Discoveries

a frame of the video on the virtual reconstruction of San Pier Maggiore

Where do churches go to die?

, , , , , 0

Following the collapse of a column, not even a main one, which took place on 2 September 1783, the Grand Duke Pietro Leopoldo di Lorena had the church of San Pier Maggiore demolished. Although it was one of the oldest churches in Florence, documented since as early as 1067 aC.

The church was full of splendid artworks, by leading artists, including Botticelli and Perugino, and located in a good neighborhood, at least around the middle of the thirteenth century, when Florence was divided into “sestieri” (six parts) and that of San Pier Maggiore was inhabited by noble families. It is also mentioned by Dante in the Divine Comedy, as the place where his ancestor Cacciaguida lived.

 

The destructive enthusiasm of the Grand Duke was actually linked more than to the stability of the building, to the desire to reduce the political and economic power of the Church. The fact is that only the arches of the façade survived, two of which today are buffered, and various traces in the private houses that have taken their place.

 

But such minor traces have made it possible to “resurrect” it and make it visible and open to visitors, both where it once stood, and from a distance, thanks to an extraordinary research work as illustrated in this video, which you absolutely must see.

It all started thanks to the National Gallery in London, and a couple of paintings of their collection which were made for San Pier Maggiore, by Jacopo di Cione and Botticini.

Now a fantastic augmented reality application has been created that we would like to see applied in many other circumstances.

For example, the church of San Pier Scheraggio, also in Florence, which was demolished for the construction of the Uffizi. Inside the church there was a famous painting by Cimabue depicting the Madonna in the act of putting her son to sleep. It was called “Madonna della ninna nanna (lullaby)“, hence the name of today’s Via della Ninna.

 

Art–Test worked, together with a large partnership, on the “PRIMARTE” regional project on the case of the former Convent of the “Campora” in Florence.

affreschi dell'ex complesso di Santa Maria al Sepolcro - Le camporaFrescoes of the former complex of Santa Maria al Sepolcro – Le campora

The entire complex, whose construction dates back to the fifties of the fourteenth century, and which was of great importance at the time, came to depend in 1434 on the Badia Fiorentina, one of the religious and cultural hubs of the city, with a studium, a library and intellectuals who promoted important artistic commissions. The building no longer exists. Only a part of it remains, now integrated into a private house, with magnificent although almost unknown frescoes, which illustrate the stories of Saint Anthony the Abbot and his encounter with the hermit Paul, according to the biographies composed in the 4th century A.D by Athanasius and Jerome. These paintings, of great beauty and pictorial refinement, are exceptional for the completeness of the cycle and for the figurative particularities that appear there.

As part of the PRIMARTE project, an integrated platform was created, already in 2015, collecting and organising a huge amount of information. Just by clicking on the various parts of the reconstructed church and convent, all data become visible: historical and current, diagnostic results and restoration reports, 3D models and orthoplanes … in short, everything. Even if, unfortunately, they are not currently available to the public, in our opinion a real shame. We hope that next time we will be able to replicate the project in another site and give it the visibility it deserves!

(Anna Pelagotti)
(Anna Pelagotti)

 

 

 

 

Video on the San Pier Maggiore project

Simone_Martini_-_frontespizio_per_codice_Virgilio_-_Biblioteca_Ambrosiana_-_Milano

Diagnostics meets poetry

0

Petrarch (Arezzo, 20 July 1304 – Arquà, 19 July 1374) was born into a Florentine family in exile (due to his father’s belonging to the white Guelphs). 

He had an adventurous life and had no respite in his wanderings, even after his death.

His tomb was in fact desecrated in 1630, probably to resell some bones of this famous poet, that remain unfound.

Diagnostic analyses on what was left, surprisingly, revealed that the skull was not his own, but that of a woman who lived in 1200.

The skeleton, on the other hand, seems authentic: in addition to a compatible dating, it reports some fractures in the ribs, which corresponds to the reported news that he was kicked by a horse.

In the illustration, the miniature by Simone Martini, for the cover of the “Ambrosian Virgil”, by Petrarch, now preserved at the Pinacoteca Ambrosiana in Milan.

The work testifies to the friendship between the two artists and literates, who both attended the court of Pope Benedict XII in Avignon.

This illuminated page shows the Latin commentator Servius, pulling back a curtain to show the supreme poet lying down. He seems to draw inspiration by looking up at the sky, pen and book in hand.

