The paint has an oil‐binding medium, with both heat‐bodied walnut oil and heat‐bodied linseed oil found to be present.³ The sitter’s red mozzetta and cap are underpainted with mixtures of vermilion, red earth and black in varying proportions according to the modelling, with final red glazes consisting of red lake, more thickly applied in the shadows.⁴ The white of the surplice is lead white, mixed with some azurite in the bluish‐grey shadows. The deep reds in the throne and the tassels are rich in red lake and red earth, mixed with some vermilion in the lighter areas. There is vermilion too in the more orange parts of the threads of the tassels and fringes, probably mixed with lead‐tin yellow, which is used pure for the golden‐yellow highlights. The brightest areas of the finials are also painted with lead‐tin yellow, while earth pigments are used for the dark areas; the redder touches – for example in what seems to be the reflection of the sitter’s red cap in the finial at the right – contain some vermilion. Lead‐tin yellow was also used for the highlights on the gold rings, with yellow earth for the duller parts. The green gem is painted with verdigris and the red ones with vermilion and red lake. The blue stone on the sitter’s left hand and the small touch of blue on the edge of what may be a diamond ring on his right hand are the only places where ultramarine seems to have been used rather than the cheaper blue azurite.

The dark green background is found in all the known copies of the composition and appears to have been Raphael’s invention. Nevertheless, the layer structure in this area is complicated and it seems that the artist altered an earlier background, replacing it with the green that we see now.⁵ Careful examination, first in 1969–70 but also more recently, has demonstrated that the idea of the green being a later modification can be rejected: there is no hint of dirt or varnish between the green and the layers of the different background below, and the craquelure runs evenly through all layers of the painting. In addition, while the sitter was painted first, and the green background brought up to the contours, small details such as golden‐yellow highlights on the tassels on the chair and the white hairs of the sitter’s left eyebrow were applied after this was done, as they extend over the green paint, softening the transitions.

The X‐radiograph (fig. 2) and macro‐XRF scanning (fig. 3), combined with paint samples prepared as cross sections, show that Raphael’s original design involved a background with three different motifs within lozenges arranged in alternating/repeating diagonal bands: two crossed keys of Saint Peter, papal mitres with lateral ribbons and probably the della Rovere symbol of an oak tree (the latter do not seem to have been painted, but it seems improbable that the series of lozenges in this part of the pattern were intended to have been left blank). The keys and mitres were painted in a golden yellow colour (a mixture of brightly coloured yellow ochre sometimes mixed with a very small amount of red lake and probably lead‐tin yellow). They are painted directly on the priming, as is the light blue background of the lozenges around them, which contains finely ground natural azurite and white. The light blue was painted across the whole lozenge for those that were probably intended to have the oak motif, and these appear empty in the iron XRF map, where the keys and mitres instead show very clearly (due to the earth content) (fig. 4). This is surprising, as it would be expected that the oaks would also have been yellow and suggests they were never completed, although there are signs in other technical images that at least a start was made on indicating their shapes. The iron XRF map seems to suggest there were also differences in the degree of finish in the key and mitre motifs, perhaps another sign that the first background was not completed before it was painted over; in some sets of keys there appears to be some modelling of light and shade, and in one key three bands are visible around its base, while in one of the mitres the details such as the three tiers and the small cross at its peak can be seen (fig. 4). The lozenges were set against a darker mid‐blue background containing azurite and lead white. The blue paint can be seen in a few places, either along the contours of the figure and chair where the green paint never completely covered the first background or where there are losses exposing the layers beneath (for example, near the Pope’s left eye, his left hand and the left acorn finial on the chair; figs 5–7). A diagrammatic reconstruction of this elaborate background is shown in fig. 8; it should be noted that it was not necessarily flat but may have been modelled to represent the fall of light across a drapery.

Raphael abandoned the first idea for the background, probably when partially completed, and painted over it with up to three layers of green paint, the uppermost of which is a translucent verdigris glaze, while in the lower layers the verdigris is mixed with some lead white (although not in the brownish shadows), and perhaps some yellow earth at least at the right of the background.⁶ The shapes of the motifs in the first background are sometimes visible because of their strong paint texture, especially in the more thickly painted keys (see, for example, fig. 9), and as a result of wearing of the green glazes on top. The impression this gives of a pattern in the green curtain was not originally intended. The brownish shadow cast by the throne at the left is painted with mixtures of verdigris and red lake, as is the dark line running vertically from above the sitter’s head. The latter is probably the corner of the room, although it could simply be a drapery fold; either way, the intention has become more difficult to read than it would originally have been as a consequence of the wearing of the green glazes, especially at the right where the curtain is likely to have been darker and in shadow.⁷ The line indicating a ‘corner’ was followed in a number of early versions, while the keys and mitres are not.

Elsewhere, there are only a few minor changes, seen from close surface examination and in some of the technical images. The far left contour of the chair curves in and out at the very bottom where the back upright meets the leg, but was originally straight, the contours of the sitter’s hands have been slightly modified (including making the right hand slightly less plump) and the white cloth in the sitter’s right hand partly overlies the red of the mozzetta. Nevertheless, the paint handling gives the impression of confident and speedy execution, with lively brushwork sometimes with a strong texture or wet‐in‐wet, and skilfully applied small impasto strokes for features such as the fur, the metalwork of the rings and the gold threads of the tassels and fringes on the chair. See ‘Dating’ below for the possibility of the picture being painted in an eight‐week window in the summer of 1511, which would support the conclusion of it having been painted quite fast.

