The Fortune Teller
Simon Vouet, 1617
BaroqueGenre ScenesNon-Italian Artists
Overview
About This Work
Painted in 1617, The Fortune Teller (Italian: La Buona Ventura; also known as The Gypsy Fortune Teller) is an oil on canvas by Simon Vouet (1590–1649), measuring 95 x 135 cm, now housed in the Galleria Nazionale d'Arte Antica (Palazzo Barberini), Rome. The painting depicts a scene of calculated deception: a young, well-dressed artisan or tradesman sits before a beautiful young woman who reads his palm while smiling seductively into his face; simultaneously, an older woman (visible at the right edge) extends her left hand into his pocket to steal his valuables, her right hand making a vulgar gesture of contempt (the thumb protruding between the first and second fingers—a medieval Tuscan gesture of mockery referenced by Dante in the Divine Comedy). A third figure—a woman in elegant pink drapery—looks directly outward at the viewer, apparently inviting complicity in the spectacle or serving as witness to the fraud. The inscription on the back of the canvas, discovered during twentieth-century restoration, provides contemporary documentation: "aegiptia. vulgo. zingara. fatvi. cerdonis. divinatrix. a. Simoe. Voet. ad. vivum. depicta. MCDXVII" ("The Egyptian woman, commonly called a gypsy, fortune-teller of the foolish artisan, painted from life by Simon Vouet 1617"). The painting was commissioned by Cassiano dal Pozzo, a powerful Roman antiquarian, collector, and cultural impresario connected to French interests in Rome. It represents Vouet's direct engagement with Caravaggesque genre painting—his response to and reinterpretation of Caravaggio's two versions of The Fortune Teller (1594, c. 1600). Where Caravaggio's paintings render the moment with psychological subtlety and ambiguity, Vouet's interpretation is theatrical and explicit: the fraud is unmistakable, the complicity of all three women in the theft is clear, and the viewer is directly implicated as a witness to the scene. The painting exemplifies the Caravaggesque tradition's engagement with street life, social marginality, and moral complexity.
Visual Analysis
Composition
The Three-Figure Arrangement: Unlike Caravaggio's more restrained two-figure compositions (the fortune teller and the naive young man), Vouet includes a third figure—the older woman picking the victim's pocket—making the fraud unmistakable and explicit. This compositional addition transforms the painting from a scene of subtle seduction into a clear narrative of organized criminal conspiracy. The three women function as a coordinated team: the young fortune teller provides the distraction (the intimate palm-reading and seductive gaze); the older woman executes the theft; the woman in pink serves as observer and implicit inviter of the viewer's complicity. This compositional clarity—what one observer termed "theatrical choreography"—differs fundamentally from Caravaggio's ambiguity.
The Foreground Intimacy: The young fortune teller and her victim occupy the immediate foreground, their bodies and faces brought close to the picture plane in a manner that recalls Caravaggesque close-up presentation. The viewer is drawn into intimate proximity with the scene, almost sharing the space with the figures. The fortune teller's hand holding the young man's hand, her face close to his, her direct eye contact—all create an impression of intimate connection that contrasts sharply with the pickpocket's theft occurring simultaneously.
The Gestural Language: The painting's narrative is conveyed primarily through gestures and expressions rather than through explicit action. The young fortune teller's smile is seductive yet ambiguous (is it genuine attraction or calculated performance?); the older woman's raised hand making the obscene gesture communicates contempt and mockery; the woman in pink's direct gaze toward the viewer seems to invite complicity. This reliance on gesture to convey complex psychological and narrative information creates what art historians term "readable narrative."
The Spatial Ambiguity: Interestingly, despite the clarity of the narrative, the spatial relationships remain somewhat ambiguous. It is not entirely clear whether the older woman and the young man occupy the same space or whether there is distance between them. This ambiguity creates compositional tension: we know intellectually that the theft is occurring, yet spatially it remains somewhat separated from the main action of the palm-reading.
