cropped-r-21-2026-11_45_55-PM.png

Ars Memoriae Vincit Oblivionem

Category: Northern Renaissance

  • Maarten van Heemskerck (1498–1574): Rome Remembered from Haarlem

    Maarten van Heemskerck (1498–1574): Rome Remembered from Haarlem

    Maarten van Heemskerck (1498–1574), Self-Portrait with the Colosseum, Rome, 1553, Oil on oak, 42.2 × 54.2 cm, Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge
    Maarten van Heemskerck (1498–1574), Self-Portrait with the Colosseum, Rome, 1553, Oil on oak, 42.2 × 54.2 cm, Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge

    For an ambitious Northern painter of the sixteenth century, Rome was an essential destination, and the drawings brought back from it could sustain a career for decades. Maerten van Heemskerck’s career exemplified this. In 1553, some seventeen years after leaving the city, he painted his self-portrait, depicting himself twice. His face dominates the foreground: an imposing man in a plain black tunic, aged 55, who is looking directly at the viewer, as indicated by the painted label. Behind him, a much smaller figure, bearded like the first and clearly the same man in his youth, sits on a block of stone, drawing the Colosseum with an inkpot and quill in hand and a sketchbook resting on an easel. Both the young draughtsman and the ruin are memories, meticulously rendered in Haarlem from the drawings Heemskerck had brought back home.

    He spent approximately four years in Rome, from 1532 to 1536 or 1537, filling sketchbooks with the city’s ruins and antiquities. He never returned, and for the remainder of his life, his paintings and prints drew steadily on what he had sketched there, so much so that other Haarlem artists were still utilising his sheets a generation later. This self-portrait serves as his acknowledgement of that enduring influence. At the height of his career, what he chose to place at the centre of the picture was the act of drawing Rome.

    Heemskerck had previously cast himself as the guiding intellect of a work. In St Luke Painting the Virgin (1532; Frans Hals Museum, Haarlem), which he presented to the Haarlem painters’ guild just before his journey to Italy, the figure steadying the evangelist’s hand is generally understood to be Heemskerck himself – the mind behind the work rather than the hand executing it (Veldman, 1977). His biographer Karel van Mander (1548–1606) would later state that Heemskerck had ‘filled the world with his inventions’ (Van Mander, 1604, fol. 246v). This portrait with the Colosseum presents a more subtle version of this claim, concealing its mechanism in plain sight. The signature is on a small painted label whose lower corner disappears behind the sitter’s tunic, an overlap that reveals the scene behind him to be a picture in its own right (DiFuria, 2010). It suggests he is not standing in a Roman landscape but rather in front of a painting of himself drawing one.

    The timing probably explains such emphasis. By the early 1550s, Rome’s ruins were suddenly ubiquitous in print. Around 1550, the Antwerp publisher Hieronymus Cock (c. 1518–1570) released a popular series of about twenty-five etched Roman views, Praecipua aliquot Romanae antiquitatis ruinarum monimenta [Some of the principal monuments of the ruins of Roman antiquity]. The extent of Cock’s debt to Heemskerck is still debated. No plate directly copies one of Heemskerck’s drawings, and the few surviving preparatory sheets are Cock’s own; however, Heemskerck possessed by far the largest collection of Roman views available, and scholarship generally agrees that his work underpinned the series, even where it was not the direct model (DiFuria, 2010). Some of Cock’s prints even feature a small figure seated among the ruins and drawing, the same motif Heemskerck uses for his younger self. In both instances, the drawing figure makes a clear point: what the viewer sees was observed and recorded on the spot. The self-portrait personalises this point, presenting Heemskerck as the eyewitness from whom the record originated.

    The frontispiece of his 1569 print series Clades Judaeae Gentis [The disasters of the Jewish nation] pairs a bust of him with a younger self drawing ruins, presenting the entire series as the work of a man who had seen Rome. By then, his name had spread far beyond Haarlem, reaching as far as Vasari’s Lives (Vasari, 1568). The Colosseum self-portrait consolidates all of this into a single panel. Ultimately, it is less about the ruin behind the man than about the man in front of it – the draughtsman who had drawn Rome and wished that record to be remembered as his own.

    Maarten van Heemskerck (1498–1574), Self-Portrait with the Colosseum, Rome, 1553, Oil on oak, 42.2 × 54.2 cm, Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge
    Maarten van Heemskerck (1498–1574), Self-Portrait with the Colosseum, Rome, 1553, Oil on oak, 42.2 × 54.2 cm, Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge

    Maarten van Heemskerck (1498–1574), Self-Portrait with the Colosseum, Rome, 1553, Oil on oak, 42.2 × 54.2 cm, Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge
    Maarten van Heemskerck (1498–1574), Self-Portrait with the Colosseum, Rome, 1553, Oil on oak, 42.2 × 54.2 cm, Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge
    Maarten van Heemskerck (1498–1574), Self-Portrait with the Colosseum, Rome, 1553, Oil on oak, 42.2 × 54.2 cm, Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge
    Maarten van Heemskerck (1498–1574), Self-Portrait with the Colosseum, Rome, 1553, Oil on oak, 42.2 × 54.2 cm, Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge

    Maarten van Heemskerck (1498–1574), Self-Portrait with the Colosseum, Rome, 1553, Oil on oak, 42.2 × 54.2 cm, Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge
    Maarten van Heemskerck (1498–1574), Self-Portrait with the Colosseum, Rome, 1553, Oil on oak, 42.2 × 54.2 cm, Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge
    Maarten van Heemskerck (1498–1574), Self-Portrait with the Colosseum, Rome, 1553, Oil on oak, 42.2 × 54.2 cm, Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge
    Maarten van Heemskerck (1498–1574), Self-Portrait with the Colosseum, Rome, 1553, Oil on oak, 42.2 × 54.2 cm, Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge

    References

    DiFuria, A.J. (2010) ‘Remembering the Eternal in 1553: Maerten van Heemskerck’s Self-portrait before the Colosseum‘, in Chapman, H.P. and Woodall, J. (eds.) Envisioning the Artist in the Early Modern Netherlands (Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek, 59, 2009–2010). Zwolle: Waanders, pp. 91–109.Available at : https://www.academia.edu/4159518/Remembering_the_Eternal_in_1553_Maerten_van_Heemskercks_Self_Portrait_Before_the_Colosseum (Accessed 10 August 2026).

