Cat. 16 Arrival of the Normandy Train, Gare Saint-Lazare, 1877

Monet’s Station

By the end of 1876 Monet had grown restless in Argenteuil, the picturesque suburb northwest of Paris that had served as his home and the setting for many of his paintings since 1871.2 With the financial assistance of his independently wealthy friend, the artist Gustave Caillebotte, Monet rented a ground-floor space at 17, rue Moncey in Paris to use as his studio.3 The apartment was conveniently located just a few blocks from the Gare Saint-Lazare, the terminus for the Normandy rail line that serviced Argenteuil. Although Monet continued to live and work in Argenteuil, he began to commute into Paris more often, with the station connecting his home life and the business of art found in the city.

The Saint-Lazare train station was, moreover, equidistant from Argenteuil and the Château de Rottembourg, in Montgeron, where the department store owner and art collector Ernest Hoschedé and his wife Alice owned a country house. By the end of 1876, Monet was finishing a commission for four large, decorative panels inspired by the château and the grounds on the property.4 This project required an extended stay, so Monet likely made periodic trips back to Argenteuil and Paris.5 It may well have been that the gare took on added significance during this time as the midpoint between Monet’s work on an important commission for Hoschedé for a generous patron and his own family life, fraught with financial strain and concern over his wife Camille’s declining health.

Following the interlude at Rottembourg, Monet began a series of works featuring the Gare Saint-Lazare. Monet had not painted in Paris for several years, and his gradual shift of focus toward the capital coincided with new approaches as well as fresh subject matter.6 The resolutely urban cityscape was a bracing antidote to the picturesque settings of Argenteuil, which had dominated his oeuvre since his move there. The Gare Saint-Lazare was a bustling hub, then the capital’s largest and busiest station. First opened in 1837, the station had recently been expanded by the newly constructed Pont de l’Europe, an engineering marvel consisting of interlocking bridges stretching over the railway yard, which allowed for increased traffic.7 A starkly modern addition to the Parisian landscape when it was completed in 1868, the bridge inspired Caillebotte’s large-scale painting Le Pont de l’Europe (fig. 16.1), which would be exhibited along with Arrival of the Normandy Train, Gare Saint-Lazare, in April 1877 at the third Impressionist exhibition.8

Monet’s Premeditated “Impressionist” Work

Having set himself up in his Paris studio in January 1877, Monet immediately sought official permission to paint inside the station.9 He seems to have begun work at once upon receiving a favorable reply from the director of the Chemins de Fer de l’Ouest. The conditions inside required dramatically different working methods, and this may account for why he executed pencil sketches in sketchbooks (or carnets), which was unusual for Monet, as he devised solutions to the difficulties involved in capturing the continual bustle of the station.10 The Art Institute’s painting retains a sketch-like, improvisational, and graphic quality within the overall balanced and highly calculated composition; this is particularly evident in comparison with a related drawing (fig. 16.2 [D153]).11

A central lamppost aligns exactly with the apex of the building’s glass canopy, bifurcating the composition in much the same way as the green streetlight does in Caillebotte’s monumental Paris Street; Rainy Day (fig. 16.3), which Monet would almost certainly have known was in progress.12 With the exception of these topographical elements, however, there is no narrative detail in this liminal space. Monet expressed the breakdown of industrial materials under the weightlessness of clouds and steam in a variety of techniques that ranged from leaving the primed canvas exposed (fig. 16.4) to wet-on-wet applications of dense layers of pigment on top of painted surfaces (fig. 16.5 and fig. 16.6; see also Technical Report).

In his initial lay-in Monet carefully sketched in the roofline for Arrival of the Normandy Train, leaving in reserve an area for the billows of steam (fig. 16.7). In situ he would have observed the effects of steam against the panes of glass overhead.13 For the iron armature of the ceiling, seen more precisely delineated in both the version at the Musée d’Orsay (fig. 16.8 [W438]) and the Fogg Art Museum version (fig. 16.9 [W439]), the artist applied narrow individual strokes of blue and green through still-wet paint (fig. 16.10).14 Although the gridwork is less visible on the right side of the final composition, the infrared reflectography (IRR) image reveals that it was a part of the earlier conception and was ultimately painted over with thick whitish-gray brushstrokes suggesting smoke and steam (fig. 16.11).

The art historian Juliet Wilson-Bareau has described Monet’s group of twelve Gare paintings as varying in technique, composition, and canvases or supports. She categorizes them as works executed on previously used canvases; those that appear as single-session sketches, those painted entirely on the motif, and ones “that seem to hover on the borderline between initial sketch and work in progress.”15 As mentioned, the Art Institute’s painting is sketch-like, yet the application of paint wet-on-wet and wet-over-dry suggests a process that lasted several sessions (see Technical Report). The picture was probably worked both on site and in the studio, given the subtle but significant changes Monet made on seemingly random areas of the composition. He fiddled with elements on the left, such as the tracks, and altered the amount of detail he wanted to include. The rails were added first, and they continue underneath the pentimento of a whirling pattern of strokes at the foot of the train at left that were painted over; these may have represented the circular front of a train engine (fig. 16.12).

Although hardly decipherable in the traditional sense, the workers milling about on the left and the people waiting on the platforms before boarding time are legible. Dark strokes of paint with daubs of reddish-brown suggest flesh sometimes beneath hats and hair (fig. 16.13 and fig. 16.14). Monet indicates gender and style only through silhouettes made up of a few economical strokes, with a male figure in the left foreground sporting a recognizable hairstyle and garments as the lone exception (fig. 16.15). Monet here, as in so many of his post-1860s figure paintings, was drawn to distilling the sensation of modern life in action rather than focusing on the individual, a goal that distinguished him from Realist writers and painters, such as Honoré Daumier, for whom the motif of the train represented a social experiment in which different classes were forced to interact. Monet’s indifference to specific individuals is clear in the Chicago version: the intangibles of urgency, deadlines, and speed are visualized with urgent strokes to denote crowds of people poised to move, while the billowing clouds, in shades of bluish-gray, give tangible shape to the suggestion of smoke, steam, and sky suspended overhead.

Third Impressionist Exhibition

At the third Impressionist exhibition, held in April 1877, Monet showed the present painting, along with six other versions of the Gare Saint-Lazare.16 Émile Zola commended Monet for having successfully expressed the excitement and energy of the modern train station, “the rumble of trains surging forward, . . . the torrents of smoke winding through vast engine sheds.”17 The group as a whole received largely positive reviews,18 with one critic singling out the Chicago version as “excellent,” for imparting “an accurate, clear impressionism,” and for being “unpretentious and well done.”19

Of the seven Saint-Lazare paintings identified as having been exhibited in 1877, Arrival of the Normandy Train, Gare Saint-Lazare bears a more detailed title, specifying both the railway line and its direction. Although not the largest or most finished of those included, it was probably the most “legible to a nineteenth-century viewer of oil sketches.”20 For this composition, Monet positioned himself inside the station where the Normandy lines pull in, which was also the side closest to the rue d’Amsterdam, the street leading to the boulevard de Clichy and to his studio on the rue Moncey (fig. 16.16).21

The nearest analogue in viewpoint and handling to the Art Institute’s painting is the version now in the National Gallery, London, The Gare St-Lazare (1877, fig. 16.17 [W441]), which was not exhibited in 1877.22 Both show the arched bays of the parcel depot beyond the roof on the rue d’Amsterdam side of the station; the vaulted rooflines and tracks are seen in a contemporary photograph (fig. 16.18).23 And both versions are closely related to a drawing from a sketchbook that Monet kept at this time (fig. 16.2).

Monet had realized some success with the gare paintings before the start of the third Impressionist exhibition. Three of the seven had already been sold to collectors, a fact advertised by the inclusion of their names in the accompanying catalogue.24 By March 1877, he had sold at least four paintings to collectors, including Ernest Hoschedé, who acquired the Chicago painting and two others (Arrival at Saint-Lazare Station [Fogg Art Museum (W439)] and Tracks Coming Out of Saint-Lazare Station [private collection (W445)]), and Georges de Bellio, who purchased The Pont de l’Europe, Saint-Lazare Station (W442) and who would later acquire the Chicago painting as well.25 Although the group of Saint-Lazare canvases lacks the temporal and iconographical cohesiveness of the series Monet would begin in the 1890s, they mark a new direction for his work that was unprecedented in the history of modern art. Novel too was Monet’s decision to exhibit the Gare paintings together as a group presaging the exhibition strategies he would use two decades later with his series Stacks of Wheat (cats. 27–32).
Gloria Groom, with research assistance by Genevieve Westerby

Technical Report

Technical Summary

Claude Monet’s Arrival of the Normandy Train, Gare Saint-Lazare was painted on a pre-primed, no. 25 landscape (paysage) linen canvas. The painting appears to retain its original stretcher. The off-white ground consists of two layers. The painting was built up from a broadly applied lay-in that blocked out the main compositional forms, leaving space in reserve for the large cloud of steam and the skylight in the station roof. Throughout the painting, the brushwork remains open and the compositional forms sketchily rendered. Areas of exposed ground and canvas texture remain visible throughout and are juxtaposed with more fluid, smooth paint applications and areas of thicker brushstrokes and impasto, creating a varied surface texture. Most of the compositional elements were executed with concise strokes of the brush, often worked wet-in-wet. The artist originally included a grid of iron tie rods underneath the right side of the station roof, creating symmetry with the left side. These were subsequently covered by the puffs of gray steam coming from the locomotive below. Painted-over brushwork in the lower left corner, visualized with the aid of infrared reflectography, indicates that the artist made a change in this area of the composition; however, the nature of the underlying form is unclear.26

Multilayer Interactive Image Viewer

The multilayer interactive image viewer is designed to facilitate the viewer’s exploration and comparison of the technical images (fig. 16.19).27

Signature

Signature/Stamp

Signed and dated: Claude Monet 77 (lower left corner, name in dark purplish-brown paint, year in dark reddish-brown paint28) (fig. 16.20, fig. 16.21, fig. 16.22). The underlying paint was dry when the signature and date were applied.

