DOI Artikel:
Krzyżagórska-Pisarek, Katarzyna: Corpus Rubenianum versus Rembrandt Research Project: two approaches to a "Catalogue raisonné"
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.34225#0054
48
KATARZYNA KRZYŻAGORSKA-PISAREK
WORK IN PROGRESS
In 2014, Koenraad Jonckheere, the then new Director of Publications of the CRLB, acknowtedged
that the whole project proved to be more complex than expected^. This would explain the long delays
and the 'work in progress' situation afler fifty years of research. The new Rubenianum Fund was to
give new impetus to the project, and as a result, the remaining volumes should be published by 2020.
Jonckheere wrote that 'simultaneously and with the generous support of the Kress Foundation, the staff of
the Rubenianum have started to digitize the older CRLB volumes, taking them into the twenty-first century.
These volumes have been updated and are enriched through links with RKD images and hyperlinks^. I have
examined some of the CRLB volumes online, but they only show the old btack and white photograph of
low quality, even more so that they were scanned.
According to Jonckheere, the lesson from the past titfy years of the CRLB is that too much reliance
on the 'ultimate truth' (received opinions) was not a good thing. 'lndeed, if the ambitious project of
writing the crz/T/ogzve nrAowzc of Rubens's oeuvre has taught art history one thing. it is the importance
of clearly plotting the status quaestionis, allowing future scholars to phrase new hypotheses and answers
instead of claiming the ultimate truth'^. Does he refer to Burchard's (and other scholars) old opinions
and the fact that at times they took precedence?
Significantly, Jonckheere also acknowledges that we must be 'keeping in mind the fact that answers
are not always clearly apprehensible', and 'the history of the project teaches us both the limitations of
scholarly research'. This for me recalls Van de Wetering's final conclusion as to the limited reliability
of the current attributions. Completing the many remaining volumes of the c<rR?/ogMc roAcwTzc in the
next few years is, according to Jonckheere, 'a daunting task. but not impossible' [...] 'as long as we are
humble enough to understand that not all the answers are necessarily to be given in our own lifetime'.
So what in the past was the task of one man such as Max Rooses (working simultaneously on yet
another large project!) and took him only six years, cannot be accomplished by more than twenty authors
in over fifty years! One hesitates here to mention that to bring all the existing volumes of the CRLB
to the 21st-century standards raised so high by the RRP. they should now be improved and expanded
to include the physical condition of works, the technical analysis of materials, the study of the painting
technique, the better quality colour images with the inclusion of valuable close ups, and the in-depth
discussions on connoisseurship issues directly related to the catalogued works, arguably crucial in a modem
crz/rz/ogzza 7Y?Ao7777e. Burchard's attributions ought to be closely examined and decisions about authorship
explained or even justified if problematic. The standards of authenticity in Rubens's oeuvre should be
raised along the lines of the Rembrandt Research Project and old attributions scrutinised for inconsistencies
and contradictions with more in-depth studies of major works acting as touchstones tbr future attributions.
Perhaps such a project could only be done online, where an on-going crzzTz/ogz/c zwzbozzzzd could be easily
and gradually updated or amended when required. by a team of intemational scholars working together.
CONCLUSION
Both monumental projects to establish the definitive coto/ogzzay roAozzzzTs of Rubens and Rembrandt
works, respectively Corpus Rubenianum Ludwig Burchard and Rembrandt Research Project, exceeded their
original deadlines by many decades. Both are still unfinished, and while the latter is officially terminated,
the former could be finaMy completed by 2020. Throughout their Bffy years of research the approach of
the RRP has changed radically, while the CRLB has not changed enough.
The scientific examination of Rembrandt's works in order to prove authorship has proven ineffective.
The strict reductionist attitude of the RRP based on judgements of quality and style became unpopular, as
the organisation demoted many Rembrandt paintings. Van de Wetering changed the direction of the Project,
and focused the research on the practical analysis of the painting technique and on studio practices. He
95 K. Jonckheere, 'Koenraad Jonckheere, the Corpus's new Director of Pubiications, on a work in progress', 77?<? //и^еп/яли???
