Dukasaur wrote:Votanic wrote:Dukasaur wrote:Votanic wrote:Seriously, why would two Crusader enemy combatants be painted together in such a pose??
The posing is undoubtedly more symbolic than realistic, but Saladin and Guy did converse after the battle of Hattin and Saladin spared Guy's life.
I imagine this painting to represent the two of them looking out at the carnage they had created and sharing a moment of private horror.
Huh?, they're almost smiling?!
Don't look like smiles to me.
Guy looks pensive, contemplative, regretful.
Saladin looks more like this...
Votanic wrote:Though the smiles do seem somewhat fake, like the kind used to disguise a grimace of disgust, ...such as when looking at an ugly baby perhaps?
Or 30,000 mutilated corpses.
I am vindicated. There already seems to be widespread concensus that this Van Lievens also-ran 'heavily borrowed' from Peter Paul Rubens
Adoration of the Magi paintings. It seems he really didn't do much more than fancifully interpret gold jewelry to be handcuffs, ...and of course, change the title. Seriously this painting is poor quality shlock that does nothing to reveal the supposed history, characters, setting, or theme. The composition, expressions, lack of background, foreground, etc. Everything is wrong. I honestly suspect that Van Lievens did a sub-mediocre copy of a detail from a Rubens, and then gave it an contrived
ad hoc new backstory for added attention.