Altarpiece History
This first section outlines the history of the Petrobelli Altarpiece: the commission, the fragmentation, the restoration, and the various attempts since 1930 to reconstruct the altarpiece on paper.
-
CommissionCommission
-
FragmentationFragmentation
-
ReconstructionReconstruction
-
RestorationRestoration
Commission
Paolo Veronese was about 35 years old when cousins Antonio and Girolamo Petrobelli commissioned him to create an altarpiece for their family chapel in the Church of San Francesco in Lendinara in the Po Valley. This altarpiece, one of the largest in the area, attests both to the piety of the patrons but also to their social standing in Venetian society.
The Petrobelli Altarpiece, created around 1563, measured close to 4.65 metres by 2.85 metres. It was set in a limestone frame and placed above an altar, the same altar where masses for the repose of the patrons’ souls were celebrated. Family members were buried near the altarpiece. The grandeur of the work and its iconography stem from their deep desire for salvation.
Paolo Veronese
Detail of Saint Anthony Abbot and Antonio Petrobelli [detail]
(c. 1563)
199.5 × 120.8 cm. National Gallery of Scotland, Edinburgh
Paolo Veronese
Saint Jerome and Girolamo Petrobelli [detail]
(c. 1563)
227.2 × 120 cm. Dulwich Picture Gallery, London. Bourgeois Bequest, 1811.
By permission of the Trustees of Dulwich Picture Gallery
The Patrons
The Petrobellis were a well-to-do family that came from the Imagna Valley to the northwest of Bergamo. Bartolomeo, Pietro and Bernardino, the three sons of Giovanni Petrobelli settled in Lendinara in the 1500s. Bernardino, without a direct heir, bequeathed his possessions to three of his nephews, including Antonio and Girolamo. These two were called upon to act as heads of the family and ensure the Petrobelli lineage.
The little information available regarding the two Petrobelli patrons comes from their wills. The first concern of these wills, with their specific rules, was to ensure that the family name is perpetuated and its possessions be passed down to future generations via the first-born males. Should Antonio and Girolamo have no legitimate heirs; the family estate would be bequeathed by drawing lots among the male descendents of Giovanni Petrobelli. Of these descendants, those possessing a doctorate in law or medicine, or holding a certain rank in the Venetian army could put their name in twice. In the event the family had no heir, the possessions would be converted into a charitable trust in honour of Saint Anthony.
Antonio Petrobelli died on December 26, 1569, four days after completing his will. Without heir, he named Girolamo as the inheritor of his possessions. Girolamo passed away 18 years later, on March 12, 1587. Petrobello, his illegitimate but recognized son, inherited the family legacy. Upon Petrobello’s death in 1635, the estate was bequeathed to distant relatives according to the rules established by Antonio and Girolamo in their respective wills. With no descendants left in Lendinara, the history of the commission was forgotten.
Giovan Battista Marini
Giovan Battista Marini
Map of Lendinara (1782)
Lendinara, Biblioteca Comunale ‘ Gaetano Baccari’
Photo: courtesy Comune di Lendinara
This map of Lendinara, created shortly before the Church of San Francesco was destroyed, is one of the few visual documents of the site of the church. This site had existed since 1218 and included various buildings.
San Francesco and the Petrobelli Chapel
Little is known of the Church of San Francesco. This church belonged to the Conventual Friar Minor order, a branch of the Franciscan order that lived communal lives. The church had 12 altars, including the one belonging to the Petrobelli family.
In 1769, the Conventual Friar Minor order was suppressed by the Venetian government. Less than a decade later the church and property were sold to a private owner, eventually falling into disrepair. In 1785 the church was finally demolished and many of its possessions were put up for auction. By 1789, the Petrobelli Altarpiece was in the hands of a Venetian art dealer, who cut it into fragments and sold the pieces.
Dating a Renaissance Masterpiece
The Petrobelli Altarpiece and its patron’s connection to the church of San Francesco is understood, in large part, due to research projects and the expert analysis of archival documents. These documents, themselves displaying the ravages of time, come together like pieces of a puzzle slowly enabling an understanding of the life of the altarpiece as well as the story behind its commission.
Notably key documents which would have enabled great advances in understanding the history of the piece have come to light only recently. For example, Baron Detlev von Hadeln’s (1878–1935) Veronese essay completed in 1930 was only published in 1975. Included in the essay is an important description of the altarpiece. The description, written less than seven years after the painting’s fragmentation was by Pietro Brandolese (1754-1809). Also recent access to an 18th-century registry confirms that an inscription in the church of San Francesco carried the names of Antonio and Girolamo Petrobelli and the date of 1563 . Due to this and other notable references, the date of the creation of the Petrobelli altarpiece can be approximated to 1563. Interestingly in and around that time, Veronese’s studio had yet to take on a large role in the creation of his projects. As such it is believed that the Petrobelli altarpiece is a work created in large part by Veronese himself.
Fragmentation
« In a short time they will begin the cutting of the great picture of Paolo, it will be sold just like meat in a butcher’s shop, poor Paolo, poor painting. »
Letter from Gavin Hamilton, one of the first buyers of a fragment of the Petrobelli Altarpiece to Giovanni Maria Sasso of 26 July 1788.
