Anonymous sale, New York, Sotheby's, 18 May 2006, lot 38.

The picture is lighter in tone and richer in colour than the catalogue illustration suggests. Painted on what appears to be a single stable flat panel with a gesso coat verso. The paint surface appears to be in good overall condition with no apparent damage or loss of paint except for an old repaired vertical crack running through the centre of the panel which is visible under a raking light and is mirrored in the gesso coat verso. There is also an even craquelure and some associated minor losses in the pronounced areas of the painting, most notably the crown as can be seen in the catalogue illustration. Examination under ultraviolet reveals several old campaigns of retouching, the first being to the darker pigments of her dress. There are also scattered minor retouchings throughout the background and there is infilling to the aforementioned craquelure visible in the flesh tones. There is also minor old retouching to the aforementioned crack. Overall the painting is in good condition given its age. Offered in what appears to be its original gilt wood and plaster architectural frame in good condition but for some minor old woodworm damage.
"In response to your inquiry, we are pleased to provide you with a general report of the condition of the property described above. Since we are not professional conservators or restorers, we urge you to consult with a restorer or conservator of your choice who will be better able to provide a detailed, professional report. Prospective buyers should inspect each lot to satisfy themselves as to condition and must understand that any statement made by Sotheby's is merely a subjective, qualified opinion. Prospective buyers should also refer to any Important Notices regarding this sale, which are printed in the Sale Catalogue.
NOTWITHSTANDING THIS REPORT OR ANY DISCUSSIONS CONCERNING A LOT, ALL LOTS ARE OFFERED AND SOLD AS IS" IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS OF BUSINESS PRINTED IN THE SALE CATALOGUE."

While details of Cecco di Pietro’s artistic development remain uncertain, we can assume that when first documented in Pisa in 1364, he was a young artist emerging as an independent personality within a larger workshop.  This Madonna and Child is a relatively early work by the artist, displaying the hallmark heavy-lidded eyes and pronounced contour shadowing that were prevalent in his youthful career, when he remained much influenced by Francesco Traini.¹ 

A close examination of the punch work decoration can assist with dating the panel by comparing the tools used here with those in other signed and dated works.  In the Christ child’s halo, the artist uses a flower-shaped tool with four large petals, interposed with four smaller ones, originally from the workshop of Francesco Traini, the foremost painter in early fourteenth century Pisa.  According to Erling Skaug, this tool was among a set nine of Traini’s punches that were dispersed to Giovanni di Nicola, who in turn passed five of them to Cecco di Pietro in the 1370s.²  The punch is noted, for example, in Traini’s Scenes from the life of Saint Dominic, dating to circa 1345 and was used again in Giovanni di Nicola’s Madonna and Child with Four Saints, dating to the 1350s.³   The flower then later appeared in Cecco di Pietro’s Madonna and Child, signed and dated, 137(?) and in his Pietà with six saints, dated 1377.⁴  The eight-petalled flower decoration then disappeared from Cecco’s works from 1379, being perhaps lost or damaged, and was replaced by 1386 with a similar stamp which instead produced a flower with an incised circular center rather than the former concave dimple. ⁵  The presence of the earlier dimpled flower in this painting therefore allows a dating before 1379.  Also of note is the decoration in the border of the Madonna’s robe, incorporating a punch not listed by Skaug among those in Cecco’s workshop.  Furthermore, an almost identical flower with four tri-lobed petals is featured in works by both Traini and di Nicola, suggesting either the tool was indeed passed to Cecco di Pietro, or that he ordered the production of a replica.⁶

We are grateful to Andrea De Marchi for supporting an attribution of this lot to Cecco di Pietro.



1. A. de Marchi and L. Sbaraglio, “Ragionamenti sull’attività pisana di Giovanni da Milano”, in Predella, 1, (“Primitivi pisani fuori contesto”, L. Pisani ed.) 2010, p.35.
2.  E. Skaug, Punch marks from Giotto to Fra Angelico, Oslo 1994, vol. I, p. 290 and vol. II, no. 9.1.(iii) and 9.1., (punch no. 376).
3.  Ibid., (punch no. 377) both works are now housed in the Museo Nazionale di San Matteo, Pisa.
4.  Ibid.
5.  Ibid.
6.  E. Skaug, op. cit. vol. II (punch no. 360).