Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilNuméros39Assumption of the Virgin by P.P. ...

Sommaire - Document précédent -

Assumption of the Virgin by P.P. Rubens: On a Modello from 1611

Jean-Pierre De Bruyn

Résumés

English Français Nederlands

Une Assomption de la Vierge, peinte vers 1611-1613 par Rubens pour le maître-autel de la cathédrale d'Anvers, fait désormais partie des collections du Kunsthistorisches Museum à Vienne. Le 22 avril 1611, Rubens présenta deux modelli. Celui conservé au Musée de l'Ermitage à Saint-Pétersbourg est largement reconnu par les historiens de l’art comme l'un des deux modelli. Le second n'a pas encore été identifié de manière concluante. L'Assomption de la Vierge de Rubens, faisant partie de la collection royale à Londres, réalisée vers 1613 ou plus tard, suscite de vifs débats. C'est pourquoi le panneau, récemment découvert à Anvers et inédit, est particulièrement intéressant. Des analyses dendrochronologiques menées par l’IRPA ont révélé que le panneau en bois, composé de trois planches de chêne, provenait d'un arbre abattu vers 1590. Notre modello se distingue de la version de Londres, notamment par la position de la paume droite de la Vierge tournée vers le haut, ainsi que par la présence de deux anges se tenant par le bras à droite dans un nuage. Le cas de l'Assomption de la Vierge de Rubens de 1611 a attiré l'attention de plusieurs historiens de l'art, dont beaucoup rejettent le panneau de Londres, daté ultérieurement. La comparaison du modello de l'Ermitage avec notre tableau offre des analogies intéressantes, notamment dans la représentation des jeunes femmes à gauche. Les ressemblances dans les visages des anges portant la Vierge, et en particulier, celui à la chevelure blonde, sont frappantes.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

  • 1 Panel, 490 × 325 cm; Freedberg 1984, p. 172-181, no. 43. The modello in The Hague (panel, 90 × 61 c (...)

1The actual Assumption of the Virgin was painted by Rubens for the High Altar of Antwerp Cathedral in 1625˗26.1 It is considered one of the highlights in a series of Assumptions by Rubens of which the modello (1611) under examination is the earliest known version.

  • 2 Panel, 458 × 297 cm (inv. 518). Freedberg 1984, no. 37.
  • 3 Freedberg 1984, p. 150; Van de Velde 1975, p. 245-277.

2Indeed, Rubens’ Assumption of the Virgin [fig. 1] in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna2 was most probably the first choice for the High Altar. Were the financial means insufficient3 or, less likely, was it feared that this commission could not compete with the artist’s Descent from the Cross, a work in progress whose central panel was finished in September 1612? The answer to this question remains unclear. It is in any case more probable that the painting, once delivered, was too small, a fact that calls to mind a similar problem which arose during the installation of the 1625˗26 Assumption (see below).

[Fig. 1]

[Fig. 1]
Agrandir Original (jpeg, 595k)

Fig. 1. Peter Paul Rubens, Assumption of the Virgin, c. 1611˗13, oil on panel, 458 × 297 cm (Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, inv. 518).

© Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum.

  • 4 Antwerp, Archives of the Cathedral, Acta Capitularia, III, p. 71-72; Baudouin 1977, p. 368, note 34 (...)
  • 5 Antwerp, Archives of the Cathedral, Acta Capitularia, III, p. 75; Baudouin 1977, p. 368, note 35: 2 (...)

3The first commission dates from 1611. On 24 March of that year, Otto Venius submitted a sketch to the Chapter of Antwerp Cathedral, representing Our Lord Inviting His Bride from Lebanon to Her Coronation.4 On 22 April 1611, Rubens (successfully) submitted two modelli,5 clearly a result of the negotiations following the meeting with Otto Venius. We do not know of any other competitors.

4We may reasonably assume that a combination of elements from both modelli submitted by Rubens resulted in the creation of the altarpiece now in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna.

5Today, three modelli can be considered for this commission. Two of them are well known and have been published by, among others, David Freedberg.

  • 6 Inv. 1703. Freedberg 1984, no. 46. Another version in de Mirimonde 1977, p. 97-197, fig. 68, most p (...)

