Perspective
Or; Further adventures of lack of linear perspective in Medieval Art
Because this is my blog and I enjoy linking the 'No Fear' articles to the 'Pointy End goes on the Paper' articles when I can.
I love early period illumination. Some people can't stand it, but I enjoy all the weirdness that comes from a lack of linear perspective. So, as always, even though I am pointing out the flaws in these pieces it is all in good fun and with a certain amount of admiration.
Because really, the drawing conventions that arose from trying to give a sense of realism and depth without the use of perspective are sometimes quite clever.
Cartoony Cut-outs
Aka- the 'front -on' method. It helps if I picture these like those construction paper things we all used to make in elementary school, where a front-on shape is broken down to other shapes and all glued on top of each other. Like the ubiquitous thanksgiving turkey with the tail feathers all spread out behind and the head and body shaped like a bowling pin.
 |
| British Library, Stowe 17, detail of f. 240v. ‘The Maastricht Hours’ c 1300 -1325 |
Like this guy, with his head and face just hanging out pasted to the middle of his chest. No proper perspective, but you do get the proper impression that he is bending forward.
 |
| gallica.bnf.fr Bibliothèque nationale de France, Département des manuscrits, Français 95, fol. 89v |
Horses in particular tend to get drawn this way
 |
| Anyone know where this is from? |
And since I've already shown you several front-on horses, please enjoy this rear-on horse I've been saving for this exact post. I'm super sad I don't have the attribution for it, because it is spectacular. Not only do we have super-short rider legs, but the horse's spine is twisted up in ways that just aren't natural... unless it's a mare and this is a poster for an action flick trying to show all her attributes.
 |
| BL Royal 19 C I, f. 41, Matfre Ermengaud , 1300 - 1324 , The British Library |
Horses really come into a lot of abuse from this method. Is it four horses harnessed closely together? Or one massive horse with 4 heads and 8 legs? Does that math even work properly?
 |
| Manesse Codex - (1300 - 1340) |
You can do it to buildings too! I can totally picture that castle and all the people figures being cut out of different sheets of construction paper. I'm a little confused by the giant guy with the feathery fish helmet though. The further away figures defending the castle are a little smaller than the soldiers at front, but that guy doesn't play along with that attempt at perspective. Is he so important he has to be shown twice the size? Or is he a literal giant? Will we ever know?
Size Games and Stacking
A lot of attempts at perspective in earlier medieval illumination is based on one simple idea... the further up the page something is, the further away from the viewer they are supposed to be.
 |
| Ottokar II of Bohemia (Přemysl Otakar II), called "the Iron and Golden King" |
So take this picture, for example. If further up the page means further away, then the six standing/kneeling figures are all arranged in front of the king. But without actual linear perspective it also kinda looks like those poor tiny minstrels are under the king, holding him and his throne aloft. And lack of perspective also means that artists are free to render people at whatever height they like, often giving greater stature to the most important. Are the minstrels really supposed to be the size of one of the king's legs? No, but they aren't the important ones in this picture.
 |
| Illumination of the chronicles of Jean Froissart, early fifteenth century |
Remember when I said that even pictures with linear perspective sometimes messed it up? This is a pretty good attempt if you just look at the placement of the horses, and further up the page definitely equals further away... but wow the sizing. Often portraying further away objects as smaller also gave the impression of distance, but sometimes things didn't get shrunk uniformly. The foreshortening of the horse's necks here is getting a little paper-cut-out-y, and look at the second rider in the black hat... her head is the same size as her horse's head! That is one impressive skull you got there lady.
 |
| Isabella de Valois meeting Jeanne Queen of France, XVIIth c |
Another good example of stacking for distance, and size problems. The two figures in the waaaay back are small because they are further away, but the hunters in front are small because they are not important. And the two royal ladies are like, twice the size of the ladies attending them because they are WAY important.
 |
| circa 1407-1409 |
All these ladies are the same size, the ones in front might even be a little smaller. You can't use that to give you any clue regarding placement, so all you have to go on is 'further up the page = further away.' That also probably means this is not really supposed to be a hill they are on. Well, maybe a little one.