An old, white‐bearded male sitter is shown at three‐quarter length and at an angle to the picture plane in an upright chair. He is set against a green background. The sitter can be identified as Pope Julius II della Rovere on the basis of comparison with a number of portraits of the Pope – indeed this picture, which has been identified as a portrait of Pope Julius for almost all of its history, served as a prototype for many (but not all) of those portraits. An independent portrait of Julius, bearded, is Pier Maria Serbaldi’s (about 1455–1522) medal of 1511.¹³ Giuliano della Rovere (1443–1513), who was born in Albisola, was created Cardinal of S. Pietro in Vincoli in 1471 by his uncle, Pope Sixtus IV della Rovere (1414–1484), and is seen as a young cardinal in Melozzo da Forlì’s (1438–1494) fresco Sixtus IV appoints Bartolomeo Platina Prefect of the Vatican Library of about 1477 (fig. 10). After a long, active and peripatetic career he was elected as Pope Julius II on his third attempt to win the papal throne in October 1503. His papacy was politically significant as well as being very important for the arts of Renaissance Rome. He was Raphael’s first papal patron, commissioning from him the decoration of the suite of rooms now referred to as the Vatican Stanze, along with other major commissions such as the Sistine Madonna (Gemäldegalerie, Dresden; about 1513–14). Raphael painted Julius on numerous occasions, including his appearance in the Disputa (probably, and painted about 1509), Pope Gregory IX receiving the Decretals (fig. 11), the Expulsion of Heliodorus (about 1512), the Mass at Bolsena (fig. 12) (all Vatican Stanze, Vatican City) and the Sistine Madonna. Julius died on the night of 20–21 February 1513.

The correct description of details within the picture follows from identifying the sitter. Julius wears a red velvet camurro (or camauro = cap in Italian; sometimes called a zucchetto) trimmed with ermine, and a mozzetta (= cape; sometimes referred to as a capucino de velluto), also in red velvet and ermine, over a white rocchetto (rochet, alb or surplice).¹⁴ These are traditional items of clothing for a Renaissance Pope, and can be seen in Melozzo’s depiction of Pope Sixtus IV (fig. 12). At a later date they were described as ‘audience dress’ (‘abito di Udienza’), and this feeds into discussion of the pose, below.¹⁵ The white cloth in his right hand has been identified a mappa, which was a symbol of authority, and is also found in a drawn portrait of Julius in the Musée du Louvre, Paris (1510; inv. 3924); this drawing was an early idea – Julius is shown without a beard – for the Expulsion of Heliodorus.¹⁶ Alternatively (or additionally), this white cloth has been discussed as representing humility, moral rigour and purity of action.¹⁷

Papal symbols are also visible in the green background; as discussed above, these are from the initial design of alternating diagonal bands with three different motifs, now showing because of wearing of the overlying green paint of Raphael’s second idea. The first of these were the two crossed keys of Saint Peter, symbolising papal authority that had been entrusted to Saint Peter, the first Pope, by Jesus (as recorded in the Gospel of Matthew 16: 19). The second device was a papal mitre (not a tiara as sometimes described) with lateral ribbons, which was a part of the ceremonial dress of the Pope in ecclesiastical settings, such as when he presided at a Mass. The third device seems not to have been painted but was probably going to show Julius’s della Rovere family symbol of an oak tree (rovere = oak in Italian). This combination of devices, and the related decision of painting them in blue and yellow, can be found in the closely contemporary fresco of Pope Gregory IX receiving the Decretals on the Justice wall of the Stanza della Segnatura (fig. 11), in which Julius appears as Pope Gregory with the crossed keys, mitres and della Rovere oak trees (as well as other symbols) all appearing on the border of his cope.

The chair in which the Pope is seated also alludes to his family name by the inclusion of two burnished gold acorns atop the stiles of the chair (fig. 13), which is otherwise upholstered in red velvet,¹⁸ with gold tassels below the finials and at the join of the manchette. It is a type of chair known as a sedia camerale, which had been used in the Vatican for decades: it is, for instance, included as Sixtus IV’s seat in Melozzo’s fresco.

One of the factors that helps to identify the picture as a portrait of Julius is his long white beard. He is shown with a clean‐shaven upper lip (the lower lip is also shaved), but was otherwise the first Pope since Urban V (d. 1370) to be depicted with a beard. Its novelty attracted a significant volume of comment, including in a later manual by Giovanni Pierio Valeriano (Pro Sacerdotum Barbis) that specifically adduced the example of the portrayal of Julius II which could be seen in the church of Santa Maria del Popolo (henceforward S.M. del Popolo) – that is, the present painting – in its discussion of beards.¹⁹ Generally, Popes of the Western Church had not worn a beard and had advocated shaving to the priesthood, although Saint Peter, with whom Julius identified closely, recalling also his original title as a Cardinal of S. Pietro in Vincoli (= Saint Peter in chains), was always shown bearded.²⁰ Julius had been represented clean‐shaven in numerous earlier portraits and medals,²¹ and grew this beard between August and December 1510 as a vow to remain unshaven until the French had been expelled from Italy – he left Rome for Bologna on 17 August to secure this end. This period (autumn 1510) coincided with his recovery from a near‐fatal illness which had been brought on by the loss of Bologna to the French, and contemporaries compared the bearded Pope to ‘a bear’ or ‘a hermit’.²² Julius only returned to Rome in late June 1511, and his beard was immediately commented upon.²³ He appeared, bearded, in the guise of Pope Gregory IX receiving the Decretals in the Stanza della Segnatura (fig. 14), where he is depicted in full ceremonial robes. This portrait attracted attention in August 1511 from Isabella d’Este’s ambassador to Rome.²⁴ (It should be noted that in the fresco he has a moustache and full beard, and that the beard is shorter than in the National Gallery portrait. The other bearded portraits of Julius, in the Expulsion of Heliodorus and the Mass at Bolsena, show a shaved upper and lower lip.²⁵) In late August 1511 Julius was again seriously ill, his funeral was prepared and the last rites were even administered to him, but he confounded those who were convinced he would die and survived.²⁶ In March 1512 political events had seemingly taken a turn for the better and he shaved, so the full beard only formed part of his image for a 15‐month period from December 1510 until March 1512.²⁷

