Mimesis has been the most important part of a painter’s training since the time of the ancient Greek painter Apelles of Kos (370 BC – 306 BC), as noted by Pliny the Elder1 . As a musician must learn basic instrumental techniques to develop their own mature style, an artist can learn a great deal from perfecting the technical elements central to past masters’ oeuvres. Painters such as DaVinci, Michelangelo, Velázquez, Rubens, and Rembrandt all worked on master copies throughout their lives. Rembrandt, in particular, made numerous master copies that would later influence his own work and compositional poses. For instance, his 1639 rendition of Raphael’s Baldassare Castiglione would be used in his own self portrait poses in 1639 and 16402 .
Training based on replication was long considered the gold standard in a variety of artistic fields. As Greek sculptors emulated ancient Egyptian forms, Roman sculptors and painters would follow in the footsteps of their Greek counterparts and give us some of the most famous examples of “Greek” art, including the Belvedere torso, itself a copy. Through the medieval, Renaissance, and Baroque periods, guilds of drafts people and painters were educated through the process of copying a master’s technique and adopting preferred poses and archetypes that would eventually appear in their own work.
Painted copies were, and are, rarely intended to deceive potential buyers; rather, they allow the painter to explore another expert’s working method and master different approaches to creating strong compositional arrangements, palettes, pigments, value, tone, figure proportions, and more. I have always felt that the sincerest form of admiration is to pay homage to an iconic masterpiece. Following in the Renaissance tradition of learning through mimesis, I embarked on a journey to paint, as close as is possible, an exact copy of Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio’s David with the Head of Goliath housed at the Galleria Borghese. Attempting to get into the painter’s head and replicate the intricacies of his technique has given me insight into my own decisions and artistic thought process and has opened my eyes to some of what Caravaggio might have prioritized and contemplated as he undertook a masterwork.
For me to be close to the Lombard Master’s work, I had to approach it in a way that was at once respectful and dignified, yet also empowered by new research that has allowed me to emulate, as closely as possible, the mood and technical essence of Caravaggio’s masterpiece In 2018 my empirical research took me on a quest to see the master works in Rome, Naples, and Sicily. I needed to view the paintings firsthand in situ, or in their original setting, to determine how Caravaggio made use of light while painting. It is so important to view Caravaggio’s work from all sides to appreciate the brushwork, grounds, colors and pentimenti in the layers of his compositions. I read numerous books on Caravaggio’s work, methods, and life. I devoured every academic article I could find before commencing my Italian journey. The entire process helped me walk in Caravaggio’s shoes and peel back the layers of his psyche. This in-depth research allowed me to ascertain Caravaggio’s techniques and gain some appreciation for his mental state during his first stay in Naples (1606-1607), when a growing body of evidence3 suggests he painted David with the Head of Goliath.
Figure 1: David with the Head of Goliath, Oil on canvas, 125 x101 cm, Rome, Galleria Borghese
TECHNICAL RESEARCH:
My primary focus in undertaking a master copy of Caravaggio’s David with the Head of Goliath was to stay as true as possible to the original in every way, from technique to scale to materials. To understand Caravaggio’s brushwork, I used close-up photos of the painting from the Galleria Borghese. Marco Cardinali’s technical analysis4 of studies from 1988, 1991,5 and 2009, including surface and cross-sectional X-ray radiography, X-ray fluorescence, and infrared (IR) reflectographic studies, among others, provided indispensable insight into the materials Caravaggio used to furnish his masterwork.
Next came the analysis of Caravaggio’s technique, materials and supports in constructing David with the Head of Goliath. I was able to get a breakdown of Caravaggio’s layers from start to finish. I engaged with Marco Cardinalli’s investigations6 of the type of wood stretcher supports used by Caravaggio, the size and weave of his canvas, natural earthen pigments available in his area, and mediums, as well as ground preparation, which changed throughout Caravaggio’s short but impactful career. (See Process Overview Below)
Figure 2: Explanation of Caravaggio’s Painting Technique
I found that there were at least ten steps in Caravaggio’s painting process during his first Naples stay (though he might not have considered all of them distinct). I followed these to recreate his masterwork. Some of the earliest technical studies on Caravaggio’s paintings came from Roberto Longhi in 1951.7 He organized an exhibition of the master’s work in Milan in which conservators and technicians discussed their findings Powerful analysis of Caravaggio’s technique can be found in Rossella Vodret 2016 two volume set, titled Caravaggio Works in Rome: Technique and Style. 8 These volumes shed light on Caravaggio’s pictorial methods through technical research on his twenty-two contiguously documented works in Rome, including the Borghese’s David with the Head of Goliath. They examine surface and hidden layers of the paintings using infrared and X-ray characterization techniques, as well as close-up photograph and materials analysis. Art historical researchers, technical art historians, scientists of conservation and restorers combine to tell a multidisciplinary tale that reveals many new elements and offers an overview of this extraordinary artist's painting in all its uniqueness and complexity. As a seasoned painter, I hoped to illuminate more aspects of Caravaggio’s unique approach by producing a master copy of his David with the Head of Goliath utilizing authentic materials and filming and documenting each step.
Supports and Canvas Substrates:
The first step was matching the wood supports of Caravaggio’s canvas. The supports on the Borghese’s David with the Head of Goliath are not the original wood strainer supports that Caravaggio used. They were replaced at some point in the painting’s history, perhaps by a conservationist 9 Stone Pine, White Poplar, and Linden (Basswood) were the most common woods used to make wood strainers during Caravaggio’s time, and the full size of Caravaggio’s David with the Head of Goliath is 125 x 101 cm or 49 x 40 inches I matched the painting’s proportions and used heavy-duty stretcher bars for added stability. The wood I used is a kilndried, knot-free pine sourced from Forestry Stewardship Council (FSC) certified suppliers.10
Figure 3: Heavy duty pine stretchers and Claessens Belgian linen
Caravaggio executed his painting on a single piece of plain-weave canvas know as ‘tela romana’ with a low thread count of 6 x 6 threads/cm2 11 The closest match that I could find was a Claessens unprimed Belgian linen roll #09 with a fine texture.12 I cut the and stretched the woven linen canvas around the wooden frame and secured it in the back with staples. Caravaggio used tack nails on the sides of his canvas to attach it to the wood strainer. Next, I applied a gesso (the Italian word for gypsum) ground layer. This thin layer creates a surface that forms a good bond between the canvas support, ground preparations and the paint layers that will follow. The gesso ground layer is crucial to the durability of the painting. Following Cardinali’s analysis of 1988 technical studies on Caravaggio’s ground layers,13 I used Natural Pigments14 ‘Easy Gesso’ to make my traditional chalk ground. This is a dry mix of calcite and rabbit skin glue with warm water added to form a gel. Once the liquefied gel sets up, I then brushed it onto the canvas. Once that layer dried, I then added a thin layer of Rublev ‘Lead Oil Ground’. It took a full week for this layer to dry.
