ARCHITECTüRAL PAINTING: ETIQUETTE, ARCHITECTURE AND GARDENS OF LOVE IN ME EARLY SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY NETHERLANDS
by
DIAMVA BEAUFORT
A thesis submitted to the Depanment of An Histol
in conformity with the requirements for
the degree of Master of Arts
Queen's University
Kingston. Ontario. Canada
April, 1997
copyright O Dianna Beaufort. 1997 National Library Bibliothèque nationale (*( of Canada du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services services bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395, rue WeUington Otmwa ON KiA ON4 Ottawa ON KIA ON4 Canada Canada
The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive Licence dowing the exclusive pennettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distriiute or sell reproduire, prêter, distri'buer ou copies of hidher thesis by any means vendre des copies de sa thèse de and in any fonn or formai, making quelque manière et sous quelque this thesis available to interested forme que ce soit pour mettre des persons. exemplaires de cette thèse à la disposition des personnes intéressées.
The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in hidher thesis. Neither droit d'auteur qui protège sa thèse. Ni the thesis nor substantial extracts la thèse ni des extraits substantiels de fiom it may be printed or otherwise celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés ou reproduced with the author's auirement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. Abstract
This study Ïnveaigates the manifestation of Italim arctutectural tom and mulaiai of French ashiaas wahm the genre of arduteciural pauiong. To adiieve th6 ta&, sewral pamtmgs
(pnmanly of exterior courtyard scaies) by the most prolific art& in ths field were chosen.
These amts mclude Dirck van Delen, whose oeuvre is key to this thesis, Banolorneus van
Bassen, Hendnk Aerts, Hendnk van Steaiwijck the Elder and Yaunger, and Hans and Paul
Vredeman de Vries.
in order to understand the infiItratjan of foreign modes, chapter 1 discusses the groundwork lard by cuba1 circumstances, mcluding the mpaa of, f9r example, C~c~~tantijn
Huygens and his love of thmgs French and ftalian. while chapter 2 focuses un the artists practlsing penpeaiw pamûng, outlming basic histoncal fia an4 bnefly, the tramg and ccmsequential infiuences on the art& productians.
Chapter 3 concerns the use of theoreucal ûeaûses, particularly of Mian ongin. and contemporary architecture III the executm of architectural pamting. The strmg prewb set by buitenpkaatsen and their gardai, courtyard and structural make-up is also analyzed.
Chapter 4 combmes the iconography of many perspectrve pamtmgs wrth thetr ardiltectural seümg. The ûequent presence of moralizing stories in hsgenre IS taken mto account, but the emulatm of French fàshions emerges as an equally importaut theme. While worldly sopbisû~on,exemplified by French eiiqueüe and âshiai may have been deerned a stgn of mperbia. the very afktatms of Fraidi wciety stood as syinbols of success. Fm& modes, mannen, leisure acûvities, and courtiy love &ames were therefbre represented m the collecbble gaice of penpectiw pamtmg. Gimthe suitab* of grand penpeciiw settmgs for the representation of statu, perspective paintmg also becamc a fônun fbr portraiture, as several portraits ofpersaaages m courtyards illustrate. Table of Contents
Abstrad ...... i
Ackn Chapter 1 . The Cultural Background ...... 1 Chapter 2: The Artists ...... -7 Hans VredaMn de Vries ...... 7 Paul Vredanan de Vries ...... 8 hdnkvan Steaiwijck die Elder and the Yoimger ...... 8 Hmdnk Aerts ...... 9 Bartolomeu~van Bassai ...... 10 hrck van Del en ...... 10 Grad Houckgeest and Daniel & Biieck ...... 12 Samuel van Hoogsû&n ...... 13 C'3:The Adufemm...... 14 Theury and Sowce Books ...... 14 Hans Vredanan de Vries ...... 15 SeriIo ...... 20 Marolots ...... 21 De Btay ...... ,,77 Rubais ...... 24 Pélenn, Cousai and Du Cerceau ...... 25 PalIadio, Scarom and Vignola ...... 26 Philrps Viboais ...... 28 The Mure of My ...... 29 Cartemp~rar~- ...... 31 laab van Caqen...... 33 Preter Post ...... 35 hhpsVmgboans ...... 36 Bartolomeus van Bassen ...... 37 Biir tenplacrtsrn...... 40 Gardai Art and Ardidecture ...... 47 Chapter 4: Tbe Staffige and Thnies ...... , C 7 Elemaits ofthe Gardai of love...... 54 Ccmtemporary ReWGaues: Buirenpart&w ...... 58 Dawd Vinckbcms ...... 59 Ekw mn de Velde ...... -62 Wilian Buytewech...... 64 Moral hders...... 65 Games, Love, and Leisure Soctety ...... 71 nie Figures: Thexr Sources and Sipficance ...... 76 Dtrck van Delen ...... 78 Van bsseq krts, and Van Stemwjck ...... 82 Portrads wdm Ardidectural Parnemg ...... 83 A Caxûnuatim ...... 89 ERRATUM Pages 5 and 6 do no1 exist. Fint and foremost 1 want to express my smcerest thanks to my parents for their uowavermg support and always wantmg the besf for me, for cuxtnbuting to my educatiai and for keeping me an track m mes of despair. Also 1 wish to express sped th& to Wendy and Richard hr their mrts wd~Katie. for makmg me bu&, and for helping me through those cornputer dilemmas. I would Iike to thank Dr Volker Manuth for tahg me under his wmg and guidmg this thesis. His "kmd cnûcisrns" managed to a& changes hile dl allowing me to focus on the posrtive and fèel encouraged. 1 am gratefiil fbr access to his knowledge and wtsdom. and for hs leadership in the mident-curated Wisdom. ffiowledge & Magie exhibition, whicb provideci many of us wrth mvaluable, praaical experience. Many thanks to the library staff, Nina Boyd and Rom Roberts, for their reliable assistance tn findmg jus the book 1 was lmkmg hr, and fbr those Off'our chats. To Drs Bernard Vermeâ fbr those delightfhi and msigtitfiil leüers, to Dr J. Douglas Stewart for tbgto ûme to a to my fellm midents m the department for their fnaicishrp, to my &end Lynne Needham for always beiievmg in me, and to the Heilig family for providmg me with a "rd home" m Amsterdam, 1 thank you. Finaiiy I want to express my appmiation to Dr Katheme Brush and Dr Comme Mandel for rnakmg Art History 040 at U.W .O. so fkbulous and inspirational. List of lllus trations (measurements in centimetres) 1. Jan van Eyck, Madonna m the Ch&, c. 1437-38. Berlrn, Gemaldegaiene, Staathche Museen. Panel, 31.1 x 13.3. 2. Jan Gossaert, Samt Luke drawinn the Vimin~c. 15 12- 15. Prague, National Gallery. Panel, 229.8 x 204.2. 3. Hans Vredeman de Vries. plate 1 3 from Perspective. .. (The Hague, 1605). 4. Sebastiano Serlio, 'Tragrc Scene" fiom The Second Booke of Architecture (London, 16 1 l), fbl. 25. 5. Hans Vredeman de Vries, ''The Five Senses" fiom Architectura ... (l'le Hague, 1606). a. Connthia/Gustus b . ionica/Odor c. DoricdAuditus 6. Dirck van Delen, Architectural View, s.d. 1625. Rodez, Musée Denis Puech. Panel. 58.5 x 33. 7. Attnbuted to Hendnk van Steenwjck the Elder, Permective, 1588. Dessau, Gemildegalene. (Support and size un)mown). 8. Hans Vreûeman de Vries. plate 14 liom Perspective... (?he Hague, 1 605). 9. Dtrck van Delen, Terrace of a Palace wrth Portrait gr ou^, s.d. 1642. Brussels, Museum of Fine Arts. (Support and size imknm). 10. Ham Vredeman de Vries, plate 43 hmPetspectzve . .. (The Hague, 1604). 1 1. Dirck van Delen, Garden of a Palace WI& Men ~laymnSiuüles. Gateshead, Shipky Art Gailcy. Panel. 67.5 x 82.3. 12. Hendnk Aerts, [ma- Renaissance Palace, s.d. 160- (2?). Merdam, Rijksmuseum. Canvas, 93 x 127.5. 13. Hendnk van Steenwijck the Younger, Cours d'un Palais Renaissance, s.d. 16 10. London, Nationai Gallery. Copper, 40.2 x 69.8. 14. Hendnk vaa Steaiwijck the Ymger, An lma- Town Sauare, s.d. 16 14. The Hague, Mauntshuis. Copper, 47 x 70. 15. Dirck van Delen, Courtvard of a Palace. s.d. 1635. Braunschweig, Herzug Anton UInch- Museum. Panel, 32.8 x43. 16. Dirck van Delen, Courtyard of a Palace w& Figures, c. 1630s. London, National Gallery. Panel, 46.7 x 60.5. 17. Hans and Paul Vredeman de Vries, Palatial Architecture wrth Musicians, s.d. 1596 Vienna, Kunsthrstorisches Museum. Canvas, 135 x 174. 18. Vincauo Scamoza, "Ionic capital" fram Ondenvys van de qfcolomen... (Amsterdam, 1657). 19. Vignola, plate XLIII corn Ugnola. or the Compiear Architecf (London, 1655) 20. Dirck van Delen, A Palace and Enaance to Gardas, s.d. 1644. Palais Gallena, Pans ( 14 Jun. 1974), lot 38. Panel, 46 x 50. 2 1. Dirck van Delen, Arcade of a Palace wnh Elesmtlv Dressed Fimres, s.ci. 1 627 Sotheby's, New York ( 1 1 Jan. 1996). lot 38. Panel, 49.5 x 64.1 22. Dirck ~n Delen. Etrtrance to a Palace, s.d. 1667(-47'). St Petersburg, Hermrtage Panel, 57.8 x. 65.5. 23 Dirck van Delen, Courtvard of a Palace wrth man^ Figures, s .d. 1640 Viema, Kunsthistnris&es Museum. Canvas, 162 x 286. 24 Dirck van Delm. Fimres outside a Palace, s.d. 1644. Sotheby's, tandon (3 Apr. 1985), lot 52. Panel. 45.5 x 63. 25. Bartolomeus van Bassen, Smptuous Intenor wrth Banmeters, or The stow of Lazarus and Dives, Munich, Aite Pmakcnhek. Panel, 85 x t 12. 26 Bartolomeus van Bassen, The Nieuwe Kerk. The Hamie, s.d. 1650 The Hague, Haags Historrsch Museum. Panel, 82.3 x 11 2.1 27. Dirck van Delen, Terrace of a Palace wd~Fiaures, c. mid4630s. Pans, Musée du Pm Palais. Panel, 32 x 47. 28. filips Vigboons. design for Daniei Sohier House, 1639. 29. Bartolomeus van Bassen, Bohemm Rom- at a Feast, s.d. 1634. Sotheby's. Landon (27 Mar. 1974), lot I 10. Panel, 62 x 90. 30. Bartolomeus van Bassen, ima&arv Palace for the Wimer Kmg, s.d. 1639. Copenhagen. Pnvate Collection. Panel, 64 x 86. 3 1. Philrps Vmgbocnç, De Kevser's Stock Exchanste, 1634. Crty of Amsterdam. Panel. 26 x 35. 32. bsBol, View of Amsterdam from the South, 1589. Belgium, Private CoIleccion. Gouache on parchment rnolrnted un panei, 1 1.7 x 33.1. 33. Hans Bol, Cade m a Landsape. 1589. krh, Gddegalerie. Parchmeat, 23.5 x 32.5. 34. Comelis Holsteyn, Reinier Pauw and his Fadv at Wenwiik, c. 1650. Rivate Collection. Canvas, 104 x 170. 35. Pieter Codde, Portrait of a Fdvm a Courtvard, c. 1640 Berim, art market c. 1925. Support unknown. 98 x 127. 36. Gemt Berckheyde, A View of Heemstede Cade. Private Collect~on.Caw, 63 x 497 37. Duck van Delen, Figures befôre a Palace. signed. Sotheby's. Laidon (1 1 Dec. 1985), la 38. Copper, 59.8 x 71. 3 8. Dirck van Delen, Entrante to a Palace wrth Fond Gardais Wonci, s.d. 1657 Christie's, hdm(1 4 Nov. 1W), Id 18. Panel, 63.5 x 92.6. 39-Cnspip de Passe, 'Stadmim" from Homu Rorîdus. Engraving, 5 1 x 2 1 40. Dirck van Delen, Exterior of a Palace wrth Ladies and Gentlemen, s .d. 164 Copenhagen, Statais Museum fbr Kunst. Panel. 49.5 x 55. 4 1. a. Formerly attnbuted to Dirck van Delen, Galerie a colmade. Brussels. Fiewz sale (20- 21 Feb. 1929), ld41. Panel,64x75. b. jean de Boulogne, Mercw. 1580. Florence. Museo Nanonale del Bargello. Br-. height 187. 42. Hans Vredeman de Vnes. "Garden design" from Hortonim Viridariorurnque efeganres (Antwerp, 1583). 43 Louis de Caulery, Homane io Venus. Copenhap, Statais Museum for Kunst. (Suppon and sue unknown). 14 Louis de Caulery, Banauet in a Venet~anPalace. Quunper, Musée des Beaux-Arts Paael, 54.5 x 78.5. 45. De Sadeier, after hlaartai de VOS,Aleuo~i of Love. Engrakkg. 46. Rem& School, AUeaory of Love, c. 1600. Vienna, Kuristhistonscbes Museum. (Support and sue &m). 47 Hendnk van Steenwijck the Younger, GuMr Plaver, s.d. 1608. Formerly London. Bnan Koetser Gallery (Spring 1965 Exh.). Copper, 10.8 x 8. 48. Anonymous, El- Fimues m a Forinal Garden. beside a Harbour. Amsterdam, Fùjksmuseum. Panel, 5 1 x 172. 49. Dirck m Delen, Exterior of a Palace with Cmwxsatian Gronm, s.d. 1636. Copenhagen, Staeos Museum for Kunst. (Suppod and size unkuomi). 50. Peter Paul Rubens, Conversafieà la mode, c. 1632-35. Madd, Museo de4 Prado. Canvas, 198 x 282.9. 5 1. Nicolaes de Bruyn, aAer David Vinckboans, A Banauet before a Cade, 1604. Engraving, 42 x 75. 52. Uendnck Hoadius II, after David Vmckboons, Spring. Signed "David Vinckboom mvait., Henricus hondius seulp. Et excud." Series dated 16 18. Engraving and etdimg, 38.2 x 50. 5 3. Esaias van de Velde (amibuteci), bd. The Hunt Indefor WcalDocumentation. CamegttMellcm Uniwnay, Pmsburgb. Peucil, pen, grey mk and wash on paper, 24.5 x 34.6. 54. Dirck van Delen, Arcade ofa Palace with an ODai Dome, s.d. 1661. London, Brian Koewr Gaiiery (1972). (Support and sire unknm). 55. David Vinckboons, Een vroliik pezellscha~. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum. Panel, 28.5 x 44. 56. Esaias van de Velde, Gardei Party More a Palace, s.d. 16 14. The Hague. Mauntshuis. Panel, 28.5 x 40. 57. Esaias van de Velde and Bartolomeus van Bassen, nie Banauet, s.d. 1624. Vienaa. Kunsthstoriscfies Museum. Panel, 47 x 67. 58. Wiilem Buytewech, ûuiten~anii,16 16-17 Berlm, Pnvate Coflecüun, loaned to Dahlem Museum. Canvas, 70 x 94. 59. Baitolomeus van Bassen, The Courtyard of a Renaissance Palace. Sotheby's, London ( 1 1 Dec. 1985). lot98. Panel, 18 x 24.5. 60. Michel Lasne, Promeclitdina Coude ai a Tenace. Engraving. 61. German wdcut, Amorous Coude, c. 1480. 62. Master of the Gardais of Love, detatl from Lam Garden of Love. Berlm, Kupfenachkabinnt Stadiche Museum. Gigraving. 63. Bartolomeus van Bassen, Sauare Mre a Raiaissame Chu& (St Peter'sl s.d. 1623. Copmhagen, Statens Mwum for Kunst. Canvas, 140 x 190. 64. Banolomeus van Bassen (attnbuted), theof a senes offive, c. 1630. Amsterdam Rxjhuseum. a. Canvas, 3 10 x 121 and 309 x 122 b. Canvas, 309 x 109.5 and 309 x 124.5 c. Canvas, 330 x 350 65. a. Bartolmeus van Bassen, @en Gallery wdh Cuwla. Elestant Fimires and Monkey, Christie's, London (18 Apr. 1980), lot 24. Support unkrtown, 78.7 x 131S. b. N. Tessm Ir., deran diustration m Ein Besuch in Hollmul(1687), bWmselaarsdijk Gallery." 66. Dirck van Delen, Corirtvard of a Palace, s.d. 1627. Providence Rhode Island School of Design, Museum of Art. Panel, 63.5 x 88.2. 67. Paul Vredeman de Vries, The Cortmation of Esther bv Ahamerus, s.d. 16 12. Darmsta&, Hessisches Landesmum. Panel, 1 18.5 x 17 1.S. 68. Duck van Delen, Coumard of a Palace Wh Return of the Pmbgal Sm, s.d. 1649 Cologne, WallrafXicbanz Museum. Panel, 56.5 x 9 1 S. 69. Bartolomeus van Bassen (attributad), hterior wrth El- Couples, dated 16 15 Formerly Brussels, Schaubrouck (3 May 1927). Panel, 48 x 70.5. 70. a. Emblm from "Het ambracht van Cupido," Nederduyrsche pwmata. Daniel Heinsius (Leiden, 162 1) . b. Emblem nom Silemrd Alcibiadis, Jacob Cats (Middelburg. 16 18). c. Jean Gourmont, "Chamed Ape". 7 1. Dirck van Delai, Skmle Plavers, s.d. 1637 Pans, Louvre. 72. Pieter de Hooch, A Game of Skrttles, c. 1663-66. Waddesdoa Manor, The lames A. de Rothschild Collection. 73. Emblerns fiom Eiirerpae suboles, Peter Rollos (Paris, 1630) a. "SWes" b. "Le Ballon" c. "Le Passe" 7.1. Emblern fiorn Amans Divin1 et Hiimani Anhpathia (Amwerp, 1629). 75. Cnspip de Passe the Elder, from Den Nieuwen lecht-spieghel (c. 1&?O), p. 85. 76. Dirck van Delen, lmaainary Architecture wtth Finures, s.d. 1636. s-'Hertogaibosch, Noordbrabants Museum. Panel, 95 x 80. 77. Dirck van Delen, Courtyard of a Palace wrth Ball~lavers,s.d. 1628. Pans, Louvre. Panel, 3 1.5 x 54. 78. Hendnk van Steenwijck the Younger, Renatssance Porüco wiO, El- Fimires, s .d. I6( 14?). New York, Metropohtan Museum. Copper, diameter 1 1 .l. 79. Wiiiern Buytewech, The Edeben, series of seven, 16 15. Engravmgs, 19.6 x 7.3 80. Abraham Bosse, OdoratudL 'Odorat. Engraving. 81. Abraham Bosse, L'Este. hgraving. 83. Abraham Bosse, The Scdptor's Studio. Engraviug. M.Dirck van Delen, Gallew of a Palace wrth Code and Servant standma at Portal, s.d. 1643. Puiuen, Musée des Beaux-Arts. Support imfmowa, 48 x 49. 85. Abtaham Bosse, fiantispiece to Le Jardin de la Noblesse Française dam lequel ce peut Ceuillir ieur manierre de Vetternents (Paris, 1629). 86. Duck van Delen, Figures stroliing on a Tenace, s.d. 1630. Munich, Private Collection. Panel, 50.8 x 69.3. 87. a. Hendnk van Steenwijck the Younger, with Daniel Mytws, Charles I m an hastinam Palace, s.d. by Van Steenwijck 1626; and by Mytens 1627. Tuin, GalIeria Sabauda. b. iiendrik van Steenwijck the Younger (amibineci), Charles 1 as P~ceof Wales. c. 1 620. Copenhagen, Statens Museum for Kunst. Canvas, 2 19.5 x 174.5. 88. a. Headnk van Steenwijck the Younger, Charles 1, 1637. Dresâen. (Support and size unblawn) . b. Hendnk van Steeiwjck the Younger, Henrieüa Mana, 1637. DreSden. (Support and size lmknown). 89 a. Damel Mytens. Thomas Howard 14th Earl of Arundel. c.16 18. Arundel Cade. Canvas, 207 x 127. b. Daniel Mytens, Alathea Talbot. Countess of Arundel. c. 16 18. Anmdel Cade. Canvas, 207 x 127. 90. Jan Myteis, Portmt of Mana van Aensais as a Shmherdess, c.1660. Private Collecûon. Canvas, 98 x 73.5. 9 1. Dirck van Delen, Emrance to a Palace, s.d. 1654. hdm, Duhivich Picture Gallery Canvas, 49.5 x 54. 92. Gerard Houckgaest View throunh an Arcade. s.d. 1638. Edinburgh, Natmal Gallery of S&d. Canvas, 131.1 x 152. 93. Samuel van Hoogsüaîen, Perspective daMan readma in a Courbard, signed. Gloucester, DyhnPark. Canvas, 264 x 273. 94. Samuel WUI Hoogctr;ilai, Portnit of a Code in the Garden of a Co~trvHouse, 1647. Forrnerly Berlm art market. (Support and size Mknown). 95. Ludolph de lm@, Women m a Garden, 1667. Cape Town, Couut Natale Labÿi CoUectioa. (Support and size Lmlmown). 96. Samuel van Hoogstmten, View fiom a Co- Estate, s.d. 1668. hdon. Mr and Mn Robert RobhColiectiaa. Canvas, 95 x 122. 97. Dirck van Delen (attnbuted), Members ofthe House of Oran@ and dher Noble Fi- in an Ickdkd Architecwal Seüing, c. 1630-32. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, ai lm to Paleis Het Loo. Canvas, 3 17.5 x 350. Introduction Architecture, being the most socio-fùnctional of the arts, at dl times tpresses the wants and aspirations of a comunity. Deric Regin was referring to the cla~~icalstructures making their appearance in Amsterdam, the Oost-Indisch Huis (East India House) executed and designed in pan by Hendrick de Keyser (c. 1 565- 162 1) in a quasi-Renaissance style, and the pukhr~kerras well, whose '~nassumingbeauty" impressed onlookers and expressed new burgher aesthetics. While the tum of the seventeefith century in Hclland initiated new forms of architecture, a renewed hterest in the pictoriai genre of architectural painting also took shape. The ponrayal of architecture on a twodimensional sufice indeed similady revealed the aspirations of the Dutch cornrnunity. A collective pride in one's town was pronounced in images of to~nsca~es,~and an interior of the local church exhibited the ownefs piety and faith. Fantastic architectural xenes, the forerumer to these naniralistic genres. are slightly more detached from a clw function or expression. The no~wem-richeburgher living in a "Golden Age" of the Dutch Republic bought art on the open market frequently, and the type of art he procured oAen mirtored and propagated his own values and aspirations. Paintings of grand architectural schemes, populated by fashionable figures was one such theme that could promote the aatus of the citizen who desired to spend his leinire the in the same son of environment as that depicted on the paintings. This thesis will look at the early emerging seventeenth-cenniry architectural painting, their ltalianate form, their Renaissance ideais of style, and their staffiage, as weli 'cil as the context in which these paintings were made. The subject will necessarily be divided into two aspects: the fomd and the thematic. The formal aspect will de:l with the representation of the architecture iitself and its sources. Sources appear in printed books and contemporary architecture of dl kinds. The thematic analysis wiil centre on the garden of love with selective examples illustrating the development of this tradition into Baroque Holland. Medieval love gardens, contemporary Wtenpartljc'rtor garden parties, games and playgrounds. and the figures participating in these activities dl help to form the thematic basis of architecturai painting. The fusion of the formal and thematic analyses will illustrate that the latter necessanly depends on the former for its meaning: in the context of the patncian society of the Dutch Republic, the theme placed in an architectural setting is imbued with new meaning. It should be taken imo account that 1 will illustrate themes with select examples. The examples were chosen primarily on the bais of their accessibility, but it is safe to assume that if a painter did one or two images of a therne, that there were probably more paintings of a sirnilar theme which are now either lost or inaccessible It can be said that this is particularly true of the genre of architectural painting which has proved a repetitive genre by nature. Architectural painting was a genre practised by many artins. Most of these miss çpecialized solely m the genre because of its demanding techicd requirement in mathematical perspective. This was determineci by tradition too, since the Antwerp ancestry of the genre dictated a division of labours between architecturai perspective and the execution of more elevated aspects like figura1 subject matter. The architectural specialists who emerged in the Northem Netherlands advanced their art and ski11 in 'ail perspective to çuch a degree that the depiction of the architecture itself is ofien thought to be the primary subject. This is commonly aated in regard, specificaily, to the early architectural specialists. The term, architectural specialias, in this thesis refen to those mias who painted elaborate, often fantastic schemes of buildings and their surroundhg terraces or gardens. These artists are predominately Hans and Paul Vredernan de Vries, Hendrik van Steenwijck the Elder and the Younger. Hendrik Aerts, B~olomeusvan Bassen and Dirck van Delen. Additionally Daniel de Blieck and Gerard Houckgeea painted fantasy exterior creations before moving to more naturalistic renditions of real architecture. While one of the most renowned painters of architecture, Pieter Saenredam ( 1 597-! 665). is indeed also an architecturai speciaiist, he and his fellow painters of architecture 41not be discussed since it is not the aim of this thesis to cover a chronological succession of the genre of architectural painting. This thesis will funhermore avoid the subject of perspective intenors. focusing instead on palatial exteriors. The images of early fantasticai architecture have been largely untreated because they were viewed as foreign intrusions; their form and content have bem seen to be unrepresentative of Dutch art and culture. If anything, they are understood as the predecessor of the depiaion of realistic architecture, particularly perspective views of church interiors. L'ndoubtedly, the redistic church interior becarne the popuiar subject of architectural representation. A cornmon fdlacy. however, is that the depiction of real architecture developed out of earlier imaBinary views. In fàct, both fonns appear throughout the careers of several artists. Walter Liedtke in his midy of three architectural painters in Delft cnticized the polarized delineation of "irnaBinary" and "rd" xiv archite~ture.~In noting Julius Held's 1937 observation that earlier northem paintea such as Jan Gossaert. Geertgen tot Sint Jans. and Jan van Scorel foreshadowed the use of realistic elements in imaginary architectural settings, Liedtke further stated that the conception of imaginary architectural painting as the descendent of the so-called Antwerp School (the work of Vredernan de Vries and students) is false." Hans Jantzen in his Dus Niederlündische Architekturbild was the fint art historian to approach the subject of architectural painting comprehensively. His thoroughly factual investigation of known anists and painting was published in 19 10 and leaves much to be desired after nearly a century of scholanhip. In 1953. Utrecht's Centraal Museum hosted an exhibition on Dutcn architectural painten and this was only followed up by Rotterdam's Museum Boijmans-van Beuningen publication in 199 1 .b ~hecatalogues of both offer a cunory survey and shon descriptions. and are lacking in qualitative interpretation. Amongst individual anists specializing in the field of perspective painting. there has becn rnucti written in the past few decades on Pieter Saenredam. a church interior specialist who 41be beyond rny area of study. Walter Liedtke published .4rchiiecrurol Puinring i~t Del/: Grrard Houckgeesr. Hendrik van Ylier, Emonuel de Witte in 1982. but this exemplary work only borders on the final phase of my proposed topic. There are merely a handful of publications on Hans and Paul Vredernan de hies.' and even fewer on Lirdike. ..lrch~tecwalPainling in De@: Cerurû fiouckgeesr. HenJrrk van I71et and Emunuel de Ilim ( 1982). ' Hm Jantzen. Dar .!'iederIandische .-Irchrrekiurbiid (Leipzig. 1 9 1 0: Bnunschweig : Rlinhardt & Bicmann. IWI. Sederlandrr .-frchirecruwscilrl&rs IMKI- 19NI Eu.cat Umht Ccntnal Museum. 1 953: Penpucrrves . Sarnreahm und rhe o.chitecrural patnren ofthe swenteenrh cent- E.lc.cat Ronerdrim. >lirsl*um Boijmiuts- van Bmingm 199 1. I.P.C.M.BalIegeer."Enkdr voorbctldm van de invloed \an Hans en Paulus Vredcman de Vries op si' the earlier specialists Aens, Van Steenwijck and Van Bassen. Timothy Trent Blade's 1976 dissertation on Van Delen's oewe is the best tool for my current task. Bernard Vermet's recent article on 'Tableaux de Dirck van Delen dans les Musées Français" will also be taken into account.' In addressing the cultural milieu 1 shall draw on Peter Burke, J.L.Pnce, Deric Regin, Jonathan Israel, and Simon ~chama.~ An inquiry into the stafFage and their activities will Iay the groundwork for the most telling aspects of a socio-culturai analysis. The figures, of Van Delen's paintings for example, are most often well-dressed and engaged in romantic interludes, while they are nirrounded by eiaborately designed gardens, terraces, and Mllas which are the complement to their status. These paintings endorse a romanticixd view of conternporary culture, and ths is exactly what Elise Goodman's Garden of Love discusses. 'O Her excellent article 'The Source of Pieter de Hooch's rite Gmof ~httfef'lis unfortunately the only Dutch dr: afchitatuurschil~in dr: Nedalandai gdm& 16c: ai 17e euw." (ienrre bijdmgen for de kuBsrgachiadtcnls di de dhadkimde 20 (1%7). 55-70: Jm Ebmam. "Hans Vredrman de Vries (~u~1527-Anvers 1606)." Guzme da Beau-;Lm 93 (1979). 2-26; Eians Miclke. Hant l*dmande I na. I-meichni~der Stichwurke und Bachmbung winm Stiis su wrr BeifnYge amIl'& Gemd Gmnrngs (Balur, 1967). Uwe Scbdc. "Interiatrs von Ham und Paul Vr& de Vries." .Vedurlands Aii~~thisrorischJudoek 18 ( 1967). 125-166; Ulk Marttn Mchrtens. "khan Vrakmm & Vries and the Hononmi Forne." in 7he =Irchitectum of Résrem Gadens. .4 Design Ifisrory /mm rhe Renaismce ro the Pmenr Day (Cnmbridge. Mass., 199 1 1. ' Tirnothy Trent Blade. The Paintinp of Dirck wn Delen (Ann Arbor. 1995). Ekrnard Vmet. -'Deux Tableaux dr: hkvan Delen (v. I6O4/1605-1671) dans Ics M& Françars." Revue du hre3 (June 1995). 3044. Peter Burke, Ibice and .hrdatn. -4 Stuc& of Seventeenrh Camty Elita (tondan. 1974): f .L.Pnce. Culture and Society in the Durch Repuôlic during the Sevenreenrh Cmkn, (London. 1974 1; Denc Regm. Tmders, .-Mists. Burghm. .-I cultuml hisron, of .-lmrenim NI the 17th centuy (AssdAmstadam. 1976); Jonathan Israel, The hich Republic; ils nse. graohress. and fiIl. 1.177-1806. (MOTCL1995); Simon Schaa fhe Embumment of &chu. .&a InturpreiPhon ofhtch Culture in the Golden .4ge. (LosAngeles. 1988). " Elise Goodman. "The Source of Pteta de Hooch's 7'he Grmie of Skittla." Sfudia in Icanopp. 58 (l979), 11 1-114. example Goodman uses to explain the themes of love, country gardens and seventeenth- cenniry culture, since her work focuses on Rubens and Fianders. Nonetheless the evidence of the uifütration of French fashion and counly manners into the Netherlands is usehl and appropriate to the study of the social mores and politese of the United Provinces as well. The proof of such atration is supponed by a visitor to The Hague, Sir William Brereton, who noted in his 1634 Travels in Holhd 'The ladies and gentlemen here all Frenchified in French fashion."12 Marcella Dreessen in her artic~e'~remarks that too much attention has been beaowed on the architecture of these paintings, minimalking the importance of the figures and their activities. Through careful and documented analysis, she has round a liejdestm (garden of love) theme to dominate, in effect, an Aens painting in the Rijksmuseum (fig. 12). 