The Last Judgment panel: mercy, resurrection and the wings of Death

The Last Judgment panel: mercy, resurrection and the wings of Death

A crowned archangel stands above an enormous skull. Behind him, small bodies struggle out of broken earth and a blue sea; underneath, other bodies tumble among creatures with teeth, horns and claws. Far above this confrontation, Christ raises his wounded hands within a gathering of angels and saints. The Metropolitan Museum's Last Judgment makes these radically different conditions occupy one continuous, narrow surface. Looking from top to bottom changes the experience from ordered assembly to exposure, falling and entanglement.

The museum currently dates the pair to about 1436–38 and attributes it to Jan van Eyck. Each image measures 56.5 by 19.7 centimetres; its paint was transferred from wood to canvas in 1867. The surviving original frames belong to both pictures.^[1] The companion overview examines their disputed first arrangement. Here, follow the right-hand image itself: how it offers protection, summons the dead and makes a boundary between salvation and punishment almost physically obstruct the view.

Close reading

These unmodified museum-published details show the central confrontation and the restored border. Open each view and compare it with the complete image above.

Details from The Last Judgment panel: mercy, resurrection and the wings of Death

1

Michael, the rising dead and Death’s wings

Follow the sword to Michael’s hand, inspect the shield’s lettering, then compare the people emerging at left and right. The winged skull marks the passage down into hell. Unmodified 760 × 760-pixel detail published in Maryan Ainsworth’s 2019 Met feature. Metropolitan Museum of Art, Public Domain; capture date unspecified. Proposed translations of the shield lettering remain uncertain.

2

The recovered red frame and fragmentary lettering

Distinguish the raised inner lettering from the white painted traces on the flat red border. Missing letters were not repainted. The lower border reads in the direction followed around the frame; the museum photograph is reproduced in its published orientation. Unmodified 1,920 × 352-pixel detail from Sophie Scully’s 2019 Met feature; Metropolitan Museum of Art, Public Domain. Photographic capture date unspecified; the feature shows the result of the 2015–16 frame treatment. Select the image to enlarge.

A heavenly court built around a wounded body

Christ's mantle spreads in a broad red shape, but its opening exposes his chest. His raised palms and bare feet display the injuries of the Crucifixion. The instruments carried around him connect the heavenly judge with the suffering shown in the other painting: the cross occupies the top, while the lance and sponge recall the last moments of his earthly life. Maryan Ainsworth's earlier catalogue emphasises this exhibition of wounds rather than the more customary opposed gestures of blessing and condemnation.^[2]

The arrangement makes authority visible through position and scale. Christ is much larger than the angels around the cross, yet the angels' long trumpets and extended bodies fill the upper corners. Their suspended garments interrupt the blue field without giving it the weight of ordinary ground. Below Christ, the blue-cloaked Virgin and green-cloaked Baptist incline towards the centre. Their lifted hands face the judge. The same frontal presence that confronts the viewer therefore receives petitions from within the picture.

Ainsworth interprets the apostles' white garments as Carthusian habits and the Virgin as a Virgin of Mercy, sheltering naked souls. Their clothing may evoke that order's devotional concerns, rather than portray identified contemporary monks.^[1]

Look at the gathering's changing arrangement. The white-robed men sit along two facing banks, with their knees, sleeves and turned heads giving each row a rhythm. A group of richly clothed women closes the space behind them. Other worshippers press in at the sides: dark habits at left, brighter courtly clothing and elaborate headgear at right. At this scale, the contrast between a white sleeve and a black garment does much of the work of separating bodies. Heaven is densely occupied, yet clothing and seating make its population comparatively easy to follow.

Sugiyama identifies a small relief of the Original Sin on the side of the apostles' seating.^[5] The miniature architectural detail introduces humanity's Fall into the scene of its final judgment. A piece of painted furniture thus brings another time into the assembly without requiring a separate narrative panel.

The earth and sea release their dead

Immediately below this assembly, space contracts into a low strip of landscape. At left, brown earth breaks into openings from which naked people rise. Their movements vary: some stretch up, some brace themselves against the ground, and others have not yet emerged. At right, the sea is crowded with heads, arms and small bodies. The turquoise water remains brightly visible between them. Resurrection has reached places that cannot be represented by a single graveyard.

