The Wilton Diptych
Catalogue entry
English or French(?)
NG4451
Richard II presented to the Virgin and Child by Patron Saints (‘The Wilton Diptych’)
2024
,2024
,Extracted from:
The National Gallery; with entries by Emma Capron, Dillian Gordon, Sarah Herring, Mary
McMahon, Letizia Treves and Francesca Whitlum‐Cooper; with technical contributions
by Paul Ackroyd, Rachel Billinge, Lynne Harrison, Catherine Higgitt, Helen Howard, Larry
Keith, Marta Melchiorre, Britta New, David Peggie, Marika Spring and Hayley Tomlinson, Online Entries (London: The National Gallery, 2024).
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00001.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
© The National Gallery, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00002.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
© The National Gallery, London
Egg tempera on oak, each panel 53 × 37 cm (including frame); painted surface 46 × 29 cm
Description
The Wilton Diptych takes its name from Wilton House, the seat of the earls of Pembroke, from where it was acquired in 1929 (see Provenance).
Interior, left wing (the Richard panel)
Richard II, King of England (born 1367, reigned 1377–99, died 1400) kneels on bare earth. He is presented by Saint John the Baptist holding a lamb and clothed in a camel‐skin with its head and a hoof still attached. Beside the Baptist are two kings: Saint Edward the Confessor (reigned 1042–66) holding a ring, and Saint Edmund, king and martyr (841–869/70), holding an arrow.
Interior, right wing (the Virgin panel)
The Virgin holds the infant Christ wrapped in a gold fabric; his halo is stippled with emblems of his Passion: three nails and a crown of thorns. The Virgin and Child stand in a meadow of plants and flowers, strewn with the heads of roses, violets and daisies, with a cluster of small mushrooms in the bottom right‐hand corner. They are surrounded by eleven angels, one of whom holds a white swallow‐tailed pennon (a type of flag) charged (that is, bearing) with a red cross.
Exterior of the left wing (the hart panel)
A white hart, gorged (that is, with a crown around its neck) and couchant/lodged (lying) on a bank of flowers and foliage.
Exterior of the right wing (the armorial panel)
The royal arms as used by Richard II, namely the arms of the kingdom of England (gules three lions, also known heraldically as leopards, passant guardant or) quartered with those of the kingdom of France (azure semé with fleurs‐de‐lis or),1 and impaled with the fictive arms of Edward the Confessor (a cross patonce between five footless martlets). Above the shield are a helm, a cap of maintenance and a crowned lion statant guardant.2 The damage (see Technical Notes) makes this panel difficult to read.
The paucity of comparable English or European works, added to the lack of any contemporary mention of the Wilton Diptych or relevant documentation, renders any argument regarding the diptych necessarily a matter of speculation.
A Note on the Text
Some of the information in this catalogue entry was originally published in the exhibition catalogue Making and Meaning: The Wilton Diptych, National Gallery, London 1993, revised and expanded in Gordon et al. , The Wilton Diptych, London 2015, with bibliography.3 This catalogue entry repeats some of the material of 2015, updated wherever possible. It should be noted that it is impossible to give an account of every publication which mentions the Wilton Diptych.
Technical Notes
Support
The diptych is painted on both sides of two wood panels, identified by microscopical examination as of oak (Quercus sp.). Dendrochronology shows that the wood comes from the eastern Baltic and the latest tree ring found was from 1375.4 Each panel measures approximately 53.3 × 37 cm. The panels are each made from two boards of wood, joined vertically: both comprise one wide board attached to a much narrower piece.5 The panels were originally about 2.5 cm thick and were carved into from both sides to make the shaped frame mouldings, leaving 6 mm of wood to provide flat surfaces to paint on. The frame mouldings around the interior paintings are deeper than those on the outer faces. The joins are simple butt‐joins glued in place, and so exceptionally well made that they are almost impossible to detect. Close examination of the X‐radiographs (fig. 1) has revealed the presence of two dowels inserted into the thickness of the wood across the join in the Richard/hart panel. At similar locations across the join of the Virgin/armorial panel are two patches.6 It seems probable that this panel also had dowels embedded in the thickness of the wood but that the depth of carving needed to make the inner frame mouldings exposed the dowels across the join, necessitating their removal and patching.7
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00003.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
X‐radiographs of both panels. © The National Gallery, London
The panels are connected with two hinges made of iron. These are original and have traces of a layer of gilding which would have made them less visually obtrusive than they are now. X‐radiographs show that on the opposite sides of the panels, level with the two hinges, are four tapered metal insertions (two in each panel), now concealed by the chalk ground and gilding applied over the frames. These are identical in size and shape to the flanges of the hinges. There could be several explanations for these insertions. Additional panels may have been planned, to be attached at either side, although this seems unlikely since the compositional coherence of the diptych implies that it is a complete object in its existing form. More probable is that these flanges were originally designed to have clasps but it was decided not to use them at an early stage, before the chalk ground was applied, since the chalk covers the sides continuously. There is no evidence of clasps having been applied to the exterior, and it seems likely that the diptych would have had a pouch of leather which held the panels together when closed.8
Preparation of the Support (Ground and Priming)
From the damaged area on the armorial panel (fig. 2) and from the X‐radiographs, it is possible to see that the surfaces of the wood were first covered with a web of fibres which, unusually, seem to be derived from parchment.9 The parchment fibres were laid directly on the wood and then covered with a layer of natural chalk in glue with which the fibres are now intermingled.10 No fibres were laid on the frames, where a layer of chalk was applied directly onto the wood. Cracks in the ground which are continuous from the main panel to the edges of the frame show that the chalk ground was laid down in a single phase of application.
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00004.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Photomicrograph of the damaged area on the armorial panel showing the embedded fibres exposed. © The National Gallery, London
Materials and Technique
The metal leaf used is gold, silver and part‐gold (oro mezzo, oro di metà or zwischgold). Identified pigments are natural ultramarine, azurite, indigo, copper green, green earth, red lake (kermes), vermilion, orpiment, lead‐tin yellow, yellow lake, red and yellow earth pigments, lead white, chalk, bone black and charcoal black.
The binding medium is egg tempera.
Underdrawing
Examination of the panels with infrared reflectography reveals extensive underdrawing (figs 3, 4, 5 and 6).11 The whole composition was sketched in detailed outline, probably in a liquid medium. The drawing was followed fairly closely in the painting, but there are many small changes, for example in the hands of most of the figures, where usually the painted fingers are longer than were drawn. The Virgin’s face was made slightly wider, the Child’s right arm was slightly repositioned, and there was a reduction in scale of all the angels’ broomcod collars and their hart badges. A more significant change was made to the finger of the standing angel to the right of the Virgin (fig. 7) which first pointed to Richard’s head but was lowered to point more directly at his heart, focusing the gesture, and so the composition, more emphatically on him.
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00005.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Infrared reflectogram of the Richard panel. © The National Gallery, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00006.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Infrared reflectogram of the Virgin panel. © The National Gallery, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00007.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Infrared reflectogram of the armorial panel. © The National Gallery, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00008.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Infrared reflectogram of the hart panel. © The National Gallery, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00009.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Infrared reflectogram detail from the Virgin panel showing the change to the pointing finger of the angel. © The National Gallery, London
Infrared reflectography can give only a partial idea of exactly what was drawn onto the panels as some pigments, including brown and green earths and black, inhibit the penetration of the infrared radiation, while metal leaf blocks it completely. Little, if any, underdrawing can therefore be found on the exterior, as the armorial panel is almost completely covered with gold or silver and the hart panel has black pigment in underlayers both for the hart itself and the foliage on which it is couched. For the hart, the infrared images do, however, give some indication of how the paint layers were built up after the underdrawing, using broad washes of undermodelling to establish the form and define light and shade. Wide brushstrokes define the contour and tonality of the anatomy, for example on the chest and forequarters, and the modelling is graduated to give a three‐dimensional effect.
Gilding
In preparation for gilding, the borders between areas to be painted and those to be gilded were incised into the chalk ground to give a clear definition of the limits of the paint. The gold backgrounds and mouldings of the frame were water gilded over a layer of red bole in a proteinaceous adhesive, presumably animal glue.12 The gold was carefully burnished.
An early change of plan is evident in the Richard panel, where the presence of bole under the forest shows that this area was intended to be gilded. It may be that the space between John the Baptist and the frame was thought to be too stark and the division between the two groups a disturbing void if it had been gilded, and so the space was instead filled with a depiction of distant woodland.
One of the distinctive features of the diptych is the variety of ways in which stippling, using a single dot punch, has been employed both for patterning and for modelling, creating subtle effects which exploit the optical qualities of the changing fall of light.
The gold background of each interior panel has a lightly incised square grid which formed a guide for the pattern carried out in the fine dot punch. A floral pattern on the Richard panel and a foliate pattern on the Virgin panel act as a counterpoint to the painted areas and contrast with the plain burnished gold in the haloes of the three saints in the left panel.13 Apart from the three plain haloes, the rays incised in the Virgin’s halo and those parts executed in mordant gilding (see below), almost every available surface of the gold has been densely tooled with the fine punch. In the case of the Child’s halo the punch has been used to create a crown of thorns and three nails (fig. 8), which replace the more customary cross. The crowns of Edmund and Edward have been minutely stippled with a fine punch in order for them to stand out against the plain surfaces of their unembellished haloes.
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00010.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Photomicrograph of the Child’s halo showing punching of nail and crown of thorns. © The National Gallery, London
The handling of the punch where it is used for modelling shows the most astonishing display of virtuosity. This is particularly remarkable in the folds of the cloth wrapped around the Child (fig. 9): here the punch has been used most densely where the folds project, as on the Child’s knee, and the gold is left untooled in the recesses of the drapery. On the armorial panel, punching has been used to create the details of the muzzle and eyes of the lion’s face. The antlers of the large white hart have been entirely modelled with stippled punchwork, without recourse to any painted outline, relying solely on the fall of light to make them stand out against the plain burnished background. The stippling has been carried out in clusters, becoming denser from one edge to the other and denser in the tips (fig. 10).
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00011.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Photomicrograph of the Child’s gold cloth. © The National Gallery, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00012.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Photomicrograph of the hart’s antler (in raking light). © The National Gallery, London
The kings’ gold fabrics are executed in sgraffito, a method practised widely, for example, by fourteenth‐century Italian panel painters. Here it is on a particularly finely detailed scale. Richard’s robe was water gilded, then thinly painted with vermilion which was partially scraped away to expose the gold and create the design of broomcods (pods of the broom plant) encircling harts couched on beds of rosemary (fig. 11). The exposed gold was densely stippled with the fine punch, and finally more translucent paint was added to create the folds.
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00013.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Photomicrograph of Richard’s robe showing one of the harts. © The National Gallery, London
The same sgraffito method was employed for the pattern on Edmund’s robe, using natural ultramarine paint to contrast with the gold. Unlike on Richard’s robe, here in some places the blue was strengthened around the pattern. Paint for the vertical folds was then applied, passing directly over the pattern and filling some of the punchmarks. A small pink and white cloud was painted on the robe below each sun (see fig. 34, below).
As well as water gilding, some details were applied in mordant gilding which allows gold to be attached over paint, giving a low relief effect for example to the angels’ broomcod collars, the antlers of the angels’ hart badges (see fig. 24 and fig. 14, below) and the harts’ crowns and minute chains which hang from them. A sample from the mordant‐gilded fleurs‐de‐lis on the shield on the exterior examined in cross section shows a substantial mordant layer which is pigmented with lead white, chalk, some calcium sulphate, a little red and yellow earth and a few particles of bone black.14 New analyses of the mordant layer in this sample have confirmed that the binding medium is proteinaceous, most likely egg tempera, and does not contain a drying oil.15
One of the many optical contrasts exploited by the painter is that between burnished and unburnished gold. While the water‐gilding is burnished, mordant gilding cannot be. The fleurs‐de‐lis on the shield on the armorial panel (see fig. 56, below) have been applied with mordant gilding, their matt appearance contrasting with the gold cross and birds. Here the burnished gold is simply left exposed, with the blue apparently painted around the forms (rather than over the whole and then scraped away, as found in the gold fabrics of the robes).
The lions, now badly damaged, of the English Royal coat of arms were mordant gilded on a red lake background, itself applied over gold. The translucent red lake allowed the gold to shine through, supplying a further optical contrast.
The helm above the shield on the armorial panel was originally silver leaf, applied like the water gilding over a red bole and modelled with delicate punchmarks which produce a stippled effect. The surface of the silver leaf would originally have been covered with a glaze or varnish to prevent tarnishing and this was sometimes tinted with colours such as yellow, red or green. However, no trace of this glaze or varnish layer is now visible and the silver has tarnished to a very dark brownish‐black with only vestiges remaining, leaving the underlying red bole exposed.
A sample taken from the lower edge of the helm provided evidence for the use of part‐gold (oro mezzo, oro di metà or zwischgold), in which gold and silver are beaten together to form a single sheet. This material was sometimes used for its particular colouristic effects rather than as an economic alternative to gold. This is likely the case here, where subtle differences in reflective effects have been achieved across the panel by the juxtaposition and combination of a variety of metallic surfaces: gold leaf burnished, tooled and applied with a mordant, glazed silver leaf and part‐gold.
Painting Technique
Although the oak support and the preparatory chalk ground are highly characteristic of northern European panel painting, the painting technique and some of the pigments seem to be linked more closely to Italian painting practice of this period. The medium of all the painted areas has been identified as egg tempera.16 The optical effect of this is quite specific: it enables the painter to exploit the full purity and intrinsic colour of certain pigments, particularly that of natural ultramarine. This is clearly demonstrated in the draperies of the Virgin and angels where the intense colour of the pure pigment is visible in areas of shadow, and then combined with varying amounts of lead white to produce modelling effects. Blue was traditionally used for the Virgin’s robe but here ultramarine has also been employed for all eleven angels, as well as for Saint Edmund’s robe, and on the shield on the armorial panel.
In common with works from fourteenth‐century Italy, where the technique of egg tempera painting was widely practised, the flesh has been underpainted in a pale bluish‐green identified as containing the pigment green earth, combined with lead white.17 This green can be seen where the flesh paint is thin, for example around the eyes, and in damaged areas such as the face of the angel immediately to the right of the Virgin. The flesh tones have been built up in a series of hatched strokes dictated by the egg tempera technique and in this case the brushstrokes are of exceptional fineness and delicacy (see fig. 28, below). The painter has exploited the precision and fineness possible with egg tempera in order to detail, for example, highlights on faces, fingertips, eyelashes, locks of hair and the delicate feathers of the wings.
A number of distinct and complex techniques were used for the greens in the foliage in the hart panel in order to differentiate between the various plants. For grey‐green foliage in the foreground, a mixture of natural orpiment and indigo has been applied over charcoal black underpaint, with a final highlight principally of orpiment. By contrast, the solid dull green of the fern stalks (fig. 12) was made by combining azurite and lead‐tin yellow.18 Elsewhere, for the rosemary, azurite was combined with lead white and a little chalk. The chalk may have been the substrate for a yellow lake pigment now faded (fig. 13): the leaves now appear rather blue in colour, suggesting that the yellow component of the paint layer has faded. The stems of the irises were painted in a quite different technique, using a thin translucent layer of deep blue‐green indigo. The effect of the latter is that of a green glaze, enhanced by light reflection from the gilding beneath where the stems reach above the horizon. The yellow glaze of the iris petals has mostly flaked or faded, leaving only a silhouette of the flowers against the gold leaf.
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00014.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Photomicrograph of a fern on the hart panel. © The National Gallery, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00015.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Photomicrograph of rosemary on the hart panel. © The National Gallery, London
In some places translucent paint layers were also used to enhance the modelling effects on draperies or laid over the gold to simulate jewels. Unfortunately, some of the jewel‐like effects of final translucent paint layers are no longer as striking as they once were: for example, the crowns had jewels of different colours, some of which are now missing or have darkened, and in each of the angels’ collars one of the two pendant pods has a green glaze, now visible only under magnification (see fig. 24, below). Final translucent paint layers also once modelled Richard’s gown, such as the glazed lines of red suggesting folds fanning out from the wrist, and yellow‐green lake painted over the fringes of the collar and sleeve. Only traces of these final paint layers survive and consequently the gown now appears flatter than was originally intended. The remnants of a deep‐red glaze can however still be seen on the part of his robe covering his breast.
A red glaze layer is also present on the shield on the armorial panel, and analysis of the red lake pigment employed here shows that it probably contains the dyestuff extracted from kermes (Kermes vermilio Planchon, 1864).19 Kermes lake was more frequently used in the fifteenth century but has not been identified in any painted work before the last quarter of the fourteenth century. One of the earliest known uses of kermes lake is in a sample taken from the frame of the tester over the tomb of the Black Prince in Canterbury Cathedral (died 1376),20 and it has also been identified in the portrait of Richard II in Westminster Abbey dated to the 1390s (fig. 26, below), where it was used in a mixture with a small amount of madder as a glaze over the vermilion of the king’s robe.21
The surface of the painting exhibits remarkable three‐dimensional effects in paint on a minute scale. As well as the raised mordant gilding discussed earlier, thickly applied tiny touches of lead white are skilfully used to create such effects. The hart motifs on the badges are painted in grey and then modelled with a thick lead white enabling the painter to define the anatomy against a green background. The white was then finely outlined in brown or black enhancing the volumetric effect (fig. 14). Raised globular touches of lead white are also used to achieve the illusion of pearls decorating the crowns, Edmund’s brooch, Richard’s broomcod collar and the antlers of Richard’s hart jewel (fig. 15).
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00016.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Photomicrograph of a hart badge on one of the angels, showing the build‐up of paint. © The National Gallery, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00017.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
3‐D surface render, a detail from the Richard panel. © The National Gallery, London
The raised lead white pigment used to paint Richard’s white hart brooch (see fig. 18, below) clearly imitates white enamel over gold (émail en ronde bosse), primarily a French metalwork technique,22 although it is thought some of this type of jewellery may also have been made in English workshops.23 Certain of the pigment mixtures used in the diptych are rather complex, but are consistent from one panel to another, confirming that the diptych was probably created in a single phase of painting, likely involving the collaboration of highly skilled craftsmen, such as a carpenter or gilder, working under a master painter. For example, small touches of paint representing grey‐green foliage in the foregrounds of both the Virgin panel and the hart panel comprise the same layer structure of charcoal black underpaint followed by a mixture of natural orpiment and indigo, with a final highlight principally of orpiment. Similarly, the greyish‐white of the cap of maintenance has been painted in an identical layer structure to the white body of the hart, with white applied over a grey undermodelling.
As mentioned above, the underdrawing was followed carefully during painting but there is one significant area that shows an unusual approach during the preparatory phases. Around the profile of Richard, infrared reflectography shows an area of the camel‐skin worn by the Baptist that seems to have been treated differently to the rest (see fig. 29, below). Under magnification it could be seen that below the brown paint of the camel‐skin there is a layer of green earth and white paint, similar to the underlayers for flesh, which suggests that an over‐large area was prepared for the portrait head and left until the artist had a model to work from.
Conservation History
The diptych was cleaned and restored in 1991–2, at which point non‐original gilding and inscribed brass plates were removed from the frame mouldings.24 There is no record of any work between the painting’s acquisition in 1929 and 1991, apart from some consolidation of loose ground and paint.
Condition of the Support and Painting
The condition of the wood panels is excellent, with just one short split, now repaired, extending down from the top edge through the full thickness of the frame of the Richard/hart panel.
The water gilding, particularly on the inner panels, is in extremely good condition. On the outer edges of the frames the gilding is worn where the frame was handled when the diptych was opened and closed.
Like the gilding, the paint on the inner faces of the panels is in excellent condition (but see below) with just a few small scratches and some flaking around the edges of figures where paint overlaps gold, and a larger area of flaking in the trees beside the Baptist. There has also been some damage across Saint Edmund’s upper body. The exterior has suffered more accidental damage, with the armorial panel more severely affected. A large area beside the silver helm has loss of paint and ground, exposing wood and parchment fibres. The gold in the top right corner has been lost and regilded, the silver degraded to black and worn to expose the bole, and those quarters of the shield that should have been red with the lions of the English coat of arms have lost most of the painted design.
The original appearance of the diptych has however been affected by changes that have taken place in some of the pigments, most seriously in the reds. For example, several areas containing red lake pigments have faded. This applies particularly to Saint Edward’s robe where lines of a brownish‐red glaze survive in the shadows and folds, in both outer and inner garments (fig. 16). The robes now appear merely off‐white, but originally must have been warmer pinkish colours which have faded almost entirely. The pink roses in the angels’ chaplets would originally have been more strongly coloured, emphasising the contrast between alternating red and white flowers. Yellow lake pigments have faded, and, where they are used in mixed green, this affects the present colour of the paint layer resulting in a blueish appearance. In addition to the fading of yellow lakes, orpiment has lost colour in the upper portions of the paint stratigraphy, changing to form white arsenic trioxide.
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00018.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Photomicrograph of Edward’s robe showing faded red lake. © The National Gallery, London
The vermilion paint on Richard’s robe where not protected by a red lake layer, and on the armorial panel, has darkened in patches at its surface.25 The ultramarine, particularly in dark areas, shows some signs of deterioration, making the surface look lighter than originally intended.