1 believe sirnilar interpretations await discovery in the works of Van Steenwijck, Van Bassen and Van Delen, and perhaps even in the works of later Dutch artists, Pieter de Hooch, Samuel van Hoogaraten and Ludolph de Jongh. ïhe fancy architectural garden settings that ofien dispiay linle of the greenery expected of a natural garden, are dl intimately connected to the earlier Renaissance tradition of love gardens. It is, however, within the architectural works that the tradition is rebom and reshaped to embody the marks of the seventeenth-century culture. David Vinckboons was inmumental in formulating the buitenpartij genre (a descendent of Flemish love gardens), whiie Esaias van de Veide's and WïUem Biiytewechs open air banquets modeniized and naturalized the dream-like quahy of gardens of love. The '' Sir William Brereton. "My Travds mto HoIIand and the 17 Provinces," Tmvek tn HoIImi the Cnifad Pmvincer Engltmd Scotland d Ireland. t Landou. 1634). Edud Haulhs ai ( 1 M).p. 33. " Marcda Dreessai. -'Mantesead RenaiSSance-palas of liefdestuui'? Over am schddenj van Hactnk A- in het hjlrsmuseirm-'-4ntiek 22 ( 1988). 484489. .nii prominent elements of these gardens that will be discussed are music and games, both of which are employed allegoricaiiy and aiso represent coatemporary forms of entertainment within the garden. In an analysis of Pieter Janssens Elinga, a follower of Van Delen, W. Martin explained that "[tlhe Northemer, doomed to shabby houses suffocated and blinded by the city, he dreamed of Italian-type palaces flooded with light."" This is, of course, a gross simplification. This paper wiU demonstrate that these paintlgs rather represent how the patricians wished to v;ew themselves and how they wished to be seen by others. The scenes were a poetic recreation of their own les sumptuous gardens and country houses, and manifésted the aspirations of the Dutch comrnunity. That the Dutch wished to surround themselves with objects of luxury is not a novel observation: howeverh manifestation in perspective painting has gone unaddressed. In conclusion this thesis aims to demonstrate that the stafFage and architecture of these paintings give testimony to the French influence of the mies of civility and aristomitic etiquette and the Italian influence on the architectural style, both of whch were seen to be the expression of high society. IJ W. Ma- "A Dutch Intimist Picter lamas Etinga" Gazette des Beuu.~-.-irts3 1 (Mar. l947). p. 96. The Cultural Background With the Fall of Antwerp in 1585 came the rise of commercial power and urbanization in the Nonhern Netherlands, particulariy in the province of Hoiland. After 1590 the attraction of the Northem Netherlands was its better wages and living standards.' Artisans and intellectuais dike fled to the Nonh to escape religious persecution, purnie oppominity, and irnrnerse themselves in a stimulating and hopefully profitable environment. Amsterdam and The Hague were the most populated regional centres ûnd quite simply held economic and politicai power in the seventeenth century Their patrician and coun populations. respectively, conaituteci the major patronage of ail fom of an: country estates for well-to-do burghers, quasi-royal retreats for Stadholders, paintings for the lucrative an market. hali decorations and distinguished portraits. A significant one third of Amsterdam's population in 1622 were first or second generation emigrants from tbe Southem ~etherlands.' The population of The Hague openly emulated the sophistication of the South. particularly France. It should corne as no surprise then that Flemish mistic styles remained the form of choice. Middelburg, in the lower province of Zeeland, had forged an important anistic link between the nonhern and southem prownces Here Van Delen practised in CO-existencewth several other substantial workshops. One cannot, in fact, deheate a 'Wemish" or "Dutch school in the work of the architectural specialists on the bais of style. Their wrme may be classified according to ' ~1(1095).p. 329. ' Burke ( 1973). p. 25. 2 their workùig environment and the diEerent functions the works participated in. The division of labour on paintings is, however, something that stemrned 6om the workshop practices of the Southem Netherlands; it is this that Freedburg and De Vries believe gave the works less artistic value in the ort th.' The cities with the most rapid urban exparsion Uicluded Amsterdam, Haarlem, The Hague and Middelburg. Amsterdam led the expansion rate with an increase of more than twice the urban population between 1600 and 1647.'>The increased urbanization of the city increased the need for relaxation and idealized escape outside the city limits. Countiy locales for city burghers provided an escape and Mshed the statu of what has been called the urban aristocracy. Pictures of country iife or imaginary retreats reaffinned the right of leisure for this cultural élite. The rise of country estates (bzritrydiwtsen) underscored the desire for escape into a world of pleasure. The idealized relaxation sought resembled that of sixteenth-century Rome. Both Rome and Amsterdam hosted a powerfùl and political élite. Mer a miraculous recovery from the 1 527 Sack of Rome, members of the Roman élite. mostly comected to the Papacy, established country villas that became an expression of the city's magnificence. In a parallel development. Amsterdam rose from obscunty and manifested its greatness in the bziir Frederick Hendrik, son of Prince William of Orange, was Stadholder for the United Provinces from the penod of 1625 to 1647, succeeding his brother Maurice of Nassau. As son of the French Louise de Coligny he appreciated French ideas and oflen ' Frdqand Dr Vries ( 199 1 ). p. 300. hel(1995 1, p. 328. visited the French corn acquainting himself with the style, etiquette and architectural examples he wished to emulate. William of Orange had written his justification of the revolt against Spanish domination, the ApoIogze, in ~rench.' The French Queen Marie deyMedicivisited Amsterdam in 1638 and received a wmand lavish welcome. The Iinks with French culture are plentifid, but what solidifieci the French-comection was that the language of France was dso the language of the Dutch coun. A proper gentleman. such as Constantijn Huygens (1 595- 1687), secretary to three consecutive Princes of Orange, was educated and well-ver& in French literanire and language. Although Latin was the language of choice, French was spoken within Huygens's family circle! Under pressure from his father, Huygens writes in Mun jrr& he was to recite daily prayers in French initially to lem proper pronunciation, and later to practise the language through acting lessons. French books were translated into Dutch. but many of those interesteci in them would already have been well-acquainted with the French original. Dutch authon even allowed the uifiltration of French words into their texts Pieter Spierenburg describes how the French language became cornmon by the end of the seventeenth century among patricians. The increased submission of the upper aratum of the Republic to French culture near the end of the century is widely recognized. However. the deference to French style and etiquette was already apparent in the earlier of the seventeenth century Huygens, writing in 1606. teus us that it was aiready common for young people to visit rance.' Ibid.. p. 1 1 1. Huygm uas refamg to Willm Ml ufim he umtt that %ij [vonci] ook ujd a gelqenheid OUI. zdsdat bij de HoUmdsche jqelui de gewoontr is. F&jk te bezocb;rn." Contemporary French. as well as Itaiian, literary examples infiuenced attempts to irnprove the Dutch language8 As a child Huygens was required to lem the art of poetry through Latin. Authors such as P.C. Hooft took from the Antique and Italian literary models. and te- of architectural theorists Alberti, Serlio, Palladio, Scamozzi, and Vignola found their way into arts education. The painter and art historiographer. Karel van Mander described in admiration the Itaiian artist Michelangelotscontribution to the art of architecture: In architecture beside the old common manner of the ancients and Vitruvius he has brought forth other new orders of comices. capitals. bases, tabernacles. sepulchres and other ornarnents, wherefore al1 architects that follow afier owe him thanks for having fieed them From the old bonds and knots. and given them Free rein. and license to invent something beside the Antique. Van Mander. however. continues with an expression of disgust at the Netherlandish use of this license: Yet to tell the tnith this rein is so fiee. and this Iicense so misused by our Netherlanders. that in the course of time in Building a great Heresy has arisen arnong them. with a heep of craziness of decoration and breaking of the pilasten in the middle ...very disgusring to see.' Van Mander may have been refemng to any nurnber of builden or architects. including perhaps Haarlem Mannerist Lieven de Key. This passage nonetheless. illustrates the intensive use of antique motifs and classical language by artists of al1 kinds. prie ( 1974). p. 86. " Van Manda Her Schdderbwck 1601. Miedema ( 1994). foi. 168v. Please Note P (8) not hdudod with origin'$ matadal und unavailabk fmm author or unhndtye FiIrnui cir mcaived. PAGES 5 AND 6 MISSING UMI The Artists Hans Vredeman de Vries (1527-before 1609) The single, moa important source for Netherlandish architectural painting is the work of Ham Vredeman de Vries. Born in Leeuwarden, Vredeman de Vries lived sporadically in Antwerp and eventually settled in Amsterdam in 160 1. He began as a building draflsman for Hieronymous Cock, in 1586 supervised Antwerp's fortifications against the Spanish siege, and worked at the court of Rudolph II in Prague. This author and artist set out to explain, pictorially, the workings of Renaissance design and perspective. His paintings pomay elaborate palaces, tenaces and gardens. which ofhprovided the setting for religious nanatives. His pattern books offered the contemporary ~istinnumerable sources for adaptation and traderrai to the canvas or panel.2Although Vredeman de Vries never came into contact with real Italian or classical design (and remained for the most part a theoria), he was given the appellation of the Fiemish Vitnivius. belvan Mander also indicates that Vredeman de Vries was well informed about the treatises of Vitnivius and Sebastiano ~erlio.' It has already been acknowledged that artias Hendnk van Steenwijck the Elder and the Younger, Hendrik Aerts, and Bartolomeus van Bassen al1 took their inspiration ' Jantzen documents heckmnde Vries's residence in An~qas the yms 1564-71) ruid lS76-86 Janam ( 1979). p. 20. Haus Vede Vnm, PerspecTive. Id at. Celeb-ma an inrpiciemtt-r aut n;nupirirnte~ ocuionun an'ei... (AnWap 1 58 1. The Haeur/Leidrn 160e05X Horfowm Iïritiurionunqur: degunter & muinplices /ormue ad arrhitectonicue &s nom oflabre drlineafue (Antuup 1583); Zanac .-ftclritecnîmeForme ( 160 1 ); ..lmhitechim. die hcwge devennaerde comte... van de fondamenten der pmpetiven dierutefick vwr allet schifdm, beefd-Itdm..(The Hague. 1604). ' Miedema ( 1994), fol. 266r. from Vredeman de Vries's designs. Each of these artists, having moved fiom Flanders to the Northem Netherlands for religious reasons, practised their profession in or near the province of Holland where they likely encountered a favourable market For their paintings. One particular pupil of Aertsts. Dirck van Delen. seems to have been the most successfül of al1 the early architectural painters in the Netherlands. if the survival of over 150 paintings by him can provide us with an accurate assessment. Paul Vredeman de Vries (1567-before 1636) Paul Vredeman de Vries became a citizen of Amsterdam in 1604. Prior to this he travelled with his father Hans to Prague and appears in the payrnent records for mural decorations at the palace." Paul was taught by and worked with his father on many projects. It is a difficult task to distinguish the two different hands which worked on he same panels. In general. Hans was usually the designer of the composition-his signature as "inventor" giving away his role--and the execution. including the staffage. was performed hy Paul. It is clear that Ham's primary focus was architecture. and it was only through Paul that the integration of figurative subject matter developed. Hendnk van Steenwijck the Elder (c.1550-1603) and the Younger (c. 1580-1649) Hendrik van Steenwijck the Younger was also taught by his father. who had in turn benefitted fiom the direct tutelage of Hans Vredeman de Vries. Hendnk van Steenwijck the Elder was not widely known. even though Van Mander felt he deserved mention and immortality in his Schilderboeck. noting :: at "one cannot hope to see bener 9 works by anyone in this field."' The better known younger painter traveiied to Frankfun and to London, workurg for Charles 1, and worked for the court at The Hague, which endowed him with a reputation among the bourgeois of Nonhern Europe. in the eighteenth century Horace Walpole made mention of a ''Henry Steenwyck..son of the famous painter of architecture'* and noted that King James's catalogue recorded ten Van Steenwijck works. Van Mander described him as a competent painter of perspectives "nae de ordenen der Antijcksche c~lumnen."~ Hendrik Aerts (d. 1603) Jantzen classified Van Steenwijck as a "romantic," but designated Hendrik Aerts as part of the new Dutch school, which gave binh to artists like Van Bassen and Van Delen. Aens is commonly seen as the link between the Southm and Nurthern perspectivias. However, given the difficulties posed by the situation of massive ernigration of Southemers to the Northem Netherlands, a nrialy defined segregation based on geographical borders is inappropriate. Many copies were made after Aens's work. Thus his reputation must have been widespread, reaching particularly, Jantzen thinks, to " in Walpole ( 1 762 ). p. 1 W. Only Hendnk the Yotmper is knoun to have travelld to En@& but hrs fatha's reputation apprars to have beu~augmentai bu the aphttxnth mm. Miaima ( 1994 ). fol. 26 1r. a haen ( 1979). p. El. Bartolomeus van Bassen (c. l590-165t) Bartolomeus van Bassen is another of those axtias whose rnernbership wavers between the Hemish and Dutch schools. Blade saw the "grandeur, xope and proportion of ûutch architectural painting" in Van Bassen's work.'O This tells us little, because the work of the Antwerp school also exhibited these qualities. Van Bassen was born in Antwerp, but his presence in Holland fiom an early age and his attendance in the gdds of Delft ( 16 13-c.1625) and The Hague ( 1622- 1652)" mark the artist as Dutch. His technicd debt to the Antwerp xhooi is, however, unrnistakable. Van Bassen's innovation, it has been noted by many authon, was his emphasis on light and shadow over linea. demarcation. He was both an architect and a painter, whose skills obtained him work at the court and with the patrons afFiliated with it." The conservative court environment of The Hague, with its appreciation of things French and classical Italian foms. iimited the artist in his artistic endeavours to a cenain extent. Dirck van Delen (1605-1671) Dirck van Delen, on the other hand, enjoyed a fieedom that allowed for an eclectic and abundant rnix of classical foms, devoid of classical des. Both Van Bassen and Van Delen aimed to incorporate more distindly classical and Italian forms. followhg the example of Serlio as well as Vredeman de Vries, but did not adhere to strictly classical " Van Bnssen became Dean of The Hague @d m 1627. and again in 1636. Jonm 1 1979). p. 58 '' Walter Liedtke mentions C~l~ta~ltijnHuygens as a patron of Van Bassen's. but negiects to assign an? ipific wark to ttus re1ationshtp. ( 1982). p. 3 1. 11 principles of proportion and design. Van Delen was aware of the niles for he had relied on printed sources for his architecture.'' Tne variety of his compositions is endless. This thesis devotes the most attention to Van Delen, quite simply because he was the most prolific artist. Arnold Houbrakea describes him as experienced in the painting of '73ouwerken en doorzichten," and says that he was a pupii of Frans ~a1s.l~Bernard Vennet beiieves that he studied under Aerts. Van Delen is recorded in the Middelburg Gtuld of St Luke beginning in 1639,'5 but his reptation reached beyond this city, as a 1666 commission for the Antwerp Guild demonstnites.l6 Based on the çurviving paintings, Blade States that Van Delen's most active years were 1627 to 1629. " The ania achieved a certain status for himself. He became the burgornaster and notary for the tom of ~rnernu~den,"althougb his admission to an Arnemuyden ecclesiastical council was impeded by one Jan Leynsen in 1633; Vermet has mggesteci that the protest was prompted by an aversion to the type of figures Van Delen painteci in church interiors. l9 '' Thm is no endaice that the mtist went to Italy. Bladr refutes bier's (1951) clah rhat Vm Drlm visitai Itaiy on the basis of a ladr of documentation. BU( 1976). p. 19. '"~oubraken (1953) üI, p. 246. This is probably a skmed clam that has its souiu in Van Delen's association with Dirck Hals, a possiblc figure pamta for Van Men's w.orks. Van Delen did copies of a church interior der Aats and it is indecd parti? fbm the mttradition of church interiors chat Van ûelat Iranicd his trade, but his concentration on Rc=naissance paiaccs and -anis and oiha elabte sets is reiatively spaial to Van Dela Gerard Bouckgest (c 16004661) and Daniel de Blieck (d. 1673) Gerard Houckgeest and Daniel de Btieck were students of the architectural specialists. Houckgeest was an innovative artist whose technique of a low vantage point created an illusion of immense height in his perspectives. He enterai The Hague guild in 1625, and the Delft guild in 1639? His contact with Van Bassen then was unavoidable. The direct impact of Van Bassen is revealed in an engraving of a church interior done by Houckgeest der Van Bassen, which is signed by the younger artist and gives Mi credit to Van Bassen for the design.'' .Mer 1650 Houckgeest concentrated on pictures of existing interion. oflen constructeci fiom a diagonal MwJ. Daniel de Btieck was a Middelburg architect and painter, well-acquainted with classical- particdarly ~cmozzian-architecture. He designed an estate in Zeeland in the 1660s and is beiieved to have visited England. As a painter, he is ükely to have been a student of Van Delen, and &ter an interlude with the style of the Delft school, continued to employ the formal vocabulary of Van Delen and of engraved architectural sources after the 1650s.~ Samuel van Hoogstraten (162701678) Samuel van Hoogstraten was bom in Dordrecht and did his Grand Tour of Italy in 165 1. Mer his trip to England (1662-6nhe lived in The Hague. tan Hoopuaten N~ottcrdam(1991).p. 165. " See Jantzen ( 1979). p. 1%. Gg. 42. * He bxmne a gudd maberof Middelburg as nn archiiect, in 1648. Licdtke (I982),p. 71. Vermet "hivan Delen" ( 1995). p. 44. 13 appreciated Vredeman de Vries's illusionism. He continued the mathematical precision of perspective painting and the accompanying imagery and atmosphere of the early fântasy architectural painters. This artia did series of palatial courtyards staffed often by a single life-size figure. The very sue of the large paintings indicates that they were made not for the average domestic home, but for the grander homes which had large hdways or great wall surfaces on which to hang the paintings. Van Hoogstraten aimed at clever and deceptive perspective illusions, and catered to a specific, narnely bourgeois audience, much like Pieter de Hooch ( 1629-c.1684) and Ludolph de Jongh (1 6 1 6- 1676) dici, with their formal gardens and courtyards. The Architecture THEORY AND SOURCE BOOKS The publication of DeIIa Piltura in 1535 by the Fiormtine Leon Battista Alberti set the stage for a new way of seeing and looking. Alberti mapped out a theory of perspective founded on geometry and mathernatics, and boldly stated: "If 1 am not mistaken, the architect took fiom the painter archves, capitds, bases. columns and pediments, and al1 other fine features of buildings."' Significantly, in 1649 Delia htttira was repubiished in ~msterdam.~Samuel van Hoogstraten wrote of the importance of perspective, recornmending mer, Vredeman de Vries, Alberti, Guido Baldi, and ~arolois,' while the publications of Serlio and Vitdus, translated by Pieter Coecke van Aelst. and his other works on geometry, architecture and perspective, laid the ground work for classical architecture in the ~etherlands.' The desire to express architectonic space was formulated in the Lowlands with artists tike Jan van Eyck and Jan Gossaert (Mabuse). Van Eyck's architectural setting was ' Wherlock beiieved Alberti's influence uas minimal (1977). p. 25. This should however be seen rn light of Whrr.Mc's cornceni not hith pmpective. but with optics ui thc srventeenth ccntuq. His ;rssertion that the natudific impulses of htchnrtists raidacd the treatises on paspectivt: uisufficicnt (p. 95) and thnt the? wixe interestcd aeithu in pute gmmûic fomis nor m iMmd architecture, but in recordq nsunl impresstons of nature" (p. 124) are inaccufate assessments of the ui&-ranpine genre of architeaural pamting. Bnels ( 1987). p. 272. 15 composed empiricaiiy . He based his ccperspective"on the needs of the central subject matter and what it required for emphasis. In his Berlin mimature panel, Madonna in the Church, an arch fiames the figure of Madonna, while a cornplementary recession of columns focuses our eye on the subject (fig. 1). Mabuse adopted the clarity of Italian architectural perspective and lavished it with excessive ornamental detail in his St Luke drawin~the Virain (fig. 2). The inclination to use architecture as background omamentation persiaed, but fiom those decorative tendencies aiso emerged a stronger, clearer development of architecturai painting. Artist Ham Vredeman de Vries, active in Antwerp, combined mathematic perspective with elaborate omamentation, producing what has been termed as a Mannena style in the depiction of architecture. It was he who popularized the principles of ltalian perspective in the Netherlands. Haas Vredemin de Vries (1527- before 1609) Vredeman de Vries's publications in Antwerp have serveci as the moa imponant source of Netherlandish architectural painting. His initiation of an "Antwerp School" began an innovation in the portrayal of architecture and encourageci a new genre of painting in the Netherlands. Vredernan's time in Antwerp was nuitfi11for he published severai pattern books on a variety of subjects ranging fiom fountains, gardens and cartouches to furniture and perspectives. Karel van Mander in his Liws of the III~isrrious NetherIatdrsh d Gennan Painferscounted 26 books by this aut hor and tells us t hat Vredeman copiously copied out a treatise by both Sebastiano Serlio and the Roman Vitruvius, published by Pieter Coecke van Aela in ~echelen.'What mon impressed Van ' Midema (1 994). fol. 266t. Code translaicd L!Wio's series in Regole Jopm le cinque mimien? de& &$CI md his dition of Vivius naaititiai Die Imentir der Colommei. 16 Mander, and preswnably his contemporary reader, was Vredeïnan's talent at creating deceptive perspectives. in Antwerp he painted a large perspectival vista of a garden for one Gillis Hofman and even the Prince of Orange was fooled by the alluring garden scene, not recognizing it as a two-dimensional surface! Vredeman explaineci the ground rules of perspective in his Perspective. Id est. Celeberritnu urs irIspc~entismrt hc~spicientisoculomm uciei... ( 1 5 8 1 ), w hose Dutch edition of 1604-05, Perspuctive. Dot Is de hmgh gherwmde comte... (The Hague/Leiden), was dedicated io Prince Maurice of Nassau, Stadholder of HoUand and Zeeland. The author instnicts with plates and very tittle text (fig. 3). Claiming the simplicity of his perspective method, he offers it to his readers as a means for beautifying art. Indeed, his instructive visuais introduced new forms of representation for the Northem artias. They did not, however, immediately delineate a standard. His published works implied that the construction of space was more meanin@ than the observation of reality.' Nevenheless, Vredeman was the first Netherlander to provide artists and artisans with source books for architectural settings and its fuminire. Foreign pattern books, many from Italy. undoubtedly inspired Vredernan and one of the £iraof those books to circulate in the North and put to use by artisans was Serlio's 153 7 Regole sopra le cimpe mmiere de& rd$ce. ' Serlio 's Second Book of Archirtxture (Paris, 1545) dealt with the constniction of perspective scenery for use on the Renaissance stage, and was immediately popdar. The Dutch translation, published in Vbid..fol. 2Mr. 17 Antwerp, foiiowed in 1553. It is perhaps the 'Tragic Scene" with its elaborate detail and stately edifices that bears the most similady, at least in conception, to Vredeman's engravings (fig. 4). Seriio's text on the Tragic Scene explains that: Houses of tragedies must be made for great personages, for that actions of love, mange adventures, and me1 murthers, (as you read in ancient and modem Tragedies) happen always in the houses ofgreat Lords, Dukes, Princes, and Kings. Therefore in such cases you must none but stately houses, as you see it here in this figure.9 Vredeman's perspective illustrations ofien resembled stage constructions and served as settings for the emblematic moralization of the Netherlands. His painted panels commoniy depicted a combination of Gothic, Baroque and Classical architectural elenents, in which some narrative played itself out. Vredeman's achievements in theatricai design were fonned early in his career. Kis involvement in the decorations and design of the Tnumphal Arch and adjunct festivities for the 1549 reception of Charles V and Prince Phiiip of Spain were documented in 3 1 woodcuts, pubiished under Pieter Coecke van Aeln. Vredeman's firn book covered cartouches and appeared in 1 55 5, and aas followed by severai untitfed books on ornamentations. Books on the orders of columns, Den &rste Boeck. ghemaecht opJr twez colomn Dorica en Ionica and Das Arider Btiech, gemacht rnrf/die .way Coioroiun. Corinfh~azmd Composita were pubiished in 1565 and demonstrateci the basis of Vredeman's style. These were foiiowed up by a later publication. Architecniro. die ------"ho, 77te Five Bookri ofRrchitecnrre (R-t Dova Pub.), fol. 2511 of the 161 1 version (a mldly inaccurate hansiation fiom the Dutch erfition). 10 Mieh~bes the bp as indegant and dimrdaiy. mahg them tmWEely som books 1 1967). p. 79. He fÙrthem0ce show them to be kd on wxks by Cornelis FIoris and Comeiis Bos. hooghe ende wrmaerde cor~~te... von de fon&menten der perspectiven dremtel~ckvoor alle schil's. beelJ-horders... (The Hague, 1606) which matched the five orders with the five senses (figs. 5% Sb, Sc). The Co~thiancolum was aligneci with taste and the Ionic with srneil. while each xene was constructeci on a onôpoint perspective. Bernard Vermet hypothesized that Dirck van Delen probably found these engravings a usefui source, pointing out that an Architc ,mal View (1626; fig, 6) in Rodez seems modeiied on these plates. " Under the tutelage of Vredeman, Hendrik van Steenwijck the Elder became a more irnmediate successor to Vredernan, modelling many of his compositions from the engravings of, for example, Vredernan's Vmiae Architechme Fomae ( 160 1). In a work attributed to Van Steenwijck the Elder, the perspective is a simplûied version of a Vredeman construction, and consists of rudimentary classical structures as well as the Netherlandish gable facade (fig. 7). Van Delen also continued to use Vredeman's prints as models, but managed to avoid such typicaüy Netherlandish features as the gable and build on an eclectic use of the classical tradition. Plate 14 of Vredeman's Perspective (fig. 8) was taken as the general mode1 for Van Delen's 1642 painting of a Palace Terrace with Portrait &OUR (fig. 9), and plate 43 (fig. 10) inspired Van Delen's composition for Men Playin! Skittles (fig. 1 1). l2 A pupil of Vredeman in Antwerp, Hendrick Hondius (1 573- 1649) published a practical handbook for artias in 1622 in The Hague, treating the representation of interiors and objets, in the manner of Vredeman. The dernand for fnstifutioArris Perspectivae evidently generated rnany editions in both Dutch and French. l3 ' ' V~A"Du& van Delen" ( 1 9951, p. 37. '' BIR& ( 1976). pp. 37-39. 