Banquet of Anthony and Cleopatra
Jan Steen(Leiden 1626 – 1679 Leiden)

ca. 1673–75
oil on canvas
82.1 x 107.8 cm
signed in dark paint along lower left
corner: “JSteen” (“JS” in ligature)
JS-107© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Banquet of Anthony and Cleopatra
Page 2 of 12

How to cite
Kloek, Wouter. “Banquet of Anthony and Cleopatra” (2017). In The Leiden Collection Catalogue, 2nd ed.
Edited by Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. New York, 2017–20. https://theleidencollection.com/artwork/the-banquet-ofanthony-and-cleopatra/ (archived May 2020).
A PDF of every version of this entry is available in this Online Catalogue's Archive, and the Archive ismanaged by a permanent URL. New versions are added only when a substantive change to the narrative
occurs.

© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Banquet of Anthony and Cleopatra
Page 3 of 12

When the Roman general Mark Antony (ca. 83–30 B.C.) met the Egyptian

Comparative Figures

princess Cleopatra (Cleopatra VII Philopator, 69–30 B.C.) in the city of
Tarsus in the year 41 B.C., he immediately succumbed to her charms.
Cleopatra, who had previously been the lover of Julius Caesar, hoped that
her relationship with Antony would strengthen her power in her own country.
The couple spent a winter in Alexandria, wallowing in luxury and sensualpleasures, after which Mark Antony continued his military campaign. Whenthey renewed their relationship several years later—Cleopatra had meanwhile
given birth to twins—they assumed regal status. In 31 B.C. the true ruler ofRome, Octavian (later Emperor Augustus), defeated the armies of MarkFig 1. Jan Steen, Card
Players, ca. 1660, panel, 45.5 x
60.5 cm, Sale, Sotheby’s London
7 December 2011, Lot 17

Antony and Cleopatra at Actium on the west coast of Greece. After the battle
Antony and Cleopatra returned to Alexandria, where Antony subsequently
attempted to commit suicide, eventually dying in Cleopatra’s lap. Cleopatra,
who had shut herself into the tomb she had had built for herself, committed
suicide by means of the poisonous snake she had hidden in a basket of figs.
The story of these lovers, first recorded by Pliny the Elder in his Naturalis
Historia (book 9, 58:119–21), inspired many paintings, plays, and poems by
William Shakespeare, Jacob Cats, and George Bernard Shaw, among
others, and of course the famous film starring Elizabeth Taylor and Richard
Burton.
A favorite scene for artists was the legendary episode of the wager between
the two lovers, who vied with each other to stage the most sumptuous

Fig 2. Jan Steen, Banquet ofAntony and Cleopatra, 1667, oil oncanvas on panel, 67.5 x 58.5
cm, Georg-August-Universität,
Göttingenbanquet. After an extremely lavish meal at Mark Antony’s expense,
Cleopatra boasted that she could lay a banquet of much greater
extravagance. On this occasion she dissolved one of her enormous pearl
earrings in an acidic substance mixed with wine.[1] When she was on the
point of dissolving the other earring too, Mark Antony managed to stop her,and it is this moment that Jan Steen has depicted in the Leiden Collection
painting.
We see Cleopatra about to present her empty glass to a kneeling servant sothat the second pearl, which she holds in her right hand, can be subjected tothe same treatment as the first, and Mark Antony leaning across the table toFig 3. Pieter Quast, Paris Shooting
Achilles in the Heel, 1645, graphite
pencil, gray wash, on vellum, 302
x 396 mm, Albertina, Vienna, inv.
no. 8711

intervene. The table is placed in the great hall of a palace: more rooms arevisible at the left behind a high balustrade, while, at the right, an open arcadeaffords a view of a hilly landscape. The room has a splendid tiled floor,
rendered in strict perspective with the vanishing point at the doorway
beneath the balustrade. The silver dish of sumptuous fruit in the foregroundpossibly alludes to the death of Cleopatra—painters sometimes depicted theFig 4. Jan Steen, Banquet of© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Banquet of Anthony and Cleopatra
Page 4 of 12

venomous snake (or snakes) emerging from a basket of assorted fruit rather
than a basket of figs.[2]Antony and Cleopatra, ca.
1667/70, oil on canvas, 113 x 102
cm, Rijksdienst voor Cultureel
Erfgoed, Zeist/Rijswijk, inv. R 816

