# The Toilet of Venus ('The Rokeby Venus') > Diego Rodriguez de Silva y Velazquez - 1647-51 (National Gallery); date, place and patron disputed > Canonical HTML: https://iconotheca.com/artworks/velazquez/velazquez-rokeby-venus-national-gallery/ > Published by Servola Systems GmbH. Last verified: 2026-10-08 ## Tombstone - **Artist:** Diego Rodriguez de Silva y Velazquez - **Date:** 1647-51 (National Gallery); date, place and patron disputed - **Medium:** Oil on canvas - **Dimensions:** 122.5 x 177 cm (National Gallery); the Art Fund gives 124.5 x 179.8 cm - **Object type:** Painting - **Period:** Spanish, mid-seventeenth century - **Current location:** The National Gallery, London (Room 19 on the Gallery's website, 8 October 2026) - **Attribution:** accepted ## Summary A reclining Venus seen from behind, looking into a mirror held by Cupid, in which her face is a blur. It is the only surviving female nude by Velazquez, and the National Gallery dates it 1647-51. The Gallery thinks a Madrid dealer and painter, Domingo Guerra Coronel, listed it unattributed as 'a nude woman' in 1651, and its formal provenance starts with the June 1651 inventory of the collector Gaspar de Haro. It then passed through the Haro, Alba and Godoy collections, reached London through the dealer William Buchanan in 1813 and hung at Rokeby Park until 1905.The National Gallery's archive shows how it was bought: Henry Edward Morritt sold it for 30,500 pounds to an intermediary acting for Agnew's on 11 August 1905, and the National Art Collections Fund paid 45,000 pounds for it in 1906. On 10 March 1914 Mary Richardson slashed it with a chopper or cleaver in protest at the treatment of Emmeline Pankhurst. Two sources name Helmut Ruhemann as the restorer without a date; he did not work for the Gallery until 1934, and the 1914 repairer is not named.This record sets out the documents that disagree about when and for whom it was painted, grades each link in the chain, shows the sale prices in period terms and keeps later readings of the picture apart from what is known of its making. ## Provenance Every link carries a grade. `documented` means a cited source supports it, `disputed` means the identification is argued but not established, `unknown` means we have no owner for that span and have not bridged it. - **1647-51-by 1651** Painted by Diego Velazquez; place and patron not documented `[disputed]` (origin) The Gallery dates the picture 1647-51 and says it has been placed before, during and after Velazquez's second Italian journey. Three accounts of who ordered it do not agree: a tradition in the Alba family, mentioned in the Burlington Magazine's 1906 review of Beruete's pamphlet (the reviewer, not Beruete, is the voice), that the king commissioned it for Haro; Buchanan's 1813 statement that the Duke of Alva had it painted as a companion to a Titian; and the Gallery's older artist page, which says it was painted in Italy for the Marques de Eliche. No contract or letter is known. - **by 16 Nov 1651-1652** Domingo Guerra Coronel, painter and dealer, Madrid `[disputed]` (ownership) The Gallery says the picture does seem to be the 'nude woman' in the household inventory of Coronel, who is reported to have died on 16 November 1651. The entry names no painter and values the picture at 1,000 reales. The identification rests on the description and is accepted by the Gallery as likely, not proved, and Spanish Wikipedia reports that a March 1652 seizure from his executor Miguel de Palacios describes a differently sized, vertical nude 'by the hand of Diego Belazquez'. Aterido published the first-owner finding in The Burlington Magazine in 2001. - **1651 or 1652-1687** Gaspar Mendez de Haro y Guzman, 7th Marques del Carpio and de Heliche `[documented]` (purchase) The Gallery says Haro bought it soon after the Coronel inventory and that it first appears in his inventory of June 1651, so the date of acquisition conflicts: an inventory of 1 June 1651 precedes both Coronel's death and the reported sale of 16 September 1652 to a servant of the Marques de Heliche for 700 reales. The Gallery adds that it was apparently listed among the possessions of the Marquesa del Carpio in 1669, that it is not certain whether it was among the pictures Haro sent from Rome to Naples in 1682 and that it was paired with a Venetian nymph. Haro died in 1687. - **1687-1802** Catalina Mendez de Haro y Guzman and the Dukes of Alba (Francisco