Rokeby Venus

Completed between 1647 and 1651,[3] and probably painted during the artist's visit to Italy, the work depicts the goddess Venus in a sensual pose, lying on a bed with her back facing the viewer, and looking into a mirror held by the Roman god of physical love, her son Cupid.

Despite this, nudes by foreign artists were keenly collected by the court circle, and this painting was hung in the houses of Spanish courtiers until 1813, when it was brought to England to hang in Rokeby Park, Yorkshire.

The ribbon's function has been the subject of much debate by art historians; suggestions include an allusion to the fetters used by Cupid to bind lovers, that it was used to hang the mirror, and that it was used to blindfold Venus moments before.

[14] The luminescent colours used in Venus's skin, applied with "smooth, creamy, blended handling",[15] contrast with the dark greys and black of the silk she is lying on, and with the brown of the wall behind her face.

His version is, according to the art historian Andreas Prater, "a highly independent visual concept that has many precursors, but no direct model; scholars have sought them in vain".

[23] Both Titian and Peter Paul Rubens had already painted Venus looking into a mirror, and as both had had close ties to the Spanish court, their examples would have been familiar to Velázquez.

[25] One innovation of the Rokeby Venus, when compared to other large single nude paintings, lies in the fact that Velázquez depicts a back view of its subject who is turned away from the viewer.

[23] There were precedents for this in prints by Giulio Campagnola,[26] Agostino Veneziano, Hans Sebald Beham and Theodor de Bry,[27] as well as classical sculptures known to Velázquez, of which casts were made for Madrid.

The two were hung together for many years in Spain when in the collection of Gaspar Méndez de Haro, 7th Marquis of Carpio (1629–1687); at what point they were initially paired is uncertain.

[30] However, within intellectual and aristocratic circles, the aims of art were believed to supersede questions of morality, and there were many, generally mythological, nudes in private collections.

The court of Philip IV greatly "appreciated painting in general, and the nude in particular, but ... at the same time, exerted unparalleled pressure on artists to avoid the depiction of the naked human body.

Low necklines were commonly worn by women during the period, but according to the art historian Zahira Veliz, "the codes of pictorial decorum would not easily permit a known lady to be painted in this way".

Preceding the opinions of such theologians as John of St. Thomas, Pedro Tapia, and Gaspar Hurtado was an anonymous essay, later attributed to the Portuguese Francisco de Braganza.

[37][38] The court was able to exert counter-pressure, and a piece by the famous poet and preacher Fray Hortensio Félix Paravicino, which proposed the destruction of all paintings of the nude, and was written to be included in the pamphlet, was never published.

Examples include Rubens's Minerva Victrix, of 1622–1625, which shows Marie de' Medici with an uncovered breast, and Anthony van Dyck's 1620 painting, The Duke and Duchess of Buckingham as Venus and Adonis.

No painting from the 1630s or 1640s, whether in the genre, portrait, or history format, shows a Spanish female with her breasts exposed; even uncovered arms were only rarely shown.

[33] In 1997, the art historian Peter Cherry suggested that Velázquez sought to overcome the contemporary requirement for modesty by portraying Venus from the back.

[44] Another attitude to the issue was shown by Morritt, who wrote to Sir Walter Scott of his "fine painting of Venus' backside", which he hung above his main fireplace, so that "the ladies may avert their downcast eyes without difficulty and connoisseurs steal a glance without drawing the said posterior into the company".

[46] In 1951, it was found recorded in an inventory of 1 June 1651 from the collection of Gaspar Méndez de Haro, 7th Marquis of Carpio,[47] a close associate of Philip IV of Spain.

The art critic Javier Portús has suggested that the omission may have been due to the painting's portrayal of a female nude, "a type of work which was carefully supervised and whose dissemination was considered problematic".

Velázquez's painting technique offers no assistance, although its strong emphasis on colour and tone suggest that the work dates from his mature period.

The conscientious modelling and strong tonal contrasts of his earlier work are here replaced by a restraint and subtlety which would culminate in his late masterpiece, Las Meninas.

[52] In 1802, Charles IV of Spain ordered the family to sell the painting (with other works) to Manuel de Godoy, his favourite and chief minister.

[54] During the Peninsular War, there was looting of art by the Napoleonic army, and British buyers took advantage to purchase works from Spanish owners eager to sell.

The Venus passed through the hands of George Augustus Wallis, a British painter who worked in Spain as an agent for William Buchanan, a major art dealer.

The critic, James Grieg hypothesised that it was by Anton Raphael Mengs—although he found little support for his idea—and there was more serious discussion about the possibility of Velázquez's son-in-law and pupil, Juan del Mazo as the artist.

[65] Manet, in his stark female portrayal Olympia, paraphrased the Rokeby Venus in pose and by suggesting the persona of a real woman rather than an ethereal goddess.

Rokeby Venus , c. 1647–1651. 122 cm × 177 cm (48 in × 70 in). National Gallery , London.
The Borghese Hermaphrodite , an ancient Roman copy, excavated c. 1608–1620, [ 1 ] of a Hellenistic original, now in the Louvre . When in Rome Velázquez ordered a bronze cast of the work for Madrid. [ 2 ]
Peter Paul Rubens ' Venus at the Mirror , c. 1614–15, shows the goddess with her traditionally blond hair. [ 7 ] As with Velázquez's Venus, the goddess's reflected image does not match that portion of her face visible on the canvas. In contrast to Rubens' luscious and 'rounded' ideal form, Velázquez painted a more slender female figure. [ 8 ]
Velázquez's Coronation of the Virgin , c. 1641–42. It has been suggested that the model used here was the same as the one used in the Venus. [ 16 ]
Giorgione , Sleeping Venus , c. 1510. Giorgione shows Venus sleeping on fine textiles in an outdoor setting against a sumptuous landscape. [ 23 ] As with Velázquez's Venus, Giorgione painted the goddess as a brunette, going against tradition.
Reclining Nude in a Landscape . This 16th-century painting of the Venetian school was paired with the Rokeby Venus when in Haro's collection and perhaps before.
Titian 's Venus with a Mirror , c. 1555, is an early example of Venus depicted at her toilet with Cupid. In this painting, Venus sits upright.
El Greco 's 1609 portrait of Fray Hortensio Félix Paravicino , who argued for the destruction of all nude paintings [ 34 ]
Correggio 's Danaё, 1531, is an early example of Cupid depicted attending to a female recumbent on a chamber bed. In this painting however, the female is a mortal, although Correggio still favoured the portrayal of a figure from mythology [ 40 ]
Francisco de Goya , La maja desnuda , c. 1797–1800. In 1815, Goya was questioned by the Spanish Inquisition over the work, but retained his title as court painter .
Manuel de Godoy in 1801, by Goya
Portrait of John Bacon Sawrey Morritt
Édouard Manet 's Olympia , 1863. Manet was enormously influenced by the paintings of Velázquez, and in Olympia a kind of paraphrasing of the eroticism and the boldness of the subject clearly shows the legacy of the Rokeby Venus .
Paul-Jacques-Aimé Baudry 's The Wave and the Pearl , 1862
Damage sustained in the attack by Mary Richardson in 1914. The canvas was later restored and the incisions repaired. The breaks visible in this photograph, above her shoulder and horizontally across the upper left of the image, were to the glass only. [ 67 ]