Relazione - Claudio Metzger 2001

Claudio Metzger1

Palazzo Otello - 6612 Ascona, Switzerland - Tel.++ 41 / 91 / 7915548 - Fax 7915549 - E-mail: [email protected]

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, and 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.

Claudio Metzger2


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 collection 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

Claudio Metzger3


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 London 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

Claudio Metzger4


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.

Claudio Metzger5


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;

Claudio Metzger6


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.

Claudio Metzger 1


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, and Erminia Finding Tancredi Wounded, oil on canvas, 240 x 292 cm Part two, notes on macro photographic comparisons With reference to my study of February 14th 2001, we produce herewith some preliminary notes regarding the comparison between the two studied paintings, whose interpretation is now possible thanks to the painstaking restoration documented aside (Pedrocchi, op. cit.) and the corresponding first versions. Erminia Finding Tancredi, 244 x 287 cm, ex Howard Castle (inv.Nr.183), today at the National Gallery of Scotland, Edinburgh; Silvio Finding Dorinda, 224 x 291 cm, Staatliche Gemäldegalerie, Dresden (Katalog der ausgestellten Werke Nr. 367, op. cit.); Thanks to the macro photography executed after cleaning completion, before varnishing and retouches (very limited and marginal, not including the studied sections), it is today very easy to identify the extreme clearness and strength of the original brushwork and it is possible to attempt a first cautious comparison by analyzing the photos of the details of the corresponding versions of Edinburgh and Dresden. (On the other side, it is quite evident that the dimensions of the paintings did represent a considerable problem when photographing the entire work; these photos, although perfectly sharp, as they were not taken in the studio, suffer from the influence of the colours in the environment and are, even if in the slightest degree, affected by the highlights impossible to eliminate from the narrow space in which they were taken.)

Thanks to the kind, open-minded collaboration of the General Director of the National Gallery of Scotland Dr. Timothy Clifford, of Director Michael Clarke and of Aidan Weston-Lewis, in charge of the Department of Italian and Spanish Painting, we got obtained the slides of the details and a complete Ektachrome of Erminia Finding Tancredi, 244 x 287. Our warmest thanks also go to Dr. Gregor Weber, in charge of Ancient Masters of Staatliche Gemäldegalerie of Dresden, who first put at our disposal the Ektachrome and later on allowed us to execute at our discretion a complete series of photos and macro photographs of Silvio Finding Dorinda, 224 x 291 cm. The first difficulty met in trying this kind of comparison was due to the different state of preservation of the two versions.

Claudio Metzger 2


Erminia Finding Tancredi, 244 x 287 cm in Edinburgh, appears better preserved in photos than the version we studied. In particular, Erminia’s face and neck, her hair and the ribbon that ties it , result in our version nearly illegible because of an excessive wear, probably due to ancient and badly performed cleaning. Nevertheless, the tear on Erminia’s cheek or other very important details such as Erminia’s hands, are of excellent quality and sublime beauty. Vafrino’s face, in the version here studied, better preserved than Erminia’s, is excellently painted and wins the confrontation with the first version of Edinburgh. But it is certainly in Silvio and Dorinda that the macro photographic comparison with the Dresda version reserves greater satisfaction. In my opinion, Silvio’s face in the version here studied, presents the evidence of the remarkable autographic intervention of Guercino, perceived immediately after the cleaning from the retouches that dulled it. The face is integral and well preserved, contrary to that of Erminia. As documented in the restoration report, the colours are bright, the brushwork steady and firm. Even the comparison between both Silvio’s and Linco’s hands and Dorinda’s bear the comparison with the first version in Dresden. In both of these two second versions, the landscape is executed with less care, which is evident even from the macro photographic comparison with the two first ones. Awaiting the opportunity to show the live paintings to the specialized critics, my personal opinion is, in any case, positive. As already considered in my introductory writing, we know that the two paintings were executed for the same customer, representing three human figures for each painting, measuring two meters and forty by two meters and ninety, made, as shown by the analysis of the pigments, with the same procedure and large use of ultramarine blue (lapis lazuli), either pure or semi- pure, as that used in works definitely autographed . All that was, from Guercino’s point of view and by what we can gather from the Account Book, a valid motive to personally care and supervise the drawing up of these two versions too. Finally, we have the quality factor, on which both Sir Mahon and Salerno agree, judging it as the decisive proof of the grade and measure of the work’s autography. As I have already written in my presentation of the 14th of February, I am convinced, after studying the two paintings and the macro photographic comparison, that we have here two paintings made when the first versions were still in the workshop, under Guercino’s supervision, as Sir Mahon already wrote (Mahon, 1968, cat. 88, note, op. cit.) and, in consideration of the importance and the commercial value, with his direct interventions on both paintings, but certainly more important in Silvio e Dorinda than in Erminia e Tancredi. Claudio Metzger Ascona, June 25, 2001 Opere citate: Bagni, Prisco, Benedetto Gennari and Guercino’s workshop, Bologna, 1986;

Claudio Metzger 3


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 del 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. Gaudi, 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 08/2000/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;

Documents

Relazione - Claudio Metzger 2001