Gerson Digital : Italy

RKD STUDIES

2.1 Caravaggism

In the meantime the works of Caravaggio (1571-1610) had liberated Rome from the late stages of Mannerism when it was largely a spent force. The renewal he triggered was so powerful that it must have had a huge impact on the young artists who came from the North, especially since his works raised the fundamental principle underlying Naturalism, which ran through Dutch veins, to a very high level and with a hitherto inconceivable consistency. There can be no talk of any interaction here, let alone of any expansionist drive on the part of the Dutch Caravaggists. They had to content themselves with the role of mediators.1 Caravaggio was forced to flee Rome in 1606 after working in the city for almost ten years, but his works remained in place: the altarpiece and lateral canvases of the Cappella Contarelli in San Luigi dei Francesci (1599/1600) [1-3], the Conversion of St. Paul and the Crucifixion of St. Peter in Santa Maria del Popolo [4-5], the Entombment of Christ in the Vatican [6], the Madonna di Loreto in Sant’Agostino [7] as well as other works in Roman churches or in the possession of his patrons. Among the latter Marchese Vincenzo Giustiniani (1564-1637) is of particular importance for us because he was favourably disposed towards the Netherlandish painters and engravers.2

1
Caravaggio
The Inspiration of Saint Matthew, 1602
canvas, oil paint 296,5 x 195 cm
Rome, San Luigi dei Francesi (Rome)


2
Caravaggio
The martyrdom of Saint Matthew, between 1599-1600
canvas, oil paint 323 x 343 cm
Rome, San Luigi dei Francesi (Rome)

3
Caravaggio
The calling of Saint Matthew, between 1599-1600
canvas, oil paint 322 x 340 cm
Rome, San Luigi dei Francesi (Rome)


4
Caravaggio
Saint Peter crucified upside down, 1601
canvas, oil paint 230 x 175 cm
Rome, Santa Maria del Popolo

5
Caravaggio
The conversion of Paul, 1601
canvas, oil paint 230 x 175 cm
Rome, Santa Maria del Popolo


6
Caravaggio
The Entombment of Christ, between c. 1602-1603
canvas, oil paint 300 x 203 cm
Rome, Musei Vaticani

7
Caravaggio
The pilgrim's Madonna, between 1604-1606
canvas, oil paint 260 x 150 cm
Rome, Basilica di Sant'Agostino


Hendrick ter Brugghen (1588-1629) was indubitably the most talented and, in a certain sense, the most personal disseminator of Caravaggism. We are obliged to use the term Caravaggism because, although Ter Brugghen was in Italy as early as 1604, there are no records indicating that he ever came into contact with the great artist himself.3 In fact, no Dutch painter had the privilege of meeting the instigator of the new style in person.4 Since we have no knowledge of any works produced by Ter Brugghen during his stay in Italy, it is impossible to envisage his style in the early stages.5 In 1620, i.e. five years after he had returned home, it was still somewhat antiquated and ungainly (The Apostles in Deventer) [8-11]. This makes it a little unlikely that he exerted any influence on the Italian artist, Giovanni Serodine (1594/1600-1630), who did not arrive in Rome from Northern Italy until 1615 and whose works are very similar to his [12].6

8
Hendrick ter Brugghen
Saint John writing his Gospel, 1621 (dated)
canvas, oil paint 77 x 102 cm
Deventer, Museum De Waag (Deventer)

9
Hendrick ter Brugghen
Saint Luke writing the gospel, 1621 (dated)
canvas, oil paint 75,5 x 102 cm
Deventer, Museum De Waag (Deventer), inv./cat.nr. H1992-0071

10
Hendrick ter Brugghen
St. Matthew writing his Gospel, 1621 (dated)
canvas, oil paint 73,5 x 100 cm
: [Resten van een signatuur] 1621
Deventer, Museum De Waag (Deventer), inv./cat.nr. H1992-0069

11
Hendrick ter Brugghen
Saint Mark writing his Gospel, dated 1621
canvas, oil paint 75 x 102 cm
lower left : ... 1621
Deventer, Museum De Waag (Deventer)

