View of Auvers-sur-Oise

Prompt: In View of Auvers-sur-Oise, how is the History discussed?

Camille Pissarro, whom Cézanne came to see as both friend and mentor, moved to Pontoise, a small country town northwest of Paris, in 1872 after his previous country residence in Louveciennes, west of Paris, was stripped of all its contents while he was in Paris during the Franco-Prussian War two years earlier. The following year, Cézanne moved to neighboring Auvers-sur-Oise, where he and Pissarro lived within walking distance of each other, and often painted side by side in plein air. They painted the same subjects, but in different and distinctive works.The two were trying to capture the "perception of sensation" in their work. Cézanne's style, especially in his landscapes, reflected the influence of his fellow artist, even as the two preferred different techniques—Pissarro dabbing while Cézanne daubed or smeared, according to a local resident who watched them both paint. Cézanne began using brighter colors than he had previously, with less stark contrasts.A catalogue to a 2006 joint exhibition of their work from this period at the Musée d'Orsay in Paris calls the two Impressionism's "painters of the earth", counterparts to its two "painters of water", Claude Monet and Alfred Sisley. But "with Cézanne the spectator is openly invited to observe the way he portrays surfaces" the catalog observes. "Shapes are simplified and each brushstroke is amplified. His paintings are intense reflections of his method."View of Auvers-sur-Oise was painted later, in 1879–80. By this time, Cézanne was preparing to leave Paris and return to his native Aix-en-Provence, where he continued painting in this style, including similar landscapes, moving toward Post-Impressionism. Ashmolean Museum director Christopher Brown describes the painting as important to understanding the artist's career, showing him transitioning from his early work to the mature style he brought to well-known later works.

File:Ashmolean museum, Oxford, Entrance Screen And Steps Fronting Beaumont Street.jpg


View of Auvers-sur-Oise

Prompt: In the context of View of Auvers-sur-Oise, explain the Provenance and the History.

French bureaucrat Victor Chocquet, a collector and advocate for Impressionism, bought the painting. After his death in 1891, it was bequeathed to his wife Marie. In 1899 the Chocquet collection was exhibited at Galerie Georges Petit in Paris, under the title Auvers. In turn it was purchased by another collector of Impressionist works, Thadée Natanson.Natanson auctioned his collection, including View of Auvers-sur-oise, at the Hôtel Drouot in 1908. It passed that way to another prominent collector, German publisher Bruno Cassirer. He loaned it to his cousin Paul for a 1921 Berlin exhibit of Cézanne works in private German collections; it was titled Ansicht an Aix. Bruno made the painting part of an extended loan to the Kunsthaus Zürich, which exhibited it in 1933 as Regenlandschaft. On another loan to a Swiss museum, the Kunsthalle Basel. This time it was known as Bei Auvers.Bruno's daughter Sophie inherited it after his death in 1941, by which time the family had moved to Oxford following Nazi persecution. She kept it in the family's hands and did not loan it out. Upon the deaths of her husband Richard Rudolf Walzer in 1975, followed by her own four years later, the estate incurred a large inheritance tax bill. The painting was accepted by the British government in lieu of inheritance tax to become part of the collection at the Ashmolean, which lists it in its catalogue under the English title A View of buildings in a valley in the Ile-de-France. In 1998 the Ashmolean loaned it to the Art Gallery of New South Wales, in Sydney, for its Classic Cézanne exhibit; in this it was given the French title Groupe de maisons, paysage d'île de France, the title used in the artist's current catalogue raisonné.

File:Ashmolean museum, Oxford, Entrance Screen And Steps Fronting Beaumont Street.jpg


View of Auvers-sur-Oise

Prompt: Explain the Provenance about the History of this artwork, View of Auvers-sur-Oise.

French bureaucrat Victor Chocquet, a collector and advocate for Impressionism, bought the painting. After his death in 1891, it was bequeathed to his wife Marie. In 1899 the Chocquet collection was exhibited at Galerie Georges Petit in Paris, under the title Auvers. In turn it was purchased by another collector of Impressionist works, Thadée Natanson.Natanson auctioned his collection, including View of Auvers-sur-oise, at the Hôtel Drouot in 1908. It passed that way to another prominent collector, German publisher Bruno Cassirer. He loaned it to his cousin Paul for a 1921 Berlin exhibit of Cézanne works in private German collections; it was titled Ansicht an Aix. Bruno made the painting part of an extended loan to the Kunsthaus Zürich, which exhibited it in 1933 as Regenlandschaft. On another loan to a Swiss museum, the Kunsthalle Basel. This time it was known as Bei Auvers.Bruno's daughter Sophie inherited it after his death in 1941, by which time the family had moved to Oxford following Nazi persecution. She kept it in the family's hands and did not loan it out. Upon the deaths of her husband Richard Rudolf Walzer in 1975, followed by her own four years later, the estate incurred a large inheritance tax bill. The painting was accepted by the British government in lieu of inheritance tax to become part of the collection at the Ashmolean, which lists it in its catalogue under the English title A View of buildings in a valley in the Ile-de-France. In 1998 the Ashmolean loaned it to the Art Gallery of New South Wales, in Sydney, for its Classic Cézanne exhibit; in this it was given the French title Groupe de maisons, paysage d'île de France, the title used in the artist's current catalogue raisonné.

File:Ashmolean museum, Oxford, Entrance Screen And Steps Fronting Beaumont Street.jpg


View of Auvers-sur-Oise

Prompt: In View of Auvers-sur-Oise, how is the Provenance of the History explained?

French bureaucrat Victor Chocquet, a collector and advocate for Impressionism, bought the painting. After his death in 1891, it was bequeathed to his wife Marie. In 1899 the Chocquet collection was exhibited at Galerie Georges Petit in Paris, under the title Auvers. In turn it was purchased by another collector of Impressionist works, Thadée Natanson.Natanson auctioned his collection, including View of Auvers-sur-oise, at the Hôtel Drouot in 1908. It passed that way to another prominent collector, German publisher Bruno Cassirer. He loaned it to his cousin Paul for a 1921 Berlin exhibit of Cézanne works in private German collections; it was titled Ansicht an Aix. Bruno made the painting part of an extended loan to the Kunsthaus Zürich, which exhibited it in 1933 as Regenlandschaft. On another loan to a Swiss museum, the Kunsthalle Basel. This time it was known as Bei Auvers.Bruno's daughter Sophie inherited it after his death in 1941, by which time the family had moved to Oxford following Nazi persecution. She kept it in the family's hands and did not loan it out. Upon the deaths of her husband Richard Rudolf Walzer in 1975, followed by her own four years later, the estate incurred a large inheritance tax bill. The painting was accepted by the British government in lieu of inheritance tax to become part of the collection at the Ashmolean, which lists it in its catalogue under the English title A View of buildings in a valley in the Ile-de-France. In 1998 the Ashmolean loaned it to the Art Gallery of New South Wales, in Sydney, for its Classic Cézanne exhibit; in this it was given the French title Groupe de maisons, paysage d'île de France, the title used in the artist's current catalogue raisonné.

File:Ashmolean museum, Oxford, Entrance Screen And Steps Fronting Beaumont Street.jpg


View of Auvers-sur-Oise

Prompt: Describe the characteristics of the Provenance in View of Auvers-sur-Oise's History.

French bureaucrat Victor Chocquet, a collector and advocate for Impressionism, bought the painting. After his death in 1891, it was bequeathed to his wife Marie. In 1899 the Chocquet collection was exhibited at Galerie Georges Petit in Paris, under the title Auvers. In turn it was purchased by another collector of Impressionist works, Thadée Natanson.Natanson auctioned his collection, including View of Auvers-sur-oise, at the Hôtel Drouot in 1908. It passed that way to another prominent collector, German publisher Bruno Cassirer. He loaned it to his cousin Paul for a 1921 Berlin exhibit of Cézanne works in private German collections; it was titled Ansicht an Aix. Bruno made the painting part of an extended loan to the Kunsthaus Zürich, which exhibited it in 1933 as Regenlandschaft. On another loan to a Swiss museum, the Kunsthalle Basel. This time it was known as Bei Auvers.Bruno's daughter Sophie inherited it after his death in 1941, by which time the family had moved to Oxford following Nazi persecution. She kept it in the family's hands and did not loan it out. Upon the deaths of her husband Richard Rudolf Walzer in 1975, followed by her own four years later, the estate incurred a large inheritance tax bill. The painting was accepted by the British government in lieu of inheritance tax to become part of the collection at the Ashmolean, which lists it in its catalogue under the English title A View of buildings in a valley in the Ile-de-France. In 1998 the Ashmolean loaned it to the Art Gallery of New South Wales, in Sydney, for its Classic Cézanne exhibit; in this it was given the French title Groupe de maisons, paysage d'île de France, the title used in the artist's current catalogue raisonné.

File:Ashmolean museum, Oxford, Entrance Screen And Steps Fronting Beaumont Street.jpg


View of Auvers-sur-Oise

Prompt: Focus on View of Auvers-sur-Oise and explain the Theft.

