The : a new aurea ætas? The revival of a myth in the seventeenth-century Republic Geneva, 31 May – 2 June 2018

« ’T was in dien tyd de Gulde Eeuw voor de Konst, en de goude appelen (nu door akelige wegen en zweet naauw te vinden) dropen den Konstenaars van zelf in den mond » (‘This time was the Golden Age for Art, and the golden apples (now hardly to be found if by difficult roads and sweat) fell spontaneously in the mouths of Artists.’) Arnold Houbraken, De groote schouburgh der nederlantsche konstschilders en schilderessen, 1718-1721, vol. II, p. 237.1 In 1719, the painter Arnold Houbraken voiced his regret about the end of the prosperity that had reigned in the around the middle of the seventeenth century. He indicates this period as especially favorable to artists and speaks of a ‘golden age for art’ (Gulde Eeuw voor de Konst). But what exactly was Houbraken talking about? The word eeuw is ambiguous: it could refer to the length of a century as well as to an undetermined period, relatively long and historically undefined. In fact, since the sixteenth century, the expression gulde(n) eeuw or goude(n) eeuw referred to two separate realities as they can be distinguished today:2 the ‘golden century’, that is to say a period that is part of history; and the ‘golden age’, a mythical epoch under the reign of Saturn, during which men and women lived like gods, were loved by them, and enjoyed peace and happiness and harmony with nature. Following Hesiod, Virgil and Ovid, the principal authors of the Renaissance evoked the myth of a golden age and presented it as a model for the ideal society.3 This was equally the case for the young Republic of the United Provinces. From the sixteenth century onwards, Dutch artists expressed the desire to revive the golden age of ancient art. This mythical revival sometimes takes the shape of a legitimization of historical events: “The begin, like in the old days, to grow and bloom, and the golden age in which our ancestors lived and for which we yearned so long, commences. It was the sole means to revive oppressed lands, and so the citizens are honored for eternity: as such the Masters win the hearts of their subjects”4 This mythical revival could likewise serve as a justification of the political choices of the Seven Provinces. This is apparent when, in 1604, remarks that it is necessary that the “kings” and “lords” are “fair and wise in the countries that they govern” and that “man” enjoys a “safe, calm and joyous life thanks to the application of good laws and unbending THE DUTCH GOLDEN AGE: A NEW AUREA Æ TAS? justice”, so that one may speak of a ‘golden age’ (gulden Eeuwe).5 But in general the reference to the golden age functioned as a factual statement. A year after the truce between the United Provinces and the Kingdom of Spain was signed, the poets Dirk Woutersz Kolenkamp and Jacob van der Schuere were very satisfied with the prosperous new society in which they lived: “Oh! such a golden age that blooms here in our country! The golden age of Saturn certainly seems to have reappeared here today”.6 Within the context of that which we might call an ‘imagined community of the golden age’ – following the words of Benedict Anderson (1983)7 – historians, philosophers, lawyers and theologians but even more so painters, poets and playwrights were mobilized in the seventeenth century to participate in the formation of the Dutch Golden Age. Organized within the project “Un Siècle d’Or? Repenser la peinture hollandaise du XVIIe siècle” (2017-2021), this conference is devoted to the artistic construction of the Dutch Golden Age during the seventeenth century. It will address four themes with regard to the Dutch Golden Age: the myth, the role of time, of space and of society.

1. The Golden Age and its myths

In the introduction of the conference we seek to define the use and functioning of myths in the construction of historical and political imagined communities in early modern Europe, specifically in the United Provinces during the seventeenth century. Several questions will be addressed:

§ What can be understood by a myth and, more specifically, a visual myth, in the seventeenth century? § In what manner is the concept used and which disciplines or main theories are involved? (e.g. Francis Bacon) § What is the function of mythological descriptions and in particular those that describe a golden age (Ovid, Vincenzo Cartari, Cesare Ripa, etc.)?

2. The ‘time’ of the Dutch Golden Age

The first aspect of the Dutch reinterpretation of the golden age that will be addressed is that of the ‘time’ of the myth, in other words: the manner in which the seventeenth-century Dutchmen conceived and constructed the relation between their ‘golden age’ and that of the Ancients.

