Object data
oil on panel
support: height 39 cm × width 52.2 cm
outer size: depth 5.5 cm (support incl. frame)
Hendrik van Balen (I), after Jan Brueghel (I)
c. 1617 - 1625
oil on panel
support: height 39 cm × width 52.2 cm
outer size: depth 5.5 cm (support incl. frame)
…; ? recorded in the collection Pieter Smissaert and the children of Jan Augustin Semino [Sernino], Antwerp estate inventory (‘Een Schilderycken van Bachus door den Ouden Van Baelen gemaeckt’), 31 December 1660;1 ? collection Hendrik van Heteren (1672-1749), The Hague;2 his son, Adriaan Leonard van Heteren (1724-1800), The Hague, (‘De ontmoeting van Diana en Bacchus, zeer vol gewoel in een Landschap, door denzelve [‘Fluweele Bruegel’ and ‘Hendrik van Balen’] h. 15 d., br. 20 d. [39.2 x 52.3 cm] P.’);3 his third cousin and godson, Adriaan Leonard van Heteren Gevers (1794-1866), Rotterdam, (‘Henry van Balen. Ce tableau représente une entrevue de Bachus et de Diane avec plusieurs autres figures. Le paysage est peint par Jean Bruegel, surnommé le Velours, peint sur bois, haut 15 large 20 pouces [40.5 x 54.6 cm]’);4 from whom, fl. 100,000, with 136 other paintings en bloc (known as the ‘Kabinet van Heteren Gevers’), to the museum, by decree of Lodewijk Napoleon King of Holland, through the mediation of his father Dirk Cornelis Gevers (1763-1839), 8 June 1809;5 on loan to the Rijksmuseum Muiderslot, Muiden, from 1949; from where stolen in July 1980 and recovered in September of the same year; on loan to the Bonnefantenmuseum, Maastricht, 2002-11 and from 2017
Object number: SK-A-17
Copyright: Public domain
Hendrik van Balen I (Antwerp 1574/75 - Antwerp 1632)
Hendrik van Balen I was the eldest child of Willem van Balen, a grocer, and Mechteldt van Aelten, and was born in a year which can be calculated from his attestation of 18 August 1618 as 1574/75. The identity of his master is not known, but he himself became a master in the guild in 1592/93, after which he travelled to Italy, when he would have visited Rome. A dated picture of 15986 and a Christ and the Virgin Interceding on behalf of the City of Antwerp,7 the landscape element of which was signed and dated by Abel Grimmer (c. 1570-1618/19) in 1600, mark what we know as the beginning of his career in Antwerp as chiefly a small-scale figure painter, connoisseur and teacher.
In 1605, he married Margareta Briers, and had as issue eleven children, of which three sons – one named Hendrik – were to become artists. Prior to his marriage he had already taken his first apprentices; these were eventually to number twenty-seven, registered in the guild, to which, if his three sons are added, bring the total of pupils to thirty during his career. It is perhaps testimony to his reputation that the wealthy parents of the young Anthony van Dyck (1599-1641) selected him as their young son’s first teacher in 1609/10 – the year when Van Balen was nominated dean of the painters’ guild. In 1613 he became dean of the guild of Romanists. Apart from a brief visit to the northern Netherlands at about this time, Van Balen seems to have remained in Antwerp. He died on 17 July 1632. A funerary monument, with profile portraits of himself and his wife, was erected in the Sint-Jacobskerk and is an indication of his social standing.8
The rubric to his portrait, engraved for Van Dyck for the Iconography, testifies to his admiration for antique sculpture, examples of which are listed in the extensive inventory of his widow’s estate. Items listed there also point to the artist’s educated interests in the form of books in several languages. Willem van Haecht II (1593-1637) depicted him inconspicuously among the distinguished guests in the Art Cabinet of Cornelis van der Geest of 1628.9 Reputed as a connoisseur, Van Balen’s services had earlier famously been sought out by the knowledgeable collector the Earl of Arundel (1586-1646) on a visit to Antwerp.
Through his friendships with Jan Brueghel I (1568-1625) and Peter Paul Rubens (1577-1640), Van Balen can be said to have occupied a not insignificant place in the artistic milieu of the city. He played a part in popularizing some particular subjects, as, for instance, the Banquet of the Gods, the Four Elements and the Holy Family in a Garland of Flowers. These were painted in collaboration with his long-standing neighbour in the Lange Nieuwestraat, Jan Brueghel I. After the latter’s death, Van Balen continued to work with his eponymous son, for whom see below; other artists he collaborated with are Joos de Momper II (1564-1634/35), Abraham Govaerts (1581-1626), Daniel Seghers (1590-1661), Andries Daniels (c. 1580-after 1640) and Jan Tilens (1589-1630). Indeed a significant factor in his career was his being a proponent of the practice of collaboration between established masters, a distinctive feature of Antwerp practice.
Werche lists 192 small-scale paintings in which she believes that the figures are by Van Balen and twelve altarpieces by him. Of these only twenty-four are dated. Among the notable collectors who owned his work are the Holy Roman Emperor Rudolf II (1552-1612) and Frederik Hendrik (1584-1647), Prince of Orange. The Elector Maximilian of Bavaria (1573-1657) owned a unique allegorical work; later the Archduke Leopold Wilhelm, governor of the Spanish Netherlands (1647-56) was to acquire three of his paintings. While Rubens at the time of his death did not own a painting by him, his brother-in-law, Arnold Lunden, owned a Van Balen valued at the same level as a painting by Martin van Cleve (c. 1527-before 1581), which had been retouched by Rubens.
