BBC History UK 04.2020

GETTY

IMAGES

Catherine Fletcher is a historian of Renaissance

and early modern Europe. Her latest book is The

Beauty and the Terror: An Alternative History of

the Italian Renaissance (Bodley Head, 2020)

Artemisia, an exhibition running from 4 April

at the National Gallery, tells the story of the artist’s

remarkable life and works of art: nationalgallery.org.uk/

exhibitions/artemisia

To hear Caroline Walker discuss Artemisia

in the BBC Radio 3 Sunday Feature

Gentileschi’s Revenge, go to

bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000cyzs

VISIT

LISTEN

trial, by the 1620s she had learnt to write and

was clearly familiar with high culture. Her

painting of Corisca and the Satyr (c1635 –37),

in which a clever nymph evades an attempted

seduction, has parallels with literary works by

her female contemporaries. Like Yael and

Judith, Corisca is an Artemisia heroine who

uses trickery to outwit her opponent.

Honoured by kings

In 1630 Artemisia moved to Naples and there

spent the remainder of her career, with the

exception of a 1638 trip to London where her

father was court painter to Charles I. Her

Self-Portrait as the Allegory of Painting was

part of Charles’s collection. By this time, as

she wrote to Galileo, she had been “honoured

by all the kings and rulers of Europe to whom

I have sent my works”.

She was not backward about asserting her

talent directly. Hoping to obtain commis-

sions from Francesco I d’Este, Duke of Mode-

na, she sent a sample of work and a letter

observing that: “I have served all the major

rulers of Europe, who appreciate my work...

it would provide the evidence of my fame...

Therefore please forgive my daring but

ambitiously honourable gesture.”

In this later period, Artemisia’s work

included multiple female nudes, such as a

Death of Cleopatra and paintings of David

and Bathsheba. Always alert to the practicali-

ties of running a business, she complained

that obtaining suitable models for this work

was “very expensive” and “a big headache”.

She added: “When I find good ones, they

fleece me, and at other times, one must suffer

[their] pettiness with the patience of Job.” By

this time, demand for her art outstripped the

works she herself was supplying, and – as was

common in the period – members of her

workshop produced paintings labelled the

work of ‘Artemisia’, even though her own

involvement may have been limited.

When it came to marketing, Artemisia

was a tough negotiator. In 1649 she wrote to

Don Antonio Ruffo, a prominent collector,

refusing him a discount: “I was mortified to

hear that you want to deduct one third...

I cannot accept a reduction, both because of

the value of the painting and of my great

need.” She was “displeased that for the second

time I am being treated as a novice”. In a

subsequent letter she did not back down,

writing that Ruffo would “find the spirit of

Caesar in this soul of a woman”. She had

overcome the barriers to women entering the

profession by training in her father’s house-

hold, but was still conscious that she was at

risk of inferior treatment because of her sex.

On receiving a drawing from her, one patron

had then hired a male artist to do the work.

“If I were a man,” she wrote, “I can’t imagine

it would have turned out this way.”

Artemisia died in c1654, but it would be

more than 300 years before her legacy truly

came to light. Even then, it remained fashion-

able to emphasise the details of her private life

at the expense of her professional work,

whether in relation to her rape, or her affair

with Maringhi. Both are easily sensational-

ised, but they often carry the sexist implica-

tion that the scandal matters more than

Artemisia’s artistic output. Of course, her

gender made a difference to her work. But it’s

high time we stopped looking at Artemisia’s

art only through the lens of her personal life.

We rarely do that with her male contempo-

raries – so why should we do so with her?

It’s still fashionable to emphasise

the details of Artemisia’s private life at

the expense of her professional work

The English view

Now part of the Royal

Collection, this Self

Portrait as the Allegory

of Painting (1638–39)

was produced by

Artemisia, probably

during her visit to

England, where her

father was court painter

to King Charles I

GETTY

IMAGES

CatherineFletcheris a historianofRenaissance

andearlymodernEurope.HerlatestbookisThe

BeautyandtheTerror:AnAlternativeHistoryof

the Italian Renaissance (Bodley Head, 2020)

Artemisia, anexhibitionrunningfrom4 April

at theNationalGallery,tellsthestoryof theartist’s

remarkablelifeandworks ofart:nationalgallery.org.uk/

exhibitions/artemisia

TohearCarolineWalkerdiscuss Artemisia

in theBBCRadio3 SundayFeature

Gentileschi’sRevenge, goto

bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000cyzs

VISIT

LISTEN

trial,bythe1620sshehadlearnttowriteand

wasclearlyfamiliarwithhighculture.Her

paintingofCoriscaandtheSatyr(c1635 –37),

inwhicha clevernymphevadesanattempted

seduction,hasparallelswithliteraryworksby

herfemalecontemporaries.LikeYaeland

Judith,Coriscais anArtemisiaheroinewho

uses trickery to outwit her opponent.

