Lot Essay
As William Jordan and Peter Cherry point out in the 1995 exhibition catalogue, (op. cit., p. 118), Toms Hiepes (or Yepes) was unquestionably the dominant figure in the development of still-life painting in Valenica in the 1640s. As in Seville, still-life painting did not begin to flourish there until the 1640s, and once it did the products of the school were distinguished by a distinctive, yet somewhat archaic style, which reflected a different way of life from that in the capital. Jordan and Cherry point out that Hiepes created still-lifes of a strongly individual character that deeply affected the work of other artist's in and around Valencia. Little factual information about the artist exists but a reference to one of his fruteros by the local chronicler Marco Antoni Ort hints at his reputation, 'There were many pictures in which many kinds of fruits were painted, all children of the brush and hand of Yepes, the painter who, in this line of the imitation of fruits has succeeded in acquiring a very singular frame and reputation' (see ibid.). Marcos Antonio Orellana, the biographer of Valencian painters, writes 'His flowers are subtle, translucent with light, his fruits very natural and everything done with admirable perfection. His paintings are equally copious as they are esteemed and celebrated' (Biographa pictrica valenciana o Vida de los pintores, arquitectos, escultores y grabadores valencianos, ed. X. de Salas, 2nd. ed., Valencia, 1967, pp. 221-2). The 1995 exhibition Toms Yepes in Valencia showed that not only was his output prolific, but also that the range of his subject matter was extremly broad and included game pieces, kitchen still lifes, still lifes in landscapes and garden pieces such as the present lot. In his catalogue entry for the 1997 exhibition An Eye on Nature at the Matthiesen Gallery, London, Jordan sums up Hiepes's undoubted appeal: '...at their best, his works are brimming with an irresisitible provincial charm and a delightful inventiveness suggestive of the sybaritic life of this prosperous Mediterranean seaport, agricultural and manufacturing centre' (see p.112).
Two other versions of the present composition are known, each with a different protagonist. One from a private collection in Madrid, in which the monkey is replaced by a small dog seated on a chair (fig.1), was featured in the Valencia exhibition, no. 14, while the other, which was sold at Sotheby's, New York, June 2, 1989, lot 76 and is now in a private collection, New York, features a girl making nosegays. Both pictures are signed and inscribed on the banderole in the lower right corner, and although a similar banderole is visible on the present picture (some of which has been folded over at the edge of the canvas) no writing is apparent. Other small differences between the three paintings exist: in the two works featuring animals, the garden is surrounded by a fence, whereas the third opens to a view of a distant hilly landscape. In the latter the leg of the girl replaces the white flowers in the picture with the dog, and, in the present work, the linnet about to land on a bunch of grapes. A clear reference to the classical literature of still-life painting, this charming feature is unique to the present composition.
Dr. William Jordan, who has seen a transparency of the present work, knew it only from a black and white photograph when he reproduced it in the 1995 exhibition catalogue (loc. cit.); he dates both this and the picture with the girl to the 1660s. A similar dating for the third would seem correct. In the catalogue for the exhibition Thomas Hiepes, Prof. A.E. Prez Snchez suggests that the New York composition is the prototype (op. cit., p. 112), and that it might in fact have served as the model for the present compositon is supported by the presence, behind the leftmost carnations in the flowerpot on the right, of a pentimento of the upright of a chair back similar to that in the painting with the girl.
Two other versions of the present composition are known, each with a different protagonist. One from a private collection in Madrid, in which the monkey is replaced by a small dog seated on a chair (fig.1), was featured in the Valencia exhibition, no. 14, while the other, which was sold at Sotheby's, New York, June 2, 1989, lot 76 and is now in a private collection, New York, features a girl making nosegays. Both pictures are signed and inscribed on the banderole in the lower right corner, and although a similar banderole is visible on the present picture (some of which has been folded over at the edge of the canvas) no writing is apparent. Other small differences between the three paintings exist: in the two works featuring animals, the garden is surrounded by a fence, whereas the third opens to a view of a distant hilly landscape. In the latter the leg of the girl replaces the white flowers in the picture with the dog, and, in the present work, the linnet about to land on a bunch of grapes. A clear reference to the classical literature of still-life painting, this charming feature is unique to the present composition.
Dr. William Jordan, who has seen a transparency of the present work, knew it only from a black and white photograph when he reproduced it in the 1995 exhibition catalogue (loc. cit.); he dates both this and the picture with the girl to the 1660s. A similar dating for the third would seem correct. In the catalogue for the exhibition Thomas Hiepes, Prof. A.E. Prez Snchez suggests that the New York composition is the prototype (op. cit., p. 112), and that it might in fact have served as the model for the present compositon is supported by the presence, behind the leftmost carnations in the flowerpot on the right, of a pentimento of the upright of a chair back similar to that in the painting with the girl.