REFERENCES
B. Werche, Hendrick van Balen (1575-1632). Ein Antwerpener Kabinettbildmaler der Rubenszeit, 2 vols., Turnhout 2004
The initials on the reverse are those of the panel maker Michiel Vriendt, who became a master in the Antwerp guild in the accounting year September 1615 to September 1616. He died on 11 August 1637.10 He is known to have supplied supports to Hendrik van Balen I.11
The attribution of the figures to Van Balen is traditional and is rightly accepted by Werche. Although Jan Brueghel I’s (1568-1625) collaboration was recognized in the eighteenth century and the painting was acquired as a joint work by the two artists, Brueghel’s participation has not been acknowledged in the museum’s catalogues since 1872, when the distant view is simply described as ‘in his style’. Brueghel’s hand, however, is evident in the fruit, dead birds, dog, goat, implements of the chase, enamel urn and wine cup. In fact, it is possible that the trees, landscape and sky are not by Brueghel but by a third hand working in his studio. Werche has reviewed the two artists’ long collaboration.12
The Rijksmuseum picture has been dated by Werche to Van Balen’s activity between 1616 and 1625.13 The earlier date is derived from Vriendt’s entry as a free master in the Antwerp guild of St Luke. Further support for this view is derived from Klein’s dendrochronological dating of the use of the support. In fact the terminus post quem should be advanced to 1617 as the Antwerp brand on the reverse is that which was in use from then until 1637.14 Jan Brueghel I’s death on 13 January 1625 provides the terminus ante quem for the picture’s completion. It may be that the work was executed in the early 1620s rather than in the second half of the second decade.
The reason for this lies in the unusual subject matter, for there is apparently no classical, literary source for the meeting of Bacchus and his retinue with Diana returning from or resting after the chase. Bacchus was the god of wine, and is depicted here youthful and drunk with companion satyrs, infant Bacchants and Bacchantes, and his emblematic goat. The goddess Diana, identified by the crescent moon on her forehead, was the virgin huntress. It may be that Van Balen and Brueghel were inspired by or reacting to Peter Paul Rubens’s Diana Returning from the Chase of circa 1622-23,15 in which the goddess is accosted by satyrs bearing fruit, of which the half-length version at Dresden16 was engraved by Schelte Adamsz Bolswert (1585/1588-1659). Even if the engraving dates from after Rubens’s death in 1640, the rubric may still have relevance to the meaning earlier attached to the encounter: ‘Thus may you have the reward of maidenly efforts: fruit and game are fine companions [go well together] at a feast.’17 In the Rijksmuseum picture, wine, personified by Bacchus and brought in the barrel, has been added to the feast.
Here the arrangement of Bacchus and his entourage more or less repeats that devised by Hans Rottenhammer (1564-1625) for his Feast of the Gods with the Marriage of Bacchus and Ariadne of 1602, in which Jan Brueghel I added the accessories of tableware, edibles, landscape, etc.18 A Feast of the Gods at Leipzig by Van Balen,19 follows the configuration, which has been slightly altered however in the Amsterdam painting, notably in the inclination of Bacchus’s head and the vomiting infant satyr and companion. Although some of the accessories, the landscape, background, and figures in the Leipzig painting differ from those in the Rottenhammer Feast, Brueghel’s role is not acknowledged by Werche. These elements and the placement of the goat (plus the introduction of the hound and dead birds, etc.) differ markedly in the present painting with its different subject, and there seems no reason to doubt that here they are the work of Brueghel, as is proposed above with a caveat concerning the landscape. Werche dates the Leipzig painting circa 1605-06.20 Van Balen probably made a copy of the Rottenhammer when it was in Brueghel’s studio, which he would have used first for the Leipzig painting and then partially altered the god and his entourage when devising the present meeting of Diana and Bacchus.
The theme of Bacchus being carried by satyrs and the god’s bloated physiognomy may have been prompted by Agostino Veneziano’s (1490-1540) print, said to be after the antique, of Bacchus Carried by Satyrs of 1528.21 The motif of the vomiting infant satyr is unusual; Van Balen also used it in his Allegory of Autumn of circa 1616 in the Alte Pinakothek, Munich.22 Also unusual is Van Balen’s witty idea of showing the nymph carrying a barrel of wine; the wine was for the feast but the barrel was also for Bacchus to sit on, as in, for instance, Jacques Jonghelinck’s (1530-1606) famous sculpture.23
Gregory Martin, 2022
B. Werche, Hendrick van Balen (1575-1632): Ein Antwerpener Kabinettbildmaler der Rubenszeit, 2 vols., Turnhout 2004, I, no. A.64
1809, p. 5, no. 14 (as ‘Hendrik van Balen In een Landschap ziet men Diana en Bacchus, met eene menigte andere figuren; zijnde het Landschap geschildert door Fluweelen Breughel’); 1841, p. 5, no. 12; 1843, p. 6, no. 12; 1853, p. 4, no. 10 (fl. 600); 1858, p. 5, no. 11; 1864, p. 7, no. 12 (the landscape in the style of Brueghel); 1872, p. 7, no. 12 (as Van Balen and in the style of J. Brueghel); 1880, p. 388, no. 450 (as Van Balen); 1891, p. 7, no. 53; 1903, p. 39, no. 424; 1934, p. 38, no. 424; 1976, p. 99, no. A 17
G. Martin, 2022, 'Hendrik van (I) Balen, Diana Offered Wine and Fruit by the Young Bacchus and his Retinue, c. 1617 - 1625', in Flemish Paintings in the Rijksmuseum, online coll. cat. Amsterdam: hdl.handle.net/10934/RM0001.COLLECT.5909
(accessed 10 November 2024 03:53:50).