Structure and Technique

Support

Canvas

Flax (commonly known as linen).29

Standard format

The dimensions correspond closely to a no. 25 landscape (paysage) standard-size stretcher (60 × 81 cm).30

Weave

Plain weave. Average thread count (standard deviation): 15.7V (0.4) × 19.2H (1.1) threads/cm.31 The vertical threads were determined to correspond to the warp and the horizontal threads to the weft. No weave match was found with other Monet paintings analyzed for this project.

Canvas characteristics

There is strong, fairly even cusping along the right edge; cusping on the other sides is absent or very slight.

Stretching

Current stretching: Dates to aqueous lining applied prior to acquisition of painting in 1933 (see Conservation History). The tacks, spaced approximately 1–8.5 cm apart, do not correspond to the cusping along the right edge.32 The tacking margins could not be fully examined due to the presence of paper edge strips.

Original stretching: Spacing of the original tacks could not be determined due to the presence of paper edge strips.

Stretcher/strainer

Current stretcher: The current stretcher may be original to the painting. It consists of five members, including a vertical crossbar, with butt-ended, mortise and tenon joints and ten keys (fig. 16.23).33 Dimensions: stretcher bar width, 6.5 cm; crossbar width, 6.0 cm; depth, 1.5 cm.

Original stretcher: See above.

Manufacturer’s/supplier’s marks

None observed in current examination or documented in previous examinations.34

Preparatory Layers

Sizing

In UV light, evidence of a light blue fluorescence between the canvas and the ground suggests the presence of an organic layer, possibly glue sizing (fig. 16.24).35

Ground application/texture

The ground extends to the edges of all four tacking margins, indicating that the canvas was cut from a larger piece of primed fabric, which was probably commercially prepared. Cross-sectional analysis indicates that two layers are present. The lower layer ranges from 25 to 100 µm in thickness. The upper layer ranges from 100 to 125 µm in thickness (fig. 16.25, fig. 16.26).36 Numerous tiny bubble holes were observed in the ground layer where it is exposed at the edges and also throughout the composition where the paint was thinly applied (fig. 16.27).

Color

When the painting surface is observed microscopically, only the upper ground layer is visible. It has a warm, off-white color, with some dark (possibly black) and red pigment particles (fig. 16.28).

Materials/composition

Analysis indicates that the lower layer contains calcium carbonate (chalk), with traces of iron oxide, various silicates, and calcium sulfate. Several intact microfossils were observed in the chalk layer (fig. 16.29). The upper layer contains primarily lead white and barium sulfate (barite), with traces of bone black and iron oxide red, various silicates, silica, calcium carbonate, and calcium sulfate. Barite is present in a wide range of sizes, including very large particles (fig. 16.30).37 Binder: Oil (estimated).

Compositional Planning/Underdrawing/Painted Sketch

Extent/character

No underdrawing was observed with infrared reflectography (IRR) or microscopic examination.38

Paint Layer

Application/technique and artist’s revisions

Overall, the brushwork is open and somewhat sketchy, with areas of exposed ground left visible through thinly painted passages and at breaks in the brushstrokes. The composition was laid in using thin layers of paint to block out the main forms. The painting was then built up using smooth, fluid paint applications (fig. 16.31), more-bodied paint and low impasto (fig. 16.32), and lightly dragged and dry-brush strokes that skip across the surface of the painting (fig. 16.33). This range of brushwork creates a varied surface texture, which is highlighted when the painting is viewed in raking light (fig. 16.34).

The station roof was blocked in using very thin applications of paint in dull hues ranging from dark brown and purple to shades of gray (fig. 16.35). These initial layers were broadly applied but are not continuous, leaving the ground layer visible in places (fig. 16.36). The roof was then built up using deeper shades of blue and green. An area of the right side of the roof was left in reserve for the large cloud of steam, which was painted directly over the ground layer, or in some places, over the initial thin lay-in of the roof structure (fig. 16.37). The panes of glass at the peak of the roof were also painted directly on top of the ground. The linear strokes of the skylight framework were laid in first using thin applications of dark green and blue paint. The glass was then painted using individual strokes of thicker, lead white–rich paint, leaving the creamy white tone of the ground layer visible in places (fig. 16.38). In the space just below the roof, where the grid of iron tie rods appears, some of the pale blue-gray strokes of the steam and the sky were laid down first, including the thick, white, diagonal strokes (fig. 16.39). The iron tie rods were then drawn through the wet paint using a fine brush (fig. 16.40), with additional strokes of steam applied on top. The infrared reflectogram shows that the artist originally painted in some of the iron tie rod grid work under the right side of the roof (fig. 16.41). This was subsequently covered by the billows of steam from the locomotive below (fig. 16.42). The compositional forms are mostly rendered with a few quick brushstrokes, without significant blending, modeling, or articulation of details. The figures, for example, basically consist of long vertical strokes of dark blue and green to denote the bodies, with daubs of warm reddish-brown paint to indicate areas of flesh (fig. 16.43). Only the tall figure in the foreground contains any specificity of detail (fig. 16.44)—his hair, jacket, pants, and left hand are all discernible—but even this was done with a few economical strokes of the brush (fig. 16.45).

The work contains both wet-over-dry and wet-in-wet paint application. The thinly applied underlayers look like they were dry before the painting was built up, as the ridges of the brushstrokes were not disturbed by subsequent paint applications. Much of the buildup of the painting was executed with localized areas of wet-in-wet brushwork. For example, the foreground lantern consists of a thick lead white–rich stroke, with the metal structure described by subsequent fine strokes of green paint that were dragged through the white (fig. 16.46). Some of the light-colored details and contours of the front of the locomotive were added over the still-wet underlayers, mixing wet-in-wet (fig. 16.47). The foreground consists of thin, relatively flat, opaque layers of light green and gray paint. A few final strokes were lightly dragged over the surface when the underlying layers were already dry. The presence of wet-over-dry paint application at different stages of the painting process indicates that the work was carried out in more than one session.

In the lower left corner, just above the signature, the infrared reflectogram reveals some sweeping brushstrokes coming from the bottom of the train car, down over the area currently occupied by the rail tracks (fig. 16.48); the texture of the underlying brushstrokes is visible in raking light (fig. 16.49). The brushwork is rather cursory, and it is unclear what the forms represented. When viewed under magnification, some of these brushstrokes are relatively thick and light in hue, containing a high proportion of lead white paint, but other areas were covered by the artist using a slightly different, more brownish-green hue compared to the cooler green of the adjacent platform (fig. 16.50). It seems that the rail tracks were laid in first and that they continue underneath the pentimento. When the area was subsequently painted over, the lines of the tracks were reinforced on top (fig. 16.48). The artist made some small changes in the area of the locomotive. The cloud of steam emanating from the chimney initially covered a larger area but was then partially covered when the chimney was extended in height (fig. 16.51). The roofline of the building behind, on the left side, also appears to have been altered slightly. There is an area of disturbed paint close to the top edge, near the center of the painting, where it appears that the paint was pushed and scraped while it was still soft.39 Losses in that area were subsequently retouched, possibly by the artist in some places. The retouching was not precisely done and the damage remains visible on close viewing (fig. 16.52).

Painting tools

Brushes, including approximately 0.2 cm, 0.5 cm, and 1.0 cm width, flat ferrule (based on width and shape of brushstrokes). There are several brush hairs embedded in the paint layers.

Palette

Analysis indicates the presence of the following pigments: lead white, cadmium yellow, chrome yellow, iron oxides including iron oxide yellow and possibly burnt sienna, vermilion, red lake,40 viridian, ultramarine blue, cobalt blue, and bone black.41 Examination of the painting under UV light suggests the use of red lake in the signature and the sky.42

Binding media

Oil (estimated).43

Surface Finish

Varnish layer/media

The painting is currently coated with a spray application of polyvinyl acetate (PVA) AYAA, which was applied in 1961. Yellowed natural-resin varnish residues are visible in the recesses of the paint texture; these residues probably relate to the varnish that was removed in 1961 (see Conservation History).

Conservation History

There are no records of conservation treatment prior to 1961, however, the painting is currently lined with an aqueous adhesive which was probably applied prior to its acquisition in 1933.

