1When describing the early modern court, patronage is an operative term for historians and art historians alike. Yet the term carries very different meanings. Historians see patronage as an essential tool of the early modern state. Given the weakness of the emerging state institutions, the distribution of places and privileges through court patronage supplemented for the deficiencies of these institutions and helped to integrate society into the expanding structures of power (Kettering, 1986). Traditional art historians define patronage strictly in terms of taste. In this view princes extend their patronage to a particular artist because of his superior talents. The essential appropriation of art as an instrument of power is thereby overlooked. In its most extreme form artistic patronage becomes something of a caricature that amounts to little more than collecting (Haskell, 1963). In every case this concept of patronage remains based on the tacit assumption of the essential role of creative genius, an assumption that is highly problematic before the nineteenth century. The present contribution therefore wants to problematize this binary approach to court patronage by challenging the distinction between the political and the artistic patronage exercised by early modern courts.

2 It is based on the case of Peter Paul Rubens and his relationship with the Court of the Archdukes Albert and Isabella. The Archdukes extended their patronage to the artist at a critical juncture in his career and thereby secured themselves as well as their Court a lasting reputation for cultural acumen (Trevor-Roper, 1976). Their patronage nevertheless presents something of an enigma. The Archdukes appointed Rubens court painter almost immediately after his return from Italy and he retained the position all through their reign. Still, he seems to have painted comparatively little for them (Brown, 1998, p. 121-128). This certainly goes against established wisdom. One of the most talented painters ever is at the disposal of a couple of discriminating and sufficiently wealthy princes and yet the relationship does not produce a vast amount of high quality works. One way of solving the enigma would be to cast doubts on the artistic tastes of the Archdukes, but that does of course falsify the entire line of reasoning. This contribution argues that Rubens’ artistic activities were determined by political, rather than artistic considerations and circumstances. It furthermore purports to show that courtiers from the Franche-Comté played a crucial role in the process.

3Perhaps the best know instance of Rubens working for the Archdukes is the so called Triptych of Saint Ildefonso of 1630-1631. Destined to adorn the chapel of the quite exclusive court Confraternity of Saint Ildefonso in the church of Saint James-on-the-Koudenberg, this altarpiece was certainly one of the most prestigious commissions that he ever received from the archducal Court. Its iconography mirrored the spirituality of the Pietas Albertina. When closed, the triptych depicted The Visit of Saint Elizabeth to the Holy Family, a well established theme in archducal gifts to altars of Our Lady1. Inside, the central panel featured the apparition of Saint Mary to Saint Ildefonso. According to hagiography, the Virgin appeared to the archbishop during a vigil and presented him with a chasuble of her own making. This gift was meant to honour him for his staunch defence of the Immaculate Conception. Ildefonso was so moved by the apparition, that he spontaneously uttered the first part of the Hail Mary at that very moment. On the wings, Albert and Isabella kneel in the company of their patron saints, contemplating these miraculous events (Vlieghe, 1972-1973, vol. 2, p. 82-92).

4 The practical handling of the project is known to have rested with Ferdinand d’Andelot, who also saw to the erection of a new altar (Castan, 1884, p. 15-107 ; De Maeyer, 1955, p. 126-127). Ferdinand d’Andelot, lord of the manor of Olans, belonged to an ancient lineage from the Franche-Comté. His maternal grandmother was Henriette Perrenot, a sister of Cardinal de Granvelle. Knighted by Archduke Albert in 1599, d’Andelot came to Court in 1606 as a member of a delegation sent by his native province. He stayed on, rising to the office of most senior major-domo. This meant that d’Andelot replaced the mayordomo mayor or grandmaster of the household – who was at that stage the Marquess of Spínola – during his frequent absences. The Archdukes entrusted him with the governorship of the town of Gray and made him colonel of the Amont bailiwick. He acted as archducal envoy to the Dukes of Lorraine, Savoy and Mantua. He certainly knew his way around the Court of Turin, for his brother Claude was a gentleman in the household of Duke Carlo Emanuele I (Poplimont, 1863-1867, vol. 1, p. 146-148 ; Duerloo and Janssens, 1992-1994, p. 127-128). In the service-year of 1629-30 d’Andelot took on the post of provost or “juge” of the Confraternity of Saint Ildefonso. It was in this capacity that he oversaw the construction of a new altar and its embellishment.

