Bernard van Orley and Malines: The Dido and Aeneas Tapestries at Hampton Court

The Antiquaries Journalhttp://journals.cambridge.org/ANT

Additional services for The Antiquaries Journal:

Email alerts: Click hereSubscriptions: Click hereCommercial reprints: Click hereTerms of use : Click here

Bernard van Orley and Malines: The Dido and Aeneas Tapestries at Hampton Court

H. G. Wayment

The Antiquaries Journal / Volume 49 / Issue 02 / September 1969, pp 367 376DOI: 10.1017/S000358150005383X, Published online: 29 November 2011

Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S000358150005383X

How to cite this article:H. G. Wayment (1969). Bernard van Orley and Malines: The Dido and Aeneas Tapestries at Hampton Court. The Antiquaries Journal, 49, pp 367376 doi:10.1017/S000358150005383X

Request Permissions : Click here

Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/ANT, IP address: 128.250.144.144 on 09 Mar 2013

BERNARD VAN ORLEY AND MALINES: THE DIDOAND AENEAS TAPESTRIES AT HAMPTON COURT

By H. G. WAYMENT, F.S.A.I. VAN ORLEY AND MALINES

DESPITE the careful and learned studies of Friedlander,1 the early development ofBernard van Orley, before his presumed journey to Italy in the winter of 1520—i,has remained obscure. In describing his formative period, Friedlander was obligedto be content with a general description of the Brussels School and the secondarymasters who succeeded Roger van der Weyden. Ascriptions of tapestry designsto Bernard van Orley in the period down to 1520 have generally been unreliable,2

because they have not been based on a consistent view of the artist's early develop-ment, or on anything like a precise knowledge of the main trends of tapestrydesigning in Brussels during that period. Above all, though a good many paintingsfrom this period have been put forward, with more or less plausibility, as his, nodrawings whatever have been ascribed to him before The Story ofRhea Silvia in theKunsthalle at Bremen, which Baldass dated about 1520.3 We now know that he wasborn not later than 1488 ;4 that he must at least have started painting the Hannetonaltarpiece by the first half of 1512,5 when he was roughly twenty-four; that he paintedthe nephews and nieces of the Regent of the Netherlands in 1515, and finallythat he became official court painter to her in 1518, when he was roughly thirty.His father Valentin van Orley and his brother Evrard were inscribed in St. Luke'sGuild at Antwerp in 1512 and 15176 respectively, but we have no information asto Bernard's domicile at that time.

A careful study of the drawings, stained-glass roundels, and tapestries connectedwith the name of Aert Ortkens can go some way towards remedying these defectsin our knowledge. It was Friedlander himself7 who isolated a group of drawings,

1 M. J. Friedlander, 'Bernaert van Orley, I: the designs of the Los Honores tapestries in the'Orley's Anfange und die Briisseler Kunst', Jahr- Spanish State Collection to Van Orley, and V.buch der Konigl. Preuszischen Kunstsammlungen Woldbye (see p. 368, n. 2) seems to follow her.xxix (1908), 246; also Altniederlandische 3 Op. cit. (n. 1).Malerei, viii, pp. 85 and 169. Cf. L. Baldass, 'Die 4 O. le Maire, in Bernard van Orley 1488-1541Entwicklung des Bernart van Orley', Jahrbuch der (see n. 2).Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien, N.F. xiii, 5 PI. Lefevre, in Pictura, October-December14.7. 1945, 126.

2 Friedlander ascribes to Van Orley a number 6 Ph. Rombouts and Th. van Lerius, De Lig-of tapestry designs which are clearly by Van geren en andere historische archleven der AntwerpscheRoome; E. Dahnens, in her 'Jan van Roome alias Sint Lucasgllde, i (Antwerp, 1872).van Brussel, Schilder', Gentse Bijdragen tot de 7 Archiv fur Kunstgeschichte, 2. Lieferung,Kunstgeschiedenis, xi, Ghent 1949, laid firm (Leipzig, 1913): Plate 23, Meister des Leipzigerfoundations for a cautious study of Van Roome's Kabinetts, Predikt Johannes und Enthauptung destapestry designs, but did not build on them; Taufers; 'Der Niederlandische Glasmaler AerdtM. Crick-Kuntziger, in 'Bernard van Orley et le Ortkens': Amtliche Berichte aus den Konigl.de"cor mural en tapisserie', in Bernard van Orley Kunstsammlungen, xxxviii, no 6 (Berlin, 1917), cols.1488-1541 (Soc.Royaled'Arche'ologiedeBruxelles), 161-7; Die Altniederlandische Malerei, vii (Berlin,1943, 80—2, is somewhat precipitate in ascribing 1929), p. 98; xii (Berlin, 1935), pp. 50—1.

