2007
Jan Van Eyck's facility with oil paint is a matter of legend. In the 16th century, Vasari offered Van Eyck the title of Inventor of Oil Painting, in effect heightening Van Eyck's already mythical throne. So legend goes, through experiments for an oil varnish Jan discovered that pigments could be suspended, bound by oil. Through Antonello de Messina came "colorire aolio" to Italy and the rest of Europe.1 In 1974, G.E. Lessing discovered the Schedula diversarium artium written by Theophilus Presbyter in the 12th century in the library of Wolfenbuttel.2 This effectively dispelled the legend by locating the invention of oil paint before Van Eyck's time. This is where the scholarship ends...with no addendum to the progenitor of oil painting. In the literature there seems to be an urgent necessity for attributing the invention to Van Eyck. A canon of glowing reviews concerning Van Eyck and his work gained almost mythological status during his lifetime. His figures "lacked only breath" according to contemporary Italian accounts. Luminosity is the most oft quoted feature of Eyckian painting and it would seem Panofsky's theory of a "nouvelle practique" holds much water - possibly the invention of a quick drying varnish or was it also the limited use of lead white?3 The "unique colorfulness of early Netherlandish Painting, identified with the name Van Eyck, required that pigments and binding agents, which were not unfamiliar to Italian painter's per se, were combined in a way that was hitherto unknown in Italy".4 Eyck's facility was not a matter of "ingredients but the recipe".5 A recipe involves timing and measure, in a word: structure.
I submit that the structure, the composition of the sensual reconstructions of reality, from detail to gestalt, is to be found in the drawing of Jan Van Eyck. In this paper I will attempt to navigate the practice of drawing in the works of Van Eyck from its service to the very concept of 'Eyckian', to the relationship of drawings and underdrawings, and finally to Eyck's anticipation of drawing's autonomy as an art form.
But let us begin at the end. There are only 600 Netherlandish drawings from the 15th century that have been preserved and two can be definitively attributed: Jan Van Eyck's study for his Albergati Portrait 6 and the St. Barbara panel. [Fig.1,3] According to Max Friedlander, Van Eyck had a "habit of making preliminary drawings".7 Where are the drawings? It would seem the answer was hiding in plain sight.
[Fig.1]Jan Van Eyck, Nicolo Albergati, 1435-1440. Silverpoint on prepared paper. Dresden, Kupfestich-Kabinett
[Fig.2] Jan Van Eyck, Nicolo Albergati, 1438. Oil on Panel. Kunsthistoriches Museum, Vienna
Paper was expensive in the 15th century. The Arabs brought paper to Spain. It's use then expanded across Italy and France. The Netherlands relied on imports (mainly) until the 16th century.8 Before the 15th century slate tablets were employed for drawing and this might explain why the number of Netherlandish drawings "increased significantly after 1440-1450".9 The expense of parchment is only a contributing factor for the paucity of 15th century Netherlandish drawings. Regardless, we know Van Eyck was well connected to bourgeoisie culture (patrons, service of the Ducal), but the drawing on prepared panel is of particular note. In the 15th century the idea of a "finished" drawing was unknown or at least not entertained. Drawings were in the form of copies, studies, and preparations. As today, drawing played a key role in the training of young artists. Copies, records of compositions, preliminary studies, and other student works were stored at the workshops for patrons to make selections.10 On this basis, we can be sure there is a "loss" of drawings from the 15th century, but to what extent is that offset by a low output based on use?
Friedlander's introduction of a patron is important. We know painting was a point of trade, and held promissory authority, whereas drawing was a means to an end: reenter drawing on panel. Drawing directly on panel would eliminate the middleman (i.e. the transfer of a drawing on paper or slate to panel) and thus the panel itself could be used as a presentation and a preparation. This shows remarkable efficiency. This does not explain the "loss" of Netherlandish drawings but speaks well to a shift in output and use of drawing. I am obligated to give proof for my theory, and the proof is seen through a platinum silicide camera.
