Description of the painting Portrait of Christ by Jan van Eyck. The story of one masterpiece: “Portrait of the Arnolfini Couple” by Jan van Eyck

Jan van Eyck "Portrait of the Arnolfini couple", 1434, oil on wood. 81.8x59.7cm, London National Gallery, London

At the Battle of Waterloo, the English Major Gay was seriously wounded and was taken to one of the residents of Brussels for treatment. Throughout his illness, the only comfort for the wounded man was the old painting hanging in front of his bed. Having recovered, when parting, he begged the owners for this painting as a keepsake of their hospitality. Now the painting, which was once given as a souvenir, is one of the treasures of London's National Gallery, and nowadays it would cost a lot of money.
">
...In the middle of the 15th century, little Holland was famous for its wealth and prosperity, although it was not an industrial country. But ships loaded with a wide variety of goods flocked to its shores from all over the world. On the streets of Dutch cities foreign speech was heard from all over the world.

So the port city of Bruges was full of huge warehouses in which cloth, linen, and woolen fabrics were stored. The large and rich city seemed to live only with thoughts of profit and trade, which had little to do with art. There is no dazzling sun in Bruges, and there are no wonderful views of Italian nature here. In the city there are no ancient buildings and hereditary artists, there are no those monuments on which the art of the Italian Renaissance grew.

But even here, in one of the clean bourgeois houses, one could see several easels arranged, at which three people, surprisingly similar to each other, were working. These are two brothers - Johann and Hubert van Eyck and their sister Margaret. They work hard to fulfill church orders. The somewhat motionless figures of the saints have the faces of typical residents of Bruges, and it seems that you are seeing the same merchants and merchants who just sold you the goods.

But it is not this that delights and amazes, but the surprisingly fresh colorful coloring of the paintings and deep tones, which have not yet been seen even in any of the Italian artists. This is the secret and pride of the Eyck brothers, this is their discovery, which has now become so commonplace that they don’t even remember it.

And then it was the Eiki brothers who invented the chemical mixture that was needed to produce oil paints. The Italians first learned this from them, and then the whole world. However, researchers have now established that back in the 2nd-4th centuries, ancient Roman artists introduced linseed or nut oils into wax paints. And yet, many generations of artists are indebted to the brilliant brothers, for they improved oil paints and developed new compositions.

The younger brother Johann (Jan), in addition to paintings, also painted portraits. And he, this great artist and inventor, was very modest. On many of his canvases there is an inscription: “The way I knew how,” as if he proudly and at the same time humbly explains to the world that he can no longer do more. But it was Jan van Eyck who created the “Portrait of the Arnolfini Couple” - a unique phenomenon in all European painting of that time. The artist was the first to depict people in their everyday surroundings, without any connection with a religious plot or images from the Holy Scriptures.

This portrait, painted on the occasion of a wedding Giovanni Arnolfini

is the first paired portrait in European art.

Giovanni Arnolfini, a silk merchant from the Italian city of Lucca, lived in Bruges, represented the Portinari firm there, and was a friend of Jan van Eyck. Both are dressed in elegant holiday costumes, in keeping with the sophisticated and whimsical fashions of the time. Their poses are solemnly motionless, their faces are full of the deepest seriousness. At first this may even repel the viewer, but as soon as he takes a closer look at the external details, he will be greatly struck by the simple truth with which the artist depicted these two personalities, and the seriousness with which he treated these characters.

take the oath of marital fidelity.
Hanging in the back of a cozy room round mirror ,

a symbol of God's all-seeing eye, reflecting the figures of two more people present in the room, but not visible to the viewer.
Some art historians, based on the inscription, suggest that one of the figures is Jan van Eyck himself, and consider everything depicted in the picture as a wedding scene (the wife’s hand lies in the husband’s hand), which the artist witnessed.

The picture was painted with extraordinary care, amazes the viewer with the subtlety of writing and loving attitude to every detail.
The ritual is performed in the holy of holies of the burgher's house—the bedroom, where all things have a hidden meaning, hinting at the sacredness of the marital vow and the family hearth.

on a low table and windowsill, hint at heavenly bliss, and an apple hints at the Fall.
small the dog signifies fidelity

And shoes- a symbol of marital devotion and love,

a brush is a sign of purity, a rosary is a symbol of piety,
one lit candle in a chandelier during the day means the symbolic-mystical presence of the Holy Spirit sanctifying the sacrament, and below them on the wall the inscription is read, deliberately highlighted: "Jan van Eyck was here"

explaining that the artist acted as a witness in this old Dutch custom of betrothal at home, not in church.

The modesty of the burgher environment and the ordinary people depicted by van Eyck become a source of special ethics, foreshadowing the future development of Netherlandish and Dutch art. In general, the Netherlands were probably the only country where painting developed independently, without the influence of Greek art.

The painting was exceptionally well preserved, although it had to go a very long way (one version is told at the beginning of the article) before it ended up in the London National Gallery. At the beginning of the 16th century, the “Portrait of the Arnolfini Couple” belonged to the viceroy of the Netherlands, Margaret of Austria.

Later, the painting ended up in Spain and at the end of the 18th century it was in the royal palace in Madrid, where it decorated the room for the king’s morning toilet. During the Napoleonic invasion, a French general took it to Brussels, where it was bought by Major General Gay in 1815 (and not given to him as a souvenir?). He brought it to England, but only in 1842 donated it to the National Gallery.