    DiFuria, A.J. (2012) ‘The Eternal Eye. Memory, Vision and Topography in Maarten van Heemskerck’s Roman Ruin Vedute‘, in Bartsch, T. and Seiler, P. (eds.) Rom zeichnen: Maarten van Heemskerck 1532–1536/37 [Drawing Rome: Maarten van Heemskerck 1532–1536/37]. Berlin: Deutscher Verlag für Kunstwissenschaft, pp. 157–169. Available at : https://www.academia.edu/4159211/The_Eternal_Eye_Memory_Vision_and_Topography_in_Maarten_van_Heemskercks_Ruin_Vedute_ (Accessed 08 Augsut 2026).

    DiFuria, A.J. (2019) Maarten van Heemskerck’s Rome. Antiquity, Memory, and the Cult of Ruins. Leiden and Boston: Brill

    Gerson, H. and Goodison, J.W. (1960) Catalogue of Paintings in the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge. Volume I: Dutch, Flemish, German and Spanish. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

    Riggs, T.A. (1977) Hieronymus Cock: Printmaker and Publisher. New York: Garland

    Van der Coelen, P. (2012) ‘Maarten van Heemskercks “Zelfportret met het Colosseum”: context en voorbeelden’ [Maarten van Heemskerck’s ‘Self-Portrait with the Colosseum’: context and models], in Face Book: Studies on Dutch and Flemish Portraiture of the 16th–18th Centuries. Liber Amicorum Presented to Rudolf E.O. Ekkart. Leiden and The Hague, pp. 55–62. Available at : https://www.academia.edu/30531534/Maarten_van_Heemskercks_Zelfportret_met_het_Colosseum_context_en_voorbeelden_in_Face_Book_Studies_on_Dutch_and_Flemish_Portraiture_of_the_16th_18th_Centuries_Liber_Amicorum_Presented_to_Rudolf_E_O_Ekkart_on_the_Occasion_of_his_65th_Birthday_Leiden_The_Hague_2012_pp_55_62 (Accesed 08 Augsut 2026).

    Van Mander, K. (1604) ‘Het leven van Marten Hemskerck, constigh vermaert Schilder’ [The life of Marten Heemskerck, skilfully renowned painter], in Het Schilder-boeck [The Book on Painting]. Haarlem: Paschier van Wesbusch, fols. 244v–247r. Available at: https://www.dbnl.org/tekst/mand001schi01_01/mand001schi01_01_0227.php (Accessed: 8 August 2026).

    Van Mander, K. (1936) Dutch and Flemish Painters. Translated from the Schilder-boeck by C. van de Wall. New York: McFarlane, Warde, McFarlane. Available at: https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000571845 (Accessed: 8 August 2026).

    Veldman, I.M. (1977) Maarten van Heemskerck and Dutch Humanism in the Sixteenth Century, trans. M. Hoyle. Maarssen: Gary Schwartz

  • Pinxi, Pinxit, Pingebat: The Signatures of Catharina van Hemessen

    Pinxi, Pinxit, Pingebat: The Signatures of Catharina van Hemessen

    Catharina van Hemessen (1527/8–after 1566), Portrait of a Woman, 1551, Oil on oak, 22.8 × 17.6 cm, National Gallery, London
    Catharina van Hemessen (1527/8–after 1566), Portrait of a Woman, 1551, Oil on oak, 22.8 × 17.6 cm, National Gallery, London

    When this portrait was painted, Catharina van Hemessen was twenty-three years old and a registered master of the Antwerp Guild of Saint Luke. In the top right corner, she inscribed in pale yellow letters: CATHARINA DE / HEMESSEN / PINGEBAT / 1551 (Catharina de Hemessen was painting this, 1551). In Latin, pingebat is the imperfect tense, indicating an action in progress, whereas pinxit is the perfect tense, denoting a completed act: she painted this, it is done.

    Three years prior, on her self-portrait now housed in the Kunstmuseum Basel, her signature differed: EGO CATERINA DE HEMESSEN ME PINXI 1548 ETATIS SVAE 20 (I, Catharina van Hemessen, painted myself, 1548, at age twenty). This formula is first person, reflexive, and includes her age. A second portrait from the same year, now in the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, omits all three elements, simply reading: Catherina de Hemessen pinxit 1548. This is third person, perfect tense, with no ‘ego’, no ‘me’, and no age. Within a single year, the assertive personal declaration of the self-portrait had evolved into the more impersonal professional formula typical of commissioned works.

