Skip to main content

Main image

Summer:
Catalogue entry

Catalogue contents

About the catalogue

Entry details

Full title
Summer
Artist
Hans Wertinger
Inventory number
NG6568
Author
Susan Foister
Extracted from
The German Paintings before 1800 (London, 2024)

Catalogue entry

, 2024

Extracted from:
Susan Foister; with Rachel Billinge, Marika Spring and Lea Viehweger; and contributions by Lorne Campbell and Allison Goudie, The German Paintings before 1800 (London: National Gallery Global and Yale University Press, 2024).

© The National Gallery

Oil on wood, 23.2 × 39.5 cm

Provenance

The picture was formerly in a private collection in Spain, probably before 1927 and certainly by 1936.1 It was purchased by the National Gallery through Sotheby’s in 1997.

Versions

A scene of rural activity attributed to Wertinger, formerly with Colnaghi, shows a similar sheep shearer (fig. 27).2

Exhibitions

NG 1999.

Technical Notes

The picture was cleaned and restored in 1997–8, when overpaint masking the gilded decoration was removed. The paint is largely in good condition. There is a roughly circular paint loss of about 1.5 cm in diameter in the landscape lower right, and some losses associated with old splits in the wood. The water, sky and lighter parts of the foreground landscape are very thinly painted and the paint has become more transparent over time, making the underdrawing more visible. Some fading of lake pigments and discoloration of greens has also occurred.

The support is a wood panel, probably lime, consisting of three boards with vertical grain, joined vertically. The panel is constructed from two wider boards with a narrower one between. The joins are at 16.7 and 22.7 cm from the left edge, measured on the reverse; the two wide boards are about 17 cm in width with a 6 cm strip in between. The panel thickness is about 5 mm. The side edges appear to have been trimmed slightly: the ground stops short of the edges but leaving only a narrow strip of exposed wood on both sides; the top and bottom edges have both been cut.

Fig. 1

X‐radiograph of NG 6568. © The National Gallery

The back of the panel has exposed worm channels, which might provide evidence that the panel has been thinned. A D‐shaped original insert has been put into the panel lower right (fig. 1), presumably to replace a knot. The panel has a marked convex warp of up to 2 cm. Two non‐original cross battens were removed in 1997 and several old vertical splits made secure (the X‐radiograph was made before this panel treatment). The wood has been damaged by woodworm but is otherwise in good condition.

The white ground contains chalk. It has not been possible to discover whether or not there is a priming.

The composition has been extensively and freely underdrawn with a brush, with hatching used to indicate the shadows on the tree trunk, left, and the cliff, right, as well as on the roofs of the buildings in the background (fig. 7). There have been no major alterations to the composition at the painting stage, although as the drawing is free the painted figures do not always follow it exactly and there are several details drawn but not painted, for example a bird drawn rising from the water to the right of the central tree (fig. 2).

The decorative corner elements are mordant‐gilded using an orange‐red mordant containing mainly earth pigments; FTIR analysis suggests they are bound with oil (fig. 3). The details are painted over the gold with translucent brown and black paint.

The paint medium appears to be oil, but has not been analysed. Examination of the surface with a microscope shows that the blue used for the sky, the water and for clothing appears to be azurite (figs 2, 4). Red lake mixed with white was used for the legs of the sheep shearer. Red lake with an opaque red, probably vermilion and possibly with red lead, was used for the legs of the man with a white bird (figs 5, 6). [page 927] [page 928] The greens are mixtures of lead tin yellow with verdigris of large particle size, to which a verdigris glaze has been applied which now appears brown but was probably originally green. The more distant green landscape is painted with a mixture of blue and yellow pigments. The paint of the tops of the growth being cut in the field consists of lead‐tin yellow, white and possibly some yellow earth. Lead white, black and earth pigments have also been used.

Fig. 2

Photomicrograph of the underdrawn bird in the water. © The National Gallery

Fig. 3

Photomicrograph showing the mordant gilding. © The National Gallery

Fig. 4

Photomicrograph of the sky just to the right and below the central gilded pendant, showing a bird and the azurite blue paint. © The National Gallery

Fig. 5

Photomicrograph of the man with the sack and two birds, just to the right of the trunk of the large foreground tree. © The National Gallery

Fig. 6

Photomicrograph of the left leg and the two birds held by the man in fig. 5, above. © The National Gallery

Subject

The scene represented is a river with distant mountains to the left and a town on the right‐hand bank; in the foreground a variety of rural activities are undertaken by people of different social classes. Near the centre and seen from the rear is a man in a light‐coloured, broad‐brimmed plumed hat and brown coat seated on a white horse, who holds two hawks or other birds of prey on his extended left arm (fig. 8). His dog, its coat partly clipped, stands on the left. On the far left a man and woman ride by, both seated on a brown horse; the woman, seated side‐saddle in a blue dress and white head‐covering, holds a bird of prey on her left wrist. On the right of the composition are two riders galloping, engaged in the same pursuit: the man on the left rides a brown horse and holds his bird of prey on his right arm, while his companion further to the right rides a white horse and raises his left arm in the air, possibly holding a whip or a lure to attract his hawk to return. Both men wear white hats with brown plumes, white tunics with slashed sleeves, white trousers and long black boots.

[page 929]
Fig. 7

Infrared reflectogram of NG 6568. © The National Gallery

In the foreground on the left a man wearing a white, flat‐brimmed hat, a blue tunic, red hose and brown boots sits under a tree, shearing a sheep which lies across his legs; the curls of the shorn fleece are visible to the right (figs 9, 10, 15). The man seems to be based on a woodcut by Sebald Beham (1500–1550) of about 1529–30 which represents the zodiac month of Cancer, late May to June (fig. 16).3 In the lower‐left hand corner the rest of the flock, some of which are black, are serenaded by a man playing the bagpipes. Behind them a man is cutting a field with a long‐handled scythe of the type used to cut grass (fig. 12).4 The yellow growth he is mowing has highlighted tops, possibly intended to represent the ears typical of wheat; however since a sickle rather than a scythe was generally used for harvesting in this period the growth may represent a hayfield rather than a field of wheat, as its relatively low height might also suggest. A brownish‐grey jug for his refreshment stands to his right. A second man in a plumed hat walks in front of the partially cut field, also carrying a scythe (figs 13, 17).5 Near them, to the right of the tree, close to the water, are men who appear to be beaters, making the ducks fly up for the hunters. In front is a man in a white tunic with a purse suspended from it and wearing red hose (fig. 5), who bends down with a sack held over a brown bird and a white goose or swan (fig. 6), confronted by a barking dog to the right (fig. 11). There are several ducks swimming on the water and one, to the right, rising up out of it. The greenery on the far bank casts reflections in the water. In the sky can be seen a number of birds, perhaps birds of prey (fig. 4). In the distance is a bridge connecting the bank on which the activities take place with the settlement opposite: there are two towers near the bridge, evidently representing a town gate, and a building with a tall spire towards the right, presumably a church. The town may be intended to represent Landshut on the river Isar, where Wertinger lived and worked. The tall spire may be that of St Martin’s church (also seen in a painting of a tournament at Landshut (fig. 19) ) .

