DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.31769#0031
Brooch on the gown of Venus
through marriage is a central theme of profane imagery,
particularly in the last years of the quattrocento. The
accepted view was that it was only in marriage that
otherwise unfettered manly desires could find proper
fulfilment, that is to say in the procreation of future
generations.'y And the task of controlling male freedom
— originally associated with the unruly god Mars —
can only be accomplished by chaste love, here embodied
in a comparatively demure-looking Venus, who lies
across from her spouse in a rather high-necked, white
gown. Here the goddess of love, clad in pure white, re-
presents the prospect of sensual pleasure, but only
within the limits of marital fidelity. This apparent para-
dox of sensuality, which is virtuous by dint of being
enjoyed within marriage, is perhaps also hinted at in the
brooch on Venus’s gown, namely in its symbolic design.
White pearls signifying purity surround one red gem-
stone which probably symbolizes love and which is,
metaphorically, held within bounds.
One of the most interesting and at the same time
complex aspects of classical mythology is its ambiguity.
This of course applies to any picture of Mars and
Venus. And indeed, here the theme of the subjugation
of the god of war by the goddess of love, the domestica-
tion of fleshly desire by the chastely-dressed Venus, goes
hand-in-hand with a tale of marital infidelity. For in cer-
tain classical accounts the husband of Venus is not
Mars but the god Vulcan, who in fact one day discovers
his wife in the arms of her lover. The theme of sensual
love outside the confines of marriage is admittedly
wholly absent from Botticelli’s painting, and yet in its
latent presence as an element in the classical Venus le-
gend, it does indirectly bring to mind thoughts of sexual
desire per se despite the clearly moral intention of the
29
through marriage is a central theme of profane imagery,
particularly in the last years of the quattrocento. The
accepted view was that it was only in marriage that
otherwise unfettered manly desires could find proper
fulfilment, that is to say in the procreation of future
generations.'y And the task of controlling male freedom
— originally associated with the unruly god Mars —
can only be accomplished by chaste love, here embodied
in a comparatively demure-looking Venus, who lies
across from her spouse in a rather high-necked, white
gown. Here the goddess of love, clad in pure white, re-
presents the prospect of sensual pleasure, but only
within the limits of marital fidelity. This apparent para-
dox of sensuality, which is virtuous by dint of being
enjoyed within marriage, is perhaps also hinted at in the
brooch on Venus’s gown, namely in its symbolic design.
White pearls signifying purity surround one red gem-
stone which probably symbolizes love and which is,
metaphorically, held within bounds.
One of the most interesting and at the same time
complex aspects of classical mythology is its ambiguity.
This of course applies to any picture of Mars and
Venus. And indeed, here the theme of the subjugation
of the god of war by the goddess of love, the domestica-
tion of fleshly desire by the chastely-dressed Venus, goes
hand-in-hand with a tale of marital infidelity. For in cer-
tain classical accounts the husband of Venus is not
Mars but the god Vulcan, who in fact one day discovers
his wife in the arms of her lover. The theme of sensual
love outside the confines of marriage is admittedly
wholly absent from Botticelli’s painting, and yet in its
latent presence as an element in the classical Venus le-
gend, it does indirectly bring to mind thoughts of sexual
desire per se despite the clearly moral intention of the
29