anonymous

The Prodigal Son among the Harlots

Antwerp, c. 1550 - c. 1560

Technical notes

Carved and polychromed. The group is composed of seven separately carved elements, joined together with nails to form a single unit: 1. the woman innkeeper with the chalkboard; 2. the woman and the jester; 3. the prodigal son, table, dog and the two women behind the table; 4. the left arm of the woman left behind the table; 5. the right arm of the woman behind the table on the right; 6. the two men in Eastern attire and the bear; 7. the tile floor. The red-marbled limewood plinth at the bottom is non-original.


Scientific examination and reports

  • condition report: A. Lorne (The Hague), RMA, december 1995

Condition

The group has been overpainted with an oil polychromy layer. Much of this layer was removed on the figures’ clothing, resulting in severe damage to the underlying, original polychromy in these areas. At some point, the separately carved elements were joined to a new limewood plinth, possibly resulting in a slight shift in their positioning. This plinth has sustained woodworm damage. An (original?) wooden doorway, previously standing behind the musicians, was removed in 1942.1Unpublished typescript by one R.M. (possibly M.M. Meurs’ legal counsel), c. 1942-43, in Object File, pp. 29, 31. This also applies to the 19th-century wooden caisse in which the piece was housed until c. 1940 (fig. a).2Unpublished typescript by one R.M. (possibly M.M. Meurs’ legal counsel), c. 1942-43, in Object File, fig. 1.


Conservation

  • M.M. Meurs, c., 1940 - c. 1942: partial removal of non-original polychromy layers.
  • M.J. Schretlen, 1942: partial removal of non-original polychromy layers.

Provenance

...; collection Reinhart Meurs (1908-1960) and Johanna Maria Meurs-Schäper Claus (1907-2005), Hilversum, September 1941; 3Note RMA from whom to art dealer M.J.A.M. Schretlen, The Hague, 1942; 4Note RMA. from whom, fl.11.000, to the museum with support from the Commissie van den Fotoverkoop. 1942

ObjectNumber: BK-15436

Credit line: Purchased with the support of the Stichting tot Bevordering van de Belangen van het Rijksmuseum


Entry

The Parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32) is one of the best-known parables from the New Testament. In the traditional Christian Bible exegesis, the son, who personifies sinful mankind, is forgiven because he has come to see the error of his ways and shown repentance for his deeds. The parable relates various episodes in the life of the young man. In the visual and applied arts, the four most commonly depicted scenes often appear in a series: the Departure of the Prodigal Son, the Prodigal Son among the Harlots, the Prodigal Son amid the Swine, and the Return of the Prodigal Son.5For the theme’s treatment in the arts, see for instance W. Witwitzky, Das Gleichnis vom verlorenen Sohn in der Bildenden Kunst bis Rembrandt, Heidelberg 1930 (diss., Ruprecht-Karls Universität); E. Vetter, Der Verlorene Sohn, Düsseldorf 1955; K. Renger, Lockere Gesellschaft: Zur Ikonographie des verlorenen Sohnes und von Wirtshausszenen in der niederländischen Malerei, Berlin 1970; E.G. D’Oench, Prodigal Son Narratives 1480-1980, exh. cat. New Haven (Yale University Art Gallery)/Middletown (Davison Art Center, Wesleyan Library) 1995-96; G.B. Guest, ‘The Prodigal’s Journey: Ideologies of Self and City in the Gothic Cathedral’, Speculum 81 (2006), pp. 35-75.

