Ince-Blundell collection, Lulworth Castle, Dorset;
Tasche collection, Lugano;
With the Alexander Gallery, London;
Anonymous sale, London, Christie's, 23 April 1982, lot 44, withdrawn;
With William Thuil🔥lier, London, from whom acquired in March 198ꦬ2.

K. Ertz, Pieter Brueghel, der Jungere, vol. I, Lingen 2000, p. 482, cat. no. E462, reproduced plate 462 and p. 485, cat. F481 (with incorrect date of 1607). 

"The following condition report has been provided by Henry Gentle, an independent restorer who is not an employee of Sotheby's. The cradled oak panel is sound and the paint layer is secure and flat. There is restored paint loss to the left of the open door, through the female figure exiting and into the area above her head. The farmer's vermillion jacket has been strengthened as has the Merchant's coat. Under ultra-violet light a scattering of minor restorations are visible across the surface denoting small paint losses and abrasions, particularly to the more vulnerable and thinly painted areas to the background. Overall, the painting is in a good, untouched condition. The paint texture is well preserved and the fine details and intentionally sketchy quality maintained. The colours are fresh and saturate well, however, the tonality would improve with the removal of the discoloured varnish. Offered in a modern dark wood and gilt frame."
"This lot is offered for sale subject to Sotheby's Conditions of Business, which are available on request and printed in Sotheby's sale catalogues. The independent reports contained in this document are provided for prospective bidders' information only and without warranty by Sotheby's or the Seller."

As Klaus Ertz has observed (see Literature) this is the earliest known version of this composition by Pieter Brueghel the Younger. In his catalogue of Brueghel's work, he lists only a further ten versions of the design which he considers to be autograph, with one example dated 1620, two from 1622, another 1625 and the latest dated 1635¹. The source and meaning of the design is not entirely clear. The most probable explanation of the scene is that it depicts the visit of a wealthy couple to a farm to see and pay the wet-nurse for their child, and indeed these paintings have often been sold under such a title. Certainly the farm interior seems too well provided for any social critique of wealth and poverty to be intended, and the scene may otherwise simply record the visit of affluent family relatives. The design itself may well reflect a lost original in grisaille by Pieter Breugel the Elder, for monochrome versions survive from the hand of Pieter Brueghel the Younger's brother, Jan Brueghel the Elder² (Antwerp, Musée Royal des Beaux-Arts) as well as from his own workshop or following³. The same or analagous subjects were also painted by Marten van Cleve, the best examples of which are those today in Philadelphia, Museum of Art, and Frankfurt, Städelsches Kunstinstitut⁴.

 

 

 

1. This painting is also listed by Ertz under questionable or unseen works (seemingly from file notes only) and with the erroneous date of 1607, but the two entries seem to refer to one and the same painting.
2. See, for example, G. Marlier, Pierre Brueghel le Jeune, Brussels 1969, p. 257, fig. 153.
3. Now Paris, Fondation Custodia. Ertz, op. cit., p. 486, cat. no. A488.
4. Ibid., pp. 480-81, reproduced figs. 362 and 363.