Infrared reflectography has allowed this theory to bare the light of day. This technology is a video system responsive to the range of infrared light between 900-2000 nanometers (for Vidicon system - platinum silicide is capable of longer wavelengths).11 Basically, the system can penetrate the layers of paint and uncover the underdrawing - the backbone of the painting. If the concept of Drawing (with a capital 'D') did not exist yet in the 15th century, and the only drawings we do have are studies and preliminary sketches, then it is fair to say we can talk about them interchangeably because they exhibit "more similarities than differences".12 This is especially the case for Jan Van Eyck. The corpus of Early Netherlandish Drawing (of which Eyck is a member) is steadily unfolding with the help of infrared reflectography. It would seem that many Netherlandish artists, including Van Eyck, produced working drawings directly on the grounded support13 (my bibliography includes four scholars who have also suggested this: Taubert, Filedt Kok, Grosshaus, Fairies).
If the armature or structure of Eyck's painting begins with drawing, and the drawings exhibit a dual nature as preparation and presentation, then one should expect to find highly finished drawings under the surfaces of paint. This is implication number one.
Let us smell the roses for a moment. I will return to the specific drawings and underdrawings of Van Eyck, but at present I feel it is important to first elucidate some signature traits of the Master. These 'Eyckian' traits are inseparable from Eyck's drawing, and they are: verisimilitude, reconstruction and elaboration.
Jan Van Eyck seems endlessly fascinated by nature - by his sense of things. His works are a testament to his deep understanding of empirical reality. Friedlander lists 'Eyckian' traits such as clarity, texture, reality/specificity, intricate tile floors, and oriental rugs.14 These traits are all tied to an elaboration of reality. The forms of Van Eyck's creation are metered. They are all taken into consideration as to their origin in sense impressions as well as to their relative position on the pictorial plane. This metering of space confirms nature as static, as things, whereas dynamism comes in the form of position first, and secondly to color and texture.15 There exists a cristallisation de l' espace.16 Everything in Eyck's work seems to fit into place - contain and be contained by its own logic. These paintings are descriptive rather than interpretive and this is evidenced in the underdrawing. The underdrawing is the ground for exactitude. Life is imbued through the "nouvelle practique" (Eyck's use of a resinous varnish?), but the structure was organized and set in stone. I agree with Desneux that "verisimilitude was ever one of Jan Van Eyck's major concerns cannot be doubted....".17 As Bartolommeo Fazio said, the figures were only "lacking a voice".18
The second 'Eyckian' trait of reconstruction is illustrated in that the "pieces" of the paintings seem to fit together. The verisimilitude implies the senses, how things look and act, and reconstruction implies order of those things. Every form is in relation to another in that "appearance depends on coordinates, on the light, on the character of the stuff, the way it behaves under illumination".19 The underdrawings, as highly finished, exhibit this relation, which implies its existence prior to the color. Van Eyck took liberties in the scale of the figures to architecture, this is obvious, but it is the architecture itself that requires a more concentrated inquiry. Lyman dives into great depths in discussing the architecture of the Washington Annunciation.20 But Panofsky's explanation of the symbolic program of the architecture is brilliant:
"The downward path of the ray divine on which the Dove of the Holy Spirit descends, the downward path from the Triune God to the Trinity, is mirrored in the downward transition from
one window to three, and at the same time, Romanesque to Gothic."21
Beyond the sensuous depiction of form, and the reconstruction of these forms, there is also a tendency towards elaboration that is echoed in not only the amount of sensuous detail but in the brushwork. This elaboration is a heightening of sorts, of adding information for the eye, increasing sensual qualities by texture building and transparency. It is obvious that Eyck is not reproducing reality. Through the reach toward verisimilitude, reconstruction and elaboration, Van Eyck is seeking a specific formal effect in service to his symbolic program.
"Drawing from the secret treasure of his heart endowed his work
with the semblance of utter verisimilitude what was in fact
imaginary".22
Question: If we know these 'Eyckian' traits from the paintings, and if my theory is that they derive primarily from drawing concerns, then the drawings should be exceptionally finished. This is implication number two.
Prior to infrared reflectography there was much scholarly debate about the existence, and use of drawings and underdrawings:
"The Flemish primitives, and Jan Van Eyck in particular, never
drew upon their panels; at least, no more than the principal
outlines, the proportions, and here and there some shading."23
Another example from Panofsky:
"If paint were removed from Eyckian pictures carried out in color
we could hardly expect to find detailed drawing(s) underneath...
such minutiae...would be obliterated by even the first and thinnest
coat of paint."24
From infrared reflectography we can make two positive observations: 1) Ubiquitous existence in Jan Van Eyck's pictures of "carefully made underdrawings", and 2) more or less modification and added late pentimenti25 after the underdrawing. The drawing mentality pervades each composition : "Jan draws when he paints: with stupendous exactitude, placing the means of drawing in the service of optic, painterly registration".26 Or in other words, Van Eyck hatched and crosshatched his way into painting history. For the most part, Van Eyck's paintings were held together by strict drawing, extremely delineated in its preparatory stage (again, for presentation), and then filled with more detail, tiny zones of even tinier brushwork. Van Eyck's metered reconstructions of space were the glue that held together his idiosyncratic genius for the sensual details of physical reality. Let's look at the physical record.
