Lot 16. Pietro di Cristoforo Vannucci, called il Perugino (c. 1450–1523), Christ Crowned with thorns, and The Virgin, oil on panel, each 33.5 x 27.5 cm, a pair, Estimate €600,000 – 800,000. © Dorotheum

VIENNA.- Paintings included in Dorotheum’s Old Masters Auction on 22 October 2024, demonstrate the line of influence that can be drawn through the stylistic innovations of three of the greatest artists in the history of art.

Pietro di Cristoforo Vannucci, called il Perugino (circa 1450-1523) was arguably the most influential artist of his time. His contribution to the development of painting was enormous, as he moved style, composition and technique on from the traditions of the early Renaissance towards what would become the High Renaissance. His compositional invention, combined with his use of Florentine figurative style and Umbrian-inspired use of structure and space, would become widely influential throughout Europe.

In 1479, Perugino was engaged to work on the decoration of the Sistine Chapel, working in the Vatican before Michelangelo and Raphael. Perugino was the most highly celebrated painter in central Italy at this time and was sought after by powerful patrons. The two paintings on panel of Christ crowned with thorns and The Virgin offered for sale at Dorotheum, date to the 1490s. At around this time, Perugino returned to Perugia where the young Raphael entered his workshop.

As Perugino’s pupil, Raphael would imitate and assimilate his master’s style to the extent that their work, in these early years, was sometimes indistinguishable. The similarity in their style is illustrated by Perugino’s present depiction of Virgin, which has an air of sweetness that would be clearly echoed in Raphael’s Florentine Madonnas, painted years later.

Raphael (1483-1520) was one of the great geniuses of the High Renaissance and he established a large and prolific studio in Rome. He was commissioned to decorate the Stanze in the papal apartments, perhaps his most famous work. Here, his talented pupil Giulio Romano became his prominent assistant, ultimately completing the prestigious work after Raphael´s premature death in 1520.

While working in Raphael’s workshop, Giulio Romano (mid-1490s-1546) collaborated with his master on easel paintings, as well as the large-scale frescos. After Raphael´s death, competition for Giulio’s services increased and in 1524, Giulio was appointed court artist by Federico II Gonzaga in Mantua. The Mystic Marriage of Saint Catherine, which is offered in Dorotheum’s Old Masters sale, comes from this Mantuan period and is dated to c.1526. The painting reflects the influence of Raphael, but the composition, colouring, and the subtlety in the observation of character and emotion of the figures, are Giulio´s own. He would become one of the outstanding figures of Mannerist art.

Lot 16. Pietro di Cristoforo Vannucci, called il Perugino (c. 1450–1523), Christ Crowned with thorns, and The Virgin, oil on panel, each 33.5 x 27.5 cm, a pair, Estimate €600,000 – 800,000. © Dorotheum

Provenance: possibly collection of Cosimo Bordoni (1623–1703), Florence;
Private collection, Northamptonshire;
art market, England;
Private collection, Switzerland

Documented: possibly Inventory of the hereditary estate of the late doctor Cosimo Bordoni, who died in Florence on the 11th of June 1703/4 and whose living house was in Florence, via Tegolaia, Florence, 11 June 1703, Archivio di Stato, Florence, 2688, no. 54, transcribed in Getty Provenance Index, Archival Inventory I–119, no. 3, in the ‘Seconda camera su la sala al primo piano’: ‘Due quadri compagni, del Perugino: la Madonna e Giesù; ornamento liscio, tutto dorato. Ducati quattro lire 28’

Exhibited: Campione d’Italia, Galleria civica San Zenone, Perugino inedito a Campione d’Italia: quattro tavolette e un dittico, 15 October 2011 – 15 January 2012 (as Perugino);

Paris, Musée Jacquemart-André, Le Pérugin, Maître de Raphaël, 12 September 2014 – 19 January 2015, nos. 27–28 (as Perugino);
Perugia, Palazzo Baldeschi al Corso, Nero Perugino Burri, 22 June – 2 October 2023, nos. 7 and 9 (as Perugino)

Literature: F. F. Mancini, in: Perugino inedito a Campione d’Italia: quattro tavolette e un dittico, exhibition catalogue, Campione d’Italia 2011, pp. 61–95 (as Perugino);
V. Garibaldi, in: Le Pérugin, Maître de Raphaël, exhibition catalogue, Brussels 2014, pp. 130–132, cat. nos. 27–28, illustrated (as Perugino);
V. Garibaldi, B. Corà (eds.), Nero Perugino Burri, exhibition catalogue, Perugia 2023, pp. 92–93, cat. nos. 7 and 9, mentioned and illustrated on pp. 22, 54, 56, 60, 62 (as Perugino)

Note: The present pair of small paintings on panel, depicting Christ crowned with thorns, and the Virgin originally formed an easily transportable diptych, for use as a domestic altarpiece. The panels were attached to one another by shell shaped hinges (still partially present) and are backed by embossed leather, designed to resemble the cover of a manuscript or liturgical text.