368 THE ANTIQUARIES JOURNAL

defined their style, and ascribed them to Aert Ortkens, the name by which theglass painter Arnold of Nijmegen was entered in St. Luke's Guild at Antwerp in1513. This attribution was based on a meaningless inscription—'Adam van Ort1424'—inserted by a seventeenth- or eighteenth-century hand on a drawinggenerally called The Power of Venus (pi. LXXVII) in the British Museum Printroom.Friedlander thought that this might have replaced a half legible inscription orsignature reading 'Arnold van Ort 1524'. It now appears far more likely, however,that the original inscription, if there was one, read 'Adrian van den Houte', thename of a glass painter of Malines who lived from 1459 to 1521 and seems to havebeen a man of some considerable influence and reputation during the seconddecade of the sixteenth century in particular.1 He was not only an outstanding glasspainter himself, but he prepared designs for other glaziers, in particular for Arnoldof Nijmegen himself, and also for tapestries. There are six or seven tapestriessigned with either a capital 'A' or the two capitals 'AM' or a monogram consisting ofthe two capitals combined.2 However, of the total of well over fifty drawings whichhave been collected under the name of 'Ortkens' only about six are from the hand ofAdrian van den Houte himself.3 The Ortkens group, in fact, proves to comprisea collection of drawings by members of the Malines School covering a period of noless than fifty years from about 1480 to about 1530. Towards the end of the periodthe school was, to all intents and purposes, for reasons which will be seen later,merged with that of Brussels.

The earliest of these drawings, a vidimus for a three-light window representingThe Ascension (pi. LXXVIII), with donors below, has been four times published4 by thelate Dr. A van der Boom as a work by Arnold of Nijmegen, although it has nothingin common with the numerous stained-glass windows and fragments which canconfidently be ascribed to this master. The rather contorted gestures of the handsand some of the angels' wings, as well as the shorthand notation used for eyes, noses,and mouths, is so close to the style of Adrian van den Houte that one is justified inassuming that the two artists were very closely connected. However, the watermark

1 H. G. Wayment, 'A Rediscovered Master: 3. Samuel Anointing David (original in SwissAdrian van den Houte {c. 1459-1521) and the private collection).Malines/Brussels School', i and ii, in Oud Holland, 4. St. Michael Presenting a Woman Donor1967, 4, and 1968,2. (Berlin-Dahlem Printroom no. 12311).

2 V. Wold bye, 'Kongernes Tilbedelse', in Del 5. An Angel with a Shield of Arms (a lionDanske Kunstindustrimuseum. Virksomhed 1959-64, rampant: Copenhagen Printroom, as M. vaniii (1964), 15—40; this tapestry of The Adoration Zwoll).of the Magi at Copenhagen is clearly signed with the 6. A Man Struggling with Death (Pierpontmonogram described. Other signed tapestries are: Morgan Library, New York: Catalogue of

A—The Funeral of Turnus (Spanish State Col- C. Fairfax Murray Collection, i, no 253).lection). • Ontwikkeling en Karakter der Oude Monumen-

AM—A Romaunt of the Rose tapestry: Bouche tale Glasschilderkunst (Amsterdam, 1944), p. 123;d'Or becomes the Vassal of Amour (Hermi- 'Een Nederlandse Glasschilder in den Vreemde,tage, Leningrad). Aerdt Ortkens van Nijmegen', Ned. Kunsthistorisch

A—A History of David tapestry: Preparations for Jaarboek, 1948-9 (The Hague, 1949), pp. 90 -1 ;the Siege of Rabbath and the Arming of Uriah De Kunst der Glazeniers in Europa 1100-1600(Museo Civico, Padua, and Cluny Museum, (Amsterdam-Antwerp, i960), p. 190; MonumentaleParis). Glasschilderkunst in Nederland (The Hague, 1950),

3 Apart from the two mentioned here: p. 87, and pi. 11.

THE DIDO AND AENEAS TAPESTRIES 369

and the use of the hennin show that it is unlikely to date from after 1480, and maywell be a few years earlier.1 Adrian's father, Herman van den Houte, was officialglazier to the city of Malines for several years before his death in 1507,2 and it is areasonable assumption that he was the author of the drawing. His hand can also betraced in a much damaged three-light window in the South aisle at Lier, elevenmiles north of Malines.3 Two of these lights appear to be by Herman himself, andthe third, representing St. George killing the dragon, may well be by Adrian. Thedate of the window is about 1490. The hand of Herman van den Houte can also betraced in the design of a window painted by Nicholas Rombouts in St. Waudru's,Mons—a Pentecost completed in 1511.4 It is true that Herman van den Houtewas already dead at this time, but there is no reason why he should not havedesigned the vidimus some years before. It is evident that he was an original artistof some standing, since he was called upon to supply a design to one of the mostsuccessful glaziers in a period of intense activity in this art.

