© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Conversion of Mary Magdalen
Page 2 of 12

Conversion of Mary Magdalen
Godefridus Schalcken(Made 1643 – 1706 The Hague)

1700
oil on canvas
94.5 x 69.2 cm
signed and dated in brown paint, lower left
corner: “G Schalcken 1700.”
GS-114

How to cite
Jansen, Guido. “Conversion of Mary Magdalen” (2017). In The Leiden Collection Catalogue, 2nd ed. Edited by
Arthur K. Wheelock Jr. New York, 2017–20. https://theleidencollection.com/artwork/conversion-of-marymagdalen/ (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

Conversion of Mary Magdalen
Page 3 of 12

When Godefridus Schalcken moved to London in 1692 and began painting

Comparative Figures

portraits of the stadholder-king William III, he enjoyed the patronage of oneof the most powerful men in Europe. Possibly because of that patronage, hiswork was also held in high esteem at other royal courts.[1] In 1694, while
Schalcken was still in London, Cosimo III de’ Medici, Grand Duke of
Tuscany, requested through his agent Thomas Platt that the artist send him
a candlelit self-portrait, for which he would pay 25 pounds sterling. After
Schalcken’s return to The Hague in 1696, this purchase was followed byseveral others and, as a result, four paintings of the master are still to befound in Florence.[2]This contact with Cosimo probably led to commissions from the court in
Düsseldorf, the residence of Cosimo’s son-in-law, Johann Wilhelm, Elector

Fig 1. Godefridus Schalcken, Wiseand Foolish Virgins, 1700, oil oncanvas, 94 x 114 cm, Bayerische
Staatsgemäldesammlungen, Alte
Pinakothek, Munich, inv. no.
296, bpk, Berlin / Alte Pinakothek /Art Resource, NY

Palatine.[3] In 1700 Schalcken painted for the elector two rather large
canvases (compared to his usual small format), both of which aremagnificent demonstrations of his skill in portraying artificial lighting.
Schalcken came from a family of Protestant clergymen, so the religious
subjects portrayed in these paintings were most likely stipulated by the strict
Catholic court. The elector and his Florentine wife would certainly not haveappreciated the racy, candlelight illuminated scenes Schalcken often painted
for other clients.
The more famous of the two paintings that Schalcken painted in 1700 for the
court in Düsseldorf is his ingenious portrayal of the Parable of the Wise andFoolish Virgins (Matthew 25:1–13). This biblical story was the perfect vehicle
for a display of the artist’s complete repertoire of nocturnal lighting effects, towhich the painting owes its well-deserved reputation (fig 1).[4] Conversion of
Mary Magdalene in the Leiden Collection is the other painting that Schalcken
made for the elector that year. This story derives not from the Bible, but fromthe highly popular Legenda Aurea, or Golden Legend, a thirteenth-century
collection of hagiographies by Jacobus de Voragine. The figure of Mary
Magdalene was still particularly topical in Schalcken’s day, for the
proponents of the Counter-Reformation saw her as the penitent sinner par
excellence.[5]Schalcken portrayed Mary Magdalene with delicate brushwork and rendered
her surroundings with an exacting eye for detail. We see her seated beside asarcophagus; on it lies a thick book and on top of that a burning oil lamp,
which she grips with her right hand. The light from this lamp falls mainly on
the saint’s nearly naked bosom. The Magdalen raises her left arm and turns© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Conversion of Mary Magdalen
Page 4 of 12

