Virgin and Child

Entry

This standing Virgin and Child generally follows a standard type that emerged shortly before 1300 in France (Paris), commonly referred to as the ‘Madonna of the Poissy type’ based on a statue preserved at the Museum Mayer van den Bergh in Antwerp.⁵ Characteristic of these Madonnas is the knee-length shoulder mantle that drapes around Mary’s body like an apron. As is also to be expected with this type, the Virgin stands in a slightly arched pose with the right foot forward emerging from beneath her undergarment, wearing a crown ornamented with fleur-de-lis palmettes. The Christ Child, seated on the Virgin’s left arm, also falls within the norm, shown naked from the waist up and making the sign of the benediction with one hand while clasping a globe in the other.⁶ Despite these shared traits, however, the Amsterdam statue also displays several noteworthy and subtle deviations from the standard type. Exceptional is the luxurious white Carrara marble from which it has been carved, at this time a material used only on a limited basis and then chiefly in the Meuse area, the Île-de-France and Tuscany. Also atypical is the sculptor’s almost graphic approach to the styling of the drapery folds on both the mother and child. Especially in front, these folds descend in a cascade of sharp, highly defined, zigzagging lines and ridges, in contrast to the sides, where they become fuller, vertical pipe folds gently falling over the arms and down the hips. Also striking are the facial types: not the full-round form with the restrained smile one typically encounters with comparable fourteenth-century saintly figures, but instead a sharper countenance more angular in form, with a pronounced, pointed chin and a sharply defined line of the nose. Another noteworthy deviation is the Virgin’s lily stem, an attribute less frequently encountered on these kinds of statues, particularly with the right hand positioned in this manner. Comparable examples of the present Virgin and Child exist in ivory and wood carving from the above-cited regions and period, but also the seminal silver-gilt Virgin and Child given by Jeanne d’Evreux to the abbey of Saint-Denis in 1339.⁷

While a number of stylistic traits – particularly the sharp, linear drapery schemes – can also be observed with works of marble sculpture produced both in the Meuse area and Tuscany in the fourteenth century, the Amsterdam statue was most likely produced in the core region from where such Madonnas originated: Paris and the Île-de-France.⁸ Austerely executed figures sculpted in Italian white marble, with draperies akin to drawn renderings, are typical of the work of the court sculptor Jean Pépin de Huy (first documented in Paris in 1312 and active until c. 1329), whose name conveys his origin in the Meuse area.⁹ Other sculptors in De Huy’s artistic milieu applied the same stylistic approach, including Jean de Brecquessent (known to have collaborated with De Huy in the years 1313-14),¹⁰ Evrard d’Orleans,¹¹ the Master of Count Haymon,¹² the Master of the Mosan Madonnas, as did artists of the succeeding generation, such as Jean de Liège (active in Paris c. 1361-d. 1381), likewise a native of the Meuse area.¹³

In pose and style, De Huy’s marble Madonna from the parish church of Gosnay (Pas-de-Calais), today preserved at the Musée des Beaux-Arts in Arras, is one example of a work displaying parallels with the Amsterdam statue. Exceptionally well documented, this l’ymage de Notre Dame d’allebastre was commissioned in 1329 in Paris by the Countess Mahaut d’Artois for the Carthusian convent Mont Sainte-Marie de Gosnay.¹⁴ Despite the similarities, differences in the treatment of the face, pose and physical proportions rule out the Amsterdam Madonna’s attribution to the master himself.

A more pronounced agreement can be observed with four royal marble tomb effigies from the abbey church of Saint-Denis near Paris, all commissioned and completed in the years 1327-29. Up to now, these gisants have received only minimal attention in the art historical literature. Depicted on these tombs are the last four kings of the Capetian dynasty: Philip IV ‘the Fair’ (reign 1285-1314), and his three sons, Louis X ‘the Quarrelsome’ (reign 1314-1316), Philip V ‘the Tall’ (reign 1316-1322) and Charles IV ‘the Fair’ (reign 1322-1328). The effigies of the brothers Philip V and Charles IV share a tomb with the effigy of the latter’s wife, Jeanne d’Evreux (fig. a).¹⁵ The stylistic affinity uniting these figures is fairly substantial, suggesting their creation by a workshop of several closely affiliated sculpture workshops. Nevertheless, clear differences can also be discerned. The effigy of Philip V, for example, is said to reflect a more ‘French habitus’, with the other three believed to betray a Franco-Flemish origin.¹⁶ On stylistic grounds, Louis’s effigy has been moreover linked to Jean Pépin de Huy.¹⁷ The disparate stylistic treatment of Jeanne d’Evreux’s effigy when compared to the two men lying at her side has been attributed to the figure’s modernization forty years after its making, by the then court sculptor Jean de Liège.¹⁸

The strongest stylistic analogies, however, exist between the effigy of Charles IV (cf. the effigy at the right in fig. a) and the present Madonna. These are expressed in details such as the treatment of the draperies, descending from the arms in overlapping zigzag lines and terminating in voluminous, tubular folds, but also the rendering of the face with fine, sharply delineated facial features, the stylization of the hair and the form of the hands. Charles’s effigy is attributed to an anonymous sculptor unquestionably active in Jean Pépin de Huy’s direct circle.¹⁹

Additionally, one finds a comparable, equally linear and less plastically stylized treatment of the drapery folds occasionally with marble Virgin and Child figures in other regions of France. In this respect, the Virgin and Child from the cathedral of Coutances (Normandy), for example, displays some interesting parallels with the Amsterdam statue, specifically with respect to Mary’s stately appearance, courtly facial expression, the stylized folds and the octagonal, integrally carved base on which she stands. This monumental statue from Coutances was presented to the cathedral by Bishop Guillaume de Thieuville in the period 1315-1345. Unclear is whether the statue was made locally or imported from another place of production (Paris?), though the latter seems most probable.²⁰

In summary, the Amsterdam Virgin and Child can be situated in the artistic sphere of influence of the court sculptor Jean Pépin de Huy on the basis of style, material and the purported nineteenth-century provenance in north-western France. Consequently, Paris emerges as the most probable place of manufacture.

Frits Scholten, 2024