Van Dyck masterpieces. Anthony Van Dyck

10.07.2019

However, long before it became general, the metamorphosis of the very spirit of Flemish painting first appeared in the best of the best students of Rubens, in Anthony van Dyck (1599 - 1641). Rubens was still in full splendor and no one was thinking about new trends when van Dyck, until then his obedient student, left for Italy and began to paint portraits there, in Genoa, in which a feature that was hitherto unknown to Flanders unexpectedly appeared: the most genuine "grandezza" - in connection with some kind of gentle melancholy, which came to the taste of aristocrats who wanted to seem jaded and tired. They say that when he was in Rome, Van Dyck kept aloof from his comrades, rude merry fellows and revelers of the Flemings, and for this he was mockingly nicknamed the “cavalier of painting”. This is typical of all his art. In later work, he became more and more wary of crude simplicity and finally became a real précieux.

If we preferred to pass over Rubens' paintings on religious themes in silence, then we can do this even more thoroughly with respect to similar paintings by van Dyck, although in the sense of pure pictorial skill, some of them, including our Hermitage “Madonna with Partridges”, "Unbelief of Thomas" And “St. Sebastian", occupy the first places in the art of the late Baroque.

Anthony van Dyck.Rest on the flight to Egypt (Madonna with partridges). 2 Fragments. Early 1630s. Canvas, oil. 215x285.5. Inv. 539. From the collection. Walpole, Houghton Hall, 1779

After all, it is painful to see the cloying “dreaming” sentimentality of these paintings, their posing for grace - features in church paintings are even less endurable than the rudeness, pathos and pomp of other Flemings. Let us therefore turn immediately to the real area of van Dyck, to portraits, pointing out in passing the enormous influence, again, of the Venetians (especially Titian), which affected the Madonna.

Van Dyck is one of the first portrait painters in the history of art. Portrait painting became his specialty precisely because of the personal nature of the artist. He was attracted to a society of elegant, well-mannered people, away from the dirt and carelessness of artistic bohemia, from the orgiasm of other Flemish creativity. It is characteristic of him that he spent a third of his life outside of Flanders, and that he ended his life as a courtier of the English king, the most refined, but also the most miserable of the sovereigns of the 17th century. The number of portraits of the master proves that real Flemish productivity lived in him, an amazing creative power. The almost uniform dignity of this endless gallery proves the enormous power of talent, unrelenting energy, which is amazing even next to the fantastic energy of Rubens. But one feature common to all van Dyck's portraits: restraint, inaccessibility, a kind of downward glance and a “noble” shadow of sadness reveal in him a painful psychology that contemporaries, especially high society, liked most of all.

Only among his bourgeois compatriots did van Dyck leave his cold politeness for a while and begin to speak in a common language. Probably, his former teacher Rubens also had a great personal influence on him in these cases. In the character of the latter, already on the return of van Dyck from Italy, Hermitage portraits were written, surprisingly strong portrait of the Antwerp "almsman" Adrian Stevens And portrait of his wife(1629). Particularly good family portrait(perhaps by the landscape painter Wildens).

Anthony van Dyck. Family portrait. Canvas, oil. 113.5x93.5. Inv. 534. From the collection. Lalive de Julie, Paris, before 1774

More Italian character are other portraits of the master, painted in Flanders (or during the first period of his stay in England), but they still give the impression of simplicity and sincerity. This includes written under the undoubted influence of Feti portrait of Jan van der Vouwer, a portrait in the style of a Florentine doctor marquisus, portrait of the great architect Jones, portrait of a young man, previously considered a self-portrait by van Dyck, portrait of the famous collector Zhabak and, finally, portraits of the Parisian philanthropist painted under the impression of Titian's works Lumanya And Sir Thomas Chaloner.

Anthony van Dyck.Self-portrait (Formerly: portrait of a young man). 1622/23. Canvas, oil. 116.5x9Z.5. Inv. 548. From the collection. Crozat, Paris, 1772

Anthony van Dyck. Male portrait (presumably a portrait of the Lyon banker Marc Antoine Lumagne). Canvas, oil. 104.8x85.5. From the collection Crozat, Paris, 1772

Anthony van Dyck.Portrait of Sir Thomas Chaloner. Canvas, oil. 104x81.5. Inv. 551. From the collection of Walpole, Houghton Hall, 1779

The portraits closest to Rubens (like our Wildens), as well as the historical paintings of van Dyck of the first period, also allow the attribution of such two Rubens masterpieces as the portraits of Isabella Brandt and Susanna Fourman to the student, not the teacher.

Anthony van Dyck.Portrait of Susanna Fourman (Fourman) with her daughter. Around 1621. Oil on canvas. 172.7x117.5. . Sold from the Hermitage in March 1930 to Andrew Mellon. National Gallery, Washington. Andrew W. Mellon Collection

In the picturesque respect, the paintings of van Dyck, preceding his resettlement in England, are superior to the later ones. They argue in terms of color with Rubens and Cornelis de Vos, in sharpness of characterization with the Dutchman Hals. But still, the “real van Dyck”, the artist who created a special world, was discovered only in the last ten years of his life at the elegant, proud and decadent court of the unfortunate grandson of Mary Stuart - Charles I.

Already with his father Carl Van Dyck lived for about 2 years in London. An Italian trip interrupted this stay and service. He was invited a second time in 1632, and from then on he almost constantly remained with the king (in 1634 he lived in Antwerp), married in England the noble maiden Rötven, was elevated to knighthood, became his own man in high society and copied almost without exception all prominent political figures and the whole court of England. The number of English portraits of van Dyck is fabulous. The king, the queen, their children, the unfortunate friend of King Strafford, the noble philanthropist Arondel - van Dyck even wrote several times.