Steen distributed the rest of the company across the entire breadth of the
middle ground, but gave particular emphasis to a dwarf-like court jester anda child who tugs at his white scarf. The jester holds a knife in his right handand in his left a piece of roast meat, which he tries to keep out of reach of asmall dog. As usual, the jester turns the world upside-down. By thrusting his
knife forward he undoubtedly mocks Mark Antony’s lecherous desires. In a
more general sense, however, the fool is a reference to the absurdity ofAntony and Cleopatra’s extravagant wastefulness.[3] The ridiculous reversal
is nicely expressed in the description of the painting in Jacobus Viet’s 1774
sale catalogue, where the piece of roast meat in the fool’s hand is calleda hammehieltje.[4] This term undoubtedly alludes to the saying “hij kluift het
hieltje van de ham” (he gnaws on the heel of the ham), meaning he tries toget every last piece of meat off the bone. In other words, he has run out ofmoney and must savor every scrap.[5] The fool thus mocks the fickleness of
fate.
Seated at the table on the right is a man who tries to catch the viewer’s eye
as he cleans his teeth with a knife. Across from him sits a man wearing aplumed cap who gestures toward the protagonists: he is presumably Lucius
Munatius Plancus, proconsul of Asia and skillful survivor of political turmoil,
whom the couple had chosen to adjudicate their wager. He decrees thatMark Antony has already lost his bet with the clever Cleopatra, and declares
it unnecessary to dissolve the second pearl.
The story of Antony and Cleopatra was seen in the seventeenth century
mainly as a cautionary tale, a warning against unnecessary extravagance.
But another interpretation—and presumably the one Jan Steen sought toemphasize—is that of a powerful man (Mark Antony) who is led by awoman’s sultry gaze to neglect his soldierly duties. In this respect thepainting recalls the words of William Shakespeare, “and you shall see in him/ The triple pillar of the world transform’d / Into a strumpet’s fool.”[6] No matter
how apt these words, it is unlikely that Steen knew them.[7] Nor is it easy todemonstrate his familiarity with the two Dutch plays about these legendary
lovers.[8]The most probable literary source for Steen, however, was not a text
specifically about these legendary lovers, but rather one that dwelt more
broadly on the nature of human relationships: Trouringh, which the popular
author Jacob Cats (1577–1660) first published in 1637.[9] Near the beginning© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Banquet of Anthony and Cleopatra
Page 5 of 12of this 800-line poem, Cats writes on the theme of a soldier who neglects his
duties because of the allure of feminine beauty: “Then he whose work wasso courageously begun / Was by a woman’s wiles completely overcome”;
and “He who is a soldier will one day, alas, be captured / Not in open battle,
but by blushing cheeks enraptured, / Not in single combat, but by seeing asweet visage, / Not by strong and mighty lords, but by seductive
language.”[10] The motif of the soldier who becomes distracted from his duties
occurs in a number of Steen’s paintings, including his genre scenes, as, forexample, his Card Players (fig 1), where a soldier loses his sword to acheating female player.[11] Indeed, the theme of a soldier who disregards his
duty by idling, sleeping, or wiling away his time in female company occurs
frequently in seventeenth-century Dutch painting—in the work of such artists
as Nicolaes Maes (1634–93), Gerard ter Borch (1617–81), and Pieter deHooch (1629–84).[12]Jan Steen portrayed the banquet of Anthony and Cleopatra four times. Twopaintings display relatively simple compositions more or less mirror images of
one another. Both show Cleopatra placing her left foot on a sphere, in all
likelihood a reference to the vicissitudes of life. The sketchier of the two, apainting in a private collection, is probably Steen’s first rendering of thissubject.[13] The other piece, in Göttingen, followed soon after and is dated
1667 (fig 2).[14] The placement of the table in the Göttingen work is similar tothat in the Leiden Collection painting, indicating that it was here that Steendeveloped his ideas for that composition. A further possible pictorial source
for the Leiden Collection painting, as first noted by Alfred Heppner, is acomposition by Pieter Quast (1606–47) portraying the dramatic moment inwhich Paris shoots Achilles in the heel, known today through a drawing
dated 1645 (fig 3).[15] Heppner noted the close correspondence between the
figure of Achilles in Quast’s drawing and that of Mark Antony in Steen’s
painting.
The artist’s most detailed portrayal of the subject is his Banquet of Antony
and Cleopatra of ca. 1667/70, a painting nearly two meters wide, in thepossession of the Netherlands Cultural Heritage Agency (Rijksdienst voor
Cultureel Erfgoed) (fig 4).[16] In that painting Steen strongly emphasizes theprodigality that characterizes the event. Jacob Cats’s poem states that
Cleopatra was in the habit of giving the precious decorations at her banquets
to her guests. Even costly furnishings and tapestries were used only
once.[17] Steen portrayed the scene in a way that affords a good view ofearthenware, chairs, a chintz tablecloth, and a costly Persian rug. The role ofthe fool who mocks wasteful behavior is played here by Jan Steen himself,© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Banquet of Anthony and Cleopatra
Page 6 of 12

