UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Memling’s independent portraits Boggende, Gijsbert Gerrit Jacob den 1975

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1975_A8 B62.pdf [ 13.46MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0093450.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0093450-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0093450-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0093450-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0093450-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0093450-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0093450-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0093450-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0093450.ris

Full Text

MEMHNG'S INDEPENDENT PORTRAITS GIJSBERT GERRIT JACOB DEN BOGGENDE B.A., Queen's University, 1971 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL PULPIIMENT OP THE REQUIREMENTS POR THE DEGREE OP MASTER OF ARTS i n the Department of Pine Arts We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OP BRITISH COLUMBIA September, 1975 In presenting th i s thes is in pa r t i a l fu l f i lment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the Un ivers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the L ibrary sha l l make it f ree l y ava i l ab le for reference and study. I fur ther agree that permission for extensive copying of th is thesis for scho lar ly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representat ives. It is understood that copying or pub l i ca t ion of th is thes i s fo r f i nanc ia l gain sha l l not be allowed without my writ ten permission. Department of Fine Art a  The Univers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 September, 1 9 7 5 i ABSTRACT At the very end of t h i s t h e s i s I c a l l Memling the m i r r o r of Brugian upper-class s o c i e t y . I n order to a r r i v e at t h i s c o n c l u s i o n I approached Memling's p o r t r a i t s i n a new way. My s t a r t i n g p o i n t was Max J. F r i e d l a n d e r 1 s hook on Memling i n which the author catalogued, i n an apparently unsystematic way, the Memling p o r t r a i t s accepted by him. The f i r s t chapter o f t h i s t h e s i s i s an attempt t o cons t r u c t a working chronology. Por a s t y l i s t i c a n a l y s i s I d i s t i n g u i s h s i x c a t e g o r i e s . The f i r s t three d e a l w i t h the three types of background which are found i n the p o r t r a i t s . The remaining three r e l a t e to ba s i c types i n the pose of the hand. The emphasis of the a n a l y s i s f a l l s on s p a t i a l develop-ment and anatomical correctness. I n s e v e r a l i n s t a n c e s my suggestions are at variance w i t h accepted dates. The new chronology forms the foundation f o r the other chapters. I n chapter I I the i d e n t i t y of some known s i t t e r s i s discussed, u s i n g i n f o r m a t i o n which has been known f o r some time. What I have done i s simply to combine some of t h i s r e l e v a n t i n f o r m a t i o n i n order to make some suggestions f o r the u n i d e n t i f i e d s i t t e r s , and to show t h a t they came from m r e s t r i c t e d social-economic group, and to suggest some p o s s i b l e reasons f o r commissioning p o r t r a i t s . The t h i r d chapter c o n s i s t s of three s e c t i o n s . The f i r s t d e als w i t h Memling as a h i s t o r i c a l l y documented f i g u r e . i i Nothing new could he added, hut I give special attention to his social-economic status, which turns out to he similar to that of his sitters. The second concentrates on the historical events between 1465 and 14-94, while Memling was a: Brugian citizen. I give special emphasis to the unification policy of Charles the Bold, because i t manifested i t s e l f i n two ways which were disastrous for Charles as well as for Bruges. The wars which were a. result cost Charles his l i f e i n 1477 and the money which was needed to wage them contributed to the financial downfall of Bruges. It i s my contention that the social-economic-political-financial in s t a b i l i t y following Charles' death influenced Memling's style, his iconography and his patrons. The third focusses on the sp i r i t u a l l i f e of this period. late fifteenth century Dutchr-Plemish literature indicates two schools of thought, namely of pietism and humanism. I discuss the influence of these two schools of thought i n Memling's portraits i n the last chapter. In discussing the iconography I return to the six categories of the f i r s t chapter. The pose of the hands and the objects the sitters hold point i n the direction of humanism and piety. It i s also i n this section dealings with the hands that I reject the idea that any of the portraits are part of a triptych, and also that a l l sitters with prayer-clasped hands must be ai part of a diptych. I suggest that i n some cases these portraits could be independent. Furthermore, i n case of a diptych i t i s not necessary that the other wing must be a Madonna and Child. It could also i i i be Christ alone or a saint. My suggestion for the neutral background i s that for some portraits there i s a possibility that they are related to court portraiture. Italian influence i s perhaps most noticeable i n the pure landscape portraits. Nearly a l l the sitters for this type were Italian. Although Memling never saw Piero della Prancesca's Sforza portraits, they may have influenced and stimulated him, via his Italian sitters, to introduce this type i n Plemish portraiture. A l l three types of background create a special psychological atmosphere, closely related to the two schools of thought. It i s through the iconography, backed up by histor i c a l events and spi r i t u a l l i f e , that Memling reflects the s p i r i t of his time and becomes the mirror of Brugian upper-class society. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT i TABLE OF CONTENTS i v INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER L THE CHRONOLOGY 5 THE NEUTRAL BACKGROUND 6 THE LANDSCAPE BACKGROUND 15 THE INTERIOR-EXTERIOR BACKGROUND 25 PRAYER-CLASPED HANDS 34 HANDS HOLDING AN OBJECT 41 HANDS AT REST 45 CHAPTER II. THE. SITTERS, 51 CHAPTER III. MEMLING'S TIME 74 THE HISTORICAL MEMLING 75 A HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 78 SPIRITUAL LIFE 82 CHAPTER IV. MEMLING'S PORTRAIT ICONOGRAPHY 98 HUSBAND-WIFE PENDANT PAIRS 98 SITTERS WITH PRAYER-CLASPED HANDS 100 OBJECTS IN THE HANDS OF THE SITTERS 106 HANDS AT REST 113 THE BACKGROUND 116 THE NEUTRAL BACKGROUND 117 THE LANDSCAPE BACKGROUND 119 THE INTERIOR-EXTERIOR BACKGROUND 121 V FOOTNOTES. INTRODUCTION 128 CHAPTER I 130 CHAPTER I I . 140 CHAPTER II I 146 CHAPTER IV 154 SUMMARY 165 BIBLIOGRAPHY 167 APPENDIX I. THE CATEGORIES 178 APPENDIX I I . CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER OP THE PORTRAITS 181 APPENDIX I I I . CHART ...... 183 APPENDIX IV. CATALOGUE RAISONNE 184 APPENDIX V. CONCORDANCE 200 APPENDIX VI. PORTINARI FAMILY GENEALOGY 202 1 INTRODUCTION John Memmeling and John van Eyck Hold state at Bruges. In sore shame I scanned the works that keep t h e i r name, The c a r i l l o n , which then did s t r i k e Mine ears, was heard of t h e i r s a l i k e : I t sets me closer to them. With these words Rossetti put the sentiments of h i s contemporaries into a poem. I t i s rather appropriate that Rossetti mentioned Memling f i r s t , because he was the f i r s t of the "Flemish Primitives" to be rediscovered. Memling 1s work was r e a d i l y accessible at Bruges, the c i t y of which Memling became a c i t i z e n i n 1465 and i n which he died i n 2 1494. Por the Pre-Raphaelite Rossetti, Memling must have seemed to be a "devotional ancestor". Perhaps the stagnation of research into Memling's work and h i s r e l a t i o n to h i s time found i n the twentieth century i s a; reaction to t h i s nine-teenth century enthusiasm. In spite of the ardor, exemplified 3 best by Crowe and Cavalcaselle , i t was not u n t i l the turn of the century that Weale produced some hard h i s t o r i c a l f a c t s on 4 the a r t i s t ' s l i f e and work. Even so, the tide had turned and Memling tended to be somewhat ignored. Memling became Pried-5 lander's "flower without thorns" and Panofsky's "very model 6 of a: major minor master". Nevertheless, i t was Priedlander who produced a volume on Memling i n h i s series Die altnieder-7 landische Malerei. And t h i s volume contained a,chapter on Memling's p o r t r a i t s . This volume-and t h i s chapter have formed the basis of subsequent publications and not much has been 8 added to the information supplied by Priedlander. 2 It was not u n t i l the 1960s that scholars started to look 9 more sympathetically at Memling. Some facts, like those un-earthed by the historian McFarlane, and the discovery of the 10 original underdrawings, led to a better understanding of Memling's development. Yet, very l i t t l e attention has been given to the portraits i n spite of the fact that roughly one-third of the generally accepted Memling oeuvre consists of independent portraits. It i s with this neglected section that this thesis i s concerned. When we ask ourselves the question "What are Memling's contributions to the art of portraiture?" immediately serious problems occur, the most serious of which i s that none of the generally accepted portraits i s signed. Since none are docu-mented either, the portraits have to be ascribed to Memling on s t y l i s t i c grounds. The problem i s compounded by the fact that only two Memling paintings are signed and dated, two others are documented, while a few are 'documented' through 11 tradition. Some of the paintings had a date either on the original frame or in the painting i t s e l f which made i t easier 12 to ascribe them to Memling, using the others as guidelines. Fortunately, four of the portraits have a date, two of which always stayed in Bruges. To these four portraits two husband-wife pendant pairs can be added which can be roughly dated by historical information. Out of these portraits- Gilles Joye, 1472; Tommaso Portinari and his wife, between 1470 and 1475; a young woman's portrait, 1480; Willem Moreel and his wife, between 1478 and 1484; Benedetto Portinari, 1487; Maarten van 3 Nieuwenhove, 1487- some interesting patterns emerge: the earlier portraits have a neutral "background, while the later ones show an interior-exterior; except one, a l l the sitters 13 have their hands i n prayer. Simplistically stated, Memling seems to have a special interest i n the "background and i n the hands. Technically these two aspects can "be described as a concern i n spatial develop-ment and anatomical correctness. However, I think that Mem-ling's portraits go beyond a mere technical exercise. It i s my contention that the aforementioned aspects contributed purposefully to a better understanding of the sitters. In other words, these aspects are essential to Memling's por-14 tra i t s . Since they are essential I have taken them as a basis and as working tools for this thesis. Within these two essential aspects a few characteristics emerge. As far as the background i s concerned we have already noted the neutral background and the interior-exterior. Looking at the other, usually accepted portraits, we notice a third characteristic, the pure landscape. None of these portraits are dated so that they have to be correlated to the others. In order to do this the characteristics w i l l be dealt with separately. Within each characteristic the essential aspects w i l l be discussed, 15 so that a certain sequence appears. In-order to t i e these characteristics together into a working chronology, the category of hands i s used. I make the ^ distinction between prayer-clasped hands and non-prayer-clasped hands. The latter can be more specifically defined by looking at the other portraits. Some sitters hold an object in their hands, while others have their hands at rest. I discuss each of these 4 c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s s e p a r a t e l y . S i n c e a c e r t a i n background does n o t c o r r e l a t e t o a c e r t a i n hand c h a r a c t e r i s t i c , new sequences o c c u r which enable 16 us t o draw up a. c h r o n o l o g y . A l t h o u g h t h e d e s c r i p t i o n " c i r c a " has t o be a p p l i e d t o t h e f i n a l r e s u l t s , some u s e f u l f a c t s emerge t o g i v e a c l e a r e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f Memling's c o n t r i -b u t i o n t o t h e a r t o f p o r t r a i t u r e . These f a c t s a r e d i s c u s s e d more f u l l y i n c h a p t e r I V , u s i n g a g a i n t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , but now as i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f what I c a l l e d " p u r p o s e f u l con-t r i b u t i o n s " . These i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o n l y make sense i n the l i g h t o f o t h e r knowledge, t h a t i s , i n f o r m a t i o n about Memling and h i s s i t t e r s . T h i s h i s t o r i c a l background i n f o r m a t i o n w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n c h a p t e r s I I and I I I . F i r s t t h e s i t t e r s a r e d i s c u s s e d because knowledge about them s e t s t h e scope and l i m i t f o r i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n t o o t h e r a r e a s . Knowledge about t h e s i t t e r s j u s t i f i e s t h e l i m i t a t i o n s o f h i s t o r i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n r e c a l l e d i n the n e x t c h a p t e r . Memling o f f e r s t h e s i t t e r s , a t 17 l e a s t p a r t l y , a way t o g i v e e x p r e s s i o n t o t h e i r own i d e a s . These i d e a s a r e d i s c u s s e d i n the c h a p t e r c a l l e d "Memling's 18 Time". F i n a l l y , a f t e r the d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e i d e a s and t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s , backed up by t r a d i t i o n s , I want b r i e f l y t o d i s c u s s Memling's p l a c e i n and c o n t r i b u t i o n t o the a r t o f p o r t r a i t u r e . T h i s w i l l t a k e p l a c e i n t h e Summary o f t h i s t h e s i s . 5 CHAPTER I THE CHRONOLOGY In the introduction several characteristics have been noted which help to establish a'possible chronology. The cate-gories dealing with the background are i n i t i a l l y loosely connected. Only by combining them with the categories dealing with the hands i s i t possible to tighten the chronology. Yet, watertight i t cannot be, because of the lack of documentation. Since the basis of this chapter i s a s t y l i s t i c analysis of the characteristics of the background and of the hands, much of the extraneous evidence has been relegated to the footnotes. The technical aspects of spatial development and anatomical correctness constitute the basis for the s t y l i s t i c analysis. The order of the categories dealing with the background i s based on histori c a l data and complexity. The f i r s t dated portrait has. a neutral background, which provides the ratio-nale for starting with this characteristic. Furthermore, i t looks simplest in perspective. The most complex characteris-t i c i s that of the interior-exterior, which has the problem of the interior perspective related to the exterior perspec-tive. This characteristic w i l l be discussed last of the three. The interior-exterior category i s followed by an interlude of one painting which i s a mixture of neutral background 6 combined with interior. The order of the categories dealing with hand charac-t e r i s t i c s i s based on number and activity. The largest cate-gory i s that of prayer-clasped hands. Next i s a small cate-gory in which the sitters hold an object. The last category 1 i s that of hands at rest on a visible or invisible parapet. THE NEUTRAL BACKGROUND Eleven portraits share the characteristic of a neutral 2 background ;' three have some form of documentation, while the 3 rest have none. The earliest portrait with a neutral back-4 ground i s that of Gilles Joye(Fr.72) : the original frame 5 bears the date 1472. The sitter i s placed against a dark background. His face, turned to the l e f t at an angle of 20 degrees, receives light from l e f t above. The light models the face, but not the space. It i s used for the prayer-clasped hands, but not for the dark fur-lined jacket. Thus there are two f o c i : face and hands. The rest of the bust-length body of the sitter receives very l i t t l e attention and remains 6 f l a t . To borrow a term of Samuel van Hoogstraten, Gilles 7 Joye looks somewhat like a "playing card". Technically there i s l i t t l e spatial development and volume. Anatomically, the nose i s just a bit too heavy and not completely foreshortened; his jawbone i s a bit too square and the right side of his face has a linear quality. Memling has not achieved a satisfactory spatial and anatomical solution i n his earliest dated portrait. Other portraits can be grouped around the Gilles Joye in a reasonably simple manner. Better solutions to the two 7 aspects would indicate a later date, while poorer solutions 8 might he dated earlier. The next two portraits belong together, that of Tommaso Portinari(Pr.69) and his wife Maria Maddalena Baroncelli(Pr.70). Their organization i s very much like that of Gilles Joye(Pr.72) and yet there are some significant differences. Their faces are nearly turned at an angle of 45 degrees as i s Tommaso's bust-length body; Maria's body i s turned more frontally. Tommaso's place in space i s different from that of Gilles Joye. The latter i s placed behind the frame, as i t were caught i n the frame, while the former i s placed in front of the frame. The frame i s now used as a spatial device and tends to become a part of the background. A similar situation i s witnessed in Maria's portrait, where her hennin and long diaphanous v e i l cover a part of the right frame. Thus, although there i s no interaction between them and the neutral background, there i s a sense of spatial i l l u s i o n through the inclusion of the frame. At the same time the sizes of their heads in relation to their bodies and the available space differs from that of Gilles Joye. There i s space around and above the sitters, unlike in Gilles Joye's portrait. Moreover, the light seems to come from one source, namely from the right. Thus Maria's l e f t f a c i a l side receives the f u l l light, with her right lightly shadowed, v/hile Tommaso's l e f t side, turned away from the viewer, receives the f u l l light, while the right i s subtly shadowed. As far as Maria i s concerned, the hennin, face, bust, arms and hands do 8 not correlate too well. Her l e f t arm and hand are parallel to the picture plane while the "body i s slightly turned, like that of Gilles Joye, and her head and hennin are turned even more; yet, the neck does not have the necessary tension to 11 • make these twists anatomically correct. In relation to Gilles Joye these two portraits seem to have a more developed spatial concept and Tommaso at least i s far more volumetric, while the subtle use of light contributes to a better modelling of the face. Since these two portraits are technically more developed I suggest that they could be placed after Gilles Joye. The diagonal pose of Tommaso, which i s completely followed through, i s more satisfying than the pose of Maria which has some awkward aspects. Thus the sequence could possibly be Gilles Joye (Pr.72), Maria Porti-nari (Fr.70), Tommaso Portinari (Pr.69). The next portrait to be discussed i s that of a young man (Fr.233) of which Priedlander wrote that i t i s "unusual in i t s vigorous modelling, probably from the master's early 12 period". This vigorous modelling i s noticeable in a much better foreshortening of the nose and mouth, not only com-13 pared to Gilles Joye, but also to the Portinaris. The chin 14 in relation to the neck i s rather distinct. In regard to the background there are two important aspects which concern us here. The f i r s t relates to the colour: instead of the dark tones used in the portraits of Gilles Joye, Tommaso Portinari and Maria Maddaleha Baroncelli, the background here has a light colour against which the sitter i s contrasted. The direct result i s more depth, even though the pose of the sitter i s less diagonal than Tommaso Portinari. The second aspect, only possible when the background becomes lighter, i s that the young man, turning towards the one light source, casts his shadow behind him on the lower right side. In this way Memling was able to create interaction between the s i t t e r and his background. In the category of neutral background this portrait i s the only one of i t s kind. Keeping i n mind that Memling was apparently concerned with spatial relation-ships, this portrait could possibly be the culmination point 15 of the neutral background i n relationship to the sitter. In other words, I would like to suggest that this portrait i s later than the three previously discussed portraits. I date the next four portraits somewhere i n between the Gilles Joye (Pr.72) and the San Diego portrait (Fr.233). The f i r s t one i s a portrait of a man with folded hands (Pr.88). The sitter i s placed diagonally i n space, like Tommaso Porti-nari. His hands are placed in the right corner, but they are not cramped into the available space as in the case of Gilles Joye. The background i s dark. The contour of the shoulders, seen through the lighter fur trimming of the coat, gives a sense of continuation to the arms, even though these are actually not visible. The light, coming from the l e f t , casts a somewhat heavy shadow on the l e f t side of his face. The nose i s rather linear, like that of Tommaso Portinari, but the right side of the chin i s more modelled. The light does not only model the face, but also the white undershirt and hands. Thus the light unifies the parts of the body. Spatially 1G the s i t t e r i s not hampered by the frame; he i s free i n his own space. This would suggest that t h i s p o r t r a i t was painted before the San Diego p o r t r a i t (Pr.233) and close to Tommaso . - 17 P o r t i n a r i ( F r . 6 9 ) , perhaps somewhat l a t e r . An overly cleaned p o r t r a i t of an old man (Fr.81) has 18 been the subject of some debate. His reddish brown fur trimmed jacket covers the lower h a l f of the painting. His r i g h t shoulder, arm and hand are c l e a r l y v i s i b l e . His hands-of the l e f t only f i n g e r t i p s are just noticeable- r e s t on a ledge, which could be regarded as an extension of the frame. The body i s nearly p a r a l l e l to the picture plane, but not pressed against the frame as i n the case of Maria P o r t i n a r i (Pr.70). The seam of the jacket and the s l i g h t l y darker area of l e f t arm and l e f t side separate s p a t i a l l y the hands from the body. The head nearly covers the other h a l f of the 19 panel. His s i l v e r y hair, which just does not touch the frame, helps to contrast the face against the dark background. Priedlander speaks about that face as rather f l a t and elabo-20 rated mainly i n l i n e , and hesitant i n the use of shading. Overcleaning has made judgment rather d i f f i c u l t , but there are some points which Priedlander seems to have ignored. The man's face seems to miss a firm outline, but i t should not be forgotten that a tanny, leathery skin with a stubbly 21 beard of some older people i s not firm either. jjis eyebrows do not look l i k e the plucked eyebrows of G i l l e s Joye or Tommaso P o r t i n a r i . Both his n o s t r i l s are v i s i b l e , even more 11 so than i n the San Diego portrait (Pr.233). The head and body have more volume than those of the early portraits. Thus, somewhat disagreeing with Priedlander I tend to place this portrait some years later than 1470 and close to but not after the San Diego portrait. A third portrait, that of a man with an arrow (Fr.85), can probably also be placed between the Gilles Joye and the 22 San Diego portraits. In his right hand, which rests on a ledge similar to the one i n the previous portrait, the sitter holds an arrow. like the Old Man (Pr.81) this s i t t e r i s placed nearly parallel to the picture plane, but the pose i s now to the l e f t . Unlike the Old Man he does not show his lower arm. The somewhat unsatisfactory connection between shoulder and hand i s partly solved by the shaft of the arrow, which diverts the attention from this aspect. The end of the shaft points to the back, while the l e f t shoulder comes slightly forward, creating a.sense of space. His dark hair and black hat contrast against the less dark background on which there i s no shadow of the head. The lighter background i s suggestive of aaclose connection to the San Diego portrait. The modelling of the face i s not as linear as i n the earlier portraits, with for example the mouth, nose and jaw, while the slightly f l a t shoulder gives a sense of volume. Although not everything has been solved satisfactorily i n spatial development and anatomical cr e d i b i l i t y , i t i s close to the San Diego portrait (Pr.233) and the New York Old Man (Pr.81), 12 23 perhaps somewhat later than the latter. There i s probably a fourth portrait which can be dated close to the San Diego portrait. The background of the Pier-pont Morgan portrait (Fr.83) i s lighter than the clothes of 24 the s i t t e r , who i s placed diagonally, freeing space in the right corner for his hands. In his l e f t he holds a carnation and in his right a small folded card or letter. His right under arm rests on a non-visible ledge, while the upper arm goes slightly inwards to connect with the shoulder. The result i s that there i s more space between the hands and the body. The solution i s better than that of the Washington portrait (Fr.85) and the face i s more firmly painted. Under the skin there i s a sense of bone structure. Friedl&nder linked the two last portraits together and I tend to agree with him here, with the stipulation that the Pierpont Morgan portrait could possibly be slightly later than the Washington portrait. Following'Priedlander's suggestion "that not every portrait with a neutral background i s earlier than with a 24 landscape background" , I would suggest that not every portrait with a neutral background i s done before the San Diego portrait (Fr.233). Three portraits are s t i l l existing which most likely were painted around 1480. In the Royal Collection at Windsor 26 Castle i s a man's portrait (Fr.91). After restoration i t i t turned out to be'that the sitter touched a chain (?) with 13 his right hand. This detail gives some sense of space to an otherwise rather f l a t figure placed against a dark background. Spatially this portrait could be connected to early portraits except that i t i s not as cramped as the Gilles Joye portrait (Pr.72). However, on the ground of f a c i a l features like nose, mouth and bonestructure, this portrait should not be dated early, but possibly between 1478 and 1480. To arrive at these" dates we can use two sources, namely the Bruges Young Woman (Fr.94), dated 1480, and two other Memling panels, Madonna Enthroned with St.George and a Donor ( F r . 6 3 ) , which perhaps can be dated around 1480, and Christ Giving the Blessing (Pr. -26 39), dated on the now lost original frame 1478. The Bruges Young Woman (Pr.94) has on i t s original 27 frame the date 1480. Her hands rest on a ledge which i s an extension of the frame. Her arms drop slightly under the frame, but are not completely cut off. As such the spatial problem has been solved in a better way than i n the Maria Portinari portrait (Pr.70). The shorter hennin and the diaphanous v e i l are kept within the frame, again different from Maria Portinari, and the difference extends into the colouring, the direction of the gaze and the modelling. The control which Memling has to indicate space in 1480 becomes clear i n a small detail. Maria: Portinari's waist belt i s of the same colour as the white trimming of her gown. It even touches the frame. The young woman's belt has been toned down, not only compared to the white trimming, but also to her dark, nearly black dress. And nowhere does i t touch the frame. Maria Portinari i s pressed against the frame and 14 tends to be f l a t , while this young woman has space between her hands on the frame and her body. Anatomically this young woman's portrait also shows Memling's improved understanding. Again I use a detail to show the development by subtle means. Her marble coloured face shows here and there some faint bluish traces, indica-tions of veins. The clearest example, however, i s in her neck, just below her ear and i n the direction of her pendant. This awareness of what i s under the skin i s absent in the Maria Portinari. Thus the development of space and the understanding of anatomy i s not only seen i n lighter background and volume, but also in other details. I already hinted at this i n the Windsor portrait (Fr.91). The conclusion i s important, for i t seems that Memling was not afraid to f a l l back on older aspects - i n this case a dark background- but to modify them through new and better solutions gained in the meantime. Old and new can go together. It i s impossible to say as yet, whether this i s a general tendency and i f so, when i t 29 started. The mixture of old and new i s important in connection with the last portrait i n this category. The shape of the National Trust portrait (Pr.87) i s peculiar, because the 30 rounded top i s unique for the portraits. Unfortunately, the portrait i s badly damaged. Since the background i s scarcely visible, i t i s d i f f i c u l t to point out any spatial relation between the sitter and the background. The prayer-clasped hands are not cramped into the corner like those of 15 G i l l e s Joye (Pr.72), but are cut off. They are i n a nearly p a r a l l e l plane with the canvas and not completely perpen-d i c u l a r to the body. S p a t i a l l y i t i s not completely convincing, but anatomically i t looks l i k e a l a t e r work. As a conclusion we can say that most of the p o r t r a i t s with a neutral background were painted early i n Memling's career as a p o r t r a i t i s t . The e a r l i e s t known one seems to be that of G i l l e s Joye (Pr.72) with the next seven probably not l a t e r than 1475. Up to the San Diego p o r t r a i t (Fr.233) there i s a development towards a better integration of the foreground, s i t t e r and background. There i s a tendency to anatomical correctness and an experimentation with volume. After 1475 there are few p o r t r a i t s i n t h i s category. The surviving p o r t r a i t s seem to be painted around 1480. THE LANDSCAPE BACKGROUND This group, which consists of ten p o r t r a i t s , presents more complicated problems than those encountered i n the previous category. Here none of the p o r t r a i t s are dated, so that there i s no fi x e d chronological s t a r t i n g point. And none of the s i t t e r s is'1.known by name, so that there i s l i t t l e extraneous evidence to help us. Since i t i s my contention that there i s i n Memling's portraiture a s p a t i a l develop-ment, already noticed i n the previous category, i t i s l o g i c a l to look f o r a similar development i n the pure landscape back-ground. In s i m p l i f i e d terms i t means a development from the simple to the more complex landscape. During the following 16 discussion these terms w i l l be given content. The f i r s t p o r t r a i t i s that of a somewhat fuzzy haired 31 young man (Pr.89). His r i g h t hand rests i n front of him on a balustrade. He himself blocks o f f the front space. Behind his dark coat i s a nearly geometrically patterned grass area; The patches of grass just above h i s shoulders are s l i g h t l y darker than the stretch above. The grass ends rather abrubtly just above h i s c o l l a r , and bluish green trees, rather compact and as undefined as his ha i r , predominate. A whitish sky turns gradually blue, giving the impression of a bright day. On the l e f t and r i g h t are two i n d i v i d u a l trees, nearly as high as the s i t t e r ' s head. The tree on the l e f t i s close enough to give the impression of touching the hair. These two trees stand on a h i l l o c k , on the l i n e where one grass areaais separated from the other. These separation l i n e s tend to diver t attention away from the s i t t e r . One can view the trees apart from the s i t t e r . Yet, the touching of the hair with the tree has the opposite e f f e c t . Thus we have here a somewhat ambiguous, unresolved s p a t i a l problem. These two trees also function as a framing device f o r the head. They define a li m i t e d space and also block o f f the sky above the other trees. The o v e r - a l l r e s u l t i s a shallow space i n which the s i t t e r i s 'pressed' between the parapet- pushing backwards-and the trees- pushing forwards. In short we can say that the massive undefined trees block o f f a view into deeper space, that the grass areas are geometric designs separated and defined by l i n e s and that the 17 32 the grass area comes nearly halfway up the panel. The next portrait, that of a swarthy young man with an 33 Italian cap (Pr.77), shows several differences. The grass i s not divided into three geometric shapes as in the U f f i z i portrait (Fr.89), hut i s a unified stretch with some high-lights and shadows. On the l e f t i s a smoothly meandering stretch of water, which contributes to the unification and 34 the continuity of the landscape. This small stream i s an interesting connection between the sitter and the landscape. Some of the water i s painted so close to the mouth, that mouth and water seem to echo each other. The organization of the trees and the black cap i s much more subtle. The descending shape of hat and hair i s continued in the trees on the l e f t and contrasted in an upward way by the trees alongside the water. The one higher tree on the right i s integrated with the rest of the trees. The horizon has been slightly raised, and the grass area ends halfway up the face. Compared to the U f f i z i portrait (Pr.89), this landscape i s much more spacious and continuous. While the poses are basically the same, the Venice sitter has been more success-f u l l y integrated with his background than the U f f i z i sitter. In the Venice portrait (Pr.77) the trees s t i l l block the view somewhat abrubtly, but that i s not the case anymore in the Brussels portrait (Fr.84).^ The sitter's body has been slightly turned towards the left-right diagonal. The horizon has been lowered again. The sitter's curly hair i s 'mirrored' in the various trees. The clusters of trees and 18 shrubs i n the "background are not as solid and do not rise up like a forbidding wall or an inpenetrable forest as occurs i n the two previous portraits. Grass continues to grow behind the f i r s t cluster of trees on the right side. There i s no sharp separation between the grass and the trees. The static solidity has been broken through. The sunlight puts high-lights on the hair as well as on the trees, thus uniting the various parts of the panel. It also means that the trees start to get more defined and that there i s a beginning of a sense of atmosphere. This atmospheric sense goes together with the greater spaciousness, an openness created by the new interplay between grass and trees. These new characteris-t i c s , as part of the spatial development, would suggest that the Brussels portrait comes after the two previous portraits. The fourth portrait, that of a young si t t e r (Pr.80), 37 shows quite a different landscape. The sitter's shoulders 38 block off the landscape on both sides. The grass stretches have given way to a h i l l y landscape with clusters of trees spread a l l over. The movement from the side to the center i s slightly downwards, which gives the impression that the sitter i s placed in front of a valley. The trees close to the sitter are relatively small, so that the viewer can look over them, far into the distance. What in the Brussels portrait (Pr.84) was barely announced.is here f a i r l y far developed into an atmospheric perspective. The details like the swans, people, individual trees, water and h i l l s give a sense of topography. Whereas the previous landscape could be 19 39 anywhere, this landscape has "been particularized. The landscape as such has thus gained two new aspects, namely atmospheric perspective and a topographical setting. In relation to the sit t e r , this landscape i s more or less separate from the sit t e r , because the direction of the body does not really lead into the landscape. Yet, there are important interactions. The upward movement of the shoulders contrasts the downward movement from the side to the center. The eyes are on the same level as the distant h i l l s . His hat and hair 'continue' i n the h i l l s and trees. Thus although the sitter i s placed before the landscape, there are subtle interactions between the two. Until the Montreal portrait the sky has been the same: white towards the horizon, pale blue i n the middle and some-what darker high above. The next portraits show a change because clouds start to appear, becoming more and more 40 substantial. The f i r s t portrait which shows some clouds, somewhat 41 hesitantly painted, i s the Copenhagen portrait (Fr.82). But not only the sky has changed, also the landscape i t s e l f . Before, i t was a real landscape, now i t i s a village scene. Houses dot the scenery and a road and a stream travers i t , while the village or the city i s silhouetted in the distance. Instead of the h i l l s , the landscape i s rather f l a t . The road and the stream give the sense of continuity and spatial depth. In relation to the face, the horizon i s lowered a 'nose length 1. 