Portrait of Joachim I. Nestor, Elector of Brandenburg

- 3 planks

- most recent annual ring: 1527, the earliest possible date that the painting could have been created (allowing for 2 years seasoning) is 1529

- examined on the 17.06.2010

[Martin Schawe, Alte Pinakothek München, 01.04.2011]

DESCRIPTION

Tools/Materials:

- fluid, black medium and brush

Type/Ductus:

- probably thin traced lines, barely visible

Function:

- binding for the final painted version; lines delineate contours and describe the essential details and the facial features; no representation of volume

Deviations:

- minor alterations made during the painting process to clearly define form

INTERPRETATION

Attribution:

- not possible

[Smith, Sandner, Heydenreich, cda 2013]

Cross-section examination:

Sample Nos. 1a and 1b

Sample location: t/r 57.0/1.5 cm

Brief description of paint: blue background

Description of 1b:

A: white ground

B: isolating layer with a strong fluorescence containing black pigment particles (charcoal?)

C: blue layer: admixture of blue pigment particles (azurite) and white

D: thin, fluorescing glaze or possibly varnish

E: thin, dark layer with no fluorescence; could be a layer of dirt

F: dark brown layer, fluorescing strongly with large lead white aggregates

Description of 1a:

A: dark brown layer, fluorescing strongly with large lead white aggregates (the same as F for 1b)

B: dark brown layer, fluorescence, containing large lead white aggregates

(A and B are only visible as discrete layers in UV light)

C: blue layer with glassy splinters of smalt embedded in lead white

D: varnish layer, fluorescing

Comments:

It was not possible to extract a sample containing all layers because the overpaint separated from the underlying original paint when the sample was taken.

At later stage a layer of brown paint was applied over the original the background that contains azurite [1] and then overpainted with smalt [2]

[1] Confirmed by the layer of dirt; however a more precise dating is not possible

[2] Smalt was in common use in the 16th and particularly 17th century, by the 18th century it was rarely used.