| Full title | Portrait of Giovanni(?) Arnolfini and his Wife |
|---|---|
| Artist | Jan van Eyck |
| Artist dates | active 1422; died 1441 |
| Date made | 1434 |
| Medium and support | Oil on oak |
| Dimensions | 82.2 x 60 cm |
| Inscription summary | Signed; Dated and inscribed |
| Acquisition credit | Bought, 1842 |
| Inventory number | NG186 |
| Location | Room 63 |
| Art route(s) | A |
| Collection | Main Collection |
5,255 Followers, 162 Following, 259 Posts - See Instagram photos and videos from Burgemeester Jan van Zanen (@burgemeesterjanvanzanen). View the profiles of people named Jav van Jav. Join Facebook to connect with Jav van Jav and others you may know. Facebook gives people the power to. Find safe, affordable, and reliable charter bus and van rentals in your area. It is a difficult time to travel — but at Bus.com, we're devoted to making it easier than ever. As an industry leader in bus transportation, we are committed to reinforcing our dedication to efficient charter bus rentals. Jav Designs is an Oregon Assumed Business Name filed on August 12, 2003. The company's filing status is listed as Inactive and its File Number is 166320-93. The Registered Agent on file for this company is Judy A Van Rijn and is located at 11675 Sw Hazelbrook Road, Tualatin, OR 97062. Jav Designs is an Oregon Assumed Business Name filed on August 12, 2003. The company's filing status is listed as Inactive and its File Number is 166320-93. The Registered Agent on file for this company is Judy A Van Rijn and is located at 11675 Sw Hazelbrook Road, Tualatin, OR 97062.
Jan Van Helsing
This must be one of the most famous and intriguing paintings in the world. A richly dressed man and woman stand in a private room. They are probably Giovanni di Nicolao di Arnolfini, an Italian merchant working in Bruges, and his wife.
Although the room is totally plausible – as if Jan van Eyck had simply removed a wall – close examination reveals inconsistencies: there's not enough space for the chandelier, and no sign of a fireplace. Moreover, every object has been carefully chosen to proclaim the couple's wealth and social status without risking criticism for aping the aristocracy.
The man's hand is raised, apparently in greeting. On the back wall, a large convex mirror reflects two men coming into the room, one of whom also raises his arm. Immediately above it is Van Eyck's signature. Could the man in mirror be van Eyck himself, with his servant, coming on a visit?
This must be one of the most famous paintings in the world, and one of the most intriguing. A richly dressed man and woman stand in a private room. Although it looks as if Jan van Eyck painted a real room exactly has he saw it, every object has been carefully chosen to proclaim the couple's wealth and social status without risking criticism for aping the aristocracy.
The house is of brick. Its window opens onto a garden, and a cherry tree can be glimpsed through the open shutters. The large and luxurious bed is covered with expensive red woollen cloth, and red cushions and fabric are scattered on the bedside chair and the bench. This is not a bedroom but a reception room, and the bed – the most expensive item of furniture in the house – is an essential part of its furnishings. The chair and bench are ornately carved, an oriental carpet lies on the floor and a splendid brass chandelier hangs from the ceiling. Even the carelessly scattered oranges indicate wealth; such fruit was extremely expensive. But this is not a palace: the floor is boarded and the walls are plastered rather than panelled or hung with tapestries. We are looking into a reception room in the comfortable, modern mansion of a wealthy merchant.
Java Vanity
The room's restrained luxury is equalled by the careful sartorial splendour of the couple. Their clothes are expensive and fashionable, but not flashy. The man wears a hat of plaited straw, and a dark tabard, probably of silk velvet, trimmed with brown fur. Under it is a black, possibly silk, doublet, with silver cuffs. His muddy pattens (overshoes) lie discarded on the floor. The woman wears a fine green wool overdress with elaborate dagged sleeves and a long train which falls in thick folds around her feet. It is trimmed with a white fur, possibly ermine or squirrel belly. She is not pregnant, though she might look it: she is holding up her bulky gown in front of her, as ladies commonly did. Her hair is caught up in fashionable but modest horns, held in red nets, and covered with an intricately folded veil.
So who are the people in this intimate setting? They are clearly husband and wife, and for many years the painting was understood as representing a marriage ceremony, though not anymore. From early on the painting was identified as showing one ‘Hernoul le Fin' or ‘Arnoult Fin'. The Arnolfini were an extensive family of Italian merchants, with various members in Bruges at this period. The most likely candidate is Giovanni di Nicolao di Arnolfini, known as Giannino or Jehannin, who would have been in his late thirties in 1434. The lady is probably his second wife, whose identity is unknown. They may have been friends of van Eyck – he painted another portrait of the man at an older age (Staatliche Museen, Berlin). A large round mirror hangs right in the centre of the composition, its convex glass showing not just the compressed and contorted room but also two men coming in through a door behind us. The first man seems to be raising his left arm and stepping down steps from the passage. Immediately above the mirror is a flamboyant signature: Johannes de Eyck fuit hic. 1434 (‘Jan van Eyck was here. 1434'). Are the men in the mirror van Eyck himself and his servant, arriving on a visit?
