Master of Delft
c. 1500 - c. 1510
oil on panel
support/centre panel: height 87.1 cm (centre panel) × width 69.2 cm (centre panel)
support/left wing: height 86.5 cm (left wing) × width 31.5 cm (left wing)
support/right wing: height 86.5 cm (right wing) × width 31.5 cm (right wing)
The support of the centre panel consists of three vertically grained oak planks (13.5, 29 and 24 cm), approx. 1 cm thick, and is bevelled on all sides (the bevels are approx. 0.4 cm deep). The reverse was probably planed down somewhat along the joins. Although there are no traces of dowels in the X-radiographs, the planks were probably butt-joined originally. The wings were constructed from a single, vertically grained plank. In 1934, the wings were sawn in two. Each half was planed down to approx. 1-3 mm and transferred onto a multiplex wooden support covered with an aluminum plate on top and along the edges. Dendrochronology has shown that the youngest heartwood ring of the centre panel was formed in 1485. That panel could have been ready for use by 1496, but a date in or after 1510 is more likely. The white chalk-glue ground was applied in the frame of the centre panel and the wings. There are unpainted edges of approx. 1 cm on all four sides of the centre panel (painted surface: 84.7 x 66.6 cm) and on the right and left sides of the wings (painted surface: approx. 84.5 x 30 cm). The barbe on the centre panel is poorly preserved, but those on the wings have survived better. The white ground is visible along the edges of the paint layers and through the transparent paint layers. The ground was applied in two layers, the topmost of which is greyish, possibly due to the addition of oil. Infrared reflectography has revealed an extensive underdrawing with the brush in black paint indicating the architecture, the figures and faces, with much parallel and cross-hatching in the shadows on all the inner panels. The underdrawing on the outer wings is less detailed and was made with a broader and coarser brush. There are obvious differences between the nature of the underdrawings on the centre panel and the inner wings. The pigment, ground black chalk, is thinner on the centre panel, and the size of the granules is much smaller than on the wings. The central underdrawing was reinforced with heavier lines here and there. That on the wings is more forceful, with strong diagonal hatchings, and the architecture is more detailed. There is no clear drawing beneath the portraits of the donors, but the faces of the saints were prepared more extensively. A thin imprimatura was applied over the underdrawing with a broad brush, with various coloured passages built up in a traditional way with reserves. There are numerous departures from the underdrawing in the painted surface of the centre panel, especially in the shape and folds of the draperies of the Virgin and the other female figures (fig. b), the Christ Child’s stomach, and his hands. The buildings behind St Martin and his staff on the left wing were painted lower down than they were drawn (fig. c). There are also changes in the figure of St Cunera and the scarf with which she was strangled on the right wing. The small figure standing in the middleground at the right was added at a late stage. The underdrawing on the outer wings was followed far more faithfully. The structure of the paint layers is fairly thin and simple, and consists mainly of two layers, with the exception of the red and purple passages, which have three or four in the shaded areas. The blue sky consists of two layers which are mixtures of lead white and azurite (of differing quality). Vermilion, lead white and various shades of red lake were used in the red passages. Joseph’s purple cloak is a mixture of azurite, lead white and red lake. The green is a verdigris that has discoloured to a brownish hue, while details in the grass are a mixture of lead-tin yellow and azurite.
Unpublised paper on frame (University Utrecht) by D. Meeuwissen and I. Verslype, 1997; unpublished paper (University Utrecht) by B. Schoonhoven, 1998; Faries in coll. cat. Utrecht 2003, p. 65; Wallert et al. 2009
Poor. The wings, and especially the centre panel, are heavily abraded, and there are many small paint losses throughout. There are extensive paint losses along the joins (for example in the donor’s face).
