Lot Essay
Grunchec points out that the model shown here posed in this attitude in 1813 for a prize competed for by twenty pupils at the École des Beaux-Arts won by A. Pagnest (1790-1819). His sketch shows the model from an appreciably different position. It is difficult to confirm definitely that Géricault took part in this competition as the archives are deficient. Professor L. Eitner (1954) accepts the picture as a 'reasonable attribution' but later expresses doubts (1980), although admitting that it is qualitatively the best of the group of studies of this model.
In a recent letter, dated July 30, 1995, Eitner states that he is now inclined to accept the attrubution, though with some reservations. Grunchec, who in 1979 fully accepted this picture, more recently (1991) began to share Eitner's doubts. 'The Painting is of high quality, but there is something in its rather dry realism that does not entirely square with what I know of Géricault's work between the Charging Chasseur of 1812 and the Wounded Cuirassier of 1814. The signature is a curious feature: studies submitted in the concours de torse were unsigned, as Grunchec points out; it is of course possible that a signature was added at some later date'. Technical investigation of the signature at the time of the Bühler sale in 1985 showed the signature to be contemporary.
We are grateful to Professor Eitner for his help in cataloguing this picture.
In a recent letter, dated July 30, 1995, Eitner states that he is now inclined to accept the attrubution, though with some reservations. Grunchec, who in 1979 fully accepted this picture, more recently (1991) began to share Eitner's doubts. 'The Painting is of high quality, but there is something in its rather dry realism that does not entirely square with what I know of Géricault's work between the Charging Chasseur of 1812 and the Wounded Cuirassier of 1814. The signature is a curious feature: studies submitted in the concours de torse were unsigned, as Grunchec points out; it is of course possible that a signature was added at some later date'. Technical investigation of the signature at the time of the Bühler sale in 1985 showed the signature to be contemporary.
We are grateful to Professor Eitner for his help in cataloguing this picture.