Mercy Seat with Princes Joachim and Wolfgang of Anhalt

DESCRIPTION

- an underdrawing is only partially visible (vase on the altarpiece, hands)

Tools/Material:

- dark, dry drawing material, stylus or dark chalk

Type/Ductus:

- relatively detailed and copied underdrawing

- delicate, fine lines

Function:

- binding for the final painted version; the lines delineate the main contours and define forms therein; scant representation of volume with hatching strokes

Deviations:

- few corrections were made to forms during the painting process

INTERPRETATION

Attribution:

- Lucas Cranach the Younger or workshop

[Sandner, Smith-Contini, Heydenreich, cda 2017]

Examination methods employed: cross-section microscopy, FTIR Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, polarized light microscopy

Summary of the results (presented in the PDF):

Sample No. 2

Description: sky without overpaint

Method: polarized light microscopy

Results: a large quantity of smalt, some azurite and malachite, charcoal among others

Sample No. 3

Description: gown/decoration

Cross-section No.: 10829

Method: microscopy: incident light; UV light

Interpretation:

11: thin coating

10: paint layer (glaze)

9: coating

8: green paint layer with relatively coarse pigment particles

7: white/grey paint (1-2 layers)

5+6: layer of binding medium (size layer or coating and gold leaf)

4: white paint layer

3: red paint layer

2: paint layer containing predominantly white pigments (ground)

1: milky-transparent layer of binding medium, in part also visible between layers 4 and 7 (consolidation material/adhesive?)

Fourth layer: white layer under the gold (in the cross-section10829):

Method: FTIR

Results: beeswax or wax-paste (indication of adhesive)

Seventh layer: grey overpaint (in the cross-section 10829)

Methods: FTIR; polarized light microscopy

Results: lead white, some gypsum, drying pigments (in part as lead soaps) predominantly lead white, lead tin yellow, iron oxide, charcoal

Sample No. 4

Description: below God the Father's head

Cross-section No.: 10830

Method: microscopy; incident light and UV light

Interpretation:

9: remnants of a white paint layer (left in the image)

8: transparent coating

7: relatively thick, white/black pigmented paint layer

6: green paint layer with relatively coarse pigment particles

5: coating

4: thin grey (?) paint layer

3: white pigmented paint layer (ground)

2: paint layer (flesh paint?)

1: remnants of a paint layer and coating

Sample No. 5

Description: sky next to the the cleaned area

Cross-section No.: 10831

Method: microscopy; incident light and UV light

Interpretation:

9: milky-transparent material (similar to the first layer in sample 3, adhesive?) 7+8: Malschichten bunt pigmentiert mit groben, dunklen blauen Pigmentanteilen

6: dark, brown/green paint layer

5: brownish coating?

4: grey (?) paint layer, lighter than 3

3: grey (?) paint layer

1+2: white and blue pigmented layer containing friable blue pigments (indication of smalt); over this a coating

Sample No. 6

Description: sky at the left beside the dove

Method: polarized light microscopy

Results: smalt, charcoal among others

[Annegret Fuhrmann, Analysis Report, Labor für Archäometrie, Hochschule für Bildende Künste, Dresden, 2014] (see also PDF)

- the canvas support consists of two large horizontal pieces sewn together and a smaller piece added to the right side of the upper piece

- it exhibits a dense weave with a thread count of 16-18 warp threads and 14 weft threads

- the original nail holes are still visible along some sections of the original tacking margin; the space between the nails ranges from 7 to 9 cm. Cusping is clearly visible along the left edge

- while the left side of the lower piece of canvas exhibits deformations caused by tension, these are only rarely present further up near the rounded top. It may therefore be concluded that the canvas was considerably cropped along both sides at the top. The format was probably changed from a rectangle to the present one with a rounded top. Both formats were used by Lucas Cranach the Younger. The lower edge exhibits only minimal deformations that stem from the last re-stretching. The striking bust representation of the donor is quite the contrary of Cranach the Younger’s usual full-length depiction of donors and suggests that the format was considerably cropped. It is conceivable that the original was a vertical rectangle and that the canvas consisted of three horizontal pieces the lowest of which is now lost.