    By 1551, the perfect tense had become the imperfect, with pingebat replacing pinxit. The imperfect tense in artist signatures carried a specific historical resonance. In Book XXXV of his Natural History, Pliny the Elder (AD 23–79) lauded the Greek painter Apelles of Kos (fl. 4th century BCE) for signing his works ‘Apelles faciebat’ — Apelles was making this — rather than the completed ‘fecit’. Pliny interpreted this habit as a gesture of modesty, implying the work remained open to criticism and revision, with the artist declining to declare it finished. The painter’s equivalent, pingebat over pinxit, drew upon this same construction. Michelangelo (1475–1564) signed the Pietà in St Peter’s Basilica, Rome, MICHAEL ANGELUS BONAROTUS FLORENTINUS FACIEBAT, adapting the sculptor’s form of the same imperfect tense. Albrecht Dürer (1471–1528) used effingebam in his 1500 Self-Portrait, signing Albertus Durerus Noricus ipsum me proprijs sic effingebam coloribus aetatis anno XXVIII (I, Albrecht Dürer of Nuremberg, was depicting myself in these my own colours, at age twenty-eight) (Boffa 2013).

    It is uncertain whether van Hemessen was aware of this lineage when she transitioned from ego me pinxi to pingebat. Antwerp in the mid-sixteenth century was sufficiently steeped in humanist scholarship (Pliny’s works circulated in print editions from 1469 and were widely read in learned circles) for this resonance to have been accessible to a painter working within a cultivated workshop tradition, even if it cannot be proven that she deliberately sought it. The fact that painters of the period moved between the two forms without apparent consistency makes it difficult to infer intention from either choice. Nevertheless, for a woman operating professionally in a field with almost no precedent for her presence, the act of signing in full on every securely attributed work was, in itself, not a neutral gesture.While the sitter, despite her evident wealth, has not retained her name through the centuries, the painter’s name has endured.

    Catharina van Hemessen (1527/8–after 1566), Portrait of a Woman, 1551, Oil on oak, 22.8 × 17.6 cm, National Gallery, London
    Catharina van Hemessen (1527/8–after 1566), Portrait of a Woman, 1551, Oil on oak, 22.8 × 17.6 cm, National Gallery, London
    Catharina van Hemessen (1527/8–after 1566), Portrait of a Woman, 1551, Oil on oak, 22.8 × 17.6 cm, National Gallery, London
    Catharina van Hemessen (1527/8–after 1566), Portrait of a Woman, 1551, Oil on oak, 22.8 × 17.6 cm, National Gallery, London

    References

    De Clippel, K. (2004) Catharina van Hemessen (1528–na 1567). Een monografische studie [Catharina van Hemessen (1528–after 1567). A monographic study]. Brussels: Koninklijke Vlaamse Academie van België voor Wetenschappen en Kunsten

    Droz-Emmert, M. (2004) Catharina van Hemessen. Malerin der Renaissance [Catharina van Hemessen. Painter of the Renaissance]. Basel: Schwabe Verlag

    Boffa, D. (2013) ‘Sculptors’ signatures and the construction of identity in the Italian Renaissance’, in A Scarlet Renaissance: Essays in Honor of Sarah Blake McHam, pp. 35–56. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/2011416/Sculptors_Signatures_and_the_Construction_of_Identity_in_the_Italian_Renaissance (Accessed: 24 May 2026).

    National Gallery, London (n.d.) Portrait of a Woman, NG 4732. Available at: https://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/catharina-van-hemessen-portrait-of-a-woman (Accessed: 24 May 2026).

    National Gallery, London (n.d.) Portrait of a Man, NG 1042. Available at: https://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/catharina-van-hemessen-portrait-of-a-man (Accessed: 24 May 2026).

    Pliny the Elder (c. AD 77) Naturalis Historia [Natural History], Praefatio, 26. Translated by H. Rackham. Loeb Classical Library 330. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1938

    RKD – Netherlands Institute for Art History (n.d.) Catharina van Hemessen, artist entry no. 37344. RKDartists. Available at: https://rkd.nl/en/explore/artists/37344 (Accessed: 24 May 2026).

    RKD – Netherlands Institute for Art History (n.d.) Catharina van Hemessen, Self-Portrait, 1548. RKDimages, image no. 41167. Available at: https://rkd.nl/en/explore/images/41167 (Accessed: 24 May 2026).

    Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam (n.d.) Catharina van Hemessen, Portrait of a Woman, 1548, SK-A-4256. Available at: https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/en/collection/SK-A-4256 (Accessed: 24 May 2026).

    Sutton, E. (ed.) (2019) Women Artists and Patrons in the Netherlands, 1500-1700. Amsterdam University Press

  • Michiel Coxie (1499–1592?) in Rome (c. 1532–c. 1539): Designs for the Loves of Jupiter

    Michiel Coxie (1499–1592?) in Rome (c. 1532–c. 1539): Designs for the Loves of Jupiter

    Michiel Coxie I (1499–1592?), The Abduction of Ganymede, early 1530s, Pen and brown ink on paper, 176 × 136 mm, the British Museum

    Michiel Coxie I (1499–1592?), Jupiter and Leda, early 1530s, Pen and brown ink on paper, 172 × 134 mm, the British Museum

    Michiel Coxie I (1499–1592?), The Abduction of Ganymede, early 1530s, Pen and brown ink on paper, 176 × 136 mm, the British Museum
    Michiel Coxie I (1499–1592?), Jupiter and Leda, early 1530s, Pen and brown ink on paper, 172 × 134 mm, the British Museum

    Michiel Coxie I (1499–1592?), The Abduction of Ganymede, early 1530s, Pen and brown ink on paper, 176 × 136 mm, the British Museum
    Michiel Coxie I (1499–1592?), The Abduction of Ganymede, early 1530s, Pen and brown ink on paper, 176 × 136 mm, the British Museum

    Coxie arrived in Rome around 1532, in his early thirties, a period when the city was still reeling from the Sack of 1527. He remained for seven years, a duration sufficient to immerse himself in the accumulated riches of the Renaissance: the principles of classical antiquity, Raphael’s compositional clarity, and direct access to Michelangelo’s drawings. From these, he borrowed the figure of Ganymede, almost without alteration, as seen here.