The content of the painting described above is only the most common version, but for some researchers another version is more attractive: this is a self-portrait of the artist. And yet other specialists are haunted by the apparent strangeness of the picture. Why, for example, did the man raise his right hand as if in an oath? If this is a wedding, then where is the priest? What moment in the life of the spouses did the artist depict? Why is there only one candle burning in the chandelier in broad daylight? And what does the inscription above the mirror mean; “Johannes de Eyck fuit hie” (“Johannes de Eyck was here. 1434.”)? These questions, which are now difficult to answer, make the picture even more mysterious.

Back in 1934, the famous Austrian art critic Erwin Panofsky suggested that the painting does not depict a marriage, but an engagement. In one of his articles, he wrote: “Look at the faces of the participants in the events, pay attention to how solemnly the man stands, holding the hand of a woman looking at him tenderly and trustingly. Look at her slightly blushing sweet face. And how carefully they are both dressed, although it seems to be happening in their own room and nothing makes you think that they are going out somewhere. Vice versa! They are at home, and we are undoubtedly talking about some kind of solemn ceremony, a rite in which they are both participants and actors.”

Erwin Panofsky emphasized that with this interpretation of the painting, the inscription becomes clear: van Eyck testifies that he was present at the ceremony. A lit candle also becomes clear, because since time immemorial, torches and lit lanterns have been carried during wedding processions. Then, then, the painting should be called not “Portrait of the Arnolfini Couple”, but “The Arnolfini Engagement”?

But in 1950, the prominent English art critic Brockwell wrote in his special study that “the portrait of Arnolfini and his wife does not exist at all.” Yes, the artist painted a portrait of Giovanni Arnolfini and his wife, but he died in Spain during a fire. But we don’t know the history of that portrait, which is in the London Art Gallery, and it depicts completely different people. As Brockwell assures, there are no documents confirming that the person depicted is Giovanni Arnolfini, and the mysterious painting is a portrait of the artist himself and his wife Margherita.

A similar judgment was expressed in 1972 by the Soviet researcher M. Andronikova: “Look more closely, does the man in the portrait resemble an Italian, because he has a purely northern type! And the woman? She has the same face as Margaret van Eyck, whose surviving portrait was painted by Jan van Eyck in 1439.” Adherents of this view argue that a man could not offer his left hand if it was a matter of marriage or engagement. But Jan van Eyck himself, who had been married for a long time by 1434, and the heroine of his painting, whose appearance resembles the artist’s wife, could shake hands with each other in this way, since the picture in question is not about an engagement at all.

In addition, it was established that Giovanni Arnolfini and his wife did not have children, and the woman depicted in the painting is clearly waiting to add to her family. Indeed, Margaret van Eyck gave birth to a son on June 30, 1434, this is also documented.

So who is the hero of the picture? Or is this really a family scene, and not a commissioned portrait at all? The question still remains open...

How many interesting things can be learned from one small picture. Jan van Eyck knew how to attract not only the art of an artist, but also a wonderful philosopher and thinker.

The portrait is one of the most complex works of the Western school of painting of the Northern Renaissance. THERE IS SO MUCH MYSTERIOUS IN THE PICTURE.

FOR TRUE PAINTING CONFIDENTS:

First of all, let's get to know the artist who created this masterpiece.

Jan van Eyck (1385-1441) - Dutch painter of the early Renaissance, master of portraiture, author of more than 100 compositions on religious subjects, one of the first artists to master the technique of painting with oil paints

The exact date of birth of Jan van Eyck is unknown. Born in the Northern Netherlands in Maaseik . Learned from my older brother Hubert , with whom I worked before 1426g. Began his activities in The Hague at the court of the Dutch counts. Since 1425 he has been an artist and courtier of the Duke of Burgundy Philip III the Good , who valued him as an artist and generously paid for his work.

Portrait of Margaret van Eyck, 1439

Van Eyck is considered the inventor of oil paints, although in fact he only improved them. But it was after him that oil gained universal recognition, oil technology became traditional for the Netherlands; in the 15th century came to Germany and France, from there to Italy.

Now let’s return to the painting, which glorified the artist and still causes controversy to this day.

PAINTING:

Portrait of the Arnolfini couple , 1434.Jan van Eyck.

Initially, the name of the painting was unknown, only a hundred years later it emerged from the inventory book: “Large PortraitHernoult le Finin the room with his wife."Hernoult le Finis the French form of the Italian surname Arnolfini. The Arnolfini were a large merchant and banking family that at that time had a branch in Bruges.

For a long time it was believed that the painting depicted Giovanni di Arrigio Arnolfini with his wife Giovanna Cenami, but in 1997 it was established that they married in 1447, 13 years after the appearance of the painting and 6 years after the death of van Eyck.

It is now believed that the painting depicts either Giovanni di Arrigio with his previous wife or Giovanni di Arrigio's cousin, Giovanni di Nicolao Arnolfini, with his wife, whose name is unknown.

Giovanni di Nicolao Arnolfini was an Italian merchant from Lucca who lived in Bruges from 1419. There is a portrait of him by van Eyck, suggesting that he was a friend of the artist.

