Completed Continental European before 1800 26 Who painted 'Laomedon Refusing Payment to Poseidon and Apollo'?

Apologies for the unexpected source (familysearch.org), but I did find the painting with the following notation: Laomedon Refusing Payment to Poseidon and Apollo, 17th century, current location: Hunterian Art Gallery, Glasgow, Scotland. Attributions: Joachim von Sandrart (1606–1688), Girolamo Troppa (1637–1710).

Perhaps the source of the notation above: http://museumsuk.net/en/collection/object/159774/laomedon-refusing-payment-to-poseidon-and-apollo

It seems French. Poussin never painted half-lengths, but maybe his Roman circle or Parisian relations might shed some light on the author of the painting?

It could well be a Joachim von Sandrart. Sandrart made his studies with Honthorst (as the Sandrart Family was of flemish origin, they had connections to dutch and flemish cities). He extensively travelled Italy from 1629 to 1635. It is known that Sandrart had some orders for religious as well as "history" paintings, including mythological scenes, when at Rome under Pope Urban VIII in the 1630. It would seem to me that the picture in question would fit into a style between 1620 and 1640, post Caravaggio, with a blend of northern and italian influences.
Actually, a Vienna Museum hast a scene where the head of the male mythological figure (Saturn) resembles one of the heads in this Picture.

A monograph on Bernhard Kielhau by Minna Heimburger was published in Rome in 1988.
The Historisches Museum held a Joachim von Sandrart exhibition in 2006

None of the Sandrart publications in the British Library show paintings anything like this
The Heimberger book on Keilhau mostly has very low quality illustrations - but look at the St John the Evangelist in the Musee des Beaux Arts,Quimper [p. 254 no 205] and The fishseller in a private collection [p. 197 no 89] for the hands and faces
However, subject pictures like this do not seem to be his thing - I saw a couple of paintings in the Musee des Beaux Arts, Rennes attributed to him [not in Heimberger] , but I have not yet located images of them

The leathery flesh could be compared with that on Keilhau's St John the Evangelist in the Musee des Beaux Arts, Quimper [De Veronese a Casanova. Parcours italien dans les collections de Bretagne, Musee des Beaux Arts, Rennes, 2014, pp. 120-121]

The Artnet page on Keil includes a number of pictures of similar style or handling:

http://www.artnet.com/artists/bernhard-keil/2

I'd like to ask please
What were the circumstances of the painting losing it's attribution?
and when did that happen?

It was engraved by Sir Robert Strange as by Rosa in 1775 and this attribution was unchallenged well into the 20th century, but it was probably very little known. There was no art historian at the Hunterian Art Gallery or indeed in the University of Glasgow until after the Second World War. The Hunterian Art Gallery's records will no doubt record when the attribution was discarded. It was probably in the 1952 London exhibition of William Hunter's collection. I do not have that catalogue here. Since 1977 a number of different artists have been suggested as possibilities have been tentatively put forward including Sandrart and Roman and Genoese painters, none of them very likely - the Hunterian's files will include them all.
William Hunter seems to have forgotten who painted a Danae in his collection, even though he may well have met the artist Andrea Casali, recognised eventually by Alastair Laing despite its dirty condition less than 20 years ago - - a major discovery for Glasgow.

Thanks very much.
I wondered whether it was a recent change as it looks like it may have also lost its title as well as its attribution during its time in the Hunterian Art Gallery.

It appears that the painting was known to Robert Strange as ‘Laomedon detected’
His engravings were sold under that title, the painting was exhibited under that title and sold to Dr. Hunter in the auction of 1771 as painting 144. under that title. There were three sales of the paintings that he bought in France and Italy, 1771, 1773 and 1775.

In 1769 RobertStrange self-printed a Catalogue of his Pictures.
The following is the extract concerning the Salvator Rosa painting.

“Salvator Rosa
Laomedon Detected No. 63
Laomedon, king of Troy, having employed Neptune and Apollo to build the walls of the city, is afterwards surprised by the gods in the very act of concealing his treasure, when at the same time he had pretended he could not pay them. Whoever is acquainted with the Belisarius of Lord Townsend, will at once see the similitude, and discover that they are both painted in the same stile, and consequently about the same period. The figure of Laomedon is one of the most expressive characters that can be imagined and is painted with that freedom so perculiar to the pencil of Salvador. The Apollo is well characterised, and finely painted: the hand and the arm of this figure are admirably drawn and foreshortened. We find united in the Neptune much of the character both of Raphael and of the antique. It appears that the painter has taken his idea from one of the heads of the gods, in the little Farnese palace at Rome. Salvator, ever celebrated for the poetry of his inventions, has introduced behind this head, and at a distance the appearance of lightening; no doubt as a presage of the future calamities which Troy sustained on this account. No painter ever under stood more thou roughly the propriety of composition, nor knew better how to dispose of the accessories of a picture than Salvator. There is a spirit and liberty of pencil throughout this subject which animates the whole, in so much that it may with justice be ranked amongst the capital works of this master.
Three feet two inches and a half high, by two feet eight inches wide.”