At midnight on 31 December 1999, fireworks went off in Oxford as part of the global millennium celebrations that year. Police believe that at that time, someone used the distraction and noise to prevent anyone from noticing that they were climbing scaffolding around an extension to the museum's library that was under construction. Once they reached the roof, they broke a skylight over the museum's Hindley Smith Gallery and dropped a small smoke bomb in.The burglar carried with them a small holdall holding a scalpel, tape, gloves and portable fan. They dropped a rope ladder into the gallery and descended. Once there they used the fan to blow the smoke around so neither the museum's security guards, should they come into the gallery, nor its CCTV cameras would be able to get a good view of their faces. After cutting View of Auvers-sur-Oise from its frame, they smashed the empty frame on the floor, climbed the rope ladder, went back down the scaffolding and out into the crowds still celebrating the new year and millennium.Alarms had been set off during the burglary, but security at the museum assumed from the smoke that there had been a fire. When police and firefighters reached the museum at 1:43am, they went into the Smith Gallery and found the smoke had dissipated, with no signs of a fire. Instead what was left of the smoke bomb was on the floor, and a flashing light on the wall alerted them to the absence of the Cézanne painting next to it.Director Brown, in London for the millennium celebrations, was alerted within the hour. He went immediately back to Oxford and saw the crime scene for himself. "It was like coming into your own house and finding evidence of a break-in," he said. "Any director builds up an intense relationship with the works of art that he or she is responsible for, and this was very personal to me."Police soon determined that View of Auvers-sur-Oise was the only work taken from a room that also displayed paintings by Renoir, Rodin and Toulouse-Lautrec. This led them to theorise that the burglary had specifically targeted the painting, the only work by Cézanne in the Ashmolean. The thief or whoever they were working for had wanted it for a personal private collection. They may also have been motivated by the £18.2 million sale at Sotheby's of a Cézanne still life, Bouilloire et fruits, itself recently recovered following a theft in 1978, and hoped to make a similar profit. Katrina Burrows, editor of the London-based magazine Trace, which covers stolen art, doubted the thieves or anyone working for them would be able to sell the painting, if that was their goal, due to the considerable publicity surrounding the theft.The Ashmolean valued the painting at £3 million. Like other artwork in British museums, it was not insured due to the high premiums required. Burrows also said that contrary to public perception of art theft as prevalent due to the recent box office success of The Thomas Crown Affair, it had actually become much rarer due to increased security and awareness of which works might have been stolen. "Anyone offered this painting will walk over to the shelf and look it up in a Cezanne book, and would see where it belongs", Brown said.There had been other thefts and attempted thefts of art from the museum and other Oxford facilities in the late 1990s. A  pair of 17th-century French bottles were taken in 1996, and the following year three thieves were caught after they broke open a glass display case to take a jewel made for Alfred the Great. Brown said the museum had not relaxed its security for the holiday.The theft also drew comparisons to another recent film, Entrapment, in which the characters use the millennium celebrations as cover for an art theft. Investigators said the thief demonstrated a high level of skill. "It was a very clever ploy, a very professional theft", an unnamed police source told The Guardian. "Whoever has taken this painting has given some thought to how to steal it" agreed Oxford police superintendent John Carr.Novelist Iain Pears, who lived nearby, said that he could have been a witness. "If I had been there 10 minutes earlier, I could have helped them load it into the car", he joked to The New York Times. He called the theft "jolly brilliant". He believed it was likely that the painting would be recovered. "Twenty years ago the Ashmolean lost a Persian carpet in a theft. They eventually got it back from a dry cleaners in New York."In January 2014, the Ashmolean made up for the painting's absence by becoming the first European museum to host an exhibit of Impressionist works from the Henry and Rose Pearlman Collection at the Princeton University Art Museum. Of the fifty paintings in Cézanne and the Modern, twenty-four were by the title artist, spanning his whole career. Museum staff recalled the theft as a low point in the museum's recent history that made them more elated to host the Pearlman exhibit.

File:Ashmolean museum, Oxford, Entrance Screen And Steps Fronting Beaumont Street.jpg


View of Auvers-sur-Oise

Prompt: Explain the Theft of this artwork, View of Auvers-sur-Oise.

At midnight on 31 December 1999, fireworks went off in Oxford as part of the global millennium celebrations that year. Police believe that at that time, someone used the distraction and noise to prevent anyone from noticing that they were climbing scaffolding around an extension to the museum's library that was under construction. Once they reached the roof, they broke a skylight over the museum's Hindley Smith Gallery and dropped a small smoke bomb in.The burglar carried with them a small holdall holding a scalpel, tape, gloves and portable fan. They dropped a rope ladder into the gallery and descended. Once there they used the fan to blow the smoke around so neither the museum's security guards, should they come into the gallery, nor its CCTV cameras would be able to get a good view of their faces. After cutting View of Auvers-sur-Oise from its frame, they smashed the empty frame on the floor, climbed the rope ladder, went back down the scaffolding and out into the crowds still celebrating the new year and millennium.Alarms had been set off during the burglary, but security at the museum assumed from the smoke that there had been a fire. When police and firefighters reached the museum at 1:43am, they went into the Smith Gallery and found the smoke had dissipated, with no signs of a fire. Instead what was left of the smoke bomb was on the floor, and a flashing light on the wall alerted them to the absence of the Cézanne painting next to it.Director Brown, in London for the millennium celebrations, was alerted within the hour. He went immediately back to Oxford and saw the crime scene for himself. "It was like coming into your own house and finding evidence of a break-in," he said. "Any director builds up an intense relationship with the works of art that he or she is responsible for, and this was very personal to me."Police soon determined that View of Auvers-sur-Oise was the only work taken from a room that also displayed paintings by Renoir, Rodin and Toulouse-Lautrec. This led them to theorise that the burglary had specifically targeted the painting, the only work by Cézanne in the Ashmolean. The thief or whoever they were working for had wanted it for a personal private collection. They may also have been motivated by the £18.2 million sale at Sotheby's of a Cézanne still life, Bouilloire et fruits, itself recently recovered following a theft in 1978, and hoped to make a similar profit. Katrina Burrows, editor of the London-based magazine Trace, which covers stolen art, doubted the thieves or anyone working for them would be able to sell the painting, if that was their goal, due to the considerable publicity surrounding the theft.The Ashmolean valued the painting at £3 million. Like other artwork in British museums, it was not insured due to the high premiums required. Burrows also said that contrary to public perception of art theft as prevalent due to the recent box office success of The Thomas Crown Affair, it had actually become much rarer due to increased security and awareness of which works might have been stolen. "Anyone offered this painting will walk over to the shelf and look it up in a Cezanne book, and would see where it belongs", Brown said.There had been other thefts and attempted thefts of art from the museum and other Oxford facilities in the late 1990s. A  pair of 17th-century French bottles were taken in 1996, and the following year three thieves were caught after they broke open a glass display case to take a jewel made for Alfred the Great. Brown said the museum had not relaxed its security for the holiday.The theft also drew comparisons to another recent film, Entrapment, in which the characters use the millennium celebrations as cover for an art theft. Investigators said the thief demonstrated a high level of skill. "It was a very clever ploy, a very professional theft", an unnamed police source told The Guardian. "Whoever has taken this painting has given some thought to how to steal it" agreed Oxford police superintendent John Carr.Novelist Iain Pears, who lived nearby, said that he could have been a witness. "If I had been there 10 minutes earlier, I could have helped them load it into the car", he joked to The New York Times. He called the theft "jolly brilliant". He believed it was likely that the painting would be recovered. "Twenty years ago the Ashmolean lost a Persian carpet in a theft. They eventually got it back from a dry cleaners in New York."In January 2014, the Ashmolean made up for the painting's absence by becoming the first European museum to host an exhibit of Impressionist works from the Henry and Rose Pearlman Collection at the Princeton University Art Museum. Of the fifty paintings in Cézanne and the Modern, twenty-four were by the title artist, spanning his whole career. Museum staff recalled the theft as a low point in the museum's recent history that made them more elated to host the Pearlman exhibit.

File:Ashmolean museum, Oxford, Entrance Screen And Steps Fronting Beaumont Street.jpg


View of Auvers-sur-Oise

Prompt: How does View of Auvers-sur-Oise explain its Theft?

At midnight on 31 December 1999, fireworks went off in Oxford as part of the global millennium celebrations that year. Police believe that at that time, someone used the distraction and noise to prevent anyone from noticing that they were climbing scaffolding around an extension to the museum's library that was under construction. Once they reached the roof, they broke a skylight over the museum's Hindley Smith Gallery and dropped a small smoke bomb in.The burglar carried with them a small holdall holding a scalpel, tape, gloves and portable fan. They dropped a rope ladder into the gallery and descended. Once there they used the fan to blow the smoke around so neither the museum's security guards, should they come into the gallery, nor its CCTV cameras would be able to get a good view of their faces. After cutting View of Auvers-sur-Oise from its frame, they smashed the empty frame on the floor, climbed the rope ladder, went back down the scaffolding and out into the crowds still celebrating the new year and millennium.Alarms had been set off during the burglary, but security at the museum assumed from the smoke that there had been a fire. When police and firefighters reached the museum at 1:43am, they went into the Smith Gallery and found the smoke had dissipated, with no signs of a fire. Instead what was left of the smoke bomb was on the floor, and a flashing light on the wall alerted them to the absence of the Cézanne painting next to it.Director Brown, in London for the millennium celebrations, was alerted within the hour. He went immediately back to Oxford and saw the crime scene for himself. "It was like coming into your own house and finding evidence of a break-in," he said. "Any director builds up an intense relationship with the works of art that he or she is responsible for, and this was very personal to me."Police soon determined that View of Auvers-sur-Oise was the only work taken from a room that also displayed paintings by Renoir, Rodin and Toulouse-Lautrec. This led them to theorise that the burglary had specifically targeted the painting, the only work by Cézanne in the Ashmolean. The thief or whoever they were working for had wanted it for a personal private collection. They may also have been motivated by the £18.2 million sale at Sotheby's of a Cézanne still life, Bouilloire et fruits, itself recently recovered following a theft in 1978, and hoped to make a similar profit. Katrina Burrows, editor of the London-based magazine Trace, which covers stolen art, doubted the thieves or anyone working for them would be able to sell the painting, if that was their goal, due to the considerable publicity surrounding the theft.The Ashmolean valued the painting at £3 million. Like other artwork in British museums, it was not insured due to the high premiums required. Burrows also said that contrary to public perception of art theft as prevalent due to the recent box office success of The Thomas Crown Affair, it had actually become much rarer due to increased security and awareness of which works might have been stolen. "Anyone offered this painting will walk over to the shelf and look it up in a Cezanne book, and would see where it belongs", Brown said.There had been other thefts and attempted thefts of art from the museum and other Oxford facilities in the late 1990s. A  pair of 17th-century French bottles were taken in 1996, and the following year three thieves were caught after they broke open a glass display case to take a jewel made for Alfred the Great. Brown said the museum had not relaxed its security for the holiday.The theft also drew comparisons to another recent film, Entrapment, in which the characters use the millennium celebrations as cover for an art theft. Investigators said the thief demonstrated a high level of skill. "It was a very clever ploy, a very professional theft", an unnamed police source told The Guardian. "Whoever has taken this painting has given some thought to how to steal it" agreed Oxford police superintendent John Carr.Novelist Iain Pears, who lived nearby, said that he could have been a witness. "If I had been there 10 minutes earlier, I could have helped them load it into the car", he joked to The New York Times. He called the theft "jolly brilliant". He believed it was likely that the painting would be recovered. "Twenty years ago the Ashmolean lost a Persian carpet in a theft. They eventually got it back from a dry cleaners in New York."In January 2014, the Ashmolean made up for the painting's absence by becoming the first European museum to host an exhibit of Impressionist works from the Henry and Rose Pearlman Collection at the Princeton University Art Museum. Of the fifty paintings in Cézanne and the Modern, twenty-four were by the title artist, spanning his whole career. Museum staff recalled the theft as a low point in the museum's recent history that made them more elated to host the Pearlman exhibit.

