EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING

THE COLLECTIONS OF THE

NATIONAL GALLERY OF ART

SYSTEMATIC CATALOGU E

Early

Netherlandish

Painting

JOHN OLIVER HAND

MARTHA WOLFF

NATIONAL GALLERY OF ART • WASHINGTON

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS
Edited by Mary Yakush.

Designed by Klaus Gemming, New Haven, Connecticut.

Typeset in Linoterm Sabon

by Meriden-Stinehour Press, Lunenburg, Vermont.

Printed by Rembrandt Press Inc., Milford, Connecticut,

on Quintessence Dull 8o lb. Text.

Color separations by Gamma One Inc., North Haven, Connecticut.

Bound by Meriden-Stinehour Press, Lunenburg, Vermont.

COVER: Jan Gossaert, Portrait of a Merchant, 1967.4.1

FRONTISPIECE: Gerard David, The Rest on the Flight into Egypt, 1937.1.43

Copyright © 1986. Board of Trustees, National Gallery of Art.

All rights reserved. This book may not be reproduced, in whole

or in part, in any form (beyond that copying permitted by Sections 107 and 108

of the U.S. Copyright Law and except by reviewers for the public press),

without written permission from the publishers.

LIBRAR Y OF CONGRES S CATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATIO N DATA

National Gallery of Art (U.S.)

Early Netherlandish painting.

(The Collections of the National Gallery of Art: systematic catalogue)

Includes bibliographies and indexes.

I. Panel painting, Flemish—Catalogs. 2. Panel painting,

Dutch—Catalogs. 3. Panel painting—15th century—Flanders—

Catalogs. 4. Panel painting—16th century—Flanders—Catalogs.

5. Panel painting—Washington (D.C.)—Catalogs. 6. National

Gallery of Art (U.S.)—Catalogs. I. Hand, John Oliver, 1941-

II. Wolff, Martha. III. Title. IV. Series: National Gallery of Art

(U.S.). Collections of the National Gallery of Art.

ND635.N37 1986 759.9492/074'oi53 86-12418

ISBN 0—894-68093-5 (paper)

ISB N 0—521-34016-0 (cloth)

Printed in the United States of America
Contents

vii Preface

ix Acknowledgments

xi Introduction and Notes to the Reader

xiii Abbreviations for frequently cited periodicals

xiv Abbreviations for books

I CATALOGU E

259 Appendix I: Dendrochronology by Peter Klein

261 Appendix II: Infrared Reflectography by Molly Faries

263 Indices

269 Concordances

271 List of artists

Preface

With this catalogue of the early Netherlandish paintings in the National Gallery of Art, we inaugurate a

projected series of more than two dozen volumes fully

cataloguing the Gallery's holdings of painting, sculpture, photographs, and decorative arts. Since the Gallery first opened its doors in 1941, information on the

collection has been available in the form of preliminary

catalogues, summary catalogues, in several detailed

volumes on aspects of the Kress collection, and in the

catalogue of Italian paintings produced by the late Fern

Rusk Shapley. However, as a national museum, we

have a responsibility toward both the inquiring general

visitor and the community of specialized scholars in art

history to provide the most complete description and

interpretation of our extraordinary holdings. The

series begun with this volume is written by Gallery

curators and, in those fields for which there are no staff

curators, by leading outside authorities, and thus takes

into account the issues and methodologies unique to

each field.

It is fitting that the series of National Gallery catalogues should begin with Netherlandish painting of the

fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Although the Gallery

is a relatively young institution, to a large extent, its

holdings reflect American collecting impulses and opportunities of the late nineteenth and early twentieth

centuries. This is the period when the great Mellon and

Widener collections were formed, and a period when

the craftsmanship and elegant serenity of early Netherlandish painting were much sought after. Subsequent

gifts, notably those of Samuel H. Kress and the Samuel

H. Kress Foundation, as well as purchases, many made

possible by the Ailsa Mellon Bruce Fund, have added

greatly to the breadth of the collection in this area. At

the same time scholarship in this field has taught us

much about the complex levels of meaning of these

paintings, the diverse personalities who painted and

commissioned them, and the functions they served in an

emerging modern society.

On a completely personal level, it is also fitting that

the early Netherlandish paintings should be the first.

My love for this school came early on in life, after a trip

through the low countries with my very knowledgeable parents, and it has stayed with me ever since. How

could anyone be insensitive to the matchless beauty of

Rogier van der Weyden's Portrait of a Lady, Jan van

Eyck's Annunciation, or Gerard David's The Rest on

the Flight into Egypt?

For all we have learned and continue to learn about

the art of this period, scholars and lovers of art are

drawn again and again to the sheer beauty of these

paintings, which first captivated Andrew Mellon. We

hope that this catalogue will make a permanent contribution to what is known about these and their sister

paintings in the nation's gallery.

J. Carter Brown

Director

PREFAC E V l l

Acknowledgments

During the almost five years of preparation of this

catalogue, we have benefited immeasurably from the

support, advice, and stimulating conversation of our

colleagues. While many of these contributions have

been acknowledged at the appropriate place in the

text, other more broad-ranging contributions were

almost in the nature of collaborations. Colin Eisler's

monumental catalogue of the non-Italian paintings of

the Kress collection provided a basis for our work on

these paintings, substantially lessening our task. He

also very graciously made his working notes and correspondence available to us. The past and present

members of the Gallery's conservation department,

including Carol Christensen, Sarah Fisher, Beatrix

Graf, Ann Hoenigswald, Ross Merrill, Barbara Miller,

and Kay Silberfeld, were essential to the preparation of

the catalogue, through their detailed examination

reports, which formed the basis for the technical notes,

and through their patience with our repeated questions. Molly Paries of Indiana University, who spent

several months as a senior fellow at the Center for

Advanced Study in the Visual Arts scanning and

documenting the early Netherlandish and German

paintings at the Gallery with infrared reflectography,

was our enthusiastic guide through the intricacies of

the study of underdrawing, and provided much additional information and encouragement. Josef Bauch

and Peter Klein of the Institut fur Holzbiologie, Universitàt Hamburg, undertook the dendrochronological examination of the panels. Both Molly Paries and

Peter Klein have contributed appendices on these

aspects of the Gallery's paintings, which expand the

catalogue's usefulness. We also benefited greatly from

conversations with Maryan Ainsworth in relation to

her study of the paintings by Gerard David, Hans

Memling, and Juan de Flandes at the Metropolitan

Museum as well as with J. R. J. van Asperen de Boer

and with Roger van Schoute. We are particularly grateful to these colleagues for their enthusiasm and willingness to share the results they have obtained in some

of the most exciting new research on early Netherlandish paintings.

We wish to thank the staffs of the many museums

that we visited in Europe and America. They were unfailingly helpful in making the works in their care

available to us and in answering our questions. Micheline Comblen-Sonkes and the staff of the Centre des

recherches primitifs flamands in Brussels and the staff

of the Rijksbureau voor Kunsthistorisch Documentatie

in The Hague, particularly Gerbrand Kotting, made us

feel at home in their respective institutions.

Various departments of the Gallery had a large part

to play in the research and production of the catalogue.

We would like to thank Thomas McGill and Julia

Wisniewski, speedy inter-library loan librarians, Ruth

Philbrick and the staff of the Photo Archive, the art

handlers headed by John Poliszuk and Andrew Krieger,

who safely and patiently moved paintings back and

forth for examination and treatment, and Richard Amt

and the staff of the photography department, who

cheerfully produced an array of excellent photographs.

Special thanks go to the following summer interns who

enthusiastically participated in our research: Anthony

Colantuono, Lynn Jacobs, Jennifer Kilian, Harry

Mergler, and Rachel Cropsey Simons. Our deep gratitude goes to the departmental secretaries who typed

the manuscript, enduring numerous revisions: Marion

Diffenderfer, Deborah Gómez, Samantha Johnston,

Sara Morris, and Grace Nelson.

The catalogue was much improved by the comments of Sydney Freedberg, who read the text through

in its early stages. We are deeply indebted to Suzannah

Fabing, coordinator of the catalogue project, and to

Lome Campbell and Egbert Haverkamp-Begemann

for further critical readings of the text and for comments on structure and content that made the task of

revision much less arduous. It was a pleasure to work

on the production aspects of the catalogue with

Frances Smyth, editor-in-chief. Mary Yakush's careful

editing, Melanie Ness' supervision of the production,

and Klaus Gemming's thoughtful design smoothed the

way for this first volume of the Gallery's systematic

catalogue series.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT S IX

Introduction and Notes to the Reader

This volume contains entries for those paintings in the

National Gallery that were produced in the fifteenth

and sixteenth centuries by artists from the Netherlands,

a region corresponding roughly to present-day Holland, Belgium, Luxembourg, and parts of northern

France. The art created in this region is usually termed

early Netherlandish or Netherlandish, while the

designations Dutch and Flemish are generally reserved

for works of the seventeenth and succeeding centuries.

The domination of the Netherlands by the dukes of

Burgundy, a cadet line of the Valois kings of France,

began in 13 69 when Philip the Bold married Margaret,

daughter of the last count of Flanders, Louis de Mâle,

and upon Louis' death in 1384 came into Flemish territories. The Burgundian duke's shrewd policy of aggrandizement continued under his heirs, especially

Philip the Good, who added several provinces and

established a secure government. The defeat and death

of Charles the Bold at the Battle of Nancy in 1477

ended the ties of the ruling family of the Netherlands to

the Burgundian territories. Subsequently, through the

marriage of Charles' only child, Mary of Burgundy, to

Maximilian of Habsburg, the affairs of the Netherlands became part of larger dynastic concerns of the

imperial family, whose territories came to include

Spain and large portions of the New World as well as

the Holy Roman Empire. While Charles V attempted

to oversee his far-flung empire, the Netherlands were

ably governed by his aunt, Margaret of Austria. She

was succeeded by Charles' sister, Mary of Hungary,

who in turn was followed by Margaret of Parma, his

illegitimate daughter. The last quarter of the sixteenth

century saw increasing resistance to the Catholic, proSpanish, and autocratic policies of Philip II, son of

Charles V. Resistance quickly turned into full revolt.

The fall of Antwerp to Spanish troops in 1585 effectively marked the partition of the Netherlands into a

Protestant north and a Catholic south.

The relatively small size of the Netherlands belied

its economic dynamism and cultural vitality. The

region produced a school of painting that was considered the equal of the Italian school. Early Netherlandish pictures have always been emulated by other

artists, admired for their appeal to the eye and to the

mind, and enthusiastically collected.

The collecting of early Netherlandish painting in the

United States did not really begin until the late nineteenth century. One of the earliest acquisitions was the

purchase in 1889 of Rogier van der Weyden's Saint

Luke Painting the Virgin by Henry Lee Higginson,

who gave it in 1893 to the Museum of Fine Arts,

Boston. The late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries saw the formation of several private collections

that became the nuclei of museum collections in such

cities as Detroit, Philadelphia, and New York.

The bulk of the Gallery's collection of early

Netherlandish painting was given by Andrew W.

Mellon and by Samuel H. Kress and the Samuel H.

Kress Foundation. Andrew Mellon's 1937 bequest to

the nation included ten early Netherlandish paintings,

mostly from the fifteenth century and of the highest

level of quality. The Kress donation included twentyfour paintings, two groups given in 1952, and 1961 and

a single panel given in 1959. It is more diverse, including outstanding examples of important trends in the

sixteenth century. During the 19605 and 19705, thanks

to the funds provided by Ailsa Mellon Bruce, the Gallery added eight first-rate early Netherlandish pictures

to its holdings. Donations by individuals have also

played an important role in enriching the collection.

The Gallery has indeed been fortunate to be the

recipient of such gifts as the Madonna and Child by Jan

Gossaert, given in 1981 by Grace Vogel Aldworth in

memory of her grandparents Ralph and Mary Booth,

who were themselves distinguished collectors and

patrons.

A list of changes of attribution is included at the end

of the catalogue. In the case of The Rest on the Flight

into Egypt, 1961.9.36, close study of the artistic personalities of Scorel and Heemskerck by several scholars

makes it possible to recognize this painting, traditionally given to Scorel, as an early work by Heemskerck. In most cases, however, changes of attribution

reflect an attempt to describe more precisely the

complex activity of artists' workshops in this period.

Growing understanding of workshop practice and of

variations on transmitted models will in the future lead

to a more specific characterization of artists in the train

of Campin, Van der Weyden, Memling, and others. In

this task, methods of investigation of early NetherINTRODUCTION XI
landish paintings as physical objects, notably infrared

reflectography and dendrochronology, provide important new information. This catalogue incorporates

the results of examination using these methods, made

possible through the participation of Molly Paries and

of Peter Klein and Josef Bauch, respectively, together

with more conventional laboratory examination. This

is probably the first museum catalogue to contain the

results of infrared reflectography and dendrochronology (see appendices I and II), results that we hope will

increase in usefulness as more comparative material

from other collections becomes available.

Iconography continues to be a prime focus of research for historians of early Netherlandish painting.

Here, however, a growing understanding of the complexity of the milieu in which the work of art was

created leads to greater awareness of the limitations of

iconographie analysis. To understand patterns of

iconographie meaning or the often multiple meanings

of a single object, the art historian must increasingly

attempt to comprehend the context in which the work

of art was created. In comparison to our colleagues

studying Italian art of the same period, the historians

of early Netherlandish painting have fewer documents

at their disposal, and surviving documents are often

not accompanied by extant paintings. This increases

the importance of understanding the social, economic,

and religious ambience of a painting. To a large extent

the task of this catalogue has been to ask questions

about the context in which the individual work of art

functioned, its original appearance, and how it was

understood in its own time. We hope that in so doing

we point to fruitful directions for future investigations.

Entries are arranged alphabetically by artist. Each

named artist is given a short biography and bibliography, with individual entries following in order of

acquisition. Anonymous artists are also incorporated

alphabetically under appropriate designations such as

Antwerp Artist, Franco-Flemish Artist, or the Master

of Frankfurt. In 1983, the Gallery assigned new accession numbers by year of acquisition; these are followed

by the old number in parentheses.

The following attribution terms are used to indicate

the nature of the relationship to a named artist:

Studio of, Workshop of: Produced in the named

artist's workshop or studio, by students or assistants,

possibly with some participation by the named artist. It

is important that the creative concept is by the named

artist and that the work was meant to leave the studio

as his.

Follower of: An unknown artist working specifically in the style of the named artist, who may or may

not have been trained by the named artist.

After: A copy of any date.

Imitator of: Someone working in the style of an

artist with the intention to deceive.

School: Indicates a geographical distinction only

and is used where it is impossible to designate a specific

artist, his studio or following.

We have used the designation north Netherlandish for

works produced in the provinces of present-day Holland. The following conventions for dates are used:

1575 executed in 1575

c. 1575 executed sometime around 1575

1575-1580 begun in 1575, completed in 1580

1575/1580 executed sometime between 1575

and 1580

c. 1575/1580 executed sometime around the

period 1575-1580

Dimensions are given in centimeters, height preceding width, followed by the dimensions in inches in

parentheses. Left and right refer to the viewer's left and

right unless the context clearly indicates the contrary.

Since, with rare exceptions, no paint samples were

taken, the paint medium has not been analyzed. However, it is assumed that the medium corresponds to

what is generally understood to be Netherlandish oil

technique. The support of panels is described as oak

only when examination by a wood expert determined

that this was the case. In some instances the way in

which a panel was cradled or marouflaged, or other

circumstances, prevented a positive determination,

though the support may well be oak. In the provenance

section parentheses indicate a dealer, auction house, or

agent. In the list of references we have attempted to be

inclusive, but have omitted publication in picture

books. Sales and exhibition catalogues cited in the

provenance and exhibition sections are not repeated in

the list of references. A list of standard abbreviations

used throughout the volume follows.

J. O. H. AND M. W.

Xll EARL Y NETHERLANDIS H PAINTIN G
Abbreviations for frequently cited periodicals

AA L'Art et les Artistes

AB The Art Bulletin

AEA Archivo Español de Arte y Arqueología;

Archivo Español de Arte

AQ The Art Quarterly

ArtN Art News

ArtNA Art News Annual

BCMA Bulletin of the Cleveland Museum of Art

BlnstPat Bulletin de l'Institut royal du Patrimoine artistique

BMRBA Bulletin des Musées Royaux des Beaux-Arts de Belgique

BSocHAF Bulletin de la Société de l'Histoire de l'Art Français

BurlM The Burlington Magazine

Conn The Connoisseur

GBA Gazette des Beaux-Arts

JbAntwerp Jaarboek van het Koninklijk Muséum voor Schone Kunsten Antwerpen

JbBerlin Jahrbuch der kôniglich preussischen Kunstsammlungen;

Jahrbuch der preussischen Kunstsammlungen;

Jahrbuch der Berliner Museen

JbWien Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des allerhôchsten Kaiserhauses;

Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien

JMMA Journal of the Metropolitan Museum of Art

JWCI Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes

MagArt Magazine of Art

Münchnerjb Münchner Jahrbuch der bildenden Kunst

NKJ Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek

OH Oud-Holland

RAAM Revue de l'Art Ancien et Moderne

RBAHA Revue Belge d'Archéologie et d'Histoire de l'Art

RevArt Revue de l'Art

RfK Repertorium fur Kunstwissenschaft

RLouvre La Revue du Louvre et des Musées de France

StHist Studies in the History of Art

ZfbK Zeitschrift für bildende Kunst

ABBREVIATION S Xll l
Abbreviations for books

Cairns and Walker 1966

Guttler, Northern Painting

Eisler 1977

Friedlànder

Kress 1951

Kress 1956

Kress 1959

Mellon 1949

NGA 1941

NGA 1975

Panofsky, ENP

Réau, Iconographie

Ryan and Ripperger,

The Golden Legend

Shapley 1979

Thieme-Becker

Cairns, Huntington, and John Walker, eds. A Pageant of

Painting from the National Gallery of Art. z vols. New

York, 1966.

Cuttler, Charles D. Northern Painting from Pucelle to

Bruegel. Fourteenth, Fifteenth, and Sixteenth Centuries.

New York, 1968.

Eisler, Colin. Paintings from the Samuel H. Kress

Collection: European Schools Excluding Italian. Oxford,

1977-

Friedlànder, Max J. Die altniederlàndishe Malerei. 14 vols.

Berlin and Leiden, 1924—1937. (English éd., Early

Netherlandish Painting. 14 vols, in 16. Brussels and Leiden,

1967-1976.)

National Gallery of Art. Paintings and Sculpture from the

Kress Collection Acquired by the Samuel H. Kress

Foundation 1945—1951. Intro, by John Walker, text by

William E. Suida. Washington, 1951.

National Gallery of Art. Paintings and Sculpture from the

Kress Collection Acquired by the Samuel H. Kress

Foundation 1951—1956. Intro, by John Walker, text by

William E. Suida and Fern Rusk Shapley. Washington,

1956.

National Gallery of Art. Paintings and Sculpture from the

Samuel H. Kress Collection. Washington, 1959.

National Gallery of Art. Paintings and Sculpture from the

Mellon Collection. Washington, 1949. Reprinted 1953 and

1958.

National Gallery of Art. Preliminary Catalogue of Paintings

an d Sculpture. Washington, 1941.

National Gallery of Art. European Paintings: An Illustrated

Summary Catalogue. Washington, 1975.

Panofsky, Erwin. Early Netherlandish Painting. Its Origins

and Character. Cambridge, Mass., 1953.

Réau, Louis. Iconographie de l'art chrétien. 3 vols, in 6.

Paris, 1955-1959.

Ryan, Granger, and Helmut Ripperger, trans. The Golden

Legend of Jacobus Vorágine, z vols. London, 1941.

Shapley, Fern Rusk. Catalogue of the Italian Paintings,

National Gallery of Art. z vols. Washington, 1979.

Thieme, Ulrich, and Felix Becker. Allgemeines Lexikon der

bildenden Künstler von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart.

xiv EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Thurston and Attwater,

Butler's Lives of the Saints

Walker 195 6

Walker 1963

Walker 1964

Walker 1976

Widener 1913

Widener 1935

Widener 1942

Widener 1948

Leipzig, 1907—1950. Continuation by Hans Vollmer.

Allgemeines Lexikon der bildenden Kunstler des xx.

Jahrhunderts. Leipzig, 1953—1962.

Thurston, Herbert, and Donald Attwater. Butler's Lives

of the Saints. 4 vols. New York, 1956.

Walker, John. National Gallery of Art, Washington. New

York, 1956.

Walker, John. National Gallery of Art, Washington. New

York, 1963.

Walker, John. The National Gallery, Washington. London

[1964].

Walker, John. National Gallery of Art, Washington. New

York [1976].

Pictures in the Collection of P. A. B. Widener at Lynnewood

Hall, Elkins Park, Pennsylvania. 3 vols. Philadelphia,

1913—1916. Early German, Dutch and Flemish Schools.

Notes by W. R. Valentiner and C. Hofstede de Groot, 1913.

Inventory of the Objects d'Art at Lynnewood Hall, Elkins

Park, Pennsylvania, The Estate of the Late P. A. B.

Widener. Philadelphia, 1935.

National Gallery of Art. Works of Art from the Widener

Collection. Foreword by David Finley and John Walker.

Washington, 1941.

National Gallery of Art. Paintings and Sculpture from the

Widener Collection. Washington, 1948.

ABBREVIATIONS XV

CATALOGUE
Antwerp Artist (Matthys Cock?), The Martyrdom of Saint Catherine, 1952.2.18

2. EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Antwerp Artist (Matthys Cock?)

1952.2.18 (1101)

The Martyrdom of Saint Catherine

c. 1540

Transferred from wood to plywood (cradled), 62.2 x 118.2

(24V2X469/16)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Technical Notes: The transfer to plywood took place before

1936. According to Gliick the original support was poplar.

Sometime shortly after 1932 several figures in the foreground,

which seem to have been later additions, were removed.1 Fig.

i shows the painting as it appeared before the alterations. It is

likely that the painting was transferred at the same time.

There are extensive, evenly scattered insect exit holes in the

paint and ground layers and no sign in either of horizontal

join lines. Poplar is more susceptible to insect damage and

worm tunneling than oak and is more likely to exist as a

single piece of wood the size of this painting. There are scattered losses of varying sizes throughout, but the actual extent

of abrasion is difficult to gauge under the thick varnish. There

are repainted losses in the upper and lower left corners and

along the right and bottom edges. Extensive later glazes are

found in the sky at the upper left and to a lesser extent in the

upper right and in the foreground landscape. Underdrawing

in what appears to be brown paint is visible with the naked

eye. The only underdrawing revealed by infrared reflectography is in the mountain at the far right.

Provenance: (Van Dieman-Margraf Gallery, Berlin, by

I93O.)2 Karl Rosier, Germany and Holland, c. 1930.

 3

 (Van

Diemen-Lilienfeld Galleries, New York, c. 1950.) Samuel H.

Kress Foundation, New York, 1950.

Exhibitions: Antwerp, Exposition d'Art flamand ancien,

1930, no. 53, as Pi éter Bruegel the Elder.

THE MARTYRDOM OF SAINT CATHERIN E ÍS of

considerable importance in the history of landscape

painting in the Netherlands, for it provides a link between two great masters, Joachim Patinir and Pieter

Bruegel the Elder. When first exhibited it was attributed to Pieter Bruegel, but this was immediately contested by Michel, Glück, and de Tolnay.4

 Although

Gliick later recanted, publishing the picture as an early

work by Bruegel of c. 15 5 3-15 54, and this attribution

was accepted by the Gallery,5 it never found widespread acceptance among Bruegel scholars.6

 A few authors felt that the painting might be the work of an

artist working later than Pieter Bruegel, such as Lucas

van Valckenborch or Jacob Grimmer.7 The most satisfactory dating, however, is that put forward by Grossmann, for whom The Martyrdom of Saint Catherine

represents the "stylistic phase between Patinir and

Bruegel."8 In 1976 the Gallery's attribution was

changed to Antwerp Artist, c. 1540.

The Martyrdom of Saint Catherine is dependent on

Joachim Patinir's painting of the same theme in the

Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna (fig. i).9 Not only

is the composition of the Gallery's painting with its

horizontal format, fantastic rock formations, and view

over a harbor based on Patinir's panel, so also are such

details as the boats under construction, the fortified

buildings, and the arched bridge over water. The differences are also important; in the Gallery's painting the

horizon line is lower, the manner of painting is broader,

and the ostensible subject, the attempted torture of

Saint Catherine of Alexandria, has been moved from a

position of prominence to a hilltop at the distant left.10

Before he died in 15 2.4 Joachim Patinir created a type

of panoramic landscape that exercised a tremendous

influence upon subsequent art in the Netherlands, particularly in Antwerp. The Martyrdom of Saint Catherine represents the next step in Patinir's continuing

influence. The inclusion in the foreground of peasants11

performing mundane activities such as chopping wood

would not have occurred in Patinir's oeuvre and is

indicative of the painting's later date. In this regard the

picture presages the work of Pieter Bruegel the Elder.

Bruegel's earliest generally accepted paintings, the

panoramic landscapes of Christ Appearing to the

Apostles at the Sea of Tiberias, 1553 (Charles de Pauw

Collection, Wavre, Belgium), and The Parable of the

Sower, 1557 (Timken Art Gallery, San Diego), grow

out of the Patinir tradition and exhibit similarities to

the Gallery's painting in such details as the tawny,

sandy color of the foreground; the soft, almost malleable rocks; and, in the San Diego panel, the gathering

storm clouds.12

It is not possible to identify with certainty the artist

who painted The Martyrdom of Saint Catherine.

Knowledge of landscape in the period between Patinir

and Bruegel is still incomplete, partly as a result of a

dearth of documented or dated landscape paintings.

The most stimulating attribution builds upon the observation made in 1935 by de Tolnay that the rocks

recall the drawings of Matthys Cock.13 Grossmann

ANTWERP ARTIST (MATTHYS COCK? ) 3
Fig. i. The Martyrdom of Saint Catherine,

1952.2.18, before restoration [photo: NGA]

and Eisler have proposed Matthys Cock as the possible

author of The Martyrdom of Saint Catherine.TM Gibson and Riggs date the painting to the 15408 and associate it with both Matthys and Hieronymus Cock.15

The attribution to Matthys merits serious attention.

Matthys Cock was born around 1509, the son of

the Antwerp painter Jan de Cock and the elder brother

of the artist, printer, and publisher Hieronymus Cock.

Matthys presented a pupil to the guild in Antwerp in

1540 and died before 1548. Van Mander praises him

as a landscape painter and it has been suggested, without definite proof, that he journeyed to Italy.16

 Although no paintings can be given to Matthys Cock

with certainty,17 there is a greater consensus of opinion

in attributing drawings to him, and several drawings

are dated. Comparison of The Martyrdom of Saint

Catherine with such drawings as the Landscape with

Castle above a Harbor, dated 1540 (National Gallery

of Art, Washington) (fig. 3);18 the Coastal Scene, dated

1540 (Victoria &c Albert Museum, London);19 the

Landscape with Rocky Island and Inlet (Louvre),20

and the Calling of Saint Peter, dated 1544 (British Museum, London),21

 reveals similarities in the conception

of space, the composition, particularly in the Patinirlike juxtaposition of rocky structures to harbors and

inlets, and perhaps most important in the peculiarities

of the rocks, which often have soft, rounded forms and

appear to be made out of a doughlike material, as with

the hills and rocks in the Gallery's painting.

I find the hypothesis that Matthys Cock was the

author of The Martyrdom of Saint Catherine attractive

and very useful, but must stop short of a definite attribution until a secure painting by Matthys can be

found for comparison. I would suggest that Pieter

Bruegel might have studied with Matthys Cock rather

than with Pieter Coecke van Aelst as is traditionally

believed.22 Viewed in this light, the manner in which

the Gallery's painting prefigures Bruegel's earliest

landscapes is intriguing and significant.

J.O.H.

Notes

1. Glück 1936, no. 2, gives the support as plywood and

cites the owner's statement that the painting was originally

on poplar. The reproduction shows the picture with the extra

figures removed. Michel 1932, 130, fig. 3, reproduces the

painting with the figures present.

2. Eisler 1977, 92, and the 1930 Antwerp exhibition

catalogue list the owner as Dr. Benedict; this refers to Curt

Benedict who was with the Van Diemen-Margraf Gallery. I

owe this information to Mrs. H. S. Schaeffer. The initial

ownership of the painting by the Van Diemen-Margraf Gallery is verified in a letter of 27 January 1951 from Karl Lilienfeld to the Samuel H. Kress Foundation, in the curatorial files.

Fig. 2. Joachim Patinir, The Martyrdom of

Saint Catherine, Vienna, Kunsthistorisches

Museum [photo: Kunsthistorisches

Museum]
3. A. B. de Vries, letter of 20 November 1952. to William

Suida, in the curatorial files. Glück 1936, no. 2, and subsequent editions list the painting as being in a private collection,

New York, but this is unverified.

4. Michel 1931, 75; Michel 1932., 74; Glück 1932., 93;

de Tolnay 1935,97.

5. Glück 1936, no. 2, and subsequent editions; Suida

1951, 202, and NGA 1975, 50, accept the attribution to

Bruegel and a date of c. 155 3—15 54. In the curatorial files are

opinions written on the backs of photographs from Max J.

Friedlànder, 17 November 1947, W. R. Valentiner, 28 June

1948, and Gustav Glück, 21 February 1948, accepting the

early date and attribution to Bruegel.

6. The Martyrdom of Saint Catherine is not discussed or

reproduced in: Friedlànder, vol. 14 (1937); Gotthard Jedlicka,

Pieter Bruegel. Der Maler in seiner Zeit (Erlenbach, 1938);

Robert Genaille, Bruegel l'Ancien (Paris, 1953); Robert

Delevoy, Bruegel (Geneva, 1959); Fritz Grossmann, Pieter

Bruegel. Complete Edition of the Paintings (London, 1973;

also 1955,1966) ; and Wolfgang Stechow, Pieter Bruegel the

Elder (New York, 1969). Bianconi 1967, 87, and Gandolfo

1968,113, note the problematical nature and lack of support

for the attribution.

7. Michel 1932, 132, thought that the painting might be

by Lucas van Valckenborch. Gudlaugsson 1959, 129, n. 23,

cites J. G. van Gelder's opinion that the picture is an early

work by Valckenborch. Wied 1971, 137, does not comment

or give an attribution except to say that it is not by the young

Valckenborch. Glück 1932, 93, suggests Jacob Grimmer,

whom he calls a follower of Matthys Cock.

8. Fritz Grossmann, letter of 25 January 1969 to Colin

Eisler, in the curatorial files.

9. Koch 1968, 12, 15, 72, no. 4, figs. 67, 7. Koch places

the painting among Patinir's earliest works, painted before

1515. See also Klaus Demus, et al., Katalog der Gemaldegalerie. Plamische Malerei von Jan van Eyck bis Pieter Bruegel

D. A. (Vienna, 1981), 265—266, repro.

10. See Réau, Iconographie, vol. 3, part i, 262—272;

Thurston and Attwater, Butler's Lives of the Saints, 4: 420—

421; Ryan and Ripperger, The Golden Legend, 2: 708-716.

Éisler 1977, 91, suggests that the fiery hilltop to the right of

the wheel refers to the martyrdom by fire of the fifty philosophers converted to Christianity by Catherine, though the

area referred to by Eisler is occupied by a fortified building

and no figures are visible. The martyrdom of the savants also

figures in Patinir's Vienna painting, see Koch 1968, 25.

11. I tend to agree with Eisler 1977, 92, that the foreground peasants are slightly different in style from those in

the background, but I am less convinced that they were possibly added by Jacob Grimmer.

12. See Grossmann, Pieter Bruegel, 190, nos. 18, 22, pis.

18, 22; Stechow, Pieter Bruegel the Elder, 18, fig. 7, 5 2, color

pi. i (as in n. 6).

13. See above n. 4.

14. Fritz Grossmann, letter of 25 January 1969 to Colin

Eisler; Eisler 1977, 91, attributes it to: Antwerp Master, active c. 1530 (Matthys Cock?).

15. Walter Gibson, letter of 16 April 1976 in the curatorial files, is inclined to see the painting as by an older

Antwerp artist working in the 15405, possibly in the circle of

Matthys and Hieronymus Cock. Timothy Riggs, letter of 12

February 1974 in the curatorial files, sees connections with

both artists in the landscape and finds that the style is not too

advanced for the 15408. There are no dated or documented

paintings by Hieronymus Cock, and the secure drawings are

neither dated before 1550 nor stylistically related to the GalFig. 3. Matthys Cock, Landscape with Castle above a Harbor, 1540, pen and brown ink with gray, pink, and

white washes, 171 x 260 mm, National Gallery of Art, Ailsa Mellon Bruce Fund 1978 [photo: NGA]
lery's painting; see Timothy A. Riggs, Hieronymus Cock.

Printer and Publisher (New York and London, 1977), 236-

2-39,307-308.

16. See Thieme-Becker 7 (1912.), 145, s.v. Matthys Cock;

Hanns Floerke, Das Leben der niederlàndischen und deutschen Maler des Carel van Mander, 2. vols. (Munich and Leipzig,

1906), i: 248—2,51. There are no documents for a trip to

Italy. However, An Zwollo, "De Landschaptekeningen van

Cornelis Massys," NKJ 16 (1965), 44, sees in Matthys' late

drawings an awareness of Venetian woodcuts from the circle

of Titian and Campagnola. See also Giorgio T. Faggin, "Aspetti delPinflusso di Tiziano nei Paesi Bassi," Arte Véneta 18

(1964), 46-49.

17. Various paintings have been proposed, but there is no

consensus of opinion. Ludwig Baldass, "Ein Landschaftsbild

von Matthys Cock," ZfbK 61 (1927/1928), 90—96, gives to

Matthys two paintings: Christ Walking on the Water (art

market, Vienna), and River Landscape (National Gallery,

London, no. 1298). Eisler 1977, 92, thinks it probable that

the London painting is by Matthys. K. G. Boon, "De tekenaar

van het Errera-Schetsboek," BMRBA 4 (1955), 224—225,

also associated the painting with Matthys and with the drawings in the Errera Sketchbook in the Musées Royaux des

Beaux-Arts, Brussels. See Martin Davies, National Gallery

Catalogues. Early Netherlandish School (London, 1968),

141-143, no. 1298, where it is called probably Antwerp

School and dated roughly between 1525 and 1550. It is, in

my opinion, not by the same hand as the Gallery's painting,

though it appears close in date and the sandy texture and light

beige color in the rocks are similar. G. J. Hoogewerff, De

Noord-Nederlandsche Schilderkunst (The Hague, 1936-

1947), 3: 364, attributes the Landscape with Saint Christopher (Gendebien collection, Brussels) to Matthys partly on

the basis of its similarity to a painting of the same theme then

in the Bissing collection, Munich (now private collection,

Germany), figs. 191, 190. Hoogewerff attributed the Bissing

panel to Lucas Cornelisz., but it has also been given to

Matthys' father, Jan de Cock, by Friedlander, vol. u (1974),

no. 104, pi. 89, and by others. Not available to me was G. J.

Hoogewerff, "Matthijs Wellens de Cock," Feestbundel Prof.

Dr. Willem Vogelsang (Leiden, 1932) 31-35. Boon 1955,

220, fig. 4, believes that yet another Landscape with Saint

Christopher (art market, Paris) is either by or a copy after

Matthys. Fritz Grossmann, letter of 25 January 1969 in the

curatorial files, found this attribution plausible.

18. 1978.19.2, Ailsa Mellon Bruce Fund 1978. See A. E.

Popham, "Mr. Alfred Jowett's Collection of Drawings at

Killinghall," Apollo 27 (1938), 137.

19. Thomas Muchall-Viebrook, "Matthys Cock (d.

1548). A Coast Scene," Old Master Drawings 6 (September

1931), 29-30, pi. 23.

20. See Pieter Bruegel d. A. als Zeichner. Herkunft und

Nachfolge [exh. cat. Kupferstichkabinett, Staatliche Museen

Preussischer Kulturbesitz] (Berlin, 1975), 113, no. 146, figs.

46-47.

21. See Riggs, Hieronymus Cock, 249-250, no. R-n, fig.

40 (as in n. 15); listed under drawings wrongly attributed to

Hieronymus Cock. Riggs, 242-251, catalogues and briefly

discusses several drawings given to Matthys Cock. In addition to the references cited in the notes above, for Matthys'

drawings see Wolfgang Stechow, "Matthys und Hieronymus

Cock," JbBerlin 56 (1935), 74—79; Charles de Tolnay, "An

Unknown Early Panel by Pieter Bruegel the Elder," Scritti di

Storia dell'Arte in Onore Lionello Venturi (Rome, 1956), i:

411-428.

22. Van Mander's biography states that Pieter Bruegel

apprenticed with the Antwerp artist Pieter Coecke van Aelst,

but several scholars, including Grossmann and Stechow,

have pointed to a lack of documentary and stylistic evidence.

Van Mander may have based his assumption on the fact that

Bruegel married Coecke's daughter Mayken in 1563. See

Floerke, Carel van Mander, i: 254—262, esp. 254—255 (as in

n. 16). Although we know that Bruegel was in contact with

Hieronymus Cock by about 1555 and it is natural to assume

that he would have known the art of Hieronymus' brother

Matthys, Bruegel's activities in the 15405, when Matthys was

alive, are unknown to us. The idea that Matthys might have

been the teacher of Pieter Bruegel the Elder has grown out of

conversations with Timothy Riggs and Konrad Oberhuber.

Since then Oberhuber has published this suggestion in "Des

dessins de Pierre Bruegel l'Ancien," Bruegel. Une dynastie de

peintres [exh. cat., Palais des Beaux-Arts] (Brussels, 1980),

60—61.

References

1931 Michel, Edouard. Bruegel. Paris: 75, pi. 46.

1932 Michel, Edouard. "Hypothèses sur quelques peintures flamandes à propos de Bruegel le Vieux." GBA 6e

 pér.

7: 132, fig. 3.

1932 Glück, Gustav. Bruegels Gemàlde. Vienna (1937

éd.): 93, no. 81.

1935 Tolnay, Charles de. Pierre Bruegel l'Ancien. Brussels: 97, no. 56.

1936 Gluck, Gustav. Das Bruegel Buch. Vienna: no. 2,

repro. 10, 20.

1938 Wetering, Cornelis van de. Die Entwicklung der

niederlàndischen Landschaftsmalerei vom An fang des 16.

Jahrhunderts bis zur Jahrhundertmitte. Berlin: 79, pi. 5 (diagram).

1951 Glück, Gustav. Pieter Brueghel the Elder. London: 9,17, no. 2, repro. (also Vienna, 1951).

1951 Kress: 202, no. 89, repro. 203.

1959 Gudlaugsson, S. J. "Het Errera-schetsboek en Lucas van Valckenborch." OH 74: 129.

1967 Bianconi, Piero. The Complete Paintings of Bruegel. New York: 87, no. 2, repro. 88.

1968 Gandolfo, Giampaolo, et al. National Gallery

Washington. Milan: 113.

1968 Koch, Robert A. Joachim Patinir. Princeton: 9.

1968 Klein, H. Arthur, and Mina Klein, Peter Bruegel

the Elder. Artist of Abundance. New York: 184.

1969 Franz, Heinrich Gerhard. Niederlandische Landschaftsmalerei im Zeitalter des Manierismus. 2 vols. Graz, 2:

fig. 189.

1971 Wied, Alexander. "Lucas van Valckenborch."

JbWien 31: 137.

1975 NGA: 50, repro. 51.

1976 Walker: no. 192, repro.

1977 Eisler: 91-93, fig. 90, text fig. 16.

6 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
Antwerp Artist (?)

1953.3.3 (1177)

A Member of the

de Hondecoeter Family

1543

Probably oak, 25.6 x 20.1 (loVie x 77/s)

painted surface: 2.4.5 x 18.8 (95/

8 x 73

/

8

)

Gift of Adolph Caspar Miller

Inscriptions:

On reverse on a banderole at top: TARTSVIS VENV.

On a banderole at bottom: Ac (?) DE HONDECOVTRE 1543.

Coat-of-arms on the reverse: The blazon of the shield of the

coat-of-arms is bendy of six argent and azure, and for

difference in the sinister chief a mullet of five of the last.

Crest: out of a wreath of the liveries, a demi-swan wings

elevated and displayed proper.1

Technical Notes: The painting is generally in good condition.

There are tiny, inpainted losses scattered throughout, and an

area of abrasion in the left shoulder has been inpainted. Over

the background is a layer of dark green, pigmented varnish. It

is possible that the original background was lighter in color

but suffered from discoloration (yellowing) or some other

damage and was restored. This restoration was partially removed and the background restored to its present appearance. Examination with infrared and infrared reflectography

reveals underdrawing in the face and hands. The gloves were

painted over the left hand and the position of the hand then

lowered. Surface dirt was removed and minor treatment administered in 1957.

Reverse: There are indications that the present design

layer is not original. Small losses appear to lie under the lower

banderole at the right, the black background seems to lie over

cracks in a lower layer of blue, and the outlines of leaves lie

over cracks and other damages. However, the present design

layer does not look modern and may be a reinforcement of

the original design. There appear to be several layers of varnish covering the surface and these have altered the colors of

the blazon.

Provenance: Sir John Ramsden, Bart., Bulstrode, Gerrards

Cross, Buckinghamshire (sale, Christie's, London, n July

1930, no. 23, as Jóos van Cleve). (Hermann Ball, Berlin.)2

(Schaeffer Gallery, Berlin, by 1930.) Adolph Caspar Miller,

Washington, by 1937.

Exhibitions: Washington, Phillips Memorial Gallery, 1937,

Paintings and Sculpture Owned in Washington, no. 2, as

Ambrosius Benson.3

Notes

i. I am indebted to Walter Angst for the heraldic description.

2. This is known from an annotated copy of the Christie's

sale catalogue. I am also grateful to Mrs. H. S. Schaeffer for

information about the Ball Gallery.

3. The catalogue erroneously refers to both paintings as

being on canvas.

1953.3.4 (1178)

Wife of a Member of the

de Hondecoeter Family

1543

Probably oak, 26 x 20.1 (ioa/4 x 77/s)

painted surface: 24.5 x 18.8 (95/s x 73/s)

Gift of Adolph Caspar Miller

Technical Notes: The painting is generally in good condition.

There are small scattered retouchings throughout and a small

abraded loss in the hair on the right side of the face. As with

its pendant, the background is covered with a green pigmented

varnish that may cover damage and partial restoration. Infrared examination and infrared reflectography reveal underdrawing in the face and hands.

Reverse: A layer of black paint has been applied over the

ground.

Provenance: Same as 1953.3.3.

Exhibitions: Washington, Phillips Memorial Gallery, 1937,

Paintings and Sculpture Owned in Washington, no. i, as

Ambrosius Benson.

IN 1930 these portraits of a member of the de Hondecoeter family and his wife were sold under the name of

Jóos van Cleve. Shortly thereafter they were attributed

to Ambrosius Benson by Friedlànder.1 This attribution

was accepted by Marlier in his monograph on Benson.2

Marlier considered the portraits to be important because of their high quality and because the male portrait

bears on the reverse a date and coat-of-arms. The panels are seldom discussed and the attribution has remained unexamined and unchallenged. It is, however,

impossible to maintain Benson's authorship of these

pictures.3

The oeuvre attributed to Benson is voluminous and,

ANTWERP ARTIST (?) J
Antwerp Artist (?), A Member of the de Hondecoeter Family, 1953.3.3

8 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Antwerp Artist (?), Wife of a Member of the de Hondecoeter Family, 1953.3.4

ANTWERP ARTIST (?) 9
as is the case with that of Adriaen Isenbrant, consists of

works that were produced by different personalities.

The corpus of paintings is constructed around two pictures that bear a monogram AB: the Altarpiece of Saint

Anthony (Musées Royaux des Beaux-Arts, Brussels)4

and the Holy Family, dated 152,7 (Wildenstein & Co.,

New York).5 There are no portraits that bear a monogram or can be given to Benson with certainty.6

The depictions of de Hondecoeter and his wife are

stylistically unrelated to either monogrammed painting or to other works, including portraits, that are clustered around Benson's name. In contrast to the rounded,

generalized forms, massive hands, warm tonalities,

and dense, almost smoky shadows of the Benson

group, the Gallery's portraits are tautly linear. Detail is

crisply rendered, faces are evenly lit with thin shadows,

and the modeling tends to emphasize the sculptural

solidity of the heads. In fact, there is nothing to suggest

that the portraits were produced in Bruges. Rather, the

style points more toward Antwerp. While I have not

found any other portraits by the same hand, the closest

comparison is with the work of an artist known as the

Master of the 15408 who was active in Antwerp.7 Portraits by this artist are dated between 1541 and 1547

and his association with Antwerp is strongly suggested

by his depiction of Gillis van Schoonbeke, patron of

the Antwerp hospital, and his wife (figs, i, z).8 The

straightforward presentation of half-length figures

against a monochromatic background—the men often

shown holding gloves—the clarity of light, usually

coming from the left, and the linear rendering of detail

are qualities that accord well with the portraits of de

Hondecoeter and his wife.9

Unfortunately, the coat-of-arms does not assist us

in localizing or specifically identifying the sitter. The

mark of cadency on the upper right corner of the shield

designates the sitter as a younger son,10 but the initial

or monogram preceding the family name is obscured.

This monogram has been read as that of Niclaes (or

Nicolas),11 but the letter form seems closer to A than

N. The motto TART svis VENV (I have come late) has

not been encountered in conjunction with the name de

Hondecoeter. We can only say that the arms are those

of de Hondecoeter (Hondecoustre, Hondecouter) and

Fig. i. Master of the 15405, Gillebert van Schoonbeke,

Antwerp, Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten [photo:

Copyright A.C.L. Brussels]

Fig. 2.. Master of the 15405, Elisabeth Heyndericx,

Antwerp, Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten [photo:

Copyright A,C.L. Brussels]

IO EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Antwerp Artist (?), A Member of the de Hondecoeter Family, 1953.3.3, reverse: Crested Coat of Arms

ANTWERP ARTIST (?) II
correspond to a description of arms of an important

family in the north of France in the early fifteenth

century.12 The names Hondecoeter, Hondecoter, and

Hondecoutre can be found in Mechelen and Antwerp

in the second half of the sixteenth century.13 The wellknown family of Dutch painters named Hondecoeter

apparently stems from a Niclaes Hondekoten (or

Hondekoeter) who was a member of the guild of Saint

Luke in Antwerp in 1585/1586; but since a coat-ofarms is not known for this family there is no way of

connecting them with the male sitter in the Gallery's

portrait.14

A replica of the male portrait was in the Loewinstein collection, Dortmund, around 1932.. Its present

location is unknown.15

J.O.H.

Notes

1. Friedlânder, vol. n (1933), 147, no. 2,96, erroneously

stating that the coat-of-arms is on the reverse of the female

portrait.

2. Marlier 1957, 2.56-2.57, 32,0—32.1, no. 146.

3. The attribution to Benson was first questioned by

Anthony Colantuono, NGA department of northern European painting, intern, summer 1981.

4. Friedlânder, vol. n (1974),

 no

-

 237? pi- I^1

-

5. Friedlânder, vol. 11 (1974), no. 268, pi. 172..

6. The Portrait of a Lady in the John G. Johnson Collection, Philadelphia Museum of Art, no. 361, is monogrammed

A.B., but is only distantly related to Benson. See Barbara

Sweeny, John G. Johnson Collection. Catalogue of Flemish

and Dutch Paintings (Philadelphia, 1972.), 5, no. 361.

7. This master is discussed and catalogued in Friedlânder,

vol. 13 (1975), 46—48, 93—95. Not all of Friedlànder's attributions are equally convincing. See also 1956.3.2., Antwerp

Artist, Portrait of an Almoner of Antwerp, which is dated

1542.

8. Friedlânder, vol. 13 (1975),

 no

-

 Z48, pi. 12.4; both

portraits are dated 1544.

9. It is worth noting that in his discussion of the wife of

de Hondecoeter, Marlier 1957, 2.56-2.57, compares both the

style and the costume to the feminine portraits of the Master

of the 15405.

10. Flora Caquant-Popelier, Director, Genealogicum Belgicum, Brussels, letter to the author, i October 1981.

u. NGA 1975, 2.6, reads the letter as a monogram from

Niclaes.

11. Baron de Kerchove d'Ousselghem, "Hondecoeter,"

Le Parchemin, no. 216 (November/December 1981), 479-

480; also in a letter to the author of 10 July 1983. The arms

correspond virtually to the description of "de Hondecoustre"

in G. Dansaert, Nouvel Armorial Beige (Brussels, 1949), 2.51.

13. The letter from Flora Caquant-Popelier cited in n. 10,

refers to a notary Guido de Hondecoutre living in Mechelen

in 1579, and another notary Jan de Hondecoutere is mentioned in Mechelen in 1558. With the expert and gracious

assistance of J. van den Nieuwenhuizen and G. Degueldre of

the Stadsarchief, Antwerp, it was possible to find that an

Antonius Hondecoter was baptized in 1580, a Niclaes Hondecoeter was married in 1572,, and a Guido de Hondecoeter

was mentioned in the Certificatieboek of 1559.

14. For the family of painters see H. Schneider, "Hondecoeter," Thieme-Becker 17 (192.4), 431—434. The family apparently fled around 1585 to Delft and Amsterdam to escape

religious persecution and seems to have come from Mechelen

and Antwerp.

15. A photograph is in the curatorial files.

References

1933 Friedlânder. Vol. n: 107, 147, no. 296, pis. 93-

94 (vol. ii, 1974: 61, ici, no. 296, pi. 183).

1957 Marlier, Georges. Ambrosius Benson et la peinture à Bruges au temps de Charles-Quint. Damme: 256—257,

320-321, no. 146, pi. 75.

1975 NGA: 26, repro. 27.

12 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Antwerp Artist, Portrait of an Almoner of Antwerp, 1956.3.1

ANTWERP ARTIST 13
Antwerp Artist

1956.3.2 (1447)

Portrait of an Almoner of Antwerp

1542.

Probably oak (cradled), 84.8 x 63.2. (333/s x 2.47/s)

Gift of Lewis Einstein

Inscription:

At the top: ALS MEN • SCRIEF • 1542 • O VT• SIINDE -48- IAER • OP •

DAT- PAS IWAERT • DAT • 1C • AELMOESENNIER • VA • ANVERPE

WAS.

Technical Notes: The picture is constructed of two boards

joined vertically at the center. The lower left corner of the left

board has been repaired with fills and added pieces. An old

check extends appx. 41 cm down from the top edge and

appx. 11 cm in from the left. There are numerous areas of loss

and subsequent repaint which have discolored in some instances. This is especially apparent in the hands; the proper

left hand in particular is very damaged and its original shape

altered. Examination with infrared reflectography reveals

changes in the hat and neckline. The thick varnish has discolored considerably.

Provenance: (Galerie Charles Sedelmeyer, Paris.1) Mr. Einstein. His son, Lewis Einstein, Paris.

Exhibitions: Alexandria, Virginia, Northern Virginia Fine

Arts Association, 1972, Styles in Portraiture.

THE DATE and identification of the sitter's occupation are given in the inscription at the top of the painting, which may be loosely translated, "In 1542. when I

was forty-eight years old, I was then almoner of Antwerp." Almoners were charged with providing charity

for the city's poor and destitute citizens. The almoner's

chamber, which was responsible for collecting money

and administering relief, consisted of four active and

four reserve volunteers. Almoners served two-year

terms, but the terms were staggered so that each year

two men retired and were replaced by two newcomers.2

In 1541 the almoners were Jan de Lantmeter and Gillis

van Bruysegem, appointed in 1540, and Goosen van

Bauhus and Gomar Raye appointed in 1541; Franciscus Stuytelinck and Cornelius Adriaenssens were

appointed in I542..3 At present it is not possible to

determine which of the six is depicted, though Van

Bauhus may be eliminated, since his age in 1542. does

not correspond to that shown in the painting.4

The keys held in the proper right hand may allude to

one of the almoner's duties, making sure that the inmates in jail were fed,5

 or they may be a general symbol

of authority and responsibility. The object held in the

proper left hand is badly damaged, but may originally

have been a money bag.6 It is unlikely that the artist

will be identified, but it seems probable that he was

active in Antwerp. The half-length figure and use of

green background and cast shadow are consistent with

other portraits produced in Antwerp, in particular

with the work of the Master of the 15405.7

J.O.H.

Notes

1. Date of purchase unknown; see memorandum by

Lewis Einstein of 10 April 1962. in the curatorial files.

2. The position of almoner is discussed by Voet 1973,

in. He notes that almoners came from the upper strata of

Antwerp society since they inevitably had to spend a lot of

their own money.

3. Eva Pais-Minne, Maagdenhuismuseum, Antwerp, letter of 30 November 1983 in the curatorial files, notes that

almoners were elected on Saint Barbara's Day (4 December)

and had to be both rich and married. I am also grateful to Dr.

J. van den Nieuwenhuizen, Stadsarchief, Antwerp, for his

assistance.

4. Voet 1973, 99, observes that according to the inscription on Van Bauhus' funerary monument in Antwerp Cathedral, he died in 1548 at the age of forty-six, which means that

in 1542. he would have been only forty years old. NGA 1975,

12.8, identifies the sitter as "Goosen van Bonhuysen," but the

source of this identification is not to be found in the files.

5. Leon Voet, remarks recorded in a memorandum of zz

April 1968 in the curatorial files.

6. Identification proposed by Gwen Tauber, NGA conservation department intern, summer 1983.

7. See 1953.3.3, Antwerp Artist, A Member of the de

Hondecoeter Family, figs, i, 2.

References

1973 Voet, Leon. Antwerp. The Golden Age. Antwerp:

99, repro. 98.

1975 NGA: 12.8, repro. 12,9.

M EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Hieronymus Bosch

c. 1450—1516

Hieronymus Bosch was born in the town of 's-Hertogenbosch (Bois-le-Duc) in northern Brabant. His true

name was Joen or Jeroen van Aken. Both his grandfather Jan van Aken (d. 1454) and his father, Anthonius van Aken (d. c. 1478), were painters, and we

may assume that he received his first instruction from

his father.

Documents offer only meager information about

his career. Sometime before 1481 Bosch married Aleyt

van der Meervenne, a woman of wealth and property.

In 1486/1487 Bosch is listed for the first time as a

member of the religious confraternity of the Brotherhood of Our Lady (Onze Lleve Vrouwe-Broederschap)

and he executed paintings for the Brotherhood as well

as designs for a stained glass window for the chapel of

the Cathedral of Saint John in 's-Hertogenbosch. The

artist had a workshop of some sort, for it is recorded

that in 1503—1504 Bosch's assistants (knechten) were

paid for painting coats-of-arms. There are other references to Bosch's artistic activity in 's-Hertogenbosch.

Perhaps the most important of these is a commission in

1504 from Philip the Fair, Duke of Burgundy, for a

large altarpiece of the Last Judgment. The painting no

longer exists. Hieronymus Bosch died in 1516; on 9

August of that year his funeral mass was attended by

members of the Brotherhood of Our Lady.

Bosch's oeuvre consists of approximately thirty

paintings, none of which is dated. Seven paintings are

signed Jheronimus Bosch, which combines a Latinized

form of the artist's first name with the shortened form

of his home town. Obviously it is not possible to

achieve a precise chronology, but de Tolnay and others

have divided the works into three large groups. The

early period, 1475-1485, includes such works as The

Cure of Folly (Prado, Madrid), and The Conjurer

(Musée Municipal, Saint Germain-en-Laye), both

modest in size; the middle period, 1485—1505, contains the great triptychs, The Haywain, The Garden of

Earthly Delights (both Prado, Madrid), and The Temptation of Saint Anthony (Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga, Lisbon); the late period, 1505—1516, includes

The Peddler (Museum Boymans-van Beuningen, Rotterdam), and The Road to Calvary (Musée des BeauxArts, Ghent).

Hieronymus Bosch is easily the most mysterious,

provocative, and inexplicable of Early Netherlandish

painters. His art has been discussed by myriad scholars

and popular writers. Bosch has been seen as a surrealist

and as a member of a heretical sect that celebrated

sexual libertinism, both erroneous assumptions. Such

diverse sources as folklore, proverbs, astrology, astronomy, alchemy, and Jewish legend have been used to

interpret his paintings. Yet the intricacies of his subject

matter and the sources of his imagery have resisted any

cogent, unified explanation.

If not all the details in Bosch's paintings can be

precisely explained, most critics would agree that Bosch

was basically a moralist, a pessimist who viewed with a

sardonic eye man's inevitable descent into sin and

damnation.

It has recently been shown that The Garden of

Earthly Delights hung in the Brussels palace of Hendrik III of Nassau by 1517 and was probably commissioned by him. This provides important evidence that

Bosch's paintings were ordered by learned secular patrons as well as by religious institutions.

The art of Hieronymus Bosch had a tremendous

influence upon Netherlandish painting and printmaking throughout the sixteenth century, and many followers and copyists emulated his bizarre and grotesque

demons. Only Pieter Bruegel the Elder, however, had

Bosch's painterly skill and moral intelligence.

J.O.H.

Bibliography

Tolnay, Charles de. Hieronymus Bosch. Basel, 1937 (Engl.

éd., with catalogue, New York, 1966).

Gerlach, P. "Jeronimus van Aken alias Bosch en de Onze

Lieve Vrouwe-Broederschap." Jheronimus Bosch. Bijdragen bij gelegenheid van de herdenkstentoonstelling te 3

sHertogenbosch. Eindhoven, 1967: 48—60.

Gibson, Walter. Hieronymus Bosch. New York, 1973.

Snyder, James, ed. Bosch in Perspective. Englewood Cliffs,

New Jersey, 1973.

HIERONYMUS BOSCH 15
Hieronymus Bosch,

Death and the Miser, 19 5 2.. 5.3 3

I 6 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
1952.5.33 (1112)

Death and the Miser

c. 1485/1490

Oak (cradled), 93 x 31 ($65/8 x iz3/io)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Technical Notes: The panel has been thinned to a veneer

(maximum thickness 0.15) and laminated to another wooden

panel, which has been cradled in turn; according to Eisler this

was done around I9OO.1 The painting was restored in Belgium sometime prior to 1951.2

 The top left corner has been

replaced with a triangular piece of veneer. Two vertical splits

run the length of the painting, one 3.7 cm from the left edge

and the other 4.0 cm from the right edge. There are small

scratches and indentations throughout the support. The

paint layer has been damaged. There are large areas of loss

and subsequent restoration in the head and upper body of the

figure of Death; in the approximate center of the painting,

extending vertically through the lid of the chest, the left corner of the bed, and into the bed-curtain and arm of the demon; and at the right edge to the right of the corner of the bed

and the standing figure in green. Moreover, extensive retouchings are scattered throughout the painting, including a

narrow strip over the split at the right, extending downward

from the bottom of the green robe into the low wall in the

foreground. Some of the retouching has discolored. The underdrawing is discussed below.

Provenance: Private collection, England, possibly in or near

Arundel, Sussex, around i8z6.3 (Unnamed dealer, Highgate

Village, London, c. I92.6.)4 (Raven, Massey and Lester, London, by 192.6.) (Asscher and Welker, London, by I932..)5

Baron Joseph van der Elst, Brussels, Biot, France, and numerous diplomatic posts, by 1932. or slightly later. Samuel H.

Kress Foundation, New York, 1951.

Exhibitions: New York, M. Knoedler and Company, 1942,,

Flemish Primitives. An Exhibition Organized by the Belgian

Government, 68, as Allegory of Avarice.

THE PAINTING shows a dying man seated in a testered

bed set in a bare, narrow room. The figure of Death as a

skeleton carrying an arrow enters at the left. Accompanying the dying man are a demon holding a sack and

an angel who urges him to recognize the crucifix in the

upper window. At the foot of the bed another figure

stands next to an open chest and puts money into a

sack held by a demon. In the foreground a demon leans

on a low wall, his head supported by his hand in a

gesture of melancholy. On the spectator's side of the

wall are pieces of armor and weapons; a cloak and a

sleeved garment are draped over the wall. The scene is

framed by columns.

The consensus among critics is that the painting

represents the death of a miser.6 Further, most authors

have agreed with de Tolnay's initial assessment that

the subject is based on the text and images of the ars

moriendi. There is, however, no agreement on the

overall iconographie program of the painting, its exact

relationship to the ars moriendi, or the interpretation

of various details.

The text of the ars moriendi was probably written

around 1400 and discusses death as a struggle between

the forces of good and evil for the soul of the dying

man. There are five stages, each consisting of demonic

temptation and angelic inspiration, which the dying

man must go through in order to achieve a happy death

and salvation. The temptations are: infidelity, despair,

impatience, vainglory, and avarice. The text of the ars

moriendi began to be illustrated during the first half of

the fifteenth century; the best-known images are found

in the blockbooks produced in the 14605 and a related

series of engravings by Master E. S.7

Fig. i. Hieronymus Bosch, Death and the Miser ^

detail of Tabletop, Madrid, Prado [photo: Prado]

Bosch's awareness of the visual tradition of the ars

moriendi can be seen, first, in the roundel showing

Death as one of the Four Last Things in the Tabletop in

the Prado, Madrid (fig. i).8 There are many points of

correspondence between Bosch's painting and ars

moriendi images, such as the figure of Death as a

HIERONYMUS BOSCH i?
shrouded skeleton, the juxtaposition of angel and devil

on the headboard of the bed, and the oblique angle of

the bed. In Bosch's picture, too, the presence of the

monk holding a crucifix, the priest administering last

rites, and the fact that the dying man holds a taper

suggest the triumph of the Church that we find in the

final text and image of the ars moriendi. The ars moriendi was very popular and available in several editions;

it was printed in 1488 and 1491 by Peter van Os of

Zwolle and in 1488 by Christian Snellaert of Delft and

thus would have been accessible to Bosch.9

The relationship of Death and the Miser to the ars

moriendi is less direct than that of the Prado Tabletop.

In place of discrete, opposing images Bosch seems to

have conflated scenes of the temptation by and triumph over avarice and introduced an element of suspense. The miser seems to ignore both the guardian

angel who offers salvation and the toadlike demon

who pops through the bed-curtain with a sack that

almost certainly contains either money or gold. Instead,

the dying man is transfixed by the figure of Death who,

as in the Prado Tabletop, is represented as a shrouded

skeleton holding an arrow. As with the ars moriendi

images, demons scurry under the furniture or peer

down at the dying man from the bed canopy. While the

outcome of the struggle may not be immediately apparent, other elements in the scene show the dying man

to be guilty of the sin of avarice, the last temptation

mentioned in the ars moriendi.

The figure at the foot of the bed has been identified

by some authors as the dying man himself in an earlier

manifestation, as in the kind of "simultaneous narrative" found in medieval art.10

 Whether intentional or

not, the figure seems to function as a personification of

the dying man. There is virtual agreement that the

standing figure is presented as evil and hypocritical;

with one hand he puts coins into the strongbox where

they are collected by a rat-faced demon and with the

other he fingers a rosary, attempting to serve God and

Mammon at the same time, so to speak. The lid of the

chest is held open with a knife, a symbol of anger,

another of the Seven Deadly Sins. A winged and ratheaded demon emerging from underneath the chest

holds up a paper sealed with red wax. It has been suggested that the paper is a letter of indulgence, a mortgage, a paper of false legitimacy, or a promissory

note.11 Although there are no markings on the paper

that would identify it as a specific type of document, it

would seem likely that it refers to the money-making

activities of misers, such as lending money at high rates

of interest. Capitalism in the Netherlands of the late

fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries resulted in an

increasing use of paper credit as a substitute for hard

currency.

The objects in the foreground—the heap of armor

and weapons, the cloak, and the sleeved garment—

have not been satisfactorily explained. The interpretations put forward are diverse, though many can be

divided into two large groups: those that see the objects as referring to the previous life of the miser and

those that see the objects as imbued with moral or

allegorical significance.

De Tolnay saw in the armor a social satire against

the nobility;12 for Baldass the discarded weapons indicated not only that the dying man was a knight but that

gold accomplishes more than bravery and courage.13

De Tervarent interpreted the armor as an emblem of

vanity that demonstrated that material weapons are

powerless against death.14 Combe and Fraenger also

viewed the objects as symbols of vanity.15 Boon thought

that the weapons identified the dying man as a knight,

as did Reuterswàrd.16 However, Reuterswàrd went

further and related the red mantle on the low wall to

the red shroud draped over the oxen of death on the

right wing of the Prado Haywain triptych. Philip also

found an evil meaning in the red cloak, but for her the

mantle and the armor refer to Saint Martin and the

contrast between Christian generosity and avarice.17

Guttler found in the foreground objects a veiled disparagement of knights and chivalry, similar to that

found in Sebastian Brant's Narrenschiff, and viewed

the entire painting as a satire on the greed of false

knights.18 The author thought the weapons were symbolic of anger, while Seymour believed they alluded to

the abandonment of the Christian active life.19 Morganstern viewed the miser as a usurer and thought that

the armor had been pawned by an impecunious

knight.20

There is no single precise and satisfactory explanation for the armor, weapons, and garments. But given

that the painting as a whole is concerned with the sin of

avarice and with death, one can assume that these objects are also malevolent in nature and perhaps refer to

the vanity of worldly possessions. It is also possible

that the image is incomplete and that an accompanying

panel would help to clarify the iconographie program.

Because Death and the Miser is thinly painted,

much of the underdrawing is readily apparent to the

naked eye. A fuller image is obtained through examination with infrared photography and infrared reflectography. The underdrawing is quite extensive and,

while varied, consists mainly of parallel hatching

strokes running from upper left to lower right.21 Between the initial design and the final painted surface

18 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
several changes have been made. Underdrawn on the

wall in the foreground are rosary beads, three metal

tumblers (perhaps intended to be the same as those in

the miser's chest), and a pilgrim's flask. As regards the

figure standing by the chest (fig. 2), the size and position of his rosary have been altered, the key and purse

have been made smaller, and hanging from the belt is

the outline of either a scabbard or a portable writing

implement. Death's arrow was originally closer to the

dying man, and there are small adjustments in the ribs

of the timbered roof.

The most striking changes were made to the dying

miser. The underdrawing depicts the miser holding in

his left hand a pokal or decorated goblet, wrongly

identified by Frankfurter and others as the viaticum,22

while his right hand grabs the neck of the sack offered

by the demon (fig. 3). As seen in the underdrawing,

then, the miser's greed is such that even in the last

moments of life he is more preoccupied with material

possessions than with his salvation. In the finished

painting, Bosch opted for greater dramatic tension and

ambiguity.

The underdrawing clarifies the relationship between

the painting and a drawing in the Louvre.23 The drawing essentially reproduces the finished painting, but

excludes the foreground; the lance, gauntlet, helmet,

and shield have been moved to the left wall inside the

space of the bedchamber. As pointed out by Filedt

Kok, however, the differences between the underdrawing and the Louvre drawing are strong evidence that

the drawing is a copy, by a different hand, after the

painting.24

Since its initial publication, the attribution of Death

and the Miser to Hieronymus Bosch has been unanimously accepted, and even though the chronology of

Bosch's works is far from certain, critics have generally

accepted de Tolnay's placement of the painting in a

middle period, which runs from 1480 to 1510. The

painting is often compared to the Haywain triptych in

the Prado and is usually dated to the beginning of the

middle period, that is, c. i485-i49O,25 though one

author associates it with the Saint Julia altarpiece at the

end of the middle period.26

While it is usually assumed that Death and the

Miser was once part of an altarpiece, there have been

different proposals on the original location of the panel

within the altarpiece and on other works that might

have been associated with it. Some authors, including

Friedlànder, have mistakenly called Death and the

Miser a grisaille.27 While Guttler thought it was the

interior right wing,28 the normative view, expressed by

Baldass, de Tolnay, and Reuterswârd, is that the panel

Fig. 2. Infrared reflectogram assembly of a detail of Death and

the Miser, 1952.5.33 [infrared reflectography: Molly Faries]

Fig. 3. Infrared reflectogram assembly of a detail of Death and

the Miser; 1952.5.33 [infrared reflectography: Molly Faries]
Fig. 4. Hiero nymus Bosch, Ship of Fools, Paris, Louvre

[photo: Cliché des Musées Nationaux-Paris]

is the exterior left wing of an altarpiece.29 De Tolnay's

proposed reconstruction has a scene of the Last Judgment on the center panel and representations of Paradise and Hell, presumably on the inner wings, together

with Death and the Miser and perhaps another death

scene on the right exterior wing. These would form a

depiction of the Four Last Things. The Four Last

Things and the Seven Deadly Sins are depicted on the

Prado Tabletop. Reuterswárd suggested that the Gallery's panel was part of a triptych, the main panel of

which was some vision of the world to come, perhaps a

Last Judgment. No other extant panels by Bosch have

been associated with this reconstruction.

In 1961 Eisler published Seymour's observation

that the height of Death and the Miser equals the combined heights of Bosch's Ship of Fools in the Louvre

(fig. 4) and the Allegory of Intemperance in the Yale

University Art Gallery (fig. 5). The widths of the panels

are also comparable.30 Seymour proposed that the

panels functioned jointly as the wings of a lost, small

devotional triptych. Adhémar cautiously favored Seymour's reconstruction while Guttler found the three

panels disparate in character and cautioned against

drawing firm conclusions about their relationship.31

Eisler was also cautious, but suggested that if the Yale

and Louvre panels were part of an altarpiece they might

have formed part of a lost central panel.32 Morganstern has demonstrated convincingly that the Louvre

Ship of Fools and the Yale Allegory of Intemperance

were originally one panel.33 She also believes that Death

and the Miser was part of the same triptych. Since the

Louvre and Yale panels may be associated with Gluttony and Lust and the National Gallery's panel with

Avarice, Morganstern suggests that these are the remnants of a triptych whose subject was the Seven Deadly

Sins.

The association of the Louvre and Yale panels with

Death and the Miser seems quite sensible. The paintings have always been grouped together in terms of

style and date. The Yale panel, which has recently been

cleaned, is very close in color to Death and the Miser.

Further, as both Filedt Kok and Morganstern have

noted, the underdrawing in all three panels is very similar.34

 While it appears likely that all three panels were

Fig. 5. Hieronymus Bosch, Allegory of Intemperance, New

Haven, Conn., Yale University Art Gallery, The Rabinowitz

Collection—Gift of Hanna D. and Louis M. Rabinowitz

[photo: Yale University Art Gallery, Joseph Szaszfai]

2.O EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
joined, any speculation about the theme of the altarpiece must at present remain conjectural. If, as seems

likely, Death and the Miser was the exterior left wing,

then we may expect that the exterior right wing also

bore painted columns.

Death and the Miser was copied in a drawing attributed to the English artist William Henry Brooke

(1772—1860), perhaps made around 1826. The drawing is in the National Gallery of Art.35

J.O.H.

Notes

1. Eisler 1977, 66.

2. René Sneyers, Institut Royal du Patrimoine Artistique,

Brussels, letter of 8 July 1968 to Eisler stating that the picture

was restored by Albert Philippot without giving a date. Eisler

1977, 69, n. 2, cites de Tolnay 1966, 347, who says that the

painting was cleaned and restored in 1937.

3. This may be deduced from the drawing after the painting attributed to William Henry Brooke. See below n. 3 5.

4. J. Massey, London, letter of 21 July 1961 to Perry

Cott, in the curatorial files.

5. Gluck 1932, 57.

6. Chailley 1978 sees the painting as representing the

unjust steward of Luke 16:9. However, his arguments are not

convincing.

7. A great deal of controversy surrounds the ars moriendi blockbooks and involves such questions as the date of

the first edition of the blockbook, whether it was produced in

the southern Netherlands, Germany, or the northern Netherlands, and its primacy in relation to manuscript sources and

the series of small engravings by the Master E. S. For the ars

moriendi and a discussion of these issues see Lionel Cust, The

Master of E. S. and the "Ars Moriendi" (Oxford, 1898);

Arthur M. Hind, An Introduction to a History of Woodcut, 2

vols. (Boston and New York, 1935),

 I:

 2.24-2.30; Wilhelm

Schreiber, "Ars Moriendi," Lexikon des gesamten Buchwesens, 3 vols. (1935),

 I:

 86—87; Wilhelm Schreiber and

Hildegarde Zimmerman, "Ars Moriendi," Reallexikon zur

deutschen Kunstgeschichte, 7 vols. (Stuttgart and Munich,

1937—1981), i: cols. 1121—1127; Fritz Saxl, "A Spiritual

Encyclopedia of the Later Middle Ages," /WC7 5 (1942),

98-99, 124-126; Mary Catherine O'Connor, The Art of

Dying Well. The Development of the Ars Moriendi (New

York, 1942); Alan Shestack, Master E. S. Five Hundredth

Anniversary Exhibition [exh. cat. Philadelphia Museum of

Art] (Philadelphia, 1967), cat. nos. 4-15.

8. De Tolnay 1966, 15—16, cat. no. 2, 338—339, repro.

60. The Tahletop is dated to Bosch's early period by de Tolnay and others. However, Walter Gibson, "Hieronymus

Bosch and the Mirror of Man," OH 87 (1973), 2.08, believes

the work was painted around 1500 by Bosch and his workshop.

9. Schreiber, "Ars Moriendi," i: 87.

10. Notably, Baldass 1943, Elst 1944, and Reuterswàrd

1970.

11. Cuttler 1968, 202; Cuttler 1969, 275.

12. De Tolnay 1937, 27.

13. Baldass 1943, 236.

14. DeTervarent 1958, 34.

15. Combe 1946, 21; Fraenger 1975, 296.

16. Boon 1968,157; Reuterswàrd 1970, 266.

17. Philip 1956, no. 14.

18. Cuttler 1969, 275.

19. John Hand, Picture of the Week text, 27 September3 October 1965, in the curatorial files; Seymour 1961, 78.

20. Morganstern 1982, esp. 33, 39, n. 10.

21. The direction of the strokes is consistent with the

work of a left-handed artist, and it has been suggested several

times that Bosch was left-handed. However, there is no agreement as to whether the drawings attributed to Bosch are by a

left-handed or a right-handed artist. Reuterswàrd 1970,

163—164, noted that use of a maulstick would reverse the

direction of the strokes and suggested that Bosch might have

been right-handed. This question is discussed in some detail

byFiledtKoki972-i973,152-153; see also Ironside 1973.

22. Frankfurter 1951, 14; Cuttler 1968, 202; Cuttler

1969, 276. The goblet is correctly identified as a pokal by

Morganstern 1982, 37, 40, n. 30.

23. No. 6947, dark gray brush, white heightening, on

gray prepared paper, 256 x 149 mm. Frits Lugt, Musée du

Louvre. Inventaire général des dessins des écoles du Nord:

maîtres des anciens Pays-Bas nés avant 1550 (Paris, 1968),

25-26, no. 70, as by Bosch. For a discussion of the drawing

seejheronimus Bosch, 1967,167-168, cat. no. 51. Opinions

about the authorship of the drawing are divided. De Tolnay

1937, 90; de Tolnay 1966, 347; Baldass 1935,

 89, n. 7;

Baldass 1943, 236;Unverfehrt 1980,44, all believe the drawing is not autograph but is a copy after the painting. Frankfurter 1951, 14, accepts the drawing as autograph as does

Eisler 1977, 66, who considers it an alternate project for the

painting. Popham 1955, 248, believes the underdrawings in

the Yale panel and the Louvre panel are similar and by Bosch

and that the drawing should be thought of as a modello.

Martin 1979 also calls the drawing a modello.

24. Filedt Kok 1972/1973,151—152, n. 43. Molly Faries,

in a talk given at the Center for Advanced Study in the Visual

Arts, National Gallery of Art, 3 December 1981, also discounted the authenticity and preparatory nature of the Louvre

drawing on the basis of its lack of correspondence to the

underdrawing. As Reuterswàrd 1970, no. 196, 268, has

noted, the Louvre drawing is not considered of high quality,

and when compared to other, more securely attributed works

there would seem to be good cause for questioning Bosch's

authorship.

25. Eisler 1977, 68, suggested a terminus post quern of

1468 because of the similarities to the illustrations to Saint

Augustine's La Cité de Dieu printed in Abbeville in 1486.

The relationship was first noted by Bax 1949, 244. For a

reproduction, see Alexandre de Laborde, Les manuscrits à

peintures de la Cité de Dieu de Saint Augustin (Paris, 1909),

pi. cxxxvii.

26. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum 1958,139.

27. Friedlànder, vol. 14 (1937), 101; New York, M.

Knoedler & Co., 1942, 68.

28. Cuttler 1968,202.

29. Baldass 1935, 89, n. 7; De Tolnay 1937, 27; Baldass

1943, 68; De Tolnay 1966, 347; Reuterswàrd 1970, 266.

30. Eisler 1961,48. The dimensions of the Yale panel are

3 6 x 31.5 cm and the Louvre panel, 57.9x32.6, giving a total

height of 93.9 cm. These are virtually the same as the measurements of Death and the Miser.

31. Adhémar 1962, 29; Cuttler 1969, 274.

32. Eisler 1977, 68.

33. Morganstern 1984, 295-302. Morganstern, 298-

300, believes that the drawing .of the Ship of Fools in the

HIERONYMUS BOSCH II
Louvre is by the same hand as the drawing of Death and the

Miser, that is to say, a copy, and further, that both were done

at the same time when the panels were together.

34. Filedt Kok 1972—1973, 151—152; Anne Morganstern,

Center for Advanced Study in the Visual Arts talk of 28

October 1982.

35. 1983.48.1, pen and brown ink, 155 x 52 mm. The

attribution to William Henry Brooke and date of c. 1826

were furnished by the previous owner, Mr. E. Kersley, London, in a letter of 17 June 1961 to John Walker in the curatorial files. The drawing was once part of a sketchbook, consisting primarily of topographical scenes, and Kersley's placement of the drawing in or near Arundel is based on its original

position in the sketchbook.

References

1932 Glück, Gustav. Bruegels Gemalde. Vienna: 57.

1935 Baldass, Ludwig. "Ein Kreuzigungsaltar von Hieronymus Bosch." JbWien N.F. 9: 89.

1937 Friedlànder. Vol. 14: 101. (vol. 5,1969: 91, Supp.

135, pi. 117.)

J

937 Tolnay, Charles de. Hieronymus Bosch. Basel:

27, 90, no. 7, fig. 20.

1942 Brian, Doris. "The Masters of Gothic Flanders."

ArtN41 (15—30 April): 14, 33, repros. 18—19.

1943 Baldass, Ludwig. Hieronymus Bosch. Vienna:

22-23, 3°, 36>

 68> 76-77, ¿36> %s. 29-30. (Engl. ed. New

York, 1960.)

1944 Elst, Joseph van der. The Last Flowering of the

Middle Ages. Garden City, New York: 103—104, pis. 90—91.

(Fr. ed. Paris, 1951.)

1945 Tervarent, Guy de. "The Origin of One of Jérôme

Bosch's Pictures." Message: Belgian Review 39 (January):

44-45, fig. i.

1946 Combe, Jacques. Jérôme Bosch. Paris: 20—21, pi.

42. (Engl. ed. Paris, 1946.)

1949 Bax, Dirck. Ontcijfering van Jeroen Bosch. The

Hague: 133, 239, 244, 248, 257-258, 261-263, 2.77, ¿83,

fig. 58. (Engl. ed. Rotterdam, 1979.)

1951 Frankfurter, Alfred. "Interpreting Masterpieces.

Twenty-Four Paintings from the Kress Collection." ArtN A

50, no. 7 (November): 113-114, repro. 108.

1953 Dorfles, Gillo. ¿osc/7. Milan: 75, repro. 36, fig. 21.

1955 Popham, A. E. "An Unknown Drawing by Hieronymus Bosch." Actes du XVHme Congrès International

d'Histoire de l'Art, Amsterdam, 23-31 Juillet 1952. The

Hague: 248.

1956 Philip, Lotte Brand. Bosch. New York: 18, no. 14,

repro. 19.

1958 Middeleeuwse Kunst der Noordelijke Nederlanden.

[Exh. cat., Rijksmuseum]. Amsterdam: 138-141^0. 180.

1958 Tervarent, Guy de. Attributs et symboles dans l'art

profane 1450-1600. 2 vols. Geneva, i: 34.

1959 Linfert, Cari. Hieronymus Bosch. The Paintings.

Garden City, New York: i o, 113, pi. 26.

1960 Broadley, Hugh. Flemish Painting in the National

Gallery of Art. Washington: 8, 30, 31. (Rev. ed. 1978).

1961 Eisler, Colin. Primitifs Flamands. Corpus. New

England Museums. Brussels: 48.

1961 Seymour, Charles Jr. Art Treasures for America.

An Anthology of Paintings and Sculpture in the Samuel H.

Kress Collection. London: 78, pis. 70—71.

1962 Adhémar, Hélène. Primitifs Flamands. Corpus. Le

Musée National du Louvre, Paris. Brussels: 25, 29.

1962 Winkler, Friedrich. Review of Primitifs Flamands.

Corpus. New England Museums by Colin Eisler. In Kunstchronik 15: 321.

1963 Walker: 127, repro. 126.

1966 Tolnay, Charles de. Hieronymus Bosch. New

York: 25, 347, cat. no. 7, repro. 91.

1966—1967 Lemmens, G., and E. Taverne. "Hieronymus Bosch. Naar aanleiding van de expositie in 's-Hertogenbosch." Simiolus i : 88.

1967 Cinotti, Mia. Tout l'oeuvre peint de Jérôme Bosch.

Paris: 92, no. 15, fig. 15 (Ital. ed. Milan, 1967).

1967 Jheronimus Bosch. Exh. cat. Noordbrabants Museum, 's-Hertogenbosch. Eindhoven: no. 51.

1968 Cuttler. Northern Painting: 201—202, fig. 252.

1968 Boon, Karel. Review of Hieronymus Bosch by

Charles de Tolnay. In BurlM no: 157.

1969 Cuttler, Charles. "Bosch and the Narrenschiff: A

Problem in Relationships." AB 51: 275—276, fig. 8.

1970 Reuterswàrd, Patrik. Hieronymus Bosch. Stockholm: 173—174, 266—267,

 cat

-

 no

-

 J9? fig8

- 35~3^.

1972 Snyder, James. Review of Musée du Louvre. Inventaire général des dessins des écoles du Nord: maîtres des

anciens Pays-Bas nés avant 1550 by Frits Lugt. In AB 54:89.

1972-1973 Filedt Kok, Jan Piet. "Underdrawing and

drawing in the work of Hieronymus Bosch: a provisional

survey in connection with the painting by him in Rotterdam."

Simiolus 6: 151—153, fig. 16 (infrared).

1973 Gibson, Walter. Hieronymus Bosch. New York:

46-47, repro. 43, figs. 31-32.

1973 Ironside, Jetske. "Hieronymus Bosch; An Investigation of His Underdrawings." Ph.D. diss., Bryn Mawr College: 73-8*, 90,184,196, 275-276, 305, pis. 1-5.

1975 Rowlands, John. Bosch. London: 8, pi. 16.

1975 Fraenger, Wilhelm. Hieronymus Bosch. Dresden:

296-297, figs. 93-94-

1977 Eisler: 66-69, figs. 60-61.

1977 Silver, Larry. "Power and pelf: a new-found Old

Man by Massys." Simiolus 9: 87—88, fig. 24.

1978 Chailley, Jacques. "Jérôme Bosch et ses symboles.

'Essai de décryptage." Académie Royal de Belgique. Classe

des Beaux-Arts. Mémoires 15. Fase, i: 106—108.

1978 Takashina, Shuji. L'oeuvre complet de Hieronymus Bosch. In Japanese. Tokyo: 246—247^0. 7, pis. 18—19.

1979 Martin, Gregory. Hieronymus Bosch. New York:

no. 7, repro.

1980 Unverfehrt, Gerd. Hieronymus Bosch. Die Rezeption seiner Kunst im frühen 16. Jahrhundert. Berlin: 26, 36,

44-45,54,78779,^2.3.

1981 Meijer, Bert W. "Titian Sketches on Canvas and

Panel." Master Drawings 19: 284.

1982 Graziani, René. "Bosch's Wanderer and a Poverty

Commonplace from Juvenal."/WCJ 45: 212.

1982 Morganstern, Anne. "The Pawns in Bosch's Death

and the Miser." StHist 12: 33-41, figs. 1-2, 4-5.

1984 Morganstern, Anne. "The Rest of Bosch's Ship of

Fools." AB 66: 299-302, figs. 4,12.

22 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Dirck Bouts

c. 1415/1420—1475

According to Carel van Mander, Dirck (Dieric or

Thierry) Bouts was born in Haarlem. The date of his

birth is not known, though circumstantial evidence

points to the time between 1415 and 1420. Bouts

moved from Haarlem to Louvain and there married a

well-to-do citizen, Katharina van der Brugghen; the

marriage probably took place by 1447 or 1448, but the

first document mentioning Dirck Bouts in Louvain is

dated 1457. It has been suggested that Bouts emigrated

to Louvain sometime between 1444 and 1448 and,

further, that he might have visited Bruges or Antwerp

after leaving Haarlem. Wolfgang Schône and Georges

Hulin de Loo, however, believe that Bouts returned to

Haarlem after his marriage and remained there until

1456/1457. After the death of his first wife, Bouts remarried in 1472 or 1473. He made his last will and

testament on 17 April, and apparently died on 6 May

1475. His two sons, Dirck the Younger and Aelbrecht,

were artists. Aelbrecht painted more or less in the style

of his father. Dirck the Younger's style is not known to

us.

No paintings can be assigned to the Haarlem period

with certainty and one can only speculate as to the

nature of Dirck Bouts' activity in that city or his relationship to Albert van Ouwater, who worked in Haarlem at roughly the same time. Considerable ambiguity

surrounds the earliest paintings attributed to Bouts.

For example, the Altarpiece of the Virgin of c. 1445 in

the Prado, Madrid, in addition to revealing the influence of Rogier van der Weyden in composition and Jan

van Eyck in rendering of light and texture, is closely

related to the work of Petrus Christus, in particular to

the National Gallery's Nativity (1937.1.40, q.v.). The

degree to which Bouts and Christus came into contact

with each other, who influenced whom, or whether

both drew upon a common source remain mysteries.

Dirck Bouts' dated and documented paintings were

produced after his arrival in Louvain. The Portrait of a

Man (National Gallery, London), is dated 1462.

Bouts' most famous work is the Altarpiece of the Last

Supper (Church of Saint Peter, Louvain), which was

commissioned by the Confraternity of the Eucharist of

Saint Peter's; its iconographie program was dictated by

two professors of theology at the University of Louvain. The contract is dated 16 March 1464, and payments were made between 1465 and 1467. The altarpiece illustrates the meticulous technique, noble solemnity of expression, and rational construction of space

that distinguish Bouts' style. Around 1468 Bouts was

asked to paint for the Hôtel de Ville, Louvain, four

panels dealing with the subject of justice. Only two

were actually painted. They depict the Justice of Emperor Otto III and are now in the Musées Royaux des

Beaux-Arts, Brussels. The first, the Ordeal by Fire, was

completed by 1473; the second, the Execution of the

Innocent Count, was nearly finished when Bouts died

in 1475 ; it was completed by another hand.

Dirck Bouts is one of the great artists who worked

in the third quarter of the fifteenth century. Like Petrus

Christus, he combines an empirical investigation of

mass and void with an internalized yet intense piety

and spirituality.

J.O.H.

Bibliography

Friedlànder. Vol. 3,192.5 (vol. 3,1968).

Schône, Wolfgang. Dieric Bouts und seine Schule. Berlin and

Leipzig, 1938.

Snyder, James. "The Early Haarlem School of Painting." AB

42 (1960): 39~55? 113-132»

DIRC K BOUTS ¿3
Follower of Dirck Bouts, Portrait of a Donor, 1961.9.66

24 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Follower of Dirck Bouts

1961.9.66 (1618)

Portrait of a Donor

c. 1470/1475

Transferred from wood to hardboard (cradled), 2.7.2. x 2.2.2.

(io1 Vi6 x 83A); painted surface: 2,5.7x2.0.6 (loVsxSVs)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Technical Notes: Although there is no written record of a

transfer, laboratory examination strongly suggests that the

paint and ground layers were removed from the original wood

support and attached to a hardboard panel.1 The reverse and

edges of the panel were then veneered with what is probably

oak. The background has been badly damaged and extensively overpainted in paint that is similar in tone to the original, but denser. The hair also has been heavily overpainted.

There are losses, filled and unfilled, in the background and

robe. The robe and areas of flesh are in relatively good condition. The painting was restored in 1949 and 1955.

Provenance: John Osmaston, Osmaston Manor, Derbyshire,

by i879.2 Alfred Brown, Brighton, by I9o6.3 Mrs. M. A. T.

Slark (sale, Christie's, London, 25 June 1948, no. 67, as Jan

van Eyck). (Koetser Gallery, London.)4 (M. Knoedler & Co.,

New York, by 1950.) Samuel H. Kress Foundation, New

York, 1952,.

Exhibitions: London, Royal Academy of Arts, 1879, Exhibition of Works by the Old Masters and by Deceased Masters

of the British School, no. 218, as Jan van Eyck. // London,

Art Gallery of the Corporation of London [Guildhall], 1906,

Exhibition of Works by Flemish and Modern Belgian

Painters, no. 4, as John van Eyck. // The Denver Art Museum, 1950-1951, Art of the Middle Ages, as Dirck Bouts.5

THE Portrait of a Donor gives every appearance of

being a fragment. It may have been part of an altarpiece, perhaps the interior left wing, or the left wing of

a diptych. It is not clear whether the figure was kneeling or standing, and thus it is difficult to extrapolate an

approximate size for the original panel. After being

exhibited as a work by Jan van Eyck in 1897 and 1906,

the Portrait of a Donor was described by Friedlânder

in 1906 as Netherlandish, c. 1450, and close to Bouts.6

He noted the overpainted background and suggested

that the painting was part of the wing of an altarpiece.

By 1925 Friedlânder had decided the work was an

autograph painting by Dirck Bouts.7 Baldass also attributed the portrait to Bouts and dated it c. 14607

1465.8 He placed it between the Martyrdom of Saint

Erasmus altarpiece (Church of Saint Peter, Louvain)

and the Madonna and Child (Stâdel'sches Kunstinstitut, Frankfurt), along with the Portrait of a Man of

1462 (National Gallery, London).9 Suida and Shapley

accepted the attribution to Bouts and proposed a date

of c. 1455.10 James Snyder also believes the Portrait of

a Donor is by Bouts and finds several points of comparison with figures in the Altarpiece of the Last Supper, 1464/1467 (Louvain, Church of Saint Peter).11

In 193 8 Schône asserted that the Portrait of a Donor

was not by Bouts, but was perhaps either by an artist

close to Bouts, the Master of the Munich Taking of

Christ, or an artist who stood between this master and

Hugo van der Goes.12 Schône noted a resemblance,

especially in the hands, to the Madonna and Child in

the John G. Johnson Collection, Philadelphia Museum

of Art, which he thought was possibly by the Master of

the Munich Taking of Christ but under the strong influence of Hugo van der Goes. Winkler, in discussing

the Philadelphia Madonna and Child as a possible

early work by Hugo van der Goes, stressed the similarity of Mary's left hand with its raised knuckles to the

hands in the Portrait of a Donor.13 Winkler did not

agree with Friedlánder's attribution of the Gallery's

picture to Bouts; he observed that like the Philadelphia

Madonna and Child it recalled both Dirck Bouts and

Hugo van der Goes without attaining the quality of

either. Eisler catalogued the painting as Circle of Bouts

and thought it was probably painted around 1470 by

an artist active in Louvain or Ghent.14

Along with Schône, Winkler, and Eisler, I do not

believe that the Portrait of a Donor was painted by

Dirck Bouts. Even making allowances for the painting's poor condition, the angular, essentially linear

handling of the face and thin, nervous hands do not

accord with the smooth, solidly rounded forms found

in those paintings securely attributed to Bouts. On a

more Morellian level, the little fingers crossed over

each other do not occur in Bouts' work. Despite the

similarly prominent knuckles, the Philadelphia Madonna and Child is not by the same hand, though both

may have been influenced by Hugo van der Goes. The

Portrait of a Donor is closer to Dirck Bouts' style than

to Hugo's and was perhaps painted in Louvain. I

would date the painting c. 1470/1475.15

J.O.H.

FOLLOWER OF DIRCK BOUTS 2-5
Notes

1. NGA 1975, 44, lists the support as wood, while Eisler

1977, 54, states that the panel was transferred to hardboard

(masonite), but gives no further information or date for the

transfer.

2. John Osmaston is listed as owner in exh. cat. London

1879.

3. Alfred Brown is listed as owner in exh. cat. London

1906.

4. I am extremely grateful to Lome Campbell for this

and the preceding reference.

5. There seems to have been no printed catalogue for this

exhibition.

6. Friedlànder 1906, 574.

7. Friedlànder, vol. 3 (192.5), no. 7.

8. Baldass 1932., 93.

9. Friedlànder, vol. 3 (1968), no. 8, pi. 14; no. 15, pi. 2.3;

no. 12, pi. 20.

10. Suida and Shapley 1956,42. Curiously, they found no

evidence that the painting had been cut down.

11. James Snyder, letter to the author (1981) in the curatorial files, feels it is an autograph painting in bad condition

and compares the facial features to those of the old man who

stands behind Saint Peter in the Last Supper panel and to the

aged donor(?) at the extreme left of the Abraham and Melchizedek panel of the Louvain altarpiece (Friedlànder, vol. 3

[1968], no. 18, pis. 27-28).

12. Schône 1938,170.

13. Winkler 1964, 254. Winkler listed the Philadelphia

painting as a disputed work; others, including Friedlànder,

suggest that it is an early work by Hugo van der Goes. See

Barbara Sweeny, John G. Johnson Collection. Catalogue of

Flemish and Dutch Paintings (Philadelphia, 1972), 41-42,

no. 336, repro. 108.

14. Eisler 1977, 54.

15. Stella Mary Newton in a letter to Colin Eisler of 19

October 1967 in the curatorial files proposed a date in the

14708 based on the costume.

References

1906 Friedlànder, Max J. "Die Leihausstellung in der

Guildhall zu London.—Sommer 1906.—Hauptsàchlich

niederlàndische Bilder des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts." RfK

19' 574-

1906 Weale, W. H. James. "Netherlandish Art at the

Guildhall. Part I." BurlM 9: 186.

1925 Friedlànder. Vol. 3: 106, no. 7, pi. 12 (vol. 3,

1968, no. 7, pi. 13).

1929 Fierens, Gevaert, and Paul Fierens. Histoire de la

peinture flamande des origines à la fin du XVe siècle. 3 vols.

Paris and Brussels, 3:18.

1932 Baldass, Ludwig. "Die Entwicklung des Dirk

Bouts. Eine stilgeschichtliche Untersuchung." JbWien N.F.

6:93-

1938 Schône, Wolfgang. Dieric Bouts und seine Schule.

Berlin and Leipzig: 41,170, no. 54, pi. 72a.

1950 Bach, Otto Karl. "Art of the Middle Ages." Denver Art Museum Quarterly (Winter): 7-8, repro.

1956 Kress: 42, no. 12, repro. 43.

1964 Winkler, Friedrich. Das Werk des Hugo van der

Goes. Berlin: 254, fig. 200.

1975 NGA: 44, no. 1618, repro. 45.

1977 Eisler: 54, fig. 56.

2,6 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Pieter Bruegel the Elder

c. 1525-1569

Although the primary source of knowledge about the

life of Pieter Bruegel the Elder is Carel van Mander's

Het Schilder-Boek of 1604, his account is sometimes

untrustworthy and anecdotal. Relatively few facts

have been added to Van Mander's biography.

Bruegel's birth date and place are unknown, but it is

generally assumed that he was born sometime between

1525 and 1530, most likely in Breda. Van Mander's

statement that Bruegel first studied with Pieter Coecke

van Aelst of Antwerp is not documented; there is,

however, some visual evidence that Bruegel was aware

of Coecke's art. A recently discovered document indicates that in 1550 Bruegel was working in Mechelen in

the shop of Claude Dorizi on an altarpiece for the

church of Saint Rombaut. Although the altarpiece is

lost and Bruegel worked only on the exterior wings, he

would have been trained in the technique of painting

on linen, a specialty of the city, which he used in some

of his later works.

In 1551 Bruegel became a master in the guild of

Saint Luke in Antwerp. Almost immediately thereafter

he set off for Italy. Drawings with Italian motifs are

dated 1552., and by 15 5 3 the artist was in Rome, where

he worked with the miniaturist Giulio Clovio. He

seems also to have visited Naples and traveled through

the Alps, returning to Antwerp sometime in 1554. In

1555 Bruegel began to provide the Antwerp artist and

publisher Hieronymus Cock with designs for prints;

their close association and friendship continued until

Bruegel's death. The artist seems to have stayed in

Antwerp until 15 63. In 15 63 he married Pieter Coecke's

daughter May ken and moved to Brussels. Bruegel

worked in Brussels until his death on 9 September

1569. His two sons, Pieter Brueghel the Younger

(1564/1565—1638) and Jan Brueghel the Elder (1568—

1625), were artists.

The majority of Bruegel's paintings are signed and

dated, and his development can be followed in detail.

The earliest paintings are landscapes, Christ Appearing to the Apostles at the Sea of Tiberias, dated 1553

(Charles de Pauw collection, Wavre, Belgium), and

The Parable of the Sower, dated 1557 (Timken Art

Gallery, San Diego), and are signed Brueghel. From

15 59 on the artist spelled his name Bruegel. The works

produced in Antwerp are encyclopedic and folkloristic,

as for example, the Netherlandish Proverbs of 1559

(Gemaldegalerie, Berlin). The influence of the art of

Hieronymus Bosch can be seen in the designs for prints

and in such paintings as The Fall of the Rebel Angels,

1562 (Musées Royaux des Beaux-Arts, Brussels), and

the Dulle Griet, probably 1562. (Museum Mayer van

den Bergh, Antwerp).

With the move to Brussels Bruegel's style changed.

Italian influence, specifically Raphael's, became apparent, and at the same time Bruegel became one of the

greatest landscape painters of the sixteenth century.

This can be seen in the series of paintings depicting the

Labors of the Months, created ^1565 for the Antwerp

home of the wealthy banker and government official

Niclaes Jonghelinck. The series is apparently incomplete; three of the pictures are in the Kunsthistorisches

Museum, Vienna, one is in the National Gallery,

Prague, and another in the Metropolitan Museum of

Art. The true subject is nature, presented on a panoramic, cosmic scale; each painting is unique in its composition and depiction of seasonal atmospheric effects.

Bruegel was also a master of figurai compositions, as

for example the Peasant Wedding, c. 1567 (Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna), or the Wedding Dance of

1566 (Detroit Institute of Arts). His late paintings,

such as The Peasant and the Birdnester (Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna) and the Misanthrope and

The Parable of the Blind (both Museo Nazionale,

Naples), all dated 1568, concentrate upon a few large

figures who often recall Michelangelo and are moralizing, even pessimistic, in tone.

Pieter Bruegel the Elder was the preeminent artist of

the mid-sixteenth century. His patrons included the

rich and powerful, like Cardinal Granvelle, Archbishop

of Mechelen and advisor to Philip II of Spain, and the

German merchant Hans Franckert, and he counted

among his friends the humanist and geographer AbraPIETER BRUEGEL THE ELDER 2.7
ham Ortelius. Although the precise interpretation of

many works is debated, Bruegel, like his predecessor

Bosch, seems to be a moralist who views man as foolish

and intolerant. This may be contrasted to the artist's

delight in nature, which he describes lovingly and imbues with the heroic grandeur lacking in man.

J.O.H.

Bibliography

Stridbeck, Carl Gustaf. Bruegelstudien. Stockholm, 1956.

Grossmann, Fritz. "Bruegel, Pieter the Elder." Encyclopedia

of World Art. 16 vols. New York, Toronto, and London,

1959—1983. Vol. z, 1960: cols. 632.—651.

Grossmann, Fritz. Pieter Bruegel. Complete Edition of the

Paintings. London, 1973.

Bruegel. Une dynastie de peintres. Exh. cat., Palais de BeauxArts. Brussels, 1980.

28 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Follower of Pieter Bruegel the Elder

1952.2.19 (1102)

The Temptation of Saint Anthony

0.1550/1575

Oak (cradled), 58.5 x 85.7 (23 x 333A)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Technical Notes: The panel consists of two boards whose

grain runs horizontally. A split along the join line of the

boards has been repaired across the center with a wide fill.

This damage may have occurred prior to 1935, when the

painting apparently fell off a wall.1 A strip of wood 1.3 cm

wide has been added to the top of the painting. With the

exception of the center split and the top edge, the painting is

relatively free of inpainting. There is some retouching along

the edges. A dendrochronological examination by Josef Bauch

in 1977 suggested that 1543!* was the earliest possible felling

date.2 Infrared reflectography discloses underdrawing in the

trees (fig. i) and other portions of the landscape, but none

apparently in the figures. The painting received minor treatment in 1965,1968,1977, and 1982.

Provenance: Private collection, Brussels. (Robert Frank, London, by 1935.)3

 (Knoedler ÔC Co., New York, on consignment from Robert Frank, 1937-1945; owned with Pinakos

[Rudolf Heinemann] 1945-1950.)4 Samuel H. Kress Foundation, New York, 1950.

Exhibitions: Brussels, 1935, Exposition Universelle et Internationale de Bruxelles. Cinq Siècles d'Art, no. 151, as Pieter

Bruegel the Elder. // Paris, Musée de l'Orangerie, 193 5, De

Van Eyck à Bruegel, no. 16, as Pieter Bruegel the Elder. // The Baltimore Museum of Art, 1943, An Exhibition

of Paintings by Living Masters of the Past, 9, as Pieter Bruegel

the Elder. // Portland Art Museum, 1944,8 Masterpieces of

Painting, not paginated, as Pieter Bruegel the Elder. // The

Baltimore Museum of Art, 1948, Themes and Variations in

Painting and Sculpture, no. 98, as Pieter Bruegel the Elder.

THE PRIMARY SOURCE for our knowledge of Saint

Anthony Abbot is the life written by his contemporary,

Saint Athanasius. In the year 272 at the age of twentyone Anthony gave away his possessions and retired to

the desert in his native Egypt to become a hermit and

ascetic. There he was tempted and tormented by the

Devil and numerous demons. In the late Middle Ages

the life of Saint Anthony was popularized, especially

by The Golden Legend.5 Anthony's temptations were

amplified and codified. The Gallery's painting depicts

essentially two scenes: the saint's terrestrial torment

and, at the left, his aerial torment, in which he was

carried high into the air and attacked by demons.

The attribution of The Temptation of Saint Anthony

to Pieter Bruegel the Elder has been doubted almost

from the moment of the painting's discovery in 1935.

The first to publish the painting was Leo van Puyvelde,

who gave it to Bruegel the Elder and dated it c. 1555;

he also, somewhat confusingly, compared it to the

Magpie on the Gallows, Hessisches Landesmuseum,

Darmstadt, painted only a year before Bruegel's

death.6 Glück thought the painting was autograph and

dated it c. 15 5 8.7 Friedlánder considered it genuine.8 In

the same year, 1935, de Tolnay listed the painting under Bruegel's contested works; for de Tolnay the touch

and coloring raised the possibility that it was an early

work by Jan Brueghel the Elder.9 In subsequent publications Glück, Friedlánder, and Puyvelde reaffirmed

their attribution of the panel to Pieter Bruegel the Elder

along with an early dating.10 Bruegel's authorship was

accepted by Hoogewerff, Delevoy, Claessens, and

Rousseau as well as by the National Gallery of Art

until 1976.11

Most scholars, however, have questioned or rejected

the attribution to Pieter Bruegel the Elder. Raczyñski,

following de Tolnay, gave the painting to Jan Brueghel

the Elder and thought that the painterly handling could

not be before the i58os.12 Van de Wetering, while not

taking a definite stand, observed that the cool greenishblue tonality was typical of the generation following

Bruegel.13 For Genaille the finesse and "sentiment" of

the landscape indicated a hand other than Pieter the

Elder's and suggested that of Jan the Elder.14 Grossmann did not accept the painting as by Pieter Bruegel

the Elder.15 He found the monsters harmless and unconvincing and the fussy surface texture and lack of

solidity separate from Pieter the Elder. While he

thought the attribution to Jan the Elder deserved consideration, the landscape composition seemed to him

to fit better into the middle than the late sixteenth century. Gibson gave the painting to a Flemish artist working later than Pieter Bruegel the Elder.16

 Although

Eisler indicated that the force and plasticity usually

found in Bruegel's work were lacking, he left open the

possibility that the painting might have been executed

in the master's atelier.17 In 1976 the National Gallery's

attribution was changed to Follower of Pieter Bruegel

FOLLOWER OF PIETER BRUEGEL THE ELDER 2-9
Fig. i. Infrared reflectogram assembly of a detail of The

Temptation of Saint Anthony, 1952.2.19 [infrared

reflectography: Molly Paries]

the Elder and the work was loosely dated to the second

half of the sixteenth century.

In this author's view, The Temptation of Saint Anthony is not from the hand of Pieter Bruegel the Elder.

The figures lack the emotional and physical power

characteristic of Bruegel; the cool tonalities of blue and

green and feathery, delicate brushwork are not traits of

the master. Yet the painting is of exceptionally high

quality and uses BruegePs artistic vocabulary in a synthetic way that is not seen in the work of other followers.

Of the numerous figures in the painting, the one

closest to Bruegel is that of Saint Anthony himself,

seated under the rough lean-to. As noted by Grossmann, the source is BruegePs drawing of The Temptation of Saint Anthony (fig. 2) of 15 5 6 in the Ashmolean

Museum, Oxford.18 The Boschian demons and biomorphic hybrids, while at once related to the creatures

that inhabit BruegePs works, are also part of the larger

tradition of copies and variants that satisfied the demand for Bosch-like paintings throughout the sixteenth

century.19 The scene of Saint Anthony's aerial torment,

while not occurring elsewhere in Bruegel, does appear

in a woodcut of 1522 depicting The Temptation of

Saint Anthony, usually attributed to Jan de Cock, as

well as in Jan Mandyn's painting in the Frans Halsmuseum, Haarlem.20

What separates the Gallery's painting from the

work of Bosch followers like Jan Mandyn (1502-

c.i56o) or Pieter Huys (i5i9-i584)21 is the dominance of the landscape. As several writers have observed, the influence of Joachim Patinir is evident in the

panoramic view and fantastic rock formation at the

Fig. 2. Pieter Bruegel the Elder, The

Temptation of Saint Anthony, 1556,

pen and brown ink, 216 x 326 mm,

Oxford, Ashmolean Museum [photo:

Ashmolean Museum]

30 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Follower of Pieter Bruegel the Elder, The Temptation of Saint Anthony, 1952.1.19

FOLLOWER OF PIETER BRUEGEL THE ELDER 3 I
left.22

 More direct is the dependence on Bruegel's

works, both early and late; the painting seems to combine the panoramic river views of the early engravings

such as the Way to Emmaus or the Flight into Egypt23

with the juxtaposition of leafy forest to deep space

found in the late paintings of The Peasant and BirdNester of 1568 in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, and to a lesser extent the Magpie on the Gallows of

the same year.24 This basically mannerist composition,

"open" on one side and "closed" on the other, occurs

in Netherlandish landscapes of the second half of the

sixteenth century, in the work of Hans Bol and Gillis

van Coninxloo, for example.25 While The Temptation

of Saint Anthony may initially resemble the landscapes

produced in the 15805 and 15905 by Gillis van Coninxloo or Jan Brueghel the Elder,26

 the absence of a patterned contrast of light and dark in the foliage argues

for an earlier date. I agree with Grossmann and would

date The Temptation of Saint Anthony to c. 15507

1575. While the possibility that the painting preserves

a lost composition by Pieter Bruegel the Elder cannot

be excluded, the heterogeneous nature of the painting

suggests that the artist drew from several of Bruegel's

works as well as from those of contemporary followers

of Bosch.

J.O.H.

Notes

1. Puyvelde 1935,17.

2. See Appendix I.

3. The 1935 Brussels exhibition catalogue states that before being acquired by Frank the painting was in Brussels in

the collection of an unnamed aristocrat. On the reverse are:

an illegible stamp, possibly an Austrian customs stamp; a

paper sticker, "Cinq Siècles d'Art (Bruxelles 1935)"; and a

paper sticker, "Exposition De Van Eyck."

4.1 am grateful for information provided by Burton

Fredericksen. The 1943 Baltimore exhibition catalogue and

Eisler 1977, 95, list Countess Montblanc, Belgium, as owner

of the painting, but this is otherwise unverified.

5. Réau, Iconographie, vol. 3, part i, 101-115; Thurston and Attwater, Butler's Lives of the Saints, i: 104—109;

Ryan and Ripperger, The Golden Legend, i: 99-103. A discussion of the life of Saint Anthony and late fifteenth-century

translations into Dutch of The Golden Legend and the Vitae

Patrum are found in Dirk Bax, Hieronymus Bosch. His Picture-Writing Deciphered (Rotterdam, 1979), 7-11.

6. Puyvelde 1935,47-48, 50.

7. Cluck 1935,151-156.

8. Friedlànder 1935, 90.

9. De Tolnay 193 5, 96.

10. Cluck 1936, ii, 23, no. 3; Cluck 1937, 15-16, 40,

no. 6a and in several later editions; Friedlànder, vol. 14

(1937), ii-i2, 58, no. 5, mentioned as on the art market in

Paris, London, or New York; Puyvelde 1962., n 8,132.

11. Hoogewerff 1954, 48~49; Delevoy 1959, 31-32;

Claessens and Rousseau 1969, 230; Suida 1951, 204, no. 90;

NGA 1975, 5°5no- 1102,.

12. Raczyñski 1937, 53.

13. Wetering 1938, 66.

14. Genaille 1953, 82.

15. Letter to Colin Eisler 25 January 1969 in the curatorial files. The omission of the Gallery's painting from Fritz

Grossmann, Pieter Bruegel. Complete Edition of the Paintings (London, 1973) as well as from Wolfgang Stechow,

Pieter Bruegel the Elder (New York, 1969), given the nature

of both books, signifies rejection of the attribution.

16. Walter Gibson, letter to the author 16 April 1976 in

the curatorial files.

17. Eisler 1977, 95.

18. Reproduced and discussed in Ludwig Münz, Bruegel,

The Drawings. Complete Edition (London, 1961), 225, no.

127, pi. 124. In his letter of 25 January 1969, Grossmann,

without elaboration, states that the figure is based on the

drawing and not on the engraving made from it.

