A Painting Transformed: From Pastoral Sunset to Burning Sodom

Once in a while, an artwork is not only aesthetically or structurally improved during treatment – it is completely transformed. This is the case with a privately owned painting treated during 2015 (Fig. 1).

 

HKI-3007_img-1 - web
Figure 1 Before Treatment: Landscape with Ruins, Oil on canvas. (© Titmus)

Formerly attributed to Leonardo Coccorante (1680-1750), the ostensible subject of the painting corresponds with the eighteenth-century fashion for scenes of Roman ruins. The work depicts a pastoral landscape featuring crumbling ancient columns, with the skyline of a city in the distance highlighted by the setting sun.

When the work arrived at the Hamilton Kerr Institute, an incredibly thick, discolored varnish and heavy layer of grime obscured the scene. Examination with ultraviolet light did not reveal the extent of previous restoration. During cleaning, it started to become astonishingly clear that the entire sky and city in the distance had been overpainted. Many of the buildings in the distance had been completely invented, as was the sunset. Removing the previous restoration uncovered red and yellow shooting flames in the background – in fact, the entire city was ablaze. Additionally, the figures in the foreground had been altered. The blue-robed figure was not a shepherd, but rather an angel: the staff the figure carried was a later addition, and the figure’s large, white wings had been hidden by overpaint.

These discoveries led to the reassessment of the painting’s subject matter after treatment (Fig. 2). The most plausible identification of the narrative, given the newly manifest iconography, was that of the biblical account of Lot. The Book of Genesis describes how angels warned Lot of God’s imminent destruction of the cities of Sodom. This allowed Lot, his wife, and two of his four daughters to escape. However, the other two daughters and their husbands refused to flee and thus perished. In grief, Lot’s wife looked back towards the burning city and turned into a pillar of salt. Accordingly, in the painting, there is a small white figure in the background. The scene depicted in the painting follows this narrative remarkably closely, except that it pictures four young women (instead of only two daughters) at the far left. One possible explanation is that two of the women are Lot’s daughters, and two are angels leading them to safety; however, the worn condition of all four figures makes it difficult to distinguish any wings or otherwise characteristic features.

AT_web_edited
Figure 2 After Treatment, Landscape with Ruins, Oil on canvas (© Titmus)

The attribution to Leonardo Coccorante was also called into question because of the painting’s drastic alteration. While famous for his dramatic scenes of ruins, Coccorante is not known to have depicted biblical subjects. It was hoped that technical analysis would clarify the painting’s dating or region of origin. The work was analysed using X-ray Fluorescence Spectroscopy to detect the elements present within the paint and, therefore, infer the presence of various pigments. Dispersed pigment samples were also taken and examined with polarized light microscopy. The range of pigments identified unfortunately does not point to a specific geographic location or time period, but considering the painting’s other physical characteristics and stylistic attributes, the work most likely dates to the seventeenth or eighteenth century. This means that we cannot confirm or rule out Coccorante as the author and that other attributions should still be considered. François de Nomé (1593-1620) stands out as a particularly plausible alternative possibility: this French painter was based out of Rome and later Naples, and his dramatic scenes of ruins tend to deal with disastrous mythological or biblical narratives. In this sense, an attribution to this painter is perhaps more credible than that of Coccorante, though this text declines to make any definitive assignment.

Treating this painting was a rich experience and necessitated close consultation with the work’s owner. The treatment itself, the details of which are beyond the scope of this post, was challenging in that it required using various approaches to overpaint removal. Additionally, the heavily abraded state of the painting (which likely factored into the reason for overpainting in the first place) as well as a large loss in the lower right corner, necessitated difficult decisions regarding the appropriate extent of retouching. The transformation of the painting during treatment leaves lingering questions as to the work’s circumstances of creation and the identity of the painter.

One day, perhaps, these mysteries will be solved.

Kari Rayner – 1st year Post Graduate Intern at the Hamilton Kerr Institute

Ms Kari Rayner graduated with a Master of Arts in Art History and gained an Advanced Certificate in Art Conservation from New York University, USA. She also has a Bachelor of Arts in Art History, Art Theory and Practice from Northwestern University, USA. During her graduate studies, Kari interned at the Wallraf-Richartz-Museum in Cologne and worked at Modern Art Conservation in New York, NY. Her final-year internship was undertaken at the National Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C., and she will be returning to the NGA in fall 2016 to begin an Advanced Fellowship in Paintings Conservation.

To contact Kari Rayner: rayner.kari.s@gmail.com

The Restoration of a Virgin and Child Tondo for the Madonnas & Miracles Exhibition at the Fitzwilliam Museum

This School of Botticelli tondo depicting the Virgin and Child was bequeathed to the Fitzwilliam Museum in 1912. During the autumn of 2015 it came to the Hamilton Kerr Institute in preparation for a loan. Upon initial inspection it became clear that the heavily blistering and slightly flaking panel was likely to be under internal stress from the battens on the reverse. Due to the importance of the piece and its projected display at the Botticelli Reimagined exhibition at the V&A (2016) and the upcoming Madonnas and Miracles exhibition at the Fitzwilliam Museum (7 March – 4 June 2017), it was possible to raise funds to allow us to fully explore the cause of the blistering and undertake a complete conservation and restoration treatment. During the treatment it was found that certain paint layers and the paint medium deserved further investigation.

