Appologies for the speedy post.
Some kind of soft discosure, hybrids?
'The animal’s soul-penetrating gaze was painted over by a second set of artists in 1550 and spent the next five centuries under wraps'
Not much faith in the dates, but a deiberate cover up?
Before
After
'To be fair, the lamb—which features prominently in a panel appropriately titled Adoration of the Mystic Lamb—is meant to represent Christ himself. But perched atop its fluffy woolly-white body, the penetrating, close-set eyes, full pink lips and flared nostrils of the original lamb are, at a minimum, eye-catching, if not alarmingly anthropomorphic. Its “cartoonish” appearance is a marked departure from the serene, naturalistic style characterizing the rest of the scene surrounding it, as well as the other panels, Hélène Dubois, the head of the Royal Institute’s restoration project, tells Hannah McGivern at the Art newspaper, For that reason, during the century or so that the painting hung in its full, unadulterated glory, onlookers gazing upon the lamb probably got a more “intense interaction” than they bargained for, Dubois suggests.
'Exactly why the Van Eycks first depicted the sheep’s stare this way remains to be seen. But its expression wasn’t the only aspect of the painting modified in the 16th-century overpainting process: Conservators found that roughly 70 percent of the altarpiece’s original panels had been obscured by the 1550 paint job, McGivern reports. Also hidden, for instance, were several small buildings lost behind the addition of a blue hill'
More evidence of hybrids? Or diversion?
Relegion is not my thing, perhaps it is perfectly normal to depict Jesus as a sheep with human like features?
Some kind of soft discosure, hybrids?
'The animal’s soul-penetrating gaze was painted over by a second set of artists in 1550 and spent the next five centuries under wraps'
Not much faith in the dates, but a deiberate cover up?
Before
After
'To be fair, the lamb—which features prominently in a panel appropriately titled Adoration of the Mystic Lamb—is meant to represent Christ himself. But perched atop its fluffy woolly-white body, the penetrating, close-set eyes, full pink lips and flared nostrils of the original lamb are, at a minimum, eye-catching, if not alarmingly anthropomorphic. Its “cartoonish” appearance is a marked departure from the serene, naturalistic style characterizing the rest of the scene surrounding it, as well as the other panels, Hélène Dubois, the head of the Royal Institute’s restoration project, tells Hannah McGivern at the Art newspaper, For that reason, during the century or so that the painting hung in its full, unadulterated glory, onlookers gazing upon the lamb probably got a more “intense interaction” than they bargained for, Dubois suggests.
'Exactly why the Van Eycks first depicted the sheep’s stare this way remains to be seen. But its expression wasn’t the only aspect of the painting modified in the 16th-century overpainting process: Conservators found that roughly 70 percent of the altarpiece’s original panels had been obscured by the 1550 paint job, McGivern reports. Also hidden, for instance, were several small buildings lost behind the addition of a blue hill'
More evidence of hybrids? Or diversion?
Relegion is not my thing, perhaps it is perfectly normal to depict Jesus as a sheep with human like features?