domingo, 30 de janeiro de 2022

A Sagrada Família em Repouso no Egito (The Holy Family at Rest in Egypt) - Jan van Huysum



 

A Sagrada Família em Repouso no Egito (The Holy Family at Rest in Egypt) - Jan van Huysum
Egito
Coleção privada
OST - 53x73 - 1727


In the very specialized world of early eighteenth century Dutch art, Jan van Huysum was rather unusual in working in two very different genres: still life and landscape. His landscapes are perhaps less well known than his famous flower paintings, but nonetheless make up a significant part of his oeuvre. Van Huysum's landscapes include both oil paintings and elaborate finished watercolors, always composed in a rather Claudian manner and often, as here, incorporating a biblical or classical subject.
Representations of the Holy Family at rest already in Egypt are rare, and the present subject is an interesting variation on the more commonly portrayed episode on Rest on the Flight into Egypt. Van Huysum's prominent placement of the female Sphinx, the pyramid, and the Obelisk decorated with figures of a sistrum-toting Isis and other Egyptian deities betray the artist's precocious interest in Egyptian antiquity, as well as firmly denoting the locale portrayed in the picture.
The pendant to this painting, Arcadian Landscape with a Herm of Priapus, is in the Amsterdam Museum. The two paintings remained together until their auction as separate lots in 1817. A finished drawing of the composition, in brush and gray and brown ink, is at the Teylers Museum, Amsterdam.

Natureza Morta com Morangos em uma Tigela Wan-Li Sobre uma Borda de Pedra (Still Life of Fraises-de-Bois in a Wan-Li bowl Upon a Stone Ledge) - Adriaen Coorte



 

Natureza Morta com Morangos em uma Tigela Wan-Li Sobre uma Borda de Pedra (Still Life of Fraises-de-Bois in a Wan-Li bowl Upon a Stone Ledge) - Adriaen Coorte
Coleção privada
OST - 30x22 - 1704




Coorte's deceptively simple still lifes depicting fruit, nuts, vegetables and shells, set against a plain dark background, are enormously appealing to the modern eye. Having fallen into obscurity in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, Coorte's work was only first fully published in 1952-53 by Laurens J. Bol. That publication and Bol’s subsequent exhibition of twenty-one of Coorte’s paintings at the Dordrechts Museum in 1958 brought the artist back into the public’s consciousness and secured his reputation as one of the most distinctive and original Dutch still life painters.
The details of Coorte’s life are largely unknown; even the years of his birth and death remain a mystery, though he is thought to have been a native of Middelburg in Zeeland. Dated paintings by the artist range from the years 1683-1705. His earliest works feature birds in landscapes and are so close in style to the works of Melchior d’Hondecoeter (1636-1695) that it has led to strong speculation that Coorte worked with him in Amsterdam. Bol’s research revealed that between 1700 and 1900, most works by Coorte were to be found in collections in Middelburg and its vicinity leading to the conclusion that this is where the artist spent the greater part of his career. In addition, in a written record from the yearbooks for 1695-96 of the painters Guild of Saint Luke in Middelburg, it is noted that an artist referred to as “Coorde” was fined for selling paintings in that city without being a guild member. By that date, Coorte had been an active painter for at least thirteen years and it is curious that he would not have been a member of the painter's guild. From this, some scholars have deduced that, perhaps, Coorte was a gentleman painter or amateur. Certainly, in his mature style, he does not show the marked influence of other artists, and the restraint and simplicity of his compositions is at odds with the more opulent still life paintings that were the prevailing fashion of the time.
Today, Coorte’s known oeuvre consists of about sixty-four paintings. Many of his compositions, like the present one, depict natural objects set on a stone ledge against a dark background. One of his favorite subjects was wild strawberries (fragaria vesca) which he included in no less than eighteen paintings. Sometimes they were combined with other fruits and vegetables, such as gooseberries and asparagus. In other paintings, as here, they are the central focus, most often depicted in a small earthenware bowl and, more infrequently, in a blue and white Wan-Li porcelain bowl. Only three paintings, including the present one, depict strawberries contained in these precious imported porcelain objects. All of these date from 1704, and in each example the porcelain bowl is decorated with intricate deer motifs, making them among the rarest of Coorte's compositions. Of the three extant pictures of this specific type, one is in the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, and the other is in the Ivor Foundation. The third and last remaining example is the present canvas.
Here, the vibrant red of the tiny berries is varied with greenish yellow patches on some of the fruit, and their stippled texture has been meticulously rendered. A single white blossom sprig juts vertically out of the bowl, a compositional device which Coorte employed in other works of this type. A small cluster of berries with their stems still attached casually rest on the stone ledge just to the left of the Wan-Li bowl. The rich red hues of the berries are juxtaposed by the cooler tones of the porcelain bowl, which itself is carefully and minutely drawn with linear deer designs. The composition is intensely focused and intimate, a feeling made all the more visceral by the hallmark starkness of the blank background, and the soft, diffuse light which washes over the scene with effortless elegance.

Santa Maria Madalena (Saint Mary Magdalen Reading) - Correggio







Santa Maria Madalena (Saint Mary Magdalen Reading) - Correggio
Coleção privada
Óleo sobre painel - 22x27



