Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="2manycats, post: 6659504, member: 13761"]It's not really 'school of', which would imply an original period work in the style of the target artist. This is clearly 'after' (a copy of) the Rubens original. How far after? Well, the little tag, which also seems to have some age, says it was in the Royal Museum at Brussels, where it still is. This museum was founded by Napoleon in 1801 and opened in 1803, so it's no earlier than that. Looking at the brushwork of your copy, I find it to be very slick & facile compared to the care & detail of the original - or the workmanship that Rubens would have insisted upon from his apprentices if the copy had been made in his workshop. I believe this was speedily done by a skilled Victorian-era workman for sale to the tourist market of the day, which would have been generally wealthy Britons & Europeans on the Grand Tour, happy to have a decent copy of an Old Master to hang in their portrait galleries. When you know a piece is a copy of an old master, you don't really have much risk of a great loss. It's unknown pieces of early Renaissance age you want to watch out for, and of course the few fake Pollocks that are actually real....[/QUOTE]