Pseudo Jan Wellens de Cock (attributed to)
c. 1515 - c. 1525
oil on panel
support: height 48.8 cm × width 27.5 cm
wing: height 53.9 cm (Incl. frame) × width 33.5 cm (Incl. frame)
depth 3.3 cm
support: height 47.6 cm (painted surface (Circumcision)) × width 26.5 cm (Painted surface (Circumcision)) × height 46.8 cm (Painted surface (Sibyl)) × width 26.5 cm (Painted surface (Sibyl))
The support is a single vertically grained oak plank, approx. 0.5 cm thick, painted on both sides. It has been sawn down at the top, which was probably arched originally. The bottom of the panel may have been trimmed slightly. Dendrochronology has shown that the youngest heartwood ring was formed in 1476. The panel could have been ready for use by 1487, but a date in or after 1501 is more likely. The thin and smooth ground was probably applied in the original frame. In some areas the ground is visible through the paint layers, as in the tile floor on the front and the marble niche on the reverse. There is a barbe and unpainted edges of approx. 0.5 to 0.8 cm on the left and right sides on both the front and back of the panel. There is an underdrawing in a dry medium, probably black chalk, which is visible with infrared reflectography. It consists of contour lines and hatchings for shading and volume. The elaborate underdrawing could be easily detected, especially in the figures of the priest and the Christ Child (fig. a). Except for some lines in the face there was no underdrawing visible in ‘The Virgin’ on the reverse. The paint was applied quite smoothly, and is thicker in the figures. Some impasto was used to suggest texture, especially for the decoration of the column and the headgear of the priest in ‘The Circumcision’. Some minor ‘pentimenti’ are present, in the black and pinkish headgear of the woman on the right in ‘The Circumcision’, for example, the contour lines of which have been moved slightly. The lower part of the Virgin’s right hand on the back of the panel was painted over the underlying paint.
Good. Some pigments may have discoloured. The brownish garment of the priest in The Circumcision, for example, was probably blue originally.
…; from the dealer F. Muller, Amsterdam, fl. 200, as Dutch school, early 16th century, to the museum, 1898; on loan to the Mauritshuis, The Hague, 1948-97
Object number: SK-A-1725
Copyright: Public domain
Pseudo Jan Wellens de Cock (active in Antwerp c. 1520-40)
Several Antwerp archives mention a ‘Jan de Cock, painter’, who according to Van den Branden is identical with Jan Wellens de Cock (Antwerp c. 1470 - Antwerp 1521) recorded in the magistrates’ rolls in 1492. In August 1502 he married Clara van Beeringen, and two of their children were probably the landscape painter Matthijs Cock (c. 1510-before 1548) and the engraver and print publisher Hieronymus Cock (1518-70). In 1502 he was also admitted as an ‘assistant’ to the Antwerp Onze-Lieve-Vrouwe-Lof fraternity, for which he repaired the brothers’ works of art in the cathedral and made woodcuts. The ledgers of the Antwerp Guild of St Luke record two pupils of his in 1507 and 1516, one ‘Loduwyck’ and Wouter Key, none of whose works is known today. De Cock was clearly a respected artist, for he and Joos van Cleve were deans of the Antwerp guild in 1520. It can be deduced from the archives that he died in 1521.
On the basis of stylistic similarities to paintings from the school of Cornelis Engebrechtsz, Friedländer suggested that Jan de Cock may have come from Leiden, and was the ‘Jan van Leyen’ who enrolled as a free master in the Antwerp Guild of St Luke in 1503. However, nothing further is known about this Jan van Leyen, so this identification with Jan de Cock is purely hypothetical.
Although there is not a single signed work by Jan Wellens de Cock known today, Friedländer gave him a few small panels with saints and religious subjects. Friedländer’s point of departure was an unsigned panel of St Christopher, (SK-A-1598, fig. c), for a later 17th-century print after it has the inscription ‘Pictum J. Kock’.1 One feature of the works that Friedländer grouped around it, including the small Crucifixion triptych in the Rijksmuseum (SK-A-1598), are the detailed landscape settings for the figures, many of them saints. The way in which the landscape is shaped by steep crags, and the graceful forms of the figures, correspond not only to the work of the Antwerp Mannerists but also to the Leiden paintings of the same period. As Gibson and others have demonstrated, the similarities to works by presumed pupils of Cornelis Engebrechtsz are striking. In addition, most of the attributed panels seem datable to the 1520s, which virtually demolishes Friedländer’s identification with Jan Wellens de Cock of Antwerp, who died in 1521.
Many of the works that Friedländer attributed to De Cock have therefore gradually been reassigned, by Beets, Hoogewerff and others, to a few of Engebrechtsz’s pupils, such as his sons Cornelis Cornelisz named Kunst (1493-1544) and Lucas Cornelisz named De Cock (1495-?), who are mentioned by Van Mander. Baldass, on the other hand, divided the attributions over two hands: the Master of the Vienna Dismissal of Hagar, and Jan de Cock. Gibson then attributed the works that Baldass had given to Jan de Cock to the Master of the Vienna Lamentation, and regarded both of these anonymous masters as pupils and assistants of Cornelis Engebrechtsz, possibly his sons. It is clear from this art-historical discussion that the paintings attributed to Jan de Cock over the years were in fact executed by different hands, but probably not by Jan de Cock himself. There is no certainty that they originated in either Antwerp or Leiden, and since none of those discussed in this catalogue, which were very probably made in Leiden, can be associated with the Antwerp painter Jan de Cock, they are here catalogued under the ad hoc name of Pseudo Jan Wellens de Cock.