The Albergati portraits are fascinating examples (and a good place to begin) concerning the use of drawing in Van Eyck's oeuvre. The identity of the sitter is hotly debated among scholars. The sitter was identified in an inventory of the Archduke Leopold William in 1659 as the Cardinal of Sante Croce.27 Desneux believes it is "superfluous to go into question of the prelate's identity, which has been sufficiently well established by the research of James Weale (Weale, J. H. And J. Van Eyck. London, 1908, p.61).28 The identity is, in fact, in question. I will not belabor the point but considering the scholarship of John Hunter29 and Malcolm Vale, the sitter could very possibly be the English Cardinal Henry Beaufort.30 At any rate, there exists a drawing and a painting of the unknown man that have both been positively attributed to Jan Van Eyck. [Fig. 1, 2] The drawing is made with silver point on prepared paper. It appears to be a study done from life. This is evidenced by the inscriptions of color notes: geelachtich und witte blauwachtich - "yellowish and white bluish", rotte purpoachtich - "purplish red", and die lippen zeer witachlich - "the lips very whitish".31 The drawing is executed with extreme skill and precision. For this paper, my interest is in its relation to the painting of the same name. If Van Eyck made a preliminary study, including color notes, would an underdrawing still be evident? Infrared evidence shows a detailed underdrawing, but that's not the interesting part. [Fig. 3, 4] When the drawing is superimposed (or compared side by side) to the painting, there is a line for line exactitude between drawing and underdrawing.32 [Fig. 5, 6] The only significant shift is a rounding of the forehead in the drawing - compared to the protruding forehead in the painting.
[Fig.3] Jan Van Eyck. Nicolo Albergati (Detail of Drawing). 1435-1440
[Fig.4]Jan Van Eyck. Nicolo Albergati (Infra-Red Detail of Painting)
[Fig.5] Jan Van Eyck. Nicolo Albergati (Detail of Drawing), [Fig.6] Nicolo Albergati (Detail of Painting)The second of Van Eyck's known drawings (not mentioned earlier due to ongoing debate) is the St. Barbara panel of 1437. [Fig. 7, 8] This is the only document of "sketch-like” expression from an early Netherlandish artist.33 The St. Barbara is executed with brush and brown - gray pigment, and silverpoint on a prepared panel. It is framed with a typical Eyckian frame that resembles a red and black veined marble, which is inscribed.34 St. Barbara sits in a central location towards the foreground, elevated above the landscape and directly in front of a tower under construction. The tower originally referred to her imprisonment due to her beauty,which protected her from defilement.35 But is this a drawing or underdrawing? Friedlander, DeTolnay, and Baldass seem to think it's an unfinished preparation. Panofsky thinks it's a drawing left unfinished for a reason. Compared to other infrared-revealed underdrawings the St. Barbara is sketchy. Why is there less detail in the St. Barbara? Desneux believes the St.Barabara was made as a Drawing.36 Panofsky remarked that it was left in its current state at the "suggestion of a discriminating client".37 If Panofsky has opened the field to conjecture, I will offer that it was unfinished at Eyck's death and framed at that time (frame could have been made or joined at another time). There is documentation that states it is customary to join and "paint the frames before one set about the picture itself."38
[Fig.7] Jan Van Eyck. St.Barbara. Brush with Brown-Grey Pigment, Silverpoint, White Body Color on Prepared Panel (Probably Oak). Koninklijk Museum Voor Schoone Kunsten, Antwerp
[Fig.8] St.Barbara (Detail)Underdrawing has been revealed to scholarship in almost all of Van Eyck's paintings (all that have been investigated with infrared reflectography). The following are examples of underdrawing, which I will briefly elaborate.