§ Did Dutch artists see and construct the Golden Age as a mythical past or rather as a radiant future? § If indeed it was treated as a mythical past, did it take the shape of a nostalgic or perhaps reactionary or even revolutionary relation with the past? Was this ‘return to the old days’ presented as a potential reality? § In which artistic disciplines was the concept of the Golden Age most discernible? In pastoral literature (Pieter Cornelisz Hooft, Johan van Heemskerck) and its visual counterparts (Gerrit van Honthorst, Abraham Bloemaert)? Or in theological justifications of the ‘destiny of the people of God’, as it was expressed by certain

2

THE DUTCH GOLDEN AGE: A NEW AUREA Æ TAS?

poets (Joost van den Vondel, Claes Jacobsz Wits, J. Boeckaert), in the trail of preachers (Jacob Boehme, Johannes Rothe)?8 § If we follow the assumption that the seventeenth century was treated as a radiant future: How was this presentist discourse manifested in texts and visual art works? And how was the Dutch Golden Age distinguished from the golden age of antiquity? § What was the role of artists and poets, to whom Johan van Heemskerck explicitly attributed the initiative of the construction of the “golden age of today” (gulde eeuw van heden)?9

3. The ‘space’ of the Dutch Golden Age

After the discussion of the time of the Golden Age, we will reflect on its imaginary spaces. The myth of the Golden Age was initially articulated within the context of Greek and Latin mythological literature. These landscapes were thus originally associated with the characteristics and topoi of ideal landscapes of the Classical Antiquity and the Mediterranean: sunny and pleasant weather; extraordinarily fertile fields and orchards; the humanity living in a true harmony with Nature in all its generosity.10

§ Was this image of a primitive golden age central in artistic representations of the subject? If so, how did artists deal with the depiction of cities and urban elites? Especially since, in the pastoral tradition, the golden age was explicitly opposed to the absence of values in the city and the court?11 § In which manner was the idyllic image of The Netherlands communicated to non- European regions such as South America, Africa and South-East Asia, whose inhabitants regularly came into contact with Dutchmen? In the literature of explorers and historians, those lands are often compared to the golden age of the first period of man12 and represented by Dutch painters (Franss Post). § Did Dutch painters, such as portraitists (), landscape painters (Paulus Potter, , Adriaen van de Velde) and painters of everyday life (, Jan Steen, ), aim to construct the image of another type of golden age, more idiosyncratic and in line with the social, economic and environmental reality of the Dutch Republic? § Can we distinguish places that were of particular importance in the creation of the myth of the Golden Age (Haarlem, ,13 )? § To which degree did the realistic or fantasized reality of the countryside have a function in the visual depiction of innocence and of barbarism (e.g. Adriaen van Ostade, Cornelis Bega, Cornelis Dusart)? § Furthermore, did the untainted and rural vision of the golden age of ancient times – in which the first men lived in harmony with nature, without needs and content with eating that which was offered to them – exist in the seventeenth-century Netherlands, a culture in which the effort to domesticate and dominate Nature and profit to the utmost from its resources appears to have been the rule?

4. The ‘society’ of the Dutch Golden Age

The subject of the place of nature in the Golden Age automatically leads to questions about its culture, that is to say: the societal model that such a myth could or should propagate. 3

THE DUTCH GOLDEN AGE: A NEW AUREA Æ TAS?

