sign in sign up
<<
Home , Altarpiece, Count of Artois, Duchy of Burgundy, Elisabeth Dhanens, Fountain of Life, Ghent Altarpiece

UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI

Date March 6, 2008

I, Thomas Haders hereby submit this work as part of the degree requirement for the degree of:

Master of Arts in:

Art History

It is entitled:

Hapsburg-Burgundian Iconographic Programs and the Arthurian Political Model: The Expression of Moral Authority as a Source of Power

This work and its defense approved by:

Chair: Diane C. Mankin, Ph.D. Lloyd C. Engelbrecht . Teresa Pac .

Hapsburg-Burgundian Iconographic Programs and the Arthurian Political Model: The Expression of Moral Authority as a Source of Power

A thesis submitted to the

Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

in the Department of of the School of Art of the College of Design, Architecture, Art and Planning

2008

By Thomas M. Haders B.A., University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 1990

Committee Chair: Dr. Diane Mankin

Abstract

This study will examine the art made for a select group of fifteenth-century European monarchs; all were Burgundian or had strong connections to . The art was intended to illustrate the concept of Vicarus Dei in order to validate their rule. The hereditary monarchies addressed in this thesis based their royal authority upon the concept that ordained a king or even a to rule in the terrestrial realm as God’s representative, and this celestial authority was passed on to their progeny. The earthly ruler, therefore, emphasized this divine ordination in various symbolic ways in the arts. In order to further justify, establish, and legitimize the existence and reign of royal , sacred bloodlines were traced back to biblical and mythological sources. For this reason, the male ruler was often depicted in the guise of a legendary warrior or a warrior . Part of the mythology is that such a ruler cannot really die. He is akin to King Arthur, who according to Sir Thomas Mallory’s Morte d’Arthur, was taken to a mystical realm from which he may one day return. This thesis also explores the of mainly Burgundian royal brides, which emphasized characteristics and roles considered gender appropriate in the fifteenth century. Essential to the heavenly designed political system was the establishment of the female consort as a sacred vessel for bearing the awaited messianic male heir who was to continue the holy .

iii iv

Table of Contents

Abstract iii

Table of Contents v

List of Illustrations vi

Introduction 1

Chapter One The Marriage of Philip the Good and Isabelle of Portugal 8

Chapter Two The Last Valois Duke, His Consort, and Heir 43

Chapter Three The Marriage of Arthur of and Katherine of Aragon: 77 The Rise of the Triumvirate

Chapter Four The Lily and the Eagle: The Apotheosis of the Last 118 World Emperor

Conclusion 153

Bibliography 159

v List of Illustrations

Chapter One

Figure 1.1 , open. St. Bavo’s, Ghent, 1432.

Figure 1.2 , closed. St. Bavo’s, Ghent, 1432.

Figure 1.3a Hubert and , detail of , detail. St. Bavo’s, Ghent, 1432.

Figure 1.3b Hubert and Jan Van Eyck, The Just Judges, lower panel of Ghent Altarpiece, St. Bavo’s, Ghent, 1432

Figure 1.2 John Palaeologus VIII, Byzantine Emperor, medal by Pisanello

Figure 1.3 Hereford Mappa Mundi, Hereford

Figure 1.4 Jan Van Eyck, Three Marys at the Tomb, ca. 1426, Museum Van Boijmans Beuningen.

Figure 1.5 Collar of the Order of the Golden Fleece.

Figure 1.6. Flag of Constantinople, ca. 1426.

Figure 1.7. Dove-shaped Eucharistic Vessel,

Figure 1.8 Dove-shaped Eucharistic Vessel Laguenne; Reconstruction Drawing (E Rupin ).of The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.

Figure 1.9 Exterior of the Ghent Altarpiece.

Figure 1.10 Petrus Christus (copy), , Prado, .

Figure 1.11 Isabelle of Portugal, unknown location.

Figure 1.12 Double Portrait of Philip the Good and Isabelle of Isabelle of Portugal, Museum voor Schone Kunsten, Ghent.

Figure 14.1 Portrait of a Young Man (Tymotheos), 1432, Oil on wood, 34, 5 x 19 cm ,

Figure 1.15, Jan Van Eyck, detail Ghent Altarpiece, 1432, St. Bavo’s, Ghent, Cumaean Sybil

Figure 1.16 Jan Van Eyck, detail Ghent Altarpiece, 1432, St. Bavo’s Ghent Erythraean Sybil

Figure 1.17 The , Jan van Eyck, c 1434. Oil on panel, 91 x 40 cm

vi National Gallery of Art, Washington, DC.

Fig 1.18 Bladelin (left wing) , 1445-50, Oil on oak, Staatliche Museum,

Figure 1.19 Habsbourg Master, Fragment of an Altarpiece showing Frederick II as a Magus. , Oesterreichishe Galerie

Figure 1.20 Isabelle of Portugal, Follower of , J. Paul Getty Museum, Malibu.

Figure 1.21, Bladelin Triptych (central panel), 1445-50, Oil on oak panel, 91 x 89 cm Staatliche Museum, Berlin

Chapter Two

Figure 2.1 Vial of the Holy Blood, ca. 1200, Basilica of the Holy Blood, .

Figure 2.2a Philip the Good Watches the of Clovis,

Figure 2.2b Juana of Castile in the Guise of Esther from Les Grandes Chroniques de , Fifteenth century. Bibliotheque National, Paris.

Figure 2.3 Anonymous master. as Vicar of Christ, in Ordinance Book of Charles the Bold, Montpellier, Biblioteche Municipale.

Figure 2.4 of Charles the Bold, Gerard Loyet, 1467 Gold and enamel, 53 x 17.5 x 34 cm; Liege, Treasury of St Paul’s cathedral (?)/Saint Lambert et Notre Dame (?)

Figure 2.5 Master of Girart de Roussìlon, Performing the Seven Acts of Mercy, in Nicolas Finet, Benoit Seront les Misericordieux, , Biblioteque Royal MS. 9296, fol. 1

Figure 2.6 Master of Girart de Roussìlon, Margaret of York Kneeling before the of St. Gudule, in Nicolas Finet, Benoit Seront les Miserìcordieux, Brussels, Biblioteque Royal MS. 9296, fol. 17.

Figure 2.7 Master of Margaret of York, Margaret of York and Charles the Bold Watch the Vision of St. Colette, in Pierre de Vaux vie de St. Colette , Ghent Convent of the Poor Claires, Ms. 8, fol. 40v

vii

Figure 2.8 Image of Margaret of York and the risen Christ, Nicolas Finet, Dialogue de la duchesse de Bourgogne à Jésus Christ. Made for Margaret of York, Duchess of Burgundy, Follower of the Girart Master, Brussels, shortly after 1468, 200 x 1 40 mm, Add. MS 7970, ff. 1v-2

Figure 2.9 Follower of Van Der Weyden, Deposition, ca. 1485, Netherlandish, about 1490

Figure 2.10 Baldwin II, Arnulf I, Baldwin III and Arnulf II, Counts of , with their Wives, Flemish, 1480, Groot Seminary, Bruges

Figure 2.11 Louis de Male’s Funeral Monument at , Engraving in A. L. Millin, Antiquites Nationales, 1797/98.

Figure 2.12 Tomb of Philip the Bold, Musee Beaux Arts. .

Figure 2.13 Tomb of Philip de Pot, Paris, .

Figure 2.14 Tomb of , Lineage of Philip of Burgundy

Figure 2.15 Israel van Meckenem, engraving of Tree of Jesse

Chapter Three

Figure 3.1 Portrait of King Richard II, gilt and tempera on wood panel, Abbey, ca. 1390.

Figure 3.2 Otto III from the Gospels of Otto. 997-1000, Vellum, Bayerische 1000, Vellum, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich.

Figure 3.3 Column of Constantine, 330 A.D., in its original form. Istanbul, Turkey.

Figure 3.4 Regentsburg, Henry II crowned by Christ, from the Sacramentary of Henry II, from Bamberg, Clm. 4456, folio 11. 1002/14. Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek.

Figure 3.5 Jan van Eyck, Ghent Altarpiece (1432), central panel God Almighty enthroned, St. Bavon’s Cathedral, Ghent.

Figure 3.6 Anthony van Wyngaerde, sketch of , 1555,

viii Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.

Figure 3.7 . The Mystic Marriage of St. Catherine. (Central panel of the St. John ). 1474-1479. Oil on wood.

Figure 3.8 Hans Burgkmair, , Cosmic Wheel, Illustration for .

Figure 3.9 Unknown artist (possibly Michael Sittow?), King Henry VII National Portrait Gallery, London; oil on panel, arched top, 1505 16 3/4 in. x 12 in. (425 mm x 305 mm)

Figure 3.9a detail of Henry VI, by Michel Sittow.

Figure 3.10 Michiel. Sittow, Katherine of Aragon, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, ca. 1505.

Figure 3.11 Sittow Assumption of the , Oil on panel, ca. 1505, National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.

Figure 3.12 Michiel Sittow, De Guevara , oil on panel, left, Gemäldegalerie, Berlin; right, National Gallery of Art, Washington, ca. 1515.

Figure 3.13 Michiel Sittow, Katherine of Aragon as Mary Magdalen, Detroit Institute of Art, ca.1515.

Figure 3.14 , Margaret of as , oil on panel, Bayer, Staatsgemaldecsammlungen, Munich .

Chapter Four

Figure 4.1 , Maximilian I, Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum.

Figure 4.2 Workshop of Joos van Cleve, Maximilian I, Brussels Musees des Beaux-Arts de Belgique

. Fig 4.3 Statute Book of the Order of the Golden Fleece, ca. 1519, Maximilian I, Vienna, Osterreische Nationalbibliothe

ix Figure 4.4 Albrecht Dürer, Portrait of Emperor Maximilian I, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna. . Figure 4.5 Albrecht Dürer, Portrait of Emperor Maximilian I, Boston Museum of Fine Arts, Harvey D. Parker Collection.

Figure 4.6 The Great Triumphal Arch of Maximilian I, National Gallery of Art, Washington D.C. (on loan from the Centenary College of Shreveport, Louisiana).

Figure 4.7. The betrothal of Maximilian I to Mary of Burgundy, from The Great Triumphal Arch.

Figure 4.8. The betrothal of Philip the Fair to , from The Great Triumphal Arch.

Figure 4.9 Giotto, Vision of the Fire Chariot, 1295-1300. Fresco. Church of St. Francis, Upper Church, Assisi, .

Figure 4.10 Arch of Constantine, Triumphal Chariot, Rome, 315 A.D.

Figure 4.11a Albrecht Dürer, The Burgundian Marriage Cart, originally conceived as part of The Great Triumphal Arch (detail of left side of print).

Figure 4.11b The Burgundian Marriage Cart (Detail of right side of print).

Figure 4.11c Albrecht Dürer, The

Figure 4.12 Albrecht Dürer, Adoration of the Altarpiece, 1511. Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna.

Figure 4.13 Albrecht Dürer and workshop, Triumphal Arch, det. Frankfurt am Main, Städelsches Kunstinstitut und Städtische Galerie

Figure 4.14 Albrecht Dürer and others, Portrait of Frederick III, detail from The Great Triumphal Arch of Maximilian I

Figure 4.15 Albrecht Dürer, Portrait of , preliminary sketch, c. 1512, Germanisches Nationalmuseum ,

Figure 4.16 Albrecht Dürer, Emperor Charlemagne and Emperor Sigismund. 1513. Oil and tempera on panel. Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg, .

Figure 4.17a Plan of the Hofkirche at Innsbruck, Austria

Figure 4.17b Tomb of Maximilian I (29 on the plan), Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria.

x

Figure 4.18 Gregor Loffer, King Clovis, 1550.

Figure 4.19 Peter Vischer, Theodoric of the , 1513. Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria.

Figure 4.20 Peter Vischer (designed by Albrecht Dürer), King Arthur, 1513 Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria. . Figure 4.21 Gottfried of , Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria.

Figure 4.22 , Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria . Figure 4.23 Emperor Hadrian, Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria.

Figure 4.24 Frederick III, Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria

Figure 4.25 Philip the Fair, Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria

Figure 4.28 Maximilian I, Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria

Figure 4.29 Alexander Colin or Bernard and Arnold Abel, Marriage of Maximilian I and Mary of Burgundy, Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria.

Figure 4.30 Leonhard Schaufelein, The Marriage of Maximilian I and Mary of Burgundy, from Der Weisskunig, c. 1571, woodcut

xi

Introduction

1

This study will examine the art made for a select group of fifteenth-century European monarchs; all were Burgundian or had strong connections to Burgundy. The art was intended to illustrate the concept of Vicarus Dei in order to validate their rule. The hereditary monarchies

addressed in this thesis based their royal authority upon the concept that God ordained a king or

even a duke to rule in the terrestrial realm as God’s representative, and this celestial authority

was passed on to their progeny. The earthly ruler, therefore, emphasized this divine ordination in various symbolic ways in the arts. In order to further justify, establish, and legitimize the existence and reign of royal dynasties, sacred bloodlines were traced back to biblical and

mythological sources. For this reason, the male ruler was often depicted in the guise of a

legendary warrior or a warrior saint. Part of the mythology is that such a ruler cannot really die.

He is akin to King Arthur, who according to Sir Thomas Mallory’s Morte d’Arthur, was taken to

a mystical realm from which he may one day return. This recalls the myths in which popular

leaders have been said to be sleeping, awaiting the day of their return. Such tales were told in

connection with Charlemagne (742-814), Frederick Barbarossa (1123-1190), and Frederick II

(1194-1250).1 Medieval and leaders used these popular myths, especially the

Arthurian romances, as models of royal authority. The Arthurian Model dictated that the ruler

must be exalted because of his sacred station, and thus he kept order by controlling his vassals

through a divinely ordained hierarchy.2 In return, the vassal could expect rewards and recognition.

1 Peter G. Bietenholz, Historia and Fabula: Myths and Legends in Historical Thought From Antiquity to the Modern Age, (Leiden: Brill, 1994), 141-144. 2 Gerhilde S. Williams, “The Arthurian Model in the Emperor Maximilian’s Autobiographic Writings Weisskunig and Theuerdank,” Sixteenth Century Journal, Vol. 11, No. 4 (Winter, 1980), pp. 3-22.

2 The of Burgundy owes its origins to the events of the Hundred Years War between

France and . It was awarded to the young Philip the Bold for his bravery at the Battle of

Poitiers by his father, John II of France. It was here also that he earned his sobriquet: “the Bold.”

Philip’s son, John, won his nickname also during battle. fought at the Battle of

Nicopolis, an ill-fated crusade led by the Holy Sigismund. This study actually

begins with the reign of John the Fearless’ son, Philip the Good and continues into the reign of

the last duke, Charles the Bold. His heir is Mary of Burgundy, who marries Maximilian of

Austria. Following are brief explanations of some literature, tales, events, and beliefs that

influenced and inspired the art associated with the Burgundian court and its allies.

This thesis also explores the iconography of mainly Burgundian royal brides, which emphasized characteristics and roles considered gender appropriate in the fifteenth century.

Essential to the heavenly designed political system was the establishment of the female consort as a sacred vessel for bearing the awaited messianic male heir who was to continue the holy dynasty. In art, she was often depicted in the guise of the Blessed Virgin Mary or other who were models of purity, humility, and reverence. These saints were often associated with divine revelation, such as St. Catherine of and Mary Magdalene. These qualities of saintly foresight often paralleled the and sibylline predictions of the coming of Christ the

Messiah. The betrothal and marriage traditions and ceremonies were symbolically very important, and lasted for days, involving a plethora of performance and visual arts, and were superlatively and extravagantly elaborate. The bloodlines of the queens and duchesses in this study were also necessarily holy in order to be worthy consorts. Their male relatives used similar associations with holy male , saints, and heroes in their own dynastic symbolism. Al of these rulers have common ancestors, many being descendants of John of

3 Gaunt. Others, such as the French royal house were related to the British through Eleanor of

Aquitaine and . The were related to the French via their

common ancestor, King John II of France. The Hapsburgs were related to the Burgundians by

Frederick III who married the niece of Isabelle of Portugal, Eleanora of Portugal.

As mentioned earlier, the Grail Romances were extremely popular during the Middle

Ages and the Renaissance as major sources for ceremony and imagery that legitimized one’s rule

through establishing strong connections with a beloved ancient ruler. The library of Philip the

Good held a large number of books containing these legends. Historically, the chronicler

Nennius (ca. 800) is the first to mention King Arthur by name. Other writers, such as Chrétien de

Troyes,3 , and Robert de Boron wrote later accounts of the legendary king. Of the texts most mentioned in this study are Geoffrey of Monmouth’s4, History of British

Kings, and Sir ’s Morte d’Arthur. Geoffrey’s edition puts forth the Arthurian legends as a whole history connected to a British past, as well as future. Mallory’s work is particularly relevant since it was composed and printed during the same time period as the events discussed in much of this study.

A number of prophecies were widely circulated during the period examined in this thesis.5 The theo-political outlook of the and Renaissance relied upon a number of

political conceits and prophecies. The status of the ruler was held to be virtually on equal ground

with Apollo and Christ and the ruler might be depicted in those guises. In addition, as part of the

revival of ancient classical art and literature in the and Renaissance, certain

3 Ffiona Swabey, Eleanor of Aquitaine, Courtly Love, and the Troubadours, (London: Greenwood Press, 2004), 71-77. 4Rodney Castleden, King Arthur: The Truth Behind the Legend, (New York: Routledge, 2000), 31. 5Marie Tanner, The Last Descendant of Aeneas: The Hapsburgs and the Mythic Image of the Emperor, (New Haven: Yale University Press), 119-130. D. Kurze, Prophecy and History Lichtenberger’s Forecasts on the Events to Come (From the Fifteenth to the Twentieth Century); Their Reception and Diffusion, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes> Vol. 21, no. ½, (Jan., 1958), pp. 63-87. Also Marjorie Reeves, The Influence of Prophecy in the Later Middle Ages; A Study in Joachimism, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969), 320-360.

4 ancient Greeks and Romans were increasingly important and respected. Even though they were not biblical; their humanistic virtues superseded their non-Christian status. The Fourth Eclogue of Virgil was an important tract because it implied the coming of a messianic leader and a

Golden Age of Peace. The poet Virgil was seen as a great pagan writer who nevertheless heralded the Christian era. The Emperor Augustus was viewed in a similar light. In Jacobus of

Voragine’s Golden Legend, he received the privilege of revelation through the Tiburtine Sibyl’s vision of the birth of Christ.

Fifteenth century interpretations of the Book of Revelations inspired visions of the impending . Such visions were often the inspiration for against evil forces.

The battle against the Antichrist would require soldiers who were honorable and chivalric.

Special orders of were initiated to fulfill this need. The two orders mentioned in this study are those of the Garter, and of the Golden Fleece. The former was initiated by King

Edward III of England in around 1438. Its motto Honi soit qui mal y pense (“Shame to the person who thinks evil of it”) is based upon what King Edward said to defend the honor of his future daughter-in-law, Joan of Kent, when her garter slipped from her leg while she was dancing. The Order of the Golden Fleece was created in 1430 by Duke Philip the Good of

Burgundy in honor of his marriage to Isabelle of Portugal. Its motto is: “Autre n’auray.” (“I will

have no other”). This was a reference to his new bride. The purpose of all knightly orders was to

protect the Church and to repel the advance of the enemies of the faith. The Muslim and Turks

encroaching upon the European borders fit this description quite well. Philip the Good’s life goal

was to mount a crusade to defend Constantinople, and as we will see, it inspired much of his

imagery.

5 This study begins with an examination of the reign of Philip the Good and Duchess

Isabelle of Portugal. The artworks discussed were intended to promote the concept of the

Arthurian-Messianic ruler and his Sacred Consort, whose duty was to perpetuate the dynasty.

The next chapter examines the reign of their son, Charles the Bold and his scheme to become king. Important to this section will be the concept of the Holy Warrior Duke and his Devoted

Consort, Margaret of York. A significant issue to be reconciled is the death of the duke, and what that will entail for his intended heir, Mary of Burgundy, who married into the Hapsburg dynasty of Austria. The third chapter explores the ideas of the messianic ruler and his virgin consort in the persons of Prince Arthur of Wales and Princess Katherine of Aragon. The alliance this marriage had brought about was crucial to the goals of Hapsburg-Burgundy and much of .

The early death of this British prince will bring near disaster to these goals. The final chapter of this study examines the goals of the Hapsburg Emperor-Elect, Maximilian I. His marriage to the

Burgundian bride, Mary of Burgundy, remained an integral part of his iconographic program because of his political goals. Finally, his monumental cenotaph in Austria will be discussed as an extravagant way to unite all the conceits typical of a Renaissance ruler.

Through this study my goal is to show that the rulers examined used literature, dramatic productions, and visual arts to validate their reign by casting themselves in the image of God’s representative. Their wives similarly cast themselves in the image of the carrier of the future dynastic messianic-ruler. Hence, she was a second Virgin Mary. The fate of Europe, it was implied, was dependent upon the perpetuation of these sacred dynasties. It is my intent to show that this was a prevalent political strategy used by all the rulers examined. Such a strategy is still used in our own day, but it is less overt. It may be seen when political candidates cast themselves as the “New Hope” or as the “One Who Will Stay the Course.” All have, perhaps unwittingly,

6 cast themselves in the role of the New Apollo ready to drive the star chariot across the heaven, thereby giving light to the world, relieving it from utter darkness

7

Chapter One

The Marriage of Philip the Good and Isabelle of Portugal

8 In this chapter I examine a number of artworks created during the reign of Philip the

Good (1396-1467). Each will be discussed in terms of historical backdrop and in terms of

iconography. In the contemporary idea of the messianic ruler, the Burgundian duke assumed that role, and the duchess was cast as the bearer of messianic heirs. In this way they fulfill the ideal set forth in the Arthurian political model of divinely appointed governance, which places the ruler in the position of one who must be exalted by those whom he rules.6 According to the

author Gordon Kipling it is likely that Thomas Malory did much of his research for his Morte d’

Arthur at the Burgundian library established by Philip the Good. Both Philip and his son, Charles

the Bold styled themselves and their courts after this legendary king.7 He was the symbol of the

undying vicar of God.

A sacred leader required a similarly sacred consort. She must, like her husband, have a

mystical aura, portraying herself as both saintly and mortal. Philip the Good’s female

counterpart, Isabelle of Portugal (1397-1471), practiced the Burgundian model of ducal

leadership. It was her duty to put in motion the forces of heaven by carrying the next generation

of Arthurian-messianic rule. It is to her messianic son that the title of would

one day fall, and he would become Grandmaster of the Illustrious Order of the Golden Fleece.

Thus the consort is seen as a second Blessed Virgin Mary because within her body this blessed

child receives nurture and shelter. Moreover, her importance is announced by works of art in

which she is depicted in the guise of sacred persons associated with the gift of Divine Revelation

and spiritual contemplation.

6 Gerhild S. Williams, “The Arthurian Model in Maximilian’s Autobiographic Writings, Weisskunig and Theuerdank, “Sixteenth Century Journal, XI, no. 4, (1980), 3-22. 7 According to Kipling, (p. 14-15, n. 12) the records of the Bruges library of Philip the Good show that it contained all of the resources used by Malory in the creation of his manuscript except for Brute du . He also notes that Charles the Bold enjoyed having these Arthurian works read to him.

9 Penny Howell Jolly believes that parts of the program of Jan and ’s

Ghent Altarpiece (Fig. 1.1, Fig.1.2, Fig.1.3a, and 1.3b)8 was intended as an apology and a way of

doing homage to Philip as the sacred ruler whom the town had disobeyed.9 Early in 1432 the city

of Ghent had revolted as a result of Philip’s intention to revise the coinage. The duchess was sent

there to represent Philip’s position. Isabelle’s presence, as well as her diplomatic skills calmed

the situation.10 It is also likely that the city felt pity on the duchess who recently lost a son. At the

same time, they were privileged to be the city in which her new son, Josse, would be

christened.11 Jolly notes that the baptism of the ducal child at the main church of Ghent, St.

Bavon’s, on the day of the dedication of the altarpiece was not a coincidence. Furthermore, she

speculates that the name chosen for the child is a form of the name Joos (Josse), in honor of the

donor of the altarpiece, Joos Vijd.12 The officiating clergy was Cardinal (1375-

1447), Cardinal of Winchester and half- to King Henry IV of England. It is likely that he

was called upon since he was related to the duchess, and being English, tied to the Arthurian

legends.13

Elisabeth Dhanens has a somewhat different view of the origin and purpose of the

altarpiece, which nevertheless, supports the idea of its creation in terms of the Arthurian political

model. She sees it as evidence of Joos’ filial loyalty to a father whose reputation had fallen into

disgrace after the death of Louis of Male and during the beginning of the reign of his son-in-law,

8 Penny Howell Jolly, More on the Van Eyck Question: Philip the Good, Isabelle of Portugal, and the Ghent Altarpiece, “Oud Holland”, v. 101, no. 4, 1987, 246. 9 Ibid. 10 Aline S. Taylor, Isabel of Burgundy: The Duchess Who Played Politics in the Age of , New York, Madison Books, 2001, 52-65. 11 ibid, 245. Also see, Iaocobellis, Lisa Ann Daugherty, The Portraits of Isabelle of Portugal, (Thesis, Columbus: Ohio State University, 1981), 19. Elizabeth Dhanens, Van Eyck: The Ghent Altarpiece, (New York, Viking Press, Inc., 1973, 114). 12 Elizabeth Dhanens, 37-38. 13Ibid. The Cardinal was the second son of and Katherine Swynford, which made him half- brother of Isabelle’s mother, .

10 Philip the Bold of Burgundy. His father, Nikolas Vijd had been Lord of the Castle for Louis of

Male since 1355. In 1390, under the rule of Philip the Bold, he was found guilty of mismanagement. Dhanens therefore sees the altarpiece as a sort of redemption for his father’s transgressions. Her view complements Jolly’s research. Each author describes an event in which

Joos Vijd felt compelled to make amends to the . Thus, each describes the reciprocal nature of the expectations between the Arthurian leader and his noble servant. Wealth and nobility must pay homage to the ruler in order to preserve their station and well-being. The sense of homage is likely the reason for the inclusion upon the altarpiece images of the first three

Burgundian of Valois. Furthermore, references to the New , crusading, and the divine right of kings within the altarpiece are Arthurian in nature.

The idea of crusading had long been an important interest for the . On

September 25, 1396, John of Nevers (later made duke John the Fearless of Burgundy) had fought and been captured at the (held by the Turks), often referred to as the Last

Crusade. The battle was joined by many of the princes of Europe as an attempt to return the Holy

Lands to the Christians, as well as to keep the Turks from encroaching farther into Europe. The

Crusaders suffered a horrible defeat although they had nearly as large an army as their Moslem enemy. After the battle, John was forced to witness the execution of thousands of captured crusaders, under the order of Sultan Bayezid I, in retaliation for the French destruction of the town of Rahovo. Since then he had adopted as the emblem of his livery badge the symbol of the steel and flint with the motto: “Ante feret quam flamma micet.” (“It strikes before the flame spurts further.”). Philip the Good would later change the form of the emblem, but keep its motto.

11 The Just Judges (figure 1.3 a & b), depicted upon the bottom inner left panel of the Ghent

Altarpiece are identified by a number of authors as the first three Burgundian dukes,14 who were also the Counts of Flanders, the title which devolved upon the first duke through his marriage to the daughter of Count Louis of Male. Carel Van Mander was the first to point this out in his Het schilderboek of 1604. However, he mistakenly said that the work was commissioned by Philip the Good. Also, Van Mander, Crow, and Cavacaselle thought that the rider closest to the picture plane is Hubert van Eyck, whereas the rider who looks outwards dressed in black, with his head cocked to the left, and is Jan van Eyck. 15 This is unlikely. The figure in black is actually none other than Duke Philip the Good, who began wearing the color after the murder of his father,

John the Fearless in 1419.16

A probable identification for the figure nearest in the panel is that of Margaret of Male’s husband, Philip the Bold. Behind him, and to his left is his son, John the Fearless. As previously stated, the third Burgundian duke peering out at the viewer, is a depiction of Philip the Good, for whom the work is unofficially dedicated.17 The bearded, profile figure in the foreground, between Philip the Bold and John the Fearless, is most likely the emperor of Constantinople,

14L. B. Philip, The Ghent Altapiece and the Art of Jan Van Eyck, (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1971), 184-178. Jeffery C. Smith, “’Venit nobis pacificius Dominus’: Philip the Good’s Triumphul Entry into Ghent”, Triumphal Celebrations and the Rituals of Statecraft, v. vi, part I, Munshower Papers in Art History from the Pennsylvania State University, 266. Also, see Smith, The Artistic Patronage of Philip the Good: (1419-1467), , Ann Arbor, 1979, 180. Smith notes that Carel Van Mander had suggested that “… Philip the Good, as , is portrayed among the Just Judges…”. Also see Max J. Friedlander, Early Netherlandish Paintings, (New York, 1967), v. I, 66, 68. Friedlander agrees that the three are the Valois dukes. Ludwig Baldass, Jan Van Eyck, (New York, 1952), does not agree with these identifications. Carra Ferguson O’Meara, “Isabelle of Portugal as the Virgin in Jan Van Eyck’s Washington Annunciation” (Gazette des Beaux-Arts, 1981). O’Meara agrees with these identifications as the Counts of Flanders, 100. 15 For a translation of Carel Van Mander’s Het schilderboek, see Dutch and Flemish Painters, Constan van der Wall, New York, 1936, 6-7. Van Mander also says that “this painting was commissioned by Philip of Charolais, 31st Count of Flanders… whose portrait on horseback appears there on the doors.” For more on this see, Art History and Its Methods, 51. See also, J. A. Crowe and G. B. Cavalcaselle, The Early Flemish Painters : Notices of Their Lives and Works, (Garland Publishing, Inc., New York, 1978), 55. 16 See Joseph Calmette, The Golden Age of Burgundy: The Magnificent Dukes and Their Courts, (New York, W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1963), 233. 17L.B. Brand agrees with this identification, 185-189, Friedlander believes this bearded figure is Louis of Male (pp. 27-28).

