Dynastic Colonialism: Gender, Materiality and the Early Modern House of Orange-Nassau (Routledge Research in Early Modern History) [1 ed.] 1138953369, 9781138953369

Citation preview

Dynastic Colonialism

‘Dynastic Colonialism is a richly detailed book that offers a refreshing take on colonial expansion in the pre-industrial age. Well-presented and lucidly written, it offers an important contribution to this major field in early modern history.’ –Danielle van den Heuvel, University of Kent, UK Dynastic Colonialism analyses how women and men employed objects in particular places across the world during the early modern period in order to achieve the remarkable expansion of the House of Orange-Nassau. Susan Broomhall and Jacqueline Van Gent explore how the House emerged as a leading force during a period in which the Dutch accrued one of the greatest seaborne empires. Using the concept of dynastic colonialism, they explore strategic behaviours undertaken on behalf of the House of Orange-Nassau, through material culture in a variety of sites of interpretation from palaces and gardens to prints and teapots, in Europe and beyond. Using over 130 carefully selected images, the authors consider a wide range of visual, material, and textual sources including portraits, glassware, tiles, letters, architecture, and global spaces in order to rethink dynastic power and identity in gendered terms. Through the House of Orange-Nassau, Broomhall and Van Gent demonstrate how dynasties could assert status and power by enacting a range of colonising strategies. Dynastic Colonialism offers an exciting new interpretation of the complex story of the House of Orange-Nassau’s rise to power in the early modern period through material means that will make fascinating reading for students and scholars of early modern European history, material culture, and gender. Susan Broomhall is Professor of Early Modern History at The University of Western Australia. Her previous publications include Women and the Book Trade in SixteenthCentury France (2002), Women’s Medical Work in Early Modern France (2004), Women and Religion in Sixteenth-Century France (2005), (with Jennifer Spinks), Early Modern Women in the Low Countries: Feminising sources and interpretations of the past (2011), and (with Jacqueline Van Gent) Gender, Power and Identity in the Early Modern House of Orange-Nassau (2016). Jacqueline Van Gent is Associate Professor of Early Modern History at The University of Western Australia. Her previous publications include (co-edited with Raisa Toivo) “Gender, Objects and Emotions in Scandinavian History”, Special Issue of Journal of Scandinavian History (2016), and (with Susan Broomhall) Gender, Power and Identity in the Early Modern House of Orange-Nassau (2016) and Magic, Body and the Self in Eighteenth-Century Sweden (2009).

Routledge Research in Early Modern History

In the same series: Penury into Plenty Dearth and the Making of Knowledge in Early Modern England by Ayesha Mukherjee Violence and Emotions in Early Modern Europe edited by Susan Broomhall and Sarah Finn India in the Italian Renaissance Visions of a Contemporary Pagan World 1300–1600 by Meera Juncu The English Revolution and the Roots of Environmental Change The Changing Concept of the Land in Early Modern England by George Yerby Honourable Intentions? Violence and Virtue in Australian and Cape Colonies, c. 1750 to 1850 edited by Penny Russell and Nigel Worden Social Thought in England, 1480–1730 From Body Social to Worldly Wealth by A. L. Beier Dynastic Colonialism Gender, Materiality and the Early Modern House of Orange-Nassau by Susan Broomhall and Jacqueline Van Gent

Dynastic Colonialism Gender, materiality and the early modern house of Orange-Nassau

Susan Broomhall and Jacqueline Van Gent

First published 2016 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2016 Susan Broomhall and Jacqueline Van Gent The right of Susan Broomhall and Jacqueline Van Gent to be identified as authors of this work has been asserted by them in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Broomhall, Susan. | Van Gent, Jacqueline. Title: Dynastic colonialism : gender, materiality and the early modern House of Orange-Nassau / Susan Broomhall and Jacqueline Van Gent. Description: London : Routledge, 2016. | Series: Routledge research in early modern history | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2015037152| ISBN 9781138953369 (hardback : alkaline paper) | ISBN 9781315636887 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Orange-Nassau, House of. | Sex role—Europe—History. | Material culture—Europe—History. | Power (Social sciences)— Europe—History. | Netherlands—Colonies—History. | Netherlands— Territorial expansion—History. | Netherlands—History—1648–1714. | Netherlands—Relations—Europe. | Europe—Relations—Europe. Classification: LCC DJ150 .B75 2016 | DDC 940.2/2—dc23 LC record available at http://lccn.loc.gov/2015037152 ISBN: 978-1-138-95336-9 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-315-63688-7 (ebk) Typeset in Times New Roman by Swales & Willis Ltd, Exeter, Devon, UK

Contents

List of figures Acknowledgements Notes on naming conventions Introduction

vii xv xvii 1

PA RT 1

Claiming spaces

19

1 Propagating the Orange: gender, material culture and the early modern trajectory of the House of Orange-Nassau

21

2 Planting the Orange: the expansion of the House of Orange-Nassau across Europe

83

3 Trading places: Orange-Nassau involvement in Dutch colonial expansion

131

PA RT 2

Materialising power

167

4 Object Orange: material culture in the rise of the House of Orange-Nassau

169

5 Collecting the world: Orange-Nassau global power on display in Europe

223

Conclusions Bibliography Index

295 299 331

This Page is Intentionally Left Blank

Figures

1.1 Circle of Dirck Barendsz., Portrait of Willem I, Prince of 22 Orange, Called Willem the Silent, 1582–92 1.2 Workshop of Wybrand de Geest, Group Portrait of the Four Brothers of Willem I, Prince of Orange: The Counts of Nassau 23 Johann, Heinrich, Adolf and Ludwig, c. 1630 1.3 Antonis Mor, Portrait of Willem I van Nassau, Prince of 25 Orange and Stadtholder (1533–1584), 1555 1.4 Michiel Jansz. van Mierevelt, Portrait of Maurits, Prince of Orange, c. 1613–30 26 1.5 Workshop of Michiel Jansz. van Mierevelt, Frederik Hendrik, Prince of Orange, c. 1632 27 1.6 Michiel Jansz. van Mierevelt, Portrait of Prince Filips 28 Willem of Orange, c. 1608 1.7 Cornelis de Man, The Gold Weigher, c. 1675 29 1.8 Anonymous, Roemer with the Arms and the Motto of Maurits, 1606 30 1.9 Anonymous, Roemer with the Coats of Arms of Maurits and Prince Filips Willem, 1608 31 1.10 Workshop of Jan Antonisz. van Ravesteyn, Portrait of Philipp von Hohenlohe-Neuenstein, c. 1609–33 32 1.11 Workshop of Michiel Jansz. van Mierevelt, Portrait of Wilhelm Ludwig von Nassau-Dillenburg, Nicknamed Our 33 Father in West Frisian, 1609 1.12 Pauwels van Hillegaert, Frederik Hendrik and Ernst Casimir 34 van Nassau-Dietz at the Siege of ’s Hertogenbosch, c. 1629–35 1.13 Follower of Adriaen Pietersz. van de Venne, Prince Maurits Accompanied by his Two Brothers, Friedrich V, Elector 34 Palatine, and Counts of Nassau on Horseback, c. 1625 1.14 Workshop of Jan Antonisz. van Ravesteyn, Portrait of Justinus van Nassau, Illegitimate Son of Prince Willem I and Eva Elinckx, c. 1609–33 35 1.15 Workshop of Michiel Jansz. van Mierevelt, Portrait of Ernst Casimir I, Count of Nassau-Dietz, c. 1623–33 36

viii Figures 1.16 Simon Frisius, Maurits’s Investiture with the Order of 37 the Garter, 1613, 1613 1.17 Willem Jacobsz. Delff, Portrait of Louise de Coligny, 1627 38 1.18 Dirck van Delen, A Family beside the Tomb of Prince 39 Willem I in the Nieuwe Kerk, Delft, 1645 1.19 Gerrit van Honthorst, Portrait of Frederik Hendrik (1584–1647), Prince of Orange, his Wife Amalia von Solms (1602–1675) and their Three Youngest Daughters Albertine Agnes (1634–1696), Henriëtte Catharina (1637–1708), and 42 Maria (1642–1688), c. 1647 1.20 Anthony Van Dyck, Willem II, Prince of Orange, and 44 his Bride, Mary Henrietta Stuart, 1641 1.21 Gerrit van Honthorst, Portrait of Friedrich Wilhelm, Elector of Brandenburg, with his Wife Louise Henriëtte, Countess of Nassau, 1647 45 1.22 Gerrit van Honthorst, Portrait of Willem II (1626–1650), Prince of Orange, and his Wife Mary Henrietta Stuart 46 (1631–1660), 1647 1.23 Thomas Willeboirts Bosschaert, Mars Receives the 47 Weapons from Venus and Vulcan: Allegory, 1624–54 1.24 Wybrand de Geest, Portrait of Willem Frederik, Count of 48 Nassau-Dietz, 1632 1.25 Anonymous, Portrait of a Boy, possibly Lodewijk van Nassau, later Lord of Beverweerd, De Leck, Odijk and Lekkerkerk, Illegitimate Son of Maurits, Prince of Orange, and Margaretha van Mechelen, 1604 50 1.26 Bartholomeus van der Helst, Mary Henrietta Stuart, 51 Princess of Orange, as Widow of Willem II, 1652 1.27 Adriaen Hanneman, Portrait of Willem III, Prince of 52 Orange, as a Child, 1654 1.28 Anon, Willem III (1650–1702), when Prince of Orange 53 1.29 Theodoor van Thulden, Allegory of the Farewell of Willem III from Amalia von Solms Following the Transfer 54 of Regency to the States General, 1661 1.30 Jan de Baen, Willem III when Prince of Orange (1650–1702), 55 c. 1667 1.31 Circle of Charles Boit, Portrait miniature of Mary II Stuart, wife of Willem III, copper, 3.2 cm × 2.7 cm, Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-4301 56 1.32 Pieter Nason, Four Generations of the Princes of Orange: Willem I, Maurits and Frederik Hendrik, Willem II and 57 Willem III, c. 1660–62 1.33 Diamond-engraved glass flute depicting Willem III. North Netherlands. c. 1665–72 58 1.34 Tiles with blue and white portraits of Henriëtte Catharina, Frederik Hendrik, Albertine Agnes and Frederik Hendrik [again], 1653–65 59

Figures ix 1.35 De Grieksche A, Samuel van Eenhoorn, Bust of Mary II Stuart, c. 1680–90 60 1.36 Johannes van Oosterwyk, Matthijs Pool, Portrait of 61 Johann Willem Friso, Prince of Orange-Nassau, 1716 1.37 Johann Philipp Behr, Portrait of Marie Louise von Hessen-Kassel, Called Maaike-Meu. Widow of the Stadtholder of Friesland Johann Willem Friso, Prince of Orange-Nassau, 62 c. 1720–56 1.38 Philip van Dijk, Portrait of Marie Louise von Hessen-Kassel, Princess of Orange (1688–1765), with her Children, Prince Willem IV and Princess Amalia, 1725 62 1.39 Anonymous, Portrait of Willem IV, Prince of Orange, c. 1750 63 1.40 Bowl featuring Willem IV and Anne of Hanover, Chinese 63 and Netherlandish porcelain, c. 1734 1.41 Attributed to Johann Valentin Tischbein, Portrait of Anne of Hanover, Princess Royal and Princess of Orange, 64 Consort of Prince Willem IV, 1753 1.42 Anonymous, lidded goblet with monograms and portraits of Anne of Hanover, Willem V and Carolina van Nassau, c. 1750–59 65 1.43 Johann Georg Ziesenis, Portrait of Willem V, Prince of 66 Orange-Nassau, 1763–76 1.44 Reinier Vinkeles, Portrait of Wilhelmine von Preußen, on 67 Horseback, 1779 1.45 Willem Joseph Laquy, Meeting of Princess Wilhelmine and her Brother King Friedrich Wilhelm II of Prussia, 1788 68 1.46 Anonymous, teapot with portraits of Willem V and Wilhelmine von Preußen, c. 1780–90 69 1.47 Anonymous, plate with an orange tree and portraits of Willem V and Wilhelmine von Preußen, c. 1780–95 70 1.48 Anonymous, creamware plate with Orange inscription, 1775–1800 70 1.49 Pieter Lesage, Willem V (1748–1806), Prince of Orange-Nassau, with his Wife (Frederika Sophia) Wilhelmine von Preußen and their children (Frederica) Louise (Wilhelmina), 71 Willem (Frederik) and (Willem George) Frederik, 1779 1.50 Anonymous, Portrait of Willem (Frederik), Prince of Orange-Nassau, later King Willem I, as a Child, c. 1775 72 1.51 Anonymous, (Willem George) Frederik, Prince of 73 Orange-Nassau, as a Child, c. 1775 1.52 Joseph Paelinck, Portrait of Willem I, King of the 74 Netherlands, 1819 2.1 Johann Jakob Walther, Portrait of Johann von Nassau-Idstein 86 2.2 Johann Jakob Walther, Simulacrum Scenographicum Celeberrimi Horti Itzsteinensis; the Idstein Florilegium, c. 1654–72 87 2.3 Pieter Post, etched by Jan Mathys, The Hall of Orange Built by H.R.H. Amalia, Dowager Princess of Orange, etc. 90 (Amsterdam: F. de Witt, c. 1650)