In 1961, a discolored surface film was removed. A spray coat of polyvinyl acetate (PVA) AYAA was applied and localized retouching was carried out along the edges. A final spray coat of AYAA was applied.44

Condition Summary

The painting is in good condition. It is lined with an aqueous adhesive and appears to retain its original stretcher. The stretcher has been keyed out, causing the ends of the top and bottom members to project slightly on the left and right sides. The bottom member is slightly bowed. There is a slight bulge at the lower right corner, but otherwise, the canvas is in plane. There is some abrasion in the frame rebate area, as well as embedded wood fibers that are probably related to framing when the paint was still soft. There are a few tiny, old flake losses in the paint and ground layers. Cracking is minimal and very fine. There are a couple of localized areas of drying cracks. Retouching is minimal and is focused mainly along the bottom edge. The synthetic varnish imparts an even surface sheen.
Kimberley Muir

Frame

Current frame: The frame is not original to the painting. It is a French (Parisian), nineteenth-century (1860/80), wedge-shaped, molding frame capped by a torus with an astragal and ogee sight molding. The frame is water gilded over red-brown bole and burnished on the torus and astragal; all other surfaces are matte. The sides and outside scotia are painted with yellow casein, and the frame retains the original gilding and glue size. The pine molding is mitered and joined with angled dovetail splines. The molding, from perimeter to interior, is scotia side; torus (three-quarter-round); beveled face; astragal; and ogee sight (fig. 16.53).45

Previous frame (installed in the 1960s; removed in 2008): A stylized, mid-twentieth-century, American reproduction of a Louis XVI architrave frame with a small fluted scotia and beaded sight molding and an independent fillet liner with a cove sight (fig. 16.54).46

Previous frame (installed by 1933; removed in the 1960s): The work was previously housed in an early-twentieth-century, Louis XV frame with swept sides and foliate rocaille miter and foliate shell center cartouches, and an independent liner (fig. 16.55).
Kirk Vuillemot

Selected References

Catalogue de la 3e exposition de peinture, exh. cat. (E. Capiomont et V. Renault, 1877), p. 9, cat. 97.66

A. P[othey], “Beaux arts,” Le petit parisien, Apr. 7, 1877, p. 2.67

“Exposition des impressionnistes: 6, rue Le Peletier; 6,” La petite république française Apr. 10, 1877, p. 2. Reprinted in Ruth Berson, ed., The New Painting: Impressionism, 1874–1886, Documentation, vol. 1, Reviews (Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco/University of Washington Press, 1996), p. 176.

Ernest Fillonneau, “Les impessionnistes,” Moniteur des arts, Apr. 20, 1877, p. 1.68

Charles Bigot, “Causerie artistique. L’exposition des ‘impressionnistes,’” La revue politique et littéraire, Apr. 28, 1877, p. 1047.

Gustave Geffroy, “Salon de 1887. Hors du Salon: Claude Monet,” La justice, pt. 2, June 2, 1887, p. 1.69

Galerie Georges Petit, Claude Monet—A. Rodin, exh. cat. (Imp. de l’Art, 1889), p. 31, cat. 33.70

J. A., “Beaux-Arts. Exposition de la galerie Georges Petit,” Art et critique 5 (June 29, 1889), p. 76.

Gustave Geffroy, “Histoire de l’impressionnisme,” La vie artistique 3, 2 (1894), p. 68.71

André Mellerio, L’exposition de 1900 et l’impressionnisme (H. Floury, 1900), p. 20.

Ludovic Baschet, ed., Catalogue officiel illustré de l’Exposition centennale de l’art français de 1800 à 1889, exh. cat. (Lemercier, 1900), p. 211, cat. 484.72

Octave Maus, Exposition des peintres impressionnistes, exh. cat. (Libre Esthétique, 1904), p. 39, cat. 98.

Art Institute of Chicago, General Catalogue of Paintings Sculpture and Other Objects in the Museum (Art Institute of Chicago, 1914), p. 211, cat. 2138.

Gustave Geffroy, Claude Monet: Sa vie, son temps, son oeuvre (G. Crès, 1922) pp. 92; 118; opp. p. 136 (ill.); 272.73

Camille Mauclair, Claude Monet (F. Rieder, 1924), pp. 61; pl. 20. Translated by J. Lewis May as Claude Monet (Dodd, Mead, 1924), pp. 5; pl. 20.74

Art Institute of Chicago, A Guide to the Paintings in the Permanent Collection (Art Institute of Chicago, 1925), p. 162, cat. 2140.75

M. C., “Monets in the Art Institute,” Bulletin of the Art Institute of Chicago 19, 2 (Feb. 1925), p. 19 (ill.).

Florent Fels, Claude Monet, Les peintres français nouveaux 22 (Gallimard, 1925), p. 45 (ill.).

Madeleine Octave Maus, “Exposition des peintres impressionnistes,” in Trente années de lutte pour l’art, 1884–1914 (L’Oiseau Bleu, 1926), p. 323.76

Louis Réau, L’art français aux États-Unis: Ouvrage illustré de vingt-quatre planches hors texte (Henri Laurens, 1926), p. 163.

Léon Werth, Claude Monet (G. Crès, 1928), pl. 26.

Xenia Lathom, Claude Monet (Philip Allan, 1931), pl. 16 (ill.).

Anthony Bertram, Claude Monet, World’s Masters (Studio/William Edwin Rudge, 1931), pl. 11.

Daniel Catton Rich, “The Paintings of Martin A. Ryerson,” Bulletin of the Art Institute of Chicago 27, 1 (Jan. 1933), pp. 9, 11 (ill.).

Art Institute of Chicago, Catalogue of “A Century of Progress”: Exhibition of Paintings and Sculpture; Lent from American Collections, ed. Daniel Catton Rich, 3rd ed., exh. cat. (Art Institute of Chicago, 1933), p. 44, cat. 299.

Daniel Catton Rich, “Französische Impressionisten im Art Institute zu Chicago,” Pantheon: Monatsschrift für freunde und sammler der kunst 11, 3 (Mar. 1933), p. 77. Translated by C. C. H. Drechsel as “French Impressionists in the Art Institute of Chicago,” Pantheon/Cicerone (Mar. 1933), p. 18.

Art Institute of Chicago, Catalogue of “A Century of Progress”: Exhibition of Paintings and Sculpture, 1934, ed. Daniel Catton Rich, exh. cat. (Art Institute of Chicago, 1934), pp. 37–38, cat. 219.

Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Independent Painters of Nineteenth Century Paris, exh. cat. (Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, [1935]), p. 24, cat. 32.

Art Institute of Chicago, A Brief Illustrated Guide to the Collections (Art Institute of Chicago, 1935), p. 28.77

Hans Tietze, Meisterwerke Europäischer Malerei in Amerika (Phaidon, 1935), pp. 289 (ill.); 344–45, no. 289.

George Slocombe, “Giver of Light,” Coronet (Mar. 1938), p. 20 (ill.).

Lionello Venturi, Les archives de l’impressionnisme: Lettres de Renoir, Monet, Pissarro, Sisley et autres; Mémoires de Paul Durand-Ruel; Documents, vol. 2 (Durand-Ruel, 1939), pp. 260, 303.

Thomas Craven, ed., A Treasury of Art Masterpieces, From the Renaissance to the Present Day (Simon & Schuster, 1939), pp. 506–07, pl. 123.

Walter Pach, Catalogue of European and American Paintings, 1500–1900: Masterpieces of Art, New York World’s Fair, biographies and notes compiled by Christopher Lazare, with the assistance of Anne A. Wallis, Marion Haviland, and Simonetta de Vries, exh. cat. (Art Aid, [1940]), p. 223, cat. 322.

Alfred M. Frankfurter, “383 Masterpieces of Art: The World’s Fair Exhibition of Paintings of Four Centuries Loaned from American Public and Private Collections,” Art News, May 25, 1940, pp. 41 (ill.), 64.

Regina Shoolman and Charles E. Slatkin, The Enjoyment of Art in America, with an introduction by George Harold Edgell (Lippincott, 1942), pp. 557; 609, pl. 537.

Hans Huth, “Impressionism Comes to America,” Gazette des beaux-arts 29 (1946), pp. 238, fig. 13; 239, n. 22; 240.

Oscar Reuterswärd, Monet: En Konstnärshistorik (Bonniers, 1948), opposite p. 104 (ill.); pp. 112, 281.

George Besson, Claude Monet (1840–1926), Collection les maîtres 32 (Braun, [1949]), pl. 34.78

Kenneth Clark, Landscape into Art (John Murray, 1949), pl. 89; p. 102.

Dayton Art Institute, The Railroad in Painting, exh. cat. (Dayton Art Institute, 1949), cat. 50 (ill.).

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, The Painter and the City, ed. Gyorgy Kepes, with the assistance of Jane M. Bagg, exh. cat. (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1950), (ill.).

Philadelphia Museum of Art, Diamond Jubilee Exhibtion: Masterpieces of Painting, exh. cat. (Philadelphia Museum of Art, 1950), cat. 70 (ill.).

Lionello Venturi, Impressionisti e Simbolisti: Da Manet a Lautrec (Del Turco, 1950), pp. 59; 211, fig. 56. Translated by Francis Steegmuller as Impressionists and Symbolists (Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1950), pp. 61; fig. 56.

Louis Zara, ed., Masterpieces, Home Collection of Great Art 1 (Ziff-Davis, 1950), p. 118 (ill.).

Art Institute of Chicago, Masterpieces in the Art Institute of Chicago (Art Institute of Chicago, 1952), n.pag. (ill.).

M. K. R., “An Exhibition for Paris,” Art Institute of Chicago Quarterly 49, 2 (Apr. 1, 1955), pp. 28, 30.

Musée de l’Orangerie, De David à Toulouse-Lautrec: Chefs-d’oeuvre des collections américaines, exh. cat. (Musée de l’Orangerie, 1955), pp. 60–61, cat. 42 and pl. 41; 129, pl. 41 and cat. 42. James Thrall Soby, “Foreword/Introduction,” in Musée de l’Orangerie, De David à Toulouse-Lautrec: Chefs-d’oeuvre des collections américaines, exh. cat. (Musée de l’Orangerie, 1955), pp. 20, 29.

Art Institute of Chicago, “Homage to Claude Monet,” Art Institute of Chicago Quarterly 51, 2 (Apr. 1, 1957), pp. 21–22 (ill.).

Art Institute of Chicago, “Catalogue,” Art Institute of Chicago Quarterly 51, 2 (Apr. 1, 1957), p. 33.

Denis Rouart, Claude Monet, trans. James Emmons (Skira, 1958), p. 70.