19. Bruegel's use of Bosch-inspired figures is well known

and perhaps most evident in the engravings, for example

Patience (1556-1557), the series of the Seven Deadly Sins

(1556-1557), and later prints of Saint James and the Magician Hermogenes and The Pall of the Magician Hermogenes

(1564-1565), reproduced in Jacques Lavalleye, Pieter Bruegel the Elder and Lucas van Leyden. The Complete Engravings, Etchings, and Woodcuts (New York, 1967), pis. 35,

41—47,138—139. Perhaps the most Boschian of the paintings

is the Dulle Griet, probably 1562 (Museum Mayer van den

Bergh, Antwerp), reproduced in Wolfgang Stechow, Pieter

Bruegel the Elder (New York, 1969), 71, color pi. 10.1 have

not found any exact correspondences between Bruegel's demons and those in the Gallery's painting. See Unverfehrt

1980, 151-186 for the extensive influence of Bosch upon

sixteenth-century northern European art and depictions of

the temptation of Saint Anthony in particular. He focuses

more upon the first rather than the second half of the sixteenth century.

20. Hoogewerff 1954, 49, and Eisler 1977, 95, call attention to the woodcut as a possible antecedent; for a reproduction see Robert A. Koch, Joachim Patinir (Princeton, 1968),

fig. 48. Mandyn's Temptation of Saint Anthony is reproduced in color in Jacques Lassaigne and Robert Delevoy,

Flemish Painting. Prom Bosch to Rubens (Geneva, 1977), 34.

21. The Temptation of Saint Anthony by Pieter Huys,

signed and dated 1577, in the Museum Mayer van den Bergh,

Antwerp, demonstrates the continuation of Bosch's imagery

into the third quarter of the sixteenth century. See Jozef de

Coo, Museum Mayer van den Bergh. Catalogus i. Schilderijen, Verluchte Handschriften, Tekeningen (Antwerp, 1978),

78-79, no. 25, pi. 42.

22. Patinir's influence on the Gallery's painting was noted

by Gluck 1935,152.; Friedlànder, vol. 14 (1937), 12; Wetering 1938, 66; Genaille 1953, 82; and Eisler 1977, 95. For

Patinir see Koch, Joachim Patinir (as in n. 20). Eisler 1977,

96, n. 2i, also observes the similarity of the rock formation to

that found in Jóos van Cleve's Rest on the Flight into Egypt,

Musées Royaux des Beaux-Arts, Brussels; Friedlànder, vol. 9,

part i (1972), no. 49, pi. 63. For the continuation of Patinir's influence in the first half of the sixteenth century, see

1952.2.18, Antwerp Artist, The Martyrdom of Saint Catherine.

23. Reproduced in Lavalleye, Pieter Bruegel the Elder and

Lucas van Leyden, pis. 14-15 (as in n. 19).

24. Reproduced in Stechow, Pieter Bruegel the Elder,

color pis. 44-45. There are also some similarities of spatial

32 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
organization to BruegePs drawing Forest Landscape with

Five Bears, dated 1554, in the National Gallery, Prague; discussed and reproduced in Karl Arndt, "Pieter Bruegel d.À.

und die Geschichte der 'Waldlandschaft,'" JbBerlin 14

(1972.), 87-90, 88, fig. 3.

25. See Heinrich Gerhard Franz, Niederlàndische Landschaftsmalerei im Zeitalter des Manierismus, 2 vols. (Graz,

1969), 2; for Hans Bol, figs. 306, 312—313, and for Gillis van

Coninxloo, figs. 412, 419—42,0.

2.6. In a letter to the author of 7 March 1978, Klaus Ertz

states that The Temptation of Saint Anthony is definitely not

an early work by Jan the Elder as de Tolnay and others have

suggested.

References

1935 Puyvelde, Leo van. "Zwei Gemalde von Pieter

Bruegel d.À." Pantheon 15:47—50, repros. 47,49, facing 47.

193 5 Friedlander, Max J. Review of Bruegel's Gemalde

by Gustav Gluck. In BurlM 67: 90.

193 5 Tolnay, Charles de. Pierre Bruegel l'Ancien. Brussels: 96, no. 54.

1935 Gluck, Gustav. "Über einige Landschaftsgemàlde

Pieter Bruegels des Alteren" JbWien N.F. 9: 151—157,161—

162, pi. 3,154, fig. 105.

1936 Gluck, Gustav. Das Bruegel Buch. Vienna: 9—10,

no. 4, repro. (Also eds. 1941,1951).

1936 Glück, Gustav. Pieter Brueghel the Elder. Paris:

ii, 23, no. 3, repro.

1937 Glück, Gustav. Bruegels Gemalde. Vienna: 15-

16, 27,40, no. 6a, repro.

1937 Friedlander. Vol. 14: 11—12, 58, no. 5, pi. 5 (vol.

14,1976: 18,42, no. 5, pi. 5).

1937 Raczyñski, Joseph Alexander. Die fldmische

Landschaft vor Rubens. Frankfurt: 53.

1938 Wetering, Cornelis van de. Die Entwicklung der

niederlàndischen Landschaftsmalerei vom Anfang des 16.

Jahrhunderts bis zur]ahrhundertmitte. Berlin: 66, pi. 456.

1938 Jedlicka, Gotthard. Pieter Bruegel. Der Moler in

seiner Zeit. Erlenbach: 540.

1951 Kress: 204, no. 90, 205.

1951 Frankfurter, Alfred. "Washington: Celebration,

Evaluation." ArtN 50 (April): 31, 62, repro.

1951 Frankfurter, Alfred. "Interpreting Masterpieces.

Twenty-four Paintings from the Kress Collection." ArtNA

50 (November): 115—n6, repro. no.

1952 Castelli, Enrico. // Demoniaco nell'Arte. Milan

and Florence: 67, 69, pi. 42.

1953 Genaille, Robert. Bruegel l'Ancien. Paris: 82, pi.

5i.

1954 Hoogewerff, G. J. Het Landschap van Bosch tot

Rubens. Antwerp: 48—49.

1956 Walker: unpaginated, repro.

1957 Shapley, Fern Rusk, and John Shapley. Comparisons in Art: A Companion to The National Gallery of Art,

Washington, D.C. New York: 136, repro.

1959 Delevoy, Robert. Bruegel. Geneva: 31-32, 39,

repro.

1960 Broadley, Hugh. Flemish Painting in the National

Gallery of Art. Washington: 8,3 2, repro. 33. (Rev. ed. 1978).

1961 Seymour, Charles. Art Treasures for America. An

Anthology of Paintings & Sculpture in the Samuel H. Kress

Collection. London: 92, repro.

1961 Denis, Valentin. All the Paintings of Pieter Bruegel. New York: 45.

1962 Cairns and Walker: 76, repro. 77.

1962 Puyvelde, Leo van. La peinture flamande au siècle

de Bosch et Breughel. Paris: n8,132, pi. 40.

1963 Walker: 128, repro. 129.

1968 Klein, H. Arthur, and Mina Klein. Peter Bruegel

the Elder. Artist of Abundance. New York: 184.

1969 Roberts-Jones, Philippe. Bruegel, le peintre et son

monde. Brussels: 47, no. 5, repro.

1969 Classens, Bob, and Jeanne Rousseau. Our Bruegel. Antwerp: 229-230, fig. 7.

1975 NGA: 50, repro. 51.

1976 Walker: fig. 191.

1977 Eisler: 93-9¿, figs. 91-92.

1980 Unverfehrt, Gerd. Hieronymus Bosch. Die Rezeption seiner Kunst im frühen 16. Jahrhundert. Berlin: 184.

FOLLOWER OF PIETER BRUEGEL THE ELDER 33
Robert Campin

e- I375-I444

The précise date of Robert Campin's birth is unknown,

but a document of 142.2. gives his age as forty-seven. He

was active in Tournai by 1406. He purchased citizenship there in 1410, which has been taken as an indication that he was born elsewhere, though this need not

be the case. He evidently enjoyed a prosperous career,

receiving a number of civic commissions and taking on

several apprentices. He must also have had some court

contacts, as the countess of Hainaut interceded on his

behalf after he had been sentenced for immoral behavior in 1432. He died in 1444.

None of the pictorial works documented to Campin

survives. Campin, the historical figure, was first linked

to a surviving body of work through comparison with

documented paintings datable to 1434 by his pupil

Jacques Daret. The early works attributed to his most

important pupil, Rogier van der Weyden, a native of

Tournai, in particular the Deposition in the Prado,

further support the connection between surviving

paintings and the historical figure of Campin. The

paintings thus given to Campin had previously been

ascribed to the anonymous Master of Flémalle, named

after altarpiece wings of the Virgin and Child, Saint

Veronica, and The Trinity said to come from Flémalle,

all now in the StàdePsches Kunstinstitut, Frankfurt.

Related paintings include a fragment from a monumental altarpiece of the Deposition also in Frankfurt;

the Entombment triptych in the Princes Gate Collection, Courtauld Institute Galleries; the Mérode triptych in the Cloisters, New York; and a Nativity in the

Musée des Beaux-Arts, Dijon. Because his oeuvre has

been assembled on the basis of stylistic associations,

and because Campin evidently headed an active workshop, the attribution of a number of works to him is

still debated. In general, the four paintings in Frankfurt

should be viewed as forming the core of his oeuvre.

Together with Jan van Eyck, Campin is a key figure

in the emergence of the Netherlandish school with its

emphasis on observation of the natural world. His influence is traceable through later generations of painters, due probably to his importance as a teacher as well

as to the expressive power of his devotional types. In

what must be Campin's mature works, such as the

fragment from the Deposition altarpiece, strongly

modeled forms appear to project forward from the

panel's surface with the effect of polychromed sculpture. For Campin, who began his career in the period of

the International Gothic, the panel as a physical surface remained an expressive element. The tension between illusion and painted surface intensifies the emotional power of his compositions.

M.w.

Bibliography

Tschudi, Hugo von. "Der Meister von Flémalle." JbBerlin 19

(1898): 8-34,89-116.

Hulin de Loo, Georges. "An Authentic Work by Jacques

Daret, Painted in 1434." BurlM 15 (1909): 20:1-2.08.

Tolnay, Charles de. Le Maître de Flémalle et les frères Van

Eyck. Brussels, 1939.

Campbell, Lorne. "Robert Campin, the Master of Flémalle

and the Master of Mérode." BurlM 116 (1974): 634—

646.

Schabacker, Peter H. "Notes on the Biography of Robert

Campin." Mededelingen van de Koninklijke Académie

voor Wetenschapen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten van

België. Klasseder Schone Kunsten 41 (1980): 3-14.

34 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Follower of Robert Campin

1959.9.3 (1388)

Madonna and Child with Saints

in the Enclosed Garden

c. 1440/1460

Oak (cradled), izz.z x 151.2 (48V4 x 599/io);

painted surface: 119.8 x 148.5 (47V4 x 58a/2)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Technical Notes: The panel is made up of five horizontal

boards. The unpainted edge on all sides suggests that the

panel was painted in an engaged frame. The present frame is a

composite construction, the oak bottom member, including

the inscription, being older than the softwood top and side

elements to which it is joined (fig. i).1 The painting was

cleaned and disfiguring overpaint removed in the 183os.2 The

panel was cradled in 1947 by Stephen Pichetto, and the painting was partially cleaned and restored at that time. A fire on

2.6 December 1956 left the paint surface blistered, stained,

and darkened. Mario Modestini secured the blisters and in

1958—1959 cleaned and restored the painting. In spite of its

history, the painting is in relatively good condition. There is

inpainting along the joins and in scattered areas throughout

the picture. There is also a certain amount of abrasion

throughout. Larger areas of loss and inpainting occur in the

Baptist's proper right leg and the robe above it, in some lower

parts of the Virgin's robe, and at the base of her neck.

The figures are underdrawn with the brush, using long

strokes and some rather widely spaced cross hatching. The

position of the heads has been adjusted slightly in relation to

the underdrawing. The four saints originally had round halos

with concentric rings that were incised in the ground layer

and apparently prepared in gold. These are visible under the

microscope and with infrared reflectography (fig. 2.). They

seem to have been overpainted in the course of the painting

process. Gold is also used as the background of the cloth

hanging from the back wall. A green paint layer forms the

brocade pattern, with the gold background showing through

as schematized flowers.

Provenance: A church in Bruges.3 Imbert de Mottelettes,

Bruges, by i83i.4 Jonkheer de Potter-Soenens, Ghent, by

i839.5 Countess de Oudemard.6 (Wildenstein and Co., New

York, 1946-1949.) Samuel H. Kress, New York, 1949.

Exhibitions: Tucson, University of Arizona Museum of Art,

1951-195^, Twenty-Five Paintings from the Collection of

the Samuel H. Kress Foundation, no. 15, as studio of the

Master of Flémalle.

THIS IMPOSIN G PANEL is the only surviving painting of a Madonna and Child with saints from the circle

of Robert Campin. The enthroned Madonna and

Child are flanked by Saint Catherine, identifiable by

the wheel and sword of her martyrdom; Saint John the

Baptist whose pointing gesture recalls his admonition,

"Behold the Lamb of God"; Saint Barbara identified

by the miniature tower behind her, and Saint Anthony

Abbot whose attribute of a little pig refers to his temptations. The walled garden both delimits the space in

which these holy figures exist and serves as a symbol of

the Virgin's purity. The enclosed garden is frequently

cited in Marian hymns as a metaphor for the Virgin

and derives from the passage in the Song of Solomon,

"A garden enclosed is my sister, my spouse; a spring

shut up, a fountain sealed."7 In a more general sense,

the enclosed garden indicates that the setting for this

meeting of the enthroned Madonna and saints is Paradise.8

 The associations with Paradise and the relationship of the composition to representations of the Madonna and Child with saints and donors suggest that

the panel may have served as an epitaph.9

As is typical for the works of Campin and his circle,

this painting employs figure types that are repeated and

varied in a number of works. The Madonna type has

much in common with that in two drawings in Paris

showing the Madonna and Child enthroned with saints

and donors, which probably copy a lost painting by

Campin or a member of his circle.10 The connection is

particularly evident in the fall of drapery over the

Virgin's lap and in the Child's gesture. Dirk de Vos has

shown convincingly that this type derives from a compositon of the Madonna and-Child with a flower originated by Campin and known only through copies.11

The Washington version includes variations in the spirit

of Campin, notably the Christ Child's shirt falling

open, his hand drawn back with the palm forward, and

the Virgin's hands intertwined over the Child's chest.

The character of these variations as well as the fact that

some of them also occur in the Holy Family in the

cathedral of Le Puy12 suggest that the design of the

Washington Madonna is close to Campin himself. The

figure of Saint Barbara appears to be an adaptation of

the woman bending toward the swooning Virgin in

Campin's monumental Deposition triptych, as it is

known through the copy in Liverpool.13 The figure of

Saint Catherine in the Washington painting is closely

FOLLOWER OF ROBERT CAMPIN 35
Fig. i. Detail of frame of Madonna and Child with Saints in the Enclosed Gar den, 1959.9.3 [photo: NGA]

related in pose and compositional function to the Magdalene Reading in the National Gallery, London. This

fragment originally formed the lower right corner of a

relatively early painting by Rogier van der Weyden.14

The pose of the Baptist in the Washington panel echoes

a type current in the circle of Campin and Van der

Weyden. Related figures include the Baptist on the left

wing of the Werl Altarpiece, dated 1438, whose attribution to Campin has been questioned,15

 and the Baptist in Rogier's Medici Madonna in Frankfurt (fig. 3).16

The Baptist in the Enclosed Garden is particularly

close to the Frankfurt figure in the distribution of

weight, the contour of the bent leg, and the way the

drapery falls around the legs. Yet the stance of the

latter is more logical, being dictated by his placement

with other saints on steps leading up to the Madonna.

This suggests that the Baptist in the Washington painting is a stock design. The repetition of established types

is also traceable in smaller details. Thus the clump of

six-petalled yellow flowers just to the left of Saint

Fig. 2. Infrared reflectogram assembly of a

detail of Madonna and Child with Saints in the

Enclosed Garden, 1959.9.3 [infrared reflectography: Molly Faries]
Follower of Robert Campin, Madonna and Child with Saints in the Enclosed Garden, 1959.9.3

FOLLOWER OF ROBERT CAMPIN 37
Fig. 3. Rogier van der Weyden, Medici Madonna,

Frankfurt, Stàdel'sches Kunstinstitut und Stàdtische Galerie

[photo: Stàdel'sches Kunstinstitut, Ursula Edelmann,

photographer]

Anthony is also found in the Frankfurt Madonna and

Child by Campin (fig. 4).17

The way these different elements are used raises the

question of the work's distance from Campin himself.

Is it a work by Robert Campin, a repetition of a lost

prototype by him, or a recombination of elements derived from Campin and Van der Weyden? Although

the Gallery attributed the painting to the Master of

Flémalle and assistants at the time of its acquisition, it

appears to be the work of a single hand. Virtually unanimous scholarly opinion gives it to a follower of Campin.18

 Indeed, the possibility that the painting is an

autograph work by Campin can readily be excluded if

the four paintings in Frankfurt together with such early

works as the Entombment triptych from the Seilern

collection19 are taken as the basis for the painter's

style. Though almost as large as the panels in Frankfurt, the Enclosed Garden nevertheless lacks the extraordinary tension between surface pattern and strongly

modelled form that characterizes these works. The

density of textures, which endows the Frankfurt paintEARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING

ings with an effect of heightened reality, is not present

in the Enclosed Garden. This is particularly evident

from the comparison of such a specific detail as the

yellow flower mentioned above. Even in earlier works,

such as the Seilern Entombment or the Cleveland Saint

John,20 the way the figures stand out in relief against

the patterned ground differs from the effect of the same

formal elements in the Washington painting.

Several authors have tried to link this painting with

other workshop productions, most notably with the

Annunciation in a Church in the Prado and the Annunciation in Brussels.21

 While it may eventually be possible to arrive at a better understanding of workshop

production based on the analysis of underdrawing (fig.

z), such groupings seem premature. Moreover, this

painting may be an example of a more complex process

whereby Campin's types are repeated with an admixture derived from Rogier van der Weyden. The Madonna and Child with Saints in the Enclosed Garden is

pervaded by a more rhythmic linear pattern than that

found in the works attributed to Campin. This is felt

in the interlocking pyramidal outlines of the figures,

which are emphasized by Catherine's sword, Anthony's walking stick, and the arms of the Virgin's

throne. Rather than overlap each other, the figures fit

neatly together. A process of recombination may also

explain a certain ambiguity in the relationship of the

different figures in space. Thus it is unclear from the

way Saint Barbara and her attribute fill the space between the Madonna and Saint Anthony whether she is

placed behind the Madonna or beside her. The setting

of the enclosed garden may be noteworthy in this context too. The drawings in Paris presumably after

Campin and the dismembered Van der Weyden altarpiece of which the Magdalene Reading was a part are

Fig. 4. Robert Campin, Madonna and Child, detail,

Frankfurt, Stàdel'sches Kunstinstitut und Stàdtische Galerie

[photo: Stàdel'sches Kunstinstitut, Ursula Edelmann,

photographer]

3»
set in domestic interiors. In Northern painting the enclosed garden tends to be the preserve of courtly saints

and, above all, of female saints as attendants to the

Virgin.22 The inclusion of the somber hermits John the

Baptist and Anthony along with the elegant Barbara

and Catherine is thus rather unusual and may be further evidence of a process of recombination.

Such a recombination is difficult to place in time.

The painting probably belongs to the decades after

Campin's death in 1444 because of the more pronounced linear quality of the design as well as the

kinship of the Baptist with the same figure in Rogier's

Medici Madonna.23 The flat halos painted out during

the course of work attest to a desire to update Robert

Campin's vocabulary. It does not seem likely that this

smooth fusion of Campin and Rogier would have

been achieved by a painter working at the end of the

century.

The Enclosed Garden remains a very compelling

work and an important example of the effect of tradition on early Netherlandish painters, though it cannot

be regarded as a work by Campin himself or as the

unalloyed reflection of a lost painting by him.

M.W.

Notes

1. The frame and inscription are shown in the print in

Speyers 1839, opp. 182.. The inscription reads: O maria consolatrix. Esto nobis advocatrix Rogans regem glorie Ut nos

Jungat Superis Donans nobis miseris I Post Spent frui Specie

Que regina diceris • Miserere [p?]osteris - Virgo mater Grade

- Amen - (O Mary, our comforter, intercede for us asking the

King of Glory that we may rejoin those on high, granting to

us, wretches, the fulfillment of hope of seeing him. Thou,

who art called Queen, Have mercy on us later born, Virgin

Mother of Grace). The inscription is followed by a housemark. The same housemark appears as part of the illumination of a copy of Boethius' De Consolatione Philosophiae

printed in Ghent in 1485 by Arend de Keysere, now in the

Library of Congress; repro. in Sandra Hindman and James

Douglas Farquhar, Pen to Press: Illustrated Manuscripts and

Printed Books in the First Century of Printing [exh. cat. University of Maryland Art Department Gallery] (College Park,

Maryland, 1977), pi. 3. While noting that the calligraphy of

inscriptions needs further study, both Paul Saenger of the

Northwestern University Library and P.F.J. Obbema of the

Leiden University Library were inclined to date this inscription to the early sixteenth century, citing, for example, the

type of flourishes and the form of the s (letters of 31 March

1983 and 23 June 1983 in curatorial files).

2. See n. 5.

3. According to Passavant 1833, 349.

4. Passavant saw the picture on his journey through England and Belgium in 18 31.

5. Speyers 1839, 188. Shortly after entering the De

Potter—Soenens collection, the picture was cleaned and disfiguring overpaint, which had caused Passavant to consider it

a pre-Eyckian tempera painting, was removed; see Passavant

18 4 3, 2 3 o and Nagler 18 5 8, i. I am grateful to Lome Campbell for the first of these references.

6. According to Suida 1951,168, no. 74.

7. Song of Solomon 4:12.

8. Howard Rollin Patch, The Other World According to

Descriptions in Medieval Literature (Cambridge, Mass.,

1950). The Garden of Eden, the earthly paradise, was commonly depicted as an enclosed garden, as, for example, in the

Très Riches Heures; repro. Jean Longnon, Raymond Gazelles,

and Millard Meiss, The 'Très Riches Heures' of Jean, Duke of

Berry (New York, 1969), pi. 2.0. Hence the playful action of

Saint Barbara offering an apple to the Christ Child in the

Gallery's painting refers to his role as Redeemer and the new

Adam.

9. Eisler 1977, 47—48, made this suggestion, noting the

relationship of the composition to Tournai funerary sculpture.

10. The drawings are in the Louvre and the École des

Beaux-Arts, the latter probably being a copy after the Louvre

drawing; Micheline Sonkes, Primitifs flamands. Contributions à l'étude des primitifs flamands. Dessins du XVe

 siècle:

groupe Van der Weyden (Brussels, 1969), 98—103, nos. C7—

8, pis. 22 a-b.

11. De Vos 1971, 63-80.

12. Here the Madonna has shifted the Child off her lap, as

De Vos notes, 1971, 74—76, fig. 12. See also Jacques Dupont,

"La Sainte Famille des Clarisses du Puy," Monuments historiques de la France n.s. 12 (1966), 150-157.

13. Davies 1972, 248—250, pi. 133.

14. Friedlànder, vol. 2 (1967), 62, no. 12, pis. 20-21, and

Ward 1971, 27-35, with

 a reconstruction of the dismembered panel that is usually dated c. 1435—1440. The Magdalene's pose is also very close to that of Saint Barbara on the

right wing of the Werl Altarpiece in the Prado; Friedlànder,

vol. 2 (1967), 7¿-73> no. 67, pi. 97.

15. Friedlànder, vol. 2 (1967), pi. 96. On the problem of

the attribution of the Werl panels, see Davies 1972, 258, and

Lome Campbell, "Robert Campin, the Master of Flémalle

and the Master of Mérode," BurlM 116 (1974), 645.

16. Stàdel'sches Kunstinstitut und Stàdtische Galerie;

Friedlànder, vol. 2 (1967), 64, no. 21, pi. 42, usually dated

about 1450, but placed even later by Anne Markham Schulz,

"The Columba Altarpiece and Rogier van der Weyden's stylistic development," Münchnerjb ser. 3, 22 (1971), 72-80,

84.

The origin of this delicately balanced pose has been much

debated; for a summary of this question and the connection

of the type to Rogier's Christ appearing to his mother, see

Davies 1972, 258, Campbell 1974, 645-646, and Rainald

Grosshans, "Rogier van der Weyden. Der Marienaltar aus

der Kartause Miraflores," JbBerlin 23 (1981), 106—107,

no—in, figs. 25, 28.

17. Lottlisa Behling, Die Pflanze in der mittelalterlichen

Tafelmalerei, zd ed. (Cologne and Graz, 1967), pis. XLIV

and XLV, as an unidentified flower.

18. The only dissenting opinions are Friedlànder, in an

opinion of 12 August 1948 (in curatorial files), who called it a

work by the Master of Flémalle equal in quality to the paintings in Leningrad and Aix-en-Provence, and Seymour 1961,

12, 14, who published the painting as by the Master of

Flémalle and assistants. Stange 1966, 19, gave it to Campin

himself. While still in the Kress collection, the painting was

FOLLOWER OF ROBERT CAMPIN 39
attributed to the studio of the Master of Flemalle; Suida

1951, no. 74, andexh. cat., Tucson 1951, no. 15.

19. See Biography. In judging the autograph quality of the

work, it is helpful to refer to photographs taken before and

during cleaning (in curatorial files).

20. Friedlander, vol. 2 (1967), 91—92., nos. Add. 147,

149, pi. 141.

2.1. Friedlander, vol. 2, (1967), 70, nos. 52, 54b, pis. 75,

80. Frinta 1966, 113—120, gave it, the Brussels Annunciation^ the Berlin Madonna on a Grassy Bank^ and other pictures to Jacques Daret. Van Gelder 1967, 3—4, included it in a

slightly different group of pictures that he felt was by Daret.

Sterling 1971, 5, gave the Washington panel and the two

Annunciations to a pupil distinct from Daret.

The extensive study of underdrawings in paintings associated with Rogier van der Weyden undertaken by J. R. J. van

Asperen de Boer, Roger van Schoute, and others should provide a firmer basis for hypotheses of workshop groupings.

Van Asperen de Boer found the underdrawing in 1959.9.3 to

be closer to the Van der Weyden group than to Campin; in

conversation 25 March 1983.

22. Thus, the Mystic Marriage of Saint Catherine in London, painted by Gerard David for the altar of Saint Catherine

in the chapel of Saint Anthony, Saint Donatian's, Bruges, is a

typically lyrical treatment of the enclosed garden; Friedlander, vol. 6b (1971), 80, 108, no. 216, pi. 221, and Martin

Davies, National Gallery Catalogues. Early Netherlandish

School, 3d ed. (London, 1968), 44-45. Female saints accompany the Virgin, and, though Saint Anthony was the titular

saint of the chapel, he is included only in the distance. If the

Gallery's painting was indeed in a church in Bruges, as Passavant reported, it is possible that it was one of the sources for

this painting by David of a similar scale and function, and

with a related type of enthroned Madonna.

23. J. K. Steppe has identified an analogous development

of Campin's style in the Trinity in Louvain; "Het paneel van

de Triniteit in het Leuvense Stadsmuseum. Nieuwe gegevens

over een enigmatisch schilderij," in Dirk Bouts en zijn tijd

[exh. cat.] (Louvain 1975), 447-495.

References

1833 Passavant, J. D. Kunstreise durch England und

Belgien. Frankfurt-am-Main: 348.

1833 "Nachrichten iiber die alt-niederlandische Malerschule." Kunst-BlattSi: 321.

1839 Spyers, F. A. "Beschryving van twee merkwaerdige Schilderyen uit de School der Gebroeders Van Eyck."

Belgisch Museum voor der Nederduitsche Tael- en Letterkunde en de Geschiedenis des Vaderlands. Ghent, 3: 182—

189, repro. opp. 183 (print by Ch. Onghena).

1843 Passavant, J. D. "Beitrage zur Kenntniss der altniederlandischen Malerschulen bis zur Mitte des sechzehnten

Jahrhunderts." Kunst-Blatt 55: 230.

1845 Michiels, Alfred. Histoire de la peinture flamande

ethollandaise. 4 vols. Brussels, i: 410-412.

1858 Nagler, Georg Kasper. Die Monogrammisten. 5

vols. Munich and Leipzig, i: i, no. i.

1951 Kress: 168, no. 74, repro. 169.

1953 Panofsky. ENP: 425-426.

1954 Davies, Martin. Primitifs flamands. Corpus. The

National Gallery London. 3 vols. Antwerp, 2:177, under no.

57-

1961 Meiss, Millard. " 'Highlands' in the Lowlands: Jan

van Eyck, the Master of Flemalle and the Franco-Italian Tradition." GBA 6e

per. 57: 277, 310, fig. 5.

1961 Seymour, Charles Jr. Art Treasures for America.

London: 12,14, 218, pis. 9-11.

1964 Koch, Robert A. "Flower Symbolism in the Portinari Altar." AB 46: 75.

1966 Frinta, Mojmir S. The Genius of Robert Campin.

The Hague: 118, 120-121, figs. 72-73.

1966 Stange, Alfred. "Vier siidflandrische Marientafeln.

Fin Beitrag zur Genese der niederlandischen Malerei." Alte

undmoderne Kunst n, no. 89: 19, fig. 21.

1967 Van Gelder, J. G. "An early Work by Robert

Campin." OH 82: 3-4.

1971 Sterling, Charles. "Observations on Petrus

Christus." AB 53: 5.

1971 Ward, John L. "A Proposed Reconstruction of an

Altarpiece by Roger van der Weyden." AB 53: 32-33, fig. 9.

1971 De Vos, Dirk. "De Madonna-en-Kindtypologie bij

Rogier van der Weyden." JbBerlin 13: 71, 74-80, 92, 97,

154,156,158, fig. ii.

1972 Davies, Martin. Rogier van der Weyden. London:

261.

1972 Kerber, Ottmar. "Die Hubertus-Tafeln von Rogier

van der Weyden." Pantheon 30: 299.

1974 Bruyn, Josua. Review of Rogier van der Weyden

by Martin Davies. In BurlM 116: 540.

1975 Verdier, Philippe. "La Trinite debout de Champmol." In Etudes d'art franqais offertes a Charles Sterling.

Paris: 85.

1975 NGA: 220, repro. 221.

1977 Eisler, Colin. Review of Petrus Christus by Peter

H. Schabacker. In AB 59: 141.

1977 Eisler: 46-50, fig. 47.

40 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
Petrus Christus

active by 1444—1472/1473

Petrus Christus is first mentioned in the record of those

purchasing Bruges citizenship, which he acquired on 6

July 1444. He was described in the record of this transaction as a native of Baerle, which probably meant the

town of Baerle-Duc on the present Belgian-Dutch border. He continued to be mentioned in Bruges documents after 1444. He and his wife were listed as new

members of the Confraternity of the Dry Tree, which

they joined by 1463. The last reference to him in Bruges

is dated 19 March 1472,.

Christus* oeuvre has been assembled around a number of works that he signed and dated, on either the

original frame, the back, or the picture itself. These

include the Portrait of a Carthusian in the Metropolitan Museum, New York, and the Portrait of Edward

Grymeston on loan to the National Gallery, London,

both dated 1446; Saint Eloy in the Lehman Collection

at the Metropolitan Museum and a Madonna and Child

in the Thyssen-Bentinck collection, Paris, both dated

1449; a pair of altarwings with the Annunciation and

Nativity on one and the Last Judgment on the other in

the Gemáldegalerie, Berlin-Dahlem, dated 1452, and

the Madonna and Child with Saints Francis and Jerome

in the Stádel'sches Kunstinstitut, Frankfurt, the date of

which is usually read as 1457. The form of the inscriptions, as well as the fact that the paintings are signed

and dated at all, recall the working method of Jan van

Eyck. Moreover, several of Christus' paintings, notably

the Last Judgment on the Berlin altarwings and the

Exeter Madonna also in Berlin, derive from Eyckian

compositions. As a result many critics have assumed

that Christus studied with Van Eyck and completed

those works left unfinished at that master's death in

1441. However, we have no information on Christus'

activity or whereabouts before his 1444 purchase of

Bruges citizenship, and those paintings possibly left

unfinished on Van Eyck's death, the Saint Jerome in

Detroit and the Madonna and Child with Saints Barbara and Elizabeth and a Donor in the Frick Collection, do not, after all, show Christus' intervention.

Moreover, his earliest dated paintings do not show a

pronounced Eyckian style.

Whether or not Christus had any personal contact

with Van Eyck, his art has an eclectic character, making

use of motifs from the works of Robert Campin, Rogier van der Weyden, and Albert van Ouwater as well

as those of Van Eyck. Nevertheless, Christus' style is

highly distinctive, emphasizing the integrity of individual forms and the clarity and continuity of spatial recession. Recasting elements taken from contemporary

painting, he frequently brings about a particularly

direct and poignant confrontation of the viewer with

the devotional subject or sitter portrayed.

M.W.

Bibliography

Pâcht, Otto. "Die Datierung der Brüsseler Beweinung des

Petrus Christus." Belvedere 9/10 (1926): 155—166.

Panofsky. ENP. 1953.

Schabacker, Peter H. Petrus Christus. Utrecht, 1974.

Upton, Joel M. "Petrus Christus." Ph.D. diss., Bryn Mawr

College, 1972..

PETRUS CHRISTUS 41

1937.1.40 (40)

The Nativity

c. 1450

Oak (cradled), i3ox 97 (51 Vax 381/*);

painted surface: 127.6 x 94.9 (soV* x 373/s)

Andrew W. Mellon Collection

Technical Notes: There are overpainted losses along the three

vertical joins of the panel and along several vertical cracks, as

well as scattered small overpainted losses along the fine fracture crackle pattern and where abrasion has occurred along

the raised edges of cupped paint. The only larger area of loss

is in Joseph's left shoulder. The Virgin's robe has been almost

completely overpainted. The robe may have been overpainted

to mask the effect of somewhat more extensive losses along

the crackle pattern; such losses are evident in sections of the

original robe still visible between strands of the Virgin's hair.

In spite of these small areas of loss and the overpainting of the

Virgin's robe, the paint layers are generally in good condi-
tion, as is the support. The varnish has yellowed unevenly

and is marked throughout by tiny gray matte spots.

Infrared reflectography reveals what appears to be a brush

underdrawing for the main figurai group. The contours of the

figures and of drapery folds are defined by a long contour line

which is sometimes repeated. Widely spaced parallel hatching strokes indicate areas of shadow (fig. i). The wings of the

two angels to the left of the Virgin were painted over the

underdrawn design of the Virgin's robe; the presumed underdrawing elsewhere in her robe is obscured by overpaint. No

underdrawing was made visible in the background or architecture.

Provenance: Señora O. Yturbe, Madrid.1 (F. M. Zatzenstein,

1930.) (Duveen Brothers, London and New York, 1930—

1937.) Purchased January 19 3 7 by The A. W. Mellon Educational and Charitable Trust, Pittsburgh.

Fig. i. Infrared reflectogram assembly of The Nativity,

1937.1.40 [infrared reflectography: Molly Paries]

THE NATIVITY is among Petrus Christus' most important devotional paintings in the complexity of its

iconography, in the harmony of its composition and

color, and in its scale. The emphasis on the sacrificial

nature of Christ's coming finds an echo in later Netherlandish Nativity scenes, including Hugo van der Goes'

Portinari altarpiece. However, Christus' well-known

susceptibility to the influence of other artists, together

with the appearance of motifs from the Nativity in

paintings by Rogier van der Weyden and Dieric Bouts,

raise the question of the degree to which Christus himself originated this impressive synthesis.

The blue-robed Virgin and the four diminutive

angels kneel in adoration before the newborn Christ

Child. Joseph, clad in a red-brown robe and red cloak

with green lining, has reverently removed his pattens

and hat, and completes the semi-circle of worshippers.

A brilliant radiance, taking the form of a solid golden

mandorla, emanates from the Christ Child, whose

body seems to glow with light. The space occupied by

the Christ Child and worshippers is delimited by the

rectangular framework of the wooden shed. Beyond

the shed, shepherds lean quietly against the ruined wall

of a Romanesque building. In the green landscape other shepherds follow their flocks, heedless of the event

which has just taken place. A marble doorsill and a

carved arch decorated with figures of Adam and Eve

and scenes from Genesis divide the sacred space from

that of the worshipper contemplating the picture.

The Virgin kneeling in adoration before the newborn Christ Child lying naked on the ground derives

from the revelation of Saint Bridget, which had become

the conventional visualization of the Nativity by the

early fifteenth century.2 The angels are not shown singing, as described by Saint Bridget, but kneel in solemn

adoration. The fact that the angels wear eucharistie

vestments, including the deacon's cope but not the

chasuble worn by the celebrant at a solemn high mass,

indicates that the celebrant's role is reserved for Christ

Himself.3 The semicircle of worshippers around the

exposed body of the Child underscores Christ's role as

priest and victim.4 With its two domed buildings, the

town in the background would be understood to be

Jerusalem, the scene of the events of Christ's Passion.5

The necessity of Christ's sacrifice is demonstrated

by the story of the Fall on the framing portal separating

the scene from the viewer's space. Above the figures of

Adam and Eve are scenes of, from left to right, the

expulsion from Paradise, Adam and Eve working the

land and spinning, the sacrifices of Cain and Abel, Cain

slaying Abel, the Lord admonishing Cain, and a scene

that has been variously interpreted as the banished

Cain taking leave of his parents, or Seth, another of

42- EARL Y NETHERLANDIS H PAINTIN G
Petrus Christus, The Nativity, 1937.1.40

PETRUS CHRISTUS 43
Adam's sons, setting off in search of the Tree of Life.6

Man's inability, before Grace, to live according to

God's dictates is further emphasized by the roundels

with figures of fighting warriors, imagery commonly

associated with the Temple of Jerusalem, as were the

crouching figures which support the statues of Adam

and Eve.7

A number of details seem to supplement the explicit

contrast between Old and New Testament and between

man's sin and ineffectual sacrifices and the sufficiency

of Christ's sacrifice. Upton suggested that Joseph's castoff pattens and the plant sprouting from the broken

central beam of the gable are references to the incidents

of the burning bush and Aaron's flowering rod respectively.8

 Both are Old Testament types of the Nativity.

The pattens must in any case be a more general sign of

Joseph's reverence, as is his gesture of removing his

hat.9 The shoots prominently placed at the base of the

gable and framed by the arch telling the story of the

consequences of the Fall may also allude to the Tree of

Life, whose fruit Adam and Eve ate and from whose

wood the cross was made.10 It is possible that these

details carry multiple meanings. The pervasive geometry of the picture must also have been intended to give

added resonance to the contrast between the old and

the new order, through the relation of the framing arch

to the pattern of repeated triangles and squares in the

structure of the shed. Although Upton has interpreted

this geometry as a reference to the Trinity and to the

conventional schema of the Defensorium inviolatae

virginitatis Mariae, we cannot now read its precise

meaning with confidence.11

Critics have been unanimous in attributing the Nativity to Christus,12

 but there is less agreement as to its

date. Most authors have dated the painting early, in the

mid-i44os.13 Exceptions include Sterling, who thought

that the sculptural elements presupposed Rogier van

derWey den's Saint John Altarpiece in Berlin and therefore dated it after I45O.14

 Presuming that Christus

traveled to Italy after 1454, Bazin and Collier proposed a date after this trip.15

 Schabacker, who placed

the Brussels Lamentation toward the end of Christus'

career, also suggested a later date for the Gallery's Nativity.16 Bruyn associated both the Lamentation and

the Nativity with the Saint Eloy of 1449.17

The most commonly cited date of 1445 derives in

part from the notion that Christus was already a mature artist at the time he first appeared in Bruges documents in 1444, that he was in some sense the inheritor

of Jan van Eyck's shop, and that the influence of Rogier

van der Weyden supplanted that of Van Eyck in Christus' work. However, as Upton has demonstrated, there

is no documentary evidence for these assumptions concerning Christus' early career.18

 Further, the notion

that Christus came under the influence of other artists

in orderly sequence seems overly mechanical. Rather,

stylistic differences in versions of the same subject by

Christus may result from differences in scale and function as well as from varying degrees of dependence on

other artists. Thus other treatments of the Nativity by

Christus, the Nativity scene on the altarwings dated

1452 in Berlin and the Nativity formerly with Wildenstein in New York, do not materially help date the

Gallery's painting.19

However, among Christus' known works, earlier

dated paintings—the Portrait of a Carthusian in the

Metropolitan Museum

 20

 and the Edward Grymeston

lent to the National Gallery, London,21 both dated

1446, and the 1449 Saint Eloy in the Lehman Collection22—are characterized by a long, heavy facial type

in which particular emphasis is placed on blocking out

the planes of browbone and jutting nose. The facial

types in the Brussels Lamentation can be associated

with these works. The treatment of the head of Saint

Joseph in the Gallery's painting is comparable to that

of Joseph of Arimathea in the Brussels Lamentation

(fig. 2,). Yet in general this tendency toward heavy facial types appears somewhat softened in the Nativity',

while the coordination of figures in the spatial setting is

more complex and fluent, suggesting a date close to,

but somewhat later than, the Saint Eloy and the Lamentation. On these grounds a date of about 1450 to

1455 is most probable.23

Linked to the problem of date is the question of the

relationship of the Gallery's Nativity to works by

Bouts and Rogier van der Weyden. Although the Gallery's painting presents a particularly impressive, complex, yet focused rendering of the Nativity, the details

of the carved arch relate closely to Bouts' Mary altar in

the Prado (fig. 3)24 and, in a more general way, to

Rogier van der Weyden's Miraflores triptych and Saint

John triptych, both in Berlin.25 Thus, while Rogier's

Miraflores altarpiece, datable before 1445,26 provides

a precedent for archivolt sculpture and column figures

commenting on a sacred scene, Bouts' Mary altarpiece

even includes the warriors in roundels and the crouching figures, this time as consoles supporting the statues

of prophets.

The close correspondence of the Bouts Nativity

scene to the Gallery's painting is also striking, above all

in the shape of the shed, the role and dress of the angels,

and the inclusion of the shepherds leaning pensively

against a Romanesque window. Opinion is divided as

to whether Christus or Bouts originated the composition or whether both paintings reflect a common

source. Bouts' early work is undated, but is usually

44

EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Fig. 2,. Petrus Christus, Lamentation, Brussels, Musées Royaux des

Beaux-Arts de Belgique [photo: Copyright A.C.L. Brussels]

Fig. 3. Dirck Bouts, Altarpiece of the Virgin, Madrid, Prado [photo: Prado]

placed in the mid-i44os.27 However, it seems unlikely

that Christus' version is directly dependent on Bouts'

Nativity, since its composition is more complex. Moreover, the various scenes of Bouts' triptych include other explicitly Rogerian figure conventions, notably the

group of Mary and Elizabeth.28 It is possible that the

Nativity scenes by Christus and Bouts reflect a common Rogerian model. Indeed, there are a number of

indications that Van der Weyden may have executed

an influential Nativity composition with a frontallyplaced shed.29

Regarding the placement of the Nativity within a

PETRUS CHRISTUS 45
sculpted arch, the direction of influences and Christus'

own contribution are less ambiguous. Christus apparently adapted a device conceived by Rogier for a linked

series of devotional images, using it instead to frame a

single scene. In the triptychs by Van der Weyden and

Bouts, the choice of subjects for the enframed scenes,

the continuation of the narrative sequence of archivolt

scenes across several arches, and the use of repeated

pairs of saints or prophets as column figures all indicate the appropriateness of the format to a series. The

function of the Van der Weyden and Bouts triptychs as

devotional sequences is further emphasized by the repetition of bays echoing the springing of the arches in

the Miraflores altarpiece and in the repetition of the

gabled shed in the Prado Mary altarpiece. However, it

is unlikely that the Gallery's painting was conceived as

part of such a linked series since the figures of Adam

and Eve could not be supplemented by comparable

pairs of figures on other panels.30 They stand alone

and, with the Genesis narrative, point to the meaning

of this particular devotional subject. By contrast, in

Bouts' altarpiece, Genesis scenes fill the arch of the

Annunciation section, while Passion scenes run across

the arches of the Visitation, Nativity, and Adoration of

the Magi. On the Annunciation panel fewer archivolt

scenes are devoted to the consequences of the Fall, and

the column figures are prophets as in the other sections.

Christus thus distills the elements of the arch altarpiece, using them to focus and elaborate the meaning

of a single devotional image. The whole work is made

more evocative by Christus' characteristically sensitive

treatment of light and space and by the care with which

degrees of distance from the newborn Child are expressed.

M.W.

Notes

1. The picture seems never to have belonged to the

Duchess of Parcent, as claimed in Duveen Pictures 1941, no.

177; see letter of 8 April 1982. from her daughter, the Princess

of Hohenlohe-Langenburg, in curatorial files.

2. Henrik Cornell, The Iconography of the Nativity of

Christ (Uppsala Universitets Ârsskrift), Uppsala, 192,4, i—

2.1, for Saint Bridget's revelation. The most comprehensive

discussion of the iconography of the Gallery's painting is

Upton 1975, 49-79.

3. M. B. McNamee, S.J., "Further Symbolism in the Portinari Altarpiece," AB 45 (1963), 142-143, in connection

with the Portinari altarpiece.

4. Upton 1975, 66-68, and Lane 1975, 480, 484-485,

stress the Eucharistie symbolism of the Nativity. Particularly

interesting is Upton's suggestion that the solid radiance on

which the Christ Child lies can be interpreted as a paten.

Contemporary Netherlandish Nativity scenes with a similar

solid radiance include the Breviary of Philip the Good, Brussels, Bibl. Royale, Ms. 9511, f. 43 verso (repro. Paul Durrieu,

La miniature flamande [Brussels and Paris, 192.1], pi. 9) and

the Nativity of 1448 in the Groot Vleeshuis (Gent: Duizend

Jaar Kunst en Cultuur, 3 vols., exh. cat. [Ghent, 1975], i:

63—70, fig. 9). However, as the radiance in the Gallery's

painting overlaps the heavily overpainted robe of the Virgin,

there may be some doubt as to its original form.

5. The prominent octagonal building with flying buttresses and domed roof recurs in other Netherlandish recreations of Jerusalem, most particularly in the miniature of the

Betrayal of Christ from the Turin-Milan Hours, repro. Friedlander, vol. i (1967), pi. 29. To the right of this octagonal

structure in the Gallery's painting is a lower domed building

with buttress-like turrets. These two exotic buildings in an

otherwise typical Flemish town presumably represent sacred

monuments in Jerusalem, possibly the Temple and the Church

of the Holy Sepulchre respectively. For fifteenth-century notions of the appearance of these monuments, see Carol Krinsky, "Representations of the Temple of Jerusalem before

1500," /WC7 33 (1970), 1-19; for the Church of the Holy

Sepulchre, see also Richard Krautheimer, "Introduction to

an 'Iconography of Christian Architecture,' "/WC7 5 (1942,),

1-2,0.

6. De Tolnay 1941, 180, interpreted the scene as Cain

founding his race in the land of Nod, while Panofsky 1953,

312, 490, suggested the apocryphal incident of Seth's departure in search of the Tree of Life. Karl Birkmeyer 1961,105,

reasserted de Tolnay's interpretation. Steefel 1962, 237-

238, connected Panofsky's suggestion with a possible reference to the Tree of Life in the shoot growing from the kingpost of the shed. Upton 1975, 62—63, and 77—78, considered

that the sculptural group represents Cain taking leave of his

parents, but that the figure "might well have a double identity"

and represent Seth as well.

In this archivolt group the elderly figures with spade and

distaff presumably represent Adam and Eve. The gestures of

Adam and his son are quite unexpressive; each extends a

clasped fist. This scene does not conflict with representations

of Seth's leavetaking. While Adam's approaching death is

emphasized in the cycle in the Cleves Hours where he is

shown on his deathbed (repro. John Plummer, The Hours of

Catherine of Cleves [New York, 1966], pi. 79), in the Boec

van den Houte, published by Veldener in Kuilenberg in 1483

and probably employing cuts of an earlier date, Adam and

Seth stand opposite each other and Adam holds a spade (repro. J. P. Berjeau, Geschiedenis van het heyliche Cruys; or

History of the Holy Cross [London, 1863]). Nevertheless, it

is unlikely that Christus would conclude the narrative sequence devoted to the Fall and its evil consequences with a

scene that was the beginning of a long apocryphal cycle tracing the history of the Cross, with its promise of health and

eternal life, into the Christian era. As Birkmeyer pointed out,

the relationship between the arch and the scene beyond it is

one of contrast, not continuity.

7. Ward 1975, 203, cites other examples of warriors on

buildings understood as the Synogogue. For the association

of the crouching figures with sin, see Upton 1975, 62, and

Krinsky 1970, 8—9 (as in n. 5). The combination of warriors

and atlas figures occurs on a drawing in the StàdePsches

Kunstinstitut; Baldass 1952,15, fig. 16.

8. Upton 1975, 72-73.

9. Discarded pattens carrying this more general meaning

occur in Christus' own Portrait of a Male Donor in the Na46 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
tional Gallery (1961.9.10), as well as in Van Eyck's Arnolfini

Wedding Portrait (Friedlànder, vol. i [1967], pi. 2.0). In the

Portinari altarpiece Joseph has also removed his pattens and

hood (Friedlànder, vol. 4 [1969], no. 10, pi. 15). Saint Bridget's

description of the Virgin removing her shoes, mantle, and veil

before the birth may also be relevant here; see Cornell 192.4,

12 (asinn. 2).

10. Steefel 1962, 2.37—2.38, and Upton 1975, 77~7%-

11. Upton 1975,73-74. It should also be pointed out that

the Defensorium inviolatae virginitatis Mariae, which in

some simplified versions employs a scheme of superimposed

rectangle and rhombus as a frame for typological devices, is

found almost exclusively in Austria and southern Germany.

No Netherlandish examples are cited by Julius von Schlosser,

"Zur Kenntnis der künstlerischen Überlieferung im spàten

Mittelalter," JbWien 23 (1902), 287-313, and Cornell

1924, 76-81 (as in n. 2).

12. The only dissenting opinions are Wilenski 1960, 33,

and a doubt as to the painting's authenticity on the part of

Colin Eisler recorded by Pañofsky 1953, 311, 489.

13. Baldass 1932, 114, and 1952, 98-99; Schóne 1938,

56; DeTolnay 1941, 179; Panofsky 1953, 310-311; Bruyn

1957, 107; Birkmeyer 1961, 103, 105; Guttler 1968, 129;

Ward 1968, 187; Gellman 1970,147; and Lane 1975,484.

Otto Pàcht did not know the Gallery's Nativity when he

wrote his important article on Christus' chronology, "Zur

Datierung der Brüsseler Beweinung des Petrus Christus,"

Belvedere 9/10 (1926), 155—166.

14. Sterling 1971, 19, using the Nativity as an example of

the difficulty in finding sure grounds for dating Christus'

work. He notes that the prominent shoot growing from the

shed may be connected with Christus' membership in the

Confraternity of the Dry Tree, which he had joined by 1463 ;

hence, he considered a date as late as the early 14605 to be

possible.

15. Bazin 1952, 199-202, hypothesizing a trip to Italy

between 1454 and 1463, and Collier 1979, 34. There is,

however, no documentary basis for such a trip; see under

1961.9.11, Portrait of a Female Donor by Christus.

16. Schabacker 1974, 44—46, 66—67, dating the Nativity

1458-1460 and the Lamentation c. 1465. For the Lamentation, see Friedlànder, vol. i (1967), pi. 93.

17. Bruyn 1975, 71-72. See also Châtelet 1980, 90, 184,

and Panhans-Bühler 1978, 71—72.

18. Joel M. Upton, "Petrus Christus," Ph.D. diss., Bryn

Mawr College, 1972, 36-41.

19. Friedlànder, vol. i (1967), pis. 77, 82. Closest in composition to the Gallery's painting is a Nativity with a sculpted

arch recently acquired by the Groeningemuseum, Bruges, together with a companion piece, The Annunciation, signed

and dated 1457; Pieper 1984, 114-123, pis. I, II, and Eisler

1984,451—469, figs, i, 5. A thorough technical report on the

Bruges panels is a prerequisite for any analysis of their relationship to the Nativity and other dated works.

20. Friedlànder, vol. i (1967), pi. 74.

21. Friedlànder, vol. i (1967), pi. 73.

22. Friedlànder, vol. i (1967), pi. 75.

23. In this context, it may be noteworthy that the halo of

closely spaced gold rays, like that of the Virgin in the Nativity, occurs only in the 1449 Saint Eloy and the 1449 Madonna and Child in the Thyssen-Bentinck collection (Friedlander, vol. i [1967], pis. 75-76) among Christus' surviving

works.

24. Friedlànder, vol. 3 (1968), no. i, pis. 1—2.

25. Friedlànder, vol. 2 (1967), nos. 1-2, pis. 1-5.

26. See Rogier van der Weyden biography and also Grosshans 1981, 49—112.

27. Friedlànder, vol. 3 (1968), 24, Schone 1938, 4—5, 7,

and Panofsky 1953, 314.

28. Compare Rogier's early Visitation in Leipzig; Friedlander, vol. 2 (1967), no. 5, pi. 12.

29. Schabacker 1974, 67—69, also raised this possibility.

The Bladelin triptych in Berlin, with its obliquely placed

shed, is the only surviving full-scale Nativity by Rogier. However, the arch above the Birth of the Baptist in Rogier's Saint

John triptych in Berlin includes a Nativity with frontal shed,

Joseph carrying a walking stick and removing his hat, and the

ox and ass, which are arrayed parallel to the plane of the

shed; repro. Anne Markham Schulz, "The Columba Altarpiece and Rogier van der Weyden's stylistic development,"

Munchnerjb series III, 22 (1971), fig. 25. The repetition of

these and other elements including adoring angels in several

depictions of the Nativity produced under the influence of

Rogier suggests a Rogerian prototype apart from the Bladelin

altarpiece. Compare the epitaph of Jehan du Sart (d. 1456)

and Margrite de Gherles (d. 1435) in the Musée d'Histoire,

Tournai (repro. Schulz 1971, fig. 29); the Nativity scene on

the Schóppingen Altar by the Master of the Schôppingen

Altar (Paul Pieper, "Zum Werl-Altar des Meisters von Flémalle," Wallraf-Richartz-Jahrbuch 16 (1954), 101-102, fig.

65, who considers that the Westphalian painter, known for

his rather literal references to Netherlandish painting, here

reflects a lost work by the Master of Flémalle); the central

Nativity scene on an altarpiece in the Cloisters by an anonymous Brussels artist, which also includes borrowings from

the Leipzig Visitation and from the Bladelin altarpiece for the

episodes of the Tiburtine Sibyl and the vision of the Three

Magi (repro. Schabacker 1974, %• 3 6);

 and a Nativity in the

Prado, one of four panels from the monastery of Sopetrán by

an anonymous Hispano-Flemish master (repro. Enrique Lafuente Ferrari, "Las Tablas de Sopetrán," Boletín de la Sociedad Española de Excursiones 37 [1929], 89—91, pi. 2).

The Berlin archivolt scene and the Nativities in Schôppingen

and in the Prado, as well as the Gallery's Nativity, show

Joseph with hat in hand, rather than his more usual gesture of

holding a candle.

In style, Bouts' Prado altarpiece relates, not to Rogier, but

to Ouwater and Northern Netherlandish painting. References

to Ouwater's one surviving documented work are also detectable in Christus' Saint Eloy and Lamentation; see Schabacker 1974, 63—65. These common stylistic connections do

not necessarily bear on the compositional similarities between

the Nativities by Christus and Bouts, however.

30. Birkmeyer 1961, 107, also noted that the statues of

the first parents implied a single scene rather than a series.

These observations on structure and function also tend to

suggest a common source for Christus and Bouts.

References

1925 Friedlànder, Max J. "Neues iiber Petrus Christus." Der Kunstwanderer (May): 297.

1932 Baldass, Ludwig. "Die Entwicklung des Dirk

Bouts: Fine Stilgeschichtliche Untersuchung." JbWien N.F.

6: 114.

1937 Cortissoz, Royal. An Introduction to the Mellon

Collection. Privately printed: 33-34, repro. opp. 33.

PETRUS CHRISTUS 47
1937 Frankfurter, Alfred M. "The Mellon Gift to the

Nation." ArtN 35 (9 January): 10, repro. n.

1937 Friedlànder. Vol. 14: 78-79, pi. Nachtrag III (vol.

2. 1967: 104, no, pi. 102.).

1937 Schône, Wolfgang. "Über einige altniederlàndische

Bilder, vor allem in Spanien." Jb Berlin 58: 159.

1938 Vaughan, Malcolm. "Painting in the Age of Faith."

Parnassus 10, no. 7: repro. 2.

1938 Schône, Wolfgang. Dieric Bouts und seine Schule.

Berlin and Leipzig: 23-2.4, 2.8, 55-56.

1939 Held, Julius S. Review of Die altniederlàndische

Malerei by Max J. Friedlànder. In Art in America 27: 88.

1941 Duveen Pictures in Public Collections of America.

New York: no. 177, repro.

1941 NGA: 39—40.

1941 Tolnay, Charles de. "Flemish Paintings in the National Gallery of Art." Mag Art 34: 179—181, figs. 7—9.

1941 Held, Julius S. "Masters of Northern Europe in the

National Gallery." ArtN40 (June): u—12, repro.

1941/1942 Einem, Herbert von. "Entwicklungsfragen

bei Hugo van der Goes." Dos Werk des Künstlers 2: 167.

1942 Schapiro, Meyer. " 'Cain's Jaw-Bone that Did the

First Murder.' " AB 24: 208.

1946 Friedlànder, Max J. "The Death of the Virgin by

Petrus Christus." BurlM 88: 159.

1948 Puyvelde, Leo van. The Flemish Primitives. New

York: 27, pi. 51.

1949 Mellon: 53, repro.

1952 Baldass, Ludwig. Jan van Eyck. London: 98.

1952 Bazin, Germain. "Petrus Christus et les rapports

entre l'Italie et la Flandre au milieu du XVe siècle." La Revue

des Arts 2: 199—202.

1953 Panofsky. BNP: 203, 311-315, 321, 333, 489-

490, fig. 402.

1957 Shapley, Fern Rusk, and John Shapley. Comparisons in Art: A Companion to the National Gallery of Art,

Washington, D.C. New York: 44, fig. 3.

1957 Bruyn, Josua. Van Eyck Problemen: De Levensbron. Utrecht: 107-108.

1960 Wilenski, R. H. Flemish Painters, 1430-1830. z

vols. New York, i: 33, 524, 686, pi. 30.

1960 Snyder, James E. "The Early Haarlem School of

Painting: I. Ouwater and the Master of the Tiburtine Sibyl."

^642:44, fig. 5.

1961 Birkmeyer, Karl M. "The Arch Motif in Netherlandish Painting of the Fifteenth Century: A Study in Changing Religious Imagery." AB 43: 103-109, fig. 25.

1962 Birkmeyer, Karl M. "Notes on the Two Earliest

Paintings by Rogier van der Weyden." AB 44: 331.

1962 Steefel, Lawrence D., Jr. "An Unnoticed Detail in

Petrus Christus' Nativity at the National Gallery, Washington." AB 44: 237-238.

1962 Philippot, Paul. "La fin du XVe siècle et les origines d'une nouvelle conception de l'image dans la peinture

des Pays-Bas." BMRB n: 9-10.

1964 Walker: 98, repro. 99.

1964 Gaya Ñuño, Juan Antonio. Pintura europea perdidapor España de Van Eyck a Tiépolo. Madrid: 22, no. 15.

1965 Châtelet, Albert. "Sur un jugement dernier de

Dieric Bouts." NKJ16: 37.

1968 Jongh, E. de. "Speculaties over Jan Gossaerts Lucas-madonna in Praag." Bulletin Museum Boymans-van

Beuningen 19: 52—53.

1968 Cuttler. Northern Painting: 129-130, 134, fig.

151.

1968 Ward, John L. "A New Look at the Friedsam

Annunciation." AB 50: 186-187.

1968 Whinney, Margaret. Early Flemish Painting. New

York and Washington: 69, 151, pi. 37.

1969 Blum, Shirley Neilsen. Early Netherlandish Triptych s. Berkeley and Los Angeles: 121—122.

1970 Koch, Robert A. Review of Northern 'Painting by

Charles Cuttler. In AB 52: 204.

1970 Gellman, Lola B. "The 'Death of the Virgin' by

Petrus Christus: An Altar-piece Reconstructed." BurlM 112:

147.

1971 Sterling, Charles. "Observations on Petrus Christus." AB 53: 19, figs. 37, 39.

1972 Dogaer, Georges. "Miniature flamande vers 1475—

1485." Scriptorium 26: 104.

1972 Schabacker, Peter H. "Saint Eloy: Problems of

Provenance, Sources and Meaning." AQ 35: 114.

1972 Schabacker, Peter H. Review of Rogier van der

Weyden by Martin Davies. In AQ 35:423.

1974 Schabacker, Peter H. Petrus Christus. Utrecht: 25,

27, 29, 34, 43-46, 48, 50, 58, 60-61, 67-69, 74,108,114,

118, cat. no. 19, fig. 19.

1975 Bruyn, Josua. Review of Petrus Christus by Peter

H. Schabacker. In OH 89: 71-72.

1975 Pâcht, Otto, and Ulrike Jenni. Die illuminierten

Handschriften und Inkunabeln der Ôsterreichischen Nationalbibliothek, Hollàndische Schule. Vienna: 65.

1975 Lane, Barbara G. '"Ecce Pañis Angelorum': The

Manger as Altar in Hugo's Berlin Nativity." AB 57: 480,

484-485,6^15.

1975 Upton, Joel M. "Devotional Imagery and Style in

the Washington Nativity, by Petrus Christus." StHist 7: 49—

79, figs, i, 8-9, 17-18, 22-23.

1975 Ward, John L. "Hidden Symbolism in Van Eyck's

Annunciations." AB 57: 203.

1975 NGA: 68, repro. 69.

1976 Lane, Barbara G. Letter to the editor, AB 58: 641.

1977 Decker, Bernhard. "Zur geschichtlichen Dimension in Michael Pachers Altaren von Gries und St. Wolfgang." Stàdel-JahrbuchN.F. 6: 309, 318.

1978 Panhans-Buhler, Ursula. Eklektizismus und Originalitàt im Werk des Petrus Christus. Vienna: 71, 76, 78—79,

fig. 52.

1979 Collier, James M. "The Kansas City Petrus Christus: Its Importance and Dating." The Nelson Gallery and the

Atkins Museum Bulletin 5 (September): 34.

1980 Châtelet, Albert. Early Dutch Painting: Painting

in the Northern Netherlands in the Fifteenth Century. New

York: 90,184.

1981 Grosshans, Rainald. "Rogier van der Weyden.

Der Marienaltar aus der Kartause Mir aflores. " JbBerlin N.F.

23:61,65,94.

1984 Eisler, Colin T. "A Nativity Signed PETRUS XPI

ME FECIT 1452." Album Amicorum Herman Liebaers.

Brussels: 451-469, fig. 2.

1984 Pieper, Paul. "Petrus Christus, Verkundigung und

Anbetung des Kindes." Pantheon 42: 120-122, fig. 6.

1984 Sterling, Charles. "A la recherche des oeuvres de

Zanetto Bugatto: une nouvelle piste." Scritti di storia

dell'arte in onore di Federico Zeri. 2 vols. Milan, 1984, i:

177-

48 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
1984 Lane, Barbara G. The Altar and the Altarpiece.

Sacramental Themes in Early Netherlandish Painting. New

York: 59, fig. 37.

1961.9.10 (1367)

Portrait of a Male Donor

c. 1455

Oak (cradled), 42 x 11.2. (i6V2 x 83/s)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Technical Notes: Wooden strips, appx. 0.5 cm wide, were

attached to all sides of the original oak panel, which has been

planed down, mounted on a thin layer of softwood, and

cradled. The top strip has now been removed. The panel has

no unpainted edges and may have been trimmed very slightly

within the painted area on all four sides. The painting was

restored by Stephen Pichetto about 1938. The paint surface

is, in general, in very good condition. There is some scattered

repainting along the crackle pattern in the robe and on the

right side of the donor's face, as well as larger areas of thin

repaint along the right edge of the painting, in the door sill,

and to the right of the donor's sleeve. Retouching to the right

of the donor's face appears to mask traces of an earlier contour here.

Provenance: Private collection, Genoa.1 Count Alessandro

Contini-Bonacossi, Florence, by 1937. Samuel H. Kress,

New York, 1937—1961.

Notes

i. I have been unable to find a basis for the Genovese

provenance of the panels beyond an unattributed statement

in the Gallery's file from the Kress Foundation. No donor

portraits or triptych positively identifiable with 1961.9.10

and 1961.9.11 are listed in Carlo Giuseppe Ratti, Instruzione

di quanta puo' vedersi di più hello in Genova in pittura,

scultura ed architettura, 3 vols. (Genoa, 1780), or Federigo

Alizeri, Guida artística per la Città di Genova, 2 vols.

(Genoa, 1846).

1961.9.11 (1368)

Portrait of a Female Donor

c. 1455

Oak (cradled), 41.8 x 2.1.6 (i67/i6 x 8V2)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Inscription:

On woodcut: O s ... a elisah. / O .../.. .

Technical Notes: Wooden strips appx. 0.5 cm wide have

been attached to all sides of the original oak panel, which has

been planed down, mounted on a thin layer of softwood, and

cradled. Both this panel and 1961.9.10 are made from single

boards, each cut from the same tree.1 The painting was restored by Stephen Pichetto about 1938. The paint surface is

in general in very good condition. There are scattered small

retouchings in the face, robe, and background, as well as

some larger areas of repaint. These are in the wall just above

the figure's hands, at the left edge of the painting above the

book, and at the bottom of the dress. Infrared reflectography

and infrared photographs show that the prie-dieu was painted

over the floor tiles and the robe of the donor. Guidelines for

the tiled floor also extend beneath the donor's robe. Before

the inclusion of the prie-dieu, the wall of the chamber met the

tiled floor appx. 10 cm from the bottom edge of the panel.

This junction is also visible in raking light.

Provenance: Same as 1961.9.10.

THESE TWO PANELS must have flanked a central

devotional image to form a triptych or small private

altarpiece. The two donor figures kneel in a complex

interior space that opens onto a hilly landscape

through an archway and terrace on the left and an

arcaded porch on the right. Hence, the central panel

would also have depicted a domestic interior, probably

as a setting for the Madonna and Child. In deference to

the holy figures in the missing central scene2 the husband has taken off his pattens and chaperon. The

woman's devotions are aided by the prayer book open

before her and by the woodcut of Saint Elizabeth of

Hungary affixed to the wall.3 A restrained harmony of

gray and brown tones links the two panels, which are

enlivened by the blue-green distant landscape and by

touches of deep scarlet in the woman's velvet robe, the

man's chaperon, and the coats of arms. Some subtleties

of color and texture have probably been lost with time.

Thus, the husband's deep purple velvet robe, the green

cloth on which the wife kneels, and the marble insets of

the arcade behind her have darkened almost to black.

In spite of their characteristic Flemish dress, the two

donors were probably Italian. The coats of arms hanging behind each figure are apparently those of the

Lomellini and Vivaldi respectively, two prominent

families in the mercantile patriciate of Genoa.4 The

two panels are also said to have come from Genoa. If

the woodcut image refers to the patron's name saint, as

seems likely, an Elisabetta or Isabella Vivaldi whose

husband was a Lomellini may eventually be singled out

as the commissioner of the small altarpiece.5

Since the two donor portraits first came to light in

the mid 19305, they have been attributed without resPETRUS CHRISTU S 49
Petrus Christus, Portrait of a Male Donor, 1961.9.10

50 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
Petrus Christus, Portrait of a Female Donor, 1961.9.11

PETRUS CHRISTUS 51
ervation to Petrus Christus. Their date is more difficult

to determine, both because of the eclectic nature of

Christus' work and because his surviving dated paintings all fall within a relatively short time span, with

none between 1457 and his death after 19 March

I472..6 Most critics place the Gallery's donor portraits

among Christus' mature paintings in the i45os.7 However, the dating of the Gallery's pair has been complicated by the possibility of an Italian trip by Christus

and by the question of the panels' relationship to the

Madonna and Child with Saints Jerome and Francis in

Frankfurt (figs. 1—2.), whose date is usually read as

I457-8

The assumption of an Italian trip by Christus stems

from the lack of references to the painter in Bruges

documents from 1454 to 1463,9 from mention of a

Fiero di Burges at the Sforza court in a document of

March I456,10 and from Christus' evolution toward a

rational projection of space. The documentary evidence for an Italian trip does not bear close scrutiny.11

Nor does the question seem relevant to the Gallery's

two donor portraits because the northern dress of the

sitters suggests that the panels were painted in Flanders.

The resident Genovese community in Bruges or Genovese merchants with business in Bruges could have

provided Christus with this commission.12 Members

of the Lomellini family played a prominent role in the

g. i. Petrus Christus, Madonna and Child with Saints Jerome

d Francis, Frankfurt, Stadel'sches Kunstinstitut und Stadtische

alerie [photo: Stadel'sches Kunstinstitut, Ursula Edelmann,

otographer]

flow of letters of exchange between Bruges, London,

and Genoa during this period.13

Barbara Lane first suggested that the two donor

portraits originally flanked the Madonna and Child

with Saints Jerome and Francis in Frankfurt, noting

that Italian patrons were particularly likely to favor

these two saints.14 In terms of their dimensions the

three panels could indeed make up a triptych, though

the Madonna and Child is 4.9 centimeters taller than

the wings. The Frankfurt panel has been cut slightly on

the left so that the Madonna is no longer in the center

of the panel and Saint Jerome has lost the cardinal's hat

that would have hung down his back.15 Lane's hypothesis is also plausible in terms of subject and general

style. The tonal balance between interior and landscape is very similar in the Frankfurt and Washington

panels, as are the doll-like figure types. The way the

heads of the female donor and Saint Francis are formed

is analogous. Yet small private altarpieces were undoubtedly an important part of Christus' production,

being especially well suited to the quiet nature of his

art, and the survival of parts of such works need not

lead to the assumption that they belong together. Somewhat stereotyped figures such as those inhabiting the

Frankfurt and Washington panels are characteristic of

Christus, as is the repetition of architectural elements

like the tiled floor, the brick wall with stone top, or the

balustrade with marble insets.16 Moreover, as Schabacker pointed out, the juxtaposition of these three

panels presents problems given the very fine adjustments in space, light, and surface pattern habitually

made by Christus.17 The donor figures dominate the

proposed whole because of their larger scale and their

position in the front plane. Apart from this disproportion, the combined interior space is not coherent. Thus

the door standing open behind Saint Francis would

effectively block the female donor's view of the holy

figures. The arcaded porch in the right wing is not

continuous with the porch visible through the door in

the Frankfurt panel. The latter is supported by a fulllength column barely visible to the right of Saint Francis,

rather than by a half column, and its capital appears to

have a different profile from those in the arcade behind

the female donor. The two donors themselves seem to

kneel at the entrance of a shallower room, which

would contain the sacred figures they adore and whose

space, as is evident from the orthogonals of the two

doorjambs, would be projected at a wider angle than

that of the Frankfurt panel. Above all, the juxtaposition of the three panels would leave the donors isolated

on the wings, rather than presented to the Madonna

and Child by the two saints, which is the customary

arrangement.
In conclusion, the Gallery's two wings must be quite

close in date to the Frankfurt Madonna and Child,

though in all probability they did not form a single

altarpiece. Some subtle stylistic differences detectable

between the donors and the dated panel in Frankfurt

tend to suggest a date slightly before 1457 for the

Washington pair. As Collier pointed out,18 the projection of space is less disciplined in the donor panels.

Moreover, the drapery folds are stiffer and more angular. A softer, more shadowy atmosphere surrounds the

Frankfurt figures, though this may be due in part to the

paintings' condition, since the donors have been cleaned

more recently. Finally, while dress cannot give a firm

indication of date, the lady's rather loose sleeves and

the bulky fabric of her bodice pleated into the waistband reflect an earlier fashion than the constricted silhouette of the later 14505.19

 Therefore a date of about

1455 seems likely for the donor portraits.

M.w.

Notes

i. See Appendix I.

i. See also the Nativity by Christus, 1937.1.40.

3. Three crowns, on her head and in either hand, identify

her as Saint Elizabeth, as does the barely legible inscription in

red below the image. The print is attached to the wall with

sealing wax. Along with the Annunciation in Brussels by a

follower of Robert Campin (Friedlànder, vol. 2. [1967], no.

54b, pi. 80), this is one of the earliest depictions of the everyday use of a woodcut; see also Alan Fern, "The Print as

Subject," The Baltimore Museum of Art, Annual /V, Part 2.

(i97z), 98-105.

4. Or, a chief gules (with a decorative foliate scroll in

silver) for the left panel. This corresponds to the Lomellini

arms as given in the Libro ¿foro, Genoa, Biblioteca Berio,

sezione di conservazione, m.r. cf. bis 4.6., under Lomellini (I

am grateful to Susan Barnes for this information), and in

Vittorio Spreti, Enciclopedia storico-nobiliare italiana, 9

vols. (Milan, 192.8-1936), 8: 2.2.7; however, in his main entry Spreti describes the upper portion as purple, not red, 4:

140. For the Vivaldi arms on the right panel, per pale gules

and argent, on a chief or a demi-eagle naissant sable, see

Spreti, 6: 955. Eisler 1977, 51, 53, noted that the husband's

arms could also belong to a member of the Van Meghem

family.

5. The family trees culled from Genovese records and

listed in Natale Battilana, Geneologie délie famiglie nobili di

Genova, 3 vols. (Genoa, 182,5—1833), include relatively few

Vivaldi women married to Lomellini men within the time

frame of the portraits, for example, several daughters of Luca

Vivaldi, including a Battina Vivaldi married to Domenico

Lomellino, listed in Battilana under Vivaldi, 10. An attempt

to identify the sitters should go back to the archival documents on which Battilana based his lists.

6. See Biography.

7. Exceptions are Upton 1975, 52., who dated them c.

1445, and Burroughs 1938, 2.50, who erroneously placed

them in the 14605 on the basis of costume (see n. 19 below).

8. In the Stàdel'sches Kunstinstitut und Stadtische Galerie.

46.7 x 44.4 cm; the panel has edging strips rather than unpainted margins on all four sides. The third digit of the date is

not clearly legible. First recorded by J. D. Passavant in the

Aders collection, London, Kunstreise durch England und

Belgien (Frankfurt, 1833), 92.

9. Documents of late April and early May 1454 relate to

Christus' commission from the Count of Etampes to make

three copies of a revered icon in Cambrai; W. H. James Weale,

"Peintres brugeois. Les Christus," Annales de la société

Fig. 2,. Composite of 1961.9.10,1961.9.11, and Fig. i [photo: NGA]

PETRUS CHRISTUS 53
d'émulation de Bruges 59 (1909), 101—102.. 1463 is the very

approximate date by which Christus and his wife were inscribed in the Confraternity of the Dry Tree, Bruges; see Joel

M. Upton, "Petrus Christus," Ph.D. diss., Bryn Mawr College, 1972,, 35, 44, 432,, no. 9, with a useful compilation of

documents relating to Christus.

10. Francesco Malaguzzi-Valeri, Pittori lombardi del quattrocento (Milan, 1902.), 88-89, 2,175 first called attention to

this name and to an Antonello da Sicilia and ilPisanello in a list

of Sforza dependents. C. de Mandach, "Un atelier provençal

du XVe siècle," Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres,

Paris. Fondation Eugène Piot, Monuments et mémoires 16

(1909), 196-199, linked this reference to PetrusChristus; see

also Bazin 1952., 195-2,08.

11. Fernanda Wittgens showed that the document quoted

by Malaguzzi-Valeri was actually a letter requesting payment

for a long list of provisional et balestieri, that is, soldiers; "La

pittura lombarda nella seconda meta del quattrocento," Storia

di Milano, 16 vols. (Milan, 1953—1966), 7: 751—752.

12. For Genovese merchants living in or trading with

Bruges, see Jacques Heers, Gênes au XVe siècle: Activité

économique et problèmes sociaux (Paris, 1961). Some early

documentary references indicate that Christus' work was

appreciated in Italy. A portrait of a French lady by Pietro

Cresti di Bruggia, included in Lorenzo de' Medici's 1492

inventory, has frequently been associated with the Portrait of

a Lady in Berlin; Schabacker 1974, 109—110, fig. 16. In his

1524 letter to Marcantonio Michiel, Pietro Summonte mentioned having seen, in the Sannazaro collection, Naples, a

little painting of Christ in Majesty by Petrus Christi, pictor

famoso in Fiandra, Fausto Nicolini, L'arte napoletana del

rinascimento e la lettera di Pietro Summonte a Marcantonio

Michiel (Naples, 1925), 163. Payment in 1451 to am0 pier o

de fiandra for an altarpiece for the church of the Carita in

Venice has been linked to Christus; Lome Campbell, "Notes

on Netherlandish pictures in the Véneto in the fifteenth and

sixteenth centuries," BurlM 123 (1981), 467-468.

13. Heers 1961, 80-81, and "Les génois en Angleterre:

La crise de 1458-1466" in Société et économie à Gênes

(XIV—XVe siècles) (London, 1979), 819. For the activity of

the Vivaldi family in Bruges, see Eisler 1977, 51, 53.

14. Lane 1970, 390—393, crediting Judith Levenson,

"Petrus Christus and the Rational Use of Space," Master's

thesis, Institute of Fine Arts, New York, 1965, 35-45, with

the same conclusion. See also Lola B. Gellman, "Petrus

Christus," Ph.D. diss., The Johns Hopkins University, 1970,

237-244, 447-449. The proposed triptych was accepted by

Gellman 1975/1976, 33, and Panhans-Bühler 1978, 118-

123. Eisler, in his review of Schabacker 1977,141, and in his

catalogue of the Kress collection, 1977, 5^-54, appears to

accept this reconstruction and the possibility of an Italian

trip; see also Eisler 1984,465, and Sterling 1984,177. Lane's

hypothesis was rejected by Schabacker 1971, 281-282, and

1974, 112-114; Paolini 1980, 164; and Paul Eich (conversation of 28 March 1983).

15. Paul Eich, who graciously helped me examine the

Frankfurt painting, suggested that the round object at Jerome's feet could be the paw of his attendant lion.

16. These elements recur, for example, in the Madonna

and Child in Budapest, in the Madonna and Child in a Porch

in Madrid, and in the Madonna and Child in Kansas City;

Friedlànder, vol. i (1967), pis. 83, 88,109.

17. See n. 14. He notes that the distant hills in the Madonna and the Female Donor are not in the same plane.

18. Collier 1979, 36-37.

19. Letters from Stella Mary Newton to Colin Eisler, 4

May 1967 and from Margaret Scott to the author, 7 May

1982, in curatorial files. Margaret Scott suggests that, since

the man's gown would have been fashionable about 1430,

this may be a case of an older or conservative man married to

a more fashionable woman. For the more constricted silhouette that came into fashion in the course of the 14505, see

1937.1.44, Rogier van der Weyden, Portrait ofa.Lady.

References

1937 Friedlànder. Vol. 14: 78-79 (vol. i, 1967: 104,

no, pi. 104).

1938 Burroughs, Alan. Art Criticism from a Laboratory.Boston: 250.

1946 Friedlànder, Max J. "The Death of the Virgin by

Petrus Christus." BurlM 88: 159, pis. IIA-B.

1948 Puyvelde, Leo van. The Flemish Primitives. Brussels: 27, pi. 53.

1951 Kress: 15, 170, no. 75, repro. 171,173.

1951 Frankfurter, Alfred M. "Interpreting Masterpieces." ArtNA 50: i oo-1 o i, repro. 103.

1952 Bazin, Germain. "Petrus Christus et les rapports

entre l'Italie et la Flandre au milieu du XVe siècle." La Revue

des Arts 2: 199, 208.

1953 Panofsky. ENP: 313,430-431,491.

1960 Broadley, Hugh T. Flemish Painting in the National Gallery of Art. Washington: 5, 20, repro. 21.

1961 Seymour, Charles, Jr. Art Treasures for America.

London: 72, 208, figs. 63-64.

1968 Ward, John L. "A New Look at the Friedsam Annunciation." AB 50: 187.

1968 Cuttler. Northern Painting: 13 3, fig. 158.

1969 Blum, Shirley Neilsen. Early Netherlandish Triptychs. Berkeley and Los Angeles: 117.

1970 Lane, Barbara G. "Petrus Christus: A Reconstructed Triptych with an Italian Motif." AB 52: 390-393,

figs. 1,3.

1971 Schabacker, Peter H., and Barbara G. Lane. Exchange of letters. AB 53: 281—283.

1972 Schabacker, Peter H. Review of Rogier van der

Weyden by Martin Davies. In AQ 3 5: 424.

1974 Schabacker, Peter H. Petrus Christus. Utrecht: 51,

55,108-109,112-114,120, 136, no. 18, fig. 18.

1975 Upton, Joel M. "Devotional Imagery and Style in

the Washington Nativity by Petrus Christus." StHist 7: 52,

72, fig. 2.

1975/1976 Gellman, Lola B. Review of Petrus Christus

by Peter H. Schabacker. In Simiolus 8:33.

1976 Sterling, Charles. "Tableaux espagnols et un chef

d'oeuvre portugais méconnus du XVe siècle." Actas del

XXIII congreso internacional de historia del arte. España

entre el mediterráneo y el atlántico. Granada, 1973. 3 vols.

Granada, i: 501-502, fig. 6.

1977 Eisler, Colin. Review of Petrus Christus by Peter

H. Schabacker. In AB 59: 141.

1977 Eisler: 51-54, figs. 4^-49, text fig. 17.

1978 Panhans-Bühler, Ursula. Eklektizismus und Originalitàt im Werk des Petrus Christus. Vienna: 118-123, fig.

75-

54

EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
1979 Campbell, Lome. Review of Eklektizismus und

Originalitàt im Werk des Petrus Christus by Ursula PanhansBühler. In BurlM 121: 802.

1979 Collier, James M. "The Kansas City Petrus Christus: Its Importance and Dating." The Nelson Gallery and

Atkins Museum Bulletin 5, no. 5: 27, 31, 36, fig. 6.

1980 Scott, Margaret. The History of Dress Series. Late

Gothic Europe, 1400—1500. London: 165, 241, fig. 96, pis.

6

~7-

1980 Paolini, Maria Grazia. "Problemi antonelliani,

Rapporti tra pittura fiamminga e italiana." Storia dell' arte

38—40: 164—165.

1981 Lurie, Ann Tzeutschler. "A Newly Discovered

Eyckian St. John the Baptist in a Landscape." BCMA 67:

115,118.

1984 Eisler, Colin T. "A Nativity Signed PETRUS XPI

ME FECIT 1452." Liber Amicorum Herman Liebaers. Brussels: 465.

1984 Sterling, Charles. "A la recherche des oeuvres de

Zanetto Bugatto: une nouvelle piste." Scritti di storia

dell'arte in onore di Federico Zeri. 2 vols. Milan, 1984, i:

177.

PETRUS CHRISTUS 55
Jóos van Cleve

active 1505/1508-1540/1541

The exact date and place of birth of Jóos van Cleve

(alias Jóos van der Beke) are unknown, though, as his

name implies, he most likely came from the region

around the Lower Rhenish city of Kleve. He was probably born around 14 8 5, as it is assumed that he entered

the workshop of Jan Joest about 1505 and assisted in

painting the panels of the high altar for the Nikolaikirche in the Lower Rhenish city of Kalkar.

Jóos van Cleve emigrated to Antwerp, perhaps by

way of Bruges, and in 1511 he was accepted as a freemaster in the guild of Saint Luke in Antwerp. In 1519,

15 20, and 15 2.5 he was a co-deacon of the guild and is

listed as presenting pupils in 1516, 152,3, 1535, and

1536. From his first marriage there were two children,

a daughter and a son, Cornelis, born in 152.0, who

became a painter. On 10 November 1540 Jóos van

Cleve made his will and testament. The exact date of

his death is not known, but on 13 April 1541 his second wife is listed as a widow.

Throughout most of the seventeenth century and in

the eighteenth and greater part of the nineteenth centuries, the name of Jóos van Cleve was lost. During the

nineteenth century there were several attempts to identify an artist known as the Master of the Death of the

Virgin, so called after a triptych now in the WallrafRichartz-Museum, Cologne. It was not until 1894,

however, that Eduard Firmenich-Rich-artz recognized

a monogram in the central panel as that of Jóos van der

Beke and thus identified the Master of the Death of the

Virgin with Jóos van Cleve alias van der Beke. This

identification formed the basis of the reconstitution of

Jóos' oeuvre by Baldass and Friedlànder.

The earliest dated panels, an Adam and Eve of 1507

in the Louvre, show the influence of Kalkar and Bruges.

The Death of the Virgin (Wallraf-Richartz-Museum,

Cologne), is datable to 1515 and was commissioned

for a house-chapel in Cologne. A masterpiece, it shows

an awareness of the emotional intensity of Hugo van

der Goes, the iconographie schema of Jan van Eyck

and Robert Campin, and the influence of Italian art as

well as Jóos' own sensitivity to effects of color and

light. Particularly in his paintings of the Adoration of

the Magi, the influence of the "Antwerp Mannerists" is

evident, though it is also possible that Jóos influenced

them in turn.

Like his compatriot Quentin Massys, Jóos van

Cleve was aware of the achievement of Leonardo da

Vinci, and in works from the 15205 onward Jóos appropriates Leonardesque motifs or, as in the Virgin

and Child (Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge), emulates Leonardo's sfumato. Jóos created several types of

tender, slightly sentimental depictions of the Madonna

and Child and the Holy Family, these images must

have been very popular, for they were produced in

quantity by the artist and his workshop.

According to Guicciardini, writing in 1567, Jóos

van Cleve's skill as a portraitist caused him to be summoned to the court of Francis I of France where he

depicted the king and queen and other members of the

court. Portraits of Francis I (Johnson Collection, Philadelphia Museum of Art) and Eleanor of Austria (Royal

Collection, Hampton Court) tend to verify Guicciardini's statement. The portraits may date to 1530, the

year Francis and Eleanor were married. Jóos is not

documented in Antwerp between 1529 and 1534, and

it is quite possible that his journey included Italy as

well as France.

Along with Quentin Massys, Jóos van Cleve was

one of the major artists working in Antwerp in the first

decade of the sixteenth century.

J.O.H.

Bibliography

Baldass, Ludwig. Jóos van Cleve. Der Meister des Todes

Maria. Vienna, 192.5.

Friedlànder. Vol. 9. 1931 (vol. 9, part i, 1971).

Bialostocki, Jan. "Jóos van Cleve in dem Kalkarer Altar."

Kunsthistorische Forschungen Otto Pacht zu seinem 70.

Geburtstag. Salzburg, 1972: 189-195.

Hand, John Oliver. "Jóos van Cleve: The Early and Mature

Paintings." Ph.D. diss., Princeton University, 1978.

56 EARL Y NETHERLANDIS H PAINTIN G
1962.9.1 (1662)

/or/s Vezeleer

Probably 1518

Probably oak, rounded top, 58 x 40 (227/s x i53A)

painted surface: 56.3 x 38.2 (223/i6 x 15 Vie)

Ailsa Mellon Bruce Fund

Technical Notes: The panel is made up of two members joined

vertically. It is likely that sometime in the past the panel was

taken apart, perhaps because of movement along the join

line. X-radiographs show three empty dowel holes, and it is

possible that the dowels were replaced by the five butterfly

reinforcements now in place. Moderate losses along the join

line have been repainted, with the heaviest retouching on the

bottom half of the join.

The panel is in generally good condition. The bottom finger of the sitter's gloved hand is repainted; there is feathered

retouching along the left side of the black robe and scattered

retouching in the face and throat and along the edges of the

hat.

Examination with infrared reflectography revealed scattered areas of underdrawing in the outline of the gloved hand,

in the knuckles, and along the edge of the sitter's nose.

At the bottom left is a resinous circular seal that is partially

destroyed and has been covered with black paint. This is

almost certainly the same seal of the house of Liechtenstein as

that found on the reverse. Reverse: At the center is a black,

resinous circular seal that is largely destroyed. At the top

center is a red, resinous, circular seal bearing the coat-of-arms

of the house of Liechtenstein and the date 1733. Also on the

reverse are a paper label from the Lucerne exhibition of 1948

and a black stamp.

Provenance: Probably Joris Vezeleer, Antwerp [d. 16 October

1570]. Probably Margaretha Boghe, his widow, Antwerp [d.

perhaps 20 August 1574]; both portraits are probably mentioned in the inventory of 15 74/1575 made at the time of her

death.1 Possibly Prince Karl Eusebius of Liechtenstein [d.

1684]. Prince Johann Adam of Liechtenstein, "Fideikommissgalerie," Vienna, by 1712, the year of his death. Prince

Emanuel of Liechtenstein, his nephew, 1712—1722 [d. 1777].

Reigning Prince Josef Johann of Liechtenstein, Vienna, by

1722 [d. I732].2 Prince Johann Nepomuk, Reigning Prince

of Liechtenstein, Vienna [d. I748].3 Reigning Princes of

Liechtenstein. Prince Franz Josef II of Liechtenstein, Vienna,

until 1945; afterward Vaduz, Principality of Liechtenstein.

(Feilchenfeldt, Zurich, 1962.)

Exhibitions: Lucerne, Kunstmuseum, 1948, Meisterwerke aus

den Sammlungen des Fürsten von Liechtenstein, no. 74.

Notes

i. Denucé 1932, "Een contrefeytsel van Joris Veselaer

ende Jouffr. Margrieten Boge syner huysvrouwen op twee

doeren."

2. A family contract of 1722 established that the "Fideikomiss" set up by Prince Johann Adam, which included the

art collection and property in Vienna, would belong to the

reigning princes of the house of Liechtenstein in succession.

3. When Prince Josef Johann died, his son, Prince Johann

Nepomuk, was under age and his uncle Prince Josef Wenzel

was appointed guardian. In 1733 Prince Josef Wenzel applied

seals bearing the arms of Liechtenstein and the date 1733

 to

all paintings that were part of the "Fideikomissgalerie." In

effect this commemorates the heritage of Prince Johann

Adam and separated the works from Prince Josef Wenzel's

own collection. See the essay by Wilhelm, "Die LiechtensteinGalerie," in the 1948 Lucerne exhibition catalogue, 19—20.1

am most grateful to Dr. Reinhold Baumstark, Director of

Collections of the Prince of Liechtenstein, for information on

this aspect of the provenance (letters of 28 June 1982 and 28

May 1985 in the curatorial files).

1962.9.2 (1663)

Margaretha Boghe, Wife of

Joris Vezeleer

Probably 1518

Probably oak, rounded top, 57.1 x 396 (227/i6 x i55/s)

painted surface: 55.1 x 37.2 (2i11/i6 x i45/s)

Ailsa Mellon Bruce Fund

Technical Notes: The panel consists of two boards joined vertically. Unlike 1962.9.1, the boards seem not to have been

separated, and the dowels can be seen in the x-radiograph.

The painting is in very good condition. There is retouching

along the join line, most apparent in the lower portion. Scattered areas of retouching are in both cheeks, the throat, the

upper bodice, the kerchief, and the sitter's left hand.

At the bottom right there is a resinous circular seal that has

been covered with black paint. At the top center of the reverse

is a red, resinous seal; this and the seal on the front are the

same as the seals of the house of Liechtenstein of 1733 that

appear on 1962.9.1. Also on the reverse are a partially destroyed black circular resinous seal, a paper label from the

Lucerne exhibition of 1948, and a black stamp.

Provenance: same as 1962.9.1.

Exhibitions: Lucerne, Kunstmuseum, 1948, Meisterwerke aus

den Sammlungen des Fürsten von Liechtenstein, no. 75.

THE EVENTUAL ATTRIBUTION of these panels to

Jóos van Cleve reflects the rediscovery of this artist that

took place during the nineteenth century and parallels

the general "rehabilitation" of Early Netherlandish

painters.1 In 1767 the paintings were ascribed to Holbein; they were still listed under Holbein's name when

they were catalogued by Waagen in 1866. However,

JÓOS VAN CLEVE 57
Jóos van Cleve,/ons Vezeleer, 1961.9.1

58 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Jóos van Cleve, Margar etha Boghe, Wife ofjoris Vezeleer, 19 62.9.2.

JÓOS VAN CLEVE 59
Waagen thought that because of their coloring the portraits were by the Master of the Death of the Virgin,

who was thought to be German or Netherlandish.2

After 1894 the identification of the Master of the

Death of the Virgin with Jóos van Cleve became more

and more certain, and in Baldass' monograph of 1915

the portraits were firmly attributed to Jóos van Cleve.3

It was not until 1955 that Gerson was able to identify the sitters as Joris Vezeleer and his wife Margaretha

Boghe.4 The identification is based on the fact that the

couple were the great grandparents of the Dutch statesman and poet Constantijn Huygens (1596—1687). On

23 December 1652 Huygens wrote to the Antwerp

dealer Musson about portraits of his ancestors sold to

Huygens' wife by Musson.5 In the letter one of the

portraits is described as a man pulling on a glove and it

is remarked that the original paintings are in Vienna.

Huygens notes that while Quentin Massys was usually

named as the author, Musson had also spoken of Jóos

van Cleve. Unfortunately Musson's reply is not recorded. On 8 January 1653 Huygens wrote to J. Buy ex,

the widower of his niece, mentioning the original portraits in Vienna and stating that the copies owned by

Huygens were made by an Antwerp artist named de

Vos. In this letter the sitters are identified as "greatgrandfather and mother Vezelaer."6

Although absolute proof is lacking it seems highly

likely that the original portraits mentioned by Huygens

as in Vienna were the Gallery's panels, which had entered the collection of Prince Johann Adam of Liechtenstein, Vienna, by 1712. What became of the copies

belonging to Huygens is not known; the paintings were

last mentioned in the inventory of Suzanna Louisa

Huygens who died in The Hague in 17857

The mention of Jóos van Cleve demonstrates that a

tradition in the seventeenth century linked his name

with works later given to the Master of the Death of the

Virgin. It is, however, hard to gauge the strength of this

tradition, for beginning with Lampsonius and Van

Mander the biography and works of Jóos were confused with those of his son Cornelis, and a Joos van

Cleve the Younger, who never existed, was created.

Joris Vezeleer was a prominent member of the Antwerp mercantile community and thanks to the research

of Coornaert, Van den Kerkhove, and others we have a

great deal of information about his life and career.8

While the tombs of Joris Vezeleer and his wife in the

Sint Andrieskerk, Antwerp, no longer exist, the inscriptions on them have been preserved. They record

that Joris Vezeleer died on 16 October 1570 at the age

of seventy-seven. He was therefore born in 1493.

The place of Joris Vezeleer's birth is not known; the

name Vezeleer may indicate an origin in the Lower

Rhenish city of Wesel. In 1515—1516 he was listed as a

citizen in the Antwerp Poortersboek.

Joris Vezeleer began his career as a goldsmith. In

1519 he owned a studio in Antwerp and in 1524 was

dean of the gold and silversmiths' guild. The greater

part of his career, however, was spent as a merchant,

financier, and entrepreneur. From 1545 onward,

probably until the end of his life, he was the mintmaster general of the Brabant mint. Without citing

specific dates, Coornaert notes that he was "prévôt de

la monnaie" in Antwerp.

Vezeleer was the head of a small family company

with relatives stationed in Paris, Lyon, and Bordeaux.

He also adopted the expedient tactic of marrying his

three daughters to merchants.9 To the extent that he

specialized Joris Vezeleer seems to have dealt in objets

de luxe. From 1528 onward he furnished first to

Francis I of France10 and later to Henry II plates and

dishes, articles of vermeil, jewels of all sorts, including

table-cut diamonds, and several tapestries. The French

court was not the only client, for in 1548 Vezeleer is

recorded as selling a tapestry series of Vertumnus and

Pomona to Mary of Hungary. In 1544 Vezeleer entered into a transaction with fellow Antwerp merchant

Pierre de Moucheron involving the shipment of wool,

quicksilver, vermilion and copper, an indication that

he did not deal exclusively in luxury items.

As a well-to-do merchant Joris Vezeleer was able to

have constructed a château called "het Lanternhof" in

the town of Deurne, just outside of Antwerp. The chateau was built between 1533 and 1535, but is no longer

standing. Vezeleer also collected paintings and seemed

to have a special interest in mythological scenes.11

We know very little about Margaretha Boghe. Two

items, however, are of considerable importance. First,

the inscription on her funerary monument states that

she was married to Joris Vezeleer for fifty-two years.

Since Joris died in 1570, this means that they were

married sometime in 1518. In Joos van Cleve's portrait

Margaretha holds a pink, traditional symbol of engagement or conjugal fidelity,12

 and it therefore seems

plausible to suggest that the portraits were commissioned on the occasion of their marriage. In 1518 Joris

Vezeleer would have been twenty-five years old, which

accords well with his appearance in the Gallery's portrait. Prior to the publication of the funerary inscription, Baldass had dated the portraits to c. 1515 and

Friedlânder and Hand, on stylistic grounds, had proposed a date of c. 15 20.13

Second, Margaretha Boghe survived her husband

by four years and died sometime between 2 November

1574 and 2i January 1575, perhaps on 20 August

I574.14 At the time of her death an inventory of the

60 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
paintings in the estate was made. Included in the inventory are portraits of Joris Vezeleer and Margaretha

Boghe "op twee doeren"15 that can be identified with

the Gallery's panels with a high degree of probability.

The portraits of Joris Vezeleer and Margaretha

Boghe are sensitively painted autograph works by Jóos

van Cleve and since the publication of Baldass' monograph in 1925 have been universally recognized as

such. Friedlànder cited Joris Vezeleer's action of drawing on his glove as an example of Jóos' more decisive

use of hand gestures. While gloves often occur in Netherlandish and German portraits of upper or merchant

class men and may be generally considered to be the

mark of a gentleman, it is difficult to assign a specific

meaning to gloves or the act of putting them on. Van

Regteren Altena suggested that Rembrandt's portrait

of Jan Six of 1654 was influenced in pose by the portrait of Joris Vezeleer.16

 The visual similarities and the

fact that the gesture of pulling on a glove is rarely seen

in Netherlandish portraits lend credence to this idea.

However, it would seem that Rembrandt saw the copy

in Huygens' possession and not the original, then in

Vienna.

Two copies of the portrait of Joris Vezeleer are extant; one is in the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, and the

other is in a private collection, Newport Beach, California.17

J.O.H.

Notes

1. For a discussion of this process see Suzanne Sulzberger,

La Réhabilitation des primitifs flamands 1802—1867 (Brussels, 1961).

2. Fanti 1767, 91; Waagen 1866, 279-280.

3. The identification was made by Eduard FirmenichRichartz, "Der Meister des Todes Mariae, Sein Name und

Seine Herkunft," ZfbK 5 (1894), 187-194. Baldass 1925,

nos. 37-38.

4. Gerson 1955, 129. Gerson gives an incorrect death

date of 1567 for Joris Vezeleer and provides him with a middle initial W, the source of which is unknown.

5. Denucé 1949,127-128.

6. Worp 1916, 162-163. Both Worp, 763, n. 2, and

Gerson suggest that the artist who painted the copies might

be Cornelis de Vos; however, there is no proof of this, and de

Vos is a rather common name.

7. Van den Kerkhove 1974, 327.

8. The biographical material in this and following paragraphs is based on Emile Coornaert, Les français et le commerce international à Anvers, 2 vols. (Paris, 1961), i: 343-

344; 2: 35, n. 2,49,167, n. 5; Jozef Duverger, "JanGossaert

te Àntwerpen," Bulletin Muséum Boymans-Van Beuningen

19 (1968), 2i, and Van den Kerkhove 1974. Jori

s

 Vezeleer's

name is spelled in a variety of ways: Vezeler, Vezelaer(e),

Veseleer, and in France, Bezellet or Vezelees. I have adopted

the spelling used by Van den Kerkhove.

9. Vezeleer had three daughters and one son. The eldest

daughter, Elisabeth, married Jacob Hoefnagel, a merchant,

and had twelve children. Her eldest son was the well-known

Antwerp painter Joris Hoefnagel (1542-1600). After the

surrender of Antwerp in 1585, the family moved north, and

in 1592 Elisabeth's youngest daughter, Suzanna, married

Christian Huygens in Amsterdam. Four years later on 2 September 1596 Constantijn Huygens was born in The Hague.

In addition to Van den Kerkhove 1974, see H. E. van Gelder,

Ikonographie van Constantijn Huygens en de zijnen (The

Hague, 1957), 4-13.

10. Given Jóos van Cleve's likely presence at the court of

Francis I from 1529 onward, it is possible that he could have

met Joris Vezeleer in France. See Hand 1978,13, 268, n. 17.

If, as his name implies, Vezeleer came from the lower Rhenish

city of Wesel, he might have known or been attracted to Jóos

because of their common geographical origins.

11. The inventory published by Denucé 1932, 6—7, lists

eleven mythological paintings.

12. For the symbolism of the flower, see Fernand Mercier,

"La valeur symbolique de l'oeillet dans la peinture du moyenâge," RAAM 71 (1937), 233—236; Guy de Tervarent, Attributs et symboles dans l'art profane (Geneva, 1958), cols.

288-289.

13. Baldass 1925, 21, nos. 37—38. The reproductions

show the painting as having square corners; Baldass stressed

the proximity of the panels to the master's first Bruges-inspired

portrait style. Friedlànder, vol. 9, part i (1972), 72, no. 117,

and Hand 1978,147-299, no. 30, stressed the stylistic affinity

with the pair of portraits in the Uffizi, Florence; the female

sitter is dated 15 20.

14. According to Van den Kerkhove 1974, 326, the inventory bears two dates: 2 November 1574 and 21 January

1575. The published funerary inscription gives a death date

of 20 August 15 64 ; this is probably an error of transcription

for the year but the day and month may well be correct.

15. See n. i under 1962.9.1.

16. Van Regteren Altena 1973.

17. Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, no. A3292, wood, 58 x

38.5 cm, rounded top; listed as a "copy after Jóos van Cleve"

in Pieter J. J. van Thiel, et al., All the Paintings of the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam (Amsterdam and Maarsen, 1976),

169-170. The second panel, 56.5 x 39 cm, rounded top, was

sold at Sotheby's, New York, n June 1981, lot 239.

References

1767 Fanti, Vincenzio. Descrizzione Completa di Tutto

ció che Ritrovasi nella Gallería di Pittura e Scultura di Sua

Altezza Giuseppe Wenceslao del S. R. I. Principe Régnante

délia Casa di Liechtenstein. Vienna: 91, nos. 450, 451.

1780 Liechtenstein, François Joseph de. Description des

Tableaux et des pièces de sculpture que renferme la gallerie de

son altesse François Joseph, Chef et Prince régnant de la

maison de Liechtenstein. Vienna: 179,181, nos. 586, 589.

1866 Waagen, Gustav. Die vornebmsten Kunstdenkmdlerin Wien. Vienna: 279—280.

1873 Katalog der Fiirstlich Liechtensteinischen BilderGalerie im Gartenpalais der Rossau, zu Wien. Vienna: 124,

nos. 1077,1079.

1916 Worp, Jacob Adolf, éd. De Briefwisseling van

Constantijn Huygens. 6 vols. The Hague, 5: 162-163.

1925 Baldass, Ludwig. Jóos van Cleve. Der Meister des

Todes Maria. Vienna: 21, nos. 37—38, figs. 41—42.

1927 Kronfeld, Adolph. Führer durch die Fiirstlich

JÓOS VAN CLEVE 6l
Liechtensteinsche Gemàldegalerie in Wien. Vienna: 136,

13 8, nos. 704, 707.

1931 Friedlánder. Vol. 9: 53, 144, no. 117 (vol. 9, part

i, 1972.: no. 117, pis. 122-113).

1932 Denucé, Jan. The Antwerp Art-Galleries. Inventories of the Art-Collections in Antwerp in the i6th and lyth

Centuries. The Hague: 6.

1948 Baldass, Ludwig. "Die niederlàndischen Bilder in

der Liechtenstein-Galerie." Meisterwerke aus den Sammlungen des Fürsten von Liechtenstein. Exh. cat. Kunstmuseum.

Lucerne: xxvii.

1949 Denucé, Jan. Na Peter Paul Rubens. Documenten

uit de Kunsthandel te Antwerpen in de XVIIe eeuw van

Matthijs Musson. Antwerp: 127—128.

1955 Gerson, Horst. "Jóos van Cleve." OH 70: 129—

130, figs. i-2.

1955 Cairns, Huntington. "Report on the National Gallery of Art." Smithsonian Institution. Report of the Secretary

and Financial Report of the Executive Committee of the

Board of Regents: 208, pi. 12.

1963 "Acquisti della National Gallery di Washington."

Domus, No. 406 (September): 57, repro.

1973 Regteren Altena, J. Q. van. "Rembrandts Persônlichkeit. Versuch einer Profilierung." Neue Beitràge zur

Rembrandt-Porschung. Berlin: 186, pi. 37, fig. 150.

1974 Kerkhove, A. van den. "Joris Vezeleer, Een

Antwerps Koopman-Ondernemer van de XVIde Eeuw."

Annalen, 63 Congres Sint-Niklaas-Waas 1974: 326-334,

figs. i-2.

1978 Hand, John Oliver. "Jóos van Cleve: The Early

and Mature Paintings." Ph.D. diss., Princeton University: 18,

147-150, 299, no. 30, figs. 37-38-

62 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Gerard David

c. 1460-152.3

Gerard David was born in Oudewater, near Gouda.

He died in Bruges on 13 August 152.3. In January 1484

he was admitted as a master to the painters' guild in

Bruges. He was an officer (Vinder) in the guild in the

years 1487-1488, 1495-1496, and 1497-1498; in

1501 he was dean of the guild. It is generally accepted

that David was a member of the Antwerp guild in 1515,

though the duration and purpose of his membership

are not known.

The Virgo inter Virgines now in the Musée des

Beaux-Arts, Rouen, which was painted by David for

the Carmelite monastery of Sion, in Bruges, is documented to 1509. This panel contains a self-portrait of

the artist, which because of his apparent age of about

fifty is used as the basis for setting the year of his birth.

While not as firmly documented as the Virgo inter Virgines, the two panels illustrating the Judgment of

Cambyses in the Groeningemuseum, Bruges, are associated with works commissioned from David for the

town hall in Bruges. The documents run from 1487 to

1498/1499, and one of the panels is dated 1498. It is

also possible to establish dates for several other paintings by Gerard David. The Baptism of Christ in the

Groeningemuseum, Bruges, was painted between 1501

and 1510, as can be deduced from the portraits of the

donor's wives on the wings. The panel in the National

Gallery, London, of Bernardino de Salviatis with Saints

Bernardin, Martin, and Donatian is part of an altarpiece commissioned by Bernardino de Salviatis in 1501

for the Church of Saint Donatian in Bruges. The Betrothal of Saint Catherine (National Gallery, London),

also done for Saint Donatian, was commissioned by

Richard de Visch van der Capelle between 1500 and

1511. The Marriage at Cana (Louvre) can be dated to

soon after 1503, the year the donor, Jan de Sedaño,

joined the Confraternity of the Holy Blood in Bruges.

Several drawings have been attributed to Gerard

David with a reasonable degree of certainty, and illuminated manuscripts of the Bruges-Ghent School show

the influence of David's style and compositions. It is

still a matter of conjecture whether David actually engaged in manuscript illumination.

Gerard David is usually considered the last great

painter of the Bruges School and, in his early works

especially, manifests the archaizing tendencies of the

late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries; that is, the

conscious quotation from the work of earlier masters

such as Jan van Eyck and Rogier van der Weyden.

Recent scholarship, however, has stressed the progressive elements in David's art in the areas of iconography

and composition as well as the history of landscape in

the Netherlands.

J.O.H.

Bibliography

Weale, W. H. James. "Gerard David." Le Beffroi i (1863):

223-234; 2 (1864-1865): 2.88-297; 3 (1866-1870):

334-346.

Bodenhausen, Eberhard Freiherr von. Gerard David und

seine Schule. Munich, 1905.

Winkler, Friedrich. "David, Gerard." In Thieme-Becker. Vol.

8 (1913): 452-455.

Friedlànder. Vol. 6.192.8 (vol. 6, part 2., 1971).

Folie, Jacqueline. "Les oeuvres authentifiées des primitifs

flamands," BInstPat 6 (1963): 230-232..

1937.1.43 (43)

The Rest on the Flight into Egypt

c. 1510

Oak, 44.3 x 44.9 (i77/i6 x I711/i6)

painted surface: 41.9 x 42.2 (i6V2 x i65/s)

Andrew W. Mellon Collection

Technical Notes: The painting is in very good condition, with

only small scattered areas of repaint. There are faint remains

of gold halos behind the heads of the Christ Child and the

Virgin. The Virgin's robe was originally larger at the lower

left, as can be seen in infrared photographs and with the

naked eye. Examination with infrared reflectography (fig. i)

reveals underdrawing in what appears to be brush in the blue

robe of the Madonna. Restored 1984/1985.

Provenance: The Rev. Montague Taylor, London, acquired

GERARD DAVID 63
c. 1845 [d. 1896] (sale, Christie's, London, 19 May 1897, no.

152). (P. & D. Colnaghi and Co., London.) Rodolphe Kann,

Paris, acquired March 1898 [d. 190 5].* (Duveen Brothers,

New York, 1907.) J. Pierpont Morgan, New York, acquired

c. 1908 [d. 1913].2 (Knoedler &c Co., New York.) Purchased

December 1935 by The Andrew W. Mellon Educational and

Charitable Trust, Pittsburgh.

Exhibitions:3 Lent by J. Pierpont Morgan to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, between 1911 and 1916. //

New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1920, Fiftieth Anniversary Exhibition. II Washington, Phillips Memorial

Gallery, 1937, Paintings and Sculpture Owned in Washington, no. 7.

WHILE MATTHEW (2:13) provided the basic text for

the theme of the Flight into Egypt, the Rest on the

Flight and related picturesque episodes are to be found

in apocryphal accounts, notably the Gospel of PseudoMatthew and The Golden. Legend. Chapter twenty of

the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew recounts how on the

third day of the journey the Virgin rested beneath a

palm tree and how the Infant miraculously made the

tree bend down to provide fruit for the Virgin.4 He also

caused a spring to issue from the base of the tree to

quench the thirst of the Holy Family. In David's painting a stream can be seen at the extreme right corner,

at the base of the ledge. Joseph's nut gathering may

be interpreted as a variation on the palm tree miracle

in that both actions are concerned with providing

nourishment.

As in many representations of the Rest on the Flight

into Egypt from the late fifteenth century, the Madonna

and Child dominate the composition.5 The grouping

also carries overtones of both the Madonna of Humility

and the Enthroned Madonna without specifically

being either.