File:Ashmolean museum, Oxford, Entrance Screen And Steps Fronting Beaumont Street.jpg


View of Auvers-sur-Oise

Prompt: In View of Auvers-sur-Oise, how is the Theft discussed?

At midnight on 31 December 1999, fireworks went off in Oxford as part of the global millennium celebrations that year. Police believe that at that time, someone used the distraction and noise to prevent anyone from noticing that they were climbing scaffolding around an extension to the museum's library that was under construction. Once they reached the roof, they broke a skylight over the museum's Hindley Smith Gallery and dropped a small smoke bomb in.The burglar carried with them a small holdall holding a scalpel, tape, gloves and portable fan. They dropped a rope ladder into the gallery and descended. Once there they used the fan to blow the smoke around so neither the museum's security guards, should they come into the gallery, nor its CCTV cameras would be able to get a good view of their faces. After cutting View of Auvers-sur-Oise from its frame, they smashed the empty frame on the floor, climbed the rope ladder, went back down the scaffolding and out into the crowds still celebrating the new year and millennium.Alarms had been set off during the burglary, but security at the museum assumed from the smoke that there had been a fire. When police and firefighters reached the museum at 1:43am, they went into the Smith Gallery and found the smoke had dissipated, with no signs of a fire. Instead what was left of the smoke bomb was on the floor, and a flashing light on the wall alerted them to the absence of the Cézanne painting next to it.Director Brown, in London for the millennium celebrations, was alerted within the hour. He went immediately back to Oxford and saw the crime scene for himself. "It was like coming into your own house and finding evidence of a break-in," he said. "Any director builds up an intense relationship with the works of art that he or she is responsible for, and this was very personal to me."Police soon determined that View of Auvers-sur-Oise was the only work taken from a room that also displayed paintings by Renoir, Rodin and Toulouse-Lautrec. This led them to theorise that the burglary had specifically targeted the painting, the only work by Cézanne in the Ashmolean. The thief or whoever they were working for had wanted it for a personal private collection. They may also have been motivated by the £18.2 million sale at Sotheby's of a Cézanne still life, Bouilloire et fruits, itself recently recovered following a theft in 1978, and hoped to make a similar profit. Katrina Burrows, editor of the London-based magazine Trace, which covers stolen art, doubted the thieves or anyone working for them would be able to sell the painting, if that was their goal, due to the considerable publicity surrounding the theft.The Ashmolean valued the painting at £3 million. Like other artwork in British museums, it was not insured due to the high premiums required. Burrows also said that contrary to public perception of art theft as prevalent due to the recent box office success of The Thomas Crown Affair, it had actually become much rarer due to increased security and awareness of which works might have been stolen. "Anyone offered this painting will walk over to the shelf and look it up in a Cezanne book, and would see where it belongs", Brown said.There had been other thefts and attempted thefts of art from the museum and other Oxford facilities in the late 1990s. A  pair of 17th-century French bottles were taken in 1996, and the following year three thieves were caught after they broke open a glass display case to take a jewel made for Alfred the Great. Brown said the museum had not relaxed its security for the holiday.The theft also drew comparisons to another recent film, Entrapment, in which the characters use the millennium celebrations as cover for an art theft. Investigators said the thief demonstrated a high level of skill. "It was a very clever ploy, a very professional theft", an unnamed police source told The Guardian. "Whoever has taken this painting has given some thought to how to steal it" agreed Oxford police superintendent John Carr.Novelist Iain Pears, who lived nearby, said that he could have been a witness. "If I had been there 10 minutes earlier, I could have helped them load it into the car", he joked to The New York Times. He called the theft "jolly brilliant". He believed it was likely that the painting would be recovered. "Twenty years ago the Ashmolean lost a Persian carpet in a theft. They eventually got it back from a dry cleaners in New York."In January 2014, the Ashmolean made up for the painting's absence by becoming the first European museum to host an exhibit of Impressionist works from the Henry and Rose Pearlman Collection at the Princeton University Art Museum. Of the fifty paintings in Cézanne and the Modern, twenty-four were by the title artist, spanning his whole career. Museum staff recalled the theft as a low point in the museum's recent history that made them more elated to host the Pearlman exhibit.

File:Ashmolean museum, Oxford, Entrance Screen And Steps Fronting Beaumont Street.jpg


View of Auvers-sur-Oise

Prompt: In the context of View of Auvers-sur-Oise, explain the Investigation and the Theft.

The Thames Valley Police assigned six officers to investigate. They knew their own resources would not be enough. "This is not a crime which is going to be solved overnight." said a spokesman. "We are more used to run-of-the-mill crimes. We need expertise." Accordingly they had called in specialists in art theft; customs officers at airports and harbours had been alerted in case anyone tried to take the painting out of Britain, although police believed that it was more likely in the possession of some domestic collector.At first police withheld some details of the crime in case a ransom request came in. Later in January they believed they were on the verge of recovering it after receiving a tip that it had been seen in a West Midlands pub. When they went there to investigate, it turned out to be a copy, its paint still wet, being painted by the landlord.As of 2021, no other leads have come in that police have discussed publicly; the investigation continues. In 2005 the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) named the theft one the world's top ten art crimes; its Art Crime Team actively seeks information from the public that may lead to the recover of View of Auvers-sur-Oise.

File:Ashmolean museum, Oxford, Entrance Screen And Steps Fronting Beaumont Street.jpg


View of Auvers-sur-Oise

Prompt: Explain the Investigation about the Theft of this artwork, View of Auvers-sur-Oise.

The Thames Valley Police assigned six officers to investigate. They knew their own resources would not be enough. "This is not a crime which is going to be solved overnight." said a spokesman. "We are more used to run-of-the-mill crimes. We need expertise." Accordingly they had called in specialists in art theft; customs officers at airports and harbours had been alerted in case anyone tried to take the painting out of Britain, although police believed that it was more likely in the possession of some domestic collector.At first police withheld some details of the crime in case a ransom request came in. Later in January they believed they were on the verge of recovering it after receiving a tip that it had been seen in a West Midlands pub. When they went there to investigate, it turned out to be a copy, its paint still wet, being painted by the landlord.As of 2021, no other leads have come in that police have discussed publicly; the investigation continues. In 2005 the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) named the theft one the world's top ten art crimes; its Art Crime Team actively seeks information from the public that may lead to the recover of View of Auvers-sur-Oise.

File:Ashmolean museum, Oxford, Entrance Screen And Steps Fronting Beaumont Street.jpg


View of Auvers-sur-Oise

Prompt: In View of Auvers-sur-Oise, how is the Investigation of the Theft explained?

The Thames Valley Police assigned six officers to investigate. They knew their own resources would not be enough. "This is not a crime which is going to be solved overnight." said a spokesman. "We are more used to run-of-the-mill crimes. We need expertise." Accordingly they had called in specialists in art theft; customs officers at airports and harbours had been alerted in case anyone tried to take the painting out of Britain, although police believed that it was more likely in the possession of some domestic collector.At first police withheld some details of the crime in case a ransom request came in. Later in January they believed they were on the verge of recovering it after receiving a tip that it had been seen in a West Midlands pub. When they went there to investigate, it turned out to be a copy, its paint still wet, being painted by the landlord.As of 2021, no other leads have come in that police have discussed publicly; the investigation continues. In 2005 the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) named the theft one the world's top ten art crimes; its Art Crime Team actively seeks information from the public that may lead to the recover of View of Auvers-sur-Oise.

File:Ashmolean museum, Oxford, Entrance Screen And Steps Fronting Beaumont Street.jpg


View of Auvers-sur-Oise

Prompt: Describe the characteristics of the Investigation in View of Auvers-sur-Oise's Theft.

The Thames Valley Police assigned six officers to investigate. They knew their own resources would not be enough. "This is not a crime which is going to be solved overnight." said a spokesman. "We are more used to run-of-the-mill crimes. We need expertise." Accordingly they had called in specialists in art theft; customs officers at airports and harbours had been alerted in case anyone tried to take the painting out of Britain, although police believed that it was more likely in the possession of some domestic collector.At first police withheld some details of the crime in case a ransom request came in. Later in January they believed they were on the verge of recovering it after receiving a tip that it had been seen in a West Midlands pub. When they went there to investigate, it turned out to be a copy, its paint still wet, being painted by the landlord.As of 2021, no other leads have come in that police have discussed publicly; the investigation continues. In 2005 the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) named the theft one the world's top ten art crimes; its Art Crime Team actively seeks information from the public that may lead to the recover of View of Auvers-sur-Oise.

File:Ashmolean museum, Oxford, Entrance Screen And Steps Fronting Beaumont Street.jpg


Manchester Madonna

Prompt: Focus on Manchester Madonna and explain the abstract.

The Madonna and Child with St John and Angels (c. 1497), also known as The Manchester Madonna, is an unfinished painting in the National Gallery, London, attributed to Michelangelo. It is one of three surviving panel paintings attributed to the artist and has been dated to his first period in Rome. The work first came to public attention in the Art Treasures Exhibition in Manchester in 1857, hence the title the "Manchester Madonna". Attribution of the painting to Michelangelo was in doubt for much of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, but now most scholars are in agreement.Like other Renaissance paintings of the Madonna and Child that include John the Baptist, the subject arises from a non-Biblical tradition that the Virgin Mary and the Child Jesus met Christ's cousin, St John the Baptist, on the Holy Family's Flight into Egypt. The Virgin is depicted with one breast bared, as if she has recently been suckling her infant son, which recalls the theme of the Virgin breastfeeding which was common in medieval painting. In her hands is a book (traditionally Isaiah chapter 53) which she attempts to hold away from her son, the contents of which probably foretell his future sacrifice and his taking to himself the evil of the world. She looks over her left shoulder to a scroll being read by a pair of angels, which is likely to read Ecce Agnus Dei ("Behold the Lamb of God"), usually an attribute of John the Baptist. The figures are arranged as if in a frieze, revealing Michelangelo's sculptor's mindset. The frieze becomes more convex at its centre, with the figures of Virgin and Child, as in the later Pitti Tondo. Another similarity to relief sculpture is in the plain background: rather than the landscapes more common for exterior settings, Michelangelo has simply painted an expanse of sky. He also eschewes the richly decorated throne typical of sacra conversazione altarpieces, and de-emphasises the angels' wings.Many areas of the painting are in a preliminary state. The black of the Virgin's robe was meant to be overpainted with the rich blue pigment, lapis lazuli, and the angels on the left are indicated only by the green underpaint used for flesh tones in a kind of non finito.