Art Institute of Chicago, Paintings in the Art Institute of Chicago: A Catalogue of the Picture Collection (Art Institute of Chicago, 1961), pp. 279 (ill.), 318–19.79

Leopold Reidemeister, Auf den Spuren der Maler der Ile de France: Topographische Beiträge zur Geschichte der französischen Landschaftsmalerei von Corot bis zu den Fauves (Propyläen, 1963), p. 114 (ill.).

Remus Niculeseu, “Georges de Bellio, l’ami des impressionnistes,” Revue roumaine d’histoire de l’art 1, 2 (1964), pp. 215, 241, 250, 252, 253, 258, 264.

Haus der Kunst München, Französische Malerei des 19. Jahrhunderts: Von David bis Cézanne, with a preface by Germain Bazin, exh. cat. (Haus der Kunst München [1964]), pp. 416–17, cat. 191 (ill.).

Frederick A. Sweet, “Great Chicago Collectors,” Apollo 84 (Sept. 1966), pp. 201, fig. 31; 202.

Daniel Wildenstein, “Claude Monet,” in Kindlers Malerei Lexikon, vol. 4 (Kindler, [1967]), pp. 464 (ill.), 470.

Minneapolis Institute of Arts, The Past Rediscovered: French Paintings, 1800–1900, exh. cat. (Minneapolis Institute of Arts, 1969), pp. 18; 146–47, cat. 60 (ill.).

Remus Niculescu, “Georges de Bellio, l’ami des Impressionnistes (I),” Paragone 247 (Sept. 1970), pp. 34, 40, 53.80

Remus Niculescu, “Georges de Bellio, l’ami des Impressionnistes (II),” Paragone 249 (Nov. 1970), pp. 47, n. 2; 62; 65–66.81

John Maxon, The Art Institute of Chicago (Abrams, 1970), p. 82 (ill.), 284.82

Wildenstein and Company, “One Hundred Years of Impressionism”: A Tribute to Durand-Ruel, with a preface by Florence Gould, exh. cat. (Wildenstein, 1970), pl. 37.

Art Institute of Chicago, “Lecturer’s Choice,” Bulletin of the Art Institute of Chicago 67, 4 (Jul. –Aug. 1973), p. 11.

Donald E. Gordon, Modern Art Exhibitions, 1900–1916: Selected Catalogue Documentation, vol. 2 (Prestel, 1974), p. 90.

Daniel Wildenstein, Claude Monet: Biographie et catalogue raisonné, vol. 1, Peintures, 1840–1881 (Bibliothèque des Arts, 1974), pp. 84; 304; 305, cat. 440 (ill.); 447, pièces justificatives 60–63, 65, 68.

Grace Seiberling, “The Evolution of an Impressionist,” in Paintings by Monet, ed. Susan Wise, exh. cat. (Art Institute of Chicago, 1975), pp. 27, 28.

Susan Wise, ed., Paintings by Monet, exh. cat. (Art Institute of Chicago, 1975), p. 96, cat. 42 (ill.).

M. Therese Southgate, “About the Cover,” JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association 233, 3 (July 21, 1975), cover (ill.); p. 259 (ill.).

Guy Hubbard and Mary J. Rouse, Art: Discovering and Creating (Benefic, 1977), p. 178 (ill.).

Art Institute of Chicago, 100 Masterpieces (Art Institute of Chicago, 1978), pp. 92–93, pl. 50.

Luigina Rossi Bortolatto, L’opera completa di Claude Monet: 1870–1889, Classici dell’arte 63 (Rizzoli, 1978), pp. 97, cat. 140 (ill.); 98.

Roger Terry Dunn, “The Monet-Rodin Exhibition at the Galerie Georges Petit in 1889” (Ph.D. diss., Northwestern University, 1978), p. 247.

Daniel Wildenstein, Claude Monet: Biographie et catalogue raisonné, vol. 3, Peintures, 1887–1898 (Bibliothèque des Arts, 1979), p. 249, letter 986.

J. Patrice Marandel, The Art Institute of Chicago: Favorite Impressionists Paintings (Crown, 1979), pp. 56, 57 (ill.).

J. Patrice Marandel, “New Installation of Earlier Paintings,” Bulletin of the Art Institute of Chicago 73, 1 (Jan.–Feb., 1979), p. 15 (ill.).

Rodolphe Walter, “Saint-Lazare l’impressionniste,” L’oeil 292 (Nov. 1979), pp. 52, 53.

Diane Kelder, The Great Book of French Impressionism (Abbeville, 1980), p. 205 (ill.).83

Diane Kelder, The Great Book of French Impressionism, Tiny Folios (Abbeville, 1980), p. 121, pl. 13.

Theodore Reff, Manet and Modern Paris, exh. cat. (National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C./Eastern, 1982), pl. 7 and cat. 14.

Robert Gordon and Andrew Forge, Monet (Abrams, 1983), pp. 77 (ill.), 290.

Andrea P. A. Belloli, ed., A Day in the Country: Impressionism and the French Landscape, exh. cat. (Los Angeles County Museum of Art, 1984), p. 365.

Hélène Adhémar, “Ernest Hoschedé,” in Aspects of Monet: A Symposium on the Artist’s Life and Times, ed. John Rewald and Frances Weitzenhoffer (Abrams, 1984), pp. 69, n. 23; 70, n. 30.

Richard R. Brettell, “The Impressionist Landscape and the Image of France,” in A Day in the Country: Impressionism and the French Landscape, ed. Andrea P. A. Belloli, exh. cat. (Los Angeles County Museum of Art, 1984), p. 48.

Sylvie Gache-Patin, “The Urban Landscape,” in A Day in the Country: Impressionism and the French Landscape, ed. Andrea P. A. Belloli, exh. cat. (Los Angeles County Museum of Art, 1984), pp. 114; 116; 125, no. 32 (ill.); 126.

Charles F. Stuckey, ed., Monet: A Retrospective (Hugh Lauter Levin, 1985), p. 61 (ill.).

Richard R. Brettell, “Le paysage impressionniste et l’image de la France,” in Réunion des Musées Nationaux, L’impressionnisme et le paysage français, exh. cat. (Réunion des Musées Nationaux, 1985), p. 39.

Sylvie Gache-Patin, “Le paysage urbain,” in Réunion des Musées Nationaux, L’impressionnisme et le paysage français, exh. cat. (Réunion des Musées Nationaux, 1985), pp. 184; 188; 190–91; 196–97, no. 70 (ill.).

John House, “Monet and the Genesis of His Series,” in Auckland City Art Gallery, Claude Monet: Painter of Light, exh. cat. (Auckland City Art Gallery/NZI, 1985), pp. 12; 17, fig. 7.

Richard H. Love, Theodore Earl Butler: Emergence from Monet’s Shadow (Haase-Mumm, 1985), pl. 9.

Guy Cogeval, Les années post-impressionnistes (Nouvelles Éditions Françaises, 1986), p. 11, fig. 15.

Charles S. Moffett, ed., The New Painting: Impressionism, 1874–1886, exh. cat. (Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco, 1986), pp. 205; 222–23, cat. 51 (ill.).

Richard R. Brettell, “The ‘First’ Exhibition of Impressionist Painters,” in The New Painting: Impressionism, 1874–1886, ed. Charles S. Moffett, exh. cat. (Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco, 1986), pp. 189, 198.

Richard R. Brettell, French Impressionists (Art Institute of Chicago/Abrams, 1987), front cover (detail); pp. 42 (ill.), 43, 118, back cover (ill.).

Art Institute of Chicago, Master Paintings in the Art Institute of Chicago, selected by James N. Wood and Katharine C. Lee (Art Institute of Chicago/New York Graphic Society Books/Little, Brown, 1988), pp. 9, 59 (ill.), 167.

Claire De Narbonne-Fontanieu, “Journey through a Cultural Landscape,” France Magazine 10 (Spring 1988), p. 20 (ill.).

Musée Rodin, Claude Monet—Auguste Rodin: Centenaire de l’exposition de 1889, exh. cat. (Musée Rodin, 1989), pp. 54, 79 (ill.).

Anne Distel, Les collectionneurs des impressionnistes (Bibliothèque des Arts, 1989), p. 115. Translated by Barbara Perroud-Benson as Impressionism, The First Collectors, 1874–1886 (Abrams, 1990), p. 115.

David Bomford, Jo Kirby, John Leighton, and Ashok Roy, Art in the Making: Impressionism, exh. cat.(National Gallery, Washington, D.C./Yale University Press, 1990), pp. 166, pl. 163; 170–71.

Bernard L. Myers, Monet, Methods of the Masters (Brian Trodd, 1990), p. 67 (ill.).

Karin Sagner-Düchting, Claude Monet, 1840–1926: Ein Fest für die Augen (Benedikt Taschen, 1990), pp. 95 (ill.), 96. Translated Karen Williams Claude Monet, 1840–1926: A Feast for the Eyes (Taschen, 2004), p. 95 (ill.), 96.

Norma Broude, Impressionism: A Feminist Reading, The Gendering of Art, Science, and Nature in the Nineteenth Century (Rizzoli, 1991), pp. 74; 75; 108, pl. 30; 109, pl. 32 (detail).

Ingo F. Walther and Peter H. Feist, Malerei des Impressionismus, 1860–1920: Der Impressionismus in Frankreich, vol. 1 (Benedikt Taschen, 1992), pp. 152, 170 (ill.).

Sophie Fourny-Dargère, Monet, Profils de l’art (Chêne, 1992), pp. 82; 87, fig. 2.

