Anthony van Dyck: By The Numbers

Where does Anthony van Dyck fit in the history of art? Grabbing the nearest art reference books on my shelf, I find one calling him “the most important Flemish painter of the 17th century apart from Rubens” and another saying “It is not too much to say that he created the English portrait tradition almost single handed.”

The question arose in my mind when a press release from Sotheby’s landed in my email box yesterday announcing that it would soon sell “an outstanding self-portrait” by van Dyke. And:

This masterpiece, which is van Dyck’s last portrait of himself, was painted in London in 1641 in the final months of his life. It is one of only three self portraits that the artist painted in England and it captures him grandly attired in a black and white silk doublet. The painting has been in the same family collection since 1712…It was one of the star exhibits of the recent Van Dyck & Britain show at Tate Britain…It ranks among the most important paintings by van Dyck ever to come to the auction market.

And the estimate? Â£2-3 million, which seems surpringly low. The high end converts to less than $5 million. According to the Daily Telegraph, the record price at auction for a van Dyck is £3,065,250, for A Rearing Stallion, in 2008.

By comparison, the number of contemporary works that have fetched higher prices is ridiculous. Finding examples is like shooting fish in a barrel: to name three, there’s Peter Doig — White Canoe: £5.7 million, Richard Prince — Man Crazy Nurse: $7.4 million, John Currin — Nice ‘N Easy, $5.5 million. Masterpieces?

OK, the market has declined since those prices were realized, but something still seems way out of whack. Whose work would you rather own?  

Photo: Courtesy of Sotheby’s