The present group of The Prodigal Son among the Harlots shows the son wasting his inheritance on alcohol, women and gambling. In sixteenth-century Netherlandish depictions of the parable, this particular episode occurs quite frequently as an independent theme, primarily because it lends itself well to genre-like scenes of debauchery, featuring seductively dressed ladies of pleasure, dancing couples, musicians, and individuals partaking in other ‘sinfully’ entertaining vices such as games of dice, cards and backgammon.6For brothel scenes in 16th-century Antwerp painting, see for instance M. Ubl, Der Braunschweiger Monogrammist: Wegbereiter der Niederländischen Genremalerei vor Bruegel, Amsterdam/Petersberg 2014 (diss., University of Freiburg 2010), pp. 137-45; 155-85, 218-20, 229-37. One figural type frequently appearing in these scenes, especially in paintings and engravings, is the jester.7To name just a few: Jacob de Gheyn II (New Hollstein Dutch 34), Abraham de Bruyn (New Hollstein Dutch 24), Hans Collaert (New Hollstein Dutch 297), Frans Hogenberg (New Hollstein Dutch 6), Karel van Mallery (Hollstein Dutch 71), Monogrammist AP (RP-P-1906-4252), Cornelis Massijs (Hollstein Dutch 138), Jan Sanders van Hemessen (Brussels, Royal Museums of Fine Arts, see KIK-IRPA, object no. 20026384), Master of The Prodigal Son (Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, inv. no. GG_986), Anonymous (Antwerp, Museum Mayer van den Bergh, see KIK-IRPA, object no. 157610), Frans Pourbus I (Antwerp, Museum Mayer van den Bergh, see KIK-IRPA, object no. 151708), Master of the Female Half-Lengths (private collection). Jesters moved in all levels of society, from princely courts to market fairs and travellers’ inns. Attired in flamboyant clothing and reputed for their inappropriate behaviour, they sought to position themselves outside the ordinary realm of life. In doing so, they functioned as the social critics of their day, ridiculing human frailty and voicing commentary on those in power without repercussion.8For jesters, see for instance H. Pleij, ‘De zot als maatschappelijk houvast in de overgang van middeleeuwen naar moderne tijd’, Groniek 23 (1990), pp. 18-39. In the context of The Prodigal Son among the Harlots, the jester’s presence serves to remind the onlooker that money-squandering, spirits and physical desire only lead to human misery. The same message is quite clearly conveyed in Lucas van Leyden’s woodcut of the same name which shows a jester presenting the following words of caution (as inscribed on a banderole): [w]acht hoet varen sal (await how it shall fare). 9New Hollstein Dutch 193. Other figures appearing in such representations are the woman innkeeper with the chalkboard on the upper left and the musicians in oriental dress on the right. The innkeeper ‘chalks up’ the son’s debts op de lat (on the tally-stick), thus referring to events soon to follow in the parable’s next episode, in which the ‘harlots’ expel the son from the inn after having spent all his money.10For some other examples of prints and paintings featuring woman innkeepers with a chalkboard or tally-stick, see M. Ubl, Der Braunschweiger Monogrammist: Wegbereiter der Niederländischen Genremalerei vor Bruegel, Amsterdam/Petersberg 2014 (diss., University of Freiburg 2010), figs. 3.60, 4.28 and p. 380, no. XVII.1. The musicians resemble figures like those encountered in Pieter Coecke van Aelst’s (1502-1550) series Moers e fachon de Faire de Turcz (Antwerp, 1553).11J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De laatste retabels uit de Scheldestad en enig aanverwant beeldhouwwerk’, Belgisch tijdschrift voor Oudheidkunde en Kunstgeschiedenis 26 (1957), pp. 75-117, esp. pp. 95-96. Iconographically, these scenes can be linked to Willem Gnapheus’s (1493-1568) comedy Acolastus de filio prodigo (Antwerp, 1529), in which two figures, Pamphagus and Pantolabus, act as intermediaries between the son and the whores.12N. Hendricks, Etude d’un fragment de retable: “L’Enfant prodigue irrésolu”, 2013 (unpublished thesis, University of Namen), p. 15. In the Amsterdam group, however, the expression on the prodigal son’s face – with his downward-looking gaze and his pensive attitude – conveys anything but elation. Depicted here is in fact the moment when the son finally begins to come to his senses, no longer wishing to succumb to the offered temptations. Even the jester in the foreground appears sombre, sitting crumpled and forlorn with the realization his role has come to an end: no longer will he or any other member of the company obstruct the prodigal son’s understanding of the gravity of life.13For a more extensive iconographic interpretation of the Amsterdam relief, see J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De laatste retabels uit de Scheldestad en enig aanverwant beeldhouwwerk’, Belgisch tijdschrift voor Oudheidkunde en Kunstgeschiedenis 26 (1957), pp. 75-117, esp. p. 100, note 1. The specific significance of the gesture made by the jester – with the left index finger and thumb seemingly poised as if to whistle – remains unclear.

