INCONGRUITIES AND PERPLEXITIES
Some of the most notable incongruities and perplexities, the recognition of which is inevitable in any sensible and non-dogmatic approach to the Polyptych.
What are the consistent answers, whether to these questions or to other iconographic absurdities, alleged by so many and so eminent hermeneuts?
Where, in fact, are the attributes of Saint Vincent (the palm of martyrdom, the ship, the ravens, the millstone, etc.) to be observed in the “Saint” — a deacon, moreover — who displays no religious insignia or identifying personal attribute (for the dalmatic does not constitute an individual attribute)?
The same perplexity holds for the other figures of “saints” invoked by other theses: where are their respective attributes? And what is the reason for the absence of religious symbols, or of the attributes hallowed in each case?
Neither, likewise, is there to be found any act of veneration with regard to the “Saint”. Only one of those present prays fervently, while the rest appear flagrantly detached from the context. The assembly is not gathered there to render him cult. The “Saint” appears to be merely an intermediary within the composition.
Only two rosaries are detectable (but devoid of crucifixes), and a single cruciform in which the shortening of the upper arm is conspicuous (rendering impossible any parallel with any known insignia).
Nowhere in the Polyptych is there to be discerned any reference to Afonso V's Maghrebi military campaigns, to their preparation, or to any other warlike or military event. The number of figures wearing armour, or displaying military equipment, is small in relation to the total of the sixty (or rather, fifty-nine) present.
If neither a miracle, nor a martyrdom, nor even the obsequies of some notable figure is depicted, what is the reason for the gathering there of the 59 figures?
Two monarchs are discernible (since they kneel upon a single knee), not identified by coats of arms, crowns or emblems of State, and even granting that they are depicted as professed members of military orders, none displays any representative insignia or collar.
The Polyptych depicts an entire illustrious gathering devoid of a single heraldic device or any other, at a time when the express identification of each individual's status was required and extremely rigorous, by means of the display of devices, or even, at times, of inscriptions inserted within the painting itself.
Why do some figures (notably, in the panels of the Fishermen and of the Relic) look out of the Polyptych (towards its beholder, addressing him), or appear indifferent, or absent from the assembly, inasmuch as they turn in one direction while directing their gaze in another?
Who is the child who, like the “Saint”, does not kneel? And why is it associated with a sword in miniature?
And the net that surrounds the Fishermen in the panel of the same name? Why is it that on the pavement of the same panel, to the left of the figure praying in the foreground, there is to be observed a dark patch that is obviously neither a shadow cast by it, nor by any other visible body?
What is the function of the knotted cord coiled at the feet of the “Saint”, in the panel of the Archbishop?
For what reason does a knight hold the sword by the blade and not by the hilt?
What is the significance of the little black box and of the board with eyelets, in the panel of the Friars?
How is one to interpret the lidless chest and the apparently illegible book, in the panel of the Relic? And if the book is illegible, why is it held that it may refer to the Miracles of Saint Vincent?
Why is it that only 14 of those present wear a conical cap and the others do not?