    These two sheets are part of a series of ten print designs depicting the loves of Jupiter, inspired by Ovid’s Metamorphoses. The indented lines confirm that they were intended for transfer. Coxie employed small cross-hatchings to create volume on the torsos and parallel strokes to delineate space. This technique is Italian, as is the confident rendering of the nude—a fluidity with the naked body that the northern tradition had not yet mastered. Coxie acquired this proficiency through direct study of classical sculpture and the artistic environment in Rome.

    It was those Roman years that earned him the nickname t’he Flemish Raphael,’ a measure of how highly his contemporaries rated him, and of how completely he had made the Italian Renaissance tradition his own.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

    References

    The British Museum (n.d.) Michiel Coxie I (1499–1592), The Abduction of Ganymede by Jupiter, early 1530s, museum no. 1861,0112.1. Available at: https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/P_1861-0112-1 (Accessed: 16 April 2026).

    The British Museum (n.d.) Michiel Coxie I (1499–1592), Jupiter, in the form of a swan, making love to Leda, early 1530s, museum no. 1861,0112.8. Available at: https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/P_1861-0112-8 (Accessed: 16 April 2026).

    The British Museum (n.d.) Virgil Solis, after Michiel Coxie I (1499–1592), Leda and the swan, from ‘The Loves of Jupiter’, 1530–1562, museum no. 1837,0616.28. Available at: https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/P_1837-0616-28 (Accessed: 16 April 2026).

    Jonckheere, K. (ed.) (2013) Michiel Coxcie (1499–1592) and the giants of his age. Turnhout: Harvey Miller.

    Jonckheere, K. (ed.) (2013) Michiel Coxcie and the giants of his age. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/12896271/Michiel_Coxcie_and_the_Giants_of_his_Age_Selection (Accessed: 17 April 2026).

  • A Silverpoint in Question: Rogier van der Weyden and Jan van Eyck

    A Silverpoint in Question: Rogier van der Weyden and Jan van Eyck

    Rogier van der Weyden (c. 1399–1464), Portrait of a Young Woman, c. 1435–40, Silverpoint on paper,166 × 116 mm, the British Museum, London
    Rogier van der Weyden (c. 1399–1464), Portrait of a Young Woman, c. 1435–40, Silverpoint on paper,166 × 116 mm, the British Museum, London

     

    This drawing is among the most discussed in the history of early Netherlandish art, primarily due to its association with the two painters whom modern scholarship identifies as the most influential in the development of northern European painting during the fifteenth century.

    While the attribution to Rogier van der Weyden is widely accepted by modern scholarship, it is not universal, and no related painting based on this design is known. The British Museum notes its stylistic proximity to Jan van Eyck (c. 1390–1441), particularly evident in the handling of line and form, which echoes the underdrawing technique seen in the Arnolfini Portrait, now housed in the National Gallery, London. Scholars have suggested the possibility that the drawing directly engages with a lost Van Eyck prototype. If this interpretation is correct, it represents the sole surviving evidence where the working methods of both great artists converge on a single sheet, with one artist exploring the visual language of the other.

    The subject is an unknown young woman, depicted in a three-quarter view, wearing a linen headdress. The linen veil (doek) is rendered with remarkable precision: the tension of the fabric across the crown, the folds at the temple, and the small pins securing the arrangement all reflect the practical realities of how such a veil was worn and assembled in the fifteenth century. The contour of the brow, the recession of the far side of the face, and the exact drape of the linen were all captured on first contact, as silverpoint does not allow for erasure or alteration. Every line therefore represents its initial rendering.

    Modern scholarship regards Van Eyck and Van der Weyden as the two foundational figures of northern European painting in the fifteenth century. Van Eyck advanced oil painting to a degree that allowed for the precise depiction of the weight of cloth, the translucency of skin, and the behaviour of light across diverse surfaces. Van der Weyden, in turn, applied a similar observational precision to convey the emotional state of the figure — capturing the tension around a mouth or the quality of attention in a pair of eyes.

    The subsequent generation of artists — including Petrus Christus (c. 1410–1475/76), Dieric Bouts (c. 1415–1475), Hugo van der Goes (c. 1440–1482), Hans Memling (c. 1430–1494), and others — assimilated both these legacies, and their work cannot be fully understood without acknowledging either influence.

    Van der Weyden’s compositional innovations disseminated across Europe through workshop transmission and, from the 1470s onwards, via the engravings of Martin Schongauer (1448-1491). Schongauer’s prints carried Netherlandish figure types and compositional structures throughout Europe with a speed that no painted original could match. Dürer, who travelled to the Netherlands in 1520 to study this tradition firsthand, perhaps offers the most telling indication of the enduring regard for this artistic legacy.

    References

    Ainsworth, M.W. (2017) Early Netherlandish Painting at the Crossroads: A Critical Look at Current Methodologies. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art. Available at: https://www.metmuseum.org/art/metpublications/Early_Netherlandish_Painting_at_the_Crossroads (Accessed: 17 April 2026)

    British Museum (n.d.) Portrait of an unknown young woman. Available at: https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/P_1874-0808-2266 (Accessed: 16 April 2026)

    National Gallery (n.d.) Jan van Eyck, The Arnolfini Portrait. Available at: https://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/jan-van-eyck-the-arnolfini-portrait (Accessed: 16 April 2026)

    Panofsky, E. (1953) Early Netherlandish Painting: Its Origins and Character. 2 vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

    Pächt, O. (1994) Van Eyck and the Founders of Early Netherlandish Painting. London: Harvey Miller

  • The Family before the Baptism in Gerard David’s Jan des Trompes Triptych

    Gerard David (c. 1460–1523), The Baptism of Christ (Jan des Trompes Triptych), c. 1502–1508, Oil on oak, 132.2 × 182.4 cm, Groeningemuseum, Bruges

    Gerard David (c. 1460–1523), The Baptism of Christ (Jan des Trompes Triptych), c. 1502–1508, Oil on oak, 132.2 × 182.4 cm, Groeningemuseum, Bruges

    This triptych belongs to the Netherlandish tradition in which sacred history unfolds within a continuous, naturalised world. In David’s handling, the tranquility of the scene keeps the baptism close—not as a remote episode, but as something sustained through the ritual practices that shaped its meaning.