Leeuwenberg attributed the present group to an Antwerp workshop active in the mid-sixteenth century.14J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De laatste retabels uit de Scheldestad en enig aanverwant beeldhouwwerk’, Belgisch tijdschrift voor Oudheidkunde en Kunstgeschiedenis 26 (1957), pp. 75-117, esp. p. 101; J. Leeuwenberg, ‘Een tentoonstelling van middeleeuwsche beeldhouwkunst te Amsterdam’, Maandblad voor Beeldende Kunsten 19 (1942), p. 282. He pointed out the thematic and formal similarities found in more or less contemporaneous Antwerp paintings, including Jan Sanders van Hemessens’s (c. 1500-1556/57) Prodigal Son among the Harlots of 1536, which features both a jester and a Turkish musician.15Brussels, Royal Museums of Fine Arts, inv. no. 2838. More striking is the connection he observed with the work of the so-called Brunswick Monogrammist (active c. 1525-45), a contemporary of Van Hemessen also active in Antwerp.16J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De laatste retabels uit de Scheldestad en enig aanverwant beeldhouwwerk’, Belgisch tijdschrift voor Oudheidkunde en Kunstgeschiedenis 26 (1957), pp. 75-117, esp. p. 101. Here Leeuwenberg still refers to the Brunswick Monogrammist as ‘Jan van Amstel’, a painter with whom the Monogrammist was long identified. For the Brunswick Monogrammist, see M. Ubl, Der Braunschweiger Monogrammist: Wegbereiter der Niederländischen Genremalerei vor Bruegel, Amsterdam/Petersberg 2014 (diss., University of Freiburg 2010). The Monogrammist’s brothel scenes, together with those of Van Hemessen, are the earliest examples in this genre, copied and imitated by many of their contemporaries in drawings, paintings, stained-glass windows and other media.17M. Ubl, Der Braunschweiger Monogrammist: Wegbereiter der Niederländischen Genremalerei vor Bruegel, Amsterdam/Petersberg 2014 (diss., University of Freiburg 2010), pp. 215-45, 363-415. The work of this master therefore served as a model and could also very well have inspired sculptors, whether in an original or derivative form. The Amsterdam carving displays a remarkable agreement to the Brothel Scene with a Brawl between Two Wenches with Bellows attributed to the circle of the Brunswick Monogrammist (fig. b).18Stockholm, private collection, see M. Ubl, Der Braunschweiger Monogrammist: Wegbereiter der Niederländischen Genremalerei vor Bruegel, Amsterdam/Petersberg 2014 (diss., University of Freiburg 2010), p. 380, no. XVII.1. The scene includes a woman with a chalkboard who bears a strong resemblance to the woman innkeeper in the Amsterdam group, whereas the head of the prodigal son in the wooden group appears to be a mirror-image variant of the youth front centre in the painting who looks to the left, including the pensive expression. Numerous parallels can also be observed in the group’s composition, the clothing, the headdresses and, for example, the form of the arms. In the painting, a print hangs above the mantelpiece that likely depicts King Saul in the role of Melancholia or Acedia (sloth, complacency). This detail contributes to the representation’s negative association, an atmosphere also palpable in the Amsterdam retable group.19M. Ubl, Der Braunschweiger Monogrammist: Wegbereiter der Niederländischen Genremalerei vor Bruegel, Amsterdam/Petersberg 2014 (diss., University of Freiburg 2010), p. 381. Oriental figures and dogs are also common elements in the work of the Brunswick Monogrammist and his circle. The musicians recall figures appearing in one of the many copies of his Ecce Homo, in which Turkish onlookers are substituted for the Flemish public.20M. Ubl, Der Braunschweiger Monogrammist: Wegbereiter der Niederländischen Genremalerei vor Bruegel, Amsterdam/Petersberg 2014 (diss., University of Freiburg 2010), pp. 221-25, pp. 295-304 and nos. IV.4-IV.9. Cf. for example the Turkish figure front right, dressed in white, in the Ecce Homo (no. IV.8) by Pieter Aertsen (an Amsterdam-born artist, active in Antwerp and, from c. 1555 in Amsterdam) with the right-hand musician in the Rijksmuseum group.

