CHAPTER XVIII

IDENTIFICATIONS

Identifying tapestries is like playing a game, like the solving of a

piquant problem, like pursuing the elusive snark. I know of no keener

pleasure than that of standing before a tapestry for the first time

and giving its name and history from one's own knowledge, and not from

a museum catalogue or a friend's recital. The latter sources of

information may be faulty, but your own you can trust, for by

delightful association with tapestries and their literature you have

become expert. The catalogue is to be read, the friend is to be heard,

in all humility, because these supply points that one may not know;

but, who shall not say that an intensely human gratification is

experienced when the owner of a tapestry with the Brussels mark tells

you that it is a Gobelins, or one with the _History of Alexander_

tells you it is the only set of that series ever woven, and you know

better.

The first thing that strikes the eye and the intelligence is the

drawing, the general school to which it belongs. There is matter for

placing the piece in its right class. It might be said to place it in

its right century or quarter century, but that tapestries were so

often repeated in later times, the cartoon having no copyright and

therefore open to all countries in all centuries. Next, then, to fix

it better, comes a study of the border, for therein lies many a

secret of identity, and borders were of the epoch in which the weaving

was done, even though the cartoon for the centre came from an earlier

time.

Last, as a finishing touch, come the marks in the galloon. This is put

last because so often they are absent, and so often unknown, the sign

of some ancient weaver lost in the mists of years, although a

well-known mark so instantly identifies, that study of other details

is secondary.

But under these three generalising heads comes all the knowledge of

the savant, for the truth about tapestries is most elusive. Knowledge

is to be gained only by a lover of the objects, a lover willing to

spend long hours in association with his love, prowling among

collections, comparing, handling, studying designs, discerning

colours, searching for details, and indulging withal a nice feeling

for textures, a vision that feels them even without touch of the hand.

If the study of design has not given a keen scent for the vague

quality which we call "feeling," the eye would better be trained still

further, for herein lies the secret of success in difficult places,

and not only that, but if he have not this sense he is deprived of one

of the most subtile thrills that the arts can excite.

But this sense is not a matter of untrained intuition. It is the

flower of erudition, the flame from a full heart, or whatever dainty

thing you choose to call it. It has its origin primarily in keen

observation of the various important schools of design that have

interested the world for centuries. We unconsciously augment it even

in following the side-path of history in this modest volume. Our

studies here are but those of a summer morn or a winter eve, yet they

are in vain if they have not set up a measuring standard or two within

the mind.

GOTHIC DRAWING

First, and dearest to the lover of designs, comes the Gothic, the

style practised by those conscientious romantic children-in-art, the

Primitives. Their characteristics in tapestry are much the same as in

painting, as in sculpture; for, weavers, painters, book-makers,

sculptors, were all expressing the same matter, all following the same

fashion. Therefore, to one's help comes any and every work of the

primitive artists. Making allowance for the difference in medium, the

same religious feeling is seen in the Burgundian set of _The

Sacraments_ in the Metropolitan Museum of Arts, New York, as is found

in stone carving of the time which decorated churches and tombs.

The figures in the Gothic tapestries show a dignified restraint, a

solemnity of pose, recalling the deadly seriousness with which

children play the game of grown-ups. The artists of that day had to

keep to their traditions; to express without over-expression, was

their difficult task (as it is ours), but they had behind them the

rigidity of the Byzantine and Early Christian, so that every free

line, every vigorous pose or energetic action, was forging ahead into

a new country, a voyage of adventure for the daring artist. Quite

another affair was this from modern restraint which consists in

pruning down the voluptuous lines following the too high Renaissance.

Faces are serious, but not animated. Dress reveals charming matter

concerning stuffs and modes in that far time. But apart from these

characteristics is the one great feature of the arrangement of the

figures, almost without perspective. And therein lies one immense

superiority of the ancient designs of tapestries over the modern as

pure decorative fabric. Men and women are placed with their

accessories of furniture or architecture all in the foreground, and

each man has as many cubits to his stature as his neighbour, not being

dwarfed for perspective, but only for modesty, as in the case of the

Lady's companion in the _Unicorn_ series--but that series is of a

later Gothic time than the early works of Arras.