Naturally, with such productivity, the technical side of the performance should have received something handicraft, especially since more and more often the master himself was forced to confine himself to a sketch from nature and entrust the completion of the portrait to his students. The last portraits also betray the great fatigue of the artist, whose strength was torn by excessive work and too luxurious a lifestyle. Characteristics become less attentive, landing poses, hand gestures become monotonous, colors fade, become cold and dead. Perhaps if Van Dyck had lived for a few more years, he would have reached a complete decline, to vulgarity. But death saved him from this and stopped him at the moment when his style began to turn into a template.

The real meaning of van Dyck is that he found style. He, a student of Rubens, thoroughly saturated with the artistic instructions of his teacher, almost the same age as Jordaens, found his own style - opposite and even hostile to them, he opened a new era of painting. No wonder he was so valued in the 18th century - he was the forerunner who guessed his sophistication. Van Dyck was one of the first to find purely aristocratic formulas of art. He conveyed in painting the specific feelings of the closed world of “blue blood” at a time when this world, leaving medieval rudeness and freedom, turned into a “courtyard”, developed all the techniques of internal and external etiquette and received, instead of the uncomfortable autonomy of feudalism, a different fullness of power and huge material resources based on the sovereign's mercy and on palace intrigues. In England, in the 1630s, under the “knightly” but weak-willed Charles I, the claims of the “blue blood” reached their maximum, and the immensity of these claims ended in a political cataclysm like the one that befell France 100 years later - after the era of Louis XV and his metres .

Van Dyck's series of English portraits in the Hermitage should begin with the royal couple themselves. “Karl of the Hermitage” is not the best in terms of painting known to us, but perhaps it is the most characteristic, the most terrible. In the eyes, in the sickly complexion, in the folds of the forehead, one can see something fatal, some kind of heavy tragedy. This is no longer Charles of the Louvre portrait: an elegant gentleman, self-confident monarch, diplomat, philanthropist, hunter and sybarite. This is already Karl of the time of eternal cunning, confused politics, who saw the inevitable future and fought against fate with the most useless and inconsistent means. A good man and a benevolent politician, but decadent from head to toe... And at the same time a king from head to toe. Such a “real king”, which has not been since then in history. Louis XIV next to Charles seems to be just an "actor playing a role."

The portrait of the energetic, intelligent, but fatal for her husband queen is less expressive, like all the ladies' portraits of van Dyck in general. But what a living picture! A delightful combination of reddish and brown colors, what an impression of the highest nobility is again achieved - by absolutely confident disposal by very simple means.

Further before us pass Primate of England- another of the personalities who killed Charles, Archbishop Laud, who himself died on the chopping block (perhaps only a good copy from the portrait in Lambeth palace); majestic Earl of Denbigh,

Anthony van Dyck.Portrait of Henry Danvers, Earl of Denbigh, dressed as a Knight of the Garter. 1638/40. Canvas, oil. 223x130,6. Inv. 545. From the collection. Walpole, Houghton Hall, 1779

in his order suit, with a fashionable curious fly on his temple; long, elegant Sir Thomas Wharton, a gallant gentleman and an active participant in court events; his handsome brother Lord Philip Wharton who betrayed the king, fought against him and only later rejoined the royal party. It is typical to see such a person in fancy dress, as a shepherd boy, in velvet and silk.

Anthony van Dyck. Portrait of Philip, Lord Wharton. 1632. Oil on canvas. 133.Chx1O6.4. Sold from the Hermitage in March 1930 to Andrew Mellon. National Gallery, Washington. Andrew W. Mellon Collection

Anthony van Dyck. Portrait of Philadelphia and Elizabeth Wharton. Late 1630s. Canvas, oil. 162x130. Inv. 533. From the collection of Walpole, Houghton Hall, 1779

They are followed by ladies: delightful in colors and very unflattered. portrait mother-in-law of the previous person, Lady Jen Goodwin in her black and pink dress, with a tulip in her hand, double portrait of Lady Delcayce and daughters Sir Thomas Killigrew Anna and another, also double, portrait of Lady Aubigny (Katharina Howard) with her sister Elizabeth, Countess of Northumberland

Anthony van Dyck.Portrait of the Ladies of the Court Anne Dalquith, Countess of Morton, and Anne Kerk. 1638/40. Canvas, oil. 131.5x15O.6. Inv. 540

Anthony van Dyck.Portrait of the Ladies of the Court Anne Dalquith, Countess of Morton, and AnneKirk. Close-up. 1638/40. Canvas, oil. 131.5x15O.6. Inv. 540

All these are persons who did not play prominent roles in confused political, religious and court intrigues, but their images speak enough about the degree of sophistication of high English society, about the "maturity of its aristocracy." How healthy, sober, vital portraits of the 16th century and even modern Flemish and Dutch portraits seem next to these majestic simpering women. Or was it van Dijk who showed them to us like that? If this is the "artist's whim", then probably a whim that corresponded to the tastes common throughout the court aristocracy.