§ Did the Dutch support an optimist reading of the golden age, following antique authors as well as certain philosophers such as John Locke?14 If so: in what manner and by means of which themes (e.g. happiness, peace, harmony with nature, Christian or secular virtues of chastity, honesty and charity)? § Did the myth, dubbed the ‘erotic communism’ of the golden age by Ernst Robert Curtius,15 in which “all men lived for all women” and “all women lived for all men” (“toutes pour touz et touz pour toutes / Chascune pour chascun commune / Et chascun comun à chascune”, Jean de Meung),16 and which is evident in many pastoral texts,17 explain the importance of scenes of seduction in seventeenth- century Dutch painting? Or should we perhaps interpret these scenes as the condemnation of behavior that was deemed incompatible with the emergence of an emphatically Christian if not Calvinist golden age? § And in the case of such a Christian golden age, did the Dutch perhaps aim for a more pessimistic and restrictive interpretation of the golden age, in line with Erasmus, Adriaan van de Venne or Thomas Hobbes?18 Did they mock the naïve idealism of primitivism: the ridiculous pretention of a contemporary golden age (heden-daegsche Gulde Eeuwe)?19 Or rather, did they promote different forms of social control and the channeling of individual impulses? Which would have been the iconographic, expressive and formal means to translate such ideas into visual images? § Moreover, how can the expressly egalitarian and classless society of the classical golden age be reconciled with that of the highly stratified society of the Dutch Republic? Was the myth of the Golden Age, often used within the context of the European monarchies such as the Spanish Netherlands and the court of Rudolph II, 20 adapted to fit political, intellectual and religious dynamics of the Dutch Republic? § Did Dutch painters aim to evoke the differences of their country to these monarchies, for example by portraying social mobility and public spaces?21 Or did the artists propose – following Plato22 – a hierarchical reinterpretation of the first golden age that could only be carried out by means of an oligarchical organization, in which the pacification of social groups was enforced by a minority that decided for the whole society? § What was the place of money and wealth in the Dutch Golden Age? Paradoxically, gold did not play any role in the ancient golden age, as property did not exist.23 This ideal was revived by Thomas More24 and by several authors that opposed the ‘love of gold’ characteristic for souls void of faith or law to the ‘golden love’ of virtuous minds.25 How did Dutch painters negotiate this contradictory relation to gold? § Should we maintain the interpretation proposed by Simon Schama, who pointed out the paradox in Dutch seventeenth-century culture between the pious aim for moderation and the reality of accumulating wealth?26 If so, what is the place of the myth of the golden age within this paradoxical image? Adriaen van de Venne mocked the hypocrisy of the ‘state of our happy, full and abundant golden age’, corrupted by gold fever and instant satisfaction.27 Some years later, Johannes Orizant agreed with Van de Venne. 28 However, half a century later Arnold Houbraken distanced himself of this critique:29 a case of retrospective idealization? § Did the seventeenth-century Dutch choose to translate this primitive absence of gold in other modern forms of disinterest? For example, the refusal of material riches, as illustrated by vanity still life paintings or Hendrick Goltzius’ motto “Eer boven Golt” (honour over gold)? And what to think of the symbolic transformation

4

THE DUTCH GOLDEN AGE: A NEW AUREA Æ TAS?

of wealth by means of the valorization of a more symbolic and cultural capital: arts and values?

Proposals

Each paper will be twenty minutes. Presentations and discussions will be in French and English; passive knowledge of these two language is thus advisable. Proposals consist of a title and an abstract (max. 250 words), a bibliography related to the subject and a short CV (max. 100 words). Please submit your proposal to [email protected] before October 1st, 2017.

Organizers

Prof. Jan Blanc (Université de Genève), in collaboration with Dr. Léonie Marquaille (Université de Lausanne) and Dr. Marije Osnabrugge (Université de Genève), within the context of the project « Un Siècle d’Or ? Repenser la peinture hollandaise du XVIIe siècle » (2017-2021).