Portrait of Giovanni Arnolfini by van Eyck, c. 1435 The canvas was painted in 1434 in Bruges, at that time the former major trading center of Northern Europe. From Russia and Scandinavia timber and fur, from the East via Genoa and Venice silk, carpets and spices, from Spain and Portugal or lemons, figs and oranges

. Bruges was a rich place The married couple depicted in Van Eyck's painting are rich. This is especially noticeable in clothing. She is wearing a dress trimmed with fur ermine, with long train

, which someone had to carry when walking. It was possible to move around in such a dress only with the appropriate skill, which was possible only in aristocratic circles. He is in a robe, trimmed, maybe even lined, mink or sable, with a slit on the sides, which allowed him to move and act freely. The fact that this man does not belong to the aristocracy is evident from his wooden shoes. Gentlemen, in order not to get dirty in the street mud, rode on horseback or in

stretcher.

This foreign merchant lived in Bruges in aristocratic luxury, he had oriental carpets, a chandelier, a mirror, the upper part of the window of his house was glazed, and he had expensive oranges on his table.

The bride in the picture is dressed in a luxurious festive dress. The white wedding dress came into fashion only from the middle 19th century . According to some researchers, her rounded belly is not a sign of pregnancy, but, together with her small breasts drawn high, corresponds to ideas about the standard of beauty in the era of late Gothic.

Also, the amount of material she has to wear corresponds to the fashion of the time. According to researchers, this is nothing more than a ritual gesture, in accordance with modern attitudes towards family and marriage, intended to indicate fertility, since the double portrait was painted on the occasion of the wedding of this couple.At the same time, the position of the woman's hand still allows for the possibility that she is pregnant, but it is also possible that she raised the hem of her dress.

The painting is a visual proof of the wedding ceremony; in fact, it even “works” as a marriage certificate, since it documents the presence of the artist and, by extension, a witness to the ceremony, in his signature on the far wall.

LEFT HAND MARRIAGE:

It is possible that a marriage contract was necessary in the case of Arnolfini, since it is obvious that we are talking about “ marriage of the left hand " The groom holds his bride's hand with his left hand, and not with his right, as custom requires. Such marriages were concluded between spouses of unequal social status in society and were practiced until the middle XIX century.

Usually the woman came from a lower background estates . She had to give up all rights to inheritance for herself and her future children, and in return received a certain amount after the death of her husband. As a rule, the marriage contract was issued the next morning after the wedding, hence the name of marriage - morganatic from the word morgen(German) morgen - morning).

At that time, Burgundian fashion dominated Europe, which was due to the strong political and cultural influence of the Duchy of Burgundy. At the Burgundian court, not only women's, but also men's fashion was extravagant. Men wore turbans and cylindrical hats of monstrous size. The groom's hands, like his bride's, are white and well-groomed. His narrow shoulders indicate that he should not have achieved a high position in society with his physical strength.

Van Eyck depicts the interior with a wooden floor as a wedding chamber, adding many hidden meanings through his realistic depiction of the objects in the room.

HIDDEN SYMBOLS OF THE PICTURE:

MIRROR.

On the axis of symmetry of the picture is mirror , which hangs on the back wall of the room. Ten medallions with the image Passion of Christ decorate its frame. The arrangement of the miniatures is especially interesting, since on the part of the man the Passion of Christ is associated with living people, and on the part of the woman - with the dead. The artist and another witness are reflected in the mirror

Flat mirrors were affordable only by the highest aristocracy and were considered a treasure. Convex mirrors were more affordable. In French they were called “witches” because they mystically increased the observer’s viewing angle. In the mirror depicted in the painting, you can see the ceiling beams, a second window and two figures of people entering the room.

The presence of a mirror indicates the virgin purity of the bride, who, according to the views on marriage of that time, was expected to remain just as chaste in marriage.

CANDLE:

Chandelier , hanging above the heads of the bride and groom, is made of metal - typical of Flanders that time. It only burns candle above the man and above the woman the candle went out. Some researchers explain this fact by the fact that the portrait of Arnolfini’s wife is posthumous, and she died during childbirth.

Another version of symbolism: in the Middle Ages, during marriage processions, one large burning candle was carried in front, or the candle was solemnly handed over by the groom to the bride.

The flame of a burning candle meant the all-seeing Christ - witness of the marriage. For this reason, the presence of witnesses was not necessary.

DOG.

The dog, an eternal symbol of devotion, was considered a sign of prosperity, as well as a symbol of fidelity. On the graves of that time, a lion, a symbol of courage and strength, is often found at the feet of men and a dog at the feet of women. Only women, obviously, were expected to be faithful.

The small dog is the ancestor of the Brussels Griffon. At that time, the griffon's nose did not yet have the modern shortened appearance,
SHOES.

The groom is depicted standing barefoot on a wooden floor, his wooden clogs lying nearby. The bride's feet are covered by the dress, but a second pair of shoes is visible in the background next to the bed.

For van Eyck's contemporaries, sandals and wooden shoes contained references to the Old Testament: And God said: Do not come here; take off your sandals from your feet, for the place on which you stand is holy ground.

When the bride and groom performed the wedding ceremony, for them the simple floor of the room was “holy ground”

FRUITS.

According to one version, this oranges located on the windowsill and on a stool by the window can be considered a sign of fertility. Since in the language of many peoples of Northern Europe, orange literally means “apple from China” (e.g. Netherlands.Sinaasappel ), then they symbolize the purity and innocence that existed in The Garden of Eden before the Fall of Man. at the same time, Panowski notes that perhaps oranges simply indicate the prosperity of the spouses.

According to another version, these are apples. Apples lie on the windowsill as a hint of autumn and a warning against sinful behavior.

WINDOW AND BED.

