Flemish Charity. UPDATE: by follower of David Vinckboons

Millon, France, sells on 17 June 2016 a "Flemish School, ca. 1600" Charity estimated at 1,200 to 1,500 Euro.

It isn't the best-painted work, but I'm always interested in old paintings with text panels on them.

At the top, we see the following:

"Die vader en moeder laet mi (of mt?) verdriet
noot hebben gheen onderstant (?) en brede
maer hener  dominere alzoo men hier ziet
metter tyt sal hemhen(?) alzoo geschieden"

My amateur translation gives:
"The father and mother give me sorrow
they have need; no support or money
but they dominate as one can see here
in due time it will come to pass for them"

Not very clear, so I'm obviously misreading or mistranslating something here! "Noot" may be "Nooit" (never) or "Nood" (need), but that doesn't help a lot. To me, this verse sounds as if the parents don't have a lot, but spend as if they do anyway (e.g. their luxury clothing), which in due time will cost them dearly.

The bottom left says:
"Houders. Wy en moghen voorwaer niet geven
de kinderen costen den tyt is quaet
het doet ghenoech noot eor dat wy leven
en onderhouden oock onsen staet"

"Parents (? or Keepers?) We can not give
The children are costly, the times are bad
It does enough need before we live
and support our state"

Again, not really clear. "Houders" is keepers, "Ouders" is parents, so either this is addressed at the parents or at the officials of some (charitable?) institution. It sounds as if we (?) can't spare anything, as all their money goes to their children and to keep up their state (impoverished nobility?).

Finally, the bottom right (near the elder couple):
"Myn lieve kinderen, laet doch ghenietre (?)
ons houtheyt ors(?) ackhaerme(?) vanigoet(?)
het gene wy.v.ten hawelieke lieten
bezeurt deur ons vleesch en bloet"

"My sweet children, let's enjoy
our old days ? (poor us?) ? ?
whatever we gave you as a marriage gift (dowry)
harmed(?) by our flesh and blood".

The text, in some form of Dutch, seems to indicate that parents should not spend all their money on themselves, and.or the struggle between the generations; the oldest wanting their adult children to take care of them, like they did in the past: the current parents wanting to live their life despite the expensive children; and the children asking theur parents not to spend to much on themselves and to keep something for later. This corresponds with the position of the three texts: the first is about the parents, the second is about the children, and the thirs is about the grandparents.

Like I said, it isn't really clear to me, you'll need a specialist in Dutch 16th century texts to get something better here!

The texts seem to be placed over the painting (especially clear on the right side of the bottom left text): perhaps the text boxes have been enlarged after the painting was finished, or the texts have been added later. It may also be that the texts have been repainted in later times, e.g. "vanigoet" would make more sense as "vantgoet", "of the goods", now it seems to be a non-existant word.

The painting is in the style of the Franckens, but not good enough to be by them. Considering the clothing of the lady, I would date it at about 1620. It can be compared to the above portrait by Marcus Gheeraerts the Younger or the 1620 portrait by Jan Ravesteyn. The estimate is probably about right, although works with text usually fetch more money than similar ones without, as they are more interesting.

UPDATE: I found another painting with the same topic, and also with accompanying texts, at the RKD (where else?).  The above high quality image comes from the Rijksmuseum though, where this 1599 painting by Pieter Pietersz is kept. While obviously not by the same artist, it shows the same story, with the poor grandparents and the rich parents.

At the lower left (the poor grandparents side), we can read
"Doet ons bijstant / mijn sone want / Ick hebbe u gegeven / ons goet Contant / In uwer hant / Waer bij zullen wij leven"
"Support us / my son because / I gave you / our belongings cash / in your hand / whereby we would live"

 The upper right (the parents side) states:
"Och vaeder siet / Ick en hebbe niet / op mijnder trouwen / U te geuen ijet / Wat mijn gheschiet / Ick moet staet houwe[n]"
"Oh father look / I don't have / on my wedding day / to give you anything / what happens to me / I have to keep state"

So the same story, the grandparents have given all they had to their children (as dowry), but the children will not support them as they need all the money to keep up their "state", their position in society.

