C5 The Virginal of Dorothea of Lorraine. Original or fake?
The numbers in square brackets in bold refer to the slides of the corresponding video presentation XVIII.
After more than 30 years, an Italian virginal from a Swiss private owner has again come to the attention of scholars. It is an instrument by Pasquino Querci, made in Florence in 1610. [1-2]
Donald H. Boalch[1] has the following entry:
«Querci, Pasquino, Maker of harpsichords, spinets and polygonal virginals in Florence; fl. 1610-25. Instruments 4 and 6 below are listed in Franciolinis catalogues, and nos. 2 and 5 probably passed through his hands.
Surviving instruments by, od ostensibly by, him
- 1610, Chicago, George F. Harding Museum, Polygonal Virginal inscribed Pasquinus Quercius, Florentinus fecit AD. MDCX. Restored by Berceau Royal,1927”
The painting on the lid was not even mentioned, but the restorer's label confirms that it is this instrument no. 1. [3-4]
Inside there was also a letter from Luigi Ferdinando Tagliavini (*1929-†2017) - Italian harpsichordist, organist and musicologist - dated August 3, 1989 to the subsequent owner, who had bought it at a Zurich auction house. In it he mentions that four of the five instruments listed by Boalch and still extant were partly certainly, partly presumably, made by the hands of the notorious antiques dealer and forger Leopoldo Franciolini (*1844-†1920)[2] and adds: ”Your instrument is not listed in the Franciolini catalogs and is undoubtedly a genuine Italian instrument. The inscription on the frontbar (with the author's name and date) is probably also authentic." He does not devote a syllable to the painting. [5]
In this respect - because of the word "probably" - there is reason to exercise particular caution when examining the lidpainting, which has not yet been the subject of investigations, because Tagliavini is not certain, and because Franciolini was italian, also his fakes could be described as "original italian instruments". The frontbar with the name, place and date can be easily removed with 2 pins - and therefore just as easily replaced. Ivory buttons have been used for this on other Querci instruments[3][6] Certainly such small parts can get lost, but even if the front board is authentic as such, that says nothing about the rest of the instrument. The annual ring structure of the softwood used for the strip stands out clearly from the rest of the instrument and the lighter coloring of the lower part below a line of dirt indicates that it was placed elsewhere for a long time. Edwin Ripin[4] reports that the interchanging of historical elements was part of Franciolini's common practice, but Tagliavini obviously ignored this information and doesn't justify his assessment. His kind letter is therefore not an expertise.
If we continue to use the term forgery in the following, it is precisely the fact that original components were used and the cover painting may well have been painted over for reasons of personal preference or in adaptation to a changed contemporary taste that must be considered. New compilations are also conceivable without any intention of deception. Numerous instruments are presented today with frames and/or paintings from another time. On the other hand, especially a forger strives for a higher-quality assessment, often combined with the pretense of an older age. The fraudulent intent established in Franciolini's case led to a four-month prison sentence and a large fine.[5]
In the context of this study, the starting point for a historical classification is the painting, whose pictorial plot we will deal with below.
The method used is to compare individual picture elements with historical events. The intention is to gradually limit the temporal focus by getting to know the message of the picture, including the historical context, in order to let the network become more and more fine-meshed. The initial suspicion that it could be a forgery should be partly ignored and partly taken into account. The meandering between pictorial narrative and history reflects the course of research, which was not straightened out afterwards. The same applies to the determination of the subject, which gains in clarity with each additional subject and corrects first impressions. The development of science takes place on a small and large scale through continuous refutation. That should definitely be visible, because a better understanding is not at the beginning, but the open question. In this way, the work process becomes comprehensible. In order to let the non-specialist reader participate, the necessary context is included.
Since it is a history painting in terms of genre, it must be taken into account that the action presented can also go further back than the date 1610. We are accordingly generous in choosing the historical perspective at the beginning of our consideration.
The picture takes us to a Flemish town and to the time of the 80 Years' War. [7] Led by a mounted commander, a company of pikemen enter the city and are met by a number of aristocratic ladies, in front of whom the commander dons his plumed hat. Apparently he is expected, for a tent is already prepared for an official meeting, guarded by a full armored spearman. Citizens of the city observe the events from a distance.
The dominant historical factor was the Spanish occupation of the Netherlands at the time. This is confirmed by the nature of the armor.
Four governesses of the Netherlands had a special connection to the fighting troops – the authority to command. While Margaret of Austria and Maria of Hungary had been appointed by Emperor Maximilian I, Margaret of Parma and Isabella Clara Eugenia owed their appointment to their relationship with the Spanish king. It was Philip II and Philip III who put them into office. A look at the dates reveals that Albrecht VII and his wife Isabella Clara Eugenia held office together from 1598 to 1621. After Albrecht's death, Isabella continued to run the official business alone until her death in 1633.
Because of her connection to the Spanish branch of the House of Habsburg, it makes sense to start a comparison with Margaret of Parma and there is immediately an event that shows certain similarities with what is happening in the picture. In 1559 she was presented by Philip II to the Estates-General in Ghent as the new governess, while her husband Ottavio Farnese stayed in Parma. Only a small number of court ladies accompanied her to Brussels[6]. Is what is depicted about the process of handing over power, on the occasion of which the commanders had to confirm their allegiance?
According to the sources, Philip II left for Spain with a small fleet shortly after the transfer of power. The ships of Spanish design [8] moored to the quay wall - on one of them there are also aristocratic ladies - may indicate this. In contrast to most of the rest, their robes are characterized by slit sleeves. A sailor holds a rope in his hands, only because of the half-set sails it is not possible to decide whether they are just arriving or ready to cast off.
The motif of the citizens standing on the sidelines [9] can also be associated with that historical event, because due to the brutal suppression of the Ghent uprising in 1540 by Charles V, a jubilant greeting from the new ruler was not to be expected, but at least there was hope a milder reign.