Toward 1785, 16 years after the suppression of the Franciscan order in Lendinara, the Church of San Francesco along with the Petrobelli Chapel were demolished. A few years later, Pietro Concollo, a Venetian art dealer, wanting to make a profit, divided up the Petrobelli Altarpiece, which he thought too large to be sold in just one piece.
The condition of the altarpiece possibly influenced Concollo’s decision and the locations of the cuts. Separating the Pietà, the upper part of the altarpiece, from the rest of the work is easy to understand, as this section is independent in form and subject. Yet the decisions made to divide the lower part raise questions. Why was only the head of the figure of Saint Michael kept? Was the painting damaged in the centre, forcing the dealer to mutilate the archangel? Preserving Saint Michael would have also made the adjacent fragments narrower, thus possibly less marketable.
Until the 20th century, this kind of approach - one that permitted the radical adaptation of works of art for commercial gain - was common. The fragments, sold and scattered, took on separate lives and their history and relationship were lost. It took more than two hundred years to reassemble the pieces of the Petrobelli Altarpiece and to understand its history. In the second half of the 19th century, connections had already been made between the three largest fragments. The fourth fragment would remain an enigma until 2007.
This section offers a description and overview of the extant fragments of the Petrobelli Altarpiece.
Paolo Veronese
Dead Christ Supported by Angels [after restoration]
c. 1563
221 × 250.5 cm.
NGC.
The restoration of this fragment was made possible thanks to the generous support of the Members, Supporting Friends, and Donors of the NGC and the NGC Foundation
This scene shows the dead Christ supported by angels-sometime called a Pietà, formed the upper part of the Petrobelli Altarpiece. It belonged to several private collections, including that of the 1st Duke of Sutherland c.1835, before being bought by the art dealer Agnew’s in 1924. During the ship journey between London and New York for sale, the canvas, stored in the hold of the ship, was damaged by seawater. On the advice of a restorer who thought the canvas could be repaired, Eric Brown, the director of the National Gallery of Canada, acquired it in 1925 for a modest price. It was thereafter restored and exhibited in the Gallery. However, the first treatments aged poorly and the painting spent the next seventy years mostly in storage.
Detail of the Ottawa fragment of the Petrobelli Altarpiece during restoration, with corresponding X-radiograph
Restoration
All the recent restorations carried out on the fragments of the Petrobelli Altarpiece share the same objective: to present each painting as an element originally belonging to a greater composition.
In general, the physical condition of the fragments is fairly typical of paintings of this age. The Dulwich fragment, Saint Jerome and Girolamo Petrobelli, was given restoration treatment in 1940, and in 1991. The Edinburgh fragment, Saint Anthony Abbot and Antonio Petrobelli, was restored in 1958. The mid-century treatments revealed elements of the figures of Saint Michael and Satan, which had been hidden beneath overpainting to conceal the fragmentary aspect of these two paintings. The Dulwich and Edinburgh fragments are now exhibited in their respective museums with the remaining sections of Saint Michael visible in each of them. The Ottawa and Austin fragments were restored in 2008 by the National Gallery of Canada. Restoring them involved significant challenges.
The upper part of the altarpiece belonging to the National Gallery of Canada, The Dead Christ with Angels, had been significantly damaged during its journey between London and New York in 1924. The painting, crated upside down in the hold of a ship, was swamped with seawater during the crossing. In addition to some loss of paint, the varnish became opaque and white, and the damage appeared so severe that the owners considered the painting unsaleable. On the advice of a freelance restorer, the painting was purchased by the National Gallery of Canada and restored in 1926. The work was then exhibited for about 15 years, by which time the materials of the restoration had discoloured sufficiently for the work to be taken off permanent display.
The recent restoration of The Dead Christ with Angels took nearly two years. In addition to the painstaking removal of all material applied during the 1926 restoration, the cropped sides of the arch-topped format were re-established, and the original width and shape re-established. The paint on these replaced edges is of course non-original, and seeks to reconstruct missing elements, but not to deceive; the additions are more bland in form and colour intensity, and can be distinguished from the original paint at a fairly close viewing distance. As the viewer moves back, the distinction becomes less visible, and this part of the painting can be appreciated as a whole. The most significant gain in this was to place the Christ group back in its original and intended relative position, which re-established the dynamism of the composition – previously the painting was irregularly cropped and in a rectangular frame, and the compositional balance destroyed.
In 1789 when the altarpiece was divided, the right side of the fragment portraying Saint Anthony and Antonio Petrobelli was very close to the left side of the fragment with St. Michael’s head, and they probably shared the same cut. This put the edge of the Saint Michael fragment fairly close to his face. To make a more saleable format, the fragment was extended on that side with a “spare” piece of the painting. This strip came from a horizontal section of sky and columns from the sacrificed space between the Ottawa and Edinburgh fragments. The addition was repainted at the time to unify it with the fragment as a whole, and had since been cleaned and restored. During the recent restoration, this had to be taken into account, and the form of the extension was respected during the process - it made little sense to uncover a section of damaged sky and column in the wrong location. The strip was therefore visually integrated by restoration to be apparent under scrutiny, but still allow Saint Michael’s face to be seen without an abrupt vertical feature close by. In this way the physical history of this painting as a fragment is respected, but with no compromise to one’s experience of Paolo’s painting.