x Figures 2.4 Govert Flinck, Amalia von Solms in Mourning for her Husband, Prince Frederik Hendrik (Allegory of the Memory of Frederik Hendrik, Prince of Orange, with the 92 Portrait of his Widow Amalia von Solms), 1654 2.5 Cornelius Janssen or van Ceulen, Louise Henriëtte van Nassau, Electress of Brandenburg 94 2.6 Exterior of Schloss Oranienburg 95 2.7 Orphanage established by Louise Henriëtte van Nassau, Oranienburg, Germany 97 2.8 Crest of Louise Henriëtte at the orphanage in Oranienburg, Germany 97 2.9 Jan Mijtens, Henriëtte Catharina van Nassau, Princess of Anhalt-Dessau 99 2.10 Adriaen Thomasz. Key, Portrait of Maria van Nassau (c.1580–90) 100 2.11 The exterior of the orphanage established by Maria van Nassau, Buren, the Netherlands 101 2.12 The gate at the orphanage established by Maria van Nassau, Buren, the Netherlands 102 2.13 Gerrit van Honthorst, Amalia von Solms-Braunfels as 103 Flora, c. 1629 2.14 House for widows established by Henriëtte Catharina van Nassau, Oranienbaum, Germany 107 2.15 Depiction of the Home of the most August and Serene Prince Frederik Hendrik of Nassau, Prince of Orange, which is Honselaarsdijk (c. 1640) 113 2.16 Isaac de Moucheron [engraved by Cornelis Danckaerts] General View in Perspective of the Mansion or Royal Pleasure House of His Majesty the King of Great Britain etc. at Loo (Amsterdam: Justus Danckaerts, 1698) 114 2.17 Daniël Stoopendaal, View of Zeist House with its Gardens and Plantations Belonging to the Count of Nassau (Amsterdam: [N. Visscher], c. 1700) 115 2.18 Leonard Scherm, Pleasure House of His Excellency the Earl of Albemarle at Voorst, (1700) 116 2.19 Daniël Stoopendaal after Isaac de Moucheron, Plan or View of Heemstede in the Province of Utrecht (Amsterdam: [N. Visscher], c. 1700) 117 2.20 Jan vande Avelen, and Nicolaas Visscher, The Orangery in the Park of Zorgvliet, one of the most beautiful in Holland (Amsterdam: Johannes Covens and Cornelis Mortier, c. 1700) 118 3.1 Anonymous, Copy of the Original Title Picture for Houtman’s 132 Journal of Dutch Ships Going to the East Indies, 1598 3.2 Michiel Jansz. van Mierevelt, Johann Moritz von Nassau136 Siegen, ca 1636, 1637 3.3 Jan van Brosterhuyzen and Johannes Willemszoon Blaeu, 144 View of Mauritsstad, c. 1637, 1645–7

Figures xi 3.4 Attributed to Frans Post, View of Mauritsstad from the Land, c. 1650 145 3.5 Albert Eckhout, Dance of the Tapuya Indians, c. 1640 147 3.6 Albert Eckhout, Tupi Woman, c. 1641 147 3.7 Theodor Matham and Frans Jansz Post, Portrait of Johann 149 Moritz van Nassau-Siegen, 1635–76 3.8 Caspar von Schmalkalden, Brazilian Raven (Ara-Papagei), c. 1642 151 3.9 Residence of Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen in Brazil in Zacharias Wagener, ‘Thierbuch’ 152 3.10 Anonymous, Palace Vrijburg, Mauritsstad, Brazil, 1642–79 153 3.11 Pineapples, aquarelle, in Zacharias Wagener, ‘Thierbuch’ 154 3.12 Tapyan dance, aquarelle, in Zacharias Wagener, ‘Thierbuch’ 155 3.13 Maquaqua, aquarelle, in Zacharias Wagener, ‘Thierbuch’ 155 3.14 Tayimbagh, aquarelle, in Zacharias Wagener, Thierbuch’ 156 3.15 Jan van Brosterhuyzen, Salomon Savery, Johannes Willemszoon Blaeu, View of Boavista in Mauritsstad, ca. 1636–1644, c. 1645–7 157 4.1 Pieter Hermansz Verlest, Lady with an Orange, c. 1653 176 4.2 Pieter Tanjé, Portrait of Prince Willem V and Princess Carolina of Orange-Nassau as Children, 1751 177 4.3 Jan Mijtens, Albertine Agnes van Nassau, Duchess of 178 Nassau-Dietz, c. 1660 4.4 Jan Mijtens, Maria van Nassau, Duchess of Pfalz-Simmern 179 4.5 Abraham van den Tempel, Albertine Agnes with her 180 Children, 1668 4.6 Cast-iron fireplace plate in the Large Hall, Schloss Oranienbaum (with coat of arms of the Orange-Nassau dynasty and Anhalt, and an orange tree) 181 4.7 Samuel Theodor Gericke, Glorifying Friedrich I as 183 Prince of Orange (sketch for a ceiling painting), 1713 4.8 Willem de Rots, Cabinet of Amalia von Solms, c. 1652–7 184 4.9 De Grieksche A, Adrianus Kocx, Two Plaques from a Column, c. 1690 187 4.10 De Grieksche A, Adrianus Kocx, Two Plaques from a Column, c. 1690 188 4.11 De Grieksche A, Adrianus Kocx, Vase designed after Daniël Marot the Elder, c. 1690 189 4.12 Daniël Marot, Ball in the Huis ten Bosch in Honour of the Birthday of the Prince of Orange, 1686, c. 1686–7 190 4.13 Romein de Hooghe and Pieter Persoy, Queen Mary II 191 Stuart on her Deathbed, 1695, 1695 4.14 De Grieksche A, Adrianus Kocx, Two Flower Holders, 192 c. 1690–1700 4.15 Etching after Daniël Marot, title page from Livre d’Appartement Inventé par D. Marot Architect du Roy, c. 1712 194 4.16 A pair of Delftware pyramid flower vases that stand on either side of a small table at Dyrham Park, Gloucestershire 195

xii Figures 4.17 Iron orange tree, erected in the Market Square in Oranienbaum in 1719, in memory of Henriëtte Catharina. Kulturstiftung Dessau Wörlitz 200 4.18 Schloss Mosigkau, built 1752–7, view from the front 201 4.19 Brown cabinet with fireplace wall, porcelain collection and Dutch flower painting [from the estate of Henriëtte Catharina van Nassau] at Schloss Mosigkau 201 4.20 Banquet hall with collection of paintings from the Orange inheritance at Mosigkau 202 4.21 Christian Friedrich Reinhold Lisiewski, Portrait of Anna Wilhelmine von Anhalt-Dessau, Daughter of Leopold I, c. 1745 203 4.22 Ceiling painting depicting Frederik Hendrik, originally at Oranienbaum 204 4.23 Königliche Porzellanmanufaktur (KPM), porcelain chandelier of pineapples, given to Wilhelmine von Preußen and Willem V, 1767 205 4.24 Anthony Van Dyck, James, Seventh Earl of Derby, his Lady and Child, 1632–41 206 4.25 Funeral monument of John Murray, first Marquess and Amelia Stanley, Marchioness of Atholl 207 4.26 Portraits on the walls of the Picture Staircase 209 4.27 The head of the Picture Staircase, showing a full-length portrait of the second Duke of Atholl facing a portrait of Willem van Nassau, Prince of Orange 210 5.1 Soapstone oriental figures in Henriette Amalie von Anhalt-Dessau’s collection at Wörlitz, part of her inheritance from Henriëtte Catharina 225 5.2 Porcelain from Henriëtte Catharina’s collection in front of her gilded leather wallpaper at Oranienbaum 226 5.3 Anonymous, Lacquer Room, before 1695 227 5.4 Pieter Nason, Prinz Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen 231 5.5 Frans Post (attributed), Pernambuco from the Seaside, on the Left, Recife, in the Middle, Mauritsstad and Vrijburg, and Right Castrum Waerdenburch, c. 1637–44 235 5.6 Frans Post, A Brazilian Landscape, 1650 236 5.7 Frans Post, Brazilian Landscape, c. 1660 236 5.8 Adriaen Hanneman, Posthumous Portrait of Mary Henrietta 237 Stuart (1631–1660) with a Servant, c. 1664 5.9 Nathaniel Thach, A Woman in Masque Costume, probably 238 a Daughter of Elizabeth of Bohemia, 1649 5.10 Jacob II de Gheyn, Spanish Warhorse Captured at the Battle of Nieuwpoort by Ludwig Günther von Nassau-Siegen from Archduke Albert of Austria, Given to Stadtholder 242 Maurits, 1603 5.11 Manufacture Royale des Gobelins, Albert Eckhout, Frans Jansz Post, Fishermen, c. 1692–1723 244

Figures xiii 5.12 Baptiste Monnoyer, Jean-Baptiste Belin de Fontenay, René-Antoine Houasse, François Bonnemer, with later additions by Alexandre-François Desportes, Tapestry: le Cheval Rayé from Les Anciennes Indes Series, c. 1692–1730 245 5.13 Albert Eckhout, A Cocoa Tree and Roasting Hut, c. 1641–4 246 250 5.14 Oranienburg Palace, porcelain cabinet, porcelain étagère 5.15 Johann Jakob Walther, The fantasy grotto at the castle of Idstein, gouache on vellum 252 5.16 Abraham Snaphaen, Die Teegesellschaft, c. 1690 253 5.17 Daniël Marot, Nouvelles Cheminée faitte en plusiers endroits de la Hollande et autres Provinces, c. 1703 256 5.18 Porcelain Chamber ceiling painting, Allegory of the Triumph of Porcelain (1697) by August Terwesten, at Oranienburg 258 5.19 Porcelain Cabinet at Charlottenburg Palace. Stiftung Preußische Schlösser und Gärten Berlin-Brandenburg 259 5.20 Chinese Gallery at Charlottenburg Palace 260 5.21 Fliesensaal at Caputh Palace. Stiftung Preußische Schlösser und Gärten Berlin-Brandenburg 260 5.22 Ceiling painting in Porcelain Cabinet at Caputh Palace. Stiftung Preußische Schlösser und Gärten Berlin-Brandenburg 261 5.23 Ceiling painting in Tea Cabinet at Caputh Palace. Stiftung Preußische Schlösser und Gärten Berlin-Brandenburg 262 5.24 Meissener Porzellan Manufaktur, seven plates from the 265 service of Willem V, c. 1772–4 5.25 Anonymous, plate with the arms of Nassau and Prussia, 1789–90 266 5.26 Jansz. van Riujven, chimneypiece with Delftware, 1719 267 5.27 Claes Jansz. Visscher II, Cassowary, Brought by Willem 269 Jacobsz. from the East Indies and Donated to Maurits, 1614 5.28 Caspar Netscher, Portrait of Mary II Stuart (1662–95), 270 Wife of Prince Willem III, c. 1683 5.29 Melchior d’Hondecoeter, The Menagerie, c. 1690 271 5.30 Johann Jakob Walther, Apples, Pears, Quince, Pumpkin, Corn, Rosehip, Greenbean Pod, Fruit of the Opium Poppy, and Hazelnuts, Chestnuts and a Brazilian Tanager 273 5.31 Anonymous, necklace (candmala), c. 1750 274 5.32 Tethart Philip Christian Haag, Orang-Utan from the 276 Zoo of Willem V, Picking an Apple, 1777

