MA.OCT.Michaus.Redin.pg proof corrs_Layout 1 25/09/2013 13:10 Page 677
Guido Reni’s ‘Conversion of Saul’: a newly attributed
painting in the Escorial
by GONZALO REDIN MICHAUS
IN THE ‘Casa de la Botica’ in the Escorial is a Conversion of Saul that
has been traditionally attributed to Luca Giordano.1 It was first
mentioned in 1681 as a Guercino when it was hanging in the
monastery of S. Lorenzo’s ‘Quadra de mediodía’ between a Susanna and the elders and Lot and his daughters, both by Guercino.2
After 1764 it was thought to be by Luca Giordano working in the
style of Guercino, and in the twentieth century it was attributed
simply to Giordano. Recently it has been downgraded and
described as an anonymous work of the Bolognese school.3 The
varnish is very opaque and oxidised in places, which prevents a
clear view of the painting, but there can be no doubt that it is in
fact an impressive work by Guido Reni (Fig.30).4
The splendid modelling of the soldier’s torso, the ease with
which certain details, such as his sandals, have been painted, the
way his arm in shadow is left unfinished (comparable with the
artist’s mature style), and the horse’s spirited head, brought
alive by the use of very loose brushstrokes, all reveal the masterly hand of Reni. Some pentimenti, visible to the naked eye
in the area of Saul’s hip, indicate that the picture is the prime
version: the cloth strips of his tunic and his green kilt have also
been modified.
The closest stylistic comparison in Reni’s œuvre is his Hercules
series (Musée du Louvre, Paris) painted for Ferdinando Gon-
zaga, 6th Duke of Mantua (reg. 1615–26) for his Villa La Favorita
in Mantua.5 Hercules on the pyre was delivered in November 1617,
and the others are dated between then and April 1621.6 That
series has more dramatic lighting and more vigorous modelling
than the Conversion of Saul, and is painted in freer brushstrokes,
but the cloudscape of the Saul recalls those of Hercules and Achelous and Hercules on the pyre (Fig.28). In the latter painting Hercules’ legs are in a very similar pose to Saul’s, albeit in reverse,
and Saul’s arm corresponds to Nessus’ raised arm in the Rape of
Deianeira (Fig.31), while the centaur’s legs resemble those of
Saul’s horse. On the other hand, Saul’s anatomy recalls that of the
Samson victorious and of St Proculus in the Pietà dei Mendicanti
(both Pinacoteca Nazionale, Bologna), and Saul’s figure, face and
aquiline nose are very similar to St Maurice in S. Maria dei Laghi,
Avigliana, in Piedmont (Fig.29).
All these paintings have been dated to the period 1615–20,7
but the obvious reference to Caravaggio in the modelling of
Saul’s mouth, and the extremely contrived posture, the limbs
arranged in an X-shape and bent into a counterpoised position,
suggests an earlier date. Daniele Benati, working from photographs, suggested that this late Mannerist style was derived from
Cavaliere d’Arpino (the sinuous movement of the horse’s tail, for
instance), so that the canvas should be dated to the time of Reni’s
I would like to thank Prometeo Cerezo, Director of the Real Centro Universitario
Escorial, in whose office the painting discussed in this article hangs, and Carmen García Frías, Curator of old-master paintings, Patrimonio Nacional, for their help. I
would also like to thank Angelo Mazza, Daniele Benati, Cristina Terzaghi, Gian
Piero Cammarota and Stéphane Loire for their opinions, and Arnold Nesselrath and
Ezio Orsini for facilitating study of Reni’s works in the Pinacoteca Nazionale,
Bologna, Musée du Louvre, Paris, Pinacoteca Vaticana and S. Maria dei Laghi,
Avigliana.
1 Patrimonio Nacional, inv. no.10033839. The painting is inscribed at the bottom
with the numbers 409 and 12.
2 F. de los Santos: Descripcion del Real Monasterio de San Lorenzo de El Escorial,
Madrid 1681, p.82. In 1698 the three works, all attributed to Guercino, were still
together, displayed on the same wall in the same room; ibid., 4th ed., Madrid 1698,
p.84. They were still there in 1700, when the Portuguese painter Felipe de Silva
attributed the Conversion of Saul to ‘Luca de Olanda’ (Lucas van Leyden?) and thought
the works to be worth the respectable sum of 200 ducats each; see Madrid, Library
of the Museo Nacional del Prado, ‘Testamentaría del sr D. Carlos II. Pinturas del
Palacio de Madrid’, 1700, no.26. In 2001 García Frías was uncertain of the attribution of the Saul to Guercino and of its whereabouts; see C. García-Frías: ‘Dos dibujos inéditos de los Aposentos Reales de San Lorenzo de 1755’, Reales Sitios 150
(2001), pp.16–25. See also B. Bassegoda: El Escorial como museo: La decoración pictórica mueble en el monasterio de El Escorial desde Diego Velázquez hasta Frédéric Quilliet
(1809), Barcelona 2002, p.233.
