Dutch and Flemish Art: the Golden Age
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Gary Schwartz
Gary Schwartz A Corpus of Rembrandt Paintings as a Test Case for Connoisseurship Seldom has an exercise in connoisseurship had more going for it than the world-famous Rembrandt Research Project, the RRP. This group of connoisseurs set out in 1968 to establish a corpus of Rembrandt paintings in which doubt concer- ning attributions to the master was to be reduced to a minimum. In the present enquiry, I examine the main lessons that can be learned about connoisseurship in general from the first three volumes of the project. My remarks are limited to two central issues: the methodology of the RRP and its concept of authorship. Concerning methodology,I arrive at the conclusion that the persistent appli- cation of classical connoisseurship by the RRP, attended by a look at scientific examination techniques, shows that connoisseurship, while opening our eyes to some features of a work of art, closes them to others, at the risk of generating false impressions and incorrect judgments.As for the concept of authorship, I will show that the early RRP entertained an anachronistic and fatally puristic notion of what constitutes authorship in a Dutch painting of the seventeenth century,which skewed nearly all of its attributions. These negative judgments could lead one to blame the RRP for doing an inferior job. But they can also be read in another way. If the members of the RRP were no worse than other connoisseurs, then the failure of their enterprise shows that connoisseurship was unable to deliver the advertised goods. I subscribe to the latter conviction. This paper therefore ends with a proposal for the enrichment of Rembrandt studies after the age of connoisseurship. -
Openeclanewfieldinthehis- Work,Ret
-t horizonte Beitràge zu Kunst und Kunstwissenschaft horizons Essais sur I'art et sur son histoire orizzonti Saggi sull'arte e sulla storia dell'arte horizons Essays on Art and Art Research Hatje Cantz 50 Jahre Schweizerisches lnstitut flir Kunstwissenschaft 50 ans lnstitut suisse pour l'étude de I'art 50 anni lstituto svizzero di studi d'arte 50 Years Swiss lnstitute for Art Research Gary Schwartz The Clones Make the Master: Rembrandt in 1ó50 A high point brought low The year r65o was long considerecl a high point ot w-atershed fcrr Rem- a painr- orandt ls a painter. a date of qrear significance in his carecr' Of ng dated ,65o, n French auction catalogue of 18o6 writes: 'sa date prouve qu'il était dans sa plus grande force'" For John Smith, the com- pl.. of ih. firr, catalogue of the artistt paintings in r836, 165o was the golden age.' This convictíon surl ived well into zenith of Rembranclt's (It :]re tnentieth centufy. Ifl 1942, Tancred Borenius wfote: was about r65o one me-v sa)i that the characteristics of Rembrandt's final manner Rosenberg in r.rr e become cleady pronounced.'l 'This date,'wroteJakob cat. Paris, ro-rr r8o6 (l'ugt 'Rembrandt: life and wotk' (r9+8/ ry64),the standard texl on the master 1 Sale June t)).n\t.1o. Fr,,m thq sxns'6rjp1 rrl years, 'can be called the end of his middle period, or equallv Jt :,r many the entrv on thc painting i n the Corpns of this ''e11, the beginning of his late one.'a Bob Haak, in 1984, enriched Renbrandt paintings, r'ith thanks to the that of Rcmbrandt Research Project for show-ing ,r.rqe b1, contrasting Rembrandt's work aftet mid-centurl' with to me this and other sections of the draft 'Rembrandt not only kept his distance from the new -. -
Henry, Duke of Gloucester C
National Gallery of Art NATIONAL GALLERY OF ART ONLINE EDITIONS Dutch Paintings of the Seventeenth Century Adriaen Hanneman Dutch, c. 1603/1604 - 1671 Henry, Duke of Gloucester c. 1653 oil on canvas overall: 104.8 x 87 cm (41 1/4 x 34 1/4 in.) framed: 128.91 x 111.13 x 11.43 cm (50 3/4 x 43 3/4 x 4 1/2 in.) Andrew W. Mellon Collection 1937.1.51 ENTRY The splendidly dressed youth in this three-quarter-length portrait looks out assuredly at the viewer. With a commanding gesture, he rests his right hand on a baton before him while he turns to his left and places his near hand over the hilt of a gold-topped rapier. His buff-colored doublet, richly brocaded with gold and silver threads, has split sleeves that reveal a white blouse with large, pleated cuffs. His breastplate is crossed by a blue ribbon that lies under his flat, white collar and tassel. The broadly painted brown rock cliff behind him and the distant landscape vista to the left provide a neutral background for this elegant figure. The identities both of the sitter and of the artist who painted him have been the subject of much speculation in the literature. [1] Descamps, the first to mention the painting while it was in the possession of Count Heinrich von Brühl (1700–1763) in Dresden, identified the work as a portrait of Willem II by Adriaen Hanneman. [2] Smith cataloged it in 1831 as a portrait by Sir Anthony van Dyck (Flemish, 1599 - 1641), and most, although not all, subsequent writers followed suit. -