Newly rediscovered, this exquisite painting on panel has recently been identified as Correggio’s long-lost picture of the reclining Magdalen, one of his most celebrated masterpieces, hitherto only known in the form of copies. Probably commissioned by Isabella d’Este, Marchioness of Mantua (1474–1539) after her visit in 1517 to the shrine devoted to Saint Mary Magdalen at Sainte-Baume, south-east France, it boasts a distinguished provenance. In the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries it was one of a number of prized small-scale masterpieces by Correggio owned by the Farnese. Housed in the Palazzo Ducale in Parma, and later moved to their palace at Capodimonte, Naples, Saint Mary Magdalen was displayed with other works by the master, such as La Zingarella and the Mystic Marriage of Saint Catherine, which are both still at Capodimonte. Inventory records, descriptions, dimensions and an engraving after this painting all support the identification of the present work as the one formerly in the Farnese Collection. Most importantly, its status as an original by Correggio is confirmed by its exceptional artistic quality, which is wholly consistent with autograph paintings such as the Saint Mary Magdalen at the National Gallery, London. A date in the late 1510s has been independently proposed by Davide Gasparotto and David Ekserdjian, a dating with which Hugo Chapman is broadly in agreement.
In this sophisticated and elegant painting Correggio translates a representation of the reclining Magdalen into an image of enduring beauty and profound spirituality. In the words of Hugo Chapman, "the painting is a wonderfully moving meditation on female piety." With characteristic subtlety, it succeeds in blurring the boundaries between the sacred and the profane by alluding to the saint’s legend and to her religious devotion, while at the same time suggesting her seductive allure. Barefoot, the Magdalen is depicted in a grotto setting that evokes the wilderness where she lived in solitude. Lying on the ground and deeply absorbed in reading a large devotional book, she cradles it with her left forearm, while propped up on her right elbow; in a remarkably natural gesture, she leans on its pages as she rests her head on her hand. The Magdalen’s sensuous body is cocooned in a robe that envelops also her head. Beside her, the ointment jar, whose lustrous surface is exquisitely rendered, catches the light that falls on her as she reads; and the finely painted clasps that form part of the book binding also gleam. In contrast to the rocky backdrop that shimmers in the distance, the grotto setting is otherwise dark.
Correggio’s image of the reclining Magdalen is one of the earliest Italian versions of this highly unusual theme. Its iconography, which is discussed by Maddalena Spagnolo, relates to a sculpture of the saint once located in her shrine at Sainte-Baume in Provence and now lost, although known through copies. Correggio, in faithful emulation of his model, conceives the Magdalen as she lies on the ground in front of the grotto at Sainte-Baume, reading while supporting her head in her hand. The nearby basilica of St Maximin, which claimed to be the repository of her relics, was also central to the cult of Saint Mary Magdalen and to the iconography of this painting; indeed, at the far left of the composition Correggio depicts the abbey above the distant cliff face, while the sailing vessel in the distance refers to the saint’s sea voyage to Provence.
Of all the versions of the composition, the one generally regarded until now as having the best claim to being Correggio’s original, is one on copper, formerly at the Gemäldegalerie, Dresden, and before that in the Este collection in Modena, missing since the Second World War. However, its authorship as a work by Correggio has not been unanimously accepted. In a recent article that presents the sensational rediscovery of Correggio’s original, David Ekserdjian examines a range of questions relating to the picture’s iconography and patronage, as well as stylistic and chronological considerations. Building on the work of Gaetano Ghiraldi published over two decades ago in the 1998 exhibition catalogue devoted to the art collections of the Galleria Estense, which clarified the Este provenance of the Dresden painting, Ekserdjian traces the latter’s provenance.
Ghiraldi dispelled the myth surrounding the Este painting, identifying it not as Correggio’s original but as the copy after Correggio by Cristofano Allori (1577–1621), first documented in 1609, when Cosimo II de’ Medici, Grand Duke of Tuscany, gave it as a gift to Princess Eleonora d’Este (1597–1661) when she took the veil. In a document listing the gifts, the picture is described as a small painting on copper of the reclining Magdalen after Correggio in an elaborate silver frame with precious stones. Its author is noted as Bronzino but this reference must be to Cristofano Allori, son of Alessandro Allori (1535–1607), Bronzino’s pupil and heir. Ekserdjian suggests that its designation as a copy after Correggio may have been forgotten and its status upgraded to that of an original when it passed out of Eleonora’s ownership and reached Modena. By 1663, when it is first securely recorded there, it is listed in an inventory without an attribution. Recorded again in successive Este inventories, the painting was widely admired as one of Correggio’s greatest achievements. As Ghiraldi has convincingly argued, the fame of the Este collections bolstered its claim as an autograph work and its true provenance fell into obscurity. It remained in the Galleria Estense until the mid-eighteenth century when Francesco III d’Este sold a portion of the collection to Augustus III of Saxony: one hundred pictures, including the Magdalen on copper, were sent to Dresden in 1746. Not until the mid-nineteenth century were doubts expressed about Correggio’s authorship.
The medium, support and dimensions of the Dresden Magdalen differ from the painting presented here. The discrepancy – not insignificant – is a key factor in establishing the primacy of this version on panel, which accords with records of it in inventories, over the version on copper. Even more significant than the dimensions in establishing this as Correggio’s original is its grotto setting, markedly different from the wooded landscape of the lost Dresden copper. The latter’s verdant landscape features in innumerable copies of its design, whereas the grotto depicted here, as well as the distant abbey, only feature in this painting and in one other, the sole known replica of this design: an eighteenth-century copy on canvas housed at Southampton City Art Gallery. This important difference distinguishes this design from written descriptions and old photographs of the Dresden painting before its disappearance and from the many copies after the latter version.
All the copies that follow the Dresden prototype, which is executed on a copper support, are either also on copper or on canvas and all are considerably larger (approximately 6 cm. higher and 12 cm. wider). The copies also differ from the present work in showing a much more elongated female saint than the more rounded proportions of the figure in Correggio’s panel. Furthermore, the explicit mention of the grotto in seventeenth-century inventories is highly significant since the Dresden prototype shows not a grotto but a landscape with stones in the foreground and background vegetation. Always the settings of the copies employ a wide landscape, never a grotto, as a backdrop. Some copies, such as the version by Allori (Palazzo Pitti, Florence), also incorporate a skull, in the case of the latter with a crucifix.
Maddalena Spagnolo has argued persuasively that the highly distinctive iconography adopted by Correggio should be understood as a reflection of Isabella d’Este’s special interest in the saint. The evidence strongly suggests that the Gonzagas of Mantua – and very possibly Isabella herself – were the painting’s original patrons. Both Isabella d’Este and her son Federigo (1500–1540) visited Mary Magdalen’s shrine in Provence within a year of each other. In the summer of 1516, the young Federigo arrived in France in the retinue of King François I for a journey motivated by political and religious reasons. Following a tour of the Loire, the party proceeded to Provence to visit the pilgrimage sites dedicated to the Magdalen. After visiting St Maximin, where they venerated the relic of Saint Mary Magdalen’s head, the company went to see the hermitage at Sainte-Baume where the saint had lived as a penitent, before continuing their tour of the south.
So eager was the Marchioness to undertake "il viaggio de santa Maria Magdalena" that she herself visited the shrine in March 1517, following in the footsteps of her son Federigo. Keeping closely to a similar itinerary to his, Isabella then travelled to Marseilles, Aix, Arles and Avignon, and later spent a few days in Lyons, where she admired some very beautiful pictures of the Magdalen and ordered some of the saint to be sent to her in Mantua. As Spagnolo relates, the paintings only arrived there in April 1518 after some delay and Isabella was disappointed with the results, for they were not as beautiful as the ones she had seen in Lyons. Rather than keep them for her own collection she decided to give them away. She resolved to do the same with another Magdalen, sourced in Lyons by Stazio Gadio, the Gonzaga maestro di casa, in April 1518, when he was in France with Federigo on the occasion of the Dauphin’s baptism. In Stazio’s letter to Isabella, he stated that he had made every effort to find a beautiful Magdalen to please her, while bemoaning the dearth of beautiful figures of the saint. If deemed not beautiful enough and not to her liking, Isabella reserved the right to give it away. A few months later, doubtless aware of his mother’s appetite for such works and her recent disappointments, Federigo ordered – most likely on her behalf – two Flemish paintings of the Magdalen ("due Magdelene dipinte… hopera fiamincha") from his agent Nicolò Nobili.
Isabella’s continuing interest in Saint Mary Magdalen is attested a decade later by a letter dated 3 September 1528 addressed to her by Veronica Gambara about a masterpiece painted by "il nostro maestro Antonio Allegri", which she describes in detail as showing the saint in a cave genuflecting, her hands clasped and raised to heaven. Its whereabouts today unknown, this lost kneeling Magdalen is known from an engraving by Piloty. As Maddalena Spagnolo has pointed out, Veronica’s letter is the earliest surviving document to link Correggio and Isabella. She makes two important observations: firstly, that Correggio was already known to her, as is clear from the wording of the letter; and secondly, that Isabella’s special interest in the depiction of the Magdalen at the cave was commonly recognized, at least in the courts near Mantua.
Spagnolo draws attention to two records linking Correggio’s Reclining Magdalen to the court of Mantua: firstly, an entry in the Gonzaga inventory of 1627 that refers to "la Madalena in terra copia del Coregio del Fetti" (Fetti’s painting – if the attribution is reliable – is lost but the record does indicate the presence of a version of Correggio’s composition in Mantua in the early seventeenth century); and secondly, an unpublished letter by Ortensio Landi, lost but recorded by Braghirolli in 1872, in which Correggio was said to have painted a Magdalen reading for Federigo Gonzaga in around 1533. While this tantalizing evidence – were it verifiable – gives some support to the idea that Federigo commissioned Correggio’s painting for his mother, none the less on balance it is more likely that Isabella, rather than her son, was the original recipient of Correggio’s sophisticated painting, given her tendency to provide detailed iconographical instructions and her devotion to the Magdalen. Indeed, Spagnolo makes a convincing case that it was executed for Isabella d’Este, a theory supported by David Ekserdjian. Stylistic reasons discussed below for dating Correggio’s painting to about 1519, rather than the early 1530s, also strengthen the case for Isabella’s patronage.
Isabella d’Este was not the only aristocratic lady in Italy interested in owning representations of the Magdalen. Vittoria Colonna, Marchioness of Pescara (1492–1547), also sought such works. Even after receiving a Magdalen painted by Titian in 1531 she persisted in requesting one from Isabella’s collection. Speculation over which painting she sought has led scholars to propose different candidates, including Correggio’s Kneeling Magdalen and his Reclining Magdalen. It may be that the latter was given as a gift to Vittoria Colonna but without further evidence this suggestion remains unproven. In any case Isabella arranged for the painting in question to be copied before its departure and Ekserdjian raises the possibility that one of the many pictures of the Magdalen recorded in the 1627 Gonzaga inventory was that copy.
