Saint Praxedis
1655
oil on canvas
101.6 x 82.6 cm.(40 x 32 1/2 in.)
The Barbara Piasecka The Johnson Collection Foundation
Princeton, N. J.

Those who sustain Vermeer's authorship of the Saint Praxedis frequently point out the similarly of the Saint's physiognomy with that of the dozing girl in A Maid Asleep (see right, the detail of the Maid Asleep has been reversed to facilitate comparison). According to Vermeer expert Arthur Wheelock, the brushwork, paint structure and buildup of the heads are analogous.
In any case, the young Vermeer seems to have already revealed his life-long fascination for female interiority in his early history paintings. For although the Diana and her Companions and the Christ in the House of Martha and Mary represent themes of great historical import, we sense that the artist's interest lies as much in the women as individuals as protagonists of some impending narrative.
In respects to the original, the modeling in Vermeer's copy is somewhat more accentuated making Ficherelli's face appear sweeter of the two. The head in Vermeer's version seems slightly elongated in respects to Ficherelli's original.

The intense blue sky was painted according to Italian practice with a mixture of natural ultramarine ( the powder of crushed lapis lazuli) and lead white over a warm brown imprimatura. p>
Natural ultramarine, the rarest and costliest pigment of the 17th century, was to become the most characteristic pigment on Vermeer’s otherwise conventional palette. It has been hypothesized that owing to its elevated price, Vermeer’s patron Pieter van Ruijven may have furnished it to the painter in order to guarantee the exceptional brilliance of the strong blues which only ultramarine can produce.
The colors in Vermeer's copy appear more saturated than those in Ficherelli's original.
One of the most significant differences between Vermeer's copy and Ficherelli's original Saint Praxedis is the inclusion of a crucifix in the hands of the kneeling Saint. Arthur Wheelock, who is the principle supporter of the painting's attribution, believes that it may reflect the young artist's new-found Catholic sympathies as it is generally believed that Vermeer had converted to the Catholic religion two years earlier upon his marriage to Catharina Bolnes.
John Montias, Vermeer's chief biographer, speculated that the Jesuits could have commissioned the young Delft artist to make a copy of the painting. "It was perhaps even they who instructed Vermeer to put a golden crucifix in the hands of the Saint: for a crucifix in 17th-centry Holland was the symbolic object, that above all objects, signaled its owner's adherence to the Roman Catholic faith." Montias also points out that the Saint Praxedis reflects Vermeer early concern with women, even in his early history paintings.
An ebony wood crucifix was listed among the objects found in the Great Hall ("groote zael") of Vermeer's home in the death inventory of the artist. The crucifix was an item found almost exclusively in Roman Catholic households and in hidden churches. Vermeer painted another crucifix in his late religious Allegory of Faith (see left).
Scriptures relate that 23 Christians were discovered in the home of St. Praxedis, they were martyred before her very eyes. She had the presence of mind to collect their blood with a sponge and placed it in a well, where she herself was later buried, marked by the disk in the Basilica's floor.The sponge of Saint Praxedis was preserved as a relic in the Roman church dedicated to the Saint.
Saint Prudenita in a mosaic in the
basilica of Santa Pudenziana in Rome.
Saint Praxedis, or Prassede, was a Roman Christian of the 2nd century who is chiefly noted for having cared for the bodies of those martyred for their faith.
Her name is often associated with her sister Saint Pudentiana who may appear in the right background of Vermeer’s painting walking near the martyrium, both followed by their father, Pudens, a disciple of Saint Paul.
After many years of burying mutilated Christians, visiting the imprisoned, and comforting her suffering loved-ones, Praxedis died on July 21 of a disputed year, which is now her feast day of the Roman Catholic Church calendar. Saint Praxedis was reportedly buried with Pudentiana and Pudens in the catacombs of Priscilla, in via Salaria. However, while there does exist evidence for the life of St. Pudens, there is no direct evidence for either Praxedis or Pudentiana. It has been suggested that there was no such person as Pudentiana, the name having originated as an adjective for the titulus of Pudens, which was mistaken for the name of a female by later generations.