The triptych is mounted in its original oak frame, with modern additions. The cross-section of the profile of the central frame shows a tenia, an asymmetrical ogee and a bead along the sight edge (fig. d). The sill has a bevelled sight edge (fig. e). The central frame has an open rebate, but this may originally have been closed. The mouldings on the frames surrounding the inner wings are a slightly compressed version of the central frame (fig. f). There is a reverse ogee profile at the outer bottom edge of the frames surrounding the wings (fig. g). The moulding at the sight edge is presently hidden. The outer wings, which were only recently reunited with the rest of the triptych, were mounted in new frames on top of the original frames in 2007. Before the inner and outer wings were separated, they were set in a closed rebate. The corner connections show various repairs, but judging by the position of the dowels they originally seem to have been stub mortise and tenon joints (fig. h). The frames have been stripped, and the traces of red and black paint at the bottom and the back of the frames do not seem original. The top member of the central frame has the remains of a hanging device in the form of a recess on the back which tapers towards the top.
…; Mrs Ursula M. Kneppelhout-van Braam (1825-1919), Oosterbeek;1 her sale et al., Amsterdam (F. Muller), 16 December 1919, no. 24, as Haarlem school, c. 1510, fl. 11,100, to the dealer Goudstikker;2 ...; sale, Michiel Onnes van Nijenrode (1878-1972), Kasteel Nijenrode (Breukelen), Amsterdam (F. Muller), 10 July 1923, no. 15, as Delft, c. 1500, fl. 13,500 to the dealer J. Goudstikker, Amsterdam;3 ...; on loan to the museum from Jan Herman van Heek (1873-1957), Lonneker, 1926 (SK-C-1168); by whom donated to the museum on the occasion of Dr F. Schmidt-Degener’s 25th year in the museum, through the mediation of the Vereniging Rembrandt, 1933
Object number: SK-A-3141
Credit line: Gift of J.H. van Heek, Lonneker
Copyright: Public domain
Master of Delft (active c. 1490-1520)
The Master of Delft was named by Friedländer in 1913 after the wings of the Triptych with the Virgin and Child with St Anne by the Master of Frankfurt, which is now in Aachen.4 The wings show the Burgomaster of Delft, Dirck Dircksz van Beest Heemskerck (1463-1545), with his four sons and St John the Baptist, and his wife Geertruyd with her daughters and St Mary Magdalen. Since their eldest son Dirck Dircksz is depicted as a Carthusian monk, Vogt recently suggested that the wings were painted on the occasion of his profession as a monk in 1514 in the monastery of St Bartholomeusdal near Delft.
A number of religious triptychs, mostly dated in the first decades of the 16th century, are attributed to this master and his workshop by Friedländer and later authors. The most representative and best preserved triptych in the group is the Triptych with Scenes from the Passion of Christ,5 which was probably made for the Premonstratensian foundation Koningsveld near Delft, which includes a view of the Nieuwe Kerk in Delft and is dated 1510-12 by Campbell. According to Bangs, the Triptych with the Crucifixion in Cologne was commissioned by the prominent Kievit family for their chapel in the St Laurenskerk in Rotterdam around 1520.6 Other generally accepted attributions are The Vision of St Bernard in Utrecht,7 and the Triptych with the Virgin and Child and Saints (SK-A-3141).
His works display the influence of Cornelis Engelbrechtsz, and he also incorporated quotations from the early prints of Lucas van Leyden. According to Friedländer, the sources of the master’s style must be sought in woodcut illustrations, such as Le chevalier délibéré (published in Gouda, c. 1486-88). Friedländer also suggested that the artist designed the woodcuts for the life of St Lidwina published in Schiedam in 1498.