12
possibly circle of Giovanni Serodine
Old Man writing, c. 1620-1630
canvas, oil paint 82 x 141 cm
Modena, Galleria Estense, inv./cat.nr. 481

13
Hendrick ter Brugghen
The calling of Saint Matthew, c. 1618-1619
canvas, oil paint 152 x 195 cm
Le Havre, Musée des Beaux-Arts André Malraux, inv./cat.nr. 77-7

If we can believe Houbraken, Ter Brugghen was also in Naples, but no trace has survived of any paintings he might have made there.7 At all events, in both Naples and Rome Ter Brugghen was able to see works not only by Caravaggio, but also those of his followers in Italy, especially the paintings of Orazio Gentileschi (1563-1639). ‘Borrowings’ from Caravaggio can still be detected in the works of his Utrecht period [13-14].8 Special credit is due to Ter Brugghen, however, for having transcended the emphatic, somewhat crude Naturalism of most of the Dutch Caravaggists and achieving a smooth tonality with a bright silvery sheen that was not found anywhere in Holland until the appearance of Vermeer (which has prompted the rather precipitate conclusion that there was an influence at play here, although Ter Brugghen died three years before Vermeer was born).

14
Caravaggio
The calling of Saint Matthew, between 1599-1600
canvas, oil paint 322 x 340 cm
Rome, San Luigi dei Francesi (Rome)

Dirk van Baburen (c. 1592/3-1624) arrived in Rome in 1611, in other words after Caravaggio’s death.9 He remained in the city until 1622 and several paintings from his time in Italy have come down to us [15].10 He was a less independent spirit and so occasionally kept very close to his revered model, as is evidenced by the repetition of Caravaggio’s Entombment of Christ in San Pietro in Montorio, which probably dates to 1617 [16]. In his Italian works Baburen generally adhered more closely to the strong chiaroscuro of Caravaggio’s mature style, as did Valentin de Boulogne, whereas after his return to Utrecht he modelled himself on Ter Brugghen’s style (for instance in his Flagellation of Christ [= Crowning with thorns, eds.] in the Franciscan monastery in Weert) [17].11

15
Dirck van Baburen
Old man pointing at a folio, c. 1618-1619
canvas, oil paint 95,5 x 105 cm
Private collection

16
Dirck van Baburen
The Entombment, 1617
canvas, oil paint 222 x 142 cm
: .. 1617
Rome, San Pietro in Montorio

17
Dirck van Baburen
The crowning with thorns (Matthew 27:27-31; Mark 15:16-20; John 19:2-3), 1622-1623
canvas, oil paint 106 x 136 cm
upper right : Baburen f.
Utrecht, Museum Catharijneconvent, inv./cat.nr. StCC s9

A companion and friend of Baburen was David de Haen (c. 1585-1622), some of whose paintings have survived in the same chapel in San Pietro in Montorio that houses Baburen’s Entombment of Christ [18-19].12 He was a moderate Caravaggist whose works were well known in Rome. He is reputed to have had many pupils and Marchese Giustianini as his patron. Mancini, in his description of San Pietro in Montorio, talks of this ‘Davit e compagno fiammenghi’ (which then must be Baburen).13 He was barely 20 years old when he died in 1622.14


18
David de Haen (I)
The Mocking of Christ, c. 1617-1619
canvas, oil paint 155 x 330 cm
Rome, San Pietro in Montorio

19
attributed to David de Haen (I)
Christ on the Mount of Olives, c. 1617-1619
canvas, oil paint 155 x 330 cm
Rome, San Pietro in Montorio


By far the most popular artist of this circle was Gerard van Honthorst (1592-1656) who arrived in Rome in 1609 before Baburen.15 He stayed in the city for almost twelve years, travelling home via Florence in 1621.16 Honthorst produced large altarpieces for various churches in Rome (Santa Maria della Scala [20], Santa Maria in Aquiro [21],17 Santa Maria della Concezione [22], Santa Maria della Vittoria [23]) and the surrounding countryside (San Albano Laziale [24], Castelvetrano [25],18 Monte Compatri [26]).19 He had patrons in Florence and Rome, where he enjoyed the protection, in particular, of Marchese Vincenzo Giustiniani and Cardinal Scipione Borghese.20 Marchese Giustiniani commissioned him to paint the large night-piece Christ before Caiaphas (now in the National Gallery in London) [27], of which there are numerous replicas both in Italian churches and collections and elsewhere.21