Fig. 8

Photomicrograph of the hunter in the centre with birds of prey. © The National Gallery

[page 930]
Fig. 9

Photomicrograph of the sheep being sheared. © The National Gallery

Fig. 10

Photomicrograph of the shorn fleece. © The National Gallery

Fig. 11

Photomicrograph of the dog. © The National Gallery

In the centre foreground a young woman in a white dress with a square neckline over a blue skirt carries a platter of round whitish‐yellow objects on her head, perhaps bread rolls (fig. 14).6 A man follows her, holding a basket in his right hand and a small bundle on a stick. On the far right, nearest to the viewer, is a man in a brown hat and boots with a large bundle over his shoulder and what may be a sword hanging from his belt: he is pointing upwards but the composition ends at this point: brown fabric with vertical folds and horizontal ones at the lower edge could indicate a sack loaded [page 931]onto the cart or conceivably the figure of a woman from the knees down; parts of the wheels and handles of the cart are also shown. The top of the composition is framed by gilded decoration in the form of an arch with decorated spandrels and a central pendant. Along the bottom are traces of white paint, possibly an inscription panel that has been cut off.

Fig. 12

Photomicrograph of the scythe blade of the man cutting a field at the left of the painting. © The National Gallery

Fig. 13

Photomicrograph of the scythe blade of the man walking in front of the field at the far left. © The National Gallery

Fig. 14

Photomicrograph of the contents of the platter on the head of the young woman. © The National Gallery

Fig. 15

Detail of NG 6568. © The National Gallery

Wertinger’s scenes of rural life evoke the tasks and pursuits carried out in the countryside in the warmest weather of the year. These were frequently represented in this period following the conventions of the calendar tradition, according to which the different months of the year were represented by typical occupations, both agricultural activity carried out by farm labourers and leisure pursuits followed by the prosperous. Similar representations of the Labours or Occupations of the Months can be seen in manuscript illumination (notably in the calendars of Books of Hours), and in wall painting, tapestry, glass painting and woodcuts, in both northern and southern Europe during the Middle Ages and onwards into the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries; the conventions for representing particular months can be traced back to antiquity.7 Scenes showing agricultural tasks appropriate to particular times of year were often alternated or contrasted with scenes of aristocratic leisure: peasants might be shown shearing sheep while their social superiors went boating or picnicking in the summer months, or in winter feasted indoors while work went on outside. The development of scenes beyond those of the traditional calendar and including more depictions of noble leisure was a feature of the work of the Netherlandish illuminator Simon Bening (1483/4–1561) in the early sixteenth century.8 A specifically German form of manuscript calendar cycle depicts only different types of hunting for the different months of the year.9

Fig. 16

Sebald Beham, June, 1527. Woodcut, 2.8 × 5.4 cm. London, The British Museum, 1927,0614.56. The British Museum, London © The Trustees of the British Museum

Fig. 17

Detail of figures with scythes in NG 6568. © The National Gallery

The principal activities shown in NG 6568 – haymaking, shearing sheep, fishing and riding out with hawks – were all traditionally represented in the summer months in calendar cycles of the Occupations of the Months. Although calendar cycles were very often based on the divisions of the year into twelve zodiacal months, rather than the twelve months of the modern calendar, sheep shearing, haymaking and harvesting were all associated with the summer months. The times of the year at which certain tasks were undertaken and so depicted might vary according to the exigencies of the European climate: the further south, the earlier tasks such as haymaking or harvesting would take place.10 For instance, sheep shearing is traditionally found in June in cycles from northern Europe, especially in the Low Countries and Germany, although it also occurs in the depiction of the month of July alongside harvesting in the famous fifteenth‐century illuminated calendar of the Très Riches Heures du Duc de Berry, whereas haymaking alone is shown in the Très Riches Heures as the activity for June.11 Sheep shearing is found along with the sign of the zodiac Cancer (late May to late June) in the woodcut series by Sebald Beham of around 1529–30 based on that of 1527 (fig. 16) which Wertinger [page 932] appears to have known, as well as in woodcuts by the Master FB and Jost Amman (1539–1591).12 Haymaking is shown as the activity for July in seven examples of illuminated calendars from the workshop of the Netherlandish artist Simon Bening as well as in Hans Bocksberger the Elder’s (1510–1561) lunette for July on the ceiling of the Landshut ducal residence where Wertinger was employed (fig. 18), but is also sometimes shown in the work of other artists in June.13 Fishing and hawking typically occur in representations of July.14 The activities seen in NG 6568 appear to encompass more than those shown in a single month in a typical depiction from a calendar cycle but might be most readily associated with the month of July.

Fig. 18

Hans Bocksberger, Labours of the Months in the Apollozimmer of the Landshut ducal residence. Stadtresidenz Landshut © Bayerische Schlösserverwaltung, Rainer Herrmann/Maria Scherf/Andrea Gruber, München

NG 6568 is one of around twenty small paintings in differing formats associated with Wertinger which represent outdoor activities in landscape settings: some of these have been thought to represent the months of the year, others the seasons. Seven paintings which appear to be individual scenes from a single cycle of Occupations of the Months are preserved in the Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg. Made from separate panels of differing woods (including alder) and panel construction and differing origins, each measures approximately 32 × 40 cm, and they share similar (but not identical) gilded spandrels with a central pendant motif; they have been identified as representing March, May, June (fig. 20), July (fig. 21), August, September and December.15 Further paintings may be part of the same series: two paintings in a private collection in Spain identified as January and November, and a third in a private collection in Germany previously on loan to the Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg, identified as February (formerly thought to be March); these three have gilded decoration resembling those of the Nuremberg series.16 A painting of a tournament now at Landshut, which includes representations of Ludwig X of Bavaria (1495–1545) and his brother Wilhelm IV (1493–1550), is also thought to be part of this group and may alternatively represent February (fig. 19).17 A twelfth fragmentary painting may represent June (see Versions).18

NG 6568 shares some physical characteristics with the paintings at Nuremberg and those associated with them – they are similar in width and in the form of panel used in the Nuremberg group – but clearly differs in size and proportions and in the gilded decoration. Nor do any of that group [page 933] feature truncated elements of the type shown in NG 6568. Moreover NG 6568 shows activities combined in a single painting which are represented in separate panels in the Nuremberg group: sheep shearing, haymaking and hunting with falcons.19 Although, as suggested above, the painting might represent the month of July, it might more plausibly represent the activities of the summer months.

