Provenance: Works
of Art in the Putnam Foundation Collection
Italian and Spanish Paintings | Dutch and Flemish Paintings | French Tapestries and Paintings | American Paintings | Russian Icons
DUTCH AND FLEMISH PAINTINGS
Pieter
Bruegel the Elder
(Flemish, ca. 15251569)
Parable of
the Sower, 1557
Oil on panel
29 x 40 1/2
in. (73.7 x 102.9 cm)
Signed and
dated lower right: Brueghel / 1557
1957:002
PROVENANCE
Fernand
Stuyck del Bruyre, Antwerp, 1924 [1]
Acquired by
the Putnam Foundation, 1957
PROVENANCE NOTES
[1] The
picture first came to notice when it was bought by Fernand Stuyck at public
auction at the Fievez Gallery, Brussels, in 1924. It was then catalogued simply
as Flemish school, seventeenth century. In December of that year, when it was
cleaned by the elder Mr. Buesco, conservator for the Belgian royal family, the
signature and date were revealed. The painting came to the United States just
before World War II. It was then shown in San Francisco and Washington, D.C.
Petrus Christus (Flemish, unknown1475/76)
Death of the Virgin, ca. 146065
Oil on oak, transferred
to mahogany and cradled
67 3/8 x 54 1/2 in.
(171.1 x 138.4 cm)
1951:001
PROVENANCE
Sciacca, Sicily, 16th
century
Gaetano Consiglio,
Sciacca, until 1856
Giuseppe Santacanale
Denti, Palermo, by 1865 [1]
Villa Santa Canale,
Bagheria, Sicily
Sold, Knoedler & Co.,
New York, 1938 [2]
Acquired by
the Putnam Foundation, 1951
PROVENANCE NOTES
[1] The
provenance of the Timken painting leads back to Sicily. Although the painting
was traditionally thought to have been in the Santacanale family of Palermo
from the fifteenth century up until the time it was sold to Knoedler and
Company in 1938, Vincenzo Scuderi (La collocazione originaria della Morte
della Vergine
attribuita a Petrus Christus, gia della collezione Santacanale a Palermio e ora
a S. Diego di California, in Antonello da Messina, Atti del convegno di
studi tenuto a Messina,
November 29December 2, 1981 (Messina, 1981), pp. 10110) has discovered that
it belonged previously to the Consiglio family of Sciacca, a town on the south
side of Sicily.
[2] As of
October 3, 2000, this item has not been registered as stolen or missing on the
Art Loss Register database. It is also not listed in the published source of
World War II
losses known to the Art Loss Register.
Pieter
Claesz. (Dutch,
1596/971661)
Still Life, 1627
Oil on oak
panel
14 1/4 x 22
5/8 in. (36.2 x 57.5 cm)
Signed and
dated lower right: PC Ao 1627 (PC in monogram)
1970:001
PROVENANCE
Sale at Sothebys, New
York, lot 35, for $29,000. February 12, 1970 [1] To Mahla Vaduz (?) [2]
Consigned by Mahla Vaduz
to Nystad Oude Kunst, The Hague, for fl.104,400 ($29,000), February 19, 1970
[3]
Acquired by
the Putnam Foundation, 1970 [4]
PROVENANCE NOTES
[1] Beatrice
Stern, of Sothebys, New York, confirms the date of sale and price in an email
dated February 7, 2005 [copy in object file]. The date had previously been
listed incorrectly. She did not identify the seller.
[2] Mahla
Vaduz is identified in the business records of Nystad Oude Kunst, which are
now at the Getty Research Institute, where they were consulted in preparation
for this entry. Frederick Mont represented the mysterious investor Mahla
Vaduzwhich turns out to have been a consortium of art investors led by Mont.
[3] The
Nystad Oude Kunst records at the Getty Research Institute include a number of
documents detailing transactions regarding the Claesz. still life. Evidently
the financial arrangements were sufficiently complex as to engender some
confusion among the participants, who nonetheless remained on good terms.
