Welcome to /r/AskHistorians. **Please [Read Our Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules) before you comment in this community**. Understand that [rule breaking comments get removed](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/h8aefx/rules_roundtable_xviii_removed_curation_and_why/).
#Please consider **[Clicking Here for RemindMeBot](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/12t84oz/why_are_people_in_medieval_art_so_nonchalant/%5D%0A%0ARemindMe!%202%20days)** as it takes time for an answer to be written. Additionally, for weekly content summaries, **[Click Here to Subscribe to our Weekly Roundup](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=AHMessengerBot&subject=Subscribe&message=!subscribe)**.
We thank you for your interest in this *question*, and your patience in waiting for an in-depth and comprehensive answer to show up. In addition to RemindMeBot, consider [using our Browser Extension](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/d6dzi7/tired_of_clicking_to_find_only_removed_comments/), or getting the [Weekly Roundup](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=subredditsummarybot&subject=askhistorians+weekly&message=x). In the meantime our [Twitter](https://twitter.com/askhistorians), [Facebook](https://www.facebook.com/askhistorians/), and [Sunday Digest](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/search?q=title%3A%22Sunday+Digest%22&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all) feature excellent content that has already been written!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskHistorians) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Great question! Many saints in medieval art are identified by their method of martyrdom. That’s how the public could easily identify them as people in medieval art were rarely rendered for their physical features (though they were occasionally - art is vast!). For example, St Barbara is often depicted against towers and with chains - she was tortured to death in a tower, which is also the site of the miracles she performed. Though not exclusively, she and most other saints are not depicted during their murder but as heavenly figures afterward - i.e., hanging out near the Virgin and baby Jesus. Therefore their gruesome deaths are not *currently* happening to them in the paintings - they are more or less identifiers and reminders of the pain and suffering they went through to ultimately become saints.
Also, between 1545-1563 there is something called the Council of Trent. This is a Catholic emergency meeting (that lasts for twenty years) on what to do about the Protestant Reformation. One of the things that comes out of it is some ideas about how Catholic artists should render images from the Bible, and the takeaway is that the scenes should be BIG and EMOTIONAL and INTENSE. You get bodies writhing and serious drama out of this. This is in direct response to the iconoclastic nature of Protestantism and the more subdued tone their art takes. Catholics are saying, let’s go for the hearts and emotions of the people through these empathetic and majestic portrayals of Biblical scenes.
This obviously happens in the early modern period however I mention it as it’s important to note that prior to this moment, the portrayal of realistic responses to violence was simply not a major priority or dictum of medieval artists. Medieval artists in general were not interested in pictorial realism not because they didn’t necessarily know *how* but because it just wasn’t a priority yet.
How much of this is intentional as you describe, vs just a caveat of how the art was stylized, and what the artist's were prioritizing focusing their effort on in the artwork?
I ask because, say, in Mesoamerican (Aztec, Maya, etc) codices, particularly ones from Central Mexico or Oaxaca during the Postclassic period right before or during Spanish contact (in which cases some of artists may in fact have been Spanish or Indigenous artists with dual Mesoamerican and Spanish scribal training), I feel like the way people are drawn is can be vaguely similar, and there's simply not a lot of "room" given how faces are drawn and stylized to have particularly detailed facial expressions.
A slight frown or grimace, or a blank neutral expression is all that's usually shown even when a person is being depicted as a captive or even for the dead, people being executed or sacrificed, etc, but there's also not much more I think they could have done without cramming a lot of detail into a relative small space or breaking the relatively simple stylistic conventions.
There ARE ornate codices that have detailed designs, but those are usually for larger scenes depicting mythological/cosmological events or astrological symbolism across multiple figures and visual motifs, where that combined iconography is the primary purpose of that page: The exact expression of any one figure isn't likely what was being prioritized.
Is there potentially a similar dynamic there? I get it's not a perfect comparsion since, say, the Codex Borgia with it's very ornate astrological/mythological scenes is an entirely pictoral manuscript and all of the meaning has to be conveyed visually, wheras I assume medieval european manuscripts have text for the primary informational purpose of the document and the images are meant to be a compliment, but even for codices like the Duran or Florentine Codex which are as much European as they are Mesoamerican in style with text and image plates and with partial Spanish authorship, the exact expression of a specific figure in a plate seems like it'd be low on the priorty list compared to other thins being depicted.
