Caring for the Kings pictures: artists and restorers in the
Spanish
by ZAHIRA VLIZ AND NGEL ATERIDO
THE HABSBURG KINGS of Spain, all assiduous collectors, were
keenly aware of the value of works of art, both as propaganda for
their dynasty and for their aesthetic value. This article begins in
the reign of Philip II, the first of the Spanish Habsburgs to import
works of art from Italy and the Low Countries in prodigious
numbers.1 Countless paintings were acquired by his agents, packed
and shipped by sea and overland to reach Philips court in Madrid,
five hundred kilometres from the coast, as well as his other royal
palaces. Inevitably, works of art travelling such distances suffered
physically, and when they reached the court, they were often
in need of restoration to be dignified before they were put on
display.2 The earliest document cited here describes the activity
of an artist-restorer in the Spanish court in 1576, and the most
modern dates from 1814, on the eve of the foundation of the
Museo del Prado. Between these dates, documents in the Spanish
archives show that the role of the restorer evolved from that of
artistrestorer, to caretaker of the Royal Collection and finally
to specialist restorer, and that all these roles were played within
the unique structure of the administration of the Spanish court.3
There are decrees of appointment, letters of payment, inventories,
invoices, requests for salary increases and lists of materials and
equipment. Most are internal documents, sent to and from the
artists and court officials who surrounded the king and administered
his household. From an early date, restoration occupied its own
place in the complex apparatus of the court in Habsburg Spain.
In 1561 Philip II, who ruled his Spanish kingdom from 1556 to
1598, ordained that the Spanish court, which had been peripatetic,
should henceforth be established in Madrid, geographically at
the centre of the Iberian peninsula. The medieval Alczar Palace
in Madrid became the principal royal residence. The story of
restoration of paintings in the Spanish Royal Collection unfolds
here, and at numerous other palaces, or reales sitios, within a short
distance from Madrid and includes San Lorenzo del Escorial, the
Palace of Aranjuez, El Pardo, La Granja and the Palace of the
Buen Retiro.
To appreciate the rise of the professional artistrestorer at the
Spanish court, it is necessary to understand the structure of the
court, which had developed from the complex Burgundian system
of court etiquette and administration. Artistic matters fell under
the direction of the mayordomo mayor (Lord High Steward) and the
summiller de corps (Lord Chamberlain) (Fig.01). The first painter to
1
The inventory of goods belonging to Queen Isabel the Catholic (reg. Castile
14691504 correct?) at the Alczar of Segovia in 1503 suggests that paintings in the
collection of her great-grandson Philip II that originate from her collection were
probably numbered in the dozens rather than the hundreds; see J. Ferrands, ed.:
Datos inditos para la historia del arte espaol, 3: Inventarios reales (Juan II a Juana la
loca), Madrid 191443, pp.6969 (please check) and passim. For Philip IIs inventory,
see F.J. Snchez Cantn: Inventarios reales: Bienes muebles que pertenecieron a Felipe II,
Madrid 1956, I.
2 june 2016 clviii the burlington magazine
the king (pintor de Cmara) was directly under the authority of the
summiller de corps in the Cmara (privy Chamber/Council), while
also having responsibilities within the Furriera (Royal Household),
the administrative department responsible for the stewardship of
the kings domestic surroundings and furnishings, including his
paintings, which was supervised by the mayordomo mayor (High
Steward) and the aposentador (Master of the Household). Officers
of the Furriera were responsible for the routine maintenance, as
well as the selection, display and care of paintings in the kings
palace, which reflected the monarchs magnificence both to his
courtiers and his visitors. The pintor de Cmara had the unique
privilege of portraying the monarch, and, although other duties
related to the office were fluid and ad hoc, those concerning
the care and display of the kings collections were undertaken
within the purview of the Furriera office. For this reason, the
pintor de Cmara was also one of the few members of the kings
household entrusted with a master key to all the rooms in the
palace. From the time of Philip II, official court artists (pintores del
rey) working on royal commissions were administratively under the
direction of the Junta de Obras y Bosques (Council of Works and
Forests), yet another executive council (on which the mayordomo
mayor usually sat) charged with the care and management of
the buildings, land and forests belonging to the crown. The
kings official artists received both instruction and remuneration
from this administrative section, a measure adopted by Philip II
when he brought dozens of artists to work on the building and
embellishment of his palaces in and around Madrid. By moving
this large body of artists from the supervision of the Cmara, their
salaries were no longer budgeted under the kings household costs,
but through a separate administrative entity. Nevertheless, their
work might sometimes be supervised by the pintor de Cmara,
who received a salary for his office and the privilege of a studio
or workroom within the palace. Responsibility for the physical
condition and display of the colossal Royal Collection fell to the
pintor de Cmara, but the practical, hands-on care was executed
under the aegis of the Furriera. Seventeenth-century documents
show that some of the assistants of the Furriera were appointed
specifically for their ability to help with the repair of paintings, and
they were charged with the responsibility to clean the paintings.4
Instructions and recipes for treatment appear in art treatises of the
period, suggesting that to clean, treat and varnish damaged or
2
An awareness of the risk to artworks being transported across unmade roads and
rough terrain is evident in the frequent employment of men to hand-carry important
pieces. See, for example, A. Aterido: El final del Siglo de Oro. La pintura en Madrid en
el cambio dinstico 16851726, Madrid 2015, p.369, note 249; and Simancas, Archivo
General de Simancas (hereafter cited as AGS), Direccin General del Tesoro,
inventario 24, leg.841.
3
Much of the relevant documentation is preserved in Madrid, Archivo General de
Palacio (hereafter cited as AGP). Other relevant documents are in the AGS; Madrid,