Leeuwenberg also linked the Amsterdam retable group to two late examples of Antwerp altarpiece production, specifically, the Retable of the True Cross in the Sint-Lambertuskerk in Bouvignes-sur-Meuse (fig. c) and the Passion altar in Roskilde Cathedral (Denmark).21J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De laatste retabels uit de Scheldestad en enig aanverwant beeldhouwwerk’, Belgisch tijdschrift voor Oudheidkunde en Kunstgeschiedenis 26 (1957), pp. 75-117, esp. pp. 76-82, 83-92; N. Hendricks, Etude d’un fragment de retable: “L’Enfant prodigue irrésolu”, 2013 (unpublished thesis, University of Namen), pp. 9-10. For the Roskilde retable, see also H. Nieuwdorp (ed.), Antwerp Altarpieces 15th-16th centuries, 2 vols., exh. cat. Antwerp (Onze-Lieve- Vrouwekathedraal) 1993, vol. 1, no. 17. In both cases, one observes the same rapid working approach, with the sculptor concentrating on the overall effect, while simplifying details like the drapery folds and hair. Other stylistic characteristics common to both the Amsterdam group and these retables include the strong, sometimes jutting lower jaw, the bent noses (male figures) and noses that extend above the brow (men and women), deep-sunken eyes, often open mouths with shallow recesses beneath the chin that enhance the protruding lower lip, heavy cheekbones, hands with discernible metacarpals, the ring and middle fingers touching together, arms arched like sabres, bent knees, heads tilted left or right and the screw-like twisting of some of the bodies.22J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De laatste retabels uit de Scheldestad en enig aanverwant beeldhouwwerk’, Belgisch tijdschrift voor Oudheidkunde en Kunstgeschiedenis 26 (1957), pp. 75-117, esp. pp. 94 and 101; N. Hendricks, Etude d’un fragment de retable: “L’Enfant prodigue irrésolu”, 2013 (unpublished thesis, University of Namen), pp. 9-12. Compare respectively, for example, the Amsterdam musician with drum and the figure of the son to the high priest and the soldier wearing a beret in the Bouvignes Crowning with Thorns. Leeuwenberg also observed a stylistic agreement with two contemporaneous sculptures: an alabaster relief depiction of Lot and his Daughters,23J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De laatste retabels uit de Scheldestad en enig aanverwant beeldhouwwerk’, Belgisch tijdschrift voor Oudheidkunde en Kunstgeschiedenis 26 (1957), pp. 75-117, esp. pp. 101-02 (ill.). The relief was lost during the Second World War and may once have formed part of a mantelpiece. and a boxwood statuette of a mercenary soldier in the Wallace Collection, London.24London, The Wallace Collection, inv. no. S274, see J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De laatste retabels uit de Scheldestad en enig aanverwant beeldhouwwerk’, Belgisch tijdschrift voor Oudheidkunde en Kunstgeschiedenis 26 (1957), pp. 75-117, esp. pp. 102-04 (ill.). He asserted that the group in Amsterdam, the altar in Bouvignes, to a lesser degree the altar in Roskilde, the relief in Berlin and the mercenary soldier in London all belong to a coherent stylistic group produced in the same workshop, in all probability just after the mid-sixteenth century and possibly even under the direction of the very same master. Leeuwenberg’s Notname for this master – the Master of the Prodigal Son25Not to be confused with the painter of the same appellation, active in Antwerp around 1530-60, named after the painting in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna, inv. no. GG_986. – derives from the present retable group.26J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De laatste retabels uit de Scheldestad en enig aanverwant beeldhouwwerk’, Belgisch tijdschrift voor Oudheidkunde en Kunstgeschiedenis 26 (1957), pp. 75-117, esp. p. 104. On the subject of attributing wood sculptures from this period to any one specific shop see U. Schäfer, ‘Is it possible to describe the personal style of an Antwerp carver?’, in C. Van de Velde et al., Constructing Wooden Images: Proceedings of the Symposium on the Organization of Labour and Working Practices of Late Gothic Carved Altarpieces in the Low Countries, Brussels 25-26 October 2002, Brussels 2005, pp. 27-50. Hendricks discusses retable sculptures in Oudenaarde and Saint-Trond, which can also be added to this same group on the basis of stylistic similarities.27N. Hendricks, Etude d’un fragment de retable: “L’Enfant prodigue irrésolu”, 2013 (unpublished thesis, University of Namen), pp. 11-12. Less evident is the agreement with three other retable groups that J. de Borchgrave d’Altena linked to the present one.28J. de Borchgrave d’Altena, ‘Notes pour servir à l’étude des retables Anversois’, Bulletin des Musées Royaux d’art et d’histoire/Bulletin van de Koninklijke Musea voor Kunst en Geschiedenis 29 (1957), pp. 2-114, esp. p. 7 and figs. 2-4. Of the three groups the London Carrying of the Cross (Victoria and Albert Museum, inv. no. 651-1902) is stylistically most similar, see P. Williamson, Netherlandish Sculpture 1450-1550, coll. cat. London (Victoria and Albert Museum) 2002, no. 28.

