17TH CENTURY PAINTIN
The emergenceon the art market in 7992of a new kunstkamerpainting related to the work of Jan Bruegel the Elder and Frans Franckenthe Youngerwas the occasionfor an article in Tablenuon the contribution of those prominent Antwerp artists to the fascinatinggenre of painted galleries.'The present article is inspired by the continued non-emergenceof two kunstkamerpaintings by their younger colleagueGuillam (also known as Willem or Guillaume) van Haecht. (SeeNote on a Name.) LOVE IN THE KUNSTKAMER ADDITIONS TO THE WORK OF GUILLAM VAN HAECHT (1593-7637)
Gary Schwartz heads destroy works of art and scientific instruments. For JuliusHeld The message seems clear: I lthough the two works art is honored by serious .l_L to which I allude have people of high moral and been referred to in passing intellectual calibre, while in the art-historical litera- those who are antagonistic ture, one of them has never to it or engage in icono- been reproduced before, clasm are morons. Francken and the other only once, in sometimes goes further in a l93o Berlin auction catà- elevating the status of art. logue. This is all the more In a painting entitled PlcÍu- amazing considering the ra Sancta, Christ himself high and growing estima- stands model to a woman tion enjoyed by van Haecht. personifying the art of sa- In her book of 7957, Les cred painting.l peintresflamnnds de cnbinets In the second halÍ oÍ the d'amateur, S. Speth-Holter- 1610s the genre originated hoff wrote oÍ him: 'il est sans conteste ORBITA PROBITÁTIS by Francken was picked up by an o1- le meilleur des peintres de Cabinets ÁD cHRISïi Ii\,tITÁTtONÊ,M der painter of higher social standing YT.RID:CO CFlRIsTIAN O d'Amateurs et, après plus de trois S VDSERVIENS. than the craftsmanlike Francken, Jan cents ans, ses teuvres n'ont rien perdu Bruegel (1568-1625),son of the great de leur attrait ni de leur éclat.' Yet, Pieter Bruegel. Bruegel was a favorite discussion of van Haecht has been of Archduchess Isabella,who with her concentrated entirely on two of his husband Albert of Austria ruled the paintings: The kunstknmer of Cornelis Southern Netherlands from their court oan der Geest in the Rubens House, in Brussels. In 1,677 and 1618 he Antwerp, and The studio of Apelles in adopted the idiom oÍ the kunstknmer the Mauritshuis, The Hague. The time painting in a series oÍ the Five Senses has come to publish all five known painted, in collaboration with Pieter kunstksmerpaintings by van Haecht, Paul Rubens (1577-7640), for Albert albeit in summary and preliminary and Isabella. Like Francken, Bruegel form.' The importance of studying the too assigned positive and negative entire group will become plain be1ow. Christian moral messages to the com- Only in this way does it emerge that binations of objects in the kunstkamer. all five share a common theme, which The aliegorical Íigure of Sight, for I have dubbed 'Iove in the kunstkamer' example, is shown studying an edify- and that all or nearly all conspicuously ing painting of Christ curing the blind, feature paintings that were famously ..--__!ffi while behind her is an admonishing fit for royalty. ChriÊiui- m*m ille image of the blind leading the blind.' The genre oÍ kunstkamerpainting There is however one new deoarture came into being in Antwerp in the first in his approach. Whereas for Franc->> decadeof the seventeenthcentury. The word kunstkamerreÍers both to the dis- play rooms of art and antiquities for mainly to the noble purpose of recon- 1. Altar of St. Gummarus,Lier, St. Gummaruskerk, which Antwerp was famous, and to ciling modern scienceand philosophy Theinsides of the zaingszuere repaintedby Guillam the paintings which evoke collections with Catholic faith.3 In spaces hung oan Haecht in L626-27.(Photo: AIb. Bequet,Lier) of that type, even those which are with paintings and filled with col- partiy or completely invented. In the lectors' objectsof all kinds, students oÍ 2. Title pageof l. Daztid,5.1., Orbita probitatis, in hands of its Íirst and most frequent cosmology debate the mysteries of cre- VeridicusChristianus, Antzoerp 1603. The imitation practitioner, Frans Francken the ation. In several of these paintings, by of Christ is expressedthrough the actiztity of Younger (7587-1642), it was devoted way of contÍast, figures with asses' painting. (Photo:Daaid Freedberg,Neu York) ZTH CENTURY PAINTINC
l. Guillam aan llaecht, The kunst- kamer of Cornelis ken the paintings within his paintings was confirmed once more around 1619 grandfather Godevaard van Haecht, oan der Geest, were mainly included on account of with a collaboration between Ian who moved to Antwerp from the vil- signed G.tr. Haecht their motif, and in most caseswere in- Bruegel and Frans Francken cele- Iage of Nijlen in 1510 or 1511, was a and dated 1628. vented by the artist to suit the oc- brating the Antwerp guild of St. Luke cabinetmaker. Godevaard's descen- Undocumented. casion, the paintings in Bruegel's se- and making use of paintings from the dants climbed higher up the hierarchy Panel, 700 x 730 ries - especially in The senseoí Sight archducal collection.' By 1620, then, of the arts, practicing sculpture, paint- cm. Antzuerp, Het (Madrid, Prado) - reÍer to existing the genre of kunstkamer painting had ing and poetry. The family married Rubenshuis. works of art, mainly by Rubens. Since become a prominent Antwerp special- into other Antwero clans in the related The inscription on a view of the archducal palace in ty, with Íar more specific overtones Íields oÍ printmaking and publishing, the lintel - Vizte Brussels is built into the scene, and than most genres. The medium had a the Liesaerts and Grapheuses, while I'Esprit - refers to since several of the objects are def- message. Kunstkamerpaintings tended several van Haechts and their in-laws the name of the initely known to have belonged to to convey the notion that the arts - also dealt in art. A notable distinction collector (Geest = the archdukes, Marcel De Maeyer con- especially painting - were an eminent- of the van Haechts is that, in the Esprit). The cluded quite reasonably that the ly praiseworthy pursuit, morally and words of the Antwero archivist who caraings aboae the painting as a whole is an evocation intellectually as well as aesthetically; has reconstructed thèir history, the Iintel emblematize and glorification of the collection of that Antwerp artists were suited as family was 'contaminated' with the the same thought. the archdukes.n none others to satisfy the desires of Lutheran form of Protestantism.t (This The doae