6The first is a painting on panel (transferred to canvas, 106 × 78 cm) in the Hermitage Museum in St Petersburg [fig. 2].6 It shows a combination of the Assumption and Coronation of the Virgin and is widely accepted as one of the two modelli Rubens submitted to the canons of the Cathedral of Our Lady in Antwerp on 22 April 1611. X-ray analysis has shown that in the final version in Vienna, a group of cypresses is visible beneath the paint surface in the background of the composition, comparable with those in the Hermitage modello.

[Fig. 2]

[Fig. 2]
Agrandir Original (jpeg, 623k)

Peter Paul Rubens, Assumption of the Virgin, 1611, oil on panel, transferred to canvas, 106 × 78 cm (St Petersburg, Hermitage, inv. 1703).

© St Petersburg, Hermitage.

  • 7 Freedberg 1984, no. 35. Several copies are known, e.g. a painting after the upper half of the compo (...)
  • 8 Inv. 378, Cat. 166. Freedberg 1984, no. 38. Canvas, 500 × 338.5 cm. Brussels, Royal Museums of Fine (...)

7The second modello has not been convincingly identified yet. An Assumption of the Virgin (panel, 102 × 66 cm) in the Royal Collection in London has been the subject of much discussion.7 The upper part recurs with minor variations in the Vienna panel. The lower part can be compared with Rubens’ Assumption of the Virgin in the Royal Museums of Fine Arts of Belgium in Brussels8 dating from about 1615-16.

8Neither modello refers to the final version of Vienna which indeed shows a combination between the upper part of the panel in London and the lower part of the modello in St Petersburg. With such clear differences as, for instance, two ‘floating’ angels to the left of the Virgin on the Vienna altar which are absent on the London panel. Noteworthy are several pentimenti, alterations to the position of the head of the apostle in the foreground on the right and in the right hand of the figure in green holding the slab of the tomb.

9X-ray examination of the upper half of the Vienna panel has revealed that a first version of the work was closer to the London panel, for instance in the rendering of the Virgin’s right palm, which originally appears to have been turned upwards. In its current appearance, it refers to our modello (see below). Freedberg suggests that the Vienna altarpiece may have been repainted in its present form by Rubens at the time of its installation in the Houtappel Chapel. Although an interesting theory, it nonetheless seems likely that these changes were made during the production of the altarpiece about 1613.

  • 9 Frans Baudouin, Correspondence with Sir Oliver Millar, 27 July 1984: (…) from the dendro-chronologi (...)

10Therefore, the modello that emerged in a private collection is important. It represents the Assumption of the Virgin [fig. 3]. The similarities with the London panel are obvious. But there are some important differences which are interesting in this discussion. The latter picture especially drew our attention after dendrochronological research showed that the wooden panel (consisting of three oak planks) [fig. 4] came from a tree cut down in 1590.9 In about 1610 they would have been in perfect condition to be used. There is a file at the Royal Institute for Cultural Heritage (KIK-IRPA) in Brussels with all the details concerning IR, UV and dendrochronology of our panel.

[Fig. 3]

[Fig. 3]
Agrandir Original (jpeg, 709k)

Peter Paul Rubens, Assumption of the Virgin, 1611, oil on panel, 105 × 66 cm (Antwerp, Private Collection).

[Fig. 4]

[Fig. 4]
Agrandir Original (jpeg, 571k)

Peter Paul Rubens, Assumption of the Virgin, 1611 (Antwerp, Private Collection). Reverse, panel consisting of three planks.

  • 10 Ibidem: (the painting) represents the earliest (or at least an early) state of the modello in Bucki (...)

11Frans Baudouin, who was aware of the above research, as was Prof. R.A. d’Hulst, saw the picture in the 1980s and immediately recognised its importance.10 Our panel differs from the London version, for instance, in the Virgin’s right palm (turned upwards) and in two angels holding each other’s arm appearing to the right in a cloud [fig. 5-6].

[Fig. 5]

[Fig. 5]
Agrandir Original (jpeg, 319k)

Peter Paul Rubens, Assumption of the Virgin, c. 1613, oil on panel, 102 × 66 cm (London, Buckingham Palace, Collection of H.M. the King). The Virgin’s right palm turned downward.

