Jan van Eyck's Arnolfini Portrait Author(s): Erwin Panofsky Reviewed work(s): Source: The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs, Vol. 64, No. 372 (Mar., 1934), pp. 117- 119+122-127 Published by: The Burlington Magazine Publications Ltd. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/865802 . Accessed: 12/09/2012 10:56 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The Burlington Magazine Publications Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs. http://www.jstor.org JAN VAN EYCK'S ARNOLFINI PORTRAIT BY ERWIN PANOFSKY OR about three quarters of a cen- in the inventories (a man and a woman stand- tury Jan van Eyck's full-length ing in a room and joining hands) is absolutely portrait of a newly married couple unique in northern fifteenth-century panel- (or, to speak more exactly, a man painting, jits identity with the London portrait and a woman represented in the seems to be fairly well established; moreover, act of contracting matrimony)1 has been almost considering that the picture formerly belong- unanimously acknowledged to be the portrait ing to the Hapsburg princesses disappeared of Giovanni Arnolfini, a native of Lucca, who after 1789, and the London portrait appeared in settled at Bruges before 1421 and later attained 1815, lit seems safe to assume that the latter is the rank of a " Conseiller du Duc de identical with the former and was carried off Bourgogne " and " G6n6ral des Finances en during the Napoleonic wars. In addition, the Normandie," and his wife Jeanne de Cename London portrait corresponds to the descriptions (or, in Italian, Cenami) whose father, Guillaume in several respects, particularly the date (1434) de Cename, also came from Lucca, but lived and the mirror reflecting the couple from in Paris from the beginning of the fifteenth behind.5 century until his death.2 But owing to certain There are only two circumstances which circumstances which require some investigation, periodically give rise to discussion and recently this identification has been disputed from time led Monsieur Louis Dimier 6 to the conclusion to time. that the picture in the National Gallery cannot The " orthodox theory " is based on the be identical with the picture mentioned in the assumption that the London portrait [PLATE I] inventories: firstly, the enigmatical inscription is identical with a picture acquired by Don Diego on the London portrait: " Johannes de Eyck de Guevara, a Spanish grandee, and presented by fuit hic "; secondly, the fact that, in Carel him to Margaret of Austria, Governor of the Vermander's biography of Jan van Eyck (pub- Netherlands, by whom it was bequeathed to lished in 1604), the " Hapsburg picture " is her successor, Queen Mary of Hungary. This described in the following manner: ". in picture is mentioned in two inventories of Lady een Tafereelken twee Conterfeytsels van Oly- Margaret's Collection (one made in 1516, the Verwe, van een Man en een Vrouwe, die mal- other in 1523), which give the name of the cander de rechter handt gaven als in Houwelijck " " vergaderende, en worden ghetrouwt van Fides, gentleman" portrayed as Hernoul le fin and Arnoult fin " respectively, as well as in the die se t'samengaf." Translated into English, the inventory of Queen Mary's property made after passage reads: " On a small panel two her death in 1558." From this we must con- portraits in oils, of a man and woman taking clude that she brought it with her to Spain each other by the right hand, [note that, in reality, the man the woman's when she left the Netherlands in i555, and in grasps right hand 1789 it is still mentioned the works of with his left :] as if they were contracting a among and art adorning the palace of Charles at marriage; they were married by Fides who III, joined them to each other." Madrid.' As for the London portrait, we only From this Monsieur Dimier infers that the know that it was discovered at Brussels in 1815 by an English Major-General called and "Hapsburg picture " not only showed a Hay bridal pair as in the London subsequently taken to England where it was panel, but also purchased by the National in a Personification of Faith who fulfilled the Gallery 1842. same office as, for the in As the subject-matter of the picture described instance, priest the 1 " 5 The fact that the picture is called a large one in the W. H. James Weale: Hubert and van John Eyck," inventories (while, in reality, it is not larger than 0.845 19o8 (" Weale: I "), p. 69 et W. H. and by seq.; James Weale, o.624 cm.) is no obstacle. Mr. Weale is