Technical analysis tell us much about how the picture was made. Infrared reflectography shows that the underdrawing was done in stages. In the first one van Eyck sketched in the figures, the main pieces of furniture and the basic architecture of the room, but left out many of the objects for which the painting is now famous: the watchful terrier, the chandelier, the chair, the beads hanging on the wall and the discarded shoes. These were painted in at a late stage. Van Eyck also altered the man and woman's faces and bodies. In the initial underdrawing, Arnolfini had a larger face and even odder features. His feet were in a different position, his robe was shorter and his hat larger. His wife originally looked up towards her husband and her features were lower, so her forehead seemed even higher. Van Eyck often manipulated his sitters‘ appearance to emphasise heads and hands, but here the faces, especially the man's, have been altered substantially. Arnolfini must have been a strange-looking man, and in the second underdrawing van Eyck improved his proportions and idealised his features.
Even the room itself if not a literal record of the couple's home. Although it looks as if van Eyck has simply removed a wall, close examination reveals inconsistencies. The chandelier cannot fit into the space it seems to occupy; there is no sign of a fireplace; the bed is too short and the ornate convex mirror on the back wall seems impossibly large. As usual, van Eyck created a perfectly convincing show of reality but altered things to fit his aesthetic purposes and perhaps also to accord with Arnolfini's aspirations.
However, there is nothing unusual in the pigments used – this illusion of reality relied on van Eyck's skill, not on any technical innovation. Look closely and you can see an astonishing level of detail. The oranges reflect in the polished wood of the casement, and the beads hanging by the bed cast both shadows and reflections on the wall behind. For a painting that seems so precise, it was surprisingly quickly and freely painted. Van Eyck was almost bouncing the paintbrush off the panel to get small touches of colour, and he used his fingers and the brush handles as well as the points of the brushes. We can see his thumbprint by the shadow of the dog's leg, and the bristles of the brush hanging by the bed are scratched into the paint.
The painting has a fascinating afterlife. By the sixteenth century it was in the hands of Margaret of Austria, Regent of the Netherlands. From her, it migrated into the Spanish royal collection. It next appears in the possession of James Hay, a Scottish soldier who was in Spain during the Peninsular War (1807–14). We don't know how Hay got it, but he brought it back to England and it was bought by the National Gallery in 1842 for ‘the moderate price' of 600 Guineas. It was our first Netherlandish painting.
Download a low-resolution copy of this image for personal use.
License and download a high-resolution image for reproductions up to A3 size from the National Gallery Picture Library.
This image is licensed for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons agreement.
Examples of non-commercial use are:
- Research, private study, or for internal circulation within an educational organisation (such as a school, college or university)
- Non-profit publications, personal websites, blogs, and social media
The image file is 800 pixels on the longest side.
As a charity, we depend upon the generosity of individuals to ensure the collection continues to engage and inspire. Help keep us free by making a donation today.
You must agree to the Creative Commons terms and conditions to download this image.
Toggle fullscreenVan Eyck's Arnolfini Portrait
This close look at van Eyck's jewel-like masterpiece of 1434 considers the intrigue and wonder it sparked when it first went on show at the National Gallery in 1843.
On 24 December 1651, accompanied by his wife and son, Jan van Riebeeck set off from Texel in The Netherlands for the Cape of Good Hope. Van Riebeeck had signed a contract with the Dutch East India Company (VOC) to oversee the setting up of a refreshment station to supply Dutch ships on their way to the East. Sailing on the Dromedaris with two other ships, the Rejiger and De Goede Hoop, Van Riebeeck was accompanied by 82 men and 8 women.
When Van Riebeeck left The Netherlands in 1651, the Council of Policy, a bureaucratic governing structure for the refreshment station, had already been established. On board the Dromedaris Van Riebeeck conducted meetings with his officials – minutes of the meetings of the Council of Policy, dated from December 1651, have been carefully archived.
Land was sighted on 5 April 1652 and the ships docked the next day. Within a week of the arrival of the three ships, work had begun on the Fort of Good Hope. The aim was to establish a refreshment station to supply the crew of the Company's passing trading ships with fresh water, vegetables and fruit, meat and medical assistance. However, the first winter experienced by Van Riebeeck and his crew was extremely harsh, as they lived in wooden huts and their gardens were washed away by the heavy rains. As a result their food dwindled and at the end of the winter approximately 19 men had died.