Gerard David depicted trees and plants with great

accuracy, and it is quite possible that much of the flora

was invested with symbolic meaning. In the foreground

is a row of plants, each prominently displayed. At the

far left is plantain, an effective stauncher of blood and

hence associated with Christ's death. Next to it is mint,

a healing and purifying herb that could symbolize virtue. More plantain is present and then strawberry,

whose tripartite leaves allude to the Trinity and whose

fruit and petals are emblematic of the blood and

wounds of Christ. The fern was regarded as protection

against evil and the Devil in particular. Last is violet,

which symbolizes the humility of both Virgin and

Child.6

The bunch of grapes held by the Madonna is a wellknown symbol of the Eucharist and may also refer to

divine generation and salvation in which the vine

stands for Mary and the grapes for Christ.7 Mundy

suggests that the cluster of grapes is to be equated with

the breasts of Mary, in function of providing nourishment, and stresses the association with the Song of

Solomon (7:7-8) and with the writings of Bernard of

Clairvaux.8

In addition to referring to the miracle described by

Pseudo-Matthew, the spring at the far right may allude

to the well of living waters mentioned in the Song of

Solomon (4:15). It is even possible to see in the chestnuts gathered by Joseph symbols of modesty and

chastity, though I believe it is sufficient to interpret

them simply as a source of food, especially since they

were a staple in the northern European diet.9 The motif

of striking the tree may have been derived from manuscript illumination.10

The attribution of The Rest on the Flight into Egypt

to Gerard David has never been questioned.11 Virtually all authors have dated the painting to about 1510

on the basis of its proximity to David's Virgo inter

Virgines in Rouen, which is documented to 1509. This

dating is eminently acceptable. Bodenhausen and de

Tolnay discern in the panel the influence of the Antwerp School and of Quentin Massys in particular,12

though I am unable to see such an influence.

The Rest on the Flight into Egypt is one of Gerard

David's loveliest and most peaceful creations. It has a

remarkable consistency and subtlety in the use of mass

and void, a simplification of natural shapes, a feeling

for the unity of landscape and atmosphere, and a

highly sensitive use of color, especially the varied tones

of blue and blue-gray.

Several paintings produced in Bruges in the early

sixteenth century are closely related to this composition. In her study of Adriaen Isenbrant and workshop

practices in Bruges, Wilson formed a grouping of nine

paintings in which the configuration of folds in the

Madonna's robes is practically identical to that in

David's panel.13

Close to the Gallery's panel is another depiction of

the Rest on the Flight into Egypt that shows a nursing

Child and a different drapery configuration. The best

example is in the Prado, and is probably by Gerard

David; an excellent replica is in the Metropolitan Museum of Art.14

J.O.H.

Notes

1. I am indebted to Burton Fredericksen for the date of

acquisition and for the preceding sale and dealer information

as well as the date of acquisition by Duveen.

2. Information in Knoedler brochure in curatorial files.

3. The curatorial files contain a presentation brochure

6 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING 4
Gerard David, The Rest on the Flight into Egypt, 1937.1.43

GERARD DAVID 65
Fig. i. Infrared reflectogram assembly of The Rest on the Flight

into Egypt, 1937.1.43 [infrared reflectography: Molly Paries]

66 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
prepared by Knoedler & Co., which states that the painting

was exhibited in London, Knoedler Galleries, Twenty Masterpieces in Aid of King George's jubilee Trust, 1935. However, it is not listed in the catalogue.

4. Montague Rhodes James, The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford, 192.4), 75. Brief mention of the bending tree

is found in the chapter on the Holy Innocents (2.8 December)

in The Golden Legend; see Ryan and Ripperger, The Golden

Legend, i: 66. See also Réau, Iconographie, vol. 2, part 2,

278-2.80.

5. Gertrud Schiller, Iconography of Christian Art, z vols.

(Greenwich, Conn., 1971), i: 12,2,.

6. Mundy 1981—1982., 2.13-2,15.

7. E. de Jongh, "Grape symbolism in paintings of the

16th and iyth centuries," Simiolus 7 (1974), 182-184,190-

191.

8. Mundy 1981—1982, 216—219.

9. Mundy 1981-1982, 213, n. 3. For chestnuts as a

foodstuff, see Waverly Root, Food. An Authoritative and

Visual History and Dictionary of the Foods of the World

(New York, 1980), 63-65.

10. For example, in the November calendar page of the

Très Riches Heures of Jean, Duke of Berry, Musée Conde,

Chantilly, fol. iiv, or the Grimani Breviary, Biblioteca

Marciana, Venice, fol. iiv.

11. Bodenhausen 1905, 186, without elaboration, questioned if the painting were entirely autograph. See also Helbig 1900, pi. 8, who gives it to Patinir.

12. Bodenhausen 1905,186; deTolnay 1941,185.

13. Wilson 1983, 60—64, 2.12-213. The pictures comprising this grouping are:

1. Rest on the Flight into Egypt, Groeningemuseum,

Bruges, no. 223, attributed to Ambrosius Benson. (Georges

Marlier, Ambrosius Benson et la peinture à Bruges au

temps de Charles-Quint [Damme, 1957], 297—298, no.

6i,pl. 14 facing 53.)

2. Rest on the Flight into Egypt, National Gallery of

Ireland, Dublin, no. 498, attributed to Adriaen Isenbrant.

(Friedlánder, vol. n [1974], no. 183, pi. 136.)

3. Madonna and Child in a Niche, Museo Lázaro Galdiano, Madrid, no. 2683, attributed to Adriaen Isenbrant.

(Friedlánder, vol. n [1974], no. 1743, pi. 132.)

4. Madonna and Child in a Niche, National Pushkin

Museum, Moscow, attributed to Adriaen Isenbrant.

(Friedlánder, vol. n [1974], no. i83b,pi. 136.)

5. Rest on the Flight into Egypt, private collection,

New York, attributed to Adriaen Isenbrant. (Friedlánder,

vol. ii [1974], no. 1833, pi. 136.)

6. Rest on the Flight into Egypt, A. J. Barton Collection, Oxford, after Gerard David. (Friedlánder, vol. 6,

part 2 [1971], no. 2i4b, pi. 16.)

7. Rest on the Flight into Egypt, present location unknown, attributed to Adriaen Isenbrant. (Sammlung Heinz

Kisters [exh. cat. Germanisches Nationalmuseum] [Nuremberg, 1963] no. 75, pi. 84.)

8. Rest on the Flight into Egypt, present location unknown. (Art market, Brussels, 25 June 1923.)

9. Rest on the Flight into Egypt, present location unknown, attributed to Adriaen Isenbrant. (Sale, ParkeBernet, New York, 23 March 1950, lot 51, repro.)

That these paintings are attributed to different artists and

are not all representations of the same subject allows one to

postulate the existence of a common workshop model.

14. Friedlánder, vol. 6, part 2 (1971), nos. 212, 2i2a, pi.

215.

References

1900 Helbig, Jules. "Joachim Patenier." Revue de l'art

chrétien ii: pi. 8.

1900 Bode, Wilhelm. Gemalde-Sammlung des Herrn

Rudolf Kann in Paris. Vienna: xxx, pi. 83.

1901 Michel, Emile. "La Galerie de M. Rodolphe

Kann." GBA 3e pér. 25: 498.

1903 Marguillier, Auguste. "La Collection de M. Rodolphe Kann." Les Arts 3e

 pér. 13 (January): 4, repro.

1905 Bodenhausen (see Biography): 186—188.

1907 Bode, Wilhelm von. Catalogue of the Rodolphe

Kann Collection. Paris: i, xxxi; 2, 7, repro. 6.

1908 Nicolle, Marcel. "La Collection Rodolphe Kann."

RAAAÍ23: 193.

1911 Catalogue of the Paintings in the Metropolitan

Museum of Art. New York, 1905; Addenda: not paginated.

1914 Burroughs, Bryson. The Metropolitan Museum of

Art. Catalogue of Paintings. New York: 61 (also 1916 éd.:

66).

1916 Friedlánder, Max J. Von Eyck bis Bruegel. Berlin:

181.

1920 Ivins, W. M. Jr. "Pictures Lent for the Fiftieth Anniversary Exhibition." BMMA 15 (August): 189.

1921 Conway, Martin. The Van Eycks and Their Followers. London:350—351.

1928 Friedlánder. Vol. 6: 155, no. 214 (vol. 6, part 2,

1971: no. 214, pi. 217).

1935 "Twenty Masterpieces at Messrs. Knoedler's."

BurlM 66: 299, frontispiece.

1941 NGA: 53-54-

1941 Tolnay, Charles de. "Flemish Painting in the National Gallery of Art." MagArt 34: 182-185, fig. 12.

1960 Broadley, Hugh T. Flemish Painting in the National Gallery of Art. Washington: 42, repro. cover (rev. ed.

1978).

1963 Walker: 104, repro. 105.

1968 Guttler. Northern Painting: 195-196, fig. 245.

1975 Bermejo, Elisa. "Nuevas Pinturas de Adrian Isenbrant." ABA 48: 16.

1976 Walker: 132, repro. 133.

1979 Dufey-Haeck, Marie-Louise. "Le Thème du repos

pendant la fuite en Egypte dans la peinture flamande de la

seconde moitié du XVe au milieu du XVIe siècle." RBAHA

48:54, 53, fig. 2.

1981/1982 Mundy, E. James, "Gerard David's Rest on

the Flight into Egypt: further additions to grape symbolism."

Simiolus 12: 211—222, figs. 1—3.

1983 Wilson, Jean. "Adriaen Isenbrant Reconsidered.

The Making and Marketing of Art in Sixteenth-Century

Bruges." Ph.D. diss., The Johns Hopkins University: 51—52,

60-64, 2.12—213, pi. 66.

GERARD DAVID 67
Gerard David and Workshop, The Saint Anne Altarpiece, 1942.9.17.3-0

68 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Gerard David and Workshop

1942.9.17.a-c (613)

The Saint Anne Altarpiece

Oak (cradled), left panel: 136.1 x 75.9 (9215/i6 x 2913/io);

painted surface: 134 (including addition at top) x 74.9

(92Vs x 297/io); Center panel: 236.1 x 97.5 (9215/i6 x

383/s); painted surface: 2.32.5 (including addition at top)

x 96 (9i9/i6X 3713/io); Right panel: 23 5.4 x 75.9 (9211/i6

x 2913/io); painted surface: 234 (including addition at

top) X 73.8 (92.V8 X 29Vlo)

Widener Collection

Inscription:

On a band around the Virgin's forehead on center panel:

SVSSIPE MARIA MATER GRACIE.

Technical Notes: Left panel: Saint Nicholas. The panel is composed of three boards with the grain running vertically. A

painted section that is not original was added to the top of the

panel; it is 21.9 cm high and composed of four pieces of

wood. There is a barbe on the right edge; strips of bare wood

1.2 cm wide have been added to the left and bottom edges.

There is a large oval repaired loss, approximately 15 cm long,

centered at height 149 cm, width 53 cm from the left edge.

There is extensive paint loss in the sky at the upper left which

follows the pattern of the wood grain. Small losses are scattered across the paint surface and there are fine losses along

the joins as well as an old check at the lower right.

Center panel: Saint Anne with the Virgin and Child. The

panel is composed of four boards with the grain running

vertically. The painted section added to the top is 20.5 cm

high and composed of five pieces of wood. There is a barbe on

the left and right edges. Small rounded losses are present

throughout and there is a diagonal scratch approximately 25

cm long in the lower right of Saint Anne's robe.

Right panel: Saint Anthony of Padua. The panel is composed of three boards with the grain running vertically. The

painted section added to the top is 20.8 cm high and composed of four pieces of wood. Strips of bare wood 1.2 cm

wide have been added to the right and bottom edges. There is

no barbe present at the left and a thin layer of ground covers

much of the unpainted edge. This suggests that, unlike the

other two panels, the ground and paint were applied before

the panel was set into the frame. There are extensive tiny

losses along the joins and, following the pattern of the wood

grain, in the saint's face and surrounding sky. Small, rounded

losses are scattered throughout. There is a diagonal scratch

approximately 40 cm long near the center of the right edge

and a smaller curved scratch on the left below the saint's

sleeve.

Examination with infrared photography and infrared reflectography reveals underdrawing in all three panels. Extensive underdrawing, in brush, is visible throughout the center

panel (figs, i, 2). In the Virgin's arm there is what can be

presumed to be a correction in a medium that has beaded and

appears greasier than the other underdrawing (fig. 3). The

underdrawing in the side panels is in a drier medium with

thinner lines. The face of Saint Nicholas is underdrawn. In

the right panel there are curving lines at the upper right and

left and underdrawing in the face, robe, and feet of Saint

Anthony.

The painting is currently under restoration.

Provenance: Cardinal Antonio Despuig y Dameto, Raxa,

Palma de Mallorca [d. 1813]. By descent to Counts of Montenegro, Raxa, Palma de Mallorca.1

 Leon de Somzée, Brussels,

by i899.2 Gaston de Somzée, Brussels, until i9O2.3 (Agnew

&; Sons, London, May 1902—January I9o6.)4 (Sedelmeyer

Gallery, Paris, by January 1906.)5 (Eugene Fischhof, Paris

and New York, 1907.) Peter A. B. Widener, Elkins Park, Pennsylvania, April I9O7.6

 Inheritance from Estate of Peter A. B.

Widener by gift through power of appointment of Joseph E.

Widener, Elkins Park, Pennsylvania.

Exhibitions: London, The New Gallery, 1899-1900, Exhibition of Pictures by Masters of the Flemish and British Schools

including a Selection from the Works of Sir Peter Paul Rubens, no. 52. // Paris, Belgian Pavilion, 1900, Exposition

Universelle. Il Bruges, Hôtel de Gouvernement Provincial,

1902, Exposition des Primitifs flamands et d'art ancien, no.

125.

THE LEFT PANEL depicts Saint Nicholas of Bari

wearing a bishop's mitre and chasuble and holding a

crozier. The center panel shows Saint Anne on a throne

decorated with four putti. Behind her is a cloth of honor

and underfoot, an orientalizing carpet.7 Seated on her

knee is the Virgin holding the Christ Child, who turns

the pages of a book held by Anne. On the right panel

stands Saint Anthony of Padua who holds a cross and a

book, upon which the Infant Jesus sits.8 The architecture is continuous throughout all three panels.

There is little doubt that the three large panels of

The Saint Anne Altarpiece are part of an altarpiece that

included three small panels depicting scenes from the

life of Saint Nicholas, now in the National Gallery of

Scotland, Edinburgh (fig. 4),9 and three small panels

with scenes from the life of Saint Anthony of Padua, in

the Toledo Museum of Art, Toledo, Ohio (fig. 5).10

There are, however, questions about the original location of the altarpiece and whether a Lamentation11 in

GERARD DAVID AND WORKSHOP 69
Fig. i. Infrared reflectogram assembly of

a detail of The Saint Anne Altarpiece,

1942.9.17.b, center panel [infrared

reflectography: Molly Paries]

Below, left: Fig. 2. Infrared reflectogram assembly of a detail of The Saint

Anne Altarpiece, 1942.9.ly.b, center

panel [infrared reflectography: Molly

Paries]

Below, right: Fig. 3. Infrared reflectogram assembly of a detail of The Saint

Anne Altarpiece, 1942.9.17.^ center

panel [infrared reflectography: Molly

Paries]
The Art Institute of Chicago was also a part of the

ensemble.

The earliest description of all ten panels was written

by Justi in 18 8 6 when they were in Palma de Mallorca,

in the gallery of the Counts of Montenegro, which was

formed by Cardinal Despuig. Justi's comments do not,

however, make it clear whether the pictures were exhibited as an ensemble or separately.12

 He assumed

that the panels came from the parish church of Saint

Nicholas in Palma de Mallorca. Upon entering the De

Somzée Collection, Brussels, the smaller panels, with

the apparent exception of the Lamentation, were put

together to form a "shrine" resembling Memling's

Shrine of Saint Ursula (Hospital of Saint John,

Bruges).13 In 1902. the three large and six small panels

went to Agnew & Sons, London. The smaller panels

immediately entered the collection of Lord Wantage,

Berkshire, while the large panels remained with Agnew

until 1906. The history of the Lamentation is not clear;

it may be the one recorded in a Paris sale in 1903.14

The first serious attempt to reconstruct The Saint

Anne Altarpiece occurred in 1976 when Farmer discussed whether the Lamentation might have been part

of the retable.15 Without coming to a conclusion, Farmer demonstrated that there is enough room for the

Lamentation and the six small panels to be a predella

to the large panels. The original location of the altarpiece is not often addressed. Weale and Friedlànder

believed it was produced for Spain, and only the 1956

Bruges exhibition catalogue suggested that it might

have been bought in Italy by Cardinal Despuig.16

From the evidence at hand, a few suggestions regarding the original appearance of the retable can be

made. The large panels formed an Italianate non-folding triptych, with Saint Anne and the Virgin and Child

in the center, Saint Nicholas on the left, and the Saint

Anthony on the right. The panels may have been

rounded at the top, echoing the shape of both the

painted architecture and the smaller panels. It has been

suggested that the center panel was taller than the side

panels.17 The smaller panels were probably arranged

underneath in the manner of a traditional predella. I

believe it unlikely that the space at the center of the

predella was occupied by the Lamentation. Its bright,

blond tonality is in contrast to the darker, more saturated colors found in the Edinburgh and Toledo panels, and its draftsmanship and modeling are more assured. Also, the juxtaposition of Saint Anne with the

Virgin and Child to a Lamentation, while not impossible, is iconographically odd.

This reconstruction suggests that The Saint Anne

Altarpiece was designed for export to either Spain or

Italy, for such an arrangement is not typical of Northern altarpieces. Cardinal Despuig, the first known

owner of the retable, was an avid collector who spent

time in both Italy and Spain.18 The altarpiece could

have been acquired in either country, and Justi's suggestion that it was in the church of Saint Nicholas in

Palma de Mallorca should not be discounted. The

combination of Saint Anne, Saint Nicholas, and Saint

Anthony of Padua in the same altarpiece is highly unusual, but does not help to localize the altarpiece, for

by the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries all

three had achieved widespread popularity. While the

question of whether Gerard David ever traveled outside the Netherlands remains moot, he and his shop

presumably produced pictures for export to both Italy

and Spain.19

In the case of Gerard David the relationship of date

to style is especially thorny. With only the Virgo inter

Virgines in Rouen securely documented to 1509, one

of the Justice panels dated, and a few panels datable by

external means, establishing a viable chronology is

difficult. With The Saint Anne Altarpiece the problem

is compounded by the fact that the quality of execution

is not on the highest level, reflecting the intervention of

David's workshop.20 An early date of 1494/1498 is

proposed by Mundy who stresses the influence of Memling.21

 Several authors suggest a date in David's maturity, roughly 1510/1515.22

 Boon considers the altarpiece to be a product of David's last years, though the

"emptiness," "dryness," and "stiffness" he ascribes to

the last phase of David's work are also the terms that

he applies to the contributions of less skilled assistants.23

 In the absence of a secure chronology one can

only observe that The Saint Anne Altarpiece is not

close to the Virgo inter Virgines or the justice ofCarnbyses panels, but until it can be proved that David's

late style is marked by increased collaboration with

assistants as well as diminished performance, the question of the date must remain open.24

The motif of the Christ Child seated on the Virgin's

lap and turning the pages of a book can be found, in

reverse, in David's Altarpiece of the Virgin Enthroned

(Louvre, Paris).25 This picture is placed by Friedlànder

in David's early period, before 1498. Replicas of the

Louvre composition are in the Hessisches Landesmuseum, Darmstadt, and the John G. Johnson Collection,

Philadelphia Museum of Art, and show the Child facing in the same direction as in the Gallery's painting

and with a very similar carpet underfoot.26

J.O.H.

GERARD DAVID AND WORKSHOP 7i
Fig 4. Here attributed to Gerard David and Workshop, Three Miracles of Saint Nicholas, Edinburgh, National

Galleries of Scotland [photo: National Galleries of Scotland]

Fig. 5. Here attributed to Gerard David and Workshop, Three Miracles of Saint Anthony of Padua, Toledo Ohio

The Toledo Museum of Art, Gift of Edward Drummond Libbey [photo : The Toledo Museum of Art]
Notes

1. The first mention of the painting is Bover 1845, 178,

no. 152,, 194, no. 2.07, and 195, no. 2.16. See also Justi 1886,

137—138. For the life of Cardinal Despuig see n. 18 below.

2. Exh. cat. London 1899—1900, no. 52.

3.Exh. cat. Bruges 1902, no. 12.5, lists C. and G. de

Somzée, but Sedelmeyer Gallery 1906, 9, lists Gaston de

Somzée.

4. Letter of 17 July 1981 from William Joli of Agnew &

Sons to the author, in the curatorial files.

5. Sedelmeyer Gallery 1906, 9.

6. Unpublished document from the Widener papers in

the curatorial files that appears to be a copy of a receipt of i

April 1907; the transaction was part purchase, part exchange,

with Fischhof receiving an Assumption of the Virgin by Murillo. Fischhof is not mentioned in the provenance given in

Widener 1908,155.

7. According to Charles Grant Ellis, research associate,

The Textile Museum, Washington, in conversation 9 September 1980, the carpet is Western and probably of Flemish

manufacture. Bodenhausen 1905, 170, seems to have been

the first to point out its similarity to the carpet in Jan van

Eyck's Madonna of Canon van der Paele, Bruges, Groeningemuseum; Guttler, Northern Painting, pi. 8.

8. For Saint Nicholas see Réau, Iconographie, vol. 3,

part 2, 976-988; for Saint Anthony of Padua see Réau, Iconographie, vol. 3, part i, 115—121; Réau notes that the

Christ Child sitting on the book refers to an apparition that

came to Saint Anthony, but does not appear in art until the

sixteenth century. For Saint Anne with the Virgin and Child

see 1976.67.1, Master of Frankfurt.

9. Colin Thompson and Hugh Brigstocke, National Gallery of Scotland. Shorter Catalogue (Edinburgh, 1970), 19-

20, no. 2213 ; each panel is 55.9 x 33.7 cm (22 x i3V4Ín).The

legends depicted are: Saint Nicholas gives thanks to God on

the day of his birth; he bestows a dowry on the three daughters

of an impoverished nobleman; he restores to life three dismembered children.

10. The Toledo Museum of Art. European Paintings (Toledo, 1976), 48, no. 59.2.1; the drowned child restored to life,

55.1 x 32.7 cm (2i11/i6 x i27/s in); no. 59.2.2, the mule

kneeling before the host, 57.3 x 34 cm (227/i6 x i33/s in); no.

59.23, Saint Anthony preaching to the fishes, 55.6 x 32.6 cm

(2I7/8X I213/16Ín).

11. Farmer 1976, no. 1933.1040, 54.7 x 62.4 cm (2iV2x

24a/2Ín).

12. JuSti l886, 138.

13. Catalogue of Pictures forming the Collection of Lord

and Lady Wantage (London, 1905), 53. See also the description in exh. cat. London 1899—1900, no. 32.

14. Farmer 1976, 57-58, n. 16.

15. Farmer 1976, esp. 47, fig. 7, 48, fig. 9; Hofstede de

Groot and Valentiner 1913 propose an arrangement whereby the smaller panels were arranged one above the other on

the exterior of the side wings and the Lamentation was placed

under the center panel. This presumes that the wings were

hinged.

16. Friedlànder 1903, 87, Weale 1903, 39, L'Art flamand

dans les collections Britanniques et la Galerie National de

Victoria [Exh. cat. Groeningemuseum] (Bruges, 1956), nos.

24—25, for the six small panels then in the collection of Christopher Loyd.

17. Colin Thompson, Director, National Gallery of Scotland, letter of 6 May 1981 in the curatorial files. I would

agree; the springing of the simulated arch is visible at the top

of the original portion of the side panels, but not in the center

panel, which seems to indicate that the arch began at a greater

height.

18. On the life of Cardinal Despuig see Luis Ripoll, Raxa y

el Cardenal Despuig (Palma de Mallorca, 1954), 8-15, and

Jaime Salva, El Cardenal Despuig (Palma de Mallorca,

1964). Despuig was in Italy in 1782-1783 (his passport was

valid for Parma, Bologna, Florence, Rome, and Naples); he

returned to Palma de Mallorca, but was again in Rome by

1785. He remained in Italy until at least 1788 and, while he

stayed primarily in Rome, he visited several other cities. In

1794/1795 he was named archbishop of Valencia. He was in

Palma de Mallorca from 1804 until 1807, after which he was

in Paris and Rome. He died in Lucca in 1813. The chances of

obtaining new information about Cardinal Despuig's collection are very slim; according to Joana Palou i Sampol, curator

of Museo de Mallorca, direct descendants of the Counts of

Montenegro have disappeared along with the family archives

(letter of 5 March 1981 in the curatorial files).

19. David's altarpiece of the Virgin Enthroned, Friedlànder, vol. 6, part 2 (1971), nos. 202,172-173 (divided among

the Louvre, Paris, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New

York, and the Palazzo Bianco, Genoa), comes from the della

Cervara Abbey near Genoa. The Virgin and Child, Friedlander, vol. 6, part 2 (1971), no. 212, in the Prado, comes

from a convent in Navarre, and another Virgin and Child,

Friedlànder, vol. 6, part 2 (1971), no. 213, (Museum Boymans—van Beuningen, Rotterdam), comes from a Carmelite

convent in Salamanca.

20. Bodenhausen 1905,171—172, was the first to observe

the unevenness of execution and the contribution of David's

assistants in both the predella and the main panels. Friedlander 1900, 249, and vol. 6, part 2 (1971), 90-91, commented on the emptiness of form, especially in the large panels, but explained it as a result of the large size. Marlier 1957,

49, saw in the figure of Saint Anthony of Padua the hand of

Ambrosius Benson. While the large hands and feet do recall

Benson, differences in the manner of painting become apparent if one examines the Altarpiece of Saint Anthony in the

Musées Royaux des Beaux-Arts, Brussels, monogrammed

A.B. and considered one of the core works for the Benson

group (repro. Friedlànder, vol. n [1974], no. 2.37, pi. 161). It

is noteworthy that Anthony's pose and drapery configuration

are virtually identical to the Saint Anthony on the interior

right wing of the Saint Michael Altarpiece in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna (repro. Friedlànder, vol. 6, part 2

[1971], no. 166, pi. 178), which implies that a model or

pattern was available in the David shop.

In regard to the predella panels, the presence of pouncing

in two of the Edinburgh panels may be taken as evidence of

workshop participation. In the scene of Saint Nicholas bestowing a dowry, pouncing was observed by Johannes Taubert, "Pauspunkte in Tafelbildern des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts," BInstPat 15 (1975), 390, fig. 3, and by Jean Wilson

(undated note to the author) in the scene of the birth of Saint

Nicholas. The composition of the scene of the mule kneeling

before the host in Toledo is found, often in reverse, in several

manuscripts of the Ghent-Bruges School. Perhaps the earliest

appearance of this motif is the miniature (fol. iSyv) in the

Hours of Isabel la Católica in the Cleveland Museum of Art;

see Patrick de Winter, "A Book of Hours of Queen Isabel la

GERARD DAVID AND WORKSHO P 73
Católica," BCMA 68 (1981), 342-427, esp. 418, color pl. 4,

figs. 12,4—126. De Winter dates the illumination by Horenbout to c. 1491—1492, but a terminus ante quern for the

entire manuscript is 1504, the year of Isabel's death.

For a discussion of the workshop practices and procedures

in Bruges see Jean Wilson, "Adriaen Isenbrandt Reconsidered.

The Making and Marketing of Art in Sixteenth Century

Bruges," Ph.D. diss., The Johns Hopkins University, 1983,

47-139-

21. Mundy 1980, 28.

22. Bodenhausen 1905, 168-172; Friedlànder, vol. 6, part

2 (1971), ici, no. 167, 90, calls it "rather late vintage";

Cuttler 1968,196.

23. Boon 1946, 46—47.

24.1 am indebted to James Mundy and Jean Wilson for

sharing their thoughts on the problems of David's workshop

and the chronology of his paintings, and also to Maryan

Ainsworth for sharing the results of her technical investigation of David's paintings.

25. Friedlànder, vol. 6, part 2 (1971), no. 165.

26. Friedlànder, vol. 6, part 2 (1971), nos. 1653, i65b.

The motif of the Christ Child holding a book may be derived

from the paintings of Memling and his circle, where it occurs

with some frequency; see Friedlànder, vol. 6, part i (1971),

nos. 59-60, 63.

References

1845 Bover, Joaquin María. Noticia Histórico-Artística

de los Museos del Eminetísimo Señor Cardenal Despuig Existentes en Mallorca. Palma: 178, 194, 195, nos. 152, 207,

216.

1886 Justi, Karl. "Altflandrische Bilder in Spanien und

Portugal." ZfK 21: 137-138.

1899 "Bibliographie." La Chronique des Arts et de la

Curiosité no. 37: 342.

1900 Lafenestre, Georges. "Les arts à l'Exposition Universelle de 1900. La peinture ancienne." GBA 3e

 pér. 24:

537-538.

1900 Friedlànder, Max J. "Die Leihausstellung der New

Gallery in London, Januar-Màrz 1900.—Hauptsàchlich

niederlàndische Gemàlde des XV. und XVI. Jahrhunderts."

RfKz¿: 249-250.

1900 C. H. "Correspondance d'Angleterre. L'Exposition des maîtres anciens à la New Gallery." La Chronique des

Arts et de la Curiosité no. 5:43.

1902 Hulin de Loo, Georges. Bruges 1902. Exposition

de tableaux flamands des XIV, XV et XVI siècles. Catalogue

critique. Ghent: 32-33.

1903 Friedlànder, Max J. "Die Brügger Leihausstellung

von 1902." RfK 26: 87.

1903 Dülberg, Franz. "Die Ausstellung altniederlàndischer Malerei in Brugge." ZfbK 14: 141.

1903 Weale, W. H. James. "The Early Painters of the

Netherlands as Illustrated by the Bruges Exhibition of 1902."

BurlMz: 39.

1905 Bodenhausen, Eberhard Freiherr von. Gerard

David und seine Schule. Munich: 168—172, repro.opp. 168.

1906 Friedlànder, Max J. "Die Leihausstellung in der

Guildhall zu London—Sommer 1906—Hauptsàchlich niederlàndische Bilder des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts." RfK 29:

579-

1906 Sedelmeyer Gallery. Illustrated Catalogue of the

Tenth Series ofioo Paintings by Old Masters. Paris: 9, repro.

opp. 16.

1908 Catalogue of Paintings forming the Private Collection of P. A. B. Widener. Ashbourne: 155.

1911 Bodenhausen, Eberhard Freiherr von, and Wilhelm Valentiner. "Zum Werk Gerard Davids." ZfbK 22:

184,189.

1913 Winkler, Friedrich. "David, Gerard." In ThiemeBecker8:453.

1913 Widener: not paginated, repro.

1916 Friedlànder, Max J. Von Eyck bis Bruegel. Berlin:

43,181.

1921 Conway, Martin. The Van Eycks and Their Followers. London: 286-287.

1928 Friedlànder. Vol. 6: 97-98, 146, no. 167, pi. 76

(vol. 6, part 2, 1971: 90-91, 101, no. 167, 132, pi. 181—

183).

1929 Erdmann, Kurt. "Orientalische Tierteppiche auf

Bildern des XIV. und XV. Jahrhunderts. Eine Studie zu den

Anfàngen des Orientalischen Knüpfteppichs." JbBerlin 50:

296.

1931 Kleinschmidt, Beda. Antonius von Padua in Leben

undKunst, Kultund Volkstum. Dusseldorf: 197, fig. 162.

1932 Laurent, Marcel. "Les Miracles de Saint Antoine

de Padoue." OH49: 79, 87-88, fig. 9.

1935 Widener: 25.

193 8 Waldman, E. "Die Sammlung Widener." Pantheon

22: 338, repro. 336.

1942 Widener: 5, no. 613.

1946 Boon, Karel G. Gerard David. Amsterdam: 46—

47, repro.

1948 Widener: no. 613, repro. 68—69. (Also cat. of

1959.)

1957 Marlier, Georges. Ambrosius Benson et la peinture à Bruges au temps de Charles-Quint. Damme: 46-50.

1960 "Neuerwerbungen in den USA." Die Weltkunst

30 (15 January): 8.

1961 Birkmeyer, Karl M. "The Arch Motif in Netherlandish Painting of the Fifteenth Century: A Study in Changing Religious Imagery." AB 43: 111-112, fig. 26.

1964 Ñuño, J. Gaya. Pintura Europea Perdida por España, de van Eyck a Tiépolo. Madrid: nos. 43-45, pl. 25.

1968 Cuttler. Northern Painting: 196.

1969 Osten, Gert von der, and Horst Vey. Painting and

Sculpture in Germany and The Netherlands 1500 to 1600.

Harmondsworth and Baltimore: 142.

1975 NGA: 94, repro. 95.

1976 Farmer, John David. "Gerard David's Lamentation and an Anonymous St. Jerome." Museum Studies (The

Art Institute of Chicago) 8: 39-57, repro. 47-48.

1980 Mundy, Edwin James. "Gerard David Studies."

Ph.D. diss., Princeton University: 28-29.

74

EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Jan van Eyck

c. 1390-1441

It is a traditional belief that Jan van Eyck and his brother Hubert were natives of Maaseik, a town north of

Maastricht. Jan van Eyck first appeared in The Hague,

in October of 1421, as painter and varlet de chambre

to John of Bavaria, Count of Holland. Since Van Eyck

was referred to at that time as a "master," it seems

likely that he was born no later than c. 13 90. Following

the death of John of Bavaria, Van Eyck moved to

Bruges and on 19 May 142.5 was appointed painter

and varlet de chambre to Philip the Good, Duke of

Burgundy. Until the end of 142,9 he resided mainly in

Lille but, in addition to his duties as painter, Van Eyck

was also entrusted with various secret missions. In

1427 he may have gone to Spain to negotiate a marriage between the Duke of Burgundy and Isabella of

Aragon; this was not successful, but in 1428 and 1429

Van Eyck was in Lisbon, where a marriage contract

between Philip the Good and Isabella of Portugal was

signed, and in December 1429 Isabella, perhaps accompanied by Van Eyck, arrived in Flanders. Following the

marriage of Philip and Isabella in 1430, it is assumed

that Van Eyck moved to Bruges where, with the exception of certain secret missions, he spent the rest of his

life as court artist to Philip. He also undertook civic

commissions; in 143 5 he painted and gilded six statues

and their tabernacles for the facade of the Town Hall

of Bruges. Van Eyck died in late June 1441.

Although none of Van Eyck's works can be authenticated by documents, he was—as Panofsky pointed out

—the first Early Netherlandish artist to sign his paintings and the only one to emulate the nobility in adopting a personal motto, Als ich chan (As Best I Can). The

combination of inscriptions, signatures, mottos, and

dates, for the most part found on the frames, has made

it possible to establish a canonical oeuvre for Van

Eyck. The earliest painting is the exceptionally large

altarpiece of the Adoration of the Lamb in the cathedral of Saint Bavo, Ghent, which was completed in

1432. The quatrain inscribed on the frame, which mentions both Jan van Eyck and his brother Hubert, has

engendered enormous controversies and endless attempts to define the artistic contribution of each

brother. It has even been suggested that Hubert was

only the creator of an elaborate frame for the Ghent

Altarpiece, and his very existence has been doubted. Of

Hubert van Eyck almost nothing is known save that he

died on 18 September 1426 and is mentioned in four

documents. There are no paintings that can be given to

him with any degree of certainty.

At the core of Jan van Eyck's oeuvre are the Ghent

Altarpiece and the nine signed paintings that date from

1432 to 1439. Included in this group is the triptych in

the Staatliche Gemàldesammlung, Dresden, which recently has been found to bear a signature, motto, and

date of 1437. The question of which, if any, of Van

Eyck's works dates before 1432 continues to be debated as does the date and Van Eyck's involvement in

the partially destroyed manuscript known as the TurinMilan Hours. A single drawing, the portrait of Cardinal Albergad in Dresden, is accepted as autograph.

Van Eyck's fame and reputation were established

by the middle of the fifteenth century and since then

have continued undiminished. He is one of the greatest

artists of all time and, with Robert Campin and Rogier

van der Weyden, is one of the founders of the Early

Netherlandish school of painting. His work combines

meticulous technique, detailed observation, and superior intellect and learning. In Friedlánder's words, "He

knows fabrics like the weaver, from whose looms they

have flowed, buildings like an architect, the earth like a

geographer, plants like a botanist."

J.O.H.

Bibliography

Weale, W. H. James. Hubert and John van Eyck. Their Life

and Work. London, 1908.

Friedlànder. Vol. i. 192.4 (vol. i, 1967).

Baldass, Ludwig.Jan van Eyck. London, 1952,.

Panofsky. ENP. 1953.

Lôhneysen, Hans-Wolfgang. Die altere niederldndische Malerei. Kunstler und Kritiker. Eisenach and Kassel: 1956,

189-254.

Folie, Jacqueline. "Les oeuvres authentifiées des primitifs

flamands." BInstPat6 (1963): 192-2.03.

JAN VAN EYCK 75
Sterling, Charles. "Jan van Eyck avant 1432." RArt no. 33

(1976): 7-82.

Dhanens, Elisabeth. Hubert and Jan van Eyck. Antwerp,

1980.

1937.1.39 (39)

The Annunciation

c. 1434/1436

Canvas (transferred from wood), 92.7 x 36.7 ($6l/2 x i47/io)

painted surface: 90.2 x 34.1 (353/s x i37/s)

Andrew W. Mellon Collection

Inscriptions:

Top of back wall to the right of furthest left figure: MOYSES

F[I]SCELLA

Above second figure from left: Pi... PHARAONIS

On banderole: OIN...VS HEBREORVM HIC EST1

On globe in window: ASIA

Above third figure from left: MOYSES

On banderole: NO ASSVMES NOM DÏTVII VAN [VM]

Above fourth figure from left: DNS

Middle of back wall on roundel left: ISAAC

Roundel right: JACOB

To the right of Gabriel: AVE GRA PLENA

To the left of Mary: /NQ V77OW 3333

On floor, lower left: A DAL/DA VXORE S2

Lower center: SAVL REX; DAV/D; GOLIAS

Second row center: SAMSSON MVLTAS GENTES INTERFECIT T

Ç VIVIÓ.

Technical Notes: The painting was transferred from wood to

canvas after it entered the Imperial Hermitage Museum,

Leningrad, probably after 1864.3 The picture has been extensively restored, though it is hard to say whether this was

necessitated by the transfer or by previously existing conditions. Areas of craquelure have been repainted and the repaint has discolored; this is most evident in the background.

Repaint is also present in portions of the angel's face and hair

and in the Virgin's blue robe. It appears that large portions of

the top glaze of the Virgin's robe have been lost and the

surface has been altered by mechanical or chemical actions.

The unsightly appearance of the robe is compounded by the

fact that in certain areas the varnish has become opaque and

milky. There are small losses in the book and the cushion.

Examination with infrared reflectography discloses underdrawing in several different areas. Parallel hatching and

clusters of longer strokes can be seen in the Virgin's robe (fig.

i). Underdrawing exists in the face and hair and a portion of

the wing of the angel Gabriel. The hem of Gabriel's robe

bears an illegible inscription.4 What appear to be perspective

lines go through the capitals of the triforium at the left, and

these indicate slight shifts of perspective. A diamond-shaped

grid is underdrawn on the floor in the area depicting David

slaying Goliath (fig. 2). There are broad indications of shadows at the edge of Gabriel's robe and thinner lines indicating

shadows at the left of the stool.

Provenance: Possibly the Chartreuse de Champmol, near

Dijon.5 Sale, Paris, 1819. (C. J. Nieuwenhuys, Brussels.) William II, King of the Netherlands [d. 1849], in Brussels until

1841, thereafter The Hague6 (sale, The Hague, 12 August

1850, no. i). Czar Nicholas I of Russia [d. 1855] for the

Imperial Hermitage Museum, Leningrad. (Knoedler &; Co.,

New York.) Purchased June 1930 by Andrew W. Mellon,

Washington. Deeded 5 June 1931 to The A. W. Mellon

Educational and Charitable Trust, Pittsburgh.

Exhibitions: Bruges, 1907, Exposition de la toison d'or et de

l'art néerlandais sous les Ducs de Bourgogne, no. 175.

THE ANNUNCIATION, or Angelic Salutation, recounted in its most basic form in Luke 1126-3 8, is one

of the fundamental events of Christianity. It marks the

origin of the human life of Christ and the incarnation

of the Savior in a necessary prelude to the redemption

of mankind through Christ's death and resurrection.7

For modern critics what is perhaps most remarkable

about Jan van Eyck's Annunciation is the complexity

and erudition of the iconographie program through

which these concepts are set forth.

The Annunciation takes place in a church interior;

this and a bourgeois interior were the two major settings used in northern Europe. Jan van Eyck was probably the first to present the scene in this manner in a

painting, though it appears earlier in manuscript illumination. The church is fictitious, but the details of the

architecture have been associated with specific buildings such as the Cathedral of Tournai or Notre Dame

in Dijon.8 Gabriel holds a sceptre and wears a crown

and elaborate cope.9 Pointing upward, he pronounces

the Angelic Salutation, "Ave gratia plena" (Hail, full of

grace, Luke 1:28). Mary, dressed in a blue robe trimmed

in ermine, is shown in an ambiguous pose; it is not

clear if she is kneeling, crouching, or standing. Her

reply, "Ecce ancilla domini" (Behold the Handmaiden

of the Lord, Luke 1:38), is written upside down so that

it can be read from above. The same device is used in

the Annunciation panels of the Ghent altarpiece. In

relation to the architecture the figures are disproportionately large, and this may relate to the identification

of Mary with the Church, a concept found in Van

Eyck's Madonna in a Church in Berlin (fig. 3).10

Other elements in the painting pertain either to the

Annunciation proper, to the préfiguration of Christ's

life and works in the Old Testament, or to Mary's role

as intermediary.

Light streams through the window at the upper left

and takes the form of seven rays; the dove of the Holy

76 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
Jan van Eyck, The Annunciation, 1937.1.39

JAN VAN EYCK 77
Fig. i. Infrared reflectogram assembly of

a detail of The Annunciation, 1937.1.39

[infrared reflectography: Molly Paries]

Fig. z. Infrared reflectogram assembly of

a detail of The Annunciation^ 1937.1.39

[infrared reflectography: Molly Paries]
Fig. 3. Jan van Eyck, Madonna in a Church, Berlin, Staatliche Museen Preussischer Kulturbesitz,

Gemàldegalerie [photo: Jôrg P. Anders]. Above, right: Fig. 4. The Annunciation, 1937.1.39, detail

Spirit descends along the longest of these rays. The rays

allude to the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit (Isaiah 11:2—

3 ) that will descend on Christ as a branch of the Tree of

Jesse.11 At the lower right is a vase of lilies (Lilium

candidum), traditional symbols of Mary's purity. Seven

of the lilies are open and two are closed.12 The divine

light entering from the upper left may be contrasted to

the natural light that illuminates the scene from the

lower right.13

The symbolism deals primarily with the relationship of the Old Testament to the New Testament and

the transition from the era sub lege (under law) to the

era sub gratia (under grace). As Panofsky pointed out,

this idea is manifest in the transition from the Romanesque round-arched windows of the clerestory to the

early Gothic pointed arches of the lower zone. This

architectural peculiarity is found, however, in several

Belgian ecclesiastical structures of the late Middle

Ages, which means that while the arrangement may be

and probably is symbolic, it is not an architectural and

historical anachronism.14 Similarly, the single stainedglass window at the top of the painting containing a

figure of the Lord may be contrasted to the three leadshot windows behind the Virgin and thus alludes to the

passage from the Jewish to the Christian era.

The stained-glass window is in itself a complex and

ambiguous image (fig. 4). Enclosed in a mandorla, the

bearded figure who holds a scepter and a tablet with an

illegible inscription is usually identified as the Old

Testament Lord of Sabaoth. That he stands upon a

world globe labelled ASIA may refer to the Lord's statement in Isaiah 66:i, "Heaven is my throne and the

earth is my footstool." However, this figure is a generalized image that does not seem to correspond to any

single biblical description of God.15 The winged red

angels standing on wheels refer to the vision of fourwinged cherubim in Ezekiel 10.

On either side of the stained-glass window are murals that, while difficult to see, appear close in style to

the late medieval wall paintings found in some Belgian

churches.16 At the left is depicted the presentation of

the infant Moses to Pharoah's daughter. In this scene

from Exodus z, Ward and others find a parallel to the

life of Christ; a woman of royal blood is presented with

and raises a son not of her husband, and this child will

transmit God's covenant to man.17 The finding of

Moses has been interpreted as a symbol of baptism or a

préfiguration of the reception of Christ by the faithful.18

 At the right is a depiction of the Lord presenting

Moses with a scroll bearing the words of the commandJAN VAN EYCK 79
ment, "You shall not take the name of the Lord your

God in vain" (Exodus 20:7). The giving of the Ten

Commandments, which established the Old Covenant,

is a parallel to the Incarnation, which established the

New Covenant sub gratia.l9

Painted on the rear wall of the lowest zone are two

roundels depicting Isaac and Jacob. The blessing of

Jacob by Isaac (Genesis 27) is also a parallel to the

Annunciation and carries with it the promise of earthly

blessing. Spiritual blessings, however, must be found in

Christ; but as Williams points out, Luke 1:32-33

states that Christ will reign over the house of Jacob.20

The iconographie program is continued in the floor

of the church (fig. 5). The floor is decorated with nielli

that form two sets of symbolic images, the signs of the

zodiac and scenes from the Old Testament. There are

also framing borders of stylized columbine and clover.21

 In medieval churches signs of the zodiac were

sometimes incorporated into the pavement to show

that God has dominion over the physical universe and

the movement of the planets as well as over the world

of the spirit.22 Not all of the signs are visible, but Panofsky attempted a reconstruction that calls for four

rows of signs with, respectively, two, three, four, and

three signs in each row (from upper left).23 Consequently, the angel Gabriel would be over the sign of

Aries, standing for the month of March and the date of

the Annunciation (25 March), while the Virgin covers

Virgo, the sign with which she was traditionally allied.

The last visible sign at the far right is Capricorn, the

sign for December and the Nativity. Ward alters and

elaborates upon Panofsky's analysis.24 While agreeing

that Gabriel and Mary are linked to Aries and Virgo,

he proposes a different sequence. Ward notes that,

with the exception of the Lion which is the sign of Leo

(August), the creatures that inhabit the roundels are

impure hybrids—a merman replaces Libra, a scorpion

is substituted for the crab of Cancer, and for Capricorn

a goat head emerges from a shell. These corrupted

beasts, Ward believes, mirror the disruption of the cosmos by the forces of evil prior to the advent of Christ.

Ward's interpretation should not be accepted uncritically, for many of the images used by Van Eyck may be

seen as simply continuation of traditional symbols.25

The malevolence in the world may also be alluded to by

the armed figures in the capital of the corner pier at the

rear of the church. The lion is unaltered because Leo is

the house of the sun and hence associated with Christ

both generally, as the "light of the world," and specifically, as the "sun of justice" (sol justitiae, Malachi

4:z).

The Old Testament scenes that adorn the pavement

have been interpreted typologically as préfigurations

of Christ's redemptive activity. Three are concerned

with Samson, who was viewed by medieval commentators as a type of Christ in the guise of sol justitiae. At

the left below the hem of Gabriel's robe is Samson

slaying the Philistines (Judges 15), a préfiguration of

Christ's triumph over sin; below it, Samson's betrayal

by Delilah (Judges 16:4-5), which foretells Christ's

betrayal by the Synagogue. In the center row, the uppermost niello is almost entirely obscured by the VirFig. 5. The Annunciation, 1937.1.39,

detail
gin's robe, but Ward identifies the scene as the death of

Abimelech (Judges 9:8-20, 54), whom he interprets as

a préfiguration of the Antichrist. Below this is Samson

pulling down the temple (Judges 16:23-30). Samson's

death prefigures the Crucifixion, and the destruction of

the Philistines in their temple presages the Last Judgment. At the bottom of the row is David cutting off the

head of the slain Goliath (i Samuel 17:51), which symbolizes Christ's victory over the Devil. The last scene at

the bottom right is covered in part by the footstool, but

Ward identifies it as the death of Absalom (2 Samuel

18:9-15), an antitype of Christ's Crucifixion.26 The

footstool itself is subject to multiple interpretations.

Because of its proximity to Mary and the lilies, it may

refer to the Virgin's humility; in its polarity to the

image of the Lord at the top of the painting it may refer

to Isaiah 66: i, "the earth is my footstool"; it may also

allude to the throne prepared for the Second Coming of

Christ.27

Broadly speaking, then, the lower portion of the

painting is concerned with the human, earthly aspects

of Christ's existence, particularly his sacrificial death,

while the upper portion refers primarily to Christ's

divine nature and association with the Lord of the Old

Testament. These two zones come together compositionally and theologically in the person of the Virgin, in

whose body Christ was made incarnate and who also

functioned as intermediary between God and man.

Mary's upraised hands have been associated by Purtle

with the expansis manibus gesture used by the priest

during parts of the Mass and in particular with the

Golden Mass, which includes a dramatization of the

Annunciation as part of the Mass.28

Depictions of the Annunciation in the late fourteenth

and early fifteenth centuries fall into three basic categories: those set in a portico, in a bourgeois interior,

and in an ecclesiastical structure. Van Eyck's Annunciation belongs to the last group, which, as Robb and

others have shown, grows out of the traditions of

courtly French manuscript illumination.29 Iconographically and compositionally the closest antecedent is the

Annunciation in the Rook oiHoms of c. 1405/1408 by

the Boucicaut Master, in the Musée Jacquemart-André,

Paris (fig. 6). The setting is ecclesiastical, the Virgin

makes the same expansis manibus gesture, and a

bearded God the Father holding a globe appears at the

upper left.30

It is astounding to realize that the Annunciation is

only the left wing of what was probably a triptych and

that the same density, ingenuity, and iconographie

complexity must have extended into the other two sections. This may also help to explain why the various

iconographie interpretations put forward, no matter

Fig. 6. The Boucicaut Master, The Annunciation,

Boucicaut Hours, Ms. 2. fol. 53v, Paris, Musée JacquemartAndré [photo: Bulloz]

how erudite, appear incomplete. It has been suggested

that a Nativity or an Adoration of the Kings formed the

center panel and that a Visitation or a Presentation in

the Temple was on the right wing.31 Such reconstructions are, of course, conjectural.

Allied to the problem of reconstruction are questions regarding the patronage and original location of

Van Eyck's painting. The painting is first mentioned as

coming from Dijon and, according to the dealer Nieuwenhuys, it was painted for Philip the Good and destined for an unspecified religious monument in Dijon.32

A description of the Chartreuse de Champmol written

in 1791 and published in part by Reinach mentions

three paintings that were originally in the ducal chapel;

one is an Annunciation whose tall, narrow shape suggests that of the Gallery's painting.33

 Unfortunately,

the picture is not described and there is no way of

connecting it with Van Eyck's painting, apart from the

fact that both were in Dijon. While it is tempting to

believe that The Annunciation was in the Chartreuse

JAN VAN EYCK 8 I
de Champmol and hence conceivably commissioned

by Philip the Good, there is no concrete evidence for

this. O'Meara suggests that the Virgin has been given

the features of Isabella of Portugal.34 Although the argument is not conclusive, the idea is provocative and if

true would certainly ally the painting to Isabella's husband, Philip the Good.

As regards the attribution and date of The Annunciation, scholarly opinions fall into three large categories. A small group of writers gives the painting to

Hubert van Eyck and therefore dates it before Hubert's

death in 1426.35 With the exception of Thalheimer and

Dhanens,36 all other authorities consider the picture to

be an autograph work by Jan van Eyck but vary in

dating the painting before or after the Ghent altarpiece. Friedlànder and de Tolnay propose c. 1433/

1434, Baldass suggests 1432/1435, and Beenken puts

the picture as late as I436/I437.37 On the other hand,

Panofsky dates The Annunciation 1428/1429 and is

joined in this opinion by Robb and Meiss.38 Panofsky's

dating had been adopted by the National Gallery.39

Those who date the picture early associate it with the

Madonna in the Church in Berlin, which was generally

placed in the mid to late 14205.

The chronology of Van Eyck's paintings was fundamentally altered, however, by the discovery of the date

of 1437 on the triptych of the Enthroned Madonna

with Saints and a Donor in Dresden, which had consistently been placed early.40

 Snyder has persuasively

argued that the Berlin Madonna in the Church should

also be placed among the late works, which would

include the Dresden triptych, the Saint Barbara of

1437 in the Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten

in Antwerp, and the Madonna by the Fountain of 1439

in the same museum.41 Van Eyck's development after

1436, then, moves not in the direction of monumentality, but toward courtly refinement, almost a

self-conscious continuation of the International Style.

Eliminating the Berlin and Dresden pictures as works

that predate the Ghent altarpiece makes it all but impossible to continue dating The Annunciation before

1432.

With Van Eyck's works compressed into less than a

decade, it becomes difficult to assign precise dates. Stylistically, The Annunciation is not readily associated

with the Ghent altarpiece, nor does it seem to belong

with the very latest works. Perhaps the best dating

would be c. 1434/1436.

The picture cited by Weale and others as a copy, in

the collection of J. J. van Hal, Antwerp, in the early

nineteenth century, is in actuality the Friedsam Annunciation now in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New

Y0rk'42

 J.O.H.

Notes

1. Although it is almost illegible, I believe the second

word is INCARNATVS.

2. Panofsky 1953, 414, believes the inscription can be

completed as: SAMSON TRADITVR A DALIDA VXORE SVA.

3. In the 1850 sales catalogue of the collection of William II the painting is recorded as being on wood, and Waagen 1864, 115, gives the support as wood. The earliest Hermitage catalogue available to me, that of 1870, lists the picture as having been transferred to canvas at the Hermitage.

4. First observed by Carol Purtle. The author and Molly

Faries, communication of August 1984, have noted that the

first word is close to the cabalistic AFAA (AGLA), which

appears in the Ghent Altarpiece; see Panofsky 1953, 210-

2i i ; Elisabeth Dhanens, Van Eyck: The Ghent Altarpiece

(New York, 1973), 75.

5. Nieuwenhuys 1843, 2, on the history of the painting

says: "D'après les meilleurs renseignements qu'on a pu obtenir, ce tableau faisait suite à deux autres peintures du même

maître; il a été peint pour Philippe le Bon, duc de Bourgogne,

et destiné à orner un monument religieux à Dijon." Reinach

192.7, 239, published a fragmentary description written in

1791 of three paintings kept in the Prior's room, but originally in the ducal chapel of the Chartreuse de Champmol.

This reads in part: "Dans la chambre du Prieur on conserve

deux tableaux sur bois dans le genre des premiers peintres

flamands, qui proviennent des chapelles [sic] des Ducs: ils ont

environ 4 pieds de haut. Le premier, d'à peu près un pied de

large, est un Annonciation...." Although the dimensions do

not match those of the Gallery's painting, the general shape is

similar and the tall, narrow format is rather unusual for a

Netherlandish Annunciation. Nieuwenhuys' statement that

the painting came from Dijon, coupled with the 1791 description, raises the possibility that 1937.1.39 is identical

with the painting mentioned as being in the Chartreuse de

Champmol. See below n. 33.

6. Nieuwenhuys 1843, ii; in 1841 the works of art were

transported from Brussels to a gallery built for them in The

Hague.

7. Réau, Iconographie, vol. 2, part 2, 174.

8. Weale and Brockwell 1912, 100; Beenken 1943, 78-

8 o, and Panofsky 1935,471, and 1953,138, note similarities

with the Cathedral of Tournai, while Kern 1912, 50—51,

makes comparison to the Church of Notre Dame in Dijon.

For other discussions of the architecture see Kern 1904,

Saintenoy 1908, and de Jong 1934. See below n. 14.

9. McNamee 1963 points out that the cope marks Gabriel as an attendant at a Solemn High Mass, thus emphasizing the connection between the Incarnation and Christ's

sacrifice on the Cross and its perpetuation in the Mass.

10. Discussed by Panofsky 1953, 144—148, and by Herzogi956.

11. The gifts are: wisdom, understanding, counsel,

strength, knowledge, piety, and fear. See Meiss 1945,

 T7^-

12. Ward 1975,

 T9?5 sees tne

 lilies

 as

 referring to Christ

rather than solely to the purity of the Virgin, and the fact that

seven lilies are open as further strengthening the association

with Isaiah's prophecy of the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit.

13. Panofsky 1953, 147-148.

14. Panofsky 1953, 137-139; compare de Tolnay 1941.

Lyman 1981 points out that the "upside down" elevation

actually occurs in several churches in Tournai, with the

church of Saint Quentin most resembling the architecture of

Van Eyck's painting. Saint Quentin is also highly unusual in

82 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
that its sanctuary faces west rather than east. Not mentioned

by Lyman but also displaying "upside down" elevations are

the Cistercian abbey at Villers-la-Ville and the cloister of the

abbey at Orval, reproduced in A. van de Walle, Gothic Art in

Belgium (Brussels, 1971), pis. XXII-XXIII.

15. Ward 1975,

 2°65 sees tne

 figure as the God of both the

Old and New Testaments; de Tolnay 1941,176, and Baldass

1952, 2.77, identify it as Christ, while Pañofsky 1953,

 I3^->

terms the figure the Lord Sabaoth of the Old Testament.

Panofsky 1938, 43 3, however, observes that a single image of

the Deity is sufficient to imply the entire Trinity.

16. Panofsky 1953 sees the style of the murals as close to

that found in Tournai, perhaps around i zoo. See Paul Rolland, La Peinture murale à Tournai (Brussels, 1946), especially the paintings in the Église Saint-Brice, pis. 37-38,

which are later and show a moderate similarity to the images

in Van Eyck's painting. Purtle 1982, 46, notes that the

churches of Saint Salvator and Saint Jacob in Bruges also give

evidence of having had wall decoration.

17. Ward 1975, 2.05; Purtle 1982, 51.

18. Williams 1977, 2.4, for the association of Moses and

baptism; Panofsky 1953, 138, for Moses as prefiguring

Christ's reception.

19. Purtle 1982, 51, discusses a medieval tradition whereby the first three commandments were associated with the

three persons of the Trinity. The Second Commandment,

then, pertains to the Son, who was further interpreted by

medieval commentators as the Word become flesh to accomplish the task of redemption. This of course is allied to the

subject of the Annunciation and the Incarnation of Christ.

20. Williams 1977, 2,7—2.8, notes that Jacob's disguising

himself in goatskins to resemble Esau and receive Isaac's

blessing parallels the fooling of the Devil by Christ's incarnation. The putting on of flesh and with it the appearance of sin

tricks the Devil and vanquishes him. Compare Meyer Schapiro, "Muscipula Diaboli: The Symbolism of the Mérode

Altarpiece," AB 17(1945), 182-187.

21. Ward 1975, 205, for the identification and interpretation of the two plants. Columbine is an attribute of Christ

and the Holy Spirit or a symbol of the sorrows of the Virgin.

Ward points out that columbine was also called "lion's herb"

and hence associated with the sign of Leo, the house of the

sun, and by extension with Christ. Clover is a symbol of the

Trinity but may also be appropriate to Samson because of its

use against disease.

22. De Tolnay 1941, 200, calls attention to zodiac representations on the floors of San Giovanni Battista and San

Miniato, Florence. See James Webster, The Labors of the

Months in Antique and Medieval Art (New York, 1970),

148, and pi. 32, fig. 51, for the pavement at San Savino,

Piacenza. I have not located any pavement nielli that closely

resemble Van Eyck's creation in style or in the combination

of zodiac signs with Old Testament scenes.

23. Panofsky 1953, 414.

24. Ward 1975,196; he believes there are only three rows

of signs, arranged 5-4-3.

25. Ward 1975,202-204. The sign of Capricorn as a goat

emerging from a shell or Sagittarius as a centaur with bow

and arrow occurs not only in the Limbourgs' Très Riches

Heures, but also in earlier manuscripts. See, for example, a

zodiacal-anatomical correlation of the late eleventh century

in the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, discussed and reproduced in Harry Bober, "The Zodiacal Miniature of the Très

Riches Heures of the Duke of Berry—Its Sources and Meaning,"/WC7 ii (1948), 14, pi. 3b. Very similar to the merman

occupying the sign of Libra is the marine knight, a misericord

from a choir stall in the church of Saint Sulpice in Diest dating

to c. 1491; repro. Flanders in the Fifteenth Century: Art and

Civilization [exh. cat. Detroit Institute of Arts] (Detroit,

1960), 250, where it is also noted that combats of marine

knights were popular and were staged on the occasion of the

reception of Philip the Good at Bruges in 1440 and at Ghent

in 1458. It is possible that the mermaid in the sign of Gemini

could also have a popular or folkloristic meaning.

26. Typological interpretation is to be found in Panofsky

1953,138, and Ward 1975, 198—202.

27. Ward 1975, 196, stresses the association with the

throne prepared for the Second Coming of Christ, while Williams 1977, 44—49, emphasizes the stool as emblem of

Mary's humility as well as its possible allusion to the Throne

of Wisdom (Sedes Sapientiae}.

28. Purtle 1982,46-50. The Golden Mass was celebrated

in Flanders in mid-December. The "stage directions" of the

Mass call for Gabriel to carry a scepter and to point to the

dove of the Holy Spirit, who descends upon the Virgin Mary.

She, who has been kneeling, then stands, faces the altar,

makes the expansis manibus gesture with her hands, and says

"Ecce ancilla domini. . . ." These actions mirror closely the

activity in Van Eyck's painting.

29. Robb 1936, esp. 499—500; Panofsky 1953, 59.

30. Meiss 1968, 72-73, fig. 29. There are several versions

of this theme by the Boucicaut workshop. In the Annunciation in the Bibliothèque Royale, Brussels, Ms. 10767, fol. 30,

Meiss 1968, fig. 199, the angel's standing posture is close to

that of Gabriel in the painting. Purtle 1982,41—45, carefully

analyzes the connection between the Boucicaut Master's Annunciation and Jan van Eyck's, while pointing out, 41, that

"the Boucicaut Master was the first to successfully visualize

the entry of Christ into the body of the Virgin as a parallel

event to the entry of Christ into the body of the Church."

31. Schmarsow 1924 suggests that the center panel might

have been a Nativity with a Presentation in the Temple on the

wing. Beenken 1943 thought that the center panel contained

either an Adoration of the Kings or a Nativity, and that a

Visitation was on the right wing.

32. Nieuwenhuys 1843, 2; see n. 5. It may be significant

that he speaks of a "monument religieux" rather than a

church.

33. Reinach 1927, 239; see n. 5. The manuscript is in the

Bibliothèque Publique, Dijon, Ms. 88, fol. 53. The other two

paintings are a Presentation in the Temple identified with the

picture by an anonymous follower of Robert Campin, now

on loan from the Louvre to the Musée des Beaux-Arts, Dijon

(repro. Reinach 1927, 241) and the Way to Calvary by

Simone Martini in the Louvre.

34. O'Meara 1981 makes comparison to only two portraits, a painting in the Louvre (lent to Dijon) and the panel

attributed to Rogier van der Weyden in the J. Paul Getty

Museum, Malibu. At least seven other representations of

Isabella are discussed by Bauch 1963, 102—109 (repr. 1967,

85—91). Of particular interest is a drawing in a private collection in Germany that purports to be a copy of the drawing

Van Eyck made in 1429 of Isabella, reproduced in Sterling

1976, 34, fig. 42.

35. Durand-Gréville 1910, Burger 1925.

36. Thalheimer 1967; in addition to the National Gallery's painting he does not accept the Madonna of Canon van

der Paele and the Maelbeke Madonna. Reasons for rejection

JAN VAN EYCK 83
are not given. Dhanens 1980 believes the picture "probably

has its source in a workshop model used also for one of the

Llangattock miniatures." I am unable to see a viable connection between the painting and the Llangattock Hours or to

accept Dhanens' attribution of the picture to a follower of

Van Eyck.

37. Friedlânder 1967, 64; De Tolnay 1939, 31; Baldass

1952., 278; Beenken 1943, 78, 88.

38. Panofsky 1935, 473; 1953, 194; Robb 1936, 506;

Meiss 1945, 178; Guttler 1968, 86. It is Robb's contention

that The Annunciation must be earlier than the Ghent Altarpiece because the Ghent Altarpiece employs the new bourgeois interior used by Robert Campin in the Mérode triptych

and hence it is unlikely that Van Eyck would have reverted to

the older ecclesiastical setting. Voll 1901, 2.18, dates the

painting c. 142.5.

39. As in NGA 1975, 124.

40. H. Menz, "Zur Freilegung einer Inschrift auf dem

Eyck-Altar der Dresdener Gemaldegalerie," Jahrbuch der

Staatliche KunstsammlungDresden (1959), 2.8-29.

41. James Snyder, "The Chronology of Jan van Eyck's

Paintings," Album Amicorum ]. G. van Gelder (The Hague,

1973), 295—296. Philip 1971, 136—137, argues that the

Berlin Madonna should be dated after the Ghent Altarpiece

and further, 139, puts forward a date for The Annunciation

after the Dresden triptych.

42. Weale 1908, 121. I am extremely grateful to Lome

Campbell for the correct identification of this painting.

References

1833 Passavant, J. D. "Nachrichten über die alt-niederlàndische Malerschule." Kunst-Blatt (no. 83): 320.

1843 Nieuwenhuys, C. J. Description de la Galerie des

Tableaux de S. M. le Roi des Pays-Bas. Brussels: 1—2.

1847 Michiels, Alfred. Histoire de la peinture flamande

et hollandaise. 4 vols. Paris, 2: 127.

1850 Catalogue des Tableaux Anciens et Modernes, de

Diverses Écoles; Dessins et Statues, Formant la Galerie de

feu sa Majesté Guillaume IL Amsterdam: i, no. i.

1858 Hotho, H. G. Die Malerschule Hubert's van Eyck

nebst Vorgàngern und Zeitgenossen. Berlin: 2, 171.

1864 Waagen, Gustav Friedrich. Die Gemàldesammlung in der Kaiserlichen Ermitage zu St. Petersburg. Munich:

115—116, no. 443.

1866 Michiels, Alfred. Histoire de la peinture flamande

depuis ses débuts jusqu'en 1864. 6 vols. Paris, 2: 317-318.

1870 Ermitage Impérial. Catalogue de la galerie des

tableaux. Les Écoles germaniques. 2d éd. 3 vols. Saint Petersburg, 2: 3-4. no. 443.

1872 Crowe, J. A., and G. B. Cavalcaselle. The Early

Flemish Painters: Notices of Their Lives and Works. London

(id éd.): 113-114.

1879 Ris, L. Clément de. "Musée Impérial de l'Ermitage à Saint-Pétersbourg." GBA 2e

pér. 19: 573-574, repro.

577 (drawing by Goutzwiller).

1887 Conway, William. Early Flemish Artists and

Their Predecessors of the Lower Rhine. London: 140-141.

1898 Kaemmerer, Ludwig. Hubert und ]an van Eyck.

Bielefeld and Leipzig: 69-71, repro.

1899 Seeck, Otto. Die charakterischen Unterschiede

der Brüder van Eyck. Berlin: 41, 70.

1900 Voll, Karl. Die Werke des Jan van Eyck. Strasbourg: 62-65.

1900 Kaemmemer, Ludwig. "Die neueste Eycklitteratur." Kunstchronik 12 (8 November): cols. 67-68, 70.

1900 Friedlânder, Max J. Review of Die Werke des Jan

van Eyck by Karl Voll. In RfK 23: 474.

1901 Somof, A. Ermitage Impérial. Catalogue de la galerie des tableaux. Écoles néerlandaises et école allemande. 2

vols. Saint Petersburg, 2: iio-iii.

1901 Voll, Karl. "Jan van Eyck en France." GBA 3e

pér. 25: 217-218.

1903 Dvorak, Max. "Das Ràtsel der Kunst der Brüder

van Eyck." JbWien 24: 237, repro. 236 (printed in book

form, Munich, 1925: 119).

1903 Weale, Frances. Hubert and ]an van Eyck. New

York: 30.

1904 Kern, G. Joseph. Die Grundzüge der linear-perspektivischen Darstellung in der Kunst der Gebrüder van

Eyck undihrerSchule. Leipzig: 13-14, diagram pi. 7.

1906 Wurzbach, Alfred von. Niederlàndisches Künstler-Lexikon. 3 vols. Vienna and Leipzig, i: 514.

1906 Kleinclausz, A. "Les Peintres des Ducs de Bourgogne." RAAM 20: 258, repro. 259.

1906 Voll, Karl. Die altniederlàndische Malerei von Jan

van Eyck bis Memling. Leipzig: 36.

1907 Girodie, André. "La Toison d'or et l'art néerlandais sous les ducs de Bourgogne." L'Art de les Artistes 5

(September): 289—290, repro.

1907 Les Chef s-d'oeuvre de l'art flamand à l'exposition

de la toison d'or. Bruges: 16—17, repro.

1907 Hymans, Henri. Les Van Eyck. Paris: 111—112,

repro. 109.

1907 Hymans, Henri. "L'Exposition de la toison d'or à

Bruges." GBA 3e pér. 38: 203-204, repro. opp. 204.

1907 Strange, Edward. "The Exhibition of the Golden

Fleece at Bruges." Conn 19, no. 73: 32, repro.

1907 Mandach, C. de "L'Exposition de la toison d'or et

de l'art néerlandais sous les ducs de Bourgogne." RAAM 22:

155.

1907 "Correspondance de Belgique. L'exposition de la

toison d'or à Bruges." La Chronique des Arts et de la Curiosité no. 26: 252.

1908 Weale, W. H. James. Hubert and John van Eyck.

Their Life and Work. London: 119—122, no. 16, repro. betw. 118 and 119.

1908 Les Chefs-d'oeuvre d'art ancien à l'exposition de

la toison d'or à Bruges en 1907. Brussels: 78, pi. 361.

1908 Saintenoy, Paul. L'Église Saint-Jacques de Compostelle et le décor architectural de l'Annonciation de Jean

van Eyck. Antwerp: 4-5, 8-10.

1909 Wrangell, Nicolas. Les Chefs-d'oeuvre de la galerie de tableaux de l'Ermitage Impérial à St. Pétersbourg.

Munich: XI, repro. 62.

1910 Durand-Gréville, E. Hubert et Jean van Eyck.

Brussels: 80-85, repro. opp. 80.

1910 "Extraits des procès-verbaux des séances. Séance

de rentrée du 13 novembre 1907." Mémoires de l'Académie

des sciences, arts et belle-lettres de Dijon 4e sér. 11 : LXX.

1912 Réau, Louis. "La galerie de tableaux de l'Ermitage

et la collection Semenov." GBA 4e pér. 8: 471-472.

1912 Kern, G. Joseph. "Perspective und Bildarchitektur

bei Jan van Eyck." RfK 35: 50-51.

1912 Weale, W. H. James, and Maurice Brockwell. The

Van Eycks and Their Art. London: 98-102, pi. 19.

1913 Durand-Gréville, E. Review of The Van Eycks

and their Art by W. H. James Weale and Maurice Brockwell.

«4 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
In La Chronique des Arts et de la Curiosité no. 32: 254.

1915 Friedlànder, Max J. "Eyck, Jan van." In ThiemeBecker n: 12.9-133.

1919 Huizinga, Johan. Herfsttij der Middeleeuwen.

Haarlem: 474—476.

1921 Conway, Martin. The Van Eycks and Their Followers. London: 64-65.

1921 Brockwell, Maurice. "Exposition des Beaux-Arts

de Burlington Club." La Chronique des Arts et de la Curiosité no. 2: 14.

1922 Pfister, Kurt. Van Eyck. Munich: 62, pi. 14.

19 24 Winkler, Friedrich. Die altniederlàndische Malerei.

Berlin: 49.

1924 Schmarsow, August. Hubert und Jan van Eyck.

Leipzig: 135-141^1.29.

1924 Friedlànder. Vol. i: 104-105, pi. 44 (vol. i,

1967:63-64,^.57).

1925 Burger, Willy. Die Malerei in den Niederlanden

1400-1550. Munich: 18-20, pl. 10.

1927 Reinach, S. "Three Early Panels from the Ducal

Residence at Dijon." BurlM 50: 234-245.

1928 Demonts, Louis. "Le Maître de l'Annonciation

d'Aix, des van Eyck à Antonello de Messine." RAAM 53:

265,278.

1932 Tolnai, Karl von. "Zur Herkunft des Stiles der

van Eyck." Munchnerjb 9: 322.

1934 Friedlànder, Max J. "A New Painting by van

Eyck." BurlM 65: 3.

1934 Jong, Johannes de. Architektuur bij de Nederlandsche Schilders vóór de Hervorming. Amsterdam: 70—71,

134, 155-156, figs. 65,128, 149.

1935 "Mellon to Give Gallery and 19,000,000 of Art to

Nation." Art Digest 9 (i March): 6, repro.

1935 "Mellon Holdings Are Announced by Knoedler &

Co."AriN33 (23 February): 4, repro. 9.

1935 Tietze, Hans. Meisterwerke europàischer Malerei

in Amerika. Vienna: 333, no. 122, repro. 123.

1935 Panofsky, Erwin. "The Friedsam Annunciation

and the Problem of the Ghent Altarpiece." AB 17: 449, 468,

471,473, fig. 22.

1936 Robb, David. "The Iconography of the Annunciation in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries." AB 18: 506-

508, fig. 31.

1937 Dupont, Jacques. "Les peintures de la Chartreuse

de Champmol." BSocHAF: 155—157.

1937 Beenken, Hermann. "The Annunciation of Petrus

Christus in thé Metropolitan Museum and the Problem of

Hubert van Eyck." AB 19: 231.

1938 Burroughs, Alan. Art Criticism from a Laboratory.

Boston: 201—202.

1939 Tolnay, Charles de. Le Maître de Flémalle et les

frères van Eyck. Brussels: 25, 66, no. 5, repro. 71-73.

1941 NGA: 61-62, no. 39.

1941 Held, Julius S. "Masters of Northern Europe,

1430—1660, in thé National Gallery." ArtN 40 (June): n,

repro.

1941 Tolnay, Charles de. "Flemish Paintings in the National Gallery of Art." MagArt 34: 175-176, 178, figs, i,

3-5-

1942 Friedlànder, Max J. On Art and Connoisseurship.

London: 186-187.

1943 Beenken, Hermann. Hubert und]an van Eyck. 2d

ed. Munich: 78-80, 88, pl. 106.

1945 Meiss, Millard. "Light as Form and Symbol in

Some Fifteenth-Century Paintings." AB 27: 178—179, fig. 4.

1948 Musper, Theodor. Untersuchungen zu Rogier van

der Weyden und]an van Eyck. Stuttgart: 104—105, pl. 165.

1948 Beer, E. S. de. "Gothic: Origin and Diffusion of the

Term; the Idea of Style in Architecture."/WCJ n: 159.

1950 Kauffmann, Hans. "Jan van Eycks 'Arnolfinihochzeit.'" Geistige Welt4 (January): 48—49, repro.

1952 Baldass, Ludwig. Jan van Eyck. London: 54—55,

277—278, no. 9, pis. 113—115.

1952 Meiss, Millard. " 'Nicolas Albergad' and the Chronology of Jan van Eyck's Portraits." BurlM 94: 137.

1952 Ladoué, Pierre. "La Scène de L'Annunciation vue

par les peintres." GBA 6e per. 39: 355.

1953 Panofsky. ENP: 137-139, 147-148, 193-194,

fig. 238.

1954 Fourez, Lucien. "L'Évêque Chevrot de Tournai et

sa Cité de Dieu." RBAHA 23: 100—101, fig. 16.

1955 Winkler, Friedrich. Review of Early Netherlandish

Painting by Erwin Panofsky. In Kunstchronik 8: 22.

1956 Herzog, Erich. "Zur Kirchenmadonna van Eycks."

Berliner Museen 6: 5, 14.

1956 Pàcht, Otto. Review of Early Netherlandish Painting by Erwin Panofsky. In BurlM 98: 274.

1957 Quarré, Pierre. "Fragment d'un primitif de la

Chartreuse de Champmol au Musée des Arts Décoratifs." La

Revue des Arts 7: 63.

1960 Broadley, Hugh. Flemish Painting in the National

Gallery of Art. Washington: 2-3, 12, repro. 13 (rev. éd.,

1978).

1960 [Pierre Quarré]. La Chartreuse de Champmol:

Foyer d'art au temps des Ducs Valois. Exh. cat. Musée de

Dijon: 15.

1960 Wilenski, R. H. Flemish Painters 1430—1830. 2

vols. New York, 1:12.

1961 Kurz, Otto. "Eyck, Hubert, and Jan van." Encyclopedia of World Art, 16 vols. New York, Toronto, and London, 5: col. 327.

1961 Meiss, Millard. " 'Highlands' in the Lowlands. Jan

van Eyck, the Master of Flémalle and the Franco-Italian Tradition." GBA 6e

 per. 57: 310.

1961 Faggin, Giuseppe. Van Eyck. Verona: 116, 126,

195, no. 14, figs. 73-76.

1961 Seznec, Jean. "Michelet et l'Annonciation." GBA

6

e

 per. 58: 147, fig. 151.

.1961 Denis, Valentin. All the Paintings of Jan van Eyck.

New York: 28, 48, pis. 81-85.

1961 Schilling, Rosy. "Das Llangattock-Stundenbuch.

Sein Verhàltnis zu Van Eyck und dem Vollender des TurinMailànder Stundenbuches." Wallraf-Richartz-Jahrbuch 23:

225.

1963 McNamee, M. B. "Further Symbolism in the Portinari Altarpiece." AB 45: 143.

1963 Walker: 96, repro. 97.

1963 Bauch, Kurt. "Bildnisse des Jan van Eyck." Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften. Jahresheft 1961/

1962. Wiesbaden: 101. Repr. in Kurt Bauch, Studien zur

Kunstgeschichte. Berlin, 1967: 83.

1963 Bruyn, Josua. "Twee Kardinaalsportretten in het

werk van Jan van Eyck." Album Discipulorum ]. G. van

G elder. Utrecht: 30.

1965 Bol, L. J. Jan van Eyck. New York: 87, repro. 47.

1966 Cairns and Walker: 74, repro. 75.

1967 Thalheimer, Siegfried. Der Center Altar. Munich:

JAN VAN EYCK 85

71.
1968 Guttler. Northern Painting: 85-86, fig. 101.

1968 Meiss, Millard. French Painting in the Time of

Jean de Berry. The Boucicaut Master. London: 72—73.

1968 Faggin, Giorgio T. U opera completa del van Eyck.

Milan: 94-95, repro. no. 18, pis. 35-36.

1969 Blum, Shirley Neilsen. Early Netherlandish Triptychs. Berkeley and Los Angeles: 10.

1969 Peman y Pemartin, Cesar. Juan van Eyck y España.

Cadiz: 43-44, fig. 24.

1969 Pauwels, H. Review of Der Center Altar by Siegfried Thalheimer. In BurlM in: 393.

1969 Minott, Charles. "The Theme of the Mérode Altarpiece." AB 51: 2.67.

1971 Philip, Lotte Brand. The Ghent Altarpiece and the

Art of Jan van Eyck. Princeton: 139, fig. 138.

1972 Braunfels, Wolfgang. Monasteries of Western Europe. Princeton: 120, fig. 145.

1972 Strauss, Konrad. "Keramikgefasse, insbesondere

Fayencegefàsse auf Tafelbildern der deutschen und niederlàndischen Schule des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts." KeramikFreundederSchweiz. Mitteilungsblattno. 84: 22, pi. 3, fig. i.

1972 Kahr, Madlyn. "Delilah." AB 54: 284.

1973 Stangel, Andrew Laurie. "The Cartographic Symbolism in Jan van Eyck's Annunciation in the National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C." Comitatus 4: 41-48, repro.

44,45-

1973 Koller, Manfred. "Der Albrechtsmeister und Conrad Laib. Technologische Beitràge zur Tafelmalerei des 'Realistischen Stiles' in Ôsterreich." Ósterreichische Zeitschrift

fur Kunst und Denkmalpflege 27: 52.

1974 Walker, John. Self-Portrait with Donors. Boston:

115.

1974 Meiss, Millard. French Painting in the Time of

Jean de Berry. The Limbourgs and their Contemporaries.

New York: 446.

1974 Birkmeyer, Karl. Review of The Ghent Altarpiece

and the Art of Jan van Eyck by Lotte Brand Philip. In AB 56:

286.

1975 Collier, James Mitchell. "Linear Perspective in

Flemish Painting and the Art of Petrus Christus and Dirk

Bouts." Ph.D. diss., University of Michigan: 62—63, %•

 I^-

1975 NGA: 124, repro. 125.

1975 Ward, John. "Hidden Symbolism in Jan van

Eyck's Annunciations." AB 57: 196—208, repro.

1976 Sterling, Charles. "Jan van Eyck avant 1432."

RArtno. 33: 9, n.

1976 Walker: 120, repro. 121.

1977 Williams, Carolyn. "Jan van Eyck's Annunciation.

An Iconographical Study." M. A. thesis, University of Delaware.

1978 Bernardini, Cecilia. Jan van Eyck. Rome: 12, pi.

20.

1978 Panhans-Bühler, Ursula. Eklektizismus und Originalitàtim Werk des Petrus Christus. Vienna: 71, fig. 4.

1979 Châtelet, Albert. Van Eyck. Bologna: 40,42, pi. 7.

1980 Dhanens, Elisabeth. Hubert and Jan van Eyck.

Antwerp: 355, 358, fig. 221.

1981 O'Meara, Carra Ferguson. "Isabelle of Portugal as

the Virgin in Jan van Eyck's Washington Annunciation."

GBA 6e per. 97: 99—103, figs. 1—2.

1981 Lyman, Thomas. "Architectural Portraiture and

Jan van Eyck's Washington Annunciation." Gesta 20/1:

263-271, fig. i.

1982 Purtle, Carol J. The Marian Paintings of Jan van

Eyck. Princeton: 40-58, 60, 75, figs. 26, 28-29.

1983 Giltay, J. Review of Hubert and Jan van Eyck by

Elisabeth Dhanens. InSimiolus 13: 56—57.

1984 Lane, Barbara G. The Altar and the Altarpiece.

Sacramental Themes in Early Netherlandish Painting. New

York: 45-47, fig. 28.

86 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Flemish School, Imitator of

probably early twentieth century

1942.16.2 (699)

Saint Bernard with Donor

reverse: Saint Margaret

Oak, 58.8 x 23.3 (23 Vs x 93/io) painted surface: 57.5 x zi.i

(zz5/8 x 811/io) painted surface, reverse: 57.8 x 2.1.3 i2-

2

-

3

/

4

X 83/4)

Chester Dale Collection

Technical Notes: The panel is made of a single piece of oak,

cut tangentially, rather than radially.1 There are unpainted

edges on all sides of both front and back, and a barbe or

raised edge of paint where the designs end. The ground layer

on both sides is pale yellow in color and extends beyond this

painted edge. There is a fine, dry underdrawing visible with

infrared reflectography and with the naked eye, especially on

the front of the panel. The paint is thinly applied; however,

an underpainting of a light iron-red color under the bluegreen robe of the donor and the saint's prayer book gives

these areas a thicker build-up of paint. Cross-sections taken

from front and back were analyzed by Hermann Kühn of the

Doerner Institut, Munich, in 1963. The painting was further

analyzed at the Gallery in 1983—1984 by means of x-ray

fluorescence, microscopy of crushed pigment samples, and

microscopy of cross-sections (see commentary below).

A fine, predominantly vertical crackle penetrates both

paint and ground layers. A fair amount of abrasion of the

paint layers has occurred along these cracks. Traces of paint

layers now partially missing are visible under the microscope

in the brown and green areas of the front and in the background of the back. There are small scattered areas of inpainting. In 1943

 me

 front and back of the panel were

cleaned and a layer of black paint was removed from the

back, revealing the figure of Saint Margaret. Remnants of this

black paint can still be found on the back, and there are some

rather similar residues on the front as well.2

Provenance: M. Dubois, Amiens. (Galerie Sedelmeyer, Paris.)

Private collection, New York. (American Art Association,

New York, 17 and 18 May 1934, no. 132, repro., as by

Gerard David.)3

IN ITS STYLE this painting approaches some works

produced at the end of the fifteenth century along the

Franco-Flemish border.4 However, an accumulation

of evidence strongly suggests that it is the work of a

skillful modern imitator of early Flemish paintings.

Microscopic and spectral analysis of cross-sections

undertaken by the Doerner Institut, Munich, and at the

Gallery5 showed that the lead white used lacks the

impurities of silver and gold found in this pigment before the late nineteenth or early twentieth century and

that the green is made up of an uncharacteristic mixture of ultramarine, ochre, and lead white.6

 The yellow

tone of the ground and the fact that it extends beyond

the barbe also tend to arouse suspicion.

Before this technical analysis was undertaken, Friedrich Winkler drew attention to the similarities between

the Gallery's panel and a group of acknowledged early

twentieth-century imitations of early Flemish paintings.7

 In one of these documented imitations, a Mystic

Marriage of Saint Catherine exhibited in London in

1927 (fig. i), the trees are strikingly close to those in

the Gallery's panel and the eyes and soft, full lips are

formed in a very similar manner.8 Apart from stylistic

considerations, the butter-yellow, rather than white or

gray, hue of the saint's habit is suspicious.9 The donor's placement in the corner of the panel with his

fingers just protruding above the frame derives from

bust-length portraits produced by Rogier van der

Weyden and Memling and seems inconsistent with the

three-quarter length of the presenting saint or with the

landscape setting.10 The figure of Saint Margaret, particularly the arrangement of her cross and book, depends rather literally on that of the same saint in Van

der Goes' Portinari altarpiece (fig. 2.), while her head

seems to derive from the neighboring figure of Saint

Mary Magdalene.11 Although the pastiche quality of

the Gallery's painting is not as marked as that of the

Mystic Marriage of Saint Catherine, the bulk of the

evidence suggests that the painting is a modern imitation rather than the product of a provincial school.

M.W.

Notes

i. Because of the angle at which the panel was cut, it

proved impossible to measure the growth rings for dendrochronological dating.

2.. The patient and perceptive work of Laurent Sozzani,

Sarah Fisher, Beatrix Graf, and Eugena Ordonez of the department of painting conservation and of Barbara Miller,

conservation scientist, served as the basis for these notes.

3. This provenance is given in the catalogue of the American Art Association sale, but could not be verified.

4. Compare, for example, the wings with a grisaille Noli

me Tangere from the Abbey of Saint Riquier published by

Nicole Reynaud, "Un Christ jardinier de l'Ecole de Picardie,"

RLouvre 19 (1979), 359—361, figs, i, 2., and a triptych now

FLEMISH SCHOOL, IMITATOR OF 8?
Fig. i. Imitator of Flemish School, Mystic Marriage of Saint

Catherine, present location unknown [photo: Copyright

Country Life]

Fig. 2. Hugo van der Goes, Portinari Altarpiece,

right wing, Florence, Gallería degli Uffizi [photo:

Copyright A.C.L. Brussels]

divided between the Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection, Lugano, and the National Gallery, London; Charles Sterling,

"La peinture sur panneau picarde et son rayonnement dans le

nord de la France au XVe siècle," BSocHAF (1979), figs. 44

a-c.

5. The samples analyzed at the Doerner Institut were

taken from the saint's crozier, his habit near his proper right

hand, and the trees near the left edge, and, on the reverse,

from the pages and cover of Saint Margaret's book. The

samples analyzed at the Gallery were taken in the areas of the

orange-red underpainting in the donor's robe and the saint's

book, the exposed ground on the front of the panel, and other

areas.

6. The presence of zinc and barium in the white areas as

shown by x-ray fluorescence was equally suspicious. Whether

the ultramarine is natural or synthetic is not entirely clear.

The yellow in all the samples appeared to be an iron oxide,

which Hermann Kühn believed to be yellow ochre; reports in

curatorial files.

7. Letters of 16 August and 28 December 1956, 29 November 1957, and 2i January 1958 in curatorial files.

8. For this painting, lent by Dorus Hermsen and exhibited as the work of the Master of the Baroncelli Portraits, see

Flemish and Belgian Art, 1300—1900 [exh. cat., Royal Academy of Arts] (London, 1927), 159, no. 86, and Georges Hulin

de Loo, "A propos de pastiches modernes à l'Exposition de

Londres," Académie Royale de Belgique, Bulletin de la Classe

des Beaux-Arts 9, nos. 6—8 (1927), 45—48. According to

Hulin de Loo, to whom the unnamed imitator explained the

genesis and history of the Mystic Marriage, that picture was

not made with intent to deceive.

9. Spectral analysis of samples taken from the habit suggested that yellow ochre and lead white were used. Cleaning

tests in 1983 confirmed the butter-yellow hue of the garment.

10. The use of the left margin of the painting to frame the

donor's head is very similar to the 1472 Portrait of Gilíes] oye

by Memling in the Clark Art Institute, Williamstown; Friedlander, vol. 6 (1971), no. 72, pi. 114. Donors with presenting

saints in a landscape are most likely to be half-length, even in

a composite triptych to which wings were added later, like

the one in the Musée de la Chartreuse, Douai, Sterling 1979,

fig. 51 (as inn. 4).

88 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Imitator of Flemish School, Saint Bernard and Donor,

1942.16.2

Imitator of Flemish School, Saint Margaret,

1942.16.2 (reverse)

FLEMISH SCHOOL, IMITATOR OF 89
Franco-Flemish Artist

1937.1.23 (23)

Profile Portrait of a Lady

c. 1410

Wood (cradled), 53 x 37.6 (zoVs x i413/io)

painted surface: 52 x 36.6 [zol/2 x i43/s)

Andrew W. Mellon Collection

Technical Notes: The panel supporting the paint surface has

been thinned, set into another panel with a 5 mm rim all

around, and then cradled. The panel supporting the paint

surface has an old, repaired split running from the bottom

edge up through the hat to the right of center. Although the

present painted surface comes to the edge of this panel, what

appear to be the original ground and support occupy a slightly

smaller area (48.6-48.8 x 31.7-32..! cm) clearly visible in

the x-radiograph (fig. i). The pronounced horizontal crackle

within this smaller area does not extend beyond its borders.

This crackle pattern and the tear-like appearance of another

disturbed area at the bottom left, visible in the x-radiograph,

suggest that the ground may have been laid on paper or

parchment.

Infrared reflectography reveals what appears to be an underdrawn design delineating the ear, some hairpins, and individual strands of hair in the coil over the lady's ear. These

delicate strands follow the line of the coil, rather than forming the horizontal bands of crimping visible on the surface.

Traces of an underdrawn brocade pattern were also detected

in the robe during examination with infrared reflectography.

Microscopic examination shows extensive repaint.1 The

profile and the eye, nostril, lips, and ear have been repainted,

though they seem to correspond to the old outline visible

underneath. The gold of the pins is repaint. The hat is totally

repainted over heavy damage. The back of the coiffure is

totally repainted. The white fur and collar appear to be old,

but with some repainted areas. Whereas most of the gold on

the robe is new, the abraded blue of the robe is apparently not

repainted except for a damage in the left corner. Most of the

gold on the beads is new, yet there are residues of old gold

underneath. The necklace and belt are apparently made of

metallic foil, possibly attached by small nails or brads in the

case of the necklace. There are scattered damages in the background, which appears to have been entirely toned over to

bring it into conformity with what are presumably later additions at left, right, and top edges.

Provenance: Henry Valentine Stafford Jerningham, 9th Baron

Stafford [d. 1884] (sale Christie's, London, 3o May 1885, no.

373, as Blanche, daughter of Henry IV of England). James

Gurney (sale, Christie's, London, 12 March 1898, no. 7, as

Blanche, daughter of Henry IV of England). M. de Villeroy,

Paris (sequestered property, sold Galerie Georges Petit, Paris,

28—29 April 1922, no. 34, repro., as School of Verona, Portrait of a Lady). (Duveen Brothers, London and New York,

1922-1923.) Clarence H. Mackay, Roslyn, New York,

1923-1935. (Duveen Brothers, New York.) Purchased January 1937 by The A. W. Mellon Educational and Charitable

Trust, Pittsburgh.

Exhibitions: New York, Duveen Galleries, 1924, Early Italian Paintings, no. 38, as Pisanello. // New York, Knoedler

& Co., 1935, Fifteenth Century Portraits, no. i, as Isotta

degli Atti, wife of Sigismondo Malatesta da Rimini by Pisanello.

THIS ELEGANTL Y STYLIZED PAINTING ÍS claimed

as one of the extremely rare surviving independent portraits from before about 142.5. It is the only portrait of

a woman within this small group.2 Such very early

portraits were often copied because of the political

importance of their sitters and the value of the images

for dynastic, propaganda, or antiquarian reasons.

Hence, they must be evaluated with particular caution.

Nevertheless, the style and costume of the Gallery's

painting as well as its physical characteristics, traceable in spite of several restorations, indicate that it was

indeed executed shortly after 1400.

Documentary evidence confirms that independent

portraits, including portraits of women, were produced

in northern Europe around 1400, though their number

was probably rather limited. This evidence includes

mention of portraits used in marriage negotiations during these years. In 1414 John the Fearless commissioned Vranque of Malines to paint his daughter, Catherine of Burgundy, whom he hoped to marry to Henry

V of England.3 Chroniclers report that Henry V was

very pleased with a portrait of Catherine of Valois,

daughter of Charles VI of France, painted from life,

brought to him by ambassadors negotiating for that

marriage in 1418.4 Portraits were valuable in other

types of diplomatic exchanges. In 1413 Jean Malouel

was working on a portrait of John the Fearless commissioned by that prince as a gift for the King of Portugal.5

 Contemporary inventories only rarely mention

independent portraits. Margaret of Flanders' inventory included "i tableau de bois a ymaige de medame,

pendant a une chaînette d'argent,"6 and the only independent portraits mentioned in the inventories of Jean

90 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
Franco-Flemish Artist, Profile Portrait of a Lady, 1937.1.2.3

FRANCO-FLEMIS H ARTIST 91
de Berry's rich collection were the quadriptych of portraits "au vif" of King Charles, King John, the Emperor, and King Edward of England.7

In its use of a profile pose, the Portrait of a Lady

agrees with the known early independent portraits

from the circle of the French court. The subjects of

these portraits were princes or rulers, and the profile

pose, with its clear outline and avoidance of the viewer's gaze, presented an easily recognizable image of

authority.8 However, comparison among this group is

complicated by questions of originality and repetition.

A portrait type, once created, tended to be repeated,

and a portrait created in another context, such as that

of a devotional image, might be repeated as an independent easel painting.9

 The possibility that the Portrait of a Lady, too, is a repetition of an existing portrait type should not be discounted. Costume, style,

and painting techniques must be the basis for judgment

of its authenticity as an International Style portrait.

No other contemporary versions of the type can be

traced. The earliest record of the pose, features, and

costume of the lady is a drawing by George Perfect

g. i. Franco-Flemish Artist, Profile Portrait of a Lady, 19 3 7. i. 2.3, x-radiograph
Fig. 2. Franco-Flemish Artist, Profile Portrait of a Lady

(photograph from Galerie Georges Petit, Paris, sale 28-29

April 1922, no. 34) [photo: NGA]

Harding (d. 1853),

 tne

 English copyist of historical

portraits, presumably made in the early nineteenth

century and now lost.10

A number of distortions have resulted from successive restorations of the Portrait of a Lady. The most

recent restoration took place in 1922—1923 after Duveen acquired the painting. Comparison of the painting's present state with the photograph in the Villeroy

sale catalogue (fig. 2) strongly suggests that changes

made at that time were intended to support Duveen's

attribution to Pisanello. A careful drawing made in

1883 by Sir George Scharf, based on George Perfect

Harding's watercolor copy, provides confirmation of

these changes as well as additional information (fig.

3 ).n The 1921 photo and Scharf s sketch show that the

present smooth beehive hairstyle projecting above the

turban is an addition. Significantly, this bulbous projection is analogous to the hairstyle in the portrait by

Pisanello in the Louvre, usually identified as Margherita Gonzaga.12

 The profile was also altered when

the picture was in Duveen's hands, although the gentler contours evident in the 1922 photograph and in

Scharf's drawing probably reflect an earlier restoration.

It is very probable that the shape of the turban was also

exaggerated and the coils and stripes added at this

time. The pattern of raised circles in the headdress

should also be regarded as an addition of uncertain

date; an unrelated design of tightly spaced holes is

visible in the x-radiograph (fig. i ).13 Other evidence for

earlier tampering with the painting includes the gold

beads revealed by the 1922—1923 cleaning, but evidently overpainted in the earlier records. Thus the ends

of the tassel pinning the beads to the lady's shoulder

are still visible in Scharf's drawing and in the 1922

photograph, and some of the overpainted beads can

even be made out in the photograph (figs. 2, 3).

The painting's dimensions seem also to have been

adjusted, possibly at a fairly early date. The uneven

surface, the crackle pattern, and above all, the evidence

of the x-radiograph, suggest that the original ground

and paint have been mounted on a larger panel and the

background extended. In the x-radiograph, what apFig. 3. Sir George Scharf, Sketchbook SSB 101,

fols. 3 iv~32, London, National Portrait Gallery

[photo: National Portrait Gallery]
pear to be the original margins of the painting hem the

figure in more closely on all sides, coming just to the

edge of the headdress at the top. There are some indications that paper or parchment was part of the support.14

In summary, the painting had evidently been extensively restored before 192.2—1923, when it was cleaned,

restored again, the hairstyle extended in the back, and

the panel set into another support and cradled. The

severely damaged headdress was originally smaller and

without the repeated curves of the present coil formation. The margins of the picture probably originally

framed the design more closely. The painting's present

hard effect, particularly in the profile, has undoubtedly

been accentuated by successive restorations.

Despite these distortions, the physical characteristics

of the picture are in keeping with a date shortly after

1400. That the figure seems to have filled the original

field of the picture to the margins agrees with the other

portraits of the period and with the sensibility of the

International Style. The combination of painting and

metal-working techniques, one of the hallmarks of the

International Style,15 is evident in the metallic foil

overlaid with glazes of pigment in the collar and belt

and presumably also in the applied jewel or heraldic

device that would have hung from the collar.16 The

tightly spaced holes in the headdress visible in the xradiograph may also originally have held some applied

metalwork. The use of such techniques points to a date

in the early fifteenth century; their use in a copy made

out of antiquarian interest seems most improbable.

The costume is more consistent with a date of about

1410 to 1420 than at first appears to be the case. During

this period, broad chokers with pendant jewels were

worn by both men and women. Beads pinned at the

shoulder and draped over the body occur on the calendar pages of the Très riches heures and in other depictions of court life.17

 The fur collar turned down to

reveal an undergarment appears to be a version of the

somewhat flatter collar worn by Isabeau of Bavaria

and her attendants in the presentation miniature of a

manuscript of Christine de Pizan's works, Harley

4431, in the British Library.18 The sausagelike coil of

hair over the temple and ear resembles Jeanne de Boulogne's hairstyle on her statue from the Sainte-Chapelle,

Bourges, as recorded in a drawing by Holbein (fig. 4).

The original form of the headdress, as suggested by the

holes traceable in the x-radiograph, probably resembled the dotted effect of the jewelled horned rolls or

bourrelets worn by Isabeau and her ladies in the presentation miniature.19

 Holbein's drawing of the statue

of Jeanne de Boulogne shows what such a configuration would have looked like in profile.

Fig. 4. Hans Holbein the Younger, Jeanne de Boulogne,

Duchess of Berry, Basel, Offentliche Kunstammlung,

Kupferstichkabinett [photo: Offentliche Kunstsammlung]

General stylistic characteristics also suggest a date

in the early fifteenth century. The artist renders details

realistically, yet organizes the whole design in a pattern

of curves. The three-quarter view of the lady's body

does not project the figure in space as much as it complicates the pattern of curving lines and permits costume details to be more fully depicted.

Although the painting was attributed to Pisanello

following its reappearance in the 19208, George Hill

and George Martin Richter first raised the question of

a northern origin,20 an opinion that was put forward

more positively by Bernhard Degenhart in I94O.21 Since

then the painting has generally been accepted as a

Franco-Flemish work from the first quarter of the fifteenth century.22

 The suggestion, first made by Panofsky, that the painting was produced in close proximity

to the Limbourg brothers is certainly plausible.23 In

view of its repainted condition and the scarcity of comparable material, however, it is not possible to hazard a

more specific attribution than the circle of predomi94

EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
nantly Netherlandish artists working for the Valois

house and its branches.

The identity of the sitter also remains unknown,

though she must have been a person of considerable

stature and political significance to justify the painting

of an independent portrait. The traditional identification as Blanche of Lancaster, eldest daughter of Henry

IV of England,24 is not implausible as far as this princess' dates are concerned. She was married to Ludwig,

Count Palatine and son of the Emperor Ruprecht, in

Cologne in 1402.. She died in 1409 at the age of seventeen and was buried in the Stiftskirche of Neustadt-ander-Weinstrasse.25

 The Franco-Flemish character of

the portrait is hard to reconcile with the fact that

Blanche seems to have lived in the Rhineland after her

marriage. While such a portrait could have been painted

at the English court before the princess's marriage, it

would then have to represent a child of ten. The age of

the sitter in this portrait is difficult to judge, but in

general one may question whether the somewhat remote profile view, with its associations of authority,

would not be used to depict a woman of dynastic or

political weight rather than a young candidate for marriage. Isabeau of Bavaria, Margaret of Flanders, Yolande of Anjou, and Margaret of Bavaria occupied

such positions of stature in the troubled years of the

early fifteenth century and are likely candidates for the

subject of this portrait.

M.W.

Notes

1. The paint has not been analyzed to determine whether

it is oil or tempera based. However, the present paint layer

appears to be oil based, with the texture of the white paint in

the hair suggesting the use of an emulsion medium there,

according to Kay Silberfeld who undertook the technical examination of the painting.

2. In his important article on early portraiture, Sterling

1959, 289-312., cites as the surviving independent painted

portraits from this period, in addition to the Portrait of a

Lady: John the Good of France in the Louvre; Archduke

Rudolf IV of Austria in the Dom- und Diôzesanmuseum,

Vienna; Louis II of Anjou in the Bibliothèque Nationale,

Paris; Richard II of England in Westminster Abbey; and

Wenceslaus, Duke of Brabant and Luxembourg in the Thyssen-Bornemisza collection.

3. C. A. J. Armstrong, "La politique matrimoniale des

ducs de Bourgogne de la Maison de Valois," Annales de

Bourgogne40 (1968), 10—n.

4. L. Douët-d'Arcq, La Chronique d'Enguerran de

Monstrelet, 3d éd. (Paris, 1859), 295, and Jean de Waurin,

Recueil des chroniques et anchiennes istories de la Grant

Bretaigne, à présent nommé Engleterre, éd. William Hardy

(London, 18 ¿8 ), 2 5 2, referred to as "la figure painte au vif de

madame Katherine."

5. Sterling 1959, 302—304, 311. Meiss and Eisler 1960,

239-240 and figs. 7, 8, suggest an attribution to Malouel for

a lost portrait of John the Fearless with hands raised in prayer, known from an eighteenth-century drawing.

6. Taken in 1405; C. Dehaisnes, Documents et extraits

divers concernant l'histoire de l'art dans la Flandre, l'Artois,

et leHainaut avant le XVe siècle, 2 vols. (Lille, 1886), 2: 913.

This portrait was part of the contents of a chest "ouquel sont

plusiers biens lesquels Lyele jadis femme de chambre de feue

ma dite dame des a lui appartenir." This, and the reference to

the portrait of Catherine of Burgundy, I owe to Jeffrey C.

Smith.

7. Jules Guiffrey, Inventaires de Jean duc de Berry

(1401—1416), 2 vols. (Paris, 1896), 2: no. 1077. The portrait

of John the Good in the Louvre may have been part of this

quadriptych; Millard Meiss, French Painting in the Time of

Jean de Berry. The Late Fourteenth Century and the Patronage of the Duke (London, 1967), 75. We do not know

whether the gallery of portraits at the duke's castle of Bicêtre,

destroyed in 1411, was made up of portraits on panel; see

Meiss 1967, 74, and Paul Durrieu, "Les tableaux des collections du Duc Jean de Berry," Bibliothèque de l'École des

Chartes 79 (1918), 268—269.

8. Bauch 1963,106, cites several instances of portraits in

a devotional or other context where a ruler is shown in profile

and subordinate figures in three-quarter view. For the importance of these portraits as political documents, see Raymond

Gazelles, "Peinture et actualité politique sous les premiers

Valois: Jean le Bon ou Charles, Dauphin," GBA 6e pér. 92

(1978), 53—65, identifying the portrait in the Louvre as the

young Charles V rather than John the Good.

In Italy the profile view was retained through the fifteenth

century, especially for portraits of women; see John PopeHennessy, The Portrait in the Renaissance (New York,

1966), 35-50.

9. The watercolor of Louis II of Anjou in the Bibliothèque Nationale may well be a copy made at mid-century;

see J[ean] A[dhemar] and F[rancoise] G[ardey], "Encore le

portrait de Louis II d'Anjou conservé au Cabinet des

Estampes de la Bibliothèque Nationale, 1400 ou 1460?"

GBA, 6e pér. 92 (1978), 66-68, figs, i, 2. The posthumous

portrait of Wenceslaus, Duke of Brabant and Luxembourg

probably derives from a devotional context; Sterling 1959,

300, fig. 191.

10. Formerly in the collection of Doyne C. Bell, sale,

Christie's, London, 5 February 1889, no. 104, as Blanche,

daughter of Henry IV (bought by Sir George Scharf). I have

been unable to locate this watercolor, but its appearance is

known from a careful copy by Scharf (notebook SSB 107, ff.

3 iv—32, the page dated 17 September 1883, in the National

Portrait Gallery, London; fig. 3). In his penciled commentary,

Scharf states that the portrait represents Blanche and that

George Perfect Harding's watercolor copy was enlarged from

a miniature. A later note in ink records his observation that

1937.1.23, when it appeared in Lord Stafford's sale, was

"exactly like" the watercolor copy. If Harding's drawing was

indeed based on a miniature, the miniature must also have

recorded a damaged and restored state of the Gallery's painting. Lome Campbell kindly brought Scharf's drawing to my

attention.

11. See n. 10. Scharf also sketched the Portrait of a Lady

with color notations in his copy of the catalogue of the

Stafford sale (copy in the National Portrait Gallery, London).

12. Giovanni Paccagnini, Pisanello (London, 1973), fig.

124.

13. These holes are filled with a dense material and toFRANCO-FLEMIS H ARTIST 95
gether outline a shape that is smaller than the present headdress all around. The headdress has evidently undergone several transformations. The catalogue of the Gurney sale describes it as a fur cap, and the Villeroy sale catalogue refers to

"un bonnet rouge bordé de fourrure blanche." On his drawing after Harding, Scharf describes the headdress as brownish

white patterned with gay colors. Under the microscope, it is

evident the orange foliate design now seen in some of the coils

extends through the whole headdress.

14. See Technical Notes.

15. Meiss 1967, 140—143 (as in n. 7), and Erich Steingràber, "Nachtràge und Marginalien zur franzôsisch-niederlàndische Goldschmiedekunst des frühen 15. Jahrhunderts,"

Anzeiger des Germanised en Nationalmuseums (1969), 30—

35-

16. Four small holes indicate that a pendant was attached

here. This emblem would probably have helped signal the

lady's identity.

17. Compare the calendar page for May in particular;

Meiss 1974, fig. 543.

18. Erich Steingráber, Antique jewelry (New York, 1957),

fig. 79, datable c. 1410-1415. Anne, Duchess of Bedford

wears a later and wider version of the fur collar with turned

down shirt in a miniature in the Bedford Hours probably

painted about the time of her marriage in 142.3; Marcel

Thomas, The Golden Age: Manuscript Painting at the Time of

Jean de Berry (New York, 1979), pi. 2.3.

19. For the construction of bourrelets, see Margaret Scott,

The History of Dress Series. Late Gothic Europe 1400-1500

(London, 1980), 87.

2,0. Hill 192,9,13, and Richter 192,9,139.

2i. Degenhart 1940, 38.

zz. Berenson 1947 acknowledged the possibility that the

painting had a northern origin. The Pisanello attribution has

found some recent adherents; see Brenzoni I95Z, 186-188,

with reservations, and Sindona i96z, 39-40.

Z3. Panofsky 1953, 8z. The relationship to the Limbourgs

was taken up by Winkler 1959,188-189; Sterling 1959, 304;

Keller 1967, zo—zi; and Bialostocki I97Z, 189.

Z4. See under Provenance and n. 10.

Z5. Walther Holtzmann, "Die englische Heirat Pfalzgraf

Ludwigs III.," Zeitschrift fur die Geschichte des Oberrheins

N.F. 43 (1930), 19-zo. For Blanche's tomb in the Stiftskirche, see A. Eckhardt, Kunstdenkmaler von Bayern. Regierungs Bezirk Pfalz. I Stadt und Bezirkamt Neustadt a. H.

(Munich, I9z6), esp. 78. Portraits of Blanche and the Pfalzgraf Ludwig are included in a fresco of the Last Judgment in

the choir of the Stiftskirche; Eckhardt, 68—70. However, this

image of the English princess does not relate to the Gallery's

portrait either in features or costume (photograph in National

Portrait Gallery, London, and Historisches Museum der Pfalz,

Speyer, no. 7z6).

On Blanche of Lancaster, see also Ulla Diebel, "Fine pfàlzische Krone in der Munchner Schatzkammer," Korrespondenzblatt des Gesamtvereins der deutschen Geschichts- und

Altertumsverein 76 (i9z8), cols. 3Z—40. Troescher 1966,

8z-84, proposes Margaret of Bavaria as the sitter. While this is

possible, his reasons are not valid, especially his claim that her

turbanlike headdress refers to John the Fearless' captivity

under the Turks after Nikopolis.

References

I9Z4 Offner, Richard. "A Remarkable Exhibition of

Italian Paintings." The Arts 5: Z57, repro. Z59.

I9Z5 Venturi, Adolfo. "Antonio Pisano of Verona,

called Pisanello." Conn 71: 196-197, repro. 199.

I9Z5 Venturi, Adolfo. "Peril Pisanello." U Arte z8: 36—

37, % iI9Z5 Venturi, Adolfo. Grandi artisti italiani. Bologna:

zzz^zz6, fig. 77.

I9Z5 Valentiner, W. R. "The Clarence H. Mackay Collection." international Studio 81: 335—337, repro.

I9z6 Valen tiner, W. R. The Clarence H. Mackay Collection. Italian Schools. New York: not paginated, no. i.

I9Z7 Van Marie, Raimond. The Development of the

Italian Schools of Painting. 19 vols. The Hague, 8: 104—105,

I5Z, zo6.

I9Z9 Hill, George F. Dessins de Pisanello. Paris and

Brussels: 13.

I9Z9 Singleton, Esther. Old World Masters in New

World Collections. New York: 99—103, repro.

I9Z9 Richter, George Martin. "Pisanello Studies—II."

BurlM 55: 139.

I9Z9 Cortissoz, Royal. "The Clarence H. Mackay Collection." International Studio 94: 3z—33.

