Calvary and the Resurrection. Elongated, attenuated figures.
680. Giles Mostaert (the elder): Singular complex picture, painted for
the Hospital of Antwerp; representing, above, The General Resurrection:
Christ enthroned between Our Lady and St. John-Baptist. Beneath, naked
souls rising from the tomb. To the L., St. Peter welcomes the just at
the gate of the Celestial City. To the R., devils drive the wicked into
the gaping jaws of Hell. Beneath, the courses that lead to either end:
the Seven Works of Mercy, inspired by the Redeemer, and the Seven Deadly
Sins, suggested by devils. I will leave you to identify them (it is
easy).
Go on into
ROOM D,
containing more works of the Transition. These large altar-pieces of the
early 17th century, the period of the greatest wealth in Antwerp, though
often frigid, as works of art, are at least interesting as showing the
opulence and the tastes of the Antwerp guilds during the epoch of the
Spanish domination. They are adapted to the huge Renaissance churches
then erected, as the smaller triptychs of the 15th century were adapted
to the smaller Gothic altars.
529. Feast of Archers, with the King of the Archers enthroned in the
background.
696, 697. Tolerable portraits by Pourbus.
183. A Madonna by Gossaert.
114. Frans Floris: St. Luke painting, with his bull most realistically
assisting, and his workman grinding his colours. From the old Academy of
Painters, whose patron was St. Luke. Italian influence.
135. Ambrose Francken: Loaves and fishes.
148. The same. Decollation of St. Cosmo and St. Damian: painted for the
Guild of Physicians, of whom these were the patron saints.
357. A splendid and luminous =Titian=, in the curious courtly ceremonial
manner of the Venetian painters. **Pope Alexander VI. (Borgia), in a
beautiful green dalmatic, introducing to the enthroned St. Peter his
friend, Giovanni Sforza da Pesaro, Bishop of Paphos, and admiral of the
Pope’s fleet. At the bishop’s feet lies his helmet, to show his double
character as priest and warrior. He grasps the banner of the Borgias and
of the Holy Church. In the background (to show who he is), the sea and
fleet. St. Peter’s red robe is splendid. The Venetians frequently paint
similar subjects,—“Allow me to introduce to your Sainthood,” etc. This
is a fine work in Titian’s early harder manner, still somewhat
reminiscent of the School of Bellini. Its glorious but delicate colour
comes out all the better for the crudity of the works around it.
146. Ambrose Francken: St. Cosmo and St. Damian, the Doctor Saints,
amputating an injured leg, and replacing it by the leg of a dead Moor.
In the background, other episodes of their profession. (Wing of the
triptych for the Guild of Physicians.)
83. M. De Vos: Triptych, painted for the Guild of the Mint, and allusive
to their functions. _Centre_, The Tribute Money. “Render unto Cæsar,”
etc., with tempting Pharisees and Sadducees, and Roman soldiers. In the
foreground, St. Peter in blue and yellow, with his daughter Petronilla.
_Left wing_: Peter, similarly habited, finds the tribute money in the
fish’s mouth. _Right wing_: The Widow’s Mite. (The French titles, “Le
Denier de César,” “Le Denier du Tribut,” “Le Denier de la Veuve,” bring
out the allusion better.)
88. M. De Vos: St. Luke painting Our Lady, with his bull, as ever, in
attendance. The wings by others. L., St. Luke preaching. R., St. Paul
before Felix. From the altar of the (painters’) Confraternity of St.
Luke in the Cathedral.
113. Frans Floris: Adoration of the Shepherds. Note persistence of
formal elements from old School, with complete transformation of spirit.
663. Floris: Judgement of Solomon.
112. Frans Floris’s horrible St. Michael conquering the devils; the most
repulsive picture by this repulsive and exaggerated master.
Right and left of it, good late Flemish portraits of donors.
483. Portrait by Van Veen, Rubens’s master.
ROOM E
contains chiefly works of the school of Rubens, most of which can now be
satisfactorily comprehended by the reader without much explanation. I
will therefore treat them briefly.
=Left of the door=,
82. A Nativity, by De Vos. Can be instructively compared with earlier
examples.
57. Good 17th century landscape.
646. Attributed to Brueghel: Paying tithes.
644. P. Brueghel the Younger: A village merry-making (“Kermesse
Flamande”). With more than the usual vulgarity of episode.
722 and 724. Capital portraits.
Good Still life, etc.
ROOM F
contains nothing which the reader cannot adequately understand for
himself. Omit Room G for the present (it contains the Dutch Masters),
and turn instead into
ROOM H,
mostly devoted to works of the =School of Rubens=.