Now Adrian van den Houte is not the only artist in the Ortkens group in whosework the direct influence of the designer of the Ascension vidimus can be traced.There is a separate series of at least six drawings by an artist who was influenced byboth the others. There is good reason for believing that his name was Bernard vanOrley. The drawings in question, in roughly chronological order, are:

1. The Magdalene Anointing Jesus' Feet, Boymans-van Beuningen Museum, Rotterdam(Inv. no. 2). pi. Lxxxa.

2. Christ's Entry to Jerusalem, Albertina, Vienna (Inv. 7791).5

3. The Circumcision, sketch for a roundel, Rijksmuseum Printroom, Amsterdam (No. 21:482).4. The Adoration of the Magi, sketch for a roundel, in the C. R. Rudolf Collection, London.6

5. Christ Among the Doctors, also in the Rudolf Collection, pi. LXXXIIA.

6. Pentheus and Dionysus, a pair of drawings, Staatliche Museen, Berlin-Dahlem, Nos. 12502and 12502a. pi. LXXXI.

A careful study of these six drawings suggests that they are all by the same handand that they range in date from about 1505 to about 1515.7 Moreover, it is not diffi-cult to see the connection between the Ascension vidimus and the Magdalene AnointingJesus' Feet, the Adoration of the Magi drawing, and the Pentheus and Dionysusdrawing. The Magdalene drawing has particularly noticeable folds sketched in longdouble straight lines with angular inter-connections. In fact this is a sort of mechani-zation of the system followed in the Ascension vidimus, particularly in the drapery

1 C. M. Briquet, Les Fiiigranes, iii (Geneva, Belgique i (Brussels, 1961), No. 32, and especially1907), no. 8606. I am most grateful to Mr. K. G. fig. 72.Boon for pointing out to me both these reasons for 4 111. J. Helbig, De Glasschilderkunst in Belgie,the early dating of the drawing: it is indeed the ii (Antwerp, 1951), pi. LVI, no. 134.earliest vidimus for glass known to me. 5 Benesch (1928), no. 27.

2 Malines archives: Register of Deaths of St. 6 Old Master Drawings from the Collection ofRomold's, 1506-22, p. 22, 25th August 1507. Mr. C. R. Rudolf (London, 1962), no. 114.Cf.CoursdesComptes,Brussels,No.4i284(i5O5), 7 I am inclined to add to this list A Young Princef. 198, and No. 41285 (1506), f. 198 v., and E. hit by a Bullet at a Siege, formerly F. KoeningNeeffs, Histoire de la Peinture et de la Sculpture a Collection, and The Execution of St. John theMalines, i (Ghent, 1876). Baptist at Leipzig: van Orley's Protean versatility

3 J. Helbig, Corpus Vitrearum Medii Aevi, is evident even at this stage of his career.

37© T H E ANTIQUARIES JOURNAL

of the Virgin and that of the Apostle facing her beneath Christ's feet in the centrelight. The same sort of folds are found in the Jupiter and Areas drawing for atapestry by Adrian van den Houte (pi. LXXIX), though here the mouths are quitedifferently managed. Both artists are trying to solve the problem of presenting agroup of roughly circular shape in deep perspective, without excluding the specta-tor. We shall see later how Bernard van Orley was to solve this problem in thesecond decade of the century.

With the Magdalene drawing should be compared an early painting hithertounrecognized as Bernard van Orley's work. This is the Crucifixion with the Virginand St. John, with God the Father and the Holy Spirit above, in an English privatecollection (pi. LXXX£). The treatment of the folds in the Virgin's robe here is very similarindeed to that in the Magdalene's, but what marks it at once as by the same artistis the similarity of the folds in Christ's loin-cloth with those in the front of the table-cloth in the Magdalene drawing. The rather mawkish air of this painting is con-sistent with a dating about 1503-4, when Bernard van Orley would be aboutfifteen or sixteen years of age. Already at this stage in his career he includes smallfigures striding across the background, as in so many of his later paintings.

A comparison of the Pentheus and Dionysus drawing with the Annunciation (pi. Lxxxna)on the wings of the Hanneton altarpiece, dated not much later than 1512, suggeststhat they are roughly contemporary. The decorative details are still Gothic, andRoman armour of the type worn by Pentheus seems to have been introduced as earlyas 1507, to judge by the dated tapestry at the Victoria and Albert Museum ofThe Triumph of Chastity over Love.l

Many of the figures can be seen to have an underlying similarity with one orother of the purely Gothic figures in the Ascension vidimus, for instance the Maenadholding Pentheus' hair with the upper left-hand angel, and the drinker just behindher with the apostle in the foreground below Christ's feet. The two characteristicdrapery motifs of Van Orley's early work, as seen in the Hanneton Annunciation—the heavy straight folds coming down between the knees and the radially expandingfolds—are indeed derived and developed from Herman van den Houte. What isnew is the obsession with movement, the characteristic Orleian stride, and themannerist treatment of drapery in the air.

With the drawing of Christ among the Doctors (pi. LXXXII3) we return to the problemof representing a group in deep perspective. It is evident that Bernard van Orleyis more successful in dealing with this problem here than Adrian van den Houtehad been in his Jupiter and Areas drawing. Nevertheless the stumbling figure of thedoctor coming through the doorway on the left and the half-kneeling figure withhis back to the spectator in the foreground remain uneasy and awkward.

II. THE DIDO AND AENEAS TAPESTRIES AT HAMPTON COURT

We can see Van Orley making the decisive move, perhaps some five years later,in what I believe to be his design for the second tapestry in the Dido and Aeneas

1 H. G. Wayment, 'A Rediscovered Master: Malines/Brussels School', ii, in Oud Holland 1968Adrian van den Houte (c. 1459-1521) and the 2, fig. 20 and Gobel (1923) 1, ii, fig. 81.


series at Hampton Court,1 Aeneas Relating his Adventures to Dido (pi. LXXXIII). Itseems clear that the designer is consciously using the Jupiter and Areas drawing byAdrian, since Aeneas' two hands are almost identical with those of Areas in the fore-ground of Adrian's drawing. But the artist has brought the two principal figures intohigh relief by placing them on either side of an opening which is closed only in thedistance by Aeneas' ships. The figure of the court fool below the gap with his dogcorresponds to some extent to the figure of Areas and the greyhound in the fore-ground of Adrian's design, though the circle here has been turned into a horseshoewhich is rendered completely natural by placing the central figure in the foregroundbelow eye level with her back towards the spectator, and her head only slightlyturned so that the left cheek can be seen. This figure appears to have been copiedby Dierick Vellert in his vidimus for The Massacre of the Innocents in King'sCollege Chapel, Cambridge; the window is dated 1517. The date of the tapestrydesign therefore, though not necessarily its execution, can scarcely be later than1515.2 The details of Aeneas' armour are reminiscent of Adrian van den Houte'sParis in the Power of Fenus drawing and are close to those in the Pentheus and Dionysusdrawing. Nevertheless the head of Aeneas resembles certain heads in the great Jacobseries at the Cinquantenaire in Brussels, for instance the figure in the left-hand fore-ground in the last tapestry of the series, the Reunion of Jacob and Joseph in Egypt.3

What is there to be said of the designs of the other four tapestries of the series ?Popham, and following him Parker,4 have suggested that all the designs are by'Aert Ortkens'. This provides us with a clue. We have seen that one small groupof the drawings collected under this name is by Adrian van den Houte, who wasglazier to the city of Malines from 1509 and to the Regent of the Netherlands from1511 until his death in 1521 .s At that date he was succeeded as City glazier by hishalf-brother Peter van den Houte,6 the son of Herman van den Houte by his secondmarriage, who was probably born between 1480 and 1485, that is to say a fewyears before Bernard van Orley. He must have worked alongside both of them,first of all in his father's workshop, and later probably in theirs. The Malines cityaccounts for 1520-1 mention considerable payments to 'Adrian van den Houte and

1 H. C. Marillier, The Tapestries at Hampton 6 E. Neeffs, 'Notes sur les anciennes verrieresCourt Palace (London, 1962), pp. 24-6, pi. 22-6. de l'dglise metropolitaine de Malines', Messager des

2 Nine of the drawings in the Ortkens corpus sciences historiques de Belgique(Ghent, 1877), 1-27;appear to be by Vellert, who probably worked in G. van Doorslaer, 'Notes sur les van den HouteMalines from about 1508 to 1511. ou Dubois', Mechlinia, x (1932—3), supplement,

3 M. Crick-Kuntziger, Musees Royaux d'Art 8-11; Chambre des Comptes, Brussels, nos.et d'Histoire de Bruxelles, Catalogue des Tapis- 41299-41305, 41308-41313, under Metselaers;series, Brussels [1956], no. 33, pi. 42. E. L6vy, Histoire de la peinture sur verre en Europe

4 A. E. Popham, Catalogue of Drawings by etspe"cialementenBelgique,ii(i86o),p.i7<);MiiYmesDutch and Flemish Artists in the British Museum, archives, Aldermanic registers nos. 152, f. 1 r9v0,andv (London, 1932), p. 37; K. T . Parker, Catalogue of 154, f. 40™. His mother was Lysbet Robs, whomthe Collection of Drawings in the Ashmolean Museum, Herman had taken as his second wife beforei (Oxford, 1938), p. 27. 24.6. 1481, and he married Jozijne van Melle. He

s Cours des Comptes, Brussels, nos. 41288 to was still working in 1539 and may possibly be the41299, under Metselaers, and nos. 21458, f. 25 v°, Peter van den Houte who was buried at St.21461, f. 5oand 21464, f. 36 v°; Malines, Register Romold's on the 1st January 1558.of Deaths of St. Romold's, 19th March 1521 (N.S.).


Master Peter van den Houte, brothers', using the word gebroeder which is roughlythe equivalent of 'Bros.' in English. This suggests, not only that Peter van denHoute was able to take up Adrian's work when he died, but that they had beenworking together for some time before. However, we know that Peter took on anapprentice in the year 1509.1 There is no documentary evidence to connect hisname with any specific surviving work, but one most interesting record implies aconnection with Bernard van Orley. This is in one of the last volumes2 of thehousehold accounts of Margaret of Austria, for the months of April-June 1530.

A pierre du bois verrier resident dans la ville de Malines, la somme de cent quarante livresdu pris de quarante s(olz) monnoye de flandres la livre qui deue Iuy estoit pour une belle grandeet exquise verriere contenant plus de trois cent pieds historiee a grands personnaiges et repre-sentand comm«»f notre seigneur entra l(e jour des rameaulx) avec ses apotres en Iherusalem, en

iaquelle aussy y a faict apres le vif monseigneur le due phillippe de savoye marry de maditedame que dieu absoille et elle avec ses armes des deux coustes avec plusieurs autres ouvraiges.Laquelle verriere madicte dame a faict mestre et poser en la chappelle des chevaliers deIherusalem qui'st en leglise de saint Rombault en la ville de maiines. Auxquels chevaliers madictedame en a faict don pour certaines causes a ce la mouvans et pour la decoration de ladite chap-pelle c (ecus) et comprins le patron de ladicte verriere.

We may conclude from other sources3 that this 'patron' or vidimus had been madeby Bernard van Orley; it must have been very different from the sketch of the samesubject discussed earlier in this article, dating from about twenty years before. Thesecretary who recorded the payment to Peter van den Houte uses a most unexpectedword in describing the window: exquise. Now it so happens that this correspondsprecisely to the delicate and even effeminate style of the author of the main body ofwork included in the 'Ortkens' corpus. An excellent example is the drawing of TheDeath of Lucretia now in the Pierpont Morgan Library at New York (pi. ^)

1 Malines archives: Lijst der meesters en leer- 9. Scenes from the Life of a Saint, Berlin-ongens van het ambacht van de Metselaers. MSS. D. Dahlem Printroom (ex. Fairfax Murray).

Macons S. ii, no. 3. 10. The Mass of St. Gregory, Dresden Printroom.2 Cours des Comptes, no. 1806, f. 213. Letters n . The Angel appearing to Zacharias, Frankfurt-

in italics are now illegible, but appear in Levy's am-Main, Stadel Inst. (no. 722).version; those in brackets are supplied by the author. 11. The Justice of Herkenbald, Brussels Print-

3 Provincie, Stad ende Districht van Mechelen room.(Brussels, 1770), i, 66 and 143; E. Neeffs (1877), 13. Herkenbald refused the Host, Rijksmuseumsee p. 371, n. 6. Printroom, Amsterdam (no. 59:03).

4 His hand may also be recognized in the fol- 14. Lucretia and Tarquin, Musee Bonnat, Bay-lowing drawings: onne.The figure of Tarquin is probably copied

3. Samuel Anointing David, F. Lugt Collection, from Van Orley's Execution of St. JohnParis, no. 5377 (previously Berlin Printroom (formerly De Boer, Amsterdam); see Baldass,no. 4425). p. 367, n. 1 above.

4. Susanna and the Elders, F. Lugt Collection 15. An Angel gives the Host to a kneeling Penitent,(no. 7098). Berlin—Dahlem Printroom no. 4427.

5. Virgil's Second Eclogue, Ashmolean, Oxford 16. Susanna before the Judge, A. E. Guinness sale,(Parker, 1938, p. 26, no. 65). Christie's, 10.7.1953 no. 5.

6. Shepherd and Nymph by a Fountain, Ashmolean, There are also two stained glass roundels whichOxford {ibid. no. 64). can confidently be attributed to this artist, both in

7. Ladies with a Casket, Ashmolean, Oxford the Victoria and Albert Museum: Wrath (no.{ibid. no. 66). 5647-1859) and The Death of Lucretia (no. 5646-

8. The Death of Lucretia, Brussels Printroom. 1859), corresponding closely to no. 8 above.

H X •2 •i c o c

The

Pow

er o

f V

enus

, or

Sce

nes f

rom

the

His

tory

of

Tro

y.

Des

ign

for

tape

stry

by

A.

van

den

Hou

te o

f M

alin

es (

Bri

tish

Mus

eum

Pri

ntro

om).

X

PLATE LXXVIII T H E ANTIQUARIES JOURNAL

The Ascension. Tinted vidimus here ascribed to H. van den Houte(Ri j ksprentenkabinet).

THE ANTIQUARIES JOURNAL PLATE LXXIX

[Photograph by W. Steinkopf)

Jupiter and Areas. Tapestry design here ascribed to A. van den Houte(Berlin-Dahlem Printroom).

t-

a.

The

M

agda

lene

an

oint

ing

Jesu

s'

Fee

t. H

ere

ascr

ibed

to

Ber

nard

van

O

rley

(Boy

man

s-va

n B

euni

ngen

M

useu

m,

Rot

terd

am).

(Pho

togr

aph

by C

ourt

auld

In

stit

ute)

b.

The

C

ruci

fixi

on.

Her

e as

crib

ed

to

Ber

nard

van

Orl

ey (

Eng

lish

pri

vate

col

lect

ion)

T H E ANTIQUARIES JOURNAL PLATE LXXXI

E

Qc

PQ

oB

j

PQo

O

IS!-•

PLATE LXXXII THE ANTIQUARIES JOURNAL

{Copyright A.C.L.)

a. The Annunciation. Grisaille from the Hanneton altarpiece by Bernard van Orley(Musdes des Beaux Arts, Brussels).

(Photograph by Courtauld Institute)

b. Christ among the Doctors. Here ascribed to Bernard van Orley (C. R. Rudolf collection).

T H E ANTIQUARIES JOURNAL PLATE LXXXI1I

Aeneas relating his Adventures to Dido (Royal Collection, Hampton Court Palace).

> -i

[Pho

togr

aph

by T

om S

cott

)

a.

Aen

eas'

Am

bass

ador

s be

fore

Did

o.

Dra

win

g fo

r a

roun

del

here

as

crib

edto

Pet

er v

an d

en H

oute

(N

atio

nal

Gal

lery

of

Scot

land

, E

dinb

urgh

).

X X X

b. L

ucre

tia.

Her

e as

crib

ed

to P

eter

van

den

Hou

te (

Pier

pont

Mor

gan

Lib

rary

, N

ew Y

ork)

.

1O C o d

T H E ANTIQUARIES JOURNAL PLATE L X X X V

Aeneas' Ambassadors before Dido (Royal Collection, Hampton Court Palace).

PLATE LXXXVI THE ANTIQUARIES JOURNAL

Aeneas encountering his Mother Venus (Royal Collection, Hampton Court Palace).

s

Aen

eas

leav

ing

Car

thag

e at

the

Bid

ding

of

Mer

cury

(R

oyal

Col

lect

ion,

Ham

pton

Cou

rt P

alac

e).

tr1 X X X

PLATE LXXXVIII THE ANTIQUARIES JOURNAL

Neptune raising the Storm which scattered Aeneas'1 Ships at the Bidding of Juno(Royal Collection, Hampton Court Palace).


The incense burners on either side of the altar-like construction behind her are, Ithink, derived from Adrian van den Houte.1 The sensuousness and delicacy ofLucretia's form seem, on the other hand, to be inspired by the drawing of a statueof Apollo at Rome which Gossart brought back with him in 1509.2 This has ahermaphroditic character which lends itself to such a metamorphosis.

Now it would be a most elegant solution to the problem of the authorship of thedesigns of the other tapestries in the Dido and Aeneas series if we could say thatthey were the work of our presumed Peter van den Houte. At first sight the figureof Venus in the first and third tapestries (pis. LXXXV, LXXXVI) would appear to beso close in style and manner to the figure of Lucretia in the Pierpont Morgan draw-ing, that they must, it would seem, be from the same hand. However, I do not thinkthis can be so. The tapestry designs must be by another member of the Van Orley-Van den Houte circle, for the figures in the air, particularly in the third and fourthtapestries (pis. LXXXVI, LXXXVII) are too clumsy to be Peter's. They should be com-pared with a similar flying figure in a tapestry of the third decade of the sixteenthcentury which according to Gobel was woven in Tournai and formed part of a Con-damnation de Banquet series.3 The figure of Aeneas in the tapestry showing theappearance of Venus to him (pi. LXXXVII) should also be compared with a Perseusand Andromeda tapestry ascribed by Gobel to Brussels.4 These are indeed patch-work designs by secondary artists, full of borrowings from earlier, more originalworks. In the fourth tapestry, for instance (pi. LXXXVII), the figure of Aeneas cross-ing his hands and leaning his head in a somewhat unconvincing gesture of regretshould be compared with the figure of Daunus in the tapestry in the Spanish Statecollection of The Funeral of Turnus.5 This carries on Turnus' shield the capital 'A'which represents the signature of Adrian van den Houte, and it no doubt goes backto about 151 o, since the style of the design is very close indeed to that of Jan vanRoome, whose follower in the field of tapestry design Adrian seems to have been.

The first tapestry, showing Sergestus and Cleanthes reporting to Dido the arrivalof Aeneas at Carthage, is even more interesting. A drawing of the same subject inthe National Gallery of Scotland (pi. Lxxxiva), which is clearly by the draughtsmanwhom I wish to identify with Peter van den Houte, appears to have served,together with the drawing of Jupiter and Areas by Adrian van den Houte, as the rawmaterial of the tapestry design at Hampton Court. This is I think clear in the figureof Aeneas standing in the background. In particular the broadening of the breast-plate above the waist seems indebted to the drawing, which I should date about1515-20. The figure of Aeneas in the Edinburgh drawing is derived from thatof Orestes Murdering Aegistheus by Gossart in the Lugt Collection.6

1 They appear in the superstructure of the 4 Ibid., no. 266.window from St. Romold's showing St. Adrian and 5 Ibid., no. 107.another saint, probably St. Gommarus, now in the 6 See n. 2 above, no. 57. The figures of Aeneas'Cinquantenaire at Brussels; and also in the tapestry two messengers kneeling before Dido reappear inof The Triumph of Chastity over Love at the Victoria The Months of March and April, Musde des Artsand Albert Museum (see p. 370 above). Decoratifs, Paris, no. 10646, and in Alexander

2 Exhibition Jan Gossaert genaamd Mabuse giving Liberty to the Family of Darius, Rosenfeld-(Rotterdam and Bruges, 1965), no. 48. Goldschmidt sale, Fred. Muller (Amsterdam,

