The Artist: For a biography of Jan van Eyck, see the Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History.

The Paintings: In unusually tall, narrow paintings, the Crucifixion and Last Judgment emphasize the narrative features of these well-known biblical themes prophesied in Isaiah and related in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John for the Crucifixion, and in Deuteronomy and the Book of Revelation for the Last Judgment. The associated texts from Isaiah, Deuteronomy, and Revelation surround the paintings on the frames. In the Crucifixion, Christ is nailed to the cross between two criminals, whose limbs are tied to their crosses with rope. The moment represented is when a soldier, by tradition a nearly blind man called Longinus, is assisted by another man as he thrusts a lance into the side of Christ to establish whether he has in fact died (John 19: 31–37). Just below the lance is the vinegar-soaked sponge that had been raised to quench Christ’s thirst as he spoke his last words. The group directly below the cross is deeply divided between those at the right who meditate quietly or appear awe-struck at the sight of the dying Savior, and the boisterous crowd of Jews at the left who are in animated discussion, disrespectfully jeering and scoffing at the event. Below, the Virgin Mary, her face hidden in extreme grief, is comforted by John, and surrounded by the other Marys, including Mary Magdalen who, dressed in a fur-trimmed green gown, raises her joined hands toward Christ, empathizing with his agony. The female figure in the lower right corner of uncertain identity (whether a Sibyl or a participatory portrait of Isabella of Portugal, for which see below), dressed in red with a black shawl and wearing a turban, dispassionately observes the anguished group. This all takes place before an extraordinarily detailed cityscape—meant to represent Jerusalem—and a mountainous landscape beneath a sky of varied cloud types. At the right edge of the painting, the waning gibbous moon is depicted at mid-day, thus several hours before the biblical third hour after noon, when, according to the Gospel of Mark 15:25, Christ died.

The Last Judgment, likewise, satisfies the specific details of the commission and function of the work (see below). Christ in majesty, clearly exhibiting the nail wounds from the Crucifixion on his hands and feet, reigns over the heavenly sphere, where he is surrounded by trumpet-playing angels and others who hold the instruments of the Passion and the cross. He is flanked by the Virgin Mary and John the Baptist. Unusual for the representation here is that the twelve apostles seated in glory are all dressed as Carthusians in their white habits. The Virgin too is uncommonly represented as the Virgin of Mercy, a Carthusian devotion, her cloak spread wide to accommodate the many naked souls who implore her to intercede with Christ on their behalf. Processing from the back are the Holy Virgins, and to the left and right are the elect—representatives of various religious orders and of all of humanity. Just as Christ reigns over the heavenly sphere, Saint Michael, with his sword and shield at the ready, rules over the damned in hell. Death spreads his wings and skeletal appendages to encompass a scene of writhing figures enduring horrific tortures, their bodies being torn apart by terrifying beasts. Between heaven and hell are the souls emerging from their graves and from the sea to be judged.
Surrounding the Crucifixion and the Last Judgment on the frames are biblical texts in gilded pastiglia in Latin and in black, and a now fragmentary Middle Dutch text in white paint that relate specifically to the images. Starting at the upper left corner of the Crucifixion is the passage from Isaiah 53: 6–9, 12. Beginning at the center left of the Last Judgment and continuing around to the right side is the text from Revelation 21: 3, 4, interrupted by brief phrases of the souls being delivered up from their graves and the sea (Revelation 20:13). Below, hell is represented by texts from Deuteronomy 32: 23, 24 describing the horrors therein.

The initial publication resulting from new technical examinations of the Crucifixion and Last Judgment revealed the aforementioned fragmentary text on the frames of the paintings that were originally painted in white and black paint on a solid red background (Ainsworth 2017). A focus exhibition at The Met (see Exhibitions History 2016) presented these new findings and a mid-stage of the cleaning and restoration of the frames. Subsequently, investigations into the text, its status and placement on the frames, and its function were undertaken by a research team including curator Maryan Ainsworth, with paintings conservator Sophie Scully, and conservation scientist Silvia Centeno, who carried out the technical study of the paintings and the frames, and Sophie Scully, their restoration. Marc Smith, a paleographer, determined that the fragmentary text is in Middle Dutch and corresponds to the Latin pastiglia texts from Isaiah, Deuteronomy, and Revelation on the cavettos of the frames. What follows is a summary of the findings presented in the 2022 book of our research (Ainsworth 2022; Scully and Centeno 2022; Smith 2022).[2] The reader may zoom in on the color images of the paintings to see the details that are discussed here.

Although long known as a diptych (among others, Belting and Eichberger 1983, Eichberger 1987), the two paintings have also been considered as the wings of a triptych with either a painted or sculpted centerpiece (Passavant 1841, Panofsky 1927–28, Weale and Salinger 1947, Kemperdick and Lammertse 2012). Evidence that also supports the idea that they were likely the doors to a tabernacle or reliquary shrine is the beginning of the text in Latin from the Book of Revelation that winds clockwise around the Last Judgment (Peters 1968). It reads Ecce Tabernaculum Dei cum Hominibus (Behold the tabernacle of the Lord is with men). The tabernacle is understood as the dwelling place of the divine presence, manifest through the sacramental host representing the body of Christ. Interestingly, this phrase is found on the doors of some tabernacles holding the host. If a ciborium holding the sacramental hosts or a monstrance holding host relics was placed in the shrine interior, then the text just noted could have been at the same level as the wafers. This explains why the biblical text surrounding the Last Judgment starts at the center left interior of the frame rather than at the upper left, as is customary in Van Eyck’s paintings. Following on the interpretation of Heinz Peters (1968) that The Met paintings could have originally been the doors to a tabernacle for the display of the host, Lotte Brand Philip (1971) developed the idea further. She suggested it was one particular host that was installed in what should more correctly be called a reliquary shrine. Extremely well known throughout the Burgundian territories at the time was the Miraculous Bleeding Host, known in several examples from manuscript illumination.[3] An important and rarefied occasion regarding this miraculous host occurred within the circle of the Burgundian court in the fifteenth century. The historical context for this is the increasingly closer relationship that developed between Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy, and Pope Eugenius IV. In 1431, the Pope showed favor to Philip by recognizing him as an equal to the rulers of Europe and by allowing him to participate in the appointment of cardinals. In return, Philip took a pro-papal stance against the Council of Basel, which intended to restrict papal prerogatives. Philip continued to maintain his support of papal positions at the subsequent Council of Ferrara and Florence convened by Eugenius (1431–49). In acknowledgment of the close collaboration between the Pope and Philip during the years of the Councils of Basel and Ferrara-Florence, the Pope granted to Philip in 1433 a relic of the Miraculous Bleeding Host, which was alleged to have been the result of an attack by a madman. A papal bull discussed the gift:

"We concede and donate to your pious devotion a host of the sacrament with the image of the Savior seated on a throne, the wondrous Sacrament of the Lord’s Body, perforated in many places by some madman with the ferocity of a sword’s blows, and stained with blood in the said places, [a host] which is deposited in our sacristy." [4]

This punctured, blood-stained host was transferred from the papal sacristy to the Burgundian court at Dijon in 1433. There it was placed in Sainte Chapelle, adjacent to the ducal palace.[5] Promoted by Philip the Good, this relic of the Miraculous Bleeding Host became an object of veneration for the members of the ducal household and for those who had access to the chapel. Among these was René of Anjou, who resided in Dijon as the Duke of Burgundy’s prisoner from 1435 to 1437. René became devoted to the relic, donating a perpetual mass in its honor.[6] He also commissioned the earliest two representations of the famous relic in 1435–37 and 1442–43 to be added to his books of hours (ms. Lat. 1156A, fol. 22, Bibliotheque nationale de France, Paris, and ms. Egerton 1070, fol. 110, British Library, London). The cult of the Host immediately took hold and spread throughout the Burgundian and French territories through miniatures in books of hours and hand-painted images bought as souvenirs at the chapel’s cloister.[7] Later on, in 1454, the Miraculous Bleeding Host relic was encased within a magnificent gold monstrance (depicted in several miniatures such as Breviary of Philip the Good, Brussels, Bibliotheque Royale, ms. 9026, fol. 258, and Diurnal of Isabelle de Bourbon, MS M221, fol. 80v, Morgan Library and Museum, New York), a gift of the duke’s third wife, Isabella of Portugal. This, in turn, was depicted in several images in various books of hours where it was sometimes linked with the “O salutaris hostia” prayer, composed by Saint Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274). However, this highly revered Miraculous Bleeding Host is unlikely to relate to The Met’s paintings, as Lotte Brand Philip had supposed. In Dijon the spoken language at court, of course, was French, not the Middle Dutch of the recently uncovered text on the frames of The Met’s paintings. Moreover, Dijon was not the only location in the ducal realm at that time where a Miraculous Bleeding Host was venerated.

Thus, we turn our attention to Brussels where Dutch was spoken at the time of Van Eyck in the fifteenth century, and to the collegiate church of Saints Michael and Gudula (since 1962 the Cathedral of Saints Michael and Gudula) where a Miraculous Bleeding Host had been venerated for decades since 1370.[8] The story of the host desecration by Jews in Brussels, described as an actual event in 1370, was unique in Brabant, which had experienced the influx of Jewish settlers (thought mostly to have come from Cologne) since the thirteenth century, a factor that had caused tensions in the community and led to outbursts of antisemitism. Based on surviving documents, accounts of the desecration of the host were repeated and elaborated upon throughout the decades. During the period of alliance between Joan, Duchess of Brabant, and Wenceslas I, Duke of Luxembourg and Limburg (r. 1355–83 with Joan), Jonathan of Edingen, the most prominent Jew of Brabant, a financier and community leader, was accused of the desecration. Jonathan had convinced a Jewish convert, “Jan van Loven” (of Leuven), to steal a number of consecrated hosts from the chapel of Saint Katherine at Molenbeek, a village near Brussels. The outcome of this event was that on Ascension Day, May 31, the Jews were paraded through the streets of Brussels, into the Grand Place, and on to Saint Katherine’s Chapel at Flanders Gate, and all were executed there. Geoffrey de la Tour, Receiver General of Brabant, then took control of the Jewish properties.

On October 4, 1435, Cardinal Albergati, professed member of the Carthusian Order, writing from the Council of Arras, and with the participation of the Carthusians in Edingen and Antwerp, issued an indulgence related to the proposed establishment of a location for the veneration of the sacred host at a former house synagogue in Brussels where the desecration had purportedly taken place.[9] In 1436–38, a chapel in honor of the Miraculous Bleeding Host was constructed on the north side of the ambulatory of Saints Michael and Gudula, establishing there the official altar for the Holy Sacrament, and thus securing its preeminence over the construction of any other altars elsewhere in Brussels at the time. The transport of the desecrated hosts to the church of Saints Michel and Gudula is thought to be represented by a drawing from the workshop of Rogier van der Weyden (British Museum, London).[10] Miracles pertaining to the host became known, and Pope Eugenius IV, who was an avid proponent of blood miracles, blood relics, and wonder hosts, showed his particular support for the host veneration at Saints Michael and Gudula.[11] In a papal bull dated March 19, 1436, the Pope encouraged participation in the cult by offering a variety of spiritual rewards to those coming to venerate the relic at Saints Michael and Gudula. This indicates that the relic was most likely already in place by that date. The bull granted one hundred days of indulgence to those who visited the miraculous host at the church. An additional indulgence was granted to visitors attending a Thursday mass sung before the relic; another was offered to those who came to Saints Michael and Gudula on Sunday during the octave of Corpus Christi or on the Sunday following July 13, or to those who contributed donations to the chapel of the Holy Sacrament. The variety of the indulgences offered implies that the relic was on public view and accessible to worshipers who wished to come to venerate it on various occasions. Amendments to the papal bull mention the location of the chapel with the shrine in which the relic of the host was placed, that is, on the north side of the ambulatory of the church, inserted between the chapels of Saint Nicholas and Saint Catherine. The new chapel was certainly completed by August of 1438 when Philip the Good decorated it with a window (of unspecified subject matter).[12] This votive oratory no longer exists today. A new and far more elaborate chapel for the relic was envisioned by the church wardens following an increased devotion to the Miraculous Bleeding Host as a result of a sweating epidemic that ravaged Brabant at the end of the fifteenth century. The new chapel, near the north transept, destroyed the four preexisting chapels devoted to Saint Peter, Saint Nicholas, the Holy Sacrament, and Saint Catherine. All had disappeared by 1537 along with their windows. The construction of the replacement chapel took place between 1534 and1542, and the church wardens made new plans for the inauguration of the chapel in 1539 and 1542. The chapel of Saint Sacrement, which still exists today, serves as the church treasury. It is decorated with a series of stained-glass windows representing scenes of the story of the Miraculous Bleeding Host as well as of Charles V and the extended royal family. The first four windows, donated by Charles V in honor of the Blessed Sacrament, were designed by Bernard van Orley and Michel Coxie and executed by Jean Haeck.

The information about the various indulgences attached to the relic of the Miraculous Bleeding Host and spiritual rewards granted at the church of Saints Michael and Gudula is important in respect to The Met paintings. If the Crucifixion and Last Judgment originally were the doors to a reliquary shrine holding the Miraculous Bleeding Host, as it is proposed here, then this would explain the purpose of the Middle Dutch translation of the Latin biblical texts surrounding the paintings. It is more likely that lay visitors venerating the relic, and thereby hoping to receive indulgences, could read the vernacular Dutch passages than the scholarly Latin. This use of the vernacular is in line with many examples from the period, as Miyako Sugiyama has discussed, that show that indulgenced prayers were translated from Latin into the vernacular for the use of lay and religious audiences.[13]

Contemporary viewers would have understood the revival of the “ancient” majuscule script surrounding the reliquary shrine doors as being “antique” or “archaic,” thus suiting both the specific story of the relic in 1370, and the related biblical narratives portrayed in the Crucifixion and Last Judgment. By choosing this archaizing mode, Van Eyck introduced in his works a certain timeless quality and a sense of authority consistent with the distant past. The original raised pastiglia lettering mimics similar texts on Byzantine and Medieval reliquary shrines that relate biblical texts or the stories of the circumstances of the enshrined relic (see fig.1 above). The Middle Dutch textualis, on the other hand, signaled the present and the availability and opportunity for the biblical texts to be more easily read in conjunction with the images, especially for those who wished to receive the promised indulgences. The chapel for the Miraculous Bleeding Host, as previously mentioned, was created between two pre-existing chapels in the ambulatory of the apse. Since it would not have been very large nor deep, it thus would have offered the opportunity for close-up reading of the texts surrounding the paintings.

What is the visual and textual evidence that The Met paintings refer to the Miraculous Bleeding Host and could have been the doors to a shrine holding the venerated relic? Furthermore, what clues are there in the specific details of the representation of the Crucifixion and Last Judgment that link this commission to Philip the Good and to the Carthusians in Brussels as well as in Dijon, where another Miraculous Bleeding Host was installed? As Roger Wieck has noted,[14] the images of the Miraculous Bleeding Host in manuscript illuminations are all identical. Unlike other hosts of varying types at the time, imprinted with such images as the cross or the sacrificial lamb, those of the Miraculous Bleeding Host were consistent in their imagery. They all show the imprint on the bloodied host of Christ seated as Judge on a rainbow, flanked by the implements of the Passion, with raised hands and feet exposed, revealing the bleeding stigmata of his Crucifixion wounds (fig. 2). The Christ in The Met’s Last Judgment painting corresponds exactly to this image of the host. Christ’s pose is the same; he is seated on a rainbow (mostly hidden, but apparent at the edges of his mantle), with angels presenting the implements of the Passion, and with special emphasis given to the stigmata of Christ’s hands and feet that are accentuated by golden rays and aureoles, as is his head above. The correspondence between the pose of Christ in the painting and that of the Miraculous Bleeding Host relic in the illuminations is intentional. It is bolstered by the fact that not all Last Judgment Christ figures in contemporary imagery take this particular pose. This is demonstrated, for example, by an illumination from a French book of hours of about 1400 where Christ’s lowered hands call up the dead from their graves to be judged (1998.179), or Rogier van der Weyden’s Last Judgment Polyptych of about 1450 (Hôtel-Dieu Musuem, Beaune, France), where Christ’s raised right hand acknowledges the blessed while his lowered left hand signals the damned. The three remaining Miraculous Bleeding Hosts (from the original sixteen) mounted in the reliquary cross in the church of Saints Michael and Gudula, of course, did not show the imprinted image of Christ of the Dijon host (fig. 3). Rather, because they were the actual sacramental hosts intended to be used in the celebration of the Eucharist, which were stolen and allegedly stabbed, they instead testify to and emphasize the actual event of the Brussels desecration.

Further to the representation of Christ, linking his pose to the imprint on the Miraculous Bleeding Host of Dijon, are references to the Carthusians, who supported the veneration in Dijon and in Brussels, and to imagery associated with the ducal court. Most unusual for a Last Judgment are the twelve apostles in the heavenly realm dressed as Carthusians in their white habits. Furthermore, the Virgin unusually is represented as the Virgin of Mercy, a particular Carthusian veneration of her, protecting all of humanity under her wide-spread mantle and serving as their intercessor to Christ. The underdrawing (see Technical Notes and fig. 6) shows her wearing the crown of seven lilies and seven gems, also promoted by the Carthusians, drawing on the visions of Saint Bridget of Sweden. This was not painted, likely in order for her representation to match instead the halos of Saint John and Christ in majesty.

Furthermore, unusual and specific to this Last Judgment is the treatment of the pose of the Archangel Michael with sword and shield as defender of the Faith and the Church rather than weighing the souls with a balance in hand. He is dressed in Byzantinizing style and holding a shield that—according to Dagmar Eichberger’s research (1987)—may well have been a known and revered relic of Saint Michael, representing the cult of the saint at Mont Saint Michel, a ducal gift to the monastery by Philip the Fair. This particular image of Saint Michael as well as the words and texts on his suit of armor may well allude to Philip’s efforts in support of the Holy Catholic Church against the infidels, the Turks threatening Constantinople, which was in part the purpose of the Crusades and of Philip’s establishment of the Order of the Golden Fleece (Ainsworth 2022, pp. 65–69).