12 John Palaeologus VIII. This becomes obvious when compared with Pisanello’s medallion which

bears the emperor’s image (Fig 1.4). This identification was first proposed by Salomon

Reinach.18

During the period in which the Ghent Altarpiece was commissioned, 1426-1432, the

Emperor of Constantinople was seeking the help of European princes to drive the Turks from his

lands.19 had noted that Philip the Good was obsessed with the idea of a

crusade throughout his career. In spite of the massive losses incurred at Nicopolis, interest in

crusading against the burgeoning influx of Turks did not wane for the duke. In 1422 he sent

Ghillebert de Lannoy, a founding member of the Order of the Golden Fleece, to the region to

study the logistical possibility of launching a crusade.20 Further, Philip Lotte Brand posits the

idea that Duke Philip had also sent Jan Van Eyck to Jerusalem as part of an envoy in 1426. This

was the year that John VIII Palaeologus had succeeded his father, Manuel II, as emperor of

Constantinople. She explains that Jan would have served as the duke’s proxy on a pilgrimage to

the Holy Land, being more or less a prerequisite journey for an early Renaissance Christian

leader. Jan would also be able to make reconnaissance drawings of the area for a crusade.

Evidence for this possible scheme she found in the mention of a no longer extent Mappa Mundi ,

or world map, made by Jan for the duke.21 Such maps typically depicted Jerusalem as the world’s

center (Fig. 1.5). Further proof is found in a painting by Van Eyck of The Three Marys at the

Tomb (Fig. 1.6), now in Rotterdam, which, she notes, appears to have the topographical study of

Jerusalem as its background. L. B. Philip points out that the uncharacteristic flatness of the piece

18 Salomon Reinach, “Jean VI Paleologue et Hubert Van Eyck,” Revue Archeologique, XVI, 1910, 369-377. 19 Friedlander, 26-27. Philip, 185-186. 20 Jennifer Speake, Literature of Travel and Exploration: An Encyclopedia, New York, Fitzroy Dearborn, 2003, p.696. The result of this journey was the publication of his travel guide, Voyages et Ambassades. 21 L. B. Philip, 183.

13 may indicate that it was a work created by a pupil of Van Eyck, not capable of proper

.22

In 1432, the year that the Ghent Altarpiece was dedicated, Philip sent Bertrand de la

Brocquiere to the east to study and gather information for the express purpose of launching a

crusade. We know this beyond a doubt from his own words, which tell us that he compiled and

wrote his survey “…by the order and command of… Philip … duke of Burgundy…in order that

any prince should wish to make conquest of Jerusalem, and lead thither an army over land…”

The book contains a wealth of information detailing the route to the Holy land, as well as

numerous examples of the enmity between the Moslems and the Christians. In one example he

describes a scene in which these infidels began to stone an image of Christ, but stopped and fled when it began to shed blood.23 Brocquiere also described what he perceived as their murderous attitudes in relation to Europeans.24

The overall theme of the Just Judges panel is that of crusading, the quest, which was then

synonymous with the search of the San Greal or Holy Grail. The main purpose for these

proposed crusades was to return the places associated with Christ’s death, burial, and

resurrection to the hands of the European Christians, for whom they held mystical potency.

Philip the Good believed it was his God-given duty, like Arthur taking back Britain from the

Saxons, to return the Holy Land to the Lord’s own people. It was also his chivalric duty to defend the Emperor of Constantinople, Constantine’s New Rome. This quest may be the reason

for the choice of the form of the flint and steel (Fig. 1.7) he would use for the livery badge of the

Order of the Golden Fleece, which was evidentally derived from the Emperor’s own flag. The

22 Ibid, 184. 23 Early Travels in Palestine: Comprising the Narratives of Arculf, Thames Wright, editor, Henry G. Bohn, London, 1848, p. 283, 297, 318, 324. 24 Ibid, 283, 353.

14 emblem in each is in the form of a stylized letter ‘B’. This letter upon the Byzantine Emperor’s flag (Fig. 1.8) stood for his motto: “Basileus, Basileon, Basileuon, Basileuonton.” (“King of

Kings, Ruling over Rulers.”). For the Burgundian duke the shape of the “B” further stood for

“Burgundy.”

The most important section of the opened altarpiece is the lower central scene with the image of the Mystic Lamb. The Lamb, which stands upon an altar surrounded by angels, is symbolic of the of the Holy . In Roman Catholicism the bread of the Host undergoes the transformative process of transubstantiation, in which the bread and wine literally become the body and . Proof of this phenomenon was seen in relics such as the

Miraculous Bleeding Eucharist which was given to Philip the Good by Eugene IV in 1433, one year after the dedication of the altarpiece.25 On that same date the pope also gave official

approval of Philip's Knightly Order of the Golden Fleece. In the ritual of the sacrament in the

Middle Ages the act of sanctifying the host was made more visually dramatic by the mechanical descent of a dove containing the communion wafer. Although this tradition had died out by the early Renaissance, its importance may be seen in the fact that the Dove of the pictured upon the central exterior of the altarpiece is apparently derived from such mechanical examples. Here we see over the head of the Annunciate Virgin a painted example of what the original mechanical device must have looked like, hovering over the head of the consecrating priest. (Figs. 1.9, and 1.10). This was done by means of a pulley and a cord. L.B. Philip notes that the image of the Dove of the Holy Ghost upon the exterior panels of the altarpiece is a two- dimensional representation of this sacramental device( Fig. 1.11). 26

25L. B. Philip, 150. 26Ibid. , 69-70.

15 Such dramatic presentations were part and parcel to the culture and society of Medieval

Europe. For example, in 1458, four years after a bloody revolt in the town of Ghent had been

quelled by the duke’s forces, Philip decided to it with his “Joyuese Entry,” and thus open up the possibility of lifting the embargo he had placed upon it. The entry route consisted of

twenty stops. At each, actors dressed as historical and religious personages confronted the duke

to beg for his mercy upon his “lost lambs”, the people of Ghent. As the duke and his entourage

reached the tenth pageant at Poel, they were greeted by music. It came from an elaborate three-

tiered stage, from which a drapery lifted to reveal a gigantic staged, live-action

representation of the Ghent Altarpiece. Musicians performed from the top story of the stage,

which as in the painting, contained angels singing and playing musical instruments. In all, there

were over ninety actors representing all of the characters seen upon the open altarpiece, except

for Adam and . The central image was that of the Mystic Lamb, with blood flowing from a

wound upon its breast. A mechanical device caused a Dove of the Holy Ghost to descend upon

the Lamb, just as described by Philip in medieval blessings of the communion host. In front of

this scene was a twenty-five foot Fountain of Life, from which flowed wine for Philip’s

refreshment.27 This elaborate performance signified the duke’s status as God’s chosen leader. A

painting of the Fountain of Life, by Petrus Christus (ca. 1410-1472), may be a record of the event

(Fig. 1.12).

Nevertheless threats to Burgundy’s power and the validity of his divine right to rule were

continuous.28 After the death of King Charles VI of France (1368-1422), the crown devolved

upon his son, Charles VII. From early in the fifteenth century the Dukes of Burgundy sought to

limit the power of the French king and his court. In 1407 this took the form of the brutal

27 Gordon Kipling, Enter the King: Theatre, Liturgy, and Ritual in the Medieval Civic Triumph, Oxford, Clarendon Press, New York, 1998, 272-276.

16 assassination of the dauphin, Louis of Orleans (1372-1407), King Charles VI’s younger

brother.29 When the king died, Philip the Good was inclined to support British claims to the

French throne, in large part due to the retaliatory assassination of his father, John the Fearless, in

1419. Therefore, the duke had no problem accepting the English king’s claim to the French

throne by virtue of his descent from and Henry V’s marriage to Catherine

of Valois, daughter of Charles VI. Thus, their son, the English King Henry VI was an eligible

candidate. However, in 1429 Joan of Arc, also called the Maid of Orleans (her advent

purportedly predicted by Merlin), had put the French King Charles VII on the throne, claiming to

have been guided by saintly voices.30 Furthermore, she had accomplished this task while

wielding the sword of , the grandfather of Charlemagne. Charles VII’s coronation

took place on July 16, 1429 in the city of Reims. He was anointed with the oil from the sacred

ampoule said to have been provided by the angels for the baptism of Clovis.31 Until this point the

rule of France had been virtually in the hands of the British and the Burgundian duke. The coronation of the French king posed a potential question to the validity of the duke’s own divine

right to rule, so he took decisive action.

In 1429, Philip the Good had completed all of the formalities concerning his marriage to

Isabelle of Portugal.32 The earliest known portrait of Isabelle of Portugal is from this period, and

is the betrothal portrait painted by Jan van Eyck for Philip the Good. Now known only from a

29 Jan R. Veenstra, Magic and Divination at the Courts of Burgundy and France, New York, Brill, 1997, 43-44. Tyler, 42, 76, 163. Calmette, 78-80. 30 Aline Taylor, Isabella of Burgundy: The Duchess Who Played Politics in the Age of Joan of Arc, New York, Madison Books, 2001, 36. Also see, Regine Pernoud and Marie Veronique Clin, Joan of Arc: Her Story, New York, St. Martin’s Press, 1998, 16. 31 Ibid, Taylor, 23, 41. Pernoud and Clin, 63-65. Tanner, 91-92. Sergio Bertelli, The King’s Body, Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania State University, 2001, 25. 32 Philip, 56-7. Calmette, 170.

17 seventeenth century drawing (Fig. 1.13),33 the original was painted between January 13 and

February 12 of 1429, coinciding with the period that Jan, as emissary for Philip, had stayed at the

Portuguese court for the purpose of arranging the marriage contract.34 That this is the duchess may be derived from a double portrait of her and Duke Philip (Fig.1.14). Philip was obviously pleased by the image as can be seen from the wedding festivities which followed her arrival at

Sluis on Christmas day. The celebrations lasted a full two weeks during which time the wedding itself was performed on the 7th of January of 1430. This event was commemorated by the founding of the illustrious Burgundian knightly Order of the Golden Fleece on January 10,

1430.35 The coinciding of these two events demonstrates the conceptual linkage between the

Burgundian consort and the Arthurian model. The elaborate wedding festivities were derived from similar celebrations found in Arthurian romances, just as the number of knights that were initiated into the Order of the Golden Fleece was twenty-four, mirroring the seating available at the table at Winchester Castle (Fig. 1.15) in Winchester England, which at the time was purported to be Arthur’s Round Table. It was then also believed that Winchester was the site of ancient Camelot.36

33 Jolly, 243-244. Diane Wolfthal, The Beginnings of Netherlandish Canvas Painting: 1400-1530, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1989, 9-10. Friedlander, Early Netherlandish Painting, plate 61A shows a completely different painting, 66, 68. Baldass, 68, no. 3; 285, no. 57. Dhanens disagrees with this identification. Iacobellis agrees with this identification, 17-20. Smith, “Artistic Patronage,”182, concurs. Jolly says that the Erythraean Sibyl is Isabelle, but explains that the identifying plaques for the two sibyls depicted were switched at some unknown point in time, 249, no. 3. 34 See Vaughan for a translation of the letter sent by Philip’s ambassadors from Aviz. 35 Jules van Praet, Essays on the Political History of the Fifteenth, Sixteenth, and Seventeenth Centuries, London, R. Bentley, 48. 36Biddle, Martin, King Arthur’s Round Table: An Archaeological Investigation, ( New York, The Boydell Press, 2000), 493. The Round Table at Winchester actually has twenty- seating sections, but only twenty-four names are painted upon it. One of the other two sections are for the king, whose portrait is the likeness of King Henry VIII, who had it repainted for the arrival of Charles V in 1522, after losing the bid to become emperor. Thus, although Henry could not wear the imperial miter, he could claim direct ancestry to King Arthur, and through him to the Emperor Constantine. The other section without a name is for the Siege Perilous, for the who would find the Holy Grail. Only Galahad could sit in it without being destroyed. See Ronan Coghlan, The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Arthurian Legends, (Barnes & Noble, New York, 1993), 223. For other ostentation in the manner of King Arthur’s court, see Richard Vaughan, Philip the Good, 56-57. Also see, William Tyler, Dijon and the Valois Dukes

18 The drawn copy of the betrothal portrait of Isabelle (Fig. 1.13), which was discovered in

1921 by Louis Dimier37 depicts the painting as contained within drawn frame that is decorated

with the flint and steel emblems of the order of the Golden Fleece, as well as with the initials of

Philip the Good and Isabelle of Portugal. Although using initials in such a way is not exclusively

a trait of Burgundian betrothal portraits, it can be found in at least four images of persons

connected by marriage to the ducal court. In each case the use of the initials is meant to

symbolize the relationship of the sitter to the court, and that person’s mystical connection to a

saint whose character is shared by the sitter. As we will see in further chapters, Margaret of York

and Katherine of Aragon were depicted wearing initialed necklaces which identified the sitters,

and indicated their relationships to particular saints. The betrothal portrait of Isabelle fits both

descriptions as well. The work itself is lost and now known only from a photograph. Lisa Ann

Daugherty Iacobellis also noted an inscription around the frame which identified the sitter as

“dame ysabel fille de Roy Jehan de Portugal” and “espeuse dud it duc phe.” (Lady Isabelle

daughter of King John of Portugal) and (spouse of said Duke Phi[lip]).38

Iacobellis discusses the illusionistic painted window frame composed of a block of stone and two slender colonettes on either side which support a lintel carved with the inscription

“LINFANTE DAME ISABIEL,” (THE INFANT, DAME ISABELLE).39 She explains that this

inner identification was copied from the original. The original, according to the inventories of

her great-granddaughter, Margaret of Austria, described the portrait of the duchess as holding a

of Burgundy, Norman, University of Oakland Press, 1971, 97. Tyler notes that Philip had “dispatched fifteen loads of there [at Bruges] for this event.” 37 Louis Dimier, “Un portrait perdu de Jean van Eyck”, La Renaissance de l’ Art Francais, vol. 5, 1922, 542. 38 Iacobellis, 17-21. 39 Ibid. Ludwig Baldass disagrees that this image is the same one mentioned in the inventories of 1516 and 1525 of the possessions of her great-granddaughter, Margaret of Austria, She is described, in the original, as holding an image of St. Nicholas . Baldass does agree that the image described in the inventories was likely Isabelle of Portugal, noting that the saint’s image was appropriate for one making a voyage at sea and for marriageable women.

19 picture of St. Nicholas in her hand. This would be appropriate for the duchess who arrived on

Christmas day at Sluis, for the wedding which would soon follow.

It is my view that the illusionistic frame indicates the likelihood that the original, of which the drawing represents, did contain an object, the image of St. Nicholas in the sitter’s hand. It was common for portrait painters to add such details in order to create a greater illusion of spatial depth and realism. Jan used a similar composition device for the portrait of Tymotheos

(Fig. 1.16), in which the hands of the sitter project from an illusionistic frame and in his right hand he holds a scroll. This visual technique was obviously part of Jan Van Eyck’s visual repertoire, and would not be unusual in a portrait of the duchess as part of a betrothal rite.

The drawing of the lost betrothal portrait of Isabelle of Portugal (Fig. 1.13) becomes problematic from Elizabeth Dhanen’s point of view. She contends that the portrait cannot be accepted as a true example of the original work by Van Eyck because it was created over three centuries later, and in a different medium from the original. Whatever it is, it is a depiction of

Isabelle as described in Margaret of Austria’s inventories. Jeffery C. Smith does accept the drawing discovered by Dimier as a copy of an older work by Jan van Eyck and adds that “…Van

Eyck re-used the betrothal portrait of Isabelle,…which he had executed at the Castle of Aviz on

13 January 1429… for the image of the Sibyl on the Ghent Altarpiece ….”40

Many scholars agree that Isabelle of Portugal appears in Van Eyck’s Ghent Altarpiece

(1426-1432) as an active personage in the sacred drama which it depicts.41 Her countenance, derived from her betrothal portrait, is present in the image of the Cumaean Sibyl (Fig. 1.18) who holds the scroll which announces: “Rex A[ltimissimus] adve[n]iet p[er] sec[u]la future[us] sci

40 Smith, Artistic Patronage, 249, no. 3. Jolly calls this sibyl the Erythraean Sibyl, explaining that at some point the name plaques were switched. 41 Smith, Iacobellis, and Jolly

20 [licet] i[n] carn[e]” (“The most high king will come, certainly in the flesh”).42 The sibyl is

painted in tableau vivant form and as Isabelle, symbolically predicts the birth of her own son, as

she literally predicts that of the . By depicting Isabelle as the Cumaean Sibyl, van

Eyck has created an image which embraces the duchess’s saintly and mystical nature. Like Mary

Magdalen, she is also given the gift of revelation.43 It is she who prophesizes both the birth of

Christ and also that of the heir to the duchy, her own son. The purpose of the consort was to give

birth to the necessary messianic male heir.44 Although the ducal birth at the time of the altar’s dedication was Josse thematically the image speaks of such prophecies on a broader scale of divine birth. Thus, it may be seen as referencing all future births of the Burgundian heirs who were to inherit the dynasty, including Charles the Bold.

The image of Isabelle as a sibyl may be seen as a counter claim to Joan of Arc’s role in prophecy. Moreover, in this depiction, the duchess predicts both the coming of the Savior, as well as the divine heir of Burgundy, a concept, which in a complex manner evokes many of the ideas of messianic birth attributed to Classical Greek and Roman tales thematically relate to portentous births not unlike King Arthur’s. Jolly has noted that the Erithraean Sibyl’s (Fig. 1.17) banderole contains the message: “’ Nil mortale sona[n]s + afflata es numine celso’ (Nothing speaking as a human, you are inspired on high). This she explains is not a prophecy, but rather it is a reference to the diety Apollo. In the section of Virgil’s book IV of The Aeneid relevant to of the birth of Christ, the god has inhabited the sibyl’s writhing and entranced body in order to speak prophecy for Aeneas. She thus tells Aeneas with the above phrase that Apollo has taken control of her body to use as a medium. In this fourth book of The Aeneid the hero’s

42 Iacobellis, 21. Jolly, 240-243. 43 Ibid, 24. Jolly notes that “… not only is Isabelle in the guise of the Erythraean Sibyl, she is likened unto the Virgin herself because of her divinely preordained pregnancy.” Jolly also notes that “The complete prophecy originated in the well-known sibylline acrostic and appeared in Augustine’s City of God.” 44Jolly, 241-2, 246. See also, Ward, 211.

21 descent into the underworld is described. Among the things he discovers on this quest are that

souls are reborn, and that he will father descendants who will become great Roman emperors.

45Among these will be Julius Caesar and Augustus Caesar. These details would not have been

lost on Philip the Good, who was a fanatic for the histories of ancient Greece and Rome and

considered himself to be a descendant of Aeneas, as well as Caesar and Constantine.46

The scene between the Cumaean Sibyl and Aeneas occurred at the Temple of Apollo at

Delphi. This specific geographical location was, to the ancient world, a place of pilgrimage associated with great mystical power. In the Christian world of the early Renaissance, Jerusalem

was likewise viewed as the center, or Omphalos, of the world. It was the city where God had

chosen the , death, burial, and resurrection of his Son. Jerusalem was thought of as both a

physical location, as well as a place of apocalyptic significance, connected with predictions of

the end of the world. Into this universal conflict the heir of Flanders and Burgundy will be born.

Like the knighted figures upon the lower left side of the altarpiece, it will be this messianic heir who will assemble the Christian forces to recapture the Holy Land, both for his own and the glory of God. The newly born heir to Burgundy is also the new Aeneas, as well as the descendant of the emperors of Rome. The classical world and that of the early Renaissance are both seen as a continuation of the eternal struggle between the forces of good and evil. In the altarpiece, looking down upon the image of the apocalyptic Heavenly Jerusalem kneel the sibyls who foretell of the birth of the messianic hero. At once he is Christ, Aeneas, Arthur, and the

Burgundian heir.

Jolly further explains that the prophetic aspect of this sibyl’s quote is within the word

“afflata”. It specifically means “inspired”, but it also has the “connotation of being breathed

45 Virgil, The Aeneid, New York, Penguin Books, 1961, 121, 142. 46 Jolly, 241-242, 246. Also see Ward, 211.

22 upon.”47 It is associated with the divine guidance given to the writers of the Gospels and to the event in which Mary had conceived Christ through her ear. God’s word, the Logos, delivered to

Mary by the angel , impregnated her instantaneously. God’s word brought all things into being. Similarly, Isabelle as the Cumaean Sibyl is guided by the omnipotent power of heavenly voices, not unlike Joan of Arc. Furthermore, the Ghent sibyls have not only the gift of divine inspiration and foreknowledge, but in Isabelle’s case the ability to make the Word Flesh. John

Ward explains that by the Blessed Virgin Mary’s acceptance of the portent of the

Gabriel’s words, the Word immediately became Flesh, and conception was achieved.48 The

quotation from Virgil adds an Arthurian element because it suggests Aeneas’ supernatural quest

to the underworld to speak with the shade of his father, Anchises. Such a quest is depicted

among the Just Judges, who stand among the Blessed in the Heavenly Jerusalem, implying that

their crusade is approved from on high. Philip the Good and the Emperor John Palaeologus VIII

of Constantinople, depicted with the departed first Valois dukes of Burgundy , stand in the presence of the Heavenly multitude, under the watchful eye of , ready for the call to battle and the defense of his Church on earth. That is the Quest for the Holy Blood and the

Holy Grail. This propaganda from the hand of Philip’s was commissioned by

Jodocus Vijd, who indeed knew how to flatter the duke.

Further reference to the coming of the messianic heir to the duchy of Burgundy has been discussed in terms of another work by Jan van Eyck. A number of authors have analyzed the

Washington Annunciation (Fig. 1.19) and have commented upon its iconography. O’Meara and

Ward have noted that in the floor upon which the Virgin stands are tiles which depict the death of Abilmilech, the son of the biblical Gideon. This reference to Gideon symbolizes the mission

47 Ibid. 241-242, 250, no.13. Carra Ferguson O’Meara, “Isabelle of Portugal as the Virgin in Jan Van Eyck’s Washington Annunciation”, (Gazette des Beaux-Arts, 1981), 102. See also Ward, 109. 48 Laurie Schneider Adams, The Methodologies in Art: An Introduction, (Boulder: Westview Press 2002), 135.

23 of the Burgundian dukes to free the Holy Land, and to protect the Church.49 That it depicts

Gideon’s heir suggests the theme of dynastic ambition. Gideon was chosen as a Christian

alternative to the pagan Jason to retrieve the fleece.50 During the first chapter meeting of the

Order of the Golden Fleece, its chancellor, Jean Germain, suggested this change. It was his view that the Biblical Gideon, whose fleece brought him victory, as well as provided “the dew of heaven” was more appropriate for an order dedicated to the Blessed Virgin Mary. It was also held that Jason was unsuitable because he had misled Medea. 51 The fleece itself stands for the

Lamb of God. This reference had a particular importance for the duke and duchess because the

political arm which served the purposes noted above was that of the Knightly Order of the

Golden Fleece, initiated in honor of the marriage a few years earlier. Therefore, this detail

acknowledges the marriage, by its depiction of Gideon, the acceptable Christian religious variant

of Jason. As such, it serves to symbolize the marriage of Philip the Good and Isabelle of Portugal

by reference to the mythical character whose quest was the retrieval of the Golden Fleece, for which the Knightly Order of the Golden Fleece had been named as part of their wedding festivities

Marie Tanner discusses the symbol of Aries upon another tile in Jan Van Eyck’s

Annunciation. The image of this zodiac sign is not actually visible because the Annunciate Angel

stands upon it. However, Panofsky had noted its presence is indicated by the sequence of the

other zodialogical tiles in the painting.52 The sign of Aries stood for the astrological time of the

Annunciation. The symbol of Aries, the ram, was the adult version of a fleece bearing male

49 Vaughan, 162. 50 Ibid, 160-162. O’Meara, 102. Tyler, 111. Calmette, 229. 51 Marie Tanner, The Last Descendant of Aeneas: The Hapsburgs and the Mythic Image of the Emperor, London, Yale University Press, 1993, 151. John L. Ward, Hidden Symbolism in Jan Van Eyck’s , “Art Bulletin”, LVII, 1975, 204. 52 Panofsky, 275-278.

24 lamb. Hence it was a symbol for Christ. Therefore, it also represented the of the

Roman Empire. As will be discussed in detail below, Augustus was emperor during the era of

Christ’s birth, and was therefore considered to be a heroically preordained ruler.

During the foundation of Philip the Good’s order of the Golden Fleece, its chancellor,

Guilluame Fillastre, announced that the “…Golden Fleece signifies Christ, , sent to redeem the world.”53 According to O’Meara the church in which the Annunciation takes place is reminiscent of the church of Notre Dame in Dijon, which suggests an official, public, and ecclesiastical event” such as a christening. The ducal heir, Charles, was born on November

21, 1433 in Dijon and was baptized there. He was also initiated into the order of the Golden

Fleece at that time.54 Charles would become the Grandmaster of the Knightly Order when he became Duke of Burgundy. Thus, although the zodialogical signs are ovine, leadership of the

Order of the Golden Fleece was not dependent upon birthright other than that of being the messianic successor to the duchy. Philip the Good, whose own sign was Leo (born July 31,

1396), initiated the Order and was its first Grandmaster. Considering the iconography, it is likely that work commemorates Charle’s baptism because he was destined to be the second

Grandmaster of the Illustrious Knightly Order of the Golden Fleece. Therefore, the astrological sign of Aries is both symbolic of the fleece at Colchis as well as the messianic heir, Charles the

Bold, who would free the Holy Land. Thus, like Ambilmilech who would continue the work of his father, Gideon, Charles would continue that of Philip the Good. Furthermore, O’Meara points out that the inventories of the Chartreuse of Champmol mention an Annunciation in which the wife of a Burgundian duke had been depicted.55 Champmol was built by the first Valois duke of

Burgundy, Philip the Bold, as an intended mausoleum for all future dukes of the realm. It was

53 Ibid 150. 54 O’Meara, 102. 55 Ibid, 100.

25 Burgundy’s answer to the French necropolis of St. Denis. Moreover, it is famous for its by the artist Claus Sluter, many of which still grace the tomb of this first Valois duke

of Burgundy.

Further reference to Burgundy’s future is found in an altarpiece that depicts its donor and

persons related to aspirations of Duke Philip the Good. Laurinda S. Dixon has identified the image of Isabelle of Portugal as the Tiburtine Sibyl in the Bladelin Altarpiece (Fig. 1.20).56 She based her theory upon the portrait of the duchess by Rogier van der Weyden which is labeled with the words “Persica Sibylla.” Shirley Nelson Blum has noted that the Emperor Augustus, as depicted in the altarpiece, wears the outfit of a Burgundian duke.57 This same figure was

identified by Dixon as the , the Hapsburg Frederick III. She bases this

identification upon the unusual hat he holds in his left hand.58 The hat, which is actually a crown

lined with fur, was painted in other images of the emperor and described by the contemporary

chronicler Oliver de la Marche.59 During the period in which this work had been painted, Philip

had sought the support of the emperor for a Crusade. Frederick III was related to Philip and

Isabelle by his marriage to their niece, Eleanor of Portugal. The vision of the Tiburtine Sibyl

(Isabelle) is seen through the open windows with panes of glass emblazoned with the black

double-headed eagle, the crest of the Hapsburg Empire. The crest represents Frederick’s double

title of King and Emperor. Dixon also notes that the emperor, then in his mid-forties, was

balding and had a protruding lower jaw, a trait that was passed on to succeeding generations of

Hapsburgs. An image for comparison (Fig. 1.21) is an altarpiece in which Frederick has been

56 Laurinda S. Dixon, Gazette des Beaux-Arts, “Portraits and Politics in Two Triptychs by Rogier van der Weyden”, 186-189. 57 Shirley Nelson Blum, Early Netherlandish Triptychs: A Study in Patronage, University of California Press, Berkley and Los Angeles, 19. Panofsky has also described Augustus as being in a room with window “the upper panes of which display the arms of the …”, ENP. 58 Dixon, 187. 59 Ibid.

26 cast in the guise of a Magus at the Holy . Here we see the balding head, as well as the

jutting Hapsburg jaw. Behind him is the image of his son, Maximilian, also in the guise of magi.

During the years from 1458-1461 at least three delegations were sent from Burgundy in

order to gain support for a Crusade. The zeal for crusade was initially brought on by of

Constantinople in 1453. As mentioned earlier, Philip the Good’s concern dates back at least as

far as 1422, the period in which the Emperor of Constantinople was seeking the help of the

European princes to drive out the Turk from his empire. In February of 1454 Duke Philip held

the Feast of the Pheasant at Lille, during which knights and dignitaries pledged to the cause of a

crusade.60 These pledges had yet to materialize by 1458. For this reason the help of the Emperor

Frederick III was sought. The painting Bladelin Altarpiece, mentioned above, is related to these

meetings.