_End Wall_, 305. =Rubens=: *The Last Communion of the dying St. Francis
of Assisi. A famous work, in unusually low tones of colour—scarcely
more than chiaroscuro. St. Francis, almost nude, is supported by his
friars. Above, angels, now reduced to cherubs, wait to convey his soul
to Heaven. Painted for the altar of St. Francis in the Franciscan Church
of the Récollets. See it from the far end of the room, where it becomes
much more luminous.
On either side, 662, good portrait by S. De Vos (himself, dashing and
vigorous: every inch an artist): and
104. C. De Vos: Admirable and life-like **portrait of the messenger or
porter of the Guild of St. Luke, the Society of Painters of Antwerp,
exhibiting the plate belonging to his confraternity. He is covered with
medals, which are the property of the Society, and has the air of a
shrewd and faithful servant. This living presentment of a real man is
deservedly popular.
661. Tolerable portrait by C. De Vos.
403. Van Dyck’s *Entombment (or Pietà), often called Descent from the
Cross. This is one of his noblest pictures, but badly restored.
335. Angry swans disturbed by dogs. Snyders.
215. Jordaens: Last Supper. The effect of gloom somewhat foreshadows
Rembrandt.
401. Van Dyck: **A Dominican picture (Guiffrey calls it “cold and
empty”), painted at his father’s dying wish for the Dominican Nunnery at
Antwerp. The two great saints of the Order, St. Dominic, the founder,
and St. Catherine of Assisi, the originator of the female branch, stand
at the foot of the Cross, which is itself a secondary object in the
picture. St. Dominic looks up in adoration; St. Catherine, wearing the
crown of thorns, fervently embraces the feet of the Saviour. On the
base, a child angel, in a high unearthly light, with a half extinguished
torch, points with hope to the figure of the crucified Lord. The whole
is emblematic of belief in a glorious Resurrection, through the aid of
the Dominican prayers. Interesting inscription on the rock: “Lest earth
should weigh too heavily on his father’s soul, A. van Dyck rolled this
stone to the foot of the Cross, and placed it in this spot.”
381. Van Hoeck: Madonna and Child, with St. Francis, from the Franciscan
Church of the Récollets.
660. Tolerable portrait by C. De Vos.
406. Van Dyck’s noble **Crucifixion, with the sun and moon darkened. One
of his most admirable pictures.
677. Jordaens: **Charming family scene, known by the title of “As sing
the Old, so pipe the Young.” Three generations—grandparents, parents,
and children—engaged in music together. Very catching: a most popular
picture.
734. Good *portrait of a priest, by Van Dyck.
402. Fine *portrait of a bishop of Antwerp, by Van Dyck.
404. Van Dyck: **Pietà, altar-piece for a chapel of Our Lady of the
Seven Sorrows. Our Lady holds on her lap the dead Christ, while St. John
points out with his finger the wound in His hand to pitying angels. All
the formal elements in this scene—Our Lady, St. John, the angels,
etc.—belong to the earlier conception of the Pietà, but all have been
entirely transfigured by Van Dyck in accordance partly with the
conceptions of the School of Rubens, though still more with his own
peculiar imagination. It is interesting, however, to note in this
touching and beautiful picture, full of deep feeling, how far the type
of the St. John has been inherited, remotely, from the School of Van der
Weyden. Even the red robe and long hair persist. The features, too, are
those with which we are familiar. This is one of the gems of the
collection. It shows the direct influence of Italian travel modifying
Van Dyck’s style, acquired from Rubens.
This room also contains several other excellent works of the School of
Rubens or his more or less remote followers, which I need not
particularize.
Now continue into
ROOM I,
containing what are considered to be the =gems= among the =Rubenses= and
the =later pictures=.
Right of the door, Rubens and Brueghel, 319: Small copy of the Dead
Christ. Schut, 327: The Beheading of St. George. A pagan priest, behind,
endeavours to make him worship an image of Apollo. Above, angels wait to
convey his soul to Heaven. This is a somewhat confused picture, with a
spacious composition and a fine luminous foreground: it is considered
its painter’s masterpiece. Intended for the altar of the Archers (whose
patron was St. George), in Antwerp Cathedral.
673. Good still life by Gysels.
669. F. Francken: Portraits of a wealthy family in their own picture
gallery.