This painting led me to a few other works with the same subject, all Dutch and from ca. 1600-1620. Very close in style to the one for sale is the above, at the RKD described as "After David Vinckboons", and comparing the work for sale with other Vinckboons works clearly shows his influence. The work for sale is a lot simpler than the RKD example (from the Museum Catharijneconvent in Utrecht).

A final example can be found in the British Royal Collections. It is anonymous and rather damaged (with the text becoming illisible). Still, of the four examples of paintings with this subject, it means that three have texts on it.

UPDATE: now for sale at anticstore, estimated at 6,800 Euro. 

"Flemish School, 15th / 16th c." is workshop or follower of Quentin Massys (plus provenance!)

Cabral Moncado Leiloes, from Portugal, sells on 30 May 2016 (i.e. now!) a "Flemish School, 15th - 16th century" Praying Virgin, estimated at 3,000 to 4,500 Euro.

It is a very nice version of a painting by Quentin Massys, known from multiple versions from his time, e.g. the above one (attributed to his Workshop) from the National Gallery. The original was part of a diptych with Christ on the left wing, but the right wing alone has often been copied. The link to Massys is given on the frame of the work, but for some reason omitted by the auction house. The work for sale is a bit less subtle in the flesh tones and the execution of the hands, and is either another Workshop copy or the work of a very good Follower. The slightly lower quality may also in part be caused by the smaller size (32 by 22 cm vs. 60 by 35 cm) of course.

An original, clearly superior version was sold at Sotheby's in 2013 and fetched $1 million... The one for sale is closer to the National Gallery version though.

The painting now for sale is probably the same as this one from the RKD (shown together here for easy comparison), which was for sale in Germany in 1919, and which Friedländer notes as "Real?", but which the RKD lists as "After Massys". The one big advantage of knowing if this is the same, is that in that case you can be certain that it isn't a recent fake, but at least a 100-year old one.

If the painting is a genuine 15th-16th c. work, then it should be worth considerably more than the estimate, at least 10,000 Euro, as Early Netherlandish paintings of this quality and so closely related to Quentin Massys are rare.

Mystery man Georg Friedrich Stettner

Plückbaum, from Germany, sells on 4 June 2016 an "Attributed to Georg Friedrich Stettner (born Augsburg - died 1639 Frankfurt/Main)", a 91 by 146 cm oil on panel estimated at 6,500 Euro.

There are a few problems here. For starters, this painting is a copy after a work by Joos Goemare (1573-1611) of ca. 1600.

That work is also known from other copies (all with some variations but keeping all major aspects), so it seems to have been fairly popular in its day.

An engraving by Bolswert is also known for it (e.g. this copy from the Rijksmuseum). That engraving states "J. Goeimar inventor", so we have a contemporary source for the attribution.

As a copy, the estimate for the Stettner is probably too high in any case.

But the mystery Stettner lies elsewhere. Take for example Joos Goemare: a relatively unknown painter, with only one or a few attributed works. But he is known from old sources and listed in artist lexicons and the like (also as Goemaere and Goeimare), and of course we have the attribution in the engraving shown above.

For Stettner: nothing. His first appearance in any source (I can find online, that is) is in 1965, when a copy of this work (88 by 120cm, so presumably not the one for sale now) is sold at Sotheby's London for £240. Presumably that work was signed and dated 1635. I haven't found an image of it. In 1997 Van Ham, in Cologne, sells another(?) version, 91 by 122 cm and signed and dated again 1635, for 11,000 Euro (nearly three times the estimate!). And in 2012 the work for sale now at Pluckbaum was offered at Van Ham for 12,500 Euro but didn't sell. In 1999, a German article about an auction again describes a similar Stettner work, this time estimated at a hefty 70,000 Deutsche mark (about 30,000 Euro?)

Artnet shows a number of works sold as by or after Stettner over the years, including the two pictured above, probably the one from the Van Ham 1997 sale. But no other compositions by Stettner are known, and I can't find any old or contemporary reference to him. The "(born Augsburg - died 1639 Frankfurt/Main)" from the auction here seems to suggest that some auctioneer or researcher has found out more; but I have to wonder whether this Georg Friedrich Stettner really ever existed.