20 While this portrait continues the topographical and atmospheric aspects i t adds a better integration of the sitter. The body i s placed more diagonally, which leaves an open space on the l e f t . The hands, placed in the corner, create space between the body and the arms. The right arm leads into the open space on the side and the curve of the shoulder i s continued in the water. The fur trimming on the right continues behind him in a small road; the fur trimming on the l e f t continues i n a stream. On the debet side are the angles which the face makes with the environment, for they are somewhat hard and uninteresting. And some of the new details tend to distract the attention from the sitter. In the Palazzo Vecchio portrait (Pr.86) Memling returned 42 to a more h i l l y landscape. The portrait i s as i t were a combination of the successful solutions of the Montreal portrait (Fr.80) with those of the Copenhagen portrait (Pr.82). The landscape i s kept much simpler in details than that of the Copenhagen portrait. Yet, the details tend to accentuate the contour of the sitter. The undulating landscape forms a smooth turn with the right side of his hair and makes his 43 somewhat blown hair on his l e f t side acceptable. Karl Yoll 44 dated this portrait around 1470, but the well-developed sense of landscape and the interplay between the sit t e r and the landscape i s far superior to that of the earlier U f f i z i portrait (Pr.89) and i t should be•dated therefore much later. One of the most discussed portraits i s that i n Antwerp 45 (Pr.71). Although there are some differences in details in 21 this portrait i s very similar to the Palazzo Vecchio portrait (Fr.86). The landscape does not come above the sitter's mouth. Bluish grass and trees start halfway up the landscape. The somehow awkward road behind the Palazzo Vecchio'sitter i s not found again in this portrait. There i s , however, an environmentally inconsistent object i n this northern landscape in the form of a palm tree. Although i t i s prominently dis-played on the right, i t does not constitute an awkward aspect. Different from most portraits i s the warm tonality of the face and the lower part of the sky and the earth colour right behind the sitter. These various qualities can also be detected in the side panels of the best documented altar piece, that of the Mystic Marriage of St. Catherine ( F r . l l ) , 46 which, on the frame, i s signed and dated 1479. This would reasonably correlate with Hulin de Loo's suggestion of 1478 47 for the Antwerp portrait. In spite of a l l these good qualities there i s also a negative aspect. The separation between the brown earth and the bluish trees and grass i s rather abrubt on the l e f t . The shadow on the right i s rather harsh. In other words, there i s a loss of subtlety and a hint of early linearity. Quite different again i s the portrait in The Hague (Pr. 48 79). The horizon has .been lowered even more and the land-scape i t s e l f i s rather minimal, just two small fragments above the broad shoulders. The colouring i s much cooler and compared to the Antwerp portrait (Pr.71) much subtler, due to a better sense of shadows. The foreground on the l e f t i s a 22 good example of this. In turn i t gives a "better feeling for deep space, even, though the landscape i s only a fraction of the canvas. While the Antwerp portrait s t i l l shows a part of the face lower than the horizon, the The Hague portrait has even the solid neck above the landscape. The lowering of the horizon already started with the Copenhagen portrait (Fr.82) and I think that this i s the latest one i n this series. The sky i s unlike anything we have seen before. Broad white-reddish-blue strokes are painted behind the sitter's head. The diaphanous clouds of previous portraits have completely disappeared. It i s the only portrait which has this natural phenomenon. Although there are other paint-ings which have a% sky with a similar tendency, the closest 49 one i s probably the loreel altar piece of 1484 (Pr.12). The white close to the horizon has been replaced by a cla r i t y which i s Vermeer-like i n quality. The objects like the trees, houses and church, have a miniature quality which creates a sense of deep space. Unfortunately, this portrait, which i s so different i n setting, also i s the end of the sequence of the pure landscape background. The spatial development gradu-ally unfolded from the early U f f i z i portrait (Fr.89) to the mature Antwerp portrait (Fr.71). But between the Antwerp portrait and the The Hague portrait (Pr.79) there i s a gap in the continuity, so that a complete reconstruction i s not possible. In the eight discussed portraits we have followed Memling more as a landscapist than as a portraitist. And we 23 have seen his development in space, perspective, atmosphere, topography and individualization. With the help of this development we are able to place two other controversial portraits which f i t more or less into this category. Up to 50 the present time an early date has been suggested for both. My suggestion for a somewhat later date for the Frankfurt 51 52 portrait (Fr.73) and the Frick portrait (Fr.231) i s based on the development of the landscape. A l l the proponents of an early date cite different reasons, but the basic reasons for the early date for the Frankfurt portrait, with which I want to deal f i r s t , can be reduced to three. The f i r s t concerns the red sugar loaf hat, popular i n the 1460s. However, some Brugian manuscripts show this hat in the 1470s as well, so that this reason for an 53 early date i s not valid anymore. The second, which also counts for the Frick portrait (Fr.231), i s more serious and centers around the window frame. Already in the portraits with a neutral background we noticed that Memling used this 54 device, certainly as late as 1480. Moreover, a complete landscape background framed by a window frame appears to be a novelty. It i s not far-fetched to state that novelty creates new problems which may not necessarily be solved completely or correctly. The development of the landscape as we have followed i t i s an example of this fact. Thus some aspects may look earlier, but others show a much later development. The third centers around certain deficiencies of the head. The objections are indeed correct- see footnote 50- but they 24 are not sufficient for an early date. Only "by looking at the painting can the problem be solved. The sky turns from white to blue. The horizon i s in the middle of the canvas. On the right side the small trees on a hillock do not come above the fur-lined collar of the sitter. On the l e f t side the sunlit plain i s blocked off by far away buildings, which rise nearly as high as the sitter's mouth. The small trees are carefully placed, creating a garden-like environment. The silhouetting buildings could be a church, a townhall or a belfry, but they are not described in detail and shimmer in the distance. Although the sitter blocks off the connection between the l e f t and the right one could imagine a conti-nuous landscape, but the juxtaposition of the sunlit plain with the darker hillock i s not completely satisfactory. The atmospheric and topographic qualities occur for the f i r s t time in the Montreal portrait (Fr.80). The size of the trees, the garden-like setting, the lower horizon and the silhouet-ting buildings are found in portraits after the Montreal portrait. The frame behind the si t t e r i s rounded and leads into the landscape, yet, i t separates the sitter from that land-scape. The Copenhagen portrait (Fr.82) already showed''a better integration of the sitter and his background, so that possibly the Frankfurt portrait comes in between the Montreal portrait 55 (Fr.80) and the Copenhagen portrait (Fr.82). The organization of the landscape in the Frick portrait (Fr.231) i s more logical. There i s no problem to imagine this 25 as a continued terrain in spite of the massive head and bust placed in front of i t . The buildings are not placed on the horizon as in the Frankfurt portrait, but are scattered about and there i s more variation in the landscape i t s e l f : a ser-pentine road leads to the back; beyond the f i r s t row of trees a h i l l y landscape continues; strips of land and shadows of trees lead the view into deeper space. The horizon i s placed below the sitter's massive chin. The deep blue sky with a l i t t l e white, combined with some technical problems in face and hands could perhaps indicate a date after the Frankfurt 56 portrait and before the Copenhagen portrait (Fr.82). Hulin de Loo thought that the Frankfurt portrait could be dated 57 around 1473 or at the latest 1475. As far as the landscapes are .concerned both the Frankfurt and the Frick portraits could possibly be dated around 1475. In the f i r s t eight portraits of this category the sitter could be thought of to be in the landscape, that i s i n the same space. The last two portraits have the sitters separated from the landscape through their frames. That means that they can be conceived as being in a different space. As such they could function as an introduction to the following category. TEE INTERIOR-EXTERIOR BACKGROUND This i s the smallest category as far as the background i s concerned, for there are only nine portraits. Of these, Benedetto Portinari (Fr.23B) and Maarten van Nieuwenhove(Fr.14) 26 are f i r m l y dated 1487, so t h a t f o r them not much d i s c u s s i o n i s necessary to e s t a b l i s h a chronology. Two other p o r t r a i t s , those of Willem and Barbara Moreel (Fr.67,68), can be support-ed by the St. Christopher a l t a r piece (Fr.12), donated i n 1484. Furthermore, the Chicago p o r t r a i t (Fr.92) can be sup-ported by a Madonna and C h i l d (Pr.50) The problems i n t h i s category are t w o - f o l d : the com-p l e x i t y of the i n t e r i o r and the complexity of the e x t e r i o r , together with t h e i r combination. Por the landscape the f i n d i n g s of the previous category can be used. The f i r s t p o r t r a i t i n t h i s category i s a s o f t brownish coloured p o r t r a i t of a man i n the Thyssen-Bornemisza C o l l e c t i o n 58 (Pr.232). The d i a g o n a l l y placed s i t t e r looks towards the r i g h t from where the l i g h t comes. The green brownish w a l l behind him i s somewhat l i g h t e r around the s i t t e r ' s head, t u r n i n g darker toward the c e n t e r , where there i s a m u l t i -coloured marble column. A carpet over a balustrade and a very simple landscape of a l i t t l e b i t of grass and a, few t r e e s complete the background. The s i z e of the landscape does not help much to determine the date. The grass has a few d e t a i l s and the t r e e s have some touches of i n d i v i d u a l i t y . This h i n t s at a date probably l a t e r than the Venice p o r t r a i t (Pr.77). The play of l i g h t and shadow around the head r e c a l l s the San Diego p o r t r a i t (Fr.233), but the Thyssen-Bornemisza p o r t r a i t has a s u b t l e r use. The diagonal pose leaves more space f o r the hands, f a i r l y s i m i l a r to the Pierpont Morgan 27 portrait (Fr.83) and the Copenhagen portrait (Fr.82). | ^ e s e details indicate a close proximity to these portraits. The second and third portrait i n this category are taken together. There i s a good reason for, even though the portraits are now separated by a few hundred kilometers. In Berlin hangs the portrait of an elderly man (Fr.75) and in 60 Paris the portrait of an elderly woman (Fr.76) i s on view. They are nearly similar in size; the Berlin portrait i s 34x29 cm. and the Paris portrait i s 35x29 cm. Placing them side by side, a few things become obvious: the balustrade continues; the road starting in the Berlin portrait continues in the Paris portrait, curves, passes a house and leads to the gate i n the Berlin portrait; the landscape i t s e l f i s unified. If we place precisely the continuing details to-gether we notice that the bottom of the Berlin portrait must have been cut. Further support for this i s found in the fact that the man i s missing two fingers. The woman's l e f t hand rests on a parapet and his right arm also seems to rest. Thus a bit of the parapet also has been cut. The differences with the Thyssen-Bornemisza portrait (Fr.232) are remarkable. The wall has disappeared and much greater prominence has been given to the landscape. The columns are placed to the side so as not to interfere with 61 the continuity between the two portraits. The balustrade i s almost horizontal. Priedlander's argument in defense of a date around 1470 i s worth quoting: "I take the aged couple portrayed on the two panels in the louvre (Fr.76) and the Kaiser Priedrich Museum 28 (Fr.75) to be an early work, although the landscape background, here set with columns at the side and a shoulder-high wall, i s already well-developed. What speaks for an early origin are the somewhat stunted hands the rather f l a t faces elaborated mainly in line, and the hesitant use of shading." °2 There i s no excuse for the f l a t faces, but older people often have lined faces. The wrinkles in his forehead, the sharp cheek lines, the strong lines of his neck are easily 63 attributable to old age. An argument against the stunted hands w i l l be put foreward i n the category dealing with hands, but even a cursory glance at hands other than priy^r-clasped hands i s sufficient to realize that Memling was not always successful i n this part of anatomy. As Priedlander pointed out, the landscape i s already well-developed. That could suggest a later date. Further evidence of a later date i s the colour of the faces, which in i t s warm tonality i s closer to that of the Antwerp portrait (Pr.71) than to the earlier portraits. Looking solely at the landscape of the two portraits combined, we notice character-i s t i c s of the Copenhagen portrait (Fr.82) and the Palazzo Vecchio portrait (Fr.86): the buildings are solid, there i s a slilghtly h i l l y landscape, the trees have been individualized and the road i s not satisfactorily integrated. Compared to the Thyssen-Bornemisza portrait (Fr.232) there i s a much better relationship between the interior and exterior. The columns in the Berlin-Paris portraits have a function, for they anchor the sitters without blocking the view. The column in the Thyssen-Bornemisza i s not really functional but -29 additive. It "blocks the view and does not help to relate to either the interior or exterior. This means for a possible date that the two portraits are somewhat later than the Thyssen-Bornemisza portrait (Fr.232) and close to the Copen-hagen portrait (Fr.82) and the Palazzo Vecchio portrait (Fr.86). Looking at the other portraits i n this category we notice that they a l l have a well-developed landscape, so that roughly we can say that this category i s - for the sur-viving portraits at least- characteristic for the mature and 64 late period of Memling. In'the Robert Lehman Collection i s a portrait of a young man (Fr.74), which deserves this description well-65 developed. The horizon i s as high as the mouth of the sitter which i s slightly above the middle of the canvas. The landscape i s only on the l e f t side, intersected by two marble columns. Behind the sitter i s a very light, nearly luminous wall. The wall and the columns form an angle of 90 degrees behind the head of the sitter. The diagonal direction of the parapet, on which the columns stand, and the wall invite the viewer to look into space. The curving road and the trees lead the eye towards"the horizon, which i s vaguely h i l l y . The pose of the sitter can be regarded as the base of a triangle, with the columns and the wall as i t s legs. This creates a space behind the s i t t e r , a space which i s defined by the clear indication of the corners formed by the wall and column. His hands rest comfortably on an invisible ledge and the direction of the arms create 30 distance between the body and the hands. There i s a subtle balance i n this painting, built up by i t s elements; the many verticals i n the deep velvet red dress and the columns and the angle of the wall; the dark collar with the white line and the fur trimming of the jacket; the hands with the horizon; the heavy columns and the wall and the landscape. These few examples are sufficient to indicate that the portrait i s later than the previous portraits i n this 66 category. The next two portraits have Willem Moreel and his wife 67 Barbara van Vlaenderberghe as sitters (Pr.67,68). These two portraits are certainly later than the Berlin-Paris portraits (Pr.75,76), for the red marbled columns are not as heavy and are placed on a diagonal balustrade. Instead of one column per portrait there are two and, unlike the Lehman portrait (Pr.74), the heads are placed between the columns. Placed beside one another, the inside columns.and the balus-trade give the impression of a corner i n a room. Separation, however, forestalls this connection line to become the 6-8 central axis. The hennin and v e i l of Barbara Moreel prevent much of the landscape from being shown. A cluster of trees, somewhat clumsily tucked in between the columns and the v e i l , and a.bluish distant h i l l with a cloudless sky are a l l what i s visible. Yet, there i s one interesting aspect worth mentioning here. Through the diaphanous v e i l a slightly dis-69 torted landscape i s visible. The portrait of Willem Moreel contains more landscape. A road close to the inside column 31 pulls the view away from this column and into the landscape. Houses and castles are placed l e f t and right of the sitter's head. Especially the l e f t side i s close to the The Hague portrait (Fr.79). The high "balustrade necessitated a-high horizon, roughly as high as the eyes of the sitter. This contrasts to what we have noticed in the pure landscape category. Yet, the depth and the c l a r i t y are indicative of a later date. The usual dating for these portraits, 1484, seems to he reasonably acceptable. The next portrait, at Chicago (Fr.92), i s quite dif-70 71 ferent in composition. The sitter i s seated with a prayer book in front of him. Behind him i s a cupboard and a glass vase holding red carnations. A dark corner i s behind his head. Through a window we can see a meandering stream, a tree and a church half hidden by the trees in front of i t . The horizon divides the window at midpoint. The window and the landscape make i t possible to match i t with a Virgin and Child painting ( F r . 5 0 ) and in 1936 the diptych was reunited. The landscape alone i s not sufficient for a precise date. The continuity of landscape from one panel into another appeared already in the portraits of the Elderly Couple (Fr. 75,76). The smallness of the trees and the clarity reminiscent of the The Hague portrait (Fr.79) indicate a possible later date. In the interior i s a lot of space between the hands, body and cornerj more than in the Lehman portrait (Fr.74), and this i s probably due to the presence of the ground and the cupboard. Compared to the dated Maarten van Nieuwenhove 3 2 (Fr.14) the interior and the exterior are not as detailed and refined. Thus i t i s probably painted before 1487. On the basis of interior-exterior alone this portrait could be placed between the Lehman portrait (Fr.74) and the Maarten van 72 Nieuwenhove (Fr.14). The last two portraits in this category, Benedetto 73 74 Portinari (Fr.23B) and Maarten van Nieuwenhove (Fr.14) are both dated 1487. It i s d i f f i c u l t to say which one i s earlier, but for establishing a.working chronology this i s not so important, especially not since no other portraits are known to be later. Since we return to these paintings several times, in this chapter as well as in others, a short description should suffice. Benedetto Portinari i s placed diagonally i n a?room, behind a desk on which l i e s an open prayer book. Behind him, on a low balustrade, are two columns which above the capital start to form an arch. Outside i s the by now .familiar Memling 75 landscape but with a somewhat awkward curved road. Maarten van Nieuwenhove nearly rests against a multi windowed wall. A prayer book l i e s open on a cloth-covered ledge i n front of him. Through two open windows a small portion of the landscape i s visible. Although the parts are tiny, a bridge with a watchtower i s visible as well as deep space and a narrow strip of sky. The interior i s rather detailed i n the window shutters with nails-and lock, the small glass panes and a stained glass panel with his patron saint. In the,right corner, hardly noticeable, i s a column. The sophistication of this portrait, which i s actually part 33 of a diptych, has generally received great acclaim. It sums up the conquests Memling has made since the early portraits i n spatial development, unification, topography, atmospheric perspective, individualization and volume. It would he nice to leave the general aspect of hack-ground on such a laudatory note. However, one painting, the 76 London portrait (Pr.78), could not be included i n any of the three background characteristics. The sitter i s placed, perhaps the word pressed i s better, between two multi coloured 77 marble columns. The background i s a neutral dark green. In front, on a desk or ledge, i s an open book. Backgroundwise this i s a combination of the neutral background and the interior. The diagonal position, the space available in front and the two columns indicate a date from 1475 onwards and • • 78 possibly as late as 1487. A few conclusions could be drawn from these three characteristics. We have discussed and followed what Pried-lander called a well-developed landscape and i n general Memling's spatial development. The emphasis on the kind of background seems i n time to switch more or less i n the order discussed here. The inceptions may have been consecutive-d i f f i c u l t to prove since not a l l portraits have survived-but for some time at least the three categories existed concurrently. The method applied here had some definitive advantages. Within each category i t was possible to follow the progress; as well as notice possible regressions. What seems regressive compared to one category may be progressive in another one. Thus i t i s impossible to say that from 34 Gilles Joye (Fr.72) of 1472 to Maarten van Nieuwenhove (Fr.14) of 1487 there i s an uninterrupted progress, which flows from one category into another. In discussing Memling's spatial development some attention was given to the placement of the hands, the three-dimensionality of the sitters and to anatomical structure. That no more attention could he given shows the limitations of one aspect. The second aspect, that of hands, helps to rectify some of these shortcomings and make i t possible to construct a tighter chronology. PRAYER-CLASPED HANDS A l l the portraits discussed above either show one or both hands. Absence of hands in a portrait attributed to 79 Memling should make one suspicious. Nearly half of the sitters have their hands put together in prayer. This i s not only the largest category, but also the most uniform, and this uniformity makes i t easier to discuss progression, regression and deviation. The starting point i s again Gilles Joye (Fr.72). His 80 arms are cut close to the armpits and his hands are tucked away i n the corner. His l i t t l e finger i s awkwardly placed against the frame. Hardly anything i s visible of his right hand. This i s probably due to the fact that the hands are placed parallel to the picture plane. Even his l e f t hand i s not completely visible, because i t i s cut close to the knuckles of the thumb and l i t t l e finger. The thumb bends somewhat strangely to the back. This spatial and structural 35 inaccuracy, the uncertainty of the relationship of the hands with the frame, the body and each other i s important enough to help us to date more firmly the Portinari portraits (Pr.69,70). The f i r s t and major difference i s that Tommaso i s shown nearly to the waist. Secondly, he i s placed diago-nally i n space. Thus the space for his hands has been enlarged and includes the arms as well. The hands.are away from the corner and free i n space. They point in the same upward direction as those of Gilles Joye (Pr.72), but now the other hand i s much more visible. The thumbs are normal and not bending backwards. In the fingers there i s more of a bone structure, but not a l l the results are correct: the l e f t l i t t l e finger has a strange knick; the angle connecting the l e f t hand with the arm i s too large and the flesh between the thumb and the index finger i s undefined. However, the better over-all structure tends to confirm the earlier suggestion that this portrait i s slightly later than the Gilles Joye. Maria. Portinari 1s hands.form an angle of 30 degrees with the lower edge, that i s , they point to Tommaso, not 81 upwards. They are close to the l e f t corner, but do not quite touch the edge. The sleeve covers the lower part of the hand, which i s painted parallel to the picture plane. Her right hand i s barely visible, the l i t t l e finger has again a., strange knick and the right index looks misshapen. Anatomically her hands are less correct than his. Structur-ally and compositionally her hands resemble more Gilles 36 Joye's hands than Tommaso's, so that her portrait may have "been painted "before Tommaso's. The fourth portrait i s again of ar sitter with a- neutral background, namely the San Diego portrait (Fr.233). He i s cut just under the armpits. Thus his situation i s similar to Gilles Joye (Fr.72). However, his hands are not pressed into the corner. His right l i t t l e finger i s circa three centimeter away from the l e f t frame. The hands are cut from the second joint of the l i t t l e finger to the third joint of the index, hut what i s visible i s rather slender. That i s because the last joints are barely indicated. The thumbs are a bit too long anatomically. Compared to Tommaso Porti-nari 's hands they have, however, gained even more i n the understanding of the bone structure. This confirms the earlier findings in the neutral background characteristic that the San Diego portrait i s of a later date. The Thyssen-Bornemisza portrait (Fr.232) i s comparable to Tommaso Portinari i n several aspects. The s i t t e r looks to the right, his hands are away from the frame, his pose i s diagonal and he i s seen nearly to the waist. However, the hands are much freers the l e f t thumb crosses the right; the whole l i t t l e finger i s curved, not just the joint; the folds around the wrist and thumb are much more natural; the knuckles are better indicated. This new freedom i s indicative of a:.date after the San Diego portrait (Fr.233). In contrast to the Thyssen-Bornemisza portrait stands the National Trust portrait (Fr.87). The sitter i s cut just 37 82 below the shoulders. Thus there i s very l i t t l e space for the hands. Not a l l fingertips are visible and the hand i s cut just above the wrist to just below the third knuckle of the l i t t l e finger. Since this portrait i s poorly preserved i t i s not easy to make a judgment about the anatomical structure. At least the thumbs are of proper length and the fingers seem to bend a. l i t t l e bit and the upper knuckles are indicated. The areaaabout the l i t t l e fingers seems to be badly damaged. In spite of the poor preservation i t i s s t i l l possible to date i t after the San Diego portrait (Fr.233). Compared to the Thyssen-Bornemisza~ portrait (Fr.232) the hands 83 seem to have a similar confidence, which suggests that i t 84 could be dated from that time onwards. Superficially, there does not seem to be ar. consistency for the length of the sitter, for the london portrait (Fr.78) 85 shows the sitter as far as the waist. The hands are at an angle of 45 degrees with the ledge on which the open prayer book rests. -Much of the inside of his l e f t hand i s shown, more than i n any of the others discussed here. The knuckles show that there i s an understanding of the bone structure. The thumbs are freely placed against one another and are of proper length. The flesh i s somewhat pale, which may be due to the age of the sitter. While the Thyssen-Bornemisza::. portrait (Fr.232) showed cupped hands, this s i t t e r shows parting hands and the shadow increases gradually. The spatial relationship to the book and the corner shows a greater ease compared to the Thyssen-Bornemisza portrait. The better 38 anatomical structure and spatial relationship indicate that the London portrait could he dated after the Thyssen-Borne-misza portrait. Compared to the hands of Benedetto Portinari (Pr.23B) and Maarten van Nieuwenhove (Pr . 1 4 ) , the London sitter's hands are f a i r l y similar, except i n the angularity of the thumb and the pale flesh colour. Talcing a-lso the 86 Chicago portrait (Pr.92) into consideration, one aspect i n connection with the prayer book becomes apparent. In the London portrait the book l i e s f l a t on the table; i n the Chicago portrait i t i s at an angle, but i t i s not clear how; in the Benedetto Portinari the book rests on an object to form an angle; i n the Maarten van Nieuwenhove i t rests on a clearly defined red cloth. And at the same time the hands move farther away from the book, while the book becomes smaller. Thus although the hands of these four sitters are f a i r l y similar, there i s a spatial development i n relation of the.hands to the open book. The consequence.; for the London portrait i s that i t can be regarded as belonging to Memling's mature or later period, but probably not later than the Chicago portrait. The situation for the Moreels (Pr.67,68) i s different again. His hands are partly covered by his sleeves so that only the fingers are visible. They are away from the frame and point at an angle of 60 degrees upwards. There i s a f a i r amount of space between his l i t t l e finger and ring finger and shadow indicates that the hands are not tightly pressed together. This relaxed manner i s also noticeable i n her 39 hands. They are only partly visible because they are cut by 87 the frame. Her right thumb crosses the l e f t and her l i t t l e finger bends considerably i n the middle joint i n a quite natural manner. The angle of the hands with the lower edge i s 45 degrees, pointing more to the husband than upwards. The bone structure of the hands i s quite well understood and they convey an easiness of handling. This tends to 88 confirm a later date. It i s rather d i f f i c u l t to say much about the hands of the sitter of the The Hague portrait (Fr.79), because only the fingertips are shown. What i s visible shows that the hands are placed on the axis l e f t bottom-top right, which gives depth to the painting. The top knuckles are clearly indicated, so that even these few details tend to confirm 89 a later date. A few words s t i l l about the Chicago portrait (Fr.92).-His right thumb rests upon his l e f t hand, something already noticed i n the Thyssen-Bornemisza portrait (Fr.232) and i n the Barbara Moreel (Fr.68). Both Benedetto Portinari (Fr.23B) and Maarten van Nieuwenhove (Fr.14) miss this playful aspect, because their thumbs are placed beside one another. His.hands do not part as far as Willem Moreel's (Fr.67), which i s noticeable i n the l i t t l e fingers which are positioned more parallel. This i s comparable to the last two portraits. His hands form an angle of 45 degrees with the lower edge, i n between the Maarten van Nieuwenhove (Fr.14), v/ith an angle of 30 degrees, and the Benedetto Portinari (Fr.23B), with an 40 angle of 52 degrees. This would suggest that this portrait i s close to the last two portraits of 1487 and close to and pro-bably after the Moreels (Fr. 67,68). The date which Priedlander suggested for the Virgin and Child (Pr.50), before i t was united with this portrait, was circa 1485, which i n the 90 light of our discussion seems to be acceptable. With the two dated portraits of 1487 this one rounds out this cate-gory. A few conclusions need to be drawn which are useful for a discussion i n the next categories and chapters. The early portraits show a lack of anatomical understanding. It i s not u n t i l the San Diego portrait (Fr.233) that there i s a.sense of underlaying bone structure; and i t i s not u n t i l the Thyssen-Bornemisza portrait (Fr.232) that ascertain freedom with and confidence i n this anatomical aspect occurs. Spatially there i s a tendency away from the corner, although there are subgroups, like those with a prayer book, which follow an added pattern. Even i f the hands are placed close to or i n the corner they tend to become freer after the pressed hands of Gilles Joye (Fr.72). Although a l l hands are prayer-clasped hands, they do not always point i n the same direction. There are basically two directions: upwards and sidewards. The significance of this w i l l be discussed in chapter IV. 41 HANDS HOLDING AN OBJECT Although this i s the smallest category, i t i s closely related to the previous one, since the hands 'do' something. The object or objects the sitters hold as well as the way the objects are held determine partially the position of the 91 hands. Through the grip on the object the anatomical understanding i s revealed. Since the objects vary a different grip may be required, which in turn creates new problems. Moreover, two of the sitters show both hands, the Pierpont Morgan portrait (Pr.83) and the Copenhagen portrait (Fr.82). Of the three categories this i s the most complex one. Since the two portraits v/ith the two hands have an added variable, they w i l l be discussed together. The hands of the Pierpont Morgan sitter (Fr.83) are placed i n the right bottom corner; those of the Copenhagen sitter (Fr.82) in the l e f t bottom corner. The latter has a rosary i n his fingers and the way the hands are placed i s rather relaxed. The fingers are parted and curved around the rosary. Some fingers curve more than others, giving more variation. The l e f t thumb hides behind the rest of the hand^ and the l i t t l e finger i s cut. The fingers and hand are smoothly continued into the sleeved arms. It a l l looks like a natural movement. Not so for the Pierpont Morgan portrait, who has two objects in his hands, a carnation and a small folded card. The hand area i s cramped; the l e f t and right have no real relationship. The fingers of the l e f t hand, which holds the carnation, are varied i n length, but rather unnatural. The 42 ring finger seems longer than the middle finger. This i s / partly due to the fact that the middle finger has heen withdrawn from the stem of the flower. The variation now achieved i s through an unnatural, cramped movement. The right hand has rather long fingers, which look insubstantial. This suggests that the Pierpont Morgan portrait i s of an earlier date than the Copenhagen portrait, probably not very much, for the latter s t i l l has a slight insubstantiality in the 92 fingers. Since both portraits have a, different background and yet are relatively close, they t i e other portraits closer together. At least a l l the portraits with a neutral back-ground before the Pierpont Morgan portrait are also before the Copenhagen portrait, and some of the landscape backgrounds are before the Pierpont Morgan portrait. The result of this interrelation of categories i s that two other portraits with a different background come before the Copenhagen portrait, namely the Washington portrait (Fr.85) and the Montreal portrait (Fr.80). The latter has a- s c r o l l i n his hand, the former an arrow. In pose the hands look very much alike. In the Montreal portrait the forefingers are only visi b l e , i n the Washington portrait there i s a bit more. This l i t t l e addition gives the hand a: more relaxed feeling, although a certain stiffness remains. Allowing for the difference i n age and objects the two hands look rather similar. In both portraits the relation to their arms i s undefined, so that also spatially there i s not much 43 difference. Probably these portraits were done very close 93 together i n time. Since the Washington portrait i s closely related to the Pierpont Morgan portrait (Fr.83) and perhaps slightly earlier, the Montreal portrait can he dated around the same time. Por the landscape portraits i t means that those earlier than the Montreal portrait are also earlier than the Washington portrait. According to our discussion on the landscape hack-ground the Prick portrait (Pr.231) i s close to the Copen-hagen portrait (Fr.82). l i k e the Berlin Elderly Man (Fr.75) the sitter shows only three fingers. Like that portrait i t may also have been cut. The sitter has a sash i n his right 94 hand. In comparison to a l l other hands his fingers look massive. Two fingers are placed partly parallel to the picture plane and catch a l l the light; then they bend per-pendicularly away and are heavily shadowed. A rather clumsy and unsuccessful attempt i n structure, both from an anato-mical as well as spatial point of view. There i s a discre-pancy between the achievements in landscape and f a c i a l modelling and the hands, a discrepancy not unlike the situa-95 tion i n the Pierpont Morgan portrait (Pr.83). Of the three other portraits the Palazzo Vecchio sitter (Pr.S6) has a similar pose as the Montreal si t t e r (Fr.80) and the Washington sitter (Fr.85). A copy of this portrait (Pr.86a) shows that the lower part has been cut. The fingertips are now cut off. Yet, the remaining parts show that there i s a: better understanding, for the last 44 knuckles are just visible. The fingers are parted so that there i s a play with shadows. This freedom was f i r s t notice-able in the prayer-clasped hands of the Thyssen-Bornemisza-portrait (Fr.232). Thus the hands tend to confirm that this portrait belongs to Memling1s mature period. The order of the Palazzo Vecchio portrait (Fr.86) and the Antwerp portrait (Fr.71) has already been discussed i n the landscape background. A discussion on the hands of the latter does not substantially add to our knowledge. The l e f t hand, which holds a Roman coin, i s tucked away in the corner. The properly foreshortened thumb, the space i n between the fingers, modelled by their shadows, are indicative of Memling's mature period. The last portrait i n this category showed the hand of the sitter only after a restoration. This gives some clue to the quality of this area. The l i t t l e finger i s only partly cut off. With his index and middle finger the Windsor sit t e r touches a chain (?) hanging down from his neck. The sharp curve of the other two fingers adds to the variety, especially since the fingers part i n the center. These details s t i l l give a sense of anatomical correctness, which confirms the suggestion that this i s not an early portrait with a.neutral background, but a portrait of Memling's mature period. In spite of the complexity and variety this characteris-t i c tends to confirm the findings of the category with the prayer-clasped hands. Due to greater mixture of the back-grounds the chronology can be more firmly established. For 45 the remaining portraits the basic problem i s where they f i t i n before 1480, that i s , before the Bruges Young Woman's portrait (Pr.94). HANDS AT REST There are ten portraits in this category of which one, the Bruges Young Woman's portrait (Pr.94), i s dated 1480. But several others are roughly dated because of the sequences. The most important for the early portraits i s the U f f i z i portrait (Pr.89). By establishing i t s date, the others f a l l more easily into place. The sitter has his right hand on a broad ledge. The pose i s f a i r l y similar to those of the Montreal portrait (Pr.80) and the Washington portrait (Pr.85). Although the fingers are parted, the shadowing does not really model the fingers, but creates a strong linearity. Compared to another portrait i n the U f f i z i (Pr.88), in which the sitter has placed his hands one over the other, the hand i s not as varied and structured. And compared to the Venice portrait (Pr.77) his hand does not have the tension. This means that this portrait i s one of the earliest Memling made. This i s more li k e l y so i f we look more carefully at the Venice portrait (Pr.77). This sitter's right hand i s placed i n the corner and he presses his hand on a ledge. The joints are consequently slightly bend. A l i t t l e bit more of the upper hand i s visi b l e , but not much. The position of his l i t t l e finger recalls the hand of Gilles Joye (Pr.72). There the hand was pressed into the corner, here the hand has been cut and not pressed into the available space. Therefore, the 46 Venice portrait i s done probably some time after the Grilles Joye. But i t also means that the U f f i z i portrait (Pr.89) i s 96 painted around the same time as that of the Flemish composer. The other U f f i z i sitter (Pr.88), with his hands placed one over the other, may be more varied and structured, but the structure i s more that of the flesh, not of the bones. And that counts also for the Brussels portrait (Pr.84). The fingers look a l l the same and do not have an individual character. The fingers are in both cases close together and the separation i s mainly done by line, not through modelling of light and dark. Both these portraits are painted f a i r l y close together. The only other portrait before the Washington portrait (Pr.85) i s the New York Old Man (Pr.81). Since this area, i s badly rubbed a complete assessment i s impossible. His right hand covers his l e f t hand, except for the nails of the middle finger and the ring finger. The higher position of the right index i s not believable and the fingers have a peculiar 97 curve. Priedlander called them stunted hands, and rightly so. But aspects discussed i n the neutral background category should not be forgotten. Furthermore, as we have seen, some other hands are not successful either. We already discussed the very clumsy hand of the Frick portrait (Fr.231) and the less than successful hands of the Pierpont Morgan portrait (Fr.83). And of roughly the same date i s the Frankfurt portrait (Fr.73). The hands are very close to the l e f t corner. The right hand, f u l l y resting, shows parted fingers 47 rather mechanically organized and separated more through line than through modelling with light and shadow. The l e f t hand shows long hut insubstantial fingers. The hands