5It was by no means unusual to leave such matters to a man of d’Andelot’s stature. Indeed, archducal patronage was regularly exercised indirectly. As early as February 1599 Archduke Albert’s German secretary of state, Blasius Hütter, was supervising the execution of artistic commissions destined for Mary of Bavaria, the dowager of Archduke Charles of Styria. Hendrik de Clerck was painting a Resurrection of Christ, Otto Vaenius an Annunciation and Jan I Brueghel, “so für kleynen Figurlein der beste Meister ist”, an Assumption of the Virgin. The larger of the three paintings was to be paid by Albert, the other two by the dowager Archduchess herself (AGR-Archives générales du Royaume, Secrétaire d’État allemande, 352, f° 132 and f° 143). Hütter was likewise called upon in 1603 and through most of 1604 to supervise Georg Müller ’s work on the fountains in the gardens of the Koudenberg palace (AGR, Secrétaire d’État allemande, 320-321 and 323 ; Lombaerde, 1991, p. 159-173). These were by no means isolated examples. Luís de Alarcon, who acted as Albert’s representative in Madrid, took care of a series of decorative projects for Spanish churches and convents. The monastery of the “Descalzas reales” was the main beneficiary. Other commissions were executed on behalf of the Convent of Saint Ursula in Alcalá de Henares and the chapel of the Blessed Francis Simon in the church of Saint Andrew in Valencia. At one stage even the plans for the Jesuit church of Madrid were being sent for (AGR, Secrétaire d’État allemande, 480-486)4.

6Further away from court the story is roughly the same. The establishment of the Augustinian hermits in Antwerp offered a good example of this. Out of fear that religious communities, particularly of the mendicant orders, would overburden the citizenry, their establishment had been made subject to the approval of the magistrate, the bishop and the cathedral chapter. Only communities that could muster powerful support stood a chance of gaining admittance. When they applied for admission in 1607, the Augustinians were well prepared. They counted Aubertus Miraeus, Hendrik de Varick and the Damants among their principal supporters (Marinus, 1995, p. 73-75). Aubertus Miraeus was the nephew and secretary of the then bishop of Antwerp, Hubertus Miraeus. A pupil and friend of Lipsius, he became a canon of the cathedral Chapter in 1598 and its scholaster in 1605. His historiographical publications earned him archducal favour. He was called to Court, becoming a chaplain of the Oratory, the archducal librarian and a protonotary apostolic. His tours of duty at Court paid off. In 1624 he was appointed dean of the cathedral Chapter (Gœtschalckx, 1925, p. 120-136 ; De Ridder, 1863). Hendrik de Varick was the “schout” of Antwerp since 1599. As such he was the highest ranking judicial representative of the Archdukes in the city and was allowed to use the courtesy title of Marquess of the Land of Rijen. Varick’s father had also been “schout” between 1574 and 1576 and had perished during the Spanish Fury. His widow, Constantia van Berchem, thereupon remarried Frederic Perrenot, Baron of Ronse (Renaix) and lord of the manor of Champagney, the youngest brother of Cardinal de Granvelle. Hendrik de Varick had seen military service as a captain of a company of German infantry (De Herckenrode, 1865-1868, vol. 4, p. 1952-1953). His wife was Anne Damant, eldest daughter of Nicolaas Damant, knight, lord of the manors of Bouwel and Olmen, Viscount of Brussels. In 1583 Nicolaas Damant was appointed chancellor of Brabant, the highest judicial office in the duchy. He served on the “Consejo de Flandes” between 1587 and 1596, returned to the Netherlands with Cardinal-Archduke Albert and henceforth sat on the Council of State until his death in 1616 (De Ryckman de Betz and De Jonghe d’Ardoye, 1956, vol. 1, p. 125-129). He had strong ties with the church and the city. One of his brothers was Peter Damant, bishop of Ghent between 1590 and 1609. Their younger brother, Jan Damant, knight, was “amman” of Antwerp, or second highest judicial representative of the sovereign, between 1589 and 1610 (De Herckenrode, 1865-1868, vol. 2, p. 621 ; Van Acker, 1989, p. 1-25, particularly p. 1-3). It was for Nicolaas Damant’s epitaph near the altar of Saint Peter in the Brussels’ collegiate church of St Gudule, that Rubens would later paint his Christ’s Charge to Peter5.

7The leverage exerted by supporters such as Miraeus, de Varick and Damant, made its mark when it came to building a new convent for the Augustinians. Albert and Isabella allowed their court architect, Wenzel Coebergher, to take on the venture (Tijs, 1989, p. 273-290 particularly p. 273). They contributed substantially to the building-fund and journeyed to Antwerp to lay the foundation-stone of the choir on 25 August 1615. The archducal patronage was recorded by an inscription and the two windows closest to the high-altar were decorated with Albert’s and Isabella’s coats of arms. Later on the Infanta, Miraeus and de Varick featured among the benefactors that helped to pay for the choir stalls (Van de Velde, 1977, p. 221-234 particularly p. 225-231). A formal link between the Court and the church’s three major altarpieces, Rubens’s Mystic Marriage of Saint Catherine, Van Dyck’s Saint Augustine in Ecstasy and Jordaens’s Martyrdom of Saint Apollonia has not been established6. Yet these works would have been difficult to conceive without the generous patronage and financial aid provided by the Archdukes and their entourage.