who glances laughingly at the viewer from his place at the right.

Chronologically, the rendering of the story in the Leiden Collection comes
last in Steen’s career. The somewhat round face of Cleopatra clearly places
the painting among the master’s late works. Moreover, in his later work
Steen depicted fewer and fewer still life details, which may be one reason
that his earlier works are generally more appreciated by art lovers. Yet thelarge dish of fruit in the foreground and the splendid depiction of the furnitureand objects such as Antony’s helmet ensure that this painting is not lacking
in arresting details.
Baruch Kirschenbaum doubted the authenticity of this work, but there is no
reason for doing so.[18] One or two background figures, particularly thesoldier rushing onto the scene in the left background, seem not to be by
Steen’s hand, but his later paintings generally include an occasional weakpassage. With regard to other details, such as the bald, corpulent man to theright behind Cleopatra and the execution of the background, this iscompletely characteristic of the work of the master. In general theconcentration on the essential elements of the story is an aspect that can beobserved in other work from Steen’s last years, such as Lazarus and theRich Man (JS-106). Therefore, a date of around 1673–75 seems most likely
for Steen’s compelling image of this fascinating episode from Romanhistory.

- Wouter Kloek, 2017

© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Banquet of Anthony and Cleopatra
Page 7 of 12

Endnotes

1. It is generally alleged that the pearl was dissolved in wine. Doubts have led to various
experiments, which have shown that pearls can in fact be dissolved in a certain kind ofvinegar. It is, however, a process that takes more than 24 hours.
2. Such a basket appears in the painting by Johann Liss in Munich; see Rüdiger Klessmann,
Johann Liss: A Monograph and Catalogue Raisonné (Doornspijk, 1999), cat. 18, plate 15.
3. The motif of the fool was most pointedly portrayed by Jacob Jordaens in his 1653 renderingof this subject, a canvas now in St. Petersburg; Natalija Babina, Birgit Boelens, BeverleyJackson, et al., Rubens, Van Dyck & Jordaens: Vlaamse schilders uit de Hermitage (Exh. cat.
Amsterdam, The Hermitage Amsterdam) (Amsterdam, 2011), no. 36. On the significance of
Jordaens to Jan Steen, see I. Nemeth, “Het spreekwoord “Zo d’ouden zongen, zo pijpen dejongen,” Schilderijen van Jacob Jordaens en Jan Steen: Motieven en associaties, Jaarboek
Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten Antwerpen (1990): 271–86, and Mariët
Westermann, The Amusements of Jan Steen: Comic Painting in the SeventeenthCentury (Zwolle, 1997), 161. Jordaens’s influence on Dutch painting dates from his
participation in the decoration of the Oranjezaal in Huis Ten Bosch. He had owned a house in