Julius is also shown with very striking rings (fig. 15) and was known to have been an avid collector of precious gemstones, spending tens of thousands of ducats on a new papal tiara (now lost), made by Cristoforo Foppa (known as Caradosso; 1445–about 1527) in 1510 (fig. 16).²⁸ He even asked to be buried with majestic rings on his fingers, to the distress of Paris de Grassis (about 1470–1528), the papal master of ceremonies whose job it was to defend papal tradition and decorum.²⁹ This extravagant display – he apparently spent more during his papacy on jewels than on anything other than the rebuilding of St Peter’s – was all part of Julius’s projection of maiestas papalis (papal majesty) and has been described as a tangible demonstration of papal solvency (which was otherwise frequently questioned, and for good reasons). If one looks ahead to the Sack of Rome in 1527 by, among others, Lutherans, one could argue that this extravagance backfired in numerous ways, including the fact that Julius’s body was exhumed from his tomb in St Peter’s and the rings stolen from his long‐dead fingers during the early days of the Sack.³⁰

The gold rings on his right hand are mounted with a rectangular emerald cut to a point on his index finger, a large rectangular‐cut diamond on his third finger and a ruby (or more likely a spinel) on his little finger; the rings on his left hand feature a large rectangular‐cut ruby or spinel (index finger), a sapphire (third finger) and a diamond (little finger). The large rectangular ruby/spinel and the rectangular diamond in particular can be compared with similar stones on Caradosso’s tiara, and the ring on his left index finger appears to be identical to that shown on his left hand in the Mass at Bolsena (fig. 12), which was painted in late 1511 or perhaps in 1512.³¹ It has been observed that the colours of the rings on his more prominent right hand reflect the overall colour scheme of the picture and recall the traditional colours of the theological virtues: faith (white), hope (green) and charity (red).³²

Several attempts have been made to identify where Julius is meant to be in this portrait. A number of scholars have assumed that he is shown in the Vatican Palace, perhaps in the Pope’s anticamera or in one of the Vatican Stanze.³³ The present writer developed this argument with reference to the windows that are apparently reflected in the burnished finials of Julius’s chair, comparing these with the extant fifteenth‐century windows of the Vatican Stanze (which are mullioned and trabeated into four lights) and indicating a possible location in the guardaroba in the Torre Borgia.³⁴ The wider reflection of the room was also discussed by Jürg Meyer zur Capellen who proposed that it showed the yellow wall hangings of the anticamera, which he presumed were as per the original background of NG27, which was in fact mainly blue, with yellow motifs.³⁵ An alternative proposal located the setting in S.M. del Popolo, but the windows in this church are quite different.³⁶

It is important to acknowledge the novelty of the portrait and the choices that have been made in how to represent Julius as Pope. He famously told Michelangelo not to depict him with a book but with a sword, which better symbolised his reputation as the warrior Pope. On other occasions he chose to be portrayed in full ceremonial dress, but here he is shown in slightly more informal attire, alone and seated in an intimate space. This ruminative Pope is how those close to him would have encountered Julius (for the seated Pope receiving standing visitors, see fig. 11), especially in the later years of his pontificate.³⁷ Julius’s tired expression may be explained by his poor state of health, and (beyond his rings) his only ‘prop’ is the white cloth or mappa in his right hand.³⁸ For someone who so carefully crafted his image (most obviously in papal medals where the obverse is the portrait and the reverse is the message),³⁹ the recent suggestion that he was promoting a more pacific depiction is attractive.⁴⁰ Julius was noted for his terribilità – which defies translation but was an irascible trait commented on by his contemporaries and even by Giorgio Vasari (1511–1574), who was not the first to note how lifelike (and therefore powerful) the representation is – but towards the end of his pontificate Julius was promoted as the bringer of peace and the defender of the liberty of the Church, including in the only bearded medal, by Serbaldi.

The decision to show the Pope three‐quarter‐length and from an angle may have originated from a Northern portrait. The inspiration has been linked to the Uomini Famosi by Justus of Ghent (active about 1460–80) in the studiolo of the Palazzo Ducale in Urbino (partly in situ, partly Musée du Louvre, Paris, about 1470–80), as well as to a lost portrait of Pope Eugenius IV Condulmer (1383–1447) by Jean Fouquet (d. 1481) which was then kept in the sacristy of S.M. Maggiore in Rome, which may itself have been presented to the church by the Pope. Raphael’s portrait subsequently became a widely used formula for portraits, and especially ruler portraits (sometimes referred to as ‘state portraits’), in subsequent centuries. Titian and Diego Velázquez are just two of the artists to have been influenced by the Julius portrait.

