The Madonna and Child with Saints Stephen, Jerome and Maurice and head of “St Joseph”

 

Introduction
This is an overview of our current research into our painting, The Madonna and
Child with Saints Stephen, Jerome and Maurice and head of “St Joseph”, private
collection and its visual twin, La Vierge à l' Enfant avec Saint Étienne, Saint
Jérôme et Saint Maurice, in the Louvre in Paris.

Please review this White Paper, the images in our Gallery, the Van Dyck
Sketchbook the Balboa Art Conservation Center, Report on Condition and a
Timeline in our website madonnaandthreesaints.com .

We believe there is an interesting possibility that our painting is the one referenced
by Jaffee in his Van Dyck Antwerp Sketchbook Vol. 2. 63 verso as, ”The Holy
Family with Three Saints, records the original of 1508-1510 in the Louvre, except
that the Louvre painting does not show the head of St Joseph”. To our knowledge,
ours is the only painting that is visually similar to the Louvre painting, on canvas,
and very close in size, ours 44.375 x 54.5 inches vs the Louvre, 44.3 x 56.4 inches.

Research
To illustrate our point of visual similarity we show full images of both paintings,
one full image of our painting with a transparent overlay of the full image of the
Louvre painting, and side by side comparison of important sections of both our
painting and the Louvre painting. We include images of the back, stretcher and
frame corners.

Images
Image 1 shows Our painting, The Madonna with Saints Stephen, Jerome and
Maurice and head of “St Joseph”.
Image 2 shows the Louvre paintingLa Vierge à l' Enfant avec Saint Étienne, Saint
Jérôme et Saint Maurice.
Image 3 compares images of Our painting with the Louvre painting, which is made
transparent and overlaid.
As can be seen, except for the additional head of “St. Joseph”, the overall
composition and placement of the faces, fabric folds and sky were intended to be
identical.

Image 4 compares our head of Mary with the Louvre head of Mary.
Image 5 compares our sleeve of the Madonna’s, with the Louvre's.
image 6 compares the bodies of Jesus, Ours with the Louvre's.

Image 7 compares our head of Jesus with the Louvre head of Jesus .
Image 8 compares the heads of St. Jerome, Ours and the Louvre’s.
Image 9 compares a portion of St. Jerome’s sleeve, Ours and the Louvre’s.
Image 10 compares our head of St. Stephen, with the Louvre’s .
Image 11 compares a portion of the skies, Ours and the Louvre’s.
Image 12 shows a closeup of a damaged portion of Our painting
Image 13 compares the heads of St. Maurice, Ours and the Louvre’s.
Image 14 compares the heads of The Madonna’s, overlaid.
Image 15 compares the bodies of Jesus, overlaid.
Image 16 compares the heads of St. Jerome overlaid.
Image 17 shows the back of Our painting
Image 18 shows a corner of the stretcher of Our painting
Image 19 shows a corner of the stretcher of Our painting
Image 20 shows a corner of the frame of Our painting
Image 21 shows a corner of the frame of Our painting

It can clearly be seen from the comparisons, that the composition, placement of the
faces, fabric folds and sky as elements are all surprisingly identical.

We believe scholars have understandably confused the Louvre painting with a
painting, possibly ours, described in 1. Jaffee in the Van Dyck Antwerp
Sketchbook Vol. 2. 63 verso. “This copies two paintings by Titian (or copies of
them). The Salome with the head of St. John the Baptist records the original of the
1514-1515 in Palazzo Doria, TIETZE 15 (16) [Fig. CXXVII].“. ”The Holy Family
with Three Saints, records the original of 1508-1510 in the Louvre, except that the
Louvre painting does not show the head of St Joseph [Fig. CXXVIII; see TIETZE,
p. 389.]”. Said Sketchbook was “used by him in Italy, 1621-1627”. We note that
the right arm of Jesus in the Sketchbook is in a different position than in either Our
or the Louvre paintings and that it corresponds to a later painting by Van Dyck,
The Mystic Marriage of St. Catherine. The existence of our painting could explain
the confusion about the head of St. Joseph. It is known that Van Dyck was in
Venice, Rome, and Genoa during the time he created his sketchbook.

