Madonna and Child
 

Dear forum!
For the first time on your sayte.Proshu express an opinion on the painting.
Size of about 45 to 60

Atte.
Annagrigorevna!

Put your pictures here on the forum, perhaps there are more than just help you with attribution .. In particular with the portrait of Litovchenko.

Nobody knows?
Or everyone who could have unsubscribed on another forum, and more opinions there?

Written in the spirit of Murillo.

He did not try to find the original?

Many thanks for the feedback!
Original, if there is one, I'm looking for a long time, until - alas ...

Excuse me, but why?
:shy:>

Removed the glass.

Dear experts, please express your opinion, the approximate time of writing, if the copy-with whom, what for signs (print) on the back?
I would be very grateful.

I think that your picture is a fragment of a larger composition. The views of the Madonna and baby Jesus are not directed at each other and not at the viewer as a stand-alone images of Madonna with Child, and somewhere toward the bottom - to something outside the scope of the picture. The old masters did not allow such a "not closed" compositions. The foregoing indicates that the fragmentation and authenticity of your pictures.

Usually these areas the views can be found at the scene of Mary with the infant Christ and John the Baptist (vlozh. 1), but as a rule, in this scene naked babies have written, and you have Christ partly sheltered. Yes, and Maria in this scene are usually only lightly holds the Christ. The most likely seems to me therefore to stage "The Flight into Egypt, when Mary, securely holding the Christ, sitting on a donkey, and Joseph is walking (vlozh. 2). There's also the scene of Rest on the Flight into Egypt. If we consider that is also possible, although less likely, the scene of "The Adoration of the Magi" (vlozh. 3), then you have an almost boundless field for research.

And it can not be one of the working pieces of painting of the cathedral ? " I'm not quite from scratch ask this question , although small, but I have reason for it. And maybe someone favors about the seals on the back storony.Privozhu photograph the back side is not entirely because on a stretcher , unfortunately , is written the name of the collector.

Добавлено через 5 часов 56 минут
Carefully looked at it on canvas print 3-2 is more clear and shallow (ok.4 cm in diameter) and a faint large (about 10 cm long) What could this be?