Or is there evidence after all? The above engraving is attributed to Georg Stettner in the lower left corner, and is accordingly given to Georg Friedrich Stettner by the Brown University Library. Case closed, except for one annoying detail: the engraving depicts a battle from 1760, which is visionary for a painter who died in 1639... This work was made in Nurnberg, but many painters moved during their career so that's not that much of a problem.

No idea whether this is a different Georg Stettner or whether the other one was not active in 1635 but 100 years later.

In any case, all this makes me wonder whether there really was a Georg Friedrich Stettner, active in 1635, or whether there has been a mixup with perhaps another Stettner or a misread (or forged?) signature. The painting for sale is in any case one of relatively many copies of the same Goeimare composition, and should struggle to fetch its estimate.

Brueghel the Younger?

Wannenes, from Italy, sells on 1 June 2016 an "Attributed to Pieter Brueghel (1564-1638)" tondo of two farmers or peasants, estimated at 1,600 to 1,800 Euro.

The dates make it clear that this is Brughel the Younger, not Pieter Bruegel the Elder. The quality of the work makes me wonder whether it isn't a Brueghel III though. The painting for sale is considerably more simplistic than many certain Brueghel II works, but matches other works sold (sometimes for a lot of money) as by him.

By far the most closely related picture is the above proverb, for sale (but unsold) at Sotheby's in 2008 for an estimated $500,000 to $700,000!! It has the same dimensions as the one for sale, the same or very similar house to the left and farm in the background, and similar figures. The one for sale also seems to illustrate a proverb. The Sotheby's one was signed though, which is of course a big plus. To me, the one for sale now looks more like a copy of a work from the same series than an original, so the big question is whether it is a contemporary copy, or one made more recently (worst case: made after the Sotheby's sale and inspired by it). It certainly is an interesting one to follow.

An auction searcher colleague  posted me better evidence linking this to Brueghel II: an engraving with the same image, with added text (typical for Brueghel proverb paintings) but a different background. I couldn't find a better quality image though.

What I did find was a drawing by Brueghel II of the two figures, from the Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden.

These two images make it undeniable that the basic composition is by Pieter Brueghel II (or less likely by his father). Coupled with the Sotheby painting, which gives us the correct background, it seems quite certain that the painting for sale is either by Brueghel II or more likely a direct copy after a painting by him (and not a copy after the engraving, which has a different background).

The anatomical knowledge and liveliness of a Brueghel II seems to be lacking, and the painting is also dull and brownish, which all helps to make it a less attractive work than what one expects from an authentic Brueghel II. If you believe it to be 17th century (I have no reason to doubt it, but everything gets faked and copied these days), then it should be worth a lot more than the estimate, at least 10,000 Euro.

"French Impressionist Lavoy" is Belgian painter Jean Laudy

Eva Aldag, from Germany, sells on 28 May 2016 a "French Impressionist, 1st half 20th c., Lavoy" estimated at 350 Euro.

It is a work by Belgian painter Jean Laudy (1877-1956, father of Jacques Laudy, collaborator of Hergé). The signature could indeed also be read as Lavoy, but both the signature and the work fit the works of Laudy perfectly. I have only found two other works by a "J. Lavoy", sold in the 90s at Bonham's, but without pictures: I wonder if they also weren't misread Laudy works.

The painting for sale fits his more early, rougher style: his later works are often more polished. He was  a very productive painter and many of his works are a bit boring, but his best works are very well composed and executed. This work, while perhaps only intended as a sketch, is attractive. His best works fetch 10,000 Euro and more, but this one will not reach these relative heights (the work shown above, "Curious after the result", sold for 2,200 Euro in 2015). It will be a success if it gets sold for 1,000 Euro, but hopefully to someone who at least will know which artist he gets.

"Old Master, 17th-18th c." is copy after Bassano

Campo, from Belgium, sells on 31 May 2016 an "Old Master, 17th / 18th century" Winter scene, estimated at 5,000 to 8,000 Euro.

