Cockerell Letters

Letters at I Tatti from Sydney C. Cockerell to Bernard Berenson about the Domenico Veneziano panels in the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge

1. Jan 24, 1924 (excerpt; the photograph mentioned by Cockerell is in the I Tatti photo archive)
You will find a little Annunciation that has come to us since you were here, with another little Florentine picture of the Miracle of St. Zenobius. Have you anything to say about the Annunciation?

2. May 17, 1924 (excerpt; the photograph mentioned by Cockerell is in the I Tatti photo archive)
I enclose a poor photograph of the little Florentine picture of St. Zenobius that came with the Dom. Veneziano (?)

3. June 17, 1924 (excerpt)
I must write not only to thank you but to say how interesting your Dom. Veneziano discovery is. The dimensions of the two little pictures are practically the same- i.e. the height.

4. Jan 30, 1925 (includes copy of letter to Venturi)
Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge

My dear Berenson,

I enclose for your information a copy of a letter to Prof. Venturi, which explains itself.

Yashiro is in America, on his way back to Japan. I am sending him another copy, which may or may not reach him. I do not known whether anything has appeared or is about to appear on the reconstruction of the Domenico Veneziano, or whether you have finally decided that our St. Zenobius picture formed part of the predella. If so the bishop in the Uffizi picture is presumably St. Zenobius and not St. Nicholas. Perhaps you will kindly tell me how the matter stands.

Yours always,

Sydney C. Cockerell

The article by Venturi has been sent to a friend of his, Mr. Addison McLeod, for translation and publication in England. If you think fit, you would be able to contribute a letter or article to the March Burlington.

---

Copy

30 Jan. 1925
Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge

Dear Sir,

As I understand from Mr. McLeod that you have written an article on our little Annunciation by Domenico Veneziano for publication in this country, I desire to set before you certain facts which have perhaps only partially come to your notice.

This picture came to us on Oct. 30, 1923. A day or two later Professor Yashiro visited the Museum and I showed it to him. He instantly recognized that it was by Domenico Veneziano and asked to have it photographed – He wrote to me on Aug. 28 that he had met you in London, that he would like a photograph of this picture sent to you, and that he was about to write an article on it as he believed that he could reconstruct the whole predella – To Professor Yashiro belongs the credit of the original discovery.

A few weeks after his visit I sent a photograph to Mr. Berenson without mentioning Prof. Yashiro’s attribution – He wrote at once that it appeared to be by Domenico Veneziano and congratulated the Museum on so interesting an acquisition. In June 1924 I had a further correspondence with him about it – He had also, independently of Prof. Yashiro, been busy on the predella of the Uffizi picture, and had arrived at definite conclusions. Mr. Berenson was therefore the second person to work the problem out.

How far either of these gentlemen may have consulted you in the course of their investigations, or may have informed you of them, I am not in a position to know more than may perhaps be inferred. This label was the subject of a good deal of interest on the opening day and it has been there ever since – If I correctly understand Mr. McLeod, it escaped your notice when you were here.

When the picture was photographed it had attached to it (i.e. to the frame) the name of Domenico Ghirlandaio – This manifestly false attribution was not ours, but was that of a previous owner; but it had an interest, which Mr. Berenson pointed out. When it left Florence there was evidently still a tradition of its being by a Domenico – Domenico Veneziano being then (c. 1820, I believe) unknown, it was rashly assumed that the Domenico in question was D. Ghirlandaio.

This name was removed from the picture some time ago – I was under the impression that it was removed before the Gallery opened, but it may have been left on the picture for some time longer – and this was certainly the case if you saw it there, as Mr. McLeod seems to imply.

I am, dear Sir,
Yours very truly,

Sydney C. Cockerell

5. Feb 7, 1925 (includes quote from a letter by Yashiro)
Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge

My dear Berenson,

I am so glad to get your letter of Feb. 3 and to know that you approve of my letter to Venturi. I hope that he will see the advisability of standing aside. I have not yet heard from him and indeed there has been scarcely time.

I have looked through your letters and can find no reference to your intention to reproduce the picture in ‘Dedalo.’ It will be a thousand pities if it is further delayed, and indeed I wondered whether you ought not to have at any rate a letter in the March Burlington.

Yashiro’s letter of Aug 28 contains this passage: “Also can I ask you to send me the exact measure of the picture, as I want to write an article on it and try to compare it with the Berlin fragment of D. Veneziano’s predella – I also found a companion piece in some private collection. So in my mind the whole predella is complete with your Annunciation as the central piece.”

This theory, about which I have no more information, would exclude our S. Zenobio piece, and I fancy it would not account for all the space.

Mr. Riches has come in as I write. He is hoping to receive your notes on his manuscript soon.

Yours always,

Sydney C. Cockerell

6. Feb 9, 1925 (includes copies of a letter from McLeod to Cockerell, and Cockerell's reply)
Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge

My dear Berenson,

I enclose copies of the latest Dom. Veneziano correspondence. I do not think I have met Mr. McLeod but his previous letters have prejudiced me strongly against him. What if you were write to the Times at once (of course giving Yashiro his proper credit) and so get in first? I can supply them with photographs of our two pictures if I hear from you. They print their illustrations rather well.

Yours always,

Sydney C. Cockerell

[enclosed with letter of January 30, 1925]

8 II. 25.
7 Belsize Park, NW3

Dear Sir,

I have received a letter from Senator Venturi in which he instructs me to write to you to the following effect:

That he has cancelled from his article the statement “Passes under the name of Domenico Ghirlandaio;” being quite convinced of what you tell him in respect of the inscription which is on the frame.

That I myself was present and witnessed his enthusiasm at the discovery of the picture by Domenico Veneziano.

That although he made the attribution independently from Prof. Yashiro, he will have much pleasure in stating in his article that the latter’s discovery was previous to his own. I am to add that he has a high opinion of the attainments of Prof. Yashiro, who is a personal friend of his.

You will understand, I hope, that I am simply acting as Senator Venturi’s intermediary in the matter and make no statement on my own account.

I am
Yours faithfully
Addison McLeod

---

Feb 9 1925
Fitzwilliam Museum

Dear Sir,

I beg to thank you for your letter of yesterday written in accordance with Senator Venturi’s instructions.

I have sent copies of my letter to Senator Venturi to Professor Yashiro and Mr. Berenson so that they may be aware that Senator Venturi was informed of all the facts contained in it before his article was published. I shall be obliged if you will let me known when and where it will appear.

I am
Yours faithfully
Sydney C. Cockerell

7. Feb 19, 1925
Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge

My dear Berenson,

Many thanks for your last letters. As you are not disposed to do it, I am arranging for Charles Marriott to write an article for the Times. I went up to see him about, and gave him particulars in writing, very carefully drawn up. The article should appear in a few days, but I hope not in time for A. V. to make any corrections, if his article is to appear in the March Connoisseur. I asked Addison McLeod to let me known when and where it will appear, but he has not answered. The whole thing now becomes rather fun and I think you will enjoy it.

Yours always,

Sydney Cockerell

I had the two panels out of their frames for the first time. They are absolutely identical. 1 3/8” deep and painted white at back and sides. I can’t help thinking that St. Zenobio is also by Dom. Ven.

8. March 16, 1925 (excerpt)
Many thanks for the copy of Dedalo. It is a very interesting article and I wish Cambridge had the stuff to figure more largely in it. The new ‘L’arte’ has not yet reached us – so slow are our agents.