17th-century copies of a 15th-century early Netherlandish painting uncovered through technical and art-historical research

Studies of Early Netherlandish panel paintings have long implemented techniques such as dendrochronology, pigment analysis and infrared reflectography. However, knowledge about the production of workshop replicas from fifteenth century paintings, and later copies, remains limited. As a result, the attribution of such paintings poses a challenge to art historians. Here, we present a multidisciplinary investigation into two copies of an Early Netherlandish panel painting attributed to the fifteenth-century Flemish painter Pieter Cristus (or Petrus Christus), active in Bruges (Belgium) between c. 1445 and 1460 CE. Earlier research dated these works to the late 15th century based on dendrochronology and pigment analysis, although alternative hypotheses suggested a 17th-century origin or even modern forgery. To resolve this debate, we applied dendrochronology, radiocarbon dating, MA-XRF, infrared reflectography, Raman spectroscopy, and stylistic analysis. The new dendrochronological results, supported by radiocarbon dating, proved key in refuting the hypothesis of the 15th-century date, revealing that the trees were cut around the mid-17th century. Furthermore, while the pigments identified were largely consistent with 15th-century painting practices, the stylistic characteristics and the presence of the inscription “I.P.C” ( invenit Petrus Cristi ) in one of the paintings supports a production in the mid-17th century or shortly afterwards. These findings challenge the reliability of earlier dendrochronological assessments and illustrate that pigment analysis alone cannot securely date paintings, as historical materials and techniques persisted over time. Overall, our research highlights the practice of copying Early Netherlandish paintings in the 17th-century and the importance of integrated technical and art-historical approaches for accurate attribution.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Cultural Heritage
Published
2026-08-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2026.08.001
Primary Topic
Cultural Heritage Materials Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

17th-century copies of a 15th-century early Netherlandish painting uncovered through technical and art-historical research

Inez Werf, Guusje Harteveld, Marta Domínguez‐Delmás, Jan Verheyen et al.
Journal of Cultural Heritage
Cultural Heritage Materials Analysis
article

17th-century copies of a 15th-century early Netherlandish painting uncovered through technical and art-historical research

Inez Werf, Guusje Harteveld, Marta Domínguez‐Delmás, Jan Verheyen, David Lainé
article en

Abstract

Studies of Early Netherlandish panel paintings have long implemented techniques such as dendrochronology, pigment analysis and infrared reflectography. However, knowledge about the production of workshop replicas from fifteenth century paintings, and later copies, remains limited. As a result, the attribution of such paintings poses a challenge to art historians. Here, we present a multidisciplinary investigation into two copies of an Early Netherlandish panel painting attributed to the fifteenth-century Flemish painter Pieter Cristus (or Petrus Christus), active in Bruges (Belgium) between c. 1445 and 1460 CE. Earlier research dated these works to the late 15th century based on dendrochronology and pigment analysis, although alternative hypotheses suggested a 17th-century origin or even modern forgery. To resolve this debate, we applied dendrochronology, radiocarbon dating, MA-XRF, infrared reflectography, Raman spectroscopy, and stylistic analysis. The new dendrochronological results, supported by radiocarbon dating, proved key in refuting the hypothesis of the 15th-century date, revealing that the trees were cut around the mid-17th century. Furthermore, while the pigments identified were largely consistent with 15th-century painting practices, the stylistic characteristics and the presence of the inscription “I.P.C” ( invenit Petrus Cristi ) in one of the paintings supports a production in the mid-17th century or shortly afterwards. These findings challenge the reliability of earlier dendrochronological assessments and illustrate that pigment analysis alone cannot securely date paintings, as historical materials and techniques persisted over time. Overall, our research highlights the practice of copying Early Netherlandish paintings in the 17th-century and the importance of integrated technical and art-historical approaches for accurate attribution.

Journal of Cultural HeritageVol. 81
Naturalis Biodiversity Center (NL), Conservation International (US), Cultural Heritage Agency of Netherlands (NL), KU Leuven (BE)
Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
Sustainable cities and communities
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Cultural Heritage Materials Analysis
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.