Anthony Van Dyck

Anthony van Dyck was born March 22, 1599 in Antwerp, was the seventh child in the family of a wealthy cloth merchant Frans van Dyck, who was friends with many Antwerp artists. In 1609, at the age of 10, he was sent to the workshop of the famous painter Hendrick van Balen (1574/75–1632), who painted paintings on mythological themes.
In 1615-1616 Van Dyck opens his own workshop. Early works include his Self-portrait (c. 1615, Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum), distinguished by grace and elegance. In 1618-1620 he creates a cycle of 13 boards depicting Christ and the apostles: St. Simon (c. 1618, London, private collection), St. Matthew (c. 1618, London, private collection). The expressive faces of the apostles are painted in a free pictorial manner. Now a significant part of the boards of this cycle is scattered in museums around the world. In 1618, Van Dyck was accepted as a master in the painters' guild of St. Luke and, already having his own workshop, collaborated with Rubens, working as an assistant in his workshop.

"Self-portrait" Late 1620s - early 1630s

From 1618 to 1620, Van Dyck created works on religious themes, often in several versions: Crowning with Thorns (1621, 1st Berlin version - not preserved; 2nd - Madrid, Prado)

"Family portrait"

"Coronation with a crown of thorns" 1620s

"Prince of Wales in Armor" (future King Charles II) c. 1637

"Self-portrait with Sir Endymion Porter" ca. 1633

"Cupid and Psyche" 1638

"Lady Elizabeth Timbelby and Dorothy, Viscountess Andover"

"Lucy Percy, Countess of Carlisle" 1637

"Sketch depicting Princesses Elizabeth and Anne"

"James Stewart, Duke of Lennox and Richmond" 1632

"Charles I on the hunt"

"Marquise Balbi" 1625

"Charles I, triple portrait" 1625

"Marquis Antonio Giulio Brignole - Sale" 1625

"Maria Clarissa, wife of Jan Voverius, with a child" 1625

In England, the dominant genre in painting was the portrait, and Van Dyck's work in this genre in England was a significant event. The main customers were the king, members of his family, court nobility. Van Dyck's masterpieces include the Equestrian Portrait of Charles I with the Seigneur de Saint Antoune (1633, Buckingham Palace, Royal Collections). The ceremonial Portrait of Charles I on the hunt (c. 1635, Paris, Louvre) stands out, showing the king in a hunting suit, in an elegant pose against the backdrop of the landscape. Known for the so-called. Triple portrait of the king (1635, Windsor Castle, Royal Meetings), in which the king is shown in three angles, because. was intended to be sent to Italy, to the studio of Lorenzo Bernini (1598–1680), who was commissioned to create a bust of Charles I. Maria also wished to have her own sculptural image. In total, Van Dyck painted the queen more than 20 times, but for this idea he created three separate portraits of her, among which the most significant Portrait of Henrietta Maria with a dwarf by Sir Geoffrey Hudson (1633, Washington, National Gallery of Art). But, apparently, they were never sent, and this idea was not put into practice. Van Dyck in 1635 receives an order to paint a painting depicting the children of the king Three children of Charles I (1635, Turin, Sabauda Gallery), which was later sent to Turin, and is considered a masterpiece of a child's portrait. In the same year, he repeats the picture, and two years later he creates the painting The Five Children of Charles I (1637, Windsor Castle, Royal Collections).

During this period, Van Dyck painted spectacular portraits of courtiers, created a portrait gallery of young English aristocrats: Prince Charles Stuart (1638, Windsor, Royal Meetings), Princess Henrietta Maria and William of Orange (1641, Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum), Portrait of Royal Children (1637, Windsor castle, Royal collections), Portrait of Philip Wharton (1632, St. Petersburg, Hermitage), Portrait of Lords John and Bernard Stuart (c. 1638, Hampshire, Mountbatten Collection).

By the end of the 30s, he created excellent male portraits, magnificent in decision and psychological characteristics, strict and truthful: Portrait of Sir Arthur Goodwin (1639, Derbyshire, Collection of the Duke of Devonshire), Portrait of Sir Thomas Chaloner (c. 1640, St. Petersburg, Hermitage ).

"Rest on the Flight into Egypt" 1625

"Triumph of Silenus" 1625

"Samson and Delilah" 1625

"Love is not mutual"

Henrietta Maria 1632

"Queen Henrietta Maria" 1635

"Vision of the Blessed Priest Joseph"

In 1639 he marries Mary Ruthven, lady-in-waiting to the queen, in 1641 their daughter Justiniana was born. In 1641, Anthony van Dyck's health deteriorated, and after a long illness, on December 9, 1641, he died at the age of 42. He was buried at St Paul's Cathedral in London.

Van Dyck painted about 900 paintings, a huge number for a man whose creative activity lasted about 20 years. He left a grandiose legacy, not only because he worked quickly and easily, but also because he used numerous assistants, artists from Flanders and England, who painted backgrounds, draperies, used mannequins to paint clothes.

The work of Van Dyck had a huge impact on the development of English and European portraiture. He was the founder of the English school of portraiture, whose traditions will be preserved in art for centuries. Van Dyck in portraits showed people of different classes, different social levels, different in spiritual and intellectual disposition. An adherent of the traditions of Flemish realism, he was the creator of the official ceremonial portrait, including an aristocratic portrait, in which he showed a noble, refined, refined person, and was also the creator of an intellectual portrait.