First Layer of Ground Preparation:
The next step was the preparation the first “ground” layer. I used the Rublev Colours15 ‘Marble Dust’ medium grade 20 microns size powder, mixed with walnut oil and calcite powder and combined with equal portions of Natural Pigments’ Transparent Red Oxide and Mars Brown to make a Bitumen approximation. This is then combined with various ratios of Pozzuoli Red, Carbon Black, and Lead White #2 to create a ground layer which is troweled onto the canvas. The consistency of the mix should resemble a thick, pliable plaster or buttery taffy. I let this first ground preparation layer dry for two weeks. During the setup period, in the first week, is when Caravaggio would begin drawing from his model. Starting with this first earthen background layer establishes a beautiful middle value for the composition and helps the painter to avoid being blinded by the brightness of a white ground.
Figure 4: Canvas with Easy Gesso chalk ground and thin layer of Rublev ‘Lead Oil Ground’As the ground starts to set up and stiffen, it gives the painter time to draw or incise into the layer. Caravaggio would etch lines into this first ground layer for his figure positions as he mapped his composition. These etched lines would be Caravaggio’s starting guide and he would sometimes change them if he felt they were not well-placed The incised lines on the Borghese David with the Head of Goliath are rather short and can be found on the profile of David’s neck and along the foreshortened left arm that holds Goliath’s head Caravaggio then constructed his composition by outlining the figure of David and Goliath’s head with a series of broad black brushstroke. This technique of using a darker black (Bone Black), sketched in with a brush over the middle value ground, was a fast way for Caravaggio to build up the underdrawing sketch of the composition in just a few sessions.
As a painter who has worked in the tradition of Caravaggio’s technique for years, I feel that Caravaggio was a strong draftsman and learned compositional drawing from his master Simone Peterzano, who himself was a student of Titian. Contrary to popular belief, Caravaggio could have used either a piece of chalk calcite or a form of vine charcoal to make quick outlines of his figures and compositions on his canvas.
Figure 5: Application of the First Layer of Ground Preparation
These underdrawings are difficult to characterize scientifically in most of Caravaggio’s works, but evidence of their existence has been found.16 The benefit of using a piece of chalk or charcoal is that you can wipe it off the surface simply by dusting it off with your hand or a wet rag.
Figure 6: Diagram Showing in Red the Incised Lines for Model Placement
The reason I use this method, and believe Caravaggio did as well, is that it offers the artist a chance to readjust their drawing when they are working from life and nature. Once I have the few lines that I feel are strong, I quickly wipe away the unnecessary portions of my sketch. Caravaggio was fully aware that having an accurate under sketch was key to having beautiful lucidity of light in his layers and if a painter has too many mistakes it will be fatal to balanced glow of a varnished painting. Caravaggio would then incise and outline the lines with dark brush work. A carbon-based charcoal drawing dissolves into the (also carbon-based) black underpainting above. As a result, the sketch underlying a Caravaggio painting, or for that matter my master copy, is invisible to the eye or to most analytic techniques except in unfinished paintings. Nonetheless, Caravaggio must have utilized a combination of incisions, dark brushwork, and gestural charcoal lines to work rapidly and develop unified compositions.
Working From Life, Lighting the Figure and Mapping Value: Caravaggio had a very distinct method of lighting and modeling his figures. As Giovanni Bellori stated in his writings about the Lombard Master,
“while working in a darkened room, Caravaggio illuminated his subjects with a single light from above. Never brought his figures out into the daylight but placed them in the dark brown atmosphere of a closed room, using a high light that descended vertically over the principal parts of the bodies while leaving the remainder in shadow.”17
In the composition of David with the Head of Goliath, Caravaggio boldly lit the scene with a single dramatic overhead light, cascading down on David’s head, torso, sword, and the rim-lit face of the slack-jawed Goliath. Caravaggio once again uses his technique of lighting his figures against a black backdrop. In this composition David’s figure emerges from the void, presenting us with the head of Goliath in dramatic chiaroscuro. The tension between light and dark, paralleling an inner tension between good and evil playing out in David’s mind, is a felt reality.
As I began to discern the form of David and the compositional pose, I felt it was necessary to break down the painting by value-mapping the light and dark forms. Painters do this mentally while looking at the manner in which light strikes a posed figure. For the sake of understanding how Caravaggio thought about light, I have value-mapped the composition in black and white to thoroughly comprehend how he simplified values. With limited time, it would have made sense for Caravaggio to stand back from his canvas and start by mapping out the largest forms in his composition. After establishing the most important tonal shapes, intended to grab a viewer’s attention, he could begin to examine his models under light (e.g. by squinting to emphasize contrast) and slowly block out lighting patterns. This technique allows the simplification of a figure like David’s.
Caravaggio was unique in his attention to two primary values, the bright whites of his highlights and dark blacks of his shadows, when blocking out tones. After the major forms were mapped, he could begin incising the area around his figure using bone black. By value-mapping the David and Goliath (with 10 corresponding to the brightest, and 0 the darkest, regions) it becomes evident that Caravaggio first established the borders along which contrast is achieved in his painting before building up subtler midtones (such as those across David’s ribs).
Figure 7: Explanation of lighting with one overhead light, following Caravaggio’s “late style”
Figure 8: Caravaggio would squint to simplify the light passages of the forms to 2 primary values
Figure 9: Caravaggio would then value map the light and dark regions of figural forms and their planes
As a figurative painter, I usually draw and paint from life with the model posed in front of my canvas. In the case of the David with the Head of Goliath, I had to adapt by making a large poster scan that was a 1 to 1 ratio in size to the original that I could look at it as if working from a live model. I also wanted to be as accurate as possible and made a quick grid of 6 five-inch square boxes across the painting horizontally and 8 five-inch boxes vertically for a reference This helped ensure that my proportions were accurate as I mapped a quick charcoal sketch of David’s pose and foreshortened arm, and Goliath’s head on my first layer of ground preparation. I used Nitram HB charcoal (5 mm), which can easily be wiped off the surface, for my sketch and to map figure proportions. I was then able to slightly incise the regions of the neck and foreshortened arm that I needed to guide me as I began to prepare the next layer of ground.
