Gestas, the Bad Thief, from a Calvary

Carved from multiple pieces of boxwood.

The fingers of the henchman’s right hand are missing. A foot claw is the only surviving remnant of the demon above him.¹¹According to the entry in the Hauptinventarbuch of the K.K. Österreichisches Museum für Kunst und Industrie in Vienna (the present-day Museum für Angewandte Kunst), this demon was already absent at the time of the sculpture’s acquisition in 1870 (der Teufel fehlt). The statuette is accompanied by a round, black, profiled, French-polished base. The base likely dates from 1871, the year in which it was added to the sculpture at the time of its acquisition by the K.K. Österreichisches Museum für Kunst und Industrie in Vienna.

…; from the dealer Georg Plach (1818-1885), Vienna, 700 Gulden, to the K.K. Österreichisches Museum für Kunst und Industrie, Vienna, 1871, inv. nos. H.I. 20562, 20563, H 257 and H 258;²²The first numbers are from the museum’s inventory book, the Hauptinventarbuch, where they are described as Schächer mit Engel (H.I. 20562) and Schächer mit Teufel (H.I. 20563). With the other numbers, the sculptures are described in the Holzinventarbuch as Figur des rechten Schächers (H 527) and Figur des linken Schächers (H 258). My thanks to Dr Sebastian Hackenschmidt, Museum für Angewandte Kunst, Vienna (written communication, 31 May 2014). exchange by the museum (by then called Staatliches Kunstgewerbemuseum)³³The two figures and a group of 21 sculptures, as well as furniture pieces and tiles from the museum’s depot were exchanged for a group of Italian 15th- and 16th-century textiles. The two statuettes were appraised at RM 4,000 making them the costliest pieces in the exchange, which amounted to a total worth exceeding RM 20,000. with dealer Oskar Hamel (d. 1946),⁴⁴G. Anderl, ‘Die Stunde der Ariseure: Die unrühmliche Rolle die der Kunsthandel bei der ‘Arisierung’ jüdischen Vermögens gespielt hat: Ein Sittenbild aus dem Wien der jahre 1938ff’, Der Standard (Album), 3-4 October 2009: ‘Dealer duo Karoline Nehammer and Oskar Hamel were among the most shameless beneficiaries of this situation. According to official investigations after the war, Hamel’s assets had increased more than 13-fold during the Nazi era, and the spreads between purchase and sale prices had been exorbitant. A report written in August 1945 by the department for safeguarding assets in the then State Office for the Interior says about Hamel’s rise after the ‘Anschluss’: ‘The business was very modest. That changed fundamentally when the upheaval came. Hamel got going and became a millionaire. Today he owns the former Liechtenstein Castle Seebenstein, which he prepared as a furniture depot, then a furniture warehouse in the tennis hall of the Auersperg Palais, then the shop at 11 Piaristengasse and is Treasurer of the Dorotheum.’’ (translated from the German). Vienna, 30 May 1943; acquired by Hubert W. Krantz (d. 1963), Aachen, 1943; his heirs, sale Cologne (Van Ham), 16 November 2013, no. 1204 (as ‘South-German, 18th century’), €12,500, to the dealer Hopp-Gantner, Starnberg, 2013; from whom, €98,000, to the museum, with the support of the Frits en Phine Verhaaff Fonds/Rijksmuseum Fonds and the Ebus Fonds/Rijksmuseum Fonds, July 2014

ObjectNumber: BK-2014-20-2

Credit line: Purchased with the support of the Frits en Phine Verhaaff Fonds/Rijksmuseum Fonds and the Ebus Fonds/Rijksmuseum Fonds

The legend of Dysmas and Gestas, respectively the good and the bad thief who flanked Christ on the cross on Mount Golgotha, was passed down via the apocryphal Acts of Pilate (part of the Gospel of Nicodemus).⁵⁵G. Schiller, Iconography of Christian Art, vol. 2 (The Passion of Jesus Christ), London/New York 1972, pp. 13, 14, 89. The good thief, Dysmas (see BK-2014-20-1), hangs from a cross made from two tree trunks; binding him to the cross are cords carved from the same piece of wood. His body is depicted in an expressive, contorted pose, with his arms and legs positioned diagonally. He is dressed in a loincloth and a jerkin that opens in front, held together by several short lengths of cord, with his bare upper chest exposed. As part of the original Crucifixion group to which he almost certainly belonged, Dysmas’s bearded face gazed sorrowfully over his left shoulder in the direction of the crucified figure of Christ. His face appears drawn and bleak, with sharp eyes and open mouth. The woodcarver has excelled in the rendering of numerous minute details, such as the freely hanging ropes and cords, elements of the clothing (buttons, buttonholes), teeth, toes, muscles and veins on the thighs and feet, but also the full head of curly hair, and lastly, the tree bark of the wooden cross. Standing above the thief is an angel wearing a long robe who, in recognition of the thief’s penitence, has come to save his soul.