of the The series was such a successthat in discriminating patrons and collectors; does not seem to be true of Guillam.) HoIy Spirit oaer- 1618 the city government of Antwerp and that both of these truths were de- The neak of artistic success in the fa- comes the skull of decided to do it over again lightly, monstratedby the patronagebestowed mrlv was reached bv (,uillam's father death. with yet another added twist. Jan on Antwerp painters by Archduke Al- Tobias van Haecht (1561-1631;also Bruegel was commissioned to create a bert and Isabella, who were famous known, from his own time on, as Ver- two-painting series of the five senses throughout Europe for their uncom- haecht). With his wild mountain to present to the archdukes, in which nrnmicino niofrr landscapesand paintings oÍ the tower the paintings within Sight and Smell Like Frans Francken and Jan Bruegel, of Babel he became one of the more would be painted by twelve difÍerent Guillam van Haecht too was born recognizable and respected artists in Antwerp masters! The association of into the kind of Antwerp dynasty of Antwerr: after iconoclasm. As the first kunstkamer painting with the artists artists to whom such a messagewouid teacheràf Rubens,to whom he was re- of Antwerp and with the archdukes have particular appeal. His great- lated by his first marriage, he shared
44 indirectly in the spectacular rise of his half an 'ame' oÍ Rhine wine. Frans impact, contributing greatly toward 4. Detail of fig.3. pupil's reputation after 1600. Francken had inserted a portrait of the apotheosis oÍ Matsys as the guid- The motto which Guillam, Tobias's third son, was van der Geest among the bystanders at ing spirit of the Antwerp School. In Cornelis aan iler baptized on November 7, 7593. His the miracle.r3 this role he was honored with two mo- Geest had canted mother, Susanna van Mockenborch, Van der Geest's sponsorship of nographs - by Franchoys Fickaert in on the tomb of died when he was not yet two years the restoration of a sixteenth-century 1648 and Alexander van Fornenbergh Quentin Matsys old, after giving birth to a daughter monument of Netherlandish art was in 1658 - which were incunabula of the utas: "Connubial named after her. A year later his father not an isolated incident. Whereas most historiography of art.'s Ioae turned a was remarried to Esther Pamphi, by patrons of the arts prefer to attach Temperamentally, Guillam van Ha- blacksmith into whom he was to have two more child- their names to new commissions,van echt was comfortable with this secon- Apelles." Matsys ren. We have no reason to doubt (but der Geest was equally open to the dary and adulatory relation to artistic became a painter no document to prove) that Guillam less glamorous need to repair and creation. He may have been the first to please his studied painting with his father. What maintain older structures and objects.'n painter to concentrate nearly exclu- >) belooeil wife. is documented is his participation in His most striking deed oÍ this kind art dealing in partnership with Tobias. was his rescue of the mortal remains fulius Held found an entry in the Ant- and tomb of Quentin Matsys. When werp aldermen's books dated Septem- during the enlargement of the Kla- ber 28, 1618, in which the merchant rissenkerk the artist's burial place was Cornelis van der Geest (about whom uncovered, van der Geesthaá the bon- we will have more to say below) decla- es and stones salvaged and brought to res to have received the year before, his house. On the one-hundredth an- for shipment to and sale in Spain via niversary of the artist's death, Decem- Ostend, forty-two iandscape paintings ber 77, 1629,he had the skeleton re-in- from 'Tobias and Guiliiam Verhaecht.'n terred at the foot of the tower of In this period van Haecht was in or re- Antwerp Cathedral. The tombstone cently returned from Paris. According was mounted on the tower, together to an unidentified source consulted by with a new plaque and portrait com- the largely reliable nine-teenth-centu- missioned by van der Geest. This act ry archivist F. Jos. van den Branden, of conspicuous commemoration was van Haecht left Antwerp for Paris on an early instance of genius-worship in August 24, 1.675.10(The family contacts Netherlandish art as well as a stimulus there were extensive and old. In the for cultural tourism. It had a lasting 1620s Tobias's cousin Hans van Ha- echt and his wife Antoinette Wiael had paintings worth more than 6,000 guil- 5. Matsys ders out on consignment witl"r no fe- Quentin or copy after wer than ten Paris dealers.") Guillam Matsys, Madonna returned sometime before 1619,when, and child. Panel, once more according to van den Bran- 75 x 63 cm. The den, he departed for Italy, where he Hague, Maurits- remained until 1626. huis (on loan Our Íirst record of van Haecht after from the Rijksmuseutt, his definitive return to Antwero finds Amsterdam). him engaged in the restoration of an Basically the sarne altarpiece from the church of St. Gum- composition as the marus in Lier, a town about eight painting zohich miles southeast of Antwerp. The altar, Albert of Austria dedicated to St. Gummarus himself, attempted to buy had been destroyed by iconoclasts in Cornelis oan 1580, and the aitarpiece, a triptych, from der Geest. The badly damaged. After a cheap (four fol- Iozafug outner of guilders) and unsuccessful attempt at that zaork was restoration ('as if it were new,' said the another burgher painter) ín L594-95, in 1620 the altar- collector, Peter piece was painted over while a new Stezsens.'That art- altar was being carved by Hans van looing soul, Heer Mildert. On August 77, 7626the altar- Steztens,'urote piece was loaded onto a barge to be oan Fornenbergh, shipped to Antwerp Íor repair and en- 'had the largement in tI-rehouse of Cornelis van following golden rule der Geest. The outsides of the wings, from the Song of Solo- depicting the Miracle of the Living mon inscribed on Tree, were entrusted for 108 guilders the golilen to Frans Francken II and the insides - frame: "Osculetur me os- an Adoration of Cltrist and a Presen- culo oris sui," Mat tation in the Temple (fig. 1) to van he kiss me u:ith th, Haecht, who was paid 168 guilders.'' kisses of his On 24, 7627, the wings were June mouth.' returned to Lier for installation. Out of thanks to Cornelis van der Geest, the 'inventor' oÍ the operation (he had also been instrumental in the commission for the new marble altar), the burgo- masters of Lier presented him with
ZO}/.IER 1996 4l 6. Cuillam oan Haecht, ApeIIes pninting Campas- sively on the creative recycling of the Van Hac.cht found at once the form ed above, for it was the sccond great pe, fauorite concu- work of other artists. A devotional that was to be his own contribution to instance of Cornelis van der Ceest's bine of Alexandcr attitude towards religious art also the history of art. lt sounds so simple Iove of that artist and a credit both to the Great, zuith came naturally to him. In 7627 he be- as to be nearly syllogistic. In 1626 he him and to Matsys. Alexander Iooking came a member and in 1633 an officer was working in the house with the 'A certain Mndonrn atrd child by on and comment- of the Jesuit brotherhood for unwed famous kunstkamerof Cornelis van der Matsys', wrote van Fornenbergh,'once ing. Unsigned, young men, which pursued an active Geest on the fronts of panels whose had as its owner the great art-lover undated, undocu- policy of dedicating art to faith. The backs wcre being, restoied by Frans Signor Cornelis van der Gheest: and mented. Panel, spiritual exercises taught by the Ant- Francken, the artist who had coined when in the year 1615,on the 23rd of 105 x 149.5cm. werp Jesuits were shot through with the kunstkamerpainting.'8 By 1628van August, their Illustrious Highnesses The Hague, imagery taken from the studio and the Haecht had oainted a ktLnstkamer Albertus and Isabellawerc in Antwerp Mauritshuis. kunstknmer(fig,. 2)." painting of the van der Geest kttnstkn- and came to see the "Konst-kamer" of Van Haecht's personal feelings will mer, on the general model pioneered the above-mentioned varr der Che'est also have been touched profoundly by by Francken and Jan Bruegel. Like the as well as a mock battle that was to his association with Cornelis van der earlier examplesby thesemasters, van take place on the Scheldt behind his Geest. His patron's housekeeper,Ca- Haecht's Kunstknmerof Cornelisuan der house, tl-re archduke so fell in love therina van Mockenborch, was a close Geest(Íig. 3) is imbued with Catholic with this picture of Mary that he used relative - perhaps the sister- of his lost humanist morals, glorifies collecting aII the means of the suitor to acquire mother.l7The artist's emotional deoen- and patronage,and honors Archdukes the same. But since two minds with dence on van der Geest and van Albert and Isabella as well as the but a single thought were opposed to Mockenborch can only have increased cultural elite of Antwerr,. The in- each other, the owner's and the arch- after the death in 7631.of his father novation introclucedby v;n Haecht is duke's, his Highness was rejectedwith (whose artistic successdid not bring in to combine these features with a start- the most respectful courtesy and ltire enough income to save his estate from ling degree of specificity. Not only are owner's] own love Ior self-conceit; seizure by the tax man). However this the figures portraits, and is the gallery "eyghen Liefde"l prevailed above the may have been,Guillam had found his presented as if it could be a private Ía-.,." fLê ':tt ^f -'i-n,' place. For the remaining ten years of collection, but the painting refers to a This rich anecdote,in which a prin- his short life, he lived in the house particular event that occurred on Au- ce and a patrician compete in love of Cornelis van der Geest, caring for gusr 23,1615, the day before Guillam of sacredart, provides the central mo- and memorializine his art collection. left Antwerp (fig. 4).r'The story is told tif for van Haecht's painting. In the Neither man marrièd. by the biographersof Matsys mention- picture over which they are struggling
+6 TABLEAU FineArts Magnzine the Iove between Mary and ]esus is huis. The timely Blindfolding ot' Amor expressed in a particularly physical which Venus is performing in the form - a kiss on the lips (fig. 5) - which large painting by Titian would have adds to the poignancy of van Fornen- averted the unfortunately uncontrol, bergh's metaphor. The imagery of led desires crf Samson (to be blinded romantic love is used by Fichaert as for his weakness), the elders spying on well, who writes of Albert's 'silent, Susanna, and Jupiter uncovering major, semi-public wooing' of van der Antiope. Apol1o would not be chasing Geest.''The archduchesstoo is smitten Daphne, Paris would have chosen by love for art. A page holds up a more wisely than he did in awarding Cupid aiming an arrow at her while in the golden apple, Mars would not her lap she fondles a flower piece by have been captured in bed with Venus, her favorite painter,Jan BruegóI. Holofernes might have kept his head. Is it coincidental that the visit of Al- Two paintings of couples in the Íore- bert and Isabella to van der Geest's ground contain mirrors in which we kunstknmeris depicted and described can look for our own reflection (fig. in terms of love? I think not. Three of 10).Do we find it in the mirror held by van Haecht's four other kunstknmer Palma Vecchio's Venetian courtesan paintings also contain a narrative sub- with her customer, or in that on the ta- ject, and all oÍ them deal with love. ble of the pious goldweigher and his Two show the well-known story from wife by ...Quentin Matsys? Pliny about how the painter Apelles We are on a descendins scale.The fell in love with the favorite concubine desire to possess is a dangerous of Alexander the Great while painting passion. It cost Cornelis van der Geest, her portrait for the ruler (figs.6-7). as pure as his heart may have been, Alexander's gencr()usand univers.rlly the high favor of the archdukes. It admired responsewas to give the giil could have cost Apelles his life, were it 8. Frans Francken to the painter. Van Haecht's visual- not for thc extraordinary graciousness II, ApeIIes ization of the scene Íollows that of of his lord Alexander. In the fourth feasting his eyes on a sleeping nymptr. painting Campas- Frans Francken in a painting dated kunstkamer to which we rurn our Tl-rereis only 'mirror' one painting in pe, the fauorite 7677now in Chatsworth (fig. B, for the attention, (fig. desire has run riot 11). this scene: the Venetian courresan we concubine of artist and the old lady),,. while the fi- The wife of the high Egyptian officer lrave already met in the Alexander nnd Alexander the gure of Campaspe is related to a Potiphar has let her lust for Josephget Apelles, a composition which the Ger- Great, in the painting on the upper right oÍ The the better oÍ her. In this painting, ap- man artist Lucas Furtenagel revised as presence of Alex- kunstknmerof Cornelisann der Geest(Íig. parently identical to the 'painting oÍ a portrait