3 F. Ximenez: Descripción del Real monasterio de San Lorenzo del Escorial, Madrid 1764,
p.175, described the three paintings in the same room as works by Guercino, but
noted that, although some considered all three to be by Giordano, Lot and his daughters had unquestionably been painted by Guercino. A. Ponz: Viage de España, Madrid
1773, II, p.387, saw the Conversion of Saul in the upper cloister of the Monastery, and
argued that it was by Guercino. A. Conca: Descrizione odeporica della Spagna, II, Parma
1793, p.81, noted that it looked like a work by Guercino. In 1794 it was attributed
to ‘Giordano, in the style of Guercino’; see Madrid, Library of the Museo Nacional
del Prado, ‘Inventario del Real Palacio Nuevo de Madrid’, 1794, p.394. J.A. Ceán
Bermúdez: Diccionario histórico de los más ilustres profesores de la Bellas Artes en España, II,
Madrid 1800, p.342, attributed the work to Giordano without qualification. V. Poleró: Catálogo de los cuadros del Real Monasterio de San Lorenzo, llamado del Escorial,
Madrid 1857, p.102, mentioned the painting, numbered 405, as hanging in the ‘Sala
Prioral’ of the Monastery. S.L. Ares Espada: ‘Il Soggiorno spagnolo di Luca Giordano’, unpublished Ph.D. diss. (Università di Bologna, 1955), p.97, considered it a
lost work by Giordano, while O. Ferrari and G. Scavizzi: Luca Giordano, Naples 1966,
p.288, believed it to be the work of one of his followers. Bassegoda, op. cit. (note 2),
p.234, attributed it to Giordano, while M. Hermoso Cuesta: ‘La pintura de Lucas
Jordán en las colecciones españolas’, unpublished Ph.D. diss. (Universidad de
Zaragoza, 2005), IV, p.1805, included it among Giordano’s dubious works. At the
Patrimonio Nacional it is currently listed as an ‘anonymous work of the Bolognese
school’; communication of Carmen García Frías, Curator of Old-Master Paintings at
the Patrimonio Nacional.
4 Although there are some paint losses, which occasionally extend to the ground
layer, the canvas is in an acceptable state of conservation. In the late nineteenth century the painting was in the Sala Capitular of the Escorial, as can be gleaned from a
photograph in M. Moreno: Catálogo de fotografías. Museo del Prado. Academia de San
Fernando. Museo de Arte Moderno. Escorial. Toledo. Sevilla etc., Madrid n.d. [1902?].
5 Hercules and the Hydra of Lerna (inv. no.535), Hercules and Achelous (inv. no.536),
The rape of Deianira (inv. no.537), and Hercules on the pyre (inv. no.538).
6 W. Braghirolli: ‘Guido Reni e Ferdinando Gonzaga’, Rivista storica Mantovana 1
(1885), pp.88–195; R. Spear: ‘Re-viewing the Divine Guido’, THE BURLINGTON
MAGAZINE 131 (1989), p.371; S. Loire: ‘Guido Reni dopo la mostra di Bologna:
qualche aggiunta’, Accademia Clementina: atti e memorie 25 (1990), p.19; C. Gnudi and
G.C. Cavalli: Guido Reni, Florence 1955, pp.27 and 43; and D.S. Pepper and R.
Morselli: ‘Guido Reni’s Hercules Series: New Considerations and Conclusions’,
Studi di storia dell’arte 4 (1993), pp.139–40 and 181.
7 M. di Macco: ‘S. Maurizio di Guido Reni’, Accademia Clementina: atti e memorie 25
(1990), pp.111–17; A. Ciffani, F. Monetti and D.S. Pepper: ‘A new altar-piece by
Guido Reni’, THE BURLINGTON MAGAZINE 192 (1990), pp.634–36; and Pepper and
Morselli, op. cit. (note 6), pp.139–40.
the burlington magaz in e
•
clv
•
o cto ber 20 13
677
MA.OCT.Michaus.Redin.pg proof corrs_Layout 1 25/09/2013 13:10 Page 678
RENI’S ‘CONVERSION OF SAUL’
28. Hercules on the pyre, by Guido Reni. c.1617–21. Canvas, 260 by 194 cm.
(Musée du Louvre, Paris).
