For the paintings of Jan Cornelisz. Vermeyen (c. 1500-1559), there is no modern catalogue raisonné. Yet the international art market follows a consistent pattern in which Friedländer, Horn, expert opinions and new technical analysis are applied. Recent auctions demonstrate why, particularly in Vermeyen’s case, a reference in the literature can never be considered separately from the question of how a painting is viewed and attributed today.
When Lempertz offered a small Virgin and Child by Jan Cornelisz. Vermeyen in May 2022, it lacked precisely the piece of information that is often sought first when dealing with Old Masters, namely an established catalogue raisonné entry.
According to the auction house, it was a newly discovered painting. It was dated to c. 1540-45 and infrared reflectography also revealed changes made during the painting process. The estimate was €70,000-90,000. The panel sold for €75,000 including buyer’s premium.[1]
What is interesting about this painting is that Vermeyen’s painted oeuvre is not governed by a single modern, definitive catalogue raisonné. Anyone researching a painting by Vermeyen has to work with several layers simultaneously. Max J. Friedländer’s early cataloguing, Hendrik J. Horn’s two-volume standard work of 1989, as well as more recent art-historical research and technical analysis.
Friedländer provides the older numbered corpus of paintings and Horn is the modern standard work. But neither functions as an up-to-date, maintained catalogue raisonné in which every new discovery or reattribution is incorporated.
Horn is the book you need to know
The most important modern reference work is Hendrik J. Horn’s Jan Cornelisz Vermeyen, Painter of Charles V and His Conquest of Tunis: Paintings, Etchings, Drawings, Cartoons & Tapestries. The publication appeared in two volumes in 1989.[2] For anyone working with Vermeyen, Horn is indispensable.
It covers not only paintings, but also etchings, drawings, cartoons and tapestries. This allowed Horn to establish connections between different parts of a diverse oeuvre. Court portraits, preparatory drawings, Charles V’s Tunis campaign and the monumental tapestry cycles that resulted from it. Horn’s monograph is the modern standard work, but the paintings were not presented as a catalogue raisonné.[3]
Friedländer, the older numbered corpus
In volume XII of his monumental Die altniederländische Malerei, Pieter Coeck, Jan van Scorel, published in 1935, Friedländer also assembled a corpus of paintings by Vermeyen.[4]
Here we find something that should not be expected from Horn, namely a numbered corpus of paintings. The main Vermeyen sequence runs from numbers 388-400, followed by a supplement numbered 401-417 and even an addendum.[5] Friedländer thus provides a historical overview of the oeuvre.
Since 1935, paintings unknown to Friedländer have surfaced, attributions have changed and technical methods of investigation have become available that have expanded the way Old Master paintings can be assessed. A Friedländer number therefore documents an important art-historical position, but it is not a modern certificate of authenticity.
Ferdinand I, Horn and the auction house speak the same language
This portrait of Ferdinand I, Holy Roman Emperor clearly illustrates how such references function in practice. Christie’s London offered the work on 8 December 2017 as Workshop of Jan Cornelisz. Vermeyen. The history of the literature supports precisely this caution. In the 1975 edition, Friedländer had treated the painting as possibly by Vermeyen. Horn subsequently catalogued it as A15, “Shop of Jan Cornelisz Vermeyen, circa 1530”.[6]
The market, however, reacted differently. Against an estimate of £40,000-60,000, the painting realised £235,000.[7] The identity of the sitter, Ferdinand I, brother of Charles V and one of the central Habsburg figures of the sixteenth century, the quality of the portrait, its age and its relationship to Vermeyen’s court production can all carry considerable weight in the market. Its status in the catalogue and literature provides an important framework.
Vermeyen in Horn, but “attributed to” at Sotheby’s
Another painting demonstrates how an auction house may depart from Horn. In October 2008, Sotheby’s London offered a portrait of a bearded man resting his hand on a skull. The attribution read Attributed to Jan Cornelisz. Vermeyen with an estimate of £10,000-15,000.
Max J. Friedländer had previously published the painting as Vermeyen. Horn reproduced the work in 1989 in volume II, p. 494, likewise as Vermeyen.[8] Yet in 2008 Sotheby’s opted for attributed to. This is precisely why a reference in the literature cannot simply be treated as an authenticity tick-box.