It was not unusual at such meetings that a marriage alliance would be proposed. Duke

Charles (then Count of Charolais) was seeking the hand of the emperor’s son for his daughter,

Mary of Burgundy.61 It is not inconceivable that such a subject may have been discussed during

the earlier meetings of 1458 and 1460. Although Maximilian was not yet born until 1459, such

parties were, by and large, optimistic nevertheless. The uniform of a Burgundian duke, as worn

by the emperor, may be seen as an allusion to just such a meeting. The prophecy of the coming

King of Kings is a reference to the heir that this powerful union would produce. That this is the

symbolic intent of the work may be gleaned from the fact that the figure of the Tiburtine Sybil is

an image of Isabelle of Portugal, wife of Philip the Good. A comparison with a contemporary

portrait lends support to this identification. Rogier van der Weyden’s Portrait of Isabella of

Portugal (Fig. 1.22), shows the duchess at the age she would have been during the painting of

60 Jesse Hurlbut, internet source. Taylor, 129-133, 147. Calmette, 163, 223, and 329. Calmette notes that the description of the feast comes down to us from “the chronicler, Le Fevre de St. Remy.” Page 233. 61 Christine Weightman, Visions of Tondal, 42.

27 the Bladelin Altarpiece. As in her guise as the Cumaean Sibyl on the Ghent Altarpiece, in her depiction as the Tiburtine Sibyl she again prognosticates the advent of the future heir of the

duchy and the sanctity of his coming rule. This leader is both temporal ruler and holy messiah.

Such a leader is reminiscent of the once and future king, King Arthur. His quest is the New

Jerusalem and the retrieval of the Holy Land from the Turk. The outcome of Byzantium is to be told by the success of a crusade by the forces of the European Princes.

That this is the message of the work is evident from the fact that the figures that are depicted in the room with the duchess have been identified by Panofsky, Blum, and Dixon as

Jean Lefevre de Saint-Remy and Jehan de Bauffremonet, ambassadors to Philip the Good.62

Vaughan notes that the account we have of the events surrounding the wedding festivities of

1429 come down to us through the writings of “the observant and punctilious herald Jehan

Lefevre.” Panofsky further describes Lefevre as generally called “… Toison d’Or so much that

he discarded his family name…”63 The Toison d’Or is the collar worn by the Knights of the

Golden Fleece, the order Philip the Good had created upon the occasion of his marriage to

Isabelle of Portugal. Moreover, Jehan de Bauffremonet had married Philip the Good’s

(illegitimate) daughter, Marie, in 1447, thus making him son-in-law to the duke.64 Both men, as

well as Peter Bladelin, were knights of the Golden Fleece. Bladelin, himself, is pictured in the

scene of the Nativity (Fig. 1.23) as the figure kneeling to the right, in front of the .

Considering all of the above, the altarpiece was most probably created under the context

of the proposed crusade against the Turks in Constantinople. As such, it also reflects the

62 Dixon, 187-8. Shirley Nelson Blum, Early Netherlandish Triptychs: A Study in Patronage, Berkley, University of California Press, 19. Panofsky, 277. 63 Panofsky, 275-278. 64 Tyler, 127. Vaughan, 134; he explains that in Burgundy, Philip the Good’s bastards were given equal status at his court. Blum notes pertaining to the presence of these two ambassadors in this painting that,” they play the same role in the painting as they did in life, except that the man they attend is not really a Burgundian duke, but a Roman emperor.” Page 19.

28 marriage alliance between the house of the Valois Dukes of Burgundy and the Hapsburg

Austrian Empire. Philip the Good’s interest in this particular crusade first appeared in 1426, and

visual evidence seems confirmed by the image of the Heavenly Jerusalem, as seen upon the

Ghent Altarpiece, which confirms the fact that Jan Van Eyck was sent to the Holy Land to create

reconnaissance drawings of the area in the event of an actual crusade (see Lotte Brand Philip).

This, of course, coincides with the plea of the Emperor of Constantinople, John Palaeologus VIII

to help rid his domain from these invaders. The panel of the “Just Judges” on the altarpiece further point to this conclusion.

In summation, it is clear that all of these works contain elements extolling the spiritual and reproductive capabilities of the Burgundian consort, Isabelle of Portugal. Each also fits the concept of the Arthurian political model by casting the awaited Burgundian heir in a messianic light. This future heir, is thus, in a sense, like King Arthur, the once and future monarch of the realm. And like this sixth-century semi-mythological ruler, he is destined to become leader of a chivalric and honorable society. It is upon him that the seat of the Grandmaster of the Illustrious

Knightly Order of the Golden Fleece will one day devolve.

29

Fig. 1.1 Ghent Altarpiece, open. St. Bavo’s, Ghent, 1432.

30

Fig. 1.2 Ghent Altarpiece, closed. St. Bavo’s, Ghent, 1432.

31

Figure 1.3a Hubert and Jan Van Eyck, detail of The Just Judges, detail of Ghent Altarpiece, open. St. Bavo’s, Ghent, 1432.

Figure 1.3b Hubert and Jan Van Eyck, The Just Judges, lower panel of Ghent Altarpiece, open. St. Bavo’s, Ghent, 1432.

32

Figure 1.4 John Palaeologus VIII, Byzantine Emperor, medal by Pisanello

Fig. 1.5 Hereford Mappa Mundi, Hereford Cathedral, 13th-century.

Fig. 1.5 Jan Van Eyck, Three Marys at the Tomb, ca. 1426, Museum Van Boijmans Beuningen.

33

Fig. 1.7 Collar of the Order of the Golden Fleece. Fig. 1.8. Flag of Constantinople, ca. 1426.

Fig. 1.9 Dove-shaped Eucharistic Vessel, Fig. 1.10 Dove-shaped Eucharistic Vessel of The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. Laguenne; Reconstruction Drawing (E. Rupin ).

34

Fig. 1.11 Exterior of the Ghent Altarpiece.

35

Fig. 1.12 Petrus Christus (copy), Fountain of Life, Prado, Madrid.

36

Fig. 1.13 Isabelle of Portugal, unknown location.

. Fig. 1.14 Double Portrait of Philip the Good and Isabelle of Isabelle of Portugal, Museum voor Schone Kunsten, Ghent.

37

Fig. 1.15 Winchester Round Table, Great Hall, Winchester. 13th

Fig. 1.16 Portrait of a Young Man (Tymotheos), 1432, Oil on wood, 34, 5 x 19 cm National Gallery, London

38

Fig. 1.17 Erythraean Sybil Fig. 1.18 Cumaean Sibyl

Jan Van Eyck, details from Ghent Altarpiece, (closed), 1432, St. Bavo’s, Ghent,

39

Fig. 1.19 The Annunciation, Jan van Eyck, c 1434. National Gallery of Art, Washington, DC.

40

Fig 1.20 Bladelin Triptych (left wing), 1445-50 Fig. 1.21 Habsbourg Master, Fragment of an Oil on oak panel, 91 x 40 cm Altarpiece showing Frederick II as a Magus. Staatliche Museum, Berlin Oesterreichishe Galerie

41

Fig. 1.22 Isabelle of Portugal, Follower of Rogier Van Der Weyden, J. Paul Getty Museum, Malibu.

Fig. 1.23 Bladelin Triptych (central panel), 1445-50 Oil on oak panel, 91 x 89 cm Staatliche Museum, Berlin

42

Chapter Two

The Last Valois Duke, His Consort, and Heir

43 The traditions of the Arthurian model and the cult of the Burgundian consort continued to

influence the art and spectacle of the next generation of ducal authority that of Charles the Bold

(1433-1477) and Margaret of York (1446-1503). However, the lavish expenditure on the arts,

which had characterized the reign of Philip the Good (1419-1467), did not carry on after his

demise.65 His successor, Charles, spent the ducal coffers supporting his martial pursuits, which

cost him his rule and his life in less than a decade.66 Part of Charles’ plan was to become sovereign of the kingdom of (the area of Lorraine), thus making him a true king67 towards which end earlier dukes had made expedient marriage alliances, cajoled those who appeared to be in the way, and had just outlived other contestants. 68 During this period, his duchess, Margaret of York, had commissioned a small number of manuscripts and painted works. Of those examined in this study, three topics are of interest: the ducal marriage, the hope for a male heir, and the sanctity of Burgundian rule. These important dynastic issues will be discussed regarding how they are defined by the Arthurian model and by the mythology created for the Burgundian consort as reflected in artworks of the time.

The Anglo-Burgundian marriage between Charles the Bold and Margaret of York was in mainly motivated by political and economic benefits to both nations.69 The death of Philip the

Good allowed Charles to pursue an alliance with England because it meant that he no longer had

65 Christine Weightman, Margaret of York: Duchess of Burgundy 1446-1503, (St. Martin’s Press, 1989) 34-41. 66 William Tyler, Dijon and the Valois Dukes of Burgundy, (Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press,, 1971), 77-9. In fact, Charles took much of the jewelry and priceless artifacts with him to the fields of battle. 67 www.blikopdewereld.nl/Geschiedenis/part_1 .Lotharingia was the domain given to Charlemagne’s grandson, Lothar, by the Treaty of in 834. Philip the Good was the first monarch since Charlemagne to begin to reassemble the vast Middle Kingdom.Charles had nearly completed this task. All he needed was Alsace, Lorraine and a royal title. Also see The Golden Age of Burgundy: The Magificent Dukes and their Court, (New York: W.W. Norton, 1963), 255-265. The Lotharingia is in the present day more often called Lorraine. 68H. Pirenne, “The Formation and the Constitution of the Burgundian State,” The American Historical Review, Vol. 14, No. 3. (Apr., 1909), 477-490. Charles did in fact meet with Frederick III in 1477 in order to be recognized as the king of Lotharingia. However, he was defeated in his quest by the French King Louis XI who had persuaded the emperor to see Charles’ lavishness as an insult to the more austere lifestyle of the emperor. Frederick left in the middle of the night without bestowing the title of King of Lotharingia upon the crest-fallen duke. 69Weightman, 38-41. These included trade, currency exchange, fishing rights, the export of English cloth, as well as the dower.

44 to abide by the Treaty of Arras of 1435, which forbade him from marrying anyone other than a

French princess.70 His ascension from the status of Count of Charolais to that of Duke of

Burgundy gave him the power to reject the treaty. This alliance was mutually beneficial to each

of these leaders against their common nemesis, the French King Louis XI. Edward IV claimed

the right to the throne of France because of his Plantagenet roots. He could expect an ally in

Charles the Bold, to whom he had pledged a 200, 000 crown dowry for the marriage of his sister.71 The English King Edward IV also decided in favor of the union72 because his own

political stability was threatened by the political unrest of the War of the Roses. During the period between 1468 and 1470 a number of conspiracies had been attempted to place Henry VI back upon the English throne. These involved the aid of the deposed king’s wife, Margaret of

Anjou, and his half-brother, . These plots were supported by Louis XI. Moreover,

Edward saw the marriage as a way to gain back the of Normandy and Gascony by

launching a war against France, with the help of his new brother-in-law. Charles also stood to

gain an ally who might help him in his conflicts with the French in , Liege, and

Guelders73. Although the war never did materialize, the trade agreements between the two

nations meant a mutual success for both the king and the duke. The Burgundian response to the

proposed union came at the Smithfield tournament in the form of the presentation of a ring to the

Lady Margaret.74

70 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_the_Bold 71 Charles Ross, Edward IV, (London: Eyre Meuthen, 1974), 111. 72 Weightman, 34-41. 73Thomas Kren, edit.; Wim Blockmans, “The Devotion of a Lonely Duchess”, Margaret of York, , and the Visions of Tondal (Santa Monica: 1992) 29. 74 Ibid, 2. Also see C. Ross, 111-121.

45 Since Charles and Margaret were “cousins of the fourth degree,” 75 a dispensation needed to be granted by the pope. When it was issued, it was quickly presented to the peoples of both realms. Edward announced the news and stated that his sister was to wed “oon of the myghtyest

Princes of all the world that bereth no crown,” undoubtedly a statement meant to flatter the

Burgundian duke, who with his father had met with the Emperor Frederick III in 1456 to negotiate for a crusade, as well as a crown for the duchy.76 During the same year, Philip the

Good, Charles the Bold, and the exiled dauphin Louis had attended the Feast of the Holy Blood at Bruges. This event had been held each year since 1291 on Ascension Day. According to legend, the blood of Jesus was purportedly saved by Joseph of Arimathea and is important to many legends concerning the Holy Grail.77 He is also important to Britain’s history as a Christian nation. It was at Glastonbury that he had landed after Christ’s , and it was later said that he had brought with him Christ’s and the Holy Grail. The Grail, he is said to have placed in the Grail Well, at the present-day ruins of Glastonbury Cathedral, for safe- keeping.78 The Holy Blood relic (fig. 2.1) was brought from Jerusalem to Bruges by Count

Thierry, Duke of Flanders in 1150.79

75 Charles and Margaret were distant cousins. Her great-great-great-grandfather was Lionel, . Charles great-grandfather was Lionel’s brother, John of Gaunt. Gaunt also spawned Isabelle of Portugal’s line, as well as Henry VII’s and that of Isabella, Monarch of Spain. See Anthony Goodman, John of Gaunt: The Exercise of Princely Power in Fourteenth Century Europe, (New York, St.: Martin’s Press, 1992), 410. 76 Ibid. Kren, 29, Wim Blockmans, “The Devotion of a Lonely Duchess”. Richard Vaughan, The Last Valois Duke of Burgundy, (London: Longman Group Limited, 1973), 47-48. Margaret arrived at her wedding donning an intricately designed coronet. The wearing of the crown signified her status as princess of the . The crown contained initials, her own and those of Duke Charles. In 1472, at the beginning of the siege of the town of Neuss, Margaret journeyed to to donate the crown to the city’s cathedral’s Virgin. This act symbolized Charles’ otherwise unrecognized status of king, since Aachen was the traditional site for the coronation of German kings. Charlemagne is buried there as well. 77 Laurinda S. Dixon, “Portraits and Politics in Two Triptychs by Rogier Van Der Weyden,” Gazette des Beaux- Arts, May-June, pp. 186-187, 190. 78 www.britannia.com/history/biographies/joseph.html. Also see, Rodney Castleden, King Arthur: The Truth Behind the Legend, (New York: Routledge, 2000), 193. In 1190 Henry II caused the at Glastonbury to excavate Arthur’s grave, which according to an obscure Welsh bard was to be found between two pyramids. Found in the digging was an oaken coffin and one large male skeleton and two female skeletons. Also found was a leaden cross containing the inscription: “HIC IACET SEPULTUS INCLITUS REX ARTURIUS IN INSULA AVOLONIA”

46 Marie Tanner discusses an illustration in which Philip the Good Watches the Baptism of

Clovis, (fig. 2.2) (from Les Grandes Chroniques de France, Fifteenth century. Bibliiotheque

National, Paris. MS. 2605, Fol. 13, fig.1). The book traces the history of the kings of France, and was compiled between the thirteenth and fifteenth centuries, and exists in nearly 130 manuscripts. This version was commissioned by Philip the Good, who used illustrations like this one in order to prove the sanctity of Burgundian rule.80 Both Tanner and Malcolm Godwin note that Clovis was believed to be directly descended from Christ.81 However, Tanner notes that another interpretation is that descent from Christ is through the act of baptismal anointing. To the

Burgundian line, the Holy Blood had the same connotations as the divinely-bestowed ampoule of angelic oil for the French kings. Both were symbols of God’s favor for the anointed leader of the realm.

Like Edward IV, Charles delivered the news of the upcoming marriage to the and to the chapter of the Order of the Golden Fleece, both of which met at Bruges that

May. He announced that the wedding festivities were forthcoming, and commented upon the

(“Here lies buried the reknowned king Arthur in the Isle of Avalon.”) All of these artifacts have long since disappeared. However, the leaden cross is still known from a rubbing made from it. 79Andrew Brown, “Civic Ritual: Bruges and the Counts of Flanders in the Later Middle Ages,” The English Historical Review, Vol. 112, no. 446, (April 1997) 277-299. The relic was given to him by the of Jerusalem for his contribution during the to the Holy Land. See also Feglely, Randall, The Golden Spurs of , (Jefferson, North Carolina: Mc Farland & Company, Inc., 2002), p. 24. This author says that this particular relic was brought to Bruges after the in 1150 by Derrick (also called Thierry) of Alsace, Count of Flanders. It is a crystal vial containing a cloth stained with what is said to be Christ’s blood, which Joseph of Arimathea wiped from Christ’s body after the Crucifixion. It was originally housed in the church of St. Basil’s. In the the Basilica of the Holy Blood was built over St. Basil’s. Its reliquary displays Count Derrick of Thierry’s coat of arms, and those of Flanders and Bruges. As to the lineage of Christ, Malcom Godwin suggests that there “is no contradiction between the vessel containing Christ’s blood, ‘San Greal, and a royal blood line, ‘Sang Real’, stemming from Jesus. He suggests that there is a direct physical kinship of the Burgundians’ ancestors, the Merovingian, and a child of Christ and Mary Magdalene. Although this is an interesting theory, it has been refuted as a twentieth century hoax. See also Kren, 139-140. Roberts, 379, fn. 14. 80 Tanner, 103-8, 146-7. 81 Ibid. Malcolm Godwin, The Holy Grail: Its Origins, Secrets, and Meaning Revealed, (New York: Viking Press, 1994) 184, 188.

47 fecundity of Margaret’s family.82 This was an important consideration for the duke who still

lacked a male heir after two previous marriages.

On her wedding day Margaret arrived at Sluis at 6 p.m. on June 25, 1468. In true

Burgundian fashion, daily pageants were performed in honor of the great event. The festivities were compared to those of King Arthur’s court by the chronicler John Paston.83 Margaret’s

rooms were hung with her symbolic flower, the marguerite.84 This flower is symbolic of her

name, as well as the symbol for betrothals and marriage.

The central theme of the wedding pageants revolved around the ideal of “proper”

marriage as recorded in the , mythology, and history. Thirty-two rooms of the palace in

Bruges were hung with tapestries from the dynastic holdings in honor of the wedding of Charles

the Bold and Margaret of York in 1468. Among the themes of these tapestries were that of

“Lucretia” and the story of “Esther.” Esther was the third wife of the Persian King Ahersuerus.85

Similarly, Margaret became the third wife of Charles the Bold. Like the main character Esther, the Jewish third wife of the Persian king, Margaret was to become bride of a foreign monarch whose responsibilities lay with her homeland, as well as her adopted one. In the Book of Esther, the queen saves her Jewish people from the intrigues of the king’s chief minister, Haman. Thus, she not only became a heroine for her own people, but also to her king by preserving the integrity of his government. Unlike Ahersuerus’ former wife, Vashti, Esther was the epitome of humility and obedience.86 The fact that Margaret’s situation had been cast in biblical terms

underlies the idea of her own divinity.

82 Tanner, 42. 83 Weightman, 54-55. Kren, 29-30. 84 Ibid. 85 ibid. 86 Vashti had earlier been deposed because she had refused to be shown off by the king.

48 Ahasuerus, Esther’s powerful royal husband, was considered to be an exemplum for

magnificentia (splendor), while the Old Testament wedding provided a suitable analogy for the

contemporary one of Charles and Margaret. Ahasuerus was a model for kingly behavior for

Duke Charles. He was all-powerful (or so he claimed), and reveled in his fine and magnificent

possessions. Esther met Ahasuerus after he had repudiated his first wife, Vashti, for refusing to

be displayed at a banquet as one of his splendid possessions. Esther became the ideal model for

female behavior because, unlike Vashti, she was virtuous and courageous and her own

insubordination was the result of her desire to help her people.87 Unlike Vashti, whose

misbehavior was to defy the request of her husband, King Ahasuerus, Esther had merely broken

the taboo of approaching the king. She is held to be one of the seven prophetesses of Judaism.88

In Sluis, Margaret was greeted with an enactment from the Book of Esther, which contrasted Esther with Vashti. In Bruges she was entetained by an enactment of the scenes when

Ahasuerus chooses Esther and the wedding banquet which followed. An idea of how the tableau might have looked may be gleaned from the miniature of Juana of Castile pictured in similar scenes from the book of Esther. The miniature (fig. 2.2b) shows a stage divided in two. On the left Ahasuerus has chosen Esther as his bride, which is the same scene enacted for Margaret.

However, different from the wedding banquet scene presented to Margaret, on the right of the miniature, Juana as Esther appears courageously petitioning the king for justice for her people, although Esther’s unbidden appearance was forbidden on penalty of death. The text says:

Queen Esther with the help of Mordecai freed the Jewish people from Haman. So Juana

will protect her people from the envious. And Ahasuerus, the King of Persia, elevated

Esther […]. So does Philip the Fair embrace Juana of Castile.”

87 Dagmar Eichberger, Women of Distinction: Margaret of York and Margaret of Austria, chapter entitled, “Female Role Models in Tapestries,” by Birgit Franke, (Leuven: Davidsfonds, Brepolis, 2005),154-165. 88 Brian McNeil, Great Couples from the Bible, (Minneapolis, Min: Fortress Press, 2006), 92-97.

49

The main iconographical elements of the wedding decorations and festivities were those symbolic of obedience and fidelity. For example, among the tapestries decorating Margaret’s room was that depicting that of the Good Lucretia.89 Lucretia was the Roman 90matron who had committed suicide after having been raped by Tarquinius. By her self-sacrifice, it was then held, she had protected the family honor and status of nobility. In this way she may be compared to

Guinevere, who apparently facing certain execution because of her affair with , nevertheless, did the honorable thing by not fleeing with him. Such a submissive attitude can also be seen in the character of Mary Magdalene, whom Christ had complimented for her contemplativeness as he spoke to her at the house of Martha and Mary (Luke 10: 38-42).91

Submissive obedience was then held to be a valuable quality in a Burgundian consort.92

Margaret of York was also characterized by her piety.93 Her function as duchess was that of benefactress and as role model for Burgundian women. She performed her duty through the commissioning of religious manuscripts for the devotion of in church foundations such

89 ibid. 90 Malory, 1166. 91Though this passage refers to Mary of Bethany, the western church conflated her with Mary Magdalen. 92 Haskins, Susan, Mary Magdalen: Myth and Metaphor, (New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 1993), pp. 16, 23-26, 177-9. The act of anointing was also associated with Mary Magdalen. During the Middle Ages and Renaissance although the Eastern Church accepted the identification of three distinct persons in Mary Magdalen, Mary of Bethany, and the penitent woman in St. Luke 7:36-50, the western church held that they were all one person. In fact, Pope Gregory the Great (540, reign 590-604) made this the official view of the church in his Homilies. To further confound the issue Jacobus Voraigne’s (1230-1298), Legend Aurea, (ca. 1267) helped to circulate those ideas via his apocryphal tales of the lives of the early Christian saints. This story had many versions, one which was known to have been commissioned for the education of Maximilian I’s son, Philip the Fair (1478- 1506). Margaret of York’s mother, Cicely Neville, owned a copy of the Legend Aurea, which was a commonplace article for the religious education of children in the Middle Ages and Renaissance. The amalgamate Mary was revered in a schizoid fashion: at once she was the woman possessed by demons; second, she was the apostle to the apostles; third, she was the model of the contemplative life. Her saintly symbol is the jar of precious ointment which she used to anoint Jesus’ head and feet in preparation for his Crucifixion and Resurrection. It thus forms a sacred and mystical function much like the tradition of royal anointing. It might even be seen to be the feminine counterpart to the Holy Grail, by some held to be the used at the . In the Arthurian Romances the Grail holds power over life and death. See Andrea Pearson, Envisioning Gender in Burgundian Devotional Art, 1350-1530, ( Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Company), 2005, 42-43. 93Kren, 16.

50 as the Poor Claires and the Filles des Madeleine. Many of these women came from less than noble origins. The Filles des Madeleine, for example, were made up largely of reformed prostitutes. Margaret’s civic duty was to instruct her subjects towards the path of salvation from the evils of this world and the subsequent damnation of the next.

Among the popular cautionary publications donated to the foundation by Margaret was

The Visions of Tondal, a story of a knight who made a supernatural journey to hell. The main character’s journey was the result of the fact that he had been self-absorbed, paying little attention to the needs of his family and the care of his immortal soul. Existing copies are often accompanied by the account of St. Patrick’s Purgatory. These tales of travels to the afterlife were popular in medieval and early Renaissance literature and theater. Dante’s Inferno is one well-known example. Margaret’s giving of these manuscripts was to demonstrate her importance as a role model for the women of her domain. By such gifts Margaret tried to compel her subjects into making correct moral decisions. It was her duty as Burgundian consort to set such examples. The illustrations in these works were important because many of the women from this era and impoverished could not read. This was also true of the average man.

Tales such as The Visions of Tondal and St. Patrick’s Purgatory serve to instruct the reader on the important aspect of the ruler’s sacred nature by illustrating the idea of heaven and hell as real domains, reachable by the living. Such a duality between the spirit and the real world tends to compliment the dual nature of kingship. The king was both temporal ruler, but also the

Vicar of Christ. In fact, according to medieval beliefs, true kings were made such only through divine will. Kantorowicz quotes the English jurist Henry de Bracton (ca. 1200-1268) on this point: “The king himself must not be under man, but under God and the Law, because the Law

51 makes the king… And that he should be ‘under’ the Law because he is God’s vicar becomes evident through the simultude with Jesus Christ in whose stead he governs here on earth.” 94

While Margaret must play the devout consort to Charles the Bold, the duke, in turn

wanted to present himself as the divinely appointed ruler. Seeing himself as the equal of kings he

wished to establish not only his temporal power, but also his divine position as Vicar of Christ.

In fact, he identified himself as more than just the vicar as illustrated in an image in his book of

ordinance (Fig. 2.3) Charles is pictured here with the words, “Nihil sine me,” which expresses

the idea that his power of vicar comes directly from God.95 The depiction of the duke is similar

to that of the Christ Pantocrator/God the Almighty figure in the Ghent Altarpiece in its rigid

frontality and its central placement. It is an image of the Militant Christian, similar in meaning to

the horse-riding figures of the Just Judges upon the left wing of the Van Eycks’ masterpiece. The

sword-wielding figure of the last Valois duke of Burgundy conveys the idea that it is his

responsibility to protect the faith. This is the quest of the Sangreal.

The Reliquary of Charles the Bold (fig. 2.4, 1467, Cathedral of St. Paul, Liege) by Gerard

Loyet is another work displaying the duke’s role as protector of the faith. The gold-clad figure of

the kneeling duke is touched upon his shoulder by St. George. Both figures wear armor,

suggesting crusade. Moreover, St. George is the patron Saint of England, the land of King

Arthur.96 These images fulfill the function of the Arthurian model in that they portray the ruler as

someone to be exalted because of his status as the Lord’s vicar.

94 Ernst Kantorowicz, The King’s Two Bodies: A Study in Medieval Political Theology, (Princeton, NJ: Princeton: University Press,, 1957), 56-61, 156-160. See also Kren, p. 55, n. 15: “What Christ is by nature, is by those whom …he has placed as his vicars, through his image.” In her Livre du corps du policie, Christine de Pisan wrote that the “bon prince comme vicaire de Dieu en terre.” 95 Kren, 49-50. 96 , Jan Van Eyck: The Play of Realism, (London: Reaktion Books, 1991), 22.

52 Margaret of York fostered a different image of herself from that of her husband. Among the works commissioned by her is a manuscript compiled by Nicolas Finet.97 The book contains

two miniatures depicting the duchess in her role of a compassionate, holy leader. In one she is

shown performing the Seven Acts of Mercy (fig.2.5). These acts were originally advocated by

Christ in Matthew 25: 35-39. In another illustration she is depicted as the vicaress of Christ, at

prayer, while her namesake, St. Margaret stands looking on (fig.2.6). Surrounding both ladies are

the ; Jerome, , and Augustine. Here she seems to be praying as she is

given council by these saintly and learned men.

Margaret’s relationship to religion can also be seen in a number of other works created

for her which define her role as Duchess of Burgundy. For example, the manuscript produced by

Pierre de Vaux, Vie de Sainte Collette. The manuscript, which Margaret presented to the convent

of the , also contains an illustration (fig.2.7) depicting herself and Charles as

witnesses to the saint’s vision of St. Anne and her large family. Such an image was important to

the ducal couple because, like St. Anne, Charles had been three times married. Nevertheless, he

still lacked a male heir. The fact that Anne’s family continued to grow, in her third marriage,

gave hope to Margaret and Charles.98 The fact that Charles and Margaret were depicted in the

presence of these sacred persons reflects their own divine nature which secured their right to

rule. Such sacred personages, were like King Arthur, God’s chosen.

Margaret undoubtedly was aware of the literary tastes of her brother, Edward IV of

England, including an interest in Thomas Malory’s Le Morte D’Arthur. In the existing printed

copies of the work it states that it was completed in the ninth year of the reign of Edward IV.

Although there is no clear proof that Edward was Malory’s patron, it is unlikely that he would

97 Kren, J. C. Smith’s article, “Margaret of York and the Burgundian Portrait Tradition,” 50-51. 98 Ibid, 20, 34-38, 55.

53 have been unaware of Sir Thomas’s development of a history of King Arthur, which comprised

three large volumes.99

During the next year 1471 Margaret of York commissioned a number of manuscripts from William Caxton. Although Malory died on March 14, 1471, Caxton would eventually print his Arthurian writings in 1485.100 Considering the historical importance of the work and the fact

that Margaret had awarded many commissions to the book’s future printer, it is not unlikely for

her to have seen the original manuscript or a copy of it. As mentioned, her role as the

Burgundian consort appears to have been derived from the submissive Queen

described in Malory’s published work.

