Sven Van Dorst & Dr Leen Kelchtermans

The Antwerp Jesuit Church, today’s Saint Charles Borromeo’s Church, was likely one of the most impressive Baroque buildings in Europe following its construction in 1615. Beyond its richly decorated façade, the interior was particularly renowned for its grandeur. In 1620, none other than Peter Paul Rubens was commissioned to create, among other artworks, a series of thirty-nine ceiling paintings. Although these were tragically lost in a fire in July 1718, Rubens’ modello of Saint Margaret – the design for one of the lost ceiling pieces – preserved in The Phoebus Foundation’s collection, offers unique insight into this monumental project. Recently restored, this exceptional work not only offers valuable insights into Rubens’ creative process but also reveals his highly efficient working methods.

Grand Commission, Grand Challenges

The commission for thirty-nine ceiling paintings for the Jesuit Church was among the most prestigious in Rubens’ illustrious career. On 29 March 1620, the artist signed a contract with Father Jacobus Tirinus, in which the scope and objectives of the project were explicitly defined. The ceiling pieces were intended to adorn both the upper and lower levels of the side aisles. The upper level focused on stories from the Old and New Testaments, while the lower level depicted saints. Rubens was given a tight deadline. The works had to be completed preferably as soon as possible: ‘before the end of the current year or at the beginning of the following year.’¹ Thus, the painter was given roughly nine months to a year to finish the project.

The timeline and scale of this commission compelled the master to adopt a highly efficient approach. He relied on his well-organized studio, a practice explicitly permitted by the contract, which stated that Rubens could involve his pupils, including Anthony Van Dyck. However, the preliminary sketches and finishing touches of the monumental canvases were to be executed by Rubens himself.

On 13 February 1621, Rubens received 7,000 guilders for the ceiling series, a considerable sum underscoring the project’s importance. The payment also confirms that the master met his deadline.² In less than a year, he completed all thirty-nine monumental canvases. By October 1621 at the latest, the works were installed in the church.

Modello of Saint Margaret

To prepare for the ceiling paintings, Rubens personally created chalk drawings and modelli, or oil sketches. The master placed great importance on these preparatory studies. Initially, the Jesuits wished to keep Rubens’ modelli for the ceiling series, but the painter successfully negotiated an agreement: he could retain the sketches in exchange for another painting by his hand, destined for one of the four side altars.³ Rubens’ oil sketches served a dual purpose: they were submitted for approval to his patrons, and functioned as artistic models for his pupils, who used them to execute the ceiling paintings to scale.

Rubens’ modello for the ceiling piece of Saint Margaret depicts her with a lamb on a rocky hill.⁴ She holds a palm branch, the characteristic attribute of a saint, and restrains a dragon with a curly tail using a rope. According to her vita, the saint escaped from the belly of this monster, making her an apt patron saint for pregnant women. At the same time, this scene emphasised Margaret’s courage. More broadly, it symbolised the triumph of faith over evil. The entire ceiling paintings series aimed to highlight the victory of Catholicism over Protestantism. The piece of Saint Margaret was installed in the southern side aisle of the Jesuit Church.

Minimal Means, Maximum Effect

The modello of Saint Margaret was painted on a small panel measuring 33.1 by 46.3 cm. The reverse is finished on all four sides with a beveled edge, known as a ‘chamfer’. Interestingly, it consists of two vertically joined oak planks. Professional panel makers would likely have crafted such a small panel from a single piece of wood; therefore, it was probably produced in Rubens’ studio using repurposed wood. This pragmatic choice, not uncommon in his oeuvre, exemplifies the painter’s economical use of materials.

The front of the panel is covered with a pale ground layer containing chalk and animal glue. On top of this, Rubens applied an ocher-coloured imprimatura, a layer characteristic of his work. The vertical streaks from the stiff brush used to spread the ocher paint are clearly visible. The imprimatura reduced the absorbency of the chalk layer and served as a mid-tone.⁵ Its visibility to the naked eye in several areas of the painting indicates Rubens’ direct working method. Consistent with this approach, an analysis of the modello using infrared reflectography (IRR) revealed no evidence of an underdrawing. This suggests that Rubens painted directly onto the panel, working quickly and decisively. However, it should be noted that certain drawing materials, such as white or red chalk, are undetectable by IRR or could have dissolved into the overlying paint layer.

Despite the minimal time and resources invested in creating the modello of Saint Margaret, Rubens achieved a maximum effect. His dynamic brushstrokes vividly depict the saint, the dragon, and the lamb in a detailed and skillfully foreshortened perspective. Rubens applied the paint thickly, with impastos visible under raking light, adding further dynamism to the composition. In short, Rubens demonstrated that less is more.

Refining the Composition

Because Rubens involved his studio and the strict deadline left no room for errors, the name of the saint was inscribed at the top of the modello to identify the composition. This highlights the master’s methodical approach, meticulously planning every aspect of his work.