Category:Paintings in the Borghese Collection

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

Category:Paintings of the Madonna and Child

Category:Religious paintings by Michelangelo

Art Treasures Exhibition, Manchester 1857


Manchester Madonna

Prompt: Explain the abstract of this artwork, Manchester Madonna.

The Madonna and Child with St John and Angels (c. 1497), also known as The Manchester Madonna, is an unfinished painting in the National Gallery, London, attributed to Michelangelo. It is one of three surviving panel paintings attributed to the artist and has been dated to his first period in Rome. The work first came to public attention in the Art Treasures Exhibition in Manchester in 1857, hence the title the "Manchester Madonna". Attribution of the painting to Michelangelo was in doubt for much of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, but now most scholars are in agreement.Like other Renaissance paintings of the Madonna and Child that include John the Baptist, the subject arises from a non-Biblical tradition that the Virgin Mary and the Child Jesus met Christ's cousin, St John the Baptist, on the Holy Family's Flight into Egypt. The Virgin is depicted with one breast bared, as if she has recently been suckling her infant son, which recalls the theme of the Virgin breastfeeding which was common in medieval painting. In her hands is a book (traditionally Isaiah chapter 53) which she attempts to hold away from her son, the contents of which probably foretell his future sacrifice and his taking to himself the evil of the world. She looks over her left shoulder to a scroll being read by a pair of angels, which is likely to read Ecce Agnus Dei ("Behold the Lamb of God"), usually an attribute of John the Baptist. The figures are arranged as if in a frieze, revealing Michelangelo's sculptor's mindset. The frieze becomes more convex at its centre, with the figures of Virgin and Child, as in the later Pitti Tondo. Another similarity to relief sculpture is in the plain background: rather than the landscapes more common for exterior settings, Michelangelo has simply painted an expanse of sky. He also eschewes the richly decorated throne typical of sacra conversazione altarpieces, and de-emphasises the angels' wings.Many areas of the painting are in a preliminary state. The black of the Virgin's robe was meant to be overpainted with the rich blue pigment, lapis lazuli, and the angels on the left are indicated only by the green underpaint used for flesh tones in a kind of non finito.

Category:Paintings in the Borghese Collection

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

Category:Paintings of the Madonna and Child

Category:Religious paintings by Michelangelo

Art Treasures Exhibition, Manchester 1857


Manchester Madonna

Prompt: How does Manchester Madonna explain its abstract?

The Madonna and Child with St John and Angels (c. 1497), also known as The Manchester Madonna, is an unfinished painting in the National Gallery, London, attributed to Michelangelo. It is one of three surviving panel paintings attributed to the artist and has been dated to his first period in Rome. The work first came to public attention in the Art Treasures Exhibition in Manchester in 1857, hence the title the "Manchester Madonna". Attribution of the painting to Michelangelo was in doubt for much of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, but now most scholars are in agreement.Like other Renaissance paintings of the Madonna and Child that include John the Baptist, the subject arises from a non-Biblical tradition that the Virgin Mary and the Child Jesus met Christ's cousin, St John the Baptist, on the Holy Family's Flight into Egypt. The Virgin is depicted with one breast bared, as if she has recently been suckling her infant son, which recalls the theme of the Virgin breastfeeding which was common in medieval painting. In her hands is a book (traditionally Isaiah chapter 53) which she attempts to hold away from her son, the contents of which probably foretell his future sacrifice and his taking to himself the evil of the world. She looks over her left shoulder to a scroll being read by a pair of angels, which is likely to read Ecce Agnus Dei ("Behold the Lamb of God"), usually an attribute of John the Baptist. The figures are arranged as if in a frieze, revealing Michelangelo's sculptor's mindset. The frieze becomes more convex at its centre, with the figures of Virgin and Child, as in the later Pitti Tondo. Another similarity to relief sculpture is in the plain background: rather than the landscapes more common for exterior settings, Michelangelo has simply painted an expanse of sky. He also eschewes the richly decorated throne typical of sacra conversazione altarpieces, and de-emphasises the angels' wings.Many areas of the painting are in a preliminary state. The black of the Virgin's robe was meant to be overpainted with the rich blue pigment, lapis lazuli, and the angels on the left are indicated only by the green underpaint used for flesh tones in a kind of non finito.

Category:Paintings in the Borghese Collection

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

Category:Paintings of the Madonna and Child

Category:Religious paintings by Michelangelo

Art Treasures Exhibition, Manchester 1857


Manchester Madonna

Prompt: In Manchester Madonna, how is the abstract discussed?

The Madonna and Child with St John and Angels (c. 1497), also known as The Manchester Madonna, is an unfinished painting in the National Gallery, London, attributed to Michelangelo. It is one of three surviving panel paintings attributed to the artist and has been dated to his first period in Rome. The work first came to public attention in the Art Treasures Exhibition in Manchester in 1857, hence the title the "Manchester Madonna". Attribution of the painting to Michelangelo was in doubt for much of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, but now most scholars are in agreement.Like other Renaissance paintings of the Madonna and Child that include John the Baptist, the subject arises from a non-Biblical tradition that the Virgin Mary and the Child Jesus met Christ's cousin, St John the Baptist, on the Holy Family's Flight into Egypt. The Virgin is depicted with one breast bared, as if she has recently been suckling her infant son, which recalls the theme of the Virgin breastfeeding which was common in medieval painting. In her hands is a book (traditionally Isaiah chapter 53) which she attempts to hold away from her son, the contents of which probably foretell his future sacrifice and his taking to himself the evil of the world. She looks over her left shoulder to a scroll being read by a pair of angels, which is likely to read Ecce Agnus Dei ("Behold the Lamb of God"), usually an attribute of John the Baptist. The figures are arranged as if in a frieze, revealing Michelangelo's sculptor's mindset. The frieze becomes more convex at its centre, with the figures of Virgin and Child, as in the later Pitti Tondo. Another similarity to relief sculpture is in the plain background: rather than the landscapes more common for exterior settings, Michelangelo has simply painted an expanse of sky. He also eschewes the richly decorated throne typical of sacra conversazione altarpieces, and de-emphasises the angels' wings.Many areas of the painting are in a preliminary state. The black of the Virgin's robe was meant to be overpainted with the rich blue pigment, lapis lazuli, and the angels on the left are indicated only by the green underpaint used for flesh tones in a kind of non finito.

Category:Paintings in the Borghese Collection

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

Category:Paintings of the Madonna and Child

Category:Religious paintings by Michelangelo

Art Treasures Exhibition, Manchester 1857


Manchester Madonna

Prompt: Focus on Manchester Madonna and explain the Attribution.

The completed angel nearest the Virgin is noted as being similar to a sketch the young Michelangelo made while he was apprenticed to Domenico Ghirlandaio.

Category:Paintings in the Borghese Collection

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

Category:Paintings of the Madonna and Child

Category:Religious paintings by Michelangelo

Art Treasures Exhibition, Manchester 1857


Manchester Madonna

Prompt: Explain the Attribution of this artwork, Manchester Madonna.

The completed angel nearest the Virgin is noted as being similar to a sketch the young Michelangelo made while he was apprenticed to Domenico Ghirlandaio.

Category:Paintings in the Borghese Collection

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

Category:Paintings of the Madonna and Child

Category:Religious paintings by Michelangelo

Art Treasures Exhibition, Manchester 1857


Manchester Madonna

Prompt: How does Manchester Madonna explain its Attribution?

The completed angel nearest the Virgin is noted as being similar to a sketch the young Michelangelo made while he was apprenticed to Domenico Ghirlandaio.

Category:Paintings in the Borghese Collection

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

Category:Paintings of the Madonna and Child

Category:Religious paintings by Michelangelo

Art Treasures Exhibition, Manchester 1857


Manchester Madonna

Prompt: In Manchester Madonna, how is the Attribution discussed?

The completed angel nearest the Virgin is noted as being similar to a sketch the young Michelangelo made while he was apprenticed to Domenico Ghirlandaio.

Category:Paintings in the Borghese Collection

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

Category:Paintings of the Madonna and Child

Category:Religious paintings by Michelangelo

Art Treasures Exhibition, Manchester 1857


The Great Day of His Wrath

Prompt: Focus on The Great Day of His Wrath and explain the abstract.

The End of the World, commonly known as The Great Day of His Wrath, is an 1851–1853 oil painting on canvas by the English painter John Martin. Leopold Martin, John Martin's son, said that his father found the inspiration for this painting on a night journey through the Black Country. This has led some scholars to hold that the rapid industrialisation of England in the early nineteenth century influenced Martin.Some authors have used the painting as the front cover for their books; examples include Mass of the Apocalypse and  Studies in the Book of Revelation.The painting is one of three works that together form a triptych entitled The Last Judgement.

Category:Paintings in the Tate galleries

Category:Paintings based on the Book of Revelation


The Great Day of His Wrath

Prompt: Explain the abstract of this artwork, The Great Day of His Wrath.

The End of the World, commonly known as The Great Day of His Wrath, is an 1851–1853 oil painting on canvas by the English painter John Martin. Leopold Martin, John Martin's son, said that his father found the inspiration for this painting on a night journey through the Black Country. This has led some scholars to hold that the rapid industrialisation of England in the early nineteenth century influenced Martin.Some authors have used the painting as the front cover for their books; examples include Mass of the Apocalypse and  Studies in the Book of Revelation.The painting is one of three works that together form a triptych entitled The Last Judgement.

Category:Paintings in the Tate galleries

Category:Paintings based on the Book of Revelation


The Great Day of His Wrath

Prompt: How does The Great Day of His Wrath explain its abstract?

The End of the World, commonly known as The Great Day of His Wrath, is an 1851–1853 oil painting on canvas by the English painter John Martin. Leopold Martin, John Martin's son, said that his father found the inspiration for this painting on a night journey through the Black Country. This has led some scholars to hold that the rapid industrialisation of England in the early nineteenth century influenced Martin.Some authors have used the painting as the front cover for their books; examples include Mass of the Apocalypse and  Studies in the Book of Revelation.The painting is one of three works that together form a triptych entitled The Last Judgement.

