Árbók Hins íslenzka fornleifafélags - 01.01.1983, Page 85

ATHUGASEMD UM LÁGMYND I NORSKU SAFNI
89
Christ is shown as a dccrepit old man; in fact wc can say of all thc figurcs in the bas-relief
that they are well advanced in years.
The bas-relief is clumsy, the figures awkward and lifeless. The general impression is
impersonal and the artist did not enliven the event in comparison with the picture in the
Skctch Book, where the artist has infused life into the dramatic event he is illustrating.
This is most evident in the total intpression of thc work, the composition, the movement,
the folds of clothing, the expressions on the faces, and the style and technique generally.
Grevenor concluded his article with thc statement that the style and models evidenced
in the Sketch Book had, in thejudgement of Harry Fett, been very important for the east-
ern Norwegian painting in the time of Haakon V. Grevcnor considcred it conccivable that
thc author of the Icelandic Sketch Book had sought for his material in Norway, or, as he
worded it, „there copied the sketch book that was the model of a great many of the
sketches in his book.“ The bas-relief from Kongsberg Grevenor considercd furthcr proof
of this.5
I am far from being of the same opinion about this as Henrik Grevenor. When all the
details that have been mentioncd in this paper arc taken together, they all point to the fact
that the bas-relief was done more recently by a man who was a rather accomplishcd
wood-carver, but no artist. Most likcly the bas-relicf was not donc bcforc Fett’s publi-
cation in 1910 of pictures from the Sketch Book. Whether the work was originally pro-
duced as a fakc or whether for selfcnjoyment 1 cannot say, and in any casc it is of no
import in this connection.
Notes:
1. Elsa E. Guðjónsson, Curator of thc National Muscum of Iceland, provided mc with
the photograph in 1962, as she knew that I had for some timc been nruch intercstcd
in the pictures in the Sketch Book and had researched thcm somcwhat. I thank Elsa
for her thoughtfulness.
2. Henrik Grevenor, „Et skaaret relief fra middelaldcren og dets tegnede forbillcdc”.
Festskrift til Hjalmar Pettersen, Oslo 1926, pp. 263-266.
3. I obtaincd this information in a letter from Albert Stccn, Curator at thc Kunstindu-
strimuseet in Oslo, 10. May 1983. Grevcnor stated that thc work is 27 cm high by
20 cm wide (p. 264). His measurcments therefore do not agrcc with those of thc
Kunstindustrimuseet.
4. „En nærmere undersokelse vil hurtig bringc paa dct rcne at skjærcrcn har eftcrgjort
tegningcn i de mindste detaljer. Hcr foreliggcr en virkclig kopi. Der er ikke cn eien-
dommclighet vcd personcrnes holdning, en haarlok cllcr et foldckast, cn detalj vcd
dragten som kunstncren ikke mcd den pinligste noiagtighct har gjcngit cfter forbill-
cdet.“ (p. 265.)
5. Grevcnor’s last paragraph, p. 266. „Dcn stil og de motiver som har fundct sit uttryk
i tegneboken har efter dr. Fetts paavisning været av indgripende bctydning for det
ostnorske maleri i Oslo paa Haakon V’s tid. Dct cr derfor mulig at dct nctop er i
disse cgnc at den islandskc kunstncr har hentet sit stof, cller rcttcre at dct er hcr han
har kopicret den monstcrbok sem danner forbillcdet for cn rækkc av tcgningcrnc i
hans cgen. Der fundnc rclief fra Kongsbcrg kan muligens tjenc som cn ydcrligcre
bekræftelse herpaa, skjont de mangelfuldc oplysningcr ikke gir megen anlcdning til
at trække nogen slutning. Det vil dog altid bli av betydning at der ber i Norge er
fundet et skulpturarbejde dcr ogsaa forcliggcr som tcgning i cn islandsk skitsebok fra
slutningen av 1400-aarenc.“