Fig. 19

Hans Wertinger, Landshut Tournament. Oil on panel, 33.5 × 16.3 cm. Landshut, Stadtresidenz. © Bayerische Schlösserverwaltung, Maria Scherf/Andrea Gruber, München

Fig. 20

Hans Wertinger, June. Oil on wood, 33.6 × 41 cm. Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum. Germanisches Nationalmuseum © Germanisches Nationalmuseum Nürnberg

Fig. 21

Hans Wertinger, July. Oil on wood, 33.5 × 41 cm. Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum. Germanisches Nationalmuseum © Germanisches Nationalmuseum Nürnberg

Wertinger’s National Gallery painting shares similar characteristics with a further group of paintings associated with the artist which also represent types of activities in outdoor settings. They are close in size and proportions and some have similar gilded decoration, but none has precisely the type of gilded decoration seen in NG 6568. The [page 934] differences between them indicate that they are not part of a single series or coherent group. The paintings are: a wintry scene of fox and deer hunting with people on the ice in the background (fig. 22), and a depiction of a bathhouse and butcher’s shop or pig slaughterhouse (fig. 23), both in the Germanisches Nationalmuseum Nuremberg;20 a painting in the Hermitage, Saint Petersburg, showing village festivities and a market (fig. 24);21 one in the Brooklyn Museum, depicting a boar hunt (fig. 25);22 a picture in a private collection of a deerhunt in Bologna;23 a painting of a bathing scene in the Museen der Stadt, Nuremberg (fig. 26);24 and a painting of a bath house, at one time on the Munich art market.25 Another painting of similar size formerly with Colnaghi (fig. 27) depicts sheep shearing (see Versions, above).

Fig. 22

Hans Wertinger, Winter. Oil on wood, 23 × 40.4 cm. Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum. © Germanisches Nationalmuseum Nürnberg. Photo Georg Janßen

Fig. 23

Hans Wertinger, Bathing and Slaughterhouse. Oil on wood, 23.8 × 39.3 cm. Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum. © Germanisches Nationalmuseum Nürnberg. Photo Monika Runge

The Bologna, Brooklyn (fig. 25) and Saint Petersburg (fig. 26) pictures share gilded spandrels and a composition marked by a central tree. Although the first two have been cut at the top, the Brooklyn painting bears no indication it ever had the central decorative motif visible in NG 6568, and the placing of the tree in the Hermitage picture and possibly also in the painting at Bologna would seem to exclude the presence of the motif in the other two cases. The winter hunting scene at Nuremberg (fig. 22) has a different kind of gilded decorative motif at the top, which is very similar to the painting of similar size depicting sheep shearing formerly with Colnaghi (fig. 27), though the motifs are not absolutely identical, differing in the manner of the turning of the terminal of the volutes. The Nuremberg bathhouse scene has yet another format, closer to NG 6568, though the panel is of a different construction.26

These paintings represent types of activities associated with different times of year which are much more varied than those shown traditionally in the Occupations of the [page 935] [page 936] Months, and in which leisure rather than labour is often to the fore. Several make references to the calendar tradition of the Occupations of the Months in their inclusion in the background of scenes with a different, more leisured emphasis, similar to those by Bening referred to above.27 Some scholars have argued that Wertinger represented the four seasons in these paintings, although there is no agreement as to which seasons might be shown.28 Moreover, the four seasons as a pictorial subject was not well established at this period. In the later sixteenth century Pieter Bruegel the Elder’s engraved representation of Summer included June, July and August, while his paintings appear to have each shown two months, with June and July represented as a haymaking scene.29 Conceivably, Wertinger’s composition might also represent these two summer months, June and July, but more probably it is a much less programmatic representation of activities carried out across the summer months, which draws on the calendar tradition.30

Fig. 24

Hans Wertinger, Village Festivities. Oil on panel, 22.5 × 40 cm. St Petersburg, The State Hermitage Museum. The State Hermitage Museum, St Petersburg. Photograph © The State Hermitage Museum/photo by Vladimir Terebenin

Fig. 25

Hans Wertinger, The Boar Hunt. Oil on panel, 21 × 38.7 cm, New York, Brooklyn Museum of Art, Gift of Mrs Watson B. Dickerman, 49.230. © Brooklyn Museum of Art

Fig. 26

Hans Wertinger, Bathing Scene. Oil on wood, 22 × 40 cm. Nuremberg, Museen der Stadt. Museen der Stadt Nürnberg. Photo © akg-images

Fig. 27

Hans Wertinger, Sheep Shearing. Oil and gold on panel, 22 × 39 cm. Whereabouts unknown (formerly Colnaghi).

Although the differences in the types of decorative motifs framing or dividing this second group of paintings suggest they are not part of a single series, none shares the form of gilded decoration seen in NG 6568. It is notable however that the Nuremberg painting of a bathhouse and butcher’s shop (fig. 23) includes a figure in the foreground on the right‐hand side who is pointing to the scene but turning to an unseen figure beyond the composition. This is similar to the manner in which the figure on the cart on the right of NG 6568 extends beyond the edge of the picture (although as previously mentioned the panel is of different construction in both paintings, that of NG 6568 resembling others of those in Nuremberg). The truncated scene in NG 6568 implies that a matching panel which would have completed the image is missing, and suggests it was part of a decorative scheme, probably set into the panelling of a room. NG 6568 must have been paired with a painting that completed it on the right‐hand side, perhaps a harvest scene, moving the subject onwards in the cycle of the year.

Original Function, Location and Patron

Duke Ludwig X of Bavaria made extensive refurbishments to his residence of Castle Trausnitz in Landshut from 1516 onwards, and very large payments are recorded to Wertinger for his work there (see biography, p. 925). The subject matter of the Occupations of the Months was one favoured by the Bavarian rulers for the decoration of their residences: the Apollo room in the Stadtresidenz Landshut, built in 1536–43 after Wertinger’s death, displays depictions of the Occupations of the Months by Hans Bocksberger the Elder (fig. 18) including tournament and bathhouse scenes.31

Löcher identified Wertinger’s patron Duke Ludwig X of Bavaria as a figure in the painting at Nuremberg representing the month of May and suggested that he commissioned all of Wertinger’s small decorative scenes, while Hess observed that the same man was present in many of Wertinger’s panels, and noted his resemblance to Ludwig in his portrait of 1516.32 Ludwig also appears to be shown in a jousting scene taking place in the market square at Landshut, the location of his castle of Trausnitz.33 Given the courtly subject of the painting, it is entirely plausible that Ludwig X is shown as one of the two men prominent in the foreground; the other is probably his elder brother Wilhelm IV, ruler of Bavaria. If NG 6568 shows Landshut it was most likely painted for Ludwig, too. Its Spanish provenance, like the other similar paintings which may have reached Spain through dynastic connections with Bavaria, also suggests that it might originate with Ludwig X.34