That Margaret understood her subordinate role as Burgundian consort is clear from a

number of representations of her. One illustration is of particular interest because Margaret is

depicted in a pose usually reserved Mary Magdalen.101 This image, (fig.2.8),

can be found in the manuscript entitled Le dialogue de la duchesse de Bourgogne a’ Jesus

Christ, which was commissioned by the duchess in 1467-8.102 In the text Christ implores her “as

the Duchess of Burgundy and the sister of the King of England” to devote herself to spiritual

concerns. In the illustration it appears as if she has replaced Mary Magdalen. The pot of oil, the

attribute of the Magdalen, at the bottom of the page seems to confirm this. The text explains that

Christ is praising her for her piety and devotion. He warns her not to become imbued with pride

99 Takako Kato, Caxton’s ‘Morte Darthur’: The Printing Process and the Authenticity of the Text, (Oxford: The Society for the Study of Medieval Languages and Literature, 2002), 1-2. 100 Felicity Riddy, Sir Thomas Malory, (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1987), 5-7. The Winchester manuscript was likely a source of Caxton’sprinting. He probably obtained it from the author’s son or widow, both of whom died in 1479. Caxton possessed it until 1489. It was eventually given to Winchester College in the seventeenth century, possibly by a descendant of the author. It is now in the collection of the . The original manuscript does show that Caxton deviated from Malory’s original intention of presenting a “hole book,” by dividing the printed version into eight separate sections. 101 Kren, 50. 102 Ibid, 258.

54 because of her noble title. This sense of humility is consistent with the role of Mary Magdalen,

as it is also with Margaret of York’s role as Burgundian Consort.

Another work of interest is a scene of the (fig. 2.9) in the J. Paul

Getty Museum. This painting is a version based on a work by Rogier van der Weyden once

owned by Philip II, and now in the Prado. In the Getty piece the figure of Mary Magdalen, though similar in pose to the Prado work, wears a more elaborately brocaded dress and her belt, which in the Prado contains the words “Gesu Maria”, has instead three marguerites and a large white . As Christine Weightman points out: “It is difficult to think of anyone apart from

Margaret of York who would be depicted wearing these symbols in a Flemish painting.”103 She also wonders why the pious Margaret would have allowed herself to be depicted as the “most sinful and penitent among women.”104 However, during the Middle Ages and Renaissance Mary

Magdalen was revered because of her penitence. It was through her turning away from sin that

she found salvation. Moreover, as we have seen, Margaret was already depicted as the Magdalen

in an illustration for Le dialogue de la duchesse de Bourgogne a’ Jesus Christ.

Hans J. Van Miegroet also discusses the Getty Descent from the Cross in terms of the duchess in the guise of Mary Magdalene.105 He tentatively connects the work to a gift from

Margaret to a religious community at Mons called the Filles des Madeleine, whose main goal was the of prostitutes.106 Although, as he notes, there is no documentation to confirm

this, if it were accurate it would be in keeping with the reputation of the saint, as well as explain

why such a dignified ruler would allow herself to be so depicted. Through her depiction of

herself as Mary Magdalene she stood as the role model for all mortals whose salvation would be

103 Ibid, 50, Weightman, 186. 104 Weightman, 186. 105 Hans J. Miegroet, “The Sign of the Rose: A Fifteenth-Century Flemish Passion Scene,” Metropolitan Museum Journal, v. 27, 1992. 106Kren, Blockman’s article, “The Devotions of a Lonely Duchess, p 35.

55 granted by Christ’s sacrifice and through the sinner’s own penitence. Margaret presented the Le

dialogue de la duchesse de Bourgogne a’ Jesus Christ to the Filles des Madeleine in 1485, the

same year that Henry VII had defeated Margaret’s brother, Richard III, gaining for himself the

throne of England. Thus, the prominence of the white Yorkist rose denotes her identity and

political sentiments which are in conflict with those of the , whose badge was the

red and white rose. This double-colored emblem symbolized the reuniting of the houses of

Lancaster and York, respectively.

Miegroet also points out that the style of the work; “with its … emphasis on Christ’s

sufferings and emphatic religious melodrama”107 demonstrates possible reference to the Devotio

Moderna. Such an emotional impact is also to be seen in Burgundian tomb , as will be

discussed later in this study. The views of the Devotio Moderna were described in Thomas

Kempis’ Imitatio Christi. The text is recorded as one of the possessions of the duchess’s library.108 It is likely that this book influenced her view of her role as duchess and as vicaress of

Christ. Inherently it thus demonstrated the relationship between the worldly and the spiritual as a

real sempiternal continuum as believed at the time. Through her humility, Margaret of York

came closer, in her mind, to Jesus’ closest female , Mary Magdalene. She therefore was

able to place herself within the “historical” realm of Burgundy’s saintly past.109

107 Ibid, 81. 108 Ibid, 39-40. In Kempis’s Bonne et necessaire doctrine de toute nostre foy, Charles the Bold’s arms are on the frontispiece and Margaret is herself depicted kneeling in front of the Holy Trinity. 109 Susan Haskin, Mary Magdalen: Myth and Metaphor, (New York: Harcourt, Brace & Company, 1993), 20, 131, 222-232. Also see Carl Edgar Eggert, Middle Low German Version of the Legend of Mary Magdalen, (Kansas City, Missouri: Steed and Ward, 1902) 133-134. See also, Joseph and Caroline Grassi, Women in Jesus’ Life, (1973), 116. The story of Mary Magdalen’s voyage to France is known from a vast variety of versions and in many different languages. Mary Magdalen’s connection to Burgundy has its connections in the tale of her voyage to Marseilles in a rudderless boat. After the death of Christ, she, the Blessed Virgin Mary, and her sister (also named Mary) leave Jerusalem to spread to all far away lands. Magdalen is known for her ministry to the early . Her first miracle was gaining conception for the first royal couple of Burgundy. Later, when the royal couple is at sea their boat is capsized. The mother was drowned, whereas the infant and the father survived. Miraculously the mother continues to provide milk to nourish the infant. After having given thanks to Mary Magdalen for saving himself and his son from death, his wife comes back to life as a reward for her husband’s faith. A version of this

56 During the reign of Margaret of York’s stepdaughter, Mary of Burgundy (1457-1482),

artistic production was also constrained.110 That which was produced tended to emphasize her descent from the Counts of Flanders due to factors explained below. This became an important matter because after the death of Charles the Bold, the duchy no longer had a male heir.111

Burgundy, which was originally given to Philip the Bold from his father, King John of France, now. Became sought after by the present French monarch, Louis XI.112 Therefore, it became

incumbent upon the duchess Mary to strengthen other lines of descent. Her father’s list of titles included: Duke of Burgundy, Brabant, , , Lothier and , Margrave of

Namur, Count of , Charolais, Flanders, Hainault, Holland, and Zutphen, and Count

Palatine of Burgundy. The most powerful of these designations, and independent of France, was

that which he had inherited from Count Louis of Male, Count of Flanders. This branch of the

genealogical tree was formed by the union of her great-great-grand parents, Philip the Bold and

Margaret of Male, Count Louis’s daughter. During Mary’s (1477-1482) she had commissioned a

number of series of portraits of the Counts of Flanders (fig. 2.10). Her tragic death, caused by a

fall from her horse,113 resulted in the building of her monumental tomb (ca. 1490, Church of

Notre Dame, Bruges). The monument differs from the traditional Burgundian models because

instead of the usual mourner figures,114 hers contains a complex genealogical tree (fig. 2.19);115

legend, by Jacobus de Vorraigne, is found within a manuscript commissioned for the education of the young Duke Philip the Fair. 110Aline S. Taylor, Isabel of Burgundy: The Duchess Who Played politics in the Middle Ages, (New York: Madison Books, 2001) 148-149. Tyler, 60-65. 111 Joseph Calmette, The Golden Age of Burgundy: The Magnificent Dukes and Their Courts, (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1963), 280-6. Thomas Kren, Roger Weick, Margaret of York, Simon Marmion, and The Visions of Tondal: papers delivered at a symposium organized by the department of Manuscripts of the J. Paul Getty Museum in collaboration with the Huntingdon Library Art Collections, June 21-24, 1990, (Malibu: Getty Museum, 1992) 29-30.. 112 Tyler, 13-19. 113 Calmette, 285-6. She died at Bruges on March 27, 1482, Also, Thomas Kren, 32. 114 See Cleveland Museum of Art, Art from the Court of Burgundy: The Patronage of Philip the Bold and John the Fearless 1364-1419, 2004, p. 223. Such mourners, by Claus Sluter and Claus der Werve can be seen upon the Tomb of Philip the Bold, in Dijon, at the Musee des Beaux-Arts, (1384-1410). Mourners are not a new tradition. Since the

57 however, the change in visual content did not result in a change of symbolic message. The

acknowledgement of these noble forebears is obviously meant to evoke exaltation in keeping

with the intent of the Arthurian model and the notion of the divine right of kings. Ernst

Kantorowicz described such a model for leadership as follows: “God’s Anointed… [is] selected

by God and imbued with the gifts of his Spirit for the better ruling and guiding of his people.”116

Depicting Mary of Burgundy part of an illustrious heritage and as the future vessel for such an anointed ruler became the impetus for a number of works of importance.

Because there was no longer a viable male heir to the Duchy of Burgundy, a number of problems arose. First was the question of Salic law, which forbade female succession and therefore inheritance.117 This posed a dilemma for Charles’ intended heir, his daughter. Although the argument had been put forth that since many of the lands in question were the result of the first duke’s marriage to Margaret of Male, and did not come from the French king, nevertheless,

Louis XI continued to pressure her for these lands.118 To strengthen her position, the marriage

negotiations between Burgundy and the various houses of Europe were brought to a quick conclusion. In 1477 she became the bride of Maximilian of Austria, thus uniting Burgundy with

the House of Hapsburg.119

The wedding itself is described in Maximilian’s much embellished autobiography,

Weisskunig, Maximilian cast himself in the image of a heroic knight who saves the damsel in

middle of the thirteenth century they had been a part of the regal monuments of French kings at the abbey of St. Denis. However, unlike those at the abbey, where the mourners are in high-, those by Sluter are free-standing. 115 Ann M. Roberts, “The Chronology and the Political Significance of the Tomb of Mary of Burgundy”, Art Bulletin, 1989, v. 71, no. 3, Sept, p. 376. 116 Ernst Kantorowicz, The King’s Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology, (Princeton, NJ: Princeton: University Press, 1957), 315-18. These words were said by Cramner to Edward VI at his coronation in 1547. See also Kren. For example, he cites Origen (d. 254): “What Christ is by nature, is achieved by those whom…he has placed as his vicars, through the image.” Christine de Pisan noted that the “bon prince comme vicaire Dieu en terre.” 117 Weightman, 106-107. 118Ibid, 106-118. Kren, 31-2. Roberts, 392-3. 119Weightman, 116-118. Kren, 32.

58 distress, Mary of Burgundy, from the clutches of the nefarious king of France, Louis XI. The author also describes the celebrations and pageants, which lasted for many days. These consisted of “tilting and knightly games.”120 Such entertainments were obviously gleaned from popular

Arthurian romances and were a cherished tradition. The Weisskunig also lists the territories

which Maximilian had gained through the union.

During Maximilian’s and Mary’s reign, a number of portrait series of the Counts of

Flanders were commissioned.121 These series existed in several media: paintings, prints, and

sculptures. One such example (fig.2.10) contains an inscription which states that it was “to be

renewde in the year of Our Lord 1480” by Mary of Burgundy. Lorne Campbell further notes that

the figures of the Countesses are very similar to the weepers on the tomb of Louis of Male in the

Collegiate Church of St. Peter in Lille(fig. 2.16).122 It is thus apparent that the reason for the

creation of this series is to draw a clear connection to the female line through which claim to

much of the realm depended. To further support Mary’s right to her inheritance, the right to

divine kingship was invoked through these ancestors.

This particular series represents four ninth-century counts of Flanders and their wives. In

884, Baldwin II (865-918 AD) married Ælfthryth, a daughter of King Alfred the Great of

England. The marriage was motivated by the common Flemish-English opposition to the

Vikings, and was the start of an alliance that was a mainstay of Flemish policy for centuries to come. Baldwin I was succeeded by his eldest son Arnulf I who married Adele of .

The son of Baldwin II and Aelfthryth was Baldwin III, who was later succeeded by his son,

Arnulf II. These counts were ancestors to the present , as well as to William the

120 Williams, 9, 14-15. Gordon Kipling, The Triumph of Honour: Burgundian Origins of the Elizabethan Renaissance, (The Hague: Leiden University Press, 1977), 59. 121Weightman, 116-118. Lorne Campbell, Renaissance Portraits: European Portrait Painting in the Fourteenth, Fifteenth, and Sixteenth Centuries, (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1990), 42. 122 Ibid, 33.

59 Conqueror, who married Countess Matlida of Flanders. By the time of Louis of Male’s rule of

Flanders the politics of the day dictated that the count play his English supporters off against their French counterparts. Louis gravitated more to the side of the French than did the Valois dukes.123 In marriage negotiations, for example, he had promised his daughter, Margaret, to wed

a son of Edward III of England, only to marry her off to Philip of Rouvres, then the duke of

Burgundy. When Philip died in 1361, Louis again promised her to a son of Edward III, Edmund

of Langley, but instead he married her to Philip the Bold; then the new duke of Burgundy. By the

era of Mary of Burgundy, the Anglo-Burgundian relationship had again come to resemble the

ninth-century version, with actual cooperation between these sovereign lands. However, instead

of the Vikings, both countries found as their nemesis the king of France, Louis XI.

The background for these policies may be seen from the method by which the Valois dukes had attained their lands and wealth. The duchy of Burgundy had been the property of the

French in 1361 when the last Capetian duke of Burgundy died. The French King John II bestowed the duchy upon his youngest son, Philip the Bold in 1363, as a reward for the valour he

displayed in the in 1356. The county of Burgundy, called the Franche-Comté,

was not included because it was an imperial fief; which was inherited by the widow of Count

Louis II, Margaret, Countess of Flanders. However, Philip the Bold married her granddaughter,also named Margaret, reuniting the duchy and the county of Burgundy. This fit in

with his plan for the restoration of a powerful kingdom, combined of the territories once

assigned to Lothaire (Lotharingia/Lorraine) in the tripartite division of the by

the treaty of Verdun of 843. Further expansion of Burgundy came through the double marriage

of John the Fearless with Margaret, the sister of William VI of Holland, and of William VI with

123Wim Blockman and Walter Prevener; translated by Elizabeth Fackelman; translation revised by Edward Peters The Promised Lands: The under Burgundian Rule, 1369-1530, (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, c1999), p. 13.

60 Margaret of Burgundy. Later, Philip the Good expanded the duchy even more by forcing his

cousin Jacoba, the only child and heiress of William of Holland, to abdicate in 1433. He thus

became , Zeeland and Hainault. Although their vast properties made the dukes

richer and more powerful the most European monarchs, they still lacked a crown.

The tradition of issuing images of the Counts and Countesses of Flanders began with the

creation of the monumental tomb of Louis of Male. The program was commissioned by his

great-grandson, Philip the Good, duke of Burgundy.124 The tomb was surrounded by stone

effigies of Louis of Male and his (fig.2.11). These were further surrounded by his

Burgundian progeny. Thus, Philip the Good had symbolically claimed the title of Count of

Flanders as part of the House of Valois by including the Burgundian line to the tomb sculpture effigies.125 This was part of the overall design begun by his grandfather, Philip the Bold, for

reuniting the county and duchy of Burgundy, as well as reestablishing the Lotharingian dynasty in order to establish a separate kingdom from that of their French cousins, one which harkened back to their common Carolingian forebears. Lotharingia was the term used which referred to the portion of Charlemagne’s empire given to his great-grandson, (795-855 A.D.). Lothair received the imperial title as well as and the territory from the North Sea to the

Mediterranean , along the valleys of the and the Rhone. After Lothair’s death, these lands were further divided among his own three sons.126

Such reference to ancestral imagery was a time-honored tradition. Geoffrey of Monmouth

used a similar device to relate the genealogy of King Arthur back to the emperor Constantine the

124 Roberts, 391. 125 Dhanens, Hubert and Jan Van Eyck,( New York: Alpine Fine Arts Collection, 1980?), 124-126. 126 George Edmundson, History of Holland, (Cambridge: The University Press, 1922), p.1-11. Mark T. Hooker, The History of Holland, (Creenwald Press: Connecticut, 1999), 72-79.

61 Great.127 It was via Constantine that the divine nature of Christian kings had been established.

His vision of the cross of Jesus, bearing the words In Hoc Signo Vinces. (“In this sign conquer”),

and the subsequent victory at the Milvian Bridge in 321 A.D., became the model for all divine kingships. As mentioned earlier, Clovis’ miraculous baptism became a second example to follow. As noted above, Tanner discusses a manuscript illustration which depicts this event. In it

Philip the Good stands as witness to his ancestor’s miracle.

The mourner figures, which once surrounded the triple tomb containing Louis, his wife,

and his daughter, were restrained in emotion in comparison to those found upon the tomb of his

son-in-law, Philip the Bold (fig. 2.12). These expressively wrought images from the hand of

Claus Sluter seem to languish perpetually in a sort of mortified stupor. In Arthurian terms they

may be likened to the three queens who took the mortally wounded body of Arthur from Sir

Bedivere, to the island of Avalon. There, it is implied, that the king will be healed. In Sir Thomas

Malory’s the Morte d’Arthur, Sir Bedivere is with the king when “a lytyll barge with many fayre

ladyes in hit, and amonge hem all was a quene, and all they had blak hoodis. And all they wepte

and shryked whan they saw kynge Arthur.” Arthur tells the knight, “Comforte thyself…and do as

well as thou mayst…for I wyll into the vale of Avalon to hele me of my grrvous wounde. And if

thou here nevermore of me, pray for my soul.’” The dark image conjured by Thomas Malory is

echoed in the beings bereft of their lord, who meander beneath the sarcophagus of the

Burgundian duke, the first to add Count of Flanders to his titles. Both the figures and Malory’s

words reflect the messianic nature of kingship in that the king never truly dies.128

That the purpose of these figures is to suggest symbolically the “sleeping dead” who have been taken to another, mystical realm, becomes clear when viewing the tomb of Philip’s nephew,

127 Editor, Betty Radice, Geoffrey of Monmouth: History of the Kings of Britain, (New York: Penguin Books, 1980), 132-133. See also Edmund Reiss, Sir Thomas Malory, (New York: Twain Publishers, Inc., 1966), 83. 128 Tanner, 146-7.

62 Philip de Pot (Fig. 2.13 Paris, Louvre). In this particular monument the hooded mourners

actually act as pall bearers, transporting their lord to a better place. Like the weeping queens

upon the barge bearing the body of King Arthur, these figures, with their heads hung low, also seem inconsolable as they carry their beloved leader to the afterlife.129

As mentioned earlier, Mary of Burgundy was mortally injured during a hunting

expedition after falling from her horse in 1482. Although she had been brought the relic of the

Holy Blood130 in the hopes of a miraculous cure, she succumbed to her injuries and died on

March 27th. She was buried at the Church of Our Lady of Bruges according to instructions that she had left in her will. In this document she had also named the Virgin as her special protectress and specified that her image be placed upon her sarcophagus. What has become of this work is not known, nor is it known whether or not it had indeed been created.131 What makes Mary of

Burgundy’s tomb so unusual is that instead of the mourner figures seen upon the earlier ducal

tombs, we see a complex genealogical tree (fig. 2.14). This shift in visual content is important

because all earlier programs contained the mourners, including the one that she ordered for her

mother, Isabelle of Bourbon.132 The need for this change was a political one: the protection of

her dominion from the French who had claimed that the lack of a male heir insured the lands

would revert back to France.

Moreover, Anne Roberts has noted that the image of the genealogical tree on Mary of

Burgundy’s tomb was derived from a printed Tree of Jesse by Israel van Meckenem (fig. 2.15).

Such images were meant to proclaim Christ’s from the biblical King David,

129 Editor, Eugene Vinaver, The Works of Thomas Malory, vol. 2 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990), 1240. 130Calmette, 286. Kren 32. 131 Roberts, footnote 4, pp. 392-3. Michelangelo’s Bruges Madonna is housed in this church, but there doesn’t appear to be any connection. 132 Ibid, 391.

63 through his mother, the Blessed Virgin Mary.133 By using such a design, the duchess’s tomb

iconography serves a similar function. The claim of hallowed ancestry derives from her own

royal lineage of the House of Valois and Flanders, and is from her, passed on to her son, Philip

the Fair. As noted, Tanner had described the political symbolism of Hapsburg Burgundy as one in which the ruler was described as the descendant of the Old Testament priest-kings.134 As the

Virgin’s genealogy was used to show her son’s right to kingship, so too does Mary imply Philip

the Fair’s claim to his Valois and Flemish lineage. Moreover, the concept of messianic kingship

goes back at least as far as the age of Arthur and Clovis, who were contemporaries.135 Both were

held to be the ancestor of the Hapsburgs and the Burgundians.

Whereas earlier tombs visually illustrated the Arthurian idea of the once and future king,

Mary of Burgundy’s tomb is more like a written history describing her lineage. It thus has the

semblance of a legal document. The importance of these noted ancestors is to demonstrate her

royal lineage and her right to rule. The idea of the Burgundian Consort is evoked by way of the

genealogical tree which casts the duchess in the role of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Its form is

derived from that used for the Virgin’s genealogy, the Tree of Jesse. In actuality, although

Maximilian would rightfully claim the role of consort, being a male, he could not perform the

biological function of a messianic vessel. Thus the roles of the Arthurian model, and the

Burgundian consort have been somewhat reversed.

The tree displays the names and arms of the duchess’s two sets of grand-parents, and

continues their lineage back four more generations. The reason for this, according to Roberts, is

to connect each branch back to King John (II) the Good of France. It was this monarch who had

133 Ibid, 390-394. 134 Tanner, 78-109. 135 Arthur was born around 475 A.D. and Clovis was born in 492 A.D. Although there is little historical proof of the actual existence of King Arthur, the former is the date assigned to the birth of this enigmatic British monarch.

64 presented the duchy of Burgundy to his son, Philip the Bold, in honor of his bravery on the

battlefield. Thus, Burgundy became a possession of Philip’s rather than an to France.

The Tree of Jesse format was meant to point out that the presentation of Burgundy to Philip the

Bold was as rightful inheritance from the former Count, John the Good, to his son. Thus it served both a complex political as well as religious function.136 By making the lineage delve back to the

generation of this French monarch, it also was possible to give reference to the house of

Flanders. This was the actual strategic power of these Burgundian dukes, as well as their most

lucrative resource.

To support further Mary of Burgundy’s right to inheritance, the right of divine kingship

was invoked. To this end, she was depicted in the guise of the Virgin Mary, her namesake. Jean

Molinet described her in the poem “Les Chappelet des Dames” as follows “and thus the

perpetual Virgin accompanied by Joseph, went to Bethlehem, which means house of Bread,

where she gave birth to her dear son. Marie, our natural princess found herself in Bruges, which

begins with the same letter and which is the second Bethlehem, and among the diverse nations

gave birth to Philip, her well-loved son.”137 As with Isabelle of Portugal, we see a comparison of

mother and child; Mary of Burgundy and Philip the Fair, respectively, with the Virgin Mary and

the infant Jesus. This comparison was symbolic of the divine right of kings, and is a prevalent

element in Renaissance political programs. It is particularly emphasized in Burgundian court

propaganda.

As we have seen, the role of Margaret of York was that of a role model to the women of

Burgundy and its possessions. Like Isabelle of Portugal, in chapter one, she too was perceived in

terms of the vessel for the sacred male heir to the duchy. Also, she was depicted in the guise of a

136 Ibid. 137 Roberts, 394.

65 person privy to holy revelation, Mary Magdalen. These attributes define her role as the

Burgundian consort.

Mary of Burgundy, whose term lasted only five years (1477-1482), came into power

amid the protests of the French monarch who claimed that in the absence of a male heir, the

duchy reverted back to France. She was also induced to give in to the terms of the Great

Privilege, which weakened her authority over the by granting their citizens greater autonomy. Thus much of the art produced under her rule reflected her ancestry in the purpose of proving the validity of her claim to her holdings. The genealogical works therefore depict her descent from Louis of Male, Count of Flanders, and King John of France. Both men were her great-great-grandfathers. Like her stepmother, she is also cast as the herald of a sacred reign. The

Tree of Jesse motifs found upon her tomb monument symbolize her function as a vessel of

messianic rule. Moreover, like Molinet’s poem, it casts her in the guise of the Blessed Virgin

Mary. Thus, her role as Burgundian duchess is recognized. During the next period of Burgundian

rule, these ideas continue, but are transplanted in the primary reign of Tudor England.

66

Figure 2.1 Vial of the Holy Blood, ca. 1200, Basilica of the Holy Blood, Bruges.

Figure 2.2a Philip the Good Watches the Baptism of Clovis, Fig. 2.2b Juana of Castile in the Guise of Esther from Les Grandes Chroniques de France, Fifteenth century. Bibliotheque National, Paris.

67

Figure 2.3 Anonymous master. Charles the Bold Figure 2.4 Reliquary of Charles the Bold, Gerard Loyet, as Vicar of Christ,in Ordinance Book of Charles 1467 Gold and enamel, 53 x 17.5 x 34 cm; Liege, Treasury the Bold, Montpellier, Biblioteche Municipale. of St Paul’s cathedral (?)/Saint Lambert et Notre Dame (?)

68

Figure 2.5 Master of Girart de Roussìlon, Margaret of York Performing the Seven Acts of Mercy, in Nicolas Finet, Benoit Seront les Misericordieux, Brussels, Biblioteque Royal MS. 9296, fol. 1

Figure 2.6 Master of Girart de Roussìlon, Margaret of York Kneeling before the Church of St. Gudule, in Nicolas Finet, Benoit Seront les Miserìcordieux, Brussels, Biblioteque Royal MS. 9296, fol. 17.

69

Figure 2.7 Master of Margaret of York, Margaret of York and Charles the Bold Watch the Vision of St. Colette, in Pierre de Vaux vie de St. Colette , Ghent. Convent of the Poor Claires, Ms. 8, fol. 40v.

70

Figure 2.8 Image of Margaret of York and the risen Christ, Nicolas Finet, Dialogue de la duchesse de Bourgogne à Jésus Christ. Made for Margaret of York, Duchess of Burgundy, Follower of the Girart Master, Brussels, shortly after 1468, 200 x 140 mm, Add. MS 7970, ff. 1v-2

71

Figure 2.9 Follower of Van Der Weyden, Deposition, ca. 1485, Netherlandish, about 1490

Detail, 2.9

72

Figure 2.10 Baldwin II, Arnulf I, Baldwin III and Arnulf II, Counts of Flanders, with their Wives, Flemish, 1480, Groot Seminary, Bruges

73

Figure 2.11 Louis de Male’s Funeral Monument at Lille, Engraving in A. L. Millin, Antiquites Nationales, 1797/98.

Figure 2.12 Tomb of Philip the Bold, Musee Beaux Arts. Dijon.

74

Figure 2.13 Tomb of Philip de Pot, Paris, Louvre

75

Fig. 2.14 Tomb of Mary of Burgundy, Lineage of Philip of Burgundy

Fig. 2.15 Israel van Meckenem, engraving of Tree of Jesse

76

Chapter Three

The Marriage of Arthur of Wales and Katherine of Aragon:

The Rise of the Triumvirate

77 “…King Uther died himself, Moaning and wailing for an heir to rule After him, lest his realm should go wrack. And that same night, the night of the new year, By reason of the bitterness and grief That vexed his mother, all before his time Was Arthur born…”138

Just as the Valois Burgundian dukes sought to establish their divine rights to kingly sovereignty through kinship to messianic heroes of the classical, legendary, and biblical past, so to did the newly crowned king of England, whose legitimacy was shaky. The importance of the

Arthurian political model for Henry VII of England may be seen in the circumstances surrounding the birth and life of his first son, Prince Arthur of Wales. He was born on September

20, 1486 at Winchester, which was thought to be the site of ancient Camelot. Moreover, Henry’s astrologer noted that the birth coincided with the appearance of the star, Arcturus. It was to this star that King Arthur had ascended, according to John Lydgate (c. 1370-1450) in the Fall of

Princes.139 Moreover, the poet Pietro Carmeliano (1451-1527) wrote in honor of the newborn prince “Arthur, who has lain buried for so many centuries, has returned.”140

After the birth, processionals and festivities were held in honor of the new heir. The “Te

Deum” was also sung because it was believed that this religious chant united the earthly voices singing with those of the saints and angels who were perpetually singing it in heaven above.141

138 Alfred Lord Tennyson, The Idylls of Kings and Other Arthurian Poems (London: The Nonesuch Press, 1968), 14. 139 Gordon Kipling, The Triumph of Honour (the Hague: Leiden University Press, 1977), 83-84. Fraser, , 27. Anglo, 73. 140 Henry Angsar Kelly, The Divine Providence in England of Shakespeare’s Histories (Cambridge: : Harvard University Press, 1970), 75. Pietro Carmeliano, Suasoria laetitiae, Additional MS, 33-73, foll. 2-3v. The fact that such prophecies were taken very seriously may be observed from the writings of Francis Bacon a century later. In his section “Of Prohecies” he wrote that “Henry the Sixth of England said of Henry the Seventh, when he was a lad, and gave him water: “This is a lad that shall enjoy the crown for which we strive.” From Francis Bacon, The Essays (Norwalk,:The Easton Press, 1980), 119. 141 Sally Leah Beerbower, Henry VII and the Symbolics of Power: Early Tudor Portraiture (New York: State University of New York at Binghamton, 1990), 63. Pamela Sheingorn , “The Te Deum and the Iconography of Praise”, in Early Tudor England, ed. Daniel Williams (Woodbridge: Suffolk, 1989), 171-82.

78 The hymn thus formed a link between those who had gone before with those who had yet to

shake off their mortal coil. This holy song therefore formed a connection to the Arthur of the

ancient Britons and the newly born infant son of Henry VII.