Turning to the Crucifixion, there is a sacramental emphasis through the portrayal of blood mixing with water emerging from Christ’s side, referring to baptismal cleansing and the blood of atonement, referred to in the Gospel of Saint John 19:34. Beneath the cross, there is a distinct difference between the contemplative and awestruck figures on the right side and the raucous, jeering crowd on the left side. This latter group, in many ways more than usual for a Crucifixion scene, emphasizes the Jews, who were seen as responsible for Christ’s Crucifixion but also for the desecration of the hosts in Brussels. They are shown wearing yellow costumes, pointed hats, rounded hats with fur (the Medieval predecessor of the shtreimel), and with red beards and heads in profile, exaggerating in a derogatory manner their hooked noses and with open, grimacing mouths, showing their teeth. This is a visual counterpart to descriptions in the Gospels that refer to the Jews as unruly and boisterous. These figures can be linked specifically with the adjacent texts from Isaiah concerning “the ungodly” (Ainsworth 2022, pp. 71–74).

The Veneration of the Miraculous Bleeding Host in Dijon and in Brussels: As a number of scholars have pointed out, there was widespread veneration of Miraculous Hosts during the fifteenth century; each had its own accompanying story that was not always linked with the Jews. What was the relationship between the veneration of the Miraculous Bleeding Host in Dijon and that in Brussels at the church of Saints Michael and Gudula? What accounts for the simultaneous revival of the cult in the 1430s in each location, and what are the differences in the manner in which they developed? How do these differences further support the connection of The Met paintings with the reliquary shrine holding the Miraculous Bleeding Host relics in Brussels and not with the relic in Dijon? Let us briefly review the circumstances of the Miraculous Bleeding Host veneration in Dijon. The relic was given by Pope Eugenius IV to Philip the Good in 1433 as a gesture in appreciation of Philip’s collaboration with the Pope over Church issues at the Council of Basel. Philip installed the relic in Sainte Chapelle, the chapel of the ducal palace in Dijon. It is not known how the relic originally was housed. Slightly more than twenty years later, in 1454, Isabella of Portugal provided the relic with a solid gold monstrance. This may be the one illustrated in the illuminations showing Philip and Isabella venerating the Miraculous Bleeding Host from the Breviary of Philip the Good or one of Charles the Bold and Isabella adoring the relic from the Diurnal of Isabelle de Bourbon. Note that the monstrance is free-standing on the altar (as depicted in several miniatures such as Breviary of Philip the Good, Brussels, Bibliotheque Royale, ms. 9026, fol. 258, and Diurnal of Isabelle de Bourbon, MS M221, fol. 80v, Morgan Library and Museum, New York) and not housed within a reliquary shrine with closing doors.

The papal bull describing the gift does not mention the Jews as the perpetrators of the desecration of the host, only that “some madman” had stabbed the wafer. In fact, it was not until about 1505 when a bi-folio addition was made for the Hours of Mary of Burgundy that an image of the Dijon Host was accompanied by the “O salutaris hostia” prayer as well as a four-stanza text describing the origins of the cult. The latter text mentions that a Jew was responsible for the mutilation of the host but omits any mention of time or place. As Miri Rubin points out in reference to the Dijon relic, “Clearly, in the Burgundian court, the local cult of the host was detached from any local resonances of host desecration accusations, in the absence of Jews, but was nourished by Eucharistic piety, in association with the Eucharistic prayer “O salutaris hostia.”[15] The Brotherhood of the Precious Blood of Our Lord was established in 1484, and it was not until 1487 that Cardinal Charles I de Bourbon granted indulgences to the Brotherhood. The fame of the relic in Dijon lasted until the French Revolution when it was destroyed.

Revived interest in and activities surrounding the Brussels relic apparently began to reemerge in the 1430s, that is, at the same time as the Dijon host was slowly gaining a cult following. In 1433 Philip the Good dedicated his newborn son Charles the Bold to the cult of the Miraculous Bleeding Host in Brussels, as his wife, Isabella of Portugal, had done simultaneously for Charles in relationship to the relic in Dijon. In 1435, Cardinal Albergati, with the participation of the Carthusians in Edingen and Antwerp, issued an indulgence related to the proposed establishment of a location for the veneration of the sacred host at a former synagogue in Brussels where the desecration had purportedly taken place. In 1436, Pope Eugenius IV attached multiple indulgences to the relic of the host for the many devoted visitors who were able to gain easy access to the chapel to pray before it on the varied stipulated occasions. The relic was installed in a newly dedicated chapel built between 1436 and 1438 in the ambulatory of the church of Saints Michael and Gudula (reconstruction of the reliquary shrine, fig. 7). In 1438, Philip the Good commissioned a stained-glass window of unknown subject for the chapel “van den heiligen Sacramente, in der kercken Sinter Goedelen te Brussel” (of the Holy Sacrament in the church of Saint Gudula at Brussels).[16] The veneration of the relic in this location lasted until the 1530s when the chapels on the north side of the ambulatory were destroyed and preempted by the construction of a new and much larger chapel of the Holy Sacrament that remains today.

Although the references to the Carthusians in the Crucifixion and Last Judgment could refer to the site of Dijon as well as to Brussels, it is the specific, heightened portrayal of the Jews, especially in the Crucifixion, that indicates the link with the Brussels veneration and its particular local history. In addition, it was the Brussels relic that was indulgenced in 1436, while the Dijon relic was not granted such privileges until 1487. This explains the addition of the biblical texts in the vernacular Middle Dutch, which could be more easily read than the formal Latin. Middle Dutch, of course, was the spoken language in Brussels at the time, while in Dijon it was French.

Proposals for the commission of the Crucifixion and Last Judgment: There are two possible reasons for this renewed attention to the Miraculous Bleeding Host, both initially in Dijon and then in Brussels. First of all, there was Philip’s ongoing anxiety over the question of a male heir, and perhaps the belief that support and veneration of the relic could work in favor of producing and sustaining a healthy male heir. Neither of his first two marriages to Michelle of France and Bonne of Artois had produced offspring. With great ceremony and extravagant festivities, Philip married Isabella of Portugal on January 7, 1430, in Bruges. Isabella became pregnant and Charles was born in Dijon on November 10, 1433, baptized immediately the following day, and dedicated by his father to the Miraculous Bleeding Host in Brussels and to the relic in Dijon by his wife, Isabella.

Further connecting the cult of the Miraculous Bleeding Host at Dijon and Brussels was Philip’s preoccupation with keeping his various territories united. When Philip remained childless and heirless throughout his first two marriages, he reluctantly recognized his cousin, Philip of Saint-Pol, as his rightful successor. But Philip of Saint-Pol died on August 4, 1430, leaving his Brabant territories, including the major center of Brussels, to Duke Philip. Philip married Isabella that same year, opening up new possibilities for an heir. In an effort to lay claim to these new Brabant territories, Philip and Isabella undertook certain initiatives. Brussels, as well as Bruges and Lille, became a favored seat of government for Philip. A significant sign of his intentions to spend more time in Brussels and make it an important center is that he had the Coudenberg Palace enlarged and renovated between 1431 and 1436. Furthermore, following the establishment of chapters of the Order of the Golden Fleece in Lille in 1431, Bruges in 1432, and Dijon in 1433, Philip established a new chapter in Brussels in 1435. The religious services took place at the church of Saints Michael and Gudula, and the meetings at the Coudenberg Palace. Supporting and enhancing the cult of the Miraculous Bleeding Host both in Dijon (established in 1433) and in Brussels (especially through acts in 1435 and 1436–38) further established links between the two major ducal centers. It also must have greatly pleased Pope Eugenius IV, donor of the Dijon host to Philip, and an aficionado of Miraculous Hosts for both spiritual and economic reasons. The Duke of Burgundy thus took over and defended the interests of the Church in Brussels, and the Brussels Miraculous Bleeding Host legend was integrated into the court ideology of the Burgundian empire. Philip, and the dukes to follow him, recognized in the annual processions of the Holy Sacrament a means of stimulating involvement in his interests in the various regions and creating a sense of devotional coherence across his territories. These and other actions were instituted by Philip to help to ensure regional unification.

A Proposal of Participatory Portraits Within the Paintings: Given these considerations about the dynastic and political circumstances of church and state surrounding the veneration of the Miraculous Bleeding Host in Dijon and in Brussels, it seems most likely that The Met paintings were commissioned by Philip the Good and Isabella of Portugal. Previously, it has been suggested that participatory portraits of Philip and Isabella can be found in the Crucifixion (Ainsworth 2022, pp. 74–83). Philip can be identified as the man at the lower right of the cross, wearing a blue chaperon and coat with ermine-trimmed sleeves, and directly addressing the viewer. Isabella, a devout follower of the Carthusian Order, is identified as the woman in red at the lower right of the composition who with a calm demeanor silently observes the weeping Virgin, other Marys, and John.

Moreover, it is highly likely that the man to the left of Philip under the cross, dressed as a doctor, lawyer, theologian or high-ranking clergy, is meant to represent Cardinal Albergati. With the support of the Carthusians of Edingen and Antwerp, he granted an indulgence to those who planned the conversion of a formerly Jewish house synagogue where the desecration purportedly took place into a chapel for the Miraculous Bleeding Host in Brussels. Further supporting the notion that the figures of both Philip and Albergati were intended as portraits is the fact that they are adjusted from the more generalized underdrawings to individualized heads in the paint layers (Ainsworth 2022, pp. 81–83 and figs. 8, 9). For the latter, Van Eyck reduced the length of the nose, accentuating its bulbous tip, and emphasized the lower lip and prominent chin above sagging jowls, thereby matching the features of Albergati as portrayed by Van Eyck in a drawing in Dresden, Kupferstichkabinett and the associated painting in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna (figs. 10, 11). The inter-relationship between the ducal couple and Albergati in the affairs of church and state, and the ongoing connection of all three with the duke’s court painter, Jan van Eyck, supports the representation of Philip, Isabella, and Albergati in the Crucifixion. Furthermore, there is the strong affiliation and devotion to the Carthusian Order by all three that bolsters an argument for their requested depiction as participatory figures at the Crucifixion (Ainsworth 2022, pp. 83–86). As such, they serve as exempla for the viewer, inviting him or her to experience the same sense of spiritual involvement and commitment.

The Denouement: If The Met’s Crucifixion and Last Judgment were originally the doors to a reliquary shrine holding the Miraculous Bleeding Host, then when and why were these paintings detached from this format and changed into a diptych? As noted above, between 1534–39, a new flamboyant Gothic chapel of the Holy Sacrament was built to house the host, and a new, more elaborate tabernacle was made as well as stained-glass windows designed by Bernard van Orley and Michiel Coxie that retold the story of the Miraculous Bleeding Host. The fifteenth-century reliquary shrine must have been disassembled then and the precious doors by Duke Philip’s court painter (see below The Attribution and Date) detached for another use. This would have been necessary particularly if the reliquary shrine was mounted into the chapel wall instead of free-standing on an altar. It was probably at this time that the two doors were reassembled as a diptych for another devotional purpose.

While the research on these paintings and their frames was underway, there appeared an article by Sue Jones (2014) concerning a description of a work comprising two paintings, framed together, found in a 1641 inventory of Ramiro Nuñez Felípez de Guzmán, Spanish Viceroy of Naples and his wife. This description of a Crucifixion and a Last Judgment with frames with surrounding inscriptions in “lettere antiche” so closely matches The Met’s paintings that they are highly likely to be the same. They were acquired between 1637 and 1641 during a vice-regal tenure in Naples and were subsequently taken back to Madrid in 1643. Exactly when and under what circumstances the panels changed location from Brussels to Italy, probably Naples, is not known. One possibility could have been as a diplomatic gift in high court circles. When the paintings were taken to Italy, their format was changed, and as the inventory description notes, they were placed in an Italian-style tabernacle frame surmounted by God the Father in the apex (Ainsworth 2022, pp. 89–91, fig. 12). The new framing of the paintings seemingly was effected by inserting the flat outer moldings of the original frames into the rabbets of the Italian-style frame, obscuring the Middle Dutch text. It is unlikely that any Italian owners would have read Dutch, and thus would have needed this vernacular translation of the Latin text. The damage to the Middle Dutch text may have been caused later in time, when the two paintings were taken out of the Italian-style framing. The paintings apparently were transported to Spain where the Russian Ambassador Tatistchev bought them and ultimately placed them in the Imperial Hermitage, from whence they were acquired in 1933 through Knoedler for The Met.

The Attribution and Date: The Crucifixion and Last Judgment are most often attributed to Jan van Eyck, or to Van Eyck with workshop assistance (see References and Ainsworth 2022, p. 146 n. 1). The question of attribution and dating is addressed in chapters 3 and 4 (Ainsworth 2022 and Scully and Centeno 2022), based on new technical material. The objections to considering the Met paintings within the oeuvre of Jan himself have included the following concerns: the narrative themes of the Crucifixion and Last Judgment are otherwise not treated so extensively in Jan’s works; the unusually tall, narrow format of the paintings; the small-scale figures; the singular use in his oeuvre of pastiglia texts on the inner cavettos of the frames, their language and scripts; the beginning of a text in the Last Judgment at the center of the frame and not at the upper left as was usual for Jan; as well as a handful of more minor anomalies. These objections may now be dismissed due to the unusual nature of the commission, likely from Philip the Good and Isabella of Portugal (see above), for the painted doors of a reliquary shrine holding the remnants of the purportedly desecrated Miraculous Bleeding Host. The compositions of the Crucifixion and Last Judgment , because of their function as doors of a reliquary shrine, required a different format than any of Jan’s extant paintings. This explains the fact that the panels (although the paintings were later transferred to canvas), uniquely in Jan’s oeuvre, were both cut from one plank of wood with fully integral frames (as is often the case with wooden reliquary shrines). It also rationalizes the vertically oriented pitch of the perspective toward the high horizon line in the Crucifixion, which accommodates a multitude of figures necessary for this particular depiction of the narrative episode. The format furthermore justifies the bipartite Last Judgment , which, in line with Saint Augustine’s commentaries, shows equal sections devoted to the heavenly realm and to Hell, rather than the more customary division of the saved and damned at the left and right of the composition respectively. The details of the composition were designed specifically to ensure a close coordination of image and surrounding text.

Stylistic Criteria: Despite their enormous difference in size, the Crucifixion (56.5×19.7 cm), and the Knights of Christ (149.5×54 cm) and the Holy Hermits (149×54.5 cm) panels of the 1432 Ghent Altarpiece represent a very similar manner of solving the problem of integrating numerous figures into the format of a tall, narrow, vertical rectangle (Ainsworth 2022, pp. 117–29). These three paintings, as well as the two versions of the Saint Francis Receiving the Stigmata (Galleria Sabauda, Turin, and Philadelphia Museum of Art) anchor the base of the composition with carefully studied igneous rocks leading to the figures directly above them. The rocks in the Crucifixion are composed of clearly identifiable geological specimens that have similarities with columnar basalts and pillow lavas, both volcanic rocks, as well as certain sedimentary rocks, as is also the case with some of the rocks in the Knights of Christ and Christian Pilgrims (see Ainsworth 2022, pp. 118–20 with observations of Federico Caro and Elena Basso). Details of the underdrawing in the Crucifixion(fig. 4) and the Saint Barbara in Antwerp show that the realistic rendering of geological specimens was of such importance to the naturalistic portrayal of the composition that Van Eyck included them already at the preliminary design stage.

Within these compositions, one can find Van Eyck’s typical manner of arranging figures in groupings for clarity and the desired expression of the theme at hand. For example, despite their significant difference in scale, the group beneath the cross in the Crucifixion and prophets from the lower left of the Adoration of the Lamb from the Ghent Altarpiece express a similar rhythmic flow and attention given to both the variety of types—young to old—with assorted expressions—serious, meditative, curious, engaging with each other in conversation—in order to create a life-like range of humans in natural interaction. The full array of head positions, from profile to three-quarter, facing left, facing right, en face, etc. is carefully arranged to suggest a sense of movement and animated life in a candidly captured moment.

The attention to detail particularly in the Crucifixion but also in the Last Judgment are typical of Jan van Eyck’s manner of working in his paintings. These features include but are not limited to the manner in which horses move and interact with their human counterparts, the studied reflections on polished surfaces that direct the eye to specific parts of the paintings, the attention to natural phenomena and atmospheric effects indicated by cloud formations and phases of the moon, and extraordinary attention to the use of lighting effects to convey meaning and to signal the relative importance of figures within a composition (for detailed discussions, see Ainsworth 2022, pp. 117–39).

It is not only the finished design, but also the preliminary drawing on the ground preparation that signals the close connection of the Crucifixion and Last Judgment with Jan van Eyck’s manner of working (Ainsworth 2022, pp. 140–44; see also Technical Notes and underdrawing images). Similar is how fully worked up the underdrawing is for the Crucifixion and Last Judgment, which is a common feature of Van Eyck’s work. Additionally, in comparisons with Jan van Eyck’s autograph paintings of diminutive scale, such as the about 1433–35 Annunciation Diptych (Museo Thyssen-Bornemisza, Madrid), or the 1437 Annunciation exterior wings or the interior figure of Saint Michael from the Dresden Triptych (Gemäldegalerie Alter Meister, Dresden), the handling and execution of the brush for the detailed modeling of the figures is identical (for detailed argumentation, see Sophie Scully in Scully and Centeno 2022, pp. 99–111; and Technical Notes, forthcoming).

