(Siegen 1577–1640 Antwerp)
Madonna and Child,
red chalk, heightened with white and cream gouache, reworked with red chalk, on laid paper, two strips of paper added at the upper margin, 24.4 x 13.4 cm, mounted and framed

Provenance:
Collection of Jonathan Richardson, Sr. (1665–1745), London, Lugt 2183;
Collection of Arthur Pond (circa 1705–1758), London, Lugt 2038, according to an inscription on the old mount;
Galerie Jan de Maere, Brussels, 1991;
sale, Dorotheum, Vienna, 18 October 1994, lot 216 (as reworked by Peter Paul Rubens);
sale, Phillips, London, 6 July 2000, lot 126 (as Peter Paul Rubens);
Private collection, Austria

Exhibited:
Metz, Musées de Metz, La Réalité Magnifée. Peinture flamande 1550–1700, 26 June 1993 - 26 October 1993, cat. no. 26 (as Italian School, 16th Century, retouched by Peter Paul Rubens).

Literature:
La Réalité Magnifée. Peinture flamande 1550–1700, exhibition catalogue, Musées de Metz, Metz 1993, p. 178, cat. no. 26 (as Italian School, 16th Century, retouched by Peter Paul Rubens);
P. Joannides, More on Rubens’ Interest in Michelangelo and Raphael, in: Paragone, LVII, third series, no. 68, 2006, pp. 35, 38, note 16, fig. 30 (as Peter Paul Rubens);
J. Wood, Corpus Rubenianum Ludwig Burchard, XXVI: Copies and Adaptations from Renaissance and Later Artists: Italian Artists, I. Raphael and His School, London 2011, cat. no. 33, pp. 232–234, fig. 76 (as after Raphael, retouched by Peter Paul Rubens)

The present study of a Madonna and Child is related to a similar drawing in red chalk at the Museum Kunstpalast, Düsseldorf (inv. no. KA [FP] 13v., 39.1 x 27 cm), which has been attributed to Giulio Romano (see P. Joannides, More on Rubens‘ Interest in Michelangelo and Raphael, in: Paragone, LVII, third series, no. 68, 2006, p. 35, 39, note 20, fig. 32). However, the prototype of this composition seems to be based on an earlier design by Raphael for his Madonna of Humility Crowned by Angels at the Musée Condé, Chantilly (inv. no. DE 64, 28.6 x 23.6 cm), which can be dated to circa 1507/8 – about eight years before Giulio entered Raphael’s workshop around 1518–1520. The drawing by Raphael is a detailed compositional study in brush, pen, and brown ink showing a further group of figures and two hovering angels in addition to the principal group of the Madonna and Child, whereas Giulio’s study concentrates solely on the figure of the Christ Child and on the Madonna’s hands. Her left arm and the folds of her dress are only summarily indicated, while the Madonna’s head is lacking completely in the Düsseldorf drawing. It could have been lost over time, as is suggested by the poor state of preservation and considerable traces of abrasion, so that the part in question might no longer be visible now. While the lower part of the sheet with the figure of the Christ Child corresponds closely to Giulio’s study, the drawing expanded by Rubens highlights the personal interaction between mother and child.

The question whether Rubens used Giulio’s model as a direct source for his copy or whether he owned a second version based on the design in red chalk and reworked the earlier drawing in the same medium has repeatedly been discussed by Rubens scholars but has not been clarified with certainty. In either case, as a reworked model by another hand and adaptation of a copied pictorial motif, the present drawing is an exemplary document of Rubens’ working method, which can be observed in numerous further examples of copies and adaptations based on other artists’ models (see K. Lohse Belkin, Corpus Rubenianum Ludwig Burchard, XXVI: Copies and Adaptations from Renaissance and Later Artist, German and Netherlandish Artists, vols. I and II, London 2009; J. Wood, Corpus Rubenianum Ludwig Burchard, XXVI: Copies and Adaptations from Renaissance and Later Artists, Italian Artists, London 2011.)