This Page is Intentionally Left Blank

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by a grant of the Australian Research Council, and we are very grateful to the Council for its financial support. We would like to thank our project team members, Susie Protschky at Monash University and Michaela Hohkamp at Hanover University, for their fellowship, exchange of ideas and support, and for their research in cognate areas that has enlightened ours. Scholars in many varied research institutions, archives, libraries, galleries and historic sites have supported and enabled our work. In particular, we are sincerely grateful for the generous assistance of staff at the Koninklijk Huis Archief in The Hague (especially Mrs Hélène J. de Muij-Fleurke [now retired], Ms Krista van Loon and Mrs Charlotte Eymael), the Museum Buren en Oranje, the VVV Tourist Office Breda; Hessisches Hauptstaatsarchiv Wiesbaden (Dr. Rouven Pons), Stiftung Preußische Schlösser und Gärten– Sanssouci, Schloß Charlottenburg, Oranienburg, Archiv Oranienbaum in Landeshauptarchiv Sachsen-Anhalt in Dessau; Jean-Luc Tulot, the Archives nationales de France; and Archivist Jane Anderson at Blair Castle, Scotland. For permission to reproduce images, we thank the Amsterdam Historical Museum, Bibliothèque nationale de France, the British Library Board, the Collectie Keramiekmuseum Princessenhof, Country Life Picture Library, the Frick Collection, the Fries museum in Leeuwarden, Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister in Kassel, the Holland Museum in Michigan and the private owner of Gold Weigher, the House of Hohenzollern, Kulturstiftung Dessau Wörlitz, the Museum het Prinsenhof, The Mauritshuis, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the National Trust, the National Museum of Denmark, Paleis Het Loo, the Paul J. Getty Museum, the Rijksmuseum, the Royal Collection Trust, the Siegerlandmuseum, Staatliche Sammlungen Dresden, Kupferstichkabinett, the Stiftung Preußische Schlösser und Gärten Berlin-Brandenburg, the Universitäts-und Forschungsbibliothek Erfurt in Gotha, and the Victoria and Albert Museum. Many colleagues have shared ideas and thoughts on emerging research. We would like to thank the Umeå University Graduate Centre for Gender Studies Visiting Fellowship 2012–14, which provided Jacqueline with the opportunity to present our emerging work in May 2012. We are grateful to Nadine Akkermann, Jane Davidson, James Daybell, Yasmin Haskell, Andrew

xvi Acknowledgements Lynch, Jeremy Martens, Philippa Maddern, Svante Norrhem, Jenny Spinks, Stephanie Tarbin, and Bob White for their support and friendship over the years. In Perth, we would not have been able to achieve this work without the enthusiastic and dedicated editorial and research assistance of Lisa Elliott, Sarah Finn, Joanne McEwan, Lesley O’Brien, and the tireless work of the University of Western Australia library staff. The doctoral research of Sandy Riley on Charlotte de La Trémoille helped remind us of the ever-widening networks of the Nassau dynasty. Jacqueline and Sue both thank the other – we could not have undertaken such a work without a strong friendship and respect for each other’s ideas, insights and contributions. Finally, in a study of the importance of family, we cannot neglect the debts of gratitude owed to our own. We dedicate this study to you, with all our love and thanks.

Notes on naming conventions

In a work that covers three centuries and a wide geographic span of western Europe, it is desirable that we establish name conventions for the protagonists of this study. No one language appeared suitable to represent individuals who operated across the Netherlands, German, French, English, and Scottish lands, as well as the wider world. We have thus chosen to identify individuals typically by the lands in which they were born and/or associated. This means that Willem’s brother Johann von Nassau-Dillenburg is referred to using German conventions, for, although he occupied positions in the Netherlands such as Stadtholder of Gelderland, in the context of this work, he appears largely as a German influence. By contrast, his brother, Willem, is referred to using the Dutch spelling since, although born at Dillenburg, the majority of his dynastic and political activities operated in the sphere of the Low Countries. Likewise, William III of England and II of Scotland is primarily analysed here in terms of behaviours oriented to his Dutch and House of Orange-Nassau affiliation. He is thus styled Willem. For women, we have generally chosen to employ the name used in the location of their birth. Thus, Louise Henriëtte, Princess of Orange, who married into Brandenburg lands remains styled as she was in the Netherlands. Similarly, Henriette Amalie von Anhalt-Dessau, Anne of Hanover and Wilhelmine von Preußen retain the spelling of their natal lands rather than their Dutch equivalents Henriëtte Amalia, Anna and Wilhelmina. At first usage, we have also noted in brackets the full name of individuals who were largely known in their lifetime by a shortened form. Thus, the daughters of Willem I and Charlotte de Bourbon, (Marie) Elisabeth and (Charlotte) Flandrina, become simply Elisabeth and Flandrina, and the daughter of Wilhelmine and Willem V, (Frederica) Louise (Wilhelmina), is styled Louise, as she was in life. Although complex, by selecting this method, we hope to elucidate the international breadth of the continental connections of the House of OrangeNassau and to enable readers to recognise protagonists by names with which they are familiar.

This Page is Intentionally Left Blank

Introduction

This book explores how women and men employed objects in particular places across the world during the early modern period, in order to achieve the remarkable expansion of the House of Orange-Nassau. The House emerged as a leading force during a time when the Dutch accrued one of the greatest seaborne empires of the early modern period. Lisa Jardine has recently examined the notion and practices of Dutch cultural supremacy in seventeenthcentury England, an important undertaking in the vein of this study.1 Whilst adding to this scholarship, our work aims primarily to explore dynastic colonialism as it applies to transnational strategic behaviour undertaken on behalf of the House of Orange-Nassau, through material culture in a variety of sites of interpretation from palaces and gardens to prints and teapots, in Europe and beyond. We consider materiality here as the study of both objects and spaces, and women and men’s behaviours relating to them. Our analysis of such material practices, artefacts, and the spaces they shape allows us to rethink dynastic power and identity in gendered terms.

Dynastic colonialism and colonisations We study the House of Orange-Nassau to understand how dynasties could assert status and power by enacting colonising strategies in a wide variety of sites that could be geographical, material, visual, or textual. We explore the expansion of the House of Orange-Nassau, in Europe and the wider world during the early modern period, through the interactions of individuals with material culture through specific sites of interpretation. How Willem van Nassau, Prince of Orange (1533–84), and his successors represented themselves, both ‘at home’ in Europe and abroad on the colonial stage, we argue, was the axis of a bold venture for Orange-Nassau power. Orange-Nassau strategies of naming, architectural and horticultural practices and gift-giving are explored here as practices that facilitated their expansion across Europe. We argue that these activities in Europe formed part of a wider colonising strategy for the House of Orange-Nassau. We do not claim that this House was alone in pursuing such interests in this period; our analysis of their strategies may well be applicable to other transcultural dynasties, not least the Habsburgs, who may have engaged in similar actions to achieve their particular aims.

2 Introduction We employ the concept of dynastic colonialism here to mean the House’s domination of lands and spaces in material and cultural ways that engendered political consequences: namely, to extend its sphere of influence both geographically and politically. We explore the specific contexts in which women and men of the House of Orange-Nassau could use opportunities to advance their power by increasing its visibility in a variety of these new lands and spaces. Our investigation considers material practices that were applied to sites and spaces within Europe and also those enacted in lands beyond Europe. Throughout, we highlight how gender affected colonising opportunities and practices, placing emphasis on different modes and mechanisms of promoting the House for women and men, whether through statecraft and government, familial alliances, economic policy, or through cultural and material means. In this analysis, we expand upon recent developments in cultural history to understand colonial expansion as a process that builds on formal, as well as informal, power networks and practices. The House of Orange-Nassau utilised both to varying degrees and at different times. In periods of hereditary stadtholdership, Orange-Nassau men also had some formal control over the Dutch trading companies, the Dutch East India Company (VOC) and the Dutch West India Company (GWIC). Dutch colonial expansion has traditionally been studied in economic histories and has been linked to the activities of these early modern trading companies.2 In recent years the historiography of the VOC and the GWIC has moved away from a predominantly economic analysis of their activities to an emphasis on the cultural aspects of colonial engagements, such as the description of rituals of diplomatic contacts and the importance of gift exchange between company officials and foreign rulers, and the necessity for Dutch merchants to learn foreign cultural protocols in order to be successful.3 The emerging scholarship that links colonial expansion to early modern knowledge, such as that of Benjamin Schmidt, argues for a new contextualisation of Dutch colonial enterprises as part of early modern knowledge production in the Low Countries.4 This work discusses individuals around the Orange-Nassau family, such as Constantijn Huygens (1596–1687), the secretary of the princes of Orange, as cultural agents who exercised significant influence on the Nassau princely taste. If members of the Nassau dynasty are themselves considered, it is typically in their role as art patrons, such as Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen (1604–79) and his commission of scientific and artistic works in Brazil. Indeed, Johann Moritz, the only individual from the Nassau dynasty to have governed a Dutch colony overseas, is perhaps the family member who has attracted the most concerted scholarly attention to date with regard to overseas endeavours during the early modern period. The corpus of research around Johann Moritz is considerable and has largely focused on the art patronage he exercised in Brazil, which resulted in unprecedented Dutch production of scientific and ethnographic knowledge of the ‘New World’. This scholarship has emphasised how Johann Moritz used the Brazilian objects and paintings

Introduction 3 produced under his patronage to forge closer links with leading members of the aristocracy and royalty after he returned to Europe. His significant gifts of paintings and objects to the Brandenburg Elector Friedrich Wilhelm (1620–88), Frederik III of Denmark (1609–70), and Louis XIV (1638–1715) have been well documented.5 However, far less attention has been paid to considering the extent to which Johann Moritz was part of a much wider Orange-Nassau strategy to use a form of dynastic colonisation (gift exchange, buildings, and naming, for example) overseas and in Europe. Furthermore, there is surprisingly little on collecting as a cultural strategy under Willem V, and the agency of Orange-Nassau women in colonial expansion, patronage, and display also remains under-researched.6 An important, but so far ignored, question in the literature concerns how Orange-Nassau women engaged with the trading companies, and their means to promote the House through colonial activities. In previous scholarship, the work of dynastic families in this kind of transnational context has been considered a transfer of culture; as a form of bridging distances between, for example, aristocratic courts.7 Cultural transfer is understood here in the sense of cultural brokerage. German historiography has interpreted Johann Moritz and Willem III (1650–1702), and to some degree Louise Henriëtte (1627–67) and Henriëtte Catharina (1637–1708), the daughters of Frederik Hendrik, Prince of Orange (1584–1647), and his wife Amalia von Solms-Braunfels (1602–75), as cultural mediators who brought innovations, technical know-how, and new tastes in art and culture to the areas they controlled, or into which they married.8 Certainly this historiography acknowledges the cultural impact that Orange-Nassau individuals and their affiliates had in Brandenburg, lands that were impoverished after the Thirty Years’ War.9 However, current scholarship does not consider these influences as a dynastic strategy in the wider sense that we study here, and not as a form of cultural colonialism. Yet this kind of dynastic work was intended to extend the range and nature of the influence of the House of Orange-Nassau – although the forms and degrees to which it was achieved depended on individuals and their context. Moreover, considering the European practices of the House in this way, and in comparison to their work in the wider world, we respond to the conceptual challenge articulated by Frederick Cooper and Ann Laura Stoler to revise current understandings of Europe and the colonial world by viewing both arenas within a unified analytical sphere.10 We contend that a global approach to dynastic families like the House of Orange-Nassau is particularly appropriate for the early modern period, given that nation states were weakly developed in Europe before the eighteenth century.11 In this book therefore, we bring together an analysis of the Orange-Nassau expansion of power, first in Europe, and then globally. We argue that strategies of dynastic colonisation were used by individuals linked to the Orange-Nassau across Europe and beyond, in conjunction with other enterprises such as the Dutch East and West India Companies. We explore how the House of Orange-Nassau was actively fashioned and promoted in the early phase of Dutch expansion into Africa,

4 Introduction Asia, and the Americas, and how the colonial ambitions of the House, tied to the VOC and GWIC, continued in the stadtholder periods under Frederik Hendrik, Willem IV (1711–51) and Willem V (1748–1806). We examine how Willem I and his successors were involved and represented on the colonial stage, and, in return, how Dutch colonial expansion was strategically employed in the representation of Orange-Nassau power in Europe through material expressions in palaces, luxury goods, and paintings.12

Orange identities The complex story of how the House of Orange-Nassau rose to power in the Low Countries, then Europe more broadly, and finally achieved global influence, typically begins with the man credited as the ‘founding father’ of the Dutch nation and of the Orange-Nassau branch: Willem I, Prince of Orange.13 More recently, however, a series of studies have shown how a range of women and men, not only its leading men, conducted important work for the House, for a variety of reasons.14 Moreover, this work has highlighted the significant impact of activities conducted by those beyond the House on its behalf. This includes both those who were members of other Nassau branches, such as Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen15 and the Friesian stadtholder Willem Frederik van Nassau-Dietz (1613–64),16 and also powerful retainers such as Constantijn Huygens.17 In this work, we extend this focus to consider the influence and actions of individuals who were identified with, affiliated to, or in client relationships with the House of Orange-Nassau. We do not treat identity as a permanent or assumed presentation for individuals of the House of Orange, nor one necessarily aligned with ‘Dutch’ identity. In this work, we hope to extend the existing literature about Dutch national identity by considering the range of meanings that were attached to Orange identity by individuals.18 Over the course of the three centuries we analyse, the House of Orange’s relationship to the wider Dutch state (as well as to Protestantism) was a complicated and contentious one, not a straightforward development of a Dutch and Protestant identity. Secondly, we adopt a transcultural approach here, examining the strategies of this House across Europe and globally, and analysing the consequences and impact of these gendered behaviours, performances, and interactions with material culture, spaces, and power in these broad environments, not only or specifically within the Netherlands. Dynasties are often transnational by nature and thus a discussion of their self-fashioning cannot be conducted solely with reference to national contexts. Moreover, while it is not the focus of this study to explore how ordinary people responded to the material presentations of the House globally, we do demonstrate how some of its preferred strategies were translated into other contexts, and adopted by other dynastic families, typically at the same class level. In this text, we approach our analysis with an understanding of identities as shifting, where personal, familial, branch, dynastic (and occasionally

Introduction 5 national) self-presentations come to the fore for individuals in different contexts. Our examples include, for instance, individuals who worked with the House of Orange, but from other branches of the wider Nassau dynasty, for a variety of reasons and in many different ways. Others are artists supported by the House of Orange whose own interests would benefit from the development of signature awe-inspiring and innovative design work for their patrons. Our concept of identity is particularly applied with other key considerations in mind: gender and materiality as they relate to a dynastic colonising strategy. Our focus is thus very much on the strategies of the House of Orange-Nassau and of individuals within the House, its varied branches and affiliates. This presents a wide range of examples through which to explore gendered colonising contexts and behaviours. We analyse numerous examples of how the family’s power in colonising contexts was achieved with the use of material objects, from gift exchanges to artworks and building projects in Europe and elsewhere around the globe. It is our aim to show how the analysis of materiality – that is, objects, spaces, and related practices – enhances more conventional assessments of political work, in line with an emerging body of new social and cultural histories of the early modern period. Much of this work is currently being conducted by scholars of women and gender who demonstrate how significant material culture was for women’s access to power, particularly when ‘the political’ is perceived in wider and non-conventional terms. Our previous work participates in this scholarly discussion and we build on it here.

