Panofskys views on Van Eyck
Panofsky’s purpose in writing this article was to identify a painting discovered in Brussels in 1815 (referred to as the “London portrait”) as the portrait of Geovanni Arnolfimi and his wife Jeanne de Cename, painted in 1434. Panofsky uses historical documentation and iconography to prove his point. Because a painting’s value can be enhanced by its historical significance, it is important to discover its background. Identifying a painting from several centuries ago is not easy. Because there is no photocopy available, we must depend on physical descriptions provided by others for recognition. Only paintings possessed by rich or historically significant people would be described in inventories or letters saved over hundreds of years. Wars often brought destruction and chaos, destroying historical documentation.Panofsky traces the “provenance” of this picture to provide a logical argument that the “London portrait” could be the Arnolfimi painting. He carefully documents the historical journey of the Arnolfimi painting, providing a continuous list of ownership from Don Diego de Guevara of Spain in the 1500’s to Charles III in 1789. This careful documentation is to prove that the Amolfimi painting was still listed as being in Madr
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Van Eyck, Art History, Geovanni Arnolfimi, Charles III, David Michal, Van Eycks, Panofsky Vermander, Nuremberg German, Council Trent, Willibald Pirckheimers, van eyck, london portrait, people standing, joining hands, people standing side, van eycks, standing side, arnolfimi painting, art history, foreign quotes, written accounts, willibald pirckheimers mother,
Approximate Word count = 1110
Approximate Pages = 4 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