her head upward in the direction of a number of angels, who hold a palmbranch and a wreath and are bathed in a heavenly light. This supernatural
illumination also falls on her head. Around her neck she wears a broken
pearl necklace, and at her feet lie two costly pieces of cloth in purple andblue. Arrayed on these fabrics are gold and silver plates, cups and otherprecious objects, including a string of pearls and a gold medal hanging froma blue ribbon. The saint’s left foot treads on an imperial crown, next to whichlies a gold scepter, another symbol of worldly power. The left side of thecomposition is closed off by a large, red drapery decorated with fringe, whichcatches the light coming from the left from a source outside the picture. A
round column on a high base stands behind Mary Magdalene, and visible atthe right is a nocturnal view of a rough sea, with several ships in distress.
This last scene refers to the Legenda Aurea, which tells how the Magdalenboarded an unnavigable boat in Palestine and finally disembarked in thesouth of France, near Marseille.[6]Schalcken’s discerning portrayal of the conversion of Mary Magdalene is an
excellent illustration of the way in which she was viewed and interpreted at
the time of the Counter-Reformation, when she was thought to embody theunion of the sensual, profane life and the spiritual life of the Church. It was in
the Magdalen that the feminine beauty prized in antiquity was united with theChristian ideals of conversion and atonement. Schalcken took great pains toportray her gracefulness: she wears only a white chemise, unfastened at thetop, and has an ample blue cloth draped over her legs. No offense could betaken at the Magdalen’s partial nakedness, because penance andnakedness were interrelated in post-Tridentine religious thought. The
beautiful and scarcely concealed body of the converted woman wasconsidered a “heroic nude,” in which the figure was placed at a distance andsurrounded by a spiritual glow. Schalcken heightened this effect with theradiant light of heaven shining on the Christian sinner.[7]As a subject, Mary Magdalene was certainly no novelty in Schalcken’s
oeuvre. At least ten paintings feature the penitent Magdalen, though all ofthem are characterized by simple iconography, showing the saint praying by
the light of a lamp or candle, with a skull or the Holy Scripture close athand.[8] None of his other works portraying Mary Magdalene can comparewith the present painting in its wealth of pictorial elements, a feature thatundoubtedly reflects the wishes of the elector’s court. Here, too, the artist
succeeded in producing a variety of light sources, just as he did in Wise andFoolish Virgins. In addition to natural light from the left, there is the light of anoil lamp—as is to be expected in the work of Schalcken—next to the© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Conversion of Mary Magdalen
Page 5 of 12

protagonist. The third and most important light source (and not only in the
iconographic sense) evokes divine intervention. Heavenly light shines mainlyon the Magdalen’s forehead, an indication that she is now about to embark
on a spiritual life that demands the rejection of all earthly splendor.
Striking in this supernatural setting are the angels, for they are portrayedhere in a way not found in any other of Schalcken’s works. Rather, theyreflect his intentional study of the work of Anthony van Dyck (1599–1641), in
whose Amaryllis and Mirtillo we find a closely related putto. In Schalcken’sday, Van Dyck’s painting was in the collection of William III until it wastransferred to Het Loo Palace near Apeldoorn in 1694–95. The canvas had
been on display in the Stadholder’s Quarters in the Binnenhof in The Hague,
which means that Schalcken certainly knew it.[9]Given the quality of the two paintings sent to him in 1700, Johann Wilhelm,
Elector Palatine, understandably became a great admirer of Schalcken’s
work. The shipment of 1700 contained the earliest known purchases, but theelector eventually acquired eight paintings by the artist. In December 1702,
Heinrich von Wiser, the elector’s ambassador in The Hague, reported toJohann Wilhelm that Schalcken had a piece in stock for which he was asking
1,000 guilders: “And as Your Electoral Highness probably knows, he would
not be willing to go much below that.” [10] The work represented the Holy
Family with John the Baptist and Elizabeth. It is not known if the elector
decided to purchase this painting in spite of its high price, but it is a fact thatin 1703 Schalcken spent some time in Düsseldorf, where he lived in thehouse called “In the Golden Helmet” (Im gold’nen Helm) on the
Flingerstrasse.[11] It was probably at this time that Schalcken received thelarge gold medal from the elector that he displays in his last self-portrait of1706.[12]- Guido Jansen, 2017

© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Conversion of Mary Magdalen
Page 6 of 12