1930 Valentiner, W. R. Unknown Masterpieces in Public and Private Collections. New York: not paginated, no. 9,

repro.

1930 Martinie, A.-H. Pisanello. Paris: Z5~z6, 30, pi.

iz.

1931 Venturi, Adolfo. North Italian Painting of the

Quattrocento. Emilia. Florence and New York: 17-18, pi. 5.

I93Z Berenson, Bernhard. Italian Pictures of the Renaissance. Oxford: 46z.

1933 Venturi, Lionello. Italian Paintings in America. 3

vols. New York and Milan, i: not paginated, pi. iz8.

1937 Frankfurter, Alfred M. "New Items in the Mellon

Collection." ArtN 35 (13 February): n, repro. 9.

1937 Cortissoz, Royal. An Introduction to the Mellon

Collection. Privately printed: 16.

1937 Pantheon 19: IZ9, repro.

1940 Degenhart, Bernhard. Antonio Pisanello. Vienna:

38, fig. 4 (zd ed. Turin, 1945: 39-40, ^9, pi- 4)-

1941 NGA: 156-157.

1941 Duveen Pictures in Public Collections of America.

New York: not paginated, no. 27, repro.

1945 "Italian Paintings in the Andrew W. Mellon Collection, National Gallery of Art, Washington." Conn 115:

repro. 113.

1947 Berenson, Bernhard. Letter to Max J. Friedlànder.

In Maandblad voor beeldende Kunsten 23, no. 5: 100-101,

repro.

1949 Sterling, Charles. Les peintres primitifs. Paris: 24,

fig. 19-

1949 Ring, Crete. A Century of French Painting 1400—

1500. London: 199, no. 64, pi. 27.

1949 Mellon (reprinted 1953,1958): xi, 13, repro.

I95Z Brenzoni, Raffaello. Pisanello pittore. Florence:

186-188, pi. 76.

1953 Panofsky. ENP: 8z, 171, 392, fig. 9Z.

1958 Coletti, Luigi. Pisanello. Milan: z8, no. Z3,pl. 39.

1959 Winkler, Friedrich. "Fin fruhfranzosisches Marienbild." JbBerlin i: 188-189.

96 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
1959 Sterling, Charles. "La peinture de portrait à la cour

de Bourgogne au début du XVe siècle." Critica d'Arte 6: 2.89,

299, 304, 306, 308, 312,, fig. 193-

1960 Meiss, Millard, and Colin Eisler. "A New French

Primitive." BurlM 102: 234.

1962 Sindona, Enio. Pisanello. Paris: 39-40, 113, pi.

137-

1963 Bauch, Kurt. "Bildnisse des Jan van Eyck." Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften. Jahresheft 1961/

1962. Wiesbaden: 122. Repr. in Kurt Bauch, Studien zur

Kunstgeschichte. Berlin, 1967: 103.

1963 Scheller, Robert W. A Survey of Medieval Model

Books. Haarlem: in.

1963 Seligman, Germain. Merchants of Art 1880-1960.

New York: 121.

1963 Journet, René. "Deux retables du quinzième siècle

à Ternant (Nièvre)." Annales littéraires de l'Université de

Besançon 49 (Archéologie 14): 10.

1963 Châtelet, Albert, and Jacques Thuillier. French

Painting from Fouquet to Poussin. Lausanne: 29.

1964 Kreuter-Eggemann, Helga. Das Skizzenbuch des

'Jaques Daliwe\ Munich: 32, fig. 41.

1966 Laclotte, Michel. Primitifs français. Paris: 23, pi.

XI.

1966 Troescher, Georg. Burgundische Malerei. Berlin:

82—84, 386, pis. 71, 72.

1966 Castelnuovo, Enrico. // gótico internazionale in

Francia e nei Paesi Bassi (I Maestri del Colore). Part 2, Milan:

not paginated, pi. XIV.

1967 Keller, Harald. Italien und die Welt der hôftschen

Gotik (Sitzungsberichte der wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft

an der Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universitat Frankfurt/

Main, 3, 1964). Wiesbaden: 20-21, fig. 15.

1968 Meiss, Millard. French Painting in the Time of

Jean de Berry. The Boucicaut Master. London: 153.

1972 Dell'Acqua, Gian Alberto, and Renzo Chiarelli.

L'Opéra compléta del Pisanello. Milan: 96, no. 79, repro.

1972 Bialostocki, Jan, et al. Spàtmittelalter und beginnende Neuzeit (Propylàen Kunstgeschichte). Berlin: 189, no.

49, fig. 49.

1974 Meiss, Millard. French Painting in the Time of

Jean de Berry. The Limbourgs and their Contemporaries.

New York: 228, 246-247, 281, 471, 474, fig. 606.

1975 NGA: 134, repro. 135.

FRANCO-FLEMISH ARTIST 97
Jan Gossaert

c. 1478-1532

Jan Gossaert was probably born around 1478. He is

often called Mabuse after his birthplace in Maubeuge

in Hainaut, a town in present-day France. Nothing is

known about his early training, though it is sometimes

suggested that he worked in Bruges. Gossaert is first

mentioned in Antwerp in 1503 when he became a master in the painters' guild. He presented pupils to the

guild in 1505 and 1507. By 1508 Gossaert was in service to Philip of Burgundy, an illegitimate son of Philip

the Good, and when, in October 1508, Philip set out

on a diplomatic mission to the Vatican, his entourage

included Jan Gossaert. Surviving from this trip are

drawings of antique statuary and architectural monuments that the artist made for his patron.

Sometime after July 1509 Gossaert returned from

Rome to service in Philip's castle in Middelburg. Jacopo de' Barbari was also working for Philip at this time;

later, when Gossaert worked for Margaret of Austria

at Malines, he stayed at the home of sculptor Conrad

Meit. In 1517 Philip of Burgundy was appointed Bishop

of Utrecht and Gossaert seems to have gone to Utrecht

with him. After Philip's death in 1524 the artist entered

the service of Philip's half-brother Adolph of Burgundy,

but also continued to receive commissions from other

private patrons such as Jean Carondelet, Chancellor of

Flanders, and King Christian II of Denmark, who had

fled to the Netherlands in 1523. Gossaert spent many

of his final years in Middelburg and died there before

13 October 1532.

Through a series of dated or documented works

beginning with the drawings he made in Rome in

1508/1509, Jan Gossaert's artistic career can be followed in some detail. The earliest paintings, such as the

signed Adoration of the Magi, c. 1510 (National Gallery, London), or the Malvagna Triptych, c. 1511 (Galleria Régionale, Palermo), show a virtuoso technique

and a thorough assimilation of Netherlandish predecessors such as Hugo van der Goes and Jan van Eyck,

as well as of the graphic art of Albrecht Durer and the

mannerist paintings of his contemporaries in Antwerp.

Jan Gossaert's greatest importance for the history of

Netherlandish painting, however, lies in the fact that

he was the first to produce paintings that combined

classical style and classical subject matter. He is the

first "Romanist," whose example paved the way for

subsequent journeys by Netherlandish artists to Italy.

For example, the Neptune and Amphitrite of 1516

(Bode-Museum, East Berlin) shows classically proportioned nude figures (influenced in part by Durer) in an

architectural setting intended as an archaeologically

accurate reconstruction of a Greek temple. The humanist bent of both the artist and his patron, Philip of

Burgundy, is evident in the fact that, for the first time,

Gossaert signed the painting in Latin, Joannes Malbodius, that is, Jan of Maubeuge. The taste for mythological subjects depicted in appropriate architectural

settings is to be seen in many of Gossaert's paintings,

such as the Danaëof 1527 (Alte Pinakothek, Munich).

Gossaert's religious paintings also combine Italianate figure poses, antique ornaments, and distinctly

Netherlandish Madonna types. Jan Gossaert was a

superb portraitist who invested his sitters with a clarity

of pose and an imposing air of self-assurance, achieving what Guttler calls "a monumentalization of the

particular."

J.O.H.

Bibliography

Friedlànder. Vol. 8. 1930 (vol. 8,1971).

Glück, Gustav. "Mabuse and the Development of the Flemish Renaissance." AQ 8 (1945): 116-139.

Jean Gossaert dit Mabuse. Exh. cat. Museum Boymans—van

Beuningen and Groeningemuseum. Rotterdam and

Bruges, 1965.

Herzog, Sadja. "Jan Gossaert called Mabuse (ca. 1478-

15 3 2.) : A Study of his Chronology with a Catalogue of his

Works." Ph.D. diss., Bryn Mawr College, 1968.

Herzog, Sadja. "Tradition and Innovation in Gossaert's

Neptune and Amphitrite and Danae." Bulletin Museum

Boymans-van Beuningen 19 (1968): 25-41.

98 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
1952.5.40.a-b (1119)

Saint Jerome Penitent

c. 1509/1512

Probably oak, two panels, each 86.7 x 25.3 (34Vs x 10)

painted surface: 86.7 x 24.5 (34Vs x 95/s)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Inscription:

In the middle ground of the right panel, on a small stone:

Technical Notes: Each panel consists of a single board with

vertical grain. Both panels have been planed down to a thickness of 0.2 cm and were laminated onto a second wood panel.

After being separated by Mario Modestini in 1950 the panels

were cradled and narrow strips of wood were added to the

right and left sides of each panel. The paintings were restored

by Modestini in 1950 and a few areas were again treated by

him in 1956.

Although the support is in plane, x-radiographs indicate

rather long vertical splits, three in each panel. These have

been filled and retouched. Examination with infrared reflectography reveals scattered areas of underdrawing in the

drapery and the landscape to the right of Jerome's left hand.

Underdrawing is intermittently visible; there may be more

that is not registering due to gray pigment, containing carbon

black, in the upper paint layer that would register as opaque.

Variations in transparency under infrared reflectography

suggest that a number of different pigments were used to

create the grisaille effect.

The panels are in fairly good condition. There is moderate

abrasion in the hands and chest of Saint Jerome and to a lesser

extent in areas of the sky, drapery and flesh. There is scattered

retouching throughout the sky of both panels as well as in the

lion and the face of Saint Jerome. To the right of Jerome's

head and shoulders are several scratches.

The "yell°w glazes" in the figure of Jerome mentioned by

Eisler and others are actually discolored restorations probably applied to mask areas of abrasion.

Provenance: John M. Romadka, Prague and Milwaukee [d.

1898], by 1858. Mrs. John M. Romadka, his widow [d.

1936]. Mary Tekla Romadka, Pasadena, California.1 (Duveen Brothers, New York, by 1945.) Samuel H. Kress Foundation, New York, 1949.

Exhibitions: New York, Durlacher Galleries, 1945, Aw Exhibition of Painting and Sculpture of Saint Jerome, no. 9. //

Flint, Michigan, Flint Institute of Art, 1945, Exhibition of

Paintings by Old Master s, no. 4. // Glens Falls, New York,

Crandall Public Library, 1945, Ten Masterpieces of Art; no.

2. // New York, Duveen Art Galleries, 1946, An Exhibition

of Flemish Paintings of the fifteenth and Early Sixteenth

Centuries, no. 8.

FRIE D LANDE R in 1916 and Winkler in 1921 both

listed a lost Saint Jerome by Gossaert that may well be

identical with the Gallery's panels.2 In 1930 Saint

Jerome Penitent was published by Friedlànder as the

work of Gossaert, with the caveat that the work was

known to him only through a photograph.3 Since then,

the attribution has been universally accepted. During

the cleaning and restoration of what was thought to be

a single panel, following its purchase in 1949 by the

Samuel H. Kress Foundation, it was discovered that

Saint Jerome Penitent was composed of two separate

panels. Suida then proposed that the panels were the

exterior wings of an altarpiece that had as its center

panel Gossaert's Agony in the Garden in Berlin (fig.

i).4 The height of the Berlin panel (85 centimeters) is

virtually the same as that of the Gallery's panels (86.4

centimeters), and the 12.2 centimeter difference in

width can easily be accounted for by the frame.5 The

interior wings are missing. Suida's proposed reconstruction is now generally accepted.

The iconography of Jerome's penitence is rooted in

a specific incident in the saint's life. Sometime between

3 74 and 3 79 A.D., Jerome retired to the desert of Chalcis to live the life of a hermit. In a letter he wrote: "oh

how often, when I was living in the desert, in that

lonely waste, scorched by the burning sun, which

affords to hermits a savage dwelling place, how often

did I fancy myself surrounded by the pleasures of

Rome ... I remember that often I joined night to day

with my wailing and ceased not from beating my breast

till tranquility returned to me at the Lord's behest."6

This and other passages provided the textual foundation for depictions of Jerome as a penitent. The most

common image, which is an essentially Italian creation, shows the saint in the wilderness kneeling in front

of a crucifix. This iconographie motif began to move

into northern Europe during the late fifteenth and early

sixteenth centuries. One of the earliest Northern examples is Durer's engraving of c. 1496—1497 (Bartsch

61), which shows the saint kneeling before a small

crucifix and accompanied by his lion.7 Panofsky

stressed the direct adoption of northern Italian sources

by Durer.8 In painting, the penitent Jerome occurs infrequently in the Netherlands, though several examples from the Ghent-Bruges school are known.9

In Gossaert's panels a further elaboration upon the

theme is provided by the motif of the cross growing out

of the tree trunk. Herzog discusses the legends of the

Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge and demonstrates that the tree in Gossaert's painting is the True

Cross, associated with the Tree of Knowledge that

emerges from the Tree of Life (lignum vitae}. The tree is

an emblem of both death and salvation; Saint Jerome

J AN GOSSAER T 99
Jan Gossaert,

Saint Jerome Penitent,

i952.5.40.a-b

100 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
in his self-mortification attempts to follow Christ and

achieve redemption. That this tree occurs first in Italian

rather than Netherlandish art is for Herzog further

proof that the panels date just after Gossaert's Italian

sojourn.10

In the middle ground there are scenes from the life

of Saint Jerome which involve his lion and would have

been known to Gossaert through The Golden Legend

or other accounts of the saint's life. At the left the lion

recovers the ass that belonged to Jerome's monastery

and had been stolen by traders. At the upper right the

lion, who was thought to have eaten the ass, is exonerated and welcomed back to the monastery of

Jerome.11

Thematically, the juxtaposition of the Agony in the

Garden as the central panel of an altarpiece with Saint

Jerome Penitent on the exterior wings is quite possibly

unique; no other examples have come to light. There is

a definite congruence between Christ's isolated vigil on

the eve of his arrest and Jerome's attempts as a hermit

to control his visions and endure pain.12 The unusual

iconography suggests a specific commission possibly

due to the presence of a theological advisor or to the

particular devotion of the patron. Both panels are of

outstanding quality and marked by flinty, highly finished surfaces and virtuoso brushwork.

While critics, with one exception,13 have been

unanimous in dating Saint Jerome Penitent to Gossaert's first period of activity, c. 1503-1513, there has

been some discussion as to the exact date and relationship of the panel to the artist's trip to Italy. Von der

Osten placed the painting before 1508/1509, arguing

that the anthropomorphic lion would not be imaginable after Gossaert's trip to Italy. He also saw in the

landscape a feeling for nature close to the Danube

School or the Lower Rhenish art of Jan Joest.14 The

Fig. i. Jan Gossaert, Agony in the Garden^

Berlin, Staatliche Museen Preussischer

Kulturbesitz, Gëmaldegalerie [photo: Jôrg P.

Anders]

JAN GOSSAERT IOI
authors of the Rotterdam-Bruges catalogue put the

panels and the Berlin Agony in the Garden contemporary with or slightly later than the Holy Family altarpiece in the Lisbon Museum, a painting usually dated

as early as i5O4.15 Friedlánder dated the Saint Jerome

Penitent to c. i5iz,16 and this date has found general

acceptance.17 Held associated the panels with Gossaert's early drawings, made in Rome in 1508/1509

and Guttler put the panels immediately after the Italian

journey.18 Eisler implied a date shortly after 1509, in

part because of the similarities to a woodcut of Saint

Jerome Penitent, by Lucas Cranach, dated I5O9.19

Herzog believes that the panels were painted after

Gossaert's trip to Italy, but is less inclined to propose a

specific date and puts them in the period 1509/1510—

15ii.20 For Herzog, the rounded forms and concern

with the manipulation of light effects found in Gossaert's earliest securely datable works, the drawings

made in Rome,21 are also to be found in the Saint

Jerome Penitent. He finds additional evidence for an

early date in the iconography of Jerome's penitence,

which is more common in Italy than in Flanders. When

compared to the drawings from Gossaert's Roman period and his other early works, such as the Adoration

of the Magi (National Gallery, London), or the altarpiece of the Virgin and Child (Galleria Régionale, Palermo),22

 there is no question that the Saint Jerome

Penitent and the Agony in the Garden in Berlin are

early. But in view of the imprecision surrounding the

dating of Gossaert's work, Herzog's general assignment

of the painting to the period 1509-1512 is the most

sensible.

A free copy of Saint Jerome Penitent appears on the

exterior wings of an altarpiecîe on the London art market in 1981, which was attributed to the Master of

Amiens. The central panel of the altarpiece depicts a

night Nativity, and groups of angels are on the inner

wings.23

J.O.H.

Notes

1. Unverified. Provenance is as given in exh. cat. Duveen

Art Galleries 1946 and Eisler 1977.

2. Friedlánder 1916, 188; Winkler 192.1, 412. In the

absence of measurements, provenance, or other distinguishing characteristics it is not clear whether the pictures are

the same as Saint Jerome Penitent.

3. Friedlánder 1930,154, no. 2.2,.

4. Suida 1951,198; the Berlin panel is no. 55iA; oak, 85

x 63 cm. Unfortunately, there are no known points of correspondence in the provenance of the two paintings. See Gemaldegalerie Berlin, Staatliche Museen Preussicher Kulturbesitz, Katalog der ausgestellten Gemdlde des 13—18. Jahrhunderts (Berlin, 1975), no. 55iA, 179-180; Rudiger Klessmann, The Berlin Museum: Paintings in the Picture Gallery,

Dahlem-West Berlin (New York, 1971), 132.

5. Herzog 1969, 67, suggests that both panels were

trimmed slightly and therefore that the frame was somewhat

narrower than the present dimensions suggest. The panels do

appear to have been cut, though the losses probably do not

exceed 1-2 cm.

6. F. Wright (trans.), Select Letters of Saint Jerome [The

Loeb Classical Library] (Cambridge, Mass., 1953), 66-69.

7. Reproduced and discussed in Charles Talbot, éd.,

Durer in America: His Graphic Work [exh. cat. National

Gallery of Art] (Washington, 1971), 118, no. 10.

8. Erwin Panofsky, The Life and Art of Alhrecht Durer

4th ed. (Princeton, 1955), 77. Although the attribution is not

absolutely secure, mention should be made of a painted Saint

Jerome Penitent in an English private collection, on loan to

the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge. Fedja Anzelewsky, Albrecht Durer. Das malerische Werk (Berlin, 1971), 122—

123, no. 14, pis. 12—15, accepts the work as autograph and

dates it c. 1495. David Carritt, "Dürer's 'St. Jerome in the

Wilderness,' " BurlM 99 (1957), 365, called this the first German representation of the theme. The saint is accompanied

by his lion and kneels in front of a crucifix that grows out of a

tree stump.

9. Herzog 1969, reproduces a Saint Jerome Penitent by

Adriaen Isenbrant in the John G. Johnson Collection, Philadelphia Museum of Art, and a panel by Aelbrecht Bouts in the

Musées Royaux des Beaux-Arts, Brussels, figs. 7, 8 respectively. To this could be added panels by Gerard David in the

StádePsches Kunstinstitut, Frankfurt, and the National Gallery, London, Friedlánder, vol. 6, part 2 (1971), nos. 220-

221, pi. 226, and panels attributed to the Master of the Saint

Lucy Legend, Friedlánder, vol. 6, part 2 (1971), Supp. 241-

243, pi. 239. A Saint Jerome Penitent by Memling is in the

Offentliche Kunstsammlung, Basel, Friedlánder, vol. 6, part i

(1971), no. 43, pi. 93.

10. Herzog 1969, 68-70. We should note that both

Dürer's engraving and the painting attributed to him show

the crucifix growing out of a tree; see above n. 8. Given

Gossaert's admiration and emulation of Dürer's art it is possible that Gossaert's use of this Italianate device was reinforced by the work of his German colleague. Dürer's example

also demonstrates that the motif was available in the North

prior to Gossaert's trip to Italy.

11. See Ryan and Ripperger, The Golden Legend, 2: 589-

591.

12. Herzog 1969, 64, notes that both Christ and Saint

Jerome are beardless and that both scenes are united by the

theme of prayer.

13. Frankfurter 1951, 115, believes that the altarpiece

was painted for Philip of Burgundy on the occasion of his

becoming Bishop of Utrecht in 1517. Frankfurter sees Jerome

as having the features of Philip and the church in the background as based on Saint Maarten's Cathedral in Utrecht. I

find neither suggestion tenable.

14. Osten 1961,457.

15. Exh. cat. Rotterdam-Bruges 1965, 53.

16. Friedlánder 1930,154, no. 22.

17. Folie 1951, 84; Winkler 1962, 151; Kuretsky 1974,

573; NGA 1975,156.

18. Held 1933,137-138; Guttler 1968, 428.

19. Eisler 1977, 80. The Cranach woodcut is reproduced

in Tilman Falk, éd., The Illustrated Bartsch. SixteenthCentury German Artists. Hans Burgkmair the Elder, Hans

Schàufelein, Lucas Cranach the Elder (New York 1980), n:

381, no. 63 (284).

IO2. EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
20. Herzog 1969, esp. 64, 70. Compare also Herzog

1968, 60—62, 210—213. ïn both discussions he cites Gluck as

dating the panels prior to the Roman trip because of the lion's

physiognomy; in actuality, it is Osten 1961 who holds this

opinion. Herzog 1968, saw the Durer monogram accompanied by the date 1513, which he thought might be contemporary with the painting and thus a terminus ante quern. The

date is no longer visible and was not mentioned in Herzog's

article of 1969. Photographs in the curatorial files made prior

to the restoration in 1956 show a complete monogram and

configuration of marks that could be read as a date. The

photograph in Friedlànder 1930, pi. 23, shows neither monogram nor date.

21. For reproductions and discussions of the drawings,

see exh. cat. Rotterdam-Bruges 1965, cat. nos. 45—48.

22. Friedlànder, vol. 8 (1972), no. 12, pi. 20 and no. 2, pi.

4-

23. Wood, center panel: 114.3

 x 82 cm; wings: 74.3 x

30.5 cm each. I am grateful to Lome Campbell for bringing

this painting belonging to David Carritt Limited to my

attention.

ings in the Dahlem Museum. Berlin: 51, no. 551 A.

1968 Herzog (see Biography): 60—62, 210—213,

 no

- 5?

pi. 6.

1969 Herzog, Sadja. "Gossaert, Italy and the National

Gallery's Saint Jerome Penitent." StHist 3: 59—73, figs. 1—5.

1969 Osten, Gert von der, and Horst Vey. Painting and

Sculpture in Germany and the Netherlands ijoo to 1600.

Harmonds worth: 156.

1972 Hand, John Oliver. Jóos van Cleve and the Saint

Jerome in the Norton Gallery and School of Art. West Palm

Beach, Florida: not paginated, fig. 2.

1974 Kuretsky, Susan. "Rembrandt's Tree Stump: An

Iconographie Attribute of St. Jerome. "AB 56: 573—5 74, fig. 4.

1975 NGA: 156, repro. 157.

J

975 Gemaldegalerie Berlin, Staatliche Museen Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Katalog der ausgestellten Gemàlde des

ij.—iS.Jahrhunderts.Rerlm: 179—180, no. 55iA.

1976 Walker: 134, figs. 137, 138.

1977 Eisler: 78-81, figs. 73-75-

References

1916 Friedlànder, Max J. Von Eyck bis Bruegel. Berlin:

188.

1921 Winkler, Friedrich. "Gossaert, Jan." In ThiemeBecker 2: 412.

1930 Friedlànder. Vol. 8: 154, no. 22, pi. 23 (vol. 8,

1972: 93, no. 22,120, pi. 21).

1933 Held, Julius. "Overzicht der Litteratuur betreffende

Nederlandsche Kunst." OH 50: 137-138.

1933 Smits, K. De Ikonographie van de Nederlandsche

Primitieven. Amsterdam: 187.

1945 Glück (see Biography) : 127, fig. 8.

1945 Breuning, Margaret. "Portraying St. Jerome." The

Art Digest 19 (15 March): 21.

1945 Louchheim, Aline. "Saint Jerome. Variations on a

Theme." ArtN44 (15—31 March): 10, 31, repro.

1945 Anon. "Old Masters Feature Flint Victory Show."

The Art Digest 19 (15 September): 8, repro.

1951 Kress: 198, no. 87, repro. 199.

1951 Folie, Jacqueline. "Les Dessins de Jean Gossaert

ditMabuse." GBA 6e pér. 38 (appeared 1960): 84.

1951 Frankfurter, Alfred. "Interpreting Masterpieces:

Twenty-four Paintings from the Kress Collection." ArtN A

50: 114-115, repro. 109,115.

1960 Broadley, Hugh. Flemish Painting in the National

Gallery of Art. Washington: 7, 28, repro. 29.

1961 Osten, Gert von der. "Studien zu Jan Gossaert." De

Artibus Opuscula XL. Essays in Honor ofErtvin Panofsky.

New York: 457, fig. i.

1961 Seymour, Charles, Jr. Art Treasures for America.

An Anthology of Paintings & Sculpture in the Samuel H.

Kress Collection. London: 86, fig. 79.

1962 Winkler, Friedrich. "Aus der ersten Schaffenzeit

des Jan Gossaert." Pantheon 20: 150—151, fig. n.

1965 Jean Gossaert dit Mabuse. Exh. cat. Museum Boymans-van Beuningen and Groeningemuseum. Rotterdam

and Bruges: 53.

1965 Bruyn, Josua. "The Jan Gossaert Exhibition in

Rotterdam and Bruges." BurlM 107: 463.

1968 Guttler. Northern Painting-. 428.

1968 The Picture Gallery. Summary Catalogue ofPaint1967.4.1 (2316)

Portrait of a Merchant

c. 1530

Probably oak, 63.6 x 47.5 (25 x i83/4)

Ailsa Mellon Bruce Fund

Inscriptions:

On the paper at upper left: Alrehande Missiven (miscellaneous letters)

On the paper at upper right: Alrehande Minuten (miscellaneous drafts)

On ring on sitter's index finger: IS

On pin on hat: IAS intertwined.

Technical Notes: The painting is in excellent condition and

contains only a few scattered retouchings on the sitter's

sleeves, the papers on the back wall, and the left page of the

ledger in the foreground. Several changes are visible: the sitter's hat was originally broader and his hair longer at the

back; the cord that hangs in front of the papers at the upper

right has been shortened. Underdrawing is visible in the sitter's hands and sleeves and in the papers hanging on the rear

wall. The reverse of the panel has been planed down and

coated with a thin layer of paint.

Provenance: The Marquesses of Lansdowne, London and

Bowood, Wiltshire (by I866).1 (Thos. Agnew & Sons, London.)

Exhibitions: London, British Institution, 1866, Exhibitions

of Works by Ancient Masters, no. 70.2 // London, Royal

Academy of Arts, 1884, Exhibition of Works by the Old

Masters, no. 288 as Holbein. // London, Thos. Agnew &

Sons, 1954-1955, Loan Exhibition of the Lansdowne Collection, no. 17. // Bruges, Groeningemuseum, 1956, L'Art

JAN GOSSAERT 103
flamand dans les collections britanniques et la Galerie Nationale de Victoria, no. 33. // Brussels, Musées Royaux des

Beaux-Arts de Belgique, 1963, Le siècle de Bruegel: La peinture en Belgique au XVIe

 siècle, no. 112.

THIS SUPERB PORTRAIT depicts a man of commerce writing in a ledger and surrounded by the tools

of his trade. On the back wall between the two batches

of papers are balls of twine and an "eared" dagger.3 In

the foreground, from the left, are: a shaker for talc or

sand (used to dry ink), a magnifying glass (?), scissors,

an ink pot, a pile of large coins, a pair of scales with a

weight and a gold coin in the pans, and a leather-bound

book and a metal receptacle for the red sealing wax,

paper, and quill pens. This "occupational" portrait, a

distinctly Northern type, is preceded by such works as

Gerard David's Portrait of a Goldsmith (Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna), and Quentin Massys' portraits of Erasmus (Royal Collection, Hampton Court)

and Pieter Gillis (collection of the Earl of Radnor, Longford Castle).4

 Here, however, it is difficult to be very

precise about the sitter's occupation. Although the

painting has often been called a portrait of a banker,

the general appellation of merchant is probably the

more accurate. There is nothing that would identify the

sitter specifically as a banker. In the sixteenth century,

however, merchants who dealt in commodities or in

wholesale trade were likely to be financiers and to deal

with money in some manner as money-changers, issuers of bills of exchange, or lenders of money.5

Two possible clues to the identity of the sitter are

provided by the letters IS found on the ring worn on the

index finger and the pin made from the letters IAS

worn on the beret. In 1957 Van Puyvelde suggested

that the sitter could be a Jerome or Jeronimus Sandelin,

who was a tax collector in Zeeland and eventually

became receiver-general of Zeeland for the West

Scheldt region. Jeronimus Sandelin is mentioned in

documents dating between 1539 and 1557, the earliest

being seven years after Gossaert's death. Puyvelde's

hypothesis was that Sandelin's brilliance as an administrator would have manifested itself early and that

he would have occupied other positions in the government prior to 1539.6

 Rosenberg accepted Puyvelde's

identification as highly probable.7 While it certainly

merits serious consideration, great caution must be exercised, for the evidence is circumstantial. First, there

are no documents putting Sandelin in Zeeland at the

time Gossaert was alive, though it is likely that he

would have been there. Second, it is possible that Gossaert was commissioned to paint the portrait of someone who came from outside the Middelburg area. Last,

the vicissitudes of sixteenth-century orthography

should make one wary of accepting an / as the first

letter of Jerome or Jeronimus (Hieronymous), though

such a spelling is possible. In the absence of hard

evidence, the identification of the sitter remains

conjectural.

While the overwhelming majority of critics attribute the Portrait of a Merchant to Jan Gossaert, the

attribution has not gone unchallenged. Ambrose, the

author of the 1897 catalogue of the Lansdowne Collection, accepted Crowe's attribution to Marinus van

Reymerswaele,8 and in 1961 Von der Osten also published the picture as a work by Marinus. For Von der

Osten, neither the coloring, the compressed composition, nor the sitter's momentary glance were typical of

Gossaert's style; he suggested instead that Marinus van

Reymerswaele painted the portrait around 152.0, at the

moment he was emerging from the influence of

Massys.9 Subsequent authors have reaffirmed Gossaert's authorship and pointed out that the manner in

which the drapery and hands are painted are practically signatures of Gossaert's style.10

 The momentary

glance and somewhat aloof character of the sitter are

also to be found in other late portraits by Gossaert such

as the Portrait of a Young Man, formerly in the Van

Beuningen Collection, Vierhouten, or the probable

Self-Portrait in the Currier Gallery of Art, Manchester,

New Hampshire.11

The Portrait of a Merchant must be placed in Gossaert's last years, probably around 1530, and thus may

be compared to other late works such as the Vierhouten Portrait of a Young Man, the Danaë of 152.7

(Alte Pinakothek, Munich), and the Portrait of a Man,

Gemáldegalerie, Berlin.12 In contrast to the relative

simplicity of Gossaert's other late portraits, the Portrait of a Merchant is quite elaborate in its emphasis on

accessories and suggests that even in his last years he

was interested in experimenting with new compositions. This portrait is one of Gossaert's most impressive achievements. The massive triangle of the sitter's

body dominates the space and the many small objects.

Surfaces are beautifully rendered, while the gray-violet

shadows on the face and hands suggest an almost Leonardesque sfumato.

Merchants, financiers, and tax collectors in the

Netherlands during the early sixteenth century were

regarded with a certain ambivalence. They were, on

the one hand, an essential part of the economic dynamism and prosperity found in northern Europe in the

first decades of the century. On the other hand, they

were considered the cause of many abuses and their

un-Christian traits of greed, usury, and immorality

were satirized in paint and in print by Massys, Erasmus, and others. Gossaert's Portrait of a Merchant is

104 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
Jan Gossaert, Portrait of a Merchant, 1967.4.1

JAN GOSSAER T 105
free from satire, yet the cool, remote portrayal creates a

psychological distance and an almost stoic monumentality.13

Gossaert's Portrait of a Merchant seems to have had

a decisive influence on certain of Hans Holbein the

Younger's depictions of merchants, in particular the

Georg Gisze of 1532. (Gemàldegalerie, Berlin). It has

been suggested that Holbein might have seen the panel

when he stopped in the Netherlands in 15 3 2 on his way

to England.14

An old copy of the Portrait of a Merchant, virtually

the same size as the original, is in the John G. Johnson

Collection, Philadelphia Museum of Art.15 At the time

of the British Institution exhibition of 1866 a copy was

made by Sir George Scharf in a sketchbook now in the

National Portrait Gallery, London.16

J.O.H.

Notes

1. First exhibited in this year, see under Exhibitions.

2. I am indebted to Lome Campbell for providing the

correct citation. The catalogue was unavailable to me. The

date of the exhibition is sometimes erroneously given as

1886.

3. The dagger was identified by Helmut Nickel, curator

of arms and armor, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New

York, letter of 27 September 1979 in the curatorial files.

"Eared daggers are thought to be of Hispano-Moresque origin and were produced during the fifteenth and first half of

the sixteenth century." Nickel tentatively suggested that the

cockle-shell on the "ear" of the dagger was associated with a

badge of Santiago de Compostela. Van Puyvelde 1957, without citing a source, suggests that the dagger identifies the

sitter as a member of the minor nobility.

4. The David is reproduced in Friedlànder, vol. 6, part 2

(1971), no. 2,2.4, pl- n-7- The Massys portraits are reproduced in Lome Campbell, et al., "Quentin Massys, Desiderius

Erasmus, Pieter Gillis and Thomas More," BurlM 12.0

(1978), y"-

5. In the London exhibition of 1884 the painting was

entitled "The Banker" and this has remained the traditional

title. However, several authors such as Grossmann 1957 and

Voet 1973 have pointed out that "merchant" would be a

better designation than "banker." For a good general discussion of the function of merchants in the sixteenth century see

Voet 1973, 249~3 50. On 275 he notes that in Antwerp in the

sixteenth century the Dutch and French terms coopman and

marchand applied to persons engaged in commodity trading

as well as to those who dealt principally with money. The

more specific terms financier or banker seem not to have been

current. Voet stresses the degree to which merchants dealt

with both mercantile and financial matters.

6. Puyvelde 1957 was not aware of 1967.4.1 and so his

discussion centered on the copy in the Johnson Collection,

Philadelphia, which he accepted as autograph. He mentions a

certain A. Sandelin, secretary of the Council of Holland, who

on 30 May 152,6 wrote a letter to the Count of Hoogstraeten.

Perhaps wisely, Puyvelde does not attempt to connect this

with the letter A in the sitter's beret.

7. Rosenberg 1967, 42..

8. Ambrose 1897, 60, citing Crowe's opinion.

9. Osten 1961, 474. Marinus van Reymerswaele's beginnings are obscure and his activity as a portraitist is almost

nonexistent; the Johnson Collection copy of the Portrait of a

Merchant was attributed to Marinus in the Bruges exhibition

of 1902. See Friedlànder, vol. 12. (1975), 136.

10. Verhaegen in the catalogue of the Brussels 1963 exhibition; Rosenberg 1967, 41-43.

11. Herzog 1968, 312-315, no. 53, makes this comparison. The portraits are reproduced in Friedlànder, vol. 8

(1971), pis. 48,49.

12. Reproduced in Friedlànder, vol. 8 (1972.), pis. 42, 46.

It was thought that the coins might be useful in dating the

picture. In a letter of 18 May 1977, H. Enno van Gelder of the

Koninklijk Kabinet van Munten, Penningen en Gesneden

Stenen, The Hague, identifies the gold coin on the triangular

pair of scales as a Spanish dobla excelente bearing the likeness of Ferdinand and Isabella. These coins were minted from

1492 onward, but the lack of detail does not permit a precise

dating. The thin silver coins were used as currency during the

first half of the sixteenth century.

13. There are, of course, great dangers inherent in attempts

to analyze or interpret facial expressions in Renaissance portraits. For the lack of expression as a possible indication of

tranquillitas, a manifestation of inner harmony and a Stoic

virtue, see William Heckscher, "Reflections on Seeing Holbein's Portrait of Erasmus at Longford Castle" in Essays in

the History of Art Presented to Rudolf Witt kower (London,

1967), 130-131.

14. Grossmann 1957; Holman 1980.

15. Sweeny 1972,, no. 2.051, wood, 64.2 x 48.3 cm.

16. Sketchbook SSB 77, fol. 3ov—31, page dated 21 August 1866.1 am very grateful to Lome Campbell for bringing

this drawing to my attention.

References

1884 Richter, J. Paul. "The Dutch and Flemish Pictures

at Burlington House." The Academy 25 (12 January): 34.

1897 Ambrose, G. Catalogue of the Collection of Pictures belonging to the Marquess ofLansdowne, K.G.: 60, no.

115.

1954 Sutton, Denys. "Pictures from the Lansdowne

Collection." Country Life 2 (December): 1959, repro.

1954 Marlier, Georges. Erasme et la peinture flamande

de son temps. Damme: 273—274.

1955 "Londra: Attività délie Gallerie." Emporium 121

(May): 229, repro.

1957 Grossmann, Fritz. "Flemish Paintings at Bruges."

BurlM 99: 4—5.

1957 Puyvelde, Léo van. "Un portrait de marchand par

Quentin Metsys et les percepteurs d'impôts par Marin van

Reymerswael." RBAHA 26: 9.

1961 Osten, Gert von der. "Studien zu Jan Gossaert."

DeArtibus Opuscula XL. Essays in Honor ofErwin Panofsky.

New York: 474, fig. 18.

1967 Rosenberg, Jakob. "A Portrait of a Banker (Jerome

Sandelin?) by Jan Gossaert called Mabuse." StHisti: 39-43,

repro.

1968 Herzog (seeBiography): 137, 312-315, no. 53,pl.

63.

1972 Sweeny, Barbara. John G. Johnson Collection.

Catalogue of Flemish and Dutch Paintings. Philadelphia: 43.

1972 Friedlànder. Vol. 8: 113, Add. no. 164, pl. 57.

106 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
1973 Voet, Leon. Antwerp, The Golden Age. Antwerp:

2.52,, repro. 253.

1975 NGA: 158, repro. 159.

1977 Silver, Larry. "Power and pelf: a new-found Old

Man by Massys." Simiolus 9: 76, fig. 15.

1978 Broadley, Hugh, and John Oliver Hand. Flemish

Painting in the National Gallery of Art. Washington: 7, 26,

repro. 27.

1980 Grosshans, Rainald. Maerten van Heemskerck.

Die Gemàlde. Berlin: 35, fig. 141.

1980 Holman, Thomas. "Holbein's Portraits of the

Steelyard Merchants: An Investigation." JMMA 14: 141, fig.

1981.87.1 (2852)

Madonna and Child

€.1532

Probably oak, 34.4 x 24.8 (131/2 x 93/4)

Gift of Grace Vogel Aldworth in memory of her Grandparents Ralph and Mary Booth

Inscriptions:

In the lower right foreground, between the hem of the Virgin's robe and the book: O"

Technical Notes: The painting is in very good condition except for the upraised hand of the Madonna, which is entirely

repainted. There are small losses in the background and small

losses in the shoulder and abdomen of the Christ Child. Infrared photography and infrared reflectography reveal underdrawing in the face and legs of the Infant and the face of the

Madonna. Only a small portion of the Madonna's drapery at

the extreme left shows underdrawing. On the reverse is the

paper sticker from the Kleinberger Galleries exhibition of

1929 and at the lower left a partially destroyed red resinous

seal, which may be read as / VAN DIEMEN / & co. LA HAYE. At

the upper right is a red resinous seal with an unidentified

heraldic design.

Provenance: (Van Diemen & Co., The Hague.) Ralph and

Mary Booth, Detroit and Grosse Point, Michigan, August

1922. By descent to William and Virginia Vogel, their daughter, Milwaukee, 1949. Grace Vogel Aldworth, their daughter, Chicago, by I977.1

Exhibitions: New York, F. Kleinberger Galleries, 1929,

Flemish Primitives, no. 80. // Antwerp 1930, Trésor de l'art

flamand du Moyen Age au XVIIlme siècle, no. 183. //

Rotterdam, Museum Boymans-van Beuningen, and Bruges,

Groeningemuseum, 1965, Jean Gossaert dit Mahuse, no. 42.

THE PAINTIN G must be placed late in Gossaert's career; this is evident from the style and is also suggested

by the existence of a replica (art market, Brussels) that

bears a signature and the date 1532., the year of the

artist's death.2 Although Gossaert treated the theme of

the Madonna and Child many times during his career,

several aspects of this painting are highly unusual. This

is the only version set in a domestic interior and one of

the very few showing full-length figures. Herzog characterizes the artist in his last year as still inventive but

moving away from his usual guiding principles.3 In

particular, Herzog points to this painting's anatomical

weaknesses, peculiar facial expressions, and the Madonna's agitated drapery.

Without discounting Herzog's observations, it is

possible to see several of these tendencies as simply the

continuation of the diverse elements that comprise

Gossaert's style. For here, as in other of religious works

by Gossaert, vocabularies and devices of Italy and the

Netherlands are combined. The muscular, expressive

body of the Christ Child is derived from Italian models,

while his face was probably inspired by the works of

Albrecht Durer,4 as can also be seen in another late

work, the Madonna and Child in a Landscape in the

Cleveland Museum of Art (fig. i). The classical architecture seen through the window is also Italianate.

Similar architecture occurs in only one other painting

by Gossaert, a Holy Family in the Museo Provincial de

Bellas Artes, Bilbao, which is also dated very late.5 The

minutely wrought yet fantastic metalwork of the

throne joins Gothic elements and Italianate motifs and

recalls the fascination of the mannerists in Bruges and

Antwerp with elaborate ornamentation and highly

polished surfaces. In Gossaert's own pictures, such as

the Altarpiece of the Virgin and Child (Galleria Régionale, Palermo), the Deësis (Prado), or the Virgin

and Child (Museu Calouste Gulbenkian, Lisbon),6

there is ample evidence of his love of meticulously rendered metalwork. Further ties to the mannerist style

can be seen in the rather contrived and elegant gesture

of the Madonna's arm and the agitated complexity of

the drapery folds that swirl around her. The Virgin's

canny, suspicious glance is also seen in Gossaert's late

portraits, such as 1967.4.1, Portrait of a Merchant

(q.v.).

The painting technique is that of a virtuoso who is

in full command of his craft. Especially interesting is

the manner in which the Madonna's blue robe was

painted. The technique is almost the reverse of the

usual procedure. The white ground was covered with

successively darker shades of paint, the darkest forming the shadows. Highlights, however, were not applied over the blue paint; rather, a very pale blue pigment was delicately stippled over the ground to form

the lightest areas. An unusual amount of control and

forethought is evident in this approach. It is also interJAN GOSSAERT 107
Jan Gossaert, Madonna and Child, 1981.87.1

I OS EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
esting that the floor tiles correspond approximately to

a grid incised into the ground, since incising of perspective lines is found more often in Italian than in

Netherlandish paintings.7

Symbolically, the ornate throne functions as a Sedes

Sapientiae for the Virgin; the apple presented to Christ

as well as those on the ledge at the back of the room

mark him as the new Adam who will redeem the world's

sin through his death on the Cross. In this regard the

Infant's outstretched arms may be seen as anticipating

Christ's posture at the Crucifixion.

The painting did not enter the literature until 192.9,

when it was exhibited in New York.8 By the following

year it was accepted as the "apparent original" by

Friedlànder, who also recognized the panel dated 1532.

as a copy. A second replica (present location unknown)

was listed by Friedlànder as a "weak copy."9 A third

copy, dated 1532,, is in a private collection in Cleveland, Ohio.10

J.O.H.

Notes

1.1 am extremely grateful to Grace Vogel Aldworth and

Mrs. William Vogel (letter of 2.0 December 1983 in curatorial

files) for information on the provenance.

2. Wood, 34.4 x 25.4 cm, inscribed IOANNES MAL

PINGEBAT 1532. See Friedlànder, vol. 8 (1972), no. 28b, pi.

30. The painting is discussed by Ernst Weisz, Jan Gossert dit

Mabuse (Parchim i. M., 1913), 124, and Achille Segará, Jean

Gossaert dit Mabuse (Brussels and Paris, 1923), 68-69,

 as

being in a private collection in America. I am indebted to

George Shackelford for bringing the painting's location to

my attention.

3. Herzog 1968,162.

4. In discussing the Madonna and Child, dated 1531, in

the Cleveland Museum of Art, Walter Gibson, "Jan Gossaert

de Mabuse: Madonna and Child in a Landscape," BCMA 61,

291—292, calls attention to the close similarity of Gossaert's

Child to the infant in Durer's Madonna and Child of 1512

(Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna) and the brush drawing

of a Head of a Child (Louvre, Paris). The same comparisons

of facial type are valid for the National Gallery's Madonna

and Child.

5. Friedlànder, vol. 8 (1972), Add. 163. This comparison

was pointed out in exh. cat. Rotterdam-Bruges 1965. The

Bilbao painting is no. 26 in that catalogue.

6. Friedlànder, vol. 8 (1972), no. 2, pi. 5; no. 19, pi. 24;

and no. 37, pi. 35.

7. These observations were made by Ann Hoenigswald

of the National Gallery's painting conservation staff during

her examination of the painting in January 1982.

8. The catalogue of the Kleinberger Gallery exhibition

mentions that the painting had a certificate from Max J.

Friedlànder.

9. Friedlànder, vol. 8 (1972), no. 28a, 34x25 cm, pi. 30.

10. Wood, 36.4 x 26.6 cm. The Madonna's expression

and the way in which the date is written suggest that the

model was the copy cited in n. 2 above rather than Gossaert's

original. I am grateful to Walter Gibson for first bringing this

painting to my attention and to Paula DeCristofaro for technical information.

References

1930 Friedlànder. Vol. 8: 40, 57-58, no. 28, pi. 26 (vol.

8,1972: 37,94, no. 28, pi. 30).

1961 Osten, Gert von der. "Studien zu Jan Gossaert."

De Artibus Opuscula XL. Essays in Honor ofErwin Panofsky. New York: 455.

1968 Herzog (see Biography): 156-157, 162, 318-319,

no. 56, pi. 68.

Fig. i. Jan Gossaert, Madonna and Child in a Landscape,

Cleveland, Ohio, The Cleveland Museum of Art, John L.

Severance Fund [photo: The Cleveland Museum of Art]

JAN GOSSAERT 109
Maerten van Heemskerck

1498-1574

Maerten (or Maarten) van Heemskerck was born in

1498, the son of Jacob Willemsz. van Veen, a farmer.

The artist is named after Heemskerk, the village of his

birth, which lies a short distance to the north of Haarlem. According to Carel van Mander, whose SchilderBoek of 1604 is an important source of information,

Heemskerck first studied with Cornelis Willemsz. in

Haarlem and then with Jan Lucasz. in Delft. The work

of neither artist is known to us. Between 1527 and

1530 Heemskerck worked with Jan van Scorel during

the period that Scorel resided in Haarlem and was ostensibly attracted by the new manner of painting that

Scorel had brought back from Italy. Heemskerck himself remained in Haarlem until at least May of 15 3 2, at

which point he set off for Rome, arriving there by July

1532.

While in Rome Maerten van Heemskerck made accurate, conscientious sketches of antique ruins and statues; he was influenced by Raphael and contemporary

artists such as Michelangelo and Salviati. It is also

likely that on his way home, in late 15 3 6 or early 1537,

Heemskerck stopped in Mantua and viewed the work

of Giulio Romano. By 1537 Heemskerck was back in

Haarlem, where he was to remain for virtually the rest

of his life. He was married twice, and the wealth of his

second wife ensured his secure financial and social

standing in the community. Heemskerck belonged to

the Haarlem Guild of Saint Luke; he was a minor official in 15 51 and 1552. and deacon of the Guild in 15 5 4.

When the Spanish laid siege to the city of Haarlem in

1572, the artist was given permission to live in Amsterdam. Maerten van Heemskerck returned to Haarlem the following year and died at the age of seventysix on i October 1574.

There are no true juvenilia, but Heemskerck's biography provides a basis for dividing the oeuvre into

three unequal segments. The paintings produced in

Haarlem between 1517 and 1532, which closely emulate the works of Jan van Scorel, comprise the first. The

portraits of Pieter Bicker and Anna Codde (Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam) of 1529 are the earliest dated pictures by Heemskerck. Several paintings date from

1532, including a portrait of Heemskerck's father in

the Metropolitan Museum, New York, but the most

important of these is a depiction of Saint Luke Painting

the Virgin in the Frans Halsmuseum, Haarlem. According to its inscription it was presented to the members of the painters' guild on the occasion of Heemskerck's departure for Rome.

A second group is composed of paintings produced

during his stay in Italy. The Rape of Helen in The

Walters Art Gallery, Baltimore, dated 1535, twice, is a

panoramic landscape filled with ancient ruins and

recognizable monuments. Dated 1536, Venus and Cupid in Vulcan's Forge (National Gallery, Prague) reveals what will be key elements in Heemskerck's style,

the absorption of Italian art and antique sculpture, in

this instance Baldassare Peruzzi's fresco of the same

subject in the Farnesina, Rome, and antique reliefs

such as that of Vulcan and the Cyclopes Making

Achilles' Shield in the Palazzo dei Conservatori, Rome.

The third and largest group consists of those works

produced after his return to Haarlem in 15 3 7. Maerten

van Heemskerck was a prolific painter and even if, as

reported by Van Mander, much was lost in the iconoclastic uprising of 1566, many pictures have survived.

The artist was adept at painting religious and mythological scenes as well as portraits. Between 1538 and

1542 he painted a mammoth altarpiece, crammed with

figures, for the church of Saint Lawrence in Alkmaar,

now in the cathedral in Linkôping, Sweden. Other religious works include the brilliantly theatrical Deposition altarpiece of 1559/1560 in the Musées Royaux

des Beaux-Arts, Brussels, and expansive depictions of

The Baptism of Christ of 1563 in the Herzog Anton

Ulrich-Muséum, Braunschweig, and the Four Last

Things of 1565 in the Royal Collection, Hampton

Court. Heemskerck's mythological paintings are often

emblematic or allegorical in character and result from

contact with Dutch scholars and humanists such as

Dirck Volkertsz. Coornhert or Hadrianus Junius. For

example, Momus Criticizing the Creations of the Gods,

110 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTIN G
dated 1561 (Bode-Museum, East Berlin), has been related to an emblem book by Junius. Other paintings

such as the lyrically exuberant Triumph of Bacchus

(Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna), probably

painted just after the artist's return from Italy, seem to

be free from overt moralizing. Heemskerck was an

excellent portraitist, more traditional and subdued

than in his religious and mythological paintings; he

seems to have favored a three-quarter length format.

Of particular interest for its spontaneity and mannerist

spatial effects is the Self-Portrait, dated 1553, in the

Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge.

Maerten van Heemskerck's importance lies in large

part in his "Romanism." He brought to the North

classical subject matter as well as a conception of the

human body inspired by Italian High Renaissance and

mannerist art. Heemskerck's brand of Romanism was

widely disseminated through the medium of prints, for

he produced numerous designs that were executed

by professional engravers and were apparently quite

popular.

J.O.H.

Bibliography

Friedlànder. Vol. 13. 1936 (vol. 13,1975).

Veldman, Ilja. Maarten van Heemskerck and Dutch Humanism in the sixteenth century. Maarsen, 1977.

Grosshans, Rainald. Maerten van Heemskerck. Die Gemàlde.

Berlin, 1980.

1961.9.36 (1398)

The Rest on the Flight into Egypt

c. 1530

Probably oak (cradled), 57.7 x 74.7 (2.2.3/4 x 29)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Technical Notes: The panel consists of two boards with horizontal grain.1

 There are losses along the join line of these two

boards. In the flesh tones, the areas of deep red, and in the

buildings at the distant right, there is extensive blistering and

it is possible that the painting was exposed to excessive heat.

There are numerous small losses in the torso of the Christ

Child. Examination with infrared reflectography reveals underdrawing, which appears to be brush. Contours and fold

lines in the drapery are loosely defined; hatching is not visible

(fig. i). The Virgin's arm has been lowered from its underdrawn position and the fingers of her proper right hand were

originally longer (fig. 2,). The painting was restored in 19847

1985.

Provenance: Heinrich Wilhelm Campe, Leipzig [d. 1862.].

Heinrich Vieweg, Braunschweig [d. 1890], his grandson.2

Heirs of Heinrich Viewig (sale, Berlin, Lepke's, 18 March

1930, no. 49, as Jan van Scorel). Antonio von Riedemann,

Meggen, Switzerland. (Frederick Mont, New York.) Samuel

H. Kress Foundation, New York, 1952..

Exhibitions: Basel, Ôffentliche Kunstsammlung (Kunstmuseum), 1945, Meisterwerke hollàndischer Malerei des 16. bis

18. Jahrhunderts, no. 78, as Madonna and Child by Jan van

Scorel. // Utrecht, Centraal Museum, i955,/¿m van Scorel^

no. 25, as Madonna and Child by Jan van Scorel.

ALTHOUGH THIS PAINTING has often been catalogued as a Madonna and Child, it should also be considered as a representation of the Rest on the Flight

into Egypt. From the late fifteenth century onward, the

image of the Madonna and Child begin to dominate

depictions of this apocryphal theme3 and, as noted by

Eisler, the theme was treated quite freely in the sixteenth century.4

 The donkey that grazes at the distant

right and the windswept figure who may be Joseph,

albeit young and beardless, support the identification

of the scene as a Rest on the Flight. An iconic rather

than narrative emphasis is stressed, in part through the

attributes associated with the infant Christ. That Christ

is seated on a crystal world-globe surmounted by a

cross implies his dominion over heaven and earth,5

while the butterfly that he holds is a traditional symbol

of the Resurrection.6 Thus, even in his infancy, Christ's

redemption of mankind through his death on the cross

is foreshadowed.

The Rest on the Flight into Egypt presents a classic

problem in connoisseurship. The painting has been attributed to both Jan van Scorel and Maerten van

Heemskerck and dated to the period when the two

artists were closest to each other. Following his voyage

to the Holy Land and stay in Venice and Rome, Jan van

Scorel had returned to Utrecht by May of 1514. Political and religious unrest in Utrecht caused Scorel to go

to the city of Haarlem, where he lived and worked

from late April 152,7 until late September i53o.7 He

was joined by Maerten van Heemskerck, who had come

from Delft expressly to learn Scorel's new, Italianinspired manner of painting. According to Van Mander, Heemskerck succeeded so well that his paintings

were all but indistinguishable from those of Scorel.8

Heemskerck was only three years younger than Scorel

and their relationship was probably not strictly that of

master and pupil, especially since Heemskerck had

MAERTEN VAN HEEMSKERCK III
Fig. i. Infrared reflectogram assembly of

a detail of The Rest on the Flight into

Egypt, 1961.9.36 [infrared reflectography: Molly Paries]

Fig. 2. Infrared reflectogram assembly of

a detail of The Rest on the Flight into

Egypt, 1961.9.36 [infrared reflectography: Molly Paries]
Maerten van Heemskerck, The Rest on the Flight into Egypt, 1961.9.36

MAERTEN VAN HEEMSKERCK 113
previously apprenticed with artists in Haarlem and

Delft.

When it first entered the literature in 18 81, The Rest

on the Flight into Egypt was called by Scheibler and

Bode a late work by Jan van Scorel.9 At the time of the

Vieweg sale, Winkler attributed the painting to Scorel,

comparing it to the Magdalene in the Rijksmuseum,

Amsterdam.10 Friedlânder concurred in the attribution.11

 Suida and Shapley catalogued The Rest on the

Flight into Egypt as a work painted by Scorel around

I530.12 They emphasized the similarity to the Rijksmuseum Magdalene as well as its Venetian and Italian

mannerist antecedents, such as Michelangelo, Beccafumi, and Granacci. Subsequent authors who accept

the attribution of the Gallery's painting to Scorel include Guttler, von der Osten, and Eisler, who found the

picture more mannered than other of Scorel's works.13

Wescher was the first to assert the countervailing

view that The Rest on the Flight into Egypt was actually by Maerten van Heemskerck.14

 He saw connections with Heemskerck's early works, Saint Luke

Painting the Virgin (Frans Halsmuseum, Haarlem) and

Judah and Tamar, formerly in Berlin. Wescher maintained that the landscape exists in a single plane and

the style in general does not have Scorel's loose, painterly manner and southern (that is, Italian) light. After

an initial confusing association with Scorel, Hoogewerff attributed the Gallery's panel to Heemskerck.15

At the time of the Jan van Scorel exhibition in Utrecht,

Bruyn, Houtzager (the author of the catalogue entry),

and Levie all thought that The Rest on the Flight into

Egypt was an early Heemskerck, similar to the Haarlem Saint Luke and the Judah and Tamar yet compar

. 3. Jan van Scorel, Magdalene, Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum

hoto: Rijksmuseum-Stichting]

able in format and composition to Scorel's Rijksmuseum Magdalene.16 Recent scholarship has overwhelmingly supported Heemskerck as the author of thé painting. Heemskerck specialists Grosshans, Veldman, and

Harrison17 and Scorel scholar Paries18 as well as Snyder, Filedt Kok and Kloek are unanimous in attributing

The Rest on the Flight into Egypt to Heemskerck.19

An analysis of The Rest on the Flight into Egypt in

comparison with Heemskerck's early works and with

pictures from Scorel's Haarlem period confirms Heemskerck's authorship and at the same time illustrates the

degree to which he emulated Scorel's manner. Of the

works generally accepted as being from Scorel's Haarlem period, the most instructive for comparative purposes are the Magdalene (fig. 3) in the Rijksmuseum,

Amsterdam, the Baptism of Christ in the Frans Halsmuseum, Haarlem, and the Madonna of the Wild

Roses in the Centraal Museum, Utrecht.

In its original shape, without the added strip across

the top, the seated figure juxtaposed to the landscape

background in the Rijksmuseum Magdalene is strikingly close to The Rest on the Flight into Egypt in

format and composition.20 Yet it is also evident that

the paintings are by two different hands. In the Magdalene, the conception of space is rational and orderly;

the horizon line is low and the middle ground assists in

establishing the coherent progression from foreground

to background. The body of the Magdalene is placed

parallel to the picture plane. The total effect is one of

ordered calm. In The Rest on the Flight into Egypt, the

arrangement of forms is more energetic and less orderly. The horizon line is rather high. There is no true

middle ground, but rather an abrupt contrast of dark

foreground and light background. The brushwork in

the background especially is looser and more active

than Scorel's.

Essentially the same differences can be observed

between The Rest on the Flight into Egypt and the

Haarlem Baptism of Christ.21 In Scorel's Haarlem

painting the figures are integrated into a cohesive, unified landscape with a definite middle ground. As in the

Rijksmuseum Magdalene, rocks are more crisply rendered, colors are more saturated, and the "handwriting" of the foliage is different from that in the Gallery's

painting.

With the Madonna of the Wild Roses in Utrecht

there are similarities in the facial type of the Child and,

as noted by Paries, in the position of the Christ Child's

legs.22 A donkey and standing male figure in the distance recall the background of the Gallery's picture

and suggest that this too might be a Rest on the Flight

into Egypt.23 The Utrecht painting in other regards is

very different in conception and broader in execution.
Fig. 4. Maerten van Heemskerck, Saint Luke Painting the Virgin,

Haarlem, Frans Halsmuseum [photo: Frans Halsmuseum]

An examination of the works definitely by or generally attributed to Maerten van Heemskerck reveals

several direct comparisons with The Rest on the Flight

into Egypt. The Family Group in the Staatliche Gemàldegalerie, Kassel, had been attributed to Jan van

Scorel. It has been recognized as a work by Heemskerck and most recently identified as a portrait of a

Haarlem nobleman Pieter Jan Foppesz. and his family,

with whom Heemskerck lived around 152.9/1530, the

probable date of the painting.24 The twisting, muscular

body, bright blond curls, general facial structure but

especially the mouth and upturned nose and short

broad thumbs of the nearly naked infant at the far right

of the Kassel portrait are echoed in the Christ Child in

the Gallery's picture. Essentially the same infant recurs

in one of the cornerstones of Heemskerck's Haarlem

period, the Saint Luke Painting the Virgin of 1532 in

the Frans Halsmuseum (fig. 4).25 Here, as in the Gallery's panel, the Christ Child is shown sitting on a

world globe, but his body is slightly more muscular

and his pose is more energetic. The Madonna's spadeshaped face and sidelong glance directly relate to the

Madonna's face in The Rest on the Flight into Egypt.26

In both paintings the line of the headdress echoes the

curve of the face; this is in contrast to the Rijksmuseum

Magdalene and Utrecht Madonna of the Wild Roses

where Scorel uses the headdress more as a device for

framing the head. In general the forms are a bit more

sculptural and contrasts of light and dark sharper in

the Haarlem Saint Luke panel, but this may in part be

due to an attempt to render the light effects of the torch

held by the angel.

Further comparisons are to be found in the Judah

and Tamar, signed and dated 1532. (present location

unknown).27 Tamar's facial type is the same as that

found in the Gallery's painting and the Haarlem Saint

Luke. Moreover, the relation of figure to background,

the absence of a definite middle ground, the landscape's

high horizon line, classically inspired ruins, and active,

wind-swept figures are all elements found in The Rest

on the Flight into Egypt.2*

The Rest on the Flight into Egypt can be separated

from Jan van Scorel's works on the level of technique.

Jan van Scorel's paintings exhibit extensive underdrawing, much of which can be seen with the naked eye, and

this underdrawing has been carefully studied with infrared reflectography by Molly Faries.29 The rather

minimal underdrawing visible in the Gallery's panel

bears no relation to Scorel's. When Heemskerck's

paintings, such as the Saint Luke Painting the Virgin,

are examined with infrared reflectography, underdrawing is either not visible or minimal and thus there

would seem to be a difference in technique between

Heemskerck and Scorel.30

MAERTEN VAN HEEMSKERC K ii5
From the above comparisons it is evident that The

Rest on the Flight into Egypt is a work from Maerten

van Heemskerck's Haarlem period. While the differences between Heemskerck and Scorel have been

stressed, it should be reiterated that this painting consciously seeks to copy Scorel's style. It is conceivable

that The Rest on the Flight into Egypt may have been

painted while Heemskerck was in Scorel's atelier and

would date around 153O.31 Since Maerten van Heemskerck often signed his works, the absence of a signature

raises the question of whether the painting might have

left the studio as a Scorel. The signed and dated works

of 1532., the Haarlem Saint Luke Painting the Virgin

and the Christ as the Man of Sorrows (Museum voor

Schone Kunsten, Ghent), are marked by figures that

are more sculptural, muscular, and dramatic, qualities

that are found increasingly in Heemskerck's later work.

Friedlánder mentioned a replica of The Rest on the

Flight into Egypt that was on the market in Cologne in

i93¿.32

J.O.H.

Notes

1. Examination did not disclose the piece of canvas covering the board in the landscape area mentioned by Eisler

1977,86.

2. Scheibler and Bode 1881, 2.12., record the painting as

being in the Vieweg collection; for Heinrich Campe see

Winkler 1930, 73, 78.

3. See 1937.1.43, Gerard David, The Rest on the Flight

into Egypt, nn. 2, 3.

4. Eisler 1977, 87.

5. See Percy Ernst Schramm, Sphaira Globus Reichsapfel.

Wanderung und Wandlung eines Herrschaftszeichens (Stuttgart, 1958), 55-108.

6. Grosshans 1980, 96. Engelbert Kirschbaum, et al.,

Lexikon der christlichen Ikonographie, 8 vols. (Rome, Freiburg, Basel, and Vienna, 1968—1976), 4: col. 96, s.v. Schmetterling.

7. Molly Faries, "Jan van Scorel, Additional Documents

from the Church Records of Utrecht," OH 85 (1970), 4—5.

8. Van Mander, Schilder-Boek, fol. 2.44v-247.

9. Scheibler and Bode 1881, 212.

10. Winkler 1930, 78; Winkler also wrote the entry in the

1930 Vieweg sale catalogue.

11. Friedlánder, vol. 12 (1935), 202, no. 327. He repeated

his belief that the painting was by Scorel in a letter of 4

November 195 5 to William Suida in the curatorial files.

12. Kress 1956,164. They also proposed that Agathe van

Schoonhoven was the model for the Madonna and that the

picture might have been the one seen by Marcantonio

Michiel in the house of Gabriele Vendramin, Venice. Both

suggestions are unsubstantiated.

13. Cuttler 1968, 452; Osten and Vey 1969, 183, who

compares the figures to animated sculpture; and Eisler 1977,

86-88.

14. Wescher 1938, 221—223.

15. Hoogewerff 1923, 141, no. 20, under atelier and

works made by assistants, listed the painting as another example of the Virgin and Child in the Staatliche Gemaldegalerie, Kassel, itself generally considered to be from Scorel's

workshop. Hoogewerff 1941/1942, 303, 305.

16. Bruyn 1954, 54; Levie 1955, 248; exh. cat. Utrecht

1955, 43-44, no. 25, catalogued under Jan van Scorel, but

discussed in the entry as early Heemskerck. However, a letter

of ii July 1957 from Fern Rusk Shapley to Guy Emerson

states that Houtzager, in conversation, had later concluded

that The Rest on the Flight into Egypt was by Jan van Scorel.

17. Grosshans 1980, 47-48, 96-97, no. 8; Ilja Veldman,

letter to the author of 22 September 1983; and Jefferson

Harrison, letter to the author of 5 December 1983. Mr. Harrison graciously shared portions of his dissertation in progress, which extensively analyzes The Rest on the Flight into

Egypt. Harrison's differentiation of the styles of Scorel and

Heemskerck can be found in "Maerten van Heemskerck and

Alkmaar. A Painting Reattributed and a Relationship Clarified between the Painter and His Patrons," Kennemer Contouren. Uit de geschiedenis van Alkmaar en omgeving (Zutphen, 1979), 91, 94.

18. Letter to the author of 12 August 1977; Faries 1982,

124—125, 129, nn. 2i, 22. While a Senior Fellow at the

Center for Advanced Study in the Visual Arts in the autumn

of 1981, Faries examined the painting several times under

laboratory conditions.

19. James Snyder, letter to the author of 5 June 1976; Jan

Piet Filedt Kok in conversation after examining the painting 3

June 1983; Wouter Kloek in conversation 13 October 1983.

20. Faries 1982, n. 22, was the first to note that The Rest

on the Flight into Egypt was nearly identical in size to the

Rijksmuseum Magdalene. Without the strip at the top, the

Rijksmuseum painting measures appx. 55.5 x 76.5 cm. See

Friedlánder, vol. 12 (1975), no. 338, pi. 182. Exh. cat. Utrecht

1955, 42, no. 23.

21. Friedlánder, vol. 12 (1975), no. 317,pi. 173. Exh. cat.

Utrecht 1955, 39-40, no. 19.

22. Exh. cat. Utrecht 1955, no. 26. A replica is in the

Gemáldegalerie, Berlin, reproduced in Friedlánder, vol. 12

(1975), no. 329, pi. 179. Jefferson Harrison in his unpublished comments on the Gallery's panel in the curatorial files

stresses the similarity to the facial type of the Child in the

Utrecht Madonna. Faries 1982,129, n. 22, observes the similarities to the surface and underdrawn positions of the Child

in the Utrecht painting.

23. See the comments in exh. cat. Utrecht 1955, 44•>

 no

-

26.

24. Grosshans 1980, 99-103, no. ii, color pi. i, pi. ii.

The painting was first attributed to Heemskerck by C. H. de

Jonge, "Vroege werken van Maerten van Heemskerck," OH

49 (1932), 158, fig. 7. The identification of Foppesz. is based

on the coat-of-arms on the man's signet ring; see J. Bruyn and

M. Thierry de Bye Dólleman, "Maerten van Heemskercks

Familiegroep te Kassel: Pieter Jan Foppesz. en zijn gezin,"

OH97 (1983), 13-22.

25. Grosshans 1980,109-116, no. 18, color pi. II, pi. 19.

26. J. R. J. van Asperen de Boer, "A Technical Study of

Some Paintings by Maerten van Heemskerck," paper delivered at the conference on "Color and Technique in Renaissance Painting," Temple University, Philadelphia, 22-23

September 1980, observes similarities between the Gallery's

Madonna and the underlying position of the Madonna's

head in Heemskerck's painting. The same relationship was

also noted by Faries, Center for Advanced Study in the Visual

116 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Arts talk of 3 December 1981, and her summary report (July

1982) on underdrawing in Gallery paintings.

27. Grosshans 1980, 105-106, no. 14. The painting was

last recorded as being in the Jagdschloss Grunewald, Berlin;

prior to that it was at Sanssouci, Potsdam.

28. The Baptism of Christ (Gemaldegalerie, Berlin) displays the same loosely painted landscape and abrupt juxtaposition of foreground and background. This work, which

seems to have been modelled on Scorel's Baptism of Christ in

Haarlem, is placed before 1532 by Grosshans 1980, 98-99,

no. 10, pi. 10.

29. Molly Paries, "Underdrawings in the workshop production of Jan van Scorel—A study with infrared reflectography," NKJ 26 (1975), 89-228. Included are reflectograms

of the Magdalene, 95, fig. 3, and the Baptism of Christ, 107,

fig. i3b.

30. In her letter of 12 August 1977 Paries reports that

underdrawing could not be made visible in either the Saint

Luke Painting the Virgin or the Berlin Baptism of Christ.

31. The notion that the Gallery's painting was produced

in Scorel's studio grows out of conversations with Paries. See

Paries 1982, 129, n. 22. Her letter of 12 August 1977 advances the idea that Heemskerck was paraphrasing Scorel's

Haarlem works; thus the Berlin Baptism of Christ was derived from the Haarlem Baptism, and the Crucifixion in The

Detroit Institute of Arts, which is tentatively attributed to

Heemskerck by Paries, is related to a Crucifixion composition created during the Haarlem period. Harrison also sees

The Rest on the Flight into Egypt as painted in Scorel's shop

and he attributes the Detroit Crucifixion to Heemskerck.

Distinguishing Scorel from Heemskerck during the time

that both were in Haarlem is a delicate and often difficult

task. Reznicek 1983, 42—43, figs, i, 2, compares the head of

the Gallery's Madonna to the Young Scholar of 1531 in the

Museum Boymans—van Beuningen, Rotterdam, which is

usually attributed to Scorel. He seems to imply that the situation is sufficiently complicated so either painting might be by

Scorel or Heemskerck. Grosshans does not include the Rotterdam Young Scholar in his catalogue, but Paries and Harrison attribute the painting to Heemskerck and Paries observes

that no underdrawing was detected with infrared reflectography.

In a communication to the author of 8 June 1984 Paries

stressed the complicated and unclear nature of underdrawing

in Heemskerck's works. For example, Paries has found underdrawing in the Detroit Crucifixion, but this is an isolated

example. Few related works have been studied and thus connections with other works attributed to the early Heemskerck are difficult to establish. J. R. J. von Asperen de Boer

1980 (as in n. 26 above) underscores the differences in Heemskerck's painting techniques and their possible experimental

nature.

32. Friedlander, vol. 14 (1937), 129, 64 x 77 cm, listed as

a fairly exact replica.

References

1881 Scheibler, Ludwig, and Wilhelm Bode. "Verzeichniss der Gemâlde des Jan van Scorel."JbBerlin 2: 212.

1923 Hoogewerff, G. J. Jan van Scorel. Peintre de la

renaissance hollandaise. The Hague: 141, no. 20.

1930 Winkler, Friedrich. "Die Sammlung Vieweg."

Pantheon 5: 78, repro. 73.

1930 Deusch, Werner R. "Die Sammlung ViewegBraunschweig." Die Kunstauktion [Die Weltkunst] 4 (23

February): 1—2, repro.

1935 Friedlander. Vol. 12: 202, no. 327 (vol. 12,1975:

123, no. 327, pi. 178).

193 8 Wescher, Paul. "Heemskerck und Scorel." JbBerlin

59: 221-223, fig. 2.

1941/1942 Hoogewerff, G. J. De Noord-Nederlandscbe Schilderkunst. 5 vols. The Hague, 4: 303, 305, fig. 143.

1954 Bruyn, Josua. "Enige werken van Jan van Scorel

uit zijn Haarlemse tijd (1527-1529)." Bulletin van hetRijksmuseum 2: 54.

1955 Levie, Simon H. "De copie van een Bewening."

OH 70: 248.

1956 Kress: 164, no. 64, repro. 165.

1968 Guttler. Northern Painting: 452, fig. 620.

1969 Osten, Gert von der, and Horst Vey. Painting and

Sculpture in Germany and the Netherlands ijoo to 1600.

Baltimore: 183, pi. 163.

1975 NGA: 322, repro. 323.

1977 Eisler: 86-88, fig. 85.

1980 Grosshans, Rainald. Maerten van Heemskerck.

Die Gemdlde. Berlin: 47-48, 96-97, no. 8, pi. 8.

1982 Paries, Molly. "Two Additional Panels from Jan

van Scorel's Workshop: Comments about Authorship." Le

Dessin sous-facent dans la peinture. Colloque IV; 29-3 0-31

Octobre 1981. Louvain-la-Neuve: 124—125,129.

1983 Reznicek, E. K. J. Review of Maerten van Heemskerck. Die Gemalde by Rainald Grosshans. In OH 97: 42,

45, fig. i, detail.

MAERTEN VAN HEEMSKERC K II?
Adriaen Isenbrant

active 1510—1551

There are no extant signed or documented works by

Adriaen Isenbrant (or Ysenbrant). In 1902., Hulin de

Loo assigned to Isenbrant a group of paintings that

were first given to the Haarlem artist Jan Mostaert and

later to the "pseudo-Mostaert." Hulin de Loo's attribution has found general acceptance and accords with

our meager knowledge of Isenbrant.

Adriaen Isenbrant was first mentioned in 1510

when he became a master in the Bruges painters' and

saddlemakers' guild. He was recorded as a stranger,

but his native town was not mentioned. Between 1516/

1517 and 1547/1548 he was listed numerous times as

a vinder or minor official of the guild and in 15 26/15 2.7

and 1537/1538 was a gouverneur or financial officer.

He was married twice, and his second wife bore three

daughters. Isenbrant died in his house in Bruges shortly

before z i July 1551.

Adding to our knowledge is Sanderus' De Brugensibus eruditionis fama claris libri duo, published in Amsterdam in 1624. Sanderus, citing the earlier authority

Dionysius Hardwijn (1530-1604/1605), describes

Adriaen Isenbrant of Bruges as a disciple of Gerard

David and skilled in portraiture and the depiction of

nude figures. Since there is no documentary evidence

that Isenbrant was ever a pupil of David, the term

"disciple" should perhaps not be taken literally.

Many paintings attributed to Isenbrant are definitely the work of a Bruges artist and are marked by an

overwhelming reliance on the art of Gerard David.

Isenbrant, however, tends to replace David's somber

colors with a warmer, smokier palette and uses more

sfumato modeling in the faces. Isenbrant frequently

quotes as well from the works of earlier masters such as

Jan van Eyck and Hugo van der Goes. There are also

affinities with the pictures of his contemporaries in

Bruges, Ambrosius Benson and Lancelot Blondeel. A

considerable range of quality in the pictures grouped

around Isenbrant's name indicates a large workshop as

well as other copyists and followers.

Friedlànder assembled a small core of works which

serve as benchmarks for Isenbrant's style. Of these the

only picture to bear a date is the altarpiece of the Adoration of the Magi of 1518, formerly in the Church of

Saint Mary, Liibeck, and now destroyed. A diptych

consisting of the Seven Sorrows of the Virgin (Church

of Our Lady, Bruges), and a panel showing the donor,

Joris van de Velde, his wife, children, and name saints

(Musées Royaux des Beaux-Arts, Brussels), have been

dated 1518 because the robe Van de Velde wears indicates his membership in the Confraternity of the Holy

Blood for that year. Van de Velde did not die until

1528 and it is possible that the robe simply commemorates his earlier affiliation with the organization. Consequently, only the most tentative chronology can be

established for this artist.

Despite our incomplete knowledge, however, Isenbrant, along with Benson and Blondeel, emerges as

one of the principal representatives of the final conservative phase of painting in Bruges in the sixteenth

century. J.O.H.

Bibliography

Hulin de Loo, Georges. Bruges. Exposition de tableaux flamands des XIVe

, XVe, et XVIe siècles. Catalogue critique.

Ghent, 1902.: LXIII-LXVII.

Friedlànder. Vol. n. 1933 (vol. n, 1974).

Parmentier, R. A. "Bronnen voor de Geschiedenis van het

Brugsche Schildersmilieu in de XVIe Eeuw. IX: Adriaan

Isenbrant," RBAHA 9 (1939): 2,2.9-2.65.

Janssens de Bisthoven, A. "Een nieuw datering voor twee aan

Isenbrant toegeschreven schilderijen." Miscellanea Jozef

Duverger. 2, vols. Ghent, 1968, i: 175-185.

Wilson, Jean. "Adriaen Isenbrant Reconsidered. The Making

and Marketing of Art in Sixteenth-Century Bruges."

Ph.D. diss., The Johns Hopkins University, 1983.

1978.46.1 (2724)

The Adoration of the Shepherds

Probably 1510/1540

Probably oak (cradled), 74.6 x 57 (2.97/i6 x227/16)

Ailsa Mellon Bruce Fund

Inscription:

At base of ornament on the square column at right: N 21

ill EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTIN G
Adriaen Isenbrant, The Adoration of the Shepherds, 1978.46.1

ADRIAEN ISENBRANT 119
Technical Notes: The painting is composed of two boards

with vertical grain. The original panel has been mounted on a

second piece of wood and thin wood strips have been attached

around the edges. The painting is in generally good condition, but there is scattered abrasion and small losses throughout. There are small losses along the join line and around all

edges. Infrared reflectography reveals underdrawing in the

figures and architecture (fig. i). In some instances the changes

in the underdrawing are paralleled by changes in the paint

layer, as, for instance, in the increased base of the square

column at the extreme left and the corresponding adjustment

in the hem of the Virgin's robe.

Provenance: (Kleinberger Gallery, Paris.) (Paul Cassirer, Amsterdam, by June 1936.) (Rudolf Heinemann, New York, by

1937—January 1975.) (Feilchenfeldt, Zurich.)1

THE ICONOGRAPHIC PROGRAM of The Adoration of the Shepherds is extensive and for the most part

traditional. The adoration of the Child by Mary, Joseph, and the angels is basically Brigantine in type, the

Infant's nakedness emphasizing his poverty and humility. Like his Netherlandish predecessors Hugo van der

Goes in the Portinari Altarpiece (Uffizi, Florence), and

Petrus Christus in the National Gallery's Nativity

(q.v.), Isenbrant stresses the association with the Incarnation and the Eucharist. The bundle of wheat in

the foreground refers to both Bethlehem and the "living bread" of the Eucharist. The body of the Christ

Child, lying on a white cloth and placed on top of a

basket, becomes the corpus verum, the object of veneration in the sacrament of the first mass celebrated by

Mary, Joseph, and the angels.2 The basket is thus

transformed into a small altar. Incorporated into this

image is the theme of the Adoration of the Shepherds,

the first manifestation of the deity in human form to

man.3 Two consecutive episodes from the Gospel of

Luke are represented; in the distant landscape the

Annunciation to the Shepherds takes place as they tend

their flocks by night (Luke 2:8—14); this is followed by

the arrival of the shepherds at the manger to worship

the Christ Child (Luke 2:15—20) shown in the foreground. The shepherds are often depicted as musicians; in Isenbrant's painting the one at the left plays a

bladder pipe.4

The architecture also functions symbolically. The

classical temple is a ruin beginning to be overrun by

vegetation; its decay is emblematic of the decline of

pagan religion after the birth of Christ. At the upper

right is a triangular timbered roof, a seeming incongruity among the masonry; it refers to the stable or

manger mentioned in the Gospel of Luke. This use of

antique architecture, found in quattrocento Italian

painting, as for example in Botticelli's Adoration of the

Fig. i. Infrared reflectogram assembly of a detail of The Adoration

of the Shepherds^ 1978.46.1 [infrared reflectography: Molly Faries]
Magi in the National Gallery,5

 indicates Isenbrant's

awareness of Renaissance architectural symbolism.

Other motifs are more typically Northern. At the

upper left is a statue of Moses with the tablets of the

law, an allusion to the transition from Old to New

Testament and the new era that begins with the Nativity. The owl perched on a log at the upper right is

subject to various interpretations, most of them negative; here it is most likely a symbol of evil and darkness,

and the Jews in particular.6 The meaning of the N¿I

symbol incorporated into the ornament is not clear;

possibly it refers to Nativitas lesu.7

An interesting and rather unusual motif is found in

the landscape: on a hill not far from the shepherds and

their flocks a group of robed and hooded figures dance

around a large bonfire. This motif seems to be confined

to Netherlandish Adorations and Nativities of the late

fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries and seems to

have a folkloric rather than textual basis. Although its

precise meaning is unclear, both Ewing and Beatson,

working independently, have associated the shepherds

dancing around a fire with the winter solstice. The

"dying" and subsequent "birth" of the sun were associated with the birth of the Messiah, who is often

equated with the sun.8

By virtue of its superior style, composition, and execution, The Adoration of the Shepherds stands above

the hundreds of paintings attributed to Isenbrant. The

picture was not known to Friedlànder when he first

wrote on Isenbrant, but was listed in the supplement to

Die altniederlàndische Malerei, published in i93y.9

Isenbrant's works have not been studied in a thorough

and systematic manner, though recently Jean Wilson

has examined the workshop practices of Gerard

David, Isenbrant, and Ambrosius Benson.10

One of the hallmarks of Isenbrant's style is its dependence on the works of Gerard David. The most

immediate precedent for The Adoration of the Shepherds is found in the center panel of David's Nativity

altarpiece in the Metropolitan Museum, New York

(fig. 2).11 Not only was the typical Davidian type of

Virgin with an oval, solid head and small chin taken

over, but even the pattern of folds in the kerchief is very

similar. The figures of Mary, Joseph, and the Child are

arranged in a similar but not identical manner and

both pictures prominently display a sheaf of wheat in

the foreground. Whereas David placed the Child in a

crib filled with straw, Isenbrant, perhaps to emphasize

further Christ's poverty, placed him atop a woven

straw basket of the kind often used by David.

Several other influences are operating here as well.

The elaborate ornament of acanthus leaves, simulated

metalwork, putti, birds, monkeys, and a caryatid in

armor demonstrates the absorption in the North of

classically inspired Italianate decoration. A similar

love of ornament is found in the paintings of Isenbrant's compatriot in Bruges, Lancelot Blondeel,12

 but

it is also possible that Isenbrant was familiar with the

decorative extravagance of the Antwerp mannerists or

the kind of Italianate metalwork used by Jan Gossaert.13

The compositionally assertive but spatially ambiguous

architecture is similar to the structures found in the

Adorations produced by the Antwerp mannerists from

the 15205 onward.14

It is all but impossible to establish a viable chronology for Isenbrant's paintings. The assimilation of mannerist elements from Bruges and Antwerp in The Adoration of the Shepherds suggests that the earliest likely

date is in the 15205. The picture thus may be roughly

contemporary with the 1518 triptych of the Adoration

formerly in Liibeck15 and the Seven Sorrows of the

Virgin diptych in Bruges and Brussels,16 which can be

dated between 1518 and 1528. Stylistically, there is

nothing to rule out a date in the 15305 or 15405.

Although an exact replica of The Adoration of the

Shepherds is not known, the general design was used

by Isenbrant in several other Nativities, notably the

Fig. 2. Gerard David, The Nativity, center panel, New York, The

Metropolitan Museum of Art, The Jules Bache Collection, 1949

(49-.7.2oa) [photo: The Metropolitan Museum of Art. All rights

reserved]
small triptych in the Metropolitan Museum17

 and single panels in the Mayer van den Bergh Museum, Antwerp, and the Ôffentliche Kunstsammlungen, Basel.18

None of these is as large or as complex as the National

Gallery's painting.

J.O.H.

Notes

i. I am indebted to Walter M. Feilchenfeldt and Mrs.

Rudolf Heinemann for information on the provenance.

2,. See Ursula Nilgren, "The Epiphany and the Eucharist:

On the Interpretation of Eucharistie Motifs in the Medieval

Epiphany Scenes," AB 49 (1967), 311—316; Joel Upton,

"Devotional Imagery and Style in the Washington Nativity

by Petrus Christus," StHist 7 (1975), 49~79>

 esP- 66-68;

Panofsky, ENP, 1953, 333-334.

3. See Réau, Iconographie, vol. z, part z, 131—136; Gertrud Schiller, Iconography of Christian Art, z vols. (Greenwich, Conn., 1971), i: 84—88.

4.1 am indebted to Helen Hollis, Division of Musical

Instruments, National Museum of American History, Smithsonian Institution, for identifying this instrument. The bladder pipe is a wind instrument in which a reed or pipe is

enclosed by a bladder; the bladder serves as a wind reservoir.

See Stanley Sadie, éd., The New Grove Dictionary of Music

and Musicians, zo vols. (London, 1980), z: 770-771. Isenbrant used a bladder pipe in the Nativities in Antwerp and

Basel; see n. 18 below.

5. 1937.1.11; Shapley 1979, 81-83, pi. 53. In Botticelli's painting the triangular wooden roof is similar to the

roof of an early Christian basilica and is perhaps a further

allusion to Christianity supplanting paganism. It is less easy

to say whether Isenbrant intended this meaning as well. On

architectural symbolism, see Rab Hatfield, Botticelli's Uffizi

"Adoration" (Princeton, 1976), 56-57.

6. See Heinrich Schwarz and Volker Plagemann, s.v.

"Eule," Reallexikon zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte, 7 vols.

(Stuttgart and Munich, 1937—1981), 6: cols. 167—311, esp.

cols. 171—178,184—191. An owl also appears in 1961.9.13,

The Nativity by Juan de Flandes (q.v.). The bird's penchant

for inhabiting ruins, mentioned in the Bible (Psalm 101:6;

Isaiah 34:11), is particularly appropriate to the decaying

temples painted by Juan de Flandes and Isenbrant.

7. A possible analogy is to be found in the Portinari Altarpiece by Hugo van der Goes, in which the letters P. N. S. C.

and M. V. carved into the tympanum of the portal of the

palace of David have been interpreted by Panofsky as standing for Puer Nascetur Salvator Christus and Maria Virgo,

respectively. See Panofsky, ENP, 1953, 334.

8. Réau, Iconographie, vol. z, part z, 114, in discussing

the date of 15 December, points out that this is also the feast

date of the solar god Mithra, and of the Roman Saturnalia. In

patristic literature Christ is called the "true sun" by Saint

Cyprian and the "new sun" by Saint Ambrose. The comparison of the Messiah to the sun and the proximity of Christmas

to the winter solstice are noted by Réau. Ewing 1978, 78,

discusses the motif of shepherds dancing around a bonfire in

connection with Jan de Beer's Nativity in the Wallraf-RichartzMuseum, Cologne, and sees de Beer as the source for both

1978.46.1 and the roundel at the upper left of Patinir's Assumption of the Virgin (John G. Johnson Collection, Philadelphia Museum of Art). To the examples he lists on page 91,

n. 11,1 would add the appearance of this motif on the inner

right wing of the Nativity attributed to the Master of Amiens

on the art market, London (see n. 13 under Gossaert's Saint

Jerome Penitent, 1951.5.40^—b). Dan Ewing, letter of 3 October 1981 in the curatorial files, sees the dancing shepherds

as part of a larger tradition that is separate from the motif of

the bonfire. Elizabeth Beatson has investigated the motif of

figures dancing around a fire in fourteenth- and fifteenthcentury manuscripts. She stresses the connection between the

Roman feast of sol invictus and Christ as sol iustitiae. I am

indebted to Mr. Ewing and Mrs. Beatson (in conversation, 16

May 1981) for sharing their research with me.

9. Friedlander, vol. 14 (1937), 115; vol. n (1974), 101,

Supp. 309.

10. Wilson, 1983. Wilson has been able to establish several stylistic groupings among the numerous works attributed to Isenbrant. The Gallery's painting is discussed as a

characteristic example of "Style I", the work of a single hand,

which includes such works as The Nativity (Ôffentliche

Kunstsammlung, Basel) and the Mass of Saint Gregory

(Prado, Madrid). The ten paintings that constitute Style I are

listed in her Appendix I, 191—191.

11. Friedlander, vol. 6, part i (1971), no. 160, pi. 164.

ii. For example, Blondeel's altarpiece of the Legend of

Saints Cosmos and Damián of 1513 (Church of Saint James,

Bruges), Friedlander, vol. ii (1974), no. 198, pis. 185—187;

Saint Luke Painting the Virgin, 1545, (Groeningemuseum,

Bruges), Friedlander, vol. ii (1974), no. 199, pi. 188.

13. For reproductions of Antwerp mannerist paintings see

Friedlander, vol. ii (1974),

 esP- pls

-

 z? 5-> 9? 37? 38, 68, 88.

For Gossaert, see Friedlander, vol. 8 (1971), esp. pis. 5, 17,

17,18,35.

14. The Adoration of the Magi was one of the most popular subjects for artists in Antwerp in the early sixteenth century, perhaps because it permitted a show of exotic types and

lavish costumes. In some instances, particularly in the Adorations of the Pseudo-Bles, the temple assumes grandiose proportions and dwarfs the figures. See Friedlander, vol. ii

(1974), pis. ï^ 2"

15. Friedlander, vol. ii (1974), no. 115, pi. 103. Jean

Wilson, in conversation of June 1981, expressed doubts

about the attribution to Isenbrant and suggested that the

altarpiece might be by a member of the Benson family.

16. Friedlander, vol. ii (1974), no. 138, pis. 115—117.

Janssens de Bisthoven 1968 (see Biography), 175-185, dates

the panels to 1518 on the basis of the emblem of the Confraternity of the Holy Blood worn by the donor. However, Joris

van de Velde did not die until 1518 and the diptych could

have been produced between 1518 and 1518. Hulin de Loo

1901 (see Biography), 64, believed the panels were commissioned by Van de Velde's widow and dated between 1518

and her death in 1535. This view was challenged by Friedlander, vol. ii (1974)549.

17. Friedlander, vol. ii (1974), no. 114, pis. 101,101.

18. Friedlander, vol. ii (1974), nos.

 I

47-> 148, pi. 113.

References

1937 Friedlander. Vol. 14: 115 (vol. ii, 1974: 101,

Supp. 309, pi. 101).

1978 Ewing, Dan. "The Paintings and Drawings of Jan

de Beer." z vols. Ph.D. diss., University of Michigan, i: 78,

i6o;i:fig. 94.

1983 Wilson (seeBiography): 10-18,191-191, pi. 17.

12.2 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
Juan de Flandes

active 1496—1519

Juan de Flandes' career is fairly well documented in the

records of his Spanish patrons, yet little is known about

his background and artistic training. He is first mentioned in 1496 in the accounts of Isabel the Catholic,

Queen of Castile. In 1498 he is described as court

painter, and the accounts indicate that he remained in

her service until her death in 1504. He was in Salamanca in 1505, since he contracted to paint an altarpiece for the chapel of the University of Salamanca, a

project that apparently occupied him for more than

two years. By 1509 he had settled in Falencia, where he

was commissioned by the bishop, Juan Rodriguez de

Fonseca, to paint eleven scenes from the life of Christ

to enlarge an existing sculpted retable in the cathedral

of Falencia. The date of the completion of these panels

is not clear. Juan de Flandes' wife is mentioned as a

widow on 13 December 1519.

The paintings still in place on the high altar of Falencia cathedral and a predella fragment with Saints

Apollonia and Mary Magdalene preserved at the University of Salamanca are the basis for the attribution of

several other works to the painter. These include the

scenes from the life of Christ formerly decorating the

retable of the main chapel of San Lázaro, Falencia,

now divided between the Prado and the National Gallery (1961.9.22-25), and the bulk of the small panels

for the oratory made for Isabel the Catholic and presumably left incomplete at her death (including the

Temptation of Christ, 1967.7.1; see also Michel Sittow, The Assumption of the Virgin, 1965.1.1). Parts of

a dismembered altarpiece devoted to the life of John

the Baptist (Museum Mayer van den Bergh, Antwerp,

the Cleveland Museum of Art, the Musée d'Histoire et

d'Art, Geneva, and a private collection, Madrid) have

been attributed to him on the basis of style. One of

these panels has been shown to come from the royal

charterhouse of Miraflores near Burgos, which strongly

suggests that the painter is identical with the enigmatic

Juan Flamenco, recorded as having painted an altarpiece of the Baptism with five panels in Miraflores from

1496-1499. An Adoration of the Magi in Cervera de

Pisuerga, incorporating a portrait of King Ferdinand of

Aragon, presumably dates from the time immediately

after Juan de Flandes' arrival in Spain.

While the names Juan de Flandes and Juan Flamenco point to the painter's Flemish origins, his family

name is unknown and his activity before arriving in

Spain untraced. If the inscriptions ]uan Astral on the

backs of two of the small panels made for Queen Isabel

refer to him, they could be a hispanicized version of a

name like Jan van der Straat. Juan may have studied in

Ghent, as the Cervera de Pisuerga Adoration and the

Saint John panels in particular show clear connections

to the Ghent painters Jóos van Ghent, Hugo van der

Goes, and the illuminators in the circle of the Master of

Mary of Burgundy, particularly the Master of the First

Prayerbook of Maximilian. Like these painters, he frequently enlivened his backgrounds with delicate narrative vignettes. While his feeling for space and light is

sophisticated, a tendency to divide space into a succession of thin planes becomes a mannerism in his late

works. His paintings demonstrate an extremely refined

sense of color, with a preference for rather acid hues.

Questions of attribution and workshop production

in the paintings given to Juan remain unresolved. The

theory that he worked in collaboration with several

painters should be weighed against the probability that

his style changed quite radically after his arrival in

Spain. Because he worked on a project over a period of

years, a single commission such as the oratory for Isabel the Catholic or the Saint John altarpiece may demonstrate a marked stylistic evolution. In any case, he

clearly adapted his style in response to the stimulus of

southern art and the landscape and light of Spain as

well as to the demands of the large multi-compartmented Spanish retable.

M.W.

Bibliography

Justi, Carl. "Juan de Flandes. Ein niederlàndischer Hofmaler

Isabella der Katholischen."/b£i?r//« 8 (1887): 157-169.

Bermejo, Elisa. Juan de Flandes. Madrid, 1962.

JUAN DE FLANDE S I23
Folie, Jacqueline. "Les oeuvres authentifiées des primitifs

flamands." BInstPat 6 (1963): 241-244.

Vandevivere, Ignace. Primitifs flamands. Corpus. La cathédrale de Palencia et l'église paroissiale de Cervera de Pisuerga. Brussels, 1967.

De Coo, Josef, and Nicole Reynaud. "Origen del retablo de

San Juan Bautista atribuido a Juan de Flandes." AEA 52

(1979): 125-144.

FOUR PANEL S FROM THE SAN LÁZAR O ALTARPIECE

1961.9.22 (1382)

The Annunciation

c. 1508—1519

Wood (cradled), 110.2 x 81 (433/s x 3i7/s)

painted surface: 110.2 x 78.4 (433/sx 3o7/s)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Technical Notes: The softwood panel was cradled in 1953

when the painting was being treated by Mario Modestini. A

thick layer of hemp in a glue sizing and three horizontal

battens on the back were presumably removed at that time.

These elements are visible in x-radiographs of 1961.9.22 and

1961.9.23 made before cradling and are still present on the

Prado panels from the same altarpiece.1 The painting was

also cleaned and restored in 1953/1954. This painting and

1961.9.23 had previously been cleaned by William Suhr in

1952.2 The Annunciation may have been trimmed very

slightly on the sides, but without removing the unpainted

edges here. The panel has also been cut at top and bottom

within the painted image and .5 cm wide strips added to these

edges.3 The panel is made up of vertically joined boards;

however, the joins cannot be readily discerned, in part because of the edging strips at top and bottom. The ground

layer includes fibrous strands, probably also hemp. Very little

underdrawing could be made visible when this painting was

examined with infrared reflectography. Apart from small localized losses, the painting is in excellent condition.

Provenance: Altarpiece of the capilla mayor, church of San

Lázaro, Palencia, commissioned c. 1508, until c. 1945.* Arcadio Torres Martin, Palencia, 1950-1951.5

 (Frederick

Mont, New York, 19 5 2.) Samuel H.Kress, New York, 1953.

Notes

i. The nail holes that secured the battens are also visible

in the x-radiographs of 1961.9.24 and 1961.9.25, though the

battens themselves had already been removed from these

panels. X-radiographs of all four panels in the Gallery and of

the Prado panels also show an irregular row of holes above

the center of the panels that have been filled with a dense

substance. Their function is unclear. However, since the actual holes are not visible on the back of the Prado panels, they

must lie below the isolating fibrous layer. In a forthcoming

article in the Boletín del Museo del Prado, María del Carmen

Garrido and Martha Wolff discuss the structure and technique of the eight panels in greater detail.

2. Eisler 1977,186-187.

3. The original unpainted edges have been removed at

top and bottom. Although it is difficult to determine how

much, if any, of the design has been cut away, the difference

of approximately 14 cm in the height of the painted image

between the Adoration of the Magi and the Baptism (1961.9.

24 and 1961.9.25), which retain their unpainted edges, and

the six panels removed from San Lázaro relatively recently

suggests that the six were rather substantially cut down; see

under 1961.9.25, The Baptism of Christ.

4. See Brans 19 5 3, 3 2, for the state of San Lázaro and the

cessation of services there shortly after September 1945.

5. In 1950 and 1951, EgbertHaverkamp-Begemann saw

six panels from the San Lázaro altarpiece—The Annunciation and The Nativity and the four panels now in the Prado—

in the house of Sr. Torres Martin in Palencia; conversations

of 3 February 1984 and 24 July 1984.1 am most grateful to

him for information concerning the provenance of the San

Lázaro panels.

1961.9.23 (1383)

The Nativity

c. 1508—1519

Wood (cradled), in.8 x 80.6 (44 x 3i3A)

painted surface: 110.5

 x 79-3 (43 */2 x 311/4

)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Inscriptions:

On angel's banderole: GLOR /.. . INECELSIS DEO ED.../ .

Technical Notes: The panel is made up of four vertical members. The unpainted edges have been trimmed slightly at the

sides and have been cut off at top and bottom where edging

strips about .5 cm wide have been added. The painting was

cleaned in 1952. In 1953/1954, the panel was cradled and

the painting cleaned and restored in the same manner as

1961.9.22. The ground is prepared with the same fibrous

material used in the Annunciation. Infrared reflectography

reveals a brush underdrawing employing evenly spaced hatching strokes in several areas, including the body of the Christ

Child, the hands of the Virgin, and the ox and ass. There are

some changes in the painted contours of the Christ Child and

the Virgin's hair. A split along one of the joins running upward through the Christ Child's ear and the manger has been

filled and inpainted. Apart from this split, some small, localized losses, and some abrasion in the lower left portion of the

Virgin's mantle, the painting is in excellent condition.

Provenance: Same as the Annunciation, 1961.9.22.

124 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTIN G
1961.9.24 (1384)

The Adoration of the Magi

c. 1508-1519

Wood (cradled), 12,6 x 82 (49

 5/s x 32*74)

painted surface: 124.7 x 79 (49Vs x 3iVs)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Technical Notes: The panel was cradled and the painting

cleaned and restored in 1953/1954 in the same manner as the

Annunciation, 1961.9.22. Although the edges of the panel

were probably planed slightly to neaten them, the panel retains its unpainted margins. The lower margin has been

trimmed somewhat, however. The panel has four vertical

members and was originally prepared in the same way as

1961.9.22. However, x-radiographs of this painting and The

Baptism of Christ made before they were cradled show that

the horizontal battens had already been removed, though the

nail holes are still visible. A broad brush underdrawing is

visible with infrared reflectography, particularly in the face of

the Virgin, the body of the Christ Child, and the face of the

kneeling magus. A point and radiating circles incised into the

ground indicate that the aureole around the star was made

with a compass. The painting is in good condition. There are

numerous small local losses throughout, as well as a larger

loss through the nose of the Christ Child and more general

abrasion along the top and bottom edges.

Provenance: Altarpiece of the capilla mayor, church of San

Lázaro, Falencia, commissioned c. 1508, until at least 1761.

(Frederick Mont, New York, I952.)1 Samuel H. Kress, New

York, 1953.

Notes

i. In 1952 all four panels now in the Gallery were with

Frederick Mont in New York; see letter of 28 October 1952

from Chandler R. Post to Mont in curatorial files.

1961.9.25 (1385)

The Baptism of Christ

c. 1508—1519

Wood (cradled), 125.3 x 8i.i Í493/

8 x 3i7

/s)

painted surface: 124.2 x 79 (487/s x 3 iVie)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Technical Notes: The panel was cradled and the painting

cleaned and restored in 1953/1954. Like 1961.9.24, The

Adoration of the Magi, this panel retains its unpainted margin on all sides, though the edges have been planed down to

give a neat appearance, and the bottom edge is not as wide as

those on the other three sides. The preparation of the panel

itself, which is made up of four vertical members, is the same

as the other panels from the San Lázaro altarpiece. The fully

worked out underdrawing in this scene is easiest to detect in

the figure of Christ where wide, evenly spaced hatching

strokes were made visible with infrared reflectography. The

concentric rings around the dove of the Holy Ghost were

incised into the ground with a compass. A number of artist's

changes have become visible with time: the height of the

tower to the right of Christ's head was lowered and the angle

and position of Saint John's right hand were changed. The

painting is in good condition. Losses along the joins in the

boards, particularly at the left, small localized areas of loss

throughout, and some larger losses in the drapery hanging

down the Baptist's back have been filled and inpainted. The

inpainting is now somewhat discolored.

Provenance: Same as The Adoration of the Magi, 1961.9.24.

THESE FOUR PANELS and four more preserved in

the Prado, The Raising of Lazarus, The Agony in the

Garden, The Ascension, and Pentecost (figs, i, 2., 3,4),

are the remains of the high altar from the main chapel

of San Lázaro, Palencia. In December of 1508, the

bishop and chapter of the cathedral of Palencia granted

Don Sancho de Castilla the patronage of this chapel, to

be built at the east end of the parish church of San

Lázaro.1 All of the surviving panels except two, The

Adoration of the Magi and the Baptism, were still decorating the high altar of San Lázaro as recently as 1945,

although in a confused arrangement flanking a copy of

a Holy Family by Andrea del Sarto and in a frame

possibly dating from the eighteenth century.2 That the

eight paintings are fragments from the retable of Don

Sancho de Castilla's chapel is virtually confirmed by an

act of the chapter of Palencia cathedral dated 1761 and

discovered by Vandevivere. It makes note of the deteriorated state of "el Retablo de la Capilla mayor sita en

Parroquial de San Lázaro, et que es de Patronato de

Don Sancho" and makes provision for a new tabernacle for the altarpiece ("un Tabernáculo muy decente").3

The name of the painter Juan de Flandes is apparently not mentioned in documents concerning the chapel's endowment. However, there can be no doubt that

he was the author of the paintings because of their

close connection in composition, style, and scale to the

documented panels of the high altar of Palencia cathedral (fig. 5). The contract between bishop Juan Rodriguez Fonseca and Juan de Flandes for the paintings of

the cathedral retable is dated 19 December 1509, but

payments for them and alterations in the structure of

the retable continued through the 15 ios, even after the

death of Juan de Flandes in 1519.4 Since the 1508

JUAN DE FLANDE S 115
Juan de Flandes, The Annunciation, 1961.9.12

I Z6 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
Juan de Flandes, The Nativity, 1961.9.23

JUAN DE FLANDES 12,7
Juan de Flandes, The Adoration of the Magi, 1961.9.24

128 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
Juan de Flandes, The Baptism of Christ, 1961.9.25

JUAN DE FLANDES 129
Fig. i. Juan de Flandes, The Raising of Lazarus, Madrid,

Prado [photo: Prado]

Fig. i. Juan de Flandes, The Agony in the Garden, Madrid,

Prado [photo: Prado]

document granting Don Sancho de Castilla the capilla

mayor of San Lázaro probably coincides with only the

initial stages of planning for the chapel's decoration, it

is not clear whether the bishop or Don Sancho brought

the painter to Falencia.5 In any case, Don Sancho de

Castilla would have known the painter's work at the

court of the Catholic kings, since he hgd served as ayo

(governor) to their son, Prince Juan of Asturias.6 The

two Palencia altarpieces must have been planned, and

were probably executed, concurrently.7

The San Lázaro cycle probably included other

painted or sculpted scenes in addition to the eight in the

Gallery and the Prado, since it is unlikely that The

Agony in the Garden was the only Passion subject. A

Visitation with a clerical donor in the Prado, formerly

in the sacristy of San Lázaro, has frequently been considered part of Don Sancho's retable, but its considerably smaller scale and workshop character make this

improbable.8

The panels would originally have been mounted in

an elaborate wooden structure filling the space above

the altar, as does the retable still in place in Palencia

cathedral. In keeping with the customary practice for

such retables—and contrary to the usual fifteenth-century Flemish usage—the panels would not have been

painted in their frames. Rather, the whole surface of

the panel was prepared with a white ground and the

area that would be visible through the framing elements

was then painted.9 The Adoration of the Magi and the

Baptism still retain portions of their unpainted edges

on all sides.10 These two panels, which were not part of

the ensemble as adapted to frame the copy after del

Sarto, are approximately 14 centimeters taller than the

other six. These six were most likely cut down when

they were reframed, perhaps to accommodate the Holy

Family, or because of damage at top and bottom. Thus

the whole group probably originally had a more pronounced vertical effect.

In this mature adaptation to the Spanish retable

form, Juan de Flandes limits each narrative episode to a

few figures that are readily legible within a large ensemble, while still referring to his own earlier treatments of the same subjects and to his roots in Flemish

panel painting and illumination. The interior space of

the Annunciation is restricted by the curtain and wall,

which isolate the figures and push them forward. Yet

130 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Fig. 3. Juan de Flandes, The Ascension, Madrid, Prado

[photo: Prado]

Fig. 4. Juan de Flandes, Pentacost, Madrid, Prado [photo:

Prado]

the compositional type, with the Virgin sitting humbly

on the ground and the angel swooping in with one arm

raised in urgent proclamation, occurs frequently in the

circle of the Master of Mary of Burgundy.11 In the

Nativity and the Adoration, screenlike architectural

members also push the large figures forward, yet the

pale, delicately painted vignettes of the shepherds and

the retinue of the kings recall similar subordinate figures in Ghent painting.12

 The Baptism is related to the

central panel from Juan de Flandes' earlier Saint John

altarpiece from the royal charterhouse of Miraflores.13

However, the textures and recession of the landscape

are simplified, and the figures are closer to the front

plane and more brittle. The Raising of Lazarus and

Pentecost in the Prado show a similar adaptation of

corresponding compositions from the small panels

from Isabel the Catholic's oratory.14

Despite the more compressed space of the San Lázaro panels, Juan de Flandes displays in them his characteristic subtlety and transparency of color. His highly

individual fusion of Flemish tradition with the requirements of the Spanish retable is especially evident in the

device of the aureoles repeated in five of the scenes.

Their geometric form emphasizes the surface of the

panels, while their vibrant colors intensify the luminous effect of the whole. In contrast, the figures in the

Palencia cathedral retable are more firmly modeled,

even to the point of caricature, and the surrounding

space is more fully worked up. Since the two ensembles

were almost certainly planned concurrently, this difference may reflect the distinct conditions of the two commissions15

 or the subtle evolution that Juan's repertory

of stock ingredients continued to undergo.

M.W.

Notes

1. This document (Palencia, archives of the cathedral,

armario X, legajo i, no. 5) is published in part by Vandevivere 1967,45. For Don Sancho de Castilla's endowment of

the chapel, see also Esteban Ortega Gato, "Blasones y Mayorazgos de Palencia," Publicaciones de la Institución "Tello

Téllez deMeneses"no. 3 (1950), 57—58.

2. According to Justi 1887,167, who first published these

paintings, the six flanked a copy of a Holy Family by Andrea

del Sarto so that on either side there were three paintings, one

above the other in the following order: Ascension, Agony in

the Garden, and Pentecost on the left and Nativity, Annunciation, and Raising of Lazarus on the right. Justi called the

JUAN DE FLANDES 131
Fig. 5. Falencia, Cathedral, High Altar [photo: Archivo

Mas, Barcelona]

framing structure modern, but Post 1933, 45, described it as

seventeenth- or eighteenth-century.

3. Falencia, acts of the cathedral chapter, in volume for

1760-1762, f. 75-75V. of the year 1761; Vandevivere 1967,

45-

4. Vandevivere 1967, 30-40, 66-67.

5. Ortega Gato 1950, 57, notes that Juan and Bartolomé

de Solórzano were involved in the construction of Don Sancho's chapel and that the latter was one of the architects of

the cathedral.

6. Ortega Gato 1950, 55-56.

7. Eisler 1977, 186 suggested that two panels from the

San Lázaro retable depended upon Durer's Small Woodcut

Passion, issued in book form in 1511. However, of the two

subjects he cites, the connection between the two Ascensions

(fig. 4 and Bartsch 50) is so general that Durer need not be

presumed as a model. The Deposition cited by Eisler as forming part of the San Lázaro retable must be the one in a private

collection in Madrid, apparently intended for the cathedral

retable from the evidence of the panel's structure; Vandevivere

1967, 59-61, pi. 173. In any case, while the cloth supporting

Christ's limp body may derive from Durer's woodcut (Bartsch

42.), the disposition of the figures is wholly in Juan de Flandes'

own idiom.

8. 51x36 cm, acquired in 19x8; Eisler 1977, text fig. 39.

Gudiol 1957, 113, fig. 2, published an Annunciation now at

Bob Jones University, Greenville, South Carolina, which he

felt was a companion piece to the Prado Visitation, both

being the remains of a separate altarpiece from San Lázaro.

9. Compare Eisler 1959, 131—132., and Vandevivere

1967,2-4.

10. Although there are no documents specifically linking

the Adoration of the Magi and the Baptism to the San Lázaro

altarpiece, the evidence of style and, above all, the structure

of the panels make this a virtual certainty. The four vertically

aligned boards, the type of isolating fibrous layer, the arrangement of the battens affixed by large nails, and the row of holes

above the center of the panel as visible in the x-radiographs of

all eight panels of the group confirm this. Compare the slightly

different structure of the panels from the cathedral retable;

Vandevivere 1967, 2—5, pis. 88, 152, 168, 169. Bolts rather

than nails were used to attach the battens to the cathedral

panels.