"Estimated portrait of the Marquise Geronima Spinola-Doria"

"Self-portrait" Late 1620s - early 1630s

"Mary Stuart and William of Orange. Wedding portrait"

"Portrait of Charles I"

"Dorothy, Lady Dacre"

"portrait of a man in armor with re"

"Henrietta Maria"

"Queen Henrietta Maria" 1632

"Young Woman Playing the Viol"

"Portrait of Charles I"

"Maria Louise de Tassis" 1630

"Thomas Chaloner"

"Portrait of prince Charles Louis"

George Goring, Baron Goring

"Cornelis van der Geest Huile sur panneau"

"Self-portrait"

"Portrait de mary Lady killigrew"

Wharton Philadelphia Elizabeth

"Henrietta Maria and Charles I"

"Mary with the Christ Child"

"SELF-PORTRAIT"

"James Stewart, Duke of Aeknock and Richmond"

Only very great portrait masters have won their place in the history of art. Van Dyck is one of them

These days in the Pushkin Museum im. A. S. Pushkin opened the exhibition "Dutch group portrait of the Golden Age from the collection of the Amsterdam Museum", which exhibits 10 large-format group portraits of the second half of the 16th - late 17th centuries, reflecting all the main stylistic and chronological stages in the development of Dutch portraiture. However, the exhibition does not see either the most famous work of this genre - "The Night Watch" by Rembrandt, or the works of the most famous Dutch (Flemish) portrait painter of the era - Sir Anthony van Dyck.

Portrait is a special genre. During life, it is easier for a portrait painter to gain fame, and with it - wealth and position; it is much more difficult for representatives of other genres to achieve recognition. But the deeper the "river of time ... drowns in the abyss of oblivion" the names and deeds of models, the more difficult it is for a portrait painter not to get lost in the history of art, while a landscape or a still life does not age, but, like good wine, acquires new qualities over time, awakening new and new generations of viewers interest in their authors. And only very great portrait masters have won their place in the history of art. Van Dijk is one of them.

This artist in his short life (he died at the age of 42) managed to become one of the most successful students of Rubens (and in the absence of Rubens - the main artist of all Flanders), live in Italy, work in England for King James I and the Prince of Orange, become court painter of King Charles I, as well as the most popular secular artist of his time.

Anthony van Dyck was born on March 22, 1599 into a large family (he was the 7th of 12 children) of a successful Antwerp cloth merchant Frans van Dyck and his wife Maria Cuypers (Cooper). It is known that Frans van Dyck was engaged in art in his youth (the guild of painters was one of the most respected in Antwerp), and by the time of the birth of Anthony, he maintained friendly relations with many Dutch masters. The mother of the future artist was fond of embroidery and even embroidered large-scale historical scenes with "such amazing skill that the masters of this profession considered them masterpieces." It is possible that young Antonis, who showed a penchant for art at a very early age, received his first lessons in painting from her. Maria Cuypers did not live long, and after her death in 1607, Antonis was first invited to teachers at home, and in 1609 a 10-year-old boy was given as an apprentice to the then-famous artist Hendrik van Balen.

Apparently, the future artist was quite easy to study: at the age of 14, he already created a completely independent portrait of a 70-year-old old man and inscribed in the corner the age of the person being portrayed next to his own - apparently proud of this achievement. His first self-portrait dates back to 1613.

In 1618, 19-year-old Anthony joined the Guild of Painters of St. Luke of the city of Antwerp and already as an independent artist began to work in the workshop of Peter Paul Rubens. By the way, despite the fact that Van Dyck received the right to be called an artist only in 1618, the first works signed by him appeared as early as 1613-1615 - thus, it can be argued that for some time Van Dyck was engaged in painting to order and sold his work in circumvention of the law prohibiting artists who did not join the guild, commercial activities in the city.

Van Dyck's portraits of this period - noble citizens, their families, familiar artists with their wives and children - seem strict, surprisingly simple and even slightly naive in comparison with the artist's later works. They are characterized by a neutral dark background, rigor and simplicity of composition, careful and realistic study of the features of the appearance of the models and the details of their costumes.

By 1620, van Dyck was already confidently taking the place of the first assistant in the workshop of Rubens, working on historical, religious and mythological scenes. By this time, he had learned to imitate the master's style so well that to this day, experts disagree about the authorship of some works, as well as fragments of works: it is sometimes impossible to distinguish the hand of a young Van Dyck from a mature Rubens. Contemporaries even noted that Van Dyck's independent paintings were in no way inferior to the paintings of Rubens, except that at the dawn of the young artist's career they were much cheaper. At the same time, orders for portraits increasingly began to distract him from work in the studio. Considering large-scale altar paintings to be the main thing in art (and, by the way, in his work too), Van Dyck then did not consider himself a portrait painter, although it was in this capacity that he gained fame, began to receive independent orders and even made his first trip outside his country.

One of the largest patrons and collectors of his time, Thomas Howerd, Earl of Arundel, invited him to work for him in England. It was apparently not easy to do this, historians know the letter received by Howerd in July 1620 from his attorney and containing the following description of the artist: “Van Dyck lives with Mr. Rubens, and his works are beginning to be valued as highly as the works of his teacher . This is a young man of twenty-one years old, his parents are very rich and also live in this city, so it will be difficult to persuade him to leave these places, especially since he sees the success and wealth of Rubens. However, in the second half of 1620, Van Dyck nevertheless departed for England. The trip turned out to be extremely successful - from the end of 1620 to the beginning of 1621, when he returned to the mainland, Van Dyck managed to work for Howerd, many representatives of the English nobility (including the Duke of Buckingham) and even for King James I, who bought one from his paintings.

After returning from England, Van Dyck, following the example of Rubens, went to Italy and stayed there for 6 years. During this time, he managed to visit Genoa (where he stayed most of the time), Rome, Venice, Milan, Mantua, Palermo, Turin, Bologna and Florence, carefully studying and copying the works of Italian masters in his sketchbook. He was most interested in the work of Titian - he sought to adopt some of his compositional schemes, learn how to work with color and convey various textures and textures of fabric, and indeed of all surfaces depicted on canvas. Throughout his later life, Van Dyck admired the talent of Titian and even collected one of the most representative collections of his paintings - he owned 17 Titian paintings.