The rest is taken care of by the imagination of an art collector who does not want to miss the opportunity to acquire something important and who does not have the time for lengthy research. It was also to Franciolini's advantage that musicologists venture into unrelated territory when they have to interpret and date a painting. For the same reason, Tagliavini did not include the virginal's imagery in his argument.
An Italian must have had a special relationship with Margaret of Parma, since Margherita d'Austria, respectfully called "Madama", had left impressive traces. The Palazzo Madama and Villa Madama in Rome are named in her honor. And one Florentine in particular will have learned during his school days that the Emperor's illegitimate "natural" daughter was married first to Alessandro de Medici and then to Ottavio Farnese. The impressive Palazzo Farnese in Piacenza is due to her initiative, as are the Palazzo Margherita in L'Aquila and the Palazzo Farnese in Ortona. The history of the instrument can be completed on the basis of the historical circumstances to the extent that she may have received it as a gift on the occasion of one of her weddings, so that she later had the most important event of her life - the official assumption of office - painted over it due to her unhappy marriages. Apparently plausible historical contexts like these lead to a hasty classification, but the arbitrary creation of such contexts is entirely the responsibility of the viewer.
Such stories are strategically promising for a forger, because he can assume that a broad target group is aware of the events and “jumps on” them. Only the celebrity counts, the details are less important. Finally, Franciolini had 6 children to feed. The fact that the instrument does not bear a coat of arms is honest in that he did not shy away from imitating papal coats of arms elsewhere[7].
Although we find numerous elements in the picture that are encountered in the Flemish environment, including a wind mill [10], a city fortification with a gate over a canal [11], there is no specific reference to Ghent. Also, the most important figure of this first pictorial interpretation - Philip II - since it was he who transferred power to his half-sister - cannot be identified in the picture.
If it is a forgery, the painter could have had no knowledge of the exact events and the location and could at best use copper engravings as a source of inspiration. With this method, combined with the help of historical descriptions, one can get quite far with a little diligence, but it is particularly striking that we do not find any ornate gables in the cityscape, nor any stepped gables, which are so characteristic of Flemish cities. [12] Some may wonder at the bored indifference of the spear bearer guarding the tent. Also the knights at the entrance to the castle, who were relaxed and completely indifferent to what was happening. which was adorned with a canopy for the entry of rulers, fuel skepticism. [13]
A factor in itself is the stereotypical character repetition. On closer inspection, this also applies to the faces, which create siblings, if not twins. Compared to the virginals of Giulia da Varano, Duchess of Urbino or Queen Elizabeth I of England [14-15], we are dealing with a significantly lower level of quality – also because of the missing carvings and in view of the soundboard rosette [16].Such a production would certainly be inappropriate for a governor of the Netherlands. The stand belongs to the high standard of furniture art of that time, but does not go beyond that. Irrespective of this: the fusion of storage furniture and instrument has resulted in a unique ensemble in the cultural history of furniture, of which we have before us a specimen that has become rare.
We learn from the correspondence between Balthazar Gerbier and Sir Francis Windebank[8] that Isabella commissioned a harpsichord from Hans Ruckers in Antwerp and had it painted by Peter Paul Rubens. The quality of the painter active here is light years removed from that of a Rubens. The patchy and fleeting white highlights on the faces make it clear that appearances were more important than reality. With the knights, too, the application of paint becomes coarse. We don't find that in Flemish art and certainly not in the courtly environment. Just a little away from the main action, the clarity of the illustration was no longer so important. [17] The illusion that the painting tries to create, that it could be a contemporary depiction of historical events, collapses like a house of cards.
Nevertheless, we continue to ask the painting what it has to say. Is there another possible interpretation? It is striking that contemporary illustrations show a greater resemblance of the mounted commander to Ambrogio Spinola or even to his son-in-law Diego Mesía Guzmán (*1590-†1655). [18-20] This puts us in a chronological range that is compatible with the instrument, since his marriage to Polyxena Spinola (*1600-†1637) took place in 1627. However, the idea that the generals and their wives would have been content with inferior picture quality is disappointed by the fact that large holdings in the Museo del Prado, no fewer than 1330 paintings, can be traced back to the Guzmán collection.[9] If you look at the instrument painting next to the portrait of Veronica Spinola by Peter Paul Rubens, it becomes completely clear that two strange worlds are confronting each other here. [21]
A certain level of expectation on the occasion of the image analysis perhaps needs to be explained. The direct inference from the action to the owners is based on the requirement that the choice of subject had to make sense to them. Courtship and wedding themes were so popular in Italy that the development from the painted bridal chest, in which the bridal treasure – often including instruments – was kept to the instrument with a separate painted case could be traced.[10] All over Europe it became customary to give away instruments on the occasion of weddings and to decorate them in a way that referred to them. In the present case, too, the subject of the picture is about an encounter between a man and a woman. The owners had an interest in capturing memories of a significant part of their lives in order to set the mood for the joyful event of making music. Lucas Friedrich Behaim's virginal cover from 1619 can be used for comparison.[11] The fidelity of the image reaches a completely different level there, too, because every country estate and every family member is identifiable. The pride of the client dictated that the people were recognizable, especially where one of the frame pictures is about the granting of a fief by the emperor. [22-23] Nuremberg Castle can be clearly seen in the background, although well-known engraving templates were also used here.[12] The music-making company in the foreground is a selfie of family and friends, but let's get back to the Italian virginal.
While searching for useful contemporary illustrations, the painter may have come across a few engravings by Antonio Tempesta (*1555-†1630), probably the most copied artist of his time. [24] Due to the widespread distribution of his works, later generations received visual ideas of historical circumstances and knowledge of fashion, accessories such as fans, gestures, hairstyles and much more. In one of those engravings, the wife of Philip III wears a robe a pattern very similar to the canopy [25] and in the background we find a row of court ladies in a similar stereotypical execution - perhaps a first confirmation that we are dealing with a collage-like composition based on models and with a fictitious historical event at freely invented place.
