76

5.2.1 SUPPORT

The monumental altarpiece with a semi-circular top, with the dimensions

315 × 181.5 cm and a weight of 110 kg, still keeps its original support, as

the potentially fatal intervention of transferring the paint film (from wood

to canvas or to another wooden support) was, as mentioned above, luckily

never undertaken.

The panel is composed of three wide poplar

planks62

with vertically oriented

 grain and a thickness of 2.5–3.5 cm. The two

widest63

come from a single,

 thick board that was split along its length. One of the planks was flipped

before gluing the two together to prevent deformation of the

support.64

A

third, somewhat narrower plank (44.5 cm wide) was attached on the right;

this shows the most severe woodworm damage and is the worst preserved

in comparison with the other

planks.65
At either side of this assemblage of three main planks, another narrow

plank, almost a strip, was added. This was presumably done to achieve the

ideal width for the semi-circular

top.66

The glue joints of the planks were

secured on the reverse with

dovetails.67

The right plank shows two larger

wood

inserts68

on the paint film side: as the x-radiograph clearly reveals

different applications of the ground, these were probably not executed at

the same time. The insert that appears lighter in the radiograph may have

been made after the ground was applied.

62	 Dendrochronological investigation by Peter Klein, Universität Hamburg, Institute

of Wood Biology, report from 10 June 2012 (see n. 51): The original panel is made
of poplar (Populus sp.). The upper and lower crossbars are made of spruce (Picea
sp.). The 87 annual rings of the lower crossbar could be assigned to the years 1517–
1431 using the comparative chronology for the Alpine region: ‘The youngest annual
ring dates to the year 1517. As usually only the bark was removed in the production
 of planks from spruce, a felling date of 1517 for the tree can be assumed and,
with a minimal wood storage time of two years, an earliest working to a plank is
conceivable from 1519. The dovetails are likewise poplar (Populus sp.)’.
63	 The arrangement of the planks to form a large panel was probably consciously chosen

 such that none of the joints would disturb the depiction (the danger of wood
movement at these interfaces was well known). In comparison, Garofalo’s Ascension
of Christ in Rome, Galleria Nazionale d’Arte Antica, Palazzo Barberini, is assembled
from multiple horizontal planks, the curvature of which disrupts the depiction. The
Florentine panel painting tradition likewise considered the tendency of wood to move.
Thus, narrow lateral planks were commonly attached to one wider middle plank, as
e.g. in the support construction of Bronzino’s portraits.
64	 Seen from the panel reverse, the wood grain of the upper middle plank is found

in the lower area of the right plank.
65	 This is probably a plank containing sapwood, which would explain the severe

woodworm infestation. The wood grain is very uneven and contains knots.
66	 The width of the individual planks, seen from the panel reverse, from left to right:

5.5 cm – 44.5 cm – 57.5 cm – 67 cm – 5 cm.
67	 The technique of dovetail inserts along glue joints is found in numerous works

from Garofalo’s oeuvre, as e.g. the altarpiece of The Virgin and Child Enthroned
with Saints William of Aquitaine, Clare (?), Anthony of Padua, and Francis
(London, National Gallery, inv. no. NG 671). See Dunkerton – Penny – Spring
2002 (cit. n. 38), 22 f.
68	 Both the wood inserts, which were presumably executed because of faults in the

panel (perhaps disturbing knots) and the massive woodworm infestation confirm
the suspicion that this piece must be a tangential plank from the outer part of
the trunk, with sapwood.

Francesca Del Torre Scheuch, Ingrid Hopfner, and Sabine Stanek