Crowning Element of a Tabernacle, with the Virgin and Child flanked by Sts Benedict and Bernard of Clairvaux

Entry

The format of this unique and exceptionally refined relief recalls a so-called ‘memorial tablet’, but in the absence of a donor or any ostensible reference to death, this function seems quite improbable. More telling is the clerical nature of the relief’s iconography, which nevertheless rules out the possibility of its use as an object of private devotion, such as a house altar. In 1989, Haarsma theorized that the relief – albeit with no means of verifying its specific purpose and with no comparable pieces known to exist² – is most likely to have functioned as a carved decorative element surmounting a wall tabernacle of a church.³ Her key argument lay in a number of explicit iconographic references to the Eucharist. First and foremost, the Christ Child appears holding two sacred objects kept in a church’s tabernacle: in his left hand he holds a chalice, in his right the Host. Depicted in this manner, he fulfils the symbolic role of the ‘first priest’, who, in a ritual known as the ‘Minor Elevation’, raises the Chalice and the Host while reciting the final verses of the Eucharistic Prayer (the Roman Canon). If so, Christ’s banderole may possibly have been inscribed with a fragment of this canonical text. Also depicted on the relief are Mary, St John the Baptist, and the saints Peter and Paul. During the Preface to the Canon, the priest not only dedicates his offering to all saints, but in the same breath he specifically cites the names of these four holy figures.⁴ Mary, wearing the crown upon her head and appearing in combination with her son holding the Chalice and the Host, can therefore be identified as Ecclesia, the Bride of Christ in the Song of Songs.⁵

Flanking the central scene of the Virgin and Child are two important monastic saints, accompanied by abbatial symbols of distinction: the crosier (baculum; on the left accompanied by a white sudarium) and the shoes (pedules). Appearing on the left is St Benedict of Nursia (480-550), the eponymous founder of the Benedictine Order, dressed in a black cowl (a long hooded garment); standing on the right is the founder of the Cistercian Order, St Bernard of Clairvaux (1091-1153).⁶ In status and scale, these two figures are rendered virtually equal to the Virgin and Child and even assigned a place above the apostles Peter and Paul, whose half-figures adorn the predella. Positioned between them is John the Baptist, depicted in his role as the prophet of Christ’s coming. The Old Testament prophet, visible beneath the corbel on which the Virgin stands and who points in Christ’s direction, has been given a similar function. In all probability, he is Isaiah, who proclaims the opening words of Salvation History: Ecce virgo concipiet… (Is. 7:14). Presumably, these words were originally inscribed on his banderole.⁷ The relief’s iconography therefore bears an explicit monastic stamp, clearly affirming its place and function within a monastic environment.

Although by no means commonly associated with iconographic convention related to the devotion of Mary, the Christ Child, or the Eucharist, the joint presence of the saints Benedict and Bernard provides a clear indication of the relief’s original context. Such a combined devotion is in fact characteristic of Cistercian ideology in north-western Europe, stemming directly from the affective teachings of Bernard of Clairvaux, with his emphasis on Christ’s human nature.⁸ Mary’s role as the bride from the Song of Songs is also a central theme in Bernard’s writings. Accordingly, the patron and function of this relief must be sought in a Cistercian monastery. Benedict’s presence is not a contradiction, when considering that the Cistercians lived by the rule of the Benedictine Order, even applying it to a stricter degree and placing greater value on simplicity, self-restraint and asceticism.⁹

In format, the relief is a miniature version of a memorial tablet or the mid-section of a monumental altar retable, specifically of a type produced in the In Low Countries during the early sixteenth century: a broad, often tripartite altar with a sinuously curving arch at the top. Examples are found in places such as Utrecht, Antwerp and Brussels, with most datable to the second decade of the sixteenth century.¹⁰ Other known sources include a number of engravings with designs for gothic (retable) architecture designed by the Master W with the Key, whose workshop has been traced to Bruges (e.g. fig. a).¹¹ Most closely related to the Amsterdam relief is perhaps a retable in Clérey, a municipality in the department of Aube in northern France. Although the caisse bears the wood quality mark of Antwerp, the retable itself is attributed to a workshop in Mechelen. Here we encounter the round arch not only framed within the retable’s basic rectangular format but also as an independent form in the two lower flanking niches of the caisse. Also to be observed is the clear similarity of the caisse’s moulding and the form of the predella.¹²

The fine tracery of the three niches is highly compact, rendered in a pattern with a number of variations previously encountered nowhere. The decorative beading above the top row of arches in the side niches, for example, is exceptional and without antecedent. The flat keystones are a motif also rarely encountered, but possibly inspired by monumental architecture on the rood screen in the Sint-Pieterskerk in Leuven (1488).¹³ A similar form can likewise be seen in the Saluzzo Altarpiece of circa 1510-20 by the Brussels workshop of the Borman-family.¹⁴ The uncommonly heavy execution of the small crowning arches in the side niches – certainly when compared to retable tracery executed in wood or lead – appears to be largely a result of limitations imposed by the material itself. Nevertheless, a small stone epitaph in the ambulatory of the Sint-Dimpnakerk in Geel likewise has a heavy moulding similar to that found on the Amsterdam altar. Here too, the material is certainly much to blame for the bulky execution.¹⁵ The compact rendering of these traceries is reminiscent of the metselrie found on a small oak portable altar, likely of Brabantine (Mechelen?) origin.¹⁶ Notably, the struck ‘M’ on the open page of Paul’s book does not signify a connection to Mechelen: neither the letter type nor the placement outside the gilding concur with the polychromy mark of that city.¹⁷

In spite of the relief’s distinct figurative style, no specific regional attribution as yet been determined. Noteworthy is the sculptor’s attempt to instil a naturalness in the folds of the drapery. Contrary to the standard graphic, angular schemes one typically observes in sculpture from this period, here ripples, breaks and creases in the folds are used to achieve a lively effect particularly evident in Mary’s blue mantle and the lower area of the habits worn by the two saintly abbots on either side. A number of Netherlandish pipeclay statuettes of the Virgin display a treatment of the drapery comparable to that encountered in the relief. These small-scale reproduction sculptures – traditionally associated with Utrecht, though they were also produced elsewhere – were dispersed throughout the Low Countries. In the present relief, the Virgin shares the same kind of elegantly arching pose of the pipeclay Madonnas, including the ornate execution of the crown.¹⁸ Another element is the socle accompanying some of these figures, furnished with gothic-arched niches that frame diminutive figures of prophets in a manner quite similar to those in the tabernacle relief’s predella.

In summary, formal and stylistic arguments regarding the tabernacle relief point to a sculptor from the Southern Netherlands, most likely active in one of the major sculpture centres in Brabant (Brussels, Mechelen and Antwerp), with a date of production circa 1510-20.¹⁹ The relief would have been made for a Cistercian monastery in this area, perhaps under the influence of ideologies emanating from the university of Leuven.²⁰

Frits Scholten, 2024