David and Goliath by Artemisia Gentileschi

A masterpiece brought to light

Art historian Gianni Papi has recently written an article about the picture published in the March 2020 edition of the Burlington Magazine (with technical contributions by Simon Gillespie and Tracey D. Chaplin): read it here.

Introduction

This 400 year-old picture appeared at auction in London in the 1970s. The auction catalogue wrongly attributed the picture to Guerrieri, an unsurprising error given that concealing overpaint was covering large areas of the original composition and brushwork. Nonetheless, even from the black and white photograph provided, art historian Gianni Papi recognised the hand of Artemisia Gentileschi, and published an article about the picture in 1996.

In the interim, its location was unknown until 2018 when it appeared at auction in Germany. The online catalogue entry initially listed the painting as attributed to a seventeenth-century painter of the school of Caravaggio, but a few days before the sale this was changed to 'Artemisia Gentileschi' and a reference to Papi's 1996 article was added.

The buyer brought it to Simon Gillespie Studio for analysis and treatment. During treatment, the signature was found. This and close study of the painting confirmed without a shadow of a doubt that the picture is by Artemisia Gentileschi.

The subject and composition

The subject is taken from the Old Testament about the defeat of Goliath, champion of the Philistines, by the Israelite shepherd David. Goliath and the Philistines are at war against King Saul and the Israelites. Goliath challenges the Israelites to send out a champion to fight in single combat to decide the outcome, but no one volunteers. David, bringing food to his elder brothers in the Israelite army, accepts the challenge. David defeats the giant Goliath by swinging a stone at the giant’s forehead using a slingshot, causing the giant to fall to the ground, and then using Goliath’s sword to kill him and cut off his head. With this victory, the shepherd boy David takes Saul’s place as king of the Israelites.

The painting is a life-size depiction of a seated David just after his victory over Goliath (the canvas measures 201 x 133 cm). David’s right hand rests loosely on Goliath’s sword, and on a stone slab at his feet lies the recently decapitated head of Goliath. The wound that Goliath sustained from the stone thrown by David is clearly visible on the giant’s forehead. The slingshot weapon can also be seen draped over the slab. David is sitting with his back to a wall or plinth which can be seen in the background of the painting. The architecture continues into the distance, and a further wall can be seen with a small window at the top right corner of the painting. The background on the left side of the painting shows a landscape with a single hut on a hill. The sky shows a billowing cloud formation. David’s dress is what one might expect from a shepherd of the artist’s period with some added colour and embellishment, such as the colourful purple waistcoat.

The composition of the picture and David’s pose relate closely to a painting of David with the head of Goliath by Domenico Fetti (1588-1623), painted around 1620, now in the collection of the National Museum of Sweden in Stockholm. It is probable that Artemisia was familiar with one of the many versions of this painting that exist (by Fetti himself, by his studio, or by followers). For example, Charles I acquired a version from the Gonzaga collection in 1627.

Condition on arrival at Simon Gillespie Studio

On arrival at the studio, the painting was examined and its condition assessed. The painting is an oil painting on a coarse handwoven canvas typical of the period. The painting has been glue lined, probably in the early 20th century, at which point it was given a new stretcher. There are recent labels from transport companies on the stretcher. The original turnover edges exist to some extent on some of the sides. Lining was probably carried out to correct raised cracking which is seen across the whole work. There is also a damage at the top left consisting of a branched tear which is about 40cm long and two smaller damages upper right, visible in reflected light. The lining canvas is in good condition and the turnover edges are strong.

No signature was noted at the time of examination.