A church was built in Saint Praxedis’ honor on the alleged site of her house, to which her relics were taken when it was rebuilt by Pope Paschal I as the present Santa Prassede (Rome) in c. 822.
In Vermeer's picture, a beheaded man lies to the right-hand side of Saint Praxedis who squeezes out a blood-filled sponge which she had gathers the martyr's blood. The figure of the martyr is painted with greater emphasis than in the original by Ficherelli.
The present day Basilica of Santa Prassede in Rome is said to contain the sponge of Saint Praxedis - not to be confused with the Holy Sponge of Christ - which she used to collect the blood of 23 Christian Martyrs who had been murdered before her very eyes. Saint Praxedis had placed the sponge in a well, where she herself was later buried. Her relics were collected by Pope Paschal and laid in an ancient sarcophagus that predates the relics' arrival.
In Christianity, relics are the material remains of a deceased saint or martyr and objects closely associated with those remains. Relics can be entire skeletons, but more usually they consist of a part such as a bone, hair or tooth. A piece of clothing worn by the deceased saint or even an object that has come in contact with a relic is also considered a relic.
As the lives of the martyrs became an important source of inspiration for Christians worshipers, their lives and relics became revered. The 2nd-century Church Father Tertullian wrote that "the blood of martyrs is the seed of the Catholic Church," implying that the martyrs' willing sacrifice of their lives lead to the conversion of others. Many tales of miracles and other marvels were attributed to relics beginning in the early centuries of the church; many of these became especially popular during the Middle Ages.
The foreboding, monumental architecture in a generalized classical style rises above the scene setting the appropriate mood for the picture's somber narrative.
The compositions's perspective, indicated by the orthogonals of the buildings' cornices, creates a deep, hollow space which evidently was meant to dramatize the Saint's anguish. However, the vanishing point of the buildings does not coincide with that of the stone steps below. Evidently, Vermeer made no attempt to improve Ficherelli's less-than-firm grasp of one point linear perspective, considered at the time, a requisite for the knowledgeable history painter. In Ficherelli's original, the chiaroscural values of the architecture seems to be treated more delicately than Vermeer's copy.

The conventionally "antique" red dress appears to have been painted with a common glaze technique using the organic ruby red madder pigment (extracted from the madder plant), one of the most transparent and brilliant reds available to painters. Madder has been cultivated as a dyestuff since antiquity in central Asia and Egypt, where it was grown as early as 1500 B.C. Cloth dyed with madder root pigment was found in the tomb of the Pharaoh Tutankhamun and in the ruins of Pompeii and ancient Corinth. In the middle ages, Charlemagne encouraged madder cultivation. It grew well in the sandy soils of the Netherlands and became an important part of the local economy.
In order to obtain the maximum depth and vibrancy of color, painters had learned it was important to separate the problems of rendering form from color. For example, intensely-colored draperies were first modeled with relatively monochrome tones, usually raw umber (a dull but extremely versatile natural earth pigment) for the darks and lead-white for the lights. In this phase, called underpainting, the artist could occupy himself exclusively with the distribution of light and dark to evoke the play of light which explains the drapery's tuck and fold. Once thoroughly dry, a somewhat syrupy mixture of naturally transparent paint mixed with drying oil was carefully "glazed" on top of the underpainting giving it a full vibrant color, especially in the lights, unattainable by direct mixture of paints. The shine-through effect is somewhat analogous to laying a sheet of colored acetate over a monochrome image. Vermeer seems to have used such a procedure in the red drapery of the present work.
Although at first glance Vermeer's copy appears to be an exact replica of Ficherelli's Saint Praxedis, there are divergences in both motif and style. The copy presents a crucifix in the hands of the saint while none is present in the original. The robust chiaroscural scheme of the copy is more clearly stated with lights and darks massed together in distinct areas to create a more dramatic effect of movement and light. Paint is applied more sparingly in Ficherelli's original and both modeling and brushwork appear more nuanced.
