“Headlong” Into Pieter Bruegel's Series of the Seasons
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
CHAPTER 7 “Headlong” into Pieter Bruegel’s Series of the Seasons Reindert L. Falkenburg Beyond matters of attribution regarding works of the “great masters,” there are not many academic controversies in art history that rise to the level of public discourse or even publicity. One of these rare occasions regards the debate, how many paintings Pieter Bruegel the Elder (c. 1525–1569) created for his Series of the Seasons. In 1999, the British writer Michael Frayn published an internation- ally acclaimed novel, Headlong, in which he construed a witty and entertaining mystery plot based on a decades-old discussion among art historians whether Bruegel’s series originally comprised six rather than twelve paintings.1 Taking his cue from Tolnay and others that the five extant paintings in Vienna, New York, and Prague2 originally had one more companion, Frayn weaves his story around a painting representing “Merrymakers in a Mountainous Landscape,” which, the protagonist of the story is convinced, is the missing one that com- pletes the series. Frustratingly, at least for the art historian, the reader is never treated at a precise description of the painting.3 We hear about wooded hills, a valley, snow-covered mountains, a sea towards the horizon and a castle upon a rock, and some “clumsy figures” (peasants) dancing to the tones of a bagpiper, as well as a “little thickset man holding two small wild daffodils [who] is ex- pressionlessly touching his comically pouted lips to the comically pouted lips of a little thickset woman.” The colors of the painting suggest a shift in atmo- spheric qualities that are typical for April and May. Clearly, we are dealing here with a literary pastiche of a few well-known paintings by Pieter Bruegel, or rather with a (not very) imaginary work of a “Boeren-Bruegel.” Only at the end of the novel, the reader is given a glimpse of a small scene representing a figure that is thrown headlong (drowned) into a millpond, apparently an allusion to 1 Michael Frayn, Headlong: a Novel (New York: Metropolitan Books, 1999; 1st. ed. London: Faber & Faber Ltd., 1999). 2 Dark Day, Return of the Herd, Hunters in the Snow: Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, inv. nos. 1837, 1018, 1837; Hay Harvest: Lobkowicz Palace, Prague; Wheat Harvest, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Rudgers Fund 1919 no.19.164. 3 See Frayn, Headlong, 40–41. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���7 | doi ��.��63/9789004354��8_008 “Headlong” into Pieter Bruegel’s Series of the Seasons 81 the “brutal regime” of Spain (Philip II) over the Netherlands. But before the reader is offered a closer look—upon which the authenticity of the painting as the missing link of the series may be established—the painting catches on fire and literally burns in the hands of the story-teller. Thus the novelist’s gift of the sixth painting is lost forever, and art history has to struggle along, again, with five. Or so it seems. For while the novel takes more from art history than it has to offer her, there is one element in this story about a found and lost again painting that helps opening the academic’s eye to an archival anomaly, the importance of which so far has escaped the attention of the art historical and literary community. As Frayn and others have mentioned, there are two archi- val records from the mid-17th century that play a certain role in the discussion about the original number of paintings belonging to the series.4 In 1659, an inventory was made of the art collection of Archduke Leopold Wilhelm, which stated: “Fünff grosse Stuckh einer Grossen, warin die Zeithen desz Jahrs von Öhlfarb auf Holcz. Die Ramen alt, schwartz und zier verguldt, die Höch 6 Spann 4 Finger und 8 ½ Span braith. Original vom alten Brögel.”5 One year later, an anonymous French letter describing the Archduke’s collection mentioned: “six pièces de l’ancien Bruegel, qui répresentent la diversité des douze Mois de l’Anneé, avec un artifice admirable du pinceau, vivacité des couleurs, et ordonnance in- dustrieuse des postures.”6 The difference between the two sources has not gen- erated much commentary; Patrick Buchanan is among the few who have tried to give an explanation for the different number. According to him, “it may be that some other painting had been added to complete the series.”7 The implicit reasoning behind his suggestion is the following. Since there are currently five paintings belonging to the series, the one that has been lost was already miss- ing in 1659—and probably even earlier. In 1660, or perhaps earlier, a painting was added to compensate for the lost one—which then, apparently, got also lost, leaving us again with the five paintings we currently have. There is some- thing peculiar in this reasoning. It seems strange that the sixth painting was 4 For the following I have used in particular Iain Buchanan, “The Collection of Niclaes Jongelinck: II. The ‘Months’ by Pieter Bruegel the Elder,” The Burlington Magazine 132 (1990): 541–550 (with further references to the respective archival sources); and Fritz Grossmann, “New Light on Bruegel 1: Documents and Additions to the Oeuvre: Problems of Form,” The Burlington Magazine 101 (1959), 341–346. 5 Buchanan, “Collection of Niclaes Jongelinck,” 542, note 13 (cited after Jahrbuch der kunsthisto- rischen Sammlungen des Allerhöchsten Kaiserhauses, 1 (1883), no. 495), with further literature. 6 Ibid., 542, note 17. Cited after Le théâtre des peintures de David Teniers, natif d’Anvers…, Antwerp (1660), fol. A2. 7 Ibid., 542..