"Portrait of Van Dyck?" is a drawing after a portrait by Van Dyck

Vanderkindere, from Belgium,  sells on 29 May 2018 a, "Attributed to Cornelis Visscher" drawing of an artist, "Portrait de Antoine Van Dyck" (?), estimated at 600 to 800 Euro. 

The drawing, which was exhibited in Dordrecht in 1968, is definitely not a portrait of Van Dyck, who was a self-confident dandy, not the slightly hunched man shown here. 

It is a copy after a work by Van Dyck though, his portrait of Hendrick Steenwyck (Hendrik van Steenwijk II, 1580-1640), painter of church interiors. The drawing is good, nothing spectacular though, and whether such a copy is by Visscher or someone else is very hard to tell. But in any case you aren't buying an unknown portrait of Van Dyck, nor an original invention, so the estimate is perhaps a bit high here.

Twitter account locked!

My Twitter accound is temporary locked, apparently for behaviour which violates the Twitter Terms of Use, although I have no idea what I might have done (I have asked for further information).

I have already had a message from someone I supposedly unfollowed on Twitter: I can assure you that I haven't unfollowed you but that it's just a technical glitch. I hope to be up and running again as soon as possible!

UPDATE: unlocked again, still no idea what went wrong though!!

Almost pre-Raphaelite work by largely forgotten Belgian artist

Horta, from Belgium, sells on 29 May 2018 a "De Cramer" large work on paper (65 by 90 cm) depicting 'The Sacrament", estimated at 1,500 to 2,000 Euro.

The deeply religious work dates probably to about 1900 and is a late Neogothic example of the renewed interest in the Early Netherlandish painters.

It is relatively unusual as a Belgian painting showing also some Pre-raphaelite inspiration, e.g. in the face of the Vrigin, which is much stronger than usual with Flemish Primitives, and reminds me of the typical English redheads of the period (or the women in Symbolist works of the same time), though without any of the erotic elements common in much of these works.

The artist is only identified by the auction house as "De Cramer". The painting is signed by "De Cramer R", and this is short for René de Cramer (1876-1951), who has an RKD entry.  This work depicts the Madonny of the Rosary with Pius V (who created the Feast of the Madonna of the Rosary) and Leo XIII, who was pope until his death in 1903: presumably the work was created during his pontificate. 

De Cramer studied at the Academy of Saint Luke in Ghent, where he obtained the first prize for painting in 1898.

Postcard for the 1913 Exhibition

He became mostly known as an illustrator for books and posters, who also made many decorations for the 1913 World Exhibition in Ghent. He became a professor of drawing at the Ghent University and the Ghent Academy, and dean of the Guild of Saint Luke (even though that position was purely honorific, not something important like in the Middle Ages). He also painted war memorials in chruches in Ghent.

Most of his large sacle work can be found in chruches and monasteries. In the crypt of the Basilica of Lisieux (France), he produced mosaics.

His work is completely out of fashion. Pre-Raphaelite and Art Nouveau works are very popular, but this highly religious, static version of it is hard to sell. Coupled with a quasi-unknown name, due to the fact that very few of his works come onto the market, and you get a good artist which is hard to sell. As a good example of a rather short-lived local school, the Ghent Neogothical school inspired by Pugin, the Pre-Raphaelites, and early Jugendstil, it is worth its estimate easily, but whether it will actually sell is not clear.

Interesting "Susanna and the Elders"

Horta, from Belgium, sells on 28 may 2018 a "Flemish School, 17th century" Susanna and the Elders, an oil on panel estimated at 6,000 to 8,000 Euro.

It looks to be an old copy after a better work, but I haven't found the original for it. There are at least three similar works, but they all have different attributions...

First, and least comparable, is a work attributed to Jasper van der Lanen which was auctioned in Stockholm in 1996 and then for sale at De Jonckheere in Brussels later that same year, according to the RKD. It is a very small example, only 17 by 23 cm.

Much closer to the one for sale are two other depictions of the same subject. The first is a Jan Brueghel II, sold at Lempertz in 2009. I can't find it on the Lempertz site though, only again at RKD.

Lempertz sold a nearly identical composition in 2016, but this time they didn't mention Brueghel but sold it as a work of Izaak van Oosten. It fetched 24,800 Euro.