But the painter did not fully exhaust his possibilities in this respect either, because the comprehensive 34-volume work by Giulio Ferrario[13] on the costumes, which was equipped with numerous colored copperplate engravings, would have provided a completely different wealth of variants: ladies, gentlemen, children, clerics, scholars, knights and nobles.
In general, it can be deduced from the previous consideration that such forgeries using original material report two different kinds of reality. On the one hand there is the chronology of their actual occurrence, on the other hand that reality which they intend to portray to us. Whoever is responsible for the arrangement had to think in advance about what they were aiming for and develop a strategic concept. What should the buyer be made aware of?
The idea of providing an Italian instrument with Flemish-looking overpainting is a perfect diversion and aims to evoke the idea that it was brought there from Italy and that what is depicted corresponds to historical truth. Numerous biographies such as those of Margarete von Parma or Polyxena Spinola offer a projection screen for this. Even more, if we look at the general custom of marriage for dynastic, financial and political reasons, we become aware of an extreme network with unmanageable variants in the area of the high nobility. Therefore, a few motivic eye-catchers are enough to activate the imagination. In the present case, these are the markers that make the locality identifiable as Dutch: the city fortifications across the canal, the windmill, the guild house [26] , followed by chronological clues about the clothing and indications of who takes an active part in the events . In the present case, these are the Spanish occupiers and the aristocratic ladies. Only a few visual templates are required for credible implementation. The colored varnish gives the whole thing an unclean patina with the intention of deliberately limiting recognizability. The interested party excuses this "sfumato" with the presumed old age. In the sales talk, the retailer is able to play off his knowledge advantage and lure the customer onto the trail with vague hints and feigned ignorance.
In the present case, use was made of the fact that memorabilia from the Golden Age were highly prized in the Netherlands. This is mainly because the important Coudenberg Castle [27],with all the treasures that the Habsburgs had accumulated over generations, fell victim to the flames. The castles of Mariemont, Binche, Folembray and many others fared no differently. However, one gets an idea of how high the qualitative standards could be by looking at a Venetian virginal in the possession of the Baden State Museum in Karlsruhe. [28, 29][14] The digression in footnote 14 points to the educational demands of an upper class and to a traditional continuum that can hardly be linked to in a rushed procedure. The pride of the client dictated that it be recognizable and that the coat of arms should express the rank of their own class. Unfortunately, the associated cases are rarely preserved. Copying such things, with a substantive reference to painting and carving, would not be worthwhile at all due to the effort required and is also not the point of a deception that has already served its purpose at the moment of sale. Whatever is going on in the imagination of a passionate art lover does not need to be detailed. It's just a matter of activating it.
Only the questioning viewer eventually reaches a point where he becomes aware of discrepancies because he comes across contradictions due to the comparison of both realities. Arriving at this point, there is no point in pursuing further source studies or in looking for concrete engravings. The quality of the remaining motifs beyond the description given here falls into a range for which templates are no longer necessary, if they exist at all.
The extent to which the planning of the pictorial composition was based on reading material, for which the illustrated Storia dell'Olanda e dei Paesi-Bassi by the Conte de Ségur[15] was available at the time of Franciolini, is questionable, since the high ecclesiastical dignitaries who always present on such occasions, and for which there is no substitute in that small group of monks appearing in front of a building which itself can hardly be identified as a Romanesque apse. [32-33]
The number of aristocratic women is therefore surprising - especially the fact that they are all women - because "emancipation" did not go so far that they were left entirely to the political field. An exception is the Ladies' Peace of Cambrai in 1529. For this reason, they were assigned advisors who were obliged to report to the emperor. The differences of opinion were reflected in the direct correspondence with the emperor, who was in charge of all matters, especially the choice of spouse.
With the help of reading, the painter would have known that the transfer of power took place in the town hall of Ghent in the presence of the estates and the clergy as an official act of state and not en passant at the quay wall. For this purpose, the Town Hall, which has been preserved to this day, has an octagonal balcony on the corner of Hoogport and Botermarkt, from which such events could be made known to the public [34].
Let us add the two horsemen, who apparently hold the office of marshal or seneschal, since their task is to carry a red bicorne banner in front. [35] Such a banner, the so-called Oriflamme, was the imperial and war flag of the French kings for centuries and appears here at the wrong time in the wrong place, because it was last used in the Battle of Azincourt in 1415. There are different appearances handed down. We are increasingly discovering the present form in historical paintings of the 19th century. [36]
A revealing detail is how the banner is hung on the fork-shaped end of the pole. [37] It means that the painter gave no thought to the practicality of his construction and the loss of dignity that would result from the banner falling to the ground. In contrast to the mostly straight-stemmed lances, which taper towards the tip as if drawn with a ruler, it is not even possible to say with certainty whether it is also a pole or just a straight branch due to the freehand added white heightening. A greater contradiction can hardly be imagined - a sacred banner on a branch forked, as if one wanted to rise blasphemously over it - unthinkable in the original time frame, for it was precisely the beliefs that were used to legitimize the oppression.
How things looked from the perspective of the oppressed is shown in a copperplate engraving by Adriaen Valéry from 1626 [38]. Precisely because it was not just about collecting taxes but also about preserving Catholic teaching, the church dignitaries, the pope, cardinal Granvelle and the bishop of Ypres are of particular importance, while Margaret of Parma is referred to as the governess. The diocese of Ypres was founded in the year Margarete came to power to strengthen Catholic influence, so the bishop is represented in the picture. Duke Alba was not sent to the Netherlands until 1567, against Margarete's will, as her successor in office, in order to lead a reign of terror there. The later Cardinal Granvelle was placed at her side right from the start. We see that it is by no means the government of a noble society of women.
