Saul and the Witch of Endor

Amsterdam, 1526

Object data

oil on panel

support: height 85.5 cm × width 122.8 cm
painted surface: height 87 cm × width 121.6 cm
frame: height 104.2 cm × width 138.9 cm × thickness 5 cm

Inscriptions

signature, upper left, on a banderole: leest Regum j[...] ghescreven // [...] Saul tot tovery heeft gehev.. // Samuel te verwrecke qua. hij te sne.ven (Read 1 Kings [...] written […] Saul yielded to sorcery. By disturbing Samuel in his sleep of death he himself lost his life)
signature, upper left, on a banderole: Saul cu[m] duob [v]iris ignoto habitum endorem adit:[...] consulturus pythonem // sup evetu[...] belli Q [...] ei erat adusus philisteos [...]Porro aia [...] Samuelis iussu // numinis ad colloqium [?] elicit r [?] q [?] et regis et triu [?] liberou iteritu [?] pnutiat [?] i regu [...] // 28 (Saul disguised himself and went with two men to Endor to consult the witch there about the outcome of the war that he was to fight with the Philistines. There, through the power of sorcery, Samuel’s shade is conjured up for a pronouncement. He predicts the fall of the king and of his three sons. 1 Kings 28)
signature and date, lower centre on a cartellino: Aº 1526 noveb. 29 // I. A.
signature, on the witch’s cap: pitonissa // Saulis (Saul’s witch)
signature, on Samuel’s gravestone: Sepulchu[.] // Samuelis (Samuel’s grave)
signature, on the albarello: MAL (Evil)

Technical notes

The support consists of five vertically grained oak planks (22.3, 23.0, 25.8, 26.4 and 25.3 cm), 0.6-0.9 cm thick. The panel was planed down for cradling, which was removed in 1976. Dendrochronology has shown that the youngest heartwood ring was formed in 1493. The panel could have been ready for use by 1504, but a date in or after 1518 is more likely. At the top and bottom there are small holes, which may be associated with an earlier framing. The white ground, which is visible at the edges of the painting and through the paint layers, must have been applied in the original frame; there are unpainted edges measuring approx. 0.6-0.8 cm on all sides, but no traces of a barbe. Infrared photography reveals a linear underdrawing in some parts of the painting that was applied with a brush in a wet medium, which is confirmed with infrared reflectography. There may also be a few chalk lines, mainly contours and some inner lines, all of them slightly undulating. There are very few hatchings. Infrared reflectography revealed several alterations. The small satyr with the book may have had pointed ears originally, the goat between the seated witches in the foreground had shorter horns and a slightly different head. The witch with the 'albarello' held a dish in her left hand. The large satyr with the hurdy-gurdy may have been playing a double flute at first, partly because two arms can be seen (fig. b) which were reserved in the background, the lower one of which was executed in flesh tones but then painted out. There are slight modifications to almost all of the underdrawing and reserves for the heads of the large figures. In the architecture, the arched shapes are underdrawn and incised, while the straight lines were drawn with the aid of a ruler. The two cockerels flying above the witch with the albarello are a later addition. The small figures seen through the openings in the ruin (Saul with Samuel, and the battle with the Philistines) were not reserved but painted on the ochre-coloured ground. The larger figures, the architecture and trees were left in reserve. The paint was applied rather smoothly and transparently, with many layers of glazing. There are small 'pentimenti' at the reserves.

Scientific examination and reports

X-radiography: J.R.J. van Asperen de Boer, RMA, nos. 1391-99, 11 March 1974
infrared reflectography: J.R.J. van Asperen de Boer, RKD, nos. AB 100:23-100a:32, January 1977
paint samples: J.R.J. van Asperen de Boer, 1979
infrared reflectography: M. Wolters / A. van Oosterwijk [2], RKD/RMA, no. RKDG343, 18 July 2005
condition report: W. de Ridder, RMA, 19 July 2005
dendrochronology: P. Klein, RMA, 4 September 2007

Condition

Fair. The panel is very thin and thus rather fragile. The paint layer is abraded and damaged along the joins. There is raised paint along the grain and extensive discoloured retouchings along the joins. The varnish is somewhat discoloured.

