Give Now
 
 
 

Tag Archives: M&G collection

Object of the Month: July 2014

The Mocking of Christ

Oil on canvas, c. 1620–30

Unknown French or Dutch (follower of Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio)

Active 17th century

 

The attribution of unsigned paintings is a tricky business and can stump even the most well-respected scholars. Sometimes documentary evidence can help to attribute firmly an author to a painting, and at other times attribution can be securely made by an expert’s trained eye through an analysis and comparison of the artist’s style and technique. The present painting illustrates the difficulty of determining attribution for an unsigned painting several hundred years old due to two complications: a dearth of documentary evidence and the artist’s using a popular style/technique (which limits unique identifying elements to an artist’s individual style).

The starting point for comparison of this work originates with the revolutionary Italian artist, Michelangelo Merisi, called Caravaggio. The dramatic lighting effects and use of ordinary people for models are some of the hallmarks of his style. These same characteristics are carried through in this painting: the shaft of light streaming down from the top center to the lower right and the variety of rugged-looking characters surrounding Christ.

The painting bears a striking similarity to the same paintings of this subject produced by Caravaggio, especially his Crowning of Thorns in the Kunsthistoriches Museum, Vienna. The characters of an armored man with a plumed hat and a torturer wearing a gaping, white shirt are found in both paintings. Even the “V” shape made by the bamboo reeds above Christ’s head are echoed in each composition. Furthermore, several of the figure types reflect similar models in some of Caravaggio’s paintings. For example, the Spanish-looking man with the reed (at the far left) resembles the man holding the ropes (at the far right) in Caravaggio’s Flagellation in the Musee des Beaux-Arts, Rouen. The boy in the feathered hat in the upper right also is a stock character found in a number of Caravaggio’s early genre paintings, including the Cardsharps at the Kimbell Museum of Art.

Comparisons such as these may seem like a good indication for an attribution to Caravaggio. However, his style became extremely popular and widely mimicked—making the task of assigning authorship difficult. Artists from all parts of Europe—France, Spain, Flanders, Holland, and Germany—flocked to Rome in the early 1600s and tried their hand at experimenting with his new style. Artists who incorporated Caravaggio’s style often retained some of their own nuances that made their work unique and more readily identifiable.

Paintings that bear a strong resemblance to Caravaggio’s paintings are often attributed to Bartolomeo Manfredi, his closest Italian follower. The similarity of Manfredi’s style to Caravaggio’s is compelling, making Manfredi a potential part of the equation with the present painting. However, scholars at Sotheby’s have isolated features unlike Manfredi’s style such as the metallic coloring, handling of the drapery, facial features (especially the figure to the far right) to point to an attribution to a Northern artist working in Rome.

The present painting seems to have the closest affinity to artists from France who were working in Rome during the 1620s—namely Nicolas Régnier, Valentin de Boulogne, and Nicolas Tournier. Of these three, the strongest possibility for an attribution for this painting is Tournier, who used similar expressive figure types, compositional arrangement, and handling of paint and drapery, as seen in his Merry Company in the St. Louis Art Museum. The facial type of Christ and handling of drapery are especially close to Tournier’s The Fiasco Drinker in the Galleria Estense, Modena.

Until further research, comparisons, and additional expert opinions support a specific attribution (such as Nicolas Tournier), the painting will continue to carry its current, more general designation as an Unknown French or Dutch Follower of Caravaggio.

John M. Nolan, Curator 

 

Published in 2014

 

Object of the Month: June 2014

The Holy Trinity

Tempera on panel

Lorenzo di Niccolò di Martino

Florentine, active 1392–1412

 

Lorenzo di Niccolò worked in Florence around the turn of the fifteenth century—one of the most significant centuries in history known as the Renaissance. Painting during this period continued in the tradition of Giotto (begun a century earlier), and Lorenzo’s own style was not much different from that tradition along with other contemporary artists. While paintings of the Trinity were common imagery within altarpieces of the time, Niccolò’s depiction is unique—painted in a way never done before. All known earlier representations of the Trinity in this configuration (known as “The Mercy Seat”) are depicted with God the Father sitting behind the crucified Christ; whereas, here, God the Father is shown standing.

Perhaps today this seems like an insignificant modification, but in the fourteenth century iconography was more codified; deviations articulated meaning, tradition, and Church dogma—all issues firmly upheld and monitored by Church officials. Interestingly, Trinity subjects with God the Father in a standing position were rare until the same concept appeared about 20 years later in one of the most famous paintings in history, Masaccio’s fresco of the Holy Trinity at Santa Maria Novella, Florence.