[4] For fl.179,215 from Nystad, June 9, 1970. Sale record, Nystad archives, contained in Duveen archives, GRI reel 329
The Art Loss
Register has pointed out that a Claesz. still life of very similar dimensions
had been in the collection of the Staatlichen Kunstakademie, Dsseldorf, and
subsequently reported missing in the aftermath of World War II. The piece in
question is illustrated in Richard Klapheck (Die Kunstsammlungen der
Staatlichen Kunstakademie zu Dsseldorf, 1928, p. 42), and it is clearly not the Timken Still
Life. Dr. Bettina
Baumgrtel, Head of the Department of Painting at the Stadtmuseum Dsseldorf,
confirms this in an email dated February 21, 2005 [copy in object file]. This
connection can now be put aside.
A claim
regarding this painting, and a number of others in the Timken collection, was
presented in 2004 by an attorney representing members of the Oppenheimer
family. Although the family lost a number of works to Nazi looting, none of the
Oppenheimer paintings, which were sold in early 1935 in a Nazi-sanctioned
auction, correspond to pieces owned by the Timken.
There are no
paintings by Pieter Claesz. matching the description of the Timken piece listed
on the major looted artwork registers. If no further information on the
pre-1970 ownership of the piece emerges, there is no reason to consider its
provenance as currently in question.
Sir
Anthony van Dyck (Flemish,
15991641)
Mary Villiers, Lady Herbert of Shurland,
ca. 1636
42 x 33 in. (101 x 83.8
cm)
Inscribed at upper left: Maria
Filia Georgij Ducis Buckingamiae / relicta Spousa Philippi Herbert
Primogen[iti] / Comitis Pembrociae [&/et] M[on]tgome[riae] (Mary Daughter of George Duke of Buckingham/Widow
of Philip Herbert First-born of The Earl of Pembroke [and] Montgomery)
2005:002
PROVENANCE
King Charles I
(16001649) [1]
Possibly a gift of the
king to Lady Mary Villiers (16221685) [2]
By inheritance to George
Legge (16481691), 1st baron Dartmouth
William Legge
(17301801), 2nd earl of Dartmouth, Sandwell Hall, Staffordshire
William Legge
(18811958), 7th earl of Dartmouth, Patshull Park, Staffordshire
By descent to Lady
Elizabeth Basset ne Legge (19082000)
Phillips, London, July
10, 2001, lot 123
Historical Portraits,
London
Acquired by
the Putnam Foundation, 2005
PROVENANCE NOTES
[1] Van Dyck, who was
court painter for King Charles I and his wife, Queen Henrietta Maria,
apparently executed this portrait of Lady Mary at the request of the king, in
whose collection the portrait once hung. On the verso of the canvas are stamped
the letters CR surmounted by a
crown. This cipher was placed only on paintings in Charles Is personal art
collection, on the authority of Abraham van der Doort, keeper of the kings
pictures. This mark was discovered in 2002, when an old lining was removed
during the paintings conservation. The conservation treatment was undertaken
after the painting had been acquired by the art gallery Historical Portraits,
London. This portrait is probably the painting referred to in Abraham van der
Doorts catalogue of the collections of Charles I as A Peece of the Dutchesse
of Lenox before shee was married By Sr Anthony Vandike.
[2] Since this portrait
was not in the royal collection at the time of the kings death in 1649, the
probability is strong that Charles I presented it to Lady Mary, perhaps
replacing it with another work by Van Dyck at the time of her subsequent
marriage to James Stuart in 1637.
Franz Hals (Dutch, ca. 15821666)
Portrait
of a Man, 1634
Oil on oak
panel
28 7/8 x 22
1/8 in. (73.3 x 56.2 cm)
Inscribed at
upper right: AETA SVAE 48 / ANo 1634 / FH (FH in monogram)
1955:003
PROVENANCE
W. Unger,
Amsterdam, 1872 [1]
Van der Willigen,
Haarlem and Germany
Collection
Eduard F. Weber, Hamburg [2]
Galerie
Weber, Hamburg, sale at Lepke, Berlin, lot 223, February 2022, 1912 [3]
Collection
Marczell de Nemes von Janoshaza, Budapest, 191213
Marczell de
Nemes, sale at Galerie Manzi, Paris, lot 53 (1,950 francs), June 1718, 1913
[4]
Baron Maurice
L. Herzog, Budapest, by 192329(?) [5]
Wildenstein
& Co., New York, by 193646(?) [6]
Acquired by
the Putnam Foundation, 1955 [7]
PROVENANCE NOTES
[1] W. Unger
was an artist who made an etching after this portrait in W. Unger and W.