Alvarez de Toledo, 10th Duke, married 1688) `[documented]` (inheritance) By inheritance from Haro and then in the Alba collection until after the death in 1802 of Maria Teresa Cayetana de Silva, Duchess of Alba. Ponz saw it in the Alba house in 1776, and Burlington's 1906 review reports two inventories of Haro's collection found among papers of a lawsuit over the pictures. The owners between the 10th Duke and the Duchess who died in 1802 are not named in the sources consulted. - **1802-1808-13** Manuel Godoy, Prince of the Peace `[documented]` (sale) The Gallery says the Duchess's heirs sold it, by order of Charles IV, to the queen's favourite. Godoy hung it in a very private room with Correggio's Venus and Mercury with Cupid and Goya's two Majas. The price is not given in the sources consulted. - **Oct 1808-Sept 1813** George Augustus Wallis, as agent for William Buchanan, dealer `[documented]` (purchase) The Gallery gives a window of October 1808 to September 1813 for the purchase by Wallis for Buchanan, who brought it to England in September 1813. Curtis (1883) says Wallis bought it from the Prince of the Peace in 1813. - **1808-1813** Circumstances of acquisition and removal from Spain `[unknown]` (gap) Curtis (1883) says only that Wallis bought it from the Prince of the Peace in 1813, with no document. No source consulted gives a price, a payment or the authority under which it was exported during the Peninsular War. Spanish Wikipedia says it vanished from Godoy's palace amid the art plunder of the war and names it among works foreign dealers acquired by legal operations or covert trade, without a document for this picture. The record neither confirms nor excludes a sale. - **Oct 1813-Jan 1814** William Buchanan, dealer, London `[documented]` (dealer stock) Buchanan's list of October 1813 offers it as item 6, Velazquez's Venus and Cupid, with Titian's Sleeping Nymph, the pair valued at 4,000 guineas (4,200 pounds), within a collection priced at 20,000 guineas in seven shares of 3,000 pounds. The words of the list are a dealer's. - **Jan 1814-1814** George Yeates `[disputed]` (possession) The Gallery says it was apparently in his possession in January 1814 and sold shortly afterwards to Morritt. No other source consulted mentions Yeates. - **1814-1843** John Bacon Sawrey Morritt, Rokeby Park, Yorkshire (now County Durham) `[documented]` (purchase) Bought from Buchanan according to English Wikipedia and Curtis's table, although the Gallery interposes George Yeates in January 1814, reportedly for 500 pounds on the advice of Sir Thomas Lawrence (English Wikipedia) or Sir Joshua Reynolds (Curtis 1883, who died in 1792 and cannot be right). The price is a secondary figure and unconfirmed. In 2024 pounds, 500 pounds of 1814 is 42,600 to 47,200 by price measures and 510,000 to 627,000 by earnings and per-capita GDP. He hung it over the library chimney-piece and wrote to Scott about it. - **1843-11 Aug 1905** The Morritt family of Rokeby, by descent `[documented]` (inheritance) The Gallery places it in the Morritt collection at Rokeby and records it at Manchester in 1857 and the Royal Academy in 1890. The Art Newspaper says the family sold it to pay death duties. The individual owners between J. B. S. Morritt (died 1843) and Henry Edward Morritt are not named in the sources consulted; Curtis (1883) names a Robert Morrit at Rokeby Park. - **11 Aug 1905-Nov 1905** Thos. Agnew and Sons, London, through the intermediary Charles Lewis Hind `[documented]` (sale) Agreement of 11 August 1905 for 30,500 pounds from Henry Edward Morritt to Hind, who is recorded as purchaser but acted for Agnew's. The file also holds a note from Lockett Agnew about a payment of 2,000 pounds to Hind, purpose not stated. In 2024 pounds, 30,500 pounds of 1905 is 4.23 to 4.42 million by price measures and 15.8 to 25.9 million by earnings and per-capita GDP. Exhibited at Agnew's, Bond Street, in November 1905. - **Nov 1905-Mar 1906** National Art Collections Fund (now Art Fund), buying from Agnew's `[documented]` (sale) The Fund raised 45,000 pounds, which is 14,500 pounds above the Agnew purchase price, and presented the picture to the Gallery in March 1906. The Burlington Magazine said the nation paid two profits. The final sum is reported three ways: 8,000 pounds anonymously from Edward VII (English Wikipedia), a 5,000 pound Agnew loan guaranteed by him (The Art Newspaper) or evidence that he