miss completely the bonestructure underneath the flesh. This i s a l l the more remarkable, since other portraits of the same 98 period show a.much better grasp of the a.natomy of the hands. Although the tendency i s s t i l l somewhat present in the Copenhagen portrait (Fr.82), i t shows already quite an improvement. As we saw on page 27-28 Friedlander called the hands of the Elderly Couple (Fr.75,76) stunted hands. Conceding that the landscape-',-was advanced, he used the hands as one of the arguments to place them early. As I just indicated from maybe as early as 1474 onwards there i s a group of portraits which seems to be regressive i n hands. The Copen-hagen portrait (Fr.82) has s t i l l a few disproportionally long fingers, but the length of the fingers of the Elderly Couple seems to be f a i r l y acceptable. Of the Elderly Man's hand only three fingers are visible, the other two are cut, so that a judgment like "stunted hands" i s not completely 99 f a i r . Her right hand rests under her clearly visible l e f t hand, not much better than the solution in the New York Old 100 Man (Fr.81). Yet, spatially the result i s better, because the hands are away from the frame and the corner. Although Friedlander's "stunted hands" remains true, there are thus two points which considerably modify his argument. The f i r s t one i s that the hands are spatially 48 more successful than those of the early portraits. The second point i s that compared to this group of "stunted-hands-portraits" her hands, and his as well, show an improve-ment, thus suggesting a later date which i s compatible with 101 Priedlander 1s idea about the landscape. With what ease Memling could paint two resting hands becomes clear in the Lehman portrait (Fr.74). Part of the right fingertips are cut. Around the fingertips of the l e f t hand, which rests on the right hand, the colour i s faintly lighter. Between the fingers are no sharp lines as i n the early portraits. The same features can be found i n the Bruges portrait (Pr.94). Since this portrait i s firmly dated 1480, i t i s possible that the Lehman portrait was painted close to i t , probably somewhat earlier, because the hands do not recede as well: the last knuckle i s higher than the middle one. Looking back on the three categories of hands i t should be noted that they f u l f i l l e d their purpose i n more firmly establishing a chronology. Por the purpose of this thesis the relative chronology here established i s sufficient to draw some conclusions which w i l l be discussed i n the following chapters. But the hands established more than a firmer chronology. Spatially they show basically two developments: a tendency to move away from the corner and a-, freedom of pose. The latter i s the more important development, for i n cases where the hands are placed i n a corner i n a later period, the freedom remains. There i s a restriction to the spatial development, due to the anatomical development. I n i t i a l l y the hands are very fleshy with long fingers without a sense of hone structure. Gradually, through modelling with light and dark instead of lines, and details like knuckles and length of thumb, and i n some cases the connection to the wrists, this bone structure becomes apparent. However, i n the middle of this development a group of portraits appears which i s qualitatively much poorer i n hands. It i s this group which puts a restriction on the aspect of spatial development. After 1477 the develop-ment i s more continuous. Furthermore, i t should be noted that although a l l portraits discussed here show hands, i t does not mean that the whole hand i s always portrayed. In whole or i n part this aspect shows i t s importance to Memling and his sitters. The last point I want to mention here concerns the modelling. Early i n his career Memling used to separate parts through darker outlines. Gradually the lines gave way to a modelling through light and dark. Some of the discussion here centered around the face as part of the ongoing develop-ment of space and anatomy. Also there the line gave way to light and dark modelling. And i f we take into consideration the background development we can roughly divide Memling's portraits into three periods. The early period up to circa 1475 i s characterized by a searching for spatial effects and anatomical correctness. The results are, however, not yet successful. After 1475 Memling has gained a freedom and con-50 fidence i n both, so that the term mature period seems to be justified. Around 1480 certain early characteristics return, the most notable a hardening i n line and a cooler light, especially i n the landscape. The f i r s t clear example i s the The Hague portrait (Pr.79) of around 1484. The time between 1480 and 1484 could be designated as a transitional period leading into Memling's late style. This division i n time i s useful when we discuss i n the next chapters the number of sitters i n these periods and discover who they are. 51 CHAPTER II THE SITTERS In the chapter on chronology some names of Memling 1s s i t t e r s were mentioned to indicate p a r t i c u l a r p o r t r a i t s . Who the s i t t e r s actually were was not discussed. In t h i s chapter some h i s t o r i c a l information i s provided, which, i t i s hoped, w i l l c l a r i f y the findings r e l a t e d to the chronology. Although that i s important, i t i s not the major reason f o r discussing the h i s t o r i c a l background of the s i t t e r s . Some of th i s information sheds l i g h t on the reasons f o r commissioning p o r t r a i t s . Furthermore, i t gives an ins i g h t into the kind of people who commissioned them, that i s , we learn about the status of the s i t t e r s . With t h i s knowledge about t h e i r status we can make some suggestions about the s i t t e r s whose i d e n t i -t i e s are as yet unknown or not documented. Moreover, some of t h i s information contributes to our understanding of the personality and character of the s i t t e r . Thus i t provides some background to the discussion of the iconographical types i n chapter IV. As pointed out i n chapter I, G i l l e s Joye's p o r t r a i t (Fr.72) may be Memling !s f i r s t known p o r t r a i t . Yet, the name i s not given i n the painting or on the o r i g i n a l frame. On that frame, i n gold coloured c a p i t a l l e t t e r s , i s written "ANNO.DOMINI. 1472" and "ETATIS.SVE.47". Furthermore, i t has 1 .. a coat of arms, repeated on the s i t t e r ' s signet r i n g , and an 2 armorial device. What i s not shown on the frame are c l e a r l y 52 discernible binge marks, although there are some n a i l holes 3 in the frame edge. This seemingly not so important aspect of absence may, however, provide a clue later on when we examine the iconography. On the back of the panel i s a s l i p of paper, added later, with the following inscription*. "Effigies venerabilis v i r i domini Egidij Joye, sacer-dotis...ecclesie Sancti Donatiani Brugensis et pastoris ecclesie Sancti. Ypoliti Del(fen)sis, sepulti i n sanctuaris dicte ecclesie Sancti Donatiani anno Domini 1473, ultima decembris. Requiescat in pace." 4 P. van Molle, whose information I summarize here, was able 5 to confirm that this sitter was indeed Gilles Joye. He was a priest in the diocese of Tournai and obtained a prebend as a canon of the chapter of the Notre-Dame-at Cleves on April 24,1453. He resigned, however, before September 9,1460 in order to take a prebend of the chapter of Saint Donatian of Bruges. But he was not installed u n t i l March 2,1463 as i t s 6 tenth prebendary. Provosts of the Bruges' cathedral were chancellors of Planders as well and closely a l l i e d to the 7 Burgundian court. Like the dean and the canons of the Notre-Dame, next in importance, they were nearly a l l court appoint-8 ments. No wonder that i n a publication of 1731 we can find the following entry "Aegidius Joye, Capellanus Honoris 9 Philippi Boni Burgundiae Ducis, Canonicus S.Donatiani,..." Accounts exist which show that he was paid as a clerk ( he succeeded Philippe du Passaigne) and then as chaplain. It may have been his reputation as a composer which earned him these positions, for i n 1462 he was a member of chapelle 53 10 musicale of Philip the Good. He remained a: member u n t i l early 1468 when sickness caused reverses in his ascending career. That Gilles Joye was highly regarded as a composer i n his time may be gathered from the fact that he was mentioned as an equal of Guillaume Dufay, s t i l l regarded as one of the great masters of the Burgundian School, in Cretin's Deflora-tion sur l a mort de J.Okeghem, written between 1496 and 1499. Por some time during his court period he was also a-priest i n charge of the Sint Hippolitus or Oude Kerk of Delft (1465 to 1469). After his illness he mostly stayed i n Bruges where he died i n 1483 (and not i n 1473 as stated on the paper affixed on the back of the panel). Thus i t was shortly after the ascendency of Charles the Bold that he lost his court position. Knowing that Gilles Joj^e was i n Bruges i n 1472 strengthens the argument that Memling painted this portrait. In the portrait he i s dressed i n a simple russet coloured jacket with greyish fur trim. He wears a: ring with a blue jewel and one with his coat of arms. It i s d i f f i c u l t to say i n what function he let himself be portrayed. Is this a commemoration of him with respect to his court functions, as a priest, or as a musician? A bit of light may be shed upon this problem by the blue green neutral background. In connection with this point three other portraits need to be mentioned, that of Tommaso Portinari (Pr.69) and two copies of the portrait of Anthony of Burgundy (Pr.102a and b). Both men were closely related to the court and their portraits 54 12 also have a neutral background. It i s possible that this neutral background practice has kept something of i t s asso-13 ciation with the court. Although the evidence i s slim, this suggestion of court association may help i n the search for 14 the identity of the sitters. The next figure to be considered i s Tommaso Portinari, who played a very important role during the reign of Charles the Bold. But before anything can be said about him, we have to take a look at the Medici banking branch at Bruges of which he was for some time manager. Raymond de Hoover, who did much research i n this f i e l d , pointed out that between 1416 and 1430 the Medici were represented, i n Bruges as well 15 as England, by either the Bardi or the Borromei firms. In 1436 Bernardo di Giovanni di Adoardo Portinari (1407-1455), son of the Venice Medici branch manager, explored the possi-b i l i t y of setting up a: Medici branch i n Bruges. In 1438 he became aaMedici agent and the branch was o f f i c i a l l y founded on March 24,1439. In 1455 a contract for the Bruges branch was made between Piero and Giovanni di Cosimo and Pier-francesco di Lorenzo de'Medici, senior partners, Gierozzo de' P i g l i , investing partner, and Agnolo Tani, managing partner. A l l partners shared i n the capital, though to varying degrees, while the profits were to be shared according to a special arrangement. P i g l i had also interests in the London branch, where Tani had worked for some time. The contract was for four years, from March 25,1456 to March 24, 1460, and the company was to be called, according to article 55 16 one,"Piero di Cosimo de'Medici, Gerozzo de' P i g l i & Co." This company was"to deal i n exchange and i n merchandise i n the 17 city of Bruges i n Flanders". Tani, the manager, had to l i v e i n Bruges and only special occasions could warrant his absence from the city (for example the yearly markets i n 18 Antwerp or Bergen-op-Zoom). He was more of a? subordinate than his legal status of co-partner indicated. Yet, this legal status was important, for i t created an independent branch at Bruges. This independence would create havoc under Tommaso Portinari, for the various branches were not obliged to support one another. The contract of 1455 could be termi-nated only after March 24,1460, but i t could also be renewed and, i f necessary, the various clauses could be changed. I n i t i a l l y i t was renewed, but on August 6,1465 a new contract was made between somewhat different people. Piero de1 Medici became the senior partner, Agnolo Tani the investing partner, 19 and Tommaso Portinari (1428-1501) the managing partner. Tani had l e f t Bruges i n 1464 to discuss the new contract and he was opposed to Tommaso's appointment. That the latter became manager after a l l may be due to paternal and fraternal influence. Folco Portinari was the Tavola manager i n Florence. His son Pigello (1421-1468) was the f i r s t manager of the Milan branch (14 55-1468), while Accerito Portinari (1427-1503) was the second manager (1468-1478). It was, i n any case, a rare occurrence, for as Be Hoover writes "I know.of no instance i n which the Medici ever refused to renew the con-tract with a manager who had given them satisfactory service." 56 Although Tani came twice to the north, in 14-67 and in 14 68-1469, i n order to save the London branch, he had no direct influence on the managing of the Bruges branch. His indirect influence, however, must be stated. In the f i r s t place, a successful attempt to save the London branch could avoid the possible disaster of the larger Bruges branch. In the second place, he attempted to steer Tommaso away from the Burgundian court. In both attempts he was not successful 21 and the results for both branches were ultimately disastrous. Perhaps Tani himself was guilty of the court connection. In 1457, when he was manager, he wrote to Plorence for permission to s e l l s i l k to the Burgundian court, even though the con-tract of 14 55 stipulated that credit was not to be extended to spiritual and temporal rulers (They had to pay in advance.1 ) His assistant manager at that time was Tommaso Portinari. And although Cosimo and Piero de' Medici were against court 23 involvement ("rulers involved more risk than profit" ), there was a breach of contract, for the s i l k was sold at the court. Carlo Cava-lcanti, who could speak French, became the salesman at the court, but Tommaso learned a; lessons a breach of contract was possible without retaliatory measures. When he became manager in 14-65 he associated himself more and more with the court, especially with Charles the Bold. He learned nothing from the precarious situation of the London branch, which had extended loans to Edward IV and to the supporters 24 of the House of Lancaster. He actually was stimulated i n his dangerous policy by Lorenzo the Magnificent who ignored 57 the cautious policy of his predecessors and in 1471 renewed the partnership with a new clause that permitted Tommaso to 25 extend credit to Charles the Bold up to i . 6000 groat. In the contract renewal of 1473 this maximum was dropped. It must have been the highlight of Tommaso's career, for not too long after that the clouds began to gather over Charles the Bold's head. I n i t i a l l y m i l i t a r i l y successful, he was unable to sustain his momentum and when he was k i l l e d i n the battle of Nancy i n January 1477 he owed Portinari £ 9500 26 groat, or more than three times the invested capital men-tioned i n the 1473 contract. In 1478 Tommaso was in Italy and Folco Portinari (1448-1490), a nephew of Bernardo di Giovanni di Adoardo Portinari, the f i r s t Bruges branch manager, became acting manager. In 1479 Tommaso was forced to take the consequences of his financial dealings and had to take over the Bruges branch from the Medici. The f i n a l settlement, actually an adjustment of a previous settlement, took place on February 15,1481. Although the settlement probably gave more to Tommaso than he legally could expect, he was not free of creditors. In 1488 he was forced to for-f e i t his rights i n exchange for ready cash supplied by his nephews Benedetto and Folco Portinari. Even in 1500, three years after his retirement to Florence, he himself received nothing when he sold the 'pawned1 Burgundian crown jewels. And his son Francesco decided, after the death of his father on February 15,1501, not to accept the inheritance, because 27 he was afraid that the debts were more than the assets. 58 The most successful period f o r Tommaso can he placed, therefore, between 1465 and 1475? Although before 1465 com-pl a i n t s reached Florence that Tommaso spent too much time at the Burgundian court, i t was not u n t i l after the conclusion of the 1465 contract that he became an influence at the court. He became advisor and l a t e r counsellor to Charles the Bold, even when the l a t t e r was s t i l l Count of Charolais. De Hoover, i n an assessment on Tommaso stated that "perhaps he was cut 28 out to be a diplomat rather than a.merchant". I t was Tommaso who persuaded Piero d i Cosimo to charter the two galleys P h i l i p the Good had ordered f o r h i s crusade against the 29 Turks. I t was Tommaso who persuaded Piero d i Cosimo to buy 30 Hotel B l a d e l i n f o r 7000 Rhenish f l o r i n s i n 1466. I t was he who secured a charter f o r Gravelines 1 t o l l i n 1465. I t seemed an innocent adventure and l u c r a t i v e as well, f o r Flanders s t i l l got English wool and P o r t i n a r i expected even more import v i a . t h i s c i t y . But i t did not turn out that way. De Roover stated i t quite b l u n t l y : "There i s no question that the t o l l of Gravelines was the f i r s t step which led Tommaso P o r t i n a r i and the Medici with him on the road to greater and greater involvement i n loans to the Duke of Burgundy, the uncrowned king of the Low Countries."-^ In 1469 Tommaso went to Florence to negotiate ainew contract. The f i r s t one was voided by the death of Piero d i Cosimo on December 2,1469. But Tommaso had already returned to Bruges when Piero died. With the correspondence on a new contract he also wrote that he intended to marry Maria 32 Maddalena d i Francesco Bandini-Baroncelli, who was only 59 33 fifteen at the time, twenty-five years younger than Tommaso. The marriage took place i n Bruges in 1470. The f i r s t child, Maria, was horn i n 1471; the second, Antonio, i n 1472, and the third, Pigello, i n 1474. These three are represented i n the altar piece Tommaso ordered from Hugo van der (Joes. Since the fourth child, Margherita, was probably born i n 1475 that altar piece was presumably finished before her birth,; Fre-quently the Memling portraits are compared with the Hugo van der Goes donors. But since the two artists were of a;, quite different nature, their products were of necessity also different. Nothing more definite can be said than that the sitters are roughly of the same age. The Memling portraits could be marriage portraits, 34 commissioned some time after the ceremony. But they could also represent another occasion. The voided contract of 35 October 14,1469 was replaced by a?.much stricter one on December 15,1469. It stipulated that Portinari should "deal as l i t t l e as possible with the court of the Duke of Burgundy 36 and of other princes and lords,..." As we have seen above, this stipulation was rescinded i n the contract of May 12,1471 and Tommaso's powers were enlarged i n the 1473 contract. Both of these dates could be used for commemoration. Since the two portraits seem to be somewhat later than the Gilles Joye, the 1473 contract could possibly serve as a moment of thanksgiving and celebration. In the light of Tommaso's financial success..around 1473, the suggested date for these •37 portraits i s even more acceptable. 60 In the case of Gilles Joye we saw that he could repre-sent several groups, and a similar situation occurs with regard to the Portinaris. They can he regarded as repre-sentatives of the Italian colony at Bruges, as courtiers, as hankers or hanker-merchants. With Gilles Joye they have the aspect of courtier i n common and, as pointed out above, the neutral background may in these cases relate to the back-grounds depicted i n previous court portraits. A few words suffice about Anthony of Burgundy, named the Great Bastard. Pew, because the two portraits are copies (Pr.l02a and b), and his social position i s much clearer. He was the son of Philip the Good and Jeanne de Prelle and born 39 i n 1421. Early i n his l i f e he participated i n Philip the Good's wars. He became commander of the army and restored i n 40 1458 Burgundian power i n the Sticht. He was supposed to lead the Burgundian army i n the crusade against the Turks i n 1464, but the death of pope Pius II prevented the crusade to 41 materialize. In 1467 and 1474 he went to England i n order to strengthen a league between England and Burgundy. He was captured at Nancy i n 1477 by the Swiss, but handed over to the French king, Charles VIII. He pledged an oath of fealty to the French king and continued to live in France where he obtained new possessions. He mediated i n the conflict between the city Ghent and Maximilian, the husband of Mary of Burgundy. Philip the Handsome honoured him for this service with a. pension. At his death i n 1504 he had collected a great number of books and manuscripts. This lover of art was 61 42 portrayed for example by Rogier van der ^ eyden. Since the Memling copies show a Golden Fleece chain, which he received i n 1456, and he resembles the Rogier portrait, the i d e n t i f i -cation seems to be an acceptable one. The original could not be after 1477 when he was captured. It i s more li k e l y that the portrait was painted at a f a i r l y early date. It i s known that the Burgundian princes resided occa-sionally i n Bruges. Wo documents have come to light indicating that Memling was o f f i c i a l l y associated with the court. But that does not mean that Memling could not portray courtiers. It i s therefore possible that some of the unidentified sitters i n one way or another were connected with the court, such as the sitter of the Washington portrait (Fr.85). This sitter has an arrow in his right hand. Friedlander suggested that this perhaps indicated a. membership i n some St.Sebastian 43 fraternity. The brown jacket and the white s i l k shirt do not easily indicate the position of the sitter. His face and longish hair could indicate an Italian, just like Tommaso Portinari. There are, however, some aspects which would make the court connection possible. There i s f i r s t of a l l the blue neutral background. Secondly, the black hat differs from that of his contemporaries. A miniature i n the Histoire de la^ Toison d'or, showing Charles the Bold surrounded by twelve members of the order, contains two figures, seen at the back and seated at a table, who also have such a hat. Thirdly, the arrow could refer to hunting, a sport which was the prerogative 44 of the nobility. These details suggest that this unidenti-62 fied sitter may well be a person associated with the court. Quite distinct from this possible court association are the other identified sitters. The f i r s t ones of this new group are Willem Moreel and his wife Barbara van Vlaender-berghe. Moreel's family had come from Italy to Bruges i n the thirteenth century and the name had been changed from Morelli 45 to Moreel. Willem,as eldest son, inherited the t i t l e and the land, which was granted to his father by Robert de Cley-46 hem in 1435. He was one of the wealthiest and most i n f l u -ential men i n Bruges. K.B.McFarlane stated that Moreel be-47 longed to the corporation of merchant-grocers, while the Detroit Exhibition Catalogue stated that he was a broker and 48 a branch manager of the Bank of Rome. He served as burgo-master in 1478, a year after the death of Charles the Bold. A strong believer i n the rights of Bruges, he did not see eye to eye with his temporal overlords. Maximilian, the husband of Maria of Burgundy, had him imprisoned i n 1481 for five months, after he had made peace with Flanders and 49 had granted amnesty to every one else. He was burgomaster again i n 1483. Around this time he ordered the St. Christopher altar piece (Fr.12) for the chantry of the chapel of the 50 52 St.Jakobskerk. Between 1485 and 1488 he was i n Nieuwpoort, and the year of his return, 1488, saw Maximilian imprisoned 53 i n Bruges and Moreel holding the office of ecoutete. i n 1489 he became treasurer of the city. A tax l i s t for 1490 included him as one of the forty richest men i n Bruges and 54 in 1491 he was number eleven on the tax l i s t . Ten years 63 later he died, hut was originally not buried in his funerary chapel. He had married "joncbrauwe Barbara, f i l i a Jan van 55 56 Herstvelde". She bore him five sons and thirteen daughters and died two years before Willem in 1499. looking at the dates above, three possibilities emerge during which the portraits could have been painted: 1/ before his imprisonment;, i n 1481; 2/ between 1481, after his imprison-ment, and 1485, when he l e f t for Nieuwpoort; 3/ after his return in 1488. Agewise and compared to their portraits i n "the St. Christopher triptych (Fr.12) they f i t best into the second possibility. S t y l i s t i c evidence supports this suggestion. That Moreel chose Memling should not come as aasurprise. The painter was well-to-do, he was the best one i n Bruges, and, like Moreel, he was a member of the Broederschap van 57 Onze-Iieve-Vrouwe-Ter-Sneeuw. Willem Moreel can be regarded as a representative of naturalized Italians, upper class Brugian citizens, success-f u l businessmen and magistrates. Thus he represents very different groups compared to the previously discussed sitters. Chronologically close i n time to the Moreel portraits i s the National Trust portrait (Pr.87). At the same time the Moreels ordered the St.Christopher triptych (Fr.12). On the l e f t wing, behind Willem Moreel, are his five sons. The eldest, also a Willem, wears the same clothes, has the same hair and, i n general, looks like the National Trust sitter. If this s i t t e r i s indeed Willem Moreel j r . , he could be 58 regarded as a representative of wealthy young men. 64 Quite often another portrait i s associated with the Moreels. It i s that of the Bruges Young Woman in the St.Jans Hospitaal (Pr.94). Since the inscriptions are of later date, 59 they are of no immediate help. Frequently she i s regarded as Maria Moreel, their second daughter, hut that suggestion has not been accepted by a l l scholars. Their objection i s based on the St.Christopher triptych of 1484, which i s four years later than the portrait. On the altar piece she seems to look younger instead of older. This identification seems, therefore, indeed somewhat questionable. A.Monballieu tried to keep the identity within the Moreel family when he wrote 60 that she could be a relative of the Moreel family. The next known sitter i s Maarten van Nieuwenhove (Fr.14). On the original frame of the diptych we can read that he was 23 years old i n 1487; he was born on November 14,1463. Sir Martin Conway, perhaps not knowing who the sitter was, stated bluntly that " the man himself i s evidently something of a fool, but Memling hides his weakness by a. treatment 61 exceptionally dramatic." This "fool", a merchant-patrician who was a guardian of St.Julian's hospital, became a magis-trate in 1492, alderman i n 1495 and a burgomaster in 1497, 62 at a time when Bruges was rapidly declining. Early i n the 63 1490s he married Margaret of Haultrain, and he died i n 1500. These historical facts do not seem to warrant Conway's out-burst. Although there was no o f f i c i a l l y closed oligarchy, the magistrates were chosen from the richer and influential families. Therefore, Van Nieuwenhove represents f a i r l y similar interests and groups as Moreel. There are differences, 65 however. He does not represent naturalized Italians and he i s much younger than the Moreels. A usually accepted suggestion i s that for Benedetto 64 Portinari (Fr.23B). It was Warburg who identified the sit t e r . In the U f f i z i where this portrait hangs i s also the sinister wing with St.Benedict.. Both panels came from the S.Maria:. Nuova hospital, Plorence, the center of the Portinari r e l i -65 gious ac t i v i t i e s . Combining these facts, Warburg suggested that this was Benedetto di Pigello di Polco Portinari, the nephew of Tommaso. He was born in 1466 and his age seems to be compatible with the sitter's face. Benedetto was i n Bruges, with Polco Portinari, to help Tommaso after the dissociation of 1480 with the Medici. In 1488 Tommaso had to s e l l out to his two nephe?;s and transferred to them the rights of the captured Burgundian galley, which had carried 66 the Last Judgment (Pr.8). Benedetto can be regarded as the young Italian entrepreneur. His identification could lead to another portrait, as yet unexplored. At the back of the Benedetto Portinari portrait i s a device which reads "Le Bono in Melius". A much earlier portrait, also in the U f f i z i , and painted probably around 1473 (Fr.88), has at the back the same device in French. If we could connect him to the Portinaris, could he be Polco di Adoardo di Giovanni Portinari, the nephew of Bernardo Portinari? Polco was born i n 1448 and worked at least since 1466 in Bruges at the Medici branch. He stayed as assistant manager t i l l the mid 1480s i n Bruges, was imprisoned for 66 embezzlements and died i n 1490. I f the suggested date of 1473 i s right he would be 25 years old, which could f i t the sitter of this portrait. Two other sitters have been identified, but the usual identification does not seem to be correct. The f i r s t one concerns the sitter of the Antwerp portrait (Pr.71). Before 1927 the s i t t e r was believed to be the Italian medallist Niccolo Spinelli, who, between 1467 and 1468, worked for Charles the Bold. Hulin de Loo proposed that i t was Jean de 67 Candida, another medallist in the service of the duke. Jean de Candida also worked for the duke as a secretary from 1472 to 1474 and, i n the same function, for Charles' daughter Maria from 1474 t i l l 1479. He was sent on several diplomatic missions, but decided to go to France i n 1480. The medals he struck have an antique quality. His contempo-rary sitters were shown in profile. The Memling portrait 68 differs from one of his own medals. Although the suggestion makes sense timewise, Friedlander, for whom Hulin de Loo had constructed this hypothesis, disagreed with the identi-fication and pointed out that the coin was not of a contem-69 porary medallist. The coin, a:sestersius of Nero, was very 70 common north of the Alps. For this reason McFarlane suggested that the coin was not only unsuitable for a medallist, but also for a numismatist. He combined two unusual aspects of the painting to find a possible name, namely the coin (Nero) and the palm (Palma). Although unable to further substantiate and document his suggestion, he was undoubtedly 67 on the right track, especially since a: Simone di Nerone was a partner of the Me'dici i n 1458, His suggestion of 'Palma 71 Nerone' seems to he a step i n the right direction. As a representative of a-group he could possibly represent Italian merchant-bankers. The second person who has been 'identified' i s the sitter of the London portrait (Fr.78). It has been thought that the sit t e r was John II, surnamed the Clement, Duke of Cleves, who was born April 23,1458. He got his training at the Burgundian court at Bruges, away from his father, John I, 72 the Tferlike. When his father died i n 1481 he started wars, imitating his admired Charles the Bold. Later he found some-what more peaceful exploits, for he became the father of 63 bastards, which earned him the nickname of "Kindermacher". He married i n 1489 Mathilde, daughter of Henry III, the 73 Landgrave of Hesse. Since the sit t e r looks rather young and the date I have suggested for the portrait i s towards the middle of the 1480s when the duke was not i n Bruges, this sitter i s not li k e l y to be the Duke of Cleves. Some conclusions can be drawn here. A l l the identified sitters stayed for some time in Bruges, either for several years and longer, or for regular or irregular periods of time. A l l belonged to the upper class, gentry or nobility. One group, centered around the Portinaris, represents the Italian colony as well as the merchant-bankers. Most of the later portraits could be associated with the Brugian magis-tracy and their families. There i s a possibility that one 68 group i s closely connected with the Burgundian court. Several of these sitters also commissioned other paintings for a.much more public view. This could mean that information about donors gathered i n connection with these paintings could be useful i n determining the identity of the sitters. Other evidence becomes apparent by looking at the other portraits. One of the most d i f f i c u l t problems i s to determine the nationality of the sitters. Fashion provides some clues. Usually the Italians dressed the.same as the Flemish. But there were some minor exceptions. Italians wore usually a black hat with a double rim, while the Flemish wore a: hat with a, single rim. Of the not yet discussed sitters, probably six can be regarded as Italians: the sitters of the Venice portrait (Pr.77), the Brussels portrait (Pr.84), the Montreal portrait (Fr.80), the San Diego portrait (Fr.233), the Pierpont Morgan portrait (Fr.83) and the Palazzo Vecchio portrait (Fr.86). That leaves very few others with a hat. The sitter of the Frankfurt portrait (Fr.73) i s obviously a:northerner with his red sugar loaf hat (and his haircut). That leaves us with the Elderly Couple (Fr.75,76). Her hennin i s somewhat oldfashioned and northern; his hat i s single rimmed so that we may assume that they are not Italians. It would be tempting to suggest that they are Willem Vrelant and his wife, Memling's friends, who ordered an unknown altar piece. He was a well-known miniaturist from Utrecht 74 who came to Bruges i n 1454, started the guild of the "boek-verluchters" (book illuminators) of St.Jan de Evangelist, 69 and died in Bruges in 1481. Although his year of birth i s unknown he was regarded as an older man and the suggested date for the portraits, 1477, would not exclude this possi-b i l i t y . Furthermore, both the Portinaris and the Moreels ordered an altar piece around the same time they had their portraits painted. Memling painted for Vrelant a passion scene, which was presented to the Stationers' Guild in 1478 75 at a meeting attended by Memling. Since we do not know what Vrelant and his wife looked l i k e , the suggestion out of necessity must remain a hypothesis. Even more d i f f i c u l t to determine are those without ai hat. In some cases the hair can give a clue. Early in the 1470s the Italians have longer hair than the northerners, although age i s a variable. Gradually the Italians l e t their hair grow shoulder length, followed somewhat later by the younger Brugian citizens. Around 1480 the latter seem to part their hair i n the center. Older people like Moreel have their hair f a i r l y straight and cut i n front. On these grounds the New York Old Man (Pr.81), the Windsor sitter (Pr.91), and perhaps the Copenhagen sitter (Fr.82) and the Lehman sitter (Pr.74) could possibly be Flemings. The others, either with curly or fuzzy hair a l a Benedetto Portinari, could be Italians with the exception of the London portrait (Fr.78) whose sitter has a much lighter skin. There i s a startling consequence resulting from this number game. Perhaps as much as 60 percent of the sitters could be Italians.' That this i s an extremely high percentage 70 becomes apparent i f we realize that the Medici as largest 76 bank had not more than eight people working for i t . Before 1475 the majority of the sitters i s Italian; between 1475 and 1480 the number of Italian and Flemish sitters i s nearly 77 equal, and after 1480 the majority i s Flemish. Before leaving the question "Who are they?" one aspect s t i l l deserves attention. Already in discussing some portraits a passing remark has been made about the age of the sitters. Since many of the sitters are unidentified, the ages have to be guessed at and that i s sometimes a: haphazard game. A.War-burg was very careful when he described the age of a man 78 between 20 and 40, and G.Rosenberg, in a public lecture on Rembrandt's Montreal female s i t t e r described her age as 79 between 17 and 35. However, some sitters are obviously young, like the Montreal si t t e r (Fr.80), the London sit t e r (Fr.78), or the Venice sitter (Fr.77). For others the age i s reasonably well established, like Maria Portinari (Fr.70), perhaps 18, Benedetto Portinari (Fr.23B), probably 21, and Maarten van Nieuwenhove (Fr.14), who was 23. Of the here accepted portraits possibly as much as 45 percent may be adolescents and young men and women. Again, that i s a very large percentage and of this number probably two-thirds i s Italian. From the information about these sitters we can also deduce a more negative statement. There seems to be l i t t l e 80 indication that middle class people had themselves portrayed. The reason may be simply economic: they could not afford the 71 expense. In Bruges the financial status was closely connected to the social status. Though d i f f i c u l t to prove conclusively, i t seems lik e l y that portraits were only painted for a few restricted social groups. Some insight may he gained from R. de Roover's research into medieval hanking, especially i n connection with the Medici and Bruges. He wrote: "The main point... i s that there were i n Bruges three different classes of money-dealers: the Italian merchant-hankers who combined foreign trade with dealings in b i l l s of exchange, the lombards who were chie vfly pawn-brokers, and the money-changers who assumed the im-portant function of purveyors to the Mint and added deposit banking to this activity. Prom a legal point of view each group enjoyed a special status. The merchant-bankers were protected against any arbitrary acts of authority by their trade privileges which were in fact diplomatic treaties between the Count of Flanders and the Italian city-states. The lombards were merely tole-rated as the lesser of the two evils and were permitted to lend money at usury under the protection of a.licence system. As for the money-changers, they were citizens who did not have any special rights or privileges and whose profession was s t r i c t l y regulated. As dealers i n bullion, the money-changers were expected to comply with monetary ordinances and were even entrusted with their enforcement." 8l The consuls of the Italian nations, certainly those of Venice, 82 Genoa;and Florence, lived around the Place de Bourse. This differed strikingly from the lombards or "Cahorsins", who lived along the lange Rei, i n the parish St.Gilles (also called 't Wye), away from the money center. Probably because they frequently went bankrupt the contracts referred to 83 groups. Since they were outcasts i t i s not very li k e l y that they had their portraits painted. On October 13,1467, Charles the Bold declared that a l l 84 new money-changers had to relinquish their citizenship. 72 Before that, men and women, citizens as well as aliens could be money-changers. Before Memling's time the licensed money-changers had disappeared and only four free money-changers 85 had survived. They belonged to the upper and middle class bourgeoisie and the gentry. The former got frequently courtesy 86 t i t l e s . But they also went bankrupt, like Collard de May and Willem Roelands i n 1482. The suppressive ordinances of 87 Maximilian accelerated the financial decline of Bruges. The Gropt Placcaet Boeck Volume I, published i n The Hague i n 1658, stated already that "these failures have wrought utter ruin among a l l classes of people, but especially among 88 the merchants and the people of note." In spite of their failures, the native money-changers belonged to the ruling class. To this native upper class ("poorterie") belonged the 89 rentiers (real estate owners), inn-keepers-brokers, cloth merchants (who were moderately ri c h ) , successful money-90 changers and commission agents. Basically lacking here are the native merchants. The more influential and richer mer-chants were the Italians. Thus i t i s from these f a i r l y restricted groups that one can expect portraits. But the social-economic-legal status does not f u l l y explain portraiture and the variety within i t . Since we know the social status of the sitters, we can use thoughts prevalent among these sitters and expressed in other ways than portraiture. In other words, what was the context i n which these portraits were painted? What was the time like?' 7 3 Who was Memling? Answers to these questions help us solve questions and problems r a i s e d before and y e t remained un-answered. These questions set the stage f o r the next chapter. 