Vosmaer, Etchings after Franz Hals (Leyden, 1873).
[2] Karl
Woermann, Wissenshaftliches Verzeichnis der lteren Gemlde der Galerie
Weber in Hamburg
(Dresden, 1907), p. 18687, no. 223
[3] Wilhem R.
Valentiner lists the painting (Frans Hals, Klassiker der Kunst [Stuttgart, 1923],
p. 314, no. 124, pl. 124) as Frher in der Sammlung Wever in Hamburg
[formerly in the Weber collection], but does not give current status.
Presumably it sold in the 1912 auction.
[4] Sale
price per Seymour Slive (Frans
Hals, 3 vols. [London, 1970],
3:5657, no. 100, and 2:pl. 158).
[5] Valentiner, 1923, has
the painting with Herzog. The business records of the dealer Duveen, now on
microfilm at the Getty Research Institute, contain additional references: Box
248, reel 103 includes 5 items dated 1929 referring to the Portrait of a Man
by Hals in the Herzog collection, Budapest.
[6] Wilhem R. Valentiner (Frans Hals Paintings in America [Westport, Connecticut, 1936], no. 46, ill.) has the
painting at Wildenstein, as does G. D. Gratama (Frans Hals [The Hague, 1943; 2nd ed., 1946], pp. 39, 55, no. 48, pl.
48). Gratamas 2nd edition includes a forward in which he explains that the
first edition was written in 1938, with publication delayed by World War II.
Gratama must have had little or no current information regarding work in
America while preparing the 2nd edition in The Hague during the war.
[7] Acquired from
Wildenstein, July 25, 1955. Date per Slive, 1970
The Art Loss Register has
recommended further investigation of the paintings provenance through
Hungarian authorities, due to the fact that portions of the Maurice L. Herzog
collection were looted during the Nazi era. However, the painting is well
documented in the United States as early as 1933. While the painting was
exhibited in Haarlem, The Netherlands, briefly in 1937, it was again on view in
New York by November of that year. Furthermore, authoritative authors
(Valentiner, Gratama) place the painting at Wildenstein, New York, in 1936,
1938, and possibly again in 194346. Although details of the paintings
ownership during this period are not yet confirmed (for example, was it
consigned to Wildenstein, or sold?), its presence in the United States from
1933 onward must have placed it out of harms way with respect to Nazi looting.
The painting was acquired from Wildenstein by the Putnam Foundation in 1955. To
date there is no evidence that it was outside the United States during World
War II. At the present time, there is no reason to believe that this painting
was looted either in Budapest or France.
Nicolaes
Maes (Dutch,
16341693)
Portrait
of a Lady, 1677
Oil on canvas
26 5/8 x 22
1/4 in. (67.6 x 56.5 cm)
Signed and
dated lower right: Maes 1677
1986:002
PROVENANCE
Estate of
Lord Northwick, Thirlestane House, Cheltenham, sale, Phillips, no. 1791 (as G.
Netscher. Portrait of a Princess of the House of Orange, with a Dog), July
26August 30, 1859 [1]
W. F. B.
Massey-Mainwaring, 1884 [2]
W. F. B.
Massey-Mainwaring collection, sale, Christies, London, March 16, 1907, lot 17
(as G. Netscher. Portrait of a Princess of the House of Orange, with a Dog),
(183.15, to Rosenberg) [3]
Rosenberg
Gallery, New York [4]
H. L. Ehrich
Gallery, New York, by 1927 [5]
Henry A.
Butler, Youngstown, Ohio
Rosenberg
& Steibel, New York, by 197479(?) [6]
Robert
Noortman Gallery, London, acquired from dealer Alex Wengraf, London [7]
Noortman
& Brod, New York, by September 1981 [8]
Mr. (and
Mrs.?) Alan Mark Levenson, Pasadena, California
Acquired by
the Putnam Foundation, 1986 [9]
PROVENANCE NOTES
[1] Len
Krempel, Studien zu den datierten Gemlden des Nicolas Maes (16341693),
Studien zur internationalen Architektur- und Kunstgeschichte 9 (Petersburg, 2000), p. 322, no.
