by Tom Gurney
Tom Gurney BSc (Hons) is an art history expert with over 20 years experience
Published on June 19, 2020 / Updated on October 11, 2026
Email: tomgurney1@gmail.com / Phone: +44 7429 011000
No. 6 (Violet, Green and Red): Introduction
No. 6 (Violet, Green and Red) is a 1951 Rothko canvas whose modern public history is entangled with a private transaction. The available sources are thinner than for a museum-held work. A Phillips auction catalogue reproduces it for comparison on PDF page 42 and gives measurements and an estate number, while a 2023 US District Court opinion documents a September 2014 private purchase of “Rothko's No. 6” for €140 million.[1][2] The court is evidence for that transaction, not an object catalogue. The Phillips dimensions still need reconciliation with other reports, and complete provenance and present ownership need primary confirmation.
At a Glance
- ArtistMark Rothko
- Date1951 [1]
- MediumOil on canvas (comparative catalogue caption) [1]
- CollectionPrivate collection (2014) [1]
This work in Rothko’s career
No. 3/No. 13
1949Contents
- A painting with a numbered title
- What can be said about size and early ownership
- The 2014 transaction was private
- What the catalogue could resolve
A painting with a numbered title
Rothko used numbered titles for many paintings. “No. 6” by itself is not enough to identify one work: the National Gallery, for example, records a much later No. 6 (?) dated 1964.[3] The colour subtitle, 1951 date and Phillips estate number help separate the work considered here, but a fully reconciled study would also check the Anfam catalogue number, medium, measurements and ownership chain against the relevant entry. The court opinion discusses a sale rather than those art-historical particulars.
The 1951 date places the painting just after Rothko had arrived at his mature arrangement of broad, soft-edged colour areas, according to the National Gallery's chronology.[3] The title's violet, green and red suggest a strong interplay of warm and cool, but colour words are only a starting point. A viewer should ask how one field changes the apparent intensity of another and where the edges allow colours to meet or remain apart. A digital photograph is particularly limited for a privately held canvas, because access to the physical painting and reliable technical documentation is sparse.
Phillips's published comparative reproduction offers a cautious visual starting point: a tall violet-blue upper area, a narrower green interval and a warmer red-orange lower area, with coloured ground visible around them.[1] That distribution is not simply three equal stripes corresponding to the title. The green can act as a hinge between areas of different temperature and extent; the surrounding ground changes how each seems bounded. These are looking questions derived from a dated reproduction, whose colour balance may differ from the canvas in person. No undocumented pigment or layering claim is inferred from it.
What can be said about size and early ownership
The Phillips caption gives estate number 5150.51, measurements of 90½ × 54 inches (230 × 137 cm), and a chain from Rothko's estate in 1970 through Marlborough A.G. in Liechtenstein in 1970–72 to a private collection.[1] That is a limited but concrete published record. Other circulating summaries give different dimensions, so this page reports the Phillips figures as the caption's measurement, not as a reconciled catalogue fact. A check of the Anfam entry and, ideally, the owner or estate record should determine whether the difference reflects an error, a frame measurement or a different transcription. The caption stops at an unnamed private collection; it does not identify the 2014 buyer or establish ownership today.
The 2014 transaction was private
The court opinion states that in September 2014 the plaintiffs purchased Rothko's No. 6 from Mei for €140 million. A Modigliani sculpture was discussed as part payment. The Modigliani was then consigned to Sotheby's and sold at auction in November; the Rothko purchase itself was not an auction sale.[2] Older web copy that says No. 6 “sold at Sotheby's” confuses two different artworks and transactions. The reported euro sum is a historical price within litigation documents, not a current value or proof of who holds the painting now.
Dmitry Rybolovlev in a 2012 portrait. The documented 2014 private transaction for No. 6 involved his collecting interests and is discussed through the later court record.
Photograph: Francknataf. Photograph remains CC BY-SA 3.0. Resized without cropping. [5]
The court's wording is also narrower than some headlines about the case. It describes the transaction before the court and associated financial arrangements. It does not supply a conservation report, a 1951 exhibition history or a full catalogue identification. Those questions must be answered through art-historical records. Phillips's comparative caption is one such lead, but the hardback Anfam entry is the desired next check.[1]
What the catalogue could resolve
David Anfam's Mark Rothko: The Works on Canvas is directly relevant to a 1951 canvas.[4] For this page the specific entry number has not been verified. A photograph of the entry should be checked for the exact title or title variants, measurements, inscription, literature and provenance to 1998. It could also show whether the Phillips caption's estate number is transcribed correctly. Later ownership would still require newer records, since a 1998 book cannot document a 2014 transaction or ownership in 2026.