29. Vision of St Maurice, by Guido Reni. c.1619. Canvas, 242
by 163 cm. (S. Maria Madonna dei Laghi, Avigliana).
association with the Cavaliere, which began just before 1610.
But above all, Saul’s complex pose was inspired by the figure of
Heliodorus in Raphael’s Expulsion of Heliodorus from the Temple in
the Vatican Stanze (Fig.33), which made a profound impression
on the artist,8 while the centaur’s tail in the Rape of Deianeira is
similar to the tail of Saul’s horse. Moreover, although the Caravaggesque facial expression is repeated in some figures in Reni’s
Massacre of the Innocents (Pinacoteca Nazionale, Bologna), documented in 1611, the techniques of the two paintings are very different, the Escorial painting being closer to the Hercules series in
the Louvre.9
Reni rejected the usual background scene of horses and riders
fleeing in terror from the divine manifestation in favour of
the solitary figure and horse inspired by Parmigianino’s depiction
of the subject (Fig.32). As Philippe Morel has explained, Parmigianino based his painting on the account given in the Epistles of
St Paul rather than on that found in the Acts of the Apostles,
avoiding a depiction of the event as ‘Historia’ and electing instead
to emphasise its spiritual significance.10 However, as in his Atalanta and Hippomenes (Museo Nacional del Prado, Madrid),11
Guido chose to depict the climax of the story, the decisive
moment in which Saul, free falling, before he has hit the ground,
with his right leg still in contact with the frantic horse, experiences the divine revelation that transformed him into Paul. As he
falls, he tries to comprehend the cause of his accident and casts a
sideways glance at the faint heavenly light which marks the
beginning of his blinding vision, while turning his head towards
his horse, which is also looking up to the sky (Fig.30). Saul’s contrived posture also has a specific purpose: the diagonal formed by
his right leg directs the eye towards the horse’s head, which in
turn points towards the revelatory light. Saul has not yet heard
the divine voice, nor has he yet been blinded, as depicted in
Michelangelo’s fresco in the Pauline Chapel, Rome, or Caravaggio’s canvas for the Cerasi Chapel in S. Maria del Popolo,
Rome. Neither does he protect his eyes from the blinding light,
as in Caravaggio’s panel of the same scene in the Odescalchi
Balbi collection.
The painting was listed in the inventory made in April 1633 of
the contents of Villa Ludovisi: ‘Una conversione di San Paolo figura
intiera, e grande del naturale sola col cavallo, cornice dorata alta p.mi dieci
8
also M.T. Martone: The Theme of the Conversion of Paul in Italian Paintings from the
Early Christian Period to the High Renaissance, New York 1985, p.23.
11 A. Vannugli: La collezione Serra di Cassano, Salerno 1989, pp.54–60; D. García
Cueto: Seicento boloñés y Siglo de Oro Español, Madrid 2006, pp.199–200; J.L.
Colomer: ‘Guido Reni en las colecciones reales españolas’, in J.L. Colomer and A.
Serra: España y Bolonia. Siete siglos de relaciones artísticas y culturales, Madrid 2006,
pp.223–24.
Guido Reni was also aware of the figure of Saul in the tapestry of the Conversion
of Saul after Raphael’s cartoon, and the painting by Ludovico Carracci or one of his
associates for the church of S. Francesco, Bologna, which inspired Saul’s legs and his
hand on the ground.
9 An opinion shared by Stéphane Loire of the Musée du Louvre, Paris.
10 P. Morel: ‘”Una cosa rarissima”. La Conversion de Saint Paul de Parmesan’, in P.
Kéchichian, S. Breton and P. Morel: La conversion de Paul, Paris 2001, pp.81–84. See
678
o c t ob er 2 01 3
•
c lv
•
t he b u r li ng t on maga zine
MA.OCT.Michaus.Redin.pg proof corrs_Layout 1 25/09/2013 13:10 Page 679
RENI’S ‘CONVERSION OF SAUL’
30. Conversion of Saul, by Guido Reni. c.1615–20. Canvas, 222 by 160 cm. (Real Centro Universitario Escorial-María Cristina; El Escorial; Patrimonio Nacional).
the burlington magaz in e
•
clv
•
o cto ber 20 13
679
MA.OCT.Michaus.Redin.pg proof corrs_Layout 1 25/09/2013 13:11 Page 680
RENI’S ‘CONVERSION OF SAUL’
32. Conversion of Saul,
by Parmigianino.
c.1528.