11. In the Hours of Engelbert of Nassau, Oxford, Bodleian

Library, Douce 219, by the Master of Mary of Burgundy,

Otto Pácht, The Master of Mary of Burgundy (London,

1948), pi. B, and in the Curial Breviary attributed to the

Master of the First Prayerbook of Maximilian, Glasgow University, Hunterian Library, ms. 5.2.15, Patrick de Winter, "A

Book of Hours of Queen Isabel la Católica," BCMA 67

(1981), fig. 71. As Eisler pointed out, 1977, 187, the scissors

case on the cupboard behind the Virgin probably refers to her

days spent spinning or weaving and praying in the Temple at

the time of the Annunciation.

12. For example, in the background of paintings by Hugo

van der Goes; Friedrich Winkler, Das Werk des Hugo van der

Goes (Berlin, 1964), figs, i, 13, 18, 151. The background

vignettes are-both more complex and more evanescently

painted in Juan's earlier Adoration at Cervera de Pisuerga;

Vandevivere 1967, pis. i9oa, 195. The owl, a symbol of evil,

seems to sound a warning note in the Nativity-, compare the

owl in the Entombment from the Falencia cathedral retable,

Vandevivere 1967, pi. 51. For owl symbolism see Jakob Rosenberg, "On the Meaning of a Bosch Drawing" in De Artibus Opuscula XL: Essays in Honor ofErwin Panofsky, ed.

Millard Meiss (New York, 1961), 422-426.

13. De Coo and Reynaud 1979,125-144, fig. 5.

14. Figs. 2, 5, and Bermejo 1962, pis. 5,18.

15. That the panels in Falencia cathedral were commissioned as enlargements to a sculpted retable may have influenced Juan de Flandes' formal choices.

References

1887 Justi, Carl. "Juan de Flandes, ein niederlàndischer

Hofmaler Isabella der Katholischen." JbBerlin 8: 167.

1908 Justi, Carl. Miscellaneen aus drei Jahrhunderten

spanischen Kunstlebens. 2 vols. Berlin, i: 324.

1909 Mayer, August L. "Studien zur Quattrocentomalerei in Nordwestkastilien." RfK 32: 519.

1913 Mayer, August L. Geschichte der spanischen Malerei. 2 vols. Leipzig, i: 149.

1917 Moreno Villa, José. "Un pintor de la reina católica." Boletín de la Sociedad Española de Excursiones 25:

281.

1926 Winkler, [Friedrich]. "Juan de Flandes." In

Thieme-Becker 19: 279.

1932 H[ulin] de L[oo], [Georges]. Trésor de l'art flamand du moyen âge au XVIIIe

 siècle. Mémorial de l'exposition d'art flamand ancien à Anvers. 1930.2 vols. Paris, 1:51.

132. EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
1933 Post, Chandler Rathfon. A History of Spanish

Painting. 14 vols. Cambridge, Mass., 4, part 1:45, 50.

1950 Revilla Vielva, Ramón. "Retablo Mayor de la

Santa Iglesia Catedral de Falencia." Publicaciones de la Institución "Tello Téllez de Meneses" no. 5: 98.

1952 Brans, Jan V. L. Isabel la Católica y el arte HispanoFlamenco. Madrid: 96—98, pl. 43.

1952 Museo del Prado. Catálogo. Madrid (and later

editions): 204.

1953 Brans, Jan V. L. "Juan de Flandes, pintor de la

Reina y de Castilla." Clavileño 4, no. 21: 29, 32.

1954 Sánchez Cantón, Francisco Javier. "Las adquisiciones del Museo del Prado en los años 1952 y 1953." AEA

27: 5.

1955 Gudiol Ricart, José. Pintura Gótica. In Ars Hispaniae. 22 vols. Madrid, 9: 259-260.

1956 Kress: 13,108, no, repro. 109, m, 112, 113.

1957 Gudiol, José. "Oeuvres inédites de Jean de Flandres. "Miscellanea Prof. Dr. D. Roggen. Antwerp: 116,118.

1958 Post, Chandler Rathfon. A History of Spanish

Painting. 14 vols. Cambridge, Mass., 12, part 2: 615, 618,

620, 622-625, figs. 262, 263.

1958 Gaya Ñuño, Juan Antonio. La pintura española

fuera de España (historia y catálogo). Madrid: 148, nos. 761,

762.

1959 Sánchez Cantón, Francisco Javier. The Prado.

New York: 138.

1959 Kress: 264-267, repro.

1959 Brans, Jan V. L. Vlaamse schilders in dienst der

Koningen van Spanje. Louvain: 55.

1959 Eisler, Colin. "Juan de Flandes's Saint Michael

and Saint Francis." BMMA n.s. 18: 130.

1962 Puyvelde, Leo van. La peinture flamande au siècle

de Bosch et Breughel. Paris: 353.

1962 Bermejo, Elisa. Juan de Flandes. Madrid: 28—31,

44, pis. 36-39.

1963 Sammlung Heinz Kisters. Altdeutsche und altniederlàndische Gemàlde. Exh. cat. Germanisches Nationalmuseum. Nuremberg: 14—15, under no. 76.

1964 Anzelewsky, Fedja. "Der Meister der Lübecker

Bibel von 1494." ZfK 27: 57.

1965 Held, Julius S. "The Bearing of the Cross Hitherto

Attributed to Juan de Flandes. " AQ 38:31.

1967 Vandevivere, Ignace. Primitifs flamands. Corpus.

La cathédrale de Falencia et l'église paroissiale de Cervera de

Pisuerga. Brussels: 44—47.

1969 Osten, Gert von der, and Horst Vey. Painting and

Sculpture in Germany and the Netherlands 1500 to 1600.

Harmonds worth: 142.

1975 NGA: 182, 184, repro. 183, 185.

1976 Lurie, Ann Tzeutschler. "Birth and Naming of St.

John the Baptist Attributed to Juan de Flandes: A Newly

Discovered Panel from a Hypothetical Altarpiece." BCMA

63: 127, fig. 2i.

1977 Eisler: 185—188, figs. 187—190.

1978 Rogers, Millard F., Jr. Spanish Paintings in the

Cincinnati Art Museum. Cincinnati: 12.

1979 De Coo, Josef, and Nicole Reynaud. "Origen del

retablo de San Juan Bautista atribuido a Juan de Flandes."

AEA 52: 140-141, figs. 7, 9.

1967.7.1 (2331)

Temptation of Christ

c. 1500/1504

Wood, 21.3 x 16 (83/s x 65/i6)

painted surface: 21x15.5 (Sl/4 x 6Vs)

Ailsa Mellon Bruce Fund

Technical Notes: The panel is made of a single piece of wood.

All four corners are slightly worn and chipped. There are

nicks in the center of all four sides, probably resulting from

the way the painting was mounted at some point. The painted

surface is bordered by a gold band, which seems to be original. Beneath it is what appears to be a layer of pale gray bole.1

No underdrawing is visible with infrared reflectography.

Removal of labels formerly affixed to the back of the panel2

revealed old inscriptions, one below the other, on the panel

itself: Lúea di... d... in black ink; Gerardo van der [MJeir

... in blue crayon; and 2 in black ink.3 The painting is in very

good condition, with some loss in the corners and some minimal inpainting, particularly along the crackle in the sky.

Provenance: Queen Isabel of Castile, castle of Toro, Zamora

province [d. 1504]. Diego Flores, by 13 March 1505, possibly as agent for Margaret of Austria.4

 Margaret of Austria,

Regent of the Netherlands, Mechelen, inventories of 1516

and 1524 [d. i53o].5 Emperor Charles V, her nephew [d.

1558] given by him to his wife Isabel of Portugal [d. 1539],

along with several other panels from Isabel of Castile's retable

made up into an altarpiece.6 King Philip II of Spain, his son,

Madrid, inventory 1598, no. 45 [d. I598].7 Oderisio de

Sangro, Prince of Fondi, Naples (sale, Galerie Sangiorgi,

Rome, 22 April—i May, 1895, no. 738, with no. 73 8bis, The

Marriage at Cana, as Bolognese school, bought in), until at

least i897.8 (Stefano Bardini, Florence, in 1899.) Vernon J.

Watney, Cornbury Park, Oxfordshire, from 1899 [d. 1928].9

Oliver Vernon Watney, his son, Cornbury Park, Oxfordshire

(sale, Christie's, London, 23 June 1967, no. 32, together with

no. 33, The Marriage at Cana). (Thos. Agnew & Sons, Ltd.,

1967.)

Exhibitions: London, Royal Academy of Arts, 1908, Winter

Exhibition, no. 12, as Gerard David.

THE THREE TEMPTATIONS of Christ by the devil

(Matthew 4:1-10; Luke 4:1-13) are set in an extensive landscape. In the foreground the devil, dressed in a

brown robe, challenges Christ to turn stones into

bread. From the top of the high mountain at the left he

offers him the kingdoms of the world, and from the

pinnacle of the Temple on the right he tempts Christ to

throw himself down unharmed.10 The Temptation of

Christ occurs among the multiple scenes of fifteenthcentury Spanish retables, though without a convincing

JUAN DE FLANDES 133
Fig. i. Master of the Dresden Prayerbook, Temptation of Christ,

detail, Breviary of Isabel the Catholic, Add. Ms. 18851, fol. 71,

London, British Library [photo: Copyright British Library]

attempt at a unified landscape space.11 The episode,

though unusual in fifteenth-century Netherlandish

panel painting and illumination, does appear in the

Breviary of Isabel the Catholic in the British Library

(fig. i). In the miniature the gestures of Christ and the

devil, the arrangement of the three scenes in a unified

landscape, and the individual landscape elements

closely resemble those in Juan de Flandes' panel. It is

quite possible that Juan de Flandes drew on this and

several other scenes in the Breviary, since the manuscript, illuminated in Bruges, was probably given to

Isabel in 1497 by Francisco de Rojas to commemorate

the double marriage of the queen's children to the children of the emperor Maximilian.12

The National Gallery's panel is one of forty-seven

small panels of the same size that were listed among the

possessions of Isabel the Catholic in the castle of Toro

after her death in 1504. The list of subjects indicates

that the series depicted the lives of Christ and the Virgin, with two panels devoted to apostles and archangels.13

 The individual panels were appraised and sold

separately. Thirty-two of them were bought by Diego

Flores, treasurer of Margaret of Austria, early in 1505

and passed into her collection. By 1516 two of this

group, The Ascension and The Assumption, had been

made into a separate diptych and were recorded in the

inventory of Margaret of Austria's collection as being

the two by the hand of Michiel, that is Michel Sittow,

who at that time worked at the Regent's court.14 The

other thirty panels were described in the inventory of

1516 as being stored in a wooden box.15 By the inventory of 152.4 their number had been reduced to

twenty-two, and after this second inventory, eighteen

of these were framed in a diptych decorated with Margaret's arms, with two more, The Temptation and The

Marriage at Cana, framed separately and placed atop

the diptych.16 This private altarpiece of Margaret of

Austria passed into the Spanish royal collection,

and fifteen of the panels are still in the Palacio Real,

Madrid.

Carl Justi first linked this group in the Palacio Real

with the list of scenes belonging to Isabel the Catholic

and attributed them to Juan de Flandes on the basis of

their similarity to his documented retable in the cathedral of Palencia.17

 A number of missing scenes have

since been identified in other collections.18 Gustav

Glück first recognized that The Temptation of Christ

and its long-time companion piece from the Fondi collection, The Marriage at Cana, were part of this

series.19

Although the intended arrangement and function of

the series are not clear from the list of scenes drawn up

after Isabel's death, the panels were probably designed

to form a small-scale retable of many compartments.

However, as they were valued and sold separately, it is

most likely that they were still unframed at the time of

Isabel's death.20 As Carl Justi first pointed out, the

series may have been left incomplete at that time, as

still more scenes could have been added to the sequence, most notably the Resurrection.21

 The possibility that more scenes were projected, together with

the number of panels now missing, makes it impossible

to determine the formal interrelationships that would

have linked the different parts of the narrative.

The series presents a number of problems that

would repay a full study of all the surviving panels

within the context of Juan de Flandes' development. In

the surviving panels the events of the life of Christ and

the Virgin are presented as dramatic episodes within

extraordinarily detailed architectural or landscape settings. The extent of the narrative sequence and its emphasis on the miracles and public life of Christ follows

the tradition of large-scale Spanish retables of many

compartments. Yet the scale of the figures, the realistic

settings, the wealth of subordinate narrative detail,

134

EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Juan de Flandes, The Temptation of Christ, 1967.7.1

JUAN DE FLANDES 135
Fig. i. Juan de Flandes, Entry into Jerusalem, Madrid,

Palacio Real [photo: Patrimonio Nacional]

Fig. 3. Juan de Flandes, Adoration of the Magi, detail,

Cervera de Pisuerga, parish church [photo: Copyright

A.C.L. Brussels]

and the degree of finish all recall Flemish panel painting and book illumination. Moreover, some of the

scenes find close parallels in the Breviary of Isabel the

Catholic, as noted above.22 The apparent inclusion of

portraits of Isabel of Castile and Ferdinand of Aragon

in The Multiplication of Loaves and Fishes in the Palacio Real seems to underscore the intimate devotional

character of the series.23 The series has yet to be studied

in relation to Isabel's personal piety.

The surviving panels, apart from those by Sittow,

though relatively unified in conception, also present

problems of attribution that have not yet been fully

studied. They show fairly marked variations in the facial types, including that of Christ, as well as in the

scale of the figures, the density of the modeling, and so

on. In the first comprehensive publication of the panels,

Sánchez Cantón singled out a group that he felt was

weaker and not by Juan de Flandes himself: Christ on

the Sea of Galilee, Christ in the House of Simon, The

Last Supper ( Apsley House), The Agony in the Garden

(private collection), The Taking of Christ, The Mocking of Christ, Christ before Pilate, Christ Appearing to

His Mother (Bode-Museum), and The Carrying of the

Cross (Kunsthistorisches Museum).24 He also placed

The group isolated by Sánchez Cantón is very generally characterized by softer, deeper shadows, smallerscale, rather doughy figures, and a less complex spatial

recession, though these elements are present in varying

degrees within the group. In several of the panels

Christ or the apostles have halos. Garments are picked

out with gold in the Apsley House Last Supper. However, a reexamination of Isabel's series in the light of

what can now be deduced about Juan's development

would probably point more to a continuous and relatively rapid evolution of a single artist than to multiple

hands. Thus, the pleating of drapery folds, the ovoid,

boneless faces and fuzzy hair, and the general sfumato

effect of Christ on the Sea of Galilee and The Entry into

Jerusalem (fig. 2.) have much in common with Juan's

presumed early work in the Cervera di Pisuerga Adoration of the Magi (fig. 3 ) ,

27

 Other scenes like the Noli me

Tánger e suggest a transition toward the more attenuated, still figures associated with Juan's documented

The Raising of Lazarus and The Three Marys at the

Tomb somewhat apart from the main group by Juan de

Flandes.25 MacLaren added The Entry into Jerusalem

to Sánchez Canton's group, while returning Christ

Carrying the Cross to Juan himself.26

136 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
works and may represent the same stage in his career as

the Beheading in Geneva from the reconstructed altarpiece of Saint John the Baptist.28

 Juan de Flandes may

indeed have worked on the series of small panels during the whole course of his employment for Isabel the

Catholic, from the time when he was first recorded in

her service in 1496 until her death in 1504. The Raising

of Lazarus (fig. 4) probably represents the furthest extension of his development within the series, anticipating the same scene from the San Lázaro retable.29

The Temptation of Christ is entirely convincing as a

work of Juan's own hand and probably falls towards

the latter part of his development within the series for

Isabel the Catholic. The landscape is already treated as

a succession of thin, overlapping planes, a tendency

that became a mannerism in the artist's later works in

Falencia.

M.W.

Notes

i. A survey of the condition of the unpainted edges of all

the panels belonging to the series would probably provide

some information on their framing history. Thus, in Christ

Appearing to His Mother with the Redeemed of the Old

Testament in London, one of four not sold in 1505, a whitish

chalk ground extends over the unpainted edges at top and

sides. A gold border, said to be a recent addition, was removed in 1967-1968; see MacLaren 1952 (zded. 1970)542.

Christ and the Samaritan Woman in the Louvre, the only

panel bought by the head of the pages in 1505, has both an

unpainted edge and a gold border apparently added within

the painted image and now partially removed and overpainted.

2.. In addition to two typed descriptive labels, one stating, "... bought by J.W. from Bardini, the dealer, in Florence,

in 1899 ...," and a label from Thos. Agnew & Sons, Ltd., no.

28505, these are a label from the Royal Academy Winter

exhibition, 1908, and smaller stickers with 55 in ink and

HAB/yzA in ink. The labels are now in the curatorial files.

3. The second inscription most probably refers to Gerard

van der Meire, a documented Ghent painter to whom many

Fig. 4. Juan de Flandes, Raising of Lazarus,

Madrid, Palacio Real [photo: Patrimonio

Nacional]
early Netherlandish paintings were attributed in the nineteenth century; see J. A. Crowe and G. B. Cavalcaselle, The

Early Flemish Painters: Notices of their Lives and Works, zd

ed. (London, 1872.), 147-154.

4. Sánchez Cantón 1930, 97-103.

5. André Joseph Ghislain le Glay, Correspondance de

Maximilien Ier et de Marguerite d'Autriche..., 2. vols. (Paris,

1839), 2:481-482.

6. For thé document listing goods sent by Charles V to

Isabel of Portugal, see Rudolf Beer, "Acten, Regesten und

Inventare aus dem Archivo General zu Simancas," JbWien 12

(1891), CXX-CXXIII. Béer places the undated document in

1526, the year of Charles V's marriage to Isabel of Portugal,

and considers the list to represent wedding presents. Sánchez

Cantón 1930,106, disputes the dating of the shipment before

Margaret's death.

7. Rudolf Beer,'"Inventare aus dem Archivo del Palacio

zu Madrid" JbWien 14 (1893), X.

8. According to Glück 1905, 228.

9. According to label cited in n. 2 above.

10. For the Temptation of Christ, see Réau, Iconographie,

2, part 2: 304—309, and K. Smits, De Iconografie van de

nederlandsche primitieven (Amsterdam, 1933), 72.

11. Examples of the Temptation in Spanish retables include Dello Delli's retable for the old cathedral of Salamanca

(Miguel Gómez-Moreno and Francisco Javier Sánchez Cantón, "El retablo de la Catedral vieja de Salamanca," AEA 4

[1928], 1—24, fully illustrated), and the Ciudad Rodrigo retable by Fernando Gallego and his assistants (Eisler 1977,

162-177, figs. IS2-"1??)-

12. For the Breviary, British Library Add. Ms. 18851, see

most recently Thomas Kren in Renaissance Painting in Manuscripts: Treasures from the British Library [exh. cat. The J.

Paul Getty Museum] (Malibu, 1983), 40-48, no. 5. The

manuscript contains the arms of Rojas, the ambassador of

Ferdinand and Isabel who negotiated the double marriage,

and of Isabel and her two children. When the book was

illuminated and whether the illustrations were planned with

the queen in mind are subjects for further study. See also

under 1965.1.1, Sittow, The Assumption of the Virgin.

13. The fullest treatments of the series are: Sánchez Cantón 1930, 97-132, giving the 1505 list of scenes, their purchasers, and later history; MacLaren 1952 (zd ed. 1970),

41—47, under no. 1280; and Bermejo 1962, with complete

illustrations of the known scenes by Juan de Flandes.

14. Le Glay 1839, 2: 481—482 (as in n. 5 above) and

Heinrich Zimerman and Franz Kreyczi, "Urkunden und

Regesten aus dem k.u.k. Reichs- Finanz- Archiv," JbWien 3

(1885), XCIII-CXXIII. See also 1965.1.1, Sittow, The

Assumption of the Virgin.

15. "Deans une layette de sapin," Le Glay 1839, 2: 482.

16. "Item en une petite boite en forme de liette de bois il y a

22 petiz tableaux, fait, comme il semble, tout d'une main...,"

Zimerman and Kreyczi 18 8 5, C. A marginal note in the 1524

inventory states that eighteen of the panels were framed in

this way, with The Temptation and The Marriage at Cana

framed separately: ". . . garniz tout a l'entour d'argent doré,

semé de rosettes et fiullages. ..." Two unframed panels remained in the wooden box, Zimerman and Kreyczi, C, n. 60.

See also the document enumerating Charles V's gifts to his

wife cited in n. 6 above and Philip IPs inventory, in which the

silver frame is fully described, Beer 1893, X (as in n. 7 above).

17. Carl Justi, "Juan de Flandes: Ein niederlândischer

Hofmaler Isabella der Katholischen," JbBerlin 8 (1887),

157-165.

18. Aside from the fifteen panels in the Palacio Real, Madrid, the following scenes belong to the series: The Temptation, 1967.7.1; The Marriage at Cana, Metropolitan Museum of Art, The Belle and Jack Linsky Collection, New York;

Christ and the Samaritan Woman, Louvre, Paris; The Last

Supper, Apsley House, London; Agony in the Garden, private collection (severely damaged); Crowning with Thorns,

The Detroit Institute of Arts; Carrying of the Cross, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna; Christ Nailed to the Cross,

Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna; Christ Appearing to His

Mother with the Redeemed of the Old Testament, National

Gallery, London; Christ Appearing to His Mother, BodeMuseum, East Berlin; Ascension (Michel Sittow), private collection, England; The Assumption of the Virgin (Michel

Sittow), 1965.1.1.

The Coronation of the Virgin attributed to Michel Sittow

in the Louvre has also been considered to be part of the series,

as this subject is included in the 1505 list; Nicole Reynaud,

"La Couronnement de la Vierge de Michel Sittow," RLouvre

17 (1967), 345—352, repro. in color opp. 348. However, its

larger dimensions (26 x 19.7 cm; painted surface 24.5 x 18.3

cm) and the differences in paint handling between it and

Sittow's Ascension and Assumption raise questions as to its

position in the series; see under 1965.1.1.

19. Glück 1905, 228.

20. First mentioned in 1505 as "en un armario todas estas

tablicas, yquales todas," Sánchez Cantón 1930, 99. MacLaren 1952, 23, suggested that armario might refer to a folding altarpiece. However, it is more probable that this word

refers to a cupboard; see also MacLaren 1952 (2d ed. 1970),

44> 47-

21. Justi 1887,162. A few of the subjects seem to overlap;

hence MacLaren 1952 (zd ed. 1970), 43—44, suggests that

the Berlin Christ Appearing to His Mother may have been

painted as an alternative to Christ Appearing to His Mother

with the Redeemed of the Old Testament now in London.

The Taking of Christ and the lost panel representing the

moment immediately preceding it, cited in the 1505 list by the

text of John 18:8 (Sánchez Cantón 1930, ioo), would also be

redundant.

22. Later Flemish illumination also provides a parallel in

form, in the quadriptych by Simon Bening in the Walters Art

Gallery, Baltimore; Marcia Kupfer-Tarasulo, "Innovation

and Copy in the Stein Quadriptych of Simon Bening," ZfK 42

(1979), 274-298, figs. 1-4.

23. Sánchez Cantón 1930, 25, and Egbert HaverkampBegemann, "Juan de Flandes y los Reyes Católicos," AEA 25

(1952), 245-246; Bermejo 1962, pi. i.

24. Sánchez Cantón 1930,119—132.

25. Sánchez Cantón 1930,123.

26. MacLaren 1952, 23 (zd ed. 1970, 43). Hulin de Loo

1932, 50, disputed Sánchez Canton's division of the panels

into two groups.

27. The delicately painted vignettes of tubby horses and

riders in the background of the Adoration and of The Entry

into Jerusalem and Christ before Pilate are also closely comparable; Ignace Vandevivere, Primitifs flamands. Corpus. La

cathédrale de Palencia et l'église paroissiale de Cervera de

Pisuerga (Brussels, 1967), pis. 226-230, and Bermejo 1962,

pi. 9.

28. Bermejo 1962, pi. 16, and Ann Tzeutschler Lurie,

i38 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
"Birth and Naming of St. John the Baptist Attributed to Juan

de Flandes: A Newly Discovered Panel from a Hypothetical

Altarpiece," BCMA 63 (1976), 118—135, %s-

 J6, 19, 2.2..

For the connection between the reconstructed altarpiece and

one made by "Juan Flamenco" for the royal charterhouse of

Miraflores in 1496-1499, see Biography and Josef de Coo

and Nicole Reynaud, "Origen del retablo de San Juan Bautista Attribuido a Juan de Flandes," AEA 52 (1979), 12.5—

144.

2,9. Bermejo 1962, pl. 40; see also under 1961.9.25.

Although the small panels may display a broad range of

Juan's style, differences in quality are still evident, so that the

possibility of more than one hand, apart from Sittow's documented participation, should not be excluded. Thus figures

with rather flat faces and small pinched eyes appear in several

panels close to Juan's mature work: The Multiplication of

Loaves and Fishes, Christ and the Samaritan Woman, and

Pentecost-, Bermejo 1962, pis. i, 4,18. Distinctive foreshortened figures modeled in opalescent tones appear in several

panels: The Multiplication of Loaves and Fishes (the mother

in the foreground), The Taking of Christ (Malchus), and

Christ Nailed to the Cross-, Bermejo 1962, pis. i, 9, 12. This

may mean that more than one painter worked on one panel;

further, Juan probably experimented with a repertory of styles

and types within a single panel. Infrared reflectography would

probably provide a key to these variations. Thus, while no

underdrawing is visible in the Temptation with infrared reflectography, the panel in the National Gallery, London, is

fully and carefully underdrawn (Davies 1970, pl. VI), while

The Marriage at Cana in the Metropolitan Museum is more

freely underdrawn and the attenuated figures standing at extreme right and left are inserted without underdrawn preparation. I am very grateful to Maryan Ainsworth and Guy

Bauman for information on the latter panel.

References

1905 Glück, Gustav. "Kinderbildnisse aus der Sammlung Margaretens von Ósterreich."/¿?W/£w 25: 228.

1908 Justi, Carl. Miscellaneen aus drei jahrhunderten

spanischen Kunstlebens. 2 vols. Berlin, i: 316—319.

1926 Winkler, [Friedrich]. "Juan de Flandes." In

Thieme-Becker 19: 278—279.

1930 Sánchez Cantón, Francisco Javier. "El retablo de

la Reina Católica." AEA 6: 97—98,120.

1931 Isherwood Kay, H. "Two Paintings by Juan de

Flandes." BurlM 58: 197—201.

1931 Sánchez Cantón, Francisco Javier. "El retablo de

la Reina Católica (Addenda et corrigenda)." AEA 7: 149-

150, pl. 2.

1932 Hfulin] de L[oo], [Georges]. In Trésor de l'art

flamand du moyen âge au XVIIIe siècle. Mémorial de l'exposition de l'art flamand à Anvers 193 o. 2 vols. Paris, i : 50-51.

1933 Winkler, Friedrich. Notes to Gustav Gluck. Aus

drei Jahrhunderten europàischer Malerei. Vienna: 322.

1933 Post, Chandler Rathfon. A History of Spanish

Painting. 14 vols. Cambridge, Mass., 4, part i: 39.

1950 Sánchez Cantón, Francisco Javier. Libros, tapices

y cuadros que coleccionó Isabel la Católica. Madrid: 185.

1952 MacLaren, Neil. National Gallery Catalogues.

The Spanish School. London: 24 (2d ed. Revised by Allan

Braham. London, 1970: 45).

1962 Bermejo, Elisa. Juan de Flandes. Madrid: 12, 41,

Pu.

1965 Eisler, Colin T. "The Sittow Assumption." ArtN

64 (September): 53.

1969 Walker, John. Self-Portrait with Donors: Confessions of an Art Collector. Boston and Toronto: 42—44.

1970 Davies, Martin. Primitifs flamands. Corpus. The

National Gallery London. 3 vols. Brussels, 3: 9.

1975 NGA: 184, repro. 185.

1981 [Demus, Klaus, Friderike Klauner, and Karl

Schiitz]. Kunsthistorisches Museum. Flamische Malerei von

Jan van Eyck bis Pieter Bruegel der A. Vienna: 176.

1982 Kauffmann, C. M. Victoria and Albert Museum.

Catalogue of the Paintings in the Wellington Museum. London: 78—79.

1984 Bauman, Guy C. In The jack and Belle Linsky

Collection in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York:

60—63.

JUAN DE FLANDES I 3 9
Lucas van Leyden

1489/1494-1533

As his name implies, Lucas van Leyden was born in

Leiden. There is some controversy over the date of his

birth. Carel van Mander in Het Schilder-Boek of 1604

says that Lucas was born in 1494 and thus his earliest

dated engraving, Mohammed and the Monk Sergius,

1508, is the work of a fourteen-year-old prodigy.

Opinion is divided over the question of Lucas' status as

a wunderkind and several scholars believe it more

likely that he was born around 1489. There is no confirming documentary evidence for either date. Lucas is

mentioned in 1514 in the register of the civil guard in

Leiden, and in 1515 and 1519 his name is listed among

the crossbowmen of that city. Sometime around 1515

he married the daughter of a Leiden magistrate. Albrecht Dürer's diary entry and his silverpoint drawing

of Lucas (Musée Wicar, Lille) confirm that the two

artists met each other in Antwerp in 1521. According

to Van Mander, Lucas made a second journey through

the southern Netherlands, perhaps in 152.7, when he

met Jan Gossaert in Middelburg. If we believe Van

Mander, the artist's health deteriorated drastically

following this trip and Lucas, who thought he had been

poisoned by an envious colleague, was often ill and

bedridden. Lucas died in Leiden in the summer of

1533-

Van Mander states that Lucas studied first with his

father Hugo Jacobsz., and then with Cornelis Engebrechtsz. Although Hugo Jacobsz. is documented in

Leiden by 1480, there are no extant works that can be

given to him with certainty. Hugo Jacobsz. has been

identified as the Master of the Turin Crucifixion or the

Master of the Saint John Panels, but this is based on the

similarities with Lucas' early engravings and it is hard

to tell in which direction the influence runs. Engebrechtsz'. influence on Lucas seems to have been limited to the occasional motif.

One of the greatest graphic artists of the sixteenth

century, Lucas van Leyden produced engravings,

woodcuts, and drawings. His dated engravings run between 1508 and 1530, and their chronology has been

worked out in some detail. The chronology of his

paintings is less complete; there are fewer dated works

and more attributions. The Adoration of the Magi

(Barnes Collection, Merion, Pennsylvania), is generally

accepted as an early Lucas, painted c. 1500-1510, as is

Lot and His Daughters (Louvre, Paris), of c. 1509. The

earliest dated painting is the Virgin and Child with the

Magdalene and a Donor of 1512. in the Alte Pinakothek, Munich. The Last Judgment altarpiece in the

Stedelijk Museum, Leiden, was commissioned in 152,6

and probably installed in the church of Saint Peter,

Leiden, by 15 2.7. Moses Striking the Rock (Museum of

Fine Arts, Boston), is signed with an L and dated 15 2,7.

Finally, the Healing of the Blind Man of Jericho (The

Hermitage Museum, Leningrad) is signed and, according to Van Mander, was originally dated 1531. An

additional fifteen to twenty paintings are attributed to

Lucas.

The two major influences upon the art of Lucas van

Leyden are Albrecht Durer and, from at least the early

15108, Jan Gossaert. The inclusion of elements from

the Antwerp mannerists and from Italianate sources

are evidence of Lucas' concern with keeping abreast of

the latest developments. Apart from his considerable

technical skill, Lucas was a master of the observed fact

who easily inserted genre or secular elements into religious works, and a composer, especially in his late

paintings, with the ability to create spatial settings of

breadth, cohesiveness, and even grandeur. It is not surprising that Lucas van Leyden was very popular in the

seventeenth century and had a decided influence upon

Rembrandt.

J.O.H.

Bibliography

Friedlànder, Max J. Lucas van Leyden. Berlin, 1963.

Vos, Rik. Lucas van Leyden. Bentveld and Maarsen, 1978.

Vos, Rik. "The Life of Lucas van Leyden by Karel van

Mander." NKJ 29 (1978): 459-507.

140 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
After Lucas van Leyden, The Card Players, 1961.9.27

AFTER LUCAS VAN LEYDEN 141
After Lucas van Leyden

1961.9.27 (1387)

The Card Players

Probably c. 1550/1599

Linden1 (cradled), 55.2. x 60.9 (zi3/4 x 2.4)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Technical Notes: The painting, composed of two boards

with the grain running horizontally, is very badly damaged

and extensive retouching is present throughout. The largest

areas of loss are in the robe of the man at the far right, the

sleeves of the seated woman at the center, and in the face of

the man standing behind her. X-radiography suggests that

generally the losses exist in both the paint and ground layers.

Examination with infrared reflectography reveals underdrawing (discussed below). The painting was cleaned and

restored by Mario Modestini in 1954.

On the reverse is a reattached label, with the following in

italic script: et is ferrarius ante xit/acríingenio. IG. C. Beiriu

Provenance: (Van Diemen Gallery, Berlin, by 192.3.) (Sale,

Christie's, London, 20 May 192.6, no. 2.69, as Van Leyden.)

(Probably Asscher and Welker, London, 192.6.)2 (Galerie Julius Bôhler, Munich, c. 192.9.)3

 (Tomas Harris Gallery, London, by 1935.) Private Collection, Switzerland, by 1945.

(Frederick Mont, New York.) Samuel H. Kress Foundation,

New York, 1951.

Exhibitions: London, Tomas Harris Gallery, 1935, Exhibition of Early Flemish Paintings, no. 19, as Lucas van Leyden. // Basel, Ôffentliche Kunstsammlung (Kunstmuseum),

1945, Meisterwerke hollàndischer Malerei des 16. bis 18.

Jahrhunderts, no. 43, as Lucas van Leyden.

THE ATTRIBUTION of The Card Players to Lucas

van Leyden is due primarily to Friedlânder who initially dated the painting to c. 152.0 and later, in his

monograph on Lucas, proposed a date of c. 152.5 on

the basis of a comparison with the facial types in Lucas'

engraving of Virgil in a Basket.4 Hoogewerff, Suida

and Shapley, and Guttler follow Friedlânder in accepting the painting as autograph.5

 However, the overwhelming majority of scholars who have discussed the

painting have rejected the attribution to Lucas van

Leyden. In 1961 Judson termed it a copy of the later

sixteenth century.6 Winkler, in the editorial notes to

Friedlànder's monograph, suggests that the panel is

probably a copy of a lost work by Lucas.7 This is essentially the view put forward by Held, Reznicek-Buriks,

Eisler, and Vos.8 In 1976 the Gallery's attribution was

changed to "After Lucas van Leyden." In a careful

discussion of the painting, augmented by a study of the

infrared and x-radiograph photographs, Filedt Kok

found that both the underdrawing and the painted surface were significantly different from those of paintings

accepted as autograph. He was reticent as to whether

The Card Players replicated a lost Lucas or was a work

in the style of Lucas, but he suggested that the style of

the garments and the nearly caricatured facial types

point to a German artist working in the later sixteenth

century.9

When it is compared to autograph paintings such as

Joseph and Potiphar's Wife of c. 1512. (Museum Boymans—van Beuningen, Rotterdam), or the Virgin and

Child with the Magdalene and a Donor of 1522. in the

Alte Pinakothek, Munich,10 there can be no doubt that

The Card Players is a copy. Even making allowances

for its damaged condition, Lucas' subtlety of coloring,

vigor of brushwork, and surety of draftsmanship are

absent. The underdrawing revealed through infrared

reflectography (fig. i) bears no relationship to Lucas

and, as one might expect of a copy, consists of contour

lines and large areas of parallel hatching that show no

evidence of change or experimentation.11 That the

support of the painting is linden strengthens Filedt

Kok's assertion that the artist may be German. Copies

are notoriously hard to date, yet I tend to agree with

those who date this painting to the mid or late sixteenth century.

The Card Players belongs to a type of work that was

undoubtedly moralizing. Gambling, whether at cards

or at dice, was condemned by ecclesiastical and civil

authorities alike. The Church denounced those at the

Crucifixion who threw dice for Christ's robe and many

municipalities passed laws that made card playing

within city walls a crime.12 Satirists such as Erasmus

and Sebastian Brant portrayed card playing in a bad

light.13 Card games often took place in unsavory

surroundings that were conducive to both amorous

dalliance and cheating. In this regard it is perhaps

significant that in the Gallery's panel two men and two

women are playing and that, from the exchange of

glances between players and kibitzers, cheating and

collusion seem likely. Several authors have commented

141 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
on the prominence of the still life in the background

and it is possible that in the original painting the

objects functioned symbolically.14

Lucas van Leyden dealt with the subject of card

players several times in the course of his career. The

Fortuneteller (Louvre, Paris), of c. i50915 is the earliest

work on this theme; it was followed by paintings of

card players in the Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection,

Lugano, of c. 1515 and the collection of the Earl of

Pembroke, Wilton House, of c. 1517.16 In composition

and use of an interior setting the Gallery's panel most

resembles the Wilton House Card Players, yet if the

greater amount of space and the influence of Durer are

true reflections of the original and not proclivities of

the copyist, then the panel may echo a work of Lucas

van Leyden from the period around 1520.

J.O.H.

the lines on page 2.56 are particularly interesting: "And many

women are so blind / That they forget their sex and kind /

And know not that propriety / Forbids such mixed society."

14. Reznicek-Buriks 1965, 2.45, for example, believes that

the still life faithfully copies Lucas' original conception. Comparison is made to the Madonna and Child of c. 1518 in the

National Gallery, Oslo (Friedlànder, vol. 10 [1973], no. 124,

pi. 98), which contains in the foreground a pot of flowering

strawberries. Some of the still-life elements in The Card Players can be interpreted symbolically. The flowers at the left

were identified in 1966 by Noel Smith, the Gallery's horticulturist, as a species of lily-of-the-valley (Convallaria). The

lily symbolizes virginity and purity and is given not only to

the Virgin Mary, but also to virgin martyrs and saints who

were pious and chaste in their youth. See Elizabeth Haig, The

Floral Symbolism of the Great Masters (London, 1913), 24,

32,198—199, 211—212, 222—223,

 Z34- The

 stoppered carafe

on the shelf at right is a traditional emblem of the purity of the

Virgin, occurring frequently in Netherlandish paintings, beginning with the work of Jan van Eyck. See Panofsky, ENP,

Notes

1. The identification of the wood as linden (Tilia) was

made by Josef Bauch, Ordinariat fur Holzbiologie, Universitàt Hamburg, in 1977; Filedt Kok 1978, 132, identifies the

support as poplar while Eisler 1977, 85, lists it as oak.

2. The copy of the 20 May 1926 sale catalogue in the

Frick Art Reference Library, New York, is annotated "Asscher".

3. John Sunderland, Witt Librarian, Courtauld Institute

of Art, London, in a letter of 4 August 1967 to Peter C.

Kinney, researcher for Eisler, reports that the painting was

with Bôhler by 1929.

4. Friedlànder, vol. 10 (1932), 95; Friedlànder 1963,62.

5. Hoogewerff 1939, 259; Kress 1956, 118; Guttler

1968,443.

6. Judson 1961, 347.

7. Friedlànder 1963, 62, n. 28.

8. Held 1966, 447; Reznicek-Buriks 1965, 245; Eisler

1977, 85, called the painting "After Lucas van Leyden"; Vos

1978,106.

9. Filedt Kok 1978,128—132. The painting is captioned,

fig. 135, "Style of Lucas van Leyden (copy after?)."

10. Reproduced in Friedlànder, vol. 10 (1973), no. 119,

pi. 95, and no. 114, pi. 91.

11. This should be compared to the underdrawings reproduced in Filedt Kok 1978.

12. See M. Wurfbain, "De genreschilderijen van Lucas

van Leyden," Antiek 13 (1978/1979), 205, on the prohibition in the Netherlands of card playing inside the city walls.

Proposed identifications of the game being played in the Gallery's painting are neither satisfactory nor verifiable. Eisler

!977> 85, identifies the game as Primero, but does not give

solid bibliographic references. Albert Morehead, letter of 12

August 1957 to Fern Shapley in the curatorial files, tentatively identifies the game as pair et sequence, which seems to

have grown out of Primero.

13. Erasmus, The Praise of Folly, tr. John Wilson 1668

(Oxford, 1931), 80; Edwin Zeydel, trans., The Ship of Fools

by Sebastian Brant (New York, 1962), chap. 77, "Of Gamblers," 255—258. In conjunction with the Gallery's painting

Fig. i. Infrared reflectogram assembly of a detail of The Card

Players, 1961.9.27 [infrared reflectography: Molly Paries]

1953,144. These symbols of purity and chastity are in ironic

juxtaposition to the actions of the card players. The white

ceramic jar and wooden boxes are too generalized to permit

interpretation. However, the presence of a stoppered carafe,

white ceramic jar, and wooden box in the Saint ]erome attributed to Jan van Eyck (The Detroit Institute of Arts) is

tantalizing. Ingvar Bergstrôm, "Medecina, Fons et Scrinium.

AFTER LUCAS VAN LEYDEN 143
A Study in Van Eyckean Symbolism and Its Influence in Italian Art," Konsthistorisk Tidskrift 2.6 (1957), 1-20, discusses

the significance of these objects. The jar is labeled "Tyriaca,"

a medieval medicine, and Bergstrôm identifies the box as a

scrinium deitatis, or container of the Host. In "Disguised

Symbolism in 'Madonna' Pictures and Still Life," BurlM 97

(1955), 346, n. 44, Bergstrôm notes that the combination of

the carafe and wooden box with an apple is an iconographie

unit that occurs often in fifteenth- and sixteenth-century

paintings. Although Bergstrôm's analysis is not wholly convincing, the still-life components in Lucas van Leyden's original picture may be part of this tradition.

15. Friedlánder, vol. 10 (1973), Supp. 172-, pi. no.

16. Friedlánder, vol. 10 (1973), Add. 181, pi. in, and

141, pi. 109, respectively.

References

1932 Friedlánder. Vol. 10: 95,137, no. 142., pi. 87 (vol.

TO, 1973: 54, 84, no. 141, pi. 109).

1935 Fell, H. Granville. "From Gallery and Mart."

Conn 96: i7i,repro.

1939 Hoogewerff, G. J. De Noord-Nederlandsche

Schilderkunst. 5 vois. The Hague, 3: 259.

1956 Kress: 118, no. 45, repro. 119.

1958 Nicolson, Benedict. Hendrick Terbrugghen. London: 84.

1960 Baird, Thomas P. Dutch Painting in the National

Gallery of Art. Washington: 26, repro. 27.

1961 Judson, J. Richard. Review of Hendrick Terbrugghen by Benedict Nicolson. In AB 43: 347.

1963 Friedlánder, Max J. Lucas van Ley den. Berlin:

62-63.

1965 Reznicek-Buriks, E. I. Review of Lucas van Leyden by Max J. Friedlánder. In OH 80: 244-245.

1966 Held, Julius S. Review of Lucas van Ley den by

Max J. Friedlánder. In AB 48: 447.

1968 Guttler. Northern Painting: 443.

1975 NGA: 202, repro. 203.

1977 Eisler: 85—86, fig. 84.

1978 Vos, Rik. Lucas van Ley den. Bentveld and Maarssen: 106, repro. 107.

1978 Filedt Kok, Jan Piet. "Underdrawing and other

technical aspects in the paintings of Lucas van Ley den." NKJ

29: 128-132, figs. 135,136,137.

1979 Rosenbaum, Allen. Old Master Paintings from the

Collection of Baron Thyssen-Bornemisza. Exh. cat. International Exhibitions Foundation. Washington: 114.

1980 Gibson, Walter. Review of Lucas van Ley den studies in the NKJ 29 (1978). In Simiolus n: 108.

144 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Quentin Massys

c. 1465/1466—1530

Quentin Massys (alternative spelling Quinten or

Quintin Metsys or Matsys) was born in Louvain, the

son of a blacksmith. On io September 1494 Massys

declared to the magistrates of Louvain that he was

twenty-eight years old. Thus he must have been born

sometime between September 1465 and September

1466. There is no record of Massys having been trained

as a painter in Louvain. Later biographers such as Van

Mander have suggested that he was self-taught or that

he began by coloring woodcuts.

Massys was first mentioned as a painter in 1491

when he entered the Guild of Saint Luke in Antwerp,

the city that was to be his home until his death in 1530.

He never held office in the Guild, but presented pupils

in 1495, 1501, 1504, and 1510. A few paintings, such

as the Madonna and Child in the National Gallery,

London, the Madonna and Child in the Musées Royaux

des Beaux-Arts, Brussels, and the Saint Christopher in

the Koninklijk Museum, Antwerp, are considered

early works and show the influence of Memling and

Dirck or Aelbrecht Bouts. The earliest documented

work is the large Saint Anne Altarpiece (Musées Royaux

des Beaux-Arts, Brussels), which is signed and dated

1509 and was commissioned in 1507 by the confraternity of Saint Anne in Louvain for its chapel in the

church of Saint Peter. This was followed by the Saint

John Altarpiece (Koninklijk Museum, Antwerp), ordered in 1508 by the carpenter's guild for its chapel in

Antwerp Cathedral and completed in 1511. Massys'

versatility can be seen in two signed and dated works,

the Portrait of an Old Man of 1513 in the Musée

Jacquemart-André, Paris, which revives in the North

the Italianate profile portrait and derives from Leonardo's grotesques, and the Moneychanger and His

Wife of 1514, in the Louvre, which is self-consciously

archaic, relating to works by Jan van Eyck and Petrus

Christus. Collaboration with the eminent landscapist

Joachim Patinir resulted in The Temptation of Saint

Anthony (Prado, Madrid), and the Virgin and Child

with a Lamb (Poznan Muzeum Narodowe), which can

be dated between 1515 and 152.4, the year Patinir

died.

Massys was an outstanding portraitist and in 1517

he was commissioned by Erasmus and Pieter Gillis,

town clerk of Antwerp, to depict both men in a diptych

that was given to Sir Thomas More; the portrait of

Gillis is now in the collection of the Earl of Radnor,

Longford Castle. It has been recently ascertained that

the portrait of Erasmus is the panel in the Royal Collection, Hampton Court, and not the picture in the Galleria Nazionale d'Arte Antica, Palazzo Barberini,

Rome. Massys' late style can be seen in The Adoration

of the Magi, probably 1526 (Metropolitan Museum,

New York), and the Madonna and Child, initialed and

dated 152.9, in the Louvre. In 1531, shortly after the

artist's death, two of his many children, Jan and Cornelis, entered the Antwerp Guild; they went on to become painters of note. However, the extent, if any, to

which they collaborated in their father's paintings is

uncertain.

Quentin Massys was the leading painter of Antwerp

and one of the outstanding Netherlandish artists of the

sixteenth century. Technically assured, his style is internally consistent yet is made up of many diverse elements: archaic quotations of past masters, the works

of his Netherlandish contemporaries, Albrecht Durer,

and Italian art, in particular that of Leonardo da Vinci.

Massys is one of the first painters to treat secular

themes, and his special mixture of sophistication,

irony, and moral satire is a complement to the writings

of the humanists and intellectuals of his day.

J.O.H.

Bibliography

Friedlànder. Vol. 7. 1929 (vol. 7,1971).

Bosque, Andrée de. Quentin Massys. Brussels, 1975.

Campbell, Lome, et al. "Quentin Massys, Desiderius Erasmus, Pieter Gillis and Thomas More." BurlM 12.0 (1978):

716-724.

Silver, Larry. The Paintings of Quinten Massys, with Catalogue Raisonné. Montclair, New Jersey, 1984.

QUENTIN MASSYS 145
1971.55.1 (2561)

Ill-Matched Lovers

c. 152.0/152.5

Probably oak, 43.2, x 63 (17 x Z413/io)

Ailsa Mellon Bruce Fund

Technical Notes: The painting is in good condition. There is

repaint along the join of the two horizontal boards. The face

and body of the fool as well as the faces of the woman and the

old man contain small, scattered areas of repaint. A portion

of the woman's chest, above the bodice, has been repainted,

and a painted crackle pattern has also been added. The fool

appears to have two pupils in his proper left eye. The pupil at

the right is more like the other eyes in the painting and is

probably the original. The left pupil might be a remnant of an

abraded shadow or an old restoration. On the reverse, at

lower right corner, is a partially destroyed red resinous seal.

Provenance: Probably Steven Wils the younger, Antwerp [d.

162.8], inventory of 6 July 1628, no. 62..1 Probably Herman

Neyt, Antwerp [d. 1642], inventory of 15-11 October 1642,

no. 4.2 Count James-Alexandre de Pourtalès-Gorgier, Paris

[d. 1855]. Heirs of Count James-Alexandre de PourtalèsGorgier (sale, Paris, 2.7 March 1865, no. 176). Countess de

Pourtalès.3 Count Edmond de Pourtalès, Paris, by 1888 [d.

i895].4 By descent to Countess de Pourtalès, Paris.5 Count

Bismarck, Paris and New York, by the late 1940s.6 (Spencer

A. Samuels, New York, by 1969.)

Exhibitions: Bruges, Hôtel de Gouvernement Provincial,

1902,, Exposition des primitifs flamands et d'art ancien, no.

359-

MASSYS' DEPICTION of an old man duped and

fleeced by a younger woman belongs to the general

category of unequal or "ill-matched" couples, which

can also include the pairing of old women and young

men. The theme can be traced in literature to antiquity

and the comedies of Plautus, and occurs with some

frequency during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance.

There are very few pictorial representations of the illmatched lovers until the late fifteenth century, when, in

northern Europe, it appears in prints by the Housebook Master and Israhel van Meckenem. The motif

achieved great popularity during the first half of the

sixteenth century. In addition to the Netherlandish examples there are numerous paintings by Lucas Cranach

the Elder and his school as well as by other German

artists. French and Italian examples are rarely encountered.7

Massys' painting makes elegantly clear the meanings of the theme. First, there is the idea that old age,

especially lecherous old age, leads to foolishness. The

English proverb "no fool like an old fool," has its

equivalent in the Dutch "hoe ouder hoe sotter" and the

German "Alter schutzt vor Torheit nicht."8 The pervading folly of the situation is further underscored by

the fool who participates in the deception; this is something of an innovation by Massys, for in other representations the fool is present as an observer or commentator.9

 Second is the notion that under the auspices

of Dame Venus women's sexual powers cause men to

behave absurdly and to lose both their wits and their

money.10 The deck of cards can allude to competition

of the sexes, morally loose or amorous behavior, and

the gain or loss of money through gambling. These

ideas were very popular in northern Europe in the late

fifteenth century and Marlier, Stewart, Silver, and

others have identified abundant literary sources for

Massys' painting in Sebastian Brant's Ship of Fools,

Erasmus' Praise of Folly and Colloquies, and in morality plays and rederijker poems.11

 Massys' Ill-Matched

Lovers is an important visual depiction of the kind of

moralizing satire that could be found in Antwerp, especially in the circle of Erasmus. Several authors have

stressed that the secular subject matter is a forerunner

of the increasing predominance given to the genre elements in the works of Jan van Hemessen, Marinus van

Reymerswaele, and the artist's sons Cornelis and Jan

Massys.12

The Ill-Matched Lovers demonstrates Massys' ability to assimilate elements from both Northern and Italian art. The half-length composition, which is almost

standard for this subject, is found in the depictions of

unequal couples by the Housebook Master and Israhel

van Meckenem as well as in paintings by Cranach and

his shop.13 The German compositions, however, tend

to be vertical. Marlier and Silver point out that the

young woman holding the old man's chin and even her

facial features derive from Lucas van Leyden's woodcut The Prodigal Son of c. 1519.14

 Both works include

a fool.

Many critics have pointed out that the distorted

leering visage of the old man is derived from the caricatures of Leonardo da Vinci, in particular the face at the

far left of the drawing of Five Grotesque Heads in

Windsor Castle (fig. i). The same face appears on the

right interior wing of Massys' Saint John Altarpiece of

1508-1511, in the Koninklijk Museum, Antwerp.

Leonardo himself seems to have created a composition

of Ill-Matched Lovers, known to us only from a drawing attributed to Joris Hoefnagel in the Albertina, Vienna, and a painting, now lost, by a follower of Massys

in which several grotesque figures are added to the

original couple to form a Festive Party.15 While it is

evident that copies of Leonardo's works were available

146 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Quentin Massys, Ill-Matched Lovers, 1971.55.1

QUENTIN MASSYS 147
Fig. i. Leonardo da Vinci, Five Grotesque Heads, pen and

ink, 160 x 205 mm, Windsor Castle, The Royal Library.

Copyright reserved. Reproduced by gracious permission of

Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. [photo: Royal Library,

Windsor Castle]

in Antwerp in the early sixteenth century, the exact

mode of transmission remains unknown to us.

The Ill-Matched Lovers is almost unanimously considered the only autograph version of this theme; only

Broadley questioned the attribution to Massys, finding

the crowded composition atypical.16 Silver assigns the

painting to the years 152.2-152.3 on the basis of stylistic similarities with Massys' figures in the Temptation of Saint Anthony of c. 1522, in the Prado, Madrid.

However, the absence of hard evidence makes it difficult to support so narrow a date.17

 The dependence on

Lucas van Ley den's Prodigal Son woodcut would tend

to put the panel after c. 1519. Since the modeling of the

skin tones is not as heavy as that in the Adoration of the

Magi of 1526 (Metropolitan Museum, New York),

perhaps the most acceptable and usable date for the

Ill-Matched Lovers is c. 1520/1525.18 One cannot entirely rule out a late date, though the female facial type

is different from that of the Virgin in the Madonna and

Child of 1529 in the Louvre.19

Copies of the Ill-Matched Lovers exist in a private

collection in Switzerland20 and in the Bibliothèque de

l'Université de Liège, Château de Colonster, Liège.21

The Liège panel, distinguished by a still life of food in

the foreground, has been dated to c. 1575. The influence of Quentin Massys' composition can also be seen

in paintings of the ill-matched couple in Douai,22 and

the Koninklijk Museum, Antwerp,23 that are in the

manner of his son Jan.

J.O.H.

Notes

i. Denucé 1932., 49. "Item, een stucxken van Meester

Quinten, daer een jonge vrouwe den ouden man om de bourse

vryt." Several authors, beginning with Hymans 1888, 205,

and including Cohen 1904, 71-72., Speth-Holterhoff 1957,

16, and Bosque 1975, 194, have associated the Ill-Matched

Lovers with the Card Players by Massys which was in the

collection of Peeter Stevens, Antwerp, in the first half of the

seventeenth century and is described in Alexander van Fornenberg's 1658 biography of Massys, Den Antwerpschen

Protheus, ofte Cyclopschen Apelles. . . . From Van Fornenberg's careful description, which reads in part, "Het Derde is

een Stuck van vier Figuren, twee Mans-persoonen, ende twee

Vroukens, staende om een Tafel, sijn doende met een uytheyms spel meest in Polen en Duyts-landt bekent" (quoted

from Briels 1980, 192., n. 149), it is clear that another painting was in Stevens' collection.

2.. Denucé 1932., 94. "Een stuck van Quinten, wesende

een out man met jonge vrouwe ende eene sot, in ebbenhoute

lyste, gen. no. 4."

3. Unverified, but annotated in the copy of the sales catalogue in the NGA.

4. Mentioned as owner in Hymans 1888, 2.05.

5. Spencer A. Samuels, in conversation n July 1984,

stated that the painting remained with the Pourtalès family

until after World War II.

6. Spencer A. Samuels, in conversation n July 1984 and

20 May 1985. It has not been possible to identify clearly

Count Bismarck.

7. Stewart 1979 discusses at length the literary sources

for the theme and catalogues the various types of Northern

representations of ill-matched couples in the late fifteenth

and early sixteenth centuries. Special mention must be made

of an ill-matched couple by Jacopo de' Barbari in the John G.

Johnson collection, Philadelphia Museum of Art. The panel,

which depicts a young woman with an old man, is dated

1503 and hence would be the earliest known painted example in the North; however, it seems to have had little effect on

subsequent images.

8. Stewart 1979, 55.

9. The fool as observer or commentator is found in Jacob

Cornelisz. van Amsterdam's painting of c. 1511 of a Young

Woman Selling Spectacles to an Old Man (Museum van

Oudheden, Groningen), in Lucas van Ley den's woodcut of c.

1519, The Prodigal Son, and in an etching after Lucas of c.

1520-1530, a Love Triangle in a Bedroom with a fool and a

figure of Death.

TO. For the deleterious influence of Dame Venus see Stewart 1979, 47—50; the closely related theme of the Power of

Women (Weibermacht) is discussed in Larry Silver and Susan

Smith, "Carnal Knowledge: The Late Engravings of Lucas

van Leyden," NKJ 2.9 (1978), esp. 251-154, 286-287, giving further bibliography on the subject. The symbolism of the

148 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
playing cards is touched upon by Silver 1974,113—114, who

notes that the topmost card is appropriately in the suit of

hearts. See also Stewart 1979, 68. The association of the

ill-matched lovers with death can be seen in Alciati, Emblematum Flumen Abundans, facsimile of the Lyons edition of

1551 (London, 1871), 127, which depicts under the heading

AMOR. Senex puellam amans a man lying on a sepulchre, an

owl on his chest, and in the distance at left an old man embracing a young girl. I owe this observation to Lynn Jacobs,

NGA department of northern european painting intern, summer 1979.

n.Marlier 1954, esp. 2.29—232; Stewart 1979, 23—24,

68-71; Silver 1974, esp. 115-123; Panofsky 1969, 214.

Brising 1909 is perhaps the first to associate the Gallery's

painting with Erasmus.

12. Boon 1942; Friedlànder 1947; Gert von der Osten

and Horst Vey, Painting and Sculpture in Germany and the

Netherlands 1500 to 1600 (Harmondsworth, 1969), 151.

13. For reproductions of the drypoint by the Housebook

Master, the engravings by Van Meckenem, and the paintings

by Cranach and his shop, see Stewart 1979, 139-161. Silver

1974, 109, believes that the theme of the ill-matched couple

developed independently in Germany and that Massys'

painting does not owe anything to Cranach. Stewart 1979,

144-145, seems to agree. Friedlànder 1947, 116, sees

Cranach learning about the theme during his stay in the

Netherlands in 1508/1509; however, the earliest ill-matched

couple by Cranach is a panel in the Szépmüvészeti Muzeum,

Budapest, dated to c. 1520-1522 (Stewart 1979, 144, cat.

no. 14).

14. Marlier 1954, 235; Silver 1974,111—112,.

15. On the Leonardo drawing and related works see Silver

1974, 109-111, figs. 7-10. Both Silver and Stewart believe

that Leonardo's ill-matched couple was influenced by Van

Meckenem's engravings. Cohen 1904 was apparently the

first to note the possible influence of Leonardo's caricatures

on the Ill-Matched Lovers.

16. Broadley 1961,147-148.

17. Silver 1974,106-107. The Prado Temptation of Saint

Anthony is the result of collaboration between Massys, who

did the foreground figures, and Joachim Patinir, who painted

the panoramic landscape and secondary figures. The dating

of the painting to c. 1522 is dependent in large part, therefore, upon an analysis of Patinir's stylistic development. See

Robert A. Koch, Joachim Patinir (Princeton, 1968), 21, 31-

32,44,49-51.

18. Bosschère 1907 dates the painting late; Baldass 1933

puts the picture after 1514, but does not consider it to be

among the very late works; Mallé 1955 dates the panel

1525-1530; Guttler 1968 tentatively proposes c. 1515-

1520; NGA 1975 gives c. 1515/1525; Bosque suggests

1520—1523; and Stewart 1979 accepts Silver's dating.

19. Bosque 1975* 2,19, %• 72»

20. Canvas, 48 x 65 cm. A photograph is in the NGA

curatorial files.

21. Inv. no. i, oak, 76.2 x 64 cm. Exh. cat. Brussels 1963,

no. 168, and Bosque 1975,194-195. See also Stewart 1979,

146, no. 19.

22. Wood, 72 x 115 cm. Repro. in Stewart 1979,147, no.

20, andMirimonde 1962, 554, fig. n.

23. Inv. no. 566, 41 x 56 cm. See Catalogue descriptif.

Maîtres anciens (Antwerp, 1970), 160, repro. Mirimonde

1962, 555, fig. 12. This painting, which is mentioned frequently in the literature, was attributed to Quentin Massys

and associated with the inventories of Steven Wils (1628) and

Herman de Neyt (1642) as well as possibly with the picture

described by Van Fornenberg in 1658. See above, n. i. However, Hymans 1888 described the Antwerp painting as an old

copy of the Ill-Matched Lovers.

References

1867 Michiels, Alfred. Histoire de la peinture flamande.

lo vols. Paris, 4: 338-339.

1883 Branden, F. J. van den. Geschiedenis der Antwerpsche Schilderschool. Antwerp: 68—70.

1888 Hymans, Henri. "Quentin Matsys," GBA 2e pér.

38:205.

1902 Hulin de Loo, Georges. Bruges. Exposition de

tableaux flamands des XIVe, XVe, et XVIe siècles. Catalogue

critique. Ghent: ici, no. 359.

1902 Hymans, Henri. "L'Exposition des primitifs flamands à Bruges." GBA 3e

 pér. 28: 303.

1903 Friedlànder, Max J. Meisterwerke der niederlàndischen Malerei des XV. und XVI. Jahrhunderts auf der

Ausstellungzu Brügge 1902. Munich: 24, pi. 64.

1903 Friedlànder, Max J. "Die Brügger Leihausstellung

von 1902." RfK 26: 155.

1904 Cohen, Walter. Studien zu Quentin Metsys. Munich: 71-72.

1905 Valentiner, W. "Oeuvres satiriques de Quentin

Metsys." Les Arts anciens de Flandre i : 2.

1907 Bosschère, Jean de. Quinten Metsys. Brussels:

116-117, 134-

1908 Brising, Harald. Quinten Matsys und der Ursprung

des Italianismus in der Kunst der Niederlande. Leipzig: 34,

50, no. 33, pi. 42.

1921 Delen, A. J. J. De Ontwikkelingsgang de Schilderkunst te Antwerp en. Antwerp: 28—29.

1924 Winkler, Friedrich. Die altniederlàndische Malerei. Berlin: 206.

1926 Delen, A. J. J. Metsys. Brussels and Paris: 78-79,

pi. 23.

1929 Friedlànder, Max J. "Meister Quentins Persônlichkeit." Cicérone 21: repro. 574.

1931 Marie, Raimond van. Iconographie de l'art profane. 2 vols. The Hague, 2: 477.

1932 Denucé, Jan. The Antwerp Art Galleries: Inventories of the Art-Collections in Antwerp in the i6th and iyth

Centuries. The Hague: 49, 94.

1933 Baldass, Ludwig. "Gotik und Renaissance im

Werke des Quinten Metsys." /¿?W/£«N.F. 7: 150—151,173.

1934 Friedlànder. Vol. 7: 63, no. 54, pi. 51 (vol. 7,

1971: 33, 66, no. 54, pi. 54).

1938 Wescher, Paul. "Ein 'Ungleiches Liebespaar' von

Hans von Kulmbach." Panthéon 22: 378.

1942 Boon, Karel G. Quentin Massys. Amsterdam: 53,

repro. 56.

1947 Friedlànder, Max J. "Quentin Massys as a Painter

of Genre Pictures." BurlM 89: 116.

1950 Larsen, Erik. "Un Quentin Metsys inconnu à New

York." RBAHA 19:171.

1954 Marlier, Georges. Erasme et la peinture flamande

de son temps. Damme: 228—234.

1955 Mallé, Luigi. "Quinten Metsys." Commentari 6:

106.

QUENTIN MASSYS 149
1957 Speth-Holterhoff, S. Les Peintres flamands de

cabinets d'amateurs au XVIIe siècle. Brussels: 16.

1961 Broadley, Hugh. "The Mature Style of Quinten

Massys." Ph.D. diss., New York University: 146-148, 2.2.2.-

2,2,3, pl-

 26a.

1962 Mirimonde, A.P. de. "Jan Massys dans les musées

de province français." GBA 6e pér. 60: 555—556, fig. io.

1962 Puyvelde, Leo van. La Peinture flamande au siècle

de Bosch et Brueghel. Paris: 301.

1963 Le Siècle de Bruegel. Exh. cat. Musées Royaux des

Beaux-Arts de Belgique. Brussels: 133, no. 168.

1968 Cuttler. Northern Painting: 42.3, fig. 567.

1968 Faggin, Giorgio. La pittura ad anversa nel Cinquecento. Florence: 16, fig. 13.

1969 Panofsky, Erwin. "Erasmus and the Visual Arts."

/WC/32:2i4.

1970 Musée Royal des Beaux-Arts. Catalogue descriptif.

Maîtres anciens. 3d éd. Antwerp: 160, no. 566.

1970 Virdis, Caterina Limen tari. "Moralismo e sátira

nella tardo produzione di Quentin Metsys." Storia dell'arte

20: 2i, fig. 2.

1974 Pigler, Andor. Barockthemen. 2d éd. 3 vols. Budapest, 2: 568.

1974 Silver, Lawrence. "The Ill-Matched Pair by Quinten Massys." StHist 6: 105—123, fig. i.

1975 NGA: 218, repro. 219.

1975 Bosque, (see Biography): 194, fig. 236.

1977 Silver, Larry. "Power and pelf: A new-found Old

man by Massys." Simiolus 9: 68, fig. 7.

1977 Silver, Larry. Review of Quentin Metsys by

Andrée de Bosque. In BurlM 119: 444.

1979 Stewart, Alison. Unequal Lovers. A Study of Unequal Couples in Northern Art. New York: 68—71, 146, no.

i8,fig.40.

1980 Briels, J. "Amator Pictoriae Artis. De Antwerpse

kunstverzamelaar Peeter Stevens (i590-1668) en zijn Constkamer."]hAntwerp: 192-194, fig. 25.

1984 Silver, Larry, (see Biography): io, 24, 79, 143-

145, 223-224. no. 35, pi. 129.

150 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Master of Frankfurt

c. 1460 —active 15208

The Master of Frankfurt was born in or close to 1460;

we know this because his age is given as thirty-six on

The Artist and His Wife (Koninklijk Museum, Antwerp), which is dated 1496. He was active in Antwerp

between 1493 and the 15205. The master's sobriquet

derives from two altarpieces originally located in

Frankfurt and it was first thought that he was a German. His style, however, is that of a Netherlander. On

the basis of the master's acquaintance with the art of

Jan van Eyck and Hugo van der Goes, Friedlánder

suggested that he came from Ghent, while Hoogewerff

stressed the master's associations with Lower Rhenish

art. Valentiner proposed that the master was identical

with Jan de Vos, who became a member of the Antwerp Guild in 1489; Delen proposed Hendrick van

Wueluwe, who entered the Guild in 1483 and died in

1533. The second hypothesis has found a greater degree of acceptance.

Four paintings form the core of the Master of

Frankfurt's oeuvre. The Festival of the Archers (Koninklijk Museum, Antwerp), was probably painted

shortly before 1493 for the Antwerp archer's guild.

The Artist and His Wife (Koninklijk Museum, Antwerp) is dated 1496. The Altarpiece of the Crucifixion

(StadePsches Kunstinstitut, Frankfurt) was probably

painted on or shortly before the death of the donor in

1504. The Altarpiece of the Holy Kindred (Historisches

Museum, Frankfurt), commissioned by the Dominican

church in Frankfurt, is dated to c. 1505 because of its

proximity to the crucifixion altarpiece. About fifty

paintings have been attributed to the Master of Frankfurt with varying degrees of certainty.

The Master of Frankfurt was a skilled and talented

painter whose early works are essential to an understanding of the state of painting in Antwerp at the end

of the fifteenth century, about which there is a paucity

of hard information. His later pictures show an ability

to incorporate the stylistic and compositional devices

of his younger and more progressive compatriots.

J.O.H.

Bibliography

Friedlánder. Vol. 7. 1929 (vol. 7,1971).

Hoogewerff, G. J. De Noord-Nederlandsche Schilderkunst. 5

vols. The Hague, 1939, 3: 19-2.5.

Valentiner, W. R. "Jan de Vos, The Master of Frankfurt."

AQ 7 (1945): 197-2.15-

Delen, A. J. J. "Wie was de 'Meester van Frankfort?' Miscellanea Leo van Puyvelde. Brussels, 1949: 74-88.

Goddard, Stephen. "The Master of Frankfurt and his Shop."

Ph.D. diss., University of Iowa, 1983.

Goddard, Stephen. "Documents Concerning Hendrik van

Wueluwe." ]bAntwerp (1983): 33-52,.

Goddard, Stephen. "The Man with a Rose, a new attribution

to the Master of Frankfurt (Hendrik van Wueluwe reconsidered). "]bAntwerp (1983): 53-83.

1976.67.1 (2701)

Saint Anne with the Virgin

and the Christ Child

c. 1511/1515

Oak (cradled), 73.5 x 57.5 (2.815/i6 x 2.210/i6)

painted surface: 72.5 x 56.7 (z89/i6 x zz

6

/i6)

Gift of Mr. and Mrs. Sidney K. Lafoon

Technical Notes: The painting, composed of two boards,

was restored in 1979-1981 and is now in secure condition.

Numerous small losses have been inpainted, and extensive

losses in Saint Anne's green robe as well as the gold cloud that

surrounds God the Father have been repainted.1

Examination with infrared reflectography reveals large

amounts of underdrawing in the figures. The manner of underdrawing in the drapery (fig. i) is somewhat different than

that in the faces and hands. There are changes in the position

of Saint Anne's and the Virgin's hands and in the heads of the

Christ Child and the Virgin. The absence of major pentimenti

suggests that changes were made at the drawing stage.2

Provenance: Private collection, Budapest. Mr. and Mrs. Sidney K. Lafoon, Washington, by or shortly before 1954.

SEATED IN A LANDSCAPE are Saint Anne, the

Christ Child, and the Virgin. Above the Christ Child

are the dove of the Holy Ghost and the figure of God

the Father. In the distance lie a harbor and fortified

buildings. The combination of Saint Anne, the Virgin,

MASTER OF FRANKFURT i5i
and the Christ Child, known in German as Anna Selbdritt, forms an iconographie unit that was enormously

popular in northern Europe in the late fifteenth and

early sixteenth centuries. This popularity was due in

part to the fact that the devotion to Saint Anne paralleled the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of the

Virgin, which became part of the liturgy in the late

fifteenth century.3

The countless images of the Anna Selbdritt grouping produced in Germany and the Netherlands may be

divided into two compositional types. The first may be

called hieratic and shows a monumental figure of Anne

holding the Virgin and Child in her lap or with the

Virgin seated at her feet. Saint Anne's status as the

mother of the Virgin is emphasized. A good example is

the center panel of the Saint Anne Altarpiece by Gerard

David and workshop (1942.9.17, q.v.). Saint Anne

with the Virgin and the Christ Child exemplifies the

second type, which might be called trinitarian. Here

Saint Anne and the Virgin are nearly equal in size and

importance and the Infant Christ is held between them.

Anne and Mary share in the care and instruction of

Christ. It is interesting that this grouping is juxtaposed

to the traditional triumvirate of Father, Son, and Holy

Ghost that is presented vertically.

There is no mention of Saint Anne with the Virgin

and the Christ Child in the literature and no record of it

having been exhibited prior to its entering the National

Gallery of Art. Nonetheless, there is little doubt that

this is a fine and typical work by the Master of Frankfurt. The attribution is based primarily on the proximity to one of the master's canonical works, the Altarpiece of the Holy Kindred (fig. 2.) of c. 1505 in the

Historisches Museum, Frankfurt. The gentler and

Fig. 2. Master of Frankfurt, center panel of the AItarpieceof

the Holy Kindred, Frankfurt, Historisches Museum [photo:

Historisches Museum]

g. i. Infrared reflectogram assembly of a detail of Saint Anne

ith the Virgin and the Christ Child, 1976.67.1 [infrared

flectography: Molly Paries]

more softly modeled facial types reflect the influence of

younger, more progressive artists working in Antwerp.

In particular, the face of the Virgin is very close to the

feminine visages of Jóos van Cleve in the period around

1511 and her robe recalls those worn by Quentin

Massys' Madonnas.41 date Saint Anne with the Virgin

and the Christ Child to c. 151 i-i 515, while Goddard

places it among the late works, c. 1518.5

Although there are no replicas of the Gallery's

painting, the composition was used several times by

the Master of Frankfurt and his shop. The center panel

of a triptych in the Bode-Museum, East Berlin, is particularly close, though it seems to be a product of the

workshop.6

J.O.H.
Master of Frankfurt, Saint Anne with the Virgin and the Christ Child, 1976.67.1

MASTER OF FRANKFUR T 15 3
Notes

1. Hoenigswald 1982, 5 5-62. The painting was restored

at least twice in the past and a memorandum of a conversation between Arthur Wheelock, curator of northern baroque

painting at the Gallery, and Mr. and Mrs. Sidney Lafoon on

30 June 1976 in curatorial files mentions the restoration by

Harold Cross in 1955.

2. Hoenigswald 1982, 56.

3. Hand 1982, esp. 48-50, and accompanying notes

which give bibliography on the iconography of Saint Anne.

4. Hand 1982, 47—48.

5. Hand 1982, 48; Goddard 1983, no—in, 389, no.

78.

6. Friedlánder, vol. 7 (1971), no. 130, pi. 102, as the

Master of Frankfurt; the center panel is reproduced in Hand

1982, pi. 9.

References

1982 Hand, John Oliver. "Saint Anne with the Virgin

and the Christ Child by the Master of Frankfurt," StHist 12:

43-52, figs. 1,6.

1982 Hoenigswald, Anne. "Saint Anne with the Virgin

and the Christ Child. Technical Investigation and Treatment." StHist 12: 55-65, figs. i-8.

1983 Goddard. (see Biography): iio-in, 153-154,

389, no. 78, fig. 136-

154

EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
Master of the Prado Adoration of the Magi

active probably third quarter of the fifteenth century

Hulin de Loo first isolated the work of this painter

from the general production of Rogier van der Weyden's workshop, hypothesizing that it was by the young

Hans Memling while a member of Rogier's shop. However, the paintings attributable to this hand, five scenes

from the infancy of Christ in Madrid, Washington,

Birmingham, and Glasgow and another scene from the

life of Saint Francis whose present whereabouts are

unknown, are instead by a contemporary of Memling.

This painter may indeed have belonged to Van der

Weyden's workshop, since his paintings display a familiarity with Rogier's mature work, particularly the

Columba altarpiece now in the Alte Pinakothek, Munich. He must have been of the same generation as

Memling and the Master of the Saint Catherine Legend,

the latter very possibly identical with Rogier's son Pieter van der Weyden. His paintings employ many of the

motifs found in their paintings. He has here been

named after The Adoration of the Magi in the Prado,

which formed the centerpiece of Hulin de Loo's group

of attributed works and is itself based on the central

panel of the Columba altarpiece.

M.W.

Bibliography

Hulin de Loo, Georges. "Hans Memlinc in Rogier van der

Weyden's Studio." BurlM 52, (1928): 160-177.

Friedlànder, Max J. "Ein Jugendwerk Memlings." Pantheon

7 (1931): 185-186.

1961.9.28 (1389)

The Presentation in the Temple

c. 1470/1480

Oak, 59x48.1 (2.34/i6xi815/i6)

painted surface: 57.9 x 47.8 (2i13/i6 x i813/io)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Technical Notes: The panel is composed of two vertical

members with a join approximately 18 cm from the left edge.

There are unpainted edges at top and bottom and on the right

side. The left side has been cut and a narrow strip affixed at

the edge. It is not clear how much, if any, of the design has

been cut off at this side. The back of the panel is covered by a

thin layer of wax. Removal of a small area of wax indicated

that the panel has probably been thinned. The back of the

panel appears to be beveled on all sides except on that corresponding to the front right edge.

Both architecture and figures are prepared with free, angular underdrawing in what appears to be black chalk, and

guidelines for the architecture at the left are incised into the

ground. The paint surface is in excellent condition, with only

a few small areas of loss and little abrasion.

Provenance: Count Johann Rudolf Czernin von Chudenitz,

Vienna, by 1823 [d. 18451.1 The counts Czernin, Vienna.

Count Eugen Czernin von Chudenitz, Vienna, until about

1954. (Georges Wildenstein and Co., New York, by 1954.)

Samuel H. Kress, New York, 1955.

Exhibitions: Vienna, Wiener Secession, 1930, CX. Ausstellung der Vereinigung bildender Künstler Wiener Secession:

Dreijahrhunderte vlámische Kunst 1400—1700, no. 31.

As RECOUNTED in Luke 2:22-38, after the birth of

Christ, Mary and Joseph traveled to the Temple in

Jerusalem in order to accomplish the ritual of purification after childbirth and to present their firstborn son

to the Lord as required by the law of Moses.2 In the

Temple they encountered the aged and devout Simeon,

who recognized the Christ Child as the Messiah, as did

the prophetess Anna. Simeon is shown taking the Christ

Child from the Virgin, who offers him at the altar,

while the prophetess Anna raises her hand in wonder.

Joseph holds a basket with the pair of doves, which

were the offering required to redeem a firstborn son.

One of the fashionably dressed girls holds a candle in

honor of the Purification of the Virgin.3

The Presentation in the Temple is very often included

in narrative cycles devoted to the Virgin or the infancy

of Christ. The architectural setting and the placement

and characterization of the figures in the Gallery's

painting derive from Rogier van der Weyden's Columba altarpiece in the Alte Pinakothek, Munich.4

 The

relationship to the Columba altarpiece was recognized

in 1841 by Passavant.5 In his catalogue of Van der

Weyden's paintings, Friedlànder attributed the Presentation to an excellent follower working about 1470,

who developed in parallel with Memling.6 In 1928

Hulin de Loo noted that two other panels, an Adoration of the Magi in the Prado (fig. i) and a fragmentary

MASTER OF THE PRADO ADORATION 15 5
Annunciation now in the Burrell Collection, Glasgow

(fig. 2.), were related in size and style and similarly

dependent on the Columba altarpiece, and he linked

them with the Presentation as parts of a portable altarpiece devoted to the infancy of Christ.7

 He considered

that the variations on Rogier's prototype in all three

panels pointed toward Memling's compositions and

that the two fashionably dressed girls in the Presentation were painted with particular elegance and sensitivity. Hence he concluded that the presumed infancy

altarpiece was the work of Memling while still in Rogier's workshop and that the figures in contemporary

dress were added by Rogier himself. This conclusion

has been widely accepted, though there has been some

disagreement on the attribution of the two girls to

Rogier.8 Hulin's hypothesis would place the panels by

or about 1464, the year of Rogier's death. To this

group of three infancy scenes, Friedlànder added a Nativity now in the Birmingham City Museums and Art

Gallery (fig. 3 ) and a Rest on the Flight into Egypt, also

in the Burrell Collection (fig. 4).9

A re-examination of these five panels shows that

Hulin de Loo's attribution of the group to the young

Memling cannot be supported. Nor is it necessary to

explain the portrait figures by the intervention of another hand, let alone that of Rogier van der Weyden.

Instead the five panels seem to be the work of a talented

southern Netherlandish painter active in the last third

of the century and strongly influenced by Rogier van

der Weyden. He probably knew the work of Memling

and was in contact with the Master of the Saint Catherine Legend, the latter possibly identical with Rogier's

son Pieter van der Weyden. The connections to Memling are found mostly in details, such as the shape of the

basket carried by Joseph in the Presentation or the

facial type of the black magus in the Adoration.TM However, the Rest on the Flight, a subject not found in the

surviving oeuvre of Van der Weyden, is clearly related

to the tiny vignette in Memling's Seven Joys of the

Virgin in Munich.11 Connections with the Master of

the Saint Catherine Legend include the floor tiles in the

Presentation and the landscape to the right of the Virgin's head in the Prado Adoration, as well as certain

similarities in the drawing of the figures noted below.12

I know of only one other painting apparently by the

same hand, a panel depicting an episode from the life of

Saint Francis formerly in a Belgian private collection.13

Others may come to light as Van der Weyden's workshop practice and legacy are studied in greater depth.

Although there is no documentary evidence concerning Memling's training or artistic activity before

he established himself in Bruges in 1465, it is presumed

 i. Master of the Prado Adoration of the Magi,

oration of the Magi, Madrid, Prado [photo: Prado]

Fig. 2. Master of the Prado Adoration of the Magi,

Annunciation, Glasgow, Burrell Collection
Master of the Prado Adoration of the Magi, The Presentation in the Temple, 1961.9.28

MASTER OF THE PRADO ADORATION 157
Fig. 3. Master of the Prado Adoration of the Magi, Nativity,

Birmingham, Birmingham City Museum and Art Gallery [photo: By

permission of the Birmingham City Museum and Art Gallery]

Fig. 4. Master of the Prado Adoration of the Magi, Flight into Egypt,

Glasgow, Burrell Collection

that he was associated with Rogier van der Weyden

before the latter's death in i^6^.14 In any case, Memling's earliest datable work, the Last Judgment altarpiece in Gdansk, completed by early 1473, reveals both

a knowledge of Van der Weyden's compositions and a

suave style already consistent with the younger master's

mature works.15 This style cannot be reconciled with

the group of paintings outlined above. In contrast to

the fine brushstrokes found in the work of Memling

and of some of Van der Weyden's followers, this group

is characterized by a relatively expressive application

of paint. Architecture is quite freely painted so that the

ground layer shows through in many areas, while some

details, such as the edges of bricks, are strongly highlighted. Skies are brushed in with thick strokes perpendicular to the horizon.16

 Facial features and hands are

frequently emphasized by a dark contour line. The underdrawing, too, is angular and forceful (fig. 5).17

 The

large heavy-lidded eyes and tapering knobby fingers

favored by this painter also suggest an effort to achieve

a stronger expression.

In spite of the evident stylistic relationship among

the five infancy scenes and the repetition of settings and

types such as that of Saint Joseph, some slight differences are detectable among them. In comparison to the

other three panels, the Adoration of the Magi and the

Rest on the Flight into Egypt are somewhat more

tightly worked up and more precious in their figure

types, particularly that of the Virgin. While this could

be explained by the participation of another artist, it

seems to me more likely that the paintings are the results of different stages of the same artist's development.

The panels do not necessarily come from a single

altarpiece. Their dimensions are similar, though the

Annunciation has been cut at the left and the Presentation probably also trimmed slightly at the left. The

backs of the panels do not provide a sure guide to their

original arrangement, since the reverse of the Birmingham Nativity, painted to simulate marble, is the only

one which appears to be undisturbed.18 Nevertheless,

the Nativity and the Presentation may well have formed

part of the same ensemble because both contain figures

of donors added over the background. The younger

girl in the Gallery's Presentation was painted over the

architecture, as is clear from the x-radiograph and

from infrared reflectography (fig. 5). Her companion

was part of the underdrawn design, but probably not

as a figure in contemporary dress; her underdrawn veil

and projecting headdress resemble those worn by the

maid in the corresponding scene from Rogier's Columba altarpiece.19

 The x-radiograph of the Birming158 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
Fig. 5. Infrared reflectogram assembly of a detail of

The Presentation in the Temple, 1961.9.28 [infrared

reflectography: Molly Paries]

Fig. 6. Master of the Prado Adoration of the Magi, Nativity,

x-radiograph of a detail, Birmingham City Museum and Art

Gallery [photo: By permission of the Birmingham City Museum

and Art Gallery]

ham painting shows that the lady behind Joseph was

added over the landscape (fig. 6). Her elegant costume

with its crisply pleated veil, now overpainted with a

nondescript brown habit, must have been a close counterpart to that of the two girls in the Presentation. That

these figures are indeed donors is confirmed by what

appears to be the tip of the lady's praying hands visible

above Joseph's shoulder in the x-radiograph. The distinctive character of these portrait figures as signaled

by Hulin de Loo is thus explained by their being inserted in a more conventional narrative. If the Washington and Birmingham panels do indeed come from

the same altarpiece, it may have been a triptych, perhaps including the Annunciation in Glasgow as the left

wing.

The Gallery's Presentation should probably be dated

about 1470 or perhaps a little later, based on such

elements of the girls' costume as the flat laced bodice of

the younger girl and the wide constricting belt of the

elder.20 Moreover, the brittleness with which the figure

of Simeon is drawn and the caricatured quality of his

flat profile are akin to the work of the Master of the

Saint Catherine Legend21 and other Brussels painters

in the generation after the death of Rogier van der

Weyden.

M.W.

MASTER OF THE PRADO ADORATION 159
Notes

1. Bóckh 1823, 294-295.1 have been unable to find the

basis for the statement made by Eisler 1977, 59-60, that

Czernin probably purchased the painting from Edward Solly.

2. See Dorothy C. Shorr, "The Iconographie Development of the Presentation in the Temple," AB 28 (1946),

17-32.

3. For the Church's commemoration of these events, celebrated in the Western church on 2 February, the feast of

Candlemas, see Shorr 1946,18-19.

4. Friedlànder, vol. 2 (1967), 69—70, 100, no. 49, pis.

70, 72.

5. Passavant 1841, 19. I am grateful to Lome Campbell

for bringing this reference to my attention. Waagen 1847,

186, first linked the painting to Memling, but later (1866, i:

306) considered it to be a workshop copy after Rogier's great

altarpiece, an opinion repeated by Crowe and Cavalcaselle

1872, 219, and Voll 1906, 287.

6. Friedlànder, vol. 2 (1924), 119, no. 85 (1967,77,101,

no. 85). He had earlier related it stylistically to the 1473

triptych of Jan de Witte now in Brussels; Friedlànder 1903,

14-

7. Hulin de Loo 1928, 160-177. For these two panels,

see Friedlànder, vol. 6a (1971), 15-16, 57, nos. 99A and C.

The Prado Adoration of the Magi, no. 1558, from the Escorial, measures 59.5 x 54.6 cm. The Annunciation, first mentioned in the Wynn Ellis collection (see Wells 1975, 13, no.

5), has been cut at the left and now measures 58.4 x 35.5 cm

(painted surface). For a cleaned state photograph showing

the hand and scepter of Gabriel, see Friedlànder [1947], 3.

8. Those who accept the Memling attribution include:

Friedlànder, vol. 6(1928), 18-20, no. 99, and vol. 14 (1937),

102 (vol. 6a, 1971,15-16, 36, 57); Glück 1930, 77; Baldass

1930, 132, considering the Presentation to be the work of

one hand (in 1942, 39-40, Baldass seemed to question the

panels' place in Memling's early work); Vollmer 1930, 375;

Destrée 1930,163; exh. cat., Bruges 1939, 65—66, under no.

2i ; Kress 1956, 128, 130, questioning the attribution of the

girls to another hand; Seymour 1961, 63-64; Walker 1964,

102; Corti and Faggin 1969, 93, and Deroubaix 1978/1979,

157-158.

De Tolnay 1941, 200, attributed the Presentation to

Vrancke van der Stockt. Hull 1981, 96,131, considered that

the author of the panels knew the works of both Rogier and

Memling. Davies 1972, 228, expressed some reservations

about the attribution, as did Eisler 1977, 57-60, who nevertheless concluded that the Presentation "may be the first

known work of Memling."

9. For the Rest on the Flight, see Friedlànder, vol. 6

(1928), 2i, 122, no. 32, and 1931, 185-186, sold with the

Schiff collection, Paris, 1905. The panel measures 59.7 x 51.7

cm. For Friedlànder's attribution of the Nativity to this

group, see Thos. Agnew &c Sons, Ltd, The Heathcoat Amory

Collection [exh. cat. The Fermoy Art Gallery] (King's Lynn,

1965), no. i. The panel measures 58.4 x 49.5 cm.

10. Hulin de Loo enumerated these connections, 1928,

165-172.

11. Friedlànder, vol. 6a (1967), 50, no. 33, pis. 82, 84.

Memling's panorama also includes the miracle of the wheatfield, shown in the distance of the Glasgow Rest on the Flight.

12. On the Master of the Saint Catherine Legend, see Deroubaix 1978/1979,153-172.1 am grateful to Lome Campbell for bringing this reference to my attention. The floor tiles

in the Presentation also appear, for example, in the Master of

the Saint Catherine Legend's Annunciation in Florence, in the

Louvre Annunciation attributed to Rogier, and in several

Madonnas by Memling and his school; Deroubaix, 160. The

section of the landscape with a ruined city wall also occurs in

an Adoration of the Magi by the Master of the Saint Catherine Legend, Deroubaix, fig. 5.

13. Photo A.C.L. A48398; repro. Patrick de Winter, "A

Book of Hours of Queen Isabel la Católica," BCMA 67

(1981), fig. 164.

14. See Rogier van der Weyden and Hans Memling Biographies.

15. The altarpiece was en route to Florence in April of

1473 when it was seized by ships of the Hanseatic League and

carried off to Gdansk. The inscription on one of the tombstones, 1C IAC . . . ANNO DOMI[NI] CGC LXVII has been interpreted as containing a reference to the year 1467, possibly

connected with the altarpiece's execution; see Jan Bialostocki, Primitifs flamands. Corpus. Les Musées de Pologne

(Brussels, 1966), 55-123, pis. LXXX-CCXXXI, and K. B.

McFarlane, Hans Memling, éd. Edgar Wind (Oxford, 1971),

esp. 25-27.

16. X-radiographs show that in both the Adoration and

Nativity the distant buildings have been brought up over the

rather untidy edge of the sky.

17. The Prado Adoration is the only other painting of the

group for which reflectograms were available. They are

markedly close to those of the Presentation in the way the

architecture, faces, and other elements are underdrawn and

in the forceful, angular strokes. For underdrawing in paintings by Memling, see under 1937.1.41, Madonna and Child

with Angels, n. 12, fig. 2, and 1952.5.46, Saint Veronica, figs.

1-2.

18. There are some traces of what appears to be a white

ground layer on the back of the Annunciation, as well as

patches of red and green paint that could be part of an original paint layer. The back is also beveled, including the trimmed

edge. The Rest on the Flight is cradled. The Presentation has

apparently been thinned (see Technical Note). The back of

the Adoration, which has what appears to be a relatively

recent bevel all around, is covered by a thin buff-colored

layer, evidently not original. Visible where this has been

scratched away is a dark reddish brown preparation, which

may or may not share the marbleized effect of the Birmingham panel.

Evelyn Silber and Stewart Méese of the Birmingham City

Museums and Art Gallery, Richard Marks of the Burrell Collection, Hugh Stephenson of the Glasgow Art Gallery and

Museum, and Maria del Carmen Garrido of the Museo del

Prado provided much kind assistance in connection with the

panels in their care, for which I am very grateful.

19. See n. 4 and also the Magdalene in Rogier's Braque

triptych; Friedlànder, vol. 2 (1967), 65-66, no. 26, pis. 47-

48.

The man whose head and shoulders alone are visible at the

right was probably also added during the course of work,

though the indications are less clear here. Although his head

is apparently not underdrawn, what look like underdrawn

lines for the column behind him run through his right cheek.

20. This type of square-necked dress with front lacing

may have been a fashion primarily for children; Margaret

Scott, The History of Dress Series. Late Gothic Europe

1400—1500 (London, 1980), 186—189. In a letter of 29 June

1982, in the curatorial files, she notes that the few examples

that she has found of "this type of dress, on girls and women,

160 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
do tend to point to the 14705, or even into the 14805"; she

cites Van der Goes' Portinari altarpiece and Memling's

Donne triptych, Reyns triptych dated 1480, Moreel triptych

in Bruges, and the Saint Ursula shrine (see her figs. 12.2., 12.3,

12.7 and Friedlânder, vol. 6a [1971], pis. 2.1, 72., 77). She

compares the cut of the elder girl's bodice and belt to those of

the wife in the triptych of Jan de Witte in Brussels, dated 1473

(her fig. 12,1).

2,1. Compare the elderly men in the Master of the Saint

Catherine Legend's Bruges Last Supper-, Anonieme Vlaamse

Primitieven [exh. cat. Groeningemuseum] (Bruges, 1969),

89-90, no. 40, repro. opp. 88.

References

1823 Bôckh, Franz Heinrich. Merkwurdigkeiten der

Haupt- und Residenz-Stadt Wien und ihrer nâchsten Umgebungen; ein Handbuch fur Einheimische und Fremde. 2

vols. Vienna, i: 295.

1841 Passavant, J. D. "Beitràge zur Kenntniss der altniederlàndischen Malerschulen des i5ten

 und i6ten Jahrhunderts." Kunstblatt no. 5: 19.

1847 Waagen, Gustav Friedrich. "Nachtráge zur Kenntniss der altniederlàndischen Malerschulen." Kunstblatt no.

47: 186.

1866 Waagen, Gustav Friedrich. Die vornehmsten

Kunstdenkmaler in Wien. 2 vols. Vienna, i: 306, no. 27.

1872 Crowe, J. A., and G. B. Cavalcaselle. The Early

Flemish Painters: Notices of their Lives and Works, zd ed.

London: 219.

1889 Leprieur, Paul. "Des répliques de l'Adoration des

Mages d'Utrecht." La Chronique des Arts et de la Curiosité

no. 40: 316.

1903 Friedlânder, Max J. Meisterwerke der niederlàndischen Malerei des XV. u. XVI. Jahrhunderts auf der Ausstellungzu Brügge 1902. Munich: 14.

1906 Voll, Karl. Die altniederlàndische Malerei von Jan

van Eyck bis Memling. Leipzig: 287.

1908 Katalog der Graf Czernin'schen Gemalde-Galerie

in Wien. Vienna: 5, no. 27.

1924 Friedlânder. Vol. 2: 119, no. 85 (vol. 2,1967: 77,

TOI, no. 85, pi. 106).

1928 Hulin de Loo, Georges. "Hans Memlinc in Rogier

van der Weyden's Studio." BurlM 52: 160-177, pis. Ill B, IV

A.

1928 Kaines Smith, S. C. "An Isenbrant for Birmingham." BurlM 53: 243.

1928 Friedlânder. Vol. 6: 18—20, 133, no. 996 (vol. 6a,

1971:15-16, 57, no. 996, pi. 125).

1930 Gluck, Gustav. "Drei Jahrhunderte vlâmischer

Kunst." Belvedere 9: 77, fig. 50.

1930 Eisler, Max. "The Exhibition of Three Hundred

Years of Flemish Art in Vienna." Apollo n: 188-189.

1930 Baldass, Ludwig. "Drei Jahrhunderte flamische

Malerei." Pantheon 5: 132, repro. 131.

1930 V[ollmer], H[ans]. "Memling." In Thieme-Becker

1930 Destrée, Jules. Roger de la Pasture - Van der Weyden. 2 vols. Paris and Brussels, i : 162-163, pi. 110.

1931 Friedlânder, Max J. "Ein Jugendwerk Memlings."

Pantheon 7: 186.

1933 Museo del Prado. Catálogo de las Pinturas. Madrid: 400—401.

1936 Wilczek, Karl. Katalog der Graf Czernin'schen

Gemaldegalerie in Wien. Vienna: 100-101, no. 27, fig. 18.

1937 Friedlânder. Vol. 14: 102, no. 99.

1938 Hulin de Loo, Georges. "Rogier van der Weyden."

In Biographie Nationale de Belgique. 29 vols. Brussels, 27:

col. 241.

1939 Exposition Memling. Exh. cat. Musée Communale. Bruges: 65-66.

1941 Tolnay, Charles de. "Flemish Paintings in the National Gallery of Art." MagArt 34: 200.

1942 Bergmans, Simone. "Visages du passé." Apollo.

Chronique des beaux-arts no. 12: 5—8.

1942 Baldass, Ludwig von. Hans Memling. Vienna: 40.

[1947] Friedlânder, Max J. Memling. Amsterdam: 10-

ii.

1952 Bergmans, Simone. La peinture ancienne, ses

mystères, ses secrets. Brussels: 86-87.

1953 Panofsky. ENP: 479.

1956 Kress: n, 128, 130, repro. 129, 131.

1956 Walker, John. "The Nation's Newest Old Masters." National Geographic Magazine no, no. 5: not paginated, repro.

1960 Flanders in the Fifteenth Century: Art and Civilization. Exh. cat. The Detroit Institute of Arts: 139.

1961 Seymour, Charles, Jr. Art Treasures for America.

London: 63—64, 213, pis. 57, 58.

1962 Neugass, Fritz. "Die Auflosung der Sammlung

Kress." Die Weltkunst^z, no. i: 4.

[1964] Walker: 102, repro. 103.

1965 Thos. Agnew & Sons Ltd. The Heath cote Amory

Collection. Exh. cat. The Fermoy Art Gallery. King's Lynn: 5.

1969 Corti, Maria, and Giorgio T. Faggin. L'opéra

completa di Memling. Milan: 93, no. 17, repro.

1972 Davies, Martin. Rogier van der Weyden. London:

228.

1975 Biermann, Alfons W. "Die Miniaturenhandschriften des Kardinals Albrecht von Brandenburg (1514-1545)."

Aachener Kunstblàtter 46: 63, 273.

1975 NGA: 232, repro. 233.

1975 [Wells, William]. Treasures from the Burr ell Collection. Exh. cat. Hayward Gallery. London: 13.

1977 Eisler: 57-60, figs. 52, 53.

1978/1979 Deroubaix, Christiane. "Un triptych du

Maître de la Légende de Sainte Catherine (Pieter van der

Weyden?) reconstitué." BInstPat 17: 157-158, 160, 166-

168.

1981 Hull, Vida Joyce. Hans Memlinc3s Paintings for

the Hospital of Saint John in Bruges. New York and London:

96,131.

1981 Winter, Patrick M. de. "A Book of Hours of

Queen Isabel la Católica." BCMA 67: 408,427, fig. 95.

MASTER OF THE PRADO ADORATION 161

24:375.
Master of Saint Giles

active c. 1500

The Master of Saint Giles takes his name from two

paintings in the National Gallery, London, Saint Giles

and the Hind and the Mass of Saint Giles. These and

the two panels in Washington, Episodes from the Life

of a Bishop Saint and the Baptism ofClovis (1952.2.14

and 15), are sections of a dismembered altarpiece and

together form the basis for reconstruction of the painter's oeuvre. Details of costume in the altarpiece sections indicate that the work dates from about 1500.

References to Parisian sites suggest that it was made in

Paris. The meticulous rendering of texture and light in

the paintings attributable to this master has been cited

as evidence of his Netherlandish background. More

specific Netherlandish connections include his adaptation, in Madonnas in the Lehman Collection, New

York, and the Musée des Beaux-Arts, Besançon, of

Madonna types developed by Rogier van der Weyden.

He was also the author of a portrait of Archduke Philip

the Fair in the Sammlung Oskar Reinhart, Winterthur,

which appears to be the original version of one of the

most common portrait types of this prince. Nevertheless it is not clear whether the Master of Saint Giles was

a French painter with Netherlandish training or a Netherlander who emigrated to France.

The surviving paintings attributed to him may have

been produced in a relatively short time span. Comparison of the four altar panels in London and Washington shows that he worked with the help of an assistant in the case of the Episodes from the Life of a

Bishop Saint (1952.2.14). Some paintings, notably the

two saints in the Abegg Stiftung, Bern, are characterized by more massive, simple forms, which may be

more pronouncedly French.

The work of the Master of Saint Giles, like that of

Michel Sittow, the Master of Moulins, or, in part, of

Jóos van Gent, represents an international extension of

the Netherlandish school.

M.W.

Bibliography

Tschudi, Hugo von. "London. Die Ausstellung altniederlàndischcr Gemalde im Burlington Fine Arts Club." RfK 16

(1893): 105-106.

Friedlánder, Max J. "Der Meister des hi. Àgidius." Amtliche

Berichte aus den kônigl. Kunstsammlungen 34 (1912.7

1913): 187-189.

Friedlánder, Max J. "Le Maître de Saint Gilles." GBA 6e per.

17(1937): 221-231.

162 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Master of Saint Giles and Assistant

surviving parts and the unusual selection of details of

setting and narrative. The altarpiece as a whole is discussed below in relation to The Baptism ofClovis. The

identification of these events from the life of a bishop

saint presents particular difficulties, however.

A stern-faced bishop is shown standing in front of a

cathedral with his hand raised in blessing and his retinue arrayed behind him. Of the crowd before him, the

figures in the right foreground are particularly prominent: the man who kneels as a supplicant at the feet of

the bishop, the woman who kneels or crouches with

her baby, and the boy standing beside her. In the center

background a possessed man is cured of a demon. Other

figures approach with gestures of amazement or prayer.

They include a blind street musician with his youthful

guide6 and a lame man. The simulated sculpture of

Saint Giles in an arched niche formerly in the back of

this panel does not survive (fig. 2).7

The setting for this narrative has long been recognized as the square in front of Notre-Dame in Paris.8

Julius Held demonstrated the accuracy with which this

setting was recorded. He noted that the bishop stands

not on the steps of the west front of Notre-Dame itself,

but on those of the smaller adjacent church of SaintJean-le-Rond, which served as a baptistry. The square

building on the right with tracery windows at its corner

is the Hôtel-Dieu with its chapel. Both the Hôtel-Dieu

and Saint-Jean-le-Rond were still standing in the eighteenth century and are known from engravings.9

 The

three west portals of Notre-Dame are shown steeply

foreshortened, with a view of the quai along the Seine

and the Left Bank visible beyond them.

Held identified the main episode depicted in the

Gallery's painting as Saint Remy converting the Arian

bishop Genebaut and the subordinate scene in the

background as the healing of the possessed blind man

of Chermizy.10 He regarded the white cloth around the

head of the kneeling figure as a reflection of the Oriental character of the bishop's Arian heresy. The explanation of the two Washington panels as episodes

from the life of Saint Remy and hence pendants to the

two Saint Giles scenes in London found general acceptance.11

 However, in 1965 William Hinkle, who

did not believe that 1952.2.15 represented the baptism

of King Clovis by Saint Remy, suggested that the bishop saint was Saint Loup or Leu of Sens.12

 He pointed

out that the feasts of Saint Leu and Saint Giles fall on

the same day, i September, and that they are the joint

MASTER OF SAINT GILES AND ASSISTANT I63

1952.2.14 (1097)

Episodes from the Life

of a Bishop Saint

c. 1500

Oak (cradled), 63.2 x 47.5 (i^/s x iSWio)

painted surface: 61.5 x 47 (i4l/4 x i8V2)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Inscriptions:

Inscribed under paint layer on wall of Hôtel-Dieu at right:

[U]oste..

Technical Notes: The panel has two vertical joins approximately 19 and 30 cm from the left margin. It was thinned and

cradled sometime before 1937. There are no traces of the

grisaille of Saint Giles formerly on the back of the panel.1 The

painting is in general in excellent condition. A few localized

losses have been inpainted, notably at the right margin and in

the sky between the two gables of the Hôtel-Dieu. Yet, in

general there is little abrasion and the brushstrokes appear

crisp and precise.

Examination with infrared reflectography showed underdrawing in both the architecture and figures. In the area of

the portal, the underdrawn design was quite closely followed

by the paint layers, though some perspective lines were also

drawn at the level of the buttress figures. The four foreground

figures facing the bishop were especially fully underdrawn

(fig. i). In the figures in the middle distance, the underdrawn

line was often more readily visible with the naked eye than

with infrared reflectography.

Provenance: Chevalier Alexandre de Lestang-Parade, Aixen-Provence, by iSz^.2

 Count Melchior de Lestang-Parade,

Aix-en-Provence (sale, Hôtel Drouot, Paris, 19—2.0 May

1882, nos. 105,106, as anonymous fifteenth century). Baron

E. de Beurnonville, Paris (sale, Hôtel Drouot, Paris, 21-2,2

May 1883, nos. 43, 44, as Burgundian School, fifteenth century). M. Watel, Paris, 1883.3

 (Paris art market, by 1937.)4

(Georges Wildenstein and Co., Paris and New York, 1938—

1946.) Samuel H. Kress, New York, 1946—1952.

THIS PANEL and 1952.2.15, The Baptism of Clovis,

together with The Mass of Saint Giles and Saint Giles

and the Hind in the National Gallery, London,5 are the

remains of an altarpiece containing multiple references

to French kingship and to the city of Paris. Despite the

complex associations of the panels, their meaning remains elusive because of the fragmentary nature of the
Fig. i. Infrared reflectogram assembly of detail of Episodes

from the Life of a Bishop Saint, 1951.2.14 [infrared

reflectography: Molly Paries]

patrons of the Parisian church of Saint Leu-Saint Gilles.

More specifically, Saint Leu was invoked against the

mal de peut, or fearfulness in children, and epilepsy,

and Hinkel stressed the role of children and possessed

people in the crowd. He argued further that Saint

Remy would not be depicted outside the metropolitan

church of Paris, but that this was an appropriate setting for Saint Leu, as Paris was a suffragan see of

Sens.13 He proposed that 195 z.2.14 was a votive panel

showing children, cripples, and epileptics propitiating

Saint Leu, and that it was intended to be displayed

separately from the other three surviving panels, probably in the Parisian church of Saint Leu-Saint Gilles.14

While the episodes depicted in the Gallery's painting are not inconsistent with the cult of Saint Leu, they

are not sufficiently specific in themselves to identify the

bishop saint.15 They might equally apply to Saint

Remy, to whom numerous incidents of miraculous

healing and eloquent mediation were attributed.16 It is

also possible that the picture represents the conversion

of the Parisian nobleman Lisbius by Saint Denis, who

was the city's first bishop.17 Moreover, the nature of

the link between the accurately depicted sites and the

narratives is not entirely clear from this or from the

other surviving panels. Although there are some points

of difference between this and the other panels, notably

in the type of niche framing the grisaille, there are not

sufficient grounds for considering it a separate votive

panel to Saint Leu. Dendrochronological examination

Fig. 2. Master of Saint Giles and Assistant, Saint Giles

(grisaille formerly on the reverse of 1952..2.14) [photo:

NGA]

164 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Master of Saint Giles and Assistant, Episodes from the Life of a Bishop Saint, 1952,.!.14

MASTER OF SAINT GILES AND ASSISTAN T 165
showing that the right boards of both Washington

panels came from the same tree makes this all the more

unlikely.18 Unless new information on the lost parts

of the altarpiece or its commission comes to light,

the identity of the bishop saint cannot be definitely

determined.

This picture stands somewhat apart from the other

panels because of stylistic differences. For Hinkle these

differences resulted from its function as a separate

votive panel.19 However, the more solid forms of The

Episodes from the Life of a Bishop Saint and the lack of

the complex, richly textured surfaces found in the

other three panels seem to be due to another painter

assisting the Master of Saint Giles. The underdrawing

in the foreground figures of the two Washington panels

is closely comparable (fig. i above and fig. 8 under

1952.2.15), suggesting that the same painter laid in the

design. The types and the painting technique of the

main figures approximate those of the Master of Saint

Giles, particularly in the furrowed face of the bishop

and in the way the hands of the bishop and kneeling

man are delineated with an angular, brown contour.

Yet the handling in general is drier. In the subordinate

figures and also in the architecture, a tendency toward

smooth, simplified form is evident. Whereas the Master

of Saint Giles applied paint with broken fluid strokes,

making numerous changes even in the upper paint

layers,20 the brushstrokes here are more precise, employing stippled modeling, and there are no changes in

the paint layer. The figures placed far back in the architectural setting typify what must be the difference between two hands: in the Baptism a few quick strokes

define the man seated in a doorway at the left margin,

while in this painting the figures at the distant quai or

on the roof of the Hôtel-Dieu are carefully rounded

and outlined. The second painter has a more pronouncedly French character, but his adaptations to the

style of the Master of Saint Giles in this painting would

make it difficult to identify his hand elsewhere.

M.W.

Notes

i. Friedlànder 1937, 2.2.3, noted that the panels had been

recently cradled. The thinness of the panel, .5 cm, makes it

most probable that the grisaille was planed away rather than

split. The intact panels in London are .7-8 cm thick.

z. [Porte] 1823,147.

3. According to Champeaux 1883,187.

4. Friedlànder 1937, 2.2,3.

5. With Saint Peter and a bishop saint depicted in grisaille

on their respective backs. For the London panels, see especially Davies 1945, 71-72. (3d ed. 1968, 107-113), and

David Bomford and Jo Kirby, "Two Panels by the Master of

Saint Giles," National Gallery Technical Bulletin i (1977),

49-56.

6. See Hellerstedt 1983,171, who links the musician and

his guide to a tradition of such figures.

7. Splits and joins visible in the photographs of the

grisailles formerly on the backs of the Gallery's panels make it

clear that the Saint Giles was on the back of the Episodes

from the Life of a Bishop Saint and the Saint Denis on the

back of The Baptism ofClovis.

8. Champeaux 1883,187.

9. Held 1932., 6-io, fig. 4, and Erlande-Brandenburg

and Kimpel 1978, fig. 16. 1952.2.14 has frequently been

cited as a document of the original state of the sculpture on

the west front of Notre-Dame; see references below.

ID. Held 1932, 3.

11. For example, Davies 1939, 27, Seymour 1961, 66,

and Réau, Iconographie, vol. 3, part 3, 1146, accept Held's

identification of the kneeling figure as the Arian bishop. More

frequently the scene has been identified in general terms as

Saint Remy blessing the people.

12. Hinkle 1965, 130-133. For Saint Leu, see Thurston

and Attwater, Butler's Lives of the Saints, 3: 459-460; Eugène Grésy, "Iconographie de Saint-Loup empruntée principalement aux monuments de l'art local," Bulletin de la société d'archéologie, sciences, lettres, et arts du département

de Seine-et-Marne 4 (1867), 65—71; and Réau, Iconographie,

vol. 3, part 2, 825—826.

13. He correctly pointed out that the cloth wound around

the head of the kneeling figure was not an Oriental turban,

but a kerchief meant to go under the furry hat that the man

has placed on the step. Compare the headgear of the distant

man who appears to the left of Clovis' head in The Baptism of

Clovis, 1952.2.15.

14. See Hinkle 1965, 139-144. He regarded the other

three panels as forming a stationary triptych. Other proposals for the arrangement of the four panels are discussed in

the following entry. One of the children is probably the blind

musician's guide, as Hellerstedt points out; see n. 6 above.

15. It seems probable too that this subject, like the other

three surviving panels, represents a specific narrative.

16. For the miracles of Saint Remy, see Thurston and Attwater, Butler's Lives of the Saints, 4: 1—3; Richier, La vie de

Saint Rémi, éd. W. N. Bolderston (Oxford, 1912); and William M. Hinkle, The Portal of the Saints of Reims Cathedral:

A Study in Medieval Iconography (New York, 1965), esp.

44-52.

The four figures in the right foreground may indeed refer

to the story of Genebaut, bishop of Laon, who after long

penitence received forgiveness through Saint Remy for having fathered two children, aptly named Larron and Volpille,

while holding high church office; Richier, Saint Remi, 210-

226. In a sixteenth-century tapestry in Reims, Genebaut is

shown in clerical dress, however; M. Sartor, Les tapisseries,

toiles peintes ó1 broderies de Reims (Reims, 1912), 146—147,

fig. 67.

17. An incident from his life would be appropriate because

of the grisaille formerly on the back of The Baptism ofClovis.

