The restoration of Lorenzo Lotto's Visitation: a masterpiece coming back to life. With its mystery

The restoration program of the Visitation by Lorenzo Lotto (Venice, 1480 - Loreto, 1556/1557), a work preserved at the Pinacoteca Civica di Palazzo Pianetti in Jesi, is certainly an important milestone in safeguarding Italy’s artistic heritage. The intervention, completed at the end of the year 2023, was made possible thanks to a total financing of €7,000.00 under the Art Bonus decree, made available by Intesa Sanpaolo Spa and TreValli Cooperlat. The grant thus made it possible to address both the conservation needs and the aesthetic recovery of the work, while the repair design made use of the experience of restorer Francesca Pappagallo, renovator of all the other Jesi works by Lotto preserved at the Pinacoteca Civica di Palazzo Pianetti. Putting attention on Jesi instead, back in 2014 the Marche city pioneered the application of the Art Bonus decree by taking advantage of the incentive for the restoration of the wooden support of Lotto’s Deposition, painted in 1512.

The Visitation was painted by Lotto in 1532 for an altar in the church of San Francesco al Monte degli Osservanti, where it was placed in symmetry with another work by the same artist, the Madonna delle Rose from 1526. Historical research conducted in 2011 by scholar Sara Tassi indicates that the Rocchi family may have been the commissioner of the Visitation, in memory of Fiore Iutii (or Juzi), wife of Gentiluccio Rocchi. The hypothesis, consolidated by the use of expensive pigments such as azurite and lapis lazuli, contrasts with the earlier attribution to the observant friars of the church of San Francesco al Monte in Jesi, who would surely have chosen less demanding materials. In addition, Fiore Juzi may be the woman standing in the background, the only one who is frontally turned, and the only one who seems completely disinterested in what is happening near her.

Set in a domestic interior, the scene unfolds between glances and reaching hands. A green curtain demarcates an intimate space, where four female figures stand out in the foreground. Striking among them is the image of Elizabeth in advanced pregnancy who responds to the questioning of her young cousin Mary by raising her gaze and hands to heaven in a sign of acceptance of the divine will. A single male character, Zechariah, appears in the painting relegated to the edge of a doorway, left at the margin of that female universe completed by the two women on the right, variously identified as two handmaids, or as Mary of Cleophas and Mary Salome. The shelf across the scene houses a still life with a strong symbolic value: the vase, representing Mary, is contrasted with the orange, symbol of original sin and Eve. The gourd, on the other hand, alludes to death and resurrection, while the writing implements evoke the New Testament, as opposed to the Old Testament parchment. In the lunette above, the Annunciation introduces the theme of contact with the divine between the Virgin Mary and the Archangel Gabriel.

The condition of the work before restoration: criticalities and potentialities

Due to some structural and chromatic criticalities, restoration was therefore necessary. In fact, the canvas showed a marked looseness accompanied by evident deformations in the upper part and a pronounced curvature along the lower side. In addition, the pictorial surface was altered by now-oxidized varnishes that blurred the original colors and caused unpleasant bleaching, especially in the shaded areas.

The alterations were quite visible in the lapis lazuli and azurite pigments used by the artist. Initially it was feared that these defects were the result of ancient clumsy interventions that would have removed the delicate original glazes, thus flattening the refinement of the modeling, but preliminary analysis revealed that these imperfections were caused by overlapping layers of altered material.

The innovative techniques and results of the restoration

But what did restorer Francesca Pappagallo discover during the repair process? Details such as the drapery of the Virgin’s mantle, the wing of the archangel Gabriel and St. Elizabeth’s purse, hidden by previous interventions, the most recent of which was in the late 1970s, emerged.

“The complex cleaning intervention has, then, made it possible to obtain an extraordinary chromatic recovery thanks to the elimination of two thick overlapping layers of altered varnishes, the oldest wax-based, applied in two successive restorations dating almost with certainty to interventions in the early twentieth century and the 1980s of the same century,” Francesca Pappagallo explains. “In addition to the removal of surface stratifications that brought to light the splendid Lottesque modeling that was in no way compromised, coarse retouches variously spread, such as those on a bag hanging with two long laces from St. Elizabeth’s right side, were removed. The bag, black, stands out against a background that alternates between dark gray and blue and is almost imperceptible unless hit by the right light. In the restoration of the 1980s it was involved in unmotivated retouching that had covered interesting decorative metal elements including two long finials.”