    On one wing, Jan des Trompes and his son kneel, brought forward by Saint John the Evangelist; on the other, Elisabeth van der Meersch appears with their four daughters, under the care of Saint Elizabeth of Hungary. After his wife death, the exterior panel is reworked to include his new wife Magdalena Cordier, presented by Mary Magdalene.

    At the centre, John the Baptist marks the moment, his role continuing into the distance where his preaching and recognition of Christ are set into the landscape. The scene extends quietly into the landscape without losing its stillness.

    The family is placed beside the sacred scene rather than within it, their devotion turned toward the central mystery. The Baptism is treated as a revelation that remains present. The figures are oriented towards it, their prayer directed toward what does not depend on them. Within this order, prayer is not a plea that secures grace, but a response to what is already given.

    Gerard David (c. 1460–1523), The Baptism of Christ (Jan des Trompes Triptych), c. 1502–1508, Oil on oak, 132.2 × 182.4 cm, Groeningemuseum, Bruges
    Gerard David (c. 1460–1523), The Baptism of Christ (Jan des Trompes Triptych), c. 1502–1508, Oil on oak, 132.2 × 182.4 cm, Groeningemuseum, Bruges
    Gerard David (c. 1460–1523), The Baptism of Christ (Jan des Trompes Triptych), c. 1502–1508, Oil on oak, 132.2 × 182.4 cm, Groeningemuseum, Bruges
    Gerard David (c. 1460–1523), The Baptism of Christ (Jan des Trompes Triptych), c. 1502–1508, Oil on oak, 132.2 × 182.4 cm, Groeningemuseum, Bruges
    Gerard David (c. 1460–1523), The Baptism of Christ (Jan des Trompes Triptych), c. 1502–1508, Oil on oak, 132.2 × 182.4 cm, Groeningemuseum, Bruges
    Gerard David (c. 1460–1523), The Baptism of Christ (Jan des Trompes Triptych), c. 1502–1508, Oil on oak, 132.2 × 182.4 cm, Groeningemuseum, Bruges
    Gerard David (c. 1460–1523), The Baptism of Christ (Jan des Trompes Triptych), c. 1502–1508, Oil on oak, 132.2 × 182.4 cm, Groeningemuseum, Bruges

    References

    RKD – Netherlands Institute for Art History (n.d.), Gerard David (c. 1460–1523), The Baptism of Christ (Jan des Trompes Triptych), c. 1502–1508. RKDimages database entry no. 43964. Available at:https://rkd.nl/images/43964  (Accessed: 6 April 2026)

  • The Virgin No One Can Settle

    Jean Fouquet (1410 / 1430–1477 / 1481), Madonna Surrounded by Seraphim and Cherubim, c. 1450, Oil on panel, 92 × 83.5 cm, Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten, Antwerp

    Jean Fouquet (1410 / 1430–1477 / 1481), Madonna Surrounded by Seraphim and Cherubim, c. 1450, Oil on panel, 92 × 83.5 cm, Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten, Antwerp
    Jean Fouquet (1410/1430–1477/1481), Madonna Surrounded by Seraphim and Cherubim, c. 1450, Oil on panel, 92 × 83.5 cm, Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten, Antwerp

    Painted for the Collegiate Church of Notre-Dame in Melun,
    the diptych once stood above the tomb of Catherine Budé,
    wife of Étienne Chevalier (c. 1410–1474).

    That setting has fractured.
    The Virgin now in Antwerp,
    Chevalier with St Stephen in Berlin,
    a medallion from the frame in the Louvre.

    —

    The Virgin sits before a compressed field of angels.
    Red and blue, arranged with near-heraldic clarity.

    Their bodies press forward.
    Space narrows, becomes controlled.

    One breast uncovered.
    Defined with precision rather than softness.

    The type recalls the Virgo lactans,
    yet devotional warmth does not fully settle here.

    The face withdraws.
    Pale. Self-contained. Resistant to easy engagement.

    —

    Agnès Sorel (1422–1450) presses close to the image.
    At the court of Charles VII (1403–1461),
    her presence as the first officially recognised royal mistress took on formal visibility,
    unsettling established hierarchies.

    Proximity to the king strained relations with the Dauphin Louis,
    later Louis XI (1423–1483).
    Exile followed.

    That history does not unfold here.
    It lingers at the edge.

    —

    The exposed breast offers nourishment,
    yet avoids tenderness.

    Its clarity draws attention
    without resolving its meaning.

    The figure does not settle.
    Neither fully maternal,
    nor reducible to portrait.

    The face holds both in suspension.

    —

    Chevalier kneels in the companion panel,
    finance minister, executor of Sorel’s will.

    Patronage, memory, obligation—
    all remain close.

    The Virgin’s red, white, and blue
    align with the heraldic colours of Charles VII.

    Catherine Budé’s tomb anchors the work,
    yet her absence complicates it.