Second Layer of Ground Preparation:
As I mentioned Caravaggio applied his grounds in two coats: the bottom layer had a middle value earthen tone, and the second ground preparation was a darker one on the top layer of the painting that was thinly troweled across the incised underdrawing sketch. The second layer of ground is once again a mix of Calcite powder Marble Dust made by Natural Pigments’ Rublev Colours.
Figure 10: Second Layer of Ground Preparation
I used the Rublev Colours ‘Marble Dust’ medium grade 20 microns size powder, mixed with slightly more walnut oil, and then equal parts of Natural Pigments earthen oil colours consisting of Transparent Red Oxide, Mars Brown to make a Bitumen approximation, which could again be mixed with various ratios of Carbon Black, Bone Black, and smaller amount of Lead White #2. Adding the Bone Black makes this layer much darker than the first ground layer The consistency of the mix once again resembled a thick, pliable plaster or buttery taffy.
The thin layer, when distributed evenly across the canvas, creates a neutral, semi-transparent tone on the surface. It also allows the incising and dark brushwork from the underpainting figure sketch to slightly show through. This painted layer provides a thin coat for the first, known as imprimatura in the Italian Renaissance, meaning that the imprimatura can still be seen through the middle values and shadow areas. The second layer of darker ground over the top of the light ground adds a sfumato, or smoking veil, across the entire canvas that allowed a painter like Caravaggio to work negatively in the Bistre (wipe-out) method.
Figure 11: Actual Size Photo Used for Modeling 1 to 1 Size Ratio - Next to Canvas Second Layer
Underpainting First Pass: Bistre (wipe-out) method With Light and Shadows
The Bistre, or “wipe-out,” method that Caravaggio implemented allowed him to quickly manipulate tonal values across his figures. Subtle nuances in relative lightness and darkness could be achieved by simply altering the force with which a cloth rag was pressed onto the painted surface, thus affecting the amount of the (still wet) second ground layer removed in one stroke The relative values of light and tone are entirely responsible for making Caravaggio’s paintings appear so lifelike after a rapid succession of relatively simple steps
Caravaggio would follow the incision marks that he had sketched gesturally in his underpainting. This delineated the regions of the second ground layer to be wiped away Wiping away within these shadow-mapped regions with a cloth rag or dry brush allows the light imprimatura to show through The force of wiping on the surface determines whether a middle value or light value is created The method allows forms to be outlined quickly and additionally creates a high contrast between lights and darks, already resulting in a very realistic chiaroscuro effect.
During this first canvas pass of the David with the Head of Goliath, Caravaggio made sure that the figural forms were lit by one predominating light source that could nonetheless emphasize multiple regions of the painting, here the lights of David’s face, his chest, the upper brow ridge and nose of Goliath, and especially David’s sword. The self-consistency of this lighting helps move a viewer’s eye around the painting. By careful positioning of his figure, Caravaggio ensured that regions of David that would normally be in different tonal planes (such as his left chest and nose) are lit with similar, dramatic harshness. He could then adjust tonal values more subtly to establish the precise, more delicate differences within David’s figure and Goliath’s head. I used a mix of bitumen and bone black to add subtle depth in a thin layer in the shaded areas of David’s figure. Importantly for the establishment of dramatic chiaroscuro, the light passages thus surrounded by darker regions appear even lighter than they actually are
Figure 12: Drawing, Incising, Second Ground Layer and Wipeout of Lights and Middletones
Ingenuity of a Master Painter:
The Bistre method had been used by earlier Italian masters, but Caravaggio’s ingenuity emerges in his use of a technique called a risparmio. This method, seemingly employed previously only in Leonardo da Vinci’s Burlington House Cartoon, involves the correction of wiped-out regions by targeted reapplication of the second ground layer in shadow-mapped regions. It was developed considerably by Caravaggio for his Contarelli chapel commission, allowing the painter to save time and exploit the dark ground as a halftone that creates a shaded intermediate region between painted forms. The brown ground is simply left exposed to create shadows, avoiding a laborintensive building up of darker regions in the painting and the addition of any superfluous matter. This technique is used by Caravaggio until his final paintings and is, in fact, even more obvious in his Naples works like David with the Head of Goliath 18 Caravaggio made sure that when wiping out while using a risparmio that his halftones from the first ground preparation were visible (halftones are simply the tones midway between his middletones and the shadows within figural shapes and planes) This method of execution also adds nuance to hard and soft edges that map out figural regions in the painting, giving the borders of his forms a loose appearance and contributing to a sense of compositional oneness that pervades Caravaggio’s scenes.
Underpainting Second Pass: Abbozzo, Grisaille and Dark Accents
The next step in Caravaggio’s process is referred to as the Abbozzo, or laying in, of the solid sketch. Abbozzo is an Italian term that refers to the first preliminary sketch or underpainting done on the canvas to add more precision. Caravaggio was known to establish the depth of the initial compositional sketch after the Bistre (wipe out) with his abbozzo-like, dark finishing strokes on the figure Additional emphasis was placed on his lights and highlights using lead white and leadtin yellow paints. Caravaggio would put this initial thin layer of lights over the monochrome earthen brown ground layers to establish a strong sense of three-dimensional form in his figures. This method reaches back to origins in 12th century Italian manuscripts and High Renaissance underpaintings by DaVinci19 and Andrea del Sarto,20 and can even be found in stained glass dating to the Middle Ages. It involved painting in shades of earthen brown and black called brunaille. This light Abbozzo sketch took about a week to dry in my master copy.
Figure 13: Detail of A Risparmio – The First Layer of Brown Ground is Exposed Creating Values
Once it was completely dry Caravaggio would then work into a full monochrome grisaille method using lead-tin yellow and lead white paints to cover lights and highlights in the painting. This paint could be thinned out across adjacent portions of the canvas to create midtones by allowing some earthen brown and black underpainting from previous layers to show through. This method of buildup creates a compositional unity between lit and shaded areas that adds to the perceived “glow” of Caravaggio’s paintings from large viewing distances and in minimal light. It is very difficult to achieve the same effect using direct painting methods. He was fully aware that once he established his highest lights and deepest dark accent tones for the David with the Head of Goliath, that he would be able to judge the entire scale of his tones in relation to these two extremes.