According to our research the first mention of the existence of a Madonna, Child
and Three Saints painting is in the Aldobradini inventory of 1603. 3. Wethey
“Certainly from the d'Este Collection, Ferrara, which Cardinal Pietro Aldobrandini
brought to Rome in 1598; Inventory of Pietro Aldobrandini, 1603, no. 16; 'Una
Madonna con S. Girolamo et altri santi, del sudetto Titiano’ ”. “Certainly from the
d’Este collection” appears to be a speculation. 3. Wethey also mentions. ”The Holy
Family with Three Saints, which records the original of 1508-1510 in the Louvre,

except that the Louvre painting does not show the head of St Joseph”. Wethey may
be assuming that the Louvre painting is our painting, “his copy (Van Dyck) of the
Louvre picture, which he saw in the Aldobrandini Collection in Rome, contains an
additional head of St. Joseph against the curtain on the left“. He, Wethey,
speculates that Van Dyck saw our painting in the Aldobrandini Collection in Rome.
He also speculates that the Head of St. Joseph, in the Louvre painting, “must have
been overpainted”.

So the Louvre painting after being in various Inventories, 3. Wethey, was a “gift of
Prince Pamphili to Louis XIV in 1665, brought to Paris by Bernini. The picture is
described as badly damaged by water on the journey: "le tableau de Titien que est
une Vierge avec un petit Christ et quelques autressaints à demi corps. Ils se sont
trouvés tour si gâtés qu'on n'y connaissait presque plus rien' (Chantelou, edition
1930, p. 213); Le Brun Inventory of Versailles, 1683, no. 188 ('Notre Seigneur, la
Vierge, St. Etienne et St. Hiérosme’)” Translation, “ Titian's painting of a Virgin
with a small Christ and some other half-length saints. They were so spoiled that
almost nothing was known about them anymore.” and “Condition: Badly damaged
in 1665 (see History); numerous losses, extensive old repaint and old discoloured
varnish; in a generally lamentable state.” We find no mention of the head of St.
Joseph in the Louvre inventories references.

It in known from Rubens letters that paintings on canvas were often shipped rolled
up, crated and re-touched on arrival. Rubens is noted giving a fellow artist
directions on how to care for a damaged painting. “And if need be, you may, with
my permission, put your hand to it and retouch it wherever damage for my
carelessness is evident.”

To reiterate, the Louvre painting was about 145 years old, condition unknown,
before it was gifted to Louis XIV then “badly damaged” in 1665 on its way to
Paris. In said Louvre inventory of 1683 it was described as “so spoiled that almost
nothing was known about them anymore.“. It apparently remained damaged and in
storage before the next and succeeding inventories being moved back and forth
between Versailles, the Louvre and Meudon, until August 10, 1793, when the
Louvre Museum was established by the National Assembly.

We have been unable to find documentation of when and who did the “extensive
repaint” and the extent of the “restoration”. There was known to be a thriving
community of Picture Restorers in Paris, in the Louvre Quarter, some by
appointment to the King.

The Rubens Attribution

In 1999 we had our painting surveyed by The Balboa Art Conservation Center.
The full report is on our website. Sarah Murray was the analyst, she is no longer
with the BACC, she can be reached here, artrestoration-sandiego.com A short
summary follows. “Attrib. to Rubens (Copy of Titian), Size 44 3/8 x 54 1/2. Oil on
fabric. The Appearance of the painting, as seen through a stereo microscope,
ultraviolet light and x-rays is consistent with a Seventeenth Century painting which
has been seriously damaged and badly restored.” We removed the painting from
the frame on February, 4, 2025, and took numerous photos, see Gallery. It can be
seen from the photographs that the frame, stretcher, wedges and nails are
handmade “in the Italian manner” and the linen is hand woven.

The timeline of events would allow for the possibility that our painting could be a
copy by Peter Paul Rubens made between 1600 and 1607 when he was in Italy. he
was known to revere Titian: “Titian was his favorite master.” 5. Emile Michel, and
had “Besides the 10 original Titian’s he possessed at his death, he copied,
according to Pacheco, all the most notable pictures of the master then at Madrid.”
And as Justi points out, they were “copies of the size of the originals, and as
faithful as Ruben’s temperament allowed.” Before that when he was in Italy we
assume that he also would have copied as many Titians as he could. Rubens was
known to have copied a number of Titian’s paintings for Vincenzo I Gonzaga,
Duke of Mantua, as gifts to the King of Spain, and for said Dukes private
collection. We have no information about which paintings they were.

