Carved from five separate parts and put together with dowels: a lid with the figure of a knight (a single piece), two short ends and two long sides of the tomb. The top is executed in high relief, and the sides of the tomb in low relief. The underside of the lid is very crudely chiselled out. Parts of the base may still be in situ where the abbey once stood.

There are several cracks in the sides of the tomb and in the lid. The knight’s face is badly damaged. The lid is missing the section with the recumbent figure’s legs, feet and fingertips, the hilt of the sword and parts of the canopy. A dog originally lay at the knight’s feet. The arms on the empty escutcheon at the foot of the tomb may have been chiselled off. The bottom of the tomb is missing.

Commissioned by or for Arnold van der Sluis (c. 1245-1296), erected in the Norbertine Abbey of Berne, near Heusden, after his death in 1296;¹¹J.-B. Gramaye, Antiquitates Brabantiae. Taxandria, Leuven/Brussels 1708, p. 7. donated by Jonkheer W.A.C. de Jonge, owner of the Bernse Hoeven, to the museum, 1886; on loan to Museum Catharijneconvent, Utrecht, 1976-2004

Object number: BK-NM-8657

Credit line: Gift of Jonkheer W.A.C. de Jonge

There are only fifteen surviving medieval Northern Netherlandish monumental tombs with a sculpted gisant (fig. a).²²For medieval tomb sculpture in the Northern Netherlands, see H.A. Tummers, ‘Medieval Effigial Monuments in the Netherlands’, Church Monuments: Journal of the Church Monuments Society 7 (1992), pp. 19-33; H.A. Tummers, ‘Recente vondsten betreffende vroege grafsculptuur in Nederland. Dertiende en veertiende eeuw’, Bulletin van de Koninklijke Nederlandse Oudheidkundige Bond 92 (1993), pp. 34-40; H.A. Tummers, ‘Laatmiddeleeuwse figurale grafsculptuur in Nederland’, Nederlands kunsthistorisch jaarboek 45 (1994), pp. 236-69. The tomb of Arnold van der Sluis is one of the most important examples in this group. The tomb comes from the former Norbertine Abbey in Berne (near Heusden), where it remained unprotected in the ruins of its church for centuries after the abbey was destroyed by the Geuzen (the Beggars) in 1579. During a visit in 1610 the historian Jean-Baptiste Gramaye (1579-1635) copied the inscription (already incomplete) in his Antiquitates illustrissimi ducatus Brabantiae³³J.-B. Gramaye, Antiquitates Brabantiae. Taxandria, Leuven/Brussels 1708, p. 7., noting that he had found the tomb ‘ad latus Chori’ – on the choir side. In 1886 the tomb, by now severely weathered, was removed from the site of the former abbey and given sanctuary in the Rijksmuseum.⁴⁴Together with four sixteenth-century gravestones; in 1927 three of these were returned on loan to Berne Abbey, which had been located in Heeswijk since 1857. The fourth was handed over to the Netherlands Cultural Heritage Agency (RCE). The Abbey well remains on the site.