Canvas,
178.5 by
123.5 cm.
(Kunsthistorisches
Museum,
Vienna).
31. Rape of
Deianeira,
by Guido
Reni.
c.1617–21.
Canvas,
259 by 193
cm.
(Musée du
Louvre,
Paris).
in circa larga sette e mezzo, mano di Guido Reni’.12 It measured 10
by 7.5 Roman palmi (223.4 by 167.5 cm.), which corresponds to
the 222 by 160 cm. of Fig.30.13 It was in the second room of the
‘Palazzo grande’, where it was seen by Fioravante Martinelli on
16th October 1662,14 and where it still hung in May 1665,
together with paintings of Lucretia and St Francis that were
attributed to the same artist, as is clear from the inventory drawn
up between 1st April and 12th May of that year.15 For Reni to be
mentioned in this inventory is something of an exception:
although the inventory describes all the paintings (and sculptures)
housed in the Villa Ludovisi on the Pincio and in the Palace of
Zagarolo, it only mentions fourteen artists by name.16
The Conversion of Saul almost certainly arrived in Spain from
the Ludovisi collection, because in his will, drawn up in December 1664, Prince Niccolò Ludovisi (1610–64), formerly Spanish
viceroy of Aragon and Sardinia, bequeathed to Philip IV of Spain
six paintings to be chosen from the Villa Ludovisi or, if these
were not to his taste, from other Ludovisi residences, to include
Titian’s portrait of the Turkish sultan Suleiman.17 The works
were selected by Pedro Antonio de Aragón, the Spanish Ambassador to Rome, who, it was reported, on 9th May 1665 was
accompanied by Cardinal Niccolò Albergati Ludovisi (1608–87)
on a visit to the family estate so that he could choose six works.18
Malvasia added that the diplomat did not select Annibale Carracci’s Annunciation because the estate’s ‘guardarroba’ advised
against it, citing its poor condition.19 Titian’s portrait of the sultan does not appear in other Ludovisi documents nor in the
Spanish inventories, but Titian did paint a portrait of Suleiman II
for Federico II Gonzaga’s series of famous men, which was delivered to Mantua in 1538.20
12
p.203, note 238.
18 L. de Frutos and S. Salort: ‘La colección artística de don Pedro Antonio de Aragón,
virrey de Nápoles (1666–1672)’, Ricerche sul Seicento napoletano (2003), p.54; García
Cueto, op. cit. (note 11), p.207, note 239.
19 C.C. Malvasia: Felsina pittrice: vite de’ pittori bolognesi, ed. G.P. Zanotti, I, Bologna
1841, p.358; Garas 1966, op. cit. (note 12), p.288; García Cueto, op. cit. (note 11), p.203.
20 What is believed to be a copy of Titian’s portrait, made c.1540–50, is at Schloss
Ambras, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna; see R. Morselli, ed.: exh. cat. Gonzaga: La Celeste Galleria: le raccolte, Mantua (Palazzo Te and Palazzo Ducale) 2002,
p.217, no.66.
21 De los Santos, op. cit. (note 2), pp.100–01; Garas 1967, op. cit. (note 12), p.339;
Bassegoda, op. cit. (note 2), p.228; and García Cueto, op. cit. (note 11), p.143.
22 Commissioned in 1617 by Alessandro Ludovisi, the future Gregory XV; see A.E.
Pérez Sánchez: Pintura italiana del siglo XVII en España, Madrid 1965, pp.140–41;
D. Mahon: Il Guercino (Giovanni Francesco Barbieri, 1591–1666). Catalogo critico dei dipinti, Bologna 1968, pp.45–47 and 53–55; Wood, op. cit. (note 16), p.519; Garas 1967,
op. cit. (note 12), p.339; Martinelli op. cit. (note 14), pp.315–17; and L. Salerno and
D. Mahon: I dipinti del Guercino, Rome 1998, pp.114–15.
23 ASV, ABL, vol.328, 1, fol.165r.
24 De los Santos, op. cit. (note 2), p.82; Bassegoda, op. cit. (note 2), p.233; and García
Cueto, op. cit. (note 11), p.206.