- the ground contains a white pigment, probably chalk bound in glue

The original painting was of higher quality and subtler execution and an impression is only approximately retained in the figure of the donor. The ground and paint layer are thin and the application is smooth, leaving the texture of the canvas visible. Impasto can be found in the white highlights (hair, lace) and decoration (crown). The blue sky is an admixture predominantly of smalt with some azurite and malachite with charcoal. The binding medium was probably oil. The original colours are obscured by the overpaint. In the cleaned areas of god's coat and the angel's wings a deep red and a dark green (copper green) are visible. Glazes may have been used. Remnants of a gold leaf application have been preserved on the angel's wings and along the God the Father's hem. Gilding is also present on the donor's medals, and Joachim's fastener or armband, where a red glaze and yellow highlights were then applied.

The original frame has not been preserved and nothing is known about its original appearance. If the original were a vertical format then an architectural frame with a console, similar to that decorating panel in the church depicting 'The Baptism of Christ' may have been used. As a retabel it would have had a simpler frame. In the description of the 'sarchophagus painting' a gilded frame is mentioned.

Support:

The original tacking margin has not been preserved. The canvas has been cropped by c. 4 to 8 cm. The marouflaged canvas support is in a stable condition, but has lost the original function and characteristics of a canvas. Before treatment in 1956 the canvas exhibited extensive deformations, numerous branched tears as well as large losses, particularly in the region of the portraits. Folds in the free-hanging canvas have caused extensive paint loss. The canvas was attached to the hardboard with the tears in this position. The numerous losses have been filled with inserts that are just glued to the auxiliary support but are not attached to the original canvas. The inserts exhibit the same texture as the original, but many do not fit exactly, creating gaps between the insert and the original canvas. These gaps have in part been filled with the wax-resin adhesive or reveal the hardboard. In some cases the thread direction is incorrect e. g. in the left sitter's face an insert was attached with the thread running diagonally. At the edge of the painting the open seam was just stuck down.

Ground / Paint layers:

• Dirt:

Due to the painting's general dirtily appearance the painting seems rather matt. It is particularly dirty at the centre. There are dark brown, matt (probably) soot- or foxing patches, drips of adhesive at the right, and drips of varnish near the pot. A chalked mark is visible on the curtain. There are traces of retouching paint on the cross and the donor's robe (flesh paint /green, red).

• Damages:

The depiction of 'The Eucharist' exhibits an extensive fine network of cracks, with cupping in the areas of the cross, the book, the background and the tablecloth. There are many small losses that go down to the original ground and also include the original paint. No flaking was observed. The paint layers are impregnated with the wax-resin adhesive and appear to be in a stable condition.

Original Paint Layers:

The original paint layers - with the exception of the donor and cleaned areas - are obscured by overpaint. It is not known to what extent the original paint has been preserved beneath the reworking. Intact as well as very damaged areas of original paint can be observed where there are losses in the upper paint layers. The original paint layers are only preserved in fragments where they have been uncovered. Coherent painted zones exist in the red, green, yellow and white paint like for example God the Father's coat, the wings of the angel and the dove. Whereas where uncovered the paint layers of the sky as well as the flesh paint of the angel, Christ and God the Father reveal only a few small coherent painted sections.

In the uncovered sections at the top of the painting it is difficult to assess the extent and the position of the original paint layers. The heads and the background were reconstructed over the fragmentary remnants of original paint, probably overpainting original. The crown, the dove and the half visible angel as well as the aureole framing God the Father and the blue sky around the angel require little retouching.

Abraded areas with exposed canvas are visible in losses, in the uncovered sections as well as in the donors. Glazes and gilding have almost completely disappeared (during the cleaning and maroflaging). The donors were not overpainted. There are some older retouches. The tears and losses have caused large paint losses in the faces. Joachim's eyes and Wolfgang's beard are particularly affected. Remnants of overpaint are visible in the uncovered areas (green of robe - grey remnants/ red robe - green and grey remnants)

[Condition Report, Silke Hönig, Nov. 2014]

Conservation Treatment:

Auxiliary Support:

• the stabilizing hardboard was removed from the reverse of the painting

• a new frame was to be made for the painting that would accommodated its present format, therefore the top of the auxiliary support was rounded from the height of about 50 cm. This caused an overhang of c. 1 to 2 cm.