The bride and groom are dressed in warm clothes, despite the summer outside - this can be seen from cherry , which is strewn with fruits - an unambiguous symbol of the wish for fertility in marriage

The red alcove on the right is an allusion to " Song of Songs "and symbolizes the bridal chamber. In Dutch painting, such a bed is an indispensable attribute of the scenes of the Annunciation, the Nativity of Christ and the Nativity of the Virgin Mary, which once again reminds us of the connection of this picture with the cult of the Mother of God.

From a Freudian point of view, in such a theme, the scarlet curtained alcove has direct associations with the female womb.

The arrangement of the figures suggests predetermined roles in marriage - the woman stands near the bed, in the back of the room, thereby symbolizing the role of the keeper of the hearth, while the man stands near the open window, symbolizing belonging to the outside world.

BED BACK.

Under the chandelier on the right side there is a wooden figure Saint Margaret slaying the dragon . She is considered the patroness of women in labor. The figurine is attached to the back of a chair standing near the marital bed. Perhaps this is further evidence that the woman is pregnant. At the same time, perhaps this is an action figure Saint Martha , patroness of housewives - a broom hangs next to her.

According to other interpretations, this is not a broom at all, but a rod. They are an etymological pun on the Latin word virga ("virgin"), serving to emphasize the motif of virginal purity. In folk tradition, it corresponds to the “core of life,” a symbol of fertility, strength and health, which was ritually lashed among the groom’s wedding ceremonies in order to provide the couple with the blessing of a large number of children.

MANY MORE OPEN QUESTIONS:

Why, for example, did the man raise his right hand as if in an oath? If this is a wedding, then where is the priest? What moment in the life of the spouses did the artist depict? Why is there only one candle burning in the chandelier in broad daylight? And what does the inscription above the mirror mean: “Johannes de Eyck fuit hie” (“Johannes de Eyck was here. 1434.”)? These questions, which are now difficult to answer, make the picture even more mysterious.

In addition, it was established that Giovanni Arnolfini and his wife did not have children, and the woman depicted in the painting is clearly waiting to add to her family. Indeed, Margaret van Eyck gave birth to a son on June 30, 1434, this is also documented.

So who is the hero of the picture? Or is this really a family scene, and not a commissioned portrait at all? The question still remains open...

HOW IS THE PORTRAIT CONNECTED WITH RUSSIA:

The merchant Arnolfini, depicted by Van Eyck on the canvas, bears a portrait resemblance to the President of Russia Putin , which gave rise to various jokes on this topic in the press. That’s why lately you can see a lot of Russian tourists there who want to make sure of this.

Oh, time, time... A year ago we already published this masterpiece (and one of our favorite paintings) by Jan van Eyck. The “Lectures” were not yet ready then, and it’s a pity, because THIS lecture by V.K., along with the “Mass” and lectures on Velazquez, was remembered by many. So, let’s fill a significant gap)

The famous “Portrait of the Arnolfini Couple,” now in the London Picture Gallery, dates back to 1434. And this time the image is not documented. There is an author's signature, but it does not indicate that it is Giovanni Arnolfini and his young wife Giovanna who are depicted here. This is a very strong tradition that came from Spain - for a long time this item was kept in the Spanish Royal Collections before being transferred to London. From old inventories of the Royal Collections, this name has migrated to the present day. Attempts are still being made to either clarify or redirect the painting's attribution.
Giovanni Arnolfini - Italian merchant, representative of the Medici bank in Northern Europe. This is the first time we meet an Italian customer with Dutch craftsmen. The first, but not the last. Several times during the 15th century. Dutch artists depicted Italians, mainly people from the Medici trading house, who would order various kinds of works from Hans Memling, Hugo van der Goes.

Netherlands |Jan Van Eyck| "Portrait of the Arnolfini couple"| 1434| canvas, oil

Another portrait of Arnolfini has survived, this time a more traditional half-length one, which appears to be an old copy of Van Eyck’s original. A half-length portrait, the cut of the figure is lower than in other portraits of van Eyck - slightly below the waist. The same face is irregular, very characteristic, unforgettable in its expressiveness. The gaze is directed to the side, the lips smile slightly, but their design seems to be initially tired, inclined to a slightly ironic smile. Apparently, Jan van Eyck was somehow connected with this person, and the paired portrait was not a single commission; perhaps they were connected by personal acquaintance or even friendship. In the 20th century, as with the Man in the Red Turban, attempts are sometimes made to clarify or challenge this traditional attribution. In particular, some Western and domestic art historians believe that this is a self-portrait of Jan van Eyck with his wife, despite the fact that the young woman depicted here bears little resemblance to the lady who is depicted in the authentic portrait of van Eyck’s wife from 1435. The changes in her appearance are explained by the fact that many years have passed since then, and that she has given birth a lot. According to documents, van Eyck and Margarita had ten children. The artist’s signature, which has been preserved and is located in the depths under the mirror hanging on the wall, is also interpreted differently. The author's signature differs from those that van Eyck put on his paintings. It reads: “Johannes de Eyck fuit hic” (“Jan van Eyck was here”). Jan van Eyck usually wrote “fecit” (“made”) or “picsit” (“wrote”). Here is a different form. And this signature is sometimes interpreted in a very wide semantic range.
The uniqueness of this thing lies in the fact that it is, in fact, the only one of the entire Dutch pictorial heritage of the 15th century. an example of a portrait-picture, a portrait with a developed composition, with its own plot, dramaturgy, with those features that are usually noted when defining this genre.
Almost all researchers, without exception, agree that the “Portrait of the Arnolfini Couple” captures the moment of the wedding or betrothal of the young people.