74 CHAPTER III MEMLING'S TIME This chapter i s divided into three sections. In the f i r s t section we take a-.', look at Memling as a: historically documented figure. It i s rather short due to the scarcety of documents, and no attempt has been made to include any possible documentation related to his paintings. In the second section a short historical survey i s given, basically dealing with Charles the Bold, duke of Burgundy from 1467 to 1477 and Maximilian of Hapsburg, husband of Mariai of Burgundy and father of, and regent for, Philip the Handsome. Under-laying the wars the Burgundians fought at this time was one basic concern: unification and consolidation of the Burgun-dian lands. These wars, however, had serious monetary reper-cussions, some of which dramatically influenced the finan-c i a l power of Bruges. The third section deals mainly with two schools of thought, that of piety and that of humanism. Both are documented with the help of literature, especially poetry, music and some other forms of art. This section i s the longest of the three, not only because several poems are quoted, but also because i t provides much inside into the complexity of Memling's iconography. 75 THE HISTORICAL MEMLING Very few documents dealing with Memling have survived. Perhaps that i s the reason why several myths were created years after his death. These myths reflect more their creators than the histor i c a l Memling. In 1931 R.A.Parmentier published two lines i n his Indices op de Brugsche Poorterboeken which are crucial to the knowledge about Memling. In the book for 1465 i s written "Jan van mimnelinghe, Harmans Zuene, Ghebooren 1 Zaleghenstat, poorter 30 i n Laumaent. Omme 24 sh.gr." Selingenstadt am Main i s close to Frankfurt and Memelingen. Romboudts de Doppere, the notary who wrote Memling's de'ath act in 1494, stated that Memling came from the surroundings of Mainz, the capital of Rhenish Hesse to which Selingenstadt 2 belonged t i l l 1803. Therefore, Vaernewijck i n his Historie 3 van Belgies was correct when he called him "duytschen Hans". The archives of Selingenstadt show that Memling's parents lived at Aschaffenburgerstrasse 5, i n a patrician house with 4 a^facade stone inscribed with the year 1444. As the entry of the Poorterboek indicates, the name of Memling's father was 5 Herman; his mother's name was Luka S'tirn. But there i s no birthday entry for Hans and nothing i s known before the entry of January 30,1465. Usually a person had to f u l f i l l two conditions i n order to become a citizen. One had to li v e within the walls for some time, often a j^ear and a day, and one had to be 25 years of age. The latter condition means 6 that Memling could have been born i n or before 1440. G u i l d l i s t s do n o t h e l p much e i t h e r , f o r t h e y do n o t me n t i o n h i s name, ex c e p t Bruges and t h e n o n l y i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h h i s own p u p i l s . S i n c e t h e B r u g i a n g u i l d l i s t s t a r t s i n 1453 t h e r e a r e two p o s s i b i l i t i e s . P r i e d l a n d e r s t a t e d one i n t h i s way: "Dare we c o n c l u d e , from t h e s i l e n c e o f t h e r e c o r d s , t h a t 7 Memlinc became a,master i n Bruges b e f o r e 1453?" The problem w i t h t h i s s u g g e s t i o n i s , t h a t no independent works a r e known 8 o f h i s e a r l y s t y l e . The o t h e r p o s s i b i l i t y i s , t h a t he became master somewhere e l s e , perhaps i n Germany. Towards t h e end o f h i s l i f e Memling p a i n t e d t h e S t . U r s u l a s h r i n e (Bruges,1489, Pr.24) and t h e scene d e p i c t i n g Cologne i s f a r more a c c u r a t e t h a n t h e f a n t a s i e s about B a s l e and Rome. I n Memling's y o u t h master Stephan Lochner (14 00-1451) r e s i d e d i n Cologne and some o f Memling's madonnas have an a f f i n i t y w i t h t h o s e o f l o c h n e r : young, c i r c a 15 y e a r s o l d , g r a c i o u s , serene and somewhat withdrawn. D i d Memling f u l f i l l t h e g u i l d r e q u i r e m e n t s o f seven y e a r s a p p r e n t i c e s h i p h e r e , make h i s m a s t e r p i e c e and l e a v e ? D i d he t h e n e n t e r R o g i e r van der Weyden's workshop? The p a r a l l e l t o t h e T o u r n a i m a s t e r ' s own s t a r t would make 9 . t h i s p l a u s i b l e . There i s some o u t s i d e e v i d e n c e t h a t Memling worked w i t h R o g i e r . G e o r g i o V a s a r i c a l l e d Memling a p u p i l o f 10 'Rugiero' and G u i c c i a r d i n i , d e s c r i b i n g t h e i n v e n t o r y o f Mar g a r e t h a o f A u s t r i a i n 1516, s t a t e d t h a t t h e wings o f an 11 a l t a r p i e c e were done by master Hans, t h e c e n t e r by R o g i e r . I n B r u g e s , Memling l i v e d i n t h e p a r i s h o f S t . N i c h o l a a s i n t h e W a l h u u s s t r a a t . Between 1470 and 1480 he m a r r i e d Anna van V a l c h e n a e r e , who d i e d on December 10,1487, l e a v i n g him 77 12 with three young sons, Jan, Cornelius and Nicholaes. Memling became a member of the Broederschap van Onze-Lieve-Vrouw-Ter-Sneeuw during the service year 1473-1474 and he i s mentioned four times i n the register of this fraternity as "Master Hans". Many influential people were member of this fraternity, so that this membership gives some indication of Memling's 13 social status. In 1480 his name appeared as one of 283 on a tax l i s t , paying for the war Maria of Burgundy was fighting 14 against France. This indicates that he was one of the richest people i n Bruges. In other words, the painter and his patrons have more or less the same economic level.' Also i n 1480 his name appeared i n the guild l i s t in connection with his pupil Jan Verhanneman; i n 1483 with that of Passchier van der Mersch and i n 1485 with that of Louis 15 Boels. The last time that his name o f f i c i a l l y appeared was at his death. His friend, the notary-chronicler Eomboudts de Doppere wrote on August 11,1494: "Lie XI Augusti Brugis obiit Magister Joannes Memmelinc, quern praedicabant peritissimum fuisse et excellentissimum , pictorem totius tunc orbis christiani. Oriendus erat Magunciaco, sepultus Brugus ad Aegidii."l° He was buried i n the church yard of the Sint Gilles church, 17 but his grave has disappeared. 78 A HISTORICAL BACKGROUND In this short survey of the historical setting our attention w i l l focus on the time Memling was a citizen of 18 Bruges. In 1465 Bruges was the financial center of the north. At Memling1s death in 1494, Bruges had collapsed as a finan-.19 c i a l power. It i s between those two monetary extremes that the p o l i t i c a l situation changed drastically. The Count of Charolais had to wait u n t i l 1467, when his father Philip the Good died, to get complete powers over the Burgundian posses-sions. Charles, born on November 10,1433, had impatiently waited for that moment and he had tried to speed i t up, but 20 had not been completely successful. Since Philip the Good frequently resided at the Princen-hof i n Bruges, Charles decided to stay away from that city. He was i n Bruges, however, i n 1468 to celebrate his marriage to Margaret of York. Nothing of the banners and other decora-tions painted by artists like Hugo van der Goes for the f e s t i v i t i e s have survived. Memling may have helped, but he i s nowhere mentioned. And i f he did any portraits, none have survived. But although Charles did not reside at Bruges, he had several connections with the city through his entourage. Older counsellors like Pierre Bladelin, the treasurer of Philip the Good, founder of Middelburg i n 1448 and citizen of Bruges; Baudouin de Lannoy, governor of L i l l e and chamber-l a i n to Philip the Good; and Pierre de Goux, the third and last chancellor to Philip the Good, lost their influence. They died shortly after one another? Bladelin and De Goux i n 79 1471 and De Lannoy in 1474. Most of Charles counsellors had r a l l i e d around him before he became duke. Besides Tommaso Portinari, Charles had other Brugian advisors: Antoine 21 Haneron, the provost of St.Donatian; Jan de Witte, who was burgomaster in 1472-1473 and in 1482; Lodewijk, Seigneur de Gruuthuse, who was made a Knight of the Golden Pleece i n 1461 22 and became governor of Holland, Zeeland and Friesland i n 1463. There were other influential counsellors like Jean Gros III (1434-1484), a finance officer, audiencier to Charles i n 1467, comptroller of finance i n 1473 and who married the niece of chancellor Guillaume Hugonet i n Bruges i n 1472; Philippe de Croy, count of Chimay and baron of Quievrain, who returned to the court in 1468, was made a.Knight of the Golden Pleece i n 1473 and lieutenant of the duchy of Gueldre i n 1474. Charles, who liked to be compared to Hercules, Alexander 23 the Great, Cyrus, Hannibal or Cae s a r and who tried very hard to live up to that image, was either counselled to expand his possessions or had his counsellors concur with his ideas of expansionism. Charles tried to unify the duchy of Burgundy with his possessions in the north. He tried to do so i n two 24 ways: unification through conquest and by obtaining a crown. I n i t i a l l y he was successful, but defeat started soon and ended at Nancy on January 5,1477 with his death. Several prominent leaders were imprisoned, like Anthony of Burgundy, Philippe de Croy, Jean Gros III. The death of Charles and the imprisonment of several leaders caused chaos at the p o l i t i c a l front. But before that 80 date, Charles had already created quite a few financial problems. The f i r s t one was his ordinance of October 13,1467 25 concerning money-changers. Secondly, he tried to pressure the clergy into paying for his wars, but i n i t i a l l y they took advantage of the situation, especially the Notre-Dame i n 26 Bruges with the amortization of certain estates. Between 27 1474 and 1476, the Estates General refused to give money, but f i n a l l y the clergy i n Bruges gave the subsidies (which was regarded as treason by the other Estates). In the third place, Charles' borrowing through Tommaso Portinari caused the downfall of the Bruges Medici branch. On top of that, on April 26,1478 the Pazzis tried to topple the Medici, but they only succeeded i n murdering Guiliano while Lorenzo escaped. The tables were turned and the Pazzis were either exterminated or exiled. And the repercussions were f e l t i n Bruges. It was this p o l i t i c a l , social and financial insta^-b i l i t y which caused the Italians to go somewhere else. This . 2 8 explains why Memling gradually had fewer Italian patrons. But not only war and financial p o l i t i c s caused a decline for Bruges. Perhaps the most immediate problem was the s i l t i n g of the harbour. In the fourteenth century Damme was made the outer port of Bruges, but Damme was not sufficient; the opening of the Zwartegat, a canal, i n 1470 did not help much; the Zwin f i n a l l y became f u l l of sediment and completely cut off Bruges from the sea. In 1481 the people were described as poor and needy; and the plague of 1483, which k i l l e d one-fourth of the population, further imbalanced the situation. 81 The city's income went down to 70.000 ecus per year and the debts accumulated and at the death of Memling the city was 29 600.000 ecus i n debt. The i n s t a b i l i t y of several sectors of society fermented rebellions, not only i n Bruges. The most notorious rebellions between 1477 and 1494 were the uprising of the weavers i n Ghent, the Jonker Pransen war and the Kaas-en-Broodvolk war 30 (Cheese-andBreadpeople). The people of Ghent hung chancel-lor Hugonet, the lord of Humbercourt and the prelate of Cluny in the presence of Maria of Burgundy. In 1488 Maximilian was put i n a somewhat comfortable prison i n Bruges. But he got his revenge, for after his release he ordered his German soldiers to plunder the city and ordered the foreign mer-31 chants to Antwerp. Although Memling may have painted other portraits, Benedetto Portinari's portrait of 1487 may well be regarded as the closing of an era; But another conclusion can be drawn from the chaotic situation. Several authors have commented on Memling's change around 1480. Blum, i n her research on the triptych's development, made this especially clear i n comparing the St.Catherine altar piece of 1479 (Pr.ll) with the St.Chris-32 topher altar piece of 1484- (Pr.12). It hardly seems acci-dental that the change i n Memling's work comes at the time the disturbances begin to accelerate. These disturbances help explain why there are fewer commissions i n general and why there are fewer portraits, perhaps only seven after 1480. It i s d i f f i c u l t to say which disturbance was more important, 82 but i t i s remarkable, that within the time of the two t r i p -tychs used by Blum- the St.Catherine altar piece ( F r . l l ) and the St.Christopher altar piece (Fr.12)- there was a devastating plague. More than hundred years before, a\similar catas-trophe had influenced painting, best described by Millard Meiss i n his book Painting i n Florence and Siena after the 33 Black Death. Disturbances and catastrophes i n particular find their reflections i n man's thinking. It i s to this thought process that we need to turn next. SPIRITUAL LIFE The above-mentioned disturbances were not the origina-tors of -new thoughts and attitudes, but they stimulated some of them. Huizinga, dealing with the period with which we are concerned, called his book Herfstti.j der Middeleeuwen (The 34 Waning of the Middle Ages). The Dutch t i t l e indicates stronger than the English t i t l e the transitional character of this period. It i s impossible to discuss here the whole gamut of thought, which ranges from Nicholas Jacquier's publication of Flagellum Maleficarum in 1458, the predecessor of the more famous Malleus Maleficarum of 1487, to Thomas aa Kempis' De Imitatio Christi, from autodafes to mysticism and contemplative l i f e , from morality plays to rude farces. Nevertheless, attention has to be given to some pertinent aspects, because they help to explain some of the unanswered questions and problems. Since so many of Memling's paintings seem to be infused 83 with religious sentiments, i t provides the rationale to start with that aspect. Prohahly the most influential stream of thought i n the church of the Low Countries was that of the •Modern Devotion 1, best exemplified by the Brethern and Sisters of the Common Life and the canons regular of Windesheim. R.R.Post pointed out that the Brethern. had no regard for study, theology, teaching at school, sound philosophical or theolo-36 gical training for priests. Josse de Bade (1462-1535), who had lived with the Brethern at Ghent, summed up their influence and attitude when he wrote " i n the observance of their order and by their shining sanctity, (they) propagated the sweet 37 s p i r i t of Christ to the edification of the people." Thomas k Kempis, of whom Huizinga wrote that he "was no theologian and no humanist, no philosopher and no poet, and hardly even 38 a true mystic", made i t very clear i n his De Imitatio Christi that study to acquire knowledge was by no means as important as the nourishment of the soul. It was no wonder, therefore, that Erasmus could not live i n this atmosphere of pietism and non- (and even anti-) humanism. I think that this sense of piety i s not only visible in Memling's altar pieces, but also i n his portraits. The serene, withdrawn Madonnas could be examples of the former. The prayer-clasped hands of the s i t -ters could be examples of the latter. Let us start with two diptychs, the Maarten van Nieuwen-hove (Fr.14) and the Chicago diptych (Fr.50,92), which have through the presence of a Madonna and Child panel strong religious a f f i n i t i e s . Both contain a mirror and reflections. 84 The mirror, the 'Speculum sine macula', i s the symbol of the 40 41 Virgin's purity and also the symbol of Truth. It i s possi-ble to say that the mirror's presence was simply the result of the fact that i n Bruges St.Luke was the patron saint of 42 painters as well as of glass and mirror makers, or that a. 43 convex mirror was common inventory in ar. workshop. And since the Netherlands and Germany were the leading mirror manufactu-rers in the north, competing with Venice, such a suggestion seems at f i r s t glance to be sufficient. Yet, I think i t i s too simplistic. As M.Meiss pointed out, light contributed to a= "new subtlety to the personalities that appear i n 44 painting". It i s this light which reflects i n the mirror and the glass. But light and reflections were not only scientific phenomena as an old Flemish poem already indicated: "Een glas a l heel dat schijnt daerdoor, .Ten breket niet van der sonnen; So heeft ene maghet nae ende voorj-Joncfrouwe een kint ghewonnen." ^ This spiritualized light was not a new thought. In a poem "In praise of Wisdom" a b i b l i c a l poet wrote these words: For within her (Wisdom) i s a s p i r i t intelligent, holy unique, manifold, subtle, active, incisive, unsullied, lucid, invulnerable, benevolent, sharp, irresistable, beneficent, loving to man, steadfast, dependable, unperturbed, almighty, all-surveying, penetrating a l l intelligent, pure and most subtle s p i r i t s ; for Wisdom i s quicker to move than any motion; she i s so pure, she pervades and permeates a l l things. She i s a breath of.the power afGod. , . pure emanation of the glory of the Almighty; hence nothing impure can find a way into her. She i s a reflection of the eternal light, untarnished mirror of God's active power, image of his goodness. 8 5 Although alone, she can do a l l ; herself unchanging, she makes a l l things new. In each generation she passes into holy souls, she makes them friends of God and prophets; for God loves only the man who lives with Wisdom. She i s indeed more splendid than the sun, she outshines a l l the constellations; compared with light, she takes f i r s t place, for light must yield to night, hut over Wisdom e v i l can never triumph. She deploys her strength from one end of the earth to the ordering a l l things for good.46 / other, And in another poem this b i b l i c a l poet wrote that Wisdom i s 4 7 "an i n i t i a t e i n the mysteries of God's knowledge". The Letter of James revealed something of that mystery when the apostle wrote " i t i s a l l that i s good, everything that i s perfect, which i s given us from above; i t comes down from 4 8 the Father of a l l Light". The F i r s t Letter of John also reveals something of that l i g h t : This i s what we have heard from him, and the message that we are announcing to you: God i s light; there i s no darkness i n him at a l l . I f we say that we are i n union with God while we are l i v i n g i n darkness, we are lying because we are not l i v i n g the truth. But i f we live our lives i n the light, as he i s i n the light, we are i n union with ;<ane another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from a l l sin. 4"" It was this Wisdom and Light that Thomas a Kempis had i n mind. Thus the mirror and the glass give clues to the inten-tion of the sitters. They give additional information to the prayer-clasped hands. Thus we find i n these diptychs a variety of religious aspects: a-: sense of devotion, of purity and purification, of truth and wisdom. They touch upon the 5 0 mystery of God, a common theme i n Flemish mystic poetry 86 since Hade wych (ca.1250), and maintained by Jan van Ruus-51 broec (1293-1381), Jan van Leeuwen (ca.1350) and the great . . . 52. preacher Johannes Brugman (ca.1400-1475). The two discussed portraits are both associated with a Madonna and Child panel, unlike the other portraits. Probably some Madonna and Child panels got lost i n the same way as the portraits themselves. There are, however, several •unclaimed1 53 Madonna and Child panels which seem to belong to a portrait. Therefore, i t i s possible that some of the religious ideas 54 discussed above could count for several other portraits. One thing has to be made very clear: the prayer-clasped hands, the open book, the glass and mirror are clarifications of an 55 attitude. Since especially the prayer-clasped hands play an important role i n Memling1s portraits I want to emphasize their function in regard to this attitude. Since Maarten van Nieuwenhove's and the Chicago sitter's hands point towards the Madonna^and Child, we could say that the function of the hands i s one of adoration. But, more generally, they can also be symbols for devotion, piety, humility ( in prayer one communicates with someone who i s greater). Perhaps even i n some cases where they are related to other objects like prayer books or mirrors, they symbolize a search for Truth 56 and Wisdom. This interpretation of the hands, however, makes .sense only i f we accept the fact that there was an inner compulsion on the part of the sitter to have him or 57 herself portrayed in this way. None of the sitters unfortu-nately documented their inner motives, so that direct proof 87 of this interpretation i s impossible. There i s , however, some indirect evidence i n a special form of piety. It i s important to note that piety was not confined to monasteries or clergy, as was often thought in the early 58 Middle Ages. Already the heghards and beguines protested against the way of l i f e of monks and clergy. The Brethern and Sisters of the^ Common l i f e continued this protest." An anonymous poet ended the stanzas of a poem with the words 59 "Dus maect die cap die monic niet". Anthonis de Roovere, an older Brugian contemporary of Memling, l e t a.i priest say 60 "Volcht onse woorden, niet onse wercken". After the turn of the century Erasmus i n his Iaus Stultitjae/Moriae Encomium (Praise of Polly) of 1508, made a.devastating attack on monks 61 and clergy, showing that they were not pious at a l l . Complaining about his countrymen, he attacked the piety of monks as well:"Ginds verachten mij die botterikken en onwe-tenden, die menen, dat de gehele vroomheid i n een monnikskap 62 en droefgeestigheid gelegen i s " . Erasmus condemned here at the same time an important time-characteristic. Huizinga wrote about this pessimistic outlook: "At the close of the Middle Ages, a. sombre melancholy weighs on the people's souls. Whether we read a chronicle, a: poem, a. sermon, a? legal document even, the same impression of immense sadness i s produced by them a l l . It would sometimes seem as i f this period had been particularly unhappy, as i f i t had l e f t behind only the memory of violence, of covetousness and mortal hatred, as i f i t had known no other enjoyment but that of intemperance, of pride and of cruelty." °3 Some of this sentiment could already be found long before Memling's time. In the Gruuthuser manuscript of Bruges 88 (ca.1360-1400), we find the poem "Egidius": Egidius, waer hestu hleven? Mi lanct na d i , gheselle myn. Du coors die doot, du l i e t s mi tleven. Dat was gheseiseap goet ende f i j n . Het sceen teen moest ghestorven syn. Nu hestu in den troon verheven Claerre dan der sonnen schijn: Alle vruecht i s di ghegheven. Egidius, waer hestu hleven? Mi lanct na d i , gheselle myn. r. Pu coors die doot, du l i e t s mi tleven. 4 This sadness of separation and death was also expressed i n the s t i l l familiar "Het waren twee conincs kinderen". In the last stanza the princess holds her drowned lover i n her arms and jumps with him into the sea: Sy hielter haer l i e f i n haer armen en spranc er met hem i n de see: 1 adieu 1 seyde sy,'schone werelt, ghy sieter my nimmermeer; adieu, o mijn vader en moeder, mijn vriendekens alle ghelycj adieu, mijne suster en hroeder ic vaere naer themelrijc. 5 These ideas of heaven, death, separation and union accelerated in the fifteenth century. An anonymous poet wrote i n his "Allegoric Passion Song": Ick wil mi gaen vermeyden In Jhesus liden groot, Van daer en wil ic niet sceyden int leven noch in die doot. 66 The mystic-preacher Johannes Brugman, using words and images from worldly l y r i c s , spoke of his longing to he with Christ i n "Ic heh Ghejaecht myn leven Lane": Ic heh ghejaecht myn leven lane Al om een joncfrou scone, Die alresoetste wijngaertranc, Die daer i s in shemels trone; 89 Met engelen i s s i om beset, Ic en can daer niet bi comen; Mijn sonden hebbent mi be^et, Des i c mi mach bedroven. °7 In several of these poems there i s a: sense of resignation, although not necessarily negative. I think that i n many cases the resigantion i s due because the poets know about the pro-mise of a good, that i s heavenly, future. An anonymous poet wrote the following stanza in his poem "Als ic met mijn l i e f spelen gaen": So wie Gode vercoren heeft, Te begheven a l l dine i s hem cleyn. Die de werelt ghelaten heeft Van alle beelden b l i j f t hi rheyn.° 8 Dire Coelde van Munster (Munster 1435-Leuven 1515), Memling's countryman and also l i v i n g in the Low Countries, wrote i n his "Och edel s i e l e " : Die bruydegom seyt: Ick wil dat ghi suit laten Alle bliscap ende ghemack, Der creaturen afsaten, Ende vlyen der werelt wrack, Ende hebt mi l i e f alleene: Ick wil u bruydegom sijn. Der menschen trdu i s cleene^ Int laatste niet dan pijn. °9 Concern about the soul i s also expressed by an anonymous Limburg poet i n a, long poem called P it i s een schone Reyme van Herdenckenisse der Doot ende Vertyenisse der Wereld. Stanzas 19 and 20 are here central: 0 z i e l , o z i e l , o gheystelijc natuer, Die god selve nae si j n figuer In den lichame heeft gheplant, Daer moeten wy uut i n dander lant. Och z i e l , och z i e l , wy en kennen u nyet, Mer metten lichaem int verdriet Soe coemder in den ewighen brant, Int veghevier, of i n dander lant. ' 0 90 At the end of the century, t i t l e s like Jan van de Dale's De ure van der doot (The hour of death; Diest,ca-i 1500) are not uncommon. And i t i s not only i n poetry that these ideas are expressed. They are found on the stage as well.' Most familiar probably i s the play Den Speyghel der Salichheyt van Elckerlijc by Pieter Doorlant (Petrus van Diest, 1455-1507), written around 1470. It was popular enough to be one 71 of the f i r s t printed plays, as well as to be translated into English under the t i t l e Everyman. The second play I want to mention here- i s Mariken van Nieumeghen, written around 1485, the Faust story of the Dutch-Flemish fifteenth century. The author, maybe born i n Mjmegen and probably working i n Antwerp, used witchcraft, sorcery and the inquisition to show his concern for the soul. Many of these given examples centered around death, the ars moriendi, the art of dying, showing a genuine concern about the soul. And this concern took a special form, because i t called up the readers or listeners to li v e a devout christian l i f e . Thus the c a l l for a devout, pious l i f e was. heard quite often. Therefore, Memling's sitters with prayer-clasped hands are not at a l l exceptional to the s p i r i t of the time. In Memling's oeuvre there are some paintings which strengthen.this argument. Several altar pieces were ordered i n connection with funerary chapels, for example the Moreel altar piece (Pr.12). Also i n those altar pieces the donors 72 are shown i n a devotional, pious attitude. That there i s a close relationship between Memling's 91 paintings and thoughts expressed i n literature, I would like to. show with a few examples, i n order to place the portraits i n their proper perspective within Memling's whole oeuvre. The f i r s t example i s related to a painting called The Seven 73 Joys of Mary (Fr.33) It has been suggested that Memling 74 worked for some time i n Rogier's studio i n Brussels. If this hypothesis i s correct, Memling may have seen a series of seven plays, called the Bliscarj van Maria (Mary's Joy). These plays wer e written i n 1448 and performed at the Grote 75 Markt of Brussels t i l l 1560. N.Schneider, discussing the Munich panel, pointed out the schematic composition i n this 76 theologically rich painting. Strangely enough, he failed, however, to mention these plays, while the schematic compo-77 sition i s not unlike medieval 'theatre' productions. The second example concerns the age of Mary, which i s described i n two stanzas of "0ns i s gheboren" and "In 't Stedetje van Nazareth". Especially the second poem i s closely related to the Lehman Annunciation (ca.l482,Pr.26). The second stanza: of "0ns i s gheboren" reads! Wei d i , wel di joncfrouwelijn, Per soeten weerder stonden, Pattu dat soete kindekijn Met ganser minnen hebt ghewonnen. In the second stanza of "In 't Stedetje van Nazareth" we reads Zij was maar veertien jaren oud, Pie zuiver klare fonteine, Als haar de boodschap wierd gedaans Pat ze den Zone Gods zoud' ontvaan En blijven maged reine. 79 92 Although few, these examples indicate that we may use literature to arrive at a better understanding of the paintings and that the examples used in connection with the portraits do not make the portraits stand apart, but incorporate them into Memling's whole output. In the beginning of this section I indicated that there was a whole gamut of thought. So far the discussion has cen-tered around the religious aspect i n i t s various manifesta-tions. The second group of manifestations i s centered around humanism, l o r clarity's sake, religion and humanism are dealt with separately, but this should not be interpreted as polari-zation. What I hope to demonstrate in this last part of the chapter, i s simply that there were certain forms which indi -cated a new awareness related to learning, antiquity, self-consciousness;; aspects which are frequently associated with the Renaissance. Information concerning northern humanism i s not as abundant as for the religious aspect. Bu.i; there are details from a variety of fields which help us form some ideas about i t . Important i n the development towards humanism were the rhetoricians. In the Low Countries the "Earners van Rhetorike" originated around 1400 under French influence. They were organized l i k e a guild. The head, often an influential person, was called a 'Keizer'(emperor) or 'Prins' (prince). Usually, but not always, he was an administrative figure. The a r t i s t i c leader was the 'Factor'(producer). Membership 93 was an honour and gave a considerable social standing. Although few names are known, their productions show that they were interested i n form and technique like retrograde, chess; board, refrain and acrostichon. Similar interests can be witnessed i n the music of G. Dufay (ca.1400-1474), J. Ocke-ghem (1420-1495), J.Obrecht (1450-1505) and Josquin des Pres (ca.1450-1521). Donald Jay Grout i n his book A History of Western Music decided that the changes brought about by Ocke-ghem warranted a chapter called "The Age of the Renaissance: 80 Ockeghem to Josquin". And the same interest i n form and technique can be witnessed i n the paintings of Van Eyck, Campin and subsequent artists. Through form and technique, the rhetoricians tried to 81 compete with one another. To best each other they sometimes referred to antiquity. In an already mentioned poem of an anonymous limburg poet (page 89) we read i n stanza eight: Waer si j n Hector ende Alexander, Julius, Artier ende menichander, Baenrits, ridder ende vroem seriant? Sy s i j n ewech i n dander lant. 82 Or we can read in the prologue to the f i r s t Bliscap van Maria 83 that Brussels i s compared to Troy. Many of their religious poems were published i n 1539 under the t i t l e Een Devoot ende Profitelvck Boecxken and their 84 secular poems in 1544 known as Antwerpse liedboek. In the latter edition many poems are simply called "Old Song". Some deal with histor i c a l events, especially with Maria of Burgundy, 85 Maximilian and Bruges. Poem 83, stanza 14, deals with those 94 86 "Gheboren wt griecken stout" (Born of brave Greeks). Another aspect of their work i s realism and again this runs parallel to Flemish painting. The landscape i n Memling's 87 portraits i s only one example. One of the most important rhetoricians was Ahthonis de Roovere, who, at the age of 17, became Prince of Rhetoric inspite of the fact that he was only a bricklayer. Most of his poems are often bitter satires on the transitoriness of worldly vanities. Throughout his work he mentions classical names like Nestor, Aeneas, Alexander the Great, Caesar, Hector, Paris, Tr#y, and he expressed the idea that immortality came 88 through fame; a predominate idea of the Renaissance. Besides the rhetoricians and the musicians, we need to look at miniatures and tapistries. A tapistry was woven i n Tournai (?), probably between 1465 and 1470', which contained the story of Caesar crossing the Rubicon and his battle against Pompei (Berne, Historisches Museum). Makers as well as commissioners are unknown, but i t has been suggested that i t 89 was for Charles the Bold's throne room. The connection with the Burgundian court i s also noticeable i n the works of the miniaturists. For example, Ioyset Liedet, who came to Bruges i n 1469 and was s t i l l there i n 1478, worked on Plutarch's 90 Life of Alexander. In the Burgundian court library with mainly French and a few Dutch manuscripts91 there were also translations of antique manuscripts, like Le's Falz du Grant  Alexandre, now i n Paris i n the''Bibliotheque Nationale.^ 2 35 But the miniaturists did not only work for the Burgundian court. In Bruges they worked for example for Lodewijk van Gruuthuse. An exhibition i n Brussels and Amsterdam called De Gouden Eeuw der Vlaamse Miniatuur- Het Mecenaat van F i l i p s de Goede 1445-1475 exhibited the following Brugian workss Epitome de Julius Valerius. Lettre d1Alexandre a Aristote (no.107); Raoul Lefevret Histoire de Troie (no.Ill); Curtius Rufus, Histoire d'Alexandre (no.116); Leonardo Bruni d'Arezzot 93 La Premiere Guerre Punique (no.138). The f i r s t and the last mentioned miniatures were made by Willem van Vrelant's work-shop. We have already seen that Van Vrelant was a friend of Memling, so that we may assume that Memling was familiar with thoughts associated with antiquity. f Furthermore, Charles the Bold, who liked to be compared to great military leaders of antiquity, looked upon the Golden Fleece, instituted January 10,1430 i n Bruges, as* Jason's fleece, much to the disgust of bishop F i l l a s t r e , who 94 proposed Gideon as patron. And people around Charles, like Wauquelin, Olivier de l a Marche and Waleran de Wavren, fre-quently discussed antiquity and made comparisons between 95 Burgundy and Classical Antiquity. Moreover, Jean de Candida.. "96 used antique profile forms for his medals. And whoever the sitter of the Antwerp portrait (Fr.71) i s , the antique coin shows a certain familiarity with and knowledge of Roman Antiquity. Lastly, Bruges had i t s own humanists in Pierre 97 Burry and Charles and Jean Fernand. 