From the lengthy inscription on the tomb,⁵⁵See the inscription field above. The part of the Latin text between brackets is missing from the monument and is taken from the transcription in J.-B. Gramaye, Antiquitates Brabantiae. Taxandria, Leuven/Brussels 1708, p. 7, with corrections by B.H. Stolte, ‘De graftombe van ridder Arnold van der Sluis’, Varia historica Brabantica 2 (1966), pp. 317-22, based on the metre of hexameters. we know that Van der Sluis was born into the house of the Lords of Heusden, a high-ranking family with a castle in what is now the town of Heusden.⁶⁶J.A. Coldeweij, ‘Arnold van der Sluis, ridder. Zijn afkomst en nageslacht (±1245-1296)’, De Nederlandsche leeuw 84 (1967), cols. 261-378, p. 1. Van der Sluis’s presence at the Battle of Woeringen (5 June 1288) is described by Jan van Heelu in his Rijmkroniek.⁷⁷J.F. Willems, Rymkronyk van Jan van Heelu betreffende den slag van Woeringen van het jaer 1288. Uitgegeven met ophelderingen en aenteekeningen, Brussels 1836, verse 8264. It can be deduced from various records that the knight was closely involved with the fortunes of Berne Abbey. He acted as a witness when John III of Heusden granted the abbey certain rights⁸⁸B.H. Stolte, ‘De graftombe van ridder Arnold van der Sluis’, Varia historica Brabantica 2 (1966), pp. 317-22, esp. p. 322. and donated money to the abbey at least twice.⁹⁹In the Berne Abbey necrology there are two references to this effect, with no mention of the years in question: on 28 November ‘In memory of Lord Arnoldus van der Sluis, knight, who gave us …’ (sum not entered), (Gedachtenis van de heer Arnoldus van der Sluis, ridder, die ons heeft gegeven …), ‘and on 26 August, namely a generous gift of one pound, i.e. the sum of 240 silver pennies’ (en op 26 augustus, te weten een royale jaarlijkse gift van een pond, d.i. de som van 240 zilveren penningen). See J.A. Coldeweij, ‘Arnold van der Sluis, ridder. Zijn afkomst en nageslacht (±1245-1296)’, De Nederlandsche leeuw 84 (1967), cols. 261-378, pp. 14-15. Regrettably, nothing is known about the installation of his tomb in the abbey church.¹⁰¹⁰Van der Sluis died on 28 November 1296, the same date as the record of one of the gifts in the Berne Abbey necrology; see the previous note. The tomb may have been paid for with this unspecified sum. In view of the date, it may be the knight’s legacy.

Van der Sluis’s escutcheon bears a wheel with six spokes – the arms of the family of the Lords of Heusden to which the knight belonged.¹¹¹¹For his genealogy, see J.A. Coldeweij, ‘Arnold van der Sluis, ridder. Zijn afkomst en nageslacht (±1245-1296)’, De Nederlandsche leeuw 84 (1967), cols. 261-378. We do not know who his mother was nor the family she came from. Although a large part of the end is now missing, old drawings of the monument show that there was originally a dog at the knight’s feet.¹²¹²These are a primitive drawing by Cornelis van Alkemade (1654-1737) dating from 1709 in the Berne Abbey archives and an inaccurate print in Van Dam van Brakel 1857 (after a 1736 drawing), in which the knight is erroneously shown as a bishop. The sides of the tomb are decorated with nine blind two-paned windows with pointed arches. At the foot end there are three shallow niches, with an escutcheon left and right, between them a standing, praying woman, who has to be regarded as a pleurant or weeper (fig. b).¹³¹³B.H. Stolte, ‘De graftombe van ridder Arnold van der Sluis’, Varia historica Brabantica 2 (1966), pp. 317-22, esp. p. 321; P. Quarré et al., Les pleurants dans l’art du moyen âge en Europe, exh. cat. Dijon (Musée des Beaux-Arts des Dijon) 1971, p. 70. The sinister arms (heraldic left), which would normally be those of the family on the mother’s side, are a crowned lion rampant with a forked tail, which are borne by, among others, the Heinsberg family.¹⁴¹⁴J.A. Coldeweij, ‘Arnold van der Sluis, ridder. Zijn afkomst en nageslacht (±1245-1296)’, De Nederlandsche leeuw 84 (1967), cols. 261-378, p. 10; H.J.J. Vermeulen, ‘Twee wapens op de tombe van Arnold van der Sluis, ridder’, Bernensia 13 (1968), pp. 1-2. The other escutcheon, which is usually reserved for the paternal arms, has either been chiselled off, for unknown reasons, or was never there in the first place. Vermeulen put forward the alternative suggestion that the two escutcheons can be interpreted as the paternal arms of the knight’s two wives. The arms with the lion correspond with those of the family of Arnold’s second wife, Agnes van der Leck. The other shield would then have been intended for the arms of his first wife, Aleydis van Roistelle, who may have been a member of the family of the Lords of Boxtel.¹⁵¹⁵See H.J.J. Vermeulen, ‘Twee wapens op de tombe van Arnold van der Sluis, ridder’, Bernensia 13 (1968), pp. 1-2.

