Gothic Art for England 1400-1547

Apollo, Feb, 2004 by Willibald Sauerlander

'Gothic Art in England 1400-1547' is a belated sequel to two earlier exhibitions devoted to medieval art in England: 'Romanesque Art 1066-1200', which was held at the Hayward Gallery in 1984, and 'The Age of Chivalry', which was held at the Royal Academy in 1987. The sequence of these exhibitions reveals a significant change in our attitude to medieval art. If 'Romanesque Art" was a sober demonstration of connoisseurship, and 'The Age of Chivalry' was a blend of well presented objects with a visual dream of the Middle Ages, then "Art for England 1400-1547' is a very different kind of exhibition. It reflects the predominance of a historical view over such traditional art historical criteria as style and connoisseurship. The topics of the show and its chronological limits were determined by historians' criteria. Historians may claim continuity for the period between 1400-57, as John Watts argues in his catalogue essay, but for art historians, whose periodic system is based on stylistic criteria, the same half-century or so is at least as much a time of change as of continuity. So it was arguably perverse to saddle this historical exhibition with an art historical title that included the word 'gothic'. No self-respecting art historian would call Torrigiano's busts, Antonio Solario's Withypoll Altarpiece, or Holbein's portraits 'gothic'.

The installation of the show displayed a glamorous panorama of the splendours of the age. The visitor entered through a dark room with the crown of Margaret of York flanked by the four Dacre beasts. It was like coming into a theatre. Huge photographs presented suggestive views: Kings College Chapel, Paycockes House at Coggeshall. The slickest travel agent could not have done better. Goldsmiths' works, jewellery, manuscripts were all displayed in showcases resembling shop windows. One may admit in order to attract a public accustomed to the media, television and advertising, exhibitions of medieval art must be dramatised. But was it necessary to present a considerable number of the objects in such a way that it was impossible to subject them to detailed scrutiny? That is what happened. Many of the smaller things, and most of the manuscripts could really not be seen. Visual theatre has its glamour, but works of arts are not posters. As an installation, this exhibition set a bad example. Curators and art historians should be on their guard against such trumpeting showmanship.

It would be unfair to deny that 'Art for England' is an intelligently conceived exhibition with a whole host of well chosen objects. The catalogue is learned and perfectly organised, while most of its entries are informative. Indeed, it is only by studying this catalogue that one begins to grasp the 'idea' of the exhibition. So the best way to discuss the objects in the show is to follow the sequence of the catalogue.

It begins with three chapters on royalty. Only a few of the many objects in this section can be mentioned. There is Torrigiano's recently cleaned terracotta bust of Henry VII (Fig. 3), which may be compared to the bust of an ecclesiastic from the Metropolitan--still overpainted--and to the bronze portrait relief of Sir Thomas Lovell attributed to the same artist. There is the exquisite statue of Henry VI from All Souls at Oxford (Fig. 1), which is so different from royal images on the continent. There is further the huge foundation charter for Kings College, Cambridge, with its telling iconography: the praying king and behind him the members of the two houses of parliament. One is less happy with the trophies of goldsmith's work lent by the Louvre and from Aachen. The 'Englishness' of the Reliquary, of the order of St-Esprit seems spurious. In its present state, the heavily restored Crown of Margaret of York from the latter is a triumph of Victorian historicism, which has much less to do with the Middle Ages. It should never have been chosen as the 'logo' of the exhibition.

[FIGURES 1, 3 OMITTED]

The next sections presented the 'Arts of Combat' and 'Chivalry', and were truly spectacular. The helm, the shield and the sword from Henry V's funeral were magnificently displayed, and so was the tournament and horse armour of Henry VIII. One saw livery badges and collars, the Great tournament roll of Westminster and the Garter Book of William Bruges. The well-established obsession of late medieval chivalry with heraldry, orders and tournaments became overwhelmingly apparent. The statue of St George and the Dragon belonging to the Worshipful Company of

Armourer and composed of wood, iron, leather textiles and horse-hair is an amusing piece of mixed craftsmanship. It is the kind of object Italian commentators of the period would have denounced as goffo.

The most original part of the exhibition assembled objects connected with distinguished art patrons from the period: the Beauchamps and the Nevilles, Archbishop Chichele of Canterbury, the founder of All Souls, Bishop Fox of Winchester, the founder of Corpus Christi at Oxford, and the remarkable Lady Margaret Beaufort, the foundress of Christ College, Cambridge. The evocation of the Beauchamp Chapel at St Mary's, Warwick, with stained glass, statues and the magnificent effigy of Richard Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, was a true tour de force. On the other hand, close examination of the effigy and its state of conversation was-alas--not possible. >From afar, Beauchamp looked suspiciously well preserved, and this was the kind of problem the exhibition all too often neglects. Chichele's statue from All Souls is by the same sculptor as the statue of Henry VI referred to above, and both originally adorned the gate-tower of the college. These were the most beautiful sculptures in the exhibition, together with Torrigiano's busts. Among Chichele's gifts to All Souls on display were two Parisian silver-gilt wine flagons of ravishing beauty. No less splendid is the English Salt, which Bishop Fox gave to Corpus Christi (Fig. 2). The beaker given by Lady Margaret Beaufort to Christ's, covered with a design of Tudor roses, is another brilliant example of the magical combination of enlightened patronage, art and luxury. In this part of the exhibition, one was on firm historical ground and there was an aura of the living past, even of real persons, their piety, their status and their character.