Jan van Eyck’s The Virgin and Child with chancellor Nicolas Rolin: presenting an image Jo’anne van Ooijen MA Jan van Eyck The Virgin and Child with chancellor Nicolas Rolin 66 x 62 cm., oil on oak panel, Musée du Louvre, Paris Introduction Jan van Eyck (ca. 1370-1441) painted The Virgin and Child with chancellor Nicolas Rolin (hereafter: The Rolin Madonna) during his time as a court painter for the Duke of Burgundy, Philips the Good. The painting was probably commissioned by Nicolas Rolin (1376-1462), the very influential chancellor to the Duke1. As a patron, Nicolas Rolin played an active part in the creation of this painting, in which Rolin is depicted in the presence of the Mary and the baby Jesus2. The biographical elements in the painting indicate that Rolin used this painting to send a message, to present an image of himself. By scrutinizing how this message is composed, the contemporary viewer is challenged to reconstruct the image that Rolin is putting forward of himself, as well as uncover his decisions to emphasize -or downplaycertain elements of his life, work, or personality, choices that are as telling as the biographical references themselves. How did Rolin think of himself? Did he see his life as consisting of separate dimensions, occupied by political and devotional demands, each with their own motivations and justifications, or were these seemingly conflicting aspects not so contradictory after all? Eventually, taken as a whole, what does this painting say about the man Rolin? Obviously, studying Rolin more closely can greatly contribute to the understanding of the message contained in this work. This analysis can only be fruitful if undertaken from the 15th century Christian Netherlandish angle. The Treaty of Arras Around 1430, France and England had been engaged in a series of conflicts for almost a century. The Duchy of Burgundy was also an important player on the European map. Burgundy, officially a vassal state of France, had seen many years of conflict with its sovereign, and had sided with England in a mutually beneficial alliance. England occupied 1 Assuming that Rolin was indeed the patron of The Rolin Madonna, a view taken by most authors based on solid evidence. Some argue that his son or his brother Jean Rolin commissioned it. Although I do not take that view, it would not effect the general findings of this thesis. 2 Assuming here that it is Rolin depicted in the painting, as the majority of authors do. Although some argue that the robe the portrayed man wears would not be worn by someone in Rolin’s position (e.g. Lejeune, see Maurice-Chabard pp. 147-151), the likeness to other -confirmed- portraits is convincing. a part of northern France and Burgundy had taken hold of Paris several times. However, the tables turned in the conflict between England and France. Under Charles VII, who was aided by Joan of Arc, France regained control and England was suddenly on the losing end. This left Burgundy looking for a way to change alliances, preferably in a dignified way.3 This was accomplished through the Treaty of Arras, concluded between Burgundy and France in 1435. The peace treaty solved the differences between sovereign and vassal, with Burgundy acknowledging Charles VII as France’s rightful king and in turn Burgundy gained a larger amount of independence from France. Burgundy thus ended its alliance with England. Furthermore, and relevant here, Burgundy obtained from France acknowledgment and an official apology for the murder in 1419 of the former Duke of Burgundy and father of Philips the Good, John the Fearless, by the hands of the French. This event had taken place on a bridge near the town of Montereau. Charles VII promised to bring to prosecution those responsible – probably men who had acted on his own orders in 1419. Shortly after the conclusion of the Treaty of Arras, a cross was put up on the bridge near Montereau, the scene of the crime, as a expression of the French apology. Chancellor Nicolas Rolin played an important part in the conclusion of the treaty. Cleverly turning the Burgundian sympathy away from England without appearing a turncoat, extracting atonement from France for the murder of John the Fearless and enhancing the Burgundian independence was considered a diplomatic tour de force, as is acknowledged by contemporary sources.4 The bridge as a biographical reference Taking part in the ongoing debate on the precise date of The Rolin Madonna, which is still unknown, several authors have argued that the bridge with a cross put up in the middle of it, spanning the river in the background of the painting, is a reference to the Treaty of Arras. If that is indeed the case, this would constitute a post quem and pinpoint the position of the painting more precisely in the oeuvre