The inner light that Caravaggio establishes in this layer is the most integral part of the painting’s perceived “glow” and compositional unity This method, essentially the application of a thin, light glaze, is referred to as velatura, or a “veiling” of the underpainting. In keeping with Caravaggio’s technique of using limited grisaille buildup on David’s figure in the lights and highlights, I built up my grisaille on David’s head, chest, ragged shirt, sword, and Goliath’s head. I ribboned out a mix of lead-tin yellow and lead white in the light and highlight regions, starting with the brightest highlights and thinning the paint to create a natural progression of scumbled lights and halftones working towards the shadow shapes. I did not mix value scale or gradients of greys on my palette The genius of Caravaggio’s method is that gradations are achieved as the lead-tin yellow paint loaded in the painter’s brush is reduced by moving from highlights to lights, blending across the figure and thinning out as the underpainting shows through. After years of painting from life, I have found that it requires an experienced painter with an intuitive understanding of how much paint to load on a brush to masterfully employ this technique. Caravaggio’s paintings, and indeed my master copy, required a great deal of control and subtlety to realize.
Figure 14: Detail of the Abbozzo stage and the Grisaille Build Up
Still Showing Through
Underpainting Third Pass: Pulling up the Lights
In the third pass, a master painter like Caravaggio would have stepped back from the canvas, likely with a mirror or hand-glass, to evaluate whether proportions were correct and if light worked in unity across the surface of the canvas. Most artists are trained to step back at least 5 feet to make sure that the overall effect is being achieved. The brilliance of Caravaggio’s paintings is that they hold up compositionally if you are a foot away or even 50 feet away in the nave of a church looking at his altar pieces. The paintings’ desired effect of feeling alive and proportionally correct never changes.
At this stage, Caravaggio would have ensured that there was a unity of tone in his painting, across all figures, clothing, and props. Simplicity of method and execution are key to the breadth and depth achieved by Caravaggio in his underpainting’s final pass He executed every brushstroke with purpose. His combination of forceful, visceral shorthand strokes is accentuated by the vivacity of his paint handling. This can be seen in the x-radiograph of David’s chest and pectoral muscle area from 2009 technical analyses 21 The image showed Caravaggio’s rapid but concise brushstrokes building up light moving across David’s chest using lead white and lead-tin yellow
I have found through years of painting, and while creating this master copy, that there is no guessing when laying in brushwork. At this stage Caravaggio would pull up the lights in relation to the brightest highlights of his forms.
Figure 15: Detail of Grisaille Buildup with Dark Accents -Underpainting
Figure 16: Bringing up Lights Over the Entire Canvas Surface, Creating the Illusion of Depth
Figure 17: Adjusting the Midtones and Figural Planes in the Shadow Shapes with a Cloth
If needed, he could adjust the highlights, lights, and midtones on his canvas to alter placement of figural planes and create an illusion of depth. At this point of my master copy I made sure that my edges were not completely lost, that my planes were distinct, and that my lights played the intended visual illusion over the entire canvas surface.
Figure 18: Detail of Grisaille Buildup of Lights Creating Chiaroscuro Effect
Analysis of Caravaggio’s ‘Late Style’ Color Palette Used in David with the Head Goliath:
The paint analysis carried out by the expert Marco Cardinali22 with the Galleria Borghese found that the 2 ground layers of David with the Head of Goliath were virtually identical to those in the Seven Acts of Mercy (1607), in Naples. Cross-sectional analysis indicated use of the same approach and hues A paint analysis showed that Caravaggio employed a very limited earthen palette that is consistent with his ‘late style’ and consists of bitumen, carbon black, earthen pigments, and calcite.23 The painted layers on the figure of David, his clothing, his sword, and Goliath’s head were comprised of lead white, lead-tin yellow, earthen browns, umbers, yellow ochres, red ochres, green malachite or nicosia green earth, carbon black, bone black and red lake madder. The red wound on Goliath’s forehead was a red ochre surrounded by a copperbased green pigment. Caravaggio’s medium of choice for glazing was walnut oil.24
Figure 19: Detail of Goliath’s Head Wound - Using Red Lake Madder, Red Ochre and Nicosia Green
The next step in the process of matching Caravaggio’s palette was to find the exact natural pigments that Caravaggio would have had available during his time period and in his region of Italy.
I utilized the expertise of master paint maker George O’Hanlon. My friend James Robinson has also done extensive research on Caravaggio and is the master instructor at The Art Academy in St Paul, Minnesota. He suggested that I use Natural Pigments’ oil colors for my master copy.
With the combination of George O’Hanlon’s Natural Pigments’ Oil Colours and cross-section paint chip analysis from Caravaggio’s actual ‘late style’ paintings,25 I was able to chart and match the natural Italian Earthen pigments that Caravaggio had available around 1607 in Naples.
20: Creating Caravaggio’s Palette Using Natural Pigments Rublev Oil Colours
I made over 25 technical swatches of the earthen pigments, their values with lead white added, and overall chroma to match scientific and empirical analysis from the Galleria Borghese’s research and conservation of the David with the Head of Goliath. My 30 years of painterly experience helped me visually to match tones and hues once I knew precisely what combinations of pigments Caravaggio commonly utilized. I also did 4 ground preparation analyses to match Caravaggio’s Rome period, as well as his late style in Naples, Malta and Sicily. (See Table 1, Figure 22)
During two separate visits to Italy, I was able to view Caravaggio’s paintings and ground preparations firsthand in Rome, Naples, and Sicily. This was invaluable to establishing the validity of my color schemes. The flattening of tones and hues that occurs in print copies of Caravaggio’s works is difficult to detether from attempts to replicate his technique, and it was therefore essential for me to compare my work with his paintings in situ. My observations align with Geroge O’Hanlon’s note that:
“Caravaggio achieved the Chiaroscuro effect with a limited palette typical of 17th century painters: iron oxide colors (red ochre, yellow ochre, umber), a few mineral pigments (vermilion, lead-tin yellow, lead white), organic carbon black and verdigris. Earths and ochers predominated, and brighter colors were always veiled. Caravaggio’s palette, which had become significantly darker in his later works in Rome and Naples, was restricted almost exclusively to a simple, nearly monochromatic array of dark earth tones and silvery whites.”26
FigureThe following figures chart my use of O’Hanlon’s paints to recreate Caravaggio’s palette, not only chemically but also tonally.
