Sample Pages: Jan van Eyck’s Crucifixion and Last Judgment: Solving a Conundrum by Brepols

Jan van Eyck’s Cruciﬁxion and Last Judgment Solving a EditeConundrumdbyMaryanW.Ainsworth

“me fecit”

As a sign not only of a burgeoning self-awareness, but also of a certain level of excellence long maintained by the medieval craft tradition, early Renaissance artists began to inscribe their works along with the declaration “ME FECIT.” This series, which takes its inspiration from this phrase, features paintings and works in other media produced by artists of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries that are deemed autograph due to inscriptions, to reliable documentary evidence, or to self-portraiture within the work or works. The aim is to explore such works in an interdisciplinary manner from all points of view: the nature of the documentation, the physical characteristics and the working procedure evident, the iconographic problems, and the unique manner by which the artist solved the challenges of particular commissions. It is hoped that in-depth views of artistic production will provide the foundation for the investigation of other works or oeuvres. These publications may be the product of one or several authors, or enriched by collaborations among specialists in different fields of expertise. | MwA

Series Editor Maryan W. Ainsworth

Edited by Maryan W. Ainsworth

Contributions by Maryan W. Ainsworth, Sophie Scully, and Silvia A. Centeno, with Marc Smith and Christina Meckelnborg

Jan van Eyck’s Crucifixion and Last Judgment Solving a Conundrum

ChapterIntroductionContents1

Maryan W.MarcAinsworthSmith

Maryan W. Ainsworth

Sophie Scully and Silvia A. Centeno

Appendix B Transcriptions of the Texts within the Crucifixion and Last Judgment

Maryan W. Ainsworth

Christina Meckelnborg

1801481163010796174178

Appendix A Deciphering the Middle Dutch Text on the Crucifixion and Last Judgment Frames

The Technical Examination and Restoration of the Frames

Chapter 3 Investigating Van Eyck’s Working Technique

Sophie Scully and Silvia A. Centeno

Maryan W. Ainsworth

Chapter 5 Reconsidering the Relationship Between The Met Painting and the Rotterdam Crucifixion Drawing

Chapter 2 In Search of the Original Form and Function of the Crucifixion and Last Judgment

Chapter 4 Attribution and Dating Questions in Historical Context

Bibliography

ThIntroductione

Thus, when I embarked on the technical study of the paintings with Sophie Scully and Silvia Centeno of the Departments of Paintings Conservation and of Scientific Research at The Met, I was anticipating that the Crucifixion and the Last Judgment would finally reveal answers to some of the more puzzling questions that had endured over time. I have always been a proponent of a methodology that begins with a tabula rasa and allows the art object to ask the questions and lead the way for research. I have never been an advocate of proceeding the other way around, approaching the work with preconceived notions, formulating the theory first, and finding the evidence to support it. For my methodology to work properly, interdisciplinary, collaborative research is critical. None of us is a master of all disciplines, and it is essential, therefore, to marry the technical study of the object with its art-historical investigation, commonly known as Technical Art History. In this respect, I am most fortunate to have worked for many years at The Met with extraordinarily knowledgeable and talented staff members who are consummate experts in their fields.

Maryan W. Ainsworth

Crucifixion and Last Judgment by Jan van Eyck are among the most published of any works in The Met’s European Paintings Collection. Consulting the references available for the online catalogue entry on The Met website is a dizzying affair. Doing so makes it clear that there has always been some disagreement about the attribution and dating of the paintings, and even how they originally related to each other. The Crucifixion and Last Judgment have long been accepted as a “diptych,” but, if truth be told, this has never been a comfortable fit. They are rather too tall and narrow for components of the traditional diptychs of fifteenth-century Netherlandish paintings. A number of scholars over time have suggested an alternative format of one kind or another—with greater or lesser success. Furthermore, it is clear with sustained looking at the paintings in the galleries that much has happened to them over time. They were transferred from panel to canvas in the nineteenth century, and the original frames experienced several campaigns of restoration, resulting in a modern covering of brass leaf that appears to be a garish accompaniment to such extraordinarily refined images of complex story-telling and powerful emotional impact.