There are many permutations of who would have had to have been where to create
our painting. In the event it is a Rubens master copy it would have been created
between 1601-1607, in Italy, possibly in the presence of the Louvre painting, or
one exactly like it, possibly in the Aldobrandini Collection, and the head of St.
Joseph added at a later date. However in any event the painting would have had to
have existed in a collection that Van Dyck had access to before 1627, if ours is the
painting referenced in the sketchbook. The Aldobrandini Collection appears to be
the most probable nexus. Said “head of St. Joseph” does not appear to be of the
same skill level as the rest of the painting.

The Van Dyck Sketchbook reference and reported poor condition of the Louvre
painting and the BACC Report on Condition makes it doubtful that our painting
could have been copied from the Louvre painting after 1665 and still meet the
criteria of the BACC Report.

It would make sense that Van Dyck would make a sketch of Rubens copy of a
Titian, possibly in Italy, most probably because Rubens would have given him
valuable social and work related contacts such as letters of introduction and social
references. It is known that he, Van Dyck, left Antwerp for his trip to Italy in 1621
in the company of a Cavaliere Govanni Nanni, a Venitian by birth and a close
friend of Rubens.

Conclusion
While we have no information about when our painting was painted and who the
artist was. The photographical comparisons between the Louvre, painting and our
painting, the care and exactitude of the similarities make it is clear that both
paintings had to be together at one time. Our painting is, to our knowledge, the
only painting in the world to fit the image in the Van Dyck Sketchbook which is
a vital part of the provenance of the Louvre and Vienna paintings. Our painting
could be of deep interest because of its almost identical imagery, materials and
historical reference.

We respectfully submit our research, please let us know your thoughts.

Rod Lingren
rlingren@nethere.com

REFERENCES

1. Jaffe, Van Dyck’s Antwerp Sketchbook, Volume Two, 1966, 63 verso,
”The Holy Family with Three Saints, records the original of 1508-1510 in the
Louvre, except that the Louvre painting does not show the head of St Joseph [Fig.
CXXVIII]”.
“used by him in Italy, 1621-1627”. Scholars date the sketches in said book to
between 1621-1627.

2. Titian, Georg Gronau 1904. Pages 282-283 Paris.- The Louvre. The Virgin
with three Saints. Canvas, 1.08 x 1.32, 42.52” x 51.94”, pages 282-283, (No.
1577). The Virgin is worshipped by the Saints Stephen, Jerome and George. This
picture may being to the period about 1508-1510. The type of the Virgin is like the
one in the Madrid “Santa Conversaione” and the Annunciation” Treviso ; later than
the first and earlier than the last named. Compare the St Stephen with the servants
head in the Salome picture in the Doria Gallery. A type like the St Jerome is to be

found in one of the Padua frescoes. From the collection of Louis XlV. The replica
in the Vienna Gallery (No. 166) is of inferior quality.

3. The Paintings of Titian Complete Edition, Harold E Wethey, The Religious
Paintings. 1971. pages 113 -114

Madonna and Child with SS. Stephen, Jerome and Maurice
Plate 15, Canvas I.08m x I.32 m, Paris, Louvre, About 1520.
Except for the peculiar face of the Child and His ugly feet, which can be explained
by extensive and faulty restoration, this picture is very handsome, one of the two
major versions, the other being in Vienna.The Madonna in a red tunic, blue-green
mantle, and pale-tan veil is very lovely. The long-bearded St. Jerome, dressed in
the cardinal's red, and the two youthful saints express the contemplative
Giorgionesque mood of Titian's early works. In Van Dyck's 'Antwerp Sketchbook'
(Jaffé, 1966, II, 63vL) his copy of the Louvre picture, which he saw in the
Aldobrandini collection in Rome, contains an additional head of St. Joseph against
the curtain at the left.

Condition: Badly damaged in 1665 (see History); numerous losses, extensive old
repaint and old discoloured varnish; in a generally lamentable state. The head of St.
Joseph (see above) must be overpainted.