Colour & Light
The Caravaggesque Dramatic Contrast: Vouet employs the characteristic Caravaggesque contrast between brilliant spotlit foreground and obscuring darkness. The young woman's face glows with warm flesh tones; her red sleeve provides a vibrant accent of colour; the young man's clothing is rendered with rich detail and jewel-like colours. Against this brilliance, the background dissolves into darkness, and the older woman emerges from the shadows. This extreme light-dark contrast creates psychological effect: it isolates the palm-reading tableau, making it visually dominant, while the theft—occurring in shadow—remains partially hidden even to the viewer who knows it is occurring.
The Red Sleeve as Focal Point: The young fortune teller's red sleeve serves as a chromatic anchor—a vivid accent that draws the eye and signals the point of narrative focus. The red, warm and luminous, creates visual interest and directs the viewer's attention to the seductive interaction between the young woman and her victim. The vibrant red contrasts with the more muted tones of the rest of the composition, making it impossible to ignore. This chromatic strategy—using colour to direct attention and to create psychological emphasis—demonstrates Vouet's mastery of the Caravaggesque vocabulary.
The Warm Flesh Tones and Sensuality: Both the young fortune teller and the woman in pink are rendered with warm, glowing flesh tones that convey both physical beauty and seductive power. The painting makes these women attractive, seductive, appealing—which intensifies the moral message: their beauty is a tool of deception, their attractiveness is weaponized.
Materials & Technique
The Oil on Canvas Medium: Executed in oil on canvas at a substantial scale (95 x 135 cm), the painting demonstrates Vouet's technical mastery in a work intended for a prestigious patron (Cassiano dal Pozzo). The canvas size and finish suggest this was an ambitious work designed for display in a collector's cabinet or gallery space.
The Caravaggesque Brushwork and Finish: The painting demonstrates the influence of Bartolomeo Manfredi, the most important practitioner of Caravaggian genre painting in Rome in the 1610s. The inscription on the back notes "the rich and surprisingly intact pictorial material, the agility of brushwork, and the extraordinary mastery of pictorial rendering" characteristic of Manfredian practice. Vouet employs visible, confident brushwork that creates luminosity and textural interest while maintaining compositional control.
The Evidence of Revision: X-radiographic examination reveals substantial pentimenti (repainted passages), particularly in the young man's clothing and in the positioning of figures. These revisions suggest that Vouet deliberated considerably about the composition, making adjustments during execution. The pentimenti confirm that this Rome painting (Barberini) is the original and that the Florentine version (Palazzo Pitti) is a later copy.
The Life Study Basis: The inscription documents that the work was "painted from life"—suggesting that Vouet employed live models to capture the specific physiognomies and expressions of his subjects. This grounding in direct observation from life—rather than in purely imagined invention—represents a legacy of Caravaggian practice.
Historical Context
Context
Vouet's Roman Formation: Simon Vouet arrived in Rome around 1613, shortly before executing The Fortune Teller in 1617. In Rome, he encountered directly the revolutionary works of Caravaggio (who had died in 1610 but whose paintings remained highly visible in Roman churches and collections) and the diverse interpretations of Caravaggio's approach practiced by his followers. Most significantly, Vouet studied the work of Bartolomeo Manfredi, who by 1617 was at the apex of his career and had established what scholars term the manfrediana methodus—a systematic approach to Caravaggesque genre painting that combined Caravaggio's light effects, dramatic contrast, and street naturalism with a more theatrical, explicitly narrative approach than Caravaggio typically employed.
The Cassiano dal Pozzo Commission: Cassiano dal Pozzo (1588–1657) was one of the most important art patrons and collectors of seventeenth-century Rome. He served as secretary and confident to Cardinal Francesco Barberini and was instrumental in commissioning and collecting works for the Barberini collection. His commission of The Fortune Teller from the young Vouet in 1617 was a strategic gesture: it brought the promising young French painter into his orbit and into the Barberini collection, simultaneously demonstrating Cassiano's taste for Caravaggesque genre painting and his support for French artistic talent.
