HistoryExtra https://www.historyextra.com/tag/what-great-paintings-say Mon, 09 Oct 2023 12:26:28 GMT en hourly 1 What great paintings say: The Ambassadors by Hans Holbein the Younger, 1533 https://www.historyextra.com/membership/the-ambassadors-hans-holbein-the-younger-1533/ Wed, 19 Apr 2023 15:51:31 GMT https://www.historyextra.com/membership/the-ambassadors-hans-holbein-the-younger-1533/ Painted by the artist of the cream of Tudor society – including the royals themselves – this painting appears at first glance to be a typical portrait of a French diplomat and his friend. But hidden within the display of wealth and grandeur are signs of discord and disruption It is 1533 and England is in turmoil: Pope Clement has refused to annul Henry VIII’s marriage to Catherine of Aragon and the English king is furious. Ignoring papal threats of excommunication, Henry marries the already pregnant Anne Boleyn and breaks with the Catholic Church in Rome.
The English Reformation had begun in earnest. It is against this backdrop of religious upheaval and uncertainty that Hans Holbein the Younger, a German artist employed at the English court, created one of his most impressive works.
Painted during his second trip to England, it depicts Jean de Dinteville (seen on the far left), courtier and ambassador to the French king Francis I, and his close friend, Georges de Selve, bishop of Lavaur.
Between them are a range of objects that at first glance, might seem to have been strategically placed to reflect the interests, religiosity or intellect of the sitters, as was common in Renaissance portraiture.
- On the podcast | Franny Moyle chronicles the incredible art and tempestuous life of Hans Holbein the Younger
“The Ambassadors is a painting whose vibrancy and imposing life-size figures immediately piques the viewer’s interest,” says Emma Capron, associate curator of Renaissance painting at the National Gallery, London. “But it is also a work that merits closer examination, to unpack the messages that Holbein and his sitters are trying to convey.”
Between the two men, scattered across an expensive Anatolian carpet, are an array of technical instruments associated with the measurement of time, altitude and the position of the stars and other celestial bodies; on the shelf beneath them sit objects relating to music and mathematics.
“What is particularly interesting about these objects is their imperfections,” comments Capron. “The timekeeping devices are all slightly miscalibrated, perhaps a reflection of the turbulent times in which they are living. The lute’s broken string and a missing pipe in the case of flutes could be symbolic of wider disharmony and discord; even the arithmetic book, propped open with a set square, has been opened to a page illustrating division.
“The piece is littered with discreet signs that something is amiss with the world. England’s break with Rome was a moment of huge instability. Today, we know that England never returned to the Catholic fold, but at the time, there was real uncertainty as to whether the country would reconcile with Rome,” says Capron.
“As well as a display of material wealth and abundance, this work may well have served as a prompt for the big conversations of the day; a reflection of the uncertainty and instability rippling across Europe.”
The Ambassadors: 3 hidden secrets
Crucifix
Partially obscured by the sumptuous green curtain is a small crucifix – perhaps a hint at the need for Christian unity and salvation through Christ.
Dagger sheath
Jean de Dinteville’s elaborate dagger sheath, with its impressive gold tassle, is inscribed with the number 29, indicating that he is in his 29th year.
Skull
The huge elongated skull, which can only be seen properly if viewed from the bottom right corner of the painting – a popular Renaissance optical illusion known as anamorphosis – was designed as a memento mori, a reminder of the frailty of life and the ever-present spectre of death.
The Ambassadors hangs in Room 12 at the National Gallery, London. Visit the website for more information on the painting and how to visit, or explore of more of secrets messages within famous paintings in our What Great Paintings Say series:
- The Arnolfini Portrait by Jan van Eyck, 1434
- Marriage à-la-mode: 2. The Tête à Tête by William Hogarth, c1743–45
- American Gothic By Grant Wood, 1930
- Dido Elizabeth Belle and Lady Elizabeth Murray by David Martin, c1779
This article was first published in the February 2022 issue of BBC History Revealed
]]> What great paintings say: Dido Elizabeth Belle and Lady Elizabeth Murray by David Martin, c1779 https://www.historyextra.com/membership/painting-dido-elizabeth-belle-lady-elizabeth-murray-david-martin/ Wed, 25 Jan 2023 22:58:03 GMT https://www.historyextra.com/membership/painting-dido-elizabeth-belle-lady-elizabeth-murray-david-martin/ This highly unusual painting of Dido Elizabeth Belle and Lady Elizabeth Murray sheds new light on the experiences of people of colour in 18th-century England Hanging in the Ambassador’s Room at Scone Palace in Perth, Scotland, is one of the most extraordinary works of British portraiture, and one whose story has only recently been rediscovered. It is the only known portrait of Dido Belle, the illegitimate daughter of Sir John Lindsay, an officer in the Royal Navy, and Maria Belle, an enslaved African woman whom Sir John had liberated from a Spanish slave ship.