It is funny to read in the Klaus Ertz expertise report for this attribution that "a further significant difference to the Brueghels is that van Oosten was also fully capable of painting the slightly squat and rounded figures that populate his landscapes himself": not only is it a bit strange to claim that the Brueghels were not able to paint such figures, but more specifically the figures here are a straight copy of the work of Rubens (here shown in the Vorsterman engraving)!

In any case, the figures in the Horta work are not of the same quality, making it an interesting old work but which won't be worth more than the lower estimate at most.

Eastbourne auctions has too many hidden treasures

Eastbourne auctions, from England, has a "Two day fine art sale" on 10 and 11 May 2018. It includes 360 paintings and prints.

What is amazing is the number of poorly described works, with unrecognised signatures, which, if genuine, would make this one of the best modern art sales of the year. How unlucky that both the owner(s) of the works, and the "Auctioneers & Valuers of Fine Art, Antiques & Collectables" (as they describe themselves) had so much trouble deciphering the signatures and attributing the paintings.

Unless of course they knowingly are selling fakes and are careful not to attribute the fakes to actual artists, hoping that the poor description and low estimate will dupe people into thinking they have uncovered some sleepers, some hidden gems, which the stupic auctioneer and seller didnt recognise. Could it be? No, of course not, knowingly selling fakes with such malicious intent would be criminal, so it must be that the auctioneers are simply extremely incompetent.

Some examples (the list, sadly, is not exhaustive).

Lot 1435 is "bearing a signature Goldbeg", estimated £100 to £200. Michael Goldberg, American abstract expressionist, comparable real works sell for $50,000.

Lot 1467 is "bearing a signature Kurt Schwithing", estimated at £150 to £250. Obviously signed "Kurt Schwitters". His abstract works fetch £100,000 and more.

Lot 1657 is "bearing a signature A L Hote", estimated at £50 to £80. You really have to make an effort not to see A Lhote (André Lhote) in this signature. No idea what this one would fetch if it was real, I haven't really found comparable works during my short search, but other works fetch 10s of thousands and more.

Lot 1648 is "bearing a signature A Han '59", estimated at £50 to £80. Hmm, could this be Jean-Michel Atlan (French, 1913-1960)? Value £20,000 to £30,000 (for a real one, that is).

Lot 1632 is "bearing a signature Marie", estimated at £80 to £120. It is made to look like a painting by Picasso from 1937 of his muse Marie-Thérèse Walter. While I can imagine an auctioneer not knowing Atlan or at a stretch Lhote, I have a hard time seeing a "valuer of fine art" not knowing this style or being unable to make the link. Another portrait of Walter from 1937 was the leading painting in a Sotheby's sale in February of this year, with an estimate "upon request" and a sale price of just shy of £50,000,000...

Lot 1627 is "bearing an indistinct signature Misse" and estimated at £200 to £300. The "indistinct signature" is rather clearly "H. Matisse"... A standing nude by Matisse starts at £500,000 or thereabouts.

Lot 1617 is  "bearing a signature De Komina", estimated £80 to £120. It is supposedly by Willem de Kooning, and worth some 100K for a real one.

Lot 1595 is "bearing a monogram Muntn" and estimated at £200 to £300. The signature is of Gabriele Münter, and if she really had pâinted something like this, it should be worth £100,000 or more.

.

If you want to, you can create your own blog post describing their "Carelle" (Corneille) "Bouher" (François Boucher, demonstrating that a major old master is more obviously a fake at first sight), "Feining" (Feininger), "Stilan" (Steinlen), "Jan...sky?" (Von Jawlensky), "a signature" (Chashnik),...

For some reason, they didn't bother to "misread" the signature on their "Munch", "Nolde", "Magritte" or "Jorn".

Misreading or not recognising an artist or signature happens at many auctions, and especially with older works the addition of aprocryphal signatures afterwards is commonplace. But I have never seen such a display of misreading signatures from truly major modern artists in one auction; if these were real, you would get a very, very nice start towards a museum of modern art for a few thousands pounds in total.

An auction house which claims to have fine art expertise but is this incompetent should probably just close its doors, as both buyers and sellers would be best advised to stay away from it at all costs.

It's also weird that some works which have been sold at the previous auction, are now again for sale. Like a "Louis Wain" (right...) sold for £220 in March, and now again for sale with the same description for £150 to £250.