(NarzcrV 2014. 2, p. 2.
96 /N'&w.
97 /N'aG?;.
KATARZYNA KRZYŻAGORSKA-PISAREK
WORK IN PROGRESS
In 2014, Koenraad Jonckheere, the then new Director of Publications of the CRLB, acknowtedged
that the whole project proved to be more complex than expected^. This would explain the long delays
and the 'work in progress' situation afler fifty years of research. The new Rubenianum Fund was to
give new impetus to the project, and as a result, the remaining volumes should be published by 2020.
Jonckheere wrote that 'simultaneously and with the generous support of the Kress Foundation, the staff of
the Rubenianum have started to digitize the older CRLB volumes, taking them into the twenty-first century.
These volumes have been updated and are enriched through links with RKD images and hyperlinks^. I have
examined some of the CRLB volumes online, but they only show the old btack and white photograph of
low quality, even more so that they were scanned.
According to Jonckheere, the lesson from the past titfy years of the CRLB is that too much reliance
on the 'ultimate truth' (received opinions) was not a good thing. 'lndeed, if the ambitious project of
writing the crz/T/ogzve nrAowzc of Rubens's oeuvre has taught art history one thing. it is the importance
of clearly plotting the status quaestionis, allowing future scholars to phrase new hypotheses and answers
instead of claiming the ultimate truth'^. Does he refer to Burchard's (and other scholars) old opinions
and the fact that at times they took precedence?
Significantly, Jonckheere also acknowledges that we must be 'keeping in mind the fact that answers
are not always clearly apprehensible', and 'the history of the project teaches us both the limitations of
scholarly research'. This for me recalls Van de Wetering's final conclusion as to the limited reliability
of the current attributions. Completing the many remaining volumes of the c<rR?/ogMc roAcwTzc in the
next few years is, according to Jonckheere, 'a daunting task. but not impossible' [...] 'as long as we are
humble enough to understand that not all the answers are necessarily to be given in our own lifetime'.
So what in the past was the task of one man such as Max Rooses (working simultaneously on yet
another large project!) and took him only six years, cannot be accomplished by more than twenty authors
in over fifty years! One hesitates here to mention that to bring all the existing volumes of the CRLB
to the 21st-century standards raised so high by the RRP. they should now be improved and expanded
to include the physical condition of works, the technical analysis of materials, the study of the painting
technique, the better quality colour images with the inclusion of valuable close ups, and the in-depth
discussions on connoisseurship issues directly related to the catalogued works, arguably crucial in a modem
crz/rz/ogzza 7Y?Ao7777e. Burchard's attributions ought to be closely examined and decisions about authorship
explained or even justified if problematic. The standards of authenticity in Rubens's oeuvre should be
raised along the lines of the Rembrandt Research Project and old attributions scrutinised for inconsistencies
and contradictions with more in-depth studies of major works acting as touchstones tbr future attributions.
Perhaps such a project could only be done online, where an on-going crzzTz/ogz/c zwzbozzzzd could be easily
and gradually updated or amended when required. by a team of intemational scholars working together.
CONCLUSION
Both monumental projects to establish the definitive coto/ogzzay roAozzzzTs of Rubens and Rembrandt
works, respectively Corpus Rubenianum Ludwig Burchard and Rembrandt Research Project, exceeded their
original deadlines by many decades. Both are still unfinished, and while the latter is officially terminated,
the former could be finaMy completed by 2020. Throughout their Bffy years of research the approach of
the RRP has changed radically, while the CRLB has not changed enough.
The scientific examination of Rembrandt's works in order to prove authorship has proven ineffective.
The strict reductionist attitude of the RRP based on judgements of quality and style became unpopular, as
the organisation demoted many Rembrandt paintings. Van de Wetering changed the direction of the Project,
and focused the research on the practical analysis of the painting technique and on studio practices. He
95 K. Jonckheere, 'Koenraad Jonckheere, the Corpus's new Director of Pubiications, on a work in progress', 77?<? //и^еп/яли???
(NarzcrV 2014. 2, p. 2.
96 /N'&w.
97 /N'aG?;.