.jpg?w=1)
拍品专文
This composition is based on Dürer's Saint Jerome painted in 1521 for Ruy Fernández de Almeida, Ambassador of King John III of Portugal, now in the Museu Nacional de Arte Antiga, Lisbon. Van Cleve adhered closely to this prototype in the attitude, if not in the detailed characterization, of the saint: his saint is less cragged in feature, and there are numerous differences in the drapery. The shelf on which Dürer's saint rests his right elbow is, in Joos van Cleve's composition, hidden by the open page of the book. The angle of the skull is changed, and van Cleve omits the jawbone of the prototype. He moves the ink well and quill and introduces the candle and snuffer. Dürer's plain background with a crucifix is replaced by the more elaborate setting - the 'Inside of the House' of the 1807 Fife catalogue - with its window and hourglass and the shelf with its flask, glass, and, below, the situla and rosary hanging from nails.
This picture has not been widely available for study since 1924 - although the late David Carritt arranged for it to be seen by John Hand, and the existence of numerous variants of the design has obscured its status. In 1934 Friedländer illustrated this picture - as in the Fife Collection - with an unqualified attribution to Joos van Cleve, remarking that it, and his no. 39b in the Hanover collection at Pattensen, which is of marginally larger dimensions, 'coincide in virtually every detail and clearly bespeak the formal idiom of our master' (as translated in the 1972 edition, in which the attribution of both pictures is, however, qualified). Hand, who acknowledges the calibre of both the Camrose and Hanover pictures, has recently published a further panel, from the J.P. Heseltine and F.A. White collections at Princeton, which is dated 1528: in reproduction at least the latter seems less vigorous than this panel. The vigorous underdrawing in the present picture, not least in the face and beard, and the pentimenti in the design of the saint's cap (in this respect the Hanover picture may correspond more closely with the original line in the present panel) would seem to confirm its autograph status.
The main difference between this and the Hanover picture is that in the latter the apple on the window sill is moved to the position of the hourglass, which is in turn transferred to a small niche under the shelf on the right, thus displacing the situla with the aspergillum which hangs from the nail. In the Princeton picture the apple takes the place of the hourglass: the box behind the flask and the snuffer are omitted, as are the shadows cast by the glass and the flask. In the Camrose and Hanover pictures the Bible is double-columned and in Latin: the Princeton text, of eighteen rather than twenty-four lines, is in Dutch. The arrangement of shelf, flask, rosary and situla in this picture is followed in a differing Saint Jerome composition in which the Saint is bare-chested behind a desk with two windows beyond (Friedländer, no. 40a, whereabouts unknown; an apparently good version recorded with the Norton Gallery, Palm Beach (reproduction in the Witt library); copies, Friedländer, nos. 40b, Salzburg, Museum Carolino Augusteum and 40c (untraced); further copies were formerly in the Chillingworth and Pasqualini collections): in that composition the skull and candlestick correspond with the Camrose, Hanover and Princeton pictures, but the candle has guttered to the left as in that at Princeton.
The popularity of this composition is attested by numerous copies, the majority of which depend on the present picture rather than that at Hanover. These include two pictures recorded by Friedländer (nos. 39c and d, respectively in a Berlin collection and at Althorp, the latter with additional Renaissance decorations on the wall behind); a copy of the present picture from the Durcel and Walters collection sold at Parke-Bernet, New York, 14 Jan. 1943, lot 73; a variant, in which the position of the glass and the flask on the shelf was reversed, sold at Christie's, London, 29 Nov. 1968, lot 110; and a poor copy sold at Sotheby's, 12 Nov. 1991, lot 66. A variant in the Johnson collection, Philadelphia (no. 387), with numerous alterations in the background, is characterized by Friedländer (no. 39e) as 'an imitation leaning strongly towards caricature'. The popularity of the composition is explained by Friedländer (1972, p. 31): 'On the eve of the struggles of the Reformation, the learned, brooding searcher after God represented an appropriate ideal; and the picture by [Dürer], who was regarded with awe, carries a sense of austere gravity and scruple that comes through in even the most indifferent imitations.' The qualities of this panel fully explain the popularity of van Cleve's restatement of Dürer's design.
We are indebted to Dr. Lorne Campbell for information about iconography and the 1994 publication.
This picture has not been widely available for study since 1924 - although the late David Carritt arranged for it to be seen by John Hand, and the existence of numerous variants of the design has obscured its status. In 1934 Friedländer illustrated this picture - as in the Fife Collection - with an unqualified attribution to Joos van Cleve, remarking that it, and his no. 39b in the Hanover collection at Pattensen, which is of marginally larger dimensions, 'coincide in virtually every detail and clearly bespeak the formal idiom of our master' (as translated in the 1972 edition, in which the attribution of both pictures is, however, qualified). Hand, who acknowledges the calibre of both the Camrose and Hanover pictures, has recently published a further panel, from the J.P. Heseltine and F.A. White collections at Princeton, which is dated 1528: in reproduction at least the latter seems less vigorous than this panel. The vigorous underdrawing in the present picture, not least in the face and beard, and the pentimenti in the design of the saint's cap (in this respect the Hanover picture may correspond more closely with the original line in the present panel) would seem to confirm its autograph status.
The main difference between this and the Hanover picture is that in the latter the apple on the window sill is moved to the position of the hourglass, which is in turn transferred to a small niche under the shelf on the right, thus displacing the situla with the aspergillum which hangs from the nail. In the Princeton picture the apple takes the place of the hourglass: the box behind the flask and the snuffer are omitted, as are the shadows cast by the glass and the flask. In the Camrose and Hanover pictures the Bible is double-columned and in Latin: the Princeton text, of eighteen rather than twenty-four lines, is in Dutch. The arrangement of shelf, flask, rosary and situla in this picture is followed in a differing Saint Jerome composition in which the Saint is bare-chested behind a desk with two windows beyond (Friedländer, no. 40a, whereabouts unknown; an apparently good version recorded with the Norton Gallery, Palm Beach (reproduction in the Witt library); copies, Friedländer, nos. 40b, Salzburg, Museum Carolino Augusteum and 40c (untraced); further copies were formerly in the Chillingworth and Pasqualini collections): in that composition the skull and candlestick correspond with the Camrose, Hanover and Princeton pictures, but the candle has guttered to the left as in that at Princeton.
The popularity of this composition is attested by numerous copies, the majority of which depend on the present picture rather than that at Hanover. These include two pictures recorded by Friedländer (nos. 39c and d, respectively in a Berlin collection and at Althorp, the latter with additional Renaissance decorations on the wall behind); a copy of the present picture from the Durcel and Walters collection sold at Parke-Bernet, New York, 14 Jan. 1943, lot 73; a variant, in which the position of the glass and the flask on the shelf was reversed, sold at Christie's, London, 29 Nov. 1968, lot 110; and a poor copy sold at Sotheby's, 12 Nov. 1991, lot 66. A variant in the Johnson collection, Philadelphia (no. 387), with numerous alterations in the background, is characterized by Friedländer (no. 39e) as 'an imitation leaning strongly towards caricature'. The popularity of the composition is explained by Friedländer (1972, p. 31): 'On the eve of the struggles of the Reformation, the learned, brooding searcher after God represented an appropriate ideal; and the picture by [Dürer], who was regarded with awe, carries a sense of austere gravity and scruple that comes through in even the most indifferent imitations.' The qualities of this panel fully explain the popularity of van Cleve's restatement of Dürer's design.
We are indebted to Dr. Lorne Campbell for information about iconography and the 1994 publication.