© H.M. the King.

[Fig. 6]

[Fig. 6]
Agrandir Original (jpeg, 429k)

Peter Paul Rubens, Assumption of the Virgin, 1611 (Antwerp, Private Collection). The Virgin’s right palm turned upward.

12These angels are only absent in the London panel and reappear in a similar pose in the in the final version in Vienna. Another angel to the left, at the same level as the Virgin’s floating dress, under the arms of a praying angel, is also missing on the London version. The backwards leaning angel with raised arm has a wing and therefore is different from its counterpart in London. On the basis of style, Freedberg suggested that the panel in London was younger than the modello in St Petersburg and there can indeed be no discussion about this.

13Julius Held did not even withhold the possibility of the London panel being the so-called second modello from 1611 and this was confirmed by several other scholars.

14This puts our modello in ‘pole position’.

  • 11 Dimensions: 627 × 442 mm; signed: Petrus Paul. Rubbens pinxit / S. à Bolswert sculpsit. Freedberg 1 (...)

15The London panel refers clearly to the engraving by Bolswert11 that bears the following text: R.P. GVARDIANO F.F. MINORVM REG: OBS: ANTVERPIAE, CETERISQVE EIVSDEM CONVENTVS ALVMNIS (EX GENIO ORDINIS SERAPHICI) FERVIDIS HONORIS PARTHENII ZELATORIBVS: HANC DEIPARENTIS GLORIOSE IN CAELVM ASCENDENTIS EFFIGIEM IN DEBITAE OBSERVANTIAE SYMBOLVM MARTINVS VAN DEN ENDEN D.C.Q.

  • 12 Logan and Plomp 2005, cat. 43.
  • 13 Freedberg 1984, no. 36, fig. 86; Logan and Plomp 2005, no. 43, repr.
  • 14 E.g. Baudouin 1977, p. 91.
  • 15 Logan and Plomp 2005, no. 43: This oil sketch (the Hermitage panel) and another one now lost were m (...)

16The question of Rubens’ Assumption of the Virgin of 1611 also drew the attention of, among others, Anne-Marie Logan and Michiel C. Plomp.12 They were not aware of the existence of our modello. In their catalogue they pay close attention to a drawing in the Albertina in Vienna,13 which is indeed related to our Assumption of the Virgin. This drawing seems to be the only one attributed to Rubens that shows an ascending Virgin. The energy needed for lifting is convincingly visualised by many angels acting as sources of power. This sheet can be placed only approximately within Rubens’ early Assumption scenes of about 1611˗16. It has been suggested that this sheet could be related to the modello, considered lost, for Antwerp Cathedral.14 The authors eventually accept that the Hermitage modello is one of the two submitted in 1611 to the Chapter of Antwerp Cathedral, rejecting the London panel as the so-called second modello.15 They reflect on the possibility that the drawing in Vienna was part of the preparation stage. On the other hand, not all scholars are convinced that the sheet in Vienna is by Rubens. Benesch considered it to be by Van Dyck; Freedberg and Held accepted the attribution to Rubens. Personally, I am inclined to follow Logan and Plomp.

17Rubens received the commission for the decoration of the High Altar for Antwerp Cathedral, so much is certain. The result is the panel (458 × 297 cm) which is now in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna. This version is strikingly smaller than the Assumption (panel, 490 × 325 cm), painted about ten years later.

  • 16 Freedberg 1984, no. 43a. The engraving by Bolswert, not illustrated in Freedberg, is well known.

18This so-called ‘second commission’ dates from 16 February 1618. As a result of this commission, two modelli were again submitted. Freedberg has suggested that the modelli from 1611 were taken into consideration, but this remains doubtful. See, for instance, the sketch in The Hague.16 Rubens’ second Assumption was paid for by deacon Johannes del Rio (1555˗1624) who, in return, was granted a tomb in the northern ambulatory of Antwerp Cathedral (recorded 22 November 1619). Rubens started painting probably in 1625 (del Rio died the year before). On 11 May 1626 Michiel Vriendt was paid for the enlargement of the panel which seemed to be too small for the altar constructed by Robrecht and Jan de Nole. This is likely the same problem that arose more than ten years earlier. Finally, Rubens received a last payment on 10 March 1627. To this day, this Assumption decorates the High Altar of Antwerp Cathedral.

