Cabinet Decorated with Episodes from the Parable of the Prodigal Son

…; the dealer Sarlius [Jonas Jacob Sarlius?], The Hague; from whom purchased by the museum, 1877;¹¹For the Furniture Department. Letter of 26 August 1878, no. 207 from David van der Kellen to the Minister, Arch. N.M. on loan to the Museum Ons’ Lieve Heer op Solder, Amsterdam, since 1956;²²The top left-hand drawer and painting were stolen 9 January 1974; the painting was replaced by a copy by Jan Everts in 1996. temporarily returned to the museum, 1996 and 1999-2000

ObjectNumber: BK-NM-4190

The subject is the parable of the Prodigal Son, recounted in Luke 15:11-32. On the door in the centre, the father divides the two brothers’ inheritance, 18.4 x 10 cm (sexagonal); on the lid, the younger brother – the Prodigal Son – departs, 18 x 52.3 cm. On the top left-hand drawer (a modern copy⁵⁵The top left-hand drawer and painting were stolen 9 January 1974; the painting was replaced by a copy, based on a photograph, by Jan Everts in 1996.), he arrives at a brothel (all drawers except the one in the centre measure 4 x 22 cm); on the inner side of the right-hand wing, he feasts with a lady of easy virtue, 41 x 29.5 cm; on the inner side of the left-hand wing, he is ejected from the brothel, 41 x 29.7 cm; on the top right-hand drawer, he begins to be ‘in want’; on the drawer second down on the left, he travels ‘to a citizen of that country’; below, he is sent by the citizen ‘to feed swine’; below ‘he would fain have filled his belly with the husks that the swine did eat’; on the drawer second down on the right, a priest refuses him alms – ‘no man gave unto him’ (for further discussion see under SK-C-286); the Prodigal contemplates his fate in the central drawer – when he ‘came to himself’, 6.5 x 14.4 cm; he is reconciled with this father on the right-hand drawer second from the bottom; on the bottom right drawer, the fatted calf is prepared for the feast.

Eight scenes in the set of thirteen are similar to the grisaille/brunaille depictions in SK-C-286, which are by Frans Francken II; indeed, the set under discussion has long been attributed to this artist.⁶⁶A. von Wurzbach, Niederländisches Künstler-Lexikon, 3 vols., Leipzig/Vienna 1906-11, I, p. 552; S. Speth-Holterhoff, Les peintres flamands de cabinets d’amateurs au 17e siècle, Brussels 1957, p. 208, under note 86, and the museum catalogues. Fabri accepts the attribution while considering that to Frans Francken III, see R. Fabri, De 17de-eeuwse Antwerpse Kunstkast: kunsthistorische aspecten. Verhandelingen van de Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten van België, Klasse der Schone Kunsten van België 57, Brussels 1993, pp. 112-13. But it is very probable, as Härting first suggested, that they are by his son Frans Francken III, assisted, it is to be assumed, by his father’s studio in which he had long worked.

The painting on the inner face of the right-hand door is signed ‘Dio ffranck in’; the letters that precede the abbreviated form of the surname very probably stand for ‘D[en] jo[nge]f[rans]’. Evidence that this must refer to Frans Francken II’s homonymous son, who distinguished himself by the appellation ‘jonge’, is provided by the dress, particularly that worn by the Prodigal Son. The wide, linen collar is already worn by Adriaen Brouwer (1603/06-1638) in Van Dyck’s portrait for the Iconography, which must have been executed before the early spring of 1635.⁷⁷Vey in S.J. Barnes, N. de Poorter, O. Millar and H. Vey, Anthony van Dyck: A Complete Catalogue of the Paintings, New Haven (Conn.)/London 2004, III.146, where the proposed date of probably c. 1631 should be brought forward. Such collars appear in the David Teniers II’s (1610-1690) Self-Portrait in a Cabinet of Pictures of that year.⁸⁸Private collection, M. Klinge, David Teniers de Jonge. Schilderijen, tekeningen, exh. cat. Antwerp (Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten) 1991, no. 11 Their width was already being reduced by 1644.⁹⁹Private collection, M. Klinge and D. Lüdke (eds.), David Teniers der Jüngere 1610-1690: Alltag und Vergnügen in Flandern, exh. cat. Karlsruhe (Staatlichen Kunsthalle Karlsruhe) 2005-06, no. 35. It thus seems acceptable to date the set on this ground of fashion to circa 1640. Fabri dates the cabinet 1640-56.¹⁰¹⁰R. Fabri, De 17de-eeuwse Antwerpse Kunstkast: kunsthistorische aspecten. Verhandelingen van de Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten van België, Klasse der Schone Kunsten van België 57, Brussels 1993, caption to fig. 14. The 1952 museum furniture catalogue dated it to the first half of the seventeenth century.

The elder Francken did not die until 1642. But the manner of execution of the Prodigal Son feasting is typical of what little is known of the son’s handling,¹¹¹¹U. Härting, Studien zur Kabinettbildmalerei des Frans Francken II, 1581-1642: Ein repräsentativer Werkkatalog, Hildesheim 1983, pp. 101-07. and the same may be said for the execution of the expulsion from the brothel on the opposite door. Fabri has observed that it is exceptional for a painted panel of a cabinet to be signed;¹²¹²Offered London (Christie’s), 26 November 1976, no. 4. the signature may be connected with Frans Francken III’s becoming a master in the guild in 1639/40.