The bad thief, Gestas (shown here), hangs from his respective cross in a far more tormented pose than his counterpart Dysmas. His pained, beardless face twists unnaturally upwards, entirely oblivious of Christ on the cross. Emerging from his mouth was the soul of this impenitent thief, torn from his body via his widely gaping mouth by the (now missing) figure of a demon. His arms wrench backwards at an agle over the cross, bound by winding lengths of the rope. Gestas’s clothing is more ornate than the other thief, with cords closing his long-sleeved jerkin in front, worn over a chemise. His full-length stockings – hose – are torn at the right knee, with his two feet emerging at the bottom. Over his hose, the man wears a braguette or codpiece tied to the jacket via short cords. Here too the woodcarver has taken every effort to incorporate various motifs with accuracy and precision, but without becoming lost in an overabundance of detail: the freely hanging ropes and cords, elements of the clothing (buttons, buttonholes, ropes), wrinkles in the face, and lushly descending curls of hair. Even the taught skin around the thief’s left heel has been depicted by the sculptor with naturalness.

When viewed collectively, the angular style of the drapery folds, the relatively uncommon iconography of clothed thieves with expressive, tormented poses – as well as the use of boxwood – all strongly point to a sculptor’s atelier in the Low Countries, or perhaps even more probable, the bordering region of the lower Rhine. Such an origin is additionally confirmed by a variety of motifs and stylistic elements belonging to the repertoire of the early-sixteenth-century woodcarvers active in this part of Europe.

Examples of figures comparable to the present Thieves crucified on the cross are found on a number of large Passion retables from Antwerp and Brussels. These also share the fine detailing of the clothing with carved dangling ropes and cords binding the figures’ limbs to the cross. Nevertheless, these observable similarities are insufficiently convincing for a definitive attribution in the Southern Netherlands.⁶⁶Cf. for example the altarpieces at Jäder and Skeptuna (Sweden) (Brussels, c. 1515-20), see B. D’Hainaut-Zveny (ed.), Miroirs du sacré: Les retables sculptés à Bruxelles XVe-XVIe siècles: Production, Formes et usages, Brussels 2005, pp. 211 (B32, with clothed thieves), 213 (B35); a retable by Jan Borman in Villberga (Sweden) (Brussels, c. 1520) and altarpieces in Münstermaifeld (Antwerp, c. 1518-19), Rhynern (Antwerp, c. 1520), see De Boodt and Schäfer 2007, p. 21 (Villberga, clothed thieves), 136 (Münstermaifeld, clothed thieves), 147 (Rhynern); and the retables at Kempen (Antwerp, c. 1520-30), Hulshout (Antwerp, c. 1510), Waase (Antwerp, c. 1515-20), Zukowo (Antwerp, c. 1520-25) and Neerharen (Antwerp, c. 1525-30), see Antwerp 1993, vol. 1, nos. 2 (Hulshout), 9 (Waase, clothed thieves), 10 (Zukowo), 11 (Neerharen), and Antwerp 1993, vol. 2. p. 38 (fig. 26, Kempen, clothed thieves). Also comparable is a somewhat later stone Crucifixion with clothed thieves originating from the workshop of Johann Brabender in Münster (c. 1530-40).⁷⁷M. van Vlierden et al., Hout- en steensculptuur van Museum Catharijneconvent, ca. 1200-1600, coll. cat. Utrecht 2004, pp. 367, 368.