made the final balance (Art Fund). In 2024 pounds, 45,000 pounds of 1906 is 6.15 to 6.53 million by price measures and 23.4 to 37.1 million by earnings and per-capita GDP. - **Mar 1906-present** The National Gallery, London, NG2057 `[documented]` (gift) Presented by the Art Fund, 1906. Damaged on 10 March 1914, cleaned in 1965-66 and its glass struck on 6 November 2023. Lent to Vienna and Paris in 2014-15 and to the Walker Art Gallery, Liverpool, 10 May to 26 August 2024. Shown in Room 19 on the Gallery's website on 8 October 2026. ## Auction results Hammer and buyer's premium are stated separately. Where a source conflates them this record says so. - **1652-09-16** Auction of the goods of Domingo Guerra Coronel, Madrid (sale handled by his executor Miguel de Palacios), Spanish Wikipedia, citing a document published by Aterido; entry not checked at source and the entry may not describe this canvas - Estimate: Not recorded - Hammer: 700 reales - With premium: None recorded - A nude woman 'by the hand of Diego Velazquez' was knocked down to a servant of the Marques de Heliche. Whether it is this picture is disputed, and the Gallery's own provenance gives Haro's inventory of June 1651 as the first appearance. No other auction is recorded; the sales from 1813 on were private and no source gives a price for the Godoy transfer. ## Open questions - Where and when was it painted? The Gallery dates it 1647-51 and says it has been placed before, during and after the second Italian journey. Coronel's 1651 inventory, Haro's inventory dated 1 June 1651, the seizure of March 1652 and the sale of 16 September 1652 cannot all describe one moment of ownership unless Haro's inventory carries later entries, and the dimensions in the three documents differ. A transcription of each document and a check of the date of Haro's inventory in the Corpus Velazqueno would settle whether they refer to this canvas. - Who commissioned it? A tradition in the Alba family, mentioned in the Burlington Magazine's 1906 review of Beruete's pamphlet, says the king ordered it and gave it to Haro. Buchanan's 1813 list says the Duke of Alva ordered it as a companion to a Titian. The Gallery's artist page says it was painted for the Marques de Eliche. No contract or letter is known. - Why did a dealer and painter, Domingo Guerra Coronel, own it unattributed, and how and when did he get it? Portus reads the omission of Velazquez's name as caution about a nude, according to English Wikipedia. The reading is an inference from the silence. - Who was the model? The Gallery asks whether a real woman was hidden. English Wikipedia reports claims about a mistress in Italy, resting on the documented affair and child, and no source consulted names a woman. - How did it leave Spain between October 1808 and September 1813? Whether Godoy himself sold it, as Curtis says without a document, who was paid, what was paid and under what authority it was exported are all undocumented in the sources consulted, and Spanish Wikipedia's statement that it vanished amid wartime plunder has no document behind it. - Did Morritt pay 500 pounds, and on whose advice? Only Curtis (1883, naming Reynolds, who had died in 1792) and English Wikipedia (naming Lawrence) give the figure. A Morritt letter, a Buchanan account book or the Agnew stock books would confirm it, and would show where George Yeates, whom the Gallery places between Buchanan and Morritt in January 1814, fits. - Who owned it between J. B. S. Morritt (died 1843) and Henry Edward Morritt (sold 1905)? Curtis names a Robert Morrit at Rokeby Park in 1883. Whether that is a slip for the first owner or a later owner is not settled. - What was the real margin on the 1905 sale, and who was in the syndicate? The agreement says 30,500 pounds to Morritt, the Fund paid 45,000, and the Agnew file mentions 2,000 pounds paid to Hind. The Burlington Magazine said a syndicate bought the picture. Pezzini's 2016 Burlington article on Hind and Lockett Agnew, not accessible here, is the place to look. - What did Edward VII do? English Wikipedia says he gave 8,000 pounds anonymously; The Art Newspaper says the last 5,000 pounds was an Agnew loan guaranteed by him; the Art Fund says only that evidence suggests he made the final balance. The Fund's ledger and the royal archive would decide it. - How did the Gallery repair it in 1914, who did it and what did it cost? The Art Fund and Wikipedia name