This was proven by Erwin Panovsky, one of the most authoritative art critics of the 20th century. It must be borne in mind that in the time of Jan van Eyck, that is, in the first half of the 15th century, church weddings were not yet absolutely mandatory. It was widely practiced, but sometimes it was enough for the young couple to take an oath of allegiance, holding hands, in the presence of witnesses. A notarial record was made about this and the marriage was considered concluded. Within a few decades, a church wedding will become mandatory in order for the sacrament of marriage to be considered perfect, and everyone without exception will undergo it. And indeed, there is no doubt that before us is precisely this solemn moment when, in the atmosphere of a rather prosperous bedroom, the spouses pronounce the solemn oath of fidelity. The gesture of the hands in an oath movement—palm placed in palm—emphatically unites the young people. Their joined palms are in the optical center of the composition, as is the mirror located in the depths directly above them.
Giovanni Arnolfini has a very expressive face - thin, highly raised eyebrows, which is why his face has an eternally surprised expression, very heavy eyelids covering his bulging eyes - so his gaze seems slightly elusive, slightly lowered. A snaking mouth, long, with slightly hidden, raised corners, hence the impression of an ironic smile. A cartilaginous long nose with high nostrils. The face is ugly, but highly expressive - nervous, mobile, despite the frozen facial expressions. This acute characteristic of the male image is set off by the mediocrity, self-sufficiency, and even the well-known doll-like quality of the female image. The figure of the bride embodies the then fashionable ideal of female beauty (remember the figure of Eve from the Ghent Altarpiece). There was a lot of fantasizing about whether the newlywed was pregnant. Indeed, her belly protrudes noticeably forward, but this is again the fashion of that time - a very high waist, which lifts the chest up, a heavy train in front, which is why the posture that was so characteristic of that time appears.

What does the phrase “Jan van Eyck was here” mean? It is very tempting to assume that the artist was really in the Arnolfini house as a witness to the marriage, as many believe. It is difficult, almost impossible, to prove otherwise. But some indirect evidence can still be cited. It’s not for nothing that a mirror is depicted here. Jan van Eyck places it in the depths, opening in European painting with such an optical-spatial technique a series of works in which effects will be built on mirror reflections, taking into account mirror reflections, on the play of mirror reflections. If the origins of this kind of work is “Portrait of the Arnolfini Couple” by Jan van Eyck, then at the top of this kind of experiments are the famous “Las Meninas” by Velazquez, where everything is also played out in a mirror. Jan van Eyck first felt that a mirror could create completely new, unique and very expressive effects that enhance the sense of space. After all, in this mirror we see part of the room depicted from another point; we see something that we would not see if we were actually in this space. Arnolfini and his wife appear in it from the back, we see a window, part of the furniture, also depicted from a different angle. And, finally, the mirror reflects that part of the room that is not depicted at all - the mirror reflects that part of the space in which we, the audience, seem to be physically located. There is no door from which we see the figures, but it is present in the reflection. Thus, the viewer is much more actively involved in the spatial play, in the optics of the work itself. And drawing the viewer into the picture has always been a very tempting dream of artists. The medieval experiments of reverse perspective are largely based on this, according to which the viewer is placed in the same optical system in which the image is given. And in more mature, more developed versions, Velasquez and other masters will create a unique philosophy of the mirror, a philosophy of reflection, because the mirror itself is one of the most powerful, ancient, most expressive and mysterious symbols. It is polysemantic, in different semantic situations it means different things - a mirror as an optical instrument, a mirror as a symbol of another world, both the otherworldly and simply another, appearing to us in all its reality, a world no less detailed in reflection than the existing one, and in the same time of a world that is fundamentally unattainable, a non-existent world. The idea of ​​a mirror, the idea of ​​a looking glass runs through the entire European culture, starting with medieval tales about playing with a mirror, about devilish mirrors and dubious magic mirrors associated with black or white magic, right up to the present day, to the prose of Borges and other writers, of which the mirror becomes one of the important, sometimes even generalizing symbols. So far, of course, this can only be seen in embryonic form in Jan van Eyck, but with some kind of brilliant insight the artist sensed the future possibilities of such a game with a mirror.
In the reflection, in the doorway, in the place where you and I would seem to be standing if we were in the space of the picture, two figures are visible, painted with two or three strokes - one in red, the other in blue. I really want to imagine that these are witnesses to a wedding. And then Jan van Eyck's inscription does not mean that the artist was one of the legal witnesses to this event.

Despite the absolute accuracy and sometimes almost prosaic nature of the depicted objects, most of them have a double meaning and have a symbolic sound. The lap dog in the foreground near the feet of the young couple is a symbol of marital fidelity; carelessly thrown shoes are not a sign of sloppiness, they are also a symbol of marital unity. A pair of shoes is traditionally understood as a married couple - each shoe individually is meaningless. The only candle inserted into the candlestick of the chandelier is also a symbol of the carnal unity of the spouses; rosary - a sign of piety; the brush hanging at the head of the bed is a sign of purity, a somewhat lower symbol, but standing in the same row as the washstand and towel in the scenes taking place in Mary's cell. A bed is both a real item in the bedroom and a symbol of marital pleasures. The fruits on the chest and on the windowsill are apples, reminiscent of the fall of our ancestors. All objects are unobtrusively involved in a semantic symbolic game, quite transparent to Jan van Eyck’s contemporaries.