19We may suppose that for the realisation of the first commission, the panel now in Vienna, a combination was made (at the request of the canons?) of the lower part of the Hermitage panel (the first modello) and the upper part of the painting under examination (the second modello).

  • 17 Freedberg 1984, no. 37 stipulates (p. 152): Rubens may thus well have begun painting the lower half (...)
  • 18 This chapel was certainly finished by 12 January 1626, the day its founder died, Godefridus Houtapp (...)

20A commission as important as the High Altar of Antwerp Cathedral was very prestigious. Certainly for an ambitious artist like Rubens, who had recently (1609) returned from Italy. Thanks to the intervention of Otto Van Veen (?), Rubens probably started the production of this important painting in 1611.17 It remained in his possession until about 1620, when it was bought by the Houtappel family and installed in the Mary Chapel in the newly built Jesuit Church in Antwerp.18 In 1776 the painting was finally added to the collection of the Austrian emperor after the abolition of the Jesuit Order (1773).

CONCLUSION

21The panel under examination dates from the period in which Rubens presented two modelli to the canons of Antwerp Cathedral (1611). See details [fig. 7-9].

[Fig. 7]

[Fig. 7]
Agrandir Original (jpeg, 704k)

Peter Paul Rubens, Assumption of the Virgin, 1611 (Antwerp, Private Collection). Detail.

[Fig. 8]

[Fig. 8]
Agrandir Original (jpeg, 440k)

Peter Paul Rubens, Assumption of the Virgin, 1611 (Antwerp, Private Collection). Detail.

[Fig. 9]

[Fig. 9]
Agrandir Original (jpeg, 389k)

Peter Paul Rubens, Assumption of the Virgin, 1611 (Antwerp, Private Collection). Detail.

22See also the detail of the imprimatura [fig. 10].

[Fig. 10]

[Fig. 10]
Agrandir Original (jpeg, 433k)

Peter Paul Rubens, Assumption of the Virgin, 1611 (Antwerp, Private Collection). Detail imprimatura.

23The rendering of Mary’s right hand and of some cherubs is interesting. Has this something to do with changes made after a first evaluation by the Chapter? We also refer to similar changes made in the rendering of Mary’s palm in the Vienna picture.

24Whatever the circumstances were for the creation of our Assumption of the Virgin, it is undoubtedly the earliest known version and can be considered the ‘second modello’ for the High Altar of Antwerp Cathedral (1611).

PROVENANCE19

  • 19 Provenances:

25We can only refer to Fernand Lefère, notary in Brussels (letter dated 13 June 1996), who confirms that our modello was in the possession of the Sisters of the Augustine Order in Brussels (Berlaymont site), probably a donation in the 1620s by Marguerite de Lalaing, founder of the convent.

ICONOGRAPHY

  • 20 Jacopo da Voragine, Legenda Aurea (Golden Legend), about 1255-66. The lack of historicity met with (...)

26The story of the Virgin’s Assumption comes from the Legenda Aurea.20 When the Virgin Mary was 60 years old, the angel Gabriel appeared to her, saying (…) in three days thou shall part from your body. Your son is expecting his honourable Mother. The Virgin begged for her sons and brothers, the Apostles, to be gathered so she could see them one last time before dying, and afterwards be buried by them after having returned her soul to the Lord.

27The angel answered: the Apostles shall come and shall bury you (…). John the Evangelist was brought from Ephesus to the house of Mary. Thanks to his intervention, the other Apostles were also brought on a cloud to Mary’s house. After Mary died, the Lord spoke to the Apostles: Carry her body to the Valley of Josaphat and place it in the tomb you will find there. Three days after the burial, Jesus appeared in a crowd of angels; the archangel Michael led Mary’s soul to the Lord (…) which immediately became one with her body that stood from the grave. It was brought to a heavenly palace by a crowd of angels.

28This is the moment captured by Rubens.