According to Leeuwenberg, the present group likely belonged to a retable comprising multiple scenes. Given the horizontal, rectangular format, the most suitable location would have been the predella.29J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De laatste retabels uit de Scheldestad en enig aanverwant beeldhouwwerk’, Belgisch tijdschrift voor Oudheidkunde en Kunstgeschiedenis 26 (1957), pp. 75-117, esp. p. 95. As far as can be ascertained, not one wooden, multi-caisse retable with episodes from the parable of the prodigal son survives to the present day.30The parable is mentioned nowhere in H.J. de Smedt, ‘De Antwerpse retabels en hun iconografie: een overzicht van onderwerpen en veranderingen’, in H. Nieuwdorp (ed.), Antwerp Altarpieces 15th-16th centuries, 2 vols., exh. cat. Antwerp (Onze-Lieve- Vrouwekathedraal) 1993, vol. 2, 1993, pp. 23-46. Nevertheless, the probability that such wooden retables once existed is confirmed by a catalogue of late-gothic Netherlandish sculpture sold in London in 1835: one lot features four carved scenes from the parable, presumably retable groups.31K.W. Woods, Imported Images: Netherlandish Late Gothic Sculpture in England c. 1400-c. 1550, Donington 2007, p. 149. The lot was purchased by the dealer Francis Street, with the later whereabouts unknown. Considering the customary grouping in series of four, a scene of The Prodigal Son among the Harlots was likely among them. With painted altarpieces, depictions of scenes from the parable are equally rare. One example is a triptych from 1526 in the style of Quinten Massijs (1465/66-1530) with the Prodigal Son Leaves Home, the Prodigal Son amid the Swine, and the Return of the Prodigal Son.32E. Vetter, Der Verlorene Sohn, Düsseldorf 1955, p. XXXI. In 1883, the triptych was held in a private collection in Berlin (present whereabouts unknown). One painted panel of the Mömpelgarder Altar in Vienna shows four episodes from the parable.33Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, inv. no. GG_870. Also known are six freestanding alabaster reliefs featuring scenes taken from the parable, one of which has been mounted as a house altar. Given the observable thematic and stylistic similarities, all six are very likely the product of the one and the same Mechelen workshop specializing in this subject.34A. Lipinska, Moving Sculptures: Southern Netherlandish Alabasters from the 16th to 17th Centuries in Central and Northern Europe (Studies in Netherlandish Art and Cultural History 11), Leiden/Boston 2015, pp. 119-21, figs. 97-99 and p. 384, note 67. One includes The Prodigal Son among the Harlots, albeit as a secondary scene, likewise containing Turkish musicians.35T. Demmler, Deutsche Skulpturen des Deutschen Museum, vol. 3, Die Bildwerke in Holz, Stein und Ton, Grossplastik, coll. cat. Berlin (Staatliche Museen zu Berlin) 1930, p. 382, no. 7798; A. Lipinska, Moving Sculptures: Southern Netherlandish Alabasters from the 16th to 17th Centuries in Central and Northern Europe (Studies in Netherlandish Art and Cultural History 11), Leiden/Boston 2015, p. 120, fig. 98. At this time, this is the only known sculptural example of the brothel scene possibly linked to retable art. One other distinct feature of the Amsterdam piece is the complete absence of gilding. This is noteworthy, as Antwerp retables produced in this later period were virtually all gilded, in part because gilt details enhanced the carving’s legibility when viewed from a distance. Likewise taking into account the exceptionality of the theme itself, this suggests the group was never intended for a large retable on public display, but meant for a house altar comprising one or more scenes from the parable and made for a private patron.

