Object data
oil on panel
support: height 86.3 cm × width 66.5 cm
frame: height 101 cm × width 83.5 cm × thickness 5.5 cm
Maarten van Heemskerck
Haarlem, 1529
oil on panel
support: height 86.3 cm × width 66.5 cm
frame: height 101 cm × width 83.5 cm × thickness 5.5 cm
The support consists of three vertically grained oak planks (28.5, 15 and 22.8 cm), 0.7-1.8 cm thick. The panel has an arched top. The planks were connected with four pairs of dowels, two of which are visible. It was planed down slightly for cradling, which has since been removed. Dendrochronology has shown that plank II of the panel comes from the same tree as planks I and III of the pendant (SK-A-3519). The youngest heartwood ring of plank III of the pendant was formed in 1504. The panel could have been ready for use by 1515, but a date in or after 1529 is more likely. The white ground was applied in the frame, as there are unpainted edges of 1-1.5 cm and a barbe on all sides (painted surface: 83.8 x 64.2 cm). A streaky priming is visible in the X-radiographs. Infrared reflectography did not reveal traces of an underdrawing; with the naked eye, however, there seems to be an underdrawing in black brush in the face and hands. The figure was reserved.
Good. There are discoloured retouched losses along the joins, and the varnish is slightly discoloured.
This frame (fig. g) and the one surrounding the pendant (fig. h) are almost identical and most likely original. They are segmental arch frames with plain friezes and shallow, carved ornamentation on both sides of the frieze. The friezes on the vertical members (fig. d) and the arches are wider than the friezes on the sills (fig. e). The frames are made of oak and have integral carved cartouches in the shape of a ribbon on the sill with raised text (see Inscriptions). Because the frames have been stripped and partly refinished in the past, it cannot be established whether the barbes on the panels correspond with the frames. The corners are constructed with mortise and tenon joints (fig. f). There are traces of various hanging methods on the frames, including so-called nostrils.
…; ? Alida van Leyden, née Van Ruytenburch (1671-1724);1 ? her great-granddaughter, Sophia Dina (1778-1835) Baroness van Rhemen, née Van Leyden;2 ? her daughter, Baroness Adriana Sophia Schimmelpenninck van der Oye, née Van Rhemen (1806-42), Huis de Poll, Voorst, near Zutphen;3 her son, W.A.A.J. Baron Schimmelpenninck van der Oye (1834-89), Huis de Poll, Voorst, as Jan van Scorel;4 his wife, Jacoba Christina Baroness Schimmelpenninck van der Oye-van Pallandt (1843-1931);5 by descent to Jonkheer Rudolf Everard Willem van Weede (1858-1933), The Hague, widower of Nicoline Adrienne Sophie Baroness Schimmelpenninck van der Oye (1865-1921);6 from whom on loan to the Centraal Museum, Utrecht, 1931-33;7…; ? the dealer J. Goudstikker, Amsterdam;8 …; purchased from a dealer by an unknown collector, USA, c. 1937;9 …; from ‘Mr van Aalst’, probably the heirs of Cornelis Johannes Karel van Aalst (1866-1939), Hoevelaken, fl. 140,000, to the dealer D. Katz, Dieren, 1940;10 the dealer D. Katz, Dieren, 1941;11 from whom purchased by Hans Posse (1879-1942) for Adolf Hitler’s Führermuseum, Linz, 1941;12 war recuperation, SNK, 9 October 1945;13 restituted to Benjamin and Nathan Katz, Dieren, fl. 35,000, 1947;14 by whom donated to the museum, 1948
Object number: SK-A-3518
Credit line: Gift of D. Katz, Dieren and N. Katz, Dieren
Copyright: Public domain
Maarten van Heemskerck (Heemskerk 1498 - Haarlem 1574)