There is no clear evidence to confirm to what form of decorative scheme NG 6568 or other panels by Wertinger might have belonged. Löcher and others have suggested that the series of Months in Nuremberg may have formed part of a single scheme along with the slightly less tall paintings he associated with the seasons, such as NG 6568, positing that some of the subjects in the Months would have been treated more extensively in the smaller panels in a manner which can be paralleled in manuscript illumination with its systems of marginal embellishment of the main image; this [page 937]might have involved each larger, squarer Month being paired with two other panels, in tiers, one above the other.35 Clarke‐Ingersoll has suggested instead that the panels probably hung in two separate rooms in the residence, with some arranged horizontally around a reception space, depicting Ludwig enacting his role as steward of the people.36

According to Clarke‐Ingersoll, Wertinger’s Months served as images of good government, a pictorial confirmation of the duchy’s prosperity and Ludwig’s obligation to be good ruler: they would have presented visitors with idealised images of Ludwig’s success in this sphere, offering views of peace and prosperity as though seen from the windows of his residence.37 Hess has drawn attention to the manner in which Wertinger's images can be related to the celebration of the German landscape by contemporary German humanists: to that end his paintings combine both close observation of daily life and idealisation.38

It is difficult to be certain whether all the surviving paintings should be considered as part of the same original scheme, plausibly intended for Castle Trausnitz, and impossible to propose an accurate reconstruction; indeed the repetitions and overlaps in subject matter, as well as the differences in decorative treatments among the group of smaller pictures, including NG 6568, suggest that at least some of these paintings may, rather, have been created for different patrons, and for schemes in different rooms. There may have been a market for these scenes beyond the Bavarian court.39 However, the Spanish provenance of NG 6568, along with that of other similar works by Wertinger (see Provenance), strongly suggests it was made for Ludwig X or another member of the Bavarian ruling family.

Attribution and Date

According to an inscription on the nineteenth‐century‐style frame used until 1997, NG 6568 was formerly thought to be by Lucas Cranach. NG 6568 is in fact extremely similar, in the manner of its painting as well as in the construction of its panel and the style of underdrawing, to other paintings such as the Nuremberg Months series which are generally accepted as Wertinger’s on the basis of comparison with landscapes in his signed works, notably that of Maria Jacobaea von Baden, Duchess of Bavaria, dated 1526 (Munich, Alte Pinakothek).40 The thin layer of paint with the underdrawing showing through in NG 6568 is characteristic not only of other seasonal paintings but also of works such as the signed portrait in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London, of Christoph von Laiming in his 59th Year of 1517.41 The man on a horse seen from the rear in the centre of the picture is very similar when reversed to the man in the painting at Nuremberg currently identified as Winter (fig. 22). The construction of NG 6568 is similar to that of several of the Months in Nuremberg, which share a very narrow central board, and suggests that even if not part of the same series, their supports were ordered from the same panel maker. The high quality of NG 6568 is particularly noticeable in the elegance of the details of the figures and in the beauty of the landscape scene dominating the background.

The Nuremberg paintings of the Months can be dated to around 1530: that date is determined not only by Wertinger’s death in 1533, but by the use of woodcuts of the Months by Sebald Beham, first published in 1527 without the signs of the zodiac and adapted to include them in 1529–30: the milkmaid in April is used for the Nuremberg May and the picnickers in August are the model for those in the Nuremberg July; similarly, the man shearing sheep in NG 6568 seems to be based on the Beham woodcut for June (fig. 16).42 NG 6568 does not differ significantly in style from the Nuremberg paintings and is therefore also likely to date from around 1530, or slightly before.

Select Bibliography

National Gallery Report, April 1997–March 1998, pp. 10–11; [Foister], ‘Hans Wertinger’s Summer, exhibition leaflet, 1999; Hess, Mack and Küffner 2008; Clarke‐Ingersoll 2014.

Notes

1 The picture was the subject of a Spanish export licence dated 13 September 1996. It may have been in the same collection as two paintings representing the months of January or February and November, according to Thieme‐Becker , vol. 35, 1942, p. 428, and Lutze and Wiegand 1937, p. 186, under no. 1240, which were still in Spain in 1976 according to Kurt Löcher (letter of 2 March 1998 in NG dossier); see further Nuremberg catalogue (Löcher 1997), but its subject precludes identification with either. The painting now at Landshut also has a Spanish provenance (see notes 16 and 34, below), as do the paintings of the months of June and July now at Nuremberg: Löcher 1997, pp. 540–1; they were acquired in 1927. (Back to text.)

2 Sold at auction by Asta, Genoa, 22 May 2000, lot 354; with Colnaghi in 2001 and given the title ‘June’, measuring 22 × 39 cm; see further below. (Back to text.)

3 See Bartrum 1995, pp. 105–6, no. 95f. The series without the inclusion of the signs of the zodiac was produced by Beham for a prayerbook by Martin Luther published in 1527; Hollstein , p. 239. (Back to text.)

5 The scythe blade is mainly repaint but there are a few traces of original brown near the man’s leg that suggest a scythe is what was intended, even though it could also be read as a sword with a brown shadow cast on the ground. (Back to text.)

6 The pigments observed here consist of white and lead tin yellow. The Month of June at Nuremberg has a similar figure with a basket on her head covered with a white cloth, evidently bringing food for a picnic. (Back to text.)

7 For the tradition of the Labours of the Months see Webster 1938 and also Alexander 1990, p. 437. (Back to text.)

8 See the Hennessy Hours (Brussels, Bibliotheque royale de Belgique, Ms II 158), Kren 2003, pp. 467–70, no 150. (Back to text.)

9 See BL Egerton MS 1146, Worms?, about 1475–85: www.bl.uk/catalogues/illuminatedmanuscripts/record.asp?MSID=7895 (accessed 17 October 2023). (Back to text.)

10 Compare NG 3109.6, a painting by an unidentified Venetian painter of the Labours of the Months, in which a labourer is harvesting in a month which can be identified as June: Penny 2008, pp. 312–17. (Back to text.)

11 See Miegrot 1986, esp. p. 32 for references to depictions of sowing and ploughing in both September and October. (Back to text.)

[page 938]
Fig. 28

Detail of NG 6568. © The National Gallery

12 Bartrum 1995, pp. 105–6, no. 95f. A similar series without the inclusion of the signs of the zodiac was produced by Beham (see note 3, above). (Back to text.)

13 See the tabulated analysis of the Bening Workshop Books of Hours in Buchanan 1990, p. 550. For Bocksberger see Clarke‐Ingersoll 2014, p. 205 and for the lunettes see Langer and Heinemann 2009, pp. 132–5. See www.hayinart.com for the associations between hay, scythes and the month of June and corn, sickles and the month of July in over 40 manuscripts at the Morgan Library, with examples, noting that French manuscripts tend to show June as the month of hay‐mowing and English, Flemish and German manuscripts July. For example, haymaking is shown under the sign of Leo (July–August) in an illumination from the Breviary of Eleanor of Portugal from about 1500 by the Flemish Master of James IV of Scotland in the Morgan Library, New York, MS M.52. (Back to text.)