Conservation

W. Hesterman, November 1976 - 1980: complete restoration; cradling and extensive overpainting removed; planks reglued

Provenance

...; sale, Louis-Maximilien Beauvois (?-1796, Valenciennes), Valenciennes (Pillion), 19 May 1879, no. 1, as Jean-Walter van Assen, fl. 500, to the museum¹

Object number: SK-A-668

The artist

Jacob Cornelisz van Oostsanen (Oostzaan c. 1472/77 - Amsterdam 1528/33)

Van Mander states that Jacob Cornelisz van Oostsanen was born in Oostzaan, a small village north of Amsterdam, and that he was already an experienced painter with teenage children when Jan van Scorel entered his workshop around 1512. Going by Van Mander’s information that Jacob’s son Dirck died in 1567 at around 70 years of age, meaning that he was born c. 1497, it is assumed that Jacob was born between 1472 and 1477. There is no information about his parents, nor when he moved to Amsterdam or by whom he was trained. Nor is it known when Jacob married his wife Anna. They had four children, at least two of whom were trained by their father: Cornelis Jacobsz, about whom there is no further information, and Dirck Jacobsz, who was best known as a portrait painter. Also according to Van Mander, Jacob Cornelisz’s brother was Cornelis Buys I, who was active as a painter in Alkmaar. The earliest mention of Jacob Cornelisz in Amsterdam is an archival document from 1500 that shows that he bought a house in the Kalverstraat. Since his wife is recorded as a widow on 18 October 1533, and his second house was sold in his absence in the autumn of 1532, it is accepted that he died before the first date, and possibly before the second. In 1526, 1527 and 1528, Egmond Abbey paid him for work on a large retable, so his date of death can be placed somewhere between 1528 and 1533.

Several of the paintings and the bulk of the drawings by Jacob Cornelisz bear his initials I (for Iacob) and A (referring to the city where he worked) and his monogram, which consists of a V and an upside-down W, the latter probably an allusion to the surname War or Warre that he sometimes used.

Most of the 200-odd woodcuts after designs by Jacob Cornelisz are dated between 1507 and 1522, making it easy to follow his development. Only 6 of the 30 or so paintings attributed to him have the monogram, but a good number are dated. The earliest ones with dates are two of 1507 that are attributed to him: the Noli me tangere in Kassel,² and The Crucifixion in a private collection.³ His last known, securely attributed painting dates from 1526 (SK-A-668).

In addition to paintings on canvas and panel and woodcuts there are designs for stained-glass windows and copes, and ceiling paintings. Jacob’s painted oeuvre mostly consists of religious works: large altarpieces, smaller panels for private devotion, and several which appear to have been made for the open market. There are also a few autonomous portraits that are attributed to him. Jacob’s earliest works are craftsman-like and executed in a very laborious technique, looking more as if they were drawn with paint than painted. The choice of subject is traditional. It was only in his later work, undoubtedly influenced by Jan van Scorel, that he transcended the craftsman-like in technique, style and iconography. His large output indicates that he had a sizable workshop with several assistants, including Jan van Scorel and his sons Cornelis Jacobsz and Dirck Jacobsz, and possibly his grandsons Cornelis Anthonisz and Jacob Dirksz as well.

References
Van Mander 1604, fol. 207r-v; Brulliot I, 1832, no. 19; Cohen in Thieme/Becker VII, 1912, pp. 428-30; Steinbart 1922, pp. 2-8; Steinbart 1929, pp. 1-48; Friedländer XII, 1935, pp. 96-111; Steinbart 1937; Hoogewerff III, 1939, pp. 72-143; Bruyn 1966, pp. 149, 160, 161; ENP XII, 1975, pp. 53-64; Van Eeghen 1986, pp. 95-132; Carroll 1987; Miedema II, 1995, pp. 284-93; Carroll in Turner 1996, VII, pp. 868-70; Beaujean in Saur XXI, 1999, pp. 235-38; Meuwissen 2006, pp. 55-81

(Daantje Meuwissen)