13 wmock ( I 9m.p. i 2. In Theatnm Yiloe Hurnanae (1 5 77, 1600,163 8) the five orders were matched wirh the ages of man and accompanied by Dutch and French poems. It is the Corinthira plate that couples the ages 16 to 32 with mares, musicians, lovers and fencers. The connotations of the Corinthian order is thus reveaied: it is exemplary of ripening youth, the phacle of potential and an age of love and leisure. It was only appropriate then that the Corinthian columns found repeated use in the architectural painting of the Dutch "Golden Age" With the fame of substantial accomplishments to pave his way, Vredeman traveiied with his son Paul ( 1567-c. 1636) to the court of Rudolph II in Prague (1 596-98) and painted the ceilings and wails of the royal palace, as well as producing several panels of architectural views. Rudolph II was openly delighted with and impressed by Vredeman's iiiusionistic perspectives. On panel Vredeman useci perspective to poriray hof architecture, that is a courtyard or garden surrowided by the palatial edifices of coun. As Hans Jantzen observed," these panels aiways had the same fom: at Ieft a loggia of columns, at right an open courtyard, and near the centre an arcade receding into the distance and establishing the vanishing point. Although direct quotation of Vredeman's work is rare, it is this form, in its basic construction that reappean in the works of Hendrik Aerts (fig. 12), Hendrik van Steenwijck the Younger (figs. 13 and 14) and Dirck van Delen (figs. 15 and 16). Vredeman's Paiatiai Architecture with Musicians in Viema (fig. 171, signed and dated 1596, displays a Renaissance loggia uphdd by rich rnarble columns and populated by a group of musicians. Their music sets the tone for the amorous strolling couple on the tenace, which Jereon Giltaij feels, evokes a garden of love theme. '' IJlantzen ( 1979), p. 20. 15 Catalogue no. 2. Roncnlam ( 1991 ). p. 59. 20 Serlio (1475-1554) The Bolognese Sebastiano Serlio began publishing his proposed project of seven books on everything fiom perspective and the five orden to building types and their potential architectonic problems in 1537. Serlio was origuial in his use of visual aids, employing competent visual material as an accompanying guide to his text. His comprehensive audy of perspective deliberately lacked the details of technical procedure since Serlio's flrst concern was the instruction of architectural drawing. He felt that, ultimately, perspective should be taught in practictim, rather than leamed from written texts. l6 Dutch anias were prepared to leam fiom Serlio's books. Vredeman's interpretation of Serlio's antiquity and modern designs allowed him to expand his vocabulary of forms, while the doonvays and fireplaces of Serlio's seventh book appeared in vaguely dtered format in the early works of Van Delen. Timothy Trent Blade cited specific parallels between Serlio's Sixrh Bouk and several Van Delen paintings.17 Serlio îùrther concemed himself with the proper use of architectural forms, complementing specific buildings with certain decorative features and emphasizing the compatibility of, for example, a particularly good and pure lifestyle with the Connthian order. '% practice, this meant that omamentation could be used to indicate the affluence and statu of a patron. Fu~hemore,Serlio delineated a superiority of style through his stage scenery. his rragic scene, with its sobriety and clean classical features, is associateci '' Tbe dmays Iradinp to interion m fi@. 21 and 40 are cited as crempla barrd on Salio's parts. Blnck am notes three pauitings with comices of triglyhs separating metopes sith altematmg rosettes anû bucrania an mangernent whch appmd in Srriio's books 3 and 3. See BIede ( 1979). pp. 29-3 1. 2 1 with noble citizenry while the Gothic comic scene sets the stage for a cruder class of people and by association reinforces the suprernacy of classical design. '' The applicability of Seriian design was recognised by architects of the Republic-particulariy Jacob van Campen-although a major study of this issue is still lacking. John Onians hinted at Serlio's broad infiuence when he stated that it was 'îvhen education becarne an essential attribute of the powerful,. .. [that] Serlio's treatise was able to senously affect taste and shape responses to architecture first in Venice and then in Europe as a who~e."~* It is unfortunate that LE.Bersier in one of the early studies on the infiuence of Iiaiy on Dutch art, remaineci judgrnental on the '5nfenority7'of talent arnong Dutch perspective painters, who employed Italianate fonns, and concluded that the htch did not understand the Renaissance fomthey copied, nor the inteileaual thought behind the forms. Bersier perceived ody a violence of form, an appropriation of the exterior of classical fonn which gave the appearance of senous thought, but which ended up merely afirming reality2l Maroiois (c. 1572-1627) The French Samuel Maroiois, a perspective theorkt who wrote his books in the Neîherlands, published his Opcra Mathematica m Oeuvres Mathematiques ttaictom de Geomeirie, Perspetive. Architecture. et Fortflcatior~in The Hague in 16 14, and it, accordhg to .Whw Wheelock became a standard text for hitch artists.12 Yn the 'O Ibid.. p. 295. Ibid.. p. 6. '' &rsier(l9Sl), p. 152. Whelock t 1977). p. 12. 22 importance of Vredeman's designs cannot de overlooked, for his 1604 Perspefmte was included in Marolois's Arsperspc!ctivae pae continet rheoram et practicum (The Hague, 16 15) as volumes V and VI. Thus Wheelock's assertion that "the architectural bias of..Vredeman, reflected a sixteenth century orientation of perspective more than it dd the needs of Dutch painten of the seventeenth centuryYuis a false assumption which negiects to consider the works of Vredernan's foiiowers in the northem Netherlands, namely Aerts, Van Bassen, and Van Delen. The classification of these mias' oeuvre as forrning a subcurrent of the seventeenth century is not doundecl, but the persistence of Van Delen's style pariicularly, is manifest in better known pupils of the architectural specialists, De Blieck Houckgeest and De Whe. Vredeman's enduring popularity was affnned by the competition it invoked with Salomon de Bray's Architectura Modem (Amsterdam, 163 1).24 It was the first architectural treatise since Vredeman's efforts. The title indicated a treatise of modem architecture and deliberately placed itseif in opposition to Vredeman's 1577 publication Architectura. derBmmg der Ant~quenoras dem VilNvius. De Bray viewed the Amsterdam architect Hendnck de Keyser ( 1 565- 1 62 1 ) as a pivotal renovator of Dutch architecture, the Alberti of Holiand, and made this treatise a tribute to and biography of De Keyser. The 44 plates by De Keyser are used to illustrate the plea for true chssical form in architecture and for an architecture based on mathematical reguianty Moa of the plates exhibit some form of architectural applications, such as portals or archways, and Ibid.. p. 324. 23 includes an illustration of Michelangelo's Porta Pia in Rome. While the plates assemble into a grabbag of Mannerism and Classicism, or in the words of W. Kuyper, "a pattern- book for an ouunoded ~annerism"~the text by de Bray reveals the importance ascribed to Italian Classical form and theory for the new burgher society of Amsterdam. The Corinthian order emerges in the introduction of Architectura Modema as the most important order. De Bray notes the use of the Corinthan order in the Temple of Solomon (the only building program described in daail in the Bible and considered wonh emulation), and the suitability of the Corinthian order for the expressions of a Dutch civic government. in the Old Testament Solomon himselfis described in architectural terms: His legs are as pillars of marble, set upon sockets of fine gold (Solomon's Song 5: 15). Plate 25 shows a portal which is described as rnodest and appropriate for its bourgeois fûnction: beyde [tijnde] in haer geheel gantsch vercierlijck, en als 26 gepast tot bysonder en Burgeriijck gebniyck... This notion typically reflects VitruMus' concept of decorn, or the propriety of certain architecniral forms for certain peoples or functions. The Corimhian order simply had a long tradition of associations. It is historically true that the richer the decoration, the more it came to embody high status. Even in ancient Rome, Trajan's Forum was adomed wÎth Corinthian columns while its adjoining markets were built up from the lesser-statu Doric pilasters? Holland was weil into its "Golden Age" at the publication of Architectura Mudemu and both the idealized and reai architecture presented in this book announceci the move fiom an auaere Batavian strength 24 to refinement, virtue and wealth-al1 the associations of the Corinthian order. Indeed, the use of the Corinthian prevailed still in 1671 when Enghsh tourist John Walker noticed that, 'Wany of the merchants' houses are of the Co~thianorder (in imitation of the Italians), the lower rooms generaily paved with rnarble and on the top battlements set with figures."" It was the onslaught of a stemm classicism and an inclination toward restraint, marked around 1 625-35, that tenninated De Keyser's influence in Holland. True Renaissance ide& were often lost in early seventeenth-c~rydesigns. In their place came the leftovers of Mannerism, or a conglomeration of decoration as is evidenced by some of De Keyser's sculpture. The works of the Dutch architectural painters likewise are not exernplary of Renaissance ideals, but the attempt to incorporate classical prototypes is telling enough in itself The plates of Architechiru Moder~did provide models for painters. Van Delen in his Familv Portrait at the Tomb of W~lliamthe Süent (signed and dated 1645; Rij ksmuseurn, Amsterdam) used the tomb of Wiam the Silent displayed in Architectrrra ~adema. Rubens (1577-1640) The patronage of architecture was limiteci by space and religion in the rising Dutch Republic. Art depicting rich palaces, gardens and terraces and the admiration of Foreign bourgeois building, moa notably in France and Italy, must, however, have been considered acceptable. The gentilhomini privuti. the upper cmst social group of Genoa lavished an " Quatad in Van Stria ( 1989)- p. 140. Liedtke ( 1982). p. 23. enviable patronage on their private palaces. Peter Paul Rubens published their showcase homes as a source book intended for emulation. The Palazzi Antichi di Genova. Pahzi bfodenti di Genow (Antwerp, 1622) featured 72 engravings of antique palaces and 68 of modern palaces. This book of comemporary Itaiian architecture was the fint ever to have its premiere edition pubiished in the ort th.^* Alan Tait explains Rubens's intention in producing this book: Rubens' ideal was that an ambitious mercantile oligarchy - a mentocracy - codd and should express itself in architecture just as well and just as vigorously as a sovereign or an absolute prince." Genoa's Sfr& Nziova was an exemplary mode1 that could aptly serve the Dutch patrician's ambitions as well. Indeai, Joan Huydecoper (1 599- 166 1 ), of the influentid Amsterdam fdy,is documentecl as buying "The Houses of Italy in this is likely the Paiczi of Rubens which surely supplied many Dutch patrons with a wealth of attractive and tempting ideas for their own country estates. PHcrin (1415-1524), Cousin (c.1490-e.1561) and Du Cerceau (1520-before 1575) The ifluence of French style. in fashion, etiquette and architecture in the Nonh is a subject that has thus far been unaddressed, but the present discussion will be limited to the contribution of French architectural books. Jean Pélenn's 1505 De Anrficaii Perspectiva introduceû the construction of oblique perspectives for the first time. a method used by later Dutch perspectivists. The Traité de pr.pective (1 560) by Jean Y) Litroduc~onto reprint, Tait (1968). p. 9. S@e engra~~wsrr: aIso availabte and were sometrmrs bound with ditions of Vignola. Tait ( 1968). p. 20, n. 12. 26 Cousin covered the delineation of diagonally placed floor tiies, ofien incorporated into the works of the architectural specialias." Jacques Androuet Du Cerceau published two books that likely had a foUowing in the Netherlands. In his Liwe d'architecture (Park, 1559) Du Cerceau expresses his hope that the book be in the service of profit and pleasure. lllustratiow provided models for practitioners and a pleasing array of architectural forms for readen. Amsterdam architect Philips Viigboons owned a copy of Du Cerceau's Les plus excellents bairiments de France (Paris, 15 i6lY and surely applied some of its motifs and p~ciplesto his own work. His father, engraver David Vinckboons, likely used as a mode! an illustration fiom this book of the Château de Verneuil for the background edifice in his Spring pruit (fig. 52). Lnbe Mehrtens pointed out that the concept of formal unity between house and garden was denved fiom Du Cerceau's Les plus exceffetitstartirne11ts de rance. '' Vredeman 's expression of this unity in his prints on gardens was carieci through to later artias and garden designers. Hans Mielke in his dissertation on Vredeman saw possible quotabons from Du ~erceau.'~ Yet, even French architects used Italian models as inspiration." PaUadio (1516 1580), Scarnoai (1552-1616) and Vignola (15074573) The idwt of the Italian style, or more specifically Paliadianism, created a strong 'Mieike ( 1967). pp. 89-92. '' Rosedieid ( 1989) fotmd fraements of cm Itab bwn mode1 book (at the CCA) which date closely to Du Cerceau's Ddmib doordmd'arrhittxttcn and discusscs interpretatiom of Salian motifs, burlJinps Palladio and Francexo di Giogîo, and aacient Roman monumcats. 27 interest in the works of Andrea Palladio and his pupil Vicenzo Scamozzi. The translation of Scamozzi's Idea del1 Architettwa Universaie, titled GroncireguIen der bow-COIN,ofre vyh~ementheyrmvmde vyjorders der Architecruta va,??fincent Scamo~i.Uyt het Itahaem overgeset er? met nrrietme copere pkaeten verciert was published and engraveci by Comelis Danckerts in Amsterdam in 1640, and later reissued in 1655 by Danker Danckerts with the original Italian woodcuts. Erik Forssman found Pailadianism and the Ionic Order to be the preferred stylistic expression in the seventeenth-century ~etherlands." While this generalization is not true of dl architects and artists, the architect Jacob van Campen indeed appean to have preferred the Scamozzi Ionic capital. The 1657 publication of Con Ondenvys FCAN DE ITF COLOWEN door Symon Bosbmm Std Steen-homer tot Arnsterciam uyt den scherpsinr~igertC'irisent Scamo~ygetrocken en in Mirmten gestelt seer gemacklick vmr du Jonge Leerltngen en diedich vmr alle longe LieBbbers der Bmw-îonst (Amsterdam) illustrateci how to drafl a weil-made volute, a rnethod surely usehl to both architects and artists alike (fig. 1 8). The strange disembodiment of the volute characteristic of Scamozzi, with its four scrolls rising up fiom the egg and dart base, daces several times in the paintings of the architectural specialists (see figs. 2 1.24. 54, 76). Van Bassen muhiplied the projected volute, giving it a more Iwcurious and almon Corinthian appearance in his Imagina? Palace for the Winter Kinq (fig. 30). Additionaily, Van Bassen &en applied mags bmeenthe volutes (see figs. 4 la and 63). Architect Philips Vingboons, on the other hand preferred capitals in the manner of Vignola. Giacomo Baro~da Vignola's publication, Le die regoie della prospetlive pracrtca (Rome, 1583) was reissued in Amsterdam in 1640. Amsterdam City Architect of 1648, Daniel Stalpaert ( 16 1 5- 1676) owned a copy of the Amsterdam edition, which was bound with a 158 1 Vredeman publication, a 1648 Vingboons publication, and his own 1650 drawings for houses on the ~mstel.'~An unusual feature in Vignola's designs was the 'Ylaming" um (fig. 19), which surfaces in Van Delen's Palace and Entrance to Gardens (1644 atop the dados of the balustrade (fig. 20). Phüips Viagboons (16û7Iûû-1678) Son of the painter David Vickboons, Philips Vigboons was the first Dutch architeet to publish his own designs in 1648: Afbeelsels der vmmaemste Gebmenuyt alle die Philips C'ingboor~sgeordinwt heefl. Vingboons developed. through his years in Amsterdam, a building type which focused al1 attention on an ornamemal. thougb classically regulated facade. In most cases the facades did not correlate with the actual plan, but Vigboons was more dedicated to the pimresque than to adhering to strictly delineated classical rules, not uniike Vredeman and Van Delen. The "Vingboons-type", refemng to the plan (with a unique voorhuis and basement storage) and facade was fully intended to serve the urban paticiate, and therefore appears in cities such as Amsterdam and Middelburg, but signtficantly not in The ~ague.~The status of Vingboons's ''type" is affirmed by the association of the architects designs with Vignola, for several of Vignola's 1642 editions have an addendum of six Vingboons prints ÏliustraUng facades. Kqpa (1980), p 97. For mmon Vhghaad his worl; xr the follo*ing section on cont~poran. arctiltestme*as wefi 3s Koen ûttenhqm's monograph Philips 1îngbcwm (1607-1679). mhitecr (Zutphm. 1989) and hrs artide in Amrxdam ( l989), pp. 4%-57. * Liîk (it The Hqus was not dammateci by an irrban patncinte. but raiha the stadholk's wurt -ch &taminai a stncta use of classicisn. Ibid., p. 1 10. By mid-century it was recognized that ltaly and France had, architecturally, nearly the same to offer. Remmet van Luttervelt in his 1943 study of country houses believed that Italian artistic style was made acceptable to the Dutch through French adaptation (by. for example, Du Cerceau) because French architects held on to some traditional, medieval aspects in their Renaissance designdl in architectural paintinghowever, the open loggias, extensive marble columns and ornamental paiazzi are of a positively Italian inspiration. Perhaps it is truet to Say, as Vigboons does in his 1648 publication, that the French and Itaiian models were based on comparable principles: Vrancknjck heeft voor lange jaren de Bouwkunst in acht genornen, en daerin, bij onze tijden, soo toegenomen, dat het byna met de Italiaense mach vergeleecken worden." The dure of Italy J.L.Price describes the Dutch Republic as having "aCU IN^ nostalgia for the south.'" He was referring to pictures of Arcadian landscapes in panicular. and the love flair with the southem ambience involved antique Nins and classical forms as weU. It was comidered obligatory for every good artist to travel to the south. There he would witness the weaith of southern art and culture first-hand. Even writers could not resist travel to the south. Huygens did it, and presumably picked up a few books dong the way. As would be expected of a humanist diplomat Huygens's book collection consisted of Vitruvius, Alberti, Palladio, Scamoni, Vignola, and Du Cerceau. Some of these works he owned in multiple editi~ns.~P.C.Hoofi, the major proponent of Renaissance poetry and " Van tuntmelt ( 1943). p. 94. Quoid in van Luttmielt ( 1943), p. 128. (3 Pnce (1974). p. 123. U Fremantle ( 1959). p. 97. 30 prose, visited both France and Itaiy. In a prose travel memoir, Reis-Heuchenis, he concerneci hirnself alrnoa exclusively with the architecture he saw in the cities he travelled to." In describing the architecture, Hoof? focused on the classical and the modem, deliberately neglecting the medieval. Of the vchitectural painters, none can be documented as having travelled to the south. Bersier clairneci, unequivocally, that Van Delen went to Italy at the age of 20." Blade rejects this since he found no documentation to suppon the claim. Vermet's archival search revealed that Van Delen was documented as owning around 200 book^.^' Vernet mentions some Literary works (Vondel, Cats, Ovid), yet Van Delen's possession of mode1 books must be unquestioned. Van Delen was the most prolific and moa imaginative in selecting and combining elernents from various sources. His signed and dated 1627 painting of A Palace Arcade with Elenantiv Dressed Fimires featured an entrance to the banquet hall rnodelled on Michelangelo's Capitoline porch, published in Vignola's Regoh delk citiqire orJini d'archiiettzrra (fig. 2 while Vignola's flaming ums show up in a few other compositions by Van Delen. The twisted columns were farned since the later Middle Ages and were employed again in the seventeenth centwy by Bernini for his baldachim at St Peter's Cathedra1 in Rome. Van Delen used severai large twisted columns in compositions dating from 1640 to the 1660s (figs. 22,23,24). The spiral, or Solomonic columns were 15 Meija(1978). p. 113. Ekrs1er(l951).p. 101. n Vennet. "Duck van Delen" ( 1995). p. 32. U Vipoln published in 1570. plate 39. Vmet in Sothews. London ( 1 1 Jan 19%). lot 38. 3 1 believed to be a feature of the Temple of Jerusalem, bdt under ~olomon.'~This would not have been lost on the Dutch audience, who saw themselves as representing the New Jenisalem. The Solomonic columns symbolicaily marked the entrance to a Heavenly Jerusalem and prefigured Christian edifices. Van Bassen also used typically Italian fonns like the Palladian tripartite arch. This can be observed on a loggia tiaming a view of a cupola behind it (fig. 25). The statue of the Roman orator Ithis painting must also have been taken fiom a source book of some kind. The architecture of these paintings are not a reflection of reality, but similarly. neither are architectural treatises or pattern and promotionai books a reflection of architectural practice. A treatise, as Onians explains at Iength in Bemrs of Mecnt~,i~,is designed to persuade. It is a vehicle for selling a new, improved set of ideals, offenng a new "syaem of values." There is a strong correlation between a treatise and the patron it was designed to appeal to, and a Van Delen painting and the patron it must have attracted. CONTEMPORARY ARCEITECTURE Theory and source books offered a graphic interpretation of architecture whkh doubtless provided artjas, who also worked on a twodirnensional surface, with resource materiai. Loose quotations and direct appropriation of details and structures can be found in the works of the architectural painters, but it is those artists who reshaped, re-hed and restructureci the details that advanced the speciality. It is also the adaptation of the J'? Fur a discusim of the source of the spiral column and its diaing Iegacy, see Forssman ( 1956). pp. 43.44 and J B. Ward Pakias. "The Shme of St. Peta and Its Twetve SpdColumns," The Joumaf of R~MISrudies 42 (1952). m.21-31. same source materiai by contemporary architects that initiateci a reformation in the architecture of the Netherlands. The revised conception of architecture, a wholly new approach to styiistic propnety and decorn, and a new interest in classical forms, if' merely in ffagrnented adaptations, manifesteci itself around 1625. The buildings erected were thernselves like pattern books, as the architects took their two-dimensional models? applied them as ornamental motifs, and constructeci an amalgamation of architectural fomrendering anirnated and taalfàcades. It is not surpnshg that the early works oc for example. Van Bassen, Van Delen and De BIieck,share that anirnated and textural rendition of architectural foms, since their three-dimensional models were the executed architecture of Holland. The architeaure of Amsterdam, Haarlem Antwerp, The Hague, Middelburg and Amemuyden probably infiuenced Van Delen, Van Bassen and Aens, and in the case of Van Steenwijck the Younger, perhaps even the architecture of London. In a few instances these artists depiaed real architecture: Van Steenwijck the Elder portrayed the cathedral at ~achen,"Van Bassen depicteci the Nieuwe Kerk at The Hague (fig. 26). and Van Delen painted The Hague's Bimenhof for his portrait of the Special Assembly of the States General of 165 1, in the Rijksmuseum. Tirnothy Trent Blade found an interior door of a mid-1630s Palatiai Tenace (fig. 27) to resemble a portal of the Middelburg house "De Globe", Rotterdamsche Kaai 17 (built 1663). Since direct quotation is impossible, the deduction can be made that Van Delen and the architect shared the contempomy vocabulaiy of architecture. This example Furthemore reveds that anis-ts such as Van Delen likely assembled motifs fiom their eovironment, which Blade feels resulted from the patron's demand for an elernent of tmth or of something familiar.'' w For a qduction se Rottadam ( 1 99 1 ), p. 66, fip. 4. " Blade (1976). p. 69. This speculafion, agam. fdls unda the assumpûon thnt it nas ptirucuiarly i!~e Dutch public that required some aspect of realitp+cn the@ a mbmation of d and mapary elements wre long a 33 We must take a look at real, contmporary architecture in the Netherlands because the conversion of Dutch architecture to classical or Italian principles reveals a generai new approach to design among the sociaiiy élite of Holiand. Constantijn Huygens's coiiection of architectural books allowed him to formulate his own opinions on what was suitable architecture for his native soil. Having traveiied ti, Itaiy and seen ancient architecture first-hand, he came to follow in the tradition of Vitnivius, believing in restraint and admiring, as well, eveqthing 'les bons Italiens" had to ~ffer.'~Alberti had been the first to modemize Vitruvius, accommodating the Italian patron of his day. In his De re aedificatoria VI, Alberti describes the architecture of Asia as impressive, and of Greece as refined. while the noble art of architecture culminates in Rome. The humble begiruiings of the Romans culminateci in wealth and power and expressed itself by selecting al1 the best in architecture, yet building in moderation." Alberti found their greatest virtue was restraint. We can be sure that Huygens and his contemporaries Iikewise thought of restraint as a virtue and admired the Roman manifestation of it. Jacob van Campen (1595-1657) Jacob van Carnpen was the firn to introduce ideas fiom the Itaiian theonsts Palladio and Scamozzi to the Dutch ~epublic." Born in Haarlem, where the Netherlandish Mannerism of Lieven de Key dominated, Van Campen began as a painter and brwched out to a study of architecture around 1625. For the unaccounted years Y Van Campin a letter to Hwens in 1642 relates hthe was occupied at lus -te of Ranhbroek Hlth the transhtion of a Palladio and Vitmvius. Marta Jan Bok in Amsterdam ( 1995). p. 45. 33 between 16 14 and 1624, Kuyper specuiates on the probability that Van Campen spent tirne in Venice and the Veneto since upon his retum Van Campen lawched into an architecturai practice and style that is strongly indebted to the classical revival architecture of this region.'* The young architect's fkst commission was the 1625 house for the merchants Jan and Balthasar Coymans. De Bray describes the home in Architectura Modena, praising Van Campen's proper application and arrangement of the orders and how "everything [is] most closely ob~erved."~~Suppon for Van Campen's work was voiced early on in his career, but praise and renown came for Van Campen upon completion of his Amsterdam Town Hall. In 1643, Amsterdam's City Council decided to reshape the Dam into a Renaissance square, in the style of an Italian piazza. Of the three surviving proposais Van Carnpen subrnitted, one plan incorporateci open loggias-a feature ill-suited to the Northem climate, yet as Kuyper explains, 'Sn rnatters of taste the imitation of the Italians was the decisive element."" It may be said that at the root of this imitation was the city councillors' desire to align themselves with the dues and ideais of the Roman Republic. The executed design of the Town Hdwas a palatial classical stnicture which lacked a pronounceci main entrance. In place of a main entrame. swen niches of equal sire composed the ground floor. This caused some confusion among contemporaries. The symbolic theme of the men niches representing the seven provinces of the Republic is highly probable, sven ihough Van Carnpen was more inclineci to court symbolism ihan civic. Deric Regin in Traders, Amsts, Burghrrs hds the style of the imposing structure qs Ku'pa !1980). p. 58. " .