Other pictorial elements lead to another temporal focus: the flags carried by the pikemen are striking – one yellow, another orange. The commander's sash is also orange. A comparison with the contemporary painting by Juseppe Leonardo [39] and a history painting by Kornelis Krusemann [40] shows the importance attached to these identification marks: the colors of Spain are red and yellow there, the sashes of the commanders are red.
With the color orange, the horseman can be identified as William I of Orange and apparently we are dealing with the period in which he still exercised command over Spanish troops. In the same year (1559) that Margaret of Parma was appointed governor-general by Philip II, he was appointed governor of the northern counties of Holland, Zeeland and Utrecht, and was therefore obliged to report to her.
Raised at the court of Charles V, whose special trust he enjoyed, he distinguished himself through his military achievements in the war against France and was accepted into the Order of the Golden Fleece for this reason. In 1556 he was commissioned to bring the imperial jewels to Frankfurt. However, it wasn't long before he fell out of favor. The Blood Council under Duke Alba accused him of high treason and confiscated his goods in 1568. After a first assassination in 1582, from which he was able to recover, he was murdered in 1584.
The action of the painting therefore takes place before 1568 and if we were informed of a military conflict with France because of the red banner, then there are two possible battles, that of St. Quentin in 1557 and that of Gravelines in 1558, after which France was forced to the Peace of Cateau-Cambrésis. The Battle of St. Quentin in particular was considered one of France's heaviest losses since Azincourt. To commemorate the victory on the day of St. Lawrence, Philip II commissioned the construction of the Escorial. In the battle hall there we find a comparable painting of the fighting troops. [41] In this way, a connection could be made with the red banner of the picture, which then does not reflect one's own spiritual background, but rather the triumph over the opponent's defeat. Looking again at the painting, the banner is not being carried by the horsemen themselves, but by one of the infantrymen immediately behind them, clearly identifying it as booty and not their own banner. So we are dealing with a triumphant entry. The information about this had rushed ahead and the reception had been prepared accordingly.
If we change the perspective again and consider a later date of origin of the picture, a previously completely unconsidered component comes into play, namely the tragedy Egmont, written by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe and published in 1788, which takes place in the same historical context but presents it in a different version. Since the piece requires incidental music, which was also provided by Ludwig van Beethoven, there would have been a special reason for painting an instrument, which does not have to have anything to do with an intention to forge, although it may have been the intellectual trigger for this. What is inconsistent, however, is the fact that the protagonist of the play Lamoral of Egmont – and here we are again in the realm of historical considerations – would not have donned the orange sash of his comrade-in-arms of the same rank.
The Battle of St. Quentin was captured in numerous paintings that may have served as a source of information for the painter. In particular, we find a large number of tents of the same type, both cone tents and steep wall tents with 2 poles. [42] The battle was led by Margaret of Parma's predecessor, i.e. Emanuel Philibert of Savoy, to whom both Lamoral of Egmont and William of Orange were subordinate. According to this, Margarete von Parma is out of the question as the greeting lady in the picture because it cannot be that the armed forces arrived with a delay of 2 years. This statement again restricts the dating of the events in the picture. If 1568 was mentioned as the terminus ante quem, it must have been before 1559 according to this finding.
Which ladies' group did the troupe pay their respects to? An answer to this question can only be found in the biography of William of Orange, from whose second marriage we know that he arrived in Leipzig with a convoy of more than 1000 horses. This second marriage to Anna von Sachsen was concluded in 1561 and is already connected to the confessional conflict that led to Wilhelm's ostracism. His first marriage to Anne of Egmond took place in 1551 and therefore cannot be linked to the Battle of St. Quentin. Image events and history do not match here. Anna of Egmond died in Breda on March 24, 1558.
This brings us to the core questions, whatever the historical facts provide. The painter, forger or not, chose this event and no other. What is it about? What made him decide to equip the virginal, whose value even then could not be denied, with it? The details mentioned must have had meaning for him, while other contents of the picture apparently deserved less attention.
We learn from Friedrich Schiller that after the peace treaty of Cateau-Cambrésis, William of Orange remained in France as an honorably treated hostage.[16] The peace treaty was signed on April 3, 1559. The decision about "preventive detention" could only have been made then, not immediately after the battle.
If one now assumes that the picture deals with the fact that he met his new governess on his way through to formally greet her and immediately say goodbye, which could only happen after her appointment on August 7th, 1559, the portal would be decorated to the castle for the following festivity and the ships for his journey determined - a much smaller occasion than the inauguration of the governor in her new office.
Despite the fact that he may have been disappointed that he was not appointed governor-general himself, William of Orange was again looking for a bride, for Friedrich Schiller reports:
«The failure of the expectation of the regency did not entirely deprive the Prince of Orange of the hope of further establishing his influence in the Netherlands. Among the others who were proposed for this office was Christina, Duchess of Lorraine, and aunt of the king, who had rendered a splendid service to the crown as mediator of the peace of Chateau-Chambrésis. Wilhelm had intentions for her daughter, whom he hoped to promote by actively employing her mother»[17]
And elsewhere:
"It was not unknown to the Prince of Orange that he [Cardinal Granvelle] had thwarted his marriage with the Princess of Lorraine and sought to undo another connection with the Princess of Saxony."[18]
As we have already heard, the marriage to Anna of Saxony was nevertheless concluded in 1561. If we now complete the pictorial narrative with Schiller's report, the lady dressed in yellow and orange in "partner look" could be the Princess of Lorraine, who is asked by Margaret of Parma to enter the tent. [43] Since the high nobility was still present when Margarete was inaugurated, the time came at the right time to choose the future wife from among the ladies. The painter apparently imagined the process in the tent as sponsalia per verba de futuro, i.e. as vows of marriage in the presence of the regent. Certainly one would have expected the father's presence in this context, but Francis I of Lorraine had already died in 1554.
If we take the grouping of people made by the painter as an occasion for an assignment, then the 2 companions of Margarete could be their court ladies, next to Renata her sister Dorothea and her mother Christina could be seen in a black robe.
If it was all about emphasizing the aspect of looking at the bride, it would be understandable why the painter only depicted women in front of the prince, but it is incomprehensible why he needed his soldiers for this purpose. It must be considered that with the soldiers the painter only intended to emphasize the importance of Wilhelm, who was authorized to lead several companies - as the German word "Fähnlein" expresses - under his own flag, because only against this background of the pictorial explanation the equestrian becomes the commander. So seen, the hundreds must not have actually been on site and can certainly point to the past. Images do not necessarily have to correspond to a photographic snapshot.
We are dealing with a difference in purpose, for while a history painter is concerned with reproducing an event which he understands to have happened in this way and not otherwise, a forger tends to make his invention comprehensible through pictorial narrative. In the same sense, the ships can be interpreted in such a way that they should be used against the action in the future, but are already visually ready.
So let's look again at the historical events of this period:
• In July 1555, Wilhelm was appointed captain-general and commander-in-chief of the Maas army operating in the French-Dutch border area, whose strength amounted to 18,000 infantry and 3,000 horsemen.
• In August 1557, William of Orange took part in the taking of St. Quentin as colonel of a cavalry regiment. Several high-ranking French nobles were taken prisoner, two of whom were taken to his castle in Breda as collateral for possible peace negotiations.
• February/March 1558 he was a member of the delegation that brought the imperial insignia to Frankfurt. Here he received the message of his wife's serious illness, who died on March 25th.
• After the end of the year of mourning, he courted the hand of Renata of Lorraine.[19] Since Philip II initially thought of naming her mother Christina as governess, who was also favored by the majority of the Flemish nobility for the post, this alliance would have proved to be particularly advantageous according to the state of knowledge at the time.[20]
• On April 3rd, 1559, William of Orange was significantly involved in the peace negotiations of Cateau-Cambrésis.
• On June 18, 1559, when Henry II took his oath of peace at Notre Dame de Paris, he was present as a hostage as a guarantor of peace.
• In the summer, William of Orange is revocably allowed to return to the Netherlands. While still in France, he became aware of the then 17-year-old widow of the Duke of Enghien, a daughter of the Count of St. Pol, but Henry II did not agree in a marriage with a foreign vassal.
• On August 7th, 1559, Margaret of Parma was appointed general governor by Philip II, William of Orange became governor of the provinces of Holland, Zeeland and Utrecht. The following month Philip II embarked on the sea route to Spain.
• In September 1559, an illegitimate son, Justinus of Nassau, was born to William of Orange.
• In connection with the search for a new wife, reference is made to «German connections», to which his relatives drew his attention, among them Anna of Saxony, whom he married in 1561. However, because of her Lutheran religion, Margaret of Parma did not approve of this relationship. So it certainly couldn't have been her who asked her to enter the tent.
At this point we can state that the painter must have been quite well informed, because the depiction is conspicuously concentrated on one point for a coincidental result: and at the same time stands in the traditional connection between instrument, courtship and wedding.
From Renata's perspective - insofar as we think we can identify her in the picture - the event corresponds to the fairytale dream of a prince who comes along on a white horse to court her and ask for her hand. If it was a contemporary painting, the two would have been the primary customers of the painting, provided they had married, but this is not the case in the present case and is also not compatible with the instrument's alleged year of origin. Renata died in 1602.
From the perspective of a forger, he could assume that the educated middle classes read Goethe and Schiller and were therefore able to relate to the plot, because the battles of St. Quentin and Gravelines are remembered in them as well as Margaret of Parma and William of Orange. The allusion to historical events with precisely set image attributes was his contribution to calming a skeptical viewer.
Due to the striking number of Querci instruments that passed through Franciolini's hands, he was almost prejudiced in the present study, without having anything concrete in hand. The fact that the virginal does not appear in his catalogs may be due to the fact that we are not aware of all the catalogues, or that he was able to sell the instrument shortly after completion, or that he simply never owned it. Then, however, there would be reason to ask which other forgers might have misused the stock of historic instruments. It's hard to believe that there was only one isolated case in such a lucrative business.
For this reason it is imperative to continue the search with an open mind and we are required not only to consider what reading was easy to get from Florence, but also to include non-Italian works which may have served as inspiration. The focus is on the main actors of the story: Margaret of Parma, William of Orange and Christine of Lorraine and her daughters. It's amazing enough that a repaint should have - or has - managed to go through so unobtrusively.
Let's switch right back to the "other reality" and turn to what's happening in the picture. The only lady in the picture who was still alive according to the stated year of origin of the instrument, 1610, and could therefore have commissioned the painting, was Dorothea von Lothringen. Although she was only a witness to what was happening - whatever we see in the picture: William of Orange was actually interested in marrying her sister - but a look at her biography reveals a different, a new perspective.
When her sister Renata was later actually married, namely to Wilhelm von Bavaria in 1568, Dorothea had to accept a bitter and personality-damaging disappointment, because originally she was intended for this marriage herself. The reason for the rejection of her person was the statement that she was lame, "had a defect in one foot" and could not walk, and "therefore it was not feasible to get involved there". Others described the foot as crippled.[21] It didn't help that her mother increased the dowry by another 100,000 crowns. Even a letter of recommendation from Emperor Maximilian II went unnoticed. "I think," said Duke Albrecht to the Emperor, "the good duchess will probably find husbands for her daughters besides my children, so I have to see how I can take care of mine."[22]
The picture of William of Orange's courtship may have had a special memory value for Dorothea, as it shows a man's efforts for his chosen one. The painter brought this topic into focus, although nothing came of the relationship. This fact is strange enough in itself.