Establishing himself and his offspring as divinely ordained rulers was important to Henry

VII (1457-1509) whose claim to political power was far less stable than that of the major rulers

of Europe such as Maximilian I (1459-1509) and the Catholic Monarchs of Spain, Ferdinand

(1452-1516) and Isabella (1451-1504). For over 20 years, England had been wracked with civil

strife as the two different branches of the royal family, Lancaster and York, fought to gain the

crown. The so-called “War of the Roses” was named for the opposing colors of roses that represented each faction: red for Lancaster and white for York. Henry’s claim as the legitimate

heir to the Lancaster royal line was tenuous at best. But upon Henry’s defeat of the Yorkish

Richard III at Bosworth, and his rise to the throne, nearly a century of civil war came to an end.

This problem was partly resolved by his marriage to (1466-1503),

daughter of Edward IV (1442-1483). The symbol of this marriage and of the peace he brought is

the image of the bi-colored Tudor, or Union rose. The red symbolizes Henry and the House of

Lancaster, the white his queen, Elizabeth, and the house of York. By this union he was able to

avoid two dangers. First, it meant that Elizabeth would not try to usurp his throne, though she

had more hereditary right to it than he did. Moreover, it eliminated the possibility that she might

produce sons to oppose him.142 On March 27, 1486, Henry VII gained further support when Pope

Innocent VIII (b. 1432, reign, 1484-1492) issued a Bull. A royal proclamation reflecting the bull

142 Ibid, Beerbower, 53. Also, Charles Rose, The War of the Roses: A Concise History (London: Thames and Hudson, 1976), 14, 97. Sydney Anglo, Spectacle, Pageantry, and Early Tudor Policy (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969), 60. Levine, Tudor Dynastic Problems, 1460-1571 (Cambridge: University of Cambridge, 1973), 33-37. Antonia Frasure, The Wives of Henry VIII (New York: Vintage Books, 1994), 15-16. Frasure notes that Henry did not have Elizabeth crowned for nearly two years, by which time she had given birth to a son and heir. Being the great-granddaughter to King Edward III gave Elizabeth a better claim to the crown than Henry VII.

79 was issued, which among other things declared that if Elizabeth died “without issue as between

our sovereign bodies bor[n and had] then such issue as between him and her whom after that

God shall join to him shall be had and born]shall be heritors to the same crown and realm of

England.” Furthermore, anyone who would question Henry’s authority would be subject to the

“…pain of his [Henry’s] great curse.”143

Nevertheless, his reign and claims as a Lancaster still had many problems that

endangered Henry’s and Arthur’s legitimacy. Before Henry’s defeat of Richard III at Bosworth

Field on August 22, 1485, Richard had spread the propaganda that Henry’s first act would be to

give back the rule of France to the French king, Charles VIII. This propaganda was potentially

harmful because it was known that Charles had provided funding for Henry’s invasion of

Britain.144 The Yorkist King Richard also kept alive the dubious quality of Henry’s Beaufort lineage, and embellished these weaknesses with outright lies.145 Furthermore, two years after

Richard’s death, in 1487, Margaret of York, Richard’s sister and Charles the Bold’s widow, sent

German forces to fight against Henry at the Battle of Stoke.146 The battle was led by one of

Richard III’s supporters, Viscount Francis Lovell, and devised by Margaret as an attempt to put

Lambert Simnel, who claimed to be Edward, and nephew of Edward IV, on the

British throne after rumors circulated that the real Warwick had perished in the Tower. However, the forces of this pretender were defeated, and Henry paraded the real Earl of Warwick through

143 Paul L. Hughes and James F. Larkin, The Royal Proclamations, vol. I, edit. (London: Yale University Press, 1964), 7. Also see Beerbower, 104-105. She gives the actual papal Bull, which differs little from the royal proclamation quoted above. 144 Ralph Griffiths and Roger S. Thomas, The Making of the Tudor Dynasty, (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1985), 120-1, 127. Also see David Grummitt, editor, The English Experience in France c. 1450-1558, War Diplomacy and Cultural Exchange, (Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Company, 2002), 7, 90-105. The French had claimed that Henry was the son of Henry VI. He was actually related to him through his own father, Edmund Tudor, who was half-brother to Henry VI. This king’s widowed mother, Katherine of Valois (1401-1437), later married , Henry Tudor’s grandfather. 145 Ibid, Griffiths and Thomas, 182-3. 146 Charles Rose, 104-105, 117. This battle was brought on by a claimant to Henry’s throne; John de la Pole.

80 the streets of London to show that he was still alive, not among the opposing forces, and was instead under Henry’s control all along.147 After putting Warwick back in the Tower, he made the eleven-year-old imposter a spit turner in his royal kitchens.

By 1491 the French king gave his support to another pretender to the throne, Perkin

Warbeck, when he perceived that Henry might lay claim to the French throne.148. As she did earlier with , Margaret of York agreed that Warbeck was one of her royal nephews, more deserving of the crown than Henry. The imposter Warbeck claimed to be the younger of the two sons of Edward IV, Richard , who had been placed in the

Tower of London in 1483 by their uncle Richard III. The boys, Edward V and Richard, Duke of

York, were the older brothers of Henry VII’s queen, Elizabeth, as well as Margaret of York’s nephews. The princes were rumored to have been murdered by agents of King Richard III that same year.149 Their deaths, ironically, benefited Richard III’s rival, Henry VII by making

Elizabeth the Plantagenet heir.

Warbeck’s attempts to invade and claim the throne came to naught. Nevertheless, this purported son of Edward IV was a serious threat to the Tudor dynasty because, unlike Lambert

147 He was the son of George, Duke of Clarence, who was also the brother of Edward IV and Richard III. Thus, this purported remaining nephew of the Yorkist kings would have been a real threat to Henry’s rule. This is why Henry put him in the Tower. Rebecca Fraser, The Story of Britain From the Romans to the Present: A Narrative History, (New York: W. W. Norton Press), 2005, 249-250. Michael Van Cleave Alexander, The First of A Study of Henry VII and His Reign, (New Jersey: Rowman and Littlefield, 1980), 53-60. Weightman, 155-161. 148 Griffiths and Thomas, 172. Actually, Henry had more right to the throne of France than he did to that of England, being that his grandmother was the daughter of the French King Charles VI (1368-1422). See Griffiths and Thomas, 24-32. Also, Robert Lacey, Great Tales From English History, New York, Little Brown and Company, 2005, 37-41. 149 Michael Van Cleave Alexander, The First of the Tudors: A Study of Henry VII and His Reign, (New Jersey: Rowan and Littlefield, 1980), 2-14. Rebecca Fraser, The Story of Britain From the Romans to the Present: A Narrative History, (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2003), 234-238. Christopher Hibbert, The , (New York: Newsweek, 1971), 43-45. Although there is no clear evidence that the boys were killed by their uncle, Richard III, it is more likely that they were murdered by his agents rather than by Henry VII. In April of 1483 their father, Edward IV, died unexpectedly at the age of forty. Richard, (then) , assumed the regency for the twelve year old Edward V (1470-1483?), until he came of age. Instead, on June 16, 1483 he placed him in the Tower, with his nine-year old brother, Richard of Shrewsbury (1472-1483?), 1st Duke of York. The two young sons of Edward IV were never to be seen again. According to they were murdered that August. See also, Lacey, 54-57.

81 Simnel, his claim as Richard, Duke of York, was supported by other monarchs such as

Maximilian, Charles VIII of France, and James IV of Scotland based upon Margaret of York’s affirmation of his identity. He had even been invited to the funeral of the Holy Roman Emperor

Frederick III, by the emperor’s son, Maximilian I.150 Moreover, if Warbeck had actually been the

lost Duke of York, unlike Warwick, he would have been the son of a king, rather than merely a

nephew. Thus, his legitimacy would have far outweighed Henry VII’s.

Considering all of the problems with establishing the legitimacy of his reign, it is no

surprise that when the Spanish ambassador, Dr. Roderico Gonsalvo de , drafted a treaty of

marriage between Henry’s eldest son, Arthur of Wales, and the Spanish princess, Katherine of

Aragon (1485-1536) in 1488, the elated king began to sing the Te Deum Laudamus.151 This

euphoria on the part of the British monarch must have been further heightened when in March of

the following year it was agreed that Warbeck, claimant to the throne, would not be welcome on

Spanish soil. The Treaty of Medina del Campo, which pledged the daughter of the Catholic

Monarchs of Spain to Henry’s eldest heir, also provided Henry with a status equal to that of other

European monarchs. On the same day of the signing of the treaty, in fact, Henry issued a coin

from his mint that bore the emblem of a closed imperial-style crown, clearly an allusion to the

successful establishment of the new Tudor dynasty.152 Moreover, the attitude of the Burgundian-

Hapsburgs shifted in Henry’s favor when Charles VIII of France jilted Maximilian’s daughter,

Margaret of Austria, and instead married Maximilian’s intended bride, Anne of .153

150 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perkin_Warbeck 151 Fraser, 16-17. 152 Dale Hoak, editor, Tudor Political Culture, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 65-70. 153 A. Fraser, 17. Griffiths and Thomas, 172. Jane de Iongh, Margaret of Austria: Regent of the Netherlands, (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1953), 51, 76. Susan Doran, edit., Tudor England and Its Neighbours, (New York: Palgrave Mc Millan), 2005, 20-1.

82 Henry VII used genealogists to create a useful family tree. He commissioned Polydor

Vergil to compile a history of Great Britain from “the earliest times until his own day.”154 This was important because part of his claim to royal blood was through his mother’s grandfather,

John Beaufort (1373-1410). John’s father was John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, whose father was King Edward III (1312- 1377) of England. However, Beaufort’s mother was Katherine

Swynford (1340-1299), who at the time of Henry’s ancestor’s birth, was a mistress, rather than wife to John of Gaunt. Although Henry’s Lancastrian line was legitimized in the reign of Richard

II (1367-1400), Henry IV added a rider which excluded the Beaufort line from the right to inherit the throne.155 For this reason the genealogy also claimed “…Tudor descent from the Welsh

princes, back to the British kings.”156 Moreover the lineage was claimed to have descended to

Cadwaladr from King Arthur. Prince Cadwaladr is mentioned towards the end of Geoffrey of

Monmouth’s Historia Regum Britannia or History of the British Kings (ca. 1136). This program

was accepted by the British in Worcester who received Henry with this welcome:

“Cadwalader’s blood lineally descending, Long hath been told of such a Prince coming. Wherefore Friends, if that I shall not see, This is the Fufiller of the Prophecy,”157

As a further reflection of this genealogical plan, Henry commissioned the frescoes of kings at Richmond Palace, which included Brute, Hengist, King William Rufus, and King

Arthur.158 All of these were British, rather than Saxon Kings of England. Henry wished to

celebrate and identify with these native kings since the country derived the name of Britain from

Brute, the grandson of Aeneas. It was to him that the goddess Diana had predicted the founding

154 Ibid, Griffiths and Thomas, 112. Kipling, 20. 155 Ibid, Rose, 93-94. 156 Beerbower, 54. Kipling, 15, 97. 157 Griffiths and Thomas, 189. 158 Kipling, 59-61. Beerbower, 55-57.

83 of a “…race of kings to whom all the world will be subject.” According to Geoffrey of

Monmouth’s History of British Kings, it was during the reign of Brute’s descendant, King

Vortigern that the invasion of the had occurred. When Arthur became king, these foreign invaders were defeated and did not return during his reign. However, after his death they did return and wrought havoc for centuries. Towards the end of Geoffrey’s history we meet Arthur’s descendant, the Welsh Prince Cadwaladr. On his deathbed he received a vision of an angel who assured him that the Saxons would be defeated by a future king of Brute’s, or, in other words, of

British lineage.

Henry wished to be seen as the fulfillment of this prophecy. This is the purpose of much early Tudor iconography. For example, he chose the Red Dragon of Wales as a personal royal emblem to this end. This image derives from Geoffrey’s history, in which Merlin has a vision of battling red and white dragons; the red dragon symbolized the advent of Arthur, while the white dragon symbolized the Saxon invaders. As in Merlin’s prophetic vision they represent a coming age of peace and prosperity. It is no accident that so much of the Tudor iconography is Welsh in character. Henry’s recent ancestors were from Wales. Their first foray into the political field came under the reign of King Richard II, son of Edward, the Black (1330-1376), and Joan, the Fair Maid of Kent (1328-1385). 159

Richard II is the first to have had his portrait made from life, and painted on a panel. The

painting (fig. 3.1) resembles an image of Christ in , in glowing gold, which was typical

of this king who believed himself as ordained by God, an iconography chosen by many before him. This theopolitical construct may be traced to Otto III (fig. 3.2), who had styled himself as

the new Constantine. Such a view implies the so-called Donation of Constantine, which was

purportedly issued by the Emperor Constantine I. The Donation granted the pope, Sylvester I,

159 Griffiths and Thomas, 19.

84 and his successors dominion over the city of Rome and the entire Western Roman Empire.

Constantine, on the other hand, would retain imperial authority in the Eastern Roman Empire

from his new imperial capital of Constantinople. The text claimed that the Donation was

Constantine's gift to Pope Sylvester for instructing him in the Christian faith, baptizing him and miraculously curing him of leprosy. When Otto III became emperor he installed his tutor as Pope

Sylvester II, and for himself had taken the title “servant of Christ,” in emulation of Constantine who ruled by Christ’s own selection. Furthermore, the reign of Constantine may be seen as a beginning of the concept of the sanctity of the Holy Roman Emperor. Constantine’s statue atop the Column of Constantine depicted him as the sun god Apollo (fig. 3.3). Such depictions were also used for Jesus Christ. Otto’s predecessor was his cousin, Henry II. Like Richard II, this emperor was considered to be sacred. The illustration depicts him being crowned by Jesus (fig.

3.4), while two angels bestow upon hin the Holy Lance and his sword160. This point of view was shared by Richard II and many medieval and early Renaissance rulers concerning their own regal status. Earthly kingship was seen as a reflection of God’s in heaven, but earthly rule was far inferior to God’s. This is symbolized upon the Ghent Altarpiece’s panel depicting the Heavenly

Father(fig. 3.5). Here we see the crown of earthly Kings laid before the feet of the Almighty as it has no power other than that which comes from the God. Similar imagery, as we shall see, was universally adopted for the depictions of European monarchs.

The Welsh house of Tudor had been patronized by Richard II. However, in 1399 Richard

II was violently overthrown by his cousin, the son of John of Gaunt and ,

160 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Holy-Lance. The Holy Lance was the lance which had pierced Christ’s heart at the Crucifixion. This relic was owned by the Holy Roman Emperors. Otto III gave a replica of the lance to Boleslaw I of in 1000 A.D.

85 who became King Henry IV. A descendant of Lord of Wales161, Owain

Glyndwr, and three of his Tudor cousins, rebelled against this usurper in 1400 and were thus

banned as outlaws for the next two decades. In spite of this, Owain publicly claimed to be the

rightful and native Prince of Wales.162 This was an act of Welsh revolt for independence against

the invading British kings. He was reclaiming the hereditary title in 1301, protesting its use as an

honorary title for the princes who would inherit the British throne. Henry VII’s great-grandfather

was one of the Tudor rebel brothers, Maredudd (Owen ap Maredudd ap Tewdr) (d. 1461). In

English he is called Owen Tudor.

The most important period for the Tudors in English politics came during the reign of

Henry IV’s grandson, Henry VI. The year that he was born his father, Henry V, had died.

Furthermore, his mother’s father, King Charles VI of France died the same year, making the

infant prince the potential heir to both kingdoms.163 His mother, Katherine of Valois (1401-

1437), only twenty-one and a beautiful widow, was restrained from marrying unsuitably by an

act of Parliament of 1427-1428 which forbade her to marry without the permission of her son.

Henry VI, being at the time a mere six-year old, could not legally grant this permission. If

Katherine went against this law, she would risk the forfeiture of her lands. Nevertheless, she secretly married Owen Tudor, a clerk at the castle, in 1431 or 1432. They were the grandparents of Henry VII. They had three other surviving sons and one surviving daughter. Their step-

161 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhys-ap-Gruffydd. Was one of the most powerful Welsh princes in the 12th century. 162 Ibid, 20-21. The tradition of bestowing this title upon British princes began in 1301. King Edward I (1239- 1307), having conquered Wales bestowed the title upon his son, the future King Edward II (1284-1327). This unfortunate monarch, the younger Edward, was horribly murdered by his own court. Also see, Eyre Evans Crowe, The , (New York: Harper, 1842), p. 49. Early on the Duke of Orleans, Louis, and his brother, King Charles VI of France, had supported Glyndwr. In 1405 they had sent sixty-eight vessels and eight hundred men to the cause of the Welsh prince. However, Henry IV defeated the rebels at Shrewsbury, and the French cause grew more unpopular. This was especially so for their cousin the Duke of Burgundy, whose lands were heavily taxed for the war effort. 163 Griffith and Thomas, 27-28.

86 brother, King Henry VI, was close with them and granted them noble title in 1452. He made

Henry VII’s father, Edmund Tudor, , and his brother (Henry’s uncle) Jasper

Tudor, . In 1455 Edmund married into Lancastrian blood by his marriage to

Margaret Beaufort, daughter of the first .

Margaret was the great-granddaughter of John of Gaunt and his then-mistress, Katherine

Swynford. The Beauforts were legitimized during the reign of Richard II, but the rider

(mentioned above) was added during the reign of his usurper, Henry IV. Edmund and Margaret

had only one son. Henry (VII) was born in 1455 to an already widowed, thirteen-year old girl.

This son’s potential claim to the throne put him in danger. In less than a century two kings had

been murdered and more violent upheavals lay ahead for England’s kings and princes164. For his safety Margaret sent her four-year-old son to France with his uncle Jasper. He would not see her again for the next twenty years. When he did return in 1485, he proclaimed himself as “y mab darogan”, the “man of destiny during his march through Wales.”165

Henry VII constantly reinforced his ancient Welsh and British lineages. As mentioned earlier, a series of frescoes were painted at the newly constructed Richmond Palace that were

designed to establish Henry’s link to King Arthur. The fresco cycle surrounded the entire main

room, culminating at the throne of Henry VII, above which his own image was depicted.166

There were also sculpted representations of Brute, Hengist167, and King Arthur. The building was

164Ibid, 53. His own grandfather, Owen Tudor, was executed by Edward IV’s forces in 1461 at the Battle of St. Mortimer’s Cross. Before his execution he is said to have remarked: “That head shall lie on the stock that was wont to lie on Queen Katherine's lap.” 165 Ibid, 61-2. 166 Beerbower, 55-56. Kipling, 58-67. 167Mrs. Matthew Hall, Lives of the Queens of England Before the Norman Conquest, (Boston: Taggerd & Thompson, 1864), 178-188. The Saxon Hengist’s daughter, Rowena, married Vortigern. For this privilege the Hengist was given Kent from Vortigern. Both of these men are defeated by Arthur’s uncle, Ambrosius, and his father, Uther Pendragon. With the help of Merlin Stonehenge was (according to the myth) erected in memorial to those slain by Hengist and Vortigern. Stonehenge was actually created nearly three thousand years earlier.

87 erected in order to replace Sheen Palace, which had burned down on December 31, 1427.168

Richmond Palace (begun in 1500; fig. 3.6) was the lynchpin of the Tudor Dynasty’s architectural achievements, as well as the site for the gatherings for the wedding of Prince Arthur and

Katherine of Aragon (1485-1436).169

The wedding took place on Sunday November 14, 1501, and was followed by elaborate

spectacles containing numerous Arthurian and messianic references.170 In Burgundian fashion, the English king had adopted words and imagery from Virgil’s Eclogue IV, which heralded a return to a Golden Age of Peace. Virgil’s pagan Roman verses were seen as prophecies of the

Advent of Christ. In particular, the following verses are of interest:

“Now the last age by Cumae’s Sibyl sung has come and gone, and the majestic roll of circling centuries begins anew: justice returns, returns old Saturn’s reign, with a new breed of men sent down from heaven. only do thou, at the boy’s birth in whom the iron shall cease, and the golden race arise, befriend him, chaste Lucina; ‘tis thine own Apollo reigns.’”171

The “boy” mentioned in these verses was held to be a prophetic reference to Christ. In the

pageants for the wedding of Arthur, Prince of Wales, and Katherine of Aragon, the author

appears to have relied heavily upon this, and a number of other sources, as we shall see.

For Katherine of Aragon’s entry into London there were six separate performances, or

pageants. These were enacted upon six wooden stages set up in different sections of the city. All

were elaborately decorated with shields and heraldic imagery. Upon each of these stages actors

were dressed as personages related to the couple’s ancestry or they functioned as part of the

168 Kipling, 3. 169 Kipling, 68-71. 170 Kipling, 72-95. 171http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext/lookup=Verg.+, P. Vergilius Maro, edit. J. B. Greenough, from an internet source based upon this editor’s book.

88 religious and prophetic underlying theme of the pageant series. The overall message of the series

was to remind the young couple that honor is the most important virtue, and that to receive it one must exhibit virtue. 172

The first pageant introduced the main subject of the series and the personalities of the

couple. It was set upon London Bridge in the form of a tower, which had two stories. Before the

tower were two great posts painted with ostrich feathers, a red Lancastrian rose, a Beaufort

, and the arms of England; the lion rampant. In the lower level of the tower sat St.

Katherine while St. Ursula sat in the upper level. Above each saint was a painting of the Holy

Trinity. The couple was first addressed by St. Catherine (or Katherine), who was recognized by

her attribute of the wheel representing the instrument of her death and torture. She said:

“I Remembyr well, in yowyr ffyrst entre Into this world, the trust & affeccion That ye & yowir ffreendys bare toward me In yowyr Baptysm, to be sheeld and proteccion Not of adventure but of free eleccion Ye took thys name Katharyn, ffor verray trust & love, Whych name ys Regystryd in the hygth court above.”

After having addressed the name parallels, the saint compares the baptism of the princess with

her upcoming wedding. She continues: “Wyth the second, honour temporall/And with the ffyrst

Glory perpetuall.”

Hence, her marriage is seen as the earthly equivalent to her baptism, which was her

wedding to Christ. Through marriage to Christ and by virtue comes the reward of honor. Such a

mystic marriage (of ) had been depicted by the artist Hans Memling The

Mystic Marriage (fig. 3.7), (ca. 1471, St. John’s Hospital, Bruges) has often been associated with

Margaret of York and Mary of Burgundy. Aymer Vallance identifies the figure of St. Barbara

172 Anglo, 57-59.

89 with a portrait of Mary of Burgundy, and the figure of St. Catherine with Margaret of York.173

Furthermore, it appears as if this Katherine is to a degree not just Catherine of Alexandria, but

also related to the fourteenth-century mystic Catherine of Siena, who experienced a vision in

which she had become Christ’s bride, and whose writings were widely distributed. This saint is

also one of the first saints to have received the stigmata, the wounds of Christ’s crucifixion. Like

St. Brigitte of , she had challenged kings and . Both were well-known throughout

Europe. In fact, their prophecies were also utilized for their value as political propaganda. The

popularity of the Brigittines in Britain may be in part due to the fact that in 1415 Henry V

himself laid the foundation-stone on part of the royal manor of Isleworth on the Thames for the

Brigittine Monastery of Syon House.174 St. Catherine of Siena’s popularity may be gleaned from

the fact of the existence of artworks depicting her life from the time of her canonization in 1461.

One example is in the Cleveland Art Museum and is entitled St. Catherine of Siena Invested

with the Dominican Habit , by . A more well-known, but later example

of an image of this saint is by the artist Pinturrichio, and is among the frescoes executed by him at the Piccolomini Library, in Siena. These images were made between 1502 and 1508. Among them is The Canonization of St. Catherine of Siena by Pope Pius II. Another image is that of the

Marriage of Emperor Frederick III to Eleanora of Portugal. Frederick III will be discussed more in the next chapter.

The reasons for the choice of St. Catherine for introducing the pageant are simple. First of all, the name parallels alludes to both the prince’s and the princess’s Lancastrian ancestry. She

173 See. Aymer Vallence, “Some Flemish Glass Panel,” The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs, vol. 19, no. 100, July, 1911, p. 189. 174 Montague Summers, Physical Phenomena of Mysticism, With Especial Reference to the Stigmata, Divine and Diabolic, (New York: Barnes & Noble, ca.1950), 32. Also see Bridget Morris, St. Birgitta of Sweden, (Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1999), 171. St. Birgitta is the patron saint of Sweden. Henry’s sister, Philippa, was married to the Swedish king, King Eric XIII (1382--1445).

90 was the descendant of another Katherine, John of Gaunt’s daughter who married Henry III of

Castile. Arthur’s Lancastrian descent from John of Gaunt, as has been discussed earlier, was via

John of Gaunt and Katherine Swynford, whose heraldic shield contained three depictions of St.

Katherine’s wheel.

The next personage to address the Princess was St. Ursula. The reason for choosing her is likely for her virtuous nature as one of a thousand martyred virgins who also happened to be a

British saint and princess. These attributes made her a good choice for the spokesperson of the

Tudor dynasty. St. Ursula also was used to introduce the astral symbolism, which was used to chart the destiny of Arthur of Wales and Katherine of Aragon. She addressed them as follows:

“Trowth It is that owth of my lynage cam Arthur the wyse, noble and vaylaunt kyng That in this Region was ffyrst of his name And ffor his strength, honour and all thing Mete ffor his estate, he was Resemblyng Arthur the noble sygn in the hevyn Beawte of the north, with brygth sterrys sevyn.

Unto the kyng, strong, ffamows and prudent Nere kyn am I, and namyd Ursula By which I also Represent An othir Image callid minor ursa That other wyse Is callid Cinosura Set ffast by Arthur, with othyr sterris bright Guyvyng grete comfort to travaylours by nyghth.

As Arthur yowir spowse, the second now Succedyth the ffyrst Arthur in dygnyte Soo In lyke wyse, madame katharyn, yow As second Ursula, shall succeed me.”175

Here the name of the star Arcturus is symbolic of Arthur, while St. Ursula/Katherine of

Aragon is represented by the constellation of Ursa Minor. The mistaken notion that the star

Arcturus was part of the constellation is played upon here as symbolic of the ideas of two souls

175 Ibid, 60-2.

91 becoming as one through the sacrament of Holy Matrimony. The source for this erroneous

astronomy was an interpretation of verses in the Book of Job, ideas that had become well known

during the period from numerous editions of Gregory the Great’s Moralia in libros beati Job.

Gregory will also figure in another pageant in the series.

The stage for the second pageant was constructed using a three-foot-tall stone wall.

Above this, built upon a wooden stage, was a wooden castle painted to resemble stone and

mortar. The Princess was addressed by actors playing the roles of Policy, Noblesse, and Virtue.

They commended the Princess on her moral strengths, and reminded her that it was her duty,

being of royal blood, to continue her virtuous ways because it is by living as such that she will

continue to protect her subjects and their interests, who being of lower rank do not have the

power to do so themselves.176

The third pageant, “the Sphere of the Moon,” was at the Conduit in Cornhill. The

Conduits were ancient water tower systems in London, which were low enough that they were

often used as stages for celebrations and Royal Entries.177 Again the stage was painted to

resemble stone and mortar; and decorated with the symbols of Henry’s reign: the Beaufort

portcullis, the Union rose, and the Red Dragon of Wales. This scene opened with the Archangel

Raphael addressing Katherine’s ancestor, King Alphonso the Wise (reign, 1252-1282), of

Castile, and the prophets Job, and Boethius (480-524 or 525).178 Above the actors was a cosmic

mechanism which showed the moon, planets and stars at its center. On the circumference were

painted the signs of the zodiac. Alphonso the Wise was represented in this scene because he had

written a treatise on astronomical instruments. The main idea of this pageant became evident

176 Ibid, 63-67. 177 John Wesley Harris, Medieval Theatre in Context: An Introduction , (London: Routledge, 1992), 70. Also see, “Early English Stages: 1300 to 1600.” By Glynne Wickham, Renaissance News, Vol. 13, No. 2 (Summer, 1960), pp. 157-162. 178 Ibid, 67-69.

92 when the Archangel addressed the princess, warning her that true knowledge comes only from

God through his angelic messengers. He also revealed to her that he had been appointed by God

to govern over marriages, reminding her that the purpose of marriage is for the “procreacion of

chyldr”, and not for the “censual lust and apetyte.”179

The celestial imagery of the third pageant was expounded upon in the fourth pageant,

“The Sphere of the Sun,” at the Great Conduit in Cheap. Again the stage was decorated with a

profusion of Tudor heraldic emblems. This stage too had a great cosmological device, upon each

side there was an image of God the Father flanked by angels. In the center of this device sat an

image of Prince Arthur, dressed in golden armor, sitting upon a golden throne (for a similar

device see Fig. 3.7).180 The actor dressed as Job explained the meaning of the imagery:

“It is the sun of Justice, the erth enlumynyng, That is the veray Hesperus, that shone soo brygth In the west, to ouir comfort, by his deth ffallyng. This is the lyon of Judah, that venquysshid in ffyght, Rysyng from deth, by his own mygth. This ys Arcturus, enlumynyng ecch coost Wyth sevyn brygth sterris vij gyfftys of the holy Goost.”181

The four images mentioned here; the Sun of Justice, Hesperus, the lyon of Judah, and

Arcturus, all refer to Arthur. Seated at the center of the cosmos, in his golden armor and upon his

golden throne, Arthur is indisputably the figure of the sun. The golden armor is the armor of

Justice; thus he is the Sun of Justice.182 The symbol of the Lion of Judah comes from the seven

stars of Ursa Minor, one of which (as mentioned) was thought to have been Arcturus. This so-

called constellation was also a reference to the seven candles of the Apocalypse. In the Book of

179 Ibid, 70-71. 180 This device, shown in Fig. 3.8 depicts the back portion of the mechanism, in which armored men turn gears which raise and lower the visible elements seen in the front of the stage by the spectators. 181 Ibid, 78. 182 Ibid, 80-82. The image described recalls the Portrait of Richard II. This is probably a coincidence. However, the motif of the king as the sun-god/Apollo/Christ is consistent in both representations.