References
Friedländer 1913; Schretlen 1922; Friedländer X, 1932, pp. 45-52, 127-28; Hoogewerff I, 1936, pp. 577-81, II, 1937, pp. 388-96, V, 1947, pp. 123-24; Vollmer in Thieme/Becker XXXVII, 1950, p. 78; ENP X, 1973, pp. 30-33, 75-76; Châtelet 1981, pp. 155-57, 237; Hutchison in Turner 1996, XX, pp. 655-57; Campbell in coll. cat. London 1998, pp. 322-33; Vogt 2002
(J.P. Filedt Kok)
The centre panel of this triptych shows the Virgin and Child seated on a lawn studded with flowers within a walled hortus conclusus - a reference to Mary’s virginity.8 On the rear corners of the wall, with stretches of water behind them, are three musician angels on the left and Joseph on the right. Ringbom identified the two sumptuously attired women in the foreground as sibyls, prophetesses from classical antiquity, who are foretelling the coming of Christ, but other authors believe that the right to be in the enclosed garden was reserved for female saints. The woman with the book on the left is hard to identify as a specific saint. According to Ringbom she is the Cumaean Sibyl or the Cimmerian Sibyl, who is drawing the Child’s attention to the vision in the sky above. The woman on the right offering the Virgin a flower from her basket could be St Dorothy.9 The nude Christ Child standing on Mary’s lap has turned his head to look up at the vision in an aureole in the heavens, which foretells his Passion. It shows two angels who have pulled aside the curtains in front of a tabernacle to reveal the many instruments of the Passion, the arma Christi, consisting of the crown of thorns, the flagellation post, the lance and the ladder, and busts of Pilate (with the jug of water and bowl), the priest Caiaphas (with a mitre), Peter (with the cockerel), and the maidservant who recognised him as one of Christ’s disciples. Seated at the table, on which there are nails, a hammer, pincers and a scourge, is God the Father, who is pointing at a rush basket. The heavenly tabernacle is described in St Paul’s letter to the Hebrews, 9:11, with Christ as the high priest, chosen by God, who will reconcile mankind with God through his sacrificial death on the cross.10
Although there are no direct models for the iconography of the centre panel, the structure of the composition is closely related to the eponymous panel by the Master of the Virgo inter Virgines (SK-A-501) in which the group of people is also depicted in a ‘hortus conclusus’. The wings of the Rijksmuseum triptych, with the two donors and their patron saints, match the centre panel both spatially and with their architecture. There are no clues as to the identity of the donors, who each kneel at a prie-dieu. The saint on the left is probably Martin of Tours, who was also the patron saint of the city of Utrecht.11 It has been suggested in the past that he has the features of Bishop David of Burgundy, who died in 1496.12 The female saint is probably Cunera, for she is wearing a crown and has the scarf with which she was murdered looped around her neck.13
In 1934, shortly after the triptych was donated to the Rijksmuseum, the wings were sawn through, with the separated fronts and backs being transferred to fresh supports and the outer wings being given new frames so that they could be exhibited separately. After the restoration of the inner wings in 2006, the outer wings were reattached to them, returning the triptych to its original form. Until 1934 the original frame of the central panel (fig. a) had the biblical inscription ‘Dolor meus inconspectu meo sempre’ (My sorrow is continually before me), meaning that Christ had been aware of his fate from an early age.14 That inscription, which disappeared when the frame was stripped (probably in 1934), was in all likelihood a later copy of an original inscription.15
The Annunciation on the outer wings is set in a cramped interior in a way that appears to be entirely original, as far as is known. The angel is climbing up a short flight of stairs, and the Virgin is seated beneath a baldachin. The figures are painted in grisaille, with a few pink, soft blue and yellow touches of colour in the costumes of the Virgin and the angel. The inner wings have bolder colours. It is true that the clothing is in fairly light pastel colours, but this will be due partly to wear and the fading of the sensitive pigments and lakes.
