the rijksmuseum bulletin

196 the rijks pieneman, history painting and the exhibitionsmuseum of the battle of waterloo bulletin

‘A Very Naive and Completely New Manner’: Pieneman, History Painting and the Exhibitions of the Battle of Waterloo

• michael putter •

n the spring of 1815 the Northern Detail of fig. 17 An artist with the right connections, I and Southern Netherlands, rough­- who could capture the national mood, ly the present-day Netherlands and would find it easy to get a commission Belgium, were united in a single for a large history painting. Taking kingdom under the rule of Willem i shrewd advantage of the opportunities of Orange-Nassau. It was the dawn the situation presented, Jan Willem of an optimistic period for artists. Pieneman established himself as the In the Northern Netherlands there leading Dutch artist of his day. With was a general sense, which had been two enormous paintings he was able growing since the eighteenth century, to achieve both national and inter­ that the arts had fallen into decline national standing, picturing the Battle after the glory years of the seventeenth of Waterloo – the most important century.1 Government committees event in the earliest years of the United appointed during the reign of King Kingdom of the Netherlands (fig. 1). Louis Bonaparte (1806-10) confirmed this image, and various measures aimed The Battle of Waterloo at raising the arts in the Netherlands to Emperor Napoleon (1769-1821) returned a higher, international standard were from exile in the spring of 1815. Within introduced.2 Most of these measures weeks he had assembled a large army were adopted or implemented by and marched north to drive a wedge Willem i (1772-1843) after 1815. between the British and Prussian King Willem had no personal armies. At that moment there was a interest in art, but he recognized British force in the United Kingdom of the importance of promoting it. A the Netherlands, a country comprising flourishing school of painting would the present-day Netherlands, Belgium help foster inter­national esteem for and Luxembourg that had been con­ the young king­dom and at the same pp. 198-99 ceived at the end of the Napoleonic time provide him with an opportunity Fig. 1 Wars as a buffer state against future to exploit the fine arts for his own jan willem French aggression.4 The infant state nation-building policy. Willem’s pieneman, received its baptism of fire even before kingdom and king­ship alike were, The Battle of its establishment had been finalized. after all, new con­structs whose only Waterloo, 1821-24. The Northern Netherlands, approx­i­­ Oil on canvas, legitimacy lay in contem­p­orary mately the modern Netherlands, 567 x 823 cm. 3 international politics. For artists, Amsterdam, reflected the old Republic of the particularly history paint­ers, this Rijksmuseum, Seven United Provinces, from which opened up enormous potential. inv. no. sk-a-1115. Stadholder Willem v had fled in 1795

197 the rijksmuseum bulletin

198 pieneman, history painting and the exhibitions of the battle of waterloo

199 the rijksmuseum bulletin in the face of a French invasion. Under the command of the king’s Since 1813 the north had been ruled oldest son, the Prince of Orange by Willem-Frederik, the oldest son (1792-1842), the Dutch army, a large of Stadholder Willem v (1748-1806). proportion of whose troops had To bind his southern compatriots previously been Napoleon’s soldiers, more strongly to him, Willem-Frederik joined the British under the supreme immediately proclaimed himself command of the Duke of Wellington King Willem i of the Netherlands. (1769-1852).

Fig. 2 willem grebner after m.i. van bree, The Hero of the Netherlands, c. 1816. Mezzotint, 404 x 256 mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, inv. no. rp-p-1903-a-22950; gift of Mrs Brandt, Amsterdam and Mrs Brandt, Amsterdam.

200 pieneman, history painting and the exhibitions of the battle of waterloo

On 16 June the French encountered the portrayed important events from first resistance from the Dutch army. the Bible, mythology or Classical At Quatre Bras, a crossroads between Antiquity, and the protagon­ists almost Charleroi and Brussels, the Dutch held always symbolized virtues.7 This the French long enough for British changed in the second half of the reinforcements to arrive. The Prince eighteenth century, when painters of Orange led an attack. On 18 June gradually also started to paint subjects 1815 the armies clashed near the village from more modern times (from the of Waterloo, not far from Brussels. Middle Ages onwards), or even the The outcome of the battle hung in the present. There had certainly been plenty balance for most of the day until, as of heroic figures in these periods.8 dusk fell, a Prussian army reinforced These changes began in Great the Dutch and British troops, and the Britain in the second half of the Allies secured the victory. By then the eighteenth century. Artists there Prince of Orange had been carried off started to organize, and in 1768 the the battlefield with a musket ball in his Royal Academy was established. shoulder. France had been defeated This sparked a lively debate about again. Soon afterwards Napoleon the paucity of history painting in was forced into exile on the island of England. Some critics even expressed St Helena. fears that the virtue of young artists The victory was greeted with could be in jeopardy if they could not jubilation in the United Kingdom of express themselves in this, the most the Netherlands. ‘The bloody battle ... exalted genre in painting.9 It was the has assured the independence of American painter Benjamin West, the monarchy of the Netherlands working in London, who came up with for all time,’ wrote the Nederlandsche the solution in 1770. History painters Staatscourant two weeks after the should no longer be dependent on event.5 Waterloo created a bond the whims of kings, nobles and the between the two parts of the new church, but should instead direct their country. The Prince of Orange’s attention to the middle class. West wound was the symbol of the battle painted The Death of General Wolfe (fig. 2). His courage in combat entirely at his own expense, with the reflected to the honour of the royal ultimate aim not so much of selling family and the whole country. Poets the painting, but selling reproductive wrote about Waterloo, printmakers prints. West also staged an exhibition produced engravings and the painters of Wolfe in his own studio, for which of portraits, landscapes and genre he charged an admission fee. To pull in works incorporated Waterloo into the public, West abandoned stories their paintings.6 It was simply a matter from the Bible and Classical Antiquity of time before the history painters in favour of an event that had taken pictured the battle on immense can­ place just eleven years earlier and still vases that rivalled the works that had great news value. He had found had glorified Napoleon’s victories in the perfect way of painting history France. works on his own initiative and making it financially feasible. ‘There are ... The Revolution of but two ways of working successfully, History Painting that is, lastingly, in this country, for Battles like Waterloo were not tra­d­ an artist,’ he wrote in 1790, ‘the one is, itional subjects for history paintings. to paint for the King; the other, to With its considerable level of difficulty, meditate a scheme of your own.’10 West history painting was regarded as the would go on to implement several highest genre in art. This type of art other ‘schemes’.

201 the rijksmuseum bulletin

His compatriot John Singleton Copley, Relief of Gibraltar (1783-91), was a who likewise lived in London, had even traditional painting, but at the same greater success with his history paint­ time so large that it was impossible ings. Under Copley, canvases became to find a suitable space to show it. In Fig. 3 even bigger and the subjects more the end a ‘magnificent Oriental tent’ anonymous topical, so that they increasingly began more than twenty-five yards long was after francesco 12 to resemble in format and commer­- erected in Green Park (fig. 3). bartolozzi, cial exploitation the panoramas that Meanwhile the commercial Copley’s Exhibition were so popular at the time. In the exploitation of history works was of the Siege of panoramas, devised in 1792, a single gaining in popularity on continental Gibraltar in Green canvas was placed all the way round Europe. In 1799 the French painter Park, c. 1850-60. Photomechanical viewers, creating the illusion that they Jacques-Louis David showed his reprint, 99 x 128 mm. 11 were in a city or a landscape. Copley’s Intervention of the Sabine Women London, Defeat of the Floating Batteries at at an exhibition he staged himself British Museum, Gibraltar, also called The Siege and instead of sending the work to the inv. no. 1894,0102.67.

202 pieneman, history painting and the exhibitions of the battle of waterloo

Salon in the usual way. In a brochure in Jaffa (1804), shows Napoleon, with he wrote especially for the occasion, utter disregard for his own life, visit- David explained why the commercial ing troops struck down by the plague. exhibition of a work of art was per- Napoleon’s pose is unmistakably Christ- mis­sible. An artist exhibiting a single like; he even touches a victim as if he work, David wrote, was no less than a wants to cure him – an allusion that practice that went back to the Ancient many viewers would have recog­nized, Greeks. Like them, he wanted to ex­ consciously or otherwise. Napoleon pose his work to the judgement of modelled himself on impor­tant figures, his compatriots. Good art could only particularly Charlemagne, in other improve people, and what a shame it paintings too.14 was that so many masterpieces were Unlike Napoleon and his successors seen by almost no one. In an exhib­- in France, King Willem i did not pursue ition he had staged himself, an artist an active propaganda policy – we may could show the public his work, and well wonder whether he actually had by their willingness to pay to view it any interest in art at all.15 He did, though, – or not – the public passed judgement appreciate that art was important to on it. The income from the admission the prestige of his kingdom at home fees enabled a good artist to become and abroad and was consequently financially independent, as was possible prepared to invest in it. Many Dutch in Great Britain. David saw this as an artists, however, had grown up with essential condition for making good the propaganda sur­round­ing Napoleon art.13 and so approached the King of the After the restoration of the mon­- Netherlands from the same viewpoint. ar­chy, David was banned from France The most eminent among them was because he had voted for the death Joseph Denis Odevaere, an artist of King Louis xvi during the French from Bruges who had studied under Revolution. The artist settled in Brus­ Jacques-Louis David and won the sels, where he organized several more French Prix de Rome in 1804. As a exhibitions of his own work. The aim well-trained history painter, Odevaere of these shows, more even than his depicted important themes of his own exhibitions of the Sabine Women, time by drawing parallels with histor­- was to garner publicity. When the ical events. In 1810, for instance, he exhibi­tion closed David donated all tried to flatter Napoleon with a sketch the entrance money he had raised to of the coronation of Charlemagne. It the poor of the city. He was an inspir­ was an indirect reference to Napoleon’s ation for several of his pupils, who as own corona­tion, which had taken place well-trained artists were destined to in 1804. take the lead in establishing a new When Odevaere suddenly found Dutch school of painting in the new himself a citizen of the Netherlands, United Kingdom of the Netherlands. he used the same approach to winning commissions from the new rulers. In Painting as Propaganda the autumn of 1814 the artist was intro­ Emperor Napoleon had actively used duced to the future King Willem i.16 art to strengthen his own position. On this occasion Odevaere showed At every exhibition staged during Willem a drawing he had probably made the emperor’s reign there was a huge not long before, showing The Delegates painting of one of his military triumphs. from the Provinces Presenting William There was no lack of pictures of the Silent with the Union of Utrecht. Napoleon as a virtuous hero either. There is a preliminary oil study for it Antoine-Jean Gros’s famous painting, in the Rijksmuseum (fig. 4).17 Here Bonaparte Visiting the Plague Victims Odevaere was packaging two political

203 the rijksmuseum bulletin

Fig. 4 Fig. 5 messages in a single image: the legiti­m- joseph denis claude-marie- From Messager des ation of the Netherlands – or in any odevaere, Sketch françois dien sciences et des arts event the Northern Netherlands and for The Union of after joseph publ. par la Société Flanders – as an independent state, Utrecht, c. 1815-16. denis odevaere, royale ... de Gand, Oil on panel, The Foundation Ghent 1824. and the legitimation of the House of 42.2 cm x 54.5 cm. of the House of Amsterdam, Univer- 18 Orange as its leader. The topicality of Amsterdam, Orange, 1822-24. sity of Amsterdam, the two events did not escape Willem i. Rijksmuseum, Engraving, Special Collections, Like his ancestor, he unexpectedly inv. no. sk-a-4896. c. 104 x 158 mm. ubm y 4091. found himself at the head of a new state that had emerged from a period of foreign rule. Odevaere was conse­ quently commissioned to scale up his sketch and produce a large painting.19 Until his death in 1830 Odevaere continued to approach the king from time to time with sketches for paintings that that legitimized the present through a reference to the past. In 1822 he went to the king with a sketch for a painting that would depict The Foundation of the House of Orange (fig. 5). In it Odevaere ingeniously showed how, after beating off a

204 pieneman, history painting and the exhibitions of the battle of waterloo

Saracen invasion, the semi-legendary painting depicting religious harmony William of Gellone (755-812/4) was (fig. 7). Since reducing the religious crowned sovereign ruler of Orange by differences between the Protestant Emperor Charlemagne.20 The parallels north and the Catholic south was a key with the present – Willem effectively element of Willem i’s policy, it is not crowned by foreign powers, including surprising that Van Bree was commis­ two emperors, after repelling a French sioned to make the painting.22 invasion – were clear. Both Odevaere and Van Bree took the The Antwerp painter Matthijs van Oranges as subjects for their history Bree also realized that if he wanted to works. They or their forebears were get commissions, he would have to at the centre of the large canvases, just approach the king with subjects that as Napoleon was central in France Fig. 6 expressed his politics. After visiting under the Empire. Immediately after matthijs ignatius Van Bree in his studio, the king the Battle of Waterloo, for instance, van bree, commissioned The Self-Sacrifice of Odevaere embarked on a large work The Self-Sacrifice Burgomaster van der Werff, a work that depicting the wounding of the prince of Burgomaster communicated the fairly universal (fig. 8). To him, this was the pivotal van der Werff, 1817. virtues of reason and self-sacrifice event of Waterloo. For Van Bree, Oil on canvas, (fig. 6).21 As soon as he had finished too, and many other artists with him, 430 x 570 cm. Leiden, Stedelijk that, Van Bree showed the king a the Prince of Orange was the most 23 Museum De Lakenhal, sketch for Prince Willem i Defending important subject of the battle. The inv. no. s 46. the Case of the Catholics in Ghent, a highlight was the vast panorama of

205 the rijksmuseum bulletin

Fig. 7 joseph pinnoy after m.i. van bree, Prince Willem i Defending the Case of the Catholics in Ghent, c. 1822. Lithograph, 450 x 590 mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, inv. no. rp-p-ob-80.442.

Fig. 8 willem van senus after joseph denis odevaere, The Battle of Waterloo, 1817. Etching, 628 x 760 mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, inv. no. rp-p-ob-88.874.

206 pieneman, history painting and the exhibitions of the battle of waterloo

Fig. 9 Panorama of Waterloo, 1816. Engraving, 468 x 385 mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, inv. no. rp-p-1963-512; gift of A.J. Laboyrie- van Goudoever, Leiden.

the Battle of Waterloo commissioned had been deficient and he had never by the Amsterdam publisher Evert really travelled, Pieneman did have Maaskamp (fig. 9).24 The prince’s excellent contacts in The Hague. As injury was likewise the focus of this the assistant director of the Konink­- huge canvas. lijk Kabinet van Schilderijen (Royal Cabi­net of Paintings) he was frequently Pieneman and The Battle in the company of the royal family, of Quatre Bras in particular the queen, to whom he The artist who would surpass both occasionally gave painting lessons. Odevaere and Van Bree in popularity, According to the author Jacob van Jan Willem Pieneman of Amsterdam, Lennep, soon after the Battle of Water-­ took a different tack. Pieneman was loo Pieneman made a sketch of the largely self-taught and did not make Prince of Orange ‘astride his horse and his debut as a history painter until he spurring it into motion to attack the was twenty-nine. Although his training enemy’. An unknown person, ‘who

207 the rijksmuseum bulletin

was a member of the King’s retinue’, to see the sketch of the equestrian saw the sketch and reported it. The portrait and then asked the artist if he next day Pieneman received a visit could add something of the battle. A from the Minister of Internal Affairs: little while later the queen returned to have another look and expressed ‘The queen,’ said he, ‘wishes to see a wish to see still more of the battle. your sketch of the Battle of Quatre Pieneman’s canvas was far too small Bras.’ – The painter looked up, for this, so he added extra pieces on surprised. ‘I did not sketch a battle, all sides.26 just an equestrian portrait of the For purely practical reasons, Prince.’ – ‘Then the Queen has been a painting as large as Quatre Bras mis­informed,’ replied the statesman – is made up of several pieces of can­- and that was indeed the case: – ‘but vas sewn to­gether. Even the largest she is now counting on seeing your pieces of canvas that could be obtain­- sketch of the battle and it might be ed measured no more than about better not to disappoint her when 130 x 190 centimetres, and the finished 27 Fig. 10 she comes to visit you tomorrow.’ painting is ten times that size. If the jacob ernst painting really did develop from a marcus after jan Pieneman worked through the night, sketch of the Prince of Orange, the willem pieneman, and the next day showed the queen initial design has probably survived in Vignette for a finished sketch, whereupon she a vignette Pieneman made for one of Napoleon’s Last commissioned him to execute the the first Dutch books about Waterloo Campaign, 1816. painting on a large scale.25 According (fig. 10). It shows the prince pointing Etching, 236 x 156 mm. Amsterdam, to a note by the artists’ biographer forward with his hat as he leads the Rijks­museum, inv. no. Christiaan Kramm (1797-1875), charge at Quatre Bras. A standard- rp-p-ob-22.760. however, the queen actually came bearer of the 5th National Militia Battalion follows him.28 These two figures appear identically in the oil sketch in the Rijksmuseum (fig. 11), except that the distance between them has been increased. If Pieneman really did keep adding pieces to his canvas, as Kramm wrote, this sketch must have been made after that was done, since it shows the complete painting. Aside from the unpublished anecdote there are no indications that the design for the painting was changed at a later stage. Documents show that as early as 1815 Pieneman had approached the minister and asked to be allowed to decorate Soestdijk Palace, which the Prince of Orange had been given in recognition of his deeds at Waterloo.29 The king apparently gave his per­mis­ sion verbally.30 When Pieneman finished The Battle of Quatre Bras (fig. 12), which is more than one and a half times the size of Rembrandt’s Night Watch, he received numerous requests to exhibit the painting at the exhibition in Amster­

208 pieneman, history painting and the exhibitions of the battle of waterloo

dam in 1818. The city even offered help Wouwerman (1619-1668), Jan van Fig. 11 in transporting it: Huchtenberg (1646-1733) and jan willem Francesco Casanova (1727-1803). pieneman, Sketch We will have it collected. The height When the exhibition closed for the Battle of Quatre Bras, 1815-16. and width mean it will have to be rolled. Pieneman was made a knight in the Oil on canvas, Our workmen are wholly familiar with Order of the Netherlands Lion. From 54 x 77 cm. this and the great Rembrand [sic], Van Amsterdam the painting travelled to Amsterdam, der Helst etc. have been transported Brussels, where Pieneman hoped to Rijksmuseum, many times like this. It is not possible to show it to the Russian imperial family, inv. no. sk-a-1520. carry it safely in any other way.31 who were visiting the city. There is no record of whether Pieneman succeeded The painting was enthusiastically in his intention. There are anecdotal received in Amsterdam and Pieneman accounts that a guest who was more became one of the most popular artists important to Pieneman, the Duke of in the kingdom overnight. The manner Wellington, did go to the exhibition. On in which the battle was portrayed, seeing the picture the Duke remarked honouring many other participants that it could do with a few figures in red in the battle as well as the Prince of coats – a reference to the total absence Orange, would certainly have been a of British troops in the painting; they, factor in its success. Pieneman chose a unlike the Dutch and French, who wore moment full of action, with the prince blue, had red jackets. ‘I understand leading the attack and fierce fighting Ostade always painted a man with a on the right-hand side. These skir­ red cap in order to keep his groups in mishes are reminiscent of the cavalry harmony’, said Wellington, lending battles by artists such as Philips weight to his comment. Pieneman

209 the rijksmuseum bulletin

agreed with the Duke’s observation occupied a place of honour among the Fig. 12 about the com­position, but explained artists of his country, worthy of the jan willem that he had painted a specific moment fame of the old Dutch masters’.33 Ghent pieneman, The in the battle and the presence of British town council also asked Pieneman Battle of Quatre Bras (detail), 1816-18. troops would not have been historic­ to show his Quatre Bras there. In Oil on canvas, 32 ally accurate. December 1819 an exhibition devoted 400 x 625 cm. Jacques-Louis David was another entirely to this single painting opened Baarn, Paleis visitor to the exhibition. On seeing in a heated room in the town hall. Soestdijk, Royal Quatre Bras the French artist is Following the examples of David’s Collections. reported to have embraced Pieneman and Odevaere’s exhibitions, visitors and declared that ‘it can be seen from were given an opportunity to make a that work of art that the Dutch, with donation for the poor as they entered.34 their verisimilitude of composition, so Eventually, after a final exhibition in that everything emerged and became Pieneman’s studio in The Hague, in loose unsought, seem to have been June 1819 it was installed in Soestdijk created painters, and that [Pieneman] Palace, where it remains to this day.

210 pieneman, history painting and the exhibitions of the battle of waterloo

Pieneman and Pieneman may also have made a sketch The Battle of Waterloo for the painting. A sketch on paper in After he finished Quatre Bras, Piene­ the Rijksmuseum (fig. 13) is identical to man was inundated with requests from an oil sketch in the collection of Earl all quarters to paint more episodes Bathurst in Cirencester Park (fig. 14).38 from the great battle.35 The artist had Pieneman dated this latter sketch 1818 in fact been planning to do this when and the Duke of Wellington later gave he was in Brussels in November 1818. it to Bathurst.39 It is not inconceivable that it was the While in Brussels, Pieneman had Duke of Wellington who expressed been offered workshop space and interest in a painting of the Battle – by his own account – ‘even more’ of Waterloo. This second work was in Ghent.40 Nevertheless he refused quite different from his Battle of the offers because he was reckoning Quatre Bras. That painting depicted on having to move to Amsterdam at the heroism of the Dutch, whereas short notice. The Royal Academy of The Battle of Waterloo is essentially a Fine Arts was due to open there at group portrait of British officers in the any moment and Pieneman had been tradition of the seventeenth-century offered a professorship. In various Dutch civic guard portraits. Pieneman letters he tried to find out more about did not approach the king for funds, when the Academy would start. In July which suggests that he intended to 1819 he cited his planned painting of exhibit and sell the work in Great the Battle of Waterloo as an important Britain.36 While he was in Brussels reason for the Academy to get off the Pieneman had met Colonel Felton ground soon. He did not have the Bathurst-Hervey (1782-1819), a British space to start on it in The Hague, but veteran of Waterloo, ‘who suggested deemed it extremely important that many details for the picture’.37 the work on his painting should start

Fig. 13 jan willem pieneman, Sketch for The Battle of Waterloo, 1818. Pen and ink, grey wash, c. 320 x 255 mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, inv. no. rp-t-1947-6.

211 the rijksmuseum bulletin

Fig. 14 as soon as possible. All sorts of eminent portraits the Duke would like included jan willem people, Pieneman wrote, were already in the composition, about thirty, more pieneman, aware of the plan. The king’s mother or less’.43 Sketch for The Battle and sister had both asked him if he had Pieneman received an invitation of Waterloo, 1818. started on the painting of the Battle of from Wellington, probably in the Oil on canvas, 77.5 x 54.5 cm. Waterloo yet. ‘I kept having to repeat autumn of 1820, to come and paint Cirencester, that I could not find a workshop’, his portrait in London. On 3 February Bathurst Collection. Pieneman­ complained.41 1821 Pieneman boarded the packet for In the end, lessons at the Academy Dover at Ostend.44 He carried with did not start until February 1822. Work him various letters of recommen­ on building Pieneman’s studio in dation.45 Arrived in the British capital, Amsterdam began in the summer of Pieneman was hospitably received 1821, so the artist had plenty of time to by the Duke of Wellington, who prepare his painting. It is probable that immediately had a room readied in he sent a sketch for the work to Lord Apsley House where Pieneman could Clancarty (1767-1837), the British paint his portraits (fig. 15). Wellington ambassador in the Netherlands in early also instructed his secretary to 1820.42 Clancarty sent the sketch on to summon the individual officers to the Duke of Wellington and suggested come and sit for their portraits when that Pieneman should go to London Pieneman so requested. Wellington ‘in order to take the Duke’s views on had drawn up a list of people whose the subject of the picture, as well as to portraits Pieneman had to paint.46 obtain sittings from the Duke himself Three weeks after reaching London, and from such other persons whose Pieneman wrote that ‘the duke has

212 pieneman, history painting and the exhibitions of the battle of waterloo

claimed in the politest way all the In 1821 the collection contained only necessary works, including the sketch a portrait of Wellington and one of for the painting of Waterloo, or rather the Marquess of Anglesey (1768-1854), he has requested them for himself’.47 both painted by Thomas Lawrence, Wellington may well have seen but Pieneman’s visit meant that the Pieneman’s work as completing a duke could get a whole series of por­ project on which he himself had traits at a stroke. For the same reason, embarked in vain a few years earlier: Wellington must also have been in- ‘a collection of the pictures of the ter­ested in the eventual painting. In principal officers whom I had the Spain, the duke had posed for the artist honour of commanding during the Thomas Heaphy (1775-1835), who was War,’ as he wrote in 1832.48 preparing a huge group portrait. When

Fig. 15 The Striped Drawing Room in Apsley House, London.

213 the rijksmuseum bulletin

Heaphy finished the painting in 1815 no brought to London from his country Fig. 16 one was really impressed by it. There estate, so that he too could be painted anker smith after was more interest in the engraving, by Pieneman. Pieneman felt he was thomas heaphy, which, beset by problems, did not being watched by the animal, to which Field Marshall the Duke of Wellington appear until 1822 (fig. 16).49 One of Wellington responded that the horse Gives his Orders, 1822. 52 the men portrayed by Heaphy was knew he was being painted. When Engraving, Colonel Felton Bathurst-Hervey, and Pieneman had finished Copenhagen’s 635 x 875 mm. the similarities between Pieneman’s portrait, Wellington asked him ‘joy­ London, Government sketches and the engraving after fully’ when he wanted him to sit on Art Collection. Heaphy make it quite possible that the horse, ‘for this is what you need’ Pieneman somehow saw an image of (fig. 17).53 Heaphy’s work in Brussels in 1818 Pieneman must have spent the first and was urged by Hervey to take this few weeks of his stay getting down the group portrait as his starting point.50 portraits he needed for his painting. Fig. 17 Although there was clearly self- The officers gave him their full jan willem interest, Wellington went to an cooperation and many of them sent pieneman, Study of extra­ordinary amount of trouble for him the clothes they had been wearing Copenhagen, the Pieneman. It would seem that the on the day of the battle.54 A biographer Duke of Wellington’s quite snobbish duke, who selected reported that Pieneman’s portrait Horse, 1820-21. his officers primarily for their social sittings brought about a reconciliation Pencil, oil on light brown paper, standing and hated sitting to painters, between Wellington and Anglesey, 524 x 415 mm. 51 liked Pieneman. The duke ordered who had fallen out after a quarrel. Amsterdam, that his horse, Copenhagen, which Because he was needed for Pieneman’s Rijksmuseum, he had ridden at Waterloo, should be painting, Wellington invited Anglesey, inv. no. rp-t-1969-91.

214 pieneman, history painting and the exhibitions of the battle of waterloo

whom he had not seen for a long time, Pieneman himself became friendly to Apsley House ‘and after an affecting, with the painter Thomas Lawrence cordial meeting in the artist’s presence, and was warmly welcomed by the the old friendship was renewed’.55 members of the Royal Academy.56

215 the rijksmuseum bulletin

Pieneman had originally intended to Pieneman had arranged for the canvas be back in the Netherlands at the end he would require to be ordered – the of March 1821, but extra work delayed large size meant that it took some his return. He made an equestrian time to prepare – and it was ready and portrait of Anglesey and possibly a waiting for him when he got back. second, full-length one.57 Pieneman Nevertheless it would be more than Fig. 18 got back to the Netherlands at the end two months before he had a studio jan willem of May with at least fourteen portraits and could start work. pieneman, Willem, taken from life, including one horse.58 Although he was unable to make a Prince of Orange ‘Mr Pieneman arrived here from start on the large painting until the (later King Willem ii), England yesterday,’ wrote Falck, the summer of 1821, in the previous two 1820-24. Minister of Public Education, ‘still years Pieneman had worked on the Oil on canvas, 104 x 82 cm. entirely a Dutchman it seemed to me, portraits he needed; aside from those of The Hague, Royal and burning with desire to start his big the British officers, a second, re­worked Collections. painting.’59 While he was in London version of the Prince of Orange has sur-

216 pieneman, history painting and the exhibitions of the battle of waterloo

vived (fig. 18). He also made draw­ings Wellington (fig. 20) and asked the Fig. 19 – probably actual size – of the skirmishes­ artist to make a copy for him. On jan willem in the background of the paint­ing receiving it, Clancarty declared that pieneman, (fig. 19). While leaving large areas of the Pieneman’s portrait had ‘killed’ a Study for The Battle of Waterloo, c. 1825. paper blank – this was where the fore­ portrait of Lord Castlereagh (1769- Chalk, 297 x 480 mm. ground figures would come – he drew 1822) by Sir Thomas Lawrence that Amsterdam, 62 the many incidents taking place on the also hung in his art cabinet. Rijksmuseum, battle­field, inclu­ding wounded soldiers inv. no. rp-t-1964-103; being carried away, an attack on French Waterloo Exhibited gift of J.A. van Dongen, artillery and a group of grenadiers While everything to do with Quatre Amsterdam. caught unawares by caval­ry. Pieneman Bras had been settled from the out­- still had his contacts from when he had set, Pieneman had embarked upon taught drawing at the military academy Waterloo without any certainty that and he probably got a lot of inspiration the work would eventually be saleable. from them. He had also supplied the All the evidence suggests, however, designs for the standards for the that the Duke of Wellington had given Nether­lands infantry in 1820.60 undertakings, possibly when Pieneman Pieneman finished The Battle of visited him in London. Pieneman had Waterloo in the spring of 1824. It was exhibited his sketch for Waterloo in almost twice the size of his Quatre Ghent on his return from London, Bras. The portrait sketches had been and probably talked at length about given into the safekeeping of Lord his adventures at Wellington’s house. Clancarty, whose portrait he had Lievin de Bast (1787-1832), a prominent painted in 1823, and the ambassador figure in the cultural life of Ghent, displayed these works in his house wrote in 1823 that Pieneman’s Waterloo in Brussels.61 Clancarty was very im­ was destined for Stratfield Saye, the pres­sed by Pieneman’s portrait of Duke of Wellington’s country estate.63

217 the rijksmuseum bulletin

The artists’ biographer Christiaan Wellington was not to get the painting Kramm had been similarly informed: that Pieneman finished in the spring of 1824. On 23 March 1824 the king and It aroused my interest and surprise that queen and Princess Marianne (1810- the English author Bryan-Stanley, who 1883) came to Pieneman’s studio to see used Immerzeel’s Work, tacitly passed the work.66 Six days later Pieneman over the Articles j.w. and n. pieneman.64 had a visit from the Prince of Orange To my mind the grounds that exist for who, according to a letter from the this may lie in an old feud regarding Russian ambassador, offered 40,000 the painting of the Battle of Waterloo, guilders as soon as he saw the painting; as I, being then in England, heard much this sum was many times higher than about at close quarters, concerning Pieneman’s asking price.67 On telling the disappointment of a highly placed his father about it, the prince con­ person there about the right of owner­ fessed that he had not been able to ship of this painting …65 resist the temptation to ensure that a

Fig. 20 jan willem pieneman, Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington, 1821-24. Oil on canvas, 76 x 63.5 cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, inv. no. sk-a-4689.

218 pieneman, history painting and the exhibitions of the battle of waterloo

masterpiece which would bring great For the exhibition in his studio, honour to ‘the Dutch school’ would Pieneman produced a brochure stay in the Netherlands.68 The king containing an outline print so that the agreed with the prince and declared many portraits could be identified.72 In that he would make his son a gift of the mid-August the exhibition opened to painting.69 the public daily from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. The newspapers reported the news To the great indignation of the visitors, with jubilation: ‘we learn with the Pieneman charged the steep admission liveliest of pleasure that the excellent fee of one and a half guilders. ‘Great is painting by Mr Pieneman ... will the general outcry against Pieneman definitely stay in this kingdom,’ wrote for charging f 1.50 to see his painting,’ the ’s Gravenhaagsche Courant. They wrote Willem de Clercq (1795-1844) were also able to inform their readers in his diary.73 The audience found it that the picture would hang in the even more ridiculous that the artist palace that the Prince of Orange was was asking this sum for the brochure, having built in Tervuren, just outside ‘while an Admission Ticket is issued Brussels. Like Soestdijk, this palace gratis’.74 Just over a week after the was a gift in recognition of the part he opening Pieneman’s commercial had played in the Battle of Waterloo. practices were criticized at length in a Before that, it was reported, Pieneman long newspaper article. Although the would show his work in London, and it painting had long not been the artist’s was the Brussels papers’ fervent hope property, wrote the anonymous that the work would also be exhibited author, Pieneman had devised ‘a very in their city: ‘This great painter ... must naive and completely new manner of know that people there, no less than in gaining very considerable advantages London, know how to appreciate his from the object he had already sold’. great achievements at their true value.’70 He obliged his visitors to buy the Undoubtedly inspired by stories description of the painting, and then about David and even more by what gave them a ‘free’ admission ticket. he had seen in London, Pieneman This practice was described as ‘not made The Battle of Waterloo a ‘scheme’ very chivalrous’, and it would have in the manner of Benjamin West. An been ‘more magnanimous’ had exhibition in London – for which the Pieneman followed the example of Prince of Orange had given his other artists in charging fifty-five cents permission – was self-evident, but entrance, ‘for the benefit of the poor’.75 Pieneman also had plans to show An anonymous poem satirized both the work in Dutch towns and cities. Pieneman’s commerciality and its Before he sent it to London, the critics. The poem suggests that the painting could be seen in his workshop high admission price was partly related in Amsterdam. Pieneman took care to to the presence of the fair in town insure his painting against fire – an and the desire not to admit the public insurance policy for three months that in great numbers straight away.76 he renewed no fewer than four times. Pieneman certainly halved the charge The policy contains a brief description when the fair ended. Advertisements of the studio: stated that this was done in response to a ‘general request, and as a conse­ being a timber building roofed partly quence of arrangements that had been with canvas and partly with glass, made to this end’.77 standing in the Garden named In the autumn of 1824, Pieneman Amstelhoek, on the corner of the set sail for London, still without the Amstel & buiten Cingel outside the painting, to look for a suitable space Utrecht gate …71 in which to exhibit his Waterloo.

219 the rijksmuseum bulletin

Wellington wrote to a friend in on 9 May and anyone who paid the September, telling her that Pieneman entrance fee of one shilling could had not been able to find a space big visit the exhibition. A second shilling enough for the painting.78 While he bought them a description of the work was in London Pieneman met the (fig. 21).83 The people of London Utrecht painter Pieter Christoffel flocked to see the picture and were Wonder (1780-1852), who had moved profoundly impressed by its vast there some time before. Wonder wrote size. A reviewer in the New Monthly to a corres­pondent that Pieneman Magazine wrote: had been un­able to find anywhere big enough to show Waterloo, so was This work ... is, without exception the hoping to have a tent put up for it in best work on a large scale that we St James’s Park; Wellington would be remember to have seen exhibited by arranging this for the artist.79 a foreigner in the country, or indeed Wellington evidently did not blame on the Continent. There is little if Pieneman for selling the painting to any of that mawkish feebleness and King Willem i and asked King George iv extravagant affectation about it, which on Pieneman’s behalf for permission characterise the present French and to exhibit the work in a temporary Italian styles. The scene is composed building in Green Park. Permission too, in a manner which gives it an air of was given on 9 October 1824, but the much business and animation, without king suggested Hyde Park, on which making it so confused and intelligible Wellington’s house bordered.80 Work as battles for the most part are.84 commenced on organizing the buil­d- ing and the insurance, a process that There was criticism, too, provoked in apparently ran into a number of part by the simple fact that Pieneman problems. In mid-January 1825 was a foreigner. After ten years, more­ Wellington wrote to tell the Dutch over, the British public had frankly ambassador that he could not possibly had enough of the whole Battle of stand surety for Pieneman. Were he Water­loo: ‘London is sick to death of to do it once, reasoned the duke, Waterloo,’ wrote The London Literary others would ask him to do the same Gazette. The building’s presence in the for them. Wellington was, though, park was condemned as an eyesore and prepared to lend Pieneman the rest of compared with a fairground sideshow: the money required after agreement had been reached on the sum he Of such an erection, in such a place, would pay for his own portrait and we would complain upon any occasion; the other sketches.81 By the end of but we complain still more, that the Fig. 21 Advertisement in January, construction of the wooden nuisance has been committed on 82 The Morning Post, exhibition building was in full swing. behalf of a foreign artist, for which 9 June 1825. The exhibition opened in Hyde Park all the native genius of Britain might have prayed in vain.85

One reviewer lamented the fact that Pieneman had painted Wellington from life instead of copying the ideal­ ized portrait by Thomas Lawrence, which was on show in the Royal Academy at the time. The most xenophobic of the critics complained about the positioning of the Prince of Orange: ‘by a patriotic anachronism,

220 pieneman, history painting and the exhibitions of the battle of waterloo the “Dutch” painter has introduced, prominently, the Prince of Orange.’86 In fact the prince pales into insignifi­- c­ance among the many leading English figures who dominate the painting. The British aristocracy seemed far less troubled by such feelings and on the Fig. 22 opening evening the crowd included a attributed to dozen dukes.87 As a result Pieneman jan willem stayed in London for longer than he pieneman, had planned. On 21 July the Board of Self-Portrait, 1818-20. Directors wrote to him, asking him to Oil on canvas, 80 x 64.7 cm. resume his duties at the Amsterdam Private collection. 88 Academy. On the same day Wellington Photo: The Hague, noted in his accounts book a payment Netherlands Institute of £417 18s ‘for the pictures of the for Art History/ officers’.89 Christie’s Amsterdam, Pieneman probably returned to 14 November 2012, Amsterdam around this time. In August, no. 191. at any rate, he judged the rather poor entries for the Prix de Rome for doubt have done much to ameliorate history painting, the first organized this, but it does go to show that at the Amsterdam academy.90 It is paintings like The Battle of Waterloo likely that The Battle of Waterloo would by no means make the artist remained in London for the time a fortune. The best paid artists were being. It was not until August 1826 still the ones who painted more that he exhibited the painting in a conveniently sized works with more room in Ghent Town Hall, very wisely commercial subjects.94 Pieneman, donating the proceeds to the poor. however, had won greater fame When the exhibition closed, the than any other living artist from his organization awarded Pieneman a country, both at home and abroad. gold medal with an inscription on In the space of ten years he had the obverse that left in no doubt how transformed himself from a little- high his star had meanwhile risen: known painter into the most cele­ j.g. pieneman inter pictores belgii brated artist in the kingdom, ousting principes adnumerato (Jan Willem much better qualified artists from the Pieneman counted the first of the Southern Netherlands (fig. 22). He Belgian painters) – to the people of owed all this to his two huge history Ghent Pieneman was now the most paintings. For Quatre Bras he had eminent artist in the Netherlands.91 managed to extract a commission from the king in the more or less usual way, The Price of Fame as Odevaere and Van Bree did. Water­ It was to be another five years before loo, in contrast, was entirely his own Pieneman had received the whole sum initiative, painted with a view to of 40,000 guilders.92 On his return showing it and selling it outside the from London Pieneman complained Netherlands. that he had earned nothing at all from Interestingly, the prestige Pieneman the exhibition, but on the contrary had achieved was an obstacle to the had suffered a loss of more than six commercial exploitation of the work thousand guilders. All he had gained in Amsterdam. The public saw the was ‘fame for his person’.93 The final painting before it was finished, as part selling price of 40,000 guilders will no of Dutch culture, not as a commercial

221 the rijksmuseum bulletin product. Its purchase by the king even works disappeared into obscure places. before the exhibition opened served At the outbreak of the Belgium’s in­ only to reinforce this feeling. In Ghent depen­dence struggle in 1830, Pieneman’s Pieneman therefore very wisely donated Waterloo was still in Brussels, where it his earning to a good cause. Never­ was awaiting installation in the Prince theless, the exhibitions brought him so of Orange’s palace in Tervuren. much prestige that his reputation was It was Pieneman’s son Nicolaas, secured. Gaining prestige as a history assisted by some soldiers, who ‘brought painter, like Odevaere, was Pieneman’s the picture unscathed to the Nether­ primary goal. He had his work at the lands, but only at the cost of much Academy for a guaranteed income. persistent diligence and skill, and The fact that the king paid an un­ danger, both to his life and the precedentedly high price for The Battle preservation of the picture’.95 The of Waterloo – out of all the works, the Prince of Orange had nowhere to put one that did least to glorify his regime it, so it was eventually installed in Wel­ – suggests that Willem attached more gelegen Pavilion in Haarlem, the newly importance to the standing of the established museum of contemporary Dutch school of painting than to the art that became part of the Rijks­ propaganda value of the pictures. This museum in 1885. With the exception would also explain why after 1830, of the Second World War and the when the Dutch economy collapsed renovation of the museum (2003-13) as a result of the Belgian secession, the painting has always hung there. enormous history paintings ceased to To many modernist art historians it be produced. The money was needed illustrated a period in art that they for more important things. In Belgium, would rather forget.96 And yet on the other hand, there was an evident Pieneman’s immense success, which need to legitimize the new state by he owed largely to his own initiative, means of large, propagandist paintings continued to inspire young artists – however, people wanted to be rid of until late in the nineteenth century. the old. Odevaere died in 1830 and his

notes 1 For example M. Engelberts, ‘Onderzoek naar ‘Een innige vereeniging’. Naar één koninkrijk de oorzaken van het verval der schilderkunst van Nederland en België in 1815, Nijmegen in Nederland’, Nieuwe vaderlandsche biblio­ 2015. theek, second part (1798), pp. 212-22, 258-66, 5 ‘De bloedige slag ... heeft voor altijd de 324-29. onafhankelijkheid van de monarchie der 2 See E. Bergvelt, ‘Lodewijk Napoleon, de Nederlanden verzekerd’. Nederlandsche levende meesters en het Koninklijk Museum Staatscourant, 1 July 1815, p. [3]. (1806-1810)’, Lodewijk Napoleon en de 6 Anonymous, Observations critiques sur les kunsten in het Koninkrijk Holland, Zwolle productions d’art en peinture et en sculpture, 2007 (Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek, exposées au salon de Bruxelles, Brussels 1816, vols. 56-57), pp. 257-99. pp. 8-9. See also W.F. Rappard, ‘Het historie­ 3 Cf. N.C.F. van Sas, De metamorfose van schilderij “De Slag bij Quatre-Bras” van Jan Nederland. Van oude orde naar moderniteit, Willem Pieneman’, Jaarboek van het Oranje- 1750-1900, Amsterdam 2004, pp. 405-07. Nassau Museum (1983), pp. 50-51. It can be See also Jenny Reynaerts’ article in this inferred from the list issued by the Amster- Bulletin. dam publisher A.B. Saakes (1768-1856) every 4 See N.C.F. van Sas, Onze natuurlijkste month, summarizing all newly published bondgenoot.­ Nederland, Engeland en Europa, works, that more than a third of all the 1813-1831, Groningen 1985; W. Uitterhoeve, works in the ‘language, poetry and drama’

222 pieneman, history painting and the exhibitions of the battle of waterloo

category related to Waterloo – and those According to an inscription, Odevaere were just the works published in 1815. gave the preliminary oil sketch to one A.B. Saakes, Naamlijst van uitgekomen ‘Mr Rey’. This was probably the owner boeken, kaarten, prentwerken, enz.: 1814-1818, of David’s Andromache (1793). See vol. 6, The Hague 1819. J.L.J. David, Le peintre Louis David, 1748-1825: 7 The classic study on representing virtues is souvenirs & documents inédits, Paris 1880, R. Rosenblum, Transformations in Late p. 570. Eighteenth Century Art, Princeton, NY, 1967. 18 In historical terms, the Union was a highly 8 E. Wind, ‘The Revolution of History Painting’, inappropriate symbol for the new kingdom. Journal of the Warburg Institute 2 (1938), The text of the Union was vehemently pp. 116-27. Cf. W.W. Roworth, ‘The Evolu- anti-Catholic and rejected any form of tion of History Painting: Masaniello’s Revolt central authority. For a long time William and Other Disasters in Seventeenth-Century of Orange refused to signed the document, Naples’, The Art Bulletin 75 (1993), pp. 219- which he saw as putting an end to his ideals. 34. The exhibition catalogues of L’Invention See K.W. Swart, Willem van Oranje en de du passé: Gothique, mon amour, Bourg-en- Nederlandse Opstand 1572-1584, The Hague Bresse 2014, and Histoires de coeur et d’épée 1994, pp. 161-62. en Europe, Lyon 2014, provide a good over- 19 Nederlandsche Staatscourant, 8 October 1814, view of developments after 1800. p. [4]. 9 J. Barry, An Account of a Series of Pictures, 20 The Hague, National Archives of the in the Great Room of the Society of Arts, Netherlands (na), 2.02.01, inv. no. 1569, Manufactures, and Commerce, at the Adelphi, 1 December 1822, no. 42. London 1783, p. 8. 21 The Hague, na, 2.04.01, inv. no. 4035, 10 J. Knowles, The Life and Writings of Henry exh. 18 April 1816, no. 1673; 16 April 1816, Fuseli, vol. 1, London 1831, pp. 174-75. See Falck to Repelaer van Driel. also O. Bätschmann, The Artist in the Modern 22 The Hague, na, 2.04.01, inv. no. 4035, World. The Conflict between Market and Self- 5 November 1817, no. 18. Expression, Cologne 1997, p. 9. 23 For the prince as the Hero of Waterloo 11 For the panorama see R. Altick, The Shows of see L.P. Sloos, Onze Slag bij Waterloo. De London, Cambridge, MA, 1978; B. Comment, beleving van de overwinning op Napoleon in The Panorama, London 1999; S. Oettermann, Nederland, pp. 125-28, 227-37. The Panorama: History of a Mass Medium, 24 There is a brief description of the panorama in New York 1997. E. Koolhaas-Grosfeld, De ontdekking van de 12 J.D. Prown, John Singleton Copley, vol. 2, Nederlander. In boeken en prenten rond 1800, Cambridge, ma, 1966, p. 331. Zutphen 2010, pp. 299-301; Sloos, op. cit. 13 J.-L. David, Le tableau des Sabines, exposé (note 23), pp. 247-49. publiquement au Palais National des Sciences 25 ‘… te paard zittende en het in beweging et des Arts, Paris [1799], pp. 1-4. brengen om op den vijand in te rukken’ … 14 D. O’Brien, After the Revolution: Antoine- ‘die tot het gevolg des Konings behoorde’ … Jean Gros, Painting and Propaganda under ‘“De koningin,” zeide deze, “verlangt uw Napoleon, University Park, pa, 2006, schets te zien van den slag bij Quatre-Bras.” pp. 104, 120-22; T. Porterfield and – Verbaasd zag de schilder op. “Ik heb geen S.L. Siegfried, Staging Empire: Napoleon, slag geschetst; maar alleen een ruiterbeeld Ingres, and David, University Park, pa, van den Prins.” – “Dan heeft men de 2006, pp. 32-33. Koningin verkeerd onderricht,” hernam de 15 E. Bergvelt, ‘Koning Willem i als verzamelaar, staatsman – en werkelijk was dit het geval: – opdrachtgever en weldoener van de “maar zy rekent er nu op, uw schets van den Noordnederlandse musea’, in C.A. Tamse slag te zien en het ware misschien beter, and E. Witte, Staats- en natievorming in haar niet te leur te stellen, als zy u morgen Willem i’s koninkrijk (1815-1830), Brussels bezoeken komt.”’ J. van Lennep, ‘Hulde aan 1991, p. 16. For art and propaganda during de nagedachtenis van Jan Willem Pieneman, the French Restoration see B.S. Wright, uitgesproken in de Maatschappij Arti et Painting and History during the French Restor­ Amicitiae, den 21. April 1853’, Astrea 5 (1856), ation: Abandoned by the Past, Cambridge, p. 454. ma, 1997. 26 Note by Christiaan Kramm on a separate 16 Nederlandsche Staatscourant, 8 October 1814, piece of paper in a copy of his Levens that p. [4]. he had annotated himself (The Hague, 17 The drawing may be in the Groeningemuseum Netherlands Institute for Art History, in Bruges (inv. no. 0000.gro1744.ii). barcode 200511193).

223 the rijksmuseum bulletin

27 J.-N. Paillot de Montabert, Traité complet schilderij De Slag bij Waterloo’, Jaarboek van de la peinture, vol. 9, Paris 1829, pp. 144-47. het Oranje-Nassau Museum (2001), pp. 77-78. Also cited in J. Kirby and A. Roy, ‘Paul 37 E. Wellington, A Descriptive and Historical Delaroche. A Case Study of Academic Catalogue of the Collection of Pictures and Painting’, in A. Wallert et al., Historical Sculpture at Apsley House, London, London Painting Techniques, Materials, and Studio 1901, p. 270. Hervey also appears in The Practice. Preprints of a Symposium Held at Battle of Waterloo. the University of Leiden, the Netherlands, 38 Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, inv. no. 26-29 June, 1995, Marina Del Rey, ca, 1995, rp-t-1947-6; Saakes, op. cit. (note 6), p. 230. p. 169. 39 R. Walker, Regency Portraits, vol. 1, cat. 28 Jacobus Scheltema, De laatste veldtogt van London (National Portrait Gallery) 1985, Napoleon Buonaparte, 1816. The Rijksmuseum p. 536, ‘1821’; Southampton, University of Print Room has several impressions of this Southampton (UoS), Wellington Papers, vignette on which the letters on the standard wp1/828/1, 4 September 1825, Wellesley to have not been filled in. Bathurst. 29 The Hague, na, 2.04.01, inv. no. 82, 40 The Hague, National Library of the Nether- exh. 20 August 1816, no. 77; 10 July 1815, lands, 121 b 4: 32, 11 January 1819, letter from Pieneman to Röell. J.W. Pieneman to J. de Vries. 30 The Hague, na, 2.02.01, inv. no. 296, exh. 41 ‘Ik moet altijd herhalen dat ik geen werkplaats 5 September 1816, no. 80; 30 August 1816, kon vinden’. Haarlem, Noord-Hollands Röell to Willem i, fol. [1r]. Archief (nha), 550, inv. no. 9, 10 July 1819, 31 ‘Wij zullen het laten afhalen. De groote en Pieneman to Van Ewijck, fol. [1r]. It emerges breedte zal de oprolling noodzakelijk maken. from this letter that after the Battle of Onze werklieden zijn daarmede volkomen Waterloo Pieneman also wanted to paint the bekend en op gelijke wijze zijn de grote subsequent siege of the French fortress of Rembrand, Van der Helst enz. meermalen Quesnoy. Willem i’s second son, Prince getransporteerd. Het is ook anders niet Frederik, had played an important role there. behoorlijk vervoerbaar’. Amsterdam, Arti et Nothing came of this intention. Amicitiae, inv. no. 120, 7 September 1818, 42 This is probably the sketch in the Rijks­ Jeronimo de Vries to Pieneman. museum (inv. no. rp-t-1947-6). 32 P.L. Gordon, Belgium and Holland: With a 43 Wellington, op. cit. (note 39), p. 270. Sketch of the Revolution in the Year 1830, 44 Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam (UvA), London 1834, p. 43; anonymous, ‘Wellington inv. no. otm: hs. 17 ck 4, 28 January 1821, and the Dutch Painter’, New-York Mirror 12 Pieneman to Rottiers. (1834), no. 21, p. 168. 45 Amsterdam, UvA, inv. no. otm: hs. 17 ck 328, 33 ‘… uit dat kunstwerk te zien, dat de January 1821, Pieneman to Rottiers; The Hollanders door hunne natuurwaarheid Hague, na 1.10.29, inv. no. 3265, 1 February van voorstelling, waardoor alles ongezocht 1821, Van Nagell to Fagel. vooruitkwam en los werd, tot schilders 46 Haarlem, nha, 550, inv. no. 9, 20 February schenen geschapen te zijn, en dat [Pieneman] 1821, Pieneman to Van Ewijck. onder de kunstenaars zijner landgenooten 47 ‘… alle de nodige werken waar onder ook den eene eereplaats bekleedde, waardig den roem portrait voor het schilderij van Waterloo der oude Nederlandschen meesters’. A. van zyn door den hertog op de beleefste wyze Lee, ‘J.W. Pieneman en zijne werken’, Album gereclameerd of liever verzocht dezelve voor der schoone kunsten 3 (1852), no. 1, p. 22; zich te hebben’. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, W. de Clercq, Dagboek van Willem de Clercq, Artists’ Letters, 141/336, 27 February 1821, vol. 8, 1820-21, p. 235 (UvA, otm: Hs. Reveil letter by Pieneman. fviii). David’s strict Neoclassicism was 48 Cited in S. Jenkins and C.M. Kauffmann, always diametrically opposed to everything Catalogue of Paintings in the Wellington regarded as traditional Dutch painting, but Museum, Apsley House, cat. London (Apsley in Brussels the Frenchman started to appre- House) 2009, p. 170. ciate Dutch art. J.-C. Lebensztejn, ‘Histoires 49 The appreciation of the painting was not belges’, in R. Michel, David contre David, helped by the fact that it was simply too Paris 1993, p. 1016. big to exhibit anywhere. Walker, op. cit. 34 Le véridique de Gand, 19 December 1818, p. 1. (note 39), pp. 630-31. 35 J.G. Bohl, ‘De Pienemans’, De tijdstroom 4 50 The composition of Heaphy’s painting occurs (1861), no. 1, p. 191. in other paintings, too, among them The 36 Cf. W.F. Rappard, ‘De Nationale bestemming Battle of Austerlitz (1810) by François van J.W. Pienemans tweede grote historie­ Gérard, and Archduke Charles with his Staff

224 pieneman, history painting and the exhibitions of the battle of waterloo

at the Battle of Aspern (1819) by Johann Peter 60 Pieneman was friends with the amateur Krafft. In my view all these works derive painter Petrus Groenia, himself a Waterloo from Benjamin West’s Battle of the Boyne veteran, who had accompanied him on part (1778). Cf. Rappard, op. cit. (note 36), p. 77. of his reconnaissance for Quatre Bras. 51 S. Jenkins, ‘Sir Thomas Lawrence and the 61 Clancarty’s descendants later sold the portrait. Duke of Wellington: a Portraitist and his Sale London (Sotheby’s), 13 May 2004, no. 6. Sitter’, The British Art Journal 8 (2007), no. 1, 62 Van Lee, op. cit. (note 33), p. 24. The portrait p. 63. by Lawrence is very probably the one in 52 W. de Clercq, Dagboek van Willem de Clercq, the National Portrait Gallery in London vol. 9, 1822, p. 18 (UvA, otm: Hs. Reveil fix). (inv. no. npg 891). Two virtually identical 53 Haarlem, nha, 550, inv. no. 9, 20 March 1821, portraits of Wellington by Pieneman Pieneman to Van Ewijck, fol. [1v]. were sold at a sale of paintings by one of 54 Van Lee, op. cit. (note 33), p. 23. Clancarty’s heirs; one of them is in the 55 ‘en na eene treffend hartelijke ontmoeting Rijksmuseum (inv. no. sk-a-4689). It is not in het bijzijn des kunstenaars, was de oude clear whether this is the original ‘sketch’ vriendschap weder hersteld.’ Ibid., pp. 23-24. or the copy. Sale London (Christie’s), I could find nothing about this quarrel 19 November 1976, nos. 38, 39. in the biographies. Cf. E. Longford, 63 L. de Bast, Annales du salon de Gand et de Wellington: Pillar of State, London 1972; l’école moderne des Pays-bas, Ghent 1823, G.C.H.V.P. Marquess of Anglesey, One-Leg: p. 160. The Life and Letters of Henry William Paget, 64 Bryan and Stanley were actually two authors. First Marquess of Anglesey, London 1961. See M. Bryan and G. Stanley, Biographical 56 Van Lee, op. cit. (note 33), p. 24. and Critical Dictionary of Painters and 57 The equestrian portrait, which probably Engravers: A New Edition, Revised, Enlarged, shows Anglesey in Spain, was with the art and Continued to the Present Time, London dealer Boris Wilnitsky in Vienna in 2013. 1849. This painting came from the estate of 65 ‘Het heeft mijne aandacht en verwondering Nicolaas Pieneman, Jan Willem’s son and gaande gemaakt, dat de Engelsche auteur heir (sale Amsterdam (De Brakke Grond), Bryan-Stanley, die Immerzeel’s Werk heeft 12 November 1868, no. 80). Van Lee also gebruikt, de Artikels j.w. en n. pieneman, reported that Anglesey commissioned stilzwijgend, is voorbij gegaan. De gronden, Pieneman to paint a portrait of him as the die hiervoor bestaan, kunnen, naar mijne Viceroy of Ireland. However, the marquess meening, liggen in eene oude veete, wegens was not appointed to the post until 1828. Van de schilderij, de Veldslag van Waterloo, zoo Lee, op. cit. (note 33), p. 24. Oddly enough, als ik, destijds in Engeland zijnde, veel van there is also another copy of the portrait of nabij hierover heb vernomen, betreffende de Anglesey that Pieneman painted for Water- teleurstelling van een hooggeplaatst persoon, loo. This copy, which was probably painted aldaar, over het regt van bezit dezer schil- by Pieneman himself, is in the Nationaal derij’. C. Kramm, De levens en werken der Tinnen Figuren Museum in Ommen. Why Hollandsche en Vlaamsche kunstschilders, this copy was made is a mystery to me. Like beeldhouwers, graveurs en bouwmeesters, the version in Apsley House it is painted vol. 5, Amsterdam 1857-64, p. 1821. on cardboard, but unlike the original it is 66 Nederlandsche Staatscourant, 31 March 1824, unsigned. p. [3]. 58 General Don Miguel de Alava (1770-1834), 67 Ibid., 1 April 1824, p. [3]. Spanish ambassador in The Hague from 1815 68 ‘... l’école hollandaise’. to 1818, was the only portrait Pieneman had 69 Letter from Meyendorff to Nesselrode, been unable to paint because the general had 3 April 1824. Published in H.T. Colen- left for Spain three years earlier. However brander, Gedenkstukken der algemeene while he was in Apsley House he had painted geschiedenis van Nederland van 1795 tot 1840, a copy of the portrait of the general that vol. 8.1 (gs 25), The Hague 1915, p. 686. George Dawe (1781-1829) had made at the 70 ‘Men verneemt met levendig genoegen Congress of Aachen (1818). dat de uitmuntende schilderij van den heer 59 ‘Gisteren is de Hr Pieneman hier gearriveerd Pieneman ... bepaaldelijk in dit koninkrijk uit Engeland … zoo mij voorkwam nog zal blijven’ … ‘Deze groote kunstschilder ... geheel Hollander, en brandende van verlan- moet wel weten dat men aldaar, niet minder gen om zijn groot schilderij te kunnen begin- dan te Londen, zijne hooge verdiensten naar nen.’ Haarlem, nha, 476, inv. no. 10, no. 16, waarde weet te schatten’. ’s Gravenhaagsche 31 May 1821, Falck to (probably) Apostool. Courant, 23 April 1824, p. [2].

225 the rijksmuseum bulletin

71 ‘… zijnde een hout gebouw van boven Beaufort (1766-1835), Hamilton (1767-1852), gedeeltelijk met zeildoek en gedeeltelijk met Argyll (1768-1839), Bedford (1766-1839), glas gedekt, staanden in den Tuin genaamd Richmond (1791-1860) and Brunswick (1804- Amstelhoek, op de hoek van den Amstel & 1873). buiten Cingel buiten de Utrechtsche poort’. 88 Amsterdam, City Archives, 681, inv. no. 65, The Hague, Gemeentearchief, Artists’ p. 166, 21 July 1825, Board of Directors to Letters, on or about 22 July 1825. Insurance Pieneman. policy taken out by Jan Willem Pieneman 89 E. Wellington, A Descriptive and Historical for The Battle of Waterloo. See also Rappard, Catalogue of the Collection of Pictures and op. cit. (note 36), p. 89. note 9. The location Sculpture at Apsley House, London, London described is somewhere along the Stad­hou­ 1901, p. 270. derskade near the River Amstel. 90 J. Reynaerts, ‘Het karakter onzer Hollandsche 72 Amsterdam, UvA, otm: hs. Z 134, 24 July 1821, school’: de Koninklijke Akademie van Beel- Pieneman to Scheltema. dende Kunsten te Amsterdam 1817-1870, 73 ‘Groot is de algemene verontwaardiging tegen Leiden 2001, p. 123. Pieneman dewijl hij het zien v. zijn schilderij 91 Anonymous, ‘Medaillon décerné par la Société met f 1.50 laat betalen’. W. de Clercq, Dag- royal des Beaux-Arts de Gand à M. Piene- boek van Willem de Clercq, vol. 11, 1824, p. 174 man, peintre d’histoire à Amsterdam’, (UvA, otm: Hs. Reveil fxi). Messager des sciences et des arts recueil (1826), 74 ‘… waarbij een Toegang-Billet gratis wordt pp. 424-26. uitgereikt’. Opregte Haarlemsche Courant, 92 The Hague, Koninklijk Huisarchief E8, 17 August 1824, p. [4]. inv. no. xiv 24, March 1827, vi capittel a, no. 19, 75 ‘… een zeer naïf en geheel nieuwe middel ... 15 November 1826, no. 54; inv. no. xiv 35, uitgevonden, om van het verkochte voor­ March 1831, v capittel, no. 19, 6 February 1831 werp nog zeer aanmerkelijke voordeelen te no. 19. G.H. Marius later wrote that Piene- trekken’ … ‘weinig ridderlijk’ … ‘meer edel- man had earned 100,000 guilders in total, moedig’ … ‘ten behoeve van den Armen’. but this information is nowhere to be found Arnhemsche Courant, 24 August 1824, p. [4]. in older sources. G.H. Marius, De Holland- 76 Amsterdam, UvA, inv. no. otm: hs. Jh 91. sche schilderkunst in de negentiende eeuw, 77 ‘… op algemeen aanzoek, en ten gevolge van The Hague 1920, p. 14. daartoe gemaakte schikkingen’. Nederland- 93 Rappard, op. cit. (note 36), p. 86. sche Staatscourant, 4 October 1824, p. [3]. 94 A. Hoogenboom, De stand des kunstenaars: 78 A. Wellesley Duke of Wellington, Wellington de positie van de Nederlandse kunstschilders and his Friends. Letters of the First Duke of in de eerste helft van de negentiende eeuw, Wellington to the Rt. Hon. Charles and Mrs. Leiden 1993, pp. 122-23. Arbuthnot, the Earl and Countess of Wilton, 95 ‘… niet dan ten koste van veel volhardenden Princess Lieven, and Miss Burdett-Coutts, ijver en beleid en van doorgeworstelde London 1965, p. 50. gevaren, zoowel voor zijn leven als voor 79 J.W. Niemeijer, ‘P. C. Wonder in Engeland, het behoud des tafereels, ongedeerd naar aanvullende gegevens in verhand met de Nederland … overgebragt’. Van Lee, op. cit. compositieschets van Sir John Murray’s (note 33), p. 24. Kunstgalerij in het Rijksprentenkabinet’, 96 Marius, op. cit. (note 92), p. 13. Bulletin van het Rijksmuseum 13 (1965), p. 121. 80 Southampton, UoS, Wellington Papers, WP1/802/10, 9 October 1824, Conyngham to Wellesley. 81 Southampton, UoS, Wellington Papers, WP1/811/10, 13 January 1825, Wellesley to Falck. 82 The Literary Gazette, 29 January 1825, p. 78. 83 ’s Gravenhaagsche Courant, 16 May 1825, p. [1]; The Times, 23 June 1825, p. 1. 84 New Monthly Magazine, 1 July 1825, p. 302. 85 The London Literary Gazette, 14 May 1825, p. 315. 86 Ibid., pp. 315-16. 87 W.T. Whitley, Art in England, 1800-1820, Cambridge 1928, p. 95. They included the Dukes of Wellington, Gloucester (1776-1834),

226 Detail of fig. 9 pieneman, history painting and the exhibitions of the battle of waterloo

227