-lrchitecttlmMdema ( 163 1 ). p. 24. 57 Ku'pa ( 1980). p. 72. Ku'pa attributes the proposal to Huygens. 35 incongruous with the intimate nature and sale of central Amsterdam, which was dominated by grachthuizen and old cham domesticity: "Van Campen tried to impose an extraneous grandeur upon an unpretentious and reserved cornmunity..however. . . .Amsterdamrners were almoa unresewedly delighted with the design.'"# ~egin's recognition that the citizens of Amsterdam were pleased with their new Town Hall reveals Regin's ignorance of the deeper, underiying burgher consciousness. Indeed, like the early bourgeois who delighted in the elaborate Renaissance, Itaiianate designs of Van Bassen and Van Delen, which they envisioned thernselves inhabiting, the Town Hall gave matenal expression to their ambitions for luxury and grandeur. The new, highly praised Town Hall set the example for future construction in neighbouring municipaiities and set the standard for what other cornmunities might wish to aim for. It is of relevance to note that the only other classicist town hall in Holland at this time stwd in Middelhaniis (built in 1639 by Arent van s'Gravesande), just 40 kilometres to the north of Middelburg where Van Delen lived and worked. Van Campen's acquaintance with Huygens served him in good aead The two collaborated on the designs of Huygens's House in The Hague and later Van Campen planneci Huygens's country estate, Hofwjck in Voorburg, jua outside The Hague. Hoîwijck was eulogized by Huygens in a poem by the same narne written in 165 1 .'9 Pieter Post (1608-1669) The architect Pieter Post was also employed at Hofwijck as a draughtsman yet )O Essentially a moralinng poan about the good counîp Life versus the hostile cih, Hofkijck beiqto the genre of literature called hofdichren wi~oserise coincideci ~iththe incrdqconsmaion of country estates. Th<: relevancr of the rise of birirenploatsen and hofdichten is discusd m the foilowxtg dm 36 one of Post's best hown achievements is the country seat of Vredenburgh (1639-1 642) in the Beemster for Frednick Alewijn. This patron was well informed on the works of Palladio and Scamozzi and in commissionhg Vredenburgh he iikely aimed for the acclah it received as the most Palladian villa in the Netherlands. Post's final design of 1642, which was published, strongly resembles Palladio's Villa Ragona pubtished in his Quattro Libri and recalls Scarnozzi's Villa Rocca pisani." Its orders were after Scamozzi and ail the decorative details which Post generally employed throughotn his work were derived from Scarnozzi, with the exception of figure omammts which were modelled on the examples from France. Post eventuaily worked in an officiai capacity as architect to the Stadholder and in his works, such as the Huis ten Bosch (1645) for Frederick Hendrik and Amalia von Solms, he adhered to the classical theory of architecture called for in the court milieu of The ~a~ue.~'The main floor of Huis ten Bosch was laid with the black and white tiles characteristic of the interiors of the painted Dutch domestic scenes and the garden tenaces of the architectural speciaiists. (See for example figs. 9,25, il, 76,86).The checkered marble or tiled floors and terraces were, however, only present in the homes of the very wealthy, and were not cornmonplace in the homes of the average bourgeois. This floor type was indeed indicative of a certain status. Philips Vingbooos (1607/081678) Philips Vingboons, author of the above-mentioned Afleeldrrls. .. ,found his niche as a prominent architect in the commissions of many well-todo merchants. The house * Ottenhqm ( 1993). p. 90. O' Kuyper ( 1980). pp. 83-84. 3 7 Vingboons built for Daniel Sohier (now Keizersgracht 3 19) in 1639 exhibited a lively mixture of Classicism and native tradition: a classicized gable, Vredeman's strapwork, and a typically Gothic verticality supporteci by Tuscan and Doric pilasters (fig. 28). The oeuil- de-boeuf motif and cartouches which appear in Vngboons's architecture also show up in opulent amounts and in more imaginative ways on the paintings of Van Bassen and Van Delen. Vingboons had submitted plans for Amsterdam's Town Hall. These designs were French in inspiratioq employing Qmed corner pavilions in the tradition of Du Cerceau and France's country châteaux. While his domestic designs epitomizcd upper class architecture in the vein of Italian predecessors, Vingboons nonetheless understood ihe language of French design and its association with class, etiquette and royalty. In his book, Vingboons singled out Paris' Palais du Luxembourg (16 15- 1625), built by Salomon de Brosse, as an exarnple of excellent contemporary architecture." Bartolomeus van Bassen (c. 1590-1652) Bartolomeus van Bassen was known as an architect as well as an architectural painter He belonged to The Hague and Delfi gudds and became city comptroller of architectural works in The Hague in 1638, and nayed on for a period of fourteen years.6' Kuyper describes Van Bassen as trained in the old mmer and reluctant to accept Ciassicism." Van Bassen is a unique case because his work rweals an acquaintance with the Classical design of Van Campen and infiuence from Vredeman. The latter influence a2 Ottrnhqm in Her Kmtbdri~..suegests thar Viboons may have rwd ihts buildmg and its vertical succession of ordas as a modef for the house rit 548 SiageL Amstadm for Joan Huykcuper. ( l989), p. 55. "'Giltaij and Jwsai in Ronh( 199 1 ), p. 8 1 . 3 8 appears in his luxurious style of painting, yet avoids exposure in his architectural oeuvre. The dserence in style between his real architecture and painted works can be attributed to Van Bassen's conservative court environment in The Hague, which demanded pseudo- classical buildings and promoted excess and opulence in the iconography and design of architectural painting. The architect Van Bassen, whose work embraced little of the classical plaimess prevalent among such stricter Classicias as Van Campen, is credited with the 1647 Hague Raa&tis tower.6' the Rhenen palace of the King of Bohemia, the remodelling of Endegeest at ~e~st~eest~~and the constmction and painting of the triumphal arch for the hineral of Fredenck ~endnk?Ail of these were prestigious commissions. Around 1650 at Endegeest, the architect used antiquated Ionic capitals afkr Vignoia. The piacing of the volutes at right angles to the arches they supporteci and the recollection of the turret of the town hall at The Hague led Kuyper to suggest Van Bassen as architect. Van Bassen's overhaul of the St. Agnieten cloister at Rhenen for a Koningshis for King Frederick V and Queen Elizabeth of Bohemia, who resided in exile at The Hague, inspired him to incorporate elements into his painting. His 1634 Bohemian Royalty at a Feast (fig. 29) depicts the King and Queen dining in public in an interior rendered in perspective and furbished with some tme-to-Iife details. The seps leading to a raised antechamber might be an accurate detail of the palace since it is an unusual feature for an intnior painter to employa The skyline in his Copenhagen painting Imaainary Palace for the Uïnter Kinq "'Van Gelda ( 19 1 1 ). pp. 276ff. "B Li&r is quitr unreiiable in sta- that the afihrtecîure *- relate to thr palace [at Rhum] itsi:ifl (1982). p. 29. AIthoiiph îhae is no evirience to support this. it is probable htVan E3assen muid renk details in 3 9 (fig. 30), Gped and dated 1639, is furnished with the Gothic tower of Cu~erakerkin ~henen.~'Such a complementary relationship between real and imaginary architecture can al= be found in a painting by Philips Vigboons. However, he reversed the more usual practice and employed the imaginative detail of an early architectural painting in a real design Iater in his career. His rendition of Hendrik de Keyser's Stock Exchange dated 1634 features a tower that he later built in Karnpen, Ovenjsell (fig. 3 1). Van Bassen's ImaPinarv Palace for the Wmter King may have been composed of a selective combination of preliminary plans for the Rhenen. However, its fùnction as a decorative piece, a painting to be hung on a wail and enjoyed for its visual appeai,mua not be overlooked. I~deed,a Koningshuis inventory records three painting by Van Bassen that would have had such a decorative function." Sirnilarly, Van Bassen's painting of an exterior Mew of Nieuwe Kerk at The Hague (fig. 26) may have served as Van Bassen's proposed plan for the chwch (the commission for which went to Pieter Arentsz. NoonMts), but in my opinion the painting which was purchased by The Hague burgomasters in 165 1 was more likely a cornmissioned work intended to decorate the tom hall illustrating the burgomasters' pride in theû slightly embeUished local church. Aside from Van Bassen's fwiction as architectural advisor to the Bohemian King, Van Bassen was also in the service of Prince Frederick Hendrik. According to D.F.Slothouwer, Van Bassen was apparentiy paid for his drawings and models for work at Honselaandijk around 1630 (but cannot be considerd the architect of the royal country accordancc uith uhat hr actudly dm@ for the palace. sinu this could save 8s self-promotional matd. It ts houn through a description bu John Evelyn in his diary. that the Konmghuis ws "a neate and uldl built Pdace. or Countp house. built &a the Italian mawa." Quoted in White (1982). p. 18. Liedilie in Rottrrdam ( 1991 ), p. 37. Van Gelder ahmentions another pamtmg with îhe Rhaen palace tower as a backdrop. ( 191 1 ), p. 235. 10 Liedtke f 1982). p. 29. n. 29. estate). and for the ground plan designs and work-in-pmgms drawings of Huis ter Nieuburch (ciml633)." Van Bassen's projects, regardless of whether they were executed or not. exemplifi the coun style of imaginary architectural painting, because they were produced for the connoisseun who bought perspective paintings and also appealed to those who wished to be associated with courtly iife. An analysis of the country estater or buirenplaotsen Iike Honselaarsdijk and Ter Nieuburch is called for in order to understand the patronage of this type of architectural painting. BUITENPLAA TSEN Retreat from the hectic coun life or the vices of the cities became an essential anribute of the patrician class. The two most powerful ruling groups were the urban regenü of Amsterdam and the court of The Hague. k was just outside of the borden of these centres that buiwploorsen were purchased." Two paintings by the Flemish painter Hans Bol (1 534-1 593). who practised and eventually senled in Amsterdam. delineate a silhouette of the city of Amsterdam in the background of country scenes populated by cajoling loven and speelhuijs inhabitants (figs. 32 and 33 j. The View of Amsterdam the SoUtb is described by Van Mander in Her Schilderboeck and accurately represents the busy trading activity of the Amsterdam region on the waters at the right. The country recreation to the left stands distinctly apan from the rest of the scene and highlights the luxury of leisure enjoyed outside the walls of the city. The figures of A Castle in a Laalso enjoy leisure. music and idol games amidst the background of the urban centre identitied as Amsterdam. a reminder perhaps of -- - Slothouwcr n.d.. pp. 27-28. " The names of buitenp/uurren. such 3s "Buitensorg"(owned by Willcm Backsr). "Tijdvrrdijf (Xicolass Witxn). and "Vwdenhof (Andria de Gnefl) reflect thcir functions. Burke ( 1974). p. 70. where their fortunes were procured. A statue of Fortuna on top of the pavilion also rerninds them of her power in guiding worldly affaU.s and the potential variabEty of fortune. The wealth of The Hague sternmed from the House of Orange and its entourage. Under the patronage of Stadholder Frederick Hendnk, the reconstruction of Honselaarsdijk cade began in 1624. A French style in the manner of Du Cerceau and Salomon de Brosse was adopteci, as steep roofs and corner quoins imitated French regional castles. The francophile Frederick Hendrik imported French architect Jacques de la Vallée for the 1634-37 building campaign, as weU as ernploying garden expert André Molln to lay out the garden grounds in 1633. The chateaux de plaisance became the Stadholder's life project and inspired many middle class '4châteaux" in Holland in country areas such as Maarsseveen, dong the Vecht and in the immediate vicinity of Amsterdam. The Stadholder Frederick Hendrik and his court acted as a "reference group" for the Amsterdam rner~hants,~~who, as Kees Schmidt explains, were undergoing a process of baristocratization',or the process of assuming a noble and aristocratie nature and aiming to attain the attributes thereof '' The increased urbanization of cities in the Republic gave rise to the need for escape and relaxation outside of the city, which in tum imbued the rniddle class with prestige and fantasies of noble grandeur. The representation of the simple burgher as noble and associateci with an estate could legitimire the Republic and the individual. (Sefor exampie Comelis Holsteyn's painting oFReinier Pauw and his " Schdt outlines tbpt the incrrasd ariaanrization of the b@er chuas tied to the -te of oligarch! of the ci-. 4cwdth and *tus developed cornpanion qmùols in buitenplaauen. grand tours and titles. (1 977-78). p. 44 1. H.A. DiedenLs ( 1976) and Pieta Spiaaibirrp ( 198 1 ) also discuss thts proce~sof admcratization Dic=dcnks in his cssap dtals uith the buitenplaars as investment (pnmanly an eqhtecnth centtxy phenmenon) and Spierenbtrrp desthe mentalip of the patriciate z.hom. hc feeb, undemeut the aristocfataatioq and not the micidie classes. ln a rather e?ctreme opinian, Simon Scbama belicved that "the major impetus for the aun. retreat came hwurt- batmg courtrm mtmd the stadholda and the States General at The Hague." (1988). p. 293. 42 Familv at Westwiik, c. 1650, fig. 34; and Pieter Codde's Portrait of a Familv in a Courtvard, c. 1640, fig. 35, where the courtyard setting is even more Italianate.) Such representation was particularly important in iight of the Republic's fiequent interaction with neighbouring monarchical countries. Regents, merchants and city representatives regularly encountered foreign noblemen,and while hgality and sobriety still mattered, the appearance of nobility was of utmost value. The word bt(itenpIaairs, Schmidt explains, derives fiom the eighteenth century when it replaced ternis such as qwefhuijs,Iusplaats, and hoj~lede." It was the regents and toprung merchants who began setting up hofsteden at the end of the sixteenth century. Old castles. origuially established as defence works, were bought up by burghers and renovated for cornfort; however,the "evidence of the feudal part'776remained untouched in order that the new owner could fancy hirnself a noble. Later architectural painter Gemt Berckheyde (Haarlem, 1633-1698) painted a New of Heemstede Castle in its renovated state, including an extension, a forecourt with fashionable balustrade, and enlarged windows (fig. 36). Oudaen Castle on the Vecht was expanded in the seventeenth century to include an ornamental tower and cupola, and larger windows. irnpressing on outsiders a stately e&ce recalling the power and prestige of Italian Renaissance Qvic ar~hitecture,~or even simply the Italian vinas of the Veneto. Peter Burke in his midy of seventeenth-century Venice and Amsterdam, observed that both Venetian and Amsterdam éiites generally had country estates.'"deas of palrician grandeur were manifesid in *' Schmidt ( 1978-79). p. 438. 'O Van der Wïjck ( 1972). p. 407. n Van Luttavelt (1943). pp. 17-18. ?I In an uitemting crossnilnual e'rample, EMipp von Zesai wote of a Vmetian noblanan li'cmg in a coune çstnte on the Amstel in .-Idriatic Romund. Burke ( 1974), p. 70. villas. The comparable republics thus shed comparable visual expressions of rnembership to a patrician élite. The famhouse Goudeheof on the Vecht was bought by the Huydecoper fady and became a bu~~enplua~swhen its name was changed to Goudestein in 1608. A year later the pied-à-terre for Jan Jacbosz. Bal would be enjoyed by feUow élites, as ody the select few of the sixteenth century had enjoyed? Transformation of the country home began around 1629 when Joan Huydecoper (1599- 166 1), burgomaster of Amsterdam, renovated the building and set an example for other buitenplaa~se11in the Maarsseveen area. Goudestein also became one of the eariiest country estates to be depicted with frequency and receive titerary attention and praise. Already in 16 1 1, Philibert van Borsselen spoke highly of the retreat;sOCaspar Barlaeus wrote an ode to Goudestein in 1640;" Jan Vos was cornmissioned by Huydecoper to write about it; and dllater, Lukas Rotgans wrote a Georgic poem "Gezang op Goudestein" comparing its location on the Vecht to Rome's Tiber river.'* A 1627 painting of Haarlem burgomaster. Jan Claesz. Loo's hofstede by Jacob Adriensz. Matham includes a lmgthy descriptive text at the bottom edge of the panel, One of its verses reads: Hier is sijn Lust-venreck, hier is sijn speelp$el, Dit is sijn last en lust, dit is sijns levensdeel. w Schum ( 1983 ), p. 204. " ibid.. p. 2M. IL If WIS publishd in his Poemara. Editio i?: alter plus pnr auctior (Amstd163546). Schvrîxt~( 1983). p. 209. n W. " llat Smmh by dm Circhurroom halen? Dar hier de Roomrch~?vùer &migr. Quotai m Van Luttervelt ( 1943). p. 126. " Quoted in Schmidt ( 1 977-78 ), p. 439 This verse serves to evince the rights and burdens of wealth, as well as the benefits it bequeaths especially with regard to the right one has to own a "Lusr-vertrecK7 or recreational retreat. The presence of these verses on a painting representing the hofstrede itself highhghts the effort to legitimize a burgher's wealth and his hitenp!aats in light of hitch cultural pressure to live modestiy and morally . Btriterzpiaatsen remained extravagant affairs and bordered on an almoa ridiculous expression of pride and vanity in the latter half of the seventeenth century. It was perhaps the hofdicht, a genre of literature parallehg the rise of the buitenplimts, that grounded élite social groups in moral humilny and sirnultaneously placed them on a pedeaal. Huygens's poem Hofwijck "thematizes the possession of Hofwick as a display of opulence,'* but ail is well as long as the estate owner7smorality remained in check. Huygens constructed a careful balance between the country seat as a place of meditation and one of recreation and "conspicuous consumption." The dual hinction of meditation and recreation as expressed in the hofdzcht is a unique aspect of htch pastoral poetry. The attention to religious topics was already strong with Erasrnus when he spoke of a square garden with a waii in ConMviirnt Religrosum: "The place is dedicated to the honourable pleasures of rejoicing the eye, refnshing the nose, and renewing the HofJichtei~can provide us with clues to what was considered fashionable and respectable. In the words of Schmidt: the hofdicht loffered a perfect opportunity to make Gothein ( 1928). vol. II, p. 4. the aristocratic pretensions of the country house relative for the Dutch public.M 1 wouid argue that the staffage and hof architecture of the early architectural specialists embrace the same mood and address the sarne ûutch public in the depiction of aristocratic pretension. Alison McNeil Kettering in her examination of the pastoral theme in The htch Arcadu, aptly States that "As the century progresseci and Dutch econornic Me flourished, [the socially élite] ranks were swelled by mernbers of the nmdveatRc riches eager to adopt the cultural preferences of the older weaithy classes."' Particularly, the 1630s and 1640s in Amsterdam were marked by the nozivemix riches assertion of exclusivity and their adoption of the attitudes and Uestyle of old wealth. The setting for the hofdicht is always the country house, in keeping with the pastoral tradition and the country house's origins in the Italian villa Iifestyle. The grounds are describeci in detail and often the architecture and topography of the eaate reveai a recognizable buitenpiaats. Again, Huygens's Hof#.rck descnbes a specific setting and identifiable estate, as well as the anatomy of the enate which was modelled on the propodions of the body-the house its head, the couriyard its main body, and the gardens its lower body-in emulation of Italian treati~es.~~ In English, French, Italian and Spanish iiteranire the pastoral has been understood as symbolicdiy nch and sociaily responsive, but as Kettering noted, this has not been the case for ûutch literature and culture. Albeit later than their European counterparts, the Rb Mv translation of: "Het hofdicht bood eai prachitge gekgtgaihiai om de atistocreûscbi: pretaties van de buittnpIoats voor agen publielc te relativeren- Schmidt (1 97&79), p. 106. Huygens's work uas publishrd in 1653 as Iïrauliimr. Hohjck. Hofirede ?'miden Hem van Zgdichen Onder I'mrburgh (The Hape). Jacob Wmcrbaen's .ircc& Tmpe. Ockenburgh (The Hague. 1654) and Jacobs Cats' Oudenian, B~ten-leva.en Hofgedachrm. op Surplier (t2mstrrdam, 1655) quickiy foiiozed suit For the most ra;ait litaature on hofdichien and the depcticm of buiterpfuutsen and pdens, sec Willanien B. & Vries. "De tuin in wootden- in Hamlem (19%). pp. 171-177. 46 Dutch, in fact, embraced the classical models of Horace and Virgil, with country house poetry peakirig in the 1630s and 1640s." The sunny and cheemil charrn of pastoral gardens and the It~sthojrnusthave appealed to the people of a region unendowed with a pleasant year-round clirnate. The sunny, cheerful and bdliantly cofourful paintings of Van Delen capture the setting of an idyllic and pastoral existence. k late work by the artist explicitly demonstrates the pastoral life through the amibute of the shepherd's staffcamed by one the figures. The paintings of simple, shepherd life discussed by Kettering, offered contemporaries a pleasure garden, where, according to Kettering, edification was not the intenti~n.'~Undoubtedly, pastoral paintings Iike that of architectural paintings take the audience beyond the everyday; the association with the forms of a great antiquity or a classicism whose style is rooted in antiquity, conferred upon these works a cultural significance and respect. Indeed, classicism was one means of constructing an image of cultural supenority and providing visual evidence of belonging to an aristocratie élite. Silhouettes of classicized country eaate facades are detectable in the backgrounds of a few Van Delen paintings. In figures 37, 38 and 4 1a, the vanishing point of the perspective clearly marks the estate. In figure 37 the structure bars the hipped roof and flat, two- storey fenestrated facade characteristic of Dutch biîitenpimtsen; it stands quit e apm from the palatial edifice of the foreground. " Ibid. p. 122. 1 dmgee with Schmkeveld-van der DUSSUI uio. in hdisrai- of Kettermg's book. doubts that Dutcb bughers used pastoral portruts to estpbiish a sodprestige. KT efl'ectrveiy hbeshow in imitation of the nobility the burgher liked to âms in the simple, country dispise. 47 GARDEN ART AND ARCIWIECTURE Gardens were a necessary addition to any proper htch residence. Space for garden grounds in the city was minimal, but every effort was made to include at least a small and opulentiy decorated garden. A woodcut by Balthasar Horisr. of 1625 illustrates the urban backyards with parterres.p0 Between the years 16% and 1647 the city of Amsterdam drained the Diemermeer and the Beemster polder in 16 12, the Purmerand in 1622, and the Schermer 163 1. The reclaimed land was used for smd houses, each of which was equipped with a tidy garden facing ont0 the main canal.91The garden itself was little more than a panerre with symmetrical flower beds and, on occasion, a fountain. Philips Vingboons designed a fountain in 1639 for an Amsterdam house at 518 singel.* Crispijn de Passe was one of the first artists to represent stadsn~inenor urban backyard gardens (fig. 39). An engravhg of an enclosed garden terrain was included in his HO~ZZIS F1oridh.s which displayed a great variety of flower types. The implication of this book was that good gardens cultivated the right kuid of flowen. nowers such as the tulip. hyacinth and rose had becorne the essence of courtly glarnour, in both France and Holland. Clipped hedges, pavilions, statues and beds of herbal plants and flowers served to ernbelhsh the garden with impressive variety. Such diversity of ornarnentation paralieled the works of the architectural specialists, whose paintings ofien Uicluded some fon of garden ait. It is, however, the garden art of the country estates, rather than the stcidmin, that was represented by Van Deien and his contemporaries, whiie that of his predecessors, Aerts and the Van Steenwijck's, found its source in the work of Vredeman. -- - - QO SeEtfen min in ûuà .-îm.sth (Amsterdam Historisch Museum, 1982). '' Gothcin ( 1928). p. ZO. " Mr de Sq.Jarrn~d ofthe Hulory of Gardming ( 1988). p. 127. cat. 12. 48 Vredeman's Hortom (1 583) was the tim of his books to deal with garden Mews. Most of the designs have an architectural fiamework, with loggias bordering the garden and rnarking the transition fiom garden to house. Vredeman also designed garden types founded on the three orders. The Donc garden was constructed from geometric beds, the Ionic consisted of cirnilar beds and the Corinthian of labyrinthine foms." When the Englishman Sir William Brereton travelled through HoUand, he encountered some "mighty spacious garden plots" as weil as the "dainty new house of the Prince of Orange," proclaiming the Prince's garden to be ''the fairest and mon spacsious plan that [he] ever saw in [his] Me, and [having] the vastest covered walls." With a round moat at its centre, a round island within and a round covered walk shading the garden, the design may have followed Vredeman's spdcations. It was however the classical garden which took precedence in the Republic. The Dutch classical garden, dehed by Fiorence Hopper as a break fiom the "de Vnesian garden," displayed "the classical principles of symmetry and hannonic proportions... [and] came to symboliie the aspirations of the hitch republic.'m A formal garden indicated that the owner must also abide by the rules of fomal etiquette. André Mollet's publication of Le Jurdtn de Plaisir (Stockholm, 165 1) outlined the appropnate classicist elements of a regal garden. Several of the thirty plates appear to represent work f?om the 1630s to 1640s, as plate 14 resembles a parterre section of the Honselaarsdijk garden? oJ For more information cm Vredcman's manneristic ganiens sce kIactrIcmi ( 19%). pp. 14 1 - 14 5. as Sir WiIiiam Brercton Tmvels in Holkmd.. (1634). pp. 32.3 1. and28. ag Prcface to mpmt by Conan in Mollet (1981), p. 110. Notmarthy Plso is that thc: centrai matif of Fredtlnck Haiddc's arms copies that of Claude Mollet's desipu for Henri N at SaÏnt-Gcnnam-en-Laye. FIorence Hoppa in -The Dutch Classicist Gardar and Andre Mollet." 73e Joyml of the Histoty of Gdming ( 1982). klieves that Mollet as uisptred by an early Dukh canal gmderk and it was thw prototye that be anploved at HuaseIaarsdijk 1 am ill~ppeclto makc an llssessment on this issue. ho~mr,1 do apee ~ithHupper that the Dutch gmh. oflm histotically alipeâ with the developments of France and Eqiaud. has its ulîimaîe source m Iialy and thts is often noi 49 Mollet greatly contributed to the dissemination of the French garden which came to symbolize courtly society. This son of the gardener to King H~MIV of France maintained that a royal house should have a grand avenue, preferably stretching out perpendiculariy from the facade of the building; this is precisely what Mollet saw executed at Honselaarsdijk, with the addition of his own parterres lining the avenue. Moiiet presented an original ensemble of garden and château. Du Cerceau had also conceived of the garden as an integral part of the architect's task, but a detailed guideline was still wanting. The essential pruiciples of a garden h lafrançaise were aiready established by 1630. Symmetry, geometry and unifomiity were the ruling factors. Mollet in his chapter on ornaments foc a jardin de plaisir (owned by any Prince or rnonarch) recommended that in order to attain perfection, the garden needed fountains, grottoes, statues on pedestals, perspectives on walls, and organic and other omaments. AU these requirements had their ultimate source in earlier Italian gardens. Italy was the acknowledged "Garden of ~urope,'~and as Erik de Iong observed recently, the formaiities of garden design were to be learned fiom Italy. Instruction in establishg the proper garden and buitr~tievenwas offered by Jan van der Groen, gardener to the Prince of Orange, in Den Nederlandise~iHovenirr (Amsterdam. 