Ownership, the Heraldry and its Significance for the Date
The diptych was almost certainly commissioned by Richard II for his personal use, as signalled by the heraldic devices on the exterior, and this is now generally accepted (although see also below).
Uppermost when the diptych is closed is the white hart, gorged (with a crown around its neck) and chained, signalling ownership:26 the white hart was one of Richard’s badges,27 which he may have adopted partly because of the implicit pun on his own name – most evident in its spelling in French, ‘Richart’.28 He first publicly distributed the white hart with a crown and gold chain as a badge at a tournament in Smithfield in 1390.29 The hart lies among various flowers and foliage which include rosemary and ferns (see fig. 12 and fig. 13, above), both of which were badges of Richard’s first wife, Anne of Bohemia (died 7 June 1394).30 It is possible that some of the flowers are mourons (pimpernels), used as a badge by his second wife, Isabelle (1389–1409), and rosemary is also associated with her (see below).31 The irises above the horizon, now barely visible (see Painting Technique), similarly refer to Isabelle.32
The shield on the armorial panel is also personal to Richard since it shows the royal arms of England impaled with the fictive arms of Edward the Confessor, which Richard II used from around 1395.33 It has been said that it was after the death in 1394 of his first wife, Anne, that Richard turned his devotion to the Confessor, having the royal arms impaled with the saint’s arms in the way a husband impaled his arms with those of his wife.34
Richard (fig. 17) wears a reddish‐orange and gold houppelande (long‐sleeved gown) with gold fringes, lined with white fur which is visible along the sleeves and hem. The textile is patterned with harts, gorged and chained, lying among sprigs of rosemary and encircled by pairs of broomcods (pods of the broom plant) (see fig. 11, above) interspersed with eagles.35 Richard’s gown would originally have appeared more sumptuous and three‐dimensional, since the folds of drapery were defined with glazes which are now barely visible (see Painting Technique). No such garment is documented in Richard’s wardrobe.36 His gown has been likened to the robes designed by Thomas Lytlington (for whom see below), worn by twenty ladies at a tournament in January 1396 (modern 1397): the robes were made of red tartaryn (a type of silk) stamped with harts of silver gorged with gold crowns and with gold chains, lying among broom plants.37
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00019.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
NG4451, detail of Richard II. © The National Gallery, London
At his breast the king wears a jewel of a white hart (fig. 18) gorged and chained, on a green background, with pearls decorating its antlers. The hart is intended to appear as if made of émail en ronde bosse (opaque white enamel fused over gold), and must have looked something like the Dunstable Swan Jewel in the British Museum, London (fig. 19).38
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00020.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Photomicrograph of the white hart jewel worn by Richard. © The National Gallery, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00021.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
The Dunstable Swan Jewel, about 1400. Gold with white and black enamel, 3.2 × 2.5 cm. London, The British Museum, 1966.0703.1. © The Trustees of the British Museum
The white hart jewel may well derive from an actual brooch, since it closely resembles one given to Richard by his second wife, Isabelle, which was itemised in the 1398/9 inventory of Richard’s treasure as a hart of gold lying on a green terrace, with almost the same number of pearls in its antlers as the 13 on Richard’s brooch: Item, un cerf d’or gisant sur un vert terrage de esmeraudez, ove iiij balaces, iiij saphirs, xviij perlez entour le terrage et sur lez corns xiiij perlez, du donn la roigne, pois’ de Troie x unc’ et vaut outre C li., dont la somme, Cxiij li. vj s. viij d. (Item, a hart of gold lying on a green terrace of emeralds, with 4 balas rubies, 4 sapphires, 18 pearls around the terrace, and on the antlers 14 pearls, given by the queen, Troy weight 10 ounces, additional value £100, total £113 6s. 8d.)39 Around his neck Richard wears a collar formed of pairs of broomcods linked by white flowers in raised lead white paint with centres of black raised pigment (fig. 20). The collar is fastened with a square brooch decorated with pearls and with a blue stone at the centre from which hang two more broomcods. The pods are stippled or pounced (poinçonnés) with clusters of rosettes intended to represent seeds.
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00022.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Photomicrograph of Richard’s broomcod collar. © The National Gallery, London
It used to be thought, presumably due to Richard’s boyish appearance, that the diptych dated from early in his reign.40 However, the portrait of Richard (see fig. 28 and fig. 29, below) was inserted at a relatively late stage of painting (see Painting Technique and below) and the impaling of the royal arms with those of Edward the Confessor suggests a date for the diptych closer to or after 1395 (see above). This is substantiated by the device of the broomcod collar which suggests a date from 1395 or 1396, probably 1397 or 1398, connected with Richard’s marriage in 1396 to Isabelle, the eldest surviving daughter of the French king, Charles VI.41 The broomcod (French cosse de genêt) was from 1387 the emblem or device of Charles VI (fig. 21): a rare surviving gold broomcod jewel with pearls as the seeds (Barcelona, Capitol de la Catedral, fig. 22) is thought to have been given by Charles VI to John I of Aragon around 1389.42
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00023.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Charles VI being Presented with a Work by Christine de Pisan, about 1405–10. Manuscript illumination. London, British Library, Harley MS 4431, f. 178. © The British Library, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00024.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Broomcod Jewel, about 1389. Gold(?) with pearls, 6.2 × 2.2 cm. Barcelona, Capitol de la Catedral.
The first documented example of Richard’s combining his own livery with that of the French king in this way is on 27 October 1396, the first day of their four‐day meeting at Ardres (near Calais) to conclude the truce in the Hundred Years’ War between England and France, when Charles formally handed Isabelle over to Richard.43 Both kings wore a red velvet gown and a collar of the livery of the French king (that is, a broomcod collar), and a white hart on the arm, looking much as Richard does in the Wilton Diptych, although both kings also wore (black?) hats hung with pearls.44 Among the many gifts that Charles gave Richard was a gold collar of broomcods identical to one he had commissioned for himself, although from the description of that collar it is clear that it was not the same as the one worn by Richard in the Wilton Diptych.45
Richard was entitled to wear the broomcod as his own livery by virtue of his marriage to Isabelle.46 Although the English kings did not use the surname Plantagenet during the fourteenth century, some authors are of the view that Richard may have adopted the broomcod device because of the implicit pun in French (plant à genêt).47 Laurent Hablot sees it primarily as a sign of the ‘entente cordiale’ between England and France in 1396.48 Livery collars were often worn as a sign of friendship and allegiance.49 However, although personal relations between Richard and Charles were mutually friendly, as evidenced by their behaviour towards each other at Ardres, it should also be noted that, following the example of Edward III, Richard styled himself as ‘by the grace of God King of England and King of France’, as did subsequent English kings.50 Henry IV, who had no immediate connection to the French royal family, wore the livery of the kings of France (a broomcod collar) in the procession on the eve of his coronation in 1399, and English kings continued to commission works with the broomcod device.51 Whether this was to perpetuate their claim to the French throne, or to legitimise their succession to the English throne, is a moot point.
Shelagh Mitchell suggested that the collar in the Wilton Diptych may be the one described as being the livery of the king of France which was made by the goldsmith Drew Barantyn (died 1415), for which he was paid £40 on 11 June 1398.52 It was argued by Dillian Gordon that the flowers linking the pods in Richard’s collar in the diptych may represent mourons, the badge of Isabelle (and of her mother):53 similar flowers occur in collars worn by Charles VI; see for example fig. 23, which has a jewel like that in Barcelona (see fig. 22, above), and some have pendant broomcods (for example, fig. 21, above, and Geneva, Bibliothèque publique et universitaire MS fr. 165, f. 7).54
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00025.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Charles VI with Pierre Salmon, detail, about 1412–15. Manuscript illumination. Geneva, Bibliothèque de Genève, MS fr. 165, f. 4r. © Bibliothèque de Genève
In the diptych the angels wear badges of white harts, gorged and chained, which are simpler than the one worn by the king, but also on a green background, and simpler broomcod collars with pendant pods (fig. 24 and fig. 14, above); the seeds are depicted using a thick mordant for the gilding under the green glaze. From the antlers visible at the shoulder of the foremost kneeling angel it is clear that the harts were intended to appear three‐dimensional.
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00026.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Photomicrograph of the broomcod collar on the angel holding the standard, showing green glaze. © The National Gallery, London
The numerous examples of objects combining the broomcod and white hart in the context of Richard’s court probably date from 1396 onwards.55
The Portrait of Richard
Richard II (fig. 25) was said to be of great beauty: ‘the fairest of men [‘pulcherrimus’], like a second Absalom’; the poet John Gower, writing at the beginning of his reign, called him ‘the most beautiful of kings’ and ‘the flower of boys’.56 In the diptych the profile portrait shows him as a youth with reddish‐golden wavy hair, blue eyes, a long nose and small chin. As discussed above, the heraldry indicates that the painting dates from after 1395 or 1396, probably around 1397–8, by which time Richard was at least 30 years old. It has been argued that by then he was bearded, possibly soon after 1386 and certainly from at least 1388–9, as depicted in various manuscripts57 (which may or may not be reliable), as well as in the portrait of Richard II Enthroned (fig. 26) now in Westminster Abbey, dating possibly from around 1395, where he is also shown comparatively young and appears to have a small forked beard.58 His appearance at the likely date for the diptych is known from the double tomb in Westminster Abbey, showing Richard with Anne of Bohemia, since the contract of 24 April 1395 with the coppersmiths specifies that the king is to be portrayed according to a ‘patron’ (pattern) in the likeness of the king, and this particular pattern must have been personally approved by Richard.59 The tomb effigy (fig. 7) is of a mature man, with a forked beard and a moustache, very different from the fresh‐faced beardless boy in the diptych, although still with the wavy hair, distinctively long sharp nose and arched brow.60
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00027.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
NG4451, detail of Richard II. © The National Gallery, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00028.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Richard II Enthroned, about 1395. Oil(?) on panel, 213.5 × 110 cm. London, Westminster Abbey. © The Dean and Chapter of Westminster, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00029.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Detail of Richard’s tomb effigy, commissioned 1395. Gilt‐latten. London, Westminster Abbey. © The Dean and Chapter of Westminster, London
Different solutions have been proposed to explain this anomaly. It has been argued that the idealisation was in order to minimise the difference in age between Richard and his child bride, Isabelle, who was not quite seven years old when they married.61 Rulers were often represented younger than they were,62 and it has similarly been suggested that the purpose was to flatter the king.63 Several writers have proposed that the intention was to show Richard as he looked when he was crowned, in his eleventh year.64
It was discovered in 1993 that an area was reserved for Richard’s hair and profile and that they were inserted at a relatively late stage in the execution of the painting (fig. 28 and fig. 29, and see Painting Technique).65 Since the portrait seems not to have been true to the king’s appearance at the time, it is possible that the artist was waiting to be given a pattern, in this instance one showing the king as a young boy, possibly as he looked when he acceded to the throne and, more importantly, when he was crowned.
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00030.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Photomicrograph of Richard’s face. © The National Gallery, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00031.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Infrared reflectogram detail from the Richard panel showing Richard’s head. © The National Gallery, London
Throughout his life Richard was overtly conscious of his extreme youth at his accession.66 He referred to it at the opening of the Revenge Parliament of 1397 when he declared that he had restored the crown of his youth that had been denied him by the Appellants in the Merciless Parliament of 1388.67 In his will, drawn up on 16 April 1399, he again referred to his youth when he was crowned.68 Thus the perhaps deliberate decision to show Richard in the Wilton Diptych as he looked at his coronation suggests one of the central preoccupations of the diptych, namely his own kingship.
The crown Richard is wearing in the diptych seems to be deliberately old‐fashioned. It is very different from the type of crown worn by Richard in, for example, the portrait in the stained glass window of about 1393 in Winchester Cathedral,69 or in the Westminster Abbey portrait of about 1395 (fig. 26, above). Both the latter have high fleurons, as was the fashion towards the late fourteenth century, for example in the crown thought to have belonged to Anne of Bohemia (fig. 30).70 Thus the crown in the diptych may be intended to refer to his actual coronation as opposed to simply denoting kingship.71 A further reference to Richard’s coronation may be in the Christ Child’s gold clothing (see below).
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00032.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Crown thought to have belonged to Anne of Bohemia, about 1370–80. Gold set with sapphires, rubies, diamonds and pearls, and decorated with enamel, H. 18 cm. Munich, Residenz, Schatzkammer. © Bayerische Schloesserverwaltung
The Resemblance of the Composition to the Adoration of the Magi
The composition of the Wilton Diptych, with one king kneeling before the Virgin and Child while two kings stand behind, has inevitably been associated with the iconography of the Adoration of the Magi.72
The feast of the Epiphany or Adoration of the Magi had a special place in the liturgical life of all European medieval royal courts, and it was not uncommon for a royal or aristocratic patron to be identified with one of the Magi.73 Matthew Brown sees Richard II as continuing the association of the Plantagenets with the ‘notion of a Magi‐styled sacral kingship’ promoted by Edward III in the wall paintings of St Stephen’s chapel at Westminster.74 Richard’s own preoccupation with the Epiphany is suggested by the fact that in about 1395 he paid for the enlarging of the crown of one of the kings in the Adoration of the Magi in that chapel.75 The significance of the Epiphany for Richard was almost certainly reinforced not only by the fact that his birthday was on 6 January, the feast of the Epiphany, but also by the fact that, according to a contemporary chronicle, when he was born in Bordeaux three kings were present – the kings of Spain, Navarre and Portugal – who brought him gifts in the manner of the three Magi.76
Saints John the Baptist, Edward the Confessor and Edmund and their Significance
Saint John the Baptist
John the Baptist (fig. 31) is here as Richard’s patron saint and intercessor. Just as Mary carries the Christ Child in her arms, so John the Baptist carries the Lamb of God, symbol of Christ himself. When Saint John baptised Christ, he described him as ‘the Lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the world’ (John 1: 29).
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00033.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
NG4451, detail of John the Baptist. © The National Gallery, London
There are numerous examples of Richard’s devotion to the Baptist.77 It is probably to be explained by his birthdate of 6 January, since according to popular devotional texts such as the Golden Legend (Legenda Aurea) written in the thirteenth century by the Dominican friar Jacopo da Voragine and the Meditations on the Life of Christ (Meditationes Vitae Christi) written in the fourteenth century, four miracles took place on 6 January, of which the Epiphany and the Baptism of Christ were two.78 The presence of John the Baptist has also been linked to Richard’s accession on 22 June, just before the 24 June, the feast of John the Baptist.79
Richard invoked John the Baptist in the epitaph on his tomb in Westminster Abbey: ‘… O Clemens Christe – cui devotus fuit iste, Votis Baptiste salves quem pretulit iste …’ (‘O merciful Christ – to whom he [Richard] was devoted, may you save him through the prayers of the Baptist whom he [Richard] venerated [literally “preferred”]’).80 His will also begins by invoking the Trinity, and then the Virgin, followed by Saint John the Baptist and Edward the Confessor, and the whole court of heaven.81
Saint Edward the Confessor
Edward the Confessor (fig. 32), the son of Ethelred the Unready, was king of England from 1042 to 1066 (canonised in 1161), and died on 5 January (the eve of Richard’s birthdate). In the diptych, Edward is wearing an ermine‐lined cloak which was originally pink over a darker red gown (see Painting Technique and fig. 16, above), and a blue robe beneath, just visible at the wrists; he holds a ring with a blue stone. The ring refers to the legend in which Edward gave a ring to a poor pilgrim who was revealed to be Saint John the Evangelist.82 It may also represent the ring said to have belonged to Edward the Confessor, which was described in an inventory of Westminster Abbey taken in 1388 as adorned with one sapphire and eight red stones, in the custody of the abbot.83
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00034.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
NG4451, detail of Edward the Confessor. © The National Gallery, London
Edward’s cult, which had been fostered by Henry III (died 1272),84 was taken up with fervour by Richard. It was manifested in his patronage of Westminster Abbey, which housed Edward’s shrine, and in his impaling of the royal arms with those of the Confessor (see above).85
Katherine Lewis has explored Richard’s devotion to Edward as that of a matter of political expediency, related to the saint’s status as a virgin and childless king (see also below).86 It has been argued that Richard’s devotion to the cult of Saint Edward was not only on account of the saint’s relevance to the coronation, but also of his being one of Richard’s forebears – demonstrating dynastic legitimacy – and a patron saint of England; Richard’s devotion signified his espousal of the cause of peace, and Jonathan Good has suggested that Richard’s idea of peace meant not only peace with France but also, within his own kingdom, obtaining submission to royal authority.87
Saint Edmund, King and Martyr
Edmund (died 869) (fig. 33), the last ruler of East Anglia, was martyred when defeated by the Danes for refusing to deny the Christian faith. He is traditionally said to have been killed with arrows. He was buried in Norfolk, and around 915 his body was transferred to the Benedictine monastery later called Bury St Edmunds. In 1095 his body was moved again to a new church and in 1198 re‐enshrined. The shrine became a focus for pilgrims and a cult grew up around it.88 Richard visited Edmund’s shrine at Bury St Edmunds in 1383.89
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00035.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
NG4451, detail of Saint Edmund. © The National Gallery, London
Edmund is wearing a green ermine‐lined cloak over a blue and gold houppelande patterned with paired birds, and under that a blue‐sleeved robe, and red hose. The birds in the pattern were identified by John Harvey as demoiselle cranes (Anthropoides virgo/Grus virgo) in reference to the Virgin.90 Lisa Monnas has suggested that the pattern with fanning rays of the birds’ tails is reminiscent of Lucchese silks, and that it was probably based on an actual fabric by the weaver from Lucca documented in Richard’s employ.91 The birds are linked not by simple rings as commonly found in such fabrics, but by crowns. Not only do these reinforce the theme of kingship, but they may also refer to Saint Edmund’s fictive arms of triple crowns.92
It was recognised only in 2015 that each crown is linked by a vertical gold line to a sun above a tiny pink cloud (fig. 34). The sun rising from clouds was another of Richard’s badges.93 The gold suns rendered in sgraffito and the clouds in paint correspond with descriptions of several of Richard’s garments ordered between 1383 and 1386 in which suns embroidered with Cyprus gold were emerging from clouds embroidered with Cyprus silver and silk.94 These motifs therefore clearly identify Saint Edmund with King Richard.95
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00036.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Photomicrograph of Edmund’s robe showing Richard’s badge of the sun rising from clouds. © The National Gallery, London
From the reign of Henry III onward, saints Edward, Edmund and George were associated with royal and popular devotion.96 Both Edward the Confessor and Edmund were considered as patron saints of England, and particularly patron saints of English kings, until eventually superseded nationally by Saint George.97 Richard’s devotion to Edward and Edmund was presumably well known, since in 1398 Philip the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, sent him a New Year’s gift (étrenne) of a gold image of Saint Edward the Confessor, while Charles VI gave him a matching image of Saint Edmund.98 Richard gave Westminster Abbey three vexilla depicting Saint Edward, Saint Edmund and a third with the arms of the Holy Roman Emperor.99 Richard also gave to the Abbey a chasuble with orphreys depicting the same saints, with the Virgin, as in the diptych,100 and Francis Wormald pointed out in 1954 that the three saints in the diptych are in the same order as their chapels in Westminster Abbey.101
Lewis sees the inclusion of the three saints, who were by the late fourteenth century explicitly understood and described as virgins, as publicly vindicating the childlessness of Richard’s sacred kingship.102 However, most writers see the saints as symbolising Richard’s right to the throne.103 Sumner Ferris interpreted the three saints as portraits of Richard’s ancestors, including the Baptist as a portrait of the Black Prince, representing the progress of Richard towards the throne culminating in his accession (in his eleventh year, hence eleven angels), and symbolised by four steps in the rocks on the right edge of the Richard panel; he saw the diptych as a visual representation of the principles of an absolutist theory of monarchy.104 John Theilmann sees the diptych as a ‘sacerdotal image of kingship’, with Richard shown as one of a line of saintly monarchs as part of an attempt at establishing his political legitimacy.105
Similarly it was argued by Alfred Wyon that Henry IV included saints Edward the Confessor and Edmund in his new seal in 1408 in order to demonstrate his own right to the throne.106
Although the royal saints stand on the earth, presenting Richard, the blue of Edmund’s gown and the blue of the robes visible at the wrist beneath the gowns of both Edmund and Edward identifies them with the Virgin and angels dressed in blue in heaven in the adjoining panel.107
The Virgin and Child
The Virgin Mary (fig. 35) stands with her Child in a meadow denoting heaven, among strewn flowers, the majority of which are roses and violets (fig. 36 and fig. 37), symbols of the Virgin.108 The angels wear Richard’s livery badges as his supporters,109 but their garments are of blue like those of the Virgin. They have chaplets of roses in their hair (fig. 38), and their folded arms are courtly gestures of reverence and of humility,110 thus also demonstrating their loyalty to the Virgin.