darkened works were skills expected of the accomplished master
artist.
The painter Francisco Pacheco (15641664) published his book
El arte de la pintura in 1649,5 and his advice may reflect methods
being used at that time. Pacheco describes how to clean paintings:
old oil paintings on canvas or panel may be reconstituted and
made bright again by cleaning without risking the paint when they
have been darkened by smoke and varnish. If they are canvases
without risk of flaking, they are placed in the sun for half a day;
if they are panels, in the night air for two nights; then, with a
small amount of sifted common ash at the ready, the painting
is bathed with water, and the powdered ash is sprinkled over
it and with a sponge one washes gently, more or less according
to how well the whites are becoming lighter and rinsing the
sponge frequently in clean water, and this will clean the painting
to the desired appearance. Take care not to use too heavy a hand,
because this can remove the paint. This method is reserved for
oil paintings because should the paint be tempera, it cannot bear
this cleaning. When the old painting is thus cleaned, it may be
varnished and given lustre with a light varnish . . ..6 Much of the
advice recorded by Pacheco is problematic insofar as the effect of
the solvents and oils he describes on the original paint layer could
be irreversible, even in the hands of a sensitive and skilled restorer;
in the hands of a less accomplished practitioner, their use could be
disastrous. Judgment and skill would be essential for these cleaning
techniques if serious damage were to be avoided. Pacheco does
not comment on the structural treatment of paintings. Then, as
now, there was often a division of labour between those who
treated the structure of the work of art, by relining, for instance,
and those who cleaned and restored the image. Although this is
never explicitly stated in the documents, it is often implied, as the
opinion expressed in 1743 about one practitioner: 35 reales for
each day he works is sufficient pay [. . .] since the ability of [this
man] only goes so far as to be able to line and clean [paintings],
but not to apply his hand to restoring [. . .] this artists judgment
is not the most exquisite.7
An artist of a later generation, Antonio Palomino (16531726),
who was appointed court painter to King Charles II in 1688,
also provides information on restoration techniques in his Museo
pictrico y escala ptica (The Museum of Painting and Optical Scale
is this translation correct?).8 He gives recipes for varnishes made
of such ingredients as mastic, walnut oil, turpentine, copal gum and
sandarac, and advises that varnishes made of the latter resin must be
applied warm or hot to avoid a bloom appearing and ruining the
painting; he also suggests that oil of spike lavender could help to
remedy this problem. Palominos text includes a detailed reference
to a varnish of egg white that at least does not risk the painting
since it can always be removed by simply washing the surface with
water and a sponge, and thus accumulations of smoke and fly spots
are also removed. One should then re-varnish with thoroughly
beaten egg white that is like snow distributed evenly over the
Archivo Histrico Nacional (hereafter cited as AHN); and Madrid, Archivo de
Protocolos.
4
Aterido, op. cit. (note 2), pp.32425.
5
F. Pacheco: El Arte de la Pintura, ed. B. Bassegoda i Hugas, Madrid 1990, book 3.
6
Ibid., p.394.
7
AGP, Legajo 17, Aranjuez, Patrimonios; cited in M.L. Barreno Sevillano: La
restauracin de pinturas de las colecciones reales durante el siglo XVIII, Archivo
espaol de arte 53/212 (1980), p.474.
8
A. Palomino y Velasco: Museo pictorico y escala ptica, Madrid 1724, II, p.223, book 9,
chapter 15, section 5, is entitled De algunas curiosidades, y secretos accessories a la Pintura,
y de importancia para el que la professa (On some curious and secret information
CARING FOR THE KINGS PICTURES
surface. Palomino advises that this varnish is best used in cool
weather because in the heat it can cause a blanched appearance
when it dries.9 Other methods for removing old varnish from a
painting proved necessary:
when it has been varnished by someone without understanding,
and of course when it has become opaque or bloomed; or if it
has been washed with water and the surface appears the colour
of ashes; or if it is very heavy and too shiny to allow enjoyment
of the painting. Those who know nothing consider that shiny
varnishes are the most perfect [. . .]; on the contrary a perfect
varnish is saturated but not over shiny. So these are the methods
I know of for removing varnish (although, I have not personal
experience of any). The first is with normal oil, quite hot,
but not so much that it burns, and with a stiff brush (and the
painting also warmed) pass over the surface by parts, not all at
once, until the old varnish comes away, and after cleaning it
with bread, apply some hot walnut oil in turpentine and allow
it to soak in for four to six hours as one wishes, and then clear
the surface with bread crumb. This is the perfect varnish to
saturate old paintings and give them back some substance that
has been consumed by time.10
Palomino tells us that some prefer to use a cut onion rather than
a brush for varnish removal.11 Concluding this section Palomino
writes, The other way to remove the varnish from a painting is
with nitric acid (agua fuerte de plateros), applying it over the painting
with a soft brush, and with care not to let it carry off the paint.
The paint will be very dry and matt after this operation, so it may
be revived with walnut oil and turpentine, and in this way it looks
as if it had just been painted.12 This procedure, of course, is highly
risky for the original paint layer. Nitric acid is used for etching
metal plates, and even the action of a dilute or reduced form of
this reagent on varnish and paint would be difficult to control.
It was deemed that an accomplished artist should, at the very
least, have an understanding of the methods of cleaning paintings.
Since Francisco Pacheco was the father-in-law and first teacher
of Diego Velzquez (15981660), it is possible that the cleaning
methods he described in El arte de la pintura influenced the
techniques Velzquez and his assistants employed on works in
the Royal Collection. Cleaning and restoring paintings formed
an essential part of the care of pictures in the Royal Collection
and contributed to the presentation of the paintings (composicin)
in the rooms of the palace; the sovereigns magnificence was
reflected in his surroundings, and the pintor de Cmara, working
with his assistants in the Furriera, had to ensure that the quality
and condition of the monarchs paintings in no way diminished
his prestige.
As part of his creation of a central Spanish capital with a court
worthy of its ruling dynasty, Philip II not only renovated old palaces
and built new ones but, in order to decorate them appropriately,
accessory to the art of Painting, and important for he who aspires to its practice).
The author stresses that he does not have personal knowledge of these methods. This
seems surprising since we know that Palomino was involved, at the very least in an
advisory role, with the treatment of paintings in the Royal Collection.
9
Ibid., pp.21920.
10
Ibid., p.223.
11
Ibid. It is possible that naturally occurring chelating agents in onions and garlic may
have played a role in their use for picture cleaning, and it is possible that garlic also
had a degree of effectiveness as a fungicide.
12
Ibid.
the burlington magazine clviii june 2016 3
CARING FOR THE KINGS PICTURES
he imported works of art both from his Netherlandish realms
and succeeded also in acquiring major works from Italy, and
in particular from Venice. When it finally became clear that,
in response to Philips overtures, neither Titian, Tintoretto nor
Veronese would emigrate to Spain to take on the decoration of
the Escorial, the king turned to the Spanish-born, Italian-trained
Juan Fernndez Navarrete, called El Mudo (c.15381579), who
was commissioned to paint religious canvases for the numerous
side altars in the basilica of San Lorenzo de El Escorial.
It was to El Mudo that Philip II also entrusted the restoration of
Rogier van der Weydens Descent from the Cross in 1576 (Fig.02).
The panel was some 140 years old at that date, and the climactic
changes it had experienced, as well as its transportation overland
after apparently suffering a shipwreck at sea, had caused the
wooden panels to split. The work was of singular significance to
this devout monarch, as is evident from Philips careful instructions
to the artist: El Mudo will restore it, painting in what has been
lost of the colours in the costumes and background, but he is not
to touch either the expression nor the headdress of Our Lady, nor
any other thing that is not costume or background, as I showed
him this day.13 The restoration of losses of paint was probably
carried out using a walnut or linseed oil, then, as now, after the
stabilisation of the complex panel support, which is composed
of numerous planks. The structural repair was carried out by
Gilles de Boullon, a master-joiner in the kings service. Navarrete
and Boullon were to work together again on at least one other
occasion, when Rogier van der Weydens Crucifixion (Patrimonio
Nacional, Real Monasterio del Escorial), which was brought to
Spain by Philip from Brussels in around 1559, required similar
treatment after the overland journey from Segovia to the Escorial
in 1567 caused the planks comprising the panel on which it was
painted to separate at the joints.14 Navarrete El Mudo made a
copy of this painting around this time, attesting to his ability to
imitate the hand of the original artist, a skill of great value in
discreet and sensitive restorations. Navarrete had not been dead
for long before one of his own paintings required repair, which
was carried out in May 1587.15
The personal relationship between the Spanish Habsburg
monarchs and their artists is reflected in the degree to which El
Mudo was trusted to care for one of the kings most treasured
possessions, and also in the fact that the king spoke directly to the
artist, not through a secretary or another agent. Philips attitude
towards practitioners of the arts painting in particular was
13
la aderece el Mudo, pintando lo que est saltado de los colores de las vestiduras y en el campo,
mas no ha de tocar en el gesto ni tocado de Nuestra Seora, ni en otra cosa que no sea vestido
o campo como lo seal hoy; J. Zarco Cuevas: Pintores espaoles en San Lorenzo el Real de
el Escorial (15751613), Madrid 1931, p.30. Philip IIs particular esteem for Rogier van
der Weydens art was shared by other members of his family. His great-grandfather
Juan II of Castile, his grandmother, Queen Isabel the Catholic, and his aunt Mary
of Hungary, Regent of the Netherlands, all owned devotional works by Van der
Weyden. The Descent from the Cross was acquired by Philip from Mary of Hungary,
brought to Spain in the 1550s and served as the altarpiece in the provisional church
of the Escorial from 1574.
14
L. Campbell, ed.: exh. cat. Rogier van der Weyden, Madrid (Museo del Prado) 2015,
pp.6061. This monumental panel suffered again in the fire at the Escorial in 1671,
and has recently been restored in a collaborative project between the Patrimonio
Nacional and the Museo Nacional del Prado, Madrid.
15
Zarco Cuevas, op. cit. (note 13), p.287, doc.10.
16
G. Gutirrez de los Ros: Noticia general para la estimacin de las Artes . . ., Madrid
1600, p.226; modern edition: J.M. Cervell, ed.: Gaspar Gutirrez de los Ros y su
4 june 2016 clviii the burlington magazine
praised shortly after the kings death in 1598 by Gaspar Gutirrez
de los Ros, who commented upon the infinite honours that His
most religious and holy majesty King Philip conceded to those
practitioners of these Arts, and the great humanity and gentility
with which he treated them.16
Philip II had many opportunities to interact with artists. He
employed scores of them to decorate the palaces he was building
(El Escorial, El Pardo, Aranjuez) or renovating (Palace of the
Real Alczar, Madrid) throughout his reign. His actions suggest
he believed it was incumbent on him to transform the provincial
town he had chosen to be his urban capital and its surrounding
countryside into a setting appropriate to the most powerful
monarchy in the world.
A pragmatic administrator, Philip II initiated changes in the
organisation of the royal household, which were necessary in
light of the many dozens of artists he employed to embellish the
Escorial, but also in the building and decoration of the other reales
sitios near Madrid. It was during this time that artists dedicated to
the restoration and physical care of the kings paintings emerged.
By the mid-seventeenth century, when the palace building
boom was over, there was no longer the need for so many
artists, and the arm of the administration Philip had created to
accommodate this workforce, the Junta de Obras y Bosques,
became redundant (Fig.01). One constant in this story, however,
was the post of pintor de Cmara (artist of the Privy Chamber),
which in Philip IIs reign and throughout the seventeenth century
was invested with the privilege of access to the person of the
king and to the private apartments as well as to all the rooms in
the palace.
The pattern of a special relationship between a monarch and his
favourite court artist that had started with Philip II was repeated
and even strengthened during the seventeenth century. Alonso
Snchez Coello,17 Peter Paul Rubens18 and Bartolom Carducho19
are among those artists documented as restoring paintings in the
Spanish Royal Collection, although, as was the case of Navarrete,
restoration was by no means their principal activity.20 Until the
mid-seventeenth century the physical care of paintings in the
Royal Collection was arranged on an ad hoc basis by or under
the auspices of the pintor de Cmara. For example, the eminent
court artist Alonso Cano (160167) was responsible for restoring
paintings damaged in a fire at the Buen Retiro Palace in 1640.
Although the palace itself was governed by Philip IVs favourite
and chief minister, the Count-Duke Olivares, who was also Canos
Noticia general para la estimacin de las artes, Madrid 2006: Pues si comenzara por las
honras infinitas que hizo a los profesores destas Artes la magestad del mismo religiossimo y
santo Rey Filipo, y por la mucha humanidad y suavidad con que los trataba, bien se ve que
sera meterme en un golfo grande para quedarme ahogado en l (Were I to begin to cite
the infinite honours bestowed on the practitioners of these Arts by the majesty of
this most religious and holy King Philip, and the great humanity and gentleness with
which he treated them, I well know that the quantity of such instances would soon
overwhelm me as a swimmer may be in deep water).
17
Zarco Cuevas, op. cit. (note 13), p.172. Extract from a document recording payment
to Snchez Coello for restoration: dos cientos reales que uvo de aver de dos reparos que
hizo en dos retablos que estavan estragados de viejos en el dicho Monasterio, concertadopor los
dichos doscientos reales (two hundred reales that were owing for two restorations that
he completed for two badly damaged old altarpieces that were in this Monastery).
18
M. Jaff: Rubens and Italy, Oxford 1977, pp.6769.
19
Zarco Cuevas, op. cit. (note 13), pp.28196.
20
Even the reports on the condition of paintings at El Pardo made by Antonio
Palomino in 1711 are remarkable because they represent only a tiny fraction of his

