DOI issue:
Cust, Lionel: A passion cyklus at Hampton court palace
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.57095#0038
A PASSION CYKLUS AT HAMPTON COURT PALACE
disgrace, and on November 29, 1530, he breathed
his last at Leicester Abbey. On his fall from power
the Cardinal handed over his palace at Hampton
Court to his royal master, King Henry VIII, who
at once took possession and entered into residence.
Of all the magnificence of Wolsey’s palace little
remains to-day but a few rooms with their original
ceilings, some portions of the great collection of
tapestry, which the Cardinal had purchased or had
made for him, and perhaps the paintings, which form
the subject of this article. These paintings are fixed
to the walls round the little room with the blue and
gold ceiling and cornice. The panelling in this room
is not original, so there is nothing to be learnt from
the panelling about the original position ofthe paint-
ings. The fireplace is original and it is possible,
though by no means certain, that the two subjects
on the wall above the fireplace may be in their orig-
inal position, this being an original wall of early
date, while the other walls are more recent partitions.
The paintings are on large panels of varying heights
and breadths. There is no particular evidence as to
any reasons for any difference in height, although
in the course of centuries, the panels may have been
altered in size to fit certain places on certain walls.
Tradition in the palace is that these paintings have
been in the palace since the days of the Tudors.
The series comprises four complete subjects and
fragments of others. They are a series of events in
the Passion of Jesus Christ of the usual selection.
On the side of the fireplace are two subjects ontwo
panels each, (1) The Last Supper, 63 inches inheight,
and (2) The Flagellation, 66' = inches high. On the
side wall is a complete subject in three sections
(3) The March to Calvary, 66 inches high, and on
the partition wall opposite the fireplace another
subject in three sections (4) The Resurrection, 69
inches high.In addition to these are single fragments
(5) a panel with St. Mary Magdalene in the Garden,
673/4 inches high (6) The Entry into Jerusalem, a
background subject, 66 inches, and (7) a group of
Apostles, from some scene perhaps in the Temple,
66 inches high, (6) and (7) perhaps being portions
of one subject.
Henry VIII had painters in his pay even before
Holbein entered the King’s Service. Among these
were two Italian painters from Florence, Antonio
Toto della Nunziata, and Bartolommeo Penni, the
latter a disciple of Raphael. Toto was in the Service
of the King at the time when Cardinal Wolsey sur-
rendered Hampton Court Palaceto the King in 1530,
in which year Toto was paid for painting certain
tables of Biblical history, and others of sacred sub-
jects, and also “forsundry colours by him employed
and spent upon the old painted tables in the King’s
privy closet.” On the strength of these payments
the paintings existing to day in Wolsey’s Closethave
been attributed to Antonio Toto.
No modern student of Painting, no reader of the
Pantheon, could for a moment ascribe the paintings
here reproduced to an Italian artist of the Floren-
tine School, such as Antonio Toto, or to Bartolom-
meo Penni, a pupil of Raphael. AtNonsuchPalace,
as at Fontainebleau, Italian artists were employed
by Henry VIII in rivalry with Francis I of France,
but the Hampton Court paintings are entirely nor-
thern in origin, sentiment and technique, such as in
England used to be called Gothic, although some
of the figures shew an Italian influence.
Now among the painters recordedas having practised
in England during the early years of the sixteenth
Century, there is no name, save one, to whom paint-
ings on this scale and of this importance can be
ascribed. That name is Hans Holbein the younger.
A glance at the plates accompanying this article will
shew that there is some relationship between the
paintings at Hampton Court Palace, and the earliest
known paintings of the younger Holbein. Both the
Hampton Court paintings and Holbein’s well-
known early paintings of the Passions Cyklus,
derive from the school of Schongauer and Dürer,
the Suabian and Upper Rhine schools, dating back
to the widespread influence of Rogier van der Wey-
den, but with as yet very little that is Italianate about
them. In the “March to Calvary ” at Karlsruhe1), one of
the earliest of Holbein’s known works painted in
1515, the head of an old man with a large smooth
face seems to be identical with that of one of the
Apostles in the “Last Supper” at Hampton Court
Palace, and to be a portrait.
The affinity of the paintings at Hampton Court Pal-
ace with the earliest dated works of the younger
Holbein canhardly bedenied. The Hampton Court
paintings are rough and crude in design and very
unequal in execution. Indeed this would seem at
first sight to be the work of different hands, especially
such a panel as the fragment with St. Mary Magda-
lene or the group of the swooning Madonna in “The
March to Calvary” which is more Italian in con-
ception.Yet throughout the scheme of construction
in the paintings at Hampton Court, the work of a
1) cf. Klassiker der Kunst, Holbein, p. 4.