Garibaldi dates the present panels to Perugino’s Venetian period during the 1490s (see literature), and as such they are significant, rare works. Perugino was documented in Venice in 1494 when he was commissioned to decorate the Sala del Gran Consiglio in the Doge’s Palace, with a series of portraits and historical scenes, however this work was never completed. In 1495, he was possibly involved in the decoration of the Scuola di San Giovanni Evangelista.

The present panels can be compared to works Perugino produced either during or immediately after his Venetian period, such as for example, his Pietà, now in The Clark Art Institute, Williamstown, Massachusetts (inv. no. 1955.947) and the Portrait of a Young Man in the Uffizi, Florence (inv. 1890, no. 1474). At this time Perugino was also working on The Lamentation over the Dead Christ, conserved in the Palazzo Pitti, Florence (inv. no. Palatina 164) and the Pala dei Decemviri in the Vatican (inv. no. MV.40317.0.0).

The representation of Christ crowned with thorns in the present diptych appears to relate to works by Antonello da Messina, who was highly influential in the production of late 15th century Venetian painting. Mancini compares the treatment of the hair in the present Christ to Antonello’s Dead Christ Supported by an Angel in the Prado, Madrid (inv. no. P003092, see literature). This influence is also evident in the deep bitumen-black background, similar to the one in Antonello’s Christ Blessing at the National Gallery in London (inv. no. NG673).

The present Virgin can be compared to Perugino’s Magdalene in Palazzo Pitti, Florence (circa 1495, inv. no. Palatina 42) showing similar facial features with half-closed eyes, thin arched eyebrows and rose-coloured cheeks. Both figures are modelled with the same soft shadows around their noses, chins and lips, as can be compared to the female figure on the far right of the Marriage of the Virgin in the Musée des Beaux-Arts, Caen (dated between 1502 and 1503, inv. no. 171).

The present works painted in oil, display a sense of form created with an exceptional transparency of colour. The modeling and details of the figures are typical of Perugino, particularly the clothing, characterised by square necklines and created by the use of colours, including red and bottle green.

Provenance: The present diptych’s early history is uncertain, however an inventory dated 11 June 1703, lists the possessions of Dr. Cosimo Bordoni, resident of via Tegolaia in Florence among which are ‘due quadri compagni del Perugino: la Madonna e Giesù; ornamento liscio, tutto dorato’ (‘two companion paintings by Perugino: the Madonna and Jesus; simple, fully gilded frames’). Bordoni was a prominent figure in eighteenth-century Florence and a friend of the art historian and biographer Filippo Baldinucci (see Mancini in literature).

It has been suggested that the brass ornaments applied on the corners of the leather coverings on the back of the diptych are in the shape of a fleur-de-lis, a symbol associated with Florence, which may support the hypothesis that the present two panels may once have been part of a Florentine collection. Additionally, the wax seals on the verso of both paintings depict a falcon, a symbol commonly found in Tuscan family heraldry, such as in the various branches of the Falconi and Falconetti families. However, the family crests may also be English.

Technical analysis by Gianluca Poldi
The present pair of paintings are very rare from a technical point of view, painted on thin wooden boards (only 7 mm thick). The type of painting, created with very thin layers, and its craquelure are consistent with oil painting and the technical characteristics are coherent with the modus operandi of Perugino, one of the first great masters of oil painting in Italy.

The original painted surface ended with the space occupied today by the frames, where the original frames were located, most likely glued to the panel, so that when closing the diptych, the painted parts would not collide and be damaged. The parts of the image, today hidden under the present frames, were painted later, probably in the 19th century, to fill the entire space of the two panels where the original engaged frames had been.

The scientific non-invasive investigations carried out on the paintings, including digital optic microscopy, reflectance spectroscopy (vis-RS) and X-ray fluorescence (XRF), enable the painting technique to be appreciated, as well as the pigments used, which are the same in both paintings. The works are painted on a white ground, probably gesso. The black background contains not only a carbon black pigment and some amounts of earths (with a few manganese), but also a copper-based pigment, according to a frequent praxis in that period.

It could be the same copper acetate (verdigris) was applied in thin glazes in the cloaks. The green colour used for the mantles may appear iconographically inconsistent, especially for the Virgin, which is usually blue, but here the painter is probably representing the lapel of the respective cloaks.