The Visitation has a frame composed of covering rods dating from the early 20th century, similar to those already removed from the Madonna of the Roses. The elements had been applied during the post-unification period, when the works were stripped of their original monumental frames to adapt them to a museum context. Prior to the intervention, some nails had already been observed on the front side of the painting, and the removal of the frame made it possible to examine the entire perimeter area of the canvas, revealing a rather unusual method of attachment: the textile support was anchored on the front of the frame rather than on the side shims. The expedient therefore resulted in a dimensional increase of the work of about 5 cm per side compared to the visible part. The frame was also found to be original (although not extensible), as the corner joints were welded with strong animal glue thus preventing further tensioning. To date, the authenticity of the nailing has been confirmed by chemical-stratigraphic analysis, which showed that the layer of preparation based on plaster, glue and siccative oil, applied by Lotto also covered the selvages attached to the frame and the heads of the nails, extending partially over the wood as well.

“Before the restoration,” the restorer continues, “the back of the altarpiece on canvas, unique among Lotto’s works from Jesolo, was covered by an impenetrable wooden paneling that, once removed in order to gain access to the support, presented well-determined characteristics that allowed us to recognize its non-originality and the nature of probable antiquarian adaptation of the post-Unitarian period. Once freed, the antique loom showed the tenon/mortise corner joints still partially glued with highly crystallized strong animal glue and, for the first time in a century and a half, it was possible to examine the entire textile support with the two pieces of cloth composing it and the overstitching joining them. Observation of the entire front perimeter area of the altarpiece has, moreover, shown the curious way in which the textile support is anchored to the frame, which, instead of on the lateral shims, is fixed to the front of the wooden structure by means of punctual nailing and gluing with a dimensional increase of the work with respect to the painted part of about 5 centimeters on each side.” The precise measurements of the two works are thus: total frames, altarpiece 166.8 x 163.1 centimeters and lunette 95.2 x 158.1 centimeters. Total painted part, altarpiece 157.5x154 centimeters and lunette 95.2x154 centimeters.

Given the excellent state of preservation of the structure, with slight signs of loosening of the textile support and modest degradation of the wood, it was therefore decided to preserve the current configuration. The choice was also justified by the rarity of the altarpiece, which seems to be unique among the Venetian painter’s works on canvas preserved in the Marche region, often altered or restored over the centuries. The restoration included the consolidation of the original frame made extensible with the addition of four steel corner turnbuckles. For the lunette, on the other hand, several jobs were performed: a thorough cleaning of the frame and lining and a stable tension adjustment using the modern support frame.

"Cross-referencing the information obtained from the visual examination with the results of the scientific investigations, performed by Dr. Pietro Rosanò of Padua, there was confirmation that the frame of the altarpiece and its mounting were the original ones of Lorenzo Lotto attesting the Jesi Visitation altarpiece as a conservative unicum. In fact, the sample of yarn taken along the edge of the canvas showed concretions of materials identical to those used for the pictorial surface, also present on the head of the nails, with no solution of continuity with those. At this point, peremptory was the conservative choice of the status quo , which, after restoration of the few particularly deteriorated or crumbling wooden parts performed by Mauro Marcolini and Lorenzo Mondaini, involved obtaining the extensibility of the old frame, in order to keep the textile support in adequate tension, by cautiously ungluing the corner joints and equipping them with specially modified stainless steel tensioners. The intervention thus restored flatness to the textile support while fully preserving its original characteristics."