20
Gerard van Honthorst
The Beheading of Saint John the Baptist, c. 1617-1618
canvas, oil paint 345 x 215 cm
Rome, Santa Maria della Scala (Rome)

22
Gerard van Honthorst
The Mocking of Christ, c. 161-1613
canvas, oil paint 210 x 179 cm
Rome, Santa Maria della Concezione (Rome)

21
Trophime Bigot
The Crowning with Thorns, c. 1635-1640
canvas, oil paint 180 x 130 cm
Rome, Santa Maria in Aquiro (Rome)

23
Gerard van Honthorst
Paul's Ecstatic Vision, c. 1618
canvas, oil paint 400 x 250 cm
Rome, Santa Maria della Vittoria (Rome)

24
Gerard van Honthorst
Madonna and Child with Saints Francis of Assisi and Bonaventura and Princess Colonna-Gonzaga, dated 1618
canvas, oil paint 370 x 233 cm
lower center : Gerardus Honthorst Flander FEC. 1618
Albano Laziale, Chiesa di San Bonaventura (Albano)

25
Anoniem Italië
The Beheading of St. John the Baptist
canvas, oil paint ? x ? cm
Castelvetrano, Chiesa di San Giovanni Battista (Castelvetrano)

26
Gerard van Honthorst
Christ in the Carpenter's Shop, c. 1617
canvas, oil paint 142 x 118 cm
Monte Compatri, Convento San Silvestro (Monte Compatri)

Gherardo delle Notti’s paintings were extremely popular, as is evidenced by the frequent copies made of them (including Italian copies) and the reputation they acquired after the artist’s death. When Willem Schellinks came to Rome in 1664 he made a point of seeing Honthorst’s Beheading of St. John the Baptist in Santa Maria delle Scala, ‘zynde Kaarslicht’ [being a candlelight-piece].22 The narrow interpretation of Caravaggio as a painter of nocturnal scenes is largely attributable to Honthorst, who was very creative in elaborating on this aspect of his work.23 Honthorst’s style has its origins in Caravaggio’s Conversion of St. Paul in Santa Maria del Popolo [4] with its stark contrasts between light and shade. His entire interest – and here he was at one with Bartolomeo Manfredi (1582-1622) – was aimed at making this effect even more intrusive and striking. He therefore delighted in placing a large, dark figure or even just a hand or a head in the foreground in order to conceal the source of light, thus bringing out the contours very starkly. Like Valentin de Boulogne (1594-1632) he was very fond of half-length paintings. However, Honthorst learned nothing from the way Caravaggio’s bodies generate space or from his powerful, cohesive composition, which is such an eminent feature of each of his paintings. Honthorst often transferred the serious style of his model to the friendly environment of a pleasing genre picture, thereby increasing its attractiveness for many collectors. Bartolomeo Manfredi (1582-1622) may have given him a few lessons in the ‘dark manner’.24

We saw earlier that Honthorst-style Caravaggism spread as far as Flanders, although there were also Flemish followers of Caravaggio.25 Gerard Seghers (1591-1651) assimilated Honthorst’s preference for artificial lighting and the use of a human figure to screen the source of light [28].26 Adam de Coster (c. 1586-1643) employed the same effect [29]. Jan Janssens (1590-after 1650) [30], on the other hand, drew his inspiration from Hendrick ter Brugghen.27

27
Gerard van Honthorst
Christ before the High Priest, c. 1617
canvas, oil paint 272 x 183 cm
on the back : C. L. (with a crown on top)
London, National Gallery (London)

28
Gerard Seghers
The denial of Peter, c. 1620-1625
canvas, oil paint 157,5 x 227,3 cm
Raleigh (North Carolina), North Carolina Museum of Art, inv./cat.nr. 52.9.112

