Frames and supports in 15th and 16th-century Southern Netherlandish painting - page 179

ARTICULATED WORKS WITH INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE
179
right subordinate wing flanking a frontal scene, today lost (fig. 92b). Given the absence
of hinge marks and the presence of suspension marks on the London panel, it seems
plausible that the painting may have been one element of an open unarticulated
diptych with both panels glued together in one plane, without hinges, and intended
for suspension. A later example of similarly hierarchical spaces is found in the
Virgin
and Child
and Margaret of Austria
attributed to the Master of 1499 (Ghent, Museum
of Fine Arts, inv. no. 1973-A) (fig. 92c).
Fig. 92. Examples of images arranged according to the rules of hierarchy by the use of perspective.
The frontal perspective of a representation leads us to contemplate it first. In the case of a diptych, a
half-fan of vanishing lines (tiles, ceilings, arches…) marks the secondary space of the wing. a. Robert
Campin,
Trinity
and Virgin and Child,
c.
1420/1425, 34.3 × 24.3 cm. b. Workshop of Robert Campin
(Jacques Daret?),
Virgin and Child in an Interior
, 1428/1432?, 22.5 × 15.4 cm, integral frame included.
c. Master of 1499 (attributed to),
Virgin and Child and Margaret of Austria
, after 1501, each element
30.6 × 14.6 cm, original frame included. d. Hans Memling,
Virgin and Child
and Maarten van
Nieuwenhove
, 1487, each element 52.5 × 41.5 cm, original frame included.
a
b
c
d
I...,169,170,171,172,173,174,175,176,177,178 180,181,182,183,184,185,186,187,188,189,...712
Powered by FlippingBook