Art Institute of Chicago, The Art Institute of Chicago: The Essential Guide, selected by James N. Wood and Teri J. Edelstein, entries written and compiled by Sally Ruth May (Art Institute of Chicago, 1993), p. 155 (ill.).84

Art Institute of Chicago, Treasures of 19th- and 20th-Century Painting: The Art Institute of Chicago, with an introduction by James N. Wood (Art Institute of Chicago/Abbeville, 1993), p. 70 (ill.).

Jeffrey Coven, Baudelaire’s Voyages: The Poet and His Painters, exh. cat. (Heckscher Museum/Little, Brown, 1993), p. 90, fig. 56; 170.

Art Institute of Chicago and Niigata Prefectural Museum of Modern Art, Shikago bijutsukan ten: Kindai kaiga no 100-nen [Masterworks of modern art from the Art Institute of Chicago], exh. cat. (Asahi Shinbunsha, 1994), pp. 52, cat. 7; 53 (ill.).

Charles F. Stuckey, “Chicago’s Fortune: Patrons of Modern Paintings and The Art Institute of Chicago,” in Art Institute of Chicago and Niigata Prefectural Museum of Modern Art, Shikago bijutsukan ten: Kindai kaiga no 100-nen [Masterworks of modern art from the Art Institute of Chicago], exh. cat. (Asahi Shinbunsha, 1994), p. 18.

George T. M. Shackelford, “The Age of Impressionism,” in Emily Ballew Neff and George T. M. Shackelford, American Painters in the Age of Impressionism, exh. cat. (Museum of Fine Arts, Houston, 1994), pp. 19; 20, fig. 7.

Andrew Forge, Monet, Artists in Focus (Art Institute of Chicago, 1995), pp. 22–24; 76, pl. 5; 106.

Charles F. Stuckey, with the assistance of Sophia Shaw, Claude Monet, 1840–1926, exh. cat. (Art Institute of Chicago/Thames & Hudson, 1995), pp. 16, 73, cat. 50 (ill.); 202.

Lynn Federle Orr, “Monet: An Introduction,” in New Orleans Museum of Art and Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco, Monet: Late Paintings of Giverny from the Musée Marmottan, exh. cat. (New Orleans Museum of Art/Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco/Abrams, 1995), pp. 18; 19, fig. 5.

Robert Rosenblum, “Impressionismen, byen og det modern liv,” in Impressionister i byen, ed. Anne-Birgitte Fonsmark and Mikael Wivel, exh. cat. (Ordrupgaard, 1996), pp. 16, fig. 5 and cat. 44; 18. Translated as “Impressionism, the City and Modern Life,” in Impressionists in Town, ed. Anne-Birgitte Fonsmark and Mikael Wivel, exh. cat. (Ordrupgaard, 1996), pp. 16, fig. 5 (cat. 44); 18.

Anne-Birgitte Fonsmark and Mikael Wivel, eds., Impressionister i byen, exh. cat. (Ordrupgaard, 1996), p. 105, cat. 44. Translated as Impressionists in Town, exh. cat. (Ordrupgaard, 1996), p. 106, cat. 44.

Ruth Berson, ed., The New Painting: Impressionism, 1874–1886, Documentation, vol. 1, Reviews (Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco/University of Washington Press, 1996), pp. 119, 134, 146, 173, 176.

Ruth Berson, ed., The New Painting: Impressionism, 1874–1886, Documentation, vol. 2, Exhibited Works (Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco/University of Washington Press, 1996), pp. 76, 94 (ill.).

Daniel Wildenstein, Monet, or The Triumph of Impressionism, cat. rais., vol. 1 (Taschen/Wildenstein Institute, 1996), pp. 125, 128.

Daniel Wildenstein, Monet: Catalogue raisonné/Werkverzeichnis, vol. 2, Nos. 1–968 (Taschen/Wildenstein Institute, 1996), pp. 178, cat. 440 (ill.); 179–80.

Stephan Koja, Claude Monet, exh. cat. (Österreichische Galerie, Belvedere, Vienna/Prestel, 1996), pp. 67; 71, cat. 24 (ill.); 216. Translated by John Brownjohn as Claude Monet, exh. cat. (Österreichische Galerie/Prestel, 1996), pp. 67; 71, cat. 24 (ill.); 216.

Elisabeth West FitzHugh, ed., Artists’ Pigments: A Handbook of Their History and Characteristics, vol. 3 (National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C./Oxford University Press, 1997), pp. 286; 287, fig. 12.

M. Therese Southgate, The Art of JAMA: One Hundred Covers and Essays from the Journal of the American Medical Association (Mosby, 1997), pp. 8–9 (ill.).

Meyer Schapiro, Impressionism: Reflections and Perceptions (Braziller, 1997), p. 104, fig 41.

Juliet Wilson-Bareau, Manet, Monet, and the Gare Saint-Lazare, exh. cat. (National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C./Yale University Press, 1998), frontispiece (detail); pp. 111; 112, fig. 99 (cat. 47); 188, n. 83; 199.

Juliet Wilson-Bareau, Manet, Monet, la Gare Saint-Lazare, trans. Isabelle Taudière, exh. cat. (Réunion des Musées Nationaux/Yale University Press, 1998), frontispiece (detail); pp. 111; 112, fig. 99 (cat. 47); 189, n. 83.

Brigitte Béranger-Menand, “Les huit expositions impressionnistes. Profil d’un groupe: 1874–1886,” in Alain Tapié, Brigitte Béranger-Menand, and Yona Beldimaw, Chemins de l’impressionnisme:Normandie–Paris, 1860–1910, exh. cat. (Landesmuseum Joanneum, 1998), p. 26.

Emily D. Bilski, Berlin Metropolis: Jews and the New Culture, 1890–1918, exh. cat. (University of California Press/Jewish Museum, 1999), pp. 119; 120, fig. 101.

Art Institute of Chicago, Master Paintings in the Art Institute of Chicago, selected by James N. Wood (Art Institute of Chicago/Hudson Hills, 1999), pp. 8, 54, 55 (ill.).

Simonella Condemi and Andrew Forge, Claude Monet: La poesia della luce; Sette capolavori dell’Art Institute di Chicago a Palazzo Pitti, exh. cat. (Giunti Gruppo, 1999), pp. 26, 27 (ill.), 28, 29 (detail).

Thomas McBurney, Artistic Greatness: A Comparative Exploration of Michelangelo, Beethoven, and Monet (Galde Press, 1999), p. 277 (ill.)

Gina Frese, Dow Chemical Portrayed, exh. cat. (Chemical Heritage Foundation, 2000), pp. 4, 5 (ill.).

Art Institute of Chicago, Impressionism and Post-Impressionism in the Art Institute of Chicago, selected by James N. Wood (Art Institute of Chicago/Hudson Hills, 2000), p. 54 (ill.).

Art Institute of Chicago, Treasures from the Art Institute of Chicago, selected by James N. Wood, commentaries by Debra N. Mancoff (Art Institute of Chicago/Hudson Hills, 2000), pp. 183, 205 (ill.).

Richard R. Brettell, Impression: Painting Quickly in France, 1860–1890, exh. cat. (Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute/Yale University Press, 2000), p. 136, n. 27.

A. G. Kostenevich, Klod Mone [Claude Monet], exh. cat. (Khudozhnik i Kniga, 2001), pp. 62–65; cat. 17 (ill. and detail).

Richard R. Brettell, “Monet e Parigi,” in Monet: I luoghi della pittura, ed. Marco Goldin, exh. cat. (Linea d’Ombra, 2001), pp. 124, 125 (ill.).

Marco Goldin, L’impressionismo e l’età di Van Gogh, exh. cat. (Linea d’Ombra, 2002), p. 43 (ill.).

Richard R. Brettell, From Monet to Van Gogh: A History of Impressionism, vol. 2 (Teaching Co., 2002), pp. 6, 16, 174.

Judith Hayward, “Nature and Progress: Winslow Homer, His Critics and His Oils, 1880–1900” (Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 2003), pp. 172; 362; 385, ill. 48.

Michel Laclotte, ed., The Art and Spirit of Paris, vol. 2 (Abbeville, 2003), p. 1049, fig. 6.127; 1052.

Richard Thomson, “Monet 1870–1890: Evoluzione, tradizione e decorazione,” in Turner e gli impressionisti: La grande storia del paesaggio moderno in Europa, ed. Marco Goldin, exh. cat. (Linea d’Ombra/Museo di Santa Giulia, 2006), p. 261, n. 8.

David L. Pike, Metropolis on the Styx: The Underworlds of Modern Urban Culture, 1800–2001 (Cornell University Press, 2007), pp. 221; 224, fig. 4.3.

Wildenstein and Co., Claude Monet (1840–1926): A Tribute to Daniel Wildenstein and Katia Granoff, exh. cat. (Wildenstein, 2007), pp. 238, cat. 21 (ill.); 300–301; 303.

Joseph Baillio and Cora Michael, “Chronological and Pictorial Survey of the Life and Career of Claude Monet,” in Wildenstein and Co., Claude Monet (1840–1926): A Tribute to Daniel Wildenstein and Katia Granoff, exh. cat. (Wildenstein, 2007), p. 166.

Joseph Baillio and Cora Michael, “Highlights of the Exhibition,” in Wildenstein and Co., Claude Monet (1840–1926): A Tribute to Daniel Wildenstein and Katia Granoff, exh. cat. (Wildenstein, 2007), pp. 194; 195 (detail).

Kelly Crow, “For Charity, Gallery Plays Museum,” Wall Street Journal, May 25, 2007. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118004588897613954.html (accessed Jan. 28, 2013).

Lance Esplund, “A Whole New Light,” New York Sun, May 17, 2007. http://www.nysun.com/arts/whole-new-light/54648/(accessed Jan. 28, 2013).