A clear parallel also exists with painting from the Rhineland, and to a lesser degree, Northern Netherlandish painting of the early sixteenth century.⁸⁸F. Lammertse and J. Giltaij, Vroege Hollanders: Schilderkunst van de late Middeleeuwen, exh. cat. Rotterdam (Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen) 2008, no. 51; D. Meeuwissen et al., Jacob Cornelisz van Oostsanen (ca. 1475-1533): De Renaissance in Amsterdam en Alkmaar, exh. cat. Alkmaar (Stedelijk Museum Alkmaar)/ Amsterdam (Amsterdam Museum) 2014, no. 23. Evident similarities can be discerned when comparing the present boxwood Thieves and a Calvary of circa 1505 by an anonymous Cologne painter known as the Master of the Aachen Altarpiece, originally painted for the church of Sankt Kolumba in Cologne (London, The National Gallery).⁹⁹Liverpool, Walters Art Gallery on loan from The National Gallery, London, inv. no. NG 1049, on loan to the. My thanks to Gregor Weber for this observation. Here we find motifs like the angel with the soul of Dysmas, and the devil violently pulling the soul from the tormented Gestas’s mouth. The painting also shows large loops of rope encircling the thieves’ arms, depicted in a manner highly reminiscent of those found on the two Amsterdam sculptures.

The most convincing stylistic agreement, however, is encountered in late-fifteenth-century sculpture from the lower Rhine region. Key works for comparison are the St Anne Altarpiece and an almost life-size Christ in Distress (fig. a) in the Sankt-Nicolaikirche in Kalkar, and a St Sebastian in the Sankt Aldegundiskirche in Emmerich (fig. b).¹⁰¹⁰My thanks to Bieke van der Mark for this observation. These monumental sculptures display the same kind of fascination for expressive corporeal forms and physical details the present figures: an angular, sometimes almost awkward positioning of the limbs and especially the hands and fingers, and the delineation of bones, ligaments, muscles, veins and wrinkles beneath the tautly stretched skin. Also characteristic is the convincing depiction of anatomy and physical proportions, even when conveyed in extreme postures. The way in which Sebastian’s sharply angled left arm connects to the shoulder – with an abrupt but fluid kink – is markedly similar to the corresponding arm on the boxwood Dysmas, but also that of the Christ in Distress at Kalkar. Other noteworthy similarities between the statue of Sebastian and the boxwood carvings include the stylized treatment of the saint’s curls, liken to those of Dysmas, and the tree to which he is bound, articulated with fine indentations made with a gouge just as on the thieves’ wooden crosses. Lastly, the smooth round cords that bind the thieves to their respective crosses are virtually identical to the Sebastian’s calligraphic loops.