    The figure gathers these presences
    without fixing them—

    whose memory, whose presence, remains here?

    References

    RKD – Netherlands Institute for Art History (n.d.), Jean Fouquet (1410/1430–1477/1481), Madonna Surrounded by Seraphim and Cherubim, c. 1450, RKDimages database entry no. 247521 Available at: https://rkd.nl/images/247521 (Accessed 22 March 2025)

    Gemäldegalerie Berlin (Staatliche Museen zu Berlin) (n.d.) Étienne Chevalier mit dem heiligen Stephanus. Collection database record. Available at: https://recherche.smb.museum/detail/865553/%c3%a9tienne-chevalier-mit-dem-heiligen-stephanus (Accessed 22 March 2025).

    Musée du Louvre (n.d.) Autoportrait en médaillon, collection database (Département des Objets d’art du Moyen Âge, de la Renaissance et des temps modernes). Available at: https://collections.louvre.fr/ark:/53355/cl010115375 (Accessed 22 March 2025)

  • Pieter Pourbus, A Triptych Wing with Juan López Gallo and His Sons

    Pieter Pourbus (c. 1523–1584), Juan López Gallo, President of the Spanish Nation, and His Sons, 1568, Oil on oak panel, 98 × 51.7 cm, Groeningemuseum, Bruges

    Pieter Pourbus (c. 1523–1584), Juan López Gallo, President of the Spanish Nation, and His Sons, 1568, Oil on oak panel, 98 × 51.7 cm, Groeningemuseum, Bruges

    When López Gallo knelt before his prie-dieu to be painted, he did so alongside his wife Catharina Pardo and their nine children, the entire household gathered in devotion across the three panels of a triptych. That unity has not survived. The central panel has never been recovered, and the right wing depicting Catharina with her six daughters has been missing since 1882. What remains is the left wing alone: López Gallo kneeling in prayer, his three sons standing behind him, their identities marked by the heraldry on the prie-dieu and echoed on his surcoat. He was originally accompanied by his patron saint, John the Baptist, later removed from the surface. In works of this kind, the saint typically mediates the act of prayer, bridging the donor and the sacred figure. His removal leaves the devotional gesture intact but less grounded, subtly shifting the panel’s internal balance.

    López Gallo appears here as the head of the Spanish Nation in Bruges, one of several merchant corporations that structured Iberian trade in the city. Even as Bruges’ economic success waned, these institutions stayed, and the painting is a proof of their continued presence.

    The Bruges context sharpens this fragment further. Retable panels for foreign patrons formed a notable strand of local art production in the mid-sixteenth century, even as Antwerp already dominated international art markets. Pourbus was one of the principal painters within this milieu. Arriving in Bruges in 1543 in the orbit of Lancelot Blondeel (c. 1498–1561), he rose to prominence through major commissions. His approach—ordering figures with clarity and suppressing anecdotal detail—proved influential among Bruges painters well into the later sixteenth century.

    Pieter Pourbus (c. 1523–1584), Juan López Gallo, President of the Spanish Nation, and His Sons, 1568, Oil on oak panel, 98 × 51.7 cm, Groeningemuseum, Bruges
    Pieter Pourbus (c. 1523–1584), Juan López Gallo, President of the Spanish Nation, and His Sons, 1568, Oil on oak panel, 98 × 51.7 cm, Groeningemuseum, Bruges

    References

    Van Oosterwijk, A. (ed.) (2017) The Forgotten Masters: Pieter Pourbus and Bruges Painting from 1525 to 1625. Ghent: Snoeck

  • Mary of Burgundy (1457–1482), last Valois Duchess of Burgundy and heir to the Burgundian Netherlands

    Mary of Burgundy (1457–1482), last Valois Duchess of Burgundy and heir to the Burgundian Netherlands

    Renier van Thienen (active c.1470–1495), Jan Borman II (c.1460–1520), Pieter de Backere (active late fifteenth century) and Jehan Hervy (active late fifteenth century), Tomb of Mary of Burgundy, c.1488–1502, Brass, copper, bronze and enamel effigy on black stone sarcophagus, 260 × 135 × 135 cm, Church of Our Lady, Bruges

    Renier van Thienen (active c.1470–1495), Jan Borman II (c.1460–1520), Pieter de Backere (active late fifteenth century) and Jehan Hervy (active late fifteenth century), Tomb of Mary of Burgundy, c.1488–1502, Brass, copper, bronze and enamel effigy on black stone sarcophagus, 260 × 135 × 135 cm, Church of Our Lady, Bruges
    Renier van Thienen (active c.1470–1495), Jan Borman II (c.1460–1520), Pieter de Backere (active late fifteenth century) and Jehan Hervy (active late fifteenth century), Tomb of Mary of Burgundy, c.1488–1502, Brass, copper, bronze and enamel effigy on black stone sarcophagus, 260 × 135 × 135 cm, Church of Our Lady, Bruges

    Renier van Thienen (active c.1470–1495), Jan Borman II (c.1460–1520), Pieter de Backere (active late fifteenth century) and Jehan Hervy (active late fifteenth century), Tomb of Mary of Burgundy, c.1488–1502, Brass, copper, bronze and enamel effigy on black stone sarcophagus, 260 × 135 × 135 cm, Church of Our Lady, Bruges
    Renier van Thienen (active c.1470–1495), Jan Borman II (c.1460–1520), Pieter de Backere (active late fifteenth century) and Jehan Hervy (active late fifteenth century), Tomb of Mary of Burgundy, c.1488–1502, Brass, copper, bronze and enamel effigy on black stone sarcophagus, 260 × 135 × 135 cm, Church of Our Lady, Bruges

    A young ruler lies in still metal, surrounded by the heraldry of a vanished political world.