9 6 A l l these details show the st i r r i n g of a new era and these new ideas affected Memling1s patrons and himself. This interest in man and man's history i s one of the aspects of the Renaissance. Man i s not only the supplicant i n his relation to the deity, hut also a person who has earthly aspirations, such as Anthonis de Roovere, who sought immortality through fame. It i s more d i f f i c u l t for a portrait painter to show "earthly worth". Yet, many of Memling's sitters cannot be classified as 'pious, devotional' like those with the prayer-clasped hands. The Montreal sitter (Fr,80) has a s c r o l l ; the Prick sitter holds a sash (Fr.231); the Antwerp figure has a medal (Fr.71). Others, like the Venice s i t t e r (Fr.77) and the Frankfurt sitter (Fr.73), have nothing in their hands, letting their hands rest on a parapet. One group of portraits can be interpreted through religious aspects; others seem tp-defy this interpretation. It i s tempting, i n the light of our discussion, to associate some of the portraits with a humanistic tendency. In the next chapter this suggestion i s tested through the iconography. Before turning to that chapter a very brief conclusion of this section i s necessary. The two tendencies of piety and humanism, which are not exclusive, were both part and parcel of Memling1s time and known to, and often expressed by, members of the higher social class. And i t was from this select social class that Memling drew his sitters. We also noticed that after 1480 even a greater emphasis f e l l on piety 97 •than before, a tendency which may be reflected i n Memling's portraits after that date, which a l l show sitters with prayer-clasped hands. The phrase "a child of his time" may be worn out, but Memling1s portraits seem very much to reflect the s p i r i t of the time. 98 CHAPTER IV MEMLING'S PORTRAIT ICONOGRAPHY Until now in this thesis Memling has been separated from the a r t i s t i c tradition i n which he operated. The imme-diate tradition was that of his Flemish predecessors and contemporaries. But i t i s reasonable to assume that through the Italian sitters Memling was also influenced by the developments which had taken place i n Italian portraiture 1 of the fifteenth century. Both the Flemish and Italian tradition had developed certain types and i t i s with these 2 types that we are concerned in this chapter. HUSBAND-WIEE PENDANT PAIRS Two pairs are presently s t i l l preserved together and their names are known. The earliest pair i s that of Tommaso Portinari and his wife Maria Maddalena Baroncelli, painted around 1472-J473 (Fr.69,70). The other pair i s that of Willem Moreel and his wife Barbara van Vlaenderberghe, painted around 1484 (Fr.67,68). A l l four sitters are shown with prayer-clasped hands. There i s another pair, that of J the Elderly Couple (Fr.75,76), which differs i n this respect. They have their hands at rest. This i s a svery crucial dis-tinction. Half a century before this pair, Robert Campin and Jan van Eyck also painted husband-wife pendant pairs, 4 which also do not have prayer-clasped hands. The age of the 99 Elderly Couple indicates that i t i s highly unlikely that they were wedding portraits. There i s a; possibility that they were anniversity portraits, but there i s no factual 5 evidence to support this. It i s also possible that a special 6 event was the prime reason for commissioning them. But nothing indicates that originally the portraits of the Elderly Couple had a religious function or connotation. Therefore, there i s no reason to suggest that originally this pair, as well as those by Campin and Van Eyck, had a~ central panel containing a devotional picture. Memling1s Portinaris and Moreels are the f i r s t known husband-wife pendant pairs which show the prayer-clasped hands. Panofsky suggested that prayer-clasped hands i n portraits indicated that there should be a devotional panel attached to the 7 portrait panels. Applied to the Portinaris and the Moreels, i t would mean that these portraits were part of a triptych. There i s , however, no evidence to confirm this proposition for the husband-wife pendant pairs. But there i s evidence against i t . In the f i r s t place, the husband-wife pendant pairs in the Flemish tradition do not have religious conno-8 tations. Secondly, no devotional image stayed with the portraits, although the portraits apparently stayed together. In the third place, the direction of the hands of the two husbands i s substantially different from that of the two wives. The former point upwards, at an angle of 60 degrees; the latter point sidewards at an angle not more than 45 degrees, that i s , towards another figure. If this figure were 100 a Madonna and Child, then i t raises the question why the husband does not do the same. Por doctrinal reasons i t i s unacceptable to suggest that he could ignore the Madonna;: and Child. If he could, the central panel would loose i t s function. My suggestion i s that there was no central panel and that the wives point to their husbands, who in turn point heaven-9 wards. That there i s an element of submission on the part of the wives i s further indicated by the fact that they 10 appear on the sinister side of the husband. N The consequence of the absence of a devotional image i s far-reaching, not only for the husband-wife pendant pairs, but also for the other portraits with prayer-clasped hands. These hands are therefore not necessarily a. reflection of adoration towards a visible image, but of a-much broader idea of attitude, of state of mind and soul. The attitudes of the husbands and wives are two-fold, namely devout and 11 submissive. To substantiate this argument further, we need to look at the next type. SITTERS WITH PR AYER«*CLASPED HANDS As we just saw the l e f t panel of the husband-wife pendant pairs i s occupied by the husband and the right panel by the wife. Of the nine other portraits which show the sitters with prayer-clasped hands there are two panels with praying males, who look to the right, namely the Thyssen-12 Bornemisza sitter (Pr.232) and the london si t t e r (Pr.78). In this respect they appear to be similar to Tommaso Portinari 101 and Willem Moreel. They could possibly be panels of a husband-wife pendant pair. But there are more possibilities. F i r s t l y , they can be f u l l y independent portraits; secondly, they can form a part of a-, devotional diptych; . thirdly, they can be part of a devotional triptych. That both portraits probably are not part of a husband-wife pendant pair may become clear by looking at the angle of their hands, which both form an angle of 45 degrees. Besides the Maria; Portinari and the Barbara. Moreel there are two other sitters who have their hands at such an angle or less, namely the Chicago s i t t e r (Pr.92) and Maarten van Nieuwenhove (Pr.14). Both these portraits are part of a. diptych with arMadonna,and Child on the dexter side. Thus the direction of the hands suggests a; solution other than the husband-wife pendant pair or triptych. Por the london portrait (Pr.78) there are two other clues 13 supporting this. The sitter i s most lik e l y an adolescent. And under his prayer-clasped hands i s an open prayer book. The prayer book i s similar to that in the just mentioned Chicago portrait and in the Maarten van Nieuwenhove and can also be seen i n the Benedetto Portinari (Fr.23B). Thus the direction of the hands and the presence of the prayer book seem to go against the suggestion of complete independence. The problem is,however, that the s i t t e r i s on the l e f t wing, that i s on the dexter side of a< possible Virgin and Child, while in the Maarten van Nieuwenhove and the Chicago portrait 14 the man i s on the sinister side. There are no immediate 102 precedents for this situation i n the London portrait, hut 15 there are a few indirect ones. In the f i r s t place, there i s the situation i n a,few Memling altar pieces. Adriaen Reins i s the only donor on his altar piece, done around 1480, and 16 he occupies the l e f t wing (Pr.5). A decade later Heinrich Greverade commissioned an altar piece (Fr.3), which shows an, donor in the corner of the l e f t wing, close to Christ carry-17 ing the cross. That the donor could he shown praying with an open prayer hook i s evidenced i n the Moreel altar piece 18 (Pr. 12). Before Memling, Petrus Christus in his Exeter Madonna (Berlin, Kaiser Priedrich Museum), a follower of Rogier i n a Calvary triptych (Berne, Kunstmuseum, Abegg Stiftung), Jan van Eyck in his Madonna of Jan Vps (Paris, Rothschild Collection) and his Madonna of Chancellor Rolin (Paris, Louvre) had already used this form of presentation. Thus there i s an indirect tradition supporting the placement of the London sitter. The suggestion made here i s that the London portrait i s the l e f t wing of a diptych, a novelty as far as the existing portraits i s concerned. The situation for the Thyssen-Bornemisza:. portrait (Fr.232) i s equally complicated. At the hack of this portrait i s a s t i l l - l i f e with a. vase and flowers on a-: table. On the jug are the letters IHS, of which the H ends i n a cross. The flowers are white l i l i e s , indicating probably the Virgin; purple i r i s for the Mater Dolorosa and the columbine for Mary's grief and sorrow. There i s no precedence for this 103 20 pure s t i l l - l i f e either. The sitter's hands and this s t i l l -l i f e indicate a religious nature. It seems to me l i k e l y that this i s also the l e f t wing of a^  diptych. When closed, the 21 s t i l l - l i f e could announce some of the contents. Of the other seven portraits probably the easiest one to deal with i s the Maarten van Nieuwenhove (Fr.14). The original frame shows that i t i s a portable diptych together with a Madonna and Child. Maybe half s. century before Rogier 22 van der Weyden had invented this type. But there are two important departures from Rogier's diptychs. None of his sitters i s shown with an open prayer book, and their hands point upwards at an angle of 60 degrees. Maarten van Nieuwen-hove i s Memling's most extreme case of an acute angle, for 23 the hands form an angle of 30 degrees. But otherwise i t i s obvious that Memling relied here on the tradition established by Rogier. Hulin de loo's successful research i n establishing 24 the Rogier diptychs and the existence of the Maarten van Nieuwenhove led scholars to the idea, that similar combina-tions could exist. Their search had as result the reunifi-cation of Memling's Chicago portrait (Fr.92) with another 25 Madonna and Child (Pr.50). On the back of the sitter's panel i s a. St.Anthony of Padua, which i n a religious nature i s similar to the s t i l l - l i f e of the Thyssen-Bornemisza portrait (Pr.232). The hands form an angle of 45 degrees, similar to that of the Thyssen-Bornemisza portrait and to that of the London sitter (Pr.78). 104 Three of the portraits with an open prayer hook have the hands at an angle of 45 degrees or less. At least two of these, the Maarten van Nieuwenhove and the Chicago si t t e r , are part of an existing diptych; and the third one, the London p o r t r a i t , was, as I suggested, most likely a part of a-dip-tych. The fourth portrait, that of Benedetto Portinari (Fr.23B), i s an exception to the angle of 45 degrees or less. This portrait came, with a St.Benedict (Pr.23C), from the Porti-nari chapel of the Santa: Maria Nuova, Florence. On the assumption that these were shutters, Priedlander suggested a Virgin and Child (Fr.23A) as centre piece. Spatially the background constitutes a disunity, quite contrary to what we have seen i n other pairs. Therefore, I do not think that 26 Priedlander's suggestion i s a proper solution. Furthermore, Benedetto does not pray to his name saint, for that i s 27 against catholic doctrine. . But i t i s possible for him to 28 pray through his patron saint St.Benedict. But that means that God, not St.Benedict i s the object of-the devotion. This explains why the hands do not point sidewards, but upwards at an angle of 52 degrees. My suggestion i s that whenever the male sitter has his hands pointing sidewards at an angle of 45 degrees or 29 less, Christ i s present i n another panel; and that whenever the sitter has his hands upwards, usually at an angle of 60 degrees, Christ i s not present in another panel. The absence of the Christ figure can result in two possible solutions for the remaining four portraits i n this category. The 105 f i r s t solution i s that the portrait goes together with m patron saint panel, exemplified i n the Benedetto Portinari panel. The second solution i s that these portraits are f u l l y independent. The four portraits for which these solutions are possible are Gilles Joye (Fr.72), the San Diego portrait (Fr.233), the National Trust portrait (Fr.87) and the The Hague portrait (Pr.79). The The Hague portrait has on the reverse a coat of arms, which possibly could indicate 30 another panel of a-, saint. But the others do not have such an indication and may indeed be independent. The absence of hinge marks on the Gilles Joye panel seems to confirm this suggestion. Looking now over the whole category of sitters with prayer-clasped hands, we may make the following conclusions and suggestions. In cases of husband-wife pendant pairs, the panels form a diptych, not a triptych. The wife points to the husband who in turn points upwards. In the other eases, some panels are part of a diptych with probably a Madonna and Child. In such diptychs the sitters can be shown on the dexter as well as on the sinister wing, with their hands sidewards. At least one panel, possibly more, forms a dip-tych with a saint. The hands, like those of the husbands, point upwards. The last suggestion i s that some panels may be independent portraits. As far as the content i s concerned, a l l these portraits stress the religious aspect. Where Christ i s present i n a 106 diptych panel the attitude could perhaps he restricted to adoration, hut i t i s more lik e l y that, in unison with the others, the idea of piety and devoutness also played a: role. THE OBJECTS IN THE HANDS -OP THE SITTERS • - — i - • When and where the tradition of sitters with objects i n their hands started i s unclear. It i s certain that i t existed around Burgundy before 1419, because John the Pear-31 less had himself portrayed with a ring i n his right hand. Prom then onwards objects like rings, scrolls, weapons and rosaries became a common feature. These objects f u l f i l l e d a 32 special purpose \as I would like to show through two examples. 33 The f i r s t one i s Jan van Eyck's Jan de Leeuw. The s i t t e r , a goldsmith, holds a golden ring in his hand. Due to the preciousness of gold, a gold smith held a very special social position. In this case the golden ring helps to identify the sitter as a goldsmith and at the same time establishes a particular social status.' The second example 34 i s Rogier van der Weyden's Philippe de Croy. In his prayer-clasped hands the sitter also holds a rosary. A rosary i s a catholic devotion consisting of prayer recitation, using the beads to count the prayers. The depiction of the rosary accentuates the religious nature of the sitter. These two examples, representatives of a much larger group, make a few thing very clear. In the f i r s t place, the objects can help to identify the sitter. In the second place, they can indicate the social status of the sitter. And thirdly, they 107 can contribute to the insight of the nature of the sitter. It i s within this tradition that Memling painted eight 35 • portraits i n which the sitters hold an object. The objects these sitters hold were common objects, found in previous representations. Object wise, therefore, Memling was firmly entrenched in the tradition. But our concern i s centered not so much around the object as object, but around the function, the purpose of the object, to which we shall turn presently. It was only during a?,, short period of time that Memling • ' • 36 portrayed his sitters with objects. Several of these por-tr a i t s were painted during a period in which Memling was not always successful in the portrayal of the hands. This techni-cal deficiency unfortunately i s reflected in some objects, 37 thus obscuring the meaning. The f i r s t portrait I want to deal with i s the Washington portrait (Fr.85). In his right hand the sitter holds an arrow. The meaning i s not immediately clear, but there are some possib i l i t i e s . Rogier van der Weyden painted i n the early 1450s a Knight of the Golden Fleece (Brussels, Koninklijk 38 Museum) with an arrow. Usually Rogier 1s sitter i s regarded 39 as Anthony of Burgundy, commonly known as the Great Bastard. If this i s true, the arrow could possibly mean two things, namely an indication of his military capacity or his fond-ness of a.noble's pastime, hunting. Although these possibi-l i t i e s should not be excluded for the Memling portrait, there are other meanings which need to be looked at. Around this time the arrow was frequently associated with St.Sebastian. 108 40 This saint was the patron saint of the victims of the plague.. 41 as well as of a military guild, the archers. Both aspects -do make sense i f we realize that Bruges suffered several 42 times from the plague and that being a~i member of the St. Se-bastian's guild was an honour. Thus in the former case the arrow could mean thankfulness for survival and in the latter 43 case a status symbol. I think that there i s a f i f t h possi-b i l i t y as well. Somewhat obscurely hidden on the sitter's 44 hat i s an emblem with a Madonna and Child, a religious subject which seems to be quite out of place. However, the arrow was not only a weapon of war, but a spiritual symbol as well, and as such an indication of the dedication to the service of 45 God. The combination of the two objects seems indicative 46 of the religious nature of the sitter. Much simpler i s the object i n the hands of the Copen-hagen sit t e r (Fr.82). The beads of the rosary are shown slightly apart as i f the sit t e r i s counting his prayers. It i s interesting to note that around the time the portrait was painted, circa 1475, the rosary devotion received i t s defi-nitive Western form through the preaching of the Dominican 47 Alan de Rupe. There does not need to be any doubt that this i s a religous object. Thus the object seems again to indicate 48 the religious nature of the sitter. A much more complicated situation i s created by the two objects i n the hands of the Pierpont Morgan sitter (Pr.83). In his l e f t hands he holds a flower, while the object i n his right hand may be a folded card or letter.^^Priedlander 109 designated the portrait as "Man with a Pink". George Ferguson pointed out that there existed a Flemish custom of a., pink. The flower was worn by the bride upon the day of her wedding and the groom was supposed to search her and find i t . In that 50 way the pink became a symbol of marriage. In the light of our discussion on husband-wife pendant pairs this could be a? possibility, especially since the sitter looks towards the right. There are, however, two objections against this inter-pretation. The f i r s t i s provided by an imitator (?) of Jan van Eyck, who painted a portrait of a "Man with a.Pink" 51 (Berlin, Kaiser Friedrich Museum). Around the sitter's neck i s a heavy chain with a cross and a small b e l l . Close to the cross he holds a pink. The red carnation, of which the 52 pink i s a variety, i s a symbol of pure love. Christ's death 55 on the cross was an act of pure love. Thus we could say that this portrait sets a precedent of the symbolic meaning of the pink. The second objection i s due to the name Fried-l&nder gave to the flower, for i t i s not aa.pink, but a: red carnation. As I just pointed out, the red carnation was a 54 symbol of pure love. Thus also i n this third portrait the objects may indicate something of the religious nature of the sit t e r . There i s a portrait which could be associated with this small group of objects with religious connotations, even though the si t t e r does not have an object in her hands. I am referring here to the Bruges Young Woman (Fr.94). Already during the sixteenth century she was regarded as a 110 55 Persian Sibyl as we can read i n the added inscriptions. 56 Although the Persian Sibyl tradition has been rejected, 57 the reasons for this description are generally ignored. 58 Sibyls had a religious connotation. If we look at the objects on her fingers, this religious aspect becomes clearer. She wears a total of seven rings. None of the 59 sitters has so many. Seven i s the symbolic number for 60 61 completion and perfection; rings are the symbol of love. The seven rings may stand for complete love, which, according to christian doctrine, was only shown by Christ. Thus the tradition seems to have had a grain of truth at i t s basis. In the four portraits just discussed the objects seem to have religious connotations. In this respect they are closely related to the prayer-clasped hands and f u l f i l a similar function, that i s , they express the sitter's r e l i -gious attitudes. But there are other objects, without religious signi-ficance. There are two clear examples of this, both related to two Italian portraits. Memling's Antwerp portrait (Pr.71) relates to B o t t i c e l l i ' s Youth with a Coin and his Prick ~ - 62 portrait (Pr.231) to Castagno's Man with a Sash. There i s another relationship as well because the sitters are Italians. B o t t i c e l l i probably painted his portrait in the early 1470s. Behind the youth i s a somewhat schematic landscape, receding t i l l just past the middle of the canvas. The sky shows a-, few clouds. The sitter i s shown in three-quarter pose and most of his head i s placed above the horizon. The coin represents I l l 63 Cosimo de1 Medici i n profile, not the sitter. The similari-ties with the Antwerp portrait, described in chapers I and II, are too great to be ignored. Although for both portraits the names of the sitters have not been found, the coins may give 64 a clue to their names. Furthermore, medals evoked associa^-tions with the courts and antiquity, so that they t e l l us . •• 65 something about the social status of the sitters. The Frick portrait (Fr.231) i s perhaps less clear i n i t s relation to the Castagno sitter. The major differences 66 are the background, the volume of the figure and the hand. Castagno's patron distinctly holds his sash, something which i s rather easily overlooked in the Memling portrait. Memling's sitt e r bursts out and beyond the frame, while Castagno's sitter i s contained within i t s given space. The most obvious difference i s the landscape, which plays such a-: prominent role in the Memling portrait, but which i s absent'dn the Castagno portrait. But i t i s this background too which recalls a similarity. The sky in the Frick portrait i s Memling's darkest blue sky found in the portraits. Behind Castagno's sit t e r i s a dark blue background gradually lightening towards an imaginary horizon. The sash holds the key to the inter-pretation. The sash was fashionable at least as late as 1470, when Federico II da Montefeltro was portrayed with one i n the '67 Brera altar piece. And i t was fashionable i n higher social 68 classes. Thus,in the f i r s t place, the sash may indicate a particular social class. Secondly, like the coin referred to Roman Antiquity, so does the sash refer to Greek Antiquity. 112 There are several Greek statues which show the figures holding their togas in a very similar way, for example 69 Dioscurides of Delos. I would suggest that we have here a similar interest in antiquity as was shown by the humanists. The meaning concerning the other objects i s rather obscure. The young Montreal s i t t e r (Fr.80) holds a s c r o l l i n his l e f t hand and nothing appears to be written upon i t . This differs from an earlier portrait, Jan van Eyck's Tymotheus (London, National Gallery). But even for that portrait Panofsky was at a loss with the s c r o l l when he tried to 70 interpret the portrait. The s c r o l l in the Memling portrait i s even obscurer. Does i t indicate a specific event in the sitter's l i f e ? Has i t anything to do with his study? His name? His work? The questions have to remain, unanswered, not only for the Montreal portrait, but also 'for the Palazzo Vecchio portrait (Pr.86). In the latter the object has been partly 71 cut, but i t could be a booklet. The age of the sitter makes i t also possible to suggest that i t could relate to a finan-c i a l action. The obscurest, however, i s the Windsor portrait (Pr.91). The sitter seems more to touch than to hold the 72 tassel (?) of a chain (?). It i s impossible to make here even suggestions. Thus, i t i s on a note of failure that this section has to come to a close. And in our failure we have to admit that the modern viewer cannot always properly identify the object. On the more positive side stands, hov^ever, the fact that the majority of objects could be interpreted, either having re-113 ligious connotations (carnation, rosary, arrow, rings, prayer book) or secular ones (coin, sash). In an indirect way those objects t e l l us who and what the sitters are, that i s , something about their nature and their social position. HANDS AT REST Although i t may seem to. be a very common gesture, two resting hands are a>rather unfamiliar sight i n Flemish art. One of the f i r s t times we come across hands placed one over the other, but not really at rest, i s in Tres Riches Heures in a group of ladies (Chantilly, Musee Conde). In portraiture, Robert Campin showed D'Alatruye and his wife with their hands at rest (Brussels, Koninklijk Museum). But i t was really Rogier van der Weyden who made i t more common. Two portraits, both of women, show the hands very prominently displayed one over the other, namely Portrait of a Young Lady (Berlin, Kaiser Friedrich Museum) and Portrait of a Lady (Washington, National Gallery). There i s another work which shows several men with their hands clasped one over the other. Although Rogier did perhaps not make i t , he most li k e l y designed the Dedication Page of the Chroniques du Hainaut (Brussels, " 73 Koninklijke Bibliotheek). Panofsky, who was more concerned about chancellor Rolin when he wrote the following, offers i n an indirect way some good insight: . "In the dedication scene of the "Chronique du Hainaut", inexoribly dominated by Burgundian etiquette, the patience of the great man of action, the Chancellor Rolin, seems to be sorely tried by the boredom of a ceremony complacent-ly and somewhat superciliously endured by his neighbour, the good Bishop Chevrot of Tournai." 74 114 And the good bishop has his hands placed one over the other. The question we need to raise here i s i f the hands at rest are only a compositional device or i f there i s a-meaning 75 behind i t . In the previous categories we noticed that the hands were more active; they were either engaged in prayer or held an object, but they were not compositional devices. That the suggestion of hand interpretation i s warranted may become more evident when we realize that already Quintilian (ca.35- ca.100) used the term of Chironomia, which he defined 76 as "the law of gestures" and that i n the sixteenth and seven-77 teenth century hand gestures became standardized. In his attempt to standardize Bulwer wrote that "Both hands do sometimes rest and are out of action; yet this rhetorical silence of the hand i s an act proper where no affection i s 78 emergent;..." This could perhaps be applied to Memling's Lehman portrait (Fr.74), his Paris Elderly Woman (Pr.76), his New York Old Man (Pr.81), his U f f i z i portrait (Pr.88) 79 and his Bruges Young Woman (Pr.94). But Bulwer dealt with rhetoric, not with art. Yet the art of ancient Greece provides 80 us with an early example of this pose in the Boxer at Rest. This leads us one step further, for in contrast to active hands, his hands at rest could be viewed as passive. This idea could ultimately lead to the idea and meaning of contemplat-i o n as being implied. In the light of so many Memling por-t r a i t s which have a religious nature this meaning takes on more credence. Of the portraits with two hands at rest only the Prank-115 furt portrait (Fr.73) deviates. The hands are not crossed, hut separated. Furthermore, the l e f t hand i s perpendicular to the right hand as well as to the frame. There i s no pre-81 cedent for this in Flemish portraiture. The hand perpendi-cular to the frame also occurs in two other portraits, the Berlin Elderly Man (Fr.75) and the Brussels portrait (Fr.84). In both these cases i t i s the right hand, which i s the most 82 • competent hand in rhetoric. It should he noted that the Berlin Elderly Man differs here from his wife (Fr.76). If 83 there i s significance behind i t , i s hard to t e l l . The last two portraits in this category are the U f f i z i portrait (Fr.89) and the Venice portrait (Fr.77). Both sitters have their right hand in the same way as the Washington sitter (Fr.85), except that there i s no object. And again the pose i s unprecedented. It should not go unnoticed that those portraits which defy at this moment a possible interpretation belong mainly to Memling's early period. The two-handed portraits on the other hand are generally of Memling's mature period. Although time-wise the division i s not totally clear-cut, i t may suggest that Memling only gradually established an iconography of consistent hand positions. Since only half of this category can perhaps be interpreted, we have to leave the possibility open that the pther half did not have a special meaning and could perhaps be regarded as compositional devices. 116 THE BACKGROUND So far in this thesis the iconography centered around the hands of the sitters and in at least three-quarters of the portraits the hands are just not anatomical objects or compositional devices, but f u l f i l a special function. Much of the interpretation could be based on and backed by tradi-tion. This reliance on tradition seems to be much more haphazard for the background. The earliest known independent portraits, of Jean le Bon (louvre, ca.1360) and archduke Rudolf IV (Vienna, Dioce-san Museum, ca.1365), have a neutral background. Por Planders this remained a tradition for nearly a hundred years, only slightly longer than i n Italy. Frequently, but not always, this background was dark, either green, brown or blue. Important exceptions before Memling's time were Campin's Portrait of a Musician (New York, Mrs.J.Magnin Collection) and his Portrait of Robert de Masmines (Berlin, Kaiser Friedrich Museum) and Rogier van der Weyden's Francesco 84 ~ d'Este (New York, Metropolitan Museum). But this traditional background changed after 1446, when Petrus Christus produced his Portrait of a;Carthusian (New York, Metropolitan Museum), Edward Grymestone (London, National Gallery) and Portrait of a Young G i r l (Berlin, • 85 Kaiser Friedrich Museum). i t i s i n this new tradition that most of Memling's paintings f i t . But i t i s the old tradition which deserves our attention f i r s t . 117 THE NEUTRAL BACKGROUND Regardless of l i g h t or dark neutral background very-many s i t t e r s had some connection with the court. Campin 86 portrayed Robert de Masmines and Mary of Savoy; Van Eyck portrayed Baudouin de Lannoy, Giovanni A r n o l f i n i and G i l l e s Binchois (?); and Rogier van der Weyden portrayed even more court f i g u r e s ; Guillamme F i l l a s t r e , I s a b e l l a of Portugal, Anthony of Burgundy, Francesco d'Este, Jean Gros I I I , Philippe de Croy, Laurent Froimont, P h i l i p the Good, the Duke of Cleves, the Count of Charolais, the l a t e r Charles the Bold. Moreover, Jan van Eyck was f i r s t court painter to Jan of 89 Bavaria i n The Hague and l a t e r to P h i l i p the Good. It may be that Memling continued t h i s type,which seems to have been associated with the court, f o r some of his known s i t t e r s also had some court connections. The f i r s t one i s G i l l e s Joye (Fr.72), tbe Burgundian court clergyman-musician. There was a t r a d i t i o n f o r musicians to be portrayed 90 and honoured. Campin portrayed one and so did Jan van Eyck. Flemish musicians were highly regarded due to t h e i r excellent t r a i n i n g , and many members of the papal musical entourage were Flemish. Thus, the honour G i l l e s Joye received i s nothing extraordinary. He was not a member of the court i n 1472 ( no payments are known to have been made), but through his close connection with i t he may have become acquainted with a-: c e r t a i n "court painting s t y l e " . Another person closely a l l i e d to the court was Tommaso P o r t i n a r i , the banker-counsellor to Charles the Bold. He 118 must have known h i s Lucchese r i v a l A r n o l f i n i who had h i m s e l f portrayed by Jan van Eyck. i s we have seen before, one U f f i z i s i t t e r (Fr.88) may be another member of the P o r t i n a r i f a m i l y and t h e r e f o r e c l o s e t o the co u r t . The l a s t one i n t h i s small-group concerns copies of Memling 1s Anthony of Burgundy ( C h a n t i l l y , Musee Conde; Dresden, S t a a t l i c h e Kunstsammlungen). i t i s h i g h l y l i k e l y t h a t the o r i g i n a l a l s o had a n e u t r a l 91 background. This p o r t r a i t shows at l e a s t t h a t Memling had some connections with the court. The extent, however, i s unknown and can only be surmised. Although these p o r t r a i t s were made e a r l y i n Memling's 92 c a r e e r , the s i t t e r s could have chosen a landscape background. That they d i d not do so may be due to t h i s court t r a d i t i o n , 93 which may have had a c e r t a i n p r e s t i g e . The p r e s t i g e may have c a r r i e d over to the other p o r t r a i t s i n t h i s category. I t should not be f o r g o t t e n t h a t of the three background c a t e g o r i e s , as introduced i n chapter I , at present the n e u t r a l background i s n u m e r i c a l l y the l a r g e s t s i n g l e group. There i s a d i f f e r e n t approach to the n e u t r a l back-ground, which strengthens my argument and adds a new aspect. I n p o r t r a i t s w i t h a n e u t r a l background the r e a l a t t e n t i o n f a l l s namely on the s i t t e r , not on the d e t a i l s . Jan van Eyck had used i t to create h i s p a r t i c u l a r i s m . Panofsky summed i t up i n the f o l l o w i n g words: "Exh a u s t i v e l y p a r t i c u l a r i z e d , completely unique, and e x i s t i n g w i t h i n an i n d e f i n a b l e space e x c l u s i v e l y h i s own, each personage i s , as l e i b n i z would say, a "nomad without window" o r , to borrow a t e l l i n g phrase from a great n o m i n a l i s t , a 'res se i p s a s i n g u l a r i s ' , " a t h i n g 119 individual of and by i t s e l f " - solidly real but i n -commensurable with any other member of_the species and isolated from the rest of the world." 94 The key phrase for our purpose i s "an indefinable space exclusively his own". Thus the neutral background creates separation between the viewer and the sitter and elevates, through isolation, the sit t e r to a.different level. This brings us back to the status and prestige this neutral background had acquired in Flemish as well as i n Italian portraiture. Yet, at the same time i t functions as a special psychological environment, creating a-; person "res se ipsa 95 singularis". But as I pointed out in chapter I, Memling tried to break through this neutrality, thus creating a-different space, a different environment. And i t i s to this new environment that I want to turn to next. THE LANDSCAPE BACKGROUND Already in the general introduction to the background Petrus Christus' portraits were mentioned. With their inte-r i o r backgrounds they broke through the old tradition of neutral backgrounds. But i t did not stop with the interior. Dieric Bouts broke through the confinement of the interior by introducing a view out of the window i n his 1462 portrait of an unknown man (London, National Gallery). Basically Bouts" portrait i s the ancestor to Memling1s interior-exte-96 r i o r background. Por a direct prototype of the landscape portrait we need to look to Italy, not Flanders, In 1465 Piero d e l l a Francesca painted his famous pair Federigo II 120 da> Montef e l t r o , duke of Urbino, and his wife B a t t i s t a Sforzai (Florence, U f f i z i ) . Behind the s i t t e r s placed i n p r o f i l e i s a vast landscape, while on the back of the panels are a l l e -9 7 gories, related to the s i t t e r s . I t seems more than l i k e l y that Memling followed the I t a l i a n t r a d i t i o n , f o r nearly 98 without exception h i s s i t t e r s i n t h i s category are I t a l i a n s . The important difference between Memling fs and Piero's por-t r a i t s i s not the three-quarter view instead of the p r o f i l e , but the absence of a l l e g o r i e s on the back. Piero•s a l l e g o r i e s 9 9 ascribed to his patrons c e r t a i n virtues of character. But these a l l e g o r i e s were not v i s i b l e when the p o r t r a i t s were viewed. Thus without them the p o r t r a i t s had to speak a s i m i l a r language. Panofsky, dealing with the character of Rogier's s i t t e r s , wrote that "A likeness conceived as a study i n character w i l l therefore r e f l e c t these outside forces together with t h e i r substratum; i t w i l l present the s i t t e r . . . as a thing co-determined by i t s environment." 100. In other words, the landscape behind the s i t t e r i s a means to i n t e r p r e t the character of the s i t t e r . In chapter I we followed, the s p a t i a l development of the landscape and already noted there c e r t a i n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . The landscape i s either f l a t or s l i g h t l y h i l l y ; the trees and shrubs are often rather dense with f o l i a g e ; some of the p o r t r a i t s with mature s i t t e r s show a s l i g h t l y cloudy sky; frequently there i s ai b i t of water often with the protected princely swans; buildings and people i n i t tend to be small and unobtrusive; the grass ranges from brown to green and blue. The colour of the land-121 scape i n general i s more tonal than local. There i s really nothing which disturbs the landscape. It evokes a. sense of peace, quietude and calmness through i t s garden-like setting. These qualities can also be an aspect of the human character. Thomas a Kempis in his De Imitatio Chr i s t i wrote that "a-.101 peaceful person i s of greater use than a great scholar" and i n a~ prayer to enlighten the mind he stated: "Order the winds and storms, .say to the sea: Be quiet.' and to the north wind: don't blow.' _ and,great peace w i l l rule there." Thomas k- Kempis equated the peace of nature with the peace of mind, panofsky's "reflection of the outside forces". Thus, while the neutral background i s a? passive a t t r i -bution to the concentration of the s i t t e r , the landscape 103 background i s an active contributor. Much of what is: attributed to the pure landscape could be applied to the interior-exterior as well. It i s to this,, last category i n this chapter that: we now turn our attention. THE INTERIOR-EXTERIOR BACKGROUND In the previous category we saw that the landscape through i t s garden-like, pastoral setting evoked a sense of peacefulness. Even though some details could slightly modify this picture, the general essence of i t remains true. But the "addition" of the interior i s just not a minor detail. In the pure landscape category the sitter could be thought 104 of to be i n nature and to be one ¥/ith nature. This i s not 122 possible for this category, because the sitter i s physically separated from the landscape through walls, balustrades or columns. It should be clearly stated that this different background evokes a different quality, which results in a: different character t r a i t . But i t does not change the fact that as an environmental factor i t contributes to the psycho-logical make-up of the sit t e r . The f i r s t quality which becomes apparent i s the duality. There i s ai duality between interior and exterior, between nature and man-made structures, between i n f i n i t y and l i m i -tation. This duality i s strengthened in the portraits with sitters with prayer-clasped hands. There we have the duality 105 of " i n the world but not of the world". The second quality i s due to the interior. Although the columns are somewhat opulent and the walls impersonal, the interior confines the s i t t e r to a more intimate setting. This i s perhaps strongest in the •familiar' setting of the Chicago sitter (Pr.92) and of Maarten van Nieuwenhove (Pr.14). In six of the nine portraits i n this category the s i t t e r has prayer-clasped hands. Intimacy with a husband or wife, a: saint, the Virgin or the Godhead could.be of great importance.. _• The third quality has already been discussed i n the pure landscape. The only addition I want to make to i t i s that the viewer can enter the same space as the s i t t e r , which enforces, at least for the interior-exterior, the quality of intimacy. The presence of these three qualities makes the inter-123 pretation more d i f f i c u l t , "but not impossible. The important thing i s to keep in mind that no individual aspect f u l l y interprets the sit t e r . As we have seen i n a l l categories i n this chapter, the aspects suggest the direction in which interpretation may be found. But the backgrounds, the hands, the objects, and other details as well, must be taken together i n order to interpret the character of the sitter properly and to discover the attitude of the sitter. 124 SUMMARY "Man's f e a t u r e s and pose do n o t f u l l y r e v e a l the - c h a r a c t e r ; f o r i f t hey d i d so a c c u r a t e r e p r e s e n -t a t i o n o f the body would a t t h e same time d e p i c t t h e i n n e r q u a l i t i e s o f t h e mind." 1 Perhaps p o r t r a i t i s t s : o f a l l time have t r i e d t o r e c o n c i l e the problem o f t h e s i t t e r ' s appearance and t h e i n n e r q u a l i t y . But i t i s u n d o u b t e d l y t r u e t h a t t h e emphasis has been p l a c e d on t h e one o r t h e o t h e r . P l i n y p r a i s e d A p e l i e s , because h i s 2 p o r t r a i t s were o f p e r f e c t l i k e n e s s . Ku K ' a i - c h i h , t h e f i r s t named C h i n e s e p a i n t e r , was v a i l i n g t o s a c r i f i c e t h e l i t e r a l 3 r e p r e s e n t a t i o n f o r chuan-shen, t h e s o u l o f the s i t t e r . I n t h e c o n t e x t o f t h i s t h e s i s , P a n o f s k y ' s s t a t e m e n t on t h e s i t u -a t i o n a f t e r J a n van E y c k ' s " d e s c r i p t i v e p o r t r a i t s " sheds l i g h t on M e m l i n g 1 s p o s i t i o n and c o n t r i b u t i o n t o p o r t r a i t u r e j " P r o g r e s s was p o s s i b l e o n l y on one o f two r o a d s l e a d -i n g i n o p p o s i t e d i r e c t i o n s but u l t i m a t e l y c o n v e r g i n g t oward t h e " i n t e r p r e t i v e " and l a t e r on m e e t i n g , v i a Memlinc, i n . t h e m a s t e r s o f t h e s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y t t h e s i t t e r ' s i n d i v i d u a l i t y c o u l d be made a c c e s s i b l e t o t h e b e h o l d e r e i t h e r by p r e s e n t i n g him w i t h i n a; w e l l - d e f i n e d environment which th e b e h o l d e r c a n s h a r e ; o r , by r e d u c i n g t h e amorphous c o m p l e x i t y o f h i s b e i n g t o w e l l - d e f i n e d p s y c h o l o g i c a l q u a l i t i e s , and a t t i t u d e s which t h e b e h o l d e r can r e - e x p e r i e n c e . " 4 P r o b a b l y Memling's p l a c e i n the 1 a r t o f p o r t r a i t u r e c o u l d n o t be b e t t e r d e f i n e d t h a n P a n o f s k y ' s s t a t e m e n t i n d i c a t e s . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , he n e v e r 'proves' Memling's p o s i t i o n . I n t h i s t h e s i s I hope t o have shown t h a t Memling t r i e d t o combine t h e two r o a d s walked by h i s p r e d e c e s s o r s . On t h e f i r s t r o a d , P e t r u s C h r i s t u s and D i e r i c B o u t s i n t r o d u c e d a w e l l - d e f i n e d 125 space. Memling went beyond t h e i r achievements through the introduction of a pure landscape. In chapter I I pointed out the s p a t i a l development, which was noticeable i n the three categories. I t i s probably clearest i n the pure landscape category, where the early p o r t r a i t s show a blocked-off space, while the l a t e r ones show a ' l i m i t l e s s 1 space. This vast space p a r a l l e l s that of Piero d e l l a Prancesca's Sforza p o r t r a i t s , of which Lipman stated that the landscape was a 5 c l a r i f i c a t i o n f o r an expressive force. But at the same time t h i s awareness f o r distance was more than a technical aspect i n perspective. In chapter IV I indicated that the landscape had a psychological e f f e c t on the s i t t e r s . Panofsky suggested that the science of perspective had as c o r o l l a r y a: new 6 h i s t o r i c a l sense. Distance was therefore not only o p t i c a l , but also h i s t o r i c a l and took on a symbolic form. This psycho-l o g i c a l e f f e c t and symbolic form are the bridge to the second road, a road which was b u i l t by Rogier van der Weyden and Hugo van der Goes. E s p e c i a l l y i n chapter IV I dealt with the categories of the hands i n t h e i r function of purpose. Frequently the"word attitude was used to describe that function. Just l i k e the p r o f i l e face suggest d i r e c t i o n , so do the prayer-clasped hands. But these hands are symbolic f o r the soul of the s i t t e r . In t h i s p a r t i c u l a r case, the prayer-clasped hands symbolize the devout nature of the s i t t e r s ; an aspect which i s f u l l y compatible with the s p i r i t of the time. This r e l i g i o u s connotation can be experienced i n 126 some of the objects as well. Por other poses I have suggested that they may be connected to an interest i n humanism and antiquity. But Rogier van der Weyden and Hugo van der Goes stayed on this road, concentrating often on the religious nature of the sitter. Memling, by combining the two roads, went beyond them and introduced a new s p i r i t in the north. Priedlander, trying to characterize Memling, stated that "Memlinc was neither a discoverer like van Eyck, nor an inventor like Rogier. He lacks the passion of vision, the fanaticism of faith. In purely material terms, he i s not as dense as van Eyck, nor as hard as Rogier." ' Perhaps Priedlander used the wrong measuring stick to assess Memling1s achievements. He used his own personal preferences and dislikes to judge the a r t i s t , without taking the s p i r i t of the time into consideration. As we saw i n chapter III, this s p i r i t was a mixture of strong r e l i g i o s i t y i n the form of piety with an emerging humanism. Instead of judging Memling myself and f a i l like Priedlander or Panofsky did i n this respect, I want to point out that his contemporaries had a different opinion. Memling never slavishly followed the Flemish tradition. He s k i l l f u l l y grafted Italian inno-vations into northern portraiture without being overwhelmed by the Italian achievements. That something of the Italian s p i r i t went along i s evidenced by the fact that so many of his sitters were Italians. At the same time his own achieve-8 ments influenced Italian artists like Fra Bartolommeo. 127 For his contemporaries Memling, the mirror of Brugian upper-class society, was, to close with notary Romboudt de Doppere's death act phrase of 1494, an^'excellentissimum pictorem totius tunc orhis christiani". 128 FOOTNOTES INTRODUCTION 1. Quoted by Mary Stratton, Bruges A Record and an  Impression (london: B.T.Batsford, 1914), p. 8. 2. For documentation and information about Memling see chapter III, section I. 3. For a good l i s t of books and articles, see Jan Bialostocki, Les Musees de Pologne Gdansk, Krakow, Warsaw (Brussels: Centre nationale de recherches "Primitifs Flav mands", Vol.9, 1966), ppi 94-104. Further references to this series are given under Primitifs Flamands and the volume number. For a discussion on the interpretations, see Max J. Friedlander, Early Netherlandish Painting (leiden: Sijthoff, Vol. VI: 2, 1971), the Editor's Note, especially page 121. 4. Friedlander, op c i t . , p. 121. 5. i b i d . , p. 35. 6. Erwin Panofsky, Early Netherlandish Painting (New York; Harper & Row, 1971), p.347. See also Friedlander, op. c i t . , p. 121, where the attitudes are discussed. 7. Max J. Friedlander, Die altniederlandische Malerei (leiden; Sijthoff, 1934- 1937). These volumes have been translated into Early Netherlandish Painting. References i n thesis are made to this translation. 8. Friedlander, op. c i t . , p. 119. "Very few thorough-going studies of Memlinc have been published since 1937." 9. i b i d . , pp. 120-121. "Since the middle of the 20th century, however, some authors seem to view the painter i n a rather different light." 10. ib i d . , p. 120. See also Jan Bialostocki, op. c i t . , p. 92; K.B.McFarlane, Hans Memling,, ed. Edgar Wind (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971), cE7~I. ;lQ)avies, Primitifs Flamands, Vol. I l l : 3, no. 129.; Paul Coremans, Rene Sneyers, Jean Thissen, "Memlinc' Mystiek Huwelijk van de H.Katharina", Bulletin de 1'Institute royal du patrimoine artistique 2 TT9597, pp. 8 3 ^ . 11. The abbreviation Fr. which I use here and in the text refer to Friedlander's catalogue numbers. The two signed and dated works are the Jan Floreins altar piece (Fr.2) and the Mystic Marriage of St.Catherine (F"r. 11), boThof 1479; 129 documented are the Munich Seven Joys of Mary, commissioned by P.Bultync i n 1480 (Fr.33) and the Bruges St. Ursula shrine in 1489 (Fr.24); documented by tradition are the LtAbeck Greverade altar piece of 1491 (Pr.3) and the Willem Moreel a H a r piece of 1484 (Pr.12). 12. These paintings are the Ottawa St. Anthony with Virgin and donor of 1472 (Fr.64); the Melbourne Virgin and Christ of 14T5"l[Fr.37); the portrait of Benedetto Portinari of,1487 (Pr.23B) and the Maarten van Nieuwenhove diptych of 1487 (Pr.14). 13. Compared to previous artists i n Planders the inte-rior-exterior i s quite new, although not an innovation. Bouts' London portrait of 1462 antedates Memling's portraits, by perhaps as much as ten years. Since Memling goes beyond Bouts' portrait, this aspect deserves more attention. The prayer-clasped hands are not an innovation either, since Rogier van der leyden already used this aspect. See also chapter IV. 14. This does not mean that there are no other aspects. But these other aspects do not constitute a~. developing pattern and are often not as tangible. 15. In Appendix I these sequences are tabulated, both of the backgrounds and of the hands; Appendix II i s the com-bination of the various sequences; Appendix III provides a chart with the Priedlander numbers which are used to identify the portraits. 16. The combinations a re s 5 neutral background- prayer-clasped hands; 3 neutral background- hands at rest; 3 neutral background- object; 1 landscape- prayer-clasped hands; 4 land-scape- hands at rest; 5 landscape- object; 6 interior-exterior-prayer-clasped hands; 3 interior-exterior- hands at rest; 1 neutral interior- prayer-clasped hands. 17. This I hope to show when I discuss the ideas of the time- in chapter III. 18. The reason for this t i t l e i s that in the case of "Memling and his Time" Memling i s somewhat set apart from his time, a mistake Priedlander made; i n case of"Memling i n his Time", Memling i s too much emphasized at the cost of the ideas and happenings. 130 CHAPTER I THE NEUTRAL BACKGROUND 1. This could also he a ledge or a window frame. 2. See Appendix IA. Some sitters w i l l not he discussed here, because the sitters do not show their hands; or are cut, thus hampering a proper evaluation; or are stolen and no good reproductions and descriptions are available; or are probably copies and in some cases are not really portraits. 3. See chapter II for the documentation; i n the same chapter some suggestions are offered for some others. 4. Where the name of the sit t e r i s known, the portrait w i l l be called under that name; otherwise the place name i s used with the exception where confusion i s possible. The appendices l i s t the names of the portraits as they are used in this thesis. 5. There are also a monogram and a coat of arms on the frame, together with the words ANNO.DOMINI.1472 at the top, and ETATIS.SVE.47 at the bottom. See chapter II for the identification. 6. On the negative side too: the pose of the hands (see under the category of prayer-clasped hands); cut-off shoulders; no space above the head, which gives the impression that the si t t e r i s cramped into his space. The portrait i s generally accepted. See also Primitifs Plamands Vol.4 (1961), no. 72, pp. 66-70. The term 'generally accepted1 means that the majority of the scholars.who discuss a particular por-t r a i t accept i t as a.Memling product. 7. Samuel van Hoogstr.aten used the term when he fa^ vourably compared Rembrandt's Night Watch to the s t i f f other m i l i t i a pieces which were made for the Kloveniersdoelen. 8. That this conclusion i s warranted becomes clear when we discuss the Bruges Young Woman (Pr.94) of 1480, the only other dated portrait with a neutral background, and the Portinari portraits (Fr.69,70), the next portraits to be discussed and which have a relative certainty of date. 9. Both are i n the Metropolitan Museum, New York, via^ the Altman bequest. See Art i n America. IV (June 1916): 187-195. Por further discussion of the identification, s*ee chapter II. The portraits are now generally accepted; the date cannot be earlier than 1470 due to their marriage and ~ probably not later than 1475, because Tommaso got into financial d i f f i c u l t i e s around that time. 131 10. Although mentioned here, the discussion of., the hands takes place in. the category of prayer-clasped hands. This counts for the other portraits as well, so that from now.onwards only the spatial aspect w i l l he discussed. 11. The problem may be caused by the high hennin and v e i l . Por the twisting of the neck some muscles would be more obvious. Colouristically, there i s a greater contrast between.her and the background than between Tommaso.and the background. Yet, she i s f l a t t e r than Tommaso. This means that brighter colours do not necessarily contribute to a better i l l u s i o n of space. 12. Priedlander, op. c i t . , p. 110. The San Diego Museum gives as date 1470, but does not give any reason. On the frame are parts of letters s t i l l v i s i b l e , which have not been , deciphered. The last three look like 147, while vaguely maybe another number looks like a-3 or 5. The length of the hair indicates a later date, not 1470. Compare also the Montreal (Pr.80) and the Venice (Fr.77) portraits. -The red underground i s uncommon for Memling; i t i s more Rogerian. I do not think that this can be used as an argument for a 1470 date: that i s six years after Rogier's death, while nothing about the intervening years i s known. The.portrait i s generally accepted. Some description i s given i n Flanders i n the Fifteenth  Century; Art and Civi l i z a t i o n . Catalogue of the Exhibition  Masterpieces of Flemish Art: Van Eyck to"Bosch (The Detroit Institute of Arts and the City of Bruges. October-December I960), p. 155. Further references to this, catalogue w i l l be given as Detroit Exh.Cat. ,. " 13. For example both nostrils are vis i b l e ; the nose i s not a lin e , but a flesh continuation; the right side of the mouth i s shorter than the l e f t side, without a tendency to pull the mouth down, which i s especially the case with Gilles Joye.. 14. A touch of light on the right side of the neck and chin; also in the Portinaris, but not in the Gilles Joye. 15. This does not mean that i t i s the last one of the~ neutral backgrounds, for there are probably three later por-t r a i t s , but these three do not show this spatial development. 16. There are very few references to this portrait, but i t seems to be accepted where i t i s discussed (J.Held, A.Warburg). 17. I wonder i f Fr.90 i s of the same si t t e r . The por-t r a i t disappeared during the second world war. The harsh light on the undershirt, the placing of the pupils, the weak modelling of the chin and neck make me wonder i f i t could not be a workshop product or a copy. 132 18. Before 1900 i t was regarded as a. Jan van Eyck; after 1900 generally accepted as a Memling. Priedlander dates i t around 1470. (op.cit.,p. 29 and 55) 19. The ratio of 1 : 2 occurs in a few other Memling portraits: Antwerp portrait (Pr.7l), The Hague portrait (Pr.79), Venice portrait (Pr.77), Gilles Joye (Pr.72), San Diego portrait (Fr.233), National Trust portrait (Pr.87); and relatively close i s the Washington portrait (Fr.85). 20. Friedlander, op.cit.,p. 29. 21. Compare for example Van Eyck's portraits of Canon Van der Paele, Vyd, Alhergati and his Nicodemus i n the Prado Descent. 22. Otherwise called the Washington portrait. Generally accepted. Priedlander, op.cit., p. 29, dates i t around 1475. 23. As w i l l become clear i n the rest of this, chapter, this portrait i s the f i r s t surviving one with an object. This may explain why the shoulder-hand-arrow relation has not been solved with complete satisfaction. 24. In the show of French Primitives i n Paris i n 1904 i t was attributed to the French School oJTthe Loire or Rhone of 1470. Now generally accepted as a Memling. 25. Friedlander, op.cit., p. 28. 26. In both editions of the Friedlander volume the portrait i s described as "without hands", although i n the translated edition, after a~. cleaning of around 1950, the il l u s t r a t i o n shows the sitter with his hands. J.A.Crowe and G.B.Cavalcaselle gave i n The Early Flemish Painters. Notices of Their Lives and Works (London: John Murray, 1857) on page 266 the following description: "A portrait i n the Hampton Court Gallery, long catalogued as being of an unknown author, strikes us as a careful effort of Memling in the earlier and cold manner which he took from Van der Weyden. It represents a young man of rather spare features, with his hair divided in the middle." They also note that at one time i t was attributed to Sir Anthony More. 27. The face of the St.George, although somewhat'more turned, seems to be f a i r l y close to that of the si t t e r . The Christ figure i s turned frontally, has a light ring beard and i s somewhat softer i n expression. The closeness may explain why this s i t t e r has a f a i r l y similar gesture to that of Christ.' One may wonder i f Memling used his sitters for other paintings as well. 133 i 28. The inscriptions are sixteenth century additions; see Priedlander, pp.cit., p. 57. The portrait i s generally accepted. 29. K.B.McParlane, op.cit., chapter I, argued a similar case for the Bonne triptych "(Fr. 10) which he dated around 1480. In the portrait's with a landscape a somewhat similar tendency emerges around this time. Perhaps the 'return 1 hangs together with the happenings.of and after 1477. Por the hi s t o r i c a l aspect, see chapter III, section 2. 30. There are some altar pieces which Memling probably did towards the end of his l i f e , such as the louvre diptych (Pr.15) around 1490 and two altar piece shutters (Pr.18). If the dates are correct, i t would further support my suggestion of a later date. THE LANDSCAPE BACKGROUND 31. Accepted by Priedlander, McParlane, Bialostocki. 32. Compare for example the Turin Passion (Pr.34) of around 1470, the St.Sebastian (Fr.45), ca.1470, the Ottawa St.Anthony (Pr.64) of 1472 with the Grenada Deposition (Pr.15)> ca.1475, and the Rotterdam Lamentation (Pr.6) of around 1475. The landscape in these paintings develop along very similar lines. 33. Generally accepted. 34. Water was one of Memling's favourite devices. The word landscape i s a derivation from the Dutch word landschap or landscap. Originally i t meant a view of the countryside as opposed to the townscape. Since water was ahundantly available, both within i n outside the town, the word land-scape should not be restricted to land only. 35. The sitter has an Italian hairstyle of the early 1470s. The linearity of the nose and chin-jaw indicates an early Memling as well. 36. Generally accepted. 37. The Montreal Museum of Pine Arts purchased the portrait i n 1956. Shortly afterwards i t was described by John Steegman, "Montreal Acquires a Memling and a;Brueghel", Canadian Art 13 (1956): 332-333. See also the Detroit Exh. Cat. , p. 156*. 38. Prom now onwards only new aspects w i l l be discussed 134 in order to avoid repetition, unless a direct comparison i s necessary. 39. I suspect the landscape to he between Bruges and -Ghent; even at the present time one can view a; similar land-scape there. 40. It i s interesting that there i s a parallel in public l i f e . More and more clouds gathered above the head of Charles the Bold and the storm broke with the battle of Nancy i n 1477. Bruges encountered serious d i f f i c u l t i e s with Maria of Burgundy and her husband Maximilian of Hapsburg. See also chapter III, section 2. 41. Mentioned only by Priedlander. 42. Generally accepted. Stolen on March 12, 1971. 43. These elements are missing i n aacopy of this portrait (Fr.86a), which may be a workshop production or done by a follower. 44. Karl Voll, Memling (Stuttgart? Deutsche Verlags Anstalt, 1909), p. 22. 45. Generally accepted. The discussion centers around the identity of the sitter; see for that discussion chapter II. 46. On the frame i s written 0PVS.JOHANNIS.MEMLING.ANNO. MCCCCLXXIX. Especially i n the John the Baptist panel i n the area, of Christ's baptism i s a very similar patterning, h i l l y landscape and clusters of trees. 47. Hulin de Loo, "Le portrait du medailleur par Hans Memlinc: Jean de Candida.et non Niccolo Spinelli," Festschrift  ftlr Max J.Friedlander zum 60. Geburtstag (Leipzig:. E. A. See-mann, 1927), p. 103ff. Other vase known as Festschrift 48. Generally accepted. 49. A cloudy sky usually appeared with a crucifixion or deposition, for example the Turin Passion (Fr.54), the Capilla Real Deposition (Fr.13), the Greverade altar piece (Fr.3). The Moreel altar piece i s somewhat more secular, see also S.N.Blum, Early Netherlandish Triptychs A Study in Patronage (Berkeley;~University of California Press, 19*69), chapter 10, where she suggests that this altar piece reflects the changes which occurred. 50. Bernice Davidson wrote i n "Tradition and Innovation: Gentile da Fabriano and Hans Memling", Apollo 93:2 (April-June 1971): 378-385 that -"The Frick portrait seems tentative when compared to the above-mentioned works (they were Fr.71,84,77,86), for at this date Memling had scarcely begun to appreciate the 135 possibilities of the landscape portrait. In the Prick Frankfurt panels the figures are separated from their backgrounds by the window frames behind them; the country side i s more distant, the trees and roads smaller. The division between figure and landscape i s sharper in the Frick than i n the Frankfurt portrait, because the window frame i s fla t t e r and provides l i t t l e recession into depth, the shoulders slope more s t i f f l y , raising an abrubt barrier between the foreground and background, and the straight line of the horizon does not respond to the silhouette of the figure." (pp.381-2) Shortly after the acquisition for the Frick Collection, Francis Spar wrote "les experts pensent qu'il s'agit d'un des tout premiers portraits commandes a Memling, en 1470, sinon dans les dernieres annexes de l a decennie 1460." In "Un Mem-li n g a New York", Connaissance des Arts 223 (Septembre 1970):9. In the catalogue o? the""Bruges exhibition Musee Communal- Bruges; Le Portrait dans les Anciens Pays-lias (Bruxelles t Editions de la-Connaissance, 1953), no. 13 i s written that the Prick portrait i s between 1462 and 1472 because i t i s close to the Man with a Medal (Fr.71). Priedlander writes about the Frick portrait that i t i s "unusual i n i t s vigorous modelling, probably from the master's early period." (Op.cit.,p. 11Q). And about the Frankfurt portrait the same autEor writes "I regard the portrait of a man in a t a l l cap in Frank-furt as Memlinc's earliest to show a landscape. Certain crudities and deficiencies in the line and the s t i f f and looming attitude of the head, which lacks animation, incline me to date this painting around 1470. The nose i s too much in profile, the averted side of the face not sufficiently foreshortened." (Op.cit. yfp. 29.). Hulin de Loo dated the Frankfurt portrait somewhat after 1470, "parce que le haut bonnet tronconique que porte le personnage n'a ete a l a mode que pendant une periode assez courtes je ne l ' a i releve que de 1465 environ a 1473 (mettons 1475 pour etre large)." Festschrift, p.106. 51. Generally accepted. Crowe and Cavalcaselle,op.cit., give on page 266 the following description which may refer to this portrait; "In the Gallery of Francfort, not catalogued, i s a portrait which we suppose to have come from the Ader's Collection. It represents a young man, one-third of the l i f e size, having a l l the characteristics of Memling's manner. The head i s covered with the long cap of the period, and the hands are joined together before the figure, of which only half i s visible." 52. Generally accepted. 53. Por examples, see Le Gouden Eeuw der Vlaamse 136 Miniatuur- Het mecenaat van Pi l i p s de Goede 1445-1475 (Exhi-bition Catalogue Amsterdam Rijksmuseum, 1959), especially catalogue numbers 157, 165, 184. 54. Early examples are Maria Portinari (Pr.70), perhaps the best example, and the U f f i z i portrait (Fr.88); somewhat later are the New York Old Man (Pr.81) and the Washington portrait (Fr.85); late i s his Bruges Young Woman (Pr.94). 55. Although there i s no definitive proof for this portrait and the Frick portrait, I think that Memling i s experimenting here for his interior-exterior background. If this i s true, than-it would further support a later date. 56. The nose i s too much profile; the hands are poorly done; the negative shape between the face and the landscape i s better than i n the Frankfurt and the Copenhagen portraits. 57. Festschrift, p. 106. THE INTERIOR-EXTERIOR BACKGROUND 58. Mentioned by Friedlander and by P.Hendy i n the catalogue of the Exhibition van Eyck.to Tiepolo of the  Thyssen Collection (London. 1961), p. 41-42. 59. On the back i s a pure s t i l l - l i f e with a vase and flowers; see also chapter IV. 60. Generally accepted. The Berlin portrait i s the l e f t wing, the Paris portrait i s the right wing. 61. Perhaps a fairer comparison for the Thyssen-Borne-misza portrait would be the Lehman portrait (Pr.74) and for the Elderly Couple,the Moreel husband-wife pendant pair (Fr.67 , 68). 62. Friedlander, op.cit., p. 29. 63. One look at a later portrait shows that Friedlander i s not consistent here i n his argumentation, for the The Hague portrait (Fr.79), which he dates around 1484, shows rather harsh lines on the neck and around the nose. 64. With well-developed i s meant then Memling's achieve-ment i n spatial development through topography, individuali-zation and atmospheric perspective. 65. Generally accepted. 137 66. The two-column system also appears in the Mystic  Marriage of St.Catherine ( F r . l l ) . The use of the light i n the central panel i s not unlike this portrait, probably somewhat more advanced. Since the altar piece i s dated 1479, this portrait could probably be dated somewhat before this date. 67. Generally accepted. The identity comes through the" coats of arms on the back. His i s on hers and hers i s on his. The sitters also appear on the wings of the St.Christopher  altar piece, which was donated in 1484 to the St.Jakobskerk. The age cannot be that much different in the altar piece and the portraits. 68. Por similar problems see S.N.Blum, op.cit., ch.lQ. 69. K.Voll published a Palermo copy (p.163) which misses the distortion. 70. Accepted by Priedlander, Held, Comstock. 71. The s i t t e r was probably called Anthony, because St. Anthony of Padua i s on the reverse. 72. Other evidence for this date i s provided by the Madonna;, and Child (Pr. 50)« which Priedlander, op.cit. , p. 52, dated around 1485"; the Lehman Annunciation (Pr. 26), which on i t s lost original frame was dated 1482 and which shows a: well-developed interior, but the figures are full-length (interiors with full-length figures are shown in Pr.10 the wings, Pr.64 and Pr.58); the face i s more profile as occurs i n more later portraits; the colour and the fashion indicate a later style. 73. Generally accepted. The date appears on a stone slab. Strangely enough, the 4 i s inverted. The reason i s not very clear. 74. Generally accepted. There i s an inscription on the frame which identifies him. 75. There are some awkward aspects, especially the angled road. I wonder i f there i s shopwork i n involved. There are no contracts which would state what was to be done by the master and what by others. There i s an interesting contract which Luca Signorelli signed on April 5,1499 for the ceiling of the Orvieto Cathedral. The contract stipulated that Luca- had to do the faces and the upper parts of the body and the rest could be done by others (see M.Salmi, Luca Signorelli (Munich: Wilhelm Goldmann Verlag,.1955), p. 29). Perhaps something similar was expected from Memling. 76. Generally accepted. 77. Some overpainting has taken place, here as well as 138 in other places; see Primitifs Plamands, Vol.3:111, pp. 170-172. 78. Priedlander dated this portrait early, originally around 14-70, later 1475. Beard on the other hand dated i t late in "Another National Gallery Problem," The Connoisseur 88:360 (August 1931): 74. Musper agreed with""Beard when he wrote "Vfegen der engen Beziehung zu dem datierten Klappal-tarchen mit dem hl.Benedikt i n Plorenz lasst er sich !um 1487' datieren." H.Th.Musper, Altniederlandische Malerei von Van Byck bis'Bosch (KbIn: M.DuMont Schauberg, 1968), p. 64. The "base of the column appears only once more i n a portrait, Maarten van Nieuwenhove (Pr.14), and the capital only i n the Benedetto Portinari (Pr.23B), while i n other panels they appear from 1475 onwards. PRAYER-CLASPED HANDS 79. This i s one of the reasons why Pr.93,95 and 230 have not been discussed here. 80. This "close cut" can also be seen i n Fr.233, 87,79. 81. Tommaso's hands form an angle of 60 degrees with the lower edge, using the middle finger for determining the direction. 82. It i s the closest of a l l the portraits. 83. I disregard here for a moment the badly damaged parts and rely on the parts which show a certain freedom. 84. Support for a more precise date has to be gained through fashion, anatomical details like the jugular vein, the more profile nose. There i s a closeness to the Moreel triptych (Fr.12) and the The Hague portrait (Fr.79), espe-c i a l l y i n the texture of the fur. 85. I think there definitely i s : 4 v/ith a book are shown to the waist; husband-wife pendant pairs are just a bit shorter; 3 with dark background close to the arm pits; 1 v/ith a landscape close to the arm pits; 1 interior-exterior nearly to the waist. 86. As we have seen probably done before 1487 and not earlier than 1480. 87. Very similar to the San Diego portrait (Fr.233). 88. Other evidence supports a later date: harder out-lines and shadows and face more towards the profile, espe-c i a l l y noticeable i n the nose. See also London (Fr.78), 139 Benedetto Portinari (23B), Maarten van Nieuwenhove (Fr.14), National (Trust portrait. (Fr.87) and the Chicago portrait (Fr.92). 89. It i s probably cut, for i t i s the only one where the fingertips are vi s i b l e , while the rest of the hands i s not. Moreover, the hair touches the frame, the pendant i s partly cut off and so i s the second ring. 90. Friedlander, op.cit., p. 52. HANDS HOLDING AN OBJECT 91. What the objects precisely are i s discussed i n chapter 17, together with their meaning. Some of the objects are not very clear. 92. There are no others i n this category to compare with. In other categories are Fr.73 (not firmly dated), Fr.74, Fr.81 and Fr.88. 93. Other aspects like fashion, foreshortening of the nose, shadow modelling and the face, may indicate that the Montreal portrait i s a fraction later. 94. * Compare the gesture with Andrea del Castagno's Portrait of a~Man (Washington, National Gallery), painted around the middle of the 1440s. 95. In the next category a few other portraits with not very successful hands w i l l be discussed and they are a l l painted close together. HANDS AT REST 96. ' Other evidence like volume, li g h t and shadow on the face, the nose, tends to confirm this suggestion. 97. Friedlander, op.cit., p. 29. 98. For example the Washington portrait (Fr.85) and the San Diego portrait (Fr.233). 99. With the cutting this area may have been damaged. 100. There are two other portraits with this pose, both more successful j the U f f i z i portrait (Fr.88) and the Lehman' portrait (Fr.74). 140 101. This clumsiness helps with the dating, probably between 1474 and 1477. Shopwork i s possible and even l i k e l y , but there i s no proof. CHAPTER II !• Primitifs Plamands Vol.4, p. 68 describes i t as "argent, a chevron gules between what may be three b i l l e t s or." 2. ibid, for a f u l l description. 3. i b i d . , p. 67. 4- Primitifs Plamands Vol. 111:3, p. 25. 5. i b i d . This short volume i s concerned only with P.van Molle's research on Gilles Joye. 6. i b i d . 7. E. de Moreau, Histoire de l'Eglise en Belgique 4 (Brussels: L'Editions Universelle, 1949), p. 70. He gives the following examples : Louis de Bourbon, later bishop of Liege, was a son of Charles the Bourbon and Agnes, daughter of.John the Fearless; Antoine Haneron was counsellor to Charles the Bold; Francois de Busleyden was counsellor to Philip the Hand-some and in the next century Jean Carondelet was secretary to Charles V. 8.. ibi d . , p. 71. 9. Primitifs Plamands Vol. 111:3, p. 25. 10. When the duke died he had in his employ the musicians Constans de Languebroek (since 1442), Robert"Morton (since 1457) and Gilles Joye (since 1462).. 11. Guillaume Cretin's Exploration welcomes Ockeghem i n the underworld. Verse 213.reads "La. Dufay, le bon homme survint, -Bunoys aussi, et aultres plus de vingt, Fede, Binchois, Barbingant et Donstable, Pasquin, lannoy, Barizon tres notables, Copin, Regis, Gilles Joye et Constant, Maint homme fut aupres d'eulx escoutant, Car bon fai s o i t ouyr t e l l e armoyne,..." (There worthy Dufay stepped to the fore/ also Busnois and over twenty more,/ Dunstable, Barbingant, Fede, Binchois,/ Pasquin, the famous Barizon, Lannoy,/ Copin, Regis, Gilles Joye and 141 Constans too;/ Pull many folk about them listening drew,/ Por good i t was to hear such harmony..." Quoted from G.Reese, Music i n the Renaissance (New York: W.W.Norton, 1959), p.115. Also the persons i n N i c o l e de l a Chesnaye's Condamnacion  des bancquetz dance to one of his tunes "Non pas" 7 "Sus Gallans qui avez l'usaige ~De harper ou instrumenter, Trop longuement faictes d'usaige Une chancon convient fleuter Savez vous point, J'ay mis mon cuer, Ou Non pas, ou Quand ce viendra,..." Quoted from J.Marix, Histoire de l a Musique et des Musiciens  de l a Cour de Bourgogne sous le regne de Philippe de""*Bon U"4*20-1467) Vol.28 (Strasbourg: Heintz, 1939), p. 208. 12. Since quite a few Portinaris are mentioned I have provided a genealogy i n Appendix VI. 13. Rogier van der Weyden's portraits of Philip the Good are good examples of court portraits. 14. It i s possible that Gilles Joye could be portrayed as, and be,a representative of, the clergyman, the successful musician or as the courtier. 15. Raymond de Roover, The Rise and Decline of the Medici Bank 1597-1494 (New York: W.W.Norton, 1966), p. 59. "(Otherwise known as The Rise). I am concerned here only with the Bruges branch. , "~ 16. i b i d . , p. 87. 17. i b i d . , p. 87 and 144. 18. ibi d . , p. 88. De Roover cites more examples, so that Tani's position as a manager i s not really exceptional. 19. Raymond de Roover, Money, Banking and Credit i n  Mediaeval Bruges. Italian Mercnant-Bankers, Lombards and Money-Changers. A Study i n the Origins of Banking (CamTrige, Mass.: The Mediaeval Academy of America, 1948), p. 36. (Otherwise known as Banking) 20. The Rise, p. 169. 21. The London branch was discdntinued by the Medici i n 1472, although Gherardo Canigiani remained i n London to manage his own affairs. • 22. The Rise, p. 88. 23. Banking, p. 86. 142 24. i b i d . , p. 87. 25. ibid. The amount was twice the capital of the partnership. 26. ibid. 27. The Rise, p. 357. 28. i b i d . 29. These ships play an important role i n the attribu-tion of the Danzig altar piece to Memling. Por s t y l i s t i c attribution J.Bialostocki i s probably the best (Primitifs Plamands 9). Por historic arguments against the attribution, see K.BrMcFarlane, op.cit., chapter II. Further, The Rise, pp. 341 and 347. ~ ~ 30. The Rise, p. 340. Page 349 gives 8000 ducats for buying and modelling. 31. i b i d . , p. 341. 32. She was a relative of Bernardo Bandini-Baroncelli, the murderer of Guiliano de' Medici, and of Pierantonio di Guasparre Bandini-Baroncelli, the Pazzi representative i n Bruges in 1478. 33. The difference i n age was not uncommon. When Tani married in.1466 he was f i f t y , while his bride Catarina Tanagli was twenty. Furthermore, i t was common practice that Italians married Italians. 34. The Portinaris ordered a triptych, now in Turin, and dated around 1470. Since they appear as donors, this painting could possibly be regarded as a marriage thanks-giving. 35. That was the date the contract was signed, after which Tommaso l e f t for Bruges. 36. The Rise, p. 343. 37. The richness of Maria's necklace i s between that worn i n the Turin altar piece and that i n Van der Goes t r i p -tych of 1475. 38. There can easily be a: difference between the reason for commissioning and the way someone i s represented. 39. Historische Winkler Prins 1 (Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1957), p. 458 gives as date 1421. John Bartier, Charles le  Temeraire (Bruxelles: Arcade, 1970), p.36 gives as date~1422. 143 40. The Sticht i s "the name for the Butch province Utrecht, which at that time consisted of the present day-province Utrecht and parts of Overijssel and Gelderland. 41; He actually went to North Africa. In 1975 Morocco threatened, the Spanish possessions i n the Sahara. These possessions were conquered by Anthony of Burgundy.. 42. Frequently this portrait i s described as "Knight with an Arrow". It i s now in Brussels, Koninklijk Museum. Panofsky dates i t around 1455, Cuttler around 1452. 43. Max J.Priedlander, "About some of Hans Memling's Pictures i n the United.States," Art in America 8 (1920),p.108. 44. Por other interpretations ,see chapter IV. The aspects are not necessarily exclusive. 45. The Italian branch of the family kept of course i t s original name. One of them, Giovanni Morelli, kept a. diary for his son around 1400. 46. S.N.Blum, op.cit., p. 97 and footnote chapter 10:2. 47. K.B.McParlane, p.p.cit., p. 31. 48. Detroit Exh.Cat., pp. 34,41. 49. W.H.J.Weale, Memlinc (London: T.C. & C.Jack, 1901), pp. 40-41. 50. McParlane gives as name St.James; Blum as St. Jacques and the Flemish i s St.Jakob. The church i s located at the St.Jakobstraat. 51. Primitifs Flamands 1, p. 94. 52. W.H.J. Weale, op. c i t . , p. 41. 53. S.N.Blum, op.cit. , p. 98 and footnote 5. 54. W.H.J.Weale, op.cit. , p. 42. 55. Primitifs Flamands 9, p. 98. "Willem Moreel ende joncvrauwe Barbara f i l i a Jan van Herstvelde, syn ghesellenede." 56. i b i d . , p. 92. 57. In English usually the French i s used for this fraternity: Notre Dame des Neiges. Moreel became a member of i t in the service year 1474-1475, a year after Memling. 58. It i s remarkable how many young people Memling portrayed. I wonder i f this has anything to do with a 'family tree'. They.could function i n a similar way as at the present 144 photographs do 59. The inscription i n the l e f t corner reads "Sibyllai Sambetha quae et Persica anno ante Christs Nat. 2040" (Sibyl Sambetha of Persia born i n the year.2040 B.C.). At the bottom the inscription reads "Ecce bestia conculcaberis. Gignetur Dominus i n orbem terrarum et gremium virgin!s e r i t salus gentium. Invisibile verbum palpabitur." (Now wilt thou con-quer the savage beasts, the Lord w i l l appear on the ter r e s t i a l globe and the f r u i t of a virgin w i l l be the salvation of the people. The invisible world w i l l become flesh.). 60. A. Monballieu, "Sibylla-Sambetha", Openbaar Kunst- bezit i n Vlaanderen (1964), no. 3. Erasmus i n his Cfolloqu'ia familiaria wrote that the women of his time had their fingers loaded with rubies and diamonds and that originally only noble women plucked their hair of the foreheads and temples, but that later on everyone did so. (In his chapter on "Advice to Women"). 61. Sir Martin Conway, The Van Eycks and Their Followers (London: John Murray, 1921), p. 241. 62. H.Pirenne, Histoire_de Belgique II (Bruxelles: Maurice Lamartin, 1922), p. 435. "La v i l l e . n 1 e t a i t dega plusque 1'ombre d'eller-mSme." * 63. Maur Guillaume/Linephty, Hans Memling i n the  Hospital of St.John at Bruges (Paris: The Marion Press, 1939), no. 10. . . . 64. A.Warburg, Gesammelte Schriften I,II (Leipzig: B.G.Teubner, 1932), p7 201. . . . . 65. It was founded by Folco d i Ricovero Portinari, the father of Dante's Beatrice, i n 1288. Tommaso was buried there; the Van der Goes altar piece was there. 66. The affai r was f i n a l l y settled i n 1499, but payments were made as late as 1512. 67. Festschrift, p. 103-106. 68. John Bartier, op.cit., p. 152. G.F.Eill i n his A Corpus of Italian Medals of 1930 gives his selfportrait on plate 134, no. 823. ~ 69. Max J.Friedlander, op.cit., p. 27. 70. K.B.McFarlane, op.cit., p. 14-15 and footnote 69. 71. There i s perhaps an other possibility: that the coin stands i n relationship to his master, just like Van Eyck's Tymotheus. 145 72. John I was portrayed by Rogier; a copy i s at the Bibliotheque Nationale. 73. Charles Beard, op.cit., p. 74. 74. The reason why he l e f t Utrecht was probably due to the problems of sellings i n 1427 an order came out that nothing painted i n Utrecht could be sold i n Bruges. 75. K.B.McFarlane, op.cit., p. 32 footnote 18. The guild ' ordered shutters and the polyptych was installed i n their chapel i n 1480. The last known information ahout i t i s that i t was sold i n 1624. 7 6 » The Rise, pp. 92-93. The percentage of Italians i n relation to the Flemish citizens must have been small, although I do ti\3# know the actual number. 77. See chapter III for possible reasons. 78. A.Warburg, op.cit., p. 202. 79. G.Rosenberg i n a lecture at the Vancouver Art Gallery on Friday, June 26,1975. 80. Brugian merchants often belonged to the middle class. 81. Banking, p. 345. 82. The family Van der Beurse were inn-keepers-brokers t i l l the f i r s t half of the fifteenth century. Their house i s now occupied by the Bank van Roeselaere en West-Vlaanderen. 83. Banking, p. 115. He gives several examples on page 101. 84. i b i d . , p. 171. 85. i b i d . , p. 175. 86. i b i d . , p. 189. For example Evrard Gaederic, a money-changer, was called "Sire". See also Francois C a l i , Bruges The  Cradle of Flemish Painting (Chicagos Rand McNally, 1964),p.49. 87. He suppressed a l l banks on December 14,1489. 88. Quoted by Raymond de Roover i n Banking, p. 340. 89. These functions often went together (F.Cali,op.cit., p. 48.). One of them, the naturalized Antoine Adornes, became burgomaster i n 1473. The Italian family branch produced several doges. 90. Banking, pp. 13 and 190. 146 CHAPTER III THE HISTORICAL MEMLING 1. R. A . Parmerrtier, Indices op de Brugsche Poorter-boeken (Brugge: Desclee de Brouwer, 1938^ Vol.2, pp. eJJo and 157, plate II, v/hich i s a reproduction of the actual entry. Also i n M.W.Brockwell. "A Document Concerning Memling," The  Connoisseur 104 (1939),-p. 186. 2. M.W.Brockwell, op.cit., p. 186. 3. G.-H.Dumont, Memling (Utrecht: A.W.Bruna, 1966),p. 10. 4. ibid. 5. ibi d . 6. W.H. J.Weale, op.cit. , p. 19 gives as date around 1425. Charles D.Cuttler, Northern Painting.From Pucelle to Bruegel (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, I968), p. T%9 gives as date around. 1440. Max J.Priedlander changed his ideas gradual-ly from 1430 towards 1440. 7. Max J.Friedlander, op.cit., p. 12. Weale thought that the absence was due to the fact ihat Memling was i n the service and protection of Charles the Bold. Friedlander doubted that, because there i s no documentary evidence. How-ever, Weale's notion of court connections could f i t i n with my suggestion on some of the neutral background portraits. 8. Before 1470 nothing has been firmly dated, not even the debated Danzig altar piece. 