The Litoměřice Altarpiece (; 1505–1507) was a large altar retable, in all likelihood with two pairs of movable wings and two pairs of fixed ones. From these wings, six panels have survived, two of which are painted on both sides. The movable wings on the left-hand side of the altar are presumed lost. The altar wing depicting Christ on the Mount of Olives belongs to the Diocese of Litoměřice, while the other panels are owned by the Regional Museum in Litoměřice. It is the largest surviving set of panel paintings by an anonymous late Gothic and early Renaissance painter called the Master of the Litoměřice Altarpiece.Oxford reference: Master of the Litoměřice Altarpiece The altarpiece is part of the permanent collection of the North Bohemian Gallery of Fine Art in Litoměřice.
Reconstruction of the presumed appearance of the altarpiece The first proposal as to how the altarpiece might have been arranged, one that didn't include the panel depicting Christ on the Mount of Olives, was made by Vincenc (Vinzenz) Luksch, the then director of the Diocese Museum, in 1900.Luksch Vincenz, Kunsttopographie des Leitmeritzer Bezirkes (typescript), Regional museum in Litoměřice He placed the Crucifixion in the middle of the altar; on both sides he placed two single-sided panels as fixed wings, the Flagellation of Christ on the left and the Crowning with Thorns on the right. These were connected on from by two double-sided panel paintings in the function of movable wings. He placed the painting of Christ before Caiaphas (Annas) on the left and Christ Carrying the Cross on the right. When the altarpiece was opened, it would show the Passion of Christ and, when closed, it would show scenes from the life of Mary: the Visitation of the Virgin Mary and the Birth of Christ. The overall width of the open altarpiece would be about 5.5 metres which is why Luksch considered that the panels might not have created an altarpiece but could, alternatively, have been individual Stations of the Cross.Haragová V, 2009, p. 100
The art historian Jaroslav Pešina attempted a different reconstruction of the altarpiece on the basis of a comparison with the altar retable from the castle chapel at Křivoklát.Pešina Jaroslav, Česká malba pozdní gotiky a renesance, Praha 1950 Pešina assumed that a receptacle with sculptural decoration formed the centre of the altarpiece that was most probably consecrated to the Virgin Mary. Placed in pairs above each other on both sides, the movable wings depicted not just the surviving scenes of the Visitation of the Virgin Mary and the Birth of Christ (right-hand side), but hypothetically also scenes showing the Annunciation to the Virgin Mary and the Sacrifice of Christ (left-hand side). The closed altarpiece showed eight scenes from the Passion of Christ in two rows, one above the other; of these, the surviving panels (from the left) are: Christ on the Mount of Olives and the Crowning of Christ with Thorns, Christ before Annas and Christ Carrying the Cross, the Flagellation of Christ and the Crucifixion.
The missing left-hand movable wings might have had scenes such as the Arrest of Christ and Christ before Pilate.Royt J, 2015, p. 141-142 This reconstruction is basically accepted by other art historians as well. Ladislav Kesner assumed that the altarpiece had a predella with the theme of Christ in the Winepress or else the Lamentation of Christ. Using comparisons with other altarpieces of the early 16th century, he proposed a variant arrangement of the missing parts. In the centre he assumed there to be a scene showing the Last Supper and, on the missing left-hand movable wings, the Annunciation and Flight to Egypt on the inner side and Ecce Homo instead of Christ before Pilate on the outer side.Kesner L, 1990, p. 305-311
Description and classification The altarpiece panels painted on one side that make up the fixed wings have dimensions of 177 x 121 cm (172 x 130 cm respectively). The movable wings painted on both sides have dimensions of 148 x 94 cm (147.5 x 96 cm respectively). The differing dimensions of the individual panels show that they were cut down to a smaller size subsequently. The altarpiece as a whole, including the lost middle part, the predella and the altarpiece attachment, could have thus measured (including the frames) about 6 metres in height and about 5 metres in width.Haragová V, 2009, s. 99 The paintings are executed in tempera on fir wood. The most recent restoration, which repaired defects such as inappropriate restoration made in 1931 and 1945–46, took place between the 1950s and 1970s.B. Slánský, L. Slánská, 1957, archives of the North Bohemian Gallery of Fine Art in Litoměřice Several panels were examined using infrared reflectography in 1998–1999. The resulting scans revealed two individual styles in the underdrawing.Chlumská Š, 1999, s. 28
Older art-historical publications detected in the panels of the Litoměřice Altarpiece the influence of Saxon painting and a relationship to the painting of Hanus Elfeldar, Bartholomäus Zeitblom, Hans Holbein the Elder and Bernhard Strigel.Royt J, 2015, pp. 139-140 The painting style of the Master of the Litoměřice Altarpiece is based in the early Gothic, however it also employs certain elements of the early Renaissance. Its compositions are loosely modelled on the prints of the Master E.S., Israhel van Meckenem, Albrecht Dürer, Hans Schäufelein and Martin Schongauer which it creatively remodels. In order to create a deeper sense of space, it uses simple, diagonally constructed architectural backdrops with alternately illuminated and shaded areas depicted in empirical perspective. The contrast of the austere architecture with naturalist details points to the lesson of Italian Renaissance painting, either directly (Bellini) or indirectly (Michael Pacher). On the basis of differences in execution of how the figures are painted, and, assuming that the landscapes were painted by a specialist, Vladěna Haragová concludes that the altarpiece was created in a painting workshop where, as well as the Master of the Litoměřice Altarpiece, there worked at least two other painters.Haragová V, 2009, p. 117 Pešina also states that several figures of the Passion series are characterised by a more common form of execution as well as by defects in the drawing, which points to the involvement of journeymen painters.Pešina J, 1958, p. 12