A196, fig. 270, plate XXIII. [The photo reproduced here is from the Archief
Sumowski at the Rembrandthuis, Amsterdam.]
[2] Krempel,
2000, no source listed
[3] Photocopy
of original sales list per Christies, received May 2005; Christies have no
record of Rosenberg in connection with this sale, beyond the notation in the
sales catalog.
[4]
Presumably this Rosenberg is connected with the firm that handled the painting
again later, as is so often the case. There was at the time more than one
Rosenberg involved in the art market.
[5] Krempel,
2000, lists L. R. Ehrich, which is here emended to H. L. Ehrich. He also
notes a San Francisco exhibition (1927) while the painting was under control of
Ehrich.
[6] Mentioned
in Apollo 99, A
Princess of Orange, (April, 1974), p. 15, ill. and Art News 78, no. 4 (April, 1979), Mary
Stuart, p. 6, no.1, ill.
[7] Noortman (London, Noortman & Brod, 1980. A Selection of Important Paintings by Old and Modern Masters from our 1980 Collection, no. 13, ill.). Acquired from Alex Wengraf as reported in communication from Robert Noortman, August 1, 2005.
[8] Exhibited from September 10, 1981
[9] The Art Loss Register indicates by gift of the Levensons, December 18, 1986.
A claim
regarding this painting, and a number of others in the Putnam Foundation
collection, was presented in 2004 by an attorney representing members of the
Oppenheimer family. Although the family lost a number of works to Nazi looting,
none of the Oppenheimer paintings, which were sold in early 1935 in a
Nazi-sanctioned auction, correspond to pieces owned by the Timken.
The inquiry to Noortman Gallery, Maastricht, has resulted in some additional information: Mr. Eddy Schavemaker of that firm provides in an email of August 1, 2005, recent contact information for Mr. Brod, who is apparently still living. The dealer Rosenberg and Stiebel, New York, (known to house the painting 197479), still does business as Stiebel, Ltd., under the management of Gerald Stiebel.
To date, research has uncovered nothing to connect the painting with that of the famous Paris dealer Rosenberg nor any other known looted collection.
Gabriel
Metsu (Dutch,
16291667)
A Young
Woman Receiving a Letter, ca. 1658
Oil on panel
10 1/8 x 9
5/8 in. (25.7 x 24.4 cm)
Inscribed
lower left: G Metsu
(possibly a later addition)
1958:001
PROVENANCE
The Dowager
Boreel, Amsterdam, her sale (v.d. Schley, Yver, Roos, de Vries), Amsterdam,
September 23, 1814, pp. 67, lot 8 (950 florins, Van Yperen) [1]
Matthias
Ignatius van Iperen (dealer), Amsterdam, 1814(?)
King of
Sardinia (?) [2]
Mr. Stanley,
London, The Catalogue of a Superb Collection of Truly Valuable Dutch and
Flemish Cabinet Pictures, auction cat., June 7, 1815, p. 13, lot 170 (210, bought in)
[3]
Mme Le Rouge,
Paris, her sale, (Laneuville), Paris, April 27, 1818, p. 22, no. 34 (bought in?
[4], 5080 francs) [5]
Lambert Jan
Nieuwenhuys (dealer), Brussels [6]
Auguste-Marie-Raimond,
prince of Arenberg, Brussels, by 1829
Duke of
Arenberg, Brussels (by inheritance) 1958 [7]
Wildenstein
& Co., New York
Acquired by
the Putnam Foundation, 1958 [8]
PROVENANCE NOTES
[1] C.
Hofstede de Groot (A Catalogue Raisonn of the Works of the Most Eminent
Dutch Painters of the Seventeenth Century, 8 vols. [London, 190827], 1:31011, no. 183 [cf. nos.
24, 262]), provides these details, including price and alternate spelling of
the buyers name.