Paul Hayes Tucker, “Some Notes on Monet’s Practice,” in Wildenstein and Co., Claude Monet (1840–1926): A Tribute to Daniel Wildenstein and Katia Granoff, exh. cat. (Wildenstein, 2007), pp. 74, fig. 12; 75.

Richard Kendall, “Claude Monet, New York,” Burlington Magazine (July 2007), p. 511.

Roberta Smith, “Monet Arrives and Ripens,” New York Times, May 4, 2007, p. E28.

Eric M. Zafran, “Monet in America,” in Wildenstein and Co., Claude Monet (1840–1926): A Tribute to Daniel Wildenstein and Katia Granoff, exh. cat. (Wildenstein, 2007), p. 113.

Gloria Groom and Douglas Druick, with the assistance of Dorota Chudzicka and Jill Shaw, The Impressionists: Master Paintings from the Art Institute of Chicago, exh. cat. (Art Institute of Chicago/Kimbell Art Museum, 2008), pp. 19 (ill.); 54 (detail); 55, cat. 17 (ill.); 57. Simultaneously published as Gloria Groom and Douglas Druick, with the assistance of Dorota Chudzicka and Jill Shaw, The Age of Impressionism at the Art Institute of Chicago (Art Institute of Chicago/Yale University Press, 2008), pp. 19 (ill.); 54 (detail); 55, cat. 17 (ill.); 57.85

James H. Rubin, Impressionism and the Modern Landscape: Productivity, Technology, and Urbanization from Manet to Van Gogh (University of California Press, 2008), p. 116.

Ian Kennedy, “Impressionism and Post-Impressionism,” in Ian Kennedy and Julian Treuherz, The Railway: Art in the Age of Steam, exh. cat. (Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art/Walker Art Gallery, Liverpool/Yale University Press, 2008), p. 159, fig. 56.

Jonathan Mane-Wheoki, “Monet’s Impressions of the Industrial Environment,” in George T. M. Shackelford, Monet and the Impressionists, exh. cat. (Art Gallery of New South Wales/Yale University Press, 2008), p. 149, fig. 33.

Art Institute of Chicago, Master Paintings in the Art Institute of Chicago, selected by James Cuno (Art Institute of Chicago/Yale University Press, 2009), pp. 9, 54, 55 (ill.).

Claudia Beltramo Ceppi, Monet: Il tempo delle ninfee, exh. cat. (Palazzo Reale/Giunti, 2009), pp. 33, fig. 18; 37.

Brian Dudley Barrett, Artist on the Edge: The Rise of Coastal Artists’ Colonies, 1880–1920, with Particular Reference to Artists’ Communities around the North Sea (Amsterdam University Press, 2010), p. 43 (ill.).

Mary Mathews Gedo, Monet and His Muse: Camille Monet in the Artist’s Life (University of Chicago Press, 2010), pp. 189; 190, fig. 13.1.

Ségolène Le Men, Monet (Citadelles & Mazenod, 2010), pp. 19; 194; 216; 217, ill. 172; 218.

Réunion des Musées Nationaux, Claude Monet, 1840–1926, exh. cat. (Réunion des Musées Nationaux/Musée d’Orsay, 2010), p. 153, cat. 44 (ill.).

John House, “Le sujet chez Monet,” in Réunion des Musées Nationaux, Claude Monet, 1840–1926, exh. cat. (Réunion des Musées Nationaux/Musée d’Orsay, 2010), pp. 23, 27.

Paul Stelkens, “Die Hensmann–Villa in Grosskönigsdorf,” in Egon Heeg, Axel Kurth, and Peter Schreiner, eds., Königsdorf im Rheinland, Pulheimer Beiträge zur Geschichte, Sonderveröffentlichung 34 (Verein für Geschichte, 2011), pp. 425, fig. 32; 427; 478, n. 28.

Other Documentation

Documentation from the Durand-Ruel Archives

Inventory number
Stock Durand-Ruel Paris 9749
Livre de stock Paris 190186

Inventory number
Stock Durand-Ruel New York 3502
Livre de stock New York 1904–2487

Photograph number
Photo Durand-Ruel Paris 709988

Documentation from the Bernheim-Jeune Archives

Label (fig. 16.63)

Inscription (fig. 16.64)

Labels and Inscriptions

Undated

Label
Location: previous Masonite-type backing board (discarded); transcription in conservation file
Method: not documented
Content: Monet / Old St. Lazare Sta Paris / 23 1/2 x 031 1/2 (fig. 16.65)

Label
Location: previous Masonite-type backing board (discarded); transcription in conservation file
Method: not documented
Content: The Minneapolis Institute of Arts / L 69.120 / Lent by Art Institute of Chicago / 77-'69 (fig. 16.66)

Label
Location: stretcher
Method: handwritten script on printed label
Content: Monet No 3502 / La gare St. / Lazare, 1877 / Paris ibbb (fig. 16.59)

Label
Location: stretcher
Method: handwritten script
Content: Cl. Monet n^o. 9749 / La gare St Lazare (le train / de Normandie) 1877. - (fig. 16.60)

Label
Location: stretcher
Method: handwritten script on printed label (added markings in blue and red crayon)
Content: Claude Monet / Le Train de Normandie / appartient à Monsieur Gaston Bernh[eim] / Jeune / 51 Rue Pierre Charron [It appears that “Gaston” has been scribbled out with blue crayon and replaced with “Alexandre,” which is written upside down] (fig. 16.67)

Label
Location: stretcher
Method: handwritten script on printed label
Content: P. R. / 2462 / Monet / Gare S Lazare (fig. 16.68)

Label
Location: stretcher
Method: handwritten script on printed label
Content: 13 (fig. 16.69)

Label
Location: stretcher
Method: residues of circular paper label
Content: [?] (fig. 16.70)

Label
Location: stretcher
Method: residues of rectangular paper label
Content: [?] (fig. 16.71)

Inscription
Location: stretcher
Method: handwritten
Content: W27 (fig. 16.72)

Inscription
Location: stretcher
Method: handwritten (passes over brown paper on stretcher back)
Content: (NO 22) (fig. 16.73)

Inscription
Location: stretcher
Method: handwritten
Content: DR 9749 (fig. 16.62)

Inscription
Location: stretcher
Method: handwritten
Content: Ph. 7099 (fig. 16.61)

Inscription
Location: stretcher
Method: handwritten, partially covered by brown paper
Content: [28?] (fig. 16.74)

Label
Location: stretcher
Method: handwritten script on printed label with green ink stamp
Content: THE ART INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO / CHICAGO ILLINOIS 60603, U.S.A. / To Monet, Claude / Old St. Lazare Station, Paris / 1933.1158
Stamp: Inventory—1980–1981 (fig. 16.75)

Inscription
Location: stretcher
Method: handwritten
Content: 33.1158 (fig. 16.76)

Inscription
Location: stretcher
Method: handwritten
Content: [app. a M?] Alexandre Bernheim (fig. 16.64)

Label
Location: backing board
Method: typewritten script on printed label
Content: THE ART INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO / artist Claude Monet / title Arrival of the Normandy Train / medium cat # 12 / credit crate # 19 / acc. # 1933.1158 (fig. 16.77)

Inscription
Location: previous frame back; 1973 photograph in conservation file
Method: handwritten
Content: ST. LAZARRE [sic] STATION MONET TOP [last word scribbled out] (fig. 16.78)

Pre-1980

Label
Location: previous Masonite-type backing board (discarded); transcription in conservation file
Method: not documented
Content: H(torn) ER KUNST MUNCHEN / Bahnhof St. Lazare in Paris / Art Institute of Chicago / 80 x 59.7 / Kat. Nr.: 191 / 42 [circled]89 (fig. 16.79)

Post-1980

Label
Location: backing board
Method: printed label with green circular sticker
Content: [logo] JAPAN / YAMATO TRANSPORT CO.,LTD. / FINE ARTS DIVISION / EXHIBT. JAPAN 94’ シカゴ美術館展 [Shikago (Chicago) Bijutsukan ten] / CASE NO. 19 / CATAL. NO. / [green sticker] 7 (fig. 16.80)

Label
Location: backing board
Method: printed label
Content: The Art Institute of Chicago / “Claude Monet: 1840–1926” / July 14, 1995–November 26, 1995 / Catalog: 50 / Arrival of the Normandy Train, Saint-Lazare Station / La Gare Saint-Lazare, le train de Normandie / The Art Institute of Chicago, Mr. and Mrs. Martin A. / Ryerson Collection (1933.1158) (fig. 16.81)

Label
Location: backing board
Method: printed label with handwritten script
Content: MANET, MONET / LA GARE SAINT-LAZARE / Musée d’Orsay / 9 février–17 mai 1998 / M’O / CAT. 47 (fig. 16.82)

Label
Location: backing board
Method: typewritten script on printed label (with handwritten check mark in upper right corner)
Content: [logo] National Gallery of Art / Washington, D.C. / Dex ID. 55 / Exhibit: Manet, Monet, and the Gare / Date: 06/14/98–09/20/98 / Artist: Claude Monet / Title: Arrival of the Normandy Train, / Gare Saint-Lazare / Lender: The Art Institute of Chicago / Cat No. 47 (fig. 16.83)

Label
Location: backing board
Method: printed label
Content: rmn [logo] / Claude Monet 1840–1926 / Galeries nationales, Grand Palais / 22/09/2010–24/01/2011 / 42 / Chicago / The Art Institute of Chicago / La Gare Saint-Lazare, train de Normandie / inv. 1933.1158 / huile sur toile (fig. 16.84 )

Examination and Analysis Techniques

X-radiography

Westinghouse X-ray unit, scanned on Epson Expressions 10000XL flatbed scanner. Scans digitally composited by Robert G. Erdmann, University of Arizona.