first protector at court, that artists role as restorer of the damaged
canvases probably owed as much to his friendship with Diego
Velzquez who, since 1626, had been pintor de Cmara. Cano and
Velzquez had been fellow apprentices in Seville, and, after the
fire, travelled together throughout Castile to acquire paintings for
the king, which they subsequently restored as required.21
By the mid-seventeenth century the responsibilities of the pintor
de Cmara for the restoration of paintings was formalised. In 1652
Velzquez, who, as pintor de Cmara had long fulfilled a role in
the Furriera (Fig.01), was promoted to Aposentador Mayor (Master
of the Household), the top post in the Furriera. This was the first
(and only) occasion when one courtier occupied both offices.
Traditionally the pintor de Cmara was aided in his artistic court
duties by the assistants working in his studio which, although
located within the palace, functioned under the pintor de Cmaras
direction and therefore independent of palace administration. In
1655, however, Velzquez petitioned for a permanent post of an
assistant to the pintor de Cmara in the Furriera to be established,
specifically to care for the kings pictures. This was necessary
since the Royal Collection had continued to grow significantly
during the reigns of Philip III and Philip IV: their agents bought
pictures at the greatest sales of the century, including Rubenss
collection in 1640, and the paintings of Charles I of England, sold
at the Commonwealth Sale in 164954. During this time, more
paintings were entering the Royal Collection from abroad than
were being commissioned from Spanish artists.
Velzquezs request was recorded in a memorandum to the king,
recommending a certain Carlos de Salazar for the post of official
assistant (mozo de la furriera similar to Page of the Chambers).
Velzquez argued, prior to the palace collection having been
augmented with artworks to ornament the palace there were three
assistants [to the pintor de Cmara: ok?] in the furriera for the care
of these things, and now there is only one and these necessities
have been in part met until now by a servant who helped him to
restore, hang and clean the paintings and other things that are in
his care, and since [the servant] is no longer there, it has become
necessary to address [ok?] this situation and my request that such
an assistant to help with these tasks be formally appointed to the
office of mozo de la furriera.22
Initially the palace bureaucrats resisted, proposing that two
existing functionaries of the Furriera should take on this job in
addition [author: rather than?] to Velzquezs candidate (for
whom a new salary would be necessary).23 But Philip IV, who
artistic activity; see F.J. Len Tello and M.M.V. Sanz Sanz: La esttica acadmica
espanola en el siglo XVIII: Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Carlos de Valencia,
Valencia 1979, pp.34952, for transcriptions of the relevant documents (AGP, Sec.
Personal, Legajo 784/1).
21
Demas de esto hizo el reparo de ciento y sesenta lienzos que se rompieron y maltrataron en
la primera quema del Rl Retiro. Y acompao a Diego Velazquez en el viaxe qe hio a Castilla
la Viexa qdo VM se lo mando para efecto de buscar pinturas, y las qe se truxeron las reparo
(In addition to this he restored one hundred and sixty canvases that were torn and
damaged in the first fire at the Royal Retiro, and he accompanied Diego Velzquez
on the trip he made through Old Castile commanded by Your Majesty for the
purpose of finding painting; he repaired those that were brought); AGS, Cmara,
Memoriales, Legajo 1367, Memorial de Alonso Cano solicitando una canonga
en la Catedral de Granada, 24th and 30th October 1658; published in J. Mart y
Mons: Estudios histricos-artsticos relativos principalmente a Valladolid basados
en la investigacin de diversos archivos, Valladolid 1898. See also A. Aterido: Corpus
Alonso Cano, Madrid 2001, doc.337.
22
Aterido, op. cit. (note 2), p.325; AGP, Expedientes personales, 947/25, Memorial
CARING FOR THE KINGS PICTURES
held Velzquez in high esteem, decreed that the new post should
be established, and Carlos Salazar was sworn in as an official
servant of the Furriera in March 1655, just a month after Velzquez
lodged his petition. From that date Salazar worked directly with
Velzquez or under his orders. The close relationship between
the two artists is reflected in the fact that Velzquez and his wife,
Juana Pacheco, stood as godparents to two of Salazars children
named, appropriately, Diego and Juana Marcelina.24
Velzquezs successful bid to appoint a specialist assistant to
the Furriera meant that from 1655 onwards the post was occupied
by painters who were, for the most part, and at least until the
mid-eighteenth century, direct descendants of Velzquez or his
assistants. For example, Diego Salazar, Velzquezs godson, worked
in the Furriera until 1715.25 The size of the kings collection,
Velzquezs standing in the palace and Philip IVs respect for his
painter, resulted in the establishment of a permanent provision for
the restoration of works of art in the Spanish Royal Collection.
Starting with Velzquezs son-in-law, Juan Bautista del Mazo, who
succeeded him as pintor de Cmara, this office was automatically
tied to a post as ayudante de la Furriera (assistant to the Royal
Steward). This insured that the pintor de Cmaras responsibilities
for the collections care were tied to the Furriera.
Juan Carreo de Miranda (161485) served as pintor de Cmara
from 1669 to 1685, with five assistants documented in his studio
in 1682,26 among them Juan Serrano who, in 1686, applied for a
post in the Furriera. In describing his qualifications for the post, he
mentioned that he had worked as an assistant to Carreo, repaired
a fresco in the Saln de los Espejos in the Real Alczar, repaired
paintings throughout the Palace and at San Lorenzo el Real at
the Escorial, and hung paintings in the Escorial and in the San
Pablo hermitage in the park of the Buen Retiro; furthermore,
he had repaired all the paintings in that palace there were over
five hundred and added that he had not been paid for five
months. The record of his appointment states he was named for
the reason that he has appropriate ability to help in the treatment
of paintings.27 Echoing the apparent close personal relationship
between Velzquez and Salazar, Juan Serrano was to become the
de facto heir of Carreo and his wife.28
A close contemporary and collaborator of Carreo was
Francisco Rizi (161485) who was never pintor de Cmara to the
sovereign, although he held the equivalent office in the household
of Don Juan Jos of Austria (162979), Philip IVs natural son.
Rizi undertook the restoration of paintings belonging to Don
de Velzquez remitido por Felipe IV al Bureo, 17th February 1655: que aviendo antes
que la casa estuviesse aumentada de piezas y adornos tres mozos de la furriera para su servizio,
oy se halla con uno solo y estando suplida en parte esta falta hasta aora con un criado que el
tena que le aiudaba a aderezar, colgar y limpiar las pinturas y a lo demas q. es de su cargo, por
averle faltado se halla en necesidad de representar lo que ai de persona con titulo de mozo de la
furriera le aiude en este ministerio y sea de servizio para el.
23
Aterido, op. cit. (note 2), p.325; AGP, Expedientes personales, 947/25, Informe del
Bureo al Rey, 12th March 1655.
24
Aterido, op. cit. (note 2), p.325, note 196.
25
Ibid., pp.32528.
26
Ibid., p.326.
27
Ibid., pp.32627; AGP, Expedientes personales, 993/31, 28th November 1686.
Juan Serrano gained the place, but with an honorary title and without a salary.
28
M. Lasso de la Vega y Lpez de Tejada: Efemridades artsticas madrileas (1603
1911), Boletn de la sociedad Espaola de Excursiones 12 (1948), pp.2834.
the burlington magazine clviii june 2016 5
CARING FOR THE KINGS PICTURES