The figural component of the paintings is dominant and the construction of space is subordinated to it. The balanced composition of the individual paintings is reduced to several key protagonists and the accompanying action is presented on a diminished scale in the background. The painter's figures are successfully incorporated into the geometric backdrop of architectural elements. In terms of perspective, they are convincingly scaled in space. Their faces are concentrated and serious, with an expressive and well-differentiated physiognomy. They don't demonstrate their feelings in too ostentatious a way and reinforce the action with economical gestures of their arms and hands. The faces of the figures have sharp-chiselled features with pronounced cheekbones, high foreheads, full lips, expressive noses and eyes with swollen eyelids. Their large hands with striking joints are carefully modelled, including the small shadows they cast. Both the bared body of Christ and the figures portrayed in close-fitting clothes show how well the painter was acquainted with human anatomy and how he understood the function of the muscles and joints.Pešina J, 1984, p. 350-351 Figures connected with Christ are portrayed in long flowing clothes, while his enemies are distinguished by contemporary Renaissance clothing.Haragová V, 2009, p. 114
The colour scale of the paintings is characterised by a wealth of shades, contrasts of cool and warm tones and a colourist inventiveness. The architectural backdrops are depicted in a limited range of illuminated monochrome areas and brownish or purplish shadows. The background is made up of dark-green vegetation, light areas of water, grey or brown stone architecture and brown cliffs. The clothes of the figures in the foreground use the contrast of rich colour tones ranging from vermillion red, sulphur yellow and an entire spectrum of greens to black and purple. The transitions in the colour areas are subtle, fluent and modelling volume. Light illuminates the given scene from a single source, usually from the top right. Its direction is represented by the lit areas of the architecture, the shading of draperies and faces, as well as by the striking triangular shadows on the floor.
The drapery of several of the figures still retains late Gothic decorative articulation with its deep or doubly-bent folds without direct connection to the volume of the body. Another Gothic element can be seen in the full halos, the gilded background and a certain disproportion in the depiction of part of the body. Most of the figures have legs that are too long, a short body and a small head. The deepening of the pictorial space with landscape sceneries is a significant innovation that the painter most probably brought back with him from a study trip to the Danube region, where he would have been able to acquaint himself with the works of Jörg Breu and Rueland Frueauf the Elder and Younger. A number of figural motifs link the Litoměřice Altarpiece with the Melk Altarpiece (1502) painted by Jörg Breu the Elder. The painter's attention to detail, such as wrinkles, sprouting whiskers, knots in wood and coils of rope, are characteristic of the early Renaissance style of painting. The painter was well-acquainted with the qualities of various materials and displayed a well-developed knowledge of human anatomy.
Individual panels of the altarpiece Christ on the Mount of Olives The model for the composition is a loosely interpreted and left-right reversed copper engraving by Martin Schongauer. The praying Christ before the cliff with a Eucharist chalice and an angel create the uppermost tip of a triangular composition in whose foreground there lie and sit sleeping apostles. In the background there are depicted fortified walls and a city gate, most probably those of Jerusalem. On the left, in small detail, soldiers coming to arrest Jesus enter through the gate. Despite the fact that the entire altarpiece is a stylistically unified whole, the composition of this picture, its unifying of space and the masterly execution of the heads and hands, stands out with its quality from the other panels.
The Flagellation of Christ The naked Christ, dressed merely in a loincloth, is tied to a pillar in the centre of a room. Four men torture him with a scourge and a birch cane. In the background, Pontius Pilate looks on. The light coming from the right-hand side is represented by the small triangular shadows of their legs that, along with fragments of the cane, articulate the area of the floor. The detail of the man with the cane originates in the engraving by Martin Schongauer.
Crowning Christ with Thorns The tormented Christ, sitting on a stone seat, is partly covered by a red robe. Three bailiffs press a crown of thorns down on his head using long wooden poles. The fourth person in the spot where the painting is heavily damaged has his back turned to us and is giving Christ a bulrush as a sceptre. The figure of Christ has a spiral composition and the figures surrounding him are portrayed in contraposition, emphasising their movement. The space is deepened by diagonally depicted architectural elements and by the contrasts of illuminated and shaded areas. The scene is loosely inspired by a print by the Master E. S.
The Crucifixion