While for Arthur Wheelock the more robust approach painting technique can be related to some passages of the Christ in the House of Martha and Mary and the red blouse of the seated nymph in Diana and her Companions, conservator Jørgen Wadum sees in the work technical elements which are uncharacteristic of any known painting by Vermeer.
In the red drapery, Wadum notes curious "minute wavy strokes" of the brush of a seemingly "trembling hand" everywhere in the figure's tunic. Wadum conjectures that these very signs "reveal the artist's character" even though he admits the possibility of a conscious attempt to imitate Ficherelli's style could explain the particular stylistic trait. Wadum wrote, "as far as I can judge from photographic evidence, wavey brush-handling is not found in the Ficherelli of Ferrara on which the copy is based. He further notes that just such way brush work is present in three works by Ficherelli in the National Gallery of Dublin.
critical excerpt
signed and dated 1655 in the lower left, and it also carries an additional inscription in the lower right corner: Meer N ... R ... o... o, which has been interpreted as Meer N[aar] R[ip]o[s]o (Vermeer after Riposo), the latter being Ficherelli's nickname
1655
Arthur K. Wheelock Jr.
Vermeer: The Complete Works, New York, (1997)
The plain-weave canvas support has a regular weft of ten threads to centimeter. The painting has been relined.
The light brown ground consists primarily of lead white, iron oxides and calcium. A darker brown imprimatura layer exists under the sky, which is painted with natural ultramarine. The gown, lips and blood are painted with red lakes of lead white. The pigments in the yellow paint on the brim of the urn are lead white and yellow ochre. Many different textural effects have been created with the use of glazing, scumbling, impasto, and dry brushstrokes.
The painting is in excellent condition, with only a few small losses along the right side and bottom.
* Johannes Vermeer (exh. cat., National Gallery of Art and Royal Cabinet of Paintings Mauritshuis - Washington and The Hague, 1995, edited by Arthur Wheelock)
literature

- Erna and Jacob Reder, New York, 1932 [Spencer Samuels & Company, New York, 1969-1987];
- Barbara Piasecka Johnson Collection Foundation; 1987
exhibitions

According to legend, St. Praxedis was a 2nd-century daughter of a disciple of St Paul living in Rome, and sister of St. Pudentiana. When the Emperor Marcus Antoninus was hunting down Christians, S.t Praxedis sought them out to relieve them with money, care and comfort. Some she hid in her house, others she encouraged to keep firm in the faith. She likewise cared for the severed bodies of those martyred for their faith.
St. Praxedis was at first venerated as a martyr in connection with the Ecclesia Pudentiana, but afterwards a separate church was built in her honor, on the alleged site of her house, to which, when it was rebuilt by Pope St. Paschal I (the present Santa Prassede), her relics were taken.
By the late 16th century she was especially revered by the Jesuits, an order which lived next door to Vermeer's mother-in-law, Maria Thins, along the Oude Langendijk in Delft.
In the two paintings by Vermeer and Ficherelli, St. Praxedis is shown kneeling in front of an ornate twin-handed jug into which she is squeezing a sponge soaked full with blood of a decapitated martyr.
Her effigy appears on a mosaic of the Catholic Church of St. Praxedis in Rome (see image above).
The Death of Cleopatra
Felice Ficherelli
1650s
71 x 78 cm
National Gallery of Slovenia, Ljubljana
The Saint Praxedis by Vermeer is indisputably a copy of a painting by Felice Ficherelli which is presently in a private collection in Ferarra, Italy.
Felice Ficherelli (1605 - 1660) was an Italian painter of the Baroque period, active mainly in Tuscany. In contrast with his nickname, il Riposo, derived from his peaceful nature, his most original works were easel paintings often of cruel and violent subjects, which he interpreted with a morbid sensuality and ambiguous tenderness. He specialized in martyrdom and famous murders of the past.
Ficherelli was brought to Florence when very young by the influential collector Conte Alberto Bardi, who arranged for him to study with Jacopo da Empoli and to copy works by Andrea del Sarto. Ficherelli's clear compositions and luminous drapery, which remain evident throughout his career, reflect his studies.