The monumental St Sebastian, dated circa 1490, is attributed to the anonymous Master of the Emmerich Saints. Recently, Karrenbrock tentatively identified this master as Raeb(e) Lambert Lutenzoon, a woodcarver active in the German city of Emmerich from 1478 on (though with origins elsewhere), up to the time of his death in or shortly before 1507.¹¹¹¹R. Karrenbrock, ‘Der Meister des Kalkarer St.-Annen-Retabels: Dendrochronologische Untersuchungen und archivalische Überlieferung’, in G. de Werd, Die Dominikaner in Kalkar: Begraben und vergessen?, exh. cat. Kalkar (Sankt-Nicolaikirche) 2013, pp. 121-29, esp. pp. 125-27; R. Karrenbrock, ‘Utrechtse beelden van de laatgotiek. Export en uitstraling’ in M. Leeflang et al., Middeleeuwse beelden uit Utrecht 1430-1530/Mittelalterliche Bildwerke aus Utrecht, exh. cat. Utrecht (Museum Catharijneconvent)/Aachen (Suermondt-Ludwig-Museum) 2012-13, pp. 128-39, esp. pp. 137-39 and fig. 10.7. The same author also suggested this anonymous sculptor (‘Raebe Lambert’) might be identical to the so-called Master of the Kalkar St Anne Altarpiece (active c. 1475-1510), the maker of both of the above-cited works in Kalkar. Regardless of his true identity, in artistic terms this anonymous sculptor was unquestionably the most innovative woodcarver in the region. Besides the altarpiece from which he derives his name and the Christ in Distress, a Triumphal Cross group originating from the Dominican monastery church in Kalkar has been added to the master’s oeuvre.¹²¹²G. de Werd, ‘Die Kreuzigungsgruppe der ehemaligen Dominkanerkirche zu Kalkar und das Oeuvre des Meisters des Kalkarer Annenaltars’, Pantheon 29 (1971), pp. 459-73; G. de Werd, Die Dominikaner in Kalkar: Begraben und vergessen?, exh. cat. Kalkar (Sankt-Nicolaikirche) 2013, pp. 90-119 and nos. 6-8; R. Karrenbrock, ‘Utrechtse beelden van de laatgotiek. Export en uitstraling’ in: Utrecht-Aachen 2013, pp. 128-39, esp. p. 139; R. Karrenbrock, ‘Der Meister des Kalkarer St.-Annen-Retabels: Dendrochronologische Untersuchungen und archivalische Überlieferung’, in G. de Werd, Die Dominikaner in Kalkar: Begraben und vergessen?, exh. cat. Kalkar (Sankt-Nicolaikirche) 2013, pp. 121-29, esp. pp. 125-27. Yet one must question whether the stylistic homogeneity of these works is sufficient enough to warrant an attribution to one sculptor (‘Raebe Lambert’), as Karrenbrock proposed. The Emmerich St Sebastian, though unquestionably produced in the immediate vicinity of the Master of the Kalkar St Anne Altarpiece, deviates distinctly from the other works in both facial type and expressiveness. Nevertheless, all of these works – including the present boxwood Thieves share obvious commonalities in terms of the high artistic quality, the realistic, expressive and almost tormented depiction of the human form and anatomy, the attention to a wide variety of physical details,¹³¹³Such as the soft depiction of the body, the form of the feet, arms and legs – compare the Christ in Distress with the present Thieves – veins, muscles and ligaments rendered sfumato beneath the skin, G. de Werd, Die Dominikaner in Kalkar: Begraben und vergessen?, exh. cat. Kalkar (Sankt-Nicolaikirche) 2013, p. 157. the strong plasticity with areas of deep undercutting and freely hanging elements, the daring, broadly conceived style of the drapery folds (excepting the Sebastian), specific similarities in the poses,¹⁴¹⁴Cf. the pose of the Christ Child on the St Anne Altarpiece or the Christ in Distress with Dysmas, see G. de Werd, Die Dominikaner in Kalkar: Begraben und vergessen?, exh. cat. Kalkar (Sankt-Nicolaikirche) 2013, p. 155. the characteristically carved curls and locks of hair, and lastly, the execution of the wooden crosses.¹⁵¹⁵Cf. the wooden cross of the Triumphal Cross from Neerbosch with those of the Thieves, see G. de Werd, Die Dominikaner in Kalkar: Begraben und vergessen?, exh. cat. Kalkar (Sankt-Nicolaikirche) 2013, p. 153. Based on all of the above-cited observations, the Amsterdam Thieves can be situated in the artistic milieu of the Duchy of Cleves with reasonable cause, with an attribution to the Master of the Kalkar St Anne Altarpiece justified in every respect.

Other parallels with lower Rhenish sculpture from around 1500 or the early sixteenth century likewise support this attribution. Relevant works for comparison include those by Henrik Douwerman (c. 1480/90-1543) and his immediate forerunners, Master Arnt and Jan van Halderen. The anonymous sculptor of the present Thieves shares Douwerman’s fascination with non-polychromed (holzsichtige) representations displaying a wealth of exquisitely carved details and facial expressions, a strong, highly evolved sense of plasticity and a discernible angularity in both the figures’ poses and the drapery folds. Lower Rhenish stylistic traits of this kind appear on a superior level in Douwerman’s two seminal works: the Seven Sorrows of the Virgin Altarpiece in Kalkar¹⁶¹⁶G. de Werd, Die St. Nicolaikirche in Kalkar, Munich/Berlin 2002, pp. 64-72, 92-99. and the predella of the Marian retable with the Tree of Jesse in the Sankt Viktor-Dom in Xanten.¹⁷¹⁷G. de Werd, Die St. Nicolaikirche in Kalkar, Munich/Berlin 2002, pp. 92-99; B. Rommé et al., Gegen den Strom: Meisterwerke niederrheinischer Skulptur in Zeiten der Reformation 1500-1550, exh. cat. Aachen (Suermondt-Ludwig-Museum) 1996, nos. 13 (curls, facial expressions), 15 (cf. face and drapery folds with Dysmas’s angel), 16, 18 (thieves). Here one also finds a similar treatment of the drapery folds, and an agreement in the carving of Dysmas’s curls,¹⁸¹⁸My thanks to Guido de Werd for this observation. and the smiling, almost naive facial expression of the angel above him. The same angel type also occurs with a St Roch, also deemed to be lower Rhenish, in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York.¹⁹¹⁹L. Goddard Kargère, ‘The Kalkar School of Carving: Attribution of a Wooden Polychromed Sculpture’, Metropolitan Museum Journal 35 (2000), pp. 121-35, esp. figs. 1 and 4.