History: Certainly from the d'Este Collection, Ferrara, which Cardinal Pietro
Aldobrandini brought to Rome in 1598; Inventory of Pietro Aldobrandini, 1603,
no. 16; 'Una Madonna con S. Girolamo et altri santi, del sudetto Titiano'
(D'Onofrio, 1964, p. 18); Inventory ordered by Olimpia Aldobrandini
Aldobrandini, 1626, no. 16, 'Una Madonna con S. Girolamo et altri Santi di mano
di Titiano…' (Pergola, 1960, p. 428); a Madonna with SS. Jerome and Lawrence by
Titian cited by Ridolfi in the collection of Cardinal Aldobrandini (Ridolfi (1648) –
Hadeln, I, p. 197); inherited from Cardinal Ippolito Aldobrandini (d. 1638) by his
niece Olimpia Aldobrandini Borghese Pamphili; gift of Prince Pamphili to Louis
XIV in 1665, brought to Paris by Bernini; the picture is described as badly
damaged by water on the journey: "le tableau de Titien que est une Vierge avec un
petit Christ et quelques autressaints à demi corps. Ils se sont trouvés tour si gâtés
qu'on n'y connaissait presque plus rien' (Chantelou, edition 1930, p. 213); Le Brun
Inventory of Versailles, 1683, no. 188 ('Notre Seigneur, la Vierge, St. Etienne et St.
Hiérosme'); 1695 and 1696 still at Versailles; at Meudon, 1706; Louvre, 1737;
Versailles, 1752 and 1760 (Bailly-Engerand, 1899, p. 80, full history).

Bibliography: See also History; Lépicié, 1752, pp. 21-22 (identified St Jerome as
St. Ambrose); Villot, 1874, p. 282, no. 458; C. and C., 1877, I, pp. 107-108 (early
Titian); Louvre catalogue, no. 1577, inventory no. 742; Gronau, Titian, 1904, pp.
282-283 (Titian); Seymour de Ricci, 1913, p. 157 (Titian); Hetzer, 1920, pp. 86-88
(unknown Venetian); Suida, 1935, pl. 84b (replica); Tietze, 1936, II, p. 305
(workshop repetition of a lost original); Berenson, 1957, p. 189 (Titian);
Valcanover, 1960, I, p. 00 (incorrect provenance; workshop replica).

COPY:
Florence, Casa Bicchierai, late careful copy (photo, London, Courtauld Institute).
VARIANTS:

1. Cracow, State Museum, 'Madonna and Child (after Louvre picture) with SS.
Catherine and John the Baptist', canvas, 0.74 x 1.15 m., from the Pininski
Collection (Bialostocki and Walicki, 1957, fig. 83)

2. Milan, Ambrosiana Gallery, canvas, 0.71 x 1.04 m., version by a follower of
Titian, 'Madonna and Child with SS. John the Baptist and Cecilia'; the Madonna
and Child are weakly copied from the Paris original; very dirty, patched and
heavily varnished; gift of Cardinal Fererico Borromeo in 1618 as Titian (Guida
sommaria, 1907, p. 132 and no. 14).

3. Unknown location, formerly Ancona, Storiani Collection, 'Madonna and Child
with St. Cecilia and St. John the Baptist', I braccia x 1 1/3 braccia, Inventory 1749
(Elia, 1936, p. 82; 1943, p. 7).
Madonna and Child with SS. Stephen, Jerome, and Maurice
Panel. 0.925m x 1.38 m. Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Titian and workshop;
About 1520

The quality seems at least equal to that of the Louvre version, from which it differs
in colour in the extensive yellow lining of the Madonna's blue cape. The hardness
of the painting of the Madonna's face (retouched) accounts for the usually low
estimate of the picture, but Titian's share certainly predominates.
Condition: Blistered paint and numerous cracks; the figure of the Child much
damaged and retouched, particularly the face and right arm; the Madonna's hand
also repaired.

History: Venice, Bartolomeo della Nave until 1636 (Waterhouse, 1952, p. 15, no.
16); Vienna, Archduke Leopold Wilhelm, 1659 (Inventory, p. XCIV, no. 129;
Teniers, 1660, pl. 68); taken to Paris in 1809; returned to Vienna in 1815.
Bibliography: See also History; Boschini, 1660, p. 40 (Titian); Storffer, 1730, II,
no. 266; Mechel, 1783, p. 30, no. 59; C. and C., 1877, I, pp. 107-108 (superior to
the Louvre version); Engerth, 1884, p. 343 (Titian); Ricketts, 1910, pp. 50, 175
(better than Louvre picture); Hetzer, 1920, pp. 86-87 (not Titian); Suida, 1935, pp.
25, 163, pl. 84a (Titian); Tietze, 1936, II, p. 315 (workshop replica of a lost
original); Berenson, 1957, I, p. 191 (replica of Louvre picture, partly by Titian);
Valcanover, 1960, I, p. 99 (workshop replica); Klauner and Oberhammer, 1960, p.
136, no. 710 (Titian).
LOST VERSION:

The small panel listed as no. 496 in the Aldobrandini collection in Rome in 1682:
'Un quadro in tavola in forma mezzana con la Madonna a sedere, che tiene il
Bambino sopra il Ginocchio con tre altri Santi, uno de quali ha un libro in mano
alto pmi due e mezzo . . . di Titiano' (Pergola, 1963, p. 176). Pergola wrongly
identifies this panel with the Madonna con S. Girolamo et altri Santi, del sudetto
Titiano', no. 16 in the Inventory of 1603, which reappears with identical title under
the same number in the Inventory of 1626. Titles characteristically do not change
from inventory to inventory of the Aldobrandini collection. No. 16 is the Paris
version (see above) which left the Aldobrandini collection in 1665.
WRONG ATTRIBUTIONS, Variants:

1. Middlebury (Vermont), A. Richard Turner, canvas, 0.762 x 1.168 m., inherited
from F.J. Mather, Princeton; attrributed to Pordenone (Berenson, 1957, p. 145).

2. Unknown location, Madonna and Child with SS. Barbara, Zaccharius and a
Donor, all half to three-quarters length, a potpourri of figures adapted from Titian;
probably a Baroque forgery by Pietro della Vecchia (Suida, 1943, pp. 355-356,
illustrated as Titian). Suida (1959 – 1960, p. 66) insisted that it was the picture cited
by Boschini as in the Scuola dei Sarti. However, the description does not
correspond closely enough to justify such a theory (Boschini, 1674, Canareggio,
pp. 15-16, as by Giorgione, the Madonna with SS. Joseph, Barbara and a donor;
Zanetti, 1733, p. 368, repeats Boschini; Zanetti, 1792, p. 122).

4. All the paintings of Titian, Part 2 (1488-1545) Francesco Valcanover.
Paintings Attributed to Titian. page 125

MADONNA AND CHILD AND THREE SAINTS (STEPHEN, JEROME
AND MAURICE). Panel 92.3 x 138. Vienna “Noted for the first time in 1639 in
the collection of Archduke Leopold William. Cavalcaselle, Rickertts , Fischel and
Sudia believe it to be an authentic Titian; A.Venturi and Phillips think it is a
replica of the Louvre picture – as do Berenson, although he thinks if is partly by
Titian himself (1957), and Gronau who feels it may be the painting recorded by
Ridolfi as being in the possession of the heirs of Cardinal Aldobrandini in Rome.
Hetzer attributes the two versions in Vienna and the Louvre (see next work) to a
follower of Titian about 1530; Heinemann (1928 Francesco Vecelio) and
Pallucchini believe, with reason that the two pictures are repetitions of a lost
original dating from about 1520.”

MADONNA AND CHILD AND THREE SAINTS (STEPHEN, JEROME
AND MAURICE). Canvas 108 x 132 x 138. Paris, Louvre. “ Lord Carlisle offered
it to Louis XIV as an exchange. A. Venturi, Philips, Berenson , and Gronau (who
believes it to date from about (1508-10) take it to be an authentic Titian;
Cavalcaselle, Rickerts, FIschel and Suida think it is a replica from Titian’s
Workshop of the Vienna panel (cf. preceding work). Tietze, Pallucchini , and
Heinemann (1928) believe, with reason that this painting is and the Vienna panel
are copies of a Titian original dating from 1520, which is now lost. Reproduced in
Suida, Tiziano, Fig. LXXXIV B.”

5. Rubens, His Life, his Work, and his Time; Emile Michel, Vol, ll. pages 113 –
114
Dates 1577-1640 It is known that Titian was Rubens favorite master and that he
made numerous copies of Titian’s paintings; “Forced to be always within reach of
the king, he fortunately discovered a profitable way of turning his leisure to
account by copying the masterpieces of Titian that Charles V and Phillip ll had
collected at the Palace.”“Titian was his favorite master.” “Besides the 10 original
Titian’s he possessed at his death, he copied, according to Pacheco, all the most
notable pictures of the master then at Madrid. And as Justi points out, they were
no mere sketches of small size but copies of the size of the originals, and as faithful
as Ruben’s temperament allowed.” We assume that when Rubens was in Italy,
1600-1607, he also copied as many Titian’s as he could.