It is the same composition (but in a different version) I already discussed in a post from February, then attributed to Vrancx, but in both cases a copy after one of the most popular works of Bassano. This one is slightly overestimated and will probably be worth 2,000 to 3,000 Euro instead.

"Monogrammist FW": could this be an early work by Fritz Wingen?

Sigalas, from Germany, sells on 31 May 2016 (as lot 260) a "Monogrammist FW, 1917" Adam and Eve, estimated at 150 Euro.

The only German Expressionist painter of the period who seems to match the monogram and subject matter is Fritz Wingen, a largely forgotten painter from Kempen.

Gottfried "Fritz" Wingen was born in 1889 and started working as an artist from an early age, first in his spare time while working as a teacher (from 1909 on), and later (from about 1920) as a full-time artist. He not only painted, but also worked as a sculptor and composer of classical music. He fought in the First World War and was wounded in 1915. Deeply religious, he worked mainly for churches and the like, but as an otherwise modern and freethinking artist he often clashed with the more conservative parts of (religious) society. Once the Nazis came to power, his position became untenable (with a "Berufsverbot" as early as 1933), and he was sent to prison for ten months in 1939. In 1942 he again was imprisoned as an enemy of the state and he died in a camp in 1944; likely in the gas chambers.

He was set to be included in the Catholic Martyrologium in the 1990s, but was removed from the list because he had children out of wedlock. Which apparently was more important than being willing to die as an opponent of Hitler and the Nazis. But I digress.

He was largely forgotten after the war, but in 2005 an exhibition of 100 works with accompanying book was organised in his hometown Kempen, where a street is named after him. Still, it is very hard to find any work by him online, and he doesn't appear in major sales lists (one view of Naples in 2010, and one view of Palermo in 2013).

The above is a painting by him from 1926, sold for 570 Euro.

The work for sale seems to match the description of the artist and his work perfectly. It is a deeply religious work which will have offended (and would still offend) many of the more conservative believers, but which is powerful and modern. It has a good size (86 by 75cm). It is clearly undervalued and should easily fetch 1,000 Euro to 2,000 Euro. A much better painting than anything Hitler ever produced, and by a person deserving more recognition for his art and his life.

It would be great if anyone familiar with the works of Wingen (and certainly his early works) could confirm that this is indeed by him. It's a good painting in any case, but it's so much better if one can put a name to a work of art.

UPDATE: it apparently sold for 1,300 Euro, good to see this get the monetary recognition it deserves

"17th century card players" is copy after Gerard Seghers

Rops, from Belgium, sells on 22 May 2016 a "17th century Card Players" large (92 by 134cm) work estimated at 2,000 to 3,000 Euro.

I doubt it is that old, and I certainly don't believe it is worth as much, as it is a relatively weak reversed copy after one of the masterpieces of Gerard Seghers, "The Denial of Saint Peter", a still larger work now in the North Carolina Museum of Art.

UPDATE: sold for 2,000 Euro.

UPDATE 2: what happened next 

Reduced activity

Due to a number or circumstances, I'll post less in the next few weeks. I seem to encounter not so many inteersting paintings (despite there being enough auctions in May), and don't have the time to adequately research the ones that might be a good blog subject.

I'll try to post as often as I can, but I prefer no new posts to uninteresting ones (like this one). It's a bit sad, because my number of readers is still growing, but I hope you'll come back once I have again a bit more to say.

"Ecce Homo" by unknown artist

Galerie Bassenge, from Berlin, sells on 27 May 2016 a "German, 16th century" Ecce Homo estimated at 6,000 Euro.

It has the date 1509 and an AD (Albrecht Durer) monogram, which is correctly not given any importance by the auctioneer as this is not some unknown Dürer painting.

However, it is a well-accomplished work which I would situate in Antwerp instead of in Germany. The work is hard to place with one specific artist, it has elements from everyone from Bosch over Francken to Massys, but so far an actual name or school escapes me.


This one warrants further attention and may well be worth a lot more than the estimate in the end.