However, Titian was not the only master whose work Van Dyck was interested in: in the album of Italian sketches that has survived to this day, there are sketches of works by Raphael, Leonardo da Vinci, Veronese and some other Venetian and Bolognese painters.

It is worth saying that the stay in Italy was not limited to the study of Italian masters. In 1624, Van Dyck, whose fame and position as a secular artist after a trip to England was significantly strengthened, received an invitation from the viceroy of Sicily, Emmanuel Philibert of Savoy, to visit Palermo. There he worked on a portrait of the viceroy (1624), and also completed a large altar painting "Intercession of Saint Rosalia for Palermo during the plague" for the Palermo church Oratorio del Rosario (1624-1627) - his largest work of religious themes in the Italian period.

A trip to Italy, in addition to artistic landmarks, helped Van Dyck to determine his own destiny in art. Experts point out that when leaving Antwerp, he considered himself a master of multi-figure compositions, large-scale genre scenes, however, with an increase in the number of orders (and in Italy he found a large clientele for himself, although he painted exclusively representatives of high society), it became completely clear that he was in first of all - a portrait painter.

In 1626-1633, he created one of his largest series - "Iconography" - a collection of portraits of prominent contemporaries, made in the technique of etching. It is known that Van Dyck personally made only 16 works (in 1627 he was forced to urgently return home from Genoa to Antwerp), the rest were made according to his preliminary sketches. Portraits were divided into three groups: monarchs and generals (initially 16 portraits were planned), statesmen and philosophers (12 portraits), artists and collectors (52 portraits). In its final form, the series was published only after the death of the artist and consisted of 190 engravings. Interestingly, although the authorship of the "Iconography" undeniably belongs to Van Dyck, today no one can say for sure which of these works the artist had a hand in, and which ones were made by one of Van Dyck's followers to replenish the series.

Concluding the story of Van Dyck's trip to Italy, it remains only to explain that he was urgently returned to Antwerp by the news of his sister's serious illness. However, upon returning alive, Antonis no longer found his sister. Apparently, he had a hard time with this event: it was during the next few years that, in addition to portraits, a significant number of works on religious subjects came out from under his brush.

In the late 1920s, Van Dyck began to prefer full-length or generational portraits to all other portrait genres (before Italy, he painted mostly bust, half-length and often chamber portraits). A ceremonial portrait has special functions: it does not aim to reflect the personality of the model (in general, the emotional component will begin to interest artists much later - closer to the 19th century), first of all, such a portrait is intended to show the social status of a person and his role in society. In order to correctly convey them, the artist, as a rule, uses all the means available to him: in such portraits there is nothing accidental or superfluous, everything matters - from the pose of the model and the tilt of her head to lighting, background, accessories and interior items - in a word, a whole science . Van Dyck also raised this science to the rank of high art - by the way, in numerous self-portraits of this period, too.

Van Dyck's fame as an unsurpassed master of the ceremonial portrait grew; he was literally inundated with orders, and in 1630 he became the court painter of the Spanish viceroy in the Netherlands, Infanta Isabella.

Late 1630 - early 1631 Van Dyck spent in The Hague, where he worked on portraits of Prince Frederick of Orange and his entourage; in the spring of 1631, at the invitation of the English king Charles I, he came to England as his court painter. On July 5, 1631, Charles I elevated him to knighthood - and from now on, Anthony van Dyck began to be called sir Anthony (in English - Anthony) van Dyck (by the way, a couple of years earlier than Rubens).

Having become the court painter of the English king, Van Dyck devoted himself almost exclusively to portraits and sought to display in them the ideal of an aristocrat that had developed in English society - a spiritually refined personality. He paints clients in elegant, relaxed poses (which, by the way, he often borrows from the paintings of Titian), pays great attention to a proud posture, ennobles the appearance of models, often regardless of whether they actually possessed this refined sophistication, endows them with useful to create a given image with accessories. He painted mainly portraits of the king, members of his family, children (by the way, the artist was one of the first to break away from the tradition of painting children in the proportions of an adult, only smaller in size), as well as some courtiers and representatives of the English nobility, although posing for the great Van Dyck, favorite of the king, aspired to all English high society.

According to Roger de Piel, a French art theorist and younger contemporary of Van Dyck, Van Dyck “created an incredible number of portraits, on which he worked with great care at first, but gradually began to rush and write hastily.” Van Dyck's friend, Cologne banker Eberhard Jabach wrote that often, due to overload with orders, he worked on several portraits in parallel, devoting no more than an hour to each customer a day and leaving the execution of clothes, hands, accessories, background to his assistants. In many portraits, this peculiar division of labor is visible to the naked eye. Meanwhile, this did not interfere with the glory of the artist: on October 18, 1634, the guild of St. Luke of the city of Antwerp recognized Van Dyck as the best among the Flemish artists, and his name was entered in capital letters in the list of members of the guild.

In 1639, Antonis married the queen's lady-in-waiting, Mary Ruthven, and thus entered the circle of the English aristocracy, which he portrayed. In the winter of 1641, the Van Dycks had a daughter. Unfortunately, the artist did not manage to fully enjoy family life, prosperity (he was richer than many of his sophisticated aristocratic models) and even the joys of fatherhood. During one of his trips to the mainland (after the death of Rubens in 1640, Van Dyck came to Antwerp for a while, then went to Paris, where he wanted to receive an order to decorate the Grand Gallery of the Louvre, etc.) he became very ill and on December 9, 1641 (8 days after the birth of his daughter) died at his home in London.

