| Study on two
paintings attributed to |
|
Giovanni Francesco Barbieri,
called Guercino (1591-1666)
and his workshop,
Bologna, ante 1652
|
|
Silvio
Finding Dorinda Wounded, oil
on canvas, 240 x 292 cm,
Erminia
Finding Tancredi Wounded, oil on canvas, 240 x 292 cm
|
|
The
two works, object of this study, known by the Art Historians for
having been taken as model by Pietro Bonato (1765-1820), an artist
friend of Canova, in 1805-1806, who engraved them on copper (acquaforte
and bulino) with writing "FRANCESCO BARBIER1 CALLED GUERCINO
PAINTED / DOMENICO DEL FRATE DRAWN / PIETRO BONATO VENETO BASSANESE
ENGRAVED ROMA /
"
Guattani
in 1806 mentions this work in the "Roman Encyclopaedic Memories",
asserting that Bonato was engraving these plates. Copying the two
original works of Guercino, which were in the mansion of a family
with origin in Bologna, heirs of Zagnoni.
|
| It was Sir Denis
Mahon, who still declares today having seen them in Rome in the Collection
of Baron Zezza , who asserts that the two works, that have been examined
here, are the ones that Bonato took as a model, and not the Silvio
Finding Dorinda, 224 x 291 cm, today in Dresden, at the
Staatliche Gemäldegalerie (Katalog der ausgestellten Werke Nr.
367, mentioned, see even Salerno/Mahon 1988, Nr. 240, mentioned) and
of Erminia Finding Tancredi of 244 x 287 cm, that was in the
Yorkshire, Howard Castle (inv.Nr.183), and today at the National Gallery
in Edinburgh (new acquisition). |
| The
chronology of the two primary paintings has been finally analysed
by Sir Denis Mahon and reported in the form of Erminia Finding
Tancredi Wounded, 1651, printed in the catalogue of The Bologna
Exhibition in 1968 (Mahon, form 88, mentioned) and by Salerno
(mentioned) cat. Nr. 240, Dorinda Silvio and Linco (1646-1647)
and cat. Nr. 285, Erminia Finding Tancredi Wounded (1651). |
| With regard
to the first version of Dorinda Silvio and Linco (1646-1647),
Mahon and Salerno mention the Account Book (mentioned) registration
of the 16th January 1647, which report the payment received from Count
Alfonso of Novellara, also mentioned by Malvasia (mentioned,1678,
II, p.375; 1841, II, p.267), whilst, with regard to the first version
of Erminia Finding Tancredi Wounded (1651) the identification
of the work related to the payment and the purchaser seems more complex. |
| Sir
Mahon writes (cat.88, mentioned): "It is evident that the Cardinal
(Cardinal Fabrizio Savelli had arrived in Bologna on the 10th of September
1648 as Legate and remained there till 1651, note of the writer) had
ordered (as pendant to that Erminia and the Shepherd that he
had taken from Ruffo) (don Antonio Ruffo, an important collector from
Sicily to whom Guercino had written on the 1st August 1648 promising
him an Erminia with the Shepherd (Mahon, mentioned, cat. 88),
note of the writer) a large painting representing the subject of this
file. It is probable that Guercino started to work on this painting
in 1650, but before it was ended and consigned, the Duke and the Archduchess
of Mantova went to visit Guercino in his studio and the Archduchess
expressed evidently her desire to buy the two paintings on which Guercino
was working, the Lot for the art dealer Girolamo Pavese (..)
and the Erminia for Cardinal Savelli." |
| "Adi
6 maggio 1652 dalla Seri.ma Arciduchessa di Mantoua si è riceuto
per mezzo del Sig.Quaranta Sampi da Bologna il pagamento del quadro,
di Arminia e Tanchredi che fu ordinato dal Eme.mo Saueli, e questi
sono stati Vnga.ri: n.o 300. che fa.no Scudi 375. (This day, the
6th of May 1652 her Serene Highness the Archduchess of Mantova paid
by means of Mister Quaranta Sampi of Bologna, the painting representing
Erminia and Tancredi that had been ordered by his Eminence Savelli,
and there were Ungari n.o 300. That makes Scudi 375)". (Account
Book of Guercino, 454, mentioned). |
| The chronology
of the orders, the payments, and at last the delivery of the two first
versions, allow us to note how often the original buyer of a work
was not, in fact, the one to whom it finally was sold. It is very
interesting, on this matter, the study of Arabella Cifani and Franco
Monetti regarding the collectionism of the Guercino works in these
years of great working frenzy and pressure from the clients (Cifani,
Monetti, Amedeo del Pozzo, Marquis in Voghera, customer and collector
of Guercino in Torino, page 226, in: Studies of Art History
in honour of Denis Mahon, Electa, Milano 2000). |
| The scrupulous
Account Book in which the listed works had to be only those for which
Guercino himself had personally cashed the payment, do not mention
any other versions of these works. Let us remember though, that Ghelfi
(Account Book, page 24, note Nr.16, mentioned), writes that since
the Guercino times the workshops' paintings used to be muddled with
the originals authored by the Master himself, and gives some examples.
