A Prince of Saxony

The painting is executed on a single piece of linden that was cut tangentially.[1]

[1] The wood was identified as linden (sp. Tilia) by Peter Klein, examination report, 29 September 1987, in NGA curatorial files.

[http://www.nga.gov/fcgi-bin/tinfo_f?object=33750&detail=tech] (accessed 11.02.2013)

- original barb along the top and bottom edges [discovered during conservation treatment - comment cda 2013]

[After Treatment Report, National Gallery of Art, Washington 2007]

See also attached pdf [forthcoming]

- near the upper edge of the painting at 0.7 cm (1/4”) from the edge, is a fine light brownish horizontal line with some gold leaf residue parallel to the edge. This line could possibly be related to the original frame or a mordant from a now lost decoration. [discovered during conservation treatment - comment cda 2013]

[After Treatment Report, National Gallery of Washington 2007]

See also attached pdf [forthcoming]

Some pigments were identified using polarized light microscopy (PLM). [1] The orange fills on both paintings were identified as red lead with circa ten percent lead white addition. The black backgrounds were made with carbon black (bone black?). The mid-tone in the prince’ sleeve consists of vermillion and lead white. The same pigment mixture was found in the decoration on top of this layer. This is in contrast to the decoration on the sleeve of the princess painting, which is built up with vermillion mixed with lead-tin-yellow and some carbon black (bone black?). The ground tone for her sleeve consists of vermillion with a five to ten percent lead white addition. On top of this layer is a red glaze mixed with some carbon black (bone black?).

[1] Both paintings were sampled on 07.12.2006 and then mounted. See the conservation files for the location of the samples.

[After Treatment Report, National Gallery of Art, Washington 2007]

See also attached pdf [forthcoming]

Both paintings were examined using infrared refectography (IRR) [1]. The prince painting shows some very faint lines in his right hand and incised lines are visible with the unaided eye in his right sleeve.

[1] Both paintings were examined with FLIR/Indigo Alpha VisGaAs camera with H filter 0.5-1.7 microns (50 mm lens) on July 13th 2006 and the prince painting was re-examined August 24th 2006.

[After Treatment Report, National Gallery of Art, Washington 2007]

See also attached pdf [forthcoming]

The painting is executed on a single piece of linden that was cut tangentially.[1]

[1] The wood was identified as linden (sp. Tilia) by Peter Klein, examination report, 29 September 1987, in NGA curatorial files.

[http://www.nga.gov/fcgi-bin/tinfo_f?object=33750&detail=tech] (accessed 11.02.2013)

The panel is made from a single piece of linden. Scientific analysis has confirmed the identity of this wood. Although dendrochronologic dating was attempted by Dr. Peter Klein, there is no master chronology for Linden wood.

[Examination report, National Gallery of Art, Washington 1989]

See also attached pdf [forthcoming]

The painting is executed on a thin white ground.

[Examination report, National Gallery of Art, Washington 1989]

See also attached pdf [forthcoming]

The shirt was built up first with an opaque layer of brown; the shadows were added with transparent dark brown shades and the decoration was placed on top with opaque dabs. The flesh tones were painted with transparent layers of colour utilizing the brightness of the ground to provide depth. The red sleeves have a bright orange underlayer over which the shadows were added in dark, transparent colours. The decorations were added on top with salmon coloured paint and the whole red area was glazed again to give a softer look to the decoration. The brown cape has the same brown underlayer as the shirt, but it is glazed over several times to add depth and modeling.

[Examination report, National Gallery of Art, Washington 1989]

See also attached pdf [forthcoming]

- x-rayed in November 1946

[After Treatment Report, National Gallery of Art, Washington 2007]

See also attached pdf [forthcoming]

This summarized report should be viewed in conjunction with the report from 1989.

The cradle has six fixed vertical members and four moveable horizontal bars. The horizontal bar at the bottom of the piece does not move, and is probably held in place with paint. The entire back of the painting and cradle is painted first with a metallic layer, possibly a moisture barrier, and then a black layer over top of that. The panel is approximately a quarter of an inch thick and has been visibly planed down. Woodworm channels are visible on the back of the panel.

The paint layer appears to be in decent condition regarding the figure. The background is visually obscured and it is difficult to tell what condition it may be in. There is a distinct ridge to the prince's left between his hair and the black background. The background appears a milkier, slightly lighter, more opaque black than the more greenish hue seen between the painted strands of hair. It is possible that the background is overpainted or covered by a pigmented varnish. The varnish is very thick in this area, and there are deep cracks throughout which do not follow the grain of the wood and look like traction cracks, but appear to only be in the varnish layer. The black background fluoresces darker in ultraviolet (UV) light than the greenish tint of the sitter. The background fluorescence matches the retouching in a crack down the right side of the sitter's face. The strange background appearance may be an indication of problems regarding the paint film, such as abrasion.