Category:Paintings in the Tate galleries

Category:Paintings based on the Book of Revelation


The Great Day of His Wrath

Prompt: In The Great Day of His Wrath, how is the abstract discussed?

The End of the World, commonly known as The Great Day of His Wrath, is an 1851–1853 oil painting on canvas by the English painter John Martin. Leopold Martin, John Martin's son, said that his father found the inspiration for this painting on a night journey through the Black Country. This has led some scholars to hold that the rapid industrialisation of England in the early nineteenth century influenced Martin.Some authors have used the painting as the front cover for their books; examples include Mass of the Apocalypse and  Studies in the Book of Revelation.The painting is one of three works that together form a triptych entitled The Last Judgement.

Category:Paintings in the Tate galleries

Category:Paintings based on the Book of Revelation


The Great Day of His Wrath

Prompt: Focus on The Great Day of His Wrath and explain the Description.

According to Frances Carey, Deputy Keeper in the Department of Prints and Drawings, British Museum, the painting shows the destruction of Babylon and the material world by natural cataclysm. William Feaver, art critic of The Observer, believes that this painting pictures the collapse of Edinburgh in Scotland. Calton Hill, Arthur's Seat, and the Castle Rock, Feaver says, are falling together into the valley between them.  However, Charles F. Stuckey, professor of Art History, Theory, and Criticism at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, is skeptical about such connections, arguing that it has not been conclusively proved. Michael Freeman, Supernumerary Fellow and Lecturer in Human Geography at Mansfield College, describes the painting as follows: Storms and volcanic eruptions, earthquakes and other natural disasters 'swept like tidal waves through early nineteenth-century periodicals, broadsheets and panoramas'. Catastrophic and apocalyptic visions acquired a remarkable common currency, the Malthusian spectre a constant reminder of the need for atonement. For some onlookers, Martin's most famous canvases of divine revelation seemed simultaneously to encode new geological and astronomical truths. This was ... powerfully demonstrated in The Great Day of his Wrath (1852), in which the Edinburgh of James Hutton, with its grand citadel, hilltop terraces and spectacular volcanic landscape, explodes outwards and appears suspended upside-down, flags still flying from its buildings and before crashing head-on into the valley below.According to the Tate Gallery, the United Kingdom's national museum of British and Modern Art, the painting closely follows a portion of Revelation 6, a chapter from the New Testament of the Bible:

Category:Paintings in the Tate galleries

Category:Paintings based on the Book of Revelation


The Great Day of His Wrath

Prompt: Explain the Description of this artwork, The Great Day of His Wrath.

According to Frances Carey, Deputy Keeper in the Department of Prints and Drawings, British Museum, the painting shows the destruction of Babylon and the material world by natural cataclysm. William Feaver, art critic of The Observer, believes that this painting pictures the collapse of Edinburgh in Scotland. Calton Hill, Arthur's Seat, and the Castle Rock, Feaver says, are falling together into the valley between them.  However, Charles F. Stuckey, professor of Art History, Theory, and Criticism at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, is skeptical about such connections, arguing that it has not been conclusively proved. Michael Freeman, Supernumerary Fellow and Lecturer in Human Geography at Mansfield College, describes the painting as follows: Storms and volcanic eruptions, earthquakes and other natural disasters 'swept like tidal waves through early nineteenth-century periodicals, broadsheets and panoramas'. Catastrophic and apocalyptic visions acquired a remarkable common currency, the Malthusian spectre a constant reminder of the need for atonement. For some onlookers, Martin's most famous canvases of divine revelation seemed simultaneously to encode new geological and astronomical truths. This was ... powerfully demonstrated in The Great Day of his Wrath (1852), in which the Edinburgh of James Hutton, with its grand citadel, hilltop terraces and spectacular volcanic landscape, explodes outwards and appears suspended upside-down, flags still flying from its buildings and before crashing head-on into the valley below.According to the Tate Gallery, the United Kingdom's national museum of British and Modern Art, the painting closely follows a portion of Revelation 6, a chapter from the New Testament of the Bible:

Category:Paintings in the Tate galleries

Category:Paintings based on the Book of Revelation


The Great Day of His Wrath

Prompt: How does The Great Day of His Wrath explain its Description?

According to Frances Carey, Deputy Keeper in the Department of Prints and Drawings, British Museum, the painting shows the destruction of Babylon and the material world by natural cataclysm. William Feaver, art critic of The Observer, believes that this painting pictures the collapse of Edinburgh in Scotland. Calton Hill, Arthur's Seat, and the Castle Rock, Feaver says, are falling together into the valley between them.  However, Charles F. Stuckey, professor of Art History, Theory, and Criticism at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, is skeptical about such connections, arguing that it has not been conclusively proved. Michael Freeman, Supernumerary Fellow and Lecturer in Human Geography at Mansfield College, describes the painting as follows: Storms and volcanic eruptions, earthquakes and other natural disasters 'swept like tidal waves through early nineteenth-century periodicals, broadsheets and panoramas'. Catastrophic and apocalyptic visions acquired a remarkable common currency, the Malthusian spectre a constant reminder of the need for atonement. For some onlookers, Martin's most famous canvases of divine revelation seemed simultaneously to encode new geological and astronomical truths. This was ... powerfully demonstrated in The Great Day of his Wrath (1852), in which the Edinburgh of James Hutton, with its grand citadel, hilltop terraces and spectacular volcanic landscape, explodes outwards and appears suspended upside-down, flags still flying from its buildings and before crashing head-on into the valley below.According to the Tate Gallery, the United Kingdom's national museum of British and Modern Art, the painting closely follows a portion of Revelation 6, a chapter from the New Testament of the Bible:

Category:Paintings in the Tate galleries

Category:Paintings based on the Book of Revelation


The Great Day of His Wrath

Prompt: In The Great Day of His Wrath, how is the Description discussed?

According to Frances Carey, Deputy Keeper in the Department of Prints and Drawings, British Museum, the painting shows the destruction of Babylon and the material world by natural cataclysm. William Feaver, art critic of The Observer, believes that this painting pictures the collapse of Edinburgh in Scotland. Calton Hill, Arthur's Seat, and the Castle Rock, Feaver says, are falling together into the valley between them.  However, Charles F. Stuckey, professor of Art History, Theory, and Criticism at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, is skeptical about such connections, arguing that it has not been conclusively proved. Michael Freeman, Supernumerary Fellow and Lecturer in Human Geography at Mansfield College, describes the painting as follows: Storms and volcanic eruptions, earthquakes and other natural disasters 'swept like tidal waves through early nineteenth-century periodicals, broadsheets and panoramas'. Catastrophic and apocalyptic visions acquired a remarkable common currency, the Malthusian spectre a constant reminder of the need for atonement. For some onlookers, Martin's most famous canvases of divine revelation seemed simultaneously to encode new geological and astronomical truths. This was ... powerfully demonstrated in The Great Day of his Wrath (1852), in which the Edinburgh of James Hutton, with its grand citadel, hilltop terraces and spectacular volcanic landscape, explodes outwards and appears suspended upside-down, flags still flying from its buildings and before crashing head-on into the valley below.According to the Tate Gallery, the United Kingdom's national museum of British and Modern Art, the painting closely follows a portion of Revelation 6, a chapter from the New Testament of the Bible:

Category:Paintings in the Tate galleries

Category:Paintings based on the Book of Revelation


The Great Day of His Wrath

Prompt: Focus on The Great Day of His Wrath and explain the Inspiration.

Following the completion of a series of his last works (including The Destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah) and sending them to the Royal Academy, Martin started working on a group of three paintings that included The End of the World. According to Leopold Martin, John Martin's son, his father found the inspiration for this painting on a night journey through the Black Country. Based on this comment, F. D. Klingender argued that this image was in fact a "disguised response to the industrial scene", a claim Charles F. Stuckey is skeptical of. Frances Carey holds that John's underlying theme was the perceived connection between the rapid growth of London as a metropolis in the early nineteenth century, and the original growth of the Babylon civilisation and its final destruction. According to the Tate Gallery, Martin was inspired by the Book of Revelation from the New Testament.

Category:Paintings in the Tate galleries

Category:Paintings based on the Book of Revelation


The Great Day of His Wrath

Prompt: Explain the Inspiration of this artwork, The Great Day of His Wrath.

Following the completion of a series of his last works (including The Destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah) and sending them to the Royal Academy, Martin started working on a group of three paintings that included The End of the World. According to Leopold Martin, John Martin's son, his father found the inspiration for this painting on a night journey through the Black Country. Based on this comment, F. D. Klingender argued that this image was in fact a "disguised response to the industrial scene", a claim Charles F. Stuckey is skeptical of. Frances Carey holds that John's underlying theme was the perceived connection between the rapid growth of London as a metropolis in the early nineteenth century, and the original growth of the Babylon civilisation and its final destruction. According to the Tate Gallery, Martin was inspired by the Book of Revelation from the New Testament.

Category:Paintings in the Tate galleries

Category:Paintings based on the Book of Revelation


The Great Day of His Wrath

Prompt: How does The Great Day of His Wrath explain its Inspiration?

Following the completion of a series of his last works (including The Destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah) and sending them to the Royal Academy, Martin started working on a group of three paintings that included The End of the World. According to Leopold Martin, John Martin's son, his father found the inspiration for this painting on a night journey through the Black Country. Based on this comment, F. D. Klingender argued that this image was in fact a "disguised response to the industrial scene", a claim Charles F. Stuckey is skeptical of. Frances Carey holds that John's underlying theme was the perceived connection between the rapid growth of London as a metropolis in the early nineteenth century, and the original growth of the Babylon civilisation and its final destruction. According to the Tate Gallery, Martin was inspired by the Book of Revelation from the New Testament.

Category:Paintings in the Tate galleries

Category:Paintings based on the Book of Revelation


The Great Day of His Wrath

Prompt: In The Great Day of His Wrath, how is the Inspiration discussed?

Following the completion of a series of his last works (including The Destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah) and sending them to the Royal Academy, Martin started working on a group of three paintings that included The End of the World. According to Leopold Martin, John Martin's son, his father found the inspiration for this painting on a night journey through the Black Country. Based on this comment, F. D. Klingender argued that this image was in fact a "disguised response to the industrial scene", a claim Charles F. Stuckey is skeptical of. Frances Carey holds that John's underlying theme was the perceived connection between the rapid growth of London as a metropolis in the early nineteenth century, and the original growth of the Babylon civilisation and its final destruction. According to the Tate Gallery, Martin was inspired by the Book of Revelation from the New Testament.