15 Löcher 1997, pp. 540–9. For more technical examinations and consideration see Hess, Mack and Küffner 2008, pp. 64–81.The identification of the months has been extensively debated: see Clarke‐Ingersoll 2014, pp. 165–9. (Back to text.)

16 Thanks to Dr Kurt Löcher for kindly sending copies of photographs of the Spanish paintings. For further details and for the third painting in the Henkel collection, Wiesbaden, see Löcher 1997, p. 546. A photograph of the same picture is in the NG photographic library (ref. Berlin 1912). (Back to text.)

17 For the painting see Langer and Heinemann 2009, pp. 42–3 and Clarke‐Ingersoll 2014, pp. 165, 175 where it is identified as February on the basis of the association of its subject with the period before Lent. (Back to text.)

18 With Otter Fine Arts 1993. Löcher 1997, p. 546. If correctly identified as part of the Nuremberg series it would displace the picture currently identified as June, and the others following would move forwards by one month. However, Wertinger may well have painted more than one cycle of the traditional Labours of the Months, as the existence of a further painting possibly depicting June might seem to suggest (see Versions and note 2, above). (Back to text.)

19 Ibid. , pp. 540–50. Haymaking occurs in one scene (currently identified as June, but possibly originally July, fig. 20, above), and people riding out hawking are shown in a scene which may represent July, but possibly originally represented August (see note 18) (fig. 21, above). (Back to text.)

20 For the painting of Winter see Löcher 1997, pp. 549–50. Thanks to Dr Daniel Hess for information concerning the painting of the bathers and butchers shop (no. 2300), acquired in 2002; the widths of each plank, differing slightly at top and bottom, are 10/10.8 cm, 15.8/15.4 cm, 13.5/13.1 cm, therefore different in construction from NG 6568; the painting, formerly in the Professor John Richard Mez collection, Ruvigliana, is discussed in Wescher 1957, where it is identified as Autumn; Ehret 1976 also identified it as Autumn. (Back to text.)

22 Wolfthal 1989, pp. 1–4, discussing Wertinger’s painting. Elizabeth Easton of the Brooklyn Museum kindly facilitated an examination of this painting. (Back to text.)

23 Wescher 1957, p. 101 where identified as Autumn. Wolfthal 1989, p. 7, note 14 gives the dimensions as 20.8 x 39.5 cm. (Back to text.)

24 Löcher 1997, p. 550 and Wolfthal 1989, p. 2. (Back to text.)

25 Ehret 1976, p. 149 identified it as Summer. Wolfthal 1989, p. 7, note 14 gives the dimensions as 22.5 × 40 cm. (Back to text.)

26 See note 20, above. (Back to text.)

[page 939]

27 The deer hunt (Bologna) shows haymaking in the background, associated with June or July; the bathhouse scene (Munich) includes boating, associated with May; the painting of fox and deer hunting (Nuremberg) depicts people on the ice; the village festivity (Hermitage), includes ploughing fields and another bathhouse scene includes pig‐killing (a second picture at Nuremberg). Such parallels with the monthly calendar cycles were pointed out by the anonymous writer of the catalogue notes for the painting of June (see Versions and note 2, above) and seem not to have been noticed by other writers on Wertinger, although the conclusion that they all form part of a single cycle of the months including the Colnaghi panel is less convincing. (Back to text.)

28 First suggested by Buchner on the basis of the Nuremberg panel of a winter hunting scene and the Hermitage painting, and maintained by Ehret 1976 with the addition of other panels, but this is not supported by Wolfthal 1989 or Löcher 1997. (Back to text.)

29 The series of engravings published in 1570 begun by Pieter Bruegel the Elder, depict Spring and Summer, with Hans Bol completing the cycle with Autumn and Winter: see Miegrot 1986. For the paintings see also Buchanan 1990. It is notable that Bruegel’s depiction of the hay harvest (June and July) includes in the centre foreground a girl bearing a basket of fruit with some resemblance to the central figure in Wertinger’s composition. (Back to text.)

30 Clarke‐Ingersoll 2014, p. 166 proposes they are termed landscapes; the Germanisches Nationalmuseum calls them pictures of rural life. (Back to text.)

31 Ibid. , pp. 205, 196. (Back to text.)

32 Löcher 1997, p. 548; Hess, Mack and Küffner 2008; Clarke‐Ingersoll 2014, p. 179. Compare also fig. 23, above. On Ludwig X and his reign see Langer and Heinemann 2009, pp. 14–63. (Back to text.)

33 On Castle Trausnitz see Langer and Heinemann 2009, pp. 38–44. (Back to text.)

34 The painting was exported from the UK in 2010 and formerly belonged to the British collector Sir William Stirling‐Maxwell (1818–1878). The frame features the crown and coat of arms of King Charles III of Spain. For other paintings of Spanish provenance see note 1, above. (Back to text.)

35 Löcher 1997, p. 548; the suggestion that the paintings were for room decoration was first made by Lutze and Wiegand 1937, p. 186. Hess in Langer and Heinemann 2009, p. 252 observes that all the months are cut except for December, making it impossible to establish a reconstruction using technical evidence. (Back to text.)

36 Clarke‐Ingersoll 2014, p. 195. She posited that fictional frames separated the paintings into two groups within the wooden panelling serving to frame them: ibid. , p. 178. (Back to text.)

37 Ibid. , pp. 180–1, 194, on the ‘Blickregie’. (Back to text.)

38 Hess in Langer and Heinemann 2009, p. 251. (Back to text.)

39 Hess in ibid. , p. 252 suggests the Prince‐Bishop Philipp of Freising as a possibility. (Back to text.)

40 The attribution of the Nuremberg Months was first made by Buchner 1927/8, pp. 106–12. See further Löcher 1997, pp. 547–8. (Back to text.)

41 Inv. 768:1–1865. See Kauffmann 1973, vol. 1, pp. 300–1. (Back to text.)

42 See note 3, above for the woodcuts. Hess in Langer and Heinemann 2009, pp. 251–2 suggests the paintings may rather date from 1516 to around 1525 and may relate to payments made to Wertinger in 1518 (see biography, p. 925, above). He points to the treatment of landscape in the background of the portrait of Ludwig X dated 1516 (Munich, R579), ibid. , p. 240, no. 6.1. (Back to text.)