The origin of small wooden statuettes from the late Middle Ages has long been primarily associated with (Southern) Germany.²⁰²⁰See for example A. Kosegarten, ‘Inkunabeln der gotischen Kleinplastik in Hartholz’, Pantheon 22 (1964), pp. 302-21; P. Williamson, Netherlandish Sculpture 1450-1550, coll. cat. London (Victoria and Albert Museum) 2002, nos. 16 (Veit Stoss) 27 (Michel Erhart), 35 (Daniel Mauch); J.C. Smith, German Sculpture of the Later Renaissance, c. 1520-1580: Art in an Age of Uncertainty, Princeton 1994, pp. 270-316 and figs. 246, 250-52, 275, 276; B. Reinhardt and E. Leistenschneider, Daniel Mauch: Bildhauer im Zeitalter der Reformation, exh. cat. Ulm (Ulmer Museum) 2009, nos. 43-50.
In recent years, however, a growing awareness of the production of exquisite Kleinplastik in the Low Countries and bordering regions in the period around 1500 has emerged.²¹²¹See F. Scholten,‘Statuettes, “taillee en bois bien fecte”’, in F. Scholten (ed.), Small Wonders: Late-Gothic Boxwood Micro-Carvings from the Low Countries, exh. cat. Toronto (Art Gallery of Ontario)/ New York (The Metropolitan Museum of Art, The Cloisters)/ Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum) 2016-17, pp. 428-74. First and foremost are the extremely small prayer nuts and other related micro-sculptures for private devotion. Such works were in all probability made in a single workshop located in the Northern Netherlands (Delft?), today linked to the name of Adam Theodrici (Adam Dircksz) (cf. BK-1981-1 and BK-2010-16).²²²²See for example J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De gebedsnoot van Eewert Jansz van Bleiswick en andere werken van Adam Dircksz’, in J. Duverger, Miscellanea Jozef Duverger: Bijdragen tot de kunstgeschiedenis der Nederlanden, vol. 2, Ghent 1968, pp. 614-24; R. Marks, ‘Two Early 16th Century Boxwood Carvings Associated with the Glymes Family of Bergen op Zoom’, Oud Holland 91 (1977), pp. 131-42; F. Scholten, ‘A Prayer-Nut for François Du Puy’, The Burlington Magazine 153 (2011), pp. 447-57 and F. Scholten, ‘A Prayer Nut in a Silver Housing by ‘Adam Dirckz’’, The Rijksmuseum Bulletin 59 (2011), pp. 322-47. One miniature retable from this ‘Adam Dircksz-group’ features a scene of the Crucifixion that also includes two thieves comparable to the present boxwood sculptures. Even at this minute scale, one still observes the freely hanging cords that binds these figures to their respective crosses.²³²³F. Scholten (ed.), Small Wonders: Late-Gothic Boxwood Micro-Carvings from the Low Countries, exh. cat. Toronto (Art Gallery of Ontario)/ New York (The Metropolitan Museum of Art, The Cloisters)/ Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum) 2016-17, no. 45. Woodcarvers in the regions of the lower Rhine and bordering Meuse area also produced such boxwood sculptures at the micro and miniature scale. One boxwood group St George and the Dragon can be localized to the lower Rhine region on stylistic grounds, while the same also applies, albeit to a lesser degree, for several other small works executed in this wood type.²⁴²⁴F. Scholten, ‘Statuettes, “taillee en bois bien fecte”’, in F. Scholten (ed.), Small Wonders: Late-Gothic Boxwood Micro-Carvings from the Low Countries, exh. cat. Toronto (Art Gallery of Ontario)/ New York (The Metropolitan Museum of Art, The Cloisters)/ Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum) 2016-17, pp. 428-74 and nos. 65, 67, 69, 74, 75-77. In recent decades, other small- and medium-size boxwood sculptures have been attributed with varying degrees of verifiability to the circle of the Master of Elsloo and the sculptor Jan van Steffeswert, both active in the Meuse area. ²⁵²⁵P. Williamson, Netherlandish Sculpture 1450-1550, coll. cat. London (Victoria and Albert Museum) 2002, no. 44 (Samson and the Lion circle of the Master of Elsloo, c. 1515-20); P. te Poel et al.¸ Op de drempel van een nieuwe tijd: De Maastrichtse beeldsnijder Jan van Steffeswert (voor 1470-na 1525), exh. cat. Maastricht (Bonnefantenmuseum) 2000-01, no. 4 (Madonna on the Crescent Moon, signed IAN VAN WEERD, 25.8 cm); G. de Werd (ed.), Mein Rasierspiegel: Von Holthuys bis Beuys, exh. cat. Cleves (Museum Kurhaus Kleve) 2012, no. 5.34 (inv. no. FK 01-XI-1, Jan van Steffeswert, St Barbara, h. 10 cm). Amsterdam 2016, nos. 75-77.