Little did I know when we embarked on the study of the Crucifixion and Last Judgment where we would arrive. A finding early on, through X-radiography, provided a quite unanticipated result. This was the recovery of a fragmentary text written in beautiful calligraphy in Gothic textualis, hidden beneath the layers of restoration on the flat part of the frames. Technical examination and analysis then helped us arrive at the decision to remove the later restorations and reveal the earliest, possibly original, decoration on the frames. Though damaged, their appearance was striking, with white, and in two places black, lettering on a solid red background. What to make of this? Call in an expert paleographer of course! Marc Smith, Professor of Paleography at the École des Chartes in Paris, who has contributed to this volume, poured over the remnants of text through a magnifying

Suddenly many doors of inquiry opened, some of them resulting in false leads, deep rabbit holes, and frustrating dead ends. However, little by little with helpful collaboration from specialists of all kinds, the detective work began to bear fruit. One thing led to another, and the paintings—as I originally had hoped—slowly began to reveal their long-held secrets. In 2016, we mounted a focus show at The Met on our findings at that point (A New Look at a Van Eyck Masterpiece, January 25–April 24, 2016), presenting the connections that the paintings had raised and questions that began to be answered. Looking back on that moment, we had learned a lot, but not nearly what we now know about the original form and function of these two intriguing and captivating paintings.

As it turns out, viewed in the context of their times, the paintings provide insight into an important veneration of relics, a duke of Burgundy, his wife, a cardinal, and a pope who, with strong influence from the Carthusian Order, were all intertwined in their agendas concerning issues of church and state at an historically complex time. The masterful way in which Jan van Eyck achieved the requirements of this particular commission for the paintings is a testament not only to his unparalleled abilities in technique and execution, but also to his deep understanding of humanity and spirituality. We hope that the chapters of this book vividly capture the journey we have made to reach this point in order now to share our results with a wider audience.

visor and determined that this is a Middle Dutch translation of the Latin pastiglia biblical text surrounding the paintings on the coves of the original frames.

8 Ainsworth

For opportunities to present the material of this research in lectures at various points throughout our progress, I am most grateful to the Princeton University Department of Art and Archeology where I served as the Robert Janson-La Palme Visiting Professor (Fall semester 2017); to Elizabeth Cropper, who invited me to serve as the Kress-Beinecke Professor at the Center for Advanced Study in the Visual Arts (casva), National Gallery of Art, Washington, DC (2018–19); to Susie Nash at the Courtauld Institute of Art, London; to Joris Corin Heyder at the Univeristy of Tübingen; to Nenagh Hathaway and to Peter Stallybrass for classes at Yale University; and to Shira Brisman at the University of Pennsylvania. I greatly benefitted from discussions with the professors and students in these classes.

Many colleagues have been instrumental in the detective work that has resulted in the present volume. I wish especially to single out Keith Christiansen, Curator Emeritus and formerly John Pope-Hennessy Chairman of the European Paintings Department, and Michael Gallagher, Sherman Fairchild Chairman of the Paintings Conservation Department, who fostered and enthusiastically supported our research in every possible way, and who served as constant sounding boards for our developing ideas. George Bisacca, Conservator Emeritus, played an essential role in the early technical study of the frames of the paintings, setting us on various new routes of investigation. Sophie Scully and Silvia Centeno have been extraordinary collaborators and indefatigable researchers throughout this research. They have enriched the detailed study of so many issues in countless ways. We have all especially benefitted from the unique talents of Marc Smith, Professor of Medieval and Early Modern Paleography, École nationale des Chartes / École Pratique des Hautes Études – PSL, Paris, without whom we never would have reached the conclusions presented in this book. We also gratefully acknowledge the important contribution of Christina Meckelnborg, who made a new, detailed transcription of the Latin texts on the frames and throughout the paintings. With heartfelt thanks, we also acknowledge the following who facilitated our work in so many ways:

I wish to acknowledge with great enthusiasm and admiration the work of many colleagues who carried out the technical investigations of the Ghent Altarpiece as well as other paintings by Jan van Eyck in the verona project, and placed this material on the website Closertovaneyck.kikirpa.be. These findings have been an enormous help to our research. We could not have reached the exhaustive conclusions of this book without this comprehensive comparative material so beautifully made available in open access online. In addition, serving on the “Experts Committee” for the cleaning and restoration of the Ghent Altarpiece with the chance to discuss with my learned colleagues the intricacies of this and other works by Jan van Eyck has been a highly valued learning experience for me, which has greatly informed the present volume. For this opportunity and for all of the splendid exhibition catalogues, books, and articles that have issued from these varied studies in recent years, I am eternally grateful and remain an indebtedWritingstudent.abook during the covid-19 pandemic was an unanticipated challenge. Thanks to Arthur K. Watson Chief Librarian Ken Soehner’s ingenuity, the staff of the Thomas J. Watson Library at The Met was organized swiftly to accommodate the ongoing needs of researchers. Our book could not have been completed at this time without the interlibrary loan and scanning services offered by our dedicated library staff. Special thanks go to Robyn Fleming, Jessica Ranne Cardona, Amy Hamilton, and Dana Keith. We are in your debt! Many individuals nationally and internationally helped us to acquire the images necessary to support our theories. Many thanks indeed!