Abbreviations

BL
British Library, London
FTIR
Fourier transform infrared microscopy

List of archive references cited

  • Brussels, Bibliotheque royale de Belgique, Ms II 158: Hennessy Hours
  • New York, Morgan Library, MS M.52: Breviary of Eleanor of Portugal, about 1500

List of references cited

Hollstein 1954–ongoing
HollsteinFriedrich W., ed., German Engravings, Etchings and Woodcuts, c.1400–1700105 volsAmsterdam 1954–[ongoing]
Alexander 1990
AlexanderJonathan, ‘Labeur and Paresse: ideological representations of medieval peasant labor’, Art Bulletin, September 1990, 723436–52
Bartrum 1995
BartrumGiuliaGerman Renaissance Prints 1490–1550 (exh. cat. British Museum, London), London 1995
Baum et al. 2014
BaumKatja vonet al.Let the Material Talk: Technology of Late‐medieval Cologne Panel PaintingLondon 2014
Buchanan 1990
BuchananIain, ‘The collection of Niclaes Jongelinck: II The ‘Months’ by Pieter Bruegel the Elder’, Burlington Magazine, August 1990, 132no. 1049541–50
Buchner 1927/8
BuchnerErnst, ‘Monats‐ und Jahreszeitenbilder Hans Wertingers’, Zeitschrift für bildende Kunst, 1927/8, 61106–12
Campbell 1998
CampbellLorneNational Gallery Catalogues: The Fifteenth Century Netherlandish SchoolsLondon 1998
Campbell 2014a
CampbellLorneNational Gallery Catalogues: The Sixteenth‐Century Netherlandish Paintings with French Paintings before 1600London 2014
Clarke Ingersoll 2014
Clarke IngersollCatherine, ‘Hans Wertinger in context: art, politics, and humanism at the court of Ludwig X, Duke of Bavaria’ (PhD thesis), University of Texas, 2014
Ehret 1976
EhretGloriaHans Wertinger in Context: Art, Politics, and Humanism at the Court of Ludwig X, Duke of BavariaMunich 1976
[Foister] 1999
[Foister], Hans Wertinger’s Summer (exhibition leaflet), 1999
Herring 2019
HerringSarahNational Gallery Catalogues: The Nineteenth‐Century French Paintings, Volume I, The Barbizon SchoolLondon 2019
Hess, Mack and Küffner 2008
HessDanielOliver Mack and Markus Küffner, ‘Hans Wertinger und die Freuden des Landlebens’, in Enthüllungen: Restaurierte Kunstwerke von Riemenschneider bis Kremser Schmidt (exh. cat. Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg), Nuremberg 2008, 65–81
Kauffman 1973
KauffmanClaus MichaelVictoria and Albert Museum: Catalogue of Foreign Paintings2 vols, 1973
Kren and McKendrick 2003
KrenThomas and Scot McKendrick, eds, Illuminating the Renaissance: The Triumph of Flemish Manuscript Painting in Europe (exh. cat., J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles; Royal Academy of Arts, London), London 2003
Langer and Heinemann 2009
LangerBrigitte and Katharina Heinemann, eds, Ewig blühe Bayerns Land’: Herzog Ludwig X. und die Renaissance (exh. cat., Stadtresidenz, Landshut), Regensburg 2009
Levey 1959
LeveyMichaelNational Gallery Catalogues: The German SchoolLondon 1959
Löcher 1997
LöcherKurtGermanisches Nationalmuseum Nürnberg. Die Gemälde des 16. JahrhundertsStuttgart 1997
Luther 1527
LutherMartinprayerbook, 1527
Lutze and Wiegand 1937
LutzeEberhard and Eberhard WiegandKataloge des Germanischen Nationalmuseums zu Nürnberg: Die Gemälde des 13.–16. JahrhundertsLeipzig 1937
Miegroet 1986
MiegroetHans J. van, ‘“The Twelve Months” reconsidered: how a drawing by Pieter Stevens solves a Bruegel enigma’, Simiolus, 1986, 16no. 129–35
National GalleryThe National Gallery Report: Trafalgar SquareLondon [various dates]
Nikulin and Avarishch 1986
NikulinNikolai and Boris AvarishchGerman and Austrian Painting in the HermitageLeningrad 1986
Penny 2008
PennyNicholasNational Gallery Catalogues: The Sixteenth Century Italian Paintings, Volume II, Venice 1540–1600London 2008
Ritch 2007
RitchAlanHay in Arthttps://www.hayinart.com, 2007
Thieme and Becker 1907–50
ThiemeUlrich and Felix Becker, eds, Allgemeines Lexicon der bildenen Künstler von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart37 volsLeipzig 1907–50
Webster 1938
WebsterJames C.The Labors of the Months in Antique and Mediaeval ArtEvanston and Chicago 1938
Wescher 1957
WescherPaul, ‘Ein weiteres Jahreszeitenbild zum Wertinger‐Zyklus’, Münchner Jahrbuch der bildenden Kunst, 1957, 8101–2
Wolfthal 1989b
WolfthalDiane B., ‘Some little‐known paintings of the Northern Renaissance in the Brooklyn Museum’, Gazette des Beaux‐Arts, 1989, 13no. 14401–7

List of exhibitions cited

London 1999, National Gallery
London, National Gallery, Summer by Hans Wertinger, 1999

The Scope and Organisation of the Catalogue

These volumes represent the third catalogue of the National Gallery’s early northern European paintings, following those of fifteenth‐century early Netherlandish paintings and sixteenth‐century Netherlandish and French paintings by Lorne Campbell published in 1998 and 2014 respectively. When the present series of National Gallery catalogues was established it was agreed that there might be variations between the approach and organisation of one catalogue and another, depending on the type of paintings involved. Hence although broad categories of information such as provenance were standard inclusions they occur in different places in different catalogues. As it seemed reasonable for the catalogues concerning early Northern paintings to take similar approaches to the presentation of information which had much in common, I have as far as possible followed the approach of Lorne Campbell in his catalogues of early Netherlandish and French paintings. One important exception occurs in the ordering of works by the same painter: I have followed more recent cataloguing practice where the order is chronological rather than by National Gallery inventory number.

During the period in which these catalogues of early Netherlandish and German paintings have been prepared it has been agreed that a few paintings should move from one catalogue to the other. In the 1959 National Gallery catalogue of German paintings by Michael Levey the Virgin and Child in a Landscape (NG 2157), originally part of the Krüger collection, was attributed to an unknown German artist, but in Lorne Campbell’s 2014 volume it is now catalogued as Netherlandish. Conversely, entries on two paintings originally believed to be Netherlandish, Edzard the Great (NG 2209) and The Entombment after Schongauer (NG 1151), were originally compiled by Lorne Campbell for the sixteenth‐century Netherlandish catalogue, but after concluding they were instead of German origin he kindly allowed them to be published in the present volumes. Two painters with Netherlandish origins or Netherlandish connections are included in this catalogue as German. In the case of the painter known as the Master of the Saint Bartholomew Altarpiece there is evidence within the paintings (see his biography, p. 687) that the artist had strong connections to Utrecht in the northern Netherlands as well as clearly having patrons in Cologne. However, this publication continues the Gallery’s decision in the 1959 catalogue by Michael Levey to place the Master within German painting, as is conventional in other German collections. Similarly, the painting by Netherlandish‐born Bartholomaeus Spranger which was acquired some time after the publication of the 1959 catalogue is presented here as German, since Spranger spent his entire career in Germany and Prague. As explained in the essay on the history of the collection (pp. 17–37), the scope of the paintings catalogued here extends to the German‐speaking lands, and hence includes works made in what is now Austria, such as those by Michael Pacher and by two anonymous artists. The chronological span of this catalogue extends to 1800 as it has always been envisaged that the National Gallery’s nineteenth and early twentieth‐century paintings, from whatever part of Europe, will be catalogued separately as a whole; the first of these volumes, The Barbizon School by Sarah Herring, was published in 2019. One work discussed in Levey’s 1959 catalogue does not appear here: the drawing by Mengs which was transferred to the British Museum in 1994. It should be noted that entries on the paintings by Lucas Cranach the Elder were originally published in 2015 on the Gallery’s website; they have been updated as necessary and added to them is the Gallery’s most recent German acquisition, the small Venus and Cupid (NG 6680).