Structural Work

The paint and ground layers were consolidated before structural work could commence. Over time, a number of cracks had begun to form in the wooden support from the edges inwards, resulting in local tenting of the ground and paint layers. These fragile layers were secured and visibly improved during the consolidation treatment, which offered a better overall surface of the painting. The presumed tension, manifested in the cracks from the edges of the panel, was supported by the fact that the battens, which appear to be non-original, were unable to move in the original dovetail grooves. It was therefore decided to temporarily remove the battens and plane down the areas causing friction in order to fit them back into their grooves. In their slightly thinned state they will in the future provide support without restraining slight natural movement of the poplar panel in response to minor shifts in relative humidity.

Pigment and Medium Analysis

X-ray Fluorescence spectroscopy (XRF) and cross section analysis respectively were employed to determine the pigments used and to observe layer structures in order to enable comparison with other paintings.1,2 An elemental composition reading of specific passages was attained with the non-destructive XRF technique. This in turn allowed well-informed sampling for cross sections to illustrate the build-up of layers. The pigments and layer structure were found to correspond to a typical build-up in late 15th century Florentine paintings3 comprising of a white gesso layer on top of the wooden support followed by a glue priming, and in some cases a white oil priming, which was then finished off with the actual paint layers.

However, unlike many of Botticelli’s paintings, this tondo did not show the characteristic hatching typical of egg tempera painting technique. The presence of brushstrokes and impasto suggested the use of either an oil rich tempera grassa4 (an egg and oil emulsion medium) or neat oil paint. A small sample was removed from an area of loss in the light sky area in order to investigate the medium that was used. With the aid of cross section staining (using ), it was possible to conclude that very little to no protein (egg) was utilised in the paint layers, whereas the glue and ground layers stained positive for protein. A reason for this slightly unusual choice of medium for Botticelli’s workshop and period may have been influenced by guidelines of the commission, the patron, or a desired visual impact.5

Varnish and Grey Layer Removal

After successful surface cleaning and varnish removal a selectively applied grey layer extending over the flesh, Virgin’s robe, and some of the background, became apparent. This resulted in a ‘veil’ concealing the delicate shading of the faces and drapery. During inspection under the microscope, it became clear that this layer extended into cracks and was therefore unlikely to be original. Solvent tests determined a suitable cleaning solution and enabled the safe removal of the grey, obscuring layer.  The painting thus regained its original tonal values and balance of highlights and shadows.

Restoration: filling and retouching

Paraloid® B72, a stable synthetic resin, was applied as a transition layer to saturate paint layers after successful consolidation and cleaning of the painting. Subsequently, the losses were filled with a water soluble putty consisting of chalk and gelatine. These losses were then textured to emulate the surrounding area and retouched using the retouching technique traditionally employed at the Hamilton Kerr Institute: First, lightfast loose pigments bound in egg tempera medium are applied to achieve the opaque lower/baselayers of the painting, which are then followed by pigments bound in a synthetic resin, in this case Gamblin Conservation Colours™, to imitate final glazes. A final synthetic resin varnish was spray-applied to even out the gloss of the painting. The composition-gilt frame that had received glazing for the exhibition was lined with gummed paper tape and self-adhesive felt tape to reduce the risk of abrasion from the rebate to the painting’s edges. Brass plates affixed to the frame were shaped to fit the painting and hold it securely in its frame. In order to protect the painting better from fluctuations in humidity and dirt a hardboard backing was screwed onto the reverse of the frame.

Michaela Straub – 3rd year student at the Hamilton Kerr Institute

mm-poster-small

About the author

Currently in her third year studying easel painting conservation at the Hamilton Kerr Institute, Michaela Straub graduated from Aberystwyth University with a BA in Fine Art and Art History in 2012. She has undertaken internships in private studio’s, the Denkmalschutzamt in Germany and the Kunsthistorische Museum in Vienna.

To contact Michaela Straub: straubmich@aol.com


  1. Bersani, P. P. Lottici, A. Casoli, and D. Cauzzi, ‘Pigments and binders in “Madonna col Bambino e Giovannino” by Botticelli investigated by micro-Raman and GC/MS’, Journal of Cultural Heritage, vol. 9, 2008, pp. 97-102.
  2. Castelli, M. Ciatti, C. Lalli and A. Ramat, ‘Il Restauro del Ritratto di Giovanne con Mazzocchio di Sandro Botticelli’, OPD Restauro: Rivista dell’Opificio delle pietre dure e laboratorio di restauro di Firenze, vol. 23, 2011, pp. 141-154.
  3. Dunkerton and A. Roy, ‘The Materials of a Group of Late Fifteenth-century Florentine Panel Paintings’, National Gallery Technical Bulletin, vol. 17, 1996, pp. 20-31.
  4. Dunkerton, ‘Modifications to traditional egg tempera techniques in fifteenth-century Italy’, Early Italian Paintings Techniques and Analysis Symposium, Maastricht 1996.
  5. Dunkerton, ‘Osservazioni sulla tecnica delle opera di Sandro Botticelli alla National Gallery di Londra’, in: D. Gasparotto, A. Gigli, F. Motta, Il tondo di Botticelli a Piacenza, Milan 2006, pp. 67 – 79.