Juan in 167879. Treatment was necessary to repair damages the
paintings had suffered travelling from Zaragoza, where Juan Jos
had served as viceroy, to Madrid. Besides relining, mounting
onto new stretchers and restoring some thirty-one unidentified
canvases, Rizi also restored the extensive losses to a Feast of the
gods on copper by Hendrick de Clerck (whereabouts unknown).
Rizis work was praised because it could not be perceived, even
by His Highness [don Juan] who, despite being so fine a painter
himself, could not detect it.29 Despite this praise, Rizi was not
paid for his work until after the Dons estate was settled 1683.
The last pintor de Cmara in the seventeenth century was
Claudio Coello (164293), who held the office from 1686 to
1693 and continued the campaign begun under Carreo to treat
all the paintings in the Alczar and the Buen Retiro Palace, which
amounted to over nine hundred works by 1686.30
Philip V (reg.170024), the first of the Bourbon kings of Spain,
wished for a complete redecoration of the royal palaces to reflect
the style and dynastic character of the new royal house. Because
the king named several painters as pintor de Cmara simultaneously,
the honour attached to the appointment was diminished,31
although this was restored by the new designation of a primer
pintor de Cmara in 1737. Meanwhile, the restoration and care
of the collection continued, as evidenced by documents relating
to the decoration of Queen Maria Luisas apartments in 1703.
Despite considerable care being taken in transporting paintings
from outlying palaces to the Alczar, some as large as Rubenss
Adoration of the Magi (Fig.03), moving the paintings around until
the queen was content with the arrangement damaged the works,
which then required relining and restoration under the direction
of Teodoro Ardemans (16611726), Maestro mayor de Obras Reales
[translate], and from 1704 pintor de Cmara and ayuda de la Furriera,
who had been trained by Claudio Coello.32 Ardemans, with his
collaborator Francisco Ortega, restored and adapted the size of
the paintings by cutting or adding sections of canvas to most of
the pictures that were set into the walls in the redecoration of the
Saln Nuevo del Alczar.33
The effectiveness of the kings household servants and courtiers
literally underwent a trial by fire on Christmas Eve 1734, when
the Alczar Palace was engulfed in flames. During that night more
than five hundred paintings were destroyed, including works
by Titian, Rubens, Veronese and Velzquez. Nevertheless, the
courageous efforts of court officials and the friars of the Convent of
St Giles at the palace gates saved some 1,200 works from outright
destruction: cut from their frames and flung from the windows of
the burning Alczar, the pictures were taken to safety in nearby
buildings including the convent, the houses [plural ok?] of the
Duke of Bedmar and the church of San Justo (Fig.04). If the names
of the artists whose paintings were lost were illustrious, so too
29
E. Gonzlez Asenjo: Francisco Rizi restaurador de pintura, Archivo espaol de arte
73/292 (2000), pp.41519, esp. p.417, cites AGS, CSR [what is this?], Legajo 207:
la pinto y renob de genero que Su alteza con ser tan estremado pintor no lo conoia . . ..
Attempts to identify this work have been unsuccessful.
30
Y. Bottineau: LAlczar de Madrid et linventaire de 1686. Aspects de la cour
dEspagne au XVIIe sicle, Bulletin Hispanique 60/3 (1958) pp.289326.
31
Aterido, op. cit. (note 2), pp.35255.
32
Ibid., p.333.
33
Ibid., p.341; AHN, Consejos, Junta de obras y bosques, Legajo 49.534.
34
AGP, Administrativos, Legajo 38, exp.36.
35
An archaic term, composicin de pinturas may be understood as the process of making
orderly and composed paintings that were in a broken or disorderly condition.
36
AGP, Felipe V, Administrativos, Bellas Artes, Legajo 38/25. Z. Vliz: The
6 june 2016 clviii the burlington magazine
were those whose paintings were rescued: Drer, Reni, Raphael,
Antonis Mor, Van Dyck, Tintoretto, Veronese, Velzquez,
Rubens, Bosch, Ribera, Cano, El Greco and Titian. A campaign
to restore the salvaged works was promptly organised; among the
paintings lined and restored were Velzquezs Las Meninas (Prado,
Madrid), Rubenss Adoration of the Magi, Titians Tarquin and
Lucretia (Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge) and his Adam and Eve
and Charles V at Mhlberg (both Museo del Prado, Madrid).34 Over
a century of experience of caring for the collection underpinned
this, one of the best-documented episodes of restoration practice.
Lessons had been learned from earlier palace fires, such as the
destruction of El Pardo in 1604 and the fire at the Buen Retiro
in 1640. However, the urgent demands of the aftermath of the
1734 Alczar fire meant that the post of restorer was more clearly
defined, although he was still supervised by the primer pintor de
Cmara. Documents reveal that a carefully monitored campaign to
restore the works was undertaken by painters of proven knowledge
and skill in the composicin de pinturas.35
One of the most intriguing documents is a letter dated 18th
January 1735, less than a month after the conflagration, written
by Jean Ranc (16741735), an artist who had arrived in Spain in
1722 as pintor de Cmara to Philip V. Rancs letter is addressed to
the minister Joseph Patio, a trusted adviser to the king:
The beauty and quality of the royal collection is so great that,
after their repair, the works damaged in the fire must not be
allowed to return to the confusion in which they previously
existed. I most humbly beseech your Excellency, if His Majesty
should honour me by putting me in charge of returning these
works to a good state, to attach to me the title of superintendent
of paintings under the orders of the Mayordomo Mayor de Palacio.
I ask this as a particular favour which would offer relief and
protection from the misery I have been caused by the malicious
rumours which my jealous enemies continue to spread regarding
the fire in the palace, about which they now see, to their great
regret, that neither in my apartment nor in my chimney was
there a single spark of fire.36
Rancs request to take responsibility for the care of the damaged
works reflects alterations in the administrative structure of the
court effected after the dynastic change in 1700. Supervision of the
care of the collection was no longer part of the pintor de Cmaras
mandate, and only with the designation of a primer pintor de Cmara
in the 1740s was a chain of command re-established.37 Rancs letter
contains his recommendations for the care and conservation of the
collection.38 First, he suggested that the paintings be taken to the
house where they will be restored only after windows had been
installed in it. He continued:
Restoration of Paintings in the Spanish Royal Collections, 17341820, in S.
Staniforth and C. Sitwell: Studies in the History of Painting Restoration, London 1998,
pp.5354: Les Beaux que appartienment a la Couronne meritent bien cette distinction;
dautant plus que se aprs avoir ete raccomods el retrent dans la Confusion ou ils etoient
cy devant, ceseroit navoir rien fait. Je suplie tres humblement V.E. si leurs Majestez me
font lhonneur de me charger du soin de les faire metre en bon Etat dy attacher le titre de
surintendant des tableaux, sous les orders du grand Maitre. Je le demande comme une grace
que poura me metre a couvert de chagrin que me cause le mauvais bruit que mes jaloux enemies
contiument afaire courir sur lincendre de Palais ou lon voit cependent encore a leur grand regret,
quil nest entre ny dans mon appartement ny dans la cheminee aucune etincelle de feu [. . .]
Honneur detre avec un profund respect [. . .] Ja. Ranc..
37
Aterido, op. cit. (note 2), p.358.
38
AGP, Felipe V, Administrativos, Bellas Artes, Legajo 38/25; Vliz, op. cit. (note