The catalogue is organised alphabetically by name of artist, or if the name is unknown, by geographical region, in some cases as unspecific as German, in others North or South German, with suggestions in the entry as to a more precise geographical origin. Many of the artists included here have not been securely identified with documented painters and are therefore called only by their traditional art‐historical nomenclature as ‘Master of’, although attempts to identify them with documented artists are discussed as appropriate. The relevant catalogue entries present important new information concerning the identification of the Master of Cappenberg as Jan Baegert: these entries are therefore presented under the latter name. However in the case of the Master of Liesborn the putative identification of the artist as Johann von Soest – although persuasive – does not rest on such secure grounds; the paintings discussed in these entries are therefore presented as by the Master of Liesborn, and the possible identification of the artist is discussed in the accompanying biography.

Entries relating to a single artist are arranged chronologically. Paintings which are signed or can be securely associated with the artist are grouped in chronological order before those which can be attributed to the artist with assistance from the workshop or to the artist’s workshop alone. Finally come paintings which appear to be the work of a painter outside the workshop practising in the style of the artist, and then paintings which are copies of works by the artist. In a very few cases I have expressed room for doubt concerning an attribution by the use of ‘Probably by’; I have not used ‘Attributed to’ or ‘Ascribed to’, as these phrases appear to relate to the past opinions of others rather than those of the catalogue author.

[page 12]

Where relevant, each entry is preceded by a short biography. Here I have endeavoured to draw attention to the principal documents concerning the artist’s life and works, on which arguments for the dating and attribution of particular paintings may be based, as well as drawing attention to works which are signed, signed and dated, or otherwise documented. The biographies include footnotes so that the reader may fairly readily access the sources for the documents; I have made efforts to include the most recent publications as well as the most accurate.

There are no changes to titles used in the 1959 catalogue and in subsequent National Gallery publications other than in the very few cases where new information has made this essential.

Each entry is preceded by information on support, medium, sizes of support and painted surface (where different), presented according to the latest National Gallery protocols. More on the ways in which this information has been obtained and presented is available in the Note on the Technical Examination of the Paintings (p. 13).

If a work bears a date this is specified, but there has been no attempt in the headmatter to provide a speculative date or range of dates: questions of dating are addressed at the end of each entry. Any additional material or clarification concerning information in the headmatter is addressed in the Technical Notes in each entry.

Although in most cases paintings have been cleaned since the 1959 catalogue this has not always resulted in inscriptions being clarified, and those of the 1959 catalogue are still in most cases the best guide. However in one case, the portrait by Bartholomeus Bruyn (NG 2605), an entire damaged inscription was painted over and has now been revealed. Inscriptions present on the reverses of the paintings are described in the entry’s Technical Notes.

Information on provenance follows the headmatter: this is frequently vital for the understanding of arguments concerning the status of the work, particularly where it was originally in an ecclesiastical setting. In the case of some provenances these are presented in a shorter form, but where it has been necessary to give explanations and alternatives these are in a fuller format. In the case of one work, Holbein’s Christina of Denmark, a full provenance is given but an Appendix to the catalogue entry gives a narrative of the painting’s acquisition in 1909, which has received much attention, so the facts are usefully gathered here. I have attempted whenever possible to provide the life dates of those owners mentioned in the provenance and very brief descriptions of their occupations.

Lists of related works include full details wherever possible, including prints and drawings. The list of exhibitions also includes long‐term loans. Each entry ends with a brief select bibliography which includes references to the 1959 Levey catalogue, references to the National Gallery Annual Review for paintings acquired after 1959 as well as references to noteworthy discussion of the paintings in significant monographs and exhibition catalogues.

Full technical notes are included on each painting: the methodology for the examination of the paintings is set out in the note on pp. 13–14. Information on the conservation history of each painting before its entry into the Gallery’s collection is included where available, along with that on significant conservation treatments by the Gallery. Where the painting’s frame is integral or original this is discussed in these notes, but I have not sought to give information on frames which replaced the original other than in the exceptional cases where this might throw light on the painting’s history. Infrared reflectograms and X‐radiographs of each painting are included wherever possible, except when the treatment or condition of the painting – for example backing with balsawood – means that these images do not yield any useful information.

I have endeavoured to ensure that the information presented in each catalogue entry is clearly presented and accessible to non‐specialist readers. The entries make use of headings which are intended to assist the reader to locate specific information and are organised as follows. Each entry starts with an account of what can be seen and of the subject matter. Excellent zooming images are available on the Gallery’s website in addition to the photographs and photomicrographs published here. However, I have aimed to clarify and answer questions of subject and action that might remain – particularly in relation to details that might seem obscure or be missed, for example the pilgrim hat badges worn in the Master of Saint Ursula’s painting of Saint Lawrence (NG 3665) or the parrot’s head on the sword in Liss’s Judith and Holofernes (NG 4597). The most extensive descriptions belong to the entry on Holbein’s Ambassadors (NG 1314) where any attempt to elucidate the painting must rely on these being as precise as possible. There follows an analysis of the function of the works, relating it where possible to what is known of its origins in Provenance.

Finally, attribution and date are discussed. Where a painting is not signed reference is made to stylistic similarities to works which are documented or otherwise securely associated with the artist. In the earlier part of the period current opinion concerning the operation of workshops (discussed in the essay, pp. 39–59) suggests a degree of collaboration between workshops as well as a grouping of paintings under the name of an artist which does not necessarily indicate the painter’s individual involvement. These issues are discussed in the entry. In the matter of dating, apart from biographical information, in a number of cases discussions can be based on interpretation of dendrochronological data. In some cases dating is still speculative and can only be based on stylistic criteria. Captions to images only include dates which are recorded or documented. New attributions for a number of the paintings are listed in the table on p. 973.

A Note on the Technical Examination of the Paintings

The technical notes preceding the main part of each entry form the basis of understanding physical aspects of each work, including not only processes of making but also conservation history. Starting with the initial phase of the cataloguing programme in 1991, every painting was brought to the conservation studios and examined in the same ways as for the other northern European paintings catalogues. The paintings were carefully measured, the supports were examined, the surface was studied with a stereomicroscope to provide observations on technique and materials and photomicrographs were made. Observations built on existing records of conservation treatments and earlier examinations, including X‐radiographs, infrared and other technical imaging, as well as reports on paint sample analysis, all of which were reviewed. Further imaging was then carried out – including infrared reflectography – and selected paint samples were taken to answer specific questions that had arisen about layer structures, pigments and paint binding media. Existing paint samples were re‐examined at the same time.