Category:Paintings in the Tate galleries

Category:Paintings based on the Book of Revelation


The Great Day of His Wrath

Prompt: Focus on The Great Day of His Wrath and explain the Martin's death and exhibitions of the painting.

While painting, on 12 November 1853, Martin suffered an attack of paralysis, now thought to have been a stroke. The attack deprived him of the ability to talk and to control his right arm, and he died at Douglas on 17 February 1854. At the time of his death, his partially unfinished three paintings were being exhibited in Newcastle. After Martin's death, his last pictures (including The End of the World) were exhibited in "London and the chief cities in England attracting great crowds". The painting was engraved in 1854 (after Martin's death) by Thomas McLean, together with two other paintings by Martin, Plains of Heaven and The Last Judgment (a group of three 'judgment pictures'). Despite wide public reception, the three paintings were rejected as vulgar by the Royal Academy. In 1945, the painting was purchased by the Tate from Robert Frank.

Category:Paintings in the Tate galleries

Category:Paintings based on the Book of Revelation


The Great Day of His Wrath

Prompt: Explain the Martin's death and exhibitions of the painting of this artwork, The Great Day of His Wrath.

While painting, on 12 November 1853, Martin suffered an attack of paralysis, now thought to have been a stroke. The attack deprived him of the ability to talk and to control his right arm, and he died at Douglas on 17 February 1854. At the time of his death, his partially unfinished three paintings were being exhibited in Newcastle. After Martin's death, his last pictures (including The End of the World) were exhibited in "London and the chief cities in England attracting great crowds". The painting was engraved in 1854 (after Martin's death) by Thomas McLean, together with two other paintings by Martin, Plains of Heaven and The Last Judgment (a group of three 'judgment pictures'). Despite wide public reception, the three paintings were rejected as vulgar by the Royal Academy. In 1945, the painting was purchased by the Tate from Robert Frank.

Category:Paintings in the Tate galleries

Category:Paintings based on the Book of Revelation


The Great Day of His Wrath

Prompt: How does The Great Day of His Wrath explain its Martin's death and exhibitions of the painting?

While painting, on 12 November 1853, Martin suffered an attack of paralysis, now thought to have been a stroke. The attack deprived him of the ability to talk and to control his right arm, and he died at Douglas on 17 February 1854. At the time of his death, his partially unfinished three paintings were being exhibited in Newcastle. After Martin's death, his last pictures (including The End of the World) were exhibited in "London and the chief cities in England attracting great crowds". The painting was engraved in 1854 (after Martin's death) by Thomas McLean, together with two other paintings by Martin, Plains of Heaven and The Last Judgment (a group of three 'judgment pictures'). Despite wide public reception, the three paintings were rejected as vulgar by the Royal Academy. In 1945, the painting was purchased by the Tate from Robert Frank.

Category:Paintings in the Tate galleries

Category:Paintings based on the Book of Revelation


The Great Day of His Wrath

Prompt: In The Great Day of His Wrath, how is the Martin's death and exhibitions of the painting discussed?

While painting, on 12 November 1853, Martin suffered an attack of paralysis, now thought to have been a stroke. The attack deprived him of the ability to talk and to control his right arm, and he died at Douglas on 17 February 1854. At the time of his death, his partially unfinished three paintings were being exhibited in Newcastle. After Martin's death, his last pictures (including The End of the World) were exhibited in "London and the chief cities in England attracting great crowds". The painting was engraved in 1854 (after Martin's death) by Thomas McLean, together with two other paintings by Martin, Plains of Heaven and The Last Judgment (a group of three 'judgment pictures'). Despite wide public reception, the three paintings were rejected as vulgar by the Royal Academy. In 1945, the painting was purchased by the Tate from Robert Frank.

Category:Paintings in the Tate galleries

Category:Paintings based on the Book of Revelation


Belisarius Begging for Alms

Prompt: Focus on Belisarius Begging for Alms and explain the abstract.

Belisarius Begging for Alms (French: Bélisaire demandant l'aumône, lit. 'Belisarius asking for alms') is a large-format (288 × 312 cm) history painting in oil on canvas by the French artist Jacques-Louis David. It depicts the Byzantine general Belisarius, who heroically defeated the Vandals in North Africa in AD 533–534 on behalf of Justinian I, and (according to an apocryphal account probably added to his biography in the Middle Ages) was later blinded by the emperor and reduced to begging for alms on the street. David exhibited the work at the Salon of 1781 after returning from Italy and it proved a great success.It is now in the Palais des Beaux-Arts in Lille.

List of paintings by Jacques-Louis David

Category:Paintings in the Palais des Beaux-Arts de Lille

Category:Cultural depictions of Belisarius

Category:Byzantine Empire in art and culture

Belisarius receiving Hospitality from a Peasant

''Belisarius Begging for Alms'', 1784, 101 × 115 cm, Louvre

Category:Paintings by Jacques-Louis David


Belisarius Begging for Alms

Prompt: Explain the abstract of this artwork, Belisarius Begging for Alms.

Belisarius Begging for Alms (French: Bélisaire demandant l'aumône, lit. 'Belisarius asking for alms') is a large-format (288 × 312 cm) history painting in oil on canvas by the French artist Jacques-Louis David. It depicts the Byzantine general Belisarius, who heroically defeated the Vandals in North Africa in AD 533–534 on behalf of Justinian I, and (according to an apocryphal account probably added to his biography in the Middle Ages) was later blinded by the emperor and reduced to begging for alms on the street. David exhibited the work at the Salon of 1781 after returning from Italy and it proved a great success.It is now in the Palais des Beaux-Arts in Lille.

List of paintings by Jacques-Louis David

Category:Paintings in the Palais des Beaux-Arts de Lille

Category:Cultural depictions of Belisarius

Category:Byzantine Empire in art and culture

Belisarius receiving Hospitality from a Peasant

''Belisarius Begging for Alms'', 1784, 101 × 115 cm, Louvre

Category:Paintings by Jacques-Louis David


Belisarius Begging for Alms

Prompt: How does Belisarius Begging for Alms explain its abstract?

Belisarius Begging for Alms (French: Bélisaire demandant l'aumône, lit. 'Belisarius asking for alms') is a large-format (288 × 312 cm) history painting in oil on canvas by the French artist Jacques-Louis David. It depicts the Byzantine general Belisarius, who heroically defeated the Vandals in North Africa in AD 533–534 on behalf of Justinian I, and (according to an apocryphal account probably added to his biography in the Middle Ages) was later blinded by the emperor and reduced to begging for alms on the street. David exhibited the work at the Salon of 1781 after returning from Italy and it proved a great success.It is now in the Palais des Beaux-Arts in Lille.

List of paintings by Jacques-Louis David

Category:Paintings in the Palais des Beaux-Arts de Lille

Category:Cultural depictions of Belisarius

Category:Byzantine Empire in art and culture

Belisarius receiving Hospitality from a Peasant

''Belisarius Begging for Alms'', 1784, 101 × 115 cm, Louvre

Category:Paintings by Jacques-Louis David


Belisarius Begging for Alms

Prompt: In Belisarius Begging for Alms, how is the abstract discussed?

Belisarius Begging for Alms (French: Bélisaire demandant l'aumône, lit. 'Belisarius asking for alms') is a large-format (288 × 312 cm) history painting in oil on canvas by the French artist Jacques-Louis David. It depicts the Byzantine general Belisarius, who heroically defeated the Vandals in North Africa in AD 533–534 on behalf of Justinian I, and (according to an apocryphal account probably added to his biography in the Middle Ages) was later blinded by the emperor and reduced to begging for alms on the street. David exhibited the work at the Salon of 1781 after returning from Italy and it proved a great success.It is now in the Palais des Beaux-Arts in Lille.

List of paintings by Jacques-Louis David

Category:Paintings in the Palais des Beaux-Arts de Lille

Category:Cultural depictions of Belisarius

Category:Byzantine Empire in art and culture

Belisarius receiving Hospitality from a Peasant

''Belisarius Begging for Alms'', 1784, 101 × 115 cm, Louvre

Category:Paintings by Jacques-Louis David


Belisarius Begging for Alms

Prompt: Focus on Belisarius Begging for Alms and explain the Themes.

The theme of mercy is omnipresent in the work, focusing on the three people considered most "based": the woman, the child and the old man who embodies the image of Mercy. The hands of these three individuals horizontally convey the idea of weakness involving need and love. The soldier, meanwhile, in the background, lifts his hands vertically to show his astonishment, with his chest forward. The three human ages represented give an idea of the glory of youth and the wreck of old age.

List of paintings by Jacques-Louis David

Category:Paintings in the Palais des Beaux-Arts de Lille

Category:Cultural depictions of Belisarius

Category:Byzantine Empire in art and culture

Belisarius receiving Hospitality from a Peasant

''Belisarius Begging for Alms'', 1784, 101 × 115 cm, Louvre

Category:Paintings by Jacques-Louis David


Belisarius Begging for Alms

Prompt: Explain the Themes of this artwork, Belisarius Begging for Alms.

The theme of mercy is omnipresent in the work, focusing on the three people considered most "based": the woman, the child and the old man who embodies the image of Mercy. The hands of these three individuals horizontally convey the idea of weakness involving need and love. The soldier, meanwhile, in the background, lifts his hands vertically to show his astonishment, with his chest forward. The three human ages represented give an idea of the glory of youth and the wreck of old age.

List of paintings by Jacques-Louis David

Category:Paintings in the Palais des Beaux-Arts de Lille

Category:Cultural depictions of Belisarius

Category:Byzantine Empire in art and culture

Belisarius receiving Hospitality from a Peasant

''Belisarius Begging for Alms'', 1784, 101 × 115 cm, Louvre

Category:Paintings by Jacques-Louis David


Belisarius Begging for Alms

Prompt: How does Belisarius Begging for Alms explain its Themes?

The theme of mercy is omnipresent in the work, focusing on the three people considered most "based": the woman, the child and the old man who embodies the image of Mercy. The hands of these three individuals horizontally convey the idea of weakness involving need and love. The soldier, meanwhile, in the background, lifts his hands vertically to show his astonishment, with his chest forward. The three human ages represented give an idea of the glory of youth and the wreck of old age.