Until that check, this page keeps an explicit evidence boundary. It presents the year, title, published caption measurements and partial early provenance as Phillips's account, and the 2014 transaction as established by the court document. It does not silently choose among conflicting measurements or invent a present owner.
Related works
- White Center is a well-documented 1950 comparison.
- No. 61 (Rust and Blue) is a later numbered canvas in a museum.
- Rothko's paintings surveys the mature period.
Rothko works in this guide
| Name | Date | Medium |
|---|---|---|
| Entrance to Subway | 1938 | Painting |
| Hierarchical Birds | 1944 | Painting |
| Slow Swirl at the Edge of the Sea | 1944 | Painting |
| No. 3/No. 13 | 1949 | Painting |
| Untitled (Violet, Black, Orange, Yellow on White and Red) | 1949 | Painting |
| White Center | 1950 | Painting |
| No. 10 | 1950 | Painting |
| No. 6 (Violet, Green and Red) | 1951 | Painting |
| Untitled | 1952 | Painting |
| No. 61 (Rust and Blue) | 1953 | Painting |
| No. 1 (Royal Red and Blue) | 1954 | Painting |
| Untitled (Yellow and Blue) | 1954 | Painting |
| Orange and Yellow | 1956 | Painting |
| Light Red over Black | 1957 | Painting |
| Four Darks in Red | 1958 | Painting |
| Black on Maroon | 1958 | Painting |
| No. 14 | 1960 | Painting |
| Orange, Red, Yellow | 1961 | Painting |
| Untitled (brown and gray) | 1969 | Painting |
| Untitled (Red on Red) | 1969 | Painting |
| Untitled (Black and Gray) | 1970 | Painting |
| Tentacles of Memory | 1945–46 | Drawing |
Frequently Asked Questions
This page concerns No. 6 (Violet, Green and Red), dated 1951 in a Phillips comparative catalogue caption. It is distinct from the NGA’s later No. 6 (?) of 1964. The colour subtitle and year help prevent the two works from being confused.[1][3]
No. A 2023 US District Court opinion describes a private purchase of Rothko’s No. 6 in September 2014. It separately discusses a Modigliani involved in the payment arrangement. Those events should not be compressed into a Sotheby’s auction of the Rothko.[2]
The Phillips catalogue publishes measurements, but they still require reconciliation with other reports. This page therefore avoids presenting a disputed size as settled. The 1951 date and colour subtitle are more secure identifiers than an unexplained measurement repeated without its source.[1]
A historical purchase record establishes an event at that date, rather than proving present ownership. The painting’s subsequent movements would require their own documentation. It should not be described as held by a particular museum or private owner solely from that transaction.[2]
Discussion
What changes when you look at No. 6 (Violet, Green and Red) as a physical painting rather than a small reproduction?
Use the questions below to compare the work with its neighbours in Rothko’s career.
Reader Insights
Which edge or interval asks you to slow down?
How does this painting differ from the earlier and later works linked here?
What remains uncertain after reading the museum record and looking closely?
Join the Conversation
Share an observation grounded in the work or its documented history.
References
- Phillips, 2017 auction catalogue, comparative caption for No. 6 (Violet, Green and Red), 1951, with published measurements, estate number and partial provenance. PDF p. 42; the caption and its placement were checked directly in the catalogue.
- US District Court, Southern District of New York, Accent Delight International Ltd. v. Sotheby's, opinion and order, 1 March 2023, p. 23.
- National Gallery of Art, “Mark Rothko,” chronology and distinct 1964 No. 6 (?).
- David Anfam, Mark Rothko: The Works on Canvas: A Catalogue Raisonné (National Gallery of Art and Yale University Press, 1998), relevant canvas catalogue; object entry not directly accessed.
- DmitryRybolovlev1.JPG. Photograph: Francknataf. Photograph remains CC BY-SA 3.0. Resized without cropping. Source · CC BY-SA 3.0.