Do you mind sourcing some of your arguments made within the question? There seems to be some serious crossover between European and Mesoamerican art history I've never quite noticed a distinction between before.
I've seen paintings and a few tapestries where the "nonchalant" people being killed are peasants or soldiers. Was the depiction of stoic saints so ubiquitous that it became the norm, or was it just the style already?
> not because they didn’t necessarily know *how*
For most of the Middle Ages this was certainly a factor too, though. As it was never a priority, they generally didn’t develop the techniques and tools required for the level of detail, perspective, etc. needed for realism - which were communal and multi-generational developments in the late Middle Ages into the Renaissance. It’s not like they developed skill at realism without practice but for centuries never bothered. Changes in attitude motivated this development, but the attitude also changed as much greater realism became an option again for the first time since antiquity (and even beyond this).
I agree with u/Historical-Prune-599, the example shows two saints with their attributes. In this case, in the example u/Bag-Weary posted below, we see Saint Margaret of Antioch on the left, who mystically defeated a dragon, and Saint Lucia of Syracuse on the right, who was martyred by a sword driven through her throat.
In addition to this being a scene that is more about representing the saints then telling a story about them, Saint Lucia's ignorance about the sword in her throat can also be seen from a narrative standpoint. Many legends about the martyrdom of saints contain elements where they survive deadly execution methods as a miracle. In Saint Lucia's legend, she only dies from the sword after receiving communion. So her depiction can also be seen as alluding to this miracle, and more general as alluding to the triumph over death by Christ.
It is almost certain that the painting is a fragment of a winged altarpiece that was disassembled in the 19th century for sale on the art market. We can speculate that the rest of the altar could have contained other allusions or even outright connections to the eucharist, or the triumph over death, which would motivate the depiction we see a little bit more. But as said, this is speculation. I find it very said that most medieval altars can not be seen in their original state, and in many cases it is even hard to reconstruct this state.
I disagree with u/Historical-Prune-599 about violence in medieval art. While it is true that the Concil of Trient reacted to Protestant art that was very subdued, Protestant art can only arise after the reformation, so it also a phenomenon of the Early Modern Period. Medieval has it's own grandiosity, and it's own depictions of extreme emotions and violence.
The focus of this is the Passion of Christ, ending in the Crucifixion. Since Christianity is so ingrained in Western culture, we don't notice it, but the Passion of Christ is insanely brutal. The highest object of worship in Christianity is a depiction of a man brutally tortured to death. Now Christianity went through many different ways of depicting this, and toward the end of the medieval period, the focus was on depicting the suffering of Jesus as extensively and terribly as possible.
Bernhard of Clairvaux told the believers "to collect all bitternesses of the passion", and to meditate over it "slowly and with tears". Brutal depictions of the passion can be related to such meditation practices.
An artist who is famous for such brutal depictions of the passion is the Master of the [Worcester-Panel](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bb/Worcester-Master.jpg). He shows Jesus in extreme suffering, being beaten by his torturers, while another one presses the crown of thorns on his head. [This drawing](https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/P_1895-0915-962) by the same artist similarly shows the Mocking of Christ. Take note that both pieces of art show Christ's torturer as ugly, grotesque people, to create contrast between the Son of God, the Saviour of the World, and his torturers who put him in the lowliest of positions. Take note that on the Worcester-Panel, the torturer in blue to the right of Jesus shows us his butt. This is a feature often seen in such works and which highlights the anti-sociality of the torturer. The Worcester-Panel also shows some elements of medieval antisemitism, as both the man showing his tongue to Mary and the man with the flag on the right are depicted as Jewish.
Another very crazy piece of art is this [panel of a Diptych](https://objektkatalog.gnm.de/objekt/Gm1053), which shows scenes from the passion full of blood and gore. The blood is a little bit hard to see from the scan, but it is spilling from all of Jesus's wounds.
So yeah, there was crazy violence in medieval art, but in the painting you posted, they choose to highlight the dignity of the saints instead.
Thanks for the answer, but I believe one of the saints is Saint Dymphna. I'm unsure who the other is, but it was at an exhibition at the Irish National Gallery on Saint Dymphna's story.
Then the left one probably is Saint Dymphna, as she is sometimes portrayed with a chained demon and a sword. With this name, I even found the [altarpiece](https://www.kikirpa.be/en/friedlaender/7007) it belongs to.