The Novel As Dutch Painting
one The Novel as Dutch Painting In a memorable review of Jane Austen’s Emma (1816), Walter Scott cele brated the novelist for her faithful representation of the familiar and the commonplace. Austen had, according to Scott, helped to perfect what was fundamentally a new kind of fiction: “the art of copying from nature as she really exists in the common walks of life.” Rather than “the splendid scenes of an imaginary world,” her novels presented the reader with “a correct and striking representation of that which [was] daily taking place around him.” Scott’s warm welcome of Emma has long been known to literary historians and fans of Austen alike. But what is less often remarked is the analogy to visual art with which he drove home the argument. In vividly conjuring up the “common incidents” of daily life, Austen’s novels also recalled for him “something of the merits of the Flemish school of painting. The subjects are not often elegant and certainly never grand; but they are finished up to nature, and with a precision which delights the reader.”1 Just what Flemish paintings did Scott have in mind? If it is hard to see much resemblance between an Austen novel and a van Eyck altarpiece or a mythological image by Rubens, it is not much easier to recognize the world of Emma in the tavern scenes and village festivals that constitute the typical subjects of an artist like David Teniers the Younger (figs. 1-1 and 1-2). Scott’s repeated insistence on the “ordinary” and the “common” in Austen’s art—as when he welcomes her scrupulous adherence to “common inci dents, and to such characters as occupy the ordinary walks of life,” or de scribes her narratives as “composed of such common occurrences as may have fallen under the observation of most folks”—strongly suggests that it is seventeenth-century genre painting of which he was thinking; and Teniers was by far the best known Flemish painter of such images.2 (He had in fact figured prominently in the first Old Master exhibit of Dutch and 1 2 chapter one Figure 1-1. -
Evolution and Ambition in the Career of Jan Lievens (1607-1674)
ABSTRACT Title: EVOLUTION AND AMBITION IN THE CAREER OF JAN LIEVENS (1607-1674) Lloyd DeWitt, Ph.D., 2006 Directed By: Prof. Arthur K. Wheelock, Jr. Department of Art History and Archaeology The Dutch artist Jan Lievens (1607-1674) was viewed by his contemporaries as one of the most important artists of his age. Ambitious and self-confident, Lievens assimilated leading trends from Haarlem, Utrecht and Antwerp into a bold and monumental style that he refined during the late 1620s through close artistic interaction with Rembrandt van Rijn in Leiden, climaxing in a competition for a court commission. Lievens’s early Job on the Dung Heap and Raising of Lazarus demonstrate his careful adaptation of style and iconography to both theological and political conditions of his time. This much-discussed phase of Lievens’s life came to an end in 1631when Rembrandt left Leiden. Around 1631-1632 Lievens was transformed by his encounter with Anthony van Dyck, and his ambition to be a court artist led him to follow Van Dyck to London in the spring of 1632. His output of independent works in London was modest and entirely connected to Van Dyck and the English court, thus Lievens almost certainly worked in Van Dyck’s studio. In 1635, Lievens moved to Antwerp and returned to history painting, executing commissions for the Jesuits, and he also broadened his artistic vocabulary by mastering woodcut prints and landscape paintings. After a short and successful stay in Leiden in 1639, Lievens moved to Amsterdam permanently in 1644, and from 1648 until the end of his career was engaged in a string of important and prestigious civic and princely commissions in which he continued to demonstrate his aptitude for adapting to and assimilating the most current style of his day to his own somber monumentality. -
Taking Dutch Art Seriously: Now and Next? Author(S): MARIËT WESTERMANN Source: Studies in the History of Art, Vol
National Gallery of Art Taking Dutch Art Seriously: Now and Next? Author(s): MARIËT WESTERMANN Source: Studies in the History of Art, Vol. 74, Symposium Papers LI: Dialogues in Art History, from Mesopotamian to Modern: Readings for a New Century (2009), pp. 258-270 Published by: National Gallery of Art Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/42622727 Accessed: 11-04-2020 11:41 UTC REFERENCES Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article: https://www.jstor.org/stable/42622727?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms National Gallery of Art is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Studies in the History of Art This content downloaded from 85.72.204.160 on Sat, 11 Apr 2020 11:41:16 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms /';-=09 )(8* =-0/'] This content downloaded from 85.72.204.160 on Sat, 11 Apr 2020 11:41:16 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms MARIËT WESTERMANN New York University Taking Dutch Art Seriously : Now and Nextl vative, staid, respectable discipline, some- posium with mounting anxiety. -
