The identity of the sitter

In 1917, Auguste L. Mayer suggested that the Metropolitan’s Portrait of a Man, then kept in a deposit at the Provinzial-Museum in Hanover, Germany, might be a self-portrait by Velázquez, although he was later doubtful and titled the work as “self-portrait?” in his Catalogue Raisonné, published in 1936. More recently, Jonathan Brown, while reattributing the painting to the hand of Velázquez, deemed Mayer right to be dubious; he could find no relationship between the sitters in the RV and the self-portrait of Velázquez held at Valencia’s Museo de Bellas Artes, or that appearing in Las Meninas. The portrait in Valencia is generally regarded as an authentic self-portrait. I suspect that this statement is mainly based on the opinion of Aureliano de Beruete.

In my opinion, the facial features of the sitters in the RV and the Valencia Self-portrait are very similar, or at least compatible in terms of features that change over time. For example, the sitters have the same forehead (note the shadow above the brow), the same peculiar nose (note the flat section in the upper part of the nasal bridge, and the divided, protruding tip), and the same mouth and lips. The mustache is also very similar, although this is a less significant feature given that mustache styles are subject to fashion. Finally, the hair would appear to be compatible. However, these similarities may be insufficient to assign the category of ‘self-portrait’ to the RV. Clearly, such evidence is based on perception, and the perceptions of different observers need not be the same. In comparisons with the unquestionable Velázquez self-portrait in Las Meninas, members of the Prado staff used this very argument to express their doubts about the identity of the sitter in the RV during a debate on the subject held at the Prado Museum in October 2012.

In Brown’s essay, it is implied that the RV would not resist his “five-second rule of portrait identification” in comparisons with Velázquez’s self-portraits in the Valencia painting and in Las Meninas. However, while it might be argued that this method could work well when the same sitter appears in different portraits painted around the same time (see below in the case of Bernini portraits), it might not work so well for paintings of the same sitter produced at very different times in his/her life. Indeed, in recent years, I have asked many of my acquaintances to undertake simple identification experiments, and noticed that when the age of the supposed same sitter differed, they often become unsure about whether it was the same person. Even when skilful painters are thus consulted they cannot clearly tell whether the sitters in a pair of portraits are the same.

If it is accepted that the sitter in the RV and in the Valencia Self-portrait is Velázquez, he must have been rather older in the latter painting. Indeed, the RV was probably painted by 1634 (when Velázquez was in his 35th year, the possible terminus ante quem for The Surrender of Breda) or even before (1630-1635, according to the Metropolitan Museum catalog). The Valencia Self-portrait can be understood as a previous sketch for the Uffizi portrait, which has been attributed to the Velázquez workshop. Interestingly, the Uffizi portrait shows Velázquez as a knight, possibly of the Order of Santiago. Although it is rather difficult to see the small cross laying across Velázquez’s breast, which might identify the order, he is clearly carrying a sword. The small cross is clearly seen in later engravings which possibly used this painting as a template (see Harris). This must therefore push the Uffizi portrait forward to 1659 or later, when Velázquez was in his sixties and had at last been made a knight of the said order. If this reasoning is correct, the gap between the RV and the Valencia Self-portrait/Uffizi portrait must be approximately 25 years, explaining the exhausted appearance of Velázquez in the last two works. One sees differences of the same nature in, for example, portraits of Great Britain’s Queen Victoria, which clearly show how time forgives no-one. Would anyone think that the fresh young lady with the fine eyebrows and lips in Franz Xaver Winterhalter’s 1842 work and the old lady with the arched eyebrows and serious expression in the 1887 photograph taken by Alexander Bessano are one and the same person? Probably not; yet their noses are identical. Velázquez also had a very peculiar nose, making him recognizable over time. The correct identification of facial features might therefore help in the identification of the sitters in the above works. Certainly, we know that, from maturity, the face essentially maintains its proportions, and these can be studied in portraits, especially if the sitter has adopted the same pose. Unfortunately, Velázquez’s typically light and diluted brush-strokes render the measurement of facial distances impossible, especially in the Valencia Self-portrait. Yet the RV shows a characteristic that can only be explained by it being a self-portrait – an inverse chiaroscuro.

A. L. Mayer, Velázquez: A catalogue raisonné of the pictures and drawings, London, Faber & Faber, 1936.
J. Brown, ‘A restored Velázquez, a Velázquez restored’, p. 12. Velázquez Rediscovered, pp. 10-15.
A. de Beruete, Velázquez, Paris: Librairie Renouard, Henri Laurens, 1898, p. 49.

E. Harris, Complete studies on Velázquez, Madrid, Centro de Estudios Europa Hispánica, 2006, pp. 241-242.