V. Klevaev. Lectures on the history of art. Kiev, "Fakt", 2007, pp. 476-480.

Jan van Eyck. "Portrait of the Arnolfini couple." 1434. National Gallery, London

The artist's signature is a huge autograph in the most prominent place of the painting, exactly along its central axis. This is very different from the usual tradition of the author signing the painting discreetly at the bottom right. Perhaps because this is not a signature here artist- A witness on the "nuptial agreement". By the way, this is one of the first signed paintings in the history of modern art in general.

This double portrait, dated 1434, is described in the inventories of Margaret of Austria as the painting "Hernoulle Fin" or "Arnoult Fin", possibly a French corruption of the Italian name "Arnolfim". Since this early explanation has never been disputed, it is probably safe to assume that the man dressed in a mink-trimmed shoulder robe and a tall, wide-brimmed hat is indeed the Italian merchant Arnolfini, who managed Marco Guidecon's Lucca Company in Bruges, where Jan van Eyck lived and worked.

Records show that his wife was Jeanne (Giovanna) Chenami, born in Pans and also of Italian descent. Therefore, she is the woman in the painting, dressed in a heavy green dress and stretching out her hands to Arnolfini. He raises his palm in a movement that looks like a gesture of blessing. Perhaps he is about to place his hand on the open, outstretched palm of his young wife.

Arnolfini stands directly facing the viewer, although his gaze is averted, Giovanna Cenami's eyes meekly lowered. She holds the fur-trimmed train of her dress, the folds of which are grouped in front of the figure. This led some critics to see the outline of her belly as a sign that the lady was pregnant. However, this is nothing more than a ritual gesture, in accordance with modern attitudes towards family and marriage, intended to signify fertility, since the double portrait was painted on the occasion of the couple's wedding.

The painting is a visual proof of this event, in fact, it even works as a marriage certificate, since it documents the presence of the artist and, by extension, a witness to the ceremony, in an inscription on the far wall ( "Johannes de Eyck fuit hic"). Together with the second witness, van Eyck is reflected in a convex mirror on the same wall. The mirror enlarges the room and is framed by ten picturesque scenes of the Passion.

In the 15th century, it was still common for the bride and groom to marry without the presence of a priest. The "dextrarum junctio" - the connection of the right hand - is enough, and the groom's promise is considered legally supported.

The use of the inscription shows a growing trend towards documenting legal transactions in written form, the development of which was accompanied by the adoption of Roman law. Therefore, the functioning of the inscription here should not be considered equivalent to simply the author’s signature. It has real force and is a testimony, just like signing an official document.

Van Eyck depicts this early bourgeois interior with a wooden floor as a thalamus - the inner wedding chamber, adding, through his realistic depiction of objects in the room, many hidden meanings, theological and moral commentary on the event. Therefore, an everyday curved mirror becomes a “speculum sine macula” (a mirror without a flaw), which testifies to the purity of the Mother of God and the virginal purity of the bride, who, according to the then views on marriage, is expected to remain just as chaste in marriage.

In the foreground is a dog, an eternal symbol of devotion - responsible for marital fidelity.

The red alcove on the right is an allusion to the Song of Songs and symbolizes the bridal chamber. Wooden clogs taken from the groom's feet and left lying on the floor - a reference to the book of Exodus 3:5 (And God said, Do not come near here; take off your sandals from your feet, for the place on which you stand is holy ground ). Burning candles in a chandelier, wedding candles, quote the traditional iconography of the Annunciation. This emphasizes the Mother of God nature of the painting. Addressed primarily to women, the cult of the Virgin Mary was a significant factor in marital morals in the 15th century.

Apples lie on the windowsill as a hint of autumn and a warning against sinful behavior. The rods hanging from the wooden panel are an etymological pun on the Latin word virga ("virgin"), emphasizing the motif of virginal purity. In folk tradition, it corresponds to the “core of life,” a symbol of fertility, strength and health, with which the groom was ritually whipped to provide the couple with the blessing of a large number of children.

In 1434, Jan van Eyck created a painting that is now his most famous work. It is kept in the London National Gallery and is known as a paired portrait of certainthe artist's contemporaries - the Arnolfini couple. In museum catalogs it is listed under the name"The wedding of Giovanni Arnolfini and Giovanna Cenami."

It is known that the portrait was painted in the city of Bruges, where Jan van Eyck lived in his house with a stone facade, being in the service of the Burgundian Duke Philip the Good. The artist’s workshop was visited by the Duke himself, the burgomaster, as well as some noble townspeople who admired his works. Probably paintings painted for the altar in Ghent. What else do we know about van Eyck? Presumably, he was a sociable and cheerful person, with a quick mind. His friends also included a representative of the Medici banking house in Bruges, a member of a wealthy merchant family from Lucca - Giovanni Arnolfini. So, the artist could well have given the merchant and his young wife a kind of wedding gift.

What then, exactly, is the uniqueness of this portrait? Firstly, in its primordial nature. Jan van Eyck was the first to depict people in everyday settings, without connection with a religious plot or images from the Holy Scriptures. Secondly, in order to create such a work, in that era one had to have maximum creative imagination and freedom of thought.

It is these properties that God endows genius with.