How Vermeer came across the Saint Praxedis, which has never left Italy and is now in a private collection in Ferrara, remains a mystery.
A Young Boy Copying a Painting
Wallerant Vaillant
1660
The present painting is presumed to be a copy of a painting by the Italian painter Felice Ficherelli by Vermeer.
Although copying the works of other painters is disdained by mainstream art educational systems today, in Vermeer's age people were far more opened to modeling themselves on great predecessors, who they took for their yardsticks.. Apprentices drew from casts of classical sculptures, copied drawings and paintings of their own teachers as well as those of the venerated Masters of the past. In addition, copying was correlated with the broader concept of emulation which was for centuries the pilaster of pictorial tradition and progress. It was then held to be impossible to rival and surpass the Masters of the past until one had acquired the same technical tools to successfully compete. Thus, for a painter in his early years, even the most talented, to copy a work of another was hardly a sign of weakness. Copying also presented a financial opportunity for many painters since collectors were not always able to acquire the great originals of the past.
Although it is not easy to understand why Vermeer would have made a replica of a relatively obscure Italian painting, the subject of this Catholic Saint may have appealed to the young painter who was just married into a staunch Catholic family and likely converted thereafter. Other writers creatively envision Vermeer rendering homage to the enormous loss of life, including one of Delft's most promising painters Carel Fabritius, caused only a few years earlier by the infamous explosion of the Delft powder magazine.
One may also speculate that he found some affinity with the picture's coloring or paint handling.
This painting, a close copy of a painting by the Florentine master Felice Ficherelli curiously, displays two signatures. The fist to be noticed was "Meer 1655" in the lower left. It also carries an additional inscription which had escaped the experts' eyes for some time in the lower right corner: Meer N ... R ... o... o, which has been interpreted as Meer N[aar] R[ip]o[s]o (Vermeer after Riposo), the latter being Ficherelli's nickname.
Arthur Wheelock, after consulting the results of laboratory examination, claimed that both "signatures and the date are integral to the paint surface" but is at a loss as to why the work bears two signatures.
Conservator Jørgen Wadum, on the other hand, states that the signature to the lower left is clearly not part of the original paint layer. He argues that the paint layer directly beneath it is visibly abraded (which means it has undergone some wear and tear) while the signature above seems relatively fresh and clear. Wadum remarks that the second signature to the lower right "is so rudimentary that any interpretation would be factitous." Furthermore, two signatures on the same painting would be a rarity for a 17th-century copy.
The present work is perhaps Vermeer's most debated painting in regards to authenticity. Since it is a very faithful copy of an extant painting by Felice Ficherelli, which had almost certainly never left the country, some Vermeer scholars believe this fact alone is sufficient to disqualify it from Vermeer's oeuvre.
However, there are various hypotheses that, while not proving Vermeer did make the copy himself, show that it is not out of the question. First of all, Vermeer could have made his copy from another copy which had somehow reached the Netherlands. Copies of Italian paintings were highly regarded in the Netherlands and were a part of an active market. In Delft, various paintings of Italian masters where known to have been part of private collections. When John Montias, Vermeer’s biographer, made a scrupulous examination of Delft archival records, only five turned up, of which only three were probably copies. It is far likelier that originals and copies by Italian masters could be found in Amsterdam.
One Amsterdam art dealer, Johannes de Renialme, owned ten. Curiously, De Renialme also had in his collection a now-lost Grave Visitation by Vermeer, presumably an early work. De Renialme was also in contact with Vermeer through his family's notary, Willem de Langue. The fact that Vermeer was summoned to The Hague to judge the authenticity of a group of disputed "Italian masterpieces" his knowledge of Italian painting must have been known.
A second, but less convincing explanation regards a hypothetical visit of Vermeer to Italy in his formative years. Another Dutch painter called Johannes Vermeer is in fact documented to have been in Italy in the 1650s, but scholars firmly believe that it was Johannes Vermeer of Utrecht, who, coincidentally, worked in the Italian manner.

