MASP

The composition shows an a­ective simplicity. A “primitive” landscape, the restful rhythm of the draped folds and the colorful pink and scarlet of the veil and clothing of the Virgin give her a look of an almost naïve vivacity. is warm image of sacred maternity, in a domestic, almost rural setting is interrupted by the contrasting and erudite detail of the window divided in two by the porphyry column topped by a sumptuously Corinthian capital. e harmony of the pink and purple tone combination is of a sophistication that is not fully noticed at first sight. In a letter to P. M. Bardi on January 3, 1946, Pietro Toesca wrote: “is Virgin is certainly a work by Jacopo del Sellaio, at a time when he was working closely with Sandro Botticelli. The simplication of the background comes from Botticelli, as does the composition of the two gures, on which Jacopo del Sellaio however leaves his own mark. Among the predominantly Botticellian characteristics there are, indeed, particularities of Jacopo del Sellaio: the very primitive landscape with rows of slender cypress, the tone of the Virgin’s veil and her elegant shape. In the warm a­ection of the two gures, which reminds one of Botticelli, there is a more familial touch that is typical of Jacopo del Sellaio”. Supporting this attribution to Sellaio, works may be quoted that are greatly similar to ours, such as the Virgin and Child, formerly in Florence, sold in the Panaciati di Ximenes d’Aragona auction in 1902 and the Blood of the Redeemer, sold in Lucerne, in the Fischer auction of June 17, 1972 (lot 18). A third example would be the Virgin and Child of the Museo del Bigallo, notably for the similarity between the two Childs, but recently the work has been attributed to an anonymous Botticelli disciple. On the other hand, an approximation attempted by Carl Strehike of the Philadelphia Museum of Art, based on a proposal by Everett Fahy (letter to P. M. Bardi, dated February 3, 1984), links our work with the author of the tondo with the Virgin with Child and Two Angels inv. 49, only identied in the museum’s documents as being of the Botticelli school. Although this approach is not accepted by Boskovits, he too thinks that the work may not be by Sellaio but by an anonymous disciple of Botticelli’s (verbal communication, February 1996). Despite this, and the fact that this small panel is not a very ne work, it has been chosen not to denitely reject Toesca’s attribution to Sellaio but mainly due to the clear link between our work and the above-mentioned Virgin and Child, sold in the Panaciati di Ximenes d’Aragona auction in 1902. To be sure, there is still room for doubt as to whether this latter work is really by Sellaio.

— Unknown authorship, 1998

---