Iconology of the Wayfarer Triptych – Detail

Clearly, the principal deathbed temptation here is avarice, although pride might also be suggested by the foreground trappings of status and power, in the form of knightly jousting equipment (hardly of any use to such an old man) and the official, seal-marked documents that demons display along with moneybags in the strongbox at the foot of the bed [vandenbroeck, 1987, 96-97.]. What this painting makes clear is that the issue of choice, expressed in the form of right seeing, is still being offered to this dying man, who opts in the (very) end for the sinful temptations of a demon rather than the way of the cross and the light urged by the angel. (p.630)

Bosch includes, in the lower right corner, a group of weapons and pieces of armour arranged like a still life. These are the symbols of the Christian soldier, the means with which the faithful can arm themselves against Evil. The conflict of Good and Evil, eternal life and eternal damnation, arc clearly represented in the picture, both sides present in equal measure. (p. 192)

It is possible that the pieces of knightly armour lying in the foreground stand for vainglory or pride (superbia) or alternatively anger (ira). (p. 298)

The different objects, especially the weapons, proved more difficult to identify. Anne Morganstern has demonstrated in a short but persuasive study that the dying man was a pawnbroker [Morganstern, 1982]… A copy (?) after Bosch – the Seven Deadly Sins in a Globe Shell [Bosch, ca. 1505-1510] illustrates Avaritia by means of a pawnbroker, surrounded by clothes, a sword and coins, who is about to take a belt from an old lady. Consequently, the dying miser is not just guilty of avarice in general, but of the specific sub-form of usury, which in Bosch’s time was considered profoundly wicked. Requiring the payment of interest or the pledging of security was contrary to the teachings of the Church. (pp. 137 -138)

The objects in the foreground—the heap of armor and weapons, the cloak, and the sleeved garment— have not been satisfactorily explained. The interpretations put forward are diverse, though many can be divided into two large groups: those that see the objects as referring to the previous life of the miser and those that see the objects as imbued with moral or allegorical significance. (p. 18)

de Tolnay saw in the armor a social satire against the nobility [de Tolnay, 1937, 27]; for Baldass the discarded weapons indicated not only that the dying man was a knight but that gold accomplishes more than bravery and courage [Baldass, 1943, 236]. (p. 18)

De Tervarent interpreted the armor as an emblem of vanity that demonstrated that material weapons are powerless against death [De Tervarent, 1958, 34]. Combe and Fraenger also viewed the objects as symbols of vanity [Combe, 1946, 21; Fraenger, 1975, 296]. (p. 18)

Boon thought that the weapons identified the dying man as a knight, as did Reuterswärd [Boon, 1968, 157; Reuterswärd, 1970, 266]. However, Reuterswärd went further and related the red mantle on the low wall to the red shroud draped over the oxen of death on the right wing of the Prado Haywain triptych [Bosch, ca. 1512-1515]. Philip also found an evil meaning in the red cloak, but for her the mantle and the armor refer to Saint Martin and the contrast between Christian generosity and avarice [Philip, 1956, no. 17]. (p. 18)

Cuttler found in the foreground objects a veiled disparagement of knights and chivalry, similar to that found in Sebastian Brant’s Narrenschiff [Brant, 1944; Brant, 1962], and viewed the entire painting as a satire on the greed of false knights [Cuttler, 1969, 275]. (p. 18)

The author thought the weapons were symbolic of anger, while Seymour believed they alluded to the abandonment of the Christian active life [Hand, 1965; Seymour, 1961, 78]. (p. 18)

Morganstern viewed the miser as a usurer and thought that the armor had been pawned by an impecunious knight [Morganstern, 1982, 33, 39, no. 10]. (p. 18)

…given that the painting as a whole is concerned with the sin of avarice and with death, one can assume that these objects are also malevolent in nature and perhaps refer to the vanity of worldly possessions. (p. 18)

The Narrenschiff beggar before the low wall has been transformed by Bosch into a veiled disparagement of knights and chivalry, suggested by the helmet, lance, gauntlet, sword, and shield. The objects seem to be related visually and conceptually to the nearby draped cloth and the little evil monkish figure behind it. There is a vague allusion to jousting and tournaments, a very popular form of entertainment in the late medieval period. Naturally tournaments were castigated in the literature, as in the sermons of Jacques de Vitay and in other writings [Bloomfield, 1952, 129, 172]. (p.275)

Some own a seal and patent good // They prove they are of noble blood. // They’re first, they claim quite rightfully, // To be dubbed in that family,… [Brant, 1944, 253]