Dating: In support of a date for the Crucifixion and Last Judgment in the 1430s are the circumstances of the commission and the original format and function of the paintings, as discussed above. This pertains to the proposal concerning the commission, most likely from Philip the Good, for doors of a reliquary shrine intended to hold the Miraculous Bleeding Host in an ambulatory chapel at the collegiate church of Saints Michael and Gudula in Brussels. Already in 1435, Cardinal Niccolò Albergati had become involved with the host relics by issuing an indulgence provided to the faithful who would help to realize a plan to convert a former synagogue on Stuiversstraat/rue des Sols, near the Coudenberg, where the host desecration is thought to have taken place, into a chapel for the veneration of the host relics. Soon thereafter, competition arose between this site and the church of Saints Michael and Gudula for the veneration of the relic. The latter prevailed as the more prestigious location, particularly when in 1436 Pope Eugenius IV attached multiple indulgences to the relics of the host that were installed in a newly dedicated chapel in the ambulatory of the church. In 1438, Philip the Good commissioned a stained-glass window of unknown subject for the chapel “vanden heiligen Sacramente, in der kercken Sinter Goedelen te Brussel” (“of the HolySacrament in the church of Saint Gudula in Brussels”). This evidence would suggest that the painted doors for the reliquary shrine were commissioned around 1435/36, and subsequently the shrine was installed in the north ambulatory chapel where the Miraculous Bleeding Host relics could be venerated, and worshipers could receive the promised indulgences. (For the further context for the attribution and date, see Ainsworth 2022, pp. 144–45.)

Maryan W. Ainsworth 2023

[1] https://www.metmuseum.org/blogs/collection-insights/2019/jan-van-eyck-frames-meaning-of-text
[2] This entry is a summary of the material presented in Maryan W. Ainsworth, ed., Jan van Eyck’s Crucifixion and Last Judgment: Solving a Conundrum, Turnhout, 2022. Please see this book for detailed information on the text, the notes and bibliography, and the illustrations.
[3] Roger S. Wieck, “The Sacred Bleeding Host of Dijon in Books of Hours,” in Quand la peinture était dans les livres: Mélanges en l’honneur de François Avril à l’occasion de la remise du titre de Docteur Honoris Causa de la Freie Universität Berlin, M. Hofmann and C. Zöhl (eds.),Turnhout: Brepols, 2007, pp.393–404; Roger S. Wieck, “The Sacred Bleeding Host of Dijon in Choir Books and on Posters,” in Manuscripten en miniaturen: studies aangeboden aan Anne S. Korteweg bijhaar afscheid van de Koninklijke Bibliotheek, J. Biemans et al., eds., Zutphen 2007, pp.385–96; Roger S. Wieck, Illuminating Faith: The Eucharist in Medieval Life and Art, New York 2014, pp. 72–78; Roger S. Wieck, “Peindre un miracle: la Sainte Hostie et l’enluminure à Dijon,” in Peindre à Dijon au XVIe siècle, Frédéric Elsig (ed.), Cinisello Balsamo (Milan), 2016, pp.139–53.
[4] Ubi Odericus Raynaldus Desinit, Annales ecclesiastici, XXVIII, Bari, 1874, cols. 153b-154a, as in Miri Rubin, Gentile Tales, the Narrative Assault on Late Medieval Jews, Philadelphia, 1999, pp. 162-63.
[5] Wieck 2007, p. 385; Wieck 2014, p. 73; Wieck 2016, p. 139.
[6] Wieck 2016, pp. 139–40.
[7] Wieck 2007, 2014, 2016. Ainsworth 2022, pp. 44–45 for images.
[8] Estienne Ydens, Histoire du S. Sacrement de Miracle, Brussels, 1605; Luc Dequeker, Het Sacrament van Mirakel, Jodenhaat in de Middeleeuwen, Leuven, 2000; Rubin 1999, pp. 181–89.
[9] Dequeker 2000, p. 40.
[10} Luc Dequeker, “Vrancke van der Stockt, Processiemet het Allerheiligste (ca.1450–60): de oudstevoorstelling van het Brusselse Sacrament van Mirakel (1370),” Trajecta: tijdschrift voor de geschiedenisvan het katholiek leven in de Nederlanden 14 (2005), pp. 257–84.
[11] The Apostolic See and the Jews II, no. 708, pp. 828-30, as in Rubin 1999, p. 187.
[12] Placide Lefèvre, “Textes d’archives relatifs aux vitraux disparus de la cathédrale Saint-Michel à Bruxelles,”Cahiers Bruxellois 11 (1966), pp. 149–67.
[13] Miyako Sugiyama, Images and Indulgences in Early Netherlandish Paintings, Turnhout,, 2021.
[14] Wieck 2016, p. 140.

The 2022 publication Jan van Eyck’s "Crucifixion" and "Last Judgment": Solving a Conundrum (see References) presents detailed technical studies of the paintings and their original frames. What follows below is a summary of the findings.

The Paintings

Support: The paintings are no longer on their original supports; they were transferred from panel to canvas in 1867, before entering The Met’s collection (see fig. 13 above).[1] As part of the transfer process, the original integral frames were cut away from the panels and preserved (see The Frames section). The paintings, including the original ground preparation, were adhered to canvases of a fairly coarse weave using what was likely a zinc-containing adhesive and attached to five-member stretchers.[2]

Study of the frames—which physical evidence demonstrates are the original, integral frames—provided important information about the paintings. Dendrochronological analysis of the frames indicated that the wood could have been felled between about 1410 and 1440.[3] Dendrochronology also revealed that the oak likely came from the same part of the eastern Baltic region as the wood used to make the Virgin at the Fountain by a follower of Van Eyck (Clark Art Institute, Williamstown). The latter painting is considered to be a workshop copy executed immediately or shortly after the original Virgin at the Fountain by Van Eyck (Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten, Antwerp), which dates to 1439.[4]

Furthermore, examination of the frames and of their x-radiographs yielded evidence that the paintings had been arranged as both a diptych and wings to a triptych at different points in their history.[5] Along the inner sides of the frames are recesses for hinges, while on the outer sides—when arranged as a diptych and closed face-to face—are a set of three square shaped holes, from the latching hardware (figs. 14, 15). Evidence of the triptych arrangement lies in the x-radiographs: evidence of nails that fixed hardware that latched the frames when closed side by side, as wings of a triptych (fig. 16). Finally, the study revealed more information about the inscriptions on the flat outer borders of the frames, hidden beneath modern gilded surfaces, prompting further study of the decoration, and eventually their conservation treatment (see The Frames section for further information about their decoration, history, and condition).

Preparation and Underdrawing: The original ground preparation for the paintings was mainly composed of calcium carbonate in its calcite form (chalk) followed by a layer containing lead white and apatite, also known as bone white.[6]

Examination with infrared reflectography revealed the presence of intricate and detailed underdrawings in both compositions, executed with a liquid medium and a brush (figs. 4, 5).[7] It appears that the underdrawing was applied in two stages. The entire composition was first underdrawn with a fine brush, with precise, parallel hatchmarks added for shading. This stage of underdrawing is often relatively faint and difficult to distinguish in the reflectogram, but is most readily observed as hatchmarks, often running from lower left to upper right, occasionally slightly curved and sometimes placed very close together. Cross-hatching was also used for the darkest areas, such as in the deepest folds of drapery. The artist then went over much of his composition with a relatively thicker brush, applying bolder lines to many of the contour lines, but not hatchmarks. The second, bolder underdrawing emphasizes the deepest folds of drapery, defines contours and facial expressions, and clarifies complex passages (figs. 17, 18).

The underdrawing across the two compositions is consistent in handling and approach, suggesting that they were executed by a single hand, but it is important to note that the level of detail varies in some sections, in accordance with the scale of the figures. In addition to their evident importance to the creative process, it is possible that the remarkably comprehensive underdrawings also served as a vidimus, a compositional drawing to be inspected by the patron.

When the artist realized his compositions in paint, he made countless small shifts to the underdrawn compositions.[8] Very few of these changes truly impacted meaning but mainly consisted of minor adjustments to contours and to the placement of details that improved the rhythm of the composition, as in the horses’ legs in the Crucifixion and the trumpets of the angels in the upper register of the Last Judgment. Other changes did impact iconography, for example, the artist omitted the elaborate underdrawn crown on the Virgin in the Last Judgment, which would have offered a further link with the Carthusian Order, but perhaps been less visually coherent with the haloes depicted on Saint John and the risen Christ.[9] These minor but significant changes are clear signs of artistic invention in progress, rather than an assistant dutifully following a plan. Beyond demonstrating that the development of these compositions is entirely consistent with the artist’s working method elsewhere, characterizing the underdrawings and parsing their stages reveals a key component of the painstaking process through which Van Eyck created these paintings. He was continually making small revisions and was concerned with their overall harmony and legibility from the beginning of their evolution on the panels.

Paint Layers: The medium in both paintings appears to be entirely oil.[10] Close examination reveals the artist’s extraordinary facility in paint. Despite the miniscule scale and intricacy of the compositions, he often painted in a fairly rapid and deft manner, with several instances of wet-in-wet paint in the details of costume and landscape. See, for example, the reflections on the helmet of the figure in lilac at the middle right of the Crucifixion or the ornamentation on Saint Michael’s armor in the Last Judgment (fig. 19). In order to depict the many and often tiny figures populating these scenes, Van Eyck painted his fleshtones in a manner that was systematic yet still allowed for individuality. He first blocked in a light, warm tone for the faces then added midtones, occasionally blending the paint wet-in wet to create the modeling. He used a dark brown or brownish-red to limn the facial features in a rather graphic manner, similar in handling to the bold underdrawn lines observed in the reflectogram. He selectively added final highlights with nearly pure white dabs of paint. In the grieving figures in the lower register of the Crucifixion he added delicate strokes of red paint to create their red-rimmed eyes (fig. 20). These strong contrasts of light and dark allowed Van Eyck to create unique facial expressions that would be legible in even the tiniest faces.

Van Eyck used many of the pigments available at the time, from the commonplace earth pigments—carbon-based black, and lead white—to bright vermilion, copper-containing greens, azurite, and ultramarine blue.[11] He used these rich colors in both nearly pure form and in combinations, to stunning effect. In general, the color palette remains nearly largely well-preserved, including what appear to be copper-containing greens and red lakes. However, the blue drapery of the Virgin’s robe is interrupted by pale, opaque patches, while its original modeling is evident in the MA-XRF distribution map for lead. This visual phenomenon may be caused by the degradation of the ultramarine blue paint. The bright red used in several robes and details of costume, as in the woman’s robe at the lower right of the Crucifixion, often contains grey or silver passages, where red should be the deepest color, characteristic of degraded vermilion.

The upper register of the Last Judgment has sometimes been attributed to an assistant, but close study did not reveal any clear differences in technique or material.[12] It is important to note that the paint in the upper register of the Last Judgment appears to be slightly rubbed. The abrasion can be most readily observed in the sky, where the broader brushstrokes of the underpaint are somewhat evident. These rough strokes would have been modulated with subsequent layers of paint, to create a solid blue seamlessly transitioning to a lighter blue at the horizon, as seen in the Crucifixion. In addition, some of the upper glazes of paint in the flesh tones are rubbed. The uneven condition could impact the perceived quality. The scale in the upper register, encompassing the most miniscule figures, should also be considered. The scale necessarily allowed for less sophisticated handling and detail, but nevertheless, by following the same system of painting flesh tones, Van Eyck was able to achieve a surprising variety of expression and appearance, recalling the larger heads elsewhere. In addition, he made several minor adjustments to the underdrawing in the upper register of the Last Judgment, similar to those seen in the rest of the two paintings. Not only do the painting technique and handling appear to be consistent, but the use of the underdrawing as a starting point to then work out the composition on the panel is also the same.

In the upper register of the Last Judgment, as in the rest of the two paintings, the artist introduced small adjustments during the course of painting. Both compositions appear to have been painted entirely by Van Eyck.

Inscriptions: Consistent with the artist’s surviving oeuvre, great importance was given to the relationship between text and image in the paintings and the frames. Marc Smith and Susan Jones have demonstrated that the inscriptions on the Last Judgment are comparable to the pastiglia text on the frames in form, suggesting that all were executed or directed by the same hand.[13] And even the choice of materials for the inscriptions was coordinated with their position within the composition. The inscriptions on the lower register of the Last Judgment were executed in paint; bright orange lines of painted text and arrows running between the bones of death and parallel to Saint Michael as well as the brown painted words on the wings of death, in contrast to the gilded inscriptions in the upper register. The inscriptions in the upper register were created through mordant gilding, although much of the gold leaf has worn off the slightly impasted ochre-colored mordant, leaving only occasional glimmers of gold. As noted by Maryan Ainsworth, the convention of associating gold with heaven may derive from the fourteenth-century writings of Saint Bridget, in which she describes the purification of the soul in purgatory as akin to the process of separating copper from gold.[14] Thus the materials may offer a translation of this idea into paint.

The inscriptions were included in the composition in the underdrawing stage. The painted inscriptions in the lower register were included in the underdrawing, and several changes can be seen: the omission of the word “MORO” (sometimes read as “MORG”) on the skull of death, the repositioning of the words on his wings, and the addition of words where only arrows emanated downwards from Saint Michael. These changes improved the formal clarity consistent with the adjustments Van Eyck made throughout his compositions. On the other hand, the gilded inscriptions were not underdrawn, but this may have been a practical consideration, as mordant gilding was a final step, completed after any underdrawing would have been entirely obscured with paint. That the artist did not underdraw all the inscriptions is notable only if the underdrawings did in fact serve as a vidimus for the patron to approve. However, the employment of a separate calligrapher for these, and possibly for the painted inscriptions on the frame as well, may explain the absence of underdrawing there.[15] It is interesting to note that Van Eyck may have added a few final touches to his painting even after the inscriptions were completed. A few strokes of original paint overlap the inscriptions in two places ever so slightly, perhaps offering a glimpse of an artist who was refining his work in every step of the creative process, up to the very end.

The Frames

Support: As noted above for the paintings, the frames are original and were originally integral to the paintings. Each painting and its frame were carved out of a single piece of oak, with the grain oriented vertically. The simple profiles, a single cavetto and a flat outer border, are typical of Van Eyck frames, specifically those that were intended to close as doors to a triptych.[16] Indeed, Maryan Ainsworth has proposed that the framed paintings were most likely the doors to a reliquary shrine, which held the Miraculous Bleeding Host.[17]

The frames have been altered from their original configuration at different moments in their history, seemingly related to changes in display, including being installed within a tabernacle style frame and joined together as a folding diptych (see Catalogue Entry). The 2022 publication Jan van Eyck’s "Crucifixion" and " Last Judgment": Solving a Conundrum (see References) details and contextualizes these significant changes and the technical evidence. In addition, the 2019 Collection Insights series “Unlocking the Mysteries of Two Jan van Eyck Frames, Parts 1–5” presented the examination and treatment of the frames in a blog format (see links to this series under the Frame heading on the object page).

Preparation and Decoration: The decoration on the frames has been greatly altered over the course of several interventions, also related to changes in the display. Prior to the 2015–16 treatment, the original decoration was obscured by several campaigns of restoration including, most recently, a layer of brass leaf. The flat outer moldings were originally painted red, with white and black inscriptions, while the inner cavetto, with pastiglia lettering, was mordant gilded. Discrepancies in the ground preparation suggest that the two parts of the decoration were not applied simultaneously, but evidence suggests that both were made in Van Eyck’s workshop. The original decoration and the subsequent changes were established through close visual examination and a combination of imaging, analytical techniques including x-radiography, macro x-ray fluorescence (macro-XRF), and the analysis of cross-sections using Raman spectroscopy and scanning electron microscopy-energy dispersive x-ray spectrometry (SEM-EDS) (fig. 21). A summary of the findings will be presented below, while the detailed technical evidence can be found in the 2022 publication.

The Inner Cavetto: The inner cavetto moldings on both frames were prepared with a white ground containing calcium carbonate. The pastiglia letters of the Latin text were created using the same calcium carbonate ground material, seemingly by building up layers in relief using a brush and then carving away some material to finesse the sharper forms. An additional thin white layer, containing apatite mixed with some lead white particles, was identified on top of the ground and the pastiglia letters. This apatite-lead white layer is similar to that identified in cross-sections removed from the paintings.[18]

The inner cavettos, including the pastiglia, were originally decorated with mordant gilding; however, the stratigraphy differs slightly between the two frames. On the Last Judgment frame, the white ground on the inner cavetto was coated with a yellow paint layer, containing lead-tin yellow type II. The gold leaf was adhered directly to this yellow layer that also acted as the mordant. On the Crucifixion frame, the white ground on the cavetto was coated with orange paint, a mixture of lead tin yellow type I and red lead, followed by a pale yellow layer, containing lead tin yellow type I mixed with lead white. A colorless organic layer, the mordant, was applied over the light yellow paint, followed by the gold leaf.

Yellow priming is consistent with the northern European tradition of mordant gilding. The use of the orange followed by the yellow on the Crucifixion frame may have been due to the need to cover a few stray blue paint strokes that were located on the inner cavetto. Alternatively, the first layer of orange could have been an initial idea for the mordant, but a decision was made to make it yellow instead. When the yellow paint was applied over the orange, the two would have been very similar in color and once gilded, the difference would be nearly impossible to detect.

The original gilding appears to be very worn, particularly at the raised rims of the curving letters, where the gold was most susceptible to abrasion. Both cavettos have been entirely re-gilded at least twice. There are traces of an earlier gilding campaign, using gold leaf, and then the most recent brass leaf, now visible on the surface.[19]

The Flat Outer Molding: The flat outer moldings of the frames were prepared with a white ground containing fossiliferous calcium carbonate, a different particle morphology than the ground identified on the inner cavettos. Then the moldings were colored with a solid layer of red paint containing vermilion and what appears to be a transparent red lake. The inscriptions were painted using lead white and, in one short segment, black paint, with a rhomboid dot demarcating the beginning of the black inscription. The inscriptions in Middle Dutch, translations of the Latin pastiglia, were executed in an extremely delicate manner, consistent with the mid-fifteenth century.[20]

The red paint and the painted inscriptions are greatly damaged. In particular, the paint and ground are lost down to the wood in many areas, primarily along the inner edges of the flat outer molding. This extreme damage possibly occurred when the framed paintings were removed from the Italian tabernacle-style frame, in which they were likely installed by the seventeenth century.[21] Later treatments sought to fill these losses and, at some point, the outer moldings were entirely gilded with brass leaf along with the inner cavettos, obscuring the remains of the original red paint and inscriptions. The later restoration campaigns that concealed the inscriptions were removed during the 2015–16 conservation treatment. The large areas of loss on the frames, which distracted from the exquisite paintings of the Crucifixion and Last Judgment, were retouched. Retouching was applied using fine vertical strokes, to offer a sense of what the original appearance would have been, from a normal viewing distance, while keeping the location and extent of the damage easily identifiable under closer examination. No attempt was made to reconstruct the inscriptions, although it has been possible to work out most of the original text.[22] Some of the original red paint has discolored to grey, characteristic of vermilion degradation, as also noted in vermilion-containing passages in the paintings.