This interpretation would be tantamount to an emotive revelation - with restrictions being atypical of the time. At this point one should remember Anna of Saxony, the 2nd wife of William of Orange and her extramarital relationship with Jan Rubens - the father of the painter Peter Paul Rubens - which had devastating consequences. It cannot be overlooked that women had to endure extraordinary unequal treatment at that time. Emotions had to be subordinate to money and power interests.
This brings us almost to the end of our journey through history. Julia Cartwright, who has studied the life of Christina of Lorraine in detail and therefore consulted other source material, reports that the agreement of a marriage between Renata and William of Orange had already come about as part of the peace negotiations of Cateau-Cambrésis, but the project by Philip II was thwarted because he could not allow William of Orange to be endowed with so much power. Friedrich Schiller reported it similarly. Cartwright only adds that the disappointed William of Orange, together with Egmont and Alva, traveled to Paris a few days later to ensure that the peace terms were adhered to as hostages.[23] At that time, Margaret of Parma was still on her way to Brussels.[24]
This makes it clear that the painter chose a point in time about a month later for the event and that the event cannot have taken place as he depicted it. If we then corrected our point of view and assumed that the painting could have been about another lady, the sources are completely silent on this and this in turn means that the painter had nothing else to do but use his imagination.
Even the variant that Dorothea could still be a possible client is thus undermined. Irrespective of the sources, this last interpretation, since the instrument was new at the time, is in conflict with a completely different observation, because both from the intensity of the paint application and from a closer look at smaller damages, we can assume the presence of at least another layer of paint. For this reason, the desideratum arose to gain further information by means of an art-technological examination with the help of X-ray technology, but no indication of a lower layer of paint was found. [44, 45, 46] The inside and outside were probably painted the same color.[25]
In summary, the painting was created with a fair amount of cunning. First of all, it was determined where the desires are most pronounced and then a subject was chosen whose context had been sufficiently made known by Goethe and Schiller. Some verses from Klärchen's song are still familiar to some today:
«Himmelhoch jauchzend,
Zum Tode betrübt -
Glücklich allein
Ist die Seele, die liebt.»[26]
In addition, the motif of courtship matches the Italian tradition of painted instruments. Inconsistencies only become apparent at second glance, both in terms of the quality of the painting and the care taken in the execution as well as in terms of the historical research, although it must be admitted that the study by Julia Cartwright, published in 1913, was probably not yet available, if at all was ever researched in a foreign language from an Italian point of view.
Nevertheless, the scientific environment cannot be completely absolved. Polydisciplinary treatments are still a rarity today and there is hardly any interest in painted instruments in either musicology or art studies - for the simple reason that the subject is equally located in both disciplines. In this way, the project succeeded in moving a simple virginal out of its shadowy existence into a historically significant light. The idea of an acoustic journey through time into the past - the musical rapture - allowed many things to be overlooked.
Today the instrument receives a further suggestive appreciation through its origin from a museum, but George F. Harding Jr. (*1868-†1939) was a private individual who regularly traveled through Europe in his own plane to expand his weapon collection, for which he created a small castle complex in Chicago as an extension to his own property. [47-48] Whatever else he liked outside of his main focus of collecting, he acquired. In an interview conducted in 1932, he confirmed that he had no intention of creating a special collection and that it therefore primarily represented what he and his father liked so much[27] - the ideal customer for a Leopoldo Franciolini.
The Art Institute of Chicago, which took over his collection in 1982, informed the author on request that George F. Harding acquired the instrument from a Parisian dealer named Salomon around 1930 - exactly where it had been restored 3 years earlier. In handwritten notes [49-50] we find a short description of the painting: "... painted inside lid depicting Queen and her court welcoming the return of the victorious army..." ... and nobody who would have asked what sense such a subject had for a client should have. The instrument was resold on October 29, 1976 through Sotheby's New York.[28] The auction catalogue says about the painting: "The interior of the lid painted with a port scene".[51]
The presented stylistic handwriting of the painter results as a new starting point for future research, which, wherever it is recognized, must give rise to a critical examination. Simply checking whether an instrument is mentioned in Leopoldo Franciolini's catalogs or not does not replace independent investigation.
At this point, there are a few things to be said against the widespread opinion that the disclosure of such a deception of interested parties would be tantamount to a devaluation of the instrument. On the one hand, it should be remembered that we are dealing with a pastiche of original components. It is therefore always a testimony to the times, and one that gives rise to differentiated consideration and, in its own way, brings us into close contact with history. It also reveals something about the psychological makeup of the human being.
If we think of the numerous ravallements of Flemish instruments, especially those of the Ruckers family from Antwerp, of the almost relic-like handling of historical instruments and of how this heritage was actually handled, we have to re-sort our analytical tools. Above all, it's about the suggestive value, because we can't speak of an objective value anyway. Being able to credibly assure that at least parts of the soundboard were still made by the Flemish old master of the rank of Stradivarius caused the prices to skyrocket and provided an unexpected predisposition of the listening experience. Who would want to deny that the increase in emotional intensity was not always associated with an increase in esteem? This could take on such bizarre forms that a middle-class instrument painting could already be passed off as Rubens.[29] Self-deception and deception are close together. Strong auditory experiences are evidently capable of enchanting perception.
Leopoldo Franciolini was able to play this keyboard with virtuosity, because as far as we can see he was the inventor of the tabernacle-clavicytherium[30], which wing doors were said to have been painted by none other than Fra Angelico.[31] The cartouche in the cracked gable bears the coat of arms of Pope Gregory XIII. The viewer inevitably thinks of the papal communication with the Most High and of music as a gift from God. With this instrument, the pianist Franz Josef Hirt opened his magnificent illustrated book Meisterwerke des Klavierbaus and especially the introductory chapter entitled "Stringed pianos of relic value." So Franciolini has come a long way in the traditional cultural history of the piano.