93 Revelation ( 5:5) is written: “Weep not: behold the lion of the tree of Judah, the root of David, hath prevailed to open a book and the seven seals thereof.” Hence, Arthur has been symbolically

portrayed as the messianic protector of the realm from the onslaught of apocalyptic doom, for

which the portent is the opening of the seals. The use of the Prophet Job to introduce this scene may be related to the fact that the Book of Job describes the Leviathan, into whose mouth fell the fallen angels. Hence, the patrons of this pageant would do well to be counted among the allies of this rising Sun of Justice, and to thus avoid a similar fate. The mention of Hesperus, while also the ancient Roman word for “Spain,” here functions as the symbol of the resurrection of the Lion of Judah, as well as that of King Arthur, who is further symbolized by the star Arcturus.

The fifth pageant, had a constructed “The Temple of God,” representing the throne of

Heaven. The building was also decorated with heraldic emblems. Above the stage sat “a

personage Representyng the ffadyr of hevyn beying all fourmyd of Gold, and brennyng before his trone vij Candylsykkis of Gold…” This figure addressed Katherine:

“In thys my chirch I am always Recydent, As my chyeff tabernacle and most chosyn place, Among these goldyn candylstykkis which Represent My catholyk chyrch, shynyng affore my fface Wyth light of ffeyth, wysdam, doctrine and grace, And marvelously eke enflaumyd toward me Wyth the extygwible ffyre of Charyte.”183

The Heavenly Father also informs the couple that the princess will have many children: “Blessed

be the ffruyt of yowir bely. Yowir substance and ffrutys shall increace and multiply…” A second

character, Perlacy, in reference to the (21:2-3), presents Katherine to Arthur

as “…the coming from Heaven as the bride adorned for her husband….”

Following this, Perlacy then compares Henry VII to God the Father: “And Ryght soo as owir

Soverayn lord the king May be Resemblid to the kyng Celestyall…”.

183 Ibid, 85-86.

94 The sixth and final pageant, “The Throne of Honour,” was built at the Conduit at the far end of Cheap at the entrance to St. Paul’s churchyard. The marriage was not seen as a mere joining of a betrothed couple. It was a means by which both parties, through a life of virtue, and subsequent honor, would thus be able to bestow those same qualities upon the subjects of the realm. This theme, portrayed throughout the series, was firmly driven home in this last pageant.

The iconography consisted of a flight of seven steps of Virtue, which lead above to the Temple of Virtue. These seven steps recall the seven stars of Ursa Minor. The character of Gregory the

Great informs the revelers and the royal couple that both the steps and the stars represent the

Cardinal and Theological Virtues. The Cardinal Virtues being: Prudence, Temperance, Fortitude and Justice, while the Theological Virtues are: Faith, Hope, and Charity. The obvious symbolism is that only by ascending these seven steps can one gain honor.

The wedding festivities lasted for two weeks. Much of the imagery appears to have

Burgundian parallels, if not direct origins. For example, on the Adoration of the Lamb panel of the Ghent Altarpiece, the British princess and martyr St. Ursula appears in the upper right of the central scene. There she is depicted with her thousand martyred virgins in procession to the

Mystic Lamb, shown at the center of the masterpiece. As mentioned above, St. Catherine of

Alexandria (ca. 287-305) was the subject of Memling’s Mystic Marriage of St. Catherine, which traditionally has been said to contain the likenesses of Margaret of York and Mary of Burgundy.

As mentioned above, both this altarpiece and the St. Ursula’s Reliquary are in Bruges, at St.

John’s Hospital, and both were painted by Memling. As was discussed in the last chapter,

Memling also painted a devotional work for John Donne, an important diplomat for Queen

Elizabeth’s father, Edward IV.

95 The wedding was also the subject of a series of tapestries to commemorate the event.

They were originally part of a set of Tudor history tapestries, the first of which was described in the inventory of King Henry VIII as the “Komyng into England of King Henrye the VII. taking

wt. th’ one hande the crowne from King Richard the thirde the usurper of the same, and with the

other hand holding a roose crowned.” Another in the set was The Marriage of Prince

Arthur, which depicted the arrival of the princess, while “in one corner Henry VII and Ferdinand

of Spain were conferring amicably on a joint throne.”184 The border of this tapestry contains the

arms of England and France contained within Garters on a ground sprinkled with flowers.

After all the high expectations, the heralding of the rebirth of King Arthur, and the

elaborate marriage festivities, on April 2, 1502 Prince Arthur of Wales died.185 As a result,

Henry VII’s main political objective became a quest for a new marriage alliance in order to

preserve the Tudor dynasty. At first this search took the form of a search for his remaining son,

Prince Henry. However, in February of 1503 Queen Elizabeth of York died. Thus Henry became himself an available widower. Among those he courted was Katherine’s sister, Joanna of Aragon

(1479-1555). 186 He pursued her after her husband’s death in 1507. She had been married to

Philip the Fair, son of Maximilian I. It was also rumored that Henry VII wished to marry

Katherine of Aragon, his own daughter-in-law. More serious proposals, however, were made to

Queen Joanna of Naples, niece of Ferdinand, and later, to Margaret of Savoy (and Austria),

Maximilian’s daughter.

184 W. G. Thomson, The History of Tapestry from the Earliest Times until the Present Day, (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1906), 149-150. Kipling, 71n. 48. Beerbower, 68-69. The wedding event is recorded in three still- existing tapestries, The Coventry Hall Tapestry, (tapestry, c. 1501, St. Mary Hall, Coventry), The Marriage of Prince Arthur, (c.1500, Lyme Regis Church ), and another The Marriage of Arthur, (c. 1500, Magdalen College, Oxford). They probably were hung at Richmond’s Great Hall among other tapestries, such as those depicting Scenes from the Trojan War. Thus, among these sacred Greek ancestors, is heralded the wedding of their descendant; the “New Arthur 185 Anglo, 106. Doran and Richardson, 32. Fraser, 33. Hilaire Belloc, Characters of the Reformation, 51. Mary M. Luke, Catherine, the Queen, (New York, Coward-McCann), 1967, 46-47. 186 Luke, 56-57. Fraser, 38-41. Beerbower, 84, no. 32. Mortimer Levine, Tudor Dynastic Problems, 1973, 39-41.

96 The stable relationships of the triumvirate of England, Burgundy-Austria, and Spain

appeared to weaken when Arthur died, especially because it was feared that Maximilian I might

go over to the French. The Spanish wanted Katherine’s dowry returned, but insisted that she

keep her English properties. Moreover, the Catholic Monarchs , King Ferdinand and Isabella of

Spain, were disgusted by the rumor that Henry VII wished to marry his former daughter-in-law,

their youngest daughter, Katherine. Nevertheless, by June 23, 1503, a marriage had been

arranged between Katherine and Henry’s second son, Henry, Prince of Wales (1491-1547).

Before the marriage could proceed, a papal dispensation was necessary because of the

biblical prohibition against a brother marrying his own brother’s widow. The biblical verse

states: “And if a man shall take his brother's wife, it is an unclean thing: … they shall be

childless.187” Thus, at the very least, it was important to established, that the marriage of Arthur

and Katherine had not been consummated. To help remedy this situation, a papal bull was

sought. It was sent to Queen Isabella upon her deathbed, late in 1504. In it Pope Julius II (b.

1443, reign, 1505-1513) gave official dispensation for the marriage to proceed, adding that

“perhaps” the original marriage between Katherine and Arthur had not been consummated.

However, by June 27, 1505 Henry, Prince of Wales declared his own betrothal to Katherine as

null and void due to the fact that he was still a minor at the age of fourteen.188 To resolve the

situation, an ambassadorial conference was formed by the Emperor Maximilian and his son soon

187 http://etext.virginia.edu/etcbin/toccer-new2?id=KjvLevi.sgi , Bible, King James Version. Leviticus, 20: 21. 188 Luke, 49-51. Fraser, 39. Henry VII was the instigator of this move. Since Arthur’s death, Katherine had been used as a ploy of Henry in a number of ways. First of all, he had only received half of the dowry money from Spain. Thus, she was more or less being kept hostage to prompt these monies. Secondly, he would marry her to the surviving Prince of Wales only as a last resort. After all, there was the question of her virginity. The pope’s own use of the word “perhaps” in relation to the earlier marriage not having been consummated was noncommittal and could be seen as such at a later time. For a king who had seen his nation to the end of a long and bloody war, the War of the Roses, he knew all too well how such a phrase could invalidate a monarch. Richard III used such incidental matters to brand his nephews bastards, thus ineligible to reign. The king seemed to have thought it more advantageous to keep the option of marrying Katherine to his one remaining son open, since he already had the princess in his custody. For this reason the marriage didn’t actually take place until 1409, after Henry VII’s death.

97 afterwards. In October of that year Herman Rinck had arrived as imperial representative, along

with the court painter Michiel Sittow. During the meeting, Henry VII agreed to marry

Maximilian’s daughter, Margaret of Austria, and to bring about the marriage of his son, the

Prince of Wales to Princess Katherine.

At some point, Henry VII sat for Sittow to have his portrait painted (fig. 3.9). Sittow’s depiction of the king shows him wearing the chain of the Burgundian Order of the Golden

Fleece, the order into which he had been inducted in 1491. This symbol was meant to show allegiance between England and Burgundy; and by extension, with Austria and Spain. The carnation which Henry holds in his right hand was universally understood as a sign of betrothal.

Moreover, it is actually an apparent hybrid of the artist’s imagination because it appears to be in the form of a Lancastrian rose, an allusion to his descent from that royal house (fig. 3.9 & 3.9a).

Also the inscription upon the piece is as follows: “Anno 1505 octobr ymago Henrich VII francieq reg illustissimi ordinate p hemann rinck Ro regie …missarium.” It basically translates as

“In the year 1505 in October the Image of Henry VII, the King of France was ordered by

Herman Rinck.” Gluck deciphers the ending abbreviations and missing letters as “Romanorum regie curie commissarium,” describing Rinck as an ambassador to the King of the Romans,

Maximilian I, who had commissioned the portrait.189 As Gluck had noted, the image documents

the event. This meeting is further described in the Calendar of Letters, Dispatches and State

Papers Relating to the Negotiations Between England and Spain, in which we read that Henry

demanded to be recognized as the King of France by Maximilian and Ferdinand; hence, he was

to be referred to as Henrich VII francieq reg.190

189 Gustav Gluck, “’The Henry VII’ in the National Portrait Gallery”, Burlington Magazine, 1933, 107. 190A. Fraser, 41. Calendar of Letters, Dispatches, and State Papers Relating to the Negotiations Between England and Spain, 358, n.39.

98 It is also known that Philip the Fair paid the artist Coninxloo for two betrothal portraits of

his sister, Margaret of Austria.191 One of these was taken to England with Hermann Rinck and the ambassadors to show to Henry VII. The ambassadors who brought the portrait of Margaret were sent by Maximilian and Philip the Fair on August 12, 1505, less than two months after

Henry of Wales announced the invalidity of his betrothal vow. The date upon the Portrait King

Henry VII, October 20, 1505, coincides with that of a letter from the Pope saying that Prince

Henry, as Katherine’s husband was empowered to “cause her to cease and desist from her vow of vigorous fasting… Such zeal might distract her from the true purpose of marriage; to wit, the procreation of children.”192 Obviously, in the pope’s mind, the betrothal must be restored. Since

Arthur’s death, Katherine had become despondent because Henry VII was not taking care of her

basic needs or those of her house and servants. In the four years since she had arrived she had not

been allowed to buy even enough food for her household. The king had refused to help because

he did not receive the full payment of her dowry. This papal document thus shows the anxiety

over this situation. First of all, it ignored the fact that the Prince had already repudiated the

marriage. Moreover, it insisted upon the begetting, in a timely fashion, of as many royal heirs as

could possibly be achieved. The idea that the Tudor dynasty had only one legitimate son to continue the Golden Age of Peace established by Henry VII was a tenuous situation to ponder.

The possible dire consequence of the dynasty failing and plunging England into further civil war was unthinkable to European leaders.

The Portrait of Katherine of Aragon, (Fig. 3.10) by Michiel Sittow unfortunately bears no inscription telling us precisely when it was made, or for what purpose. However, I agree with

191 Kipling, 26-27. Luke, 56, 49-51. Fraser, 38-41. Doran and Richardson, 32-34. 192 Fraser, 41.

99 Gluck that it was painted in England.193 I propose that it was painted during this same visit by the

imperial ambassador as one of the traditional activities surrounding the betrothal of the princess

to the young Prince Henry of Wales. In essence, like the Portrait of Henry VII, it is a state

portrait meant to commemorate an important event; however, in this case, extra care had to be

taken to convey the correct messages. The halo surrounding her head communicates that she is in

the guise of the Blessed Virgin Mary, an allusion to her own virginity. The composition is an

obvious attempt to establish that she did not consummate the marriage during her very brief time

with the sickly 14-year-old Prince Arthur.194 Thus, the newly proposed union with Arthur’s

younger brother Henry was not incestuous, making the passage in the book of Leviticus

irrelevant.195 This seems to have been the artist’s specific intent because Katherine’s face, pose,

and demeanor are very similar to those of the Virgin in Sittow’s Assumption of the Virgin, (Fig.

3.11), and again in the Virgin and Child panel for the diptych companion to the Portrait of Diego

de Guevara, (Fig. 3.12). Katherine’s and the Virgin’s heads are posed facing slightly to the left,

with modest downcast eyes.

The iconography of the portrait confirms Katherine of Aragon as the sitter. For example,

the linked “K’s” that form her necklace reflect the first letter of her name. In fact, on her voyage

to England her possessions were packed into chests emblazoned with “the initial ‘K of A’ on

their lids.”196 The pearl in each ‘K’ is a symbol of her virginity, an important issue as discussed

above.197 Her halo not only connects her to the Blessed Virgin Mary, but also tells the viewer

that she is no mere mortal. As one who is meant to be a queen, she is anointed by God as a

193 Gluck, 107. 194 Fraser, 29-32. Fraser points out that both his parents and Katherine’s had agreed that because of their youth, consummation should not be rushed. 195 Ibid. 196 Luke, 28. These cases can be seen at Kimbolton Castle “a former royal residence.” Also, Strong notes that the letters ‘H’ & ‘K’ were monogrammed upon Henry and Katherine’s Bible (p. 15). 197 James W. Earl, “Modern Philology,” St. Margaret and the Pearl Maiden, vol. 70, no. 1, Aug. 1972, pp, 1-8.

100 consort. The alternating red and white roses of her necklace identify her as a Tudor bride. The

cockleshells, found within the border of her square neckline, further declare her Spanish origins.

They are the symbols of St. James the Greater, whose eleventh-century pilgrimage Cathedral of

St. James (Santiago de Compostella) in northern Spain, was built over the apostle’s grave, and is

still a popular pilgrim destination. The strong linkage between British, Spanish, and Burgundian-

Austrian royal dynasties was emphasized by the common knowledge that one of the pilgrimage

routes from traditionally stopped in Burgundian territory at the shrine of St.

Mary Magdalen at Vezelay.198 The letter ‘c’ upon the center of her bodice might have two

functions. First, it could be an alternative spelling of her own name, and more importantly, it

may stand for “Catolico”, the designation given to her parents emphasizing their role as

protectors of the church.199 The strands which hang down from her gabled hood are called billiments, and are studded with pearls, possibly a reference to the Spanish discovery of the New

World where this gemstone, rare in Europe, was extremely plentiful. Again, the pearls emphasize

her virginity.200

The Katherine of Aragon in the guise of Mary Magdalen in Detroit (Fig. 3.13) is a third

image directly related to the Portrait of Katherine of Aragon (fig. 3.10).201 This piece

deliberately recycles the iconography from the images of the earlier Anglo-Burgundian union of

Charles the Bold and Margaret of York. For example, Margaret is depicted as Mary Magdalen in

198 Edward Mullins, The Pilgimage to Santiago, (New York: Taplinger Publishing Co., 1974), 12. Also, Anglo- Castilian Trade in the Middle Ages, (Manchester: Manchester University, 1978), 181-189. These authors also note that the Order of the Knights of Santiago called themselves “Matamoros”, or “Moor Killers”, and credited their freeing of the land of Spain from the “infidels” was due to the divine intervention of Santiago Matamoro, or St. James the Moor Slayer. It was in part for the expulsion of Jews and Moslems from Spain that Ferdinand and Isabella were given the designation of “Catholic Monarchs.” 199 Fraser, 9. According to Fraser the title was given to Ferdinand and Isabella in 1494 by Pope Julius II. She quotes J. H. Elliot, Imperial Spain 1469-1716, page 65, (see Fraser, n. 1, 431). Since Julius did not begin his pontificate until 1503, the title “Catolico” must have originally been bestowed upon them by Alexander IV. Also, in Chiyo L. Ishikawa’s Retablo de la Reina Catolica, (Ann Arbor: UMI Dissertation Services, 1989), the author wrote that the title was bestowed by Pope Alexander IV in 1495. 200http:// www.elizabethancostume.net/index.html 201 E. P. Richardson, “Three Paintings by Master Michiel,” Art Quarterly, 84.

101 the version of Rogier van der Weyden’s Descent from the Cross, as well as in Hans Memling’s

Mystical Marriage of St. Catherine (fig. 2.10). Mary Magdalen was a strong fertility and a

historic figure in early Burgundian history.202 These factors were important for the new Tudor

monarchy looking towards a third generation. Such a situation was of importance to the

perseverance of the political alliance because it symbolized the promise of a successor to the

Spanish and British houses.

The rose upon Magdalene’s ointment pot in Katherine of Aragon as Mary Magdalen 203 may be seen as a symbol of divine revelation; it was Mary Magdalen who first saw the risen

Christ, mistaking Him at first for the gardener at the tomb.204 This seems unsupported symbolism

to me. During the Middle Ages, Mary Magdalen was also thought to have been the bride at the

Wedding at Cana.205 This was when Jesus performed His first miracle by turning water into

wine. As the original witness to Christ’s resurrection and his first miracle confirming his

divinity, Mary Magdalen symbolizes a close relationship to divine revelation, and therefore prophecy. This sibylline aspect is one that has been seen in all Burgundian female consorts so far

examined. Each Magdalen image also contains a flower which identifies the sitter. Upon

Margaret’s dress, in the Getty Deposition, is embroidered her symbolic marguerite; her sash is

connected by a . On the image of Katherine of Aragon as the Magdalen we

see what looks like Tudor roses upon the pot of ointment she holds.206 Henry VII’s betrothed,

202 Haskins, 98-100, 121, 224-225. The story of the arrival of Mary Magdalen in a rudderless boat at Marseille and her conversion of the heathen ancient rulers of Burgundy is told in an illuminated manuscript made for the instruction of the young Philip the Fair. This was a version of the story of Mary Magdalen written by Jacobus Voraigne in his Legenda Aurea. 203 Richardson, 81. Richardson believes the rose is a symbol of Katherine’s two unhappy marriages. This is unlikely because there was no incentive to commission such a piece with such psychological symbolism by anyone connected to the royal houses. It is, however, likely a . 204 Haskins, 8-9. 205 Ibid, 51. 206 Although it might seem inconsistent that Katherine, a Spanish princess who married a Tudor, rather than a Burgundian, could be seen in the role of Burgundian consort; this is not exactly the case. First of all, the portrait was

102 Margaret of Austria, Maximilian I’s daughter, is similarly depicted in the guise of the Magdalen

(Fig. 3.14).

Sittow’s Portrait of Henry VII, as noted earlier, depicts him wearing the Toison d’Or, the chain of the Order of the Golden Fleece, which displays the stone and flints symbols of the order

(which are shaped like ‘B’, standing for Burgundy), as well as its pendant emblem of the Golden

Fleece. This pendant is symbolic of the Quest of Jason and the Argonauts, as well as a symbol for the Mystical Lamb of God, whose name was invoked in the name of crusading zeal. This honor was bestowed upon Henry in 1491. Henry reciprocated this great honor by making

Maximilian a Knight of the English Order of the Knights of the Garter207 thus putting them on equal ground. However, between such powerful rulers as Henry VII and Maximilian of Austria, the stakes were much higher than those between a ruler and a mere noble. The proposed marriage between Henry VII and Margaret of Austria would have made their heirs Burgundian-

Hapsburgs, as well as Tudors. Among other things, they would be potential Grandmasters of the

Order of the Golden Fleece. Unfortunately, Margaret of Austria’s betrothal portrait is lost, so it is not possible to examine the image regarding its iconographical content. Considering the fact that

a Hapsburg-Burgundian commission. It was painted by an artist who was favored by their court and the court of Spain. Furthermore, Katherine’s older sister, Joanna of Aragon, who had been married to Philip the Fair, Duke of Burgundy, should have been seen in this light, had long produced evidence of mental instability, so perhaps the court preferred to bestow the symbolism on the more stable sister.. Finally, although images of state leaders of the era had been exhibited in the Premiere Chambre of Margaret of Austria (Savoy), it stands out by exclusion that Joanna’s portrait was not shown there. This is particularly so since Sittow’s Portrait of Henry VII was reverently displayed. Katherine of Aragon was a better model for this role, being known for her refinement and intelligence. Dagmar Eichberger and Lisa Beaven come to a similar conclusion. “Family Members and Political Allies: The Portrait Collection of Margaret of Austria”, Art Bulletin, vol. LXXVII, no. 2, June, 1995, pp. 236, n. 80 Luke tells us that at one point the Archduchess, Joanna (the Mad). 207 Hugh E. L. Collins, The , Oxford, Clarendon Press, 2000, 1-24. The Order of the Garter was founded in 1348 by Edward III after his victory at Crecy. It was formed, in part, to gain support of the nobility for his war with France. It was formed in honor of and it is dedicated to the Blessed Virgin Mary and to its patron saint, St. George. They meet on his feast day, each April 22nd. The idea for the order likely evolved from a similar proposed Order of the Round Table, in honor of King Arthur’s order of the same name. This idea was proposed by the king at a tournament at Windsor and would have involved the actual construction of a Round Table. However, the change in the iconography of the order may be related to the badge created for the Crecy campaign.

103 so much time and effort was put forth on the part of Maximilian and Philip the Fair208 towards

the marriages of Henry and Margaret of Austria, and between the younger Henry and Katherine

of Aragon, it becomes obvious that the union with England was of paramount importance.209

Despite Arthur’s death, the theme of the messianic princeling, as has been seen in the Ghent

Altarpiece persist in Europe as does the tradition of the consort, who would bear new generations

of messianic rulers. These ideas are the ideas that have bonded the Burgundian dynasty together

since the time of Philip the Good and Isabelle of Portugal, and would continue to do so as it

branched out forming bonds with other European realms. These ideas will also form the backdrop for Maximilian’s own political propaganda. This will be discussed in the following chapter.

208 Fraser, 39-41. Henry had planned upon marrying Margaret himself, and his daughter Mary (1496- 1533) to Philip’s heir, Charles (V) as early as 1505. This plan was agreed upon in January of 1506 by Philip the Fair after he and his queen, Joanna had been stranded in England when their ship was blown off course. However, Henry saw Joanna as a possible queen for himself when Philip died in October of that year. 209While it is true that the marriage between the king and Margaret of Austria never actually took place, it was not for lack of trying on the part of the emperor and his son. Moreover, in spite of earlier opposition, the young Henry did marry Katherine after the death of his father, Henry VII, indicating that it was the first Tudor king who was the real fly in the ointment.

104

Fig. 3.1 Portrait of King Richard II, gilt and tempera on wood panel, , ca. 1390.

105

Fig. 3.2 Otto III from the Gospels of Otto. 997- Fig. 3.3 Column of Constantine, 330 A.D., 1000, Vellum, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich. in its original form. Istanbul, Turkey

106

Fig. 3.4 Regentsburg, Henry II crowned by Christ, from the Sacramentary of Henry II, from Bamberg, Clm. 4456, folio 11. 1002/14. Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek.

107

Fig. 3.5 Jan van Eyck, Ghent Altarpiece (1432), central panel God Almighty enthroned, St. Bavon’s Cathedral, Ghent.

108

Fig. 3.6 Anthony van Wyngaerde, sketch of Richmond Palace, 1555, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.

109

Fig. 3.7 Hans Memling. The Mystic Marriage of St. Catherine. (Central panel of the St. John Altar). 1474-1479. Oil on wood.

110

Fig. 3.8 Hans Burgkmair, woodcut, Cosmic Wheel, Illustration for Weisskunig.

111

Fig. 3.9 Unknown artist (possibly Michael Sittow?), King Henry VII National Portrait Gallery, London; oil on panel, arched top, 1505 16 3/4 in. x 12 in. (425 mm x 305 mm)

112

Fig. 3.9a detail of Henry VI, by Michel Sittow.

113

Fig. 3.10 Michiel. Sittow, Katherine of Aragon, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, ca. 1505.

114

Fig. 3.11 Sittow Assumption of the Virgin, Oil on panel, ca. 1505, National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.

Fig. 3.12 Michiel Sittow, De Guevara Diptych, oil on panel, left, Gemäldegalerie, Berlin; right, National Gallery of Art, Washington, ca. 1515.

115

Fig. 3.13 Michiel Sittow, Katherine of Aragon as Mary Magdalen, Detroit Institute of Art, ca.1515.

116

Fig. 3.14 Bernard van Orley, Margaret of Austria as Mary Magdalene, oil on panel, Bayer, Staatsgemaldecsammlungen, Munich.

117

Chapter Four

The Lily and the Eagle: The Apotheosis of the Last World Emperor

118 The Burgundian model for the iconography of the ruler and consort carried over into the imperial Hapsburg dynastic art. As we have seen in all of the previous chapters, the dynastic sovereigns of Burgundy and England saw themselves as messianic rulers charged by God with the power and responsibility to administer their realms and perpetuate their royal lines. The use of Arthurian references was a popular feature of political rhetoric during the Renaissance since he was a divinely appointed king who never died and would rise to power again. In the examples of female consorts examined so far, she is the holy mother for the next male heir, and is seen in terms of her relationship to saintly figures. She is the sibyl, the prophetess, the Lord’s chosen vessel. Through her service the world is given the gift of sacred leaders. In this section I will examine how these ideas shaped the political art of Maximilian of Austria, particularly regarding his early marriage to Mary of Burgundy.

Maximilian’s motives for his political campaigns and propaganda are complex. First of all, he actively promoted the idea that his empire was a direct continuation of all previous Roman empires, beginning with that of Julius Caesar.210 Moreover, he sought to underline his status as

Duke of Burgundy, and thus Grandmaster of the Order of the Golden Fleece.211 The order was

originally founded in honor of the marriage of Philip the Good and . It

devolved upon Maximilian by his marriage to Philip the Good’s last living descendant, Mary of

Burgundy. Maximilian claimed to be a descendant of King Arthur and Aeneas, and therefore

thought it imperative that he should be the leader of his own chivalric order in emulation of his

210 Eduard Vehse, Memoirs of the Court and Aristocracy of Austria, translated from the German by Franz Demmler (London: H.S. Nichols, 1896), 11-12. Maximilian also had his genealogy traced back to Adam, and claimed to be related to the Greek Palaeologi emperors. Also see Paula Sutter Fichtner, The Hapsburg Monarchy, 1490-1498: Attributes of Empire (New York: Palgrove Macmillan, 2003), 4. See also Gerhard Benecke, Maximilian I, 1459-1519: An Analytic Biography, (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1982), 125. After becoming Roman Emperor-elect in 1508, Maximilian would sometimes sign documents with “per cesarem per se…”. 211 Edward Crankshaw, The Hapsburgs, (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson), 1971, 42.

119 ancestor who led the fabled Order of the Round Table. In fact, a bronze statue of King Arthur

appears in bronze upon Maximilian’s cenotaph at the Hoffkirche, among the statues identified as

his ancestors.212 Like this legendary king, his rule too was the product of God’s will.

During the period of Maximilian’s coronation in 1508, strangely, the emperor

commissioned the painter Joos van Cleve to paint a betrothal portrait. A youthful Maximilian is

depicted holding two carnations in his left hand, a universal symbol of betrothal (Fig. 4.1).213

This is puzzling because at the time his wife of fifteen years, (1472-1511),

was still living, and he was forty-eight years old. They were married in 1493.214 John Hand

explains that this “betrothal” portrait was created in order to commemorate his first marriage to

Mary of Burgundy in 1477. Hand notes that shortly after the death of their son, Philip the Fair,

Maximilian needed to strengthen his claims to the Burgundian territories. Thus, this “betrothal” portrait reminded the viewer that Maximilian was indeed heir to the ducal dominion by virtue of his first marriage to the heir of Charles the Bold.215 Moreover, the Emperor–Elect also wears the

Toison d’Or, proclaiming his status as the leader of that noble and chivalric Order of the Golden

Fleece.

A similar picture, by the workshop of the same artist, depicts the Emperor holding a

scroll; instead of carnations (Fig. 4.2). It was kept in the Premiere Chamber of his daughter,

212 Jeffrey Chipps Smith, German Sculpture of the Late Renaissance, 1520-1580, ( Princeton: Princeton University Press), 187. See Gerhild S. Williams, “The Arthurian Model in Maximilian’s Autobiograhical Writings Weisskunig, and Theuerdank “, Sixteenth Century Journal”, (1980), 3. Also, John Collin Dunlop, Henry Wilson, History of Prose Fiction, AMS Press, 1906, p. 457. The authors tell of a design for such a statue in a manuscript in the Vienna Library with the inscription:”Kunig zu Enngelandt und grave zu Habsurg.” (King of England and Earl of Hapsburg). 213 Joos van Cleve, Maximilian I, ca. 1507, Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum. 214 Jean Berenger, A History of the Hapsburg Empire, 1273-1700, (New York: Longman Group), 1990, 134. See also Crankshaw. He tells us that “…Leonardo daVinci was called in to supervise the decorations for the proxy wedding in Milan…”. 215Dagmar Eichberger and Lisa Beaven, Family Members and Political Allies: The Portrait Collection of Margaret of Austria, Art Bulletin, vol. LXXVII, no. 2, June 1995, 232-3.

