Alexander Wiskemann or Dirck De Quade Van Ravesteyn

Bonham's, from England, sells on 5 December 2018 an "Attributed to Alexander Wiskemann" Venus and Amor, estimated at 21,000 to 29,000 Euro.

They give an extensive provenance, including a sale at Im Kinsky in 2010. It was offered there with an estimate of 20,000 to 30,000 Euro, and failed to sell in the regular auction (it may have sold during the aftersale).

It seems to have been offered at Teeuwisse in 2011 as well.

A different or uncleaned version of this painting was sold at Neumeister in 2008, with an estimate of 30,000 Euro. It was attributed to Dirck de Quade van Ravesteyn.

I understand the attribution to Ravesteyn better than the one to Wiskemann, as the Venus here shares similarities with Venuses (Veni?) in other works by the artist. But these Ravesteyns show a more accomplished artist, so at best it would be a "circle of" or "follower of" him.

Alexander Wiskemann on the other hand is a nearly unknown painter, and I have not found any comparable paintings. So I have not the faintest idea why the attribution to Wiskemann is given, it doesn't seem to be based on a signature either. Strange!

UPDATE: the composition is close to a 1610 work by Mattäus Gundelach, sold at Dorotheum in 2011 with an estimate of 60,000 Euro. I don't think the artist of that work and the one for sale are the same though, but I wouldn't be surprised if one artist lies at the basis of both.

UPDATE 2: not sold

Sad story

I often see paintings in auctions which turn out to have been sold at auction just a few months or years before, sometimes with a different attribution, sometimes with a different estimate, but often with little loss or gain (except for the auction houses, good for them).

This one is a rather sad story though: the painting for sale at Bonham's as Circle of Flaminio Torri degli Ancinelli was sold four years ago at Alcala as "Attributed to Flaminio Torri", and sold for 6,000 Euro. Now, it is only estimated at 2,000 to 2,700 Euro. I don't think the main culprit is the change from "attributed" to "circle of", although that won't help. But the large tear through Mary is really sad. Still, it is a nice picture, but the cost of restoration will be serious. UPDATE: sold for £1,750.

Dutch School or Toorenvliet?

At Bonham's, you can buy on 14 April 2015 two nice paintings from the Dutch School, 18th century, depicting a vegetable seller and a fruit seller. Combined estimate of £2,000 to £3,000, which is cheap for the quality. UPDATE: not sold.

Strangely, a different  (larger) version of the latter one was for sale just last week at Auctionata, estimated at 9,000 Euro (but apparently unsold), and attributed to Jacob Toorenvliet. According to the RKD, it used to have a pendant, but they are no longer together. Could it have the same image as the pendant in our sale here? In any case, I think it is safe to attribute the two paintings for sale as "Circle of Jacob Toorenvliet". The paintings for sale have a rougher finish, but are not worse, just different (e.g. showing the muscles of the woman), and from these pictures I actually prefer the ones for sale now.

Aert Mytens

Aert Mytens is a bit of a mystery. Not that many paintings by him are known, most of them apparently still in their original Italian churches. He lived from about 1541 to about 1602, the period between the last Early Netherlandish painters like Brueghel and the final great period of Flemish painting with Rubens, Van Dyck c.s. Following Jan Gossaert, the first great Flemish painter who focused mainly on Italy, Mytens studied and worked mostly in Italy. He was the first of a whole series of Mytenses who became famous painters.

But Aert Mytens rarely appears in auction, and when he does, he doesn't fetch a lot of money, despite the clear qualities of his work. I could find one work, a putto playing the lyre, that was attributed to him which sold in Vienna in 2007 for 12,000 Euro. And that's it...

And then the current painting. Now for sale at Bonham's (17 February) for only 2,000 to 2,700 Euro, and attributed to a "Follower of Aert Mytens", it (or a very, very similar one) was for sale in Venice in 2008, and in Genova in late 2013. Both were sold as "Aert Mytens", not Follower of or anything else, but I haven't been able to find the result these made. Looking closely at the Wannenes sale in Genova, I can see the exact same damage to the painting (small things, e.g. in the rocks to the left of her shoulder), so it clearly is the very same painting that is now, a year later, again for sale. No longer considered an original Mytens, the estimate is lowered. But looking at it closely, it is a very, very good picture, which looks original to me (based solely on what I can see online). Things like the rocks on the left, and the hand to the right of her head (with the beshadowed fingers) are very nicely done, and if not by Mytens then at least done by a very skilled painter. I don't think I have seen any 16th century Flemish painting of this quality and size for an estimate below $10,000, so this one, even if not by Mytens, is very cheap. Perhaps because Mytens isn't well-known enough, but then he probably needs a revival. For a museum like the Royal Museum of Fine Arts in Antwerp, which doesn't have an Aert Mytens yet (only a Jan Mytens), this may be their best chance to fill that gap for a bargain price.

ADDENDUM 26 January 2015.

I just noticed that the figure of the Magdalena in this painting, is a copy / reinterpretation of an Aert Mytens in the British Royal Collection, a "Death of Cleopatra". No idea where the picture is kept or can be seen, but it at least explains why the link with Mytens is so easily made for the painting now up for sale. Due to the condition of the Royal Collection copy, it is hard to compare the two. The Cleopatra seems more pictural, while the Magdalena is a bit more a drawing, but I don't see either as fundamentally better.
END OF ADDENDUM

The same sale also has a  Lady Godiva (top picture). Described as "Continental School, 19th century" and estimated at Euro 2,700 to 4,000, the auctioneers at Bonham's seem to be unaware that it is a very nice copy after Lerius (bottom picture). Obviously, the original (kept in the Royal Museum of Fine Arts in Antwerp) is vastly superior, but of the few copies I have seen at older auctions, this is by far the best. No idea if it is worth more than the estimate, but it was worth a better description at least.