The painting itself was unharmed, but the 17th-century frame sustained some damage after the soup acted as paint stripper on the delicate surface. The frame was retouched and the painting was returned to display the same day.
In July, a jury found Plummer, 23, and Holland, 22, guilty of criminal damage to the frame.
At the sentencing, Judge Christopher Hehir said the sentences were exacerbated by the damage that they might have caused to a painting deemed to be priceless.
“The action you took was extreme, disproportionate and criminally idiotic,” said Hehir. “You came within the width of a pane of glass of irreparably damaging or destroying the painting.”
Holland’s barrister Raj Chada said that if possible harm to the painting was considered in the sentencing, the pair should have been charged for that.
“It’s an outrageous sentence for a crime that they didn’t actually commit,” said Chada. “We will be considering an appeal.”
