 |
Some new findings on the method of work in Theodoric's
workshop emerged quite unexpectedly from the study of
the preparatory drawing. The significance of this drawing,
with which we are acquainted by means of infrared rays,
can be considered from various points of view, from the
purely technical to the more art-historical aspects. As
we know, a centre has actually been established for
the study of the preparatory drawing of Dutch panel painting
which sets itself the target, inter alia, of differentiating
the various authors in this way and thus distinguishing
later replicas or copies. In its initial phase our study,
too, was directed towards the possible differentiation
of the hands of individual masters and their assistants.
The partial results have already been published in Technologia
Artis 2. With regard to the actual technique of the preparatory
drawing it must be pointed out that the black brush drawing
which can be seen so clearly on the infrared photos was
not the initial drawing. According to reflectograms it
was preceded by a drawing in strongly diluted water
paint, the lines of which run almost parallel and probably
followed the initial charcoal drawing. The individual
artistic types of drawing are stated and illustrated in
the previously mentioned article (Technologia Artis 2,
p.75).
There exists a large group of pictures in which the
dimensions of the head or the entire figure were enlarged
at the stage of the preparatory drawing. Further corrections
of dimensions were then carried out in the painting layer.
An example we might mention is the painting of St Matthew,
where an increase in the number of strokes, indicating
shadows, can be clearly seen on the cheek or at the base
of the nose. Differences were also observed in the manner
of drawing of the face and draperies, indicating that
these tasks may have been specialised. In the flesh parts
of the Holy Prophet and St George there prevails in the
faces delicate drawing with a double line indicating
shadow at the base of the nose, whereas the folds of the
drapery are drawn with strong, energetic strokes, similar
to the drawing of the painting of St Anne.
The role of the workshop in the phase of the preparatory
drawing is clear in a whole series of paintings where
the drawing shows signs of seeking form and the lines
are uncertain, with frequent corrections. The preparation
of the painting was clearly entrusted to the workshop
in the initial phase. How the workshop dealt with this
task and what means it had available is the subject of
the further part of the study.
The study of the drawing showed that it is possible to
prove the existence of workshop patterns and tracings
which served various purposes. First of all there are
overall composition schemes, the nature of which was governed
by the given theme, often binding for reasons outside
art. These schemes are the same in a number of cases
or are used in mirror reversion. Good examples are the
paintings of the female saints, such as St Otylia, St
Barbara, St Catherine, St Margaret, etc. Also connected
with the theme are patterns of the character of the face
which point to a certain more or less limited number
of variants. Study of the typology of the heads showed
that the shape of the head and the details of the face,
i.e. eyes, nose, are completely identical in a number
of cases, as though they originated through tracing. Variations
concern only the shape of the beards or hair, or perhaps
the absence of both. Also demonstrable are patterns of
certain details of composition, for instance of the hands
or folds of drapery. In the study of these details on
infrared photos there stood out not only identical forms,
but also identical proportions, so that one gains the
impression that in the workshop there existed full-size
patterns. Several types of hands were used for various
functions, but it is possible to demonstrate that those
employed in the workshop did not always select the right
type for the given function. Thus, for instance, the motif
of the holding of a cross between two fingers was
quite often transferred quite illogically to the holding
of a book or an orb. As an example of the stereotype
of a gesture of the hand one might mention the paintings
of St James the Less, St Bartholomew, St Matthew, a Holy
Ruler and St Louis. The striking appearance of the identical
gestures was suppressed in some cases in the paint layer
by the covering of one or more fingers with paint. In
all cases there exist mirror reversions.
A similar situation also exists in the motifs of drapery.
The basic shape of the folds, for instance at the bend
in the elbow, is in a number of cases completely
identical at the stage of the preparatory drawing and
was later possibly altered in the layer of painting. It
is difficult to judge whether the change in the dimensions
of the figures, which can be seen in a great number
of the infrared photographs, especially in the faces,
is connected with the work of the workshop. It is possible
at least to conjecture that the drawing was prepared in
advance in the workshop on a whole series of panels
at once and only later amended in the painting when suitable
proportions had been fixed. This is indicated, inter alia,
by the series of pictures of the Holy Rulers and Bishops,
where the infrared photography showed changes in the size
of the faces. The final version also suppresses the crowns
of the rulers as indicated in the drawings. It is possible
to presume that these pictures with corrections of form
and also the pictures where the figures do not exceed
the inner area of the panel represent the initial stage
of work. This is also suggested by the draft drawings
of the saints found on the plaster of the Altar Wall,
where the figures are sketched together with the frames
in various scales, as though the author was searching
for the right size for the paintings, as is reported by
Tamara Beranová and Jiří Třeštík. No figure here, however,
extends onto the frame. A similar example is the painting
of St Bartholomew, the first compositional sketch for
which did not count on extending to the frame and only
in the course of the painting were the outlines of the
figure extended onto the area of the frame. The painting
altered the sketched scheme of the folds of the drapery,
the shape of the head, the hair and the face.