Friedländer, the RKD and Horn, and still no full attribution
We see the same pattern at Hampel in Munich in 2021. A large Holy Family, measuring 96 by 78 centimetres, was offered there. The work was not catalogued as fully autograph Vermeyen, but as attributed to Jan Cornelisz. Vermeyen. The estimate was €30,000-60,000.[9] There was a handwritten confirmation by Max J. Friedländer from 1950. The work was registered and illustrated at the RKD and Horn was cited in the literature. Nevertheless, the attribution remained cautious.
When the painting is younger than the standard work
The Virgin and Child sold by Lempertz in 2022 could not have appeared as a known entry in Horn because it was not known at the time of his research. Its attribution therefore had to be supported elsewhere. Lempertz referred to an expert opinion, stylistic comparison and technical examination. Infrared reflectography, for example, revealed small changes made to the composition during the painting process.[1]
That does not, however, bring the discussion to an end. In a scholarly KIK-IRPA publication from 2025, the same painting is described as “Attributed to Jan Cornelisz. Vermeyen”.[10] With an artist for whom there is no current catalogue raisonné, such differences can continue to exist side by side.
A portrait of George Schenck and a striking market development
On 10 December 2019, Vanderkindere in Brussels offered a remarkable portrait of George Schenck van Toutenburg, Stadtholder of Overijssel and later also Governor of Friesland. The attribution was cautious, Attribué à Jan Cornelisz. Vermeyen. According to the auction catalogue, the work had been examined by the Rijksmuseum in 1974. It had also been included in an exhibition in Bruges in 1962 and in Art before the Iconoclasm at the Rijksmuseum in 1986.[11] The estimate was €50,000-60,000. The result was €520,000.
The most expensive “Vermeyen” portrait that subsequently became a Van Scorel
The most striking warning against an overly rigid reading of an oeuvre is the Portrait of Joost Aemszoon van der Burch. Christie’s New York offered the portrait on 14 April 2016 as Jan Cornelisz. Vermeyen. The estimate was $1-2 million. The painting realised $2,740,000 including buyer’s premium.[12] But the attribution was already under discussion before the sale.
In the saleroom notice, Christie’s stated that Matthias Ubl and Molly Faries attributed the painting to Jan van Scorel. A year later they published their arguments in The Rijksmuseum Bulletin.[13] A distinguished provenance, an exceptional price and an established artist’s name in an auction catalogue therefore do not bring an art-historical debate to an end.
The Louvre, one painting, two completely different names
The Louvre also owns a Vermeyen whose recent history demonstrates just how quickly an attribution can change. Saint Jérôme méditant was auctioned in Paris on 14 December 2002 as Flemish School, circa 1560, follower of Pieter Coecke van Aelst. It subsequently appeared at TEFAF Maastricht in 2003, where it was presented as Vermeyen. In September of that same year, the Louvre acquired the painting.[14]
For connoisseurship and provenance research, the earlier attribution is essential. Vermeyen’s oeuvre does not simply expand as previously unknown paintings are recognised. At the same time, it can contract or be reorganised as works are reattributed.
An oeuvre that is still evolving
Museum research also demonstrates that Vermeyen’s painted oeuvre was not frozen in 1989. In 2014, Ainsworth and Vandivere published a Judith with the Head of Holofernes that had long been associated with Jean Bellegambe. By re-examining the monogram and combining stylistic and technical research, they presented the painting as an early Vermeyen.[3]
Friedländer and Horn constructed their corpora primarily through art-historical documentation, comparison, provenance and connoisseurship. Today these methods are supplemented by dendrochronology, infrared reflectography, materials analysis and digital image comparison.
What makes Horn particularly valuable
When was the work first recognised as Vermeyen? What comparisons were available at the time? Has the dating changed? How was it subsequently positioned within the oeuvre? And has technical or art-historical research since emerged that further nuances its position?
With Vermeyen, “Is the work in Horn?” is a good first question. What matters next is everything that happened after publication. What has happened to the painting since 1989? Has it been re-examined? Has a museum accepted it? Has an earlier attribution been downgraded? Is technical research now available?