There was a small amount of surface dirt and debris on the front and reverse of the painting. The ground of the painting was observed to be a dark chocolate brown. The paint layers were in a fair condition but it was clear that the painting had been abraded in the past, possibly during cleaning; there were thinnesses and damage to some of the half tones, for example the white sleeve in the centre of the painting. However, initial investigation revealed a promising natural well-preserved paint layer. Some of the colours have changed with age and become more transparent. For example, in a passage of the sleeve near the figure’s elbow, the paint has become quite transparent and pentimenti are now visible. UV investigation revealed that the painting had been partially cleaned in the past with remains of old varnishes strongly fluorescing in the darker areas. Some of the darker areas in the right hand side were lacking volume as the thick layers of discoloured varnish obscured the detail. Excessive and artistically applied old restoration was evident across the painting. In some areas a campaign of covering the paint layers such as the sky with a fine spray of overpaint had occurred (leaving a speckled appearance). There appeared to be layers of more recent varnish which may have a UV filtering component. The varnish was very thick and glossy and did not complement the work.

An x-Ray was taken, and the painting viewed under infrared light . Paint analysis was carried out.

Senior conservator Majo carrying out comparison and research in front of the painting

Treatment was carried out by our senior conservator Majo Prieto-Pedregal ACR and overseen by Simon Gillespie ACR.

Discovery of the signature

During cleaning to remove the dirt, discoloured varnishes, and disguising overpaint, the delicate remains of the artist’s signature and a date were found. Unfortunately, the last two digits of the date are illegible. The inscription reads ‘Artemisia’, below which the letters ‘Fe’ can be made out, followed by illegible characters and then the digits ‘16’, presumably reading ‘Fecit 16 [–]’.

It had been hoped that a signature might be discovered. The painting was scrutinised during the assessment process and when treatment began in the bottom part of the painting. Based on known signed paintings by Artemisia Gentileschi, it was thought that the ground near David’s foot and Goliath’s head or the plinth behind David might be good candidates for an inscription, but nothing was found during the cleaning of these areas. The client, Majo, Simon and the team had almost given up on the hope of finding one when during Majo’s cleaning of the blade of the sword, Artemisia’s name began to emerge from underneath the overpaint.

Simon describes the discovery: ‘Finding the signature during removal of the overpaint was an amazing moment. This discovery highlights the importance of conservation practice in supporting the conclusions of art historians’

*The signature as it was discovered during cleaning*

*A false colour photograph of the signature*

*After treatment: detail of the signature*

Some notes on the techniques used by the artist

The preparation layer is a rich brown colour, typical of 17th century Neapolitan pictures.

On careful inspection and in raking light, it is evident that the artist incised the design of the figure into the wet ground layer freehand, reworking or emphasising certain elements with multiple incisions, for example David's right heel.

Once this was done, the artist applied the paint thickly, naturally defining areas of colour and in some areas leaving pronounced impasto, for example the drapery across David's leg.

The artist's technique is very sophisticated: Artemisia has enhanced the three-dimensional space in the composition by leaving openings between the limbs of David, made more pronounced by reflected light on their lower and upper surfaces, and through which the landscape beyond can be seen. This detail distinguishes the present painting from studio copies.

It was also interesting to see the artist’s technique of making a purple coloured waistcoat by blending the blue smalt and the carmine lake directly on the picture. The technique is now evident as the highlighted area blended with white has become more exposed as a result of ageing and transparency of the blended blue smalt and carmine lake.

As observed by Gianni Papi (1996 and 2020), several aspects of the painting are consistent with Artemisia Gentileschi’s works from the 1630s and 40s: The ochre of the cloak draped over David's leg is a colour characteristic of Artemisia's works, seen for example in the shawl of the Barberini 'Allegory of Painting'. David's linen sleeves are similar to other fabrics painted by Artemisia: see for example the depiction of the chemise worn by the servant woman in 'The Birth of Saint John the Baptist'. The face of David and the way light falls on flesh are reminiscent of 'Esther before Ahasuerus'. The barren landscape and white clouds are comparable to those of 'Corisca and the Satyr'.

