Portrait of a Man

The Painting: At once captivating because of his highly concentrated and somewhat dour expression, the man wears a red hat and blue-gray coat with fur trim at the collar. With praying hands, he turns toward an object of veneration, perhaps a Virgin and Child, suggesting to some scholars that the portrait was originally one half of a diptych (Conway 1921, Fierens-Gevaert 1928, Friedländer 1968). Alternatively, the man could have been balanced by a portrait of his wife, placed at the far right on the other side of the holy figures, to form a triptych (Smeyers 1998, Périer-d’Ieteren 2006). There are quite a number of paintings of the Virgin and Child attributed to Dieric Bouts (for whose authorship, see below), but none have the appropriate dimensions to match The Met portrait. Furthermore, there are no surviving female portraits that present likely candidates to complete such an ensemble. The concern that the man wears a hat presumably in the presence of holy figures (Bauman 1986; Sprinson de Jésus 1998) has been countered by Campbell (1997), who listed other contemporary examples where this also occurs.[1]

To add to these unresolved questions about the painting’s original format, technical examination has shown that the panel was trimmed on all sides to an unknown degree, and set into a secondary oak panel (see Technical Notes).[2] As there is no barbe present, there can be no determination of the original dimensions of the painting. Moreover, there was no reserve left for the hands during the painting process, as was usual practice. Instead, they were painted over the man’s dark coat, which over time—due to the increasing transparency of the flesh tones—has caused the hands to appear darker than the man’s face. Notable as well is that the hands are painted in a higher position than is normally found in donor portraits; see, for example, Hans Memling’s Portinari portraits (14.40.626–27) or Hugo van der Goes’s Portrait of a Man (29.100.15). One final unexplained fact is that the background was originally painted a bright red, over which a thick layer of blue—probably azurite—was added, most probably by the artist himself as either an optical strategy or a change of intention. In order to resolve these anomalies and to consider another plausible explanation for the present state of The Met portrait, it is necessary to study it in the context of its attribution to Dieric Bouts.

The Attribution and Date: There has never been any other suggestion than Dieric Bouts or his immediate circle for the authorship of this portrait (see References). Typical for Bouts are the elongated form of the head, and the finely articulated features of the face with almond-shaped eyes, sharply defined nose, and pale thin lips. Bouts paid special attention to the tendrils of hair peeking out from beneath the hat, the bushy eyebrows, and hints of an emerging beard. These are also characteristics of Bouts’s only independent portrait, possibly of Jan van Winckele, dated 1462 (National Gallery, London; see fig. 1 above).[3] The solitary surviving portrait drawing by Bouts is the Portrait of a Man of about 1470, fully worked up in silverpoint on tinted paper (Smith College Museum of Art, Northampton, Mass.; fig. 2). As the National Gallery and Met portraits show very summary or little apparent underdrawing respectively, then such portrait drawings would have provided the details of the sitter’s physiognomy for developing the painting.

It must be said, however, that The Met man with his introspective demeanor is quite unlike the London and Northampton portraits, where the sitters gaze upward and out of the picture. Rather, The Met painting can be more closely associated with the portrait heads that populate Bouts’s Altarpiece of the Holy Sacrament of 1464–68 (Saint Peter’s Church, Leuven; fig. 3)[4] and the Justice of Cambyses panels, produced for the Town Hall in Leuven in 1471–80 (Musées Royaux des Beaux-Arts de Belgique, Brussels; fig. 4).[5] Like his contemporary Hugo van der Goes, Bouts is not known as a painter of independent portraits. Instead, the two artists populated their biblical and history paintings with portraits of their contemporaries in order to convey a sense of realism in these narratives, thereby engaging the viewer more fully.[6] The Met portrait perhaps most closely resembles the figure at the far right of the Last Supper in the Holy Sacrament Altarpiece (fig. 5), who exhibits the same sense of solemn concentration.[7] Might it not be more likely that The Met portrait was originally part of a larger narrative composition that for unknown reasons was not preserved? The portrait may have been cut from this larger piece and then reworked—with the hands added by Bouts himself (see Technical Notes)—to serve as a devotional portrait. Such intentional changes to paintings occurred early on as well as later in time.[8] This would explain the unusual demeanor for a Bouts portrait, the added hands, and perhaps even the changed background from red to deep blue. All of the stylistic connections for The Met painting are with Bouts’s late works, indicating that it too dates to around 1470.

