MADRID.- European painters of the Early Modern age undertook their professional activities in workshops, making use of numerous collaborators. This exhibition, curated by Alejandro Vergara, Senior Curator of Flemish Painting and Northern Schools at the Museum, focuses on that of Peter Paul Rubens (1577-1640), which was one of the most prolific and successful.

On display are paintings executed by Rubens himself, works by his assistants and others resulting from different degrees of collaboration between them. The chance to see these works side by side enables visitors to discern their different levels of quality. Although all the works created in Rubens's workshop were the products of his “brand”, both he and his contemporaries valued the originals painted entirely by his hand more than those produced by the workshop. In order to immerse visitors in the space where Rubens executed his paintings, a curtain leads into Room 16B where, in addition to the paintings that comprise the exhibition, there is a display of tools, materials, furniture and other items characteristic of a painter’s activities - brushes, palettes, canvases, panels, easels and mahlsticks - as well as various elements that evoke the artist himself, such as a cloak and a hat made by the milliner Ana Lamata, inspired by portraits of him.

To further develop the exhibition’s argument and focus in depth on Rubens’s working methods and the use he made of his collaborators, the gallery housing the exhibition also features a video in which the painter Jacobo Alcalde Gibert recreates the process behind the execution of Rubens’s painting Mercury and Argus using historical materials and techniques. The video explains how Rubens painted and how he made use of his studio assistants.

In addition, the book Rubens's Workshop has been published to accompany the exhibition. It includes texts which explain how paintings of the time were executed in phases by superimposing different layers, so that each one of them determined the effect produced by the next one. This system allowed work to be divided, as one artist could paint some of the layers and then be substituted by another.

“In this room many young painters sat, all painting different pieces which had been sketched out by Mr Rubens.” Otto Sperling, 1621

“It is impossible for me to accept the young man whom you recommend. From all sides applications reach me […]. Some young men remain in Antwerp for several years with other masters, awaiting a vacancy in my studio.” Rubens, 1611

“Yor excellency must not think that the others are mere copies, for they are so well retouched by my hand that they are hardly to be distinguished from originals.” Rubens, 1618

“He never let me understand clearly whether this picture was to be a true and entire original or merely retouched by my hand.” Rubens, 1621

European painters of the early modern age worked in studios or workshops and relied on many collaborators. This exhibition focuses on one of the most prolific and successful, that of Peter Paul Rubens (1577-1640). On display in this room are pictures executed by the master himself, others painted by his assistants, and a few on which they collaborated with him in varying degrees. All the pictures that came out of Rubens'sworkshop were products of his brand. Even so, his contemporaries and he himself valued originals painted entirely by the master more highly than those executed by hisworkshop. In this respect, Rubens's paintings can be likened to the products of certain modern fashion brands.

To give an idea of the workshop where Rubens painted his pictures (mostly in Antwerp), we have put together a recreation based on images of contemporary studios. The main goal of these images was to dignify the painter's profession by stressing the nobility of his person and enterprise (Rubens painted his own portrait on several occasions without including any references to his trade). In spite of this, they help us imagine what painters' work places looked like. In Johannes Stradanus's Color Olivi and Jan Brueghel the Younger's Allegory of Painting we see teams of artists engaged in different tasks ranging from preparing supports, brushes and colours to painting pictures. Workshops were spaces where painters went about their business. They were also places where the wonder of artistic creation took place.

1. Portrait of Peter Paul Rubens, Aged 46
Paulus Pontius after Peter Paul Rubens Burin
Private collection

2. Allegory of Painting
Attributed to Jan Brueghel the Younger
Oil on copper c. 1625–30
Courtesy of the JK Art Foundation

3. The Monkey Painter
David Teniers the Younger
Oil on panel c. 1660
Madrid, Museo Nacional del Prado

4. The Genius of Painting
Lieven Mehus
Oil on canvas c. 1650
Madrid, Museo Nacional del Prado

5. The Emperor Maximilian in a Painter’s Studio
Hans Burgkmair
Engraving 1512–16
Madrid, Museo Nacional del Prado

6. Color Olivi (Invention of Oil Painting)
Hans Collaert II after Johannes Stradanus
Burin, illuminated print c. 1600
Madrid, Museo Nacional del Prado