1669). It propagated the advantages of country life (in bettering one's mord, physical and spintual wealth), as weil as covering the practical needs of perfecting the art of gardening, which the author felt was an architecturai matter. Van der Groen aipulated that orchards and gardens required protection by high trees such as oaks, 50 poplars and elmsw This was not something introduced by Van den Groen, as most early country estates, including Vredenburgh and Honselaarsdijk among othen, had a row of high trees on the grounds. A 1644 painting by Van Delen displays a prominent row of trees alongside a terrace (fig. 40) while several other paintings display them in the diaance. The inclusion of trees, tiirthermore, signals the increased importance of nature in the 1640s. Van den Groen calleci Holland a 'little garden". Gardens were regular metaphors for the prosperous Republic. An etching by Willem Buytewech, Aliegoory of the Twelw Years Tm( 16 15), iilustrated the lion (a patriotic syrnbol of Hollmd) guarding the fertile garden enclosure populated by a citizen, merchant, fanwr and Stadholder. Garden sculptures also betrayed a purpose. in a painting of an open gdlery, the centre of the picture feahires a fountain statue of Mercury (fig. 41a and 41b)? The nude balancing on his left leg, is an exact replica of a 1580 sculpture of Mercury, now in Florence. Executed by the Fiemish sculptor Jean de Boulogne (1 529-1 608), known as Giambologna, this figure of Mercury with his characteristic caduceus held in his Iefl hand, is unmiaakably duplicated in the painting which was auctioned in Brussels in 1929. As the focus of attention, positioned before the vanishing point, this statue of the Roman god of commerce and gain may exemplify the merchant aspirations of the contemporary staffage ponrayed. " Enk & hg. "For Profit and Onitmient: The Function and Meaninp of Dutcti Gardrn Art in the Pmod of Willam and Mary. 1650-1702" in Hunt (1990). p. 20. For more intintormationon Van den Grrwn sec De long's .'.VetItddish Haperitfet Garden Art in the Paiod of Wiiiirnn md Miiry. 1650-1702- in Journal of the Hisrory of Gurdming ( 1 988), pp. 1540. 00 Sale Fieva, BnciscIs, 20-21 Fe- 1929. Assiped to Van Men, hmeva, cm accoimt of the style of thr: caprtnls-hc sith sqmmted volutes and mags-an attribution to Von E3assen ma? be more probable. 5 1 Aside fiom potentially propagandistic portraits of gardens, the cultivated garden and its accornpanying structures of speeihuijzen, arbours, loggias and broderies became a stage for social activities, including conversuties, amorous play, and games. According to the early seventeenth-century French courtesy book Le Jardin d 'amour.mi est enseignie b methocie & desse pour trouver entretenir une Maitresse. avec des demcvides & des r~pomesjoyeuses (Rouen), young ladies congregated in gardens and it was there that honest lovers shodd go.1ooThis was of course a long-standing tradition, dating back to medieval gardens of love, where chivaIric young gentlemen courted eligible mistresses in a paradiasical setting consisting of walls, casties and the riches of nature. This theme is indeed also an important aspect of earîy seventeenth-century Netherlandish painting and requires examination in the foilowing chapter. 52 CmR4 The Staffage and Themes This chapter will discuss the iconographie details and broad thernes of the architectural paintings that have thus far been analyzed for their depiction of architecture. This undertaking wiU involve an analytis of the garden of love theme, an interpretation of the potential moralization of some of the works, the staffage of the paintings and their sources, the propagation of etiquette and aatus, and finally the occasionai execuiion of ponraiture and its fuiiction in the genre. AU of these aspects, it will be shown, are inextricably linked to one another and therefore find an appropriate place in their architectural fiameworks. Hendrik Bramsen in his paper "Le Château d'Amour" dimsses the literary and mythological theme of the garden of love in the context of a Ham Bol miniature panel, Cade in a Landscape (1589; fig. 33). His proof of the identification of the subject as a châfeaud'amour lays in its kinship with the iconography of eariier founeenth-century ivories and their images of tounüunents, balustrades, hanging carpets and promenading couples.' His obsewations are valuable and 1 have funher noticed that a few of these feanires aiso appear in a Vredeman print of a garden design (fig. 42). The painting and the print both illuarate themes of love. The importation of ideas from the utistic circles of Randers occurred through the migration of southem mists to the Northern Netherlands. Bol travelled from Antwerp 53 through Bergen op Zoom, Dordrecht, Delft and to Amsterdam where he eventually came upon a favourable market for his miniature coilectibles, no doubt because of the culture of collecting and the appeal of his idyllic images to those who were blessed with the capability and good fortune to collect. Ariane van Suchtelen in her article on Bol is apparently unaware of Brmen's paper since she simply States that the artist's combination of fantasy and reality found a market in the Northern ~etherlands.' in fact, Bol was instrumental in bringing the garden of love motif to the North at the tum of the cenhiry and, indeed, his miniatures became a source for painters such as David Vinckboons and Adriaen van de Verne, and in tum Dirck Hals, Esaias van de Velde and Wiilem Buytewech. Bol is ahimportant in the context of this thesis because in his painted works: Bol sets up the garden of love theme with architecture. Through a succession of mias fiom Bol to De Caulery and to David Vinckboons, a recognition of the suitability of the theme to architeçtural stages was fomulated. Fiemish artist Louis de Caulery (c. 1580-der 1621), active in Antwerp, concentrated mainly on gardens of love, banquets and ariaocnitic bds and hedmost of his scenes in an architeaural, garden or courtyard setting. His paintings of good society, which fuid their ultimate source in the Fontainebleau School, expose images of bourgeois delight and their proponents succumbing to Venus. Venus is ever-present in De Caulery's work, either as scuiptural ornamentalion or the focus of the feast, as in Homa& to Venus (fig. 43). In his Banquet in a Venetian Palace, Venus with Cupid stands upon a pedestal by the water (fig. 44). In this painting 25 elegant and fine figures promenade or interact with a superficial prattle, a notion syrnbolized by the parrot perched above them 54 The feast takes place with the boudaries of a forrnai garden and a palace. This work, W Dutch perspective painters who chose to emulate the De Vnesian Renaissance style of architecture in conveying not solely skU in perspective, but also themes of Iove and propriety among the upper classes, a social pinnacle which the prosperous Dutch society was nearing. ELEMENTS OF THE GARDEN OF LOVE The artist Hendrik Aerts is presently known for ody a few select paintings. Among the three signed and dated works are a palatiai interior, an allegory on death, and a fantasy architecturai setting (fig. 12). The last, typicaiiy titled Imsainary Renaissance -9Palace was the object of MarceUa Dreessen's attention in 1988 when she analyzed the iconography of the painting and identifid prominent elernents of the garden of love.' The components of this theme include a garden, often with a fountain, idealized surroundings, elegant staffage, and musical activities. The figures are engaged in amorous activities, stimulated by the music and erotic atmosphere. Other elements alluding to a garden and an aüegory of Iove are the do& present in rnoa of the paintings discussed in this paper and a si@cant detail comecting the subject to an overall eroticism, a plumed hat on the neps which symbolized lust in Cesare Ripa's ~conolug~a~'a lute, a lutist in antique attire who is accompanied by a cupid, and finally a chateau d'mm,dehed by idealized architechire 3 Andrti Cariou in Paris ( l98T), p. 1 1, cat. 9. Sepage 65 for &W. M.Drerssea "Gefantaseerd Rauhnx-palei.~of iiefdesniin? Over en schildenj van Hartnck A~xtsin het Ri-useum." Antiek 22 (1988), pp. 484488. J.P.C.MBallegea in I%7 atiributed another puhgto Aerts. fÔrmer& in the Chdocollection in Kiev. set his figure 37, ( 1967). p. 69. The costuane of the Mageof the fmqround couple in this painting ccrtainly uKficate stmqiv the w-ark of Aats. anri the influence of ûanzig &es on Aerts (senote 9). and garden art. A title mch as 'Tantasy Renaissance Palace," Beessen notes, is a modem construction and does not adequately reflect the tme nature of the painting. It rather . .. emphasizes the architecture and de-emphasizes the figures, minunalipng their activities and subsequent ~ignificance.~The remaining features obsenred in the painting, when they are considered as a complementary arrangement (as they must be), serve to reinforce the ailegory of love and the "liefdest~in'~motX The lute player and mythological cupid act as repoussoir figures and as such communicate most directly to the audience. The lutia looks to the prominent strolling couple and perhaps aiso to the dancing couple behind ihem. Another couple dance in the Eame of an archway to their rear, while merry-making musicians parade in from the right towards the banquet table at the centre of the composition. Bernard Vermet has pointed out to me in a letter that Aerts used a Sadeler print iliustrating Amor in classical dress.' The allegory of love by Sadeler is &er Mmen de Vos and ponrays the persmification of Amor in front of an enclosed garden with an arbour (fig. 45). He is outfitted in ancient Roman attire, crowned with a floral wreath, plays the lute and is mrrounded by the attributes of love. Among these are a musical score. Molin, trumpet, racquet, full purse, dagger and sword. A Flernish painting in Vienna, of Amor simiiarly surrounded by the symbols of his personfication includes all of these attributes, as wel as playing sticks for croquet and ka pume, a wooden ampiece(?) for la pme,a baii, playing cards, a tric-trac board, and three bound books inmibed with the names of ûvid, Vigil and Boccaccio (fig. 46). Sigdicantly, this portrait of Amor bears a arong resemblance to Aerts's repoussoir figure, particularly in the facial features " Dreesscai *es note of a 1912 title. "Banquet dmun palais: which agam. only qia out one ûctivity. ' Vamet mas lund enou@ to stuire thts information ticith me in a letter of 3 May. 1 9%. and the placement of the chord hgers on the lute. Vernet in his more recent article on Aerts placed the artist in Danzig around 1603 (perhaps the year of his death).' The city of Danzig had active cultural relations with the Southem Netherlands at the end of the sixteenth cenniry and thus the comection is not entirely unusual. Vernet fwther discovered that the dress wom by the elegant couples originate fiom Danzig and were also wom in the Netherlands for a period just before 1600.~Aens was surely associated with Paul Vredeman de Vries who spent the in Danzig as weli, between 1592 and 1595, and may have gone to Prague with the father and son team. l0 It was noied eariier that Hans and Paul Vredeman de Vries often worked together and the painting bearing the signature of Hans as "IW.,"or inventor. is likely no exception (fig. 17). In this work, Palatid Architecture with Musicians, elements similar to the Aerts painting, though not as overt, are depicted. An elegantîy anired couple stroll dong an ideahed Gothic and Classical setting while a musical Company, including a male and female lutist, a flutist, an organia and a violinkt set the mood. Al1 the figures are dressed in contemporary garb. In the seventeenth century the lute wu, among other things, a symbol of loose morality. The lute may appear as a symbol for hearing, among penonifications of the five senses, as a reminder of Temperance, as a sign of youth, or as harmony in mmiage." At the very least, the Iute symbolized fnvolity, as it was often Ibïd.. p. 1 12. Vamet reproduces (uo uoodcuts fmm Anton Mûilds Der lhuger Fmwn und JunpIfmen... (Damg, 1601) which esuibIishes an unquestionable lrnk to the Ampainmg. The author also mates that the parntmg was pmducai m ûmq, dthotqh tbere is no concrete cvidsnce to support this. Repdess of ~hàhathis is bue ur no4 A& was, by 1600, a mature artist and pdd his paintiogs for the patrons or market he wrts most familtar with at hoaw in the Netherlands. or abroari at rqd courts. 'O Ibid. pp. 112-1 16. " For erampk sec Amrterdam ( l976). p. 24. @. 5-7: pp. 105-106. For embla relacing b the lute ami mnor,scep. 60,fig. 8b;p. 106, fig. Zlb. 57 shown with sin- youth behaving gutside the sober nom of Dutch culture." A miniature copper oval signed by Van SteemMjck the Younger of 1608 uses the repoussoir figure of a lutia in his composition which opens out onto a courtyard peopled with several leisurely strders and centered with a foutain (fig. 47). The lute here may symboiize any combination of youth, Temperance, or the sense of hearing, but a Iess ambiguous painting attributed to Van Steenwijck the Elder (fig. 7) depicts the lute with numerous young couples, ranking the lute within that category of musical instruments signalhg an unethical ticense, allowing for drink and arnorous interplay and leading to imorality. l3 Hence, images of eiaborate gardens, architechiral fantasies and erotic attributes were also used to decorate musical instruments. The virginal was one such instrument. The anonymous panel painting in the Rijksmuscwn with its teUing dimensions of 5 1 by 172 centimetres, was surely used for a virginal (fig. 48). The covers of virguials offered a wide space for both pictures and painted or inscribed phrases. Many seventeenth-century paintings depicting young maidens at virginais in the rnidst of theh music lessons show the covers painted with Latin phrases, landscapes, and occasionaiiy architectural scenes." The Rijksmuseurn panel is closely related to De Caulery's Banauet in a Venetian Palace: it dupiicates the protruding terrace, rectiiinear garden layout, and waterways with Venetian gondolas. The architecture is, however, more distinctly nonhan, following Vredernan's mixture of Gothic and classicd styling. " Som: crcamples Crom tbe catalogue Amsterdam (1976) are Dirck Haîs. Buitemart& in the Frans Haism- Isacir EIp, Fesiend ~eztlschwi( 1620) in the Ri-uscum, Hendnck ta Bru@~enLute Piava uith Woman S& (1628) in thc Louvre, and David Vmckbocms, (fîg 55). 13 Cmpip & Passe, in an allegory of the earth aAa MBartcn de Vos, fa~tureda couple excimgmg a g.lance as the male partner pla!s thc la. Placui on the table befm thaa are the attribut- of immorialih., and bchmd thun la? a couple in the gras. The uuptiuition of the lute is stiii that of love and courtshrp. For a reproduction of the rngrrivÏq see Mirimonde, "Venusw( 1%6). p. 276, fig. 19. 14 Tu-o notable paxnters of music lessons werc Pieter de Hooch and Jan Vamea. A.-P. Murmonde, in a stuc& of the reprexntation of music and its afîiiiation ~ithdcism. argues that man? gare sema of musical companies and menat wpinals are indeed allegories of love. See Mirunon&, -Ems" ( 1%7). The use of musicians as stafFage became les common, althou& other typical features of the allegory of courtly love remained. Fountahs, grottoes, and ideal villas appear in the works of Van Bassen and Van Delen (see figs. 24,37,41a), and even the occasional statue of Venus and Cupid sudaces in Van Delen's work (see fig. 68). Whiie Aerts's work is more overtly a moraiization on love, the works of his contemporaries betray rather subtle ailusions to love, leinire and moral codes. CONTEMPORARY RELATED GENRES: BUITENPARTIJEN Butte~tparn~en(garden parties) and gedschuppen ((merry companies) hdtheir roots in the medieval tradition of liefdestuin imagery . In tum, these early seventeenth- century Dutch genres may be evaluated as possible thernatic sources for the early perspective painters. The garden party was a representation of élite leisure. The link betwem the garden pwor merry company genre and early architectural painting becomes most evident in the work of Esaias van de Velde, though the influentid painters, David Vinckboons and W~llemBuytewech also formulated the association of gardens, architecture and gezellschuppen. In Aerts's painting, the merry company banquets in an enciosed terrace, and in several Van Delen painting the banquet takes place in an intenor with a view ont0 an elaborate architectural setting. Van Delen's Arcade of a Palace with Elenanth Dressed Fiaures ( 1627) and Terrace of a Palace with Fimres (c. 1636) have interior banquethg tables with rnerry companies, while both depict a couple as the primary focus (fig. 2 1 and 27). The second depicts a convershg couple at the picture plane, or a possible conversatie à la mode. This was a popular seventeenth-cenniry subject which portrayecf fishionable young bourgeois interacting on a social level, often in a highly charged 59 atmosphere. in Van Delen's Exterior of a Palace with Conversation Grou0 (1636; fig. 49) the depiction of a comets(~tie,such as thaî identifieci by Goodman in Rubens's Garden of -Love (fig. 50), is more apparent. This is one of only three paintings in which Blade recognizes the representation of a conversation group. l5 Perhaps this is because the figures in this work are unavoidably the core of the painting. David Vinckboons (1576-1632) The garden of love began as a medieval dream and can be found in manuscripts, such as the Trés Riches Heures, where the calendar months of April and May are ponrayed with courtly gatherings in front of, or within the enclosure of a castle. Traces of the early Netherlandish graphic tradition of gardens of love, as well as the themes of pkuimce tapestries, and the artistic production of Ham Bol who also worked in tapestry design are discernible in the work of the artist David Vinckboons. Vuickboons's fàther was a "Joeck-schddrr" or tapestry watercolourist, according to Van an der,'^ and the influence of his father's training was profound, as the decorative character of David's work is derived from the tapis de plaisant. The artist Vuickboons originated fiom Mechelen, the Remish centre of tapestry and textile weaving, and moved to Amsterdam as a young child. He practised in the Northem Netheriands, oflen working for printing houses while also painting his own cornpositions-oneç that would become instrumentai in establishing the genres of buiter~parlijenand gezellschqpen in the North pa~ticularlyin Haarlem around 16 10. The 1607 songbook Den Nieuwen verbeterden L~isthojfeatured a &le page " in an Edinburgh pamting (Car 70). Biade nota Use dpted Venus and Cupid above a pdhmq the ccmvemtion group, ~bichhe admits, ail& to mniantic love. 81aQ (1976). p. 188. 60 designed by Vmckboons and nine ihstrations accompanying the love songs, whose lyrics were composed by P.C.Hooft, ioost van den Vondel, and Van an der.'^ One of the prints within the book is &er Vinckboow and illustrates a woman at a virginal, harmonizing with two lutists among a Company or gezeIf'hp, who are entertallied by the mgand music provided by the guidance of Den Niemen Lusthof Vinckboons's aristocratie garden parties are the forerunners of the Dutch gereflschappn popular in the 1620s. 1 believe hckboons's opulent buitenpmijen also provided a thematic source for the architectural specialists who represented fantastic architecture and oaentatious stafFage in outdoor settings. Vinckboons's painting of A Banquet before a Castle, engraved by Nicolaes de Bruyn, depicts elaborate grounds constructed fiom pavilions, canals and casties which recd tapestry motifs (fig. 5 1). The rich spectacle is irnbued with meaning through the numerous figures, who are mostly coupled and attend to their drink and music. His earliest baquet scene used the Prodigal Son theme, but Vrnckboons soon abandoned such overt narratives in favour of, in Van Mander's words, "Landtschappen met Moderne beeldekens. "" These modem figures, as opposed to classical ones, frolic in their iusthdin and are indeed the focus of A Banquet before a Castle even though in their diminutive sue, they are ovetwhelmed by their setting. The imposing landscape architecture effectively emphasizes the smallness and triviality of their, mere human, amusements. hother of t'inckboons's work incorporates a mythoiogical detail, intended to highhght that garden parties themselves might not be sinfil, but the enactment of excesses at such fùnctions are. Che of a series on the four seasons for Hendrick Hondius 11, 17 nie titie page is mgraveci "DVBinv." althou@ not ail of the iiiustrauans in the book are Vinckbooas's bsigns. Lammaste in Amsterdam ( 1 9891, p. 27. 6 1 Vickboons's rendition of SD~Q(161 8) had the statue of Fortuna piaced atop a middle- ground fountain piece (fig. 52), much lie that of Bol's pavilion in figure 33. Once again, the sethg for springtime and the ritual of love associated with this season, is a tenace fiiied with an array of garden art and coupled with opulent architecture in the background which-significantly-is an halianate palace. The statue of Fortuna was often seen as part of fountain decorations or as a garden statuette and served as a moral reminder of one's potentidy changing fortunes. l9 This panidar symbol of fortune does not appear to carry oa with the architectural specialists, but it was apparentiy replaced with other sculptural symbols. In another seasonal prht representing A@, a statue of a female with a globe and sceptre can be seen on the railing of some garden steps (fig. 53). Kahren Heilerstedt says that this figure is a symbol of so~erei~nt~.~~A simiiar version of this statue was Iater employai by Van Delen in a 166 1 painting, Arcade of a oalace with an open dome (fig. 54). The large sculpture is the focus of the group of three figures standing before it; the gentleman points to the antiquated statue, whose orb is emphaticaliy highlighted by the SMof sunlight fdling on it . Undoubtedly the theme of sovereignty is the important element of this painting, and its placement in an arcade peopled by figures of contemporary Dutch &eu is not negligible. hrtists of builer~pclr(ijeriused estabtished iconographie settings. Thus, the scenery of antique subjects and gardens of love served as models for the garda feasts of Esaias van de Velde and Wdem Buytewech. Buitenparr~ertare essentiaiiy rooted in the Remish l9 Sec HeUmtedt (1986) nhae the author &ah wiih the moral implications of garda settmp ui yi cruhihtion on "The Gardais of EarthIy Dciight 16th and 17th c;clihry Gardais," pp. 2û-43. 62 tradition, brought to the fore by Hans Bol and David Vinckboons. Dutch artias took over the format and replaced the ideal aristocratie courtiers with Dutch burghers, enlarging them and placing hem close to the picture plane. As Helientedt observeci, ". . .sixteenth century moralizing and allegorical prototypes [were aansformed] into everyday situations populated by recognizable, if somewhat Wed,~itizens."~' This transformation of the subject, naturaiiy, creates problems in the interpretatioo of the hitenpartr~:does the allegory remain unaitered and is the genre's purpose to deiight or moralire? Esah van de Velde (c.1591-1630) Buitenpartijen could easily dernonstrate lax rnorals since the very nature of feasting is idle and transient. A 1622 agahgof a buitenpurti~der Esaias van de Velde told of the excess prosperity enjoyed by the burghers of a new Republic: five /murmet vrucht, ons hoinuelick 1s begonnerz, ON ûuders waeren bwrch. sy hebben weck ghewonnen. Pmnegen ver, moy weer, net moet al dmden kop. Wy hebben gwts ghenwch, hw Cryghen wyt maer op.* The question asked is how will the forninate Repubiic ever use up al1 its plentifid Iuxuries? It is a candid acknowledgernent of the Dutch burgher's excessive liberties and Iumries; its underlyhg implication is a wamuig concerning gluttonous over-indulgence. Van de Velde followed the imovative technique of Vinckboons in placing conternporary figures who were the embodiment of questionable mords, in the immediate foreground. As such, the figures were posed for the viewer and offered up as an emblem. Vinckboons's Een vroliik ~ezellschapof c. 16 10 is not dkeVan de Velde's Garden ?' Ibid.. p. 46. 63 Party before a Palace, si& and dated 1614 (figs. 55 and 56)." Remsof the garden of love theme prevail in both: elegant rnerry-makm, a banqueting table, fomal gardens and other attributes of aflluence. The ciifferences are thVan de Velde's figures communicate more intimately with the viewer and the architecturai backdrop of the later work is distinctly Renaissance. Van de Velde's painting even makes use of perspective. A strong axis extends the depth of the picture, and leads the eye to a garden rotunda, recalling ancient Roman structures and the pergolas and arbours of Hans Vredeman de Vries. During the 1620s Van de Velde collaborated with architecturai speciaiist Bartolomeus van Bassen, in a mutud exchange of services. Van Bassen painted the architecture for Van de Velde's garden parties, and Van de Velde, the stafTage for Van Bassen's work. Van de Velde's ultimate expression of the kiter~partijgenre was accomplished through a coilaborative effort with Van Bassen, and portrays ten comrnanding figures complemented by an imposing Renaissance palace behind an arbour (fig. 57). The Banauet, painted in 1624, reveals not oniy Van de Velde's increasingiy sophisticated execution of figure compositions, but aiso an undeniable importance placed on architecture. The architecture of hiitenpartijen did not merely provide compositional stability, it was rather an essential ingredient for the theme, acting as the idealized surroundings of love gardens and recalling the châteuu d'amour. Furthemore. the paiatiai edifice irnplied wealth and affluence, a fmture doubtless meant to flatter the figures. Van de Velde's paintq is scen by Goodman ( 1992)as antiqmtq P.P.Rubars's C.hrdcn of Love. p. 15. Wüiem Buytewech (c.159112-1624) Buytewech was another transitional artist who transfomeci the grand banquet into a domestic bourgeois setting. As Madlyn Kahr observeci, Buytewech's outdoor gatherings recall the medieval love garden." His Berlin Buiten-mt& convincingly dated 16 16- 1 7 by Egbert ~averkam~-~e~emann,~displays various ostentatiously dressed figures on a terrace flanked by prominent columns (fig. 58). The background of the piece has trees and an ecclesiastic structure of an Italianate style. The reference to what is perhaps a church may underscore the incompatibility of worldly indulgences with mord propriety and the dvation that the church offers. On the whole, Buytewech's wrrwe, in the tradition of his foremers. focuses on figures who function as emblems of dissolute living, for tjey often represent perhaps the five senses, enact a moral narrative. or engage in idle pastimes such as feasting, drinking and c~urtship.~~The figure farthest to the right in the painting compons hirnseifin a leisurely dance with his elbow boldly protmding. The arm or arms akimbo. according to ioaneath Spicer in a study on "The Renaissance Elbow," appeared in rnany merry companies because it was suggestive of a lack of propriety." Ail the figures are explicitly posed for the viewer, as they are in the works of Van Delen where their function of instruction takes on a varying tone involving aspects of social propriety more than Christian rnoraiity. 