A Masterly Hand / Scientia Artis 9

147 Michel Lefftz 6 146 Summary – A Reflection on Methodology and a Contribution to the Morphological Definition of the Sculptures of the Elsloo Group In this article a number of ideas are set forth for approaching this subject, based solely upon internal criteria such as the stylistic features of the some two hundred sculptures attributed to the Master of Elsloo. It has been ­possible to date this significant output and to distinguish between the more accom- plished work of the master and that of his workshop by using detailed ­ morphological and technical analysis. The two approaches are entirely con- sistent with each other because the techniques used for making copies within a single workshop are not the same as those used for making copies of works produced in other workshops. The sheer number of works connected with the St Anne with the Virgin and Child of Elsloo, from which the group derives its name, is a major advantage because it strengthens the presumptions made regarding attribution of author- ship. The classification criteria based upon features of the works serves not only to identify which works should be included in the St Anne group and which should not, it also enables a date sequence to be established for the work of the main sculptor – master – and that of his helpers. The great number of these works means that there must have been quite a few ‘assistants’ doing secondary work. There is a continuity of style, so that we can still speak of the Master of Elsloo even though it is obvious that many hands were at work. The ten figures of the Crucified Christ, shown in the catalogue, already reveal the main features, and a look at other statues has provided the details and shades of difference required for an overall picture of the main types of figure to be arrived at. And of course this continuity does not mean that there had to be a single main master; it can also have been the result of several successive generations of artists. This would also explain the most significant stylistic changes, notably representations of the face between the first and the second periods, but also the variations in physiognomy during the fourth period. Passage from the third period to the fourth seems strongly to suggest a single individual, since it reflects an abrupt change rather than a gradual transition. ( translation by the author)