7. The Noble Painter Abraham Bosse Etching
c. 1642
Madrid, Museo Nacional del Prado

TWO UNFINISHED PAINTINGS

8. Helena Fourment with her Children Clara Johanna and Frans
Peter Paul Rubens
Oil on panel c. 1636
Paris, Musée du Louvre, Département des Peintures

9. Marie de’ Medici, Queen of France
Peter Paul Rubens
Oil on canvas c. 1622
Madrid, Museo Nacional del Prado

As they are unfinished, these pictures help understand the technique of painting in stages that was used in Rubens's day. Painters progressed slowly, in different layers: over the primer, they drew the design; on top of that, they applied dead colour; and over the dead colour, layers of paint of varying transparency. This enabled the master and his assistants to take turns.

The portrait of Marie de' Medici (1575-1642) may have been left unfinished because it was intended as a model for making studio replicas, and therefore it would not have been necessary to complete the background. On the left is a curtain that is still in the initial dead-coloured phase in which the painter had built up the volumes using a very limited range of shades that barely cover the primer.

In the portrait of Ruben's second wife Helena Fourment (1614-1673) and their children, the faces and the boy's outfit are finished or almost complete. The rest remains in an earlier state: either at an advanced stage in the dead colouring (when the painter concentrares on modelling the forms using very little colour) or the start of the colour phase (the garments and the red chair). In the woman's clothing, the abundant underdrawing visible beneath and the fact that the volume of the knees was still being worked up indicare that this was not the final layer.

Although there is no indication that these pictures were executed with the involvement of Rubens's workshop, they help us understand how his assistants might dead colour a picture or layer themselves and then, for example, leave the colour phase to the master, or take turns with him in other ways.

TWO VERSIONS OF A PORTRAIT OF ANA DE AUSTRIA

One of these two portraits of Anne of Austria Queen of France(1601- 1666), was painted by Rubens around 1622, during his stay in Paris. The other is a studio copy. It was common in that period for painters to make several versions of their pictures, especially if they were portraits of distinguished people. It is important to bear in mind that all the pictures that came out of Rubens's workshop, including copies, were considered products of his brand.

In general studio copies were clearly inferior in quality to originals. In this case, however, both versions of the portrait are very high quality. That is why we cannot rely on excellent execution technique to distinguish which is by the master and which is by a workshop assistant. Instead, we need to identify characteristic traits of Rubens's personal language. In addition, when comparing an original and a copy we can expect to find greater spontaneity in the original, as the painter was deciding how to give shape to the scene while he painted it. In the copy these decisions were already made; all that was needed was imitate them.

10. Anne of Austria, Queen of France
Peter Paul Rubens
Oil on canvas c. 1622
Madrid, Museo Nacional del Prado

11. Anne of Austria, Queen of France
Workshop of Peter Paul Rubens Oil on canvas
c. 1622–25
Vienna, private collection

These portraits depict Anne of Austria (1601–1666), daughter of Philip III of Spain and Margaret of Austria. She is probably dressed in mourning for her father, who died in 1621. She became Queen of France through her marriage to Louis XIII in 1615 and was Queen Regent from her husband’s death in 1643 until 1651, the year her son acceded to the throne as Louis XIV.

The two versions of the portrait are very similar. The larger one is of high quality but is not by Rubens. The spontaneity visible in the smaller painting (the one in the Prado) shows that the artist was making creative decisions as he went along. This one was painted by Rubens.

The spontaneity of the Prado painting can be seen, for example, in the handling of the paint in the areas of the lace collar. The outlines of some of the motifs along the outer edge of this garment changed as they were painted, sometimes overlapping. In the part of the collar on the (viewer’s) right the transition from the shaded area closest to the head to the one on which the light falls is abrupt, as if decided on the spur of the moment. This transition is much smoother and more deliberate in the copy (the larger painting). The broad, bold black brushstrokes framing the white lace in the Prado painting also denote spontaneity.