List of paintings by Jacques-Louis David

Category:Paintings in the Palais des Beaux-Arts de Lille

Category:Cultural depictions of Belisarius

Category:Byzantine Empire in art and culture

Belisarius receiving Hospitality from a Peasant

''Belisarius Begging for Alms'', 1784, 101 × 115 cm, Louvre

Category:Paintings by Jacques-Louis David


Belisarius Begging for Alms

Prompt: In Belisarius Begging for Alms, how is the Themes discussed?

The theme of mercy is omnipresent in the work, focusing on the three people considered most "based": the woman, the child and the old man who embodies the image of Mercy. The hands of these three individuals horizontally convey the idea of weakness involving need and love. The soldier, meanwhile, in the background, lifts his hands vertically to show his astonishment, with his chest forward. The three human ages represented give an idea of the glory of youth and the wreck of old age.

List of paintings by Jacques-Louis David

Category:Paintings in the Palais des Beaux-Arts de Lille

Category:Cultural depictions of Belisarius

Category:Byzantine Empire in art and culture

Belisarius receiving Hospitality from a Peasant

''Belisarius Begging for Alms'', 1784, 101 × 115 cm, Louvre

Category:Paintings by Jacques-Louis David


Belisarius Begging for Alms

Prompt: Focus on Belisarius Begging for Alms and explain the Style.

The same subject had already been used by Peyron in his own Belisarius receiving Hospitality from a Peasant; in contrast, only a few characters are present here and the scene is dependent on the story for dramatic effect. David shows us a fallen hero, old and blind, begging in the street with a young child when one of his former soldiers, astonished, recognises him.The setting is Antique: sober, austere and overwhelming architecture is placed behind the depiction of harsh conditions. This shows that the artist wanted to associate Greek style with heroic themes in the context of the concerns of the artist's time. Essentially, it is through the theme of virtues borrowed from ancient times that the "true style", later called neo-classical, spread into art, rejecting the frivolities of the royal court of Louis XVI at the time of the French Revolution. In the very composition of the work of David, however, the essence of the tableau juxtaposes several rococo ideas, and is thus not a completely neo-classical work. Nonetheless, the neo-classical perspective can still be found, especially in the ideas behind this painting: a revolutionary (David) offers a meditation on the moral heroism in adversity.The artist returned to the subject in 1784, producing a smaller canvas with minor changes which is in the collection of the Louvre.

List of paintings by Jacques-Louis David

Category:Paintings in the Palais des Beaux-Arts de Lille

Category:Cultural depictions of Belisarius

Category:Byzantine Empire in art and culture

''Belisarius Begging for Alms'', 1784, 101 × 115 cm, Louvre

Category:Paintings by Jacques-Louis David


Belisarius Begging for Alms

Prompt: Explain the Style of this artwork, Belisarius Begging for Alms.

The same subject had already been used by Peyron in his own Belisarius receiving Hospitality from a Peasant; in contrast, only a few characters are present here and the scene is dependent on the story for dramatic effect. David shows us a fallen hero, old and blind, begging in the street with a young child when one of his former soldiers, astonished, recognises him.The setting is Antique: sober, austere and overwhelming architecture is placed behind the depiction of harsh conditions. This shows that the artist wanted to associate Greek style with heroic themes in the context of the concerns of the artist's time. Essentially, it is through the theme of virtues borrowed from ancient times that the "true style", later called neo-classical, spread into art, rejecting the frivolities of the royal court of Louis XVI at the time of the French Revolution. In the very composition of the work of David, however, the essence of the tableau juxtaposes several rococo ideas, and is thus not a completely neo-classical work. Nonetheless, the neo-classical perspective can still be found, especially in the ideas behind this painting: a revolutionary (David) offers a meditation on the moral heroism in adversity.The artist returned to the subject in 1784, producing a smaller canvas with minor changes which is in the collection of the Louvre.

List of paintings by Jacques-Louis David

Category:Paintings in the Palais des Beaux-Arts de Lille

Category:Cultural depictions of Belisarius

Category:Byzantine Empire in art and culture

''Belisarius Begging for Alms'', 1784, 101 × 115 cm, Louvre

Category:Paintings by Jacques-Louis David


Belisarius Begging for Alms

Prompt: How does Belisarius Begging for Alms explain its Style?

The same subject had already been used by Peyron in his own Belisarius receiving Hospitality from a Peasant; in contrast, only a few characters are present here and the scene is dependent on the story for dramatic effect. David shows us a fallen hero, old and blind, begging in the street with a young child when one of his former soldiers, astonished, recognises him.The setting is Antique: sober, austere and overwhelming architecture is placed behind the depiction of harsh conditions. This shows that the artist wanted to associate Greek style with heroic themes in the context of the concerns of the artist's time. Essentially, it is through the theme of virtues borrowed from ancient times that the "true style", later called neo-classical, spread into art, rejecting the frivolities of the royal court of Louis XVI at the time of the French Revolution. In the very composition of the work of David, however, the essence of the tableau juxtaposes several rococo ideas, and is thus not a completely neo-classical work. Nonetheless, the neo-classical perspective can still be found, especially in the ideas behind this painting: a revolutionary (David) offers a meditation on the moral heroism in adversity.The artist returned to the subject in 1784, producing a smaller canvas with minor changes which is in the collection of the Louvre.

List of paintings by Jacques-Louis David

Category:Paintings in the Palais des Beaux-Arts de Lille

Category:Cultural depictions of Belisarius

Category:Byzantine Empire in art and culture

''Belisarius Begging for Alms'', 1784, 101 × 115 cm, Louvre

Category:Paintings by Jacques-Louis David


Belisarius Begging for Alms

Prompt: In Belisarius Begging for Alms, how is the Style discussed?

The same subject had already been used by Peyron in his own Belisarius receiving Hospitality from a Peasant; in contrast, only a few characters are present here and the scene is dependent on the story for dramatic effect. David shows us a fallen hero, old and blind, begging in the street with a young child when one of his former soldiers, astonished, recognises him.The setting is Antique: sober, austere and overwhelming architecture is placed behind the depiction of harsh conditions. This shows that the artist wanted to associate Greek style with heroic themes in the context of the concerns of the artist's time. Essentially, it is through the theme of virtues borrowed from ancient times that the "true style", later called neo-classical, spread into art, rejecting the frivolities of the royal court of Louis XVI at the time of the French Revolution. In the very composition of the work of David, however, the essence of the tableau juxtaposes several rococo ideas, and is thus not a completely neo-classical work. Nonetheless, the neo-classical perspective can still be found, especially in the ideas behind this painting: a revolutionary (David) offers a meditation on the moral heroism in adversity.The artist returned to the subject in 1784, producing a smaller canvas with minor changes which is in the collection of the Louvre.

List of paintings by Jacques-Louis David

Category:Paintings in the Palais des Beaux-Arts de Lille

Category:Cultural depictions of Belisarius

Category:Byzantine Empire in art and culture

''Belisarius Begging for Alms'', 1784, 101 × 115 cm, Louvre

Category:Paintings by Jacques-Louis David


Prompt: Focus on Rue Saint-Honoré, dans l'après-midi. Effet de pluie and explain the abstract.

Rue Saint-Honoré, dans l'après-midi. Effet de pluie ("Rue Saint-Honoré in the Afternoon. Effect of Rain") is an 1897 oil painting by Camille Pissarro.  The work was made towards the end of Pissarro's career, when he abandoned his experiments with Pointillism and returned to a looser Impressionist style.  It is part of a series of works that Pissarro made in 1897-98 from a window of the Hôtel du Louvre, looking down across the edge of the place du Théâtre Français (now the Place André-Malraux) and along the rue Saint-Honoré, portraying the people, carriages and buildings, the trees, fountains and streetlamps, in an early afternoon shower of rain.  Other paintings in the series depict a similar scene in morning sunlight, or in the shadows of the evening.  The painting measures 81 cm × 65 cm (32 in × 26 in).The painting has been displayed at the Museo Thyssen-Bornemisza in Madrid since the museum opened in 1992.  It had been bought by Baron Hans Heinrich Thyssen-Bornemisza at the Hahn Gallery in New York in 1976, from a US collector who bought it at the Knoedler Gallery in New York in 1952.  In 1993, the baron sold it with the rest of his collection of 775 works to the Spanish state for US$350 million.  A claim that the painting was Nazi looted art was dismissed by US federal courts in 2019 and 2020, on the grounds that the law of Spain applied. However, in September 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court accepted certiorari to review that decision, and on 21 April 2022, the Court ruled that the lower courts had incorrectly applied federal common law to apply Spanish law when they should have applied the law of California, and remanded the case for further proceedings. On January 9, 2024, the federal intermediate appellate court ruled in favor of the Museo Thyssen-Bornemisza by holding that California would apply its law on conflict of laws in such a way as to defer to the law of Spain.

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

United States District Court for the Central District of California

Category:Paintings in the Thyssen-Bornemisza Museum


Prompt: Explain the abstract of this artwork, Rue Saint-Honoré, dans l'après-midi. Effet de pluie.

Rue Saint-Honoré, dans l'après-midi. Effet de pluie ("Rue Saint-Honoré in the Afternoon. Effect of Rain") is an 1897 oil painting by Camille Pissarro.  The work was made towards the end of Pissarro's career, when he abandoned his experiments with Pointillism and returned to a looser Impressionist style.  It is part of a series of works that Pissarro made in 1897-98 from a window of the Hôtel du Louvre, looking down across the edge of the place du Théâtre Français (now the Place André-Malraux) and along the rue Saint-Honoré, portraying the people, carriages and buildings, the trees, fountains and streetlamps, in an early afternoon shower of rain.  Other paintings in the series depict a similar scene in morning sunlight, or in the shadows of the evening.  The painting measures 81 cm × 65 cm (32 in × 26 in).The painting has been displayed at the Museo Thyssen-Bornemisza in Madrid since the museum opened in 1992.  It had been bought by Baron Hans Heinrich Thyssen-Bornemisza at the Hahn Gallery in New York in 1976, from a US collector who bought it at the Knoedler Gallery in New York in 1952.  In 1993, the baron sold it with the rest of his collection of 775 works to the Spanish state for US$350 million.  A claim that the painting was Nazi looted art was dismissed by US federal courts in 2019 and 2020, on the grounds that the law of Spain applied. However, in September 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court accepted certiorari to review that decision, and on 21 April 2022, the Court ruled that the lower courts had incorrectly applied federal common law to apply Spanish law when they should have applied the law of California, and remanded the case for further proceedings. On January 9, 2024, the federal intermediate appellate court ruled in favor of the Museo Thyssen-Bornemisza by holding that California would apply its law on conflict of laws in such a way as to defer to the law of Spain.