Another possible lead to the Magdalen’s later sixteenth-century provenance is given by the Florentine art historian and biographer Filippo Baldinucci (1625–1696) in his Notizie de’ Professori del Disegno da Cimabue in qua (1681). There in his biography of Cristofano Allori he mentions a picture of the reclining Magdalen that was among the beautiful paintings collected by "il cavaliere Gaddi" – Niccolò Gaddi (1537–1591) – who lived in Florence in the time of Grand Duke Francesco de’ Medici (1541–1587). Baldinucci describes it minutely: "a small figure of a St Mary Magdalen in the desert, almost wholly covered by a blue drapery, reclining propped up on her right arm, and reading a book, which she holds in her left hand, all the work of Correggio." He goes on to report that somehow the picture came to the attention of Cristofano and that he copied it again and again and from those copies proliferated more copies by at least one of his pupils. Such was the demand that many believed them to be Allori’s invention. However, Baldinucci says nothing of the picture’s whereabouts and with Gaddi’s death the trail runs cold, for the painting does not feature in his posthumous inventory.
The next documentary record of the picture places it securely in one of the most distinguished ducal collections in Italy, that of the Farnese in Parma. From about 1680, or slightly later, until 1736, Correggio’s Magdalen is recorded in Parma as hanging at the Palazzo Ducale and is listed in six inventories. The Magdalen is described in the most precise and detailed of these, the Inventario de’ Quadri esistenti nel Palazzo del Giardino, a document that is traditionally dated about 1680 but is thought to be later, perhaps drawn up at some point in the first half of the following decade. In this inventory, both dimensions and medium are given, frame descriptions and old and new inventory numbers. Applying conventional conversion, the dimensions given in the inventory of 5 oncie in height by 6 oncie in width are equivalent to 22.7 by 27.3 cm. This corresponds with the present panel, which was originally approximately 5 mm. greater in height before the rebate was removed. The few millimeters lost along the bottom edge can be assessed through the painted copy on canvas at Southampton City Art Gallery, which measures 23.2 by 29.3 cm. The precise description, medium, support and almost identical size make it certain that the present work is the picture described in the inventory.
How Correggio’s Magdalen came to be part of the Farnese collection is not yet known. One intriguing possibility is that it belonged to Carlo Beccaria (1605–1680), treasurer of the Farnese in Parma. A work fitting its description – "A Magdalen on panel reading by Correggio" – is recorded in a list of Beccaria’s paintings bequeathed in part to the Farnese. Drawn up in 1680, the year of Beccaria’s death, and transcribed by Filangieri di Candida, who published it in 1902, the list records the painting under item 14. If it does indeed denote the present work, it would make it the earliest written description of Correggio’s painting known to date.
Be that as it may, soon after Beccaria’s death, Correggio’s painting is recorded at the Palazzo del Giardino of the Farnese in Parma in their inventory of about 1680 (commonly referred to with that date but probably drawn up slightly later). In this, the first of the Farnese documents to include the present work, all paintings are listed with an attribution and sometimes even "school" or "workshop" as identifiers. As might be expected, the most important pictures were displayed in the principal rooms, while minor pictures were kept in various private apartments and feature towards the end of the inventory. The Magdalen is listed in the third of the principal rooms, known as the "Terza Camera detta della Madona della Gatta" (the room named after the Madonna of the Cat at the time thought to be by Raphael and now given to Giulio Romano; at Capodimonte, Naples). This reflects the high esteem in which Correggio’s Magdalen was held. Among the highlights displayed in this room were Parmigianino’s Holy Family with the young Saint John the Baptist, still at Capodimonte; several works by Annibale Carracci, now dispersed between Capodimonte, the Musée Condé, Chantilly, and the Galleria Nazionale, Bologna; as well as Correggio’s small gem, still in Naples, the Mystic Marriage of Saint Catherine, a work of the early 1520s painted on a panel of comparable dimensions to the present work.
Described as hanging in the Galleria by 1708, the record of the Magdalen in the inventory of that date retains the same numbering as in the earlier Farnese inventory. It describes the composition’s principal elements in a similar way, while adding further details on framing (it was displayed in a gilt frame) and a significant demotion in terms of its attribution (‘viene dal Coreggio’ means it is a copy of an original by Correggio). By 1736 Correggio’s Magdalen is recorded as hanging in the "primo Corridore" at the Palazzo Reale in the inventory of that year, drawn up to record the works to be transported to Naples. Although after 1736 the Magdalen no longer appears in Farnese inventories, other circumstantial evidence proves the painting went to Naples with the rest of the collection. Works were initially stored at the Palazzo Reale, with only a small proportion on display. The majority, including probably the present work, remained stored in crates under conditions that were far from ideal. By 1758 the Palazzo at Capodimonte was ready to house the paintings, the Magdalen had regained its earlier autograph status, and was noted in travellers' accounts as displayed there.
Of significance as a further demonstration of the work’s return to favor and as evidence of the painting’s continuing presence in Naples in the 1770s is an engraving of it by Raphael Morghen (1761–1833), which he made at some time between about 1770 and 1778. The painting’s link to Morghen’s engraving was first noted by Hugo Chapman. Morghen, who was born in Naples in 1761 (and not 1758 as is commonly stated), was the son of Filippo Morghen (1730–1807), himself an engraver and print dealer, who moved to Naples from Florence. The family was well connected at the Bourbon court. Stylistically Morghen’s print of the Magdalen is comparable to his earliest engravings, which he executed at the young age of nine; by age twelve he was considered a fully trained engraver. A small print, rather crudely executed, the Magdalen is not recorded in the complete catalogue of his works by Robert Halsey. Nevertheless it is likely to date to the early 1770s and certainly no later than 1778, when Morghen, aged seventeen, left Naples for Rome.
Morghen’s engraving – the only print to match the rediscovered Magdalen – clearly reproduces the latter composition and not the Allori derivation reproduced in countless other prints, a reflection of the fact that the fame of the Dresden version eclipsed that of Correggio’s original. The engraving, which is inscribed "Ant. Allegri da Coreggio pin.", is distinctive in featuring the grotto, the silhouette of the mountain on the left, with the sailing boat and the tiny building of the basilica of Mary Magdalen in Saint-Maximin-la-Sainte-Baume. It also reproduces the flowers and plants in the foreground that none of the other versions has, apart from the faithful copy in Southampton. Furthermore, the figure’s compact proportions differ markedly from the elongated forms of the Allori derivation. The rounded forms of Correggio’s Magdalen denote a voluptuousness more akin to the feminine ideal of the early Cinquecento.
The Magdalen must still have been in the collection at Capodimonte in 1783, when it was described by Tommaso Puccini in his account of his visit there, but it is not yet known when exactly the painting left the collection. A terminus ante quem is provided by the 1799 inventory made by Ignazio Anders after the sack of Naples, which no longer lists the Magdalen. As Davide Gasparotto has pointed out, the Portrait of a Collector by Parmigianino today in the National Gallery, London, and the Portrait of a Man, also by Parmigianino, now at the York City Art Gallery, shared the same destiny as the Magdalen by Correggio, since they left the Farnese collection in unknown circumstances during the turbulent years of the Napoleonic period, and entered the antiquarian market of the early nineteenth century.
The panel is highly refined in its detail and the figure of the Magdalen is in excellent state, as is the meticulously detailed foliage in the foreground, which is not found in any of the other known versions – as Ekserdjian points out – and the distant coastal landscape. Although overall the effect is darker than it would originally have appeared, notably in the area of the saint’s robe, which shows degradation of the blue pigments, an occurrence found also in other paintings by Correggio, nevertheless the painting retains the figure’s subtle qualities and the beautiful tonal gradations of the setting. With a delicate play of carefully nuanced tones, Correggio portrays the Magdalen’s unselfconscious beauty. The volume of her hair is rendered in a particularly sensuous way, its blonde waves framing her lovely face. She is illuminated partly by light falling from the left but also by its reflection from the pages of her book, highlighting her cheeks, in contrast to the more shadowed areas of her face, especially her downcast eyes. Correggio not only conveys her total absorption in the act of reading, he also captures the intimacy of a woman in contemplative solitude, unaware of the world around her; the effect on the viewer is beguiling.
Infra-red reflectography reveals some pentimenti by the artist; the principal changes are an adjustment to the pages of the book, most obviously around the Magdalen’s left breast, which was originally covered by the upturned left-hand page; and some reworking to the area of the right-hand page to show more space between her raised torso and the book’s flat surface. In the center foreground the foliage has likewise been slightly altered and there is some indication that the outline of the woman’s feet was adjusted.
Stylistically Correggio’s painting is datable to a year or two later than the Magdalen at the National Gallery. The juxtaposition of the two paintings in 2018 helped shed light on the stylistic and chronological relationship between them. Certainly, they share several features: in both the saint is shown in blue, semi-nude, hair unbound, with the same attributes of book and ointment jar, the latter so similar in form that it could be taken for its pair; the wild setting and careful attention paid to vegetation are also common to both. Independent cabinet pictures of Mary Magdalen were rare, especially full-length depictions, as David Ekserdjian points out. Indeed, the complimentary qualities of these two pictures and Isabella d’Este’s desire to possess such images, led him to propose that the standing Magdalen may also have been commissioned by the Marchioness of Mantua. Her patronage of Correggio was to culminate in his two Allegories of Virtue and Vice for her Studiolo; meanwhile, her son Federigo ordered for the Emperor Charles V arguably Correggio’s finest works on canvas: the four great mythologies of the Loves of Jove.
"La famosissima Maddalena" – among the most widely copied images of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries – holds a special place as an icon of western art. Its acquisition from the Este collection as Correggio’s original – incorrectly, as is now widely recognized – was deemed a great coup for the Dresden Gallery and indeed it was one of its most highly prized (and costly) purchases. Upon its arrival there, the Magdalene became a favorite of the king’s and by 1750, if not before, it was hanging in his bedroom. In 1746 when Dresden was under attack from the Prussians the picture was handed to the queen for safe keeping; and two years later, following the city’s surrender and the Gallery’s relocation to Königstein, only the Magdalen and one other painting – Raphael’s Sistine Madonna – had special crates built to safeguard their transit.
The desirability of this treasured masterpiece made it the object of an art theft in 1788. By coincidence, in October of that same year, the scandalous Venetian writer Giacomo Casanova was travelling to Dresden. In his infamous memoirs he vividly describes the thorough search he and his luggage had to undergo during the hunt to recover the masterpiece. In a detailed letter to Prince Belozelski, Russian Minister to the Court of Dresden, he writes, "Trust me my Prince..., I have known many Magdalens but none made me swear as much as the one of Correggio". The picture even featured in the list of desiderata in The Wants of Man, the celebrated poem written in about 1840 by John Quincy Adams, sixth President of the United States. Only very recently have the historical fortunes of Correggio’s long-lost original been disentangled from the history and erroneous attribution of the Dresden picture.
Among the greatest rediscoveries of modern times, Correggio’s Magdalen constitutes an Italian Renaissance masterpiece of real distinction. His interpretation of the Sainte-Baume Magdalen, while remaining faithful to the iconographic detail of his French prototype, succeeded in transforming its compositional elements to create a work of unrivalled elegance. Endlessly imitated, the original, which boasts a superb provenance, can now take its rightful place at the head of a long line of derivations, most of which departed from the restrained elegance of his original conception. Only now with the re-emergence of this intimate painting can the artist’s true intentions be fully appreciated and properly understood in the context of his work and the patronage of the Gonzaga.