The story of Lisbius' conversion, denunciation by his pagan

wife Larcia, and martyrdom is summarized by Hinkle 1965,

118-121. This scene is not among the more frequently illustrated episodes in the life of Saint Denis, however; for illustrated cycles of his life, see Charlotte Lacaze, The "Vie de

Saint Denis" Manuscript (Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Ms.

fr. 2090—2092) (New York and London, 1979), 87—122.

18. See Appendix I.

166 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
19- Hinkle 1965, 140, 144. He attributed both paintings

to the Master of Saint Giles, but felt that this panel showed "a

more astringent linear quality and a harsher light and shade,

in contrast to the enveloping glazes and softer modelling in

the other panels." The distinction he made between the

courtly figures of the other three panels and the "contemporary Parisian townspeople" results, I think, from a difference

in hand rather than function.

Friedlànder 1937, 230, perceived a certain dryness in both

panels now in Washington, and Sterling 1942., 51, raised the

question of the collaboration of a French assistant in both

these panels.

20. See Bomford and Kirby 1977, 49—56, and the following entry.

References

1823 [Porte, Jean-Baptiste-François]. Aix ancien et moderne, ou Description des Édifices sacrés et profanes, Établissemens, Monumens antiques, du moyen âge et modernes,

Bibliothèques, Cabinets, Promenades d'Aix, etc., etc

Aix-en-Provence: 147.

1841 Gaszynski, C. In Mémorial d'Aix (13 June): 2.

1883 Champeaux, Alfred de. "Deux vues de la Cité de

Paris au XVe siècle." La Chronique des Arts et de la Curiosité

no. 23: 186—187.

1907 Reinach, Salomon. Répertoire de peintures du

moyen âge et de la renaissance (1280—1580) 2 vols. Paris, 2:

665, no. 2, repro.

1912/1913 Friedlànder, Max J. "Der Meister des

hl. Agidius." Amtliche Berichte aus den kônigl. Kunstsammlungen 34: 187-188.

1921 Conway, Martin. The Van Eycks and their Pollowers. London: 190.

1931 Lemoisne, P. A. Die gotische Malerei Prankreichs

vierzehntes und fünfzehntes Jahrhundert. Leipzig: 113.

1932 Held, Julius. "Zwei Ansichten von Paris beim

Meister des heiligen Agidius." JbBerlin 53: 3-10, 12, 14,

fig. i.

1934 Jong, Johannes Assuerus Bernardus Maria de.

Architektuur bij de Nederlandsche Schilders vóór de Hervorming. Amsterdam: 53—54, fig. 47.

1937 Friedlànder, Max J. "Le Maître de Saint-Gilles."

GBA 6e pér. 17: 223-225, 230, figs. 6,9.

1938 Sterling, Charles. La peinture française: les primitifs. Paris : 13 5, fig. 171.

1938 Dimier, Louis. "Les primitifs français." GBA 6e

pér. 20: 234-235.

1939 Réau, Louis. La peinture française du XIVe au

XVIe siècle. Paris: 14, figs, n, 12.

1939 National Gallery, London. Supplement to the

1929 Catalogue Including Accessions to the End of 1937.

London: 27.

1942 Sterling, Charles. Les peintres du moyen âge.

Paris: 51, 64, pi. 141.

1945 Davies, Martin. National Gallery Catalogues.

Early Netherlandish School. London: 71—72 (2d éd., 1955:

82-83; 3d éd., 1968,108-109).

1946 Davies, Martin. Paintings and Drawings on the

Backs of National Gallery Pictures. London: xi.

1949 Ring, Crete. A Century of French Painting 1400—

1500. London: 33, 230, no. 24ob., repro. 25.

1949 Hébert, Michèle. "Les monuments parisiens dans

l'oeuvre du Maître de Saint Gilles." Fédération des sociétés

historiques et archéologiques de Paris et de l'Île-de-France.

Mémoires i: 213-214, 224-231^!. 10.

1950 "Meister des hl. Agidius." In Thieme-Becker 37:

6-7.

1951 Kress: 15,186-188, no. 82.

1954 Tietze, Hans. Treasures of the Great National

Galleries. New York: 117,123-124.

1959 Réau. Iconographie. Vol. 3, part 2: 1146.

1959 Sauerlànder, Willibald. "Die kunstgeschichtliche

Stellung der Westportale von Notre-Dame in Paris." Marburger Jahrbuch fur Kunstwissenschaft 17: 22.

1961 Seymour, Charles Jr. Art Treasures for America.

London: 66—67,

 2-°2

-? 2,18, fig. 59.

1963 Châtelet, Albert, and Jacques Thuillier. French

Painting from Pouquet to Poussin. Geneva: 92—93.

1964 Walker: 108, repro. 305.

1965 Hinkle, William M. "The Iconography of the Four

Panels by the Master of Saint Giles." /WC/ 28: iio, 130-

133,pis. 19, 2ie-f.

1966 Hinkle, William M. "The King and the Pope on

the Virgin Portal of Notre-Dame." AB 48: 6, 7, fig. 6.

1966 Laclotte, Michel. Primitifs français. Paris: 45.

1967 Greenhill, Eleanor S. "The Provenance of a Gothic

Head." AB 49: 103-104,106, fig. 15.

1973 National Gallery, London. Illustrated General

Catalogue. London: 444.

1975 NGA: 224, repro. 225.

1977 Eisler: 239-243, fig. 230, text figs. 53, 54.

1978 Erlande-Brandenburg, Alain, and Dieter Kimpel.

"La statuaire de Notre-Dame avant les destructions révolutionnaires." Bulletin Monumental 136: 217, 222, 230, 264,

fig-4-

1983 Hellerstedt, Kahren Jones. "The blind man and his

guide in Netherlandish painting." Simiolus 13: 171, fig. 11.

MASTER OF SAINT GILES AND ASSISTANT I67
Master of Saint Giles, The Baptism ofClovis, 1952.2.15

l68 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Master of Saint Giles

active c. 1500

1952.2.15 (1098)

The Baptism of Clovis

c. 1500

Oak (cradled), 63.3 x 46.7 (z47/sx i83/s)

painted surface: 61.5 x 45.5 (z^fa x 18)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Technical Notes: Like 1952.2.14, the panel was thinned and

cradled sometime before 1937, leaving no traces of the grisaille formerly on the back. There are two vertical joins approximately 15 and 30 cm in from the left edge and a split

approximately 39 cm from the left edge. These correspond to

the joins and split on the grisaille of Saint Denis, presumably

destroyed (fig. i). The paint surface is in good condition.

There is some fill and inpainting along the split where it

extends down through the head of the priest holding the

bishop's robe. There are many scattered small losses in the

paint and ground layer, with a larger loss in the lower right

corner. Rather extensive abrasion has resulted in the loss or

breaking up of some of the fine highlights and transparent

glazes in areas such as the heads of the priests at the right and

of the king, queen, and man to her left. Two small losses, to

the left of the left eye and beside the right eyebrow of the

queen, have probably not altered her expression unduly.1

The somewhat disturbed appearance of the surface is due in

part to extraordinarily extensive changes in every area of the

painting, including a complete reworking of the setting and a

repositioning of the heads of most of the foreground figures.

These changes were made at all stages of the painting process,

in the underdrawing and in the lower and upper paint layers,

and are discussed in the text below.

Provenance: Same as 1952.2.14.

THE BAPTISM OF CLOVI S and 1952.2.14, Episodes

from the Life of a Bishop Saint, have been together as

companion pieces since the early nineteenth century.2

They originally had figures of a beheaded bishop saint,

presumably Saint Denis, and Saint Giles, painted in

grisaille on their respective backs (fig. i above and fig.

2 under 1952.2.14). The size of the panels, the type of

setting, their execution, and the selection of grisaille

figures all link them to Saint Giles and the Hind and the

Mass of Saint Giles in the National Gallery, London

(figs. 2 and 3),3 as was first recognized by Salomon

Reinach and Max Friedlànder.4 The London panels

depict the two best-known episodes from the life of

Saint Giles: the accidental wounding by the hunting

party of Wamba, king of the Goths, of the hind whose

milk nourished Saint Giles at his hermitage near Aries,

and the miraculous pardon of King Charles of France,

through the mediation of Saint Giles during the celebration of mass.5

 Different versions of the second episode identify the king as Charles Martel or, anachronistically, as Charlemagne. In the London painting he

is identified as Charlemagne by the imperial form of his

double-arched crown.6 These two panels, which were

reunited in the National Gallery, London, only in

1933, have grisaille figures of Saint Peter and a bishop

saint resembling the main figure in 1952.2.14 on their

respective backs (figs. 4, 5). A number of factors, most

notably the apparent lack of narrative scenes corresponding to the grisailles of Saint Peter and Saint

Denis, suggest that other panels once existed. Although several reconstructions of the altarpiece have

been suggested, it is difficult to form a clear idea of its

arrangement without the missing sections.

This panel shows the baptism of an adult king by a

bishop. A woman stands immediately behind the king,

while two courtiers beside her appear to take a more

active role in supporting him. The scene is set just inside the doorway of a church, and other courtiers look

on from the porch and from the organ loft above. Julius

Held first recognized the setting as the Sainte-Chapelle,

the chapel attached to the royal palace on the île-de-laCité in Paris.7

 The painting shows a mixture of elements

from the upper and lower chapels. Thus the alternating

lozenges of fleurs-de-lis and castles on the socle of the

trumeau in the painting are those of the lower chapel,

which is also the source for the porch opening at ground

level. The statue on the trumeau is the blessing Christ

from the entrance to the upper chapel, however, not

the Madonna and Child from the lower entrance.8 The

height of the window, the attached supports framing it,

and the cornice below resemble those of the upper

chapel.9 The underdrawing and first paint layers made

visible in infrared reflectography and x-radiography

accurately portray the lower chapel, however (figs. 6,

7). Thus, the arcade, which was the first design for the

upper right corner of the picture, corresponds to the

northwest corner of the lower chapel, rendered precisely as it appears to a person standing within the

chapel about ten feet from the portal and opposite the

south jamb of the door.10 The placement of the arcade

MASTER OF SAINT GILES I 69
Fig. i. Master of Saint Giles and Assistant, Saint Denis

(grisaille formerly reverse of 195^.2..!5) [photo: NGA]

and the details of capitals and moldings are recorded

with a degree of accuracy equal to that of the depiction

of Notre-Dame, Paris, in the Episodes from the Life of

a Bishop Saint and of the royal abbey of Saint-Denis in

the Mass of Saint Giles. Why the architecture was

transformed to approximate the upper chapel is not

clear, but perhaps, with its direct access from the palace, this was considered a more appropriate royal setting than the lower chapel.

The portraitlike rendering of architectural settings

in three of the panels may well result from the commission rather than from the painter's own tendencies.

Setting does not play the same role in any of the other

surviving paintings by the Master of Saint Giles.11

While the choice of such specific settings must be

related to the narratives depicted and to the circumstances of the commission, the precise nature of the

connection is unclear. The subject of this panel has

usually been interpreted as the baptism of Clovis.12

This Merovingian king of the Franks was converted

through the efforts of his wife Clothilde and Saint

Remy, bishop of Reims, who baptized him.13 He thus

became the first Christian monarch of France and, in

the eyes of his descendants, the first to enjoy God's

Fig. 2,. Master of Saint Giles, Saint Giles and the Hind, London,

National Gallery [photo: Reproduced by courtesy of the Trustees,

The National Gallery, London]

Fig. 3. Master of Saint Giles, The Mass of Saint Giles, London,

National Gallery [photo: Reproduced by courtesy of the Trustees,

The National Gallery, London]
Fig. 4. Master of Saint Giles and Assistant, Saint Peter

(reverse of The Mass of Saint Giles), London, National

Gallery [photo: Reproduced by courtesy of the Trustees,

The National Gallery, London]

Fig. 5. Master of Saint Giles, A Bishop Saint (reverse of

Saint Giles and the Hind), London, National Gallery

[photo: Reproduced by courtesy of the Trustees, The

National Gallery, London]

special relationship with the French monarchy. For,

according to tradition, at his baptism the chrism required to anoint the royal catechumen was missing,

whereupon, at Saint Remy's prayer, a dove bearing a

vial of holy oil descended from heaven. The ampoule

and holy oil used for the consecration of French kings

were claimed to be those miraculously given at Clovis'

baptism.14 Another tradition whereby the fleur-de-lis

device was sent to Clovis from heaven through the

intermediary of a holy hermit further enhanced his position as a founder of the special privileges of French

kings.15

William Hinkle has questioned this identification of

the subject of the Gallery's painting, since the miracle

of the holy ampoule is not depicted here. He suggested

that the painting represented instead the baptism of the

Parisian nobleman Lisbius by Saint Denis, who was

formerly depicted in grisaille on the back of this same

panel.16 While the omission of the dove descending

with the holy ampoule is puzzling, the baptism of an

adult French king can only represent Clovis. That the

catechumen is a king of France is indicated by his

crown with its large fleur-de-lis ornaments and flat

jewel-studded surface closely resembling the French

coronation crown. It is less accurately portrayed here

than is the crown worn by Charlemagne in the London

Mass of Saint Giles—to which the double arches of the

imperial crown have been added—but must nevertheless belong to the same type.17

 While a dove or, more

rarely, an angel is usually shown bringing the holy

ampoule, a number of other representations of the

event lack dove or ampoule.18 It is possible too that one

of the lost panels was devoted to the miracle of the holy

chrism.19 Moreover, in the Gallery's painting it is the

cleansing rather than the anointing aspect of the Baptism ritual that is represented.

In this context it is noteworthy that this painting is

especially closely linked with the Mass of Saint Giles.

In both, the interior of a royal church is depicted with a

tilted ground plane permitting the inclusion of much

historicizing detail. The panels feature Clovis and

Charlemagne, both symbols and protectors of the

French monarchy and its special relation to God.20

Both scenes contain references to the canonized Louis

IX: his major building project of the Sainte-Chapelle in

this painting and the ciborium above his tomb visible

behind the high altar in the Mass of Saint Giles.21

These two panels, in particular, with their emphasis on

MASTER OF SAINT GILES i7i
Fig. 6. Infrared reflectogram assembly of detail of The Baptism ofClovis,

1952.z.15 [infrared reflectography: Molly Paries]

the central sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist,

may have expressed the close connection between the

king of France, the "most Christian king," and the

Church.

The original arrangement of the altarpiece is far

from clear, in spite of the links that can be made between the scenes of baptism and communion, between

the two episodes from the life of Saint Giles, and between the front and back of the various panels. The

grisaille reverses strongly suggest that the altarpiece

had movable wings. On none of the panels do the front

and the back depict the same saints, and the inclusion

of Saint Peter and Saint Denis among the grisaille figures suggests that other, presumably narrative, panels

are missing. Although the reverse of the Episodes from

the Life of a Bishop Saint presents additional difficulties

in that it shows Saint Giles in an arched niche with a

shallow molding rather than in a plain rectangular

niche, it may be significant here that the artist evidently

experimented with different arched niches on the reverse of Saint Giles and the Hind.22

Julius Held suggested that the panels formed two

complementary diptychs.23 Friedlânder proposed that

the panels flanked the lost middle section of a triptych,

with two narrative scenes on each wing.24 His arrangement did not take into account the arched niche formerly on the back of 1951.2.14. Martin Davies questioned Friedlànder's proposal. He felt that the perspective of the niches implied a central position for Saint

Giles and the Hind and a position on the right-hand

side for the Mass of Saint Giles, as the figure of Saint

Peter on its reverse turns slightly to the right. He first

proposed that the two London panels occupied these

positions in a triptych with fixed wings, while the

Washington panels belonged to a separate altarpiece,25

but by 1968 gave up this idea, stating that "it seems

best to have reserves about all the suggestions put forward so far."26

 In 1965 Hinkle proposed that 1951.2.

14 was a separate votive panel dedicated to Saint Leu

while the other three panels made up a triptych with

fixed wings.27 Eisler tentatively suggested six scenes in

two registers, allowing for a row of arched niches at the

171 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
top, and assuming that the altarpiece was stationary.28

Given that the ensemble cannot be reconstructed from

the surviving panels, Eisler's proposal of an upper register with grisaille saints in arched niches is useful,

though it seems likely that the panels were movable.

Apart from the question of the presumed missing

panels and their arrangement, the parts of the altarpiece cannot be adequately interpreted given our present lack of knowledge about the commission and its

destination. Hinkle suggested that the panels were

made for the church of Saint Leu-Saint Gilles in Paris,

just within the Porte Saint-Denis.29 If the miracleworking bishop depicted in 1952.2.14 and on the back

of Saint Giles and the Hind (fig. 5) should not be Saint

Leu, then there would be little justification for their

placement in this church. Montesquiou-Fezensac and

Gaborit-Chopin raise the question of whether the

panels might have constituted the table peint protecting

the gold decoration of the high altar at Saint-Denis.30

However, there is no evidence to support this hypothesis, beyond the portrait of the abbey and its treasures

in the London painting. Indeed, the unusual choice of

narratives and settings, the complex royal references,

and the multitude of portraitlike onlookers suggest

that the patron or patrons belonged to high official

circles.31 With the exception of the abbot Saint Giles,

the altarpiece seems to be dedicated to bishop saints

and celebrates their miracles, especially those in support of the kings of France. The altarpiece may have

been commissioned by a high ecclesiastical official or

body possibly to express ties to the monarchy.32 In any

case, judging by the costume shown in all four panels,

the altarpiece must have been painted about I5OO.33

M.W.

Notes

1. Eisler 1977, 242, suggested that her dour expression

was due to restoration.

2. Alexandre de Lestang-Parade, in whose collection

they are first mentioned, was an amateur miniature painter

active in Paris and Aix-en-Provence; Georg Kasper Nagler,

Neues allgemeines Kunstler-Lexicon, 22 vols. (Munich,

1835-1852), 7:466.

3. Nos. 1419 and 4681, with painted surfaces measuring

61.5 x 46.5 (24V4 x i8V4) and 61.5 x 45.5 (24V4 x 18)

respectively; see Davies 1945, 71-72 (3d ed. 1968, 107-

113), and David Bomford and Jo Kirby, "Two Panels by the

Master of Saint Giles," National Gallery Technical Bulletin i

(1977), 49-56. The Mass of Saint Giles was first recorded in

the collection of the Due de Tallará in 1752 by Dezallier

d'Argenville, Voyage pittoresque de Paris, 2d ed. (Paris,

1752), 213, and in his sale, Paris, 22 March 1756, no. 132, as

by Durer. No mention of the other London panel is known

before the Thomas Emmerson sale, Christie's, London, 27

May 1854, no. 63.

4. Reinach 1907, 2: 665, 744, and Friedlánder 1913,

cols. 187-188.

Fig. 7. Master of Saint Giles, The Baptism ofClovis,

1952.2.15, x-radiograph

5. Réau, Iconographie, vol. 3, part 2, 593-597 and V.

Mayr in Lexikon der christlichen Ikonographie, 8 vols. (Freiburg-im-Breisgau, 1968-1976), 5: cols. 51-54. Saint Giles,

who is said to have died about 720, was the first abbot of the

monastery of Saint-Gilles in Provence.

6. Hinkle 1965,111-112, and Robert W. Scheller, "Imperial themes in art and literature of the early French renaissance: the period of Charles VIII," Simiolus 12 (1981/1982),

8—10. See also n. 17 below.

7. Held 1932,10-13. Champeaux 1883,187, had identified the setting as the interior of Notre-Dame.

8. Compare the view out of the lower portal in Held

1932, fig. 5. For the upper porch and its trumeau statue, see

Bildarchiv Marburg +1 131435.

9. The painting lacks the richly decorated dado of the

upper chapel; see Jean Bony, French Gothic Architecture of

the 12th and i$th Centuries (Berkeley, Los Angeles, and

London, 1983),fig. 363.Held 1932, n, noted that the organ

of 1493 was replaced in 1550 with a larger one known to

have been placed against the entrance wall of the upper

chapel.

ID. I am much indebted to Caroline Bruzelius and Stephen

Murray for the identification of the underdrawn architecture

(letter of 19 July 1983 and statement transmitted by Molly

Paries, both in curatorial files).

This is the most striking of several changes made in the

MASTER OF SAINT GILES 173
setting and accessories of the Gallery's painting. Its effect can

only be fully understood on comparing the drawing and

painting with the actual view from the chapel entrance;

however, see also Bony 1983, fig. 366 (as in n. 9 above). In

earlier stages of work on the painting the view through the

portal ended in a crenellated wall rather than in the palace

buildings now represented (fig. 8): a row of figures, larger in

scale than those presently visible through the portal, stood in

front of this wall. To suggest the portal of the more lofty

upper chapel, the painter simply reduced the scale of these

figures. Thus the painted moldings and columns of the porch

agree with the actual view through the doorway of the lower

chapel, but the scale of the figures, particularly those visible

through the north side of the door, is now much reduced.

Among changes in other areas, the king stood in a hexagonal font on which a scene of the Baptism of Christ was

underdrawn (fig. 9) and a hexagonal canopy or tabernacle,

apparently corresponding to the shape of the font, was underdrawn above the king's head. X-radiography indicates

that the wall and arcade were also prepared in paint.

ii. For the painter's oeuvre, see Friedlânder 1937, 2,2,1—

231.

iz. First suggested in the catalogue of the Beurnonville

sale; see provenance under 1952.2.14.

13. The baptism of Clovis probably took place about 490;

for the historical Clovis, see Georges Tessier, Le Baptême de

Clovis (Paris, 1964).

14. The earliest account of Clovis' baptism to include this

miracle is the late ninth-century Life of Saint Remy by

Hincmar; see Francis Oppenheimer, The Legend of the

Sainte Ampoule (London, n.d.), 27—37.

15. Sandra Hindman and GabrielleM. Spiegel, "The Fleurde-lis Frontispieces to Guillaume de Nangis's Chronique

Abrégée-. Political Iconography in Late Fifteenth-Century

France," Viator 12 (1981), 381—400.

16. Hinkle 1965, esp. 113-124, as part of the most comprehensive study yet devoted to the iconography of the four

panels. For Hinkle the setting of the Mass of Saint Giles in the

abbey of Saint-Denis rather than in the cathedral of Orléans

argues for a dependence upon the text of the Life of Saint

Denis by Yves, a fourteenth-century monk of the abbey, in

which this exceptional location is mentioned. By extension,

the subject of the baptism scene and its Parisian setting would

necessarily derive from the same text. I find that in all four

panels the principle linking setting and narrative is unclear,

but doubt that this principle would have been supplied by

close adherence to the more circumstantial aspects of a specific text.

The adult Lisbius was baptized in Paris, while the baptism

of Clovis took place in Saint Remy's see of Reims. Yet the

Sainte-Chapelle's function as the palatine chapel may have

determined its use as the setting here. Accounts of Clovis'

baptism stress the procession from the royal palace to the

church, the way having been decorated by Queen Clothilde;

see Richier, La vie de Saint Remi, ed. W. N. Bolderston (Oxford, 1912), 11. 3819-3872.

The reason the chrism could not be found varies from one

account to another; see Colette Beaune, "Saint Clovis: histoire, religion royale et sentiment national en France à la fin

Fig. 8. Infrared reflectogram assembly of detail of The

Baptism of Clovis, 1952.2.15 [infrared reflectography:

Molly Paries]

174 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
du moyen âge" in Le métier d'historien au moyen âge: études

sur l'historiographie médiévale, éd. Bernard Guenée (Paris,

1977), 146. It is interesting that the box of holy oils held by

the deacon at the extreme right of the Gallery's painting was

apparently an afterthought. X-radiography and infrared reflectography show that the cope of the figure holding the

bishop's robe originally extended over most of the area now

occupied by the box.

17. For this and related French royal crowns, see Danielle

Gaborit-Chopin, "Les couronnes du sacre des rois et des

reines au trésor de Saint-Denis," Bulletin Monumental 133

(1975),

 I^5~I

74- The double arches added to the crown in

the London panel and the different forms and connotations

of ducal, royal, and imperial crowns are discussed by Scheller

as in n. 6 and in "Ensigns of authority: French royal symbolism in the age of Louis XII," Simiolus 13 (1983), esp.

103-115.

18. From her work on illustrations of the Grandes Chroniques de France, Anne D. Hedeman cites the following representations without reference to the holy ampoule in copies of

the Chroniques. Brussels, Bibliothèque Royale, Ms. 2, fol. 2

(c. 1390—1410) and Ms. 5, fol. 13 (c. 1330—1340). Paris,

Bibliothèque Nationale, Ms. fr. 2605, fol. 13 (Master of

Marguerite d'Orléans, c. 142.5); Ms. fr. 10135, f°l-

 J3 (c

-

1380-1400, from the library of Charles VI); and Ms. fr.

20352-53, fol. 6v. (Master of the Cité des Dames and other

hands, c. 1410—1420); letter of 5 March 1984 in curatorial

files.

Eisler cites a woodcut illustration of the baptism and victories of Clovis from a 1488 edition of La Mer des Histoires

in which the dove and ampoule are also omitted from the

baptism scene proper; Eisler 1977, 242, text fig. 52. However, on the right side of the woodcut an angel brings the

fleur-de-lis to the hermit while a dove descends with what

appears to be the holy ampoule.

19. Eisler 1977, 242, also made this suggestion.

20. On the cult of the uncanonized "Saint Clovis," see

Beaune 1977, 139-156 (see n. 16 above). For the cult of

Charlemagne, who was canonized in 1165, see Mireille

Schmidt-Chazan, "Histoire et sentiment national chez Robert Gaguin" in Le métier d'historien au moyen âge: études sur

l'historiographie médiévale, éd. Bernard Guenée (Paris,

1977), 279-280, and Jacques Monfrin, "La figure de Charlemagne dans l'historiographie du XVe

 siècle," Société de

l'Histoire de France. Annuaire-Bulletin (1964/1965), 67—

78.

21. Davies 1945 (3^

 ed- 1968, m), and Alain ErlandeBrandenburg, "Le tombeau de Saint Louis," Bulletin Monumental 126 (1968), 7-12.

22. A shallow arched niche, which appears to be incised

and possibly also underpainted, is visible with infrared photography; Bomford and Kirby 1977, fig. 4. The incised outline of another, narrower, pointed arch is discernible in raking

light. I am most grateful to Alistair Smith and David Bomford

of the National Gallery, London, for help in examining the

panels in their care.

23. Held 1932, 3

24. Friedlànder 1937, 223-224, fig. 6.

25. Davies 1945, 71-7* (¿d ed. 1955, 83).

26. Davies 1945 (3¿ed. 1968,108).

27. Hinkle 1965,139-144, pis. 25A and B; see also under

1952.2.14.

28. Eisler 1977, 242, text figs. 53-54.

29. Hinkle 1965,133—139.

30. Montesquiou-Fezensac and Gaborit-Chopin 19737

1977, 3: 98 and 2: 294, with extracts from the abbey's

accounts recording payments for the tabula picta of the high

altar.

A rather startling artist's change in the London Mass of

Saint Giles made visible by infrared reflectography may, coincidentally, relate to the panel for the high altar mentioned in

the abbey accounts. Figures of Christ on the cross and the

mourning Virgin are underdrawn where the accurately rendered gold altar frontal now appears. In type of underdrawing they resemble the Baptism scene on the font of the Baptism

of Clovis (fig. 8). Conceivably this underdrawing may record

a panel or wings depicting the Crucifixion displayed on the

high altar on less festive occasions. Alternatively, the underdrawn Baptism and Crucifixion scenes may have been pictograms for the main events to be painted on the panels. The

nature and extent of changes on the four panels need further

study before any conclusions can be drawn. Technical examination of other works by the Master of Saint Giles would

help determine whether such changes result from the artist's

usual working procedure or from the particular conditions of

the commission.

31. The hausmark on the grisaille of Saint Peter may refer

to the altarpiece's commissioner (Eisler 1977, 243, suggested

that it referred to the artist's first name).

32. I am grateful to the participants in the symposium on

French and Burgundian art held at the Gallery's Center for

Advanced Study in the Visual Arts in 1983—1984 for their

stimulating discussion of these panels.

33. Letter of 20 September 1983 from Stella Mary Newton in curatorial files; she is inclined to date the costume in

the very first years of the sixteenth century.

Fig. 9. Infrared reflectogram assembly of detail of The Baptism of

Clovis, 1952.2.15 [infrared reflectography: Molly Paries]
References

182,3 [Porte, Jean-Baptiste-François]. Aix ancien et

moderne, ou Description des Édifices sacrés et profanes,

Établissemens, Monumens antiques, du moyen âge et modernes, Bibliothèques, Cabinets, Promenades d'Aix, etc., etc.

Aix-en-Provence: 147.

1841 Gaszynski, C. In Mémorial d'Aix (13 June): 2.

1883 Champeaux, Alfred de. "Deux vues de la Cité de

Paris au XVe siècle." La Chronique des Arts et de la Curiosité

no. 2.3: 186-187.

1907 Reinach, Salomon. Répertoire de peintures du

moyen âge et de la Renaissance (1280—1580). 2 vols. Paris, 2:

744, no. 2, repro.

1912/1913 Friedlànder, Max J. "Der Meister des hl.

Àgidius." Amtliche Berichte aus den konigl. Kunstsammlungen 34: 187-188.

1921 Conway, Martin. The Van Eycks and their Followers. London: 190.

1931 Lemoisne, P. A. Die gotische Malerei Frankreichs

vierzehntes und fünfzehntes Jahrhundert. Leipzig: 113.

1932 Held, Julius. "Zwei Ansichten von Paris beim

Meister des heiligen Àgidius." JbBerlin 53: 3-4, 10-15,

fig. 2.

1934 Jong, Johannes Assuerus Bernardus Maria de.

Architectuur bij de Nederlandsche Schilders vóór de Hervorming. Amsterdam: 54.

1937 Friedlànder, Max J. "Le Maître de Saint-Gilles."

GBA 6e pér. 17: 223-231, figs. 6,10.

1938 Sterling, Charles. La peinture française: les primitifs. Paris: 135, fig. 170.

1938 Dimier, Louis. "Les primitifs français." GBA 6e

pér. 20:234-235.

1939 National Gallery, London. Supplement to the

1929 Catalogue Including Accessions to the End of 1937.

London: 27.

1939 Réau, Louis. La peinture française du XIVe au

XVIe siècle. Paris: 14, fig. 10.

1942 Sterling, Charles. Les peintres du moyen âge. Paris:

51,64, pi. 140.

1944 Luttervelt, R. van. "Chineesche zijden stoffen en

tapijten in Europa in vroeger eeuwen." Maandblad voor

beeldene Kunsten 20: 45—46, fig. i.

1945 Davies, Martin. National Gallery Catalogues.

Early Netherlandish School. London: 71-72 ^à éd. 1955:

82-83; 3d éd. 1968: 108-109).

1946 Davies, Martin. Paintings and Drawings on the

Backs of National Gallery Pictures. London: xi.

1949 Ring, Crete. A Century of French Painting 1400—

1500. London: 33, 230, no. 24oa, fig. 40.

1949 Hébert, Michèle. "Les monuments parisiens dans

l'oeuvre du Maître de Saint Gilles." Fédération des sociétés

historiques et archéologiques de Paris et de l'Île-de-France.

Mémoires i: 213—214, 231—235, pi. XI.

1950 "Meister des hl. Àgidius." In Thieme-Becker 37:

6-7.

1951 Kress: 15,186-189, repro. no. 83.

1951 Frankfurter, Alfred M. "Interpreting Masterpieces." ArtNA 50, no. 7: 112—113, repro. 107.

1954 Tietze, Hans. Treasures of the Great National

Galleries. New York: 117,123-124, pi. 197.

1959 Réau. Iconographie. Vol. 3, part 3: 1146.

1961 Seymour, Charles Jr. Art Treasures for America.

London: 66-67, 202, 218, fig. 60.

1963 Châtelet, Albert, and Jacques Thuillier. French

Painting from Fouquet to Poussin. Geneva: 92-93.

1964 Walker: 108-109, repro.

1965 Hinkle, William M. "The Iconography of the Four

Panels by the Master of Saint Giles." JWCI 28: no, 113-

124,127,129-130,139-144, pis. 2ig-h, 22b-c, 25A-B.

1966 Laclotte, Michel, Primitifs français. Paris: 45, pi.

XXXVI.

1973 National Gallery, London. Illustrated General

Catalogue. London: 444.

1973/1977 Montesquiou-Fezensac, Biaise de, and

Danielle Gaborit-Chopin. Le Trésor de Saint-Denis. 3 vols.

Paris, 3: 105, pi. 933.

1975 NGA: 224, repro. 225.

1977 Eisler: 239-243,6^. 231, text figs. 53, 54.

i76 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Master of the Saint Lucy Legend

activée. 1480—0. 1510

The Master of the Saint Lucy Legend was named by

Max J. Friedlânder for an altarpiece in the church of

Saint James, Bruges, which is dated 1480 and depicts

three scenes from the life of Saint Lucy. A second painting recognized by Friedlânder as by the same hand is

the Virgin and Child with Female Saints in the Musées

Royaux des Beaux-Arts, Brussels. With these two

works as the foundation, twenty-five to thirty-five

paintings have been attributed by Friedlânder and

others to the Master of the Saint Lucy Legend.

The master was active in Bruges from the 14805 into

the early years of the sixteenth century. His style is

marked by certain stereotyped facial types for both

men and women, crisply rendered architectural detail

and decorative patterning, and a preference for bright,

clear colors that are often acidic. The belfry in Bruges is

often depicted in his paintings, and Nicole VeroneeVerhaegen has proposed a chronology for several paintings based on changes in the belfry's appearance between 1483 and 1501. Ann Roberts has suggested that

the master is Jan de Hervy who was active in Bruges

and died before 1512.

The master is allied to the art of Hans Memling, but

also borrows from Jan van Eyck and Rogier van der

Weyden as well as from Dirck Bouts and Hugo van der

Goes. The master's influence extended outside the

boundaries of Flanders. Several of his paintings have

Spanish provenances, and it has been suggested that

the artist spent time in Spain and may have trained

Spanish painters in his Bruges studio. A large altarpiece

commissioned by the Confraternity of the TêtesNoires in Tallinn, Estonia, still in that city's museum,

has been attributed to the Master of the Saint Lucy

Legend.

J.O.H.

Bibliography:

Friedlânder, Max J. "Die Brugger Leihausstellung von

1902.." RfK 26 (1903): 84-85.

Friedlânder. Vol. 6. 1918 (vol. 6, part i, 1971: 41-43, and

parti, 1971: 123-124).

Verhaegen, Nicole. "Le Maître de la légende de Sainte Lucie.

Précisions sur son oeuvre," BInstPat 2 (1959): 73—82.

Anonieme Vlaamse Primitieven. Exh. cat. Groeningemuseum. Bruges, 1969: 47—54.

Roberts, Ann. "The Master of the Legend of Saint Lucy: A

Catalogue and Critical Essay." Ph.D. diss., University of

Pennsylvania, 1982.

1952.2.13 (1096)

Mary, Queen of Heaven

c. 1485/1500

Probably oak (cradled), 201.5 x 163.8 (793/s x 6^/2)

painted surface: 199.2 x 161.8 (787/i6 x 6^/4)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Inscriptions:

On the sheet of music held by the angel to the left of the

Virgin's head: A/ve regina celorum mr regis[?]

On the sheet of music held by the angel to the right of the

Virgin's head: A/Tenor ve/regina

Technical Notes: The support consists of six boards with

vertical grain. X-radiographs show that the joins are reinforced with dowels. A smooth white ground is present.1

 The

presence of a barbe on all sides indicates that the panel is very

close to its original size and was painted in an engaged frame.

In general, the painting is in very good condition, but there

are numerous small losses throughout and somewhat larger

losses in the upper paint layers of the landscape. Some retouches have darkened. Examination with infrared reflectography reveals extensive underdrawing, discussed below. The

painting was cleaned and restored in 1950—1951 and a very

small area of flaking paint was restored in 1962.

Provenance: Probably Don Pedro Fernández de Velasco,

Count of Haro and Constable of Castile [d. 1492] for the

convent of Santa Clara, Medina de Pomar, near Burgos, until

at least 1934.2 Raimundo Ruiz y Ruiz, Madrid.3 (French &

Company, New York, by c. 1947.) Samuel H. Kress Foundation, New York, 1949.

THE VIRGIN' S corporeal assumption into heaven is

depicted. She stands on a crescent moon, a golden

aureole behind her, surrounded by angels in brightly

colored and embroidered robes. Some of the angels

assist in her ascent, others sing and play musical instruments. At the top, ringed by clouds, are the enthroned

figures of God the Son and God the Father holding a

MASTER OF THE SAINT LUCY LEGEND 177
crown between them. The dove of the Holy Ghost hovers over the crown.

Mary, Queen of Heaven is of great interest to musicologists. Not only does the painting depict Renaissance instruments with great accuracy, but it also mirrors contemporary performance practices. The musicmaking angels can be divided into two groups, those

accompanying the Virgin and those clustered around

the "inner heaven" of the enthroned Trinity. Emanuel

Winternitz points out that the ensemble around the

Virgin is a mixed consort composed of "loud" instruments (trumpets and shawms) and "soft" instruments

(vielle, lute, and harp).4 Immediately above and flanking the Virgin are four singing angels; two of the angels

hold books bearing legible words and music. This music, which is the source of the painting's title, has been

identified as a setting of the Marian antiphon, "Ave

Regina Caelorum, Mater Regis."5 The antiphon is very

similar to a motet, "Ave Regina Caelorum, Mater

Regis," by Walter Frye (died 1474/1475), an English

composer whose works were popular on the continent,

particularly at the Burgundian court.6

In terms of contemporary performance, Winternitz

has noted that the eight instrumentalists would overpower the four singers around the Virgin.7

 The upper

region corresponds more closely to actual usage. At the

right the six instrumentalists are all playing "soft" instruments: recorders, lute, dulcimer, and harp. They

are balanced at the left by eleven singers, divided into

two groups. The uppermost group of five winged angels appears younger than the lower group of six wearing embroidered copes and clipei. It has been suggested

that the upper group is a Kinder chor* Both groups

have one book of music each, suggesting that here too

the music is antiphonal and polyphonic. The music

held by the angel in the lower group is somewhat legible, and Kathleen McGhee has cautiously suggested

that it may be a countertenor part to the "Ave Regina

Caelorum" sung by the angels next to Mary.9

Three facets of Marian iconography are represented

in this large and colorful painting. The first theme is

that of the Immaculate Conception; the crescent moon

and the radiance behind her identifies Mary as the

Woman of the Apocalypse, mentioned in Revelation

12,: i. Although the notion that Mary had been conceived free from sin was long-standing, it received special impetus in 1476 when Pope Sixtus IV instituted the

Feast of the Immaculate Conception.10 Indulgenced

prayers quickly followed. As Eisler points out, the Immaculate Conception was especially popular in Spain.11

The second theme represented is the corporeal Assumption of the Virgin into heaven. This event, which

took place three days after her death, also emphasizes

her purity. Mary, Queen of Heaven is unusual in that

the death of the Virgin and her open tomb are not

depicted, as usually the case with images of the Assumption. Eisler sees the landscape, normally reserved

for the Virgin's sarcophagus, as representing the earthly

paradise, cleansed at the time of her death.12

The third theme, shown at the top of the painting, is

the Coronation of the Virgin or, strictly speaking, the

incipient coronation since Mary is not yet present in

heaven. The Coronation is the logical conclusion of

Mary's Dormition and Assumption, for in heaven her

body and soul are reunited and she is glorified by the

Trinity.13 Early representations show the Virgin being

crowned by Christ, but by the early fifteenth century

the coronation by all three members of the Godhead

appears with some frequency.14 The tiled floor and

brocaded cloth on the throne recall the Deësis in

the Ghent Altarpiece, while the representation of the

Trinity is similar to that found in contemporary

manuscripts.15

As noted by Eisler, the general arrangement probably derives ultimately from fourteenth-century representations of the Assumption of the Virgin. These Italian depictions usually show the Virgin full-face, with

her hands in the same prayerful attitude as in the Gallery's panel. Moreover, the Virgin is often accompanied by angels singing and playing instruments.16

 The

unusual iconographie program may be the result of a

specialized commission. Both Eisler and Roberts emphasize the veneration given the immaculately conceived Virgin in Spain, reinforcing the tradition that

the panel was a Spanish commission, specifically for

the convent of Santa Clara in Medina de Pomar.17

Examination of the underdrawing with infrared reflectography emphasizes the originality and importance

of Mary, Queen of Heaven. The underdrawing is quite

vigorous, extensive, and varied in its effects and techniques. The greater portion is done with a brush. A

wide brush was used for figure placement and general

indications of drapery (fig. i), while parallel hatching,

often indicating shadows, in the drapery folds was

done with a finer brush. In other areas, such as the

figures at the top of the panel, the underdrawing seems

to have been made with a harder medium, perhaps

chalk (fig. z). A surprising degree of change occurred

between the initial layout and the final painted surface.

For instance, the figure of the angel playing a harp at

the upper left was originally drawn vertically and fullface rather than in profile (fig. 3). At the upper right the

wing of an angel playing a vielle was originally placed

over the head of an angel playing a shawm. The angels

on either side of the Virgin show changes in the position of the eyes and facial contours, and the entire

178 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Master of the Saint Lucy Legend, Mary, Queen of Heaven, 1951.2.13

MASTER OF THE SAINT LUCY LEGEND 179
position of a head has been altered. The Virgin's eyes

and nose have been shifted and her hands have been

moved down and to the left. There are traces of what

appear to be angels' wings in the landscape at the bottom (fig. 4).

The underdrawing strongly suggests that the composition was worked out on the panel without recourse

to a predetermined pattern or design, perhaps because

the specific iconographie requirements of the commission necessitated creating an original composition. The

panel is without known precedent in early Netherlandish painting. I have found no representations that

incorporate the Immaculate Conception, the Assumption, and the Coronation of the Virgin, that predate

Mary, Queen of Heaven.

In 1946 Friedlànder attributed Mary, Queen of

Heaven to a Bruges or Ghent artist working about

i48o;18 three years later he suggested the Master of

Evora, a Portugese artist active in the late fifteenth

century.19 In 1947 Valentiner attributed the panel to

the Master of the Saint Lucy Legend and Suida first

published it under this attribution in 1951.20 Since

then the attribution to the Lucy Legend Master has

Fig. i. Infrared reflectogram assembly of a detail of Mary,

Queen of Heaven, 1951.1.13 [infrared reflectography:

Molly Paries]

Fig. z. Infrared reflectogram assembly of a detail of

Mary, Queen of Heaven, 1952.. 2,. 13 [infrared

reflectography: Molly Faries]

180 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Fig. 3. Infrared reflectogram assembly of a detail of Mary, Queen of Heaven

I952.-2..I3 [infrared reflectography: Molly Paries]

Fig. 4. Infrared reflectogram assembly of a

detail of Mary, Queen of Heaven, 1952.2.13

[infrared reflectography: Molly Faries]

MASTER OF THE SAINT LUCY LEGEND l8l
been almost unanimously accepted, and with it a date

of c. 1485 to 1500.21

Verhaegen sees stylistic affinities with the work of

the Master of the Morrison Triptych, in particular

with a pair of shutters depicting the Adoration of the

Shepherds and the Adoration of the Magi from an altarpiece donated in 1503/1504 to the Church of the

Holy Savior, Valladolid.22 Verhaegen emphasizes the

fact that both the Morrison and Lucy masters worked

for Spanish patrons and suggests that the latter might

have journeyed to Spain. Roberts believes that because

of the heavy reliance on Spanish compositional and

iconographie types the painting was executed in Spain

by the Master of the Lucy Legend. She dates the picture

to c. 1491/1492, based in part on the 1492. death date

of the putative patron Don Pedro Fernández de Velasco.23

 For Eisler, several of the angels' faces are the

work of a studio assistant who could have been Spanish or have had a knowledge of Italian art; Roberts

does not see two hands.24 I believe it is possible to

discern the hand of at least one assistant. In particular,

the angels just above the lowest ones flanking the Virgin have faces that are homelier and more individually

characterized than the types usually used by the Master

and may point to a Dutch or even Lower Rhenish

artist. J.O.H.

Notes

1. Kress 1951, 182., states that the paint was applied

directly to the panel without an intervening ground; this error is repeated by Walker 1963, 106, but corrected in Eisler

1977, 63, n. 6.

2. According to notes from the Kress Foundation records, now in the curatorial files, an escutcheon at the top of

the purportedly original frame once bore the arms of Don

Pedro Fernández de Velasco, Count of Haro and Constable

of Castile (c. 142.5-1492.). An old photograph in the curatorial files shows a space at the top of the frame where the

arms may have been. Eisler 1977, 61, thinks the frame is

original and made in Spain; the Gallery's frame and painting

conservators suggest that the frame is not original, but includes portions of an old frame. The records of French ÔC

Company indicate only that the painting was "said to have

been the gift of a Constable of Castile to a convent near

Burgos founded by his daughter and suppressed in the nineteenth century," correspondence of 19 July 1967 to Eisler

and Eisler 1977, 63. The most convincing suggestion for the

painting's original location is made by Roberts 1983,92-95,

who places it in the chapel of the Immaculate Conception in

the convent of Santa Clara in Medina de Pomar, near Burgos.

Don Pedro's daughter, Doña Leonor, was abbess of the convent. Don Pedro had begun construction of the chapel in

1460 and his son finished paying for it. Roberts cites a description of a painting in the convent in 1934 that accords in

terms of dimensions, style, and subject matter with Mary,

Queen ofHeaven ; this is contained in Garcia Sáinz de Baranda 1934, 88: "Otra tabla flamenca atribuida a Van der

Weiden, de unos dos metros de alta, por 1,50 de ancha que

tiene por asunto la Asunción de la Virgen obra maestra llena

de colorido y expresión." The identification would seem to

be strengthened by the fact that the painting is not mentioned

in Jacques Lavalleye, Primitifs flamands. Corpus. Collections

d'Espagne 2. vols. (Antwerp, 1953—1958), although another

painting from the same convent is catalogued, 2: 17. Lavalleye states, 2: 7, that he visited the province of Burgos in

1954-

3. Letter of 19 July 1967 from Robert Davis, French &c

Company, to Dale Kinney, assistant to Colin Eisler, in curatorial files. I am grateful to Colin Eisler for making this

letter available.

4. Starting with the ensemble around the Virgin, the instruments on the left in descending order are: alto (or tenor?)

shawm, Gothic harp, trumpet (only partially visible), and

portative organ. From the top on the right are: soprano

(treble?) shawm, vielle, soprano (or treble) shawm, and lute.

The identification of the instruments is based on Winternitz

1963, 459-463; Chrisman and Fowler 1965, 93-98; and

Mirimonde 1976, 42—51.

5. Kress 1951, 182, cites Mirella Levi d'Ancona as the

first to recognize the text as "Ave Regina Caelorum." Kathleen McGhee, in an unpublished paper written in 1982 for

the department of music, University of Maryland, cautions

against confusing this "Ave Regina" with a second and more

famous antiphon, "Ave Regina Caelorum, Ave Domina." I

am indebted to Miss McGhee for making her paper available

tome.

6. For Walter Frye see Kenney 1964. There is no evidence that Frye himself was ever in Europe. Frye's "Ave Regina" is discussed and analyzed in Sylvia Kenney, "Contrafacta in the Works of Walter Frye," Journal of the American

Musicological Society 8 (195 5), 182-202, as an example of a

secular song provided with a sacred text. Kenney 1964, 67—

75, discusses Frye's "Ave Regina" and compares it, 154, with

the music in Mary, Queen of Heaven-, compare Carapezza

1975, esp. 139-152. McGhee 1982 extensively analyzes the

music in Mary, Queen of Heaven and notes the several comparisons and similarities to Frye's "Ave Regina." She points

to a certain eclecticism in the music depicted by the Saint

Lucy Legend master and observes, 22, that the composer

Jacob Obrecht who was at Saint Donatian at Bruges in the

14808 paraphrased Frye's "Ave Regina" in a similar manner.

Frye's "Ave Regina" is depicted in paintings by the Master of

the Embroidered Foliage, an artist active in Brussels at the

end of the fifteenth century. The paintings are a Madonna

and Child with Angels (R. Grog collection, Paris), repro.

Friedlânder, vol. 4 (1969)^0. 88, pi. 83, and the center panel

of the altarpiece of the Virgin with Angels (Church of Santa

Maria degli Angeli, Polizzi Generosa, Sicily), repro. Friedlander, vol. 4 (1969), Supp. 129, pi. 111. Frye's music in these

paintings is discussed by Kenney 1964 and Carapezza 1975.

7. Winternitz 1975, 230.

8. Chrisman and Fowler 1965, 98.

9. McGhee 1982.

TO. Mirella Levi d'Ancona, The Iconography of the Immaculate Conception in the Middle Ages and Early Renaissance (New York, 1957), esp. 11-13; Réau, Iconographie,

vol. 2, part 2, 76-83.

11. Eisler 1977, 62.

12. Eisler 1977, 62. In n. 13 he cites Georg Troescher,

Burgundische Malerei (Berlin, 1966), pis. 64, 66-67, for

early representations of the Assumption and Coronation of

the Virgin, and Manuel Trens, María. Iconografía de la Vir182. EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
gen en el Arte Español (Madrid, 1946), 156-157, for sixteenth-century Spanish paintings of the Assumption of the

immaculately conceived Virgin. Suzanne Stratton, "The Immaculate Conception in Spanish Renaissance and Baroque

Art," Ph.D. diss., New York University, 1983, 88-167, has

challenged the belief that Spanish Assumptions with the crescent moon under the Virgin's feet always refer to the Immaculate Conception; q.v. 1965.1.1, Sittow, The Assumption of

the Virgin, n. 9. Stratton does not discuss 1952.2.13 except to

note, 116, that it may have been modeled on an earlier Netherlandish example.

13. Philippe Verdier, Le Couronnement de la Vierge

(Montreal and Paris, 1980); Réau, Iconographie, vol. 2, part

2, 621-626.

14. Réau, Icongraphie, vol. 2, part 2, 623, notes that the

coronation by the Trinity occurs in Spain, Italy, and France in

the first years of the fifteenth century.

15. For example, a similar image can be found in the Croy

breviary by the Master of James IV of Scotland, Vienna,

Ôsterreichische Nationalbibliothek, Cod. 1858, fol. 97v.,

repro. Friedrich Winkler, Die flàmische Buchmalerei des XV.

undXVLJahrhunderts (Leipzig, 1925), 126, pi. 74.

16. Eisler 1977, 62; see Henk van Os, Marias Demut und

Verherrlichung in der sienisischen Malerei 1300—1450

(Kunsthistorische Studiën van het Nederlands Historisch Instituut te Rome, i) (The Hague, 1969), esp. 145—156, pis.

13,143,15—20, ii2,116,127—128.

17. See under Provenance; Eisler 1977, 63, n. 26 for mention of other convents in Burgos; Roberts 1983, esp. 156—

159. Ann Roberts, letter of 6 June 19 8 3 in the curatorial files,

points out that Doña Leonor, daughter of the Count of Haro,

became abbess of the convent at Medina de Pomar in 1491

and suggests a direct relationship to the commission or delivery of the Gallery's painting. See Julián Garcia Sáinz de

Baranda, Apuntes históricos sobre la ciudad de Medina de

Pomar (Burgos, 1917), 199.1 am grateful to Dr. Roberts for

this reference and information.

18. Certificate dated April 1946 in the curatorial files.

19. Letter of 11 March 1949 to French & Company in the

curatorial files.

20. W. R. Valentiner, letter of 25 August 1947 to French

& Company in the curatorial files; Kress 1951,182.

21. Goldblatt 1961, 42, 44, attributes the painting to

Michel Sittow.

22. Verhaegen 1959, 81-82. The Valladolid wings are

catalogued and reproduced in Friedlànder, vol. 7 (1972), 44,

70, no. 84, pi. 74, who expressed some doubts about the

attribution to the Master of the Morrison Triptych. See also

L'Art flamand dans les collections espagnoles [exh. cat.

Groeningemuseum] (Bruges, 1958), 52-56, nos. 24-27.

23. Roberts 1983,92-95,152-159; she draws attention,

158, to the angel at the lower right grasping the horn of the

moon as a motif that has no precedent in Northern art, but

which occurs frequently in Spanish Assumptions. See also n.

!4-

24. Eisler 1977, 63; Roberts 1983, 220.

References:

1934 Garcia Sáinz de Baranda, Julián. Medina de Pomar. Como Lugar Arqueológico y Centro de Turismo de las

Merindades de Castilla-Vieja. Alcalá de Henares: 88.

1951 Kress: 182, no. 8o, repro. 183.

1951 Frankfurter, Alfred. "Interpreting Masterpieces.

Twenty-four Paintings from the Kress Collection." ArtNA

50, no. 7: loi—102, repro. 104, 101.

1952 Walker, John. "Your National Gallery of Art after

i o Years." National Geographic Magazine 101: 76, repro.

IOO.

1959 Verhaegen, Nicole. "Le Maître de la Légende de

sainte Lucie. Précisions sur son oeuvre." BInstPat 2: 81—82.

1960 Broadley, Hugh. Flemish Painting in the^National

Gallery of Art. Washington: 6, 26, repro. 27 (rev. ed. 1978).

1961 Goldblatt, Maurice. Deux grands maîtres français.

Paris: 42, 44, pi. 21.

1961 Baudouin, Frans. "Der Meister des Bartholomausaltares und die sudniederlàndische Malerei des 15. Jahrhunderts." Wallraf-Richartz-Jahrbuch 23: 357-358.

1961 Verhaegen, Nicole. "Un important retable du

Maître de la Légende de sainte Lucie conservé à Tallinn."

BInstPat 4: 143.

1963 Winternitz, Emanuel. "On Ángel Concerts in thé

15th Century: A Critical Approach to Realism and Symbolism

in Sacred Painting." The Musical Quarterly 49: 263, 459—

460, pi. 5 (repr. m Musical Instruments and their Symbolism

in Western Art. New York, 1967: 145—149, pis. 66, 67).

1963 Walker: 106, repro. 107.

1964 Kenney, Sylvia. Walter Fry e and the Contenance

Angloise. New Haven and London: 153—155, pis. 6—9.

1964 Gaya Ñuño, Juan. Pintura europea perdida por

España, de van Eyck a Tiépolo. Madrid: 27, no. 32, pl. X.

1965 Chrisman, Jo, and Charles B. Fowler. "Music Performance in a Renaissance Painting." Music Educators'Journal (November/December): 93-98, pis. I-VIII and cover.

1965 Eisler, Colin. "The Sittow Assumption." ArtN 64

(September): 35-37, fig. 6.

1969 Rensch, Roslyn. The Harp. Its History, Technique

and Repertoire. London: 56-57.

1970 Meyer-Baer, Kathi. Music of the Spheres and the

Dance of Death. Princeton: 170-171, fig. 82.

1971 Friedlànder. Vol. 6,part 2:115, Add. 277^1.257.

1975 NGA: 226, repro. 227.

1975 Fischer, Pieter. Music in Paintings of the Low

Countries in the i6th and iyth Centuries. Amsterdam: 8,

repro. 9, 10.

1975 Winternitz, Emanuel. "Secular Musical Practice in

Sacred Art." In The Secular Spirit: Life and Art at the End of

the Middle Ages. Exh. cat., The Metropolitan Museum of

Art. New York: 230, repro. 231.

1975 Carapezza, Paolo. "Regina angelorum in música

picta. Walter Frye e il 'Maître au Feuillage Brodé.' " Revista

italiana di musicología io: 135—136,152—154, pl. 4.

1976 Mirimonde, A. P. de. "Le sablier, la musique et la

danse dans les 'Noces de Cana' de Paul Veronese." GBA 6e'

pér. 88: 134.

1976 Larsen, Erik. Review of Friedlànder, vol. 6, 1971.

In Art Journal 35: 298.

1976 De Vos, Dirk. "Nieuwe toeschrijvingen aan de

Meester van de Lucialegende alias de Meester van de Rotterdamse Johannes op Patmos." OH 90: 157.

1976 Mirimonde, A. P. de. "La musique chez les peintres

de la fin de l'ancienne école de Bruges." JbAntwerp: 42-51,

figs. 17-23.

1977 Eisler: 61-63, %s. 54, 55.

1981 Châtelet, Albert. Early Dutch Painting. New York:

227, no. 102.

1982 Roberts, Ann. (See Biography): 92-95,154-159,

185,190,194, 202-207, 2.19-222, cat. no. 7, figs. 13,14.

MASTER OF THE SAINT LUCY LEGEND 183
Hans Memling

active by 1465—1494

Hans Memling or Memlinc was born in the Middle

Rhenish town of Seligenstadt. He is first recorded in

Bruges in 1465, when he acquired citizenship. He was

active in that city, working largely for the merchant

class and resident foreign communities, until his death

on ii August 1494. His compositions and figure types

show a debt to Rogier van der Weyden, and Vasari

called him a disciple of Rogier. It has therefore been

assumed that he worked in Van der Weyden's Brussels

workshop in the years preceding that master's death in

1464. Memling's art shows little or no trace of his

German heritage, but there is no documentary evidence to indicate whether he received his artistic training in Germany or Flanders or how old he was upon

settling in Bruges.

Memling is named in inscriptions on the original

frames of two paintings, The Mystic Marriage of Saint

Catherine and the triptych of Jan Floreins, both in the

Saint John's Hospital, Bruges, though these inscriptions seem to have been restored or renewed. A relatively large group of paintings has been attributed to

Memling on the basis of style. Among these a number

are dated or dateable, including the Virgin and Child

with Donor and Saint Anthony in Ottawa, inscribed

with the date 1472., possibly transposed from the original frame; The Last Judgment in Gdansk, which was

shipped from Bruges early in 1473; The Mystic Marriage of Saint Catherine and the Floreins triptych in the

Saint John's Hospital, Bruges, both dated 1479; the

Reyns triptych and the Portrait of a Woman, both in

the Saint John's Hospital and dated 1480; the devotional diptych with Martin van Nieuwenhove in Bruges,

dated 1487, and the Lübeck Crucifixion altarpiece,

dated 1491. McFarlane has shown that the Donne

triptych in the National Gallery, London, long placed

c. 1468 and considered to mark the beginning of

Memling's early maturity, can be dated as late as c.

1480.

In spite of the number of dated paintings, relatively

little stylistic development can be discerned in Memling's work. The problem of placing undated works is

complicated by his tendency to repeat established compositions and types, and by the probable intervention

of assistants.

Memling was the dominant painter in Bruges at the

end of the fifteenth century, and his work provided a

fitting summation of his predecessor's achievements.

M.W.

Bibliography

Weale, W. H. James. Hans Memlinc. London, 1901.

Friedlánder. Vol. 6. 1918 (vol. 6a, 1971).

Baldass, Ludwig von. Hans Memling. Vienna, 1941.

Folie, Jacqueline. "Les oeuvres authentifiées des primitifs

flamands." BInstPat 6 (1963): 2.2.5—2.2.9.

McFarlane, K. B. Hans Memling. Ed. Edgar Wind. Oxford,

1971.

1937.1.41 (41)

Madonna and Child with Angels

After 1479

Oak (cradled), 58.8 x48.0 (2,3Vax i87/s)

painted surface: 57.6 x 46.4 (zz5/8 x i8V4)

Andrew W. Mellon Collection

Technical Notes: The panel is composed of two boards aligned

vertically with a join 34.2 cm from the left edge. It is mounted

on a thin secondary panel of the same wood as the cradle.

There are numerous very small losses, especially at the top left

and top right corners and the bottom of the right angel's robe.

Losses along the splits and the join have been filled and inpainted. The Madonna's features and some of the outlines of

her robe have been strengthened. In general the numerous

tiny strokes of inpainting make the picture appear to be in

more pristine condition than is actually the case.

The figurai group and the landscape are underdrawn in

what seems to be black chalk; see commentary below.

Provenance: Probably Leopold Friedrich Franz, Prince of Anhalt, Gotisches Haus, Wórlitz, near Dessau [d. I8I7].1

 Probably Leopold Friedrich, Prince of Anhalt [d. 1871]. Friedrich

I, Duke of Anhalt, by 1872. [d. 1904]. Friedrich II, Duke of

Anhalt, until 192,7. (Hugo Perls, Berlin, i9i7.)2Mannheimer

collection, Amsterdam, 192.7. (Duveen Brothers, London

and New York, 192.7.) Purchased November 192,7 by Andrew W. Mellon, Washington. Deeded 5 June 1931 to The

A. W. Mellon Educational and Charitable Trust, Pittsburgh.

184 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Hans Memling, Madonna and Child with Angels, 1937.1.41

HANS MEMLING 18 5
Exhibitions: Bruges, Hôtel de Gouvernement Provincial,

1901, Exposition des primitifs flamands et d'art ancien, no.

79. // New York, F. Kleinberger Galleries, Inc., 1929, Loan

Exhibition of Flemish Primitives, no. 22.

THIS is one of several versions of one of Memling's

most characteristic compositions, repeated with variations by him and his workshop. The most authoritative

treatment of the Madonna and Child type is found in

The Mystic Marriage of Saint Catherine in Bruges,3 in

which the atmosphere of a heavenly court also receives

the most grand expression. In the Gallery's painting

the music-making angels introduce the idea of Christ's

sacrifice, in addition to offering praise and emphasizing the queenly aspect of the Virgin. The angel at the

left gives the Christ Child an apple, the token of his role

as the new Adam.4 The eucharistie vestments worn by

this angel5 and the grapevine in the molding of the arch

underline the theme of Christ's sacrifice. The snail and

salamander at the base of the grapevine symbolize

Mary's virginity.6 The two sculpted figures atop the

columns represent King David, the ancestor of Christ,

and Isaiah,7 who foretold the virgin birth.

Fig. i. Hans Memling, Madonna and Child with Angels,

Florence, Galleria degli Uffizi [photo: Copyright A.C.L. Brussels]

Closest to the National Gallery's painting in the

disposition of the figures, arch, throne, and landscape

are the central section of a triptych in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna,8

 and a painting in the Uffizi

(fig. i).9 The arrangement of the enthroned Madonna

and Child with music-making angels in an archway

recalls a Boutsian composition in the Capilla Real,

Granada.10 In Memling's three paintings, the arch carries sculpture that comments on the enthroned figures

and also serves to divide the space into a succession of

richly shadowed recesses.

Friedlànder and Panofsky, among others, considered

the Gallery's version to be earlier than the paintings in

Vienna and Florence, which include putti holding garlands and a more agitated windblown canopy; these

Italianate elements suggest a date toward the end of

Memling's career for these two works.11 However, a

number of factors indicate that the Gallery's painting is

not Memling's first formulation of the composition of

the Madonna and Child in an arch. Figures and architectural elements are combined in an awkward, additive manner in comparison with the more organic spatial arrangement of the Vienna painting in particular.

While the carving on the molding of the arch is very

similar to that in the Uffizi painting, even to the inclusion of the snail and salamander, in the Gallery's painting these details lack the crispness and play of light

characteristic of Memling's most careful work. The

snails in the Uffizi painting are shown crawling on the

roots of the vine, yet this detail has been omitted in the

Gallery's painting. In comparison to the version in

Vienna, the faces of the Madonna and angels have a

blandness and fixity that also suggest less careful execution rather than an early working out of the subject.

The gesture of the Christ Child is less strongly motivated in relation to the angel offering an apple and may

be compared to the static blessing gesture of the Christ

Child in the Jacob Floreins altarpiece.12

Earlier in this century several authors including

Kaemmerer, Weale, Voll, and Friedlànder expressed

reservations about the attribution of the Gallery's painting to Memling himself. However, following Friedlander's acceptance of the painting in his 1928 catalogue, it has been universally regarded as autograph.13

Since the degree to which Memling collaborated with

assistants is at present not known, the Gallery's painting should be retained as a work by Memling, but

considered a rather routine production of the master.14

The weak effect of the whole is increased by numerous

small retouches, yet some passages, such as the red and

gold dalmatic and the viol of the angel at the left, are

very fine.

The group of paintings showing the Madonna and
Child with angels in an arch should probably be dated

after The Mystic Marriage of Saint Catherine in Bruges

of 1479. The Gallery's painting is presumably contemporary with and may even be later than the paintings in

Vienna and Florence, that is, toward the end of Memling's career.

M.W.

Notes

1. This prince built the Gotisches Haus and its English

park and was an active collector, adding early German and

Netherlandish paintings to the family holdings; see C. Rost,

"Der alte Nassau-Oranische Bilderschatz und sein spáterer

Verbleib," Jahrbücher fur Kunstwissenschaft 6 (1873), 52—

93, esp. 78—79, listing early catalogues of the collection. The

descriptions in the early catalogues of the Anhalt-Dessau collection are not sufficiently specific to identify the Madonna

and Child with Angels.

2. According to a note on a photograph in the Friedlander archive, R.K.D., The Hague.

3. Friedlánder, vol. 6a (1971), no. n, pis. 41—43, and

Paul Coremans with René Sneyers and Jean Thissen, "Memline's Mystiek Huwelijk van de H. Katharina. Onderzook en

Behandeling," BInstPat 2 (1959), 83-94.

4. The connection with the Fall is more explicit in the

related Vienna triptych, which includes Adam and Eve on the

reverse of the shutters, Friedlánder, vol. 6a (1971), no. 9, pi.

32»

5. McNamee 1963,143, noting that this angel wears the

deacon's dalmatic and the other angel wears an alb, thus

reserving the role of celebrant for the Christ Child.

6. For the snail, S. Braunfels, s.v. "Schnecke," Lexikon

der christlichen Ikonographie, 8 vols. (Freiburg-im-Breisgau,

1972.), 4: 99. Among other associations, the salamander can

symbolize chastity; Robert Koch, "The Salamander in Van

der Goes' Garden ofEden,"JWCI 2.8 (1965), 324.

7. A saw is the attribute of Isaiah; see Réau, Iconographie,

vol. 2, part i, 365-367.

8. Seen. 4 above.

9. Friedlánder, vol. 6a (1971), no. 61, pi. 105.

10. Van Schoute 1963, 29-35,

 no

- 94? pi- 3ia; attributed

by Wolfgang Schône to Dieric Bouts the Younger, Dieric

Bouts und seine Schule (Berlin and Leipzig, 1938), 183-184,

no. 71. See also a drawing sold in Munich, Karl Hartman

sale, Helbing, 30 May 1905, no. 73, repro., as Rogier van der

Weyden, and Petrus Christus' two paintings of the Madonna

and Child Enthroned in a Porch in Madrid, Friedlánder, vol.

i (1967), pis. 88-89.

11. Friedlánder, vol. 6 (1928), 30 (vol. 6a, 1971, 53);

Panofsky 1953, 349—350, and deTolnay 1941,181—182.

12. Friedlánder, vol. 6a (1971), no. 66, pi. 109. K. B.

McFarlane, Hans Memling, ed. Edgar Wind (Oxford, 1971),

31, 59, dates the completion of the altarpiece after the plague

of 1489—1490 in which Jacob Floreins died, as his wife is

dressed as a widow.

13. Kaemmerer 1899, 134, Weale 1903, 76, 104, Friedlander 1903, 83, and Voll 1909,136. In an expertise dated 9

March 1927, Friedlánder called the painting an autograph

replica of the one in Florence (Friedlánder archive, R. K. D.,

The Hague). In Die altniederlàndische Malerei, vol. 6 (1928),

30, he also held it to be autograph and dated it earlier than the

paintings in Vienna and Florence.

Fig. 2. Infrared reflectogram assembly of Ma do nna and Child

with Angels, 1937.1.41 [infrared reflectography: Molly Paries]

14. Infrared reflectography of the Madonna and Child

shows very free and open underdrawing strokes in the landscape, in the near wings of both angels, and, to a lesser extent,

where the angels' wings join shoulder and upper arm (fig. 2).

In the figure of the Madonna and the rest of the angels'

drapery, underdrawing made visible by infrared reflectography is confined largely to long, straight strokes to which the

surface contours conform. This difference in the underdrawing may indicate that the forms of the Madonna and angels

were already relatively fixed, but that Memling was varying

and reworking the wings and landscape. An infrared photograph of the Madonna in the Uffizi (A.C.L. 26691.6) shows

repeated strokes for folds and widely spaced hatching lines

for areas of shadow in the underskirt of the Virgin's robe,

comparable to underdrawing in the Bruges Mystic Marriage

of Saint Catherine-, see Johannes Taubert, "Beobachtungen

zum schôpferischen Arbeitsprozess bei einigen altniederlândischen Malern," NKJ 26 (1975), 61-68, figs. 17-18. Compare also the underdrawn drapery in 1952.5.46, Saint VeronHANS MEMLING I87
tea (fig. i). Dominique Hollanders-Favart discusses analogous

differences in types of underdrawing in Memling's devotional

diptychs, "A propos de l'élaboration du diptych van Nieuwenhove de Hans Memling," Le Dessin sous-jacent dans la

peinture. Colloque IV (Louvain-la-Neuve, 1982), 103-106.

References

1872. Crowe, J. A., and G. B. Cavalcaselle. The Early

Flemish Painters: Notices of Their Lives and Works, zd ed.

London: 273, 2.80.

1899 Kaemmerer, Ludwig. Memling. Bielefeld and Leipzig: 13 4, fig. 116.

1901 Weale, W. H. James. Hans Memling. London: 76,

104.

1902 Hulin de Loo, Georges. Bruges. Exposition de

tableaux flamands des XIVe, XVe, XVIe siècles. Catalogue

critique. Ghent: 18, no. 79.

1902 Hymans, Henri. "L'Exposition des primitifs flamands à Bruges." GJBA3e

pér. 28: 288 (repr. as a book, Paris,

1902: 56).

1903 Weale, W. H. James. "The Early Painters of the

Netherlands as Illustrated by the Bruges Exhibition of 1902."

BurlMz: 35.

1903 Friedlander, Max J. "Die Brugger Leihausstellung

von 1902." RfK z6: 83.

1904 Benoit, François. "Un Gérard David inconnu."

GBA 3e pér. 32: 321.

1909 Voll, Karl. Memling (Klassiker der Kunst). Stuttgart and Leipzig: 136, repro. 178.

1910 Wurzbach, Alfred von. "Memling." In Niederlàndisches Kunstler-Lexikon. 3 vols., Vienna and Leipzig. 2:

138,143,144.

1913 Durand-Gréville, E. "Notes sur les primitifs néerlandais du Louvre." GBA 4e

 pér. 10: 426.

1924 Vioux, Marcelle. Memling. Paris: 69.

1928 Hulin de Loo, Georges. "Hans Memlinc in Rogier

van der Weyden's Studio." BurlM 52: 171.

1928 Friedlânder. Vol. 6: 30, 127, no. 60, pi. 34 (vol.

6a, 1971: 2i, 53, no. 60, pi. 104).

1930 International Studio 97 (December): repro. 28.

1930 V[ollmer], H[ans]. "Memling." In Thieme-Becker

16'- 375-376.

1934 Huisman, Georges. Memlinc. Paris: 146.

1935 Tietze, Hans. Meisterwerke europdischer Malerei

in Amerika. Vienna: 334, no. 135, fig. 135.

Ï937 Jewell, Edward Alden. "Mellon's Gift." MagArt

30: repro. 72.

1937 Cortissoz, Royal. An Introduction to the Mellon

Collection. Privately printed: 34.

1941 Duveen Pictures in Public Collections of America.

New York: not paginated, no. 178, repro.

1941 NGA: 132, no. 41.

1941 Tolnay, Charles de. "Flemish Paintings in the National Gallery of Art." MagArt 34: 181-182, 200, fig. 10.

1942 Baldass, Ludwig von. Hans Memling. Vienna: 22,

43, no. 70, fig. 70-

1945 Comstock, Helen. "A Memling for the Nelson

Gallery of Art." Conn 116: 37.

1949 Mellon: 57, repro.

1953 Panofsky. ENP: 349-350, 507, fig. 481.

1955 Verhaegen, Nicole. "Notes à propos de Jean Gossart et d'une Tentation de S. Antoine.' " BMRBA 4:181.

1960 Broadley, Hugh. Flemish Painting in the National

Gallery of Art. Washington: 24, repro. 25 (rev. ed. 1978).

1961 Birkmeyer, Karl M. "The Arch Motif in Netherlandish Painting of the Fifteenth Century: A Study in Changing Religious Imagery." AB 43:110-111, fig. 29.

1963 McNamee, M. B. "Further Symbolism in the Portinari Altarpiece." AB 45: 143, fig. 2.

1963 Van Schoute, Roger. Primitifs flamands. Corpus.

Grenada. Brussels: 77.

1962/1963 Mirimonde, A. P. de. "Les anges musiciens

chez Memling."//?Antwerp: 14, 53.

1964 Denis, Valentin. "Memling." In Encyclopedia of

World Art. 16 vols. New York, London, and Toronto, 9: col.

733-

1968 Cuttler. Northern Painting: 175, fig. 217.

1969 Rensch, Roslyn. The Harp: Its History, Technique

and Repertoire. London: 55, pi. i8a.

1969 Pauwels, H. In Anonieme Vlaamse Primitieven.

Exh. cat. Groeningemuseum. Bruges: 45—46.

1969 Corti, Maria, and Giorgio T. Faggin. L'opéra

completa di Memling. Milan: 107, no. 78, repro.

1971 Ward, John L. "A Proposed Reconstruction of an

Altarpiece by Rogier van der Weyden." AB 53: 29.

1972 Campbell, Lome. Review of Hans Memling by

K. B. McFarlane. In Apollo 96: 564.

1975 NGA: 230, repro. 231.

1976 Walker: 130, no. 126, repro.

1977 Eisler: 59, under K2o88 (1961.9.28).

1984 Lane, Barbara G. The Altar and the Altarpiece.

Sacramental Themes in Early Netherlandish Painting. New

York: 32, fig. 21.

1937.1.42 (42)

Portrait of a Man with an Arrow

c. 1470/1475

Probably oak, 31.9 x 25.8 (i29/i6x io3/io)

painted surface: 31.3 X25.i (i25/i6X97/s)1

Andrew W. Mellon Collection

Technical Notes: Comparison with the x-radiograph shows

that the bottom and left edges have been filled and extended

over what was originally unpainted wood (fig. i). Thus the

sitter's hand originally occupied the corner of the painting,

with his fingertips at the painting's margin. X-ray fluorescence indicates the presence of modern pigments such as

cadmium yellow, zinc white, and Prussian blue in the extended portions of the hand and along all four edges. At some

point after these extensions were made the original panel was

set into a new mount visible on all four sides as exposed

wood.2 The face, hair, and hat are in good condition with

some scattered areas of abrasion and inpainting in the

sitter's proper left cheek.

The background was originally a bright blue-green, but

the surface layer has discolored, accounting for its present

dark appearance. Patches of bright blue are still visible under

the microscope, especially at the edge of the hair.3 The light

188 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Hans Memling, Portrait of a Man with an Arrow, 1937.1.42,

HANS MEMLING 189
appearance of the background in the x-radiograph is apparently due to the thick layer of azurite in this area. In the

x-radiograph the background shows a wide traction crackle

not visible on the surface. A change in the contour of the

sitter's hair at the right is visible in infrared photographs and,

more clearly, in infrared reflectography. The boundary of the

hair was moved further to the right here.

Provenance: British private collection, until i895.4 (Bourgeois, Cologne, i895.)5

 Baron Albert Oppenheim, Cologne,

from 1895 [d. 1912,].6 (F. Kleinberger and Co., New York,

1912—1916.)7 Michael Dreicer, New York, from 1916 [d.

192,1]. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, bequest of Michael Dreicer, 192.1 (ace. no. 2.2.60.45). Mrs.

Dreicer Whyte, widow of Michael Dreicer, by March, 19 3 3.8

(M. Knoedler & Co., New York, by 1936.) Purchased February 1936 by The A. W. Mellon Educational and Charitable

Trust, Pittsburgh.

Exhibitions: Bruges, Hôtel de Gouvernement Provincial,

1902,, Exposition des primitifs flamands et d'art ancien, no.

70. // Brussels, Hôtel Goffinet, 1912., Exposition de la miniature, no. 2031.

THIS is a relatively early portrait by Memling, probably painted about 1470 to 1475. The sitter wears

Burgundian dress, a black doublet under a brown robe

with padded and extended shoulders. His tall, black

cap has an upturned rim to which is pinned a badge of

the Virgin and Child on a crescent moon.9 Although

the vertical accent of the tall cap is now scarcely visible,

the very dark blue-green background was originally

brighter and in stronger contrast to the figure. Since the

painted surface has been slightly extended at the bottom and left edges, the sitter's hand must originally

have occupied the corner of the picture, with the fingers resting on the frame, possibly even overlapping

the frame as in Memling's Portrait of a Woman in the

Saint John's Hospital, Bruges.10 The position of the

hand would be comparable to that in Memling's Portrait of a Young Man in the Accademia, Venice (fig. z).

This would result in a rather cramped and ambiguous

placement of the golden arrow, raising the possibility

that the arrow, though very old, was not part of the

original conception of the portrait.11

Fig. i. Hans Memling,

Portrait of a Man with an Arrow,

1937.1.42,, x-radiograph
The precise meaning of the arrow is unclear. In a

number of other fifteenth-century Netherlandish portraits, sitters also hold an arrow as an attribute. These

are: Rogier van der Weyden's portrait of Antoine de

Bourgogne, the illegitimate son of Philip the Good, in

Brussels;12 the Man with an Arrow in the Koninklijk

Museum voor Schone Kunsten, Antwerp;13 and a fulllength portrait of Charles the Bold in a copy of the

Statutes of the Order of the Golden Fleece in the British

Library.14 The arrows in these portraits may not all be

of the same type, nor can it be assumed that they all

convey the same associations. Thus the man in the

Antwerp portrait holds an oversize arrow,15 while the

subjects of the other three portraits carry what seem to

be ordinary longbow arrows. Helmut Nickel has suggested that oversize arrows held by armed men are a

sign of military authority, pointing to depictions of

such arrows held by military commanders in narrative

contexts where their leadership role is clear, as well as

to surviving oversize elaborately decorated ceremonial

arrowheads.16

The ordinary arrows in the context of a portrait are

more difficult to interpret. In 1926 Wilhelm Stein advanced the theory, in relation to the Antwerp portrait

whose sitter he identified as Jean Lefèvre de Saint Remy,

that the arrow referred to the sitter's role as judge of a

tournament.17 This suggestion was repeated by Buttin,

Nickel, and Kantorowicz.18 While some Burgundian

chroniclers do mention the judge of a tournament

throwing down an arrow to stop combat,19 the judge's

signal is much more frequently described as given with

a baton (bastón).20 Another possibility is that the arrows refer to the archery guilds, which played an important role in most cities and small towns in the Netherlands in the fifteenth century, and more specifically

to the position of king of the guild awarded in an annual shooting competition.

The award most frequently went to a member of the

guild, but it was not uncommon for a prince or dignitary to enter and win the competition. Thus Antoine de

Bourgogne was king of the Guild of Saint Sebastian in

Bruges in 1463,21 and Charles the Bold was king of the

Brussels archers guild from 1466 to 1471.22 A tradition of portraits of kings of archery guilds holding arrows as a badge of office from the seventeenth century

on gives weight to the possibility that the fifteenthcentury portraits can be seen in this context.23

 In any

case, the arrow was, in all probability, added at some

time after completion of the painting in reference to a

newly acquired honor.

In its present state, the Gallery's portrait includes no

armorial bearings or other specific indications of the

sitter's identity. Nevertheless, Ernst Kantorowicz put

Fig. 2,. Hans Memling, Portrait of a Man,

Venice, Accademia [photo: Alinari]

forward the hypothesis that he is Francesco d'Esté,

based on comparison to Francesco's features in documented portraits, one by Rogier van der Weyden in the

Metropolitan Museum24 and another in a miniature in

the Este family iconography in Rome.25 Francesco

d'Esté was born about 142.9, the illegitimate son of

Lionello d'Esté, marquess of Ferrara, and was a member of the Burgundian court for most of his career. The

portrait by Rogier would show him as a young man,

his features interpreted in Rogier's austere and elegant

late portrait style. While the features of the sitter in the

Gallery's portrait—the high-bridged aquiline nose,

projecting lower lip, and prominent rounded chin—do

show some similarity to the less idealized portrait of

Francesco in the Este iconography, the extreme rarity

of securely identified fifteenth-century portraits makes

it rash to identify a sitter based on facial features alone.

The Man with an Arrow has been unreservedly accepted as the work of Memling.26

 It is closest to his

portraits of Tommaso and Maria Maddalena Portinari

in the Metropolitan Museum in the set of the head and

shoulders, in the attention to the volume of the head,

and in the fineness of detail and texture, an analogy

that suggests a date of 1470 to 1475.27

M.W.

HANS MEMLING 191
Notes

1. These dimensions include the areas that have been

filled and extended; see Technical Notes.

2. Two portraits in the Metropolitan Museum, Portrait

of a Man by Dieric Bouts (ace. no. 14.40.644) and Portrait of

an Old Man by Memling (ace. no. 14.40.648), which were

together with the Portrait of a Man with an Arrow in a British

private collection and in the Oppenheim collection, have also

been set into new panels. Friedlànder 1919/1920, 107-108,

reported that the portraits were all in one frame when Oppenheim acquired them.

3. The composition of the background is very similar to

that of the Portinari portraits by Memling in the Metropolitan Museum; Friedlànder, vol. 6a (1971), nos. 69—70, pis.

111—113.

4. According to a letter of 17 November 1911, from

Friedlànder to Kleinberger in the archives of the department

of European paintings, Metropolitan Museum, under Bouts,

Portrait of a Man (ace. no. 14.40.644); information kindly

supplied by Lome Campbell.

5. Friedlànder letter cited in preceding note.

6. Letter cited in n. 4.

7. Sold to Dreicer 5 January 1916, according to information in the Kleinberger archive, department of European

paintings, Metropolitan Museum; information kindly transmitted by Mary Sprinson de Jesús.

8. I am grateful to Mary Sprinson de Jesús for this information; letter of 6 September 1979 in curatorial files.

9. This pin may reflect a particular devotion on the sitter's part or his membership in a confraternity.

TO. Friedlànder, vol. 6a (1971), no. 94, pi. 113. For Memling's use of illusionistic devices that appear to extend beyond

the picture plane, see Jan Bialostocki, "Modes of Reality and

Representation of Space in Memlinc's Donor Wings of the

Last Judgment Triptych," Essays in Northern European Art

Presented to Egbert Haverkamp-Begemann on his Sixtieth

Birthday (Doornspijk, 1983), 38-42.

11. That the arrow is painted over the blue-green background tends to support this notion. X-ray fluorescence

pointed to the presence of azurite (for the background), lead

white, lead tin yellow, and vermilion in the arrow feather,

pigments consistent with an early date. Modern pigments

were found in the lower part of the arrow where the design

was extended; see Technical Notes.

12. Friedlànder, vol. 2 (1967), no. 37, pi. 58. Lome Campbell has positively identified the sitter, "Rogier van der Weyden's 'Portrait of a Knight of the Golden Fleece': The Identity

of the Sitter," BMRBA 21 (1972), 7-14.

13. Probably a replica of a lost painting by Rogier van der

Weyden or his workshop; Friedlànder, vol. 2 (1967), no. 44,

pi. 65. Stein 1926, 21—24, identified the subject as Jean Lefèvre de Saint Remy, king of arms of the Order of the Golden

Fleece, through an interpretation of the inscriptions on the

banderolles and clock. This identification was challenged by

Wuyts 1969, 67—95. Most significantly, among other arguments adduced by Wuyts, the subject does not wear the blazon

that was the king of arms' badge of office.

14. Ms. Harley 6199, fol. 69, probably executed shortly

after 1481; see Paul Durrieu, La miniature flamande (Brussels and Paris, 1921), 58-59, pi. LVIII.

15. Wuyts 1969, 65-66, 81-83. He also holds a dagger.

16. Nickel 1968, 61-90. He describes the arrow in the

Antwerp portrait as an ordinary arrow, however, 78.

17. Stein 1926, 22—23; seen. 13 above for problems with

this identification of the sitter.

18. Buttin 1954, 57—64 (apparently unaware that Stein

had suggested Lefèvre as the subject of the Antwerp portrait);

Nickel 1968, 83-85; and Kantorowicz 1939/1940,178.

19. Lefèvre de Saint Remy describes Philip the Good

throwing down an arrow to end combat in a tournament in

1435, Chronique de Jean Le Fèvre, seigner de SaintRemy . . . , 2 vols. (Paris, 1876-1881), 2: 318-319, and a

similar usage is mentioned in Antoine de la Sale, L'Hystoire et

plaisante cronique de Petit Jehan de Saintre et de la jeune

dame des Belles Cousines (Paris, 1843), 173, both quoted by

Buttin 1954, 62-63.

20. See other examples quoted by Buttin 1954, 60-63,

 as

well as Lefèvre de Saint Remy's description of the "pas de la

Fontaine de Plours," "Epître de Jean le Fèvre, Seigneur de

Saint-Remy," éd. F. Morand in Société de l'Histoire de France.

Annuaire-Bulletin (1884), 216, 221, 223, 228. Buttin's argument that bastón is a generic term for arrow does not seem to

be sufficient explanation for these descriptions.

21. Henri Godar, Histoire de la gilde des archers de Saint

Sébastien de la ville de Bruges (Bruges, 1947), 114, 518.1 am

grateful to Professor Paul Rosenfeld for bringing this and the

following reference to my attention.

22. Alphonse Wauters, "Notice historique sur les anciens

sermens ou gildes d'arbalétriers, d'archers, d'arquebusiers, et

d'escrimeurs de Bruxelles," La Belgique Communale i

(1847), 1048.

23. For Bruges archers, see Godar 1947, fig. 6i. For kings

of the Bruges guild of crossbowmen, Andre Vanhoutrywe,

De Bruges Kruisbouggilde van Sint-Joris (Handzame, 1968),

pis. 31-32; in addition to holding a crossbow bolt, these

victorious competitors wear a jewelled prize as a pendant.

Membership in these guilds was restricted to citizens of Bruges.

24. Kantorowicz 1939/1940, 178, an identification first

proposed by Stein 1936, 30—31, who, however, misidentified

the portrait by Rogier van der Weyden in the Metropolitan

Museum as that of Lionello d'Esté. For Rogier's portrait, see

Friedlànder, vol. 2 (1967), no. 23, pi. 44.

25. Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale VittorioEmanuele, Ms.

Vitt. Eman. 293, probably compiled in or shortly after 1476;

repro. Kantorowicz 1939/1940, fig. 32b.

26. Only Huisman 1934, 149, and Wilenski 1960, 686,

contested the attribution to Memling. Hulin de Loo 1902,

17, no. 70, supported the attribution to Memling while stating

that it had been questioned.

27. See n. 3 above. Memling's portraits probably fall between the sitters' marriage in 1470 and their portraits on Van

der Goes' Portinari altarpiece of c. 1475/1476; see Friedrich

Winkler, Das Werk des Hugo van der Goes (Berlin, 1964),

24.

References

1899 Kaemmerer, Ludwig. Memling. Bielefeld and

Leipzig: 20-21, fig. 16.

1900 Nieuwbarn, M. C. Hans Memling. Leipzig: no.

52, repro.

1900/1901 Voll, Karl. Review of Memling by Ludwig

Kaemmerer. In Kunstchronik N.F. 12: 115.

1902 Hymans, Henri. "L'Exposition des primitifs flamands à Bruges." GBA 3e

 pér. 28: 292, repro. opp. 294,

etching by J. Vyboud (repr. as a book, Paris, 1902: 60).

1902 Hulin de Loo, Georges. Bruges. Exposition des

192 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
tableaux flamands des XIVe

, XVe, et XVIe siècles. Catalogue

critique. Ghent: 17, no. 70.

1903 Weale, W. H. James. 'The Early Painters of the

Netherlands as Illustrated by the Bruges Exhibition of 1901."

BurlM i : 336.

1903 Friedlânder, Max J. "Die Brügger Leihausstellung

von 1902." R/K 26: 82.

1903 Mont, Pol de. L'Evolution de la peinture néerlandaise aux XIVe

, XVe et XVIe siècles et l'exposition de Bruges.

Haarlem: no. 106, repro.

1904 Molinier, Emile. Collection du Baron Albert Oppenbeim. Tableaux et objets d'art. Paris: 10, no. 25, pi. XXII.

1906 Voll, Karl. Die altniederlàndische Malerei von Jan

van Eyck bis Memling. Leipzig: 188-189, 2.2.5.

1909 Voll, Karl. Memling (Klassiker der Kunst). Stuttgart and Leipzig: 21, repro.

1910 Wurzbach, Alfred von. "Memling." In Niederlàndisches Künstler-Lexikon. 3 vols. Vienna and Leipzig, 2:

140.

1912. Fierens-Gevaert. "Correspondance de Belgique.

L'Exposition de la miniature à Bruxelles." GBA 4e pér. 7:

194-195.

1916 Friedlânder, Max J. Von Eyck bis Bruegel. Berlin:

179-

1919/1920 Friedlânder, Max J. "About some of Hans

Memling's Pictures in the United States." Art in America 8:

107-108, fig. 2.

1922 Wehle, Harry B. "The Michael Dreicer Collection."

BMMA 17: loo, 102, repro.

19 24 Metropolitan Museum of Art. Catalogue of Paintings. 7th ed. Compiled by Bryson Burroughs. New York: 221

(8th ed. 1926: 233; 9th ed. 1931: 241).

1926 Stein, Wilhelm. "Die Bildnisse von Roger van der

Weyden."/b£er/m47: 30-31.

1928 Friedlânder. Vol. 6: 44,131, no. 85 (vol. 6a, 1971,

28-29, 56, 130, no. 85, pi. 119).

1927-1929 Fierens-Gevaert, Hippolyte, and Paul Fierens. Histoire de la peinture flamande des origines à la fin du

XVe siècle. 3 vols. Paris and Brussels, 3: 62, 72.

1930 V[ollmer], H[ans]. "Memling." In Thieme-Becker

24: 376.

1934 Huisman, Georges. Memlinc. Paris: 149.

1935 Fierens, Paul. Memling. Paris: no. 13, repro.

1937 Cortissoz, Royal. An Introduction to the Mellon

Collection. Privately printed: 35.

1939 Bazin, Germain. Memling. Paris: 20, pi. 6.

1939/1940 Kantorowicz, Ernst H. "The Este Portrait

by Roger van der Weyden."/WC/ 3: 178, fig. 32C.

1941 NGA: 132, no. 42.

1941 Tolnay, Charles de. "Flemish Paintings in the National Gallery of Art." MagArt 34: 186, 200, repro. 187.

1941 Held, Julius S. "Masters of Northern Europe in the

National Gallery." ArtN40 (June): n, repro. 13.

1949 Mellon : 5 8, repro.

1954 Buttin, Charles. "La flèche des juges du camp."

Armes anciennes i: 59, pi. XX.

1960 Wilenski, R. H. Flemish Painters, 1430-1830.

New York: 686.

1968 Nickel, Helmut. "Ceremonial Arrowheads from

Bohemia." JMMA i: 78, fig. 31.

1968 Whinney, Margaret. Early Flemish Painting. New

York and Washington: 89, pi. 55.

1969 Corti, Maria, and Giorgio T. Faggin. L'opéra

completa di Memling. Milan: 111, no. 111, repro.

1969 Wuyts, L. "Aantekeningen bij een vermeend portret van Jean Lefèvre door Rogier van der Weyden." JbAntwerp: 82, fig. 14.

1975 NGA: 230, repro. 231.

1976 Walker: 131, repro., no. 127.

1952.5.46 (1125)

Saint Veronica

Reverse: Chalice of Saint John

the Evangelist

c. 1470/1475

Oak, 3i.2x 24.4 (i2V4x 99/io)

painted surface: 30.3 x 22.8 (n15/i6 x 9)

painted surface, reverse: 30.2 x 23 (n7/s x 9l/ie)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Technical Notes: The panel is composed of a single piece of

wood which has been unevenly trimmed at the top edge. It is

approximately . 5 cm thick at the bottom edge. The painting

on the front of the panel is in excellent condition, with only a

few scattered small losses. There are some small areas of

abrasion in the sky. The back is in less good condition, having

received a number of nicks and scratches as well as more

abrasion. However, the chalice and snake are well preserved

with only a few small losses. The front of the panel was

cleaned and restored in 1982 and the reverse cleaned and

restored in 1983.

The figure of Saint Veronica is fully underdrawn in what

appears to be black chalk (fig. i), but infrared reflectography

revealed minimal underdrawing in the landscape. The underdrawing on the reverse is free and cursory, providing a more

general guide for the painted design, including the shadow

cast by the chalice (fig. 2).

Provenance: Probably Bernardo Bembo, Venice or Verona

[d. 1519]. Probably Pietro Bembo, his son, Padua [d. 1547]^

Nicolai Demidoff, San Donato, near Florence [d. i828].2

Anatole Demidoff, Prince of San Donato, his son, San Donato,

near Florence (sale, Paris, 3 March 1870, no. 204, repro.,

etching by Rajou). Private collection, Italy, until c. 1928.

 3

(Matthiesen Gallery, Berlin.) (Paul Cassirer, Berlin.)4 Baron

Heinrich Thyssen-Bornemisza, Villa Favorita, Lugano-Castagnola, by 1930. (M. Knoedler ÔC Co., New York, 1950—

Exhibitions: Munich, Neue Pinakothek, 1930, Sammlung

Schloss Rohoncz, no. 222 // Munich. Alte Pinakothek,

1931 // Washington, National Gallery of Art, 1983, Raphael and America , no. 78.

THIS PANEL was evidently once part of a small

winged altarpiece. With a slight turning gesture, Saint

HANS MEMLING 193
Hans Memling, Saint Veronica, 1952.5.46

194 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Hans Memling, Chalice of Saint John the Evangelist, 1952.5.46 (reverse)

HANS MEMLING 195
Fig. i. Infrared reflectogram assembly of detail of Saint Veronica,

1952.5.46 [infrared reflectography: Molly Paries]

196

Veronica displays the kerchief miraculously imprinted

with Christ's face. Her pose seems to acknowledge

other elements of the design at her right-hand. On the

back of the panel, a wall with a niche containing the

chalice of Saint John the Evangelist is painted in the

cool, subdued tones characteristic of an altarpiece exterior. In all probability the painting was part of a

diptych, the left half of which was the Saint John the

Baptist now in the Alte Pinakothek, Munich (figs. 3,

4).5 This suggestion was first made in 1930 by Rudolf

Heinemann, who also linked the panels to a diptych

recorded as belonging to the Bembo family in the early

sixteenth century.6 While Heinemann's suggestion has

found many supporters, the documents regarding the

Bembo panels are not without contradictions. The fact

that the reverse of the Gallery's panel shows the attribute of Saint John the Evangelist rather than of the

Baptist and that the reverse of the Munich painting

shows a skull in a rectangular rather than a rounded

niche has led to a number of other hypotheses.

The first mention of the presumed diptych is a letter

of 31 August 1501 written by Carlo Bembo on behalf

of his father, Bernardo, to Isabella d'Esté, and accompanying a loan of some paintings to her in Mantua.

Included in the shipment were a Saint John and a Veronica together, both the work of a Northern artist.7

About three decades later, after the death of Bernardo

Bembo, two Flemish paintings are more specifically

described as a diptych and given to Memling in MarEARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING

cantonio Michiel's notes on the paintings belonging to

another of Bernardo's sons, the celebrated poet Pietro

Bembo: "El quadretto in due portelle del San Zuan

Baptista vestito, cun lagnello che siede in un paese da

una parte, et la nostra donna cun el puttino da laltro in

un altro paese, furona de man de Zuan Memglino,

Fig. 2.. Infrared reflectogram assembly of detail of Saint

Veronica (reverse), 1952.5.46 [infrared reflectography:

Molly Paries]
Fig. 3. Hans Memling, Saint John the Baptist, Munich, Alte

Pinakothek [photo: Bayerische Staatsgemàldesammlungen]

Hans Memling, Saint Veronica

Fig. 4. Hans Memling, Saint John the Baptist

(reverse), Munich, Alte Pinakothek [photo:

Bayerische Staatsgemàldesammlungen]

lanno 1470, in salvo el vero."8 Finally, Jacopo Morelli,

the early nineteenth-century Venetian archivist who

first published Marcantonio Michiel's notes in 1800,

stated that he had seen what he presumed was the wing

with the Baptist described by Marcantonio in a Venetian private collection in 1801. Morelli described it as

having a death's head and the inscription MORIERIS on

the reverse.9 Lome Campbell, in publishing Morelli's

note, points out that his description corresponds to the

reverse of the Munich painting as revealed in a recent

cleaning, but that the precise basis for the link with the

Bembo diptych remains unclear.

Taken together, these documents contain some contradictions. It is not obvious that the northern Saint

John and Saint Veronica mentioned in Carlo Bembo's

letter of 1501 formed a diptych, nor that the Baptist

was the saint represented. Moreover, while Michiel's

description of a robed Baptist with a seated lamb in a

landscape can be readily linked with the Munich painting,

 10

 his identification of the other wing as a Madonna

and Child seems to exclude the Gallery's painting. Sterling suggested, apparently without knowing the 1502

HANS MEMLING 197
Fig. 5. Hans Memling, Floreins Triptych (exterior), Bruges,

Sint-Janshospitaal [photo: Copyright A.C.L. Brussels]

letter, that Memling painted pendant diptychs, one

representing the Baptist and the Madonna and Child

and the other Saint John the Evangelist and Saint

Veronica.11 While resolving the problem of the

Evangelist's chalice, this suggestion does seem to strain

the bounds of probability, especially in view of the

formal unity between the Munich and Washington

panels. The alternate possibility, that Michiel confused

the Veronica with the Madonna and Child, at first

appears equally improbable. Yet, as Jennifer Fletcher

pointed out in a recent study of Marcantonio Michiel,

the diarist's grasp of religious iconography and the lives

of the saints in particular is frequently shaky. Her

suggestion of the thought process by which Michiel

could have substituted the Veronica for the Madonna

is plausible.12

The formal unity between the Munich and Washington panels is the most important evidence for the

diptych, however. The dimensions of the two saints'

images are the same,13 and the landscape is continuous

across the two panels. The pool of water visible between the foreground hillocks and the craggy rocks at

the right of the Saint John continues across into the

Saint Veronica. In each panel the elements that mark

the stages of the landscape recession appear at the same

level and are treated in the same manner. Thus the

broad-leafed plants in the foreground give way to finer

sprays of vegetation, and a rocky promontory topped

by feathery trees fills the middle distance across the

panels. The scale of the figures in relation to the landscape is the same, and their slightly turning poses are

complimentary. The clear, bright colors of the Baptist's red cloak and Veronica's blue mantle dominate

the landscape, while very similar purple-grays determine the subdued tones of each exterior. In addition to

these formal consonances, the pairing of the Baptist

and Saint Veronica is entirely in keeping with Memling's practice of repeating and varying his own* compositions. The same two saints, in very similar poses,

are paired on the closed wings of the Floreins triptych

in Bruges, dated 1479 (fig. 5).14

Saint Veronica was a legendary personage whose

name and cult are connected with the vera icon, or

sudarium, a cloth imprinted with Christ's features and

venerated as a relic in Saint Peter's in Rome from at

least the middle of the twelfth century.15 Saint Veronica's popularity increased through the fifteenth century. It was thought that the miraculous image was

created when the saint wiped Christ's face with her

kerchief as he carried the cross to Calvary. She is usu198 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
ally depicted holding her kerchief before her so that the

head of Christ regards the viewer, either with the serene and abstracted gaze of the Salvator Mundi, as

here, or in the aspect of the Passion, crowned with

thorns. Images of the miraculous portrait were supposed to be safeguards against violent death, and Saint

Veronica herself was a protectress against sudden

death without benefit of the sacraments.

Memling's pairing of Saint Veronica with Saint

John the Baptist emphasizes Christ's role as redeemer,

as Vida Hull has pointed out in the context of the

Floreins triptych.16 In the presumed Bembo diptych,

Saint John gestures towards the Lamb of God, which is

both his own attribute and the symbol of Christ's sacrifice, while Saint Veronica displays the icon of Christ

the Saviour. These christological symbols, especially

the large sudarium, assume greater prominence through

the reserved gestures and downcast eyes of the saints.17

The reverse of the presumed diptych remains difficult

to interpret. Possibly it connected the need for redemption with the more personal anxieties of the diptych's

owner. Certainly the death's head and inscription

MORIERIS (you will die) sound a direct note of warning.

Wolfgang Kermer has suggested that the highly unusual depiction of the chalice of Saint John the Evangelist may have had anti-demonic associations.18

 As

far as the problem of the rectangular and arched niches

is concerned, it is evident from the few diptychs that

survive intact that the backs of these small, personal

altarpieces were not governed by conventions of formal unity. One or the other back may have been

painted, and in cases where both were decorated, they

were not necessarily equivalent images.19

Apart from the evidence of the added inscription on

the Munich panel and the date reported by Michiel, the

Munich and Washington panels should be considered

on stylistic grounds to be among Memling's relatively

early works. They must precede the Floreins triptych of

1479, in which the same figure types are treated with

the more complex play of light and shade and more

elongated proportions of the artist's later paintings.20

Memling's conception of figures in a landscape, as

well as the stylized plants and foliage of these two

panels, may be reflected in the young Raphael's Saint

George and the Dr agon ^ 1937.1.26 in the National

Gallery, and Canigiano Holy Family in the Alte Pinakothek, Munich.21

 A more specific Italian reflection of

the presumed diptych, and further evidence of its early

Italian provenance, is a Raphaelesque portrait in Munich, which repeats the landscape of the Saint John the

Baptist.22

M.W.

Notes

1. See commentary below.

2. According to catalogue of the Demidoff sale, 3 March

1870, no. 204.

3. According to Friedlànder 1928, 125.

4. According to Friedlànder 1930, no. 27.

5. No. 652, 3i.6x 24.4 cm (30.5 x 2 3.1, painted surf ace,

front), approximately .5 cm thick at bottom edge; added

inscription H. V. D. GOES /1472 at lower right. A painted verso

showing a skull in a rectangular niche with the inscription

MORIERIS chiseled in the wall below was revealed in a recent

cleaning, see [Peter Eikemeier] 1983, 341. I am indebted to

Dr. Eikemeier and the staff of the Alte Pinakothek for their

gracious help with queries about the Munich painting.

6. Rudolf Heinemann-Fleischmann 1930, 66.

7. ". . . mando etiam per el dito porta tore ala S.a uostra

un San Ziouani et una Veronica adinsime ambi lauor oltramontano che credo non spiacere a la S.a

 uostra di uedere.

..." The letter was published by Vittorio Cian, "Pietro Bembo e Isabella d'Esté Gonzaga. Note e documenti," Giornale

storico della letter atura italiana 9 (1887), 85—86; see also

Campbell 1981, 468—471, who summarizes the documents

relating to the presumed diptych and adds important new

material.

Bernardo Bembo was at that time away from Venice on a

diplomatic mission. Carlo Bembo died in 1503. For the

Bembo family see Dizionario biográfico degli italiani (Rome,

1966), 8: 103-109 and 133-151.

8. "The little painting with two wings of Saint John the

Baptist clothed, with a lamb that sits in a landscape on one

side, and Our Lady with the little Child on the other [side] in

another landscape, by the hand of Hans Memling, year 1470,

this being true;" D. Jacopo Morelli, Notizia d'op ere di disegno (Bassano, 1800), 17, and Theodor von Frimmel, Der

Anónimo Morelliano (Quellenschriften fur Kunstgeschichte

undKunsttechnik) N.F. i (Vienna, 1896), 86. Pietro Bembo's

paintings were then in Padua. Jennifer Fletcher, "Marcantonio Michiel: his friends and collection," BurlM 123 (1981),

461, dates Michiel's notice of Pietro Bembo's collection in the

15205 or early 15308.

9. Campbell 1981, 471. The painting was then in the

possession of the Abate Alvise Celotti. In 1819/1820 it was

acquired by King Max I of Bavaria in Mannheim.

10. It was, in fact, first linked to the Munich painting by

Gustavo Frizzoni, Notizia d'opéré di disegno pubblicata et

illustrata da D. Jacopo Morelli, 2d ed. (Bologna, 1884), 44.

11. Sterling 1952, 127, n. 33, noting that a Saint John on

Patmos could be paired with the Saint Veronica. This suggestion was taken up by Shapley andShapley 1957,122,132.0

Brown 1981, 27, also suggested that the Bembo family

owned two Memling diptychs, one comprised of the Munich

and Washington panels and another resembling the reconstituted diptych of the Madonna and Child with Saints and

Saint John the Baptist and a Donor in the Louvre (Friedlander, vol. 6a [1971], no. 15, pi. 54).

Hull 1981,124,140, thought a triptych made up of panels

of equal size with the Madonna and Child in the center was

another possibility. In this case, the wings would not close

over the center, which seems improbable given the painted

backs.

12. Fletcher 1981, 604-605. Noting that the Veronica is

not common in Venetian art, she suggests that, when writing

up his notes, he recalled seeing a seated woman with someHANS MEMLING 199
thing involving a head in her lap and guessed that it was the

Madonna. If the Munich panel were indeed joined in a diptych with a Madonna and Child, then both the saint's pose

and Michiel's description indicate that the Madonna would,

of necessity, be on the right side. That she should occupy the

less honored sinister half of a diptych is unusual, a rare example being a grisaille diptych in the Louvre, probably after

Jan van Eyck; repro. Charles Sterling, "Jan van Eyck avant

1432," RArt no. 32 (1976), fig. 52.

13. See Technical Notes and n. 5 above.

14. Friedlànder, vol. 6a (1971), no. 2, pis. 4, 7.

15. An earlier tradition connected Veronica and the image

with the woman cured of an issue of blood. For Saint Veronica, see K. Pearson, Die Fronica (Strasbourg, 1887); Ernst

von Dobschütz. Christusbilder (Texte und Untersuchungen

zur Geschichte des altchristlichen LiteraturN.Y. 3) (Leipzig,

1899), 197—2.60; and Réau, Iconographie, vol. 2, part 3,

1314-1317.

16. Hull 1981,126-128.

17. According to Eisler 1977, 56, the pool, which is especially prominent in the Munich panel, probably refers to the

Baptism of Christ, while the winding road behind Saint Veronica may refer to the road to Calvary. It is noteworthy that

such narrative references are much more explicit in the Floreins triptych, where a vignette of the Baptism occupies the

background of one wing and a ship, perhaps the one in which

the legendary Saint Veronica and her kerchief traveled to

Rome, is shown in the background of the other.

18. Kermer 1967, 187, 293-294. This attribute of Saint

John the Evangelist refers to a miracle performed by him on

the island of Ephesus. The high priest of the Temple of Diana

wished to test the power of the Evangelist's faith by having

him drink from a poisoned cup. After blessing the cup, the

saint drank the poison without harm; see Ryan and Ripperger, The Golden Legend, i: 61. The coiling snake represents

the poison leaving the cup. Prayers and charms with associations of exorcism which are connected with this episode in

the legend of Saint John may have been more current in

Germany than in the Netherlands; Gustav Gugitz, Fest- und

Branchturnskalendar fur Ôsterreich, Suddeutschland und die

Schweiz (Vienna, 1955), 162—163.

The Evangelist's symbol may also refer to the name saint

of the diptych's first owner. However, there is no basis for the

supposition, raised by Kermer 1967, 187, and Eisler 1977,

56, that this was Jan Floreins, who made his profession as a

brother of the Saint John's Hospital, Bruges, in 1479.

19. The back of Hugo van der Goes' diptych of the Fall of

Man in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, may be analogous to the presumed diptych in function and appearance;

on one reverse Saint Geneviève, protectress against the plague

and fever, is depicted in grisaille, while a coat of arms formerly decorated the other. See [Klaus Demus, Friderike Klauner,

and Karl Schütz], Kunsthistorisches Museum, Katalog der

Gemâlde-Galerie. Flamische Malerei von Jan van Eyck bis

Pieter Bruegel d. A. (Vienna, 1981), 189-192, repro.

20. The Munich and Washington panels have been consistently dated before the Floreins triptych; for example, Hull

1981,124—126. Panofsky 1953,498, found the landscape of

the Saint John to be more advanced than that of the Veronica

panel and suggested a possible prototype by Hugo van der

Goes.

That the diptych could have been dated on its lost original

frame is suggested both by Michiel's report of a specific date

and by the inscription added to the Munich panel. A date in

the early 14705 is certainly in accord with Lome Campbell's

observation that Bernardo Bembo could have acquired the

diptych during his embassy to the court of Charles the Bold

from 1471 to 1474; Campbell 1981, 471.

21. Washington 1983, 153-157, 196-197, pi. 12, and

Shearman 1983, 25, for the Saint George; von Sonnenburg

1983, 26, for the Holy Family. Brown supposes that Pietro

Bembo took the diptych to the court at Urbino in 1506 and

that Raphael saw it there. It is also possible that Raphael had

access to another, similar devotional work by Memling.

22. Von Sonnenburg 1983, 26, and 107—108, figs. 121,

126. The porphyry columns framing the figure suggest the

influence of Memling's portrait convention as well.

References

1872 Crowe, J. A., and G. B. Cavalcaselle. The Early

Flemish Painters: Notices of their Lives and Works. 2d ed.

London: 299.

1916 Friedlànder, Max J. Von Eyck bis Bruegel. Berlin:

178.

1928 Friedlànder. Vol. 6:125^0.46 (vol. 6a, 1971: 52,

130, no. 46, pi. 95).

1930 Friedlànder, Max J. In Unknown Masterpieces in

Public and Private Collections. Ed. by W. R. Valentiner. London: unpaginated, no. 37, repro.

1930 "La vie artistique à l'étranger." Le Bulletin de l'art

ancien et moderne 58: 416, repro. 415.

1930 Mayer, August L. "Die Ausstellung der Sammlung

'Schloss Rohoncz' in der Neuen Pinakothek, München."

Panthéon 6: 297, repro. 305.

1937 Heinemann, Rudolf. Stiftung Sammlung Schloss

Rohoncz. 2 vols. Lugano-Castagnola, i: 104-105, no. 281,

pi. 68.

1939 Bazin, Germain. Memling. Paris: pis. 10, n.

1942 Baldass, Ludwig von. Hans Memling. Vienna: 20,

42, no. 57, fig. 57.

1949 Alexander, H. G. "The Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection at Lugano." Conn 123: 30, fig. VI.

1950 Krônig, Wolfgang. "Geertgens Bild Johannes des

Tâufers." Das Munster 3: 198.

1951 Frankfurter, Alfred M., "Interpreting Masterpieces." ArtNA 50, no. 7: 102, in,repros. 102, 105.

1952 Sterling, Charles. La Nature morte de l'antiquité

à nos jours. Paris: 27,127.

1953 Panofsky. ENP: 498.

1954 Ferguson, George. Signs and Symbols in Christian

Art. New York: pi. XI.

