.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
Sebastiano Conca moved to Rome from Naples as a young man and, under the wardship of his early patron Cardinal Pietro Ottoboni, received numerous commissions for altarpieces and frescoes from the Roman Curia. Interestingly, the subject of these works were mostly depictions of the lives of saints and prophets; examples include Scenes from the Life of Saint Dominic (1715) and the Miracle of Saint Clement, both executed in San Clemente, Rome; an oval medallion of the Jeremiah (1718), in San Giovanni Laterano, Rome; and The Coronation of Saint Cecilia (1721-24), in Santa Cecilia in Trastevere, Rome.
The success of these early projects prompted the Duke of Parma to offer the artist a studio in the Palazzo Farnese in 1725. This became the site of the Accademia del Nudo, Conca's well-known drawing academy. It was at this academy that the young Pompeo Batoni studied upon his arrival in Rome in 1727. While Batoni notoriously resisted the influence of his contemporaries, choosing instead to rely on studies of antiquity and early Renaissance masters such as Raphael, he took every opportunity to draw from life and regularly attended Conca's lessons.
This Saint John the Evangelist has traditionally been placed among Conca's early production, c. 1720. It is, however, more likely to date to his mature phase of over a decade later, when the artist produced easel paintings on a more regular basis for foreign collectors passing through Rome. It is possible that this intimate painting, remarkably small in scale for Conca, was used as inspiration for Pompeo Batoni's Saint John the Evangelist (Berkshire, Basildon Park), one of a series of apostles commissioned by Count Cesare Merenda for his gallery at Forlì. That series is dated by most to c. 1740-43, and is evidence of a connection between these two artists well beyond their contact at the Accademia.
More compelling evidence for the late dating of this work comes when comparing the figure present here with that of Saint John in Christ and the Woman taken into Adultery (sold, Christie's, London 8 July 2005, lot 44), which is signed and dated 1741. The model and the costume are identical in both pictures, but the vigorous treatment of the paint and pronounced chiaroscuro here, show the artist's reluctance to entirely abandon the exuberant Baroque style in favor of the lighter touch of his Rococo works.
An alternative attribution to Tommaso Maria Conca has been proposed by Professor Giancarlo Sestieri (written communication, 17 August 2007).
The success of these early projects prompted the Duke of Parma to offer the artist a studio in the Palazzo Farnese in 1725. This became the site of the Accademia del Nudo, Conca's well-known drawing academy. It was at this academy that the young Pompeo Batoni studied upon his arrival in Rome in 1727. While Batoni notoriously resisted the influence of his contemporaries, choosing instead to rely on studies of antiquity and early Renaissance masters such as Raphael, he took every opportunity to draw from life and regularly attended Conca's lessons.
This Saint John the Evangelist has traditionally been placed among Conca's early production, c. 1720. It is, however, more likely to date to his mature phase of over a decade later, when the artist produced easel paintings on a more regular basis for foreign collectors passing through Rome. It is possible that this intimate painting, remarkably small in scale for Conca, was used as inspiration for Pompeo Batoni's Saint John the Evangelist (Berkshire, Basildon Park), one of a series of apostles commissioned by Count Cesare Merenda for his gallery at Forlì. That series is dated by most to c. 1740-43, and is evidence of a connection between these two artists well beyond their contact at the Accademia.
More compelling evidence for the late dating of this work comes when comparing the figure present here with that of Saint John in Christ and the Woman taken into Adultery (sold, Christie's, London 8 July 2005, lot 44), which is signed and dated 1741. The model and the costume are identical in both pictures, but the vigorous treatment of the paint and pronounced chiaroscuro here, show the artist's reluctance to entirely abandon the exuberant Baroque style in favor of the lighter touch of his Rococo works.
An alternative attribution to Tommaso Maria Conca has been proposed by Professor Giancarlo Sestieri (written communication, 17 August 2007).