[Fig.9] Jan Van Eyck. The Virgin and Child with Saint Donatian and St. George and Canon Joris Van Der Peale. 1436. Oil on Panel. Stedelijke Musea, Groeninggemuseum, Bruges
[Fig.10] Van Der Peale Madonna (Infra-Red Detail)
[Fig.11} Van Der Peale Madonna (Detail)
1) The Virgin and Child With Saint Donatian And St. George and Canon Joris Van Der Paele, 1436. [Fig. 9, 10, 11] This painting shows us the extensive armature of an underdrawing. Van Eyck strictly adhered to the underdrawing during the painting process.39 I will focus on the face of Canon Van Der Paele (detail). [Fig. 12, 13]
>[Fig.12] Canon Van Der Peale (Detail), [Fig.13] Canon Van Der Peale (Infra-Red Detail)When comparing the photograph and the infrared photograph of this section of the painting I find a striking completion of drawing that echoes the similarities (dare I say verisimilitude) between the drawing and painting of Albergati. Van Eyck’s drawing of Albergati exactly matches the painting of the same sitter – line for line. This is also the case for the underdrawing of Canon Van Der Paele. The left side of his head is mapped out completely in the underdrawing. The line in the face is very graphic and primarily vertical (upper right to lower left), accumulating to very dark shadow around the jowls (tempered later in the painting). The Canon’s temple region is drawn with subtle cross hatchings.40 Eyck’s variation of mark and attention to detail in the high finish of the underdrawing (as presentation to patron and preparation for painting) could quite possibly be “one of the secrets of that incomparable ‘builder of faces’”.41
From drawing to painting there were few changes (as seen in the detail images of the Canon’s face). The hand of St. George is another matter. The hand has been shifted in position. The thumb of St. George was originally drawn below the collar of the Canon, then changed to its final, painted position as encroaching the collar.42 This subtle yet significant change directs St. George’s presentation from the general location of the Canon and prayer book to the head of the Canon. Van Eyck has focused the relation between St. George and the Canon and thereby further directed the viewer’s gaze throughout the composition.
[Fig.14] Jan Van Eyck. Lucca Madonna. 1435? Oil on Panel. Stadelches Kunstinstitut Und Stadtische Galerie, Frankfurt
Lucca Madonna (Infra-Red Detail)2) The Lucca Madonna, 1435. [Fig. 14] This Virgin and Child painting is labeled the ‘Lucca Madonna’ as it was once in the collection of the Marquis of Lucca. Infrared reflectography is especially adept at penetrating red paint. Through the Madonna’s red mantle we see another clear example of a highly finished underdrawing that was painstakingly followed. The infrared photographs show a drawing of very hard line. The marks are geometric, cross-hatched with an accumulation in sections that boldly distinguish the planes of the mantle. [Fig. 15]
[Fig.16] Jan Van Eyck. Giovanni Arnolfini and His Wife. 1434. Oil on Panel. National Gallery, London3) Giovanni Arnolfini And His Wife, 1434. [Fig.16] The extent to which underdrawing is present in this piece is well laid out by Martin Davies, Les Primitfs Flamands, II, 1954, and can be found partially summarized in Desneux’s essay ‘Underdrawings and Pentimenti…”.43 From the evidence, it is safe to say that the question of extensive underdrawing is conclusive. Of particular interest is Van Eyck’s repositioning of Arnolfini’s raised right hand. [Fig. 17]
[Fig.17]Arnolfini(Infra-Red Detail)Originally, the hand was facing palm outward. The underside of the hand was clearly visible. Van Eyck pivoted the hand to a more condensed profile in the final painting. The original drawing of the hand - palm out and hand pulled back towards Arnolfini’s body – implies anxiousness, hesitation and instability. The change may have occurred at the behest of the patron – this we can’t be sure. According to Seidel, a Spanish inventory of 1700 claims the original frame of the Arnolfini Portrait was inscribed with verses from Ovid: “…y los versos declaran como se engan an el uno al otro”.44 She continues to translate the inventory claim as “…the verses explain how they deceive one another”.45 The connection is not for this paper to decipher, but the complex iconography and relation between artist/drawing, and presentation/patron is ripe for further investigation.