The 1998 catalogue relates the broken earth and rough water to Revelation 20:13, distinguishing distant earthly fires from the red-lit underworld.^[2] The sea is integral to the subject, while the painting's physical environments remain distinct even within this compressed field.

Michael interrupts the line between land and water. His body is enormously larger than those emerging around him, just as Christ is larger than the heavenly attendants. Consistent naturalistic scale would make these two presiding figures difficult to find. Here their enlarged bodies locate the decisive points: judgment above and the confrontation with Death below. The little resurrected people supply the multitude; the larger figures make its fate legible.

Michael's equipment: defence, justice and difficult letters

Michael lifts a sword over his head and carries a circular red shield. His wings flare to either side, their coloured, eye-like markings quite different from the dark membranes of Death's wings underneath. His legs straddle the great skull. The shield's roundness, the sword's narrow diagonal and the layered horizontal bands of his armour give him a firm outline amid small, unsettled bodies. He occupies the central axis without adopting Christ's frontal symmetry: the tilt of his head and raised arm suggest an encounter still taking place.

A useful comparison survives in France. The Hospices de Beaune's account of Rogier van der Weyden's Last Judgment, made about 1443–51 for Nicolas Rolin's hospital chapel, explains Michael's role there through the balance weighing souls. In the Met painting, sword and shield instead give the central figure an explicitly armed presence. The two works share the subject, but their means of making judgment visible differ. Beaune's documented hospital setting cannot be transferred to the smaller New York object.^[3]

The tiny lettering on Michael's equipment also resists an easy reading. In their French study of Eyckian inscriptions, Jacques Paviot and Dina Goren identify forms of AGLA, Adonay and Tetragrammaton on the shield. Their analysis finds Greek-looking letters being used with inconsistent linguistic accuracy. On the breastplate, Paviot recognises a form of the Latin vindex, meaning avenger, and favours a cautious reading concerning justice at the waist over a longer proposed identification with Jesus Christ.^[4]

Paviot places such divine names within medieval prayers and protective formulas, suggesting that AGLA could act against demons. The argument does not require Van Eyck to have read Hebrew theological works fluently. Indeed, the point of the study is to question that inference.^[4] The museum's inscription field still calls Michael's lettering illegible.^[1] A responsible close view can therefore show where the writing occurs and explain scholarly proposals without presenting every mark as a securely translated sentence.

The shield makes that protective function particularly pointed: written names occupy equipment held towards the threatening realm. Paviot's interpretation places religious language in an active defensive setting, rather than treating the lettering as an ornamental display of foreign alphabets.^[4]

Why does Death have wings?

Below Michael, the skull faces outward, its empty sockets and teeth strikingly exposed. The ribs descend into the darkness while the arms and finger bones reach sideways. Behind them, two great membranes open across almost the whole width. This is neither a natural human corpse nor a creature disguised as an ordinary animal. It combines recognisable remains with an impossible capacity to spread over an entire region.

Watch: Jan van Eyck in context

Choose a Smarthistory close reading of the Arnolfini Portrait or the closed and opened Ghent Altarpiece.

Jan van Eyck, The Arnolfini Portrait

Smarthistory

Look closely at the room, mirror and gestures in the London double portrait.

Watch on YouTube

▶01 · PortraitThe Arnolfini PortraitSmarthistory▶02 · ExteriorThe Ghent Altarpiece, closedSmarthistory▶03 · InteriorThe Ghent Altarpiece, openSmarthistory

The wing inscriptions name a great chasm and the shadow of death. Miyako Sugiyama's study proposes that their combination recalls Bernard of Clairvaux's fourth sermon for All Saints' Day, where the resting place of righteous souls is separated from the wicked. Her reading sets the skeleton's spreading wings against the Virgin's protective mantle above. She explicitly leaves the sermon's direct use unproved; neither an adviser nor a performance of that sermon before this painting is documented.^[5]

The distinction matters because a source proposed for the language is not necessarily the source of the creature's entire appearance. The visible body does its own work. Its wings shelter no comfortable congregation. Its open frame instead exposes the falling bodies below. Mary gathers people into a garment; the skeleton's bones fail to enclose the people passing through them. Even before the words are deciphered, the two expanded silhouettes offer very different kinds of covering.