29We can recognise two young women, probably a reference to the (three) young virgins that washed Mary’s body after her death three days earlier. Twelve men, the Apostles, are also represented in the lower part of the composition. One of them is Paul. Thomas, who actually did not witness the scene (he arrived later), is also present.

30An essential element in this story is that Jesus did not want his Mother’s body to be given over to putrefaction and worms. His own flesh was lifted above the stars (Ascension of Christ); the same had to hold for the flesh of his Mother, from whom he was born.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Baudouin 1977 F. Baudouin, P.P. Rubens, Antwerp, 1977.

de Mirimonde 1977 A.P. de Mirimonde, Rubens et la Musique, in Jaarboek Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten Antwerpen, 1977, p. 97-197.

Freedberg 1984 D. Freedberg, Rubens. The Life of Christ after the Passion (Corpus Rubenianum Ludwig Burchard, 7), 1984.

Grieten and Bungeneers 1996 S. Grieten and J. Bungeneers (ed.), De Onze-Lieve-Vrouwekathedraal van Antwerpen. Kunstpatrimonium van het Ancien régime (Inventaris van het kunstpatrimonium van de provincie Antwerpen, 3), Antwerp, 1996.

Held 1980 J.S. Held, The Oil Sketches of Peter Paul Rubens, I-II, Princeton, 1980.

Logan and Plomp 2005 A.M. Logan and M.C. Plomp, Peter Paul Rubens. The drawings, New York, 2005, cat. 43.

Van de Velde 1975 C. Van de Velde, Rubens’ Hemelvaart van Maria in de Kathedraal te Antwerpen, in Jaarboek Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten Antwerpen, 1975, p. 245-277.

Voorhelm-Schneevoogt 1873 C.G. Voorhelm-Schneevoogt, Catalogue des Estampes Gravées d’après P.P. Rubens, Haarlem, 1873, p. 76, no. 18.

Zuidweg 1948 J.J.A. Zuidweg, De duizend en een nacht der heiligenlegenden. De Legenda aurea van Jacobus de Voragine, Amsterdam, 1948.

Haut de page

Notes

1 Panel, 490 × 325 cm; Freedberg 1984, p. 172-181, no. 43. The modello in The Hague (panel, 90 × 61 cm) and a version in Washington (panel, 125.4 × 94.2 cm) under no. 43a and 43b. See also Grieten and Bungeneers 1996, no. 956.

2 Panel, 458 × 297 cm (inv. 518). Freedberg 1984, no. 37.

3 Freedberg 1984, p. 150; Van de Velde 1975, p. 245-277.

4 Antwerp, Archives of the Cathedral, Acta Capitularia, III, p. 71-72; Baudouin 1977, p. 368, note 34: 24 Martii 1611 / Comparuit D. Octavio, pictor istius civitatis, et exhibuit dominis projectum sive modellum certae picturae et historiae (quae Dominum nostrum Sponsam suam de Libano provocantem ad coronam continet) in summo altari chori nostril ponendae, et placuit dominis idem projectum et historia, et deputatus est cum Domino decano dominus thesaurarius ad agendum desuper cum aedituis ecclesiae, acturi insuper super electione pictoris dictam tabulam picture. (D. Octavio [Otto Van Veen], a painter from the city appeared for us and showed the gentlemen a modello of a painting, a history representing Our Lord inviting his Bride from Lebanon to her Coronation to be placed in the High Altar in the choir. Painting and subject pleased the gentlemen and together with the dean the treasurer was delegated to negotiate with the ‘synod’ e.g. about the choice of the painter who would receive the commission.)

5 Antwerp, Archives of the Cathedral, Acta Capitularia, III, p. 75; Baudouin 1977, p. 368, note 35: 22 Aprilis 1611 / Exhibita sunt a N. Vriendts Aedituo ecclesiae nostrae Petri Rubenii pictoris (qui etiam postae in capitulo comparuit) duo modella continentia historiam Assumptionis B. Mariae Virginis, diverso modo depicta, quae tanquam nihil inhonestatis aut ecclesiae traditionibus continentia, placuerunt dominis, mansuris nihilominus in optione eligendipraestantissum pictorum (To N. Vriendts, member of the ‘synod’ were shown two modelli by the painter Peter Rubens (who also appeared before the Chapter), representing the history of the Assumption of our blessed Mother Virgin, painted in a different way and not interfering with the reverent church. The modelli pleased the Chapter who nevertheless reserved the option to choose the best of the painters (paintings ?).)