People Stacking
Or; Someone figured out how to use the clone tool in Photoshop.
This happens all the time when medieval artists are trying to draw crowds of people. If someone is standing right behind me, obviously you are not going to see their whole body, but they are further away so they need to be further up the page... so you get this effect where you see rows and rows of just heads.
 |
| National Library of the Czech Republic XIV.A.17 |
And if the people in the crowd are standing reeeaaallly close together, then you don't even get that much detail, just the tops of their heads.
 |
| Histoire universelle depuis la Création jusqu’a César, MS M.516 fol. 252v |
Helmets all the way back! Just draw them in like fish scales and you've doubled the size of your army!
But this... this is my favorite example of this phenomenon...
 |
| The great company of saintly women - Hours of Louis de Laval by Jean Colombe |
Halos for days. You know why the golden carp granted wishes? Because each and every one of his golden fishy scales was really a tiny saint.
Escher Furniture
You know what's a great way to tell if there is proper linear perspective in a piece of art? Look at the furniture.
 |
| Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS. Douce 292, Mid 11th Century |
Do the planes of that bench agree with each other? Or with the footstool? Nope, not in the slightest. And the book stand is actually kind of floating off the floor.
Further up the page means further away, which means that we don't really play chess with the board standing on it's side.
Check out that table, and the stools!
 | |
| Chess Problem #35 from Libro de los Juegos (The Book of Games, 1283) |
Further up the page means further away, which means that we don't really play chess with the board standing on it's side.
 |
| Three men playing dice, 1479 |
Check out that table, and the stools!
Swords
Or; Medieval women had it rough
Unfortunately there are enough illustrations of medieval women stabbing themselves, or getting stabbed, that this can be it's own section. But swords are hard to draw in perspective, unless you are looking at them sideways... which doesn't really work with the whole 'action stabbing' thing.
 |
| Getty Museum |
 |
| BnF, Auteur du texte Date d'édition : 1501-1600 |
You can get around it by stabbing sideways, which is a totally natural way to stab oneself apparently. Or you can death from above, which is a little more realistic I guess.
 |
| BnF, Ovid's Herodies, 1476-1531 |
At least this one is attempting to do some foreshortening, but that's still an awkward angle.
Worst Offenders
I was going to do a section of buildings and towns in bad perspective, but this post is getting long and I absolutely have to share with you the worst offenders when it comes to no perspective in all of medieval art. They have everything... buildings and towns, cloned people, image stacking, swords... you guessed it.
Battle art.
 | ||
| The Battle of Guinegate (Triumphal Arch of Maximilian) Museum of Fine Arts, Boston |
 |
| Battle of Legnica, Germany, Poland (c. 1353) |
 |
| Tournament, Heidelberg-Biblioteca Palatina, ca. 1304 |
 |
| Chroniques de France ou de Saint Denis (from 1108 to 1270) |
I could keep going, but you get the idea right? There are just two I want to highlight:
 |
| "The Crusader Bible" Paris 1240's |
The interior of the battle scene in the top pane is as bad as any of the others for perspective, and worse than most when you try to parse out what is happening on the ground under the horse's feet. But I think the guy hanging from the trebuchet and the archer up top being outside the main frame of the picture is just a really clever way to put them actually above and behind the action of the main scene. It's not linear perspective, but it's a darn neat artistic device to achieve a similar effect.
 |
| Rijmbijbel Folio 152v, Netherlands c1332, Museum Meermanno-Westreenianum |
And this one, because it is the most crazy, chaotic example of battle art with no proper perspective I have found so far, and it literally hurts my eyes... so I have to share.
And Finally, The Best of the Worst
 |
| Book of Hours, MS M.453 fol. 16v, The Morgan Library |
This doesn't looks so bad at first glance, does it? Certainly better than some of the others in today's article. But then notice that the angel is closer to the viewer, but smaller... ok maybe it's just a tiny angel or not as important as the scribe. Then look at the desk and the stairs... and the space under the stairs... which shouldn't exist because of the walls... oh god the walls...
... and then I try to parse the angle of the walls in the corner with the door and the window and my brain melts.
Comments
Post a Comment