Circle of Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres

Sale, Paris, Drouot, 24 April 1907, lot 21 (as Ingres);
Comtesse de Béarn;
Jacques-Léon Stern,
sale, New York, Parke-Bernet, 3-4 November 1950, lot 9 (as Ingres);
David Daniels (according to Minneapolis Art Institute label)

New York, Galerie Jacques Seligman, One Hundred Years of French Art, 1800-1900, 1934, no. 10;
London, The Leicester Galleries, Water Colours and Drawings by Modern French Masters, 1934, no. 1;
New York, Galerie Paul Rosenberg, Ingres in American Collections, 1961, no. 19, reproduced (always as Ingres);
Minneapolis Art Institute (their loan label on reverse of frame)

Hans Naef, Die Bildniszeichnungen von J.-A.-D. Ingres, 5 vols., Bern 1977, vol. I, pp. 212-3, reproduced fig. 3 (as formerly attributed to Ingres)

Unframed. Drawing is less grey/pink than appears in the catalogue illstration. The sheet has been exposed to light, so has yellowed, except at very edges where it was protected . Some very pale, isolated fox marks at centre left. A very tiny loss at the upper left corner and some slight surfce dirt, visible at the upper centre edge. The pencil is still fresh and overall makes a good impression. Hinged to mount at top.
In response to your inquiry, we are pleased to provide you with a general report of the condition of the property described above. Since we are not professional conservators or restorers, we urge you to consult with a restorer or conservator of your choice who will be better able to provide a detailed, professional report. Prospective buyers should inspect each lot to satisfy themselves as to condition and must understand that any statement made by Sotheby's is merely a subjective qualified opinion.
NOTWITHSTANDING THIS REPORT OR ANY DISCUSSIONS CONCERNING CONDITION OF A LOT, ALL LOTS ARE OFFERED AND SOLD "AS IS" IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS OF SALE PRINTED IN THE CATALOGUE.

In 1810, Ingres made a drawn profile portrait of Dupaty, whom he met in Rome.¹ The present drawing of the sculptor seated in a chair was always considered an autograph work by Ingres until demoted by Naef (loc. cit.), who also dismissed as impossible the date of 1815, inscribed on the mount. He does not, however, consider it a copy of a lost drawing by Ingres, but rather an independent work by another artist, stating that the costume indicates a date for the drawing of around 1800, a moment from which there is no stylistically comparable drawing known by Ingres.

1. Naef, op. cit., cat. 59