What is significant, though, is that Dido – a mixed-race woman living in London near the peak of the transatlantic slave trade – is portrayed as an equal to the painting’s white sitter – her cousin, Lady Elizabeth Murray. It is, in short, one of the earliest positive portrayals of a black person in British art.
View Green Video on the source website
A powerful influence
“For centuries, it was assumed that Lady Elizabeth had been painted with her servant or slave,” says William Murray, Viscount Stormont, whose family have lived at Scone for more than 400 years. “But in the 1980s, the identity of the portrait’s mixed-race sitter was rediscovered, and the incredible story of Dido Belle came to light.”
Dido is thought to have been brought to England at the age of about five, and was placed under the guardianship of her father’s uncle, William Murray, 1st Earl of Mansfield. Raised as an aristocratic lady alongside her cousin, Dido was taught to read, write, play music, dance and entertain guests. But her presence and status as a member of the family would certainly have raised eyebrows in 18th-century society.
“Dido was much-loved by the family and enjoyed a close relationship with the Earl, who probably commissioned this double portrait,” says Stormont. “But their relationship may have had consequences that no one could have predicted.
“As Lord Chief Justice, Murray presided over several high-profile cases, including the 1772 case of Somerset v Stewart, which saw a slave owner try to have his escaped slave forcibly removed to the West Indies. In a landmark ruling that is widely considered the beginning of the end of slavery in Britain, Murray found in favour of the enslaved man, concluding that ‘the state of slavery... [is] so odious that nothing can be suffered to support it’. Nine years later he would rule against the owners of the Zong slave ship, who tried to claim insurance on the enslaved people they had callously thrown overboard. Did Murray’s fondness for Dido influence his decision? In my opinion, it’s highly likely.”
When Murray died in 1793, he officially granted Dido her freedom and left her £500 and an annual allowance of £100. Nine months later she married John Davinier, a gentleman’s steward, and went on to have three children. She died in 1804, aged just 43, but her bold gaze and dimpled smile remain frozen in time – a testament to her remarkable life and legacy.
Words by Charlotte Hodgman
]]> What great paintings say: American Gothic by Grant Wood, 1930 https://www.historyextra.com/membership/painting-american-gothic-by-grant-wood-1930/ Tue, 19 Jul 2022 18:37:23 GMT https://www.historyextra.com/membership/painting-american-gothic-by-grant-wood-1930/ Instantly familiar and much parodied, Grant Wood’s Depression-era painting American Gothic leaves observers with more questions than answers “All the really good ideas I ever had came to me while I was milking a cow,” reflected Grant Wood in 1936. And – whether bovine-inspired or not – arguably none of his ideas have been as good, nor had such an impact, as his 1930 work American Gothic.
Dubbed the US answer to Mona Lisa, American Gothic is arguably one of the most parodied artworks in the world, lampooned in films such as The Rocky Horror Picture Show, and even starring in an episode of The Simpsons. But what is it about this painting that has captured our imaginations for nearly a century?
“For me, American Gothic’s appeal lies in its sense of mystery and ambiguity,” says Sarah Kelly Oehler, Field-McCormick chair and curator of arts of the Americas at the Art Institute of Chicago. “From the identity of the sitters to Wood’s reasons for painting it, the work has an intriguing narrative blankness that has allowed it to be re-envisioned in so many different ways.
“Wood deliberately cultivated this ambiguity – mostly because it was good publicity – staying vague as to whether the duo are husband and wife or father and daughter; it is these sorts of enduring questions that have helped drive the painting’s popularity.”
Watch: Secrets of American Gothic
View Green Video on the source website
Midwestern outrage
Wood painted the work in the autumn of 1930 – at the outset of the Great Depression – after being inspired by a house he had seen in Eldon, Iowa, earlier that year. As he looked at the house – an outdated building from the 1880s, built in a style known as Carpenter Gothic – Wood had tried to imagine the sort of people who might live there: “American Gothic people” was his final conclusion. On his return home, Wood asked his sister, Nan, and his dentist to model – on separate occasions – for the piece, styling and dressing them as if they were “tintypes from my old family album”. Indeed, Wood instructed Nan to send away for “a prim, colonial print” apron and overalls from a mail order firm. The rickrack trim of Nan’s apron, long out of style, was ripped from some of their mother’s old dresses.
Intriguing as it is, the painting would likely have remained relatively unknown had Wood not entered it in a competition at the Art Institute of Chicago, where, incidentally, it has hung ever since. The piece was awarded third prize, but it wasn’t long before it was being picked up in the press as an exemplar of rural Iowa. And Iowans were outraged.