9. See E.Panofsky, op.cit., in his chapters on Rogier, especially chapter IX, p. 247ff. Memling's borrowings for some of the portraits seem to indicate that he was f a i r l y familiar with Rogier's work. However, most borrowings seem to be from before 1460. This whole f i e l d of Memling«s rela-tionship to Rogier i s rather confused and, I think, not thoroughly researched. 10. Giorgio Vasari, Lives of the Most Eminent Painters,  Sculptors and Architects, trans. Gaston Du C. de Vere (London: Pliilip Lee Warner, 1912-1915), Vol.9, p. 265. 11.G.-H.Dumont, op.cit., pp. 11-12. 12. i b i d . , p. 13. See also Detroit Exh.Cat., p. 369. 147 13. A. Schouteet, "Nieuwe teksten betreffende Hans Mem-ling , " Revue Beige d'Archeologie et d'Histoire de 1'Art 24 (1955), pp. 81-84. He gives the following four accounts? Pol. 129 (1473-1474) "Dit i s den ontfanc van den nieuwen ghildebroeders ende susters ontfaen binnen dezen jare:...Meester Hans, schilder, 4.gr." (This i s the receipt of the new guild brothers and sisters.received i n this yean...Master Hans, painter, 4.gr.). Pol. 160 (1475-1476) "Ontfanc van jaerlix ghildeghelt in 't ommegaen van buten de houder veste de anno 76;...Meester Ans, schildere, 2 gr." (Receipt of yearly guild money of a procession outside the walls for the year 76:...Master Ans, painter, 2 gr.). Pol. 277 (14 93-1494 ) "Andre ontfanc van doodschult ende zielmessen.dit jaer»...Meester Hans, de schilder, 3 s.gr." (Other receipt of death debt and Requiem masses this y e a r M a s t e r Hans, 3 s.gr. ). Pol. 280 (same account) "Betalinghe van zielmessen dit jaer ghecelebreirt;...Meester Hans, de schilder, 13 gr." (Payments for Requiem masses celebrated this year;...Master Hans, the painter, 13 gr.). In the service year 1471-1472 the name "Lodewic de Valkenare et uxor" i s mentioned. Probably they were Memling's parents-in-law. In 146861469 "Kaerle, hertoghe van Bourgoigne, grave van Vlaendre, etc., ons harde gheduchtich heere ende prince" and "Minheere de bisscop van Doornike" became members and i n 1472-1473 "Mevrauwe van Bourgoigne". 14. G.-H.Dumont, op.cit., p. 13. and P.Cali, op.cit., p. 47 where we read tha^ Memling got the 'third t i l e grant' for a house i n the Rue du Pont-Plamand. 15. Charles D. Cuttler, pp.cit., p. 168. 16. G.-H.Dumont, op.cit. , pp. 13-14. 17. Flowers s t i l l , grow now i n the l i t t l e garden. A HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 18. Raymond de Roover makes this clear i n both books cited here, The Rise and Banking. 19. Both Pirenne and De Roover agree that Antwerp out-classed i t s r i v a l shortly after 1480. 20. Charles plotted a kind of coup d'etat, but his father stayed i n power. However, Charles got far more res-ponsibilities after that. 148 21. Henri Stein gives a lengthy account of Haneron i n "Un Diplomate Bourguignon Du XVe Siecle Antoine Haneron". Bibliotheque de 1'Boole des Chartes 98 (1937), pp. 283-348. 22. Holland, Zeeland and Friesland form the west and north of the Netherlands. Holland was roughly equal to the present two provinces Noord- and Zuid-Holland. 23. John Bartier, op.cit., p.254. 24. The two main areas, Burgundy and Flanders, were separated from each other by French territory and bishoprics. Charles tried to obtain these intervening areas through conquest. The crown was to be given by the German emperor, the father of Maximilian, who at the last moment backed out of the deal. 25. See also page 71. 26. John Bartier, op.cit.,p. 228 and E.de Moreau, op. c i t . , p. 100. 27. J.& A.Romein, De lage landen b i j de Zee I (Zeist: W.de Haan, 1961), p. 218. According to the Estates General they already paid enough. Flanders paid since 1463 one-third of the repartition. 28. See also page 70. 29. F.Cali, op.cit., p. 26. 30. The Jonker-Fransen war was basically a. rebellion of the 'Hoekse' party against the monarchical 'Kabeljauwse' party. Thomas Basin, bishop of Lisieux, who had fled to the north for louis XI of France, compared the viciousness with the Guelphs and Ghibellines i n Italy and the Bourguignons and Armagnacs in France. The 'Hoeken' were led by Frans van Brederode and Jan van Naaldwijk i n the north and by F i l i p s van Kleef i n Flanders. In 1492 their last strongholds, Ghent and Sluis, f e l l into the hands of Maximilian. In the same year, the free farmers in the north were defeated. They had rebelled against the levies used to pay for a war i n the south. In their banner they portrayed a saint as well as a loaf of,bread and cheese. See also J.& A.Romein, op.cit., pp. 221-228. 31. Historische Winkler Prins 1, p. 483. 32. S.N.Blum, op.cit., chapters 9 and 10. 33. Millard Meiss, Painting i n Florence and Siena after the Black Death (Princeton: Princeton University~press, 195~l7"~ 149 SPIRITUAL LIFE 34. J.Huizinga, The Waning of the Middle Ages (New York: Doubleday, 1954). The original Dutch edition was published i n 1919, but the f i r s t English translation of 1924 differed i n some respect from the Dutch text. 35. The Dutch words fo farces are 'cluten, boerden, sotternieen 1. There are some differences between the three, but they were a l l played after the main play. They are often quite rude. Not many have survived complete. 36.R.R.Post, The Modern Devotion. Confrontation with Reformation and Humanism (Leiden; E . J . B r i l l , 1968), p.""257. There was a difference~b"etween the Windesheimers and the Brethern i n that the former showed more concern for education. Only once i n a while some of the Brethern taught i n Zwolle. On the other hand, the Brethern often provided the churches and monasteries with good candidates for the priesthood.: 37. ifcia., p. 225. 38. ibid. 39. Thomas a Kempis, De Navolging van Christus (Utrecht: Het Spectrum, 1957). Thomas Hemerken, born around 1380, entered the monastery of St.Agnietenberg, close to Zwolle, i n 1399 and stayed there t i l l his death on July 25,1471. He was either the writer or the editor of this booklet, which, appeared around 1420. It became one of the most read books of western C h r i s t i a n i t y . 40. Detroit Exh.Cat., p. 145-147. 41. Heinrich Schwartz, "The Mirror of the Artists and the Mirror of the Devout," Studies i n the History of Art.. Dedicated to Williaia E.Suida: on his 80th Birthday (London: phaidon Press"TT*959), p. 99. 42. ibid. 43. i b i d . , p. 94. 44. Millard Meiss,"Light as' Form and Symbol i n Some Fifteenth Century Paintings," Art Bulletin 27 (1945), p. 175. 45. Horae Belgicae X (Hannover: Carl Rumpler, 1854), p. 53. Also quoted by Millard Meiss, op.cit., p. 177. "An unbroken glass- through which light shines,does not break through the light of the sun; Similarly has a virgin, before and after, given birth to a child." 150 It i s noteworthy that the poem i s found i n a group of "minnen liederen", poems of the loving soul (no. 4-2-110). Furthermore, i n the Chicago portrait two children's heads are reflected i n the glass. 46. The Book of Wisdom chapter 7s 22- 8s 1. The b i b l i c a l quotations are taken from the Jerusalem Bible (Garden City: Doubleday, 1966). \ 47. The Book of Wisdom chapter 8:4. 48. letter of James 1: 17. 49. 1 John 1: 5-7. 50. This mystery can also be detected i n the Mystic Marriage of St.Catherine ( F r . l l ) . 51. J.Huizinga, op.cit., p. 198 gives an interesting quote, worthwhile to quote again: "Ruysbroeek, i n The Adornment of the Spiritual Marriage, says:"Here begins an eternal hunger which i s never appeased; i t i s an inner craving and hankering of the loving power and the created s p i r i t for an uncreated good..."...The metaphor may be inverted, so that the hunger i s Christ's, as i n The Mirror of Eternal Salvation." 52. Horae Belgicae X gives two of Brugman's poems, no. 107,109. Perhaps his most familiar poem i s "Ic heb ghejaecht myn leven lane" (I have hunted my l i f e long). 53. Pr.l4a, Fr.23A, Fr.47, Fr.48, Fr.49, Fr.53, Fr.54. 54. A further discussion on the connection between the religious ideas and the portraits w i l l follow i n chapter IV. 55. The aspect of attitude w i l l be discussed i n chapter IV i n connection with the iconography. 56. It i s possible that there i s a Stoic influence, but i f there i s , i t i s at least 'biblicized'.. 57. The inner compulsion could be the result of two motives. In the f i r s t place, a genuine religious compulsion without any other motives. In the second place, the sitters may like to be seen by others i n this way. 58. Even at the present time catholic doctrine states that celibate l i f e , away from the world, i s a higher state than that of the layman. The roodscreen i n the churches i s actually a good example of this separation. 151 59* Horae Belgicae X, no. 119. A free translation of i t gives the intention "You do not have to be a monk to be a follower of Christ.». 60. G.-H.Dumont, op.cit., p. 6. 61. Desiderius Erasmus, lof der Zotheid (Utrecht: Het Spectrum, 1912). In part 54 Erasmus deals with.the vices of the religious and.monks. 62. J.& A.Romein, Erflaters van onze Beschaving (Amster-dam: E.M.Querido, 1959), p. 75. "There these blockheads and stupids despise me, those who think that the total piety i s found in-t-a monk's cap and i n sadness." 63. J.Huizinga, op.cit., p. 31. 64. J.C.Brandt Corstius, et.al., Nederlands Literatuur-boek I (Amsterdam: J.M.Meulenhoff, 1959), 32. Jos Vandeloo,' Vlaamse Poezie (Utrecht: Het Spectrum, 1965), pp.69-70 gives a slightly ...different version, but the essence i s the same. "Egidius, where have you gone to? I am longing for you, my companion. You choose death, you let me l i v e . We made good and fine company. But i t ssems one had to die. Now you have been elevated into the throne, brighter than the sunshine: A l l joy has been given to you. Egidius, where have you gone to? I am longing for you, my companion. You choose death, you let me l i v e . " 65. J.C.Brandt Corstius, et.al., op.cit., pp. 33-34 with a variation i n Jos Vandeloo, op.cit., pp. 72-73. "There were two kings' children": "She held her lover i n her arms and jumped with him into the sea: 'farewell',she said, beautiful world, you'll never see me again; farewell, o my father and mother, my friends a l l the same; farewell sister and brother I go (ride) to heaven's kingdom." 66.ibid.,p.44 with a variation i n Horae Belgicae X, no. 61 and 62. "I want to enjoy myself In Jesus' greax suffering, I do not want to separate from this, i n l i f e nor in death." 67. ib i d . , pp. 45-46. "I have hunted my l i f e long Por a beautiful young g i r l (woman), The sweetest vine branch, Which i s i n heaven's throne; Surrounded by angels i s she. And I can't come near to her; ...My sins have prohibited this, I am.very sad about i t . " 68.Jos Vandeloo, op.cit., p. 90. "Yftien I play with my lover" "Thus for him who has chosen God, Everything to give up i s a: small thing, Who has l e f t the world Remains clean of a l l statues." 152 69. i b i d . , p. 111. "Oh noble soul" "The groom said: I want you to leave A l l joy and comfort, of human creatures, And lay down worldly vengeance, And only love me: I want to be your groom. Human f i d e l i t y i s small, At the end.nothing but pain." 70. i b i d . , p. 120. "0 soul, o soul, o spiritual nature, That God himself, after his own image, has planted into the body, Which we have to leave for the other land." "Oh soul, Oh soul, we do not know you, But with our body i n sorrow, we arrive at the eternal f i r e , In purgatory, or i n the other land." 71. Louvain got presses (at the university) i n 1475, Bruges i n 1475, Brussels in 1476, Ghent i n 1477, Antwerp i n 1480. 72. It i s possible that the eyes, which do not look at the viewer, may reflect this attitude. Eyes are the mirror of the soul. In the bible tha physical organs also have psychical and moral values, for example the eye i s proud (Isaiah 5:15), has pity (Deut.7:16), desire (Ezk.24:16),~shows sorrow (Job. 17:7, Psalm 6:7; 31:9), e v i l (Deut. 15:9; 28: 54; Matth.20:15). 73. Generally accepted and documented. . 74. Some authors accept this as a fact instead of an hypothesis. Conclusive proof as yet has not been given. 75. J.C.Brandt Corstius, et.al., op.cit., p. 60. Every summer one 'bliscap' was played. Only ^ e f i r s t and the last are now known. 76. Norbert Schneider, "Zur Ikonographie von Memling's •Die Sieben Preuden Mariens',l' Mttnchner Jahbuch der bildenden Kunst, Dritte Polge, 24 (1973), pp. 21-32. 77. Frequently the platforms on which the plays took place were divided into several 'compartments'; a different area meant a different scene. 78. J.C.Brandt Corstius, et.al., op.cit., p. 41. "Unto us i s born": "Well done, well done, young lady, of the sweet, worthy hours,-That you have won that sweet child with complete love." 79. Jop Pollmann and Piet Tiggers, Nederlands Volkslied (Haarlem: Musica, 1959), pp. 48-49. "In the City of Nazareth": "She was only fourteen.years old, That pure, clear fountain, When the message was brought to her:That she would receive God's Son, and remain a pure virgin.'.' 80. Donald Jay Grout, A History of Western Music (New York: W.W.Norton, 1964), chapter V l T 153 81. Their "landjuwelen" (festivals) drew large crowds. The Burgundian dukes realized that these Chambers of Rhetoric could be used i n their drive for unification. '• ' 82. Jos Vandeloo, op.cit., p. 118. "Where are Hector and Alexander, Julius, Artier and so many others, Baenrits, knight and brave sergeant? They are for ever i n the other land." 83. i b i d . , p. 109. "Tprieel uut Troyen, den edelen greyne, Gegroyt, gebloeyt,.es Brussel genaemt." (The arbour from Troy, the noble green, grown and flowering, i s called Brussels). 84. The former i s published i n Horae Belgicae X; the latter i n Vol. XI of 1855. 85. i b i d . , XI, numbers 4, 6, 16, 65, 126. 86. i b i d . , number 83. 87. On the reverse of the Thyssen-Bornemisza portrait (Fr.233) i s a pure s t i l l - l i f e with a jug and flowers. In poetry Jesus i s often compared to a gardener, for example in "Heer Jesu h:eeft een Hof ken" (lord Jesus has a Garden). One poem i n Horae Belgicae X, number. 94, compares the flowers to Spes, Fides, Caritas and Humilitas. 88. Reinder P.Meyer, Literature of the Low Countries A Short History of Dutch Literature i n the Netherlands and  Belgium1 (Assent VanTGorkum, 1971), p. 64"! These names are mentioned i n a poem called "The Dream of De Roovere about the Death of Duke Charles of Burgundy of Blessed Memory". Although De Roovere wanted a larger measure of individual fame, he never explicitly stated this i n his poetry. It i s more through bitterness that 'his personal disappointment shows. 89. Roger-A.d'Hulst, Flemish tapistries from the Fifteenth to the Eighteenth Century (Brussels: Editions Arcade, 1967), p. 87 and John Bartier, op.cit., pp. 261-263. 90. John Bartier, op.cit., p. 212. 91. Philip the Good had learned to speak some Flemish. 92. John Bartier, op.cit., p. 212. 93. De Gouden Eeuw der Vlaamse Miniatuur- Het mecenaat van Filips""de Goede 1445-1475. The Exhibition was held i n 1959. The descriptions are found on.pp. I l l , 113, 115, 125. 94. John Bartier, op.cit., p. 256. "Jason devenait un des deux patrons de l a Toisori d'Or, au grand scandale de 154 de 1'eveque Guillaume F i l l a s t r e qui l u i f i t substituer Gedeon, de plus sainte memoire." 95. ibi d . , p. 256. 96. See also chapter II. 97. E . de Moreau, op.cit., p. 140. CHAPTER IV 1. In his other works, Memling used swags of f r u i t and puttis, while the multi-coloured columns appear i n the portraits as well i n his other paintings. 2. Portraiture had more or less disappeared not long after Pliny wrote that " r e a l i s t i c portraiture indeed has for many generations been the highest ambitions of art." (The Elder Pliny's Chapters on the History of Art, trans. K. Jex-Blake (Chicago: Argonaut, 1968), p. 99. ) I t was only after 1350 that portraiture returned.to the art.of painting. A good survey of this early period i s found i n E.Panofsky, op.cit., p. 21. Panofsky also pointed out that the f i r s t autonomous portraits appeared at the same time as nominalism became more prominent; see his page 170. HUSBAND-WIFE PENDANT PAIRS 3. That they belong together has been pointed out i n chapter I; for their identity see chapter II. Julius Held, at the end of an arti c l e on the Chicago diptych( "A Diptych by Memling," Burlington Magazine 68, 1939, pp.17 6*17 9.) suggested a.fourth pair (Fr. 88,94). I reject this suggestion on the basis of time, size and pose.. 4. : Robert Campin painted Bartholomew d'Alatruye and his wife (Brussels, Koninklijk Museum) and the more famous anonymous pair now in the London National Gallery. Jan van Eyck's Margaret van Eyck (Bruges, Groeninge Museum) looks to the l e f t and tradition has i t that his selfportrait hung together with hers i n the guild h a l l (see Detroit Exh.Ca-t., p. 68.). Por a good discussion related to this portrait and i t s possible companion piece, see E.Panofsky, op.cit., p.198 and footnote 3. The Italian tradition shows i n Piero della-Francesca's Sforza portraits a significant difference, because the husband and wife are reversed. 155 5. In the case of the Portinaris a suggestion for a wedding anniversary i s not possible. 6. A special event in the Portinaris 1 lives could be a new contract; for the loreels either his release from prison or his appointment as burgomaster; for the Vrelants(?) member-ship of the fraternity of Onze-Lieve-Vrouw-Ter-Sneeuw and the presentation of the altar piece.to the guild. 7. E.Panofsky, op.cit., pp. 294-296, where he discusses Hulin de.Loo's reconstructions. The suggestion has been generally., accepted that sitters with prayer-clasped hands were accompanied by a devotional image. The hypothesis i s only partly correct as I hope to show in.this chapter. 8. The Italian tradition, exemplified by Piero's Sforza portraits, seems to be secular, although the Sforza portrait's on their reverses may give a more religious interpretation. But the references, couched in religious terms, are basi-cally classical. 9. The difference of angle i s also found ijj the Moreel  triptych.(Fr.12), the Turin Passion (Fr,34) and'the contro-versial~I>anzig altar piece (Fr.8). Although the angles are not the same as i n Memling's works, the difference between husband and wife i s also noticeable i n Rogier's Beaune altar,  piece and Van Eyck's Ghent altar piece. Concerning the aspect of the absence of a central panel, we are at a disadvantage with the frames, for I have been unable to check i f the frames had any special marks. 10. The sinister side aspect has b i b l i c a l foundations: Christ discussed the division between l e f t and right i n Matth. 25: 31-46. Paul's statement on the submission of women has often been taken out of context,and due to these misinterpretations these texts (e.g. Eph.5:21f; 1 Cor.7? 11:3; Col.3: 18f) provided a strong impetus to the submission of the wife. These texts also give the reason why women had their heads covered while praying, while men have bare heads. Even to-day lefthandedness i s s t i l l often frowned upon in schools. Children are taught to give the right hand while greeting. A practical example can be given in Van Eyck's so-called Arnolfini double portrait in London. 11. Prayer i n christian doctrine means communication with the Godhead through submission. This counts just as much for the husband as for the wife.. SITTERS WITH PRAYER-CLASPED HANDS 12. The seven others look to the l e f t . 156 13. As I have pointed out before, age guessing i s a haphazard game. Perhaps the more general description 'young person' would have been adequate, but that term i s rather vague and could be misleading. 14. The reason why I leave Benedetto Portinari out of the discussion here, i s that he has his hands i n a different direction. 15. The procedure may have followed a similar plan as Rogier's invention for the sinister side, that i s , he took probably the pose of the s i t t e r out of the familiar surround-, ings of an altar piece. 16. Max J.Priedlander, op.cit., p. 45, where he dis-cusses the painting. The donor's hands are at an angle of 45 degrees. 17. ibid. Also here the hands are at an angle of 45 degrees. Who the donor i s , i s s t i l l a matter of debate. The agreement i s on the family Greverade, but not on the i n d i v i -dual member. The altar was commissioned in 1491. 18. This altar piece i s important, because i t i s close i n time and the attitudes are similar. Close as well i s Prancisco Royas (Pr.228). Compare Pr.4B, Pr.10 and Pr.20. Furthermore, i t occurs several times with saints and Mary. An early predecessor of an open book with husband and wife i s Rogier's Beaune altar piece. 19. It does not seem to be cut. See Primitifs Plamands 3:11, p. 170. Thus, there i s no possibility that i t woulcFbe a part of a larger panel. 20. A good comparison can be found i n Hugo van der Goes Portinari altar piece of around 1475, which i s close in date and pro'vicTes similar flowers. 21. The problem for the triptych i s the direction of the hands. It i s unknown what would be on the right wing. The diptych panel could be a Christ with a Cross. Jan Provost painted such a diptych (which i s dated on the frame 1522),now i n Bruges, St.John's Hospital. On i t s reverse i s a skull. 22. There i s general agreement on this point, especially after Hulin de Loo's successful combinations of some of the portraits with a Madonna and Child. See his "Diptychs by Rogier van der Weyden," Burlington Magazine 43 (1923), p. 53ff and 44 (1924), p. 179ff. 23. Since the prayer book appears to be late i n his work, i t seems that Memling wanted to re-emphasize the devout attitude. It i s possible that they are the last four known portraits. 157 24. See footnote 22. 25. As we have seen i n chapter I, the backgrounds of the two panels form a unity. A parallel to the St.Anthony on the reverse i s Rogier's Laurent Froimont, who also has his patron saint on the reverse. 26. K.B.McFarlane, op.cit., p. 35, footnote 30, also rejects Friedlander's suggestion "To postulate i n this case av central panel with a Madonna...might be redundant." The staff of St.Benedict contains symbols of victory, which i s rather appropriate i n the light of his take-over from Tommaso. 27. D.Bont, et.al., De Katholieke Kerk (Utrechtt Het Spectrum, 1946), Vol.1, p.679, where the. authors write "The figure of the one mediator, however, cannot disappear behind the figure of the saints." And Vol. I l l , p. 1115 "We should short change God's honour through reverence to saints i f we should worship Mary and the other saints, in other words, i f we show them a very special honour-which only i s due to God and Him alone. But whatever many protestants may assert, that i s not what catholics doJ" (translation mine). 28. i b i d . , Vol. I l l , p. 1116 "There i s no church order stating that one should c a l l upon a-saint, although the custom i s widespread. But the request i s always "Pray for us", not "Have mercy upon us" for that i s the prerogative of God.» 29. Christ's presence could be either i n a Madonna and Child panel or in a Man of Sorrows; that means that the God-head i s present. The qualification 'male' i s necessary due tp the situ-ation i n the husband-wife pendant pairs, where the position of the wife i s of a different nature. 30. Fairly similar situations occur in the Benedetto Portinari (Fr,23B), the Thyssen-Bornemisza portrait (Fr.232) and the Chicago portrait (Fr.92). J.Bruyn,("Mans Portret", Openbaar Kunstbezit 5 (1961), p. 2b.) states that the coat of arms indicates"The presence of a: Madonna and Child. Proto-types could be Rogier's Philippe de Croy (Antwerp, Koninklijk Museum) and Jean Gros III (Chicago, Art Institute),. who both have a.coat of arms on.the reverse. A later example i s Jan Gossaert's diptych with Jean Carondelet of 1517 (Paris, Louvre). It also has a s t i l l - l i f e with a skull. THE OBJECTS IN THE HANDS OF THE SITTERS 31. John the Fearless was murdered that year. The portrait i s now i n the Louvre, Paris. 158 32. Other examples could he mentioned as well, l i k e Jan van Eyck's Tymotheus or Baudouin de Lannoy (Berlin-Dahlem, Gem&ldegalerie der Staatlichen Museen) and Rogier's Francesco d'Este (New York,Metropolitan Museum), Anthony of Burgundy and Philippe de Croy. 33. There i s an inscription on the frame, which i n d i -cates that he was horn on October 21,14-01. See E.Panofsky, QD.cit., p. 198. 34.. Por a discussion on this portrait, see E.Panofsky, op.cit., p. 295. Por information about him as a person, see JohnTartier, op.cit., p. 42. 35. According to the category of sitters with objects in their hands, there are eight portraits. I have included here the Bruges Young Woman (Fr.94), while there i s actually l i t t l e discussion on the Windsor portrait (Fr.91), due to damage. 36. The surviving portraits a l l date from 1475 to 1480, that i s in Memling's mature period. 37w At least so for the present viewer and with the available knowledge. 38. Panofsky dates the portrait around 1455, Cuttler around 1452. Rogier's arrow looks solid, Memling's arrow looks more like a dart. I do not know i f the difference has any iconographic significance. 39. Por information about him, see chapter II. 40. St.Sebastian survived his ordeal like the victims theirs. See also G.Ferguson, op.cit., p. 304. 41. At a later time, the military aspect would lead to group portraits, the so-called m i l i t i a pieces('Schuttersstuk') Memling painted.a St.Sebastian around 1470 (Pr.45) and around 14-90 (Fr.7). 42. The most notable plague occurred i n 1483, see chapter III. 43. The usual interpretation i s the one connected to the guild. Other interpretations are not mentioned, either for the Memling or the Rogier portrait. 44. This information I obtained from the National Gallery, Washington. 45. The spiritual nature of the arrow i s found i n several b i b l i c a l textss "The arrows of Shaddai stick fast in me" (Job 159 6:4); God exclaims "I w i l l make my arrows drunk with blood." (Deut.32: 42) and Jeremiah laments "He has bent his bow and,, taken aim, making me the target for ..his arrows. "(lamenta-tions 3: 12). 46. The presence of the Madonna and Child make a.hunt-ing or military solution less l i k e l y . However, their presence does not preclude the guild association, because the guilds performed important religious functions. 47. Encyclopedia Britannica 19 (1968), p. 619. The prayers which are recited are the Pater Hoster, Ave Maria and Gloria Patri. In 1520 pope Leo X gave his pontifical approbation to the devotion. 48. Undoubtedly Philippe de Croy i s i t s ancestor, also for the Master of Royal portraits' Portrait of Lodewi.ik  van Gruuthuse (Bruges, Groeninge Museum), between 1480 and 1490, which i s even closer to the Rogier portrait. 49. I t has not been determined what i t i s exactly. The object has a pseudo-inscription. 50. G.Ferguson, pp.cit., p. 34. If the second object i s a letter, i t could make .this suggestion more acceptable. 51. Friedlander gives i t to Van Eyek, Panofsky to an imitator. 52. G.Ferguson ,op.cit., p. 34. The Master of the Legend of St.Ursula used a pink several times. In a" diptych of 1486 (Fr.116) Christ i s shown with a pink. In Fr.128 Mary holds a pink and i n Fr.127 an angel reaches out to Christ with a pink. The marriage aspect i s spiritualized i n Fr.118, where St.Catherine reaches out with a pink. 53. Por example Paul's letter to the Galatians 2:20 "faith i n the Son of God who loved me and who sacrificed himself for my sake", or 1 John 4:7- 5:4. 54. Flowers often had (have) a.symbolic meaning. A good example for an 'anjelier' or 'anjer' (carnation) I have not been able to find. 55. For the inscription see chapter II, footnote 59. 56. The tradition i s often kept, however, i n the assigned t i t l e . The two most common ones are Maria Moreel and Sibyl Sambetha. 57. I have not found anyone who gave a good reason for the inscription. Usually i t i s stated that i t happened more often. A good example can also be found i n Rogier's 160 Isabella of Portugal, who i s also designated as a Persian Sibyl (New York, John D.Rockefeller Collection) and who wears three rings. 58. Sibyls had been appropriated by C h r i s t i a n i t y from antiquity. The most famous example i s undoubtedly Michel-angelo's use of them i n the Sistine Chapel. A good sixteenth century example i n the north i s Maarten van Heemskerck's De Sibylle Erythraea of 1564 (Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum). 59. There are no other examples i n his other paintings either. The closest we can come i s with Rogier»s Isabella of Portugal. painted around 1445, who wears three rings, and a Portrait of a Young lady (Berlin, Kaiser Friedrich Museum), painted around 1435, who wears four rings. Both were thus painted long before Memling's time'. 60. In the bible the number seven i s associated with completion, fulfilment and perfection. Por example the crea-tion story, the naming of the Sabbath, the sabbatical year (Lev. 25: 2 -6), the branches of the candlestick and the churches mentioned i n Revelation 1. 61. Rings are s t i l l exchanged i n marriage as tokens of love. According to Isaiah 61j 10 i t i s proper to put on ornaments i n case of a wedding, but immoderate use i s con-demned (Is. 3: 18-23; 1 Tim. 2:9). 62. P.Hartt, History of Italian Renaissance Art (Engle-wood C l i f f s : Prentice-Hall, 196"9), p. 281, introduces Botti-c e l l i i n this way "The unquestioned leader of our second, or poetic current i n later Quattrocento Florentine art i s Sandro B o t t i c e l l i (1445-1510).". And the same author writes about Andrea del Castagno (1417/9-1457) that "his deepest interest i s i n man, and the man. he presents i s character-i s t i c a l l y the truculent mountaineer of his Tuscan surround-ings." (p. 220). 63. i b i d . , p. 291. Hartt thinks that the s i t t e r i s Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco. The date he gives i s 1470 (?). 64. It may also be possible that the objects work i n a similar way as Van Eyck's Tymotheus. In a mathematical equation we ?/ould get Tymotheus j Alexander the Great = Binchois J Philip the Good, or Alexander the Great $ Binchois -(sitter )=. Philip the Good j Tymotheus. Expanded to the two other paintings we would get.Alexander the Great : Binchois (sitter) =Philip the Good s Tymotheus =Cosimo j sitter = Nero * sit t e r . In words we would get "like the 'servant' (Petronius? Suetonius?) served Nero, so does the Antwerp sitter serve his master (Charles the Bold?). 65. Por the influence of medals on Italian portraiture, see John Pope-Hennessy, op.cit., chapter II. It is'possible, 161 i f not l i k e l y , that Memling's si t t e r knew the B o t t i c e l l i painting. 66. As far as the hand: of the Prick si t t e r goes, he i s here at a: disadvantage, because a part may have been cut. Memling's portrait i s nearly half Castagno's portrait. 67. Por a:discussion on the time and a r t i s t , see Pierluigi de Vecchi, The Complete Paintings of Piero della Prance sea (New York: Harry N.Abramsr 1967;, p. 106. *" 68. I t seems that the sash was a leftover of the l i r i -pipe and turban, which we see for example i n Van Eyek's Tymotheus. ' 69. Reinhard L u l l i e s , Greek Sculpture (New Yorks Harry N.Abrams, I960) gives other examples in a male portrait. (Hippocrates),.a marble of Cos (no.266) and an attic funerary r e l i e f at the National Museum of Athens (no. 241). Also a~ bronze statue of Hadrian (?) i n Istanbul, Archaeological Museum, holds his hand on-his drapery i n a.similar pose. 70. E.Panofsky, op.cit., pp. 196-197. See also his "Who i s Jan van Eyek's "Tymotheus!'?," Journal of Warburg and  Courtauld Institutes,XII.(1949), pp.-80-90. Rogier .painted-a Philip.the Good (copy at Bruges, Groeninge Museum) with a?, s c r o l l on which some letters can be seen. 71. It could also be a ledger. The thickness of the object makes i t unlikely to be a letter. The copy (Fr.86a) i s not very clear on this point either. 72. The chain, or chord does not go around the neck. In the middle.it has a strange knot. It cannot be confirmed by other portraits i f i t i s a chord to t i e the shirt, since i t i s quite unlike those. HANDS AT REST 73. E.Panofsky, op.cit., p. 268 and especially footnote three. A later example i s D.Bouts London Man's Portrait of 1462. 74. i b i d . , p. 292. 75. Actually the question i s not properly phrased, because "at rest" i s already an interpretation. The term i s used here as a means of differentiation between hands with objects and prayer-clasped hands and those which 'do nothing'. 76. John Bulwer, Chirologia and Chironomia, ed. James W.Cleary (Carbondale and Edwardsvillet Southern I l l i n o i s 162 University Press, 1974), p. XVI, footnote 6 and p. X1III. 77. i b i d . , see especially the Preface (pp. 5-7), where he quotes P.Bacon. See also the Editor's introduction, p.XIIIf. 78. i b i d . , p. 248 Cautio XXVII. 79. Bulwer's 'Confido' cannot be applied here, because, although the pose i s reasonably similar, there are two persons involved. 80. Although the Boxer (bronze, Rome, Museo delle Terme) was not found u n t i l ,1884, we may assume that this tradition, of hands at rest was familiar during Memling's time. 81. The closest we come to this pose i s with Rogier's portrait of John the Pear less (Antwerp, Koninklijk' Museum) (Panofsky regards i t as ai workshop production), where the hands are reversed, and i n his portrait of Charles the Bold (Berlin, Kaiser Priedrich Museum), which may be a, replica. Cuttler dated this work around 14 57. Charles has a sword i n his hand, but otherwise this aspect i s f a i r l y similar. More-over, the way Charles holds his sword i s unbelievable, to say the least. 82. John Bulwer, op.cit., pp. 247-248, Cautio XXVI, where he states, that the l e f t hand alone i s the most incom-petent. 83. There does not seem to be a precedent for this pose either. Campin's London portraits also differ. 1 The man does not show his hands, while she shows one. The reason i s unknown to me. John Bulwer does not write anything about this pose. One may wonder i f the Brussels portrait i s also a wing of a husband-wife pendant pair. THE BACKGROUND 84. Por a further discussion', see E.Panofsky, op.cit. , chapter VI: VII and IX s X. 85. i b i d . , p. 310, footnote 5. The f i r s t two are dated 1446. The dates for the Young G i r l d i f f e r considerably. Priedlander thinks 1446,"~Panofsky -regards i t as one of his very last works, while Cuttler dates i t between 1468 and. 1472. 163 THE NEUTRAL BACKGROUND 86. Robert de Masmines was cousellor to and general of John the Fearless and Philip, the Good. He was k i l l e d i n the battle of Bouvines i n 1430.1 Mary of Savoy was the wife of Filippo Maria Sforza. Panofsky thinks at least that she i s the princess with the book (op.cit., p. 175). She looks to the l e f t , which also occurred .'in, the husband-wife pendant pairs. 87. Baudouin de Lannoy (Berlin, Kaiser Friedrich Museum), was a Knight of the Golden Fleece, ambassador to Spain with Jan van Eyck, governor of L i l l e and chamberlain to"Philip the Good. For the date of the portrait, see E.Panofsky1s dis-cussion on pages 197 and 198. Giovanni Arnolfini was a Lucchese merchant-banker who became a i counsellor to Philip the Good and died a knight . He stayed for half a century i n Bruges, from 1420 t i l l 1472. Tommaso could have seen his portrait and also the so-called Arnolfini double portrait, now"! i n London. For the latter, see-Peter H.Schabacker*s article "De Matrimonio Ad Morganaticam Gontracto: Jan van,Eyck's "Arnolfini" Portrait Reconsidered," Art Quarterly 55t4 (1972),.pp. 375-398. Gilles Binchois, the Burgundian court musician, i s , according to Panofsky, op. c i t . , pp. 196-197, to be equated with Tymotheus. See also footnote 70. 88. For information about Guillame F i l l a s t r e , see E.Panofsky, op.cit., p. 292, especially footnote 5, and John Bartier7 pp.-cit. , p. 4. For the identification of Isabella of Portugal, see E.Panofsky, op.cit., pp. 293-294. Anthony' of Burgundy has been discussed i n chapter II. Por the identification of Francesco d'Este, see E.Panofsky, op.cit., pp. 272-273. For the-much despised Jean Gros III, John Bartier, op.cit., p. 96 gives some information. E.Panofsky, op.cit., p. 295 gives some information on Philippe de Croy; see also his footnote 6. Furthermore, John Bartier, op.pit., p. 42 adds some more to i t . Not much -is known about Laurent Froimont. Philip the Good, Charles-the Bold and John I, Duke of Cleves have been discussed several times i n this thesis. 89. For some of the documents related to his position, see Wolfgang Stechow, Northern Renaissance Art 1400-1600 (Englewood C l i f f s : Prentice-Hall, 1966), pp. 3-8. •- - -90. Several times Campin's Portrait of as, Musician and Van Eyck'a Tymotheus have been,mentioned (see -chapter-II). The great It a l i a n composer Landini was crowned with a ?laurel wreath and.Guillaume de Machaut was made a court troubadour. 164 91. There i s a possibility that the Washington portrait (Fr.85) belongs: to this group. His arrow and the one of Rogier*s Anthony of Burgundy could make this suggestion acceptable. See, however, my discussion i n chapter I? on the objects. The religious interpretations do not necessarily exclude court connections. 92. I do not think that the financial aspect would have played a decisive role (assuming that landscape portraits were more expensive), for the sitters were a l l well-to-do as I pointed out in chapter II. 93. In Italy this possible court tradition was certainly broken with Piero della Francesca's Sforza:. portraits. I have been unable to strengthen this suggestion with research done by other scholars. Nothing seems to be written about i t . At least one courtier differed. There i s a copy of James of Savoy (Fr.101), which has aalandscape of an early date as background. The condition of i t i s very poor. 94. E.Panofsky, op.cit., p. 289. 95. We have to keep i n mind that the word psychology i s a much later 'invention', but that does not mean that the painters were not concerned about either the personality or the character of the sitters. The difference between personali-ty and character i s , that personality i s innate, while character i s acquired. The Greek word charassein means to carve into. THE LANDSCAPE BACKGROUND 96. It has been suggested, e.g. by Priedlander, that Petrus Christus' London donor was an earlier portrait with an interior-exterior. However, this painting i s not really a; portrait, but an altar wing. And thus i t cannot count as an earlier, example. Similarly, Rogier's St.Ivo, rediscovered, i n 1970, shows an interior-exterior, close to"~Memling's later portraits, such as Maarten van Nieuwenhove (Fr.14;. Martin Davies made a worthwhile statement on the St.Ivo: "The picture here i s from i t s presentation not acceptable as a portrait, although the features may record those of someone who made himself available to be used." Quoted from his Rogier van der Weyden. An Essay, with a c r i t i c a l Catalogue of paintings assigned to him and to Robert Campin (London: Phaidon, 1972)', p. 222. 97. For inscriptions, see Pierluigi de Vecchi, pp.cit., p. 100, no. 22. The allegories show the four cardinal and the four theological virtues. The profile of the sitters may refer to antiquity. 165 98. Rogier's Braque altar piece (louvre, Paris) has wings which could easily he converted into a. sitter with a landscape background, but they are not as close as Piero's portraits. 99. Pierluigi de Vecchi, op.cit., p. 100, no. 22. 100. E.Panofsky, op.cit., p. 290. 101. Thomas a Kempis, op.cit., p.56 (section 11:3). 102. ibid., p. 115 (section III: 23). 103. Although the general impression for the landscapes i s peaceful, the individual landscapes could contribute other aspects. THE INTERIOR-EXTERIOR BACKGROUND 104.. In i t s e l f the oneness with nature could constitute a psychological aspect, although Flemish literature i s silent about i t . It i s noteworthy that towards the end of this century artists like Leonardo and Dtirer are in the forefront of interest i n nature. 105. Compare Christ's priestly prayer in John 17, .espe-c i a l l y verse 15, 16 "I am not asking you to remove them from the world, but to protect them from the e v i l one (or: from e v i l ) . They do not belong to the world no more than I belong to the world." See also lCor.5:10; 1 John 2:15 and 1 John 5:19. SUMMARY 1. Herbert Furst, Portrait Painting. Its Nature and  Function (London: John Lane the BocTley Head, 1927), p. 93. 