The Prado portrait shows characteristic traits of Rubens’s manner of painting. The transitions between concave and convex contours – in the hairline and the fingers of both hands, for instance – convey an enlivened sense of form typical of the master’s style. The surface texture reflects his fondness for leaving clear traces of the movement of the paint-laden brush. This is particularly noticeable in the highlights – the areas of thick, light paint intended to create the illusion of being brightly lit.

There are marked and revealing differences between the two paintings in the hands. In the larger painting the forms and texture are uniform. In the Prado version the surface of the hand is highly textured and the shapes of the wrist and fingers are more robust and discontinuous.

It remains to be explained why a collaborator in Rubens’s workshop made a copy that is so similar at first glance but departs from the master’s style with its polished and uniform finish. We do not have a straight answer to this question. It is possible that this copy was initially more similar to the original and was later modified when a smoother and more polished appearance became fashionable. As things stand, given its high quality and the fact is it closely based on the Prado painting conceived and executed by Rubens, it is best attributed jointly to Rubens (as designer and supervisor of all the high-end products made in his workshop) and an assistant who worked for him (the artist responsible for the actual execution).

A PAINTING BY RUBENS AND ANOTHER BY AN ASSISTANT

12. Democritus, the Laughing Philosopher
Workshop of Peter Paul Rubens
Oil on canvas 1636–39
Madrid, Museo Nacional del Prado

13. Saturn devouring a Son
Peter Paul Rubens Oil on canvas 1636–39
Madrid, Museo Nacional del Prado

These two paintings belong to a series of more than sixty commissioned by King Philip IV (1605-1665) for a hunting lodge, the Torre de la Parada. Rubens designed them all but only painted a few himself. Democritus is the work of an assistant. The rendering of volume around the thighs and knees, for example, is unconvincing. When the assistant had finished, Rubens added a few final touches, particularly to the red tunic (distinguishable by their light, intense tone around the forearm). That way he corrected the structure of the folds and lent the picture vitality.

In Saturn Rubens depicts the Roman god who 'fearful, devoured his children as soon as born'(Ovid, Fasti). In this case,the master is entirely responsible for both the design and the execution of the painting. The god's anatomy and powerful posture are fully consistent with the story. The distortions of the body - the curve of the right leg and toes, the sinuous shoulder and arm, and so on - are not the result of lack of training or talent but are deliberately intended to create an intense and dramatic effect. The picture seems to be painted quickly and displays an astonishing deftness. The underlayers show through the various coats of paint. In the right hand and feet, for example, Rubens transitioned from the greenish grey of the priming layer to the final orange brushstrokes, with no intermediate stage. The touches of very thick impasto in the god's hair, eyelashes, moustache and beard are crucial.

A PAINTING BY RUBENS AND HIS WORKSHOP

14. Mercury and Argus
Peter Paul Rubens and workshop
Oil on canvas 1636–39
Madrid, Museo Nacional del Prado

This painting belongs to the same series as Democritus and Saturn. It is likely that Rubens was aided by his workshop in several stages of its execution, but much of what we see on the surface of the canvas was painted by him.

The master devised the scene in an oil sketch (now in Brussels, Royal Museum of Fine Arts). It was his assistants' job to transfer this design to canvas. The next phase, the dead colouring - when the volumes and space take shape but there is little colour was possibly a joint effort, with the members of the workshop performing the more mechanical tasks and Rubens retouching as he saw fit. The changes visible in Mercury's hat most likely reflect the transition from an initial stage in which the assistants painted this element exactly as Rubens had designed in the oil sketch to a later adjustment made by the master to enlarge it.

Assistants could also be involved in the next phase, the paint stage, applying overthe underpainting masses of colour which the master then worked up to give the surface its final colour and texture.

In the face of the animal, which represents lo turned into a heifer by Jupiter, we can see one of the most personal characteristics of Rubens's art: his way of enlivening the picture surface by overlapping and mixing different tones and creating textures by moving the brush in different directions (for instance, the zigzag in the snout bone).