of Hans Burgkmair and his ander. Signed and 9)." The choice of this subject illuml- Joseph and the wife of Putufar, being a wiÍe with skulls in the reflection.,. But tlated 1617. Chats- nates the meaning to van Haecht of small Ái.rnstkamr'r painting,' mentión- instead of heeding the warning in worth, inzt. nr. B Albert and Cornelis's love for Matsys's ed in van Haecht's testament, alarm lhese represental.ions,Potiphar's wife 75/862. Collection Mndonnn. Both are examples of the signals are flashing all over. Above the allows them to excite her still further. of Duke of Deoons- desire to possess,excited by the sense two figures are paintings of Jupiter's Love of art is not an innocent occu- hbe. of sight. Once we have noticed this, we successful abduction of Europa and pation. are struck by the high frequency of the Apollo's frustrated pursuit of óaphne. The fifth known kunstksmerpainting motif among the paintings in the large On the table are bronzetti of Nessus by van Haecht, here illustrated íor the Alexanderand Apellesin the Maurits- raping Dejaneira and a satyr lustfully first time, is the only one lacking a central narrative tfig. 12).. Like so many kmstkarzer paintings, it is com- posed of modules and clustersthat re- cur in other works, which here are not subordinated to a dominant motif. The company is divided into Frans Franck- en-like groups of scholars and cognos- centi, none of which is elevated in importance above the others. In the adjoining room another Franckenes- que scene is taking place which is not found elsewhere in the work of van Haecht: two men with asses'heads are breaking a statue and a painting. The subject of that painting is Lot and his daughters,in which the two girls, fear- ing that the destruction of Sodom left 9. Detail of fig. 3. them and tl.reir old father the last The central group people on earth, ply the old man with of figs. 6-7 joins drink to get him to impregnate them. the olil zooman In the hands of many a Netherlandish and, with slight artist, the story is interpreted not as a changes, ApeIIes tragic attempt by frightened disaster from fig, 8 zoith a 7. GuiIIam ztan Haecht, ApeIIes painting campaspe. lrnsigned, undated, undocumenteil. victims to save humanity but as a lewd modified aersion Panel, 76 x 111 cm. Collection of charles de Beistegui, France. The painting of a zoanior seduction,all the more árousine for its of this ltalian behind Alexander, which also occurs in 6 and figs.3, 12, is giz:en a prominent place in incestuousness.In the corresp-onding painting in the The sense of sight by Bruegel I anil Frans Francken Jan il, which is belieaed to contain space in the large Alexander and Kunstkamer of only zoorks that belonged to the archdukes. I interpret this to mean that the painting Apelles, the same painting, possibly a Cornelis oan der uas gizten by aan der Geest to the archdukes upon the occasion of the uisit to his composition by Frans Floris, is being Geest. collection. held up for delectation. On the table >
ZOMER 1996 47 ITTI-{ CENTURY PAINTINC
71. Guillam oan in the main room of the new panel, Haecht, loseph and near the archway, is a painting oí a Potiphar's zuife in Gothic church in which a monumental n kunstkamer. golden statue is being worshipped. Panel, 51 x 70 cm. Iconoclasm, van Haecht seems to be Unsigned, undated. saying, is stupid but not necessarily Corresponds to de- unProvoked. scription of be- In the absence of a narrative motif, quest in artist's how shall we name this important new Iast zuill. Location addition to the small ceuvre of Guil- unknozan. Repro- lam van Haecht? My proposal is to duced from cata- descend to the second level of main Iogue of auction identifiers, which in the case of van held at Lepke, Haecht are the individual paintings Berlin, 1.1-12lune within the painting. The featured item 1936. (Photo RKD, in the KrnsÍkamer of Cornelis aan der The Hague,) Geestis of coursethe Matsys Mndonna. In the large Alexatder and Apelles it is the market scene by Joachim Beucke- laer, in the small one Rubens's Achilles among the women and in losephand f.he uife of Potiplur Rubens's Reconciliation of lncob and Esau.By this standard, the new painting should be called Klnsf- kamer zoith ann Dyck's Mystic marriage of St. Cntherine,a work that is pushed up to front center of the composition, ine because she was not beautiful greatest Antwerper of the day was in front of the Beuckelaer and flush enough for him, Christ himself uses a honored as an artist and a diplomat. with the picture plane (figs. 73-74)." materialistic, aesthetic metaphor for On August 13, 7628 - the year of the This title brings the painting into the- the spiritual state of a human being. KtLnstksmerof Cornelisuan rier Ceest- matic line with the other four, This was as good a precedent as one Rubens was summoned to Madrid. depicting a movingly appropriate sub- could wish for the dedication of art to The real reason was to involve him, ject for love in a Catholic ktrnstkamer. religion - and of excellent art at that, forty years after the defeat of the 'The legend surrounding the Mystic beautiful enough to be pleasing in the Armada, in a confidential Spanish Marriage is that before Catherine was demanding eyes of Christ the con- attempt to re-establish ties with baotized she had a dream in which she noisseur. Britain. The pretext was the delivery of saw the Virgin Mary holding the Guillam van Haecht himself is pru- eight paintings that had been ordered Christ Child in her arms. When the dent in his passion for art. He m.rkes from the artist some years previously Virgin asked the child to allow Cather- as strong a caseas he can for the joys by the Spanish court. He left Antwerp ine to serve him, he averted his heacl of collecting while taking care to show with the paintings on August 29th and and said that she was not beautiful that he is aware of its dangers and by June 26,7629 they had been paid enough, even though she was reno- those of visual seduction in general. for, framed in gilded frames and hung wned for her beauty. Then, tormented To affirm the morality of art in a post- by order of Philip IV in the New Room about what she should do to make iconoclastic environment required de- of the Alcázar, tlle most prominent herself more appealing to the Christ licate judgment.:" That kind of judg- display venue in the paiace.'"The com- Child, she allowed herself to be ment is manifested in van Haecht's positions of two of these paintings as baptized. When she once again had kunstkamer paintings. Repairing the well as a third which