"Attributed to the Master of Saint Giles" is actually by the Master of the Guild of St. George at Mechelen

I recently purchased a fragment from a wing of a triptych by the Master of the Guild of St. George at Mechelen (Malines). This anonymous Southern-Netherlandish artist was active as one of the leading painters in Mechelen during the last quarter of the 15th century. This painting was misattributed to the completely unrelated Master of St. Giles, perhaps due to a translation error from the dutch "meester van de St Goris Gilde" on the back.

The Master is best known for a large painting today on display at the Royal Museum of Fine Arts of Antwerp (KMSKA) depicting the members of the Mechelen guild of the great crossbow and their patron saint, Saint George (with the face of the Phillip the handsome). This where the anonymous master received his notname from M. J. Friedlander.

The Master is also known for several other paintings. There are several royal portraits in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna, including child portrait of Charles the V.

One of the highest quality portraits attributed to this master is the portrait of Jan de Mol, today in the Courtauld Gallery in London.

The painting I purchased was the subject of an excellent article in French in the 1971 publication of the Belgian Journal of Archeology and History of Art by Catheline Périer-D'ieteren entitled "The portrait of the Lord of Bricquegny by the master of the Gilde of Saint-Georges". In 1973 she published another article which attributed for the first time the previously mentioned panel of Charles V and his sisters to the Master. So, Périer-D'ieteren is an expert on this Master and perhaps the art historian who researched the artist the most.

In the 1971 publication, Périer-D'ieteren identified the patron as the Lord of Bricquegny based on the coat of arms on the tapestry. Later in the article she also points out that the Lord of Bricquegny worked as clerk to the Grand Council of Mechelen since 1504, his signature appearing above the Registers at the Roles from that year. She also shows that the tapestry is not in the original location, and was move to the current location later, perhaps when the painting was fragmented as a way to record the identity of the patron in the fragment.

Several clues prove this: its outlines with geometric shapes, the imbalance it causes in the composition, the difference in level of the pictorial layers, and above all the small gray triangular surface, remaining between the lower right edge of the tapestry and the piece of furniture, whose network of cracks shows that it is original and which indicates the probable state of the decoration, an architectural background, before it was altered to affix the coat of arms.

The author also conducted X-Ray and Infrared Reflectography analysis. The X-ray revealed an original, now hidden face of the patron which was smaller, and different angle, but was later covered up. This would indicate the Master made changes while painting.

The infra-red reflectography revealed that the clothing had been altered, most noticeably with the fur collar of the coat being less widely open. The closed book of hours, which after cleaning became slightly visible to the naked eye, was also original but later covered with the open book of hours.

The author points out that it is not the only known painting where the Master of the Guild of Saint Georges made modifications of this kind. Périer-D'ieteren then goes on to justify the attribution based on stylistic and technical similarities in detail. The author also compares the patron to a patron in another painting by the same Master, located in the Cathedral Saint-Rombaut in Mechelen. However, she does not believe it can be confirmed to be the same patron based only on visual similarity, and could be a generic type of composition.

Because the the Lord of Bricquegny started to work as clerk to the Grand Council of Mechelen in the year 1504, the author suggests a date close to then for this panel.

The painting is interesting to me because it shows the luxurious lifestyle of a patron of the turn of the 15th century, including: the gold ring, the Mille-Fleurs tapestry (which could have been produced in Mechelen), the book of hours with illuminated borders and the lavish fur coat with slit-sleeves.

Although the painting is obviously not in its original state of condition, there is a colorful history and it is visual appealing. The oeuvre of this master is very limited with less than 20 extant works, and the school of 15th century Netherlandish painting in Mechelen is also quite limited.