Viewed in this light, the association of the appurtenances of knighthood with the main theme of Avarice becomes understandable. This is not a social satire of the nobility, as Tolnay [de Tolnay, 1965, 25] thought, but a satire on the greed of false knights; it is also a statement of Bosch’s inherent pessimism. That all life leads to death is a truism, he seems to say, but men’s actions, because of the enormity of their sins, lead to an everlasting death without hope of resurrection to a new and better life. The baleful little man on the far side of the cloth hung over the low wall (a visual anticipation of the mounted skull-topped armored figure trailing a long cloth in the Lisbon panel) is a pictorial exposition of Bosch’s meaning, for in his thinking all the things of this world are permeated with evil. (p.276)

On the threshold lie symbols of earthly possessions, ownerless now: a length of cloth falling in heavy folds, signifying good, and knightly armor, signifying honor. A legacy-hunting cleric has already laid hands on the cloth, long treasured as family property. Like a thieving bat he is nesting in the death chamber. But the coat of arms helmet and lance are now no more than gimcrack rubbish lying discarded on the floor. (p. 298)

Almaengien’s theological conception emerges readily from the three fields of concentration… The threshold, with the vain symbols of good and honor, comes from the words of Ecclesiastes: “A man to whom God hath given riches, wealth, and honor… yet God giveth stranger eateth disease” [English Standard Version Bible, 2001, Ecclesiastes, 6:2] (p. 300)

…the objects strewn in the foreground, notably articles of clothing and weaponry, have lacked a convincing explanation. They have generally been considered as either allusions to the miser’s earlier life or as somehow related to the sin of avarice [Eisler, 1977, 66-69]. Tolnay suggested that the weaponry was included as a social satire against the nobility, while various other authors thought it simply alluded to an earlier time of rank and power in his life [de Tolnay, 1937, 27; Elst, 1946, 104; Combe, 1957, 24; Baldass, 1968, 41; Reuterswärd, 1970, 266; Gibson, 1983, 46; de Tervarent, 1945, 45]. Philip interpreted the coat as an allusion to Saint Martin’s generosity, in contrast to the miser’s greed [Philip, 1969, 34]. None of these explanations consider the objects indispensable to the central meaning of the painting. Yet their prominent position and their very nature suggest that they provide the clue to the specific economic abuse practiced by the miser. Bosch’s comment would hardly have been lost on his contemporaries. It has been misunderstood by the modern viewer since the economic conditions that evoked it are obsolete, in spite of currently escalating interest rates. For the objects suggest that Bosch’s miser was guilty of the sin of usury [Walker, 1975, 127] (p. 33).

Two articles of clothing are carelessly draped across the wall in the foreground, an orange coat and a pink cloak or other long garment. In front of them in disarray, just outside the room, are a helmet, a tournament shield, a sword, a lance, and a gauntlet. A rosary and a flask with tumblers were also earlier planned to form part of this accumulation, as they can be seen in the underdrawing visible beneath the thin paint on the right side of the wall and in an infrared photograph [Reuterswärd, 1970, 266; Eisler, 1977, 66]. (p. 33)

… all of these articles were among those commonly pawned by people in need of cash in the late Middle Ages [Morganstern, 1982, 39:note 9]. Jewelry and plate were among the most common articles pawned by the nobility; the tournament knights were prone to pawn their jousting equipment; but clothing, kitchenware, and even bedding were commonly pawned by the poor [Bigwood, 1921, 479-506; de Roover, 1948, 114, 121; Cartellieri, 1929, 90]… There is a striking resemblance between his hoard and that of a proven usurer. The inventory made in 1368 of the household of Hugues du Chataignier, recently deceased canon at Rouen, mentions a collection of goods curious in the possession of a venerable canon, but similar in nature to the miser’s [Bishop, 1918, 423-425]… he had stored many belongings for which he could have no obvious use. The nature of this dubious assemblage was explained, however, by little labels found on some of the plate and jewelry, inscribed “put on pawn” by so and so. Hugues du Chataignier, canon at Rouen, was a clandestine usurer, an undeniable violator of the law of his church concerning lending at a profit. The position of the medieval church on the question of usury was unequivocal. It rested on the combined weight of the Bible, the patristic writings, and the councils [Noonan, 1957, 11, 14, 19-20, 30, 294-303; Postan, 1963, 564-570; de Roover, 1967, 28; Le Goff, 1979, 27-29]. (pp. 33-35)

…the objects strewn in the foreground of Bosch’s Death and the Miser are directly related to its main theme, the death of an avaricious old man. (p. 37)

In the right front corner of the setting lie the trappings of nobility – the armor sword lance and shield of the toutnament joust. Since’ these objects seem out of place in a chamber like this, Vandenbroeck hypothesizes that such objects are being held in pawn for acrual noblemen by tthe old man who would thus be identifiable as a usurer [Vandenbroeck, 2002, 104-107; Morganstern, 1982, 33-42]. Certainly in late-medieval canon law, usury was a mortal sin, one that prevented the taking of interest and acted as a brake on early economic development [Nelson, 1969; Noonan, 1957; Kaye, 1998, 79-87]. (pp. 240-242)