Male Portrait

- an examination of the wood species was not carried out (probably limewood)

- the support consists of 5 boards of varying widths with vertical grain and glued butt-joints;

viewed from the recto from left to right the widths of the boards measure: Board I 11.0 (t.) 14.2 (b.)cm, board II 14.9 (t.) 11.2 (b.) cm, board III 11.7 (t.) 12.6 (b.) cm, board IV 10.4 (t.) 11.6 (b.) cm, board V 14.8 (t.) 13.1 (b.) cm

- the joins have not been visibly reinforced

- the original surface on the reverse of the panel has not been preserved. The panel was thinned to a thickness of 0.6 cm (toothed plane) and cradled, probably in the 19th century.

- There is a narrow addition along the left edge, in both bottom corners there are wedge-shaped inserts. There are battens set into the reverse of the panel, which extending across the its entire width along the top, the bottom and the centre. These end flush with the surface of the panel.

Historical inventory entries and photographs document an earlier enlargement of the format with additions on the left and top edges, which was removed in 1924. [see Fig. 8 in: Hoppe-Harnoncourt, A., The Restoration of Paintings at the Beginning of the Nineteenth Century in the Imperial Gallery, in: CeROArt, Hors series La restauration des oeuvres d’art en Europe entre 1789 et 1815: pratiques, transferts, enjeux, 2012. (URL : http://ceroart.revues.org/2336)].

- the present format should be almost that of the original and is more or less the same size as that of the female pendant (AT_KHM_GG886_FR430). It may be presumed that the edges were trimmed marginally, probably least along the lower edge, as here a narrow strip of the unpainted edge has been preserved.

- white ground

- analysis was not carried out, probably a glue bound calcium carbonate

- the ground application extends to the edge of the panel on the sides and the top. Only the bottom edge exhibits a narrow strip where the wood is still visible (now partially overpainted).

The underdrawing indicates primarily the facial features like the eyebrows, the bridge of the nose and single hairs from the beard.

The short, jagged freehand, sometimes repeated lines were executed in a dry medium. The dotted course of some lines results from the surface structure of the ground and is characteristic for a dry drawing material. The shadow on the right eye was indicated with sparse parallel hatching-strokes. The position of the right ear was shifted down slightly. The underdrawing was to a greater extent adhered to in the painting process. The fine lines of the underdawing in the face are also visible to the naked eye.

(see Fig. AT_KHM_GG885_FR429_2008-03-02_Photomicrograph-M6x-009)

The flesh paint was laid in at an early stage of the painting process, followed by the execution of the clothes. Then the figure was overlapped with the paint from the background. This is visible in the x-radiograph in the form of bold brushstrokes which frame the figure. Details like the fringed contour of the beret and the collar were painted over the background.

In some places there is an alternating and marginal overlap of the figure and the background and there are additional minor corrections to the contours. The cast-shadow was held in reserve when the background was painted and then executed with a thin paint application of streaky brushstrokes. The transition to the background paint was blended by painting wet-in-wet.

The x-radiograph shows that the flesh paint in the area of the forehead is more generously laid in and was subsequently covered by the black paint of the beret. The modelling followed with prominent highlights containing lead white. In the flesh paint it is apparent, that his coloring with the reddish, pink areas is substantially warmer than that of the female pendant (AT_KHM_GG886_FR430). Highlights and modelling were applied not only in white but also in a cool pink tone, shadows followed in brown and red tones. The paint application of the pattern on the handkerchief was executed wet-in-wet, likewise the hair of the beard was applied over the wet paint of the lace collar. The white of the lace cuffs was applied in an impasto manner over the black and partially blended with a dry brush while still wet.

A particular feature can be observed in the area of the hands where a dark line runs along the back of the hand. This line appears to be drawn less as a final contour, but rather as an indication of the extent to which the flesh paint should be covered by the background paint. (see fig. AT_KHM_GG885_FR429_2008-03-02_Photomicrograph-M6x-017).

- not original

[Translation, Smith, cda 2013]

DESCRIPTION

[Interpretation made on the basis of details]

Tools/Material:

- dry drawing material, black chalk, or stylus

Type/Ductus:

- freehand underdrawing

- delicate, fine lines; partially reinforced

Function:

- relatively binding for the final painted version; the lines define the main contours, describe essential details and facial features; hatching- strokes define the areas of shadow on the nose, the right eye and the right cheek

Deviations:

- minor adjustments were made to forms during the painting process; small changes (e. g. the position of the right ear)

INTERPRETATION

Attribution:

- Lucas Cranach the Younger

[Sandner, Smith-Contini, Heydenreich, cda 2016]

Support:

• the panel was thinned to a thickness of 0.6 cm, inserts were attached in numerous places and it was cradled (see support). It is not documented when this treatment occurred. Additions, which enlarged the size of the panel, were removed in 1924 and are documented in the historical photographs and the inventory entries. The panel has been trimmed marginally on all four sides.

The panel exhibits a minimal amount of old woodworm damage, which is most concentrated along the left edge and the lower third of the panel and is visible at the side in the end-grain wood as well as on the reverse.

Paint Layers:

• the curtain in the upper right corner is a later, not documented, addition; the x-radiograph reveals the representation of a coat-of-arms, which is original (see Interpretation/History/Discussion). The panel was in a frame when the coat-of-arms was overpainted as the paint does not extend to the edge of the panel. The paint layer of the curtain exhibits strong x-ray absorption and probably contains lead white or lead tin yellow. The inventory number '333' from 1772 in the bottom right corner, which was later overpainted, is also clearly visible in the x-radiograph.

The colour of the batten attached to the left edge of the panel was adjusted and the paint layer slightly overlaps the original paint. In the flesh paint there are small isolated discoloured retouches; further retouches are located along the joins.

There is a fine network of drying cracks predominantly in the dark paint areas. Numerous tiny roundish paint losses can be observed mainly in the flesh paint; further losses are located along the edges of the painting.

[Monika Strolz, Ute Tüchler, Kunsthistorisches Museum, revised 2012]

[Translation, Smith, cda 2013]

Galerieakt Z. 14/1952: rest.[auriert]

[Kunsthistorisches Museum, revised 2012]

[Translation, Smith, cda 2013]

Restaurierbuch 1, 1924/Nr. 373:

additions removed from the top, varnish removal [sic: indeed the addition on the left side must also have been removed at this time]

[Kunsthistorisches Museum, revised 2012]

[Translation, Smith, cda 2013]