{"title":"Mozes, muiters en munten. De Wet in Maerten de Vos’ Panhuyspaneel volgens de ‘methode Radermacher’","authors":"John T. Hanou","doi":"10.1163/18750176-90000191","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Moses, mutineers, money : the Law in Maerten de Vos' Panhuys panel (1575) according to Johan Radermacher. \nThe panel shows Moses and Aaron with the Ten Commandments, surrounded by Israelites, philosophers and members of the Antwerp merchant families Hooftman and Panhuys (some as portraits histories), backed by relatives and friends. The black-and-white tablets of the Law dominate the center of the otherwise richly colored painting. They are divided in illuminated \"divine\" and shadowed \"human\" commandments. Moses' right hand and its shadow pont mirror-wise at hte top of each tablet, starting with \"thou shalt not make images\" and \"thou shalt honor thy father and mother\". Several Israelites point at a collection of valuables in the foreground, or melancholically look at their bare hands. A frame inscription refers to Exodus 34.35, in whick Moses, after suppressing a heretical mutiny around the image of theGolden Calf, renewed the broken covenant with Israel' s spiritual God. \nNext, the people volunteered labor and precious goods to build His tabernacle. \nThe painting's (unofficial) title refers to its provenance from the Panhuys legacy. Researchers have concentrated so far on identifying the portrayed persons. They are mostly membeers of a humanist group of intellectuals , merchants and artists around Antwerp book printer Christoffel Plantijn. Some believe the scene expresses support of the spiritualist protestant sect of the Huis der Liefde (House of Love). \nResearch by the author identifies a contemporary event as the incentive for the panel. Invading Spanish mutineers terrorized Antwerp in 1574, in an attempt to extort their back pay from the city magistrate. His article describes religious, political and societal factors determining the burghers' reaction to this rampage. Gillis Hooftman, Peeter Panhuys and their families responded voluntarily to the city council's plea to Ioan cash and valuables to buy off the rebel troops. The author also establishes that Hooftman, Panhuys and their staff-employee, humanist, linguist and art connoisseur Johan Radermacher were covert Calvinists. They supported William of Orange, since 1566 leader of the Dutch Revolt against the catholic king of Spain. Radermacher designed the iconographical programs for a sequence of five paintings De Vos did for Hooftman's dining-room in 1568. The cycle showed scenes from Paul's missionary travels, and covertly criticized papist idolatry and the magistrate's impotence during the 1566 iconoclastic fury, by methodically dovetailing selections from Calvin's Commentary on Acts with contemporary events and persons. Radermacher re-applied this method to the Panhuys panel, by comparing the biblical rebellion around the Golden Calf to the spanish mutiny and the Israelites' voluntary gifts to the burghers' ransom money. A synthesis of humanist and religious thougts on civil government in Calvin's Institution clarifies the connection with the Law : even the ancient philosophers believed that God's divine authority always overrules god-given human powers, whether \"fathers and mothers\" or kings. Calvin therefore claims it is lawful to expel the latter if they become ungodly tyrants, preferably by a prince in cooperation with the three estates. The painting expresses this idea in the form of an allegorical apology. The gifts made by Hooftman cum suis express their loyalty to the spiritual Lord of the first \"divine\" commandment and consequently their legal rejection of the unlawful, heretical and idolatrous tyranny of Spanish rule and its rebel soldiers. The Law also justifies their own revolt against the king of Spain, guided by Moses (identifies with William in Calvinistic propaganda) and Aaron as political and religious authorities, while backed by civilian friends representing the third estate. Apart from using a bible story as a moral example for lawful behavior, the iconographical program also includes an artistic metaphor. Radermacher must have informed De Vos about Calvin's comparison of the Old Testament Law tables with a black and white sketch, prefiguring the lively colored masterpiece of the Nwe Testament. Behind closes goors and understood by clse friends and realtives, the Panhuys panel presents the business partners and their personnel as Calvinists righteous critics of catholic idolatry and supporters of the Dutch Revolt. Radermacher's visual line of reasoning corresponds with the verbal apology (currently the Dutch national anthem Wilhelmus) by Revolt leader William of Orange, dating from the same period and attributed to a Calvinist author.","PeriodicalId":39579,"journal":{"name":"OUD HOLLAND","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2014-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"OUD HOLLAND","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18750176-90000191","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ART","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Moses, mutineers, money : the Law in Maerten de Vos' Panhuys panel (1575) according to Johan Radermacher.