was already in the dream, the Christ Child offered her damage oÍ iconoclasm- the activity in Soain are recreated bv van Haecht in the ring, which she found on her fin- which we first make the acquaintance three different paintings of his own. ger when she woke.'2' of Guillam van Haecht and Cornelis The reconciliatiottof lncohand Esau of ca. For the Christ child to extend a van der Geest - is a fitting metaphor 7625-27is the showpiece of losephand 10. Details of fig. wedding ring to a devoted worshipper for the kunstkamerpaintings on which the ruife of Potiphnr; Mucitrs Scaez,olnbe- 6. The paintings is in itself r:roof that no matter what they collaborated as patron and fore Lars Porsennt(figs. 15-17)occupies zuith mirrors, one Calvinists may think, the sanctified painter. The love engendered in the a olace of honor in the Kunsfkamerzuitlr of a sinful and the exchange of precious goods between kunstkamercan be divine love, but not ain Dyck's Mystic marrin,geof St. Csther- other of a pious God and man is possible.In that sense exclusively. The sensual mechanism itre; and Achillas discoaeredbr1 Odyssctts couple, are here Christ's ring reéiprocates the gift of which triggers love Íor God borders, nntong the daughters of Lycomedesad- interpreted as a the Magi, an offering of costly obiects in the creatures of flesh and blood we orns the mantleDiece of the small challenge to the from man to God. But the story has are, on the realms of the libido and the Alrrnrtdrr nttd Aucllcs.'' To these zsiezoerto mitrot added relevance.By rejecting Cather- desire of the collector to oossess.The paintings by Rubens in the collection his or her ozan wise apologist for art does well to ack- of the Spanish king can possibly be ad- love life. nowledge rather than deny this. ded a gift offered to the English crown/ On a more mundane level which the Mystic mnrríngaof St. Catherineby nonetheless underscores this message, van Dyck. By all appearances,the pain- the same paintings also exemplify roy- tine in the van Haecht seems to be the al patronage oÍ the arts. Not only is 'vcry beautitul Virgin and St. Catheri- this plain in the main action of the ne, ... one oÍ the best pictures Van Ktrnstkamer of Cornelis ann der Geest Dyck has executed,'that in December and the two paintings oÍ Alexandernnd 1631 was sent to England 'to present Apelles,it is also implicit in the choice either to the King or the Queen as a of many of the paintings singled out new year's gifl' by Bal-thazar Gerbier, for special display. The most striking resident of Charles I at the court of the proof of this concerns a famous epi- Infanta Isabella in Brussels. According sode in Rubens's liÍe, in which the to Gerbier, the painting in question
48 TABLEAU FirrcArts Mngnzine had been hung by Isabella 'in the cha- his work comes up with different sets dobrandini. His rival Cardinal Scipio pel of the Queen Mother [Maria de' of significances in his overloaded com- Borghese wanted so badly to own it Medicil when she was at her Court' in positions, of which the gloriÍication of that he seized it Írom the artist before Brussels in the summer oÍ 7637." art and collecting are only the most it was delivered, arresting Domenichi- Al1 of this information fits admira- obvious. In the present context I wish no to prevent him from interfering and bly into our initial sketchof kunstkamer to call attention to one more of these: paying him for it at a derisory rate. painting as a means of advertising the ethics of patronage as exemplified In juxtaposing these paintings in Antwerp as a premier source for high in the Iarge Alexander and Apelles. Apelles' studio, Guillam van Haecht art, with archducal patÍonage serving Several of the paintings on the wall of would appear to be submitting patron- as a testimonial. The works by Rubens honor and foreground of that com- age to the same nuanced critique as he 12. GuiIIam aan and van Dyck in van Haecht's kunstka- position were well known for the re- does to love of art, on a scale declining Haecht, Kunstka- mer patntings were destined for even Iationship they typified between a pa- from the selflessness of Alexander mer zuith oan more exalted courts than that of tron and a painter. Two contemporary vis-à-vis Apelles through the mutual Dyck's Mystic Brussels. Antwerp was clearly indis- Antwerp examples are heartwarming- respect of van der Geest and Isabella marriage of St. pensable for the realization oÍ the 1y positive: The Bsttle of the Amazons for Rubens and Bruegel to the un- Catherine. Panel, cultural ambitions of Spanish and was painted by Rubens for Cornelis speakable aggressiveness oÍ Scipio 73 x 104 cm. English royalty as we1I. Obversely, the van der Geest in thanks for brokering Borghese to Domenichino. This hypo- Unsigned, undated, kunstkamersof the city from which this the commission of The eleaationof the thesis could be judged better if we undocumented. art emergesare virtual Alcázars on the Cross;and Diana departingfor the hunt knew the story behind the most pro- Priaate collection. Schelde. by Rubens and Jan Bruegel, which im- minently displayed painting in the In the left middle- This reading of van Haecht as a re- mortalizes the hounds and other be- studio: tlre Market in a harbor town by ground, studying a pairer oÍ the moral and material dam- loved animals owned by the Infanta Joachim Beuckelaer. Beuckelaer was manuscript by the age of iconoclasm and a prociaimer of Isabella, was a token of the trust bet- typecast by Karel van Mander in the light from the znin- Antwerp artistic hegemony by no ween her and the painters. The lru- role of the conscientious and all too tlozt, is the occult means exhausts the meanings of his umph of the nymphs above them, by trusting soul who let himself be ex- scientist Para- kunstksmerpaintings. Van Haecht well way of contrast, was the object of a ploited by ruthless patrons. celsus (L493-L541-). deserved his epithet, in a prini of notoriously unediíying act of high 'Among other works ... he made for His presence here, 1630 dedicated to him by Guillaume patronage. The original painting by the mintmaster of Antwerp a very ex- as in other guises Panneels:'pictor artificiosissimi An- Domenichino (of which van Haecht cellent piece which was commissioned in figs.3 and 7, tuerpiensis': supremely sophisticated apparently owned a copy) had been from him for a low price; but daily the suggests that aan painteÍ of Ar-rtwerp. Every student of commissioned by Cardinal Pietro A1- mintmaster added so many things >> Haecht u)as inte- rested in hermetic philosophy.