352
disgrace, and on November 29, 1530, he breathed
his last at Leicester Abbey. On his fall from power
the Cardinal handed over his palace at Hampton
Court to his royal master, King Henry VIII, who
at once took possession and entered into residence.
Of all the magnificence of Wolsey’s palace little
remains to-day but a few rooms with their original
ceilings, some portions of the great collection of
tapestry, which the Cardinal had purchased or had
made for him, and perhaps the paintings, which form
the subject of this article. These paintings are fixed
to the walls round the little room with the blue and
gold ceiling and cornice. The panelling in this room
is not original, so there is nothing to be learnt from
the panelling about the original position ofthe paint-
ings. The fireplace is original and it is possible,
though by no means certain, that the two subjects
on the wall above the fireplace may be in their orig-
inal position, this being an original wall of early
date, while the other walls are more recent partitions.
The paintings are on large panels of varying heights
and breadths. There is no particular evidence as to
any reasons for any difference in height, although
in the course of centuries, the panels may have been
altered in size to fit certain places on certain walls.
Tradition in the palace is that these paintings have
been in the palace since the days of the Tudors.
The series comprises four complete subjects and
fragments of others. They are a series of events in
the Passion of Jesus Christ of the usual selection.
On the side of the fireplace are two subjects ontwo
panels each, (1) The Last Supper, 63 inches inheight,
and (2) The Flagellation, 66' = inches high. On the
side wall is a complete subject in three sections
(3) The March to Calvary, 66 inches high, and on
the partition wall opposite the fireplace another
subject in three sections (4) The Resurrection, 69
inches high.In addition to these are single fragments
(5) a panel with St. Mary Magdalene in the Garden,
673/4 inches high (6) The Entry into Jerusalem, a
background subject, 66 inches, and (7) a group of
Apostles, from some scene perhaps in the Temple,
66 inches high, (6) and (7) perhaps being portions
of one subject.
Henry VIII had painters in his pay even before
Holbein entered the King’s Service. Among these
were two Italian painters from Florence, Antonio
Toto della Nunziata, and Bartolommeo Penni, the
latter a disciple of Raphael. Toto was in the Service
of the King at the time when Cardinal Wolsey sur-
rendered Hampton Court Palaceto the King in 1530,
in which year Toto was paid for painting certain
tables of Biblical history, and others of sacred sub-
jects, and also “forsundry colours by him employed
and spent upon the old painted tables in the King’s
privy closet.” On the strength of these payments
the paintings existing to day in Wolsey’s Closethave
been attributed to Antonio Toto.
No modern student of Painting, no reader of the
Pantheon, could for a moment ascribe the paintings
here reproduced to an Italian artist of the Floren-
tine School, such as Antonio Toto, or to Bartolom-
meo Penni, a pupil of Raphael. AtNonsuchPalace,
as at Fontainebleau, Italian artists were employed
by Henry VIII in rivalry with Francis I of France,
but the Hampton Court paintings are entirely nor-
thern in origin, sentiment and technique, such as in
England used to be called Gothic, although some
of the figures shew an Italian influence.
Now among the painters recordedas having practised
in England during the early years of the sixteenth
Century, there is no name, save one, to whom paint-
ings on this scale and of this importance can be
ascribed. That name is Hans Holbein the younger.
A glance at the plates accompanying this article will
shew that there is some relationship between the
paintings at Hampton Court Palace, and the earliest
known paintings of the younger Holbein. Both the
Hampton Court paintings and Holbein’s well-
known early paintings of the Passions Cyklus,
derive from the school of Schongauer and Dürer,
the Suabian and Upper Rhine schools, dating back
to the widespread influence of Rogier van der Wey-
den, but with as yet very little that is Italianate about
them. In the “March to Calvary ” at Karlsruhe1), one of
the earliest of Holbein’s known works painted in
1515, the head of an old man with a large smooth
face seems to be identical with that of one of the
Apostles in the “Last Supper” at Hampton Court
Palace, and to be a portrait.
The affinity of the paintings at Hampton Court Pal-
ace with the earliest dated works of the younger
Holbein canhardly bedenied. The Hampton Court
paintings are rough and crude in design and very
unequal in execution. Indeed this would seem at
first sight to be the work of different hands, especially
such a panel as the fragment with St. Mary Magda-
lene or the group of the swooning Madonna in “The
March to Calvary” which is more Italian in con-
ception.Yet throughout the scheme of construction
in the paintings at Hampton Court, the work of a
1) cf. Klassiker der Kunst, Holbein, p. 4.
352