Another nuance of Niccolò’s imagery is that God the Father is also shown as a young man—the same likeness used for Christ. This approach heightens the physical and spiritual connection between the Father and Son, who are mysteriously distinct persons in a unified Trinity. However, the depiction of a youthful Heavenly Father was later forbidden by papal edict revealing that the iconography shown in this painting was short lived in art history.

An intriguing facet of this panel is that the entire back side of the panel is painted (with the exception of areas of wear and damage expected for an artwork over 600 years old). A full, decorative reverse side of a painting is somewhat common to early Italian panel paintings and suggests that people were intended to view the reverse. Sometimes entire narratives or portraits are found on the back of paintings; others have painted inscriptions or symbols for organizations such as confraternities. However, the pattern and application here supply a completely abstract, decorative function. In fact, the effect was intended to mimic the type of decorative marble inlaid patterns commonly incorporated into many existing Florentine churches, including the Duomo, Santa Maria Novella, and Santa Croce.

Preliminary research has revealed an almost identical pattern for what we see on this panel on a wall fresco border painted by Agnolo Gaddi in 1380 at Santa Croce. This pattern could be a clue to its inclusion in that same church to match the existing faux stonework existing on the walls. The pattern is distinct and would have the same markings as some or all of the other panels associated with the altarpiece from which this panel came. Such unique features can aid in attribution and dating, if related panels have firm documentation.

John M. Nolan, Curator 

 

Published in 2014

 

Object of the Month: May 2014

Solomon’s Prayer for Wisdom

Oil on canvas, c. 1655

Govaert Flinck

Dutch, 1615–1660

 

Govaert Flinck began his artistic career in the studio of a Mennonite preacher named Lambert Jacobsz of Leeuwarden. However, after Rembrandt settled in Amsterdam, Flinck assured his future success by entering the great master’s studio as a journeyman. He was the first to closely imitate Rembrandt’s new, Amsterdam style, so much so that some of his pictures were sold as if by Rembrandt himself.

In spite of his facility to learn his master’s style, Flinck later abandoned his teacher’s manner to assume a lighter classical style of painting learned from nearby Flanders. This change proved to be one that the patrons loved and, consequently, brought him great popularity and wealth. The officials of Amsterdam patronized Flinck more than any other artist (including Rembrandt), which is evidenced by his winning the most important civil commission in Amsterdam—the decoration of the new town hall—with this very work!

As the winning entry, Solomon’s Prayer for Wisdom is a preparatory sketch for the much larger finished canvas, which still hangs in its original position as a chimneypiece in “The Moses Room” of the Amsterdam town hall. Flinck would have shown the present sketch to the town commissioners for approval before working on the final canvas. This colorful and ambitious composition marks the height of Flinck’s powers as the leading historical painter of his day. Govaert Flinck’s classical style of painting became the standard for Dutch artists for the next hundred years.

John M. Nolan, Curator 

 

Published in 2014

 

Object of the Month: April 2014

The Man of Sorrows

Oil on panel

Albrecht Bouts

Flemish, c. 1452-d. 1549

 

Albrecht Bouts was born into an artistic family; his father, Dieric, was one of the most prominent artists in Louvain in the mid-fifteenth century and was elected official painter to the city in 1468. Albrecht learned his craft working closely with his father in his workshop; Dieric’s influence on his son’s artistic technique is seen most in Albrecht’s compositional choices rather than his style and brushwork. The present devotional panel, The Man of Sorrows, is widely believed to be based on a lost type created by Dieric; Albrecht would have been familiar with such images in his father’s shop as well as had access to his cartoons and drawings. Small and intimately composed images of Christ and Mary became enormously popular in the last part of the fifteenth century and into the sixteenth century, largely emanating from the workshops of the father and son.

The close-up focus on Christ’s face in this composition is a variation of an earlier fifteenth century model and reflects the Netherlandish trend of pious adoration of Christ’s head. Here, the bust-length image of Christ is presented frontally with a gaze fully engaging the viewer. Christ’s sunken, blood-shot eyes confront and invite the devotee to deeply contemplate the evidences of His suffering for mankind’s behalf. His eyelids are nearly half-way down, reflecting the countless hours of agony, pain, torture and sleeplessness. His brow bears a thick, entwined crown of thorns—one of the primary emblems of Christ’s torment and shame. Unlike any contemporary Italian painter’s conception of this theme, Bouts fully renders each thorn to depict their excruciating effect. On Christ’s sullen cheeks, translucent tears echo the flow of blood; the cool purple color of Christ’s lips reflect the blood loss and strain of torment. Finally, both Christ’s hands are raised in a blessing gesture.