29
Adam de Coster
Young woman holding a distaff before a lit candle
canvas, oil paint 134 x 94,9 cm
Sotheby's (New York City) 2017-01-25 - 2017-01-26, nr. 23

30
Jan Janssens (1590)
Christ crowned with thorns, na 1620
canvas, oil paint 185 x 154 cm
Toulouse, Musée des Augustins

Needless to say, it was in Utrecht itself that the influence of Honthorst’s work lasted the longest. Jan van Bijlert (c. 1597/8-1671), who might have met Honthorst in about 1620 when he was still in Rome, helped to spread his style in his native city, where he achieved considerable renown in the course of a long life. It should be pointed out, however, that van Bijlert, who had many pupils, was not a fanatical Caravaggist [31].28 Even the past master of Utrecht Mannerism, Abraham Bloemaert (1566-1651), who had taught Honthorst and van Bijlert, was persuaded by his former pupils to try his hand at the new style [32].29

31
Jan van Bijlert
A young man with a beret and a feather tuning a viola da gamba, c. 1625-1630
canvas, oil paint 101 x 83,3 cm
upper left : Jbijlert fe
Jeruzalem (Israel), The Israel Museum, inv./cat.nr. B05.0502

32
Abraham Bloemaert
The supper at Emmaus, dated 1622
panel, oil paint 145 x 215,5 cm
lower center : A. Bloemaert f: / 1622
Brussels, Koninklijke Musea voor Schone Kunsten van België, inv./cat.nr. 3705

33
Paulus Moreelse
Shepherdess beating the tambourine, dated 1635
panel, oil paint 74 x 59,4 cm
upper right : PM : / 1635
Alkmaar, art dealer Bijl-Van Urk Masterpaintings

This backwash effect can also be seen in the work of Paulus Moreelse (1571-1638) [33]. While Moreelse was in Rome before the turn of the century, where he might have seen Caravaggio’s earliest works, his Mannerist compositions of the first ten years make it clear that at that time he still had no proper grasp of the new style [34]. Hendrick Bloemaert (c. 1601-1672) [35], Johan Moreelse (1602-1634) [36], Wouter Crabeth II (c. 1594-1644) [37-38], Paulus Bor (c. 1601-1669) [39] and Herman van Aldewereld (1628/9- 1669) [40] are painters who can be counted in a broad sense among the followers of Caravaggio in the Netherlands. They concentrated for the most part on half-length figures with a Naturalist surface treatment. This external assimilation of Caravaggism together with light, grey shading would suggest that Ter Brugghen’s style of painting took on a significance in Utrecht that should not be underestimated.

34
Paulus Moreelse
Diana discovers the pregnancy of Callisto, 1606 or earlier
paper, oil paint, grisaille 290 x 405 mm
bottom left of the middle : PMorelse fe.
Private collection


35
Hendrick Bloemaert
Merry Drinker, dated 1634
canvas, oil paint 74,5 x 60 cm
upper left : Bloemaert fe: 1634
Leipzig, Museum der bildenden Künste Leipzig, inv./cat.nr. 1626

36
Johan Moreelse
Shephard playing Pan's pipe, c. 1627 or later
panel, oil paint 73 x 57,8 cm
upper right : JPM
Private collection


37
Wouter Crabeth (II)
The cheater, after 1626
canvas, oil paint 133,5 x 169 cm
center : CR [...]
Berlijn, Gemäldegalerie der Berliner Museen, inv./cat.nr. 2196

38
Wouter Crabeth (II)
Young courtisane playing cards with two men at a table, an old procuress in the background, after 1626
canvas, oil paint 134,7 x 169 cm
left center : WCRABETH.F. (WC in ligature)
Warsaw, Muzeum Narodowe w Warszawie, inv./cat.nr. M.Ob.531 MNW


40
Herman van Aldewereld
Allegory on the five senses, dated 1651
canvas, oil paint 117,5 x 206,0 cm
lower right : H. V. Alde O fecit. 1651
Schwerin, Staatliches Museum Schwerin, inv./cat.nr. G 917