Maryan W. Ainsworth 2022

[1] See also Catheline Périer-d’Ieteren, Dieric Bouts: The Complete Works, Brussels, 2006, p. 119.
[2] These interventions also have prevented any dendrochronology from being undertaken.
[3] Lorne Campbell, National Gallery Catalogues, The Fifteenth Century Netherlandish Schools, London, 1998, pp. 46–49.
[4] Micheline Comblen-Sonkes, Corpus of Fifteenth-Century Painting in the Southern Netherlands and the Principality of Liège, 18: The Collegiate Church of Saint Peter Louvain, Brussels, 1996, pp. 1–84.
[5] Cyriel Stroo and Pascal Syfer-d’Olne, “Justice of Emperor Otto III,” in eds. Cyriel Stroo, Pascal Syfer-d’Olne, Anne Dubois, Roel Slachmuylders, The Flemish Primitives II: The Dirk Bouts, Petrus Christus, Hans Memling and Hugo van der Goes Groups, Brussels, 1999, pp. 56–104.
[6] See Maryan W. Ainsworth, “Hugo’s Approach to Portraiture,” in eds. Stephan Kemperdick, Erik Eising, Hugo van der Goes (exh. cat., Gemäldegalerie, Berlin, March 31–July 16, 2023), Munich, forthcoming Summer 2022.
[7] Although both The Met portrait and the Last Supper observer have been suggested as self-portraits of Bouts (Hymans 1902, Hulin de Loo 1902), the engraving of Bouts by Dominicus Lampsonius (Pictorum aliquot celbrium Germaniae inferioris effigies, Antwerp, 1572) shows a very different physiognomy. See Perier-d’Ieteren, as in note 1 above, pp. 124–25.
[8] Maryan W. Ainsworth, “Intentional Alterations of Early Netherlandish Paintings,” Metropolitan Museum Journal 40 (2005), pp. 51–65.

Support: The original support was constructed from a single plank of wood. At some point before entering The Met’s collection, the panel was trimmed on all sides by an indeterminate amount. The panel was also set into a secondary panel, obscuring any evidence about the original dimensions. There are no traces of a barbe. The structural intervention also inhibits dendrochronology.

Preparation: The panel was prepared with a white ground. Examination with infrared reflectography did not reveal any underdrawing (see fig. 6 above).[1] There are a few lines that could easily be mistaken for underdrawing, for example, the contour lines around the sitter’s ear, but these are in fact related to carbon-containing paint on the surface. It is possible that underdrawing is present, but is not detectable with infrared reflectography or is entirely obscured by the painted contours.

Paint Layers: The crisp contours of the sitter, set in front of the solid blue background, are an immediately striking feature of this painting. In fact, technical examination reveals that the artist emphasized these contours in the final steps of painting. After painting the sitter, Bouts brought the dark blue paint of the background around the figure, as if outlining him. He used rather thick paint for this that occasionally left a low lip of paint, particularly around his hat; this is even evident in the buildup of paint in the x-radiograph where the background meets the figure (fig. 7). Bouts then added dark brown contours to further set off the figure.

While such bold contours against the solid background could have resulted in a flat painting, the sensitive depiction of light and some hyper-realistic details make this portrait lifelike. In particular, the artist seemed to delight in portraying individual hairs: the grey and white flecks on the hairs peeking out from underneath his hat, the multi-directional masses at his eyebrows, and even the whitish strokes on his eyelashes where the light may catch them, that serve to subtly set the lashes off from the brown-shaded flesh behind (fig. 8).

The portrait has suffered some abrasion, which impacts how this painting compares with other works by the artist (see Catalogue Entry). The fleshtones have a markedly pink tint at the midtones, for example, in his proper right cheek and near the back of his neck. These regions appear especially pink when they lie next to very pale passages, like his right jawline, where some warm glazes are missing, seemingly abraded during an insensitive cleaning. Warm glazes, which are most vulnerable to solvent damage, would have imparted greater shading and helped to ease the transition from pinkish midtones to shaded areas.