Conclusions: The discrepancies in the white grounds on the inner cavettos and the flat outer moldings—the non-fossiliferous followed by a thin apatite-lead white layer vs. fossiliferous calcium carbonate—suggests that the two parts were not prepared simultaneously.[23] The preparation on the inner cavetto is consistent with that identified on the paintings. However, there is no physical evidence that the flat outer molding was executed at a later date than the cavetto. Both kinds of calcium carbonate were equally accessible to Van Eyck’s workshop.

Neither gilded pastiglia, nor white and black painted inscriptions on a flat red field are found in other extant Van Eyck frames; however, the ingenuity and variety of decoration on Eyckian frames is well known. The combination of red paint and gilding is seen on contemporary and earlier frames. The paleography study of the painted inscriptions by Marc Smith found that the script and language of the painted inscriptions could have occurred in Van Eyck’s workshop.[24] And the recent study by Maryan Ainsworth brings together many pieces of evidence that place the form and function of the painted inscriptions within the intricate original display of the painting.[25]

Sophie Scully 2025

[1] Aleksandr Sidorovich Sidorov (1835–1906) signed the reverses of the canvases. In translation: “Transferred from wood 1867. A. Sidorov”. The transfer occurred when the paintings were in the collection of the State Hermitage Museum, Saint Petersburg. The original reverses, reportedly grisaille paintings of the Annunciation as described by Passavant 1841, are now lost. For further information on the transfer, see Scully and Centeno 2022, pp. 11 and 97–99.
[2] See Scully and Centeno 2022, p. 97.
[3] Wood identification and dendrochronological analysis by Ian Tyers, Dendrochronology Consultancy Limited, report dated November 2012. A copy of the report is in the files of the Paintings Conservation Department. See Scully and Centeno 2022, p. 13, nn. 7–8 for more details.
[4] Vandenbroeck 2002, pp. 21–23.
[5] See Scully and Centeno 2022, pp.13–15; Catalogue Entry.
[6] Apatite (or bone white), made from calcined and ground bones, has been identified as a preparatory material for metalpoint drawings, but detected as a preparatory material for paintings only rarely. See Scully and Centeno 2022, pp. 17 and 99 for further discussion about apatite, its possible role in the paintings, and the analysis of the paint samples using Raman spectroscopy and SEM-EDS.
[7] Infrared reflectography was acquired in 2012 with a Merlin Indigo InGaAs near-infrared camera fitted with a StingRay macro lens customized for the wavelengths covered by the camera, 0.9 to 1.7 microns. See Scully and Centeno 2022, pp. 99–106 for a more detailed discussion of the underdrawings.
[8] See Scully and Centeno 2022, pp. 105–6 and Ainsworth 2022, pp. 140–42 for a detailed discussion of the changes.
[9] Ainsworth 2022, pp. 59–60.
[10] The binding medium was not analyzed.
[11] Pigment characterization is based on elemental mapping with MA-XRF of painting and analysis of select cross-sections with Raman spectroscopy, see Scully and Centeno 2022, pp. 106–9.
[12] See Scully and Centeno 2022, pp. 110–11; Ainsworth 2022, pp. 136–39; and Catalogue Entry.
[13] See Ainsworth 2022, pp. 37–38 and Appendix A.
[14] Ainsworth 2022, pp. 59–60.
[15] See Ainsworth 2022, p. 143.
[16] Verougstraete 2015, p. 242; Verougstraete and Van Schoute 2000, pp. 109–13; and Scully and Centeno 2022, p. 11.
[17] See Ainsworth 2022, Chapter 2.
[18] See Scully and Centeno 2022, Chapter 3, note 7.
[19] The brass leaf on the cavetto was not removed during the 2015–16 treatment
[20] See Ainsworth 2022, p. 37 and Appendix A.
[21] Scully and Centeno 2022, pp. 21–23; Ainsworth 2022, pp. 89–91; and Catalogue Entry.
[22] See Appendix A and B in Ainsworth 2022. See also hypothetical reconstruction in Ainsworth 2022, p. 36, fig. 2.12.
[23] Customarily, an entire frame would be prepared with the same material, even if individual parts were to be decorated differently, however, there are other scenarios to consider. For example, it is quite possible that the artist or his workshop may have scraped off one part and then use a slightly different preparation material for a new decoration scheme. See Scully and Centeno 2022, Chapter 1 and Ainsworth 2022, Chapter 2 for further discussion.
[24] See Marc Smith Appendix A in Ainsworth 2022.
[25] See Ainsworth 2022, Chapter 2.

Inscription: Inscribed: (on cross, in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin) IHC·NAZAR[ENVS]·REX·IVDE[ORVM]; (twice, below Christ's hands) Venite benedi[c]ti p[at]ris mei (Come, ye blessed of my Father [Matthew 25:34].); (on Saint Michael's shield and armor) [illegible]; (twice, below Saint Michael's wings) . . . vos maledi[ct]i i[n]ignem [aeternum?] (. . . ye cursed, into everlasting fire [Matthew 25:41].); (on Death's wings) CHAOS MAGNV[M] / VMBRA MORTIS (great chaos / shadow of death); (on the original gilt frames) with verses from Isaiah (53:6–9, 12), Revelation (20:13 and 21:3–4), and Deuteronomy (32:23–24)

Dmitry Pavlovich Tatishchev, Vienna and St. Petersburg (by 1841–d. 1845; purchased while he was Ambassador to Spain from a convent near Madrid [or near Burgos?], as by Jan van Eyck; bequeathed to Imperial Hermitage); Czar Nicholas I, Imperial Hermitage, St. Petersburg (from 1845); Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg (1917/18–1933); [Knoedler, New York, 1933; sold to The Met]

New York. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. "Art Treasures of the Metropolitan," November 7, 1952–September 7, 1953, no. 91.

Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. "Masterpieces of Painting in The Metropolitan Museum of Art," September 16–November 1, 1970, unnumbered cat. (p. 34).

New York. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. "From Van Eyck to Bruegel: Early Netherlandish Painting in The Metropolitan Museum of Art," September 22, 1998–February 21, 1999, no. 1.

New York. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. "A New Look at a Van Eyck Masterpiece," January 25–April 24, 2016, no catalogue.

THIS WORK MAY NOT BE LENT.

J. D. Passavant. Kunstblatt (January 12, 1841), p. 9, states that these panels were the wings of a triptych acquired from an auction at a monastery in Spain by Tatistcheff, from which the center, an Adoration of the Magi, had been taken; attributes them to the brothers Jan and Hubert van Eyck; believes two figures beneath the cross are portraits of the brothers and a third a portrait of Margaret van Eyck; notes traces on reverse of panels of two standing figures on pedestals, painted in grisaille.

C. Carton. Les trois frères Van Eyck. Bruges, 1848, p. 87 [first published in Société d'émulation pour l'étude de l'histoire et des antiquités de la Flandre, Bruges, ser. 2, vol. 5, 1847; see Ref. Wehle and Salinger 1947], as works of the Van Eycks.

J. D. Passavant. Die Christliche Kunst in Spanien. Leipzig, 1853, p. 123, as works of Jan van Eyck.

H. G. Hotho. Die Malerschule Hubert's van Eyck nebst deutschen Vorgängern und Zeitgenossen. Vol. 2, Die flandrische Malerei des fünfzehnten Jahrhunderts. Berlin, 1858, pp. 169–70, believes they may be by a pupil of the Van Eycks, most likely painted before Hubert's death.

Alfred Michiels. Histoire de la peinture flamande depuis ses débuts jusqu'en 1864. Vol. 2, 2nd ed. Paris, 1866, p. 199 n. 2, p. 204 n. 1, accepts Passavant's [see Ref. 1841] hypothesis that the panels contain portraits of the Van Eyck brothers and their sister Margaret.

G[ustav]. F[riedrich]. Waagen. Die Gemäldesammlung in der Kaiserlichen Eremitage zu St. Petersburg. 2nd ed. St. Petersburg, 1870, pp. 116–17, no. 444, notes that Tatistcheff purchased them in Spain as the work of Jan van Eyck, but based on parallels between the Last Judgment and a painting of this subject in the Gemäldegalerie, Berlin, signed and dated by Petrus Christus, attributes the wings to Christus in a considerably earlier period.

Ermitage Impérial: Catalogue de la galerie des tableaux. Vol. 2, Les écoles germaniques. 2nd ed. St. Petersburg, 1870, pp. 4–5, no. 444.

J. A. Crowe and G. B. Cavalcaselle. The Early Flemish Painters. 2nd ed. London, 1872, p. 143, attribute them to Petrus Christus.

Carl Schnaase. Geschichte der bildenden Künste. Vol. 8, Geschichte der bildenden Künste im 15. Jahrhundert. Stuttgart, 1879, p. 155 n. 1, ascribes them to an immediate pupil of Jan van Eyck.

L[ouis]. Clément de Ris. "Musée Impérial de l'Ermitage à Saint-Pétersbourg." Gazette des beaux-arts 19 (1879), pp. 574–75, questions the attribution to Petrus Christus.

Carl Justi. "Altflandrische bilder in Spanien und Portugal." Zeitschrift für bildende Kunst 22 (1887), pp. 244–45, ascribes them to Jan van Eyck.

Ludwig Kaemmerer. Hubert und Jan van Eyck. Bielefeld, 1898, pp. 42–43, 52–56, ill., suggests they are early works of Jan, or even of his sister, Margaret; notes that the wings were transferred from panel to canvas when they were acquired by the Hermitage.

Hugo von Tschudi. "Jan van Eycks Christus am Kreuz zwischen Maria und Johannes." Jahrbuch der Königlich Preussischen Kunstsammlungen 19 (1898), pp. 202–5, compares these panels to the Crucifixion in Berlin and ascribes them to Jan van Eyck.

Karl Voll. Die Werke des Jan van Eyck. Strasbourg, 1900, pp. 106–7, 132–33 nn. 67–68, agrees with Justi [see Ref. 1887] that these panels are not by Christus, but rejects his attribution of them to Jan van Eyck, suggesting they may be from his school .

Otto Seeck. "Zu dem Werke des Hubert van Eyck." Kunstchronik 12 (February 28, 1901), cols. 260–62, ascribes these panels and the Ghent Altarpiece to Hubert van Eyck and comments on similarities in the inscriptions in the two works.

Wilhelm Bode. "Jan van Eycks Bildnis eines Burgundischen Kammerherrn." Jahrbuch der Königlich Preussischen Kunstsammlungen 22 (1901), pp. 126–29, attributes them to Jan van Eyck, and dates them 1420–25.

Paul Durrieu. "Les débuts des van Eyck." Gazette des beaux-arts, 3rd ser., 29 (1903), pp. 11, 18, 108.

Fortunat von Schubert-Soldern. Von Jan van Eyck bis Hieronymus Bosch. Strasbourg, 1903, pp. 28–30, ascribes them to Jan.

August Schmarsow. Die Oberrheinische Malerei und ihre Nachbarn. Leipzig, 1903, p. 23 n. 1 (from p. 22).

Jean Guiffrey. "L'exposition des primitifs flamands à Bruges." L'art 3 (1903), pp. 490–92, ill. (etchings of the panels), doubts the attribution to Van Eyck.

W. H. James Weale. "Popular Opinions Concerning the Van Eycks." Burlington Magazine 4 (January 1904), pp. 35–36, lists them with works attributed wholly or in part to Hubert.

Max Dvorák. "Das Rätsel der Kunst der Brüder van Eyck." Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des allerhöchsten Kaiserhauses 24 (1904), pp. 177–78, 183, 185, 228–34, 236, pl. 22, fig.28 (detail), dates the panels before 1425 and ascribes them to Jan van Eyck, finding the style too advanced for Hubert.

[Hippolyte] Fierens-Gevaert. La Renaissance septentrionale et les premiers maîtres des Flandres. Brussels, 1905, p. 118 .

Alfred von Wurzbach. Niederländisches Künstler-Lexikon. Vol. 1, Vienna, 1906, p. 509, lists them with works by Hubert and copies after him.

Karl Voll. Die altniederländische Malerei von Jan van Eyck bis Memling. Leipzig, 1906, pp. 269–71, ascribes them to an immediate, probably Dutch, follower of Jan van Eyck.

Paul G. Konody. The Brothers Van Eyck. London, 1907, p. 39, ascribes the snow-capped mountains in the Crucifixion to Jan van Eyck.

L. de Fourcaud in Histoire de l'art. Ed. André Michel. Vol. 3, part 1, Paris, 1907, pp. 194–96, ascribes them to Hubert and assistants.

Henri Hymans. Les van Eyck. Paris, [1908?], pp. 116, 119–20, thinks they could be by Jan, but only if one supposes them earlier than any of his known works.

Emile Mâle. L'art religieux de la fin du moyen age en France. Paris, 1908, p. 501–2, believes the figure of Death in the Last Judgment is derived from Mystery plays.

Nicolas Wrangell. Les chefs-d'oeuvre de la galerie de tableaux de l'Ermitage Impérial à St.-Pétersbourg. London, [1909], pp. XI, ill. p. 63.

Emile Durand-Gréville. Hubert et Jean van Eyck. Brussels, 1910, pp. 95–98, ill., attributes them to Hubert van Eyck.

Georges H. de Loo. Heures de Milan: Troisième partie des Très-Belles Heures de Notre-Dame. Brussels, 1911, pp. 33, 35, ascribes them to Hubert van Eyck based on their similarity to the pages in the Turin–Milan Hours attributed to Hand G, whom he believes is Hubert.

F. Schmidt-Degener. "Notes on some Fifteenth-century Silver-points." Burlington Magazine 19 (1911), p. 256.

W. H. James Weale and Maurice W. Brockwell. The Van Eycks and their Art. London, 1912, pp. 153–56, nos. 26–27.

L[ouis]. Maeterlinck. Nabur Martins ou le Maître de Flémalle. Brussels, 1913, pp. 62, 119–20, ascribes them to a Ghent painter, contemporary with Hubert van Eyck.

Max J. Friedländer in Allgemeines Lexikon der bildenden Künstler. Ed. Ulrich Thieme. Vol. 11, Leipzig, 1915, p. 131, lists them with the works of Jan.

Friedrich Winkler. "Über verschollene Bilder der Brüder Van Eyck." Jahrbuch der Königlich Preuszischen Kunstsammlungen 37 (1916), p. 301.

F. Winkler. "Gemäldegalerie: Über eine frühholländische Kreuztragung [response to Ref. Zimmermann 1917]." Amtliche Berichte aus den Königlichen Kunstsammlungen 39 (September 1917), cols. 25–27, rejects Zimmermann's attribution of these panels to Ouwater, ascribing them with certainty to the workshop of the Van Eycks.

Heinrich Zimmermann. "Gemäldegalerie: Über eine frühholländische Kreuztragung." Amtliche Berichte aus den Königlichen Kunstsammlungen 38 (September 1917), cols. 22–23, suggests that the works are by Ouwater, about 1440.

Max Dvorák. "Die Anfänge der Holländischen Malerei." Jahrbuch der Königlich Preuszischen Kunstsammlungen 39 (1918), pp. 66–70, fig. 4 (The Crucifixion), ascribes them to an unknown painter who was the author of the Turin-Milan Hours and the lost original of "Christ Bearing the Cross" (Szépmuvészeti Múzeum, Budapest), tentatively suggesting that he was Aelbert van Ouwater.

Paul Durrieu. "Les tableux des collections du duc Jean de Berry." Bibliothèque de l'École des Chartes 79 (1918), pp. 280–82, dates them before 1413 and ascribes them to Hubert and Jan van Eyck; identifies these panels with the diptych in Jean du Berry's possession between 1413 and 1416 and doubts there was ever a central panel.

[Friedrich] Winkler. "Forschungen." Kunstchronik und Kunstmarkt 55 (October–March 1919/1920), pp. 563–64, reports Durrieu's [Ref. 1920] findings regarding the Hermitage panels .

Ludwig von Baldass. "Ein Frühwerk des Geertgen tot Sint Jans und die holländische Malerei des XV. Jahrhunderts." Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien 35 (1920–21), pp. 4, 6–8, fig. 3 (detail), as by Aelbert van Ouwater.

Alexander Benua [Benois]. Putevoditel po kartinnoi galereye imperatorskago Ermitazha. St. Petersburg, [192?], pp. 195–98, ill., attributes the panels to one of the Van Eyck brothers.

Paul Durrieu. "Les van Eycks et le duc Jean de Berry." Gazette des beaux-arts 1 (1920), pp. 77–105, ill. (overall and details), attributes them to Hubert and Jan van Eyck working together, and, on the basis of costume, places them between 1400 and 1420; finds the inscriptions on the surviving frame uniquely characteristic of works from the van Eyck workshop, including the Ghent Altarpiece; records the inscriptions on Saint Michael's armor [which today are largely illegible], noting that the two mysterious words "adonay" and "agla" (meaning "God") inscribed there appear frequently in the core works ascribed to the brothers; doubts that the original ensemble included a central panel, although an unrelated work may have been added at the whim of a subsequent owner; believes the pictures can be identified with a diptych listed as no. 1266 in the duc de Berry's posthumous inventory of 1416: "uns grans tableaux en deux pièces de painture, l'un de la Passion Nostre Seigneur et l'autre du Jugement"; notes that this work was not mentioned in the Dukes 1413 inventory and would thus have been acquired by him between 1413 and 1416; believes the Hermitage diptych could acurately be called "large" in the context of French princely inventories of the period; notes that at the time of the inventory, the work in question was no longer part of the Duke's succession, but had been given to a chapel in Bourges.