The act of pulling the curtain aside is a clear metaphor for the commentator’s disclosure role.

A soldier, a shepherd and a farmer attend the scene, alluding to the epic, pastoral and bucolic themes sung in the poet’s work.

By Simone Martini Art–Test analysed the Polyptych of Santa Caterina. We will talk about it soon! Stay tuned!

(Anna Pelagotti)
(Anna Pelagotti)
maddalena-in-estasi-1606

Magdalene, one and three

, , 0

Mary Magdalene, protagonist, in spite of herself, in the very popular book the “Da Vinci Code”, (where it is fictionalized that she was the wife of Christ, and mother of his descendants), has always inspired artists with her “irregularity” as a saint sinner.

The best known “penitent Magdalene”, or “Magdalene in ecstasy”,  is perhaps the one by Caravaggio. Because of the author’s fame, of course, but also because more versions of it have appeared, and critics are debating which one is the original.

These days, a version that emerged in the antiques market some time ago is exhibited in Possagno, after being at the MART in Trento. In 2014 the well known scholar Mina Gregori had authenticated another one, disavowing what for years had been considered the first version, the so-called Maddalena Klein, from the family of collectors who owned it. These two last versions have also been exhibited together to allow for comparisons.

The interest is also accentuated by the fact that the painting is perhaps the last created by the master. In fact, from his biographers we know that on his death during the return trip to Rome, he had with him a “half-length Magdalene”, perhaps still to be completed.

How do we find out which is the original? The question is complex, also because there are many other versions, some copies signed by Louis Finson, the painter who hosted Caravaggio in Naples, but others still to be studied.

Art–Test has investigated a very remarkable version, which has not yet been published.

We only know that the question of the autography of Caravaggio’s paintings and of possible copies or doubles is still open.

It is striking, however, that, when debating about authorship, no reference is made to diagnostic investigations and scientific data to at least narrow the number down.

Of course, the fact that there is an X-ray or a reflectography, rarely both, is not enough. The diagnostic companion should be complete and start from the basics.

For example: has the canvas been dated with C14?

Have the pigments been checked for any anachronisms?

As we have seen, opinions change and are subjective. The scientific data remain. There is still so much to discover. Let’s do it!

(Anna Pelagotti)
(Anna Pelagotti)
IMG-20141124-WA0002

How much is it?

, , , 0

How not to fall in a trap

A recurring question we are asked is, of course, “How much do your tests cost?” Less often it is asked “what value do these tests have?”

We want to share with you a reflection that for some time we have been discussing during our days at work.

The answer is: “the value of a #diagnostic campaign lies in the ability to answer the questions posed”.

And therefore more than the “cost” of a single #investigation or a complete and complex diagnostic campaign, it is the “value” that should be inquired for.

For example, if the purpose of an analysis is the #authenticity of an #artwork (which is independent of the #attribution and/or wants to give certainty about consistency with a given historical period), this cannot be obtained using the cost of the survey as a choice factor.

The costs of the investigations are linked to a variety of parameters, including the time and equipment required.

We have experienced various types of customers, with some attempts to downgrading our work, and others for whom it seems that the cost measures the value, so they only trust those laboratories who perform diagnostic analyzes at exorbitant prices. But then get burned and come to us.

The survey type to choose is the one that is able to answer the Question you have.

Each artifact is a “unicum” and therefore even if the same question is asked for two or more artworks, it is not always answered by the same analyses.

Conversely, investigations and their correct interpretation can give answers to different questions.

Furthermore, the result of an analysis must always be contextualized.

The documents accompanying an object, whether they are administrative documents or scholar research, previous diagnostic campaigns, expertise, etc. must be objectively evaluated, bearing in mind that, like the #counterfeiting of works of art, the counterfeiting of accompanying documents is not rare either. 

Furthermore, scientific data must be considered reliable only when they are documented throughout their acquisition process and interpreted without preconceptions.

The value of a diagnostic campaign is not in its cost, but in the scientific “sincerity” and in the fairness towards those who commission it.

And now ask how much does it costs, please, and compare our services with those of our competitors, and the value we offer.

We are ready to offer you personalized advice.