Material sources of power Scholars are increasingly demonstrating the performative power of material culture to create and extend power. They show how early modern men and women could employ a cultural politics to signify their status and authority.19 In the early modern context, objects have attracted scholarly interest in critical studies of consumption, luxury and courtly representation.20 Scholars in the field of New Materialism have also argued for the importance and impact of material culture on social relations and modes of representation and identity building.21 Peter de Bolla, for example, argues that the ‘presentational aspect’ of the early modern miniature portrait ‘subordinates the representational through the social practice of self-display and exchange’, the display of which ‘then becomes a part of a set of practices and rituals, both social and psychic’.22 Material culture as evidence of social processes is increasingly attracting the interest of historians and literary scholars.23 Following anthropological and sociological studies, rituals involving material culture and space can be understood as cultural aspects of rule and forms of power.24 Moreover, these rituals were also key to identity formation, since they defined community membership for some and denoted exclusion for others. These ‘status interactions’, as they are termed by Giora Sternberg, were ‘symbolic expression[s] of social position’, and negotiations of power, identity, and agency.25 These

6 Introduction were early modern practices and processes creating and reinforcing social hierarchies enacted through material culture.26 We argue that power relations within the House of Orange had to be constantly negotiated between men and women, between generations, and between different branches and families of the wider Nassau dynasty, and these negotiations occurred at least in part through material culture. Moreover, objects helped to give spaces meaning and organisation (whether large or small, from palaces to territories to different rooms within buildings); objects mapped gender and power relations in particular spaces. The literature on gift exchange that has highlighted how objects were invested with cultural meaning, social expectations of honour and exchange, and the need to reciprocate favours in patron–client relationships is important for our analysis.27 For example, giving gifts was an important tool in these negotiations of power, alliances, and loyalty. We thus investigate what gendered power relations were created, reinforced, or side-stepped in these object exchanges of intra-familial gifts, and changes in such patterns over generations. Geert Janssen illustrates how gifts were an instrumental part of the early modern social relationships of Willem Frederik van Nassau-Dietz, and expressed hierarchical relationships in the form of honouring, rendering patronage a constant process of negotiation.28 Objects are no longer seen by scholars solely as representations of social relations, but also as being able to create them, as they act on people and operate in relation to them. Thus, analysis of this human–material relationship, as Daniel Miller has explored, can help us to examine how power is practised around and through material culture.29 He argues that its study can be ‘an effective way to understand power, not as some abstraction, but as the mode by which certain forms or people become realized, often at the expense of others’.30 Artworks as gifts played an important part in diplomatic exchanges between rulers because they bestowed considerable social honour on the receiver,31 but we suggest here that such works also carried similar importance for intradynastic exchanges. The increasing role that art played in the strategies of the House of Orange for princely representation has been documented by recent scholarship.32 Artworks were not only easily moveable and thus suitable as presents, but also had the advantage that they could be copied, meaning that the networks of exchange and social honouring could be indefinitely expanded.33 Moreover, in social gift-giving between members of the elite, artists played an important role and themselves became key material means of sustaining family relations between House members when they moved away and established courts elsewhere. As Marika Keblusek has suggested, artists facilitated contacts between courts and acted as diplomatic agents.34 Indeed, Michael Auwers has argued that artists themselves became gifts in diplomatic exchanges between aristocratic courts.35 We analyse the involvement of the House of Orange in European and Dutch overseas colonial projects through dynastic strategies including naming, gift-giving, collecting, and display. However, the early modern culture of

Introduction 7 social obligation also facilitated colonial outreach in the form of diplomatic exchanges of letters and gifts, which necessitated the involvement of House members. The House of Orange-Nassau and its involvement in Dutch colonial expansion has attracted attention from cultural historians, especially those associated – as curators – with Dutch museums. A number of exhibitions, and their accompanying publications, have pointed to the importance of the cultural aspects of colonial exchange and trade, and especially the transfer of goods as a cultural exchange. Kees Zandvliet and Rita Wassing-Visser have emphasised the nature of cultural exchange between the Dutch and their colonies, and have demanded a more detailed discussion of the kinds of objects exchanged and the nature of relationships involved. This approach has moved beyond the more narrow perspectives on mercantile exchange to diplomatic gift practices in which the Orange-Nassau family played an important role, but no systematic study of this has yet been undertaken for the early modern period.36 We apply recent insights on the cultural aspects of diplomacy, in particular the system of gift-giving as a mechanism to successfully establish social hierarchies, reciprocities, and long-term obligations in early modern societies.37 The specific mechanisms of establishing, refuting, or creating social obligations are, for example, expressed in diplomatic gift-giving with foreign rulers and Dutch trading company officials.38 Recent scholarship on early modern diplomatic relationships, which are relevant to understanding the ways colonial networks were formed, have emphasised that gift-exchange was the key mechanism in establishing political relationships. Additionally, the possession and appreciation of cultural objects, such as paintings, could enhance the authority and status of rulers in the diplomatic realm.39 This perspective on early modern diplomacy within Europe is a productive theoretical lens through which to view the establishment of, and OrangeNassau involvement in, Dutch colonial networks. There is typically little discussion of a dynastic component here as the Orange-Nassaus were neither continuously in formal charge of the expansion, nor were they the primary scholarly drivers for knowledge production. However, our view on cultural activities and cultural meanings allows us to move beyond discussion of House of Orange formal positions of power (or the lack of them) within the companies. The involvement of dynastic families in the early modern overseas expansion, and the uses of cultural power, has only recently become a field for historical inquiry.40 The important relationship between cultural prestige and social power that shaped the power potential of early modern dynastic families can be seen in the increasing efforts of early modern rulers to display ‘exotic’ objects and subjects, and thus lay claim to ruling them. This link between representation style and political aspiration has been noted in recent scholarship on early modern Wunderkammern at European courts by Dominik Collet and others.41 The more specific historiography on OrangeNassau art patronage, collecting, and displaying has so far concentrated on Frederik Hendrik and Amalia, as well as on Johann Moritz and his dynastic gifts.42 For the discussion of gender and colonial displays in aristocratic

8 Introduction families, however, the literature has concentrated on the eighteenth century and English aristocratic women as collectors of porcelain and natural history artefacts.43 We argue that cultural prestige enhanced dynastic power, and that the House of Orange-Nassau consciously drew such prestige from networks that were established by the Dutch trading companies. We thus extend the discussion of the Orange-Nassau colonial involvement beyond their formal positions of power as stadtholders to include informal networks of obligations, prestige, and status display, which formed part of the House’s strategies for expansion. Naming, letter exchange, gift-giving, and material display were key tools of Orange colonisation. We argue that the display of these dynastic aspirations and power was not restricted to the Wunderkammer, but extended significantly into other spaces of courtly representative life. Orange-Nassau power was aided by Dutch colonial expansion and culturally demonstrated in portraits depicting colonial goods and slave servants, in menageries, ante-chambers, and palaces, by using servants from Suriname, establishing public galleries, patronising scientific collections, and through the rituals of gift-giving.

Gendered sites of power In this book, we explore spaces and objects as gendered sites of power. In his early work, Henri Lefebvre distinguished three different forms of social spaces: spatial practice, representations of space, and representational spaces.44 His approach, and Pierre Bourdieu’s influential habitus theory, still influence the more recent works on gendered spaces and gendered power on which we are building in this book. Although his work was not focused on gender, Lefebvre’s concept of spaces as social products that reflect contemporary understandings and experiences of social relations and identities is a productive starting point for the discussion of gendered power and materiality.45 This includes the realisation that gender roles are embodied in the configuration of buildings.46 Amanda Flather has discussed early modern space as ‘an arena for social action’, which was given social and cultural meanings by the activities of men and women.47 Concerns about the ability of dynastic women to control the social space of their households is at the centre of Félix Labrador Arroyo’s discussion of the spatial power of the Habsburg women, in particular the queens’ court and their separate royal households. This spatial power ‘referred to the spaces allocated, the material goods consumed, and expenses incurred by the court’.48 The struggle over which model was adopted by the Habsburg women (Castilian or Burgundian) reflected the power of the respective dynasties.49 No member of the House of Orange-Nassau, male or female, had royal powers in the way such Habsburg queens did. We examine social and dynastic spaces, showing how hierarchies of gender (both for women and men) impacted on the opportunities for women and men associated with the House of Orange-Nassau to ascribe meaning on particular sites. The spaces we foreground here are representational ones, and we explore how

Introduction 9 men and women presented their Orange-Nassau identities within these sites. Architectural and horticultural design in the residences of individuals of the House of Orange-Nassau reflected ideas about power and identity as members of varied groups and as individuals, creating both sites of power and, as a result, becoming influential locations for particular individuals.50 Moreover, we understand these sites as physical locations and objects that were imbued with multiple meanings by different groups. We focus on the cultural, gendered, emotional, and political meanings of these sites as they were employed specifically by individuals associated with the House of Orange-Nassau, while recognising that these were not the only meanings ascribed to such spaces and objects.51 This is particularly pertinent in the context of forms of colonisation, in both early modern Europe and beyond, that is the focus of this text. Scholars are increasingly drawing attention to the gendered forms of power in colonial discourse and practice. To date attention has been drawn to the feminisation of colonised populations, producing important insights on how local cohorts were feminised to enact new power structures in colonised spaces.52 In contrast, we focus here on the gendered ways in which colonisation occurred through the actions of both women and men, and how it functioned in specific ways as it occurred in European territories and those beyond.53 Finally, we also understand how forms of knowledge, identity, and power for the House of Orange-Nassau were constructed in part through the interplay of objects in particular spaces. Some work has already explored how this occurred through material culture in specific locations within the Dutch East India Company’s intercultural contacts.54 We now extend these considerations to sites of power that Orange-Nassau women and men encountered and created around the world.

Book structure In this book we analyse how women and men circulated objects in material, textual, and visual forms, and organised particular spaces in order to advance the House of Orange-Nassau. To do so, our work opens with an analysis of how individuals fashioned the House’s trajectory over the early modern period, expanding its power in phases with particular characteristics, although these phases do not have discrete beginning and end dates, but sometimes represent overlapping developments. The first chapter draws on a wide range of materials, events, and practices in order to develop a new narrative of, and context for, the colonising activities, in the broadest sense, of the House of Orange-Nassau during the early modern period. In the sections that follow, we artificially distinguish between elements that were integrated actions for the House, in order to place a new analytical lens on these gendered activities and materials. The two chapters that comprise the first part of the book, ‘Claiming spaces’, focus attention on the construction of Orange-Nassau space in European and global sites. The expansion of the House across Europe and the wider world during this period required careful

10 Introduction communications of power in new locations, and provided different geographical and political spaces to articulate and display meanings of power. Chapter 2 examines how individuals associated with the House employed space through the organisation of European sites and material culture within them. Here, strategies of dynastic colonialism including naming, architectural, and horticultural practices of the Orange-Nassau are analysed. Chapter 3 examines gendered Orange-Nassau interactions with global territories beyond Europe, particularly via House engagement with the Dutch trading companies and the work of individuals affiliated with Orange-Nassau interests. In the second part of the book, ‘Materialising power’, our focus turns to an analysis of the significance of gendered material culture in different ways. We particularly explore how objects in gift-giving and exchange materialised, sustained, and made power for the House of Orange-Nassau from the Netherlands to German and French lands, England, Scotland, and colonies worldwide, thereby staging Orange-Nassau identities. We examine connections, exchange, gifts, and display as the House’s political fortunes waxed and waned, but material objects maintained its broader power and aspirations. In Chapter 4, we consider a range of different strategies, and their protagonists, that functioned to secure the political, spatial, and cultural claims of the House of Orange, employing a wide variety of material practices and a combination of objects to create distinctive and innovative styles for, and as, members of the House. Chapter 5 analyses the opportunities for the House to assert power and status in Europe, which were created by their employment of material culture from beyond Europe. In both chapters, we emphasise the critical significance of objects to fashion new meanings for the House as they moved through different sites of interpretation, from varied spatial locations to their rendering in prints and portraits. Through this work, we hope to provide a broader understanding of how the House of Orange-Nassau was made through material means. Objects and spaces were claimed, named, displayed, gifted, and exchanged, to the benefit and advancement of the House of Orange-Nassau in the early modern period, materialising its powerful philosophy of dynastic colonialism.