Maria Madalena (Mary Magdalene) - The Master of the Parrot








Maria Madalena (Mary Magdalene) - The Master of the Parrot
Coleção privada
Óleo sobre painel - 74x62


This vibrant, crisp, and enchantingly detailed portrayal of Mary Magdalene is a characteristic work of the Master of the Parrot, an anonymous yet highly accomplished hand active in Antwerp and possibly Bruges in the second quarter of the sixteenth century. A contemporary of the Master of the Female Half-Lengths, this artist shares some stylistic affinities with Pieter Coecke van Aelst, with whom he may have trained. In an important 1949 article, Max J. Friedländer first identified a group of paintings by this artist, who he aptly named after the exotic birds that appear in a number of the compositions given to the master. As this group has grown over the years, so have thoughts about this master, now thought possibly to be a group of Flemish artists working together in the same workshop in Antwerp, one that specialized in devotional images for the wealthy bourgeois population. Consistent stylistic elements found throughout the works ascribed to this master are elegant and finely painted females with slightly oval faces and fingernails, long necks and fingers, wide foreheads and delicate eyebrows, all of which are visible in the present picture.
This painting is a particularly captivating depiction of Mary Magdalene, who was a very popular subject for artists and collectors in Flanders in the sixteenth century. She is seen here set before a stone niche and a clothe of honor adorned with pearls and gold brocade, her lavishly attired figure filling the composition. An ermine mantel lined with black velvet is draped over her shoulders, partly covering her elegant gown edged with gold brocade, and a large gold crucifix with a fleur-de-lis is draped around her neck on a thick gold chain. A shimmering blue sash is looped around her waist, serving as a striking contrast to the rich red velvet near the cuff of her sleeves. She wears a large sapphire ring, and her opulent headdress is adorned with rubies, pearls, and gold. In her right hands she holds an elaborate gold ointment jar set atop a devotional book, while in her left she holds a pink flower, symbolizing a belief that she was the bride of Christ. Before her is a stone ledge with a raised edge, upon which rests cherries, a knife, and a sheathed dagger, while behind her are particularly distinct and inventive landscapes that recall the work of Joachim Patinir.
The free and sketchy underdrawing rendered with a liquid medium and applied with a brush is revealed through infrared images of the present painting. Such imaging also unveils a number of compositional changes to the design made by the artist, including shifts in the hands, details of the costume, and the face, such as her left eye.

Propaganda "Descubra Ouro Preto num Veraneio", Chevrolet Veraneio, Chevrolet, Brasil


 

Propaganda "Descubra Ouro Preto num Veraneio", Chevrolet Veraneio, Chevrolet, Brasil
Propaganda

Retrato de um Homem (Portrait of a Man, Ottaviano de' Medici?, Wearing a Large Hat, with a Box of Wax Seals Resting on a Ledge Before Him) - Andrea del Sarto







Retrato de um Homem (Portrait of a Man, Ottaviano de Medici?, Wearing a Large Hat, with a Box of Wax Seals Resting on a Ledge Before Him) - Andrea del Sarto
Coleção privada
OST - 81x64