So, let's turn directly to the work. The portrait shows a man and a woman dressed in costumes in the fancy fashion of the Burgundian court of the early 15th century. They stand in the middle of their room with a rich bed under a red canopy - the bedchamber. Under the ceiling is a chandelier with one candle, lit at the wrong time of day, on a clear afternoon. Through the slightly open window you can see a blooming garden, the sun's rays pour into the room. The poses of the people portrayed are solemnly motionless, their faces are serious. They do not look at each other, nor do they look at the viewer standing in front of the portrait.

A young woman holds the folds of a fashionable wide dress on her stomach with her left hand. Anyone who is not familiar with the Burgundian fashion of that time will confidently think that the woman is expecting a child. But was it appropriate to depict a young bride in this interesting position? Suppose Van Eyck agreed with his friends to depict life in its natural, human manifestation? The way the couple behaves with each other speaks of the love and complete connection of this couple. The woman’s right hand rests trustingly on the man’s palm. His right hand is raised up. The gesture is oath-like and clearly addressed to the two people standing in the doorway.

The figures of these people are visible in the mirror that hangs on the wall, behind the backs of the bride and groom. One figure is dressed in red, the other in blue. It is impossible to see faces. In the same mirror is a convex reflection of the room and the backs of the engaged couple. Above the mirror on the wall is an inscription in Latin, which is usually translated as follows: “Jan van Eyck was here. 1434"

It follows that the author of the portrait himself is standing on the threshold of the room. But with whom? With his wife Margarita? Or not? The visitors wear fancy hats and their clothes are hard to see. The woman should wear full skirts and the same silhouette as the bride. Ah, this Burgundian fashion! Beauty really did require sacrifice. Then pillows were placed under the dress in front. A large exposed belly indicated the lady's fertility. Folds of fabric flowing down from the line under the bust create this illusion. In the same dressvan Eyck's style depicts St. Catherine from the Dresden triptych. And one more thing: posture and gait were in fashion, in which a woman’s stomach and hips protruded forward, but no one canceled wearing a rigid corset, the narrow waist was invariably emphasized, and the chest was pulled tightly together. And the heroine of the portrait, dressed expensively and elegantly, this is clearly noticeable, is not wearing a corset, only her chest is emphasized with a belt. She stands, leaning back comfortably. Here is another reason to think. Pregnant bride or fashionably dressed bride? Let us present here images of the fashion of the Burgundian court during the time of Philip the Good - the richest in Europe, courtly, refined, it was there that European fashion of the 15th century was born.

The rosary on the wall next to the mirror is piety. House shoes in the background are a symbol of comfort. The broom indicates order in the house and spiritual purity. The bed is the place of birth and death, as well as the marriage bed. The carved figurine above the bed is the image of St. Margaret, or St. Martha, the patroness of women in labor. The apple on the window is a symbol of the Fall. Oranges scattered on the table by the window are synonymous with heavenly bliss, for sinful desires are purified in Christian marriage.

But is it? Doesn't the viewer have involuntary doubts and protests? Those who know, will understand what we are talking about: according to custom, during betrothal, the RIGHT hands of the bride and groom are crossed. This was the case not only in Christian Europe, but also in Ancient Rome, as evidenced by paintings, frescoes and sculptures. In Van Eyck, the man gives the woman his LEFT, not his right, hand. This rather indicates that they are already married. So this is a family portrait. Let's try to figure it all out.

So, it is generally accepted that the hero of the picture is Giovanni Arnolfini. An Italian merchant who was sympathized with Philip the Good himself, who knighted him. Not handsome, but the owner of an expressive and memorable face. His appearance is stern, his gaze directed to the side, into the depths of himself, thoughtful. It is known that he was married to Giovanna dei Cenami, daughter of Guilelmo Cenami, also an Italian merchant. At the time of the portrait's creation, the bride's father lived in Paris, where his trading business flourished. Therefore, the picture depicts Italians, while for some reason the appearance of both of them corresponds not to the southern Mediterranean type, but to the northern one. In appearance, they are compatriots of Jan van Eyck. The woman’s face, gentle, touching, with soft features and white skin, is reminiscent of the images of Madonnas painted later by Jan. Mystery? A mystery for sure! Serious art experts began to solve it, and not without success. The research of the famous art critic M.I. Andronikova, carried out in the seventies of the last century, convinces precisely that the portrait depicts a married couple, however, not natives of Italy. There are no documents indicating that the artist depicted Giovanni Arnolfini and his wife. One thing is known: the Arnolfini couple were childless. If a woman is pregnant, then it is not Giovanna. The characters in the picture were named after Arnolfini... almost a hundred years later! And here you involuntarily turn again to the faces of Van Eyck’s Madonnas. If they look like the heroine of the portrait, the lady in a green dress, Giovanna Chenami, then the latter’s resemblance to... the artist’s wife, Margarita van Eyck, is striking. Of course, many researchers and viewers may object to such a statement. It’s better to show here a portrait of the artist’s wife Margarita, already described in a previous blog post. Her portrait was created in 1539, that is, five years after the portrait of the Arnolfini couple. On the frame of Margarita’s portrait there is an inscription: “My husband Jan graduated from me on June 17, 1439. My age is 33 years old.” Of course, there is a difference. The lady in the green dress is gentle, soft and submissive. Margarita van Eyck is strict, smart, businesslike. Her facial features are harsher, her nose is longer, her eyes look sharp. The lady in the portrait has a very delicate face, her eyes are swollen, but her upper, narrower lip and full lower lip, like Margarita’s. The eye shape and face shape are similar. The lady in the portrait looks more touching and youthful. However, five years have passed. She grew older and, judging by the number of children the van Eycks had, she was pregnant more than once. The softness has disappeared somewhere, the time has come for maturity. A curious headdress is the same as that of the lady in the portrait of the couple, and that of Margarita. The so-called cornette is a horned headdress. The horns on the lady's head were arranged like this: the base was a wire frame, which was covered with fabric. Or they did it simpler: they wrapped fabric around their own hair, styled in horns or extensions, and pinned it with pins. A scarf folded several times was attached to the top. And this figurine of St. Margaret above the marital bed. It is quite possible to interpret her, not only as a saint who helps during childbirth, but also as a patron saint, an allusion to the name of the heroine of the portrait?