ZOMER 1996 49 rTTH csxruny PATNTTNG
that also had to be in it, for he always etching plates in the estate.The prov- step-sister Margriete van Immerseel was mar- brought something novel to be por- isions of the wil1, which appoints Cor- ricd to the important burgomaster Adam Rade he himself was thc uncle of thc trayed, that it was impossible for him nelis van dcr as main makers ancl Geest executor church n'arden of thc Sint Gummaruskerk, to earn his bread and cheesewith it, so and beclueathesto him the best indivi- Andries Ilechts. (Held 1982, p. 64; Lcemans, full was the piece with fowl, fisl-r, dual items, speak of a close and p. 299.) Van Hacchi's half-sister Maria van Haecht mcat, fruit and vegetables.'ra trusting relationship between the tw
50 TABLEAU FineArts Mngazina position nonetheless evokes the Spanish royal 15. Detail of fig. 12. The three paintings in collection. Needless to say, the image in a kunst- this group - Mucius ScaeztolabeforeLars kamer painting of a recognizable composition cannot tell us which version oí the subject was Porsenna,Salome receiTring the headof consulted. John the Baptist anil Churchinterior with 32. Wheelock, p. 226. Carpenter, pp.57-64. golden iilol do not occurin any other 33. Harris. paintings by z.tanHaecht. 34. Miedema, p. 210 (van Mander, fol. 238r). 35. Duverger ^1989,p. 91, document 946. 16. Pieter Paul Rubens or copy after
Literature Rubens, Mucius Scaeaola before Larc Baudouin, Frans, "De 'Constkamer' van Corne- P ors enn a. Unsigne il, und ate d. Cano as, lis van der Geest, geschilderd door Willem van 187 x 156 cffi. Budapest, Szépmiiz:észeti Haecht," Antwerpen, vol. 15, nr. 4 (December Muzeum. 1969),pp.2-17. Reprinted as chapter 13 in the same author's book, Pietro Pauolo Rubens, Antwerp 1977 (reprint New York 1989). Branden, F. Jos. van den, Geschiedenisder und BiId in der NiederliindischenKunst und Lite- An tw erpsches childer school, Antwerp 1883. ratur des 76. und 17. lahrhundelÍs, ed. Herman Broos, Ben, Meesterwerkenin het Maurítshuis, Vekeman & Justus Mriller Hofstede, Erfstadt The Hague 1987. 1984, pp . 243-89 . Buijsen, Edwin, "Schildersportretten in een Orso, Steven N., PhíIíp IV and the decorationof the Antwerpse kunstkamer," Tableau,vol. 76, nr. 1 Alcózar of Madrid, Princeton 1986. (September I Sq3).pp. 100- I 03. Van Roey, I., "Het Antwerpse geslacht Van Carpenter, William Hookham, Pictorial notices: Haecht (Verhaecht): tafereelmakers, schilders, consisting of a memoir of Sir Anthony aan Dyck..., kunsthandelaars," rn Miscellanealozef Duaerger: London 1844. bíjdragentot de kunstgeschiedenísder Nederlanden, Delen, A.J.J., "Cornelis van der Geest, een groot vol. 1, 1968,pp.2"16-29. figuur in de geschiedenis van Antwerpen," Rombouts, Ph. and Th. van Lerius, De líggerenen Antwerpen 5 (1959), pp.57-7"1. anderehistorische archieaen der AntwerpscheSínt De Maeyer, Marcel, Albrecht en Isqbella en de Lucasgí\de..., 2 vols., Antwerp etc. 7864-76 schilderkunst:bijdrage tot de geschiedenisaan de (reprint Amsterdam 1961). XVIIe-eeuwse schilderkunst ín de Zuidelijke Neder Schwartz, Gary, "Lady Pictura painting Ianden, Brussel 1955 . ílowers," Tableau,vol. 15, nr. 6 (Summer 1993), Denucé, J., De Antwerpsche'Konstksmers':ín- pp.66-81. aentarissenuan kunstuerzamelingente Antwerpen Speth-Holterhoff,S., Lespeíntres flamands de cabí- ín de 1.6een 17e eeuwen,Amsterdam 1932. nets d'amateur au XVIIe siècle,Brussels 1957. Duverger, Erik, Antwerp se kunstinuentsrissen uit Stoichita, Vicior, "Cabinets d'amateurs et scena- -1636-1642, de zeaentiendeeeuw, vol. 4, Brussels rio iconoclaste dans la peinture anversoise du 1989. XVIIe siècle," L'nrt et les réaolutions,section 4, Duverger. Frik, "Fnige biograíische gege\ enc Les iconoclasmes,CIHA (7989) Ácfes, StrasbouÍg over Willem Panneels" and other contributions "1992,pp. 17"1-92. to exhib. cat. RubensCailtoor: een rerznmeling te- Volk, Mary CrawÍord, "Rubens in Madrid and kcningenontsl00n in Ruben<'alclicr, Antwerp the decoration oÍ the Salón Nuevo in the pa- (Rubenshuis) and Ghent (Snoeck-Ducaju) 1993. lace," Burlíngton Magazine 122 (1980),pp. 168-80. Fickaert, Franchoys, MeÍamorphosis,ofte INonder Wheelock, Arthur et al., exhib. cat. Anthony aan baereaeranderingh' ende leaen aanden aermaerden Dyck, Washington (National Gallery of Art) Mr. Qointen Matsys..., Antwerp 1648. 1990-91. Fornenbergh, Alexander van, Den Antuerpschen Wood, Jeremy, "Rubens or van Dyck? 