Endnotes

1. King Christian V of Denmark (1646–99), for example, shortly before his death, commissioned
Schalcken to paint Holy Family, which arrived in Copenhagen in 1700 and is still preserved
there; Thierry Beherman, Godfried Schalcken (Paris,1988), no. 5. It was not known until
recently that the king also had his portrait painted, as emerges from Samuel Sylvius,
Gedigten (‘s-Gravenhage, 1729), 2:183, in which the portrait is honored with a four-line
verse: “Christianus de Vijfde, Koning van Denemarken en Norwegen, Door den Hofschilder
G. Schalke. Dus maalt een Schalke hand den Koning Christiaan, / Wijs, deugdzaam, dapper,
kloek en goed, tot heil der Noren. / Euroope en Asië zien ’t beeld verwondert aan. / Geen
vorst op aarde is zo bestendig ’t rijk beschoren” (Christian V, King of Denmark and Norway,
by the court painter G. Schalcken. So an impish hand paints King Christian / Wise, virtuous,
brave, strong, and good, to the benefit of the Norwegians. / Europe and Asia look at his
image with wonder. / No king on earth is blessed with so solid an empire). It was no doubt
these commissions that led the painter’s widow to refer to him incorrectly as the Danish court
painter in her will of 6 July 1742 (with a codicil of 13 October 1743): “Francoisia van Diemen,
weduwe van Godefridus Schalcken, in leven kunstschilder en hofschilder van Z. K. H. van
Denemarken” (Francoisia van Diemen, widow of Godefridus Schalcken, in life an artist andcourt painter to His Royal Highness of Denmark). The Hague, Gemeentearchief, Protocol
book of the notary Jacob Spex, inv. 2654.
2. Marco Chiarini, I dipinti olandesi del Seicento e del Settecento (Rome, 1989), 511–23, inv.
nos. 76.248, 76.250, 76.252, and 76.253 with illustrations; the inv. nos. 76.249 (copy after thepainting in Dresden) and 76.251 are not by the master’s hand.
3. See Karla Langedijk, Die Selbstbildnisse der holländischen und flämischen Künstler in derGalleria degli autoritratti der Uffizien in Florenz (Florence, 1992), 167. In 1692 Johann
Wilhelm had purchased his first Schalcken at an auction for 121 guilders; Theodor Levin,“Geiträge zur Geschichte der Kunstbestrebungen in dem Hause Pfalz-Neuburg,” Beiträge zur
Geschichte des Niederrheins: Jahrbuch des Düsseldorfer Geschichtsvereins 22 (1910): 143.
Coincidentally, in 1690 the artist had painted the portrait of the elector’s sister, Maria Anna
von der Pfalz-Neuburg (1667–1740); Thierry Beherman, Godfried Schalcken (Paris, 1988),
407, no. 314 and 379 (oil on canvas, 50 x 39.5 cm). With regard to this portrait, see my entry
in Sabine Craft-Giepmans and Annette de Vries, eds., Portret in portret in de Nederlandse
Kunst 1550–2012 (Exh. cat. Dordrechts Museum ) (Dordrecht, 2012).
4. See my entry in Ekkehard Mai, Sander Paarlberg, and Gregor M. Weber, Vom Adel derMalerei: Holland um 1700 (Exh. cat. Cologne, Wallraf-Richartz-Museum; Dordrecht,
Dordrechts Museum; Kassel, Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister, Schloss Wilhelmshöhe) (Cologne,2006), 264, no. 75. Also Reinhold Baumstark et al., Kurfürst Johann Wilhelms Bilder, 3 vols.
© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Conversion of Mary Magdalen
Page 7 of 12(Munich, 2009), 1: 400.
5. John B. Knipping, De iconografie van de contra-reformatie in de Nederlanden, 2 vols.
(Hilversum, 1939–40), 2: 96–109. At this time, in fact, the influence of the CounterReformation was overpowering in the Palatinate. Until 1685 the Electors Palatine had beenamong the leaders of the Protestant faction in Germany, but Charles II’s death without issue
in that year meant the extinction of the Protestant branch of the Wittelsbach-Simmern family.
A dispute erupted over the succession, which was settled in favor of the Catholic branch ofWittelsbach-Neuburg. The new Catholic Elector Palatine was Johann Wilhelm’s father, who
did his best to make his largely Protestant subjects return to the fold of the mother Church, a
policy that his son and successor pursued with increased zeal after 1690.
6. Engelbert Kirschbaum, ed., Lexikon der christlichen Ikonographie, 8 vols. (Rome, 1968–76),
7: coll. 516–41, esp. 534.
7. John B. Knipping, De iconografie van de contra-reformatie in de Nederlanden, 2 vols.
(Hilversum, 1939–40), 1:62 and 80.
8. Thierry Beherman, Godfried Schalcken (Paris,1988), nos. 15–24. Remarkably enough, it wasa representation of Mary Magdalene in the collection of Diego Duarte in Antwerp that usheredin Schalcken’s international reputation. As early as 1687, the Swede Nicodemus Tessin the
Younger (1654–1728) observed, during his visit to the collection: “aber sonderlich schön wahr
die Sta Magdalena, so von dem reflex einer Lampen gantz eclairiret wurde, dessent gleichen
ich nimmer artiger gemahlet gesehen, der es gemacht hat heisst Schalcken undt wohnet inDort” (but the Saint Mary Magadalene was exceptionally beautiful, as she was completely lit
by the reflection of a lamp, something I have never seen painted more felicitously; the one
who did it is called Schalcken and lives in Dordrecht); Gustaf Upmark, “Ein Besuch in Holland
1687,” Oud Holland 18, no. 1 (1900): 202. For the inventory of Duarte’s paintings, see Erik
Duverger, Antwerpse kunstinventarissen uit de zeventiende eeuw, 10 vols. (Brussels,
1984–2009), 9: 154–64; for the Mary Magdalene by Schalcken, see 9:164, no. 192.
9. Susan J. Barnes et al., Van Dyck: A Complete Catalogue of the Paintings (New Haven,2004), 294, no. III.60; Peter van der Ploeg and Carola Vermeeren, Princely Patrons: The
Collection of Frederick Henry of Orange and Amalia of Solms in the Hague (Exh. cat. The
Hague, Mauritshuis) (Zwolle, 1997), 114, no. 5. The painting had been acquired by William
III’s grandfather, Prince Frederik Hendrik.
10. “Und wie E. Ch. D. ihne wohl kennen, würdt er davon nicht vil nachlassen.” For the letterfrom Von Wiser, see Theodor Levin, “Geiträge zur Geschichte der Kunstbestrebungen indem Hause Pfalz-Neuburg,” in Beiträge zur Geschichte des Niederrheins: Jahrbuch desDüsseldorfer Geschichtsvereins 22 (1910): 34. Just how high this amount was emerges fromthe fact that in those days 800 guilders was the highest price fetched at auction by a work of
Schalcken. Jonckheere states that the average price for a work by Schalcken was 188
guilders, as evidenced by his database of 41 works. The mean was 130 guilders. Of all the© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Conversion of Mary Magdalen
Page 8 of 12