Peculiar is Francken’s proffered information in the signature that he had devised (‘in’ for invenit) the work, but, by the omission of an ‘f’ (fecit), had (seemingly) not executed it. There is no clear-cut explanation of this (apart from carelessness on the artist’s part), unless Francken was referring to some of the scenes – those on the drawers – which are clearly inferior in handling. If Francken had received the commission to provide painted decorations for a cabinet as a newly independent master, it is likely that he would have obtained assistance from his father’s studio. This is suggested by the similarity between eight of the scenes and those earlier painted by Frans Francken II as a surround to a central image by Hieronymus Francken II (see SK-C-286). A variant of this ensemble suggests that there were indeed available templates for rough and ready reference in the studio.¹³¹³R. Fabri, De 17de-eeuwse Antwerpse Kunstkast: kunsthistorische aspecten. Verhandelingen van de Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten van België, Klasse der Schone Kunsten van België 57, Brussels 1993, p. 77. The chief difference from the grisaille/brunaille scenes is that the costumes of the main protagonists have been brought up to date. Other differences are: 1) in the division of the inheritance, the brother has been introduced; 2) in the departure, the weeping woman and dog have been omitted, the comportment of the horses is altered, and the landscape has been curtailed; 3) in the expulsion, the inn has a new name and sign, the dog has been omitted and the village is less prominent; 4) in the refusal of alms, the church has been simplified, the cross and bones have been left out; 5) in the despair and hunger of the Prodigal Son, the village has been reduced and simplified, as is the case, 6) with the reconciliation; 7) in the preparation of the feast, a servant works at a table, a dog eats from the floor and there is an outdoor view.

To meet the requirement of decorating the cabinet four new scenes had to be introduced. Three of these Fabri describes as depicting the despairing and penniless protagonist;¹⁴¹⁴R. Fabri, De 17de-eeuwse Antwerpse Kunstkast: kunsthistorische aspecten. Verhandelingen van de Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten van België, Klasse der Schone Kunsten van België 57, Brussels 1993, p. 77. but these depictions of the solitary figure may have had some Biblical justification in the account of the parable: the decoration of the top, right-hand drawer may illustrate Luke 15:14: ‘…and he began to feel want’; that second from the top on the left may show Luke 15:15: the Prodigal Son travelling to ‘a citizen of that country’; and that for the central bottom drawer may show him ‘coming to himself’, Luke 15:17. The fourth scene, on the top left-hand drawer, shows him arriving at the brothel, and being offered a drink by a woman as he dismounts. This was perhaps newly invented; curiously it also shows the protagonist wearing the style of lace collar that was to be replaced by the flatter, wider version, shown elsewhere.

Despite the introduction of four new compositions, the feast given to celebrate the Prodigal Son’s return was omitted. It must have been decided that the formats available were too small for rendering such an event. Further, a new depiction showing the Prodigal as he ‘wasted his substance with riotous living’ was required perhaps because in the previous, sequential account of the parable to hand, this had been provided by Hieronymus Francken II, and no templates were available in his brother’s studio; nor, presumably, were records of Frans Francken II’s depictions of the scene, executed not long previously.¹⁵¹⁵Most notably, the parable as depicted in U. Härting, Frans Francken der Jüngere (1581-1642): Die Gemälde mit kritischem Oeuvrekatalog, Freren 1989, no. 161; the brothel scene offered for sale, London (Christie’s), 19 May 1989, no. 117; and the Louvre composite of 1633 (ibid., no. 159), which would have offered another set of templates.

Baarsen has pointed to two general characteristics of the Antwerp decorated cabinet (kunstkastje): that the outer scenes are of a higher standard of handling than the panels decorating the drawers and that in the inner section images are incoherently placed with regard to the narrative.¹⁶¹⁶R. Baarsen, 17th-Century Cabinets, translated by J. Rudge, Amsterdam/Zwolle 2000, p. 24. The positions of the drawers could, of course, have been changed over time. In the case of this cabinet, it would seem that there are perhaps three levels of handling: most accomplished is that on the two wings; then follows that on the lid and central door; more summary is that on the drawers. Although Fabri sees the story as moving from left to right,¹⁷¹⁷R. Fabri, De 17de-eeuwse Antwerpse Kunstkast: kunsthistorische aspecten. Verhandelingen van de Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten van België, Klasse der Schone Kunsten van België 57, Brussels 1993, pp. 80-81. it can hardly be described as following the narrative when the first episode is depicted in the centre of the ensemble.

The meaning of the inscription on the sign above the entrance to the brothel may perhaps be loosely translated as ‘easy credit’.

Gregory Martin, 2022

U. Härting, Studien zur Kabinettbildmalerei des Frans Francken II, 1581-1642: Ein repräsentativer Werkkatalog, Hildesheim 1983, no. B.392; R. Fabri, De 17de-eeuwse Antwerpse Kunstkast: kunsthistorische aspecten. Verhandelingen van de Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten van België, Klasse der Schone Kunsten van België 57, Brussels 1993, pp. 76-81, 112-13

1903, p. 101, no. 938 (as F. Francken II); 1934, p. 102, no. 938; 1952, p. 179, no. 135; 1976, pp. 231-32, no. NM 4190 (as F. Francken II)

G. Martin, 2022, 'Frans (III) Francken, Cabinet Decorated with Episodes from the Parable of the Prodigal Son, c. 1640', in Flemish Paintings in the Rijksmuseum, online coll. cat. Amsterdam: hdl.handle.net/10934/RM0001.COLLECT.56028