3 Gobel (1923) 1, ii, no. 233. 1916).

c c


The fifth tapestry, in which the figure of Neptune raising a storm appears twice,once on land and once on sea (pi. LXXXVIII), should be compared with The Triumphof Death over Chastity in the Triumphs of Petrarch series which is representedtwice at Hampton Court and once in the Victoria and Albert Museum. Herea follower of the Van Orley-Van den Houte school is re-hashing the materialcontained in earlier tapestries in the same series. There is no difficulty in recognisinghis style in the Neptune tapestry, and in at least one other place. At Trento there isa tapestry representing Christ Carrying the Cross1 which appears to be signed ROM,and has indeed all the characteristics of Jan van Roome's style. A later version of thetapestry in the Spanish State Collection has an additional figure in the right fore-ground, a ruffian lunging at Christ with the flat of his foot as he staggers under theweight of the cross.2 This is an imitation of the figure caught in the same movementin the Carrying of the Cross on the back of the Furnes altarpiece by Bernard vanOrley, Brussels. However, I believe this rendering of the Carrying of the Cross,which is painted in grisaille, to be from the hand of Adrian van den Houte, and notof Bernard van Orley himself.3 It was only later, after Adrian's death in March1521, that Van Orley developed the gesture to a magnificent conclusion in his ownCarrying of the Cross tapestry now in the Spanish State Collection.

We are fortunate enough to possess a document of 1527* giving us the names andages of a number of members of Bernard van Orley's family and his closest colla-borators at that time, including incidentally Nicolas Rombouts. It may be askedwhether there is any documentary evidence, apart from the single case quoted, ofthe collaboration which I have sketched between the Van den Houtes and Bernardvan Orley. Unfortunately such records as have been unearthed in Brussels provideno trace of the Van den Houtes, and Bernard van Orley's name does not appear, asfar as I have been able to look, in the extensive archives at Malines. The records ofthe Masons' Guild at Malines survive only in a fragmentary state.s We do, however,know that Adrian van den Houte worked as Margaret of Austria's glazier inMalines during the years from 1515 to 1521 when Bernard van Orley was workingfor her as a painter.

There is also one other rather tenuous link between them, which should berelated, if only because it revives the memory of one of the most charming coatsof arms that can be imagined. Bernard's father Valentin van Orley was theillegitimate brother of a certain Evrard van Orley who had inherited the family'sproperty.6 On his death Evrard left part of this to Valentin, and the other part to twocousins, Jan Suls and Jan van Portener, his sister Maria'shusband. Now Adrian vanden Houte married as his second wife, before 31st January 1515, a certain BarbeleSroyen, or Sroeyen, alias Suls.7 Her father's name is given as Jan Sroyen, and she

1 Gobel (1923) 1, ii, no. 138. 4 See J. Maquet-Tombu, 'Bernard van Orley2 Ibid., no. 260. et son entourage', in Bernard van Orley 1488-15413 This composition has not Italianate (as Baldass (p. 367, n. 2).

thought, see p. 367, n. 1) but German con- 5 Seep. 372, n . i .nections. It is clearly indebted to Grunewald's 6 See p. 367, n. 4.Mocking of Christ at Munich, and should be 7 Malines Aldermanic records no. 137, f. 6,compared stylistically with Adrian's window in the 31.1.1515; cf. no. 140, f. 29 v°, 31.12.r516.S. transept at Tournai, Sige/bert's Attack.


had probably been married previously to a Suls, though to a member of a differentbranch from the one to which Jan and Maria Suls belonged. Adrian's widow used thename Barbele Suls after his death1 instead of calling herself Barbele van den Houteor Sroeyen, as would have been more usual, no doubt because the Suls family washigher in the social scale. The family is indeed recorded in Malines as early as thefourteenth century, and they bore arms; azure three mermaids or, two and one, eachholding her three-finned tail in the sinister hand and a mirror in the dexter hand.2

In the church of St. James at Antwerp there is a series of paintings on the life ofSt. Roch.3 These include the Van Orley arms and the date 1517. There has beensome discussion whether these paintings are to be attributed to Valentin or to his sonEvrard van Orley, but they seem rather to be the work of a group of artists sharingroughly the same style; in some of them Renaissance detail is prominent, whilein others there is very little if any to be seen. The latter is the case with the sceneof St. Roch at Rome, which was exhibited at the Flemish exhibition at BurlingtonHouse in 1927.4 The hand of the painter of this scene is to be recognized inthe designs of eight of the twenty-two historical scenes which were executed inglass for the Cathedral at Tournai in 1513-14 under the leadership of Adrian vanden Houte, and now stand in the transepts of the Cathedral.5 Curiously enoughfive of the eight scenes concerned, numbers 15 to 19, concern journeys to Rome,the first by Canon Letbert, in the attempt to persuade Pope Eugene III to re-establish an independent see at Tournai, and the second by Abbot Anselm, to beconsecrated Bishop of Tournai. The scene in which Canon Letbert presents AbbotAnselm to the Pope is similar in style and in certain details of the composition tothe painting of St. Roch at Rome, and there are several features in the other scenes,for instance the horses on the journeys to Rome, which are paralleled in the Antwerppicture.