The red tunics contain vermillion and are shaded with glazes of coccid-derived red lake. The same red lake is mixed with finely ground azurite in the purplish/mauve hair band of the Virgin and a fine, transparent veil painted with lead white, which is now barely visible.

Flesh tones are a mixture of lead white, finely ground vermillion and ochres, with a few carbon black particles in the lights and more black added to the shadows. Vermillion is added to brown ochre in the hair, while the crown of thorns is simply made with black, gently highlighted with a grey mixture based on lead white. Traces of shell-applied gold are still visible above the black edge of the red robes and of the Madonna’s cloak.

Infrared reflectographic imaging, carried out in the 850-1700 nm range, show only a few traces of underdrawing and no dots of pouncing: the painter could have used mainly a graphic medium transparent to IR radiation, as iron-gall ink, red chalk or a metalpoint, or simply a very thin black dry medium, partially erased by the brush while painting. A few thin black lines attributable to an outline drawing can be seen in the right side of the Virgin’s cloak and in the lower part of the noses. A small change occurred close to the tip of Christ’s nose, that was originally drawn a little higher. The painting is extremely precise, with insignificant adjustments to the contours of the figures.

The IR appearance of a shadow on the Virgin’s green cloak is typical of Perugino’s practice, sometimes using black pigment.

Back covering:

The panels are covered on the back with brown leather with identical punched and gilded decorations, as if they were two book covers. There is no indication that such distinctive leather coverings were added later. It is indeed probable that these works, created for private devotion and easily transportable, were created on thin panels already prepared with the outer surface covered with leather, so as to be painted on the recto (inner side) in such a way as to form a folding diptych, in which the left wing (the opening one) presented the Virgin, the right wing (the closing plate) the Christ crowned with thorns, one mirroring the other.

In the centre of the leather covering of the diptych the monogram ‘YHS’ is stamped with the crossed h, adopted in the mid-15th century by Saint Bernardino of Siena and his followers to signify the special devotion to the heart of Jesus. The monograms are surrounded by four cherubs’ heads in gold leaf. On the reverse of the Christ is the number 3 and the inscription ‘Francia’, written in italics using a dark ink, which is easier to read in IR images.

Among the other outstanding important works paintings in the auction are paintings works by Artemisia Gentileschi, Thomas Patch, Dirck von Baburen, as well as a drawing in red chalk by Peter Paul Rubens.

Lot 101: Artemisia Gentileschi (Rome 1593–1653 Naples), Madonna and Child, oil on canvas, 116 x 89.3 cm, framed. Estimate €600,000 – 800,000. © Dorotheum

Provenance: sale, Catherine Charbonneaux, Paris, 26 February 2010, lot 7 (as Attributed to Artemisia Gentileschi);
where acquired by the present owner;
Private collection, Switzerland

Exhibited: Milan, Palazzo Reale, Artemisia Gentileschi – Storia di una passione, 22 September 2011 – 29 January 2012, cat. no. 9 (as Artemisia Gentileschi);
Paris, Fondation Dina Vierny - Musée Maillol, Artemisia 1593–1654, gloire, pouvoir et passions d’une femme peintre, 14 March – 15 July 2012, cat. no. 43 (as Artemisia Gentileschi)

Literature: R. Contini, in: R. Contini/F. Solinas (eds.), Artemisia Gentileschi. Storia di una passione, exhibition catalogue, Milan 2011, pp. 152–153, cat. no. 9, illustrated (as Artemisia Gentileschi);
G. Papi, Artemisia Gentileschi, Milan, exhibition review, in: The Burlington Magazin, December 2011, CLIII, p. 846 (as not by Artemisia);
R. Contini, in: R. Contini/F. Solinas (eds.), Artemisia 1593–1654, exhibition catalogue, Paris 2012, p. 43, cat. no. 3 (as Artemisia Gentileschi);
F. Solinas, La Madonna de Latte di Artemisia Lomi Gentileschi alla Galleria Spada, in: A. Capriotti (ed.), Rome 2024, pp. 35–50, illustrated p. 37, fig. 2 (as Artemisia Gentileschi)

Note: We are grateful to Riccardo Lattuada for independently endorsing the attribution of the present painting and for his help in cataloguing this lot.

This refined work has been dated to circa 1609–1610, when Artemisia Gentileschi was circa 16 or 17 years old, and it is therefore one of her first known works and a significant rare example of her precocious talent as a young artist.

Artemisia studied painting in the workshop of her father Orazio. Her remarkable ability allowed her to duplicate his style closely in her earliest pictures, seen here in the present painting particularly in the depiction of the drapery. Her palette, the physiognomy of her figures, the sensitive glazing and modelling of skin tones, and the details of texture apparent in the present painting show Orazio’s influence. However, from the beginning Artemisia showed an ability to depict meaning and emotion in the narratives she painted, such as the evident affection of a mother and child displayed in this work, which set her work apart from that of her father. During the 1590s and early 1600s her father, like Caravaggio, worked directly on the canvas using posed models. It is likely that she was taught to paint in the same way.

