Venus

Venus

Title

Venus

[http://www.colnaghi.co.uk/venus-0; accessed 10.02.2015]

Painting on oak wood

Medium

Painting on oak wood

[Princely Collections, revised 2014]

The panel depicts the Goddess Venus as a naked full-length figure against a dark background, which emphasizes the rosy hue of the flesh paint. Venus wears her hair loose, an elaborately decorated neck band and holds a transparent veil in front of her body underlining her nakedness rather than concealing

The panel depicts the Goddess Venus as a naked full-length figure against a dark background, which emphasizes the rosy hue of the flesh paint. Venus wears her hair loose, an elaborately decorated neck band and holds a transparent veil in front of her body underlining her nakedness rather than concealing it. Specific features of the Goddess' pose are the frontal presentation of her left leg and the position of the right leg behind, parallel to the picture plane, causing the torso to twist to the left.

[Görres, cda 2015]

Attributions
imitation of Lucas Cranach the Elder
Lucas Cranach the Elder

Attributions

imitation of Lucas Cranach the Elder

[cda 2016]

Lucas Cranach the Elder

[http://www.colnaghi.co.uk/venus-0; accessed 10.02.2015]

Production date
after 1560

Production date

after 1560

[1531 dated, not original, imitation of younger date]

Dimensions
Dimensions of support: 39.5 x 24.6 cm

Dimensions

  • Dimensions of support: 39.5 x 24.6 cm

  • [Katherine Ara, examination report Jan. 2013]

  • 38.7 x 24.5 cm

  • [http://www.colnaghi.co.uk/venus 0; accessed 10.02.2015]

Signature / Dating

Signed lower left with the winged serpent monogram and dated 1531.

Signature / Dating

  • Signed lower left with the winged serpent monogram and dated 1531.

  • [not authentic, cda 2016]

Owner
Liechtenstein. The Princely Collections, Vaduz-Vienna
Repository
Liechtenstein. The Princely Collections, Vaduz-Vienna
Location
Vienna
CDA ID
AT_PCLW_GE2497
FR (1978) Nr.
FR-none
Persistent Link
https://lucascranach.org/en/AT_PCLW_GE2497/

Provenance

  • Private Collection, Belgium, since the mid-nineteenth century
    [http://www.colnaghi.co.uk/venus 0; accessed 10.02.2015]
    [Information not validated by cda]
  • 2013 acquired by H.S.H. Prince Hans-Adam II. von und zu Liechtenstein for the Princely Collections, Vaduz - Vienna
    [http://www.colnaghi.co.uk/venus-0; accessed 10.02.2015]

Research History / Discussion

Excerpt of the Colnaghi description (2014):

[...]

A classical goddess, whose beautifully modelled figure shows the influence on Cranach of Italian Renaissance paintings and classical sculpture, our Venus, standing on a curved rocky platform suggestive of a lunar landscape, also belongs to an older and more local German medieval tradition of planetary deities. Cranach's earliest depictions of Venus and among his first essays in the treatment of the female nude, are the large-scale painted Venus and Cupid of 1509 in Vienna and a woodcut of the same subject, which bears the date 1506, but which most scholars now believe was also executed around 1509. In both cases the figure of Venus was clearly influenced by Dürer's famous engraving of Adam and Eve and, via Dürer, from classical prototypes such as The Capitoline Venus. The anatomy of the goddess, broad-hipped, rounded and full-breasted, is ultimately Roman in derivation and very different from the petite small-breasted nudes of Cranach's later career. The Vienna Venus, the first life-sized painting of the goddess in northern art, is the nearest Cranach gets to replicating the conventions of the classical nude and both her anatomy and certain stylistic traits may, as Kenneth Clark suggested,[17] show first-hand acquaintance with Italian Renaissance prototypes. The black background, for example, which provides such an effective foil to the nude (an idea to which Cranach returned in the Frankfurt and Colnaghi Venuses) might well derive from paintings from the Botticelli workshop such as the Venus in Berlin, or from examples by Lorenzo Costa or Lorenzo di Credi, both of whom adopted this motif to lend a sculptural quality to their painted nudes; the sfumato and subtle play of light over her body, obviously depend ultimately on Leonardo.[18] But even at this early date,[19] the proportions of the body of the Vienna Venus do not conform as closely as Dürer's Eve to the Vitruvian canon, and the figure's swollen belly and rather elongated torso, hark back to North-European medieval traditions of the nude and probably reflect the impact of Cranach's trip to the Netherlands in 1508, where he would have had the opportunity to see earlier paintings of the nude by Memling and the contemporary, eroticized and depictions of Adam and Eve by Jan Gossaert, which Clark found 'curiously indecent.'[20] Also redolent of these earlier northern traditions are the clouds which surround Venus in Cranach's contemporary woodcut, which allude to her role as an astrological planetary deity. The print shows Venus trying unsuccessfully to cover her pudendum with a veil which is being whipped away by the wind, while restraining the young Cupid from drawing his bow - an iconography which presents the male viewer with a rather mixed message at once enticingly erotic and sternly admonitory. Similar mixed messages are conveyed by the painted Venus and Cupid in Vienna, where the alluring image of the goddess of love, serenely restraining her "trigger-happy" son, is accompanied by moralizing Latin verses warning the [presumably male] viewer of the consequences of physical passion: 'Drive out the excesses of Cupid with all your strength so that Venus may not possess your blind heart.'[21] Clearly nudity was perfectly acceptable in Wittenberg, provided it was packaged with a suitably moralizing epithet or legitimized through a classical or biblical text.

