Dutch School, early 17th century

Dr. G.L. Laporte, New York (L.1170);
sale, Amsterdam, Sotheby Mak van Waay, 3 May 1976, lot 230 (as Dutch School, circa 1630);
with Bernard Houthakker, Amsterdam;
sale, London, Christie's, 2 July 1985, lot 128 (as Attributed to Cornelis van Poelenburg), purchased by Ralph Holland

Paper somewhat browned at edges. Minor repairs, top, bottom and left edges. Some apparent restorations in white heightening in sky. Ink somewhat sunk in darker areas. Evidence of light vertical crease towards right.
"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."

The late Roman building depicted here, variously described as a Mausoleum and a Temple to Mars, became a Christian Church dedicated first to St. Andrew, and later to Santa Maria delle Febbre.  It was also adopted as the sacristy of the Basilica of St. Peter's, and was demolished in 1776 to make way for the new sacristy, designed by Marchionni.  The present view is taken from a position close to the South Transept of the Basilica, looking North East;  from this viewpoint, the skyline behind Santa Maria delle Febbre would have been relatively open, as it is shown seen here, until the nave of St Peters was rebuilt and extended in 1606-14. 

This topographical information would seem to preclude the former attribution to Poelenburch, who only arrived in Rome in 1617.  Mr. Holland's proposed alternative attribution to Willem van Nieulandt II does not seem convincing, so the drawing remains for now an anonymous product of the explosion of interest in the monuments of Rome on the part of early 17th-century northern European artists.