| Povzetek: | The article presents new discoveries on the icon of the Nursing Madonna from the
permanent collection of the National Gallery in Ljubljana (NG S 1845). The key areas
addressed in the paper include the analysis of the icon using IRF and UVF imaging,
an attempt to determine the icon’s origin through comparisons, an examination of its
complex iconographic motif, and questions regarding provenance.
The icon likely dates to the first half of the 16th century. It combines elements of the
Galaktotrophouse and Hodegetria types, symbolizing the incarnation and divine authority
of Christ. The frame of the icon, made in the Venetian tradition, revealed a
complex history of modifications and restorations. It includes elements from different
periods with a model of the crucifixion, identified by Zuleika Murat. Differences in
measurements and styles among the frame’s components suggest that the frame was
most likely not originally intended for this icon but was later adapted to fit it. The state
of the icon’s surface and frame shows signs of dirt, dust, and multiple layers of varnish
that were applied during various restoration efforts. Parts of Mary’s face are faded,
possibly due to extensive cleaning or the icon’s use in religious practices.
In 2019, the National Gallery conducted infrared (IRF) and ultraviolet (UVF) imaging
of the icon, revealing significant details about its construction and condition. The IRF
photography uncovered an underdrawing, likely made with graphite, visible as thin
lines on the faces and garments of both Mary and Jesus. These images also provided a
clearer view of the folds in Mary’s robe and the punched decoration of the halos. UVF
photography highlighted more distinct lines on the faces of Mary and Jesus, while also
making the soft shading on both figures’ faces more visible. These IRF and UVF investigations
revealed that the icon is crafted with a much higher level of quality than
can be seen with the naked eye.
The rear of the icon is covered with a wooden panel composed of two different types of
wood, both of which are damaged. This makeshift construction suggests that the icon
was not intended for processions but was meant to be viewed only from the front. Research
into the numbers on the back panel of the icon provided further context about
its history and movement. The back panel bears several inventory numbers and a handwritten
note recorded by France Stelè. The number “1591” corresponds to a record
from France Stelè’s field notes from the year 1947, identifying the icon as part of the
inventory of an art history seminar. Furthermore, a certificate found in the Archive of
the Republic of Slovenia confirms that Stelè intended the icon for teaching purposes.
The provenance of the icon prior to 1947 was recently discussed by Igor Sapač in his
research on the history of the rural Villa Pachta on Kozjak, where he linked the icon
with the field notes of France Stelè, dated to 5 October 1945. However, the icon from
NG could not be matched with the object numbers listed in the Federal Collection
Centre, as presented by Sapač in Appendix 6.
The icon’s exact dating cannot yet be established. Most evidence points to its creation
in the first half of the 16th century, particularly based on iconographic characteristics,
comparisons with other icons from that period, and the piece’s stylistic features. The
study suggests two possible explanations for the frame’s origin: either it was originally
crafted as an antique piece, later minimally altered during restoration due to damage,
or it was assembled in the 19th century using a combination of old and new parts.
In addition to the question into the individual origins of both elements, there is also
the issue of timing their assembly. It is clear that the icon, with its added plank, was
definitively adapted to fit the frame. There are two possibilities: both elements might
have been created in different workshops and combined in the 16th century, with the
icon adjusted to fit the frame, which was later modified due to damage; or the icon
was inserted into the frame only in the 19th century, at which point it was adapted to
match the width of the tympanum and the height of the old pilaster, with the remaining
parts of the frame newly constructed.
To gain a more precise understanding of the creation of the icon and its frame, it
would be essential to know the provenance and the collector’s relationship with their
art collection. This will only be feasible after systematic provenance research on objects
from the Federal Collection Center, similar to the research conducted by Sapač
on Villa Pachta, along with a thorough investigation of 19th-century collecting practices.
Additional scientific research would also significantly contribute to clarifying the
frame’s dating and the time when both elements were joined. In particular, comparative
analysis of samples from the icon panel, the added board, the tympanum with the
removed patina, both sides of the frame, and the back closure would be of great benefit.
|
|---|