41
Joachim von Sandrart (I)
The death of Seneca, dated 1635
canvas, oil paint 171 x 215 cm
Berlin, Bode-Museum, inv./cat.nr. 445

Honthorst, on the other hand, had the satisfaction of familiarising a number of German artists with the advantages of the new style. Joachim von Sandrart (1606-1688) painted his first pictures in his teacher’s Caravaggist style [41].30 Not long after, he combined Honthorst’s approach with motifs taken from Hendrick Bloemaert and Jacob Jordaens to create a style of his own, as is apparent from the Twelve Months cycle in Schleissheim.31 Sandrart had in the meantime been to Rome, where he frequented the house of Marchese Vincenzo Giustiniani (1564-1637). Later on he returned to a Caravaggist theme in the manner of Honthorst in the Beheading of St. John, dated 1651, in Bamberg [42].32 Another example of a late imitation of Caravaggio (in the manner of Honthorst) among German artists is the work of Wolfgang Heimbach (1613/16-1678). His candlelight pictures are formal and inept derivatives of Honthorst’s genre paintings in shimmering yellow light [43-44].33 Heimbach did not arrive in Rome until 1645, which indicates just how tenacious this style was.34

42
Joachim von Sandrart (I)
The decapitation of John the Baptist, dated 1651
canvas 252 x 140,5 cm
lower center : J. Sandrart. de Stockau / f: 1651
Bamberg, Diözesan-Museum (Bamberg), inv./cat.nr. 88

43
Wolfgang Heimbach
A young man with an oil lamp, c. 1646
canvas, oil paint 43 x 35 cm
Rome, Galleria Doria Pamphilj, inv./cat.nr. 421

44
Wolfgang Heimbach
A girl with an oil lamp, dated 1646
canvas, oil paint 43 x 35 cm
lower right : CH(B?)/W/fec. 1646
Rome, Galleria Doria Pamphilj, inv./cat.nr. 422

Imitations of Honthorst’s painting were naturally rarer among Italian artists.35 After all, they had Caravaggio’s original paintings to consult. The artificial light effects employed by Francesco Rustici (1592-1626) [45] and Carlo Saraceni (1579-1620) [46] are reminiscent of Honthorst, but a more tangible influence is only apparent in the work of the Flemish artist Matthias Stom (c. 1589/90-?), one of Honthorst’s pupils, whose pictures were among those in the inventory of Conte Antonio Ruffo (1610/1-1678) in Messina in 1648.36 The starting point here is a work entitled The Miracle of St. Isidore in the Augustinian Church in Caccamo which bears the inscription ‘Matthias Stom ft a 1641’ [47]. Over the course of time other works by this master have been rediscovered in Sicily, Naples and various museums, where they were mostly recorded under Honthorst’s name.37 Stom is also reputed to have had followers in Sicily, including – according to Hermann Voss – the ‘Master of the dying Cato’, whose works have been included by other connoisseurs among Stom’s late paintings [48].38 Stomer had two Netherlandish pupils in Messina: Jan Baptist van der Bracken and Joannes van Houbracken (born c. 1600), whose works must be extremely rare [49-50].39 Looking at the ‘Cato master’ Hermann Voss is reminded of Leonello Spada (1576-1622), whose Judith in Bologna [51] is similar in style, while Bernardo de Dominici was familiar with works in Naples of a Domenico Viola (c. 1610/15-1696) , whose night-time effects are supposedly reminiscent of Stom.40 At all events, the extent of Honthorst’s influence in Southern Italy is quite striking.

It was not long before Caravaggism came to an end in Rome itself. After the mid-1630s Caravaggio’s art no longer held any power over the artists from the north who came to the city.