• at the top edge the missing section was reconstructed with material from the removed panel: the sections were butt-joined and a wooden veneer (2 cm thick) was adhered to the reverse (with PVAC glue (Ponal)) as carpenters glue would not have provided the required stability considering the relatively small area of adhesion.

• the canvas was attached by reactivating (with heat/iron) what wax-resin adhesive was left, and where necessary new wax was added.

• an 8 mm plywood board was fitted in the new frame to provide addition support for the painting. It was then fixed in the frame with wooden battens that were screwed into the frame. The rebate was lined with polyester felt to cushion the contact surface.

Surface cleaning:

• the reverse was surface cleaned with a Hoover

• surface cleaning of the paint layers (slightly damp cloth/sponge or swab)

• removal of the dark dirty incrustations in the beige background of 'The Last Supper' was done mechanically with a scalpel, and the area was then cleaned with slightly damp swab.

• mechanical removal (scalpel) of a glossy varnish drip as well as crusty spots and displaced paint flakes (from the maroflage)

• removal of partial incrustations of dirt on the green curtain: repeatedly softened with a moisture treatment and then removed in discrete layers with drying periods in between

After the surface cleaning a whitish film was evident in some areas and was probably caused by remnants of a surface coating or varnish that has begun to degrade.

• regeneration of these areas by rolling an acetone swab over them once

Removal of the remnants of overpaint from the uncovered lower section of God the Father's coat

• softened with acetic acid (25%ig) (following the method recorded in the examination report from 1959 to 1965), subsequently mechanically removed with a scalpel, repeated treatment of an area with drying periods in between; in some sections DMSO achieved the same degree of softness

The removal was very laborious and time consuming, particularly in areas where the original paint layers beneath the overpaint are very damaged. Here, because the original was so damage the adhesion of the overpaint to the support is much greater.

The dark green final glaze belonging to the overpaint was removed first and then the compact grey layer.

Restoration Treatment:

Filling of losses in the paint layers

Only the large, obtrusive losses around the tears and holes were to be filled. In the sections where inserts were already present the fill material was to be applied like a ground, exploiting the canvas beneath to achieve the desired surface texture.

• first the two inserts with incorrect thread counts were replaced

• the losses were sized with rabbit skin glue (70:1000)

• deeper losses were filled with a chalk paste (champagne chalk/animal skin glue 70:1000, pigmented slightly with yellow)

• the shallow losses were filled with a liquid chalk ground (champagne chalk/animal skin glue 70:1000, pigmented slightly with yellow)

• finally the surface was wet sanded flush with the surrounding area

• an isolating layer of shellac was applied to the fills

Retouching:

Concept:

The extent and the type of retouching as well as the use of different media were decided in situ on the 28.04.2015 together with Fr. Dr. Danz and Herrn Pfarrer Lindemann (representing the owner). The retouches were generally to be glazed, and in the area of the curtain an aqua-sporca method was to be employed. It thus remains possible to recognize the fragmentary and damaged state of the painting, while achieving the optical reintegration of isolated areas. Losses in the overpainted sections of the curtain where original paint is visible were not to be retouched.

Method and execution:

• 'The Eucharist' (Overpaint, Beck 1853): water colours, in the pale background, mixed with white tempera paint to achieve the pale tones

• green curtain: lean Mussini-oil/resin paint with oil of turpentine as diluent, gloss adjusted with dammar in turpentine (1:8)

• the figures of Wolfgang and Joachim (preserved original paint): application of a thin dammar varnish (1:8) to saturate the predominantly dark area; retouched with Mussini-oil/resin paints using turpentine as a diluent

• the uncovered original sections (red coat, background): lean Mussini- oil/resin paint using turpentine as a diluent; the gloss was adjusted with dammar in turpentine (1:8)

Once the painting was framed it became apparent that a strip of the backboard (c. max. 2 cm in width) was exposed at the left and right sides where the rounded top begins. This area was also retouched with lean Mussini-oil/resin using turpentine as a diluent.

Conclusion:

An optical reintegration of the disfiguring sections was achieved. However as already suggested by Frau S. Hönig in her Conservation concept it would be helpful for the viewer (particularly for the final display situation in the St. Bartholomäi-Kirche) if a explanatory text were available. The painting has a documentary character and exemplary historical validity due to its present condition.