6 Inv. 1703. Freedberg 1984, no. 46. Another version in de Mirimonde 1977, p. 97-197, fig. 68, most probably the painting Burchard saw at Joseph Hirsch in Berlin (canvas, 97 × 66 cm).

7 Freedberg 1984, no. 35. Several copies are known, e.g. a painting after the upper half of the composition, Wilton House, Wiltshire, the Earls of Pembroke, panel, 34.3 × 23.5 cm, provenance: Thomas, 8th Earl of Pembroke (1656-1733), attributed to Rubens. A copy of the lower half in Chiswick House, panel, 55.9 × 67 cm, provenance: Sotheby’s, London, 7 November 1951, lot 36 (attributed to Rubens).

8 Inv. 378, Cat. 166. Freedberg 1984, no. 38. Canvas, 500 × 338.5 cm. Brussels, Royal Museums of Fine Arts of Belgium. Provenance: Church of the Discalced Carmelites, Brussels (High Altar). When this church was consecrated on 15 October 1614 in the presence of the Archdukes, this huge painting had not yet been installed.

9 Frans Baudouin, Correspondence with Sir Oliver Millar, 27 July 1984: (…) from the dendro-chronological examination (Brussels, Koninklijk Instituut van het Kunstpatrimonium), there is no doubt that the wood, (…) dates from 1590, and that it probably was ready to be used as a panel to be painted, about 1610-12.

10 Ibidem: (the painting) represents the earliest (or at least an early) state of the modello in Buckingham Palace, before it was slightly changed (somewhat) later by Rubens.

11 Dimensions: 627 × 442 mm; signed: Petrus Paul. Rubbens pinxit / S. à Bolswert sculpsit. Freedberg 1984, no. 35, 6, fig. 84; Voorhelm-Schneevoogt 1873, p. 76, no. 18.

12 Logan and Plomp 2005, cat. 43.

13 Freedberg 1984, no. 36, fig. 86; Logan and Plomp 2005, no. 43, repr.

14 E.g. Baudouin 1977, p. 91.

15 Logan and Plomp 2005, no. 43: This oil sketch (the Hermitage panel) and another one now lost were most likely submitted to the canons of Antwerp Cathedral on 22 April 1611, for consideration for a new painting on the high altar. With reference to Held 1980, p. 509, no. 374.

16 Freedberg 1984, no. 43a. The engraving by Bolswert, not illustrated in Freedberg, is well known.

17 Freedberg 1984, no. 37 stipulates (p. 152): Rubens may thus well have begun painting the lower half of the work very shortly after 1611.

18 This chapel was certainly finished by 12 January 1626, the day its founder died, Godefridus Houtappel, who built it with the assistance of his niece, Anna ‘s Grevens, as confirmed by his epitaph in the crypt below the chapel (cf. Freedberg 1984, p. 151). Construction of the chapel probably started about 1620 (interestingly, Cornelia Boot, Godefridus’s wife, died on 17 September that same year).

19 Provenances:

    1. Our panel: Brussels, Order of the Augustine Sisters (Berlaymont), probably donated by Marguerite de Lalaing in the 1620s; Belgium, private collection (since the 1980s).

    2. London panel: The Hague, collection A. Bout, auction 11 August 1733, lot 37; Paris, collection Count d’Orsay, auction 14 April 1790, lot 66; collection John Puring, 16 February 1801, lot 98; London, collection Sir Simon Clarke and George Hibbert, auction Christie’s, 15 May 1802, lot 56; London, collection Henry Hope, auction Christie’s 29 June 1816, lot 79; acquired by Lord Yarmouth for the future King George IV.

    3. Hermitage panel: Amsterdam, collection François Ignace de Dufresne, De Winter, Cok and Yver, auction 22 August 1770 e.g., lot 134; acquired by Empress Catherine II for the Hermitage.