artists whose work was sold at auction, Schalcken is thus the 36th most expensive painter on
the list; Koenraad Jonckheere, The Auction of King William’s Paintings, 1713 (Philadelphia,
2008), 215, 217.
11. On his stay in Düsseldorf, see K. Strauven, Ueber künstlerisches Leben und Wirken in
Düsseldorf bis zur Düsseldorfer Maler-Schule unter Direktor Schadow (Düsseldorf, 1862), 20.
Schalcken had gone to Düsseldorf to work. While there he painted at least three portraits,
including the portrait of Anna Maria Louisa de’ Medici (1667–1743), second wife of Elector
Johann Wilhelm, and the portrait of Theresia Catharina Lubomirska (1683–1712), the wife of
his younger brother and successor, Karl Philipp of the Palatinate; Thierry Beherman, Godfried
Schalcken (Paris, 1988), 406, no. 289 (dated 1703, oil on canvas, 131 x 98 cm) and 407, no.
330a (dated 1703, oil on canvas, 118.8 x 88.4 cm). Another portrait painted at that time was alikeness of a Count of Bylandt, which E. W. Moes reported in 1892 as being in the possessionof a descendant, along with the curious correspondence between the artist and the patron;see G. H. Veth “Aanteekeningen omtrent eenige Dordrechtsche schilders. XXXII. Godefridus
Schalcken,” Oud Holland, 10 (1892): 5. It is not known if either the portrait or the letters arestill extant. The only heir and grandson of the owner, Willem Frederik Lodewijk, Count of
Bylandt (1896–1990), informed me in writing in 1986 that he had never heard of an ancestral
portrait by Schalcken in his family’s possession.
12. The self-portrait is discussed in Thierry Beherman, Godfried Schalcken (Paris, 1988), 156,
no. 58, and figured in a sale at Christie’s in London on 10 July 1998, lot 36, with color
illustration. See also Roland, Browse, and Delbanco, Old and Modern Paintings 19 Cork
Street, Old Bond Street, London, W1 Regent 7984, cat. 1963, 10–11. The medal Schalcken
wears features a younger image of the elector than the medal Adriaen van der Werff(1659–1722) proudly displays in his Self-Portrait of 1699 in the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam,
inv. no. Sk-A-465 (oil on canvas, 81 x 65.5 cm); Peter J. J. van Thiel, ed., All the Paintings of
the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam (Amsterdam, 1976), 599, with illustration. See also Guido
Jansen, “Selbstporträt mit der goldenen Medaille von Johann Wilhelm von der Pfalz, 1706,”
in Schalcken–Gemalte Verführung, ed. Anja K. Sevcik. (Exh. cat. Cologne, Wallraf-RichartzMuseum; Dordrecht, Dordrechts Museum. Stuttgart, 2015), 106–9, no. 7 and Annelise
Stemper, Die Medaillen der Pfalzgrafen und Kurfursten bei Rhein (Worms, 1997): S. 378, Nr.
372 for the medal in Van Der Werff’s Self-Portrait and S. 390, Nr. 379A for the medal in
Schalcken’s Self-Portrait.