During his short life, Van Dyck painted about 900 paintings - a huge number for a man whose creative activity lasted about 20 years.

Van Dyck's art stands at the origins of the national portrait school of England in the 18th century. His work served as an example for Thomas Gainsborough, Joshua Reynolds and other prominent portrait painters of the English school. Therefore, today experts rank the later work of Van Dyck in the history of English art to the same extent as the Flemish. Van Dyck's lifetime popularity and fame continued into the next generations. His paintings fell into the collections of the most famous collectors, and then - the largest museums. Today, his works (mostly portraits, but not exclusively) are on permanent display in the largest museum collections in the world - from the State Hermitage to the New York Metro.

The history of the market of his works dates back several centuries, but even today it continues to amaze the world with its results. So, in December 2009, the last self-portrait of Van Dyck, written by him in 1640, just a year before his death, went to the London auction of the auction house Sotheby's for 8.3 million pounds (13.6 million dollars), exceeding the upper estimate by more than 2 times and setting a record for open sales of the artist's works. This sensational result remains unsurpassed to this day. A year later, at the same Sotheby's, the work "Two studies of a man with a beard" was sold for $7,250,500, also above the upper estimate of $5-7 million. Van Dyck's third result was $2.85 million for The Bust of the Apostle Peter at Sotheby's in 2002.

Formally, the 3rd place in the list of the most expensive works should have been the painting "The Rearing Stallion", which was sold at Christie's in 2008 for more than 6 million dollars, three times higher than the estimate. But there is a very interesting story connected with this work. In January 2012, the painting was put up for auction again. To everyone's surprise, she left with a result of $ 2.2 million, having lost $ 3.85 million from her previous price in 3.5 years, and thus took second (or first, depending on what you count) place in ours. That a year ago (when the rating was compiled), that now we tend to think that this is a one-time failure, and it happened not in 2012, as it might seem, but in 2008, in the wake of the general excitement in the art market, when more than one obscure peak result was shown. The situation on the market for Van Dyck's works is generally not bad: his things were put up for auction about 350 times, painting and drawing drawings were about equally divided; about three-quarters of the lots are for sale; the market is gradually growing: according to artprice, $100 conditionally invested in his work in 1999 turned into $133 by September 2013. Probably, in 2008, the buyer just got carried away. And when re-selling, the thing did not fail, but went away within the estimate, as it should be.

It is interesting that in our time, not only the results of Van Dyck's sales become sensations. In March 2011, restorers in Spain confirmed that Van Dyck's brush belongs to the painting "Virgin Mary and Child and Repentant Sinners", written in 1625 for the Spanish Duke of Medina de las Torres and kept at the Royal Academy of Fine Arts for the last 200 years. Until recently, the picture was considered a copy. And in the summer of the same year, the London company Philip Mold Fine Paintings at the exhibition “Van Dyck Acquired” exhibited three portraits by Van Dyck at once, previously considered works of either an “unknown author of the 17th century” or a follower of the artist. “Portrait of a girl with a fan”, “Study of the head of an old man” and “Portrait of Olivia Porter” regained their author thanks to the efforts of the British specialist in painting of the Old Masters Philip Mauld, known for his discoveries in the field of attribution of works of fine art.

Anthony Van Dyck. Self-portrait. 1622-1623 State Hermitage. wikipedia.org

Flanders. Antwerp. Anthony van Dyck was born in a wealthy merchant family in 1599. He was the seventh child. His mother will give birth to five more. And he will die shortly after the 12th birth. Antonis was only 8 years old.

His father saw nothing wrong with his son wanting to become an artist. After all, his mother masterfully embroidered. He himself was fond of drawing in his youth. Therefore, with a light heart at the age of 10, the father sent the boy to study with the artist.

Having talent and extraordinary perseverance, after 4 years of study, young Van Dyck began to work independently.

Van Dyck was a child prodigy

Here is his self-portrait, painted at the age of 14. Van Dijk was clearly a child prodigy. Agree, it is already clear that this boy is molded from a special test. Both ambition and self-confidence are read in the look.

Anthony Van Dyck. Self-portrait. 1613 Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna. wikipedia.org

His progress has been noticed. At the age of 18, he was accepted into the guild of St. Luke, which united artists. Only within the framework of this guild did the artist have the right to take orders and receive money for them.

And they accepted him into the guild thanks to a series of amazing works. He creates the "Heads of the Apostles". Here is one of the sketches.

Anthony Van Dyck. Heads of an old man. 1618 House of Rocox Museum in Antwerp, Belgium

From this work, we can already say that Anthony van Dyck should be a great portrait painter.

But while he has not yet realized this, he falls into the disciples of the great Rubens.

Who is better, Van Dyck or Rubens?

At the age of 24, Antonis writes his next masterpiece. Portrait of Cardinal Guido Bentivoglio.

Anthony Van Dyck. Portrait of Cardinal Guido Bentivoglio. 1625 Palazzo Pitti, Florence

What is special about this portrait? And the fact that before us is not just a church official vested with power. Before us is a person with a certain character. Intelligent and well-read. ambitious diplomat. Guido was a controversial person.

On the one hand, he did a lot to prevent a repetition of St. Bartholomew*. On the other hand, he was one of those who signed the death warrant for Galileo Galilei. Although once was his student.

There were enough orders in Italy. But in 1627 Van Dyck returned to Antwerp.