Lattuada has emphasised that the present composition is related to Scipione Pulzone’s Holy Family with Saint Elizabeth and Saint John the Baptist, circa 1588–1590, in the Galleria Borghese in Rome (inv. no. 313), as well as an engraving by Marcantonio Raimondi (see also R. Ward Bissell, Artemisia Gentileschi and the Authority of Art, 1999 pp. 184–187, no. 1, figs. 1–5).

The position of the Madonna’s legs in the present lot are similar to those in Pulzone’s painting, as is the rendering of the hair of Mary and the Child which have the same golden highlights.

The present composition is known in other later versions also by Artemisia, including one in the Galleria Spada, Rome (116.5 x 86.5 cm), dated to 1610–1611, and another from the Medici collections in the Galleria Palatina, Florence (118 x 86 cm), dated to 1616–1618. Although the compositions are similar and with identical iconography there are variations, especially in the pose of the Christ Child. The Madonna in the present composition has a serene, slightly plump, youthful countenance with unruly lighter hair and she appears to be more youthful than the Madonna in the other versions. It has been suggested that Artemisia used herself as a model and indeed the facial features of her female protagonist do appear to be similar. The Christ Child in the present composition is depicted with a refinement that is different to the later versions. The depiction of a transparent scarf around the Madonna’s neck in the present composition is also singular and the colouring of the present painting is harmonious and diffused.

It has been suggested by Francesco Solinas that these versions of the Madonna and Child (Madonna del Latte) may derive from similar preparatory drawings and cartoons (see op. cit. Solinas, 2024). The three paintings were compared in Paris in 2012, during the Musée Maillol’s monographic exhibition and in all three compositions the figures are of similar dimensions.

Artemisia, like her father Orazio and her uncle Aurelio Lomi, replicated compositions, in more or less similar versions, using drawings and cartoons which had been prepared sometimes years earlier. Her use of cartoons and preparatory drawings is documented in her correspondence, including letters written to her clients from Naples. The use of a cartoon – a thick sheet of perforated paper used to transfer the outline of a composition onto canvas, wall or panel – was a widespread artistic practice, especially in sixteenth century Tuscany, but also in Rome during this period.

The present painting dating to 1609–1610 was created before the very public, well-documented trial of Agostino Tassi, which took place between the Spring and Winter of 1612. In 1611, Agostino Tassi, Orazio’s colleague on several important projects, took advantage of his access to the Gentileschi household by raping Artemisia. Orazio brought charges against Tassi who was found guilty and sentenced to exile, however he never served his sentence. Artemisia married a Florentine, Pietro Stiattesi, on 29 November 1612, and in January of the following year she settled with him in Florence. She lived there for the next seven years and bore four children; only one, a girl, survived to adulthood. Artemisia was to become a celebrated artist who would work for several European rulers, and she ran an impressive workshop during her more than 20 years in Naples. She also worked in Rome, Florence and Venice and also spent a brief period in London in the late 1630s before returning to Naples, where she died.

Technical analysis by Gianluca Poldi:

The painter used a canvas prepared with a brown ground, then locally covered with a white priming where the dark ground would affect the lightness of the final colour: i.e. under the Madonna’s robe and under the lights of her cloak, but also under shadowed areas of the background, as microscopic images show.

Reflectance spectroscopy show the pigments used, including natural ultramarine (obtained from lapis lazuli) mixed with lead white in the blue cloak (with indigo used in old restorations), a carmine type red lake in the pink robe of the Madonna, ground both finely and coarsely, yellow and brow ochres and earths.

From the point of view of painting technique, flesh tones are particularly interesting because large amounts of coarsely ground lead-based yellow are added by the painter to the usual mixture of lead white, vermillion and ochre, together with a few particles of red lake and, in the shadows, black pigment.

IR reflectography show some composition changes, particularly in the Child, whose face profile was originally painted slightly closer to his Mother’s breast, and whose legs and right arm were placed in different positions: the left leg was probably aligned with the other, then raised to its present position. The white robe that covers the right leg of the Child runs under his right arm, indicating that the arm was painted in that position later, joining the other arm across his belly. A few small corrections can be seen along the Madonna’s outline. Some traces of outline drawing, possibly underdrawing, emerge in some zones by IRR. So, the painter worked on a composition that was presumably originally studied (on paper?), but then modified directly on the canvas, in a way that would also characterise some of her later works.