[...]

[17] K. Clark, The Nude, 1956, p. 319. pp. 17-18.

[18] Possibly via one of the many copies of the now-lost Leda.

[19] For the clearest exposition of the differences between the proportions of classical/Mediterranean female nudes, comparing the Cnidian Venus with Memling's Venus in Vienna (see Clark, op. cit., pp.17-18).

[20] Op. cit., p. 320.

[21] The original inscription reads: 'PELLE CUPIDINEOS TOTO CONANIME LUXUS/NE TUA POSSIDEAT PECTORA CECA VENUS'.

[http://www.colnaghi.co.uk/venus-0; accessed 10.02.2015]

Courtesy of the Princely Collection Liechtenstein, who also kindly provided a high resolution image, the painting 'Venus' as well as another works from the Liechtenstein collection was published online by the Cranach Digital Archive on the 03.03.2015 in the research database together with c. 100 other works. The cda documented the available attributions and the provenance provided by Colnaghi and clearly cited the source of this information. Verification of the accuracy of the information was not carried out by the cda. After the painting was confiscated in Paris the entry in the cda was amended accordingly on the 07.03.2016 to express the new doubt surrounding the attribution and to make it clear that the cda-team had not yet vetted the provenance of the painting. In consultation with the Princely Collection Liechtenstein it was decided to remove the entry from the database on the 08.03.2016 until the 23.05.2016 in order to verify the information on the painting.

In recent years the Cranach Digital Archive team has examined over 1000 paintings in cooperation with numerous partner institutions using modern physical analytical methods and has successfully identified some later copies and forgeries. In a letter from the 08.02.2013 Prof. Dr. Dieter Koepplin, a founding member of the cda, recommended a thorough examination of the painting 'Venus' be carried out by Prof. Dr. Gunnar Heydenreich. In an e-mail from the 13.02.2013 Dr. Bodo Brinkmann also advised that the painting should be examined by Heydenreich. A request for such an examination has not yet been received.

In 2012/2013 the painting was examined and documented by Libby Sheldon, London and Katherine Ara, London. The following methods of examination were employed: analysis of 10 paint samples, which comprised of the preparation of cross-sections and elemental analysis (SEM/EDX), polarized light microscopy; infrared reflectography, x-radiography (Courtauld Institute of Art), inspection under UV-light and stereomicroscopy.

In their conclusions both reports express certain doubts regarding the authenticity of the painting and recommend further more extensive examination.

On the 25.04.2016 the Cranach Digital Archive team consulted the examination reports from December 2012 (F2271) and January 2013, by kind permission of Vincent Noce, Katherina Ara and Libby Sheldon and as such could compare the results with findings on verified works from the Cranach workshop.

After studying these reports and subjecting the results to a comparative evaluation we consider the painting 'Venus' to be an imitation of a Cranach painting, because

  1. The pigments detected using modern physical analytical methods differ considerably from the pigments that were commonly employed in the Cranach workshop

  2. The layer structure does not correspond with the characteristic practice of the Wittenberg workshop

  3. Stylistic differences and variation in quality are evident when compared with verified works by Cranach and his workshop members

  4. The condition is quite different from naturally aged Cranach paintings.

Below are some specific examples:

  • The construction of the wooden panel does not correspond with the characteristic practice documented by the supports of other paintings by Cranach. However, it cannot be excluded that the paint layers were transferred to a new support.

  • The underdrawing differs considerable from that usually found on works by Cranach (IRR)

  • The colour of the imprimatura is not the same as that generally found on verified works by Cranach and his workshop

  • No lead-tin-yellow was identified in the yellow paint (EDX)

  • Titanium white was detected in a paint sample taken from the pearl necklace. However, retouching paint cannot be precluded here (EDX)

  • Several pigments are of a different particle size and shape to those generally detected on verified works by Cranach (SEM)

  • Two pigment admixtures appear to be rather unusual when compared with other works by Cranach

  • The technique employed to apply paint and to work up details (hair, eyes, etc.) is different from the usual method practiced in the Cranach workshop (x-radiography, stereomicroscopy, examination)

  • The form of the signature and date and their multi-layered application do not correspond with the usual workshop practice.

  • The crack pattern differs from that normally found on paintings by Cranach and his workshop and also exhibits certain irregularities in relation to the structural support

  • The type of damage evident on the painting is quite distinct

Gunnar Heydenreich, cda 23 May 2016

  • Venus, after 1560

Images

Compare images

Technical studies

No examination by cda

Conservation History

Date2013 - 2014

Conservation treatment 2013-2014

Citing from the Cranach Digital Archive

Entry with author
<author's name>, 'Venus', <title of document, data entry or image>. [<Date of document or image>], in: Cranach Digital Archive, https://lucascranach.org/en/AT_PCLW_GE2497/ (Accessed {{dateAccessed}})
Entry with no author
'Venus', <title of document, data entry or image>. [<Date of document, entry or image>], in: Cranach Digital Archive, https://lucascranach.org/en/AT_PCLW_GE2497/ (Accessed {{dateAccessed}})

Help us to improve the Cranach Digital Archive.

Please contact us, if you have noticed a mistake.