Chart of the 25 Natural Pigments Colors Used to Create Caravaggio’s Palette Oil Colours
Lead White #2 (Walnut Oil)
Lead Tin Yellow Light
Lead Tin Yellow
Lemon Ochre
Italian Yellow Earth
Italian Raw Sienna
Italian Dark Ochre
Ercolano Red
Pozzuoli Red
Vermilion (Cinnabar)
Tuscan Red
Red Lake Madder
Transparent Red Oxide
Table
Nicosia Green – (Copper Green)
Antica Green Earth
Italian Burnt Sienna
Cyprus Burnt Umber Warm
Cyprus Umber Light
Cyprus Umber Medium
Cyprus Umber Dark
Italian Green Umber
Roman Black (Carbon)
Bone Black
Mars Brown
Bitumen (Mars Brown + Transparent (Red Oxide)
Ground Layers (Marble Dust Medium Grade)
Figure 21: Detail of David’s Face with Local Veil of Color Using Natural Pigments 1: Caravaggio’s pigmentsIndirect Painting: Caravaggio’s Technique of Velaturas,
Glazing
and Local Veil of Color
There are two types of painting: Direct and Indirect. Direct painting, which is more modern, was used by painters in the 19th century and utilizes direct application of the paint in the Alla Prima (in one session) style. Direct painters are more spontaneous in their approach, creating very fast compositions while applying thought-out and concise color palettes. Traditionally they use a weton-wet painting technique in which they try to capture the light and values they see before them in one sitting. The paintings, however, can lack the depth and luminosity that is found in the old, more elaborate works of indirect painters from the Renaissance and Baroque times. Indirect painting is the approach that Caravaggio used
Figure 22: Breakdown of Caravaggio’s palette and ground preparations. My gradations are made using paints from Natural PigmentsIndirect painters’ breakdown the entire painting process into managed stages that allow for transparency between light, shadow, and color as layer after layer are built up creates an incredible depth and facilitates chiaroscuro and atmosphere-building by the application of wet paint to underlayers in varied stages of drying This creates an elaborate interplay between “fused” and “hidden” layers on the same canvas. Caravaggio’s mastery of indirect painting is evident in his ability to build up his warm and cool glazes over the dry preparation until the desired hue was obtained, whether in flesh tones, clothing, or background sections.
Caravaggio’s training with Simone Peterzano, a student of Titian, would have familiarized him with the method of colorito, or “coloring” of a grisaille, developed in Venice in the sixteenth century. This method, and Peterzano’s work, departed from the Florentine standard of disegno, or “drawing” and cartooning, and produced more visceral color over monochrome underdrawings 27 It is in Venetian painting that we first find the process of layering and blending colors to achieve a glowing richness that Caravaggio would later exploit to revolutionize his natural realism, creating vivid dramas of the human condition that jumped off the canvas. For instance, Frederick Hartt describes Titian as the “first painter in modern times to free the brush from the task of exactly describing tactile surfaces, volumes, and details, and to convert it into a vehicle for the direct perception of light through color and for the unimpeded expression of feeling.”28
Colorito and disegno represent two very different approaches to painting. In fact, a long-lived debate between the two schools involved theorists as well as painters, and regional rivalries as well as aesthetic concerns.29 There is a deep-seated myth that Caravaggio was an unskilled draftsman who did not draw and relied entirely on camera obscura. In addition to evidence from unfinished paintings, the understanding of line, form, and value in Caravaggio’s works and his clear use of pentimenti indicate that he in fact understood the drafting process at an extremely high level. He simply elevated the colorito technique to a high form of naturalism.
Caravaggio was a master of using velature and glazing He would apply color velature at this stage in his work, painting a thin layer of opaque or semi-opaque earthen color pigments over the base grisaille. As with white velature, discussed earlier, it is easy to overpower the values in the underpainting during this stage and lose the subtlety that it lends to the overall piece. When wellapplied, however, colored velature add nuance to hard and soft edges and allow different regions of a painting to be pronounced or subdued.
Glazing is different from velatura because it involves the application of an oil medium in addition to a paint layer. It is achieved by mixing an oil pigment with a thin glazing medium, walnut oil in Caravaggio’s case, thus diluting the hue of the earthen pigment and allowing application of a transparent or semi-transparent layer to the underpainting. This allows the layers beneath to show through, while altering the brightness of a color pigment and the general atmosphere of the work of art. Application of a thin glazing layer could be used, for instance, to apply subtle reds or blues to a flesh-tone. Transparency can be increased or decreased by respectively including less or more of the pigment. Caravaggio masterfully employed glazing to make subtle alterations in flesh tones, clothing, backgrounds, and color “temperature” (i.e. warm vs. cool). In addition, glazing layers can be utilized to change the chroma, hue, value, and atmospheric character of the unified painted surface to achieve a desired compositional depth and color, and also to foster the perception of “glow.”
Caravaggio used a combination of velature and glazing to add a thin veil of local color to the light and highlighted regions of his painting. Local color is understood by painters as the actual color of the part of each mass, unaffected by any modification. The artist finds the local hue and value of the area they are bringing to life in terms of color.
For instance, the local color I glazed and veiled into the flesh for David’s entire body was a mix of lead tin yellow, Italian yellow earth, and touch of vermillion. The earthen red in David’s ear, lips, and parts of Goliath’s head, I added a mix of Pozzuoli red, red lake madder and Italian sienna. The local color on David’s trouser was a mix of Italian dark ochre and Italian earth yellow. Depending on the transparency of the earthen color pigment and the pigment-to-walnut oil ratio, a painter might find that multiple layers are required to cover the underdrawing and establish the realistic local color.
As I began working in the local veil of color, sometimes referred to as the “dead coloring,” I made sure that I put down only the amount of natural pigment color needed. This is a strength of indirect painting, as working slowly through multiple stages preserves the luminosity and unity of the whole composition. Thus, my approach was to use the least amount of paint possible, and at the same time to achieve a nice coverage of the color hue across the surface, so that the strength of my underdrawing in monochromatic values would still show through. The strength and depth of Caravaggio’s tenebrism lies in its simplicity and ability to let the underdrawing and preparation ground show through as the foundational structure for the entire range of values in the composition. The local color is a veiled layer that builds on that structure and keeps the entire painting moving forward in depth, color, and oneness.