The Relationship to Caravaggio's Versions: Caravaggio executed two versions of The Fortune Teller (c. 1594 and c. 1600), both of which depicted a beautifully rendered but fundamentally ambiguous scene: a young man has his palm read by a young woman while she removes his ring. The paintings' power derives from the complexity of reading the scene: is the palm-reading genuine or fraudulent? Is the woman's smile seductive or predatory? Vouet's radical innovation was to eliminate the ambiguity entirely. By including the pickpocket openly engaged in theft, by positioning the older woman in a gesture of mockery, by having the woman in pink invite the viewer's complicity—Vouet transforms the scene from one of subtle seduction into one of explicit, theatrical fraud.
The Popularity of the Fortune Teller Theme: The story of the fortune teller seducing a foolish young man while her accomplice pickpockets him was a popular folk tale and street scenario of the period. It appears in literature, in drama, in satirical prints—it was a recognized figure of the urban underworld and of human gullibility.
Key Themes
Deception, Complicity, and Moral Ambiguity
The Seduction of False Knowledge: The fortune teller represents the appeal of false knowledge—the promise to reveal hidden truth, to predict the future, to communicate divine secrets. The young man is susceptible not merely to the woman's physical beauty but to the promise of knowledge she offers. The painting asserts that the desire for secret knowledge—the wish to know one's future, to understand one's destiny—makes one vulnerable to fraud.
The Vulnerability of Youth and Status: The young man's fine clothing, his obvious wealth (the jewels and rings that can be stolen), his evident social status—none of these protect him from deception. Indeed, his wealth and status make him a target. The painting suggests that youth, status, and material prosperity create vulnerability rather than protection.
Complicity and Moral Ambiguity: The woman in pink, who looks directly out at the viewer with an expression that might signal invitation to complicity or simple witnessing, raises troubling questions about the viewer's position. By looking directly at us, she implicates us: we are witnesses to the fraud; we understand what is occurring; we could warn the victim but we do not. The painting thus creates a kind of moral complicity on the viewer's part.
The Theatricality of Urban Street Life: The painting treats the street scene with the intensity and compositional care typically reserved for history painting or religious narratives. It asserts that street life—the encounters of urban underworld figures, the schemes of thieves and charlatans—is worthy of serious artistic attention.
Exam Focus Points
Critical Perspectives
The Modification of Caravaggio's Model: Vouet's Fortune Teller functions partly as a response to Caravaggio's versions. Where Caravaggio emphasizes ambiguity and psychological complexity, Vouet emphasizes narrative clarity and theatrical explicitness. This difference reflects not a failure to understand Caravaggio but rather a deliberate aesthetic choice: Vouet prioritizes legibility and moral clarity over psychological subtlety.
The Inscription and Attribution History: The discovery and restoration of the inscription on the back of the canvas resolved a long-standing attribution controversy. Art historians had debated whether the painting was by Vouet, by Antiveduto della Gramatica, or by Bartolomeo Manfredi. The inscription definitively establishes authorship and date. This attribution history demonstrates how physical evidence can resolve historical ambiguities.
The Manfredian Influence: While Caravaggio pioneered dramatic tenebrism and genre painting, Manfredi systematized and theatricalized the approach. Vouet's adaptation of the manfrediana methodus—employing three-quarter-length figures close to the picture plane, bright spotlit foreground against dark background, theatrical arrangement of figures, explicit narrative—became the dominant model for Caravaggesque genre painting throughout Europe.
The Social Commentary and Moral Lesson: Unlike purely descriptive genre paintings, Vouet's Fortune Teller functions as moral commentary. The inscription itself—identifying the woman as "fortune-teller of the foolish artisan"—establishes a moral judgment: the young man is a fool, and his fate is deserved. This moralistic dimension connects it to the Counter-Reformation's use of visual art for moral instruction.