Following the departures of Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, and Raphael from Florence by 1508, Andrea del Sarto emerged as the preeminent painter in the city (a circumstance that led one scholar to bestow on him the ironic designation “Florentine caposcuola by default”). He oversaw a large and industrious workshop, and numbered among his gifted pupils and followers Pontormo and Rosso Fiorentino, luminaries of the Florentine maniera, as well as the painters Francesco Salviati and Giorgio Vasari and the sculptor Baccio Bandinelli. His style fuses a delicate sfumato inspired by Leonardo with a subtle, luminous and jewellike palette. Surfaces are crystalline, polished and prismatic, with flesh and fabric undifferentiated. A quiet and deeply moving pathos imbues his numerous altarpieces and private devotional images, while his portraits—which share the exquisite coloristic sensibility of his religious compositions, if in a more subdued range—offer sensitive and penetrating likenesses of his mostly reticent sitters.
Prolific as a painter of frescoes and panel paintings, and also as a draftsman, Andrea del Sarto produced a small number of portraits over the course of his roughly 30-year career, although this was not the primary focus of his activity. This singular example—the attribution of which is unassailable on stylistic grounds—is an important new addition to his oeuvre, and significantly augments the modest corpus of portraits by him. Its authorship was confirmed by the late Professor Sydney Freedberg, a preeminent expert on the artist, who considered it “an autograph portrait by Andrea del Sarto… of very high quality” (letter to the owner, January 14, 1991). Despite this authoritative endorsement, and its self-evident significance—both as a newly discovered work by the artist and a notable addition to the inventory of early 16th-century Florentine male portraits by the likes of Franciabigio, Ridolfo Ghirlandaio, Giuliano Bugiardini Francesco Granacci, and Sarto himself—the Portrait of a Man has remained unknown until now.
On stylistic grounds, the portrait can be dated to the mid-1520s, making it a mature work from the last decade of the artist’s life. (He died of the plague in 1530.) This was a period of intense activity. In those years, he was absorbed in the ongoing campaign to fresco the Chiostro dello Scalzo with monochrome scenes from the life of St. John the Baptist, patron saint of Florence—one of the most significant undertakings of his career—and the monumental Last Supper in the refectory of San Salvi, a monastic church on the outskirts of Florence. As in Leonardo da Vinci’s paradigmatic treatment of the subject, the Apostles gathered around Jesus show a compelling range of emotions and expressions. Following the practice of Leonardo and Raphael, for the Last Supper and other works Andrea produced masterful chalk studies of heads and hands, which allowed him to explore and fix the individual figures’ heightened emotional states. It was not unusual for his portraits, too, to be preceded by head studies of the sitters, executed in order to capture both their outer physical likeness and their inner animating spirit. Although no such preparatory drawing for present portrait is known, it is not difficult to imagine that one preceded the acutely captured aspect of this sitter.
Internal evidence supports the portrait’s proposed chronology. The sitter’s clothing, notably the broad-brimmed hat and the tunic with a voluminous upper sleeve, worn here under a mantle, points to a date in the 1520s. Two contemporaneous portraits by Rosso Fiorentino (National Gallery, London; National Gallery of Art, Washington, DC) offer close comparisons; the unknown sitters in both wear hats and tunics with ballooning sleeves, that are markedly similar to the costume of the sitter in Sarto’s portrait. (Both these sartorial flourishes would soon disappear from the lexicon of Florentine male fashion, to be replaced by small berets and tighter, often slashed, sleeves).
This dating places the work some seven or eight years later than the celebrated portrait of a man—possibly Lorenzo di Matteo Peri, a Florentine stationer—in the National Gallery, London, with which it nevertheless shares a number of similarities, notably the same half-length format and tight compression of the sitter in a shallow, unarticulated space; the presence and placement of a single, sparse piece of furniture; and the dark, non-descript background. Their faces each partly enveloped in shadow, both sitters’ heads are turned at the identical ¾ angle, and their poses, with arm extended along the lower edge of the composition, are analogous if essentially reversed, with one seen from the front and the other from the rear. Separating the execution of these two masterful portraits was Andrea’s presumed trip to Rome, where he would have seen Raphael’s recent work. Unparalleled in Florentine portraiture of the period, the sober dignity of the man in the present portrait is indebted to Raphael’s portrayals of male sitters like Baldassare Castiglione (Paris, Louvre), Agostino Beazzano (the sitter on the left in the double portrait; Rome, Palazzo Doria-Pamphilj), and Antonio Tebaldeo (whereabouts unknown), all executed in the mid-1510s.
The identity of Andrea del Sarto’s sitter is unknown, but his elegant and obviously costly attire conveys his wealth and elevated social standing. While most of the artists’ portraits, like those of his collaborator Franciabigio (1482-1525), depict merchants, artisans, and functionaries—identified by the tools of their respective trades that appear as attributes in their portraits — the subject here is a patrician, as his costume, it bears repeating, clearly signals. In the 1520s, when the portrait was painted, Florence was nominally a republic, although the powerful Medici family—long the true wielders of political power of the city, which clung to the trappings of its proud republican past while knowing the pretense was performative rather than authentic—had reestablished a political stranglehold after a period of exile. In this perilous and politically fraught decade, which culminated in the bloody Siege of Florence in 1529-30, the definitive demise of the republic, and the official establishment of the Medici as autocratic hereditary dukes, the populace was divided into pro-Medicean and pro-republican camps. Some portraits of the period appear to contain coded messaging about the sitter’s political leanings. A case in point is Pontormo’s seductive portrait of two friends (Venice, Cini Foundation): the letter with a legible passage from the ancient Roman orator and statesman Cicero’s dialogue On Friendship held by one of the sitters has been interpreted as obliquely signaling their, or the unknown recipient’s, republican sympathies. This interesting interpretation is speculative, but what is certain is that one and perhaps both the sitters—Pontormo’s close friends, according to Vasari, who referred to this portrait in his biography of the artist—were the sons-in-law of the glassmaker Beccuccio Bicchieraio (Domenico di Jacopo di Matteo), whose appealing likeness was captured by Andrea del Sarto in a slightly later portrait (Edinburgh, National Galleries of Scotland).
Given that it lacks any of the pictorial devices believed to signal pro-Republican (and therefore anti-Medicean) sentiments, the present portrait may depict someone in the pro-Medici camp, a surmise bolstered by the observation that the sitter wears the traditional colors—red and blue—of the familiar Medici stemma (coat-of-arts) with its red and blue palle (balls). It has been suggested that the subject is Ottaviano de’ Medici (1484-1546), a member of a minor branch of the Medici family. As yet uncorroborated by documentary evidence, the proposal is compelling nonetheless, and it warrants due consideration. Ottaviano was married to Lorenzo de’ Medici’s grand-daughter Francesca Salviati—the probable subject of a fetching portrait of woman in a red gown by Bronzino (Frankfurt, Städel Museum)—a pedigree that gave him impressive bona fides in pro-Medicean circles, and he operated as a loyal agent and guardian of the family’s interests in Florence during the pontificates of the Medici popes Leo X (r. 1513-21) and Clement VII (r. 1523-34). Ottaviano was, moreover, the patron of Andrea del Sarto, who painted the Medici Holy Family (Florence, Uffizi) for him. When his Medicean allegiance landed him in prison during the waning days of the Florentine republic, the artist safeguarded the coveted picture, fending off offers by clamoring would-be buyers until Ottaviano was freed and could take ownership. (The grateful client paid him double.) He was also a mentor of Giorgio Vasari, who credited his early success as an artist at the new Medici ducal court in Florence in the mid-1530s to Ottaviano’s sponsorship.
One of Ottaviano’s undertakings as a Medici henchman in Florence was the formation of a family portrait gallery, for which he gathered and occasionally commissioned images of illustrious relations. These included Raphael’s Portrait of Leo X with Two Cardinals (Palazzo Pitti), Lorenzo de’ Medici, Duke of Urbino (private collection), and Giuliano de’ Medici, Duke of Nemours (a version is in the Metropolitan Museum of Art), Pontormo’s posthumous Cosimo de’ Medici, Pater Patriae (Florence, Uffizi), and two symbol-laden portraits by Vasari, Lorenzo il Magnifico, and Duke Alessandro de’ Medici in Armor (both Florence, Uffizi)—the latter a blatant piece of Medici political propaganda in its assertion of the dubious Alessandro’s right to rule the subjugated city of Florence. Here again, he and Andrea del Sarto intersected: when the newly elected Pope Clement VII ordered Raphael’s portrait of Leo X sent off as a diplomatic gift in 1523 (roughly the date of the present work), Ottaviano, loathe to relinquish it, had Sarto execute a copy, which was dispatched in its stead. So masterful was the replica that it persuaded in its deception (and so in demand was the original that Ottaviano later had Vasari make another copy; that version is now in Holkham Hall).
As the Medici popes’ trusted “boots on the ground” in Florence, which they surveilled and meddled in ceaselessly from their lofty perch in Rome, Ottaviano’s most important assignment was to oversee the campaign to fresco the salone of Poggio a Caiano, a family villa outside Florence, with historical scenes celebrating—and mythologizing—the Medici dynasty. (The project was conceived at the end of the pontificate of Leo X, when his cousin and close confidante, Cardinal Giulio de’ Medici, the future Clement VII, was Archbishop of Florence and de facto ruler of the city.) Foremost among the narratives was Andrea del Sarto’s Tribute to Caesar (1520-21), a thinly veiled glorification of Medici political power carried out not long before the present portrait. As a key protagonist in this ambitious commission, Ottaviano was a party to and purveyor of Medici myth-making. Given his ongoing association with Andrea del Sarto, it is easy to imagine that the artist would have executed Ottaviano’s portrait—a tantalizing scenario in which the present work undoubtedly figures.
A clue to the identity of the sitter here resides in the small casket on the table and its contents. These appear to be wax seals. Affixed to private letters, diplomatic correspondence, and official documents as a mark of authenticity, seals denote the holder’s (and often, the recipient’s) authority and high station, the status Ottaviano de’ Medici enjoyed in Florence. A roughly contemporaneous portrait illustrating their use in this way is Sebastiano del Piombo’s Ferry Carondelet and his Two Secretaries (Madrid, Thyssen-Bornemisza Museum). Garbed in a costly, fur-lined cloak and seated at a table covered in a Lotto rug (like his costume, a sign of wealth and status), the prelate-diplomat clutches a folded letter. Several other, opened missives, their red wax seals visible, clutter the table before him. Papal legate to the court of the Hapsburg Emperor Maximilian at the time the portrait was executed, Carondelet is obviously the recipient of these written communications, responses to which are being penned by the attentive secretary seated beside him.
Essential for identifying the sitter, the seals in the Sarto portrait —if seals they in fact are—are not entirely analogous. They are not affixed to correspondence but have been pried or cut out of the paper to which they were originally attached and assembled like precious gems (a collecting specialty of the Medici) in the small, silk-lined casket. Moreover, the sitter here—who is neither a secretary, as his elegant garb makes clear, nor a dignitary executing the duties of rank or office—is not engaged in any act of writing, personal or professional, in which seals would be used, as the absence of paper and writing implements makes clear. There is a marked difference between this man’s withdrawn reverie in the presence of his enigmatic tokens and the active, alert attitude of the young man writing in a ledger book, a folded letter with a wax seal seen on the ledge before him, in a contemporary portrait by Franciabigio (Berlin, Gemäldegalerie). Comparison with the portraits by both Sebastiano and Franciabigio make clear that, whoever it represents, this is a private rather than an official or public image. The same is true of the National Gallery portrait, whose sitter, absorbed in a private pursuit, turns his back to the viewer and looks back over his shoulder, interrupted. And while the present work cannot be considered a friendship portrait, as the London portrait surely is—the patrician sitter here is the artist’s social superior rather than his equal—it is of note that both are painted on thin canvas or linen, a lightweight support that was more easily transportable, and less expensive, than wood panel. The implications of its use here remain to be more fully investigated.
In keeping with the interpretation of the portrait as a private rather than public or official depiction, the excised seals (for lack of a clearer identification) in their elegant coffer should be seen as mementos having personal meaning or value to the sitter. (Were they attached to letters he received, they signify his impressive network of connections—a visual iteration of Renaissance name-dropping.) In this regard, they are akin to the kind of precious and esoteric bibelots frequently displayed by subjects in Renaissance portraits as signs of their cultivated taste and erudition, a convention seen, for instance, in Alessandro Allori’s portrait of Ortensia Montauto de’ Bardi (Florence, Uffizi).
Whoever the sitter here might be, his averted gaze and introspective mien suggest contemplation rather than action: he is not engaged in the worlds of commerce or diplomacy, nor does he have the character of a humanist or poet like the male sitters in Raphael’s Roman portraits. Withdrawn and absorbed in thought, he ruminates on the rarefied objects before him that carry personal and private meaning. Significantly, his aspect recalls one of Michelangelo’s capitani in the Medici Chapel in San Lorenzo in Florence, an idealized portrayal of Lorenzo de’ Medici, Duke of Urbino, who is often characterized as a personification of the vita contemplativa (contemplative life). The portrait transcends mere descriptive likeness to capture what Leonardo called the “moti mentali”—the animating movements of the mind—even if its subject evasively guards those inner thoughts. In this consummate demonstration of his great gifts as a portraitist, Vasari’s declaration that Andrea del Sarto was “senza errore”—in essence, the perfect painter—resounds.