Though many variations of this bust-length subject exist from Bouts and his workshop, very few, if any, are exactly alike. However, such detailed, realistic imagery focused on Christ’s substitutional sacrifice reflects the contemporary interest to contemplate Christ’s head and wounds both in art, but also in devotional tracts and meditations such as Thomas à Kempis’s Imitation of Christ.

 

Published in 2014

 

Object of the Month: March 2014

St. Cecilia

Oil on canvas

Giovanni Lanfranco

Roman, 1582-1647

 

Generally, a painter’s style refers to the way an artist executes a painting. Style can also be described as a general trend in painting usually initiated by an artist seeking to paint in an innovative or previously unexplored way.  However, a specific artist’s style can often be revealed in his individual expression—idiosyncrasies that help experts identify his work. For example, an artist may paint faces with certain characteristics (i.e. chubby cheeks, almond-shaped eyes, or small ears), use backgrounds in a similar way, or mark out his composition with heavy drawings before painting.

The technique an artist uses to apply paint is also characteristic of style. Every painter employs certain techniques that become distinctive to them—Botticelli outlined his figures; Rembrandt used very thick paint in highlights; Degas used hatching marks in his pastels; Van Gogh used thick paint for each individual brushstroke, etc… So, the actual stroke and method an artist uses to apply paint becomes an integral part of his personal style. Connoisseurs and scholars thoroughly inspect, discern, and memorize both the artist’s characteristic techniques and the general style or trend the artist follows—these are subjective considerations in determining a painting’s attribution.

To illustrate the concepts of style and technique, consider the context of Lanfranco’s painting of St. Cecilia from c.1620. At the turn of the 17th century, Italian artist Caravaggio initiated a style of painting viewed as revolutionary for his time. Artists all around him were painting in the “mannerist” style of the time—an eclectic blend of ideal forms with asymmetrical compositions, uneven or overall lighting effects, and garish colors. However, Caravaggio broke from these conventions to explore the dramatic possibilities of lighting combined with a candid, straightforward realism.

Caravaggio’s innovative style flourished rapidly within Rome’s fertile artistic environment, and Giovanni Lanfranco was one of the artists influenced by Caravaggio’s radical style, as evidenced in M&G’s painting. The half-length figures emerge from a dark background, bathed in a heavenly light streaming in from the upper left. The effect is intensified by deep shadows covering nearly half of each figure. This manipulation of light mixed with a strong sense of realism meet the criteria for the style that Caravaggio inspired called tenebrism.

Lanfranco worked in the tenebrist style intermittently throughout his career, with this St. Cecilia being one of his best representative works. However, M&G’s work is not his only treatment of this subject. The National Gallery’s St. Cecilia and an Angel in Washington D.C. provides unique insight into identifying Lanfranco’s particular style and technique; the National Gallery painting has been confirmed as a collaboration of two artists—Giovanni Lanfranco and Orazio Gentileschi. In 1990, Erich Schleier, the foremost scholar on Giovanni Lanfranco, expressed the opinion that the sleeves and hands of St. Cecilia reflect the style of Lanfranco (for centuries before, the painting bore a firm attribution to Orazio Gentileschi, one of Caravaggio’s principal Roman followers). Following Schleier’s input, further research was made into the old Rondanini inventories from which the National Gallery (and M&G’s) painting once belonged. Alessandro Rondanini’s painting inventory compiled on January 19, 1741 described two St. Cecilia paintings: one (M&G’s) by Lanfranco says, “St. Cecilia playing the cembalo with two angels,” and the other St. Cecilia (National Gallery) “with the heads by the hand of Gentileschi and the rest by Giovanni Lanfranco.”

Not only did the 1741 inventory confirm the attribution of the National Gallery’s painting to Gentileschi and Lanfranco, but analysis of x-radiographs, pigments, and x-ray fluorescence by National Gallery conservators have also supported this conclusion. This remarkable example reveals how expert (subjective) opinion by Erich Schleier led to objective proof for the collaborative attribution found in an old inventory and supported by scientific tests.