Honouredbykings

In 1630 ArtemisiamovedtoNaplesandthere

spenttheremainderofhercareer,withthe

exceptionofa 1638triptoLondonwhereher

fatherwascourtpaintertoCharlesI. Her

Self-PortraitastheAllegoryofPaintingwas

partofCharles’scollection.Bythistime,as

shewrotetoGalileo,shehadbeen“honoured

byallthekingsandrulersof Europe to whom

I havesentmyworks”.

Shewasnotbackwardaboutassertingher

talentdirectly.Hopingtoobtaincommis-

sionsfromFrancescoI d’Este,DukeofMode-

na,shesenta sampleofworkanda letter

observingthat:“Ihaveservedallthemajor

rulersofEurope,whoappreciatemywork...

it wouldprovidetheevidenceofmyfame...

Thereforepleaseforgivemydaringbut

ambitiouslyhonourablegesture.”

Inthislaterperiod,Artemisia’swork

includedmultiplefemalenudes,suchasa

DeathofCleopatraandpaintingsofDavid

andBathsheba. Alwaysalerttothepracticali-

tiesofrunninga business,shecomplained

thatobtainingsuitablemodelsforthiswork

was“veryexpensive”and“abigheadache”.

Sheadded:“WhenI findgoodones,they

fleeceme,andatothertimes,onemustsuffer

[their]pettinesswiththepatienceofJob.”By

thistime,demandforherartoutstrippedthe

workssheherselfwassupplying,and– aswas

commonintheperiod– membersofher

workshopproducedpaintingslabelledthe

workof‘Artemisia’,eventhoughherown

involvementmayhavebeenlimited.

Whenit cametomarketing,Artemisia

wasa toughnegotiator.In 1649 shewroteto

DonAntonioRuffo,a prominentcollector,

refusinghima discount:“Iwasmortifiedto

hearthatyouwanttodeductonethird...

I cannotaccepta reduction,bothbecauseof

thevalueofthepaintingandofmygreat

need.”Shewas“displeasedthatforthesecond

timeI ambeingtreatedasa novice”.Ina

subsequentlettershedidnotbackdown,

writingthatRuffowould“findthespiritof

Caesarinthissoulofa woman”.Shehad

overcomethebarrierstowomenenteringthe

professionbytraininginherfather’shouse-

hold,butwasstillconsciousthatshewasat

riskofinferiortreatmentbecauseofhersex.

Onreceivinga drawingfromher,onepatron

hadthenhireda maleartisttodothework.

“If I were a man,” she wrote, “I can’t imagine

it wouldhaveturnedoutthisway.”

Artemisiadiedinc1654,butit wouldbe

morethan 300 yearsbeforeherlegacytruly

cametolight.Eventhen,it remainedfashion-

abletoemphasisethedetailsofherprivatelife

attheexpenseofherprofessionalwork,

whetherinrelationtoherrape,orheraffair

withMaringhi.Bothareeasilysensational-

ised,buttheyoftencarrythesexistimplica-

tionthatthescandalmattersmorethan

Artemisia’sartisticoutput.Ofcourse,her

gendermadea differencetoherwork.Butit’s

hightimewestoppedlookingatArtemisia’s

artonlythroughthelensofherpersonallife.

Werarelydothatwithhermalecontempo-

raries – so why should we do so with her?

It’sstillfashionabletoemphasise

thedetailsofArtemisia’sprivatelifeat

the expense of her professional work

TheEnglishview

Nowpartof theRoyal

Collection,thisSelf

PortraitastheAllegory

of Painting(1638–39)

wasproducedby

Artemisia,probably

duringhervisitto

England,whereher

fatherwascourtpainter

to King Charles I