Provenance
Johann Wilhelm (1658–1716), Elector Palatine of the Rhine, Count Palatine of Neuburg,
Düsseldorf, ca. 1700–16; by descent to his brother Karl Philipp (1661–1742), Elector Palatine© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Conversion of Mary Magdalen
Page 9 of 12of the Rhine, Count Palatine of Neuburg, Düsseldorf, until 1742; by descent to his nephew
Karl Theodor (1724–99), Elector Palatine of the Rhine, Count Palatine of Neuburg, and, later
Elector of Bavaria, until 1799; by descent to his successor, Maximilian IV Joseph(1756–1829), Elector of both the Palatine and Bavaria, and from 1806 King of Bavaria, until
1806; by descent to the Bavarian Royal collections.
Recorded in the “Munich Gallery” in 1833.
Moved to the Landauerbrüderhaus, Nuremberg, possibly by 1834 and certainly by 1840.
Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg, possibly in 1876 and certainly by 1893.
(Sale, Parke-Bernet, New York, 5 March 1952, no. 64).
(Sale, Parke-Bernet, New York, 6 October 1971, no. 75; [Spencer A. Samuels & Co., by1972]).
(Sale, Christie’s, New York, 9 January, 1981, no. 11 [Christopher Janet, New York, by
1984]).
Martin Pomp, New York [Lawrence Steigrad Fine Arts, New York, by 1996; Jack Kilgore, New
York, 1997; Johnny van Haeften, London, 2004].
From whom acquired by the present owner.

