The nameless

We know that he was not very keen to sign his paintings, or to identify his subjects, even if they were friends, artists and courtiers. If some characters have names today is because the royal family or the stocks included next to the name of Velázquez. The time has proved right. What mattered was the painter ... and not them. Maybe it's nothing unusual about the picture that is now our home has not yet identified, though the author seems more than obvious, at least for a specialist like Peter Cherry.

It happened a couple of months ago. The excitement of her phone call from Dublin, where he teaches, suggested that the discovery "the most important thing I've done so far" was draft. No pictures yet wanted to teach, nor to give more clues. It took several weeks until x-rays and analysis they confirmed that it was not a fake: Peter Cherry wanted to tie everything together before taking the plunge. And the step was to make a wise proposal.

Some have told us that Velázquez in the journal appears as an obsession. I think not. Just emerging news, articles, sometimes with some controversy, that the work of experts puts us on the table. I would point out that, for each frame of the master we have published, we discarded a few more that we thought were worthy of inclusion in our pages. But this portrait of man himself. Although he never has played in any of the monographs of the painter or any other author. It is simply a coincidental discovery ... and work. There is a great composition, or a mythological scene, but everything indicates that it is a portrait of the master. Join the list of the nameless, this group of magnificent portraits full of character whose sole mission is now singing the praises of the master. A teacher who made them go down to posterity.