Estátua de um Homem Egípcio em Calcário, Final da 5ª Dinastia, Circa 2440-2355 A. C., Egito

 














Estátua de um Homem Egípcio em Calcário, Final da 5ª Dinastia, Circa 2440-2355 A. C., Egito
Fotografia


Property from an American Private Collection.
An Egyptian Limestone Figure of a Man.
Late 5th Dynasty, circa 2440-2355 B.C.
Striding on a rectangular base with slightly tapering back pillar, his arms held to his sides, his hands gripping short staves, with powerful legs and broad shoulders, and wearing a short wrap-around kilt, knotted belt with tab drawn up beside the navel, and short layered wig of notched curls; remains of red pigment on the body, yellow on the flap of the kilt, blue and turquoise on the knot and tab of the belt, and black on the wig, pillar, and base. Height 31 5/8 in; 80.3 cm.
Excavated at Giza (Serdab of Weri and Meti [G2415]), by American archeologist George Andrew Reisner on behalf of the Harvard University-Museum of Fine Arts, Boston expedition, and awarded to the museum by the Egyptian Government Antiquities Service in 1921.
Museum of Fine Arts, Boston (Sotheby Parke Bernet, New York, December 14th, 1978, lot 304, illus.).
British Rail Pension Fund, United Kingdom (Sotheby's, London, July 2nd, 1996, no. 52).
acquired by the present owner after the above sale.
Egypt’s Old Kingdom (2663-2195 B.C.) is considered its Classical Age and nothing later ever quite equaled it. Renowned for its spare purity of form, the sculpture of this era, the Age of the Pyramids, has a timeless beauty and serenity unmatched by other periods. This commanding statue of a man is an outstanding example of the art of this incomparable era.
The figure was excavated by the great American archeologist, George Andrew Reisner working for the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston at Giza in the shadow of the Great Pyramid in 1913 and was awarded to the Museum by the Egyptian Government Antiquities Service through partage or a division of finds, which allowed foreign expeditions to retain and export some of the material they discovered in the course of their work.
The statue came from a tomb (G 2415) located in the Great Western Cemetery beside the Pyramid of Khufu belonging to a man named Weri and his wife Meti dating to the Fifth Dynasty, probably during the reign of Niuserra circa 2432-2421 B.C. It originally stood in the serdab or statue chamber, a feature of these mastaba tombs which contained sculptures of the tomb owner and his family. The statues served a purpose as a home for the spirit in case anything might happen to the mummy. For this reason an individual might have multiple images of him or herself, and usually depicted as young and vigorous. This statue is one of seven limestone figures that were found in the serdab, including ones of Weri and a pair statue of a man named Ikhui and his wife Bebi, who may have been relatives of Weri.
The statue is uninscribed, but most probably represents Weri, and depicts him striding forward with his left leg advanced in a pose typical of the period. He wears a wig composed or rows of curls and a knee-length kilt tied at the waist with a belt knotted in the front and the tab end sticking up beside his navel. His muscular arms grasp two round bosses, a stylistic feature often found in Egyptian sculpture. The cubic form of the image along with the back pillar were intended to make sure that the sculpture would survive intact as an eternal home for the soul. Such large statues are rare, as is the preservation of much of the pigment on the surface. William Stevenson Smith, art historian of the Old Kingdom, noted that the Weri group of sculptures, “…characterizes the best of the small private statues of Late Dynasty V.”

O Homem das Dores (The Man of Sorrows) - Sandro Botticelli

 







O Homem das Dores (The Man of Sorrows) - Sandro Botticelli
Coleção privada
Têmpera e óleo sobre painel - 69x51


