 Can everybody hear me? Good afternoon, thank you for that lovely introduction. My name is Emma Jansson and I'm a final year student at the Courtauld Institute of Art where I'm studying easel paintings conservation, I'm in my final year. For those of you who are not familiar with the course at the Courtauld, it's a three year training programme designed to teach students practical skills within easel paintings conservation but also analytical methods and is used within the technical examination of artworks. I'm here today to talk to you about this painting that I recently treated which belongs to the society as you know. You can see it in the collection catalogue that's over there but also you can go and look at it upstairs later if you want to as well. The work is entitled The Pluminty of Hamel which is a title based on a comment inscription on the painting which is situated along the scrolls that you see. This is just a rough translation based on what we can see. It refers to John Palmentier who is the main owner on the left-hand side of the painting. I'll show you the details soon. The inscription also provides a rough date for the panel which states that the Pluminty family donated the work in 1519. However at this point I would like to mention that this inscription has been badly damaged in the past and as a result has been heavily retouched and restored so its interpretation needs to remains get to cool. John Palmentier is accompanied by St John the Baptist who is shown here wearing a camelskin robe and holding a lamp as is traditional for his classes. On the other side of the painting we see St Peter who is holding the keys to heaven and he is accompanied by the female donor who is assumed to be John Palmentier's wife. The centre of the painting is dominated by a figure of Christ who in this case is surrounded by an orange and yellow coloured mandala and he is flanked on the far left and far right by two unnamed prophets. I received the painting on my first year of course and I completed the treatment just at the beginning of 2015. The painting was also the focus of the technical examination project that Paul told in 2013 which is carried out by three students Olympia Diamond, Douglas MacLennan and Roxanne Sperbock and their research and technical analysis that they and they took provided the basis for my own research that I did into the painting's possible original function as well as its material composition. For this talk I am going to discuss some of the art struggle and technical research that I did in order to inform my treatment of the painting. So I am going to talk about a detailed look at the panel's physical structure as well as the range of pigments used that I was able to identify and I will also provide a brief outline of the painting's condition and material history and how this also affected my treatment decision. And finally I want to discuss the various stages of the treatment itself with particular focus on my approach to the retouching of the work. So when it comes to conserving works of art it is important to consider the context in which it was produced. This includes factors such as the artist's working process and their possible aesthetic intent as well as the function of the work itself and how its original audience would have perceived it. However, as you probably know sometimes this information is not readily available as artworks are often being devolved from their original context. And this is definitely the case with the Parmentier panel which is currently displayed in a non-original frame and forms part of this diverse collection which features works from different periods and from different regional schools as well. In addition to this the Parmentier panel was painted in multiple stages consisting essentially of various campaigns that appeared in added at different dates. The first campaign which is not as visible as it probably was originally consists of this green and white layer which has been suggested as a form of polychlorone decoration which may have been intended to mimic marble or porphyry. And it is visible in certain parts of the painting still. I've just highlighted it here just above price. So you can still see it in the painting where the top black layer has been illuminated. And this polychlorone layer was subsequently over-painted at an unknown date corresponding to the time when the black background was added as well as the figures of Christ and the two prophets and the white scrolls probably added at this date as well. And finally, and the third painting campaign consists of the Jones figures and the saints that we saw previously since the inscription from 1519 refers to these figure groups it's likely that they were added at the same date as well. And finally, the final painting campaign represents the heraldic device that we see on John Parmentier's preview and the date of this edition is also wondering. The painting's complicated material structure and lack of knowledge pertaining to its original context made it necessary for me to form an appreciation of its possible function based on physical evidence gained from the work itself. And looking at the unusual size and orientation of the panels suggests that it was not intended as an artwork in the conventional sense. But given the painting's horizontal orientation and large format it is possible that it may once have been a proddella belonging to a larger altarpiece. And in the exhibition catalogue that's over there it is indeed concluded that the panel was once a pudar and that the Jones figures and the saints were added together with text to existing scrolls when the panel was adapted and personalised by the clientiers in 1519. And the cut grooves that you see on the back of the panel in this picture it's probably not so clear but there's a cut groove in the central painting and there's one on the far right with a