The panel shows Moses and Aaron with the Ten Commandments, surrounded by Israelites, philosophers and members of the Antwerp merchant families Hooftman and Panhuys (some as portraits histories), backed by relatives and friends. The black-and-white tablets of the Law dominate the center of the otherwise richly colored painting. They are divided in illuminated "divine" and shadowed "human" commandments. Moses' right hand and its shadow pont mirror-wise at hte top of each tablet, starting with "thou shalt not make images" and "thou shalt honor thy father and mother". Several Israelites point at a collection of valuables in the foreground, or melancholically look at their bare hands. A frame inscription refers to Exodus 34.35, in whick Moses, after suppressing a heretical mutiny around the image of theGolden Calf, renewed the broken covenant with Israel' s spiritual God.
Next, the people volunteered labor and precious goods to build His tabernacle.
The painting's (unofficial) title refers to its provenance from the Panhuys legacy. Researchers have concentrated so far on identifying the portrayed persons. They are mostly membeers of a humanist group of intellectuals , merchants and artists around Antwerp book printer Christoffel Plantijn. Some believe the scene expresses support of the spiritualist protestant sect of the Huis der Liefde (House of Love).
Research by the author identifies a contemporary event as the incentive for the panel. Invading Spanish mutineers terrorized Antwerp in 1574, in an attempt to extort their back pay from the city magistrate. His article describes religious, political and societal factors determining the burghers' reaction to this rampage. Gillis Hooftman, Peeter Panhuys and their families responded voluntarily to the city council's plea to Ioan cash and valuables to buy off the rebel troops. The author also establishes that Hooftman, Panhuys and their staff-employee, humanist, linguist and art connoisseur Johan Radermacher were covert Calvinists. They supported William of Orange, since 1566 leader of the Dutch Revolt against the catholic king of Spain. Radermacher designed the iconographical programs for a sequence of five paintings De Vos did for Hooftman's dining-room in 1568. The cycle showed scenes from Paul's missionary travels, and covertly criticized papist idolatry and the magistrate's impotence during the 1566 iconoclastic fury, by methodically dovetailing selections from Calvin's Commentary on Acts with contemporary events and persons. Radermacher re-applied this method to the Panhuys panel, by comparing the biblical rebellion around the Golden Calf to the spanish mutiny and the Israelites' voluntary gifts to the burghers' ransom money. A synthesis of humanist and religious thougts on civil government in Calvin's Institution clarifies the connection with the Law : even the ancient philosophers believed that God's divine authority always overrules god-given human powers, whether "fathers and mothers" or kings. Calvin therefore claims it is lawful to expel the latter if they become ungodly tyrants, preferably by a prince in cooperation with the three estates. The painting expresses this idea in the form of an allegorical apology. The gifts made by Hooftman cum suis express their loyalty to the spiritual Lord of the first "divine" commandment and consequently their legal rejection of the unlawful, heretical and idolatrous tyranny of Spanish rule and its rebel soldiers. The Law also justifies their own revolt against the king of Spain, guided by Moses (identifies with William in Calvinistic propaganda) and Aaron as political and religious authorities, while backed by civilian friends representing the third estate. Apart from using a bible story as a moral example for lawful behavior, the iconographical program also includes an artistic metaphor. Radermacher must have informed De Vos about Calvin's comparison of the Old Testament Law tables with a black and white sketch, prefiguring the lively colored masterpiece of the Nwe Testament. Behind closes goors and understood by clse friends and realtives, the Panhuys panel presents the business partners and their personnel as Calvinists righteous critics of catholic idolatry and supporters of the Dutch Revolt. Radermacher's visual line of reasoning corresponds with the verbal apology (currently the Dutch national anthem Wilhelmus) by Revolt leader William of Orange, dating from the same period and attributed to a Calvinist author.
