|
Caravaggio controversies (18 February,
2004)
The Taking of Christ at the National
Gallery: is it or is it not a Caravaggio?
compiled by Eimear McKeith
The Irish art world is in a state of turmoil
following the questioning of the authenticity of the National
Gallery of Ireland's most famous painting. Caravaggio's The
Taking of Christ has come under fire recently due to claims
that the original painting is in Rome, with the one in Ireland
being a mere copy.
In response to the claims, the Director of the
National Gallery, Raymond Keaveney, has said that he is confident
that the Dublin Taking of Christ is authentic. Head Curator,
Sergio Benedetti, has also stated that he believes it is the original
painting.
 |
Caravaggio?, The Taking of Christ,
1602. This version is the NGI painting.Image held here |
The painting, which is on long-term loan to
the National Gallery, was discovered by Benedetti hanging in the
dining room of a Jesuit house in Dublin in August 1990. At the
time it was believed to be a copy of the lost original that had
been painted by Gerard von Honthorst, a Dutch follower of Caravaggio,
but Benedetti immediately recognised it as the Caravaggio which
had been missing for 200 years. After the painting had been cleaned
and examined, it was officially declared a Caravaggio, with Benedetti
publishing his findings in the Burlington art magazine in November
1993. No one disputed this attribution. Yesterday, Keaveney said:
With respect to the
painting here in the National Gallery, all the homework has been
done and this has been in the public domain for 15 years. It is
universally accepted that ours is a Caravaggio.
In 1943, Italian art critic Roberto Longhi examined
the Rome painting and found its subject matter and style to be
strongly suggestive of Caravaggio, but he felt it to be by "too
weak a hand" to be attributed to the 17th-century Italian
master.
However, it has just been announced by Maria
Letizia Paoletti, an art expert in Rome, that she had "cast-iron
proof" that the painting in Rome is the original version,
saying that new tests have proved it:
When I first set eyes on the painting in Rome, I had
a strong hunch that it was a Caravaggio. At the end of six months
of painstaking investigations and cleaning, I can safely say
that it is unquestionably Caravaggio's original work of The
Taking of Christ.
She revealed that the British art historian
and renowned expert on Italian 17th-century art, Sir Denis Mahon*,
had examined the painting with her several days ago and was in
"full agreement" over her attribution. She told the
Telegraph:
His reaction was extremely
positive. He had no doubt now that this was the original work.The
discovery will now force specialists to reconsider exactly how
to place the Dublin painting in the context of Caravaggio's work.
The tests, carried out by the Sapienza University
in Rome, included colour comparisons, x-rays and infra-red examination
and produced results that "dovetailed perfectly" with
signs of Caravaggio's hand in his other paintings. Tests on the
lower layers of the work showed that it related closely to his
other paintings.
The tests showed that the colours used and the
repainted details all matched Caravaggio's other works. The most
significant similarity was the way in which the painting had been
altered during the course of the work by the painting over of
some details, including an arm whose position he later completely
changed.
In comparison, tests on the work in Dublin revealed
signs of "corrections" in the lower layers only, "rather
than serious afterthoughts as was Caravaggio's wont". According
to Paoletti, this suggests that someone else painted it, following
a preestablished plan. She said:
Every expert who has seen
the painting in Rome agrees with myself and Sir Denis, apart from
Benedetti, which of course is understandable, since the new attribution
throws the old one into doubt.
The National Gallery remains confident that
the Dublin Taking of Christ is the original. It is scheduled
to go on loan to an exhibition in Milan in October and November.
Benedetti has proposed that it be put on display alongside the
Rome painting at the exhibition, so that the two could be studied
and judged. As Keaveney said
In an ideal world, putting
the two paintings side by side helps establish the merits of each
one. There is currently an opportunity to put the two side by
side. You can't do that at a distance of thousands of miles.
Hopefully, this will help to establish once
and for all which painting is the original Taking of Christ.
An 80-years-old scoop
compiled by Rossella
Regina
Caravaggio painting found in royal collection...Caravaggio
original 'found'...etc. etc.
These were titles to be read on some websites
few days ago only. It seems that, after cleaning a very dirty
painting tucked away in a corner of the British royal art collection,
Sir Denis Mahon, just mentioned above, discovered it was a major
work by Italian Old Master Caravaggio, specifically The calling
of Saints Peter and Andrew: This is the title of the
old canvas which King Charles I bought in 1637.
|
Caravaggio, Vocazione
dei Santi Pietro e Andrea (The Calling of Saints Peter
and Andrew), Hampton Court. Image held here
|
But Mahon apparently ignored that this painting
has been known to the Italian critics since 1925, when it was
written about for the first time, arousing a cointroversy about
its provenance. At the beginning of the eighties the controversy
about the painting was reignited and finally, in 1996, the painting
was declared to be an original Caravaggio.
At least now tha painting will leave Hampton
Court for Saint James, as Prince Charles has requested after this
' discovery'.
Most recent news items:
• Art in and from Germany proves very troubling (17 February 2004)
• Art reaches music (12 February, 2004)
• Kennedy leaves National Gallery of Australia / records at auction for contemporary art (10 February, 2004)
• Hunt Museum hit by looted-art claims (9 February, 2004)
For a full list of news items, click here.
Latest reader
feedback:
News item 603
I have to say I agree with Circa. I have been working on a projec...
News item 624
The idea of exhibiting a group of objects bought on eBay, though ...
News item 617
It'd be interesting to see how many visitors attended the gallery...
News item 603
re. Comment 2 - most people who get turned down for grants have t...
News item 603
'sour grapes aside, what are culture ireland up to?' i think we n...
News item 606
hang on a minute... surely the feller who won the prize at art st...
News item 603
As someone who received a grant from Culture Ireland this year, f...
News item 602
try and make work that doesn't topple over in future!...
Do you have an opinion on this news item? If so, please click
here for our comments form.
| Responses so far |
| Comment 1 |
The picture was catalogued by Michael Levey in 1991 as very
dirty and covered in an old heavy discoloured varnish, but
that it would look more impressive if cleaned.
|
Failed to execute CGI : Win32 Error Code = 2
Back
to top of page
|
|
