DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.44747#0042
foxtails. The pope says, “The biggest foxtail is appropriate for me
because I reign in the religious realm, so that I can blind emperors,
kings, and dukes in this profane domain.’’ The cardinal tells the
pope: “Holy Father, I support you. I need three good foxtails so that
I can receive the Roman Papacy in Concilium.” In the same way, all
the clergy are coming to the foxtail store to acquire gifts to flatter
their superiors and buy supporters in the expectation of receiving
promotions. However, a brother, the lowest one in clerical orders,
recognizes that the monastery is full of abuses, so he does not want to
stay there any more. “Listen to what the peasant says. I don’t want to
stay in the monastery any longer. I want to return home to my friends
again, before our order declines.”
The laymen in the store watch the reality of the world of the
clergymen, criticizing their deception, hypocrisy, and avarice. A
soldier sitting astride a monk takes his foxtail away with a cry, “Oh,
you have deceived us for a long time. You made us obey you, showing
us a foxtail. You are an inveterate hypocrite. Now I will treat you as
you have treated us.” Thus, allegories involving foxtails were com-
mon in Northern Europe in the sixteenth century. They often ap-
peared in pictures meant as social satires.
A similar problem exists with political interpretation of Magpie
on the Gallows (fig. 27), a painting included in the present exhibi-
tion. A number of scholars, apparently on the basis of a passage in
Karel Van Mander’s biography of the artist, have interpreted this
painting as a deliberate protest against contemporary political op-
pression. It was painted in 1568, and Fierens sees it as referring to the
execution of the counts of Egmont and Hoorne for treason, which
took place in the square of Petite Sablon in Brussels that same year.
In a passage concerning captions on Bruegel’s preparatory drawings
for prints, Van Mander says,
...he got his wife to burn [some of these prints],
when he was on his deathbed
because they were too caustic or derisory, either
because he was sorry or he was afraid that on
their account she would get into trouble or she might
have to answer from them.59)
If we accept the fact of Bruegel’s concern for his family’s security,
it is difficult to imagine that he intended to directly criticize or ex-
pose the wrongdoing of the regime in power. Magpie on the Gallows
would be as dangerous as the drawings. It would be well to consider
whether or not there is a more universal human message in one of his
last paintings which Bruegel left to his wife.
First, let us look at the role of the magpie. According to Flemish
superstition, a magpie crying or flying about one’s house was a bad
omen, indicating that a member of the family was going to die or
have bad luck. Also, it was believed that if one saw a magpie before
any other bird when setting out for work in the morning, there would
be bad luck that day. It was not always regarded negatively, however.
In Antwerp, it was thought that a person’s fortune could be told by
the number of magpies seen flying together. One meant good luck,
two a marriage, and three bad luck. It was also said that a magpie on
the right was a sign of good luck and one on the left of bad.60)
According to Marijnissen, this superstition is found in the Gospel
of the Spindle of the fifteenth century,61) where a magpie on the roof
is sometimes a bad omen but sometimes brings good news, for
example, foretelling recovery from illness. In Bruegel’s painting,
there is a magpie flying in the sky and another perched on a dead tree
stump in addition to the one on the gallows, which would seem to
foretell that someone is about to die on the gallows. A crucifix at the
foot of the gallows indicates that the execution has already taken
place. A cow skull in the foreground serves as a memento mori
(remember the death). From the proverb, “cry like a magpie,” the
bird could stand for a “slanderer” or “scandalmonger,” and there is
a possibility that someone has been executed for the crime of libel.
Seemingly by way of contrast, three peasants join hands and dance
joyfully to the music of a bagpipe at the side of the gallows. An old
Flemish proverb, aan de galg dansen (dancing at the gallows) refers
cynically to the condition of a condemned criminal’s body dangling
from the gallows rope. Did Bruegel use the dancing peasants to
allude to the excution scene? I believe this is a possible explanations
of the meanings of the magpie, the gallows, and the peasants in the
foreground.
There are other aspects to this picture which reveal Bruegel’s
intentions. In contrast to the enigmatic elements in the foreground,
the middle ground and background present a broad panorama of
nature with leaves beginning to change color and a feeling of autumn
in the air. Bruegel was most concerned with painting this macrocosm.