Studying the sleeves of M&G’s St. Cecilia furnishes insight into Schleier’s stylistic and technical analysis of comparing Lanfranco’s hands and sleeves in the Washington painting. Cecilia’s hands in both works are formed in a curved manner, almost as if no bone structure supported the flesh. Since artists tend to paint similar figural forms in paintings from a particular phase of their career, the stylistic detail of the hands in the Washington and Greenville paintings reflect the way Lanfranco uniquely handled this element of his composition. The flowing sleeves have highlights painted with rapid, bold brushstrokes, which is another stylistic trait carried over in each work.

In 1620, Lanfranco turned from the influence of other artists and was the first to develop an inventive style of ceiling fresco that presents an atmospheric illusion of figures rising into the heavens by using dramatic foreshortening and figure recession as seen in the fresco of the dome of S. Andrea della Valle in Rome; this Lanfranco innovation created a sensation inspiring many artists after him to use and develop this style.

John M. Nolan, Curator

 

Published in 2014

 

Object of the Month: February 2014

Madonna and Child with Saints

Tempera on panel, 1469

Baldassare di Biagio del Firenze (called the Master of Benabbio) and Matteo Civitali

Biago: Florentine, c. 1450-1500; Civitali: Luccan, c. 1436-1501

Paintings dating to the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries present an inherent obstacle—attribution, since artists were not consistently signing works prior to the nineteenth century. To compound the problem, many artists up until the mid-1400s painted in a similar manner, not especially concerned with individual styles and expression. When art experts are unable to associate an unsigned painting with a particular known master painter, a pseudonym is derived from the name of the place where the most characteristic work of the unknown artist resides.

In the case of this painting, the artist was known as the “Master of Benabbio” when we acquired the painting in 1961. This unknown artist’s best representative work was a triptych that belongs to the church of Santa Maria Assunta in the small, Tuscan village of Benabbio, Italy; hence the unknown artist was dubbed “Master of Benabbio.”

Scholars who research and distinguish authorship for unsigned paintings specialize in a particular field of study; their specialization usually focuses on a particular country and time period but may also narrow further to a particular region or city. This concentration allows the scholar to review closely the nuances of artists’ particular styles working in a certain time and place, honing the skill of art connoisseurship.

Another facet of researching authorship for Old Master paintings involves documentary evidence. Scholars using archives comb through original documents (often dating hundreds of years old) looking for clues that will allow them to piece together information for a known work of art. In 1978 one such art historian, Massimo Ferretti, defined the career and primary works of the “Master of Benabbio.” Ferretti connected M&G’s painting with a citation in Michele Ridolfi’s 1819 publication of a sixteenth century inventory of the church of San Michele in Antraccoli (near Lucca) which said, “In the Oratory of the Company next to the church there is an old altar of wood in Gothic ‘gusto,’ in the panels of which is represented the Virgin and Child, and the four saints, and in the predella below the twelve apostles; it is a work of the Florentine School of uncertain author, and bears a date of the year 1469.” Since the artist’s name was not mentioned in this inventory, he continued to be known under the pseudonym, “Master of Benabbio.”

The inventory’s date of 1469 corresponds exactly to the date that is written in Roman numerals across the base of the triptych. Furthermore, the prominent presence of St. Michael the Archangel on the left side of the painting supports its position as the main altar of a church dedicated to this same saint, San Michele.

Subsequent archival research by Roberto Ciardi in 1997 led to the discovery of the original contract when this altarpiece was commissioned by Antonio del fu Domenico and Biagio del fu Tofanello for the Church of San Michele di Antraccoli. The contract says on December 15, 1467, Antonio del fu Domenicho and Biagio del fu Tofanello, operai (workers), sindici, e procuratori (prosecutors) dell’opera (of the work) di San Michele di Antraccolo, commissioned “Valdassar olim Bazii del Firenze, lucensis civis et Matteus olim Johnnis di Coviatlie, Luce commorans, pictures,” to paint a ‘tabulam de lignamine’ for the high altar of San Michele within ten months for seventy ducats. The artists were to begin in January 1468 and to complete the painting in ten months. However, the altarpiece was not delivered until October 6, 1469—twenty months later.

Documentation such as this provides concrete evidence for the attribution of this altarpiece to not one, but two prominent Luccan artists of the Italian Renaissance—Baldassare di Biagio del Firenze and Matteo Civitali. For centuries it was thought that only one artist, provisionally called “Master of Benabbio,” was responsible for the painting. However, the contract revealed that the painting was actually a collaborative effort, which was not unusual for this time period or for these artists. The importance is in the firm identification of the artists.

