This view of Subiaco evidently antedates the erection of the arch dedicated by Pope Pius VI, when still a cardinal, to the commemorate the opening of a new road from Rome in 1789, on or near the spot where the low white gate appears in the foreground. The monastery of Santa Scolastica is glimpsed at the lower right. From the 1990s onward, the attribution of this study to Alexandre Hyacinthe Dunouy was met with occasional skepticism, and it can now be discarded in favor of his contemporary Joseph Bidauld. As observed by Damien Dumarquez, there are convincing stylistic and physical similarities to other works that provide a sure context for Bidauld as their author. The point of departure for his assertion is a recently rediscovered study,
Vue de la Rocca Abbatiale à Subiaco (Paris art market), in which the town is seen from the opposite direction, that is, from an elevated spot between the town and Santa Scolastica.[1] The studies are essentially identical in size, and they are comparable in scale as well as in their blonde tonality, limpid atmosphere, and meticulous facture.
For such a small painting, a factor of its having been executed out of doors (at least in part), The Met’s study evinces remarkable attention to compositional structure and to the ways in which its overall design could be reinforced by constituent details, much in the same way that a portrait painter marries the conventions of his practice to the particularities of a sitter. Taking advantage of Subiaco’s distinctive profile, Bidauld divided the picture diagonally from the upper left to the lower right, a simple geometrical device diffused by the myriad rooflines. The artist reveled in the haphazard lines and interstices of hilltown architecture, the concomitant play of light and shadow over its complex faceting, and the distinctive punctuation of rows of windows. Those were among the principal qualities of the picture that underpinned the former attribution to Dunouy, seen in such examples as
The Palazzo Reale and the Harbor, Naples (The Met
2003.42.25) and Castel Sant’Elmo from Chiaia, Naples (The Met
2009.400.52). However, the treatment of these same features in
Vue de la Rocca Abbatiale à Subiaco is virtually indistinguishable. In this regard it cannot be coincidental that the left side of the Rocca’s peaked roof sits just within the curved contour of the mountain looming behind it, while in The Met’s painting the artist achieved precisely the same effect with the campanile on the right side. Also notably similar in both pictures is the handling of the trees, wisps of smoke, and even the slight blockiness of the mountains.
Features of the two Subiaco studies which provide compelling evidence that they are the product of the same hand can be extended to works that are undoubtedly by Bidauld. To cite just one example,
View of Isola di Sora (whereabouts unknown), which is signed and dated 1789, we see the same treatment of architecture (although it less complex) and trees—and the spray rising from the waterfall at the right is comparable to the smoke in the others.[2]
The two same-size studies of Subiaco are not described in the catalogue of Bidauld’s posthumous atelier sale, though they may have been sold as part of number 114, the final lot: "Under this number will be sold all the objects omitted in the present catalogue."[3] Indeed, the more detailed notarial document for the auction, or
procès-verbal (Archives de la Ville de Paris), does list studies individually and in groups. Paradoxically, while the authorship and subjects of the two pictures have been identified relatively recently, the only study listed in the auction catalogue that is identified as having been painted at Subiaco, number 35, betrays a complete absence of manmade forms (Musée du Louvre, Paris, INV 2600).
The Met’s
Subiaco and other studies discussed here reveal that Bidauld had a predilection for depicting nature as though it were imbued with a potential for rationality and logic. The evidently hard-won lessons that he learned by patiently producing plein-air studies like this one would serve him well as he went on to use them as the basis for larger, idealized landscape paintings. Yet Bidauld’s approach to working out of doors was very different from that of his contemporaries who sketched rapidly as a means of rendering nature’s evanescent qualities. The latter painters, Pierre-Henri de Valenciennes and his followers above all, developed a practice that prioritized responsiveness to fleeting effects of light and atmosphere, unwittingly setting the stage for Impressionist practice.
Asher Miller 2023
[1] Email correspondence, 2022–23, Department of European Paintings file
[2] Formerly in the collection of J. E. Safra; sale, Sotheby’s, New York, January 29, 2020, no. 67, as oil on canvas, 9 1/2 x 12 1/2 in. (24.1 x 31.8 cm)
[3]
Catalogue d’une belle collection d’études peintes et de dessins, Faits d’aprè nature par feu M. Bidauld, Peintre Paysagiste [. . . ], Hôtel des ventes mobilières, Paris, March 24–26, 1847, no. 114, "Sous ce numéro seront vendus tous les objets qui auraient été omis au présent catalogue."
![The Path of Nature: French Paintings from the Wheelock Whitney Collection, 1785–1850 [adapted from The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, v. 70, no. 3 (Winter, 2013)]](/-/media/Images/Art/Metpublication/Cover/2013/The_Path_of_Nature_French_Paintings_from_the_Wheelock_Whitney_Collection_1785_1850.jpg)
