The Deposition

This is the oldest work that with some degree of certainty may be attributed to Rogier van der Weyden; the master never signed his work. If this is the case, it is probably also his most impressive work. As an altarpiece it was intended for a chapel in Leuven, but fell into Spanish hands in the 16th century. Today, it is on display in the Prado in Madrid.

In the center, Jesus is taken down from the cross by a bearded Joseph of Arimathea and a well-dressed Nicodemus. Christ’s pale body forms an arch with the upper arm of the woman on the left: Mary Magdalene, known by her low-cut dress.

Christ’s body is almost immaculate apart from his wounds; the holes in his hand and feet, the blood on his forehead from his crown of thorns, and the cut inflicted by a Roman spear.The woman in blue is Mary, Jesus' mother. Her immense grief causes her to faint. In her fall, her body takes on the same shape as her son's, implying that her suffering is close to his.

The skull on the foreground reminds us that we are looking at Golgotha, the Mount of Skulls. (There is a straight line across the painting between the skull's eyes and the eyes of Nicodemus.)

Despite all the action and people participating in it - ten in all - Van der Weyden manages to create an atmosphere which is both convincing and intimate without a sense of crowdedness

The Descent from the Cross

Joseph of Arimathea has been granted permission to take down the body of Christ - a special dispensation, since it was customary to let the bodies hang.

John the Apostle, Nicodemus and two servants lend a hand. Christ's feet are resting on Mary Magdalene’s shoulders. The woman in blue is Mary, Mother of Christ.

This is the central panel of a triptych. A single element unites the three scenes - Christ is portrayed as being carried.

Rubens made this painting for the Guild of Arquebusiers, who wanted their patron Saint Christopher (meaning: carrier of Christ) portrayed. If Rubens had complied with this wish, he would have had to explain himself to the authorities, because the strict Contra-Reformation’s principles did not allow portraits of saints to be hung in cathedrals. Instead, Rubens chose to hide all references to Christopher by portraying Christ as being carried in all three panels.

Jan van Scorel 1495 – 1562 Mary Magdalene

Van Scorel had just returned from Italy when he painted this work. Italian influences are visible in the landscape and in the figure of Mary Magdalene, who resembles a Venetian courtesan.

The tree springing from the decayed trunk symbolizes a new life after a bad start: Mary Magdalene has converted to become a follower of Jesus.In the background, in front of the overhanging rock, Mary is being borne up to Heaven.

The top plank of this panel, with the sky and tree branches, was added in the second half of the 16th century. That part was not painted by Van Scorel.

the last supper

Jesus has just told his followers that he is about to be betrayed by one of them. We see the reactions of all. From left to right:

Bartholomew, James Minor and Andrew are flabbergasted by the announcement. Jude is hanging over the table, small money pouch in his right hand. Peter is angry, demanding that John find out whom Jesus is referring to. John looks about to faint. Jesus looks imperturbable, acquiescent – as if he just wants to get on with sharing the bread and wine. Thomas is angry, James Major looks stunned and seems to be holding back Thomas and Philip. Philip seems to be looking for an explanation. Matthew, Thaddeus and Simon are emerged in a lively conversation, most likely about the betrayal.

All the disciples’ feet are visible, be it vaguely. Jesus, however, has to do without. When the monastery was renovated at some point in time, someone decided to have a door put in, sacrificing Jesus’ feet in the process.

The Last Supper is in every aspect a remarkable composition, with excellent use of perspective, lively figures and strong emotions.For this fresco, Leonardo tried out a new technique. He painted on a dry layer of plaster instead of a wet one, so as to achieve livelier colors and sharper images. It worked well, but unfortunately the tempera started peeling.

Through the centuries restorers have applied layers of varnish upon which oils were applied to repaint the work.

A bombing in 1943 fortunately spared the refectory. However, the building itself was severely damaged, causing damp problems. The fresco became moldy as a result.

At the latest restoration effort in 1999, concluding a period of 20 years of restoration, attempts were made to remove as many non-original layers as possible. This is a picture of the painting before the 1999 restoration.
We also have a photo after the restoration.