The significance for Baldassare is that this is one of the few altarpieces of his where the original church context is known. Furthermore, his artistic personality is still in its infancy because until 1982, the artist’s works were only known by the elusive pseudonym, Master of Benabbio. A secure attribution and dating for this altarpiece make it a benchmark for judging undocumented works thought to be by him.

As for Matteo Civitali, the documentation for this altarpiece is paramount. Until 1997, Matteo Civitali’s acclaim rested wholly on his work as a sculptor. He is considered to be the most important marble sculptor outside Florence during the second half of the fifteenth century. In spite of his fame as a carver, historical evidence pointed to his activity as a painter as well, though no painting could firmly be identified. Before the revelation of the contract for our polyptych identifying him as a collaborator, the extent of his painting activity was only surmised. Now M&G’s polyptych has become a key work for Civitali’s career as a painter. In 2004, this polyptych traveled to the Villa Giunigi in Lucca, Italy for an important monographic exhibition focused on the career of Matteo Civitali.

John M. Nolan, Curator

 

Published in 2014

 

Object of the Month: January 2014

Madonna of the Lake (“Madonna del Lago”)

Oil on panel, c. 1520

Marco d’Oggiono

Milanese, 1475-d. 1530

 

Marco d’Oggiono’s training is not documented with certainty, but he probably worked in the studio of one of the greatest artists who ever lived—Leonardo da Vinci. As such, d’Oggiono did not gain much recognition as an innovator, but rather as a pupil who skillfully learned his master’s style and produced a number of faithful copies. In fact, the composition for this rare panel probably derives from one of da Vinci’s lost paintings and references at least two of the great master’s celebrated works. The poses of both John the Baptist and Christ are found in the Virgin of the Rocks while Mary’s position is based on the Virgin and Child with St. Anne and the Lamb, both by Leonardo and housed in the Louvre.

Among the Leonardesque characteristics evident in this work is the softly shaded modeling on the figures called sfumato. This technique of Leonardo’s invention was inspired by his scientific studies of the effects of light and is used by d’Oggiono to soften the sharp edges of his figures. Consequently, the figural contours subtly dissipate into the natural surroundings to create a unified and harmonious whole. Another interesting motif d’Oggiono borrows from da Vinci is the rocky shelf separating the figures from the view and is found in both the Virgin of the Rocks and the Virgin and Child with St. Anne and the Lamb.

This painting has some very interesting hand-written notes on the reverse made with pen and ink that appear to be fairly old. In the center of the panel is a handwritten note, “Cesare da Sesto, Countess of Harr….”  Comparing the partial “Countess of Harr…” with the clearly legible handwritten words ending in “Harrington” in the upper left of the wood panel confirms that a Countess of Harrington once owned the painting. Further research lead to a discovery in an 1857 publication where art critic Gustav Waagen wrote about the painting when it was hanging in the Drawing Room of the Earl of Harrington’s London home, called Harrington House. He said, “Marco Oggione (no. 79): I am in inclined to attribute to this master a small early copy on wood of Leonardo da Vinci’s Madonna del Lago, known by Longhi’s engraving. The head of the Virgin is elevated, and of great power and colour; the two children are less successful.”

The Harringtons sold paintings in 1917 at Christie’s including the Madonna of the Lake. The catalog lists further provenance information as “formerly in the collection at Malmaison.” This was the country chateaux of Napoleon and Josephine Bonaparte. Additional investigation led to the discovery that M&G’s painting was listed in Josephine’s Malmaison inventory when she died in 1814 with a painting by Cesare da Sesto of the Madonna and Child with John the Baptist. Thus, M&G’s painting was once owned by Emperor Napoleon and Josephine!

John M. Nolan, Curator

 

Published in 2014

 

Object of the Month: December 2013

The Adoration of the Shepherds

Oil on panel

Hans von Aachen

German, 1552-1615

At Christmas, our thoughts naturally turn to gifts. Given a choice, would you choose a large package or a small one? Perhaps it would be wise to remember the adage, “Good things come in small packages.” That sentiment is certainly true of M&G’s Object of the Month, a small painting (9.25” x 7”) that is like a precious jewel in a small gift box.