ABRAHAM BOSSCHAERT (Middelburg 1612/13 – 1643 Utrecht)
CS0253 ABRAHAM BOSSCHAERT (Middelburg 1612/13 – 1643 Utrecht) A Still Life of Flowers laid on a Table Signed on the front edge of the table, lower right: ABosschaert On panel, 10 x 12⅝ ins. (25.5 x 32 cm) PROVENANCE Sale, Sotheby’s, London, 16 March 1966, lot 60, where bought by H. Terry-Engell Gallery, London, 1966 Gebr. Douwes, Amsterdam, 1967 Sale, Amsterdam (Paul Brandt), 20-23 May 1969, lot 3 (illustrated in colour) Kunsthandel P. de Boer, Amsterdam, September 1986 Richard Green, London P. Hoogendijk, Baarn, 1987 Private collection, the Netherlands, until 2014 EXHIBITED London, Terry Engell Gallery, Winter Exhibition, 1966-67, no. II, illustrated Delft, Oude Kunst en Antiekbeurs (Douwes), 1967, (illustrated in guide) Delt, Oude Kunst en Antiekbeurs (Hoogendijk), 1986 Maastricht, Pictura Fine Art Fair (Hoogendijk), 1987, p. 156, (illustrated in colour) LITERATURE Masters of Middelburg: exhibition in honour of Laurens J. Bol, exh. cat. by Sam Segal et. al., Kunsthandel K. & V. Waterman, B.V., Amsterdam, March 1984, p. 75, cat. no. 23 (illustrated) E. Gemar-Koeltzsch, et. al., Holländische Stillebenmaler im 17. Jahrhundert, Lingen, 1995, vol. I, p. 158, no. 50/1 NARRATIVE This still life by Abraham Bosschaert depicts a few cut flowers lying casually on a wooden table. They do not appear to be arranged in any formal sense, rather one gets the impression that they have just been freshly picked and brought indoors. A yellow iris, a red and white striped carnation and a yellow and red flamed tulip, together with a sprig of forget-me-nots, comprise this intimate floral display. -
1. Compare and Contrast the High Renaissance Period with the Baroque Period
Preliminary Handout: David and Goliath Summarize the story of David and Goliath: How is David significant in Medici Florence? High Renaissance Period The Baroque Period Dates of the period: Dates of the period: Locations: Locations: Influences on the period: Influences on the period: Stylistic Characteristics: Stylistic Characteristics: Compare Donatello's David, Michelangelo's David, and Bernini’s David Donatello's David Michelangelo's David Bernini’s David Date Period Material Height Nude? Contrapposto? Moment in story: David represents... Original location: Stylistic Characteristics: Short Answer Essays: Please write a concise paragraph essay answering each of the questions below. You will work in groups and do a short two-minute presentation to the class on one question. 1. Compare and contrast the High Renaissance period with the Baroque period. What are the important influences and stylistic differences? 2. What are the primary defining elements of Italian Baroque sculpture and architecture? Select one Baroque sculpture and one Baroque building in Italy and discuss how they exemplify the style. 3. Compare and contrast Donatello, Michelangelo, and Bernini's David. How does each work embody the stylistic principles of its age? 4. Describe Bernini's Apollo and Daphne. What moment does it depict in Ovid's myth? Why would the Church approve of such a work? 5. How has Bernini drawn from his knowledge of theater, writing plays, and producing stage designs to create an emotionally dramatic experience for worshipers that involve architecture, sculpture, and painting at the Cornaro chapel? 6. How is Gianlorenzo Bernini’s work typical of the Baroque period? Give several examples of his work that support your answer. -
The Distinctiveness of Bohemian Baroque: a Study in the Architecture of Central Europe, C.1680-C.1720
artificialhorizon.org The distinctiveness of Bohemian baroque: a study in the architecture of Central Europe, c.1680-c.1720 RALPH HARRINGTON Between the late seventeenth century and the first years of the eighteenth the architecture of Bohemia underwent a marked transformation as the Italian influences that had been dominant until around 1690 gave way before Southern German and Austrian influences. In 1680 there were 28 architects of Italian origin working in Prague, compared with seven recorded as coming from northern Europe.1 The rapidity with which German influence displaced Italian can be gauged from the fact that by the later 1690s the proportions were reversed, largely as a result of the great immigration of architects, particularly from southern Germany, which took place from 1690 to 1700. This influx of talent ensured that, despite long-established Italian architectural dominance, the great flowering of the Austrian baroque which took place in the 1680s had rapid repercussions in Bohemia, where its influence interacted with local influences to produce a style of architecture altogether distinct from that prevalent in Austria itself. The first phase of the Austrian baroque had itself been dependent on Italian artists, and a large number of architects, sculptors and decorators originating in Italy made vital contributions to the development of the style known as ‘Imperial Baroque’. This Austrian imperial architectural style, dynamic in its manipulation of volumes and planes, grandiloquent in detail but massively authoritarian in overall character, had reached its fullest expression around 1700, finding its greatest exponents in two Italian-trained native architects, Johann Fischer von Erlach (1656- 1723) and Lucas von Hildebrandt (1688-1745). -
