In the 16th and 17th centuries, genre paintings featuring dancing peasants were enormously popular in the Low Countries. The Peasant Dance and The Wedding Dance by Pieter Bruegel the Elder are iconic. Artworks depicting the dancing elite, nonetheless, were equally in demand. Dutch and Flemish artists depicted elegant couples dancing in courtyards, banquet halls, and gardens. In an earlier post, Court Dancing in the Age of Bruegel, I looked at court dancing indoors. This post will take us outdoors, presenting refined dancers frolicking in picturesque gardens, architectural fantasies, and panoramic landscapes.

The painting Elegant Company in a Garden, by Joris Hoefnagel (1542-1600/1) or an artist in his circle, presents courtiers feasting and dancing on a rectangular grassy lawn in front of a Renaissance-style villa. Note how the artist draws our attention towards the elite, dancing figures; the white tones of the woman’s skirt stand out vividly against the other, more earthy tones. The couple, in all probability, is dancing a fashionable Renaissance upper-class dance, the galliard. It is a lively dance in triple time, comprising swift jumps and leaps combined with intricate footwork. In contrast to improvised peasant dancing, the nobles were skilled dancers who trained regularly with (Italian) dance masters. Choreographically, the galliard was a physically demanding dance for both performers. Moreover, this vibrant dance provided the elite male dancer an opportunity to exhibit his vitality and virility.

The assemblage of dancers, musicians, and nobles cannot, however, conceal the bizarre elements scattered throughout the painting. The lower layer, approximately one-third of the painting’s surface, is filled with birds of different plumage. It is not surprising to discover birds in Hoefnagel’s paintings; he is known for his highly accurate illustrations of fauna and flora. But a continuous row of birds, including a cormorant, an owl, a jay, and a pheasant, placed beneath a cordial social scene, makes one wonder. Iconographically, the bird is often a symbol of greed, vanity, and haughtiness. The owl, now often associated with wisdom, was in Hoefnagel’s time an allegory for lust and stupidity. Does that explain why the artist has perched an enormous owl on a tree branch? The owl appears to be almost the same height as the feasting nobles. But the most bizarre of all the symbols is the ugly, nude female figure looking towards the festivities from behind a hedge. A close look reveals a serpent crawling around her torso and reaching into her mouth. The figure is Invidia (Envy), an allegory representing lust and greed, one of the Seven Deadly Sins. To assist the audience, the artist has incorporated an inscription featuring the name ‘Invidia’. (1)

During the Northern Renaissance, the church denounced music and dance. Music, except church music, was considered reprehensible. Dancing fared no better. Hoefnagel weaves an explicit moral message into his work with the help of music and dance imagery. The artist subtly warns his audience of the illicit nature of this unchaste amusement, which inadvertently leads to pride, indiscretion, and lust. The educated citizen of the time understood the intended symbolism.

Sixteenth-century paintings featuring elegant Renaissance dancers, musicians, and amorous couples without religious or moral connotations are uncommon. The painting Elegant Couples Dancing in a Landscape, however, created by Ambrosius Benson (c. 1495-1550), is exactly such an artwork. Benson, an Italian artist, relocated to Bruges early in his career. He became an important link between Italian and Flemish art. Benson is primarily known for his portraits and religious works; Elegant Couples Dancing in a Landscape forms a unique piece within his extensive oeuvre.

The customary dance-related artwork in the 16th century, peasant or elite dance, was, respectively, a bird’s-eye view of a village festivity or a ballroom scene presented from a balcony or similar high vantage point. The scene, whether indoors or outdoors, was boisterous and crowded. The dancing figures, and all the other figures for that matter, were relatively small. Benson’s painting, presenting a scene of three elite couples dancing outside in a park, is a marked deviation from the traditional conventions.

In Elegant Couples Dancing in a Landscape, the dancers are full figures that cover the entire central section of the panel. The face and expression of each dancer are distinct. In fact, the ladies’ faces appear to glow in the sunlight. The men have a darker skin tone, possibly shaded by foliage or clouds. Each dancer is unique, and each figure has an individual personality and identity. The costumes are impeccable; they are rendered with accuracy, immediately drawing attention to the quality of the various fabrics. Yet the most outstanding feature is that the dancers appear to move. In the mid-16th century, elite dancers were illustrated statically, either poised in a refined, stationary pose or promenading with composure.

Benson’s dancers are lively. They revolve, dart, spring, and rotate their torsos gracefully. The group appears to dance in a circular formation. One couple dances back-to-back, while another faces the front, lifting one arm above shoulder height. The man in the centre front is a true mover; he lunges passionately towards his lady. Though virile and energetic, he takes a mere second place to the male dancer wearing the silver-coloured apparel; he is absolutely stunning in his metallic-coloured breeches and stockings. Prominent as he is, his curious bearing raises questions. His feet, for example, are rushing forward, but his upper body is forcefully rotated towards his partner. This movement is difficult to perform, but then to additionally place the right arm behind the back, touching the partner’s hand and simultaneously placing the other arm around her waist, is physically improbable. Has Benson painted a dance action in mid-movement? Or has a lack of space forced him to contort the figure? Despite my reservations about the physical probability of the movement, Benson’s rendering of motion was innovative in his time. This painting, if the date 1540 as suggested by the Utah Museum of Fine Arts is reasonably accurate, was created at least a quarter of a century before Bruegel the Elder’s revolutionary peasant dance paintings.