2s This paiatmg had previously beai attnbuteci to Van de Vd&. HnvakampEkg~iannfdy attnbukd the surk to B~ytt~~hand compares it with signai and datai dcsipns in ordm to &te it. k ( 1959). pp. 63f. 2b Haverkampkgemartn_ in fact traces a deck in mblanatic sigdicancc in Bptewech's work Tbis is revealed hqzh the artist's use of mm naturalism and a frea movemcnt of figures. The commentan, on limg is ihus pushed mto the background ( i959), p. 27. n Spicer in Bremmer and Roodaib~( 199 1 ), p. 100. MORAL REMINDERS The presence of moral commentary in paintings of gardens of love cannot be denied. The modeiiing of later genres, such as the buitenpurtij and perspective piece, on the imageiy of gardens of love infèrs that these genres too, mut involve edification to a certain extent. Indeed such features as the fmered rnookey, enslaved by his earthly passion, the parrot, representing eloquence in rhetoric, and the peacock, mblematic of pride and the sin of superbiu, appear regularly in gerellschqpen, and sporadically in architectural painting. Van Bassen's Couriyard of a Renaissance Palace (fig. 59) shows a monkey and panot facing each other across the steps leading to the interior of the palace. Van Baûen curiously omits the idle chattering and lusdiil endeavours of youthfùl courtiers referenced by t hese symbols. The Mannerist-Classical appearance of the courtyard itself is apparent1y enough to suggea the potential activitia that could occw between the columns of the courtyard. Indeed, the associations of elegant gardens and courtyards with commentaries on dissolute living was well established by the tum of the century. The French engraver Michel Lasne's Promenadinn Couple on a Terrace makes the meaning of the simian symbol clearer, for the monkey on the balustrade is chained to a ball and he observes the intimate encounter of the gentleman in pursuit of a lady (fig. 60)? Apes were aiready part of the iconography of late medieval gardens of love. in a c. 1480 1 am grateful to bf.J.Dou@ Stewart for bnngrng to m). attention the various possible rn- of the parrot. Althou& in ths Middle Ages the panot had Marian qmboüsm (ser S. Dmgias Stewart's "Hidden Persuadas:Reiigiws S~znbolismin Van ûyk's Portraiturc mith a Note on Dura-s 'Knight kath and the Dcril'." in R-lC-LR ICI ( 1983). pp. 66-68). by the seventeenth mtiay it had also acqued an association to ktoric and eloquaux. and appuued as a qmbol of EIoguaua in both Dutch editions ( 1644 and 167'7) of Ripa's Icmlogiu. Sce also E.KL. Remi& "De nconstniaie van 't'Altacf \.an S. Lucas' van Mimen van Hdack." Oird HolM 70 f 1 955). pp. 239-242. "he(1590-1670)~;orkedm~n~erpin Rubens's studio, ~vmgtherec.1618.Gaxfmm(1992). p. 17. German woodcut of an amorous couple, the monkey balances on a tight rope and admires himself in his hand-held mirror (fig. 6 l), while the Master of the Gardens of Love depicted a card-playing couple attended by a fettered monkey (fig. 62). The sixteenth century developed the monkey in conjunction with the five senses. Both Maarten de Vos and Crispijn de Passe did engravings on the senses. with taste personified by a woman accompanied by a rn~nke~.~* Two peacocks strut on the terrace of Van Bassen's signed and dated painting of a terrace with a view onto St Peters in Rome (fig. 63):' In such close proximity to an institution of charity. the couple in the foreground who are followed by a servant. fail to acknowledge the despair of the two beggars. who serve to warn the audience that neglect of othen in need constitutes a sinîul and damning self indulgence. The peacock was ultimately the symbol of prîde and vanity. and rarely escaped use. One of the five large Rijksmuseum canvases designed as a series, has a couple of peacocks on the lower terrace (fig. 64). This painting, dong with its rnatching partner which includes a parrot. featured anonymous élites enjoying their leisure. while the othen feanired specified po~ts.3'Conveniently. the anonymity of the elegant figures allowed for the ernbiematization of the subject. The peacock, while being the exemplification of self pride. was indeed rightfully allowed to be proud because the bird was considered both elegant and beautiful. The seductive characteristics were precisely what assisted the development of love. companionship and marriage. For this reason it was the bird of ho.Roman goddess of JO Janson ( 1959). p. 255. n. 13. For a hinoq of the pictorial tndition and rcpmtiüiom of monkeys. srt: pp. 239K " The 1626 DelR inventop of Comclis Cornelia van Lecuwen lincd a pmpective painting of Si Peter-S. This was surel: the 1623 dated painting now in Copcnhqen. Brcdius (1915). item 4. p. 21. " Sesection on Pomaiturc in Architectural Painting. marriage. The bird usually only evoked conjugal symbolism when it appeared in marriage portraits." Ornamental features mch as sculptures could also be designed to convey a meaning. in An Open Gallery with a Cupola elegant fiwes and a monkev (fig. 65a), Dutch fortunes in sea trade are penonified by the fountain sculpture of Poseidon, standing with his tradernark trident. Poseidon is the god worshipped here, jua as homage was paid to Venus in the works of De Caulery. The repoussoir motif of the fettered monkey encourages the viewer to assess the atnuence and ptide of the richly dressed figures wandering in the courtyard, in light of the uitimate transience of worldly possessions. The ape was already cast as the animal of worldliness in the thirteenth century,)' and the animal soon after emerged as a submissively chained monkey, happy to be in eternal captivity under the seductions of earthly codort as opposed to ultimate salvation." The wigned painting was attributed to Van Delen by Christie's; however, in my opinion, the work may be attributed to Van Bassen on the bais of style and subject. The gallery between two large, classicking stmctures recalls that of Honselaarsdijk, the princely retreat that Van Bassen was involveci with. A rendition of this gallery was engraved by N. Tessin Ir. (fig. 6~b)."Yet more importantly, it is highly unlikely that Van Delen would ever have included such a blatant moral reminder as the repoussoir monkey Van Delen rather chose to include enigmatic details, designed as decorative features. This is likely the case in Van Deien's Providence painting (fig. 66j. Statues of " Frmis Hais's Isaac MasM and Ekatrix van da Lacn ( 1622). nith NO peauxks b, the drps ladmg uito the palace, is an ample of this. 3s Ibid.. p. 148. k The pilastas oa the side paviliom are ficticious. but it @va a good idra of the appmmcc:. It appared in Ein Besuch in HolW 11687). Sei: Slothmer. nd 69 architecture continued to be portrayed with cont emporary staffage. Several interior perspectives did, however, include subtie remiaders by way of the paintings on the wds. Pictures of the Tower of Babel regularly appeared in such intenor scenes populated by modem aafige (fig. 69). Thqr medto complemem the feasting figures and warn of the divine judgement and destruction that meupon the arnbitious participants. The anathematization of architecture by Christianity seems to have affected the genre of architecturai painting on1 y rninirnally . On a more popular level, love emblems came into vogue in the Nonhern Netherlands at the beginning of the seventeenth century with the publication of Quaeris quidritamor, "You ask what love is" (1601)." The book found immediate readership, was often irnitated, and was frequently reprinted. The second edition, titled Emblemutu Amatoria: iam demm emendou (1605), had an addition of two more Dutch love poems, and was irnitated in 16 1 1 in P. C . Hooft's Emblernata Amamia. Apeellinghen van Mime. Ernblemes d'Amour. The humania academic Daniel Heinsius arrangeci emblems into a thematic sequence, rallying around the personification of cupid in his Het Amhracht vmCupido ( 16 13).'' Heinsius employs the bal1 of fortune, a metaphor common in Baroque poetry, as a referme to love. The bail figures prominently in the emblems iilustrating his mostly original verses. ïhe embiem iliustrating Pda mirndus Anrom est (The world is a bal. with which we play) feawes two cupids playing buoyantly with a bal1 The acceptui author of Quaens is Daniel Heinsius. It consisîs of Duîch vents and 24 enpmgs b) Jacques & Ghqn. Becker-Cantanw ( 1978), p. 58. * Ibid., p. 62. .-lmbmchr was republishal in Amsterdam 1616 as .\.edetdyt~che Pocimota uith apvuigs by Theocritus à Gan* Jacob Matham and Pieter !3emwtbs wfio copied some kpaAer Vinckb. Praz ( 1 W),p. 90 and bertscin Amsterdam (1989). p. 39, n. 65. 70 (fig. 70a). The cupids as personifications of elernentary passion toy with the variabiiity of eaahly love. Jacob Cats also put out an emblern book in 16 18 called Silenus Alcibrudis, sive Proteus (Middelburg). This stressed moral applications and religious explanations. The large number of reprints of Cats's work and the high prices they fetched ver@ Cats's popularity." In another example of simian personification, one of the emblems show monkeys as lacking the moral strength to resist ternptation (fig. 70b). They are seduced away fiom their training (3r by implication, tom their religious education) by nuts thrown from a disembodied hand. Similarly, in a Jean Gourmont emblem, a chained ape, significantly set within classical architecture, gropes for a piece of hit; he becornes the embodiment of material greed (fig 70c)." Eddy de Jongh in the 1976 exhibition of Tot Lering en Vemdexplained that prints with explanatory legends cm often help to clari+ meanings in paintings. Market paintings were not provideci with texts or dialogues as the emblematic engravings were. Yet an interpretation based on these prints merits caution. Not al1 peacocks were meant to invoke conjugal happiness or the sin of pride, and not al1 dogs were erotic symbols. A unique dog weaMg a meciallion appears repeatedly in Van Delen's paintings between the years 162%1640 (see fig. 7 1).'* The dog is uncharacteristic of a symboiic canine, usually of the hunting type or a lap do& causing Vernet to speculate that the dog was probably Van Delen's own loyal dog. Loyal companions were, of course, also part of the repertoire * !3e jmgh in Amslrrdam (1976). p. 24. Janson ( 1952). pp. 156-1 57. Vernid ~'Dvckvan klai' ( 1995). p. 44. 7 1 images of the weil-to-do. To be certain, they appear this way in prims too? Emblems such as those depicting bali games nonetheless informed artists on both didaclic and plafil imagery . GAMES, LOVE AND LEISURE SOCIETY The pursuit of play and recreation came to represent another aspect of lrefdestuin imagery. Some perspective pieces, with their fantasticai constructions were beyond familias expenence and utility and achidy became the playgrounds for an expenence of wealth, leisure and statu. Recreation involved conspimous leisure above al, informed conversation, priviledges of relaxation, and the tirne to play games. One of the most popular games occupying the leisure thne of seventeenth-century ariaocrats was the game of skittles. This outdoor pastirne consisteci of the cubic arrangement of nine pins and a ball. These pins were set up on checker-patteni grounds. The black and white tenace tiles common to the ûutch country estates were oflen used for the game. This usage is seen in a painting by Van Delen from 163 7 in the Louvre (fig . 71 ). Elise Goodman's excellent anaiysis of Pieter de Hooch's c. 1663 painting, A Game of Skittles (fig. 72), elucidates that the game is "anything but innocently bourgeois and mundane.. .," for, as Goodman goes on the explain, 'De Hooch transforms the game into a metaphor for love, whose meanhg mua be read in the artistic, social, and literary contexts of the seventeenth century '" Goodman's investigation into the source of De Hooch's painting uncovered the garden of love theme which prdedin later Dutch art. 1 believe that the existence of the theme in the latter haif of the seventeerith century mua be prefaced by eariier works wbich carried and developed the theme. Its nirvival cm, indeed, be traced in a few perspective paintuigs, particularly, as the foilowing anaiysis will show, tnrough riir; lconography of garden recreation in architectural paintings. The game of skittles was usually enjoyed in formai country house gardens by élites who could while away their time on erotic endeavours, which required expression through metaphoncal play. The erotic emblem book by Dutchman Peter Rollos, Eute'pae nhks ( 163O), contained 92 emblems demonstrating proper gdantry and appropriate and amusing recreational activities." The bourgeois handbook conrained three notable engravings dealing with garnes. The game of skitties is represented with an enclosed yard peopled by two young gentlemen actively engaged in a match, and a fashionable couple viewing the game at the right (fig. 73a). The setting includes trees, parierres and an arbour, al1 part of the standard repertoire of a forma1 garden. The lyrical text explainhg the image reduces the sport to an erotic amusement. The Gefman verse reads: Zmr Schon Jun@uw tch euch frcgeti wiff Wdchr 1st der &est Krgel im Spiell He= si ich euch soll sagenfeinn So soifsder Mittel Kegel seinn. ." The semal and phallic overtones of the game are unmistalcable. An earlier example of this same theme can be seen in Van Delen's A Game of Skitties in a Garden painted not long after Rollos's published engravings (fig. 1 1). The pins are set up on a tileû terrace where a nurnber of people have gathered to watch. The country house, of a relatively Dutch classical style, towers over the background and Iocates the scene in a hite~tplmtsor fuslhof Two fashionable couples are among the '' F'ublished in Berlin (1630 and repintd 1665) with a Gaman translation and in Paris as Le Cmm de 1 '.ûnoirr. Decouvert soubs Divem Emblesmes G&IUet Jicetieux ( 1633). An Ongmd 1630 &ion sas consulteci for the following study. 'D Q~tdhm an orignal 1630 editioa (Pais), plate 5. Wby f ru& ~uwu,Iaveh, pmg la& which ;s the most plmsant cone of the pme? TIre besr is in the male, sa I mrly tell -wu." figures who devote themselves entirely to recreation and conversation. Without reservatio this scene can be aligned with Rollos's engraving and its erotic meankg. Furthemore, Van Delen's compositioaai reliance on RoiIos is clear; this is an observation that has hitherto gone unnoticed The couple closest to the foregound, wherein the man extends his arm and directs the lady's attention to the skittle pins-probably, more speciflcally to the phailic centre pin4 a near reverse image of the elegant couple on the right of Rollos's print; and the striding position of the skittle player opposite hem may equally be drawn Eom the print. Skittles was a gentle game imbueci with erotic meaning for those educated in emblematic literature. Another of Van Delen's pahings of skittle players undoubtedly activated for the viewer the same erotic associations of the game, even though its relation to Rollos's image is less marked (fig. 71 ). Here it is perhaps the dogs who communicate most directly to the audience the tme meaning behind the game. Other sports were also known as metaphors for love. in the emblem book Amorfi Divinr et Ht~muniAntiptrha (Antwerp, 1629), an early type of croquet was one such metaphor (fig. 74; see also fig. 73c)." Although the book was a commentary on divine love, the male and fernale figures enact a game for which the legend reads, in the translation: '"ïhere is a proverb, he who loses, always gains." The game called, in the French, le bahin Rollos's eighth engraving of Le Centre de I iimour is sidarly atnliated with the pursuit of love (fig. 73b). The ami equipment, a hoUow wooden he placed over the right forearm of the player, was represented as one of the attributes of Amor in the %enna allegory (fig. 46). In the Rollos engraving it is used with a ball and four playen are involveci in the match whde a couple watch fiom the sidelines. Once The embluns wre the ~orkof Michael SniJders. (hodmm ( 1979), p. 15 1. Thrs pune of la parse mas also reprarentcd bj RoIlos (fig. 73c). again, an emblematic verse of four iines gives meaning to the image: Den Baflott km ich hmsîlich schlagen Jun&awlein wolf thrs mit mir wagn? Versuchts vieleicht Ranr ruch gefuh Dus ihrs muBt lebn bey dema~ïn.~ Boisterous play was discouragecl by social constraints among aristocrats, though the viewing of aich pasthes was considered mtertaining and even erotic. The songbook Den Niecnwn leucht-Spieghel... hmaround 1620 was engraved by Crispijn de Passe the Elder (fig. 75). It too, demonstrated a boisterous exchange of the bal1 with a couple and a dog positioned to the right of the field. Its text focused more on a light-hearted commentary on the inconstancy of love, than an oven eroticism. Zoo de wint-bal gite&even wert Nirt meer rua heefi een Minnaers ~ert? A palatial perspective with a centralized vanishing point by Van Delen depicts the game of le ballon in the open air (fig. 76). In another painting of five yean earlier, 1628, the middle ground of the setting acts as the coun for the ballon players (fig. 77). In both a central strolling couple is the focus of the picture, just as the couples are in the Rollos prints. AU that is lacking is the erotic dialogue. in yet another depiction of the sport by Van Steenwijck the Younger, illegibly dated but believed to be 16 14, two figures lounge in an arnorous embrace on the fore-aeps of a Renaissance palace (fig. 78). It is evident f?om this last exampie that even before Rollos's emblems, the tradition of IMW mnor~s,or the game of love, rernained alive and weii through the transition into the seventeenth Roilos, Le Cenm de 1 '.-Intour ( l63O), phte 8. Thm is a 16 10 Van Delai paintmg in London's National Gallery which bas the pme of le ballon cepnsated in the co~.ardFor a repmductmn ser Vamet. "Duck wn Delen' ( 1995). p. 34, fie 10. Finally, eic-trac, the precursor to back-gammon, was ofien represented in interiors and getellschappen. When played by opposing genden, the board game was a onesn- one contest of love, based on chance and the roUing of the dice. The playing of tric-trac was criticized, probably, as Ger Luijten niggests, because of its associations with sexualrty? Figures playing this garne, as well as card games were emblematic of the passion for gambling and extravagance as wel1." This was clearly aidenceci in the merry companies of Buytewech. A game of tric-trac between two men often had this negative implication. Gardens of love were obviously Iinked with notions of play which represent an escape into a life of leisure and an exploration of pleasure. Goodman recognised in Rubens's Garden of Love the historian Johan Hujzinga's evaluation of play as "an adomment of Me, a civilking process indispensable for culture and for life as a who~e."'~ Play, in the architecturai paintings is, above aii, expressed as a social activity, and the figures who pmicipate as sodly superior. THE FIGURES: TBEIR SOURCES AND SIGNIFICANCE The figures used by Buytewech show an anist's dependence on "types". Earlier 04 in 161 5, Buytewech had engraved a series of seven noblemen representative of a nationality (fig. 79). These edelmmnen were in essence comme snidies and midies of the national characters of French, Spanish, Italian, English, Scomsh, Dutch and Gennan Lujten mentions an qeof "Idiencss" by CmeLis Anthwisz, in which aic-trac is refared io as the pune of love. SeAmdedam ( 1997). catno. 39 adp. 206. gentlemen. In his 1 6 16 Buytewech had employed a mirror image of his French Edelmun as the third figure from the nght (fig. 58).53 Both French culture and style enjoyed a vogue in Holland and the French Edelman is therefore not making an unprecedented appearance. In Holland, foreign fashion and mannes were introduced through the wealthy Antwerp immigrants fier the 1585 Fall of Antwerp, and by 1620 the court at The Hague had adopted the Flernish and French rituals ~f~olitesse.~"The Flemish and their sophistication were held in disdain. but they were also adrnired for their worldliness. The francophone Flemish culture had inherited Burgundian opulence and Renaissance ceremonial pomp.55The French language had long been the preferred communication of court. and French manners fowid their way into use in the Netherlands through manuals of civility. widespread since the sixteenth century. It was, however. only in 1671 that De Courtin's Nouveau iraité de la civilité was published in Amsterdam. and ~slatedthe fo 110 wing y ear as Nieuwe verhandeling vrin de welgemanierdheidt, welke in Vrankrijck under fi.aaye lieden ge bruikelyk is? The publication represents the culmination of Dutch consurnerism of French mannes and fashion. Prior to this a variety of lwury objects had already found their way from France to the Republic. The coach was arnong the lwturious modes of üavel which came from France. A carriage of four wheels with springs was an unheard of lu'rury. Only William the Silent's wife. Louise de Coligny, had had such a coach which was " Hman Roodcnburg. The he.hdof fiendship': shaking han& and otha gcmira in the Dutch Rcpublic.. in Bremmer and Roodcnburg ( 199 1 ). p. 157. f 5 Schama ( 19881. p. 223. (6 Rdenburg op. cd.. p. 155. n imported from France. They were Fbshionable der 16 10, but did not appear in large numbers until &er 1650.~' A signai and dated 1636 painting in the Noordbrabants Museum in ~'Hertogenboschfeatwes one of these coaches through the columns on the right (fig. 76). The anaiysis of staEage, and their activities, in architectural painting allows us to rnake a transition from the iconography of love gardens and playgrounds, to a discussion on the emulation of stylized etiquette. As Goodman demonstrated in her examination of Rubens's Conversatie à la mode (or Garden of Love), the iconography of the garden is more than jua a garden of love, for it reveals contemporary valuations of fashion, beauty, etiquette, love and courtship. The large production of love scene prints, coiiected by the bourgeoisie in the fhthalfof the seventeenth century, inspireci rather than recorded the social aatus and behaviour of the This is pmicularly true of Randers, but the impact of love and society prints by, for example Abraham Bosse, was equaily felt in the Noah in the works of Van Delen. The urban ariaocracy wished to see itself malung music, courring and promenading among elegant courtyards and in sumphious costumes. Dirck van Delen Van Delen's figure painters have variously been cited as Theodor Boeyermans, Pieter Codde, Frm Francken the Younger, Dirck Hals, Anthonie Palamedesz.. Jan Olis. and David Teniers the Younger. Van Delen spent some years in Haarlem and he would v Zumthor (1%2), pp. 15-16. Evai afk ths date, Van Striai found a nimiber of Eqhsh trnvel- wntm who dcçcnbed the local Amstadam transport as %e body of a coach upon a sledge wthout wher:ls.* a form ihat resulted from a fcar that a coach on wheels would shake up the housmg founciations. Van Shen ( 1989). p. 88. 78 therefore have corne into contact with skilled figure painters such as Dirck ~als.~~His collaboration with Hals (1 59 1- 16%) seems to have been the most hiiâul for, like Van Bassen and Esaias van de Velde, they employed each othen talents regularly Hais, in painting his gezeII,~chappseems mostly to have used Van Delen for interior amchires of a classiciring nature. The effervescent and boiaerous figura on occasion appear incompatible with the sober. classicizing walls surroundhg them. In Van Delen's work, Hals is known to have copied some figure types fiom ~u~tewech.*A typicai figure thought to have been executed by Hals is a woman with a wide mff collar, positioned with a hand at her midriffholding a fan or some object, and the other arm akimbo. The repetition of posture and costume is, however, not an absolute indication that the figures rendered were by a hand other than the artists of the architecture. 'Types" were used by al1 artias and the repeated use of them was cornmoR and they weie fieeiy appropnated. Blade maintains that Van Delen executed his own aafFage in merely nine or ten paintings; ail but one of these are Biblical scenes." Only Vernet believes that Van Delen almost aiways did the figures hirnse1f6' This wthor's position is that if the Biblical painting by Van Delen have figures that are undisputedly by Van Delen, then why could not the figures of his pleasure gardas be painted by the artist as well? Vermet concedes that Van Delen executes Hals's style with such remarkable consistency that it is di8icult to teii the difference. Furthermore, the physiognomies of the staffage throughout the years are extrernely sirnilar, leading one to believe that Van Delen * This hnppau -y ùetwcen the yem 1620 and 1628. !h ~vr=rkamp@~(1959). pp. 49-50. Also De Jmgh in Arnstrrdam (1976) notes Hais's Ml of the staMting wpman and dog in his BuitenPartij hm Bqte~zch'sDef?inc Vriiaq- (botb in the Rijksmuseimi, Amsterdam), p. 125. Vma"Du-& van Delen- (1 995 j. pp. 35-36. 79 himseif painteci the same style of face repeatedly. Such consistency could, of course, rdtfiorn the fact tbat the figurepainter modelled the figures on the popular prhts ckculating in the Netherlands. Many of these origjmted kom France and portrayeci a model of etiquette, posture and appearance which appealed to the Dutch. The characteristic round faces of Van Delen's figures have mouths that fail slightly open, black and minuscule eyes. and arched and elongated eyebrows. These features, Vernet noted, appear also on the sculptures. But once agah, this was aiso curent fishion and the comemporary physical ideai. Blade detected ar: Italianate quality in the sculptures of Van Delen's paintings, and accepts that they are by Van Delen hllnself; consequently. for Blade, the staffage, who have a distinctly northern quality, must be by another band? (See for exarnple figs. 22, 23, 54 and 68). With the exception of a couple of cases where the paintings have been signeû by both painters," attributions of figures are difficult to make. 1 tend to side with Vernet and his beiief that the staffage in Van Delen's paintings was executed by the artist himseif But what is of most importance for the context of this papa is that the figures were modelled on foreign examples. Blade recognized that Abraham Bosse "seems to have been responsible for conveying to the Netherlands through his engravings the most fashionable views of the upper classes and of the court, of high fashion in both costume and setting.'*' Vernet in his research found Bosse's De hperspective arnong Van Delen's possessions as well as Made's Cat. 93. interior of a Palace wiibFimaes at a Table (c. 1650). signai by both Van Delen md Jan Olis Cat. 72,Intaior of the Caîhadral of Sint Jans at ~'Hatopenbosch(dated 1644), signeci by both Van Delen and Palmedesz. 388 prints, of which some were surely society prints by or after oss se.