I should also note that Caravaggio’s color harmonies in his “late style,” which appear muted and muddy, are related to the pigments that were available and affordable to the painter in his area and time. I feel this is one factor that is not often considered in assessments of Caravaggio’s paintings.
Figure 23: Detail of Dead Coloring Stage with Vermillion, Italian Yellow Earth, and Lead Tin Yellow
He was a highly effective painter who understood color as well as any painter of the Renaissance. Caravaggio could paint large compositions like the Burial of St. Lucy, which is 13’ x 10’, in just a few months.30 He was also conscious of his surroundings at any given point in his short career. His method is therefore meticulous, concise, and utilitarian, from his canvas choice to compositional arrangements and color choices, to the pigments available in areas where he was painting. For instance, Caravaggio would not have had access to his Roman palette in Sicily and Malta but would still have needed to work quickly and accurately in every commission. To achieve this end, he most likely only carried a small selection of earthen colors (yellow and red ochres, umbers, carbon black and a few strong colors like lead-tin yellow, vermilion/cinnabar, red lake, and malachite green). He never had blues available and would instead use carbon black mixed with lead white as a muted cool blue hue.
Color Layers and Second Application of Blacks:
Caravaggio understood how to take full advantage of his limited pigments to apply subtle glazes and change color temperature in his flesh tones, as well as cloth and metal props. I found in the figure of David that Caravaggio builds the illusion of roundness in painted forms by altering his use of warm and cool glazing colors in his shadows, midtones, and lights. For instance, the shadows of David’s right arm holding the sword are warm. I also found that his cloth shirt is warm in its shaded regions, but its half-tones and lights are cool
Figure 24: Detail of Warm and Cool Glaze Buildup Across David’s Head, Torso, and Hand
Realistic folding and a sense of movement are created by the transition between cool and warm regions across the garment. I found this method applied to the sword and parts of Goliath’s head as well.
In situ, it is especially evident that Caravaggio’s selective use of cool colors, especially in planes of flesh populated by midtones, help accentuate the action implied by figures’ poses. Light and pigment saturation, for instance, aid in the optical illusion that Caravaggio uses to make objects appear close to the viewer, while cool carbon black pushes figural planes into the background. The twists of David’s body are particularly enhanced by this technique, and I learned to create a rhythm of cool and warm light moving across its contours while establishing the tonal relation between the flesh tones in David’s face, neck, and torso, and his white shirt.
Figure 25: Detail of Cool and Warm Glazes on David’s Garment and the Warm Earthen Flesh Pigments Built Up on David’s Chest with Increased Highlights
Figure 26: Detail of Sword Inscription
As I applied second and third color passes on my buildup of glaze, I paid special attention to Caravaggio’s use of cool and warm color layers. In Goliath’s head wound, I glazed in a cool malachite Nicosia green hue around the warm Pozzuoli red ochre wound, resulting in the incredible optical illusion of a dented head abrasion that sinks back while warm lights and highlights in the blood and brow ridges appear closer.
It is in these subtle nuances that we can see the brilliance of chiaroscuro. It is the combination of thin vivid pigment layers placed accurately against dramatic shadows and light accents that moves the eye around the entire composition. Very realistic flesh tones are obtained by adding very thin glazes of red lake madder to David’s ears, cheeks, sternum and foreshortened hand and knuckles. The glazes I used in these final stages on David with the Head of Goliath intensified a color mass and added saturation and vividness The subtle interplay between the effects of glazing and color harmony development (between the earthen reds, yellows, and carbon black) adds a shimmer and vibrancy to the entire painting.
The final painting step in creating my master copy of David with the Head of Goliath involved a second application of blacks to the entire shaded part of the painting. This “late style” method is consistent across Caravaggio’s works from his first stay in Naples until his death and was confirmed in all of his Maltese works in 1991.31 Close up IR reflectography confirmed that a second round of black was also applied last on the Galleria Borghese David with the Head of Goliath 32
Figure 27: Detail of the Third Pass on Goliath’s Head Wound
Figure 28: Final Glazes Across the Entire Painting Creating Harmony and Unity
Figure 29: Second Application of Blacks
Varnish – The Final Step:
After Caravaggio finished his painting, he would let it thoroughly dry (or, given his constant movements, perhaps place it in the care of a trusted companion). An oil painting can take six months to a year to fully dry. A painter in the Renaissance would know if the painting was dry enough by testing the thickest layer of paint by pressing the back of a brush handle or fingernail into that area. If the area was firm with no movement, then it was ready to varnish. If the area of paint was soft and gave a little to the touch, then it would need to sit longer before the final layer of varnish could be applied.
The application of varnish was an important step for the painter for two reasons. The first was that a coating of varnish would evenly unify the surface quality and overall visual affect in the finalized canvas. For instance, the darker earthen oil pigments and their values in Caravaggio’s painting would have lost some of their saturation and depth as the painting dried. Oil colors will vary as they naturally dry, causing variations in color depth and pigment color saturation known as “sinking in.” The oil pigments would also have varied for Caravaggio depending on how much walnut oil he used in various regions. When a painter uses more oil with the pigment to create thin glazes, they can appear glossy on the surface of the painting while untouched areas of the ground preparation in the shadows and midtones have a more matte finish. The varnish layer would unite these subtle variations into one surface with an even gloss. The second reason varnish was essential was to protect the overall painting. A patron would insist that a painting be given a layer of varnish that would ensure it could last beyond their lifetime. The varnish would protect the surface from aging, mild cracking that can occur with varied temperatures, and also possible dust and dirt that would collect on the surface over time.
Some Italian Renaissance painters would also use a technique that I call toned varnishing and some historians refer to as a “veiled glazing.” This form of glazing was used on the very last layers of some chiaroscuro paintings to set objects, backgrounds, or figures back further in the composition by applying a thin veiled shadow of toned varnish over areas that appeared too bright in comparison to the highlights and lights in the painting. The painter would mix a small amount of carbon black or bitumen with varnish (not walnut oil) and apply it over the area they wanted to set back. It would sometimes take two or three layers to achieve the lighting effects and subtle color shading the painter desired. Once these layers were dry, the final varnish was applied over the entire painting. This technique could create special sfumato (smokiness) and tenebrism by toning down lighting effects to soften edges as a painter desired
As varnishes start to darken over time, collectors and museums have found it necessary to remove and replace varnish layers. An outstanding issue for museum conservators is the preservation of a painter’s intended mood during the cleaning of a painting. In some cases, replacement of toned with untoned varnish can increase color saturation, improving the purity of pigments at the expense unified composition and atmosphere. As an aside, a thorough comprehension of the use of sfumato effects in varnishing is indispensable when undertaking any conservation on a masterwork.