    The tomb erected in Bruges some years after Mary of Burgundy’s death gathers into sculptural form the inheritance that had briefly converged in her person. The gilded effigy shows the duchess resting in composed stillness, crowned and wrapped in the mantle of Burgundian sovereignty. Along the sides of the sarcophagus a dense sequence of heraldic shields borne by lions unfolds in measured succession.

    These arms evoke dynastic lineage and the territories of the Burgundian house, so that the monument begins to resemble a visual genealogy as much as a funerary image, metal and stone quietly assembling the web of lands and claims once held together under Burgundian rule.

    That political configuration had taken shape during the long reign of Philip the Good (1396–1467), whose government consolidated the territories of the Low Countries into one of the most powerful princely formations of late medieval Europe. When his son Charles the Bold (1433–1477) was killed at Nancy in 1477, the inheritance passed to his only child, Mary of Burgundy.

    Her short rule unfolded at a fragile historical threshold between the Burgundian structure fashioned under Philip and the Habsburg order that would soon emerge. After 1477 the French king Louis XI (1423–1483) sought to dismantle Burgundian power, while the cities of the Low Countries compelled the young ruler to confirm their liberties in the Great Privilege of 1477.

    Her marriage that same year to Maximilian I (1459–1519) brought military support but also drew the Burgundian inheritance into the orbit of the Habsburg dynasty. Through their son Philip the Handsome (1478–1506) and grandson Charles V (1500–1558), these territories would become the political core of the Habsburg Netherlands.

    Renier van Thienen (active c.1470–1495), Jan Borman II (c.1460–1520), Pieter de Backere (active late fifteenth century) and Jehan Hervy (active late fifteenth century), Tomb of Mary of Burgundy, c.1488–1502, Brass, copper, bronze and enamel effigy on black stone sarcophagus, 260 × 135 × 135 cm, Church of Our Lady, Bruges
    Renier van Thienen (active c.1470–1495), Jan Borman II (c.1460–1520), Pieter de Backere (active late fifteenth century) and Jehan Hervy (active late fifteenth century), Tomb of Mary of Burgundy, c.1488–1502, Brass, copper, bronze and enamel effigy on black stone sarcophagus, 260 × 135 × 135 cm, Church of Our Lady, Bruges
    Renier van Thienen (active c.1470–1495), Jan Borman II (c.1460–1520), Pieter de Backere (active late fifteenth century) and Jehan Hervy (active late fifteenth century), Tomb of Mary of Burgundy, c.1488–1502, Brass, copper, bronze and enamel effigy on black stone sarcophagus, 260 × 135 × 135 cm, Church of Our Lady, Bruges
    Renier van Thienen (active c.1470–1495), Jan Borman II (c.1460–1520), Pieter de Backere (active late fifteenth century) and Jehan Hervy (active late fifteenth century), Tomb of Mary of Burgundy, c.1488–1502, Brass, copper, bronze and enamel effigy on black stone sarcophagus, 260 × 135 × 135 cm, Church of Our Lady, Bruges
    Renier van Thienen (active c.1470–1495), Jan Borman II (c.1460–1520), Pieter de Backere (active late fifteenth century) and Jehan Hervy (active late fifteenth century), Tomb of Mary of Burgundy, c.1488–1502, Brass, copper, bronze and enamel effigy on black stone sarcophagus, 260 × 135 × 135 cm, Church of Our Lady, Bruges
    Renier van Thienen (active c.1470–1495), Jan Borman II (c.1460–1520), Pieter de Backere (active late fifteenth century) and Jehan Hervy (active late fifteenth century), Tomb of Mary of Burgundy, c.1488–1502, Brass, copper, bronze and enamel effigy on black stone sarcophagus, 260 × 135 × 135 cm, Church of Our Lady, Bruges
    Renier van Thienen (active c.1470–1495), Jan Borman II (c.1460–1520), Pieter de Backere (active late fifteenth century) and Jehan Hervy (active late fifteenth century), Tomb of Mary of Burgundy, c.1488–1502, Brass, copper, bronze and enamel effigy on black stone sarcophagus, 260 × 135 × 135 cm, Church of Our Lady, Bruges
    Renier van Thienen (active c.1470–1495), Jan Borman II (c.1460–1520), Pieter de Backere (active late fifteenth century) and Jehan Hervy (active late fifteenth century), Tomb of Mary of Burgundy, c.1488–1502, Brass, copper, bronze and enamel effigy on black stone sarcophagus, 260 × 135 × 135 cm, Church of Our Lady, Bruges
    Renier van Thienen (active c.1470–1495), Jan Borman II (c.1460–1520), Pieter de Backere (active late fifteenth century) and Jehan Hervy (active late fifteenth century), Tomb of Mary of Burgundy, c.1488–1502, Brass, copper, bronze and enamel effigy on black stone sarcophagus, 260 × 135 × 135 cm, Church of Our Lady, Bruges
    Renier van Thienen (active c.1470–1495), Jan Borman II (c.1460–1520), Pieter de Backere (active late fifteenth century) and Jehan Hervy (active late fifteenth century), Tomb of Mary of Burgundy, c.1488–1502, Brass, copper, bronze and enamel effigy on black stone sarcophagus, 260 × 135 × 135 cm, Church of Our Lady, Bruges

    References

    Van Loo, B. (2021) The Burgundians: A Vanished Empire: A History of 1111 Years and One Day. Translated by N. Forest-Flier. London: Head of Zeus.