Mary wears her traditional blue gown and cloak, but the clothing of the half‐naked Child (fig. 39 and fig. 9, above) is unusual: such a pure gold textile almost certainly did not exist, but has a symbolic function underlining both the majesty and the divinity of Christ.111 Furthermore, the use of a gold cloth for the King of Heaven may also refer to part of the ritual of Richard’s coronation, when he was stripped of his clothing ‘… and a golden covering [‘pannus aureus’] was brought by the earls under which the king concealed himself while he received the sacrament of the anointing’.112
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00037.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
NG4451, detail of the Virgin. © The National Gallery, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00038.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Photomicrograph of the foreground of the Virgin panel showing a cut rose. © The National Gallery, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00039.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Photomicrograph of the foreground of the Virgin panel showing a violet. © The National Gallery, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00040.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Photomicrograph of one of the angels’ garlands. © The National Gallery, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00041.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Detail of NG4451, the clothing of the half‐naked Child. © The National Gallery, London
The three nails and crown of thorns (fig. 40 and fig. 8, above) stippled within Christ’s halo refer to Christ’s Passion,113 which is also referenced by the white pennon charged with a red cross, the banner of the Resurrection (see below), while the Virgin displays the sole of the Child’s foot which at the Crucifixion will be pierced by a nail.114
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00042.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Detail of NG4451, the three nails and crown of thorns. © The National Gallery, London
The Child’s gesture is ambiguous. Although it clearly involves blessing the king, it is unclear whether he is also about to grasp the staff of the pennon, possibly in order to return it to Richard (see The Commissioning of the Diptych and the Relationship between the Two Panels, below), indicated by the fact that four of the angels gesture towards the king. Eleanor Scheifele sees Christ’s foot as presented to Richard to be ceremonially kissed in feudal fashion.115 Several writers have noted the identification of Richard with Christ.116
Whether the pose of the Virgin in the diptych is intended to evoke a particular image is an open question. Alfred Thomas sees the resemblance to the type of Bohemian sculpture exemplified by the so‐called Krumlov Madonna (Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum) as alluding to Anne of Bohemia (see below and fig. 53).117 Gervase Rosser suggested that the Wilton Diptych might be a votive painting to a miraculous statue of the Virgin (either in St Stephen’s College or in Westminster Abbey).118 A jewelled gold statue of the Virgin bequeathed by Henry III to his son was kept in the king’s private oratory of St Mary le Pew (sometimes called Our Lady of Pity) next to St Stephen’s chapel (not to be confused with the chapel of St Mary de la Pew/Our Lady of the Pew in Westminster Abbey). According to Elizabeth Biggs the cult image of the Virgin is first referred to in 1356 when pilgrims were given permission to enter the oratory via Westminster Hall to pray before it.119 It is not known whether it was among the jewellery and ornaments stolen from the chapel in 1393 (and thus replaced or returned, since a statue there was destroyed by fire in 1452).120
Another possibility is that the Virgin in the Wilton Diptych was based on a (probably French) statue of the Virgin and Child itemised in Richard’s treasure in 1398/9, since it was surrounded by the same number of angels as in the diptych: Item, j image de Nostre Dame et son fitz et iij branches d’or contenant Cvj perles et la dit image contient iiij balays et entour la dit image xj angels et la pee de la dit image d’argent dorrez ove tourrettz enbattellez, pois’ x li. iij unc’,It j li. d’or par estimacion, et vaut outre xx I dont la somme, lj li. vijs. vjd. (Item, an image of Our Lady and her son and 3 gold branches bearing 106 pearls and the said image contains 4 balas rubies and around the said image [are] 11 angels, and the foot of the said image [is] silver gilt with turrets with battlements, weight 10 lbs, 3 ounces, of which 1 lb estimated of gold, and worth an additional £20, total £51 7s. 6d.)121 The reverse is of course also possible – that the jewel was based on the Wilton Diptych – although this seems unlikely.
The Eleven Angels
Numerous theories have been proposed as to why there are eleven angels in the Wilton Diptych. One possible reason is the statue of the Virgin itemised in Richard’s treasure in 1398/9, mentioned above. Before the discovery of the inventory of the treasure, those writers who considered that Richard is portrayed at the age when he became king tended to be those who considered the eleven angels to refer to the fact that Richard was in his eleventh year when he acceded to the throne.122 Other suggestions include, for example, that of Eleanor Scheifele who has pointed out that in 1397 Richard elevated eleven nobles.123 It has also been suggested that the angels refer to the eleven disciples after Christ’s Resurrection.124 Germ suggests that the number refers to Joseph’s dream that the sun, the moon and eleven stars were bowing down to him (Genesis 37: 9), that medieval exegesis saw the sun as Christ, the moon as the Virgin, the stars as the apostles (minus Judas), and Joseph as the twelfth star, and that by analogy Richard is here the twelfth star.125
The Swallow‐Tailed Pennon and the Orb
One of the angels holds a swallow‐tailed white pennon charged with a red cross (fig. 41). It was argued by Gordon that the pennon has a dual function and that it represents both the banner of Christ and of Saint George, and this is accepted by some writers.126
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00043.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Detail of NG4451, the angel holding a swallow‐tailed white pennon charged with a red cross. © The National Gallery, London
The pennon in the diptych would have been recognised as referring to Christ’s Passion, since such a flag is often carried by Christ in scenes of the Resurrection (see, for example, fig. 42). This is reinforced by the symbols of Christ’s Passion stippled within his halo and the display of the sole of Christ’s foot (see above). Resurrection banners carried by Christ are often surmounted by a cross, and in fact the top of the pennon in the Wilton Diptych was originally stippled with a cross as part of the initial stages of execution.
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00044.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Ugolino di Nerio, The Resurrection, possibly 1325–8. Egg tempera on wood, 41.5 × 58.1 cm. London, The National Gallery, NG4191. © The National Gallery, London
However, in 1991, during cleaning of the diptych, it was discovered that painted over the cross is a small orb (fig. 43 and fig. 44), 1 cm in diameter, depicting a green landscape on which stands a white castle with two turrets and black windows, and trees on the horizon; below is a sea of silver leaf with a boat in full sail, and above is blue sky. Before the silver leaf became tarnished this would originally have been more visible than it is today.
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00045.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Photomicrograph of the orb at the top of the pennon on the Virgin panel, painted over a cross stippled into the gold background. © The National Gallery, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00046.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Infrared reflectogram detail of the orb at the top of the pennon on the Virgin panel, painted over a cross stippled into the gold background. © The National Gallery, London
It was argued by Gordon on the basis of a lost altarpiece in Rome that the landscape
depicts an island, symbolising England as the Dowry of the Virgin.127 The concept of England as the Virgin’s dowry was current from at least 1362 when
a Franciscan friar, John Lathbury (died 1362), not only described England in this
way, but also linked that concept with the well‐known pun on Angles and angels:
Dicitur enim vulgariter quod terra
Anglie est dos Marie, unde
Anglici quasi angelici
(It is even commonly said that the land
of England is Mary’s dowry, whence
Angles [are] as angels).128
In this context the red‐haired angels are presumably meant to be English.129
Most scholars see the pennon as that of Saint George. Before discovery of the painting within the orb, Ferris interpreted the pennon as that of the saint, associated with the Order of the Garter and the monarchs of England, and the orb as representing sovereignty; in his view Richard is about to receive the pennon as a symbol of his kingdom, presented by God and the Virgin as her dowry.130 In his study of the cult of Saint George in medieval England and the importance of that saint for the English kings, Jonathan Good cites a contemporary description of the banner of Saint George during the reign of Richard II as being ‘the king’s banner’, connected with the authority of the monarch, and although Good notes that the banner was normally a square standard, and that a forked banner surmounted by a cross is normally associated with Christ of the Resurrection (see above), he concludes that in the case of the Wilton Diptych the presence of the orb representing the island of Britain makes the pennon a symbol of royal authority.131
However, the interpretation of the orb as a symbol of England has been disputed. Lukas Madersbacher sees it as the type of orb held by Christ, symbolising the world, which was relatively commonly depicted during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries.132 For example, the sinopia for the wall paintings by Simone Martini (died 1344) in Notre Dame des Doms, Avignon, shows the blessing Christ holding an orb with sea, land and sky, linked in this case to the inscription ‘EGO SUM LUX MUNDI’ (‘I am the light of the world’).133 Closer to home, the Westminster Retable, completed probably by 1269 for the high altar of Westminster Abbey, shows the standing Christ holding an orb with a boat on the sea, landscape with trees and animals, and sky with birds and clouds (fig. 45 and fig. 46).134 In the case of the Wilton Diptych Madersbacher sees the pennon and orb as symbolising Christ’s Resurrection and the triumph of the regnum Christi (the reign of Christ), the boat as symbolising Christianity on this earth, and the castle as the refuge offered by Christ, all underlined by the arma Christi (the crown of thorns and nails in Christ’s halo).135 However, such an interpretation seems not to take account of the secular and political context, suggested by the presence of saints Edward the Confessor and Edmund, and their possible significance (for which see above).
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00047.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
The Westminster Retable, about 1269. Linseed oil on oak, 95.9 × 33 cm. London, Westminster Abbey. © The Dean and Chapter of Westminster, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00048.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Detail of the orb held by Christ in the Westminster Retable. London, Westminster Abbey. © The Dean and Chapter of Westminster, London
In Shakespeare’s Richard II (II. 1. 45–6), John of Gaunt, in a famous speech, describes England as ‘this little world … set in a silver sea’.136 Whether this is a coincidence or not is impossible to tell, but it is close to the image of the little world in the orb at the top of the pennon.137
How and Where the Wilton Diptych was Used
Richard led an extremely peripatetic existence,138 and the diptych was clearly designed to be portable. The relatively good condition of the outer panel with the white hart indicates that for much of the time the diptych must have been kept in a case, presumably one of cuir bouilli (boiled leather), probably decorated with Richard’s personal arms.139 As noted by Monnas, the diptych could have been used in any one of Richard’s various palaces, such as those at Sheen, King’s Langley and Eltham, all of which would have been equipped with private oratories (‘closets’) and domestic chapels for the king and queen; some of these chapels had an oratory set high into the wall, overlooking the main chapel.140 Pamela Tudor‐Craig argued that all the palace chapels were already furnished with altarpieces by the time the diptych was painted and that it was specifically commissioned to take to Ireland.141
The centre of Richard’s kingdom was Westminster.142 Within the palace complex of Westminster, St Stephen’s College played a crucial role. Elizabeth Biggs noted that the king attended services in the chapel there on feast days, and on other days heard Mass in the adjoining private oratory of St Mary le Pew with his personal chaplain.143 Martin Conway argued that the diptych was for use specifically in this chapel.144 The oratory of St Mary le Pew is not to be confused with the chapel of St Mary de la Pew (also known as Our Lady of the Pew) within Westminster Abbey (see above), which is another possible temporary location for Richard’s devotions: in this chapel a white hart is painted on the altar wall, and the royal arms and those of Edward the Confessor are placed at the entrance;145 the chapel had a squint through which Richard could have observed services taking place in the adjacent chapel of Saint John the Baptist.146
The Commissioning of the Diptych and the Relationship between the Two Panels
Some scholars have argued that the diptych was commissioned by someone other than Richard II himself. Some thought it to be a memorial picture commissioned after his death,147 and that its patron might, for example, have been Henry V, who had Richard’s body transferred from King’s Langley to Westminster Abbey in 1413.148 This is based on an interpretation of the imagery as representing Richard’s reception into heaven and/or on the style being thought to be comparable with fifteenth‐century manuscript illuminations. However, the miniature scale of the diptych, and its portable and private nature, make it inherently unlikely to have been a memorial picture.
Another theory proposed that the diptych was produced by a secret society or confraternity dedicated to maintaining Richard on the throne.149 But a lack of evidence for the existence of any such society makes this idea equally doubtful.
Other writers have also seen the diptych as having been commissioned by someone other than Richard. It has been suggested that the diptych could have been commissioned by Richard’s half‐sister, the Countess of St Pol (died 1392),150 by Anne of Bohemia (neither is compatible with the likely date of the diptych) or Isabelle of France (who would have been a mere child at the time it was completed),151 or made as a gift for Isabelle from Richard.152 However, much of the symbolism featured in the diptych would have been superfluous to such a purpose. It has also been suggested that the diptych was commissioned by Jean, Duke of Berry as a presentation gift for Richard.153 Yet the collective meaning of the diptych is so personal to Richard that it probably could only have been devised at the English court.
The interaction between the two wings is ambiguous and there have been different interpretations regarding the purpose and theme of the diptych.154 Several authors have connected it with the crusades, based on an illuminated manuscript written in 1395 entitled the Epître au Roi Richart (London, British Library, Royal 20 B VI, f.1v) which shows the crowns of Charles, King of France and Richard, King of England linked by the crown of thorns with drops of blood, and above the crowns the fleurs‐de‐lis of France and the leopards of England. Written by the Celestin monk Philippe de Mézières, it proposed the foundation of an order of knighthood to be called the Order of the Passion, and argued the case for Richard’s marriage to the daughter of Charles VI which would create a lasting peace between England and France, enabling the two kings to undertake a crusade to the Holy Land.155 A second manuscript, La sustance de la chevalerie de la passion de Iehsu Crist en François (Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Ashmole 813), also written in 1395 by Philippe de Mézières, described the purposes of the order, the offices of the members, the regulations, the habit to be worn and the arms, accompanied by illuminations.156 However, in the diptych Richard is not shown in the robes of the order, and the pennon is very different from that of the order; the theory of the diptych linked to a crusade is not generally accepted.157
The consensus of opinion is that Richard II commissioned the diptych for his personal use and that it embodies his own exalted ideas of his sacral kingship, fusing secular and religious symbolism.158 The Virgin, the Christ Child, the two royal saints, the eleven angels and the symbolism of the orb and pennon have all been linked in various ways to his particular kingship, as discussed individually above.159
There is an obvious emphasis on crowns: apart from those worn by the three kings, crowns link the birds on the houppelande of Saint Edmund, and the earthly crowns invite comparison with the crown of thorns in the halo of the Christ Child, King of Heaven (see fig. 8 and fig. 40, above). Martin Conway saw the diptych as specifically commemorating the coronation.160 John Theilmann described it as a ‘sacerdotal image of kingship’.161
Most authors consider Richard’s gesture to be one of reception, his hands open to receive the pennon.162 Charles Wood characterised the diptych as ‘an extended meditation on kingship’, with the banner of Saint George representing sovereignty which an angel will pass to Richard as a sign that his power is a divine gift.163 According to Ferris Richard is about to take the banner and kiss the Child’s foot; the Child has given the pennon to the angel and is about to bless the king; he saw the diptych as expressing ‘the principles of the absolutist theory of monarchy’.164
Nigel Morgan emphasised the Child blessing the pennon as key to the meaning of the diptych, with the orb symbolising England as the dowry of the Virgin and divine blessing being given to Richard for his authority as king,165 although Christopher Wilson argued that the Child cannot be blessing the pennon since it is not within his sightline.166
Ruth Wilkins Sullivan saw the gestures as reciprocal: Richard has dedicated himself to the Virgin by presenting her with the banner of Saint George; the Child is about to grasp it in order to return it as a sign of Richard’s sovereignty over England; he will kiss the Child’s foot in fealty; Richard, the divinely ordained king, has the support of angels carrying the royal devices of the new Anglo‐French alliance into the realm of heaven.167
With its small scale, minutely exquisite detail and jewel‐like surfaces, the painting would have been for private, possibly solitary, contemplation and devotion. Kneeling in front of the open diptych, Richard would have identified himself as a perpetual supplicant, much as in a private Book of Hours where patrons had before them an image of themselves at prayer as they themselves knelt to pray.168 However, the diptych differed from conventional religious devotional images. With its secular overtones it offered Richard a complex multi‐layered symbol of the nature of his kingship, as well as hope for the salvation of his soul.
Style and Iconography
The Wilton Diptych has been categorised as ‘International Gothic’. This was a style fashionable among the courts of Europe towards the end of the fourteenth century,169 when panel paintings and manuscript illuminations were characterised by a refined elegance which combined an interest in the natural world of plants and animals with minute attention to decorative effects, as exploited in the rendering of rich fabrics, jewels and elaborate architecture. The diffusion of the taste for French paintings, sculpture and metalwork and for Sienese paintings, particularly those of Simone Martini who was painting a generation earlier, promoted in the courts of northern Europe at the end of the fourteenth century, contributed considerably to this approach.170
Some individual details in the diptych are commonly found in works of art connected with northern courts. Gold backgrounds with stippled patterns (see fig. 41, above and fig. 47) are found in contemporary manuscript illuminations,171 but also in panel paintings of the period.172 The stippled modelling of the crowns reflects contemporary metalwork: there were numerous examples of gold objects poinconnés in Richard’s treasure.173 The unruly hair of the angels occurs in French art, for example in The Angel with a Book in the Angers Apocalypse tapestries of 1377–80 designed by Jean Bondol (active about 1368–81), court painter to Charles V.174 This motif may have been circulating in pattern books, as seen in two Bohemian(?) drawings of the head of the Angel of the Annunciation, in Harvard Art Museums (fig. 48) and the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, Kunstkammer.175
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00049.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Detail of NG4451, the gold background in the Richard panel, with stippled patterns. © The National Gallery, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00050.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Head of the Angel of the Annunication, about 1400–10. Black and red inks applied with a brush over black chalk on prepared parchment, 5.1 × 3.6 cm. Harvard Art Museums/Fogg Museum, Alpheus Hyatt Purchasing Fund, 1947.80. Photo © President and Fellows of Harvard College
The motif of the outward‐turned sole of the Child is commonly found in northern European painting and sculpture.176 The concept of placing the crown of thorns and three nails within the Child’s halo (see fig. 40, above) may also be French in origin. A later circular painting of the Lamentation over the Body of Christ (Paris, Louvre), known as the ‘Petite Pietà ronde’ of about 1410–20(?) (fig. 49), has painted on its reverse the crown of thorns around the circumference and the three nails within (fig. 50).177
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00051.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Lamentation over the Body of Christ (‘Petite Pietà ronde’), about 1400–20. Oil (tempera?) on panel, diam. 22.8 cm including frame. Paris, Musée du Louvre, RF 216. Photo © RMN-Grand Palais (Musée du Louvre) / Tony Querrec
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00052.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Crown of Thorns and Three Nails on a Red Background (reverse of fig. 49), about 1400–20. Oil (tempera?) on panel, diam. 22.8 cm including frame. Paris, Musée du Louvre, RF 216. Photo © RMN-Grand Palais (Musée du Louvre) / Tony Querrec
John the Baptist’s camel‐skin garment with the head still attached can be found in England, as in a pilgrim badge, but also in a number of French examples,178 including the camel‐skin worn by John the Baptist in the Parement de Narbonne (Paris, Musée du Louvre); a hoof or hooves are sometimes also shown.179 The camel’s head in the Wilton Diptych is very similar to that in an early fifteenth‐century French embroidery where a hoof is also visible.180
Attribution
No other work by the painter of the Wilton Diptych is known to survive.181
Some of the techniques of the diptych are Italian, such as the use of green underpaint for the flesh tones and a binding medium of egg (fig. 51, and see Painting Technique). There is no surviving Italian painting with which it can be compared and an Italian painter is probably to be ruled out.