The sitter’s costume appears altered to varying degrees as well. The hat seems to have been painted using a mixture of red lake, white and a small amount of blue. But there are now splotches of deep purple paint in the hat that would have been better modulated originally, likely by a rich red lake that has faded. It is unclear what the original appearance of the robe would have been exactly, but it would also have had a modulating glaze. The transparent blue that remains at the collar and central closure of the coat, with broad and visible brushstrokes, would have served as the underlayer, meant to be integrated by subsequent paint layers. It is quite possible that this phenomenon is also due to a faded red lake, which would have resulted in a deep purple hue.

The painting was executed very neatly and confidently, with only one minor change at his right shoulder. The artist made the shoulder higher using warm brown paint on top of the blue background. This brown is a clue to the original appearance of the robe. While maybe not entirely brown, the brown change at the shoulder is at odds with the light blue and mauve paint that remains in the robe; clearly it was warmer in color and deeper in tone. The sitter’s hands were also added after the robe was painted, as is evident in close examination of the surface and in the infrared reflectogram. The increased transparency of the paint of the hands, which is characteristic of aged oil paint, and the dark paint evident at the cracks now make them appear darker than the face. However, technical examination did not reveal any evidence that the hands were not added by Bouts himself and, in fact, comparison of the painting technique with the depiction of hands in other works by the artist argues for his authorship. See, for example, the similar reflections on the fingernails and dark tips of the hands in the Portrait of a Man (National Gallery, London; fig. 1) and in the Ordeal by Fire panel of the Justice of Emperor Otto III (Musées Royaux des Beaux-Arts de Belgique, Brussels; fig. 4), particularly the emperor’s right hand.[2]

The solid blue of the background, which appears to be azurite, lies over a bright red paint layer. This red may have been an earlier idea for the background, or part of an optical strategy to offset the greenish hue of azurite. Either way, a thick layer of blue was required to cover the bright red. This thick application may have contributed to the wide drying cracks evident in the background, now integrated with selective retouching.

Sophie Scully 2022

[1] Infrared reflectography was acquired with an OSIRIS InGaAs near-infrared camera fitted with a 6-element, 150mm focal length f/5.6–f/45 lens; 900-1700nm spectral response, April 202
[2] Cyriel Stroo and Pascal Syfer-d’Olne, “Justice of Emperor Otto III,” in eds. Cyriel Stroo, Pascal Syfer-d’Olne, Anne Dubois, Roel Slachmuylders, The Flemish Primitives II: The Dirk Bouts, Petrus Christus, Hans Memling and Hugo van der Goes Groups, Brussels, 1999, p. 36, fig. E.

private collection, England (until about 1895); Baron Albert Oppenheim, Cologne (by 1896–1912; cat., 1904, no. 3); [Kleinberger, New York, 1912]; Benjamin Altman, New York (1912–d. 1913)

Bruges. Palais du Gouvernement. "Exposition des primitifs flamands et d'art ancien," June 15–September 15, 1902, no. 38 (lent by Baron Albert Oppenheim, Cologne).

Brussels. Hôtel Goffinet. "Exposition de la miniature," March–July 1912, no. 2003A (lent by Baron Oppenheim).

New York. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. "Art Treasures of the Metropolitan," November 7, 1952–September 7, 1953, no. 94.

New York. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. "From Van Eyck to Bruegel: Early Netherlandish Painting in The Metropolitan Museum of Art," September 22, 1998–February 21, 1999, no. 26.

THIS WORK MAY NOT BE LENT, BY TERMS OF ITS ACQUISITION BY THE METROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART.

Henri Hymans. "L'exposition des primitifs flamands à Bruges (1er article)." Gazette des beaux-arts, 3rd ser., 28 (August 1902), p. 48, calls it a self-portrait.

Paul Heiland. Dirk Bouts und die Hauptwerke seiner Schule. PhD diss., Kaiser Wilhelms-Universität, Strassburg. Potsdam, [1902?], pp. 122–23, 141.

Georges H. de Loo Palais du Gouvernement, Bruges. Exposition de tableaux flamands des XIVe, XVe et XVIe siècles: catalogue critique précédé d'une introduction sur l'identité de certains maîtres anonymes. Ghent, 1902, p. 11, no. 38, as possibly a self-portrait, in spite of the discrepency between the artist's late technique and the sitter's relative youth.