treatment should begin with the most beautiful works, including
measuring them for their stretchers and frames. One should
always reckon the stretchers a little bigger so that when they
are lined onto the new canvas, one can have a little ease in
placing them to one side or the other, according to the taste
and knowledge of the one in charge; and they must not be
placed too near the edge, as they will be hidden by the frame.39
To avoid misunderstanding and bad restoration of the
originals by those who have never studied [the conservation
of paintings ok?], the restoration of the important passages
should be carried out only by the most able restorers.
When restored, the pictures should be divided into good,
mediocre and bad. The good ones will be placed in the salons
according to the schools of Rome, Venice, Lombardy, Flanders
and others. The mediocre ones will be displayed separately and
the bad ones put aside and not shown.
The stretchers for the very large paintings must be hinged in
two parts, so that it will be possible to fold them and to transport
them without having to roll them.40
Ranc attached a room-by-room summary of the pictures saved
from the fire, including Veroneses The finding of Moses and Alonso
Canos Castilian King (Figs.05 and 06). From the great Hall of
Mirrors, he notes, all the pictures were saved except the portrait
of Philip IV on Horseback by Rubens and the Expulsion of the
Moriscos by Velzquez.41 Although some of Rancs suggestions
were adopted, his death only six months later may have been
hurried by the profound distress caused by the episode.
By mid-1735, Juan Garca de Miranda (16771749), a minor
artist trained in the circle of Antonio Palomino, who formerly
served as painter to Queen Isabel Farnese, wife of Philip V, was
effectively in charge of the restoration work and was named pintor
de Cmara in recognition of his skill as a restorer.42 Ranc was
not replaced until 1737, when Louis van Loo came to Madrid
and was eventually named primer pintor de Cmara in 1744.
Practices established by Garca de Miranda continued well into the
nineteenth century and informed restoration practice in the Museo
del Prado, established in 1819 with the rescued Royal Collection at
its heart. From the time of Garca de Miranda and throughout the
eighteenth century, the physical care of the collection became the
responsibility of specified pintores de Cmara rather than the Furriera.
A building known as the Casa Arzobispal was designated for the
repair of works damaged in the fire. It was not far from the palace,
next to the church of San Justo and only a short distance from the
main store for the damaged works, the Casa de Bedmar. From
1765 restoration was carried out at the Casa de Rebeque (Fig.04).
Garca de Miranda began preparing for the conservation of
damaged paintings in the early summer of 1735, and his request for
materials on 14th August gives an idea of the scale of the enterprise:
36), pp.5455.
39
Ibid. [correct?], page reference?: . . . lorsque lon prendra la mesure des dits tableaux
pour faire les Chassis, on commencera par les plus beaux; il faut toujours les faire un plus grand
afin quen les collant sur la toile on soit matre de leur donner un peu plus de jeu dun cote ou
de lautre, selon le gout et la connoissance de celuy que en sera charg, et cela afin de ne point
etre oblige de placer quelques fois des parties Essencielles trop pres du pord, lesquelles se cachent
dans la bordure.
40
Ibid. [correct?], page reference?: . . . Ces tableaux maltraits etant mis sur toile seront
raccomods sous les yeux de plus habile Peintre pour Empecher que le dessein ny soit pas
corrompu par des gens que dordinaire nenfont aucune Etude, et lorsquil sy trouve des parties
principals de gates, il faut que le plus habile les raccomode luy meme [. . .]. Tous les tableaux,
mis en bon Etat seront separez en trois classes, les bons, les mediocre, et les mauvais. Les Bons
seront placez dans les salles, selon les Ecoles de Rome, de Venise, de Lombardie, de Flandres,
CARING FOR THE KINGS PICTURES
914 metres of angulema linen for lining large pictures, and 450
metres of finer Corua linen for the more delicate ones; 23 kilos
of tacks or nails [for fixing canvases to stretchers]; two plates of
iron, three hammers and two pairs of pliers [used in stretching
canvases]; 90 kilos of flour, two combs of honey [added to the
relining adhesive], 16 litres of spirit of wine [for removing varnish];
45 litres of walnut oil, and 45 kilos of sandarac gum [for varnish and
oiling out]; two loads of coal. A dozen sponges [used in cleaning
away smoke and discoloured varnish].43 He also requested funds
to pay assistants for a period of six months to help with lining, and
ordered large wooden worktables used during lining, stretchers,
a load of clean sand for weighing down relined canvases and a
labourer to carry it up to the workroom.44 On 30th October,
another 185 kilos of flour, eight litres more of spirit of wine, five
and a half kilos of soap, and another 130 kilos of coal.45 Using
sand for weighing down relined canvases is no longer employed,
but in the hands of skilled practitioners, it could have helped to
avoid potential collateral damage from lining such as increasing
the canvas weave texture or flattening the impasto of the original
paint surface. One of the dangers of using heated irons to secure
the adhesive and relax distortions in the original paint (a procedure
used extensively in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries) is that
it flattens the impasto of the original paint surface or, if excessive,
can even melt the paint. The two iron plates that Miranda ordered
may have been heated and placed on the painting to speed the
evaporation of the water in the pasteglue adhesive (la gacha), but
it is probable that the join between the original canvas and lining
attached behind it was in fact secured by weighing it down with
sand. Working from the dates and quantity of materials ordered
by Miranda, we can deduce the sequence of treatments carried
out in the first year after the fire. The first six months must have
been occupied with imposing order on the chaos resulting from
the Christmas Eve rescue operations by cataloguing paintings
and prioritising them for treatment. By focusing his workforce
on relining the structurally damaged canvases Miranda stabilised
the extremely vulnerable paintings, many of which had been cut
from their stretchers and may well have suffered creases, tears and
punctures from urgent handling during the crisis. An inventory of
the paintings, dated 1747, notes that the dimensions of numerous
paintings differed from those recorded in pre-fire inventories
because severely damaged parts of the canvases were cut away
before lining.46 The quantities of walnut oil and spirit of wine
(ethyl alcohol) ordered in August suggest that cleaning and varnish
removal occurred in tandem with the structural interventions.
Soap was purchased for cleaning utensils, brushes, palettes and
grinding slabs.
By December Miranda was ready to begin restoring, and
ordered pigments in quantity: fine carmine, ultramarine of the
best quality, fine madder, ten kilos of walnut oil; 15 litres of glue
et autres; le Mediocres de meme separem.t. et les mauvais seront mis aussi a part [. . .] il faout
observer que tous les chasis des grand tableaux soient fait en deux, pour pouvoir les plier et les
transporter dans tous les Endroits ou on poroit en avoir besoin sans etre oblig de les rouler . . ..
41
AGP, Felipe V, Administrativos, Bellas Artes, Legajo 38/25, transcribed in Vliz,
op. cit. (note 36), pp.5658.
42
Aterido, op. cit. (note 2), p.360.
43
AGP, Felipe V, Seccin Bellas Artes, Legajo 38/25, partially transcribed in M.L.
Barreno Sevillano: La restauracin de pinturas de las colecciones reales durante el
siglo XVIII, Archivo espaol de arte 53/212 (1980), pp.46790. Original units of varas,