The arrival of Van Riebeeck marked the beginning of permanent European settlement in the region. Along with the Council of Policy, Van Riebeeck came equipped with a document called the ‘Remonstrantie', drawn up in the Netherlands in 1649, which was a recommendation on the suitability of the Cape for this VOC project.
Charles Bell (1813-1882) painting of Jan van Riebeeck arrives in Table Bay in April 1652 www.andrewboraine.com
Van Riebeeck was under strict instructions not to colonise the region but to build a fort and to erect a flagpole for signaling to ships and boats to escort them into the bay. However, a few months after their arrival in the Cape, the Dutch Republic and England became engaged in a naval war (10 July 1652 to 5 April 1654). This meant that the completion of the fort became urgent. Fort de Goede Hoop – a fort with four corners made of mud, clay and timber – was built in the middle of what is today Adderley Street. Around this a garden was planted and meat was bartered for with the Khoikhoi (who were initially called Goringhaikwa, and later Kaapmans). The construction for Castle of Good Hope which stands today only began in 1666, after Van Riebeeck had left the Cape, and was completed 13 years later.
Dead man's hand pc game download. Van Riebeeck's Original Fort on the Shores of Table Bay, 1658 by Wouter Schouten (1638-1704) . Source: William Fehr Collection. Permission: www.africamediaonline.com
Although the VOC did not originally intend to establish a colony at the Cape, permits were issued in February 1657 to free nine company servants (who became the Free Burghers) to farm along the Liesbeeck River in order to deal with a wheat shortage. They were given as much land as they could cultivate in three years but were forbidden to trade with anyone other than the VOC. With the number of private farms increasing, by 1659 the station was producing enough to supply any passing ship. The station also began to experience a chronic labour shortage and because the Khoisan were seen as ‘uncooperative', slaves were imported from Batavia (now northern Jakarta) and Madagascar in 1657.
The land on which the Dutch farmed was used by the Khoikhoi and the San, who lived a semi-nomadic culture which included hunting and gathering. Since they did not have a written culture, they had neither written title deeds for their land, nor did they have the bureaucratic framework within which to negotiate the sale or renting of land with strangers from a culture using written records supported by a bureaucratic system of governance. Hence Van Riebeeck, coming as he did from a bureaucratic culture with a unilateral, albeit written, mandate to establish a refreshment station, refused to acknowledge that land ownership could be organised in ways different from the Dutch/European way. He denied the Khoisan rights and title to the land, claiming that there was no written evidence of the true ownership of the land. Consequently in 1659 the Khoikhoi embarked on the first of a series of unsuccessful armed uprisings against the Dutch invasion and appropriation of their land – their resistance would continue for at least 150 years.
In response to the growing skirmishes with the local population, in 1660 Van Riebeeck planted a wild almond hedge to protect his settlement. By the end of the same year, under pressure from the Free Burghers, Van Riebeeck sent the first of many search parties to explore the hinterland. Van Riebeeck remained leader of the Cape until 1662. By the time he left the settlement in May 1662 it had grown to 134 officials, 35 Free Burghers, 15 women, 22 children and 180 slaves.
Statue of Jan van Riebeeck, Adderly Street, Cape Town Pubg on macbook air download.
This image is licensed for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons agreement.
Examples of non-commercial use are:
- Research, private study, or for internal circulation within an educational organisation (such as a school, college or university)
- Non-profit publications, personal websites, blogs, and social media
The image file is 800 pixels on the longest side.
As a charity, we depend upon the generosity of individuals to ensure the collection continues to engage and inspire. Help keep us free by making a donation today.
You must agree to the Creative Commons terms and conditions to download this image.
Toggle fullscreenVan Eyck's Arnolfini Portrait
This close look at van Eyck's jewel-like masterpiece of 1434 considers the intrigue and wonder it sparked when it first went on show at the National Gallery in 1843.
On 24 December 1651, accompanied by his wife and son, Jan van Riebeeck set off from Texel in The Netherlands for the Cape of Good Hope. Van Riebeeck had signed a contract with the Dutch East India Company (VOC) to oversee the setting up of a refreshment station to supply Dutch ships on their way to the East. Sailing on the Dromedaris with two other ships, the Rejiger and De Goede Hoop, Van Riebeeck was accompanied by 82 men and 8 women.
When Van Riebeeck left The Netherlands in 1651, the Council of Policy, a bureaucratic governing structure for the refreshment station, had already been established. On board the Dromedaris Van Riebeeck conducted meetings with his officials – minutes of the meetings of the Council of Policy, dated from December 1651, have been carefully archived.
Land was sighted on 5 April 1652 and the ships docked the next day. Within a week of the arrival of the three ships, work had begun on the Fort of Good Hope. The aim was to establish a refreshment station to supply the crew of the Company's passing trading ships with fresh water, vegetables and fruit, meat and medical assistance. However, the first winter experienced by Van Riebeeck and his crew was extremely harsh, as they lived in wooden huts and their gardens were washed away by the heavy rains. As a result their food dwindled and at the end of the winter approximately 19 men had died.