^ There has been no comprehensive study carrieci out on the work of Abraham Bosse (c. 1602-l676), with the exception of André Blum's book in 1924. Blum asserted that Bosse's engravings documented the manners. habits, fashions and social life of eatly seventeenth-century France. The author was slightly naive in his assessrnent of the documentary accuracy of the persons and modes represented in the prints; he fails to recognize the superficial level of his images. However, it is true that Bosse represented the ultimately desirable costumes of the court and the city, and the accessory fashions, manners and politesse which accompanied the lifestyle. In two painting, in Viema and Brussels (figs. 23,9), a conversing couple stand directly below the central arch; their interactive posture is taken directly fiom one of Bosse's prints ofOdorah~sL'Odomr(fig.80). The woman stands full-front to the viewer with her lefi arm elegantly extended and the gentleman beside her faces the direction in which she gemires. Bosse reversed this position in his Sumrner engraving; here the man has his back to us and extends an arm, pointing to the garden (fig. 8 1 ). In A Game of Skittles (fig. 1 l), the man pointing to the pins and his lady partner resemble the couple of Bosse's Sumrner engraving strongiy. Süght variations on this couple appear in figure 54, where both the lady and gentleman face the viewer but the gentleman's chivalric gesture signals our attention to an important sculpture and the palace respectively. The couple of central focus in the s7Henogenôoschpainting (fig. 76), openly face and approach the audience. Their position resembles Bosse's engravhg of Le Bal, which takes place in an interior hg(fig. 82). The style of dress wom by the fernale even closely foUows Bosse's fdecosnime, with the exception of the open neck so fieeIy revealed on Bosse's lady. The general arrangement of couples exiting fiom palaces and strolling towards the gardens seen in, for example wsouside a Pakg (1644; fig. 24) and of a P&ce with Co-ewrn Sa(1643; fig. 84), also recall Bosse's prints Odoratus and W. Van Delen's Portico of a Puewith tbemof the Proda Son (fig. 68) has a large and prominent sculpture of Venus and Cupid on a pedestal. This sculpture is an exact replica of Bosse's engraving showing the sculptor in his studio (fig. 83). The reliance on foreign sources is further underscored by Blade's observation that the life-like sculptures on the upper half of the building in mico with the ProuSon painting were taken frorn Sciaminossi's siby The balustrade. an architectural feature in so many of Van Delen's paintings. recalls those in Bosse's society prints. where they mark the inner enclosure of the lusthof or court of Venus. In Bosse. ladies and gallants stroll dong such delicate Stone barriers or courtiers lean over the balustrades. as in the fiontispiece of Le Jardin de la Noblesse Françuise dmlequel ce peur Ceuillir leur manierre de Verrements (Paris. 1629) ( fig. 85). The lower right corner of Van Delen's 1630 painting bears a strong affiliation with the fiontispiece: two men stand at a balustrade. engage in conversation and one could easily imagine that they might have the same view out onto a garden as the genrilhornmes of Bosse's fiontispiece (fig. 86). Many figures have the open medposture, or the extension of the arm in a couneous welcoming gemup like that employed by Bosse. In the Brussels painting. the gathering of six figures is lified fiom Bosse's Le '' Blade (1976). p. 88. The Eryhrag and Cmean sibyls are repmted. 82 ~aries.~'Unfominately, Blade Med to conclude anythmg 60m his discovery of the occasional use of Bosse's prints. Van Bassen, Aerts, and Van Steenwijck the Youoger The affüiation of architechiral specialist Van Bassen with figure painter Esaias van de Velde has already been discussed above. Neil Maclaren believed Van Bassen's figure painters to be Van de Velde and Frans Francken the younger. and Thieme-Becker's Lexicon Iisted Anthonie Pdamedesz. as weln Because Van Bassen's wwre has not yet been assessed and catalogueci, an evaluation of his varied figure types is dificuit to carry out. It can generally be said that his staffage displays the ultllnately desirabie elegance of an aristocratie élite, as weîi as betraying an emblematic si@cance. From the single work by Aerts discussed above, only his use of Danziger costume models can be deduceci. The expression of joy through dance is untypicai of the solemn figures and conversing couples dorninating the works of Van Delen and Van Bassen: however, this is but a srnail feanire of the picture which, on the whole, highlights the elegance of court life and moralizes on love. Van Steenwijck the Younger's figures have the petiteness and painterly style of Antwerp figure painter Frans Francken the ~oun~er."They are the least imposing daads. It is Van Steenwijck's collaboration with portrait painters which desewe attention, for they fonn the most interestins and unique extension of the artist's work. @ klarrn ahkiirved tbt the pamtings wcn: sait to Antwerp for the addition of the figura. (1%0), p. Il. in Berlin there is a "Church interior" datai 1624 und signai both Van Bassa and Francka Legrand ( 1963). p. 37. 9 Tinun~Becka( 1 W9),vol. p. 10. " For a qnopsis of Francken's mdependrnt wmk see kgnnd ( l%3), pp. 25-39. PORTRAITS WITHIN ARCHITECTURAL PAINTING Most notable among Van Steenwijck's collaborators was Daniel ~~tens.'?Van Steenwijck tmvelled to England and encountered there some demand for his services in royal circles. Van Steenwijck was documented in London between 16 17 and 1637, where he painted the perspective background for a Hans Holbein the Younger portrait of Erasmus in the collection of Charles 1." The over-painting was probably carried out by the instigation of the King himself. an admirer of the perspective genre. In another portrait of Charles 1 in Tuin by Mytens, Van Steenwijck's palatial backdrop takes in a considerable amount of space, and in fact his signature appean on the 1626 dated painting (fig. 87). indicating the value allocated to perspective painting. Van Steenwijck's architecture is clean. sober. and of a classical seventy. A gallery to the right of Charles 1 runs into deep recession and commands the viewer's attention. In a rnatching pair of portraits of Charles 1 and his Queen Henrietta Maria the archways of both are again to the right and open out ont0 bright and bare terraces (figs. 88a and 88b). The space is soleiy rneant to imply wealth. through iü classical character. and exhibit a ski11 in penpective which could be appreciated by someone Iike Charles who owned "A linle boock of ~ross~ectives.""Charles 1 and his Queen entenainhg their court is represented in a palatial interior by ~ouck~eest."The interior is based almost exactly. on Van Bassen's at a Fm (fig. 29). z For an ovrrview of Myirns's oeuvre sec Onno ter Kuilc "Daniel bfyiens." .Veder!an& Kumthistomch Jaarboek 20 (1969). pp. 1-107. T.T. Bladc mentions that Van Stmwijck the Younger dso painted the mhitecntnl backpunds of scvdVan Dyck portraits during his timc in London. ( 1976). p. 38. '5 This occurrcd eitha in 1626 or 1629. Liedtkt in Rotterdam ( 199 1 ). p. 33. SeaIso Oliver Millar. Tudor. Smwt and EPIlv Georgian Piciwes in the Collec~ionof Her .tlajesfy the Queen Vol. I (London: Phaidon. 1963). p. 62. no. 39 and p. 58. no. 27. -4 Lidtke in Rotterdam ( 1991 ). p. 33. 75 This painting is at Hampton Coun See Licdtlit ( 1982). ift. 8 for a reproduction. 8J On another occasion, Van Steenwijck the Younger is believed to have executed the perspective for Mytens's pendant portraits of the 14th Earl and Countess of Arundel, Thomas Howard and Alathea Talbot (fig. 89). The receding archway of the Earl's portrait depicts a sculpture gallery, wMe the Countess is coupled with a picture gallery.76These features are not to be missed as they stand in bright contresi to the dark and subdued foregrounds. The architecturai perspective backgrounds in portraits rarely represented real spaces. As John Peacock explains, '%y methods of generalisation and abstraction [portraits] must reinforce social distinctions. ldealisation becomes a means to represent power and subord~iation."~The incorporation of court!y and especially classickt forms, as well as in this instance the inclusion of a fine art collection and an Italian sgaùeiio chair (in the Countess's gaiiery), reflect on the patron. Such a reflection of taste is surely also the desire of the patrons of a Van Delen painting in Brussels (fig. 9). This relatively large picture was discussed above with respect to the use of Bosse rnodels. In front of the centraiiy placed couple is a distinctly posed group of Dutch burghers. At the picture plane, the group of three women and a young child are flanked by two gentlemen, and are segregated from the terrace by a few steps, but remain in dewith the rest of the picture. Blade confimis that this group poses for a portrait and tiirther observeci that the wornan holding the hand of the young girl resembles a portrait by ~alamedesr." The aatic portrait group do not interact with the elegant *' Ter Kde (1969) identifieci îhe backgmurid as Arundel Castle. whùe Anne Thackray in London ( 1995) callai on Arundei House on the Strand as the source. in cithcr case the @airs arc catamly mkllishments of the o\ina's &tes since the stnicturcs ore dile&10 have been so compiekiy and austerrly classicd at Lhis tirne. David Hmarth in Lod .hmdeI and his Circle (New Haven: Yale University Ress, 1985: p. 58. j, is of the opinion that the Arundel House gaileries could not have lookrd as ihq are pûayed. by any "sûetch of ilie tmapnaticm" The most mtuork on these pminttngs, the @mz~tie~ahibiticm catalogue, London (1995) makes no refarnce to who lnight have painted the backgrounds. *~racalr(1994).~.211.loa~pirofpn~aitrJawhkeckpomaydAdnamBra~wdMana van Graeff ~iihideaid buitenpluar~enbehiad the lifted ciatains. For a repduction see Haarlem ( 19% ), p. 186. fie, 139. 7" POrffajt of a Woman in Museum der baidende Kuast, Budapest (si@ ûnd datd !6% ). Bla& 85 Company. The disparity of the pleasurable world and the static portmit group is puzzling, and may indicate that the portrait group was added later. In another example, attributed to Van Deien, members of the House of Orange and various other noblemen in an inner courtyard, appear fuliy at ease, though poised for a portrait (fig. 97). A. Staring, in his examination of a surMving set of architectural paintings, suggestively wonders whether a buyer could simply buy a perspective piece from a dealer and add in the stage on his own accord." Potentially then, the consumer might buy a perspective piece and insert a portrait group as in the Van Delen painting. In the series of five exceptionally large canvases, which Staring attributes to Van Bassea the author identifies specific figures from The Hague court. These figures are no less than Prince Fredenck Hendrik and his wife Amalia von Solms (fig. 64c). Prince Frederick V of the Palatine appears in a secondary position to the members of the Orange House, who were his hoas in the Netherlands during the Prince's winter exile fiom ~ohemîa.~Arnalia, who was once part of Princess Elizabeth's court in the Palatine, is portrayeci at the picture plane, in the moa prominent position. On mother canvas of the group. in an interior. fmed pictures of the Bohemian King, his deElizabeth Stuart of England, and a few of m Stanng (1965). p. 12. indaci, it appears that this occiared uith the portrart of Chartes 1 in Turin (see p. 83). Pipa (1963) notes Chat Anthoay van Dyck declined IO paint the purbruts of Charles and Harietta Mana on architecturai backdrops. p. 1 62. eo Rince Fredenck V sas the nephcw of Aine Maiaice of Nassau He had frnt visited Hoiiand in 16 13 and went on to becomr the ctected of Bohemia on 28 septanber of 16 19, dyto be oustai soon &a. The Rince fied first to Raguc with his %de. the Scuttish dauphter of King James VI of Enpland, but it nas the province of Holland who accqted the ded-ai hm&. Therc they set up houe in The Hague at the Wassaenor Hof. Sec Gorst-Wililams ( 1977). their children hgon the back wall. A third painting contains the figure of Prince Maurice of Orange and his nephew, the Palatine Phce, and a sculptured lion, on a pedesial at the foot of sorne steps, with the heraldic shield of the House of Orange. It is the combination of these features that urged Staring to conclude that the set of five canvases might originally have corne 6om the palace at ~henen." Van Bassen's connection with The Hague and counly Qrcles was aiready established through architectural work. He worked at the Rhenen avnmer retreat for the deposed Bohemian King, P~ceFrederick V. and was also involved with the consmiction of Honselaarsdijk for Frederick Hendrik. The connedon of these painthgs to the Dutch court and the visiting couri of Prince Frederick V is mong." Yet the two remaining paimings apparently bear no portraits. In light of this absence, it is worth noting again the presence of NO peacocks and a parrot within this pair. They may ad as a decorative feature, as weU as providing a traditional embiematic ton-a feature that might be inappropriate to include with the four portrait paintings commissioned by the siners. In contrast to I.L. Price, who believed that Dutch pomaits were 'tealistic records, not pieces of proPaganda'" 1 believe that these portraits set in palaces are exactly that: a fonn of propaganda. Patrons of the architectural specialias are generaily assumed to be of the upper socid mata; perspectives were a specialized genre that ody certain consumers might appreciate. Yet, as Kettmng reveaied in her analysis of pastord portraiture, KI It is ais udnoting that îhe Dmch genw had sucial sontact wich the hehemim -al&. Tius is testifid to by Sir William B~~etm'suntten nooliection of his visit to the Queai's Eoid as a gest of Colonel and La@ Gormg of HoUand on 3 Jrmc. 1634. a Rie ( 1974), p. 143. Ricc admtts that social proppmda did occur alter the 1655 section of the AmsterQm Tom Hall. "Members of the highest levels of Dutch society...desire[d] confirmation-or even improvement-of their social status.'* The pastorai theme had long-standing associations with the cul~raland social élite, and by using pastoral imagery in conjunction with portraits, the aristocratie pretensions of the sitters were enhanced. The wne can be aated for portraiture executed in conjunction with architectural painting. Like the pastoral dress of contemporary shepherdesses, the nch ornamental fomis of architecture were %om'' by the contemporary staffage of perspective painting. Portraits such as Jan Mytens's Portrait of Maria van Aerssens as a Shepherdess (fig. 90) exhibiteci material wealth and an elevation f?om mundane reality, much the same as Van Delen's paintings displayed wealth and an alternative reality. On occasioh Van Delen actually used pastoral costume in his work (fig. 9 1 ). While pastoral dress was usudy shown with an Arcadian landscape, its inclusion in architectural painting is not out of order and furthemore, helps to demonstrate what Kettering analyzed in pastoral portraiture, that the pastorai dress of the sitters enhanced their aristocratie pretensions. The man in Fiaures before a Palace (6%.37), making his way fiom the grounds to the palace, holds a crook, a key attribute of the shepherd or shepherdess. Van Delen's early and late paintings display an evolution of Society, a development from a preoccupation with the activities of an unattainabîy élite Mestyle to a pictonal manifestation of the process of ariaocratization. His figures' costumes evidence the change since contemporary fàshion is consiaently emulated. The figures embody the desires and aspirations of the burgher élite. When mie country leisure is attained by the select few in the Republic, the figures can be seen wearing rustic attire, a sign of the transfomtion of the era frorn simple burgher élite to a pretentious, yet real aristocracy. 88 If one is to take Van Delen's staage as typical of the Nonhem architecturai specialists. then it wiU be observeci that Van Delrn's work lacks the dynamic energy and baroque exubemce characteristic of aristocratie, lusthof feasting, such as that witnessed in Rubens's Garden of Love. It was, of course, necessary for the figures to have outward rearaint and composure, for they represented htch burghers. Proper posture was of utmoa importance for it demonstrated a discipline of the body. Physical composure and appropriate dress were socidy controlled. In seventeenth-century Venice these issues were regulated by sumptuary laws, or legal stipulations and restrictions on public appearance, which appiied to the nobility as well as those socially beaeath them. In 1618, the consensus at the Synod of Dordrecht was to Vnplement sumptuary laws to curb feastfy extravagance." Although no such law was implemented, Amsterdam did issue a regulation against extravagant weddings in 165 5. Amsterdam could align itself with the glory of Venice for she was a feiiow Republic In his comparative social midy of Vemtian and Amsterdam élites, Burke found that Venice and Amsterdam, both leading cities for theû respective republics, were both led by àvilians and emrepreneurial patricians. Burke explaineci that traditionaiiy the noble Venetian avoided display and favoured fi~~ality.~The Venetian nobility wu, however, quite prone to ostentatious display. Yet their style of life as Burke reveais, 'Bas marked by fnigality, by gravity, and by prudence. Its dominant note was self-control. The ethos discourageci eating, drinking, taking and spending money in excess ~fre~uirements.'"Gravity and dignity were thus essential character traits of Venetian society. Walking slowly, appearuig stately and ceremonious 89 was a Venetian cultural style. Signincantly, this is also much tike the stature exhibiteci by the staffage of architectural painting. Red Me in Amsterdam was distinctiy less ceremonious; élites "walked the streets like everyone e~se.'~Indeed, self-control was a virtue here, as it was in Venice, but a certain regaiity in exercising this was desirable. This was, in fact, the task of the painter. A CONTINUATION Gerard Houckgeest was a pupil of Van Bassen who enjoyed an international reptation for his classicking architecture. Charles I is, in fact, known to have owned four of his works." An Open Gallery with an Imam- Palace (1 638) is Houckgeest's second known dated painting (fig- 92). This work exhibits the traditional centrai vanishing point and measured projection, learned at the early stages of perspective instruction. Houckgeest continued to paint Van Bassen's type of imaginary archit~ein the late 1640's.~~The strong iinearity of Houckgeest's early paintings betray the influence of Vreâeman's designs. Houckgeest's experimentation with both famastic spaces and, more or les, contemporary interiors occurred around 1650, but he continued to paint imaginary structures aiter this date.91 This artist's innovation was his abiiity to use perspective to construct more naturai and intimate spaces. This is equatüy meof Pieter de Hooch and Samuel van Hoogaraten, who appropriateci the new construction of space developing in Delft. Ibid.. p. 66. Gdtaij and Iansai in Rotterdam (1991).p. 165 Oa Liedtke ( 1 982). p. 22. '' Haak ( 1984). p. 327. Both De Hooch and Van Hoogstraten Fvere unmiaakably affected by the architectural painters in their spatial concerns. The orthogonals and vanishing points found in the underhwings of De Hooch's pauitings, reveal the artist's use of perspective as the starting point for his compositions." Van Hoogstraten went so fàr as to rival Vredeman's achievements in iliusionistic decePtion," attempting to create illusionistic perspectives through so-cded perspective boxes and paintings conveying deep recession through grand pdatial edifices. Van Hoogstraten also seems to have copied, nearly exactly, a composition from one of the early specialists. His Perspective of a Man Reading in a Courtyard (signed; Bg. 93) dupiicates The Courtyard of a Renaissance Palace (fig. 59), attributed to Van Bassen, in every detail with the exception of the tiling pattern of the imer courtyard." Following the tradition of the architectural specialias, De Hooch and Van Hoogstraten displayed an "unapologetic deiight in bourgeois ~omfort.''~~Significantly, these artists also began to produce more exclusively for wealthy patrons at mid-century Regin feels that it was the art of the latter Mf of the seventeenth-century art that catered to court tastes and patronage, reflecting the changing course of bourgeois life. In his assessment, the [Mt] shows up in the pictues with architectural scenes, which fiequently tend toward the formality of stage sets. Samuel Hoogstraten, for instance, painted a Piilor GaIIery with palatial ambitions, showing a richly ol Bmtinotes a version former!! attributai to Van StmwiJck (pi,17.8 x 24.1 cm). Its skdcher dace and more distant view of a wurtymi led Brusati ta belicve that the d pend wu a modcllo for the hrger wxk on cauvas. whch must then bi: @ Van Sttmwijck and not Van Bassen (1994). p. 292, n 95. This is. of a possii,but the style of Wh reWs an duerr hm ihe a& perspecb&s. dressed lady.. ., and a playful statue well worked ioto a structure of opulent marble columns. Ludolph de Jongh's siiady produced The Gmden, fodyand stiffly laid out against a stately house in the background with in the fiont a groug of ladies sophisticated in arrangement and appearance. While one cannot go so far as to Say, as Regin does, that an mesuch as De Hooch's illustrates the social history of seventeenth-century ~o~and,*his work does deheate a Msual continuation of the haughty pretensions of the Dutch burgher. What De Hooch and Van Hoogstraten did was replace the imposing, palatial structures of the eady architectural specidists with the country homes, intimate courtyards. and garden settings of contemporary Dutch Me, while continuhg to embellish on matenai details. De Hooch's A Game of Skittles (fig. 72; De Hooch painted three versions), Van Hoogstraten's Portrait of a Coupie in the Garden of a Countrv House (fig. 94)' and Ludolph de longh's Women in a Garden (fig. 95) illustrate the transformation. Van Hoogstraten, particularly, used classical architectural motif' and Italian statuary in his paintings to his advantage, for as Celeste Brusati demonstrated by the example of Van Hoogstraten. an artist's appeal to the aesthetics of court patronage increased the status and market value of his ~ork.~' Brusati in her study of Van Hoogstraten, placed the painter's "self-reflexive artistry," or seEserving goals of forging an identity, within the social and cultural context of seventeenth-centuy Holland. In pursuit of a profitable (or profit-inducin@ individual identity, Van Hoogstraten wrote lofdichteen, elaborated on the complernentary relationship between Pictrrre and Poiisis, arid translated Nicolas Faret's L 'homeste homme m I 'art de 92 piaire à la court (Paris, 1630)? Written for a bourgeois audience, the ah of this book was to provide formulateci tactics on how to find favow at court. This and Van Hoogstraten's painted works, such as View fiom a County Estate (fig. 96), are "indicative of the cosmopolitan elite for which Van Hoogstraten's work was Unended in the ~etherlands."'~~More work could stiu be done on how the eady architectural specialists similarly projected a collective social identity through pictorial means for their consumer. 90 Transiated into Dutch as Den EHenlongeling ofde Edele Kmvon rirh ly gmotr en klqne te dmeeren en beminnen (Dordrecht, 1657). John hians desrri'bed a 'W demies to columns as a means of u>munication"' in the orpanùation of Roman buildings, how columns were a "measure of wealth and statu.'" What this thesis has sought to express is indeed the way in which the classically inspired paiaces and th& colwmiar details have cornrnunicated the aspirations of the hitch Repubtic. The Eunastic structures maintaid ingredients of the native tradition; the ciassical fomwere subjected to an irreguhty and free application. From Van Mander to Huygens, ducated cihm promoted ciassiciSm. The reasons behd the choice of form are intimately connecteci to the elevated burgher status and the aristocratization of the new class of citizens. Van Luttewelt's contention that "Het etassicimie is altijd de kunstvom geweest van de wektand gekomen burgerij" has repeatedly been proven me. The building campaign of classically inspird buitenpi~drenreveal to us the mentality of htch society. While it is doubtful that the architecniral paintings of Van Delen and Van Bassen make reference to the rnany cherished hiitepf'n of the city burghers, the Héstyle of nich a place and its atnnity with the coudy life of The Hague is certainly alhided to. In several instances details l?om contemporary We, such as contemporary dress, the rows of proteaive trees, the inconspicuous background hriter~plcwrtsen,the typicaily Dutch decorative red and white window stnmers, whoüy Uicongnious with the classicai architecture (in fig. 77, for example), were incorporatecl hto the paintings of Van Delen. Buitenlevett ' Ibid.. p. 70 ' Tlassicisn has duqs bsrn the art fmof chce for mfy.prwpamrs citaais.' Van Luttaveit f 1943). p. 89. 94 presented a dual ideal: nature and culture.' The desire to rnuse both these thuigs affecteci the fom of the hifetpImtsand garda The opportunity to explore the bounty of nature and to cuitivate a social statu were rewarding benefits of country Gfe. Gary Schwartz in his examhion of Jan van der Heyden and the Huydecopers's country place argueci convincingiy that paintings of buiferplmren were political props, particularly ifthey were not commissionai, for they serveci to flatter the infiunrtial ownm of country estates who could in turn bestow position and prestige on the artist. Ahhough this argument revolves around *mgesof specinc counby estates, tbe images of elabrate palatial settings were similarly used as props-in thcase by the bwgeoning urban aristocracy, who were gaining political prestige but Iacked the cultural legitlliiization of an estabiished ehe. Among the aids to nich legmmization was the genre of portraiture in architedural painting. It is worth noting, as Spierenbtirg reveals, that, t was the need to keep up with the honnêfesgemabroad, rather than pressure kom the middle class at home, which accoulrts for refinements in mersamong the higher strata in the ûutch Republic. The prestige of memkof nrling groups hou& out Eumpe was not only detnniined by the opinions of th& countrymm of the me but also by those of the élites abroad.'" The hitch, therefore, ailowed themseives to be duenced, most süongly by the French, the acknowledged superion in taste and social behaviour. The type of siaffage used by the architecrural specialists display the wide dependence on French sources, such as Abraham Bosse whose prints helped to convey the new civilized and cornfortable way of Me emerging 6om Paris. The type of activities the hhionable figures engaged in aiso allowed for a subsidiary reading. Garden recreations and comrsdes, enjoyed by the st-e of rnany arctiit- paintmgs, surface as the main components of ii@desfi~inixnagq. These very 95 actMties represented a life of leisure and a p& of plmedesmeci by the new burgher class, while love gardens were a recognuabty priviieged feahae of the docratic way oflife. My analysis of the staffage as it pertains to contemporary life was ttnis desigoed to illustrate the genre of architectural painting as socially responsive. intaestingiy, these architectural images with stafbge were ofkm as0 reproduced in marquetry on domestic fùmiture, revealing perhaps the inhate connection burghen felt with the subject6 While I have chosen not to ou?iïne speafic issues of production and coUecting, 1 have determineci to understand art as a projection of values, and thus the durai milieu and aestfietic values of the period becorne paramourrt. This thais has foaised on two divergent aspects, the architecture and the staflàge within a nngle genre, and has concluded that the anistic expressions of the Italian pemnsuk were dateciand the decorn and social fàshions of the French were openly Uiiitated. Both foreign sources medto legithm the burgeoning new Repubiic, and both found expression in fiunasticai architectural pauning. %~uxrmi Boijmans-van Banmgen has an ewmplap-cupboard (c.1620). SaTh. K Lmmgh Schmirxr. "The Dutch and th& homes in the Seventaaith Centup." ..lmof the .hglo-..Im~canCommami', in the Smfeenth Crntuqt (Cbmlottemille. 1975). pp. 1 3-42. lllustrations Figure 1. Jan van Eyck Madonna in the Church c. 1437-38. Berlin Geddegaicrie. Smtiiche Muxen. Panel. Figure Z Jan ûosslcn. Saint Lukc drau-inethe Virein. c 1512-1 5 Prague. National Galle- Panel Figure 3. Hans Vredeman de Vries. plate 13 from Yerspectwe... (-The Hague. 1605). 01 Perfpeetiue 3t~ft~fi5rsqtoits,zslb Figure 1. Sebastiano Scrlio. "Tngic Scene" from The Second Booke of .-irchitecture (London. 16 1 1 ). fol. 25. Figure Sa Ham Vredeman de Vries. "The Five Sens:DoricalAuditus" from .-lrchitmfura...(The Hague. 1606). Figure Sb. Hans Vredemrin & Vries. "The Five Senses: [onica/ûdor* from .-lrchirectura... (The Hague. 1606). Figure Sc. HmVrcbcmrin & Vries. "The Five Senses: CorintiiidGustus" from .Irchitecturo .. . (The Hague. l6O6). Figure 6. Dirck GUI Delen Archited View. s.d 1625. Rodez. Musée Denis Puech. Panel. 58.5 x 33. Figure 7. Attnbutcd to Hcndrik van Steenwijjck the Elder. Perspective. 