It was commissioned by Jean Pointel, a banker from Lyon and a close friend and faithful patron of Poussin, and sent to him to display in Paris during the following months.

After Pointel's death, the work passed to the financier Nicolas du Plessis-Rambouillet, then the Procureur Général to the Parliament of Paris Achille III de Harlay, and then to Charles-Antoine Hérault, a painter and a member of the Académie française.

In 1792–1793, in accordance with the principles of the Decree of 2 November 1789, the painting was seized by the revolutionary state and moved to the Louvre as one of the works displayed there when it first opened as a public museum on 10 August 1793.

In 1649, the year Judgement was completed, Poussin also produced an Assumption, Eliezer and Ebecca and his first self-portrait,[24] although around this period the Fronde made it difficult for him to contact his patrons back in France[2][25] - Oskar Bätschmann even argues from Judgement that Poussin wanted France's religious conflicts to end, with the artist superimposing an idea of justice, wisdom and equity on an emotional debate in the work.

[18][19] According to British art historian Timothy James Clark, the executors of Pointel's will very quickly realised that they were not knowledgeable enough to assess the works and took on academician Philippe de Champaigne to catalogue and value them before putting them on the market.

[34] In 1687 Judgement was number 443 in Charles Le Brun's catalogue of the royal collection, then it was recorded in 1695 and by 1701 at the latest in the cabinet des Tableaux in the Petit Appartement du roi at the château de Versailles.

[33] In 1789 Martin de la Porte was taken on to restore the 1637-1638 version of Poussin's Rape of the Sabine Women and he also worked on Judgement, with the account book stating the latter was "cleaned and [its] holes repaired" for 60 livres.

[32][38][39] It has remained on permanent display within the museum walls ever since 1793, except for travelling exhibitions, and as of 2024 was in Room 826 of the aile Richelieu alongside six other works by the artist.

[45]Jean-François Sobry, author of a Poétique des arts, also praised the work: The Judgement of Solomon by Poussin offers just as perfect details; but it is so well-known a treatment that any educated viewer can take pleasure in devoping them for himself.

He explained in these terms what - for him - made Poussin a great master of painting: The gravity of his style, the beautiful ordering of his compositions, the truth and the variety of his various characters, are a continual subject of admiration and study.

[47]The French art historian, engraver and painter Charles-Paul Landon wrote that it "is impossible to render better than Poussin did the fierce joy imprinted on the livid face of the bad mother, and which appears in her commanding gesture",[48] adding that "the figures in this painting are perfectly drawn" and that "the draperies are adjusted with this noble and severe taste that Poussin drew from his study of the antique".

[48] In Pierre-Marie Gault de Saint-Germain's 1806 biography of the artist he staed "we must look upon this painting as one of the greatest models of the art of imitation of impression by expression, [we] can think nothing above the characters and sentiments that animate the actors in this scene".

[49] The British writer and traveller Maria Graham wrote that Judgement "is considered as one of Poussin's finest works, and perhaps no other painter has produced a better treatment of the subject", though she added that "there is not much beauty in the women, and their violent expressions excite more horror than sympathy".

[52] French parliamentarian and historian François Emmanuel Toulongeon praised the work but also noted some errors and imperfections in it: the bas-relief [on the throne] is in too Greek a style, much more modern ... [one man] is shaved; the Hebrews wore beards; this historical fault is very rare in Poussin's works ... [the half-nude] soldier is an inconvenience, especially before the king, [he is] inappropriately wearing an [ancient] Greek helmet; he is also beardless ... the child [which the soldier holds] hanging by a foot must have its belly hanging on its stomach due to its position; it is a fault of anatomy, and its foot is not felt in the soldier's hand ... there is also to the right an admiring head, whose expression is cold and filling ... Solomon's right hand is not correctly drawn ... the two hands of the woman on the right, in a blue dress, are not in the same flesh ... [and] [the background architecture], although rich, noble and wise, is too reminiscent of Greek architecture of Pericles' time[51]Toulongeon explains his rigorous approach by admitting that "its in the first rank of paintings that one must search for and note imperfections; in others one searches for beauties".

[57] Guillaume Chasteau's 1685 engraving measures 37 by 52.7 centimetres and has a Latin inscription with a French translation reading "Wise Solomon invoked Nature to arbitrate his Judgement, the true mother was unable to let her son be divided.

Gantrel's version was published around 1750 by the print seller Robert Hecquet at a size of 55 by 74.5 cm[67] with a new inscription, replacing the twinned Latin and French of previous prints with a single French one reading “Wise Solomon invoked Nature to be arbitrator of his Judgement, the true mother was unable to allow her son to be divided”.

[74] Due to a dispute over money, he abandoned the project and the print, completing less than a quarter of it[75] and leaving only a pencil, brush, and wash drawing for it, now in the Louvre.

Two years later, in 1804, the sixth volume of Annales du Musée et de l'École moderne des beaux-arts featured that century's first completed print after Judgement, this time by Charles Normand.

[98] He argued that people's complexions and skin tones demonstrated their dominant humour and that historic and contemporary painters observed this from life and depicted it.

He states that in Judgement "because the true mother is in good faith, [Poussin] paints her as a simple woman without malice, whose flesh colour witnesses to the goodness of her nature; for sanguine people are not usually capable of doing ill deeds; they can be quick and choleric, but their fire soon evaporates, and they keep no hatred in their souls" whereas he "not only makes known the malice [of the bad mother] through her skin colour, but still more in her thinness and dryness caused by black bile which dominates bad people, who are hot and burning, dried out, and makes their bodies skinnier, unlike those who are a little sanguine, whose skin is fresher and firmer".

[99] Toulongeon uses similar language to describe the two women: The bad mother's face has the more knowing expression; her red and dry eye, her flared nostrils, her toothy and gaping mouth painting her natural evil and the evil of her character; this is neither anger nor an outburst; she was born evil; her whole costume fits this; she is dirty and scruffy; she carries her dead child as if she is holding a package, uninterested, with no pain, no affection; this figure is a masterpiece of feeling and execution; she contrasts with the good mother, whose costume is simple and tidy; her head has a simple and common beauty; the two heads are both beautiful in profile".

[51]He also described the depiction of the king: Solomon's head is the most beautiful choice if one chooses by form; he is entering adolescence, and his features already have the tranquil character of youth; his skin tone is pale and bilious, because a sanguine temperament at this age will not be susceptible to profound thoughts and reflections; his right eye squints slightly - this movement adds to his expression deciding his look towards the action.

[53] He notes that the woman normally understood to be the bad mother is not sympathetic to us, with a "vehement expression", "hardened features", "hair bound with a simple band", "pale skin", "rumpled clothes", "unalluring", "dull in colour".

[53] The woman holding the dead child "is seized with an outburst and protests at the last moment, [under] the influence of anger, [born] out of a feeling of injustice".

Neither the philosopher adviser who is only astonished nor evidently the bad mother have this skin tone, one which the painter conventionally lends to bodies from which life has departed.According to this analysis, Depauw argues that this anger is at the very moment of turning into pity mixed with a feeling of terror.