[2] The
Hague, Mauritshuis, and The Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco, Great Dutch
Paintings from America,
1990/91, exh. cat. by Ben Broos, pp. 33033, no. 42, ill. (shown San Francisco
only)
[3] Bought in
at 210 per HdG, 1908. Seller was anonymous per Getty Provenance Index
database.
[4] Peter C.
Sutton, et al. (Love Letters: Dutch Genre Paintings in the Age of Vermeer [London, 2003]) lists the buyer as
Le Rouge. This might indicate the piece was bought in, or purchased from the
estate by another family member.
[5] Price per
HdG, 1908. Mme Le Rouge died ca. 1818 per Getty Provenance Index database.
[6] Citation
for this owner not located.
[7] August
Marguillier (LExposition des matres anciens Dsseldorf, Gazette des
Beaux Arts 32 [1904],
p. 284) cites au Duc dArenberg. HdG, 1908, states, Now in the collection of
the Duc dArenberg, Brussels. Edouard Plietzsch (Gabriel Metsu, Pantheon 17 [January 1936], p. 5, ill.) cites
the location as Ehemals Brssel, Herzog von Arenberg.
[8] November
21, 1958
The
suggestion by the Art Loss Register that the painting might be the same as that
lost from the Kunstmuseum, Dresden, can be ruled out. The dimensions differ,
and the Dresden piece is merely attributed to Metsu in Verlorene Werke der
Malerei in Deutschland in der Zeit von 19391945, the published list of works lost
from German museums in the period 19391945, while the Timken painting has long
been recognized as being among his most characteristic and masterly pieces.
Finally, the literature cited in Verlorene Werke does not refer to this painting.
A claim
regarding this painting, and a number of others in the Putnam Foundation
collection, was presented in 2004 by an attorney representing members of the
Oppenheimer family. Although the family lost a number of works to Nazi looting,
none of the Oppenheimer paintings, which were sold in early 1935 in a
Nazi-sanctioned auction, correspond to pieces owned by the Timken.
An inquiry to
Wildenstein, New York, (in progress) should reveal additional information
regarding the date and conditions of sale by the Duke of Arenberg to that firm.
If Wildenstein is able to confirm, as expected, purchase directly from
Arenberg, then there is no reason to question the World War II-era provenance
of this painting.
Rembrandt Harmensz.
van Rijn (Dutch, 16061669)
Saint Bartholomew, 1657
48 3/8 x 39 1/4 in.
(122.7 x 99.7 cm)
Signed and dated center
left: Rembrandt / f. 1657
1952:001
PROVENANCE
Jonathan Richardson,
London, sale by Mr. Cock, Covent Garden, London, March 3, 1747, lot 49, to
William Fauquier [1]
William Fauquier,
(London?) [2]
Dr. Robert Bragge, sale
(Prestage), London, February 9, 1757, lot 48, to Sir Joshua Reynolds, London,
for 26 guineas [3]
Possibly lent by Sir
Joshua Reynolds to Mr. Humphreys, King Street, around 1770 [4]
Acquired, possibly at
Paris, by Jean Charles Franois (Ivan Stepanovich) de Laval de la Loubrerie,
Count Laval (17611846) (St. Petersburg), by 1790(?) [5]
By inheritance to
Ekaterina Ivanovna Katacha, Countess Laval (18001854), 18461854
By inheritance to
Elisaveta Sergeevna, Princess Trubetskaia (Trubetskoy) (18341918), 18541912
By gift to Princess
Trubetskaias grandson, Vassili Vassilievich Davydoff (1877unknown), by 1912
Sold to Thomas Agnew
& Sons, London, by V. V. Davydoff, 1912
Possible sale to Henry
Goldman by Duveen, New York, 1912 [6]
Collection Henry Goldman
(d. 1937), New York, by 191237
Bought from estate of
Henry Goldman, deceased, by Wildenstein, New York, December 22, 1947 [7]
Acquired by
the Putnam Foundation, 1952 [8]
PROVENANCE NOTES
[1] The
confusion between the Timken St. Bartholomew and the Getty Museum St.