'Mucius Protheus,ofte CyclopshenIsicl Apelles...,Antwerp Scaevola before Lars Porsenna'and some pro- 1658. blematic drawings," Hot'stedeNaumann Mercury Freedberg, David, "Fame, convention and 10 (1987). insight: on the relevance of Fornenbergh and Gerbier," The Ringling Museum of Art Journal Note on a name (Papers presented at the International Rubens The name by which the artist whose work is dis- Symposium, 7982), 7983, pp. 236-59. cussed in the present article is known in Dutch, Freedberg, Davrd, The pouer of images: studíes in English and German publications is Willem van the history and theory of response,Chicago and Haecht IL (In the French literature, he is called 17. Pieter PauI London 1989. Guillaume van Haecht.) This name :isincorrect Rubens?, Harris, Ann Sutherland, "Domenichino's Caccia and misleading. The artist's baptismal name was sketch ofThe reconci- di Disns: art and politics in seicento Rome," in the Latin Guillelmus, and his last will is signed liation of lacob sndEsau Shop talk: studies in honor of Seymour Slioe, Cam- with the (non-standard)Italian form Guielmo. and Mucius Scaeztola (Mass.) ol-e[. bridge 1e95,pp. In the books of the Antwerp guild of St. Luke before Lars Porsenna, Hàrting, Urstla, Frans Francken der Jilngere he is recorded as Guillam van Haeght, while in ffi*t Unsigned, undated. Pen (1.5811642): díe Gemiilde,mit kritischem (Euare- other documents he is referred to as Guilliam katalog, Freren 7989. van Haecht or Verhaecht. The one signature on a ;r"'- and broTon ink, 31.6 x 20.5 Hàrting, Ursula, ">doctrina et pietas<: iiber frti- painting and the six on prints by the artist are $ cn. Berlin, print rooffi, he Galeriebilder," Jaarboek Koninklijk Museum all identical: G.V. Haecht. Of course, these are Th es e tz.Lto comp o sitions / aoor SchoneKunsfen, Antwerpen 7993, pp. 95- all varying forms of the common Flemish name along znith the Achilles 133. Willem, and in a sense it is nitpicking to insist affiong the daughters of Held, Julius, "Artis pictoriae amator: an on a form closer to the documented spellings. Antwerp art patron and his collection," in Ru- However, there are good reasons for returning Lycomeiles, urere dis- bensand his circle: studies,Princeton 1982. Origin- at thjs juncture to one of lhe original forms. played in the Nezo Salon ally appeared i\ Gazettedes Beaux Arts 50 (7957), beginning wjfh Lheletter C. even lhough no in the Alcázar. To the pp. 53-84. The 1982 edition has valuable additio- single one of them can be considered more existing questions con- nal material. authentic than the others.l Two reasons I consi- cerfling the drazoing zoe Held, Julius, "Van Dyck's relationship to Ru- der sufÍicient follow. bens," in Van Dyck 350 (Studies in the History of The choice oÍ lhe Romanizing C-íorm by the cdn no|L, add a nezo one: Art 46),Washington (National Gallery of Art) artist's father Tobias van Haecht may well have usas GuiIIam oan Haecht 1994, pp.63-76. been intended to distinguish the child írom the or Cornelis oan der Geest '|:lt € Leemans, Hertha, De Sint-Gummsruskerk te Lier, relatives who went by the name Willem van inooloed in some zoay Haecht. These relatives were Antwerp and Utrecht 1922. Lutherans, which zoith the Sltanish com- Miedema, Hessel, ed., Karel oan Mander: the lioes Tobias seems not to have been; his son, our the Bool oI f.alms. in u*e through the mission to Rubens? of the illustríous Netherlandíshand German artist, served as an officer of a Jesuit confrater- eighteenth century, and was thus identi- painters.,.,vol. 1, Doornspijk 1994. nity, and must therefore have been a practicing fied publicly and emphatically as a Lut- Miiller Hofstede, Julius, "'Non Saturatur Oculus Catholic. The artist-rhetorician known as Willem heran. I hi. q3* no light mdtte; in Visu': zur 'Allegorie des Gesichts' von Peter van Haecht I, our artist's great-uncle, was the Antwerp in the period following the faul Rubens und Jan Brueghel d.4," in Wo,t author oÍ the standard Lutheran translation of bloody re-establishment oí the >
ZOMER 1996 51 TTTF{CENTURY PAINTINC
LIEFDE IN DE KUNSTKAMER
'kunstkamer' !f et schilderij is ontstaan in het I I zeventiende-eeuwse Antwerpen. Frans Francken de Jongere en Jan Bruegei waren de eersten die dit fascinerende genre van geschilder- de galerijen beoefenden. Rond 1620 was het 'kunstkamer'schilderij een gevestigde Antwerp- se specialiteit geworden. Het had een duidelijke boodschap: beoefening en bevordering van de kunsten - vooral de schilderkunst - vormen uitne- mende bezigheden en Antwerpse kunstenaars zijn daar bij uitstek bedreven in. Dat beeld werd nog versterkt door het mecenaat van de in Brussel zetelende aartshertogen Albert en Isabel- la. Guillam van Haecht, de schilder die centraal staat in dit artikel, stamde uit een Antwerps kunstenaarsgeslacht,en een dergelijke boodschap zou hem bijzonder aangesproken hebben. In op- dracht van ziin patroon Cornelis van der Geest heeft hij onder meer meegewerkt aan de restaura- tie van een door beeldenstormersvernield zes- tiende-eeuws altaarstuk. Als restaurator, schil- dert van kunstkamerschilderijen, en reproduktie- etser is Van Haecht wellicht de eerste kunstenaar geweest die zich bijna uitsluitend bezighield met het creatief recyclen van andermans werk. Hij bleef gedurende zijn hele (korte) Ieven bij Van der Geest wonen, en nam diens collectie onder zijn hoede. Uit zijn 'Kunstkamer van Cornelis van der Geest' (afb. 3) blijkt zijn vernieuwende bijdrage aan de kunstgeschiedenis. Het werk verwijst naar een specifieke gebeurtenis, de figu- ren