Profoundly arresting and highly original, Sandro Botticelli’s Man of Sorrows is a defining masterpiece from the artist’s late career. Dating to the cusp of the sixteenth century, this painting enriches our understanding of a Florentine artist best known for his beautiful Madonnas, captivating portraits, and enchanting allegorical and mythological scenes. After the political and religious uprisings in Florence in the 1490s, a notable shift occurred in Botticelli’s pictorial language, and his works became more somber and spiritual in character. Although religious in subject, this painting has a strikingly realistic quality that imparts the individuality of a portrait. Christ’s two distinct natures as both perfectly divine and perfectly human find their fullest expression here, a testament to the prodigious talents of one of the greatest artists of the Italian Renaissance. An important rediscovery, this picture comes to light as scholars argue for a more nuanced reading of Botticelli’s work in the context of his own spirituality and a fuller understanding of the creative impulses that led to the innovative masterpieces of his late years.
In Botticelli’s Man of Sorrows, the viewer encounters Christ wearing a pleated crimson robe in a strictly frontal pose, set against a somber, dark background. His half-length figure, nearly life-size, fills the composition; his long, flowing auburn hair frames his brightly illuminated and sensitively modeled face. Delicate drops of blood from the sharp tendrils of his crown of thorns trickle into the softly reddened areas around his slate gray eyes, his gaze at once both sorrowful and serene. A closely trimmed beard sets off his high cheekbones, strong jaw-line, and thin upper lip, ever so slightly raised, as if parted to speak. With tightly bound arms and wrists, he crosses his hands in front of his chest, displaying to the viewer the wounds of the Crucifixion on his hands and at his side. Though nearly imperceptible, the delicate asymmetries in the picture further imbue it with a palpable sense of immediacy and remarkable psychological depth, particularly in the faint irregularity of the position of Christ’s eyes. and even more so in the gentle lean of his head to the left, a slightly straining muscle in his neck suggesting he has perhaps only just shifted position.
The delicate halo of angels painted en grisaille and orbiting Christ’s head is perhaps the painting’s most distinctive feature. Clothed in billowing fabrics, their graceful figures contrast markedly with the crown of long, sharp, blue-green thorns. All but one angel shield their grief-stricken faces from the sight before them, as they hold the Arma Christi, or the instruments of Christ’s Passion that symbolize his death and suffering. Botticelli captured each of these implements in naturalistic colors and with meticulous detail. On the left is the ladder that features in the Raising of the Cross and the Descent; the scourge used to flagellate Christ; and the lance with which he was stabbed; on the right is the column to which Christ was bound and flogged; as well as the pincers used to draw out the nails; finally the sponge soaked in vinegar and fixed to a pole that is offered to Christ before his death. Crowning the design at the top is the cross, which is prominently positioned above Christ’s head as a symbol of his sacrifice, but also as the universal emblem of the Christian religion. A trio of angels connected by the elegant, serpentine lines of a ribbon-like cloth—possibly the shroud to wrap Christ’s body for burial—is arranged around the cross: the central figure kneels in reverence before it; the one at left holds up the three nails used to fasten Christ’s hands and feet to the cross; and the angel on the right may have once held the hammer to drive in these nails. The most conspicuous omissions from the Arma Christi are the chalice used to catch Christ’s redeeming blood as well as the sudarium, or veil, used by Saint Veronica to wipe the sweat from Christ’s brow as he bears his cross to Calvary. The viewer is left to imagine these in the hands of one of the angels hidden, or partially hidden, from sight, including the one whose foot appears from behind Christ’s hair at right.
Indeed, in Botticelli’s conception, the Passion is further evoked by two accessories: the crown and the rope used by the soldiers for his arrest, rendered here as doubled loops that bind Christ’s upper arms and wrists, as well as a variation of the words of the titulus from the cross (INRI: Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeorum, or Jesus the Nazarene King of the Jews) partially inscribed on the neckline of his robe: [CHR]ISTO/ JESVNAZAR/ ENOR[…].
In this painting, Botticelli seamlessly blends Christ’s divinity and humanity into one, or in other words, his dual nature as both fully God and fully man. The directness of the image—above all the piercing quality of Christ’s gaze—evokes secular imagery and portraiture in such a way that it elicits a powerful and discernible response. Concurrently, the close-up view presents the head and torso of Christ displaying three wounds: those in his hands from when he is nailed to the cross and the wound in his right side inflicted with a lance by one of the soldiers after his death. Thus, the viewer is invited to contemplate simultaneously the Crucifixion, Redemption, and Resurrection. The intense religious experience elicited in the mind of the viewer by the sheer physical presence of the crucified Christ illuminates both his humanity and his divinity.
Botticelli’s Man of Sorrows has been in private hands since the nineteenth century when it was first recorded in the collection of the famed opera singer Adelaide Kemble Sartoris (1815–1879). The painting remained with her descendants until its auction in 1963, where it was acquired by the present owner. At the time of that sale, Federico Zeri identified it as an autograph work by Botticelli and suggested a completion date of about 1500. Due in part to the picture remaining out of the public eye for much of the last century, thus hampering its study and discussion, it was largely overlooked in critical scholarly discourse. Until its inclusion in the major monographic exhibition devoted to Botticelli at the Städel Museum in Frankfurt in 2009–2010, the painting was not widely known in the literature on the artist, receiving only a brief mention in Ronald Lightbown’s catalogue of Botticelli’s work, in which he took a restrictive view of the artist’s production. More recently, however, this highly original painting has been reassessed in the context of Botticelli’s late career and Zeri’s opinion in favor of its autograph status has been upheld by several art historians, foremost among them Laurence B. Kanter and Keith Christiansen, both of whom know it firsthand and consider it a remarkable work by Sandro Botticelli.
As pointed out by Kanter, there are long-standing misconceptions surrounding Botticelli’s late career as first perpetuated by Vasari, and the artist’s late paintings still provoke some debate today. Botticelli’s work around the turn of the century became increasingly spiritual, and his Mystic Nativity of 1500 in the National Gallery, London —the only signed and dated painting by the artist—is a case in point. Herbert Horne, the early twentieth-century cataloguer of Botticelli’s work, accepted as autograph only five paintings from the artist’s last decade. In his 1978 publication, Lightbown listed this Man of Sorrows under "workshop and school pictures" as one of the versions of this subject to have been attributed to Botticelli or his workshop. Unillustrated, he describes it as the Redeemer, following his discussion of a group of three paintings of the Resurrected Christ: a version at the Detroit Institute of Arts attributed to Sandro Botticelli by some scholars but deemed to be a workshop product by others; and two variants at the Accademia Carrara, Bergamo and the Fogg Museum, Cambridge.
When presented in the 2009-2010 exhibition at the Städel Museum, this painting was denoted as an unpublished, fully autograph work. In the exhibition catalogue, it is discussed in detail by Bastien Eclercy, who writes: "…the rediscovered painting from a private collection thus not only represents an important new example of Botticelli’s late period, but also adds a striking facet to our understanding of the depiction of Christ in the Renaissance." At the time of the exhibition, Scott Nethersole referred in very few words to its attribution in his review of the show. He proposed that the attribution of the aforementioned Detroit Christ, described in the Städel catalogue as a workshop painting of around 1490 and depicting a different iconographic type, be swapped with that of the present painting on qualitative grounds. However, comparison of the two does not bear out this view, and Nethersole has since revised his opinion and is considerably more positive about the present painting's attribution. He now considers The Man of Sorrows to have been largely painted by Botticelli. Following examination of the infra-red images of the painting, he is reassured by the changes throughout the composition and particularly those made to the hands, consistent with Botticelli's workshop practice.
As Eclercy aptly argues in his entry on the present Man of Sorrows: "In both quality and complexity, the painting far surpasses the half-length depictions of Christ from the Botticelli workshop currently known to scholars." Christiansen singled out the extraordinary figure of Christ, whose face shows signs of humanity and judgement: Christ as the Son of Man and Christ the judge. Kanter considers it a masterpiece of the artist’s late period and dates it to the first decade of the 1500s, placing it later than the Mystic Nativity of 1500 in the National Gallery in London, and perhaps even as late as 1510, very close to Botticelli’s death. While Kanter supports the autograph status of the Detroit Christ, he considers that painting to be one in a series of repetitions of types, but he regards the present Man of Sorrows as a wholly original work by Sandro Botticelli.
The most inventive feature of this painting is the remarkable ring of angels encircling Christ’s head. This motif, along with the bold conception of the painting as a whole, belie the originality of a master of the highest order and further point to Botticelli’s creative mind. Traditionally, such angels were found surrounding Christ as the Man of Sorrows as he stands in the tomb and displays his wounds, whereas here they form Christ’s halo. In terms of pose and the all’antica style of their garments, as well as the articulation of wings and feet, the angels are comparable in form and expressiveness to those in Botticelli’s Coronation of the Virgin altarpiece from San Marco, today in the Uffizi Gallery, Florence, and in the aforementioned Mystic Nativity.
These angels and their strong graphic presence, moreover, are especially akin to the celestial figures in one of Botticelli’s greatest achievements: his magnificent series of drawings made to illustrate the epic poem The Divine Comedy (La Divina Commedia) by Italy’s most celebrated medieval poet, Dante Alighieri (1265–1321). This project to illustrate all one hundred of the poem’s cantos was undertaken for Lorenzo the Magnificent’s cousin and former ward, Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco de’ Medici (1463–1503), the owner of Botticelli’s famous mythologies. The poem describes the author’s imaginary journey through Hell, Purgatory and Heaven. Botticelli grappled with the immense challenge of rendering Dante’s allegory on the quest for spiritual enlightenment for many years, beginning this endeavor probably in the 1480s and continuing until the 1490s. In his Lives of the Artists, the sixteenth-century biographer Giorgio Vasari tells us Botticelli wasted much time and effort on his Dante project, "neglecting his work and thoroughly disrupting his life." Although this ambitious program remained unfinished, it still stands as one of the greatest expressions of Botticelli’s genius, and clear visual affinities can be drawn between the figures that animate Dante’s poems and the angels in the Man of Sorrows. Close comparisons, for example, appear in Botticelli’s drawings for Paradiso IV and Paradiso XXVIII, both of which are today preserved in the Kupferstichkabinett, Berlin.
Further corroboration for the Man of Sorrows autograph status lies in the remarkable visual parallels between it and works found elsewhere in Botticelli’s corpus. Indeed, use of subtle gradations of light and shade to model Christ’s face, a trademark stylistic element of the artist, has recently been compared with Botticelli’s portrait of Michele Marullo Tarcaniota. The manner in which the hands are painted, particularly in the way both little fingers are rendered with a slight bend, is a consistent detail employed by the artist throughout his career, such as in all three of the figures in the Bardi Altarpiece of about 1484–1485 in the Staatliche Museen in Berlin. Additional analogies are visible in Botticelli’s Lamentation in the Poldi Pezzoli Museum, a late work by the artist that not only features a similar blue-green crown of thorns but also employs a figure covering her face in grief, a gesture echoed by the angels that comprise Christ’s halo. This action is a seeming allusion to a pathos ridden formula suggested by Leon Battista Alberti in his De Pictura, particularly how by covering a mourning figure’s face the artist creates an emotional response that allows the audience to more completely imagine the full extent of this state of grief.