New insight with regards the history of the object:

[...]

The overpaint on the Holy Trinity:

In the second half of this chapter written sources are listed that indirectly suggest a change in the painting's appearance:

1. 1596 - the painting of the Holy Trinity was eliminated and replaced by a cloud

2. 1662 - the baptism of Christ should be removed or concealed

3. 1699 - the sarcophagus painting was touched up and recorded in the town chronicle of 1758-1823 as being among the paintings located there

The period between 1596 and 1699 can be considered as the possible time span in which the Holy Trinity was overpainted. However the ageing and condition of the paint layers as well as the observations made during the removal of areas of overpaint do not allow a more precise dating, as no significant changes occurred in painting techniques during that period. The degree of ageing is typical for both the 16th and 17th centuries. It can however be excluded that a cloud was painted beneath the overpainted curtain. Removal of remnants of overpaint at the right beside the figure of Wolfgang began with a final dark green glaze. The layer beneath this revealed an arrangement of folds executed in white and grey. This undermodelling would have been completed with the application of the afore mentioned glaze and would have shimmered through (as can be observed in other areas of the painting). It is a very compact layer and was applied directly over the original paint surface.

The overpaint on the Eucharist:

It is certain that the painting was reworked in 1853 by the court painter Beck. The depiction of 'The Eucharist' attributed to him was executed on a pale, relatively thick isolating ground that was applied to the area between the two sides of the curtain and the donor figures before it was reworked. The paint application here is quite different from the rest of the picture; the surface appears more matt and was probably executed employing a certain amount of tempera medium (during the surfacing cleaning it appeared sensitive to moisture). Along cracks and in areas where the paint layers have separated the underlying dark curtain is visible. Cleaned areas mentioned by Beck were not found, but are (if they were present) covered by the ground layer. My observations here correspond with those of Frau Hönig.

Observations concerning the cleaned area at the bottom:

Dark shadows could be discerned in the exposed zone along the lower edge beneath 'The Eucharist' by Beck after surface cleaning. These could not be reconciled with the representation of Christ's foot now visible. They may represent shadows caused by the binding medium of another paint layer. However this phenomenon cannot be determined with absolute certainty.

[Conservation Treatment Report, Grit Jehmlich Juni 2014]

Between 1959 and 1965 the painting was treated in the studio of the former Institut für Denkmalpflege Halle. The painting was very dirty and exhibited extensive deformations. The faces of the dukes were compromised by large losses in the canvas and the paint layers. The painting was examined and a conservation treatment was carried out. Surface dirt was removed from the painting. The lining and painted areas in the corners was removed. Due to the extensive damage it was decides to maroflage the painting onto a hardboard auxiliary support. The adhesive chosen for both this transfer and the consolidation of the paint layers was a wax-resin mixture (wax + rosin + venetian turpentine).Where larger areas of canvas were missing inserts with similar surface textures were fixed in place.

X-radiography was employed to establish what was depicted beneath the overpaint. The results suggested that the underlying paint layers were in good condition and lead to the decision to remove the overpaint. This was begun at the left side, then tests were done at the bottom and finally the overpaint was removed from the upper section. Various solvents were tested and diluted acetic acid was selected as most suitable. In the lower and upper sections the solvent was used to soften the layers of overpaint and then it was removed with a scalpel under the microscope. From the beginning the removal prompted a very controversial discussion. The removal was then abandoned in 1965 because of the fragmentary state of the original paint. The upper section was then reconstructed (a wax/chalk ground over losses, watercolours, two coats of Mastic/turpentine 1:3, mussini-oil paints), however the original sections in this area are still difficult to decipher.

[Examination Report, Silke Hönig, Nov. 2014]

The last reworking of the painting by the Dessau court painter Beck in 1853 is recorded in the sources. The following interventions had probably already been made: the top of the painting had been rounded, the bottom had been cropped, to conserve it the painting had been lined on a rectangular canvas,, re-stretched and the corners of the lining had been decorated with neo gothic tracery to complement the curtain drapery. Beck painted the 'The Eucharist' at the centre of the image and reworked the curtain with glazes. Beck also attempted to uncover the original paint, but according to the sources was unsuccessful.

[Examination Report, Silke Hönig, Nov. 2014]