chiseled-up part of the panel essentially making a slight process and they're quite similar to what we see on the back of other altarpieces and these grooves are made to facilitate the assemblage of a larger altarpiece structure and you can see it, this is just an example of a proddella box from the op-lit reticle in Gauvinj where vertical wooden slacks were inserted into the back of the panel in order to create a proddella box. So just going back it's possible that evidence from the panel suggests that it had been nailed to something in these grooves from the front and then those nails were subsequently covered over on the face of the panel which suggests that it might have been assembled already before it was painted this was not on common sometimes you'd put the structure together or you'd put the painting in an engaged frame and then you would paint over that when it was already assembled and indeed not so visible in this image up the top of the painting of the panel the wood has been reduced slightly as well so it looks like it might have been inserted into an engaged frame or another sort of structure and on the front of the painting is actually a lift where the paint stops and we call that the bar where there's just a slight area of raised paint and this also suggests that it may have been painted when it was already assembled so in addition to looking at the physical structure of the painting support information regarding the form or a function of the panel can also be gained through comparing it with other works from this period and in terms of styling and composition the Parmentier panel shows many common qualities with this Pradella from an old piece in Advocode which also features a monochrome background in this Pradella the centre figures are also arranged in a similar fashion to the large figures in the Parmentier panel where their bodies just cut off for their shoulders in addition the Advocode Pradella features a donor figure and a scribe scroll on the left hand side as well as a coat of arms on the right interestingly it has also been thought that the Pradella may have had an alternate function prior to its incorporation into the old piece which has also been suggested for the Parmentier panel a similar composition featuring Christ in the centre flanked by six apostles on either side can be seen in this Pradella from a church in the Papenidog district of Burkheim in Germany this Pradella also has similar large dimensions to the Parmentier panel measuring 37.5 x 242.5 centimetres and Pradellas such as these were often prefabricated workshop productions created for an expanded commercial market in northern Europe at the beginning of the 16th century these Pradellas are typically decorated with conventionalized scenes from the passion which could then be personalised by individual parishes or using donor figures or inscriptions However, whilst the format of the Parmentier panel bears many similarities with other extant Pradellas from the 15th and 16th centuries the compositional arrangement of featuring Christ in the centre is unusual compared with other Pradellas of this period but Pradellas of later medieval and Renaissance periods commonly featured narrative scenes which were complementary to the lives of the persons depicted in the main register of the old piece Furthermore, these narratives often more subdued in style compared to the elaborate detail reserved for the central composition and taking this into account the celestial connotations inferred by the placement of Christ in the centre of the panel especially considering the subservient function of a Pradellas within the context of a large altarpiece It was therefore suggested to me by Susie Nash who is a lecturer in medieval painting at the Courtauld as well as her PhD student in Arirau i Capron that the Parmentier panel apart from being a Pradellas features a composition that is more consistent with so-called Super-CO registers and a Super-CO has the same horizontal format as Pradellas but is placed above the altarpiece as opposed to below and a compare of examples include this Super-CO here which is part of the triptych of the burning bush by Nicholas Framon which features a Super-CO bearing a representation of called the father was surrounding angels and again others are to be seen in this 18th century drawing after the lost adoration of the true cross altarpiece and here the compositional arrangement features God the Father in the Centre with flaky prophets on either side by the decorative element of the poor free imitation which I discussed earlier posits yet another interpretation for the power which may be more closely related to the tradition of instrument or furniture or imitation however was compare of those art was featuring so-called decoration of yet to be found on altarpieces similarities between the climb into your panel can be seen in these two lid panels from Cologne that are thought to belong to a set of relatively chests and a purely decorative arrangement can be seen on the out-of-face of each lid panel consisting of a red monochrome background and gilth star ornamentation the two-year axle panel was also very similar horizontal format to the climb into your panel and although the lid panels do consist of two boards each as opposed to just one the dimensions are comparable with the large size of the climb into your panel as well and moreover the out-of-face of each lid panel there were two recessed grooves similar to the ones at Montabout and the climb into your panel and these were cut in order to facilitate the insertion of strap hinges and although these similarities offer only near-conjecture when it comes to the previous function of the climb into your panel they serve it that feel an interesting juxtaposition that challenges our current understanding of the painting which mainly served an initial utilitarian purpose in