The arrival of Van Riebeeck marked the beginning of permanent European settlement in the region. Along with the Council of Policy, Van Riebeeck came equipped with a document called the ‘Remonstrantie', drawn up in the Netherlands in 1649, which was a recommendation on the suitability of the Cape for this VOC project.
Charles Bell (1813-1882) painting of Jan van Riebeeck arrives in Table Bay in April 1652 www.andrewboraine.com
Van Riebeeck was under strict instructions not to colonise the region but to build a fort and to erect a flagpole for signaling to ships and boats to escort them into the bay. However, a few months after their arrival in the Cape, the Dutch Republic and England became engaged in a naval war (10 July 1652 to 5 April 1654). This meant that the completion of the fort became urgent. Fort de Goede Hoop – a fort with four corners made of mud, clay and timber – was built in the middle of what is today Adderley Street. Around this a garden was planted and meat was bartered for with the Khoikhoi (who were initially called Goringhaikwa, and later Kaapmans). The construction for Castle of Good Hope which stands today only began in 1666, after Van Riebeeck had left the Cape, and was completed 13 years later.
Dead man's hand pc game download. Van Riebeeck's Original Fort on the Shores of Table Bay, 1658 by Wouter Schouten (1638-1704) . Source: William Fehr Collection. Permission: www.africamediaonline.com
Although the VOC did not originally intend to establish a colony at the Cape, permits were issued in February 1657 to free nine company servants (who became the Free Burghers) to farm along the Liesbeeck River in order to deal with a wheat shortage. They were given as much land as they could cultivate in three years but were forbidden to trade with anyone other than the VOC. With the number of private farms increasing, by 1659 the station was producing enough to supply any passing ship. The station also began to experience a chronic labour shortage and because the Khoisan were seen as ‘uncooperative', slaves were imported from Batavia (now northern Jakarta) and Madagascar in 1657.
The land on which the Dutch farmed was used by the Khoikhoi and the San, who lived a semi-nomadic culture which included hunting and gathering. Since they did not have a written culture, they had neither written title deeds for their land, nor did they have the bureaucratic framework within which to negotiate the sale or renting of land with strangers from a culture using written records supported by a bureaucratic system of governance. Hence Van Riebeeck, coming as he did from a bureaucratic culture with a unilateral, albeit written, mandate to establish a refreshment station, refused to acknowledge that land ownership could be organised in ways different from the Dutch/European way. He denied the Khoisan rights and title to the land, claiming that there was no written evidence of the true ownership of the land. Consequently in 1659 the Khoikhoi embarked on the first of a series of unsuccessful armed uprisings against the Dutch invasion and appropriation of their land – their resistance would continue for at least 150 years.
In response to the growing skirmishes with the local population, in 1660 Van Riebeeck planted a wild almond hedge to protect his settlement. By the end of the same year, under pressure from the Free Burghers, Van Riebeeck sent the first of many search parties to explore the hinterland. Van Riebeeck remained leader of the Cape until 1662. By the time he left the settlement in May 1662 it had grown to 134 officials, 35 Free Burghers, 15 women, 22 children and 180 slaves.
Statue of Jan van Riebeeck, Adderly Street, Cape Town Pubg on macbook air download.
The day of Jan Van Riebeeck's arrival became a public holiday with the 300th anniversary in 1952 and was celebrated as Van Riebeeck's Day until 1974. During the tercentenary celebration on 6 April 1952, the Joint Planning Council (made up of members from the ANC, SAIC, SACP and COD) held mass meetings and demonstrations throughout the country as part of the lead up to the Defiance Campaign. The ANC and TIC issued a flyer entitled ‘April 6: People Protest Day'.
In 1980 the public holiday was changed to Founder's Day. The holiday was abolished in 1994 by the democratically elected ANC government. However, statues of Jan van Riebeeck and his wife remain in Adderley Street, Cape Town. The coat of arms of the city of Cape Town is also based on that of the Van Riebeeck family, and Hoërskool Jan van Riebeeck is a popular Afrikaans high school in the centre of Cape Town. Read more on the history of Cape Town.
Aartsma, H (2008). ‘Early history of the Cape Colony, South Africa' from South Africa Tours and Travel [online]. Available from www.south-africa-tours-and-travel.com [Accessed 6 March 2012] |SouthAfrica.to (date). ‘Jan van Riebeeck (21 April 1619 - 18 January 1677)' from SouthAfrica.to [online]. Available from www.southafrica.to | Turton, A. R. (2009). 'A South African Diary: Contested Identity, My Family '' Our Story, Part A: Pre-1700'� from How many bones must you bury before you can call yourself an Africa? [online]. Available from www.anthonyturton.com [Accessed 7 March 2012]