120 Margaret of Austria. The work was also used as the model for his image in the statute book for

the Order of the Golden Fleece (Fig. 4.3). It served as one of the series of images of

Grandmasters of the order. The book was probably created for his grandson, Charles V, shortly

after 1519.216

Maximilian wanted to promote the idea of the messianic nature of his reign. The Portrait

of the Emperor Maximilian I by Albrecht Dürer in the Kunsthistorisches Museum is

complemented with a logo made up of the shield of the Hapsburgs, and crowned with an

imperial miter (Fig. 4.4). Below the shield hangs the Toison d’Or. Considering that this work is

the most elaborate version of the three versions that Dürer painted, and that the text is in the

universal language of the time, , this version was meant to be his official state portrait.217

However, he died shortly after it was painted, at the age of fifty-nine. A second version has a

similar text which is in German. Both painted versions, as well as a woodcut version, proclaim

the emperor as “Caesar.” The other painted examples refer to his recent demise, and thus, are

commemorative of his life. The image of Maximilian in Dürer’s woodcut links him to ancient

Roman sacred prophecy through the invocation of the name of the Emperor Augustus (Fig. 4.5)

As noted earlier, such a comparison had been made in the Bladelin Altarpiece (Fig. 1.12)

in relation to the previous emperor, his father, Frederick III. During the meeting with Philip the

Good and Frederick III, in response to Philip’s repeated requests for a crown, Frederick is said to

have told the duke: “He who bears the name ‘Augustus’ cannot divide or split his realm.”218

Frederick’s long reign was compared to that of the Emperor Augustus, whose rule also lasted 41

216 Ibid., 233-4. 217 Ibid., 46. Wolfram von Prinze, Dürer, New York, Smithmark Publishers, 1998, 82-3, 153. 218 Laurinda S. Dixon, Portraits and Politics in Two Triptychs by Rogier van der Weyden, Gazette des Beaux-Arts, May-June, 1987, 187. Quoted from P.J. Block, History of the People of the Netherlands, (London: 1899), 129.

121 years.219 The importance of the Emperor Augustus is that he had heralded in the Golden Age of

Virgil’s Fourth Eclogue and the birth of Christ. It was to Augustus that the Tiburtine Sybil pronounced her vision of the birth of the messiah. Such a comparison conveyed the idea to the viewer that the reign of the Hapsburgs was destined to bring about a similar messianic dawning.

According to the scholar Marie Tanner, Maximilian was promoted as being the “Last

World Emperor,” or the final great, holy ruler before the end of the world.220 She points out that

after the millennial year 1,000 that there was an increase in apocalyptic literature. By the eleventh century it became linked with the emperors, who had preceded the

Hapsburgs, claimed to be the descendants of Troy, and were destined to play an important role in

the apocalyptic future. The source of these prophecies was the Vaticinium Sibillae Erithraeae,

which was purportedly written during the Golden Age of Greece.221 The sibyl predicted the

coming of the beast, and its temporary defeat by the Last World Emperor. The prophecy had

been applied to the Hohenstaufen Emperor Frederick II.

As time progressed there were other versions of the prophecy. A French variant gave the description of the Last World Emperor: “Lofty head, high eyebrows, wide eyes, and an aquiline

nose.”222 To this prognostication the Germans added that this emperor would politically unite

with an angelic pope. This divinely elected emperor would appear right before“the End of Time,

the Second Coming, and the descent of the Heavenly Jerusalem.”223 As the year 1500

approached, this emperor was identified with Frederick III. However, after his death in 1493, it

219 Katherine Crawford Luber, Albrecht Durer and the Venetian Renaissance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2005). She discusses Albrecht Dürer’s representations of the Portrait of Emperor Maximilian I. These images which were made from a single modello, were repeated in a variety of media, including woodcut prints. In the latter form they were widely disseminated. 220 Marie Tanner, The Last Descendant of Aeneas: The Hapsburgs and the Mythic Image of the Emperor, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1993,120-130. 221 Ibid, 122. 222 Tanner, 122-124. 223 Ibid, 124.

122 passed to his son Maximilian. His court astrologer, Johann Licthenberger, added to the prophecy, the Prognosticatio, that this emperor was “destined to destroy the Turks, to be identified with the

Antichrist, and to satisfy the Birgittine prophecy of chastising the church.”224 Hence it was his

rule that would bring about a new golden age. Furthermore, Tanner notes that Johann

Licthenberger’s Prognosticatio tells us that these events would be “…achieved through the union of German and French aspirations – the Eagle and the Lily…” By his marriage to Mary of

Burgundy, Maximilian seemed to have fulfilled the prophecy. Moreover, his most prominent feature, according to the prophecy, was his “eagle’s” or aquiline nose. Dürer’s portrait clearly emphasizes this aspect of the emperor-elect.225

In July of 1506, Maximilian’s planned coronation at Rome was blocked by French and

Venetian troops. He had to settle instead for a coronation at Trent, and the title of Emperor-Elect.

This provisional title, bestowed upon Maximilian at the Cathedral of Trent, was agreed upon by

Pope Julius II in 1508.226 To counteract this undesired development, Maximilian commissioned a printed Triumphal Arch (Fig. 4.6) by Albrecht Dürer and others, representing a fictive substitute

for the failed Roman coronation. The printed composition symbolized Maximilian’s ceremonial

adventus into the Holy City, as well as his imperial coronation. In fact it places him in direct succession to all Roman emperors beginning with Julius Caesar. His status among all former

Roman emperors is evident in the section dubbed the Portals of Praise. To the left of the central

224 Gerhard Benecke, Maximilian I, An Analytical Biography, (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1982), 31. 225 Marie Tanner, The Last Descendant of Aeneas: The Hapsburgs and the Mythic Image of the Emperor, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1993, 124. The name Hapsburg itself comes from their family’s Castle, known as Habichtburg, or Falcon’s Castle. Mary of Burgundy, whose French ancestry of the House of Valois, is thus symbolized by the lily, or fleur-de-lis. The duchess’ love of hunting was such that she is said to have kept falcons in the ducal bedroom. See Crankshaw, p. 14. See also Marjorie Reeves, The Influence of Prophecy in the Middle Ages, Clarendon Press, New York, 1969, p. 339. She notes that this vision of St. Birgita of Sweden was interpreted as the unification of Germany and France with the purpose of reforming the Church in terms of recognition of the sanctity of Hapsburg rule. 226 Ibid. Crankshaw, 33.

123 opening is a frieze of emperor portraits.227 The Triumphal Arch’s overall message is that the

coronation in the Holy City was, after all, merely a formality; his right to the title was without

question. In all, the arch is made from 192 different printed blocks. Nearly 1,000 copies of the

entire arch were printed during the sixteenth century, 200 of which were printed in 1517-1518.

Such an emperor might be compared to King Arthur, who also endeavored, unsuccessfully, to

travel to Rome for an imperial coronation.228

One section of the arch depicts the betrothal of Maximilian and Mary of Burgundy (Fig.

4.7). In this image the emperor’s shield and crown rest against a wall in the foreground. Behind it

stands the ducal couple, jointly holding a shield with the coat of arms of Burgundy. The shield

contains the fleur-de-lis, symbol of the bride’s descent from the French House of Valois, and the

Lion of Burgundy. The shield in the foreground contains the Hapsburg eagles and is topped with

an imperial crown. Another scene depicts Maximilian at the betrothal of their son, Philip the Fair

to Juana of Aragon (Fig. 4.8). Again we see the double-headed eagle of the Hapsburgs229 in the foreground, while in the background the betrothed couple holds the shield with the coat of arms of the wife. The castle represents her title to the land of Castile. In this print, as in so many other portraits, we see Maximilian I wearing the Toison d’Or, the chain of the Burgundian Order of the

Golden Fleece, as well as the imperial miter. Both scenes clearly tell us that Maximilian is the

227 Jane Campbell Hutchinson, Albrecht Dürer: A Biography, (New Jersey: Princeton University press: 1990), 89-90. See also Jean Berenger, 130. Also, Susan Fichtner, 10. Also, Jan-Dirk Muller, edit. Martin Grossman, “The Court of Maximilian I,” Princes and Princely Culture, 1450-1650, Leiden, Brill, 2003, 308, Benecke,125. And, Larry Silver, Shining Armor: Maximilian as the Holy Roman Emperor,: Museum Studies, v, 12, (Fall, 1989, pp.8-29), 19. 228 Norma Lorre Goodrich, King Arthur, (New York: Harper& Row, Publishers, 1989), 257-261, Sir Thomas Malory, New York, Twayne Publishers, Inc., 1-83. 229 The first mention of a double-headed eagle in the West dates from 1250, in a roll of arms for the Hohenstaufen Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II. The image of the two-headed eagle later came to represent the geographic location of Habsburg Austria as the center of Europe; indicating that their empire was sovereign over the east and the west.

124 rightful heir to the duchy of Burgundy. These illustrations celebrate the founding and merger of

sacred dynasties as well as their perpetuation.

The most important image, in terms of the emperor’s Burgundian claim was printed

separately by Albrecht Dürer in 1522. This is The Burgundian Marriage Cart (Fig. 4.11), which

commemorates the union, and was originally meant as part of The Great Triumphal Arch.230 The use of a triumphal cart for this signifies the divinity of the couple and the sacred nature of the event. Traditionally triumphal carts were reserved for kings and gods.231 They were symbolically

related to the rising sun which Apollo pulled across the heavens. In the Middle Ages and earlier

in , only the most sacred persons were so depicted. For example, Giotto painted St.

Francis being carried heavenward in such a vehicle (Fig. 4.9). The emperor Constantine rides in

one on the northern face of the triumphal arch dedicated to him (fig. 4.10).

That the Burgundian Marriage Cart was originally meant to be incorporated into the

triumphal arch tells us that his union with Mary was not an ordinary marriage, but one in tune with the prophecy of the Last World Emperor. Beneath the canopy, the shield the couple holds displays the fleur-de-lis and the Lion of Burgundy (fig. 4.11a). Overflowing from a vase at the

front of the cart are pomegranates whose profusion of seeds symbolize Mary’s fertility.

Maximilian also holds one in Dürer’s official state portraits. Beneath the couple, as if in relief on

the plinth they stand on, appears a tableau of the betrothal of Mary and Maximilian. At the

extreme left stands young Maximilian. The bearded figure looking outward, wearing a collar

with the flints and steels of Burgundy is Charles the Bold. The figure with his back to the viewer,

to the left of Charles, is Frederick III. Interwoven around this scene we again see numerous

230 , The Life and Art of Albrecht Dürer, (New York: Princeton University Press, 1955), 179-180. Panofsky tells us that after Maximilian’s death, Dürer sensed that the enterprise was hopeless, so he left with these . He also was dissatisfied with Maximilian over the subject of payment. See also Jane Campbell Hutchinson, Albrecht Dürer: A Biography , 113-115. 231 Sergio Bertelli, The King’s Body, (Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2001), 86, 92.

125 pomegranates on a winding vine. The cart itself is being driven by an angel (fig. 4.11b). On the

sides of seat are more pomegranates. The hitch of the cart has a stylized eagle’s head, which by

its placement suggests another on the other side of the hitch, out of view of the observer. This is

the Hapsburg emblem. The horses which pull the cart are dressed in livery containing the flints

and steel of the Order of the Golden Fleece. The steels are shaped like the letter ‘B’, and stand

for Burgundy. The ‘X’ may stand for the Austrian Order of St. George, thus symbolizing the

quest for the Holy Land and its relics – in essence, a grail quest.

In conjunction with The Great Triumphal Arch, is The Triumphal Procession (fig. 4.11c),

which symbolized the emperor’s triumphant entry at the portal of the city of Rome. According to

Kantorowicz, the entry of any person of royalty represented Christ’s entry into Jerusalem on

Palm Sunday.232 Thus he was considered to be the new messianic ruler.233 The emperor at the

gate was the anointed Vicar of God.234 Such triumphal symbols represented the gloria Christi,235

the adoration of Christ, here in the person of his earthly proxy. Traditionally the antiphon

Benedictus qui venit was sung at the royal reception. This antiphon was also sung at the

celebration of mass on Palm Sunday. It ended with the verse: Benedictus qui venit in nomine

domine:”Blessed is He Who comes in the name of the Lord.”236

Sergio Bertelli, quoting Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749-1832), commented upon the

duality of the world in relation to the election of a world leader, noting that: “We should behold

earthly majesty before our eyes, surrounded by all symbols of power; but while it bends before

232 Kantorowicz, 42-3. Bertelli, 70. 233 Ibid.,40. 234 Ibid, 51-2, Pamela Sheingorn, “’And flights of Angels sing thee to thy rest:’ The Soul’s Conveyance to the Afterlife in the Middle Ages,” Edit., Carol Garrett Fisher and Kathleen L. Scott, Art Into Life Papers from the Kresge Art Museum Medieval Symposium (Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University Press, 1995), p. 156. 235 Sheingorn, 170. 236 Kantorowicz, “King’s Advent”, 51.

126 that of heaven, brings to mind the communion of both. For even the individual can only prove

his relationship with the Deity by subjecting and adoring.”237 This recognition of the sacred

nature of kingship is also a reflection of the concept of the Arthurian model in that it implies that

the nature of the institution is irrevocably sacred. The roles of the cleric and the king have been

blended into the Vicarus Dei, or the Vicar of God.

During the years 1508-1511, Albrecht Dürer was commissioned to paint an Adoration of the Trinity (Fig. 4.12) by the Nuremburg metal dealer, Matthaus Landauer. Landauer wanted the painting for the All Saints Chapel of his retirement community called the “Zwolfbruderhaus,” the house of the Twelve Brothers.” The community was named in honor of the Twelve Apostles.238

Panofsky has correctly described the work as a representation of St. Augustine’s City of God.239

In Augustine’s vision he described the presence of the Triune God, represented in the upper

register of Dürer’s composition. God the Father, in imperial garb240 is enthroned behind a

crucified Christ, whose cross is held aloft by the hands of his Heavenly Father. Angels hold the

sleeves of His garment. Above the father and Son hovers the Dove of the Holy Spirit.

In the middle register we see the prescribed group of virgins on the left, and on the right,

the pre-Christian believers in Christ. Among these are the biblical priest-kings, with whom the

Burgundians claimed kinship from Noah to Abraham to Boaz to Jesse to David to Christ.241

These sacred forebears were cited as proof of their divinity and thus further proved their right to rule the duchy. These two groups are led by the Virgin Mary and respectively.242

237 Bertelli, 86. 238 Wolfram von Prinz, Dürer, 126-8. It was originally made up of twelve retired artisans. Landauer, himself, spent his last days there. 239Erwin Panofsky, The Life and Art of Albrecht Dürer, 126-8. 240Prinz, 127. 241 Ibid. 242 Tanner, 76.

127 These are the sainted that have “died in God,” as described by Pamela Sheingorn in her study.243

“’And flights of Angels sing thee to thy rest:’ The Soul’s Conveyance to the Afterlife in the

Middle Ages.” All members of this last group are guaranteed a place in the Heavenly Jerusalem.

Below the immortals and the sainted mortals are the ranks of ordinary believers. By

and good deeds, these average, non-sainted believers may gain passage to the Eternal

City of God and partake of the Eternal Liturgy.244 Among this group are both the living and the

dead,245 each may help the other. The living can offer prayers of intercession to God to shorten

any purgatorial penance. The departed may likewise guide the living by their mystical

presence.246 The bond between the living and the dead is symbolized by the robes of the

ascendant mortals, which hangs over the heavenly clouds, coming in contact with the sky above

the earth. This is the terminus between the two realms. The world of the living mortal is

symbolized in the minute figure of the artist, who alone seems to inhabit the terrestrial realm (on

the bottom right). Panofsky described the work as “…the City of God [which] exists partly in

Heaven and partly on earth . [It]…includes both angels and living human beings, and therefore

has a temporal as well as eternal aspect.”247 Furthermore, the City of God “… extends beyond

the universe and the Christian era.”248 This state of affairs will continue until the ,

when the deserving will remain in the City of God, whereas those not in the Book of Judgment

will be consigned to their punishment.249 This three-tiered hierarchical system imitates that of the mortal world, as well as that imposed by the Arthurian political model. Only the Trinity and

243Sheingorn, 163-5. 244 Ibid. 167. 245Sheingorn, 167-170. Panofsky, 126. 246 Ibid. Also see, Ernst H. Kantorowicz, “The King’s Advent’ And The Enigmatic Panels In The Doors of Santa Sabrina,” Selected Studies by Ernst Kantorowicz, (New York: J.J. Augustin Publisher, 1965), 37- 8. 247 Panofsky, 127-8. 248 Ibid. 249 Ibid.

128 angels inhabit the highest portion of heaven. They are the heavenly royalty. The second register

is inhabited by the saints, they are the nobility. The lowest register is populated by ordinary

mortals, who by their good deeds and belief in God are elected to the lowest rank.

Among the figures in Dürer’s composition we find the patron, Matthaus Landauer; his

son-in-law, Wilhelm Heller (on the right, wearing gold armor)250, Pope Julius II, and a figure

described as simply “an emperor.”251 If this figure is compared with the Portrait of Frederick III

(Fig. 4.14), by Dürer’s on The Great Triumphal Arch of Maximilian I, it is obvious that the original inspiration for the printed image comes from Dürer’s Adoration of the Trinity.

Moreover, the painted emperor wears a Toison d’Or, the emblem of the Order of the Golden

Fleece, whose Grandmaster was Frederick III’s son, Maximilian I. The placing of the former emperor among those shown taking part in St. Augustine’s City of God would have pleased

Frederick’s loyal subjects, as well as his son. It may also have lent strength to the concept of the symbolic Roman Imperial Coronation, as depicted in the vast program of The Great Triumphal

Arch of Maximilian I. Frederick’s inclusion among the ranks of God’s elect in the altarpiece, and as a Roman Emperor upon the printed arch, illustrates the concept of the ruler as the Vicarus Dei, the Vicar of God on earth. According to Augustine’s doctrine, only the righteous who lived for the glory of God could attain acceptance into the City of God. Nevertheless, certain individuals were preordained as God’s elected representatives. However, these elect, being mortal, could still stumble upon the wrong path, one which might even lead them to hell. In Dürer’s Adoration of the Trinity, Frederick III is depicted as the emperor who already achieved heaven.

250 Prinz, 128. Also see, Anja-Franziska Eichler, Albrecht Dürer 1471-1528, (: Koneman), 1999, 82. Also see, Francis Russell, The World of Dürer, 1471-1528,., (New York, Time Inc 1967), 120- 121. 251 Panofsky, 126. Also see, Francis Russell, 120-1. Russell notes that the emperor is “wearing Charlemagne’s crown…”

129 The portrait likeness of Frederick III on The Great Triumphal Arch was also very likely

used for Dürer’s Portrait of Charlemagne painted around 1512 for the Heiltumskammer, the

chamber which held the “insignia,” or crown jewels of Charlemagne.252 The resemblance between Charlemagne and both portraits of Frederick III, on the Triumphal Arch and the

altarpiece, is clear when the latter two are compared with the composition submitted for approval

in the master’s own hand (Fig. 4.15).253

Depicting Frederick in the guise of Charlemagne had multiple significances. It was meant

to remind the viewer that the Hapsburgs were descended from this powerful emperor, and to

symbolize the translatio imperii, the continued translation of the title of Roman Emperor to the

Germanic north.254 Charlemagne was, in addition, important to the prophecy of the Last World

Emperor, who is predicted to be a Second Charlemagne. Frederick III was, until his death,

identified as the Second Charlemagne. That he is pictured along with the Emperor Sigismund

(fig. 4.16) serves to strengthen this idea because it was Sigismund who led the Battle of

Nicopolis, often called “the Last Crusade.” Crusades were identified with Charlemagne and his grandfather, Charles Martel, who was said to have prevented Islam from entering Europe. This was not an accurate assessment, however, as travelers and immigrants from the region did not cease.

Further, the image of Frederick III was key to Hapsburg political programs because he was the last Holy Roman Emperor truly anointed by the Pope in Rome255. The act of anointing,

252 Among the items stored in the Heiltumskammer were the crown, sword, glove, and orb of Charlemagne. Dürer made studies of these sacred objects in relation to these portraits and subsequent works. 253 It is less clear in the final version, which was executed by assistants. 254 Larry Silver, Shining Armor: Maximilian I as Holy Roman Emperor, Museum Studies, (Fall, 1985), 17-19. 255M. Creighton, The From the Great Schism to the Sack of Rome, (New York: Longmans, Green, and Co. 1911), 123-125. He was crowned King of the Romans on March 16, 1452 by Pope Nicolas V. On

130 especially by the highest earthly religious leader, symbolized the sacred power of the ruler.256 Its

value may be traced back as far as Clovis, whose balm was said to have descended directly from

heaven brought by the Dove of the Holy Spirit for the sole purpose of his coronation.257 Via

Clovis we come eventually to the emperor Charlemagne.258 As noted earlier, his image

symbolized the translation of the title of Holy Roman Emperor to Maximilian’s Germany. The

issue became more important in light of the fact that Maximilian’s coronation in Rome was

blocked by the French, and by the militant activities of Pope Julius II’s forces.259 As mentioned

above, Maximilian had to settle for a coronation at Trent.

A further aspect of Frederick’s image in Dürer’s altarpiece is that his likeness is used for

the figure of God the Father.260 Traditionally, emperors represented the Sol Invictus, or

unconquered sun. The cult of the sun god was created by the emperor Aurelian in 274 A.D.261

This was a term also applied to Christ and God, as well as to pagan gods of the Roman Empire:

Apollo, El Gabal, Mithras, and Sol. In Christian times, it referred to Apollo as the forerunner of

Christ, the god of light, and the god’s image was an early model for the appearance of Christ.262

Furthermore, as I have noted, similar symbolism had been applied to Henry VII and Arthur of

Wales in the pageantry performed in honor of the wedding of Prince Arthur and Katherine of

Aragon.263 In The Great Triumphal Arch of Maximilian I is an image of the Emperor-Elect and

that same day the Pope performed the marriage of Frederick III to his bride, Leonora. On March 19, 1452 the pope crowned him as Holy Roman Emperor. 256 , The Histories and Poems, “Richard II,” III, 2. (New York: Smithmark, 2000), 37. Shakespeare wrote: “Not all the water in the rough rude sea/ can wash the balm off from an anointed king;/ The breath of worldly men cannot depose/ The deputy elected by the Lord.” 257 Henry A. Myers, Medieval Kingship, (Chicago: Nelson-Hall, 1982), 84. Also, Bertelli, 26. 258 Tanner, 94-104. 259 Berenger, 130. Fichtner, 10. Hutchison, 89. 260 Anja-Franziska Eichler noted that in Dürer’s “…portrait of Charlemagne, [the] beard was reminiscent of God the Father…”. , 88. 261 Bertelli, 12. 262 See Chapter Three, p. 19-21. 263 Antonia Fraser, The Wives of Henry VII, (New York: Vintage Books, 1994), 27.

131 his son, Philip the Fair, in which the two are so depicted. Maximilian is enthroned above his son.

In front of him is his heraldic shield bearing the Imperial double-headed eagle. Below him stands

Philip the Fair behind shields bearing his heraldic symbols, the fleur-de-lis, the castles of Castile,

the Burgundian Lions, as well as the Imperial double-headed eagle. Once again we are

confronted with the image of King and Prince as stand-ins for God the Father and God the Son.

As mentioned above, the Adoration of the Trinity Altarpiece (4.12) describes the social

stratification of the Civitas Dei, which is a reflection of that of the contemporary world of

mortals: the monarch, his nobles, and their subjects. In these key works by Dürer, the images of

God the Father and Charlemagne resemble Frederick III. In the altarpiece below the Trinity are

varying levels of the Heavenly Jerusalem’s society. As Panofsky has pointed out, this realm

transcends time and space. Albrecht Dürer’s Adoration of the Trinity is a pictorial representation

of like places in popular cautionary literature, such as St. Patrick’s Purgatory, mentioned in

Chapter 2. They served as conduits through which mortals might glimpse the immortal realm

that coexists with that of the living. Moreover, it was fabled that within this “” resided

great crusaders from the past, such as Charlemagne, Constantine, and King Arthur; angels and

sibyls had often foretold of the day that these heroes would return to the mortal realm.264 In this

theo-political construct, the images of Frederick III in the altarpiece depicting the City of God

and the other artworks, illustrate the ideas discussed by Kantorowicz in which the king never dies.265 The king, being God’s representative, actually inhabits three different planes at once

acting as God and the first and second Charlemagne. The Law, which gives him power to rule, is

264 Bertelli, 29-30. 265 Ernst Kantorowicz, The King’s Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology, (Princeton: Princeton University Press), 1957, pp. 78-81. Kantorowicz explains that the concept refers to the idea that the sanctity of kingship remains the same regardless whether or not the monarch is alive. In this view all monarchical power is given by God, hence kingship can never die, and thus in essence neither can the king. See also Bertelli, pp. 29-30. See Williams, p. 8.

132 from God. When the king’s body ceases to be, the Law continues on forever. That which is

God’s merely returns to God. Frederick III, whose anointing signified the grace of God, surely

was accepted into the heavenly kingdom and will live forever.

Another important aspect of the Burgundian Arthurian model of kingship is that of the

ruler as a military leader. As the head of the Order of the Golden Fleece, Maximilian became the

inheritor of the tradition which began with the wedding ceremony of Philip the Good and

Isabelle of Portugal. This honored position of Grandmaster of a body of Militant Christi

(Christian soldiers) translated into power over the Christian fighting forces, and in particular over

the nobility who were appointed knights of the order. Maximilian, their sovereign, was the “Last

World Emperor,” the prophesized messianic ruler. According to the prophecy derived from the

Vaticinium Sibillae Erithraeae, his reign heralded the return of such legendary figures as Arthur and Charlemagne. Only those worthy of were deemed fit to fulfill this role. Gerhild

S. Williams had described Maximilian’s strategies as being those which granted the nobility

“considerable political autonomy, while binding them to his person and court through the deliberate emphasis on the mystical union of the divinely appointed ruler and the ruled.”266

Knights were thus obliged to acknowledge the sanctity of the Christian monarch.

Maximilian’s tomb in the Hofkirche at Innsbruck, Austria, (church plan - fig. 4.17 and tomb – 4.17a) is the culmination of all his knightly ideals and iconographic programs.267 It was originally planned as a monumental sculptural program for a chapel. However, his grandson,

Ferdinand I, saw that the intended chapel location would have crumbled under the weight of the cenotaph program and statues. Ferdinand instead revised the plan so that the statues would be

266Gerhild S. Williams, 10. 267 Jeffrey Chipps Smith, German Sculpture of the Late Renaissance ca. 15201580: Art in an Age of Uncertainty, (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), p. 185. See: http://www.hofkirche.at/en/hofkirche/

133 contained within a church connected to a Franciscan monastery, the monks would serve as

guardians to the elaborate program.

Surrounding the tomb are over-life-size statues of Maximilian’s most eminent

contemporaries and ancestors (figs. 4.18-21, 24-27). Included among these representations are

both fictional and real personages. Of the latter, Ferdinand of Portugal (d. 1363-the first

completed statue), Clovis, the first Christian King of France (d. 511) (fig. 4.18), Duke Gottfried

of Bouillon (1060-1100) (fig. 4.21), Theodoric of the Ostrogoths (454-526) (fig. 4.19), and

predictably, the legendary King Arthur (c. 475-542) (fig. 4.20) are depicted. The last two figures

were most likely designed by Albrecht Dürer, the court artist. Theodoric was an early ruler of

Italy who was originally a northern king of the Ostrogoths. At his capital at Aachen,

Charlemagne installed the equestrian monument of Theodoric. These facts were very important

to Maximilian. The appropriation of the statue represented the “translatio imperii,” or the translation of the imperial power of Rome to the Germanic north.268 Finally, the statue of

Gottfried of Bouillon was also significant since he was a leader of the First Crusade, the Duke of

Lower Lorraine (), and the King of Jerusalem. He was buried in the church of

the Holy Sepulcher.

Statues of his significant contemporaries include his father, Frederick III (Fig. 4.24),

Maximilian’s son, Philip the Fair (1478-1506) (fig. 4.25), his daughter-in-law, Queen Juana (la

Loca) of Spain, her father, King Ferdinand, and Maximilian’s own father-in-law, Charles the

Bold, Duke of Burgundy (Fig. 4.26). Upon Charles’ and Philip’s necks hang the Golden Fleece,

symbol of the Knightly Order. Mary of Burgundy, Maximilian’s wife, is shown in front and to

the right of Maximilian (Fig. 4.27).

268 Kantorowicz, 81. Silver, 18.

134 The second part of Maximilian’s tomb was originally to contain one hundred statuettes of

Hapsburg saints. Only forty were completed, of these only seventeen survive. These were

originally on the balustrade of the front gallery.269 The use of family saints was derived from the

tomb of his father, which was in progress from 1493 to 1513. The saints were to remind the

viewer of the ruler’s divine status. The use of such images was meant to convey the idea of the

sacredness of the Hapsburg family, though they are obscure and not generally known saints

today (for example, Rolandus, Waldetrudis, Tarsitia, Emelindis, Guido, and Chlodoveus). Hence they symbolize Maximilian’s role as the Vicarus Dei. Similar depictions can be seen in the printed Great Triumphal Arch of Maximilian I (c. 1512-1518).