The picture was held to be by Raphael for most of its early history, but Friedrich Wilhelm Basilius von Ramdohr dismissed it as a school work in the late eighteenth century,⁴¹ and soon thereafter it was sold from the Borghese collection. It was acquired by John Julius Angerstein and subsequently by the National Gallery in 1824 as by Raphael, and celebrated as such by William Young Ottley, William Hazlitt, John Landseer and others, but it was then demoted.⁴² The respected scholar of Raphael Johann David Passavant described it as a copy in 1839 (adding a misleading provenance to the Palazzo Falconieri in Rome, which might also have put some authorities off course to a secure identification),⁴³ repeating this verdict in 1860 and 1872.⁴⁴ Gustav Friedrich Waagen referred to the picture in his Treasures of Art in Great Britain (1854) as ‘an excellent old repetition’,⁴⁵ and a similar verdict was passed by Joseph Archer Crowe and Giovanni Battista Cavalcaselle in their two‐volume book on Raphael of 1882–5.⁴⁶ A rare defence of the attribution in the mid‐nineteenth century was made by Samuel Palmer in a letter of 1 January 1871 to Leonard Rowe Valpy.⁴⁷

For most of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries the National Gallery picture was thought to be a copy of the picture in the Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence (fig. 17), and was catalogued by Cecil Gould in 1962 as ‘After Raphael’ and by an unidentified sixteenth‐century artist.⁴⁸ The version in the Uffizi was usually accepted as by Raphael, although some authors were not persuaded that any of the extant versions could be identified as the original.⁴⁹ Only after Gould’s publication of the National Gallery picture after cleaning was the over‐promotion of the Uffizi version reined in.⁵⁰ It was defended as a second original by Antonio Natali,⁵¹ while in 1984 it was described as ‘Raffaello e Bottega’ in the exhibition Raffaello a Firenze,⁵² and it has recently been displayed with an attribution to Giulio Romano.⁵³ The priority of the Florence version as Raphael tout court was also promoted by James Beck in 1996, but this has not found support.⁵⁴

Prompted by an enquiry from Konrad Oberhuber, Gould had initiated an X‐ray investigation, a new examination and a restoration (1970), which demonstrated that the background of the picture showed papal emblems which had been partially overpainted,⁵⁵ that the previously misread inventory number could be connected with the 1693 Borghese inventory, and – in combination with the picture’s known provenance – that the picture could be identified as the portrait of Pope Julius II that was shown at S.M. del Popolo in 1513.

Since Gould’s and Oberhuber’s ensuing publications the doubting voices have been largely silenced, but Beck dismissed the picture as a workshop copy, and suggested that it might be by Gian Francesco Penni (1496–1528).⁵⁶

The attribution of the National Gallery painting is necessarily related to the conclusions drawn regarding other versions. The principal ones among these are listed below under ‘Copies and versions’, but the issue also needs to be discussed at this point. The versions that require serious attention are on wood and show a corner behind the sitter’s head. None of the other candidates feature any of the decorations in the green background akin to those from the first idea for the background visible through the overlying layers of green paint in the National Gallery picture. It probably follows that the crossed keys and papal mitres were not originally as visible as they are today (see also ‘Materials and technique’), and indeed the green paint has suffered from wearing, which may have happened by the time of two early nineteenth‐century copies where they do appear: a drawing by Henry Bone of 1811 (fig. 18) and a slightly later engraving (the former has three sets of keys, one mitre and the ‘corner’; the latter two sets of keys and the ‘corner’).⁵⁷ Very few of the versions show this corner behind the sitter’s head. Those that do, include the cartoon in the Galleria Corsini (fig. 19) and versions of the portrait in the Corsini collection in Rome (inv. n. 134) and in the Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence (inv. 1412 n. 4533), and the canvas in the Galleria Borghese (inv. 413).⁵⁸ In some later derivations from this picture the green curtain is pulled back to reveal a window on the right.⁵⁹

In 2010 the Städel Museum in Frankfurt acquired a version on the basis of advice from Meyer zur Capellen, who attributed some areas of the painting (especially the face) to Raphael and the rest to his workshop.⁶⁰ Jochen Sander expanded upon this to attribute large parts of the painting to Raphael.⁶¹ This has been strongly resisted by Dietrich Seybold, Arnold Nesselrath and Michael Rohlmann among many others,⁶² and the picture appears to be a later copy of only marginal interest: it has a plain green background with no corner.

Discussion thus far has aimed to clarify specific aspects of the picture’s appearance, its attribution or date, but some further context adds to our understanding of the portrait and its commission. The painting was first recorded in September 1513 as having been given to the church of S.M. del Popolo by Julius, presumably before his death earlier that year.⁷² Bram Kempers has proposed that Julius probably gave the picture to the church in 1511, possibly as early as September and perhaps as a result of a vow for a return to health after his near‐fatal illness that August. In December 1511 Julius gave another portrait of himself to the church of S. Marcello ‘because of a vow made to an image of Our Lady’.⁷³ He can be shown to have promoted various feast days associated with the Virgin, and he instituted a tradition of important and regular papal Masses in the church of S.M. del Popolo (for example, the Feast of the Purification of the Virgin on 2 February each year). He also established the feast of the Virgin’s holy name (12 September) for the town of Cuenco in 1513. Julius launched his first Bologna campaign in S.M. del Popolo on 26 August 1508, and stayed at the convent quite frequently, attending the funerals of various cardinals and della Rovere supporters who were buried there during his pontificate. He is known to have attended S.M. del Popolo on 7/8 September 1511 for the celebration of the Birth of the Virgin Mary (and it was on this feast day that Raphael’s portrait was first recorded as being displayed, in 1513). This was very soon after his recovery from illness, and if an early date is accepted for the painting then he may have presented his portrait (and another picture?) at this time, effectively instituting the occasion which recurred in September 1513 (and was subsequently commented upon, albeit with reference to the more generic ‘on feast days’, in the anonymous Codex Magliabechiano, and by Vasari and others).⁷⁴ Huge numbers visited Julius’s body as it lay in state in St Peter’s in February 1513,⁷⁵ and he was hailed by the people (at least in Rome) as the saviour of Italy. This popular admiration explains why people rushed to the showing of the picture in 1513, a little over six months after Julius’s death.

