Universitätsbibliothek HeidelbergUniversitätsbibliothek Heidelberg
Metadaten

Instytut Sztuki (Warschau) [Hrsg.]; Państwowy Instytut Sztuki (bis 1959) [Hrsg.]; Stowarzyszenie Historyków Sztuki [Hrsg.]
Biuletyn Historii Sztuki — 73.2011

DOI Heft:
Nr. 1-2
DOI Artikel:
Ström, Emilia: Pierścień i nić. Próba atrybucji portretu z Gripsholmu
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: 
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.34475#0050

DWork-Logo
Überblick
loading ...
Faksimile
0.5
1 cm
facsimile
Vollansicht
OCR-Volltext
44

EMILIA SlRÓM

The woman depicted wears a ring, and the ring
rests on her breast near her heart, attached to the
band of the ruff. The stone has a pyramidal cut,
common in the 16th century. This cut was most
suitable for diamonds, the hardest and noblest of
precious stones. The ring was a symbol of eternal
love while the diamond symbolised perfection,
purity and invulnerability. According to popular
belief, a diamond could win a woman's favours. The
ring on the woman's breast would thus seem to be a
gift from the man she loved.
According to Grosvenor, Steven van Herwijck
was not just a medal engraver and portrait painter
but also a precious gem cutter. He probably worked
together with the jeweher, John Dymock. On a
portrait that can now possibly be ascribed to him,
one of those depicted also wears a ring in a band
around the neck. If we presume that Steven van
Herwijck painted Cecilia's portrait in 1563, she
could not have been the model for the picture. The
princess was in Sweden while van Herwijck was in
England, following the time he had spent in Poland.

The artist probably worked from an older image.
Why not a portrait of van Uther after Verwilt? The
latter painted Cecilia's portrait for the first time in
1556, the same year he came to Sweden, but this
portrait has not been found. Henricus Moderns
mentions in an epigram how it might have looked,
while reference is again made to it by Johannes
Messenius in TAeezAzzzn zmAz'A'tutA Wecuzzae 1616U
One section reads:
'... TAA yorAozt .y/icnw tAe Aeuzztz/A/ z/noge o/"
CeczYz'o, of SiveeAhA royoi AzAA, wzYA Aerfzrze
features'.* YYerforeAea<Y g/eamzug wAzte as sz-zorg
Aer eyas* syarAYzng /z'Ae tAe sun, Aer <YeA'gYzt/u/
/zys ec/zysfng z^oses wAezz sAe sznzYes...
This source can explain why the painting
stylistically refers to the portrait attributed to
Dominicus Verwilt but above all Jan Baptista van
Uther. The ring can provide Steven van Herwijck's
own contribution to the composition.
(TTansYatz'ozM of VocAazzowsAz an<Y AYessenzus
frozu biveJAA into Ezzg/AA Ay Hgzzeta Y?zWt-
TzzzgAez-g-)
 
Annotationen