A Masterly Hand / Scientia Artis 9

323 Conclusion 322 The stylistic analysis was not an end in itself, however, but was embedded in the larger body of technical and art-historical research. A good example of what such an interdisciplinary approach can produce is provided by the sculp- tures in Neeroeteren and Siersdorf, several of which show striking stylistic similarities. Moreover, a sculpture from Neeroeteren and one from Siersdorf proved to have been made from the same tree. Other sculptures in the two places were found to bear corresponding workbench marks. Together, all these material, technical and stylistic elements confirm the relationship between the sculptures. Issues of methodology also arose throughout the period of the study. A work- ing method was developed and perfected whose aim was to enable the research, particularly the material and technical examinations, and the photography of the sculptures to proceed systematically and efficiently. This working method proved successful and can be applied to other groups of sculptures in the future. An important methodological question concerned the name given to the Master of Elsloo. What exactly did the name stand for and does it still have the same connotations? The technical and stylistic study has made the diversity within the extensive oeuvre even more apparent, which would seem to indicate that there were several sculptors and possibly even several workshops involved. This is consistent with suggestions made in the earlier art-historical literature. Nevertheless, the sculptures bear common stylistic traits, stylistic formulas, as it were, that form the binding medium of the oeuvre and gave rise to those numerous attributions. The term ‘Master of Elsloo’ seems not to represent a single sculptor, therefore, but rather a style that was in fashion in a certain period and region. Another problem associated with the name ‘Master of Elsloo’ is that the stylistic diversity in the oeuvre means that not every sculp- ture displays a clear relationship to the key work, the St Anne with the Virgin and Child in Elsloo. Moreover, this sculpture does not come from Elsloo itself but was moved there in the nineteenth century from the Minster in Roermond, from which it could also originate. So to replace ‘Master of Elsloo’ with ‘Master of Roermond’, as has been sometimes suggested, offers no ­solution to the other problems just outlined. During the final discussion of the conference the term ‘middle Meuse style’ was suggested as an alternative. This would immediately eliminate the impres- sion of a single sculptor and would also neutralize the reference to the Elsloo St Anne and Elsloo the place. Robert Didier and Hartmut Krohm had already tacked ‘middle Meuse’ onto the name ‘Master of Elsloo’ in reference to works attributed to ‘him’ in the catalogue of the 1977 Duitse Middeleeuwse beeld­ houwwerken in Belgische verzamelingen exhibition. Didier brought this term up for discussion again in the Laatgotische beelden in Limburg en Grensland cata- logue of 1990, but in that context preferred ‘Limburg’ to denote the specific stylistic character of works from that region. However, the main objections raised at the colloquium in 2011 were that the term ‘middle Meuse style’, as being the style of the middle Meuse region, covers more than just the Master