1588. Dessau. GemiYdegalcrie. .ngpage) Figure 8. Ham Vredeman & Vries. plate 14 hmPempecdve. .. (71ie Hague. Fire 9. Dirck tan Delea Tmceof a Paiace with Portrait Group. s.d 1642. Bnissels. Museum of Fine Arts. (Recedtng page) Figure IO. Hami Vredeman de Vries. plate 43 hmPerspective ... (The Hague. 1604). Figure II. Dirdc \an Dclen. Garden of a Wace with Men ~lnin~.Skitries. Gateshead Shiplq Art Galle.. Ebnel. 67.5 x 82.3. Figure 12. Hcndnk Am. Imapinm Rcnaissa~Paiace, s.d 160- (2?). Amsterdam Rijhurum. Cma. Y3 .u 127.5. Figure 13. Hendnk ,.an Stecnwijck the Youngcr. Cours d'un Palais Renaissance. s.d 1610. London. Nationai Gallery. Copper. 40.2 x 69.8. Figure 11. Hcndrik 1311Stccntvijck the Youngcr. An Imaainam Town !kum. s.d. 1614 Thc Hague. Mauntshuis. Coppcr. 47 x 70 Figure 15. Dirck tan Delen, Coumard of a Palace. s.d 1635. Bnwischweig Henog Anton Ulrich- Museum. Panel. 32.8 x43. Figure 16. Dmk van Delen Court,ard of a Palace with Figures. c. 1630s. London National Gailep-. bel, $6.7 x 60.5. Figure 17. Hans and Paul Vrebcnian ck Vries. Palatial Architecture with Musicians, S. d 1596. Vieruin Kunsthistorisches Museum. Canvas. 135 x 174. Figure 18. Vinœnzo SumoPsi. "IONCcapital" hm Ondeys r1aode yyf colomen.. . (Amstcrdsun 1657). Figure 19. Vîgnoia. plate XLiII from I ignoia. or the Cornpieat drchitect (London 1655). Figure 20. Dirck van Delen. A Palace and Entrana ta Gardens. s.d 1644. Palais Galleria Pans (14 Jun. 1974). lot 38. Panel. 46 .u 50. Figure 22. thrck van Deien. Envame to a Palace. s-d l667(&? 1. St Rtersburg Hermitage. Panel, 57.8 x 65.5. Pollouing page) figure 23. Dirck van Delen Coumad of a Wce with m3m' Figures. s.d 16M Viem. Kunsthistorixhes Museum. Cimas. 162 x 286. Figure 24. Dirck cui Delen. Fi- outside a Palace. s.d 1W.SotMy's. Landon (3 Apr. 1985). Figure 25. Bartolorneus van Bassen Summous inténor with Bruiaueters, or The ston of Lîizms and Dives. Munich Aitc Pidcothek Panel. 85 x 1 12. Figure 26. Bartolomais van Basxn. The Nieuaie Kek The Haeue. s.d 1650. The Hague. kgs Historisch Museum. Panel. 82.3 .u 1 12.1. Figure 27. Dirck \an Delen Terna of a Palace nith Fi-, c. mid-1630s. Paris. M& du Petit Palu. Pancl. 32 x 17. Figure 28. Philips Vingboons. design for Daniel Sofuer j , House. 1639. Figure 29. BartoIomcus van Bassen Bohemian Rovalfi: at a Feast. s.d 1634 Sotheby's. London (27 Mar. 1974). Pancl. 62 x 90. Wre M. Bartolomeus van Bassen Imanan. Palace for the Winter King, s.d 1639. Copcnhagcn bateCollection. Panel. 44 x 86. Figure 31. Philips Vingboons. Dc Ka-scr's Stock Exchrinec. 1634. City of Amstcrdarn. Panel, 26 x 35. Figare 32. Ham Bol. View of Amsterdam frorn the South, 1589. Belgium, Pmate Collection. Gouache on parchment mounted on panel. 1 1.7 x 3 3.1. Figure 33. Ham Bol. Cade in a Landscaue. 1589. Berlin Gemiüdegalerie. Parchment. 23.5 x 32.5. figure 51. Cornelis Hoistqn Reinier Pauw and his Familv at Westwi~kc. 1650. Private Collecüon. Cam-as. 1û-i .u 170. Figure 35. Pieter Codde. Portrait of a Farnilv in a Cornard, c. 164). E3erlin art market c. 1925. Support unknonn 98 x 127. - - Figure 36. Gcnit Berckheyde. A View of Heemstede Castle. Rivate Collection. Cam=. 63 .u 19.7 Figure 37. ûirck van Delen Finmbefore a Palace signed. Sotheby 'S. London ( 1 1 Dec. 1985). Copper, 59.8 x 71. Figure 38. Duck van Delen, Enmce to a Mace with Fonnal Gdens Bevond S.d 1657. Chnsties. London (14 Nov. 1952). Panel. 63.5 x 92.6. Figrire 10. Dirck van Delen. Extuterior of a Pal;ice with Ladies and Gentlemen. s.d 1644. Copenhagen, Statens Museum. Panel. 49.5 x 55. Figure 42. Hans Vrcdeman de Vrics. "Garden design" from Horturum I iridu~anrmqueefrgantes . (Anmcrp. 1583). Figure 43. Louis de Caulery. Horna~eCO Venus. Copenhagen Statens Museum for Km. Figure U. Louis de Cauleq-. Banouet in 3 Venetian Palaœ. Qlumper. Musée cies Beaux-Arts. Pruicl. 54.5 x 78.5. Figure 15. De Sadeler. after Maarten de Vos. Aîlemrr: of he. Figure Younge Brian K Copper. Figure #. Anoaynious. Elemt Fimues in a Formal Garden ksi& a hbour. Amsterdam. Rijksmaseum. Panel. 5 1 x 172. (Pre=.Rdingpage) Figure 19. ûirck van Delen. Exterior of a Macc with Coaversation gr ou^, s-d 1636. Copnhagen. Statens Museum for Kunst. Figure 51. Nidaes & Bnnn, after htdVinckhons. A Bancnret before a Castle. 1605. Enping. Figure 52. Hendrick Hondius II. afkr Dnid Vinckbuons. SDring. Signed "hidVinckboons iment.. Henricu hondius sculp. Et cucudu Senes &tcd 1618. Engrzning 38 x 50.2. /;"- +"s+ LwLc-. .Ln VER. .i-.w- -. l %# .IU1. - %#PhCI Q-: Figure 53. masvan de Velde (awibuted). Ad. Pend. pen grey ink and wash on paper. 24.5 x 34.6, Figure 3). Dirdc van Dela A& of a Palace with an OPen Darne. s.d 1661. London. Brian Koewr Gailery ( 1972). Figure 55, Da,id Vinckboons. Een mliik nezcllscha~.Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum. figure S. Esaias \.an & Velde. Garden F2ub before 3 Palace> s.d 1614. The Hague. Mauritshuis. Panel. 28.5 .u $0. (Mgpage) Figare 57. Esaias van & Velde and Bartofomeus van Bassen The kcniet, s.d 1624. Viennrr Kunsihistorixhes Museum. Panel, 17 x 67. Figure 58. Willem Bp?meck Buitenmrtij, 16 16- 17. Beriin. Private Collection loaned to Dahlem Musem. Figure 59. Bartolomeus van Bassen. The Comdof a Renaissance Palace. Sotheby's. London ( 1 1 W.1985). Panel. 18 x 24.5. Figure 60. Michel Lame. Promenaâinn Couple on a Terrace. Engrrrving Figure 61. Ge- woodcut. Amornus Cornle, c. 1480. Figure 62. Master of the Gdens of Lave. detail from Large Garden of Love. Figare 63. Bartolomeus van Bassen. Suuare before a Renaissance Chwch (St Peter's), s.d 1623. Copenhagen. Statens Museum for Kunst. Cimas. 1JO x 190. Figure Ha. Bartolomcus tm Biissen (attnited). one of a group of five. c. 1630. Amsterdam. Rijksmuseum. Cm= in îwo parts, 310 x 121 and 309 x 122. figure ab. Bartolowus van Barsen (actnbuted). one of a group of fke. c. 1630. AmscerQn Rijksmuseum. Canas in Wo parts. 309 x 109.5 and 309 x 124.5. RymW. Banolomcus van Bassen (amibuteci). one of a gmup of fwc. cc.1630. Amsterdam. Rijhuseum. C~~';IS.330 x 350 Figure 65e Bartolomcus van Bassen. Open Gallew nith Cupola. Elcmt Fimires and Monkev. Chnstie's. London ( 18 Apr. 1980). Support unknmn. 78.7 x 13 1 3. Figure 65b. N. Tessin Jr.. aAer an illustrrition in fin Besrrch in HoIland (1687). "Honselaarsdijk Gallery." Figure 66. Dirck \an Delen. Courtvard of a Paîacc, s.d 1627. Pmidcncc Rhode Island Schoof of hgn. Museum of Art. Panel. 63 -5 x 88.2. Figure 67. Paul Vredeman de Vries. The Cornnation of Esther b Ahmerus, s.d 16 12. Darmstabt, Hessixhcs Landesruuseum. Panel. 1 18.5 x 17 1S. Figure 68. Dirck tan Delen. Coumard of a Palace with Return of the Rodigai Soa s.d 1649. Cologne. Wallraf-Richartz Museum. Panel. 56.5 x 9 1.5. Figure 69. Bartolomeus \an Bassen (attributed). Interior with Elemt Couules. dated I6 15. Former. Brussels. Sch3uùruuck (3 M;ry 1927). Panel. $8 .u 70.5. Figure 70% Emblem hm"Het Eunbracht van Cupido." .Vederdtqtsche poemua. Daniel Heinsius (Leiden 162 1). Figure 70b. Emblem from Silenud Rlcibiadis. Jacob Cats (Middclbwg. 1618). Figure 7kJean Gounont. "Cbined Ape". 6; . . I-- . - Figure 71. Dirck \.an Delen Skialc P1n.m. s.d 1637. Paris. Loinm. Figure 72. Pieter de Hooch A Grne of Skittles, c. 1663-66. Wadâesion Manor. The James A ck Rothschild Collection. Figure 73a "Skittlcs"from Euterpae suboles. Peter Rollos (Pans. 1630). ' * tu Figure 73b. "Le Ballon" froir Euterpae suboles. WrRollos (Paris. 1630). Figure 73c. "Le Passeu hmEuterpe suboles. Peter Rollos (Paris. 1630). Figure 71. Emblem from .4moris Divini et Humani .-lntipathia ( Antwerp. 1629). Luefiar-jjr,th/f[r.(rrt *rat~t~f~%rt',. .)-&pu9 ÿG". 4 iriy r ruadi/ahmu , 3~r.r- pwmnr dq .rprwtm, , -*mt c& ,, . , .:ÇA4 de pz+ . - . .-- - . - fimm 75. Crispijn de Passe ihe Eldcr. hmDen Siemen Iecht-spieghel (c. 1620). p. 85. Fipre 76. Dirck van Dclen. Irna- Architecture uith Fieiucs. s.d 1636. s-'Hcnogcnbosch Noordbrabanis Museum. Panel, 95 x 80. Figure 77. Brck van Dciea Courbwcf of a Psilace with Bail~hers,s.d 1628. Parxs. Louvre. Panel. 31.5 .u 54. Figure 79. Willem Buytmech. T& Edelmannen. series of seven. 1615. Engrnings. 19.6 s 7.3. Figrire 81. Abnh;im Bosse. L'Este. Engming. Fipre 82. Abaham Bosse. Le Bal. Engraving. Figure 83. Abraham Bosse. The Scul~tor'sStudio. Engming. Figure W. ûirdc van Delen Gallerv of a Palace with Comle and Senant stand in^ at PoPortal. s.d 1643. Poitiers. Mddes Beaux-Arts. Support unkncm. 48 x 49. Fipm 85. Abraham Bosse. hntisptece to Le Jwdio de la .Vobleae Fmnçoise dmrr lequel ce peut Ceuillir leur manierre de I éttements (Pans. 1629). (Folloning page) Figure 86. ûuûc mn DeIen Figures strollinp; on a Terrace. s.d 1630. Munich Mate Collection. Panel, 50.8 x 69.3. Figure 872 Hendrik van Steenuijck the Younger. with Daniel Mytens. Charles 1 in an Imaginm Palace. s.d by Van Steenwijck 1626; and ip- Wens 1627. Turin. Gaileria Sabauda. Figure 87b. HénQrk \an Steenwijck the Younger (mibuted). Chrules 1 as Rince of -Wales. c. 1620. Copenhagen, Sratens Museum for Kunst. Cmas. 2 19.5 x 174.5. Figure ûûa. Hendrik van Steenwijck the Younger. Charles 1, 163 7. Dresden. Figure ûûb. HenQik tan Steennijck the Youngcr. Elenrietta Maria 1637. Dmden. Figure 89a. Daniel Myiens. Thomas Howard le Ead of Arundci, h&lCade. Canvas. 207 x 127. Figure Wb. Dame1 Mj-tens. Alaîhea Talbot. Countess of Arundel. ANndeI Castle. Cwas. 207 x 127. Figaro 90. fan Mjtens. Portrait of Maria \an Aerssens as a Shebherckss. c. 1660. RimeCollection. Cam& 98 x 73.5. Figure 91. Dirck van Delen. Entrance to 3 Palag. s.d 1654. London. Dulmich Picture Gailep Cam%. 49.5 x 54. Figure 92. Gerard Houckgeest View tbmuph an Am&. s.d 1638. Edinburgh. National Gallery of Scotland Cmz.13 1.1 x 152. Figure 93. Samuel van Hoogstraten. Pers~ectrt.eof a Man rcading in a Court~arci.signed Gloucester. B~hamPark. Cmas. 264 x 273. Figure 94. Samuel van Hoogstnten. Portrait of a Couple in the Garden of a Countn. Housc. 1447. Fonerh. Berlin art market. Figure 95. Ludolph de Jongh. Womcn in a Gardcn. 1667. Cape Town Couat Natale Labia Collection. Figure %. SamueI van Hoogstraten. View hma Countrv Estate. s.d 1668. London. Mr and Mrs Robert Robinson Collection. Cm%.95 x 122. Figure 97. Dirck van Delen (rittnbuted). Members of the House of Oranne and other Noble Fimm in an Idwltzed Grchitectanl Setung c. 1630-32. Amsterdam. RiJksmuseum on Icm to Pdeis Het Loo. Canvas. 317.5 x350. Bibliography AIberti ( 1972) Alberti, Leon Battista On Painting and On Sa~ghire.(ï?te Latin tcx~~of& Pichrra cuid De Statrra). Tram. Cecil Grayson. London: Phaidon, 1973. BalIegeer ( 1967) Ballegeer, I.P. C. M. "Enkele voorbeelden van de invloed van Ham en Paulus Vredeman de Vries op de architectuurschiiden in de Nederlanden gedurende 16e en 17e eeuw." Gentse bijdkagen tot de K~rns~geschiedertis en de ûu&ei&t~de 20 (1967). 55-70. Banks ( 1977) Banks, Otiver T. Wattem and the North: Studies iri the Ditch and Flmish Barape It~fluenceson French Rococo Painting. New York: Garland, 1977. Becker-Cantarino ( 1978) Becker-Cantarino. Baerbel. Daniel Heirtsirrs. Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1978. Bersier ( 195 1 ) Bersier, Jean-Eugene. L '111j7tiencede I'Itaiie dans b Peititrrre Hollwr&ise. Paris: Compagnie Francaise des Arts Graphique, 195 1. Blade ( 1995) Blade, Timothy Trent. nie Paintir~gsofDirck van Deiett. (Diss. 1976) Ann Arbor: UMI Dissertation SeMces, 1995. Blum ( 1924) Blum, André. Abraham Bosse er la socrétéfrat~çuiseau dix-septkhte siiclt) Paris: 1924. Brarnsen ( 1976) Bramsen, He~k.Le Chuteuz~#Amour Hafnis: Copenhagen Papers in the History of Art, ( 1976), pp. 9 1-95. De Bray (1971) Bray, Salomom de. Architectura Moderna. ofrr Bouwinge von Onsrn Tyt. ( 163 1 ). Soest : Davaco, 1971. Bredius ( 19 15) Bredius, A. Kiinstierhveriztare. 7 Vols., The Hague, 19 15-22. Bremmer (1991) Bremmer, Jan and Herman Roodenburg, Eds. A Ctrih~raiHistory of Grmre Ithaca, New York: CorneU University Press, 199 1. Brereton ( 1846) Brereton, Sir William. "My Travels Uao Holland and the 17 Provinces," Trmtes irt Holkand the United Provinces Engid Scothrtd and Ireiund, ( 1634- 35). Edward Hawkins, ed. London: The Chetham Society, 1 846. Briels (1 987) Bnels, Jan. VIaam.w Schifdersin de Noordeiijke Nederfanden in het brgrz van de Gouden Eeuw, 15854530. Haarlem: H.J.W.Becht 1987. Brown ( 1972) Brown, Jonathan. Dutch Towttscq Painti~ig.London: Phaidon, 1 972. Brusati ( 1994) Bmat i, C .A. Praistworthy Decepriotu: Artijice and lihsio~niri the Art of Samtwi van Hoogstraten. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994. Burke ( 1994) Burke, Peter. Yetnice and Amsterdmn. A A&& of Seveinteetiih Cetihiy Efites. London: Temple Smith, 1994. DaCosta-Kaufmann (1988) DaCosta-Kaufmann, Thomas. 7k Schoof ofPrague: Pairntlrng ai the Court of Rudofph II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988. Van Deursen ( 199 1 ) Deursen, A.T. van. Pfuiri Liws In a GufdernAge: Poptrlar culn~re,refigtorl utid society In seventeetith-centirry Hofi..d. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 199 1. Diederiks ( 1976) Diederiks, H. A. "Stedeling en Buitenplaats," Jaarbwk Amstei&mtrm 68 ( 1976), 108- 122. Dreessen ( 1988) Dreessen, Marcella. "Gefanteseerd Renaissance-paleis of liefdestuin? Over een schilderij van Hendrik Aerts in het Rijksmusewn." Antiek 22 (1 988). 484- 489. Ehmann (1979) Ehrmann, Jean. 'Ham Vredernan de Vries (Leeuwarden 1 527 - Anvers 1606)" Gazette des Beaux-Arts 93 ( 1979), 2-26. Freedberg ( 199 1 ) Freedberg, David and Jan de Vries. Eds. Art in history, His10t-y in arc S~trùïesin seventeenth centwy Dutch cuitm. Chicago: University of Chicago Press and The Getty Center for the Historj of Art and the Humanities. 199 1 Fremantle ( 1959) Fremantle, Katherine. 7he Baroque TmHaif of Amsterdam. Utrecht: Haentjens Dekker & Gumbert, 1959. Fock ( 1979) Fock Wflemijn C. "The Princes of Orange as Patrons of Art in the Seventeenth Centuy." Apollo 1 10 ( 1979), 466-475. Forssman ( 1956) Forssman, Erik. hdeIII~ Onment. Snrdim mm Problem des Mw~ierismzrsin den Nwdscher~~ie~deüchem und Vorluge blattent des 16. rmd 17. Jahrhit~derfs.(Diss. 19 56) Stockholm. Van Gelder (l91 1) Gelder, H.E. van. "Iets ove: BarthoId van Bassen. ook als bouwrneester van het Koningshuis te Rhenen." Bulletin van den Nederlandschert Otc&ei&i GenaiUe ( 1966) Genaiiie, Jeanne and Robert. 'Peux Tableaux de Louis de Caulery."Gazette des Berna-Arts 6th ser. 67 ( 1966), 1 1 1- 1 14. Glang-Süberkmb ( 1975) Glang-Süberkrub, Anna-Gret. P.P. Rubens. Der Liehesgarte~r.Bern: Herbert Lang, 1975. Goodman ( 1 979) Goodman, Elise. "The Source of Pieter de Hooch's nir Gume of Sht~~es." Sfudies in Icoilography 5 8 ( 1979), 147- 1 58. Goodman (1992) Goodman, Elise. Rubens: 7ne Gmhof Love er Corwerrstie ci la mode Amsterdam/Philadelphia John Benjamins, 1992. Goossens ( 1954) Goossens. Komeel. Duvid Vir~ckbuotfi.The Hague: Martinus Nij hoff. 1 954. Gorst-Williams (1977) Gora-Williams, Jessica. Ehbeth. the WinferQtcee~~. London: Abeland, 1977 Gothein ( 1928) Gothein, Mary Louise. A History of Garden Art. London: J.M.Dent & Sons. 1928 Haak ( 1 98.1) Haak, Bob. Thr Golden Age: Bttch Paiiiters of the Sevetlrret~rh(hnry. New York: Abrarns, 1984. Hartt (1964) Hartt, Frederick. Love in Bmoqrte Art. New York: New York University. 1964. Haverkamp-Begemann ( 19 8 7) Haverkamp-Begemann, Egben. "The State of Research in Northem Baroque Art." An BtrlIetin LXIX4 (1987), 5 10-5 19. Haverkamp-Begemann ( 1959) HaverkarnpBegemann, Egbert. WiffernBuytewech. Amsterdam: Menno Hertzberger, 1959. Heilerstedt ( 1986) Hellentedt, Kahren Jones. Gardens of Earthlj Deiighis: Sixtee~ztrthd Seventeenth-Cenhcry Ne~herI&sh Gardem. Pittsburgh: The Frick Art Museum, 1986. Hooft (1983) Hooft, P.C. Ernbiemata amatoria. (Amsterdam, 1 6 1 1 ). Leiden, 1 983 Hoogstraten ( 1969) Hoogstraten, Samuel van. Iniyding tot de Hooge Schoole de Schilder Konst. (Rotterdam, 1 678). Soest : Davaco, 1 969. Hopper ( 1982) Hopper, Florence. "De Nederlandse Klassieke tuin en André Mollet." fie JMI~IILI~of the History of Gmde»i~g2,l ( l982), 25-40. Hopper ( 1986) Hopper, Florence. "The Erasmian Garden," in rite WordCornpanion [O Garderis ( 1 986), 390-39 1 . Houbraken ( 1 953) Houbraken, Arnold. De Grwre Schoirbwgh Hunt (1990) Hunt. John Dixon ed. rite D~chGarderi in the Sevetitetwth Cer~tr~ry Washington: Ibnbarton Oak. 1990. Huygens ( 1 946) Huygens, Constantijn. Mun jeugd, ( 1606) Trans. and Preface, A. H.Kan. Rotterdam: Donker, 1946. Israel ( 1995) Israel. lonathan. ne Dritch Reprrblic: ifs rise, greatness, andjiaiI, 1477-I 806. Oxford: Clarendon, 1 995. Janson ( 1 952) Janson, H.W. Apes and apfore in the rnkkife ages and the renaissur~ce. London: Warburg Inaitute, University of London, 1952. De Iong ( 1993) long Erik de. Nuh>cir en Ktmt: NederImtaSe tuin- ert iru~~chapsarchiteci~~r 1650-1 710. Amsterdam: Thoth, 1993. Kahr (1 978) Kahr, Madlyn. Dutch Painting in the SeveriteertfhCentuv. New York: Harper & Row, 1978. Kettering ( 1983) Kett ering, Alison McNeil . Thr htchArcadia: Pll~~oralal rt ami ifsA i~diericein the Golde,i Age . Montclair: AUanhel and Schrarn, 1983. Keyes ( 1984) Keyes, George hiusvu11 de Velde. Doornspijk: Davaco, 1984. Kloek (1989) Kloek, Wouter. "Genit Adriaensz. Berckheyde, De Bocht van de Herengracht bij de Nieuwe Spiegelstraat te Amsterdam, 1672." Bullrtit~vmt het &j-huser Ku yper ( 1980) Kuyper, Wouter . htch Classicist Architech~re:A Suntey of Lhrch Architecture. Gmdetts and Angio htchArchitecturai Reiationr from 1625- i-1700.Del fi : Deifl University Press, 1980. Legrand ( 1963 ) Legrand, F.4. Les Peinttmsflamands Liedtke ( 1970) Liedtke, Walter. 'Rom Vredernan de Vries to Dirck vari Delen: Sources of Imaginary Architectural Painting." BuIfetin of the Rhode IsidSchmf of Desipi LW42 (Dec 1970), 15-25. Liedtke ( 1979) Liedtke, Walter. '?ride in Perspective. The Dutch Townscape." me CoritzuIsseur 200 ( f 979),264-273. Lu@ (1936) Lugt, Frits. "Itaiiaansche kunstwerken in Nederlandsche versamelingen van vroeger tijd." Oud Holfund 53 (1%6), 97- 135. Van Lutterveit ( 1943) Luttervelt, Remmet van. De brcitenplautseen am de I'écht. De Bilt: B. Cuperus, 1943. hlaclaren ( 1960) Maclaren, Niel. nie hitch School: Natio~fGaffery Catafogws. London: National Gallery, 1960. De Maere ( 1994) Maere, J. de and M. Wabbes. Illustruted Dicrionary of Seventeenth Cenfiiry FIemish Painfers. Bnissels: La Renaissance du Livre, 1994. Van Mander ( 1935) Mander, Karei van. Her Schilderboek Het leven van dwrluchtige Nederlandsche en Hcwgdrii~cheSchilders. Trans. A. F.Mirande and G.S. Overdiep. Amsterdam: WereId Bibliotheek N. V., 1935. Martin ( 1970) Martin, Gregory. nie Ffemish Schwl circa 1600- circa 1900. London: National Gallery, 1970. Meijer ( 1978) Meijer, Reinder P. Literature of the Low Countries: A Short History of Dutch Literature in the Netherian& and Belgium. Cheltenham: Stanley Thomes Ltd., 1978. Miedema ( 1994) Miedema, Hessel, ed. Karrl van hlandr. fi7 Liveic of the Ill~istrio~is Nether/mtdish and Grman Painters. Doomspijk: Davaco, 1994. MieUce ( 1967) Mielke, Hans. Hans F'rtrdemm de Vries. Verzeichtiis Stickwerke trtid Beschreibzrrrg seines Siiîs smie Beitrage m Werk Gerard Grmntiings. Berlin: Der Philosophischen FakuItat der Freien Universitat, 1967. blkirnonde, "Venus" ( 1966) Mirimonde, A.-P. de. "La Musique dans les Allégories de l'Amour: Venus." Gazette des Berna-Arts 6th series, 68 (1966), 265-290. Mirimonde, "Eros" ( 1967) Mirimonde, A.-P. de. 'la Musique dans les AUégories de l'Amour: Eros " Gazette des Beor#-Arts 6th series, 69 ( 1967)- 3 19-346. Mirimonde (1976) bliimonde, A.-P. de. 'Thjardin d'amour d'apres D. Wnckboons au musée d'Orleans." Revue cht Lame et aès Musies de France 26 (19761, 15-23 Mollet (1981) Mollet, André. Le Jardin dzr Plaisir. (Stockholm, 165 1). Paris: Editions du Moniteur, 198 1. Mosser ( 199 1) Mosser, Monique and Georges Teyssot, eds. n>e Architechire of Westenz Gardens- A Design Historyfrom the Rtnaimce to the Present Dqy. Cambridge, Mass. : The MIT Press, 199 1. Okayama ( 19%) Okayama, Yassu. ntr R~paIndex. Persotliflcatiot~sanci their Attributes itl Five Editons of the Iconologra. Doompijk: Davaco, 1 992. Onians ( 1 988) Onians, John. Becvers of Meanitig. fie Clrrûical Orders in Antiqzrip, the Mi& Ages. md the Renaiswnce. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1988. ûttenheyrn (1989) Ottenheym, Koen. Philijs Vingboor1~(i6O%I678), architect . Zutp hen: Walburg, 1989. Ottenheym (1993) Onenheym, Koen. Pieter Post (16084669) A rchitect. Zutp hem Walburg, 1993. Piper ( 1963) Piper, David. Cataiogue of Seventetinth-Centuy Portraits in the Nationaf Portrait Gallery. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963. Praz ( 1964) Praz, Mario. SIi Pnce ( 1973) Price, J. L. C~~fttrrc!and Society in the Dtctch Reptrbiic &ring the Seventeenth Centwy. London: B.T.Batsford, 1974. Regin ( 1976) Regin. Deric. Traders, Artists. Btrrghers. A cctturai hisîory ufAmster&m iii the 17th century as sen^Amsterdam: Van Gorcum, 1 976. RoUos ( 1630) Rollos, Peter. Et~terpat'suboles. hoc est. Embiemata varia, rlegariri ioconrm misfirra variata distîchis itictrndis exornatu, in faorein et grutiam rom rn WJestivis hice locis pldent vettuste & deganter aer; incisa. (Berlin, 1 630s, 1 MO). Roscam Abbing (1993) Roscam Abbing, Michiel. Dr Schilder etz Schripr Samiret va,r Hoogstraten, 162 7-1678: eigentîjùse bronnen en oetivre van gesipierrde schilderijen. Leiden. Nijhoff, 1993. Rosenfeld ( 1989) Rosenfeld. Myra Nan. "From Drawn to Printed Model Book: Jacques Androuet du Cerceau and the Transmission of Ideas fiom Designer to Patron, Master Mason and Architect in the Renaissance," RA CAR XVI, 2 ( 1 989), 1 3 1-115. Scharna ( 1988) Schama. Simon. ntr Embarrassment ooflliches. An Interprermiori of Dirtch Culture in the Goikn Age. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1988. Schenkeveld-van der Dussen ( 1984) Schenkeveld-van der Dussen, M. A. "Review of ne Dutch Adia: Pastoral Art and its Audience in the Golden Age ." Simiolus 1 4 ( 1984), 23 1-3 3. Schmidt ( 1977-78)l Schmidt (1978-79) Schmidt, Kees. "Hollands buitenleven in de zeventiende eeuw." Amterdms Socioiog~chTijhchnfr 4 (1977-78), 434-449; 5 (1978-79), 9 1-109. Schneede ( 1967) Schneede, Uwe M. "Interieurs von Hans und Paul Vredeman de Vries." Nederlmtds Kunsthistorisch Jambwk 18 ( 1967), 125- 166. Schwartz ( 1983) Schwartz, Gary. "Jan van der Heyden and the Huydecopers of Maarsseveen." 71re J.Paul Getty Museim JoumaI 1 1 (1983), 197-220. Schwartz and Bok ( 1990) Schwartz, Gary and Marien Jan Bok. Pieter 5àenreJm. Thr Painter ami His Time. London: Tharnes and Hudson, IWO. SerIio ( 1982) SerIio, Sebastiano. ne Five Books of Arch~tectwe.Translateci from the Italian to the Dutch and to the English (London, 161 1). New York: Dover Pub.. 1982. Slothouwer (n-d.) Slothouwer, D. F De Paleicen van Fredwik HenJrk Leiden: A. W. Sijthoff, n.d. ( 1945). Spierenburg ( 198 1) Spierenburg, Pieter. Efitrs urui Etiqtiette: Me~jtaMyund Srniai Structures tri the Early Mdem NetheriandS. Rotterdam: Erasmus Universiteit Centmm voor Maatschappqgeschiedenis (vol. 9), 1 98 1 Starhg (1965) Staring, A. "Een raadselachitige Kamerbeschddering," BtifIetin van het R@srnusetim 1 (1965), 3-13,35-36. Stechow ( 1966) Stechow, Wolfgang. Dtrtch chthcape Pahting in the Syventeenth Cerrttiry Oxford; Phaidon Press, 1966. Van Strien ( 1989) Strien, Cornelis Daniel van. British Tawlferin Holfm~dduring the Stuart Periad. miss. 1989) Vrije Universiteit van Amsterdam. Van Suchtelen ( 1993) Suchtelen, Ariane van. "Ham Bol. Een van de eerste schilders van het HoIlandse aadsgezicht." Antiek 5 (ûec. 1993), 220-227. Sutton ( 1984) Sutt on, Pe ter C . Masers of Seventeeti th-Cttnhrry Uutch GmePainting, Philadelphia: Philadelphia Museum of Art, 1984. Sutton ( 1980) Sutton, Peter C. Pieter de l%wch. Mord: Phaidon Press, 1980. Tait ( 1968) Rubens, P .P. Palai antichi di Genova Pulazzi modemi di Genou. (Antwerp, 1622). Introduction by Alan A. Tait. London: Benjamin Blorn, 1968. Ter Kuile (1 969) Ter Kuile, Omo. 'Daniel Mytens." Nederfmzds K~mthisto~schJaarboek 20 (1969), 1-107. Thierne-Becker Thieme, Ulrich and Felix Becker. Ailgemrines Lexikort der bifde~tdenKÜ~l~tkr vori der Antik bis rrrr Gegenwart . Leipzig, 1907- 195 0. Van Buren Hagopian ( 1985) Van Buren Hagopian, Anne. 'Un jardin d'amour de Philippe le Bon au parc de Hesdin. Le role de Van Eyck dans une commande ducale." Revue cl« Louvre et des h111siesde France 3 SI 2 ( 198S), 2 1 9-242. Vernet, "Hendrik Aens" (1 995) Vernet, Bernard. 'Wendrik Aerts." Gentse Bijckagen rot de K~~mtgt!schiede~tis en Oudhei&mde 30 (1995), 107-1 18. Vmet "Direk van Delen"( 199 5) Vermet, Bernard. 'Tableaux de Dircic van Delen (v. 1604- 1605-167 1 ) dans les Musées Français." Rew di De Vries ( 1992) Vries, Lyckle de. 'Rotterdam Saenredam and seventeenth century architectural painting." Review of Rotterdam exhibition. Burlington Maga=ii,ie 134 ( 1 992), 5 1-54. Walpole ( 1762) Walpole, Horace. Anecdotes of Painting NI Eng!und Wtth some Accotmt of the principle Artistx mrd incidentuf Notes on other Arts: Collected by rhz hte Mr George F'emre. Vol. II. Strawberry W, 1762. Van der Wijck (1 972) Wijck, H.W.M.van der. "Countiy Houses in the Northern Netherlands. The way of life of a Calvinistic partriciate," Apoh 96 (1972), 406-4 15. Wheelock ( 1977) Wheelock, Arthur K. Ir. Perspective. Optics, und Delfi A rtists urmmd 1650 New York: Garland Publishing, 1977. Van Winter ( 1957) Winter, P.J.van. 'De HoIlandse Tuin," Ne Jerlm& K11r1sthisfortschJaarbork 8 (1957), 29-121. Wright (1989) Wright. Christopher. Dtîfch Painting in the / 7th Cerzn~ty.lmuges of a GolJer Age iti British Collections. London: Lund Humphries, 1989 wnght ( 1978) Wright, Chriaopher. Drrtch Pointers. 100 Seventrerrth Ccinnîry hfastt!rs London: Orbis Publishing, 1978. Zurnthor ( 1962) Zumthor, Paul. Dai& LIfe iir Rernbrcmdi's HoIIand. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1962. EXHIBITION CATALOGUES Amsterdam ( 1976) Tùt Leririg en Vermaak Betekenisen vm Holimi&e genrewrsteiiingen uit de zeventiende eernv. E. de Jongh, Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum), 1976. Amsterdam (1 986) De smdvan de élite. Amsterdam in de eetw van de beeldertstom. Amsterdam (Amsterdam Histonsch Museum), 1986. Amsterdam ( 1989) Het ktmtbe&ld var1 de fmilie YNgboom. Schliders, architecten en kaarîntakers in de Goucien Eeuw. Amsterdam (Konlliküjk Paleis te Amsterdam), 1989. Amsterdam ( 1993) Dawn of the Golden Agr: Northern Nether fmdish art, 1580- 1620. Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum), 1 993. Amsterdam ( 1995) Jacob wn Campen. Het kfwieke ideml in de Gden&W. Amsterdam (Koninklijk Paleis te Amsterdam), 1995. Amsterdam ( 1997) Mirror of Everydoy Lije. Genre prints in the Netherld, I55Q 1700. Eddy de Jongh and Ger Luijten, eds. Amsterdam (Rijksprentenkabinet), 1997. Apeldoorn ( 1988) 'The Anglo-Dutch Garden in the Age of Wiliiarn and Mary/De Gouden Eeuw van de Hollandse Tuinkunst," Jarnaf ofthe History of Gardening 8,2&3 ( 1988), 1-34 1. John Dixon Hunt and Erik de Jong, eds. Amsterdam (Museum Paleis Het Loo), 1988. Haarlem ( 1996) Aarhe Paradijzen 1. De ruin in de Nederlmhe K1112st, 15de for I8de eetw. Erik de Jong and Marieen Dominicus-van Soest. eds. Haarlem (Frans Halsmuseurn), 1996. Leeuwarden ( 1979) ffansVredeman de Vries (f526ca.1606). Bueken met Ornument- eu Perspctiefprenten. Leeuwarden (Museum het Princessehof), 1979 London ( 1995) 0y.asties: Painting in Tudor m>d Jacobem England 1530-1630. Karen Heam, ed. London (Tate Gallery), 1995. Northampton (1 956) McCormick, Thomas J. Ir. and ROMO. Parks, Abraham Boisse: An EXhibitiori of the Smith Cdege Museum of Art, Feb 29-Mar 23, 1956 (Northampton, Mass.: Smith CoUege, 1956). Paris (1987) Tableauflamands et holldisL Musée des Beaux-Arts de Quimper. Paris (Institut Néerlandais), 1987. Rotterdam ( 1 99 1 ) Perspectiven: Pieter Saewedmn en de wchitectuur-schilders van de 17de eetw Rotterdam (Museum Boijmans-van Beuningen), 1 99 1. Venice ( 1 994) 7ne Renaisumce from Bnmeifeschi to Michelmgelo. ne Representation of Architecture. Henry A. M.onand Vittorio Magnago Lampugnani, eds. Venice (Palaao Grassi). 1 994. Wadum ( 1996) Jorgen Wadum. 'Vermeer and spatial illusion" in ex-cat. iIre Scholarb World of Vermeer. The Hague (Museum van het BoeWMuswm Meexmanno- West reenianum), 1996.