There are unfortunate people in this world who end up on the gallows
and others who enjoy dancing. These minor tragedies and comedies
of everyday life exist side by side, but ultimately human beings are
a part of the larger order of nature. This work, which Bruegel may
have painted for himself, or at any rate did not relinquish until the
52
because I reign in the religious realm, so that I can blind emperors,
kings, and dukes in this profane domain.’’ The cardinal tells the
pope: “Holy Father, I support you. I need three good foxtails so that
I can receive the Roman Papacy in Concilium.” In the same way, all
the clergy are coming to the foxtail store to acquire gifts to flatter
their superiors and buy supporters in the expectation of receiving
promotions. However, a brother, the lowest one in clerical orders,
recognizes that the monastery is full of abuses, so he does not want to
stay there any more. “Listen to what the peasant says. I don’t want to
stay in the monastery any longer. I want to return home to my friends
again, before our order declines.”
The laymen in the store watch the reality of the world of the
clergymen, criticizing their deception, hypocrisy, and avarice. A
soldier sitting astride a monk takes his foxtail away with a cry, “Oh,
you have deceived us for a long time. You made us obey you, showing
us a foxtail. You are an inveterate hypocrite. Now I will treat you as
you have treated us.” Thus, allegories involving foxtails were com-
mon in Northern Europe in the sixteenth century. They often ap-
peared in pictures meant as social satires.
A similar problem exists with political interpretation of Magpie
on the Gallows (fig. 27), a painting included in the present exhibi-
tion. A number of scholars, apparently on the basis of a passage in
Karel Van Mander’s biography of the artist, have interpreted this
painting as a deliberate protest against contemporary political op-
pression. It was painted in 1568, and Fierens sees it as referring to the
execution of the counts of Egmont and Hoorne for treason, which
took place in the square of Petite Sablon in Brussels that same year.
In a passage concerning captions on Bruegel’s preparatory drawings
for prints, Van Mander says,
...he got his wife to burn [some of these prints],
when he was on his deathbed
because they were too caustic or derisory, either
because he was sorry or he was afraid that on
their account she would get into trouble or she might
have to answer from them.59)
If we accept the fact of Bruegel’s concern for his family’s security,
it is difficult to imagine that he intended to directly criticize or ex-
pose the wrongdoing of the regime in power. Magpie on the Gallows
would be as dangerous as the drawings. It would be well to consider
whether or not there is a more universal human message in one of his
last paintings which Bruegel left to his wife.
First, let us look at the role of the magpie. According to Flemish
superstition, a magpie crying or flying about one’s house was a bad
omen, indicating that a member of the family was going to die or
have bad luck. Also, it was believed that if one saw a magpie before
any other bird when setting out for work in the morning, there would
be bad luck that day. It was not always regarded negatively, however.
In Antwerp, it was thought that a person’s fortune could be told by
the number of magpies seen flying together. One meant good luck,
two a marriage, and three bad luck. It was also said that a magpie on
the right was a sign of good luck and one on the left of bad.60)
According to Marijnissen, this superstition is found in the Gospel
of the Spindle of the fifteenth century,61) where a magpie on the roof
is sometimes a bad omen but sometimes brings good news, for
example, foretelling recovery from illness. In Bruegel’s painting,
there is a magpie flying in the sky and another perched on a dead tree
stump in addition to the one on the gallows, which would seem to
foretell that someone is about to die on the gallows. A crucifix at the
foot of the gallows indicates that the execution has already taken
place. A cow skull in the foreground serves as a memento mori
(remember the death). From the proverb, “cry like a magpie,” the
bird could stand for a “slanderer” or “scandalmonger,” and there is
a possibility that someone has been executed for the crime of libel.
Seemingly by way of contrast, three peasants join hands and dance
joyfully to the music of a bagpipe at the side of the gallows. An old
Flemish proverb, aan de galg dansen (dancing at the gallows) refers
cynically to the condition of a condemned criminal’s body dangling
from the gallows rope. Did Bruegel use the dancing peasants to
allude to the excution scene? I believe this is a possible explanations
of the meanings of the magpie, the gallows, and the peasants in the
foreground.
There are other aspects to this picture which reveal Bruegel’s
intentions. In contrast to the enigmatic elements in the foreground,
the middle ground and background present a broad panorama of
nature with leaves beginning to change color and a feeling of autumn
in the air. Bruegel was most concerned with painting this macrocosm.
There are unfortunate people in this world who end up on the gallows
and others who enjoy dancing. These minor tragedies and comedies
of everyday life exist side by side, but ultimately human beings are
a part of the larger order of nature. This work, which Bruegel may
have painted for himself, or at any rate did not relinquish until the
52