Christ as Man of Sorrows

- limewood

- three vertically aligned boards with butt joints

- joints reinforced with recycled parchment

- sketchy underdrawing visible in the infrared reflectogram

- mixed media

after 1844, with stencilled Neorenaissance pattern

[Cat. Coburg 2018, no. 13, 80-83]

Sample location: 26.4 cm below the upper edge from an area where the background was painted around the Man of Sorrows

Examined under a magnification of 1000x in both incident and UV light

Histochemical (staining) tests for both protein and oil: Ponceau red S for protein and Sudan black B for oil

Scanning electron microscopy (200x)

A summary evaluation of the results can be found under: Technical examination. For more detail see [Eble 2002, 23f.].

- limewood panel consisting of three vertically aligned boards with butt joints (from the left: 20.3/20.9 cm; 14.4/14.1 cm; 12.9/11.2 cm), dimensions: 75 x 48 cm, c. 0,8 cm thick [1]

- the right-hand board is tangentially cut and exhibits two knots; the other two are radial cut boards

- planed on the reverse

- the joints are reinforced with strips of parchment on the front (in places text is visible in the x-radiograph)

- on the reverse of the panel rhombus-shaped incisions along the joints indicate the applicatioinof some form of reinforcement

- chamfered on all four sides, reducing the panel thickness to 0.7 cm at the edge (bevel at the top and bottom: 2.8 cm; right and left: 0.8 cm)

[1] identification of wood species, 17.12.2001, H. Piening, Department for the Conservation of Paintings, Nymphenburg Palace [Eble 2002, 113]

- size layer (contains some dirt, charcoal particles); histochemical (staining) test for protein

- ground application in two thin layers: 1. white and opaque in visible light.; yellowish green and crystalline in UV light; twice as thick as the second layer; 2. more transparent, strong yellow fluoresence in UV light; staining tests showed the evidence of protein in both layers; the SEM identified calcium carbonate as the fill material; the ground extends to the edge at the top and bottom of the panel (the original edges are no longer present at the left and right sides)

- imprimatura: very thin, pale yellow, semi-opaque layer

- ecomomic, linear underdrawing executed with a brush with schematic indication of details like eyes, mouth etc.; washes indicated areas of light and shadow; used for the final painted version

Paint layers: very thin, smooth and not applied in discrete layers, but rather a rationalised use of glazes. The fact that he edges were left unpainted suggests the panel was fitted in its frame during the painting process. Staining tests confirmed the presence of oil; the SEM detected calcium and lead.

The artist began by laying in the flesh paint, wet-in-wet, in part dabbed on, in part brushed and spread with the hand; grey paint was dabbed on in the area of the stomach; application method also viible in the x-radiograph. The lead white highlights were applied witha broad brush; the grey and brown glazes contain very coarse ground pigments, the detail in the head was executed with a very fine brush, a dark brown glaze was used as the base tone for the hair, single strands were applied with a fine brush in various brown tones. The pigments employed for thein the background are very coarse and were therefore not very carefully ground.

Coatingsthe original coating or varnish is still evident in the ofrm of small islands

Profile frame, presumably second half of the 19th century; softwood consisting of five separate mouldings

- three smaller decorative mouldings have been glued onto the base profile; moulding decorated with leaves (embossing filler) was attached between the two mouldings on the inside; the outer mouldings were gilded with imitation gold leaf and the patterns were stencilled with bronze in glue.

[Eble 2002, 15-21, 23-34]

• reworked in five phases and extensively overpainted

[Cat. Coburg 2018, no. 13, 80-83]

Support:

• convex warp; both joints are to a greater extent open; four splits in the boards

• in numerous places the parchment covering the joints is no longer attached to the support

• at the bottom left the edge of the panel is damaged

• both the left and right sides trimmed slightly; worm channels visible; exit holes also visible on the reverse, particularly in the bottom, left quarter and around the left joint

Paint layers:

• raised ground and paint layers, particularly in the areas covered with parchment; tenting of paint layers; the adhesion of the ground to the parchment may not be adequate

• in the areas with parchment overpaint covers the fills; the joints were also extensively and repeatedly overpainted; this has discoloured; retouched in the flesh paint where abraded or the edges of the craquele are damaged

• at least four later varnish layers can be identified; the last application (with a brush) was an AW 2 synthetic varnish, now yellowed and dirty; various natural resins are represented in the other layers including dammar, mastic and colophonium

[Eble 2002, 34, 46-51]

• conservation treatment Inga Pelludat, Bayerische Schlösserverwaltung, Munich

[Cat. Coburg 2018, no. 13, 80-83]

• discoloured old retouches were reintegrated using a pointillist technique

• a micro climate box was designed specifically for displaying the panel

[Restauro 2004]

Polyamide film was attached to the reverse of the panel as a provisional measure until the panel could undergo more comprehensive treatment.

[Eble 2002, 89]

• about 1900 treated with elemi oil

(stamp on the reverse of the panel: 'Bezeichnung No. 21/90, Restaurator Dr. Büttner-Pfänner zu Thal')

[Eble 2002, 1, 66-69]

According to [Brunner und Seelig 1990] in 1811 the court painter Johann Heinrich Krüppel was assigned the job of „auszubessern und zu restaurieren“ (repairing and restoring) the damaged works. They confirm that by 1833 he had restored 177 works.

[Eble 2002, 58]

Examination of the panel showed evidence for following treatments:

• a dovetail was inserted in the lower section on the reverse of the panel to reinforce the joint between the right and left boards; after it fell out it was replaced by a small batten, that was glued onto the reverse and fixed with two hand-forged nails

• a piece of corrugated iron was inserted into the bottom edge between the right and central boards

• two horizontal sliding bars were inserted into the reverse of the panel

• the joints were reinforced with glue, the right-hand one with animal glue and other with PVA glue.

Five stages of overpainting:

1. vanish removal, overpaint (not very soluble) and fills (white and porous) for the most part in the areas with parchment

2. fills (double layer: grey on reddish-brown, oil bound) where the parchment covers the joints.

3. partial cleaning; fills (white, aqueous material); extensively overpainted

4. small retouches, recent application of a coating of AW2 synthetic resin varnish(1960/70s?)

5. retouching in the face

Frame:

• original frame: grooved frame

• this was replaced by a second grooved frame and the panel was trimmed on both the right and left sides

3. rebate frame

4. two stamps confirm that the panel was fitted with the present frame at the end of the 19th century.

[Eble 2002, 59-66]