P. Post. "Forschungen: Noch einmal die Petersburger Tafeln der Brüder van Eyck." Kunstchronik und Kunstmarkt, n.s., 32 (1920–21), pp. 34–36, rejects Durrieu's proposal [Ref. 1920] that these panels may be the diptych mentioned in the 1416 inventory of the duc de Berry, observing that in comparison with other princely possessions of the period, they would have been considered not only "not large," but "small"; accepts Passavant's account of the lost central panel, and claims that Christus's copy of the right wing in Berlin was originally part of a triptych and included grisaille saints on its reverse, as did the Hermitage panels before they were transferred to canvas .

Martin Conway. The Van Eycks and Their Followers. London, 1921, p. 60, attributes them to Hubert.

Louis Maeterlinck. Hubert van Eyck et les peintres de son temps. Paris, 1921, pp. 93–97, fig. 63 (detail), ascribes them to a painter of Ghent, Liévin van den Clite, who is recorded as having painted a Last Judgment for the city in 1413.

Louis Maeterlinck. "L'école flamande avant les van Eyck." Revue de l'art ancien et moderne 40 (June–December 1921), pp. 191–98, figs. 1–2 (details).

Louis Maeterlinck. "Autour de la retable de "L'agneau mystique"." Gazette des beaux-arts 63 (1921), p. 111.

[Hippolyte] Fierens-Gevaert. La peinture à Bruges. Brussels, 1922, p. 15.

P.P. von Weiner. Meisterwerke der Gemäldesammlung in der Eremitage zu Petrograd. Munich, 1923, pp. 11, 103, ill.

Friedrich Winkler. Die altniederländische Malerei: Die Malerei in Belgien und Holland von 1400–1600. Berlin, 1924, p. 49, as by Hubert van Eyck.

August Schmarsow. Hubert und Jan van Eyck. Leipzig, 1924, pp. 89–95, pl. 17, as by Jan van Eyck.

Willy Burger. Die Malerei in den Niederlanden 1400–1550. Munich, 1925, pp. 20–21, 23–24, pl. 9, attributes them to Hubert.

L. Maeterlinck. Une école préeyckienne inconnue. Paris, 1925, p. 31, fig. 63 (detail).

Max Dvorák. Das Rätsel der Kunst der Brüder van Eyck. Munich, 1925, pp. 106–8, 262–63, pl. 26, finds the attribution of these panels to either Hubert or Jan a more difficult task since the appearance of the Milan Hours.

Martin Conway. Art Treasures in Soviet Russia. London, 1925, p. 158, suggests that the landscape in the background of the Crucifixion represents Monte Rosa and adjacent mountains in Switzerland.

A. E. Popham. Drawings of the Early Flemish School. London, 1926, pp. 20–21, pl. 3.

Guido Josef Kern. "Die verschollene 'Kreuztragung' des Hubert oder Jan van Eyck." Der Kunstwanderer (1927), pp. 309–13, 357–62, 415–20, ill. (overall and details), ascribes them to Hubert or Jan van Eyck, arguing that the lost central panel was a Way to Calvary recorded in a 15th century Netherlandish drawing (Albertina, Vienna) and in a narrower painted panel of the subject ascribed to Dieric Bouts or his school (Suermondt-Ludwig-Museum, Aachen).

[Hippolyte] Fierens-Gevaert. Histoire de la peinture flamande des origines à la fin du XVe siècle. Vol. 1, Les créateurs de l'art flamand. Paris, 1927, pp. 87–89, pls. 47–51 (overall and details), places them among Jan van Eyck's earliest works.

Paul Lambotte. Flemish Painting before the Eighteenth Century. London, 1927, p. 9, as perhaps by Hubert.

Erwin Panofsky. "G. J. Kern, 'Die Verschollene Kreuztragung des Hubert oder Jan Van Eyck,' Berlin, 1927 [book version of Kern's 1927 articles]." Kritische Berichte 1 (1927–28), pp. 74–83, fig. 6, is inclined to identify them with the diptych mentioned in the inventory of the duc de Berry.

Bryson Burroughs. "The Discoverer of Landscape." The Arts 12 (September 1927), pp. 153–62, ill. (overall and details).

Leo van Puyvelde. "A 'Last Judgement' in the Musée Royal, Brussels." Burlington Magazine 52 (May 1928), pp. 222, 229, refers to the author of the Last Judgment as "a master in the studio of the Duc de Berry who some people continue to identify with the young Hubert Van Eyck".

Karl von Tolnai. "Zur Herkunft des Stiles der van Eyck." Münchner Jahrbuch der bildenden Kunst, n.s., 9 (1932), pp. 330 n. 10, mentions the Last Judgment as by the creator of the Turin–Milan miniatures and as influenced by the Van Eycks.

Chandler Rathfon Post. A History of Spanish Painting. Vol. 4, The Hispano-Flemish Style in Northwestern Spain. Cambridge, Mass., 1933, part 1, p. 21.

Hermann Beenken. "The Ghent Van Eyck Re-examined." Burlington Magazine 63 (August 1933), p. 71, ascribes them to the "hypothetical Hubert van Eyck, painter of the G group of Turin–Milan Hours".

"Metropolitan Museum Acquires a Hubert van Eyck from Russia." Art Digest 8 (November 15, 1933), pp. 8–9, ill. (overall and details).

K. Smits. De iconografie van de Nederlandsche primitieven. Amsterdam, 1933, pp. 100–101, fig. 40.

Bryson Burroughs. "A Diptych by Hubert van Eyck." Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin 28 (November 1933), pp. 184–93, ill. (overall and details), as "bought in Spain (from a monastery near Madrid, it is said) . . .".

Stanley Morison. Letter to H. W. Kent. July 19, 1933, based on lettering on the frame alone thinks "it would be bold to say it is 1415, but it would not be bold to say it may be".

Hermann Beenken. "Zur Enstehungsgeschichte des Genter Altars Hubert und Jan von Eyck." Wallraf-Richartz-Jahrbuch, n.s., 2–3 (1933–34), pp. 196–202, ill., ascribes them to Hubert.

C. Henschel. New York Times (November 7, 1933), p. 3 [see Ref. Williams 1980, p. 70].

Friedrich Winkler. Letter to Bryson Burroughs. November 24, 1933, supports an attribution to Hubert.

Frank Jewett Mather Jr. "Notes on Hubert van Eyck." Art in America 22 (1934), pp. 49–50, 53–56, 59, ill., ascribes them to Hubert van Eyck; argues that they could not, for a number of reasons, be the diptych with the Crucifixion and Last Judgment listed in the posthumous inventory of the duc de Berry; is convinced that the MMA panels were originally conceived as a triptych.

A. L. Mayer. "La Crocifissione di Pietroburgo di Hubert van Eyck." L'arte 37 (1934), pp. 341–47, figs. 1, 2, supports an attribution to Hubert; suggests the figure with a turban that appears alongside the bad thief is a portrait.

A. L. Mayer. Letter to Harry B. Wehle. February 11, 1934, supports an attribution to Hubert van Eyck and identifies the man with the turban-like headdress beneath the bad thief as a self-portrait.

"New York." Bulletin de l'art [supplement of Revue de l'art] 65 (January 1934), pp. 32, 35, ill.

Frank Jewett Mather. Letter to Bryson Burroughs. January 14, 1934.

Ernst Günter Troche. Niederländische Malerei. Berlin, 1935, pp. 7, 29, pl. 5 (detail), as by "Hubert (?) van Eyck".

Erwin Panofsky. "The Friedsam Annunciation and the Problem of the Ghent Altarpiece." Art Bulletin 17 (December 1935), pp. 434, 468, 471–72, fig. 3, ascribes them, "at least in the main," to Hand G of the Turin–Milan Hours, and illustrates them as "Jan van Eyck or Follower"; notes that some parts, especially of the Last Judgment, seem to be executed by a collaborator.

Emile Renders. Jean van Eyck. Bruges, 1935, pp. 14, 46, 65, 69–71, 83, 87–88, 91–92, 95–96, 99–100, 103, 119–21, pls. 3–4, 7–10, 12,16 (overall and details), dates them between 1415 and 1425 and attributes them to Jan van Eyck.

J[acques]. Lavalleye in "De vlaamsche schilderkunst tot ongeveer 1480." Geschiedenis van de vlaamsche kunst. Ed. Stan Leurs. Antwerp, 1936, p. 173, attibutes them to Jan van Eyck, dating them before 1425.

H. Beenken. "Der Stand des Hubert van Eyck: Problems, Fragen um den Genter Altar." Oud-Holland 53 (1936), pp. 16, 23–24, fig. 1 (detail), ascribes them to Hubert van Eyck.

Max J. Friedländer. Die altniederländische Malerei. Vol. 14, Pieter Bruegel und Nachträge zu den früheren Bänden. Leiden, 1937, p. 78, no. 76.

Hermann Beenken. "Bildnisschöpfungen Hubert van Eycks." Pantheon 19 (1937), pp. 118–20, as early works of Hubert.

Ottmar Kerber. Hubert van Eyck: Die Verwandlung der Mittelalterlichen in die Neuzeitliche Gestaltung. Frankfurt, 1937, p. 23, attributes them to Jan.

Alan Burroughs. Art Criticism from a Laboratory. Boston, 1938, pp. 194, 196–98, 207, 249, 252–54, as "formerly attributed to Hubert van Eyck"; notes that they "reveal an artist already master of his craft and experienced in the world in a way which Jan van Eyck was not"; sees parallels in the works of "Hand G" of the Turin-Milan Hours and the "Three Marys at the Tomb" (Boymans-van Beuningen Museum, Rotterdam), as well as Campin's "Nativity" (Musée des Beaux-Arts, Dijon) and "Marriage of the Virgin" (Prado, Madrid); dates the MMA panels from about the time the Ghent altarpiece was completed.

Charles de Tolnay. Le Maître de Flémalle et les frères van Eyck. Brussels, 1939, pp. 37, 53, 64, 79–80, figs. 123–24.

Aurelio Minghetti. "Un nuovo documento per l'iconografia dei Van Eyck." L'arte 11 (1940), pp. 39–40, figs. 4 and 5 (Crucifixion and detail), ascribes them to Hubert and discusses the presumed self–portrait.

Hermann Beenken. Hubert und Jan van Eyck. Munich, 1941, pp. 10–14, figs. 14–18, attributes the panels to Hubert, perhaps painted several years after the Turin-Milan Hours.

Chandler Rathfon Post. "The Master of the Encarnación (Louis Alimbrot??)." Gazette des beaux-arts 23 (March 1943), p. 156.

Margaret Breuning. "Metropolitan Re-Installs Its Treasures in Attractive Settings." Art Digest 18 (June 1, 1944), p. 6.

M[argaretta]. S[alinger]. "Notes." Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin 2 (June 1944), inside front cover, ill. p. 286 (overall) and on front and back covers (color details).

Erwin Panofsky. Letter. September 11, 1944, comments on Tatistcheff's story of the lost central panel, observing that a thief "if not going off with the whole triptych, would certainly not go off with the central piece and leave the wings in place"; suggests that the MMA diptych may easily be a replica of the diptych listed in the inventory of the Duc de Berry.

Maurice W. Brockwell. "The Adoration of the Lamb: Fresh Evidence of John van Eyck's Authorship." Connoisseur 116 (December 1945), p. 123, rejects the attribution to Hubert, declaring that he was a myth, and ascribes them to Jan.

Gerda Boëthius. Bröderna van Eyck. Stockholm, 1946, pp. 59–60, fig. 22, as by Jan van Eyck.

Wilhelm R. Valentiner. Letter. April 12, 1946, ascribes them to Hubert.

Harry B. Wehle and Margaretta Salinger. The Metropolitan Museum of Art: A Catalogue of Early Flemish, Dutch and German Paintings. New York, 1947, pp. 2–12, ill., attribute them to Hubert and find them stylistically analagous to the "Hand G" miniatures of the Turin-Milan hours; are inclined to accept that a central panel was part of the original ensemble and favor Panofsky's view (see Ref. 1927–28) that a drawing in Berlin of the Adoration of the Magi would be a likely composition for this center.

Ernest Lotthé. La pensée chrétienne dans la peinture flamande et hollandaise. Lille, 1947, vol. 2, pp. 218–19, 297–98, 302, 339, no. 487, 346, no. 684, pls. 165b, 215b.

Theodor Musper. Untersuchungen zu Rogier van der Weyden und Jan van Eyck. Stuttgart, 1948, pp. 85–90, 94–96, 102–3, 107, pl. 113, attributes them to Jan; identifies the rider with the turban headdress under the right cross as Philip the Good at about age 30, and dates the painting after May 19, 1425, the date on which Jan entered his service.

Julius S. Held. "Book Reviews: Harry B. Wehle and Margaretta M. Salinger . . ., 1947." Art Bulletin 31 (June 1949), pp. 140–41, considers it unlikely that these panels were originally conceived as the wings of a triptych with an Adoration of the Magi at its center; asserts that it would be an iconographic anomaly for a Crucifixion to serve as the left wing of an Adoration, and notes, moreover, that the MMA Crucifixion is clearly pervaded by a movement from the left side and that the "finality" of the right edge acts like a barrier; comments that the woman standing at the lower right edge, probably a donor, would not have turned her back to the central panel; prefers to think of the Crucifixion as the right wing of an altarpiece and the Last Judgment as one of its outside panels.

Dirk Bax. Ontcijfering van Jeroen Bosch. The Hague, 1949, pp. 29, 247, 253 n. 19 [English ed., Hieronymus Bosch: His Picture-Writing Deciphered, Rotterdam, 1979, p. 328 n. 50, pp. 329–30, 349, 357, 401].

Stephen V. Grancsay. "The Interrelationships of Costume and Armor." The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin 8 (February 1950), ill. p. 183 (detail).

Ruth Massey Tovell. Flemish Artists of the Valois Court. Toronto, 1950, pp. 84, 86–87, 137 n. 12, ascribes them to Jan, before 1425.

Emile Renders. Jean van Eyck et le polyptyque: Deux problèmes résolus. 1950, pp. 11, 73–74, 77–79, 81–83, 85–91, 93–95, 98–102, pls. 19, 21–24, 26–29, 32–33 (overall and details), attributes them to Jan before 1425.

Art Treasures of the Metropolitan: A Selection from the European and Asiatic Collections of The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Exh. cat., The Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York, 1952, p. 225, no. 91, colorpl. 91.

Ludwig Baldass. Jan van Eyck. New York, 1952, p. 92 n. 3, pp. 95–96, 287, no. 62, pls. 163–65 (overall and detail).

J. V. L. Brans. Isabel la Católica y el arte hispano-flamenco. Madrid, 1952, pp. 41–42, 104 n. 5, ascribes them to Hubert and calls them "wings of a triptych"; states that their acquisition from a convent in Spain "where they must have been for centuries" allows us to consider them one of the donations of Juan II, or at least to conclude they were present in Spain by the first half of the fifteenth century; publishes inventories of Queen Isabella, including docket no. 186 of May 3 and January 13, 1499, which lists a diptych in a gilded frame with the Crucifixion and Last Judgment; believes that this may correspond to the MMA works.

Chandler Rathfon Post. "Flemish and Hispano-Flemish Paintings of the Crucifixion." Gazette des beaux-arts 39 (April 1952), p. 239.

Erwin Panofsky. Early Netherlandish Painting: Its Origins and Character. Cambridge, Mass., 1953, vol. 1, pp. 237–40, 242, 246, 269, 309, 454 nn. 1–2 (to p. 238), nn. 1, 3 (to p. 239), p. 455 nn. 1–2 (to p. 240), p. 456 n. 8; vol. 2, pls. 166, 168 (overall and details), attributes them to "Hand G" of the Turin-Milan Hours, which he takes to be Jan, and believes that they were planned as a diptych; discusses the iconography of both panels and asserts that the figure at the lower right edge of the Crucifixion is the Erythrean Sibyl and not a donor (see Held 1949); rejects Held's opinion of the same year that the Crucifixion was the right wing and the Last Judgment one of the outside panels of an altarpiece, observing that outside panels were usually given less sumptuous treatment while these are set in identical gilded and inscribed frames; considers improbable Musper's (1948) identification of a figure under the right cross as Philip the Good.

Leo van Puyvelde. La peinture flamande au siècle des van Eyck. Paris, 1953, pp. 86–89, 190, 298, ill. (overall and detail), attributes them to Hubert, and identifies them with the Crucifixion and Last Judgment listed in the inventory of the duc de Berry.

Federico Zeri. "Il Maestro dell'Annunciazione Gardner." Bollettino d'arte 38 (April–June 1953), p. 130.

Maurice W. Brockwell. The Van Eyck Problem. London, 1954, pp. 53, 60, 74, ascribes them without doubt to Jan.

Klára Garas. "Some Problems of Early Dutch and Flemish Painting." Acta Historiae Artium Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 1, no. 3–4 (1954), pp. 239, 243, 247–48, 251, 253, 259, fig. 4, attributes these panels and the Turin-Milan Hours to a Dutch painter active about 1440, "presumably Albert van Ouwater" .

F. C. Legrand. La peinture belgique des primitifs à nos jours. Brussels, 1954, p. 13, as generally attributed to Hubert van Eyck.

Josephine L. Allen and Elizabeth E. Gardner. A Concise Catalogue of the European Paintings in The Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York, 1954, p. 34.

Theodore Rousseau Jr. "A Guide to the Picture Galleries." Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin 12, part 2 (January 1954), p. 10, ill.