Lot 71: Dirck van Baburen (Wijk bij Duurstede circa 1592/93–1624 Utrecht), A Doctor of the Church (Saint Augustine or Saint Ambrose?), oil on canvas, 98 x 133 cm, framed. Estimate €150,000 – 200,000. © Dorotheum

Provenance: possibly collection of Pietro Cussida (died 1622), Rome;
possibly by descent to his son Gianfrancesco Cussida, Rome, 1622;
possibly by descent to his daughter, Laura Cussida, Rome (described in 1624 as ‘un Santo Agostino che legge tutti grandi con cornici d’oro’);
possibly given to her guardian, Nicolò Gavotti (d. 1674), Rome;
possibly by inheritance to Carlo Gavotti, Rome, 1674-1702;
possibly by descent to the heirs of Carlo Gavotti;
sale, Casa d’Aste Oppizzi, Piacenza, 13 December 1987, lot 257, illustrated (as Paolo Antonio Barbieri?);
art market, Bologna 1987;
Private European collection

Documented: possibly Inventario dell’eredità dei beni della Bo.me. Ioannes Francisci Cusida a favore di Laura Cusida sua figlia sotto la tutela di Enrico Gavotti, 8 March 1624, Archivio Storico Capitolino, notaio Bernardino Pasquetti, sez. LXIII, vol. I, c. 85: ‘un Santo Agostino che legge tutti grandi con cornici d’oro’ (see C. Grilli, Il committente della cappella della Pietà in San Pietro in Montorio in Roma, in: Bollettino d’Arte, no. 79, 1994, p. 163, note 26)

Literature: W. Franits, The Paintings of Dirck van Baburen ca. 1592/93–1624. Catalogue Raisonné, Amsterdam/Philadelphia 2013, pp. 103–104, cat. no. A11, illustrated p. 284, plate 11 (as Dirck van Baburen);
W. Franits, A new painting by Dirk Van Baburen, in: D. T. Cashion, H. Luttikhuizen, A. D. West (eds.), The primacy of the image in Northern European art, 1400–1700: essays in honor of Larry Silver, Leiden 2017, illustrated p. 465 (as Dirck van Baburen);
T. Borgogelli, Dottore della chiesa (Sant’Agostino?) in: E. Ghetti, D. Benati (eds.), Massimo Turchi. La collezione, Turin 2019, p. 172, cat. no. 98, illustrated p. 173 (as Dirck van Baburen);
G. Papi, Ancora sul Maestro del Samaritano, in: G. Papi, Un misto di grano e di pula. Scritti su Caravaggio e l’ambiente caravaggesco, Naples 2020, pp. 141–142, illustrated p. 144 (as Maestro del Samaritano)

Note: We are grateful to Wayne Franits for reconfirming the attribution of the present painting.

Dirck van Baburen trained in Utrecht under Paulus Moreelse, a portraitist and history painter. In around 1612, he departed for Italy, where he resided mainly in Rome, working for prominent patrons, including the Spanish diplomat Pietro Cussida and Marchese Vincenzo Giustiniani. Baburen was particularly influenced by the work of Caravaggio and his followers, such as Jusepe de Ribera and Bartolomeo Manfredi. In 1620 or 1621, he returned to Utrecht, where he died in 1624.

In his catalogue raisonné Franits suggested that the present painting may be the work mentioned in the 1624 inventory of Gianfrancesco Cussida’s collection ‘un Santo Agostino che legge tutti grandi con cornici d’oro’ [‘St. Augustine who reads, all large with gilt frames’]. Cussida’s father, Pedro, who had died in 1622, was Baburen’s principal patron in Rome. He had commissioned the artist to paint The capture of Christ with Saint Peter severing the ear of Malchus (now in the Fondazione Longhi, Florence) and the canvases for his chapel in San Pietro in Montorio, executed by Baburen around 1617 in collaboration with his colleague David de Haen. The collector formed a picture gallery in his residence in Via del Corso, which included works by Jusepe de Ribera, Giovanni Lanfranco, and many paintings on copper, probably by one of the Brueghel.

However, as Franits has suggested, the question of provenance remains open because of the ambiguous 1624 inventory entry which may instead refer to a series of paintings, possibly of Doctors of the Church, with Saint Augustine as the prominent figure. It is also possible that the bishop’s mitre on the far left in the present painting suggests that the composition may in fact depict Saint Ambrose, who is also often depicted reading.