Instead of seeing this situation as an embarrassment and selling such an instrument - once in a museum inventory - it would be appropriate to include such pieces in the larger context of the cultural history of keyboard instruments and to use the information they contain.
On a larger scale, this also applies to the Christian symbolism of Western harmony - a man-made addition to the suggestive assumption of a higher descent: MUSICA DONUM DEI There is no organ that does not know anything about it. So who would think of denying this supposed gift of God its cultural-historical relevance?
© Aurelius Belz 2022
SUMMARY
A 17th-century Italian virginal was painted to achieve a higher selling price.
Key Factors:
- the stylistic
- the sketchy knowledge of the appearance of a Flemish town
- the ignorance of the importance of the clergy on the occasion of marriage vows
- the temporal misjudgment in relation to the moment of the action.
All this is incompatible with an origin. It is unclear who commissioned the painting and who carried it out. The workshop of Leopoldo Franciolini is certainly an option, but not mandatory. None of the persons depicted can be the client.
Nothing has yet been said about the instrument as such. However, the original affiliation of the front bar with name and date is to be doubted.
Literature
Altoviti, Giovanni, Essequie della sacra cattolica, e real maestà di Margherita d'Austria regina di Spagna, celebrate dal serenissimo Don Cosimo II. Gran Duca di Toscana IIII, Florence 1612
Belz, Thomas Aurelius, Das Instrument der Dame. Bemalte Kielklaviere aus drei Jahrhunderten, Dissertation, Bamberg 1996
Beurmann, Andreas, Historische Tasteninstrumente, Cembali, Spinette, Virginale, Clavichorde, Munich, London, New York, 2000
Boalch, Donald, H. Makers of the Harpsichord and Clavichord 1440-1840, Oxford 1974
Bricqueville, Eugène de, Les ventes d’Instruments de Musique au XVIIIe siècle, Paris, 1908
Canosa, Romano, Vita di Margherita d’Austria, Ortona, 2016
Cartwright, Julia, Christina of Denmark, Duchess of Milan and Lorraine 1522–1590, New York, 1913
Di Trojano, Massimo, Die Vermählungsfeier des Herzogs Wilhelm des Fünften von Bayern mit Renata, der Tochter des Herzogs Franz des ersten von Lothringen, zu München im Jahre 1568, Munich 1842
Ferrario, Giulio, Il costume antico e moderno: o storia del governo, della milizia, della religione, delle arti, scienze ed usanze di tutti I populi antichi e moderni provata coi monumenti dell’antichità, e rappresentata con analoghi disegni. 34 Vol., Florence, 1831-1842.
Fornari, Carlo, Margherita d’Austria e di Parma, Parma, 2017
Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von, Egmont, Ein Trauerspiel in fünf Aufzügen, Leipzig 1788
Hirt, Franz Josef, Meisterwerke des Klavierbaus, Zürich 1981
Mörke, Olaf, Wilhelm von Oranien, Stuttgart 2005
O’Brien, Grant, Ruckers. A harpsichord and virginal building tradition, Cambridge 1990
Otto, Brinna, Ein venezianisches Spinett im Badischen Landesmuseum Karlsruhe, In: Jahrbuch der Staatl. Kunstsammlungen in Baden-Württemberg, Vol. 8, 1971, 97-119
Rachfahl, Felix, Margareta von Parma Statthalterin der Niederlande, 1559-1567, Leipzig 1898
ibid. , Wilhelm von Oranien und der niederländische Aufstand, 3 Bde., Halle 1906-1924
Ripin, Edwin M., The Instrument Catalogs of Leopoldo Franciolini, New Jersey, 1974
Rosenberg, Adolf, Geschichte des Kostüms, Bd. 3, New York 1905
Sanvitali, Leonardo, Conte Storia dell'Olanda e dei Paesi-Bassi Pubblicata in continuazione al compendio della storia universale del Sig. Conte di Ségur, Milan 1824
Schiller, Friedrich, Die Geschichte des Abfalls der vereinigten Niederlande von der spanischen Regierung, Leipzig 1801
Ibid. Storia della rivoluzione dei Paesi Bassi sotto il regno di Filippo 2., translated by S.B., Torino 1852
Tacke, Andreas, Der Behaimsche Spinettdeckel von 1619. Zu einem hochrangigen kulturgeschichtlichen Zeugnis der Nürnberger Barockzeit. In: Krickeberg, Dieter [Hg.] Der schöne Klang. Studien zum historischen Musikinstrumentenbau in Deutschland und Japan unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des alten Nürnberg, Nürnberg 1996
Vetter, Klaus, Wilhelm von Oranien, Berlin 1987
[1] Boalch, 1974, 123 A copy of the indicated page was found in the instrument. In 1995 an extended 3rd edition was published, ed. by Charles Mold, Oxford, 1995, see also Boalch-Mould online: https://db.boalch.org/instruments/basicsearch
[2] The business was founded in 1879, according to the information on its catalogues
[3] Beurmann, 2000, 50f
[4] Ripin 1974, ix
[5] ibid., Appendix I
[6] Fornari, 2017, 100 reports next to the servants of 4 court-ladies who accompanied her
[7] For example, the coat of arms of Gregory XIII can be found on a tabernacle-shaped clavicitherium, see Hirt, 1981, 26, as well as that of Sixtus V on a clavizitherium of the Hans Adler Collection.