In the period of time that has elapsed since the initial examinations in the early 1990s the technology available has advanced considerably. Wherever possible the paintings have been re‐examined to take advantage of new methods to improve imaging and analyses and to address unanswered questions. Some paintings have been treated in the Conservation Department in the intervening period, so have been revisited, and others have been part of other projects that have generated new research. In bringing this catalogue to completion this more recent work has been incorporated wherever appropriate. In addition, new high‐resolution colour images have been made of almost every work, existing X‐radiography plates have been digitised and mosaiced to the latest standards, new digital infrared images and digital photomicrographs have been made. The most recent X‐radiographs have been made with a new direct digital system, used for a small number of works.1 In most cases, the effect of stretcher bars and cradles on the image has been digitally reduced through further processing to make the images clearer. For one painting (NG 3662), macro X‐ray fluorescence scanning (MA‐XRF) was carried out.2

The measurements given at the head of each catalogue entry are almost always those of the original support, including original integral frame where relevant, with a few works where non‐original additions are included in the sizes given because they are painted to extend the composition; unpainted non‐original additions are instead described in the text. Measurements of the painted surface are also given where they are different to the support size. The supports were carefully examined to describe their construction and any evidence of alterations or trimming – especially important for panels that are from deconstructed altarpieces. Dendrochronological analysis was carried out by Peter Klein, who was also responsible for most of the wood identifications. The full results are in the reports kept on file; in the entry only the youngest heartwood ring is given, followed by an earliest creation date and a plausible creation date based on the current statistical assumptions used for sapwood and storage time.3 Any inscriptions, seals, numbers or other significant marks on the reverse were noted. The edges of the painting were described and studied to understand whether there was evidence that a work originally had an engaged or integral frame, and also to search for any surviving traces of paint with which the frame may have been decorated.

The more recent infrared examinations have been carried out using one of three cameras with digital sensors based on indium‐gallium‐arsenide (InGaAs).4 For paint samples, the preparatory layers, pigment mixtures and layer structures were examined by optical microscopy and analysis was undertaken by energy dispersive X‐ray analysis in the scanning electron microscope (SEM‐EDX), X‐ray powder diffraction and attenuated total reflectance – Fourier transform infrared microspectroscopic imaging (ATR‐FTIR). The dyestuffs in red lake pigments were studied with high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) where there was sufficient sample, and also by microspectrophotometry. Paint binding media were identified by Gas Chromatography (GC), Gas Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry (GC–MS) and the complementary technique of FTIR microscopy in transmission mode.

The conservation history as far as it is known is summarised briefly in the technical notes, incorporated with a short comment on condition, concentrating on significant paint losses, interventions or changes on ageing that most affect the current appearance and are important in understanding the artist’s original intention. The information then given about support, preparation layers, underdrawing, pigments and media is gained from an integrated interpretation of the results from the various methods of examination. Particular attention is given to changes in the composition during underdrawing and painting as they relate closely to the creative processes of the artists, and also to observations that serve to inform the description given in the main body of the entry. In almost every case the infrared images are illustrated, as are the X‐radiographs, and a significant number of the photomicrographs are also included; the choice has been made to not include any other technical images or detailed results, which can all be found in reports in the Conservation and Scientific department files.

[page [14]]
Notes

1 The XRis Dx‐80‐G3 was installed at the National Gallery in September 2021. This high resolution purpose‐built direct digital X‐radiography system was designed for imaging paintings and has a micro‐focus x‐ray tube and an area detector on a moving gantry that scans over the painting. The areas captured are then mosaiced to produce the final image. (Back to text.)

2 Macro‐XRF scanning was carried out with a Bruker M6 JETSTREAM macro‐XRF scanner (with a 60 mm2 XFlash® silicon drift X‐ray detector) on six areas of the painting and frame mainly to investigate the metal leaf composition. The data was examined and processed using both the Bruker M6 JETSTREAM software and DataMuncher/PyMCA in an attempt to obtain element maps that were as representative as possible. (Back to text.)

3 For the methodology see the contribution by Katja von Baum and Peter Klein in Baum 2014, pp. 21–7. (Back to text.)

4 Infrared reflectography was initially carried out using a Hamamatsu C2400 camera with an N2606 series infrared vidicon tube. The three digital infrared systems, which all use indium gallium arsenide (InGaAs) sensors, are: SIRIS (Scanning InfraRed Imaging System), which uses an indium gallium arsenide (InGaAs) array sensor, developed at the National Gallery in 2005 and in use until 2008; OSIRIS, which was in regular use from 2008; and Apollo which has been the main camera in use since 2019. For further details about OSIRIS and Apollo see www.opusinstruments.com/cameras. (Back to text.)

Hans Holbein the Younger, ‘The Ambassadors’ (NG 1314), detail (© The National Gallery, London)

[page 15]

The German‐speaking lands and neighbouring regions, showing places mentioned in the text. Artwork: Martin Lubikowski, ML Design

About this version

Version 2, generated from files SF_2024__16.xml dated 12/03/2025 and database__16.xml dated 12/03/2025 using stylesheet 16_teiToHtml_externalDb.xsl dated 03/01/2025. Document created from press‐ready PDF document and existing ‘taster’ HTML pages; structural mark-up applied to skeleton document in full; ‘taster’ entries for NG1925, NG3922 and NG6344, and print entries for NG705, NG706, NG722, NG1014, NG1314, NG2475, NG4597, NG5786, NG6463, NG6470, NG6540, NG6550, NG6563, NG6568 and NG6647, prepared for publication; ‘taster’ entry for NG6344 and print entries for NG705, NG706, NG722, NG1014, NG1314, NG2475, NG4597, NG5786, NG6463, NG6470, NG6540, NG6550, NG6563, NG6568 and NG6647 proofread and corrected.

Cite this entry

Permalink (this version)
https://data.ng.ac.uk/0EDK-000B-0000-0000
Permalink (latest version)
https://data.ng.ac.uk/0DTU-000B-0000-0000
Chicago style
Foister, Susan. “NG 6568, Summer”. 2024, online version 2, March 13, 2025. https://data.ng.ac.uk/0EDK-000B-0000-0000.
Harvard style
Foister, Susan (2024) NG 6568, Summer. Online version 2, London: National Gallery, 2025. Available at: https://data.ng.ac.uk/0EDK-000B-0000-0000 (Accessed: 19 March 2025).
MHRA style
Foister, Susan, NG 6568, Summer (National Gallery, 2024; online version 2, 2025) <https://data.ng.ac.uk/0EDK-000B-0000-0000> [accessed: 19 March 2025]