What to look for
Repeating forms
Wood uses several repeating forms in the painting, linking all the elements together: the shape of the pitchfork is duplicated in the lines of the man’s overalls, and to some extent in the lines of the house. Elsewhere, the pattern of the woman’s apron is the same as the fabric of the blinds at the window. The whole painting feels elongated – from the faces to the pitchfork, to the Gothic-style window.
Black dress
Some art historians believe that this is a mourning portrait, reflected in the woman’s black dress and the closed blind in the window – a mourning custom that had been common in 19th-century America.
Masculine v feminine
The woman is associated with the domestic elements of the house – such as the plants and porch behind her – while the barn and pitchfork represent traditionally masculine farm labour.
“The painting sparked a huge backlash in Wood’s hometown of Cedar Rapids, with many Iowans taking offence at being depicted as ‘pinched, grim-faced, puritanical Bible-thumpers’,” says Oehler. “Locals wrote to the press asserting that the painting was not an accurate representation of the Midwest, insisting that they had fashionable hairstyles and clothing and used modern farming techniques.” One particularly incensed farmer’s wife is even said to have threatened to bite off Wood’s ear.
Whether a work of satire or not – something Wood always denied – there have been countless theories about the painting over the past nine decades. To some, the unsmiling couple – exuding a formality reminiscent of 19th-century daguerreotypes – represent the grit of the pioneer spirit and a return to authentic American values. Others have been more preoccupied with their relationship. Whether he is a father or husband, the hostile stare and tightly gripped pitchfork evoke the feeling that this is a man protecting both the virtue of the woman beside him and his home.
Concludes Oehler: “For me, who they are is not important; it’s the lack of knowing that interests me. The painting’s ambiguity, their blank expressions, leave it wide open to interpretation – and parody. It’s a big part of why American Gothic remains such a popular and well-known painting, even after all this time.”
What other great paintings say
- The Arnolfini Portrait by Jan van Eyck, 1434
- Marriage à-la-mode: 2. The Tête à Tête by William Hogarth, c1743–45
American Gothic hangs in Gallery 263 at the Art Institute of Chicago. Visit the institute’s website for more information on the painting, and how to visit
This article was first published in the June 2022 issue of BBC History Revealed
]]> What great paintings say: Marriage à-la-mode: 2. The Tête à Tête by William Hogarth, c1743–45 https://www.historyextra.com/membership/william-hogarth-marriage-a-la-mode-2-the-tete-a-tete/ Thu, 26 May 2022 13:29:26 GMT https://www.historyextra.com/membership/william-hogarth-marriage-a-la-mode-2-the-tete-a-tete/ William Hogarth’s satirical series provided humour with a serious undertone. Discover the meaning behind his painting Marriage à-la-mode: 2. The Tête à Tête A quick glance at William Hogarth’s oil on canvas work is enough to tell the viewer that all is not well in this 18th-century aristocratic household. The second in a six-part series, designed to illustrate the disastrous consequences of marrying for money rather than love, evidence of disorder, debauchery and disarray are scattered all around the expensive, yet garishly decorated, room.
“Hogarth’s Marriage A-la-Mode series spoke to the social preoccupations of the time,” says Alice Insley, assistant curator of historic British art at Tate Britain and co-curator of a current exhibition on the artist. “It’s a classic tale of an aristocratic family that has fallen on hard times marrying into a wealthy merchant family who are looking to better their social standing: a marriage of convenience.”
Watch: the meaning behind Marriage à-la-mode: 2. The Tête à Tête
View Green Video on the source website
The union is clearly not a happy one. The clock to the right of the mantelpiece shows that it is past midday, yet there is little in the way of household activity. Viscount Squanderfield is slumped in a chair after a night of debauchery with his mistress – alluded to by the dog who is tugging a woman’s muslin cap from his pocket and the lady’s favour wrapped around his fallen sword. The Viscountess, too, seems to be feeling the effects of what, from the scattered cards on the floor, looks to have been a late evening of gaming. Even the servant in the adjoining room, his hair still in rollers, looks half asleep, stretching and yawning.
“This series is one of the finest four examples of Hogarth’s painting,” says Insley, “and follows the couple’s relationship from the brokering of their marriage to the tragic conclusion to their dissolute lives.
“Hogarth made a name for himself with these types of paintings – what he referred to as his modern moral series – and their contemporary themes struck a chord during a period of rapid social change in England.
“The market for art changed a great deal in the 18th century,” Insley continues, “and even middle-class households could afford to line their walls with art, particularly prints, which were also common features in taverns and coffeehouses. It’s no surprise, then, that Hogarth capitalised on England’s burgeoning print-culture, initially painting the works so that they could be engraved, and then selling the engravings to subscribers for a guinea a set.”