[8] O’Brien, 1990, 303
[9]https://artigos.wiki/article/de/Diego_Felipez_de_Guzmán,_1st_Marquess_of_Legané, visited on Sept 29th 2022
[10] Belz, 1996, 43ff, 79 ff
[11]ibid, 74
[12] Tacke, Andreas, 1996, 153
[13] Ferrario, Florence 1841-1842
[14] At this point we would like to point out the thematic relationship to the virginal of Giulia da Varano (see Video XVII). The carvings on the keyboard cheeks, which are located outside the body "fuori dello strumento", are dedicated in both cases to physical love or vice, and in both cases there is a clear demarcation immediately on the case wall: we find on the instrument of Giulia da Varano the reference to a Bible text, in the case of Karlsruhe the phoenix. Herodotus writes that this one looks most like an eagle (Histories 2:73). The reader can easily relate the saying from the mouth of Cupid "Phenice sei, hor che legato m'hai" (Phoenix see you, now that you have bound me) to himself. We hear from Pierius Valerianus in his hieroglyphics on the concept of the phoenix: "We are in the habit of calling those men Phoenices who distinguish themselves far above the rest through virtue and learning," quoted from Otto, 1971, 111. That this also applies to Ladies, as evidenced by the numerous paintings, copperplate engravings and pieces of jewelery which connect Elizabeth I with the phoenix. [30] With her lifestyle, the Virgin Queen has contributed so much to the spread of the motto that some even attribute the term virginal to her fondness for this instrument. In a Christian reading, the phoenix is a symbol of resurrection, which can be earned through virtuous behavior, the 10-piece soundboard rosette is reminiscent of the 10 commandments. In the copper engraving shown from the Westfälisches Landesmuseum, the biblical connection is made with the reference to Psalm 118.
To the coat of arms:
Both the natural rose with stem and leaves and the three eight-pointed stars in a pyramidal arrangement and the crossbar are found in the coat of arms of the Angerami family - partially ennobled: De Angerami - which can be traced back until the 14th century. [31] However, the historical sources are sparse and the distribution of the name, whose spelling occurs in variants, is limited to a few places in Italy see ganino.com/cognomi_italiani_a and www.paulflo.com/files/ angerami.htm visited on 11/29/2022. Due to the fact that it was only distributed selectively, the state archives of Bologna, Modena, Foggia and Naples as well as the episcopal archive of Naples were requested. The feedback showed that the rose only found its way into the coat of arms later through a marriage. We also encounter the crown of nobility only in the south of Italy. Therefore, the search radius was limited to the area of responsibility of the Tricarico Diocesan Archives.
Historical connection:
A historical link to the theme of the virginal is that Philip II was proclaimed King of Naples by his father Charles V the day before his marriage to Elizabeth's half-sister Maria Tudor in 1554. When he asked for the hand of Elisabeth four years later after Maria's death, she is said to have replied: "By marrying you, my sister gambled away the favor of her people, do you think I will make the same mistake?" It can be assumed that the Neapolitan nobility observed the events closely and such anecdotes spread like wildfire. In this way, the instrument became a contemporary document that reports on the intellectual league in which the owners played. Being Phenice oneself was a predicate of nobility. This reflects a subtle inner distance to the foreign determined monarch, who did not even speak the national language, without attacking him personally. After all, his half-sister Margarete von Parma had been introduced to local customs in Naples, and for that reason alone she enjoyed far more sympathy. An additional and accidental point of reference may have been the fact that both the house of Tudor and that of the Angerami have a rose in their coat of arms, which is referred to in a central place.
[15] S. Sanvitali, Milan 1824
[16] Schiller, 1801, First book 103
[17] Meant is Renata of Lorraine, daughter of Franz I of Lorraine and his wife Christina of Denmark, Schiller 1801, first book, 107, cf. Mörke 2007, 73
[18] Schiller, 1801, second book, 148, an Italian translation appeared in Turin, 1852, there: 69 and 89f
[19] Mörke, 2007, 73
[20] Rachfahl, 1898, 61
[21] Cartwright, 1913, 302
[22] Di Trojano, 1843, viii
[23] After Julia Cartwright pays special attention to this process, her account is reproduced here: «One day, when Philip was walking in the park at Brussels with the Prince, he told him how much he regretted to find that Madame de Lorraine was strongly opposed to his marriage with her daughter, and had begged him to inform the Prince that she must decline to proceed further with this matter. The King added, in a friendly way, that he had told him this in order that he might look about for another wife while he was still young. The Prince was naturally much annoyed at this unexpected communication, and replied proudly that, if this were the case, he would promptly seek another alliance in Germany, where he had already received several offices for marriage. He was deeply wounded, not without reason, and went off to Paris a few days later, with Egmont and Alva, to remain there as hostages until the conditions of the treaty had been fulfilled. It was not until many months afterwards that he discovered how he had been duped. Christina meanwhile remained in her convent retreat, unconscious of what was happening in her absence, and heard with some surprise that the Prince of Orange had left Court without informing her of his departure.” Cartwright, 1931, 455f
[24] The course of the journey is sufficiently documented by correspondence. She arrives in Besançon on July 2nd, in Basel on July 10th, via Cologne she reaches Brussels on July 26th, see Fornari 2017, 100, Canosa, 2016, 98
[25] An example of an unpainted inner surface of the lid, only in the color of the outer case, can be found in Antonio Migliai, Florence around 1682, see Beurmann, 2000, 61
[26]"Rejoicing sky high, saddened to death -Happy alone Is the soul that loves."
[27]archive.artic.edu/arms-and-armor/resource/1246: Essay: George F. Harding, Jr. and his "Castle"From Arms and Armor in The Art Institute of Chicago, (1995) by Walter J. Karcheski, Jr., visited on Sept. 26th 2022
[28] Mail from October 5th, 2022 from Bart H. Ryckbosch to the author
[29] See Bricqueville, 1908, 8, 10 for examples
[30] Yale Collection of musical instruments
[31] Hirt, 1955, 1