The cross at the top and Death's extended body below both approach the width of the picture. Between those two horizontal spans, the painted populations gather, rise and fall. Neither span simply closes the view: angels surround the cross, and limbs project through the skeleton's open body. That repeated expansion is particularly forceful within a format otherwise dominated by vertical movement. It gives the narrow picture a succession of pauses, each organised around a form the eye can recognise before examining the smaller figures.

Death also changes the viewer's relation to the image. Christ and Michael can be followed along the vertical axis, but the skull and wings stretch a barrier across that route. The eye must pass over them to examine the lower region. The skeleton is simultaneously a figure to recognise and a structure through which the composition is organised. Its position makes the descent feel like crossing a threshold.

Looking into the crowded lower field

Under the ribs, pale legs and torsos descend almost headfirst into the darkness. Farther down, human backs, faces and bent knees meet a succession of beaks, jaws and animal-like bodies. A large bird-like head juts across the lower centre. Red, brown and black forms repeatedly interrupt the lighter flesh. Looking closely does not resolve the scene into an orderly row of separate punishments; one action overlaps another, and bodies disappear behind other bodies.

The loss of stable footing distinguishes this field from the heavenly seating. Above, knees rest beside benches and bodies can be followed through clothing. Below, a torso may be turned upside down or grasped from several directions. The monsters also refuse a single consistent anatomy. Recognisable parts have been combined in ways that prevent the viewer from treating this as a scene of dangerous but ordinary wildlife. Its inventions make bodily vulnerability feel pervasive.

Sugiyama notes ecclesiastical and noble figures among those subjected to punishment.^[5] Status does not place everyone automatically in the assembly above. Yet identifying a mitre or crown differs from identifying a particular historical bishop or ruler. Nothing in the surviving image licenses a list assigning named individuals, precise offences or numbered circles of hell to every body. The scene can be described closely without supplying biographies the painting does not provide.

Words that direct the eye

Scully's 2025 notes distinguish worn gilded inscriptions above from orange painted warnings below and brown wing lettering. Infrared examination reveals moved wing lettering and an omitted forehead word.^[1] Hidden underdrawing is not visible lettering.

Around the picture, the original frame carries another coordinated programme. Marc Smith's palaeographical study identifies adapted passages from Revelation promising God's presence and an end to suffering, short passages about the dead yielded by sea and Death, and Deuteronomy's threats of hunger and destructive creatures. The sequence begins midway up the left side. Raised Latin letters occupy the curved inner border; Middle Dutch translations were painted on the flat outer border.^[6]

These passages meet different parts of the scene rather than merely supplying its title. Consolation belongs beside the celestial assembly; resurrection beside the earth and sea; threats beside the tormented bodies. Words therefore provide a second route through the height of the picture. Reading them can alter what a viewer notices next, turning an apparently small background swimmer into part of the subject's central promise.

The Dutch is fragmentary. Smith could reliably reconstruct about half of this panel's vernacular inscription, using remaining letter traces, regular Gothic spacing and contextual comparison.^[6] His work is a reconstruction constrained by material evidence, not a declaration that half the border now reads effortlessly. The Bibliothèque nationale de France preserves an illuminated Middle Dutch Apocalypse, Néerlandais 3, made in Flanders around 1400. It offers context for vernacular encounters with Revelation, although it is not established as the painter's manuscript or the frames' exact translation source.^[7]

Jones also stresses that the Middle Dutch letters have not been proved contemporary with the pictures. Smith's dating around 1450 leaves their precise relationship to the original design open. Jones suggests that the short resurrection passages opposite one another might have provided a starting point for devotion, rather than requiring a continuous circuit around the border.^[10] This is an interpretation of possible use, not an instruction recovered from the first patron.

What conservation changes about interpretation

The red outer border was recovered through investigation and treatment. Centeno and Scully explain how elemental mapping distinguished the lead associated with white lettering, while microscopic cross-sections established the sequence of red paint, a letter and later coverings. Imaging located evidence that was difficult to see from the surface; it did not automatically translate the text.^[8] Scully's account of presentation explains that damaged red areas were retouched with fine strokes, while lost letters were not painted back.^[9]

Scully records adjusted trumpets, an omitted drawn crown for the Virgin, abrasion above and no clear technical division identifying an assistant.^[1] Wear and figure size therefore matter when attributing a small, less finished face.

