No. 14 Auction History

Artist → Sidney Janis Gallery, New York (by 1961) [2] → Undisclosed owner/consignor → Sotheby’s New York, 19 Nov 1997 (sold; SFMOMA buyer) [3][4] → San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (SFMOMA), acquired 1997 via the Helen Crocker Russell Fund; on view Floor 2 [1].

The 1997 Sotheby’s sale of Mark Rothko’s No. 14 (1960) to SFMOMA for a reported $5.94 million set a new auction record for the artist and signaled renewed demand at the top end of postwar American abstraction as the market strengthened in the late 1990s [3]. Local coverage placed the price around $5.9 million, underscoring the magnitude of the institutional commitment at the time [4]. The acquisition quickly became a cornerstone of SFMOMA’s postwar collection and a widely cited benchmark in Rothko’s market history [1][3][4].

Institutional context has furthered the work’s significance. Contemporary reporting tied SFMOMA’s ability to acquire No. 14 to funds from an earlier deaccession of Monet’s The Seine at Argenteuil (1875) [12]. Years later, when the museum deaccessioned a different 1960 Rothko to diversify the collection, it emphasized that No. 14 (1960) remained on view and in the collection—reinforcing the painting’s status within SFMOMA’s holdings [5]. Continued visibility through major loans, including participation in the Fondation Louis Vuitton Rothko retrospective (2023–24), supports the work’s scholarly and public profile [6].

Rothko’s broader market has since reached far higher levels. Orange, Red, Yellow (1961) achieved $86.88 million in 2012 [7]; No. 7 (1951) realized $82.5 million in the Macklowe Collection sale in 2021 [8]; and a 1960 canvas, Untitled, fetched $48 million in 2022, underscoring the desirability of the year’s production [9]. Recent marquee results include No. 31 (Yellow Stripe) at $62.16 million in 2025 [10], and a new auction record of $98.385 million for No. 15 (Two Greens and Red Stripe) in 2026 [11]. Against this backdrop, the 1997 sale of No. 14 remains a pivotal early marker of Rothko’s ascent, while its long-term museum ownership and frequent display enhance its historical resonance rather than immediate market liquidity [1][3][5][6].