Each fragment of the Petrobelli Altarpiece gives rise to its share of ethical questions. Should a restorer attempt to return an object to its original form, if that were possible? Should the fragments’ respective histories and mutilations be respected?
The different restorations of these four different fragments, each with its own physical history and independent life, permit consideration of these issues. Remarkably however, the fragments together form a coherent ensemble. This restoration project is part of a larger exhibition project. For the first time since it was divided up, the fragments of the altarpiece are reassembled and presented to the public.
The Dead Christ with Angels
Photograph of The Dead Christ with Angels of the National Gallery of Canada before the recent restorations.
Photograph of The Dead Christ with Angels of the National Gallery of Canada before the recent restorations.
Photograph of The Dead Christ with Angels after its restoration in 2008-2009.
Photograph of The Dead Christ with Angels after its restoration in 2008-2009.
Head of Saint Michael
Infrared reflectography mosaic of the Blanton fragment of the Petrobelli Altarpiece
Infrared Reflectography of the Blanton fragment, showing the strip added at the left. At the lower end of this strip appear the drawing and painting of the edge of a column. At the far right of the surface, we can see the line marking the vertical centre of the painting. An adjacent vertical line, part of the reference lines of Christ, crosses the face of Saint Michael to form the central reference line of the archangel.
Paolo Veronese,
Head of Saint Michael[after restoration]
(c. 1563)
41 × 32.1 cm.
Blanton Museum of Art, Austin, Texas
Photograph of the restored fragment of the Head of Saint Michael.
Saint Anthony Abbot and Antonio Petrobelli
Photograph of the National Gallery of Scotland fragment before its restoration in 1956. National Gallery of Scotland, Edinburgh
Photograph of the National Gallery of Scotland fragment before its restoration in 1956.
Paolo Veronese,
Saint Anthony Abbot and Antonio Petrobelli (c. 1563)
199.5 × 120.8 cm.
National Gallery of Scotland, Edinburgh
The 1956 restoration revealed the wing, the right arm and the spear of Saint Michael, as well as parts of Satan’s limbs.
Saint Jerome and Girolamo Petrobelli
Photograph of the Dulwich Picture Gallery fragment before its restoration in 1940.
Photograph of the Dulwich Picture Gallery fragment before its restoration in 1940.
Paolo Veronese,
Saint Jerome and Girolamo Petrobelli (c. 1563),
227.2 × 120 cm.
Dulwich Picture Gallery, London. Bourgeois Bequest, 1811.
By permission of the Trustees of Dulwich Picture Gallery
Photograph of the restored fragment of the Dulwich Picture Gallery. Treatment revealed a hand holding a scale, drapery, and a sinister, clawed forearm; these elements belong to Saint Michael, and of course Satan.
Stephen Gritt and Xavier F. Salomon
Reconstruction of the Petrobelli Altarpiece (2008)
Paolo Veronese
Dead Christ Supported by Angels [after restoration] (c. 1563)
221 × 250.5 cm. NGC. The restoration of this fragment was made possible thanks to the generous support of the Members, Supporting Friends, and Donors of the NGC and the NGC Foundation
Paolo Veronese
Head of Saint Michael [after restoration] (c. 1563)
41 × 32.1 cm.
Blanton Museum of Art, Austin, Texas
Paolo Veronese
Saint Anthony Abbot and Antonio Petrobelli (c. 1563)
199.5 × 1208 cm.
National Gallery of Scotland, Edimburg
Paolo Veronese,
Saint Jerome and Girolamo Petrobelli (c. 1563),
227.2 × 120 cm.
Dulwich Picture Gallery, London. Bourgeois Bequest, 1811.
By permission of the Trustees of Dulwich Picture Gallery
Reconstruction
Reconstructing the Petrobelli Altarpiece
Historically, many works of art that were too large to be easily sold were divided. These fragmented pieces typically require years of research before their histories and journeys are finally established. This is true of the Petrobelli Altarpiece. It took a little over 200 years to reconstruct a reasonably complete history.
Many factors contributed to this problem. The church for which Veronese created this work was completely destroyed, and little information exists about it or about the patrons at the origin of the commission. The altarpiece was then divided up and sold to various private individuals; the geographical separation and recasting of the fragments as individual paintings causes further problems. The Dulwich and Edinburgh canvases bore titles that would encourage other interpretations. The National Gallery of Canada’s canvas remained in storage for several years. Various restorations, including those that deliberately concealed elements of the work, also contributed to the mystery surrounding the Petrobelli altarpiece. And of course the head of St. Michael bore no attribute to indicate identity, and this is a significant factor in his lengthy separation.
This section examines the various proposals for reconstructions of the altarpiece, and in doing so explores the events and hypotheses that led to our present understanding. The first attempts at a reconstruction of the altarpiece are on paper and in photographic composites in 1932-33. The most recent are digital images, and more significantly, a physical reconstruction for a temporary exhibition.