Dorothy Ainsworth, Anne Margaret As-Vijvers, Elena Basso, Andrea Bayer, Till-Holger Borchert, Douglas Brine, Emma Capron, Federico Caró, Elizabeth Cleland, Christopher Daly, Luc Dequeker, Albert Derolez, Youri Desplenter, Consuelo Dutschke, Katrin Dyballa, Adam Eaker, Helen Evans, Dan Ewing, Noël Geirnaert, Charlotte Hale, Jeffrey Hamburger, Astrid Harth, Susan Frances Jones, Ann Kelders, Dan Kershaw, Joyce Klein-Koerkamp, Nikos Kontogiannis, Anne Korteweg, Thomas Kren, Berthold Kress, Philip Krey, Clifford La Fontaine, Friso Lammertse, Donald La Rocca, Hilde Lobelle-Caluwe, Dorothy Mahon, Timothy McCall, Michael Alan Miller, Elizabeth Moodey, Elizabeth Morrison, Cynthia Moyer, Linda Müller, Susie Nash, Timothy Newbery, Sumihiro Oki, Jean-Marie Plumer, Evan Read, Margaret Scott, Christine Seidel, Anna-Claire Stinebring, Miyako Sugiyama, Ruben Suykerbuyk, Juan Trujillo, Ronald Van Belle, Gert van Gerven, Michiel Verveij, Sylvanie Wallington, Timothy Wengert, Roger Wieck, Stephan Wolohojian, Charlotte Wytema, Nikolay Zykov. We owe special thanks to E. Melanie Gifford and Bernhard Ridderbos who read various chapters of the book in progress and provided excellent critiques.

9 Introduction

Finally, we are grateful to Johan Van der Beke, Publishing Manager, at Brepols for his enthusiasm for bringing out this volume in the Me Fecit Series, and to Paul van Calster for so expertly editing our texts and providing the beautiful design of this book.

also exposed, stunningly, the existence of inscriptions on the flat outer borders of the frames, hidden beneath the gilded surfaces.15 Interfer ence from other radio-opaque materials on the frames resulted in low contrast X-radiographs that were difficult to read, but elemental mapping by macro X-ray fluorescence (ma-xrf), showed more of the inscriptions.16 In the lead distribution maps, it was possible to see that inscriptions executed using a lead-containing pigment, later identified as lead white, were present around the entire perimeter of both frames. The inscriptions seemed quite damaged but a few nearly complete words allowed identification of the language as Middle Dutch, painted in Gothic minuscule.17 The discovery of the hidden inscriptions naturally led to more ques tions about their appearance, their dating and possible originality, as well as the authenticity of the Latin pastiglia inscriptions.

ings originally have been part of another ensemble, such as a triptych, and did any physical evidence of an alternative arrangement remain? 12

While this technical study was underway, concurrent archival findings by Susan Frances Jones offered a possible explanation for the presence of the incon gruous gilded pastiglia lettering on the frames. The Crucifixion and Last Judgment were present in Italy by the first half of the seventeenth century, as recorded in the 1641 inventory of Ramiro Núñez Felípez de Guzmán, Duke of Medina de las Torres and Spanish Viceroy of Naples (ca. 1600–1668), and his second wife, Anna Carafa della Stadera, Principessa di Stigliano (1607–1644) (See Chapter 2). In that document, the paintings were described as a diptych mounted in an Italian-style tabernacle frame with columns and topped by an image of God the Father.18 The inventory also noted the classical lettering on the frames, ostensibly the Latin pastiglia, but made no mention of a painted Middle Dutch inscription. However, the painted inscriptions could have remained underneath the tabernacle-style frame. This re framing would most easily have been done by inserting the flat outer moldings of the framed panels into the rabbets of the tabernacle frame, obscuring the Middle Dutch text but allowing the inner cavettos to show. At this point in our investiga tion, it was not yet clear whether the pastiglia lettering belonged to the original concept of the frames, or whether it was added as part of this reframing all’antica.19