Franits compares the present painting to a Philosopher in a private collection, believed to have been executed in the years around 1618–1619, perhaps also for the Cussida collection (this work has been recently acquired by the Yale University Art Gallery, inv. no. 2023.43.1). Tommaso Borgogelli also dates the present painting to around 1618–1619 (see literature) just before Baburen’s return to Utrecht during the period when he was very much influenced by the early works of Ribera such as Saint Jerome in the National Gallery of Ontario, Toronto (inv. no. 95/150) or The Mendicant in the Galleria Borghese, Rome (inv. no. 325). After returning to Utrecht, Baburen gradually moved away from Caravaggism towards a more luminous style of painting and his compositions became increasingly compact and refined.

Lot 49: Peter Paul Rubens (Siegen 1577–1640 Antwerp), Madonna and Child, red chalk, heightened with white and cream gouache, reworked with red chalk, on laid paper, two strips of paper added at the upper margin, 24.4 x 13.4 cm, mounted and framed. Estimate €120,000 – 150,000. © Dorotheum

Provenance: Collection of Jonathan Richardson, Sr. (1665–1745), London, Lugt 2183;
Collection of Arthur Pond (circa 1705–1758), London, Lugt 2038, according to an inscription on the old mount;
Galerie Jan de Maere, Brussels, 1991;
sale, Dorotheum, Vienna, 18 October 1994, lot 216 (as reworked by Peter Paul Rubens);
sale, Phillips, London, 6 July 2000, lot 126 (as Peter Paul Rubens);
Private collection, Austria

Exhibited: Metz, Musées de Metz, La Réalité Magnifée. Peinture flamande 1550–1700, 26 June 1993 - 26 October 1993, cat. no. 26 (as Italian School, 16th Century, retouched by Peter Paul Rubens).

Literature: La Réalité Magnifée. Peinture flamande 1550–1700, exhibition catalogue, Musées de Metz, Metz 1993, p. 178, cat. no. 26 (as Italian School, 16th Century, retouched by Peter Paul Rubens);
P. Joannides, More on Rubens’ Interest in Michelangelo and Raphael, in: Paragone, LVII, third series, no. 68, 2006, pp. 35, 38, note 16, fig. 30 (as Peter Paul Rubens);
J. Wood, Corpus Rubenianum Ludwig Burchard, XXVI: Copies and Adaptations from Renaissance and Later Artists: Italian Artists, I. Raphael and His School, London 2011, cat. no. 33, pp. 232–234, fig. 76 (as after Raphael, retouched by Peter Paul Rubens)

Note: The present study of a Madonna and Child is related to a similar drawing in red chalk at the Museum Kunstpalast, Düsseldorf (inv. no. KA [FP] 13v., 39.1 x 27 cm), which has been attributed to Giulio Romano (see P. Joannides, More on Rubens‘ Interest in Michelangelo and Raphael, in: Paragone, LVII, third series, no. 68, 2006, p. 35, 39, note 20, fig. 32). However, the prototype of this composition seems to be based on an earlier design by Raphael for his Madonna of Humility Crowned by Angels at the Musée Condé, Chantilly (inv. no. DE 64, 28.6 x 23.6 cm), which can be dated to circa 1507/8 – about eight years before Giulio entered Raphael’s workshop around 1518–1520. The drawing by Raphael is a detailed compositional study in brush, pen, and brown ink showing a further group of figures and two hovering angels in addition to the principal group of the Madonna and Child, whereas Giulio’s study concentrates solely on the figure of the Christ Child and on the Madonna’s hands. Her left arm and the folds of her dress are only summarily indicated, while the Madonna’s head is lacking completely in the Düsseldorf drawing. It could have been lost over time, as is suggested by the poor state of preservation and considerable traces of abrasion, so that the part in question might no longer be visible now. While the lower part of the sheet with the figure of the Christ Child corresponds closely to Giulio’s study, the drawing expanded by Rubens highlights the personal interaction between mother and child.

The question whether Rubens used Giulio’s model as a direct source for his copy or whether he owned a second version based on the design in red chalk and reworked the earlier drawing in the same medium has repeatedly been discussed by Rubens scholars but has not been clarified with certainty. In either case, as a reworked model by another hand and adaptation of a copied pictorial motif, the present drawing is an exemplary document of Rubens’ working method, which can be observed in numerous further examples of copies and adaptations based on other artists’ models (see K. Lohse Belkin, Corpus Rubenianum Ludwig Burchard, XXVI: Copies and Adaptations from Renaissance and Later Artist, German and Netherlandish Artists, vols. I and II, London 2009; J. Wood, Corpus Rubenianum Ludwig Burchard, XXVI: Copies and Adaptations from Renaissance and Later Artists, Italian Artists, London 2011.)

