Erik Eising

Completed 2018.

Through comparative research, this thesis (re)determines the origins, Europewide dissemination, functions, and meaning of embedded iconography (figures and scenes depicted in art as lifeless decoration or objects), c. 1250-1500.

"From 15 November 2017 to 18 February 2018, the Liebieghaus Skulpturensammlung presents a special exhibition revolving around a work of key significance to the history of European art in the collection of the Städel Museum: the so-called “Crucified Thief“ by the “Master of Flémalle”, one of the most enigmatic figures of Early Netherlandish painting. The exhibition sheds light on the procedure and spectacular outcome of the technological examination and the restoration. It also features thirteen selected comparanda in the mediums of sculpture, panel painting, drawing and book illumination, serving to contextualize the fragment in a wide variety of ways. “With New Splendour: The Restored Crucified Thief by the Master of Flémalle in Context” will be the first presentation ever to bring works together that, as early copies, testify to the fame of the original altarpiece while at the same time providing the basis for reconstructing that nonextant overall ensemble."

During the late Middle Ages, painters in various European regions included images of figurative artworks or "images-within-images" in their work. Examples range from depictions of sculptures to representations of paintings, mosaics, stained-glass figures, and even woodcuts. These depicted artworks could serve a variety of functions, both on a meta-level (i.e. as a comment on the nature of art itself, or as a form of illusionism), as well as in support of the content of the main scene (i.e. have a narrative or symbolic purpose). One particularly often-found function of the depicted artwork in late-medieval art is the indication of Otherness, for example through the representation of pagan idols or Old Testament imagery. Yet, a survey of the depiction of “images-within-images” throughout late-medieval Europe shows that the exact nature of the Otherness indicated by this type of imagery varies between European regions, centers, and even workshops. In fourteenth-century Italy, for example, the depicted artwork could be used to signify historical or temporal Otherness (i.e. placing a scene in the “past”), while in fifteenth-century German art, images-within-images can frequently be identified as indications of religious or cultural Otherness (i.e. placing a biblical scene in a Jewish or pagan setting), often with negative connotations. Interestingly, although “images-within-images” are a common occurrence in fifteenth-century Netherlandish painting, they can rarely be interpreted in a critical manner towards the Other.
This conference paper, based on a doctoral dissertation finished in 2018 (defended in 2020), aims at illustrating the differences in the usage of this type of iconographic motif among Italian, German, and Netherlandish artists, as well as highlighting occasional similarities. In some cases, for example, specific motifs of this type were disseminated throughout Europe via travelling artists or transported artworks and subsequently picked up by artists elsewhere, whereby the original meaning or function of the motif in question was diluted, altered or ignored. Thus, the identity or meaning of the Other could change as well, in accordance with local or regional views and culture.

In scholarly literature, the statue of Moses is often regarded as a conventional motif in fifteenth-century Netherlandish painting. However, recent research has shown that the Moses statue can in fact mainly be found in paintings by artists active or trained in Brussels after c. 1450, while, previously, the motif most frequently occurred in Parisian manuscript illumination shortly after 1400. Is there a connection between these two groups of works? The recent restauration of an Eyckian panel painting at the Prado suggests Jan van Eyck may have played a role in bridging the gap between the two art centers.