20 Jacopo da Voragine, Legenda Aurea (Golden Legend), about 1255-66. The lack of historicity met with criticism from theologians in the sixteenth century, but its advocates in the seventeenth century emphasised the scholarly merits of its author. It became a valuable source for the iconography of late medieval, Renaissance and indeed baroque art.

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre [Fig. 1]
Légende Fig. 1. Peter Paul Rubens, Assumption of the Virgin, c. 1611˗13, oil on panel, 458 × 297 cm (Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, inv. 518).
URL http://journals.openedition.org/kikirpa/docannexe/image/3436/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 595k
Titre [Fig. 2]
Légende Peter Paul Rubens, Assumption of the Virgin, 1611, oil on panel, transferred to canvas, 106 × 78 cm (St Petersburg, Hermitage, inv. 1703).
URL http://journals.openedition.org/kikirpa/docannexe/image/3436/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 623k
Titre [Fig. 3]
Légende Peter Paul Rubens, Assumption of the Virgin, 1611, oil on panel, 105 × 66 cm (Antwerp, Private Collection).
URL http://journals.openedition.org/kikirpa/docannexe/image/3436/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 709k
Titre [Fig. 4]
Légende Peter Paul Rubens, Assumption of the Virgin, 1611 (Antwerp, Private Collection). Reverse, panel consisting of three planks.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/kikirpa/docannexe/image/3436/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 571k
Titre [Fig. 5]
Légende Peter Paul Rubens, Assumption of the Virgin, c. 1613, oil on panel, 102 × 66 cm (London, Buckingham Palace, Collection of H.M. the King). The Virgin’s right palm turned downward.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/kikirpa/docannexe/image/3436/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 319k
Titre [Fig. 6]
Légende Peter Paul Rubens, Assumption of the Virgin, 1611 (Antwerp, Private Collection). The Virgin’s right palm turned upward.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/kikirpa/docannexe/image/3436/img-6.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 429k
Titre [Fig. 7]
Légende Peter Paul Rubens, Assumption of the Virgin, 1611 (Antwerp, Private Collection). Detail.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/kikirpa/docannexe/image/3436/img-7.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 704k
Titre [Fig. 8]
Légende Peter Paul Rubens, Assumption of the Virgin, 1611 (Antwerp, Private Collection). Detail.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/kikirpa/docannexe/image/3436/img-8.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 440k
Titre [Fig. 9]
Légende Peter Paul Rubens, Assumption of the Virgin, 1611 (Antwerp, Private Collection). Detail.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/kikirpa/docannexe/image/3436/img-9.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 389k
Titre [Fig. 10]
Légende Peter Paul Rubens, Assumption of the Virgin, 1611 (Antwerp, Private Collection). Detail imprimatura.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/kikirpa/docannexe/image/3436/img-10.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 433k
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence électronique

Jean-Pierre De Bruyn, « Assumption of the Virgin by P.P. Rubens: On a Modello from 1611  », Bulletin de l’Institut royal du Patrimoine artistique / Bulletin van het Koninklijk Instituut voor het Kunstpatrimonium [En ligne], 39 | 2024, mis en ligne le 01 septembre 2024, consulté le 05 octobre 2024. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/kikirpa/3436

Haut de page

Auteur

Jean-Pierre De Bruyn

Dr Jean-Pierre De Bruyn, master in Press and Communication Sciences (Ghent, Sydney), doctor in History of Art (Ghent, 1982), director of the Keizerskapel Antwerp (since 2008); contributions to art historical magazines and exhibition catalogues, e.g. Ghent, Antwerp, Brussels, Paris, Cassel, Dijon, Warsaw, Moscow. Books: De Dendermondse schilderschool (1994, 2000), Erasmus II Quellinus (1607˗1678) (Freren, 1988), De Keizerskapel Antwerpen (1994), Dans le sillage de Rubens: Erasme Quellin (Cassel, 2014). Contributions to CODART (online), e.g. on the Assumption of the Virgin (2016, 2021).

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

CC-BY-4.0

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence CC BY 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.

Haut de page
Sommaire - Document précédent -
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search