(Emanuela Massa)
(Emanuela Massa)
buchakjian4

Never again

, , , 0

During the explosion in Beirut on 4 August 2020, which caused 207 deaths and approximately 7,000 injuries, and which irreparably destroyed part of the Lebanese capital, the losses to assets were also considerable. Making an inventory of them has also brought to light two paintings until recently without attribution.

The Lebanese art historian Gregory Buckhakjian is convinced that the artworks recovered were created by the hand of Artemisia Gentileschi. And Buckhakjian knows very well the history of the Sursock Palace collection, the building where the paintings were located – and which was heavily damaged during the attack -, as in 1993, he discussed his doctoral thesis at the Sorbonne University, precisely on this topic.

It is known that the works arrived in Lebanon in 1920, with the collecting nucleus of Alfred Sursock, husband of Maria Teresa Serra di Cassano, Neapolitan, daughter of Francesco Serra, seventh Duke of Cassano. The collection consisted of works by various Neapolitan artists of the seventeenth century, such as Luca Giordano and Andrea Vaccaro, but also Matthias Stomer. Artists already known and valued. There were also two paintings of unclear attribution. The hand of the painter was not among the best known.

The idea of them being by Artemisia came to the scholar right during his studies. At the time, he told Hyperallergic magazine, “it was still a student job. When I discussed my thesis, my teachers told me it was very convincing and that I should continue my research and publish it. But I didn’t, because at the time, after I returned to Beirut, I was completely shocked by what was happening in the city and I forgot about Artemisia [the Lebanese civil war had just ended, ed]. My priorities concerned the city, reconstruction, etc. ”.

His studies were shelved until last year, when the two paintings were found among the ruins of the palace. The works are: a Hercules and Onfale, dating back, according to Buckhakjian, to the early thirties of the seventeenth century, and a Penitent Magdalene from around 1640. Making a comparison with other paintings, attributed with certainty to the artist, the historian focused on some details that make Artemisia’s works recognizable, such as drapery, jewels and more, and found many similarities.

Ercole e Onfale by Artemisia Gentileschi, damaged by the explosion

The current attention for these works is also linked to the interest in the artist, linked to that for women painters which has finally seen a strong increase in recent years.

Although, to tell the truth, Artemisia’s name is perhaps mostly known for the gruesome story of her rape and the torture trial that ensued.

A series of events we would never want to hear about again.

The Penitent Magdalene was loaned to the exhibition The Ladies of Art in Milan (Palazzo Reale), the attribution was confirmed by Riccardo Lattuada (specialized in Artemisia Gentileschi). The scholar, Sheila Barker also confirmed the attribution, recognizing the details and traits that distinguish the artist’s hand.

To date, the two paintings are still unpublished: in all probability Buckhakjian will publish some studies on the subject soon.

As the two works will almost certainly undergo a restoration, given the damage suffered during the explosion (La Maddalena exhibited in Palazzo Reale still shows the signs), we hope that a diagnostic campaign will also be carried out, which would help knowledge of the technique of this extraordinary painter who, despite recent glories, is still largely unknown.

And a scientific attribution of these, as of all works, can no longer ignore a comparisons of this type as well.

(Chiara Martine Menchetti)
(Chiara Martine Menchetti)
intero

Man or Woman?

, , , , 0

Gender fluid ante litteram

A painting by the genius Leonardo da Vinci unexpectedly provides us with an interesting reflection on the notion of “gender identity“, never as much debated as in recent times. What distinguishes and separates being a woman from being a man? Where is the borderline?

We premise that the panel with the Head of Christ now in the Pinacoteca Ambrosiana in Milan is not unanimously accepted as by Leonardo’s hand, despite the undoubted quality of the painting, the presence of a textbook “sfumato” and the convincing comparison of scientific data (to which Art -Test contributed).

However, we are absolutely convinced of this attribution, enraptured by the power of this image and also a by what we are about to tell you.

We carried out the IR reflectography of this panel, to discover the preparatory drawing, and we realized with immense amazement that the preparatory drawing for this image of Christ, depicts a woman.

The face in reflectography has no beard; the hair is less thick, in line with what were the beauty canons of the time, even if in an official portrait a woman would probably have demanded her hair gathered. But Leonardo had already produced the Scapigliata.

The shoulders are small and round, like those considered desirable by the canons of beauty of the time.

But above all, the folds of her dress widen for the unmistakable presence of a female breast.