Van Dyck could have become a religious artist

The artist's return was forced by misfortune in the family. His sister became seriously ill. However, he did not have time to catch her alive.

For several years, Van Dyck has been focusing on religious subjects. Apparently under the influence of what happened. This is how his painting “The Ascension of Mary” appeared.

Anthony Van Dyck. Ascension of Mary. 1628-1629 Washington National Gallery. Nga.gov

For some reason, Van Dyck depicted all the holy virgins with thick necks. Yes, and some of his angels are very strange. That's why one of them wrapped his head in a veil? Moreover, he looks at us so capriciously.

Here, for comparison, is a painting by Rubens on the same subject.

Peter Paul Rubens. Ascension of Mary. 1618 Kunstpalast Museum, Düsseldorf. Artchive.ru

Rubens has more sublimity, religious solemnity. His characters do not imply ambiguity. Mary is impeccable. Angels too.

No, after all, it was not in vain that Van Dyck retreated. Why fight genius? When you can go to another country and become equal in greatness, but in a different genre. So Van Dyck did.

Why Van Dyck moved to England

In 1632, Van Dyck received an offer from King Charles I of England to become a court painter.

He agreed. In England, he had every chance of becoming the number one artist. The British did not need altar paintings. In this they differed from the Catholics. But portraits were ordered with pleasure.

This is what portraiture was like in England before the arrival of Van Dyck.

Portraits by William Larkin. Left: Lady Love. 1610-1620 Private collection. Right: George Villiers, Duke of Buckingham, 1616 National Portrait Gallery, London

What do you see? Absolutely motionless dolls. With skin color and thinness of seriously ill creatures. And neither a bright blush nor smart clothes can revive these people.

No wonder Van Dyck captivated the English aristocracy. And especially King Charles I.

Here is Van Dyck's most famous portrait of him. "Charles I on the hunt".

Anthony Van Dyck. Portrait of Charles 1 on the hunt. 1635. renessans.ru

Before us is a living person. Gentleman. No heavy dresses, just a hunting suit. Casual, but aristocratic pose. The languid look of a man endowed with power.

The king had something to be delighted with. And he orders his portrait, as well as portraits of his wife and children 30 times!

Anthony Van Dyck. Queen Henrietta Maria and Sir Geoffrey Hudson. 1633 Washington National Gallery

Van Dyck, of course, embellished his customers. We can judge this by the memoirs of their contemporaries. One lady saw portraits of Van Dyck. By which I concluded that all the ladies in England are beautiful.

But she was very disappointed when she saw Queen Henrietta Maria live. Instead of a pretty woman, an elderly person appeared to her with skinny arms, crooked shoulders and front teeth sticking out of her mouth.

Finest Hour by Van Dyck

The master was given the title of nobleman. He received a knighthood from the hands of the king. Dreams came true.

The most noble nobles of British society pose for him. He has no end to expensive orders.

Van Dyck masterfully feels and conveys on the canvas the atmosphere of the royal environment. The portrait painter gives pride to the posture of his clients, and elegant nobility to postures and gestures.

Here are the offspring of the Stewart family. One of Van Dyck's most famous portraits.

Anthony Van Dyck. Lord John Stewart and his brother Lord Bernard Stewart. 1638 National Gallery of London. Nationalgallery.org.uk

These gentlemen are only 17 and 16 years old. Both of them will die at the age of 23 in the Civil War. As a result of which Charles I himself will die. He will be the only executed English king in the entire history of England.

Anthony Van Dyck. Lady d'Aubigny and the Countess of Portland. 1638-1639 , Moscow

And these ladies tell their family history. The one on the left is the sister of the husband of the one on the right. The portrait was painted as a sign of their reconciliation. After all, Earl Stewart married a girl without the consent of the family. After some time, his relatives recognized this marriage. And the count's sister favorably demonstrates this.

Van Dyck was also an unsurpassed children's portrait painter. Although he depicts them in adult poses and adult clothes. Otherwise, etiquette did not allow.

But in their eyes we can catch mischief. And each one has its own character.

Anthony Van Dyck. King Charles' Elder Children 1. 1636 Royal Art Collection, Windsor Castle, UK

Pot, don't boil

Van Dyck was inundated with similar orders. Every aristocrat longed to be captured by Van Dyck.

As a result, it turned out like in a fairy tale, “Pot, do not cook.”

The work was put on stream. The artist gave the customer less than an hour a day. With his hand, he depicted only the main thing, and everything else was written by his students from invited sitters.

Or he wrote everything himself, but in a hurry. Working on two or even five portraits at the same time. Some carelessness appeared in the works.

But this did not deter the customers. On the contrary, his thin layer of paint and quick strokes made the image more alive, vibrating. What really liked his models.

Anthony Van Dyck. Portrait of Sir Anthony George Digby. 1638 Dulwich Picture Gallery, UK. commons.wikimedia.org

Van Dyck's personal life

In England, Van Dyck had a beloved Margaret Lemon. She was his model. They were in a relationship for over a year.

But he decided to marry an aristocrat. Miss Lemon was in complete shock when she found out about the engagement of her lover. Made a scandal by trying to bite off the artist's finger. So that he can no longer write. But fortunately she failed to do so.

Anthony Van Dyck. Margaret Lemon (portrait not finished). 1639 Hampton Court Castle, UK. Royalcollection.org.uk

The unfortunate had to reconcile. And at the age of 40, the artist married Mary Ruthven, a young lady-in-waiting to the Queen. So he himself became an English aristocrat.