The overall appearance of the varnish is a cloudy wiped surface with some glossy spots scattered throughout. It is also very thick and under microscopic examination appears to be slightly reticulated. It is possible that there are multiple varnish layers due to the difference in fluorescence between the portrait and the background.

Treatment Recommendations:

• sampling and analysis to aid treatment and understanding in background black area

• remove discoloured and disfiguring varnish and inpainting

• consolidation of loose paint

• check structural condition of panel

• apply isolating varnish, inpaint losses, apply final varnish

[Examination Report and Treatment Proposal, National Gallery of Art, Washington 2005]

See also attached pdf [forthcoming]

Support:

Additional wooden strips approximately 1 cm wide have been attached to the left and right edges and retouched to match the adjoining paint. The reverse, including the cradle, has been coated with a paint, possibly containing lead, that is absolutely opaque to x-radiography.

Paint Layers:

The painting is in good condition. The contour lines around the face have been strengthened, and the paint is thin in the face and in areas of shadow beneath the chin. The shadows in the robe have been reinforced.

[http://www.nga.gov/fcgi-bin/tinfo_f?object=33750&detail=tech] (accessed 11.02.2013)

The condition of the painting is reasonably good. [...]

Besides the panel on which the original painting was applied, there are additional borders attached to the left and right edges which are approximately 1 cm. wide. These are retouched to match the surrounding paint. On the reverse of the painting a cradle has been applied; it consists of five fixed vertical members and four sliding horizontal members. The wood on the cradle and the reverse of the painting are painted over with a paint which is absolutely opaque to x-rays; it is possible that this is a lead paint. Because of the presence of this coating, the x-radiographs show no image. [...]

The support appears stable but the inability to see into the structure of the panel with x-rays makes it impossible to know if there is any obvious weakness in the panel.

The paint layer is in reasonably good condition. The majority of the retouching can be clearly seen by viewing the painting under u. v. light. There is a good deal of thinness in the face and in the areas of the shadow beneath the chin. The contour lines around the face have been strengthened. There is a tiny loss at the left top of the head. The shadows in the cape have been re-enforced.

There is a very fine network of cracks running primarily in the vertical direction corresponding to the orientation of the wood grain.

The varnish is a relatively thick layer of natural resin - its greenish fluorescence under ultraviolet light indicates this type of resin. [...]

The varnish is milky and has become somewhat opaque, particularly in the background. The effect is to make the background appear absolutely flat.

[Examination report, National Gallery of Art, Washington 1989]

See also attached pdf [forthcoming]

Treatment Report Summary [to be read in conjunction with the condition reports from 1989 and 2007]

• the surface dirt was removed

• the varnish and some overpaint was removed using organic solvents

• the old inpainting and fills were removed with a scalpel under the microscope

• a removable varnish was applied

• the losses were filled using a proprietary, removable synthetic filling putty

• the cracks, losses and several zones showing abrasion were inpainted using dry pigments ground into a synthetic resin

• a removable synthetic varnish was applied over the whole

[After Treatment Report, National Gallery of Art, Washington 2007]

See also attached pdf [forthcoming]

'wiped'

[from the 'Repair of work of Art' records in the National Gallery of Art, Washington, cited in: After Treatment Report, National Gallery of Art, Washington 2007]

See also attached pdf [forthcoming]

The old entry cards show that both paintings were with the restorer for four days, starting on the 24th of February 1947. There is no record on the Repair of work of art record of what treatment was done during those days.

[from the 'Repair of work of Art' records in the National Gallery of Art, Washington, cited in: After Treatment Report, National Gallery of Art, Washington 2007]

See also attached pdf [forthcoming]

Both paintings went to the restorer again on January 29th 1947, this time for the following:

The prince painting:

• corrected stains on the left side of face

• glazed both hands

[from the 'Repair of work of Art' records in the National Gallery of Art, Washington, cited in: After Treatment Report, National Gallery of Art, Washington 2007]

See also attached pdf [forthcoming]

On December 12th 1946 both paintings were at the restorer's [1]

The painting of the prince underwent the following treatment:

• reduced cracks in lower part of red garment and background

• corrected stains in face and forehead

• refinished surface and reframed painting

[1] this restorer was possibly Frank Sullivan, then on contract the National Gallery of Art

[from the 'Repair of work of Art' records in the National Gallery of Art, Washington, cited in: After Treatment Report, National Gallery of Art, Washington 2007]

See also attached pdf [forthcoming]