A Masterly Hand / Scientia Artis 9

321 320 Conclusion Famke Peters and Christina Ceulemans For two years researchers from the KIK-IRPA and other institutions in ­ Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany and elsewhere pored over the complex phenomenon that is the Master of Elsloo. In this comparatively short space of time a wealth of data was collected. Over one hundred sculptures were closely examined and detailed photographic records were made. In Belgium every one of the eighty or so works linked to the Master of Elsloo was dealt with in this way. The sculptures were studied from both a technical and an art-historical point of view. The technical study focused on the materials and working ­ methods involved in their manufacture. This led to several interesting find- ings. It is, for instance, quite exceptional to be able to analyse such a sizable group of sculptures by dendrochronology, which provides a firm basis for establishing the date and origin of the wood. All the works examined proved to be made from regional oak; in the entire Elsloo oeuvre only a very few sculptures are in a different species of wood. The oak wood used was fairly raw, with the knots and irregular growth pattern typical of isolated trees or trees that have grown on forest borders or in open woodland. This comparatively ­ inferior material was resourcefully handled to create an end product of great quality. Despite the difficulties inherent to the choice of wood the ­ sculptures were generally carved from a single block with only an occasional element, such as an arm, hand or attribute, being separately made and added. Dendrochronology also brought to light some surprising cases of sculptures preserved in different places yet made with wood from the same tree. Of great interest, too, was the opportunity to make a dendrochronological comparison of sculptures that are part of a coherent group, such as a series of apostles, to better determine the relationships between them. That it was often possible to fix the earliest possible felling date for the tree from which a sculpture was made, with a number of more precise dates in cases where sapwood is present, can be regarded as a major achievement. From the presence of specific marks on the top and bottom surfaces of sculptures it was established that several types of workbench were used. In one type wooden or metal pins held the block of wood horizontal between the two uprights of the workbench, allowing it to be rotated; in another the block was clamped to a kind of table or trestle. Marks from different bench types were found even within iconographically or stylistically coherent groups, which would seem to indicate that the sculptures were produced in workshops of a certain size. Then again, the presence of matching marks on other works suggests that they were made on the same bench, which strengthens the pre- sumed link between these sculptures. The surface treatment of the wood – clearly visible in the numerous ­ sculptures that are now without paint – varies from one work to the next,