8The Antwerp Augustinians were not the only community to benefit in this manner. The way the Annunciate nuns established their convent in the city, was remarkably similar. The Annunciate Order enjoyed special favour at Court. Its founder, Princess Joan of Valois, belonged to the same dynasty as Isabella’s mother. Recalling these ties, the Infanta joined King Louis XIII in 1624 in his attempts to further Joan’s beatification (Hébrard, 1900, p. 365-368). The Order had strong links with the Franciscans. Its rule enjoined the nuns, who called themselves daughters of Mary, to imitate ten virtues ascribed to the Virgin. Decimal numbers and mystic symbolism dominated the Order’s rites and spirituality (Monastère de l’Anonciade, 1934 ; Maria, 1617 ; Spœlberch, 1614 ; Remans, 1929, p. 39). All these elements blended in perfectly with the values and ethos of the archducal Court (Dureloo, 1998, p. 282-283). Backed by Jean Richardot, the Annunciates petitioned for the right to settle in Antwerp in 1606. When the local authorities seemed to be dragging their feet, the Archdukes intervened in person, demanding a swift admission. Still the negotiations went on until a final agreement was reached in August 1608 (Prims, 1935, p. 366-373 particularly p. 366-367). Unfortunately for the nuns, their main supporter died within little more than a year. Richardot’s death was equally painful for the archducal regime, for with him it lost one of its ablest ministers.

9Jean Richardot was a native of the Franche-Comté. Born under the name of Jean Grusset, he was educated by his uncle, François Richardot, who was bishop of Arras and one of the principal clients of the Cardinal de Granvelle. He subsequently took on his uncle’s name. After a brief spell with the rebels, Richardot rose fast under the Duke of Parma. He was appointed to the Council of State in 1583. Fourteen years later he was promoted to chief-president, the highest ministerial office in the Netherlands. In this capacity Richardot headed the Council of State and the Privy Council. He ran the Archdukes’ diplomatic service with great resourcefulness, taking an active part in the negotiations leading to the Treaties of Vervins and of London as well as the Twelve Years’ Truce. He died on his way home from a mission in France, where he had tried to talk Henry IV out of a war over the succession of Cleves (Brants, 1901, p. 831-914). He left his heirs a sizeable estate, including the lordship of the manor of Lembeek, a jurisdiction with a quasi-sovereign status. His residence in the capital was equally prestigious, for it had previously been the home of Frederic Perrenot, Baron of Ronse (De Maegd, 1998, p. 6-44). Rubens made designs for an Epitaph in honour of the great statesman, but his project was not executed (Held, 1982, p. 80-93).

10While the community was still in provisional housing, Martina Moerentorf, a sister of Balthazar Moretus, took the veil of the daughters of Mary in 1614. So did Joanna Peckius. With the latter, a powerful intermediary between the Court, the city and the convent reappeared on the scene. Joanna’s father, Peter Peckius, was a most respected minister. Son of a professor of law who had taught Jean Richardot at the University of Louvain, he was eminently well-connected from the start. For a decade Peckius was the Archdukes’ trusted envoy at the Court of Henry IV. After his return in 1610, he was introduced in the Privy Council. Appointed lieutenant-chancellor of Brabant in 1614, Peckius succeeded Nicolaas Damant as chancellor two years later. In 1617 he took his seat in the Council of State. Meanwhile Peckius had bought the lordships of the manor of Borsbeek and Boechout from François-Thomas Perrenot de Granvelle d’Oiselet, Count of Cantecroy. His Portrait by Rubens shows a minister aware of his power and responsibilities. One of Peckius’s daughters married Adrien d’Andelot, a cousin of Ferdinand d’Andelot and a gentleman of the table of the Archdukes, who became governor of the town of Bouchin (De Ryckman de Betz and De Jonghe d’Ardoye, 1956, vol. 1, p. 130-134). With Peckius on their side, the Annunciates started building their convent in earnest. On 26 August 1615, the day after they had been at the Augustinians, Albert and Isabella laid the foundation-stone of the convent’s church. Chancellor Peckius, who could make or break political careers in the city, urged the magistrate on until the building was completed (Thijs, 1990, p. 108-109). On the brink of his eight term as first burgomaster, Nicolaas Rockox donated a stained-glass window depicting The Adoration of the Magi. Moretus followed suit with a representation of The Pentecost. Other windows were filled at the expense of the bishop and the dean of the Chapter. On the two windows next to the high altar, Albert and Isabella knelt accompanied by their patron saints. Among the convent’s altarpieces were an Ecstacy of St Francis by Gerard Seghers and no less than two altarpieces by Rubens. The Miracle of St Justus, donated by Moretus, hung in the main church over the altar with the saint’s relics7. An Annunciation adorned the altar in the nuns’ choir (Génard, Van Lerius and Rombouts, 1871, p. 39-568; Bieneck, 1992, p. 36 and 249 ; Vlieghe, 1972-1973, vol. 2, p. 104-105).

