A painter of exquisite detail and acute observation: Fede Galizia

With her talents praised in several contemporary written sources, Fede Galizia (Milan or Trent, ca. 1578–Milan, 1630) was already famous in her own lifetime. She achieved considerable success among art collectors of the time with her works reaching the imperial court of Rudolf II of Hapsburg in Prague. Besides producing portraits and biblical scenes, this early modern Italian artist created mysteriously illuminated still-life compositions and, owing to her innovative rendition of the space, she has been considered a pioneer in this genre of painting in which women artists would eventually make their mark.

Trained by her father, the miniaturist and metalworker Nunzio Galizia (1550–1621), Fede Galizia must have been a child prodigy if in 1590, when she was only twelve, was mentioned by the painter and art theorist Gian Paolo Lomazzo (1538-1592) in his volume Idea del tempio della pittura (The Ideal Temple of Painting).

Already during the 1590s, this precocious talent had been in contact with Giuseppe Arcimboldo (1526-1593) – the portrait painter famous for his creative heads made entirely of objects, mostly fruits and vegetables – and Ambrogio Figino (1540-1608) – another leading Milanese painter who will be discussed further down. It was Arcimboldo, in fact, who promoted Galizia’s name beyond Milan all the way to the court in Prague, where he recommended the painter to Rudolph II.

Portrait of Paolo Morigia, ca. 1592-1595. Pinacoteca Ambrosiana, Milan

The history of early modern Italian women artists is mostly one of pictorial responses to Sofonisba Anguissola’s work. Like Sofonisba, Fede Galizia painted portraits of her family members and intellectuals close to her family.

Portrait of Paolo Morigia is a warm likeness of a prominent figure in Milanese culture towards the end of the sixteenth century. As the superior general of the Jesuates – a religious order that, not to be confused with the Jesuits, was abolished at the end of the 1660s – Morigia is wearing the white habit of his order which stands out on the black background. But, above all, he was an historian and therefore Fede surrounds him with the tools of the trade: paper, pen, books, inkwell, and glasses.

The portrait, grounded in the naturalism of the Lombard school, was much admired for its likeness. But Fede displayed her remarkable technical skills in the rendition of the objects too. The meticulous execution of some of them, for instance the pair of glasses Morigia is holding in his right hand, reminds the viewer that Fede Galizia was a still-lifes painter too.

The rendition of the space reflected in the eyeglasses demonstrates that Fede was familiar with Northern European painting. In that same reflected space it is also possible to catch a glimpse of the artist working. The fact that Morigia seems to have been interrupted in his study to have a conversation with Fede suggests familiarity between the artist and the scholar.

Fede Galizia may not have painted, like Sofonisba Anguissola and Lavinia Fontana did, a portrait of herself as a learned woman – that is reading, drawing, or playing an instrument. However, by virtue of hinting at having a learned conversation with a scholar, this portrait accomplishes the same result and proves that Fede was a cultured woman.

Judith with the Head of Holofernes, 1601. Galleria Borghese, Rome

Fede Galizia was already famous in her lifetime, praised as a portraitist and history painter of exquisite detail and acute observation of which the painting above - Judith with the Head of Holofernes (1601), a later version of the one painted in 1596 and now in the Ringling Museum of Art - is a good illustration.

As in the one of the same subject painted by Lavinia Fontana in 1600 and now in the Bolognese Museo Davia Bargellini, Judith is shown immediately after the decapitation of Holofernes.
Following the example of Caravaggio’s contrapposto between Judith’s and the handmaid’s age and looks, in Fede Galizia's version the handmaid is too an old woman and serves to highlights by contrast the beauty and youth of the Biblical heroine.
The major difference with Caravaggio’s Judith Beheading Holofernes (ca. 1599) is the moment of the story Galizia and Fontana decided to depict.
Caravaggio’s drama will be found in Artemisia Gentileschi's version of the theme. Artemisia’s Judith will be just as monumental as Fede Galizia's, but by no means as sumptuous.

Fede Galizia’s Judith with the Head of Holofernes is certainly a tour de force with all the details having an extraordinary tactile quality.
We really can see the daughter of the metalworker in the rendering of the belt and the bracelet. Not to mention the pearls, two strands around Judith's neck and two large drop pearls as earrings – only one is visible because the heroine looks over her right shoulder. There are pearls adorning her hair too.

Remarkable is also the richness of the colours, from the fairness of Judith's skin, especially the arm and décolleté rendered with a mother-of-pearl tint, to the red of the tent, the blue of the hair dress, the pink of the petticoat, and the green of the servant’s dress.
Judith is wearing a white chemise under a dazzling dress of purple-grey silk. A veil is attached to the blue velvet hair dress. It falls behind her back and can be seen again behind the hand holding the sword. It is ornamented by golden threads.