45
Francesco Rustici
The death of Lucretia, 1624-1625
canvas, oil paint 175 x 259,5 cm
Florence, Galleria degli Uffizi, inv./cat.nr. 6421

46
Carlo Saraceni
Martyrdom of Saint Cecilia, c. 1610
canvas, oil paint 135,9 x 98,4 cm
Los Angeles (California), Los Angeles County Museum of Art, inv./cat.nr. AC1996.37.1


47
Matthias Stom
Saint Isidore creates a fountain with his spade, dated 1641
canvas, oil paint 347 x 253 cm
lower left : Matthias Stom / F. A° 1641
Caccamo, Duomo di San Giorgio martire (Caccamo)

48
Matthias Stom
The death of Cato, 1640s
canvas, oil paint 223,5 x 278,5 cm
Catania, Museo civico di Casello Ursino

49
Joannes van Houbracken
Crucifixion with May, John and Mary Magdalene, dated 1657
canvas, oil paint 426 x 320 cm
bottom (positional attribute) : IOANNES HDUBRAKEN ANTVERPIAE PINSEBAT.1657
Randazzo, Basilica minore di Santa Maria Assunta (Randazzo)

50
Joannes van Houbracken
Discovery of the bodies of St. Placidus and company, dated 163[5 or 6]
canvas, oil paint 314 x 223 cm
lower right : Joanne Van Houbracken Flandriae inv. et Faciebat 1635
Messina, Museo regionale interdisciplinare di Messina (Messina), inv./cat.nr. 1170

51
Leonello Spada
Judith and Holofernes, c. 1608-1612
canvas, oil paint 112 x 138 cm
Bologna, Pinacoteca Nazionale di Bologna, inv./cat.nr. 69


Notes

1 [ Gerson 1942/1983] It must however not be overlooked, that Italian artists like Orazio Gentileschi (1563-1639) propagated the style of their role model all over Europe. Compare Longhi 1916 ; Gamba 1922 . For the questions regarding Dutch Caravaggism: Voss 1924 ; von Schneider 1933 and the literature noted there; Longhi 1927 . [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Blankert/Slatkes 1986-1987; Klessmann 1987; Van der Sman 2016A; Ebert/Helmus 2018-2019.

2 [Gerson 1942/1983] In 1633 Giustiniani had the Dutch engravers Cornelis Bloemaert, Theodor Matham and Reinier van Persijn come from Paris through the mediation of Joachim von Sandrart, in order to engrave his collection, the Galleria Giustiniana. His death in 1637 thwarted the completion of this project. [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Recent studies of the art patronage of Benedetto and Vincenzo Giustiniani include Danesi Squarzina 2001; Fusconi 2001-2002; Danesi Squarzina 2003.

3 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Ter Brugghen’s Italian sojourn began no earlier than the summer of 1607 (Bok/Kobayashi 1985, p. 25-26), while Caravaggio fled Rome in May 1606 after killing Ranuccio Tomassoni in a brawl over a gambling debt. Ter Brugghen presumably arrived in Rome in the course of 1608.

4 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] With the exception of Abraham Vinck (c. 1574/5-1619), who befriended Caravaggio in Naples (compare § 3.1, note 14).

5 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Van der Sman 2016A, p. 135 ; Franits 2017A.

6 [Gerson 1942/1983] As Von Schneider suspects (Von Schneider 1933, p. 33-34). [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] It cannot be excluded that Hendrick ter Brugghen exerted a certain influence on Serodine and other North Italian painters as a result of his stay in Milan around 1614. See Prohaska/Swoboda 2010, p. 110, 114 and De Nile in Van der Sman 2016A, p. 138 under cat.no. 28.

7 [Gerson 1942/1983] Houbraken 1718-1721, vol. 1, p. 133. Compare Fokker 1931, p. 60-61. [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] See § 3.1, note 5.

8 [Gerson 1942/1983] Longhi 1927, p. 112-115; Von Schneider 1933, p. 36, and Von Schneider 1927.

9 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] It is still unclear when the young Van Baburen arrived in Italy and which cities he visited before he temporarily settled in Parma in 1615 (Franits 2013, p. 6). It is possible that Van Baburen travelled to Italy around 1614, rather than 1612/13, and took up residence in Rome between 1615 and 1616, after a brief sojourn in Parma.