addition to these hypotheses that I mentioned further suggestion for the function of the panel included decorative piece for a door lid or a similar architectural unit although comparables aren't yet to be found as well and although it wasn't possible for me to provide a definite attribution relating to the form and function of the panel with complex material composition and various painting campaigns does suggest that its purpose may have changed during the course of this history as well so although the question on the panel's form and function essentially remains unanswered it's still possible to draw conclusions about its origin based on stylistic and material similarities with contemporary works from this period now the inscription from 1519 does suggest that a French artist or workshop is responsible for at least one of the paintings campaigns how the style used to represent the figure of Christ and the two prophets is more reminiscent of works by another language in Flemish artists of the 15th and 16th centuries Christ's face shows the same elongated features that you see in portraits by Robert Campan and Roger Van Vaeden the best writing example is probably this which was highlighted in the 2013 technical examination of the Brach family triptych which returned from Van Vaeden's earlier last judgement water piece however although the likeness is between Van Vaeden's representation of Christ and the last scene in the Parmentier panel R&D is striking it is not possible to say that the artist of the former directly inspired the latter of course it is possible that the artist of the Parmentier panel had access to drawings or other secondary representations of Van Vaeden's painting however I feel it is more likely that they were drawing upon contemporary representations of Christ of other artists workshops as well and this is outlining the degree in the century of French painting 1400-1500 where to state that painting French painting during this period was considerably influenced by the workshops of the Flanders in particular artists and workshops situated in the north of the French provinces many artists even travelled across the border to serve the Burgundian court injecting the French School of Painting with the developments taking place and the influence of Flemish art upon French painting to be seen in the work of northern French artists such as Simon and Marmian for example in this St. Berthyn Altarpiece the physiognomy of Marmian's figures there are many similarities to those seen in paintings by contemporary French masters and the turban proper on the left hand side of the painting as well as the red fit proper on the right did not bear the same facial features as price but they nonetheless seem to belong to the same painting campaign based on similarities between their handling and although it wasn't possible to establish the identity of the two prophets in the absence of an inscription similar representations can be seen in other paintings dating to this period a French example dating to the end of the 15th century is the power featuring three prophets attributed to Jean Chaginere of Burgundy and this power depicts the prophets of the Annunciation Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel and stated to around 1490 a similar representation I found was on the outer wings of the Passion Altarpiece with scenes from the life of St Thomas of Canterbury now on the last half of the month in Germany and in this example the iconography represented belongs to the arm of Christine Beechman, Pontius Pilate, St Peter and the servant maid Caiaphas and Judas for the purse containing pieces of silver but in contrast to the style of the larger figures the smaller donor figures which most likely belong to another campaign show a more linear approach to form I felt that the style of these figures makes use of flat planes of colour and sharp contours which is more reminiscent of French manuscript delimination of this period which further strengthens that it is a different hand that is painted to these paintings and this can be seen in the works of artists such as the French Limbaugh brothers as well as the master of the Harvard Handle in this example here so now moving on to the technical analysis that I did the materials that I identified on the painting are essentially consistent with more than half paintings of this period for one thing the power support consists of a single board of wood and although further analysis such as what something is necessary to definitively confirm the type of wood used I find that the regularity of the grain as well as the density of the grain as well suggest that it is likely to be oak and oak was the most common type of support used by northern artists in the 15th and 16th centuries and it was used almost exclusively in the Netherlands during this period another interesting feature which I found on the reverse of the panel is an incised mark which is sometimes referred to as a gouge sign or a Goode smaggen in this case it consists of an N shaped mark with two lines on it through it and you will see in the drawing if you realise this is a bit better and these marks are found almost exclusively on road panels derived from the Baltic region another example of a Goode smaggen is the mark through a historic trading company that was based in our present-day DASC which consists of a cross inside a triangle and furthermore what that bears is marks were found on altars or calocatins seemed to have been produced during the 15th century and took the last quarter of the 16th century and this date range corresponds to the suggested date of the panel of reading description as well in addition most of these marks have been found on rebound panels from Antwerk, Bruges, Brussels and Levan however there are also a number of North German altarpieces that bear marks belonging to the Baltic trading companies cut