2. Pliny, op.cit., p. 125. 3. E l i Lancman, Chinese Portraiture (Rutland. Charles E. Tuttle, 1966), p. 35. 4. E.Panofsky, op.cit., pp. 289-290. 5. Jean Lipman, "The Florentine Profile Portrait i n the Quattrocento," The Art Bulletin 18 (1936), p. 58. 6. i b i d . , p. 80. Lipman used Panofsky' article "Die Perspektive als symbolische Form" which appeared i n Vortrage der Bibliothek Warburg (1924-25), pp.258ff and in Metropolitan Museum^StudTes 4 (1933), p. 274. 166 7. Max J.Friedlander, op.cit., p. 34. 8. Everett Fahy, "The earliest Works of Fra Bartolommeo", Art Bulletin 51 (1969),-pp. 142-154. 167 BIBLIOGRAPHY GENERAL WORKS ON MEMLING Baldass, Ludwig von. Hans Memling. Wien: Anton Schroll, 1942. Bazin, Germain. Memling. New York: French Library of Pine Arts, 1939. Dumont, George-Henri. Memling. Utrecht: A.W.Bruna, 1966. Priedlander, Max.-J. Altniederlandische Malerei. Leiden: A.W. Sijthoff, 1934-1937. Band VI, XIV. Priedlander, Max J. Early Netherlandish Painting. Leiden: A.W. Sijthoff, 1971. Vol. 6. Priedlander, Max J. Memling. Amsterdam: J.H.W.Becht, 1949. Voll, Karl. Memling. Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags Anstalt, 1909. Weale, W.E.J. Memling. London: T.C. & O.Jack, 1901. Beard, Charles R. "Another National Gallery Problem." Connoisseur 88 (1931): 74. Brockwell, Maurice W. " A Document concerning Memling." Connoisseur 104 (1939): 186, 218. Bruyn, J. "Mans Portret." Openbaar Kunstbezit 5 (1961): 2. Buysse, Emile. "Memling de laat-gotische dromer." Prinses 17-18 (December 1970): 63-68. Comstock, Helen. "A Memling Diptych Reunited." Connoisseur 134 no. 539 (August 1954): 73. Coremans, Paul; Sneyers, Rene; and Thissen, Jean. "Memlincs Mystiek Huwelijk van de H.Katharina." Bulletin de ^ I n s t i t u t e royal du patrimoine artistique 2 (1959): Davidson, Bernice. "Tradition and Innovation: Gentile da Fabriano and Han.s Memling." Apollo 93:2 (April-June SPECIFIC ASPECTS 83~~9"57 1971): 378-385. 168 Priedlander, Max J. "About some of Hans Memling's Pictures in the United States." Art in America 8 (1920): 107-116. Priedlander, Max J. "The Altman Memlings i n the Metropolitan Museum of Art.'-'.Art in America 4 (June 1916): 187-195. Priedlander, Max J. "The Memling Exhibition at Bruges." Burlington Magazine 70 (1939): 123-124. Ganshof, P.L. "Le Lieu de Naissance de Hans Memling." Humanisme et Renaissance 6 (1939): 81-82. Held, Julius. "A Diptych by Memling." Burlington Magazine 68 (1936): 176-179. Hulin de Loo, G. "Hans Memling in Rogier van der Weyden's Studio." Burlington Magazine 52 (1928): 166-177. Hulin de Loo, G. "Le portrait du medailleur par Hans Memlinc; Jean de Candida et non Niccolo Spinelli." Pestschrift  ftlr Max J. Priedlander, zum 60. Geburtstag.""Leipzig: E.A.Seemann, 1927,pp. 103-108. McParlane, K.B. Hans Memling. Edited by Edgar Wind. Oxford; Clarendon Press, 1971. Book Review Amis-Lewis, Francis.. Review of Hans Memling, by K.B. McFarlane. British Journal of Aesthetics 12:3 (1972): 3087 Campbell, Lome. Review of Hans Memling, by K.B.Mc "Farlane. Apollo 96 (December 1972); 563-564. Cuttler, Charles D. Review of Hans Memling, by K.B. McFarlane. Art Bulletin 55:2 (June 1973): 296-297. Sonkes, Micheline. Review of Hans Memling, by K.B. McFarlane. Rlvue Beige d 1Archeologie et d'Histoire de l'Art 40 (1971): 126-128. Linephty, Maur Guillaume. Hans Memling i n the Hospital of  St.John at Bruges. Paris: The Marion Press, 1939. Monballieu, A. "Sibylla Sambetha." Openbaar Kunstbezit in  Vlaanderen 2 (1964); 3. Schneider, Norbert. "Zur Ikonographie von Memlings "Die Sieben Freuden Mariens"." Mttnchner Jahrbuch der bildenden Kunst 24 (1973): 21-32. 169 SchBne, Wolfgang. "Hans Memling zur Ausstellung seines Lebens-werkes in Brugge." Pantheon 24 (1939): 291-299. Schouteet, A. "Nieuwe teksten betreffende Hans Memling." Revue Beige d'Archeologie et d'Histoire de l'Art 24 Tl955)7 81-84. : " Spar, Francis. "Un Memling a. New York." Connaissance des Arts 223 (September 1970): 9-10. Steegman, John. "Montreal Acquired a Memling and a Brueghel." Canadian Art 13 (1956): 332-333. Vervaet, J. "Hans Memling Portret van Jan de Candida?" Openbaar Kunstbezit i n Vlaanderen 9 (1971): 13. Winkler, Friedrich. "An Unknown Portrait of a Woman by Memling." Apollo 7 (1928): 9-12. BOOKS AND ARTICLES ON FIFTEENTH CENTURY FLEMISH ART, INCLUDING MEMLING Arndt, Karl. Altniederlandische Malerei. Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag, ""19 687" Birkmeyer, Karl. M. "The Arch Motif i n Netherlandish Painting of the Fifteenth Century." Art Bulletin 43 (1961): 1-20; 99-112. Blum, Shirley Neilsen. Early Netherlandish Triptychs A Study  in Patronage. Berkeley: University of California Press, I9B9T Conway, Sir Martin. The Van Eycks and their Followers. London: John Murray, 1921." Crowe, J.A., and Cavalcasell, G.B. The Early Flemish Painters Notices of Their Lives and Works. London: John Murray, 1857. Cuttler, Charles D. Northern Painting From Pucelle to Bruegel. New York: Holt, Rineharf &~TCiston, 15587 reprint ed"7 1973. Denis, Valentin. "Le Theatre et les Primitifs." L'Oeil 23 (November 1956): 18-27. Fierens-Gevaert, Hippolyte, La Peinture a Bruges Guide Historique et Critique. Bruxelles: G. van Oest, 1922. 170 Priedlander, Max J. Van Eyck to Bruegel. London: Phaidon, 1969. 2 vols. Goris. J.A. Portraits "by Flemish Masters in American Collections. New York: Belgian Government information Center, 1949. Lassaigne, J. Flemish Painting. Lausanne: Albert Skira, 1957. Musper, H.Th. Altniederlandische Malerei von Van Eyck bis Bosch. Kb*In; Verlag M.DuMont Schauberg, 1958. Panofsky, Erwin. Early Netherlandish painting. New York: Harper & Row, 1971. 2 vols. Book Review Held, Julius. A Review of Early Netherlandish Painting, by Erwin Panofsky. Art Bulletin 57"Tl955yr"205-254. Primitifs Plamands. Corpus, de l a peinture des anciens Pays-Bas. ~ meridionaux au XVe Siecle. Bruxelles: Centre nationale de recherches""Primitifs Plamands". Vol. 1. Janssens, A. de Bisthoven, and Parmentier, R.A. Musee Communal des Beaux-Arts, 1951. Vol. 2. Aru, C., and Geradon, Etienne de. La Galerie Sabauda de Turin, 1952. Vol.3:11 Lavies, Martin. The National Gallery, 1954. Vol.3:111 Davies, Martin. The National Gallery, 1970. Vol.4. Eisler, Colin Tobias. New England Museums, 1961. Vol. 6. Schoute, Roger van. La% Chapelle Royale de Grenade, 1963. Vol. 9. Bialostocki, Jan. Les Musees de Pdlggne, 1966. Vol.12. Hoff, Ursula, and Daviesy Martin. The National  Gallery of Victoria, 1971. Primitifs Flamands. Contributions a, l'Etude des Primitifs ~ Plamands. Bruxelles: Centre nationale de recherches "Primitifs Flamands". Vol. 111:3. Molle, Frans van. Identifications d'un  portrait de Gilles Joye attribue a Memlinc, 1970. 171 Vol. 111:4 Sosson, Jean-Pierre. Les Primitifs Flamands de Bruges Alports des Archives Contempo- raines (1815-1907). 1970. Puyvelde, leo van. La Peinture Flamande au Siecle des Van  Eyck. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1953. Puyvelde, Leo van. Les Primitifs Flamands. Bruxelles: Meddens, 1973. Ring, Grete. "St. Jerome Extracting the Thorn from the Lion's Foot." Art Bulletin 27 (1945): 188-194. Warburg, A. Gesammelte Schriften Lie Erneuerung der heid-nischen Antike. Leipzig: B.G. Teubner, 1SW. Weale, W.H.J. "The Early Painters of the Netherlands as Illustrated.' by the Bruges Exhibition of 1902." Burlington Magazine 1-2 (1903): 41-52; 202-217; 329-336. Whinney, Margaret. Early Flemish Painting. London: Faber and Faber, 1968. BOOKS AND ARTICLES ON FIFTEENTH CENTURY FLEMISH ART, EXCLUDING MEMLING Bauch, Kurt. "Bildnisse des Jan van Eyck." Studien zur Kunst-geschichte. Berlin; Walter de Gruyter, 1967, pp. 79-122. Davies, Martin. Rogier van der Weyden. An Essay, with a C r i t i c a l Catalogue of Paintings Assigned to him and to Robert Campin. London: Phaidon, 1972. ~ Friedlander, Max J. Altniederlandische Malerei. Leiden: A.W. Sijthoff, 1934-1937. ' * Vol. I Die Van Eyck. Petrus Christus. 1934. Vol. II Rogier van der Weyden und der Meister van Flemalle. 1934. " Vol. I l l Dierick Bouts und Joos van Gent. 1934. Vol. IV Hugo van der Goes. 1934. Friedlander, Max J. Early Netherlandish Painting. Leiden; A.W. Sijthoff, 1967-1970. Vol. I The Van Eycks- Petrus Christus. 1967. 172 Vol. II Rogier van der Weyden. and the Master of  Flemalle. 1967. Vol. I l l Dieric Bouts and Joos van Gent. 1968. Vol.IV Hugo van der Goes. 1969. Vol.VI:2 Gerard David. 1970. Hulst, Roger- A. d'. Flemish Tapistries from the Fifteenth to the Eighteenth Century. Brussels: Editions Arcade, 1967. Panofsky, Erwin. "Who i s Jan van Eyck's "Tymotheus."?" Journal  of Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 12 (1949): 80-90. Schabaeker, Peter H. "De Matrimonio Ad Morganaticam Contracto: Jan van Eyck's t'Arnolfini" Portrait Reconsidered." Art Quarterly 35'A (1972); 375-398. Schwartz, Heinrich. "The Mirror of the Artists and the Mirror of the Devout." Studies i n the History of Art Dedicated to William E.Suida on his 80th Birthday. London: Phaidon, 1959. Winkler, F."Rogier van der Weyden's Early Portraits." Trans-lated by Liselotte Moser. Art Quarterly 13 (1950): 211-220. HISTORICAL AND RELIGIOUS BACKGROUND Adelson, Howard L. Medieval Commerce. Toronto: D. van Nos-trand, 1962. Artz, Frederick B. The Mind of the Middle Ages An Historical Survey: A.D. 200- 1500. New York: Alfred A. Knopf" 1966. Bainton, Roland H. Christendom. New York; Harper & Row, 1966. Bartier, John. Charles le Temeraire. Bruxelles: Arcade, 1970. Ca l i , Francois. Bruges The Cradle of Flemish Painting. Trans-lated by Dennis Chamberlin. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1964. Clarke, C.P.S. Short History of the Christian Church. London: Longmans, 1948.. Erasmus, Desiderius. De Lof der Zotheid. Translated by J.B. Kan. Utrecht: Het Spectrum, n.d. Erasmus, Desiderius. Samenspraken. Utrecht; Het Spectrum, 1961. 173 Ferguson, Wallace K. Europe i n Transition 1300- 1520. Boston: Houghlin Mi f f l i n , 1962. Fremantle, Anne. Age of Faith. New York: Time-Life, 1965; reprint ed., 1972. Huizinga, Johan. The Waning of the Middle Ages. Garden City: Loubleday, 1954. Kempis, Thomas a. Le Navolging van Christus. Translated by P.A.H.j.Merkx. Utrecht: Het Spectrum, 1957. Moreau, E. de. Histoire de l'Eglise en Belgique. Bruxelles: L'Editions Universelle, 1949. Vol.4. Palmer, R.R. , and Colton, Joel. A History of .the Modern World. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1965. Parmentier, R.A. Indices pp de Brugsche Poorterboeken. Brugge: Desclee~de Brouwer, 1938. Pirenne, Henri. Economic and Social History of Medieval Europe. Translated by I.E.Clegg. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1937. Pirenne, Henri. Histoire de Belgique. Bruxelles: Maurice Lamartin, 1922. Vol. II. Post, R.R. The Modern Levotion Confrontation with Reformation  and Humanism. Leiden; E . J . B r i l l , 1968. ~ Roraein, J., and Romein, A. Le Lage Landen by de Zee. Zeistj W. de Haan, 1961. Vol. I. Romein, J., and Romein, A. Erflaters van onze Beschaving. Amsterdami E.M.Querido, 1959. Roover, Raymond de. Money,. Banking and Credit i n Mediaeval  Bruges Italian Merchant-Bankers, Lombards and Money- changers. A Study in the origins of Banking. Cambridge: The Mediaeval Academy of America, 194 8. Roover, Raymond de. The Rise and Decline of the Medici Bank 1397-1494. New York: W.W.Norton, 1966. Slicher van Bath, B.H. De Agrarische Geschiedenis van West-Europa (500-1850). Utrecht; Het Spectrum, I960. Stein, Henri. "Un Diplomate Bourguignon Du XVe Siecle Antoine Haneron." Bibliotheq.ue.de l'Ecole des Chartes 98 (1937): 283-348. -Stratton, Mary. Bruges A Record and an Impression. London; B.T.Batsford, 1914. 174 Vloemans, Arrtoon. Erasmus. Zeist; W. de Haan, 1962. Weiler, A.G. et a l . Geschiedenis van de Kerk in Nederland. Utrecht: Het Spectrum, 1962. Wescher, P. "Burgundy." CIBA Review 51 (July 1946): 1830-1868. DUTCH-FLEMISH LITERATURE AND MUSIC Bosch, J. van den. Pat was gezelschap. Amsterdam: E.M.Querido, 1963. —  Brandt Corstius, J.C. Nederlands Literatuurboek. Amsterdam: J.M.Meulenhoff, 1959. Vol. I. Eitner, R. Bibliographisch-bihliographisches Quellen-Lexikon der Musiker. Graz: Akademische Druck- U. Verlagsanstalt, 1959. Vol. V. Grout, Donald Jay. A History of Western Music. New York: W.W. Norton, 1964. Horae Belgicae. Hannover: Carl Rtlmpler, 1854-1862. Vols.9-12. Marix, J. Les Musiciens de l a Cour de Bourgogne au XVe Siecle  (1420-1467 )• Paris: Editions de I'Oiseau-lyre, Louise B.-M Dyer, 1937. Marix, J. Histoire, de l a Musique et des Musiciens de l a Cpur de Bourgogne sous le regne de Philippe le Bon (1420-1467.). StrassbourgsHeintz, 1939. Vol. 28. Meyer, Reinder P. Literature of the Low Countries A Short  History of Dutch Literature in. the Netherlands and  Belgium. Assenj Van Gorcum, 1971. Reese, G. Music in the Renaissance. New York: W.W.Norton, 1959. Sachs, Curt. Geschiedenis der Muziek. Translated and edited by Otto Hamburg. Utrecht: Het Spectrum, 1961. Vandeloo, Jos. Vlaamse Poezie. Utrecht: Het Spectrum, 1965. Weevers, Theodoor. Poetry of the Netherlands in i t s European Context 1170-1950. London: University of London Athlone Press, I960. 175 ITALIAN PORTRAITURE Baxendall, Michael. Painting and Experience i n Fifteenth  Century Italy A Primer i n the Social History of Picto*rial*"Style. Oxford:"Clarendon Press, 1972. Davidson, Bernice. "Tradition and Innovation: Gentile da Pahriano and Hans Memling." Apollo 93:2 (April-June 1971): 378-385. Fahy, Everett. "The Earliest Works of Fra Bartolommeo." Art Bulletin 51 (1969): 142-154. Hartt, Frederick. History of Italian Renaissance Art. Englewood C l i f f s : Prentice-Hall, 195?. Lipman, Jean. "The Florentine Profile Portrait in the Quattrocento." Art Bulletin 18 (1936): 54-102. Martinelli, Giuseppe. The World of Renaissance Florence. Translated by Walter Darwell. New York: G.P.Putnam, 1968. Plumb, H.J. et.al. The Renaissance. London; Collins, 1961. Pope-Hennessy, John. The Portrait in the Renaissance. New York: Bollingen Foundation, 1966. Vasari, Giorgio. Lives of the Most Eminent Painters, Sculp-tors and Architects. Translated by Gaston DuC.de Vere. London: Philip Lee Warner, 1912-1915. Vol. 9. Vecchi, Pierluigi de. The Complete Paintings of Piero della Francesca. New Yorkj Harry N.Abrams, 1967. MUSEUM AND EXHIBITION CATALOGUES Berti, Luciano. The U f f i z i . Firenze: Becocci Editore, 1971. Delaisse, L.M.J. De Gouden Eeuw der Vlaamse Miniatuur-, Het Mecenaat van F i l i p s de Goede 1445-1475. Amsterdam: RTjksmuseum, 1959. Flanders i n the Fifteenth Century: Art and C i v i l i z a t i o n Catalogue"~of*~:tHe Exhibition Masterpieces of Flemish Art: V^iEyck to Bosch. The Detroit Institute of Arts. I960. Fierens, Paul, and Vries, A.B.de. IfasSe Communal- Bruges: Le Portrait dans les Anciens Pays- Bas. Bruxelles: Editions de l a Connaissance, 1953. 176 Hendy, p. Prom Van Eyck to Tiepolo. Pictures from the Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection. London: National Gallery, 19<xU Marconi, Sandro Moschini. Gallerie dell'Accademia di Venezia Opera d'Arte del Secoli XIV e XV..Roma: Instituto Poligrafico dello~1?i^ato,"1955. Maxon, John. The Art Institute of Chicago. London: Thames and Hudson, 1971. Pauwels, H. Groeningemuseum. Brugge, i960. Bi-jvoegsel. 1964. Valentiner, William R. Catalogue of European Paintings and Sculpture from 1500-1800 Masterpieces of Art. New York: World Pair, 1939. MISCELLANEOUS Bulwer, John. Chirolpgia and Chironomia. Edited by James ?/. Cleary. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern I l l i n o i s Press, 1974. Denis, Valentin. "Hans Memling" Encyclopedia of World Art 9 New York: McGraw-Hill, 1964, pp. 729-735. Ferguson, George. Signs and Symbols in Christian Art. New York: Oxford University Press, 1954. Folie, Jacqueline. "Hans Memling." Encyclopedie universalis 10. Paris, 1971, pp. 783-785. Friedlander, Max J. On Art and Connoisseurship. Oxford: Bruno Cassirer, 1946. Friedlander, Max J. Portrait S t i l l - L i f e Their Origin and Development. Translated by R.F.C.Hull. Oxford: Bruno Cassirer, 1949. Furst, Herbert. Portrait Painting Its Nature and Function. London: John Lane the Bodley Head, 1927. Heinz, G. "Hans Memling." Kindlers Malerei Lexikon 4 Zurich: Kindler, 1967, pp. 379-384. Lancman, E l i . Chinese Portraiture. Rutland: Charles E.Tuttle, 1966. Meiss, Millard. "Light as Form and Symbol i n some Fifteenth Century Paintings." Art Bulletin 27 (1945): 175-181. 177 Panofsky, Erwin, and Saxl, Pritz. "Classical Mythology in Medieval Art." Metropolitan Museum Studies 4 (1933): 228-280. ; Payne, Blanche. History of Costume. New York: Harper & Row, 1965. Pliny, Secundus C. The Elder Pliny's Chapters on the History of Art. Translated by K.Jex-Blake. Chicago: Argonaut, 1968. Stechow, Wolfgang. Northern Renaissance Art 1400-1600. Englewood C l i f f s : Prentice-Hall, 1966. Vollmer, Hans. "Hans Memling." Allgemeines Lexikon der  bildenden Kunstler 24. Leipzig: E.A.Seemann, 1930, pp. 374-377. White, John. Birth and Rebirth of Pic t o r i a l Space. London: Paber and Paber, 1957. ~ . 178 APPENDIX I A/ PORTRAITS WITH A NEUTRAL BACKGROUND 1/ G i l l e s Joye Fr.72 2/ Maria P o r t i n a r i - B a r o n c e l l i Fr.70 3/ Tommaso P o r t i n a r i Fr. 69 4/ U f f i z i P o r t r a i t (Polco P o r t i n a r i ? ) Fr.88 5/ New York Old Man Pr.81 6/ Washington P o r t r a i t Fr.85 7/ Pierpont Morgan P o r t r a i t Fr.83 8/ San Diego P o r t r a i t Fr.233 9/ Windsor P o r t r a i t Fr. 91 10/ Bruges Young Woman (Maria Moreel?) Fr.94 11/ National Trust P o r t r a i t Fr.87 B/ PORTRAITS WITH A LANDSCAPE BACKGROUND 1/ U f f i z i P o r t r a i t Fr.89 2/ Venice P o r t r a i t Pr.77 3/ Brussels P o r t r a i t Fr.84 4/ Montreal P o r t r a i t Fr.80 5/ Frankfurt P o r t r a i t Fr.73 6/ Fri c k P o r t r a i t Fr.231 •7/ Copenhagen P o r t r a i t Fr.82 8/ Palazzo Vecchio P o r t r a i t Fr.86 9/ Antwerp P o r t r a i t Fr.71 10/ The Hague P o r t r a i t Fr.79 179 C/ PORTRAITS WITH INTERIOR-EXTERIOR BACKGROUND 1/ Thyssen-Bornemisza Portrait Pr.232 2/ Elderly Man (Willem Vrelant?) Pr.75 3/ Elderly Woman (Willem Vrelant"s Wife?) Pr.76 4/ Lehman Portrait Pr.74 5/ Willem Moreel Pr.67 6/ Barbara Moreel- van Vlaenderberghe Pr.68 7/ Chicago Portrait Pr.92 8/ Benedetto Portinari Pr.23B 9/ Maarten van Nieuwenhove Pr.14 PORTRAIT WITH NEUTRAL-INTERIOR BACKGROUND London Portrait Pr.78 D/ SITTERS WITH PRAYER-CLASPED HANDS 1/ Gilles Joye Pr.72 2/ Maria Portinari-Baroneelli Pr.70 3/ Tommaso Portinari Pr.69 4/ San Diego Portrait Pr.233 5/ Thyssen-Bornemisza Portrait Pr.232 6/ National Trust Portrait Pr.87 7/ London Portrait Pr.78 8/ Willem Moreel Pr.67 9/ Barbara Moreel- van Vlaenderberghe Pr.68 10/ The Hague Portrait Pr.79 11/ Chicago Portrait Pr.92 180 12/ Benedetto Portinari Fr.23B 13/ Maarten van Nieuwenhove Pr.14 E/ SITTERS WITH OBJECTS IN THEIR HANDS 1/ Washington Portrait Fr.85 2/ Montreal Portrait Fr.80 3/ Pierpont Morgan Portrait Fr.83 4/ Frick Portrait Fr.231 5/ Copenhagen Portrait Fr.82 6/ Palazzo Vecchio Portrait Fr.86 7/ Antwerp Portrait Fr.71 8/ Windsor Portrait Pr.91 F/ SITTERS WITH THEIR HANDS AT REST 1/ U f f i z i Portrait Pr.89 2/ Venice Portrait Pr.77 3/ U f f i z i Portrait (Folco Portinari?) Fr.88 4/ Brussels Portrait Fr.84 5/ New York Old Man Pr.81 6/ Frankfurt Portrait Fr.73 7/ Elderly Man Fr.75 8/ Elderly Woman Pr.76 9/ Lehman Portrait Fr.74 10/ Bruges Young Woman Fr.94 181 APPENDIX II CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER OP THE PORTRAITS Legend: N: Neutral; L: Landscape; I-E s Interior-Exterior; Ps Prayer-Clasped Hands; 0: Objects; R: Hands at Rest; N-Ij Neutral-Interior. 1/ Gilles Joye N/P 1472 Pr.72 2/ U f f i z i Portrait L/R c a. 1472 Pr.89 3/ Maria Portinari-Baroncelli N/P c a. 1472/3 Pr.70 4/ Tommaso Portinari N/P ca. 1472/3 Pr.69 5/ Venice Portrait L/R c a. 147 2/3 Pr.77 6/ U f f i z i Portrait (Polco Portinari?) N/R c a. 1473 Pr.88 7/ Brussels Portrait L/R ca. 1473/4 Pr.84 8/ New York Old Man N/R ca. 1474/5 Pr.81 9/ Washington Portrait N/0 c a. 1475 Pr.85 10/ Montreal Portrait L/0 c a. 1475 Pr.80 11/ Pierpont Morgan Portrait N/0 ca.1475 Pr.83 12/ San Diego Portrait N/P ca.1475 Pr.233 13/ Prankfurt Portrait L/R ca. 1475/6 Pr.73 14/ Prick Portrait L / O ca. 147 5/6 Pr.231 15/ Copenhagen Portrait L/0 ca; 147 5/6 Pr.82 16/ Thyssen-Bornemisza Portrait I-E/p ca.1476 Pr.232 17/ Elderly Man (Willem Vrelant?) I-E/R ca. 1477 Pr.75 18/ Elderly Woman (Vrelant"s wife?) I-E/R ca.1477 Pr.76 19/ Palazzo Vecchio Portrait L/0 ca. 1477 Pr.86 20/ Antwerp Portrait L / O ca. 1478/9 Pr.71 21/ Lehman Portrait I-E/R ca. 1478/9 Pr.74 182 22/ Windsor Portrait 23/ Bruges Young Woman (Maria Moreel?) 24/ National Trust Portrait 25/ London Portrait 26/ Willem Moreel 27/ Barbara Moreel- van Vlaenderberghe 28/ The Hague Portrait 29/ Chicago Portrait 30/ Benedetto Portinari 31/ Maarten van Nieuwenhove COPIES, DOUBTPUL WORKS U f f i z i Portrait Houston Widow Woman Chantilly Anthony of Burgundy Dresden Anthony of Burgundy Duke of Savoy N/0 ca.1479 Pr. 91 N/R 1480 Pr.94 N/P ca.1483 Pr.87 N-I/P ca. 1483/4 Pr.78 I-E/p cail484 Pr. 67 I-E/P ca. 1484 Pr.68 L/P ca.1484 Pr.79 I-E/p ca,1485 Pr.92 I-E/P 1487 Pr.23B I-E/P 1487 Pr.14 Pr. 90 Pr.93 Pr.95 Pr.l02A Pr.l02B Pr.101 183 APPENDIX III Legend: Nj Neutral; L: Landscape; I-E: In t e r i o r - E x t e r i o r ; N-I: Neutral-Interior; Pi Prayer-Clasped Hands; 0:.Objects; R: Hands at Rest. A l l numbers are Priedlander numbers. oo :r w —--43 CO -ar Z O .3-CO ~T \> CO \S ^  N «f» OO X CO N oi GO :3C co ar o X o-ft <?-•v. ©a T r i C O W-| vO N N C o 1 r^-' T •O «o> C*=j C O ^ | C O $"< X T 03 : r 1 cx? T CD CO o o-l C O C O CO Ot t> a- O O -- • • i it : Q_ O 184 APPENDIX 17 CATALOGUE RAISONNE L/ Gilles Joye Fr.72. Location: Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute, Williamstown,Mass. Cat. no. 408. Dimension with original frame: 37,3x29,2 cm.; without frame: 30,5x22,4cm. Condition: face badly rubbed, lightl y overpainted. Paper with inscription on the back. Original frame i n -scribed with the date 1472. Bibliography: Ei s l e r , Colin Tobias. Les Primitifs Flamands 4. Molle, Frans van. Les Primitifs Flamands 111:3. Joye was priest, courtier and musician (see chapter II). Neutral background typical of early Flemish portraiture. May have court associations. Figure somewhat crammed into the available space. F i r s t known dated portrait. Probably independent. 2/ U f f i z i Portrait Fr.89. Location: U f f i z i , Florence. Inv. no. 1102. Dimension: 38x27cm. Condition: Unknown. Sitter: Unidentified Italian Youth. Background i s a somewhat geometrically patterned landscape. Ambiguous relation between the sitter and background. Probably the f i r s t portrait with a landscape. Independent portrait. 185 3/ Maria Portinari-Baroncelli Pr.70. Location: Metropolitan Museum, New York. ice. no. 14.40.627. Dimension: 44.2x34cm. Condition: Unknown Bibliography: Priedlander, Max J. "The Altman Memlings i n the Metropolitan Museum of Art." Art i n America 4:4 (1916): 187-195. Maria Baroncelli became Tommaso's wife i n 1470 (see chapter II). Neutral background. The use of the frame to create space frees the sitter from i t s confinement as was s t i l l the case with Gilles Joye. Hands unsatisfactorily placed. Right wing of a husband-wife pendant pair. 4/ Tommaso Portinari Pr.69. Location: Metropolitan Museum, New York. Acc. no. 14.40.626. Dimension: 44x33.5 cm. Condition: Unknown. Seems to be rubbed. Bibliography; See Maria Portinari. Tommaso was manager of the Medici branch i n Bruges. Cour-t i e r at the Burgundian court (see chapter II). Neutral Background. Placed diagonally i n space. Hands satisfactorily placed. Hands are not anatomically correct. Left wing of a husband-wife pendant pair. 5/ Venice Portrait Pr.77 Location: Academia, Venice. No. 586. Dimension: 26x19cm. Condition; Good, except along the border; restored i n 1907 and 1949. 186 Bibliography: Marconi, Sandra Moschini. Gallerie d e l l ' Accademia di Venezia. Opere d'arte dei Secoli XIV e XV. Roma: Instituto Poligrafico dello Stato, 1955, pp. 183-184. Sitter: Unidentified Italian Youth. Background: landscape; trees blocking off deep space; geometric pattern has disappeared. Certainly later than the U f f i z i portrait. Independent portrait. 6/ U f f i z i portrait Fr.88. location: U f f i z i , Florence. Inv. no. 1101. Dimension: 32x23 cm. Condition: Unknown. Sitter: May be a member of the Portinari family, perhaps Folco Portinari (see chapter II). Neutral background. Hands placed i n the right corner, which could indicate an early date. Spatially the sitter i s not hampered by the confinement of the frame. More distinction between sitter and background than i n Tommaso Portinari's portrait. Independent portrait. 7/ Brussels Portrait Fr.84. location: Koninkliji: Museum voor Schone Kunsten, Brussels. No. 294. Dimension: 34x25 cm. > Condition: Unknown. Sitter: Unidentified Italian. Background i s a pure landscape. The trees do not block off 187 the view into deeper space as before. There i s a better integration between the sit t e r and the landscape. Pacial bone structure does not show under the fleshy skin, proba-bly independent portrait. Possibly the l e f t wing of a husband-wife pendant pair. 8/ New York Old Man Pr.81. Location: Metropolitan Museum, New York. No. M.50-1. Dimension: 25x18 cm. Condition: Badly rubbed and overcleaned i n the flesh parts. Bibliography: See Maria Portinari. Sitter: Unidentified Pleming. Neutral background. Hands are rather weak, but not placed i n the corner. Proper foreshortening. Pacial bone structure i s noticeable. There i s a definite space between the hands and body. Independent portrait. 9/ Washington Portrait Pr.85 Location: National Gallery of Art, Mellon Collection, Washington. Inv. no. 42. Dimension* 32x26 cm. Condition: Good. Sitter: Unidentified Italian with possible Burgundian court connections (see chapter II). Neutral background of medium blue colour. This background i s lighter than the previous ones. Pirst known sitter with an object i n his hand. Modelling of the face with the help of light and shadow, without heavy accentuation. He holds 188 the arrow without really gripping i t . Lack of tension. Independent portrait. 10/ Montreal Portrait Pr.80. Location; Museum of Pine Arts, Montreal. Acc. no. 1129. Dimension; 33.9x22.8 cm. Condition: Pace and hair carefully repainted before 1939, otherwise untouched. Bibliography: Steegman, John. "Montreal Acquires a Memling and a Brueghel." Canadian Art 13 (1956): 332-333. Sitter: Unidentified Italian Youth. The background i s a far extending h i l l y landscape; the trees are relatively small,and somewhat individualized. The horizon has been raised to achieve deep space. Independent portrait. 11/ Pierpont Morgan Portrait Pr.83 Location: Pierpont Morgan Library, New York. Dimension; 36.5x20 cm. Conditionj Apparently not damaged. Bibliography: Priedlander, Max J. "About some of Hans Memling1s Pictures in the United States." Art i n America 8 (1920): 107-116. Sitter; Unidentified Italian. Neutral background, similar to the Washington portrait. The s i t t e r holds two objects i n his hands, a red carnation and a booklet(?). The hands are unconvincing. A somewhat 189 bony face gives sharp features to the sitter. Placed diagonally i n space, the pose creates more depth than the Washington portrait. Most li k e l y an independent portrait, but possibly the l e f t wing of a husband-wife pendant pair. 12/ San Diego Portrait Fr.233. Location; Collection of the Pine Arts Society of San Diego, San Diego. Acc. no. 47.1. Dimension; 30.5x21.5 cm. Condition: Good. Original frame contains undeciphered legend. Bibliography: Flanders i n the Fifteenth Century: Art and  Civilization. Detroit Exhibition Catalogue, I960, p. 155. Sitter: Unidentified Italian Youth. Background; light, neutral with the s i t t e r 1 s shadow on the right. The only portrait of this kind. Strongly modelled. The prayer-clasped hands are away from the corner. Probably an independent portrait. 13/ Frankfurt Portrait Fr.73. Location: Stadelsches Kunstinstitut, Frankfurt. No. 107. Dimensions 42x31 cm. Condition: Unknown. Sitter: Unidentified Fleming. Bibliography; See chapter I footnotes 50,51. I reject the conclusions the authors have drawn. A bust-length figure placed before a 'window' frame with 190 a landscape behind him. The landscape contains small trees and a few buildings. The figure separates the land-scape completely. Pace and hands are poorly modelled. Perhaps an introduction to the interior-exterior back-ground. Independent portrait. i47 Prick Portrait Fr.231. Location: Prick Collection, New York. Dimension: 32x23 cm. Condition: Unknown, possibly cut at the bottom. Sitter: Unidentified Italian. A bust-length figure placed before a f l a t 'window1 frame, with a luminous, far extending landscape. Strong modelling of the face, weak i n the hand. Pose similar to a Castagno portrait (see chapter IV). Garden-like nature of land-scape indicates a date around 1475/6. Independent portrait. !5/ Copenhagen Portrait Fr.82. Location: Statens Museum for Kunst, Copenhagen. Inv.No. 738. Dimension: 44x32 cm. Condition: Unknown. Sitter: Unidentified Pleming. The bust-length sitter holds a rosary in his hands. The landscape i s dotted with buildings. Por the f i r s t time diaphanous clouds appear i n the sky. Horizon somewhat lower than eye level. Independent portrait. 191 16/ Thyssen-Bornemisza Portrait Pr.232. location; Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection, Schloss Rohoncz Foundation, Castagnola. Dimension; 28x21 cm. Conditions Unknown. Bibliography j Hendy, P. From Van Eyck to Tie-polo, Pictures from the Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection. London; National Gallery Exhibition, 1961, pp. 41-42. Sitters Unidentified Italian. The diagonally placed sitter has prayer-clasped hands. There i s a good understanding of the anatomy. Behind the sitt e r i s a light wall, lighter around his head, with a marble column and a tiny piece of landscape. It i s pro-bably the f i r s t known interior-exterior background. On the back of this portrait i s a s t i l l - l i f e with a jug and flowers. Perhaps an independent portrait, but more lik e l y the l e f t wing of a diptych. 17/ Elderly Man Pr.75. Location: GemSldegalerie der Staatlichen Museen, Berlin-Dahlem. No. 529C Dimension: 34x29 cm. Condition; 1 cm. cut at the bottom. Sitter: Unidentified Fleming, perhaps Willem van Yrelant. Behind the sitter i s a column with a balustrade, behind which i s a landscape with a bridge, gate and watchtower. The space available for the landscape i s not blocked by 192 trees as i n the Thyssen-Bornemisza portrait. Left wing of a husband-wife pendant pair (see number 18). W Elderly Woman IT.76. Location? Louvre, Paris. Inv.no. R.P. 1723. Dimensions 35x29-cm. Condition; Unknown. Sitters Unidentified Pleming; perhaps the wife of Willem van Vrelant (see above). Background; A continuation of the interior-exterior of the previous portrait. Right wing of a husband-wife pendant pair. 19/ Palazzo Vecchio Portrait Pr.86. Location: O f f i c i a l l y on exhibition at the Palazzo Vecchio, Florence. Stolen March 1971. Dimension: 33x25 cm. Conditions Unknown; probably cut at the bottom. Sitter; Unidentified Italian. The background i s a pure, slightly h i l l y landscape. Pairly broad light stretch of sky close to the horizon, which i s lowered to the mouth of the sitter. The clouds are more substantial. Landscape and sitter, who holds a ledger (?), are carefully related. Shadow on face somewhat abrubt. Probably an independent portrait. 20/ Antwerp Portrait Fr.71. Location: Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten, Antwerp. No. 5. 193 Dimensions 29x22 cm. Condition: Good. Parchment on wood. Bibliography: Vervaet, J. "Hans Memling." Openbaar Kunst-bezit in Vlaanderen 9 (1971); 13. Hulin de Loo, G. Festschrift ftlr Max J. Priedlander. 1927, pp. 103-108. Sitter: Unidentified Italian. Por suggestions, see chapter II and IV. The sitter holds a coin of Nero i n his hand. Behind him, in a?.Flemish landscape, i s a palm tree. There are more and bigger clouds in the sky. Well-modelled. The colour of the landscape changes too abrubtly from brown to blue. Independent portrait. 21/ Lehman Portrait Fr.74. Location; Robert Lehman Collection, New York. Dimension; not given. Condition; Unknown. Sitter: Unidentified Fleming (?). Background: A very light wall, two marble columns in between which a far extending landscape i s visible. The horizon i s nearly halfway the canvas. Very carefully gardened landscape. The youth has his hands placed one over the other, but the knuckles of the l i t t l e finger i s higher than that of the middle finger. Independent portrait. 194 22/ Windsor Portrait Pr.91. location: Royal Collections at Windsor Castle. Dimension: 31.3x26.2 cm. Condition; Badly damaged; after cleaning in the 1950s a-hand hecame visible. Sitter: Unidentified Pleming. The background i s neutral. Anatomical structure indicates a good understanding, in spite of the fact that damage makes judgment on the modelling d i f f i c u l t . Close to a Christ Giving the Blessing, dated 1478 (Fr.39). Independent portrait. 23/ Bruges Young Woman Pr.94. Location; St. Jans Hospitaal, Bruges. Dimension: 37x22.5 cm. Condition; Good; original frame with the date 1480. Other inscriptions are 16th century additions. Bibliography; Monballieu, A. "Sibylla Sambetha." Qpenbaar Kunstbezit i n Vlaanderen 2 (1964 ): 3. Sitter; Unidentified young Plemish woman; perhaps a member of the Moreel family (see chapter II). Neutral, dark background. Good anatomical understanding. Her hennin i s placed away from the frame. It i s covered v/ith a v e i l which partly covers the face. Her hands are freely placed on a ledge and the frame. She wears seven rings, which i s quite unusual. Perhaps an independent portrait. Maybe the right wing of a husband-wife pendant pair. 195 24/ National Trust Portrait Pr.87. Locations Upton House, Banbury, National Trust. Dimension; 16x12 cm.; rounded at the top (cut?). Condition? rubbed. Sitter; Unidentified Fleming; possibly Willem Morrel jr. (see chapter II). Very l i t t l e i s visible of the dark neutral background. Texture of clothes i s close to the Moreel triptych (Fr.12) of ca. 1484. Prayer-clasped hands are large, but anato-mically correct. Perhaps an independent portrait. 25/ London Portrait Pr.78. Location? National Gallery, London. N. 2594. Dimension; 39x25.5 cm. Condition; slight general wearing, with some overpainting in the face, hair, background. The frame i s probably original. Bibliography; Davies, Martin. Les Primitifs Flamands 3:11. Sitter; Unidentified Fleming (?). See also chapter II. Background; A dark green with marble columns; unique for Memlingfs portraits. The sitter looks to the right. His prayer-clasped hands are placed over an open prayer book. The dating i s d i f f i c u l t , probably done around the same time as the Moreel triptych (Fr.12) of ca.1484. Most lik e l y the l e f t wing of a diptych. 26/ Willem Moreel Fr.67. Location; Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten, Brussels. No. 292. 196 Dimension: 37x27 cm. Condition: Unknown. Sitter? Willem Moreel, burgomaster of Bruges in 1478 and 1483. Merchant-banker (see chapter II). Background: Two columns on a high balustrade are placed on either side of the sitter. A landscape i s visible on both sides of his head. Balustrade and sitter are placed diagonally. One of the better solutions between hands, arms and body. On the reverse i s the coat of arms of his wife Barbara, l e f t wing of a husband-wife pendant pair. 27/ Barbara Moreel- van Vlaenderberghe Pr.68. Location: Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Eunsten, Brussels. N. 293. Dimension; 37x27 cm. Condition: Unknown. Sitter: Barbara van Vlaenderberghe, wife of Willem Moreel. Background: Similar to that of Willem Moreel, except that there i s less landscape due to her hennin and v e i l . On the reverse i s the coat of arms of Willem Moreel. Right wing of a husband-wife pendant pair. 28/ The Hague Portrait Fr.79. Location: Mauritshuis, The Hague. Inv.no. 595. Dimension: 30.1x22.3 cm. Cut? Condition: Slight general wearing. Bibliography: Bruyn, J. "Mans Portret." Qpenbaar Kunstbezit 5 (1961): 2. 197 Sitter: Unidentified Italian. Background: Unusually coloured cloudy sky at the top. Close to the horizon i s a "broad stretch of white sky. Luminous small patches of landscape are Vermeer-like i n quality. The sitter has a very large head compared to the available space. The prayer-clasped hands are only partly visible. Strong modelling, although there are some linear aspects. On the verso i s an armorial bearing. Perhaps the right wing of a diptych, but possibly independent. 29/ Chicago Portrait Pr.92. Location: Art Institute, Chicago. A.Sachs Bequest. Acc. no. 53.4 67. Dimension? 35x27 cm. Condition: Unknown. Bibliography: Maxon, John. The Art Institute of Chicago. London: Thames and Hudson, 1971. Sitter: Unidentified Italian, surnamed probably Anthony. Background: An interior space with a cupboard and a small window, looking out onto a landscape with a river, a few trees and a church. The sitter i s placed diagonally in the room with his prayer-clasped hands above an open prayer book. On the reverse i s a St.Anthony of Padua. The right wing of a diptych with a Madonna and Child (Pr.50). 30/ Benedetto Portinari Fr.23B Location: U f f i z i , Plorence. No. 769. 198 Dimensions 43x31 cm. Conditions Unknown. Sitter: Identified by A.Warburg as Benedetto Portinari, who was i n Bruges to take over the business of Tommaso Portinari in 1487 (see chapter II). The background i s an interior with three columns, giving the impression of a small room or c e l l . In front of Bene-detto i s a table on which an open prayer book rests. On the table the date 1487 i s inscribed, the numbers of which are not a l l common. Behind the balustrade i s a some-what blocked off landscape. A few diaphanous clouds are in the sky. On the reverse i s a coat of arms. Probably the right wing of a diptych with St.Benedict (Pr.23C). 51/ Maarten van Nieuwenhove Pr.14. Location: St.Jans Hospitaal, Bruges. Dimensions 44x33 cm. Condition: Unknown, but seems to be good. The original frame bears an inscription and the date 1487. Bibliographys Linephty, Maur Guillaume. Hans Memling i n the Hospital of St.John at Bruges. Paris: The Marion Press, 1939. Sitter: A young Brugian magistrate who in the 1490s became involved i n city p o l i t i c s (see chapter II). The half-length figure i s placed behind a ledge on which an open prayer book rests as well as his coat sleeve. Behind him, diagonally, i s a wall v/ith windows. Through 199 an open window a clear landscape with several details i s visible. Strong modelling and a good anatomical struc-ture. Probably the last portrait. The right wing of a diptych with a Madonna and Child,., (Pr.14 ). 200 APPENDIX V CONCORDANCE Legend j Pr.{Priedlander; Ds Dumont; Ys Voll; McPs McFarlane * 9 Bis Baldass ; Bz? Bazin. Own f r D Y McP Bl Bz 1 72 2 89 140 3 70 161 134 17 4 69 160 133 16 5 77 23 51 6 88 7 84 20 148 50 40 8 81 162 9 85 21 6 10 80 11 83 12 233 13 73 73 49 7 14 231 53 15 82 • 16 232 17 75 74 8 18 76 21 75 9 19 86 22 52 70 20 71 36 19 141 54 63 201 Own Fr D V McF Bl Bz 21 74 144 22 91 23 94 54 60 61 67 24 87 143 25 78 25 98 37 26 67 56 58 92 58 68 27 68 51 59 93 59 69 28 79 37 24 147 55 79 29 92 30 23B 71 150 101 77 31 14 61 69 152 97 73 202 APPENDIX VI PARTIAD GENEALOGY OP THE PORTINARI FAMILY Folco di Ricovero di Polco d.1289 father of Dante's Beatrice I Manetto d.1334 Giovanni d.1349 Iccerrito C.1361-C.1427 Adoardo 1406-1470 GTovanni 1438-C.1526 Bruges,1478 MoafcTo 1333-1398 GooviSnl c. 1363-1436 branch manager i n Venice,1417-1435 1 ^ Bernardo Sandro 1336-1358 Polco' 1386-1431 manager of tavola;. i n Florence, 14 20-14 31 1407-1455 factor in Venice,1435 branch manager i n Bruges, 1439-1448 Pigello 1421-1468 branch manager in Milan, 1453-1468 ToTco 'Polco 1448-1490 1462-1527 factor i n Bruges, factor of 14 65-1480; Tommaso with Tommaso in Portinari Bruges, 14 80-1487 i n Bruges Iccerrito 1427-1503 branch manager in Milan,1468-1478 Tommaso1 1428-1501 Benedefto 1466-1551 with Tommaso Portinari i n Bruges 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0093450/manifest

Comment

Related Items