10 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Van Baburen probably departed Rome in the summer or fall of 1620 and seems to have arrived in Utrecht in 1621 (Franits 2013, p. 15, 35). For the works he produced in Italy: Franits 2013, nos. A1-A14. No scholarly consensus has yet been reached on the attribution of the painting depicting Archimedes (Rome, private collection; Franits 2013, no. A2, RKDimages 241857). Instead, the recent addition of A Philosopher (with Nicholas Hall, New York in 2019) is undisputed (Capitelli 2016, p. 37, fig. 17; Franits 2017B), illustrated here as fig. 15.

11 [Gerson 1942/1983] New attributions of the Italian works of Baburen: Bodmer 1936. Gerstenberg 1937. [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Gerstenberg’s attribution of the Entombment in the cathedral in Bamberg (RKDimages 295219 ) is rejected since the 1960s. The painting has been attributed by some authors to the Flemish painter Gérard Douffet (1594-1660/1). Franits 2013, p. 199-200, no. R24.

12 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] It is not certain that de Haen was responsible for the execution of more than one painting in the chapel. The Mocking of Christ is the only work that is unanimously attributed to the master. The canvas lunette with Christ on the Mount of Olives is different in style and is often given to Baburen.

13 [Gerson 1942/1983] Mancini/Schudt 1923, p. 60.

14 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] De Haen died on 31 August 1622 while living in the house of Vincenzo Giustiniani, whose service he entered in 1621 (Grilli 1997, p. 33-34 and 45-46, notes 4, 12 and 13).

15 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] While Gianni Papi and Liesbeth Helmus have recently argued that Honthorst arrived in Rome around 1610-12 or 1613 (Papi 2015, p. 38 ff.; Helmus 2018-2019, p. 53), it seems more likely that his Roman career started around 1615 (Van der Sman 2016A, p. 105-106).

16 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Written evidence firmly places Honthorst’s return trip between 9 April 1620, when the painter received a payment in Rome for the Nativity commissioned by Piero Guicciardini, and 29 July of the same year, when a party was organized to celebrate his return in Utrecht. No documents have yet been found that record his stay in Florence.

17 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] The three nocturnal passion scenes in Santa Maria in Aquiro (Hoogewerff 1924, p. 10) are no longer given to Honthorst. On the complex issue of the attribution to Master Jacomo, Trophime Bigot (1579-1650) and the Candlelight Master: Vodret/Granata 2011-2012, p. 85-88.

18 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Now considered to be an anonymous work of the Italian School. By Judson/Ekkart 1999, p. 71, under no. 41 wrongly mentioned as a copy after the painting by Honthorst in the S. Maria della Scala in Rome.

19 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Stolen in 1977 (Papi 1999, p. 130-131, no. 6).

20 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] On Honthorst’s Roman patrons: Lorizzo 2015A and Ebert/Hoppe 2018-2019, p. 68-73.

21 [Gerson 1942/1983] Hoogewerff 1924 leaves the possibility open that the version in the Santa Croce in Gerusalemme is the original. Compare Hoogewerff 1917A, Hoogewerff 1917B and Hoogewerff 1917C. [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Judson and Ekkart list 22 painted copies, including the painting in the Sacristy of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme (Judson/Ekkart 1999, p. 80-81). RKDimages 240358.

22 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Houbraken 1718-1721, vol. 1, p. 267: ‘Hy [Schellinks] meld in 't byzonder dat hy in de Kerk Madonna della Scala, of L.V. der Trappen een konstig stuk gezien heeft van Honthorst, zynde Kaarslicht, verbeeldende de onthoofding van Johannes, verscheiden van Rubbens[…]’. Houbraken had access to Schellincks’s handwritten diaries through Arnold van Halen in Amsterdam.

23 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] The systematic use of candlelight in history paintings with large-scale figures is largely due to Honthorst. It is not a coincidence that Caravaggio’s Taking of Christ (National Gallery of Ireland, Dublin, RKDimages 295892), one of his rare works to use artificial illumination, bore a traditional attribution to the painter from Utrecht.