W. H. James Weale. "The Early Painters of the Netherlands as Illustrated by the Bruges Exhibition of 1902, Article III." Burlington Magazine 1 (April 1903), p. 217, as apparently a late work.

Octave Maus. "The Exhibition of Early Flemish Pictures at Bruges." Magazine of Art, n.s., 1 (1903), p. 30, as a very fine portrait.

Max J. Friedländer. Meisterwerke der niederländischen Malerei des XV. u. XVI. Jahrhunderts auf der Ausstellung zu Brügge 1902. Munich, 1903, p. 9, pl. 19, states that it is not a self-portrait, but probably half of a diptych, and a late work.

Max J. Friedländer. "Die Brügger Leihausstellung von 1902." Repertorium für Kunstwissenschaft 26 (1903), p. 76.

Franz Dülberg. "Die Ausstellung altniederländischer Meister in Brügge." Zeitschrift für bildende Kunst, n.s., 14 (1903), p. 56, suggests that the head was cut from a larger picture.

Karl Voll. Die altniederländische Malerei von Jan van Eyck bis Memling. Leipzig, 1906, p. 117, as a late Bouts.

Arnold Goffin. Thiéry Bouts. Brussels, 1907, p. 64, ill.

Arnold Goffin. "Het werk van Dirk Bouts te Leuvin." Onze Kunst 12 (December 1907), p. 201, ill., hesitantly ascribes it to Bouts.

Alban Head. "Letters to the Editor: An Early Flemish Portrait in the National Gallery." Burlington Magazine 12 (October 1907–March 1908), p. 107.

Max J. Friedländer. Letter to F. Kleinberger. June 6, 1912.

Wilhelm R. Valentiner. The Art of the Low Countries. English ed. Garden City, N.Y., 1914, pp. 43–44, ill. opp. p. 44.

Max J. Friedländer. Von Eyck bis Bruegel: Studien zur Geschichte der Niederländischen Malerei. Berlin, 1916, pp. 39–40, pl. VII, as one of the latest works by Bouts.

Martin Conway. The Van Eycks and Their Followers. London, 1921, p. 164, dates it before 1447; as probably half of a diptych, not a self-portrait.

Ludwig Baldass. "Dirk Bouts' Bildnis eines betenden Mannes." Graphischen Künste 45 (1922), pp. 107–8, ill., illustrates the engraving of the portrait by Peter Halm; states that the picture was not part of a diptych.

François Monod. "La galerie Altman au Metropolitan Museum de New-York (1er article)." Gazette des beaux-arts, 5th ser., 8 (September–October 1923), pp. 192–93, ill., as "Portrait de l'artiste(?)".

Willy Burger. Die Malerei in den Niederlanden 1400–1550. Munich, 1925, p. 65, pl. LXXIII.

Max J. Friedländer. Die altniederländische Malerei. Vol. 3, Dierick Bouts und Joos van Gent. Berlin, 1925, pp. 44, 111, no. 32, pl. XLI, as one of the latest works by Bouts.

Handbook of the Benjamin Altman Collection. 2nd ed. New York, 1928, pp. 47–49, no. 21, ill.

Franz Dülberg. Niederländische Malerei der Spätgotik und Renaissance. Potsdam, 1929, p. 71.

[Hippolyte] Fierens-Gevaert and Paul Fierens. Histoire de la peinture flamande des origines à la fin du XVe siècle. Vol. 3, La maturité de l'art flamand. Paris, 1929, pp. 18, 29, pl. VIII, fig. 14, consider it half of a diptych.

Ludwig von Baldass. "Die Entwicklung des Dirk Bouts." Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien, n.s., 6 (1932), pp. 100, 108–9, 114.

Hans Tietze. Meisterwerke europäischer Malerei in Amerika. Vienna, 1935, p. 333, pl. 128 [English ed., "Masterpieces of European Painting in America," New York, 1939, p. 317, pl. 128].

Ernst Günter Troche. Niederländische Malerei. Berlin, 1935, pp. 11–12, 26, pl. 31.