Notes   1 Lisa Jardine, Going Dutch: How England Plundered Holland’s Glory (London: Harper, 2008). A growing awareness of transnational approaches to the family is also demonstrated in Dorothea Nolde and Claudia Opitz, eds, Grenzüberschreitende Familienbeziehungen. Akteure und Medien des Kulturtransfers in der Frühen Neuzeit (Cologne: Böhlau Verlag, 2008).   2 Leonard Blussé and F. S. Gaastra, Companies and Trade: Essays on Overseas Trading Companies during the Ancien Régime (Hingham, MA: Kluwer Boston, 1981); Grote Atlas van de Verenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie/Comprehensive Atlas of the Dutch United East India Company. Zeven delen van de hand van meerdere auteurs, 7 vols (Voorburg: Atlas maior, 2006–10); F. S. Gaastra, De geschiedenis van de VOC (Haarlem: Fibula-Van Dishoeck, 1982); F. S. Gaastra, Bewind en beleid bij de VOC. De financiële en commerciële politiek van de bewindhebbers,

Introduction 11 1672–1702 (Zutphen: Walburg Pers, 1989); E. M. Jacobs, Koopman in Azië. De handel van de Verenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie tijdens de 18e eeuw (Zutphen: Walburg Pers, 2000); K. Glamann, Dutch-Asiatic Trade, 1620–1740 (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1958).   3 W. O. Dijk, Seventeenth-Century Burma and the Dutch East India Company 1634–1680 (Singapore: Singapore University Press, 2006); A. Schrikker, Dutch and British Colonial Intervention in Sri Lanka, 1780–1815: Expansion and Reform (Boston: Brill, 2007); W. Remmelink, The Chinese War and the Collapse of the Javanese State, 1725–1743 (Leiden: KITLV Press, 1994); G. J. Knaap and H. A. Sutherland, Monsoon Traders: Ships, Skippers and Commodities in EighteenthCentury Makassar (Leiden: KITLV Press, 2004); L. Y. Andaya, ‘The Kingdom of Johor, 1641–1728: A Study of Economic and Political Developments in the Straits of Malacca’ (Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Cornell University, 1975); Barbara Watson Andaya, Perak, the Abode of Grace: A Study of an Eighteenth-Century Malay State (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979); A. T. Huang, Silk for Silver: Dutch-Vietnamese Relations, 1637–1700 (Boston: Brill, 2007).   4 Benjamin Schmidt, Inventing Exoticism: Geography, Globalism, and Europe’s Early Modern World (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2015); Benjamin Schmidt, Innocence Abroad: The Dutch Imagination and the New World, 1570–1670 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001); Benjamin Schmidt and Pamela Smith, eds, Making Knowledge in Early Modern Europe: Practices, Objects, and Texts, 1400–1800 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008); Benjamin Schmidt, A. Stott and J. Goodfriend, eds, Going Dutch: The Dutch Presence in America, 1609–2009 (Boston: Brill, 2008); Benjamin Schmidt, ‘The Limits of Language and the Challenges of Exotica: Pictures, Words, and Global Knowledge in Early Modern Europe’, in Translating Knowledge in the Early Modern Low Countries, ed. Harold J. Cook and Sven Dupré (Berlin: Lit Verlag GmbH & Co., 2012), 79–106; Benjamin Schmidt, ‘Collecting Global Icons: The Case of the Exotic Parasol’, in Collecting across Cultures: Material Exchanges in the Early Modern Atlantic World, ed. Daniela Bleichmar and Peter C. Mancall (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2011), 31–57; Benjamin Schmidt, ‘Accumulating the World: Collecting and Commodifying “Globalism” in Early Modern Europe’, in Centres and Cycles of Accumulation in and around the Netherlands during the Early Modern Period, ed. Lissa Roberts (Berlin: Lit, 2011), 129–55; Benjamin Schmidt, ‘The Dutch Atlantic: From Provincialism to Globalism’, in Atlantic History: A Critical Appraisal, ed. Jack P. Greene and Philip D. Morgan (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), 163–90.   5 A foundational study is still Thomas Thomsen, Albert Eckhout. Ein niederländischer Maler und sein Gönner Moritz der Brasilianer. Ein Kulturbild aus dem 17. Jahrhundert (Copenhagen: Munksgaard 1938); E. van den Boogaart, H. R. Hoetink and P. J. P. Whitehead, Johan Morits van Nassau-Siegen 1604–1679: A Humanist Prince in Europe and Brazil. Essays on the Occasion of the Tercentenary of his Death (The Hague: The Johann Moritz van Nassau Stichting, 1979); Morgens Bencard, ‘Fürstliche Geschenke’, in Sein Feld war die Welt. Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen (1604–1679). Von Siegen über die Niederlande und Brasilien nach Brandenburg, ed. Gerhard Brunn and Cornelius Neutsch (Münster: Waxmann, 2008), 1–77. See more recently, Mariana Françozo, ‘Global Connections: Johann Moritz of Nassau-Siegen’s Collection of Curiosities’, in The Legacy of Dutch Brazil, ed. Michiel van Groesen (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014), 105–23.   6 The only extensive discussion of Willem V’s art collections as a form of power has been offered by Edwin van Meerkerk, ‘Colonial Objects and the Display of Power: The Curious Case of the Cabinet of William V and the Dutch India Companies’, in The Dutch Trading Companies as Knowledge Networks, ed. Siegfried Huigen, Jan L. De Jong and Elmar Kolfin (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 415–36.

12 Introduction   7 See Eirwen E. C. Nicholson, ‘The Oak v. the Orange Tree: Emblematizing Dynastic Union and Conflict, 1600–1796’, in Anglo-Dutch Relations in the Field of the Emblem, ed. Bart Westerweel (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 227–52; and, more recently, Nolde and Opitz, Grenzüberschreitende Familienbeziehungen.   8 Peter-Michael Hahn, ‘Magnifizienz und dynastische Legitimation durch Übernahme kultureller Muster: Die Beziehungen der Hohenzollern zum Haus Oranien und den Niederlanden im 17. Jahrhundert’, in Formen der Visualisierung von Herrschaft. Studien zu Adel, Fürst und Schloßbau vom 16.bis 18. Jahrhundert, ed. Peter-Michael Hahn and Helmut Lorenz (Potsdam: Verlag für Berlin-Brandenburg, 1998), 9–56; I. Hantsche, ed., Johann Moritz von NassauSiegen (1604–1679) als Vermittler. Politik und Kultur am Niederrhrein im 17. Jahrhundert (Münster: Waxmann Verlag, 2005); Horst Lademacher, ed., OranienNassau, die Niederlande und das Reich. Beiträge zur Geschichte einer Dynastie (Münster: Lit, 1995); Olaf Mörke, ‘De hofcultuur van het huis Oranje-Nassau in de zeventiende eeuw’, in Cultuur en maatschappij in Nederland 1500–1850. Een historisch-antropologisch perspectief, ed. Peter Burke and Willem Frijhoff (Amsterdam: Open universiteit, 1992), 39–77; Markus Schacht, Jörg Meiner and Horst Lademacher, eds, Onder den Oranje boom. Dynastie in der Republik: das Haus Oranien-Nassau als Vermittler niederländischer Kultur in deutschen Territorien im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert (Munich: Hirmer, 1999).   9 Lademacher, Oranien-Nassau, die Niederlande und das Reich; Schacht, Meiner and Lademacher, Onder den Oranje boom. Dynastie in der Republik. 10 Frederick Cooper and Ann Laura Stoler, ‘Introduction: Tensions of Empire – Colonial Control and Visions of Rule’, American Ethnologist 16, no. 4 (1989): 609–21; see also Frederick Cooper and Ann Laura Stoler, Tensions of Empire: Colonial Cultures in a Bourgeois World (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997). 11 W. R. Van Gulik, ‘The House of Orange and Pre-Modern Japan’, in The Dutch Royal Collection: Oranda Oshitsu, ed. Stichting Historische Verzamelingen van het Huis Oranje-Nassau (Tokyo: Mainichi Shinbunsha, 2000), 197–201. 12 For a discussion of the unique collections of Amalia, see for example C. Willemijn Fock, ‘Frederik Hendrik en Amalia’s appartementen: Vorstelijk vertoon naast de triomf van het porselein’, in Vorstelijk verzameld. De kunstcollectie van Frederik Hendrik en Amalia, ed. Peter van der Ploeg and Carola Vermeeren (Zwolle: Waanders, 1997), 76–86; Marika Keblusek and Jori Zijlmans, eds, Princely Display: The Court of Frederik Hendrik of Orange and Amalia van Solms (The Hague: Waanders, 1997); Virginia Clare Treanor, ‘Amalia van Solms and the Formation of the Stadhouder’s Art Collection, 1625–1675’ (Unpublished PhD Dissertation, University of Maryland, 2012); and Saskia Beranek, ‘Power of the Portrait: Production, Consumption and Display of Portraits of Amalia van Solms in the Dutch Republic’ (Unpublished PhD Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 2013). 13 With the exception of C. V. Wedgewood, William the Silent: William of Nassau, Prince of Orange 1533–1584 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1944). For Dutch monograph studies, see J. G. Kikkert, Willem van Oranje (Soesterberg: Aspekt, 2006); M. G. Schenk, Willem de Zwijger (Baarn: Kern, 1984); K. W. Swart, Willem van Oranje en de Nederlandse Opstand 1572–1584 (The Hague: SDU Uitgeverij Koninginnegracht, 1994); Hubrecht Klink, Opstand, politiek en religie bij Willem van Oranje. Een thematische biografie (Heerenveen: Groen en Zoon, 1998); Arie van Deursen, Willem van Oranje; een biografisch portret (Amsterdam: Bet Bakker, 1995); and in German, Olaf Mörke, Wilhelm von Oranien (1533–1584): Fürst und ‘Vater’ der Republik (Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 2007). There are some articles on personal aspects of his political rule, such as L. Blok, ‘Wilhelm von Oranien und die Entstehung des Nordniederländischen