Voorburg since 1659; in 1661 and 1662 he stayed in the provinces of Holland and Utrecht.
Oddly enough, Jordaens was in turn inspired, when painting this composition, by the Tavern
Scene with a Fool (“Wacht hoet varen sal”), a woodcut by Lucas van Leyden (Bhsn 20).
4. “Ter linker zyde ziet men een Hofnar met een hammehieltje in de hand” (On the left-handside one sees a court jester with a heel of ham in his hand).
5. See J. H. van Dale, Groot Woordenboek der Nederlandse Taal (’s-Gravenhage, 1961), s. v.
“Hieltje.”
6. Quoted by Ewoud Mijnlieff in Hoogtepunten/Highlights: Musea Catharijne Gasthuis en Musea
Moriaan Gouda (Zwolle, 2003). The words quoted are uttered by Philo in the first scene of theplay.
7. Apart from the story of Pyramus and Thisbe and a few of the sonnets, Shakespeare’s
writings were not available in Dutch translation in the seventeenth century. It is extremely
unlikely that Steen was familiar with the English text.
8. The two Dutch plays are by Willem van Nieuwelandt (1624) and Dieverina van Kouwenhoven(1669). On this subject, see Alfred Heppner, “The Popular Theatre of the Rederijkers in theWorks of Jan Steen and His Contemporaries,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld
Institutes 3 (1939–40): 22–48.
9. Cats was the most popular author of the seventeenth-century Dutch Republic, and it is almost
inconceivable that Jan Steen would not have had his verses in mind when producing this© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Banquet of Anthony and Cleopatra
Page 8 of 12

painting.
10. “Doen is hy, die het werck soo moedigh hadt begonnen, Doen is hy door een wyf ten vollen
overwonnen;” 583: “Hy die een velt-heer is die wort, eylaes! Gevangen / Niet in een hardenslagh, maer door gebloosde wangen: / Niet in een fel gevecht, maer door een soet gelaet: /Niet door een machtigh heir, maer door een hoofsche prate.” Jacob Cats, Trouringh(Dordrecht, 1637), 576. Click here for the online version.
11. H. Perry Chapman, Wouter Th. Kloek, and Arthur K. Wheelock Jr., Jan Steen, Painter andStoryteller, ed. Guido Jansen (Exh. cat. Washington D.C., National Gallery of Art;
Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum) (New Haven, 1996), no. 14.
12. This theme, however, has seldom received attention in the literature. For example, the matter
is not mentioned by M. Kersten in the chapter “Interieurstukken met soldaten,” in M. P. vanMaarseveen et al., Beelden van een strijd: Oorlog en kunst vóór de Vrede van Munster
1621–1648 (Zwolle, 1998), 337–58. Occasionally, a parallel is drawn to the theme of theProdigal Son, but without suggesting any neglect of duty on the part of the soldiers portrayed.
See, for instance, Elmer Kolfin, Een geselschap jonge luyden: Productie, functie en betekenis
van Noord-Nederlandse voorstellingen van vrolijke gezelschappen 1610–1645 (Leiden,
2002).
13. Karel Braun, Alle schilderijen van Jan Steen (Rotterdam, 1980), no. 287