Julius S. Held. "Erwin Panofsky, 'Early Netherlandish Painting, Its Origin[s] and Character'." Art Bulletin 37 (September 1955), pp. 222–24, figs. 4a, 5a, 6a, 7b (details), compares some of the heads in the Crucifixion with those of apostles, pilgrims, and hermits in the Ghent Altarpiece, and gives reasons why the MMA panels might be assigned to Hubert; accepts Panofsky's identification of the figure at the lower right with the Erythrean Sibyl, but still considers her to be a donor, tenatatively identifying her as Margaret, sister of William of Bavaria and wife of Jean sans Peur.

Ruth Massey Tovell. Roger van der Weyden and the Flémalle Enigma. Toronto, 1955, p. 36.

Martin Davies. "A Reminiscence of Van Eyck by Gerard David?" Bulletin des Musées Royaux des Beaux-Arts nos. 1–3 (1955), pp. 173–75 n. 4, fig. 2 (detail).

Otto Pächt. "Panofsky's 'Early Netherlandish Painting'–II." Burlington Magazine 98 (August 1956), p. 273.

Millard Meiss in "Jan van Eyck and the Italian Renaissance." Venezia e l'Europa: atti del XVIII congresso internazionale di storia dell'arte. Venice, 1956, pp. 66–67.

Josua Bruyn. Van Eyck problemen. Utrecht, 1957, p. 6 n.2, p. 104, as from the hand of miniaturist G, most closely related to the work of Jan but fundamentally different in its form; tentatively supports identification of hand G with Hubert.

Jacques Lassaigne. Flemish Painting. Vol. 1, The Century of Van Eyck. New York, 1957, pp. 68–69, suggests an attribution to a master contemporary with Jan and in close touch with him.

Albert Châtelet. "Les enluminures eyckiennes des manuscrits de Turin et de Milan-Turin." Revue des arts (July–August 1957), pp. 160–63, p.164 n. 12, ill. (detail), attributes them to Hand H and suggests that this artist may be Jean Coene, a miniaturist working at Bruges between 1424 and 1450.

L. M. J. Delaissé. "Chronique: Enluminure et peinture dans les Pays-Bas, à propos de E. Panofsky "Early Netherlandish Painting"." Scriptorium 11 (1957), p. 116, as an "Eyckian" work, often incorrectly attributed to "Van Eyck".

J. Q. van Regteren Altena. Middeleeuwse Kunst der Noordelijke Nederlanden. Exh. cat.Amsterdam, 1958, pp. 133–34.

F. Winkler. "Die Wiener Kreutztragung." Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 9 (1958), p. 83.

Jean Squilbeck. "Un oeuvre énigmatic, 'les Trois Marie au Tombeau' du Musée Boymans à Rotterdam." Revue belge d'archéologie et d'histoire de l'art 28 (1959), pp. 59, 68.

Erik Larsen. Les primitifs flamands au Musée Metropolitain de New York. Utrecht, 1960, pp. 28–33, 39, 107, figs. 1–2, as by Hubert; believes they are wings of a triptych and that the central panel was probably an Adoration of the Magi; dates them before 1420.

R. H. Wilenski. Flemish Painters, 1430–1830. New York, 1960, vol. 1, pp. 12, 14, 19–23, 25, 33–35, 47, 67, 74, 86, 89–92, 96, 107, 114 159–60; vol. 2, pls. 1–8, 16, guesses that they were painted about 1467 by Hieronymus Bosch at about the age of eighteen.

James E. Snyder. "The Early Haarlem School of Painting, I. Ouwater and the Master of the Tiburtine Sibyl." Art Bulletin 42 (1960), p. 49 n. 51.

Albert Châtelet. "Albert van Ouwater." Gazette des beaux-arts 55 (February 1960), p. 75.

Millard Meiss. "'Highlands' in the Lowlands: Jan van Eyck, the Master of Flemalle and the Franco-Italian Tradition." Gazette des beaux-arts, 6th ser., 57 (May–June 1961), pp. 281, 310 n. 21, p. 313 nn. 61, 65, attributes them to Jan.

H. Th. Musper. Gotische Malerei nördlich der Alpen. Cologne, 1961, pp. 224, 250.

Federico Zeri. Due dipinti, la filologia e un nome: il Maestro delle Tavole Barberini. Turin, 1961, pp. 58–60, fig. 48, as very early works of Jan.

Germain Seligman. Merchants of Art: 1880–1960, Eighty Years of Professional Collecting. New York, 1961, p. 176.

David G. Carter. "The Providence Crucifixion: Its Place and Meaning for Dutch Fifteenth Century Painting." Bulletin of Rhode Island School of Design 48 (May 1962), pp. 3, 6, 10–11, 13, 17–19, 22 n. 4, p. 23 n. 63, p. 24 n. 65, figs. 2, 28 (details).

Hélène Adhémar. Le Musée National du Louvre, Paris. I [Les primitifs flamands, I: Corpus de la peinture des anciens pays-bas méridionaux au quinzième siècle, vol. 5]. Brussels, 1962, p. 69, as attributed to Jan.

Jan Goris [Marnix Gijsen]. Jan van Eyck in de Kempen. [Arendonk], 1964, pp. 25–27, sees a sign referring to the miller's profession in the Crucifixion as well as other works which he attributes to Jan van Eyck; believes that these marks are signs of an artist who was a member of the Van der Moelen (Miller) family.

Albert Châtelet. "Roger van der Weyden et Jean van Eyck." Jaarboek van het Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten te Antwerpen (1966), p. 29 n. 27, pp. 30–34, fig. 12 (detail), attributes the Crucifixion to Hand H.

Georg Troescher. Burgundische Malerei. Berlin, 1966, vol. 1, pp. 336–37; vol. 2, fig. 705a.

Max J. Friedländer et al. Early Netherlandish Painting. Vol. 1, The van Eycks—Petrus Christus. New York, 1967, pp. 51–53, 94, 109 n. 15, pl. 36, dates them about 1424.

Siegfried Thalheimer. Der Genter Altar. Munich, 1967, pp. 84, 115, as not stylistically close enough to the Ghent Altarpiece to be attributed to Jan with complete conviction.

Georg Troescher. "Die Pilgerfahrt des Robert Campin. Altniederländische und südwestdeutsche Maler in Südostfrankreich." Jahrbuch der Berliner Museen 9 (1967), pp. 110, 112, 114, 133–34, fig. 6 (detail).

Charles D. Cuttler. Northern Painting from Pucelle to Bruegel. New York, 1968, pp. 87–89, 131, ill., attributes these panels to a Bruges painter familiar with the work of Jan van Eyck, about 1430–35.

Raymond Bouyer Giorgio T. Faggin in L'opera completa dei Van Eyck. Milan, 1968, pp. 87–88, no. 3a–b, ill. p. 88 and colorpl. 63.

Martin Davies. National Gallery Catalogues: Early Netherlandish School. London, 1968, pp. 45–46.

Ottmar Kerber. "Hubert van Eyck." Amico Amici: Festschrift für Werner Gross zu seinem 65. Geburtstag am 25.11.1966 (1968), pp. 145–46, 151, fig. 63 (detail), as Jan's early work, not likely to be the wings of a painting based on the composition of the Adoration of the Magi drawing in Berlin.

Heinz Peters in "Zum New Yorker 'Diptychon' der 'Hand G'." Munuscula Discipulorum: Kunsthistorische Studien Hans Kauffmann zum 70. Geburtstag 1966 (1968), pp. 235–46, pls. 205–7, attributes them to Jan and suggests that they were originally tabernacle doors which, when closed, showed two angels or prophets in grisaille.

Shirley Neilsen Blum. Early Netherlandish Triptychs: A Study in Patronage. Berkeley, 1969, pp. 44, 139 n. 49.

[Luisa Marcucci] and Stanley Ferber in McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Art. Ed. Bernard S. Myers. Vol. 5, New York, 1969, p. 404, as possibly an early collaboration of Hubert and Jan, probably left incomplete at Hubert's death, and finished by his "conscientious brother".

Cesar Peman y Pemartin. Juan van Eyck y España. Cadiz, 1969, pp. 63–64, fig. 36, erroneously as from the Mellun [sic] collection; says it is tempting to place them early in Jan's oeuvre; observes that they may be connected in some way with his voyage to Spain, adding that it is logical to assume that they were in Spain from an early time.

Calvin Tomkins. Merchants and Masterpieces: The Story of The Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York, 1970, pp. 225, 235 [rev., enl. ed., 1989].

Lola B. Malkis Gellman. "Petrus Christus." PhD diss., Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, 1970, pp. 118–23, 125, 139–45, 148, 153, 174, 326 n. 102, p. 327 n. 109, pp. 394, 401, 408, fig. 21, as works of Jan van Eyck, calling the Last Judgment clearly the source for Christus's work in Berlin, and the Crucifixion the source for his Dessau Crucifixion; suggests that the MMA panels may have originally included other scenes.

Charles Sterling. Letter. February 20, 1971, thinks they should be called "Attributed to Jan van Eyck," although one may still reasonably hesitate between Jan and a close, most able, follower; personally believes in Jan's authorship noting that "Hubert is to be excluded not because of his nonexistence (which is very far from being proven) but because of the incompatibility of what we know of his life and may suppose to have been his style".

Lotte Brand Philip. The Ghent Altarpiece and the Art of Jan van Eyck. Princeton, 1971, pp. 32, 60, 78 n. 157, pp. 101, 140–64, p. 186 n. 363, pp. 225–26, figs. 140–41, 160, 167, 168, 170 (overall and details), ascribes them Jan van Eyck, perhaps after the Ghent Altarpiece; believes they were the doors of a wooden tabernacle commissioned by Philip the Good for a relic given him by Pope Eugene V in 1433.

Zsuzsa Urbach. "Charles D. Cuttler, Northern Painting from Pucelle to Bruegel, 1968." Acta Historiae Artium 17 (1971), pp. 132, 134.

Charles Sterling. "Observations on Petrus Christus." Art Bulletin 53 (March 1971), p. 9 n. 38, pp. 11–13, 17, 18 n. 66, fig. 42 (Crucifixion), supports Held's [see Ref. 1955] identification of the painter with the painter of the Hermits and Pilgrims in the Ghent Altarpiece, concluding that "since the Diptych with its alpine vista is in all probability later than 1426, this author can only be Jan van Eyck, Hubert having died on September 18, 1426"; gives evidence which he believes indicates that the MMA panels were in Bruges between 1432 and 1437.

Martin Davies. Rogier van der Weyden: An Essay, with a Critical Catalogue of Paintings Assigned to Him and to Robert Campin. London, 1972, p. 249.

Joel M. Upton. "Petrus Christus." PhD diss., Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr, Pa., 1972, p. 18, 89, 268–70.

Lorne Campbell. "Studies in Early Netherlandish Art." Apollo 98 (July 1973), p. 62, considers the iconographic interpretation of the reconstructed triptych tabernacle proposed by Philip [see Ref. 1971] so extravagant that it cannot be taken seriously.

Peter H. Schabacker. Petrus Christus. Utrecht, 1974, pp. 30, 34, 65, 100, fig. 25.

James Snyder. "Lotte Brand Philip, 'The Ghent Altarpiece and the Art of Jan van Eyck' 1971." Renaissance Quarterly 27 (Spring 1974), p. 52.

Odile Kammerer-Nouvel. "Contribution à l'étude de l'iconographie sibylline dans les régions d'Allemagne du sud, de Rhénanie et de Flandres." Master's thesis, Université de Strasbourg, 1974, pp. 82–84 [opinion cited in Ref. Châtelet 1980, p. 50], notes that the feminine silhouette seen from behind at the left in the Crucifixion must be a mate to the Erythreaen sibyl on the right [see Ref. Panofsky 1953] and would thus be a European sibyl, probably the Cumaen sibyl.

Diane Graybowski Scillia. "Gerard David and Manuscript Illumination in the Low Countries, 1480–1509." PhD diss., Case Western Reserve University, 1975, pp. 105–6 n. 38, pp. 164, 202 n. 25, p. 204 n. 38.

Margaretta Salinger in "The Price Was Not Too High." The Chase, the Capture: Collecting at the Metropolitan. New York, 1975, pp. 196–98, fig. 50.

Luciano Bellosi. "I Limbourg precursori di Van Eyck? Nuove osservazioni sui 'Mesi' di Chantilly." Prospettiva 1 (April 1975), p. 34 n. 23.

V. Denis. La peinture flamande 15e–16e–17e siècles. Brussels, 1976, p. 38, figs. 10–11.

Charles Sterling. "Jan van Eyck avant 1432." Revue de l'art no. 33 (1976), pp. 15, 23–25, 29–30, 33–34, 36, 40–50, 53, 56, 76, 80 nn. 118–19, 124, pp. 81 n. 126, figs. 28, 46, 55, 67–69, 71 (overall and details); corrections in Revue de l'art, 34, 1976, p. 103 nn. 109 bis, 132 bis, states that the panels could date from the end of 1426, noting that the view of the Alps in the background of the Crucifixion must be a reminiscence of Jan's trip to Italy, which he deduces took place in that year; tentatively suggests that a central panel depicting the Adoration of the Magi was added at some later date.

Charles Sterling. "Tableaux espagnols et un chef d'oeuvre portugais méconnus du XVe siècle." Actas del XXIII Congreso Internacional de Historia del Arte, España entre el Mediterraneo y El Atlántico. Vol. 1, Granada, 1976, pp. 506, 508, 511, 512, 514, 524 n. 10, fig. 15. (detail).

Ursula Panhans-Bühler. Wiener Kunstgeschichtliche Forschungen. Vol. 5, Eklektizismus und Originalität im Werk des Petrus Christus. Vienna, 1978, p. 22 n. 24, ascribes the panels to the "Turiner Meister (Hubert?)".

Albert Châtelet. Van Eyck. Bologna, 1979, pp. 34, 56, colorpl. 6, illustrates them with works of Jan van Eyck, but comments that it is not altogether certain that the panels are from the same hand, as the Last Judgment is weaker in composition and handling than the Crucifixion; believes they may originally have been a diptych.

Robert C. Williams. Russian Art and American Money, 1900–1940. Cambridge, Mass., 1980, pp. 31–35, 155, 170, 180, 183, ill.

Howard Hibbard. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York, 1980, pp. 186, 188, 194, figs. 356, 357 (color).

Edwin James Mundy III. "Gerard David Studies." PhD diss., Princeton University, 1980, p. 163.

Elisa Bermejo. La pintura de los primitivos flamencos en España. Vol. 1, Madrid, 1980, pp. 60, 92, as coming from an unidentified convent in Burgos.

Elisabeth Dhanens. Hubert and Jan van Eyck. New York, 1980, pp. 359–61, ill. (color), discusses the diptych with works by "Anonymous Epigone and Imitators"; notes that an altarpiece formerly in the church of St. Michael in Ghent and now lost was iconographically similar to the Last Judgment.

Albert Châtelet. "Un Collaborateur de van Eyck en Italie." Relations artistiques entre les Pays-bas et l'Italie à la Renaissance: Études dédiées à Suzanne Sulzberger. Brussels, 1980, pp. 45–56, figs. 3, 6 (Crucifixion and detail), accepts the attribution to Jan; dates them between 1422 and 1424, when the artist worked for John of Bavaria, noting that in the Crucifixion a man wears the plain broad-brimmed hat of the type worn by partisans of John of Bavaria; supports Panofsky's [Ref. 1953] identification of the woman at the lower right in the Crucifixion as the Erythrean Sibyl and finds "seductive" Kammerer-Nouvel's [Ref. 1974] suggestion that the female figure at the left with her back turned to us may be a European sibyl, probably the Cumaen sibyl; believes that the horsemen seen from the rear were inspired by Altichiero's Crucifixion in the oratory of San Giorgio in Padua; considers it most likely that the two panels were originally a diptych.

Hellmut Wohl. The Paintings of Domenico Veneziano, ca. 1410–1461: A Study in Florentine Art of the Early Renaissance. New York, 1980, p. 11.

Albert Châtelet. Early Dutch Painting: Painting in the Northern Netherlands in the Fifteenth Century. English ed. [French ed. 1980]. New York, 1981, pp. 37–39, 168, 196–97, 201–2, 210, 242, no. 20, figs. 23, 26, 27, observes that "the Last Judgment, interesting though it is, is less novel in conception and less brilliant in execution [than the Crucifixion], suggesting the collaboration of some assistant", perhaps Master H, or more probably Hand I of the Turin–Milan Hours; finds an original diptych format more plausible.

Ann Tzeutschler Lurie. "A Newly Discovered Eyckian 'St. John the Baptist in a Landscape'." Bulletin of the Cleveland Museum of Art 67 (April 1981), pp. 98, 101–2, 116 nn. 50–51, p. 117 n. 54.

Daniela Hammer-Tugendhat. Hieronymus Bosch: Eine historische Interpretation seiner Gestaltungsprinzipien [Theorie und Geschichte der Literatur und der schönen Künste, vol. 58]. Munich, 1981, pp. 28–29, 42, 64, 91, 102–5, 176 n. 6, p. 177 n. 1, p. 179 n. 23 from p. 178, figs. 16, 47, 75, 88 (details and Crucifixion), as by the Master of the Turin Book of Hours.

Hans Belting and Dagmar Eichberger. Jan van Eyck als Erzähler: Fruhe Tafelbilder im Umkreis der New Yorker Doppeltafel. Worms, 1983, 198 pp., ill. (overall and details), attribute them to Jan, and believe they were originally a diptych; relate them to other early Eyckian panel paintings and manuscript illuminations and compare the Last Judgment to a fourteenth-century Sienese panel from Bourges (Louvre, Paris) depicting the Fall of the Rebel Angels, and to two related compositions of the Limbourg brothers in the Très Riches Heures–a Saint John on Patmos and a Fall of the Rebel Angels; believe Jan was familiar with all three works.

Liana Castelfranchi Vegas. Italie et Flandres dans la peinture du XVe siècle. Milan, 1984, pp. 67, 81, 152 [Italian ed., 1983].