25 Martinelli, op. cit. (note 14), p.323.
K. Garas: ‘The Ludovisi Collection of Pictures in 1633 – I’, THE BURLINGTON
138 (1966), pp.287–90; idem: ‘The Ludovisi Collection of Pictures in
1633 – II’, ibid. 139 (1967), pp.339–49; D.S. Pepper: Guido Reni, Oxford 1984, p.307;
and idem: Guido Reni. L’opera completa, Novara 1988, p.356. Pepper included the
work among those cited in seventeenth-century sources which have been lost.
13 The Roman palmo measures 22.34 cm.
14 F. Martinelli: ‘Roma ornata dall’architettura, pittura e scoltura (1660–63)’, in C.
D’Onofrio: Roma nel Seicento, Rome 1969, pp.315–17.
15 Rome, Archivio Segreto Vaticano, Archivio Boncompagni Ludovisi (cited hereafter as ASV, ABL), vol.328, fol.165r. The Lucretia is cited in Garas 1967, op. cit. (note
12), p.347, as the one which appears in the 1686 inventory of the Alcazár, where the
painting is described as almost destroyed, and Pepper 1984, op. cit. (note 12), p.329,
includes it in his ‘Index of Works by Subject’; see also Pepper 1988, op. cit. (note 12),
p.258. Nothing more is known about the St Francis.
16 B. Palma: I marmi Ludovisi, Rome 1983, p.50; C.H. Wood: ‘The Ludovisi Collection of Paintings in 1623’, THE BURLINGTON MAGAZINE 134 (1992), pp.515–23; C.
Benocci: Villa Ludovisi, Rome 2010, p.185.
17 ‘. . . sei quadri con le loro guarnitioni et adrezzi di quelli che stanno nella vigna di Roma e
perche intendo che sono di maggior gusto suo le pitture del Titiano voglio che siano di sua mano,
et uno di quelli sia il ritratto di Solimano imperatore dei Turchi e quando quelli della vigna di
Roma non si stimassero a proposito si pigliaranno da altra parte a questo effetto’; ASV, ABL,
vol.293, fol.489v. Published partially in Spanish in García Cueto, op. cit. (note 11),
MAGAZINE
680
o c t ob er 2 01 3
•
c lv
•
t he b u r li ng t on maga zine
MA.OCT.Michaus.Redin.pg proof corrs_Layout 1 25/09/2013 13:11 Page 681
RENI’S ‘CONVERSION OF SAUL’
One of the paintings selected was Guercino’s Susanna and the
elders (Museo Nacional del Prado, Madrid),21 which was in the
Villa Ludovisi in 1623 and 1633, and which Martinelli saw there
in October 1662.22 Despite the fact that the artist is not named,
it must be the canvas of the same dimensions that hung in the
same room as the Conversion of Saul in April 1665.23 The arrival
of Guercino’s painting is not referred to in any Spanish documents, but because of the gift to Philip IV in Prince Niccolò
Ludovisi’s will of December 1664, the Ambassador Pedro Antonio of Aragon’s visit to the villa in May 1665, and the presence
of the painting in the Escorial only two years later, there can be
little doubt about its provenance.
The same could be said about the Conversion of Saul, which
was also in the Villa Ludovisi in 1623 and 163324 and was also
seen by Martinelli with Susanna and the elders in 1662, although
Guercino’s Lot and his daughters had been moved elsewhere in the
villa.25 In May 1665 the Saul was still close to Susanna and the
elders, but Guercino’s second canvas had disappeared.26 Finally, in
the August 1670 inventory of the Villa Ludovisi, there is no
mention of the three works,27 supporting the hypothesis that
they probably arrived in Spain between May 1665 and 1667.
However, Niccolò Ludovisi bequeathed six works in total.