A PICTURE PAINTED BY RUBENS IN COLLABORATION WITH A SPECIALIST

15. The Death of Decius Mus
Peter Paul Rubens and workshop
Oil on panel 1616–17
Madrid, Museo Nacional del Prado

Besides producing fully autograph pictures and others painted with varying degrees of involvement of Anonymous assistants, for some works Rubens relied on artists who specialised in landscapes, animals, flowers or fruit. When he needed a specialist in painting animals, dead or alive, Rubens usually turned to Frans Snyders (1579-1657).

Rubens first devised the whole scene in a small oil sketch (Paris, Louvre), which Snyders used as a guide for his part of the composition: the dead animals and the fruit and vegetables on and under the table.

The final picture was painted on three pieces of canvas. Work was begun on a very large one which stretches from the edge on the (viewer's) right all the way to the seam running from top to bottom just to the left of the woman's right hand. Snyders did his part of the composition on this piece, leaving the upper left area unpainted. Rubens painted the figures on this part and on the two rectangular pieces of canvas that were added on the left-hand side. Of what Snyders painted, Rubens only considered it necessary to retouch a small fragment of the white cloth beneath and around the boar's open mouth, where sorne of his vigorous brushstrokes are recognisable. Perhaps he wished to relate it to the white cloth worn by the old woman, painted in a similar technique. He also applied a line of black paint between the animal's head and the cloth, most lilkely to clarify the limits between these two elements.

A SKETCH BY RUBENS AND A WORKSHOP VERSION

16. The Education of Achilles Workshop of Peter Paul Rubens Oil on panel
c. 1630–35
Madrid, Museo Nacional del Prado

17. The Education of Achilles
Peter Paul Rubens
Oil on panel c. 1630–35
Rotterdam, Collection Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen. Gift D. G. van Beuningen

18. The Victory of Truth over Heresy
Peter Paul Rubens
Oil on panel c. 1625
Madrid, Museo Nacional del Prado

The two paintings depicting The Education of Achilles were executed in preparation for a tapestry (which was part of a series, The Life of Achilles). Rubens began by painting the small Rotterdam sketch. The freshness and spontaneity of the handling of the paint and the vivid characterisation of the figures are signature traits of his approach to oil sketches. Also typical is the transparency of the various layers, which gives the scene a pleasing tonal unity. Visible beneath the paint is a rapidly executed drawing in black pencil, also by Rubens himself.

The composition of the small sketch was repeated by an assistant in the larger model in the Prado, which was to serve as a guide for the weavers. In this painting the folds in the garments worn by the herms (busts on pillars) and the child are not up to parwith the master's technique. They lack liveliness and are unconvincing in their weight and how they fall. Rubens made a few final corrections - in the lower part of the landscape, in the clouds surrounding the centaur Chiron's head, and in his face and part of his body - and painted the still life in the lower part.

A comparison of this painting with an autograph work by Rubens with similar elements and a similar purpose, The Victory of Truth over Herery, is revealing. The difference in the spontaneity of the rendering of the architectural motifs in the two pictures reveals the different level of skill of the master and his assistants.

A PAINTING BY THE WORKSHOP WITH A FIGURE ADDED BY RUBENS

19. The Recognition of Philopoemen
Peter Paul Rubens and Frans Snyders
Oil on canvas c. 1609–10
Madrid, Museo Nacional del Prado

This painting is an oil sketch for a tapestry. Rubens must have made preliminary drawings and perhaps a smaller sketch (they are not known) himself but commissioned this painting from another painter. The features of the figures and animals are not compatible with the master's types. The separation between the mane and the neck of the rearing horse is uncharacteristic. The four men on the ground beneath the horses look too sleek to be by his hand. When the painting was finished, Rubens decided to add the winged Victory at the top.

Generally speaking, when we establish that a painting is byone of Rubens's assistants and not by the master himself it is because it is either not up to his standard or is of high quality but uncharacteristic of him. This is an example of the latter type. The figures are entirely convincing in their anatomy, movement and expressions but they are different from what we would see had they been painted by Rubens. The figure of Victory, in contrast, is painted with his characteristic calligraphy and lightness.

