Panofsky uses many descriptions of the painting from the 16th and 17th centuries to explain some of the symbols in the painting.2 The use of these sources illustrates that this painting in particular was considered intriguing soon after its completion. But the main point of these descriptions, in my interpretation, is to show how many aspects of the description and symbolism can be lost in translation. Interpretation of symbolism is open to those viewing it and it can take on different meanings based on the person and how those items were represented in their own culture. There has definitely been a paradigm shift since Van Eyck painted this portrait, so it is near impossible to discern the original meaning intended. Thus the items surrounding the couple should not be used in interpreting the action taking place in the
Panofsky uses many descriptions of the painting from the 16th and 17th centuries to explain some of the symbols in the painting.2 The use of these sources illustrates that this painting in particular was considered intriguing soon after its completion. But the main point of these descriptions, in my interpretation, is to show how many aspects of the description and symbolism can be lost in translation. Interpretation of symbolism is open to those viewing it and it can take on different meanings based on the person and how those items were represented in their own culture. There has definitely been a paradigm shift since Van Eyck painted this portrait, so it is near impossible to discern the original meaning intended. Thus the items surrounding the couple should not be used in interpreting the action taking place in the