Bernard van Orley

Probably commissioned by Abbot Jacques Coëne for the Benedictine abbey of Marchiennes near Douai, circa 1515-19;
With F. Kleinberger & Co, New York;
Arnold Seligmann, Rey & Co. Inc., New York;
Their sale, New York, Parke-Bernet, 23-5 January 1947, lot 237, for $1,050 to Knoedler;
Private collector, Boston;
By whom sold, New York, Parke-Bernet, 28 April 1949, lot 70, for $650 to G. Butler Sherwell;
Dr. Ricardo Espíritu Santu Silva (died 1954), Lisbon;
Presumed to have been bought in Paris by the father of the present owners.

Toledo, Toledo Museum of Art, 1935, no. 30;
Cleveland, Cleveland Museum of Art, 1936, no. 35;
Bordeaux, Flandre, Espagne, Portugal, 1954, no. 70, reproduced in the catalogue.

M.J. Friedländer, Die Altniederländische Malerei, vol. XIV, Leiden 1937, p. 112;
L. Baldass, `Die Entwicklung des Bernaert van Orley' in Jahrbuch des Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien, 13, 1944, pp. 153-4, reproduced fig. 133;
L. Reis-Santos, Masterpieces of Flemish Painting of the 15th and 16th Century in Portugal, Lisbon 1962, pp. 99-100, reproduced plate LXVII;
M.J. Friedländer, Early Netherlandish Painting, vol. VIII, Leyden 1972, p. 103, part of no. 92, reproduced plate 91;
J.G. van Gelder, `Scorel, Mor, Bellegambe und Orley in Marchiennes' in Oud Holland 87, 1973, pp. 170-176;
J.D. Farmer, Bernard van Orley of Brussels, dissertation, Princeton 1981, pp. 99-102, 119, 338-9, no. 92b;
J.O. Hand & M. Wolff, National Gallery of Art, Washington. Early Netherlandish Painting, Washington 1986, p. 222;
B.L. Dunbar, The Collections of the Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art.  German and Netherlandish Paintings 1450-1600, Kansas City 2005, pp. 207-9, reproduced p. 208, fig. 15g.

"The following condition report has been provided by Sarah Walden, an independent restorer who is not an employee of Sotheby's. This painting is on an oak panel with two joints, that was cradled at some time in the last century. There is no history of cracking or movement, and even the joints have minimal retouching and may not have been reglued. The cradle was evidently unnecessary but is also doing no harm. There are a few little chips along the base edge, and occasional minute flakes down the joints. The right joint has a narrow line of retouching but there are only one or two brief retouchings on the left joint. There is some tiny crackle in the green drape behind Herod at upper right, and a small scattering of tiny chips or flakes in the legs of the executioner, also a group of little circular holes apparently bored into the surface at the edge of the background fire. There is one small recent knock in the archway the left. The paint appears to have always been perfectly secure generally throughout. The condition is exceptionally good. There has been no recent restoration and apparently minimal intervention ever, with clearly a calm stable early history. The darks are rich and unrubbed, with deep glazing intact, including the copper resinate greens, and all the detail is intact. This report was not done under laboratory conditions."
"This lot is offered for sale subject to Sotheby's Conditions of Business, which are available on request and printed in Sotheby's sale catalogues. The independent reports contained in this document are provided for prospective bidders' information only and without warranty by Sotheby's or the Seller."

This is the obverse of one of two panels of similar dimensions presumed to have come from the same altarpiece of Saint John.  The other panel, depicting The Birth of Saint John the Baptist, was donated to the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York in 2001 (see Fig. 2).¹  Both panels had similar reverses, although the present one has been largely effaced:  within a decorative framework incorporating a crozier and an intertwined banderolle bearing the legend Finis Coronat they depict within fictive frames with curved top an Abbot in prayer (corresponding to the present panel) and Christ as the Man of Sorrows (the reverse of the ex-Katz panel) (see figs 1 & 3).²  Friedländer thought that two other panels of similar size with very similar reverses came from the same altarpiece.  These depict on the obverse The Knighting of Saint Martin by the Emperor Constantine and Saint Martin adoring the Virgin and Child.³  Farmer thought it more likely however that they came from another altarpiece of similar dimensions.  They are however very similar in style to the two Saint John panels, and the latter picture incorporates Van Orley's coat-of-arms appears in the window behind Saint Peter.  Dr. Maryan Ainsworth has kindly suggested (email) that the central part of each of the altarpieces may well have been a sculptural group.