[Fig.18] Jan Van Eyck. Annunciation. 1434-1436. Oil on Canvas (Transferred). National Gallery of Art, Washington D.C.4) The Washington Annunciation, 1434 – 1436. [Fig. 18] Mary Gifford’s analysis of the Washington Annunciation is instructive when considering the stages of Van Eyck’s working methodology.46 I object to her interchangeable use of the words basic and base. To qualify, I agree the underdrawings of Eyck form the ‘base’ of his painting process, but this is not to conclude that they are ‘basic’. This may be simply a matter of semantic opinion. Nevertheless, it is evident through infrared photographs that the underdrawing of the Washington Annunciation is complex, clear, and in a state of exceptional finish. [Fig. 19]
[Fig.19] Annunciation (Infra-Red)This is not to claim Eyck’s changes to the drawing are insignificant for the changes are iconographically and compositionally important. These additions are strategic yet strictly pentimenti. My observation is challenged by only two examples of later, painterly addition (not seen in underdrawing). One example is to be found in the Washington Annunciation: The Marian symbol of the Lilies, and the other is to be found in the addition of the fountain in the Ghent altarpiece. [Fig.20, 21]
[Fig.20] Annunciation (Detail), [Fig.21] Annunciation (Infra-Red Detail)Oil paint increases in transparency over time. Dark paint can ‘show through’ lighter pigments over time. As Gifford point out, it is very typical of Van Eyck to leave areas of the painting open for lighter pigments to be added at a later date (asserting the ‘coloring in’ of the paint to a drawing).47 Surprisingly, the lilies were painted on top of the blue mantle and the tile floor. Through the chipping of paint, the blue mantle is visible, and the brown tile floor is peeking through.48 Other additions: roundels with zodiac and bible scenes replaced a diamond grid on the floor [Fig. 22, 23], the stool was enlarged [Fig. 20, 21], and the pilasters of the back wall were painted with roundels to replace the their original ‘continuous’ nature in the underdrawing.49 [Fig. 24, 25] This evidence leads Gifford to the conclusion that Eyck may have presented the drawing to a patron, who suggested additions or changes, before the painting had begun (or even in process).50
-23(IR+Floor+Detail%29.jpg)
[Fig.22] Annunciation (Floor Detail)[Fig.23] Annunciation (Infra-Red Floor Detail)
[Fig.24] Annunciation (Pilaster Detail)[Fig.25] Annunciation (Infra-Red Pilaster Detail)There are many other examples of comprehensive underdrawings in Van Eyck’s known oeuvre including the removal of the ‘change purse’ in the Virgin With Chancellor Rolin. The examples presented, in conjunction with the growth of contemporary scholarship, should give ample evidence to the extent, and high degree of finish, to which Van Eyck employed his underdrawing.
Infrared reflectography has opened many doors in our exploration of Van Eyck’s underdrawings in relation to painting and patron, but there also exists an intertwined undercurrent of drawing’s burgeoning autonomy as an art form. Jan’s paintings do not simply record events. They are part of an ongoing transaction in which the “viewer is intimately implicated”.51 Painting itself is a ‘middle ground’ between artist and viewer/patron. Van Eyck is a master of binding representation and the viewer’s reality. The specificity and verisimilitude of Eyck’s work positions the viewer, and demands intellectual activity. The reflections (Arnolfini mirror, armor of St. George) inside the work quote an ongoing reality outside of the picture plane. The graphic addition of language (inscription, bible verse) also obligates the viewer. This ‘middle ground’ is increasingly (in the 15c.) for sale to sections of society outside of the church. Jan Van Eyck, “…facilitated the transfer of art’s promissory authority from the church to the ‘street’. It had already assimilated the language of contractual practice…Eyck transformed a future transaction into an occurring one….”.52
What exactly is the ‘ongoing ‘ transaction? The transaction was that of supply and demand: the rising art market in the 15th century. Van Eyck’s paintings were commissioned…but increasingly so was his talent, his name. He not only worked as a ‘court’ painter but also free-lanced for the bourgeoisie. His paintings were ornamentally rich, filled with jewels, gold, luscious fabrics and heavenly, celestial motifs. Glasser points out that artists in the 15th century were obligated through receipt of material; there existed a pact between artist and patron where payment was then given upon completion of the work.53 It is doubtful that this exact method of transaction can be attributable to a notable court painter such as Jan Van Eyck. What we do know, is that Jan was held in the highest regard, and was paid handsomely for his talent.54
In Bruges and Antwerp (around 1450), art was growing into a major export commodity.55 At the beginning of this paper I stated that Van Eyck was a legend in his own time. He was famous. The Medici’s even owned a Van Eyck.56 I will not attempt to prove the fame of Van Eyck in his time, the record is very clear. What we know is that with fame comes demand, and thus attempts to increase supply. There were great art fairs in Antwerp at which patrons from all over Europe descended. Auctions were reserved for the most highly sought after works while lower cost copies were sold at the fairs.57 Here is the point at which drawing begins its ascent into autonomous art form. Drawing on paper establishes itself on a broader basis around this time, after mid century.58 Might this be related to the lesser expense of paper - in response to higher demand and increased availability? While drawing’s autonomy may have been aided by the presence of a cheap ground, it can only be understood in relation to the monetary value of the Northern European ‘style, which is identified most clearly with ‘Eykian’.