11By that stage, Joanna Peckius had moved out with seven other sisters, to found a convent of the Annunciates in Brussels. They acquired a plot of land overlooking the deer park of the palace. Albert and Isabella duly turned up for the deposition of the first stone in 1616. Eleven years later, the widowed Infanta came to witness the dedication of the church. Peter Peckius had died some months before and was already buried in the convent. In the choir an epitaph was erected in his honour by his widow, Barbara Boonen, the sister of Jacobus Boonen, archbishop of Mechlin. She furthermore perpetuated his memory by adorning the high altar with an Adoration of the Magi by Rubens9.

12With a whole string of foundations across the Habsburg Netherlands, the Capuchins painted on a broader canvass. Yet their experiences were not unlike those of the Augustinians and the Annunciates. In order to propagate their cause, the Capuchins chiefly relied on the House of Arenberg. Charles, Princely-Count of Arenberg, was their champion at Court, their foremost patron in the provinces. His devotion to Saint Francis was common knowledge. He had once worn grey for an entire year, out of gratitude for the recovery of his wife from a dangerous disease (d’Anvers, 1919, p. 13 and p. 110). In his newly acquired lordship of Enghien, he founded a Capuchin monastery in 1615. It was to serve as the necropolis of his lineage for generations to come (Hildebrand, 1945-1956, vol. 1, p. 266-270). As final gesture of dedication, Charles of Arenberg directed in his will that he wanted to be buried in the Capuchin frock. At Court Arenberg was a man of consequence. Son of a pro-Spanish stadholder of Friesland and Groningen, who had given his life fighting the Revolt, he had no trouble picking up offices and commissions in the army. Philip II awarded him the Golden Fleece in 1586, at the age of thirty-six. At the accession of the Archdukes, Charles of Arenberg was made gentleman of the bedchamber and grand falconer, member of the Council of State and admiral of the Habsburg Netherlands. Having performed various diplomatic missions in the past, he acted as archducal ambassador extraordinary to Henry IV of France and James I of Great-Britain on several occasions10. A man of means by birth and married to the heiress of the immense fortune of the dukes of Aarschot, Arenberg controlled by far the largest estate in the country. It was difficult to think of a province where he had neither lordship nor land, a fact that contributed largely to his authority when dealing with local magistrates. The Capuchins could always depend on him. He seconded their petitions for still more subsidies from the archducal government. He pressed town-councils into welcoming the fathers in their jurisdiction. The minister-general recognised his exemplary support, by affiliating him and his family to the spiritual merits of the order. After Charles of Arenberg died in 1616, his widow continued to protect the Capuchins and so did the next generation. Philippe-Charles of Arenberg almost joined, his brothers Antoine and Eugene actually did. After taking the frock, the former was given the name Carolus of Brussels, the latter was known as Desideratus of Brussels (d’Anvers, 1919, passim).

13Antoine of Arenberg alias Carolus of Brussels retained the contacts he had made at Court while serving as a gentleman of the bedchamber. In 1625 he was called upon to provide spiritual guidance during Lent. He preached four sermons a week to the courtiers assembled in the chapel. Later that year, he was put in charge of the establishment of a Capuchin convent adjoining the archducal hunting-lodge in Tervuren (d’Anvers, 1919, p. 180-186). The Infanta Isabella supplied the land out of the ducal domain and made a considerable grant in cash. She deposited the first stone in the summer of 1626 and attended the dedication of the church the following year. The bulk of the furnishings of the church were also provided by her. In 1631 Isabella had a hermitage built in the grounds of the convent. She used it as a retreat for penance and meditation. The list of the other benefactors almost read like a roll-call of the Arenbergs, a clear sign that their network patronized the undertaking. There was Anne de Croÿ, widow of Charles of Arenberg, and their sons Philippe-Charles, Duke of Aarschot, and Alexander, Prince of Chimay. There were the daughters : Ernestine of Arenberg and her husband Guillaume de Melun, Prince of Épinoy, a knight of the Golden Fleece, who had just been appointed to the governorship of the county of Hainaut, and Claude of Arenberg, wife of Ottavio Visconti, Count of Gamalero, an old confidant of the Archduke and now the grand stable master. And there was aunt Antoinette-Wilhemine of Arenberg, the dowager Countess of Isenburg and mistress of the Household of the Infanta (Hildebrand, 1945-1956, vol. 1, p. 376-378 ; vol. 5, p. 114-132).