of Jan van Eyck. The reason for the inclusion of this reference, so these authors argue, is that Rolin wanted to call attention to his role in the conclusion of the Treaty of Arras. This theory 3 4 Hagen p. 71. Hagen p. 71-73. assumes therefore that Rolin deliberately chose to use the painting as a medium to record and emphasize his political accomplishments. How likely is it that such a biographical reference would be intentionally included in a devotional work of art? Although a religious painting does not at first appear to be suitable as an ego-document, this is not entirely without precedent. Many examples exist of paintings in which the donor is holding up a building or object that he is offering to Christ, Mary or a saint. In doing so, he not only dedicates the building or object in a devout gesture, he also makes sure that there is a testimony of his donorship. His role in the creation of the building or object, his generosity and devotion speak for him, to the saint as well as to the public audience seeing the picture.5 In a different but not uncomparable manner, Rolin wanted to draw attention to his role in the conclusion of the peace treaty, and let it speak for him. It appears that The Rolin Madonna contains more of these specific biographical references to the life and work of Rolin. For instance, the distinctive presence of vineyards – present in the background of the painting as well as ‘carved’ in the stone arches - points to the vineyards that Rolin bestowed on the hospital in Beaune, providing that institution with longterm financial security.6 These references variously stress social or religious virtues or emphasize accomplishments of a political nature. However, that does not mean that the image that Rolin presents of himself is fragmented, or that these elements serve to counterbalance each other. To the Medieval mind, these dimensions did not necessarily clash. In order to better understand the image of himself that Rolin was putting forward, it is useful to take a closer look at the manner in which he himself is depicted. Unconventional aspects of the portrayal of Rolin The depiction of Rolin in The Rolin Madonna deviates in several remarkable ways from the conventional ways of depicting a patron. Here, too, a historical development can be traced. A patron usually occupied a very humble and – literally – marginal position in medieval miniatures, in which tiny patrons 5 6 Oakes p. 198 etc. Hagen p. 70. are lying almost flat on their faces at the bottom of the picture7. This evolved around the time of Van Eyck to miniatures and paintings in which the patron was approximately the same size as the saint, no longer lying down but kneeling down, and – perhaps the most revolutionary change – occupying the same space as the saint, in their direct presence. In The Rolin Madonna, this evolution is taken a step further. Rolin presents himself directly to Mary and Jesus themselves, without any intermediating saint present. That constitutes a departure from tradition. Furthermore, Rolin is the same size as Mary, and positioned on the same height as Mary, not on a lower level. In size and height, therefore, they are presented as equal. Rather than humility, this depiction seems an expression of strong self confidence. There would even be direct eye contact, were it not that Mary averts her eyes. This shows the liberties Rolin dared take. The painting is the expression of veneration, but not of submission. As a powerful patron and strongwilled man, it can safely be assumed that Rolin’s own specific wishes would explain for this unusual and very confident portrayal. Without adding to the discussion of whether this painting belongs to the Middle Ages or whether it should be understood as “heralding the dawn of a new era”8 called the Northern Renaissance, it will be clear that this amount of self awareness should be considered in the light of the rise of humanist thinking, which propelled the notion of individuality. Another justified question is: who was the intended audience for this message? First of all, the visitors to Rolin’s chapel in the church of Notre Dame in Autun, where this painting was hung and where Rolin was buried and mass was conducted in his commemoration9. However, at the same time the intended audience are Mary and Jesus themselves, witnessing in this painting several of Rolin’s accomplishments and charital works. In the painting, Rolin adresses Mary and Jesus10 in a request of compassion, blessing and mercy. His achievements and virtues contribute to this request that Rolin, as appears from his confident composure, expects to be receiving. In fact, he is already receiving it from the baby Jesus, who raises his right arm in a gesture of blessing. This 7 Oakes p. 202-203. Panofsky p. 146. 