Charles D. Cuttler. "Exotics in 15th Century Netherlandish art: Comments on Oriental and Gypsy Costume." Liber Amicorum Herman Liebaers. Brussels, 1984, p. 421, mentions them as "sometimes attributed to the Van Eycks, but more likely the work of a Bruges painter of c. 1430–35".

Ivan Gaskell. "Book Review: The Van Eyck Problem." Apollo 120 (August 1984), p. 146.

Anna Eörsi. "From the Expulsion to the Enchaining of the Devil: The Iconography of the Last Judgement Altar of Rogier van der Weyden in Beaune." Acta Historae Artium 30 (1984), pp. 147, 152 n. 55.

James Snyder. Northern Renaissance Art: Painting, Sculpture, the Graphic Arts from 1350 to 1575. New York, 1985, pp. 118, 156, fig. 115, calls the panels and the "Stigmatization of Saint Francis" in the Philadelphia Museum of Art "works by Jan van Eyck in his later years".

Jeffrey Chipps Smith. "Hans Belting and Dagmar Eichberger, 'Jan van Eyck als Erzähler: Frühe Tafelbilder im Umkreis der New Yorker Doppeltafel,' 1983." Speculum 60 (July 1985), pp. 638–40.

Charles Sterling. "L'influence de Konrad Witz en Savoie." Revue de l'art 71 (1986), p. 22.

Claude Schaefer. "Belting (H.) et Eichberger (D.), Jan van Eyck als Erzähler." Gazette des beaux-arts 108 (July–August 1986), p. 25.

Stephen V. Grancsay. Arms & Armor: Essays by Stephen V. Grancsay from The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin 1920–1964. New York, 1986, p. 373, fig. 102.12 (detail), reprints Grancsay 1950.

Introduction by James Snyder in The Metropolitan Museum of Art: The Renaissance in the North. New York, 1987, pp. 9, 18–21, ill. (color, overall and detail).

Carol J. Purtle. "Hans Belting and Dagmar Eichberger, 'Jan van Eyck als Erzähler: Frühe im Umkreis der New Yorker Doppeltafel, 1983'." Art Bulletin 69 (1987), p. 651.

Charles Sterling. "Charles VII vu par Jean Fouquet." L'Oeil 389 (1987), p. 37.

Dagmar Eichberger. Bildkonzeption und Weltdeutung im New Yorker Diptychon des Jan van Eyck. PhD diss.Wiesbaden, 1987, pp. 1–137, ill., discusses the iconography; identifies the paintings as a diptych, attributes them to Jan van Eyck, and connects them with manuscript illumination examples; notes that the shield held by Saint Michael in the Last Judgment precisely evokes a relic formerly preserved at the abbey of Mont Saint-Michel, suggesting a connection with France; identifies the female figure on the lower right of the Crucifixion as the Cumaen sibyl, whose prophecies referred to the Passion and also to Christ 's return to earth; suggests that the parallel figure on the left may be the Eritriaen sibyl.

Albert Châtelet. "Dagmar Eichberger, 'Bildkonzeption und Weltdeutung im New Yorker Diptychon des Jan van Eyck,' 1987." Bulletin Monumental 146 (1988), pp. 165–66.

Adam S. Labuda. "Hans Belting, Dagmar Eichberger, 'Jan van Eyck als Erzähler, Frühe Tafelbilder im Umkreis der New Yorker Doppeltafel,' 1983." Kunstchronik 41 (March 1988), pp. 109–14.

Hans J. van Miegroet. Gerard David. Antwerp, 1989, pp. 50, 112, 115, 141 n. 80, p. 227, colorpl. 29 (Crucifixion).

Otto Pächt. Van Eyck: Die Begründer der altniederländischen Malerei. German ed. [English ed. 1994]. Munich, 1989, pp. 191–95, figs. 115, 119 [English ed. 1994, pp. 190–9, as by the "Master of the Hours of Turin (Hubert van Eyck?)".

Joel M. Upton. Petrus Christus: His Place in Fifteenth-Century Flemish Painting. University Park, Pa., 1990, p. 5 n. 15, p. 11 n. 13, pp. 39–40, 44–45 n. 56, p. 46, fig. 33, suggests the "considerable possibility that this Last Judgment was not painted by Jan van Eyck but by another artist working in the Eyckian tradition"; refers to it as a diptych and dates it about 1440–50.

Janey L. Levy. "The Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven: Ecclesiastical Authority and Hierarchy in the Beaune Altarpiece." Art History 14 (March 1991), pp. 22–23, 25, 47 nn. 33–35, ill. (Last Judgment), notes that the seated apostles are clearly characterized as assistant judges, and suggests that their portrayal may have been inspired by a 1404 catechetical treatise, "which, elaborating on the well-known bilblical passage, explicitly compares the Apostles at the Last Judgment to aldermen seated on thrones"; adds that the artist has followed conventions found in contemporary depictions of secular courts of justice.

Susan Urbach. "Research Report on Examinations of Underdrawings in Some Early Netherlandish and German Panels in the Budapest Museum of Fine Arts II." Le dessin sous-jacent dans la peinture. Ed. Hélène Verougstraete-Marcq and Roger van Schoute. Colloque 8, Louvain-la-Neuve, 1991, p. 83.

Albert Châtelet. "Peinture et enluminure au XVe siècle." Masters and Miniatures: Proceedings of the Congress on Medieval Manuscript Illumination in the Northern Netherlands. Ed. Koert van der Horst and Johann-Christian Klamt. Doornspijk, The Netherlands, 1991, p. 375.

Rudolf Preimesberger. "Zu Jan van Eycks Diptychon der Sammlung Thyssen–Bornemisza." Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 54 (1991), pp. 474–75, fig. 7 (detail).

Otto Pächt. Rembrandt. Munich, 1991, p. 81, fig. 48 (Last Judgment), as by the Master of the Turin Hours (Hubert van Eyck?).

Stanley David Gedzelman. "The Sky in Art." Weatherwise 44 (December 1991–January 1992), p. 11, ill., identifies all the cloud formations in the Crucifixion; asserts that "a slowly moving cold front has just passed and cleared the sky"; remarks that "astronomers will note that this location is not possible for the waning moon".

Introduction by Walter A. Liedtke in Flemish Paintings in America: A Survey of Early Netherlandish and Flemish Paintings in the Public Collections of North America. Antwerp, 1992, p. 334, no. 232, ill.

Christiane Lukatis. "Ein verlorenes Weltgerichtsretabel aus dem künstlerischen Umfeld des Jan van Eyck? Mit einem Tafelbild des Germanischen Nationalmuseums auf Spurnsuche." Anzeiger des Germanischen Nationalmuseums und Berichte aus dem Forschunginstitut für Realienkunde (1992), pp. 175–76, 179, 184, 187, 189–91 nn. 4–5, p. 193 n. 33, ill. (Last Judgment).

Christopher S. Wood. "Book Reviews: . . . Joel M. Upton, 'Petrus Christus: His Place in Fifteenth-Century Flemish Painting . . .'." Art Bulletin 75 (March 1993), p. 177.

Adam S. Labuda. "Jan van Eyck, Realist and Narrator: On the Structure and Artistic Sources of the New York Crucifixion." Artibus et Historiae no. 27 (1993), pp. 9, 11–22, 26–30, ill.

Robert Suckale in Stefan Lochner, Meister zu Köln. Ed. Frank Günter Zehnder. Exh. cat., Wallraf-Richartz-Museum. Cologne, 1993, p. 37, fig. 7 (Last Judgment), notes that the central panel of a Crucifixion triptych in the Historishces Museum, Frankfurt, is based on the MMA panel, which he tentatively ascribes to Hubert van Eyck.

Alice K. Turner. The History of Hell. New York, 1993, p. 152, fig. 21 (Last Judgment, color).

Theo Jülich in Gottesfurcht und Höllenangst: Ein Lesebuch zur mittelalterlichen Kunst. Darmstadt, 1993, p. 98, fig. 48 (Last Judgment).

Paul Philippot. La peinture dans les anciens pays-bas, XVe–XVIe siècles. Paris, 1994, pp. 28–29, 31, 286, ill. (color), attributes the Crucifixion to Jan van Eyck, but ascribes the Last Judgment to a student or collaborator.

Hans Belting and Christiane Kruse. Die Erfindung des Gemäldes: Das erste Jahrhundert der niederländischen Malerei. Munich, 1994, pp. 140–41, 199, colorpls. 12–13 (overall and detail), as by Jan van Eyck.

Maryan W. Ainsworth. Petrus Christus: Renaissance Master of Bruges. Exh. cat., The Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York, 1994, pp. 30–31, 64 n. 27, fig. 20, discusses the raised gesso or "pastiglia" frame.

Otto Pächt. Van Eyck and the Founders of Early Netherlandish Painting. Ed. Maria Schmidt-Dengler. London, 1994, pp. 190–92, 206, ill. fig. 115 and colorpl. 19 [German ed. 1989].

Scott L. Montgomery. "The First Naturalistic Drawings of the Moon: Jan van Eyck and the Art of Observation." Journal for the History of Astronomy 25 (November 1994), p. 317, figs. 1–2 (Crucifixion; overall and detail), notes that in the Crucifixion the moon is depicted in its gibbous phase, with all the major lunar maria visible on its surface as would be the case in the morning hours.

Stephanie Buck. "Petrus Christus's Berlin Wings and the Metropolitan Museum's Eyckian Diptych." Petrus Christus in Renaissance Bruges: An Interdisciplinary Approach. Ed. Maryan W. Ainsworth. New York, 1995, pp. 65–69, 71–72, 74, 77–78, 79–83 nn., figs. 1–4 (details), dates it in the mid-1430s.

Didier Martens. "Les 'Trois Orders de la chrétienté' de Barthel Bruyn et l'iconographie de saint Renaud de Dortmund." Zeitschrift fur Kunstgeschichte 58 (1995), pp. 186–87.

Volker Herzner. Jan van Eyck und der Genter Altar. Worms, 1995, pp. 135, 201, 262–65, 267–68, 270–71, colorpl. 10, accepts the connection of these panels with works ascribed to "Hand G" of the Turin-Milan Hours, whom he appears to identify with Jan van Eyck; sees the turbaned female figure at the lower right of the Crucifixion not as a sibyl [see Ref. Panofsky 1953], but as an early idea for Jan's subsequent use of oriental dress for his sibyls on the wings of the Ghent altarpiece; judging from the view in the background of the Crucifixion, believes the artist must have seen the Alps, perhaps before 1426.

Katharine Baetjer. European Paintings in The Metropolitan Museum of Art by Artists Born Before 1865: A Summary Catalogue. New York, 1995, p. 242, ill. p. 243.

Albert Châtelet. Robert Campin, Le Maître de Flémalle: La fascination du quotidien. Antwerp, 1996, pp. 63, 251, 253, ill. (color detail), believes that the Crucifixion, but not the Last Judgment, is by Jan van Eyck, and relates it to a lost painting of the same theme by Robert Campin, a copy of which is in the National Museum, Poznan.

Cyriel Stroo and Pascale Syfer-d'Olne. The Flemish Primitives: Catalogue of Early Netherlandish Painting in the Royal Museums of Fine Arts of Belgium. Ed. Elizabeth Moodey and Stanton Thomas. Vol. 1, The Master of Flémalle and Rogier van der Weyden Groups. Brussels, 1996, p. 75 n. 27.

Mark L. Evans. "Otto Pächt, Van Eyck and the Founders of Early Netherlandish Painting, 1994." Burlington Magazine 138 (May 1996), p. 333.

Catherine Reynolds. "Reality and Image: Interpreting Three Paintings of the 'Virgin and Child in an Interior' Associated with Campin [a version of this paper was delivered as a public lecture at the National Gallery, not at the symposium]." Robert Campin: New Directions in Scholarship. Ed. Susan Foister and Susie Nash. [Turnhout, Belgium], 1996, p. 185.

Otto Pächt. Early Netherlandish Painting from Rogier van der Weyden to Gerard David. Ed. Monika Rosenauer. London, 1997, pp. 40, 44, 88, 129–30, 153–54, fig. 30 (Last Judgment).

Kenneth Bé. "Geological Aspects of Jan van Eyck's 'Saint Francis Receiving the Stigmata'." Jan van Eyck: Two Paintings of "Saint Francis Receiving the Stigmata". Philadelphia, 1997, p. 94, notes the depiction of fossils within the landscape [see lower edge of the Crucifixion].

Carlenrica Spantigati. "The Turin Van Eyck 'Saint Francis Receiving the Stigmata'." Jan van Eyck: Two Paintings of "Saint Francis Receiving the Stigmata". Philadelphia, 1997, p. 19, fig. 21 (Crucifixion).

Marigene H. Butler. "An Investigation of the Philadelphia 'Saint Francis Receiving the Stigmanta'." Jan van Eyck: Two Paintings of "Saint Francis Receiving the Stigmata". Philadelphia, 1997, pp. 29, 44 n. 1, notes that the underdrawing of the Crucifixion in delicate, parallel hatching strokes defines form and indicates a few changes in design, and that the underdrawing in the upper portions of the Last Judgment appears to be by a different hand.

Jos Koldeweij in La pittura nei Paesi Bassi. Ed. Bert W. Meijer. Milan, 1997, vol. 1, p. 81.

Maryan W. Ainsworth. "A Meeting of Sacred and Secular Worlds." From Van Eyck to Bruegel: Early Netherlandish Painting in The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Ed. Maryan W. Ainsworth and Keith Christiansen. Exh. cat., The Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York, 1998, pp. vii, 2, 14–16, 24–25, 70, 74, 79–80, 86–89, 209, no. 1, ill. (color, overall and details), ascribes them to "Jan van Eyck and Assistant" about 1430, giving to the assistant the upper half of the Last Judgment except for the figure of Christ; notes that the exterior edges preserve traces of an old clasp for closing a diptych.

Maryan W. Ainsworth. Gerard David: Purity of Vision in an Age of Transition. New York, 1998, pp. 28, 95.

Mark Zucker. "The Skull in Van Eyck's 'Crucifixion': A Belated Tribute to Howard Davis." Source: Notes in the History of Art 17 (Spring 1998), pp. 1–6, ill. (left wing and detail of left wing).

John Oliver Hand. "New York. From Van Eyck to Bruegel: Early Netherlandish Painting in The Metropolitan Museum of Art." Burlington Magazine 140 (December 1998), p. 854.

Karen Wilkin. "A Northern Renaissance at the Metropolitan." New Criterion (November 1998), p. 50.

Francisco Fernández Pardo et al., ed. Las tablas flamencas en la ruta Jacobea. Exh. cat., Claustro de la Iglesia de Palacio, Logroño. San Sebastián, Spain, 1999, p. 201, states that these panels came from a convent in Burgos.

Irmgard Siede. "'Pferde von hinten' in der New Yorker Doppeltafel: Eine unberücksichtigte Pathosformel und die Rolle Italiens bei ihrer Verbreitung." Pantheon 57 (1999), pp. 22–32, figs. 1, 6a–b.

Bernard Aikema in Renaissance Venice and the North: Crosscurrents in the Time of Bellini, Dürer and Titian. Ed. Bernard Aikema and Beverly Louise Brown. Exh. cat., Palazzo Grassi. Milan, 1999, p. 202, ill. (Crucifixion).

Cyriel Stroo et al. The Flemish Primitives: Catalogue of Early Netherlandish Painting in the Royal Museums of Fine Arts of Belgium. Vol. 2, The Dirk Bouts, Petrus Christus, Hans Memling and Hugo van der Goes Groups. Brussels, 1999, p. 122 n. 39.

Michael Rohlmann. "Flanders and Italy, Flanders and Florence. Early Netherlandish Painting in Italy and its Particular Influence on Florentine Art: An Overview." Italy and the Low Countries—Artistic Relations: The Fifteenth Century. Florence, 1999, pp. 39, 57 n. 3.

Scott L. Montgomery. The Moon & the Western Imagination. Tucson, 1999, pp. 87–93, 234 n. 10, figs. 6.1–6.2 (left wing; overall and detail), discusses the representation of the moon in the Crucifixion's landscape; states that it is a gibbous moon, and that the major lunar maria are all shown as they would appear in the late afternoon [but see Ref. Montgomery 1994 and Leonardi 2008], perhaps corresponding to the "ninth hour" (about 3 p.m.) in the biblical account; observes, however, that the moon in its waning gibbous phase could not occupy this position in the sky.

Albert Châtelet. "Jan van Eyck entre l'Italie et la France." Journal des Savants (January–June 2000), pp. 79, 81–89, 95–98, figs. 6, 8, attributes the Crucifixion panel to Jan van Eyck and the Last Judgment tentatively to Hubert.

Margaret Scott. "Dress in Van Eyck's Paintings." Investigating Jan van Eyck. Turnhout, Belgium, 2000, pp. 140–41.

Catherine Reynolds. "'The King of Painters'." Investigating Jan van Eyck. Turnhout, Belgium, 2000, pp. 10–11, fig. 10.

Jan Piet Filedt Kok in Netherlandish Art in the Rijkmuseum, 1400–1600. Zwolle, The Netherlands, 2000, p. 35.

Reinhard Liess. Zum Logos der Kunst Rogier van der Weydens: Die 'Beweinungen Christi' in den Königlichen Museen in Brüssel und in der Nationalgalerie in London. Münster, 2000, vol. 1, pp. 54, 194, 309, 324; vol. 2, pp. 581, 606.

Mauro Natale and Frédéric Elsig. El renacimiento mediterráneo: Viajes de artistas e itinerarios de obras entre Italia, Francia y España en el siglo XV. Exh. cat., Museo Thyssen-Bornemisza. 2001, pp. 397–98, 400, figs. 60a–b, date them about 1426, and state that they were in the Mediterranean region, perhaps Naples, in the mid-fifteenth century.

Carl Brandon Strehlke. "Madrid and Valencia, the Mediterranean Renaissance." Burlington Magazine 143 (May 2001), p. 320.