Klára Garas suggested that Jacopo Bassano’s Forge, first listed in
the Alcázar of Madrid in 1686, is quite possibly the ‘Fucina di Vulcano’ of very similar size (11 by 17 palmi = 245.7 by 378.7 cm.)
that had hung together with a Nativity of the same dimensions
and also by Jacopo Bassano in the Villa Ludovisi in 1665,28 since
the other works depicting this subject attributed to Bassano or his
school are of smaller dimensions.29 Moreover, the canvas does
not appear in the Villa Ludovisi inventory of 1670, although a
Nativity is listed there which, on the basis of its dimensions, must
be that by Bassano now in Madrid.30
There was a Titian portrait in the Ludovisi collection at the
Villa Borghese in 1633; in an inventory of that year, no.19 was
‘un ritratto d’un Huomo, che tiene la mano sopra un orologgio alto
palmi cinque mano di Titiano’.31 Titian’s Knight with a clock (Museo
Nacional del Prado, Madrid), which it has been suggested was
the former Ludovisi painting, first appears in the Alcázar in 1666
(listed as a Tintoretto).32 While it has been proposed that it was
one of the six paintings given by Niccolò Ludovisi to Philip IV
in exchange for being invested with the state of Piombino,
which arrived in Spain with the Duke of Medina de las Torres
in 1643, the Titian does not appear in that list.33 Nor can it be
the man with an hour glass in the 1665 Ludovisi inventory as
Wood has proposed.34 Therefore, since Ludovisi specifically
mentioned a portrait by Titian in his will, albeit of a very different sitter, the Knight with a clock may have been one of the paintings chosen by Antonio de Aragón. The last painting could have
been Reni’s Judith in the Alcázar in 1686, now lost, which,
because of its poor condition, had been taken out of its frame in
order to be copied.35
While the Conversion of Saul and Lot and his daughters are first
reported to be in Spain in 1681, this does not preclude the possibility that they had arrived at some point during the fourteen
years which had passed since the previous inventory of the Escorial had been published in 1667,36 nor does it exclude the possibility that they formed part of the Royal Collection before being
placed in the Escorial. In 1675 the court painter Juan Carreño de
Miranda arrived at the Escorial with twenty paintings to decorate
the ‘Quarto del Rey’ and the bedroom of Philip II in preparation
for a visit by Charles II of Spain, and it is possible that these two
works were among them.37
Nothing is known about who commissioned the painting
which first appears in the inventory of the Villa Ludovisi in 1633.
Reni had worked for the Ludovisi family since 1621.38 Nor does
26 The Susanna must be, according to its description and Martinelli’s remarks, the
painting measuring 7 by 10 palmi (mentioned without an attribution). Lot and his
daughters could be the painting in the Palace of Zagarolo, where no mention is made
of either the artist or the painting’s measurements; see ASV, ABL, vol.328, fol.229.
27 ASV, ABL, vol.310, fols.163–92.
28 Garas 1967, op. cit. (note 12), p.343; Wood, op. cit. (note 16), p.520; and Martinelli, op cit. (note 14), p.317.
29 The collection of the Duke of Lerma included two paintings by Bassano of the
same subject, one smaller and the other, bought in 1608, of unknown dimensions,
acquired at the auction of the Duke of Peñaranda.
30 They were still together in 1662; Martinelli, op. cit. (note 14), p.317.
31 Garas 1967, op. cit. (note 12), p.340; Wood, op. cit. (note 16), p.520.
32 To attribute a portrait by Titian to Tintoretto was very common at the time; see
E. Wethey: The Paintings of Titian, 2. The Portraits, London 1969, p.114; and M.
Falomir: exh. cat. Tiziano, Madrid (Museo Nacional del Prado) 2003, pp.204–05.
33 A. Anselmi: ‘Arte, politica e diplomazia: Tiziano, Correggio, Raffaello. L’investitura de Piombino e notizie su agenti spagnoli a Roma’, in E. Cropper: The Diplomacy of Art: Artistic Creation and Politics in Seicento Italy, Bologna 2000, pp.101–17, esp.
pp.107–11.
34 Wood, op. cit. (note 16), p.520.
35 It would not appear that this is the canvas in the Sedlmayer collection, Switzerland (212 by 143 cm.), as suggested in Pepper 1984, op. cit. (note 12), pp.252–53,
since in 1665 it was listed in the Villa Ludovisi as measuring 12 by 5 palmi, equivalent to 268 by 111 cm. However, the inventory of 1665 states that the Conversion of
Saul and Judith, located next to it, measured 12 by 5 palmi, a very narrow format
(only 111 cm. wide). The present height of the Conversion of Saul, 223.4 cm., corresponds to the 10 palmi mentioned in the inventory of 1633, so the painting of Judith,
although always described as measuring 12 palmi high, was probably the same height
as the first; see Y. Bottineau: ‘L’Alcázar de Madrid et l’inventaire de 1686. Aspects
de la cour d’Espagne au XVIIe siècle’, Bulletin Hispanique 60/3 (1958), pp.310–11;
A.E. Pérez Sánchez: Carreño, Rizi, Herrera y la pintura madrileña de su tiempo, Madrid
1986, p.237; S. Ebert-Schifferer: ‘Judit e Oloferne’, in idem, A. Emiliani and E.