The multilayer images show how the artist had modified these characteristics with a few brush strokes to change the folds of the garment, and make them become vertical, to raise the shoulder line and to add beard and lengthen the hair.

A few touches, no changes to the very intense gaze, and a woman becomes a man. The symbols of the trinity are added and here is the head of a Christ. Who is born a woman, metaphorically.

A very strong message, a secret that had to remain so until the analyses literally brought it back to light.

Who if not Leonardo could dare so much?

PS. If you want to see more, reflectographic images have been published in Leonardo in France (SKIRA), and in “Leonardo Da Vinci and Gian Giacomo Caprotti Called Salai’ : The Enigma of a Painting”, by Maurizio Zecchini, ed. Marsilio

(Anna Pelagotti)
(Anna Pelagotti)
Caravaggesco_Empoli_vis del fotografo mano

An original without copies or Caravaggio’s zigzag

, , , 0

Spunti diagnostici di riflessione sull'attribuzione

From how they all got on the bandwagon (“I discovered it!” “No, I discovered it first!“) there would seem to be no doubts that the painting at auction in Madrid is the real “Ecce Homo” made by Caravaggio as result of a competition between painters arranged by Monsignor Massimi, as documented in old biographies. About the painting that had been indicated so far as the Massimi’s painting, now in Genoa, many are quick to say that after all no one had ever believed in it, it is clearly not by “him”. Sic transeat gloria mundi.

As diagnosticians, it is of course super interesting for us to go and see why this attribution is so eagerly, and almost unanimously, supported. A fate that did not touch the many other “Caravaggio” that have been proclaimed (even by the same who are pronouncing now) and disowned over the years.

Much has been written about the difference between originals and copies by Caravaggio. As on the possibility that Caravaggio produced “doubles”.

And here we notice the first anomaly, perhaps only temporary. Of all the Caravaggio, or presumed such, that we have investigated, there were always copies. Generally very similar versions, on which to make comparisons on technique and materials used. Also of the “Ecce Homo” Genoese version. Actually we probably know only copies of some of Caravaggio’s inventions.

Mario Minniti – Malta

No other versions of this painting appear to have emerged. Although it is true that the canvas had been in Spain for almost four centuries, and it has the very same subject as a painting documented to have arrived in Madrid in 1659, it seems anomalous that no one has made copies. Among similar composition that come to mind, there is a painting in Malta, with a similar subject, by Mario Minniti.

There are several versions, one of which in Vienna, attributed to Minniti too, of another “Ecce Homo” with an analogous composition, considered by some to be Caravaggesque, but of which the three protagonists do not resemble those of the Madrid canvas.

We diagnosticians would have loved to have been able to make comparisons with a copy or a version.

But the most interesting contribution for us was the commentary by Rossella Vodret, who, together with others, edited two volumes full of observations on the Lombard painter’s technique for Silvana Editoriale.

We quote from an interview on the subject: “Then there are further observations relating to the executive technique, made visible thanks to an HD photo that was sent to me. I am referring to a series of specific executive features of Caravaggio, such as the full-bodied zig-zag white lead sketches that the artist uses mainly starting from 1605 and which are found in various works, such as the San Girolamo Borghese, the San Girolamo di Montserrat, the Flagellation of Capodimonte. They are very particular sketches through which the painter fixes the points in which to position the highlights on the dark preparation of the canvas. It is a feature that, up to now, I have not found in other painters. In the “Ecce Homo” there are zigzag sketches on the chest, shoulder and arm of Christ, all in full light. The incisions are also typical, although we now know that all the artists of the period made the incisions, but these are perfectly compatible with those found on Caravaggio’s autographed paintings “.

We would like to give some news: we have not found them on many Caravaggio that we have investigated, but the famous zigzags traces can also be found in the “San Giovannino” in Empoli, which we studied (unfortunately the allocated budget did not allow a complete diagnostic campaign). We talked about it in the essay we wrote on the occasion of the presentation of the restoration intervention, and in the video that you can see (in Italian) on our YouTube channel.

We look forward to learning more. Hoping that it doesn’t disappear into thin air.