With regard to the activity of the co-operators, we must however refer
to the previous study of Prisco Bagni on Benedetto Gennari and the
Workshop (Bagni, mentioned) and for a clear vision of the genealogical
tree of the Barbieri-Gennari families, refer to Bagni in his report
on engravers of Guercino (Bagni, Engravers, table 1, page 3,
mentioned). |
| All the experts
agree however, both on the high quality of the paintings supplied
by the "firm Barbieri-Gennari", and on the fact that with regard to
large paintings, it was usual that the co-operators had the task of
portraying minor subjects or care for decorative elements in the landscape. |
| Extreme care
was given to all the works coming out from the workshop, both those
recorded in the Account Book as being paid directly to Guercino, and
those made in co-operation and paid to Gennari. Considering that there
are some works of Gennari paid to Guercino and viceversa, it seems
evident that the Account Book does not suffice to establish with certitude
the roles of the Master and of the co-operators in the accomplishment
of larger and, for the so called "firm", financially more profitable
paintings. Another aspect to take into consideration as regard the
division of the tasks, the expenses and the profits, is with no doubt
the importance that Guercino gave to the purchase of the colours,
in particular the precious pigment ultramarine blue, 12 Silver Ducats
a ounce the price of the finest one and half the price, 6 Silver Ducats,
the so called "half blue", and of the canvases. |
| As a matter
of fact, it must have been rather difficult to keep a regular account,
although a domestic one, of the costs of the materials, the work done
and, at last, of the incomes. |
I should have
not noted this, if Guercino himself had not complained about the cost
of the materials, specially of the precious ultramarine blue (lapis
lazuli), giving in that way a particular importance even to its destination
and to the sharing out of the profits.
(Account Book, introduction, page 34, note 48, mentioned) |
|
Salerno
(mentioned, page 15) remarks that "On the base of the technical
procedures used, there are no evident differences between the autograph
works and those made by the workshop, because the assistants and
the pupils used the same methods as the Master. The difference evidenced
is always and mainly in the quality".
However,
Salerno points out just above (mentioned, page 14) that "in
the stratigraphies one can see that, on a base of pure ultramarine,
he used ultramarine blue mixed with white lead, to obtain the modelled
movement of the drapery, and completed the effect with a final veil
of pure ultramarine blue, which is rather transparent, to attain
the right colour intensity."
The
two paintings object of this study, have been analysed at the Swiss
Institute of Art Studies of Zurich, SIK (Reports 0021a-b of 12.09.2000
mentioned) and at the Monumental Art International Pancella (Report
0812000/MAIP of 20.09.2000 mentioned) with extremely interesting
and positive results: "La palette des pigments employés
est identique pour les deux toiles"..."il est à
remarquer que les matériaux identifiés sur ces deux
toiles, autant pour la préparation que pour les couches picturales,
sont totalement conformes à la date d'attribution proposée,
étant donné que leur utilisation remonte à
I'Antiquité et que nous n'avons décelé aucun
composé postérieur à cette date" (MAIP,
p.7, mentioned)
|
|
It
is interesting to know that both the Institutes, which have independently
worked on the samples taken by the restorer Sabrina Pedrocchi (Restoration
Report, mentioned), have evidenced the use of the lapis lazuli or
ultramarine blue either pure or mixed with lead white, and this
agree perfectly with the results of the stratigraphies executed
on the works considered totally autograph by Dr. Joyce Plesters
of National Gallery of Londra and by Dr. Rossi Manaresi of Bologna,
mentioned by Salerno at page 14 (mentioned).
The
selected period is defined by a constant utmost care devoted to
execution, which nowadays would be called quality standard, and
by the success the subject and the creation of the two works, Erminia
in particular, had had in a particularly frantic period of activity
for the "workshop".
As
regards the use of the Account Book, we cannot exclude that large
canvases and expensive colours such as lapis lazuli for the ultramarine
blue which had been bought were then used by the assistants and
not even that significant and extensive work made by the master
is not recorded in it.
Both
Sir. Mahon and Dott. Salerno agrees that quality is the decisive
factor to establish the degree or extent of autography of the work.
|
|
Although
the layer of dirt covering them hid details and changed colours,
when Sir Mahon saw the paintings in Rome, he considered both of
them as belonging to Guercino's workshop and he was sure they had
been painted when the previous version, which was almost contemporary,
had not been delivered to the respective clients yet (Mahon, mentioned)
Unlike
those kept now in Dresden and Edinburgh, which have slightly different
dimensions, the two works I am writing of here were born as pendant
intended for the same client and therefore having exactly the same
dimensions. These works are still together nowadays by chance and
thanks to the respectful restoration made by Sabrina Pedrocchi at
Losone in Switzerland during 2000, which is the subject of my present
study.
The
Client, who saw at Guercino's the first two versions, destined,
as we know, to two different clients, discovered the fascinating
Baroque link connecting them, perhaps the suggestion not to hide
one's own feelings, and wanted both of them. So he had to commission
them from Guercino before the models left the workshop.