24 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] The importance of the of the so-called ‘Manfrediana methodus’ is stressed in many publications including Hartje 2004.

25 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Van der Sman 2019-2020.

26 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] It is generally believed that Seghers, who must have known Honthorst in Rome, visited him in Utrecht around 1625 (Roggen/Pauwels 1955-1956, p. 257; Bieneck 1992, p. 25-26).

27 [Gerson 1942/1983] See also p. 177-178 [§ 13]. [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Recent studies on the work of Jan Janssens have singled out his indebtness to Gerard van Honthorst and to Dirck van Baburen, whose work he appropriated in several signed copies.

28 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] On van Bijlert and his critical fortune: Huys Janssen 1998.

29 [Gerson 1942/1983] For example ‘Emmaus’, museum Brussels, no. 692, dated 1622.

30 [Gerson 1942/1983] ‘The death of Seneca’, Berlin, no. 445. [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Lost during World War II; see also this work in Sandrart.net.

31 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Klemm 1986, p. 24 ff., 99-124, 311 ff.

32 [Gerson 1942/1983] Von Schneider 1933, p. 60.

33 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Adam de Coster, who is known to have stayed in Hamburg around 1635, clearly acted as a mediator. Heimbach must have had direct contact with de Coster’s work (Slatkes 1998-1999, p. 40; Van der Sman 2019-2020, p. 50-51).

34 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Much attention to Heimbach has been paid in Gerson/Van Leeuwen et al. 2017-2018. An article on Heimbach by Justus Lange will be published in the proceedings of the symposium Masters of Mobility, held in 2017 on the occasion of the launch of Gerson Digital on Germany (forthcoming).

35 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Papi 2015, p. 228-253.

36 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Ruffo 1917, p. 15, 16.

37 [Gerson 1942/1983] Stom’s work was first compiled by H. Voss (Voss 1908, Voss 1909A, Voss 1909B) and a ‘Master of the Dying Cato’ was created. T.H. Fokker published the signed work in Caccamo (Fokker 1929), which he however attributed to another artist by name of M. Stom. This view is disputed by Hoogewerff and A. von Schneider. [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] The correct spelling of his surname is Stom, not Stomer, as evidenced by the signatures on Tobias and the Angel (Museum Bredius, The Hague) and The Miracle of St. Isidore in the Augustinian Church in Caccamo mentioned above. See Osnabrugge 2015, p. 99.

38 [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] Indeed Hermann Voss’s attributions to the ‘Master of the dying Cato’ were never generally accepted. They are now commonly considered to be late works by Matthias Stom.

39 [Gerson 1942/1983] Are they maybe one and the same artist? [Leeuwen/Sman 2019] The painter Joannes van Houbracken should not be confused with ‘Gio. Battia Vanderbrachen’ who became a member of the Oratorio della Compagnia dei Mercanti in Messina in 1647 and who died in 1665 (Gozzano 2014, p. 166; Campagna Cicala 2018, p. 42). This Gio. Battista Van der Broech was active as a merchant and mainly traded in silk. As to Joannes van Houbracken, he painted altarpieces for churches in Messina and Randazzo in Flemish style (illustrated here). A caravaggesque series of the five senses in the Chiesa Madre in Caccamo is attributed to him since 1968 (Negri-Arnoldi 1968, RKDimages 246329). There is no direct link between the painting style of Matthias Stom and that of Joannes van Houbracken. Since Joannes van Houbracken’s Sicilian career started at least eight before Stom’s arrival in Sicily, there is no reason to consider Joannes a ‘scolare di Matteo Stohom’, as Caio Domenico Gallo described him in 1755 (Gallo 1755, p. 95).

40 [Gerson 1942/1983] Voss 1909A, p. 113-114. Spada had followed Caravaggio to Naples. A similarity to Stom shouldn’t surprise us, as they both go back to the same sources. De Dominici 1742-1743, vol. 3, p. 105.

Cookies disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to deliver better content and for statistical purposes. You can disable the usage of cookies by changing the settings of your browser. By browsing our website without changing the browser settings you grant us permission to store that information on your device.