Free Stealing the Mystic Lamb by Noah Charney Page A

so many great Renaissance artists, was engaged frequently in the mounting of temporary decorations to celebrate one-time events, from weddings to royal visits—decorations that would be dismantled soon after the event took place. As a result, a large chunk of the time and effort of Renaissance court artists was focused on temporary artistic installations never intended to outlive the events themselves—precious time that might otherwise have been directed towards the creation of more masterpieces for the ages. This is a frustrating fact for art lovers, who would welcome a few more extant van Eycks in today’s museums, and was perhaps likewise so for the Renaissance artists themselves. With this in mind, we might consider that, while for van Eyck and for Joos Vijd, The Ghent Altarpiece was a monument for the ages, for Duke Philip the Good, the altarpiece served merely as a most elaborate and intricate stage set, a backdrop that would be used for the baptism of his son, born just as the altarpiece was completed.
    It has generally been assumed that a learned theologian advised van Eyck on the iconography of The Ghent Altarpiece , designing an elaborate symbolic scheme, one that would require extensive knowledge of theological sources in a variety of languages. Most Renaissance artist contracts specified what the painter was to paint, which allegories might be represented, for example, and the biblical or literary scenes therein. The interpretation, or invenzione , as the Italians called it—what to do with the specifications—was up to the artist. But the scenes were, in the main, dictated ahead of time by the commissioners and their advisors.
    What is particularly astonishing in the case of The Ghent Altarpiece is that no evidence has been found to suggest that elaborate predesigned
schemes for religious artwork played a role in Flemish or Netherlandish art of this period. That is to say, in terms of theological complexity, The Ghent Altarpiece is without precedent. That does not necessarily mean a theologian did not design the concept of the work, but it does mean, if one did, it was a first in the art of the time. It is only one generation later that documents have been found that attest to another Flemish master, Dirk Bouts, having been advised on his iconography by a theologian.
    One scholar, Dana Goodgal, not only believes that a theologian was responsible for the altarpiece’s iconographic scheme but has named an entirely plausible candidate for the role. Olivier de Langhe was the prior of the Church of Saint John (later renamed Saint Bavo) while the altarpiece was being painted. De Langhe’s most notable known accomplishment was a treatise on the Eucharist—a subject that resonates with the Christ-as-sacrificial-lamb theme of The Adoration of the Mystic Lamb . Van Eyck scholar Craig Harbison draws parallels between De Langhe’s text and The Ghent Altarpiece :
    De Langhe’s thought also corresponds with the image in the way it presents a traditional view of the nature and necessity of Church ritual. As visualized by van Eyck, the saints, martyrs, prophets and highly-placed ecclesiastics, both bishops and confessors, lead the strictly regulated religious and social groups that adore the sacrificial Lamb of God. A mystical vision of the Godhead—Paradise—is only accessible through the carefully mapped paths of traditional Church leaders and theologians . . . [reiterating] in a many-layered form the centuries’ old claim of the Church hierarchy to absolute authority.
    In this way, The Ghent Altarpiece could be seen as a collective affirmation of traditional Catholic values as the only way to access the Godhead. Although no documentary evidence confirms this, Olivier de Langhe was in the right place, at the right time, possessed the right knowledge, and wrote about relevant topics, all suggesting that he might well have been
the theologian who developed the iconographic scheme for The Ghent Altarpiece .

    Van