One of the most engaging and enigmatic among the host of anonymous artists of the Florentine Cinquecento is the so-called 'Master of the Copenhagen Charity', who takes his name from the ambitious allegory now in the Statens Museum for Kunst in Copenhagen (Fig.1). The anonymous master was the author of a small group of works characterised by highly refined draughtsmanship, a jewel-like pictorial finish and an idiosyncratic canon of figure types, with strong reflections of the works of leading Florentine artists of the 1520s and 1530s.' It is no accident that works now attributed to this exquisite but unprolific painter were long given to Bugiardini, Granacci and other contemporary Tuscan masters before Laura Pagnotta recognised them as the work of a single artist whom she dubbed the 'Copenhagen Master'. Pagnotta, the only scholar to propose an identification for the 'Master of the Copenhagen Charity', implausibly suggested that his oeuvre was nothing more than the early work of the sixteenth-century Florentine painter Pier Francesco Foschi. This article presents evidence pointing to a different identity for the long-elusive Copenhagen Master: Bartolomeo di Zanobi di Benedetto Ghetti (d.1536), a pupil of Ridolfo Ghirlandaio, whose career at the court of Frangois I is briefly mentioned in Vasari's Lives, but whose extant oeuvre has hitherto not been identified.

The Trinity of Masaccio in the church of S. Maria Novella in Florence (Fig. 14) has long been referred to as one of the most remarkable and innovative paintings of the early renaissance in Italy. For this reason, in studies devoted to the work, the identification of its donor has been an intensely debated issue. Several miscellaneous items of evidence have led to various hypotheses which will be mentioned below. But none of them can be regarded as an ultimate answer to the question of who was the patron of Masaccio's Trinity. Nor does this article, which anticipates one of the concluding points of my forthcoming study on workshops and artistic production in renaissance Florence, offer a definitive answer. But thanks to the analysis of some sixteenth-century documents referring to a family of Florentine artisans, it aims to shed new light on the history of the Trinity and on those individuals who were associated with the fresco in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries.

Despite three-quarters of a century of intense research, culminating in the monographic exhibition in Bologna and Fort Worth in 1993-94, Ludovico Carracci (1555-1619) remains the most under-appreciated of the great founders of baroque art. It was not always so, particularly in Bologna, where it was a matter of civic pride (what Italians refer to as campanilismo) to prefer Ludovico to his younger, more widely admired cousin Annibale Carracci (1560-1609). After all, Annibale had abandoned Bologna for Rome - a crucial event for the subsequent history of European painting, but one for which his countrymen never forgave him. By contrast, Ludovico made only a short, uneventful trip to the papal city in 1602, and his art, unlike Annibale's, continued to favour Correggio, Parmigianino, Titian and Tibaldi over Raphael and Michel- angelo and the example of ancient art. He was, nonetheless, a master of what later generations came to call the 'grand manner'. Indeed, in his second Discourse, Sir Joshua Reynolds put forward Ludovico as the paradigm of the artist whose command of style enabled him to convey whatever conceptions or sentiments he sought: 'And in this Ludovico Caracci (I mean in his best works) appears to me to approach the nearest to perfection. His unaffected breadth of light and shadow, the simplicity of his colouring, which, holding its proper rank, does not draw aside the least part of the attention from the subject and the solemn effect of that twilight which seems diffused over his pictures, appear to me to correspond with grave and dignified subjects, better than the more artificial brilliancy of sunshine which enlightens the pictures of Titian."

The Rabbit hunt by Pieter Bruegel the Elder (Fig.25) is unique in his art: it is the single etching by his hand and, as far as is known, the only occasion when he was responsible for the execution of one of his own prints. In other respects it is typical. The Rabbit hunt combines two familiar aspects of Bruegel's art – his use of proverbs as subject matter, and his ability to create the compelling illusion of a vast and varied landscape. A large tree dominates the right fore- ground, its trunk serving to separate two figures: a hunter with his dog at his side who aims his crossbow at two rabbits, and a second hunter who creeps up behind the first, a long spear in his hand. A broken stump occupies the centre foreground, a smaller tree is on the right, and beyond them is one of Bruegel's characteristic landscapes. The ground rises sharply behind the two hunters and is surmounted by a group of buildings, but on the left the view expands outwards, a vast space animated by sailing boats, various buildings, livestock, a distant city and a broad river that winds its way through the countryside to empty into the sea barely visible on the horizon.

On 29th January 1960 Marcel Duchamp installed a display in a shop window of Bamberger's department store in Newark, New Jersey (Fig.34). It was intended to promote the publication by Grove Press of the English translation of Robert Lebel's monograph Sur Marcel Duchamp.' Although the installation is listed by Gough-Cooper and Caumont and by Naumann and Obalk, to my knowledge it has not been discussed in the Duchamp literature. Yet it is of more than passing interest in the canon of Duchamp's works.