The high altar of S.M. del Popolo housed a miraculous icon of the Virgin and Child, as well as relics related to the Virgin Mary and to Saint Sixtus that had been presented to the church by Pope Paschal II (about 1050/55–1118). The church had long‐standing della Rovere ties and has been aptly described as a ‘Julian temple, sanctuary, showcase, and theatre’.⁷⁶ Its prominent position as the first church that a visitor encountered inside the Aurelian walls on arrival from the north along the Via Flaminia gave S.M. del Popolo an important propagandist potential. The church had been rebuilt in 1472–80 with support from Julius’s uncle, Pope Sixtus IV, and a number of della Rovere chapels line the walls. Julius intervened to see a prominent chapel pass to his closest confidant and financial backer, Agostino Chigi (1466–1520), which was given a new dedication to the Madonna di Loreto, saints Augustine and Sigismond,⁷⁷ and eventually an altarpiece depicting the Birth of the Virgin Mary. The Pope also installed family tombs in the choir of the church, which was effectively converted into a della Rovere mausoleum (following the inspiration of the Sforza at S. Maria delle Grazie in Milan) in a rich piece of combined patronage in which Donato Bramante (1444–1514), Pintoricchio (about 1454–1513) and Guillaume de Marcillat (about 1470–1529) worked to produce an exceptionally modern ensemble in the years 1508–10.

This chapel behind the high altar was dedicated to the Madonna and had been blessed by Pope Julius in March 1507. Scenes from her life (including the Birth of the Virgin Mary) feature prominently in Marcillat’s stained‐glass window on the left of the choir (she is also prominent in the Nativity scenes on the right). We know that Raphael’s picture was hung on a pilaster in the church, and if this was, as we might reasonably suspect, on the left‐hand side of the choir (fig. 20), or possibly on a column on the left of the nave, then it would have been seen in relationship with the miracle‐working icon on the high altar and the Julian choir beyond. The papal throne was also a permanent fixture in the left crossing of the church and so it had become expected to see the Pope to the left of the high altar. The culmination of ecclesiastical/political stagecraft in Julius’s relationship with the church came in early October 1511 when S.M. del Popolo was chosen as the location for the negotiations that resulted in an alliance of the Papal States, Spain, Venice and (later) England and the Holy Roman Empire – the so‐called Holy League – against the French and their allies in northern Italy.

There have been divergent views regarding the relationship of the portrait of Julius with Raphael’s painting of the Holy Family, now known as the Madonna di Loreto and in the Musée Condé, Chantilly (fig. 21). Although the two paintings are on panels of poplar of slightly different sizes (the Madonna di Loreto is 120 × 90 cm) and were probably painted at slightly different dates (with the Madonna di Loreto being one to two years earlier), they were both in S.M. del Popolo from 1544 and were both displayed in the church on feast days;⁷⁸ they subsequently shared a provenance through the Sfondrati and Borghese collections until about 1794–5. This might have developed as a coincidence of collocation, but it is also possible that the pairing and display was intended by Julius.⁷⁹ In the context of his repeated choice to mark major Marian moments at S.M. del Popolo, the idea that Julius might have presented both his portrait and a Holy Family to the church is not overly fanciful.

One further aspect of the relationship with the picture in Chantilly (fig. 21) has a bearing on the Julius portrait. The composition is now known as the Madonna di Loreto, only after a version (or more likely a copy) of this original by Raphael (which can be traced visually to S.M. del Popolo from 1553 and earlier in documentary records)⁸⁰ was presented to the basilica at Loreto in 1712.⁸¹ There it became famous and acquired its modern name: the Madonna di Loreto. This is interesting in itself, but unrelated to Pope Julius II, and nothing proves that this iconography of the Virgin lifting a veil from a sleeping child was associated with Loreto in the sixteenth century. Nevertheless, Julius had a significant devotion to the shrine of the Virgin Mary at Loreto, where the house in which she had been born in the Holy Land was held to have been miraculously transported – a belief that was recognised by Julius in a papal bull of 1507 (titled In sublimia). This shrine was the most important centre of Marian devotion in Europe. Papal interest can be traced to 1375, and was further promoted throughout the fifteenth century, along with a programme of strategic rebuilding. Julius visited the shrine whenever he could, and may have been behind Agostino Chigi’s dedication of his chapel in S.M. del Popolo being changed to the Madonna di Loreto (as well as to the name saints of Agostino and his brother). When Julius overcame a life‐threatening illness in August 1511, he credited his recovery to the succour that the Madonna di Loreto had given him, and earlier that summer he had presented the shrine with the cannonball that had nearly killed him during the siege of Mirandola in January 1511 (this still hangs from a chain inside the Santa Casa). It is not impossible that the decision to make a gift of a version of the composition to Loreto in the eighteenth century was related to Julius’s known devotion to the shrine and his apparent connection to this image.