Anne-Marie Logan, whose attention had been brought to the present drawing by Julius Held in 1989, described it in the Dorotheum’s auction catalogue (Vienna, 18 October 1994, lot 216), and before that in the Metz exhibition catalogue (see A.-M. Logan, in: La Réalité Magnifée,
Peinture flamande 1550–1700, exhibition catalogue, Metz 1993, p. 178, cat. no. 26), as a Renaissance drawing reworked by Peter Paul Rubens. In her opinion, the lower part of the drawing dates from the time after Rubens’ return from his Italian journey to Antwerp around 1609/10, while the two small strips at the top were added much later, towards the end of the artist’s life, and need not necessarily be by the hand of Rubens himself, but could have been executed by one or more assistants working in his studio. This was contradicted by Paul Joannides in 2006, who was the first to identify the model of Giulio Romano’s drawing in Düsseldorf and concluded that the drawing must be an autograph study by Rubens based on Giulio’s drawing, which could possibly have been owned by the artist (see P. Joannides 2006, op. cit., p. 35, 38, note 16, fig. 30). Similar to Logan he was of the opinion that the upper and lower parts of the drawing were executed at different points in time, but he believed that the additions at the upper margin, as well as the partial retouching and white highlights, all came from Rubens himself and were likely added in preparation of a two-figure devotional panel of the Madonna and Child.

In 2011 Jeremy Wood published the drawing in the Corpus Rubenianum, agreeing with Logan that it was an earlier drawing after Raphael reworked by Rubens (see J. Wood 2011, op. cit., cat. no. 33, pp. 232–234, figs. 76–78), rightly pointing out that “the Virgin and Child can also be compared to drawings entirely by Rubens such as a black chalk study in the Albertina of a standing naked body (inv. no. 17639, 39.6 x 26.5 cm), which was used around 1616–1618 for the figure of Christ in the Holy Family with Saint John the Baptist at the Wallace Collection, London. This drawing has a similar softness of handling and concern with fleshiness of the child’s stomach. The main difference between these two drawings is that one was made from life, while the other was adapted from a work of art” (J. Wood 2011, op. cit., p. 233, no. 11).
Whereas in his publication of 2011 he still described the drawing of the Madonna’s head at the upper margin as a possible addition or ‘restoration’ by another hand dating from the time after Rubens’ intervention and before the drawing passed into the possession of Jonathan Richardson, Sr., Wood later revised his hypothesis after examining a high-resolution digital photograph of the drawing (written communication, 13 September 2024). In his opinion, it is much more likely that Rubens himself was responsible for the additions at the upper margin and that the Madonna’s head is also by his hand. As can be seen with the aid of a microscope, several additions and retouches have been executed in chalk of a slightly different tone. They include not only Mary’s head, but also the outline of her right arm; moreover, the fingers of the Christ Child’s left hand have been elongated, and the heel of his right foot has been enlarged. As has been revealed through the microscope, the lighter-coloured chalk used for the upper part of the drawing has also been used for retouching the earlier drawing below. According to Wood it is therefore highly plausible that both the retouches of the earlier drawing and its extensions are by Rubens’s hand.
The attribution of the added head is confirmed by the fact that Rubens used Mary’s head in profile in the reverse direction, yet in a very similar fashion for the painted addition in the painting by Henri met de Bles that was offered at Sotheby’s London on 3 July 2024 (lot 5, as Herri met de Bles and Sir Peter Paul Rubens). The profile, which might give a somewhat awkward impression, can probably be interpreted as a way of historicising the motif, as Rubens attempted to render a more ancient type of Madonna, which can similarly be observed in Mary’s head in the reworked de Bles painting.

The drawing offered here is thus not only an impressive document of Rubens’s approach when appropriating an Italian model and translating another artist’s pictorial motif into his own artistic idiom. Moreover, it is also one of the master’s rare known drawings in red chalk, a medium Rubens chose for the present work in imitation of the model adapted by him. Due to its rarity, the present drawing can be considered of special importance within the artist’s drawn oeuvre.

We are grateful to Prof. Dr. Nils Büttner, chairman of the Centrum Rubenianum in Antwerp, for examining the drawing in the original and for his scholarly support.

Lot 138: Thomas Patch (Exeter 1725–1782 Florence), The Arno with the Ponte Santa Trinita, Florence, oil on canvas, 84.5 x 160 cm, framed. Estimate €100,000 – 150,000. © Dorotheum

Provenance: art market, London;
where acquired by the present owner, 1970s

Note: We are grateful to Hugh Belsey for endorsing the attribution of the present painting on the basis of a photograph and for his help in cataloguing this lot.

The Ponte Santa Trinita in Florence was one of the views Thomas Patch was most frequently commissioned to paint during the 1770s. The vista was sometimes paired with another from the same spot on the Lugarno Guicciardini but looking westwards, towards the Ponte Santa Carraia. Although the topography is very similar in each of Patch’s works, the activity on the river and the arrangement of figures on the roadway on the right-hand side of the composition differs from painting to painting.

