Cities of Belgium: Grant Allen's Historical GuidesAllen, Grant
History
Cities of Belgium: Grant Allen's Historical Guides
Allen, Grant
Belgium -- Guidebooks
As a whole, the work before you is _not_ entirely by the two Van Eycks.
The Adam and Eve on the outer upper shutters of the interior (originally
by Hubert) have been altogether removed, and are now in the Museum at
Brussels, where we shall see them in due course. Their place has been
filled, not by copies (for the originals were nude), but by skin-clad
representations of the same figures, whose nudity seemed to the Emperor
Joseph II. unsuitable for a church. The lower wings, which were
principally (it is believed) by Jan van Eyck, have also been removed,
and sold to Berlin. They are replaced by very tolerable copies, made in
the early 16th century by Michael Coxcie. Thus, to form an idea of the
_detail_ of the original in its full totality it is necessary to visit,
not only Ghent, but also Brussels and Berlin. Nevertheless, I describe
the whole picture here _as it stands_, as this is the best place to
observe its general composition. I shall say a few words later as to
variations of this work from the original. There is a good copy of the
whole picture in the Museum at Antwerp, where you will be able to
inspect it at greater length and under easier conditions. The remaining
portions of the original still left here are believed to be for the most
part the work of Hubert van Eyck. Jan must rather be studied in many
scattered places,—Bruges, Brussels, Berlin, Paris, Madrid, and London.
The altar-piece was commissioned from Hubert van Eyck by Josse Vydts
(Latinised as Jodocus), a gentleman of Ghent, and his wife, Isabella,
about the year 1420. Hubert died while the polyptych was still
unfinished, and Jan completed it in 1432. Too much importance has been
attached by critics, I fancy, to the rhyming hexameter inscribed upon
it, (with the words “De Eyck” unmetrically introduced:) “Pictor Hubertus
major quo nemo repertus,” etc. They have been twisted into a deliberate
expression of belief on the part of Jan that Hubert was a greater
painter than himself. If so, it seems to me, Jan was a worse critic than
painter. They are probably due, however, to a somewhat affected modesty,
or more probably still, to a priestly poet who was in straits to find a
rhyme for Hubertus.
I proceed to a =detailed explanation= of the picture.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account