Alessandro di Mariano di Vanni Filipepi, known as Sandro Botticelli, was born around 1444–1445, the son of a tanner. He lived and worked in Florence for nearly all his career, and his considerable talents were recognized at a young age. A consummate Italian Renaissance artist, he was the progenitor of some of the most enduring images of the age. In the 1470s and 1480s, Botticelli secured regular commissions and support from the Medici family and their elite entourage, for whom he painted opulent religious works and sophisticated mythologies expressing the highest ideals of classical literature and philosophy. Botticelli’s Man of Sorrows, however, arose from a markedly different moment in his career, one that bore witness to a dramatic shift in the political, social, and religious life of the Florence he knew so well.
This painting is thought to date to the final years of Botticelli’s artistic practice, from the years around 1500 to perhaps even as late as 1510, the year he died. The last years of the fifteenth century were deeply troubled: in 1494 Florence was invaded by foreign armies, the Medici family was expelled, and fears of an apocalypse at the turn of the half-millennium were fueled by the hell-fire preaching of the fervent Dominican friar Girolamo Savonarola (1452–1498). Appointed Prior of San Marco, the convent favored by the Medici, Savonarola grew in power and popular appeal in the 1490s. A charismatic preacher, he railed against the sin and iniquity of the Florentine populace, becoming a veiled religious dictator. He declared Florence a new Jerusalem, demanded that the citizens purge themselves of sin and instigated the Bonfire of the Vanities: luxury objects, clothing and paintings considered idolatrous were burned, including possibly some works by Botticelli. Eventually the Signoria—Florence’s ruling council—arrested Savonarola, tried him, and made him confess to being a false prophet. On 28 May 1498, they had him hanged and burnt as a heretic in the Piazza della Signoria. Yet even after his death, Savonarola’s impassioned religiosity had a lingering effect on the populace of Florence and on the pictorial language of artists for years to come.
Savonarola scorned the type of art which gave Botticelli his fame, though he remained devoutly Christian throughout his life. In his biography of the artist, Vasari declared the painter to have been among Savonarola’s followers (known as piagnoni, or “weepers”). Indeed, Botticelli’s brother, Simone, with whom he shared a house, was documented as a supporter of Savonarola, and in November 1499, over a year after the friar’s execution, Simone wrote in his diary that he used Sandro’s studio for clandestine meetings of sympathizers. Vasari’s claim that Botticelli never painted again after Savonarola’s death is untrue. Instead, the artist undoubtedly fell under the friar’s influence, as did the wider Florentine population, and Savonarola’s teachings impacted not only the subjects he chose to depict but also those in demand among the collecting public of this period around the turn of the millennium. In these later years, Botticelli began to produce more sober and spiritual paintings, and his style became more archaic in form. Themes from the sermons of the Dominican preacher surface in paintings such as the Mystic Nativity in the National Gallery and the Mystic Crucifixion of about 1500 preserved in the Fogg Museum, both of which transcribe separate apocalyptic visions of Savonarola. Certainly, The Man of Sorrows underscores Savonarola’s message of a return of his contemporaries to the fundamental tenets of the Christian faith.
Rooted in early Christian imagery, half-length depictions of Christ reached their apogee during the High Renaissance. The potency of this representation inspired varied treatments of the theme on both sides of the Alps, with Northern artists focusing on the trauma of Christ’s Passion and Italian artists exploring the inherent humanity of the Godhead incarnate. Botticelli’s Man of Sorrows is wholly reflective of this dual creative impulse explored by some of the greatest artistic geniuses of the early modern era.
In his unique design of the Man of Sorrows, Botticelli integrated several thematically related pictorial types whose iconographic traditions occasionally overlap. First is the archetypal image of the later Middle Ages of Christ as the Man of Sorrows (or Imago pietatis), a devotional image in which Christ prominently displays the wounds in his side and hands after his Crucifixion. Second is the Ecce Homo, or the moment when a scourged Christ stands before Pontius Pilate and a crowd. In this tradition, he is shown bound with ropes with his arms crossed before him, and he wears a crown of thorns and a purple robe—the color emphasizing his royal status as Christ the King, a descendant of the house of David. The final is the vera icon, or the “true image” of the face of Christ, like the one imprinted on Veronica’s veil as he carried his cross on the way to Calvary; in this tradition Christ is often shown frontally, upright, in direct confrontation to the viewer. In seamlessly combining all of these pictorial types into one united whole Botticelli captures an image that suspends temporal constraints.
Though unprecedented in his oeuvre and the wider artistic landscape, Botticelli’s iconographic invention reflected influences from both the North and the South. The impact of Northern artists is perhaps reflected in Botticelli’s choice and treatment of this subject matter, particularly insofar as such works conveyed an intensity of spiritual feeling shared by Botticelli himself. For example, the iconography of the Redeemer, shown in the act of blessing as the Salvator Mundi and combined with the attributes of the Man of Sorrows, wearing a crown of thorns and presenting his wounds, is prevalent in fifteenth century Netherlandish painting. Botticelli’s Christ in Detroit, for instance, bears a marked resemblance to a Man of Sorrows by Hans Memling whose provenance can be traced to a Florentine collection and is today preserved at Palazzo Bianco, Genoa. The direct manner in which Christ is presented also harks back to other models, the work of Eyckian artists such as Petrus Christus offering some additional analogies. For instance, Christus’ small devotional image of Christ in the Metropolitan Museum of Art of about 1445 similarly treats the head as a portrait. The connection between Botticelli and the North also runs in the other direction, and echoes of Botticelli’s highly original iconography are found in the later work of Haarlem painter Jan Mostaert (act. 1498; d. 1552/3), particularly in his Christ as the Man of Sorrows with a Halo of Angels in the Hamburger Kunsthalle.
But perhaps one of the most striking predecessors to Botticelli’s exploration of this theme is Fra Angelico’s Head of Christ of circa 1435 in the Church of Santa Maria del Soccorso in Livorno, one of the earliest half-length portrayals of Christ against a somber background explored by an Italian artist, though with clear roots also in the North. Like the present painting, Fra Angelico shows a frontal Christ crowned with thorns with bloodshot eyes and wearing a red robe with the words REX REGUM inscribed in the gold of his collar. Fra Angelico’s work was influential on contemporary and later artists, even inspiring a copy by Benozzo Gozzoli, today in the Museo della Basilica in San Francesco in Assisi. In Botticelli’s treatment of Christ, there is also a pronounced emphasis on the wound in his side, underscoring his identity as the Resurrected Christ. Andrea del Verrocchio’s celebrated sculpture of Christ and St Thomas, completed in 1483 for the exterior of Orsanmichele in Florence, has also been discussed as a point of departure for Botticelli’s image. In the sculpture, Christ opens his robe to reveal the wound so that Thomas may see for himself by touching that Christ is risen from the dead. The implicit meaning in Botticelli’s painting places the viewer in the role of Thomas, thereby acting as witness to Christ’s Resurrection.
Botticelli’s “pathos laden” image of Christ as the Man of Sorrows is described as “resolutely symbolic” by David Ekserdjian, who favors a dating of around 1500 for the work. Interestingly, the most striking contemporary comparisons to this painting are two other masterpieces from exactly the same moment: Albrecht Dürer’s Christ-like Self-Portrait and Leonardo da Vinci’s Salvator Mundi. The former is the ultimate example of an artist looking at earlier Flemish models of this type in order to re-imagine their own image making. The latter, while differing in mood, shares with the protagonist of the present picture an “apparent refusal to allow the viewer to look away,” according to Ekserdjian. Indeed, Botticelli endows Christ's gaze with great intensity of feeling, compelling the viewer to look and urging us to meditate.
This painting has survived in overall good condition, allowing for a fuller appreciation of Botticelli’s confident skills as a painter. Although painted late in the artist’s life, characteristic elements employed by Botticelli throughout his career are visible throughout. The modeling of Christ’s flesh, for example, is built up with delicate brushstrokes of brown and pink atop soft creamy tones. The three dimensional cross at the top of Christ’s head was rendered by way of incisions into the painted surface, a practice commonly employed by Botticelli to help lay out certain elements of his composition, as visible in his Portrait of a Young Man Holding a Roundel.
Further insight into the artist’s creative process is unveiled through modern imaging technology. Infrared imaging of Botticelli’s Man of Sorrows reveals a number of changes he made as he worked through the composition. Some adjustments are visible, for example, in the placement of a few of the thorns on his temple, an alteration to the position of Christ’s eyebrows, a slight shift in the outline of his chin, and a lowering of Christ’s wound at his side. The distinct changes observable in the rendering of Christ’s hands further underscore Botticelli’s authorship, particularly in the refined contours of the fingers as well as their placement in space. In addition to the noticeable shift in the foreshortening of Christ’s proper left thumb, his middle finger on that same hand was originally conceived as visible outside of the open wound, an idea the Botticelli ultimately changed in his final conception.
The same infrared imaging also shows elements of a partial and unrelated underdrawing, affirming that the panel was originally prepared for an entirely different image. Although difficult to discern in an upright position, when turning the infrared image upside down, outlines of what appear to be early stages of the figures of the Christ Child and the Madonna come more clearly into view. Mother and Child appear close to the upper edge of the composition and seem to be pressed cheek to cheek in an endearing composition, derived from the venerable image of the Virgin Eleousa (of “tenderness”), a type that was common in the Greek tradition and adapted by many later Italian painters of the Renaissance. The head of the Christ Child, with his upward gaze, is supported by the left hand of the Madonna, and the thick folds of her mantle are visible at her shoulder near the right of the composition. This particular compositional pose is found in a number of paintings by Botticelli and from his workshop, indicating that the earlier idea for a painting of the Madonna, a mainstay of Botticelli’s production, was replaced with what would be a virtually unique and inspired invention by the master.
The reverse of the panel bears what appears to be an old and as yet unidentified inventory number (355.) painted in red in the upper left. Also visible near the center of the upper edge is a wax seal that may point to provenance of the painting in Rome, possibly where the earliest recorded owners, the Sartorises, acquired it, as they resided in the Eternal City for many years.
Like many paintings by Botticelli, the provenance of this painting dates back to the nineteenth century. It was in this period of a reawakened interest in late quattrocento Florentine history and art that Botticelli resumed his rightful position as one of the most admired and beloved artists of the Renaissance. Botticelli’s Man of Sorrows once formed part of the collection of the wealthy politician Edward John Sartoris (1814–1888) and his wife Adelaide Kemble Sartoris (1815–1879), a famous opera singer and the niece of the celebrated actress Sarah Siddons and John Philip Kemble. It then descended in the Sartoris family until Adelaide’s great-granddaughter, The Hon. Pamela Margaret Stanley, consigned it in 1963 for sale at Sotheby’s, where it was acquired by the present owner.
Adelaide and Edward Sartoris were well-connected in society and within many artistic circles in the places they lived and traveled, spending ample time in Italy, particularly Rome, as well as Paris and London. Frederic, Lord Leighton, met the couple in Rome in 1853, and they quickly were counted among his closest friends. Regularly frequenting Adelaide’s literary and artistic Salons in Rome, Leighton formed a very strong relationship with Adelaide, one that could be described as an intense but platonic adoration, devotion and reliance, and one that would last until her death in 1879. Leighton painted several portraits of Adelaide and Edward’s eldest daughter, May Sartoris, perhaps the most recognizable being the one today in the Kimbell Art Museum. May was also the grandmother of the Hon. Pamela Margaret Stanley, the consignor of the present painting when it last appeared on the market in 1963. A recently rediscovered painting by Leighton entitled “Italian Girl,” which belonged to Edward and Adelaide Sartoris, was recently sold at Sotheby's, London, on 14 July 2021, lot 1. Their collection also featured a number of Old Masters, including the present work as well as a Gentile da Fabriano today preserved in the National Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C., as part of the Samuel H. Kress Collection.