9 Dahnen p. 269. 10 According to Harbison, Rolin is confessing. Harbison p. 113-116. 8 must have been the reason for the alteration in the position of Jesus’s arms, which can be seen in the underdrawing11. A patron depicted in the act of kneeling down to request blessing or mercy was very common in Medieval art, especially in miniatures. The kneeling position was not only an expresson of devotion in general, but more specifically an expression of a request for intercession12, as can often be seen in miniatures where the patron utters words that are included in a tiny strip with text such as "Have mercy on me".13 However confident Rolin may present himself, his request for blessing should not be misinterpreted as insincere or opportunistic, as will be further explained in the next paragraphs. The presentation of Rolin as a devout man is an important part of the total image. Another element in the underdrawing is the large money purse hanging from Rolin’s belt, that was left out in the final painting. Apparently, that display of wealth was considered unappropriate. The omission may have served good taste as well as the religious nature of the painting. Nicolas Rolin’s position and character Nicolas Rolin first took office with the Duchy of Burgundy as a lawyer. As of 1422 he was chancellor to Philips the Good. In this position he oversaw the expansion of Burgundy to a size six times its original, becoming an important political and economic power on the European continent, with Rolin manoeuvering a delicate political and diplomatic course in the continuous conflict between England and France. Rolin was in charge of a large variety of affairs of state: he handled matters of economy and finance as well as military issues. He appears to have been in his element. His career was, by 15th century standards as well as today’s, very successful. Rolin’s reputation and character are well documented by contemporary sources, among which the court chronicler Georges Chastellain14. These sources are consistent in their description of a man who was smart and skilful, and who made sure he got his share. Through his position as a chancellor, he became immensely wealthy. He was not someone 11 Maurice-Chabard p. 153, Harbison p. 109. Oakes p. 202-203. 13 Van Os, p. 168 etc. 14 Roosen-Runge pp. 17-18, Hagen pp. 70, 73. 12 who was content to quietly operate in the background, in the shadows of Philips the Good. In less diplomatic terms, he is described as ruthless, cunning and greedy. This agrees with the impression of someone who would be eager to showcase his accomplishments. This image of Rolin does not seem to leave very much room for spirituality. Therefore it seems odd, even contradictory, that Rolin was actively involved with several charitable and religious institutions that could count on him as a generous benefactor. He founded a hospital in Beaune (which is still functioning to this day), and donated large sums to the church of Saint Mary in his native town of Autun as well as to other charities. Given the image of Rolin as a cunning politician and a clever businessman, the notion of him donating large sums to these charitable organisations gives rise to suspicions in the modern mind. Rolin’s behaviour seems hypocritical. Fear and guilt seem to have been driving Rolin to his generosity. “The spirit of piety that drove him to make his donations was widely mistrusted”, Huizinga remarks.15 Was Rolin “anxious to strike another deal”16, another clever business proposition or cunning diplomatic scheme, this time with God himself, through Mary and Christ? However, as several authors point out, all is not black or white17. Devotional practices which are usually associated with the Middle Ages on the one hand, and worldly interests, displays of power and wealth associated with the rise of the class of citizens on the other hand are not mutually exclusive, as can be seen in the person of Rolin. Devotional practices in the 15th century On closer inspection, there is no reason to regard The Rolin Madonna as originating from motives of pretence or feelings of guilt on Rolin’s part, since there are no grounds to suspect that Rolin was anything other than a devout Christian, concerned for his eternal soul just as any other Medieval man or woman. The suspicions of hypocrisy often raised by The Rolin Madonna are rooted in modern perceptions of what being a ‘true Christian’ actually means. In that light, Rolin’s behaviour seems to be morally lacking, and his donations seem to serve to make up for that. However, in Christian devotional practices in the 15th century, it was perfectly normal for rich people to donate a part of their material possessions in exchange for 15 Quoted by Harbison in Ridderbos, p. 383. Harbison, p.100. 17 Harbison pp. 114-116. 