As discussed under ‘Sitter, function and style’ above, the picture was first referred to by Vettore Lippomano, who wrote from Rome to his brother Girolamo Lippomano (1460–1527) who duly informed the Venetian Senate. His report was summarised by Marino Sanuto (1466–1536) on 12 September 1513, and recorded that a portrait of Pope Julius II was on display in the church of S.M. del Popolo in Rome (on the altar, which presumably implies the high altar) for eight days, resulting in a rush to go and see the picture as though it were a papal jubilee.⁸⁵ The work was said to have been given to the church by the Pope, who died in February 1513 (and arguments have been put forward for the painting’s donation to the church in 1511, and alternatively for its presentation after the Pope’s death). It was subsequently recorded in the church in 1529/31,⁸⁶ and writing between 1544 and 1546 the anonymous author of the Codex Magliabechiano, who was listing the major works of art in Rome, also noted that a portrait of Julius II was hung on special occasions on a pilaster in the church in some relationship with a painting of the Madonna and Child with Saint Joseph, which was hung on a nearby pilaster.⁸⁷ This latter picture is usually identified as the Madonna del Velo or Madonna di Loreto (fig. 21), and the author of the Codex Magliabechiano was the first commentator to attach Raphael’s name to both paintings.⁸⁸

A significant number of these commentators referred to the resemblance to Julius (Lippomano), or to the quality of the head or the draperies (Anon. Magliabechiano), and these themes were developed by Vasari, who described the picture with care in his biography of Raphael in the Lives of the Artists, published in two editions in 1550 and 1568.⁸⁹ Vasari repeated the observation that the picture was displayed on feast days and with the Holy Family apparently now in Chantilly (fig. 21). He also noted how the picture was ‘so true and so lifelike, that the portrait caused all who saw it to tremble, as if it had been the living man himself’.⁹⁰

In between these two editions of the Lives, Ludovico Dolce’s (1508/10–1568) L’Aretino of 1557 referred to a portrait of Julius as an example of Raphael’s skill as a portrait painter,⁹¹ and it was also described by an anonymous commentator on the buildings of Rome in about 1564 (again bracketed with the ‘quadro di Nostra Donna’ and with both works being attributed to Raphael).⁹² The picture was mentioned by Pablo de Céspedes (about 1538–1608) before 1577,⁹³ and the two paintings by Raphael were recorded in the church of S.M. del Popolo by Raffaello Borghini (1537–1588) in his Il Riposo of 1584.⁹⁴ They were subsequently listed by Gian Paolo Lomazzo (1538–1592), whose visit to Rome can be dated between 1559 and 1565, although his Idea del Tempio della Pittura was only published in 1590.⁹⁵ Karel Van Mander (1548–1606) had visited Rome from 1573 to 1577, but the pictures were in fact in the Sfondrati collection by the date at which his comment on them was published in 1604.⁹⁶ Copies of the two paintings by Raphael were recorded in the sacristy of the church in about 1656, and it seems likely that the originals were kept in this location when not on display in the sixteenth century.⁹⁷

The two paintings remained in the church until they were appropriated ‘per forza, non senza dispiacere universale di tutta Roma’ (‘by force and not without the universal displeasure of all Rome’) in 1591 by Cardinal Sfondrati (also Sfondrato). Paolo Camillo Sfondrati (1560–1618) was the Cremonese nephew of Pope Gregory XIV Sfondrati (1535–1591), who appointed him as Cardinal of Santa Cecilia (the cardinalate that the Pope had also held) in 1591. The newly appointed Cardinal Sfondrati apparently acquired these paintings in the same year and in exchange for 100 scudi, which he gave as a charitable donation to the church of S.M. del Popolo.⁹⁸ Although this detail depends on a much later note, the key information is found in earlier records as well.⁹⁹ In 1595 Cardinal Sfondrati started to entertain offers for the sale of the portrait (which was misidentified as a portrait of Pope Leo X) and the Madonna, both of which were listed as available for purchase by a correspondent of Emperor Rudolf II (1552–1612).¹⁰⁰ A few years later Duke Francesco Maria II of Urbino (1549–1631) was also interested in acquiring the picture from the cardinal. This approach was recorded in Cardinal Sfondrati’s correspondence with the duke’s minister in Rome between 1600 and 1606, but his interest might have dated back to September 1596.¹⁰¹ In 1600 this agent wrote to the duke saying that Cardinal Sfondrati was selling his possessions, and that his pictures, which were valued at about 10,000 scudi, included ‘the portrait of Pope Julius made by Raphael, which [Cardinal Sfondrati] took from the church of the Popolo’.¹⁰² The duke replied on 8 March 1600 that he did not wish to buy Cardinal Sfondrati’s pictures en masse, but only some choice selections.¹⁰³ This apparently enraged Cardinal Sfondrati, who called off the negotiations. The duke then reiterated that if the cardinal changed his mind then he would still like to buy some specific pictures.¹⁰⁴ Six years later, Cardinal Sfondrati tried to reanimate the sale, but again offering the pictures en bloc. In February 1606 he wrote to the duke’s minister in Venice, the Abate Giulio Brunetti, stating that he had ‘many Raphaels’ and was willing to sell these for 6,000 scudi, for the benefit of his titular church, but the sale was never completed.¹⁰⁵

Rome, Palazzo Borghese, Cardinal Scipione Borghese

While the proposed sales to Rudolf II or to the Duke of Urbino were never realised, Cardinal Sfondrati finally found a buyer for a block of 71 paintings in 1608: Cardinal Scipione Borghese. Scipione (1577–1633) was appointed cardinal by Pope Paul V Borghese (1552–1621) in 1605. As seen in what follows (and in other entries: see NG168 and NG213), Scipione was an avid collector of works by Raphael. He wielded enormous influence as effective head of the papal government and amassed a huge fortune. The core of the collection is still housed in the Galleria Borghese (or Villa Borghese), which he built between 1613 and 1633.

