The Altar and the Altarpiece: Sacramental Themes in Early Netherlandish Painting
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past twenty-five years, historians of church art have often stressed its liturgical meaning.More recent scholarship has expanded this contextual approach by locating religious belief, ritual, and art in a network of social, politi- cal, and economic issues.Today, the best scholarship is apt to look at church art not as the symbolic visual expression of timeless truth or ritual but as the vehicle for the often conflicting religious ideologies of various groups in a given historical setting.'In The Altar and the Altarpiece, Barbara Lane rejects this multi-dimensional analysis in favor of a monolithic liturgical reading.Her main thesis is that the seemingly ordinary naturalism of fifteenth-century Flemish art conceals from modem viewers an ongoing liturgical symbolism and meaning.Taking the most popular Christological subjects of Flemish painting, (Madonna and Child, Nativity, Crucifixion, Descent, Lamentation, Last Supper, Gregorian Man of Sorrows), Lane explains their frequency on the grounds that they were easily inter- preted liturgically by artist and viewer.Such thinking overlooks the fact that these themes were all, with the exception of the Last Supper and the Descent, common in fifteenth-century woodcuts and engravings, works clearly used in non-liturgical spaces for private purposes.Rather than admit Flemish art might have had a variety of settings and functions.Lane insists on a liturgical context for all Flemish art.Even the many small devotional paintings seen by most scholars as private meditational aids are said to have been commissioned for domestic altars, a theory that allows Lane to group them with church altarpieces: "No matter where they
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it