The National Gallery London has acquired the painting Lot and his Daughters (1624) by Abraham Bloemaert (Netherlandish, 1566 – 1651). This is the first painting by the artist to enter the National Gallery Collection.
The painting’s subject is the Old Testament story of Lot and his daughters, popular because of its moralising potential and dramatic possibilities. The story (Genesis 19) recounts how Lot was spared on account of his virtue and escaped God’s destruction of the immoral city of Sodom with his wife and two daughters. After the loss of his wife, who was turned to salt for disobeying God’s command not to look back at the burning city, Lot eventually settled inside a cave with his daughters. Lot’s two daughters believed only they remained alive on earth and took the desperate measure of seducing their own father to ensure the continuation of the human race. Nine months later, the sisters bore the sons Moab and Ben-Ammi, founders of the Moabite and Ammonite tribes. From the Moabite tribe eventually emerged Ruth, who, according to some theologians, was the ancestress of Christ.
Already in the Middle Ages, depictions of this biblical story served to moralise on the danger of female seduction and the unfavourable effects of alcohol. Abraham Bloemaert drew inspiration from a print on the same subject by Lucas van Leyden (Netherlandish, c.1494 – 1533) and a painting by Hendrick Goltzius (Netherlandish, 1558 – 1617). But Bloemaert also altered the narrative thrust of their scenes, portraying Lot and his daughters as mostly clothed and psychologically disconnected from one another, rather than nudes engaging in a range of carnal pleasures. This had the effect of emphasising the moral dilemma of this story to the viewer.
On the National Gallery’s Bloemaert painting, Lot looks hazily to the ground, seemingly unaware of the unsteady drinking cup he holds in his hand. A shadow cast by his wide-brimmed hat falls over his eyes, symbolic of his disengagement and obliviousness to the intentions of his daughters. In the background we see how the city of Sodom is burning, while the fate of Lot’s wife is also visualised. The symbolically charged items forming the still life provide a commentary on the moral and ethical issues surrounding this biblical narrative.
A striking feature in Bloemaert’s rendition is the sumptuous still life spread out on a stone table partially covered by a plain white damask tablecloth. It consists of apples and grapes in a Wan-li porcelain bowl, half a bread loaf stacked on top of an old Gouda cheese, a pewter dish with oysters, and a knife balancing precariously on the edge of the table. These objects and motifs are typical of early seventeenth-century still-life painting. Some of them—the bread, grapes, and cheese in particular—appear frequently in depictions of Lot and His Daughters, including in Goltzius’s version. Standing before the table is a large, ornate, gilded ewer and on it a covered goblet. Bloemaert probably based these vessels on actual prototypes, possibly by the Utrecht silversmith family Van Vianen.
A prominent element of this still life is the plate of oysters—aphrodisiacs that allude to the imminent sexual consummation planned by Lot’s daughters. Discarded shells of consumed oysters lying on the ground in the shadow of the elder sister’s dress further indicate the sexual implications of the story. Nevertheless, also prominently displayed in this still life are bread and wine, fundamental elements of the Eucharist. It’s argued that the prominence of such Christological symbols in depictions of Lot and His Daughters presents the moral dilemma of this story to the viewer. They serve as reminders that Lot was a sinner, redeemed by Christ, but also that he was also an archetypal prototype for Christ. The red admiral butterfly hovering above the still life also has Christological implications, for it refers symbolically to the resurrection of the soul.
‘Lot and his Daughters’ was only recently recognised as a work by Abraham Bloemaert. Around the beginning of the 20th century it was attributed to Peter Paul Rubens on the basis of a false signature applied in the 19th century. With the discovery of Abraham Bloemaert’s signature and date during the painting’s restoration in 2004, it became possible to identify this work as the ‘grand gallery picture’ auctioned on 14 February 1811 in London, which, according to the sale catalogue, had belonged to King Charles II of England (1630 – 1685).
Part of the above text is from the excellent article about this painting when it still belonged to the Leiden Collection.