The relevant documentation for Scipione’s acquisition of the picture is mostly in the Archivio Borghese at the Archivio Apostolico Vaticano (formerly known as the Archivio Segreto), but Paola Della Pergola also referred to copies from these made by Giovanni Piancastelli (1845–1926), first director of the Galleria Borghese, in the archives of the museum, which can no longer be traced. Piancastelli recorded the purchase under the date of 20 July 1608 and said that the sum of 4,000 scudi had been paid,¹⁰⁶ and he mentioned a quittance of 20 August.¹⁰⁷ There is also an earlier note of the sale of 28 June, which states that the 4,000 scudi did not in fact change hands: instead, Borghese wrote off a debt owed to him by Sfondrati for the Bishopric of Cremona, which he had been nominated to in September 1607.¹⁰⁸ As well as the Julius II, Scipione Borghese acquired the Madonna del Velo (fig. 21).

The Portrait of Julius II is first documented in an inventory of Scipione’s collection that was probably drawn up between 1621 and 1633.¹⁰⁹ Scipione was then living in the newly built Ripetta wing of the Palazzo Borghese al Campo Marzio.¹¹⁰ After his death the collection was inherited first by his nephew Prince Marcantonio II (1601–1658), and then by his grandson Giovanni Battista (1639–1717), who married Eleonora Boncompagni (1642–1695). During the lifetime of Prince Marcantonio II the picture was seen by the royalist painter Richard Symonds (1616–1660), who took detailed notes on his visit to Rome in 1650–1.¹¹¹ He was guided around the collection by a doorman, Sante Scopatore (in seventeenth‐century usage he was a ‘sweeper’), who may have contributed identifications of the more important pictures. The Julius was shown on the ground floor in ‘Another square low roome large and faire’ and this location, close to the Gallery of Mirrors, was mentioned by numerous other visitors to the Palazzo;¹¹² the portrait was also recorded here in the inventory of 1693. Although the portrait of a seated Pope was not identified as Julius II in this inventory, the number ‘118’ was noted and the picture was apparently skied (it was described as being just under the cornice).¹¹³ As stated above (a, b), the picture is inscribed in white paint in the bottom left corner: ‘II8’ (with this information being repeated on an old label on the reverse of the painting: ‘Raffaello / 118’). The 1693 inventory is the most complete record of the collection and frequently refers to numbers that are still legible on dispersed works from the Borghese collection.¹¹⁴ Forty‐four pictures were attributed to Raphael, and the next picture to be listed was the Madonna del Velo now at Chantilly (fig. 21), again with a Borghese inventory number that is still visible today (133).¹¹⁵

The gallery at the Palazzo Borghese remained one of the city’s most popular destinations for visitors to the city for more than two centuries. Von Ramdohr recorded the picture in a room beside the Gallery of Mirrors, but attributed it to ‘Raphael’s school’.¹¹⁶ It was noted in the same location in successive Italian editions of Mariano Vasi’s (1744–1820) guide to Rome, published in 1791¹¹⁷ and 1794,¹¹⁸ but in the French edition of 1797 this room is described in similar detail but without reference to the Julius.¹¹⁹ It therefore seems that the portrait had been sold before the latter edition was published, which coincides with Napoleon’s (1769–1821) occupation of Italy (1796–7) and the foundation of the Cisalpine Republic, which resulted in anxious aristocrats selling pictures to European dealers who then organised to export these works, often illegally, out of, in this case, the Papal States.

Raphael’s Portrait of Julius II was apparently acquired by Alexander Day (1751–1841) and Pietro Camuccini (1760–1833), who were in partnership from 1794 to 1801.¹²⁰ Day was based in Rome from 1774 to 1815. Camuccini was a pupil of the painter Domenico Corvi (1721–1803), and first made his name as a restorer. Information about the Camuccini/Day partnership can be established from Camuccini’s archive and in particular from an account book which has recently been studied by Pier Ludovico Puddu. In October 1799 the partners listed pictures that they owned, and in this list the Julius II is listed as 50 per cent owned by the partnership and 50 per cent owned by the banker Giovanni Torlonia (1755–1829).¹²¹

Raphael’s picture was next recorded in the collection of the financier John Julius Angerstein (1735–1823). It does not seem to have been displayed in the exhibition of Day and Camuccini’s pictures at No. 20, Lower Brook Street in February 1801 ,¹²² but had entered Angerstein’s collection by November 1802 when it was referred to in a letter from William Buchanan (1777–1864) to James Irvine (1759–1831).¹²³ It was also sketched by Henry Bone (1755–1834) in Angerstein’s collection in July 1811 (fig. 18) and was then among the 38 paintings that the British government bought from Angerstein’s executors for £60,000 to form the nucleus of the new National Gallery collection, which opened to the public in 1824 where it was given the inventory number NG27. It can be seen hanging (high on the wall) when at Angerstein’s house at 100 Pall Mall in 1824 in a watercolour by Frederick Mackenzie (about 1788–1854) that is now in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London (fig. 23).