Anthony Van Dyck. Portrait of Maria Rusven, the artist's wife. 1639. Artchive.ru

Was it love? Or another conceited act? Unknown. In any case, family happiness did not last very long.

Once Van Dyck went to Paris, where he painted the galleries of the Louvre. There he became seriously ill. Returning home in December 1641, he died. He was only 42 years old.

He was buried on the day of the christening of his newborn daughter. Which at that time was only eight days old.

Why is Van Dyck so famous?

Van Dyck became the greatest portrait painter. Which in itself is phenomenal. Since there are few well-known names in this genre. For one simple reason.

The portrait painter is forced to please the customer. And in such a vice, few people manage to bring something of their own. And even more so to influence the development of painting.

Van Dyck succeeded in both. And the customers were happy. And he glorified his name for many generations to come. Because he raised the bar to the next level.

Now a self-respecting artist had no right to depict motionless dolls. From now on, in the eyes of each model, character must be read. As did the brilliant Van Dyck.

Read about another outstanding artist of the Baroque Era in the article.

* IN On the night of August 24, 1572, Catholics staged a massacre of Huguenots (Protestants) on the streets of Paris. 6000 people died.

For those who do not want to miss the most interesting about artists and paintings. Leave your e-mail (in the form below the text) and you will be the first to know about new articles in my blog.

In contact with

Guide to the Picture Gallery of the Imperial Hermitage Benois Alexander Nikolaevich

Dijk, Anthony van

However, long before it became general, the metamorphosis of the very spirit of Flemish painting first appeared in the best of the best students of Rubens, in Anthony van Dyck (1599 - 1641). Rubens was still in full splendor and no one was thinking about new trends when van Dyck, until then his obedient student, left for Italy and began to paint portraits there, in Genoa, in which a feature that was hitherto unknown to Flanders unexpectedly appeared: the most genuine "grandezza" - in connection with some kind of gentle melancholy, which came to the taste of aristocrats who wanted to seem jaded and tired. They say that when he was in Rome, Van Dyck kept aloof from his comrades, rude merry fellows and revelers of the Flemings, and for this he was mockingly nicknamed the “cavalier of painting”. This is typical of all his art. In his later work, he became more and more wary of crude simplicity and finally became a real précieux.

Anthony van Dyck.Rest on the flight to Egypt (Madonna with partridges). 2 Fragments. Early 1630s. Canvas, oil. 215x285.5. Inv. 539. From the collection. Walpole, Houghton Hall, 1779

Anthony van Dyck. Family portrait. Canvas, oil. 113.5x93.5. Inv. 534. From the collection. Lalive de Julie, Paris, before 1774

Anthony van Dyck.Self-portrait (Formerly: portrait of a young man). 1622/23. Canvas, oil. 116.5x93.5. Inv. 548. From the collection. Crozat, Paris, 1772

Anthony van Dyck. Male portrait (presumably a portrait of the Lyon banker Marc Antoine Lumagne). Canvas, oil. 104.8x85.5. From the collection Crozat, Paris, 1772

Anthony van Dyck.Portrait of Sir Thomas Chaloner. Canvas, oil. 104x81.5. Inv. 551. From the collection of Walpole, Houghton Hall, 1779

In the picturesque respect, the paintings of van Dyck, preceding his resettlement in England, are superior to the later ones. They argue in terms of color with Rubens and Cornelis de Vos, in terms of sharpness of characterization - with the Dutchman Hals. But still, the “real van Dyck”, the artist who created a special world, was discovered only in the last ten years of his life at the elegant, proud and decadent court of the unfortunate grandson of Mary Stuart - Charles I.

The real meaning of van Dyck is that he found style. He, a student of Rubens, thoroughly saturated with the artistic instructions of his teacher, almost the same age as Jordans, found his own style - opposite and even hostile to them, he opened a new era of painting. No wonder he was so valued in the 18th century - he was the forerunner who guessed his sophistication. Van Dyck was one of the first to find purely aristocratic formulas of art. He conveyed in painting the specific feelings of the closed world of “blue blood” at a time when this world, leaving medieval rudeness and freedom, turned into a “courtyard”, developed all the techniques of internal and external etiquette and received, instead of the uncomfortable autonomy of feudalism, a different fullness of power and huge material resources based on the sovereign's mercy and on palace intrigues. In England, in the 1630s, under the “knightly” but weak-willed Charles I, the claims of the “blue blood” reached their maximum, and the immensity of these claims ended in a political cataclysm like the one that befell France 100 years later - after the era of Louis XV and his metres .

Anthony van Dyck.Portrait of Henry Danvers, Earl of Denbigh, dressed as a Knight of the Garter. 1638/40. Canvas, oil. 223x130.6. Inv. 545. From the collection. Walpole, Houghton Hall, 1779

Anthony van Dyck. Portrait of Philip, Lord Wharton. 1632. Oil on canvas. 133.4x106.4. Sold from the Hermitage in March 1930 to Andrew Mellon. National Gallery, Washington. Andrew W. Mellon Collection

Anthony van Dyck. Portrait of Philadelphia and Elizabeth Wharton. Late 1630s. Canvas, oil. 162x130. Inv. 533. From the collection of Walpole, Houghton Hall, 1779

Anthony van Dyck.Portrait of the Ladies of the Court Anne Dalquith, Countess of Morton, and Anne Kerk. 1638/40. Canvas, oil. 131.5x150.6. Inv. 540

Anthony van Dyck.Portrait of the Ladies of the Court Anne Dalquith, Countess of Morton, and AnneKirk. Close-up. 1638/40. Canvas, oil. 131.5x150.6. Inv. 540