Protected by a rich ebony and silver frame which is most likely apocryphal, this is an interesting work of remarkable quality. It is a smaller version of a composition by Francisco de Zurbarán. It initially came to light as an outstanding copy, dated around 1635, when it appeared on the British market in 1972. From where it went to the Plácido Arango Collection, which donated it to the Museo del Prado, along with other pieces by Spanish masters, in 2015. On the occasion of the presentation of this piece in the context of other Immaculate Conceptions from the Spanish Baroque period from the Arango Collection, Javier Portús published an assessment of the piece which perfectly tallies with the small studio copy prized by the Banco de España: ‘Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception from the Arango donation has her own personality. She is different from the others particularly from the point of view of her attitude: instead of having her hands together in prayer, as the others do, her arms are stretched out and she is looking upwards, which contrasts with the concentrated, downward gaze of the versions in the Prado and in Sigüenza.  These outstretched arms are accompanied by a significant shift of body, unlike the other three versions, where the child Virgin Mary is looking straight ahead. The upward gaze, the outstretched arms and the avoidance of a frontal pose make the image dynamic. The upward momentum is very effectively stressed, in a way that was to become increasingly characteristic of the theme as the 17^th century advanced. [...] The greater dynamism and the emphasis on light not only make this Immaculate Conception stand out from the painter’s earlier works, but also from the Sevillian tradition up to that time.

This small version of the work was certainly made for private worship by one of the journeymen at the master’s workshop. At the time when the larger version was painted, in around 1635, Zurbarán was embarking on his period of greatest success and influence. He had recently set up in Seville at the request of the city’s officials, most certainly assisted by a large, important atelier. The version is quite faithful to the model, although slight differences can be seen: in the folding of the white tunic (not in the blue mantle, which is very faithfully produced), in the clasp which is a gold cherub’s head in the original and a rectangular small gemstone, and in the cherubs around the base, of which there are only four here while there are more than a dozen under the feet of the Virgin Mary in the larger work. The background landscape, where some of the features of the litany (the well, the fountain, the tower and the cypress tree) can be made out in the poetic, transparent composition, is also very similar to that of the large version.

Commentary updated by Carlos Martín.

Alfonso Pérez Sánchez