喬瓦尼‧弗朗契斯科‧巴爾別里－或稱圭爾奇諾

Lucien Bonaparte (1775 - 1840), 1st Prince of Canino and Musignano (according to Northwick sale catalogue entry);
John Rushout (1770 - 1859), 2nd Baron Northwick, Thirlestane House, Cheltenham;
His estate sale, London, Phillips, 26 July - 30 August 1859, lot no. 1818;
John Samuel Wanley Sawbridge Erle-Drax (1887 - 1828), Olantigh Towers, Wye, Kent;
By descent to his nephew, Wanley Ellis Sawbridge Erle-Drax (1887 - 1928), Olantigh Towers, Wye, Kent, in 1828;
His sale, London, Christie's, 19 - 21 February 1910, lot 29.

The following condition report has been provided by Simon Parkes of Simon Parkes Art Conservation, Inc. 502 East 74th St. New York, NY 212-734-3920, simonparkes@msn.com, an independent restorer who is not an employee of Sotheby's.This work seems to be in beautiful condition and should be hung in its current state. Although the canvas has an old lining and the cracking is slightly raised, the paint layer is by no means unstable. Nor is the cracking disturbing. There are hardly any retouches throughout, and the only retouching of any significance is in the cheek on the right side of the Magdalene, where a very thin scratch in the paint layer measuring about 1 ½ inches has been retouched.
"This lot is offered for sale subject to Sotheby's Conditions of Business, which are available on request and printed in Sotheby's sale catalogues. The independent reports contained in this document are provided for prospective bidders' information only and without warranty by Sotheby's or the Seller."

Unpublished since its sale in 1910 (see Provenance), this stirring representation of the Penitent Magdalene is a superb example of Guercino’s masterful painting style.  David Stone endorses the attribution, dating the painting to circa 1648-1655.¹ Close comparisons – in terms of drapery, brushwork, and facial type – can be made with the Samian Sibyl in the Palazzo Reale, Genoa (1653), and the Astrology in the Blanton Museum, Austin (c. 1650-53).² The artist depicts the Magdalene’s hair with remarkably fine strokes, highlighting the thick, waving tresses at her head and shoulders, down to the individual hairs that uncoil across her abdomen.  The crucifix at left is bound to the broken branch of a tree stump, a device repeated in his Saint Francis in the Desert in the church of San Cetteo, Pescara.³  The figure of Christ is shown from below and behind, and the shadows of the musculature in his torso and legs are expressed with impressive naturalism. 

In her 1997 edition of the Libro di Conti, Guercino’s account book¸ Barbara Ghelfi lists a half-length Magdalene which Stone tentatively suggests may be identifiable as the present lot.⁴  On 12 January 1654, Guercino notes the receipt of payment from a Signor Moscardini for a Magdalene painted for a noble Venetian patron: Dal Sig:^r Moscardini si e riceuto per il pagamento della Mezza Figura, di S: M: Madalena, per un nobbil Veniciano…”⁵  While the payment was made in January, Stone proposes the painting would likely have been finished a month prior, in December of 1653. The artist received 60 ducatoni for the canvas, the same amount paid to him by Signor Ludovico Fermi in 1649 for a half-length painting of the same subject: “Dal Sig.^re Lodouico Fermi si è riceuto ducat.ⁿⁱ 60- per il Quadro della Santa maria madalena…”⁶  The Fermi Magdalene is now in the Museo del Prado, Madrid (inv. no. P203).⁷

If we compare the present composition with another half-length Magdalene, offered in the Koller, Zurich sale in 2011, though similar in many ways, the effects of the two paintings are remarkably different.⁸  In the Zurich picture, the Magdalene faces the light source at left, looking down at the crucifixion which itself casts a shadow across the figure of Christ.  In contrast, in the present painting, the Magdalene is lit from the right, the light falling fully onto the face of the crucifix and figure of Christ.  Rather than looking down at the cross, here the starkly lit figure of Christ bears over the Magdalene.  She turns away from her study of the scripture in order to contemplate the crucifix, her hand raised and a tear rolling down her cheek in an expression of anguish.  In the Zurich painting, the skull is placed in the foreground, again in full light, while here it is veiled in shadow at right, a more foreboding symbol of memento mori.

The treatment of drapery in this painting is of particular interest.  Guercino used charged flashes of white pigment to highlight the edges of the thick folds, conveying the texture of the heavy fabric with efficacy.  As Stone indicates, the artist employed the same method to describe the weighty folds of cloth surrounding the bed in his Death of Cleopatra, now in Palazzo Rosso, Genoa (fig. 1).  The Cleopatra is likely identifiable as the painting listed in Guercino’s Libro dei Conti, commissioned by Monsignore Abbate Carlo Emanuele Durazzo, for which the artist received payment on 24 March 1648.⁹   

We are grateful to David M. Stone for endorsing the attribution and date following a firsthand inspection.

1.  Private written communication with David Stone, dated 8 December 2014.
2.   D. Stone, Guercino, Catalogo Completo, Florence 1991, p. 291, cat. no. 283; and p. 292, cat. no. 284, respectively.
3.  L. Salerno, I Dipinti del Guercino, Rome 1988, p. 331, cat. no. 260, reproduced.
4.  B. Ghelfi and D. Mahon, Il libro dei conti del Guercino 1629-1666, Bologna 1997,  p. 164, entry no. 477.
5.  Ibid.
6.  Ibid., pp. 142-43, entry no. 407.
7.  D. Stone, Guercino, Catalogo Completo, Florence 1991, p. 258, cat. no. 248, reproduced.
8.  Anonymous sale, Zurich, Koller, 23 September 2011, lot 3073.
9.  B. Ghelfi and D. Mahon, Il libro dei conti del Guercino 1629-1666, Bologna 1997, p. 138, entry no. 387.