Looking at the results from that previous comparable sale, I note that luckily most items fail to sell (well, "sell" for £40 or so, no idea if any real sale happened then); but some works seem to have fooled a buyer anyway. A "monogram CK" (which aims to be a work of Cal Kylberg, but fails) sold for £5400, which is £5350 too much. They also sold 2 "Kurt Schwitters" (hey, they knew the name then) at £380 each.

In January they sold quite a few things using this tactic, including another André Lhote (then read as "Alha O?", whatever) for £1200. Oh, and another one, this time signed "A Chote", for £2,200. They must be laughing their pants of cataloguing  these things. Mind you, you could just as easily have fooled your self into buying an "E B-J" drawing (no, they had no idea who that could be, never heard of Edward Burne-Jones, sorry!) for £3200, or a fake Alechinsky for £680 (which is now again for sale for £100 to £200, or are the fakers simply making multiple copies of the same work?).

Looking through my older blog posts, I notice that I have highlighted some Eastbourne works in the past, sometimes with reservations, sometimes just as a bargain. In retrospect, this was stupid, as those sales all had more or less the same problems as this current one does (athough this one seems to be the most blatant and featuring the biggest names). My advice from now on is never deal with Eastbourne auctions in any way.

Don't spill, 't has cost money!

Düsseldorfer Auktionshaus, from Germany, sells on 4 May 2018 as lot 135 a "Dutch, 17th century" oil on panel estimated at 200 Euro.

They have deciphered the text at the bottom of the panel nearly correctly: instead of "Stort niet/theyt gel´e kost" it should be "Stort niet  / 'theyt gelt´e kost" meaning "Don't spill / 't has cost money".

It is a typical amusing moralistic painting in the tradition of Teniers, but I haven't found another version of this one. it looks as if the farmer spills either money he is paying to the milkmaid, or seed, from his hat, when he is startled by the dog. The milkmaid at the same time is spilling milk from her yoke. She is perhaps carrying grain or seed which she offered to or received from the farmer, or money she received in return for some milk, although the farmer has nothing to carry the milk in. Of course, with a farmer spilling his seed and the milkmaid spilling her milk, there is a small chance that some subtle sexual innuendo is hidden in the painting. Subtlety wasn't always the strongest point of these artists!

The story isn't exactly clear, and the painting is not made by a major artist, but it is an amusing and relatively unusual 17th century work, much more fun to own than the usual second-rate crucifixions or unidentifiable ugly portraits of long-forgotten sitters, and at 200 Euro it is very cheap. Somewhere closer to 700 or 800 Euro seems reasonable.

UPDATE: a reader informed me (correctly) that the work is a copy after (or more likely an original by) Adriaen Van de Venne (I didn't find the exact work this is based on, but multiple others from the same series), and that it sold for a whopping 8000 Euro, or 40 times their and ten times my estimate. Looking again at the picture, I wonder if there is some signature or date on the rock left of the inscription, but the image is too small to make this out. 

UPDATE 2: this painting was sold at Dorotheum in April 2019, as "Attributed to Adriaen Pietersz. van de Venne": estimated at 10,000 to 15,000 Euro, it sold for nearly 14,000 Euro. And they confirmed that there was indeed an inscription on the rock: it was dated 1627! 

"Jacob Boutats" is manner or circle of Jan Brueghel II

Hotel de Ventes de Monte Carlo, in Monaco, sells on 28 April 2018 a "Jacob Boutats" Bird concert, a small (27 by 37 cm) oil on panel estimated at 20,000 to 30,000 Euro.

The RDK lists three other (even smaller) versions of the same composition, but attributes them to "Circle of Jan Brueghel II" (1, 2, 3). Among the six works by Jacob Bouttats they list are no really similar works, but all have Brueghel-like (or Roelant Savery-like) animals in them in scenes from Paradise or Orpheus. I can find one other copy of this work much larger at 64 by 52 cm) which was sold as "Circle of Bouttats" in 1997, but without further indications this seems rather speculative.

This panel was offered at Artcurial in 2013 as "Flemish School, early 17th century, workshop of Jan Brueghel". The estimate seems about right, even though this is a good but not the best copy of this work.

UPDATE: now on 26 September 2019 for sale at Hampel, Germany, with the same estimate and "attributed to Jacob Bouttats".