• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

By Root 1375 0

’s Knight of Malta’, Burlington Magazine, vol. 139, no. 1,128 (Mar. 1997) pp. 156–60. Some authors continue to question the picture’s attribution to Caravaggio, others to doubt that it represents Martelli. But a mid seventeenth-century inscription in a Medici collection inventory records the name of the painting’s sitter as Antonio Martelli and I see no reason to doubt that. He was a celebrated man and the painting probably hung in the Vasari corridor alongside other depictions of worthies and notables treasured by the Medici, which makes it all the more likely that the inventorist would have got his name right. It used to be thought that Martelli could not have been painted by Caravaggio on Malta in 1607–8 because of his appointment to the Priory of Messina in 1606, so the archival evidence showing that he did not actually leave for Messina until the autumn of 1608 is important. Last but not least, the nonpareil moral and intellectual force of the painting, its abbreviated style, its depth of chiaroscuro, even such details as the slightly blocky impasto highlights in the prominent sunburned ear of the sitter – all scream out late Caravaggio. I cannot see who else could possibly have painted the picture.

58. For these documents, see Fr John Azzopardi, ‘Documentary Sources on Caravaggio’s Stay in Malta’, in Caravaggio in Malta, Philip Farrugia Randon (ed.) (Malta, 1986), pp. 45–56; and Stefania Macioce, ‘Caravaggio a Malta e i suoi referenti’, in Storia dell’Arte, vol. 81 (1994), pp. 207–8. Helen Langdon, in conversation with me, has expressed second thoughts about whether this document actually refers to Caravaggio. She points out that Knights of Malta were so universally prone to violence that the reference to a homicide committed does not necessarily point the finger at Caravaggio alone as the intended recipient of one of the two knighthoods for which papal approval was being requested. However, given the scarcity of Knighthoods of Magistral Obedience awarded by Wignacourt – indeed, so great was his reluctance to award such knighthoods at all that he had all but abolished them – it seems highly unlikely that he gave two in the same year to men who had committed murder. In my opinion, the man mentioned in the document, and Caravaggio, are beyond all reasonable doubt the same person.

59. See n. 47 above.

60. I am indebted to Keith Sciberras for explaining this crucial sequence of points to me, in conversations on Malta in 2001.

61. It has been suggested that he may have painted the work in situ, in the Oratory of St John itself, but I think that is implausible on the grounds that the light in that space would have been so far from ideal, even in the summer months. There is no absolute proof either way, but I think it more likely that he found a space elsewhere and adapted it accordingly.

62. Some writers have identified her with Salome, others with Salome’s mother, Herodias, Herod’s consort. But she is dressed in the clothes of a serving wench. Everything about the way in which Caravaggio painted her indicates that she is meant to be seen as a member of the chorus, not as a leading player in the drama.

63. The inscription has occasionally been thought to imply the phrase ‘fecit Caravaggio’, ‘Caravaggio made this’, rather than ‘Fra Michelangelo’. But the fact that it was his reception painting into the Order of St John argues compellingly for the latter as the true reading.

64. Cited in John T. Spike, Caravaggio, pp. 209–10. Fr John Azzopardi published a photograph of the document, with transcription and translation, in ‘Documentary Sources on Caravaggio’s Stay in Malta’, pp. 55–6.

65. I am grateful to John T. Spike for pointing out to me dell’Antella’s probable authorship of the Bull, and for teasing out the implication that by praising Caravaggio as Apelles, it offers even higher praise to Wignacourt as his patron.

66. For dell’Antella’s life and personality, see Helen Langdon, Caravaggio: A Life, p. 354; and Keith Sciberras and David Stone, Caravaggio: Art, Knighthood and Malta, p. 80.

67. I am indebted to Elizabeth