In my master copy of David with the Head of Goliath, the varnish I chose to use was made by Natural Pigments’ Rublev Colours. I wanted to use the safest and most natural varnishes available to facilitate upkeep Rublev’s Conservar Finishing Varnish is made according to the original formula developed by Etienne René de la Rie, formerly of the National Gallery, Washington, D.C. Varnishes based on this formula will not crosslink or yellow over at least 100 years, as shown by tests conducted at the National Gallery, Washington, D.C.33 I used two types of varnish on my painting: Natural Pigments’ Laropal A81 Isolating Varnish and Regalrez34 1094 Gloss Varnish.
To varnish, I first let my painting dry for 8 months. I then cleaned the canvas surface, removing any dirt and dust, and let it dry for another week. At this point, I applied a thin coat of Laropal A81 Isolating Varnish. The reason I chose to use an Isolating coating was because I wanted to separate the paint surface from the final, and removable, Regalrez 1094 Varnish. An Isolating coating will protect the painting if I ever need to remove and reapply the varnish at a later date. It also reduces absorbency and creates an even surface for my final application of varnish. I let the Isolating Varnish coating dry thoroughly for three weeks.
The next step was to apply the optimum amount of Regalrez 1094 Varnish. It is very important that the application is done with as little varnish as possible to achieve the overall desired appearance. The entire canvas must also be coated evenly. I placed the varnish in a wide-mouth jar, which was about an inch wider than my varnish brush. I dipped the lower third of the brush into the varnish, removing any excess against the side of the jar, and then applied a thin, even coat.
This application gave the entire painting a subtle gloss on the canvas surface, while simultaneously enhancing depth of value and bringing out subtle colors in David and Goliath’s flesh tones. The varnish helped unify and protect the surface while enhancing the depth of chiaroscuro.
Psychological Analysis and Composition of Place:
Besides the technical reasons for making a master copy, it is important to put yourself in the time and place of the painter and imagine the choices they would have made as they progressed through their painting. To become a great painter of in the Lombard tradition of naturalism, chiaroscuro, and tenebrism, an artist must also understand the psychological power of the composition they are creating and the best way to present the posing models for maximum impact.
What I appreciate most about Caravaggio’s genius is his ability to utilize narrative storytelling on a deeper level than the painted surface. In contrast with idealized figures from previous eras, and to some extent northern painters like Rubens and Rembrandt who would carry on his tenebrist legacy, his subjects are relatable and flawed. His emphasis on dirty fingernails and feet and his penchant for inviting viewers into a secluded scene by showing us the backs of onlookers keeps superfluous beauty out of his canvases. This engages the viewer powerfully by drawing on commonplace experiences to flush out religious and historical dramas.
As someone who grew up in the Jesuit tradition, I was particularly drawn to Caravaggio’s art because of its Ignatian underpinnings. Caravaggio, in his youth, found a spiritual connection and ally in (now Saint) Philip Neri (1515-1595) and his Brotherhood of the Little Oratory.35 Following St. Ignatius of Loyola’s Spiritual Exercises, Neri stressed composition of place in artistic endeavors. Like other Ignatian painters, notably including Giovanni Moroni,36 Caravaggio would have been taught to place himself mentally and visually in the shoes of each person in the story he was painting. This desire helps explain the visceral representation of the human condition in Caravaggio’s works, which engaged him directly with the thinking of the Counter Reformation during his career.
The power of Caravaggio and the power of his paintings is his ability to portray the realism of loss, death, poverty, violence, and cruelty in our natural world. Caravaggio was not interested in classical idealization. He was a painter who stuck to his convictions and rejected those who doubted his ideas, compositions, and techniques. His work came first with no compromise, and
he ignored the conventions, canons, rules, and idealizations of his time, finding himself constantly at odds with wealthy patrons and church commissioners. Some of his major church commissions would be removed and taken off the altar, or even sold to third parties. Even contemporary artists and art historians like Baglione, Bellori, Poussin and Vincencio Carducho sullied his reputation and character in their writings.37 Nonetheless, the outside forces that came together against Caravaggio and who would ultimately lead to his demise at Porto Ercole were unaware that his timeless paintings are a doorway to the eternal.
In making my master copy, I tried to engage with composition of place as well, considering what Caravaggio might have been thinking and seeing while creating David with the Head of Goliath. The half-length scene that Caravaggio decided to depict comes from Samuel 17:57:38 "When David came back after killing the Philistine (Goliath), Abner took him and presented him to Saul with the Philistine's head still in his hand." The pose that Caravaggio has decided to depict takes on a frontal presentation of the head of Goliath to the viewer, who is thereby placed in the position of Saul. Caravaggio takes us through three acts (past, present and future) of David’s life in this one moment. David has killed the giant Goliath on the battlefield, which is now in the past He stands in the present moment showing the viewer and Saul his actions and so-called heroic prize, though his gaze portrays him less as a hero and more as someone filled with melancholy from his actions. David has now sealed his own fate with Goliath’s by taking his life. He will live with this guilt for the rest of his days
Goliath’s slack-jawed mouth gasping one final breath with eyes wide open is Caravaggio’s selfportrait. I could not help but conclude while making my master copy, however, that David may have been a self-portrait as well. The model for David is not Cecco del Caravaggio, Il Caravaggino, the assistant and model that Caravaggio used during his Roman years as suggested by Manilli.39 After the murder of Tomassoni, Caravaggio fled the city of Rome to Naples on his own without his assistant. Furthermore, David’s face is significantly rounder than Cecco’s visage in paintings for which he was known to have been the model. A closer resemblance can be found in Caravaggio’s earlier self-portraits, including those as Bacchus, before a loss of innocence. David should be celebrating, but in Caravaggio’s narrative we see a hollow young man in a reflective state, contemplating loss. A life taken out of fear and haste is not a victory, but David also realizes that if he didn’t kill Goliath, it would have been his own life taken in a reversal of fortune. The sword in his hand is not the immense biblical sword of the fabled Goliath that David took and cut his head off with. Instead, it is the Italian forerunner proto-rapier of Caravaggio’s time, probably the one used to kill Tomassoni in the street duel.40 The letters on David’s sword spell out ‘H.OC.S’ the Latin acronym from St. Augustine’s Psalm 33, "Humilitas Occidit Superbiam" – ‘humility kills pride.’41 Caravaggio, by adding this phrase, shows a deep understanding of the duality of life and contrast between right and wrong, life and death, and light and shadow, on the canvas and in the soul.