If the frames once formed part of a triptych, any evidence of latching hardware would be found on the backs of the frames, which were planed down during the nineteenth-century transfer and then obscured by the secondary wood supports. However, X-radiographs, examined by The Met’s Painting Conservator Emeritus and panel specialist George Bisacca, revealed evidence of another set of nails that once came through the backs of the frames. The larger parts of the shafts were removed in the transfer and only evidence of the tips remain, but these nails too were square in shape. These nails seemingly served to fix hardware that would latch the frames when closed side by side, as wings of a triptych. The X-radio graphs also confirmed that the square-shaped nail holes seen on the outer sides of the frames, presumably related to a latch for a diptych, originally extended deep into the frame and tapered in a manner characteristic of handmade nails, indicating that this arrangement dated at least as far back as the nineteenth century.13 Remnants of iron staining on the surrounding wood were also apparent in the X-radiographs, a phenomenon that can be the result of cyclic changes in ambient relative humidity causing the leaching of iron oxide into the wood and imparting a black stain. This is characteristic of nails that have been embedded for a considerable length of time.14 The evidence suggested that the frames had been arranged as both a diptych and a triptych at different points in their history (see Chapter X-radiography2).

Analysis of microscopic paint cross section samples removed from the frames

1.10 Line drawing of the Italianstyle tabernacle frame, based on the description in the 17th-century Naples inventory. © Drawing: Dan Kershaw

15 1 | Technical Examination and Restoration of the Frames

1.101.91.81.71.6

1.12 Cross section of a sample taken from the pastiglia in the Last Judgment frame, photographed with polarized visible (A) and UV (B) illumination, and a 200× original magnification. The arrow in C indicates the location where this sample was taken. In B , #1 corresponds to the calcite layer in the ground preparation; #2 to the second preparatory layer composed of lead white and apatite; layer #3 is mainly lead-tin yellow type I; #4 is a gold leaf; layer #5 is composed of vermilion, a carbon-based black pigment and an ochre; #6 corresponds to a second gold leaf application; #7 is an organic layer; and #8 is a brass (copper and zinc) leaf.

A C B 1 2 4 6 7 5 3 A B 1 8 2 64 7 5 3

16 Scully and Centeno

1.11 Cross section of a sample taken from an area in the inscription in the lower member of the Last Judgment frame, photographed with polarized visible (A) and UV (B) illumination, and a 200× original magnification. The arrow in C indicates the location where this sample was taken. In B , layer #1 corresponds to the calcite ground preparation; #2 to the red paint layer composed of vermilion; # 3 to an organic layer; the partial layer #4 to the inscription in lead white paint; layer #5 to a gold leaf; and #6 to the mordant for the top gold leaf (layer #7).

UNCOVERING THE HIDDEN INSCRIPTIONS

1.15 Cross section of a sample taken from the sky in the Crucifixion, photographed with polarized visible (a) and UV (b) illumination, and a 400× original magnification. In b, #1 is the calcite layer in the ground preparation; #2 is the second preparatory layer containing lead white and apatite; layer #3 is mainly composed of azurite and lead white, and layer #4 is azurite.

1.9

B C D 2 3 4 4 6 5 3 2 1 1

In d, layer #1 is the calcite layer in the ground preparation; #2 is the second preparatory layer containing lead white and apatite; layer #3 is mainly azurite and lead white and corresponds to the paint from the sky that extended to the frame; and layer #4 is the mordant of the gilding, composed of lead-tin yellow type I. In the bottom half of layer #4, labeled as #5, red lead particles and soap aggregates (#6) have formed as a result of the saponification of the lead-tin yellow type I pigment (Chen-Wiegart, Catalano, et al. 2017). A gold leaf is present at the very top of the stratigraphy in this sample.

The decision to uncover the earlier decoration was the result of careful consid eration and discussion among conservators, curators, and scientists. In the end, all agreed that revealing the possibly original decorative scheme and learning more from it would be an immense gain while acknowledging that it would be challenging to find an acceptable retouching strategy for the damages. It was im

20 Scully and Centeno

c and d are photomicrographs of a sample cross section taken from the frame in the Crucifixion, photographed with polarized visible and UV illumination, respectively, and a 400× original magnification.