Infrared Reflectography

Goodrich/ Sensors Unlimited SU640SDV-1.7RT with H filter (1.1–1.4 µm) and J filter (1.5–1.7 µm); Fujifilm S5 Pro with X-Nite 1000B/2 mm filter (1.0–1.1 µm); Inframetrics Infracam with 1.5–1.73 µm filter.

Transmitted Infrared

Fujifilm S5 Pro with X-Nite 1000B/2 mm filter (1.0–1.1 µm).

Visible Light

Natural-light, raking-light, and transmitted-light overalls and macrophotography: Fujifilm S5 Pro with X-NiteCC1 filter.

Ultraviolet

Fujifilm S5 Pro with X-NiteCC1 filter and Kodak Wratten 2E filter.

High-Resolution Visible Light (and Ultraviolet)

Sinar P3 camera with Sinarback eVolution 75 H (PECA 918 UV/IR interference cut filter and Kodak Wratten 2E filter).

Microscopy and Photomicrographs

Sample and cross-sectional analysis using a Zeiss Axioplan2 Research Microscope equipped with reflected light/UV fluorescence and a Zeiss AxioCam MRc5 digital camera. Types of illumination used: darkfield, differential interference contrast (DIC), and UV. In situ photomicrographs with a Wild Heerbrugg M7A StereoZoom Microscope fitted with an Olympus DP71 microscope digital camera.

X-ray Fluorescence Spectroscopy (XRF)

Several spots on the painting were analyzed in situ with a Bruker/Keymaster TRACeR III-V with rhodium tube.

Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM)

Zeiss Universal research microscope.

Scanning Electron Microscopy/Energy-Dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy (SEM/EDX)

Cross sections were analyzed after carbon coating with a Hitachi S-3400N-II VP-SEM with an Oxford EDS and a Hitachi solid-state BSE detector. Analysis was performed at the Northwestern University Atomic and Nanoscale Characterization Experimental (NUANCE) Center, Electron Probe Instrumentation Center (EPIC) facility.

Electron Microprobe

Applied Research Laboratories (ARL) electron microprobe analyzer. Analysis was carried out at McCrone Associates, Chicago, Illinois

Automated Thread Counting

Thread count and weave information were determined by Thread Count Automation Project software.90

Image Registration Software

Overlay images registered using a novel image-based algorithm developed by Damon M. Conover (GW), John K. Delaney (GW, NGA), and Murray H. Loew (GW) of the George Washington University’s the School of Engineering and Applied Science and the National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.91

Image Inventory

The image inventory compiles records of all known images of the artwork on file in the Conservation Department, the Imaging Department, and the Department of Medieval to Modern European Painting and Sculpture at the Art Institute of Chicago (fig. 16.85).

Arrival of the Normandy Train, Gare Saint-Lazare (W440) corresponds to Daniel Wildenstein, Monet: Catalogue raisonné/Werkverzeichnis, vol. 2, Nos. 1–968 (Taschen/Wildenstein Institute, 1996), pp. 178, cat. 440 (ill.); 179–80. The Art Institute currently uses the title that was given to the painting when it was exhibited at the third Impressionist exhibition. The painting had the following titles during the lifetime of the artist:

Apr. 1877: Arrivée du train de Normandie, gare St-Lazare (Catalogue de la 3e exposition de peinture, exh. cat. [E. Capiomont et V. Renault, 1877], p. 9, cat. 97).

June 21, 1889: Gare Saint-Lazare. 1877 (Galerie Georges Petit, Claude Monet—A. Rodin, exh. cat. [Imp. de l’Art, 1889], p. 31, cat. 33).

May 1, 1900: Le Train de Normandie (Ludovic Baschet, ed., Catalogue officiel illustré de l’Exposition centennale de l’art français de 1800 à 1889, exh. cat. [Lemercier, 1900], p. 211, cat. 484).

Feb. 25, 1904: La Gare Saint-Lazare (Octave Maus, Exposition des peintres impressionnistes, exh. cat. [Libre Esthétique, 1904], p. 39, cat. 98).

Oct. 13, 1911: La gare Saint-Lazare, le train de Normandie (Durand-Ruel, Paris, stock book for 1901 [no. 9749]; Paul-Louis Durand-Ruel and Flavie Durand-Ruel, Durand-Ruel Archives, to the Art Institute of Chicago, Oct. 5, 2010, curatorial object file, Art Institute of Chicago).

Dec. 16, 1911: Paris, la Gare Saint-Lazare, 1877 (Durand-Ruel, New York, stock book for 1904–24 [no. 3502]; see Paul-Louis Durand-Ruel and Flavie Durand-Ruel, Durand-Ruel Archives, to the Art Institute of Chicago, Oct. 5, 2010, curatorial object file, Art Institute of Chicago).

Monet moved into his studio at 17, rue Moncey, nearby the Saint-Lazare train station, by January 17, 1877, thanks to Caillebotte, who paid the annual rent of 700 francs. See Charles F. Stuckey, with the assistance of Sophia Shaw, Claude Monet, 1840–1926, exh. cat. (Art Institute of Chicago/Thames & Hudson, 1995), p. 202, citing Monet to Charpentier, Jan. 17, 1877, in Daniel Wildenstein, Claude Monet: Biographie et catalogue raisonné, vol. 1 (Bibliothèque des Arts, 1974), p. 431, letter 101. Juliet Bareau points out that without a Paris studio, Monet needed a pied-à-terre, a place to store canvases and work on them during inhospitable weather. See Juliet Wilson-Bareau, Manet, Monet, and the Gare Saint-Lazare, exh. cat. (National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C./Yale University Press, 1998), p. 105. Wildenstein further suggests that Monet used the rue Moncey pied-à-terre as a place to conduct business with those who were unable to travel out to Argenteuil. See Daniel Wildenstein, Monet, or The Triumph of Impressionism, cat. rais., vol. 1 (Taschen/Wildenstein Institute, 1996), p. 125.

Paul Hayes Tucker, Claude Monet: Life and Art (Yale University Press, 1995), p. 91. Monet worked on the Hoschedé commission for about six months, July–December 1876, resulting in four decorative panels: Les dindons (Turkeys) (1877; Musée d’Orsay, Paris [W416]); Coin de jardin à Montgeron (The Garden at Montgeron) (1876; State Hermitage Museum, Saint Petersburg [W418]); L’étang à Montgeron (The Pond at Montgeron) (1876; State Hermitage, Saint Petersburg [W420]); and La chasse (Hunting) (1876; Musée de la Chasse et de la Nature, Hôtel Guénégaud, Paris [W433]). According to Charles Stuckey, Monet was invited to Château de Rottenbourg in September 1876 and stayed through December; see Charles F. Stuckey, with the assistance of Sophia Shaw, Claude Monet, 1840–1926, exh. cat. (Art Institute of Chicago/Thames & Hudson, 1995), p. 201. The number preceded by a W refers to the Monet catalogue raisonné; see Daniel Wildenstein, Monet: Catalogue raisonné/Werkverzeichnis, vols. 1–4 (Taschen/Wildenstein Institute, 1996).

See Charles F. Stuckey, with the assistance of Sophia Shaw, Claude Monet, 1840–1926, exh. cat. (Art Institute of Chicago/Thames & Hudson, 1995), pp. 201–02. Scholarly opinions differs on the nature of the relationship between Monet and Alice during the Château de Rottembourg commission. Both Stuckey and Wildenstein suggest that an affair between the two began during this extended stay in Montgeron. Daniel Wildenstein further mentions that the last of Alice’s children, Jean-Pierre Hoschedé was born nine months later on August 20, 1877; see Wildenstein, Monet, or The Triumph of Impressionism, cat. rais., vol. 1 (Taschen/Wildenstein Institute, 1996), p. 125. Mary Mathews Gedo rejects this supposition, suggesting that Alice’s strong religious beliefs would have precluded the start of their relationship at this time; see Gedo, Monet and His Muse: Camille Monet in the Artist’s Life (University of Chicago Press, 2010), p. 183.

See Jean Renoir, Renoir: My Father, trans. Randolph and Dorothy Weaver (Little, Brown, 1962), pp. 174–75. Jean Renoir relays the (likely apocryphal) story of how Monet worked within the Saint-Lazare train station. According to Jean, after gaining access to the station Monet had trains stopped and platforms cleared, and “the engines were crammed with coal so as to give out all the smoke Monet desired.” While this story is likely to some extent hyperbole, it is often recounted when discussing the Gare Saint-Lazare group of paintings. See Joseph Baillio and Cora Michael, “Highlights of the Exhibition,” in Wildenstein and Co., Claude Monet (1840–1926): A Tribute to Daniel Wildenstein and Katia Granoff, exh. cat. (Wildenstein, 2007), p. 194; and Karin Sagner-Düchting, Claude Monet, 1840–1926: A Feast for the Eyes, trans. Karen Williams (Taschen, 2004), p. 94.

Juliet Wilson-Bareau, Manet, Monet, and the Gare Saint-Lazare, exh. cat. (National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C./Yale University Press, 1998), pp. 106–09. According to John House, Monet likely reused canvases when he was not financially sound, mostly prior to 1880 (see, e.g., The Gare Saint-Lazare, Exterior View; 1877 [W447]), and the “few traced examples of reused canvases after 1880 were all executed on Monet’s travels, when he would have been more reluctant to scrap abortive starts for fear of being unable to obtain fresh materials,” even though he may have been able to afford to discard canvases. See John House, Monet: Nature into Art (Yale University Press, 1986), pp. 183–84. The number preceded by a W refers to the Monet catalogue raisonné; see Daniel Wildenstein, Monet: Catalogue raisonné/Werkverzeichnis, vols. 1–4 (Taschen/Wildenstein Institute, 1996).