6. Peter Paul Rubens (born June 28, 1577, Siegen, Nassau, Westphalia
[Germany]—died May 30, 1640, Antwerp, Spanish Netherlands, now Belgium.
Anthony van Dyck, Born in Antwerp, Spanish Netherlands on March 22, 1599
Died in London on December 9, 1641

7. Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Creator/Titian.
A webpage listing, image-picture, label-title, description-attribution, collection-
Museum etc., inventory number-of collection, catalog code- ?, inception-date of
creation, location-where held, URL, depicts-short description.

8. Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Creator/Rubens.
A webpage listing, image-picture, label-title, description-attribution, collection-
Museum etc., inventory number-of collection, catalog code- ?, inception-date of
creation, location-where held, URL, depicts-short description.

9. Wikipedia: The Bacchanal of the Andrians, Titian
The painting was made by Titian for the Sala dei Baccanali in theCamerini
d’alabastro Alfonso d’Este after The Worship of Venus (1518–1519) andBacchus
and Ariadne (1520–1523) and Titian's intervention on The Feat of the Gods by
Bellini in 1524–1525 where he retouched the landscape to match the style of the
other paintings.
In 1598, control of Ferrara passed to the Papal State and the Este family had to
withdraw to Modena. During the transfer, cardinal and papal legate Pietro
Aldobrandini appropriated many paintings, among which were The Bacchanal and
The Worship of Venus. Aldobrandini never exhibited the taken paintings. His
theft only became known in 1629 after the paintings had come into the Ludovisi
inheritance and then were sold to the Duke of Monterrey in payment of the
Principality of Piombino. They were then donated to Philip IV of Spain in 1639.
The first documentation of the paintings in Spain date to the inventories of the
Royal Alcazar of Madrid in 1666, 1686, and 1700.

10. The Matthiesen Gallery, Sales Catalog, Jupiter and Semele, by Giovanni
Luteri, also known as Dosso Dossi. “This recently re-discovered and hitherto
unknown Jupiter and Semele is a characteristic example of Dosso Dossi’s work at
the height of his career in the 1520s, arguably his most fruitful decade. It is an
important and rare addition to the full-scale figure paintings of the protagonist of
the High Renaissance at the cosmopolitan court of Ferrara during the reign of
Alfonso dEste (1476-1534). The Jupiter and Semele displays all of Dosso Dossi’s
charming eccentricities, from his interest in sculptural figures, to the undulation of
colourful drapery and his unusual interpretation of iconography.
Provenance. Duke Alfonso I dEste, Castello di San Michele, Ferrara circa 1524
1527? Thence by decent to his son, Ercole II dEste (158 1559)? By descent to his
son, Alfonso II dEste (1533-1597)? The dukes of Osuna, and then by descent?,
Jose Maria Martorell Tellez-Giron. Noveno Duque de Plasencia descendant of the

Duque de Osuna. (As attested by a label dating from 1936, dating from the
registrations during the Spanish Civil War 1936-39).”

11. Norton Simon Museum
Salome with the Head of John the Baptist
16th century
Titian (Italian, c.1487/90-1576)
This painting is first documented in the 1603 inventory of the prestigious Roman
collection of Cardinal Pietro Aldobrandini, alongside another painting of the same
subject and by the same artist: Tiziano Vecellio. Both paintings passed by
inheritance into the Doria Pamphilij Gallery, but whereas the better version
remained in the collection (and still resides there today), the Simon painting was
sold by the Doria family in the late eighteenth century. It has been called the best
workshop replica of the Doria original. Why two paintings of the same style and
subject came to be owned by the same family for almost two hundred years has
never been established.

Titian was known to have a large, bustling workshop, where students duplicated a
number of his most popular compositions; some paintings were finished or
corrected by Titian himself, allowing them to be sold as the work of the master. In
this case, at least four versions of the Doria original (which was executed around
1515) are known to have been made.

End

But since you are such a great
man in our profession, you will easily remedy this by exposing it to the sun, and
leaving it there at intervals. And if
need be, you may, with my permission, put your hand to it and retouch it wherever
damage or my carelessness.