Pieter Brueghel the Younger

With Galerie van Diemen, Berlin;
Jacob Hartog, The Hague;
His forced sale to Hitler for the Linz Museum, 18 August 1942, for 5,000 Dutch florins;
Restituted to the Dutch Government, 29 April 1946;
Returned to Jacob Hartog, New York, in 1946;
Thence by family descent until sold New York, Sotheby's, 25 January 2007, lot 20, for $2,900,000;
With Richard Green, London;
Acquired from the above in 2009.

B. Schwarz, Hitler's Museum. Die Fotoalben Gemäldegalerie Linz, Vienna 2004, no. XXI/41, p. 144, reproduced p. 351.

The following condition report is provided by Sarah Walden who is an external specialist and not an employee of Sotheby's: Pieter Brueghel the Younger. Winter Landscape with Skaters. Signed at lower right P.Breughel. This painting has a cradle probably from the middle of the last century. The upper joint has been reglued presumably at that time and retouched narrowly all along. A lower joint appears to have remained perfectly stable and unmoved, without any trace of retouching even for instance through the lovely snowy roots of the tree on the right edge. Nearer the base on both side edges there are brief cracks, with some old retouching on the left side for about two inches, and a narrow line on the lower right edge for about five inches. However there is no sign of past instability or movement overall, and the paint surface is essentially beautifully preserved. The drawing is frequently visible in the liquid brushwork, as it has grown naturally more transparent over time. The fine minute detail of the distant landscape remains almost perfectly intact, with only slight wear blurring the mid right distance to the left of the yellow house where there is a little retouching. Another retouching can be seen under ultra violet light in the sky at the centre of the top edge. Older light retouching has strengthened thinner areas in the central ice, with a few minute touches for instance in the face and hands of the central foreground lady warming her hands over a pot, and in the man's face at the end of the fence further left. The row of figures lower down in the foreground is beautifully intact throughout as is the ice and the figures on or falling into the ice at lower right, all remarkably untouched, pure and complete. This report was not done under laboratory conditions.
"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."

Brought to light only within the last decade, this beautifully preserved picture is a significant addition to the group of some ten to twelve autograph versions of this composition by Pieter Brueghel the Younger. The present painting is distinguished from the others by subtle variations of tone and by the menacing cloudy sky rendered with scumbled brushwork, denoting slanting flurries of snow. All autograph versions of the scene are signed, one securely dated 1621, and two others possibly dated 1613 and 1622.¹ The form of the signature here would suggest a date of 1616 or later, as it was in this year that the artist began to sign his name with the spelling ‘Breughel’, rather than ‘Brueghel’.

Representations of the seasons or the months have a long, rich history in Flemish painting, reaching as far back as medieval books of hours, and as with most of Pieter Brueghel the Younger’s compositions, this one has an earlier source. It is not entirely clear, however, if its origins lie with the artist’s father Pieter Bruegel the Elder (c. 1525/30–69), or with the Flemish painter and draughtsman Hans Bol (1534–93). The composition is known through an engraving by Hieronymus Cock (1518–70) – one of a set of the Four Seasons, published in 1570 (see fig. 1).² The engraving of Spring is inscribed 'Bruegel inv', acknowledging Pieter Bruegel the Elder’s authorship of the design, and both Spring and Summer are closely derived in reverse from careful preparatory drawings by Bruegel the Elder, clearly made to be engraved, although they are dated three years apart: 1565 and 1568.³ The engravings of Autumn and Winter, however, acknowledge Hans Bol as the source of the design. They are of a rather different character to the other two seasons and are more consistent with Bol’s compositions than with those of Bruegel the Elder.

It seems unlikely, then, as Klaus Ertz has suggested might be the case, that Pieter Bruegel the Elder is the source of the designs for all four Seasons and that they were interpreted by Bol. More probable is the possibility that Bruegel the Elder had not completed the preparatory drawings for the engravings upon his death in the preceding year, 1569, so his publisher sought sources for the other two designs elsewhere.⁴ Unfortunately, neither of Bol’s preparatory drawings appears to have survived. What further complicates the matter is that Bol himself was heavily dependent on Pieter Bruegel the Elder's example, and both artists were familiar with the landscape surrounding Antwerp. The inn to the right (in both the print and the painting) for example, is based on that which both Bruegel and Bol would have known in Hoboken, outside Antwerp. It occurs, for example, in Bruegel the Elder's drawing of 1559 in the Courtauld Institute, London, and in engravings after his designs.⁵

All four seasonal compositions were painted subsequent to the engravings, not only by Pieter Brueghel the Younger but by other painters, such as Abel Grimmer (c. 1570–1618/19), whose series in the Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten, Antwerp, is rather more simplified.⁶ All the authentic versions of this composition by Brueghel the Younger are on panels of similar size, or when cut down, of similar proportions, confirming that in all likelihood the design was transferred by tracing within the Brueghel atelier. Brueghel has freely adapted the design from Cock’s print, emphasising the repoussoir tree trunks on either side, including two church spires in the distance on the left and increasing the size and prominence of the castle. Even within the autograph group of painted versions there are numerous differences in the details, particularly in the actions and number of figures on the ice. The dress of many of the figures has also been adapted from the print, lending the scene a rather more contemporary feel. Overall, the composition is generally sparser and more wintry (the vineyard on the hill to the left of Cock’s print, for example, has been transformed into a bare, snow-covered bank) – closer in fact, to the spirit of the artist’s father.

1 See K. Ertz, Pieter Brueghel der Jüngere, Freren 1998/2000, pp. 601–02, cat. nos E 665–E 677. E = Echt, meaning Genuine, as opposed to A = Abgeschrieben, meaning De-attributed or Rejected, and F = Fraglich, meaning Doubtful or Questionable. The uncertainty about the number of accepted works is due to the likelihood of the duplication of entries. 
2 See F.W.H. Hollstein, Dutch and Flemish etchings, engravings and woodcuts ca. 1450–1700, Amsterdam 1951, vol. IV, p. 185, cat. nos 120 and 121.
3 See Ertz 1998/2000, reproduced p. 538, figs 412 and 413.
4 See Ertz 1998/2000, pp. 537–42.
5 See H. Mielke, Pieter Bruegel: die Zeichnungen, Belgium 1996, pp. 55–56, cat. no. 44, reproduced p. 167.
6 Inv. no. 831; see E. Vandamme, ed., Catalogus schilderkunst oude meesters. Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten, Antwerp, Antwerp 1988, p. 170, cat no. 831, reproduced.