107. C. De Vos: *Portraits of the Snoek family, in devotion to St.
Norbert. This picture requires a little explanation. St. Norbert was the
Catholic antagonist of the heretic Tankelin at Antwerp in the 12th
century. In this frankly anachronistic picture the Snoek family of the
17th century, portly, well-fed burghers, are represented restoring to
the mediæval saint the monstrance and other church vessels removed from
his church during the Calvinist troubles. The Snoeks are _living
personages_; the Saint is envisaged as a _heavenly character_. It is, in
short, a highly allegorical picture of the family showing their devotion
to true Catholicism, and their detestation of current heresy. In the
background stands the town of Antwerp, with the Cathedral and St.
Michael. (From the burial chapel of the Snoek family at St. Michael.)
There is a Brueghel in Brussels Museum, representing St. Norbert
preaching against Tankelin.
307. Beyond the door, Rubens: **Triptych, to adorn a tomb, for the
funerary chapel of his friend Rockox. Compare, for size and purpose, the
Moretus tomb in the Cathedral. It shows the painter’s early careful
manner, and represents in its _central piece_ the Incredulity of St.
Thomas. On the _wings_, the Burgomaster Nicolas Rockox, and his wife,
for whose tomb it was painted. The wings are finer than the central
portion. This early work, still recalling Van Veen’s academic tone,
should be compared with the Van Veens and also with Rubens’s fine
portrait of himself and his brother, with Lipsius and Grotius, in the
Pitti at Florence. It marks the earliest age, when he was still content
with comparatively small sizes, and gave greater elaboration to his
work, but without his later dash and vigour. M. Rooses thinks ill of it.
781. *Fine farmyard scene by Rubens, with the story of the Prodigal Son
in the foreground. One of the many signs of his extraordinary
versatility.
Beyond, on either side of the great Rubens, to be noticed presently, are
two pictures by his master, Otto van Veen: 480, The Calling of Matthew,
and 479, Zacchæus in the Fig-Tree. These two careful works recall the
later Italian Schools, more particularly Titian, and are good examples
of that careful academic transitional Flemish art which Rubens was to
transform and revivify by the strength of his own exuberant and powerful
personality. They are admirably placed here for comparison with
297. Rubens’s famous altar-piece of the Crucifixion, for the Church of
the Franciscans, commonly known as the =**Coup de Lance=. In this
splendid work Rubens is seen in one of his finest embodiments. The
figure of Christ has fine virility. St. Longinus, to the L., on a white
horse, is in the very act of piercing his side. The Magdalen, embracing
the foot of the Cross, as ever, throws up her arms with supplicating
gesture. To the R. is the Madonna. Behind, a soldier is engaged in
breaking the limbs of the Impenitent Thief (always on Christ’s L.) who
writhes in his torture. The whole work is full of Rubens’s life and
bustle, well contrasted with the academic calm of the Van Veens beside
it. Even those who do not love Rubens (and I confess I am of them) must
see in such a work as this how his great powers _succeeded_ in effects
at which his contemporaries aimed ineffectually. Boldly dramatic, but
not sacred.
300. **Triptych by Rubens, commonly known as the =Christ à la Paille=,
painted for a tomb in the Cathedral (compare the Moretus one). In the
centre is a Pietà: Joseph of Arimathea supporting the dead body of the
Christ on the edge of a stone covered with straw. Behind, Our Lady and
another Mary, with the face of St. John just appearing in the
background. This “too famous” work is rather a study of the dead nude
than a really sacred picture. Some of its details overstep the
justifiable limits of horror. The _wings_ are occupied by, L., a
so-called Madonna and Child, really a portrait of a lady and boy—(his
wife and son?): R., St. John the Evangelist (patron of the person for
whose tomb it was painted), accompanied by his eagle.
706. Admirable *portrait by Rubens of Gaspard Groaerts, town secretary.
The bust is Marcus Aurelius.
171. J. Fyt: Excellent screaming eagles, with a dead duck. One of the
earliest and best presentations of wild life at home.
315. Rubens: Small copy (with variations) of the Descent from the Cross
in the Cathedral (by a pupil).
708. One of the best *portraits by Rubens in the Gallery, subject
unknown: lacks personal dignity, but Rubens has made the most of him.
The rest of this wall is occupied by some tolerable gigantic
altar-pieces and other good works of the School of Rubens. Most of them
derive their chief interest from their evident inferiority in design and
colour to the handicraft of the Master. They are the very same
thing—with the genius omitted.