The Angerstein catalogue of 1823 recorded the picture as ‘Raphael. Pope Julius II. From the Falconieri Palace. […]’, while a Descriptive Catalogue of 1825 introduced another red herring with reference to a provenance from the ‘Lancillotti Palace’.¹²⁴ These misleading provenances were often repeated in catalogues from 1838 until 1962.¹²⁵ This was despite the correct provenance from the Palazzo Borghese being given by Ottley in 1826, and in some National Gallery catalogues until 1840.¹²⁶

A list of copies and versions follows below. None of the early copies show any decorative elements in the green background, which is instead always plain and often flat. Some of the copies/versions that are closest to NG27 do show a ‘corner’ behind the sitter in the green background, and it follows that these depend more closely on the London portrait. These include the cartoon in the Galleria Corsini (fig. 19) and versions of the portrait in Rome (Corsini) and the Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence (inv. 1412 n. 4533). See further discussion under ‘Attribution’, above.

Painted copies

• 1. Florence, Galleria degli Uffizi, inv. 1890.1450, Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II, oil on wood, 107 × 80 cm.¹³¹
• 2. Florence, Palazzo Pitti, Florence, inv. 1912 n. 79, Titian (active about 1506; d. 1576), Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), oil on canvas, 99 × 82 cm.¹³²
• 3. Florence, Galleria degli Uffizi, inv. 1412 n. 4533, Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II.¹³³
• 4. Rome, Galleria Nazionale d’Arte Antica (Palazzo Corsini; ex‐Torlonia collection), inv. 848, Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), oil on canvas, 111 × 91.3 cm.¹³⁴
• 5. Rome, Galleria Nazionale d’Arte Antica (Palazzo Corsini), inv. 134, Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), oil on wood, 112.5 × 88 cm.¹³⁵
• 6. Paris, M. Bèrcioux sale, 29 March 1905 (same as Dorotheum, Vienna, 6 June 2007, lot 4; now Städel Museum, Frankfurt), Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), oil on wood, 103 × 79 cm.
• 7. Rome, Villa Borghese, inv. 413, Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), oil on canvas, 101 × 83 cm.¹³⁶
• 8. Vienna, Dorotheum, 6 June 2007, lot 4 (same as M. Bèrcioux sale, Paris, 29 March 1905; now Städel Museum, Frankfurt), Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), oil on wood, 103 × 79 cm.
• 9. Turin, Galleria Sabauda, inv. 145, Workshop of Raphael, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), oil on wood, 108 × 79 cm.¹³⁷
• 10. Berlin, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin – Preussischer Kulturbesitz, inv. 232 (from the Giustiniani Collection), Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), oil on canvas, 93 × 80 cm.
• 11. Leigh Court, Miles collection, Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael) (praised by Passavant 1860, II, p. 95).¹³⁸
• 12. Sale, 1800, ex‐Orléans Collection, Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), oil on canvas, inscribed ‘JVLIVS’. Engraved by Morel (Couché 1786, no. IX).
• 13. Paris, sale, 1826, Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), version sold by the Duc de Moncada to Marchese Altamira. This is said to be the version that is now in Frankfurt.
• 14. Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), Collection G. Cornwall Legh, MP, exhibited Manchester, 1857, no. 131 in definitive catalogue, no. 151 in provisional catalogue.¹³⁹
• 15. Norfolk, Holkham Hall, Earl of Leicester, Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), oil on canvas, 105.4 × 80.6 cm.
• 16. Vatican City, Vatican Museums, inv. MV.40736.0.0, Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), oil on canvas, 110 × 85 cm, Musei Vaticani Archivio Fotografico, neg. no. XXXV.17.64.¹⁴⁰
• 17. Lucca, Palace, Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), sold in London with the other paintings from the collection.
• 18. Urbania, Collection Marco Rossi, Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael).
• 19. Alton Towers, Collection Earl of Shrewsbury, Anonymous, The Head of Pope Julius II (after Raphael).
• 20. County Tyrone (Ireland), Collection Captain Peter Montgomery, Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), Courtauld Institute of Art, neg. no. B 70 / 1968.
• 21. Sale, Sotheby’s, Colonnade, 19 November 1996, lot 139, S. Mazzolini, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), nineteenth century, oil on canvas, 103 × 84.2 cm.
• 22. Sale, Bonhams, Chelsea, 4 February 1998, lot 284, Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), nineteenth century, 111.8 × 86.3 cm.
• 23. Sale, Bonhams, Chelsea, 18 March 1998, lot 5, Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), nineteenth century, oil on canvas, 111.8 × 86.3 cm.
• 24. Frankfurt, Städel Museum, inv. 2337 (same as M. Bèrcioux Sale, Paris, 29 March 1905 and Dorotheum, Vienna, 6 June 2007, lot 4), Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), oil on wood, 103 × 79 cm.
• 25. Rome, Galleria Colonna, inv. 134, Anonymous, Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), oil on canvas, dimensions unknown.
• 26. B. Millini, ‘Saggio della Roma descritta da Benedetto Millino. Piazza e chiesa del Popolo, about 1656, Bibl. Vaticana, Cod. Chigi, O.VIII.141’, fol. 49, recorded a copy in the sacristy of S.M. del Popolo.¹⁴¹
• 27. Wadsworth, CT, Wadsworth Athenaeum, a version can also be seen in the apparently imaginary view, painted by Giovanni Paolo Panini (1691–1765), of The Collection of Cardinal Silvio Valenti Gonzaga, 1749, oil on canvas, 198 × 268 cm.

Drawn copies

• 1. Frankfurt, Städelsches Kunstinstitut, inv. 4311, Attributed to Federico Zuccari (1539–1609), Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael).
• 2. London, National Portrait Gallery, inv. NPG D17424, Henry Bone (1755–1834), Portrait of Pope Julius II (after Raphael), 1811, pencil on paper, squared in ink for transfer.