Maarten van Heemskerck was born in 1498 in the small village of Heemskerk, a few miles north of Haarlem, as the son of the farmer Jacob Willemsz van Veen. Sometime between 1527 and 1530 he worked in Haarlem as an assistant in the workshop of Jan van Scorel, who had returned from Italy in 1524. In 1532, Heemskerck joined the Haarlem Guild of St Luke. Soon after 23 May 1532, he left Haarlem for Rome, arriving there before mid-July. At the end of 1536, or possibly the beginning of 1537, he returned to Haarlem, where he spent the rest of his life with the exception of a short stay in Amsterdam during the siege of Haarlem of 1572-73. Heemskerck was a wealthy man and was acquainted with many influential people in Haarlem, such as the magistrate and burgomaster Jan van Zuren, and the Van Berensteyn family. In Delft he had good connections with the humanist prior Cornelis Musius, whom he befriended soon after his return from Rome. Heemskerck’s first wife, Marie Jacobs Coningsdr, whom he probably married at the end of 1543, died in childbirth on 25 October 1544. Around 1550 he married his second wife, Marytgen Gerritsdr (?-1582), the daughter of former burgomaster Gerrit Adamz. She was a fairly wealthy woman and they lived in a large house on Donkere Spaarne in Haarlem between 1559 and 1567. Heemskerck remained childless. From 1551 to 1552 he was the warden of the Guild of St Luke in Haarlem, and was its dean in 1553-54. In 1553 he became a churchwarden of St Bavo’s in Haarlem, which he remained until his death. Heemskerck was a member of the city council from early 1562 until 22 August 1572. In 1570 he was relieved of paying municipal tax in recognition of his graphic work. He died on 1 October 1574 at the age of 76 and was buried in the Nieuwe- or Kerstkapel on the north side of St Bavo’s.
Not much is known about Heemskerck’s training before 1527. Van Mander tells us that his first teacher was Cornelis Willemsz of Haarlem. According to archival documents, Willemsz was a relatively successful painter, and was Jan van Scorel’s master as well. All we know of the second teacher Van Mander mentions, Jan Lukasz of Delft, is that he was the dean of the Delft Guild of St Luke in 1541.
An extremely productive artist, Heemskerck’s extant oeuvre consists of more than 100 paintings, two albums with Roman drawings and sketches, and around 600 print designs. No works are known from his time with Willemsz and Lukasz. Close similarities between Scorel and Heemskerck’s early work stand in the way of determining the latter’s earliest oeuvre. His Rijksmuseum Portrait of a man, possibly Pieter Gerritsz Bicker and Portrait of a Woman, possibly Anna Codde of 1529 (SK-A-3518 and SK-A-3519) are generally considered to be his earliest extant paintings. Heemskerck started to sign and date his paintings from 1531 onwards. His monumental 1532 St Luke painting the Virgin in the Frans Hals Museum in Haarlem was painted as a farewell gift to his fellow guild members upon his departure for Rome.15 Apart from the two Roman sketchbooks, four paintings survive from his period there, of which the 1535 Landscape with the Abduction of Helen in the Walters Art Gallery in Baltimore is the most monumental.16
Heemskerck was particularly active as a painter during the 1540s. Major commissions included the large 1538-42 St Lawrence Altarpiece for the Laurenskerk in Alkmaar, now in the Domkyrka in Linköping, Sweden,17 and the 1546 wings of the Drapers’ Altarpiece for the St Bavokerk in Haarlem, now in the Frans Hals Museum.18 Throughout his career he painted works for various religious institutions in Delft, of which the monumental 1559-60 Haarlem Ecce homo19 and the Brussels Entombment triptychs are important examples.20 At the same time Heemskerck executed many portraits of distinguished citizens, and painted numerous allegorical, biblical and mythological scenes. In 1548 he started his grand production of print designs that were brought into prints by professional engravers like Philips Galle, Cornelis Cort and D.V. Coornhert. From 1552 onwards Heemskerck became associated with the influential Antwerp printmaker and publisher Hieronymus Cock. His last paintings are dated 1567. He still remained active as a print designer after that date.
Little is known about Heemskerck’s workshop. The earliest reference to a pupil is a payment record of 1538 in which a 'servant of Master Maerten’ is mentioned in connection with the St Lawrence Altarpiece. Van Mander names three pupils: Jacob Rauwaert, who became an art dealer and collector and housed Heemskerck during the siege of Haarlem in 1572, Cornelis van Gouda, and Symon Jansz Kies of Amsterdam.