With almost every brushstroke, Hogarth painted a story of marital disharmony. The overturned chair and the two violins laying on top of each other suggest that someone has had to leave the room in a hurry and is one of several details – including the Viscountess’ satisfied stretch and side-eyed look of apparent triumph – that indicate that the mistress of the house is also up to no good. Indeed, later in the series it is revealed that she is conducting an affair with the young lawyer, Silvertongue, who brokered the marriage.
All around are signs that this is a couple with more money than taste – from the grotesque buddha, cat and fish pastiche to the mantelpiece crammed with mismatched figurines, to the room’s garish colour scheme. Money, Hogarth seems to say, does not necessarily bring happiness or, indeed, taste.
This article was first published in the January 2022 issue of BBC History Revealed magazine
]]> What great paintings say: The Arnolfini Portrait by Jan van Eyck, 1434 https://www.historyextra.com/membership/the-arnolfini-portrait-jan-van-eyck-1434/ Thu, 05 May 2022 11:50:38 GMT https://www.historyextra.com/membership/the-arnolfini-portrait-jan-van-eyck-1434/ Jan van Eyck’s 15th-century masterpiece The Arnolfini Portrait has intrigued art historians for centuries, but what secrets does it contain? At a modest 86cm by 60cm, The Arnolfini Portrait – as it is commonly known – is far from the National Gallery’s largest painting, but it is certainly one of its most intriguing. Not for nothing has it been described as one of the greatest examples of Early Northern Renaissance art.
On first glance, the painting – oil on wood – appears to depict a wealthy couple in a domestic setting, the bed perhaps indicating that they are in a bedchamber. End of story? Far from it, says Dr Emma Capron, associate curator of Renaissance painting at the National Gallery, London.
Watch: Secrets of The Arnolfini Portrait
“The Arnolfini Portrait is completely unique,” says Capron. “There is nothing else like it that has survived in 15th-century art. For a long time, it was thought to depict the Italian merchant Giovanni di Arrigo Arnolfini. But more recently, art historian Lorne Campbell has argued that the figures are more likely to be his merchant cousin, Giovanni di Nicolao Arnolfini and his second wife, whose identity is unknown. They all resided in Bruges.”
The pose of the woman as she deliberately clutches her voluminous green gown to her stomach has led many to conclude that she is pregnant, while the couple’s joined hands could indicate that this is, in fact, a wedding portrait. Indeed, the artist’s flourishing signature above the mirror – Johannes de eyck fuit hic (Jan van Eyck was here) – has been interpreted by some as the artist bearing witness to the nuptials.
“The pregnancy theory was popular for a long time,” comments Capron. “But her pose actually has more to do with showing off the rich fabric of her gown, and ideas of female beauty at the time. Women with prominent stomachs had a strong visual appeal in the 15th century, and these were sartorially emphasised with high belts and folds of fabric. By lifting her gown, she reveals the expensive fur lining beneath – possibly ermine or miniver (squirrel fur) – which is depicted in a white that would have been nearly impossible to achieve in real life. The focus on her stomach does relate to fertility, but it is more a demonstration of fecundity and an ability to produce an heir rather than evidence of pregnancy.”
- READ MORE | A beginner's guide to art history
Historically, much has been read into the other objects carefully strewn around the room. In the 1930s, art historian Erwin Panofsky used the painting as a basis for his theory of ‘disguised symbolism’, whereby each object has a hidden meaning. Paintings, he believed, could be decoded and deciphered: the oranges on the table represented original sin, for example, while the presence of the dog at the woman’s feet could be read as a symbol of her fidelity to her husband.
“Panofsky’s theories are very seductive,” says Capron, “and he, too, also argued that the painting was a form of marriage contract. But his ideas are not always grounded in fact. Once we begin to unpick the realism of the painting, it becomes clear that what Van Eyck has done is create an illusion of reality; something to be enjoyed for its exquisite detail rather than its hidden mysteries.
“The portrait is a carefully constructed reality – a figment of Van Eyck’s imagination and a product of his incredible brush and powers of observation. His elaborate signature, ‘Jan van Eyck was here’, in this context calls us back to that fact that, as a place only he has visualised, he is the only one who has ever been in this room.”
The Arnolfini Portrait: 3 hidden secrets
1. MIRROR
The two figures depicted in the ornate mirror are unidentified, but a popular theory is that one of them is the portrait’s artist, Jan van Eyck himself.
2. DOG
The small dog is of a breed now known as the Brussels Griffon and, remarkably, was painted onto the portrait with no initial underdrawing.
3. CHANDELIER
One theory is that the painting is a posthumous portrait of Arnolfini’s wife: the candle on his side is lit, the candle on her side is not. The presence of the little dog at her feet, as is often seen on female tombs, has also been put forward to support this idea.
The Arnolfini Portrait hangs in Room 63 at the National Gallery in London. Visit the website for more information on the painting
This article was first published in the Christmas 2021 issue of BBC History Revealed
]]>