Árbók Hins íslenzka fornleifafélags - 01.01.1983, Blaðsíða 84

88
ÁRBÓK FORNLEIFAFÉLAGSINS
other of a picture from the lcelandic Sketch Book AM673a III 4to, fol. 9r in the Arna-
magnæan Institute in Copenhagen; both showed the Betrayal (Fig. 1). The pictures are in
the Middle Ages section of the museum where they are displayed side by side, thus giving
the impression that both date from the Middle Ages.
I found the photograph of immediate interest, especially as I had not seen the bas-relief
before. On careful examination I saw no indication that it could be from the Middle Ages;
more likely from the twentieth century. (Fig. 2).
Sevcral years later I saw a article by Henrik Grevenor, „Et skaaret relief fra middelal-
deren og dets tegnede forbillede", published in 1926.2 There he compares the picture of
the wood carving with the picture in the Sketch Book and considers that the carving was
done in Norway in the Middle Ages (Fig. 2). Grevenor says that Norsk Folkemuseum
had purchased the bas-relief a few years before from Kongsberg in Norway. The
Kunstindustrimuseet informed me of the catalogue number of the work, D113 („Deposi-
tum fra Norsk Folkemuseum"). The height of the carving was given as 25 cm, the width
as 15 cm, and the wood was thought to be oak.3
I did not wish to have my opinion published until I had seen the bas-relief myself, and
that was not until last May. My supposition was then even more defmitely confirmed so
that I have decided to make it known.
Grevenor considers the wood carving to be from the fifteenth century, though conceiv-
ably quite a bit later, and says that it resembles thc picture in the Icelandic Sketch Book
down to the smallest details. „This is a true copy,“ he says. He also says that there is no
sign in the bearing, hair or clothing of the figures that the artist has not copied with de-
tailed exactness.4
Comparison of the two pictures left me with the totally opposite impression. The two
styles are completely different. The bas-relief, in my opinion, does not have the slightest
medieval appearance. It bears no sign of thc free style of medieval art. The frame around
the picture plane was no hindrance to mcdicval artists if they chose to ignore it. They
often broke the frame so as to infuse their work with movement and life, and allowed
the people to move freely both within and outside of the frame. They often cropped parts
of the figures and clothing. The artist of the Betrayal in the Sketch Book did both (Fig.
3). To take one example, thc feet of Malchus extend well below the frame. A great dcal
is cut off the soldier on the right, though his hat and hair are complete and break though
thc frame to extend way beyond. The figure of St. Peter has also been cropped, both his
halo and his clothes. In addition the frame is broken by a wand which the soldier on the
left is holding aloft.
All this is differently treated in the bas-relief. Thcrc all the figures are held neatly within
the frame, neither figures nor folds of clothing cut off, though a tiny portion of the sword
of the soldier on the far right is not shown.
As noted, Grevenor found complete congruence between the bas-relief and the picture
in the Sketch Book, and gave as examples the locks of hair and the folds of clothing. I
cannot sce but that the hair of St. Pcter is completely different in the two pictures. In the
bas-relief the crown of his head is not visible, and the locks of hair falling over his forc-
head are different, as well as the locks falling down over the back of his neck. There is
no lock of hair at all over Christ’s forehead. The halo over his head is so heavy and broad
that he appears to be straining under it. The halo most closely resembles a life ring. In
the Skctch Book Christ is shown as a young man with large alive eyes. Judas, by com-
parison, is ugly and sly-looking; a short goatee underlines his craftiness. In the bas-relief