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00053.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Detail of NG4451, the head of the angel next to the Virgin where paint losses show green underpaint, and the brushstrokes visible in the head of the Virgin. © The National Gallery, London
If not an Italian, then the question is why the painter should have chosen egg as a medium, since oil was by then commonly used throughout northern Europe.182 It is possible that the painter was closely observing or indeed mimicking an early Italian, presumably Sienese, panel painting. The diptych has long been described as having drawn in various ways on Paris and Siena for its style and iconography,183 and some aspects of the iconography reflect the paintings of Simone Martini and his workshop and followers.184
Although English painting of the fourteenth century has often been said to show Italian influence, the extent of actual Italian paintings to be found in England at the end of the fourteenth century is not known. One documented example is that of an (unfinished) work which belonged to the painter Hugh of St Albans: consisting of six panels, it was described in his will as ‘of Lombardy’ (that is, Italian), possibly one and the same altarpiece costing over £45 which Abbot Thomas of St Albans (1349–1396) gave to the high altar of the Abbey of St Albans, which was also described in a chronicle as ‘Lombard’.185
The close ties between the English and French courts, particularly during and after the negotiations for the marriage between Richard II and Isabelle of France in 1396, have led several scholars to explore the connections between the Wilton Diptych and French manuscript illuminations of the end of the fourteenth century. Richard’s library contained a number of French books of poetry and romance,186 and friendship between the French and English courts led to exchanges of books among other gifts. In 1389 Philip the Bold, Duke of Burgundy gave Richard some illuminated manuscripts, and at the marriage of Richard and Isabelle, Richard received from Charles VI a present of the Belleville Breviary, painted by Jean Pucelle around 1325.187 According to the chronicler Froissart, there were works by André Beauneveu in England,188 while Froissart himself presented an illuminated copy of one of his own works to Richard II.189
A number of scholars have considered the diptych to be French.190 Ursula Ilg attributed it to a manuscript illuminator known as Hand A, possibly identifiable with Jacquemart de Hesdin, in the service of Jean, Duke of Berry; she saw the diptych as a presentation gift commissioned by the duke for Richard as the spouse of his great‐niece, Isabelle, and therefore made in France.191
There is no existing French panel painting with which the diptych can be directly compared. However, Gordon has argued that some details point to a possibly French painter. The overall composition of the Richard panel appears to find its origin in France, where there are several examples of a supplicant being presented by patron saints in the same way (see, for example, the lost textile depicting Charles V and his sons with their patron saints, fig. 52).192
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00054.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Eighteenth‐century watercolour copy of part of a lost late‐fourteenth‐century textile showing Charles V and his sons being presented by saints John the Baptist, Charlemagne and Louis of Toulouse. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, OA 13, f. 17, Gaignières 445. © Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Paris
On the other hand, Alfred Thomas, who views the diptych as reflecting Bohemian ideas and court culture rather than French (that is, the result of the marriage to Anne rather than to Isabelle), draws attention to the depiction of Charles IV of Bohemia being presented to the Virgin and Child by Saint Wenceslas in a similar gesture, in a Bohemian panel painting dating from the 1370s.193
The distinctive stance of the Virgin and Child seems to derive from sculpture rather than manuscript painting,194 and to amalgamate two types. The standing Virgin with her head slightly bent to look at the diagonally presented Child, counter‐balancing the S‐swing of her pose and leaning outwards, may derive from the type of ‘Schöne Madonna’ common in Bohemia, the native land of Richard’s first wife, Anne. The statue known as the Krumlov Madonna (fig. 53) is an outstanding example, and is similar to the Wilton Diptych in the positioning of the Child’s legs (the arms of the Child in the Vienna statue are largely missing).195 However, the simpler drapery folds of the Virgin in the diptych, with their fluent curves dipping across the front of her dress, and with the mantle pulled diagonally across the body and draped over the arm, compare more closely with a type of French sculpture of the Virgin and Child in which the arrangement of the drapery changed minimally between the mid‐thirteenth and mid‐fourteenth centuries (for example, fig. 54).196 Moreover, it is possible that the Virgin was based on the image of the Virgin and Child with eleven angels listed in the inventory of Richard II’s treasure of 1398/9 (see above), which may conceivably have been French: the description of the turrets with battlements suggests something like the reliquary of the Holy Thorn (London, British Museum, The Waddesdon Bequest) made for Jean, Duke of Berry.197
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00055.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Statue of the Virgin and Child from Krumlov, Bohemia (‘The Krumlov Madonna’), about 1390–1400. Soft limestone, H. 112 cm. Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum.
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00056.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
The Virgin and Child, mid‐fourteenth century. Marble. Formerly in the abbey of Longchamps. Paris, Musée de Cluny – Musée national du Moyen Age, Cl. 19254.
It is not impossible that a French painter was suggested to Richard, just as he employed an embroiderer, Stephen Vine, on the recommendation of Jean, Duke of Berry.198 We know, for example, that Charles VI’s court painter, Jean d’Orléans, was involved in the preparation of Isabelle’s trousseau when she married Richard in 1396.199 Gordon has suggested that Philip the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, who acted as chief negotiator for the marriage, could have been involved in recommending a French painter to Richard.200
One question is how the painter of the diptych acquired his (or her) knowledge of Italian technique. At least one French painter familiar with Italian techniques who was active earlier in France was Jean d’Arbois, who is documented as having been brought from northern Italy to work for Philip the Bold: in 1373 the duke sent a coach to fetch Jean from Pavia in Lombardy to come (or to return?) to work for him; by June 1385 he had returned to Pavia.201 While in Paris Jean is likely to have encountered some of the many local painters to whom he could have introduced Italian techniques.202 It can be inferred from the work of Jean’s son, Stefano da Verona, who was born around 1375 and almost certainly trained with his father, that Jean d’Arbois used egg as a medium.203 Similarly, he could have introduced to French painting the type of naturalism which came to typify the work of Lombard painters, such as Michelino da Besozzo (active from 1388) (fig. 55), with whom Jean worked after his return to Italy,204 although the painter of the Wilton Diptych also had a potential model in the white hart which was given to Richard in 1393 and kept at Windsor.205
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00057.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Attributed to Michelino da Besozzo, frontispiece to De Consolazione Philosophiae, about 1390. Manuscript illumination. Cesena, Biblioteca Malatestiana, c D. XIV, 1, f. 66.
The change to the top of the pennon – apparently an afterthought – and the deeply personal nature of the heraldry and iconography suggest that the diptych was painted in England, at Richard’s court. It has been attributed to an English painter,206 but very little English panel painting survives from the Middle Ages, and nothing comparable to the diptych.207
The overall design and execution of the Wilton Diptych points to a single hand, although it is not impossible that a specialist gilder was involved (see Painting Technique).208 It has in the past been proposed that the armorial panel (fig. 56) was painted by a different artist,209 and in fact there are inconsistencies in the painting of the shield in which some, but not all, of the martlets are outlined in black (fig. 57). It was argued by Charles Beard and Francis Henry Cripps‐Day that the armorial panel offered evidence that the diptych must have been painted by an Englishman; Cripps‐Day suggested the unusual tuft in the lion’s tail indicated that it was modelled on the achievement of arms above the tomb of the Black Prince in Canterbury Cathedral.210
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00058.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Detail from NG4451, the shield on the armorial panel. © The National Gallery, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00059.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Photomicrograph of one of the martlets on the armorial panel, showing a partial outline in black. © The National Gallery, London
If another hand was in fact involved in the armorial panel, the likelihood is that it would have been one of Richard’s court painters who specialised in heraldic painting. A number of scholars have attributed the diptych to Gilbert Prince,211 or (more likely) to Thomas Lytlington,212 although nothing by them survives and most of the recorded works are for heraldic ephemera connected with festivals, entertainments and ceremonial occasions such as tournaments, birthdays and funerals. Gilbert Prince died probably in 1396.213 He was succeeded by Thomas Prince (alias Thomas Lytlington), who accompanied Richard to Ireland in 1399 and returned to continue as painter to King Henry IV until at least 1402.214
Provenance
The earliest record of the Wilton Diptych is in the collection of Charles I in 1639 (fig. 58 and fig. 59) when it was catalogued by Abraham van der Doort as having been given to the king by Sir James Palmer, who had it from Lord Jennings; in the margin this was corrected to Lady Jennings, and stated that in exchange she was given a portrait of the king by the Dutch painter Jan Lievens (1607–1674).215 No Lord Jennings was known at the time. The scholar Mrs Reginald Lane Poole plausibly suggested that the original owner was Sir James Palmer’s daughter, Vere, who married Thomas, a son of Sir John Jennings.216 According to Carlo Gambarini the diptych was given by King James II to Lord Castlemaine (that is, Roger Palmer, son of Sir James Palmer) when he went on an embassy to Rome (February 1686 to August 1687); after the death of Lord Castlemaine in 1705 it was bought from his heirs by Thomas Herbert, 8th Earl of Pembroke.217 It remained at Wilton House, from which it takes its name, until it was bought by the National Gallery by special grant with contributions from Samuel Courtauld, Viscount Rothermere, C.F. Stoop and the National Art Collections Fund in 1929.
Engravings
(1) The interior wings were engraved in 1639 by Wenceslaus Hollar (fig. 58 and fig. 59), with a dedication to Charles I and two sets of Latin verses by Henry Peacham.
(2) The armorial panel was engraved in 1724 prefacing an address by Anstis to Thomas Herbert, Earl of Pembroke (see Provenance).218
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00060.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Wenceslaus Hollar, the Wilton Diptych in the Collection of Charles I, 1639. Etching, 24.6 × 13.3 cm (sheet size). London, National Portrait Gallery, purchased, 1867, NPG D17881. © National Portrait Gallery, London
![](/external/online-catalogues/images/NG_2024__NG4451__img__00061.jpg?width=750&height=750&mode=max&upscale=false)
Wenceslaus Hollar, the Wilton Diptych in the Collection of Charles I, 1639. Etching, 24.2 × 13.2 cm (sheet size). London, National Portrait Gallery, purchased, 1867, NPG D17882. © National Portrait Gallery, London
Exhibitions
London 1848 (77); Manchester 1857, provisional catalogue (920), definitive catalogue (42); London 1901–2 (2); London, Olympia 1928 (X13); London 1945–6 (37); London 1993; Oxford 2024.
Notes
I am grateful to Christopher Given‐Wilson and Caroline Campbell for reading a first draft of this catalogue entry.
1 Reflecting the claims of the kings of England to the French throne. See also below. (Back to text.)
2 For the cap of maintenance see St John Hope 1901, pp. lxxxii–lxxxviii. (Back to text.)
3 For a bibliography from 1639 to 1972, see Whittingham 1981, pp. 148–50. The diptych has largely been the focus of analysis by historians and art historians. However, extensive discussion in the context of contemporary literature is given by Barr 2001, by Bowers 2001 in his study of the fourteenth‐century poem Pearl, as well as by Kendall 2008 and Simpson 2019. (Back to text.)
4 Ian Tyers, ‘Tree‐ring Analysis of a Panel Painting: The Wilton Diptych’, January 2023, unpublished report in the National Gallery Scientific Department, scientific dossier for NG4451. (Back to text.)
5 Richard/hart panel: the main board is 24.1 cm wide, the smaller board 12.7 cm wide; Virgin/armorial panel: the smaller board is 10.5 cm wide, the main board 26.3 cm wide. Both small boards are closest to the hinges. (Back to text.)
6 Previously described as possibly reinforcing the join; Gordon et al. 2015, pp. 94–5. (Back to text.)
7 Thanks to Ian Tyers for first suggesting this idea in his dendrochronology report cited in note 4, above. (Back to text.)
9 The fibres beneath the chalk ground were identified by Josephine Darrah, former Senior Scientific Officer, Victoria and Albert Museum, as collagen, and are closest to reference standards of parchment. (Back to text.)
10 Coccoliths (microfossils) were found in the ground by scanning electron microscopy, indicating that the chalk is of natural sedimentary origin. (Back to text.)
11 Infrared reflectography was carried out in 2015 using the digital infrared scanning camera OSIRIS, which contains an indium gallium arsenide (InGaAs) sensor. (Back to text.)
12 ATR‐FTIR analysis of a cross section containing the red bole indicated a proteinaceous medium for this layer by the presence of amide absorption bands at ~ 1640 and 1545 cm ‐1. (Back to text.)
13 For an account of gilding techniques of the period, see Stroo 2012. (Back to text.)
14 Bone black was identified by ATR‐FTIR analysis and confirmed by the presence of calcium and phosphorus in the SEM‐EDX spectra of the black particles. (Back to text.)
15 FTIR analysis, both in transmission mode and by ATR‐FTIR on the cross‐section sample, identified protein in the mordant layer. SEM‐EDX analysis showed that the mordant contained phosphorus, distributed throughout, presumably due to the presence of phosphorus‐containing lipids found in egg yolk. GC‐MS analysis of fragments of mordant detected palmitate and stearate fatty acids with a P/S ratio of 2.9. Only trace quantities of diacids were observed, indicating that no drying oil was present in the sample. These results confirm the earlier analysis published in White and Pilc 1995, which indicated the mordant layer was bound in egg. The mordant layer also contained some largely organic particles which exhibit some fluorescence under ultraviolet light. These particles have not been fully identified, but ATR‐FTIR suggests that a gum‐resin type material may also be present in small quantities. For comparison, a proteinaceous mordant, likely containing egg, has also been identified in a sample of mordant for tin foil applied to an early thirteenth‐century polychromed sculpture of Christ in Majesty at Worcester College Hall. National Gallery Scientific Department, unpublished report, 2023, scientific dossier for NG4451. (Back to text.)
16 Egg tempera was identified in samples as follows: Richard panel: green of Saint Edmund’s cloak; Virgin and Child panel: white edge of an angel’s wing; intense blue of an angel’s robe; dark foliage in the foreground; hart panel: dark foliage in the foreground; armorial panel: red glaze background to the lions on the arms. The binding material for the ultramarine of the shield was published as being animal glue in 1993. The medium results were revisited and correctly published in 1995 as all being egg, including the sample from the blue of the shield; White and Pilc 1995. (Back to text.)
17 Green earth in underpaint layers for the flesh paint was identified microscopically and by EDX analysis. The fine blue‐green pigment particles were shown to contain potassium, aluminium, silicon and iron. No copper was detected in the samples. (Back to text.)
18 The manufactured pigment lead‐tin yellow is known in two distinct varieties termed ‘type I’ and ‘type II’. The pigment identified in the Wilton Diptych is the earlier form, type II, and has an origin in the technology of coloured glass‐making. As well as combined lead and tin oxides, silicon is an essential constituent in this form. Lead‐tin yellow type II has a particular connection with Florence in Italian fourteenth‐century painting; it has been identified also on an altarpiece by Melchior Broederlam in Dijon dated 1396 (Comblen‐Sonkes and Veronee‐Verhaegen 1986, p. 74). Lead‐tin yellow type II has also been identified in a number of Bohemian panel paintings from the period 1345–1420, see Šefců, Chlumská and Hostašová 2015. Some further commentary on the identification and history of the use of lead‐tin yellow can be found in Kühn 1993. The history of use of the two forms of lead‐tin yellow in a wide range of paintings can be found in Martin and Duval 1990. (Back to text.)
19 SEM‐EDX analysis of a cross‐section sample from the shield indicated an alumina‐based lake substrate. ATR‐FTIR analysis of the same sample showed that the red lake particles contain protein, indicating that the lake pigment was made from the shearings of dyed woollen textiles. Lake pigments made in this way have been found to contain madder or the more expensive kermes, but the absence of characteristic madder fluorescence in this sample gives a strong indication that the dyestuff employed here was kermes. Certainly, the lake pigment does not contain lac dyestuff which was extracted directly from the sticklac and does not produce a proteinaceous lake pigment. Recent analyses of lake pigments from paintings at Westminster (including, for example, the Sedilia, wall paintings in the Chapel of St Faith and south transept, and the tombs of Edmund Crouchback and Aveline de Forz) have shown that lac lake is the only red organic colorant employed in these high‐quality commissions until the last quarter of the fourteenth century when the use of kermes is confirmed in paintings for the first time. Howard and Sauerberg 2015, pp. 205–61. For further discussions about the manufacture of lake pigments, see Kirby, Spring and Higgitt 2005. (Back to text.)
20 Jo Kirby, Analysis by high‐performance liquid chromatography, National Gallery Scientific Department, unpublished analytical report, August 2009, scientific dossier for NG4451. (Back to text.)
21 White and Kirby 2006; Nadolny and Roy 2006, pp. 137–47. (Back to text.)
22 Eikelmann 1995. (Back to text.)
23 See Marks and Williamson 2003, pp. 152–3, no. 10. (Back to text.)
24 The non‐original brass plates were inscribed ‘INVENTION OF PAINTING IN OYLE 1410 THIS WAS PAINTED BEFORE, IN/THE BEGINNING OF RIC D : 2d : 1377., and HOLLAR GRAVD & DED: IT TO K: CH: 1st : & CALLS IT TABULA ANTIQUA OF K: RICD : 2d : Wth : HIS 3 : SAINTS : PATRONS, ST : I N : BAPT : & 2 Kgs : ST : EDMUND AND EDWD: CONFR:’. (Back to text.)
25 Vermilion is known to darken in a variety of binding media including egg tempera paint films. In Richard’s sgraffito robe, the change is slight and is present only in an exceedingly thin layer at the surface. Earlier views suggested that light was the principal cause, but it is now known that other factors, including environmental pollutants, are in addition implicated in the colour change. See Spring and Grout 2002 and Da Pieve et al. 2013. (Back to text.)
26 See Scheifele 1999, p. 270 for the religious connotations of the white hart (Psalm 42) symbolising Richard’s devotion to Christ as a source of salvation and Richard’s divine authority to rule. See also Morgan 1997, p. 186 for the attributes credited to the hart. See further Gordon et al. 2015, pp. 40–7. (Back to text.)
27 For a list of Richard’s badges see Siddons 2009, vol. II, part 1, pp. 30–1; for Richard’s use of the white hart see Siddons 2009, vol. II, part 1, pp. 134–42. For satirical references in contemporary literature to Richard’s use of the white hart see Gordon 1993, p. 50 and Barr 1993, pp. 109–10, lines 36–45. Barr (p. 16) is of the view that Richard the Redeless and Mum and the Sothsegger are two separate poems by the same author. For Richard’s white hart and the attention it drew from his detractors see Barr 2001, pp. 63–79. (Back to text.)
28 Gordon 1993, p. 49; Barr 2001, p. 83. (Back to text.)
29 Clarke 1931, p. 287; Lindenbaum 1990, pp. 1–20, esp. p. 4. For objects with the Ricardian hart see Cherry and Stratford 1995, pp. 92–9. (Back to text.)
30 Siddons 2009, vol. II, part 1, p. 31, and vol. II, 1, pp. 103, 227. See also Ilg 1994, pp. 13–14 and Stratford 2012, R 52 and commentary p. 274, R 80, R 84 and pp. 16–17 and p. 52. (Back to text.)
31 In 1398 Richard ordered two long gowns, one red and one white, embroidered with rosemary and broomcods for Queen Isabelle for the festival of Christmas (Anstis 1724, vol. I, p. 115). See Harvey 1961, p. 10, note 4. (Back to text.)
32 Fisher 1997, p. 162. (Back to text.)
33 Clarke 1931, p. 284. Tout 1930, p. 204, noted that until the end of his reign Richard used ‘our personal signet of St Edward’. For Richard’s seal see Cherry and Stratford 1995, p. 94. (Back to text.)
34 Barron 2015, p. 22. (Back to text.)
35 Eagles were included in the arms of Bohemia, and were an imperial symbol (Siddons 2009, vol. II, part 1, pp. 89–95; Stratford 2012, commentary to R375, pp. 294–5). They also decorated the coronation pallium regale (see Tristram 1949, vol. 1, part I, p. 384). For the textiles in the diptych see Monnas 1997, pp. 165–77, also Monnas 2008, pp. 48–9. For badges on Richard’s garments see Siddons 2009, vol. I, pp. 122–4. (Back to text.)
36 For Richard’s clothing see Staniland 1997, pp. 85–93; Monnas 1997, pp. 165–77. (Back to text.)
37 Harvey 1961, p. 7. For tartaryn see Monnas 2008, p. 297. Siddons 2009, vol. II, part 1, p. 140, notes that the pattern of Richard’s gown resembles a set of hangings of red worsted made for Edward III which had harts lying in circles of chains and locks. (Back to text.)
38 It was found on the site of the Dominican Priory of Dunstable. Alexander and Binski 1987, pp. 487–8, no. 659; and Baumstark 1995, pp. 256–9, no. 18. For the technique of enamelling on gold see Taburet‐Delahaye and Avril 2004, Appendix II, pp. 380–7. (Back to text.)
39 Stratford 2012, R 391 and commentary p. 296; also p. 85. A second white hart listed in the inventory is specifically said to be a brooch ( ibid. , pp. 19 and R 131). (Back to text.)
40 For example, Evans 1950, pp. 1–5 (with a summary of opinion up until 1948, pp. 1–2), argued that the diptych commemorated Richard’s recoronation in St Stephens in 1389. Another useful summary of views is in Bodkin [1947?], pp. 4–14. (Back to text.)
41 Maude Clarke recognised that Richard’s use of the broomcod indicates that the diptych could not have been painted before 1395 when the negotiations began for the marriage (Clarke 1931, pp. 287–9). Hartshorne’s assertion (1909, p. 86, repeated by Tristram 1955, p. 55) that in 1392 Anne of Bohemia wore a robe embroidered with broomcods appears to be a misreading of ‘De caput a planta nil nisi gemma patet’ (‘from head to foot there was nothing to be seen but jewels’) (Wright 1859, p. 286). (Back to text.)
42 Domenge 2012, pp. 118–19, no. 5. For the broomcod device see further Gordon et al. 2015, pp. 49–52. (Back to text.)
43 For the events at Ardres see the anonymous French chronicler in Bellaguet 1840, pp. 453–71; Froissart (1867–77), vol. XV, pp. 302–7; and an anonymous detailed account by a member of the English contingent (Oxford, Oriel College, MS 46, ff. 104–06) published by Meyer 1881, pp. 209–24. See also Stratford 2012, Appendix 2, pp. 387–91, for a transcription of the Oriel College text. (Back to text.)
44 Richard: ‘une gowne longue de rouge velvet, et sur son test un chapeu’ plein des perles pendans, ovec un riche coler entour’ le col de la livree le roi franczois, ovec un graunt cerf en son arme’; Charles:‘une gowne de rouge velvet … ovec un coler de son’ propre liveree, et un cerf en l’arme et sur son teste une chapeau de noir plain des perles pendanz’; transcribed by Stratford 2012, pp. 387 and 388. See also Meyer 1881, pp. 212–13. (Back to text.)