1957 Shapley, Fern Rusk, and John Shapley. Comparisons in Art: A Companion to the National Gallery of Art,

Washington, D. C. New York: 122,132, repro.

1959 Kress: 284-285, repro.

1960 Broadley, Hugh T. Flemish Painting in the National Gallery of Art. Washington: 5, 22, repro. 23.

1960 Flanders in the Fifteenth Century: Art and Civilization. Exh. cat. Detroit Institute of Arts. 1960: 144.

1961 Seymour, Charles, Jr. Art Treasures for America.

London: 62-63, 213, pis. 55, 56.

1962 Neugass, Fritz. "Die Auflôsung der Sammlung

Kress." Die Weltkunst 32: 4.

1967 Kermer, Wolfgang. Studien zum Diptychon in der

sakralen Malerei von den Anfàngen bis zur Mitte des sechzehnten Jahrhunderts. 2 vols. Ph.D. diss. Eberhard-KarlsUniversitàt, Tubingen, i: 184-187, 292-294; 2: 139-141,

no. 139, figs. 178, 179.

1969 Corti, Maria, and Giorgio T. Faggin. L'opéra

completa di Memling. Milan: 104, no. 59b, pi. 51.

ZOO EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
I971

 McFarlane, K. B. Hans Memling. Ed. Edgar Wind.

Oxford: 45, fig. 132..

1975 NGA: 2.32., repro. 233.

1977 Eisler: 55-57, figs. 50, 51-

1978 Chastel, André. "La Véronique." RArt no. 40/41:

75,82.

1979 Rosenbaum, Allen. Old Master Paintings from the

Collection of Baron Thyssen-Bornemisza. Exh. cat. International Exhibitions Foundation. Washington: 116.

1981 Hull, Vida Joyce. Memlinc's Paintings from the

Hospital of Saint John in Bruges. New York and London:

123-128,140-141, figs. 44, 45.

1981 Brown, Clifford M. "Un tableau perdu de Lorenzo

Costa et la collection de Florimond Robertet." RArt no. 52:

27-2.8, fig. 4.

1981 Campbell, Lome. "Notes on Netherlandish pictures in the Véneto in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries."

BurlM 123: 471, fig. 15.

1981 Fletcher, Jennifer. "Marcantonio Michiel, 'che ha

veduto assai.' " BurlM 123: 604—606.

1983 Shearman, John. "A drawing for Raphael's 'St.

George.'" BurlM 125: 25.

1983 [Peter Eikemeier], Alte Pinakothek München. Erlauterungzu den ausgestellten Gemdlden. Munich: 341.

1983 Sonnenburg, Hubertus von. Raphael in der Alten

Pinakothek. Exh. cat. Bayerische Staatsgemáldesammlungen.

Munich: 107-108.

1983 Shearman, John. The Early Italian Pictures in the

Collection of her Majesty the Queen. Cambridge: 210.

1984 Gould, Cecil. Review of John Shearman, The

Early Italian Pictures in the Collection of her Majesty the

Queen. In Apollo 119: 225.

HANS MEMLIN G 101
Antonis Mor

c. 1516/1520—0. 1575/1576

Antonis Mor van Dashorst, frequently referred to by

the Spanish form of his name, Antonio Moro, was a

native of Utrecht. The evidence concerning Mor's birth

and death dates is ambiguous. A document dated 17

April 1576 mentioning his son in the role of heir to his

estate has recently been interpreted to mean that Antonis had died by this date. The early biographers Van

Mander and Buchelius state that he died a year before

the massacre called the Spanish Fury (4 November

1576), but give different accounts of his age at death,

fifty-six or fifty-nine. His birthdate has therefore been

calculated as c. 1516/1520.

Mor was a pupil of Jan van Scorel in Utrecht. The

only certain early work by him is the double portrait of

the Canons Cornelis van Horn and Antonis Taels,

signed and dated 1544, in the Gemaldegalerie, Berlin.

In 1547 he registered as a master with the guild of Saint

Luke in Antwerp. By 1549 he was painter to Antoine

Perrenot de Granvelle, bishop of Arras and later Cardinal and a key figure in the Habsburg court. Mor's

next known works are the portraits of Granvelle and of

the Duke of Alba, in the Kunsthistorisches Museum,

Vienna, and the Hispanic Society, New York, respectively, both dated 1549. They show Mor already in

command of the type of formal state portraiture that

he was to practice at several European courts. Mor

may have accompanied Granvelle to the imperial Diet

in Augsburg in 1548 when Titian was also in Augsburg

working for Charles V, which would account for the

influence of Titian's portrait types on these early

works. Mor's work for Granvelle evidently recommended him to Prince Philip of Spain, the future Philip

II, and to his family, for in the next few years he traveled

to Spain, Portugal, and Italy painting members of the

Habsburg family. His portrait of Queen Mary of England, signed and dated 1554, was presumably painted

in England in connection with her marriage to Prince

Philip that year.

Mor seems to have lived primarily in Utrecht, where

he owned property, but to have divided his time between that city and Antwerp and Brussels. Toward the

end of his life he moved his household from Utrecht to

Antwerp. The date of this move is unclear; however, he

seems to have been settled in Antwerp by 1573.

Mor's portraits of princes and courtiers exercised a

strong influence on subsequent state portraiture, particularly in Spain. His somewhat less reserved portraits

of middle-class sitters influenced painting in Antwerp.

Mor also produced a number of religious works.

M.W.

Bibliography

Buchelius, Arnoldus. "Res Pictoriae" Ed. G. J. Hoogewerff

and J. Q. van Regieren Altena. Quellenstudien zur hollàndischen Kunstgeschichte. Vol. 15. The Hague, 192.8.

Mander, Carel van. Het Schilder-Boeck. Haarlem, 1604.

Marlier, Georges. "Antonis Mor van Dashorst (Antonio

Moro)." Académie Royale de Belgique. Classe des BeauxArts. Mémoires. Séries 2.. 3 Fase, z (1934).

De Vries, A. B. Het Noord-Nederlandsch Portret in de Tweede

Helft van de i6e Eeuw. Amsterdam, 1934.

Friedlànder. Vol. 13. 1936 (vol. 13,1975).

Frerichs, L. C. J. Antonis Moro. Amsterdam, 1947.

Wijburg, W. A., Jr. "Antonie Mor van Dashorst 'vermaard

schilder van Utrecht' en zijn naaste familie." De Nederlandsche Leeuw 76 (1959), cols. 230—2,48.

1937.1.52 (52)

Portrait of a Gentleman

Inscriptions:

At upper left: Antonius mor pingebat a. 1569

Technical Notes: The painting has been transferred from a

panel to a canvas support.1 The original support was composed of three boards joined vertically. The background,

originally very thinly painted, is now somewhat abraded and

has been rather heavily inpainted, perhaps to give it a more

finished appearance. In addition, a strip about one inch wide

has been repainted along the margin of the painting on all

sides. Inpainting is also evident in two vertical strips along the

former join lines, in the beard of the sitter to the left of his

mouth where there is a rather large loss, and in small scat2O2 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING

1569

Wood, transferred to canvas, 119.7x88.3 (47V8 x 343A)

Andrew W. Mellon Collection
Antonis Mor, Portrait of a Gentleman, 1937.1.52

ANTONIS MOR 203
tered patches on his forehead, cheeks, and hands. The signature and date appear to be original, though the signature has

been reinforced.

Provenance: Probably Sir Peter Lely, London [d. 1680] (sale,

London, 18 August 1682).2 George John, zd Earl Spencer,

Althorp House, Northamptonshire, by i8zz.3 The Earls

Spencer, Althorp House. Albert Edward John, yth Earl Spencer, Althorp House, until 192.7. (Duveen Brothers, New

York.) Purchased February 1930 by Andrew W. Mellon,

Washington. Deeded 28 December 1934 to The A. W.

Mellon Educational and Charitable Trust, Pittsburgh.

Exhibitions: Manchester, 1857, Exhibition of Art Treasures,

no. 513. // London, South Kensington Museum, 1866, Special Exhibition of National Portraits Ending with the Reign

of King James the Second, no. 186. // Manchester, Corporation of Manchester Art Gallery, 1897, Exhibition of the

Royal House of Tudor, no. 126. // London, Whitechapel

Art Gallery, 1904, Dutch Exhibition, no. 140. // London,

Royal Academy of Arts, 1907, Exhibition of Works by the

Old Masters, no. 8. // London, Royal Academy of Arts,

1927, Flemish and Belgian Art, 1300-1900, no. 231.

THE IDENTITY of the sitter is unknown, yet form

and accessories link this work to the tradition of court

portraiture, of which Mor was a leading exponent. The

massive hunting dog conveys aristocratic and princely

associations.4 Gold chains are a traditional sign of

honor and might have been bestowed on the sitter by a

prince.5 The standing three-quarter length pose also

suggests the sitter's high social position, as Mor favored

more informal seated poses for his middle-class subjects.6

When in the Spencer collection, this painting was

considered to be a self-portrait.7 Comparison with

Mor's self-portrait of 15 5 8 in the Uffizi shows not only

a lack of correspondence in the features, but a fundamental difference in the presentation of the sitter, which

is direct and modest in the case of the artist seated

before his easel and reserved and haughty in the Gallery's portrait.8

 Based on the mistaken assumption that

the painting was a self-portrait, it was commonly dated

in the early 15505, yet the treatment of the figure in

space agrees with the date of 1569 that was revealed

when the portrait was cleaned.9 In comparison to

Mor's earlier portraits in which the poses are aligned

with the frontal plane, the pose here is freer, as evident

in the sitter's more relaxed silhouette and in the arm

thrust out akimbo, emphasized by the play of highlights on the gray sleeve.10

 In its combination of aristocratic elegance and ease the Portrait of a Gentleman

anticipates Flemish portraiture of the next century,

notably that of Van Dyck.

The discovery of the date does not provide a firm

indication of where the portrait was painted, however.

About 15 69 Mor moved his household from Utrecht to

Antwerp, having commuted between Utrecht and the

southern Netherlands in the preceding years. Frerichs

maintained that the portrait was painted during a trip

to England in 1568/1569, based on the mistaken assumption that the 1568 Sir Henry Lee in the National

Portrait Gallery, London, would have been painted in

England.11

A drawing of the head from the Gallery's portrait in

colored chalks with watercolor is in the Musée Jacquemart-André, Chaalis, and has been cited both as Mor's

preparatory study for the portrait12 and as a copy after

the portrait by a sixteenth-century French artist.13 The

technique of the drawing does not justify either supposition. Indeed the regular cross hatching, strong contrast of dark and light in the face, and generalized treatment of ear and hair are not characteristic of a sixteenthcentury drawing.14

 Another copy of the head, on paper

laid down on panel, was sold at Christie's in 1954.15

M.W.

Notes

1. Presumably the painting was transferred after Duveen

acquired it, when it was also cleaned and restored. In the

catalogue of the 1927 Royal Academy exhibition, no. 231,

and in earlier catalogues it is described as on panel.

2. "A Man with a Gold Chain and a Dog," 3 ft 5 in by 2 ft

9 in, is listed after Antonis Mor's name in the handlist for the

sale of Sir Peter Lely's collection; "Sir Peter Lely's Collection," BurlM 83 (1943), 187. Lely's collection also included a

self-portrait, among other works by Mor. Dallaway's notes

to Walpole's Anecdotes 1826, i: 240, first connected the

painting, then in the Spencer collection, with the item in the

Lely sale.

Joanna Woodall has made the interesting suggestion that

the picture may be identical with a three-quarter length portrait by Mor in the Orléans collection, in conversation, 4

February 1985; see Louis-François Dubois de Saint-Gelais,

Description des Tableaux du Palais Royal. . . (Paris, 1727),

62-63,

 as

 the portrait of a Spaniard from the collection of

Monsieur, that is, Philippe de France, Duke of Orléans, d.

1701. This may be the picture sold with part of the Orléans

collection in London in April 1793, no. 49 for 15 guineas, as

a self-portrait by Mor; see Waagen 1854, 2: 501. Christiaan

Kramm (1857-1864) first linked the reference in the 1793

Orléans sale to the portrait then in the Spencer collection.

However, there are a number of discrepancies between

Dubois de Saint-Gelais' relatively precise description and the

Gallery's painting. Thus Dubois de Saint-Gelais does not

mention chains of honor, sword, or dagger, but does describe

a signet ring on the hand resting on the dog's collar. I am

grateful to Joanna Woodall for her comments on the

painting.

3. Dibdin 1822, i: 262-263.

4. The portraits of Charles V with a hound by Seisenegger and Titian, in Vienna and Madrid respectively, are most

notable among court portraits with hunting dogs; John PopeHennessy, The Portrait in the Renaissance (New York, 1966),

2.04 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTIN G
lyi—i?2

-? fig8- 190—191. Other examples include Cranach's

1514 portrait of Duke Henry the Pious of Saxony in Dresden

(Max J. Friedlánder and Jakob Rosenberg, The Paintings of

Lucas Cranach [Amsterdam, 1978], no. 60, fig. 60) and

Bronzino's portrait of Guidobaldo della Rovere, Duke of

Urbino, in the Pitti Palace (Andrea Emiliani, // Bronzino

[Milan, 1960], pi. 11 ). Socially restrictive hunting regulations

may account in part for the aristocratic associations of portraits with hunting animals; see Scott A. Sullivan, "Rembrandt's 'Self-Portrait with a Dead Bittern,' " AB 62 (1980),

236—243. In Mor's portrait of Cardinal Granvelle's fool in

the Louvre, the inclusion of one of the Cardinal's hunting

dogs heightens the irony of this full-length image; Friedlánder,

vol. 13 (1975), no. 377, pi. 185.

5. Julius S. Held, Rembrandt's 'Aristotle' and other Rembrandt Studies (Princeton, 1969), 35-37.

6. Philippot 1965,173-174.

7. Dibdin 1822, i: 262—263. Ellis Waterhouse suggested

that this notion may have resulted from the 2d Earl Spencer's

interest in portraits of artists; letter of 7 August 1980 and

note in curatorial files.

8. Friedlánder, vol. 13 (1975), no. 358, pi. 178.

9. See for example von Loga 1907/1909, 112, Marlier

1934, 22, and Friedlánder, vol. 13 (1936), 172, no. 354 (vol.

13, 1975,

 I02-)> wno

 dated it c. 1555 though he had earlier

doubted that it was a self-portrait, in Friedlánder 1907, 378.

The signature and date were first recorded in the catalogue of the 1927 Royal Academy exhibition, though the

picture was still assumed to be a self-portrait. This assumption was corrected in NGA 1941,135, by Frerichs 1947, 39,

and in most later literature on the painting.

ID. See Philippot 1965,173-174.

11. Frerichs 1947, 57, and Groeneveld 1981, 115. Friedlander had assumed that Mor traveled to England in 15687

1569); vol. 13 (1975), 65. Actually, Lee was in Antwerp in

March 1568; see Roy Strong, National Portrait Gallery.

Tudor and Jacobean Portraits, 2 vols. (London, 1969), i:

190-191, no. 2095, repro. frontispiece.

12. Marlier 1934, 81-83, 9^~97-> nos- 11—12..

13. Louis Dimier, Histoire de la peinture de portrait en

Prance au XVI siècle, 2 vols. (Paris and Brussels, 1924/1925),

i: pi. 50; 2: 207, no. 816; and Albert Châtelet and Jacques

Thuillier, Prench Painting from Pouquet to Poussin (Geneva,

1963), 136, color repro. 132, as by Pierre Dumoûtier l'oncle

without reference to the Gallery's painting.

14. Egbert Haverkamp-Begemann noted that the drawing

technique is reminiscent of the eighteenth century; letter of

2i September 1980 in curatorial files.

15. Christie's, London, 10 December 1954, no. 126, from

the collection of John Scott-Taggart; photo in curatorial files.

References

1822 Dibdin, Thomas Frognall. Aedes Althorpianae; or

an Account of the mansion, books, and pictures, at Althorp;

the residence of George John earl Spencer, K.G 2 vols.

London, i: 262—263, repro. opp. 262.

1823 Catalogue of the Pictures at Althorp, the seat of

the Right Honorable the Earl Spencer, K.G.. Northampton:

2.3-

1826 Walpole, Horace. Anecdotes of Painting in England. ... 2d ed. Ed. James Dallaway. 5 vols. London, i: 240.

1831 Catalogue of the Pictures at Althorp House in the

County of Northampton, with occasional Notes, Biographic

and Historical. London: no. 271.

1836 Passavant, J. D. Tour of a German Artist in England. 2 vols. London, 2: 35.

1854 Waagen, Gustav Friedrich. Treasures of Art in

Great Britain.... 4 vols. London, 3: 457.

185 7-18 64 Kramm, Christian. De levens en werken der

hollandsche en vlaamsche Kunstchilders beeldhouivers, graveurs, en bouwmeesters. .. . 7 vols. Amsterdam, 4: 1160—

1161.

1860 Burger, W. [Théophile Thoré] Trésors d'art en

Angleterre. Brussels and Ostende: 173—174.

1861 Blanc, Charles. Histoire des peintres de toutes les

écoles. École hollandaise. 2 vols. Paris, i: 4, 8, repro. i (engraving of head).

1906 Pierre-Marcel, René. "Collection du Comte Spencer." Les Arts 60 (Dec.): 8, repro. 5.

1907 Friedlánder, Max J. "Die Winterausstellung der

Royal Academy in London 1907." RfK 30: 378.

1907/1909 Loga, Valerian von. "Antonis Mor ais Hofmaler Karls V. und Philipps II." JbWien 27: 112, pi. XXII.

1910 Hymans, Henri. Antonio Moro son oeuvre et son

temps. Brussels: 114-115.

1926 Tipping, H. Avray. English Homes. 9 vols. London, 9: repro. 315.

1927 Benkard, Ernst. Das Selbstbildnis vom ij. bis zum

Beginn des 18. Jahrhunderts. Berlin: XXXVIII-XXXIX,

24-25, pi. 31.

1931 L. S. "AntonisMor." InThieme-Becker 25: ni.

1934 Marlier, Georges. "Antonis Mor van Dashorst

(Antonio Moro)." Académie Royale de Belgique. Classe des

Beaux-Arts. Mémoires. Séries 2. 3. Fase. 2: 22, 79—83, 96—

97, no. ii, fig. ii.

1936 Friedlánder. Vol. 13: 172, no. 354 (vol. 13,1975:

102,118, no. 354, pi. 176).

1937 Cortissoz, Royal. An Introduction to the Mellon

Collection. Privately printed: 35-36.

1941 NGA: 135, no. 52.

1941 Duveen Pictures in Public Collections of America.

JSIew York: not paginated, no. 190, repro.

1941 Tolnay, Charles de. "Flemish Paintings in the National Gallery of Art." MagArt 34: 189-191, 200, figs. 20-

22.

1947 Frerichs, L. C. J. Antonio Moro. Amsterdam: 39,

5 7, repro. 52.

1947 Friedlánder, Max J. "Frans Pourbus der Altere."

OH 57: 65-66, fig. 6.

1949 Mellon: 66, repro.

1953 De Vries, A. B. "Antonio Moro." Les arts plastiques. Series 6. 3: 206, fig. 95.

1960 Wilenski, R. H. Flemish Painters 1430-1830.

New York: 168, 608, pi. 428.

1962 Müller Hofstede, Justus. "Zur frühen Bildnismalerei von Peter Paul Rubens." Pantheon 20: 286-287, fig. !3-

1962 Puyvelde, Leo van. La peinture flamande au siècle

de Bosch et Breughel. Paris: 264, fig. 142.

1965 Philippot, Paul. "Le portrait à Anvers dans la seconde moitié du XVIe

 siècle." BMRBA 14: 173, fig. 4.

1972 Ragghianti, Carlo. "Pertinenze francesi nel cinquecento." Critica d'Arte 19, n.s. 122: 46, 73, fig. 53.

1975 NGA: 244, repro. 245.

1978 De Meyere, J. A. L. "Utrechtse schilderkunst in de

tweede helft van de i6de eeuw." Jaarboek Oud-Utrecht:

145, fig. 26.

1981 Groeneveld, Elizabeth E. H. "Een herziene biographie van Anthonis Mor." JbAntwerp: 115.

ANTONIS MOR 105
Follower of Antonis Mor

1961.9.79 (1631)

Portrait of a Young Man

i558

Probably oak (cradled), 97.5 x 69.9 ($83/8 x 2,7 Vi)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Inscriptions:

At upper left: • y£ • S • 20 I A° • ijj#

Technical Notes: The panel, which is composed of three vertical members, was cradled in 1955 when it was cleaned and

restored by Mario Modestini. It is in very good condition,

with losses and inpainting largely confined to the joins and to

some scratches in the lower left corner. There is some abrasion in the face. An adjustment in the angle of the sitter's

proper left arm is visible in raking light. Examination with

infrared reflectography shows a number of changes between

the underdrawing and the painting of the costume. The collar

of the leather doublet was lower, as was the position of the

buttons; the waist was higher and the position and angle of

the vertical cuts in the doublet different. Chains of honor

underdrawn around the sitter's neck were not painted.

Provenance: Probably Prince Karl Anton von HohenzollernSigmaringen [d. I885].1

 Prince Leopold von HohenzollernSigmaringen, his son [d. 1905]. Prince Wilhelm August Karl

von Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen, his son [d. 192.7]. Fürstlich

Hohenzollernsches Museum fur Wissenschaft und Kunst,

Sigmaringen. (A. S. Drey, Munich and New York, 1928-

1929.) (M. Knoedler & Co., Inc., 1929-1934.) (Robert

Frank, Ltd., 1934. )2 Baron Heinrich Thyssen-Bornemisza,

Villa Favorita, Lugano-Castagnola, by 1937 [d. 1947].

Baroness Gabrielle Bentinck-Thyssen, his daughter, 1947-

1952. (M. Knoedler & Co., Inc., by 1952. )3 Samuel H. Kress,

New York, 1952.

Exhibitions: Munich, Alte Pinakothek, 1928, no cat. //

New York, A. S. Drey, 1928, Flemish Primitives Formerly in

the Collection of the Prince of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen, as

Mor. // New York, M. Knoedler & Co., Inc., 1932, Naval

and Military Portraits, no. 9, as Mor.

THE TWENTY-YEAR-OLD SITTER'S creamy leather

doublet, decorated with a pattern of fine and long

slashes, and his sleeves and breeches of muted purplegray form a striking color harmony against the neutral

gray background. Details such as the doublet's curling

edges, the buttons, and the gleaming hilts of sword and

dagger are rendered with a crisp and rather decorative

touch. The artist evidently had some trouble with the

arm placed akimbo, since he changed its contour,

sharpening the angle of the elbow without conveying

the ease the gesture implies.4

The elegance and reserve of the sitter and his pose

with the near arm grasping the edge of a summarily

indicated table owe much to Antonis Mor, to whom

the portrait was previously attributed. Beginning with

the portrait of his patron Granvelle, dated 1549, in the

Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, Mor used the

corner of a table as an anchor for a standing figure

shown in three-quarter view.5 However, the Gallery's

portrait lacks the tension that Mor sets up between

richly textured surfaces and rather rigid, planar poses.

The decorative treatment of details and flatter modeling of the face here result in a more flaccid image

lacking the intensity with which Mor's sitters confront

the viewer.

Colin Eisler first questioned the attribution of this

portrait to Mor.6 He suggested that it belonged to the

international style of the mid-sixteenth century and

might well be the product of a Netherlandish artist

working at a foreign court. However, the pose, together with the portrait's relatively early date and the way

the sleeves and hands are modeled, point to an artist

within Mor's sphere of influence and probably working in the Netherlands.7

The identification of the sitter as Count Willem IV

van den Bergh, put forward by J. A. G. C. Trosée, rests

on the fact that the property of the Van den Bergh

family was inherited by the Princes of HohenzollernSigmaringen, the first recorded owners of the portrait.8

The date and age inscribed on the painting agree with

the birthdate of this Dutch nobleman, a brother-in-law

of William the Silent.9 While the sitter's aristocratic

bearing would be appropriate for a portrait of the

young count, this identification requires confirmation

through a secure portrait of Van den Bergh or positive

evidence that the portrait entered the HohenzollernSigmaringen collection through the Van den Bergh

family.

M.W.

Notes

i. See Reiffel 1924, 59. The painting is not mentioned in

F. A. von Lehner, Fürstlich Hohenzollernsches Museum fur

Wissenschaft und Kunst, Verzeichniss der Gemdlde (Sigma206 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
Follower of Antonis Mor, Portrait of a Young Man, 1961.9.79

FOLLOWER OF ANTONIS MOR 207
ringen, 1871; zd éd., 1883), suggesting either that it was

acquired after 1883 or that it hung in some other property of

the family.

2. I am grateful to Nancy C. Little, Librarian, M. Knoedler & Co., Inc., for this information; letter of 14 February

1984 in curatorial files.

3. See preceding note.

4. The painting has probably been trimmed slightly at

the bottom, since the lower edge of the table and hand are

missing. The possibility that the painting was originally fulllength should not be entirely excluded, but seems unlikely.

5. Friedlànder, vol. 13 (1975), 64, 101, pi. 344.

6. Eisler 1977, 96. Jacques Foucart also questioned the

attribution to Mor, note of 2.1 March 1975, in curatorial

files.

7. In a letter of 6 February 1984, Paul Philippot suggests

that the portrait is, in all probability, a good contemporary

copy after Mor.

8. Trosée 192.9, 6.

9. Trosée states that he was born 2.4 December 1537. For

this nobleman, see also Nieuwe Nederlandsch Biographisch

Woordenboek, lovols. (Leiden, 1910—1937), 8: cols. 81—84.

According to Drs. R. R. A. van Gruting, Stichting Huis Bergh

(letter of 10 September 1984 in curatorial files), a note of

Albertus Hermans (d. 1874), Pastor of Boxmeer, another

former property of the counts of Bergh, mentions a portrait

similar to the Gallery's but full-length, which was at Boxmeer

before 1861. However, Dr. Peter Kempf, Curator of the

Fürstlich Hohenzollernsches Museum in Sigmaringen, could

provide no information on how the painting entered the museum in Sigmaringen (letter of 17 February 1984 in curatorial

files).

References

192,4 Reiffel, Franz. "Das Fürstlich Hohenzollernsche

Museum zu Sigmaringen: Gemálde und Bildwerke." StàdelJahrbuch 3-4: 59.

192.9 Trosée, J. A. G. C. Het eerste Tijdvak van h et Verraad van Graaf Willem van den Bergh (Gelre. Werken, no.

18). Arnhem: 6, frontispiece.

1931 The Arts 17: repro. cover.

1932 Parnassus 4, no. 4: 2.0, repro.

1936 Friedlànder. Vol. 13: 172., no. 359, pi. 66 (vol. 13,

1975: TOI, no. 359, pi. 179).

1937 Heinemann, Rudolf. Stiftung Sammlung Schloss

Rohoncz. Lugano-Castagnola: 107, pi. 98.

1956 Kress: 132, repro. 133.

1959 Kress: 288, repro.

1975 NGA: 246, repro. 247.

1977 Eisler: 96, fig. 83.

208 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Netherlandish Artist

1943.7.7 (744)

The Healing of the Paralytic

c. 1560/1590

Oak (cradled), 107.8 x 76 (42.V2 x 2.97/s)

Chester Dale Collection

Technical Notes: The panel consists of three boards with

vertical grain. A wedge-shaped piece of wood in the upper

right-hand corner appears to be an old restoration. The

painting is in relatively good condition. There is moderate

abrasion in the most thinly painted areas. Heavy abrasion in

the beard of the paralytic has been repainted. There is

darkened repaint in the wedge at the upper right and along

the two vertical join lines. An A-shaped scratch at the lower

left was inpainted in 1967.

Provenance: Sale, Christie's, London, n April 192.4, no. 89,

as Jan van Hemessen, purchased by Lacey.1 (Spink & Son,

London.)2 (Ehrich Galleries, New York, by 1925.) W. Lever

(sale, American Art Association, Anderson Galleries Inc., New

York, 18 April 1934, no. 54, as Jan van Hemessen). Chester

Dale, New York, April 1934.

THE PAINTING illustrates one of the miracles performed by Christ, which is recounted in the Gospels of

Matthew, Mark, and Luke. The fullest version is that

found in Mark 2:1—12. While Christ was preaching in

Capernaum, a paralytic was brought to him, but because of the crowd it was necessary to cut a hole in the

roof of the building and lower him down to Christ.

After forgiving him his sins, Christ healed his paralysis

and ordered, "rise, take up your pallet and go home."

The earlier portion of the parable is depicted in the

background, where at the left is a building with figures

clustered around a hole in the roof, at whose entrance

Christ gestures over the prone paralytic. This miracle is

represented infrequently in northern European art of

the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries and is often confused with depictions of Christ at the Pool of Bethesda

(John 5:2-9), where a paralytic is also healed.3

While The Healing of the Paralytic was sold in 1924

as a work by Jan van Hemessen, the strongest support

for the attribution was offered a few years later by Paul

Wescher. Wescher considered the painting to be of

high quality and dated it late in Hemessen's career,

after his putative stay in Haarlem from 1551, where he

was influenced by Jan van Scorel and Maerten van

Heemskerck. He compared the picture to Christ Driving the Money-Changers from the Temple, dated 1556

(Musée des Beaux-Arts, Nancy).4 No other critical discussion of the painting has been published, though

Puyvelde accepted the attribution to Hemessen.5 Burr

Wallen does not consider the painting to be an autograph Hemessen.6

The Healing of the Paralytic appears to be the only

known painting by this as yet unidentified artist. There

is a dearth of useful comparative examples, and attempts to associate the painting with the work of

known artists or to localize the style have produced

what are at best tentative and often divergent opinions.

The color has been compared with that of Cornells van

Dalem,7 and some details to Pieter Aertsen's pictures.8

The most interesting connections, however, are with

paintings grouped around Pieter Pourbus the Elder (c.

1523/1524-1584) who was born in Gouda, but was

active in Bruges.9 In 1978 Henri Defoer found similarities between the Gallery's panel and the depiction

of Saints Crispin and Crispinian (fig. i) that is on the

reverse of the Baptism of Saint Eustace in the museum

"Het Catharina-Gasthuis," in Gouda.10 These panels

are considered part of an altarpiece painted for the

church of Saint John, Gouda, by Pourbus.11 There is a

certain degree of similarity between the saints and the

paralytic in the figure types and in the muscularity of

the legs and arms, though hands and faces are different.

Paul Huvenne also connects the Gallery's picture with

the Saints Crispin and Crispinian panel, but does not

think that both are by the same artist.12 Wouter Kloek

suggests similarities to the work of Lambert van Noort

(c. 1520—1571) who was active primarily in Antwerp.13

There are some points of comparison, specifically with

Van Noort's Christ Washing the Disciples9 Feet (fig. 2),

signed and dated 1560, in the Koninklijk Museum,

Antwerp.14 The bulky, muscular figures and the short

cropped hair of several of the disciples is generally

comparable, but not close enough to assist in the attribution of the Gallery's painting.15

It would appear, then, that The Healing of the Paralytic should be associated with a figurai style of the

15608. However, a dendrochronological examination

of the panel conducted by Josef Bauch indicated a tree

with a probable felling date of 1584^.16 Martha Wolff

observes that the drapery in the Gallery's painting is

more crisply rendered than in the examples cited

above. This stiffer and crisper drapery style is more

NETHERLANDISH ARTIST 209
Fig. i. School of Gouda ( ?), Saints Crispin and Crispinian, Gouda,

Museum Het Catharina Gasthuis [photo: Bob de Wit]

characteristic of the 15805, as seen in the works of an

artist like Anthonis Blocklandt.17 One way of explaining the discrepancy is to suggest that The Healing of

the Paralytic was painted by an archaizing Netherlandish artist working in the 15805 in a manner of

twenty years before. The vertical format and placement of a single large figure against a simplified background suggest that it may have been possibly part of a

series of panels depicting Christ's miracles. More precise information must await further study and inquiry.

J.O.H.

Notes

i. The word Lacey is written in ink in the margin of the

Library of Congress copy of the catalogue.

z. Information contained in the Chester Dale papers on

file at the National Gallery of Art.

3. See Andor Pigler, Barockthemen, zd éd., 3 vols. (Budapest, 1974),

 I:

 3°4~3°5>tne more numerous representations of Christ at the Pool of Bethesda are listed 306-309.

4. Wescher 1929, 40—41.

5. Puyvelde 1962,190.

6. Letter to the author, 3 January 1984, in the curatorial

files, noting some connections with Hemessen's style and

suggesting a date in the 15608. The painting is not discussed

in Wallen's dissertation or in his book, Jan van Hemessen, an

Antwerp Painter between Reform and Counter Reformation

(Ann Arbor, 1983).

7. Samuel Nystad, letter of 10 February 1978 to the author, in the curatorial files.

8. Anthony Colantuono, summer intern in the department of Northern European painting, 1981, compared the

clouds to those in the exterior wings of Pieter Aertsen's Crucifixion Altarpiece of 1546 (Koninklijk Museum, Antwerp),

repro. in Friedlánder, vol. 13 (1975),

 no

-

 Z93> pi- Z44-

9. Roger d'Hulst, letter of zo March 1977 to the author,

was certain that the Gallery's painting was not by Pourbus,

while Horst Gerson in a letter of 31 March 1977 thought that

Pourbus was a "good guess."

Fig. z. Lambert van Noort, Christ Washing the Disciples' Feet, 15 60, Antwerp,

Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten [photo: Copyright A.C.L. Brussels]

2,10 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Netherlandish Artist, The Healing of the Paralytic, 1943.7.7

NETHERLANDISH ARTIST III
i o. Letter to the author of 19 January 1978.

11. Paul Huvenne, Pierre Fourbus. Peintre brugeois

1524—1584 [exh. cat. Musée Memling (Hôpital Saint-Jean)]

(Bruges, 1984), 189—192,, no. 12. Huvenne does not believe

that the Saints Crispin and Crispinian is by Fourbus, but

rather is by an anonymous artist of the School of Gouda.

12. In conversation, 6 October 1983.

13. In conversation, 13 October 1983.

14. Walther Vanbeselaere, Musée Royal des Beaux-Arts,

Anvers. Catalogue Descriptif. Maîtres Anciens (Antwerp,

1970), 172, no. 449; photo ACL 1157356.

15. The background figures have not provided clues. The

closest parallel is found in the scene of the Entombment that

occurs in the background of a Lamentation (present location

unknown, photograph in NGA photographic archives) attributed to the Master of the Prodigal Son, who was active in

Antwerp from the 15305 to the 15605. I have not found

similar background figures in other works given to this master. I am indebted to Martha Wolff for bringing this painting

to my attention.

16. See Appendix I.

17. In conversation 22 December 1983. For example, The

Adoration of the Shepherds in the Museum of Fine Arts,

Budapest, repro. Marianne Haraszti-Takàs, The Masters of

Mannerism (New York, 1968), no. 37. For the artist see

Ingrid Jost, "Studien zu Anthonis Blocklandt, mit einem

vorlàufigen beschreibenden Oeuvre-Verzeichnis," Ph.D.

diss., Universitât Kôln, 1960.

References

1929 Wescher, Paul. "Einige neue Bilder zum Werk Jan

van Hemessens." Belvedere 8: 40—41, repro.

1935 Tietze, Hans. Meisterwerke europàischer Malerei

in Amerika. Vienna: repro. 150 (also Engl. éd., New York

1939).

1962 Puyvelde, Leo van. La peinture flamande au siècle

de Bosch et Breughel. Paris: 190.

1965 Paintings Other than French in the Chester Dale

Collection. Washington: 12, repro.

1975 NGA: 172, repro. 173.

212. EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
Northern Netherlandish Artist

1952.5.41 (1120)

Adoration of the Magi

Last quarter of fifteenth century

Wood, transferred to canvas, 183 x 164.5 (l2-

x

 643A)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Technical Notes: The paint and ground layers were transferred at an unknown date from a panel that had six vertical

members, as is evident from traces of the joins still visible in

raking light. The present canvas support has been relined.

The type of wood making up the original panel is unknown,

though a label affixed to the back of the frame states that it

was "transferred from an oaken panel."1 The painting has a

smooth white ground with underdrawing to which the painted

design conforms quite precisely.

The painting is in good condition. There are some areas of

loss and abrasion, particularly at the edges and along the

former joins in the panel, in the blue cloak of the Virgin and

the area around her head, especially her veil, and in the right

wall of the shed, as well as numerous tiny losses throughout.

The old inpainting has discolored in these areas.

Provenance: Probably from a convent in the province of

Guipúzcoa, Spain.2 Count Alessandro Contini-Bonacossi,

Rome, by 192.6.3 Samuel H. Kress, New York, 192.7.

As A SUBJECT for large altarpieces, the Adoration of

the Magi exemplified Christ's kingship over the forces

of the world. It was also often the occasion for a splendid display of courtly and exotic figures; toward the

end of the fifteenth century in particular, the retinue of

the wise men played an important role.

The biblical account of the journey of the wise men,

or Magi, to pay homage to the child born king of the

Jews (Matthew 2,11—12) was elaborated by later authors, who added much narrative and symbolic detail.4

Thus the wise men came to be identified as kings, and

their number, unspecified in Saint Matthew's account,

was given as three. This corresponded to the three gifts

of gold, frankincense, and myrrh mentioned in the

Bible, as well as to medieval notions of the three continents and the three ages of man. In the Western church

their names were Melchior, Casper, and Balthasar;

though their order and kingdoms fluctuated, Balthasar

was most frequently the Moorish or African king.

A classic version of these legends, the Liber trium

Regum, written in the late fourteenth century by Johannes of Hildesheim, describes the setting for the Nativity and Adoration as a shabby little house built on

the ruins of the structure in Bethlehem where Christ's

ancestor King David was born.5 In the Gallery's painting the ruin is very summarily indicated by the rough

brick wall at the left and probably also by the flowerlined brick walks suggesting the remnants of a formal

garden. The placement of the Virgin and Child in this

implied enclosure and before the ruined house of David

emphasizes the Virgin's queenly role and Christ's dominion over the princes of the world. Johannes of

Hildesheim also describes the caravan of the Magi

mounted on mules, horses, and camels.6 In the Gallery's painting the crowd of figures unloading packs,

holding monkeys or falcons, or engaged in more warlike activities forms three separate groups, probably

each representing the retinue of one of the Magi.7 To

the left of the shed, the brown-hooded figure leaning

on a stick and his green- and red-clad companion are

probably shepherds, often present in scenes of the

Adoration of the Magi.8 The two figures conferring at

the back of the shed may, as Eisler suggested, relate to

King Herod and his jealous interest in Christ's birth.9

In view of the Adoration's ambitious size and lively

detail, it is surprising that no other works by this painter are known. Its Spanish provenance led to the assumption that it was the work of a northerner active in

Spain, and since entering the Gallery it has been called

"Hispano-Dutch school."10 However, it contains no

clear references to Spanish painting.11 Instead, the

Adoration of the Magi shows a distinctive fusion of

several currents in northern Netherlandish art toward

the end of the fifteenth century. The treatment of faces

and hands of the foreground figures as smooth rounded

surfaces recalls the few known works by Ouwater and

the early Bouts, yet the long facial type and little eyes of

these figures are closer to those of a later generation,

such as the Master of the Virgo inter Virgines and his

followers.12 In its reliance on a clearly delimited rectangular space at the center, the composition of the

Adoration of the Magi is related to works of the Master

of the Tiburtine Sibyl and the Virgo Master.13 The

crowd of overlapping and straining mounted figures in

the background is also close to those in the Virgo Master's paintings of the same subject, though painted in a

much harder manner.14

In addition to these multiple connections with Dutch

painting, the author of the Adoration possessed a disNORTHER N NETHERLANDIS H ARTIST 113
tinctive feeling for decorative effect. This is expressed

in the combination of large forms and crisp, fanciful

detail, and also in the repetition of stereotyped figures.

Thus the two attendants in the lower corners who

frame the scene are mirror images of each other in

pose, though their elaborate costumes have been varied.

The repetition of only a few designs for the horses and

camels filling the middle ground adds to the decorative

effect of the whole.

This painter's apparent familiarity with several currents in northern Netherlandish painting, which he

combines in a brittle and eccentric way, suggests that

he worked in a provincial area. This could have been in

the Netherlands, in Spain, or perhaps even in the Lower

Rhine where contacts with Dutch art were extensive. It

is difficult to date the picture precisely because of its

provincial character, but it was probably painted in the

last quarter of the fifteenth century.

M.W.

Notes

1. The label reads: "PP-Az — a picture representing The

Adoration of the Maggi [sic]. An early painting attributed to

the Dutch School, said to be painted not later than 1480.

Transferred from an oaken panel. From a convent in Spain.

Contini-New York, 4-6-1927. $EM, NxN."

2. I have been unable to find the precise basis for the

tradition that the picture comes from the Basque province of

Guipúzcoa. In a statement in the curatorial files, Robert Quinn

analyzed the history and holdings of various monastic establishments in the province, concluding that the most likely

candidates for ownership of the Adoration were the Convento de Bidaurrete and the Convento de Aránzazu, both in

Oñate; see also Eisler 1977, 65-66.

3. See certificate of Roberto Longhi, November 1926, in

curatorial files.

4. See Hugo Kehrer, Die heiligen drei Konige in Literatur

und Kunst, 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1908-1909), and Stephan Waetzoldt, "Drei Kônige" in Reallexikon zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte, 8 vols. (Stuttgart, 1937— ), 4: cols. 476—501.

5. Margaret B. Freeman, The Story of the Three Kings:

Melchior, Balthasar and]aspar, which was originally written

by John of Hildesheim . . . (New York, 1955), based on an

early English translation of the text.

6. Freeman 1955, 13—15.

7. The retinues of the kings are sometimes shown as

three distinct processions, as in a panel by the Master of Saint

Bartholomew in the Weld Collection; Kolner Maler der Spdtgotik: Der Meister des Bartholomâus Altares, der Meister des

Aachener Altares [exh. cat. Wallraf-Richartz-Museum] (Cologne, 1961), 73-75.

 n°- IO> fig- 2-3-

8. For example, in Hugo van der Goes' Monforte altarpiece and in his Adoration of the Magi known only from

copies; Friedlànder, vol. 4 (1969), no. 17, pi. 28, no. 20, pi.

34. Eisler 1977, 64, suggested that they were pilgrims in

quasi-monastic garb.

9. Eisler 1977, 64-65, suggesting that the jewel-studded

gold badge and costume worn by the figure at the right may

be that of a messenger, as identified by Helmut Nickel, "The

Man beside the Gate," BMMA n.s. 24 (1966), 237-244. It

seems unlikely that either of these somewhat sinister figures

represents Saint Joseph. Eisler suggested that Joseph might

have been on another panel, now lost. Other Adorations

without Joseph include Stefan Lochner's altarpiece in

Cologne cathedral, Alfred Stange, Deutsche Malerei der

Gotik, ii vols. (Berlin, 1934-61), 3: 100-103, fig8- 12.2.—

124, and a triptych by a follower of the Master of the Virgo

inter Virgines, Friedlànder, vol. 5 (1969), no. 50, pi. 34.

10. See references below. On fifteenth-century Dutch

painters working in Spain or the importation of their works

in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, see Wolfgang Schône,

"Uber einige altniederlàndische Bilder, vor allem in Spanien,"

JbBerlin 58 (1937), 174—181, and K. G. Boon, "De schilder

van de triptiek in de Disputación Provincial te Avila," Miscellanea JozefDuverger, 2 vols. (Ghent, 1968), i: 110—123.

11. Students of Spanish painting have been unable to perceive Spanish elements in the work; see note by Robert Quinn

dated 14 June 1963, referring also to the opinion of José

Gudiol, and a letter of 16 August 1982, from Judith Berg

Sobré, in curatorial files. In general, students of a particular

regional school have tended to disavow the painting. Thus,

Max Friedlànder maintained that it was Spanish (opinions of

21 March 1937 and November 193 8 in curatorial files). K. G.

Boon (letter of 29 August 1982 in curatorial files) suggests

that the painting may be Westphalian rather than Dutch,

citing the work of the Master of 1473, while Paul Pieper

(letter of 24 November 1983 in curatorial files) saw no relation to late fifteenth-century German painting.

12. In the work in the Rijksmuseum from which the painter

takes his name or in the Annunciation in Aachen; repro.

Albert Châtelet, Early Dutch Painting: Painting in the northern Netherlands in the fifteenth Century (New York, 1981),

figs. 123,126.

13. For example, the Master of the Tiburtine Sibyl's Augustus and the Tiburtine Sibyl in Frankfurt and the Marriage

of the Virgin in the Johnson Collection, Philadelphia, or the

Virgo Master's Virgo inter Virgines; repro. Châtelet, Early

Dutch Painting, figs. 121,122,126.

14. In paintings in the Carolino Augusteum Museum,

Salzburg, and the Johnson Collection, Philadelphia; repro.

Châtelet Early Dutch Painting, fig. 127, and Friedlànder, vol.

5 (1969), no. 52, pi. 35.

15. The Adoration parallels the adaptation of Dutch

forms in two Germanic copies of a lost Boutsian Madonna in

the Metropolitan Museum and the Museo Correr, Venice;

see Wolfgang Schône, Dieric Bouts und seine Schule (Berlin

and Leipzig, 1938), 136-138, no. 22, pi. 50.

References

1951 Kress: 184, no. 81, repro. 185.

1975 NGA: 174, repro. 175.

1977 Eisler: 64-66, fig. 59.

214 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTIN G
Northern Netherlandish Artist, Adoration of the Magi, 1951.5.41

NORTHERN NETHERLANDISH ARTIST 215
Bernard van Orley

c. 1488—1541

Bernard van Orley was born in Brussels, probably

around 1488. His father, Valentin, was a painter as

was his younger brother, Everard, and it is assumed

that Bernard was initially taught by his father. The

altarpiece of Saints Thomas and Matthias, split between

the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, and the Musées

Royaux des Beaux-Arts, Brussels, is signed and is generally regarded as an early work, c. 1512/1515. Bernard

became associated with the court early in his career. In

1515 he was commissioned by Margaret of Austria to

paint portraits of the children of Philip the Fair. In the

same year Van Orley began work on an altarpiece for

the Brotherhood of the Holy Cross of the church of

Saint Walburga in Veurne (Furnes), which was not

installed until 1520. In 1518 the artist was appointed

painter to the court of Margaret of Austria. He remained in this position until her death in 1530 and

continued to work for Margaret's successor, Mary of

Hungary.

Bernard van Orley's first dated work is the portrait

of Dr. George Zelle of 1519 in the Musées Royaux des

Beaux-Arts, Brussels. This was followed by several important dated works: the "Vertu de Patience" altarpiece of 1521, possibly commissioned by Margaret of

Austria (Musées Royaux des Beaux-Arts, Brussels);

two depictions of the Holy Family, one in the Louvre,

dated 1521, and one in the Prado, dated 1522. The

Last Judgment altarpiece (Koninklijk Museum, Antwerp), was completed by 1525. Something of Van Orley's ultimate painting style can be seen in the huge

Crucifixion triptych in the Church of Our Lady, Bruges,

which was begun in the 15305 and remained unfinished

at the time of his death. It was completed by Marcus

Gheeraerts after 1560 and restored in the late 15805.

These and other paintings illustrate Van Orley's ability

to assimilate Renaissance architectural and ornamental

elements as well as Italianate figurai rhythms into an

essentially Netherlandish matrix. It is not known if

Bernard van Orley ever journeyed to Italy. His knowledge of Italian art could have come from engravings

and, from 1517 on, through direct observation of

Raphael's cartoons for the Acts of the Apostles tapestry series, which was woven in Brussels.

Bernard van Orley was the head of a large workshop and, as an artist affiliated with the court, he doubtless depended on his atelier to fill the demand for images. In particular, this included portraits of Margaret

of Austria and Charles V, for these exist in numerous

replicas. Van Orley was a skilled designer and draftsman, and in many ways his fame as a creator of a High

Renaissance style in the North rests as much upon the

tapestries he designed from 1518 onward as upon his

paintings. He was also a gifted designer in stained

glass, as can be seen in the windows in the Chapel of

the Holy Sacrament in Saint Gudule, Brussels, which

are dated between 1537 and 1540. Bernard van Orley

died in Brussels on 6 January 1541.

J.O.H.

Bibliography

Friedlânder. Vol. 8,1930 (vol. 8,1972.).

Terlinden, Charles, et al. Bernard van Orley 1488-1541.

Brussels, 1943.

Baldass, Ludwig. "Die Entwicklung des Bernart van Orley."

JbWienN.F. 13 (1944): 141—191.

Farmer, John David. "Bernard van Orley of Brussels." Ph.D.

diss., Princeton University, 1981.

1952.5.48 (1127)

The Marriage of the Virgin

0.1513

Probably oak (cradled), 55.5 x 34 (ziVs x i33/s)

painted surface: 54.4 x 33(top) — 35.1 (bottom) (ziVie x

i33/4)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Technical Notes: The painting is in very good condition with

only small scattered retouchings and a large, repainted loss in

the upper left sky. With the possible exception of the bottom

edge, the panel has been cut down slightly at the edges, so that

portions of the design and barbe are missing. The paint surface narrows on the sides 10 cm from the bottom, suggesting

that the frame was irregularly shaped. Examination with infrared reflectography reveals extensive underdrawing through2.16 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTIN G
Bernard van Orley, The Marriage of the Virgin, 1951.5.48

BERNAR D VAN ORLEY 217
out the figures and architecture (fig. i). There are numerous

minor changes in the figures; the small square windows were

originally drawn larger and arched. The painting was cleaned

and restored in 1949.

Provenance: Abbot Jacques Coëne, Marchiennes [d. 1542.].

(Annesley Gore, London, I92.3.)1 Albert J. Kobler, New

York, by I9Z9.2 Mrs. Edward A. Westfall, New York, before

I946.3 (Duveen Brothers, New York, by 1946.) Samuel H.

Kress Foundation, New York, 1949.

Exhibitions: New York, F. Kleinberger Galleries, 192.9, Loan

Exhibition of Flemish Primitives, no. 85. // New York,

Duveen Art Galleries, 1946, An Exhibition of Flemish Paintings, no. 16.

Notes

i. Reproduced in an advertisement for Annesley Gore,

Ltd. in BurlM 42, (January 1913), V.

2.. According to exh. cat. F. Kleinberger Galleries 192.9.

3. According to exh. cat. Duveen Art Galleries 1946.

1952.5.47 (1126)

Christ among the Doctors

Reverse: Putto with Arms of

Jacques Coëne

c. 1513

Probably oak, 54.9 x 33.3 (2.i5/s x i^l/s)

painted surface: 54.4 x 3z.9(top) — 33.3(bottom) (2.i7/i6

x 13 - i3Vs)

reverse, painted surface: 54.4 X32..6(top) - 3z.9(bottom)

(ZI7/16X I215/16- 13)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Inscriptions:

On the border of the red robe worn by the seated figure at the

right: NVLLE ION. NE. M. • •

Technical Notes: The painting is in very good condition.

There are small, scattered retouchings, particularly in the

Fig. i. Infrared reflectogram assembly of a detail of The Marriage

of the Virgin, 1951.5.48 [infrared reflectography: Molly Faries]
Bernard van Orley, Christ among the Doctors, 1951.5.47

BERNARD VAN ORLEY 219
Bernard van Orley, Putto with Arms of Jacques Coëne, 1951.5.47 (reverse)

2,2.0 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
upper portions of the architecture and the columns. Remnants of unpainted edges and a barbe indicate that the panel

was painted in an engaged frame. A narrowing of the painted

surface on the sides 9 cm from the bottom may indicate an

irregularly shaped decorative frame. Examination with infrared reflectography reveals extensive underdrawing in both

brush and what appears to be pen or chalk. There are large

areas of cross hatching in the figures and the architecture. The

young Jesus originally stood on a small round dais, and in the

upper story of the loggia shallow arches are drawn underneath the horizontal lintel on either side of the portico.

The reverse has suffered more damage than has the front.

There are large areas of loss and retouching in the putto's face

and thigh and generally in the lower half of the painting. No

underdrawing was made visible with infrared reflectography.

Provenance: Same as 1952.5.48.

Exhibitions: New York, F. Kleinberger Galleries, 1929, Loan

Exhibition of Flemish Primitives, no. 86. // New York, Duveen Art Galleries, 1946, An Exhibition of Flemish Paintings,

no. 15.

THE MARRIAG E OF THE VIRGI N depicts an event

mentioned in apocryphal accounts such as the Protevangelium of ]ames or the Golden Legend.1

 The marriage of Mary and Joseph takes place on the porch of

an ornate temple. Mary, who wears a crown, takes

Joseph's hand in the gesture of dextrarum junctio symbolic of conjugal union. Depictions of the marriage of

the Virgin often include her parents, and the figure

wearing a kerchief at the extreme left has been identified as Saint Anne.2

Christ among the Doctors is based upon the account

given in Luke 2.: 41-51.3 The twelve-year-old Jesus is

in the temple of Jerusalem, here represented as a loggialike structure, astonishing with his wisdom the two

groups of doctors who flank him. Directly behind Jesus

are Mary and Joseph, who have returned from their

journey home to seek their son.

The attribution of The Marriage of the Virgin and

Christ among the Doctors to Bernard van Orley has

never been questioned and virtually all authors agree

with Friedlànder in dating the panels as early as c.

1512,71513.4 The starting point for an analysis of Van

Orley's first style is the signed altarpiece of Saints

Thomas and Matthias, now split between the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna (fig. z), and the Musées

Royaux des Beaux-Arts, Brussels. This altarpiece came

from the Church of Notre-Dame du Sablón, Brussels,

Fig. 2. Bernard van Orley, Saints Thomas and Matthias Altarpiece, center panel,

Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum [photo: Kunsthistorisches Museum]
where it was presumably commissioned by the carpenter's guild, and is dated on stylistic grounds c. 15127

I5i5.5 Friedlànder was able to group several paintings,

including the Gallery's panels, around this altarpiece

as belonging to Bernard van Orley's first phase of

production.6 There are several points of comparison

between the Saints Thomas and Matthias altarpiece

and the Gallery's panels, among them certain facial

types, dramatic yet inarticulate gestures, bright colors

and use of couleur changeant in certain fabrics, and

perhaps most important, the juxtaposition of figures

in an exterior setting to elaborate architectural constructions.

The most extensive discussion of The Marriage of

the Virgin and Christ among the Doctors is provided

by Farmer.7 He dates the Saints Thomas and Matthias

altarpiece as close to 1515 as possible and believes that

the Gallery's panels may be Van Orley's earliest extant

work, dating to c. 1513. The sources for Bernard van

Orley's architecture are diverse. In addition to the

work of Brussels painters, Farmer sees in Van Orley's

early paintings and drawings the influence of Jan Gossaert's architectural forms, the fantasy of the Antwerp

Mannerists, and ceremonial structures that were erected

in conjunction with the Joyous Entry of Charles V into

Bruges, which took place in 1515. All of these examples derive from the richly decorated and highly ornamental style that distinguished Renaissance art and architecture in such northern Italian cities as Brescia,

Pavia, and Milan. The vasiform columns in Christ

among the Doctors are singled out as a specifically

northern Italian motif while Eisler sees the loggia-like

setting as possibly of northern Italian inspiration.8

The figurai and facial types in Van Orley's earliest

works cannot be seen as originating wholly in the rather

angular and dry style of his predecessors in Brussels

such as the Master of Saint Gudule, Colijn de Coter, or

the Master of the Legend of Saint Barbara.9 Rather,

there are the similarities with painting in Antwerp, particularly with the male facial types of Quentin Massys.10

This relationship is not surprising given the closeness

of the two cities, and it is significant in this regard that

Bernard's father and brother were registered in the

painters' guild in Antwerp.11 Moreover, Farmer finds

in Van Orley's female types an awareness of Haarlem

artists Geertgen tot Sint Jans or Jan Mostaert, while

Eisler sees a similarity to Juan de Flandes, especially in

the female attendant to the left of the Virgin in The

Marriage of the Virgin.^2

As seen in Christ among the Doctors and The Marriage of the Virgin, Bernard van Orley's earliest style is

at once eclectic and cosmopolitan, assimilating diverse

elements from contemporary northern and Italian art.

His youthfulness is revealed only in the somewhat

naive expressions and ungainly gestures of his figures.

The coat-of-arms on the reverse of Christ among

the Doctors indicates that Van Orley was receiving

commissions outside the confines of Brussels. J. G. van

Gelder identified it as that of Jacques Coëne, abbot of

the Benedictine abbey at Marchiennes, not far from

Douai in northern France. Coëne was born in Bruges in

1468/1469 and held the position of abbot from 1501

until his death in 1542. at the age of seventy-three.13

The abbot was an active patron of the visual arts and

commissioned several important works during his long

career. The Gallery's panels are the earliest paintings

that can be identified with Jacques Coëne. Because of

their modest size they were probably intended for the

abbot's private devotion.14 Most critics believe these

panels functioned as a diptych, though Eisler suggests

that they might have belonged to a series depicting the

Life of the Virgin.15 Despite the somewhat unusual

juxtaposition of subject matter, I believe the pictures

functioned as a diptych.

The abbot was evidently satisfied with Bernard van

Orley's work, for the Gallery's panels were followed

by four paintings which have been dated to c. 15187

1519 on stylistic grounds. It is probable that they

formed two diptychs: The Emperor Constantine

Knighting Saint Martin (Nelson Gallery of Art, Kansas

City, Missouri) ; The Virgin and Child with Saint Martin

and other Saints (present location unknown); and The

Birth of Saint John the Baptist-, and The Beheading of

Saint John the Baptist (present location of both unknown). On the reverse of the Saint Martin panels is a

portrait of Coëne, his motto, and a Madonna and Child,

while on the reverse of the John the Baptist panels is

Coëne's portrait, his motto, and a Man of Sorrows.16

On the evidence of this and later pictures commissioned

by Coëne it seems plausible to suggest that on the reverse of The Marriage of the Virgin there might have

been a portrait of Jacques Coëne as well as his motto

"Finis Coronar."17

J.O.H.

Notes

i. Réau, Iconographie, vol. 2,, part z, 170—173; Montague Rhodes James, The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford,

192.6), "Book of James or Protevangelium," chap. 9, 42,.

2.. Eisler 1977, 81.

3. Réau, Iconographie, vol. 2,, part 2,, 2.89-2.92,; see also

James, The Apocryphal New Testament, the "Gospel of

Thomas, Greek Text A," chap. 19, 54—55.

4. Sperling 1929, 2,40, cites Friedlànder as dating the

panels toe. 1512; Friedlànder, vol. 8 (1930), 167, as c. 1513;

Lavalleye 1943, 46, as before 1515; Farmer 1981, 338, no.

90,asc. 1513.

5. Friedlànder, vol. 8 (1972,), pis. 71-73.

Ill EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
6. Friedlánder, vol. 8 (1972.), 54-55, nos. 91, 121, pis.

89, 107. See also n. 16 below.

7. Farmer 1981, 63-65, 68-69, 33$, no. 90.

8. Farmer 1981, 61; Eisler 1977, 82.

9. For discussion and reproduction of works by these

masters see Friedlánder, vol. 4 (1969).

10. Farmer 1981, 67—68.

11. Valentin registered in the Antwerp guild in 1512. and

registered apprentices in 1516 and 1517; Everard is listed as a

master in Antwerp in 1517; see Friedlánder, vol. 8 (1972),

51. It has also been suggested that Bernard received some of

his training in Mechelen in the shop of Adrian van den Houte.

See Hilary Wayment, "A Rediscovered Master: Adrian van

den Houte of Malines (c. 1459—1521) and the Malines/Brussels School. III. Adrian's Development and his Relation with

Bernard van Orley," OH 84 (1969), 266-269; Farmer 1981,

65-66, has difficulty accepting Wayment's proposal on stylistic and documentary grounds.

12. Farmer 1981, 69; Eisler 1977, 82. Farmer also sees the

influence of Cornelis Engebrechtsz., noting that the artist was

in Brussels in 1502 and 1506 and putting forward Engebrechtsz.' Marriage of the Virgin (present location unknown)

as a model of the Gallery's panel; repro. Friedlánder, vol. 10

(1973), no. 79, pi. 68.

13.}. G. van Gelder, "Jan van Scorel in Frankrijk en

Vlaanderen," Simiolus i (1966/1967), 5—36, and Van Gelder 1973,156-176.

14. An earlier image of Jacques Coëne and his coat-ofarms is found on the dedication miniature, fol. 2v, of the

Rituale ad usum monasterii Marchianensis of 1508 in the

Bibliothèque Municipale, Douai; reproduced in Van Gelder,

"Scorel in Frankrijk," 17, fig. 15.

15. Eisler 1977, 81.

16. Friedlánder vol. 8 (1972), no. 92, pis. 90—91, seems to

think that all were part of the same altarpiece. Farmer 1981,

338-339, correctly I believe, separates the works into two

diptychs.

17. Jacques Coëne also commissioned from Jean Bellegambe a triptych of the Holy Trinity (Palais des Beaux-Arts,

Lille) that bears his arms and is usually dated c. 1515. A

second version in the Musée des Beaux-Arts, Aies, is dated

after 1530 and is considered by Genaille a probable workshop piece. See Robert Genaille, "L'Oeuvre de Jean Bellegambe," GBA 6e

 per. 87 (1976), 20-21, nos. io-ii.

In 1541 three additional chapels were consecrated as part

of the abbey at Marchiennes. Jan van Scorel provided altarpieces for each chapel. The surviving segments of these altarpieces and their relationship to the abbey at Marchiennes

have been discussed extensively; see Jacques Guillouet, "Un

polyptyque de Jan van Scorel peint pour l'Abbaye de Marchiennes," OH 79 (1964), 89—98; Le XVIe

 siècle européen

[exh. cat. Petit Palais] (Paris, 1965), no. 258; Van Gelder,

"Scorel in Frankrijk," 5—36 (as in n. 13); Jacques Guillouet,

"Un volet retrouvé du triptyque des 'Onze Mille Vierges'

peint par Jan van Scorel," RLouvre 22, no. 2 (1972), 79-84;

and Van Gelder 1973,156-176.

Van Gelder 1973, 172, noted a resemblance between the

angel holding Coëne's coat-of-arms in Scorel's polyptych depicting scenes from the lives of Saints Stephen and James

(Musée "La Chartreuse," Douai), and that on the reverse of

Christ among the Doctors and inferred that Scorel must have

known Van Orley's diptych.

References

1929 "Partial List of Flemish Primitives in Kleinberger

Show."AriN28 (12 October): 5.

1929 "Flemish Show Opens Today at Kleinbergers."

ArtNzS (26 October): 12, nos. 85, 86.

1929 Burrows, Carlyle. "Exhibition of Flemish Primitive

Painting." Parnassus i (November): 9.

1930 Friedlánder. Vol. 8: 86, 87, 167, no. 90, pis. 74-

76 (vol. 8,1972: 54, 55,103, no. 90, pi. 88).

1932 H. V. "Orley, Bernart van." In Thieme-Becker 26:

49-

1943 Lavalleye, Jacques. "Le Style du peintre Bernard

van Orley." In Bernard van Orley 1488—1541. Brussels: 46.

1944 Baldass (see Biography): 145.

1951 Kress: 200, no. 88, repro. 201.

1969 Osten, Gert von der, and Horst Vey. Painting and

Sculpture in Germany and the Netherlands 1500 to 1600.

Harmondsworth: 145.

1973 Gelder, J. G. van. "Scorel, Mor, Bellegambe und

Orley in Marchiennes." OH 87: 171—172, figs. 16—18.

1975 NGA: 256, repro. 257.

1977 Eisler: 81-82, figs. 76-78.

1981 Farmer (see Biography): 49, 61, 63-65, 68-69,

79, 338, no. 90, figs. 19-21.

BERNARD VAN ORLEY 123
Joachim Patinir

c. 1485-1524

Very few facts are known about the life and career of

Joachim Patinir (or Patinier). The artist was born in

southern Belgium, probably in Bouvignes. His date of

birth is unknown; from his appearance in a drawing

made in 152.1 by Albrecht Durer, now lost, but engraved by Cornelis Cort and published in 1572., it is

thought that he was born around 1485. In 1515 Patinir

entered the painters' guild in Antwerp. That Patinir

remarried on 5 May 152.1 we know from Dürer's diary

of his journey to the Netherlands, for the German artist

was invited to Patinir's wedding as well as the prénuptial festivities. A document of 5 October 1524

mentions his second wife as a widow.

Patinir's fame and influence rest upon his landscapes.

While it is true that all his works contain an identifiable

theme, usually religious, the subject is dominated by

the panoramic space, the cartographic clarity with

which both near and far objects are rendered, and the

fantastic rock formations recalling those geologic structures found in Patinir's presumed birthplace along the

Meuse River near Dinant and Namur. Patinir's artistic

training is unknown, but the decisive influence of Hieronymus Bosch is evident even in his earliest works. In

particular, the high vantage point and frequent use of

an elevated horizon line are derived from Bosch. Some

influence of Gerard David is also discernible and it is

possible that Patinir was in Bruges before coming to

Antwerp.

In his study of Patinir's oeuvre Koch considered

only nineteen paintings to be autograph. None of these

pictures is dated and only five bear what appeared to be

genuine signatures. Koch divided the work into three

groups. The early period consists of four small pictures

painted prior to Patinir's entrance into the guild in

Antwerp. The middle period, running from 1515 to

1519, contains the bulk of the artist's production. Included in this group is the Assumption of the Virgin in

the Johnson Collection, Philadelphia, which bears the

arms of Lucas Rem, an Augsburg merchant who spent

time in Antwerp and probably commissioned the

painting in 1516/1517. Only four paintings comprise

the late period from 1520 to 1524; of interest is the fact

that all four were acquired by Philip II of Spain. Three

of the paintings are now in the Prado, Madrid, the Rest

on the Flight, the Temptation of Saint Anthony, and

the Landscape with Charon's Boat-, the Saint Christopher is in the Escorial. In the Temptation of Saint Anthony, c. 1522, Patinir collaborated with another Antwerp artist, Quentin Massys (q.v.), who executed the

figures.

Joachim Patinir's panoramic paintings provided the

vocabulary for one of the main currents of landscape

painting in the Netherlands in the sixteenth century.

Patinir's settings were adopted by his contemporaries,

such as Jóos van Cleve, and were continued well into

mid-century by the Master of the Half-Lengths, Lucas

Gassel, and Herri met de Bles. The early works of Pieter

Bruegel the Elder also grow out of the Patinir tradition.

J.O.H.

Bibliography

Baldass, Ludwig. "Die niederlándische Landschaftsmalerei

von Patinir bis Bruegel." JbWien 34 (1918): 111-157.

Friedlànder. Vol. 9,1931 (vol. 9, part z, 1973).

Koch, Robert A. Joachim Patinir. Princeton, 1968.

2.2.4 EARL Y NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
Follower of Joachim Patinir

1961.9.81 (1633)

The Flight into Egypt

c. 1550/1575

Oak, 23.6 x 15 (95/i6 x 57/s)

Samuel H. Kress Collection

Technical Notes: The painting is generally in good condition.

Although there is extensive repaint along the edges, traces of

a barbe are visible in raking light and in the x-radiograph,

which seems to indicate that the panel was not cut down.

There is repaint in the cloud at the upper left, the area to the

left of the large rock, and the sky at right. There is retouching

in the rock formations. The x-radiograph (fig. i) discloses

underneath the Holy Family what appears to be a large kneeling figure.

Provenance: Imperial collection, Belvedere Palace, Gemàldegalerie, Vienna, by I783;1

 Kunsthistorisches Museum, Gemàldegalerie, Vienna, c. 1891 until 1952.. (Frederick Mont,

New York.) Samuel H. Kress Foundation, New York, September 1953.

THE STORY of the Flight into Egypt is recounted in

Matthew 2: 13-15.2 From the late eighteenth until the

late nineteenth century this panel was attributed to

Herri met de Bles. In 1882 Engerth found the style

close to the manner of Joachim Patinir, though Scheibler is credited with first attributing the picture to Patinir

in the Kunsthistorisches Museum catalogue of i896.3

In 1907 The Flight into Egypt was given to an archaizing follower of Patinir. This idea was essentially restated by Baldass who dated the panel to c. 1550 and

thought that the figures and the landscape were contemporary with each other.4

 Koch also dated the painting to c. 1550 on the basis of the figure style, which he

identified as Italianate and somewhat in the style of

Correggio.5 Eisler accepted the attribution to a later

follower of Patinir. He observed that the figures are too

large for the surrounding landscape and suggested that

the artist had utilized a segment from one of Patinir's

horizontal compositions and combined it with Italianate figures.6

The landscape elements in The Flight into Egypt

continue the Patinir tradition, and the painting can be

associated with other works by followers of Patinir.7

The linear, textural handling of the tall rocks behind

the Holy Family, however, recalls the rocky landscapes

produced by Lucas van Valckenborch in the 15 8os and

159os,8 though an attribution to Valckenborch cannot

be sustained.9

A single source for the figures of the Holy Family

has not been found, but possible Italian prototypes

seem to come from the end of the century rather than

the middle. The pose of the Madonna and Child resembles that found in a painting attributed to Lelio Orsi

(1511—1587),10 while the round faces and sweet expressions of the group recall the works of il Cavalière

d'Arpino (1568-1640) or Francesco Vanni (1563-

161o);11 Pietro Mera (c. 1550-1639) has also been

suggested.12 The donkey is almost an exact duplication

of the donkey in Annibale Carracci's Rest on the Flight

into Egypt in the Hermitage.13

The small size of the panel implies but does not

prove execution by a single hand. The discrepancy in

scale between the figures and the landscape, along with

the kneeling figure (Saint Francis or Saint Jerome?)14

visible under the Holy Family in the x-radiograph raises

the possibility that the figures now visible were added

later. There is, however, no way of determining this

with certainty. Given the unusual combination of stylistic elements, a precise dating of The Flight into Egypt

is not possible. A date in the third quarter of the sixteenth century would take into account the strength of

Patinir's influence as well as the more progressive tendencies in landscape and figures.

J.O.H.

Notes

1. The earliest mention of the painting is Mechel 1783,

167, no. 77. On the reverse of the panel are five paper labels:

23; ll.D.u.N. II. 20 (this refers to the painting's location in

the Belvedere Palace, that is, on the second floor, German and

Netherlandish gallery, second room); Aus dem Inventar des

Gemaldegalerie gestrichen. Wien n Februar 1952.; Kunsthistorisches Museum in Wien / Direktion der Gemaldegalerie stamped, K 1970 in pencil; 2 St : 37:! A.N.S. / N/37;

Gemalde Galerie des Allerh. Kaisershauses. No. 953, crossed

out in red ink.

2. Réau, Iconographie, vol. 2, part 2, 273-276.

3. Engerth 1884, 30, no. 691; Schaeffer, Wartenegg, and

Gliick 1896,15, no. 664.

4. Schaeffer and Glück 1907,154, no. 664; Baldass 1938,

128, no. 664. Ernest Buschbeck of the Kunsthistorisches

Museum, letter of 16 May 1955 to John Walker in the curatorial files, agrees with Baldass' opinions.

5. Koch 1968, 84, no. 34.

6. Eisler 1977, 90.

FOLLOWER OF JOACHIM PATINIR 225
y. Koch 1968, 47, grouped the painting with the Temptation of Christ, Bearsted collection, National Trust, Upton

House, Banbury, and The Plight into Egypt, Museo Arte

Cataluña, Barcelona, as works that continue Patinir's style

after his lifetime. The Gallery's panel is similar to a small

Landscape with Saint Jerome from Patinir's workshop in the

Mayer van den Bergh Museum, Antwerp, repro. Koch 1968,

no. 2.9, fig. 34. Although there are similarities in scale and in

the manner in which the foreground rocks are rendered, the

two panels are not by the same hand, and the Mayer van den

Bergh painting appears earlier. Faggin 1968, 30, 40, n. 25,

attributed both this and the Gallery's panel to Matthijs Cock.

I am grateful to Hans Nieuwdorp and his staff for allowing

me to examine the painting at length.

8. Specific examples are the landscape dated 1582 in the

Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, the landscape dated 1583 in the

Gemàldegalerie, Berlin, and the landscape with miners' huts

dated 1595 in the Prado. They are reproduced in Heinrich

Franz, Niederldndische Landschaftsmalerei im Zeitalter des

Manierismus (Graz, 1969), figs. 2.48, 249, 247. See also Alexander Wied, "Lucas van Valckenborch," JbWien N.F. 31

(1971), 199-2,00, nos. 33-37. Perhaps the earliest landscape

of this type is the small roundel monogrammed and dated

1576 in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London; see Wied

1971, no. 23,198, fig. 192.

9. Alexander Wied, letter of 24 February 1984 to the

author in the curatorial files, stated that The Flight into Egypt

had nothing to do with Valckenborch. Walter Gibson, letter

of 16 April 1984; Robert Koch, letter of 28 March 1984;

Wouter Kloek and Jan Piet Filedt Kok, letter of 4 May 1984;

and Joaneath Spicer, letter of 6 April 1984 (all letters in the

curatorial files) were unanimous in denying an attribution to

Lucas van Valckenborch.

Fig. i. The Flight into Egypt,

1961.9.81, x-radiograph

10. Madonna and Child, location unknown; repro. Critica d'Arte, no. 122 (March-April 1972), 63, fig. 39. This

observation was made by Rachel Cropsey Simons, summer

intern, department of Northern European painting, 1983.

n. See Herwarth Rôttgen, // Cavalier d'Arpiño [exh. cat.

Palazzo Venezia] (Rome, 1973),

 esP- color pis. 38, 72, figs.

13, 29, 38. I am indebted to Richard Spear for suggesting

both these artists as possible sources.

12. Sydney J. Freedberg, in conversation, March 1984.

See Franca Zava Boccazzi, La Basilica dei Santi Giovanni e

Paolo in Venezia (Padua 1965), 292—294, fig. 191; Georgio

Faggin, "Pietro Mera: Un Paesaggio," Arte Véneta 18 (1964),

172-173.

13. Repro. Vladimir Levinson-Lessing, The Hermitage,

Leningrad. Baroque and Rococo Masters (London 1965),

no. 3. This observation was made by Rachel Cropsey Simons.

14. The identification of the figure as Saint Francis is suggested in part by what was tentatively identified as a crucifix

in the sky to the left of the large vertical rock; this image is

visible only with infrared reflectography. Saint Jerome was

suggested by Egbert Haverkamp-Begemann in a note, i July

1984.

References

1783 Mechel, Christian von. Verzeichniss der Gemalde

der Kaiserlich Koniglichen Bilder Gallerie in Wien. Vienna:

167, no. 77 (French éd., 1784).

1845 Krafft, Albert. Catalogue de la galerie de tableaux

impériale et royale au Belvédère à Vienne. Vienna: 213, no.

23 (German éd., 1849).

1866 Waagen, Gustav Friedrich. Die vornehmsten

Kunstdenkmdler in Wien. Vienna: 183, no. 20.

1880 "Notizen." ZfbK 15: 128, repro. after 128, etching by H. L. Fischer.

1884 Engerth, Edouard von. Kunsthistorische Sammlungen des allerhochsten Kaiserhauses, Gemàlde. 3 vols. Vienna,

2: 29-30, no. 691.

1896 Schaeffer, August, W. von Wartenegg, and Gustav

GJück. Kunsthistorische Sammlungen des allerhochsten

Kaiserhauses. Pührer durch die Gemàlde-Galerie. Alte Meister. II. Niederlàndische und Deutsche Schulen. Vienna: 15,

no. 664.

1899 Frimmel, Theodor von. Geschichte der Wiener

Gemàldesammlungen. 2 vols. Leipzig, i: 465, no. 664.

1903 Suida, Wilhelm. Wien. Moderner Cicerone, z vols.

Stuttgart, Berlin and Leipzig, i: 98, as Patinir.

1907 Schaeffer, August, and Gustav Gluck. Kunsthistorische Sammlungen des allerhochsten Kaiserhauses. Die

Gemàldegalerie. AlteMeister. Vienna: 154, no. 664.

1911 Preyer, David. The Art of the Vienna Galleries.

Boston: 91.

1938 Baldass, Ludwig. Katalog der Gemàldegalerie.

Vienna: 128, no. 664.

1946 Weissenhofer, Anselm. Wiener Madonnen. Vienna: 20—2i, fig. 2i.

1956 Walker: 140, no. 54, repro. 141.

1968 Koch, Robert A. Joachim Patinir. Princeton: 47,

84, no. 34, fig. 68.

1968 Faggin, Giorgio T. La pittura ad Anversa nel Cinquecento. Florence: 40, fig. 68.

1975 NGA: 262, repro. 263.

1976 Walker: 135, no. 134, repro. 134.

1977 Eisler:90-9i,fig. 79.
Follower of Joachim Patinir, The Flight into Egypt, 1961.9.81

FOLLOWE R OF JOACHIM PATINI R 2,27
Michel Sittow

c. 1469—1525/1526

Michel Sittow was born about 1469 of German-Scandinavian stock in the Hanseatic port city of Reval, now

Tallinn, in Estonia. He probably received his earliest

training in Reval from his father, also a painter, yet his

apprenticeship in Bruges and years of work for Queen

Isabel of Castile and for allied courts gave his art a

Flemish and cosmopolitan flavor.

Sittow began his apprenticeship in Bruges about

1484. The assumption that he studied with Memling

rests only on that artist's position as the leading painter

in Bruges and on Sittow's use of Memling's Madonna

types. Sittow's apprenticeship would have ended about

1488. He did not register as a master with the Bruges

guild and his whereabouts are unknown before 1492.

when he entered the service of Isabel the Catholic. Sittow appears to have been identical with the painter

"Melchior Alemán" also mentioned in Isabel's household accounts.

At the Spanish court he was prized as a portrait

painter. He is known to have collaborated with Juan de

Flandes on the series of small panels of the lives of

Christ and the Virgin for Isabel, producing at least The

Ascension (private collection, England) and The Assumption (1965.1.1). While he remained in Isabel's

service until her death in 1504, he was apparently absent from Spain after late 1502. Suggestions that he

visited the courts of Margaret of Austria and Henry VII

of England shortly after 1502. cannot be substantiated,

though the portrait of Henry VII in the National Portrait Gallery, London, has been attributed to him. He

was in Brabant at the end of 1505 or early in 1506,

working for Philip the Fair. He returned to Reval in

1506 to settle his inheritance and remained there, receiving membership in the artists' guild late in 1507

and marrying in 1509. He was called away from Reval

in 1514 to paint the portrait of Christian II of Denmark, the future husband of Margaret of Austria's

niece, Isabella. Sittow then began a second, shorter

period of service at the court of Margaret of Austria

and her nephew Charles V in the Netherlands. This

was interrupted by a brief trip to Spain to negotiate the

salary still owed him. By 13 July 1518, when he married again, Sittow was back in Reval. He lived there, a

prosperous and respected citizen, until his death between 2.0 December 152,5 and 2.0 January 1526.

While Sittow's movements and patrons are well

documented, we know little about his early style, and

very few of the paintings described as by him in the

inventories of Margaret of Austria and Charles V survive. The body of work attributed to him in recent

years contains a number of problems of attribution

and dating.

M.W.

Bibliography

Friedlànder, Max J. "Ein neu erworbenes Madonnenbild im

Kaiser-Friedrich-Museum." Amtliche Berichte aus den

konigl. Kunstsammlungen 36 (1915): cols. 177—183.

Friedlànder, Max J. "Neues über den Meister Michiel und

Juan de Flandes." Der Cicerone 21 (1929): 2.49—254.

Johansen, Paul. "Meister Michel Sittow, Hofmaler der Kônigin Isabella von Kastilien und Burger von Reval." JbBerlin

61 (1940): 1—36.

Winkler, Friedrich. "Zittoz, Miguel." In Thieme-Becker.

1947,36:531-534.

Trizna, Jazeps. Primitif s flamands. Contributions. Michel Sittow, peintre revalais de l'école brugeoise (1468—15257

1526). Brussels, 1976.

1937.1.46 (46)

Portrait of Diego de Guevara (?)

c. 1515/1518

Oak (cradled), 33.6 x 23.7 (i^ l/4X9 5/ie )

Andrew W. Mellon Collection

Technical Notes: The panel has been thinned, attached to a

secondary panel, and cradled. An x-radiograph made in October 1949 shows a different cradle with wider members than

the one now in place. The portrait is, at present, painted to

the edges of the panel on all sides, but this was not originally

the case. The wood and the paint surface are reconstructed at

the left and right edges. Narrow, irregular strips added to

either side are clearly visible in the x-radiograph (fig. i). The

strips are both joined to the original panel at slight angles

similar to the angle of several vertical splits in the panel,

228 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Michel Sittow, Portrait of Diego de Guevara (?), 1937.1.46

MICHEL SITTOW 119
Fig. i. Michel Sittow,

Portrait of Diego de Guevara (?J,

1937.1.46, x-radiograph

which suggests that the splits and the damage necessitating

the additions were caused by the same stress. In addition to

the reconstructed sections of the painting on these two strips,

the paint surface has also been extended to cover the original

unpainted margins at top and bottom. Before these extensions the height of the painted surface was approximately

31.6 cm, as indicated by traces of a barbe. The original paint

surface itself is in very good condition, apart from inpainting

along the splits.

The x-radiograph also shows an important artist's change

in the costume. The top of the brocade doublet was originally

lower, as was the neckline of the white shirt. The shirt filled a

wider square opening now partially covered by the fur collar.

Since the cross of the Order of Calatrava is apparently painted

over the brocade and its edges do not overlap the present

placement of the fur collar, it must have been added in the

course of work on the painting.

Provenance: Probably Don Diego de Guevara, Brussels [d.

1520]. Probably heirs of Don Diego de Guevara.1 Probably

Mencía de Mendoza, Marchioness of Zenete, third wife of

Hendrik III of Nassau and subsequently wife of Fernando de

Aragon, Duke of Calabria and viceroy of Valencia, castle of

Ayora, province of Valencia [d. 1554; inventories 1548 and

I554].2 Infante Don Sebastián Gabriel de Borbón y Braganza,

Pau [d. 1875]. Heirs of Don Sebastián Gabriel de Borbón y

Braganza, Pau, 1876.3 Mme. Maurer, Madrid, by I9i5.4

(Leo Blumenreich, Berlin.)5 (P. & D. Colnaghi, Ltd., London,

1929.) (M. Knoedler ÔC Co., London and New York, 192.9—

1930). Purchased March 19 3 o by Andrew W. Mellon, Washington. Deeded 2.8 December 1934 to The A. W. Mellon

Educational and Charitable Trust, Pittsburgh.

Exhibitions: New York, M. Knoedler & Co., 1930, A Loan

Exhibition of Sixteen Masterpieces, no. 14.

130 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTIN G
THIS SENSITIV E PORTRAIT, together with a Madonna and Child by Sittow in the Gemáldegalerie, Berlin (fig. 2), once formed a devotional diptych. The dimensions of the two panels correspond, and the sitter

places one hand on a stone parapet that is covered by

part of the same carpet more prominently displayed in

the Berlin Madonna and Child.6 Their attribution to

Sittow, first made by Friedlànder, is confirmed by comparison with his documented work, notably the Assumption, 1965.1.1, painted with a similar fluid touch

and attention to effects of light.7 In the implied continuity of space between the Madonna and donor, the

diptych follows the tradition of Memling, with whom

Sittow probably studied in Bruges.8 Yet Sittow endows

the subject with a more intense pathos. The Madonna's

head and shoulders fill the panel. She holds the Christ

Child up before her, and his curiously inert pose, together with the goldfinch he clutches, may refer to his

Passion.9 The donor's rapt contemplation of the Madonna and Child, a convention with such devotional

paintings, is here conveyed with a poignant melancholy.10

Sittow worked for the Habsburg rulers of the Netherlands at several points during his peripatetic career,

and strong circumstantial evidence suggests that this

diptych was painted for and represents a valued member of the Habsburg court, Don Diego de Guevara. In

his Comentarios de la Pintura, Diego's illegitimate son,

Felipe de Guevara, refers to "dos retratos de Don Diego

de Guevara, mi Padre, la una de mano de Rugier, y la

otra de Michel, discípulo de dicho Rugier."11 Furthermore, a portrait of Don Diego de Guevara forming half

of a small devotional diptych is listed in two inventories of the collection of Mencía de Mendoza. The

collection of this Spanish noblewoman was transported

from the Netherlands to Spain following the death of

her first husband Hendrik III of Nassau in 15 3 8.12 The

painter's name is not mentioned in her inventories, and

the description is rather generalized: the Madonna

holds her son in her arms and Don Diego de Guevara

wears a robe with fur trim. Yet the dimensions given in

the 1548 inventory, which appears to describe the two

paintings together with their frame, correspond to the

Berlin and Washington panels, assuming a frame

Fig. 2. Michel Sittow, Madonna and Child, Berlin,

Staatliche Museen Preussischer Kulturbesitz,

Gemáldegalerie [photo: Jôrg Anders] Michel Sittow, Portrait of Diego de Guevara (?)

MICHEL SITTOW 131
Fig. 3. Michel Sittow, Portrait of a Princess, Vienna,

Kunsthistorisches Museum [photo: Kunsthistorisches

Museum]

about 2.V2 inches wide around each.13 The presumption that these early accounts refer to the Berlin and

Washington panels is supported by the cross of the

Order of Calatrava embroidered on the sitter's brocade doublet and partially hidden by the richly furred

robe, for Don Diego was indeed a member of this Spanish order.14

Diego de Guevara, whose family came from Santander in northern Spain, must have arrived at the Burgundian court as a young man in the last decades of the

fifteenth century. On 29 January 152.1, the Constable

of Castile, in a letter to the Emperor Charles V, referred

to the recent death of Don Diego and praised his more

than forty years of service to the house of Burgundy.15

In the course of his career, he enjoyed numerous positions of trust in the households of Philip the Fair and

Charles V. He was a maître d'hôtel in the household of

Philip the Fair in 150116 and was first maître d'hôtel to

Queen Joanna of Castile during the voyage of Philip

and Joanna to Spain in I5o6.17 Entrusted with several

diplomatic missions to Spain and England, he became

one of two Contadores Mayores de Cuentas for Castile

in September of 1517.18 Another sign of favor was his

appointment by Charles to the wardenship (clavaría]

of the Order of Calatrava in I5i7.19 Don Diego de

Guevara must also have been an important collector

and patron of the arts. This can be deduced from scattered references to works from his collection, the most

famous being the Arnolfini Wedding Portrait by Van

Eyck that he presented to Margaret of Austria, Regent

of the Netherlands.20

Don Diego could have encountered Sittow and commissioned the diptych before the painter left the Habsburg court to return to his native Reval in 1506 or after

he was called back in c. 1514 to 1517/1518.21 However, the dating and interpretation of the diptych is

complicated by its relation to other enigmatic portraits

by Sittow.

The Berlin Madonna must be considered in relation

to other paintings by Sittow that show strikingly similar facial features. These are a portrait in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna (fig. 3),22

 and a Mary

Magdalene in Detroit.23 The assumption that the Vienna painting is a portrait of a historically important

personage is supported by the subject's fashionable

dress and by the fact that there were two old copies of

the painting in the Ambras collection.24 The halo and

the indirect, downcast gaze suggest that she is presented

in the guise of a saint.25 Friedlànder, on the basis of the

alternating Ks and roses of her necklace and the cockleshells decorating her bodice, identified the lady in the

Vienna painting as Katherine of Aragon. This identification has found wide acceptance.26

 Katherine, who

was born in 1486, lived at the English court after her

brief marriage to Arthur, Prince of Wales, in 1501. The

correspondence of the Spanish ambassador attests to

her admiration for the portraiture of Sittow, her mother's court painter.27

 Moreover, the inventories of Margaret of Austria indicate that Sittow sometimes depicted

his princely patrons in the guise of sacred figures.28

However, Friedlànder's identification is not confirmed

by comparison with reliable portraits of Katherine. A

miniature in the National Portrait Gallery, London,

attributed to Lucas Horenbout, shows a woman with a

longer face, a Spanish hairstyle draped over the ears, a

higher hairline, and more protruding, full lips.29

The striking similarity of facial features in the Vienna Lady, the Berlin Madonna, and the Detroit Magdalene defies explanation. Sittow may have brought the

features of the lady represented in the Vienna painting

into conformity with his pervasive ideal of feminine

beauty, or the Detroit and Berlin sacred figures may be

idealized repetitions of the same portrait type. The latter possibility would affect the meaning of the Berlin232. EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
Washington diptych, since its commissioner would

presumably have wished to express reverence for the

lady as well as for the Virgin. Whether or not such an

implied relationship can be reconciled with the decorum of early sixteenth-century devotional imagery,30

 it

would not militate against the identification of the sitter as Diego de Guevara, since he and Sittow looked to

the same patrons in Spain and the Netherlands.

The dating of the interrelated paintings is also difficult to determine because the painter's few surviving

works do not show a clear stylistic development. The

costume of the sitters and Sittow's documented travels

provide the surest framework for dating. The Gallery's

portrait has generally been considered a product of

Sittow's later period of activity at the court of Margaret of Austria.31

 Such a date does indeed seem most

likely and is in accord with the sitter's costume.32 A

date during Sittow's later period of activity at the Habsburg court finds further support in the cross of Calatrava, evidently added in the course of work on the

picture. If the sitter is indeed Diego de Guevara, the

addition of this emblem may reflect his appointment to

a high position in that Order in 1517.

M.W.

Notes

1. Steppe 1982., 217—218, notes that there was a dispute

over the estate of Don Diego because he had made two wills.

The beneficiary of the first will was his half-brother Pedro de

Guevara and of the second his illegitimate son Felipe de

Guevara, still a minor at the time of his father's death. Professor Steppe also states that the diptych now divided between

Berlin and Washington was acquired by Mencía de Mendoza

through the agency of Don Pedro. In a letter of 2.0 October

1981, Steppe notes that he has found the will of Don Diego

(in curatorial files; see also Steppe 1982, 114-215, n. 7).

Steppe's publication of this and other documents related to

Diego de Guevara and his circle is anticipated with the

greatest interest by students of early sixteenth-century

patronage.

2. Archivo del Palau, Barcelona, Marquesado del Zenete,

Legajo 12.2, inventory of 1548, "Item, un retablico pequenyo

de dos tablas; en la una esta una pintura de Nuestra Señora

con su hijo en brassos y en la otra don Diego de Guevara con

una ropa enforrada . . . , tiene la pintura todo a la redonda

una orla de ora; tiene de alto la pintura media vara y de ancho

las dos tres palmos e medio"; see Steppe 1967, 39, n. 8o and

1982, 218, n. 17, in which the entry from the inventory taken

after Mencia's death is also quoted, "Item un retaule ab dos

portes, en la una porta esta pintada la verge Maria ab son fill

en los brasos y en laltra esta pintada don Diego de Guevara ab

una roba forrada de pells." Apparently an artist's name was

noted in these inventories only when it could be read on the

work itself; see Steppe 1967, 13. These inventories have not

yet been published in their entirety. Mencía de Mendoza's

heir was Don Luis de Requesens (d. 1576).

3. Catalogue abrégé des tableaux exposés dans les salons

de l'anden asile de Pau appartenant aux héritiers de feu Mgr

l'Infant don Sébastien de Bourbon et Bragance (Pau, 1876),

71, no. 631, as by Holbein. I am grateful to Nicole Reynaud

for her help in locating this catalogue.

4. See Friedlànder 1915, 179, and Sánchez Cantón

1930,117.

5. Friedlànder 1929, 254.

6. No. 1722, 32 x 24.5 cm (painted surface), also with a

Spanish provenance; Gemáldegalerie 1978, 414.1 am grateful to Rainald Grosshans for facilitating my study of the

panel in his care. While the original width of the Gallery's

painting cannot be determined, due to the added segments,

the height of the original painted surface was 31.6 cm; see

Technical Notes above.

An old copy of the Madonna was in a private collection

in Verdun in 1974 (information from curatorial files, Gemáldegalerie). A portrait formerly belonging to Alexander

Stahlberg, Hannover, and described as almost identical to the

Gallery's painting in exh. cat. Mechelen 1958, no. 85, is

related only in terms of age and general facial type of the

sitter; sold Lempertz, Cologne, 8-10 May 1969, no. 33, pi. 9.

I am grateful to Hans Georg Gmelin of the Niedersàchsisches

Landesmuseum, Hannover, for help in locating this painting.

7. The two panels were first linked in Friedlànder 1915,

179-181, where he also identified their author with the

documented Master Michiel. The attribution of the two to

Sittow has been universally accepted; see references below.

8. Compare Memling's diptych of Martin van Nieuwenhove in the Hospital of Saint John, Bruges; Friedlànder, vol.

6a(i97i),no. 14, pis. 52-53.

9. See Herbert Friedmann, The Symbolic Goldfinch: Its

History and Significance in European Devotional Art (Washington, 1946), 7-9, 54-55.

10. For the significance of the worshipper's unfocused

gaze, see James Snyder, "Jan van Eyck and the Madonna of

Chancellor Nicolas Rolin," OH 82 (1967), 165-166.

11. Don Felipe de Guevara, Comentarios de la Pintura,

éd. Antonio Ponz (Madrid, 1788), 181-182, written c. 1560

to 1563. Felipe de Guevara goes on to state that the portrait

by Rogier was made ninety years earlier and that by Michiel

more than sixty years earlier ("la de Rugier debe haber cerca

de sus noventa años que está hecha, y la de Michel mas de

sesenta"). This reference occurs in a passage praising the

color and technique of the old Flemish masters. De Guevara

does not mention the location of the portraits. His statement

that Rogier van der Weyden painted his father probably resulted from the common tendency to attribute early paintings

to only a few masters. Bruyn 1978, 214, suggests that the

other portrait may have been by Memling, presumably Sittow's teacher.

12. See Provenance and nn. 1-2 above. On Mencía de

Mendoza, see J. K. Steppe, "Mencía de Mendoza et ses relations avec Érasme, Gilles de Busleyden et Jean-Louis Vives"

in Scrinium Erasmianum, 2 vols. (Leiden, 1969), 2: 449-471

and A. Staring, "Vraagstukken der Oranje-Iconographie,"

OH 67 (1952), 144-156.

13. The Valencian vara is approximately .99 yards and the

palmo approximately 8.9 inches; see J. H. Alexander, Universal Dictionary of Weights and Measures . . . (Baltimore,

1850), 79-80, 118.

14. During this period the Order of Calatrava was administered directly by the crown and was no longer a semimonastic community defending Christianity in Spain; see

Francis Gutton, La chevalerie militaire en Espagne, l'Ordre

de Calatrava (Paris, 1955), 118-123.

MICHEL SITTOW 133
In the membership book of the Confraternity of the Seven

Sorrows of the Virgin founded in the church of Saint Géry,

Brussels, Don Diego's arms are superimposed on the red

cross of Calatrava, which terminates in a fleur-de-lis at each

point; Brussels, Archives de la Ville, no. 3413, fol. n8v, with

the date 152.0 and Don Diego's motto hors du conte.

I have been unable to find an explanation for the thistle

buttons; the thistle may have been a personal device adopted

by the sitter.

15. Letter of Don Iñigo Hernández de Velasco to Charles

V; see Constantin von Hôfler, "Zur Kritik und Quellenkunde

der ersten Regierungsjahre K. Karls V.: III. Abteilung: Das

Jahr 1521," Denkschriften der Kaiserlichen Akademie der

Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-Historische Classe 33 (1883),

52. I am most grateful to Paul Rosenfeld of Rutgers University, Newark, for this and other references to the career of

Don Diego de Guevara.

16. Louis Prosper Gachard, Collection des voyages des

souverains des Pays-Bas, 4 vols. (Brussels, 1876-1882), i:

12.7,349.

17. Gachard, i: 410, 453. For an account of the important role played by de Guevara following Philip the Fair's

untimely death on this voyage, see Steppe 1982, 209—218,

esp. 2ii, based in part on an unpublished history of the de

Guevara family.

18. Thus he was sent to England in 1507 and again in

1514; see Calendar of State Papers, Spanish, vol. i, Henry

VII, 1485—1509, éd. G. A. Bergenroth (London, 1862), 425—

426, and Supplement (London, 1868), 116, and Letters and

Papers, Foreign and Domestic, of the Reign of Henry VIII,

ed. J. S. Brewer, 21 vols. (London, 1864), 2, part I: 44, 73.

For his role as a Contador Mayor de Cuentas, or receiver of

the royal revenues, see Gachard, i: 442, 521. This position

may have been a source of the confusion of de Guevara with

Diego Flores, treasurer of Margaret of Austria, who acted as

agent for the purchase of the Sittow and Juan de Flandes

panels from the estate of Isabel the Catholic (see 1967.7.1).

This misidentification, first made by Carl Justi, Miscellaneen

aus drei Jahrhunderten spanischen Kunstlebens, 2 vols. (Berlin 1908), i: 317, was corrected by Sánchez Cantón 1930,

103, 117, and Steppe 1967, 20.

19. Alonso de Santa Cruz, Crónica del Emperador Carlos

V, 5 vols. (Madrid, 1920-1925), i: 98-99; this was the

second highest elected position. For the hierarchy of the Order, see Joseph F. O'Callaghan, " 'Difiniciones' of the Order

of Calatrava Enacted by Abbot William II of Morimond,

April 2,1468," Traditio 14 (1958), 231-268.

A glimpse of the maneuvering for the wardenship is provided by the report of the English ambassador to the court of

the Netherlands, dated 7 June 1517, that another courtier,

Juan de la Nucha, was complaining of ill treatment, for "as he

was an ancient knight of the Order of Calatrava, he had been

promised a commandery soon to fall vacant. It had not been

given to him, but to Don Diego de Gavaro [sic]," Letters and

Papers ... Henry VIII, 2, part 2: 1069.

20. On his collection, see Steppe 1967, 20, 39, n. 78.

21. See Biography. Trizna 1976, 52-55, maintains that

Sittow returned to Reval in 1517, though the first mention of

his reappearance in Reval is the notice of his remarriage on 13

July 1518. Trizna also claims that Sittow could not have

encountered Don Diego during his earlier stay before 1506

due to the latter's absence in Spain at that time. However, de

Guevara had apparently returned to the court of Philip the

Fair, then in Brussels, by February of 1505 ; Correspondencia

de Gutierre Gomez de Fuensalida, Embajador en Alemania,

Flandres e Inglaterra (1496-1509), ed. Duque de Berwick y

de Alba (Madrid, 1907), 330. Further, a still earlier encounter in Spain is also probable, as de Guevara was a member of

Margaret of Austria's household when she traveled to Spain

to marry Prince Juan; Max Bruchet, Marguerite d'Autriche,

Duchesse de Savoie (Lille, 1927), 22.

22. No. 5612, from thé Ambras collection; [Klaus Demus,

Friderike Klauner, and Karl Schütz], Kunthistorisches Muséum, Katalog der Gemâldegalerie, Flàmische Malerei von

Jan van Eyck bis Pieter Bruegel d. À. (Vienna, 1981), 282-

284, repro.

"23. Trizna 1976, 53—54, 98, pi. XVI. The same preparatory study may have been used for this painting and for the

Berlin Madonna since the contours of hair, ear, and cloak

correspond very closely.

24. See 1981 Vienna catalogue, 284 (as in n. 22). For one

of these copies, without a halo, see Günther Heinz and Karl

Schütz et al., Kunsthistorisches Museum, Portràtgalerie zur

Geschichte Osterreichs von 1400 bis 1800 (Vienna, 1976),

202—203,

 no

-

 I7I

? %• 34?

 as

 Katherine of Aragon.

25. Bruyn 1978, 213, pointing out that the Detroit Magdalene has the same type of halo. Although the originality of

the halo in the Vienna painting has been doubted Karl Schütz

kindly informs me that microscopic and other examination

of the Vienna painting establishes that the halo is original;

letter of 3 December 1985, in curatorial files.

26. Friedlànder 1915, 180—183, considered the roses to

be emblems of the English royal house of Tudor and the shells

to be associated with the Spanish pilgrimage site of Santiago

de Compostela. This identification was accepted by Glück

1933,106-107; Trizna 1976, 32-36, 96; Bruyn 1978, 213;

and, with reservations, in the Vienna catalogue (as in n. 22).

It was rejected by Weinberger 1948, 248—249, and Roy

Strong, National Portrait Gallery, Tudor and Jacobean Portraits, 2 vols. (London, 1969), i: 40.

27. When, in August of 1505, she was shown two portraits of Margaret of Austria sent as part of the negotiations

for a proposed marriage with the widowed Henry VII of

England, she remarked that Michel would have made them

much better, "que mejor y mas cierta y perfectamente las

pintura Michel.. .," quoted by Trizna 1976, 31, and Glück

1933,106.

28. Heinrich Zimerman and Franz Kreyczi, "Urkunden

und Regesten aus dem k.u.k. Reichs-Finanz-Archiv,"/¿>W/£«

3 (1885), XCVII, for a lost diptych by Sittow with the Madonna and Margaret of Austria and her first husband, Prince

Juan, as Saint Margaret and Saint John the Evangelist.

29. Probably painted c. 1525; see Roy Strong, The English Renaissance Miniature (London, 1983), fig. 17. For other

reliable portraits of Katherine, see Strong 1969, i : 39-40, as

in n. 26 and Dictionary of British Portraiture, 4 vols., éd.

Richard Ormond and Malcolm Rodgers (London, 1979—

1981), i: 2i. The youthful Katherine may also be the subject

of a portrait by Juan de Flandes in the Thyssen collection; J.

C. Ebbinge-Wubben in The Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection

(Castagnola, 1969), 169—172, no. 147, pi. 82.

30. The convention of depicting contemporary sitters in

the guise of sacred figures deserves further study. The Madonna as well as saints may have been treated this way. Thus

Van Mander's report that Gossaert painted portraits of the

wife and child of his patron Adolf of Burgundy as the MaZ34 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
donna and Child has been tentatively identified with a painting in the Metropolitan Museum; Pauwels, Hoetink, and

Herzog 1965, 151, 383, no. 2.2., repro.

31. Johansen 1940, 16, implied a date during his Spanish

period. Winkler 1943, 99, dated it c. 1500; Sass 1971, 2.95,

and Bruyn 1978, 214, also favor an early date. Friedlànder

1915,181, dated the diptych about 1515, as did Weinberger

1947, 248; Trizna 1976, 53—54; and Steppe 1981, 2.18.

Baldass 1935, 78, who was unaware of Sittow's return to

Reval, dated it c. 152,0.

The persistent tendency to date the diptych before 1506 is

due to its close connection in terms of quality and modeling,

as well as type, to the Vienna lady, commonly given an early

date because of the age of the presumed sitter, Katherine of

Aragon. Yet, as noted above, she may not be its subject.

Moreover, the assumption of Sittow's trip to England in

1505, which would have given him the opportunity to paint

such a portrait, is itself predicated on the attribution to him of

the Henry VII in the National Portrait Gallery, London (Trizna 1976, 31-32,, 96, pi. n). This last attribution seems unwarranted. Baldass 1935, 78, pointed out that the portrait

was not given to Sittow in Margaret's inventory, whereas he

is specified as the author of several other works in her collection. He compared it instead to early portraits by Massys. See

also Campbell 1977, 2,2,5. The other dated portrait by Sittow,

the Christian II in Copenhagen, generally identified as the

work the artist was instructed to paint on his way back from

Reval, also presents problems. X-radiography shows that it

was painted over a portrait of the young Charles V, unlikely

to have been available to Sittow during his brief stop in Denmark. The portrait is thus probably a version of the documented portrait of the Danish king; see Sass 1976,1—14, and

Bruyn 1978, 213.

32. For the costume compare the portraits of Charles V

originated by Van Orley c. 1515-1517, Friedlànder, vol. 8

(1972), 63, no—in, nos. 142—143, pi. 120. See also letters

from Stella Mary Newton of 15 May 1980 and from Margaret Scott of 16 January 1984 in curatorial files.

References

1915 Friedlànder, Max J. "Ein neu erworbenes Madonnenbild im Kaiser-Friedrich-Museum." Amtliche Berichte

aus den konigl. Kunstsammlungen 36: 179-181.

1922 Mayer, August L. Geschichte der spanischen

Malerei. Leipzig: 147.

1926/1928 Falck, G. "Mester Michiel og Kunstmüseets

Portraet of Christiern II." Kunstmüseets Âarsskrift 13—15:

129-13 3, repro.

1929 Friedlànder, Max J. "Neues über den Meister

Michiel und Juan de Flandes." Der Cicerone 21: 249, 254,

repro. 253.

1929 Siple, E. S. "Art in America—Messrs. Knoedler's

Exhibition." BurlM 55: repro. opp. 326.

1930 Wilenski, R. H. "A Recent Loan Exhibition in

New York (at Messrs. Knoedler's Galleries)." Apollo n:

repro. opp. 32.

1930 "Old Masters in New York Galleries." Parnassus

2 (January): 4.

1930 Sánchez Cantón, Francisco Javier. "El retablo de

la Reina Católica." AEA 6: 117.

1931 Winkler, Friedrich. "Master Michiel." Art in

America 19: 248, 252, fig. 5.

1931 Sánchez Cantón, Francisco Javier. "El retablo de

la Reina Católica (Addenda et corrigenda)." AEA 7: 151-

I 5 2,P1.IV.

1933 Glück, Gustav. "The Henry VII in the National

Portrait Gallery." BurlM 63: 105, 107.

1933 Post, Chandler Rathfon. A History of Spanish

Painting. 14 vols. Cambridge, Mass., 4, part i: 34-35.

1935 Baldass, Ludwig. "The Portraiture of Master

Michiel." BurlM 67: 77-82, pi. IB.

1939 Richardson, E. P. "Three Paintings by Master

Michiel." AQ 2: io8,fig. 9.

1940 Johansen, Paul. "Meister Michel Sittow, Hofmaler

der Kônigin Isabella von Kastilien und Burger von Reval."

JbBerlin 61: i, 16-18, fig. 5.

1940 Contreras, Juan de. Historia del arte hispánica.

Barcelona: 282, fig. 279.

1941 Tolnay, Charles de. "Flemish Paintings in the National Gallery of Art." MagArt 34: 187,189, 200, fig. 19.

1943 Winkler, Friedrich. "Neuentdeckte Altniederlànder III: Michiel Sittow." Pantheon 31: 99, fig. 4.

1945 Benesch, Otto. The Art of the Renaissance in

Northern Europe. Cambridge, Mass.: 75, fig. 42.

1947 Winkler, Friedrich. "Zittoz, Miguel." In ThiemeBecker 36: 531-533.

1948 Weinberger, Martin. "Notes on Maître Michiel."

BurlM 90: 248.

1949 Mellon: 59, no. 46.

1952 Haverkamp-Begemann, Egbert. "Juan de Flandes

y los reyes católicos." AEA 25: 241.

1953 Kehrer, Hugo. Deutschland in Spanien: Beziehung, Einfluss, und Abhàngigkeit. Munich: 138, fig. 69.

1958 Gaya Ñuño, Juan Antonio. La Pintura española

fuera de España. Madrid: 305, no. 2665.

1958 Margareta van Oostenrijk en haar hof. Exh. cat.

Mechelen: 10, under no. 85.

1958/1959 Richardson, E. P. "Portrait of a Man in a

Red Hat by Master Michiel." Bulletin of the Detroit Institute

of Arts 38: 80.

1962 Puyvelde, Leo van. La peinture flamande au siècle

de Bosch et Breughel. Paris : 355-356^1.41.

1965 Eisler, Colin T. "The Sittow Assumption." ArtN

64 (September): 52—53, fig. 8.

1965 Pauwels, H., H. R. Hoetink, and S. Herzog. Jan

Gossaert genaamd Mabuse. Exh. cat. Museum Boymans—van

Beuningen and Groeningemuseum. Rotterdam and Bruges:

69, under no. 5.

1967 Steppe, J. K. "Jheronimus Bosch. Bijdrage tot de

historische en de ikonografische studie van zijn werk." In

Jheronimus Bosch. Bijdragen bij gelegenheid van de herdenkstentoonstelling te 's-Hertogensbosch. Eindhoven: 14,

39-

1968 Gudlaugsson, S. J. "Sittow (Zittoz)." In Kindlers

Malerei Lexicon. 6 vols. Zurich, 5: 363.

1969 Osten, Gert von der, and Horst Vey. Painting and

Sculpture in Germany and the Netherlands 1500 to 1600.

Harmondsworth: 142, fig. 137.

1971 Sass, Else Kai. "A Portrait of King Christian II as a

Young Prince." The Antiquaries Journal 51, part 2: 294-

2-95-

1973 Gilbert, Creighton. History of Renaissance Art,

Painting, Sculpture, Architecture, throughout Europe. New

York: 366, fig. 457.

1975 NGA: 328, repro. 329.

MICHEL SITTOW ¿35
1976 Lurie, Ann Tzeutschler. "The Birth and Naming of

St. John the Baptist Attributed to Juan de Flandes. A Newly

Discovered Panel from a Hypothetical Altarpiece." BCMA

63:131.

1976 Trizna, Jazeps. Primitifs flamands. Contributions.

Michel Sittow, peintre revalais de l'école brugeoise (1468—

1525/26). Brussels: 53-54, 61, 96-97, cat. no. 18, 105, pi.

XV.

1976 Sass, Else Kai. "Autour de quelques portraits de

Charles Quint." OH 90: 12.

1977 Campbell, Lome. Review oí Michel Sittow ... by

Jazeps Trizna. In Apollo 105: 22.5.

1978 Bruyn, Josua. Review of Michel Sittow .. . by

Jazeps Trizna. In OH 92: 214.

1978 Staatliche Museen Preussischer Kulturbesitz. Gemâldegalerie. Catalogue of Paintings, 13-18th Century. 2d

éd. Berlin-Dahlem: 414, under no. 1722.

1979 Westrum, Geerd. Altdeutsche Malerei. Munich:

50.

1982 Steppe, J. K. "Het overbrengen van het hart van

Filips de Schone van Burgos naar de Nederlanden in 1506-

1507." Biekorf. Westvlaams Archief 8z: 218, repro. 212.

1985 Haverkamp-Begemann, Egbert. "Paintings by Michiel Sittow Reconsidered." In Rubens and his World.

Bijdragen Opgedragen aan Prof. Dr. Ir. R.-A. d'Hulst. . . .

Antwerp, 1985: 4-5, 8, fig. 4.

1965.1.1 (1928)

The Assumption of the Virgin

c. 1500

Wood, 21.3 x 16.7 (83/s x 69/i6)

painted surface: 21.1 x 16.2 (85/i6 x 63/s)

Ailsa Mellon Bruce Fund

Technical Notes: The panel consists of a single piece of wood

with a vertical grain. The painted surface comes to the edge of

the panel at the bottom, but there are unpainted margins on

the other three sides. A thin band estimated to be lead white

runs along the left and top edges of the painted surface. A

nick in the panel at the top edge slightly to the right of center

has been filled. The x-radiograph shows a very dense layer,

probably containing lead white, applied over all with diagonal parallel strokes. Its purpose is unclear.1

 Contrary to

Jazeps Trizna's statement,2 the painting is in very good condition. There are some small areas of loss and inpainting in the

Virgin's blue robe, at the edge of the paint surface, and along

the vertical crackle pattern.