Ruhemann as restorer without a date, and he did not work for the Gallery until 1934. The 1914 restorer's name, the method and whether the canvas was relined are not in any source consulted. - What do the pigments, ground, canvas and linings show, and what was done in the 1965-66 cleaning? No published analysis was found. The Gallery's 2006 catalogue and conservation files are the places to ask. - How many cuts were there in 1914? The Keeper's 1914 count of seven as relayed by Century Ireland, the V&A's six and the eight of one Art Newspaper article against the seven of another cannot all be right, and the Gallery's own condition report would give the number. - Did the Inquisition ever act on this or any nude by Velazquez? The 1,500 ducats penalty comes to Curtis through Palomino. No case file is cited in any source consulted. ## Sources - [1] The National Gallery, London, 'The Toilet of Venus (The Rokeby Venus)', NG2057: overview, in-depth text, provenance extract from MacLaren and Braham 1988, exhibition history from 2009 and bibliography. - [2] National Gallery Archive, NGA27/20/2/5/1, Agreement for the Sale and Purchase of the Rokeby 'Venus', 11 August 1905 (Thos. Agnew and Sons archive). - [3] National Gallery Archive, NGA27/20/2/5/2, Correspondence sent to Charles Lewis Hind re the Rokeby 'Venus', 11 August 1905 (Lockett Agnew note and H. E. Morritt letter). - [4] National Gallery Archive, NGA27/22/2/8, Press Cuttings, The Rokeby Venus, Velasquez, November 1905 to January 1906. - [5] National Gallery Archive, NG7/301/1, letter from the National Art-Collections Fund, 20 November 1905, on securing the Rokeby Velazquez. - [6] National Gallery Archive, NG7/302/3, letter from the National Art-Collections Fund, 6 December 1905, on a contribution from Gallery funds. - [7] National Gallery Archive, NG7/311/1, letter from the Prime Minister, 6 June 1906, on the appointment of Sir Charles Holroyd as Director. - [8] National Gallery Archive, NG24/1906/6, press cuttings 14 February to 19 May 1906, including the National Art-Collections Fund gift of the Velazquez. - [9] National Gallery Archive, NG24/1966/19, press cuttings April to September 1966 on conservation and restoration, including the cleaning of NG2057. - [10] National Gallery Archive, NG29, Helmut Ruhemann Papers 1930-1979, administrative history. - [11] Hamilton Kerr Institute, Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge, 'Helmut Moritz Ruhemann (1891 - 1973)'. - [12] National Gallery Archive, NGA27, Thos. Agnew and Sons Ltd Archive, collection description. - [13] Art Fund, 'The Toilet of Venus (The Rokeby Venus)', Art Funded by you, grant record: 45000 pounds, 1906. - [14] Jenny Waldman, Art Fund, 'Why Art Fund campaigns to save great works of art'. - [15] Louis Jebb, 'How Velazquez's Rokeby Venus became a symbol of public pride and political protest', The Art Newspaper, 8 November 2023. - [16] Tom Seymour, 'Climate activists attack Velazquez's Rokeby Venus at the National Gallery in London', The Art Newspaper, 6 November 2023. - [17] Louis Jebb, 'Rokeby Venus goes back on show at National Gallery four weeks after attack by climate activists', The Art Newspaper, 4 December 2023. - [18] 'National Gallery painting examined by conservators after damage from protest', Museums and Heritage Advisor, 7 November 2023. - [19] The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs, Volume VIII, October 1905 to March 1906 (London): 'The Rokeby Velazquez', p. 206; editorial 'The Lesson of the Rokeby Velasquez', pp. 224-8; Bernhard Sickert, 'Independent Art of To-day'; review of A. de Beruete, La Venus del espejo (Madrid 1906), signed A. G. B. R. Internet Archive copy, full text read. - [20] William Buchanan, Memoirs of Painting, with a Chronological History of the Importation of Pictures by the Great Masters into England since the French Revolution, vol. 2 (London 1824), pp. 238-45, list of October 1813. Internet Archive copy, full text read. - [21] Charles B. Curtis, Velazquez and Murillo: a Descriptive and Historical Catalogue (London and New York 1883), introductory sales table and no. 34. Internet Archive copy, full text read. - [22] Auguste Breal, Velazquez, translated by Madame Simon Bussy (London: Duckworth, Popular Library of Art, c. 1904). Internet Archive copy, full text read. - [23] Andrew Graham-Dixon, 'ITP 178: The Toilet of Venus (The Rokeby Venus) by Diego Velazquez', Sunday Telegraph In The