Now in 1513 the younger Evrard van Orley was not more than twenty-twoyears of age, and it is extremely unlikely that he would have been called upon toprepare designs for these eight scenes, when the first six had been designed eitherby Adrian of Malines himself or in his workshop. It is far more likely that thework was in fact done by Valentin van Orley, who at that time was forty-sevenyears old and in the prime of his activity. It is quite possible that he had actually been

1 Cours des Comptes, Brussels, no. 21469, f. 62: S. Hartfeld, 'Valentin van Orley', The Burlington'A Barbele Sulse vefve de feu Adrien den Houdt Magazine, December 1936, lxix, 263; L. Baldass,voiriere la somme de cinquante solz six deniers 'Die Entwicklung des Bernard van Orley', Jahbruchmonnoye de ce comptre' for repairs, releading and der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien, N.F. xiii,cleaning of glass, 9th September 1526. See also 1944, 160; J. Maquet-Tombu, see p. 374, n. 2;no. 21464, f. 36 v°. also 'Three Early Views of Rome in the Flemish

2 O. le Maire, see p.367, n. 4 ; also Bibl. Royale, Exhibition', The Burlington Magazine, June 1927,Brussels, MSS. H II. 6601 f. 378, genealogy of 325.Suls family. 4 M. Con way, Catalogue of the Loan Exhibition

3 F. Prims, De Sint-Rochus schilderijen in de of Flemish and Belgian Art, Burlington House 1927,Collegiate kerk van Sint-Jacob te Antwerpen Memorial Volume, no. 125, pi. LVIII.(Antwerp, 1933); Aschenheim, Die Christliche 5 J. Helbig, Corpus Vitrearum Medii Aet'i,Kunst,\\, 169; J. Held, OudHolland, 1933, p. 140; Belgique i, 259-77. On the date of the TournaiM. Friedlander, Altniederlandische Malerei, x, 85; glass see H. G. Wayment, of. cit. ii (p. 368, n. 1).


at Rome, not only because in both these cases he is found dealing with a subjectwhich might be considered to require local knowledge, but because his picture ofRome in St. James' at Antwerp may well have been based on first-hand experience,though from at least fifteen years before the date of the picture. Unfortunately allthis work is unimaginative and clumsy, and one can well understand that Valentin,finding that his eldest son Bernard had a talent much greater than his own, shouldhave wished to send him away for training to the workshop of a leading glazier anddesigner in Malines. There Bernard van Orley must have worked for some years along-side Herman's son Adrian, who, as we have seen, was one of the leading designers forglass and tapestry in the second decade of the century. We do not know whetherBernard actually made glass himself, though a roundel executed to his design isextant,1 but it was in Malines, I believe, that he laid the foundations of his out-standing success as a designer of tapestry.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The five tapestries of the story of Dido and Aeneas are reproduced by graciouspermission of Her Majesty the Queen.

SUMMARY

The designs of the early sixteenth-century series of five tapestries on the story o/"Dido and Aeneasat Hampton Court Palace {Collection of H.M. the Queen) were tentatively ascribed by A. E.Popham in 1926, and following him by K. T. Parker, to 'Aert Ortkens'. But the drawings at-tributed to Ortkens by successive writers since Friedlander (1921) can now be shown to represent theproduction of the Malines school of designers for glass and tapestry during the first third of the six-teenth century, and to include a number of early sketches by Bernard van Orley. The article suggestshow the design of the second tapestry of the Dido and Aeneas series fits into van Orley''s oeuvre, andrefers the others to minor masters of the Malines—Brussels circle round van Orley and the brothersAdrian and Peter van den Houte of Malines.

1 The Baptism of Christ in the De Boer Collection, The Sacrifice of Isaac, from Bernard van Orley'sAmsterdam, illustrated in cat. of exhibition Jeroen workshop, at Schwerin. The Baptism design isBosch:Noord-Nederlandsche Primitieven (Rotterdam, used again in glass now in the chapel at Cholmond-1936), p. 114, and in A. van der Boom, 'Aert Ortkens, eley, Cheshire. The roundel was clearly paintedeen Nederlandsche Glasschilder in den Vremnde' by the same glazier as the roundel of The Carryingin Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek, 1948-9, of the Cross discussed by A. E. Popham in 'Notes83, in both cases as by 'Ortkens'. The figure of St. on Flemish Domestic Glass Painting', II, Apollo,John reproduces one of the figures of Pentheus in ix (1929), 15 5. This is based on a woodcut from thethe Pentheus and Dionysus drawing, which cor- Passionby Jacob Cornelisz of Amsterdam, 1511-14,responds also to the figure in the left foreground of and was then in the collection of Mr. P. E. Sidney.

Documents

Bernard van Orley and Malines: The Dido and Aeneas Tapestries at Hampton Court