Was the role of efficiency part of this growing art market? Drawing on panel, in effect, expedited the process of painting as well as the steps to appease the patron. Painting was a job. Painters were part of guilds and guild regulated art markets.59 As the renown of Netherlandish artists grew, demand rose in turn. Around this time (c.1450), graphic work became another chief product of export. Drawings as copies, sketches, or preparations were well known as academic tools (useful) – originality was relative. The 14th century showed artists reconstructing standard motifs; excellence was to be sought in technique and therefore perception. I advance the theory that Eyck’s particular technical talent as well as the idiosyncratic nature – the genius of his reconstructions, furthered the possibility of monetary value not only for the work but also for the artist. His ‘style’ was iconic, recognizable. In this proclamation, drawing emerged as autonomous art form. Drawing’s difference from painting was no longer a matter of degree, but of kind. Jan Van Eyck was there at the beginning (Johannes de eyck fuit hic).60 [Fig. 26] Albrecht Durer and his well known monogram of ‘AD’ [Fig. 27] will solidify the position of artist as much in demand as art - specifically - through the immediacy of drawing and later, the reproducibility of engraving.
[Fig.26] Arnolfini (Detail of Jan Van Eyck's Signature)[Fig.27] Albrecht Durer. The Sojourn of Mary and Joseph In Egypt (Detail of Monogram)The process of painting in the 14th century, culminating with Van Eyck, was elaborate and absolutely dependent on the finished drawing. Van Eyck’s process has similar significance to a state in the development of an etching. Van Eyck took very deliberate steps in creating a painting. As for the paucity of drawings – we will never know the amount of reworked imagery left as dust in front of Van Eyck’s preparatory/presentational underdrawing. Ainsworth has noted that in Northern European art, the craft tradition was a “super structure” where one “stage of production followed the next”.61 In terms of the market: Through the presence of a cheap ground, and the rise of the ‘Artist’, drawing’s autonomy was revealed.
Jan Van Eyck’s underdrawing serves as a passage to ‘D’rawing. His underdrawing was a hybrid of painterly hatching and graphic cross-hatching. As presentation it reached a level of finish that anticipated the graphic line and forms of Rogier Van Der Weyden and even to Schongauer and Durer. We must return to the St. Barbara to find the only extant example of a drawing showing the “handwriting of a draughtsman”. The line is sketchy, vital, energized, and personal. Might this be the historical line that leads to Hieronymous Bosch and the purely subjective drawing? Two paths were anticipated and consequently emerge after Van Eyck: Drawing’s autonomy as product and Drawing’s autonomy as subjective artistic expression.
********************
Footnotes
1. Borchert, Till-Holger. "Van Eyck and The Invention of Oil Painting. Artistic Merits in Their Literary Mirror", The Age of Van Eyck. New York: Thames and Hudson, 2002, p.221.
2. Ibid, p.221.
3. Panofsky, Erwin. Early Netherlandish Painting, vol. 1. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1953, p.180.
4. Campbell, L., Foister, S., Roy, A., (eds). "Methods and Materials of Northern European Painting", National Gallery Technical Bulletin, 19, 1997, pp.6-55.
5. Borchert. ‘Van Eyck And The Invention…”, p.225.
6. Koreny, Fritz. Netherlandish Drawings of the 15th Century. Antwerp: Rubenshuis, 2002, p.12.
7. Friedlander, Max. Early Netherlandish Painting, vol.1. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1953, p.57.
8. Koreny. ‘Netherlandish Drawing…’, p.11.
9. Ibid, p.13.
10. Friedlander. ‘Early Netherlandish…’, p.72.
11. Ainsworth, Maryan W. "Northern Renaissance Drawings And Underdrawings:
A Proposed Method Of Study", Master Drawings, vol.27, no.1, Spring 1989, p. 35.
