his bow.
So Plato and Aristotle Socrates die on Ginnie's Pythagoras and Euclid.
Suggestions have been made concerning the end identities of several other figures,
and not least the brooding seated figure in the left foreground resting his left elbow on a stone block to whom we will return.
But they are altogether less certain. The overwhelming majority of the drawings for the School of Athens are in Metal Point,
predominantly on pink prepared paper, sometimes heightened with white.
One of the most revealing is a sheet in Vienna for the group around Pythagoras's,
which shows the figures in everyday clothes and in essence, exactly as they will appear in the fresco.
In the case of the standing figure holding a book and with a small stone block under his left foot,
it's clear that he is maintaining his difficult pose by holding Krutch under his left armpit.
And indeed, the attitude of his right arm is completely different.
In the finished work over to the right of the page,
he is restudy it in the definitive pose and clothed in the classical draperies he will wear in the fresco.
And now, I'm sorry, almost Insaf. Indecipherable, faint, but extremely informative.
Mattapoisett drawing on greenish grey prepared paper here in their Smolan shows the group around Euclid.
They are likewise dressed in everyday clothes,
as is particularly clear when it comes to what will become the crowned figure of Ptolemy standing to the right and seen from behind.
In the main and above all, because my time is limited, I've avoided discussing possible sources for raffles inventions.
But in this instance, and not least since the connexion was not previously been noted,
I would like to suggest that Rafaela's Ptolemy must have been inspired by the figure of Judith by Michelangelo
in one of the corners mandrels he executed at the outset of his work on the Sistine Chapel ceiling.
As I explained last week, the scaffolding covering the first half of the ceiling was removed in fifteen ten.
And although it was not generally open for viewing,
Fusari may well be right in relating that Broman smuggle Rafaelle in when Michelangelo was not about whether it
should be noted that Saari implies that this sneak preview took place after the completion of the stance of Dallas.
Enter the pose of Ptolemy is not absolutely identical, but strikes me as more than coincidentally close.
And even the general colour scheme of oranges, blues and greens is tellingly similar.
Finally, it is worth adding that it is extremely uncommon in Renaissance art to represent
major figures from the rear and without showing their facial features at all.
We kind of get lost profiles, but the back of the neck is a bit of a rarity to return to the drawings.
Arguably, the most perfect of all these metal point studies is the sheet for Diogenes in Frankfurt, in which Rafil dispenses with weight,
height and its way of surrounding the complete figure of the reclining philosopher with
immaculately rendered Close-Up details of various parts of his anatomy is strikingly
reminiscent of Michelangelo's practise in such drawings of the Sistine Chapel ceiling
as the red chalk study for the Libyan symbol in the metropolitan I showed last week.
Although relatively speaking, Rafeal keeps his distance and does not beam in, for instance, on the toes.
There are two further metal point drawings, both in the Ishmail.
The first is a study for the two men on the steps beyond Euclid and his entourage,
where the only significant difference between their appearance here and in the
fresco is that the one facing us is beardless and not yet in pure profile.
Below them is an incredibly intense screaming head.
Which relates to that of the Gorgon Medusa on the shield by the statue of Minerva in the neck behind them.
In her turn, she Minerva, together with a number of apprentices in their work clothes, posing as.
The statues in the flight of Neches beyond her are the subject of the second drawing when it comes to her attitude and expression.
They could hardly be closer to the final fresco,
except that the position of a right arm and the extent to which it emerges from the niche are fractionally modified.
Two final drawings for the school of Athens are both executed in a new medium red chalk.
And I'm sorry I couldn't get this one in colour, which Raffaelle had only occasionally previously employed the first.
This one in Frankfurt is almost certainly a workshop copy of a now lost study by Rafil.
But interestingly, is on the reverse of an autograph study unrelated to the stance of the listening tour.
So it really does come from his world. It combines the standing bearded philosopher with the celestial glow.
Customarily, I densified the Zoroaster with two of the figures beyond him and beneath the Nitsch with the statue of Minerva.
The second yet again here and there,
monium is a thrillingly energetic study for the fictive marble relief of fighting figures directly below the nitch,
which seems to be based on actual life studies and serves to underline the fact that no detail of the fresco was too minor,
not to inspire Rafael's meticulous attention. Almost miraculously, there also exists Raffles cartoon for the School of Athens,
which is preserved in the Bibliotheque Ambrosiano in Milan, as one would expect it.
And the fresco of virtually identical. But there is one major change of plan in the cartoon.
The seated figure in the left foreground resting his left elbow on a stone block is missing.
In fact, as can be established by study of the plaster on which the fresco is painted,
Rafaelle must have faithfully followed the cartoon and only then hacked out the relevant section had new plaster laid and repainted it.
The pensive additional figure is often identified as Heraclitus.
And it has been suggested that he may in some sense represent my client may be a kind of push to make that.
The final wall of the stance deals with the intrusive window by dividing the space into three separate compartments, maddeningly,
there are no extant drawings for the upper zone in which the three monumental figures of the virtues of fortitude with a Delta rover,
a Oaktree prudence, gazing into a mirror and temperance with the bridle are represented with a surely Michelangelo inspired amplitude.
I can't believe that the person who painted these figures haven't seen the Sistine Chapel see.
Instead, we must settle for the two single sheets respectively, connected with the frescoes below, which are both in Frankfurt.
These frescoes, as I've said, represent civil law in the form of Justinian receiving the pan depth and canon law
in the form of Gregory and the 9th handing the decreed force to raiment of Penfold.
In this latter scene, the pope is endowed with the features of Julius the second and the fresco must date
from after the bellicose pontiff's return to Rome on the twenty seventh of June.
Fifteen. Eleven. Because he'd only grown the splendid beard he sports.
During his 12 month absence from the city on a military campaign,
the worriedly disciplined pen drawing for the right side of the fresco reveals that the rest of the composition
must already have been devised by reserving space for the figure to the immediate left of this group.
Even more winning, however, is to study for the other scene,
which was only recognised as having been delegated to the Venetian painter Lorenzo Lotto as recently as the year 2000,
when Arnold Nessel RAAP made the attribution in an article in the Burlington magazine.
This drawing is almost entirely executed in wash time.
You needed a pen and was presumably above all,
designed to establish the distribution of the respective areas of light and shade within the composition.
It may serve as a compelling reminder well, when needed.
Of the fact that almost without exception and for all that they serve a preparatory purpose within the scheme of design,
these drawings are extremely beautiful.
They may be part of a process leading to a painting, but Raffaelle, for one,
can scarcely have been unaware of their purely visual appeal and must surely have taken immense pride and delight in it.
Thank you.