erop zijn portretten en de Salerij wordt 8e- presenteerd als een privécollectie. Afgebeeld is een twist tussen aartshertog Albert en Van der Geest om een 'Madonna met Kind' van de schil- der Matsys, dat Albert wilde hebben maar Van der Geest niet van de hand wilde doen. Het is L8. Pieter Paul Rubens or copy after Notes geen toeval dat het bezoek van Albert en Isabella l. For the baptismal name see baptismal registry Rubens, The reconciliation of aan Van der Geests kunstkamer eeschilderd is in lacob Onze Lieve Vrouw 5 in the Antwerp municipal and Esau. Canaas,331 x 282 cm. archives. The will is in vol. 2280 of the notarial termen van liefde. Drie van Van Haechts andere Unsigne à, undat eil. B ay eris che St aats- files there [Th. Ketgen, 1636-37, fol.312r]. The 'kunstkamer' schilderijen gaan ook over de lief- gemiililesammlungen. (In former cat, of books of the guild of St. Luke are kept in the de. Twee werken verwijzen naar de schilder AIte Pinakothek number 1-302[751].) archive of the Koninklijke Academie voor Scho- Apelles die verliefd werd op Campaspe, de favo- ne Kunsten in Antwerp. Van Haecht's entry is riete concubine van Alexander de Grote (alb. 6 en in the Rekeningen der dekens van St. Lucas en der Violieren, register nr. 7, nr.200, p. 425. 7). Liefde en verlangen in alle mogelijke vormen Catholic faith there. By calling our artist Willem With thanks to Jan Lampo and Arnout Balis komen voor op de andere schilderijen op deze van Haecht II, we obliterate a distinction that for checking the latter on my behalf. werken. Van Haecht's teruskerend thema is het was a determining factor in the biographies of 2. Duverger "1989,pp. 90, 91, 710: Guilliam. verlangen om te bezitten, zóals dit door het oog ( those concern ed. The use of the form Willem Duverger 1993,pp.40 et al.: Cuilielmo. woÍdt aangewakkerd. Maar hij wijst ook op de van Haecht has been known to cause serious er- gevaren die er aan verbonden zijn. Het kostte rors even in standard reference works. The entry on the artist in Tlrieme-Becker's Ktittstler-Lexíkort Van der Geestde achting van de Aartshertog. Het by Kurt Zoege von Manteuffel says that he was 19.Entry on Kunstkamerof Cornelisaan der Geestin had Apelles zijn leven kunnen kosten. Bij de vier- not inscribed in the Antwerp guild of St. Luke, exhibitionheld in ArunilelHouse, London,1907, de kunstkamer (afb. 11) van Van Haecht, 'Jozef an error due entirely to the uncritical acceptance en de vrouw van Potifar' is het verlangen op hol of the form van Willem Haecht. At the close oí geslagen verwijst het hooÍdmotieÍ en vele af- the entry von Manteuffel expresses wonderment en that the prints are signed "G.V. Haecht" and Nq 20. gebeelde kunstwerken naar een ontembare lust. asks whether the G. stands for Guillaume. Het vijfde 'kunstkamer' schilderij van Van Ha- Which of the older forms shall we adopt? In two (aÍb. GUILLAM VAN HAECHT. echt, hier voor het eerst afgebeeld 12) is het recent publications, Erik Duverger opts in one enige werk zonder een duidelijk thema. Maar place for Guilliam and in the other for Guilielmo prominent aanwezig is hier Van Dijck's 'Mystiek van Haecht.'1While these forms, as well as Cuil- For descriptioh of this picture see an article by Mr. Edward laume, are certainly justified, I prefer to revert Dillon, huwelijk van de H. Catharina', een werk dat ook " AtbeDeum," JaouaÍy 26th, r9o7, ald CateloÊueof Toion D'OR Exbi- to the version (of the first name only) sanctioned bitioo, Bruges, r9o7, Several well.lnown pictures eÍe represeDted oD gaat over de liefde. tbe well, the mosr inreresringol wbich is a lost Van Eyck representinga by the guild books, which was also the one Lady at her toilet. Among-others easily Íeognised áre thi ', Battle- oÍ In zijn hartstocht voor de kunsten is Guillam chosen early in this century by the first writers tbe Am@Ds," by Rubeos,now at MuDich; tbe portrait of Pracelsus by Metsys, (klown through rhecopy by RubeD!at Brussels) portrait van Haecht voorzichtig. Hij toont de lusten van on van Haecht in English: Guillam. In any case, I the of Kuipperdolling at Frankfort, and the Madoroa at Anrslerdam by the het verzamelen maar wijst tegelijkertijd ook op it is well to realize that van Haecht went by a sme artist : aod the Cer6 aDd Stellio by Elsheimerat Madrid. The igures are variety of names in Flemish, French, all Dastiche Dortraits. de gevaren, met name die van de visuele verler- Italian and Tb-e picture records a visit by the Arcbduke Àlbêrt ald the Infanta Latin, and not to insist on the correctness of any Igbella to Coroelius van der Gest, whose Dortrait bv Van Dvck is io ding. Liefde voor God, liefde voor de kunst, 'ei- of them. Nonetheless, I do insist, with Duverger, tbe National Gallery, Iandon. Tbe picture-cn the floor,oÍ óanaë is sigDedG. V. Haecht, 1626. genliefde', liefde tussen de seksen - dit alles en on the incorrectnessof Willem. nog veel meer vindt men terug in de 'kunstka- mers' van Guillam van Haecht. (<
52 TABLEAU Fine Arts Magaztne