_End wall_, 314, Rubens: called the =*Holy Trinity=. The Almighty
supports on His knees the figure of the dead Christ. Behind, hovers the
Holy Ghost. On either side, boy angels hold the crown of thorns, the
three nails, and the other implements of the Passion. This is really a
study in the science of foreshortening, and in the painting of the dead
nude, largely suggested, I believe, by a still more unpleasing Mantegna
in the Brera at Milan.
719. Above. Excellent fishmongery by Snyders.
212. Janssens: The Schelde bringing wealth to Antwerp, in the
allegorical taste of the period.
712. Rubens: St. Dominic.
172. Fyt: Excellent dogs and game.
299. Rubens: An **allegorical picture to enforce the efficacy of the
prayers of =St. Theresa=. The foundress of the Scalzi, dressed in the
sober robe of her Carmelite Order, is interceding with Christ for the
soul of Bernardino de Mendoza, the founder of a Carmelite convent at
Valladolid. Below, souls in Purgatory. In the left-hand corner stands
Bernardino, whom, at St. Theresa’s prayer, angels are helping to escape
from torment. A fine luminous picture of a most unpleasing subject.
Painted for the altar of St. Theresa in the church of her own barefooted
Carmelites.
405. Van Dyck: Magnificent portrait of Cesare Alessandro Scaglia, in
black ecclesiastical robes, with lace cuffs and collar, and the almost
womanish delicate hands of a diplomatic, astute, courtier-like
ecclesiastic. The thoughtful eyes and resolute face might belong to a
Richelieu.
306. Rubens: =**The Education of the Virgin=, painted for a chapel of
St. Anne. A charming domestic picture of a wealthy young lady of
Flanders, pretending to be Our Lady, in a beautifully painted white silk
gown. Beside her, her mother, a well-preserved St. Anne, of aristocratic
matronly dignity. Behind is St. Joachim, and above, two light little
baby angels. The feeling of the whole is graceful courtly-domestic.
481, 482. Two scenes from the life of St. Nicholas, by Van Veen, the
master of Rubens. R., he throws through a window three purses of gold as
dowries for the three starving daughters of a poor nobleman. (This
ornate treatment contrasts wonderfully with the simpler early Italian
pictures of the same subject.) L., he brings corn for the starving poor
of Myra. Both pictures represent the _bourgeois_ saint in his favourite
character of the benefactor of the poor. They are here well placed for
contrast with
298. Rubens: =**Adoration of the Magi=, considered to be his finest
embodiment of this favourite subject, and one of his masterpieces. R.,
Our Lady and Child, with the ox in the foreground, and St. Joseph behind
her. L., two kings make their offerings. Behind them, the third, a Moor,
in an Algerian costume, leering horribly. Above, the ruined temple, the
shed, and the camels. M. Max Rooses calls this work “the _chef d’œuvre_
by which Rubens inaugurated his third manner,” and other critics praise
loudly its gorgeous colouring, its audacious composition, its marvellous
certainty. To me, the great canvas, with its hideous ogling Moor, is
simply unendurable; but I give the gist of authoritative opinion.
312. Rubens: *The Holy Family, known as =La Vierge au Perroquet=. It is
chiefly remarkable as a rich and gorgeous piece of colouring, with a
charming nude boy of delicious innocence.
313. Rubens: *Crucifixion. One of his best embodiments of this subject.
Opposite wall.
709. Rubens, partly made-up: Jupiter and Antiope. A mythological
subject, treated in a somewhat Italian style, with a quaint little
huddling Cupid in the foreground.
Beyond this, three designs by Rubens for Triumphal Cars and Arches, on
the occasion of the entry of Ferdinand of Austria in 1635.
The whole of this room contains several other excellent altar-pieces,
many of which are Franciscan.
ROOM J.
R. and L. of the door, 105, C. De Vos: Portraits of a husband and wife,
with their sons and daughters.
370. Van Cortbemde: The Good Samaritan, pouring in oil and wine in a
most literal sense. In the background, the priest and the Levite.
109. Fine portrait of a well-fed Flemish merchant, William Van Meerbeck,
by C. De Vos. Behind him his patron, St. William.
748. Van Thulden: Continence of Scipio.
265. Murillo (Spanish School). St. Francis. A reminiscence of the older
subject of his receiving the Stigmata. It has the showy and affected
pietism of the Spaniards. A mere study.
214. Jordaens: Pharaoh in the Red Sea.
=Room N= contains several good portraits and views of the town and other
places, of the 17th and 18th centuries, many of them excellent as
studies of Old Antwerp, enabling us to appreciate the greatness of the
architectural losses which the city has sustained. These, however, are
essentially works for the visitor to inspect at his leisure. They need
little or no explanation. Notice especially 728, 348, 726.