14. Karel Braun, Alle schilderijen van Jan Steen (Rotterdam, 1980), no. 283
15. Alfred Heppner, “The Popular Theatre of the Rederijkers in the Works of Jan Steen and His
Contemporaries,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 3 (1939–40): 36. Quast’s
drawing, presumably relates to a lost painting, indicates that he based his composition on theplay Achilles and Polyxena by Pieter Cornelisz Hooft (1581–1647), a work dated variously to1597 and 1614.
16. Karel Braun, Alle schilderijen van Jan Steen (Rotterdam, 1980), no. 306
17. “Maer al het aerdigh tuygh waer uyt men had gedroncken / Dat heeft het prachtigh wijf haer
gasten wech-geschoncken, / Oock al het schoon tapijt, en menigh ander kleet, / Al wasset net
gestickt en uytermaten breet” (After banqueting from vessels of the very best, / The dazzling
woman gave it all away to every guest, / Even splendid tapestries and rugs that were her
pride, / Although they were just newly woven and extremely wide). Jacob Cats, Trouringh(Dordrecht, 1637). Click here for the online version.
18. Baruch Kirschenbaum, The Religious and Historical Paintings of Jan Steen (New York, 1977),
145.

© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Banquet of Anthony and Cleopatra
Page 9 of 12

Provenance
Jacobus Viet, Amsterdam (his sale, Amsterdam, 12 October 1774, no. 200 [to Witsen]).
Jonas Witsen, Amsterdam (his sale, Amsterdam, 16 August 1790, no. 60 [to Ijver]).
Leonard Pieter de Reus (1783–1860), The Hague.
Baron Rothschild, Frankfurt am Main, ca. 1844.
[D. Katz, Dieren, 1936–37].
[Schaeffer Galleries, New York, 1938].
[Rosenberg & Stiebel Gallery, New York].
[S. Nijstad, The Hague].
Mahmoud Rabbani, Wassenaar, The Netherlands (his sale, Sotheby’s, London, 11 April
1990, no. 116, not sold; sale, Sotheby’s, New York, 10 January 1991, no. 24).
[Noortman Master Paintings, Maastricht, 1992].
AEX–Amsterdam Exchanges NV, 1999–2006.
[Haboldt & Co., Paris, 2007].
From whom acquired by the present owner.

Exhibition History
Eindhoven, Stedelijk Van Abbe Museum, 22 December 1936–31 January 1937 [lent by D.
Katz to Dieren].
Poughkeepsie, New York, Vassar College Art Gallery, “Exhibition of Old Masters from the
XVII and XVIII centuries,” 6 April–1 May 1938 [lent by Schaeffer Galleries, New York].
Providence, Rhode Island, Rhode Island Museum, “Dutch Painting in the SeventeenthCentury,” 1938 [lent by Schaeffer Galleries, New York].
Delft, Het Prisenhof, “27ste oude kunst-en antiekbeurs,” 16 October–5 November 1975.
Gouda, Stedelijk Museum van Gouda, “Oude bekenden en nieuwe gezichten,” 4 July–10
October 1999, no. 21.
Gouda, Stedelijk Museum van Gouda, on loan with the permanent collection, 1999–2006 [lentby AEX–Amsterdam Exchanges NV].
Kyoto, Kyoto Municipal Museum of Art, “Communication: Visualizing the Human Connectionin the Age of Vermeer,” 25 June–16 October 2011; Sendai, Miyagi Museum of Art, 27
October – 12 December 2011; Tokyo, Bunkamura Museum of Art, 23 December 2011–14© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Banquet of Anthony and Cleopatra
Page 10 of 12