14Further away and in somewhat less august surroundings, the same procedures prevailed, be it on a more modest scale. At Dendermonde for instance, the Capuchins had installed themselves under the wings of Charles of Arenberg and the commander of the Spanish garrison in 1595. Cardinal-Archduke Albert had visited the new foundation shortly afterwards and had enlarged its precinct at his expense (Hildebrand, 1945- 1956, vol. 1, p. 197-199). By the late 1620s the buildings were in need of repair and extension. The community decided to build an entirely new convent. The Infanta and the Bishop of Ghent expressed their support by deputizing representatives to lay one of the foundation-stones. When Antoon Triest, bishop of Ghent, came to dedicate the new church in 1629, he marked the occasion by donating Van Dyck’s altarpiece The Crucifixion with the Virgin, SS. Mary Magdalene, John the Evangelist and Francis of Assisi (Vlieghe, 1999a, p. 65-77 particularly p. 68-70)11. He also had his coat of arms put up in stained glass above the main entrance. His relative, Frans van Royen, lord of the nearby manor of Gijzegem, followed suit by furnishing the altar-rails (Hildebrand, 1945-1956, vol. 1, p. 376-378 ; vol. 5, p. 229-231). Bishop Triest had inside knowledge of the archducal Court as well as of the Capuchins. While he had served in the ecclesiastical household of Albert and Isabella, his brother Jan-Baptist had abandoned his military career for the life of a Capuchin. They descended of a noble family that featured prominently in the civic government of Ghent. His father, Filips Triest, lord of the manor of Ouwegem, and his cousin Antoon Triest, lord of the manor of Ruddervoorde, both served as aldermen in the 1590s. Both were knighted during the Joyous Entry of the Archdukes in the city. The latter’s son, Joost Triest, married a daughter of chancellor Damant in 1606 and became a gentleman of the household (De Herckenrode, 1865-1868, vol. 4, p. 1687-1688). In the year Joost Triest made his entry in the Damant circle, his cousin Antoon got a chaplaincy at the archducal Court. By that stage the future prelate had already earned his degree in law and a canonry in the cathedral of his home town. Triest resigned these charges when the Archdukes appointed him dean of the Cathedral Chapter of Bruges in 1610. In 1616 he became the new bishop of Bruges. Four years later he succeeded Jacobus Boonen as bishop of Ghent. For the next thirty-seven years he proved himself an able and energetic administrator and a great patron of the arts (Cloet, Colin and Boudens, 1991, p. 66-75)12.

15All this evidence goes to show that there was a well-established procedure for indirect patronage. Under the procedure the Archdukes would not take the initiative themselves. This would be left to a group of middlemen that answered specific prerequisites. To begin with, the middlemen had to promote a project that fitted in with the values pursued by the archducal regime. It was essential to emulate the ethos that prevailed at Court, to fit in with the projects the Archdukes were undertaking themselves. In this process, the convent of the Discalced Carmelites erected in Brussels and above all the pilgrimage-shrine of Scherpenheuvel operated as touchstones. Secondly it was crucial to have access to the Court. There is no evidence that these projects were tabled in the formal sessions of the councils. It is much more likely that their merits were discussed in an informal way. Albert and Isabella had to be persuaded to give their personal support. Finally the promoters needed a local power base to see the project through. They had to get the support of the local authorities, raise sufficient funds and mobilise the available artistic talent. When all these conditions were met, the Archdukes would step in and validate the project. They would lay the foundation-stone or attend the dedication of the church, contribute a more or less generous amount of money or donate stained-glass, paintings, ritual plate or vestments. Their gifts would in turn be emulated by the local elites. All in all indirect patronage amounted to an exercise of mutual validation. Projects of this nature strengthened the prestige of Habsburg rule and disseminated the ethos of the archducal regime. They also boosted the prestige of local power networks. As such they were instrumental for the return of order and hierarchy to the war-torn society of the Habsburg Netherlands.

