Portraits of ‘Mary of Burgundy’-Part 1: introduction of 9 portraits
On internet very often this type of portrait is mislabelled as Mary of Burgundy from life, and myself I told you it is Margaret of Austria:
But I was forced to rethink that assumption when I discovered that there are many different versions of this painting! I found 9:
According to National Gallery there is 12 at least. (wiki says 13, but wiki is not a credible source). Several are in private collections. I was not able to track them all. What is going on?!
Some historians think they might be copies after lost earlier original or simply mass produced portraits of Magdalen of same/similiar design by same workshop. Not portraits of anybody, but generic paintings. Admitably seeing the almost exact the outfits and similiar features of the ladies, one could easily believe such notion.
But it does not hold under scrunity of nipicker such as myself. There are details hiding in plain sight and you need to be really observant to notice them. There is pattern among them. There is likeness hidden among them.
You can try to guess what it is and for what reason so many portraits would be made. Deliberately same, and yet deliberately slightly different. It has very logical explanation.
I’d love dive deep into my theory, but I know tumblr won’t allow me to save post with too many photos. So I am forced to split it in two(at least). Hence today will be just introduction of portraits, links etc.
The nine portraits:
1) Maria Magdalena, Atelier van de Meester van de vorstenportretten (Mary Magdalene-Workshop of Master of Princely Portraits), c. 1500, Royal museum of Fine Arts of Belgium:
Link: https://www.fine-arts-museum.be/nl/de-collectie/atelier-van-de-meester-van-de-vorstenportretten-maria-magdalena
(Unfortunately online collection was not available in English.)
There is debate whetever Master of Princely portraits and master of Legend of Magdalene could have been same person or members of same workshop, if they could be master and pupil and some paintings are atributed to one or the other. (Exact same scenario as with master of Legend and Pieter van Coninxloo).
I am not sure how accurate is date of c.1500, but if it was true, it could mean this painting is predecesor of all the remaining paintings- inspiration for all of them.
Because rest of them are mostly dated between c.1510-1520(rough estimation) by master of Legend of Magdalene. (Rest is not dated nor atributed.)
However it can be simply misdated. However I do believe the face is not by master of Legend of Magdalene. But whenever workshop is involved, another painter can step in if need be to finish the painting on time. That member could have been the old master(Master of Princely Portraits).
But by then he might have not been very active, and painting could be assumed to be of earlier date, because he was more active back then.
2) Portrait of a Young Woman, possibly Mary of Burgundy, in the guise of Mary Magdalene (c.1500-i don’t agree).Southern Netherlandish School. Private collection:
Clearly this one has few inches cut off in lower part. Sometimes that was deliberately done for no other reasons other than make it fit the smaller frame but also it can happen during fire evacuation-when painting is cut from the frame in hurry to save it.
Link: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Portrait_of_a_Young_Woman,_possibly_Mary_of_Burgundy,_in_the_guise_of_Mary_Magdalene_(c.1500)._Oil_on_panel,_Southern_Netherlandish_School._Private_collection.jpg
It is in private collection(probably), it was last sold at Sotheby, which totally went with identification of it as Mary of Burgundy and forgot to give any information about painting itself. Their description is honestly so bad, I am not even putting link to their past auction.(Usually they are not this bad.)
This one doesn’t look as typical work of Master of Legend of Magdalene-but does account to it being workshop of his. I see some similiarities in face to one portrait by Jan Gossart, but even if so, he could still be part of that workshop.
3)Master of the Magdalen Legend - The Magdalen, c.1510, National Gallery, UK:
Link:https://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/workshop-of-the-master-of-the-magdalen-legend-the-magdalen
4) the Saint Mary Magdalene, from Fogg Museum(Harvard Art Museums), USA,supposedly c.1520(i don’t agree):
(It’s not in great condition, I hope they shall restore it soon)
Links: https://harvardartmuseums.org/collections/object/230310?position=1
If you see it labelled as painting located in Cambridge, it is not inccorect.
But Cambridge, Massachusetts, in USA!!! That is where Harvart Arts Museums are. And I will probably be refering to them as singular-but there are 3, Fogg is one of them. It’s complicated-but this one if in USA, ok?
(And no it is not same one as previous one.)
Photo from 1943 when it was already in Fogg museum shows it in much better condition.
Idk if it deteroriated so badly or if there was lots of overpaint which hid painting’s poor state and now they cleaned it off.
5) Portrait from Musee de Conde, France, which has it as both Mary of Burgundy and Margaret of Austria, c.1510:
Text is later than the painting and hallo is partly overpainted.
https://www.musee-conde.fr/fr/notice/pe-588-portrait-de-marie-de-bourgogne-en-sainte-marie-madeleine-d4d1fea7-4965-42e8-9dad-6a8a8b800706
6)Portrait of “Mary of Burgundy”
Not atributed to anybody.
Link: http://www.artnet.com/artists/anonymous-flemish-bruges-1516/portrait-of-mary-of-burgundy-aW0-fXSfbQneF5WCZKP-dg2
This was on webpage among past auctions, probably ended in private collection. In this case I am not sure if it is copy or not. It could be original with overpaint imo. Or well made copy done before previous painting lost several inches.
7) Mary Magdalene in bust-lenght, Master of the Legend of the Magdalen, lastly in Ludwig Roselius collection, Bremen, Germany (private collection):
Link to photo: https://www.kikirpa.be/en/friedlaender/5350
Hair appears to be overpainted or simply not visible in poor quality of the photo. Despite this the painting is actually usable for comparison without much difficulty.
8)Maria Magdalena, Master of Legend of Magdalene, c.1500-1524, lastly in private collection of Willem van Gelder, Ukkel, photo from 1951:
Link:https://rkd.nl/en/explore/images/51185
I don’t know where it currently is, I’d love to know and see it in colour, but this black and white photo is very good quality and I can work with that, no problem.
9) Maria Magdalena met zalfpot(Mary Magdalen with saltpot), Master of the Legend of Magdalen, c.1500-1524 private collection, photo taken probably in 1947:
Link:https://rkd.nl/en/explore/images/51189
Sadly this photo is of bad quality and makes it almost impossible to work with, because almost every detail is not visible. Without the other paintings it’d be undoable. But like this, we can look at the other paintings, and know what to look for. For example, we know several others have hallo-and this one has too.
I am still missing 3 paintings and I’d love to see them and get better photo of the last one I showed you. If you know any more(or better have pictures), please write to me.
Expert dating ranges from c.1500 to c.1520. In my opinion they are from c.1510-1514, possibly excluding the first one, which might be earlier.
Stylistical differences make me believe we’re looking at workshop, with several different artist involved. But most likely it is workshop of Master of Legend of Magdalene(so the atribution is correct), because his style is notable in almost all paintings.
I don’t know about if paintings were ever tested to see if they are copies, but in most cases I’d say they are truly 16th century originals.
And that begs a question, why would so many paintings like this be created? You’ll find in part 2.
I hope you’ve enjoyed this.
11 notes
·
View notes