Exhibition History
New York, Spencer A. Samuels & Co., “Recent Acquisitions,” 8–29 April 1972.
New York, Christophe Janet, “The Intimate Vision,” 19–21 April 1984, no. 11.
New York, Otto Naumann Ltd., “Lawrence Steigrad Fine Art Exhibiting at Otto Naumann,” 5
December 1996–4 January 1997, no. 51.
Cologne, Wallraf-Richartz-Museum, “Schalcken—Painted Seduction,” 25 September 2015–24
January 2016; Dordrecht, Dordrechts Museum, 21 February–26 June 2016 [lent by thepresent 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].

References© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Conversion of Mary Magdalen
Page 10 of 12

Karsch, Gerard Joseph. Ausführliche und gründliche Specification derer vortrefflichen undunschätzbaren Gemählden, welche in der Galerie der Churfürstlichen Residentz zu
Düsseldorf. Düsseldorf, 1719, no. 21. Translated and republished as Désignation exacte despeintures précieuses, qui sont en grand nombre dans la Galerie de la Résidence de son
Altesse Sérme. Electorale Palatine à Dusseldorff. Dusseldorf, 1720.
Van Gool, Johan. De nieuwe schouburg der Nederlantsche kunstschilders en schilderessen
waer in de levens- en kunstbedryven der tans levende en reets overleedene schilders, dievan Houbraken, noch eenig ander schryver, zyn aengeteekend, verhaelt worde. 2 vols. The
Hague, 1750–51, 2: 533.
De Pigage, Nicolas, and Chrétien de Mechel. La Galerie Electorale de Dusseldorff ou
catalogue raisonné et figuré de ses tableaux: Dans lequel on donne une connoissance exacte
de cette fameuse Collection, & de son local, par des descriptions détaillées, & par une suitede 30. planches, contenant 365. petites estampes. Basel, 1778, no. 322, fig. 24.
Catalogue de la Galerie de Mannheim actuellement au Chateau de Nymphenbourg… 19
novembre 1799. Archiv der Bayerischen Staatsgemäldesammlungen, inv. Ma A 799/1.
Churfürstl Gemaelde-Sammlung von Mannheim, den 26. October. 1802. Archiv derBayerischen Staatsgemäldesammlungen, inv. Ma A 802/1.
Verzeichniß der Gemälde der Churfl: Bilder-Galerie von Mannheim, verfasst den 22ten July
1802. in München. Archiv der Bayerischen Staatsgemäldesammlungen, inv. Ma A 802/2.
Verzeichniß derjenigen Gemälde, welche aus der Churfürstl. Mannheimer Gemäldesammlungen nach den Churfürstlichen Schloß Schleissheim abgeschiket worden sind. Archiv
der Bayerischen Staatsgemäldesammlungen, inv. Ma A 802/4.
Smith, John. Catalogue Raisonné of the Works of the Most Eminent Dutch, Flemish, andFrench Painters. 9 vols. London, 1829–42, 6:282, no. 75.
Königlichen Gemäldegalerie. Verzeichnis der Königlichen und städtischen Gemälde welch inder Königlichen Gemäldegalerie in Nürnberg im Landauerbrüderhause Ausgestellt sind.
Nuremberg, 1840, no. 154.
Blanc, Charles. Histoire des peintres de toutes les écoles: Ecole hollandaise. 2 vols. Paris,
1861, 2:6.
Germanischen Museum. Katalog der im germanischen Museum befindlichen Gemälde.
Nuremberg, 1882.
Germanischen Museum. Katalog der im germanischen Museum befindlichen Gemälde.
Nuremberg, 1893, no. 342 (326), (Stadt Nürnberg 39).
Germanischen

Museum.

