The paper discusses the case study of the Marriage at Cana, a sixteenth century wall painting located in Ravenna and executed by Luca Longhi. A multi-analytical approach based upon OM, SEM–EDS, μ-Raman, μ-FTIR and biological analyses was selected to investigate the painting technique and the state of preservation of the artwork, compromised by a severe alteration. Data demonstrated that the artwork was executed with a dry painting technique: a siccative oil was used as binder, while indigo, lead white, carbon black, ochres, vermilion and red lead were identified as pigments. Biological analyses clearly allowed identifying Eurotium halophilicum as the fungus responsible for the white patina compromising the painted surface and, according to this result, Biotin T was selected as the most effective biocide to stop the biological attack. The precarious conditions in which the painting was, attributable to previously performed interventions and to the conservation environment, laid the groundwork for a challenging restoration conducted in 2016. Scientific analyses better clarified the kind of materials employed in the execution on the artwork, as well as how the previous restoration was carried out; furthermore, analytical data methodologically supported phases of the intervention like cleaning, filling of the lacunae and pictorial retouching, as products were selected on the basis of their affinity to original materials and painting technique. This study will hopefully encourage reflections on how a synergic dialogue between conservation science and restoration can represent an important reference point for interventions to be conducted with scientific criteria and suitable methodology, in the light of the shared vision and common goal of transferring patrimony to future generations.

This study presents the results of the technical investigation carried out on several English portrait miniatures painted in the 16th and 17th century by Nicholas Hilliard and Isaac Oliver, two of the most famous limners working at the Tudor and Stuart courts. The 23 objects chosen for the analysis, spanning almost the entire career of the two artists, belong to the collections of the Victoria and Albert Museum (London) and the Fitzwilliam Museum (Cambridge). A non-invasive scientific methodology, comprising of stereo and optical microscopies, Raman microscopy, and X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy, was required for the investigation of these small-scale and fragile objects. The palettes and working techniques of the two artists were characterised, focusing in particular on the examination of flesh tones, mouths, and eyes. These findings were also compared to the information written in the treatises on miniature painting circulating during the artists’ lifetime. By identifying the materials and techniques most widely employed by the two artists, this study provides information about similarities and differences in their working methods, which can help to understand their artistic practice as well as contribute to matters of attribution.

In 2014, a painting attributed to the seventeenth century Dutch artist Jan Ruyscher appeared on the art market. Despite a prestigious career, Ruyscher, who possibly was a pupil of Rembrandt and Hercules Seghers, vanished from art history after his death and was only rediscovered in the 1930s. In this research paper, the combination of multiple analytical techniques ranging from radiocarbon dating of the support material to multispectral imaging and spectroscopic analyses (XRF, SEM-EDS, FTIR and Raman) of the pictorial layer offers a comprehensive analysis of the object. Radiocarbon analyses of the wooden panel indicated that the tree was probably cut down in the mid-eighteenth century, whereas spectroscopic analyses pinpointed the twentieth century as a timeframe for the application of the pictorial layers. The applied methodology sheds new light on the story of the object itself. The painting was created at the earliest in the 1930s possibly as a consequence of the rediscovery of Ruyscher, and the deliberate use of an aged panel supports an intent to deceive and hence classifies the object as a forgery. The painting under study was furthermore compared with artworks of renowned forgers in an attempt to identify the forger in disguise.