Provenance: Queen Isabel of Castile, castle of Toro, Zamora

province [d. 1504]. Diego Flores, by 13 March 1505, possibly as agent for Margaret of Austria.3

 Margaret of Austria,

Regent of the Netherlands, Mechelen, inventories of 1516

and 1524 [d. i53o].4 Jules Quesnet, Paris, by 1904.5 Private

collection, Zurich, from about i94i.6 (Feilchenfeldt, Zurich,

by 1964.)

Exhibitions: Paris, Musée du Louvre and Bibliothèque Nationale, 1904, Exposition des primitifs français, no. 111, as a

follower of the Master of Moulins.

THIS SMALL PANEL from a group of forty-seven

scenes illustrating the lives of Christ and the Virgin,

painted for Queen Isabel the Catholic, depicts the Virgin's corporeal Assumption into heaven. Through his

masterly use of light and space, Sittow transforms the

conventional symbols of the Assumption into natural

phenomena. The pink and lemon-colored light breaking through the clouds substitutes for the more usual

rays of the Madonna clothed in the sun. Similarly, the

silver-gray mantle draped over the angels' hands serves

as a mandorla setting off the figure of the youthful

Virgin. Below her a rich plain and bare hills are minutely rendered in delicate shades of blue while the

lilac, chartreuse, and orange robes of the angels add a

more complex harmony to the effects of color and light.

The notion of the corporeal assumption of the Virgin had an apocryphal rather than a biblical basis, and

was an expression of the honor due to Mary as the

bearer of Christ.7 The Gallery's picture has been called

a combined depiction of the Assumption, Immaculate

Conception, and Coronation of the Virgin.8 While the

doctrine of the Immaculate Conception had many adherents in Spain about 1500, including Isabel and Ferdinand, "los reyes católicos," the Gallery's painting

should not be taken as an explicit reference to this

belief. Whereas the crescent moon and other attributes

of the woman clothed in the sun as described in the

Revelation of Saint John came to be specifically linked

with the Immaculate Conception in the late sixteenth

century, in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth century

they were given to the Virgin in a number of devotional

settings including that of the Assumption.9 Furthermore, such an explicit doctrinal statement would be

inappropriate to the extended narrative series of which

this panel was a part. Nor should the painting be considered a representation of the Coronation, known to

have been the subject of a separate panel within the

series.10 The angels holding the crown above the Virgin

indicate her heavenly role in a more general sense. In

Spanish Assumptions the Virgin is frequently shown

crowned by angels. Examples include an Assumption

in the Prado by an anonymous master11 and a panel

from a retable attributed to Pedro Berruguete.12

The painter of the forty-seven small panels is not

mentioned in the inventory drawn up after Isabel the

Catholic's death in 15O4.13 However, in the 1516 inven136 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
Michel Sittow, The Assumption of the Virgin, 1965.1.1

MICHEL SITTOW 137
tory of Margaret of Austria's collection, into which a

group of the panels had passed, two are singled out as a

diptych: "les deux qui estoient faiz de la main de Michiel sont estez prins pour faire ung double tableaul."14

These two are described as the Assumption and the

Ascension. In the late nineteenth century, Justi linked

the items in Isabel's inventory with a group of surviving panels, attributing them to Juan de Flandes based

on that artist's documented works (see Juan de Flandes,

Temptation of Christ, 1967.7.1). Justi also recognized

Michiel to be Michel Sittow, known from documents

to have worked for Isabel the Catholic and later for

Margaret of Austria.15 It was not until 1929 that Friedlander recognized the Gallery's panel as one of the two

mentioned as being by Sittow in Margaret of Austria's

inventory.16 Winkler later identified the Ascension in

the Earl of Yarborough's collection (fig. i).17

Sittow's contributions to Isabel of Castile's series of

panels probably date from about 1500 or shortly thereafter. The entire series must have been painted between

1496, when Juan de Flandes first appears in the Queen's

employment, and her death in 1504. Sittow himself

probably left Spain in 1502, which may account for his

much smaller share in the work on the retable.18

The Ascension and the Assumption are the only

surviving securely documented works by Sittow and as

such are cornerstones of our knowledge of his style.

They are also outstanding as narrative subjects in the

oeuvre of a painter now known primarily for his Madonnas and portraits, and they provide evidence of his

sure and extremely delicate treatment of the figure in

space.19

Sittow's Assumption probably influenced Joachim

Patinir's painting of the same subject in the Johnson

Collection, Philadelphia.20 Here angels also hold out

the Virgin's mantle to frame her figure, though without

the shimmering effect of Sittow's version. Patinir could

have seen the Assumption and the other narrative

scenes in Margaret of Austria's collection in Mechelen.

Several early copies after the Assumption are

known. One is with Julius Weitzner in London. It was

included in a sale at Christie's in 1983, but was not

sold.21 Another, on copper and without the landscape,

belonged to Francis Cabanach, Jackson Heights, New

York, in I969.22 A third, rather free, copy was in a

Madrid collection.23

M.W.

Notes

1. The back of the panel is bare wood and is inscribed FR

at upper right and Marie Stre 12 juin. . . in the center, along

with other illegible notations.

2. Trizna 1976, 90.

3. Sánchez Cantón 1930, 97—103.

4. André Joseph Ghislain le Glay, Correspondance de

Maximilien Ier et de Marguerite d'Autriche..., 2 vols. (Paris,

1839), 2: 481-482.

5. See exh. cat. Paris 1904, no. ni.

6. Letter of 31 October 1960 from Mrs. Walter Feilchenfeldt, in curatorial files.

7. Réau, Iconographie, vol. 2, part 2, 597-599, 615-624

and H. W. van Os, Marias Demut und Verherrlichung in der

sienesischen Malerei 1300-1450, Kunsthistorische Studiën

van het Netherlands Historisch Instituut te Rome i (The

Hague, 1969), 147-156.

8. Post 1933, 470; Lépicier 1956, 76; Eisler 1965, 34-

37; and Schiller 1980,4: 2,151.

9. Suzanne Stratton, "The Immaculate Conception in

Spanish Renaissance and Baroque Art," Ph.D. diss., New

York University, 1983, 88-167,

 wno

 dates this change to the

15805. She cites, among other evidence, the treatise of Johanus Molanus, De historia SS. imaginum et picturarum

provero earum usu contra abusus (Louvain, 1568), 393-

394, in which he describes the correct depiction of the Immaculate Conception as the Virgin tota pulchra, while also

acknowledging the Meeting at the Golden Gate as a less

correct way of illustrating this dogma. According to another

passage in Molanus, representations of the Assumption should

show the Virgin with the traits of the Apocalyptic Woman.

Noting that the crescent moon was also used in representations of the Madonna of the Rosary and other devotional

themes, Stratton stresses the importance of an image's context for the interpretation of these attributes.

10. Sánchez Cantón 1930,97—101. This entry in the list is

frequently identified with a panel now in the Louvre; see n.

19 below.

11. No. 2515, on deposit in the Museo de Santa Cruz,

Toledo; Post 1933,4' 47O~473>

 fig- l8¿.

12. Post 1947, 9: 114-117, fig. 31, then in the Ruiz collection, Madrid.

13. Sánchez Cantón 1930, 97—103.

14. Le Glay 1839, 2: 481—482. This diptych also has a

separate entry in the same inventory, "Ung double tableaul

de la main de Michiel de l'Assumpcion de Nostre-Seigneur et

de celle de Nostre-Dame; qui a une coustode couverte de

cuyr" ; le Glay 1839,2:481. See also Heinrich Zimerman and

Franz Kreyczi, "Urkunden und Regesten aus dem k.u.k.

Reichs-Finanz-Archiv," JbWien 3 (1885), C, n. 60. The two

are also described as a diptych in the 1524 inventory, but

without mention of the artist; Zimerman and Kreyczi 1885,

CXIX.

15. Carl Justi, "Juan de Flandes, ein niederlàndischer Hofmaler Isabella der Katholischen," JbBerlin 8 (1887), 157-

i65.

16. Friedlânder 1929, 249—254. Winkler 1926, 278, had

earlier attributed the painting, then linked to the Master of

Moulins, to Juan de Flandes, without recognizing its connection to Isabel's series.

17. Winkler 1931,175—178.

18. See also Josef de Coo and Nicole Reynaud, "Origen

del retablo de San Juan Bautista Atribuido a Juan de Flandes,"

AEA 52 (1979), 346, n. 7, and Trizna 1976, 25-27. Eisler

1965, 34, dates it in the late 14905.

19. The Coronation of the Virgin in the Louvre has frequently been considered another contribution by Sittow to

Isabel's retable; Reynaud 1967, 345-352, color pi. opp. 348.

A Coronation of the Virgin was listed in Isabel's inventory

z3S EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Fig. i. Michel Sittow, Ascension, private

collection, England [photo: A.C.L.

Brussels, by permission of owner]

and was among those panels assigned the highest value. It

was not among the panels acquired by Margaret of Austria.

The Louvre panel, 26 x 19.7 cm (2.4.5

 x I^-3 painted surface)

is significantly larger than the other panels given the small

scale of the works (The Ascension measures 2.1.5

 x l6 cm)>

though a Coronation panel would perhaps have occupied a

more prominent place in the projected altarpiece and hence

have been somewhat larger. However, apart from the question of its place in the series, I find the handling of the paint to

be less fluid and transparent than that of the Assumption and

Ascension, especially in view of the comparable visionary

subject. In my opinion, a more likely candidate for another

figurai composition by Sittow is the extraordinary miniature

of Saint John on Patmos, in the Breviary of Isabel the

Catholic, British Library, Add. Ms. 18851, fol. 309. This

miniature, though sometimes attributed to Gerard David, is

relatively isolated in the context of late fifteenth-century

Flemish manuscript illumination; see Thomas Kren in Renaissance Painting in Manuscripts: Treasures from the British Library [exh. cat. The J. Paul Getty Museum] (Malibu,

1983), 40—48, no. 5, color pi. V. The liquid touch and refined, luminous effects, as well as the handling of the clouds,

the saint's upturned face, and his distinctive corkscrew curls,

support an attribution to the artist of the Ascension and

Assumption.

20. Koch 1968, 9—10, 29—30, 75, cat. no. 9, figs. 20,

22—25; with the arms of the Augsburg merchant Lucas Rem.

Koch dates it c. 1516/1517, and links it to purchases in Antwerp mentioned in Rem's diary for this period. He notes

"compositional similarities" to 1965.1.1. The multiple narrative scenes surrounding the Assumption may also be related to the concept of Isabel's retable.

21. Christie's, London, 2 December 1983, no. 89, repro.

22. Acquired in South America; photograph in NGA curatorial files.

23. The figure of God the Father has been added above the

Virgin and a putto added below; photograph in the Friedlander archives, R. K. D., The Hague, with notation "HerreroMadrid" on the verso. This copy may be identical with the

one mentioned by Friedlànder 1929, 254.

MICHEL SITTOW 239
References

1904 Bouchot, Henri. L'Exposition des primitifs français. Paris: not paginated, pi. 81.

1904 Lafenestre, Georges. "L'exposition des primitifs

français." GBA 3epér. 32: 12.7.

1904 Durrieu, Paul. "L'exposition des primitifs français." Revue de l'art ancien et moderne 16: 419.

1904 Fry, Roger. "The Exhibition of French Primitives."

BurlM 5: 369—370, repro. 371.

1926 Winkler, [Friedrich]. "Juan de Flandes." In

Thieme-Becker 19: 278—2.79.

1929 Friedlànder, Max J. "Neues über den Meister

Michiel und Juan de Flandes." Der Cicérone 21: 249-254,

115-118,132, pi. 25.

1930 Sánchez Cantón, Francisco Javier. "El retablo de

la Reina Católica." AEA 6: 101-105,132, pi. 25.

1931 Winkler, Friedrich. "Neue Werke des Meisters

Michiel." Panthéon 7: 175—178.

1931 Kay, H. Isherwood. "Two Paintings by Juan de

Flandes." BurlM 58: 200-201.

1931 Winkler, Friedrich. "Master Michiel." Art in

America 19: 247-248, 252, fig. 2.

1931 Sánchez Cantón, Francisco Javier. "El retablo de

la Reina Católica (Addenda et corrigenda)." AEA 7: 150.

1932 H[ulin] de L[oo], [Georges]. In Trésor de l'art flamand du moyen âge au XVIIIme siècle. Mémorial de l'exposition de l'art flamand ancien à Anvers 193 o. 2 vols. Paris, i :

50.

1933 Post, Chandler Rathfon. A History of Spanish

Painting. 14 vols. Cambridge, Mass., 4: 35, 38,470.

1935 Baldass, Ludwig. "The Portraiture of Master

Michiel." BurlM 67: 77-81.

1939 Richardson, E. P. "Three Paintings by Master

Michiel." AQ 2: 103.

1940 Johansen, Paul. "Meister Michel Sittow, Hofmaler

der Kônigin Isabella von Kastilien und Burger von Reval."

JbBerlin 61: 2,16-17, 35> %• 8.

1943 Winkler, Friedrich. "Neuentdeckte Altniederlànder III: Michel Sittow." Pantheon 31: 98.

1947 Winkler, Ffriedrich]. "Zittoz, Miguel." In ThiemeBecker 36: 531, 533.

1948 Weinberger, Martin. "Notes on Maître Michiel."

BurlM 90: 251.

1950 Sánchez Cantón, Francisco Javier. Libros, tapices

y cuadros que coleccionó Habel la Católica. Madrid: 188.

1952 MacLaren, Neil. National Gallery Catalogues.

The Spanish School. London: 22, 24—25 (zd éd. rev. by Allan

Braham, 1970: 42—43, 45—46).

1953 Michel, Edouard. Musée National du Louvre.

Catalogue raisonné des peintures du moyen âge, de la renaissance et des temps modernes. Peintures flamands du XVe

 et

du XVIe siècle. Paris: 182.

1956 Lépicier, Augustin-Marie. L'Immaculée Conception dans l'Art et l'Iconographie. Spa: 76, pi. 4.

1958 Gaya Ñuño, Juan Antonio. La Pintura española

fuera de España. Madrid: 305, no. 2662.

1958 Margareta van Oostenrijk en haar hof. Exh. cat.

Mechelen: 10, under no. 86.

1959 Brans, Jan V. L. Vlaamse Schilders in dienst der

Koningen van Spanje. Louvain: 44,189.

1961 Goldblatt, Maurice H. Deux grands maîtres français, le Maître de Moulins identifiés, ]ean Perréal. Paris: 42,

fig. 18.

1962 Bermejo, Elisa. Juan de Flandes. Madrid: 11.

1962 Puyvelde, Leo van. La peinture flamande au siècle

de Bosch et Breughel. Paris ^55,455-4 56.

1963 Folie, Jacqueline. "Les oeuvres authentifiées des

primitifs flamands." BInstPat 6: 245-246, fig. 36.

1965 Eisler, Colin T. "The Sittow Assumption." ArtN

64 (September): 34-37, 52-~54> % i1966 "Chronique des arts." GBA 6e

pér. 67 (February):

46, no. 179, repro.

1967 Reynaud, Nicole. "Le Couronnement de la Vierge

de Michel Sittow." RLouvre 17: 345-351, fig. 3.

1968 Gudlaugsson, S. J. "Sittow (Zittoz)." In Kindlers

Malerei Lexicon. 6 vols. Zurich, 5: 363.

1968 Koch, Robert A. Joachim Patinir. Princeton: 30.

1969 Walker, John. Self-Portrait with Donors: Confessions of an Art Collector. Boston and Toronto: 42-44.

1970 Davies, Martin. Primitifs flamands. Corpus. The

National Gallery London. 3 vols. Brussels, 3: 9, ii.

1975 NGA: 330, repro. 331.

1976 Trizna, Jazeps. Primitifs flamands. Contributions.

Michel Sittow., peintre revalais de l'école brugeoise (1468—

1525/26). Brussels: VIII, 25-28, 73, 91-92, pis. 1-3.

1976 Lurie, Ann Tzeutschler. "The Birth and Naming of

St. John the Baptist Attributed to Juan de Flandes. A Newly

Discovered Panel from a Hypothetical Altarpiece." BCMA

63: 119,129,132,133, fig. 26.

1977 Campbell, Lome. Review of Michel Sittow ... by

Jazeps Trizna. In Apollo 105: 225.

1978 Bruyn, Josua. Review of Michel Sittow .. . by

Jazeps Trizna. In OH 92: 212-213.

1980 Schiller, Gertrud. Ikonographie der christlichen

Kunst. 6 vols. Gütersloh, 4, part 2: 151, 257, fig. 743.

1981 [Demus, Klaus, Friderike Klauner, and Karl

Schütz]. Kunsthistorisches Museum. Flamische Malerei von

Jan van Eyck bis Pieter Bruegel der A. Vienna: 176.

1982 Kauffmann, C. M. Victoria and Albert Museum.

Catalogue of the Paintings in the Wellington Museum. London: 78.

1984 Bauman, Guy C. In The Jack and Belle Linsky

Collection in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York:

62-63.

1984 Haverkamp-Begemann, Egbert. "Paintings by Michiel Sittow Reconsidered." In Rubens and his World.

Bijdragen Opgedragen aan Prof. Dr. Irr R.-A. d'Hulst. . . .

Antwerp, 1985: 8.

240 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Rogier van der Weyden

c. 1399/1400—1464

Rogier van der Weyden or, in French, Rogier de le

Pasture, was born in Tournai in 1399 or 1400. He died

in Brussels on 18 June 1464. On 5 March 142.7, Rogier

began an apprenticeship with Robert Campin (q.v.)

that lasted four years. On i August 1432 he was received as a master in the painters' guild of Tournai. By

April 1435 he is recorded as being in Brussels, and in

March 1436 Rogier is mentioned as official painter of

the city of Brussels, though exactly when he was appointed to this post is unknown. It is generally assumed

that Rogier made a trip to Rome in the Jubilee year of

1450, as reported by Fazio in De Viris Illustribus, written in 1456.

There are no signed or dated works by Rogier van

der Weyden. Three extant paintings can be associated

with the name Rogier van der Weyden by means of

documents. Antonio Ponz, writing in the late eighteenth

century, described a triptych then still in the Charterhouse of Miraflores, Spain, and transcribed a document

recording the gift of this altarpiece by Magistro Rogel,

Magno et Famoso Flandresco, to the monastery by

King John II of Castile in 1445. A triptych from Miraflores in the Gemaldegalerie, Berlin, and another version divided between the Capilla Real, Granada, and

the Metropolitan Museum, New York, correspond to

Ponz's description. While the autograph quality of the

Berlin altarpiece was formerly doubted, the underdrawing, as revealed by infrared reflectography, shows extensive changes that attest to its status as a first version

and make it probable that it is the painting referred to

in the document cited by Ponz. In a 1574 inventory of

works sent to the Escorial by Philip II, the Crucifixion

(Escorial, Nuevos Museos) is listed as having come

from the Charterhouse of Scheut, near Brussels. It is

known that Rogier gave pictures and money to the

Charterhouse and a recently published document indicates that when the Crucifixion was sold from Scheut

in 1555 it was recorded as having been donated by

magistro Rogero. The reasonable assumption is that

the painting was given by Rogier to the Charterhouse

sometime after its foundation in 1454. The Descent

from the Cross in the Prado is also mentioned as being

by Maestre Rogier in the 1574 inventory of works sent

to the Escorial. The painting was probably commissioned by the crossbowmen's guild for the Chapel of

Our Lady Outside the Walls in Louvain. A copy of the

painting, dated 1443, suggests that Rogier's picture

was finished and installed by this date.

Despite a paucity of information, it nonetheless has

been possible to construct a large, relatively well-defined

oeuvre for Rogier. Along with Jan van Eyck, Rogier

van der Weyden must be considered the greatest Netherlandish artist of the fifteenth century. His compositional inventiveness and emotional intensity had an

overwhelming impact on Netherlandish and German

art during the second half of the fifteenth and well into

the sixteenth century.

J.O.H.

Bibliography

Destrée, Jules. Roger de la Pasture van der Weyden. 2 vols.

Paris and Brussels, 1930.

Rolland, P. "Les Impératifs historiques de la biographie de

Roger." RBAHA 18 (1949): 145-161.

Panofsky. ENP. 1953: 155—158, 248—302..

Feder, Theodore. "A Reexamination Through Documents of

the First Fifty Years of Roger van der Weyden's Life." AB

48 (1966): 416-431.

Davies, Martin. Rogier van der Weyden. London, 1972..

Soenen, M. "Un renseignement inédit sur la destinée d'une

oeuvre bruxelloise de Van der Weyden, le Calvaire de la

chartreuse de Scheut." Rogier van der Weyden, Rogier de

le Pasture. [Exh. cat. Musée Communal de Bruxelles]

1979: 12.6-12,8.

1937.1.44 (44)

Portrait of a Lady

c. 1460

Oak, 37 x 2.7 (i4Vi6 x io5/s)

painted surface: 34x25.5 (i33/s x loVio)

Andrew W. Mellon Collection

Technical Notes: The panel is composed of a single board

with vertical grain. There is an unpainted margin on all sides

ROGIER VAN DER WEYDEN 2.41
Fig. i. Rogier van der Weyden, Portrait of a Lady,

1937.1.44, x-radiograph

of the panel and a slight barbe at the edge of the painted

surface. Incised lines at the edge of the painted surface were

probably guidelines for the application of the ground. The

painting is in excellent condition. It was cleaned about the

time it left the Anhalt collection1 and received a surface cleaning in 1980. There is a fine overall crackle pattern and some

inpainting along the crackle. A few small, local losses on the

lady's veil and kerchief, on her proper right sleeve, and to the

left of her ear have been inpainted. There is some abrasion in

the ear.

No underdrawing was made visible by infrared reflectography apart from a single stroke within the fur collar and

parallel to its edge on the right side and another horizontal

stroke in the little finger of the top hand. The lady's silhouette

was originally even more slender than at present, since the

thickly applied paint of the background extends into the area

of the belt on either side. This change is visible in raking light,

while the extreme slenderness of the original silhouette is

evident in the x-radiograph (fig. i).

Provenance: Probably Leopold Friedrich Franz, Prince of Anhalt, Gotisches Haus, Wôrlitz, near Dessau [d. iSiy].2

 Probably Leopold Friedrich, Prince of Anhalt [d. 1871]. Friedrich

I, Duke of Anhalt [d. 1904]. Friedrich II, Duke of Anhalt,

Gotisches Haus, Wôrlitz and Herzogliches Schloss, Dessau,

until 1925. (Bachstitz Gallery, The Hague, I925.)3 (Duveen

Brothers, London and New York, 1926.) Purchased December 1926 by Andrew W. Mellon, Washington. Deeded 30

March 1932 to The A. W. Mellon Educational and Charitable Trust, Pittsburgh.

Exhibitions: Bruges, Hôtel de Gouvernement Provincial,

1902, Exposition des primitifs flamands et d'art ancien, no.

108. // London, Royal Academy of Arts, 1927, Flemish and

Belgian Art 1300—1900, no. 33. // New York, F. Kleinberger Galleries, 1929, Loan Exhibition of Flemish Primitives, no. 8.

TOWARD THE END of his career, Rogier van der

Weyden was particularly concerned with the problem

of the portrait, as suggested by the number of surviving

examples datable between about 1450 and his death in

1464. Of these the Gallery's Portrait of a Lady is the

only autograph portrait of a woman.4

The almost abstract elegance characteristic of Van

der Weyden's late portraits is brilliantly realized here

in a balance of pattern and form. A red belt relieves the

severity of the lady's black robe, which is trimmed with

dark fur bands at the neck and wrists. The background

is a deep blue-green. Although the sitter is placed at a

slight angle, the balanced, interlocking diagonals of

her décolletage, arms, and veil give her pose a frontal

and hieratic effect. The smooth, almost shadowless

volume of the head is accentuated against the relatively

flat field of the veil.

There are very few external indications of date for

Rogier's late portraits. The inscription on the reverse

of the portrait of Philippe de Croy in Antwerp includes

a title that the sitter used by 1454 and gave up by

1461.5 In his portrait in Brussels the Grand Bâtard

Antoine is depicted wearing the collar of the Golden

Fleece that he received in i4$6.6 In addition, a relative

chronology is suggested by the development in costume in the male portraits toward a broad chest, padded

shoulders, and hair cut to cover the temples and forehead.7

 At the same time, Rogier's work shows an increasing emphasis on the plane and his figures become

more brittle and abstracted.8 Within the framework

suggested by these observations, it is possible to suggest a general sequence for the late portraits. The Gallery's portrait should be placed toward the end of this

group.9 The degree to which the surface of the panel is

asserted seems comparable to the portraits of Philippe

de Croy and of the Grand Bâtard Antoine, for which

2.42. EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Rogier van der Weyden, Portrait of a Lady, 1937.1.44

ROGIER VAN DER WEYDEN 2.43
dates between about 1456 and 1461 can be derived.

The portrait of Laurent Froimont in Brussels and the

Madonna and Child in Caen, which it presumably accompanied, can be placed somewhat earlier.10

 The figures exist more freely in space, the features are less

abstracted, and the texture and luminosity of the skin

are more precisely detailed; the costume and hairstyle

of the Froimont portrait also support an earlier date.

These observations suggest a date about 1460 for the

Portrait of a Lady, though the possibility of a date at

the very end of Rogier's career cannot be excluded.11

The hands, placed at the edge of the painting as

though resting on the frame, indicate that the Portrait

of a Lady is an independent portrait, not part of a

devotional diptych or triptych. It is possible that it

formed a pendant to a portrait of the sitter's husband,

though no such pairs by Rogier van der Weyden can be

reconstructed. The choice of Van der Weyden, who

seems to have been a favored court portraitist toward

the end of his career,12 and the reserve, even hauteur,

expressed in the set of the head and the downward

gaze, suggest that the lady portrayed belonged to the

nobility. Her identity is likely to remain unknown.13

There are no heraldic devices on the back of the uncradled panel, and the lady's features and costume cannot be linked with an identified portrait. Indeed, it is

difficult to isolate the individual quality of the sitter's

features, as they have evidently been refined through

the process of idealization to which all of Rogier's late

portrait subjects were submitted.14

The Gallery's portrait has frequently been compared

to the Portrait of a Lady in the National Gallery, London.15

 However, it is difficult to see the London portrait as a product of Rogier's own hand, despite its

evident high quality. The bright color scheme, the

more emphatic projection of the figure in space, and

the particularity of texture and light all suggest a shift

of emphasis from that found in Rogier's late portraits.

A Portrait of a Lady employing a related portrait

type was sold with the Halifax collection in 1947.16 A

free copy of the Gallery's portrait, probably of modern

origin, was on the art market in i93i.17

M.w.

Notes

1. According to a note on Friedlànder's photograph of

the painting, "III.i9z6/Gereinigt Duveen Mellon," in Friedlander archive, R.K.D., The Hague.

2. For the activity of this prince as a collector, see C.

Rost, "Der alte Nassau-Oranische Bilderschatz und sein

spàterer Verbleib," Jahrbücher fur Kunstwissenschaft 6

(1873), 51-93. The numerous portraits in the Anhalt collection are not very precisely described in the early catalogues.

However, Lome Campbell has suggested that 1937.1.44 may

be identical with no. 1318, "Dirk Bouts (?), Weibliches Portràt in schwarzer Kleidung mit rothem Gürtel," in the bedroom of Duke Franz in the Gotisches Haus; Wilhelm Hosàus,

Worlitz. Ein Handbuch fur die Besucher des Wôrlitzer Gartens und die Wôrlitzer Kunstsammlungen, zd éd. (Dessau,

1883), 40.

3. See ArtN (10 October 1915), 6 and (2.4 October

192.5), i.

4. For portraits by Rogier, see most recently Campbell

1979, 56-67.

5. Friedlánder, vol. 2. (1967), no. 39, pi. 63; Campbell

1979, 58, and 1980, 85-86. Hulin de Loo had previously

supposed that Philippe de Croy used the title seigneur de

Sempy from 1459, "Diptychs by Rogier van der Weyden,"

BurlM^ (192,3), 57.

6. Friedlánder, vol. 2 (1967), no. 37, pi. 58. See Lome

Campbell, "Rogier van der Weyden's 'Portrait of a Knight of

the Golden Fleece': The Identity of the Sitter," BMRBA 21

(1972.), 7-14.

7. Hulin de Loo 192.3, 53-58 and Hulin de Loo, "Diptychs by Rogier van der Weyden," BurlM 44 (192.4), 179—

189.

8. Rogier's late style is analyzed by Schulz 1971, 63—

116.

9. Most authors have dated the portrait in the 14505; see

Friedlánder, vol. 2 (1924), 101 (1967, 66); Holmes 1926,

i27;Tietze 1935, 127; Schóne 1938, 61; Beenken 1951,73;

Panofsky 1953, 294; and Cuttler 1968, 125. Hulin de Loo

1902, no. 108, and 1938, col. 241, and Campbell 1980, 78,

have implied a date at the end of Rogier's career. With the

exception of Hymans 1902, 294; Voll 1906, 73, 289; and

Reinach 1907, 2: 484, no. 2, the portrait has been universally

accepted as autograph. Firmenich-Richartz 1897, 385, and

Wauters 1900, 60—61, suggested an attribution to Hugo van

der Goes.

10. In the Musées Royaux des Beaux-Arts, Brussels, and

the Musée des Beaux-Arts, Caen; Friedlánder, vol. 2 (1967),

nos. 30-31, pis. 53,52.

11. Dendrochronological examination of the panel, undertaken by Peter Klein, provides additional support for a

late date; see Appendix I.

Margaret Scott, letter of 13 December 1980 in curatorial

files, notes that the lady's costume, with its tight-fitting bodice and sleeves yet relatively narrow neck opening, would

have been the height of fashion in aristocratic circles in the

early 14505 (compare the illustrations to the Roman de Girart

de Roussillon, Vienna, Osterreichische Nationalbibliothek,

cod. 2549, transcribed 1448; L. M. J. Délaissé, La Miniature

Flamande, exh. cat. Bibliothèque Royale [Brussels, 1959],

no. 45, pi. 22). Factors that could explain the retention of this

dress in a portrait of a slightly later period include conservative taste on the part of the sitter, aesthetic considerations

governing the artist, or the somewhat lower social status of

the sitter, though the latter seems unlikely because of the

portrait's air of elegance. The adjustment in the waist (see

Technical Notes and fig. i) suggests that the slenderness of

the lady's silhouette was something of an issue.

12. Campbell 1979, 63.

13. Wilhelm Stein's attempt to identify the sitter with

Marie de Valengin, illegitimate daughter of Philip the Good,

was based upon a supposed resemblance to Philip's features,

Stein 1926,13-14.

14. As Lome Campbell has pointed out (1979, 62, and

1980, io), in the Gallery's portrait Rogier placed the ear high

in order to give an uninterrupted contour to throat and chin.

244 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
15. Friedlànder, vol. 2 (1967), no. 34, pi. 56, and Davies

1968, 170—171, no. 1433. For the comparison of the two

portraits, see especially Holmes 192.6, 12.2-128.

16. Sold Christie's, London, 12 December 1947, no. 23;

repro. Pantheon 22 (1938), 366. Another version of this portrait is in the J. W. Frederiks collection, on loan to the Museum Boymans—van Beuningen, Rotterdam; photograph

Friedlànder archives, R. K. D., The Hague.

17. Photograph in curatorial files.

References

n.d. Wauters, A. J. Die vlamische Malerei. Leipzig: 64.

1897 Firmenich-Richartz, E. "Hugo van der Goes. Eine

Studie zur Geschichte der altvlàmischen Malerschule." Zeitschrift fur christliche Kunst 9: 385.

1899 Friedlànder, Max J. In Ausstellung von Kunstwerken des Mittelalters und der Renaissance aus Berliner

Privatbesitz. Exh. cat. Kunstgeschichtlichen Gesellschaft.

Berlin: 7.

1900 Wauters, A. J. Le Musée de Bruxelles. Tableaux

anciens. Notice, guide et catalogue. Brussels: 60—61.

1902. Hulin de Loo, Georges. Bruges. Exposition des

tableaux flamands des XIVe, XVe, et XVIe siècles. Catalogue

critique. Ghent: 2,5, no. 108.

1902. Hymans, Henri. "L'Exposition des primitifs flamands à Bruges." GBA 3e

 pér. 2.8: 294, repro. 293. (Repr. as

a book, Paris, 1902: 62, repro. 59.)

1903 Weale, W. H. James. "The Early Painters of the

Netherlands as Illustrated by the Bruges Exhibition of 1902."

BurlM i: 202, repro. 209.

1903 Friedlànder, Max J. Meisterwerke der niederlàndischen Malerei des XV. und XVI. Jahrhunderts auf der Ausstellung zu Brugge 1902. Munich: 6, no. 12, pi. 12.

1903 Friedlànder, Max J. "Die Brugger Leihausstellung

von 1902." RfK 2.6: 71.

1906 Voll, Karl. Die altniederlàndische Malerei von Jan

van Eyck bis Memling. Leipzig: 73, 289.

1907 Reinach, Salomon. Répertoire de peintures du

moyen âge et de la Renaissance (1280—1580). 2 vols. Paris, 2:

484, no. 2, repro.

1908 Laban, Ferdinand. "Ein neuer Roger. Begleitworte

zu seiner Verôffentlichung." ZfbKN.E. 19: 58, 60, 64, repro.

55-

1913 Winkler, Friedrich. Der Meister von Flémalle und

Rogiervan der Weyden. Strasbourg: 53-55,176.

1916 Friedlànder, Max J. Von Eyck bis Bruegel. Berlin:

175-

1921 Conway, Sir Martin. The Van Eycks and their Followers. London: 136.

1923 Burger, Willy. Roger van der Weyden. Leipzig:

50-51, 70, pi. 48b.

1924 Friedlànder. Vol. 2: 41, 101, no. 29A, pi. 28 (vol.

2,1967: 26, 66, no. 29A, pi. 55).

1925 ArtN 24 (10 October): 6.

1925 ArtN24 (24 October): i.

1926 ArtN 24 (2 January) : 3.

1926 ArtN 24 (23 January): 6.

1926 ArtN 24 (30 January): i, repro.

1926 Holmes, Sir Charles. "Portraits by Roger van der

Weyden." BurlM 48: 122-128, pi. B.

1926 Destrée, Jules. "Roger van der Weyden (Roger de

la Pasture)." RArt 49: repro. 145.

1926 Hulin de Loo, Georges. "Robert Campin or Rogier

van der Weyden? Some Portraits Painted between 1432 and

1444." BurlM 49: 273.

1926 Stein, Wilhelm. "Die Bildnisse von Roger van der

Weyden. " JbBerlin 47: 13—14.

1927 Demonts, Louis. "L'Exposition d'art flamand à la

Royal Academy de Londres." GBA 5e pér. 15: 262.

1928 Hulin de Loo, Georges. "Hans Memlinc in Rogier

van der Weyden's Studio." BurlM 52: 172-177, pi. 46.

1928 Jamot, Paul. "Roger van der Weyden et le prétendu Maître de Flémalle." GBA 5e

 pér. 18: 276-277, repro.

281.

1929 Singleton, Esther. Old World Masters in New

World Collections. New York: 166—168, repro.

1929 Burrows, Carlyle. "Exhibitions of Flemish Primitive Painting." Parnassus i (November): 6—9, repro.

1930 Destrée, Jules. Roger de la Pasture van der Weyden. Paris and Brussels: 180—181, pi. 137.

1935 Tietze, Hans. Meisterwerke europàischer Malerei

in Amerika. Vienna: 127, repro. 333.

1937 Cortissoz, Royal. An Introduction to the Mellon

Collection. Privately printed: 34—35.

1938 Schône, Wolfgang. Dieric Bouts und seine Schule.

Berlin and Leipzig: 61.

1938 Hulin de Loo, Georges. "Rogiervan der Weyden."

In Biographie Nationale de Belgique. 29 vols. Brussels, 27:

col. 241.

1939 Mather, Frank Jewett, Jr. Western European Painting of the Renaissance. New York: 77, fig. 43.

1941 Duveen Pictures in Public Collections of America.

New York: not paginated. No. 169, repro.

1941 Tolnay, Charles de. "Flemish Paintings in the National Gallery of Art." Mag Art 34: 186, 200, fig. 18.

1941 Held, Julius S. "Masters of Northern Europe,

1430-1660, in the National Gallery." ArtN 40 (June): n,

repro. 13.

1941 NGA: 214, no. 44.

1942 Winkler, F[riedrich]. "Rogier van der Weyden."

In Thieme-Becker 3 5: 472, 475.

1945 Davies, Martin. National Gallery Catalogues.

Early Netherlandish School. London: 112, under no. 1433

(2ded., 1955: 127; 3d éd., 1968: 171).

1948 Davenport, Millia. The Book of Costume. 2 vols.

New York, i: 306, no. 819, repro.

1948 Puyvelde, Leo van. The Flemish Primitives. Brussels: 27, pi. 45.

1948 Musper, Theodor. Untersucbungen zu Rogier van

der Weyden und Jan van Eyck. Stuttgart: 23—24, 59, fig. 66.

1949 Mellon: 55, repro.

1950 Winkler, Friedrich. "Rogier van der Weyden's

Early Portraits."AQ 13: 215.

1951 Beenken, Hermann. Rogier van der Weyden. Munich: 73-75, fig. 92.

1952 Tolnay, Charles de. "Remarques sur la Joconde."

La Revue des Arts 2: 23-24.

1953 Panofsky. ENP: 292, 295, 477, fig. 367.

1954 Davies, Martin. Primitifs flamands. Corpus. The

National Gallery, London. 3 vols. Brussels and Antwerp, 2:

198, under no. 60.

1954 Tietze, Hans. Treasures of the Great National

Galleries. New York: 112,124, pi. 196.

1966 Frinta, Mojmír S. The Genius of Robert Campin.

The Hague: 81.

1967 Eckardt, Gôtz. Die Schonheit der Frau in der europàischer Malerei. Berlin: 11, pi. 11.

ROGIER VAN DER WEYDEN 145
1968 Guttler. Northern Painting: 12.5, fig. 145.

1968 Whinney, Margaret. Early Flemish Painting. New

York and Washington: 66, pi. £9.

1970 Blum, Shirley Neilsen. Review of The Genius of

Robert Campin by Mojmir Frinta. In AB 51:435.

1971 Fingerlin, Use. Gürtel des hohen und spàten Mittelalters. Munich: 198.

1971 Schulz, Anne Markham. "The Columba Altarpiece and Roger van der Weyden's stylistic development."

Munchnerjb, series 3. 2,2.: 104, fig. 39.

1971 Davies, Martin. Rogier van der Weyden. London:

122., 141, pi. 107.

1971 Schabacker, Peter H. Review of Rogier van der

Weyden by Martin Davies. In AQ 3 5: 414.

1973 Campbell, Lome. Review oí Rogier van der Weyden by Martin Davies. In Apollo 98: 64.

1974 Kunstler, Gustav. "Vorn Entstehen des Einzelbildnisses und seiner frühen Entwicklung in der flamischen Malerei." Wiener Jahrbuch fur KunstgeschichteN.S. 17: 47-48,

fig. 13.

1975 Kerber, Ottmar. "Rogier van der Weyden." Giessener Beitràge zur Kunstgeschichte 3: 48-49, 61.

1975 NGA: 374, repro. 375.

1977 Eisler: 58, under Kio88 (1961.9.18).

1979 Campbell, Lome. "L'art du portrait dans 1'oeuvre

de Van der Weyden." In Rogier van der Weyden. Rogier de le

Pasture. Exh. cat. Musée Communal de Bruxelles: 58, 61,

repro. 60.

1980 Campbell, Lome. Van der Weyden. New York:

9-10, 78, pi. 7.

1980 Scott, Margaret. The History of Dress Series. Late

Gothic Europe, 1400-1500. London: 163, 165, 167, 141,

%• 93-

1966.1.1 (2310)

Saint George and the Dragon

c. 1431/1435

Wood, 15.1 x 11.8 (6 x 45/s) painted surface: 14.3 x 10.5

(55/8X4V8)

Ailsa Mellon Bruce Fund

Technical Notes: The picture is painted on a panel with a

vertical grain, which is set into a larger panel with vertical

grain, which in turn is mounted on another panel with horizontal grain. The painting is in good condition. A vertical

split left of center runs the length of the panel, and small

flakes of paint have been lost along the split. Minor treatment

was administered to the lower portion of the split in 1976 to

increase the security and adhesion of the paint.

On the reverse of the panel are two seals and a small piece

of paper (fig. i). The paper bears an inscription in what may

be a sixteenth-century German hand: A0/ / Videatur et

pondere- I tur ab arte repentis, and in a different hand:

albrictür.1 The seal at the upper left seems to bear the words

BUREAU BERLIN and an intertwined monogram FR; the seal

could indicate Royal Prussian possession between the time of

Fig. i. Reverse of Saint George and the Dragon, 1966. i. i

Frederick the Great and the middle of the nineteenth century,

or it could simply be a customs seal. The seal at the lower

right corner bears a coat of arms that has been identified with

a high degree of probability as that of the Polish family

Grudna-Grudzinski.2

Provenance: Possibly Grudna-Grudzinski family, Poznan.

General de Plaoutine, Leningrad, by 1901, Nice, by 1917,

and London, by i9io.3 Lady Evelyn Mason [d. 1944], cousin

of General de Plaoutine's wife, London, purchased I913.4

Mrs. L. A. Impey, her daughter, Chilland, Hitchin Abbas,

near Winchester, by inheritance (sale, Sotheby's, London, 16

March 1966, no. i).

Exhibitions: London, Burlington Fine Arts Club, 1910, Pictures and English Furniture of the Chippendale Period, no.

30, as Hubert van Eyck. // London, Royal Academy of

Arts, 1917, Flemish and Belgian Art 1300-1900, no. 10, as

attributed to Hubert van Eyck. // London, Royal Academy

of Arts, 1953-1954, Flemish Art 1300-1900, no. i, as attributed to Hubert van Eyck. // Winchester-Southampton,

Winchester College and Southampton Art Gallery, 1954,

Pictures from Hampshire Houses, no. 13, as attributed to

Hubert van Eyck. // Bruges, Groeningemuseum, 1956,

U Art flamand dans les collections britanniques et la Galerie

Nationale de Victoria, no. i, as attributed to Hubert van

Eyck. // London, Thos. Agnew ôc Sons, Ltd., 1957, European Pictures from an English County, no. 41, as Hubert van

246 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
Rogier van der Weyden, Saint George and thé Dragon, 1966.1.1

ROGIE R VAN DER WEYDEN 2.47
Eyck. // Brussels, Musée Communal de Bruxelles, 1979,

Rogier van der Weyden. Rogier de le Pasture, no. 3Y, as

Rogier van der Weyden.

ACCORDING TO LEGEND, Saint George was a Roman soldier of the third century and a native of Cappadocia. He was martyred in 303 A.D. The theme of

Saint George's struggle with the dragon, a rather late

development, did not appear until the eleventh or

twelfth century. Probably the most popular account is

contained in The Golden Legend, which gives two versions of the story. In one, George slays the monster in a

single blow. Alternatively, the dragon is only hurt and

the princess, who was to have been devoured, is able to

lead the dragon by a girdle tied round its neck. Afterward, the dragon was paraded in front of the townspeople and then slain by Saint George.5

 In the Gallery's

painting it appears that the dragon is not being killed in

one blow, but only wounded and pinned to the earth

with the lance point.

Although the high quality of Saint George and the

Dragon has been acknowledged ever since it entered

the literature in 1902., its precise attribution remains

controversial. It was first given to Hubert van Eyck, an

untenable appellation that persisted in exhibition catalogues into the 19505, or associated with Jan van Eyck

and with a lost Saint George.6 The main lines of criticism have involved a discussion of whether the painting was by Robert Campin, Rogier van der Weyden, or

some unidentified figure who is allied with one or both

men. Winkler was probably the first to give the painting to Campin and was followed by Schneider and de

Tolnay.7 Devigne gave the panel to an artist in the

entourage and under the influence of Campin, an opinion favored by Panofsky.8

 The prevalent attribution is

that put forward by Hulin de Loo who suggested that

the Saint George and the Dragon is the work of Rogier

van der Weyden, perhaps executed during his years of

apprenticeship with Campin, and that the awkwardnesses in the painting are those of a beginner.9

 Beenken,

Fig. 2. Rogier van der Weyden, Madonna

and Child, Lugano, Thyssen-Bornemisza

Collection [photo: Brunei]
Baldass, Van Gelder, and Davies also consider the

panel to be early Rogier.10 In 1937 Friedlànder also

attributed it to Rogier, but his opinion is somewhat

clouded by the fact that at that time he was under the

influence of Renders' theories on the unity of Rogier

van der Weyden and the Master of Flémalle.11

Beenken in 1940 was the first to suggest that the

Saint George and the Dragon and the Madonna and

Child (fig. 2) in the Thyssen-Bornemisza collection,

Lugano, were originally pendants. This view is not accepted by all, but the recent monograph on Rogier van

der Weyden by Davies cautiously classes both paintings as "immature originals" by Rogier and asserts

that they probably formed a diptych.12 Subsequent

critics have challenged both the association of the two

panels and the attribution of Saint George and the

Dragon to Rogier van der Weyden.13

The measurements of the panel on which the Saint

George is painted correspond so closely to those of the

Thyssen Madonna and Child that the almost inevitable

assumption is that the two panels were conjoined in

some manner, probably as a diptych.14 With diptychs,

it is traditional to place the Virgin and Child on the

viewer's left, but this arrangement has George galloping awkwardly off toward the right.15

 It is conceivable

that the two panels were placed back to back or that

one functioned as a cover for the other. Iconographically, the association of Saint George and the Virgin

had chivalric and political implications in the early

fifteenth century and was popular to some degree in

Burgundy, though more so in England.16 The possibility that both pictures were part of a larger ensemble

should not be excluded, though there is no evidence for

this.17 Whatever its original disposition it is almost

certain that Saint George and the Dragon was used for

private devotion.

A variety of compositional and stylistic influences

operate on Saint George and the Dragon. First, there

are correspondences with manuscript illumination of

the late fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries. Several

scholars have noted similarities between the depiction

of Saint George in the hours of the Maréchal de Boucicaut (fig. 3) and the Gallery's panel; those similarities,

such as the pose of the horse, are shared with other

painted and manuscript depictions of the scene.18 Additional connections with manuscripts may be seen in

the distinctive "parenthetical" mountains that occur in

the Flight into Egypt miniature of the Très Belles

Heures of Jean de Berry by Jacquemart de Hesdin.19

Second, the strong influence of Jan van Eyck can be

seen in the "optical" manner of rendering surfaces and

the delight in shimmering light effects, such as the reflections on George's armor and the dragon's scales.

Fig. 3. The Boucicaut Master, Saint George and the Dragon,

Bouicaut Hours, Ms. z, fol. 2.3 v, Paris, Musée Jacquemart-André

[photo: Bulloz]

Eyckian influence has long been recognized as a component of the early style of Rogier van der Weyden.20

Moreover, a possible relationship exists between the

Gallery's painting and a Saint George and the Dragon

by Van Eyck that was bought for King Alfonso of Aragon in 1444 and sent from Valencia to Naples. The lost

original may be reflected in Pedro Nisart's Saint George

and the Dragon (fig. 4), commissioned in 1468, in the

Museo Diocesano, Palma de Mallorca.21 Nisart's

painting is in general compositional accord with the

Gallery's panel, especially in its detailed background of

fortified buildings, water, and high horizon. The Gallery's picture deviates from Nisart's in small but significant details, such as the way in which the dragon is

attacked with the lance.22

As regards the art of Robert Campin, comparison

can be made to the landscape in the background of the

Nativity in the Musée des Beaux-Arts, Dijon, though

the two paintings do not appear to be by the same

ROGIER VAN DER WEYDEN 249
Fig. 4. Pedro Nisart, Saint George and the Dragon, Palma

de Mallorca, Museo Diocesano [photo: Mas, Barcelona]

hand.23 In general Campin's works do not have the

delicacy and the sense of fantasy found here.

The closest and yet most frustrating comparisons

are to be found in the works attributed to Rogier van

der Weyden. The possible association of the Gallery's

picture and the Madonna and Child in the ThyssenBornemisza collection has already been discussed. The

second most immediate point of comparison, in terms

of style, format, and date, is with the two small pictures

depicting the Madonna and Child and Saint Catherine

in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna.24 Here, too,

a Virgin and Child in an architectural setting are juxtaposed with an image of a saint in a landscape setting.

Although the landscapes in the Catherine and George

panels are similar, it is not certain that the two pictures

are by the same artist.25 Some scholars have questioned

the Saint Catherine as an autograph Rogier, but this

author is prepared to accept both Vienna panels as

early works of the master.26 Further removed in date

and style, but still comparable, are the landscape backgrounds of the Donor and Visitation panels in the Galleria Sabauda, Turin.27

 Especially similar are the tiny

sailing ships and the walled city in the donor panel. The

features of Saint George are consonant with some of

the visages found in Rogier's oeuvre and to a lesser

extent with those of Campin. And while the difference

in scale makes comparison difficult, the straight noses

rounded at the tip and manner of highlighting found in

other male faces in the Prado Descent are similar.

There is, for example, a resemblance to the Saint John

the Evangelist in Rogier's Descent from the Cross in

the Prado.28 Unfortunately there are no adult male

faces in the earliest works associated with Rogier—the

Vienna diptych and the Thyssen Madonna and Child.

In sum, the name that can be best associated with

the Saint George and the Dragon is that of Rogier van

der Weyden. On the basis of style and costume the

painting may be dated to c. 1432/143529 and thus may

be the earliest work by Rogier. The most telling argument in favor of the attribution lies in the exceptionally

high quality of the panel. Rogier's characteristic linearity may be discerned, in embryo as it were, in the

crisp outlines of the horse and the rock formations.

The multiple associations with Campin, Van Eyck, and

International Style manuscript illumination accord

with what one would expect of Rogier at this time, as

do the facial types, which are much more Rogerian

than Campinesque. Moreover, it seems likely that the

panel was allied in some manner with the Thyssen Madonna and Child, a work usually given to Rogier. However, the attribution oí Saint George and the Dragon to

Rogier must be made very cautiously, and the possibility of authorship by an unidentified artist working in

proximity to Campin and Rogier should not be excluded.30

 Setting aside questions of authorship, Saint

George and the Dragon, which combines courtly chivalric elegance with a microscopic yet realistic and

atmospheric landscape (fig. 5), must be reckoned one

of the finest achievements in the history of Netherlandish painting.

J.O.H.

Notes

i. The Latin phrase may be translated, "Look and ponder, from art you will learn." The source of this quotation has

not yet been determined. It is possible that the word albrictür

may refer to Albrecht Durer and thus reflect an early attribution.

i. Both seals are identified and discussed by Dr. Zimmermann, Director of the Geheimes Staatsarchiv, Berlin, in a

letter to Robert Oertel, Director of the Gemàldegalerie, Berlin, 2.2. January 1966, in the curatorial files. Oertel, in a letter

of 9 February 1966, to Carmen Gronau of Sotheby's, also

adds to the discussion, noting that the seal at the upper left

may be a customs seal. It has not been possible to find men250 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
tion of 1966.1.1 in the collections of Frederick the Great or

the Grudna-Grudzinski family. It should be noted, however,

that Joanna of the house of Grudna-Grudzinski married the

Russian Grand Duke Constantine on 24 May 182.0. She received the title of Princess von Lowicz (Jnowraczlaw) from

Czar Alexander. If the painting did belong to the GrudnaGrudzinski family, it is possible that it came to Saint Petersburg through the person of Joanna. Perhaps it was given to

her as a wedding present.

3. Phillips 1902, 598, is the earliest mention of the painting being in the Plaoutine collection, Saint Petersburg. Plaoutine still owned the picture in 1920; see Pictures and English

Furniture of the Chippendale Period [exh. cat. Burlington

Fine Arts Club] (London, 1920), no. 30. Mrs. L. A. Impey,

letter of 20 August 1984 to the author, in curatorial files,

states that Plaoutine emigrated to Nice in 1917 and sent the

painting to his wife's cousin in England.

4. Mrs. L. A. Impey, letter of 20 August 1984, to the

author in the curatorial files.

5. Réau, Iconographie, vol. 3, part 2, 571-576, esp. 576;

Thurston and Attwater, Butler's Lives of the Saints, 2: 148-

150; Ryan and Ripperger, The Golden Legend, 1:23 2-238.

6. See under Exhibitions. Weale and Brockwell 1912,

161-162, who list it under paintings of doubtful authenticity,

quote Phillips 1902 as attributing it to Hubert van Eyck, and

Maclagen as reminiscent of the Turin Hours. Phillips 1920

gave the painting to Konrad Witz. For the lost Saint George

by Van Eyck see n. 19.

7. Winkler 1927, 222; Schneider 1927, 39; de Tolnay

1939,57-

8. Devigne 1927, 68-69; Panofsky 1953,425-426, n. 4

specifically cites the disproportion of the horse.

9. Hulin de Loo 1938, col. 233.

10. Beenken 1940, 137, and 1951, 29-30; Baldass 1952,

17, 89, considers it a copy of a lost Campin; Van Gelder

1967, 3, dates it to c. 1420-1425; Davies 1972, 222-223.

11. Friedlánder, vol. 2 (1967), 55-56, 89,supp. 130,puts

it in the period 1425-1429; Renders 1931, 2: 35, calls it

Flémalle or Rogier; Musper 1948, 58, also believes Rogier

and the Master of Flémalle are the same person.

12. Davies 1972, 222—223.

13. Schabacker 1972, 423; Perier-d'Ieteren, Rogier van

der Weyden [Exh. cat. Musée Communal de Bruxelles] (1979),

139-140, suggests that it may be a studio work.

14. The Thyssen panel measures 15.8x11.2011; painted

surface 14.2 x 10.2 cm. See The Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection. Catalogue of the Paintings (Castagnola, 1969), 354-

356, entry by J. C. Ebbinge-Wubben. The Thyssen picture

was in the possession of King Frederick the Great of Prussia

and bears on its reverse a seal with an intertwined FR and the

words BUREAU BERLIN that is very similar to the seal at the

upper left of 1966.1.1. This by itself, however, is not enough

to suggest that the pictures were together at one time. Most

critics give the Thyssen panel to Rogier, with varying degrees

of certainty. John Ward, "A New Attribution for the Madonna Enthroned in the Thyssen Bornemisza Collection,"

AB 50 (1968), 354-355, attributes the painting to Campin

and dates it to c. 143 5.

15. See Wolfgang Kermer, "Studien zum Diptychon in der

sakralen Malerei," Ph.D. diss., University of Tubingen, 1967,

esp. 166—173, for diptychs pairing the Virgin and a saint. It is

by no means an ironclad rule that the Virgin is always placed

on the viewer's left.

16. Susan King, "St. George and the Virgin Mary in FifFig. 5. Saint George and the Dragon, detail, 1966.1.1
teenth Century Burgundy: Political and Chivalric Implications," M.A. thesis, University of Maryland, 1977. Richard

Vaughan, Philip the Good (New York, 1970), 146, notes

that in 1435 Pierre de Bauffremont entered a tournament

carrying a banner depicting the Virgin on one side and Saint

George on the other.

17. The chances of the two panels being part of a polyptych seem rather slim and it is difficult to ascertain what the

iconographic program might have been. Another, perhaps

more viable suggestion is that the two panels were part of a

non-folding triptych; the Madonna and Child would be the

center panel flanked by Saint George on the left and another

mounted, militant saint, such as Saint Martin, on the right.

Just such a triptych was painted in the late fourteenth century

by the Spaniard Francesco Comes, and is in the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, Boston. See Philip Hendy, European

and American Paintings in the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum (Boston, 1974), 56—58.

18. Baldass 1952., 17, n. i, was perhaps the first to associate 1966.1.1 with the Boucicaut Master's miniature. This

connection is also made in the entry by Maurice Brockwell in

the Flemish Art 1300-1900 [Exh. cat., Royal Academy of

Arts] (London, 1953—1954), 9-10, no. i, and by Meiss 1974,

243. Representations of Saint George and the dragon abound

in the late fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries. The following, while similar to 1966.1.1, are not necessarily direct

sources: Modena, Bibl. Estense, Book of Hours, Ms. R.7-3.

lat. 842, fol. 24or, Lombard, c. 1387, repro. ArteLombarda

8, no. 2 (1963), 36, fig. 15; London, British Museum, Beaufort Hours, Royal Ms. 2A XVIII; fol. 5v, Flemish master

active in England (?) c. 1400, repro. AB 22 (1940), fig. 9;

Bernardo Martorell, panel painting, Spanish, c. 1438, The

Art Institute of Chicago, no. 1933.786, repro. The Art Institute of Chicago 100 Masterpieces (Chicago, 1978), 40.

19. Brussels, Bibl. Royale, Ms. 11060/61, fol. 106, repro.

Millard Meiss, French Painting in the Time of Jean de Berry.

The Late Fourteenth Century and the Patronage of the Duke

(London, 1967), fig. 188. "Parenthetical" mountains are also

encountered in the Visitation by the Egerton Master, Madrid,

Bibl. Nacional, Vit. 25, No. i, fol. 12, repro. in Millard

Meiss, French Painting in the Time of Jean de Berry. The

Boucicaut Master (London, 1968), fig. 178.

20. During the first years of Rogier's apprenticeship Jan

van Eyck was in Lille, not far from Tournai, and in fact was

offered the vin d'honneur by the city of Tournai on 18 October 1427. It is also quite probable that in 1432 Rogier, as

apprentice or master, would have journeyed to see the newly

completed Ghent altarpiece.

21. The lost Van Eyck and Nisart's Saint George are discussed at length in Chandler Post, A History of Spanish

Painting 14 vols. (Cambridge, Mass., 1938), 7, part 2: 615-

624. Compare August Mayer, "Neue Dokumente zur Kiinstlergeschichte des 14. und i$.]ahrhunderts," Monatsheftefiir

Kunstwissenschaft 7 (August, 1914), 298; and Cuttler, Northern Painting, 248. Jose Gudiol Ricart, Ars Hispaniae 22 vols.

(Madrid, 1955), 9: 295, sees French and Italian influence in

the background of Nisart's painting. Peman y Pemartin

1969, 37—39, also discusses the relationship between the lost

Van Eyck and Nisart's Saint George; he sees 1966.1.1 as a

freer version of the lost Van Eyck.

22. Post 1938, 621, cites Pietro Summonte's letter of 1524,

which concerns a copy of a Flemish Saint George by the

Neapolitan artist Colantonio. The description corresponds

to Nisart's painting, especially the following: "his spear,

which he had fixed in the dragon's mouth; and the point,

having passed completely within, had only to penetrate the

skin, which, already swollen, made a kind of bag outside."

This detail is also found in an Upper Rhenish Saint George of

c. 1435—1460 in the Bayerische Staatsgemaldesammlungen,

Munich, no. WAF 729. In contrast, the dragon in 1966.1.1 is

pinned to the earth in a manner that I have not found in any

other representations of this theme. This motif was either an

original creation of the artist or was derived from a source,

such as manuscript illumination, which is as yet undiscovered. At any rate, it belongs to a different recension.

23. Catalogued and repro. in Davies 1972, 247—248, pi.

155-

24. Davies 1972, 240, pis. 87-88.

25. In the Saint Catherine the rocks appear to be painted

more softly, the dotting of trees and grasses is different, and

the background is constructed with a greater emphasis on

overlapping hills.

26. Panofsky 1953, 251, considers it shopwork; Karl Birkmeyer, "Notes on the Two Earliest Paintings by Rogier van

der Weyden," AB 44 (1962), 331, n. 16, doubts the attribution; Perier-d'Ieteren, exh. cat. Brussels, 1979, 141, sees the

Catherine panel as weaker than its companion and questions

whether it and the Saint George might be by the same apprentice.

27. Davies 1972, 236-237, pis. 19-21. The center panel

of the dismembered triptych is the Annunciation in the Louvre.

The pictures are consistently dated early.

28. Davies 1972, 223—226, pis. 1—9.

29. Saint George's armor is comparable to that worn by

the "Warriors of Christ" on the inner left wing of the Ghent

altarpiece of 1432. Helmut Nickel, curator of arms and armor at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, letter to Martha

Wolff of 27 September 1979, in the curatorial files, compares

George's armor to that worn by Sir Hugh Halsham on the

tomb brass of 1441 in the West Grinstead Church, Sussex,

and notes that much English armor was imported from the

Netherlands. The closest parallel to the costume of the Princess is found in Jan van Eyck's depiction of Giovanna Cenani,

wife of Giovanni Arnolfini, in the double portrait of 1434 in

the National Gallery, London. The sleeve of her robe is ornamented with a similar hanging fringe and her coiffure a

comes, is comparable, though the Princess wears a transparent veil rather than a white kerchief.

30. This essentially is the opinion put forward by Davies

1972, 223, "But too little is known for any certainty; and I do

not think it excluded that these two pictures are by a painter

(or two?) separate from Rogier and from Campin." The

strongest argument against Rogier's authorship lies in the

awkward, unconvincing proportions of the horse, the nonCampinesque character of the work, and—in the eyes of

some critics—the incompatibility with the Thyssen panel. If

one accepts the hypothesis of a second, unknown artist, then

this person must have been gifted with a talent equal to

Rogier's and it is curious that there are no other paintings or

manuscript illuminations that can be attributed to him.

References

1902 Phillips, Claude. "Impressions of the Bruges Exhibitions." The Fortnightly Review N.S. 72: 598.

1912 Weale, W. H. James, and Maurice W. Brockwell.

The Van Eycks and Their Art. London: 161-162, no. 30.

1920 Phillips, Claude. "Burlington Fine Arts Club. Win252. EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
ter Exhibition." Daily Telegraph (18 December): 6.

1921 Fry, Roger. "The Burlington Fine Arts Club." The

New Statesman 16 (i January): 392.

1921 Conway, Martin. The Van Eycks and Their Followers. London: 63.

1925 Hulin de Loo, Georges. "Quelques notes du voyage, i. Un document Catalan concernant un Saint Georges

peint par Johannes van Eyck." Academic Royale de Belgique.

Classe des Beaux-Arts. Bulletin 7, nos. 6—9: 100—104.

1927 Winkler, Friedrich. "Die flamisch-belgische Ausstellung in London." Der Kunstwanderer (February): 222.

1927 Demonts, Louis. "L'Exposition d'art flamand a la

Royal Academy de Londres." GBA 5e per. 15: 261, repro.

1927 Devigne, Marguerite. "Notes sur 1'Exposition

d'art flamand et beige a Londres, i." OH 44: 68-69, %•

 I •

1927/1928 Schneider, Hans. "Die Ausstellung flamischer und belgischer Kunst in London." ZfbK 61: 39,

repro.

1929 Renders, Emile. "The Riddle of the Maitre de

Flemalle." BurlM 54: 292.

1931 Renders, Emile. La solution du probleme van der

Weyden Flemalle Campin. 2 vols. Bruges, 2: 35, pi. 6.

1937 Friedlander. Vol. 14: 84, 85-86, 88, pi. Nachtrag

6 (vol. 2,1967: 55, 56, 89, supp. 130, pi. 36).

1938 Hulin de Loo, Georges. "Rogier van der Weyden."

In Biographie Nationale de Belgique. 29 vols. Brussels, 27:

col. 233.

1939 Tolnay, Charles de. Le Maitre de Flemalle et les

freres van Eyck, Brussels: 46, 57, no. 9, fig. 19.

1940 Beenken, Hermann. "Rogier van der Weyden und

Jan van Eyck." Pantheon 25: 129—130,136—137.

1942 Winkler, Ffriedrich]. "Weyden, Rogier van der."

In Thieme-Becker 3 5: 475.

1948 Musper, Theodor. Untersuchungen zu Rogier van

der Weyden und Jan van Eyck. Stuttgart: 58, pi. 27.

1950 Winkler, F[riedrich]. "Meister von Flemalle." In

Thieme-Becker 37: 100.

1951 Beenken, Hermann. Rogier van der Weyden.

Munich: 29-30, 33-34, 44, fig. 12.

1952 Baldass, Ludwig. Jan van Eyck. London: 17, 89.

1953 Panofsky. ENP: 425-426, fig. 273.

1953 Gamber, Ortwin. "Harnischstudien: V. Stilgeschichte des Plattenharnisches von den Anfangen bis um

i44o."/£>W/£«N.F. 14: 78, no. 146.

1954 Sutton, Denys. "Flemish Painting at the Royal

Academy." Les Arts Plastiques 6th ser. no. 6: 6, 8, 69, fig. i.

1954 Rothel, H. K. Review of Rogier van der Weyden

by Hermann Beenken. In Kunstchronik 7: 74—75.

1954 Rothel, H. K. "Die Ausstellung flamischer Malerei

in London." Kunstchronik 7: 89.

1956 Winchester Cathedral Record 25: 25—26, pi. 9.

1956 Weiss, Roberto. "Jan van Eyck and the Italians."

Italian Studies n: 12.

1957 Nicolson, Benedict. "Pictures from Hampshire

Houses." BurlM 99: 273.

1962 Birkmeyer, Karl M. "Notes on the Two Earliest

Paintings by Rogier van der Weyden." AB 44: 329.

1966 Frinta, Mojmir. The Genius of Robert Campin.

The Hague: 28, 35.

1966 Frohlich-Bume, L. "Der heilige Georg als Drachentoter von Hubert van Eyck." Die Weltkunst 36(1 March):

171, repro.

1967 Gelder, J. G. van. "An Early Work by Robert

Campin." OH 82: 3.

1967 Cfott], P[erry] B. In Hugh Broadley. Flemish

Painting in the National Gallery of Art. Rev. ed. Washington:

4,16, repro. 17.

1969 Peman y Pemartin, Cesar. Juan van Eyck y Espana.

Cadiz: 37-39, fig. 15.

1970 Chatelet, Albert. Review of French Painting... by

Millard Meiss. In Revue Art no. 8: 83.

1972 Davies (see Biography): 33, 222-223, pi. 86.

1972 Schabacker, Peter H. Review of Rogier van der

Weyden by Martin Davies. In AQ 25: 423.

1974 Meiss, Millard. French Painting in the Time of

Jean de Berry: The Limbourgs and Their Contemporaries.

New York: 243, fig. 754.

1974 Bruyn, Josua. "A New Monograph on Rogier."

Review of Rogier van der Weyden by Martin Davies. In

BurlM 116: 540.

1974 Walker, John. Self-Portrait with Donors. Boston

and Toronto: 41-42.

1975 Smeyers, Maurice. "Een collegeschrift van de oude

Leuvense Universiteit (1481—1482). Een codicologisch en

iconografisch onderzoek." Area Lovaniensis 4: 281, 285, fig.

12.

1975 NGA: 374, repro. 375.

1976 Walker: 125, pi. 121.

1981 Randall, Richard H. Jr. "Jan van Eyck and the St.

George Ivories." The Journal of the Walters Art Gallery 39:

41, 44, 47, fig. 2.

1984 Lane, Barbara G. The Altar and the Altarpiece.

Sacramental Themes in Early Netherlandish Painting. New

York: 25—35.

ROGIER VAN DER WEYDEN 2.53
Follower of Rogier van der Weyden

1937.1.45 (45)

Christ Appearing to the Virgin

c. 1475

Probably oak, 163 x 93 (64^8 x ^65/s)

Andrew W. Mellon Collection

Technical Notes: The panel is composed of four boards with

vertical grain. There are extensive small losses and repaint

throughout, with large areas of repaint in the foreground and

in Christ's left foot. Changes exist above Christ's left hand

and in the columns of the window frame at the right.

Provenance: Don José de Madrazo y Agudo, Madrid, by

1 856.! Don Federigo de Madrazo y Kuntz, his son, Madrid,

by inheritance.2 Marques de Salamanca, Madrid3 (sale, Paris,

3— 6 June 1867, no. 155, as Hugo van der Goes). Don Pedro

de Madrazo, Madrid, until i^oy.4 (Durlacher, London, by

1909.) (Duveen Brothers, New York, September 1912..)

(Kleinberger, New York, May-June, i9i4-)5 (Duveen Brothers, New York, June, 1914.) Purchased January 1937 by the

A. W. Mellon Educational and Charitable Trust, Pittsburgh.

Exhibitions: London, Royal Academy of Arts, 192.7, Flemish

and Belgian Art, 13 00-1900, no. 30, as Rogier van der Weyden. // Brussels, Exposition Universelle, 1935, Cinq siècles

d'art Bruxellois^ no. 1 1, as Rogier van der Weyden.

NOT DESCRIBE D in the canonical Gospels, the appearance of the resurrected Christ to the Virgin is to be

found in apocryphal writings, the most important and

influential of these being the Pseudo-Bonaventura's

Meditations on the Life of Christ , which was composed

in the thirteenth century.6 The Pseudo-Bonaventura's

vivid and emotional account sets the scene in the Virgin's house and describes her as kneeling down to honor Christ. At the beginning of the fifteenth century

there was a Northern iconographie type that was based

generally on representations of the "Noli me tangere."

This type was used by Rogier van der Weyden on the

right wing of the Miraflores altarpiece (Gemaldegalerie,

Berlin).7 Rogier's panel does not show Christ carrying

a staff and banner, but this feature is found in other

representations of the theme. That the banner in the

Gallery's painting is green and not the banner of the

Resurrection, which is white with a red cross, may be

due to an iconographie misunderstanding.8

Only Weale and Friedlànder attribute Christ Appearing to the Virgin to Rogier van der Weyden.9

 Most

critics believe that the painting is by an unnamed artist

strongly influenced by Rogier, but working at a later

date.10 However, Hulin de Loo and de Tolnay give the

panel, either fully or in part, to Vrancke van der Stockt

who succeeded Rogier as city painter of Brussels.11 An

Annunciation in the Musée des Beaux-Arts, Dijon,

which is the same size and was also in the Madrazo

Collection, Madrid, has been proposed as a companion

piece and published as by Vrancke van der Stockt.12

Despite the similarities of size and provenance, it is not

possible to accept the two panels as part of the same

ensemble. Not only are the features different, but the

pattern of the floor tiles, the perspectival schemes, and

the framing devices are not in accord. In the absence of

any documented works by Vrancke van der Stockt, the

attribution to him of Christ Appearing to the Virgin

can neither be proved nor disproved.13

Christ Appearing to the Virgin derives in a general

way from the right wing of Rogier's Miraflores altarpiece (fig. i).14

 A version closer in composition and

date is one of a pair of shutters in the Metropolitan

Museum of Art, New York, attributed to the Master of

the Saint Ursula Legend. Also related is a depiction of

the same theme in the National Gallery, London, by a

follower of Rogier, which is dated between about 1450

and 1475.15

The Gallery's panel was painted by an anonymous

Netherlandish follower of Rogier van der Weyden and

dates to the third quarter of the fifteenth century. It is

possible that it functioned as the right wing of an altarpiece. The panel may have been produced in Brussels

or even Bruges, but because Rogier's influence was so

widespread it is hard to localize the works of his followers. The painting's large size and the fact that it was

first recorded in a collection in Spain suggests that it

might have been originally destined for a religious institution in Spain.

J.O.H.

Notes

1. Catalogo de la Galena de Cuadros del Excmo. Sr. D.

José de Madrazo (Madrid, 1856), 519.

2. Unverified, but very likely; information from Duveen

Brothers brochure in the curatorial files.

3. I have been unable to locate the catalogue of his collection, Catalogo de la galena de Cuadros de la posesión de

Vista-Alegre, de propriedad del Excmo. Sr. Marques de

Salamanca (Madrid, 1865).

¿54 EARLY NETHERLANDIS H PAINTING
Follower of Rogier van der Weyden, Christ Appear ing to the Virgin, 1937.1.45

FOLLOWER OF ROGIER VAN DER WEYDEN 255
Fig. i. Rogier van der Weyden, Christ Appearing to the

Virgin, right wing of the Miraflores Altarpiece, Berlin,

Staatliche Museen Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Gemâldegalerie [photo: Jôrg P. Anders]

4. Duveen Brothers brochure in the curatorial files.

Weale 1909, 159, cites the painting as being with Durlacher

and mentions the previous owner as Pedro de Madrazo.

5. Kleinberger archives, card no. 9561, department of

European painting, Metropolitan Museum. I am grateful to

Lome Campbell for bringing this information to my attention and to Mary Sprinson de Jesús for access to the files.

6. Isa Ragusa and Rosalie Green, Meditations on the Life

of Christ (Princeton, 1961), 3 59-360. The basic study of this

theme is Breckenridge 1957, 9-32.; compare Réau, Iconographie, vol. 2, part 2, 554-556.

7. Breckenridge 1957, 22.

8. Christ with the staff and banner of the Resurrection is

depicted in a sculpture by Veit Stoss (Nonnberg Abbey,

Church of Saint John, Salzburg), and in a painting by an

Antwerp mannerist in the Museum of Fine Arts, Richmond,

Virginia; repro. Breckenridge 1957, figs, n, 14.

9. Weale 1909,159-160; Friedlànder, vol. 2 (192.4), no.

41. Friedlànder's acceptance was somewhat modified by

"certain troublesome traits, especially in the head of Christ"

that he attributed to a restorer. Examination by the Gallery's

conservation staff does not indicate that the head of Christ

has been exceptionally altered by restoration.

10. Among those who believe that the painting is by a later

follower are: Mather 1917, 149; Destree 1930, i: 97—98;

Schône 1938, 64, no. 15; Beenken 1951, 100; Nicole Verhaegen, letter to John Walker, January 1961, in the curatorial

files; Davies 1972., 2.15. Both Destree and Schône state that

the panel was in the Bache Collection, New York. There is no

verification of this.

11. Hulin de Loo 192.6/1927, col. 73, sees in the painting

a collaboration between Rogier van der Weyden and Vrancke

van der Stockt, with Vrancke responsible for the architectural details. De Tolnay 1941, 185—186, considers the picture to be entirely by Vrancke van der Stockt and probably

late in date. Panofsky 1953, 463, n. 4, seems to accept an

attribution to Vrancke van der Stockt.

12. Friedlànder, vol. 2. (1967), Add. 160,pi. 143,160x92

cm. Beenken 1951, 100, cites Winkler as proposing that the

Gallery's painting is by Vrancke van der Stockt and is a

pendant to the Annunciation in Dijon. Davies 1972., 2.15,

found the association of the two pictures "very probable." A.

Brunard, "Vrancke Van der Stockt (Successeur de Rogier van

der Weyden, en qualité de peintre officiel de la Ville de

Bruxelles)," Bruxelles au XVme siècle (Brussels, 1953), 83-

84, published the Dijon Annunciation as by Vrancke, but did

not link it to the Gallery's painting or include the latter in his

discussion of Vrancke's works.

13. For a discussion of the putative oeuvre of Vrancke van

der Stockt, see Hulin de Loo 192,6/192.7, cols. 66—76; Duverger 1938, 69—70; Brunard 1953, 83—84 (as in preceding

note); and Craig Harbison, "A Late i5th Century Flemish

Panel Attributed to Vrancke van der Stockt," Allen Memorial

Art Museum Bulletin 30 (1973), 52.—62,.

14. Friedlànder, vol. 2 (1967), 60, no. la, pis. i, 3.

15. For the New York painting see Harry Wehle and

Margaretta Salinger, New York. The Metropolitan Museum

of Art. A Catalogue of Early Flemish, Dutch and German

Paintings (New York, 1947), 76-77, no. 32.100.636. For

the London panel, see Martin Davies, National Gallery Catalogues. Early Netherlandish School 3d ed. (London, 1968),

176, no. 1086.

References

1856 Catalogo de la Galena de Cuadros del Excmo. Sr.

D. José de Madrazo. Madrid: 12,6, no. 519.

1909 Weale, W. H. James. "The Risen Saviour Appearing to His Mother: a masterpiece by Roger de la Pasture."

BurlM 16 (December): 159—160, repro.

1912/1913 Wauters, A. J. "Roger van der Weyden."

BurlMzi-.Sz.

1917 Mather, Frank Jr. " Christ Appearing to His Mother by Rogier de la Pasture." Art in America 5 (April): 149.

1924 Friedlànder. Vol. 2: 105, no. 41 (vol. 2,1967: 68,

no. 41, pi. 64).

1926/1927 Hulin de Loo, Georges. "Stockt." In Biographie National de Belgique. 29 vols. Brussels, 24: col. 73.

1927/1928 Schneider, Hans. "Die Ausstellung flàmischer und belgischer Kunst in London." ZfbK 61: 40.

1928 Vaughan, Malcolm. "Roger van der Weyden in

America." International Studio 90 (July): 42,~43, repro. 41.

1930 Destree (see Biography): 97-98, pi. 18.

1938 Duverger, J. "Stock." In Thieme-Becker 32: 69—

70.

256 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
193 8 Schône, Wolfgang. Dieric Bouts und seine Schule.

Berlin and Leipzig: 64, no. 15.

1941 NGA: 2.14.

1941 Tolnay, Charles de. "Flemish Paintings in the National Gallery of Art." MagArt 34 (April): 185-186, fig. 14.

1951 Beenken, Hermann. Rogier van der Weyden. Munich: IOO.

1953 Panofsky. ENP: 463.

1957 Breckenridge, James. "'Et Prima Vidit': The Iconography of the Appearance of Christ to His Mother." AB

39: 2.4.

1972 Davies, Martin. Rogier van der Weyden. London:

215.

1973 Campbell, Lome. "Studies in Early Netherlandish

Art." Review of The Ghent Altarpiece and the Art of Jan van

Eyck by Lotte Brand Philip and Rogier van der Weyden by

Martin Davies. In Apollo 98 (July): 64.

1975 NGA: 376, repro. 377.

1976 Walker: 125, fig. 120.

1981 Grosshans, Rainald. "Rogier van der Weyden.

Der Marienaltar aus der Kartause Miraflores." JbBerlin 23:

77-

FOLLOWER OF ROGIER VAN DER WEYDEN ¿57

Appendix I

Dendrochronological Analysis of Early Netherlandish Panels

in the National Gallery of Art

by Peter Klein

Measurements were taken from panels in the collection whose edges permitted a clear reading of the

growth rings and which were large enough to provide a

space of about two hundred growth rings. In some

cases the measurements taken did not yield concrete

results. The measurements were taken by Josef Bauch

of the Ordinariat für Holzbiologie, Universitát Hamburg, on 15—19 July 1977, and by Peter Klein, Ordinariat fur Holzbiologie, Universitát Hamburg, on

12-16 September 1983. They were interpreted using

the comparative material gathered at the Ordinariat

für Holzbiologie.

Peter Klein provided the following explanation of

the possibilities and limitations of dendrochronological analysis:

Oak panels were usually cut from the tree trunk

with an approximately radial orientation and therefore contain a large number of growth rings. As the

sapwood is light colored and perishable it was usually

trimmed away by the panel maker. It has recently been

determined that in most cases Netherlandish pictures

were painted on oak panels of Polish/Baltic origin and

the allowance for sapwood growth rings is a statistical

average of 15 í ¿ years, depending on the age of the

particular tree. This allowance is different in trees

originating in other parts of Europe.

If no sapwood is present, the felling date can only be

approximated by adding to the latest measured growth

ring a minimum of 15 sapwood rings. The possible

error in the felling date is indicated by the designation

15 ±5, where "15 — 2" accounts for the number of sapwood rings that might be missing, while the "x" stands

for an unknown number of missing heartwood rings

which may have been trimmed off together with the

sapwood.

Determination of the felling date for dated paintings

also provides information on the amount of time the

wood was customarily stored before being used for a

painting. For oak panels of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, in most cases the interval between

felling and creation of the painting was approximately

5 ± 3 years. The few investigations carried out with

signed and dated Netherlandish panels of the fifteenth

century do not yet permit such a close estimate. However, present studies performed on fifteenth century

panels of the school of Cologne indicate a storage time

of i o to 15 years.1

i. See also Peter Klein, "Dendrochronologische Untersuchungen

an Eichenholztafeln von Rogier van der Weyden," Jb Berlin 2.3

(1981), 113-12.3.

i. HieronymusBosch, 1951.5.33

Death and the Miser

2. Follower of Pieter Bruegel, 1952.2.19

Temptation of Saint Anthony

3. Follower of Robert Campin, 1959.9.3

Madonna and Child with Saints

in the Enclosed Garden

1

 Both boards of this panel come from the same tree as all four boards of Bosch's Prodigal Son

in the Museum Boymans-van Beuningen, Rotterdam.

APPENDIX I 259

Number of

Boards

I

II

I

II

I

II

III

IV

V

Number of

Growth Rings

109

33

199

89

250 (220 measured)

2 20 (no measured)

190 (90 measured)

249 (119 measured)

225 (220 measured)

Latest

Growth Ring

I4761

I4771

1528

1528

1391

1400

1391

1395

1390

Probable

Felling Date

I492Í*

I543±ï

I4i5±í

Probable

Earliest Use

1502

J

545

1425
Also measured but not yielding concrete results were: Master of Saint Giles and Assistant, Episodes from the Life of a Bishop

Saint (1952.2.14), Master of Saint Giles, Baptism ofClovis (1952.2.i5),5 Michel Sittow, Diego de Guevara(?) (1937.1.46),

and Flemish School, Imitator of, Saint Bernard and a Donor (1942.16.2).

2

 Boards in and iv are from the same tree.

3

 Both panels were cut from the same tree.

4

 Only 153 rings on this board were measured.

5

 Though it was not possible to date these two panels, dendrochronological examination did demonstrate

that the right-hand board of each panel came from the same tree.

260 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING

Number of Number of

Boards Growth Rings

4. Petrus Christus, 1937.1.40

Nativity

5. Petrus Christus, 1961.9.10, 1961.9.11

Portrait of a Male Donor

Portrait of a Femle Donor

6. Gerard David and Workshop, 1942.. 9. 17

Saint Anne Altarpiece

Right wing:

Center panel:

Left wing:

7. After Lucas van Ley den, 1961.9.27

The Card Players

i

ii

in

IV

i

i

i

ii

in

i

ii

in

IV

i

ii

in

Lindenwood — not readily datable by dendrochronological

8. Master of the Prado Adoration of the Magi

1961.9.2.8

Presentation in the Temple

9. Hans Memling, 1937.1.41

Madonna and Child with Angels

lo. Hans Memling, 1952.5.46

Saint Veronica

ii. Netherlandish Artist, 1943.7.7

The Healing of the Paralytic

12. Rogier van der Weyden, 1937.1.44

Portrait of a Lady

i

ii

i

ii

i

i

ii

in

i

286

136

i772

I472

i48

3

I293

i87

204

2IO

H3

2-53

172 (44cmnot

measured)

i58

190

218

79 (i5cm not

measured)

analysis.

175

i83

4

307

117

221

96

2O6

138

265

Latest Probable

Growth Ring Felling Date

1431

1433 I448±£

1431

1430

1412 I427±£

1391

1380 i496±£

1363

1375

1477

1478

1481

1353

1480

1387

no dating

1428

1433 i448±ï

1465 1480!^

1425

1458 i473±ï

1569 i584±ï

1562

1438 i453±ï

Probable

Earliest Us<

1458

1437

1506

1458

1490

1483

1586

1463
Appendix II

Examination of Early Netherlandish Paintings

in the National Gallery of Art with Infrared Reflectography

by Molly Faries

The infrared reflectography survey of fifteenth- and

sixteenth-century Netherlandish and German paintings at the National Gallery of Art was undertaken by

Professor Molly Faries (Indiana University, Bloomington) while a fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in

the Visual Arts in 1981—1982. The examination of

nearly ninety paintings and the preparation of documents were carried out with the help of the curatorial,

conservation, and photography staff and permitted

many of the findings to be included in this catalogue.

At the same time Professor Faries surveyed the fifteenth- and sixteenth-century German paintings in the

collection, which resulted in material that will be incorporated in the catalogue of German painting. The

Center for Advanced Study in the Visual Arts published her provisional report of this 1981—1982 study

with reflectography in Center 2, Research Reports and

Record of Activities. Other illustrative material and

reports resulting from this survey are now in the Gallery's files.

Professor Faries provided the following summary of

the technology used for this survey as a guide for the

interpretation of the resulting documents:

Since the video equipment employed in this survey

was identical to that adapted for this type of study by

J. R. J. van Asperen de Boer, the Dutch physicist who

developed infrared reflectography in the late 19605,

the results meet current standards. The high resolution

video camera is the Grundig FA 70 H, outfitted with a

Hamamatsu N 214 infrared vidicon, a TV Macromar

1:2.8/36 mm lens, and Kodak 87 A infrared filter. The

display (termed a reflectogram) appears on the Grundig BG 12 monitor. The reflectogram assemblies illustrated in this catalogue were photographed from the

monitor screen by Faries while the painting was illuminated with a dimmed quartz lamp, and while

using a Canon A-i 35 mm camera and Kodak Plus X

film. Infrared reflectography is sensitive to infrared

radiation in a range from approximately 900—2000

nanometers, well beyond conventional infrared

photography. The N 214 Hamamatsu infrared vidicon,

which is capable of "seeing" in this range of the spectrum, has now become a fairly standard component in

reflectography systems; and it is part of the equipment

that has been in use at the Gallery since this survey.

Capable of penetrating most pigments, infrared

reflectography is able to detect any carbon-containing

materials—in an underdrawing or underpainting—

beneath the surface of a painting. The registration of

these normally unseen aspects of a painting can be

affected by many factors, however. Underdrawing in

colored chalks, brownish paints, or non-carbon inks

such as iron gall ink will be penetrated just as the paint

layers are. Any carbon blacks in the surface paint,

extremely thick paint, dirt in cracks, thick, dark varnish, or dark overpainting will interfere with or obscure the visibility of the underdrawing. Differences in

the absorption or reflection of infrared light from different pigments in the overlying paint may cause variations in the intensity with which underdrawing registers. The documents obtained with infrared reflectography must therefore be carefully interpreted.

Underdrawing was revealed in approximately half

the paintings examined. Of those works that lacked

detectable underdrawings, almost all were small in size

or were portraits. The draftsmanship of many underdrawings was distinctive. Reflectography also encountered a variety of underdrawing procedures and materials, sometimes in combination, along with differing

degrees of completeness in the compositional layout,

and compositional change.

APPENDIX II 261

Index of Titles

The Adoration of the Magi

Juan de Flandes 1961.9.2.4(1384) — 12,5

The Adoration of the Magi

Northern Netherlandish Artist 1952.5.41(112.0)

— 2-13

The Adoration of the Shepherds

Adriaen Isenbrandt 1978.46.1(2.72.4) — 118

The Annunciation

Jan van Eyck i937-i-39(39) — 7^

The Annunciation

Juan de Flandes 1961.9.22(1382) — 12.4

Assumption of the Virgin

Michel Sittow 1965.1.1(192.8) — 2,36

The Baptism of Christ

Juan de Flandes 1961.9.2,5(1385) — 125

The Baptism ofClovis

Master of Saint Giles and Assistant 1952..2.. 15 (1098)

-169

The Card Players

After Lucas van Leyden 1961.9.27(1387) — 142

Christ among the Doctors/reverse : Putto with Arms of

Jacques Coëne

Bernard van Orley 1952.5.47(1126) — 218

Christ Appearing to the Virgin

Follower of Rogier van der Weyden 1937.1.45(45)

— 254

Death and the Miser

Hieronymus Bosch 1952.5.33(1112) — 17

Episodes from the Life of a Bishop Saint

Master of Saint Giles and Assistant 1952.2.14(1097) — i63

The Flight into Egypt

Follower of Joachim Patinir 1961.9.81(1633) — 225

The Healing of the Paralytic

Netherlandish Artist 1943.7.7(744) — 209

Ill-Matched Lovers

Quentin Massys 1971.55.1(2561) — 146

Joris Vezeleer

Jóos van Cleve 1962.9.1(1662) — 57

Madonna and Child

Jan Gossaert 1981.87.1(2852) — 107

Madonna and Child with Angels

HansMemling 1937.1.41(41) — 184

Madonna and Child with Saints in the Enclosed Garden

Follower of Robert Campin 1959.9.3(1388) — 35

Margaretha Boghe, Wife of Joris Vezeleer

Jóos van Cleve 1962.9.2(1663) — 57

The Marriage of the Virgin

Bernard van Orley 1952.5.48(1127) — 216

The Martyrdom of Saint Catherine

Antwerp Artist (Matthys Cock?) 1952.2.18(1101)

— 3

Mary, Queen of Heaven

Master of the Saint Lucy Legend 1952.2.13(1096)

— 177

A Member of the de Hondecoeter Family

Antwerp Artist (?) 1953.3.3(1177) — 7

The Nativity

Juan de Flandes 1961.9.23(1383) — 124

The Nativity

Petrus Christus 1937.1.40(40) — 41

Portrait of an Almoner of Antwerp

Antwerp Artist 1956.3.2(1447) — 14

Portrait of Diego de Guevara(?)

Michel Sittow 1937.1.46(46) — 228

Portrait of a Donor

Follower of Dirck Bouts 1961.9.66(1618) — 25

Portrait of a Female Donor

Petrus Christus 1961.9.11(1368) — 49

Portrait of a Gentleman

Antonis Mor 1937.1.52(52) — 202

Portrait of a Lady

Rogier van der Weyden 1937.1.44(44) — 241

Portrait of a Male Donor

Petrus Christus 1961.9.10(1367) — 49

Portrait of a Man with an Arrow

HansMemling 1937.1.42(42) — 188

Portrait of a Merchant

Jan Gossaert 1967.4.1(2316) — 103

Portrait of a Young Man

Follower of Antonis Mor 1961.9.79(1631) — 206

Presentation in the Temple

Master of the Prado Adoration of the Magi

1961.9.28(1389) —155

Profile Portrait of a Lady

Franco-Flemish Artist 1937.1.23(23) — 90

The Rest on the Flight into Egypt

Gerard David 1937.1.43(43) — 63

The Rest on the Flight into Egypt

Maerten van Heemskerck 1961.9.36(1398) — in

The Saint Anne Altarpiece

Gerard David and Workshop 1942.9.17.3-^613)

— 69

Saint Anne with the Virgin and the Christ Child

Master of Frankfurt 1976.67.1(2701) — 151

Saint Bernard with Dowor/reverse: Saint Margaret

Imitator of Flemish School 1942.16.2(699) — 87

Saint George and the Dragon

Rogier van der Weyden 1966.1.1(2310) — 246

Saint Jerome Penitent

INDICES 263
Jan Gossaert 1952.5.40^—13(1119) — 99

Saint Veronica/reverse: Chalice of Saint John the Evangelist

HansMemling 1952.5.46(1125) — 193

Temptation of Christ

Juan de Flandes 1967.7.1(2331) — 133

The Temptation of Saint Anthony

Follower of Pieter Bruegel the Elder 1952.2.19(1102)

— 29

Wife of a Member of the de Hondecoeter Family

Antwerp Artist 1953.3.4(1178) — 7

264 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Index of Subjects

RELIGIOUS SUBJECTS

A. Archangels

Gabriel — 76, 80,130

B. Old Testament

Absalom — 81

Abimelech— 81

Cain and Abel — 42

David— 186

David and Goliath — 81

Expulsion from the Garden of Paradise — 42

Isaac and Jacob — 80

Isaiah— 186

Lord of Sabaoth — 79

Moses — 79, i2i

Samson — 80

C. New Testament

Adam and Eve — 42,44

Adoration of the Child — 42

Adoration of the Magi— 125-133, 213-215

Adoration of the Shepherds — 118-122,131

Anna — 155

Annunciation — 76-86,124-133

Annunciation to the Shepherds — 120

Assumption of the Virgin — 177-183, 236-240

Baptism of Christ— 125-133

Baptism of Clovis — 163,169—176

Capernaum — 209

Christ, Miracles of— 209—210

Christ among the Doctors — 218-223

Christ Appearing to the Virgin — 254-257

Coronation of the Virgin — 178, 236

Flight into Egypt — 225—227

Genesis — 42

God the Father — 151

Healing of the Paralytic — 209-210

Immaculate Conception — 152,178, 236

Madonna and Child, see Virgin and Child

Marriage of the Virgin — 216—223

Mary and Joseph — 41-49, 63-67,118-122,155-161,

221

Nativity — 41-49,124-133

Presentation in the Temple — 155-161

Purification of the Virgin — 155

Rest on the Flight into Egypt — 63-67,111-117

Sacra Conversazione — 35-40

Seth — 42

Simeon — 155

Temptation of Christ — 133-139

Tree of Life — 44

Trinity —44, 64,152,177-178

Virgin and Child — 35-40, 41-49, 63-67, 69-74,

107-109,111-117,151-154,184-188, 213

Woman of the Apolcalypse — 178

D. Saints

Anna Selbdritt — 15 i-i 54

Anne — 69-74,15

I

~

I

54? 2-21

Anthony Abbot— 29-33, 35~4O

Anthony of Padua — 69

Barbara — 3 5—40

Bernard—87-89

Bishop — 163—167

Bridget — 42

Catherine — 3—6, 35—40

Denis — 164,169

Elizabeth of Hungary — 49

George — 246—253

Giles — 163,169

Jerome — 99-103

John the Baptist — 3 5—40,193—201

John the Evangelist — 193—201

Joseph — 42, 44, 64,120,130,155, 221-222, 225

Louis — 163—164

Loup or Leu of Sens — 163,172

Margaret— 87-89

Martin — 18

Nicholas of Bari — 69—74

Remy— 163—164,170

Veronica— 193—201

PORTRAITS

Almoner of Antwerp — 14

(?) Blanche of Lancaster — 95

Boghe, Margaretha, Wife of Joris Vezeleer — 57-62

(?) Count Willem IV van den Bergh — 206

Female — 49~55> 9O~97> 241-246

(?) Guevara, Diego de — 228—236

de Hondecoeter Family Member — 7-12

de Hondecoeter Family, Wife of a Member of — 7—12

(?) Jerome or Jeronimus Sandelin — 103—107

(?) Lomellini — 49

Male — 25-26, 49-55, 189-193, 202-205, 2.06-208

Merchant— 103-107

INDICES ¿65
Vezeleer, Joris— 57—61

(?) Vivaldi —49

OTHER SUBJECTS

Ars moriendi — 17—11

Card Players — 141—144

Chalice— 193—101

Clothilde— 170

Coats of Arms and Seals— 7-11,49,118-113

Death and the Miser — 17-11

Demons— 17-11

Devil — 133-139

Dijon, Notre-Dame Cathedral — 76

Enclosed Garden — 35—40

Fool — 146

Ill-Matched Lovers — 146—150

Jerusalem — 41, 44, in

Mammon— 18

Order of Calatrava — 131

Paris, Hôtel-Dieu — 163, 166

Paris, Notre Dame — 163

Paris, Saint Jean-le-Rond — 163

Paris, Saint Leu-Saint Gilles — 164,173

Paris, Sainte-Chapelle— 169—176

Peasants — 3

Putti— 118-113

Salvator Mundi— 199

San Lázaro, Falencia — 115

sub gratia — 79—81

sub lege — 79—81

Sudarium— 198

Tournai, Cathedral of— 76

Zodiac, signs of— 80

266 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Index of Previous Owners

Thomas Agnew and Sons — 69,103, 133

Aldworth, Grace Vogel — 107

American Art Association — 87, 209

Anhalt, Friedrich I, Duke of— 184,242

Anhalt, Friedrich II, Duke of— 184, 2.42.

Anhalt, Leopold Friedrich, Prince of— 184, 2,42.

Anhalt, Leopold Friedrich Franz, Prince of— 184,242

Asscher and Welker — 17,142

Bachstitz Gallery — 142.

Ball, Hermann — 7

Bardini, Stefano — 133

Belvedere Palace — 225

Bembo, Bernardo — 193

Bembo, Pietro — 193

Bentinck-Thyssen, Baroness Gabrielle

— 206

Beuronville, Baron E. de — 163,169

Bismarck, Count — 146

Blumenreich, Leo — 230

Julius Bôhler Gallery — 142

Boghe, Margaretha — 57

Booth, Ralph and Mary — 107

Borbón y Braganza, Infante Don Sebastián

Gabriel— 230

Bourgeois, Cologne — 190

Brown, Alfred — 25

Campe, Heinrich Wilhelm — 111

Cassirer, Paul — 120,193

Champol, Chartreuse de — 76

Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor — 133

Christie, Manson oc Wood Limited — 7, 25, 64, 90, 133,

142, 209

Coëne, Abbot Jacques — 218, 221

P. & D. Colnaghi and Co. — 64, 230

Contini-Bonacossi — 49, 213

Czernin von Chudenitz, Count Eugen — 155

Czernin von Chudenitz, Count Johann Rudolf — 155

Dale, Chester — 87, 209

Demidoff, Nicolai — 193

Demidoff, Prince Anatole of San Donato — 193

Despuig y Dameto, Cardinal Antonio — 69

Dreicer, Michael — 190

Drey, A. S. — 206

Dubois, M. — 87

Durlacher— 254

Duveen Brothers — 42, 64, 90, 99, 184, 204, 218, 221,

24^ 2.54

Ehrich Galleries — 209

Einstein, Lewis — 14

Elst, Baron Joseph van der — 17

Emanuel, Prince of Liechtenstein — 57

Feilchenfeldt— 57,120, 236

Fischhof, Eugene — 69

Flores, Diego — 133, 236

Fondi, Oderisio de Sangro, Prince of— 133

Frank, Robert — 29, 206

Franz Josef II, Prince of Liechtenstein — 57

French & Co. — 177

Fürstlich Hohenzollernisches Museum fur Wissenschaft und

Kunst — 206

Georges Petit Gallery — 90

Gore, Annesley — 218, 221

Grudna-Gruzinski Family — 246

Guevara, Don Diego de — 230

Gurney, James — 90

Tomas Harris Gallery — 142

Heinemann, Rudolf— 29,120

Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen, Prince Karl Anton von — 206

Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen, Prince Leopold von — 206

Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen, Prince Wilhelm August

Karl — 206

Hôtel Drouot— 163,169

Imperial Hermitage Museum — 76

Impey, Mrs. L. A. — 246

Isabel, Queen of Castile — 133,236

Isabel of Portugal, wife of Emperor Charles V — 133

Kann, Rodolphe — 64

F. Kleinberger Galleries — 120,190, 254

M. Knoedler and Co. — 25, 29, 64, 76,190,193, 206, 230

Kobler, Albert J. — 218, 221

Koester Gallery — 25

Kress Foundation— 3,17,25,29,35,49,99, in, 124,125,

142,155, 163, 169,177,193, 206, 213, 218, 221, 225

Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna — 225

Lacey — 209

Lafoon, Mr. and Mrs. Sidney K. — 151

Lansdowne, Marquesses of— 103

Lely, Sir Peter — 204

Lepke's— in

Lestang-Parade, Chevalier Alexandre de — 163, 169

Lestang-Parade, Count Melchior de — 163,169

Lever, W. — 209

Liechtenstein, Johann Adam, Prince of — 57

Liechtenstein, Johann Nepomuk, Reigning Prince of— 57

Liechtenstein, Karl Eusebius, Prince of— 57

Mackay, Clarence H. — 90

Madrazo, Don Pedro de — 254

Madrazo y Agudo, Don José de — 254

Madrazo y Kuntz, Don Federigo de — 254

Mannheimer Collection — 184

Margaret of Austria, Regent of the Netherlands — 133,236

Mason, Lady Evelyn — 246

Matthiesen— 193

Maurer, Madame — 230

INDICES z67
Mellon, Andrew W. — 76, 184, 204, 230, 242.

The A. W. Mellon Educational and Charitable Trust — 42,

64, 76, 90, 184, 190, 204, 230, 242, 254

Mencía de Mendoza, Marchioness of Zenete — 230

Metropolitan Museum of Art — 190

Miller, Adolph Caspar — 7

Mont, Frederick — in, 125, 142, 225

Montenegro, Counts of — 69

Morgan, J. Pierpont — 64

Mottelettes, Imbert de — 35

Neyt, Herman — 146

Nicholas I, Czar of Russia — 76

Nieuwenhuys, C. J. — 76

Oppenheim, Baron Albert — 190

Osmaston, John — 25

Oudemard, Countess de — 35

Perls, Hugo — 184

Phillip II, King of Spain — 133

Pinakos — 29

Plaoutine, General de — 246

Potter-Soenens, Jonkheer de — 35

Pourtalès, Count Edmond de — 146

Pourtalès, Countess de — 146

Pourtalès-Gorgier, Count James-Alexandre de — 146

Private Collection, Brussels — 29

Private Collection, Budapest — 151

Private Collection, England — 17, 190

Private Collection, Genoa — 49

Private Collection, Italy — 193

Private Collection, New York — 87

Private Collection, Switzerland — 142

Private Collection, Zurich — 236

Quesnet, Jules — 236

Ramsden, Sir John — 7

Raven, Massey and Lester — 17

Riedemann, Antonio von — 111

Rosier, Karl — 3

Romadka, John M. — 99

Romadka, Mrs. John M. — 99

Romadka, Mary Tekla — 99

Ruiz y Ruiz, Raimundo — 177

Salamanca, Marques de — 254

Samuels, Spencer A. — 146

San Lázaro (church), Palencia — 124, 125

Sangiorgi Gallery, Rome — 133

Santa Clara convent, Medina de Pomar — 177

Schaeffer Gallery — 7

Sedelmeyer Gallery — 14, 69, 87

Slark, Mrs. M. A. T. — 25

Somzée, Gaston de — 69

Somzée, Leon de — 69

Sotheby's — 246

Spencer, Albert Edward John, 7th Earl of — 204

Spencer, George John, 2nd Earl of — 204

Spink and Son — 209

Stafford, Henry Valentine Stafford Jerningham, 9th Baron

— 90

Taylor, Reverend Montague — 63

Thyssen-Bornemisza, Baron Heinrich — 193, 206

Torres Martin, Arcadio — 124

Van Diemen &c Co. — 107

Van Diemen Gallery — 142

Van Dieman-Margraf Gallery — 3

Van Diemen-Lilienfeld Galleries — 3

Velasco, Don Pedro Fernández de, Count of Haro and

Constable of Castile— 177

Vezeleer, Joris — 57

Vieweg, Heinrich — 111

Villeroy, M. de — 90

Vogel, William and Virginia — 107

Watel,M. —163,169

Watney, Oliver Vernon — 133

Watney, Vernon J. — 133

Westfall, Mrs. Edward A. — 218, 221

Whyte, Mrs. Dreicer — 190

Widener, Peter A. B. — 69

Wildenstein and Co. — 35,155,163,169

William II, King of the Netherlands — 76

Wils, Steven, the younger — 146

Yturbe, Sra. O. — 42

Zatzenstein, F. M. — 42

268 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
Concordance of old-new titles

Artist

Attributed to Antwerp

Artist, Sixteenth Century

Attributed to Antwerp

Artist, Sixteenth Century

Antwerp Artist,

Sixteenth Century

Petrus Christus

Petrus Christus

Jan Gossaert

Master of Saint Giles and

Assistant

Netherlandish Artist,

Sixteenth Century

Michel Sittow

Accession No.

1953-3-3

1953-3-4

1956.3.2

1961.9.10

1961.9.11

1967.4.1

1952.2.14

1943-7-7

1937.1.46

Old Title

Niclaes de Hondecoeter

Wife of Niclaes de

Hondecoeter

New Title

A Member of the de Hondecoeter Family

Wife of a Member of the

de Hondecoeter Family

Goosen van Bonhuysen Portrait of an Almoner of Antwerp

Portrait of a Donor

Portrait of a Donor's

Wife

Portrait of a Banker

Saint Leu Healing the

Children

"Arise, and Take Up

Thy Bed, and Walk"

A Knight of the Order

ofCalatrava

Portrait of a Male Donor

Portrait of a Female Donor

Portrait of a Merchant

Episodes from the Life of a Bishop Saint

The Healing of the Paralytic

Portrait of Diego de Guevara (?)

Concordance of old-new attributions

Old Attribution Accession No.

Ambrosius Benson 19 5 3.3.3

Ambrosius Benson 1953.3.4

Dirck Bouts 1961.9.66

Pieter Bruegel the Elder 1952.2.18

Pieter Bruegel the Elder 1952.2.19

Gerard David 1942.9.17 a-c

Flemish School 1942.16.2

Flemish School 1956.3.2

Jan van Hemessen 1943.7.7

Hispano-Dutch School 1952.2.41

Lucas van Ley den 1961.9.27

Master of Flémalle and Assistants 1959-9-3

Master of Saint Giles 1952.2.14

HansMemling 1961.9.28

AntonisMor 1961.9.79

JanvanScorel 1961.9.36

Circle of Rogier van der Weyden 1937.1.45

New Attribution

Attributed to Antwerp Artist, Sixteenth Century

Attributed to Antwerp Artist, Sixteenth Century

Follower of Dirck Bouts

Antwerp Artist (Matthys Cock?), Sixteenth Century

Follower of Pieter Bruegel the Elder

Gerard David and Workshop

Imitator of Fifteenth-century Flemish School

Antwerp Artist, Sixteenth Century

Netherlandish Artist, Sixteenth Century

Northern Netherlandish Artist, Fifteenth Century

After Lucas van Leyden

Follower of Robert Campin

Master of Saint Giles and Assistant

Master of the Prado Adoration of the Magi

Follower of Antonis Mor

Maerten van Heemskerck

Follower of Rogier van der Weyden

CONCORDANCES 269
Concordance of new-old accession numbers

1937.1.2.3 / 2.3 Franco-Flemish Artist, Profile Portrait of a Lady

1937.1.397 39 Jan van Eyck, The Annunciation

1937.1.407 40 Petrus Christus, The Nativity

1937.1.41 7 41 Hans Memling, Madonna and Child with Angels

193 7. i. 42, 7 42. Hans Memling, Portrait of a Man with an Arrow

1937.1.43 7 43 Gerard David, The Rest on the flight into Egypt

1937.1.44 7 44 Rogier van der Weyden, Portrait of a Lady

1937.1.45 7 45 Follower of Rogier van der Weyden, Christ Appearing to the Virgin

193 7. i.46 7 46 Michel Sittow, Portrait of Diego de Guevara (?)

1937.1.517 52. Antonis Mor, Portrait of a Gentleman

1942..9.i7a—c 7 613 Gerard David and Workshop, The Saint Anne Altarpiece

1942.. 16.2. 7 699 Imitator of Fifteenth-Century Flemish School, Saint Bernard (?) with Donor-,

Saint Margaret (reverse)

1943.7.7 7 744 Netherlandish Artist, Sixteenth Century, The Healing of the Paralytic

1952.2.13 7 1096 Master of the Saint Lucy Legend, Mary, Queen of Heaven

195 2.2.14 / IO97 Master of Saint Giles and Assistant, Episodes from the Life of a Bishop Saint

1952.2.15 7 1098 Master of Saint Giles, The Baptism of Clovis

1952.2.18 7 iioi Antwerp Artist (Matthys Cock?), Sixteenth Century, The Martyrdom of Saint Catherine

195 2.2.19 7 1102 Follower of Pieter Bruegel the Elder, The Temptation of Saint Anthony

1952.5.33 7 iii2 Hieronymus Bosch, Death and the Miser

1952.5.40 7 1119 JanGossaert, Saint Jerome Penitent

1952.5.41 7 ii 20 Northern Netherlandish Artist, Adoration of the Magi

1952.5.46 7 1125 Hans Memling, Saint Veronica; The Chalice of Saint John the Evangelist (reverse)

1952.5.47 7 1126 Bernard van Orley, Christ among the Doctors; Putto with Arms of Jacques Coëne (reverse)

1952.5.48 7 1127 Bernard van Orley, The Marriage of the Virgin

1

9 5 3 • 3 • 3 / ! x 77 Attributed to Antwerp Artist, Sixteenth Century, A Member of the de Hondecoeter Family

1

9 5 3 • 3 -4 / 1178 Attributed to Antwerp Artist, Sixteenth Century, Wife of a Member of the de Hondecoeter family

195 6.3.2 7 1447 Antwerp Artist, Sixteenth Century, Portrait of an Almoner of Antwerp

1959.9.3 7 1388 Follower of Robert Campin, Madonna and Child with Saints in the Enclosed Garden

1961.9.10 7 1367 Petrus Christus, Portrait of a Male Donor

1961.9.11 7 1368 Petrus Christus, Portrait of a Female Donor

1961.9.22 7 1382 Juan de Flandes, The Annunciation

1961.9.23 7 1383 Juan de Flandes, The Nativity

1961.9.24 7 1384 Juan de Flandes, The Adoration of the Magi

1961.9.25 7 1385 Juan de Flandes, The Baptism of Christ

1961.9.27 7 1387 After Lucas van Ley den, The Card Players

1961.9.28 71389 Master of the Prado Adoration of the Magi, Presentation in the Temple

1961.9.36 7 1398 Maerten van Heemskerck, The Rest on the Flight into Egypt

1961.9.66 7 1618 Follower of Dirck Bouts, Portrait of a Donor

1961.9.79 7 1631 Follower of Antonis Mor, Portrait of a Young Man

1961.9.81 7 163 3 Follower of Joachim Patinir, The Flight into Egypt

1962.9.1 7 1662 Jóos van Cleve, Joris Vezeleer

1962.9.2 7 1663 Jóos van Cleve, Margaretha Boghe, Wife of Joris Vezeleer

1965.1.1 7 1928 Michel Sittow, Assumption of the Virgin

1966.1.1 7 2310 Rogier van der Weyden, Saint George and the Dragon

1967.4.1 7 2316 Jan Gossaert, Portrait of a Merchant

1967.7.1 72331 Juan de Flandes, The Temptation of Christ

270 EARLY NETHERLANDISH PAINTING
I

97I-55-1 / 2.561 Quentin Massys, Ill-Matched Lovers

1976.67.1 / 2701 Master of Frankfurt, Saint Anne with the Virgin and Christ Child

1978.46.1 / 2.724 Adriaen Isenbrandt, The Adoration of the Shepherds

1981.87.1 / 2.852, Jan Gossaert, Madonna and Child

List of Artists

Antwerp Artist

Antwerp Artist (?)

Antwerp Artist (Matthys Cock?)

Bosch, Hieronymus

Bouts, Dirck

Bruegel, Pieter the Elder, Follower of

Campin, Robert, Follower of

Christus, Petrus

Cleve, Jóos van

David, Gerard

Eyck, Jan van

Flemish Artist, Imitator of

Franco-Flemish Artist

Gossaert, Jan

Heemskerck, Maerten van

Isenbrandt, Adriaen

Juan de Flandes

Leyden, Lucas van, after

Massys, Quentin

Master of Frankfurt

Master of the Prado Adoration of the Magi

Master of Saint Giles

Master of Saint Giles and Assistant

Master of the Saint Lucy Legend

Memling, Hans

Mor, Antonis

Netherlandish Artist

Northern Netherlandish Artist

Orley, Bernard van

Patinir, Joachim, Follower of

Sittow, Michel

Weyden, Rogier van der

LIST OF ARTISTS 2.71