A noticeable feature is that the centre of vision is placed high on

the tapestry. The eye must look to the top to find all the strength of

the design. The lower part is covered with the sweeping robes or

finished figures of the folk who are playing their silent parts for

the delight of the eye. This covers well the space with large and

simple motive. No recourse is had to such artifice as distant lands

seen in perspective, nor angles of rooms, but all is flat, brought

frankly into intimate association with the room that is lived in, so

that these people of other days seem really to enter into our very

presence, to thrust vitally their quaint selves into our company. This

feature of simple flatness is in so great contrast to later methods of

drawing that one becomes keenly conscious of it, and deeply satisfied

with its beauty. The purpose of decoration and of furnishing seems to

be most adequately met when the attention is retained within the

chamber and not led out of it by trick of background nor lure of

perspective, no matter how enticing are the distant landscapes or how

noble the far palace of royalty. Thus the Primitives struck a more

intimately human note than the artists of later and more sophisticated

times.

The more archaic the tapestry, the simpler the motive, is the rule.

The early weavers of Arras and of France were telling stories as

naturally as possible, perhaps because the ways of their times were

simple, and brushed aside all filigree with a directness almost

brutal; but also, perhaps, because technique was not highly developed,

either in him who drew with a pencil or him who copied that drawing in

threads of silk and wool and gold. Whatever the cause, we can but

rejoice at the result, which, alas, is shown to us by but lamentably

few remnants outside of museums. These very archaic simple pieces are,

for the most part, work of the latter part of the Fourteenth Century

and the first part of the Fifteenth, and as the history of tapestry

shows, were almost invariably woven in France or in Flanders. At the

end of the time mentioned, designs, while retaining much the same

characteristics already described, became more ambitious, more

complicated, and introduced many scenes into one piece. This is easily

proved by a comparison of the illustration of _The Baillee des Roses_,

or _The Sacraments_, with _The Sack of Jerusalem_, all in the

Metropolitan Museum.

The idea in the earliest Gothic cartoons--if the word may be allowed

here, was to make a single picture, a unified group. Into the later

cartoons came the fashion of multiplying these groups on one field, so

that a tapestry had many points of interest, many scenes where

tragedies or comedies were being enacted. Ingenious were the ways of

the early artist to accomplish the separation between the various

scenes, which were sometimes divided merely by their own attitudes, as

folk dispose themselves in groups in a large drawing-room; and

sometimes were divided by natural obstructions, like brooks and trees,

or by columns.

Later yet, all the antique eccentricities passed away, and the laws of

perspective and balance were fully developed in an art which has an

unspeakable charm. All the things that modern art has decreed as crude

or childish has passed away, and the sweet flower of the Gothic

perfection unfolded its exquisite beauty. This Gothic perfection was

the Golden Age of tapestry.

ARCHITECTURAL DETAIL

The use of architecture in the old Gothic designs makes a pleasing

necessity of fastening our attention upon it. In the very oldest

drawing the sole use is to separate one scene from another, in the

same hanging. For this purpose slender columns are used. It is

intensely interesting to note that these are the same variety of

column that meets us on every delightful prowl among old relics of

North Europe, relics of the days when man's highest and holiest energy

expressed itself at last in the cathedral. Those slender stems of the

northern Gothic are verily the stems of plants or of aspiring young

trees, strong when grouped, dainty when alone, and forming a refined

division for the various scenes in a picture. It must be confessed

that in the medium of aged wool they sometimes totter with the effect

of imminent fall, but that they do not fall, only inspires the

illusion that they belong to the marvellous age of fairy-tale and

fancy.

The careful observer takes a keen look at these columns as a clue to

dates. The shape of the shaft, whether round or hectagonal, the

ornament on the capitals, are indications. It is not easy to know how

long after a design is adopted its use continues, but it is entirely a

simple matter to know that a tapestry bearing a capital designed in

1500 could not have been made prior to that time.

The columns, later on, took on a different character. They lifted

slender shafts more ornamented. It is as though the restless men of

Europe had come up from the South and had brought with them

reminiscences of those tender models which shadowed the art of the

Saracens, the art which flavoured so much the art of Southern Europe.

The columns of many a cloister in Italy bear just such lines of

ornament, including the time when the brothers Cosmati were

illuminating the pattern with their rich mosaic.