Map As Tapestry: Science and Art in Pedro Teixeira's 1656 Representation of Madrid
The Art Bulletin ISSN: 0004-3079 (Print) 1559-6478 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rcab20 Map as Tapestry: Science and Art in Pedro Teixeira's 1656 Representation of Madrid Jesús Escobar To cite this article: Jesús Escobar (2014) Map as Tapestry: Science and Art in Pedro Teixeira's 1656 Representation of Madrid, The Art Bulletin, 96:1, 50-69, DOI: 10.1080/00043079.2014.877305 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00043079.2014.877305 Published online: 25 Apr 2014. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 189 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rcab20 Download by: [Northwestern University] Date: 22 September 2016, At: 08:04 Map as Tapestry: Science and Art in Pedro Teixeira’s 1656 Representation of Madrid Jesus Escobar “Mantua of the Carpentana, or Madrid, Royal City” reads the attributed to the overreach of Philip IV’s royal favorite and Latin inscription on the banderole that hovers above Pedro prime minister, Gaspar de Guzman, the count-duke of Teixeira’s monumental map of the Spanish capital, the Topo- Olivares (1587–1645). In 1640, in the midst of the Thirty graphia de la Villa de Madrid (Topography of the town of Years’ War, rebellions arose in Catalonia and Portugal, com- Madrid) (Fig. 1). The text refers to a place from the distant pounding the monarchy’s ongoing financial crises and lead- Roman past, the purported origin of Madrid, as well as the ing to Olivares’s ouster. -
The Drawings of Cornelis Visscher (1628/9-1658) John Charleton
The Drawings of Cornelis Visscher (1628/9-1658) John Charleton Hawley III Jamaica Plain, MA M.A., History of Art, Institute of Fine Arts – New York University, 2010 B.A., Art History and History, College of William and Mary, 2008 A Dissertation presented to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Virginia in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Art and Architectural History University of Virginia May, 2015 _______________________________________ _______________________________________ _______________________________________ _______________________________________ Table of Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................................. i Acknowledgements.......................................................................................................................... ii Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1: The Life of Cornelis Visscher .......................................................................................... 3 Early Life and Family .................................................................................................................... 4 Artistic Training and Guild Membership ...................................................................................... 9 Move to Amsterdam ................................................................................................................. -
Internacional… . De Hispanistas… …
ASOCIACIÓN………. INTERNACIONAL… . DE HISPANISTAS… …. ASOCIACIÓN INTERNACIONAL DE HISPANISTAS 16/09 bibliografía publicado en colaboración con FUNDACIÓN DUQUES DE SORIA © Asociación Internacional de Hispanistas © Fundación Duques de Soria ISBN: 978-88-548-3311-1 Editora: Blanca L. de Mariscal Supervisión técnica: Claudia Lozano Maquetación: Debora Vaccari Índice EL HISPANISMO EN EL MUNDO: BIBLIOGRAFÍA Y CRÓNICA ÁFRICA Argelia, Marruecos y Túnez...................................................................................... 11 Egipto........................................................................................................................ 13 AMÉRICA Argentina.................................................................................................................... 14 Canadá........................................................................................................................ 22 Chile........................................................................................................................... 25 Estados Unidos........................................................................................................... 29 México........................................................................................................................ 41 Perú.............................................................................................................................49 Venezuela..................................................................................................................