Traces of an inscription (an A, an N and possibly a T) are visible in the lower part of this painting. A study using X-ray macro-fluorescence technology carried out by the Prado's Technical Department has made it possible to complete it: 'ANTONI MISBECQ. (or 'MISBEco'). Could this be the name of the painter to whom this task was assigned in Rubens's work shop? Sometimes not even hard evidence is much help: there are no further references to this person in the known documents.

A LARGE PICTURE PAINTED BY RUBENS AND HIS ASSISTANTS

20. Achilles discovered by Odysseus and Diomedes
Peter Paul Rubens and workshop (Anthony van Dyck)
Oil on canvas c. 1617–18
Madrid, Museo Nacional del Prado

This is possibly the picture Rubens described in 1619 in a letter to a client mentioning works he could sell him: 'A picture of Achilles clothed as a woman, done by the best of my pupils, and the whole retouched by my hand; 9 x 10 ft.' The subject matter and the attribution to the workshop fit the description, but its proportions are different (the letter describes a horizontal painting, and the painting in the Prado, now in this format after suffering much damage, was originally vertical). Perhaps Rubens made a mistake with the measurements, or perhaps there was another version of this painting,nowlost, with different proportions.

At first glance there are stylistic inconsistencies: the two men on the right are in keeping with Rubens's style (though not all specialists agree), but the rest of the picture was not painted by him. Rubens must have first made drawings and possibly an oil sketch that was followed by his assistants. After the composition was transferred to the canvas, the next stage was the dead colouring, which was probably also done by his assistants. In this system of successive layers, the next step was to add the colours to the figures. One or more workshop assistants painted the group of women and, most likely at the end, Rubens completed the two male figures and made sure that the two parts were integrated. He also modified the structure of the folds of the red sleeve above and below Odysseus's hand with his typical vigorous brushstrokes in a lighter tone. At this point he also adjusted a few elements of the overall composition. For example, he painted over a flowing cloak worn by Achilles (traces of which are still visible).

Recreation by Jacobo Alcalde Gibert of the process of painting Mercury and Argus using historical materials and techniques This video shows how Rubens painted and how he made use of his studio assistants. The works were painted in phases by superimposing different layers, so that each one of them determined the effect produced by the next one. This system allowed work to be divided, as one artist could paint some of the layers and then be substituted by another.

RUBENS’S WORKSHOP

This recreated setting displays materials and objects that evoke Rubens’s life and profession. Many belong to the Museo del Prado; others have been created for this exhibition. The unfinished Mercury and Argus was painted by Jacobo Alcalde Gibert.

The marble pieces on display here remind us that Rubens was one of the foremost scholars and collectors of classical sculpture of his time. Works such as Arrotino, figures such as Venus, Hercules, Medusa and various herms appear in many of his paintings. The Roman cinerary urn on view is similar in size and motifs to one that Rubens acquired from a collector in 1618 in exchange for paintings.

This room smells of turpentine, one of the most common odours of early workshops. Rubens once remarked to the physician Théodore Turquet de Mayerne (1573–1655), who sat for him, that for the colours to be easily spread it was necessary to mix them with turpentine.

The bust of Philip IV recalls the instructions given by the Spanish court to the Florentine ambassador in 1634 for a sculptor of that city to create a bronze equestrian statue of the king, ‘after portraits by Pedro Pablo Rubens’. This commission culminated in the statue that now stands in Madrid’s Plaza de Oriente, which was not finally based on a model by Rubens.

The wide-brimmed hat is based on one worn by Rubens in the self-portrait he sent to the Prince of Wales in 1623. Made out of beaver fur and dyed with oak galls and logwood by the milliner Ana Lamata, it evokes the painter’s luxurious style of dress. The sword alludes to the one Rubens displays in several self-portraits. Carrying a sword was a privilege of the nobility. Rubens received permission to do so when the prince and princess who ruled the Spanish Netherlands (present-day Belgium) ‘girded him with the sword’ in 1609.