The Met's 1998 catalogue instead assigned much of the upper Judgment, except Christ, to an assistant trained in illumination, citing opaque, additive brushwork.^[2] The disagreement concerns interpretation of evidence, beyond a change of museum label. That earlier conclusion belongs to the research history; the current catalogue supplies the attribution used here.

Scully’s technical account also describes wet-in-wet handling in Michael's armour ornament. Intricate appearance need not mean every tiny mark was individually finished after the underlying paint had dried.^[1]

Comparison without inventing a chain of ownership

Susan Frances Jones's review of the later Met study keeps the attribution debate open. She draws attention to Michael's unusual combination of plate, textile and scale-like armour and a comparable costume on Nimrod in the Amsterdam Tower of Babel. She also questions whether the evidence establishes the specific Brussels shrine commission proposed for the pair.^[10] The Rijksmuseum currently catalogues its little Babel panel as anonymous, about 1490; its fuller entry leaves derivation from a Van Eyck workshop composition uncertain.^[11] Costume resemblance supplies a research question, rather than a secure painter's signature.

Another comparison is more directly compositional. Berlin's Gemäldegalerie describes Petrus Christus's signed 1452 Last Judgment wing as a free reworking of the New York design, retaining Christ as judge and Michael's struggle with Death and the Devil.^[12] Its existence shows the design's adaptability. It does not, by itself, establish that Christus personally inspected this precise object, entered Van Eyck's workshop or copied it for the same audience.

The New York panel remains distinctive in the pressure it puts on looking. An assembly that seems remote becomes a set of individual faces; a thin landscape becomes the release of the dead; a gigantic skeleton becomes both a being and a boundary. Begin with the open hands of Christ, pause at the Virgin's mantle, then follow Michael down towards the skull. Returning upward after looking into hell makes the offered shelter above newly conspicuous. The painting holds warning and protection within the same small, demanding field.

Related reading

The Crucifixion and the Last Judgment

Ghent Altarpiece

The Arnolfini Portrait

References

1. Metropolitan Museum of Art, The Crucifixion; The Last Judgment, 33.92ab: current catalogue, Maryan Ainsworth's 2023 entry, Sophie Scully's 2025 Technical Notes and inscription field. View Source
2. Maryan W. Ainsworth, catalogue entry 1, in From Van Eyck to Bruegel: Early Netherlandish Painting in The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1998, pp. 86–89: iconography and earlier attribution. View Source
3. Hospices Civils de Beaune, L'Hôtel-Dieu pas à pas, 2026 visitor booklet, section “Un chef-d'œuvre pour les malades”: Rogier's polyptych and Michael's balance. View Source
4. Jacques Paviot, with Dina Goren, “Les inscriptions grecques et hébraïques dans les tableaux eyckiens,” Revue belge d'archéologie et d'histoire de l'art 75, 2006, pp. 53–73, particularly 64–65 and 70–72: Michael's lettering and protective names. View Source
5. Miyako Sugiyama, “Jan van Eyck's New York Diptych: A New Reading on the Skeleton of the Great Chasm,” Arts 11, 2022, article 4, particularly sections 2–4: figures, Death and the proposed Bernard connection. View Source
6. Marc Smith, “Unlocking the Mysteries of Two Jan van Eyck Frames, Part Four: What Does the Text Mean?,” 2019: biblical programme and reconstruction limits. View Source
7. Bibliothèque nationale de France, “Apocalypse,” teaching dossier on Néerlandais 3, particularly p. 1: Flemish manuscript and Middle Dutch context. View Source
8. Silvia A. Centeno and Sophie Scully, “Unlocking the Mysteries of Two Jan van Eyck Frames, Part Two: Imaging the Hidden Details,” 2019: elemental maps and paint samples. View Source
9. Sophie Scully, “Unlocking the Mysteries of Two Jan van Eyck Frames, Part Three: Addressing Questions of Display,” 2019: retouching and damaged inscriptions. View Source
10. Susan Frances Jones, review of Jan van Eyck's Crucifixion and Last Judgment: Solving a Conundrum, February 2024: armour comparison, attribution and commission debate. View Source
11. J.P. Filedt Kok, “Anonymous, The Tower of Babel,” Rijksmuseum online collection catalogue, 2010, SK-A-2851: current identification and uncertain Eyckian model. View Source
12. Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Gemäldegalerie, Das Jüngste Gericht, Petrus Christus, 1452: signed wing and free reworking of the Met design. View Source