Anne-Marie Logan, whose attention had been brought to the present drawing by Julius Held in 1989, described it in the Dorotheum’s auction catalogue (Vienna, 18 October 1994, lot 216), and before that in the Metz exhibition catalogue (see A.-M. Logan, in: La Réalité Magnifée, Peinture flamande 1550–1700, exhibition catalogue, Metz 1993, p. 178, cat. no. 26), as a Renaissance drawing reworked by Peter Paul Rubens. In her opinion, the lower part of the drawing dates from the time after Rubens’ return from his Italian journey to Antwerp around 1609/10, while the two small strips at the top were added much later, towards the end of the artist’s life, and need not necessarily be by the hand of Rubens himself, but could have been executed by one or more assistants working in his studio. This was contradicted by Paul Joannides in 2006, who was the first to identify the model of Giulio Romano’s drawing in Düsseldorf and concluded that the drawing must be an autograph study by Rubens based on Giulio’s drawing, which could possibly have been owned by the artist (see P. Joannides 2006, op. cit., p. 35, 38, note 16, fig. 30). Similar to Logan he was of the opinion that the upper and lower parts of the drawing were executed at different points in time, but he believed that the additions at the upper margin, as well as the partial retouching and white highlights, all came from Rubens himself and were likely added in preparation of a two-figure devotional panel of the Madonna and Child.

In 2011 Jeremy Wood published the drawing in the Corpus Rubenianum, agreeing with Logan that it was an earlier drawing after Raphael reworked by Rubens (see J. Wood 2011, op. cit., cat. no. 33, pp. 232–234, figs. 76–78), rightly pointing out that “the Virgin and Child can also be compared to drawings entirely by Rubens such as a black chalk study in the Albertina of a standing naked body (inv. no. 17639, 39.6 x 26.5 cm), which was used around 1616–1618 for the figure of Christ in the Holy Family with Saint John the Baptist at the Wallace Collection, London. This drawing has a similar softness of handling and concern with fleshiness of the child’s stomach. The main difference between these two drawings is that one was made from life, while the other was adapted from a work of art” (J. Wood 2011, op. cit., p. 233, no. 11).
Whereas in his publication of 2011 he still described the drawing of the Madonna’s head at the upper margin as a possible addition or ‘restoration’ by another hand dating from the time after Rubens’ intervention and before the drawing passed into the possession of Jonathan Richardson, Sr., Wood later revised his hypothesis after examining a high-resolution digital photograph of the drawing (written communication, 13 September 2024). In his opinion, it is much more likely that Rubens himself was responsible for the additions at the upper margin and that the Madonna’s head is also by his hand. As can be seen with the aid of a microscope, several additions and retouches have been executed in chalk of a slightly different tone. They include not only Mary’s head, but also the outline of her right arm; moreover, the fingers of the Christ Child’s left hand have been elongated, and the heel of his right foot has been enlarged. As has been revealed through the microscope, the lighter-coloured chalk used for the upper part of the drawing has also been used for retouching the earlier drawing below. According to Wood it is therefore highly plausible that both the retouches of the earlier drawing and its extensions are by Rubens’s hand.
The attribution of the added head is confirmed by the fact that Rubens used Mary’s head in profile in the reverse direction, yet in a very similar fashion for the painted addition in the painting by Henri met de Bles that was offered at Sotheby’s London on 3 July 2024 (lot 5, as Herri met de Bles and Sir Peter Paul Rubens). The profile, which might give a somewhat awkward impression, can probably be interpreted as a way of historicising the motif, as Rubens attempted to render a more ancient type of Madonna, which can similarly be observed in Mary’s head in the reworked de Bles painting.

The drawing offered here is thus not only an impressive document of Rubens’s approach when appropriating an Italian model and translating another artist’s pictorial motif into his own artistic idiom. Moreover, it is also one of the master’s rare known drawings in red chalk, a medium Rubens chose for the present work in imitation of the model adapted by him. Due to its rarity, the present drawing can be considered of special importance within the artist’s drawn oeuvre.

We are grateful to Prof. Dr. Nils Büttner, chairman of the Centrum Rubenianum in Antwerp, for examining the drawing in the original and for his scholarly support.