Technical examination also led to a more accurate understanding of the condition of the frames and their conservation history. The pastiglia letters remained structur ally intact, in general, aside from a few small losses. The original gilding was worn, particularly at the raised rims of the curving letters, where the gilding had been most susceptible to abrasion. The areas of legible Middle Dutch inscription visible in the elemental distribution maps obtained by ma-xrf indicated that some signif icant expanses of paint were preserved on the flat outer borders beneath the gild ing, as mentioned above, but they did appear to be seriously damaged. The ostensi ble damages in the ma-xrf maps corresponded to the many divots and depressions that were apparent on the gilded surfaces of the frames, suggesting extreme losses there, possibly down to the wood supports. Revealing a highly damaged, fragmen tary surface could present enormous challenges for displaying the frames and the paintings. It was vital that the Crucifixion and Last Judgment remain in their original frames, as they had for nearly six centuries; the frames were important objects, as works of art themselves and in their vital role of framing the paintings. Yet, in their current state, with the garish brass leaf and irregular surfaces, and with possibly original decoration obscured, they did not fully perform that function.

21 1 | Technical Examination and Restoration of the Frames

The first impression upon revealing the painted borders was the delicate and calligraphic manner in which the white inscriptions were painted. The brush strokes were quite fine in areas, some so fine that they hardly registered in the lead distribution maps. To our great surprise, black paint was used for one portion of the inscription along the left member of the frame for the Last Judgment, that is, the text from Revelation. This apparently carbon black-based paint had not regis tered in the mapping by ma-xrf. The red background was originally a rich, solid red, without traces of marbling or any differentiation in the color. Carrying out the painstaking process of removing the layers of overpaint and gilding made it easier to focus on the beauty of the intact portions, but when viewed altogether the damage to the decoration was distressing. The original appearance of the red paint was not immediately obvious as it had taken on a variety of tones and colors, the result of various damages. In some passages a blade had grazed the surface, revealing the brighter, lighter red beneath. There were also the scattered losses and abrasion typical of a very old paint layer. In addition to the varied tones of red, there were several grayish-silver passages, which could be mistaken for paint but appear to be a deterioration product of vermilion, similar to the silvery discolor ation observed on the paintings (see Chapter 3).

Seen as a whole, even the pattern of damage on the flat outer borders was illu minating. The losses were mostly concentrated towards the inside of the painted

1.191.181.16

1.16 Series of photo micrographs showing the gradual removal of overgilding and overpaint from the lower member of the Last Judgment frame, 15× magnification.

possible to discuss any compensation in a meaningful way before the restorations were removed and their true state known, but an essential tenet from the outset was that the frames must remain on the paintings and that the treatment would more accurately reflect the original relationship between paintings and frames.

A A B B

and a final two who hold up the cross behind Christ. The titulus of the cross, in accordance with John 19:19 identifies Christ as Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews in three languages—Hebrew, Latin, and Greek. Varying from John’s order of the texts, here it is Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, and in the underdrawing it was first arranged top to bottom as Greek, Hebrew, and Latin. Whether the painter was corrected in the order of the texts by an adviser is hard to say.90 However, there are other anomalies in the phrases themselves. For example, the Greek phrase is actually Latin words written with Greek letters, especially recognizable by the word pEX (REX) instead of the Greek basileus in the phrase: ihc nazar rex ivde ω .91 Furthermore, the Greek letters are sometimes transposed: for example, the word pex in Greek should be written pE Ξ Such irregularities have been noted in many Van Eyck paintings where Greek transliteration from Latin words was not uncommon.92

The text issuing from Christ’s head and halo above, left and right, is damaged and very difficult to decipher. Only two words can be partially read with difficulty: omnes and angeli. This is possibly a reference to Matthew 25:31–32.93 Translated from the Latin, it reads: “And when the Son of man shall come in his majesty, and all the angels with him, then shall he sit upon the seat of his majesty.” Below Christ’s arms, left and right, is the text: Venite benedicti pris [patris] mei. From Matthew 25:34, it may be translated as: “Come you who are blessed by my father.” Stating the rewards of the heavenly kingdom, for those who have earned them, the full text reads: “Then the king will say to those on his right side, Come you who are blessed by my father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world.”94 These texts related to Christ in Majesty are produced in gold leaf over a yellow-orange mordant, consistent with the rays emanating from Christ’s head, the stigmata of his hands, side wound, and feet, as well as the rays superimposed on the haloes surrounding the heads of the intercessors, the Virgin Mary and John the Baptist (see Chapter 3). The idea that gold is reserved for the heavenly realms

59 2 | Original Form and Function

2.49 Detail of Christ with arrows pointing to the painted biblical texts (A) that are not visible in the infrared reflectogram (B).