Bartholomew is resolved convincingly by Francis Broun (Sir Joshua Reynolds
Collection of Paintings
[Doctoral dissertation, Princeton University, 1987], pp. 4547, no. 4). It now
appears clear that the painter and collector Jonathan Richardson owned the
Timken piece, not the Getty painting.
[2] Though
the identity of William Fauquier is uncertain, he may have been William
Fauquier, London (17081788), who had been admitted to the Royal Society a few
weeks before this sale, on January 29, 1747. Fauquiers brother Francis
(17031768) was colonial governor of Virginia.
[3] Price per
Broun, 1987
[4] Broun,
1987
[5] The
primary source regarding the Russian ownership history of the piece, including
its sale to Agnew, is Alexander Davydoff (Russian Sketches: Memoirs [Hermitage Press, New Jersey, 1984],
pp. 6165, St. Bartholomew). This source corrects a number of inaccuracies,
including the identity of the first Franco-Russian owner, the Count Laval
(Broun, 1987, incorrectly suggests Anne-Adrien-Pierre de Montmorency, duc de
Laval, b. 1768). The date given by Davydoff for Lavals acquisition of St.
Bartholomew (around 1790) corresponds well with the suggestion by Francis
Broun (1987) that Reynolds had already disposed of the piece prior to his 1791
sale at Ralphs, London.
[6] C.
Hofstede de Groot (A Catalogue Raisonn of the Works of the Most Eminent
Dutch Painters of the Seventeenth Century, 8 vols. [London, 190827]: Vol. 6 [1916]:120, no. 169.
[Reprinted Teaneck, New Jersey, 1976]) reports that Goldman purchased the
painting in 1912 from Duveen in New York; other sources show that it had been
purchased from V. V. Davydoff by an agent of Agnew, also in 1912, at Berlin.
[7] From Elliott W. Rowlands, Wildenstein, December 2000. The breakup of Goldmans collection is also reported in Art News, (February, 1948), p. 38 ff.
[8] Every
Picture Has a Story: Looking at History through Art (Timken Museum of Art, San Diego),
October 2000February 2001, exhibition brochure, ill. provides additional
detail regarding the 19th- and 20th-century provenance of St. Bartholomew,
including information on sale prices and the condition of the painting.
Anne T.
Woolett of the J. Paul Getty Museum, who performed research on the painting in
preparation for the 2005 Late Religious Portraits exhibition, supports its ownership by
the 18th-century collectors, Richardson, Fauquier, and Bragge.
Peter Paul
Rubens (Flemish,
15771640)
Portrait
of a Young Man in Armor,
ca. 1620
Oil on canvas
(transferred from panel)
25 1/2 x 20
in. (64.8 x 50.8 cm)
1952:002
PROVENANCE
Probably the
painting listed as no. 129 in the posthumous inventory of Peter Paul Rubenss
estate, 1640 [1]
Mr. Alfred
Seymour
Miss Seymour
(by inheritance), by 1920
Miss Seymour,
her sale, Christies, London, January 23, 1920, lot 98, as The Duke of
Burgundy, to
Colnaghi, London [2]
Colnaghi,
London (in partnership with Horace Buttery, London, and Agnew, London) 1920 [3]
Acquired by
Leonard Gow, Glasgow, from Colnaghi (Colnaghi stock #A892) for 9000, July 31,
1920 [4]
[Duveen?] [5]
Mrs. Henry
Goldman (by inheritance), 19371952 [7]
Acquired by
the Putnam Foundation, 1952 [8]
PROVENANCE NOTES
[1] Walter Liedtke
(catalog entry for Timken Museum of Art: European Works of Art, American
Paintings and Russian Icons in the Putnam Foundation Collection [San Diego, 1996], pp. 9599, ill.) argues
against the earlier identification (London, Burlington House, Royal Academy of
Arts, 1927, Catalogue of the Loan Exhibition of Flemish and Belgian Art:
Memorial Volume, exh. cat. by Sir
Martin Conway, p. 106, no. 258) with a portrait in the collection of Vicenzo
II, 7th Duke of Mantua, at the time of his death, 1627.
[2] An annotated copy of
this auction catalog exists at the Getty Research Institute (1920 Jan. 23 LoChS;
copy 2).