Though I cannot hope to know Caravaggio’s exact mental state during the painting of David with the Head of Goliath, trying to ascertain what he may have been thinking aided me in bringing intangible emotional energy to my canvas. I wanted to do justice to his emotionality as well as to his technical brilliance. Having walked in a master’s footsteps, I feel that my ability to use composition of place in my own work has improved drastically. I am much better able than I was before undertaking this project to identify and simplify my approach to the subjects of my art. I know that this process has helped me to realize my intents as a painter, and I hope that it also has shed meaningful light on how the disparate documented portions of Caravaggio’s painting process came together in a master work. I would also hope that this effort bridges the gap between art historical research in museums and the practical execution of a painting, and in doing so opens up new technical avenues to budding artists unsure how to realize their narratives.
Figure 30: David with the Head of Goliath, Oil on canvas, 125 x101 cm, Private Collection
References:
1 Gutzwiller, K. “Apelles and the Painting of Language.” Revue de Philologie, de Littérature et D’Histoire Anciennes. 2009, 1, 39-63.
2 Field, D.M. “Chapter Nine: Rembrandt’s House.” Rembrandt. Grange Books: Kent, UK, 2003. p. 220221.
3 Vodret, R. “David with the Head of Goliath.” Opere a Roma: Tecnica e Stile. Silvana Editoriale: Milan, Italy, 2016. pp. 654-655.
4 Cardinali, M. “Painting Technique.” Opere a Roma: Tecnica e Stile. Silvana Editoriale: Milan, Italy, 2016. pp. 656-674
5 Lapucci, R. and Gregori, M. Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio: come Nascono I Capolavori. Electa: Milan, Italy, 1991.
6 Cardinali, M. 2016, op. cit.
7 Ed. Longhi, R.; Baroni, C.; dell’Acqua, G.A.; Gregori, M.; Mazzini, F. “Exhibition Catalog.” Mostra del Caravaggio e dei Caravaggeschi. Milan, Florence, 1951.
8 Ed. Vodret, R.; Leone, G.; Cardinali, M.; De Ruggieri, M.B.; Ghia, G.S. Opere a Roma: Tecnica e Stile Silvana Editoriale: Milan, Italy, 2016.
9 Cardinali, M. 2016, op. cit.
10 “Certifications.” Forest Stewardship Council. Web. 2021. https://us.fsc.org/en-us
11 Cardinali, M. 2016, op. cit.
12 Claessens Artists’ Canvas. Belgium, 2021. Web. https://www.claessenscanvas.com/en
13 Cardinali, M. “Painting Technique.” Opere a Roma: Tecnica e Stile. Silvana Editoriale: Milan, Italy, 2016. pp. 656-674.
14 Natural Pigments, Inc. Web. 2021. https://www.naturalpigments.com/
15 “Rublev.” Natural Pigments, Inc. Web. 2021. https://www.naturalpigments.com/
16 Bellucci, R.; Frosinini, C. ed. Ciatti, M.; Brunetti, B.G. “New Evalulations on Caravaggio’s Methods of Underdrawing: Art Historical and Scientific Challenges.” Caravaggio’s Painting Technique: Proceedings of the CHARISMA Workshop. Kermes Quaderni: Florence, 2012.
17 Mancini, G.; Baglione, G.; Bellori, P. Lives of Caravaggio. Rome, 1672. trans. Friedlander, W. Caravaggio Studies. Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, 1955. pp. 245-254.
18 Vodret, R. “Scientific Analysis: What Makes the Painting a Caravaggio?” The Toulouse Caravaggio Galleria Nazionale d’Arte Antica, Palazzo Barberini, Rome, 2019.
19 Zöllner, F. and Nathan, J. Leonardo da Vinci: The Complete Paintings and Drawings. Taschen: Köln, Germany, 2003
20 Brooks, J. Andrea del Sarto: The Renaissance Workshop in Action. Getty Publications: Los Angeles, 2015.
21 Cardinali, M. 2016, op. cit.
22 Cardinali, M. 2016, op. cit.
23 Cardinali, M. 2016, op. cit.
24 Cardinali, M. 2016, op. cit.
25 Cardinali, M. 2016, op. cit.
26 O’Hanlon, George. “Caravaggio and the Baroque Palette.” Natural Pigments. 9 June, 2013.
27 Rosand, D. Painting in Sixteenth-Century Venice: Titian, Veronese, Tintoretto. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1997.
28 Hartt, F. History of the Italian Renaissance. Harry N. Abrams, Inc.: New York, 1994. p. 586.
29 Sorabella, J. “Venetian Color and Florentine Design.” Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History. Metropolitan Museum of Art: New York, 2000. Ed. 2002.
30 Graham-Dixon, A. Caravaggio: A Life Sacred and Profane. Norton & Co.: New York, 2012. pp. 392395.
31 Lapucci, R. and Gregori, M. 1991, op. cit.
32 Cardinali, M. 2016, op. cit.
33 René de la Rie, E.; McGlinchey, C. ed. Mills, J.S.; Smith, P. “New Synthetic Resins for Picture Varnishes.” Cleaning, Retourching, and Coatings: Technology and Practice for Easel Paintings and
Polychrome Scultpure – Preprints of the Contributions to the Brussels Congress. International Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works: Brussels, 3-7 Sept. 1990.
34 “Regalrez.” Natural Pigments, Inc. Web. 2021. https://www.naturalpigments.com/
35 Graham-Dixon, A. 2012, op. cit. pp. 115-116
36 Graham-Dixon, A. 2012, op. cit. pp. 115-116
37 Graham-Dixon, A. 2012, op. cit.
38 Graham-Dixon, A. 2012, op. cit. p. 332.
39 Graham-Dixon, A. 2012, op. cit. p. 332.
40 Macrae, D. “Observations on the Sword in Caravaggio.” Burlington Magazine 106 (738), 1964, 412416.
41 Graham-Dixon, A. 2012, op. cit. p. 333.