For a detailed map highlighting the locations of paintings made in and around the Gare Saint-Lazare by Manet, Monet, and Caillebotte, as well as the locations of their Paris homes and studios, see Juliet Wilson-Bareau, Manet, Monet, and the Gare Saint-Lazare, exh. cat. (National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C./Yale University Press, 1998), pp. 6–7. Manet had exhibited his own railway painting (1873; National Gallery, Washington, D.C.) at the Salon of 1874 and continued to live on the rue de Rome overlooking the Gare Saint-Lazare. This was not lost on reviewers who commented on the “‘School of the Place de l’Europe,’ after the neighbor of M. Manet, of whom they [the Impressionists] are both the emulators and the contradictors.” Ernest Fillonneau, “Les impressionnistes,” Moniteur des arts, Apr. 20, 1877), p. 1, reprinted in Ruth Berson, ed., The New Painting: Impressionism, 1874–1886, Documentation, vol. 1, Reviews (Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco/University of Washington Press, 1996), p. 146.

Using the toolbar at the bottom right, any two images of the painting may be selected for comparison by clicking the layers icon to the right of the slider bar. The slider bar may be moved to transition back and forth between the two chosen images. The jagged line icon brings up a list of available annotations, or colored lines that show the significant features visible in each image, which may be turned on or off in any combination. For example, the red annotation lines, associated with the natural-light image, trace some of the painting’s key compositional features. When overlaid onto a technical image (X-ray, raking light, UV, etc.), the red outlines help the viewer to better observe how features in the technical image relate to or diverge from the painting as seen with the naked eye. (When annotations are turned on, a legend appears in the upper right showing each color and its associated image type.) The circular arrow icon returns the image to the default settings (natural light, full-image view, natural-light [red] annotation on). The four-arrow icon toggles between the view of the image in the page and a full-screen view of the image. In the upper right corner, the vertical slider bar may be moved to zoom into or out of the image; different parts of the image can be accessed by clicking and dragging within the image itself. The icon in the upper left corner opens a small view of the full image, within which a red box indicates the portion of the overall image being viewed when zooming is enabled.

PLM and XRF analysis, in conjunction with microscopic and UV examination of the painting surface, indicates that the paint mixture for the signature (t) contains red lake, cobalt blue, viridian, and some angular, opaque, black particles (possibly charcoal). Charcoal particles were also detected in several of the paint samples. Although no underdrawing was detected with infrared reflectography (IRR) or microscopic examination, it is possible that the charcoal particles are associated with limited underdrawing that became incorporated into the paint when painted over. Where charcoal underdrawing was detected in other Monet paintings, the material present was minimal—usually not detectable with IRR—and similar black particles were also observed in the paint samples. XRF analysis indicates that the date contains viridian, cadmium yellow, and cobalt blue. Other pigments may also be present. The paint scraping taken in 1977 was reexamined in 2013. See Inge Fiedler, “1933_1158_Monet_PLM_Results,” Oct. 16, 2013, and Kimberley Muir, “Mon_Gare_33_1158_XRF_Results,” Nov. 16, 2011, on file in the Conservation Department, Art Institute of Chicago.

The pigments were identified by the following methods: lead white, iron oxides, vermilion, viridian, cobalt blue (SEM/EDX, PLM, XRF); red lake, bone black (PLM, SEM/EDX); cadmium yellow (PLM, XRF); chrome yellow, ultramarine blue (PLM). Starch particles were identified in many of the paint samples analyzed with PLM and SEM/EDX and were probably added by the manufacturer. Analysis was carried out on selected areas and may not include all pigments present in the painting. Paint scrapings taken in 1977 were reexamined in 2013. For more detailed results and conditions used, see Inge Fiedler, “1933_1158_Monet_PLM_Results,” Oct. 16, 2013; Inge Fiedler, “1933_1158_Monet_analytical_report,” Oct. 25, 2013; and Kimberley Muir, “Mon_Gare_33_1158_XRF_Results,” Nov. 16, 2012, on file in the Conservation Department, Art Institute of Chicago.

Identifying the specific type of lake used only by its fluorescence under UV is difficult, as many factors, including the type of substrate, binders, varnishes and admixtures with other pigments, can ultimately affect the perceived color of the fluorescence. Some types of madder and purpurin lake pigments have been reported to fluoresce orange, but other lakes, such as lacs, may fluoresce as well. The characteristics of red lakes, including their fluorescence under ultraviolet light, are discussed in Helmut Schweppe and John Winter, “Madder and Alizarin,” in Artists’ Pigments: A Handbook of Their History and Characteristics, ed. Elisabeth West FitzHugh, vol. 3 (National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C., 1997), pp. 124–26. See also Ruth Johnston-Feller, Color Science in the Examination of Museum Objects: Nondestructive Procedures (Getty Conservation Institute, 2001), p. 207.

The exhibition catalogue does not include exhibition dates, but newspaper articles confirm that the exhibition opened May 1 and closed November 12. While the Exposition Universelle of 1900 officially opened to the public on April 14—see “Paris Fair to Be Open Today,” Chicago Daily Tribune, Apr. 14, 1900, p. 1—many of the exhibitions had yet to be installed. See “Exposition Nearly Complete,” Chicago Daily Tribune, Apr. 29, 1990, p. 9, which states that the palaces of the Champs-Élysées opened to the public on May 1. See also, “American Exhibits at Paris. Palaces of Fine Arts Inaugurated by President Loubet,” New York Times, May 2, 1900, p. 8. For the closing of the exposition, see “Paris Exposition Closes Its Gates,” New York Times, Nov. 13, 1900, p. 7; and “Big Paris Fair Is Now Closed,” Chicago Daily Tribune, Nov. 13, 1900, p. 3.

Location/negative #	Format	Purpose	Date	Lighting, Notes
C2589	8 × 10 B&W negative		Unknown
C17904			Unknown
C22329	8 × 10 B&W negative		Unknown	Normal, verso, framed
E14205	4 × 5 CT		Unknown	Normal, overall
E14207	4 × 5 CT		Unknown	Normal, detail: center
Conservation	35 mm color slide		Unknown	Normal, framed, cropped
Conservation	35 mm color slide	Midtreatment	Unknown	Normal, overall; partially cleaned (2 total)
Conservation	35 mm color slide	Midtreatment	Unknown	Normal, detail; partially cleaned (4 total)
MX82	B&W print		Unknown	Normal, overall; in curatorial file
B5029	8 × 10 B&W negative		1955	Normal, detail; damage
C22306	8 × 10 B&W negative		1955	Normal, overall, framed
C22307	8 × 10 B&W negative		1955	Normal, overall, without frame
C32627			Aug. 1, 1967	Normal, overall
Conservation	35 mm color slide		Feb. 1977	Normal, overall
Conservation	35 mm color slide	After cleaning?	Aug. 1978	Normal, detail
G28171	Digital	Loan	Feb. 26, 2008	Normal, overall
G28172	Digital	Loan	Feb. 26, 2008	Normal, detail: center
129033	Digital	Loan exam	Nov. 2008	Annotated image E14205
Conservation	Digital	OSCI	Nov. 18, 2009	Normal, overall
Conservation	Digital	OSCI	Nov. 18, 2009	Raking light, overall (2 total)
Conservation	Digital	OSCI	Nov. 18, 2009	Ultraviolet, overall (2 total)
Conservation	Digital	OSCI	Nov. 18, 2009	Infrared (Fuji, 1000B/2 mm filter), overall
Conservation	Digital	OSCI	Nov. 18, 2009	Detail images of verso, labels (17 total)
Conservation	Digital	OSCI	Nov. 19, 2009	X-ray films scanned/digitally composited, overall
Conservation	Digital	OSCI	Nov. 20, 2009	Normal, verso
Conservation	Digital	OSCI	Nov. 20, 2009	Macro details (12 total)
Conservation	Digital	OSCI	Nov. 23, 2009	Photomicrographs of surface (30 total)
G32959	Digital	OSCI	Dec. 14, 2009	Normal, overall
G32960	Digital	OSCI	Dec. 14, 2009	Normal, detail: center
G32961	Digital	OSCI	Dec. 14, 2009	Normal, detail: signature
G32962	Digital	OSCI	Dec. 14, 2009	Normal, detail: lower left edge
G32963	Digital	OSCI	Dec. 14, 2009	Normal, detail: lower left
G32964	Digital	OSCI	Dec. 14, 2009	Normal, detail: street lamp and crowd near center
G32965	Digital	OSCI	Dec. 14, 2009	Normal, detail: crowd at lower right
Conservation	Digital	OSCI	Feb. 11, 2011	Transmitted light, overall
Conservation	Digital	OSCI	Feb. 11, 2011	Transmitted infrared (Fuji, 1000B/2 mm filter), overall
Conservation	Digital	OSCI	Feb. 25, 2011	Detail images of verso, labels (6 total)
Conservation	Digital	OSCI	Mar. 4, 2011	Macro details (9 total)
G39801	Digital	OSCI	Mar. 20, 2012	Normal, overall; composite of G40081–G40100
G39802	Digital	OSCI	Mar. 20, 2012	Normal, frame only
Conservation	Digital	OSCI	Mar. 22, 2012	Infrared (Goodrich, 1.5–1.7 µm filter), overall
G40081–G40100	Digital	OSCI	Apr. 4, 2012	Sections (20 total)
G39803	Digital	OSCI	May 7, 2012	Ultraviolet, overall