.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
This impressive Roman Charity is an important rediscovery in the oeuvre of Willem Drost, one of Rembrandt’s most talented and innovative pupils.
Depicting the Roman story of filial piety, in which Pero saves her father Cimon from death by starvation, the painting, with its loose handling of the paint and the flecked highlights in Cimon’s arms and torso, exemplifies the tenebrist style developed by Drost after his arrival in Italy in circa 1655. This evolution in the young artist’s technique away from the accomplished Rembrandtesque works of his Amsterdam period is fascinating to consider. From the very small body of extant works that date to the four years he spent in Venice before his untimely death, it is clear that Drost, despite his success in both the fine and rough manner of painting that he had adopted so adeptly whilst in Rembrandt’s studio, almost completely abandoned this, turning instead to the neo-Caravaggesque style of the present work.
The group of painters with whom Drost was associated in la Serenissima were known as the tenebrosi. Including Antonio Zanchi, the Genoese Giovanni Battista Langetti and the German Johann Carl Loth, (with whose works those of Drost have in the past been confused), their style was predicated on Jusepe de Ribera’s masterful chiaroscuro and was imbued with a shadowy realism. In Roman Charity this can be seen in the play of soft light and shadow across the two figures, which highlights the weary slump of Cimon’s sinewy body and the quiet strength of Pero’s selfless gesture.
Only sixteen paintings are securely given to Drost’s Italian period. Interestingly, within this corpus Drost can be seen experimenting with different versions of similar poses, using a small number of models that he may have shared with Loth, (further confusing the question of authorship between their two oeuvres). The figure of Pero in the present painting can be compared to that of Saint John the Evangelist (private collection, see J. Bikker, Willem Drost: A Rembrandt Pupil in Amsterdam and Venice, New Haven and London, 2005, p. 28-30, no. 29). With their statuesque presence and the three quarter turn of the head, they could almost be mirror images of one another. Similarly, the seated Cimon echoes the figure of Argus in Drost’s Mercury lulling Argus to Sleep (Dresden, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen).
Another version of Roman Charity, currently on loan to the Rijksmuseum (sold Sotheby’s, New York, 1 February 2018, lot 25, $1,095,000), shows a subtly different approach to this story of ultimate sacrifice and charity. In the Amsterdam version, which arguably still displays Rembrandt’s influence, the weakened Cimon clutches at Pero’s skirts in desperation, whereas in the present painting Drost captures the full extent of his vulnerability, with his manacled hands resting limply in his lap. The position of Pero is very similar in both instances, with her strong stance and far off gaze. However, where the Rijksmuseum shows a woman who quite closely resembles a figure of Drost’s own time, the present painting depicts an idealised heroine, highlighting the ancient Roman source of the subject.
We would like to thank Dr. Jonathan Bikker for confirming the attribution following first-hand inspection of the painting.
Depicting the Roman story of filial piety, in which Pero saves her father Cimon from death by starvation, the painting, with its loose handling of the paint and the flecked highlights in Cimon’s arms and torso, exemplifies the tenebrist style developed by Drost after his arrival in Italy in circa 1655. This evolution in the young artist’s technique away from the accomplished Rembrandtesque works of his Amsterdam period is fascinating to consider. From the very small body of extant works that date to the four years he spent in Venice before his untimely death, it is clear that Drost, despite his success in both the fine and rough manner of painting that he had adopted so adeptly whilst in Rembrandt’s studio, almost completely abandoned this, turning instead to the neo-Caravaggesque style of the present work.
The group of painters with whom Drost was associated in la Serenissima were known as the tenebrosi. Including Antonio Zanchi, the Genoese Giovanni Battista Langetti and the German Johann Carl Loth, (with whose works those of Drost have in the past been confused), their style was predicated on Jusepe de Ribera’s masterful chiaroscuro and was imbued with a shadowy realism. In Roman Charity this can be seen in the play of soft light and shadow across the two figures, which highlights the weary slump of Cimon’s sinewy body and the quiet strength of Pero’s selfless gesture.
Only sixteen paintings are securely given to Drost’s Italian period. Interestingly, within this corpus Drost can be seen experimenting with different versions of similar poses, using a small number of models that he may have shared with Loth, (further confusing the question of authorship between their two oeuvres). The figure of Pero in the present painting can be compared to that of Saint John the Evangelist (private collection, see J. Bikker, Willem Drost: A Rembrandt Pupil in Amsterdam and Venice, New Haven and London, 2005, p. 28-30, no. 29). With their statuesque presence and the three quarter turn of the head, they could almost be mirror images of one another. Similarly, the seated Cimon echoes the figure of Argus in Drost’s Mercury lulling Argus to Sleep (Dresden, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen).
Another version of Roman Charity, currently on loan to the Rijksmuseum (sold Sotheby’s, New York, 1 February 2018, lot 25, $1,095,000), shows a subtly different approach to this story of ultimate sacrifice and charity. In the Amsterdam version, which arguably still displays Rembrandt’s influence, the weakened Cimon clutches at Pero’s skirts in desperation, whereas in the present painting Drost captures the full extent of his vulnerability, with his manacled hands resting limply in his lap. The position of Pero is very similar in both instances, with her strong stance and far off gaze. However, where the Rijksmuseum shows a woman who quite closely resembles a figure of Drost’s own time, the present painting depicts an idealised heroine, highlighting the ancient Roman source of the subject.
We would like to thank Dr. Jonathan Bikker for confirming the attribution following first-hand inspection of the painting.