Bibliography

ANONYME 1659 : ANONYME, Trompet of lofrede Common-Wealth Ecclesiasticall and Civill, over den eeuwigen Nederlantschen vrede New Haven, 2010. (1648), Haarlem, 1659. HOUBRAKEN 1718 : Arnold HOUBRAKEN, De BAER, VAN NIEROP 2015 : Ronni BAER, Henk F. groote schouburgh der nederlantsche K. VAN NIEROP (éd.), Class Distinctions : konstschilders en schilderessen, 3 vol., Dutch Painting in the Age of Amsterdam, 1718. and Vermeer, Boston, 2015. KAMEN 1974 : Henry KAMEN, « Golden Age, CANOVA-GREEN 1993 : Marie-Claude CANOVA- Iron Age », J. Mediev. Renaiss. Stud., IV, GREEN, « Le mythe de l’âge d’or dans les p. 135‑155. divertissements à la cour des Bourbons et LEVIN 1970 : Harry LEVIN, The Myth of the des premiers Stuarts », dans Pierre BÉHAR Golden Age in the Renaissance, Londres, (éd.), Image et spectacle, Amsterdam, 1970. 1993, p. 25‑45. LOCKE 1690 : John LOCKE, Two Treatises of CULLEN 1969 : Patrick CULLEN, « Imitation and Government, Londres, 1690. Metamorphosis : The Golden-Age MELISSEN 1981 : Spiko MELISSEN, « De Eclogue in Spenser, Milton, and Marvell », heedendaagse Goude-eeuw », Spektator, PMLA, LXXXIV, 6, p. 1559‑1570. XI, p. 30‑60. CURTIUS 1990 : Ernst Robert CURTIUS, European MORE 1677 : Thomas MORE, Het onbekent en Literature and the Latin Middle Ages wonderlijk eyland Utopia, ontdekt door (1948), Princeton, 1990. Rafaël Hythlodeus, en by t’samenspraeke ÉRASME 1615 : ÉRASME, Moriae encomion, dat beschreven, Rotterdam, 1677. is, Eenen Lof der sotheyt., Rotterdam, MYARA KELIF 2012 : Elinor MYARA KELIF, « Les 1615. Noces de Pelée et Thétis de Cornelis GOUWERACK 1646 : Leonardus GOUWERACK, Cornelisz. van Haarlem : une Erato ; Omhelst van verscheyde Minne- représentation de l’Âge d’Or ? », Rev. Art, Deuntjes, Sangh-rijmpjes ende Nieu- CLXXVII, 3, p. 25‑36. quelige Veersjens, Utrecht, 1646. ORIZANT 1643 : Johannes ORIZANT, Heraclitvs HOBBES 2010 : Thomas HOBBES, Leviathan, or, beschreyende de weereldt, La Haye, 1643. The Matter, Forme, & Power of a

5

THE DUTCH GOLDEN AGE: A NEW AUREA Æ TAS?

OUTREIN 1700 : Johannes d’OUTREIN, Proef- VAN MANDER 1604 : Karel VAN MANDER, Het stukken van heilige sinne-beelden, Schilder-Boeck, Haarlem, 1604. Amsterdam, 1700. VAN MANDER 1610 : Karel VAN MANDER (éd.), OVIDE 1588 : OVIDE, Metamorphosis dat is, die Den Nederduytschen Helicon, Alkmaar, Herscheppinge oft veranderinge, 1610. Amsterdam, 1588. VANDOMMELE 2011 : Jeroen Jos Maarten OVIDE 1657 : OVIDE, Metamorphosis : dat is VANDOMMELE, Als in een spiegel : vrede, Veranderingh, of herscheppingh, kennis en gemeenschap op het Rotterdam, 1657. Antwerpse Landjuweel van 1561, OVIDE 1671 : OVIDE, Herscheppinge, Hilversum, 2011. Amsterdam, 1671. VANHAELEN, WARD 2013 : Angela VANHAELEN, OVIDE 1678 : OVIDE, Al de werken, 3 vol., Joseph P. WARD (éd.), Making Space Leyde, 1678. Public in Early Modern Europe. ROSENTHAL 2003 : Lisa ROSENTHAL, « Political Performance, Geography, Privacy, and painterly virtue in Cornelis Cornelisz. Londres, 2013. van Haarlem’s Wedding of Peleus and VIRGILE 1597 : VIRGILE, Bucolica en Georgica, Thetis for the Haarlem Prinsenhof », Ned. dat is, Ossen-stal en Landt-werck P. Virgilii Kunsthist. Jaarb., LIV, p. 173‑201. Maronis, prince der poëten, Haarlem, SCHAMA 1991 : Simon SCHAMA, L’Embarras de 1597. richesses : une interprétation de la culture VIRGILE 1646 : VIRGILE, Publius Virgilius Maroos hollandaise au siècle d’or, Paris, 1991. Wercken, Amsterdam, 1646. VAN DE VENNE 1635 : Adriaen Pietersz VAN DE VIRGILE 1658 : VIRGILE, Eclogæ, ofte Harders- VENNE, Tafereel van de belacchende kouten, Hoorn, 1658. werelt, en desselfs geluckige eeuwe, goet VIRGILE 1666 : VIRGILE, De herders-sangen, rondt, met by-gevoegde raedsel- Amsterdam, 1666. spreucken, La Haye, 1635. VIRGILE 1688 : VIRGILE, Herders-kóuten en VAN DEN VONDEL 1927 : Joost VAN DEN VONDEL, Land-gedichten, midsgaders de XII Werken, 11 vol., Amsterdam, 1927. boecken van Æneas, Gouda, 1688. VAN HEEMSKERK 1622 : Johan VAN HEEMSKERK, WITS 1649 : Claes Jacobsz WITS, Stichtelijcke Pvb. Ovidii Nasonis Minne-kvnst, gepast bedenckinge, onledige ledigheyt, op d’Amsterdamsche vryagien, stichtelijcke tijt-kortinge, Enkhuizen, 1649. Amsterdam, 1622. VAN HEEMSKERK 1637 : Johan VAN HEEMSKERK, Inleydinghe tot het ontwerp van een Batavische Arcadia, Amsterdam, 1637.