MB/JPFK
References
Rombouts/Van Lerius I, 1864, pp. 58, 65, 87, 94; Van den Branden 1883, pp. 289-90; Thieme/Becker VII, 1912, p. 144; Baldass 1937; Friedländer XI, 1933, pp. 59-72; Beets 1936; Hoogewerff III, 1939, pp. 321-87; Gibson 1969a, pp. 161-200, 250-64; ENP XI, 1973, pp. 37-43; Filedt Kok in Amsterdam 1986a, p. 154; Riggs in Turner 1996, VII, p. 497; Romer in Saur XX, 1998, pp. 70-71; Van der Stock 1998, pp. 115, 119, 121, 207, 228, 258-59, 283; Born in Antwerp 2006, pp. 11-12; Yao-Fen You in Antwerp 2006, p. 224
This small panel is probably the left wing of a triptych with its arched top sawn off. The front shows the Christ Child being circumcised in the Temple. According to the gospels, that took place eight days after his birth, when he was also given the name Jesus (Luke 2:21). It is fairly unusual for Joseph to be holding the Child for the circumcision. That is a task normally performed by the Virgin, who is standing beside him here. The candle that is customary in the scene is being held by one of the onlookers behind Joseph. It is an allusion to Christ as the light of the world, and to the purification of the Virgin, which was often combined with the Circumcision.2 One unusual detail is the three coins hanging from the candle. Such candles were sold to pilgrims as votive offerings, and it is possible that this one alludes to the giving of money that was customary at a circumcision.3 The reverse of the Amsterdam panel has the Virgin standing in a niche with a book. She has hitherto been regarded as a Sibyl, but it is much more likely that she is a Virgin of the Annunciation, as so often found on the outer wings of triptychs.4 As far as is known, no other panels have survived from the triptych. The centre panel was probably an Adoration of the Magi, for there are other examples of such a combination.5
The sketchy underdrawing prepared the figures with short and rather impatient scrawly lines. This is particularly visible under the Christ Child, whose head was defined with several contour lines (fig. a). The figures were carefully reserved in the background on the basis of the underdrawing, with the occasional encroachment over the contour lines. There are a few alterations relative to the underdrawing, particularly in the eyes of several of the figures. The artist drew upright ovals to mark the eyes, but often failed to follow this in the paint. The same is true of the figure of the Virgin on the outer panel.
There has been much speculation about the identity of this artist. Stylistic similarities to the work of Cornelis Engebrechtsz place the panel in Leiden, where it was probably made by one of his pupils. However, there are no works that can be securely attached to those pupils, who included Engebrechtsz’s three sons. Van Gelder, Friedländer and Baldass had earlier attributed the wing to Jan de Cock, who was active in Antwerp.6 Beets hesitantly gave it to Lucas Cornelisz named De Cock or his brother Cornelis Cornelisz named Kunst.7 Gibson assigned it to the Master of the Vienna Lamentation.8 It is true that the figures and faces in the Amsterdam panel do bear a striking resemblance to those in the Vienna Lamentation (fig. b), such as the uneven placement of the eyes remarked upon by Gibson, and the way in which they are underdrawn.9 The manner of painting and the underdrawing in both works, which can be dated between 1520 and 1530, are so closely related that one can only conclude that they are by the same artist.10 The rather heterogenous group of paintings that Gibson attributed to the Master of the Vienna Lamentation needs further investigation, but there is little doubt that the artist can be associated with the workshop of Cornelis Engebrechtsz, and may have been one of his sons.11
MB/JPFK
Van Gelder 1927, p. 74 (as Jan de Cock); Friedländer XI, 1933, pp. 66-70, 126 (as Jan de Cock); Beets 1936, p. 3 (as Cornelis Cornelisz named Kunst or Lucas Cornelisz named De Cock); Baldass 1937, p. 125 (as Jan de Cock); Hoogewerff III, 1939, pp. 372-74 (as Lucas Cornelisz named De Cock); Gibson 1969a, pp. 187, 195, 257, no. 68 (as Master of the Vienna Lamentation); ENP XI, 1974, pp. 42, 78, no. 106 (as Jan de Cock)
1903, p. 7, no. 52 (as Dutch school, beginning of the 16th century); 1934, p. 7, no. 52 (as Dutch school, beginning of the 16th century; attributed to Jan Wellens de Cock); 1976, p. 175, no. A 1725 (as attributed to Cornelis Cornelisz named Kunst; back as 'Grisaille of a sibylle')
M. Balm, 2010, 'attributed to Pseudo Jan Wellens de Cock, Left Wing of an Altarpiece with the Circumcision (inner wing) and the Virgin of an Annunciation (outer wing), c. 1515 - c. 1525', in J.P. Filedt Kok (ed.), Early Netherlandish Paintings, online coll. cat. Amsterdam: hdl.handle.net/10934/RM0001.COLLECT.7481
(accessed 7 May 2024 23:51:48).fig. a Detail of the infrared reflectogram assembly of SK-A-1725, showing the Christ Child (© Stichting RKD)
fig. c Pseudo Jan Wellens de Cock, 'St Christopher with the Christ Child', c. 1520-30. Oil on panel, 35.7 x 45.9 cm. Private collection
fig. a Detail of the infrared reflectogram assembly of SK-A-1725, showing the Christ Child (© Stichting RKD)
fig. b Master of the Vienna Lamentation, 'The Lamentation', c. 1520-30. Oil on panel, 45 x 35 cm. Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum