Head of Christ (Ecce Homo)

The Artist: For a biography of Petrus Christus, see the Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History.

The Painting: This mesmerizing image of Christ derives from the Gospels of Mark (15: 17–18) and John (19: 1–5) wherein Jesus was beaten, crowned with thorns, and dressed in a purple robe, subsequently to be presented by Pilate to the jeering crowd of Jews with the words "Ecce Homo" (Behold the man). According to John: “And the soldiers plaited a crown of thorns, and put it on his head, and arrayed him in a purple robe; they came up to him, saying, ‘Hail, King of the Jews!’”

Christ is treated as a portrait, surrounded with a trompe-l’oeil frame, thereby underscoring his physical immediacy. Christ’s Passion was a particularly popular devotional focus in the Netherlands during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. In his Imitatio Christi of about 1425, Thomas à Kempis (ca. 1380–1471) encouraged piety based on imitating Christ’s life and Passion through daily prayer. This devotional surge resulted in the production of paintings that evoked compassionate reflection on Christ’s suffering for the redemption of humankind.

In general, the Head of Christ belongs to a group of images called acheiropoetoi, which were associated with devotional practice in the Eastern Church. Thought to have been miraculously created, this group includes two forerunners: the vera icon, or sudarium type, and the Holy Face (Upton 1990, Hand 1992). Because The Met’s painting shows Christ crowned with thorns (Salvator Coronatus) and his portrait bust with the tripartite floriated nimbus found in Holy Face depictions, it has been considered a fusion of the two types (Bruyn 1957, Hand 1992).

This painting stems from the lost Holy Face by Jan van Eyck, now known only through copies: one from 1438 (Gemäldegalerie, Berlin; see fig. 1 above), and two dated 1440 (Groeningemuseum, Bruges, and formerly J.C. Swinburne collection, Newcastle-upon-Tyne). Like Van Eyck’s image, Christus’s version includes a fictive frame, with an inscription. It is also similar in the frontal presentation, the direct gaze of Christ, and the cross-shaped, floriated nimbus behind Christ’s head. However, the crown of thorns, causing trails of blood to run down Christ’s forehead, neck, and chest, and his furrowed brow differ from the Eyckian prototype.
This emphasis on the Ecce Homo and the direct address of Christ to the viewer, as Panofsky pointed out, was an appeal to the faithful to “behold the man” as an object for meditation, particularly during Holy Mass in the guise of the Host.[1] Ludolf of Saxony (ca. 1295–1378), in his Vita Jesu Christi explained that “the sacrament of the altar commemorates the Lord, and [how] Christ has suffered according to His human nature: for according to His divine nature He is incapable of suffering; wherefore the priest, when elevating the Host, might more fittingly say ‘Behold the man’ than ‘Behold God.’ True, Christ is both man and God; but in that presentation [by Pilate] the man was manifest and the God was latent.”[2] An appropriate way for the viewer to respond to the image would be through prayer, such as the one composed by Thomas à Kempis to the suffering Christ.[3] A chapter of the fourth and final book of his Imitatio Christi is devoted to meditation upon the union with Christ through the Sacrament.[4] Therefore, the Ecce Homo or image of the suffering Christ, as in The Met’s painting, may be associated with the Host and thus with the mystical transformation of the body of Christ, or transubstantiation (Ainsworth 1994).

Christ’s visage corresponds with the description of his appearance in the apocryphal Letter of Lentulus—supposedly written by Publius Lentulus to the Roman Senate, but which actually dates from the thirteenth century. To demonstrate the perfection of Christ’s face as described in the Lentulus letter, Christus used Pythagorean and Neoplatonic ideals, basing the structure of the head on the intersection of the circle and the square, with the distance between the eyes providing the base measurement (Ainsworth 1994). Infrared reflectography has revealed a ruled underdrawn line running down the center of the face, demonstrating the importance of symmetry to its proportions (fig. 2). Otherwise, there is limited underdrawing in the painting, showing only some subtle changes in the neck opening of Christ’s garment and a few slight strokes for the features of the face (see Technical Notes).

The small size of the painting and its unusual support of parchment or vellum indicates that it was meant to serve a private devotional purpose, perhaps handheld by the worshiper. Joel Upton suggested that it could have functioned as a pax, that is, “a liturgical tablet used in the mass to transmit the Kiss of Peace from the celebrant…” (Upton 1990, p. 56). However, such objects are usually enamels or metalwork, not oil paintings on parchment. Moreover, the frequent kissing of Christ’s face or touching it would have damaged the painting, which is relatively well preserved.

The painting is now laid down on a mahogany board and cradled (see Technical Notes). The original dimensions of it must have been somewhat larger, so that the entire illusionistic frame would have been visible. As an independent painting on parchment, the Head of Christ might initially have been slipped into a prayer book adjacent to devotional texts. Kathryn Rudy has focused on these parchment paintings, which she calls “postcards,” that were tipped into books and exchanged between individuals.[5] Subsequently, the painting may have been attached to a panel. Tack holes, now filled, are regularly spaced around the edge of the parchment (see the x-radiograph and Technical Notes). However, they interrupt and ruin the trompe-l’oeil effect of the frame, and therefore cannot have been the original plan for the image. This may indicate that the painting at one point was tacked to a panel that could be hung on a wall or handheld for contemplation. An example of a wall-mounted Holy Face image is found in the background of Christus’s Portrait of a Young Man of about 1450 (National Gallery, London; fig. 3).

The Attribution and Date: A fragmentary inscription at the lower edge of the painting most likely is the name of Petrus Christus. Although there is little to go on, the formation of the letters in the signature of the Berlin Nativity provides a convincing parallel for the Gothic script Petr…, which is also common to manuscript illumination. It is painted in the same location as in other paintings by Petrus Christus and Jan van Eyck, that is, at the lower edge of the fictive frame (see Ainsworth 1994, pp. 27–33 and figs.). Furthermore, the partial inscription was made in the same pale yellow paint as was used for the strokes of the tripartite nimbus surrounding Christ’s head.

There is general agreement about the attribution of the painting to Christus (see References). However, some dissenters (Folie 1963, Gellman 1970, and Richter 1974) have argued that the remarkable refinement of this head is different in approach than the rather formulaic heads of Christ in Christus’s other paintings, such as the Man of Sorrows (Birmingham Museums and Art Gallery; Ainsworth 1994, pp. 112–16, fig. 4). Within its trompe-l’oeil frame and directly addressing the viewer, The Met Christ was conceived as a portrait, and therefore may be compared with Christus’s other portraits, such as the Portrait of a Carthusian (The Met, 49.7.19). Here one may find a similar approach to subtle handling and detailed execution intended to produce lifelike effects. And yet, there are also similarities to the heads of holy figure types in Christus’s other paintings. The Met Head of Christ can be compared to the tiny head of Christ in Majesty in the Berlin Last Judgment, for example, where there are the same vertical wrinkles in the brow, similar morphological details of the facial features (heavily lidded eyes, prominent triangular-shaped nose, and full lips), and the same modeling of the facial features, broadly lit on the left side, sharply defining the boundaries between light and dark.

Friedländer (1967), Upton (1972), and Schabacker (1974) all date the painting between 1444 and 1450, preceding the rather hard-edged geometric forms of Christus’s later works. This stylistic observation, as well as the connection of this painting with the Eyckian Holy Face pictures of the late 1430s and 1440s, reinforces an early date in Christus’s oeuvre. The earliest provenance of The Met painting places it in Spain. It may have traveled there early on, as a Hispano-Flemish Head of Christ of the late fifteenth century appears to have been copied after it (Calahorra, Museum of Calahorra Cathedral).[6]

Maryan W. Ainsworth 2012, updated Maryan W. Ainsworth 2023

[1] Erwin Panofsky, “Jean Hey’s ‘Ecce Homo’: Speculations about its Author, Its Donor, and Its Iconography,” Musées Royaux des Beaux-Arts Bulletin 5, 1956, pp. 95–138, especially 110.
[2] Ludolf of Saxony, Vita Jesu Christi redemptoris nostril, Lyons, 1519, fol. ccxiv, as quoted in Panofsky 1956, pp. 110–11.
[3] See Opera omnia, ed. M. J. Pohl, 7 vols., (Freiburg, 1902–22), vol. 5, p. 9: “Laude et glorifico te speciali devotione compassivi cordis mei pro tua gravissima poena, quam in sacri capitis tui spinosa coronatione pro nobis vermiculis patientissime pertulisti…” (as quoted in Sixten Ringbom, Icon to Narrative, The Rise of the Dramatic Close-up in Fifteenth-Century Devotional Painting, Doornspijk, 1984, p. 143 n. 5.
[4] Thomas à Kempis, The Imitation of Christ, trans., L. Sherley-Price, Harmondsworth, England, 1952, pp. 209–10.
[5] Kathryn Rudy, Postcards on Parchment: The Social Lives of Medieval Books, New Haven, 2016, pp. 309–10.
[6] Manuel Parada López de Corselas and Jesús Folgado Garcia, “Jan van Eyck’s Holy Face, the Holy Shroud, and Spain,” Colnaghi Studies Journal 7 (October 2020), p. 32.

Support: The original support is most likely parchment, based on its appearance, and will be referred to as such in this entry.[1] The parchment measures about 14.5 x 10.2 cm on average, although it is not a perfect rectangle. The parchment must have been larger formerly; on the lower member of the frame is a painted inscription, which appears to be original, but is cropped and at least another 0.5 cm would be needed to complete the letters. The parchment may have been affixed to a solid support originally or kept loose, slipped into a prayer book perhaps (see Catalogue Entry). Unfortunately, the loss of material at the edges limits evidence about the former mounting or display of the painting. Perhaps the very damage itself argues for it being kept loose for some time, and therefore more vulnerable to damage.

Aside from any original means of display, the painting has been mounted to a solid support at least twice in its lifetime. Currently, it is adhered to a mahogany panel, which measures 5 mm thick on average and is also cradled.[2] The mahogany panel appears to be a relatively modern construction. The parchment was adhered to it with a good deal of force: it is extremely flat, and the texture of the wood has been transmitted to the parchment.

At some point between its original creation and this modern mounting, the painting must have been mounted in a different way. There are several evenly spaced, old tack holes around the perimeter of the parchment, now filled, which can be more readily located in the x-radiograph (see fig. 5 above). It is extremely unlikely that the tacks related to the original display of this painting, to affix it to a solid wood support for handling or hanging on the wall. For an example of such a construction see the detail from the Portrait of a Young Man by Petrus Christus (National Gallery, London, NG2593) in which a page of an illuminated manuscript was edged with a red ribbon and tacked down to a wooden board (fig. 3). The Head of Christ was presented in an entirely different way, surrounded by the painted trompe l’oeil frame that was rendered in a very sensitive manner, in keeping with Christus’s work elsewhere (see Paint Layers below). Tacks would have ruined the illusionary effect; while it is possible that the work was originally mounted onto a solid support, it was not by these tacks, which could have been related to a later framing that obscured the painted frame, or a mounting that disregarded it.

Preparation: There may be a very thin, white preparatory layer present on the parchment support. Examination with infrared reflectography (fig. 6) revealed a small amount of underdrawing.[3] Most readily apparent is a straight vertical line at the center of Christ’s face that is clearest in his forehead and nose, but possibly runs the length of the painting (fig. 2). This line sets out the central axis of the face and of the composition (see Catalogue Entry). Additionally, a few lines of underdrawing are visible near Christ’s neckline, that indicate a slightly narrower opening. These two instances demonstrate the faint appearance of the underdrawing in the reflectogram supporting the possibility that more underdrawing is present but is simply not distinguishable from the painted features in the reflectogram.

Paint Layers: This image was painted with impressive naturalism, especially considering its diminutive scale. Technical details compare well with the other small-scale works by Christus in The Met’s collection, The Lamentation (91.26.12) and particularly, the Portrait of the Carthusian 49.7.19. Even though the head of Christ is about half the size of the latter, a similar attention to tiny details, like the tiny pale pink strokes at the eyelids that suggest their curve around the eyeballs, is evident. Similarly, the two catchlights in the eyes of Christ recall those of the Carthusian, although there was more space in the latter for the artist to suggest further reflections and even the slightly watery effect along the lower lids.

However, technical examination of the Head of Christ revealed a somewhat different buildup of paint in the fleshtones. In the Carthusian, the radio-opacity of the fleshtones is relatively even in the x-radiograph, with only slightly more opacity at a few select highlighted areas, such as around the eyes (see Technical Notes and fig. 7 for 49.7.19. This appearance suggests that either the artist included a small amount of lead white throughout the fleshtones, or that he applied white more broadly to the face in an early stage, as a preparatory step perhaps, but clearly, he used little additional white for his highlights. In Christ, the radio-opacity is more pronounced at the highlights, reflecting the concentrated use of lead white in these places. The x-radiograph of The Lamentation reveals that Christus did seem to follow a variety of approaches when rendering flesh, for example, the distribution of lead white in the Virgin is more comparable to that noted in the Head of Christ.

In another detail of technique, the vertical creases between the eyes of Christ are more exaggerated relative to the wrinkles in the forehead; the darkest paint is deeper in tone, as if the artist was emphasizing these folds. Such exaggerated vertical creases are present in other paintings by the artist, for example in several figures in the Lamentation as well as in the figure of Christ in the Last Judgment in Berlin. On close examination, the paint in this region has a slightly greyish tone and is slightly more opaque. It is possible that Christus reworked this area, perhaps even laboring over it, resulting in a very slight discrepancy in the paint buildup. There is very little damage or retouching present in this passage.

The painted fictive frame was also done with care. The artist used fine highlights along the sill to suggest the fall of light and, best viewed under magnification, introduced subtle veining into the grey stone. As with the frame for the Carthusian, Christus made the painting before adding the fictive frame; the paint for Christ’s chest and robe continues underneath the painted frame by a few millimeters. But, unlike the frame for the Carthusian, the pale-yellow inscription was not painted as if carved into the frame, with attendant highlights, but painted in a single color and a more elaborate script that would not have lent itself to imitating carved text. The damaged and significantly cropped inscription is now illegible (see Catalogue Entry).

The painting has suffered from some abrasion and pinpoint losses, particularly in the brown passages, but the current restoration addresses these through sensitive retouching. There are also several losses around the perimeter of the painting, in the region of the fictive frame, related to losses to the original parchment support.

Sophie Scully 2023

[1] The original support was not sampled.
[2] Previously, it was thought that the parchment was laid down onto a veneer of oak, less than 0.1mm in thickness, which was originally thicker but, in a structural intervention, was thinned and mounted to the current mahogany construction. Recent examination by Alan Miller and Kristin Holder (Conservator and Research Scholar in the Department of Paintings Conservation) revealed that no such oak panel remained and that the parchment is adhered directly to the mahogany panel. The parallel grooves from a toothing plane on the mahogany board are pronounced on the painted surface, perhaps resulting in the previous conclusion (Klein 1994, p. 215).
[3] Infrared reflectography was acquired with an OSIRIS InGaAs near-infrared camera fitted with a 6-element, 150 mm focal length f/5.6–f/45 lens; 900-1700 nm spectral response, March 2023.

Inscription: Signed (bottom, on simulated frame): Petr. . . [the remaining letters are illegible]

private collection, Spain; [Lucas Moreno, Paris, until 1910; sold to Kleinberger for Fr 1,500]; [Kleinberger, Paris, 1910–31]; Mr. and Mrs. William R. Timken, New York (1931–49); Mrs. William R. (Lillian S.) Timken, New York (1949–d. 1959)

New York. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. "Petrus Christus: Renaissance Master of Bruges," April 14–July 31, 1994, no. 4.

New York. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. "From Van Eyck to Bruegel: Early Netherlandish Painting in The Metropolitan Museum of Art," September 22, 1998–February 21, 1999, no. 3.

Los Angeles. J. Paul Getty Museum. "Illuminating the Renaissance: The Triumph of Flemish Manuscript Painting in Europe, 1467–1561," June 17–September 7, 2003, no. 4.

New York. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. "Antonello da Messina: Sicily's Renaissance Master," December 13, 2005–March 5, 2006, no cat. number.

Ghent. Museum voor Schone Kunsten. "Van Eyck: An Optical Revolution," February 1–March 12, 2020, unnumbered cat. (fig. 11.7).

Max J. Friedländer. Von Eyck bis Bruegel: Studien zur Geschichte der Niederländischen Malerei. Berlin, 1916, pp. 21, 174, lists it, with works by Christus, as in the private collection of Fr. Kleinberger; mentions the illegible inscription.

Max J. Friedländer. Die altniederländische Malerei. Vol. 1, Die Van Eyck, Petrus Christus. Berlin, 1924, p. 149, pl. 57, as definitely by Christus, and in the private collection of F. Kleinberger, Paris.

[Hippolyte] Fierens-Gevaert. Histoire de la peinture flamande des origines à la fin du XVe siècle. Vol. 2, Les continuateurs des Van Eyck. Paris, 1928, p. 91, pl. 70, fig. 117, as in the Kleinberger collection; mentions that Christus reproduced this work in the background of his "Portrait of a Young Man" (National Gallery, London).

Ella S. Siple. "Recent Acquisitions in America." Burlington Magazine 60 (1932), p. 110.

Wolfgang Schöne. Dieric Bouts und seine Schule. Berlin, 1938, p. 57, no. 23.

Germain Bazin. "Petrus Christus et les rapports entre l'Italie et la Flandre au milieu du XVe siècle." Revue des arts 4 (December 1952), p. 200 n. 25, p. 202, compares it with Antonello's "Salvador Mundi" (National Gallery, London); considers our painting close to the small "Christ in Majesty" by Christus owned by the poet Sannazaro and described in Pietro de Summonte's letter of 1524 to Marc Antonio Michiel.

Leo van Puyvelde. La peinture flamande au siècle des van Eyck. Paris, 1953, p. 187, mentions it as a signed work by Petrus Christus.

Max J. Friedländer. Early Netherlandish Painting: From van Eyck to Bruegel. Ed. F. Grossmann. English ed. [first ed. 1916]. New York, 1956, p. 15, as now in the collection of Mrs. W. R. Timken, New York.

Josua Bruyn. Van Eyck problemen. Utrecht, 1957, p. 115, says the facial type and nimbus derive from Van Eyck's "Head of Christ," known through copies, and notes that Bouts adopts this subject and expression in his often-repeated type of the Man of Sorrows.

John Canaday. "Flip of Coin Helps Divide Fortune in Art." New York Times (May 15, 1960), p. 77.

John Rowlands. "A Man of Sorrows by Petrus Christus." Burlington Magazine 104 (October 1962), p. 420, as in the collection of Mrs. W. R. Timken [sic]; mentions it as a signed "Imago Salvatoris coronati" in which appears a decorative cruciform halo similar to that in the Birmingham painting under discussion.

Jacqueline Folie. "Les oeuvres authentifiées des primitifs flamands." Institut Royal du Patrimoine Artistique Bulletin 6 (1963), p. 206, observes that a recent x-ray of this painting reveals a structure totally different from that of authentic works by Christus and appears to indicate a later work; notes further that what remains of the inscription is incompatible with known inscriptions by the artist.

Colin Eisler. "Erik Larsen, Les primitifs flamands au Musée Metropolitain de New York, 1960." Art Bulletin 46 (March 1964), p. 104, observes that "if, as seems most likely, this painting is by Christus, it would have to be a fairly early work, from the 1440's"; suggests that it may originally have been part of an illuminated prayer page like the one attached to the wall in Christus's portrait of a male donor (National Gallery, London); mentions a work reminiscent of ours and similar in size in the Hyde collection, Glens Falls.

Max J. Friedländer et al. Early Netherlandish Painting. Vol. 1, The van Eycks—Petrus Christus. New York, 1967, pp. 84, 95, 110 n. 55, pl. 79, dates it about 1450.

Lola B. Malkis Gellman. "Petrus Christus." PhD diss., Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, 1970, pp. 484–85, no. 27, fig. 79, rejects the attribution to Christus but agrees with Friedländer that it probably reflects an Eyckian prototype.

Charles Sterling. "Observations on Petrus Christus." Art Bulletin 53 (March 1971), p. 24, calls this picture and the "Portrait of a Young Man (National Gallery, London) Christus's final works of the 1450s.

Joel M. Upton. "Petrus Christus." PhD diss., Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr, Pa., 1972, pp. 139–43, 152, 154, 179–80 n. 20, pp. 368–72, no. 21, fig. 21, dates it around 1444–50; calls it "a remarkable fusion of the 'imago pietatis' with the Face of Christ or 'vera icon'".

Peter H. Schabacker. Petrus Christus. Utrecht, 1974, pp. 17, 42–43, 46, 73, 80–81, 129–30, no. 2, fig. 2, discusses the inscription; observes that during the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries parchment was not an uncommon support for small pictures and mentions two other examples; suggests that this painting may have served the same function as the head of Christ on parchment, with a prayer inscribed below, that appears in the background of Christus's "Portrait of a Young Man" (National Gallery, London) [see Ref. Eisler 1964]; finds our painting close to or possibly identical with the one mentioned in Summonte's letter [see Ref. Bazin 1952]; dates it about 1444, calling it almost certainly Christus's first independent work; comments on its relationship to his Carthusian of 1446 (MMA 49.7.19) and to Jan van Eyck's late head of Christ known only through copies.

Ursula Panhans-Bühler. Wiener Kunstgeschichtliche Forschungen. Vol. 5, Eklektizismus und Originalität im Werk des Petrus Christus. Vienna, 1978, pp. 11–17, fig. 1, ascribes it to Christus, considers it probably an early work, and compares it with Jan van Eyck's "Head of Christ," which survives only in copies.

André Chastel. "La Véronique." Revue de l'art nos. 40–41 (1978), pp. 75, 82 n. 30.

Ann Tzeutschler Lurie. "A Newly Discovered Eyckian 'St. John the Baptist in a Landscape'." Bulletin of the Cleveland Museum of Art 67 (April 1981), pp. 95–96, 115 n. 40, fig. 22, ascribes it to Christus.

Sixten Ringbom. Icon to Narrative: The Rise of the Dramatic Close-up in Fifteenth-century Devotional Painting. rev. ed. Doornspijk, The Netherlands, 1984, p. 148 [first published in Acta Academiae Aboensis, ser. A, Humaniora, 1965, vol. 31, no. 2, same page nos.].

Liana Castelfranchi Vegas. Italie et Flandres dans la peinture du XVe siècle. Milan, 1984, pp. 70, 87, fig. 57 [Italian ed., 1983].

Hans J. van Miegroet. Gerard David. Antwerp, 1989, p. 128, colorpl. 114, illustrates it as by Petrus Christus.

Joel M. Upton. Petrus Christus: His Place in Fifteenth-Century Flemish Painting. University Park, Pa., 1990, p. 1 n. 4, pp. 56–59, 64–65, 70, fig. 58, dates it about 1446.

Marigene H. Butler. "An Investigation of Two Paintings of "The Stigmatization of Saint Francis" Thought to Have Been Painted by Jan van Eyck." Le dessin sous-jacent dans la peinture. Ed. Hélène Verougstraete-Marcq and Roger van Schoute. Colloque 8, Louvain-la-Neuve, 1991, pp. 98, 100 n. 16.

John Oliver Hand. "'Salve sancta facies': Some Thoughts on the Iconography of the 'Head of Christ' by Petrus Christus." Metropolitan Museum Journal 27 (1992), pp. 7–17 nn. 1–2, fig. 1, discusses related images of the head of Christ, and literature and imagery connected with the cult of Veronica and the "imago non manu facta"; suggests that this is the earliest Netherlandish painting of its type, in which the passional head of Christ (with the crown of thorns) is conflated with the non-passional Holy Face; compares it with the "Head of Christ" assigned to the studio of Rogier van der Weyden, on the reverse of Rogier's "Portrait of a Woman" (National Gallery, London), dated about 1450/60.

Maryan W. Ainsworth. Petrus Christus: Renaissance Master of Bruges. Exh. cat., The Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York, 1994, pp. 32, 34, 53, 71, 80, 86–91, 105, 115, 178–79, no. 4, figs. 19, 105, 106 (detail of inscription, diagram showing proportions, and detail infrared reflectograms), ill. p. 87 (color), suggests an early date in Christus's oeuvre despite the fact that the picture is considerably damaged and retouched; notes that the picture is based on Pythagorian ideas, expressing the idealization of the image of Christ according to a strict canon of proportion and observes that the distance between the eyes establishes the base measurement; notes that the technique of the painting and the gothic script in particular follows the handling found in manuscript illumination; concludes that it was conceived as a portrait and should be compared with other portraits such as the "Portrait of a Carthusian" (MMA 49.7.9) .

Peter Klein in Maryan W. Ainsworth. "Dendrochronological Analysis of Panels Attributed to Petrus Christus." Petrus Christus: Renaissance Master of Bruges. Exh. cat., The Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York, 1994, p. 215.

John Oliver Hand. "Petrus Christus at the Metropolitan." Apollo 140 (October 1994), p. 50.

Joel M. Upton in Les Primitifs flamands et leur temps. n.p., 1994, p. 365, ill. (color).

Lorne Campbell. "New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art: Petrus Christus." Burlington Magazine 136, no. 1098 (September 1994), p. 639.

Hélène Verougstraete, A. De Schryver, and R. H. Marijnissen. "Peintures sur papier et parchemin marouflés aux XVe et SVIe siècles. L'exemple d'une 'Vierge et enfant' de la suite de Gérard David." Le dessin sous-jacent dans la peinture. Ed. Hélène Verougstraete and Roger van Schoute. Colloque 10, Louvain-la-Neuve, 1995, pp. 97, 103–4 n. 10.

Marta Renger. "Petrus Christus. A Renaissance Artist in Bruges." Kunstchronik 48, no. 3 (March 1995), pp. 96–97, ill.

Katharine Baetjer. European Paintings in The Metropolitan Museum of Art by Artists Born Before 1865: A Summary Catalogue. New York, 1995, p. 248, ill.

Marigene H. Butler. "An Investigation of the Philadelphia 'Saint Francis Receiving the Stigmanta'." Jan van Eyck: Two Paintings of "Saint Francis Receiving the Stigmata". Philadelphia, 1997, pp. 38, 45 n. 17.

Della Clason Sperling in From Van Eyck to Bruegel: Early Netherlandish Painting in The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Ed. Maryan W. Ainsworth and Keith Christiansen. Exh. cat., The Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York, 1998, pp. 84, 96–97, 139, 210, 238, 286, no. 3, ill. (color), dates it about 1445.

John Oliver Hand. "New York. From Van Eyck to Bruegel: Early Netherlandish Painting in The Metropolitan Museum of Art." Burlington Magazine 140 (December 1998), p. 854.

Maryan W. Ainsworth in Thomas Kren and Scot McKendrick. Illuminating The Renaissance: The Triumph of Flemish Manuscript Painting in Europe. Exh. cat., J. Paul Getty Museum. Los Angeles, 2003, pp. 41, 82, 94–96, no. 4, ill. (color).

Paula Nuttall. From Flanders to Florence: The Impact of Netherlandish Painting, 1400–1500. New Haven, 2004, pp. 236, 280 n. 12, pl. 262.

Pia Palladino in Fra Angelico. Exh. cat., The Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York, 2005, pp. 172, 175 n. 10.

Catheline Périer-d'Ieteren. Dieric Bouts: The Complete Works. Brussels, 2006, p. 207 n. 11.

Edith Gabrielli. Cosimo Rosselli: catalogo ragionato. Turin, 2007, p. 208, mentions it in connection with Rosselli's "Head of Christ Crowned with Thorns" (private collection, New York), which was inspired by Netherlandish models.

Judie Bogers in Firenze e gli antichi Paesi Bassi 1430–1530, dialoghi tra artisti: da Jan van Eyck a Ghirlandaio, da Memling a Raffaello . . . Ed. Bert W. Meijer. Exh. cat., Palazzo Pitti, Galleria Palatina, Florence. Livorno, 2008, p. 88.

Bette Talvacchia. "Antonello da Messina's Meditation on the Suffering Christ." Around Antonello da Messina: Reintegrating Quattrocento Culture. Ed. Michael W. Kwakkelstein and Bette Talvacchia. Florence, 2014, p. 92, fig. 14.

Diane Wolfthal and Cathy Metzger. Los Angeles Museums. Brussels, 2014, pp. 135, 138 n. 24.

Larry Silver. "Eyckian Icons and Copies." Making Copies in European Art 1400–1600: Shifting Tastes, Modes of Transmission, and Changing Contexts. Ed. Maddalena Bellavitis. Leiden, 2018, p. 153, fig. 3.17 (color).

Lieve De Kesel in Van Eyck: An Optical Revolution. Ed. Maximiliaan Martens et al. Exh. cat., Museum voor Schone Kunsten. Ghent, 2020, pp. 354, 363 n. 106, p. 492, fig. 11.7 (color).