The signature and the mystery of the missing figures

The signature affixed by Lotto on the work, a subject that has provoked much discussion, revealed no new elements following cleaning. It can clearly read “∙ L ∙ Lotus ∙ 15...,” but traces or remnants of the last two figures, apparently made on the blue of the Virgin’s mantle, are missing. The circumstance reinforces the hypothesis that the art historian Giovanni Morelli, who saw the work on May 9, 1861, was also unable to decipher them, as is evident from his notes regarding a previous intense cleaning that, according to him, had compromised some areas of the painting, confusing them with stains present in the same area. A further question concerns Lotto’s choice to place the last two figures on a surface of such dark blue as to make them virtually illegible, despite the fact that he had ample room to sign and date the work more prominently. Although it is unlikely to reach a definitive explanation, one possible hypothesis could relate back to studies of the painting’s commissioning by the previously anticipated Rocchi family, owners of the altar and burial at San Francesco al Monte.

“During the cleaning, practiced with the help of powerful illuminating sources, no evidence emerged in the signature at the last two digits of the date, which should have been painted in black on a deep blue shadow of Mary’s mantle,” the restorer further explains. "Having observed the inscription under a powerful light, before, during and after cleaning, I wondered why on earth Lotto chose to write the last two figures on a color that would make them illegible even under optimal lighting conditions. Considering Lorenzo Lotto’s manic attention and attention to detail, the question becomes more interesting: why put the figures over a blue so dark as to make them virtually invisible? First, I do not think it was a matter of space, since the bench on which the signature is inscribed has an abundant surface area to write the signature and date on a single line. Moreover, one cannot attribute this to Lotto’s habit of writing the signature in cursive on a single line, since in the National Gallery’sAdoration of the Child, for example, the same signature is arranged on two lines. My guess, of course a suggestion, is that Lotto wanted to ’hide’ the last two digits of the date. Readings of the signature made over the years by a number of scholars, and taken up in later contributions, have occasionally identified at least the presence of the number three of the decade, but this could result from a misinterpretation of small stains caused by dirt accumulation in the depressions of the herringbone fabric. In light of all this, the most appealing interpretation is the one I hypothesize in Lotto’s intent to write the date in the middle, leaving patrons and then readers of the painting’s history free to associate it with events of an earlier period."

The identification of the flowers depicted on the ground should also be noted: these are Viola odorata (violet violet) and Cheirantus cheiri (yellow wallflower). The symbolic meaning of these flowers has been attributed by almost all scholars to the Virgin Mary to symbolize her purity and humility or the sorrowful Mysteries. However, the flowers, Francesca Pappagallo points out, are placed beside and behind the Madonna in a rather unusual pictorial setting if one wants to attribute their symbolism to her. And, as if that were not enough, they were made in a rather narrow portion of the floor compared to the greater space present, and moreover empty, that is noticeable right between the two holy women. “In fact, the flowers, neither withered nor bloomed, are right in front of the female figure in the background, the only one turned frontally and who seems not to participate in the sacred happening: Fiore Juzi.”The woman, as mentioned recognized by Jesi researcher Sara Tassi, makes a will on August 29, 1519 since she is in the grip of severe fevers resulting from an abortion in the eighth month due to which she will die shortly thereafter. “Following this interpretation, one can argue, therefore, that their emblematic presence does not refer to Mary but to the noblewoman from Jesolo whose gaze now belongs to another dimension,” the restorer concludes. "As a result of the restoration, the flowers were precisely identified as Viola odorata or Viola Mammola or Violetta and Cheirantus cheiri or Yellow Violet, which, when referred to Fiore’s personal story, take on particular symbolic overtones. In fact, violets in ancient Rome were a symbol of mourning and were thrown on the graves of dead babies as a symbol of innocence and purity while yellow wallflowers are a symbol of absolute fidelity and love capable of surviving misfortunes. Gentiluccio di Giovan Battista Rocchi, the probable commissioner of the Jesi Visitation for his family’s altar, in the tragic event that Lorenzo Lotto seems to want us to remember not only loses his beloved wife but also his firstborn son who was about to be born. A work then, this one by Lotto, completely dedicated to Motherhood in all its even painful facets in memory of a mother who was never born!"

The restoration of Lorenzo Lotto's Visitation: a masterpiece coming back to life. With its mystery

Warning: the translation into English of the original Italian article was created using automatic tools. We undertake to review all articles, but we do not guarantee the total absence of inaccuracies in the translation due to the program. You can find the original by clicking on the ITA button. If you find any mistake,please contact us.