Notes Vondel (1587-1679), in turn, rather evokes a ‘period of gold’ (goude tijt) (OVID 1678, vol. I, p. 5). The same indecisiveness can

be seen in the translations of Virgil. For 1 « ’T was in dien tyd de Gulde Eeuw voor Carel van Mander (gulden eeuwe), de Konst, en de goude appelen (nu door Johannes Ulaeus and Willem Godschalck akelige wegen en zweet naauw te vinden) van Focquenbroch (gulden eeuw), the dropen den Konstenaars van zelf in den aurea aetas could just as well be part of a mond » (HOUBRAKEN 1718, t. II, p. 243). myth or of history (VIRGIL 1597, p. 23; 1666, 2 In his translation of Ovid, Johannes p. 40). Vondel remains faithful to the Florianus evoked a ‘world of gold (Gulde translation that he proposed for Ovid o wereldt) (OVIDE 1588, f 3r). Johannes van (gulde tijt), as did Henrick Bruno (gulde der Gracht (gulde Eeuw), Abraham tijden) (VIRGIL 1646, p. 11; 1658, p. 19, 21). Valentyn (gulde Eeuw) et Johannes Only Dirk Doncker, to our knowledge, d’Outrein (goude eeu) talk about ‘golden made the curious choice to talk about a age’ (OVID 1657, p. 5 ; 1671, p. 5 ; ‘year of gold’ (guldejaar) (VIRGIL 1688, OUTREIN 1700, p. 413). Joost van den p. 10).

6

THE DUTCH GOLDEN AGE: A NEW AUREA Æ TAS?