Schleier: Guido Reni e l’Europa, Bologna 1988, pp.145–49; and Colomer, op. cit.
(note 11), pp.226–27.
36 De los Santos, op. cit. (note 2), p.82.
37 Bassegoda, op. cit. (note 2), pp.54 and 222.
38 See C.H. Wood: The Indian summer of Bolognese painting. Gregory XV (1621–1623)
and Ludovisi art patronage in Rome, Ann Arbor 1988, pp.143 and 159. In 1621 he
received 100 escudos for two unspecified works and, between November 1624 and
July 1626, he was commissioned by Cardinal Ludovisi to paint the high altarpiece for
the church of Trinità dei Pellegrini, Rome; see S. Vasco Rocca: SS. Trinità dei Pellegrini, Rome 1979, p.99; and A. Lemoine: ‘Caravage, Cavalier d’Arpin, Guido Reni
et la confrérie romaine dela SS Trinità dei Pellegrini’, Storia dell’arte 85 (1995),
pp.428–29.
33. Expulsion of Heliodorus from the Temple, by Raphael. c.1511–14. Fresco, 750 cm.
wide. (Vatican Museums, Vatican City).
the burlington magaz in e
•
clv
•
o cto ber 20 13
681
MA.OCT.Michaus.Redin.pg proof corrs_Layout 1 25/09/2013 13:11 Page 682
RENI’S ‘CONVERSION OF SAUL’
34. Conversion of Saul. Anonymous copy after Guido Reni. Sixteenth century. Canvas, 222 by 182 cm. (Museo Regionale Conte Agostino Pepoli, Trapani).
Reni’s Saul seem to have been on public view since it had no
influence on Bolognese or Roman painting.39
In the ‘Inventario delle cose più singolari del Signor Cavaliere Carlo
Maratti’, drawn up in 1712, we find a ‘San Paolo, che cadde da cavallo copiato da Ciccio Napolitano famoso, viene da Guido Reni, figura
grande al naturale con sua cornice nera’.40 This is the only documentary reference to a copy of Reni’s painting, if it is indeed the same
composition. The name of the artist, Ciccio Napoletano, is
39
A Conversion of Saul by Pier Francesco Cittadini, Reni’s pupil, in S. Paolo Maggiore in Bologna, decorated in the 1640s, recalls Reni’s horse. This may be related
to a previous commission given to Reni for the church, built by the architect and
general of the Barnabite order Giovanni Ambrogio Mazenta, who in 1614 commissioned a bust-length St Paul from the painter and who, in letters he sent to the
Superior of the church of S. Carlo ai Catinari, Rome, for the façade of which
Guido had painted the fresco of S. Carlo Borromeo between 1612 and 1613,
described him as ‘suo figliuolo spirituale’ and ‘suo penitente’. However, the choir of S.
Paolo had barely been built in 1625 and the church was completed by the Spada
family after 1634, when the painting had already been in the Villa Ludovisi for at
least one year; N. Gauk Roger: ‘The Architecture of the Barnabite Order
1545–1659’, unpublished Ph.D. diss. (University of Cambridge, 1977), pp.71–72;
J. Stabenow: Die Architektur der Barnabiten, 1600–1630, Berlin 2011, pp.243–44; K.
Takahashi: ‘Mazenta e Guido Reni. Il San Carlo per la chiesa dei Catinari di
Roma’, in M.L. Gatti Perer, ed.: Lorenzo Binago e la cultura architettonica dei Barnabiti, Milan 2002, pp.174–79; O. Premoli: Guido Reni e i Barnabiti, Rome 1914,
docs.5 and 6; E. Riccomini: ‘I pittori del coro di San Paolo in Bologna’, Arte
antica e moderna 20 (1962), pp.448–55; C. Guidotti Roli: ‘Pierfancesco Cittadini’, in
M. Gregori, ed.: La pittura in Italia. Il Seicento, II, Turin 1989, p.696; and N. Roio:
‘Pier Francesco Cittadini’, in M. Pirandini and A. Roio: La scuola di Guido Reni,
Modena 1992, pp.165–85.