16Quite clearly, ties of kinship structured local power networks and the way they interfaced with the Court. They were of similar importance in determining which artists would be called upon to execute commissions13. Although taste obviously played a role, it was certainly not the only rationale that led Peckius and his associates to Rubens’s studio. With good reason, Filips Rubens, Peter Paul’s elder brother, once wrote that the chancellor “Celui-ci était lié avec mon père par des liens d’amitié et de sang” (Douxchamps, 1977, p. 142)14. Strong ties of friendship were equally in place between the Rubens brothers and the younger generation of the Richardots. Filips Rubens and Jean Richardot’s youngest sons, Guillaume and Antoine, all stayed with Lipsius during their studies at the University of Louvain. To complete their education, the Richardots were then sent off to their older brother Jean junior, who served as archducal envoy in Rome. Filips Rubens was allowed to accompany them as their secretary (De Maegd, 1998, p. 10-14). The party brought Peter Paul Rubens, who was then at the Court of Mantua, into contact with Jean Richardot junior. The contact earned him his first major commission. In 1602 Rubens was instructed to paint three altarpieces, representing Saint Helena and the Exaltation of the True Cross, the Crowning of Thorns and the Elevation of the Cross for the Santa Croce in Gerusalemme in Rome. The Santa Croce had been Archduke Albert’s titular church during the years that he was a cardinal, and the altarpieces were meant as a token of remembrance. The commission helped to establish Rubens’s reputation in the peninsula. It likewise paved the way to his appointment as “peintre de l’hostel de Leurs Altesses” on 23 September 1609, an appointment that was to prove of critical importance for the development of Netherlandish art (De Maeyer, 1955, p. 93-98 and p. 129)15.

17In the summer of 1609 the Richardot clan was at the height of its power. Chief-president Richardot had just successfully negotiated the Twelve Years’ Truce. Six years earlier his eldest son, Jean Richardot junior, had returned from Rome to become bishop of Arras and reclaim his seat in the Privy Council. In August 1609 the Archdukes promoted him to the archbishopric of Cambray, the second highest ecclesiastical dignity in the Netherlands that entailed the somewhat hollow titles of Duke of Cambray, Count of Cambrésis and Prince of the Holy Roman Empire. His younger brother Pierre headed the ancient abbey of Echternach. Two other brothers having died on the battlefield, the third surviving son Guillaume had surrendered his clerical benefices in 1606 in order to continue the family line. To this end he had set his mind on marrying Anne de Rye. It was an ambitious match with an old house of the Franche-Comté. Anne’s elder brother was Christophe de Rye de la Palud, Marquess of Varambon. He was a colonel of a regiment of infantry, sat on the archducal War Council and stood to be awarded the Golden Fleece. Her younger brother François was groom of the “cortina” or master of ceremonies in the archducal Chapel and would in time rise to the position of grand almoner. Appointed titular archbishop of Caesarea in 1626, he was ultimately elected coadjutor with the right of succession to his uncle, Ferdinand de Rye, archbishop of Besançon. The august house of de Rye does not seem to have welcomed the proposed union wholeheartedly. It took an intervention by Archduke Albert to secure its conclusion in the autumn of 1610. Similar means of persuasion had been used in 1602 to arrange the marriage of the chief-president’s youngest daughter, Jeanne, with Antoine de la Baume, Baron of Montfalconnet. The de la Baumes were every inch as aristocratic as the de Ryes (Vanhoutte, 2000, p. 58- 64 and 79-91). Antoine’s father, Louis de la Baume, served the Dukes of Savoy as a courtier, commander and diplomat. He was created Count of Saint-Amour by Philip II and a knight of the Annunziata by Duke Emmanuele Filiberto. His eldest son – characteristically christened Emmanuel-Philibert – married Helena Perrenot de Granvelle, the only child of Frederic Perrenot, Baron of Ronse and Constantia van Berchem (Duerloo and Janssens, 1992, vol. 1, p. 576 ; Van den Eeckhout, 1984, p. 81-94 particularly p. 86-87 ; Koller, 1974, p. 24-25).

18Chief-president Richardot secured his offspring influential offices and illustrious alliances. The marriages brokered for Jeanne and Guillaume integrated the family into the aristocracy and tightened the bonds with the Granvelles. Richardot and his nuclear family stood at the heart of a faction. One of its clients was Peter Peckius, who in turn had strong ties with the Arenbergs (d’Anvers, 1919, p. 57 and p. 76-78). Conrard Schetz, who later took on the name of d’Ursel, was another client. Born the son of a wealthy banker who had taken public office, Conrard became a member of the Council of Finance in 1580. Seven years later he married Richardot’s eldest daughter, Françoise. He was knighted in 1588 and created Baron of Hoboken by the Archdukes in 1600. Between 1604 and 1609 Conrard served as archducal envoy at the Court of James I. Upon his return, he succeeded Jan Damant as “amman” of Antwerp. Conrard knew the Damants well. He styled Nicolaas Damant “cousin” and brought him along as a witness when his marriage contract was signed (Vanhoutte, 2000, p. 80-83).