775. Good unknown Flemish portrait.
22. Portraits by Boeyermans.
Room O, beyond, is filled for the most part with canvases of the school
of Rubens, mainly interesting for comparison with the works of the
master, and needing little comment.
Now return to
ROOM G,
containing the =Dutch Pictures=. Many of these are masterpieces of their
sort, but need here little save enumeration. The Reformation turned
Dutch art entirely upon portraiture, landscape, and domestic scenes.
Dutch art is =frankly modern=.
338. Jan Steen: Samson and the Philistines, as Jan Steen imaged it.
767. Admirable calm sea-piece, by Van der Capelle.
752. Weenix poaching on Hondecoeter’s preserves.
502. A beautiful little Wynants.
399. W. van de Velde the younger: Calm sea, with ships.
398. Admirable cows, by A. van de Velde.
293. =Rembrandt=: **Admirable portrait of his wife, Saskia; almost a
replica of the one at Cassel, perhaps either painted by a pupil, or else
from memory after her death, and badly restored. It breathes Dutch
modesty.
349. Terburg: *Girl playing a mandoline.
705. Excellent *portrait of a Burgomaster, by Rembrandt.
324. A charming Schalken.
628. Unknown: perhaps =Frans Hals=: Excellent portrait of a calm old
lady.
668. Karel du Jardin: Admirable landscape, with cows.
188. Celebrated and vigorous **Fisher-boy of Haarlem, with a basket, by
=Frans Hals=, rapidly touched with the hand of a master.
339. One of Jan Steen’s village merry-makings.
26. Delicate soft landscape, by J. and A. Both.
675. A mill, by Hobbema.
768. Van der Velde: Fine landscape, with cows.
427. Flowers by Van Huysum.
674. Admirable *portrait, by Frans Hals, of a round-faced, full-blooded,
sensuous Dutch gentleman. Full of dash and vigour.
738. Venus and Cupid, by W. van Mieris.
437. Excellent fishmonger, by W. van Mieris.
466. *The Smoker, by A. van Ostade.
682. Arch and charming portrait, by Mytens.
773. A fine Wynants.
382. B. van der Helst: Child with a dog.
679. Some of Molenaer’s peasant folk.
713. Ruysdael: *Waterfall in Norway.
The room is full of other fine and delicately-finished pictures of the
Dutch School, of which I say nothing, only because they are of the kind
which are to be appreciated by careful examination, and which do not
need explanation or description.
Room K. contains Flemish works of the later School of Rubens and the
beginning of the decadence.
The remaining rooms of the Gallery have =modern pictures=, belonging to
the _historical_ and to the _archaic_ Schools of Antwerp. These works
lie without the scope of the present Guides, but many of them are of the
highest order of merit, and they well deserve attention both for their
own intrinsic excellence and for comparison with the works of the 15th
and early 16th centuries on which they are based. The paintings of Leys
and his followers, mainly in Room T, are especially worth consideration
in this connection. These painters have faithfully endeavoured to revert
to the principles and methods of the great early Flemish Masters, and
though their work has often the almost inevitable faults and failings of
a revival, it cannot fail to interest those who have drunk in the spirit
of Van Eyck and Memling.
On the _ground floor_, a good copy, 413, etc., of the Adoration of the
Lamb at Ghent, useful for filling up the gaps in your knowledge, and
more readily inspected at leisure and from a nearer point of view than
the original. The _portraits_ and _battle scenes_ on the remaining walls
need little comment.
_D_. THE TOWN IN GENERAL
[=Mediæval Antwerp=, now no more, lay within a narrow ring of
walls in the neighbourhood of the Cathedral. Its circumference
formed a rough semi-circle, whose base-line was the Schelde,
while its outer walls may still be traced on a good map about
the Rempart Ste. Catherine and the Rempart du Lombard. This
oldest district still remains on the whole an intricate tangle
of narrow and tortuous streets, with a few ancient buildings.
Later =Renaissance Antwerp= stretched to the limit of the
existing Avenues in their _northern_ part, though the _southern_
portion (from the Place Léopold on) extends beyond the boundary
of the 17th century city, and occupies the site of the huge
demolished Old Citadel, built by Alva. Antwerp, however, has
undergone so many changes, and so few relics of the mediæval age
now survive, that I can hardly apply to its growth the
historical method I have employed in other Belgian towns. It
will be necessary here merely to point out the principal
existing objects of interest, without connecting them into
definite excursions.]