libras, cuartillos, fanegas etc. have been converted to their metric equivalents.
44
Ibid.
45
Ibid.
46
AGP, Administrativos, Legajo 38, exp.36.
the burlington magazine clviii june 2016 7
CARING FOR THE KINGS PICTURES
from Valladolid, eleven kilos of yeso mate (a fine grade of calcium
carbonate); 14 kilos of linseed oil to make the siccative [for use
in retouching];47 brushes in all sizes; and more pigments: yellow
lake, ochres from Valencia or Calamocha, umber, Prussian blue,
natural and artificial greens, and lead white (described at various
times as fine, from Venice, Holland, etc.). Red lakes were specified
as ordinary, fine, from Florence, from Venice, from Honduras or
the Indies.48 Walnut oil seems to have been used as the medium,
while glue and gesso were used as putty to fill losses in the paint
layers before applying pigments in oil to imitate the original and
dissimulate losses and damages. The specialised merchants who
supplied these materials traded in the Calle de Postas, between
the Puerta del Sol and the Plaza Mayor (Fig.04).
Garca de Miranda was succeeded in 1749 by Andrs de la
Calleja whose career in the royal service spanned fifty years;
for the last thirty-five he was in charge of all restoration in the
palaces in Madrid and its environs. In compliance with Bourbon
administrative reforms, from 1753 he produced regular and
detailed budgetary reports on the cost of materials, assistants and
journeys. Every January he submitted accounts for the preceding
year with a summary of the work carried out.49 Callejas accounts
included payment for such items as pumice stone, fine Venetian
alum and many dozens of eggs, which he used with rock sugar
for varnishing.50 The pumice stone would have been used for
smoothing off uneven threads on the reverse of the original canvas
as well as on the relining canvas before gluing them together.
Alum was probably added for stabilising glazes, or as an additive
to other pigment mixtures, or possibly for purifying water to be
used in the preparation of lining adhesives. Callejas accounts also
include such items as esparto, the tow-like fibres used to bridge
joins on the reverse of wood panels, and paper for fans [can you
explain why it was called for fans?], a kind of vellum that could
be applied in strips to the reverse of panels for the same purpose.
The same year he occasionally ordered cola de pescado (fish glue,
a form of isinglass), which suggests that flaking paint on wooden
panels, which could not be treated by relining, was glued in place.51
The volume of work completed is astounding. Between 1751
and 1753 Andrs de la Calleja and a handful of assistants treated
257 paintings, including Orazio Gentileschis Finding of Moses
(Fig.07), of which he noted: from the Pardo Palace which was in
bad condition, flaking and very dry, and with old varnishes which
took much time to clean, and this kind of composition, because
of its size, to clean it without damage consumes a deal of time.52
In the same period he cleaned Rubenss St George and the dragon,
also from the Pardo, now in the Museo del Prado, in a similarly
bad state. As the treatments were finished one assistant fitted
and gilded new frames to the paintings. The list also included 4
hunting or game scenes by Snyders; A gentleman wearing the Cross
of Malta [in a very bad condition from having been stuck onto a
panel; this is Titians painting in the Prado]; St Peter the apostle
and St Jerome by Ribera were relined; a portrait of a seated
47
Ibid.
48
Ibid.
49
Most of the copious documentation of materials and costs relating to work directed
by Andrs de la Calleja is published in J.L. Morales y Marn: Coleccin de documentos
para la historia del arte en Espaa, VII: Pintores cortesanos de la segunda mitad del siglo
XVIII, Madrid 1991, pp.81143, passim.
50
Ibid., p.125, doc.159.
51
Ibid., p.122, doc.156; p.125, doc.159; p.137, doc.171.
52
AGP, Fernando VI, Bellas Artes, Caja 354/1.
53
Morales y Marn, op. cit. (note 49), pp.14445, document 177. AGP, Seccin
Carlos III, Legajo 65. The paintings are by Francisco de Zurbarn, PO1241, PO1242,
8 june 2016 clviii the burlington magazine
woman with a dog in her hand by Antonis Mor was also treated
(Fig.08) [author: please check where in the above quotation
marks should be inserted]. At the start of 1752 he began work on
a very damaged picture of Hippomenes and Atlanta [. . .] chosen
from the Torre de la Parada; this is Guido Renis painting now
in the Prado.
In 1783, Andrs de la Calleja was occupied with paintings from
the Hall of Realms in the Buen Retiro Palace, including ten
paintings of the Labours of Hercules (these are by Francisco Zurbarn
and now in the Museo del Prado) and six large battle scenes, all
of which were nearly lost, for which reason it has been necessary
to line them and provide new stretchers.53 The inventory of
pictures awaiting treatment in 1785, the year of Callejas death,
again gives an idea of the number and quality of works being
restored: Titians Sleeping Venus, Venus and Adonis, Dana and two
more of his Venuses; Rubenss The three Graces, Judgment of Paris
and Persueus and Andromeda; eighteenth-century royal portraits
included Rancs Family of Philip V (Fig.09); portraits by Titian;
copies after Correggio; Veroneses Venus and Adonis; Riberas
St John the Evangelist; and Renis Hippomenes and Atalanta (in
the studio since 1752?[why the question mark?]) and Annibale
Carraccis Venus and Adonis. In 1796 most of these pictures were
transferred from the Royal Collection to the Royal Academy of
Fine Arts of San Fernando, where the nudes would have been
of use to train aspiring artists.54 The inventory continues with
Sebastiano del Piombos Descent from the Cross, Titians Charles V
at Mhlberg, The fable of Arachne by Velzquez (all in the Prado)
and works by Murillo, Rubens, Ranc, Corrado Giaquinto, Van
Dyck, Amigoni and Giordano, among others. In all, fifty-two
paintings were committed to the care of Jacinto Gmez, who
had been Callejas assistant for nearly ten years.55
At the time of Callejas death, two senior royal painters shared
the position of primer pintor de cmara, while the supervision
of restorations was carried out by Callejas successor, Jacinto
Gmez, and other artistrestorers in the royal service. The political
manoeuvring between Francisco Bayeu (173495) and Salvador
Maella (17391819), which resulted in a shared appointment,
seems to have been motivated by rivalry to take possession of the
studio in the Casa de Rebeque (Fig.04). If it was large enough to
contain all the pictures listed above, it must have been impressive.
In any event, the lions share of conservation and restoration
continued to be carried out by Jacinto Gmez. The equipment
inventoried in the Casa de Rebeque in 1785 includes the usual
easels and porphyry slabs for grinding pigments and mixing them
with the medium. It also contained substantial pieces of canvas,
some three and four metres square, which were used for moving
large paintings when they were unstretched; canvas impregnated
with wax and resin used for the same purpose; a very large canvas
four and a half metres square on a stretcher, to place over the
paintings when the relinings were weighed down with sand; large
tables, small stoves for heating the lining adhesives, and much
PO1243, PO1244, PO1245, PO1246, PO1247, PO1248, PO1249 and PO1250,
Museo del Prado, Madrid.
54
AGP, Seccin Carlos III, Legajo 202/45.
55
AGP, Seccin Carlos III, Pintores de Cmara, Legajo 202/9.
56
AGP, Seccin Carlos III, Legajo 202/45; transcribed in Vliz, op. cit. (note 36),
Appendix, doc.5.
57
Morales y Marn, op. cit. (note 49), pp.13435, doc.168; AGP, Seccin Carlos III,
Legajo 55.
58
Morales y Marn, op. cit. (note 49), pp.105108, doc.138; AGP, Seccin Carlos
III, Legajo 41.
59
Morales y Marn, op. cit. (note 49), pp.199200, doc.132; AGP, Seccin Carlos