[3] Per emails of March
29 and 30, 2005, from Tim Warner-Johnson of Colnaghi [copies in object file],
Agnew was a half owner of the painting at the time of the sale to Gow. It is
not known exactly when Agnew purchased this share; it may have been purchased
from Buttery.
[4] Per email of March
29, 2005, from Tim Warner-Johnson of Colnaghi.
[5] There is an
undocumented notation in the Timken files indicating possible connection with
Agnew and/or Duveen during the period prior to Henry Goldmans acquisition (by
1927). Agnews involvement may now be explained by his part ownership in 1920.
An inquiry to Colnaghi, London, has clarified details of the 192021
transactions. Apparently the painting was owned jointly by Colnaghi, Horace
Buttery, and Agnew. Agnew is listed as half owner at the time of sale to Gow.
(It is possible that Agnew bought out Butterys share; according to Colnaghi,
the entries in their ledger are partially crossed out and unclear on the
details of the shares.) Buttery was a noted London art restorer (later he
became the first appointed to care for the collections at Kenwood House).
[6] Conway, 1927, has the piece Lent by
Henry Goldman, Esq. This is probably the year of acquisition, since W. R.
Valentiner, a close art advisor to Goldman, in 1927 refers to a Meleager and
Atalanta as the Rubens in Goldmans collection (in Art News XXV, no. 32; pp. 34).
[7] McCall (New York, New
York Worlds Fair, 1939, Masterpieces of Art, Catalogue of European
Paintings and Sculpture from 1300 to 1800, exh. cat. by George Henry McCall [W. R. Valentiner, ed.], pp.
15657, no. 320. pl. 60) has the piece Lent by Mrs. Henry Goldman, New York,
as do Jan-Albert Goris and Julius S. Held (Rubens in America, [New York, 1947], p. 27, no. 9, pl. 4).
[8] Acquired
from Wildenstein.
n.b. Goldman
purchased Rembrandts St. Bartholomew now in the Timkens collection from
Duveen in 1912. An agent of Agnew had acquired it earlier that year. Both the
Rembrandt and the Rubens were acquired from Wildenstein in 1952.
Given the
documented ownership and exhibition history of the Portrait of a Young Man,
it seems clear that the painting remained in the Goldman family throughout the
World War II era, and there is no reason to doubt its provenance during that
period.
Jacob
Isaacksz. van Ruisdael
(Dutch, 1628/291682)
A View of
Haarlem and Bleaching Fields, ca. 166570
Oil on canvas
23 1/2 x 30
5/8 in. (59.7 x 77.8 cm)
Signed lower
right: JvRusdael
(JvR in monogram)
1954:002
PROVENANCE
Count Paul
Stroganoff Museum, St. Petersburg, by 1864 [1]
Stroganoff
Museum, Leningrad, 1928 [2]
Stroganoff
Collection sale, Berlin (Lepke), no. 74, ill. (DM60,000) May 1213, 1931 [3]
Professor
Kocher, Bern
Mlle Maurer,
La Tour-de-Peilz, Switzerland
Knoedler, New
York, 1954
Acquired by
the Putnam Foundation, 1954 [4]
PROVENANCE NOTES
[1] G. F.
Waagen (Die Gemldesammlung in der Kaiserlichen Eremitage zu St. Petersburg:
nebst Bemerkungen ber andere dortige Kunstsammlungen [Munich, 1846; 2nd ed. St.
Petersburg, 1870], pp. 41213); Petr Petrovich Semenov-Tian-Shanskii (tudes
sur les peintres des coles hollandaise, flamande et nerlandaise quon trouve
dans la collection Smenov [sic] et les autres collections publiques et prives de St.
Petersburg [St.
Petersburg, 1906], p. cxvi, note 2)
[2] Jakob
Rosenberg (Jacob van Ruisdael [Berlin, 1928], p. 75, no. 50)
[3] Price per
auction catalog annotation, Getty Research Institute copy.