Picture, 14 September 2003 (excerpt on the author's archive page; contains Morritt's letter to Scott). - [24] Philip McCouat, 'From the Rokeby Venus to Fascism Pt 1: Why did suffragettes attack artworks?', Journal of Art in Society. - [25] Philip McCouat, 'From the Rokeby Venus to Fascism Pt 2: the Strange Allure of Fascism', Journal of Art in Society. - [26] 'Mary Raleigh Richardson (died 7 November 1961)', Monstrous Regiment of Women blog, reproducing 'Miss Richardson's Statement', The Times, 11 March 1914. - [27] 'Slashing the Rokeby Venus', Fight for the Right: the Birmingham Suffragettes project blog, 19 December 2012 (quotes Richardson's later interview). - [28] 'Famous painting mutilated by suffragette', Century Ireland (RTE and Boston College), a modern article written from 1914 news reports, dated London, 10 March 1914. - [29] London Museum, object 50.82/1393, Central News photograph, Mary Richardson leaving for police court, 10 March 1914, with catalogue text. - [30] Alexandra Sullivan, 'Art Attack: the vandalism of artworks by the suffragettes, and how the V&A prepared for an anticipated attack', Victoria and Albert Museum blog, 16 September 2024. - [31] Wikipedia (English), 'Rokeby Venus'. TERTIARY: used for scholarship it summarises (Prater, Carr, MacLaren, Portus, Lopez-Rey, Nead, Calvo Serraller) which was not consulted directly; replace with those texts. - [32] Wikipedia (Spanish), 'La Venus del espejo'. TERTIARY: used for the Alba and Godoy chain and the plunder-context statement; replace with Aterido 2001 and the Corpus Velazqueno. - [33] Wikipedia (Spanish), 'Domingo Guerra Coronel'. TERTIARY: summarises Aterido 2001 and Pita Andrade and Aterido (eds), Corpus Velazqueno (2000), pp. 245, 258, 266, 273; replace with those texts. - [34] Wikipedia (English), 'John Bacon Sawrey Morritt'. TERTIARY: replace with the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography and the History of Parliament. - [35] Wikipedia (English), 'Rokeby Park'. TERTIARY: used only for the North Riding and County Durham locations. - [36] Wikipedia (English), 'Gaspar Mendez de Haro, 7th Marquess of Carpio'. TERTIARY. - [37] Rokeby Park, 'Art' page of the house website (copy of the Rokeby Venus by W. A. Menzies in the saloon). - [38] The National Gallery, London, artist page 'Diego Velazquez 1599-1660', biography and research note on slavery connections. - [39] Wikipedia (English), 'Diego Velazquez'. TERTIARY: used for baptism, apprenticeship contract and death dates; replace with Pacheco, Palomino and the Corpus Velazqueno. - [40] Wikipedia (English), 'Mary Richardson'. TERTIARY: used for life dates only. - [41] MeasuringWorth, Five Ways to Compute the Relative Value of a UK Pound Amount: 500 pounds in 1814 expressed in 2024 pounds. - [42] MeasuringWorth, Five Ways to Compute the Relative Value of a UK Pound Amount: 45,000 pounds in 1906 expressed in 2024 pounds. - [43] MeasuringWorth, Five Ways to Compute the Relative Value of a UK Pound Amount: 30,500 pounds in 1905 expressed in 2024 pounds. - [44] National Museums Liverpool press release, 'Velazquez in Liverpool: Walker Art Gallery to host 17th-century masterpiece'. - [45] The National Gallery, London, National Treasures partners page, Walker Art Gallery, 10 May to 26 August 2024. - [46] Open University Digital Archive, 'Sexuality and pleasure: remaking the bed in women's art', AA318 VCR4, BBC Open University, 2002 (record page read in the in-app browser). - [47] The International Art Market Studies Association, listing of Barbara Pezzini, 'Days with Velazquez: when Charles Lewis Hind bought the Rokeby Venus for Lockett Agnew', The Burlington Magazine 158 (May 2016), pp. 358-67. Listing only; the article itself was not accessible. - [48] Wikipedia (English), 'Joshua Reynolds': dates 1723-1792. TERTIARY, used only for the death date. - [49] Wikipedia (English), 'Thomas Lawrence': dates 1769-1830. TERTIARY, used only for the death date. - [50] Wikimedia Commons file page, 'Vandalized Rokeby Venus 1914.jpg': 1914 magazine page showing the damaged canvas and the cleaver, public domain. - [51] Mike Higginbottom, 'Venus' previous home', Mike Higginbottom Interesting Times blog, 6 February 2019 (Rokeby Park visit; dates the Menzies copy 1906). --- Images on this record are public domain or CC0 and are hosted by us. No image on this site is generated or simulated. If you quote this record, quote the provenance grades with it.