March 2012, no. 38 [lent by the present owner].
Worcester, Mass., on loan with the permanent collection, August 2015–August 2016 [lent by
the present owner].
Paris, Museé du Louvre, “Masterpieces of The Leiden Collection: The Age of Rembrandt,” 22
February–22 May 2017 [lent by the present owner].
Beijing, National Museum of China, “Rembrandt and His Time: Masterpieces from The
Leiden Collection,” 17 June–3 September 2017 [lent by the present owner].
Shanghai, Long Museum, West Bund, “Rembrandt, Vermeer and Hals in the Dutch Golden
Age: Masterpieces from The Leiden Collection,” 23 September 2017–25 February 2018 [lentby the present owner].
Moscow, The Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts, “The Age of Rembrandt and Vermeer:
Masterpieces of The Leiden Collection,” 28 March 2018–22 July 2018 [lent by the present
owner].
St. Petersburg, The State Hermitage Museum, “The Age of Rembrandt and Vermeer:
Masterpieces of The Leiden Collection,” 5 September 2018–13 January 2019 [lent by thepresent owner].
Abu Dhabi, Louvre Abu Dhabi, “Rembrandt, Vermeer and the Dutch Golden Age.
Masterpieces from The Leiden Collection and the Musée du Louvre,” 14 February–18 May
2019 [lent by the present owner].

References
Nederlandsche Kunst-Spiegel. The Hague, 1844–45, 1: 287.
Hofstede de Groot, Cornelis. A Catalogue Raisonné of the Works of the Most Eminent Dutch
Painters of the Seventeenth Century Based on the Work of John Smith. Edited and translatedby Edward G. Hawke, 1: 31, no. 85. 8 vols. London, 1907–28. Originally published as
Beschreibendes und kritisches Verzeichnis der Werke der hervorragendsten höllandischen
Maler des XVII. Jahrhunderts. 10 vols. Esslingen and Paris, 1907–28.
Schmidt-Degener, Frederick, and Hendrik Enno van Gelder. Veertig meesterwerken van Jan
Steen, met een karateristiekvan zijn kunst. Amsterdam, 1927, 9.
Thieme, Felix and Ulrich Becker, eds.. Allgemeine Lexikon der bildenden Kunst. 37 vols.
Leipzig, 1937, 31:511.
Stechow, Wolfgang. Dutch Paintings in the Seventeenth Century. Providence, 1938, no. 53.
Vassar College Art Gallery. Exhibition of Old Masters of the XVII and XVIII Centuries. Exh.
cat. Poughkeepsie, Vassar College Art Gallery. Poughkeepsie, 1938, 2.
Heppner, Alfred. “The Popular Theatre of the Rederijkers in the Works of Jan Steen and His© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Banquet of Anthony and Cleopatra
Page 11 of 12

Contemporaries.” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 3 (1939–40): 36.
De Groot, Cornielius Wilhelmus. Jan Steen: Beeld en woord. Utrecht and Nijmegen, 1952,32–33, n. 34.
Stedelijk Museum Het Prinsenhof. 27de Oude kunst – en antiekbeurs: der vereeniging vanhandelaren in oude kunst in Nederland. Exh. cat. Delft, Stedelijk Museum Het Prinsenhof.
Delft, 1975, fig. 133.
Kirschenbaum, Baruch D. The Religious and Historical Paintings of Jan Steen. New York,
1977, 144–45, no. 85, fig. 87.
Braun, Karel. Alle schilderijen van Jan Steen. Rotterdam, 1980, 140–41, no. 364.
Rabbani, Mahmoud, ed. Oude meesters in de verzameling M.S. Rabbani. Wassenar, 1981,
no. 10.
Rabbani, Mahmoud, ed. Old masters from the Collection of Mahmoud S. Rabbani. Wassenar,
1983, 72–76.
Westermann, Mariette. The Amusements of Jan Steen: Comic Painting in the SeventeenthCentury. Zwolle, 1997, 284, no. 164, 285, 308, n. 21.
Stedelijk Museum van Gouda. Oude bekenden en nieuwe gezichten. Exh. brochure, Gouda,
Stedelijk Museum van Gouda. Gouda, 1999, 7, no. 21, fig. 7.
Mijnlieff, Ewoud, Nicolette Sluijter-Seijffert, and Hans Vogels. Hoogtepunten/Highlights.
Museum het Catharina Gasthuis en Museum De Moriaan, Gouda. Exh. cat. Gouda, Stedelijke
Museum. Gouda, 2003, 50-51, no. 18, fig. 51.
Pollack, Rachel. “The Banquet of Antony and Cleopatra.” In Human Connections in the Ageof Vermeer. Edited by Arthur K. Wheelock Jr., 98-101, no. 38. Exh. cat. Kyoto, Kyoto
Municipal Museum of Art; Miyagi, Miyagi Museum of Art; Tokyo, Bunkamura Museum of Art.
Tokyo, 2011.
McCarthy, Alexa.