[4] June 3,
1954
As noted by
the Art Loss Register and others, inclusion in the famous Soviet-sponsored 1931
Stroganoff sale is hardly a guarantee of Stroganoff family provenance. However,
thanks to Seymour Slive (Jacob van Ruisdael: A Complete Catalogue of his
Paintings, Drawings, and Etchings [New Haven, 2001], pp. 8990, no. 64, ill.), we can now
definitively place this painting in the Stroganoff collection from 1864 onward.
We can safely assume that it remained there until its appearance in the 1931
auction at Lepke. There is nothing to disrupt the apparent continuity of Swiss
ownership through the 1930s and 1940s.
A claim
regarding this painting, and a number of others in the Timken collection, was
presented in 2004 by an attorney representing members of the Oppenheimer
family. Although the family lost a number of works to Nazi looting, none of the
Oppenheimer paintings, which were sold in early 1935 in a Nazi-sanctioned
auction, correspond to pieces owned by the Timken.
Anonymous (Flemish, act. last quarter 15th
century) (formerly attributed to Master of Saint Lucy Legend)
Adoration
of the Magi, last
quarter 15th century
Oil on oak
panel
22 7/8 x 17
in. (58.1 x 43.2 cm)
1955:005
PROVENANCE
M. Chillingworth,
Nuremberg, sale, Galeries Fischer, Lucerne, September 5, 1922, Catalogue de
la collection Chillingworth: Tableaux anciens XIII XVII sicles, p. 9, no. 9, ill.
Albert J. Kobler, New
York
Mrs. Edward A. Westfall,
New York
Acquired by
the Putnam Foundation, 1955
Emanuel de
Witte (Dutch,
16151691/92)
Interior
of the Nieuwe Kerk, Amsterdam, 1657
Oil on canvas
34 1/2 x 40 1/2 in. (87.6 x 102.9 cm)
Signed and
dated lower right, in perspective, as though carved on the floor of the church:
E DE Witte / INV Ao 1657
1969:003
PROVENANCE
Horace-Jean-Louis
Turrettini, Geneva, ca. 1760 [1]
Sophie
(Turrettini) Perrot and Adolphe Perrot, Geneva [2]
By descent to
Mme Louis Perrot de Montmollin
From the
estate of Mme Louis Perrot de Montmollin of Geneva (sold by the heirs),
Christies, London, lot 71 (19,000; $47,900, to Clive), June 27, 1969 [3]
Edward
Speelman, London, June 27, 1969December 4, 1969 [4]
Acquired by
the Putnam Foundation, 1970 [5]
PROVENANCE NOTES
[1] Christies catalogue, Montmollin sale, June 27, 1969, names Horace Jean Louis Turre[t]tini, Geneva. It appears there are two individuals with this name, one b. 1744, the other b. 1746. The French version Turrentine, which has been used in Timken Museum publications, does not appear in listings of historic Geneva family names.
[2] Per
Christies catalogue, Montmollin sale, June 27, 1969.
[3] Price
list, Christies letterhead, inserted into auction catalog, Getty Research
Institute. Hand annotations again list the price and buyer (Clive), and also
name the Timken Gallery, San Diego. Price listed as 19,950 in communication
from Christies, May 11, 2005 [in object file]. The discrepancy probably
represents the amount of the sales commission.
[4] From
typed notes dated 4/23/02 in the Timken files. Presumably Clive was an agent
for Edward Speelman; Christies have no record of Clives identity (per
correspondence with Marijke Booth, Christies, April 2005).
[5] Acquired
from Speelman, December 4, 1969. There has been some confusion regarding the
date. Timken Museum publications list the date as Acquired by the Putnam
Foundation, 1970, despite the note above. The piece also carries a 1969
accession number, 1969:003.
Some progress
has been made in identifying the two Geneva families (Turrettini and Perrot)
with which the painting is connected. Also, the Montmollin name comes from the
Neuchatel region, where there is also a town by that name. All of these facts
contribute to support the apparent validity of continuous Swiss provenance.
A claim
regarding this painting, and a number of others in the Timken collection, was
presented in 2004 by an attorney representing members of the Oppenheimer
family. Although the family lost a number of works to Nazi looting, none of the
Oppenheimer paintings, which were sold in early 1935 in a Nazi-sanctioned
auction, correspond to pieces owned by the Timken.