obviously right in M. W. Brockwell: " The van Eycks and their Art,"" Weale: II 1912 pointing out that " large " and " small " are relative terms, (" "), p. 14 et seq. Both with bibliography. and that the panel is set down " 2 For the Cename as " large in comparison family and the personality of Giovanni with those preceding it in the of In addition Arnolfini L. " Etudes inventory 1516. a cf. Mirot, Lucquoises," Bibl. de l'Ecole picture which was " small " for a late des Chartes, XCI, et sixteenthrcentury writer 1930, p. Ioo, seq., especially p. I14 like Vermander, was " large " when judged by the standards 3 These inventories are reprinted in Weale: I. and Weale p. 70o of about 140oo. As for the inventory of 1555/58 it is obviously II, p. i4. In Weale: II a third inventory of Lady based on an earlier one. Margaret's Collection, made in is also " 1524 quoted. This is 6 Revue de l'Art," XXXVI, 1932, p. 187, et and said to contain a similar of the seq. description picture. As for also November, 1932. Monsieur Dimier's statements were Queen Mary's inventory, cf. R. Beer: " Jahrb. d. d. Allerh. Kunstslgn. already contradicted, though not properly disproved, by Mr. Kaiserh.," XII, 189I, p. CLVIII, Nr. 85. M. Jirmounsky, " Gazette des K. " Zeitschrift Beaux-Arts," LXXIV, 1932, 4 Justi: filr bildende Kunst," XXII, 1887: p. 423, and also December, 1932. Otra vara de alto 7 " pintura y tres quartos de ancho; Hombre y Carel Vermander: " Het Leven de las manos. der doorluchtighe Neder- muger agarrados Juan de Encina, Imbentor de landtsche en Hooghduytsche Schilders, ed. H. Floerke ": la pintura al oleo." I9o6, I, p. 44- 'I7 Jan Van Eyck'sArnolfini Portrait versions of the Sposalizio, and he confirms Vermander and Sandrart obtained their infor- this conclusion by quoting Joachim von Sand- mation, and his description of the " Hapsburg rart who, in 1675, qualifies Vermander's des- picture " reads as follows: " een cleen cription by adding the statement that " Fides " tafereelkin . waerin gheschildert was/een appeared as an actual female (" Frau Fides " trauwinghe van eenen man ende vrauwe/die as the German version puts it): " Par quod- van Fides ghetraut worden," " that is in dam novorum coniugum, quos muliebri habitu English: " a small panel on which was depicted adstans desponsare videbatur Fides."8 the wedding of a man and a woman who were Now, Monsieur Dimier is perfectly right in married by Fides." pointing out that Vermander's " Fides " cannot It is self-evident that Vermander's description possibly be identified (as was conjectured by nothing but an amplification of this text, and some scholars)' with the little griffin terrier or ,iswe can see that he amplified it rather Bolognese dog seen in the foreground of the at haphazard..easily Since he was familiar with the London picture. For although a dog occurs usual form of a wedding ceremony, he ventured fairly often as an attribute or symbol of Faith,10 the statement that the two people took each the Flemish word " tesamengeven " is a other by the right hand (whereas, in the technical term equivalent to what " despon- London portrait, the man proffers his left); sare " or " copulare " means in Latin-a term and since, in his opinion, Vaernewyck's denoting the action of the person entitled to sentence " die van Fides ghetraut worden " hand over the bride to the bridegroom. Thus (who were married by Fides) was lacking in it is beyond doubt that not only Sandrart, but precision he arbitrarily added the adjectival also Vermander actually meant to say that the clause " die se t'samengaf " (who joined them couple portrayed in the " Hapsburg picture " to each other). So this adjectival clause, so were united by a human figure embodying much emphasized by Monsieur Dimier, turns Faith. The only question is whether or not out to be a mere invention of Vermander's. Vermander is reliable. And this question must But what did Vaernewyck mean by his be answered in the negative. mysterious sentence ? In my opinion he meant Apart from the fact that a description as nothing at all, but simply repeated (or rather thorough as that in Queen Mary's inventory translated) information which in all probability where even the mirror is mentioned would puzzled him as much as his translation puzzles hardly omit a full-size figure, we must inquire his readers. We should not forget that from whom Vermander gleaned his information Vaernewyck had not seen the picture either, about a picture which, as mentioned above, for it had been brought to Spain by Queen he had never seen.