The woman depicted in the portrait

So, is it similar? Do not like? And yet, if this is Margarita van Eyck, then only one man can stand next to her - this is the artist himself. Notice the absence of a wedding ring on his raised right hand. It should have been on the ring finger. On the little finger of the woman’s left hand, on the second, or more precisely, phalanx of her little finger, you can see a wedding ring. This is how both women and men wore wedding rings and just for decoration at that time. The church required strict adherence to the procedure for putting on wedding rings only during the wedding ceremony. At other times, married ladies wore wedding rings either on their left or right hands. So she is no longer a bride? In addition, crossed arms are not the center of everything, they are offset to the side. And the surroundings: a bedroom, scattered indoor shoes, and freshly taken off street shoes - pattens, which the man apparently threw off when returning from somewhere - is not suitable for an engagement scene.

Although, what doesn’t happen in this world? And further. It was in 1434 that Margaret van Eyck was expecting a child. The eldest son of John and Margaret, the first child of ten, was baptized before June 30, 1434, and Duke of Burgundy Philip the Good gave the artist six precious goblets. Moreover, Duke Philip himself acted as a godfather, and Pierre de Befremont held the baby over the font on his behalf. The artist was an adviser to the Duke and was in his great favor. Philip the Good always found pleasure in his company and showered him with honors throughout and until the end of his life. Why shouldn’t Jan van Eyck, favored and confident in the favor of a powerful person, paint a family portrait, just “for himself”? For your beloved wife and future children? It is unlikely, I repeat, that anyone would commission such an intimate portrait of himself from him. This is intended exclusively for those close to you and respectful of the family. Van Eyck is a Renaissance man, with his own worldview and sense of self. The court painter of a powerful duke, he, taking an oath in the circle of his family, wants to glorify this family and himself, the beauty of his pretty and feminine wife, reconciled with the fate of his wife. The plot, of course, is bold and unusual for its time, but its author, an outstanding genius and innovator, is a singer of the beauty of an earthly woman and a humanized, earthly world.

Suddenly? Why? Moreover, it is very similar to the truth. In addition, researchers who studied the Latin inscription in the painting found that it can be translated not only as “Jan van Eyck was here,” but also “This (man) was Jan van Eyck, the artist.” Latin was not a dead language at that time; it was spoken and written. However, it is also difficult to categorically assert that the artist depicted himself and his wife in the portrait. Much has sunk into oblivion: the dates of birth of the characters and weddings of both van Eyck and Arnolfini. In any case, the artist is present in the portrait, but where is he? Is it the main character of the picture, or a character entering the room?

And now a little about the history of the portrait. At the end of the 15th century, the painting was the property of a certain Spanish nobleman, Don Diego de Guevara. Ancient descriptions say that the painting had doors with the coat of arms of this nobleman. Then Don de Guevara presented the portrait to the ruler of the Netherlands, Margaret of Austria. Leaving the Netherlands after completing her reign, Margarita transported the portrait to Spain. After her death in 1530, it passed to Queen Mary of Hungary of Spain. At the end of the 18th century, he was still in Spain and decorated the palace of Charles III in Madrid. During the Napoleonic Wars, a French general took the painting from Spain, and in 1815 it was discovered in Brussels by the English General J. Hay, who bought it and brought it to London. The portrait entered the National Gallery in 1842. By the way, the picture was received under the title “A Flemish Man and His Wife.” And since 1856 it was called “Possible portrait of the artist and his wife.” However, the biographer of Northern Renaissance artists, Karel van Mander, on whose works art historians rely, describes another small painting, painted in oil paints on a board and depicting a man and a woman offering each other their right hands, which are united by Fidelity. It is not surprising that some of the paintings were lost during the war or fire. So, you can give and give arguments, the riddle will remain a riddle, and will tease the minds of the next generations. It is a pity that much of the past reaches us only in the form of hypotheses and riddles, but the image of a remarkable man endowed with diverse abilities, the great master of the golden age of Dutch painting, Jan van Eyck, shines from the depths of centuries, like a ray sent by the hand of God. We will no longer know who the man and woman who appeared before us on the threshold of their bedroom are. The main thing is that Jan van Eyck is the discoverer of simple and great poetry of everyday life. His work, which developed in the bowels of the new art, the national school of the Netherlands, is the source of the future great discoveries of Rembrandt and Velazquez.

The era in which Jan van Eyck worked is usually called the early Northern Renaissance, by analogy with the Italian one. What is their difference? The art of Italy came to the discovery of nature and man through science and the revival of antiquity. The art of Northern Europe – through religious and mystical knowledge of the world. A lot of things went through intuition. That is, it developed independently, independently. Jan van Eyck rightfully stands at the head of this new school.