Crucifixion | Medieval Portland

Description:

Patinir, Joachim (South Netherlandish painter, ca. 1480-before 1524)

Crucifixion
Flemish, 1500

oil on wood
height 72.4 cm
width 59.7 cm

Portland Art Museum European Collection, 41.7
Museum Purchase: Ella M. Hirsch Fund

Erin C. Jones, Medieval Portland Capstone Student, 2008

Located in the European collection at the Portland Art Museum is Crucifixion, an oil painting circa1500 ascribed to the Netherlandish painter Joachim Patinir, although this attribution is debatable. In 16th-century Antwerp, it was commonplace for multiple artists to work on one painting. Although some of the figures seen in other works by Patinir resemble those of the Crucifixion, little else correlates to Patinir's style, thus giving rise to suspicion of the painting's origins. There are major conceptual diversions in composition, especially regarding the relationship of figures to landscape. Most of Patinir's work emphasizes the landscape over the figures, and even the few pieces that have figures in the foreground still have detailed and beautiful landscapes. The Crucifixion at the Portland Art Museum, on the other hand, has figures in the foreground with little attention to the landscape. After comparing the Crucifixion with other paintings by Patinir and by his workshop, it is unlikely that this is a work by Patinir, but because the actual painter is unknown, and collaborative painting was so common, the mistaken attribution to Patinir is not unique and can be found in collections around the world.

The Crucifixion depicts Jesus on the cross with the two thieves slightly behind him at each side. One thief's head hangs down while the other's faces upward, an aspect that almost all depictions of the Crucifixion from this time employ and likely a reference to the Gospel where one thief accepts Jesus as the Savior and is therefore saved. Mary Magdalene kneels while holding the bottom of the cross. On the left, two solemn men hold a lance piercing Jesus' side. In the foreground the Virgin Mary with downcast eyes has collapsed to the ground; two women and John the Apostle comfort her, as described in the Gospel. To the right lies a skeleton, which is a common element in medieval Crucifixion paintings and likely an allusion to Adam and the legend that Adam was buried at the Golgotha. The scene takes place atop the mountain at Calvary, and the walls of Jerusalem are found on the right in the distant background. Although the Bible does not mention the Crucifixion took place on a mountain, it was a common aspect of representations of the Crucifixion from the 6th century onward.

The attribution to Joachim Patinir is not completely unfounded, and the confusion is based in the way that paintings were created in the Netherlands during Patinir's time. Joachim Patinir was born in either 1480 or 1485 in what is currently southwestern Belgium. He worked in Antwerp, an economically prosperous town and a leading commercial center. He is often credited as the father of landscape painting, and although he had influential predecessors, such as Hieronymus Bosch, his contribution to the evolution of landscape painting and his shift in the relation of landscape to figure! s was of great importance. Although little is known about his life, his contemporaries regarded him highly and he greatly influenced successive European painters.

The scale and detail of a painting by Patinir denote its status, that is whether a patron commissioned it or whether it was sold at a market. Because of the strong differences found throughout his work, we know that multiple apprentices or other painters worked to create the various paintings. This was a widespread practice in Antwerp, gaining popularity in the 16th century. Artists would specialize in certain aspects of a painting; Patinir likely started his apprenticeship as a landscape painter and then incorporated and gave reward to this mastery in his own paintings. Most of the paintings attributed to Patinir were created in his workshop, and some of them may not have even met the artist's own hand. The controversy surrounding the Crucifixion begins with the basic uncertainty confronted when identifying any work by Patinir. Some of the works are conceptually quite similar to Patinir but of much lesser quality; these paintings are often attributed to Patinir and his workshop. The composition of the Crucifixion, on the other hand, departs conceptually from many of Patinir's paintings, which obscures its provenance.

Most of Patinir's paintings depict a panoramic landscape with figurines enacting a religious story. The landscape almost always takes precedent, and the horizon usually reaches close to the top of the painting, providing only a small portion of the setting for the sky. The Crucifixion, contrarily, highlights the figures and action versus the landscape, which is in the background on the upper right side, and the perse-colored night dominates the backdrop of the crosses. A similar painting attributed to Patinir's associates, but not Patinir himself, provides for an interesting comparison. Landscape with the Crucifixion on Mount Calvary (c. 1520-1524) conceptually appears to correlate with Patinir's technique. Here, unlike in the Crucifixion at the Portland Art Museum, the landscape is the focus with special detail on the rocky clefs that follows Patinir's formula. The perspective of the scene relates to other works by Patinir, but the figures are completely dissimilar. For these reasons this painting has been attributed to an unknown painter who worked with Patinir, but the work was likely not conducted under Patinir's supervision.

Alejandro Vergara, the editor of Patinir: Essays and Critical Catalogue postulates whether the Crucifixion may have been painted independently by an unknown artist whom Patinir may have employed to paint figures in a few of his works. "The relative flatness of these figures is reminiscent of that found in his works. The bone structure of the man with the turban is close to the figures of Jerome in the Prado and Louvre paintings, and also to some of the Apostles in the Assumption. But the foreshortening and the expressiveness of the three crucified figures are unlike anything found in Patinir" (Vergara 31). It is true that the expressiveness of the two thieves, a highlight in the Crucifixion, is unlike Patinir. And although some works by Patinir have figures in the foreground, they still devote a great deal of attention and space to the landscape.

In comparison to the works that are indubitably Patinir's and those that came from Patinir's workshop but may have only been under his supervision, the Crucifixion diverts strongly from both. Besides the similarities in the structure of a few of the figures, an artist independent from Patinir's supervision likely created this work. This doubt of authorship in regards to Patinir is not uncommon. The number of works attributed to him varies from scholar to scholar and has changed over time.

The most recent and extensive research concludes that there are 29 paintings from Patinir's workshop that exist today; twelve of them are attributed directly to Patinir and the others to his workshop.


	Created: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 - 15:30 Description: Joachim de Patinir (Flemish, ca. 1480-before 1524), Crucifixion, 1500, oil on panel, Museum Purchase: Ella M. Hirsch Fund, no known copyright restrictions, 41.7 Rights: no known copyright restrictions