(Anna Pelagotti)
(Anna Pelagotti)
grasshoper3

Entomology for Dummies

0

Sometimes the demonstration of how useful, and surprising, the collaboration between art and science in the study of a painting can be, goes beyond common expectations.
A few years ago, in the “Olive trees” artwork that Van Gogh painted outdoors in 1889, a grasshopper was found trapped in oil layers. The insect was almost invisible to the naked eye given its very small size, and at first it was mistaken for a small leaf. Despite a consultation with a biologist, it was not possible to determine in which season the painting was made, however, it was possible to assert that the insect ended up on the canvas already dead, since no signs of movement were detected.
A new study on the same work has also revealed the presence of particles of dry leaves and numerous information on the technique used by the painter. The XRF and FTIR techniques have in fact shed light on how Van Gogh proceeded layer by layers and on how he preferred the combination of complementary colours, aware of the harmony they would have created as a whole.
A curious aspect of studying the works carried out outdoors is the possibility of discovering information on the nature of the subject of the painting, beyond what the painting itself represents and wants to communicate. With the masters of the so-called School of Barbizon we witness the spread of painting en plein air, which will be the stylistic code of the painters generally referred to as Impressionists and Post-Impressionists. Landscapes, trees and rivers become the protagonists of the works together with the subjective vision of the performer, who often proceeds quickly and with large brushstrokes; the boundary between preparatory sketch and finished work becomes blurred!
Thanks for example to letters and biographies, about the habits of painters, we are in possession of a lot of information. We know, for example, that Daubigny had prepared his study on a boat and that Monet did the same, as well as usually painting from his own garden. At the same time, many objects for outdoor painting were invented, including kits with transportable easels, while the development of photography was an important support tool in capturing images of atmospheric phenomena, to be reworked with ease in the studio.

Diagnostic investigations allow us to know more about the “experience” of a work, about how the painter chose colours, how he gave quick brushstrokes before the light changed and how some works were retouched even after years.

In the most curious cases, like that of Van Gogh, they also give us the pleasure of feeling, at least for a moment, transported inside the painting, among the leaves moved by the mistral.

Do you want some more examples? The sprouts of leaves on the canvas of Gustave Caillebotte‘s “Laundry hanging to dry on the banks of the Seine” and the grains of sand on Armand Guillamin‘s “The sea at Saint-Palais”. This is also living art … as well as living on art !!

(Federica Fani)
(Federica Fani)
piattino montanari 2

Precious colours of the empire

, , 0

The recent discovery of a very rare Chinese porcelain reminds us of another remarkable discovery for Eastern art and technique in which we were involved.

A few days ago, thanks to a search started in 2014, a RU bowl belonging to the Song dynasty was identified within the collection of the Dresden museum. A similar specimen was auctioned, and sold, in 2017, to the record price of 37.7 million dollars.

For the exclusive use of the imperial court, the colour of these porcelain is a particular blue shade made possible by the presence of agate. Poetically it is described as “blue of the sky in a clearing of the clouds after the rain”.

The subject of the discovery made by working together with S.T.Art-Test and the scholar Riccardo Montanari,  on an object of oriental origin too, was also colour, and its trade and use in the East.

The original aim of the research was to demonstrate how non-invasive investigations could be alternatives to micro-destructive ones and diriment in the authentication of oriental porcelain. Thus, favouring non-invasive diagnostics, the study featured a polychrome enameled Mukozuke porcelain, also very rare, produced in the Kan’ei period.

In particular, the analyses investigated blue and yellow pigments. The yellow surprisingly turned out to be Naples Yellow, a novelty for Japanese production. A somewhat destabilizing discovery.

But this data was crossed with historical sources, and it was possible to understand how the Jesuits imported, in their mission to Japan, the Renaissance technique of majolica decoration and therefore the use of this yellow pigment.

Only later, did the Japanese potters transfer this know-how to their Chinese colleagues.

Another step in the endless journey of research. Here is the article for those wishing to read more

(Emanuela Massa)
(Emanuela Massa)
floris

I saw a Cat

, 0

Cats… they hide everywhere and pop up when you do not expect them! For example, in this painting by Frans Floris in which a cat is visible only thanks to Reflectography, as it is not present in the final version. 
And, did you know that a painting very similar to this one, now at the Palatine Gallery in Florence, can be seen in the  “Cabinet d’amateur”, which represents the workshop of Jan Suellincks and is attributed to J. Franken II (now at the Musées Royaux des Beaux Arts in Brussels)? Can you spot it? Will there be a cat underneath there too?🐱

(Emanuela Massa)
(Emanuela Massa)

 

Load More