45 See Mirot 1902, pp. 151–2 and 154; Stratford 2012, commentary on R 49 and R 50, p. 273. Of the five gold broomcod collars listed in the inventory of Richard’s treasure in 1398/9, Stratford considers one matches that which Charles VI gave to Richard: see ibid. , pp. 16–17, R 85 and commentary p. 277. At the same time Charles had collars made for Richard’s three uncles, as well as for some of the noblewomen (Meyer 1881, p. 219; Clarke 1931, pp. 288–9). (Back to text.)
46 Ilg 1994, pp. 12–13. (Back to text.)
47 Harvey 1961, p. 8, note 7; Wood 1988, p. 83; Scheifele 1999, p. 262. For the broomcod device see also Ilg 1994, pp. 11–13; Ilg 1996, pp. 143–7; Mitchell 2002, pp. 171–80; Gordon et al. 2015, pp. 49–53. (Back to text.)
48 Hablot 1999–2000, pp. 134–5 and 140–1. (Back to text.)
49 Lightbown 1992, pp. 245–6. (Back to text.)
50 ‘Richard, par la grâce de Dieu roy d’Engleterre et de France, et seignur d’Irlande …’. See, for example, in a letter to the Duke of Bavaria (Champollion-Figeac 1847, pp. 288), and in the marriage contract of 9 March 1395 (modern 1396), in which the promise was made that any children of Isabelle would have no claim to the French throne (Le Laboureur 1663, pp. 308–9 and 312). Edward III had claimed the throne of France through his French mother, and the arms of the kingdom of France were incorporated with those of the kingdom of England from 1340 (see above). (Back to text.)
51 For example, Henry VI ordered a collar of esses (SSs) interspersed with broomcods (Anstis 1724, vol. I, pp. 115–16, note m); see Gordon et al. 2015, p. 53 and p. 123, notes 89–91. (Back to text.)
52 Mitchell 2002, pp. 176–7; Campbell 1997, p. 104; Gordon 2021, p. 606. The collar Richard wears in the Wilton Diptych is not the one described in the inventory of the treasure as being ‘du livere du roi de France’, which Stratford deduces was the one given to Thomas of Woodstock at Ardres in 1396 (Stratford 2012, R 70 and commentary p. 275). (Back to text.)
53 Gordon 2021, pp. 605–6. The pimpernel (mouron) was also the badge of Isabelle’s mother, Isabeau. (Back to text.)
54 For Geneva, Bibliothèque publique et universitaire MS fr. 165, ff. 4 and 7, see Sterling 1987, pp. 361–6, illus. p. 365, fig. 254; and Taburet‐Delahaye and Avril 2004, pp. 120–3, no. 52. (Back to text.)
55 See the numerous items in the inventory of Richard’s treasure (Stratford 2012); also Gordon et al. 2015, pp. 52–3. (Back to text.)
56 Given‐Wilson 1997, pp. 2 and 3; Saul 1997b, pp. 451–2. (Back to text.)
57 Whittingham 1971, esp. pp. 16–19. (Back to text.)
58 For the portrait see Binski 1995, pp. 203–5; Alexander 1997, pp. 197–206. (Back to text.)
59 For the tomb see Lindley 1997, pp. 61–74; Duffy 2003, pp. 163–73. (Back to text.)
60 Pastoureau 1985, pp. 108–15, esp. pp. 113–14, sees the profile portrait as part of a new form of individual symbolic representation or personalisation, and part of the ‘effervescence emblématique’ which proliferated during the period 1360–1420. (Back to text.)
61 For example, Beard 1931, p. 375; Whittingham 1971, p. 20. (Back to text.)
62 Saul 1997b, p. 451. (Back to text.)
63 Jones 1995, p. 262. Ilg (1996, pp. 56–8 and 154) argued that this was an idealised portrait, since she does not consider the diptych to have been commissioned by Richard himself, but to have been commissioned and painted in France, where beardlessness was the fashion. (Back to text.)
64 For example, Conway 1929, p. 211; Tristram 1949, vol. 1, part I, p. 383; Mathew 1968, p. 199; Scheifele 1999, pp. 269–70 (as a symbolic not a literal record). (Back to text.)
65 The crown was done together with the rest of the water gilding. When the face and hair were added, the hair within the crown was painted over gold and has partly flaked, exposing the gold. (Back to text.)
66 James Simpson has argued that in exaggerating his youthfulness Richard was inadvertently exposing his own vulnerability (Simpson 2019, pp. 360–2, setting the Wilton Diptych within the context of contemporary literature). (Back to text.)
67 Scheifele 1999, p. 269. (Back to text.)
68 ‘… jam ab etate tenera …’ (‘already from a tender age’), Nichols 1780, pp. 191–202, esp. p. 191. (Back to text.)
69 Gordon et al. 2015, p. 37, figs 14 and 15. (Back to text.)
70 Stratford 2012, pp. 9, 13–14, R 7 and commentary pp. 258–62. It was taken from England when Henry IV’s daughter, Blanche, married Ludwig of Bavaria in 1401. (Back to text.)
71 Morgan 1997, p. 187. (Back to text.)
72 Everard Green typescript dated 17 March 1905 in the National Gallery dossier for NG4451; Conway 1929, p. 210; Tristram 1949, vol. 1, part I, p. 387; Wood 1988, p. 78; Bath 1992, p. 179; Scheifele 1999, p. 266; Monnas 2004, p. 201. Mitchell 1997, pp. 122–3, notes that it was the Baptist who foretold the coming of the Messiah whom the Magi were seeking. For arguments against any allusion in the diptych to the Adoration of the Magi see Weilandt 1998, p. 145 and Grandmontagne 2005, pp. 417–28. (Back to text.)
73 Kirsch 1991, pp. 36–7 (in relation to the Visconti), and note 79; Pujmanova 1997, pp. 247–66, with particular reference to Bohemian painting, and Thomas 2007, pp. 67–73, also for the importance of the Epiphany for the Bohemian court, and with the view that Richard was here emulating Luxembourg practice. (Back to text.)
74 Brown 2017, pp. 61–85, esp. pp. 74–7. See also Howe 2001, pp. 259–303, esp. pp. 283–4 and 287; Binski 1995, p. 183. (Back to text.)
75 Mathew 1968, pp. 12–13 and p. 180, note 5. (Back to text.)
76 Saul 1997b, p. 12 and notes 14 and 15. (Back to text.)
77 For examples of Richard’s devotion to the Baptist see Mitchell 1997, pp. 120–2; Bowers 2001, pp. 84–7; Gordon et al. 2015, pp. 56–7. (Back to text.)
78 See Jacopo da Voragine (1993), vol. 1, pp. 78–9; and the Meditations on the Life of Christ, Ragusa and Green 1961, pp. 46–8. Monnas 2004, p. 203, note 75, and Weilandt 1998, p. 144, observe that in the fourteenth century the Baptism was not yet a major feast in the Church calendar. (Back to text.)
79 Everard Green, typescript dated 17 March 1905 in the National Gallery dossier for NG4451; Ferris 1987, p. 46; also Wormald 1954, p. 200. (Back to text.)
80 See Lindley 1997, p. 72 and p. 292, note 49, citing Royal Commission on Historical Monuments 1924, vol. I, p. 31, for the full Latin epitaph. ‘Pretulit’ is incorrectly translated by Harvey 1961, p. 20; and by Gordon in Gordon et al. 2015, p. 57, as ‘presented’. (Back to text.)
81 Nichols 1780, p. 191. Edward III’s will likewise invokes the Trinity, Virgin Mary and whole court of heaven, but not the Baptist or the Confessor (see ibid. , p. 59). (Back to text.)
82 For images of the ring story see Tanner 1952, pp. 4–12. (Back to text.)
83 Wickham Legg 1890, pp. 199 and 223. For the ring denoting the wedding ring of England and Richard’s marriage to his realm see Wilkins Sullivan 1997, pp. 8–9. For a suggestion that it refers to miraculous curing with cramp rings by English monarchs see Pujmanova 1997, pp. 264–6. (Back to text.)
84 Tanner 1952, pp. 1–12; Carpenter 2007, pp. 865–91. (Back to text.)
85 For Richard’s devotion to the Confessor see Mitchell 1997, pp. 115–18. (Back to text.)
86 Lewis 2002, pp. 86–96; Wilkins Sullivan 1997, pp. 9–10 saw Richard’s devotion to Saint Edward as related to the saint’s chastity. (Back to text.)
87 Saul 1997b, pp. 311–13; Saul 1999, pp. 41–2; Good 2008, pp. 171–8; Good 2009, pp. 78–81. (Back to text.)
88 For the cult of Saint Edmund by English medieval kings see Webster 2020, pp. 636–51, esp. pp. 643–4, 647–8; also Ridyard 1988, pp. 211–33; Ilg 1996, p. 50. (Back to text.)
89 Saul 1997b, pp. 310 and 470. (Back to text.)
90 Letter from John Harvey, National Gallery dossier for NG4451, 16 November 1993; Monnas 1997, p. 324, note 25; Mitchell 1997, p. 118 (cranes). They are certainly not peacocks (Wood 1988, p. 85), or swans as identified by Kathrin Müller; see Monnas 2020, p. 1216. (Back to text.)
91 Monnas 1997, pp. 171–2; Monnas forthcoming. (Back to text.)
92 See St John Hope 1913, p. 150, fig. 78. (Back to text.)
93 For this badge on objects in Richard’s treasure see Stratford 2012, R 495, commentary p. 307 and R 841. Metaphorical reference to this badge is made in the Kirstall Chronicle (Galbraith 1942, p. 238; Siddons 2009, vol. II, part 1, p. 235), where the king is described as triumphing over his enemies in the Revenge Parliament of 1397: ‘Previously the sun was hidden behind a cloud – in other words, the royal majesty was obscured by a hostile force – but now, soaring in arms above the mountains, and bounding over the hills with his might, he has dispersed the clouds with his sun, whose light shines ever more brightly’ (trans. Given‐Wilson 2013, p. 96). (Back to text.)
94 For example, ‘cum sol’ de auro de Cipre exeunt’ de nebul’ de argento et serico diversorum colorum’. See Siddons 2009, vol. I, Extracts 26 and 27, pp. 190, 192 and 193; also vol. II, part 1, pp. 234–5 (Siddons refers to the badge as a sunburst). (Back to text.)
95 For Richard’s association with Saint Edmund see also Mitchell 1997, pp. 118–19. (Back to text.)
96 Wyon 1883, pp. 150–3. (Back to text.)
97 See Tanner 1952, p. 3; Wilkins Sullivan 1997, p. 6; see in particular Good 2008, pp. 161–78, for why Saint George eventually became pre‐eminently the patron saint of England. They were often paired (see Wyon 1883, pp. 150–3). For example, in Bury St Edmunds were two statues of saints Edward and Edmund with a statue of the Virgin (Luxford 2017, p. 118). (Back to text.)
98 Stratford 2012, R 970 and R 971 and commentary pp. 348–50. (Back to text.)
99 Wickham Legg 1890, pp. 200 and 227. (Back to text.)
100 Ibid. , Appendix II, pp. 280–1. (Back to text.)
101 Wormald 1954, p. 200. See further Gordon et al. 2015, pp. 78–86 (exploring possible links of the Wilton Diptych with Westminster Abbey). (Back to text.)
102 Lewis 2002, p. 87. (Back to text.)
103 For example, Wilkins Sullivan 1997, p. 3. (Back to text.)
104 Ferris 1987, pp. 45–66, esp. p. 49; a slightly similar view is taken by Wood 1988, pp. 81–3. The dates of three of the four events pinpointed by Ferris could in fact have been chosen to coincide with the feast days of John the Baptist and Edmund. Evans 1950, p. 3, saw the two royal saints as idealised portraits of Richard’s father and grandfather. (Back to text.)
105 Theilmann 1990, pp. 255, 259–61, 263. (Back to text.)
106 Wyon 1883, pp. 147–59, esp. 158–9. (Back to text.)
107 Wood 1988, pp. 84–5. (Back to text.)
108 For the flowers see Fisher 1997, pp. 155–63, esp. p. 159. Wilkins Sullivan 1997, p. 4, sees it as a ‘hortus conclusus’. (Back to text.)
109 Simpson 2019, pp. 360 and 362, sees this as a ‘colonization’ of heaven with heaven subordinate to England on account of the lack of decoration on their badges compared to those of Richard, and points out that Richard was in flagrant defiance of the 1988 Act of Parliament forbidding the distribution of livery badges. (Back to text.)
110 Ilg 1996, p. 83. Angels flanking the Virgin and Child with their arms folded across the chest are common in fourteenth‐century French and Italian painting (for example, in the sinopia for frescoes in the Notre Dame des Doms, Avignon, by Simone Martini; see note 133, below). (Back to text.)
111 Monnas 2019, pp. 95–134, esp. pp. 105–6. (Back to text.)
112 Described in The St Albans Chronicle, vol. I, 1376–1394, translated Taylor, Childs and Watkiss 2003, pp. 144–5. (Back to text.)
113 That Christ’s halo in the wall paintings of the Nativity/Adoration of the Shepherds in St Stephen’s chapel in the Palace of Westminster contains three nails (as stated by Wilson 2016, p. 291) is difficult to see. For the drawings made before they were destroyed by fire in 1834, see Englefield 1811, pp. 15–16, Pl. XVII. For a colour copy made about 1804 by Richard Smith see Howe 2001, p. 267, fig. 5b. (Back to text.)
114 For the display of the sole of the Child’s foot see Grandmontagne 2005, p. 365ff. (Back to text.)
115 Scheifele 1999, pp. 265–71 for a full discussion of the Wilton Diptych as ‘a consummate example of Richard’s image‐making’, which she thinks may have been commissioned for his birthday in 1398. Ferris 1987, p. 43 also saw Richard as about to do homage. (Back to text.)
116 Wood 1988, pp. 83–8; Thomas 2020, pp. 131, 162. (Back to text.)
117 Thomas 2020, pp. 162–3. (Back to text.)
118 Rosser 1999, pp. 60–1. (Back to text.)
119 Biggs 2020, pp. 47, although see also Howe 2001, p. 261, giving the date as 1354, and p. 292, note 21, suggesting pilgrims might not have gone beyond the threshold. Biggs (pp. 47 and 92) suggests this is the statue meant by Froissart which the kings of England had great faith in and to which Richard prayed before confronting the rebels in 1381. However, Froissart does not name the church and he may well have confused the two churches in Westminster, since the account in the Anonimalle Chronicle states that Richard came to pray in Westminster Abbey, and the ‘monk of Westminster’ specifies that he came to the shrine of Saint Edward (Dobson 1983, pp. 193, 163, 202–3). See also Spooner 2015, vol. I, pp. 272–3, for the possibility that the statue was in Saint Mary de la Pew in the Abbey. (Back to text.)
120 Calendar of the Patent Rolls 1905, vol. V, 1391–6, p. 244, 6 March 1393: ‘Grant to the dean and canons of the king’s free chapel of Westminster [i.e. St Stephen’s chapel; see ibid. , p. 685, 20 April 1396: ‘grant to Nicholas Slake, dean of the king’s free chapel of St. Stephen in the palace of Westminster’] that they have restitution of all jewels, ornaments and other church goods which were recently stolen out of the king’s closet of St. Mary de la Pewe near the said chapel …’ See also Kingsford 1917, pp. 2–6 and p. 8. In 1452 the statue with all its ornaments and the chapel itself burnt down, but the latter was rebuilt (Smith and Hawkins 1807, p. 126). However, Biggs (2020, p. 197) states that the image was not removed from the chapel until 1545. (Back to text.)
121 Ilg 1996, p. 84; Stratford 2012, R 1013 and commentary p. 360; also pp. 30–1. The battlements with angels probably resembled those in the reliquary of the Holy Thorn (London, British Museum, The Waddesdon Bequest, for which see Cherry 2010). (Back to text.)
122 See the typescript of notes from Everard Green dated 17 March 1905 in the National Gallery dossier for NG4451; also Conway 1929, p. 211; Tristram 1949, vol. 1, part I, p. 385; Mathew 1968, pp. 48 and 199; Ferris 1987, p. 44. Theilmann (1990, p. 260), who saw both the left‐hand and right‐hand panels as alluding to the coronation, noted that shortly before his coronation, on 23 April (the feast of Saint George), Richard was created Knight of the Garter, and eleven other men were knighted on that day. (Back to text.)
123 Scheifele has also argued that the number 11 held special meaning for Richard, not only because he was in his eleventh year when he was crowned, but also because he was in his eleventh regnal year when he lost his royal prerogatives (Scheifele 1999, p. 270). She suggests the eleven angels have not one significance but compress several references. Germ 2003, pp. 13–14, had already pointed out that the difficulty in identifying the angels with the eleven nobles is that they are already in heaven while Richard remains on the earth. (Back to text.)
124 Theilmann 1990, p. 260; Wood 1988, pp. 83. Ilg (1996, pp. 84–8) suggested that the eleven refer to eleven members of Richard’s household; however, the members of his household were not fixed in their number (Stratford 1997, p. 408). (Back to text.)
125 Germ 2003, pp. 13–17. (Back to text.)
126 Gordon 1993, p. 57; Gordon et al. 2015, p. 74. Accepted, for example, by Scheifele 1999, pp. 269–70, who sees the dual symbolism as representing the transformation of the secular banner by Christ’s blessing. Morgan 1997, pp. 180–4, interpreted the pennon as exclusively that of Saint George, unconnected with the Resurrection. (Back to text.)
127 Gordon 1992, pp. 662–7; Gordon 1993, p. 58; Gordon 1997, pp. 23–6. This interpretation is accepted by Saul 2017, p. 687; Simpson 2019, p. 360; and by Good 2009, p. 77, but rejected for example by Madersbacher 2001, esp. pp. 73–4 and 92; also by Ilg 1996, pp. 124–5 and 155; Vannutelli 1997, pp. 176 (erroneously considering that it would have been almost invisible). It has also been argued that the orb may represent Ireland rather than England (Bennett 2003, p. 203, note 66). It is not accepted as depicting Britain or England by MacColl 2006, p. 262, note 51. Goodman in Goodman and Gillespie 1999, p. 13, sees the white tower as representing England’s strength and the boat her naval power. Already in 1905 Everard Green (typescript dated 17 March 1905 in the National Gallery dossier for NG4451) considered the Wilton Diptych represented Richard giving the pennon to the Virgin as a sign that England was the Dos Mariae. Tudor‐Craig 1997, pp. 216–17, suggested the Rome altarpiece might originally have been made for Westminster Abbey. (Back to text.)
128 Oxford, Exeter College, MS 27. See Smalley 1960, p. 223 and p. 223, note 1; cited by Morgan 2005, p. 60, note 47. For Lathbury see Smalley 1960, pp. 221–39. For examples of England described as the Dowry of the Virgin see Gordon et al. 2015, pp. 72–3. (Back to text.)
129 Wilkins Sullivan 1997, p. 4, sees them specifically as having Richard’s red‐gold hair of the Plantagenets. (Back to text.)
130 Ferris 1987, p. 43. For the association of the Virgin and Saint George (particularly under Edward III) see Howe 2001, p. 278 and p. 299, note 127. (Back to text.)
131 See in particular Good 2009, pp. 52–94, chapter 3 titled ‘Royal St George’, and pp. 75–7 for the Wilton Diptych. Good points out that medieval illustrations of Saint George holding a forked banner do exist. (Back to text.)
132 Madersbacher 2001, pp. 71–93. See also Weilandt 1998 (review of Ilg 1996), p. 146. (Back to text.)
133 Enaud 1963, illus. p. 153. (Back to text.)
134 Binski and Massing 2009, illus. p. 63, fig. 22. See also Binski 2009, pp. 16–44, esp. pp. 26–7. See also Gordon 2012, pp. 31–8, esp. pp. 34–5 for the links of the orb in the Westminster Retable to the Cosmati floor. (Back to text.)
135 Madersbacher 2001, p. 92. (Back to text.)
136 For an overview of other parallels between the Wilton Diptych and Shakespeare’s Richard II, see Candido 2001, pp. 468–73. (Back to text.)
137 Madersbacher 2001, p. 73, appears to have misunderstood the argument for the orb as representing England (see above) as originating in this quotation, and appears (p. 72) to see it as nationalistic. The point is whether Shakespeare might have seen the Wilton Diptych or something similar. (Back to text.)
138 For Richard’s itineraries see Saul 1997b, pp. 468–74. Richard was not unusual in being constantly on the move. For travelling courts see Vale 2001, pp. 136–62, esp. pp. 138–40. (Back to text.)
139 Contemporary French royal accounts and those of the dukes of Burgundy dating from 1351 to 1420 contain a number of examples; see in particular accounts for 1351, 1390 and 1391, cited by Brière 1919, p. 236, notes 1 and 4. There is no evidence of there ever having been clasps to hold the two panels of the Wilton Diptych together (see under Technical Notes, Support, above. (Back to text.)
140 Monnas 2004, pp. 191–7. She notes (p. 200) that the fact that Richard is alone in the Wilton Diptych is not problematic, since the queen would have had her own devotional images for use in her closet. See also Gordon 1993, p. 62. Nigel Morgan (1997, p. 181) speculates whether the diptych could have been used by the Knights of the Garter in their chapel at Windsor. (Back to text.)