Division of labour was, as we know, quite common in medieval
workshops and it is not possible to preclude a certain
amount of specialisation in the execution of the preparatory
drawings. It would be quite natural that the author of
the drawing would not always be the author of the painting,
but it is difficult to imagine that an important master
would limit his participation to the preparatory drawing.
Nor can the cooperation of the workshop be considered
a phenomenon which would reduce the artistic value
of the work in the eyes of the person ordering it, taking
into consideration the basically different concept of
authorial merits in the Middle Ages. With regard to the
complicated nature of such an immense task as was the
decoration of the Chapel of the Holy Rood, the work done
by specialist assistants played an important part. It
is natural that such an assistant should make his work
easier by using patterns (tracings or stencils?). The
examples we have given indicate that Theodoricus' workshop
used both complete compositional schemes and also patterns
of certain details of the shape of hands and parts of
drapery.
St Ann Metertia by Master Theodoric - infrared photo Sona
Divišová. Detail.
Striking paint drawing with widening of stroke in middle
and pointed completion. Marked alterations in composition
indicate creative procedure of one of main Masters.
|
|
Infrared Photographs of Apostles
by Master Theodoric
(S. Divišová): St. Simon: the composition, type
of head and position of left hand are the same as in the
picture of St Bartholomew (head is mirror image). Identical
drawing of hand - with variation of visible fifth finger
- is to be found on a number of further paintings. Here
the little finger is hidden by the painting of the book
(clear traces of fixing of metal cross).
Infrared Photographs of Apostles
by Master Theodoric
(S. Divišová): St Bartholomew: A number
of motifs in composition and form are identical to the
picture of St Simon, the left hand, however, holds only
a book, not a cross: shape is used illogically, regardless
of function.
At the same time the
positions of these details were shifted or reversed as
in a mirror. The relatively large number of pentiments
shows that the preparatory drawing was often corrected
by the painting in order to achieve a greater variety
of form. Only in the actual painting layer was the picture
given its true artistic form.
Convincing proofs of the use of
patterns in workshop practice in another field of art
were given recently in a study by M. Schuster-Gawlowska
which dealt with preparatory drawings of icons of Lesser
Poland from the period 1450-1550 (Annales d'Histoire de
I'Art et d'Archeologie XII -1990, pp.43- 53). This concerned
mainly a popular type of Hodegetria which was copied,
as proved by the author, in painters' studios for the
relatively lengthy period of one hundred years. The infrared
photographs showed that the heads of the Virgin Mary and
the Infant Jesus and their hands are identical and variations
concern only a shifting of the position of the Child closer
to the Mother or a shift in the axis of the entire composition.
More basic differentiation was then carried out on the
one hand in the manner of gilding the background and on
the other hand in the actual painting. A total of nine
variations of the given type were studied, but the author
claims that in reality there are a great many more in
existence. Their widespreading may also have taken place
thanks to the travels of journeymen whose duty was not
only to gain experience in other workshops, but also to
collect the patterns of popular compositions.
It seems that religiosity in Eastern areas was favourable
to the repetition of this pattern, which was an important
one for religious reasons. In our country no such widespreading
of patterns seems to have occurred. The case of Karlštejn
Castle is clearly an exception caused by the nature of
the task in hand.
In conclusion it is possible to say that the study of
the preparatory drawings of Theodoric's type confirmed
its innovative standing in the development of Gothic painting
in our country. The character of this drawing is, taken
as a whole, far more fluent and free in comparison with
the strictly linear concept of the drawing of other works
of the same period, especially those which later culminated
in the Beautiful Style. The frequent changes, concerning
not only details, but the entire composition, are proof
of a creative enthusiasm which is imposing in its extratemporal
nature.
From composition analyses, published by M. Schuster-Gawlowska.
 author
Radana Hamsíková, AHVT B 047
|
|