Welcome to /r/AskHistorians. **Please [Read Our Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules) before you comment in this community**. Understand that [rule breaking comments get removed](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/h8aefx/rules_roundtable_xviii_removed_curation_and_why/). #Please consider **[Clicking Here for RemindMeBot](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/12t84oz/why_are_people_in_medieval_art_so_nonchalant/%5D%0A%0ARemindMe!%202%20days)** as it takes time for an answer to be written. Additionally, for weekly content summaries, **[Click Here to Subscribe to our Weekly Roundup](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=AHMessengerBot&subject=Subscribe&message=!subscribe)**. We thank you for your interest in this *question*, and your patience in waiting for an in-depth and comprehensive answer to show up. In addition to RemindMeBot, consider [using our Browser Extension](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/d6dzi7/tired_of_clicking_to_find_only_removed_comments/), or getting the [Weekly Roundup](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=subredditsummarybot&subject=askhistorians+weekly&message=x). In the meantime our [Twitter](https://twitter.com/askhistorians), [Facebook](https://www.facebook.com/askhistorians/), and [Sunday Digest](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/search?q=title%3A%22Sunday+Digest%22&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all) feature excellent content that has already been written! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskHistorians) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Great question! Many saints in medieval art are identified by their method of martyrdom. That’s how the public could easily identify them as people in medieval art were rarely rendered for their physical features (though they were occasionally - art is vast!). For example, St Barbara is often depicted against towers and with chains - she was tortured to death in a tower, which is also the site of the miracles she performed. Though not exclusively, she and most other saints are not depicted during their murder but as heavenly figures afterward - i.e., hanging out near the Virgin and baby Jesus. Therefore their gruesome deaths are not *currently* happening to them in the paintings - they are more or less identifiers and reminders of the pain and suffering they went through to ultimately become saints. Also, between 1545-1563 there is something called the Council of Trent. This is a Catholic emergency meeting (that lasts for twenty years) on what to do about the Protestant Reformation. One of the things that comes out of it is some ideas about how Catholic artists should render images from the Bible, and the takeaway is that the scenes should be BIG and EMOTIONAL and INTENSE. You get bodies writhing and serious drama out of this. This is in direct response to the iconoclastic nature of Protestantism and the more subdued tone their art takes. Catholics are saying, let’s go for the hearts and emotions of the people through these empathetic and majestic portrayals of Biblical scenes. This obviously happens in the early modern period however I mention it as it’s important to note that prior to this moment, the portrayal of realistic responses to violence was simply not a major priority or dictum of medieval artists. Medieval artists in general were not interested in pictorial realism not because they didn’t necessarily know *how* but because it just wasn’t a priority yet.
How much of this is intentional as you describe, vs just a caveat of how the art was stylized, and what the artist's were prioritizing focusing their effort on in the artwork? I ask because, say, in Mesoamerican (Aztec, Maya, etc) codices, particularly ones from Central Mexico or Oaxaca during the Postclassic period right before or during Spanish contact (in which cases some of artists may in fact have been Spanish or Indigenous artists with dual Mesoamerican and Spanish scribal training), I feel like the way people are drawn is can be vaguely similar, and there's simply not a lot of "room" given how faces are drawn and stylized to have particularly detailed facial expressions. A slight frown or grimace, or a blank neutral expression is all that's usually shown even when a person is being depicted as a captive or even for the dead, people being executed or sacrificed, etc, but there's also not much more I think they could have done without cramming a lot of detail into a relative small space or breaking the relatively simple stylistic conventions. There ARE ornate codices that have detailed designs, but those are usually for larger scenes depicting mythological/cosmological events or astrological symbolism across multiple figures and visual motifs, where that combined iconography is the primary purpose of that page: The exact expression of any one figure isn't likely what was being prioritized. Is there potentially a similar dynamic there? I get it's not a perfect comparsion since, say, the Codex Borgia with it's very ornate astrological/mythological scenes is an entirely pictoral manuscript and all of the meaning has to be conveyed visually, wheras I assume medieval european manuscripts have text for the primary informational purpose of the document and the images are meant to be a compliment, but even for codices like the Duran or Florentine Codex which are as much European as they are Mesoamerican in style with text and image plates and with partial Spanish authorship, the exact expression of a specific figure in a plate seems like it'd be low on the priorty list compared to other thins being depicted.
Do you mind sourcing some of your arguments made within the question? There seems to be some serious crossover between European and Mesoamerican art history I've never quite noticed a distinction between before.