The adaptability of Rubens’ designs is well illustrated by the modello of Saint Margaret. Initially, the scene was conceived in an octagonal format, most evident at the top. As Antoon Gheringh’s interior view of the Jesuit Church from around 1665 shows, the ground-floor side aisles alternated between ceiling paintings with octagonal and oval frames. From the Amsterdam artist Jacob de Wit’s drawing of the ceiling piece of Saint Margaret, made around 1711, and Jan Punt’s print based on it in 1751, it is evident that the final work deviated from the octagonal form initially suggested by Rubens in the modello. Both the drawing and print depict an oval composition.⁶

Rubens had already modified the proposed composition of Saint Margaret earlier. The 1620 contract stipulated that the saint should hold a cross.⁷ Rubens chose to omit this element, instead giving the saint a palm branch in her hand. The Antwerp Jesuits approved this change, as De Wit’s drawing and Punt’s print of the final ceiling painting show a palm branch, not a cross.

Later, Rubens’ modello itself was altered. The restoration treatment revealed that the four corners of the panel were overpainted. Initially, Rubens left them bare, as he did in other surviving modelli. These areas were originally covered only by the imprimatura. The overpaints, likely intended to give the piece a more finished appearance, were preserved for their historical significance.

From Modello to Ceiling Painting

Once Rubens’ modello was approved, it became the basis for the intended ceiling painting. To scale up the small design to monumental dimensions, Rubens used a grid system, also known as squaring-up. Along the edges of the panel, a series of small incisions in the paint were discovered, spaced approximately 4 cm apart. These were likely used to stretch strings across the composition, forming a grid to scale the design accurately. On the canvas, the grid would then be replicated proportionally. The ceiling pieces in the Jesuit Church are estimated to have measured around 300 by 420 cm, meaning Rubens’ modello was scaled up approximately 9.3 times, with the grid on the canvas consisting of squares measuring approximately 37.2 by 37.2 cm. The squaring-up and scaling were likely entrusted to Rubens’ studio assistants, further illustrating his efficient workshop practice.

Squaring-up was a common technique in the Low Countries from the sixteenth century onward.⁸ Artists such as Antwerp still life painter Joachim Beuckelaer had already employed this method. Rubens used it not only for the Jesuit Church ceiling paintings but also for other monumental projects, such as his designs for temporary triumphal arches and his tapestry series depicting the life of the ancient Greek hero Achilles.⁹

Master & Manager

The modello of Saint Margaret provides invaluable insight into Rubens’ artistic process. The work demonstrates how the painter achieved impressive results quickly and with limited resources. His pragmatic use of materials and assured painting style reinforce his reputation as a grandmaster of his time. Moreover, the modello stands as an important testament to Rubens’ effective workshop management and serves as a tangible reminder of one of his most significant commissions: the now-lost thirty-nine ceiling paintings for the Antwerp Jesuit Church, which he completed under intense time pressure. The modello embodies Rubens’ artistic ingenuity, masterful style, and efficient approach, combining these elements into a design that continues to captivate audiences centuries later.

1. ‘voor het uytgaen van desen tegenwoordigen Jaere ofte met het beginsel van het toekomende Jaer’. The standard publication on Rubens’ paintings for the Antwerp Jesuit Church remains J.R. Martin, The Ceiling Paintings for the Jesuit Church in Antwerp, Corpus Rubenianum Ludwig Burchard, 1, London/New York, 1967. For the contract, see Martin 1967: 213-219, quotation on p. 213.[↩]
2. Martin 1967: 40.[↩]
3. Martin 1967: 38.[↩]
4. Martin 1967: 164-166; L. Kelchtermans, ‘Design for a Ceiling Piece in the Jesuit Church in Antwerp: Saint Margaret, c.1620’, in: K. Van Cauteren et al., From Memling to Rubens. The Golden Age of Flanders, Veurne, 2020: 352-353.[↩]
5. A. Balis & N. Van Hout, Rubens doorgelicht. Meekijken over de schouder van een virtuoos, Antwerp, 2010: 42-45.[↩]
6. Jacob de Wit’s drawing after Rubens’ ceiling piece of Saint Margaret is preserved in The British Museum in London. For an image, see https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/P_1921-0411-54, accessed on 31.12.2024.[↩]
7. The contract described the scene as ‘18: Margareta cum cruce in manu calcans draconem’. Martin 1967: 216.[↩]
8. M. Wolters, ‘Met kool en crijt’: de functie van de ondertekening in de schilderijen van Joachim Beuckelaer, doctoral dissertation, University of Groningen, 2011, especially chapter “‘Ruyten en netten of raemkens met draden cruyswijs ghespannen.” Het kwadraatnet in schilderijen van Joachim Beuckelaer’.[↩]
9. Balis & Van Hout 2010: 60-61.[↩]