40 R. Galli: La collezione d’Arte di Carlo Maratti, Bologna 1928, p.17; and D.L. Bershad: ‘The Newly Discovered Testament of Carlo Maratti and His Wife Francesca’,
682
o c t ob er 2 01 3
•
c lv
•
t he b u r li ng t on maga zine
the pseudonym of Francesco Graziani, a painter of battles
who was also a renowned copyist of Reni’s works.41 On no
account can the mediocre copy of the Escorial painting in the
Museo Regionale Conte Agostino Pepoli, Trapani (Fig.34), be
attributed to Graziani. Negri Arnoldi attributed it to an early seventeenth-century anonymous Emilian artist influenced by Caravaggio and Guercino.42 It came from the collection of the
Trapani noble Antonio Sieri Pepoli, who belonged to the Sicilian branch of the Bolognese family, and it was acquired by his
brother Agostino, who bought and renovated the Pepoli Vecchio palace of his ancestors in Bologna.43
It is surprising that Reni’s Conversion of Saul received so little
attention, possibly because of the exaggerated Mannerist pose of
the figure of Saul, so unlike Reni’s ‘classical’ style. Even more
surprising is the fact that it went unnoticed in the Royal Collection following its arrival in Spain, and more surprising still that it
was mistaken for a painting by Guercino. In 1664 the Royal
Alcázar received from the Serra collection Reni’s Atalanta and
Hippomenes (Museo Nacional del Prado, Madrid), but neither
this nor any of the many other works by Reni in Madrid were
linked with the Conversion of Saul. Perhaps the painting arrived
shortly after the death of its intended recipient, Philip IV, during
an interregnum, so that it was overlooked. It is probable that it
was taken to the Escorial in 1675 among the works sent by Juan
Carreño de Miranda to decorate rooms such as the ‘Quadra de
mediodía’, but if so, it is strange that the painter responsible for the
Royal Collection failed to recognise the hand of Guido Reni,
amply represented in the collection.
Furthermore, Antonio Ponz, who had lived in Italy for nine
years and had been associated with Mengs and Winckelmann,
also attributed the painting to Guercino.44 Juan Agustin Bermudez Ceán unaccountably attributed it to Giordano. When in
1857 Vicente Poleró catalogued the painting in the ‘Sala Prioral’
at the Escorial,45 it was in the company of other great works by
Titian, Ribera and Tintoretto, and was still hung near Guercino’s Lot and his daughters, which had almost certainly arrived at
the same time from the Villa Ludovisi. It is to be hoped that this
splendid painting will soon regain a place of honour in the
Monastery’s magnificent collection.
Antologia di Belle Arti 25–26 (1985), p.73.
41 As shown by the inventory of Camillo Pamphilij of 1652; see L. Lorizzo: ‘Nuovi
documento su Francesco Graziani detto Ciccio Napoletano e su Paolo Porpora a
Roma’, Ricerche sul ’600 napoletano (2007), pp.57–61.
42 I wish to thank Daniela Scandariato for information about the painting’s provenance. According to F. Negri Arnoldi: ‘Attività delle soprintendenze’, Bollettino
d’Arte 53 (1968), p.161, and idem: IV Mostra di opere restaurate, Trapani 1969, p.25, the
horse shows similarities to those painted by Guercino in the Ludovisi Aurora. A naive
eighteenth-century engraving in the Diocesan Museum of Sassari copies Reni’s
painting, adding several figures. It is possible that a copy of the painting reached Sardinia since Niccolò Ludovisi was Viceroy of Sardinia. A Conversion of Saul attributed
to Reni, ‘Powerfully painted’, of unknown dimensions was auctioned at Christie’s,
London, 5th March 1836, lot 36. I wish to thank Lynda McLeod (Christie’s Archive)
for her help.
43 V. Sola: ‘La collezione Pepoli: note sulle vicende di una raccolta ottocentesca’, in
V. Abbate, ed.: Miscellanea Pepoli: ricerche sulla cultura artistica a Trapani, Trapani 1997,
pp.291–311.
44 Ponz, op. cit. (note 3), III, p.387, rightly recognised that the Christ carrying the cross
(Patrimonio Nacional, inv. no.10014598; canvas, 115 by 148 cm.), which in 1681,
1700, 1764 and 1773 was considered to be by Reni, was in fact by Guercino.
Bassegoda, op. cit. (note 2), p.266, identified the painting as the one described by
Santos.
45 See note 3 above.