Then, later still, the columns burst into the exquisite bloom of the

early Renaissance, their character profoundly different, but their use

the same, that of dividing scenes from one another on the same woven

picture. But as any allusion to the Renaissance seems to thrust us far

out onto a radiant plain, let us scamper back into the mysterious wood

of the Gothic and pick up a few more of its indicative pebbles, even

as did Hans and Gretel of fairyland.

A use of Gothic architectural detail gives a religious look to

tapestry, quite other than the later introduction of castles. These

castle strongholds of the Middle Ages wasted no daintiness of

construction, nor favoured light ornament, nor dainty hand. They were,

par excellence, places of defence against the frequent enemy; so, in

bastion and tower they were piled in curving masses around the scenes

of the later Gothic tapestries. Even more, they began to play an

important part in the _mise en scene_, and were drawn on tiny scale as

habitations of the actors in the play who thrust heads from windows no

larger than their throats, or who gathered in gigantic groups on

disproportioned tessellated roofs.

Occasionally a lovely lady in distress is seen in fine raiment praying

high Heaven for deliverance from the top of a feudal pile not half as

high as her stately figure. Laws of proportion are quite lost in this

naive way of telling a story, and one wonders whether the wise old

artist of other times, with his rigid solemnity was heroically

overcoming difficulties of traditional technique, or whether he was

smiling at the infantile taste of his wealthy patrons. The past

fashion in history was to record only the lives and expressions of

those great in power. The artist is ever the servant of such, but may

he not have had his own private thoughts, unpurchaseable, unsold, and

therefore only for our divining. There must have been a sense of

humour then as now, and twinkling eyes with which to see it.

GOTHIC FLOWERS

Always, in studying a Gothic tapestry, we find flowers. The flowers of

nature, they are, a simple nature at that, and never to be thought of

in the same day as the gorgeous, expansive, proud flowers of the

Seventeenth and Eighteenth Century decoration. Those splendid later

blossoms flaunt their richness with assured swagger and demand of man

his homage, quite forgetting it is the flower's best part to give.

Botticelli had not outgrown the Gothic flowers when he sprinkled them

on the ambient air and floating robe of his chaste and dreamy _Venus_,

nor when he set them about the elastic tripping feet of the _Spring_.

He knew their simple power, and so do we. Scarce a Gothic tapestry is

complete without them, happily for those bent on identification, for

rarely can one discover them without the same thrill that accompanies

the discovery of the first violets and snowdrops in the awakening

woods.

The old weavers set them low in the picture, used them as

space-fillers wherever space lay happily before them, and they never

exaggerated their size, a virtue of which the full Renaissance cannot

boast. They are the simplest sort of flowers, the corolla of petals

turning as frankly toward the observer as the sunflower turns toward

her god, and little bells hanging as regularly as a chime. These are

their characteristics, easily recognisable and expressing the

unsophisticated charm of the creations of honest childish hands.

Irrelevancy is theirs, too. They spring from stones or pavement as

well as from turf or garden, and thus express the more ardently their

love for man and for close association with him. When they are seen

after this manner, it is sure that the early men have set them, just

as Shakespeare, at the same epoch, set violets blue and daisies pied,

cowslip, rosemary "for remembrance," and other familiar dainties, in

the grim foundation stones of his tragedies.

A comparison of the different hangings available to the amateur, or of

the pictured examples given in this book, will reveal more than can be

well set down with the pen. The use of flowers in the set of _The

Baillee des Roses_ is exceptional, in that here the flowers form a

harmonious decorative scheme and are at the same time an important

part of the story which is pictured.

In other earliest examples they playfully peep within the limits of

the hanging. Important use is, however, made of them in that

altogether entrancing set of _The Lady and the Unicorn_, where they

indicate the beauties of a fascinating park in which the delicate lady

and her attendant led a wondrous life guarded by two beasts as

fabulous as faithful, and the whole region of leaves and petals but

serving as a paradise for delectable white rabbits and piquant

monkeys. Could any modern indicate by sophistry of brush or brain so

intoxicating a fairyland, so gracious a field of dear delights?

