Frames and supports in 15th and 16th-century Southern Netherlandish painting

CHAPTER X 270 116. Verougstraete and Van Schoute 1994, 349-360. These observations allow us to suggest some conclusions and hypotheses. Firstly, the frames of the large triptychs are carefully constructed, with neat mouldings. Median rails reinforce the central portion to the rear. At the front the lower rails are bevelled to form inclined sills. The frames of the wings are similar to those of the central part, but a little narrower and less deep, and therefore lighter. In the small triptychs the lower rails also take the form of inclined sills, with the other mouldings sometimes simpler than on the large altarpieces. In the frames of works by Jan van Eyck and Robert Campin, we have observed the opposite: the profiles of the small frames are much more neatly produced than those of the large frames. 116 The adoption of the outer listel strip seems to represent a step in evolution, perhaps based on improved tooling. It is not found on the earliest frames, or else is simply painted in black on a gold background. A parallel trend is observed in the joints, which are originally cut square or have mixed cuts: full mitering has the effect of producing a triangular shaped tenon. The frame of the Maarten van Nieuwenhove Diptych (Bruges, SJH , no. 5 ) occupies a special place, in terms of both mouldings and joints. The moulding lacks the listel that had become habitual in contemporary works. The light joints at the top (glued only, which is exceptional: joints being almost always pegged) and solid joints at the bottom (mortise and tenon) would seem to signify that the work was intended to be supported from the bottom rather than hung. The original presentation of the diptych and its use do not seem fully resolved. The simple assembly of the frame of Gilles Joye , along with the equally simply moulding and marbled polychromy, sets it apart from the characteristic frames of Memling works. In this case, these observations are consistent with the style and pictorial layer, both intentionally archaic. A question mark must remain over its attribution to Memling. The frame of The Sibyl Sambetha (Bruges, SJH , no. 3 ) has an ogee moulding and is decorated with marbling. The Boston Christ Blessing also presents ogee moulding. This type of moulding is rarely observed in this group of works. One can probably not draw any conclusions except in the case of the frame of the Portrait of Obrecht where the joints and polychromy are also different from those usually observed in Memling. The frame bears the date 1496 and Jacob Obrecht was attached to the Church of Our Lady in Antwerp (now Antwerp Cathedral) from 1492 to 1496. We therefore propose to consider the construction of the frame as an additional argument for locating this portrait in Antwerp rather than in Bruges. The grisaille on the outside, for the catalogue author “in the style of Metsys”, appears original. This grisaille, the attitude in prayer of the figure facing to the right, the presence of traces of hinges on the right side and bevelled mouldings on the reverse suggest that this painting is a wing rather than an isolated work.