  • The Braunschweiger Monogrammist’s The Loose Society and the Regulation of Brothel Life in Sixteenth-Century Antwerp

    Braunschweiger Monogrammist (fl. in Antwerp c. 1525–1545), The Loose Society, c. 1535–1540, Oil on oak, 30,1 x 46,5 cm, Gemäldegalerie

    B
    B
    Braunschweiger Monogrammist (fl. in Antwerp c. 1525–1545), The Loose Society, c. 1535–1540, Oil on oak, 30,1 x 46,5 cm, Gemäldegalerie

    Braunschweiger Monogrammist (fl. in Antwerp c. 1525–1545), The Loose Society, c. 1535–1540, Oil on oak, 30,1 x 46,5 cm, Gemäldegalerie

    The Braunschweiger Monogrammist, an artist whose identity still remains elusive and who is known from only a small number of surviving works, created several meticulously staged interior scenes. Among these, the Berlin painting stands out as probably the most intricate in its spatial and narrative organisation.

    On the left, a long table serves as the focal point for a compact group of figures: women sit on men’s laps, couples engage in tactile negotiation, glasses are raised, and bodies press close together. Barred openings and wall markings suggest a commercial rather than a domestic setting.

    The right side of the painting presents a dramatic shift in tone. On the floor, two women are engaged in a fight, with one forcing the other down. A man leans forward, attempting to break up the altercation by pouring water over them, while nearby, another woman extends her arm to prevent a man from intervening. The setting is replete with numerous smaller details, each imbued with coded meaning, transforming the brothel interior into a closely observed theatrical space where seduction, calculation, possession, and disorder unfold within a single, continuous scene.

    This inherent ambivalence mirrors historical reality. In sixteenth-century Netherlandish cities, brothels were officially condemned but practically regulated. Commercial hubs like Antwerp attracted a diverse population of merchants, labourers, sailors, and foreign mercenaries. From the era of the Burgundian dukes and later under the Habsburg crown, pragmatic containment frequently superseded outright prohibition. Brothels thus functioned as managed outlets within a volatile urban environment.

    The painting precisely captures this delicate balance. It moralises while simultaneously observing; it entertains while also dissecting. In doing so, it occupies a compelling position between didactic imagery and the emerging Netherlandish genre painting – a concise genre scene where moral framing and social observation operate in deliberate tension.

    References

    RKD – Netherlands Institute for Art History (n.d.), Braunschweiger Monogrammist (fl. in Antwerp c. 1525–1545), The Loose Society, c. 1535–1540, RKDimages database entry no. 51439 , Available at: https://rkd.nl/images/51439 (February 16 2026)

    Other versions

    RKD – Netherlands Institute for Art History (n.d.), after Master of Brunswick (fl. in Antwerp c. 1525–1545), Brothel Scene with Card Players, c. 1540, RKDimages database entry no. 56035, Available at: https://rkd.nl/images/56035(February 16 2026)

    RKD – Netherlands Institute for Art History (n.d.), Braunschweiger Monogrammist (fl. in Antwerp c. 1525–1545), The Loose Society, c. 1535–1540, RKDimages database entry no. 213411 Available at: https://rkd.nl/images/213411 ( February 16 2026)

  • Petrus Christus’ Portrait of a Young Girl: Between Burgundian Code and Individual Presence

    Petrus Christus (active c. 1444–1476), Portrait of a Young Woman, c.1470, Oil on oak panel, 29 x 22.5 cm, Gemäldegalerie, Berlin
    Petrus Christus (active c. 1444–1476), Portrait of a Young Woman, c.1470, Oil on oak panel, 29 x 22.5 cm, Gemäldegalerie, Berlin

    The sitter appears composed within the frame, her presence stabilised through dress, posture, and the tight limits of the composition. Everything required for recognition is present — and yet we know neither who she is nor why the portrait was made.

    That sense of completion sits oddly beside a long history of misattribution. For centuries the portrait was attributed to Jan van Eyck(1390-1441). Petrus Christus was recovered as an independent Bruges master only in the nineteenth century through the work of Gustav Friedrich Waagen (1794-1868) and later Max J. Friedländer (1867-1958), who reconstructed a small, unusually coherent oeuvre. That the painting sat so long under Van Eyck’s name is itself a measure of its quality: precise and authoritative enough to bear the greater reputation.

    The sitter’s appearance conforms to the most exacting Burgundian ideals of beauty in the later fifteenth century, particularly the preference for a conspicuously high forehead. This effect was carefully produced. Hair is tightly bound and drawn back to heighten the forehead; the neck is lengthened through posture and dress; the body is compressed into a narrow vertical silhouette. The tall black headdress is a variant of the truncated, or bee-hive, hennin fashionable at the Burgundian court, reinforcing height and linearity.

    Johan Huizinga (1872–1945), in The Autumn of the Middle Ages, described a Burgundian court culture in which ceremony had become increasingly rigid and elaborate — a response, he argued, to the violence and instability of the wider world. The fixed forms of dress, precedence, and display that governed courtly life were, in his account, compensatory rather than confident: the more brittle the social order, the more exacting the performance required to sustain it. Christus’ portrait belongs to that moment. The high forehead, the stiff verticality of the hennin, the compression of the body into a narrow silhouette — all conform to a code of appearance that left little room for accident or individuality. And yet the sitter’s gaze complicates the reading. She looks out at the viewer directly, with an alertness that many art historians have found unsettling. Something personal — watchful, self-possessed, faintly resistant — survives within the form.

    References

    Dyballa, K. and Kemperdick, S. (eds.) (2024) Netherlandish and French Paintings 1400–1480: Critical Catalogue for the Gemäldegalerie – Petersberg: Michael Imhof Verlag

    Huizinga, J. (1996) The Autumn of the Middle Ages. Chicago: University of Chicago Press