141 Tudor‐Craig in Alexander and Binski 1987, p. 135. (Back to text.)
142 For Richard’s itineraries, with Westminster a fixed point of return, see Saul 1997b, pp. 468–74. (Back to text.)
143 Biggs 2020, pp. 72–3, 91–3, and plan on p. x. See also Thurston 1929, pp. 30–6. (Back to text.)
144 Everard Green (typescript dated 17 March 1905 in the National Gallery dossier for NG4451) suggested that the diptych could have been a votive offering to the shrine of Our Lady at Pewe (sic); Conway 1929, pp. 210–11, as being the place for commemoration of his coronation; see also Monnas 2004, p. 201, as one possible Westminster location. (Back to text.)
145 Monnas 2004, pp. 201–5; also Gordon 1993, p. 62. For the chapel (later called the chapel of Saint Erasmus) see Micklethwaite 1873, pp. 93–9, esp. p. 95; the Royal Commission on Historical Monuments 1924, vol. I, pp. 73–4, and pls 141–3 and p. 38 (plan). For the chapel and its decoration see also Spooner 2015, pp. 262–78. (Back to text.)
146 Monnas 2004, p. 205. (Back to text.)
147 Galbraith 1942, pp. 237–8; Wormald 1954, pp. 201–2; Alexander 1983, p. 146. Wright 1992, p. 196 (commissioned by the Duke of Bedford when Richard’s body was transferred to Westminster Abbey by Henry V). (Back to text.)
148 Shaw 1934, pp. 175–81; Panofsky 1953, vol. I, p. 118; Davies 1957, p. 100, note 12, points out that Henry V, reputedly in atonement for the deposition, founded three monasteries. See also Goodman in Goodman and Gillespie 1999, p. 13, suggesting Henry V might have been the possessor and preserver of the Wilton Diptych. (Back to text.)
149 Harvey 1961, especially pp. 19–24, dating it between 1394 and 1395. (Back to text.)
150 Galway 1950, pp. 9–14, on the basis that the Virgin resembles Richard’s mother, Joan of Kent, and that the Child represents Edward of Angoulême (died 1370) handing on his inheritance to Richard. (Back to text.)
151 Whittingham 1981, p. 147. Taglianini (1993, p. 52) makes the improbable suggestion that the diptych was commissioned 1385–9 by Joan of Kent. (Back to text.)
152 Beard 1931, p. 375, suggested that it might have been given to Charles VI as a gift for Isabelle when the two kings met in October. There is, however, no evidence for this. (Back to text.)
153 Ilg 1996, pp. 45 and 153 (Isabelle is incorrectly described as the duke’s niece). (Back to text.)
154 For an interpretation of the diptych in terms of alchemy see Hughes 2012, pp. 141–2. For discussion of the diptych in terms of the number two (based on the mistaken premise that a diptych is an uncommon format), the significance of the forest, the contrast between earth and heaven, the four elements, etc., see Bucklow 2014, pp. 107–40. (Back to text.)
155 Scharf 1882, pp. 65–9; Clarke 1931, pp. 290–4; Tristram 1949, vol. 1, part I, p. 390 (as a possible minor secondary theme). It was reiterated as the main theme by Palmer 1972, p. 205 and Appendix q, pp. 242–4, and also by Tyerman 1988, p. 297; Nievergelt 2010, p. 105. See also Keen 1997. For the manuscript see McKendrick, Lowden and Doyle 2011, pp. 394–5, no. 140. It was edited and translated by Coopland 1975. (Back to text.)
156 See Clarke 1931, p. 293. The members are listed in another manuscript in French (Paris, Arsenal MS 2251, ff. 113b–114 a). See Clarke 1931, p. 293, note 56. (Back to text.)
157 For arguments against the crusader theory see Beard 1931, p. 365; Ferris 1987, pp. 40–2; also Ilg 1994, p. 13. (Back to text.)
158 Freeman Sandler 1997, p. 154, saw it as reinforcing ‘his idea of earthly kingship under heavenly protection’; see also Saul 1997b, pp. 384–5. Thomas sees the Wilton Diptych as reflecting Richard’s new vision of kingship modelled on that of his Luxembourg relatives (Thomas 2007, pp. 67–73). For the symbols of regality in the Wilton Diptych paralleled in Chaucer’s Prologue to the Legend of Good Women see in particular Barr 2001, pp. 89–105. For a discussion of the Wilton Diptych in relation to Richard’s absolutist exaltation of the crown see Kendall 2008, pp. 52–3. (Back to text.)
159 For Richard’s ideas regarding kingship see further Taylor 1971, pp. 189–205, esp. pp. 195–7; Saul 1995, pp. 854–77; Saul 1997a, pp. 27–32; Saul 1999, pp. 37–57. (Back to text.)
160 Conway 1929, pp. 209–12. (Back to text.)
161 Theilmann 1990, p. 263, expressed also in Richard’s attempts to have Edward II canonised, and in his own coronation. (Back to text.)
162 For example, Simon 1993, pp. 316–17; Scheifele 1999, pp. 266–7. An exception is Grandmontagne 2005, pp. 428–33, who analysed the gesture in the context of prayer. (Back to text.)
163 Wood 1988, p. 82. (Back to text.)
164 Ferris 1987, pp. 36, 49. (Back to text.)
165 Morgan 1997, pp. 179–88. (Back to text.)
166 Wilson 2016, p. 291. He considers Richard’s hands to be raised purely in adoration, not in order to receive the pennon or having just passed it across. (Back to text.)
167 Wilkins Sullivan 1997, pp. 1 and 12. (Back to text.)
168 See especially Freeman Sandler 1997, pp. 137–54, esp. pp. 144–54. Van der Velden 2006, p. 146, discusses diptychs which have the supplicant in the left‐hand wing, intended to be placed open and viewed at an angle. (Back to text.)
169 Denys Sutton (1962, pp. 248–57, esp. p. 250) raised the question as to whether International Gothic was really ‘a form of French cultural expansion’. Michael Michael identified the Wilton Diptych as ‘transnational’ rather than international (Michael 2010, pp. 365–74, esp. pp. 366–7, with further references). (Back to text.)
170 Gordon 2024. (Back to text.)
171 For example, the stippled patterns in the 1380s in the Bohun Psalter (British Library, Egerton 3277, f. 29v), McKendrick, Lowden and Doyle 2011, pp. 136–7, no. 20; and the stippled patterns in a grid, around 1400, in the St Omer Psalter (British Library, MS Yates Thompson 14, f. 29v), ibid. , pp. 164–5, no. 33. (Back to text.)
172 For example in the altarpieces for Champmol painted in Ypres by Melchior Broederlam, 1393–9. See note 18, above. (Back to text.)
173 Stratford 2012, passim. (Back to text.)
174 Illus. Muel et al. 1987, p. 18, fig. 8 (detail); pp. 150–1, no. 27 (24). (Back to text.)
175 Inv. KK5003. See Schmidt in Boehm and Fajt 2005, p. 109, fig. 9.8; Robert Suckale and Jiří Fajt in ibid. , pp. 274–6, no. 117. (Back to text.)
176 See Grandmontagne 2005, pp. 365ff; also Nash 2007, p. 77, for a sculpture by André Beauneveu. (Back to text.)
177 See Taburet‐Delahaye and Avril 2004, p. 200, no. 116; Roelofs et al. 2017, pp. 124–5, no. 22. (Back to text.)
178 See Gordon 1993, p. 72, for English examples; it is wrongly stated there that it is exclusively an English iconography. (Back to text.)
179 The head and hooves are clearly visible in the figure of Saint John the Baptist carved on the chapterhouse altarpiece for Champmol (see Fliegel, Jugi and Barthélémy 2004, pp. 193–4, no. 67, as well as in early fifteenth‐century French sculpture (see Taburet‐Delahaye and Avril 2004, p. 313, no. 192). (Back to text.)
180 See Taburet‐Delahaye and Avril 2004, p. 316, no. 196, illus. p. 317. (Back to text.)
181 For discussion of the possible nationality of the artist see also Gordon et al. 2015, pp. 109–17. (Back to text.)
182 For some examples see Gordon 2024. (Back to text.)
183 For example, Constable 1929, p. 43; Rickert 1965, p. 159; Mathew 1968, p. 199. (Back to text.)
184 The nineteenth‐century connoisseur Gustav Waagen said it was ‘without doubt by a very able Italian painter, who probably lived at the court of Richard II’ (Waagen 1854, vol. 3, pp. 150–1); in 1857 he called it Sienese (Waagen 1857, p. 2, no. 42). See also Simon 1993, p. 318; Gordon 2024. (Back to text.)
185 Riley 1869, vol. 3, p. 381; see Binski and Howard 2010, pp. 195–6. (Back to text.)
186 Rickert 1933, pp.144–7; Green 1976, pp. 235–9. (Back to text.)
187 Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, ms. lat. 10483‐4. See Sterling 1987, no. 9, pp. 71–88. It was subsequently given by Henry IV to Jean, Duke of Berry. (Back to text.)
188 Froissart (1867–77), vol. XIV, 1872, p. 197. The portrait of Richard enthroned (see fig. 26) has been compared to the series of enthroned prophets by André Beauneveu in the Psalter of Jean de Berry (Paris, BNF, Fr. 13091; for which see Taburet‐Delahaye and Avril 2004, p. 104, no. 42; and Nash 2007, pp. 107–43). (Back to text.)
189 Froissart (1867–77), vol. XV, p. 167. (Back to text.)
190 Cust 1909, pp. 18–19, commenting that it was then seen as ‘French school even if … executed in England’; Borenius and Tristram 1927, pp. 26–8 (close to the Berry Book of Hours and the Epître de Philippe de Mézières, but see Tristram 1949, vol. 2, part II, p. 29 with a different view); Constable 1929, p. 45 (‘a painter of the French school in close contact with André Beauneveu’); Lemoisne 1931, pp. 57–8 (in the same ‘group’ as the two Carrand diptychs in the Bargello in Florence, close to the Parement de Narbonne, therefore Parisian, about 1395–1400); Borenius 1936, p. 214 (by a French manuscript illuminator, close to Jacquemart de Hesdin); Sterling 1942, p. 20 and pp. 78–9, note 22 (School of Paris, Franco‐Flemish with French dominance, about 1377). Martin Davies in 1946 (pp. 46–9, esp. p. 48) catalogued the diptych as ‘not simply under French influence (which is in any case true) but positively French’; in 1957 (pp. 92–101, esp. p. 96) he modified this to ‘doubtfully retained in the French school, which some scholars think correct’. (Back to text.)
191 Ilg 1996, pp. 25–45 and 153. However, her claim to present ‘a solution’ to the authorship of the diptych has not been generally accepted. See, for example, the reviews of her monograph by Eisler 1997, pp. 1186–7 (suggesting it is more likely to be by an English artist); Weilandt 1998, p. 144. (Back to text.)
192 Gordon 2015, pp. 821–6; Gordon et al. 2015, pp. 116–17. (Back to text.)
193 Thomas 2020, p. 162 and fig. 32. For Bohemian panel painting see Royt 2003. (Back to text.)
194 Ilg 1996, p. 31, cites French manuscript illuminations, in particular the Virgin and Child in the Petites Heures of Jean de Berry (Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, MS lat. 18014, f. 97v). (Back to text.)
195 Gordon et al. 2015, p. 112. (Back to text.)
196 Lemoisne 1931, p. 58; Gordon et al. 2015, fig. 48 and p. 113. (Back to text.)
197 Gordon et al. 2015, p. 68. (Back to text.)
198 See Devon 1837, p. 285. (Back to text.)
199 See Mirot 1902, p. 156; Henwood 1980, p. 139 and p. 140, note 24 (citing BnF, ms. fr. 20684, p. 474). (Back to text.)
200 Gordon 2024. (Back to text.)
201 Karet 1992, pp. 8–19, esp. p. 9; Villela‐Petit 2006, pp. 315–44. (Back to text.)
202 In 1391, 25 painters were recorded in Paris (Henwood 1981, p. 95). (Back to text.)
203 For a painting of the Crucifixion attributed to Stefano (New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art) painted with egg, see Christiansen 2020, pp. 35–45; De Marchi 2021, pp. 8–47. (Back to text.)
204 For a manuscript illumination with a recumbent hart by Michelino (Cesena, Biblioteca malatestiana, ms D. XIV l, f. 1) see Castelfranchi 1996, pp. 116–27 and fig. 14. Wormald 1954, p. 196, and p. 31, fig. b, also noted a similarity of the hart in the Wilton Diptych to a drawing showing a recumbent hart by the Lombard painter Giovannino de Grassi (1351–1402). (Back to text.)
205 Siddons 2009, vol. II, part 1, p. 141; Gordon et al. 2015, p. 47. (Back to text.)
206 Popham 1928, pp. 317–18 (dating it to about 1380, style similar to that of André Beauneveu, but probably by an English artist); Conway 1929, p. 212; Shaw 1934, pp. 175–81, esp. p. 181, on the basis of comparison with fifteenth‐century manuscript illuminations; Evans 1949, pp. 102–4, p. 104, possibly by an Englishman ‘not unfamiliar with French painting’. (Back to text.)
207 For an overview of contemporary English panel painting see Tudor‐Craig in Alexander and Binski 1987, pp. 131–6, and Tudor‐Craig 1997, pp. 207–22. (Back to text.)
208 For gilders involved in the wall paintings in St Stephen’s chapel see Ayers 2020, vol. II, p. 1199. (Back to text.)
209 Evans 1950, p. 4, considered the exterior to have been painted or repainted to take to Ireland in 1398, as she dated the diptych to 1389, and was therefore having to explain the impaling of the arms of Edward the Confessor (which occurred around 1395, see above) on the armorial panel. Mathew 1968, pp. 47–8, attributed the armorial panel to Thomas Lytlington, the white hart panel to John Siferwas (a manuscript illuminator) and the interior panels to the ‘Master of the Wilton Diptych’. (Back to text.)
210 Beard 1931, p. 375 (by an English artist familiar with the ‘idiosyncrasies of English armory’); Cripps‐Day 1933, pp. 167–9. Tudor‐Craig 1997, p. 207, suggested it might be by the painter of the Black Prince’s tester (which Harvey 1947, p. 304, attributed to Gilbert Prince). (Back to text.)
211 Tristram 1949, vol. 2, part II, pp. 34–6 (he dated the diptych to about 1377). (Back to text.)
212 Tudor‐Craig in Alexander and Binski 1987, p. 135. (Back to text.)
213 For Gilbert Prince, who succeeded Hugh of St Albans as court painter, see Wylie 1898, vol. 4, Appendix A, pp. 157, 161, 170; Shaw 1934, pp. 171–5; Harvey 1947, p. 304 (p. 305 for Gilbert Prince’s will, naming Thomas Lytlington as his clerk and executor); Harvey 1948, pp. 61–2; also Ayers 2020, vol. I, p. 43; vol. II, pp. 1151, 1153, 1196, 1197, 1210, 1211, 1218, 1219 (wall paintings in St Stephen’s chapel in the Palace of Westminster, 1351–54). (Back to text.)
214 Calendar of the Patent Rolls 1909, vol. VI, 1396–9, p. 573, 17 June 1399. For Thomas Prince see Wylie 1898, vol. 4, Appendix A, pp. 174, 185; Appendix C, p. 221; Harvey 1947, p. 304 (attributing to him the tester over the tomb of the Black Prince); Harvey 1948, p. 65. For a certain John Prince, a painter in 1397, painting, gilding and silvering delicacies designed as birds for a banquet, see Wylie 1898, vol. 4, Appendix A, p. 183. (Back to text.)
215 Poole 1931, pp. 147–52, esp. p. 148. Poole (p. 149) noted that the Palmers were direct descendants of John of Gaunt but that no relevant records had been found. (Back to text.)
216 Ibid. , pp. 148–9. For other suggestions regarding the identity of Lady Jennings see Davies 1957, pp. 100–1, note 18, who observes that Mrs Poole mistakenly identified the diptych in the catalogue of the collection of James II made in 1688, since she misread ‘Rings’ as ‘Kings’; also Harvey 1961, pp. 2–4. (Back to text.)
217 Gambarini 1731, pp. 4–5 and 61–2. (Back to text.)
218 Anstis 1724, vol. I, p. 61, in an essay regarding the institution of the Order of the Garter, pp. 61–129. Anstis discusses the badges shown in the Wilton Diptych, p. 112ff. (Back to text.)
Glossary
- azure
- blue
- badge
- a device or emblem usually worn as a mark of identification, ownership or allegiance
- cap of maintenance
- a cap of dignity borne by a person of noble rank
- couchant
- descriptive of animals lying down
- cross patonce
- a cross with splayed arms ending in three points
- fleur‐de‐lis
- lily flower
- gorged
- wearing a collar around the neck
- guardant
- descriptive of a beast with its head turned toward the observer
- gules
- red
- impaled
- two coats of arms combined side by side on a shield
- lodged
- descriptive of a beast of chase lying down
- martlet
- a martin or swallow without feet used as a bearing
- or
- gold
- passant
- descriptive of animals walking
- pennon
- a type of flag
- semé
- scattered with
- statant
- descriptive of a beast standing
List of archive references cited
- Cesena, Biblioteca Malatestiana, D. XIV, 1: Boethius, De consolazione philosophiae, about 1390
- London, British Library, MS Egerton 3277: Bohun Psalter
- London, British Library, MS Royal 20 B VI: Philippe de Mézières, Epître au Roi Richart, 1395
- London, British Library, MS Yates Thompson 14: St Omer Psalter
- London, National Gallery, Archive, curatorial dossier for NG4451: Everard Green, typescript, 17 March 1905
- London, National Gallery, Archive, curatorial dossier for NG4451: John Harvey, letter, 16 November 1993
- London, National Gallery, Scientific Department, scientific file for NG4451: Jo Kirby, analysis by high‐performance liquid chromatography, August 2009
- London, National Gallery, Scientific Department, scientific file for NG4451: Ian Tyers, ‘Tree‐ring Analysis of a Panel Painting: The Wilton Diptych’, January 2023
- London, National Gallery, Scientific Department, scientific file for NG4451: unpublished report, 2023
- Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Ashmole 813: Philippe de Mézières, La sustance de la chevalerie de la passion de Iehsu Crist en François, 1395
- Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal, MS 2251: list of members of the Order of the Passion
- Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Fr. 13091: Psalter of Jean de Berry
- Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, ms. lat. 10483‐4: Belleville Breviary
- Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, MS lat. 18014: Petites Heures of Jean de Berry
List of references cited
- Alexander 1983
- Alexander, Jonathan, ‘Painting and Manuscript Illumination for Royal Patrons in the Later Middle Ages’, in English Court Culture in the Later Middle Ages, eds V.J. Scattergood and J.W. Sherborne, London 1983, 140–162
- Alexander 1997
- Alexander, Jonathan, ‘The Portrait of Richard II in Westminster Abbey’, in The Regal Image of Richard II and the Wilton Diptych, eds Dillian Gordon, Lisa Monnas and Caroline Elam, London 1997, 197–206
- Alexander and Binski 1987
- Alexander, Jonathan and Paul Binski, eds, The Age of Chivalry: Art in Plantagenet England 1200–1400 (exh. cat. Royal Academy, London), London 1987
- Anstis 1724
- Anstis, John, Register of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, London 1724, vols I and II
- Ayers 2020
- Ayers, Tim, ed., The Fabric Accounts of St Stephen’s Chapel, Westminster 1292–1396, translated by Maureen Jurkowski, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781787446151, Woodbridge 2020
- Barr 1993
- Barr, Helen, ed., The Piers Plowman Tradition: A Critical Edition of Pierce the Ploughman’s Crede, Richard the Redeless, Mum and the Sothsegger and The Crowned King, London 1993
- Barr 2001
- Barr, Helen, Socioliterary Practice in Late Medieval England, Oxford 2001
- Barron 2015
- Barron, Caroline, ‘Richard II: Image and Reality’, in The Wilton Diptych, Dillian Gordon, with an essay by Caroline Barron, contributions by Ashok Roy, Rachel Billinge and Martin Wyld, London 2015, 15–25
- Bath 1992
- Bath, Michael, The Image of the Stag: Iconographic Themes in Western Art, Baden‐Baden 1992
- Baumstark 1995
- Baumstark, R., ed., Das goldene Rössl. Ein Meisterwerk der Pariser Hofkunst um 1400 (exh. cat. Bayerisches Nationalmuseum, Munich), Munich 1995
- Beard 1931
- Beard, Charles R., ed., ‘The Wilton Diptych – English!’, The Connoisseur, 1931, LXXXVIII, 375
- Bellaguet 1840
- Bakhtin, Mikhail, Chronique du Religieux de Saint‐Denys contenant le Règne de Charles VI de 1380 à 1422, edited and translated by M.L. Bellaguet, Paris 1840, II
- Bennett 2003
- Bennett, Michael J., ‘Richard II and the Wider Realm’, in Richard II: The Art of Kingship, eds Anthony Goodman and James Gillespie, Oxford 1999 (paperback edn, Oxford 2003, 187–204)
- Biggs 2020
- Biggs, Elizabeth, St Stephen’s College, Westminster: A Royal Chapel and English Kingship 1348–1548, Studies in the History of Medieval Religion, L, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781787448728, Woodbridge (online edn, Cambridge 2010)
- Binski 1995
- Binski, Paul, Westminster Abbey and the Plantagenets: Kingship and the Representation of Power 1200–1400, New Haven and London 1995
- Binski 2009
- Binski, Paul, ‘Function, Date, Imagery, Style and Context of the Westminster Retable’, in The Westminster Retable: History, Technique, Conservation, eds Paul Binski and Ann Massing, Cambridge and Turnhout 2009, 16–44
- Binski and Howard 2010
- Binski, Paul and Helen Howard, ‘Wall Paintings of the Chapter House’, in Westminster Abbey Chapter House: The History, Art and Architecture of ‘A Chapter House beyond Compare’, eds W. Rodwell and R. Mortimer, London 2010, 184–208
- Binski and Massing 2009
- Binski, Paul and Ann Massing, eds, The Westminster Retable: History, Technique, Conservation, Cambridge and Turnhout 2009
- Bodkin [1947]
- Bodkin, Thomas, The Wilton Diptych in the National Gallery, London [no date, 1947?]