else besides.56
As well as the continuing restoration of works damaged in
the fire and routine treatment of paintings in Madrid, the royal
restorer and his assistants regularly journeyed to outlying palaces
to inventory and review the condition of paintings and make
recommendations to the primer pintor de cmara or the Mayordomo
mayor whose authorisation was necessary for treatment. Some
work was done on site, but extensive interventions were usually
undertaken in the Casa Arzobispal or the Casa de Rebeque. On
one occasion, an Annunciation by Titian (untraced) could not
be rolled; perhaps it was painted on panel and transported from
Aranjuez to Madrid with the help of eight labourers who steadied
the picture on the rough road.57 When pictures were rolled, they
were protected with thin paper, rolled around a wooden tube and
placed inside a tin canister for the journey.58 There were trips to
Aranjuez, El Escorial or El Pardo two or three times a year, and
the accounts note extra costs for transportation, lodging, meals and
even replacement of personnel in the case of illness.59 Memoranda
with observations on the state of paintings frequently conveyed
an alarming image. Paintings seen in the Pardo in 1751 were in
bad condition since they have been in that place for so long, they
suffered when they were moved [. . .] those in the Zarzuela palace
were in a bad state, fragile, and perished since they were there
such a long time in that place with no windows, and the worst
was that they were also soiled by birds and by the urine of bats,
which causes very pernicious damage and is difficult to repair.60
In 1777 Anton Rafael Mengs, primer pintor de cmara, reported
on paintings at the Escorial, noting that the humidity in the old
church and cloisters was detrimental to paintings placed against
the stone walls, which led to a sunken and damaged appearance.61
He urged that the monks pay the cost of restoration, but the work
should not be done by an indifferent restorer, who might destroy
them forever; rather, they should be placed in the hands of a
restorer of recognised ability, such as one of those who worked
for the king.
On the one hand, Mengss high opinion of the royal restorers
was shared in the nineteenth century by Jos de Madrazo, Director
of the Prado from 1838 to 1857, who claimed that even the
most knowledgeable connoisseurs could not distinguish these
eighteenth-century restorations.62 On the other hand, in 1785 a
successful private restorer, Nicolas de Lameira, declined to accept
the honour of treating paintings in the Royal Collection under the
direction of Mariano Salvador Maella, pintor de Cmara, claiming
that he refused to be directed by Maella or any other artist, since,
recognising his ability, both Maella and Bayeu gave him their
pictures to restore. It was therefore evident that neither could
teach him anything about the art of restoring paintings, nor was
he in need of any direction; [. . .] economically, too, he could
not afford to work for the king since he would have to give up
working for any private collectors as there were so many paintings
in the Palace that are damaged by terrible treatments, that not even
in twenty years could the work of many skilled hands devoted
III, Legajo 38.
60
AGP, Felipe VI, Bellas Artes, Caja 354/1.
61
Barreno Sevillano, op. cit. (note 43), p.469; AGP, Legajo 3879.
62
J. de Madrazo: Viaje artstico de tres siglos por las colecciones de cuadros de los reyes de
Espaa, Barcelona 1884, p.216.
63
Morales y Marn, op. cit. (note 49), p.285, doc.95; AGP, Seccin Administrativa,
Caja 606/12.
64
E. Harris: Goya, London and New York 1969, pp.2930.
65
Personal communication from Nigel Glendinning in 1995. Extract from volume
CARING FOR THE KINGS PICTURES
exclusively to this end achieve it.63
In 1800 Goya was asked to review the disappointing and inferior
work of a restorer named ngel Gmez Maran. He commented:
Even the artists themselves, if they came back to life now, could
not retouch [their paintings] perfectly because of the darkened
tone of colours which is produced by Time, who is also a painter,
according both to the maxim and observation of the wise. It is
not easy [even for the artist himself] to preserve the rapid and
transitory intent of the fancy and the harmony and order planned
at the first execution in such a way that they are not weakened
by change and retouching. And if this is thought to be inevitable
for a consummate artist, what is to happen when retouching is
undertaken by one who lacks the solid principles [of his art]?
[. . .] With regard to the nature of the ingredients employed for
the glazing [varnishing] of the paintings, although I asked what
he used, he spoke only of white of egg, without any further
explanation; so that I knew for certain that he was making a
mystery of it and was anxious to hide the truth.64
Another contemporary, the painter Luis de Paret (174699)
explained in detail this method for preparing egg-white varnish:
take two egg whites and put them in a bowl and beat them
and when they have made much foam the plate is tipped and a
clear varnish is poured off and the foam is thrown off because
this [. . .] would ruin the pictures; then add 1/4 part of lemon
juice and with a very clean little sponge a very little bit of the
varnish is taken up and passed over the entire picture lightly.65
Beyond providing valuable evidence about the materials and
processes employed by Spanish restorers in past centuries, what
more do the documents uncover? They make evident that, from
the time of Philip II, there was a relationship of trust between
the sovereign and the artists who restored the paintings in his
collection. The restoration was administered by the Furriera office,
and the mozos de la furriera who cared for the kings paintings
belonged to the kings household. In a court culture where
proximity to the person of the king was a sign of high status,
courtiers with access to the rooms inhabited by the king were
worthy of respect. Sometimes the sovereign even entrusted key
political missions to his painters, as when in 1706 Jos Garca
Hidalgo carried secret correspondence for Philip V during the
Wars of the Spanish Succession,66 enduring rough treatment and
only being spared execution because the rebel leader was his
former pupil. In 1814 Mariano Salvador Maella, a venerable elder
statesman of the art establishment, who as primer pintor de Cmara
had been in charge of restoration with Bayeu from 1785, was
subjected to a test of political purity (pureza) at the time of the
restoration of the monarchy after Napoleons defeat.67
We also learn from the documents of the vicissitudes suffered
by great artworks even early in their lives: the impact of transport
4 (178992) of the Diario de Pedro de Seplveda; Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional,
MS 12628.
66
This episode was recounted by Garca Hidalgo in a tract running to eight pages
published in 1706; see Seor Don Joseph Garcia Hidalgo, pintor de camara de V.Magestad,
dize: que aviendo partido desta Corte en primero de diziembre del ao de 1706, proximo
passado [. . .] llevando indulto para Juan Basset, rebelled en el Reyno de Valencia . . .;
Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional de Espaa, VE/1224/46.
67
Morales y Marn, op. cit. (note 49), pp.31819, doc.255; AGP, Seccin
Administrativa, Caja 606/12.
the burlington magazine clviii june 2016 9
CARING FOR THE KINGS PICTURES