Why the absence of a catalogue raisonné makes Vermeyen particularly interesting
Researching Vermeyen requires more work. Friedländer provides an early numbered core. Horn is the indispensable modern standard work, but not a formal catalogue raisonné of the paintings. What follows are decades of new discoveries, technical examinations, museum reassessments, expert opinions and changing attributions.
An oeuvre consists not only of paintings that were once assigned a number. It also consists of changing observations about those paintings. In Vermeyen’s case, that process is still very much alive.
Do you have a particular interest in this artist or in this subject?
Do you follow this artist, or have you come across a work you would like to know more about? We regularly research works appearing on the market and are always happy to exchange views on quality, provenance, art-historical context and previous auction results. You can contact us directly via info@antonello.art.
Notes and Sources
[1] Lempertz, Old Masters, Cologne, 21 May 2022, lot 2008, Jan Cornelisz. Vermeyen, The Virgin and Child, oil on panel, 45.7 × 34.7 cm, estimate €70,000-90,000, realised €75,000 including buyer’s premium.
[2] Hendrik J. Horn, Jan Cornelisz Vermeyen, Painter of Charles V and His Conquest of Tunis: Paintings, Etchings, Drawings, Cartoons & Tapestries, Doornspijk: Davaco, 1989.
[3] Maryan Ainsworth and Abbie Vandivere, “Judith with the Head of Holofernes: Jan Cornelisz Vermeyen’s Earliest Signed Painting”, Journal of Historians of Netherlandish Art 6, no. 2, 2014.
[4] Max J. Friedländer, Die altniederländische Malerei, XII: Pieter Coeck, Jan van Scorel, Leiden: A.W. Sijthoff, 1935.
[5] Friedländer, Early Netherlandish Painting, XII, “Catalogue L: The paintings of Jan Cornelisz. Vermeyen”, nos. 388-400; supplement nos. 401-417; addendum no. 418.
[6] Christie’s, Old Masters including Old Master & British Drawings and Watercolours, London, 8 December 2017, lot 106, Portrait of Ferdinand I, Holy Roman Emperor, Workshop of Jan Cornelisz. Vermeyen and Horn 1989, II, p. 489, no. A15, “Shop of Jan Cornelisz Vermeyen, circa 1530”.
[7] Christie’s, London, 8 December 2017, lot 106; estimate £40,000-60,000; realised £236,750 including buyer’s premium.
[8] Sotheby’s, Old Master and Early British Paintings, London, 30 October 2008, lot 5, Portrait of a bearded gentleman, Attributed to Jan Cornelisz. Vermeyen, estimate £10,000-15,000.
[9] Hampel Fine Art Auctions, Old Master Paintings – Part II, Munich, 24 June 2021, lot 431, The Holy Family, attributed to Jan Cornelisz. Vermeyen, oil on panel, 96 × 78 cm, estimate €30,000-60,000.
[10] “Rediscovered and Reconsidered: Jan Gossart’s Virgin and Child with a Book”, Bulletin of the Royal Institute for Cultural Heritage / Bulletin de l’Institut royal du Patrimoine artistique 41, 2025.
[11] Vanderkindere, Brussels, 10 December 2019, lot 105, Portrait de George Schenck van Toutenburg, stadhouder d’Overijssel, attributed to Jan Cornelisz. Vermeyen, oil on cradled oak panel, 87 × 67.5 cm.
[12] Christie’s, Old Master Paintings: Part I, New York, 14 April 2016, lot 113, Portrait of Joost Aemszoon van der Burch, offered as Jan Cornelisz. Vermeyen, estimate $1,000,000-2,000,000, realised $2,741,000 including buyer’s premium.
[13] Molly Faries and Matthias Ubl, “A New Attribution to Jan van Scorel: The Portrait of Joost Aemsz van der Burch and the Artist’s Portrayals of ‘Great Lords of the Netherlands’”, The Rijksmuseum Bulletin 65, no. 4, 2017, pp. 354-371.
[14] Musée du Louvre, Jan Cornelisz. Vermeyen, Saint Jérôme méditant, inv. RF 2003 8.