2.492.482.43

2.48 Infrared reflectogram (A), showing the different arrangements of the text in the underdrawing and the painting (B).

60 Ainsworth

2.50 Head of Death, labelled “mORg ” in the underdrawing (B), revealed by infrared reflectography. © Photos: The Met, Juan Trujillo, in collaboration with KiK-iRPA , Brussels; iRR : The Met, Department of Paintings Conservation

B A

In terms of their spiritual life, the Carthusians were encouraged to contem plate sin, death, judgment, and hell. In so doing, they also were meant to “med itate on the mercy of God, on hope, heaven, divine benefits, and the life and Pas sion of Christ.”112 Just as the specific depictions of the Virgin Mary and the apostles above in the Last Judgment signal a connection with the Carthusians and their belief

purge the affections as a remedy for the vices to be discussed later. Otherwise, we will not be able to ascend any higher.… Therefore, according to the Prophet, from the fear of the Lord we must give birth to a spirit of salvation …

The opening line alone of the text—“Think too of the excruciating intensity of the individual punishments, and of their multitude… of the most miserable society of demons and their cruel tortures, for they are without mercy”—describes all manner of torture in Van Eyck’s depiction. Added to this is “an intolerable cold, a rotten stink, a palpable darkness, undying worms.” Clearly shown as well are the high and mighty—kings, queens, popes, cardinals—as well as the common folk. “Where is your glory now, your sensuous desire, your honor, your high station, your immense riches, your power, your dignity, your influence, your rule? What profit is there now to all these things?” Most of all is the seeming sense of unending tortures that play out in this hell, a place, as the text says, from which one cannot escape. “After a thousand years the end will draw no closer, because there is no end.”

2.52 Detail of Saint Michael in the Last Judgment. © The Met, Juan Trujillo, in collaboration with K i K- i RPA , Brussels

Ainsworth 64

Saint Michael

One of the most distinctive features of the Last Judgment, on which Van Eyck lav ished great attention, is Saint Michael at the very center of the painting, dividing heaven from hell. His particular stance, with multi-colored peacock wings un furled (symbolic of everlasting life), as well as the meticulous detail of his suit of armor and elaborately decorated shield, beg for an explanation. The figure merits our attention here because of Saint Michael’s role in the historical context of the times, especially the fight against the infidels, namely the Turks. This also has a likely connection with the person or persons who commissioned the painting.

Instead of brandishing the cross staff and balance scale with weights found in most Last Judgments, or the cross staff and shield, as one often encounters in depictions of Saint Michael alone, here the saint is represented with sword and shield as the defender of the Church and the victor over the devil and hell. He holds his sword behind his back, ready to strike, and his shield raised for defense. However, it is the style of his suit of armor and particularly its details that indicate a different meaning than is normally found in Van Eyck’s other 2.52

2 | Original Form and Function

2.53 Detail of Saint Michael, left wing of the Dresden Triptych. Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Dresden. © Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Dresden / K i K- i RPA , Brussels

65 system, so too does this vivid description of hell of the type that may have inspired Van Eyck’s graphic rendition.

is book relates the unfolding story of the investigations from in-depth technical research, facilitating the conservation treatment of the frames, to the art-historical study that connected these findings to the religious, political, and social contexts of the times. rough considerable interdisciplinary detective work, it was possible to reach a new understanding about the original form and function of the Crucifixion and Last Judgment and their pivotal role concerning devotions to a cherished relic, the Miraculous Bleeding Host, housed in the then collegiate church of St. Michael and St. Gudula in Brussels. e implications of these discoveries also shed new light on the relationship between e Met Crucifixion and Van Eyck’s metalpoint drawing of the same theme in the Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen, Rotterdam. Finally, the study of the Crucifixion and the Last Judgment draws attention to commissions Van Eyck received that are somewhat outside of the canon of works usually associated with this esteemed artist.

Among the most intriguing and confounding works of Jan van Eyck’s oeuvre are the Cruciﬁxion and Last Judgment in New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art. Although acquired in 1933 as a diptych, questions have remained about their initial conﬁguration, and how these paintings functioned. e recent technical investigations of the paintings and their original frames added further complexities to these inquiries when a fragmentary text in Middle Dutch was discovered through X-radiography on the frames surrounding the two paintings. e many facets of the ensuing investigation necessitated an interdisciplinary collaboration of researchers involving an art historian, paintings conservator, and museum scientist—namely, Maryan Ainsworth, Sophie Scully, and Silvia Centeno. Moreover, the new discovery of the formerly hidden text called for the enrichment of the research team by a paleographer and a classical philologist, Marc Smith and Christina Meckelnborg.