The painting seems to be more about Judith’s dress and jewels – how expensive they look, how refined they are – than the accomplishment of such a difficult feat. And yet, the heroine’s face doesn’t show any emotion whereas the servant, bringing a finger to the mouth, expresses wonder and amazement.

The reflection of the servant’s hand on the washbasin, where signature and date are also to be found under Holofernes’ ear, is typical of the Northern Italian school’s interest in light but also suggests an awareness of the study of reflection and refraction.

The painting that in 1958 didn’t make much of an impact when sent to Zurich for an exhibition dedicated to women artists, in 2021 made the cover of the catalogue for Le Signore dell’Arte exhibition in Milan. Also, in the same year, Fede Galizia received her first monographic exhibition in Trento.

As already pointed out, with her talents praised in several contemporary written sources, Fede Galizia was already famous in her own lifetime. Although she painted mainly portraits, during the twenty century, predominantly but not exclusively Italian art historians focused their research on the work of Fede as a painter of still-lifes and put it at the origins of this genre.

Although rediscovered in the 1930s, Fede Galizia’s works have been featured in exhibitions and publications only from the 1960s. She is now considered one of the most important Italian still life painters of the seventeenth century, responsible for the earliest signed and dated still life in Italian art.

Glass Tazza with Peaches, Jasmine Flowers, and Quinces, ca. 1607. The Montreal Museum of Fine Arts

Glass Tazza with Peaches, Jasmine Flowers, and Quinces is a simple but balanced composition whose viewpoint is slightly elevated to better catch the forms of the fruits – six peaches on the glass bowl, two quinces and a half on the table. The light, coming from a window on the left, is reflected on the base of the tazza, and reminds the reflection on the eyeglasses of Paolo Morigia.

The painting is not over-detailed and strikes the viewer for its naturalism and delicacy, especially in the depiction of the jasmine flowers and the contrast between the ripeness of the peaches and the browning of the cut quince on the right which is about to decay.
The observation made by some art critics that peaches and quinces mature at different times of the year seem to be pointless as the painting is most likely supposed to be a memento mori. All the same, those peaches are just glorious with their incredibly soft skin that the artist managed to recreate painting them in complex layers of glazing.

As mentioned before, during the 1590s the young Fede Galizia had been in contact with two regarded Milanese painters: Giuseppe Arcimboldo and Ambrogio Figino.
Still Life with Peaches and Fig Leaves (also known as Still Life with Peaches on a Plate) painted by Ambrogio Figino around 1595 may have clearly inspired our artist.

Giovanni Ambrogio Figino (1548-1608), Still Life with Peaches and Fig Leaves, 1591-1594. Private collection

Moreover, the rendering of fruits to appear larger than life and near enough that could be touched is a trompe l'oeil effect that Fede may have learned from Arcimboldo and Caravaggio.

The invention of the genre of still-life paintings of fruit has traditionally been attributed to Caravaggio (1571-1610), who created his famous Basket of Fruit at some point between 1597 and 1600.

Caravaggio (Michelangelo Merisi) (1571-1610), Basket of fruit, 1597-1600. Pinacoteca Ambrosiana, Milan

Yet within a matter of years, or months, Fede Galizia, who was seven years younger than Caravaggio, began a series of oils on the same theme that rivalled the work of her Lombard compatriot.

Caravaggio may still be more famous, but it was through Fede Galizia's work that the display of a careful selection of fruits on a shallow sill against a dark background became characteristic of Lombard still life painting.

Still Life of Cherries in a Bowl, ca. 1610-30. Royal Collection Trust, London

Still Life of Cherries in a Bowl, once in the collection of King Charles I and now exhibited in Kensington Palace, London, is another example of our artist’s simple but mysteriously illuminated compositions.

A white open-work porcelain bowl of cherries stands on a narrow sill against a dark background. Stalks and leaves are attached to the cherries on either side of the bowl as well. Cherries may vary in colour, going from yellow through red to dark red, but they all look fleshy.
Although it is not clear if Fede used to give the fruit a particular symbolic meaning, cherries are found in religious paintings, often held by the Christ child as in The Madonna of the Cherries by Federico Barocci, to symbolise Paradise.

Like the work of most women artists of her time, Fede Galizia’s pioneering still-lifes ended up being attributed to her male contemporaries. This one, for example, was first catalogued as a seventeenth-century Dutch work, then generically attributed to Italian School before, eventually, similarities with another work by Fede Galizia (one including the same white bowl) were noticed.
As for the wide time frame of its execution – sometime between 1610 and 1630, the year Fede Galizia died, in her early fifties, from plague – it is still difficult to narrow down dates, because this extraordinary woman artist’s practice is still not well known.
But then, of course, this may change any time soon.