DOI Artikel:
Tomalak, Mirosław: Two Unknown Paintings by Lodewijk Toeput and Joos de Momper the Younger
DOI Seite / Zitierlink:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.72800#0150
to Momper's drawings and Collaert's prints, even if in these later works the reper-
tory of human activities is different, and each month is depicted separately. On the
other hand, Toeput's idea to incorporate antique deities in the two Warsaw paint-
ings26 owes more to Lambert Lombard's cycle than to that of Heemskerck. In the
four engravings, partially inspired, just like the woodcuts by Monogrammist
A.P., by Hypnerotomachia Poliphili, spring is represented by Venus with Cupid
(exactly as in Pozzoserrato's drawing in Basel!), summer by Ceres holding a horn
of plenty, autumn by Bacchus, while winter by Aeolus and Janus by a fire. In the
background of each print one can see activities such as harvesting, picking of
grapes and other fruit, making wine, as well as people amusing themselves with
ice skating or feasting outdoors.
Although by the end of the 16th century it was still common to depict months
or seasons as mythological figures against simplified landscape backgrounds,27
the general tendency which was to begin to dominate in the first quarter of the
next century was to represent them only by means of an animated landscape,
either with labours of the months as a part of it, or without them, like in the
case of Momper's Brunswick cycle. But even if we compare the two Warsaw
paintings with the engravings by Maarten van Heemskerck, Lambert Lom-
bard, or Crispijn de Passe the Elder: the works that could have served as their
compositional models, one thing is striking: the difference in the emphasis put
on the figures of either the seasons' personifications or Olympian deities and the
landscape. In all of the above-mentioned prints these figures remained central.
Landscape backgrounds with labours of the months actually continued the alle-
gorical programme introduced by the personifications. They illustrated specific
seasons, but on a universal or rather, symbolical level; they combined particu-
lar activities with the appropriate time of the year according to an established
iconographical tradition without any attempt to place them at a specific location,
such as a Flemish countryside or an Italian villa. In our paintings this situation
is reversed: the importance of gods is diminished in favour of a detailed depic-
tion of the landscape. The repertory of labours of the months remains to some
extent the same as in the medieval calendars or early modern prints and paint-
ings, but it is enriched with current Venetian motifs (gondolas and chimneys)
and local amusements (bull running or carnival procession). The two paintings
by Toeput and Momper do include allegorical elements, but they are placed
in a specific, though of course not a topographical landscape, depicting realistic
elements and scenes taken from (everyday) life. A further comparison with the
Two Unknown
Paintings...
26 There can be little doubt that despite the cooperation with young Joos de Momper it was
Lodewijk Toeput who designed the composition of both our paintings.
27 See i.e. Crispijn de Passe the Elder after Maarten de Vos, Four Seasons [in:] Friedrich
Wilhelm Hollstein, Dutch and Flemish etchings, engravings and woodcuts, ca. 1450-1700, vol. 15,
Amsterdam 1964, p. 199, nos. 560-63; Adriaen Collaert after Maarten de Vos, Four Seasons [in:]
Hollstein, Dutch and Flemish..., vol. 4, Amsterdam 1950, p. 204, nos. 457-60; Crispijn de Passe,
Four Seasons [in:] Hollstein, Dutch and Flemish..., vol. 15, Amsterdam 1964, p. 198, nos. 556-559.
149
tory of human activities is different, and each month is depicted separately. On the
other hand, Toeput's idea to incorporate antique deities in the two Warsaw paint-
ings26 owes more to Lambert Lombard's cycle than to that of Heemskerck. In the
four engravings, partially inspired, just like the woodcuts by Monogrammist
A.P., by Hypnerotomachia Poliphili, spring is represented by Venus with Cupid
(exactly as in Pozzoserrato's drawing in Basel!), summer by Ceres holding a horn
of plenty, autumn by Bacchus, while winter by Aeolus and Janus by a fire. In the
background of each print one can see activities such as harvesting, picking of
grapes and other fruit, making wine, as well as people amusing themselves with
ice skating or feasting outdoors.
Although by the end of the 16th century it was still common to depict months
or seasons as mythological figures against simplified landscape backgrounds,27
the general tendency which was to begin to dominate in the first quarter of the
next century was to represent them only by means of an animated landscape,
either with labours of the months as a part of it, or without them, like in the
case of Momper's Brunswick cycle. But even if we compare the two Warsaw
paintings with the engravings by Maarten van Heemskerck, Lambert Lom-
bard, or Crispijn de Passe the Elder: the works that could have served as their
compositional models, one thing is striking: the difference in the emphasis put
on the figures of either the seasons' personifications or Olympian deities and the
landscape. In all of the above-mentioned prints these figures remained central.
Landscape backgrounds with labours of the months actually continued the alle-
gorical programme introduced by the personifications. They illustrated specific
seasons, but on a universal or rather, symbolical level; they combined particu-
lar activities with the appropriate time of the year according to an established
iconographical tradition without any attempt to place them at a specific location,
such as a Flemish countryside or an Italian villa. In our paintings this situation
is reversed: the importance of gods is diminished in favour of a detailed depic-
tion of the landscape. The repertory of labours of the months remains to some
extent the same as in the medieval calendars or early modern prints and paint-
ings, but it is enriched with current Venetian motifs (gondolas and chimneys)
and local amusements (bull running or carnival procession). The two paintings
by Toeput and Momper do include allegorical elements, but they are placed
in a specific, though of course not a topographical landscape, depicting realistic
elements and scenes taken from (everyday) life. A further comparison with the
Two Unknown
Paintings...
26 There can be little doubt that despite the cooperation with young Joos de Momper it was
Lodewijk Toeput who designed the composition of both our paintings.
27 See i.e. Crispijn de Passe the Elder after Maarten de Vos, Four Seasons [in:] Friedrich
Wilhelm Hollstein, Dutch and Flemish etchings, engravings and woodcuts, ca. 1450-1700, vol. 15,
Amsterdam 1964, p. 199, nos. 560-63; Adriaen Collaert after Maarten de Vos, Four Seasons [in:]
Hollstein, Dutch and Flemish..., vol. 4, Amsterdam 1950, p. 204, nos. 457-60; Crispijn de Passe,
Four Seasons [in:] Hollstein, Dutch and Flemish..., vol. 15, Amsterdam 1964, p. 198, nos. 556-559.
149