Wolfgang Schöne. Dieric Bouts und seine Schule. Berlin, 1938, pp. 5, 7, 32, 107–8, pl. 33, dates it between 1470 and 1473, calling it one of Bouts' latest works; comments on the influence of Rogier van der Weyden.

Harry B. Wehle and Margaretta Salinger. The Metropolitan Museum of Art: A Catalogue of Early Flemish, Dutch and German Paintings. New York, 1947, pp. 47–48, ill.

Leo van Puyvelde. The Flemish Primitives. Brussels, 1948, p. 28.

M. J. Schretlen. Dirck Bouts. Amsterdam, [1948?], p. 36, pl. 52.

J. Francotte. Dieric Bouts: Zijn Kunst—zijn laatste Avondmaal. Louvain, 1951, pp. 52, 53, 56, 183, pl. 32.

Art Treasures of the Metropolitan: A Selection from the European and Asiatic Collections of The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Exh. cat., The Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York, 1952, p. 226, no. 94, colorpl. 94.

Erwin Panofsky. Early Netherlandish Painting: Its Origins and Character. Cambridge, Mass., 1953, vol. 1, p. 479 n. 16 (to p. 294), p. 493 n. 3 (to p. 318), discusses role of devotional portraits in diptych with Virgin; based on the findings of Murray Pease, thinks this is not half of a diptych but a fragment of a larger composition.

Leo van Puyvelde. La peinture flamande au siècle des van Eyck. Paris, 1953, p. 207.

Josephine L. Allen and Elizabeth E. Gardner. A Concise Catalogue of the European Paintings in The Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York, 1954, p. 12.

Valentin Denis. Thierry Bouts. Brussels, 1957, pp. 8, 16, 21, 26, 39.

Erik Larsen. Les primitifs flamands au Musée Metropolitain de New York. Utrecht, 1960, pp. 63–64, 116–17, fig. XIV.

R. H. Wilenski. Flemish Painters, 1430–1830. New York, 1960, vol. 1, pp. 13, 26, 506; vol. 2, pl. 60, as by the New York Man in High Cap Painter.

A[lbert]. Châtelet. "Sur un jugement dernier de Dieric Bouts." Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 16 (1965), p. 33.

Charles D. Cuttler. Northern Painting from Pucelle to Bruegel. New York, 1968, p. 143, fig. 173, calls it fragmentary; dates it about 1470.

Max J. Friedländer et al. Early Netherlandish Painting. Vol. 3, Dieric Bouts and Joos van Gent. New York, 1968, pp. 27–28, 63, 86–87 nn. 8, 40, pl. 51, Friedländer suggests the panel was one side of a diptych, the other side depicting a Madonna; Veronée-Verhaegen feels it could not be part of a diptych with the Madonna since the man is praying to the right, and considers it instead a fragment from a larger composition.

Gustav Künstler. "Vom entstehen des Einzelbildnisses und seiner frühen Entwicklung in der flämischen Malerei." Wiener Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 27 (1974), pp. 59–60, fig. 17, implies that it is not a fragment, regarding it as an example of portraiture in which Bouts concentrates exclusively on the person and his inner contemplation; rejects the possibility that it formed half a devotional diptych as the sitter's head is covered.

V. Denis. La peinture flamande 15e–16e–17e siècles. Brussels, 1976, pp. 84, 86.

Albert Châtelet. Early Dutch Painting: Painting in the Northern Netherlands in the Fifteenth Century. English ed. [French ed. 1980]. New York, 1981, p. 213, suggests that this picture could be attributed to the "Master of the Taking of Christ".

Guy Bauman. "Early Flemish Portraits, 1425–1525." Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin 43 (Spring 1986), p. 52, ill. (color), notes that the fingertips joined in prayer suggest that it is a devotional portrait from a triptych or diptych, although the hands were painted over the coat and may be a later addition; also observes that a male sitter with a covered head would be unusual in a devotional portrait and would appear disrespectful; notes that the picture is a fragment and its original form and function enigmatic; dates it about 1470 on the basis of style and costume.

Martha Wolff. "An Image of Compassion: Dieric Bouts's Sorrowing Madonna." Museum Studies 15, no. 2 (1989), p. 125, fig. 17, notes the "greater concern for the varied substance of the flesh: the folds around the eyes, the tighter skin over the cheekbones" and mentions it with works from the very end of Bouts's career.