Titia de Haseth Möller, 2024


Literature

J. de Borchgrave d’Altena, ‘Notes pour servir à l’étude des retables Anversois’, Bulletin des Musées Royaux d’art et d’histoire/Bulletin van de Koninklijke Musea voor Kunst en Geschiedenis 29 (1957), pp. 2-114, esp. p. 7; S. Bergmans, J. De Coo et al, De eeuw van Bruegel: De schilderkunst in België in de 16de eeuw/Le siècle de Bruegel: La peinture en Belgique au XVIe siècle, exh. cat. Brussels (Koninklijke Musea voor Schone Kunsten van België) 1963, no. 443; J. Leeuwenberg with the assistance of W. Halsema-Kubes, Beeldhouwkunst in het Rijksmuseum, coll. cat. Amsterdam 1973, no. 163, with earlier literature; N. Hendricks, Etude d’un fragment de retable: “L’Enfant prodigue irrésolu”, 2013 (unpublished thesis, University of Namen)


Citation

Titia de Haseth Möller, 2024, 'anonymous, The Prodigal Son among the Harlots, Antwerp, c. 1550 - c. 1560', in F. Scholten and B. van der Mark (eds.), European Sculpture in the Rijksmuseum, online coll. cat. Amsterdam: hdl.handle.net/10934/RM0001.COLLECT.24443

(accessed 18 February 2025 20:30:22).

Figures

  • fig. a Photograph of the 19th-century caisse that housed the retable group until c. 1940

  • fig. b Circle of the Brunswick Monogrammist, Brothel Scene of a Fight between Two Wenches with Bellows, c. 1540-50 (?)

  • fig. c The Crowning with Thorns, detail from the Retable of the True Cross, Sint-Lambertuskerk, Bouvignes-sur-Meuse (Belgium). Photo: KIK-IRPA, Brussels, cliché G004451