Could this 19th c. drawing sold by Cambi be a major Raphael sleeper?

Cambi, from Italy, sold last week an "Italian School, early 19th century" large (100 by 84 cm) drawing "in the Renaissance style", estimated at 400 to 500 Euro.

Instead, it sold for 40,000 Euro.

So, what could be the reason? Well, the sitter and her pose look suspiciously like a Raphael portrait, "La Donna Gravida", from the Palazzo Pitti. The drawing is obviously done by a very skilled artist (and the estimate was very low in any case, even for a random 19th century drawing of this quality). Could this be a real Raphael, completely misjudged by the auction house? It seems quite possible, without having handled the actual work (and not having seen e.g. the back of it), and in that case this is a major find and at 40K a major bargain for whoever spotted it and took the risk.

Perhaps it will reappear in a few months or years time and we will know more then. For now, it is just nice to speculate a bit.

"Dutch painting, ca. 1600: November" is a workshop copy of Sebastian Vrancx, Spring or April

Galerie Bassenge, from Germany, sells on 27 May 2016 a "Dutch, ca. 1600" painting of Farmers on the way to the market, estimated at 1,200 Euro.

It is a somewhat weaker (and more damaged) version of a painting by Sebastiaen Vrancx, offered by Galerie Lowet de Wotrenge, an Antwerp art gallery. The work for sale lacks some details, like the axe in the hands of the boy leading the farmer, but is otherwise very close, even down to the colours (which indicates that the work for sale is based on the same painting and not on an engraving or drawing of it). It seems likely that the one for sale is a workshop copy of the one at the Wotrenge gallery.

The work for sale has an indication "November" at the back, indicating that it is one of a series of 12 allegories of the months. However, the Wotrenge gallery makes the case for this being an Allegory of Spring instead, which much better matches the iconography, from the green leaves at the trees to the erection of a maypole in the middle.

It may be part of the same series as the above "Winter" or "January" from the Museum Bredius, which has approximately the same dimensions.

Its value is probably close to 3,000 Euro, as Vrancx is popular at the moment.

"Attributed to Jan Brueghel the Younger" is a copy after him

Deutsch, from Austria, sells on 31 May 2016 an "Attributed to Jan Brueghel the Younger" Allegory of Flora, estimated at 1,200 to 2,500 Euro.

It is a good, partial copy of a genuine Brueghel, an "Allegory of Spring" from a private collection. But it seems highly unlikely that Brueghel has had a hand in that copy, it lacks his finesse and style.

Still, as a highly attractive painting with a Brueghel composition and colouring, it should easily fetch the upper estimate.

"Dutch School around 1700" seems to be from the School of Mytens

Deutsch, Austrian auction house, sells on 31 May 2016 a "Dutch School, around 1700" portrait of a lady, estimated at 500 to 800 Euro.

It is a nice enough portrait for that price and reminds me of the works of some of the Mytens, especially Jan or Daniel Mytens the Elder (pictured: work by follower of Daniel, and portrait by Jan), and should probably be dated a little bit earlier than 1700.

The painting is far from good enough to be a real Mytens, but should still be worth more than the estimate and fetch at least 1,000 Euro. It could do with some cleaning to bring out the colour again though.

"Dutch Painter, 16th c." seems to be by Vincent Sellaer

Cambi, Italy, sells on 4 May 2016 a "Dutch painter, 16th c." "Female figure with putti", estimated at 6,000 to 8,000 Euro.

It is a better version of a work by Vincent Sellaer (Flemish, not Dutch) sold 10 years ago at Artcurial for nearly 6,000 Euro, and so should be worth more than the estimate (image from artvalue.com). However, the Sellaer market seems to have gone a bit flat lately, with multiple works not selling or selling rather cheap, so perhaps the estimate, despite not recognising the artist, is spot-on anyway. The work for sale is larger than the one sold ten years ago, so if these dimensions are correct, it isn't the same work. Otherwise it has been restored, which was obviously much needed.

UPDATE: not sold, in an auction were the Italian paintings fetched high prices but the others struggled mostly.