(Rome 1593– post 12 August 1654 Naples)
Madonna and Child,
oil on canvas, 116 x 89.3 cm, framed

Provenance:
sale, Catherine Charbonneaux, Paris, 26 February 2010, lot 7 (as Attributed to Artemisia Gentileschi);
where acquired by the present owner;
Private collection, Switzerland

Exhibited:
Milan, Palazzo Reale, Artemisia Gentileschi – Storia di una passione, 22 September 2011 – 29 January 2012, cat. no. 9 (as Artemisia Gentileschi);
Paris, Fondation Dina Vierny - Musée Maillol, Artemisia 1593–1654, gloire, pouvoir et passions d’une femme peintre, 14 March – 15 July 2012, cat. no. 43 (as Artemisia Gentileschi)

Literature:
R. Contini, in: R. Contini/F. Solinas (eds.), Artemisia Gentileschi. Storia di una passione, exhibition catalogue, Milan 2011, pp. 152–153, cat. no. 9, illustrated (as Artemisia Gentileschi);
G. Papi, Artemisia Gentileschi, Milan, exhibition review, in: The Burlington Magazin, December 2011, CLIII, p. 846 (as not by Artemisia);
R. Contini, in: R. Contini/F. Solinas (eds.), Artemisia 1593–1654, exhibition catalogue, Paris 2012, p. 43, cat. no. 3 (as Artemisia Gentileschi);
F. Solinas, La Madonna de Latte di Artemisia Lomi Gentileschi alla Galleria Spada, in: A. Capriotti (ed.), Rome 2024, pp. 35–50, illustrated p. 37, fig. 2 (as Artemisia Gentileschi)

We are grateful to Riccardo Lattuada for independently endorsing the attribution of the present painting and for his help in cataloguing this lot.

This refined work has been dated to circa 1609–1610, when Artemisia Gentileschi was circa 16 or 17 years old, and it is therefore one of her first known works and a significant rare example of her precocious talent as a young artist.

Artemisia studied painting in the workshop of her father Orazio. Her remarkable ability allowed her to duplicate his style closely in her earliest pictures, seen here in the present painting particularly in the depiction of the drapery. Her palette, the physiognomy of her figures, the sensitive glazing and modelling of skin tones, and the details of texture apparent in the present painting show Orazio’s influence. However, from the beginning Artemisia showed an ability to depict meaning and emotion in the narratives she painted, such as the evident affection of a mother and child displayed in this work, which set her work apart from that of her father. During the 1590s and early 1600s her father, like Caravaggio, worked directly on the canvas using posed models. It is likely that she was taught to paint in the same way.

Lattuada has emphasised that the present composition is related to Scipione Pulzone’s Holy Family with Saint Elizabeth and Saint John the Baptist, circa 1588–1590, in the Galleria Borghese in Rome (inv. no. 313), as well as an engraving by Marcantonio Raimondi (see also R. Ward Bissell, Artemisia Gentileschi and the Authority of Art, 1999 pp. 184–187, no. 1, figs. 1–5).

The position of the Madonna’s legs in the present lot are similar to those in Pulzone’s painting, as is the rendering of the hair of Mary and the Child which have the same golden highlights.

The present composition is known in other later versions also by Artemisia, including one in the Galleria Spada, Rome (116.5 x 86.5 cm), dated to 1610–1611, and another from the Medici collections in the Galleria Palatina, Florence (118 x 86 cm), dated to 1616–1618. Although the compositions are similar and with identical iconography there are variations, especially in the pose of the Christ Child. The Madonna in the present composition has a serene, slightly plump, youthful countenance with unruly lighter hair and she appears to be more youthful than the Madonna in the other versions. It has been suggested that Artemisia used herself as a model and indeed the facial features of her female protagonist do appear to be similar. The Christ Child in the present composition is depicted with a refinement that is different to the later versions. The depiction of a transparent scarf around the Madonna’s neck in the present composition is also singular and the colouring of the present painting is harmonious and diffused.

It has been suggested by Francesco Solinas that these versions of the Madonna and Child (Madonna del Latte) may derive from similar preparatory drawings and cartoons (see op. cit. Solinas, 2024). The three paintings were compared in Paris in 2012, during the Musée Maillol’s monographic exhibition and in all three compositions the figures are of similar dimensions.

Artemisia, like her father Orazio and her uncle Aurelio Lomi, replicated compositions, in more or less similar versions, using drawings and cartoons which had been prepared sometimes years earlier. Her use of cartoons and preparatory drawings is documented in her correspondence, including letters written to her clients from Naples. The use of a cartoon – a thick sheet of perforated paper used to transfer the outline of a composition onto canvas, wall or panel – was a widespread artistic practice, especially in sixteenth century Tuscany, but also in Rome during this period.

The present painting dating to 1609–1610 was created before the very public, well-documented trial of Agostino Tassi, which took place between the Spring and Winter of 1612. In 1611, Agostino Tassi, Orazio’s colleague on several important projects, took advantage of his access to the Gentileschi household by raping Artemisia. Orazio brought charges against Tassi who was found guilty and sentenced to exile, however he never served his sentence. Artemisia married a Florentine, Pietro Stiattesi, on 29 November 1612, and in January of the following year she settled with him in Florence. She lived there for the next seven years and bore four children; only one, a girl, survived to adulthood. Artemisia was to become a celebrated artist who would work for several European rulers, and she ran an impressive workshop during her more than 20 years in Naples. She also worked in Rome, Florence and Venice and also spent a brief period in London in the late 1630s before returning to Naples, where she died.

Technical analysis by Gianluca Poldi:

The painter used a canvas prepared with a brown ground, then locally covered with a white priming where the dark ground would affect the lightness of the final colour: i.e. under the Madonna’s robe and under the lights of her cloak, but also under shadowed areas of the background, as microscopic images show.

Reflectance spectroscopy show the pigments used, including natural ultramarine (obtained from lapis lazuli) mixed with lead white in the blue cloak (with indigo used in old restorations), a carmine type red lake in the pink robe of the Madonna, ground both finely and coarsely, yellow and brow ochres and earths.

From the point of view of painting technique, flesh tones are particularly interesting because large amounts of coarsely ground lead-based yellow are added by the painter to the usual mixture of lead white, vermillion and ochre, together with a few particles of red lake and, in the shadows, black pigment.

IR reflectography show some composition changes, particularly in the Child, whose face profile was originally painted slightly closer to his Mother’s breast, and whose legs and right arm were placed in different positions: the left leg was probably aligned with the other, then raised to its present position. The white robe that covers the right leg of the Child runs under his right arm, indicating that the arm was painted in that position later, joining the other arm across his belly. A few small corrections can be seen along the Madonna’s outline. Some traces of outline drawing, possibly underdrawing, emerge in some zones by IRR. So, the painter worked on a composition that was presumably originally studied (on paper?), but then modified directly on the canvas, in a way that would also characterise some of her later works.

► WATCH VIDEO