KatalogderGemäldeSammlungdesGermanischen

Nationalmuseum. Nuremberg, 1909, no. 410 (342) (Stadt Nürnberg 39), Gal. 86.
Hofstede de Groot, Cornelis. A Catalogue Raisonné of the Works of the Most Eminent Dutch© 2020 The Leiden Collection

Conversion of Mary Magdalen
Page 11 of 12

Painters of the Seventeenth Century Based on the Work of John Smith. Edited and translatedby Edward G. Hawke, 5: 336–37, no. 49. 8 vols. London, 1907–1928. Originally published as
Beschreibendes und kritisches Verzeichnis der Werke der hervorragendsten höllandischen
Maler des XVII. Jahrhunderts. 10 vols. Esslingen and Paris, 1907–1928.
Beherman, Thierry. Godfried Schalcken. Paris, 1988, 101–2, no. 19.
Möhlig, Kornelia. Die Gemäldegalerie des Kurfürsten Johann Wilhelm von Pfalz-Neuburg(1658–1716) in Düsseldorf. Cologne, 1993, 140.
Baumstark, Reinhold, et al. Kurfürst Johann Wilhelms Bilder. 3 vols. Munich, 2009, 2: 106,
no. 257; 3:332.
Jansen, Guido M. C. “Die Bekehrung der Maria Magdalena, 1700.” In Schalcken–Gemalte
Verführung. Edited by Anja K. Sevcik, 292–94, no. 79. Exh. cat., Cologne, Wallraf-RichartzMuseum; Dordrecht, Dordrechts Museum. Stuttgart, 2015.
Bartilla, Stefan. “Eine prunkvolle Manhung: Schalckens Maria Magdalena entstagt den
Eitelkeiten der Welt.” Wallraf-Richartz-Jarbuch 77 (2016): 113–25, no. 1.
McCarthy, Alexa. “Conversion of Mary Magdalen.” In The Age of Rembrandt and Vermeer:
Masterpieces of The Leiden Collection. Edited by Polina Lyubimova, 208–9; 246–47, no. 71.
Translated by Daria Babich and Daria Kuzina. Exh. cat. Moscow, The Pushkin State Museumof Fine Arts; St. Petersburg, The State Hermitage Museum. Moscow, 2018.

Technical Summary
The support, a single piece of a fine, plain-weave fabric, has been lined. All four tacking margins
have been almost entirely removed. Narrow tacking margin remnants and cusping along all fouredges indicate the original dimensions have been retained. Remnants of paper tape are present
along the right side of the lower edge only. There are two canvas stamps, two labels and one
inscription, but no wax collection seals along the lining or stretcher.
A light gray ground has been thinly and evenly applied and extends onto the right tacking margin.
A red underlayer is visible along the right tacking margin and can be seen below much of thecomposition. The paint has been applied with loose fluid brushstrokes in thin, smooth glazes, withno use of impasto. Details along the gold objects in the foreground and tassels hanging from thered fabric have been applied with fine dabs and strokes of color.
No underdrawing is readily apparent in infrared images captured at 780–1000 nanometers.
Compositional changes visible in the images include the following: the stars along the edge of theblue drapery over the figure’s proper right knee were originally smaller; and the toes along thefigure’s proper right foot have been shifted downward closer to the edge of the crown. A
pentimento along the pink drapery wrapped around the waist of the putti in the upper right corner© 2020 The Leiden CollectionPowered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Conversion of Mary Magdalen
Page 12 of 12

indicates a change to the fabric’s contour.
The painting is signed and dated in brown paint along the lower left corner.
The painting has not undergone conservation treatment since its acquisition in 2004 and remains
in a good state of preservation despite areas of thinness along the blue drapery, the locks of hairdraped over the figure’s shoulder, the rays emanating from the putti, and the area where thewhite clouds meet the red drapery.[1]Technical Summary Endnotes

1. The painting was examined on-site without the use of a stereomicroscope.

© 2020 The Leiden Collection