marks like these are to be expected on panels used in Northern Europe is the wood derived from the Baltic region where it was marked before shipment to the Hansa towns for further manufacturing and through my reading I found that there have been several hypotheses on the production of these gauge marks within the context of the handsiatic timber trade one interpretation is that these marks served as a form of quality mark for wood in stock although it has also been speculated that the lumberjacks in the Baltic region may have made these marks or possibly that they serve as a means of identifying the forest cleaner and timber producer it is also possible that the marks acted as a way for the handsiatic merchants to mark their goods and to track their journey as they travel across both naval and overland routes although since many of these marks have been destroyed in the subsequent preparation process for the wood for painting or sculpture there are essentially a little value in the information they supply and they are also difficult to identify I feel that it is likely that the relevant routes making provided a number of different functions as opposed to just one however until a systematic study that is conducted involving these marks exists there interpretation will remain limited although it does highlight that the wood is likely to be oak and drive from the Baltic which together strengthens all the attribution of the painting the pigment applied on the painting are also characteristic of 15th and 16th century northern workshop productions and the brown layer which is the first layer that you add to the painting to prepare the support and generally consist of chalk or calcium carbonate as well as a dark pigment that is most likely a form of carbon black and chalk browns are also characteristic of northern paintings in this period and this contrast with southern European power preparation that you see in a lot of Italian medieval paintings where gypsum or calcium sulphate is more commonly employed Other pigments that I identified on the paint layers included the million or mycurex sulphide a coppery pigment which may be third degree as it was known traditionally azurite which is also a copper based blue pigment a lead based yellow pigment as well as an organic red lake and just to demonstrate this is a cross section of paint that I took from the robe of Christ and in this cross section you can see in combination quite clearly with azurite which is the blueish pigment particles combined with lead white as well as an organic red lake the top layer you see here is actually not original overpaint and is not representative of the paintings that the artist used and just to highlight the use of azurite is also very consistent with northern European power paintings of this period as it was the most commonly used blue as opposed to ultramarine which was more often used in Italy and in addition the layer structure of the painting as well as some of the pigment fixtures used bears similarities with other northern paintings for the 15th and 16th centuries for example the combination of azurite and red lake was commonplace for purple paint fixtures in northern European paintings during this period and has been identified in paintings by Austrian, German, Netherlandish as well as Flemish artists in this Virgin and Child in Throne in the Virgin and Child in Throne with Angels and Saints by Markle Parker the blue purple velvet of the Bishop Saints cape was painted using a mixture of azurite, red lake and lead white you can see on the right here similarly the use of purples based on azurite and red lake mixtures have been found in a high proportion of early Netherlandish and German paintings exemplified by the workshops of Robert Campan Roger Van Veden Derek Fouts, Stephen Lochner and Gerard David and like I said although ultramarine was very occasionally used in purple paint fixtures as seen in Lady Don's purple robe enhanced Mending's Don Trindig azurite is rather more frequently found in Morgan Workshop Productions and another notable use of paint can be seen in this cross section which was taken from the red section of the right hand of Robert's robe which shows three discernible layers of red paint the first layer is quite coarsely ground and it consists of the million and carbon black and a more finely ground layer was added on top of this underlayer consisting purely of the million as well as smaller editions of lead white I just sort of went out that the upper most layer in this cross section is a recent restoration layer which contains the million and a zinc-based pigment which indicates that it was added later at least in the 18th century and during the 15th and 16th centuries it was very common for northern artists to build out passages of red paint using a variety of late structures for example in the workshops of Yann by Derek Fouts and Hans Mending some passages of red have an underpaint of opaque red and the million followed by a layer of red lake pigment mixed with lead white another variant of such layer structures can be seen in the works of Gerard David where lead white was added to the million and red lake in the underlayers and in the workshop of Roger Randveden it was common to make use of an underlayer in the Red Drogues and this can be seen in the exclamation of St Hubert where St Hubert's white pinkish red tassable has an orange red underpaint consisting of the million mixed with red lake In the early part of the 16th century there was also a tendency in the work of some painters for the modeling to become a bit more simplified and more directly achieved by the addition of white or black to the underlayer and two paintings from the workshop of the master of 1518 seeing here the visitation and the flight into Egypt showed the use of a brown underpaint layer for the red and pink droguaries This underpaint layer