The present composition relates to an engraving, no. 9 in a group of 26 views of Florence, made in 1744 after drawings by Giuseppe Zocchi (1711–1767) now in the Morgan Library in New York (inv no. 1952.30:8). The notable similarities between the two compositions include the fact that, although they are not in reality visible from the Lugarno, Patch adds the dome and campanile of the Duomo, peeping over the buildings on the far bank, to both views. Furthermore, two of the boats have flags decorated with the arms of the Grand Duke of Tuscany, the double-headed eagle of the Hapsburg Empire, and at least four of the river boats have guides (bear leaders or cicerone) pointing out salient features for their companions on board. In this present work, which is otherwise unrecorded, Patch chooses to paint the river view in the early evening, illuminating the buildings in shadow with a soft dappled light.

Thomas Patch walked from Exeter in south-west England to Rome in 1747, in the company of Richard Dalton, who was to become the Librarian of King George III. In Rome, he studied his trade in the studio of the French landscape painter Claude-Joseph Vernet until he was banished from the city after a homosexual indiscretion in 1755. He fled to Florence where he forged a close friendship with Sir Horace Mann, the British Minister in Florence, and developed a range of interests and strategies for providing an income. He painted topographical views of the city (‘bridge painting’ as he called it), wrote a study of physiognomy, and produced painted and engraved caricatures. He became one of the earliest enthusiasts for 14th and 15th century Florentine art, reproducing the work of several artists in fine soft-ground etchings and engravings. He also dealt in paintings and sculpture. He remained in his adopted city but in 1778 fell ill and died there four years later.

Lot 139: Thomas Patch (Exeter 1725–1782 Florence), The Arno with the Ponte alle Grazie from the Molo di Santa Maria sopr’Arno, Florence, oil on canvas, 82 x 115 cm, framed. Estimate €70,000 – 90,000. © Dorotheum

Provenance: Collection of Edward Peter Jones;
with Leger Galleries, London, 1962;
with Harari and Johns, London;
with Derek Jones, London, 1980s;
where acquired by the present owner

Exhibited: Florence, Forte di Belvedere, Firenze e la sua immagine. Cinque secoli di vedutismo, 29 June – 30 September 1994, no. 101 (as Thomas Patch)

Literature: Six Centuries of Old Master Paintings, exhibition catalogue, Uxbridge 1989, s. p., no. 51 (as Thomas Patch);
M. Chiarini, Thomas Patch, in: M. Chiarini, A. Marabottini (eds.), Firenze e la sua immagine. Cinque secoli di vedutismo, exhibition catalogue, Venice 1994, pp. 166–168, cat. no. 101 (as Thomas Patch);
M. Gregori, S. Blasio, Firenze nella pittura e nel disegno dal Trecento al Settecento, Milan 1994, p. 237, illustrated p. 241, no. 310 (as Thomas Patch)

Note: Inspired by the principles spread by great Enlightenment intellectuals such as Denis Diderot, one of the founders of the Encyclopédie, the city views of Thomas Patch aim to engage the viewer by encouraging them to compare the artistic experience with the real one.

This view of the Arno, with the Ponte alle Grazie in the background, offers a unique image of the river. The buildings and the left bank are reflected in the still water, creating a suspended and melancholic atmosphere. On the left, the loggia of the Uffizi Palace, commissioned by Cosimo I de’ Medici and designed by Giorgio Vasari in 1560, is clearly visible. The naturalistic influence of Vernet, Patch’s teacher, is evident in this painting.

In two other versions of this view – one kept at Chatsworth and another that has passed through the English art market – the artist gave more prominence to the Santa Maria Soprarno landing stage, placing groups of people in the scene, observing the city from afar, another typical feature of Vernet’s works (Gregori/Blasio 1994, p. 237).

While Venice had a long-standing tradition of topographical painting, and Rome was well-documented through the works of Panini and Piranesi, up to that point, Florence had mainly been depicted by Giuseppe Zocchi, whose views were highly sought after by the grand tourists visiting the city. Recognising this demand, Patch saw an opportunity to establish himself as a topographical painter. In one letter, he referred to this work as ‘abridge painting’, describing it as the most straightforward way for him to make a living.

In addition to his city views, Patch also dealt in classical and Renaissance art, which helped finance his scientific pursuits in physiognomy and its humorous interpretation through caricature. By the 1770s, Patch had embarked on an ambitious project to document the works of Florentine Quattrocento artists like Giotto and Masaccio, creating detailed etchings of their works – some using soft-ground techniques – which he published in a series of folio volumes.