Due to the technical virtuosity of the carving and the phenomenal level of artistic freedom, the statuettes of Dysmas and Gestas can be described as core works within this scarcely examined group of micro-carvings from the Low Countries and bordering regions. The astounding quality of the carving on the figures leaves absolutely no doubt that their maker was a leading artist working for the most opulent of patrons. The Thieves once formed part of a small-scale, but very costly and elaborately detailed Passion altarpiece, commissioned by someone in the highest circles. The making of this altarpiece is certain to have been a highly exceptional enterprise, in part because as yet no other known work exists by this sculptor on such a small scale with which it might be compared. Moreover, when considering the impressive display of woodcarving mastery, but also their execution in the round, one cannot exclude the possibility that such an ensemble could very well have been produced for a Kunstkammer rather than as a work merely intended for private devotion. If indeed the attribution to a woodcarver from the Emmerich-Kalkar-Cleves region proves correct, the most obvious patron for such an object would be the court of Duke John I of Cleves (1419-1481), or even more likely, the court of his eldest son, John II (1458-1521), and their familial relations.²⁶²⁶Such as John I’s other children: Adolf (1461-1498), canon in Liège, Engelbert (1462-1521), Count of Nevers; Diederik (b. 1464), Marie (1465-1513) and Philip (1467-1505), Bishop of Nevers, Amiens and Autun. The internationally oriented, art-loving court at Cleves maintained close ties with the Burgundian court of Philip the Good in Brussels via Duke John I’s mother – Mary of Burgundy (1393-1463) – and his marriage to Elizabeth of Burgundy (of the Estampes-Nevers branch). The comital court at Cleves would most certainly have provided a befitting context for a precious miniature Passion altarpiece of this kind. Also noteworthy is the fact that the Emmerich woodcarver Raebe Lambert was married to a woman from the Van der Graef family: Johan van der Graef, an affluent burgher from Kalkar, served as chamberlain of Duke Philip of Cleves (1467-1505), a brother of Duke John II and bishop of Nevers, Amiens and Autun. Van der Graef also accompanied Philip during his sojourn in Rome in 1499.²⁷²⁷R. Karrenbrock, ‘Der Meister des Kalkarer St.-Annen-Retabels: Dendrochronologische Untersuchungen und archivalische Überlieferung’, in G. de Werd, Die Dominikaner in Kalkar: Begraben und vergessen?, exh. cat. Kalkar (Sankt-Nicolaikirche) 2013, pp. 121-29, esp. pp. 126-27.

Frits Scholten, 2023

F. Scholten, ‘Recent Acquisitions: Paintings and Sculpture’, The Rijksmuseum Bulletin 63 (2015), pp. 294-315, esp. pp. 298-99 (no. 2); F. Scholten (ed.), Small Wonders: Late-Gothic Boxwood Micro-Carvings from the Low Countries, exh. cat. Toronto (Art Gallery of Ontario)/ New York (The Metropolitan Museum of Art, The Cloisters)/ Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum) 2016-17, pp. 439-43, 480-83, figs. 188, 189, and no. 66

F. Scholten, 2024, 'attributed to Meester van het Sint-Anna-altaar in Kalkar, Gestas, the Bad Thief, from a Calvary, Lower Rhine region, c. 1490 - c. 1510', in F. Scholten and B. van der Mark (eds.), European Sculpture in the Rijksmuseum, online coll. cat. Amsterdam: hdl.handle.net/10934/RM0001.COLLECT.561153