To return to the more traditional composition; envision standing on a hilltop overlooking an expansive scene featuring festive nobles, an enclosed garden with dancing figures, barges sailing in a lake, and an impressive Renaissance palace. Le Jardin d’Amour offers the viewer precisely such a picturesque scene. The painting, created by an anonymous Flemish artist, is based on a work by David Vinckboons (1576-1632). Vinckboons’ original design has been lost. His artwork has been preserved through an engraving by Nicolaes de Bruyn (1604). The oil painting, shown below, is based either on Vinckboon’s original design or on De Bruyn’s engraving.(2)

Despite the abundance of activity, only the dancing couple truly stands out. They are flamboyantly positioned in the foreground. Unlike the clusters of tender couples affectionately caressing each other, these dancers are detached. The lady, wearing voluminous robes embellished with an Elizabethan collar, leans slightly backward in a gentle s-curve. Her partner is more animated; one leg is lifted, so we can assume that he either hops or has just descended after jumping some elaborate step. The artist offers little information about the particular dance, if any, that the couple is executing. The painting does tell us, however, that these dancers are trained to perform fashionable choreographed dances which they execute with aristocratic sophistication.

The painting is constructed on various levels. The foreground is reserved for nobles to enjoy a picnic, converse, and embrace, all accompanied by a flurry of musicians. I discovered a lute, a viol, and a viola da gamba. At the centre level, miniature figures meander, dance, and play in an enclosed garden. You can distinguish nobles strolling, a dog, a line dance (a branle?) and dancing couples. These, too, are accompanied by musicians. A closer look reveals a stringed keyboard instrument, possibly a harpsichord, and a lute. Finally, the lake forms a passage towards a scenic background with a palace and panorama.

How to interpret Jardin d’Amour? On the one hand, the composition presents a merry company set against a spectacular background. The leading dance couple invites the audience to ‘participate’ in the celebrations. There is also another possible reading; it was not uncommon in 16th- and 17th- century Dutch and Flemish art to portray a religious subject within a contemporary setting. Art scholar Kahren Hellerstedt recognises the dancing figure as Mary Magdalene, drawing a comparison between Vinckboons’ artwork and an earlier engraving, ‘The Worldly Life of Mary Magdalene‘ by Lucas van Leyden (1519).(3)

Imagine my surprise to discover a practically identical dancing couple, as depicted in Vinckboons’ work, featured in The Hortus Voluptatum (Garden of Love), a collection of prints by engraver Crispijn de Passe the Elder. The Hortus Voluptatum serves as a guidebook for youthful aristocracy, discussing courtship and social behaviour in a worldly and sensual manner. On plate 33 of this enlightening guide, Crispijn de Passe, like Vinckboons’, situates the scene within a garden of delight. The dancing figures, along with the lovers and musicians, gather in the idyllic foreground. The scene is completed with a delicately rendered Renaissance palace, a church, and a vast skyscape.

The print, published in 1599, was presumably inspired by Vinckboons’ initial design. If Vinckboons’ original work has a religious connotation, this work is definitely secular. The couple in an embrace and the man on the right, who is charming a reluctant lady, are enough to suggest a sensual undertone. De Passe has drawn the dancers in the foreground, enabling a detailed view of their movements and their expressions. It is obvious that the nimble gentleman does his utmost to impress his graceful companion. Should there be any uncertainty regarding the meaning of the print, the inscription, discussing how music enchants the ears and excites the senses, will clear up any misunderstanding.

And finally, Outdoor Merry Company, a work by the master himself, David Vinckboons. Vinckboons, a Flemish painter who moved to the Dutch Republic after the Spanish occupation of Antwerp in 1585, introduced a new variety of genre painting: the gallant company. An early example is La Fête Champêtre, a work I referred to in Dance Images – The Dutch Golden Age. Outdoor Merry Company presents a similar idyllic scene of extravagant nobles engaging in courtship, music, and dancing. The dancers in this work are comparable to the dancing couples mentioned in the preceding works.

Outdoor Merry Company presents the epitome of elegance and opulence. However, as is common in 16th- and 17th-century Dutch and Flemish art, this work is multi-layered. We see nobles indulging in a hedonistic lifestyle. The artist, nonetheless, points out that these are but transient pleasures. Another layer shifts the painting from a moralistic to a religious theme. The dancer in this painting is also interpreted as Mary Magdalene prior to her conversion. The tiny, indistinct vista nestled among the trees makes the interpretation more puzzling. The viewer may interpret the painting at will.

_{1 – See ‘Elegant Gezelscap in een Tuin – Een muzikaal schilderij vol zestiende-eeuwse wijsheid’ by Timothy de Paepe for an in depth study of ‘Elegant Dancers in a Garden.’ – The Phoebus Foundation, ISBN 978 90 828 2909 9 Antwerp 2019 – In Dutch only.}

_{2. Nicolaes de Bruyn’s engraving ‘Festivities in a Garden of a Palace’ is also titled ‘Pleasures of St Mary Magdalene. Festivities in the garden of a palace, with musicians, dancing, and boats on canals’. The Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam dates the work as 1604. Other sources give different dates, but all before 1610.}

_{3. Kahren Hellerstedt in her 1986 catalogue used the title ‘The Dance of Mary Magdalene’, identifying the principal female figure dancing in the foreground as that saint. Historian Larry Silver suggested ‘Pleasures of St Mary Magdalene. Festivities in the garden of a palace, with musicians, dancing, and boats on canals, after David Vinckboons’ in his book ‘Peasant Scenes and Landscape The Rise of Pictorial Genres in the Antwerp Art Market’ – University of Pennsylvania, 2006.}