.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
This arresting head study is one of a number of fantasy portraits of bearded men in eastern-inspired dress, probably intended to be philosophers, painted by Giandomenico Tiepolo in the late 1750s. These paintings were produced in direct response to a series of twenty portraits by the artist’s father, Giambattista Tiepolo, apparently inspired by Rembrandt, thirteen of which survive today (see G. Knox, Domenico Tiepolo: Raccolta di teste, Udine, 1970). Though based on earlier models, Giandomenico's spirited heads are entirely different in style from those of his father. Their immediate and impressive effect are exemplified in the present canvas, with its dazzling and beautifully preserved brushwork. Rapid, zig-zag marks denote the man’s beard and folds of his turban, the vertical gold stripes of his robe are indicated with swift, broad marks and white highlights almost electrify the outer edge of his collar.
The original series was painted around 1757, before Giandomenico, his father Giambattista and brother Lorenzo departed Venice for Würzburg, where the three worked on decorative cycles for the Würzburg Residence. The bust-length fantasy portraits are presumed to be philosophers and, according to George Knox, must have been specifically commissioned from the artist since the subject matter is otherwise incongruous with the rest of Giambattista’s oeuvre (Knox, 1975, loc. cit., p. 148).
Giambattista’s philosopher series remained in the studio for sufficient time for two further sets to be copied by Lorenzo (ibid.). One set of these copies – five paintings of which survive today – was identical in size to Giambattista’s originals, while the second set – of which seven are known – was slightly smaller. During the same period, Giandomenico created etchings after his father’s original series, which he went on to publish in 1774, after his father’s death, in a volume named Raccolte di Teste (‘Collection of Heads’; see Knox, 1970, loc. cit.). Prior to their formal publication, however, Giandomenico used these etchings as models for a set of his own paintings, to which the present canvas belonged. Of this fourth series, ten were published by Knox, including that in the Art Institute of Chicago (fig. 1) and a further three were recently offered at auction (Knox, 1975; Sotheby's, New York, 26-27 January 2023, lots 157, 158 and 430). Since these heads follow the etchings closely, the present painting - and the rest of the series to which it belongs - can be dated to sometime after 1757-58, when the initial phase of the Raccolte di Teste was complete (ibid.).
The present head study is closely connected with a work in the Martin-von-Wagner-Museum, Würzburg, attributed by Knox to Giambattista (fig. 2; Knox, 1975, loc. cit.). Here, however, Giandomenico's figure faces right, rather than left, indicating that it must be based on the print rather than on Giambattista’s canvas. While there is little doubt that Giandomenico used his father’s Würzburg prophet as the model for his etching, he did not copy it faithfully and introduced variations of his own invention instead, such as the shape of the headdress and its decorative band.
While it is not known how many heads made up Giandomenico’s set in its entirety, it can be assumed that, like Giambattista’s, the series was specifically commissioned from the artist. As Knox notes, ‘A set of 'philosopher portraits' of uniform style and character would be an odd thing to paint in a speculative way for possible sales, and there are no other examples of Domenico working in this way after his own etchings. Even his replicas after his own painted compositions are extremely rare’ (Knox, 1975, loc. cit., p. 148). In view of the fact that some of the surviving paintings have Spanish provenance, Knox proposed that they might have been painted in Spain, where the artist worked from 1762 (ibid., pp, 148-149).
If these series were indeed intended to represent philosophers, as is generally presumed, the absence of specific attributes makes it difficult to identify them individually. The tradition of philosopher portraits can be traced back to Cicero and in the fourth canto of Dante’s Inferno, where the narrator finds a group of philosophers among illustrious pagans in Limbo and he names precisely twenty of them (Inferno IV: 130-141). That the number specified by Dante should correspond exactly with the number of philosophers depicted by Giambattista is intriguing but, wtihout any visual clues as to their individual identities, it cannot be assumed that the painted figures are the same as those philosophers cited in the epic poem. Indeed, Knox acknowledges that those mentioned by the poet do not correspond with his own partial attempt at identification (Knox, 1975, p. 152). The reference to Dante would certainly have appealed to an erudite Italian patron and perhaps Giandomenico left the figures’ attributes intentionally vague in order for the series to have broader appeal or so that the figures could be more specifically tailored in the future.
The original series was painted around 1757, before Giandomenico, his father Giambattista and brother Lorenzo departed Venice for Würzburg, where the three worked on decorative cycles for the Würzburg Residence. The bust-length fantasy portraits are presumed to be philosophers and, according to George Knox, must have been specifically commissioned from the artist since the subject matter is otherwise incongruous with the rest of Giambattista’s oeuvre (Knox, 1975, loc. cit., p. 148).
Giambattista’s philosopher series remained in the studio for sufficient time for two further sets to be copied by Lorenzo (ibid.). One set of these copies – five paintings of which survive today – was identical in size to Giambattista’s originals, while the second set – of which seven are known – was slightly smaller. During the same period, Giandomenico created etchings after his father’s original series, which he went on to publish in 1774, after his father’s death, in a volume named Raccolte di Teste (‘Collection of Heads’; see Knox, 1970, loc. cit.). Prior to their formal publication, however, Giandomenico used these etchings as models for a set of his own paintings, to which the present canvas belonged. Of this fourth series, ten were published by Knox, including that in the Art Institute of Chicago (fig. 1) and a further three were recently offered at auction (Knox, 1975; Sotheby's, New York, 26-27 January 2023, lots 157, 158 and 430). Since these heads follow the etchings closely, the present painting - and the rest of the series to which it belongs - can be dated to sometime after 1757-58, when the initial phase of the Raccolte di Teste was complete (ibid.).
The present head study is closely connected with a work in the Martin-von-Wagner-Museum, Würzburg, attributed by Knox to Giambattista (fig. 2; Knox, 1975, loc. cit.). Here, however, Giandomenico's figure faces right, rather than left, indicating that it must be based on the print rather than on Giambattista’s canvas. While there is little doubt that Giandomenico used his father’s Würzburg prophet as the model for his etching, he did not copy it faithfully and introduced variations of his own invention instead, such as the shape of the headdress and its decorative band.
While it is not known how many heads made up Giandomenico’s set in its entirety, it can be assumed that, like Giambattista’s, the series was specifically commissioned from the artist. As Knox notes, ‘A set of 'philosopher portraits' of uniform style and character would be an odd thing to paint in a speculative way for possible sales, and there are no other examples of Domenico working in this way after his own etchings. Even his replicas after his own painted compositions are extremely rare’ (Knox, 1975, loc. cit., p. 148). In view of the fact that some of the surviving paintings have Spanish provenance, Knox proposed that they might have been painted in Spain, where the artist worked from 1762 (ibid., pp, 148-149).
If these series were indeed intended to represent philosophers, as is generally presumed, the absence of specific attributes makes it difficult to identify them individually. The tradition of philosopher portraits can be traced back to Cicero and in the fourth canto of Dante’s Inferno, where the narrator finds a group of philosophers among illustrious pagans in Limbo and he names precisely twenty of them (Inferno IV: 130-141). That the number specified by Dante should correspond exactly with the number of philosophers depicted by Giambattista is intriguing but, wtihout any visual clues as to their individual identities, it cannot be assumed that the painted figures are the same as those philosophers cited in the epic poem. Indeed, Knox acknowledges that those mentioned by the poet do not correspond with his own partial attempt at identification (Knox, 1975, p. 152). The reference to Dante would certainly have appealed to an erudite Italian patron and perhaps Giandomenico left the figures’ attributes intentionally vague in order for the series to have broader appeal or so that the figures could be more specifically tailored in the future.