It was exhibited in the Hunterian in 1880 under a slight variant of ‘Detection of Laomedon’ but there were still books from the 1950s that noted that there was a painting called ‘Laomedon Detected’ by ‘Salvator Rosa’ at the Gallery.

Whether it is or isn't a Rosa, has anyone read through Robert Strange’s correspondence and papers in the archives in the National Library of Scotland? (I'm too far away)
I understand that the paintings were allegedly shipped from the continent at the same time.
It may have some practical details as to where the painting was bought or shipped from. Judging by the above the probability would be Italy.


Ref:14253-59; CH 10674-83
Desc. Corresp and papers
Date 1750/1791

There were plans for a Sir Robert Strange exhibition some years ago in which the National Gallery of Scotland and the Hunterian Art Gallery . This never happened, but I believe that Strange's correspondence was looked through then . Some of Strange's purchases were in France

I should add that the extreme rarity of the subject means that the painting's earlier history might be elucidated by an inventory or an earlier sale catalogue

The attribution to Sandrart remains plausible, although this picture is relatively coarsely painted, so it would be more likely to be by "circle of Sandrart." Here's a Sandrart for comparison:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Joachim_von_Sandrart_-_Der_Monat_Januar.jpg

Keilhau seems much less likely to have painted a mythological subject, although his style was rougher than Sandrart's.

Information available here:

https://es.wahooart.com/@@/A2A7GN-Joachim-Von-Sandrart-Laomedonte-Negarse-Pago-a-Poseidón-y-Apolo

Martin proposed this discussion 7 years ago. The last post was more than 3 years ago. I wonder if Martin or others think it worth continuing? Or should Xanthe recommend closure?

I have nothing to add - but the style is fairly individual . So an answer may appear eventually. Both Xanthe and I have in the past been the curator responsible for this picture

What I said was wrong . Xanthe was never in Glasgow. I was succeeded there by Peter Black

I thought that a couple of composites might help to move this older discussion forward. They are based on the two artists that Patty mentioned in her first comment (20/04/2015 18:46).

The first composite is based on a work by Joachim von Sandrart (1606–1688).
https://rkd.nl/en/explore/images/244606

The second composite is based on a work by Girolamo Troppa (1637–1710).
https://tinyurl.com/s9cu3jhn

Could this work be "circle of" one of those two artists?

I would favor circle of Sandrart. It feels more German than Italian to me.

I recommend that this discussion is brought to a close. It was opened more than 8 years ago by Martin Hopkinson to discuss whether an artist could be suggested for the Hunterian Museum and Gallery’s unusually titled 'Laomedon Refusing Payment to Poseidon and Apollo'. Its original 18th century attribution to Salvator Rosa was rejected in the 20th century. As a result of the ArtUK thread Michael Storck (29/06/2015) suggested Joachim von Sandrart (1606–1688), especially when he was travelling in Italy and settled in Rome. The Italian artist Girolamo Troppa (1637-1710) has also been suggested based on the similarity of the model for Laomedon with a painting of ‘Homer’ in the Staatens Museum fur Kunst, Copenhagen, Denmark. But despite the distinctiveness of the painting’s style and the rarity of its subject, in which Laomedon, the king of Troy, refuses to pay the gods Neptune and Apollo for building the city’s walls, no definitive attribution has emerged. Any further progress as to attribution or provenance may be dependent on future research in the papers of Sir Robert Strange, in the National Library of Scotland in Edinburgh. Strange had acquired the painting in France or Italy by 1769 (no.63 in his self-printed catalogue) and owned it until 1771, when it was bought by Dr. William Hunter, the founder of the Hunterian Museum and Art Gallery.

In volume 3 of his "Treasures of Art in Great Britain......" (1854), Dr. Gustav Friedrich Waagen, Director of the Royal Gallery of Pictures in Berlin, wrote, of his visit to the Hunterian, that he had seen "Salvator Rosa - A scene from the history of Laomedon King of Troy, with Neptune and Apollo. A most strange conception, with a wild treatment quite in his style."

http://tinyurl.com/yckhbn8f

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustav_Friedrich_Waagen

Given his standing as an art historian of great renown, is it known by whom and on or around what date was the artist attribution to Salvator Rosa subsequently withdrawn? Would the opinion of Waagen not count in the consideration that the painting might actually be by Salvator Rosa?

Please note that Wikipedia, to which Kieran, refers says that "Waagen has been criticised for his "amateurish and erratic expertise" by modern standards". DNB and the OUP Dictionary of Art stress his importance in art education and museum policy rather than his connoisseurship. Unfortunatey the modern online Dictionary of Art Historians is down for maintenance.

Andrew, with the reddest of blushes, your point is very well taken.

The question, though, remains: Is it known by whom and on or around what date was the artist attribution to Salvator Rosa withdrawn?