摩西,叛乱分子和硬币。法律在Maerten De Vos ' panhuypanel根据' methode Radermacher '
摩西,叛变者,金钱:Maerten de Vos' s Panhuys panel(1575)中的法律,根据Johan Radermacher。展板上的摩西和亚伦拿着十诫,周围是以色列人、哲学家和安特卫普商人家族胡夫特曼(Hooftman)和潘休伊(Panhuys)的成员(有些是肖像历史),背后是亲戚和朋友。黑白相间的《律法》碑占据了这幅色彩丰富的画作的中心。它们分为明晃晃的“神的”诫命和阴暗的“人的”诫命。摩西的右手和他的影子在每一块石碑的顶端与镜子相对,上面写着“不可造像”和“当孝敬父母”。几个以色列人指着前景中的一堆贵重物品,或者忧郁地看着自己的双手。画框上的铭文指的是《出埃及记》第34章第35节,摩西在镇压了围绕金牛犊形象的异端叛乱后,与以色列的精神之神重新签订了被破坏的契约。接下来,人们自愿提供劳动和宝贵的物品来建造神的帐幕。这幅画的(非官方)标题是指它的来源,从Panhuys的遗产。到目前为止,研究人员一直专注于识别所描绘的人物。他们大多是安特卫普图书印刷商Christoffel Plantijn周围一个由知识分子、商人和艺术家组成的人文主义团体的成员。一些人认为这一场景表达了对Huis der Liefde(爱之家)的唯灵论新教教派的支持。作者的研究确定了一个当代事件作为小组的动机。1574年,入侵的西班牙叛变者恐吓安特卫普,试图从城市治安官那里勒索欠下的工资。他的文章描述了宗教、政治和社会因素决定了市民对这次暴行的反应。吉利斯·霍夫曼、彼得·潘休斯和他们的家人自愿响应市议会的请求,向他们提供现金和贵重物品,以收买叛军。作者还指出,霍夫曼、潘休斯和他们的员工、人文主义者、语言学家和艺术鉴赏家约翰·拉德马赫是隐蔽的加尔文主义者。他们支持奥兰治的威廉,自1566年以来,他一直是荷兰反抗天主教西班牙国王的领袖。Radermacher为De Vos在1568年为Hooftman的餐厅所做的五幅画设计了图像程序。这个循环展示了保罗传教旅行的场景,并通过有系统地将加尔文的《使徒行传注释》中的选段与当时的事件和人物相结合,在1566年的反圣像愤怒中暗中批评了教皇的偶像崇拜和地方长官的无能。Radermacher将这种方法再次应用于Panhuys小组,将圣经中围绕金牛犊的叛乱与西班牙兵变和以色列人的自愿礼物与市民的赎金进行比较。在加尔文的《制度》中,人文主义和宗教思想对公民政府的综合阐述阐明了与律法的联系:即使是古代哲学家也相信上帝的神圣权威总是凌驾于上帝赋予人类的权力之上,无论是“父亲和母亲”还是国王。因此,加尔文声称,如果后者成为不敬虔的暴君,驱逐他们是合法的,最好是由君主与这三个等级合作。这幅画以一种讽喻的道歉的形式表达了这种想法。Hooftman cum suis的礼物表达了他们对第一“神圣”诫命的精神之主的忠诚,因此他们在法律上拒绝了西班牙统治及其反叛士兵的非法,异端和偶像崇拜的暴政。律法也证明他们反抗西班牙国王是正当的,由摩西(在加尔文主义的宣传中与威廉一致)和亚伦作为政治和宗教权威指导,同时得到代表第三阶层的平民朋友的支持。除了使用圣经故事作为合法行为的道德榜样外,图像学节目还包括艺术隐喻。拉德马赫一定告诉德沃斯,加尔文把旧约律法表比作黑白草图,预示着新约中生动的彩色杰作。在亲密的朋友和亲戚的理解下,Panhuys小组将商业伙伴和他们的员工描述为加尔文主义者,对天主教偶像崇拜的正义批评和荷兰起义的支持者。Radermacher的视觉推理线与起义领袖William of Orange的口头道歉(目前是荷兰国歌Wilhelmus)相一致,该道歉可以追溯到同一时期,并被认为是一位加尔文主义作家的作品。
OUD HOLLANDArts and Humanities-Visual Arts and Performing Arts
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
33.30%
发文量
7
期刊介绍:
The periodical Oud Holland is the oldest surviving art-historical periodical in the world. Founded by A.D. de Vries and N. der Roever in 1883, it has appeared virtually without interruption ever since. It is entirely devoted to the visual arts in the Netherlands up to the mid-nineteenth century and has featured thousands of scholarly articles by Dutch and foreign authors, including numerous pioneering art-historical studies. Almost from the magazine’s inception, the publication of archival information concerning Dutch artists has played an important role. From 1885 to his death in 1946, the renowned art historian Dr. Abraham Bredius set a standard of excellence for Oud Holland.