References
Van Mander 1604, fols. 244v-47r; Van der Willigen 1866, pp. 126-31; Preibisz 1911, pp. 3-55; Hoogewerff in Thieme/Becker XVI, 1923, pp. 227-29; Friedländer XIII, 1936, pp. 71-83; Hoogewerff IV, 1941-42, pp. 290-386; ENP XIII, 1975, pp. 40-45; Veldman 1977, pp. 11-18; Grosshans 1980, pp. 18-27; Veldman in Amsterdam 1986a, p. 190; Harrison 1987, pp. 2-99; Miedema I, 1994, pp. 236-49; Veldman in Turner 1996, XIV, pp. 291-94; Van Thiel-Stroman in coll. cat. Haarlem 2006, pp. 197-201
(Ilona van Tuinen)
The reception history of this portrait and its pendant, SK-A-3519 or fig. d, reflects the general underestimation of Maarten van Heemskerck’s work until relatively recently. When Martin and Moes published the portraits for the first time in 1912 they attributed them to Jan van Scorel, arguing that no other artist could have portrayed two people so well in the year 1529.21 As early as 1914, Beets suggested an attribution to Heemskerck, mainly on the basis of the stylistic similarities to his 1532 Virgin in St Luke Painting the Virgin.22 Most scholars remained reluctant to accept the Haarlem master as the creator of the Amsterdam paintings. It was not until De Jonge’s convincing article of 1932 that nearly all the specialists agreed with the attribution to Heemskerck,23 but it was only after Bruyn’s 1955 contribution to the debate that it ceased to be a point of discussion.24
These portraits belong to the earliest known works by Heemskerck, and are an astonishing example of his abilities in his early career, which exacerbates the frustration that we have no substantial knowledge of his training. The portraits also stand out within their period, as it was not common at the time to depict sitters amidst their daily activities in such a defined domestic interior.25
The man, who is looking at the beholder, is seated at a table and is in the process of handling his financial administration. According to the carved scroll on the bottom of the frame he is 34 years old. Judging from the word ‘betaelt’ (paid to) in his account book, he is paying his debts.26 Among his sand shaker, inkpot and other objects scattered on the table lies his personal seal with the device of an anchor. On the wall behind him hangs a prominent mirror, in which the man’s face is, curiously, shown in profile. It is likely that the mirror is a symbol for prudence.27 The composition of this portrait is reminiscent of Jan Gossart’s Portrait of a Merchant dated c. 1530 in the National Gallery of Art in Washington,28 but it resembles Portrait of a 42-year-old Man formerly in the Furst zu Wied Collection in Schloss Waldheim even more strongly.29 It is unclear how these paintings connect to Heemskerck’s Amsterdam Portrait of a Man, although the Waldheim picture is probably not by Heemskerck,30 and it seems likely that it was painted after the Amsterdam portrait.31
The woman is seated behind her spinning-wheel. According to the carved scroll on the bottom of the frame she is 26 years old. Unlike the man, she is not looking at the beholder but gazing at a point in the distance. The little basket on the wall is probably holding the balls of yarn already spun.32 Bruyn has pointed out the symbolism of the spinning-wheel, which must have been clear to the contemporary viewer. Spinning was a well-known symbol of the virtuous woman, as stated in Proverbs 31:13 and 19, a widely referenced and illustrated text at the time.33 It is possible that Heemskerck’s pictorial source was a print dated around 1520, probably from the circle of Lucas van Leyden, depicting a spinning woman (fig. a).34 It seems that Heemskerck used the Amsterdam portrait as the model for his larger Portrait of a Spinning Woman in the Museo Thyssen-Bornemisza in Madrid, dated around 1530 (fig. b).35 It is unclear what the function is of the golden letters AEN, which are embroidered on the distaff in the Rijksmuseum and the Madrid paintings.36
Thus, as a pair, the portraits reveal the sitters in the roles inherent to their gender: the honest, working (i.e. active) man and the pious, calm (i.e. passive) woman. As Bruyn has noted, this is accentuated by the different depictions of the space surrounding them: the wall behind the man runs diagonally to the picture plane as opposed to parallel in the woman’s portrait.37 Considering that the plinth behind the man is more elaborately decorated than in the companion piece, it seems that Heemskerck emphasised that both persons are sitting in different rooms and thus in their ‘own domains’. Interestingly, the woman is seated on the right side of her partner, a heraldic position that was usually reserved for the man. This could mean that the couple were betrothed but not yet married,38 though it might also be that the woman had a higher position in society.39
On the basis of the age of the sitters, Martin and Moes identified the man and woman as the Amsterdam mint master Pieter Gerritsz Bicker (1497-1567) and his wife Anna Codde (1504-?), ancestors of the mother of Baron Schmimmelpenninck van der Oye, in whose collection the portraits were until 1931.40 Various inconsistencies led to this identification being rejected for the first time in the 1976 Rijksmuseum collection catalogue. The birth dates of the Amsterdam couple, for instance, do not quite match the ages on the frames, and there is little resemblance between the pendant portraits and the anonymous 1560 portraits of Pieter Bicker and Anna Codde in the Amsterdams Historisch Museum.41 The differences between the birth dates and the ages stated on the frames are slight, however, and similar discrepancies are encountered in other portraits from the period. In 1986, Bruyn rightly urged caution when comparing the sitters with those in the later pendant pair, given the time span between 1529 and 1560.42 In 1987, Harrison pointed out that Pieter Bicker’s personal seal did not contain an anchor, nor does his coat of arms in the 1560 painting.43 It might, however, also be possible that the anchor is meant to be interpreted symbolically. In view of these factors, it seems that until a convincing new identification is proposed the traditional one cannot be dismissed entirely.