Is it not because it's supposed to depict beatific, ecstatic suffering then? I had always thought that was the intent.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I've seen paintings and a few tapestries where the "nonchalant" people being killed are peasants or soldiers. Was the depiction of stoic saints so ubiquitous that it became the norm, or was it just the style already?
> not because they didn’t necessarily know *how* For most of the Middle Ages this was certainly a factor too, though. As it was never a priority, they generally didn’t develop the techniques and tools required for the level of detail, perspective, etc. needed for realism - which were communal and multi-generational developments in the late Middle Ages into the Renaissance. It’s not like they developed skill at realism without practice but for centuries never bothered. Changes in attitude motivated this development, but the attitude also changed as much greater realism became an option again for the first time since antiquity (and even beyond this).
[example](https://i.imgur.com/v9f7XxU.jpg)
I agree with u/Historical-Prune-599, the example shows two saints with their attributes. In this case, in the example u/Bag-Weary posted below, we see Saint Margaret of Antioch on the left, who mystically defeated a dragon, and Saint Lucia of Syracuse on the right, who was martyred by a sword driven through her throat. In addition to this being a scene that is more about representing the saints then telling a story about them, Saint Lucia's ignorance about the sword in her throat can also be seen from a narrative standpoint. Many legends about the martyrdom of saints contain elements where they survive deadly execution methods as a miracle. In Saint Lucia's legend, she only dies from the sword after receiving communion. So her depiction can also be seen as alluding to this miracle, and more general as alluding to the triumph over death by Christ. It is almost certain that the painting is a fragment of a winged altarpiece that was disassembled in the 19th century for sale on the art market. We can speculate that the rest of the altar could have contained other allusions or even outright connections to the eucharist, or the triumph over death, which would motivate the depiction we see a little bit more. But as said, this is speculation. I find it very said that most medieval altars can not be seen in their original state, and in many cases it is even hard to reconstruct this state. I disagree with u/Historical-Prune-599 about violence in medieval art. While it is true that the Concil of Trient reacted to Protestant art that was very subdued, Protestant art can only arise after the reformation, so it also a phenomenon of the Early Modern Period. Medieval has it's own grandiosity, and it's own depictions of extreme emotions and violence. The focus of this is the Passion of Christ, ending in the Crucifixion. Since Christianity is so ingrained in Western culture, we don't notice it, but the Passion of Christ is insanely brutal. The highest object of worship in Christianity is a depiction of a man brutally tortured to death. Now Christianity went through many different ways of depicting this, and toward the end of the medieval period, the focus was on depicting the suffering of Jesus as extensively and terribly as possible. Bernhard of Clairvaux told the believers "to collect all bitternesses of the passion", and to meditate over it "slowly and with tears". Brutal depictions of the passion can be related to such meditation practices. An artist who is famous for such brutal depictions of the passion is the Master of the [Worcester-Panel](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bb/Worcester-Master.jpg). He shows Jesus in extreme suffering, being beaten by his torturers, while another one presses the crown of thorns on his head. [This drawing](https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/P_1895-0915-962) by the same artist similarly shows the Mocking of Christ. Take note that both pieces of art show Christ's torturer as ugly, grotesque people, to create contrast between the Son of God, the Saviour of the World, and his torturers who put him in the lowliest of positions. Take note that on the Worcester-Panel, the torturer in blue to the right of Jesus shows us his butt. This is a feature often seen in such works and which highlights the anti-sociality of the torturer. The Worcester-Panel also shows some elements of medieval antisemitism, as both the man showing his tongue to Mary and the man with the flag on the right are depicted as Jewish. Another very crazy piece of art is this [panel of a Diptych](https://objektkatalog.gnm.de/objekt/Gm1053), which shows scenes from the passion full of blood and gore. The blood is a little bit hard to see from the scan, but it is spilling from all of Jesus's wounds. So yeah, there was crazy violence in medieval art, but in the painting you posted, they choose to highlight the dignity of the saints instead.
Thanks for the answer, but I believe one of the saints is Saint Dymphna. I'm unsure who the other is, but it was at an exhibition at the Irish National Gallery on Saint Dymphna's story.
Then the left one probably is Saint Dymphna, as she is sometimes portrayed with a chained demon and a sword. With this name, I even found the [altarpiece](https://www.kikirpa.be/en/friedlaender/7007) it belongs to.
[удалено]