Introduction by Walter A. Liedtke in Flemish Paintings in America: A Survey of Early Netherlandish and Flemish Paintings in the Public Collections of North America. Antwerp, 1992, pp. 24, 319, no. 126, ill.

Jochen Sander. Niederländische Gemälde im Städel, 1400–1550. Mainz, 1993, p. 303.

Dirk De Vos. Hans Memling: The Complete Works. Ghent, 1994, p. 146 n. 1.

Dirk De Vos. Hans Memling: Catalogue. Exh. cat., Groeninge Museum, Bruges. Ghent, 1994, p. 68 n. 1.

Katharine Baetjer. European Paintings in The Metropolitan Museum of Art by Artists Born Before 1865: A Summary Catalogue. New York, 1995, p. 250, ill.

James Snyder in The Dictionary of Art. Ed. Jane Turner. Vol. 4, New York, 1996, p. 593, notes that the panel is a fragment, and that "contrary to the established convention for devotional diptychs, in which the Virgin always appears on the left in keeping with hieratic order," our portrait would be at the left in a diptych context.

Lorne Campbell. Letter to Mary Sprinson de Jesús. August 28, 1997, feels it is not unusual for a male sitter to be represented at prayer with his hat on and cites other examples of this in Netherlandish painting.

Otto Pächt. Early Netherlandish Painting from Rogier van der Weyden to Gerard David. Ed. Monika Rosenauer. London, 1997, pp. 142–43, ill., notes that the Madonna toward which the sitter would have prayed is missing and that the panel may be cut at its lower edge; places the portrait in the 1470s in Bouts's "late phase of exaggerated vertical emphasis".

Mary Sprinson de Jesús in From Van Eyck to Bruegel: Early Netherlandish Painting in The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Ed. Maryan W. Ainsworth and Keith Christiansen. Exh. cat., The Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York, 1998, pp. 66, 74, 160–61, no. 26, ill. (color), observes that "there are no technical reasons for doubting as original either the hands, which have been painted over the sitter's jacket, or the flat azurite background"; finds the hat not necessarily inconsistent with the representation of a praying sitter, noting that other comparable, but later examples survive; remarks that Bouts was generally inclined to represent his male subjects with tall hats, thereby emphasizing the figure's verticality.

Maurits Smeyers in Dirk Bouts (ca. 1410–1475): Een Vlaams primitief te Leuven. Ed. Maurits Smeyers. Exh. cat., Sint-Pieterskerk en Predikherenkerk, Leuven. Louvain, 1998, p. 451, no. 131, ill. (color), considers this panel a fragment of a larger work, most likely the left wing of a triptych.

Maurits Smeyers. Dirk Bouts: Peintre du silence. Tournai, 1998, pp. 126–27, ill. in color.

Paul van Calster. "Of Beardless Painters and Red Chaperons: A Fifteenth-Century Whodunit." Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 66 (2003), p. 469, fig. 6.

Till-Holger Borchert. "Collecting Early Netherlandish Paintings in Europe and the United States." Early Netherlandish Paintings: Rediscovery, Reception and Research. Ed. Bernhard Ridderbos et al. English ed. Amsterdam, 2005, p. 212 [Dutch ed., "'Om iets te weten van de oude meesters'. De Vlaamse Primitieven—herontdekking, waardering en onderzoek," Nijmegen, 1995].

Catheline Périer-d'Ieteren. Dieric Bouts: The Complete Works. Brussels, 2006, pp. 113, 117, 119–20, 122, 124, 297, no. 23, ill. in color, p. 297 and figs. 107, 116, as perhaps the left wing of a devotional triptych; believes the hands are most likely a later addition by Bouts himself; notes that both the male portrait in the National Gallery, London, and this panel have extremely summary underdrawing for the composition as a whole, and none for the face, suggesting that they were preceded by a drawing like the Portrait of a Man in the Smith College Museum of Art, Northampton, Mass.

Alte Meister. Dorotheum, Vienna. June 16, 2011, p. 276, under no. 409.

The panel has been marouflaged.

This work may not be lent, by terms of its acquisition by The Metropolitan Museum of Art.