COSTUMES

A minute study of all the details of costume and accessories is one of

the measuring sticks with which we count the years of a tapestry's

life. This applies more particularly to the work prior to the

Renaissance, to the time when all characters were dressed in the mode

of the day--another evidence of that ingenuousness that delights us

who have passed the period where it is possible.

As we have noted before, a costume cannot be used before its time, so,

as much as anything can, the study of its details prevents us from

going too far back with its date. When one has reached the point of

identifying a Gothic tapestry to where the exact decade is questioned,

the century having been ascertained, a careful study of costumes

outside the region of tapestries is necessary. This leads one into a

department all by itself and means delightful hours in libraries

poring over illustrated books on costume. It means to learn in what

manner our gods and heroes of fact and fancy habited themselves, how

Berengaria wore her head-dress and Jehane de Bourgogne her brocades,

and how the eternally various sleeve differed in its fashioning for

both men and women.

Head-dresses were of such size and variety that they form a study in

themselves, and dates have been fixed by these alone. The turban in

its evolution is an interesting study, and makes one wonder if that,

too, did not wander north from the Moorish occupancy of Spain and the

wave of inspiration which flowed unceasingly from the Orient in the

years when Europe created little without inspiration from outside.

A patriarchal bearded man in sacerdotal robes of costly elegance

seriously impresses his fellows all through the Gothic tapestries, and

his rival is a swaggering, important person, clean-shaven, in full

brocaded skirt, fur-bound, whose attitude declares him royal or near

it. The first of these is the model nowadays for stage kings, and even

a woman's toilet must vaunt itself to get notice beside his gorgeous

array. He wears about his waist a jewelled girdle of great splendour,

and on his head some impressive matter of either jewels or draping.

His face is usually full-bearded, but even when smooth, youth is not

expressed upon him. Youths of the same time are more _debonnaire_, are

springing about, clean-faced, clad in short, belted pelisse, showing

sprightly legs equally ready to step quickly towards a lovely lady or

to a field of battle.

Soldiers--let a woman hesitate to speak of their dress and arms in any

tone but that of self-depreciating humility. Suffice it to say that in

the early work they wore the armour of the time, whether the scene

depicted were an event of history cotemporaneous, or of the time of

Moses. Fashions in dress changed with deliberation then, and it is to

the arms carried by the men that we must sometimes look for exactness

of date.

LETTERING

The presence of letters is often noticed in hangings of the

Fourteenth, Fifteenth and early Sixteenth Centuries. It was a fashion

eminently satisfactory, a great assistance to the observer. It helped

tell the story, and, as these old pictures had always a story to tell,

it was entirely excusable--at least, so it seems to one who has stood

confounded before a modern painting without a catalogue or other

indication as to the why of certain agitated figures.

The lettering was, in the older Gothic, explicit and unstinted, in

double or quadruple lines, in which case it counts as decoration

banded across top or bottom. Again, it is as trifling as a word or two

affixed to the persons of the play to designate them. This lettering

may be French or Latin.

EARLY BACKGROUNDS

Backgrounds of the early Fifteenth Century deal much in

conventionalised, flat patterns, but fifty or sixty years later, when

figures began to be more crowded, there was but little space left

unoccupied by the participants in the allegory, and this was filled by

the artifices of architecture or herbage that formed the divisions

into the various scenes. Later the designing artists decided to let

into the picture the light of distant fields and skies, and thus was

introduced the suggestion of space outside the limit of the canvas.

LATER DRAWING

After the Gothic drawing, came the avalanche of the Renaissance. That

altered all. The Italian taste took precedence, and from that time on

the cartoons of tapestries represent modern art, trailing through its

various fashions or modes of the hour. The purest Renaissance is

direct from the Italian artist, in tapestry as well as in painting,

but it is interesting to see the maladroitness of the Flemish hand

when left to draw cartoons for himself after the new manner.

After the Renaissance came exaggeration and lack of sincerity; then

the improvement of the Seventeenth Century, notably in France, and

after that the dainty fancies of the Eighteenth Century, and here we

are dealing with art so modern that it needs no elucidation. The

drawing in tapestries is a subject as fascinating as it is

inexhaustible, but, however much one may read on it, nothing equals

actual association with as many tapestries as are available, for the

eye must be trained by vision and not by intellectual process alone.

The Tapestry Book · 第 18 / 24 章