Introduction 13 Staates’, Jahrbuch für Geschichte des Feudalismus 10 (1986): 275–82; S. Morse, ‘William the Silent: The first tolerant prince’, Historian 77 (2003): 13–21. 14 Susan Broomhall and Jacqueline Van Gent, Gender, Power and Identity in the Early Modern House of Orange-Nassau (Farnham: Ashgate, 2016). 15 H. R. Hoetink, ed., Zo wijd de wereld strekt (The Hague: Mauritshuis, 1979); Boogaart, Hoetink and Whitehead, Johan Maurits van Nassau-Siegen; G. de Werd, ed., Soweit der Erdkreis reicht: Johann Moritz van Nassau-Siegen 1604–1679 (Kleve: Städtisches Museum Haus Koekkoek Kleve, 1979). For recent German scholarship, see I. Hantsche, Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen (1604–1679) als Vermittler; Brunn and Neutsch, Sein Feld war die Welt. 16 Luuc Kooijmans, Liefde in opdracht. Het hofleven van Willem Frederik van Nassau (Amsterdam: Bakker, 2000); Geert H. Janssen, Princely Power in the Dutch Republic: Patronage and William Frederick of Nassau (1613–64), trans. J. C. Grayson (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2008). 17 For Huygens, see Hendrik Arie Hofman, Constantijn Huygens (1596–1687): een christelijk-humanistisch bourgeois-gentilhomme in dienst van het Oranjehuis (Utrecht: Hes, 1983); Leendert Strengholt, Constanter. Het leven van Constantijn Huygens (Amsterdam: Querido, 1987); Lisa Jardine, The Reputation of Sir Constantijn Huygens: Networker or Virtuoso? (Wassenaar: NIAS, 2008); and, on his son, Rudolf Dekker, Family, Culture and Society in the Diary of Constantijn Huygens Jr, Secretary to Stadholder-King William of Orange (Leiden: Brill, 2013). On Brederode, see Adrienne J. M. Koenhein et al., Johan Wolfert van Brederode, 1599–1655: een Hollands edelman tussen Nassau en Oranje (Zuytphen: Walburg, 1999). 18 See A. C. Duke, Judith Pollmann and Andrew Spicer, eds, Public Opinion and Changing Identities in the Early Modern Netherlands: Essays in Honour of Alastair Duke (Leiden: Brill, 2007); and Robert Stein and Judith Pollmann, eds, Networks, Regions and Nations Shaping Identities in the Low Countries, 1300–1650 (Leiden: Brill, 2010). 19 Anne J. Cruz and Maria Galli Stampino, eds, Early Modern Habsburg Women: Transnational Contexts, Cultural Conflicts, Dynastic Continuities (Farnham: Ashgate, 2013); Broomhall and Van Gent, Gender, Power and Identity; Susan Broomhall and Jacqueline Van Gent, ‘The Gendered Political Agency of Porcelain among Early Modern European Dynasties’, in Gender and Political Culture in Early Modern Europe, ed. James Daybell and Svante Norrhem (London: Routledge, forthcoming). 20 See for example Maxine Berg and Helen Clifford, eds, Consumers and Luxury: Consumer Culture in Europe, 1650–1850 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1999); and, more recently, Maxine Berg, Luxury and Pleasure in EighteenthCentury Britain (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007). 21 Provocatively argued by Jane Bennett in Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2010). See also, Sara Ahmed, ‘Open Forum Imaginary Prohibitions: Some Preliminary Remarks on the Founding Gestures of the New “Materialism”’, European Journal of Women’s Studies 15 (2008): 23–39; Daniel Miller, Stuff (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2010). 22 Peter De Bolla, The Education of the Eye: Painting, Landscape, and Architecture in Eighteenth-Century Britain (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2003), 39. 23 Barbara J. Harris, ‘Property, Power and Personal Relations: Elizabethan Mothers and Sons in Yorkist and Early Tudor England’, Signs 51, no. 3 (1990): 606–32; Thomas J. Kuehn, ‘Understanding Gender Inequality in Renaissance Florence: Personhood and Gifts of Maternal Inheritance by Women’, Journal of Women’s History 8, no. 2 (1996): 58–80; Barbara J. Harris, English Aristocratic Women, 1450–1550: Marriage and Family, Property and Careers (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002); Elizabeth Mazzola, Women’s Wealth and Women’s Writing

14 Introduction in Early Modern England: ‘Little Legacies’ and the Materials of Motherhood (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2009); Amanda E. Herbert, Female Alliances: Gender, Identity, and Friendship in Early Modern Britain (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2014). 24 Clifford Geertz, Negara: The Theatre-States in Nineteenth-Century Bali (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1980); and his chapter ‘Centers, Kings, and Charisma: Reflections on the Symbolics of Power’, in Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology (New York: Basic Books, 1983), 121–46; Joëlle Rollo-Koster, ed., Medieval and Early Modern Ritual: Formalized Behavior in Europe, China and Japan (Leiden: Brill, 2002); Jeroen Duindam, Myths of Power: Norbert Elias and the Early Modern European Court (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1995); Laurie Postlewate and Wim Husken, eds, Acts and Texts: Performance and Ritual in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2007). 25 Giora Sternberg, Status Interaction during the Reign of Louis XIV (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 1. Also T. C. W. Blanning, The Culture of Power and the Power of Culture: Old Regime Europe, 1660–1789 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002). 26 A recent study of importance to this approach is Giulia Calvi and Isabelle Chabot, eds, Moving Elites: Women and Cultural Transfers in the European Court System (EUI Working Papers HEC, 2, 2010). 27 Marcel Mauss, The Gift: Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies (France, 1923–4; New York: W.W. Norton, 1954, 1990); Natalie Zemon Davis, The Gift in Sixteenth-Century France (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000); Gadi Algazi, Valentin Groebner and Bernhard Jussen, eds, Negotiating the Gift: Pre-Modern Figurations of Exchange (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2003); Irma Thoen, Strategic Affection? Gift Exchange in Seventeenth-Century Holland (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2007); Ilana Krausman BenAmos, The Culture of Giving: Informal Support and Gift-Exchange in Early Modern England (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008). 28 Janssen, Princely Power. For discussion of gift exchanges, see 151–83. 29 Daniel Miller, ‘Materiality: An Introduction’, in Materiality, ed. Daniel Miller (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2005), 19. 30 Miller, ‘Materiality: An Introduction’, 19. 31 Michael Auwers, ‘The Gift of Rubens: Rethinking the Concept of Gift-Giving in Early Modern Diplomacy’, European History Quarterly 43, no. 3 (2013): 421–4; Maija Jansson, ‘Measured Reciprocity: English Ambassadorial Gift Exchange in the 17th and 18th Centuries’, Journal of Early Modern History 9, no. 3/4 (August 2005): 348–70. 32 Marika Keblusek and Jori Zijlmans, eds, Vorstelijk vertoon. Aan het hof van Frederik Hendrik en Amalia (Zwolle: Waanders, 1997); Fock, ‘Frederik Hendrik en Amalia’s appartementen: Vorstelijk vertoon naast de triomf van het porselein’ and Marieke Tiethoff-Spliethoff, ‘Representatie en Rollenspel. De Portretkunst aan het Hof van Frederik Hendrik en Amalia’, in van der Ploeg and Vermeeren, Vorstelijk verzameld, 76–86 and 161–200; Marieke Tiethoff-Spliethoff, ‘Bilder von Glück und Unglück. Die Porträtmalerei am Hofe des Statthalters in den Haag 1625–1655’, in Schloss Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje, ed. Wolfgang Savelsberg (Heidelberg: Vernissage-Verl., 2003), 132–41. 33 This has been demonstrated for Willem Frederik’s strategies to expand his patronage system by commissioning copies of existing portraits of Orange-Nassau family members. Geert H. Janssen, ‘De kunst van het kopiëren: Opdrachten van stadhouder Willem Frederik van Nassau aan Pieter Nason’, Jaarboek Oranje–Nassau Museum (2001): 36–47. See also Alexandra Nina Bauer, ‘Die Porträtmalerei für das Haus Oranien-Nassau in der zweiten Hälfte des 17. Jahrhunderts’, in

Introduction 15 Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje (exhibition catalogue), ed. Ingo Pfeifer and Wolfgang Savelsberg (Oranienbaum: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2003), 143–52. On the exchange of children’s portraits within the Nassau family, see Susan Broomhall and Jacqueline Van Gent, ‘Framing Childhood: Children through the Lens of Portraits in the Nassau Family Collections’, in Children’s Worlds in Europe c. 1400–1750, ed. Stephanie Tarbin and Philippa Maddern (Aldershot: Ashgate, forthcoming). 34 Marika Keblusek and Vera Noldes Badeloch, eds, Double Agents: Cultural and Political Brokerage in Early Modern Europe (Leiden: Brill, 2011). 35 Auwers, ‘The Gift of Rubens’, 421–41. 36 Kees Zandvliet, Dutch Encounter with Asia 1600–1950 (Zwolle: Waanders, 2002); Rita Wassing-Visser, Royal Gifts from Indonesia: Historical Bonds with the House of Orange-Nassau, 1600–1938 (Zwolle: Waanders, 1996). 37 Auwers, ‘The Gift of Rubens’; Jansson, ‘Measured Reciprocity’; Christian Windler, ‘Tributes and Presents in Franco-Tunisian Diplomacy’, Journal of Early Modern History 4, no. 2 (2000): 168–99; Diana Carrió-Invernizzi, ‘Gift and Diplomacy in Seventeenth-Century Spanish Italy’, The Historical Journal 51, no. 4 (2008): 881–99. 38 Mauss, The Gift. The gift displays, in exemplary form, the ‘social life of things’. Arjun Appardurai, The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), 5: ‘things-in-motion illuminate their human and social context’. See also Craig Muldrew, The Economy of Obligation: The Culture of Credit and Social Relations in Early Modern England (Houndmills: Macmillan, 1998). 39 Auwers, ‘The Gift of Rubens’, 426. 40 Jason McCloskey and Jgnacio Lopez Alemany, Signs of Power in Habsburg Spain and the New World (Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press, 2013). 41 Dominik Collet, Die Welt in der Stube: Begegnungen mit Aussereuropa in Kunstkammern der Frühen Neuzeit (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2007); see also Dominik Collet, ‘The Museum Predicament: Representing Cultural Encounter in Historical and Contemporary Collections’, in The Fuzzy Logic of Encounter: New Perspectives on Cultural Contact, ed. Süne Juterczenka and Gesa Mackenthun (Munich: Waxman Verlag, 2009), 53–74. On Dutch Kunstkammern more generally, see Russell W. Belk, Collecting in a Consumer Society (New York: Routledge, 1995), esp. 35–7 on early modern Netherlands; Eric Jonk, Reading the Book of Nature in the Dutch Golden Age, 1575–1715 (Leiden: Brill, 2010). 42 On the Oranjezaal see, most recently, Margriet Eikema Hommes and Elmar Kolfin, De Oranjezaal in het Huis ten Bosch. Een zaal uit louter liefde (Zwolle: Waanders, 2013). See also Fock, ‘Frederik Hendrik en Amalia’s appartementen’; Keblusek and Zijlmans, Vorstelijk vertoon; Marika Keblusek, ‘The Bohemian Court in The Hague’, in Keblusek and Zijlmans, Princely Display, 47–57; Van der Ploeg and Vermeeren, Vorstelijk verzameld; Peter van der Ploeg, Carola Vermeeren and P. B. J. Broos, eds, Princely Patrons: The Collection of Frederick Henry of Orange and Amalia of Solms in The Hague (Zwolle: Waanders, 1997); Hahn, ‘Magnifizienz und dynastische Legitimation durch Übernahme kultureller Muster’. Schmidt, Innocence Abroad, 251–7, Brunn and Neutsch, Sein Feld war die Welt. Quentin Buvelot, ed., Albert Eckhout: A Dutch Artist in Brazil (The Hague: Royal Cabinet of Paintings Mauritshuis, 2004). 43 Recent work on aristocratic women’s display of porcelain places it in the context of gendered consumption trends of luxury goods of the eighteenth century, or in a literary and intellectual context. See, for example, Elizabeth KowaleskiWallace, ‘Women, China, and Consumer Culture in Eighteenth-Century England’, Eighteenth-Century Studies 29, no. 2 (1995/6): 153–67; Stacey Sloboda, ‘Porcelain Bodies: Gender, Acquisitiveness, and Taste in Eighteenth-Century England’, in

16 Introduction Collecting Subjects: The Visual Pleasures and Meanings of Material Culture in Britain, ed. John Potvin and Alla Myzelev (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2009), 19–36; Stacey Sloboda, ‘Displaying Materials: Porcelain and Natural History in the Duchess of Portland’s Museum’, Eighteenth-Century Studies 43, no. 4 (2010): 455–72; Cordula Bischoff, ‘Women Collectors and the Rise of the Porcelain Cabinet’, in Chinese and Japanese Porcelain for the Dutch Golden Age, ed. Jan van Campen and Titus Eliëns (Zwolle: Waanders, 2014), 171–89. 44 Henri Lefebvre, La production de l’espace (Paris: Editions Anthropos, 1974). 45 Henri Lefebvre, State, Space, World: Selected Essays (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2009), ch. 8: ‘Space: Social Product and Use Value’. 46 See, for example, Dörte Kuhlmann, Gender Studies in Architecture: Space, Power and Difference (London: Routledge, 2013). 47 Amanda Flather, Gender and Space in Early Modern England (Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 2007), 1. See also Erica Carter, James Donald and Judith Squires, eds, Space and Place: Theories of Identity and Location (London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1994); and Doreen Massey, Space, Place and Gender (Cambridge: Polity, 1994). Barbara J. Harris discusses specifically the patterns of residency for married aristocratic women in ‘Space, Time, and the Power of Aristocratic Wives in Yorkist and Early Tudor England, 1450–1550’, in Time, Space and Women’s Lives in Early Modern Europe, ed. Anne Jacobson Schutte, Thomas Kuehn and Silvana Seidel Menchi (Kirksville: Truman State University Press, 2001), 245–64. 48 Cruz and Stampino, Early Modern Habsburg Women, 11. 49 Félix Labrador Arroyo, ‘From Castile to Burgundy: The Evolution of the Queens’ Households during the Sixteenth Century’, in Cruz and Stampino, Early Modern Habsburg Women, 119–50. 50 Marie-France Auzépy and Joël Cornette, ‘Lieux de pouvoir, pouvoirs des lieux’, in Palais et pouvoir de Constantinople à Versailles, ed. Marie-France Auzépy and Joël Cornette (Saint Denis: Presses universitaires de Vincennes, 2003), 5–31. 51 On the emotional meanings of spaces, see Kay Anderson and Susan Smith, ‘Editorial: Emotional Geographies’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, n.s. 26, no. 1 (2001): 7–10; Andreas Reckwitz, ‘Affective Spaces: A Praxeological Outlook’, Rethinking History: The Journal of Theory and Practice 16, no. 2 (2012): 241–58; Ben Anderson, ‘Affect and Emotion’, in The WileyBlackwell Companion to Cultural Geography, ed. Nuala C. Johnson, Richard H. Scheine and Jamie Winders (Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013); and Susan Broomhall, ed., Spaces for Feeling: Emotions and Sociabilities in Britain, 1650–1850 (London: Routledge, 2015). 52 Nancy R. Hunt, Tessie P. Liu and Jean Quataert, eds, Gendered Colonialism in African History (Oxford: Blackwell, 1997); Julia Clancy-Smith and Frances Gouda, eds, Domesticating the Empire: Race, Gender, and Family Life in French and Dutch Colonialism (Charlottesville: The University Press of Virginia, 1998); Ruth Roach Pierson and Chaudhuri Nupur, eds, Nation, Empire, Colony: Historicizing Gender and Race (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1998); Wendy Woodward, Patricia Hayes and Gary Minkley, eds, Deep hiStories: Gender and Colonialism in Southern Africa (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2002); Tony Ballatyne and Antoinette Burton, eds, Bodies in Contact: Rethinking Colonial Encounters in World History (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2005); Natalya Vince, Marie Rodet and Odile Goerg, ‘Introduction: Shifting Gendered and Colonial Spaces in Africa’, Stichproben. Wiener Zeitschrift für kritische Afrikastudien 12 (2007): 1–11; Susie Protschky, ‘Race, Class and Gender: Debates over the Character of Social Hierarchies in the Netherlands Indies, circa 1600–1942’, Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde 167, no. 4 (2011): 543–56. 53 Some initial work was conducted as part of this research project by Susie Protschky. See Susie Protschky, ‘Between Corporate and Familial Responsibility:

Introduction 17 Johan Maurits van Nassau-Siegen and Masculine Governance in Europe and the Dutch Colonial World’, in Governing Masculinities: Regulating Selves and Others in the Early Modern Period, ed. Susan Broomhall and Jacqueline Van Gent (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2011), 108–20. 54 Nigel Worden, ed., Contingent Lives: Social Identity and Material Culture in the VOC World (Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press, 2007); Susan Broomhall, ‘Dishes, Coins and Pipes: The Epistemological and Emotional Power of VOC Material Culture in Australia’, in The Global Lives of Things: Materials, Material Culture and Commodities in the First Global Age, ed. Anne Gerritsen and Giorgio Riello (London: Routledge, 2015); Susan Broomhall, ‘Fire, Smoke and Ashes: Communications of Power and Emotions by Dutch East India Company Crews on the Australian Continent’, in Fire Stories, ed. Grace Moore (Brooklyn: Punctum Books, forthcoming); Susan Broomhall, ‘Dirk Hartog’s Sea Chest: An Affective Archaeology of VOC Objects in Australia’, in Feeling Things: Objects and Emotions through History, ed. Sarah Randles, Stephanie Downes and Sally Holloway (forthcoming).

This Page is Intentionally Left Blank

Part 1

Claiming spaces

This Page is Intentionally Left Blank

1 Propagating the Orange Gender, material culture and the early modern trajectory of the House of Orange-Nassau

This chapter charts a history of how women and men associated with the House of Orange-Nassau helped this dynastic family confront the challenges and changes of the early modern period. The House of Orange-Nassau emerged from among other leading families of the region during the sixteenth century, saw a remarkable rise to power, and concluded the period as the appointed monarchs of a new country. Here we analyse the changing strategies of the House – in materials, behaviours, and acts – to increase and maintain their power and status, and the people who were instrumental to this creation and exercise. Scholarship to date has predominantly focused on the role of male interlocutors in the creation of Orange-Nassau power.1 However, as we have argued elsewhere, a wide variety of men and women, from family members and those from other Nassau dynastic branches, to paid retainers, courtiers, and artists, were involved in advancing the interests of the House of Orange-Nassau when they intersected in a beneficial way with their own objectives. We follow J. P. J. Duindam, who has argued that dynastic power is ‘based on the transmission of power from generation to generation; spouses, mothers, heirs and siblings are the building blocks of dynasticism’.2 Gender shaped the nature of the engagement that different women and men undertook, but critical too were their positions within the dynastic hierarchy, age, faith, reproductive and familial status, professional capacities, and experiences with state institutions and military endeavours, for example. In a recent study we argue that letters were a particularly important mechanism for negotiating individuals’ alignments to the House, and certainly one that allows historians to see these dynamic processes in action.3 In this study, we focus on presentations of Orange-Nassau identity and power in other forms, particularly through material culture in sites of interpretation that could range from physical spaces to textual forms. These also played a key role in negotiating one’s affiliation to the House of OrangeNassau, for the consumption of varied audiences and viewers. In this chapter, we examine the trajectory of the relationship of the House of Orange-Nassau over the early modern period in three different yet overlapping phases, each with particular characteristics of interaction with material culture. In each phase, we argue that different strategies were applied to achieve distinct objectives by varied individuals, thus creating distinctive phases in the employment of objects, their materials, and their use in specific

22  Claiming spaces spatial sites. These engagements with materiality are explored in more depth throughout this study. Our aim here is to articulate an over-arching narrative of the House for the early modern period, which will provide context for the more thematic focus and detailed examination of activities, materials and spaces in the chapters to follow. In the first section, we explore how individual actions in times of conflict in the sixteenth century became materialised sources of power and identity for the House of Orange-Nassau.

Conflict and sacrifice The political and military leadership provided by the Nassau dynasty was critical to the capacity of the northern provinces to break away from the control of the Spanish Habsburg monarchs in the later sixteenth century. Although the branch of the Orange-Nassau led by Willem van Nassau, Prince of Orange (1533–84) (Figure 1.1), would come to dominate the elite political world of

Figure 1.1 Circle of Dirck Barendsz., Portrait of Willem I, Prince of Orange, Called Willem the Silent, 1582–92, oil on panel, 49cm × 33cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-2164.

Propagating the Orange 23 the United Provinces over the early modern period, a far broader group of men from the Nassau dynasty were centrally engaged in the pursuit of these political, and confessional, objectives.4 Willem might have emerged as the ‘Father of the Fatherland’ but his brothers – Johann (1536–1606), Ludwig (1538–74), Adolf (1540–68) and Heinrich (1550–74) – provided key political, military, financial, and familial support to his actions (Figure 1.2). Ludwig drafted some of the early political documentation explaining the position of those who disapproved of the rule of Margaret of Parma (1522–86) in 1566, while it was Johann who authored the Union of Utrecht (1579) that formally brought together the northern states in a shared purpose. Adolf and Ludwig fought in military engagements, including the Battle of Heiligerlee (1568), in which Adolf died, and the Battle of Mookerheyde (1574), in which both Ludwig and Heinrich perished. Ludwig’s military support to French Huguenots fighting under the Admiral Gaspard II de Coligny (1519–72) not only integrated the Nassau with wider Protestant movements, but also established a bond that would enable Willem’s fourth marriage

Figure 1.2 Workshop of Wybrand de Geest, Group Portrait of the Four Brothers of Willem I, Prince of Orange: The Counts of Nassau Johann, Heinrich, Adolf and Ludwig, c. 1630, oil on canvas, 189cm × 147cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-566.

24  Claiming spaces to Coligny’s daughter, Louise (1555–1620). Meanwhile, Johann VI and his successive wives, Elisabeth von Leuchtenberg (1537–79), Kunigonde Jakobäa von Simmern (1556–86) and Johannetta von Sayn-Wittgenstein (1561–1622), took care of many of Willem’s growing brood of children, leaving Willem free to focus on political matters. The brothers were also adept users of print media to justify their actions and advance their causes.5 In the following generation, Willem’s Calvinist sons – Justinus (1559–1631), Maurits (1567–1625), and Frederik Hendrik (1584–1647) – all maintained positions of martial leadership in the northern Low Countries. Willem’s eldest son Filips Willem (1554–1618), whose mother was Willem’s first wife Anna von Egmont (1533–58) and who was raised as a Catholic at the Spanish court, later enjoying his father’s inheritance in the Spanish-controlled southern Netherlands, remained militarily neutral in the conflict between the provinces, although he did take part in the negotiations for the Spanish in 1608 for the Twelve Years’ Truce. By contrast, Maurits, son of Willem’s second wife Anna von Sachsen (1544–77), applied the strategic innovations of theorists such as Simon Stevin (1548–1620) to siege warfare and training, which initially produced great results for the northern provinces’ campaign.6 By the age of twenty, Maurits was captain-general and admiral-general of the Union. These appointments gave him control over both the sea and land forces of the northern provinces. Likewise, Justinus, Willem’s illegitimate son by Eva Elinckx (c. 1535–c. 1590), was first appointed lieutenant-colonel, then lieutenantadmiral, of Zeeland in 1585 and later was the governor of Breda between 1601 and 1625. These military actions helped to assert the (legitimate) brothers’ claim to political positions. Maurits became the stadtholder of Holland and Zeeland in his father’s footsteps in 1585, conveniently sidestepping any suggestion that these were to be considered hereditary claims. His success in reclaiming Breda in 1590 was matched by political gains as the stadtholder of Guelders, Overijssel, and Utrecht in the same year. After the execution of the statesman Jan van Oldenbarnevelt (1547–1619) in 1619, Maurits was unrivalled in political power.7 The stadtholderates of Groningen and Drenthe followed in 1620. The ascendant status of the Orange-Nassau brothers was assured when youngest brother Frederik Hendrik, son of Willem and his fourth wife Louise de Coligny, was appointed to five of these stadtholderates, as well as becoming captain and admiral-general of the Union in 1625, at Maurits’s death. Visualisations of Willem’s sons in martial garb reinforced their political ascendancy as stadtholders of many, although not all, provinces in the north. Their military and political roles were mutually reinforcing in these images, as they had been in the rise of the status of these Orange-Nassau men. The potential for male military and political achievement, and the celebration of successful accomplishments, were signified in part on the bodies of aristocratic men through armour and other material objects of power.8 The portrait by Antonis Mor (c. 1517–77) of Willem (1555), in which his right hand firmly clasps a staff while his left rests upon an orange-plumed military helmet, signalled his military ascendancy (Figure 1.3). The same material vocabulary was

Propagating the Orange 25

Figure 1.3 Antonis Mor, Portrait of Willem I van Nassau, Prince of Orange and Stadtholder (1533–1584), 1555, 105cm × 81.5cm. Museumslandschaft Hessen Kassel, Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister.

repeated in many later portraits of Maurits and Frederik Hendrik by Michiel Jansz. van Mierevelt (1566–1641) (Figures 1.4 and 1.5), asserting their right to the legacy and status of their father. Although perhaps better known as an adept statesman, who created an elegant courtly culture with his wife, Amalia von Solms-Braunfels (1602–75), Frederik Hendrik’s military garb was no mere show. He had enjoyed a sustained series of victories from Grol (1627) to Hulst (1645). The personal claims of Maurits and Frederik Hendrik to power through individual achievement, forged through these material embodiments, are all the more striking when compared to the van Mierevelt portrait of their elder brother, Filips Willem, made around 1608 (Figure 1.6). Here, Filips Willem rests his right hand, not on a baton or command staff, but on a fashionable walking stick. His clothes are those of the courtier, not the military leader. However, his latent or potential power, which was never actualised in the conflict against his brothers in the north, is signalled by his left hand resting upon the hilt of his sword, while a plumed helmet also rests upon the table to the right behind him.

26  Claiming spaces

Figure 1.4 Michiel Jansz. van Mierevelt, Portrait of Maurits, Prince of Orange, c. 1613–30, oil on panel, 220.3cm × 143.5cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-255.