Infrared reflectography did not reveal traces of any underdrawing in either of the pendant portraits. Nonetheless, with the naked eye it is possible to see traces in the flesh tones of what seems to be an underdrawing in black brush. In the man’s face, the black line on his forehead might indicate that Heemskerck had initially intended the hairline to be lower.
Some significant changes took place in the woman’s head during the painting process. X-ray photographs reveal that a larger version of her cap and head exists under the present composition (fig. c). Traces of paint above the cap, visible to the naked eye, reveal that a different kind of headdress was indeed executed. The initial, larger one seems to have fallen on the woman’s back, much like the one in the print from Lucas van Leyden’s circle (fig. a). Indeed, the long, white slips of the woman’s cap in the Rijksmuseum painting seem to have been unplanned, later additions. The position of the woman’s original cap together with traces of an underdrawing or paint layer near the woman’s eyes, on her nose and to the left of her cap, all visible to the naked eye, reveal that Heemskerck had also initially intended the woman’s head to be tilted slightly more towards the right. This suggests that he had intended his sitter to be looking at her distaff. Interestingly, the spinning-wheel was not reserved, but overlaps the woman’s clothing. Considering the very specific position of the woman’s left hand, it does seem that Heemskerck had intended to include the spinning-wheel from the beginning. It is interesting to note that he also changed the position of the Virgin’s head in his 1532 St Luke Painting the Virgin in the Frans Hals Museum. In that painting, though, the adjustment was more radical.44
(Ilona van Tuinen)
Martin/Moes 1912, nos. 20-21 (as Jan van Scorel); Beets 1914b, p. 89-91; Friedländer XII, 1924, p. 207, nos. 384-85 (as Jan van Scorel); De Jonge 1932, pp. 145-60; De Jonge 1941, pp. 1-5; Hoogewerff IV, 1941-42, pp. 230-44 (as Master of the Bicker Portraits); Bruyn 1955, pp. 27-35; ENP XII, 1975, p. 128, nos. 384-85 (as Jan van Scorel); ENP XIII, 1975, p. 113; Veldman 1977, p. 27, note 25; Grosshans 1980, pp. 91-93, nos. 3-4, with earlier literature; Bruyn 1983b, pp. 217-18; Bruyn in Amsterdam 1986a, pp. 192-94, nos. 71.1-2; Harrison 1987, pp. 126-40, nos. 2-3, with earlier literature; Kloek in Van Os et al. 2000, pp. 144-45, no. 52
1948, pp. 45, nos. 1128 A1, 1128 A2; 1960, pp. 125-26, nos. 1128 A1, 1128 A2; 1976, p. 264, nos. A 3518, A 3519
I. van Tuinen, 2010, 'Maarten van Heemskerck, Portrait of a Man, possibly Pieter Gerritsz Bicker (1497-1567), Haarlem, 1529', in J.P. Filedt Kok (ed.), Early Netherlandish Paintings, online coll. cat. Amsterdam: hdl.handle.net/10934/RM0001.COLLECT.8651
(accessed 22 November 2024 16:41:47).