The present grisaille representing Venus in the forge of Vulcan putting an arrow in Cupid’s quiver, surrounded by various ‘amorini’ - a wonderful mythological theme - is a rare modello related to a small painting of the same subject, now in the Louvre (fig. 1). The painting, formerly in the Gonzaga collects ion in Mantua,¹ was acquired in 1671 by Louis XIV from the collects ion of Everard Jabach.²

The recto of present sheet, most probably a presentation drawing, bears a traditional attribution to Giulio Romano. The elegant and masterly composition, surely Raphael’s invention, is characterized by elaborate layers of wash enriched by abundant white and beige heightening, creating a highly pictorial effect. There are some light indentations over some of the contours and it is likely that this highly finished drawing has been used for transferring the composition onto a small panel, such as the one in the Louvre, which is very similar in size to the drawing (38 x 26 cm).

Yet although these two compositions are close, there are numerous and important pent.mes nti and obvious differences between them. Two of the most conspicuous are that the putto to the far left of the painting, holding a butterfly aloft, only exists in the drawing in the form of a faint black chalk sketch of his arms and body, and that the central figure of Venus is, in the drawing, putting the very first arrow into Cupid’s quiver, whereas in the painting the quiver is already half full. Also, the bed in the background is unmade in the drawing, its pillows suggested by thick black chalk lines, and the staircase seen through the arched opening, onto which the shadow of Vulcan falls, is curved in the drawing, but has become straight in the final painting. Other differences include the indication of part of a window seen through the same arch, to the left, which is more prominent in the drawing, and the draped cloth around Venus's legs, far more voluminous and elaborate in the drawing, as is also her elegantly plaited hair, which is far less natural in the painted version. The list continues: more of Venus’s left foot can be seen behind the putto holding the bowl of fruit towards which she reaches with her left hand; Vulcan’s left hand is not visible over the drapery that he wraps under Venus’s armpit; the quiver in the foreground is placed lower in the painting, so that the seated putto to the left corner can rest his right foot over its straps; and Cupid's right foot is corrected to come further forward, a position upheld in the painting and subsequent copies.

In contrast to the Louvre painting – which was probably, as some scholars have suggested, left unfinished³ – this modello is more spontaneous and vibrant in execution and there are a number of pent.mes nti visible in black chalk: for instance, the head of cupid was initially studied in a different position, more to the right, as is clear from the black chalk indications of the original hair, and the right leg of the putto to the left corner was slightly further forward. The highly finished nature of the present modello, with its extensive use of heightening and washes, does, however, makes it more difficult to detect all the changes that the artist must have made to the details of this elaborate drawing.

The generally held belief that the invention of the composition is due to Raphael is supported by the existence of a print by Agostino Veneziano (1490-1540), representing the composition of the painting in reverse, and with minor differences.⁴ This print is inscribed, dated and signed with initials: RAPH. URB. DUM. VIVERET. INVEN. 1530 A.V. Agostino Veneziano was in Mantua in 1530-31, and presumably Giulio provided him with the drawing from which he made his print.  The great fame of this appealing subject is evidenced by a good number of painted copies that appear to follow the composition of the Louvre painting⁵, including a pen and ink drawing of a similar size in the Louvre.⁶

The original function of this composition remains uncertain, though its scale and exquisite theme would seem perfect for a small painting executed for a refined, private patron or collects or. Based on accounts in Vasari's Vite, scholars have in the past proposed a link, on the basis of subject, either with a lost fresco on the façade of Giovanantonio Battiferro’s house, painted by Vincenzo Tamagni after Raphael’s design, or with another fresco executed, over a chimneypiece, by Giulio, for his friend ‘Messer Girolamo’, the organist of the Duomo of Mantua.⁷ Neither of these theories can, however, be sustained as the work does not in fact correspond sufficiently closely to Vasari’s descriptions. Moreover, drawings for both those projects have been identified (namely a study in the Louvre, Vulcan forging an arrow in the presence of Venus and Cupid, given to the workshop of Raphael,⁸ and one at Windsor, Venus, Vulcan and Cupid, given to the workshop of Giulio Romano.⁹)

In the 1990s Nicholas Penny endorsed the attribution to Giulio Romano of the modello on the recto of the present sheet, and proposed a dating shortly after Raphael’s death.¹⁰ Having recently seen the drawing again in the original, Penny has added that the variations between the two compositions demonstrate beyond any doubt that the present finished study is not after the painting.

On the verso, the outlines of a Madonna and Child with St. Elizabeth and the young St. John the Baptist can be detected, executed in a soft black chalk. This sketch appears to be by another hand – an artist with a style closer to that of Gianfrancesco Penni. A number of compositions with similar subjects were produced by Raphael and his workshop before the master’s death.¹¹

1. A 1627 inventory of the Gonzaga collects ion records a painting by Giulio representing Vulcan, Venus and Cupid. See A. Luzio, La Galleria dei Gonzaga venduta all’Inghilterra nel 1627-1628, Milan 1913, p. 105, no. 234

2. Paris, Louvre, Inv. no. 424, Giulio Romano and workshop; for the complete provenance of the painting see S. Béguin in, Autour de Raphael, Dessins et peintures du Musée du Louvre, exhib. cat., Paris, Louvre 1984, p. 126, cat. P4, reproduced

3. Béguin, loc. cit.; S. Ferino Pagden, Giulio Romano und das Künstlerische Vermächtnis Raffaels, Vienna 1989, p. 93, note 50

4. Bartsch, XIV, p. 261, no. 349

5. See Oberhuber and Gnann, loc. cit., for a listing

6. Paris, Musée du Louvre, inv. no. 3657; variously attributed to Giulio and to Raphael, but rightly considered later by some scholars (see A. Gnann, Raphael, exhib. cat., Vienna, Albertina, 2017, no. 136, reproduced p. 405 (as Raphael))

7. Respectively ed. G. Milanesi, Le  vite de’ più eccellenti pittori…..1879, vol. IV, p. 490 and 1880, vol. 5, p. 546; respectively: J.D. Passavant, Raphael d’Urbin et son père Giovanni Santi, Paris 1860, vol. II, under p. 578; F. Reiset, Notice des Dessins, Cartons, Pastels, …, Paris 1866, p. 85, under n. 259

8. Paris, Louvre, inv. no. 618; see D. Cordellier and B. Py, Raphael, Son Atelier, Ses Copistes, Paris 1992, pp. 485-487, reproduced p. 486

9. Windsor, Royal collects ion, RCIN 990302. We are grateful to Stefano L’Occaso for this information.

10. Moreover, Penny noted a reference in a letter by Giovanni Maria Sasso (agent and collects or) to Sir Abraham Hume (30 October 1789) of the existence in a Mantuan house of another small painting of the same subject by Giulio Romano. Sasso stressed that he himself owned an impression of Agostino Veneziano's engraving, further reinforcing the fame of this composition

11. See for instance: The Madonna of Divine Love, by Raphael and workshop datable to circa 1516, now in Capodimonte Museum, Naples (inv. Q146); Giulio Romano The Spinola Holy Family datable 1517 or later, Los Angeles, The J. Paul Getty Museum (inv. 95. PB.64) and The Small Holy Family, circa 1517-1518, in the Louvre (inv. 605)