The underdrawing, which is typical of the Master of Delft, was done with the brush. The paint for it was applied more thinly on the centre panel, and the only extensive hatching is in the drapery folds (fig. b). The underdrawing on the wings is more clearly visible and appears to be more detailed, particularly in the architecture. The underdrawing on the outer wings was done with broader brushstrokes. Quite a few changes were made to the design of the inner wings in the paint layer, with the architecture being moved downwards and the bishop’s crosier being shortened (fig. c). Despite the differences in the amount of detailing, the underdrawing in the various parts of the triptych displays sufficient points of resemblance to suggest that it is the work of the same hand. The underdrawing as a whole is closely related to that of the Triptych with Scenes from the Passion of Christ by the Master of Delft in London.16
In 1913 Friedländer attributed the Rijksmuseum triptych to a painter working in Delft at the beginning of the 16th century, whom he called the Master of Delft,17 and since then it has formed the core of the master’s oeuvre. The light, sometimes almost pastel-like tints are regarded as one of the distinguishing features of the master’s work. They are also found in the donors’ wings of the Van Beest Triptych in Aachen,18 which are also in rather poor condition. The colours are deeper and more saturated in the London triptych, perhaps because it is better preserved.19 The joyful female figures are characterised by the master’s fine headdresses, high foreheads and receding chins, after the model of the Master of the Virgo inter Virgines. The elaborate underdrawing and the painstaking execution are also common to the core works assembled by Friedländer. The triptych is widely seen as a relatively early work by the master, and is dated around 1500-10. The year 1496, in which David of Burgundy died, whose features have been recognised in St Martin, can hardly be regarded as a valid argument for dating the work, and is anyway contradicted by the dendrochronology, which points to a date in or after 1510. The wings do not differ markedly in style from those of the Van Beest Triptych in Aachen, which can probably be dated to 1516. The Amsterdam triptych does look calmer and more traditional, and lacks the packed and cluttered appearance of the London Passion triptych of c. 1510-12.
(J.P. Filedt Kok)
Friedländer 1913, p. 107; Schretlen 1922, p. 16; Enklaar 1931, p. 36; Friedländer X, 1932, pp. 47, 127, no. 62; Rotterdam 1936, p. 37, no. 75 (as The Annunciation); Hoogewerff I, 1937, pp. 577-81; Amsterdam 1951, p. 5, no. 14; Amsterdam 1958, pp. 71-72, no. 61; ENP X, 1973, pp. 31-32, 75-76, no. 62; Ringbom 1989; Hutchison in Turner 1996, XX, p. 656 (as workshop of the Master of Delft, The Annunciation); Van Bueren in Utrecht 1999, pp. 235-36, no. 88; coll. cat. Utrecht 2002, pp. 70-71; Dijkstra in coll. cat. Utrecht 2003, pp. 62-65; Filedt Kok in Rotterdam 2008a, pp. 292-96, no. 55
1926, p. 50, no. 774a; 1934, p. 81, no. 774a; 1960, pp. 196-97, no. 1538 L1; 1976, p. 632, no. A 3141
J.P. Filedt Kok, 2010, 'Meester van Delft, Triptych with the Virgin and Child and saints (centre panel), the Donor with St Martin (inner left wing), the Donor’s wife with St Cunera (inner right wing) and the Annunciation (outer wings), c. 1500 - c. 1510', in J.P. Filedt Kok (ed.), Early Netherlandish Paintings, online coll. cat. Amsterdam: hdl.handle.net/10934/RM0001.COLLECT.9539
(accessed 22 November 2024 18:39:52).fig. b Detail of the infrared reflectogram assembly of SK-A-3141, showing the female figure on the right in the centre panel (© Stichting RKD)
fig. c Detail of the infrared reflectogram assembly of SK-A-3141, showing the architecture and St Martin of Tours on the left wing (© Stichting RKD)
fig. d Rendering of the profile of the vertical and top members of the central frame (width 69 mm)
fig. e Rendering of the profile of the bottom member of the central frame (width 66.5 mm)
fig. f Rendering of the profile of the vertical and top members of the frames surrounding the wings (width 58 mm)
fig. g Rendering of the profile of the bottom member of the frames surrounding the wings (width 66 mm)
fig. h Rendering of the construction of the bottom corners of the frames surrounding the wings (width 68 mm)
fig. a The original frame of the triptych, with the biblical inscription that was removed in 1934 (© Stichting RKD)
fig. b Detail of the infrared reflectogram assembly of SK-A-3141, showing the female figure on the right in the centre panel (© Stichting RKD)
fig. c Detail of the infrared reflectogram assembly of SK-A-3141, showing the architecture and St Martin of Tours on the left wing (© Stichting RKD)