“Banquet of Antony and Cleopatra.” In Masterpieces of The Leiden

Collection: The Age of Rembrandt. Edited by Blaise Ducos and Dominique Surh, 26, no. 3.
Exh. cat. Paris, Musée du Louvre. Paris, 2017.
Yeager-Crasselt, Lara. “Banquet of Anthony and Cleopatra.” In Rembrandt and His Time:
Masterpieces from The Leiden Collection. Edited by Lara Yeager-Crasselt, 160; 189, no. 70.
Translated by Li Ying. Exh. cat. Beijing, National Museum of China. Beijing, 2017.
Long Museum, West Bund. Rembrandt, Vermeer and Hals in the Dutch Golden Age:
Masterpieces from The Leiden Collection. Exh. cat. Shanghai, Long Museum, West Bund.
Shanghai, 2017, 178–79.
Kloek, Wouter. “Jan Steen, His Repertoire of Motifs and History Painting.” In Jan Steen’s
Histories. Edited by Ariane van Suchtelen, 37–38, no. 10. Exh. cat. The Hague, Mauritshuis.
Zwolle and The Hague, 2018.
Yeager-Crasselt, Lara. “Banquet of Anthony and Cleopatra.” In The Age of Rembrandt and© 2020 The Leiden CollectionPowered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Banquet of Anthony and Cleopatra
Page 12 of 12

Vermeer: Masterpieces of The Leiden Collection. Edited by Polina Lyubimova, 194–95; 245,
no. 64. Translated by Daria Babich and Daria Kuzina. Exh. cat. Moscow, The Pushkin State
Museum of Fine Arts; St. Petersburg, The State Hermitage Museum. Moscow, 2018.
Ducos, Blaise, and Lara Yeager-Crasselt, eds. Rembrandt, Vermeer and the Dutch Golden
Age. Masterpieces from The Leiden Collection and the Musée du Louvre. Exh. cat. Abu
Dhabi, Louvre Abu Dhabi. London, 2019, 180, no. 93. [Exhibition catalogue also published in
French and Arabic.]

Technical Summary
The support, a single piece of medium-weight, plain-weave fabric with tacking margins removed,
has been lined. Paper tape extends onto the front of the stretcher and butt joins of the support
edges along all four sides. Broad cusping along the upper and lower edges and slight cuspingalong the vertical edges indicates that the support dimensions have not been significantly altered.
There is a yellow chalk inscription and three paper labels, but no wax seals, import stamps or
stencils along the stretcher or lining reverse.
A light-colored ground has been thinly and evenly applied followed by a dark underlayer, whichshows through the floor tiles in the foreground and the figures, including Cleopatra and Antony.
The paint has been applied in thin, opaque layers of rich paste blended wet-into-wet with lively
brushwork. Areas such as the fruit platter in the foreground resting on the tile, the lower portion of
the white drapery of the proper right portion of Cleopatra’s skirt, and the lower portion of the blue
swag of fabric which falls between her knees have been applied wet-over-dry.
No underdrawing is readily apparent in infrared images captured at 780–1000 nanometers.
Compositional changes visible in the images and X-radiograph include a slight change in the size
and angle of the wine glass in Cleopatra’s proper left hand and a shift in position of the page’s
proper left arm and the wine decanter between his proper left heel and proper right knee.
The painting is signed in dark paint along the lower left corner but is undated.
The painting has not undergone conservation treatment since its acquisition in 2007 and remains
in a good state of preservation.

© 2020 The Leiden Collection