The figure of the knight is rendered in the traditional way, in full armour, with eyes open, his hands folded in prayer on his chest, amend with a canopy above his head, a convention that probably originated in France and spread from there.¹⁶¹⁶K. Bauch, Das mittelalterliche Grabbild. Figürliche Grabmäler des 11. bis 15. Jahrhunderts in Europa, Berlin 1976, pp. 120-39; J.W. Hurtig, The Armored Gisant before 1400, New York/London 1979. As comparisons Leeuwenberg referred to the effigy of Robert d’Artois (d. 1317) in the Basilique Saint-Denis in Paris, attributed to the sculptor Jean Pépin de Huy (active in Paris 1311-1329), who originally came from the Meuse area,¹⁷¹⁷For this tomb, see G. Schmidt, Gotische Bildwerke und ihre Meister, Vienna and elsewhere 1992, pp. 46, 49-52, 54, 55-9, 72, pls. 33, 39. and the tomb effigy of Haymon I, Count of Corbeil (d. 957) in Corbeil Cathedral, which can be dated to around 1335-40.¹⁸¹⁸J. Leeuwenberg with the assistance of W. Halsema-Kubes, Beeldhouwkunst in het Rijksmuseum, coll. cat. Amsterdam 1973, p. 35. For this tomb, see G. Schmidt, Gotische Bildwerke und ihre Meister, Vienna and elsewhere 1992, pp. 73-76, 329, 331, pl. 55.

While masons in other countries had already switched to softer types of stone, such as marble, in the Low Countries they continued to use hard, dark sorts, such as Tournai stone, for tomb sculptures until the late fourteenth century. Stone of this kind is very difficult to work, which meant that the vitality of the sculpture often suffered; this is very evident in the effigy of Arnold van der Sluis. From the viewpoint of the use of materials and the type, the following tombs in the Northern Netherlands are similar: the tomb of Bishop Guy of Avesnes (d. 1317) in Utrecht Cathedral,¹⁹¹⁹For this tomb, see H.A. Tummers, ‘Medieval Effigial Monuments in the Netherlands’, Church Monuments: Journal of the Church Monuments Society 7 (1992), pp. 19-33, esp. pp. 22-24 and fig. 3; S. Frequin, ‘A voice from the grave. The Tomb of Guy of Avesnes in Saint-Martin’s Cathedral in Utrecht’, in A.J. van Egmond and C.A. Chavannes (eds.), ¬Medieval Art in the Northern Netherlands before Van Eyck: New Facts and Features, Utrecht 2014, pp. 160-71. the monument to Jan III of Arkel (d. 1324) and his wife in the Dutch Reformed Church in Gorinchem,²⁰²⁰For this tomb, see H.A. Tummers, ‘Het grafmonument van een heer Van Arkel en zijn vrouw te Gorinchem’, Bulletin van de Stichting Oude Hollandse Kerken 17 (1983), pp. 3-14. that of Nicolaas van Putten (d. 1311) and Aleida van Strijen (d. 1316) in the Dutch Reformed Church in Geervliet,²¹²¹For this tomb, see A. Mulder, ‘Het praalgraf van heer Nicolaas van Putten en van diens gemalin Aleida van Strijen’, Bulletin Nederlandse Oudheidkundige Bond 8 (1907), pp. 56-65; H.A. Tummers, ‘Het grafmonument van de heer Nicolaas van Putten (†1311) en Aleida van Strijen (†1316) in de Nederlands Hervormde Kerk te Geervliet, Zuid-Holland’, Bulletin van de Stichting Oude Hollandse Kerken 21 (1985), pp. 3-14. that of a knight of the Utrecht Drakenborch family in the Centraal Museum in Utrecht (c. 1370-90),²²²²For this tomb, see J. Klinckaert, De verzamelingen van het Centraal Museum Utrecht, vol. 3, Beeldhouwkunst tot 1850, coll. cat. Utrecht 1997, pp. 55-58, no. 4. and the four-person tomb of Gijsbrecht (d. 1342) and Arnold (d. 1363) van IJsselstein and their wives in the Dutch Reformed Church in IJsselstein.²³²³For this tomb, see H.A. Tummers, ‘Medieval Effigial Monuments in the Netherlands’, Church Monuments: Journal of the Church Monuments Society 7 (1992), pp. 19-33, esp. pp. 24-25 and fig. 5.