then, as now, was a factor, as were damaging environmental THUMBNAILS

conditions. The material life of a painting can be perceived as
layered and cumulative, its history embedded in the artwork
we view today. The simplicity of materials employed in these
early documented treatments indicates the consummate practical
skill and considered judgment with which they were used by
practitioners like Garca de Miranda and Andrs de la Calleja.
The archival records reveal a slow but steady growth of
professionalism in the practice of restoration in the Royal
Collection. The early Habsburgs, in particular Philip II and Philip
IV, had a real knowledge of painting, and their sophisticated
appreciation of art created a culture that was propitious for the
care of artworks. With the support of the monarch, the pintor
de Cmara supervised treatments, in many cases doing the work
himself. Treatments seem to have been focused above all on
stabilising the fragile structures and repairing damage resulting 01. Diagram showing the relative positions at court of pintores de Cmara and
from transportation and environmental conditions. Nevertheless, pintores del rey, and the three administrative authorities for which the artists
a quiet but constant undercurrent of aesthetic concerns suggests worked. BEING REDRAWN IN-HOUSE, PLACEHOLDER VISUAL
ABOVE
that criteria about cleaning and retouching were also concerns.
The traditions of care established in the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries ensured that in response to the disastrous fire at the Royal
Alcazar in 1734, a well-organised and documented restoration
programme was promptly initiated, on which a succession of
pintores de Cmara and restorers were employed for over fifty
years.
Another observation touches on the possible influence of
restoration practice on the artistic development of the Madrid
school in the seventeenth century. The artists who worked as
picture restorers include some of Spains greatest painters: Alonso
Cano, Diego Velzquez, Juan Carreo de Miranda, Francisco Rizi
and Claudio Coello. Although impossible to prove, it is probable
that the close study of the techniques of the old masters and the
assessment of condition that go hand-in-hand with restoration
would have heightened these artistrestorers perceptions of
canvases by artists such as Titian and Rubens and would have led
to stylistic shifts in their own work.
The twin factors of an extremely large and centralised collection
of paintings and the inevitable physical deteriorations of even the
most beautifully crafted works of art determined that restoration
practice and conservation of the collection evolved naturally in the 02. Descent from the Cross, by Rogier van der Weyden. c.1435. Panel, 220 by 262
cm. (Museo del Prado, Madrid).
Spanish Royal Collection. The crisis of the fire in 1734 ultimately
strengthened the spirit of commitment and tradition in the care
of this great historical collection.

03. Adoration of the Magi, by Peter Paul Rubens. 1610. Canvas, 346 by 438 cm.
(Museo del Prado, Madrid).

10 june 2016 clviii the burlington magazine

 CARING FOR THE KINGS PICTURES

04. Map of Madrid by Pedro Teixeira, 1656. (Biblioteca Nacional, Madrid).

Detail with locations for A) Real Alczar Palace; B) Convent of Saint Giles; C)
Palacio de Bedmar; D) Parish of San Justo; E) Archbishops Palace; F) Casa de
Rebeque; G) Calle de Postas.

05. The finding of Moses, by Paolo Veronese. c.1580. Canvas, 57 by 43 cm. (Museo
del Prado, Madrid).

08. Portrait of a seated woman, by

Antonis Mor. c.156065. Panel,
100 by 80 cm. (Museo del Prado,
Madrid).

06. A Castilian king, by Alonso Cano. Date? Canvas, 165 by

125 cm. (Museo del Prado, Madrid).

09. Family of Philip V, by Jean Ranc. c.1722. Canvas, 44 by 65 cm.

07. Finding of Moses, by Orazio Gentileschi. 1633. Canvas, 242 by (Museo del Prado, Madrid).
281 cm. (Museo del Prado, Madrid).