- Boehm and Fajt 2005
- Boehm, Barbara Drake and Jiří Fajt, eds, Prague: The Crown of Bohemia 1347–1437 (exh. cat. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York and Prague Castle), New York 2005
- Borenius 1936
- Borenius, Tancred, ‘Das Wilton Diptychon’, Pantheon, July 1936, XVIII, 209–14
- Borenius and Tristram 1927
- Borenius, Tancred and Ernest William Tristram, English Medieval Painting, Florence and Paris 1927 (reprinted, New York 1976)
- Bowers 2001
- Bowers, John M., The Politics of Pearl: Court Poetry in the Age of Richard II, Cambridge 2001
- Brière 1919
- Brière, Gaston, ‘Un nouveau primitif français au Musée du Louvre’, Gazette des Beaux‐Arts, 1919, 61, 233–44
- Brown 2017
- Brown, Matthew C., ‘The “Three Kings of Cologne” and Plantagenet Political Theology’, Mediaevistik, 2017, 30, 61–85
- Bucklow 2014
- Bucklow, Spike, The Riddle of the Image: The Secret Science of Medieval Art, London 2014
- Calendar of Patent Rolls 1905
- Calendar of the Patent Rolls: Richard II, 1391–1396, London 1905, V
- Calendar of Patent Rolls 1909
- Calendar of the Patent Rolls: Richard II, 1396–1399, London 1909, VI
- Campbell 1997
- Campbell, Marian, ‘White Harts and Coronets: The Jewellery and Plate of Richard II’, in The Regal Image of Richard II and the Wilton Diptych, with an introduction by Caroline Barron, eds Dillian Gordon, Lisa Monnas and Caroline Elam, London 1997, 95–114
- Candido 2001
- Candido, Joseph, ‘King Richard’s “I”’, Religion and the Arts, 2001, 5, 4, 464–83
- Carpenter 2007
- Carpenter, D., ‘King Henry III and Saint Edward the Confessor: The Origins of the Cult’, English Historical Review, http://www.jstor.org/stable/4493985, 2007, 122, 498, 865-891
- Castelfranchi 1996
- Castelfranchi, Liana, ‘La formazione e gli esordi di Michelino da Besozzo miniatore’, Prospettiva, 1996, 83/84, 116–27
- Champollion‐Figeac 1847
- Champollion‐Figeac, Aimé, Louis et Charles, ducs d’Orléans. Leur influence sur les arts, la littérature et l’esprit de leur siècle, Paris 1847, II
- Cherry 2010
- Cherry, John, The Holy Thorn Reliquary, London 2010
- Cherry and Stratford 1995
- Cherry, John and Neil Stratford, Westminster Kings and the Medieval Palace of Westminster, British Museum Occasional Papers, Department of Medieval and Later Antiquities, 115, London 1995
- Christiansen 2020
- Christiansen, Keith, ‘Stefano da Verona: A New Work and Some Old Problems’, Predella, 2020, 47, 35–45
- Clarke 1931
- Clarke, Maude Violet, ‘The Wilton Diptych’, The Burlington Magazine, 1931, 58, 339, 283–94 (reprinted, Sutherland, Lucy Stuart and May McKisack, eds, Fourteenth Century Studies, Oxford 1937)
- Comblen‐Sonkes and Veronee‐Verhaegen 1986
- Comblen‐Sonkes, M. and N. Veronee‐Verhaegen, Les Primitifs Flamands: Le Musée des Beaux‐Arts de Dijon, Brussels 1986, I
- Constable 1929
- Constable, W.G., ‘The Date and Nationality of the Wilton Diptych’, The Burlington Magazine, 1929, 55, 316, 36–7 & 40–5
- Conway 1929
- Conway, Martin, ‘The Wilton Diptych’, The Burlington Magazine, http://www.jstor.org/stable/864127, 1929, 55, 320, 209–12
- Coopland 1975
- ed. and trans. Coopland, George William, Philippe de Mézières, Letter to King Richard II: A Plea Made in 1395 for Peace between England and France, Liverpool 1975
- Cripps‐Day 1933
- Cripps‐Day, Francis Henry, ‘The Wilton Diptych – English!’, The Connoisseur, 1933, XCI, 167–9
- Cust 1909
- Cust, Lionel, ‘Portraits of Richard II’, in Exhibition Illustrative of Early English Portraiture, London, Burlington Fine Arts Club, 1909, 16–22
- Da Pieve et al. 2013
- Da Pieve, F., C. Hogan, D. Lamoen, J. Verbeeck, F. Vanmeert, M. Radepont, M. Cotte, K. Janssens, X. Gonze and G. Van Tendeloo, ‘Casting Light on the Darkening of Colors in Historical Paintings’, Physical Review Letters, 2013, 111, 20, 167–9
- Davies 1946
- Davies, Martin, National Gallery Catalogues: The French School, London 1946 (revised 2nd edn, London 1957)
- Davies 1957
- Davies, Martin, National Gallery Catalogues: The French School, 2nd edn, revised, London 1957
- De Marchi 2021
- De Marchi, Andrea, ‘Alla ricerca delle origini di Stefano da Verona, figlio di Jean d’Arbois: la Crocifissione von Lenbach’, Arte Veneta, 2021, 78, 8–47
- Devon 1837
- Devon, F., Issues of the Exchequer: A Collection of Payments Made out of His Majesty’s Revenue from King Henry III to King Henry VI Inclusive, London 1837
- Dobson 1983
- Dobson, R.B., The Peasants’ Revolt of 1383, second edn, London 1983
- Domenge 2012
- Domenge, Joan, Catalunya 1400. El Gòtic internacional, eds R. Cornudella, G. Macias and C. Favà (exh. cat. Barcelona Museu Nacional d’Art de Catalunya), Barcelona 2012
- Duffy 2003
- Duffy, Mark, Royal Tombs of Medieval England, Stroud and Charleston 2003
- Eikelmann 1995
- Eikelmann, Renate, ‘Goldemail um 1400’, in Das goldene Rössl. Ein Meisterwerk der Pariser Hofkunst um 1400, ed. R. Baumstark (exh. cat. Bayerisches Nationalmuseum, Munich), Munich 1995, 106–30
- Eisler 1997
- Eisler, Colin, ‘Review of Ulrike Ilg, Das Wiltondiptychon; Stil und Ikonographie, Berlin 1996’, Speculum, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2865984, 1997, 72, 4, 1186–7
- Enaud 1963
- Enaud, François, Simone Martini à Avignon, Les monuments historiques de la France, 3, 1963
- Englefield 1811
- Englefield, Henry C., Description of the Additional Plates of St Stephen’s Chapel (published as an addition to John Topham, Some Account of the Collegiate Chapel of St Stephen, Westminster, London 1795), London 1811
- Evans 1949
- Evans, Joan, English Art 1307–1461, Oxford 1949
- Evans 1950
- Evans, Joan, ‘The Wilton Diptych Reconsidered’, Archaeological Journal, 1948 (published 1950), CV, 1–5
- Ferris 1987
- Ferris, Sumner, ‘The Wilton Diptych and the Absolutism of Richard II’, Journal of the Rocky Mountain Medieval and Renaissance Association, 1987, 8, 33–66
- Fisher 1997
- Fisher, Celia, ‘A Study of Plants and Flowers in the Wilton Diptych’, in The Regal Image of Richard II and the Wilton Diptych, with an introduction by Caroline Barron, eds Dillian Gordon, Lisa Monnas and Caroline Elam, London 1997, 155–63
- Fliegel, Jugi and Barthélémy 2004
- Fliegel, S., S. Jugi and V. Barthélémy, eds, Art from the Court of Burgundy: The Patronage of Philip the Bold and John the Fearless, 1364–1419 (exh. cat. Musée des Beaux Arts, Dijon and Cleveland Museum of Art), Paris 2004
- Freeman Sandler 1997
- Freeman Sandler, Lucy, ‘The Wilton Diptych and Images of Devotion in Illuminated Manuscripts’, in The Regal Image of Richard II and the Wilton Diptych, with an introduction by Caroline Barron, eds Dillian Gordon, Lisa Monnas and Caroline Elam, London 1997, 137–54 (reprint, Studies in Manuscript Illumination, London 2008, 249–76)
- Froissart (1867–77)
- Froissart, Jean, Oeuvres de Froissart, Chroniques, ed. Kervyn de Lettenhove, 25 vols, Brussels 1867–77
- Galbraith 1942
- Galbraith, V.H., ‘A New Life of Richard II – Review of A. Steel, Richard II, Cambridge 1941’, History, 1942, 223–39
- Galway 1950
- Galway, ‘The Wilton Diptych: A Postscript’, Archaeological Journal, 1950 (published 1952), 107, 9–14
- Gambarini 1731
- Gambarini, Carlo, A Description of the Earl of Pembroke’s Pictures, Westminster 1731
- Germ 2003
- Germ, Martin, ‘Les onze anges du Diptyque Wilton et le symbolisme médiéval des nombres’, Revue de l’Art, 2003, 140, 2, 13–17
- Given‐Wilson 1997
- ed. and trans. Given‐Wilson, Christopher, The Chronicle of Adam of Usk 1377–1421, Oxford 1997
- Given‐Wilson 2013
- Given‐Wilson, Christopher, Chronicles of the Revolution, 1397–1400: The Reign of Richard II, Manchester 2013
- Good 2008
- Good, Jonathan, ‘Richard II and the Cults of Saint George and Edward the Confessor’, in Translatio or the Transmission of Culture in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance: Modes and Messages, ed. Laura H. Hollengreen, Turnhout 2008, 161–78
- Good 2009
- Good, Jonathan, The Cult of Saint George in Medieval England, Woodbridge 2009
- Goodman and Gillespie 1999
- Goodman, Anthony and James Gillespie, eds, Richard II: The Art of Kingship, Oxford 1999 (paperback edn, Oxford 2003)
- Gordon 1992
- Gordon, Dillian, ‘A New Discovery in the Wilton Diptych’, The Burlington Magazine, 1992, 134, 1075, 662–7
- Gordon 1993
- Gordon, Dillian, Making and Meaning: The Wilton Diptych (exh. cat. The National Gallery, London), London 1993
- Gordon 1997
- Gordon, Dillian, ‘The Wilton Diptych: An Introduction’, in The Regal Image of Richard II and the Wilton Diptych, with an introduction by Caroline Barron, eds Dillian Gordon, Lisa Monnas and Caroline Elam, London 1997, 189–96
- Gordon 2012
- Gordon, Dillian, ‘Small Worlds: The Orbs in the Westminster Retable and the Wilton Diptych’, in A Wider Trecento: Studies in 13th‐ and 14th‐Century European Art Presented to Julian Gardner, eds Louise Bourdua and Robert Gibbs, Leiden and Boston 2012, 31–8
- Gordon 2015
- Gordon, Dillian, ‘A Possible French Source for the Left Wing of the Wilton Diptych’, The Burlington Magazine, 2015, 157, 1353, 821–6
- Gordon 2021
- Gordon, Dillian, ‘Richard II’s Broomcod Collar in the Wilton Diptych: A New Identification of the Flowers and their Significance’, The Burlington Magazine, 2021, 163, 1420, 604–6
- Gordon 2024
- Gordon, Dillian, ‘Courtly Responses to Sienese Painting: From Siena to Northern Europe via Avignon’, in Siena: The Rise of Painting, 1300–1350, ed. Joanna Cannon (exh. cat. The National Gallery, London), London 2024,
- Gordon et al. 2015
- Gordon, Dillian, The Wilton Diptych, with an essay by Caroline Barron, contributions by Ashok Roy, Rachel Billinge and Martin Wyld, London 2015
- Grandmontagne 2005
- Grandmontagne, Michael, Claus Sluter und die Lesbarkeit mittelalterlicher Skulptur: das Portal der Kartause von Champmol, Worms 2005
- Green 1976
- Green, Richard F., ‘King Richard II’s Books Revisited’, The Library, https://doi.org/10.1093/library/s5-XXXI.3.235, 1976, XXXI, 235–9
- Hablot 1999–2000
- Hablot, Laurent, ‘L’ordre de la Cosse de genêt de Charles VI: mise en scène d’une devise royale’, Revue française d’héraldique et de sigillographie, 1999–2000, 69–70, 131–48
- Hartshorne 1909
- Hartshorne, Albert, ‘The Gold Chains, the Pendants, the Paternosters and the Zones of the Middle Ages, the Renaissance and Later Times’, Archaeological Journal, 1909, LXVI, 77–102
- Harvey 1947
- Harvey, John H., ‘Some London Painters of the 14th and 15th Centuries’, The Burlington Magazine, 1947, 89, 536, 303–5
- Harvey 1948
- Harvey, John H., Gothic England: A Survey of National Culture 1300–1550, second edn, London 1948
- Harvey 1961
- Harvey, John H., ‘The Wilton Diptych – A Re‐examination’, Archaeologia, Oxford 1961, 98, 1–24
- Henwood 1980
- Henwood, Philippe, ‘Jean d’Orléans, peintre des rois Jean II, Charles V et Charles VI (1361– 1407)’, Gazette des Beaux‐Arts, 1980, 95, 137–40
- Henwood 1981
- Henwood, Philippe, ‘Peintres et sculpteurs parisiens des années 1400. Colart de Laon et les statuts de 1391’, Gazette des Beaux‐Arts, 1981, 98, 95–102
- Howard and Sauerberg 2015
- Howard, Helen and Marie‐Louise Sauerberg, ‘The Polychromy at Westminster Abbey, 1250–1350’, in Westminster: The Art, Architecture and Archaeology of the Royal Abbey, eds Warwick Rodwell and Tim Tatton‐Brown, British Archaeological Association Conference Transactions, 39, 2015, I, 205–61
- Howe 2001
- Howe, Emily, ‘Divine Kingship and Dynastic Display: The Altar Wall Murals of St Stephen’s Chapel, Westminster’, Antiquaries Journal, 2001, 81, 259–303
- Hughes 2012
- Hughes, Jonathan, The Rise of Alchemy in Fourteenth‐Century England: Plantagenet Kings and the Search for the Philosopher’s Stone, London and New York 2012
- Ilg 1994
- Ilg, Ulrike, ‘Ein wiederendecktes Inventar der Goldschmiedarbeiten Richards II. von England und seine Bedeutung für die Ikonographie des Wiltondiptychons’, Pantheon, 1994, LII, 10–16
- Ilg 1996
- Ilg, Ulrike, Das Wiltondiptychon; Stil und Ikonographie, Berlin 1996
- Jacopo da Voragine 1993
- trans. Ryan, William Granger, Jacobus de Voragine. The Golden Legend: Readings on the Saints, 2 vols, Princeton, New Jersey 1993 (first edn, 1969; paperback edn, 1995; single-volume reprint (but with identical pagination), introduction by Duffy, Eamon, Princeton 2012)
- Jones 1995
- Jones, Michael, ‘“En son habit royal”: le Duc de Bretagne et son image vers la fin du moyen âge’, in Représentation, Pouvoir et royauté à la fin du moyen âge, ed. J. Blanchard (Actes du colloque organisé par l’Université du Maine (le 25 et 26 mars 1994)), Paris 1995, 253–78
- Karet 1992
- Karet, Evelyn, ‘The Pavian Origins of Stefano da Verona’, Arte Lombarda, http://www.jstor.org/stable/43105566, 1992
- Keen 1997
- Keen, Maurice, ‘The Wilton Diptych: The Case for a Crusading Context’, in The Regal Image of Richard II and the Wilton Diptych, with an introduction by Caroline Barron, eds Dillian Gordon, Lisa Monnas and Caroline Elam, London 1997, 189–96
- Kendall 2008
- Kendall, E., Lordship and Literature: John Gower and the Politics of the Great Household, Oxford 2008
- Kingsford 1917
- Kingsford, C.L., ‘Our Lady of the Pew – The King’s Oratory or Closet in the Palace of Westminster’, Archaeologia, 1917, 68, 1–20
- Kirby, Spring and Higgitt 2005
- Kirby, Jo, Marika Spring and Catherine Higgitt, ‘The Technology of Red Lake Pigment Manufacture: Study of the Dyestuff Substrate’, National Gallery Technical Bulletin, 2005, 26, 71–87
- Kirsch 1991
- Kirsch, Edith W., Five Illuminated Manuscripts of Giangaleazzo Visconti, University Park and London 1991
- Kühn 1993
- Kühn, Hermann, ‘Lead‐tin Yellow’, in Artists’ Pigments: A Handbook of their History and Characteristics, ed. Ashok Roy, 1993, II, 83–112
- Le Laboureur 1663
- Le Laboureur, Jean, Histoire de Charles VI, roy de France, escrite par les ordres et sur les mémoires et les avis de Guy de Monceaux et de Philippes de Villette, Abbez de Sainct Denys, par un Autheur contemporain Religieux de leur Abbaye, Paris 1663
- Lemoisne 1931
- Lemoisne, P.A., Gothic Painting in France: Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries, Florence and Paris 1931
- Lewis 2002
- Lewis, Katherine J., ‘Becoming a Virgin King: Richard II and Edward the Confessor’, in Gender and Holiness: Men, Women and Saints in Late Medieval Europe, eds Samantha J. Riches and Sarah Salih, London and New York 2002, 86–100
- Lightbown 1992
- Lighbown, Ronald W., Medieval European Jewellery with a Catalogue of the Collection in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London 1992
- Lindenbaum 1990
- Lindenbaum, S., ‘The Smithfield Tournament of 1390’, Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 1990, 20, 1, 1–20
- Lindley 1997
- Lindley, Phillip, ‘Absolutism and Regal Image in Ricardian Sculpture’, in The Regal Image of Richard II and the Wilton Diptych, with an introduction by Caroline Barron, eds Dillian Gordon, Lisa Monnas and Caroline Elam, London 1997, 61–83
- Luxford 2017
- Luxford, Julian, ‘Review of Rebecca Pinner, The Cult of St Edmund in Medieval East Anglia’, The English Historical Review, 2017, 132, 554, 117–18
- MacColl 2006
- MacColl, Alan, ‘The Meaning of Britain in Medieval and Early Modern England’, Journal of British Studies, 2006, 45, 2, 248–69
- Madersbacher 2001
- Madersbacher, Lukas, ‘Land in der gläsernen Kugel. Das “Weltbild” des Wilton‐Diptychons im Kontext christlicher Weltsymbolik’, in Imitatio. Von der Produktivität künstlerischer Anspielungen und Missverständnisse, eds Paul Naredi‐Rainer and Lukas Madersbacher, Berlin 2001, 71–93
- Marks and Williamson 2003
- Marks, Richard and Paul Williamson, eds, Gothic: Art for England 1400–1547 (exh. cat. Victoria & Albert Museum, London), London 2003
- Martin and Duval 1990
- Martin, E. and A.R. Duval, ‘Studies in Conservation’, Journal of British Studies, 1990, 35, 3, 117–36
- Mathew 1968
- Mathew, Gervase, The Court of Richard II, London 1968
- McKendrick, Lowden and Doyle 2011
- McKendrick, Scot, John Lowden and Kathleen Doyle, eds, Royal Manuscripts: The Genius of Illumination (exh. cat. The British Library, London), London 2011
- Meyer 1881
- Meyer, P., ‘L’Entrevue d’Ardres. 1396’, Annuaire‐Bulletin de la Société de l’Histoire de France, 1881, XVIII, 209–24
- Michael 2010
- Michael, Michael A., ‘Transnationality: The Wilton Diptych as Text’, in Tributes to Nigel Morgan, eds Julian M. Luxford and Michael A. Michael, London and Turnhout 2010, 365–74
- Micklethwaite 1873
- Micklethwaite, J.T., ‘A Description of the Chapel of Saint Erasmus in Westminster Abbey’, Archaeologia, 1873, XLIV, 93–9
- Mirot 1902
- Mirot, Léon, ‘Un trousseau royal à la fin du XIVe siècle’, Mémoires de la Société de l’Histoire de Paris et de l’Ile de France, 1902, XXIX, 125–58
- Mitchell 1997
- Mitchell, Shelagh, ‘Richard II: Kingship and the Cult of Saints’, in The Regal Image of Richard II and the Wilton Diptych, with an introduction by Caroline Barron, eds Dillian Gordon, Lisa Monnas and Caroline Elam, London 1997, 115–24
- Mitchell 2002
- Mitchell, Shelagh, ‘Richard II and the Broomcod Collar: New Evidence from the Issue Rolls’, in Fourteenth Century England, ed. C. Given‐Wilson, Woodbridge 2002, II, 171–80
- Monnas 1997
- Monnas, Lisa, ‘Fit for a King: Figured Silks shown in the Wilton Diptych’, in The Regal Image of Richard II and the Wilton Diptych, with an introduction by Caroline Barron, eds Dillian Gordon, Lisa Monnas and Caroline Elam, London 1997, 165–77