Peter Parshall. "Commentary: Conformity or Contrast?" Early Netherlandish Painting at the Crossroads: A Critical Look at Current Methodologies. Ed. Maryan W. Ainsworth. New York, 2001, p. 22, ill. p. 20 (detail of the Crucifixion, in color).

Roberta J. M. Olson and Jay M. Pasachoff. "Moon-Struck: Artists Rediscover Nature and Observe." Earth, Moon, and Planets 85–86 (2001), pp. 307–10, fig. 4 (Crucifixion, detail).

Till-Holger Borchert. The Age of Van Eyck: The Mediterranean World and Early Netherlandish Painting 1430–1530. Exh. cat., Groeningemuseum, Bruges. Ghent, 2002, p. 20, fig. 15 (color), as by Jan van Eyck and workshop.

Georg Zeman with the collaboration of Fritz Koreny in Early Netherlandish Drawings from Jan van Eyck to Hieronymus Bosch. Ed. Fritz Koreny. Exh. cat., Rubenshuis. Antwerp, 2002, pp. 56–57, 60 nn. 17–19, fig. 10b (detail of Crucifixion), supports a later dating, comparing them with Jan's Dresden triptych (Staatliche Kunstsammlungen), dated 1437, and his Antwerp Madonna at the Fountain (Koninklijk Museum), dated 1439.

Dirk De Vos. The Flemish Primitives: The Masterpieces. Antwerp, 2002, p. 54, ill. 15.

Mar Borobia in Gerard David y el paisaje flamenco. Exh. cat., Museo Thyssen-Bornemisza. Madrid, 2003, pp. 82–83, 90, fig. 39 (detail).

Dan Ewing. "Book Reviews: The Moon and the Western Imagination, Scott L. Montgomery . . . 2001 [first published 1999]." Sixteenth Century Journal 34 (Fall 2003), p. 907.

Frédéric Elsig. "I rapporti pittorici tra Genova e la Francia nel XV secolo." Genova e la Francia: opere, artisti, committenti, collezionisti. Ed. Piero Boccardo et al. (Cinisello Balsamo) Milan, 2003, p. 87, fig. 9.

Oleg Neverov. "Collection of D.P. Tatishchev." Our Heritage no. 66 (2003), p.?.

Boudewijn Bakker. Landschap en Wereldbeeld: Van Van Eyck tot Rembrandt. PhD diss., Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam. Bussum, The Netherlands, 2004, pp. 103, 404 n. 177, figs. 22–23 (overall and detail).

Till-Holger Borchert. "Collecting Early Netherlandish Paintings in Europe and the United States." Early Netherlandish Paintings: Rediscovery, Reception and Research. Ed. Bernhard Ridderbos et al. English ed. Amsterdam, 2005, p. 216 [Dutch ed., "'Om iets te weten van de oude meesters'. De Vlaamse Primitieven—herontdekking, waardering en onderzoek," Nijmegen, 1995].

Thomas Ketelsen in Thomas Ketelsen and Uta Neidhardt. Das Geheimnis des Jan van Eyck: Die frühen niederländischen Zeichnungen und Gemälde in Dresden. Exh. cat., Residenzschloss Dresden. Munich, 2005, p. 88.

Bernhard Ridderbos in "Objects and Questions." Early Netherlandish Paintings: Rediscovery, Reception and Research. Ed. Bernhard Ridderbos et al. English ed. Amsterdam, 2005, pp. 78–79, 82–83, fig. 35 (color) [Dutch ed., "'Om iets te weten van de oude meesters'. De Vlaamse Primitieven—herontdekking, waardering en onderzoek," Nijmegen, 1995].

Mauro Lucco in Antonello da Messina: l'opera completa. Ed. Mauro Lucco. Exh. cat., Scuderie del Quirinale, Rome. Cinisello Balsamo (Milan), 2006, pp. 142, 216, attributes them to the workshop of the Van Eyck brothers and dates it about 1426.

Till-Holger Borchert in Antonello da Messina: l'opera completa. Ed. Mauro Lucco. Exh. cat., Scuderie del Quirinale, Rome. Cinisello Balsamo (Milan), 2006, pp. 32, 41 n. 29, fig. 5 (color, Crucifixion), as by Jan van Eyck.

Catheline Périer-d'Ieteren. Dieric Bouts: The Complete Works. Brussels, 2006, p. 287.

Larry Silver. Hieronymus Bosch. New York, 2006, p. 345, colorpl. 269 (detail of Last Judgment), dates them about 1440.

Laura D. Gelfand. "The Devotional Portrait Diptych and the Manuscript Tradition." Essays in Context: Unfolding the Netherlandish Diptych. Ed. John Oliver Hand and Ron Spronk. Cambridge, Mass., 2006, p. 48.

Till-Holger Borchert. "Innovation, Reconstruction, and Deconstruction: Early Netherlandish Diptychs in the Mirror of Their Reception." Essays in Context: Unfolding the Netherlandish Diptych. Ed. John Oliver Hand and Ron Spronk. Cambridge, Mass., 2006, pp. 175, 192 nn. 18, 21, fig. 1.

Pascale Syfer-d'Olne et al. The Flemish Privitives IV: Catalogue of Early Netherlandish Painting in the Royal Museums of Fine Arts of Belgium. Vol. 4, Masters with Provisional Names. Brussels, 2006, p. 96 n. 49.

Renzo Leonardi. "Jan van Eyck, les Alpes et la lune." Revue de l'art no. 155 (2007), pp. 51–57, ill. (details), believes that it was near Gex that Jan first saw the mountain range depicted in the background of the Crucifixion panel; compares a photograph taken from Gex toward the end of summer to a detail of the mountain range in the painting and concludes that Jan was there at the same time of year; adds that this would probably be the season in which Jan traveled south, no doubt to Italy; also comments on the representation of the moon, noting that it is painted as it appears in the morning, just after sunrise, two or three days after the full moon, chosen by Jan, he concludes, as this was the precise phase of the moon at the time of the Crucifixion, just before Easter.

Helmut Nickel. "The Sun, the Moon, and an Eclipse: Observations on 'The Crucifixion with the Virgin and Saint John,' by Hendrick Ter Brugghen." Metropolitan Museum Journal 42 (2007), p. 123, fig. 2.

Michael Rohlmann. "The Annunciation by Joos Ammann in Genoa: Context, Function and Metapictorial Quality." Cultural Exchange Between the Low Countries and Italy (1400–1600). Ed. Ingrid Alexander-Skipnes. Turnhout, Belgium, 2007, p. 25.

Till-Holger Borchert. Jan van Eyck. Cologne, 2008, pp. 86, 89, ill. p. 87 (color), dates it about 1440 and calls it "a late composition upon which the workshop probably collaborated and which may in turn have taken up earlier versions of the subject by the master".

Dan Ewing. "Addendum à Jan van Eyck, les Alpes et la lune." Revue de l'art no. 160 (2008), pp. 82–83, juxtaposes the contributions of Montgomery [Ref. 1994] and Leonardi [Ref. 2007] in their discussions of Van Eyck's observation of the moon in the Crucifixion.

Colin Eisler. "Lettre de Colin Eisler à propos de l'article de Renzo Leonardi, 'Jan van Eyck, les Alpes et la lune' . . ." Revue de l'art no. 161 (2008), p. 75.

Renzo Leonardi. "Réponse de Renzo Leonardi aux réflexions de Colin Eisler sur l'article 'Jan van Eyck, les Alpes et la lune'." Revue de l'art no. 161 (2008), pp. 75–76.

Renzo Leonardi. "Commentaire à l' 'Addendum à Jan van Eyck, les Alpes et la lune'." Revue de l'art no. 161 (2008), pp. 77–79 nn. 6–8, comments on Montgomery's [see Refs. 1994 and 1999] contradictory assessment of the time of day indicated in the Crucifixion based on the appearance of the moon; points out that in European latitudes the gibbous moon with its right side in shadow—as is the case here—must indicate a morning hour.

Dominique Thiébaut in Mantegna, 1431–1506. Ed. Giovanni Agosti and Dominique Thiébaut. Exh. cat., Musée du Louvre. Paris, 2008, pp. 172–73.

Mauro Lucco in Giovanni Bellini. Ed. Mauro Lucco and Giovanni Carlo Federico Villa. Exh. cat., Scuderie del Quirinale, Rome. Cinisello Balsamo, Milan, 2008, p. 182.

Emanuele Lugli. "Connoisseurship as a System: Reflections on Federico Zeri's 'Due dipinti, la filologia e un nome'." Word & Image 24 (April–June 2008), pp. 166, 174 n. 36, fig. 6 (Crucifixion).

Till-Holger Borchert in Van Eyck to Dürer: Early Netherlandish Painting & Central Europe, 1430–1530. Exh. cat., Groeningemuseum, Bruges. Tielt, Belgium, 2010, pp. 130, 158, 458.

Stephan Kemperdick in Van Eyck to Dürer: Early Netherlandish Painting & Central Europe, 1430–1530. Exh. cat., Groeningemuseum, Bruges. Tielt, Belgium, 2010, p. 289.

Zsuzsa (Susan) Urbach in Van Eyck to Dürer: Early Netherlandish Painting & Central Europe, 1430–1530. Exh. cat., Groeningemuseum, Bruges. Tielt, Belgium, 2010, p. 197.

Renzo Leonardi. "Commentaire à l' 'Addendum à Jan van Eyck, les Alpes et la lune'." Revue de l'art no. 168 (2010), pp. 77–79 nn. 6–8, reprints Ref. Leonardi 2008 with correction of textual errors.

Jacques Paviot. "La 'Crucifixion' et le 'Jugement dernier' attribués à Jan van Eyck (Diptyque de New York)." Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 73, no. 2 (2010), pp. 145–68, figs. 1–3.

Luc Dequeker. Het Mysterie van het "Lam Gods": Filips de Goede en de Rechtvaardige Rechters van Van Eyck. Louvain, 2011, p. 93.

The Road to Van Eyck. Ed. Stephan Kemperdick Friso Lammertse. Exh. cat., Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen. Rotterdam, 2012, p. 106, fig. 20, suggest that between the two panels there once was a sculpture representing the Lamentation over the dead Christ.

Mauro Minardi in The Alana Collection. Ed. Sonia Chiodo and Serena Padovani. Vol. 3, Italian Paintings from the 14th to 16th Century. Florence, 2014, p. 134 n. 19.

Renzo Leonardi. "La Crucifixion de Van Eyck et l'étonnante lune du retable de Gand." Revue de l'art no. 184 (2014), pp. 21–24.

Susan Frances Jones. "Jan van Eyck and Spain." Boletín del Museo del Prado 32, no. 50 (2014), pp. 30–49, attributes the "Crucifixion" and "Last Judgment" to Hand G of the Turin-Milan Hours, an associate of Jan van Eyck; discusses the document that the paintings were in Naples in the seventeenth century, acquired by Ramiro Núñez Felípez de Guzmán, Duke of Medina de las Torres and Spanish Viceroy of Naples (ca. 1600–1668).

Susan Urbach. Early Netherlandish Paintings. London, 2015, vol. 1, pp. 141, 149–50, 152, 157–58, 160 nn. 60–61, 63, under no. 11, p. 221, under no. 18.

Jacques Paviot. "Voyager dans les tableaux de Van Eyck." Van Eyck Studies: Symposium XVIII for the Study of Underdrawings and Technology in Painting, Brussels, 19–21 September 2012. Ed. Christina Currie et al. Paris, 2017, pp. 367–72, discusses landscape features that appear in the Met paintings and their associated origins.

Kathryn Calley Galitz. The Metropolitan Museum of Art: Masterpiece Paintings. New York, 2016, pp. 10, 141, 273, no. 133, ill. pp. 112, 141 (color).

Till-Holger Borchert. "Some Remarks on Drawings by Jan van Eyck, His Workshop and His Followers." La pensée du regard: Études d'histoire de l'art du Moyen Âge offertes à Christian Heck. Ed. Pascale Charron et al. Turnhout, 2016, p. 77 n. 2, pp. 79–80, fig. 4.

Albert Châtelet. "Un Bréviaire rouennais illustré par les Van Eyck." Art de l'enluminure no. 63 (December 2017–February 2018), pp. 11–12, ill. (color; Last Judgment), attributes the Last Judgment to Hubert.

Catherine Reynolds. "Jan van Eyck as Illuminator? Hand G of the Turin-Milan Hours." Van Eyck Studies: Symposium XVIII for the Study of Underdrawings and Technology in Painting, Brussels, 19–21 September 2012. Ed. Christina Currie et al. Paris, 2017, pp. 518–33, presents Hand G, whom she indicates is not Jan van Eyck, as the painter of The Met's "Crucifixion" and "Last Judgment".

Maryan W. Ainsworth. "Revelations Regarding the 'Crucifixion' and 'Last Judgment' by Jan van Eyck and Workshop." Van Eyck Studies: Symposium XVIII for the Study of Underdrawings and Technology in Painting, Brussels, 19–21 September 2012. Ed. Christina Currie et al. Paris, 2017, pp. 220–31, discusses initial technical investigation of the frames and the paintings revealing new information regarding the original format of the ensemble.

Emma Capron. The Charterhouse of Bruges: Jan van Eyck, Petrus Christus, and Jan Vos. Exh. cat., Frick Collection. New York, 2018, p. 116, fig. 72 (color).

Sergey Androsov. Western European Painting of the Fourteenth–Early Twentieth Centuries in the Hermitage Collection. St. Petersburg, 2018, p. 19.

Larry Silver. "Eyckian Icons and Copies." Making Copies in European Art 1400–1600: Shifting Tastes, Modes of Transmission, and Changing Contexts. Ed. Maddalena Bellavitis. Leiden, 2018, pp. 154–55, 157–58.

Till-Holger Borchert. "Jan van Eyck and His Workshop: Organization, Collaborators, Legacy." The Ghent Altarpiece: Art, History, Science and Religion. Ed. Danny Praet and Maximiliaan P. J. Martens. Veurne, Belgium, 2019, pp. 138–57, as possibly a late work left unfinished and completed by a collaborator.

Holland Cotter. "The Met Casts New Light on Hit Works and History." New York Times (December 25, 2020), p. C1 [online ed., "The Met Casts New Light on its Greatest Hits and History," December 24, 2020, ill. (color, installation view); https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/24/arts/design/metropolitan-museum-european-paintings-skylights.html].

Matthias Depoorter in Van Eyck: An Optical Revolution. Ed. Maximiliaan Martens et al. Exh. cat., Museum voor Schone Kunsten. Ghent, 2020, pp. 210, 218–19, 230, 234. n. 66, p. 235 nn. 92, 95, p. 494, fig. 8.23 (color detail), discusses the accuracy of the depictions of the moon and clouds in The Met's paintings and their similarity to treatments in the Saint Francis and Ghent Altarpiece paintings.

Larry Silver in Van Eyck: An Optical Revolution. Ed. Maximiliaan Martens et al. Exh. cat., Museum voor Schone Kunsten. Ghent, 2020, pp. 43–44, 50, fig. 2.1 (color), considers The Met's paintings a “high quality outlier” of Jan van Eyck’s works.

Lieve De Kesel in Van Eyck: An Optical Revolution. Ed. Maximiliaan Martens et al. Exh. cat., Museum voor Schone Kunsten. Ghent, 2020, pp. 354, 363 n. 161.

Till-Holger Borchert in Van Eyck: An Optical Revolution. Ed. Maximiliaan Martens et al. Exh. cat., Museum voor Schone Kunsten. Ghent, 2020, p. 428.

Sophie Scully and Silvia A. Centeno in Jan van Eyck’s "Crucifixion" and "Last Judgment": Solving a Conundrum. Ed. Maryan W. Ainsworth. Turnhout, 2022, pp. 10–29, 97–115, ill. (color, overall, details, reverse, frame, and technical images), discuss the technical examination of the frames and Van Eyck's working technique.

Maryan W. Ainsworth in Jan van Eyck’s "Crucifixion" and "Last Judgment": Solving a Conundrum. Ed. Maryan W. Ainsworth. Turnhout, 2022, pp. 6–9, 30–95, 116–47, 149–73, ill. (color, overall, details, reconstructions, and technical images).

Marc Smith in Jan van Eyck’s "Crucifixion" and "Last Judgment": Solving a Conundrum. Ed. Maryan W. Ainsworth. Turnhout, 2022, pp. 174–77, ill. (color, frame detail), discusses the deciphering of the Middle Dutch frame texts.

Christina Meckelnborg in Jan van Eyck’s "Crucifixion" and "Last Judgment": Solving a Conundrum. Ed. Maryan W. Ainsworth. Turnhout, 2022, pp. 178–79, ill. (color details), provides transcriptions of the texts inscribed within the paintings.

Frank Willaert and Luc De Grauwe in Jan van Eyck’s "Crucifixion" and "Last Judgment": Solving a Conundrum. Ed. Maryan W. Ainsworth. Turnhout, 2022, pp. 180–81, discuss the linguistic implications of the Middle Dutch frame inscriptions.

Larry Silver. "Review of Ainsworth 2022." Burlington Magazine 165 (July 2023), pp. 804–5, fig. 3 (color), dates it about 1440–41.

Heather Madar. Albrecht Dürer and the Depiction of Cultural Differences in Renaissance Europe. New York, 2023, pp. 22, 25, fig. 1.3, dates it about 1440–41.

For information about the frames, see the Collection Insights blog series:

Unlocking the Mysteries of Two Jan van Eyck Frames, by Maryan Ainsworth

Unlocking the Mysteries of Two Jan van Eyck Frames, Part Two: Imaging the Hidden Details, by Silvia A. Centeno and Sophie Scully

Unlocking the Mysteries of Two Jan van Eyck Frames, Part Three: Addressing Questions of Display, by Sophie Scully

Unlocking the Mysteries of Two Jan van Eyck Frames, Part Four: What Does the Text Mean?, by Marc Smith

Unlocking the Mysteries of Two Jan van Eyck Frames, Part Five: Mysteries Unlocked, by Maryan Ainsworth

This work may not be lent.