Entry

According to the inscription in the banderole at top left, the true subject of this painting is Saul, despite the fact that he is no more than a minor figure in the left middleground. The inscriptions follow the biblical narrative in 1 Samuel 28:3-20, in which Saul, the first king of the people of Israel, becomes fearful on the eve of a battle with the Philistines and goes in disguise to the witch of Endor to discover how the war will turn out. The witch summons up the spirit of the dead priest Samuel, who announces that God has turned away from Saul because of his godlessness, and that as a result David will soon become king in his place. On the far left we see Saul at the head of his men asking the witch’s advice. Through the archway on the right Samuel can be seen sitting on the edge of his tomb, disturbed from his repose of death. Beyond the tomb we see Saul talking with Samuel, and behind them the battle with the Philistines. Saul loses the battle and commits suicide. ‘By disturbing Samuel in his sleep of death he himself lost his life’, is the message on the banderole at top left. Oddly enough, the foreground is taken up with the non-biblical scene of a witches’ sabbath that again features the sorceress of Endor, this time bare to the waist. The witches are surrounded by satyrs and fantastical figures, both on the ground and in the sky.

The story of the witch of Endor was rarely depicted in painting in this period, and never in combination with the world of witchcraft and sorcery as Jacob Cornelisz has done here. His contemporaries Hans Baldung Grien and Albrecht Dürer did publish prints with scenes of witches which helped to popularise the subject.⁴ One widely read book of spells at this time was De sleutel van Salomo,⁵ which among other things describes what articles are needed to summon spirits, and some of them can be seen in this painting, such as the prophetic ruin and the candles made from human fat. The book held by the small satyr beside the witch of Endor contains nonsense words which probably refer to spells like those in ‘De sleutel van Salomo’. By combining the biblical story of the witch of Endor with the subjects of witchcraft and sorcery, Jacob Cornelisz uniquely created a moral example of the fate in store for those who break the divine commandment by engaging in witchcraft.⁶

The Witch of Endor is signed on the cartellino at the bottom, just to the left of centre, and has the remarkably precise date of 29 November 1526. It may have something to do with the unusual iconography, but so far no one has been able to come up with a satisfactory explanation for this date. It very probably denotes the day when the painting was finished, for the style and technique of both the underdrawing and the painted surface are in keeping with Jacob Cornelisz’s late work. Unlike those in the early oeuvre, the figures are very lively, have extremely elongated limbs, and are arranged within the picture surface in an almost geometrical way that is totally new for the artist. The painting technique, with the use of glazes and bold pastel tints, is another departure from Jacob Cornelisz’s earlier works, which look as if they were “drawn” in paint with full, more turbid colours.⁷ On top of that, the underdrawing is in a very different style from the assured and often chaotic hand in previous works, being more reminiscent of that in Salome with the Head of John the Baptist of two years earlier (SK-A-1349). Distinctive features of the underdrawing in both paintings include the use of wavy contours and inner lines which appear to have been applied cautiously, almost uncertainly, with the brush in a wet medium (fig. a). There are very few hatchings. In addition, the artist made more changes than usual at a relatively late stage in the painting process. The position of the large satyr’s right arm, for example, was moved twice during painting (fig. b), possibly because he was originally meant to play a double flute instead of the hurdy-gurdy that he now has. The witch clad in red with the albarello was probably holding a dish originally. These alterations may have had something to do with the unusual iconography.

(Daantje Meuwissen)

Literature

coll. cat. The Hague 1874, pp. 1-3, no. 1; Bode 1881, pp. 300-01; Scheibler 1882, p. 18; Steinbart 1922, pp. 132, 143, 152; Friedländer XII, 1935, pp. 100, 194, no. 250; Hoogewerff III, 1939, p. 132 (as ‘Andriesnacht’); ENP XII, 1975, pp. 56, 115, no. 250; Caroll-Kremer in Amsterdam 1986a, pp. 133-34, no. 20; Carroll 1987, pp. 90-104, no. 3; Kloek in Van Os ‘et al.’ 2000, pp. 126-27, no. 42

Collection catalogues

1880, pp. 75-76, no. 60; 1887, p. 31, no. 241; 1903, p. 76, no. 722; 1934, p. 74, no. 722; 1960, p. 75, no. 722; 1976, p. 176, no. A 668; 1992, p. 48, no. A 668

Citation

(accessed 30 April 2024 10:07:48).

Figures

fig. b Detail of the infrared reflectogram assembly of SK-A-668, showing the satyr’s right arm (© Stichting RKD)

fig. a Detail of the infrared reflectogram assembly of SK-A-668, showing the wavy contour lines (© Stichting RKD)