- Monnas 2004
- Monnas, Lisa, ‘The Furnishing of Royal Closets and the Use of Small Devotional Images in the Reign of Richard II: The Setting of the Wilton Diptych Reconsidered’, in Fourteenth Century England, ed. W.M. Ormrod, Woodbridge 2004, III, 187–206
- Monnas 2008
- Monnas, Lisa, Merchants, Princes and Painters: Silk Fabrics in Italian and Northern Paintings 1300–1550, New Haven and London 2008
- Monnas 2019
- Monnas, Lisa, ‘All that Glitters: Cloth of Gold as a Vehicle of Display 1300–1550’, in Arrayed in Splendour: Art, Fashion and Textiles in Medieval and Early Modern Europe, ed. C. Brachmann, Bettie Allison Rand Lectures in Art History, Chapel Hill and Turnhout 2019, 97–134
- Monnas 2020
- Monnas, Lisa, ‘review of Kathrin Müller, Musterhaft Naturgetreu: Tiere in Seiden, Zeichnungen und Tapisserien des 14 und 15 Jahrhunderts, Kunstgeschichtliches Institut der Goethe‐Universität, Frankfurt am Main and Berlin 2020’, The Burlington Magazine, 2020, 162, 1413, 1215–16
- Monnas forthcoming
- Monnas, Lisa, ‘From the Battlefield to the Table: The Costly Display of Heraldic Clothing and Furnishings’, in Heralds and Heraldry in Medieval England, ed. Nigel Ramsay, Donnington forthcoming
- Morgan 1997
- Morgan, Nigel, ‘The Signification of the Banner in the Wilton Diptych’, in The Regal Image of Richard II and the Wilton Diptych, with an introduction by Caroline Barron, eds Dillian Gordon, Lisa Monnas and Caroline Elam, London 1997, 179–88
- Morgan 2005
- Morgan, D.A.L., ‘The Banner‐Bearer of Christ and Our Lady’s Knight: How God became an Englishman Revisited’, in St George’s Chapel Windsor in the Fourteenth Century, ed. Nigel Saul, Woodbridge 2005, 51–61
- Muel et al. 1987
- Muel, F., A. Ruais, C. Mérindol and F. Salet, La Tenture de l’Apocalypse d’Angers, Paris 1987
- Nadolny and Roy 2006
- Nadolny, Jilleen and Ashok Roy, ‘The Original Technique of the Westminster Abbey Portrait of Richard II’, in Medieval Painting in Northern Europe: Techniques, Analysis, Art History. Studies in Commemoration of the 70th birthday of Unn Plahter, with Kaja Kollandsrud, Marie Louise Sauerberg and Tine Frøysaker, ed. Jilleen Nadolny, London 2006, 137–47
- Nash 2007
- Nash, Susie, ‘No Equal in any Land’: André Beauneveu, Artist to the Courts of France and Flanders, London and Groningen 2007
- Nichols 1780
- Nichols, J., A Collection of the Wills of the Kings and Queens of England, London 1780 (reprinted, New York 1969)
- Nievergelt 2010
- Nievergelt, Marco, ‘Conquest, Crusade and Pilgrimage: The Alliterative “Morte Arthure” in its Late Ricardian Crusading Context’, Arthuriana, 2010, 20, 2, 89–116
- Palmer 1972
- Palmer, J.J.N., England, France and Christendom 1377–99, London 1972
- Panofsky 1953
- Panofsky, E., Early Netherlandish Painting, Its Origins and Character, Cambridge, Mass. 1953
- Pastoureau 1985
- Pastoureau, Michel, ‘Leffervescence emblématique et les origines héraldiques du portrait au XIV siècle’, Bulletin de la société nationale des antiquaires de France, 1985, 108–15
- Poole 1931
- Poole, Reginald Lane, Mrs, ‘Notes on the History in the Seventeenth Century of the Portraits of Richard II’, Antiquaries Journal, 1931, XI, 145–59
- Popham 1928
- Popham, A.E., ‘The Wilton Diptych’, Apollo, December 1928, 8, 317–18
- Pujmanova 1997
- Pujmanova, Olga, ‘Portraits of Kings Depicted as Magi in Bohemian Painting’, in The Regal Image of Richard II and the Wilton Diptych, with an introduction by Caroline Barron, eds Dillian Gordon, Lisa Monnas and Caroline Elam, London 1997, 247–66
- Ragusa and Green 1961
- Ragusa, Isa and Rosalie B. Green, eds, Meditations on the Life of Christ: An Illustrated Manuscript of the Fourteenth Century, trans. I. Ragusa, Princeton, New Jersey 1961 (paperback edn, 1977)
- Rickert 1933
- Rickert, Edith, ‘King Richard II’s Books’, The Library, https://doi.org/10.1093/library/s4-XIII.2.144, 1933, 4, XIII, 2, 144–7
- Rickert 1965
- Rickert, Margaret, Painting in Britain: The Middle Ages, second edn, Harmondsworth 1965
- Ridyard 1988
- Ridyard, Susan, The Royal Saints of Anglo‐Saxon England: A Study of West Saxon and East Anglian Cults, Cambridge 1988
- Riley 1869
- Riley, Henry Thomas, Gesta Abbatum Monasterii Sancti Albani, London 1869, 3
- Roelofs et al. 2017
- Roelofs, P., R. Dückers, E. Ravaud, V.M. Schmidt, F. Scholten, D. Thiébaut and M. Ubl, Johan Maelwael: Nijmegen – Paris – Dijon: Art around 1400 (exh. cat. Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam), Amsterdam 2017
- Rosser 1999
- Rosser, Gervase, ‘Review of Dillian Gordon, Lisa Monnas and Caroline Elam, The Regal Image of Richard II and the Wilton Diptych, London 1997’, Apollo, 1999, 148, 60–1
- Royal Commission on Historical Monuments 1924
- Royal Commission on Historical Monuments (England): An Inventory of the Historical Monuments in London, vol. I, Westminster Abbey, London 1924
- Royt 2003
- Royt, Jan, Medieval Painting in Bohemia, Prague 2003
- Saul 1995
- Saul, Nigel, ‘The Vocabulary of Kingship’, English Historical Review, 1995, 110, 438, 854–77
- Saul 1997a
- Saul, Nigel, ‘Richard II’s Ideas of Kingship’, in The Regal Image of Richard II and the Wilton Diptych, with an introduction by Caroline Barron, eds Dillian Gordon, Lisa Monnas and Caroline Elam, London 1997, 27–32
- Saul 1997b
- Saul, Nigel, Richard II, New Haven and London 1997
- Saul 1999
- Saul, Nigel, ‘The Kingship of Richard II’, in Richard II: The Art of Kingship, eds Anthony Goodman and James Gillespie, Oxford 1999, 37–57
- Saul 2017
- Saul, Nigel, ‘Review of Dillian Gordon, Lisa Monnas and Caroline Elam, The Regal Image of Richard II and the Wilton Diptych, London 1997’, English Historical Review, http://www.jstor.org/stable/26793109, accessed 18 May 2023, 2017, 132, 556, 686–7
- Scharf 1882
- Scharf, George, Description of the Wilton House Diptych containing a Contemporary Portrait of King Richard the Second, London 1882
- Scheifele 1999
- Scheifele, Eleanor, ‘Richard II and the Visual Arts’, in Richard II: The Art of Kingship, eds Anthony Goodman and James Gillespie, Oxford 1999, 255–71
- Šefců, Chlumská and Hostašová 2015
- Šefců, Radka, Štĕpánká Chlumská and Alena Hostašová, ‘An Investigation of the Lead tin Yellows Type I and II and their Use in Bohemian Panel Paintings from the Gothic Period’, Heritage Science, http://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-015-0045-2, 2015, 3, 16, 1–15
- Shaw 1934
- Shaw, William A., ‘The Early English School of Portraiture’, The Burlington Magazine, https://www.jstor.org/stable/865981, 1934, 65, 171–84
- Siddons 2009
- Siddons, Michael Powell, Heraldic Badges in England and Wales, 4 vols, Woodbridge 2009
- Simon 1993
- Simon, Robin, ‘The Wilton Diptych, Exhibition Review’, Apollo, 1993, 138, 381, 143–80
- Simpson 2019
- Simpson, James, ‘Richard II’, in A New Companion to Chaucer, ed. P. Brown, Newark 2019, 359–77
- Smalley 1960
- Smalley, Beryl, English Friars and Antiquity in the Early Fourteenth Century, Oxford 1960
- Smith and Hawkins 1807
- Smith, J.T. and J.S. Hawkins, Antiquities of Westminster: The Old Palace of St. Stephen’s Chapel (now the House of Commons), London 1807
- Spooner 2015
- Spooner, Jane, ‘The Virgin Mary and White Harts Great and Small: The 14th‐Century Wall‐Paintings in the Chapel of Our Lady of the Pew and the Muniment Room’, in Westminster: The Art, Architecture and Archaeology of the Royal Abbey and Palace, eds Warwick Rodwell and Tim Tatton‐Brown, 2 vols, British Archaeological Association Conference Transactions, 39, Leeds and London 2015, 262–90
- Spring and Grout 2002
- Spring, Marika and Rachel Grout, ‘The Blackening of Vermilion: An Analytical Study of the Process in Paintings’, National Gallery Technical Bulletin, 2002, 23, 50–61
- St John Hope 1901
- St John Hope, William Henry, ‘The Cap of Maintenance’, in English Coronation Records, ed. L. Wickham Legg, London 1901, lxxxii–lxxxviii
- St John Hope 1913
- St John Hope, William Henry, Heraldry for Designers and Craftsmen…, 1913 (reprinted in paperback, Heraldry for Designers and Craftspeople, Ontario and London 1999)
- Staniland 1997
- Staniland, Kay, ‘Extravagance or Regal Necessity? The Clothing of Richard II’, in The Regal Image of Richard II and the Wilton Diptych, with an introduction by Caroline Barron, eds Dillian Gordon, Lisa Monnas and Caroline Elam, London 1997, 85–93
- Sterling 1942
- Sterling, Charles, La peinture française. Les peintres du Moyen Age, Paris 1942
- Sterling 1987
- Sterling, Charles, La peinture médiévale à Paris 1300–1500, Paris 1987
- Stratford 1997
- Stratford, Jenny, ‘Review of Ulrike Ilg, Das Wiltondiptychon; Stil und Ikonographie, Berlin 1996’, The Burlington Magazine, 1997, 139, 1131, 408–9
- Stratford 2012
- Stratford, Jenny, Richard II and the English Royal Treasure, Woodbridge and Rochester NY 2012
- Stroo 2012
- Stroo, Cyriel, ‘Tooled and Painted Gilding in Pre‐Eyckian Painting’, in Zeitschrift für Kunsttechnologie (Postprints of the symposium Let the Material Talk: The Technology of Late Medieval Painting in Cologne from the Master of Saint Veronica to Stefan Lochner, Cologne, November 2011), 2012, 26, 220–9
- Sutton 1962
- Sutton, Denys, ‘The Challenge of International Gothic’, Apollo, 1962, 76, 248–57
- Taburet‐Delahaye and Avril 2004
- Taburet‐Delahaye, Élisabeth and François Avril, eds, Paris 1400. Les arts sous Charles VI (exh. cat. Musée du Louvre, Paris), Paris 2004
- Taglianini 1993
- Taglianini, Patrizia, ‘Il dittico Wilton. Lo stato degli studi sul problema iconologico e storiografico’, Storia dell’ Arte, 1993, 77, 34–55
- Tanner 1952
- Tanner, L.E., ‘Some representations of St Edward the Confessor in Westminster Abbey and Elsewhere’, Journal of the British Archaeological Association, 1952, 3rd, XV, 1–12
- Taylor 1971
- Taylor, J., ‘Richard II’s Views on Kingship’, Proceedings of the Leeds Philosophical and Literary Society, Literary and Historical Section, 1971, XIV, V, 189–205
- Taylor, Childs and Watkiss 2003
- eds and trans. Taylor, John, Childs, Wendy R. and Watkiss, Leslie, The St Albans Chronicle, The Chronica Maiora of Thomas Walsingham, vol. I, 1376–1394, Oxford 2003
- Theilmann 1990
- Theilmann, John M., ‘Political Canonization and Political Symbolism in Medieval England’, Journal of British Studies, 1990, 29, 3, 241–66
- Thomas 2007
- Thomas, Alfred, A Blessed Shore: England and Bohemia from Chaucer to Shakespeare, Ithaca and London 2007
- Thomas 2020
- Thomas, Alfred, The Court of Richard II and Bohemian Culture: Literature and Art in the Age of Chaucer and the Gawain Poet, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781787449190, Woodbridge 2020 (online publication, 2023)
- Thurston 1929
- Thurston, H., ‘The Wilton Diptych’, The Month, 1929, CLIV, 27–37
- Tout 1930
- Tout, T.F., Chapters in the Administrative History of Medieval England: The Wardrobe, The Chamber and the Small Seals, Manchester 1930, V
- Tristram 1949
- Tristram, E.W., ‘The Wilton Diptych – I’, The Month, 1949, 1, 6, 379–90; ‘The Wilton Diptych – II’, 1949, 2, 1, 18–36
- Tristram 1955
- Tristram, E.W., English Wall Painting of the Fourteenth Century, London 1955
- Tudor‐Craig 1997
- Tudor‐Craig, Pamela, ‘The Wilton Diptych in the Context of Contemporary English Panel Painting’, in The Regal Image of Richard II and the Wilton Diptych, with an introduction by Caroline Barron, eds Dillian Gordon, Lisa Monnas and Caroline Elam, London 1997, 207–22
- Tyerman 1988
- Tyerman, C., England and the Crusades 1095–1588, Chicago and London 1988
- Vale 2001
- Vale, Malcolm, The Princely Court: Medieval Courts and Culture in North‐West Europe 1270–1380, Oxford 2001
- Van der Velden 2006
- Van der Velden, Hugo, ‘Diptych Altarpieces and the Principle of Dextrality’, in Essays in Context: Unfolding the Netherlandish Diptych, eds J. Oliver and R. Spronk (exh. cat. National Gallery, London 2020–1), Cambridge and New Haven, Harvard University Art Museums, 2006, 125–55
- Vannutelli 1997
- Vannutelli, Carla, ‘Nuove indagini sul dittico Wilton’, Arte Cristiana, 1997, LXXXV, fasc. 780, 173–8
- Villela‐Petit 2006
- Villela‐Petit, Inès, ‘Propositions pour Jean d’Arbois’, in La Création Artistique en France autour de 1400, ed. Élisabeth Taburet‐Delahaye (actes du colloque international, Ecole du Louvre, Musée des Beaux Arts de Dijon, Université de Bourgogne), Paris 2006, 315–44
- Waagen 1854
- Waagen, Gustav Friedrich, Treasures of Art in Great Britain: Being an Account of the Chief Collections of Paintings…, ed. and trans. Lady E. Eastlake, 3 vols, London 1854 (Galleries and Cabinets of Art in Great Britain, London 1857, supplement (vol. 4))
- Waagen 1857
- Waagen, Gustav, A Walk Through the Art Treasures Exhibition at Manchester: A Companion to the Official Catalogue, London 1857
- Webster 2020
- Webster, Paul, ‘The Cult of St Edmund, King and Martyr, and the Medieval Kings of England’, History, https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-229X.13029, accessed 16 May 2023, 2020, 105, 367, 636–51
- Weilandt 1998
- Weilandt, Gerhard, ed., ‘Review of Ulrike Ilg, Das Wiltondiptychon; Stil und Ikonographie, Berlin 1996’, Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte, 1998, 61, 1, 144–6
- White and Kirby 2006
- White, Raymond and Jo Kirby, ‘Some Observations on the Binder and Dyestuff Composition of Glaze Paints in Early European Panel Painting’, in Medieval Painting in Northern Europe: Techniques, Analysis, Art History, ed. Jilleen Nadolny, London 2006, 215–22
- White and Pilc 1995
- White, Raymond and Jennifer Pilc, ‘Analyses of Paint Media’, National Gallery Technical Bulletin, 1995, 16, 85–95
- Whittingham 1971
- Whittingham, Selby, ‘The Chronology of the Portraits of Richard II’, The Burlington Magazine, 1971, 113, 12–21
- Whittingham 1981
- Whittingham, Selby, ‘The Date of the Wilton Diptych’, Gazette des Beaux‐Arts, 1981, XCVIII, 145–50
- Wickham Legg 1890
- Wickham Legg, J., ‘On An Inventory of the Vestry in Westminster Abbey taken in 1388’, Archaeologia, 1890, LII, 195–286
- Wilkins Sullivan 1997
- Wilkins Sullivan, Ruth, ‘The Wilton Diptych: Mysteries, Majesty and a Complex Exchange of Faith and Power’, Gazette des Beaux‐Arts, January 1997, CXXIX, 1–18
- Wilson 2016
- Wilson, Christopher, ‘Review of Dillian Gordon, Lisa Monnas and Caroline Elam The Regal Image of Richard II and the Wilton Diptych, London 1997’, The Burlington Magazine, 2016, 158, 1357, 291
- Wood 1988
- Wood, Charles T., Joan of Arc and Richard III, New York and Oxford 1988 (paperback edn, 1991)
- Wormald 1954
- Wormald, Francis, ‘The Wilton Diptych’, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 1954, XVII, 191–203
- Wright 1859
- Wright, T., ed., Rerum Britannicarum Medii Aevi Scriptores, Political Poems and Songs Relating to English History, I, London 1859
- Wright 1992
- Wright, Sylvia, ‘The Author Portraits in the Bedford Psalter‐Hours: Gower, Chaucer and Hoccleve’, British Library Journal, http://www.jstor.org/stable/42554348, 1992, 18, 2, 190–201
- Wylie 1898
- Wylie, J.H., A History of England under Henry IV, 4 vols, London 1898, 4, 1411–1413
- Wyon 1883
- Wyon, Alfred B., ‘The Great Seals of Henry IV, Henry V and Henry VI, and more particularly on the Second Great Seal of Henry IV’, Journal of the British Archaeological Association, 1883, 39, 139–67
List of exhibitions cited
- London 1848
- London, British Institution, 1848
- London 1901–2
- London, New Gallery, Monarchical Exhibition, 1901–2
- London, Olympia 1928
- London, Olympia, The Daily Telegraph Exhibition of Antiques and Works of Art, 19 July–1 August 1929
- London 1945–6
- London, National Gallery, Exhibition in Honour of Sir Robert Witt, C.B.E., D.LITT, F.S.A. of the principal acquisitions made for the Nation through the National Art‐Collections Fund, 1945–6
- London 1993
- London, National Gallery, Making and Meaning: The Wilton Diptych, 1993
- Manchester 1857
- Manchester, Old Trafford, Exhibition Hall, Art Treasures of the United Kingdom Collected at Manchester in 1857, 5 May–17 October 1857
- Oxford 2024
- Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, National Treasures, 2024
About this version
Version 2, generated from files NG_2024__16.xml dated 30/08/2024 and database__16.xml dated 28/08/2024 using stylesheet 16_teiToHtml_externalDb.xsl dated 30/07/2024. Document created from design‐ready Word document and prepared for digital publication.
Cite this entry
- Permalink (this version)
- https://data.ng.ac.uk/04FM-000B-0000-0000
- Permalink (latest version)
- https://data.ng.ac.uk/01A2-000B-0000-0000
- Chicago style
- Gordon, Dillian, Rachel Billinge and Helen Howard. "NG4451, Richard II presented to the Virgin and Child by Patron Saints (‘The Wilton Diptych’)". Version 2, August 30, 2024. https://data.ng.ac.uk/04FM-000B-0000-0000.
- Harvard style
- Gordon, Dillian, Billinge, Rachel and Howard, Helen (2024) NG4451, Richard II presented to the Virgin and Child by Patron Saints (‘The Wilton Diptych’). Version 2. Available at: https://data.ng.ac.uk/04FM-000B-0000-0000 (Accessed: 11 September 2024).
- MHRA style
- Gordon, Dillian, Rachel Billinge and Helen Howard, NG4451, Richard II presented to the Virgin and Child by Patron Saints (‘The Wilton Diptych’), version 2 (2024) <https://data.ng.ac.uk/04FM-000B-0000-0000> [accessed: 11 September 2024]