12. Ibid, p.6.
13. Ibid, p.11.
14. Ibid, p.61.
15. Panofsky. ‘Early Netherlandish…’, p.182.
16. DeTolnay, Charles. Le Maitre de Flemalle et les Freres Van Eyck. Brussels: Editions de la Connaissance, 1938, p.31
17. Desneux, Jules. "Underdrawings and Pentimenti in the Pictures of Jan Van Eyck",The Art Bulletin, vol.40, no.1, Mar. 1958, p.17.
18. Baxandall, Michael. "Bartholomaeus Facius on Painting; A Fiftennth Century Manuscript of the Deviris Illustribus", Journal of The Warburg and Courtauld Institute, 27, 1964, pp.90 - 107.
19. Friedlander. ‘Early Netherlandish…’, p.79.
20. Lessing, G.E. Werke in 6 Banden. Gopfert, H.,(ed.), VI, Munich, 1974.
21. Panofsky. ‘Early Netherlandish…’, p.138.
22. Ibid, p.137.
23. Vanderneken, J. “Experimenten met Betrekking Tot de Van Eyck Techniek”, Gentsche Bijdagen Tot De Kunstgeschiedenis, Deel, V. Ghent, 1938, pp.5-14 (translated by Jules Desneux).
24. Panofsky. ‘Early Netherlandish…’, p.185.
25. Desneux. ‘Underdrawing and Pentimenti…’, p.13.
26. Koreny. ‘Netherlandish Drawing…’, p. 24.
27. Friedlander. ‘Early Netherlandish…’, p.57.
28. Desneux. ‘Underdrawing and Pentimenti…’, p.16.
29. Hunter, John. "Who is Jan Van Eyck's 'Cardinal Nicolo Albergati'?", The Art Bulletin,vo.75, no.2, June 1993, pp.207 - 218.
30. Vale, Malcolm. "Cardinal Henry Beaufort and the 'Albergati' Portrait", The English Historical Review, vol.105, no.415, April 1990, pp.337-354.
31. Panofsky. ‘Early Netherlandish…’, p. 200.
32. Desneux. ‘Underdrawing and Pentimenti…’, p.16.
33. Koreny. ‘Netherlandish Drawing…’, p. 42.
34. Panofsky. ‘Early Netherlandish…’, p. 185.
35. Ibid, p.186.
36. Desneux. ‘Underdrawing and Pentimenti…’, p.20.
37. Ibid, p.21.
38. Koreny. ‘Netherlandish Drawing…’, p.42.
39. Desneux. ‘Underdrawing and Pentimenti…’, p. 13.
40. Ibid, p.15.
41. Ibid, p.15.
42. Ibid, p.15.
43. Ibid, p.18.
44. Seidel, Linda. "The Value of Verisimilitude in the Art of Jan Van Eyck", Yale French Studies, no.80, Contexts: Style and Values in Medieval Art and Literature, 1991, p. 40.
45. Ibid, p.40.
46. Gifford, Melanie E. “Van Eyck’s Washington Annunciation: Technical Evidence For Iconographic Development”, The Art Bulletin, vol.81, March 1999, pp.108-116.
47. Ibid, p.113.
48. Ibid, p.113.
49. Ibid, p.115.
50. Ibid, p.115.
51. Seidel. ‘The Value of…’, p.32.
52. Ibid, p.36.
53. Glasser, Hannelore. "Artists Contracts of the Early Renaissance", Ph.D diss., Columbia University, 1965, 5-20.
54. Snyder, James. Northern Renaissance Art. Painting, Sculpture, The Graphic. Arts From 1350-1575. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2nd Ed., 2005, p.94.
55. North, Michael. "Art Markets", The Age of Van Eyck. New York: Thames and Hudson, 2002, p.36.
56. Steyaert, John. “Northern European Painting”, University of Minnesota Lecture, 2005.
57. North. ‘Art Markets…’, p.53.
58. Koreny. ‘Netherlandish Drawing…’, p.24.
59. North. ‘Art Markets…’, p.54.
60. Snyder. ‘Northern European…’, p.103.
61. Ainsworth. ‘Northern Renaissance…’, p.34.
********************
Bibliography
Ainsworth, Maryan W. "Northern Renaissance Drawings And Underdrawings:
A Proposed Method Of Study", Master Drawings, vol.27, no.1, Spring 1989,
pp.5 - 38.