In addition to the Holy Family and the shepherds, the crowded scene includes women, another child, barn animals, the requisite angels tumbling from heaven, and a huge mastiff. Other innovative additions include bagpipes and a shovel. Far in the background the light of the angelic host can be seen illuminating the hillside. The painting is housed in a tabernacle-type frame with decorative gold tooling and stone insets. Tabernacle frames often held large pieces of art; this version captures the architectural features in miniature.

Aachen lived in Italy from 1574–1588, studying the great Italian masters, and in 1592 he became Court Painter to Holy Roman Emperor Rudolf II in Prague, a prestigious position that entailed diplomatic as well as artistic responsibilities. Rudolf was the greatest patron of the arts of his time, acquiring works by Dürer, Brueghel, and Veronese as well as works of contemporary northern Mannerist artists such as Aachen, Archimboldo, Spranger, and Savery.

The provenance, or history, of the painting can be traced to English ownership in 1834. English collectors of the nineteenth century amassed great quantities of art, much of it available because of wars and unrest in Europe. This work was part of an 1834 bequest to the Fitzwilliam Museum of Cambridge University; they retained ownership until 1959 when it was sold at Sotheby’s and acquired by the museum.

Anne Short, Former Research Supervisor

 

Published in 2013

Object of the Month: November 2013

Julius Weitzner

Oil on canvas

John Koch

American, 1909-1978

The influence of an individual can be far reaching, if not profound. Just as the old masters’ legacy lingers with us even today revealing the technology and culture of previous ages, so the legacies of other masterful individuals endure in collections near and afar.

Dealers in the early to mid 20th century played a significant role in the development of many private and public collections which are highly respected today.  At that time, the large auction houses were closed to the public, and dealers were the only buyers permitted. Dealers connected with private collectors and museum directors for nurturing their interests in making acquisitions for their growing collections.

One of the dealers whose impact is still felt is Julius Weitzner.  Of Jewish birth and Hungarian roots, he was a concert violinist with a PhD in chemistry. He began his career as an art dealer in the late 1920s, when he opened the first of a succession of galleries in New York.  He quickly gained a reputation for his discerning eye in spotting undervalued paintings and was known to impatiently clean dirty canvases in order to discover the artist, who many times proved to be significant.  M&G’s founder, Bob Jones Jr., once stated in a media interview that Weitzner’s “wife used to say that Julius made his living selling unsalable pictures.”  He died at the age of 90 in January 1986.

Weitzner was instrumental in painting acquisition for many collections, such as the national galleries in Washington and London, and the metropolitan museums of Philadelphia, Boston, Detroit, Cleveland, Birmingham, and Raleigh.  Over a period of three decades, he sold more than 75 Italian paintings to the Bob Jones University collection, now the Museum & Gallery at Bob Jones University.

It is disappointing to find that little is recorded about this talented man, but perhaps the perspective of M&G’s founder may provide insight into the significance of Weitzner’s influence both in broader terms and in M&G’s own setting.  In a letter to Weitzner himself dated June 1977, Bob Jones, Jr. expressed his opinion that Julius was the “best expert, the most cognizant . . . most successful dealer in the world.”  In an interview with the Washington Post, printed Sunday, August 26, 1984, Dr. Bob prized Weitzner as “a great friend, almost like a brother.”

Just two days following Weitzner’s death, Dr. Bob’s letter to Weitzner’s widow Ruth warmly comforts, “Julius was one of the dearest friends I ever had . . . He was a remarkable man who had a most profound influence in getting me interested in paintings and involved with them in what has been a 35-year experience.  I always trusted his knowledge more than any other man’s, even the so-called ‘experts.’ He is going to be missed by many people; but aside from you and [your son], I am sure no one will feel his loss more than I.”

M&G has been given a vivid reminder of Weitzner’s friendship with and influence on our collection.  Appropriately hanging in the Weitzner gallery (gallery 10) is a beautiful portrait by John Koch of the dealer surrounded by his love, Old Master paintings.  The old master painters influenced the development of art, while dealers like Weitzner heavily influenced the landscape of today’s collections and museums, especially our own.

Erin R. Jones, Director

 

Published in 2013

Object of the Month: October 2013

 

Wittenberg, October 31, 1517

Oil on canvas

Eyre Crowe, A.R.A.

English, 1824-1910

Wittenberg, October 31, 1517

Click on the image to learn more about Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation!

Created by Donnalynn Hess, Director of Education

 

Published in 2013

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »
 
Facebook Page864.770.1331 contact@museumandgallery.org

M&G at BOB JONES UNIVERSITY; 1700 Wade Hampton Blvd - Greenville, SC 29614