Footnotes

  • 1Unpublished typescript by one R.M. (possibly M.M. Meurs’ legal counsel), c. 1942-43, in Object File, pp. 29, 31.
  • 2Unpublished typescript by one R.M. (possibly M.M. Meurs’ legal counsel), c. 1942-43, in Object File, fig. 1.
  • 3Note RMA
  • 4Note RMA.
  • 5For the theme’s treatment in the arts, see for instance W. Witwitzky, Das Gleichnis vom verlorenen Sohn in der Bildenden Kunst bis Rembrandt, Heidelberg 1930 (diss., Ruprecht-Karls Universität); E. Vetter, Der Verlorene Sohn, Düsseldorf 1955; K. Renger, Lockere Gesellschaft: Zur Ikonographie des verlorenen Sohnes und von Wirtshausszenen in der niederländischen Malerei, Berlin 1970; E.G. D’Oench, Prodigal Son Narratives 1480-1980, exh. cat. New Haven (Yale University Art Gallery)/Middletown (Davison Art Center, Wesleyan Library) 1995-96; G.B. Guest, ‘The Prodigal’s Journey: Ideologies of Self and City in the Gothic Cathedral’, Speculum 81 (2006), pp. 35-75.
  • 6For brothel scenes in 16th-century Antwerp painting, see for instance M. Ubl, Der Braunschweiger Monogrammist: Wegbereiter der Niederländischen Genremalerei vor Bruegel, Amsterdam/Petersberg 2014 (diss., University of Freiburg 2010), pp. 137-45; 155-85, 218-20, 229-37.
  • 7To name just a few: Jacob de Gheyn II (New Hollstein Dutch 34), Abraham de Bruyn (New Hollstein Dutch 24), Hans Collaert (New Hollstein Dutch 297), Frans Hogenberg (New Hollstein Dutch 6), Karel van Mallery (Hollstein Dutch 71), Monogrammist AP (RP-P-1906-4252), Cornelis Massijs (Hollstein Dutch 138), Jan Sanders van Hemessen (Brussels, Royal Museums of Fine Arts, see KIK-IRPA, object no. 20026384), Master of The Prodigal Son (Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, inv. no. GG_986), Anonymous (Antwerp, Museum Mayer van den Bergh, see KIK-IRPA, object no. 157610), Frans Pourbus I (Antwerp, Museum Mayer van den Bergh, see KIK-IRPA, object no. 151708), Master of the Female Half-Lengths (private collection).
  • 8For jesters, see for instance H. Pleij, ‘De zot als maatschappelijk houvast in de overgang van middeleeuwen naar moderne tijd’, Groniek 23 (1990), pp. 18-39.
  • 9New Hollstein Dutch 193.
  • 10For some other examples of prints and paintings featuring woman innkeepers with a chalkboard or tally-stick, see M. Ubl, Der Braunschweiger Monogrammist: Wegbereiter der Niederländischen Genremalerei vor Bruegel, Amsterdam/Petersberg 2014 (diss., University of Freiburg 2010), figs. 3.60, 4.28 and p. 380, no. XVII.1.
  • 11J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De laatste retabels uit de Scheldestad en enig aanverwant beeldhouwwerk’, Belgisch tijdschrift voor Oudheidkunde en Kunstgeschiedenis 26 (1957), pp. 75-117, esp. pp. 95-96.
  • 12N. Hendricks, Etude d’un fragment de retable: “L’Enfant prodigue irrésolu”, 2013 (unpublished thesis, University of Namen), p. 15.
  • 13For a more extensive iconographic interpretation of the Amsterdam relief, see J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De laatste retabels uit de Scheldestad en enig aanverwant beeldhouwwerk’, Belgisch tijdschrift voor Oudheidkunde en Kunstgeschiedenis 26 (1957), pp. 75-117, esp. p. 100, note 1.
  • 14J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De laatste retabels uit de Scheldestad en enig aanverwant beeldhouwwerk’, Belgisch tijdschrift voor Oudheidkunde en Kunstgeschiedenis 26 (1957), pp. 75-117, esp. p. 101; J. Leeuwenberg, ‘Een tentoonstelling van middeleeuwsche beeldhouwkunst te Amsterdam’, Maandblad voor Beeldende Kunsten 19 (1942), p. 282.
  • 15Brussels, Royal Museums of Fine Arts, inv. no. 2838.
  • 16J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De laatste retabels uit de Scheldestad en enig aanverwant beeldhouwwerk’, Belgisch tijdschrift voor Oudheidkunde en Kunstgeschiedenis 26 (1957), pp. 75-117, esp. p. 101. Here Leeuwenberg still refers to the Brunswick Monogrammist as ‘Jan van Amstel’, a painter with whom the Monogrammist was long identified. For the Brunswick Monogrammist, see M. Ubl, Der Braunschweiger Monogrammist: Wegbereiter der Niederländischen Genremalerei vor Bruegel, Amsterdam/Petersberg 2014 (diss., University of Freiburg 2010).
  • 17M. Ubl, Der Braunschweiger Monogrammist: Wegbereiter der Niederländischen Genremalerei vor Bruegel, Amsterdam/Petersberg 2014 (diss., University of Freiburg 2010), pp. 215-45, 363-415.
  • 18Stockholm, private collection, see M. Ubl, Der Braunschweiger Monogrammist: Wegbereiter der Niederländischen Genremalerei vor Bruegel, Amsterdam/Petersberg 2014 (diss., University of Freiburg 2010), p. 380, no. XVII.1.
  • 19M. Ubl, Der Braunschweiger Monogrammist: Wegbereiter der Niederländischen Genremalerei vor Bruegel, Amsterdam/Petersberg 2014 (diss., University of Freiburg 2010), p. 381.
  • 20M. Ubl, Der Braunschweiger Monogrammist: Wegbereiter der Niederländischen Genremalerei vor Bruegel, Amsterdam/Petersberg 2014 (diss., University of Freiburg 2010), pp. 221-25, pp. 295-304 and nos. IV.4-IV.9. Cf. for example the Turkish figure front right, dressed in white, in the Ecce Homo (no. IV.8) by Pieter Aertsen (an Amsterdam-born artist, active in Antwerp and, from c. 1555 in Amsterdam) with the right-hand musician in the Rijksmuseum group.