Doing
that he joined them until nowadays.
|
|
(Tancredi
and Erminia, in Torquato Tasso, 1544-1595, Gerusalemme Liberata,
of 1575, X11, 64-69; Silvio and Dorinda in the pastoral play
by Battista Guarini, 1538-1612, Pastor Fido, of 1595)
I
happened to be surprised at the high pictorial quality of these
two paintings (Silvio Finding Dorinda Wounded, in particular,
which, according to me, is higher-quality than its pendant with
Erminia) when they were in London, still almost unreadable,
as Sir Mahon had seen them many years before. Already at the time
I suggested the owner a cleaning and restoration intervention I
considered as urgent and very precious to revive what proved to
be two masterpieces.
Describing
the works before cleaning them, Ms. Pedrocchi writes: "Readability
of the two works was prevented by a thick coat of yellowish paint.
During the cleaning phase several retouches were found that had
been carried out before ... These retouches had undergone a chromatic
alteration to dark due to photochemical reactions, natural aging
of binder and protection paint, in particular along the upper perimetric
border of the painting portraying Silvio." (Pedrocchi, mentioned)
The
present owner has decided to undertake a careful preservative restoration
process, precisely documented with photos (Pedrocchi, mentioned).
During this intervention some samples have been taken to be studied
by the SIK of Zürich (mentioned) and by the MAIP of Montreux
(mentioned). The aesthetic restoration was actually very limited
since the works were nearly intact.
|
|
Thanks
to the macrophotography of details performed after cleaning completion,
the brushwork can now be identified very clearly and strongly so
that it can be easily compared with the corresponding versions of
Dresden and Edinburgh.
Sir
Denis Mahon examined this photographic documentation on Wednesday,
27 September 2000 in London, he congratulated on the painstaking
restoration work that has restored the paintings light and volume.
He was glad to recognise Guercino's direct interventions in particular
in Silvio's face, but also in various other parts of his works.
These were only conjecturable before because they were unrecognisable
under the thick coat of yellowish paint covering and flattening
the two paintings.
|
| The appearance
of bright and vivid colours, which could not even be guessed before,
the landscape details reappeared from century-old darkness, the despair
expression on Silvio's face who could not believe the tragedy or Erminia's
tears can be documented with photos but only direct view of the works
can confirm the impression of strength and character that are evidence
of a remarkable autography by Guercino in terms of significant and
marked direct interventions in both paintings, but above all in Silvio
and Dorinda and less extended in Erminia and Tancredi. |
|
We
are waiting for the possibility of comparing the most revealing
details with the first versions, thanks to the kind collaboration
of Dr. Gregor Weber, in charge of ancients masters at the Staatliche
Gemäldegalerie of Dresden, the director of the National Gallery
of Scotland, dr. Michael Clarke and the Curator of Italian and Spanish
Art dr. Aidam Weston-Lewis and presenting the final results to Sir
Denis Mahon. In the meantime I am very grateful to Sir Mahon for
encouragement and I thank him sincerely for the attention he has
shown for this study.
We
want to assure in advance that results will be available for all
experts who are interested in continuing the research started by
Sir Denis Mahon.
Claudio Metzger
Ascona, 14 February 2001
|
|
Bibliography
|
|
Bagni, Prisco,
Benedetto Gennari and Guercino Workshop, Bologna, 1986;
Bagni, Prisco,
The Guercino and his engravers, Ugo Bozzi Editore, Roma,
1988;
Cifani,
Monetti, Amedeo del Pozzo, Marquis of Voghera, buyer and collector
of Guercino in Torino, in. Studies of Art History in honour
of Denis Mahon, Electa, Milano 2000;
Ghelfi,
Barbara, edited by, Guercino's Account Book, 1629-1666, scientific
expert Sir Denis Mahon, Nuova Alfa Editoriale 1997;
Swiss
Institute for Art Studies, Schweizerische Institut für Kunstwissenschaft,
SIK, Zollikerstrasse 32, CH-8032 Zürich, analysis carried out
under the direction of Dr. Christoph Herm, Leiter Labor und Kunsttechnologieforschung,
reports 0021a-b of 12.09.2000;
Malvasia,
C. C., Felsina Painter, The Lives of the Bolognese Painters,
Bologna, 1678,
|
|
Mahon,
Denis, The Guercino, Paintings, Exhibition Catalogue with
introduction essay of C. Gnudi, Bologna 1968 & Nuova Alfa Editoriale,
Bologna 1991;
Monumental
Art International Pancella, Grand Rue 20, CH-1820 Montreux, analysis
carried out under the direction of the chemist ITIS/UTS, director
Renato Pancella, and of Amalita Bruthus, responsible for the study,
Report 0812000/MAIP of 20.09.2000;
Pedrocchi,
Sabrina, Restoration Report, Via ai Molini 47, CH-6612 Losone,
February 2001;
Salerno,
Luigi, scientific advise of Sir Denis Mahon, The paintings
of Guercino, Ugo Bozzi Editore, Roma, 1988;
Staatliche
Gemäldegalerie Dresden, Alte Meister, Katalog der ausgestellten
Werke, E.A.Seemann Leipzig 1992.
|
| |
|