Loading...
There have been other significant challenges. For example, the attribution of the Brueghel. It was painted on serge, a very fine cloth, about half as thick as any cloth that we might wear. It was extremely fine and had been relined and then covered with a polyester varnish that covered up its true qualities. It was like oilcloth.
The work was already known. Matías Díaz Padrón had already published something on it, attributing it to Brueghel The Younger; and the composition was also known from a seventeenth century engraving and a copy by Brueghel The Younger which belonged to the Museum of Brussels. But the original was supposed to have been lost. I met Zugaza on the terrace of the Italian restaurant and he said: “Have you seen the Brueghel?! It’s a real marvel!” And I said: “Hold your horses! We have to look at it, we have to see the X-ray and the technical material, and then I’ll tell you whether it’s a Brueghel or not”. When I study a work, I don’t get carried away or say in advance that this is a Bosch, this is a Velázquez or this is a Brueghel. No. I analyse what I see and try not to act like ‘Capitán Araña’: “This wouldn’t be a Brueghel because of this; this would be a Brueghel because of that”. So then we looked at the X-ray and we had no doubt that it was a Brueghel. But we had to demonstrate it, because the majority would deny it. Then, shortly before we had to decide whether to purchase the work or not, the signature appeared, and fortune smiled on us.
Professor of the Department of Art, School of Geography and History, of the Universidad Complutense of Madrid; she worked as Head of the Departments of Spanish Painting (1100-1500) and of Flemish Painting and the Northern Schools up to 1700.
Interview recorded on October 18, 2017