consists of varying proportions of the million, then white and black often followed by more brightly coloured layers containing red lake and then white varying proportions and similarly in Mariner Spen famous of our last two tackscares the underlayer of the red droguary contains the million and a black pigment and the use of an underlayer facilitated a more economical painting technique was also contributing to the modeling of the drapes which could then be emphasised using red lake glazes and although no red lake glazes identified in our of the red paint layers in the Hermantio panel I found that clear use of the layer structure in order to achieve the red tonality of the prophet's robe echoes this practice of more than painting workshops of the turn of the century where the use of a darker underpaint layer consisting of a million and a black appears more consistent with the simplified methods identified in Flemish and Neverlandish paintings dated to the early 16th century as opposed to 15th century productions and again this similarity strengthens the suggested date range for the painting which the inscription states is the early 16th century Now the research I conducted regarding the origins and possible function of the Hermantio panel proved useful when it came to treating the painting The initial examination of the panel showed that there were extensive losses to the original paint and ground layers throughout the painting and these losses are subsequently been overpainted as part of several past restoration campaigns including the treatment that took place at the portal in 1962 As part of my assessment of the panel's condition I tested the solubility of these various retouching campaigns as well as the solubility of the varnish using a range of organics solvers These tests showed that the varnish had actually not discovered discolored significantly and therefore did not disrupt the colour balance within the painting However the tests of the old retouching provided me with quite a clear picture of the extensive damage to the original paint layers particularly in the black background overpainted almost completely using a resume for retouching medium Due to the extent of restoration present on the painting and the seemingly poor condition of the underlying original paint I decided that the retouching and the varnish should be obtained and in making this decision I was essentially choosing to value the aesthetic coherence of the work over the fragmented nature of the original paint Historically the composition would have played a role for its audience and in this sense my treatment of the decision was significantly influenced by my interpretation of the power's previous function Having made the decision not to paint the painting I was faced with the challenge of approving the appearance of the surface Although the varnish had not discolored significantly it still had a very catchy appearance with various levels of gloss and saturation and in order to improve this I had a re-saturating layer using MS2A which is a synthetically synthesised keto present which is better at adding properties compared to traditional naturalism varnishes After varnishing the painting it was also necessary to address several new losses in the black background and thick groups You can see here these are just a couple of them before and after images so you can see the white fills which have been retouched in the lower image The aim of the retouching was to improve the aesthetic of the painting for making the composition more legible whilst also respecting the various painting campaigns as well as the material of the object The approach to the retouching was also guided by the previous restoration campaigns The thicker groups were filled and retouched mimetically as these areas had already been brought to a high level of finish compared to the rest of the painting So these are the white fills that you see in the areas that contain them In the black background however the retouching was applied directly on to the blue support as the emission of fills were more in keeping with the existing restoration in this area You can sort of see it in the upper left hand image where the prophet has two large losses showing the wooden support right next to his head and then in the below image you can see how he touched them out but using just the resin itself and not the fills In addition to this efforts were also made to integrate areas of old retouching that had been discovered and no longer match the original surrounding paint During the retouching process it was at this point when I decided that it would be appropriate to leave the copper green marbling visible around Christ's head exposed as this represents an earlier painting campaign that has an interest I feel to art historians and conservators alike The various campaigns are of interest historically as they show the history of the object as an artwork that was constantly being reinvented to suit the needs of its patrons and audience Well I'd like to thank you all for listening and I hope this talk has demonstrated how both technical analysis and art historical research play an important role when it comes to conserving works of art In the case of the Parmentia panel my research provided me with a greater understanding of the painting's origins and possible form of function which in turn influenced my final treatment decision I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the Society of Antiquities for entrusting the treatment and the technical foundation of the painting to me The project provided me with an amazing opportunity where I was able to explore the history and material technique of this historical object was also developing in my schools as a painting's conservator and I'd be happy to take any questions regarding the treatment or the research or indeed any aspect of the course at all Thank you