19In other words, right through this long and tedious onomastic litany the same names crop up time and again. One name is still lacking though, that of Nicolaas Rockox. Rockox was a heavyweight in Antwerp politics and the pivotal figure when it came to awarding artistic commissions on the local level (Baudouin, 1977, passim). His ancestors had made their way up by studying law and taking up civic office. Nicolaas Rockox first became and alderman of the city in 1588. His political career lasted until 1636 and counted just one year in which he was out of office. Over these nearly fifty years, he served twenty-nine terms as alderman and was elected nine times first burgomaster. His contacts with Hendrik de Varick were more than just professional. Rockox’s wife, Adriana Perez, was a first cousin of de Varick, their mothers being sisters. The two households went on very well. Rockox accepted to be godfather of de Varick’s oldest son Nicolaas. He furthermore lent him a considerable sum of money and provided for him in his will (Van Cuyck, 1881, p. 330-451 ; Boni, without date, p. 135-136).

20Behind Richardot, d’Ursel and Peckius, Rockox, de Varick and Damant and not forgetting the de la Baumes and the d’Andelots, loomed an even greater name : Perrenot de Granvelle. The cardinal was long dead and gone. He had been called to Madrid in 1575, where he died thirteen years later. Yet at least part of his power base had weathered the storm. The cardinal’s county of Cantecroy, a sizeable fief to the south and south-east of Antwerp, remained with his heirs until legal squabbles forced them to sell it off in parcels in 1616 (Stockmans, 1881, p. 210-218). Peckius was among the buyers. The barony of Ronse, which was once owned by the cardinal’s brother Frederic, was sold by his grandson, Jacques-Nicolas de la Baume, Count of Saint-Amour, to Count Jan VIII of Nassau-Siegen in 1629 (Van Butsele, 1987, p. 115-161 particularly p. 131). In the mean time the stately house that Frederic held in fief in Brussels, had been purchased by Jean Richardot in 1604 (De Maegd, 1998, p. 29). The cardinal’s bastards were still around. Jean Gilbert de Granvelle was a gentleman of the household and the brother-in-law of the prodigious historiographer Jan-Baptist Gramay. His half-sister Marie de Granvelle was the wife of the keeper of the archducal hunting-lodge at Tervuren (Castan, 1884, p. 67-68). The principal heir of the Granvelle interest, François-Thomas Perrenot de Granvelle d’Oiselet, Count of Cantecroy, was himself a gentleman of the bedchamber. Cantecroy added to the lustre of his house by marrying Marchioness Caroline d’Austria, an illegitimate daughter of Emperor Rudolf II. He was subsequently created a Marquess of the Holy Roman Empire in his own right and was granted the title of imperial marshal of Besançon. In 1617 Albert and Isabella employed him as their ambassador extraordinary to the imperial Court. His mission was to deliver the Archdukes’ congratulations for the election of Archduke Ferdinand to the crown of Bohemia (AGR, Secrétarie d’État allemande, 339 and 442)16. The Count and Countess of Cantecroy hoped the embassy would help pave the way to their gaining at least part of the inheritance of their cousin, the Marquess of Burgau. These hopes went unfulfilled. By way of a consolation, Cantecroy became a knight of the Golden Fleece in 1621. Although he had inherited a collection that was renowned and coveted, Cantecroy does not seem to have engaged in active artistic patronage himself. The traditional clients of his house however, were all the more active and showed an unmistakable preference for their friend and kinsman Rubens.

21The death of chief-president Richardot, which came just three weeks before Rubens received his appointment of court painter, sent his faction into decline. Richardot’s successor as chief-president was Engelbert Maes, who immediately set out to provide for his kin (De Herckenrode, 1865-1868, vol. 3, p. 1268-1275). There were a great many mouths to feed, for Maes had no less than nine brothers and sisters. Foremost among them was Karel Maes, sometime dean of the cathedral of Antwerp and grand almoner of the archducal Chapel, who was currently bishop of Ypres. In 1610 Karel Maes succeeded Peter Damant in the bishopric of Ghent, by any standard the richest see in the Netherlands, only to die there after less than two years in office (Goetschalckx, 1925, p. 83-100). Their younger brother Filips became the archducal envoy in Rome (Gœmans, 1908, p. 505-507). In fact all permanent diplomats were changed. Peckius ceded his post in Paris to Hendrik de Vicq, knight, while Conrard Schetz, Baron of Hoboken, was replaced in London by Ferdinand de Boisschot, a member of the Privy Council, whose sister Maria had married yet another brother of Engelbert Maes (De Ryckman de Betz and De Jonghe d’Ardoye, 1956, vol. 1, p. 135-142). Through these changes the Richardot clientele was effectively pushed to the sidelines.