*Detail of the sleeve after treatment showing the pentiment in the area by the elbow.*

*Detail of the heel seen in raking light, showing the curving incisions made by the artist to place the foot prior to the application of paint*

*Detail of the left ankle and right knee seen in raking light, showing the incisions made by the artist to place the figure prior to applying paint.*

*Detail of the openings left between David’s legs and left arm, through which the dark colour of the landscape can be seen.*

Comparison with the Neapolitan version

There is a comparison to be made with a painting formerly in a Neapolitan collection, which Simon Gillespie had the opportunity to view first hand in order to make comparisons when it appeared for sale at Dorotheum in the autumn of 2019, offered as ‘by Artemisia Gentileschi’ (having previously appeared at auction in 2002 as ‘Attributed to Cesare Fracanzano’).

The size of these two pictures is very similar, although the Neapolitan picture is on a very slightly larger canvas (203.5 x 152 cm). The composition of the Neapolitan picture is almost identical to the London picture, with the notable difference that the head of Goliath, instead of being at David’s feet, is held in his right hand, and the hilt of the sword is visible at David’s feet. The London picture has a landscape in the background, whereas the Neapolitan one has a balustrade. The London picture has a secondary wall with a window covering half the sky behind the head of David.

A tracing was made of the figure in the London picture and taken to Vienna for comparison with the Neapolitan figure while it was being exhibited at Dorotheum. The only difference in the tracing of the figure is the shape of the head, the London picture being slightly shorter by about 3 or 4 cm. In the Neapolitan picture, there is little evidence of any incisions made by pressing through a tracing in the preparation of the composition. The Naples version has virtually no pentimenti, and areas appear to have been filled in precisely. As for the London picture, when viewed in strong raking light, freehand incisions can be seen in what would have been the wet ground layer. Many of these incisions are overlapping and are corrected, which is consistent with their being executed by hand. Further to this, the laying in of the paint and colour has also resulted in major changes in the London picture, the most prominent being the direction of the pleats in the white sleeve, which were incised to point down to the bottom right and were painted in to point down to the bottom left. The London picture has many more layers of colour than the Neapolitan picture, for example the waistcoat where a rich purple would have been achieved by blending smalt with a red carmine lake both of which have subsequently faded. The Neapolitan version in contrast appears to have been made with less subtle layering, and the application of paint is so precise that there is actually a gap between certain areas, with almost no overlapping of different colours. Regarding the ground, the London picture has the dark brown chocolate preparation which is typical of Artemisia Gentileschi, particularly during her Naples period, and the ground of the Neapolitan picture is a slightly lighter brown-grey.

Both paintings have been painted on a typical 17th century Italian broad-weave canvas, resulting in the characteristic square formations of cracks. The skin tones are similar but the London version achieves a higher calibre of finish in the blending of colours and achieving a three dimensional effect whereas the Neapolitan picture lacks this higher finish and is therefore flatter. Further to the above, the London version has achieved a very pronounced three dimensional quality, particularly in the small details that appear between the lower arm and the adjacent leg and also between the two legs. What is noticeable here is the reflected light on the upper parts and the very small details that are emphasising the opening including the colour from the landscape in the distance. This detailed study promotes the three dimensions of the composition of the figure. In the Neapolitan picture this has been left out, resulting in a lack of dimension.

A connection to Charles I?

In his 1996 article, and again in the Burlington Magazine in March 2020, Gianni Papi pointed to sources close to Artemisia Gentileschi's time which suggest that she painted three full-length-depictions of David with the head of Goliath. Papi proposed that the present painting is the one mentioned in 18th century sources as having been part of the collection of king Charles I.

"King Charles had several of her [Artemisia's] works. Her best was David with the Head of Goliath." Horace Walpole, 'Anecdotes of Painting in England' (1762-1771)

"The most celebrated picture of her [Artemisia's] hand is the victory of David over Goliath." Reverend Pilkington, 'The Gentleman's and Connoisseur's Dictionary of Painters' (1770)

Papi viewed the work at Simon Gillespie Studio after treatment. Although there are some conservation issues, treatment has brought out the quality of the picture. Based on comparisons with other known works by Artemisia Gentileschi, Papi has dated it to the fourth decade of the 17th century, and specifically to Artemisia's London period.