3 HESIOD, Works and Days, v. 109-120 ; OVID, 9 « So menig minne-Liedt vol viers en Métamorphoses, I, v. 89-129 ; VIRGIL, aerdigheden, / Daer prachtig mede praelt Georgica, II, v. 533-540 ; Eclogues, IV ; de gulde Eeuw van heden. / Leest maer Aeneid, VI, v. 791-796 ; VIII, v. 313-327 ; de Liedtjes eens van Breroo’ en van Hooft, CALPURNIUS SICULUS, Eclogues, I, v. 65-180. / Wiens helle glants den glants der ouden On this subject, see CULLEN 1969 ; schier verdooft » (VAN HEEMSKERK 1622, KAMEN 1974 ; MELISSEN 1981 ; CANOVA- p. 118). GREEN 1993. 10 VIRGIL, Georgica, II, v. 149 ; Ovid, 4 « Nederlandt begint, gelijk van oudts, te Metamorphoses, I, v. 107. groeien, te bloeien, en de goude tijdt, 11 VAN HEEMSKERK 1622, p. 311. gaat in, daar onze Voorvaders in leefden, 12 VAN MANDER 1604, fo 110v (Uutlegginghe, en wy zoo langh naar verlangden. Dit was en sin-ghevende verclaringhe, op den het eenighe middel om de verdrukte Metamorphosis Publij Ovidij Nasonis). landen weder op te helpen , aldus leggen 13 ROSENTHAL 2003 ; MYARA KELIF 2012. de burgers een eeuwige eere in : aldus 14 LOCKE 1690 (A Essay Concerning the True winnen de Heeren de harten hunner Original, Extent, and End of Civil onderdanen » (ANONYME 1659, p. 73). Also Government, II, III, 19). This text was see VAN HEEMSKERK 1637, pp. 173‑174. directly translated into French by David 5 « Dit can verstaen worden, dat door Mazel in Amsterdam, under the title Du oprechte wijse Coningen en Heeren, in gouvernement civil, où l’on traite de Landen daer sy heerschen, de Menschen l’origine, des fondements, de la nature, du een gherust, stille, en vrolijck leven pouvoir, et des fins des sociétés politiques ghenutten, om datter goede Wetten en 1691. gheoeffent worden, en onghebogen 15 CURTIUS 1990, p. 125. gherechticheyt, die by de schaeldrichtighe 16 LEVIN 1970, p. 37. Astrea wort verstaen, gelijck Virgilius in 17 We could especially think of ‘the beloved Pollio t’vierde Boer-liedt verhaelt, paradise’ (amoroso paradiso), evoked by segghende : ‘De maeght hercomt nu van Torquato Tasso in Aminta (Torquato den Hemel neder, / En t’soete rijck Saturni TASSO, Aminta, Milan, Mursia, 1985, v. keert oock weder’. Van desen gulden tijdt 1846), re-published in Italian in 1656, 1678 noemde Virgilius Augustum den oorsaker, and 1705 in the Netherlands, before it was om dat onder zijn heerschen t’volck translated into Dutch and published in vreedlijck, en in grooter ghenuechte several editions (Aminta, Herders Bly- onderlinge leefde : daerom seght den eindende Treur-spel, 1660 ; Amintas, Poeet, datter van melck en honich vlieten bosch-tonneelspel, 1711 ; Amintas : vloeyden, en honich op den boomen is Herderspel, 1715 ; Amintas : Harderspel, o ghewassen » (VAN MANDER 1604, f 3v 1722) and in French in 1679 and 1681 (Uutlegginghe, en sin-ghevende (L’Aminte du Tasse : pastorale). We could verclaringhe, op den Metamorphosis likewise think of the love stories described Publij Ovidij Nasonis)). by Giovanni Battista Guarini in his Il Pastor 6 « Ach, of den gulden tijdt / dus bloeyd’ fido (1590), of which the translations and hier in ons lant. […] Saturni gulden eeuw’ imitations in Dutch were numerous in the schijnt nu verschenen wis » (VAN seventeenth century. Besides in the Italian MANDER 1610, p. 275). language, the Guarini’s text was available 7 ANDERSON 2006. as a French translation (Le Berger fidèle, 8 VAN DEN VONDEL 1927, vol. I, p. 218 (Het pastorale, 1600), re-edited to facilitate Pascha ofte De verlossinge der kind’ren learning the Italian language (Il pastor fido Israels wt Egypten [1612] 2, 1008) ; = Le berger fidèle : fait italien et français WITS 1649, p. 357. pour l’utilité de ceux qui désirent

7

THE DUTCH GOLDEN AGE: A NEW AUREA Æ TAS?

apprendre les deux langues, 1610) ; through its adaptation by Theodoor Rodenburg (Anna Rodenburghs trouwen Batavier. Treur-bly-eynde-spel, 1617) and its Dutch translation (Den ghetrouwen herder : herderliick bly-eyndende treurspel, 1638), published again 1646, 1650, 1671, 1678, 1695 and 1696. 18 ÉRASME 1615, p. 75 ; VAN DE VENNE 1635 ; HOBBES 2010, I, xiv. The Dutch translation of Leviathan by Abraham van Berkel was published in Amsterdam sixteen years after the publication of the first English edition (Leviathan : of van de stoffe, gedaente, ende magt van de kerckelyke ende wereltlycke regeeringe, 1667) and republished in 1672. 19 VAN DE VENNE 1635, Voor-Beduydsel. 20 VANDOMMELE 2011, p. 109‑132. 21 VANHAELEN, WARD 2013 ; BAER, VAN NIEROP 2015. 22 LEVIN 1970, p. 13. 23 LUCRETIUS, De natura rerum, V, v. 1113- 1114, 1241, 1423, 1428 ; OVID, Metamorphoses I, v. 141-142 ; SENECA, Epistulae Morales ad Lucilium, 115, 13. Voir LEVIN 1970, p. 70. 24 MORE 1677, pp. 71‑72, 138‑147. 25 GOUWERACK 1646, pp. 69-73. 26 SCHAMA 1991. 27 VAN DE VENNE 1635, Voor-Beduydsel. 28 ORIZANT 1643, pp. 6‑7. 29 HOUBRAKEN 1976, vol. II, p. 243.

8