Baldass, L. Jan Van Eyck. London: Phaidon Press, 1952.
Baxandall, Michael. "Bartholomaeus Facius on Painting; A Fiftennth Century Manuscript of the Deviris Illustribus", Journal of The Warburg and Courtauld Institute, 27, 1964, pp.90 - 107.
Borchert, Till-Holger. "Introduction: Jan Van Eyck's Workshop",
The Age of Van Eyck. New York: Thames and Hudson, 2002.
Borchert, Till-Holger. "Van Eyck and The Invention of Oil Painting. Artistic Merits in Their Literary Mirror", The Age of Van Eyck. New York: Thames and Hudson, 2002.
Campbell, L., Foister, S., Roy, A., (eds). "Methods and Materials of Northern European Painting", National Gallery Technical Bulletin, 19, 1997, pp.6-55.
Desneux, Jules. "Underdrawings and Pentimenti in the Pictures of Jan Van Eyck",
The Art Bulletin, vol.40, no.1, Mar. 1958, pp.13-21.
DeTolnay, Charles. Le Maitre de Flemalle et les Freres Van Eyck.
Brussels: Editions de la Connaissance, 1938.
Faries, M., Heller, B., Levine, D. "The Recently Discovered Underdrawings Of The Master Saint Ursula Legend's Triptych of The Nativity", Bulletin of The Detroit Institute of Arts, 62, no.4, 1987, pp.4-19.
Filedt Kok, J.P. "Underdrawings and Other Technical Aspects in the Paintings of Lucas Van Leyden", Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarbook, 29, 1978, pp.1-2.
Friedlander, Max. Early Netherlandish Painting, vol.1, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1953.
Gifford, Melanie E. “Van Eyck’s Washington Annunciation: Technical Evidence For Iconographic Development”, The Art Bulletin, vol.81, March 1999, pp.108-116.
Glasser, Hannelore. "Artists Contracts of the Early Renaissance",
Ph.D diss., Columbia University, 1965, 5-20.
Grosshans, R. Bilder im Blickpunkt. Jacob van Utrecht. Der Alter von 1513. Berlin - Dahlem, 1982, pp.51-72.
Hunter, John. "Who is Jan Van Eyck's 'Cardinal Nicolo Albergati'?", The Art Bulletin, vo.75, no.2, June 1993, pp.207 - 218.
Koreny, Fritz. Netherlandish Drawings of the 15th Century. Antwerp: Rubenshuis, 2002.
Koster, Margaret. "Italy and the North: A Florentine Perspective", The Age of Van Eyck. New York: Thames and Hudson, 2002.
Lessing, G.E. Werke in 6 Banden. Gopfert, H.,(ed.), VI, Munich, 1974.
Lyman, Thomas W. "Architectural Portraiture and Jan Van Eyck's Washington Annunciation", Gesta, vol.20, no.1, Essays in Honor of Harry Bober, 1981, pp.263-271.
North, Michael. "Art Markets", The Age of Van Eyck. New York: Thames and Hudson, 2002.
Pacht, Otto. Van Eyck. Prestel: Munich, 1989.
Panofsky, Erwin. Early Netherlandish Painting, vol. 1. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1953.
Seidel, Linda. "The Value of Verisimilitude in the Art of Jan Van Eyck",
Yale French Studies, no.80, Contexts: Style and Values in Medieval Art and Literature, 1991, pp.25-43.
Snyder, James. Northern Rennaissance Art. Painting, Sculpture, The Graphic Arts From 1350-1575. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2nd Ed., 2005.
Steyaert, John. “Northern European Painting”, University of Minnesota Lecture, 2005.
Taubert, J. "Zur kunstwissenschaftlichen Auswertung von naturwissenschaftlichen Gemaldeuntersuchungen", Ph.D diss., Philipps-Universitat, Marburg, 1956, pp.21-23.
Vale, Malcolm. "Cardinal Henry Beaufort and the 'Albergati' Portrait",
The English Historical Review, vol.105, no.415, April 1990, pp.337-354.
Vanderneken, J. “Experimenten Met Betrekking Tot De Va Eyck Techniek”, Gentsche Bijdagen Tot De Kunstgeschiedenis, Deel, V. Ghent, 1938, pp.5-14 (translated by Jules Desneux).
No comments:
Post a Comment