  • 21J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De laatste retabels uit de Scheldestad en enig aanverwant beeldhouwwerk’, Belgisch tijdschrift voor Oudheidkunde en Kunstgeschiedenis 26 (1957), pp. 75-117, esp. pp. 76-82, 83-92; N. Hendricks, Etude d’un fragment de retable: “L’Enfant prodigue irrésolu”, 2013 (unpublished thesis, University of Namen), pp. 9-10. For the Roskilde retable, see also H. Nieuwdorp (ed.), Antwerp Altarpieces 15th-16th centuries, 2 vols., exh. cat. Antwerp (Onze-Lieve- Vrouwekathedraal) 1993, vol. 1, no. 17.
  • 22J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De laatste retabels uit de Scheldestad en enig aanverwant beeldhouwwerk’, Belgisch tijdschrift voor Oudheidkunde en Kunstgeschiedenis 26 (1957), pp. 75-117, esp. pp. 94 and 101; N. Hendricks, Etude d’un fragment de retable: “L’Enfant prodigue irrésolu”, 2013 (unpublished thesis, University of Namen), pp. 9-12. Compare respectively, for example, the Amsterdam musician with drum and the figure of the son to the high priest and the soldier wearing a beret in the Bouvignes Crowning with Thorns.
  • 23J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De laatste retabels uit de Scheldestad en enig aanverwant beeldhouwwerk’, Belgisch tijdschrift voor Oudheidkunde en Kunstgeschiedenis 26 (1957), pp. 75-117, esp. pp. 101-02 (ill.). The relief was lost during the Second World War and may once have formed part of a mantelpiece.
  • 24London, The Wallace Collection, inv. no. S274, see J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De laatste retabels uit de Scheldestad en enig aanverwant beeldhouwwerk’, Belgisch tijdschrift voor Oudheidkunde en Kunstgeschiedenis 26 (1957), pp. 75-117, esp. pp. 102-04 (ill.).
  • 25Not to be confused with the painter of the same appellation, active in Antwerp around 1530-60, named after the painting in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna, inv. no. GG_986.
  • 26J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De laatste retabels uit de Scheldestad en enig aanverwant beeldhouwwerk’, Belgisch tijdschrift voor Oudheidkunde en Kunstgeschiedenis 26 (1957), pp. 75-117, esp. p. 104. On the subject of attributing wood sculptures from this period to any one specific shop see U. Schäfer, ‘Is it possible to describe the personal style of an Antwerp carver?’, in C. Van de Velde et al., Constructing Wooden Images: Proceedings of the Symposium on the Organization of Labour and Working Practices of Late Gothic Carved Altarpieces in the Low Countries, Brussels 25-26 October 2002, Brussels 2005, pp. 27-50.
  • 27N. Hendricks, Etude d’un fragment de retable: “L’Enfant prodigue irrésolu”, 2013 (unpublished thesis, University of Namen), pp. 11-12.
  • 28J. de Borchgrave d’Altena, ‘Notes pour servir à l’étude des retables Anversois’, Bulletin des Musées Royaux d’art et d’histoire/Bulletin van de Koninklijke Musea voor Kunst en Geschiedenis 29 (1957), pp. 2-114, esp. p. 7 and figs. 2-4. Of the three groups the London Carrying of the Cross (Victoria and Albert Museum, inv. no. 651-1902) is stylistically most similar, see P. Williamson, Netherlandish Sculpture 1450-1550, coll. cat. London (Victoria and Albert Museum) 2002, no. 28.
  • 29J. Leeuwenberg, ‘De laatste retabels uit de Scheldestad en enig aanverwant beeldhouwwerk’, Belgisch tijdschrift voor Oudheidkunde en Kunstgeschiedenis 26 (1957), pp. 75-117, esp. p. 95.
  • 30The parable is mentioned nowhere in H.J. de Smedt, ‘De Antwerpse retabels en hun iconografie: een overzicht van onderwerpen en veranderingen’, in H. Nieuwdorp (ed.), Antwerp Altarpieces 15th-16th centuries, 2 vols., exh. cat. Antwerp (Onze-Lieve- Vrouwekathedraal) 1993, vol. 2, 1993, pp. 23-46.
  • 31K.W. Woods, Imported Images: Netherlandish Late Gothic Sculpture in England c. 1400-c. 1550, Donington 2007, p. 149. The lot was purchased by the dealer Francis Street, with the later whereabouts unknown.
  • 32E. Vetter, Der Verlorene Sohn, Düsseldorf 1955, p. XXXI. In 1883, the triptych was held in a private collection in Berlin (present whereabouts unknown).
  • 33Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum, inv. no. GG_870.
  • 34A. Lipinska, Moving Sculptures: Southern Netherlandish Alabasters from the 16th to 17th Centuries in Central and Northern Europe (Studies in Netherlandish Art and Cultural History 11), Leiden/Boston 2015, pp. 119-21, figs. 97-99 and p. 384, note 67.
  • 35T. Demmler, Deutsche Skulpturen des Deutschen Museum, vol. 3, Die Bildwerke in Holz, Stein und Ton, Grossplastik, coll. cat. Berlin (Staatliche Museen zu Berlin) 1930, p. 382, no. 7798; A. Lipinska, Moving Sculptures: Southern Netherlandish Alabasters from the 16th to 17th Centuries in Central and Northern Europe (Studies in Netherlandish Art and Cultural History 11), Leiden/Boston 2015, p. 120, fig. 98.