Whether or not all the four panels came from the same altarpieces, the legend they all bear – Finis Coronat – is the motto of Jacques Coëne, whose coat-of-arms appears on the reverse of Van Orley's Christ among the Doctors in Washington.⁴  Coëne was born in Bruges in 1468/9 and he was Abbot of the Benedictine abbey of Marchiennes, near Douai in Northern France from 1501 until his death in 1542.  He was an active patron of the visual arts and commissioned several important works from Netherlandish painters during his long tenure as Abbot, including works by Jan van Scorel, Anthonis Mor and Jean Bellegambe.⁵  It thus seems very likely that he commissioned from Van Orley the altarpiece of which this panel is a part, perhaps because he had been well-pleased with the Washington picture, a small-scale work presumably intended for private devotion, which probably dates from slightly earlier, circa 1513.  Friedländer dated this panel circa 1513 in a certificate offered with this lot when sold in 1947.

It is not known when the panels left Marchiennes, or what happened to them afterwards.  The Saint Martin panels were thought to have been in the collection of Charles X (Charles Gustavus) of Sweden (1622-1660), and later in the Chateau Ris Orangis.⁶

Scholars have disagreed over the dating of this and related panels.  Farmer dates them circa 1517-18, Hand & Wolff circa 1518-19, while Van Gelder concluded that the Saint Martin panels were in situ in Marchiennes by 1515, and Dunbar dates them circa 1514.⁷

A recent dendrochonological examination conducted by Ian Tyers has shown that the centre and left-hand panel of the three that make up this panel come from the same tree, and that the last hardwood ring of the right-hand panel dates from 1484, indicating an earliest felling date of 1492, and a conjectural usage date of 1492-1524.  A copy of his report is available on request.  It is interesting to note that Peter Klein's dendrochronological report on the Kansas City Saint Martin panel which comprises four planks, gives a probably felling date between 1496 and 1502, and he concludes that 1504 is the earliest plausible date of use.⁸  Since he is inclined to allow for more years of sapwood growth than Tyers, one may infer a similar likely date for both panels

1.  It was previously recorded in the collection of the late Dr. George Katz in Long Island, New York, and was bequeathed to the museum by Hertha Katz in 2001.
2.  The reverse of the present panel is supposed to have been separated from the obverse and was last heard of in a sale in New York, Parke-Bernet, 23 January 1947, lot 228, (as depicting Saint Bernard of Clairvaux), but the reverse of the present cradled panel reveals the clearly original inscription.  The identity of the reverse sold in 1947 thus remains a complete mystery.
3.  They were both in the collection of Mortimer Schiff, New York, but were separated at his sale in 1938. The first is in now the Nelson-Atkins Museum, Kansas City and the second was in the Hans Wetzlar collection, Amsterdam until sold at Sotheby's Amsterdam, 9 June 1977, lot 87, for 760,000 guilders to Cramer.  subsequently it was in a German private collection.
4.  Washington, National Gallery of Art, inv. 1952.5.47 (1126); see Hand & Wolff, 1986, pp. 218-223.
5.  Part of a polyptych by Scorel is in Douai, Musée de la Chartreuse, and the panel depicting the Martyrdom of Saint Ursula and her 11,000 Virgins, has a portrait of Coëne on the reverse.
6. Dunbar, 2005, p. 216.
7.  See under literature.
8.  See Dunbar 2005, p. 201.