The third part of the tomb was designed to contain busts of the Roman Emperors starting with Julius Caesar (Figs. 4.22 and 4.23).270 These were based upon the collection of Roman

coins in the collection of the Conrad Peutinger, a scholar employed by Maximilian for his

literary talents. They were meant to establish the idea that his rule was a continuation of that of

the ancient Roman Emperors. He claimed to be directly descended from Julius Caesar. The busts

were not used in the final arrangement of the tomb, but have been placed there in the northern

gallery in 1948 and have been there since.. As we have seen, a number of programs had been

devised by the emperor’s court to support his fictive coronation at Rome, and much of his

iconographic propaganda was created around the idea of his destiny as an emperor in the long

history of Rome and its empire. Of thirty-four busts which were documented in 1534, only

twenty-one can be accounted for today. All were designed from the collection of classical

269 http://www.hofkiche.at/en/hofkirche/. Since 1945 they have been exhibited in the Northern Gallery. 270 Smith, 189. Also, Peter G. Bietenholz, History and Fabula: Myths and Legends in Historical thought from Antiquity to the Modern Age, (Leiden ; New York: Brill, 1994), pp. 201-202. 270 Silver, 15.

135 Roman coins in the collection of Konrad Peutinger.271 The busts were produced between 1509

and 1517, not long after the coronation at Trent.

Atop the tomb is the statue of Maximilian I kneeling (Fig. 4.). On the sides are twenty-

two reliefs illustrating the highlights of his life. In all probability, the scene most important to the

emperor is chronologically the first. This scene represents Maximilian’s marriage to Mary of

Burgundy, which took place at the Prinsenhof in Ghent on August 19, 1477 (Fig. 4.29). The

image appears to have been derived from the same subject in Weisskunig, (Fig. 4.30). The

sculpted relief greatly resembles the central group of the illustration in the autobiographical

work.272 As noted, this subject is also to be found among the images of the series of woodcuts

making up the Triumphal Arch of Maximilian I. It was through Maximilian’s marriage to Mary

of Burgundy, the sole heir of Charles the Bold, that he was invested with the title of Grandmaster

of the Order of the Golden Fleece. Their children and grand-children continued the Hapsburg

dynasty for many centuries, keeping alive the traditions of the Valois dukes. Moreover, by the

union of the House of Hapsburg with that of Burgundy, the rebuilding of the Middle Kingdom of

Lotharingia (Lorraine) continued. With the marriage of their son to Juana of Castile, Spanish

territory was added to that kingdom. Thus, the quest for a kingdom separate from the French

continued beyond the rule of Maximilian I.273

As we have seen, throughout the reign of Maximilian I, the allegiance to his Burgundian consort and to the Arthurian model make up much of the content of his iconographic programs.

These themes are found in the Burgundian mythologies at least as far back as the programs

commissioned by Philip the Good. Just as Philip and Isabelle had been depicted in saintly guise,

272 Smith, 191. 273Clark, Samuel, State and Status: The Rise of the State and Aristocratic Power in Western Europe, (Montreal, Buffalo: McGill-Queen’s University Press), 1995, 51-58.

136 so too do we find the family of Maximilian and his Burgundian bride, Mary, portrayed in the role

of sanctified rulers. Maximilian’s reverence for his consort takes a number of artistic forms. We

see her shadow in Maximilian’s “betrothal” portraits, painted decades after her death. We see

their wedding upon the triumphal arch created by Dürer and others. We see it again

commemorated upon Maximilian’s own tomb. He intends all such posthumous reverence as reminders that God chose him and gave him the divine right and responsibility to rule

137

Fig. 4.1 Joos van Cleve, Maximilian I, Fig. 4.2 Workshop of Joos van Cleve, Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum. Maximilian I, Brussels Musees des Beaux-Arts de Belgique

Fig. 4.3 Statute Book of the Order of the Golden Fleece, ca. 1519, Maximilian I, Vienna, Osterreische Nationalbibliothek

138

Fig. 4.4 Albrecht Dürer, Portrait of Emperor Maximilian I, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna.

139

Fig. 4.5 Albrecht Dürer, Portrait of Emperor Maximilian I, Boston Museum of Fine Arts, Harvey D. Parker Collection.

140

Fig. 4.6 The Great Triumphal Arch of Maximilian I, National Gallery of Art, Washington D.C. (on loan from the Centenary College of Shreveport, Louisiana).

141

Fig. 4.7. The betrothal of Maximilian I to Mary of Burgundy, from The Great Triumphal Arch.

Fig. 4.8. The betrothal of Philip the Fair to Joanna of Castile, from The Great Triumphal Arch.

142

Fig. 4.9 Giotto, Vision of the Fire Chariot, 1295-1300. Fresco. Church of St. Francis, Upper Church, Assisi, Italy.

Fig. 4.10 Arch of Constantine, Triumphal Chariot, Rome, 315 A.D.

143

Fig. 4.11a Albrecht Dürer, The Burgundian Marriage Cart, originally conceived as part of The Great Triumphal Arch (detail of left side of print).

Fig. 4.11b The Burgundian Marriage Cart (Detail of right side of print).

Fig. 4.11c Albrecht Dürer, The Triumphal Procession

144

Fig. 4.12 Albrecht Dürer, Adoration of the Trinity Altarpiece, 1511. Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna.

145

4.13 Albrecht Dürer and workshop, Triumphal Arch, det. Frankfurt am Main, Städelsches Kunstinstitut und Städtische Galerie

146

Fig. 4.14 Albrecht Dürer and others, Fig. 4.15 Albrecht Dürer, Portrait of Charlemagne, Portrait of Frederick III, detail from preliminary sketch, c. 1512, The Great Triumphal Arch of Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg Maximilian I

147

Fig. 4.16 Albrecht Dürer, Emperor Charlemagne and Emperor Sigismund. 1513. Oil and tempera on panel. Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg, Germany.

148

4.17a Plan of the Hofkirche at Innsbruck, Austria 4.17b Tomb of Maximilian I (29 on the plan)

149

Fig. 4.18 Gregor Loffer, King Clovis, 1550. Fig. 4.19 Peter Vischer, Theodoric of the Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria. Ostrogoths, 1513. Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria.

Fig. 4.20 Peter Vischer (designed by Fig. 4.21 Gottfried of Bouillon, Albrecht Dürer), King Arthur, 1513. Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria. Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria.

150

Fig. 4.22 Julius Caesar, Fig. 4.23 Emperor Hadrian, Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria.

Fig. 4.24 Frederick III, Fig. 4.25 Philip the Fair, Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria

Fig. 4.26 Charles the Bold, Fig. 4.27 Mary of Burgundy, Fig. 4.25a Detail of above, Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Philip the Fair, Symbol of the Austria . Austria. Order of the Golden Fleece of Burgundy

151

Fig. 4.28 Maximilian I, Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria

Fig. 4.29 Alexander Colin or Bernard and Arnold Abel, Marriage of Maximilian I and Mary of Burgundy, Hofkirche, Innsbruck, Austria.

Fig. 4.30 Leonhard Schaufelein, The Marriage of Maximilian I and Mary of Burgundy, from Der Weisskunig, c. 1571, woodcut.

152

Conclusion

153 As we have seen, the Arthurian political model and the virtuous consort as holy vessel

model were important for the Dukes of Burgundy and their royal allies. Each of the dukes

utilized elements of the Arthurian legends as part of their courtly identity. The British king and

the Burgundian/Hapsburg emperor did likewise. To a large extent this seminal paradigm defined much of the form of court celebrations and festivities. This conceit also created a religious and political hierarchy which their subordinates felt compelled to follow. That is, the wealthy, the nobles, and vassals knew protocol dictated that they must exalt the ruler as a god-like being ordained by God. To fail to do so would likely have dire consequences.

The focus of the holy vessel model of the consort was the bearing of the messianic heir.

In each example of this study, whether princess or duchess it was her most important duty to give birth to the male heir in order to perpetuate the sacred dynasty. Though it is beyond the scope of this study, it was the perceived failure in this important duty which brought two of the wives of

Henry VIII to the executioner’s block.

The association of the Renaissance dynasties with royal bloodlines of Ancient Rome and

Greece was also universally accepted. All of the royalty studied here found a common ancestor in the person of Aeneas. Philip the Good named his knightly order, the Burgundian Order of the

Golden Fleece after the adventure of the Greek Jason. Henry VII included the image of Aeneas’ grandson, Brut of Troy among the frescoes of his Richmond Palace. Henry purported himself to be the savior-king, descendant of Brut, as prophesized by Cadwaladr by an angel. His son, Prince

Arthur of Wales was touted as being the return of Arthur, as has been seen in references to him during the wedding pageantry in honor of his marriage to Katherine of Aragon. Maximilian claimed lineage to the emperors of Rome, and to King Arthur as well. All leaders considered

154 themselves to be descendants of Constantine. For these fifteenth-century rulers the poetry of

Virgil became an important tool in connecting to an ancient past.

The age also was one in which prophecies related to current events were widely respected. The prophecy of Merlin concerning the rise of the Maid of Orleans was thought by many to have predicted the coming of Joan of Arc. St. Joan was responsible for returning the throne of France to the French King Charles VII. Also examined in this study was the prophecy revealed to Welsh Prince Cadwaladr upon his deathbed. An angel appeared to him predicting the rise of a future British king who would subdue the country’s enemies, and usher in a new age of peace and prosperity. Henry VII made use of this prophecy during his campaign against Richard

III. The prophecy of the Last World Emperor and the rise of the Second Charlemagne was used by many Renaissance rulers and their followers. Important to this study is how they were used by the Habsburgs, beginning with Frederick III, and later, his son Maximilian I. The astrologer

Johann Lichtenberger identified Frederick and Maximilian as the return of the great Frankish emperor using astrology and the prophecies of St. Birgitta of Sweden.

A number of saints were highly revered during the late middle ages and early

Renaissance. As mentioned, St. Birgitta was admired for her gift of prophecy. Other saints were also venerated for their gift of revelation. Among these were St. Catherine of Siena and St. Mary

Magdalene. As noted, Margaret of York, her step-granddaughter, Margaret of Austria, and

Katherine of Aragon were all depicted as Mary Magdalene. Saints such as St. Catherine of

Alexandria and St. Ursula were venerated for their courage in the face of martyrdom, as well as for the chaste way that they lived. Margaret of York was depicted as St. Catherine in Hans

Memling’s Mystic Marriage of St. Catherine, while St. Ursula figured prominently in the stage presentations in celebration of the marriage of Katherine of Aragon to Prince Arthur of Wales.

155 Of great importance to women of this study was that they be seen as holy and chaste. Each was

to be the bearer of the Messianic heir, thus each must be as pure and saintly as Christ’s mother,

the Blessed Virgin Mary. The rhetoric used in the pageantry surrounding the marriage of Arthur

and Katherine of Aragon confirm the importance of such ideals within the wedding ritual. It was

not the mere uniting of flesh to flesh, but the uniting of two souls with Heaven.

The ritual veneration of holy relics was another important practice for the dukes and their

contemporaries. Especially noted among these sacred articles are those which had a connection

with Christ’s body and blood. The relic of the Holy Blood figured in the meeting of Philip the

Good and Charles the Bold with the exiled dauphin Louis (XI) in 1458. The three attended the

annual procession of the Holy Blood of Bruges. This article was also brought to the side of

Charles’ daughter, Mary of Burgundy, after a fatal fall from a horse in the hopes of a cure.

Another such relic was the Bleeding Eucharist given to Philip the Good by Pope Eugenius IV in

1433. This was kept in a special chapel that Philip the Good had built for it, where it was kept within an elaborate gold monstrance commissioned by Isabelle of Portugal. All of these relics are

Eucharistic in nature, and thus remind us of the importance of the act of consecration performed

by the priest.

This act of consecration, so important in the Eucharist, was also an important

consideration for the anointment or validation of the holy rule of kings and emperors. As we

have seen, Maximilian commissioned vast artistic enterprises in order to offset the fact that he

was never officially anointed with holy oil by the pope in Rome to validate his status as Holy

Roman Emperor. Both his printed Triumphal Arch and his cenotaph at the Hoffkirche at

Innsbruck are examples that attest to this.

156 The main duty of all Christian rulers in northern Europe was to defend the true faith and protect the Holy Church. This was also the duty of knighthood and was much of the impetus for the crusades. Rulers being valiant in the name of Christ and His Church were depicted in paintings and sculpture, such as The Ghent Altarpiece, The Reliquary of Charles the

Bold, and the All Souls Day Altarpiece.

The works examined in this study most importantly were designed to preserve the sacred dynasty. The result of not producing an heir was death and destruction, as evidenced by the intermittent wars which were so prevalent. Among these were the Hundred Years War and the

War of the Roses. Thus, propagandistic art was employed to convey rulers as undying heroes chosen by God, and consorts as the Virgin Mary, worthy to bear a messianic heir.

This study has brought together the political struggles of the Dukes of Valois Burgundy and their scheme to create a kingdom for themselves by resurrecting the Middle Kingdom of

Lotharingia (Lorraine). Towards this end, they used the political constructs of the Arthurian model and that of the Burgundian consort. The scholar, Marie Tanner’s work, The Last

Descendant of Aeneas, was a valuable resource for this present study. However, her approach was much broader, and examined a wider range of detail, far beyond the scope of this thesis. I concentrated upon the concept of the Arthurian political model, as described by Gerhild

Williams. My research added to this idea that of the Burgundian consort and her importance as the vessel for the birth of the awaited-Messianic heir.

Other authors referred to, such as Iacobelli and Beerbower were also important to this study. However, Iacobellis who made a brilliant study of the portraits existing of Isabelle of

Portugal, did not examine the political significance of the portraits in great depth. Beerbower’s,

157 study on the iconography of Henry VII, likewise, concentrated upon the works made for that monarch, and did not study the relationships between Britain, Burgundy, Spain, and the Empire.

This study has examined the rise of the Valois Dukes of Burgundy and the transfer of the title to the rulers of the Holy Roman Empire, thus uniting, arguably the most powerful institutions in Europe at the time. Moreover, my thesis has also described the uniting of England and Spain and their allegiance with Burgundy against the nation of France. This occurred toward the end of the fifteenth century with the marriages of the Spanish princesses to the princes of

Britain and Burgundy.

In summation, in this study I have examined the use of the Arthurian political model and its counterpart that of the Burgundian consort model by the specific courts of Europe: the Valois

Dukes of Burgundy, the Tudors, and the Hapsburgs. I have uniquely shown that these rulers used it as part of an overall theopolitical strategy to validate their right to rule, as well as to justify the perpetuation of their dynasty. Their promise was to bring an age of peace and prosperity for their subjects, as well as a crown for the heads of their heirs. In the process they caused to be created some of the greatest masterpieces in art the world has ever seen. These works expounded the theme of the messianic ruler, his consort, and the cosmic forces which demanded his ruler ship to keep the forces of good and evil in balance. Thus, this paper has helped to put these works into a more contextual framework than other previous writings.

158 Bibliography

Alexander, Michael Van Cleave, The First of the Tudors: A Study of Henry VII and His Reign. New Jersey: Rowan and Littlefield, 1980.

Anglo, Sydney. Spectacle, Pageantry, and Early Tudor Policy. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969.

Bacon, Francis. The Essays, Norwalk,:The Easton Press, 1980.

Baldass, Ludwig. Jan Van Eyck. New York, 1952.

Beerbower, Sally Leah, Henry VII and the Symbolics of Power:Early Tudor Portraiture. New York: State University of New York at Binghampton, Dept. of Art History,1990.

Belloc, Hilaire. Characters of the Reformation, New York: Image Books, 1958.

Benecke, Gerhard. Maximilian I, ,1459-1519: An Analytic Biography. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1982.

Berenger, Jean. A History of the Hapsburg Empire, 1273-170. New York: Longman Group, 1990.

Bertelli, Sergio. The King’s Body. Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2001.

Biddle, Martin. King Arthur’s Round Table: An Archaeological Investigation. New York, The Boydell Press, 2000.

Bietenholz, Peter G. History and Fabula: Myths and Legends in Historical thought from Antiquity to the Modern Age. Leiden ; New York: Brill, 1994.

Block, P.J. History of the People of the Netherlands. London: 1899.

Brown, Andrew. “Civic Ritual: Bruges and the Counts of Flanders in the Later Middle Ages,” The English Historical Review. Vol. 112, no. 446, April 1997.

Blockman ,Wim. and Walter Prevener; translated by Elizabeth Fackelman; translation revised by Edward Peters, The Promised Lands: The Low Countries under Burgundian Rule, 1369- 1530. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, c1999.

Blum, Shirley Nelson. Early Netherlandish Triptychs: A Study in Patronage. Berkley, University of California Press, 1969.

Campbell, Lorne. Renaissance Portraits: European Portrait Painting in the Fourteenth, Fifteenth, and Sixteenth Centuries. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1990.

159 Joseph, Calmette. The Golden Age of Burgundy: The Magnificent Dukes and Their Courts. New York, W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1963

Castleden, Rodney. King Arthur: The Truth Behind the Legend, New York: Routledge. 2000.

Clark, Samuel. State and Status: The Rise of the State and Aristocratic Power in Western Europe. Montreal, Buffalo: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1995.

Coghlan. Ronan. The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Arthurian Legends. Barnes & Noble, New York, 1993.

Crankshaw. Edward. The Hapsburgs. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1971.

Crowe, Eyre Evans. The History of France. New York: Harper, 1842).

Crowe , J. A., and G. B. Cavalcaselle. The Early Flemish Painters : Notices of Their Lives and Works by Crowe , J. A., and G. B. Cavalcaselle. London: J. Murray, 1857.

Collins,Hugh E. L. The Order of the Garter. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 2000.

Dhanens, Elizabeth. Van Eyck: The Ghent Altarpiece. New York, Viking Press, Inc., 1973.

Dhanens, Elizabeth. Hubert and Jan Van Eyc.,( New York: Alpine Fine Arts Collection, 1980?

Dimier, Louis. “Un portrait perdu de Jean van Eyck”. La Renaissance de l’ Art Francais, vol. 5, 1922. \

Dixon, Laurinda S., “Portraits and Politics in Two Triptychs by Rogier Van Der Weyden,” Gazette des Beaux-Arts,( May-June, 1987) p. 181-190.

Doran, Susan, edit. Tudor England and Its Neighbours. (New York: Palgrave Mc Millan), 2005.

Dunlop, John Collin, Henry Wilson. History of Prose Fiction. AMS Press, 1906.

Eichberger, Dagmar, and Lisa Beaven. Family Members and Political Allies: The Portrait Collection of Margaret of Austria. Art Bulletin. vol. LXXVII, no. 2, June 1995

Eichberger, Dagmar. Women of Distinction: Margaret of York and Margaret of Austria. chapter entitled, “Female Role Models in Tapestries,” by Birgit Franke, Leuven: Davidsfonds, Brepolis, 2005.

Eggert, Carl Edgar. Middle Low German Version of the Legend of Mary Magdalen. Kansas City, Missouri: Steed and Ward, 1902.

Elliot, J. H. Imperial Spain 1469-1716. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1964.

160 Earl, James W. “Modern Philology,” St. Margaret and the Pearl Maiden. vol. 70, no. 1, Aug. 197.

Edmundson, George. History of Holland. Cambridge: The University Press, 1922.

Fraser, Antonia. The Wives of Henry VIII., New York: Vintage Books, 1994.

Fraser, Rebecca. The Story of Britain From the Romans to the Present: A Narrative History. New York: W. W. Norton Press, 2000.

Feglely, Randall. The Golden Spurs of Kortrijk. Jefferson, North Carolina: Mc Farland & Company, Inc., 2002.

Friedlander, Max J. Early Netherlandish Paintings. New York, 1967, v.I.

Great Britain, Public Record Office. Calendar of Letters, Dispatches, and State Papers Relating to the Negotiations Between England and Spain. V.1, Krause Reprints, 1495-1598.

Godwin, Malcolm. The Holy Grail: Its Origins, Secrets, and Meaning Revealed. New York: Viking Press, 1994.

Goodrich, Norma Lorre. King Arthur.New York: Harper& Row, Publishers, 1989.

Goodman, Anthony. John of Gaunt: The Exercise of Princely Power in Fourteenth Century Europe. New York, St.: Martin’s Press, 1992.

Grassi, Joseph and Caroline. Mary Magdalene and the Women in Jesus’ Life.Kansas City: Sheed & Ward, 1986.

Griffiths, Ralph, and Roger S. Thomas. The Making of the Tudor Dynasty. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1985.

Grossman, Martin. “The Court of Maximilian I,” Princes and Princely Culture. 1450-1650. Leiden, Brill, 2003.

Grummitt, David. editor, The English Experience in France c. 1450-1558, War Diplomacy and Cultural Exchange, (Burlington, Ashgate Publishing Company, 2002.

Hall, Mrs. Matthew. Lives of the Queens of England Before the Norman Conquest. Boston: Taggerd & Thompson, 1864.

Harbison, Craig. Jan Van Eyck: The Play of Realism. London: Reaktion Books, 1991.

Harris, John Wesley. Medieval Theatre in Context: An Introduction. (London: Routledge, 1992).

161

Haskins, Susan. Mary Magdalen: Myth and Metaphor. New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 1993.

Hurlbut, Jesse. internet source. http://toisondor.byu.edu/perform/hurlbut.html

Hutchinson, Jane Campbell. Albrecht Dürer: A Biography., Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990.

Hibbert, Christopher. The Tower of London. New York: Newsweek, 1971.

Hughes, Paul L, and James F. Larkin. The Royal Proclamations. vol. I, edit., London: Yale University Press, 1964.

Jolly, Penny Howell. More on the Van Eyck Question: Philip the Good, Isabelle of Portugal, and the Ghent Altarpiece, “Oud Holland”. v. 101, no. 4, 1987.

Kren, Thomas edit.; Wim Blockmans. “The Devotion of a Lonely Duchess”, Margaret of York, Simon Marmion, and the Visions of Tondal. Santa Monica: 1992.

Kren, Thomas, J. C. Smith’s article, “Margaret of York and the Burgundian Portrait Tradition.”

Iongh, Jane de. Margaret of Austria: Regent of the Netherlands. New York: Norton, 1953.

Ishikawa, Chiyo L. Retablo de la Reina Catolica. Michigan: UMI Dissertation Services, 1989

Iaocobellis, Lisa Ann Daugherty. The Portraits of Isabelle of Portugal. Thesis, Columbus, Ohio State University, 1981.

Kato, Takako. “ Caxton’s ‘Morte Darthur’: The Printing Process and the Authenticity of the Text. Oxford: The Society for the Study of Medieval Languages and Literature, 2002. Kren, Thomas. Roger Weick. Margaret of York, Simon Marmion, and The Visions of Tondal: papers delivered at a symposium organized by the department of Manuscripts of the J. Paul Getty Museum in collaboration with the Huntingdon Library Art Collections, June 21-24, 1990. (Malibu: Getty Museum, 1992).

Kantorowicz, Ernst. The King’s Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton: University Press, 1957.

Kipling, Gordon. The Triumph of Honour: Burgundian Origins of the Elizabethan Renaissance. The Hague: Leiden University Press.

Kipling, Gordon, Enter the King: Theatre, Liturgy, and Ritual in the Medieval Civic Triumph, Oxford. Clarendon Press, New York, 1998.

162 Lacey, Robert, Great Tales from English History: Joan of Arc, the , Bloody Mary,. Oliver Cromwell, Sir , and More, New York, Little Brown and Company, 2004

Luke, Mary M., Catherine, the Queen, New York, Coward-McCann, 1967.

Mander, Carel Van. Dutch and Flemish Painter: translation From the Schilderboeck, And Introduction By Constan van der Wall. New York, 1936.

McNeil, Brian. Great Couples from the Bible. Minneapolis, Min: Fortress Press, 2006.

Miegroet, Hans J. The Sign of the Rose: A Fifteenth-Century Flemish Passion Scene, “Metropolitan Museum Journal,” v. 27, 1992. Morris, Bridget. St. Birgitta of Sweden. Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 1999.

Mullins, Edward. The Pilgimage to Santiago. New York, Taplinger Publishing Co., 1974.

Myers, Henry A. Medieval Kingship. Chicago, Nelson-Hall, 1982.

O’Meara, Carra Ferguson. “Isabelle of Portugal as the Virgin in Jan Van Eyck’s ‘Washington Annunciation’”. (Gazette des Beaux-Arts, 1981).

Panofsky, Erwin. The Life and Art of Albrecht Düre., New York: Princeton University Press, 1955.

Pearson, Andrea. Envisioning Gender in Burgundian Devotional Art, 1350-1530. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Company, 2005.

Pernoud., Regine, and Marie Veronique Clin. Joan of Arc: Her Story. New York, St. Martin’s Press, 1998.

Philip, Lotte Brand. The Ghent Altapiece and the Art of Jan Van Eyck. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1971.

Pirenne, H . “The Formation and the Constitution of the Burgundian State.” The American Historical Review, Vol. 14, No. 3. (Apr., 1909).

Praet, Jules van. Essays on the Political History of the Fifteenth, Sixteenth, and Seventeenth Centuries. London, R. Bentley.

Prinze, Wolfram von. Durer. New York, Smithmark Publishers, 1998.

Radice, Betty, Editor. Geoffrey of Monmouth: History of the Kings of Britain. New York: Penguin Books, 1980.

163

Reeves, Marjorie. The Influence of Prophecy in the Middle Age., Clarendon Press, New York, 1969

Reinach, Salomon. Jean VI Paleologue et Hubert Van Eyc., Revue Archeologique, XVI, 1910.

Reiss, Edmund. Sir Thomas Malory. New York, Twayne Publishers, Inc., 1966.

Richardson, E. P., “Three Paintings by Master Michiel,” Art Quarterly, 84.

Riddy, Felicity.Sir Thomas Malory. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1987.

Roberts, Ann M. , “The Chronology and the Political Significance of the Tomb of Mary of Burgundy”, Art Bulletin. 1989, v. 71, no. 3.

Rose, Charles. The War of the Roses: A Concise History. London: Thames and Hudson, 1976.

Sheingorn, Pamela. “’And flights of Angels sing thee to thy rest:’ The Soul’s Conveyance to the Afterlife in the Middle Ages.” Edit., Carol Garrett Fisher and Kathleen L, Scott, Art Into Life Papers from the Kresge Art Museum Medieval Symposium, Lansing, Michigan State University Press, 1995.

Sheingorn, Pamela. “The Te Deum and the Iconography of Praise”, in Early Tudor England. ed. Daniel Williams (Woodbridge: Suffolk, 1989), 171 1

Silver, Larry. Shining Armor: Maximilian as the Holy Roman Emperor,: Museum Studies. v, 12, (Fall, 1989). Smith, Jeffrey Chipps. German Sculpture of the Late Renaissance ca. 15201580: Art in an Age of Uncertainty. (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1994).

Smith, Jeffery C. “’Venit nobis pacificius Dominus’: Philip the Good’s Triumphul Entry into Ghent”, Triumphal Celebrations and the Rituals of Statecraf., v. vi, part I, Munshower Papers in Art History from the Pennsylvania State University. Smith, Jeffery C. The Artistic Patronage of Philip the Good: (1419-1467). Columbia University, Ann Arbor, 1979.

Speake, Jennifer. Literature of Travel and Exploration: An Encyclopedia. New York, Fitzroy Dearborn, 2003.

Summers, Montague. Physical Phenomena of Mysticism, With Especial Reference to the Stigmata, Divine and Diabolic. New York: Barnes & Noble, ca.1950.

Tanner, Marie. The Last Descendant of Aeneas: The Hapsburgs and the Mythic Image of the Empero., New Haven, Yale University Press, 1993,

164 Taylor, Aline S. Isabel of Burgundy: The Duchess Who Played Politics in the Age of Joan of Arc. New York, Madison Books, 2001.

Thomson, W. G. The History of Tapestry from the Earliest Times until the Present Day. (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1906.

Tyler, William. Dijon and the Valois Dukes of Burgundy Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 1971.

Vaughan, Richard. The Last Valois Duke of Burgundy, London: Longman Group Limited, 1973.

Vaughan, Richard. Philip the Good: the Apogee of Burgundy, New York: Boydell Press, 2002.

Veenstra, Jan R. Magic and Divination at the Courts of Burgundy and France. New York, Brill, 1997.

Vehse, Eduard. Memoirs of the Court and Aristocracy of Austria., translated from the German by Franz Demmler, London: H.S. Nichols, 1896.

Virgi., The Aeneid. New York, Penguin Books, 1961.

Ward, John L, Hidden Symbolism in Jan Van Eyck’s Annunciations, “ Art Bulletin,” LVII, 1975.

Weightman,Christine, Margaret of York: Duchess of Burgundy 1446-1503, (St. Martin’s Press, 1989).

Williams, Gerhild S. “The Arthurian Model in Maximilian’s Autobiograhical Writings Weisskunig, and Theuerdank “, Sixteenth Century Journal. (1980)

Wolfthal, Diane, and John Hand. The Beginnings of Netherlandish Canvas Painting: 1400-1530. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1989.

Websites

www.blikopdewereld.nl/Geschiedenis/part_1

www.britannia.com/history/biographies/joseph.html.

www.elizabethancostume.net/index.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhys-ap-Gruffydd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy-Lance

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perkin_Warbeck .

165

http://etext.virginia.edu/etcbin/toccer-new2?id=KjvLevi.sgi , Bible, King James Version. Leviticus, 20: 21.

http://www.hofkirche.at/en/hofkirche/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_the_Bold

166