22Maes’s talent for manoeuvring his kinsmen into places of importance was not matched by his political acumen. As a result, power simply seeped away from the councils to the Spanish entourage of the Archdukes (Janssens, 1979, vol. 6, p. 372-378 particularly p. 372). One of the chief beneficiaries was Don Rodrigo Niño y Lasso, Count of Añover. If anyone could claim the title of archducal valido or favourite, it was certainly Añover. In the early years of the reign, Añover served as gentleman of the bedchamber and member of the War Council. At that stage Archduke Albert employed him as a special envoy to secure the remittance of the Spanish war-subsidies (Lonchay and Cuvelier, 1923, passim). Thereafter he became head of the archducal Bedchamber, with the title of somelier du corps. In 1611 he took up the post of high steward of the Household, while retaining his control over the Bedchamber. Shortly afterwards, he added the office of grand stable master to his duties, thereby combining all three principal court functions until his death in October 1620 (Lanoye, 1998, p. 111). Añover was more than just a very successful courtier. After the death of Richardot, he was regularly called upon to participate in the juntas that dealt with major policy issues. His contacts at the Court of Philip III, enabled him to obtain royal favours for archducal subjects. For one, the recently established Discalced Carmelites seem to have regarded him as their particular patron (Duerloo and Werner, 1998, p. 267-268).

23It took most of the 1610s for Peter Peckius, who was very much Richardot’s political heir, to recover at least part of his faction’s stake in the conduct of affairs. His skilful conduct during the negotiations of the Treaty of Xanten in 1614 proved an important step in that direction (Roggendorf, 1968, p. 1-211 particularly p. 196-205). Becoming the only Netherlander to sit on the juntas, he was sent to The Hague in a desperate attempt to renew the Twelve Years’ Truce (Lonchay and Cuvelier, 1923, p. 528). During the eclipse of the Richardot faction, Rubens painted remarkably little for the archducal Court. The commissions he did get were destined for the relative seclusion of either the archducal Oratory or for the Gallery (De Maeyer, 1955, p. 98-130). Meanwhile the principal public projects of the regime were handled by Wenzel Coebergher, who contracted most if not all paintings out to Theodoor van Loon (Vlieghe, 1999b, p. 82-84 and p. 259). With the comeback of Peckius, Rubens’s fortune improved with equal measure. The commissions he now received were situated in the public rather than the private sphere. He was ennobled and made an ayunda de camera or servant of the bedchamber, later on being appointed secretary of the Privy Council. Entrusted with the kind of diplomatic missions that used to be handled by Peckius, Rubens finally rose to knighthood and a lordship of the manor.

Conclusion

24As the 1620s turned into the 1630s, the archducal regime began falling apart. The Infanta Isabella was now a venerable relic from the past, left over from the previous generation. All she wanted was to end her days in the seclusion of the “Descalzas reales”. For all intents and purposes the Court had ceased to function. The arrival of the exiled Queen Marie de’Medici brought a sudden reawakening, but it went as suddenly as it had come. Discontent spread among the aristocracy. Commands in the army were again hard to come by. Netherlandish noblemen were ousted and replaced by Castilians. The established councils were only consulted for trifles. All major issues were settled in Madrid. The war went from bad to worse. ’s-Hertogenbosch, the city that was considered impregnable, fell to Prince Frederik Hendrik in 1629, Maestricht was captured in 1632. In the end a group of aristocrats conspired to overthrow Habsburg rule. Their conspiracy ended in dismal failure. When the plot was discovered in November 1633, the ringleaders, Hendrik van den Bergh, Count of ’s-Herenberg, Alexander de Bournonville, Count of Hénin-Liétard, and Guillaume de Melun, Prince of Épinoy, fled the country. They were condemned to death in their absence and their estates were seized. Philippe-Charles of Arenberg, Duke of Aarschot, whose involvement could not be proven, was put under house-arrest in Madrid. His brother, the capuchin father Carolus of Brussels, was told to stay away from the Netherlands (Janssens, 1992, p. 23-40).

25The Infanta Isabella died on 1 December 1633. The government was in such dire straits that it could not afford the cost of a funeral that would befit her rank. Instead an almost private ceremony was held during the night. With Isabella’s death the archducal regime came to an end. The regime had reconstructed Habsburg rule over the Netherlands. The Court and its opportunities for advancement and favour had been its instrument to reconcile the interests of the aristocracy with those of the dynasty. Patronage of the arts, by commission and by validation, had been the regime’s tool to propagate its ethos. The actual distribution of commissions was greatly influenced by the politics of faction. It was highly symbolic that the advent of the archducal regime almost coincided with the birth of Van Dyck. It was equally symbolic that its demise came little more than a year after he had left for the Court of Whitehall.