Conclusion

We are hugely grateful to Gianni Papi for coming to see the picture and for his insightful article, and to Michael Hall for publishing it in the Burlington Magazine. With the National Gallery (London) opening a major exhibition of works by Artemisia in April, we look forward to more research being carried out into Artemisia’s techniques and especially into her time in London. There is still much to be discovered about Artemisia Gentileschi’s life, works and techniques.

Simon says: ‘The opportunity to work on this picture and closely study the technique of such an important and still overlooked female artist has been fantastic’

Simon pointing out the incisions in the painting

Majo discussing the painting during the unveiling reception

Further information:

Artemisia Gentileschi: Key dates

1593: Born in Rome, the eldest child and only daughter of Orazio Gentileschi and Prudentia Montone.

1610: Painted 'Susanna and the Elders', her earliest known signed painting.

1612: Trial of Agostino Tassi, who was accused by Orazio of having taken Artemisia's virginity against her will. Artemisia underwent torture to verify her testimony that she had been raped by Tassi. Tassi was found guilty but never served a sentence. After the trial, Artemisia was married to Pierantonio Stiattesi and moved to Florence, where the Grand Duke Cosimo II became her patron.

1615: Painted her 'Self-Portrait as Saint Catherine of Alexandria', recently acquired by the National Gallery, London.

1616: Became the first female member of the prestigious Florentine Accademia delle Arti del Disegno.

1620: Returned to Rome.

1630: Moved to Naples.

1638: Moved to London, joining her father there. Orazio died in February 1639.

1640: Returned to Naples.

After 1654 (date uncertain): Died.

Depictions of David with the Head of Goliath by Artemisia

1631: a life-size work depicting David holding in his hands the head of Goliath was seen in Artemisia’s house in Naples by Joachim von Sandrart (Papi 1996; Lattuada 2017)

1638: In the inventory drawn up in February in Rome on the death of the Marquis Vincenzo Giustiniani is recorded a "picture with an entire figure of David, who holds the head of the giant Goliath, painted on canvas, approx. height of 9 palmi width of 6 1/2, by Artemisia’s hand, without frame “ (see Getty Provenance Index Database / Lattuada 2017). The collection was sold off in 1812.

December 1663: A David measuring eight by six palmi (perhaps the same David that afterwards went to D’Afflitto’s collection) was on the market in Naples, when it was purchased for 14 ducats by Giovanni di Franco from Alessandro Balzamo (R. Lattuada and Eduardo Nappi 2005, doc. 8 p. 98; also Zapletalova 2013)

29 April 1700: Among the works listed in the collection of Ferdinando d’Aflfitto, Prince of Scanno, are ‘Tre quadri di 6 larghi et 8 lunghi con cornice nera e con filetto indorato, uno con S. Eustachio e l’altro con David l’altro di S. Sebastiano, e le teste sono di mano di Artemisia’. (see Getty records) Six by eight Neapolitan palmi rendered in contemporary terms would be roughly 156 cm wide by 208 cm high. (Lattuada 2017)

1700: Reverend Pilkington, in his 'The Gentleman's and Connoisseur's Dictionary of Painters' writes that "The most celebrated picture of her [Artemisia's] hand is the victory of David over Goliath"

1762-1771: Horace Walpole, in his 'Anecdotes of Painting in England' , writes that "King Charles had several of her [Artemisia's] works. Her best was David with the Head of Goliath."

Literature

G. Papi: ‘A ‘David and Goliath’ by Artemisia Gentileschi rediscovered’, The Burlington Magazine (2020), pp188-195

G. Papi: ‘Un “David e Golia” di Artemisia Gentileschi’, Nuovi Studi 1 (1996), pp.157–60.

Press

We are delighted that various publications have expressed an interest in the discovery of the picture and in Gianni Papi’s article: we will keep our Press page updated with articles published in print and online.

On 27th February, Simon Gillespie Studio and The Burlington Magazine hosted a reception to celebrate the publication of Gianni Papi’s article: find out more here