.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
.jpg?w=1)
Lot Essay
A flourish of activity fills this intimately-scaled representation of the Crucifixion, set against a sweeping northern landscape. In keeping with the Gospel’s account, the sky has darkened in anticipation of Christ’s death. A host of angels, each portrayed in varying attitudes ranging from quiet contemplation to extreme anguish, hovers around the crucified Christ. Below, at left John the Evangelist supports the Virgin Mary as she gazes at her son, while Mary Magdalene kneels before them at the foot of the Cross. Other companions of the Virgin Mary, including Mary Cleophas and Mary Salome appear behind them. At lower right, four exotically-attired gamblers roll dice for Christ’s clothes. In the middle-distance, children race alongside a procession of men on horseback and soldiers who lead Christ bearing the Cross through Jerusalem’s gates along the path to Calvary before a throng of spectators. The depiction of the sun and moon on either side of the Cross ultimately derives from pagan imagery. Over the centuries, theologians assigned them a range of Christian meanings so that by the Renaissance their presence in representations of the Crucifixion not only visually signified the darkening of the sky during the day, but also functioned as allegorical symbols of the Old and New Testaments and reflections of God’s anger.
The details of Isenbrant's life remain obscure. He became a master in the Bruges Guild of St. Luke in 1510, and must have enjoyed a successful career, as he held various offices through the 1530s. He is thought to have worked in Gerard David's studio, either as an apprentice or a highly-skilled journeyman. Isenbrant's oeuvre was the subject of a critical essay by Jean C. Wilson (J.C. Wilson, 'Adriaen Isenbrant and the problem of his oeuvre', Oud Holland, CIX, 1995, pp. 1-17). In it, Wilson observed that the entire body of paintings identified as being by Isenbrant (over 500 works) is, in fact, a conglomeration of different artists' works that reflect the homogeneity of compositional forms in Bruges in the first half of the sixteenth century, as well as the considerable influence of Gerard David on his contemporaries. This problem had been raised as early as 1934, in Max J. Friedländer's criticism of Bodenhausen's 1905 list of fifty-three pictures as by Isenbrant and his workshop (see M.J. Friedländer, Die altniederländische Malerei, XI, Leiden, 1934). Friedländer later grouped these together, and expanded the list to 150 panels, using Isenbrant as an umbrella name and noting that future scholars would need to 'disentangle this large store into several groups.' Accordingly, attributions to Isenbrant, including for the present work, should now be regarded as representing a picture's belonging within what might be called the 'Isenbrant group'.
The present painting’s warm palette of orange and yellows, together with the distinctive treatment of the background, in which the architecture and mountains are arranged in horizontal bands, suggest a relatively late date for the work. On the basis of photographs, Till-Holger Borchert, to whom we are grateful, proposes that the panel may have been executed sometime after 1540, reflecting an awareness of artistic developments in Antwerp at that time.
The details of Isenbrant's life remain obscure. He became a master in the Bruges Guild of St. Luke in 1510, and must have enjoyed a successful career, as he held various offices through the 1530s. He is thought to have worked in Gerard David's studio, either as an apprentice or a highly-skilled journeyman. Isenbrant's oeuvre was the subject of a critical essay by Jean C. Wilson (J.C. Wilson, 'Adriaen Isenbrant and the problem of his oeuvre', Oud Holland, CIX, 1995, pp. 1-17). In it, Wilson observed that the entire body of paintings identified as being by Isenbrant (over 500 works) is, in fact, a conglomeration of different artists' works that reflect the homogeneity of compositional forms in Bruges in the first half of the sixteenth century, as well as the considerable influence of Gerard David on his contemporaries. This problem had been raised as early as 1934, in Max J. Friedländer's criticism of Bodenhausen's 1905 list of fifty-three pictures as by Isenbrant and his workshop (see M.J. Friedländer, Die altniederländische Malerei, XI, Leiden, 1934). Friedländer later grouped these together, and expanded the list to 150 panels, using Isenbrant as an umbrella name and noting that future scholars would need to 'disentangle this large store into several groups.' Accordingly, attributions to Isenbrant, including for the present work, should now be regarded as representing a picture's belonging within what might be called the 'Isenbrant group'.
The present painting’s warm palette of orange and yellows, together with the distinctive treatment of the background, in which the architecture and mountains are arranged in horizontal bands, suggest a relatively late date for the work. On the basis of photographs, Till-Holger Borchert, to whom we are grateful, proposes that the panel may have been executed sometime after 1540, reflecting an awareness of artistic developments in Antwerp at that time.