Although it was previously thought that there was a Tournai monopoly on the export of tombs to the Northern Netherlands,²⁴²⁴D. Roggen, ‘Doornikse grafplastiek in het Sticht’, Gentse bijdragen tot de kunstgeschiedenis 13 (1951), pp. 193-98. it later emerged that a number of the monuments, including those in Gorinchem, in the Centraal Museum, in IJsselstein and the present tomb, were carved from Namur stone, which resembles Tournai stone, and are therefore more likely to have come from the Meuse area, where there were also many monumental masons.²⁵²⁵H.A. Tummers, ‘Medieval Effigial Monuments in the Netherlands’, Church Monuments: Journal of the Church Monuments Society 7 (1992), pp. 19-33, esp. p. 24 and notes 25, 27. The tombs would have been transported across the Meuse River to the Northern Netherlands.²⁶²⁶H.A. Tummers, ‘Recente vondsten betreffende vroege grafsculptuur in Nederland. Dertiende en veertiende eeuw’, Bulletin van de Koninklijke Nederlandse Oudheidkundige Bond 92 (1993), pp. 34-40, esp. p. 38.

Bieke van der Mark, 2024

J. Leeuwenberg with the assistance of W. Halsema-Kubes, Beeldhouwkunst in het Rijksmuseum, coll. cat. Amsterdam 1973, no. 4, with earlier literature; H.L.M. Defoer et al., Vroomheid per dozijn, exh. cat. Utrecht (Rijksmuseum Het Catharijneconvent) 1982, p. 30; H.A. Tummers, ‘Het grafmonument van een heer Van Arkel en zijn vrouw te Gorinchem’, Bulletin van de Stichting Oude Hollandse Kerken 17 (1983), pp. 3-14, esp. p. 3; N.H. Koers, ‘Dr. D.P.R.A. Bouvy en zijn Catharijneconvent, 2’, Catharijnebrief 27 (1989), pp. 4-11, esp. p. 9; H.A. Tummers, ‘Medieval Effigial Monuments in the Netherlands’, Church Monuments: Journal of the Church Monuments Society 7 (1992), pp. 19-33, note 25; H.A. Tummers, ‘Recente vondsten betreffende vroege grafsculptuur in Nederland. Dertiende en veertiende eeuw’, Bulletin van de Koninklijke Nederlandse Oudheidkundige Bond 92 (1993), pp. 34-40, esp. p. 38; H.A. Tummers, ‘Laatmiddeleeuwse figurale grafsculptuur in Nederland’, Nederlands kunsthistorisch jaarboek 45 (1994), pp. 236-69, note 6; F. Scholten, ‘The World of the Late-Medieval Artist’, in H. van Os et al., Netherlandish Art in the Rijksmuseum 1400-1600, coll. cat. Amsterdam 2000, pp. 233-52, esp. p. 246; M. van Vlierden et al., Hout- en steensculptuur van Museum Catharijneconvent ca. 1200-1600, coll. cat. Utrecht 2004, pp. 64-66

B. van der Mark, 2024, 'anonymous, Tomb of Arnold van der Sluis of Heusden, Knight (c. 1245-1296), Meuse area, c. 1296 - c. 1325', in F. Scholten and B. van der Mark (eds.), European Sculpture in the Rijksmuseum, online coll. cat. Amsterdam: https://data.rijksmuseum.nl/200116967