16 eternal salvation of the soul. Also, it was not really a matter of active consideration whether God would place more value on the actual everyday practice of compassion for fellow human beings. Even the sermons of the strictest of preachers were more focused on the eradication of explicit vices and displays of wealth than on the need to practice compassion in everyday life. Actively spending time and attention to the care of fellow human beings was almost exclusively the occupation of the clergy, laybrothers and laysisters. This did not preclude that everybody considered themselves to be Christian.18 Furthermore, for the average Medieval man or woman, concerns about the afterlife were just as real and present as everyday worries, and they were more closely intertwined than today. This seems to have left less room for a concept like hypocrisy. Considering this, there is no ground to consider Rolin’s behaviour as anything other than perfectly normal Christian behaviour. Although his personality may have been criticized by contemporary authors, questioning the sincerity of his devotion was not prominent in these sources. The fact that Rolin, well versed in diplomatic negotiations, emphasizes his selling points, including his political accomplishments, in order to obtain a desired result, does not detract from his devotion. The image of Rolin presented in The Rolin Madonna In the light of 15th century social customs and devotional practices, it would be incorrect to assume that Rolin presented the viewer of The Rolin Madonna with contradictory elements of his life and person. The biographical references included in the painting should not be misinterpreted as a testimony of relentless politicial ambitions covered by large donations. The manner in which he is portrayed should not be misconstrued as a bald expression of self confidence covered by mock devotion. On the contrary, it appears that Rolin strove to present an balanced image of himself that very naturally integrated different aspects of his life and personality that he did not perceive as contradictory. In fact, it appears that the image he presents is composed of dimensions which merge together seamlessly and which he perceives as perfectly compatible. He is so much at ease in the setting of the painting, including the background, as if it presents a world he owns, or rules as his own. He feels in control. He consideres himself an important and powerful man, he is used to receive respect and awe, 18 Van Os, p. 157-174. which he had come to accept as self evident. The testimony of his acts is part of his world, stressing his achievements but also shaping that world. He is proud to present this perfectly accomplished life. His devotion is sincere, but strictly a matter between himself and Mary and Jesus, and he consideres it only natural to have direct access to them, without intervention. Receiving the blessing of the baby Jesus seems to fulfil his life’s purpose, perfecting it. Considering the image Rolin puts forward of himself, perhaps he considered this the natural order of things. There may be a touch of vanity in the richness of his robe, a small expression of pride he permitted himself, considering his position. Conclusion The Rolin Madonna can be considered a medium through which Nicolas Rolin presents a biographical vision, an image of himself which shows not only who he was, but also how he saw himself, and how he wanted to be seen. In this vision, political ambitions and religious concerns do not clash, but merge together in the person of a powerful, self confident and devout 15th century politician. Modern perceptions about the compatibility of these dimensions may lead to misinterpretations and hinder the possibility to see the image as a whole. In order to fully understand this image, it is necessary to approach the painting from a 15th century point of view. JvO 2010 Literature • E. Panofsky, Early Netherlandish Painting. Its origins and character, Harvard 1953/1971 • R.-M. & R. Hagen, What great paintings say, Keulen 2005 • B. Ridderbos, A. van Buren & H. van Veen (ed.), Early Netherlandish Paintings. Rediscovery, Reception and Research, Amsterdam 2005 • C. Harbison, The play of Realism, Londen 1991 • E. Dahnens, Hubert en Jan van Eyck, Antwerpen 1980 • B. Maurice-Chabard, La Splendeur des Rolin. Un mécénat privé à la court de Bourgogne, Paris 1999 • H. Roosen-Runge, Die Rolin-Madonna des Jan van Eyck, Wiesbaden 1972 • C. Kruse & F. Thurlemann (ed.), Porträt - Landschaft – Interieur, Jan van Eycks Rolin-Madonna im ästhetischen Kontext, Tübingen 1999 • Os, Henk van, The Art of Devotion in the late Middle Ages in Europe, 1300-1500, Amsterdam/New Jersey 1994 • Catherine Oakes, The Virgin as Intercessor in Medieval Art and Devotion, Londen/Turnhout 2008