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

United States District Court for the Central District of California

Category:Paintings in the Thyssen-Bornemisza Museum


Prompt: How does Rue Saint-Honoré, dans l'après-midi. Effet de pluie explain its abstract?

Rue Saint-Honoré, dans l'après-midi. Effet de pluie ("Rue Saint-Honoré in the Afternoon. Effect of Rain") is an 1897 oil painting by Camille Pissarro.  The work was made towards the end of Pissarro's career, when he abandoned his experiments with Pointillism and returned to a looser Impressionist style.  It is part of a series of works that Pissarro made in 1897-98 from a window of the Hôtel du Louvre, looking down across the edge of the place du Théâtre Français (now the Place André-Malraux) and along the rue Saint-Honoré, portraying the people, carriages and buildings, the trees, fountains and streetlamps, in an early afternoon shower of rain.  Other paintings in the series depict a similar scene in morning sunlight, or in the shadows of the evening.  The painting measures 81 cm × 65 cm (32 in × 26 in).The painting has been displayed at the Museo Thyssen-Bornemisza in Madrid since the museum opened in 1992.  It had been bought by Baron Hans Heinrich Thyssen-Bornemisza at the Hahn Gallery in New York in 1976, from a US collector who bought it at the Knoedler Gallery in New York in 1952.  In 1993, the baron sold it with the rest of his collection of 775 works to the Spanish state for US$350 million.  A claim that the painting was Nazi looted art was dismissed by US federal courts in 2019 and 2020, on the grounds that the law of Spain applied. However, in September 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court accepted certiorari to review that decision, and on 21 April 2022, the Court ruled that the lower courts had incorrectly applied federal common law to apply Spanish law when they should have applied the law of California, and remanded the case for further proceedings. On January 9, 2024, the federal intermediate appellate court ruled in favor of the Museo Thyssen-Bornemisza by holding that California would apply its law on conflict of laws in such a way as to defer to the law of Spain.

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

United States District Court for the Central District of California

Category:Paintings in the Thyssen-Bornemisza Museum


Prompt: In Rue Saint-Honoré, dans l'après-midi. Effet de pluie, how is the abstract discussed?

Rue Saint-Honoré, dans l'après-midi. Effet de pluie ("Rue Saint-Honoré in the Afternoon. Effect of Rain") is an 1897 oil painting by Camille Pissarro.  The work was made towards the end of Pissarro's career, when he abandoned his experiments with Pointillism and returned to a looser Impressionist style.  It is part of a series of works that Pissarro made in 1897-98 from a window of the Hôtel du Louvre, looking down across the edge of the place du Théâtre Français (now the Place André-Malraux) and along the rue Saint-Honoré, portraying the people, carriages and buildings, the trees, fountains and streetlamps, in an early afternoon shower of rain.  Other paintings in the series depict a similar scene in morning sunlight, or in the shadows of the evening.  The painting measures 81 cm × 65 cm (32 in × 26 in).The painting has been displayed at the Museo Thyssen-Bornemisza in Madrid since the museum opened in 1992.  It had been bought by Baron Hans Heinrich Thyssen-Bornemisza at the Hahn Gallery in New York in 1976, from a US collector who bought it at the Knoedler Gallery in New York in 1952.  In 1993, the baron sold it with the rest of his collection of 775 works to the Spanish state for US$350 million.  A claim that the painting was Nazi looted art was dismissed by US federal courts in 2019 and 2020, on the grounds that the law of Spain applied. However, in September 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court accepted certiorari to review that decision, and on 21 April 2022, the Court ruled that the lower courts had incorrectly applied federal common law to apply Spanish law when they should have applied the law of California, and remanded the case for further proceedings. On January 9, 2024, the federal intermediate appellate court ruled in favor of the Museo Thyssen-Bornemisza by holding that California would apply its law on conflict of laws in such a way as to defer to the law of Spain.

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

United States District Court for the Central District of California

Category:Paintings in the Thyssen-Bornemisza Museum


Prompt: Focus on Rue Saint-Honoré, dans l'après-midi. Effet de pluie and explain the Provenance.

The painting was bought from Pissarro by the German businessman Julius Cassirer in 1897, and it was inherited by his son Fritz Cassirer and then by Fritz's wife Lilly.  She remarried, but in 1939, as a German Jew, she was forced to sell the painting to Jakob Scheidwimmer, an official of the Reichskammer der bildenden Künste, for the low price of 900 ℛℳ to secure an exit visa, shortly before the outbreak of the Second World War.  The painting was sold at an auction in Berlin in 1943 for 95,000 ℛℳ and disappeared from public view.  In 1958, a German court awarded Lilly Cassirer Neubauer compensation of DM 120,000, the fair market value for the work.In 2005, Lilly's grandson Claude Cassirer and other heirs filed a claim to recover the painting.  In January 2011 the Spanish government denied a request by the US ambassador to return the painting, and in 2015 a Spanish court ruled that the painting belonged to the museum.   In April 2019 the United States District Court for the Central District of California ruled that the painting belongs to Fundación Colección Thyssen-Bornemisza, on the basis that the baron and then the museum did not know it was looted art when they bought it.  While that decision was affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in 2020, in September 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court accepted certiorari to review the Ninth Circuit's decision.  The case was heard on January 18, 2022 and on April 21, 2022, the Supreme Court, disagreeing with the decision of the Ninth Circuit's decision, vacated the judgement.  Writing for a unanimous court, Justice Elena Kagan ruled that the lower courts had erred in applying federal common law to resolve the threshold choice of law question of whether the law of Spain or the law of California would control.  The high court held that when hearing non-federal claims under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, a federal court must apply state law to choice-of-law questions, which in this case meant the law of California.  Therefore, the case was remanded to allow the lower courts to apply the law of California governing conflict of laws, to determine whether a California state court would apply its own substantive property law to the ownership of the painting or would defer to the law of Spain.  Following the Supreme Court's decision, the case was remanded to the Ninth Circuit, which tried to certify the choice-of-law question under California law to the Supreme Court of California. In August 2023, the state supreme court declined to hear that question and sent it back to the Ninth Circuit, meaning that the federal court was required to make an Erie guess as to how a California state court would resolve the question. On January 9, 2024, the Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of the foundation — holding that under the law of California (specifically, a 2010 landmark opinion of the Supreme Court of California involving Terrence McCann), ownership of the painting had to be decided under the law of Spain, rather than the law of California.  The critical difference between the two is that the Civil Code of Spain allows for acquisitive prescription of personal property against the true owner, while California does not recognize adverse possession of personal property.This decision was highly controversial in California.  As a result, on September 16, 2024, Governor Gavin Newsom signed a bill which expressly overrides California's governmental interest test for resolving a conflict of laws in the specific context of "art or personal property taken in cases of political persecution" and instead prescribes that California substantive law will always control.  The bill was enacted as an urgency statute with immediate effect.  This new rule was to apply not only to all new cases going forward, but also to all cases still pending on appeal (including the Cassirer case).

Category:Paintings in the Thyssen-Bornemisza Museum


Prompt: Explain the Provenance of this artwork, Rue Saint-Honoré, dans l'après-midi. Effet de pluie.

The painting was bought from Pissarro by the German businessman Julius Cassirer in 1897, and it was inherited by his son Fritz Cassirer and then by Fritz's wife Lilly.  She remarried, but in 1939, as a German Jew, she was forced to sell the painting to Jakob Scheidwimmer, an official of the Reichskammer der bildenden Künste, for the low price of 900 ℛℳ to secure an exit visa, shortly before the outbreak of the Second World War.  The painting was sold at an auction in Berlin in 1943 for 95,000 ℛℳ and disappeared from public view.  In 1958, a German court awarded Lilly Cassirer Neubauer compensation of DM 120,000, the fair market value for the work.In 2005, Lilly's grandson Claude Cassirer and other heirs filed a claim to recover the painting.  In January 2011 the Spanish government denied a request by the US ambassador to return the painting, and in 2015 a Spanish court ruled that the painting belonged to the museum.   In April 2019 the United States District Court for the Central District of California ruled that the painting belongs to Fundación Colección Thyssen-Bornemisza, on the basis that the baron and then the museum did not know it was looted art when they bought it.  While that decision was affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in 2020, in September 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court accepted certiorari to review the Ninth Circuit's decision.  The case was heard on January 18, 2022 and on April 21, 2022, the Supreme Court, disagreeing with the decision of the Ninth Circuit's decision, vacated the judgement.  Writing for a unanimous court, Justice Elena Kagan ruled that the lower courts had erred in applying federal common law to resolve the threshold choice of law question of whether the law of Spain or the law of California would control.  The high court held that when hearing non-federal claims under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, a federal court must apply state law to choice-of-law questions, which in this case meant the law of California.  Therefore, the case was remanded to allow the lower courts to apply the law of California governing conflict of laws, to determine whether a California state court would apply its own substantive property law to the ownership of the painting or would defer to the law of Spain.  Following the Supreme Court's decision, the case was remanded to the Ninth Circuit, which tried to certify the choice-of-law question under California law to the Supreme Court of California. In August 2023, the state supreme court declined to hear that question and sent it back to the Ninth Circuit, meaning that the federal court was required to make an Erie guess as to how a California state court would resolve the question. On January 9, 2024, the Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of the foundation — holding that under the law of California (specifically, a 2010 landmark opinion of the Supreme Court of California involving Terrence McCann), ownership of the painting had to be decided under the law of Spain, rather than the law of California.  The critical difference between the two is that the Civil Code of Spain allows for acquisitive prescription of personal property against the true owner, while California does not recognize adverse possession of personal property.This decision was highly controversial in California.  As a result, on September 16, 2024, Governor Gavin Newsom signed a bill which expressly overrides California's governmental interest test for resolving a conflict of laws in the specific context of "art or personal property taken in cases of political persecution" and instead prescribes that California substantive law will always control.  The bill was enacted as an urgency statute with immediate effect.  This new rule was to apply not only to all new cases going forward, but also to all cases still pending on appeal (including the Cassirer case).

Category:Paintings in the Thyssen-Bornemisza Museum