Such images did not only signal military prowess in abstract terms. Van Mierevelt’s portrait of Maurits depicted him wearing the glittering, engraved, gilt armour that had been presented to him by the States General in celebration of his victory at the Battle of Nieuwpoort (1600). By visualising the ceremonial garb in this portrait, its impact was extended far beyond those who might have access to the physical body of Maurits adorned in it. In 1612, Henry, Prince of Wales (1594–1612), ordered a copy be made for his own use, spreading the renown of the original and the military victory it materialised to the English court.9 Moreover, the portrait became a visual site of interpretation for the material item, creating an opportunity to narrate the historical significance of the man and the military victory that it came to represent. Additionally, prints provided another way to circulate these portraits to new audiences, and offered their own narratives of the martial achievements

Propagating the Orange 27

Figure 1.5 Workshop of Michiel Jansz. van Mierevelt, Frederik Hendrik, Prince of Orange, c. 1632, oil on canvas, 111.5cm × 87.7cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-254.

of Orange-Nassau men. After Breda, Maurits had enjoyed a stunning series of victories, bringing a succession of cities into the hands of the northern provinces. Christi M. Klinkert has noted how prints celebrating these events particularly downplayed the destructive and deadly realities of war for those in the besieged towns, while visually and textually emphasising Maurits’s military skills and positioning him as the region’s leader.10 In portraits and prints, van Mierevelt documented the changing face of Maurits, literally, over much of the course of his life, and in the process assisted with the creation of a kind of celebrity culture through his visualisation of the Orange-Nassau men. In 1607, he created a half-length portrait.11 This was followed in the next year by a series of copies, one of which he presented to the States General. Van Mierevelt’s eye for the commercial possibilities of Maurits’s image would accrue benefits for both men. A wide range of individuals and organisations were eager to display their support for the United Provinces’ military and soon-to-be political leader, and van Mierevelt and his studio churned out copies to meet the demand. One such studio copy

28  Claiming spaces

Figure 1.6 Michiel Jansz. van Mierevelt, Portrait of Prince Filips Willem of Orange, c. 1608, oil on canvas, 122.3cm × 108.3cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-256.

is depicted in The Gold Weigher (c. 1675) by Cornelis de Man (1621–1706) where it hangs with pride of place over the fireplace (Figure 1.7). Moreover, interest in Maurits’s image filtered down to other social groups, as well as far and wide, when van Mierevelt allowed his painting to be etched by engraver Jan Harmensz. Mulder (1571–1628).12 The generation of Maurits’s image served the House of Orange-Nassau well, providing instant recognition for their nominal patriarch far beyond other leading families. But it also paid lucrative dividends for those who produced these images, whose interests in this context aligned with those of the House of Orange. In 1607, for example, van Mierevelt was granted the exclusive right to reproduce Maurits’s etched image for six years by the States General.13 The success of van Mierevelt’s connection to the Orange-Nassau, or rather to Maurits’s images, is demonstrated in the celebratory engraved portrait by printmaker Simon Frisius (c. 1570–c. 1628) of van Mierevelt. In it the artist holds just such a painting of Maurits, clearly suggesting it was a connection and production that was a source of much pride.14 Van Mierevelt was an artist who was heavily commissioned by the House to create lavish Orange portraits, but he also acted on his own initiative to maximise the benefits that could accrue to him personally from the wide circulation of his patron’s image.

Propagating the Orange 29

Figure 1.7 Cornelis de Man, The Gold Weigher, c. 1675, oil on canvas, 81.5cm × 67.5cm. Private Collection, USA.

In addition to the recycled repertoire of martial material culture used in the portraits of the House of Orange’s leading men, other objects could also signify the transition of power and status from Willem to his Protestant sons in the subsequent generation. Maurits’s personal motto, ‘Tandem fit surculus arbor’ (‘in time, the shoot becomes a tree’), reflected his aspirations to follow in his father’s footsteps. In 1606, a roemer was fashioned that was either commissioned by, or designed to appeal to, Maurits in just these terms (Figure 1.8). Not only bearing his arms and his personal motto, combined with the motto of the House, ‘Je maintiendray Nassau’, the delicate cup shows two young shoots sprouting from a pollarded tree stump, representing the life of Willem abruptly cut short. The two young shoots likely represent Maurits and his younger Protestant brother, and eventual heir, Frederik Hendrik. Another roemer, engraved with the year 1608, carefully articulated the identities of the elder two (legitimate) Orange-Nassau brothers in deeply political terms (Figure 1.9). This was the year in which Filips Willem and Maurits first came face to face, on opposite sides of the negotiations for the Twelve Years’ Truce. This glass offers a northern perspective on the relative power of the brothers: the larger arms of Maurits, combined with the smaller ones of Filips

30  Claiming spaces

Figure 1.8 Anonymous, Roemer with the Arms and the Motto of Maurits, 1606, glass, 11.1cm × 9.0cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, BK-NM-10754-47.

Willem, each with their crown, coupled with the House’s motto. A branch bearing three oranges reflects the legitimate male heirs of their father Willem, although under Maurits’s own arms is a branch with just two oranges, pointedly representing the two legitimate and Protestant sons of his father. Throughout their belligerent activities, the Protestant Orange-Nassau brothers were, like their father, supported by a large pool of elite Protestant men, many of whom were relatives by blood or marriage.15 For example, Philipp von Hohenlohe-Neuenstein (1550–1606) effectively shadowed the youthful Maurits in his appointment as admiral and captain-general, upon the request of the State of Holland to command on his behalf. Hohenlohe had earlier been in Willem’s service and, in 1595, married Maurits’s older halfsister, Maria (1556–1616) (Figure 1.10). Maurits’s cousin, Wilhelm Ludwig (1560–1620), son of Johann VI, with whom Maurits had been raised at Dillen­ burg and Heidelberg, was a source of critical military advice and co-ordinated

Propagating the Orange 31

Figure 1.9 Anonymous, Roemer with the Coats of Arms of Maurits and Prince Filips Willem, 1608, glass, 16.5cm × 10.5cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, BK-NM-5272.

a series of campaigns. He married Maurits’s sister, Anna (1563–88), in 1587 (Figure 1.11). Artworks were a critical resource for cementing these relationships and alliances between elite Protestant men of the region. Images celebrated historic shared victories among them, visually narrating their allegiances at the time and into the future. Just after 1629, Pauwels van Hillegaert (1596–1640) depicted the triumphant, joint participation of Frederik Hendrik (depicted holding his commander’s staff) and his cousin Ernst Casimir van NassauDietz (1573–1632), son of Johann VI, at the Siege of ’s-Hertogenbosch in that year (Figure 1.12). A series of historical portraits created by the workshop of Wybrand de Geest (1592–1661) in the 1630s celebrated the contribution of Willem’s four brothers (Figure 1.2 above). However, such images could also

32  Claiming spaces

Figure 1.10 Workshop of Jan Antonisz. van Ravesteyn, Portrait of Philipp von Hohenlohe-Neuenstein, c. 1609–33, oil on panel, 30cm × 25cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-544.

bring together men of shared blood in compositions that were historically fictitious, or in reality politically problematic. A follower of Adriaen Pietersz. van de Venne (1589–1662) captured just such an unlikely dynastic outing in his c. 1625 depiction of Maurits riding on horseback accompanied by his brothers Frederik Hendrik and Filips Willem, and their nephew Friedrich V, the Elector Palatine (1596–1632) and son of their sister Louise Juliana (1576–1644). Behind them ride their cousins, the brothers Wilhelm Ludwig, Ernst Casimir, and Ludwig Günther (1575–1604) (Figure 1.13). An earlier engraving by Adriaen and Jan van de Venne (d. 1625) dating from 1620, had captured six of the Nassau princes in a similar moment of male bonhomie on horseback.16 The complex political and dynastic challenge that Filips Willem had represented in his lifetime dissipated after his death in 1618, enabling his partial re-integration into the Nassau dynastic story, at least in visual terms. The importance of visualising these alliances and shared military experiences between men can be seen in Frederik Hendrik’s significant commission of more than thirty individual portraits of military officers who served in the Eighty Years’ War. Between 1609 and 1633, the workshops of Jan Antonisz.

Propagating the Orange 33

Figure 1.11 Workshop of Michiel Jansz. van Mierevelt, Portrait of Wilhelm Ludwig von Nassau-Dillenburg, Nicknamed Our Father in West Frisian, 1609, oil on panel, 29.8cm × 24.1cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-525.

van Ravesteyn (c. 1570–1657) and Michiel Jansz. van Mierevelt produced a series of portraits, thirty-two of which are extant, for Frederik Hendrik’s newly renovated residence, Huis Honselaardijk. A substantial proportion (twenty-six of the thirty portraits of officers who were fighting for the north) were connected to the Nassau dynasty by birth or marriage. The portraits of Philipp von Hohenlohe-Neuenstein and Wilhelm Ludwig above (Figures 1.10 and 1.11), as well as those depicting Justinus and Ernst Casimir below (Figures 1.14 and 1.15) form part of this series. Others included key allies from across the Channel, such as Robert Dudley (c. 1532–88) and Horace Vere (1565–1635) who had fought with the Dutch States Army, and Gaspard de Coligny and his son, François (1557–91), in France. Although the series is not visually unified, the majority of the portraits share elements, such as the depiction of the right hand side of the body and face and the bright orange sash that when displayed en masse was surely designed to have made quite an impression on the viewer. The nobility of the conflict itself was heightened by the presence of the commander of the Spanish forces, Ambrosio Spinola (1569–1630), who, along with Filips Willem, represented the other side of this conflict.

Figure 1.12 Pauwels van Hillegaert, Frederik Hendrik and Ernst Casimir van Nassau-Dietz at the Siege of ’s Hertogenbosch, c. 1629–35, oil on panel, 47.1cm × 63.1cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-607.

Figure 1.13 Follower of Adriaen Pietersz. van de Venne, Prince Maurits Accompanied by his Two Brothers, Friedrich V, Elector Palatine, and Counts of Nassau on Horseback, c. 1625, oil on canvas, 172cm × 283cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-445.

Propagating the Orange 35

Figure 1.14 Workshop of Jan Antonisz. van Ravesteyn, Portrait of Justinus van Nassau, Illegitimate Son of Prince Willem I and Eva Elinckx, c. 1609–33, oil on panel, 29.4cm × 24.1cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-536.

The gift of portrait images of Orange-Nassau individuals was one that, as seen above, was shared by House members and those beyond. However, the meanings of such gifts could be profoundly different. In 1637, Frederik Hendrik commissioned a half-length copy of his own image painted by Gerrit van Honthorst (1592–1656). It was to be given to Jacob Woutersz. van Rijckervorsel (c. 1583–1656), the town carpenter of Breda whose drawings had helped Frederik Hendrik to capture the town.17 Frederik Hendrik’s gift constituted a tangible visual and material connection for van Rijckervorsel to the Orange-Nassau, one that reinforced the power of proximity to the House in a material form to a new community of viewers. Shared military experiences were not the only connections materialised in artworks between men associated with the House of Orange-Nassau at this period. Other forms of alliance were equally important to visualise for the growing power of the House and its leading men. These emphasised exclusive acceptance in elite male orders that raised their status. Filips Willem’s 1608 portrait depicted him wearing the chain of the Habsburg Order of the Golden Fleece, an honour he was awarded in 1599 that had also once been bestowed

36  Claiming spaces

Figure 1.15 Workshop of Michiel Jansz. van Mierevelt, Portrait of Ernst Casimir I, Count of Nassau-Dietz, c. 1623–33, oil on panel, 29.8cm × 24.2cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-529.

upon his father, and his male ancestors before him. This represented a kind of continuity of loyalty to the Habsburg monarchs that Filips Willem shared with his father, asserting a shared courtly experience that his brothers would never enjoy. Likewise, the 1608 roemer celebrated these links, with his arms shown surrounded by the chain of the Order. When Maurits was made a member of the Order of the Garter by James VI and I (1566–1625) in 1613, it signalled the House’s entry into an exclusive international network of elite male power. Maurits’s investiture by the English ambassador in the Binnenhof was depicted in a print engraved by Simon Frisius for a far wider audience, amplifying the significance of Maurits’s investiture and his status in turn as a major protagonist on the international political scene, akin to Europe’s monarchs (Figure 1.16). To commemorate the occasion, a precious linen tablecloth was made for the celebratory banquet, at which the English ambassador was present, depicting Maurits’s heraldic sign and the device of the Order.18 This occasion may also have been the reason for the commission by the States General of a new portrait of Maurits by van Mierevelt in which he was shown wearing the medal of the Order under his orange sash.19 Orders were the elite, gendered, social

Propagating the Orange 37

Figure 1.16 Simon Frisius, Maurits’s Investiture with the Order of the Garter, 1613, 1613, etching, 282mm × 495mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, RP-P-OB-80.433A.

networks of an all-male clientele who exchanged prestigious material objects intended for display in just such a highly visible manner. Material gifts and objects to commemorate these new and renewed international alliances for the House of Orange-Nassau were an important part of visualising male dynastic power, and a way for the men of the House to claim membership of exclusive European communities of governing individuals. Another form of material culture, which interpreted the acts of OrangeNassau men for a range of communities, was more commemorative than celebratory. These were artefacts, from monuments to ‘relics’, which articulated the commitment in blood of the House and wider Nassau dynasty to the cause of the United Provinces. Willem’s shocking assassination in July 1584, and his model death, were widely imagined in a range of prints visualising his final moments. His widow, Louise de Coligny, utilised letters to situate herself and Willem’s children under the protection of the States in return for her husband’s sacrifice of material goods, and ultimately his life, for their objectives.20 At the same time, her own portraits reinforced the notion of loss through her repeated depiction as a widow (Figure 1.17). It was a visual strategy that would be employed throughout the period by later Orange-Nassau widows and descendants – from Amalia von Solms-Braunfels to Charlotte de La Trémoille, Duchess of Stanley (1599–1664) – to keep present, and heighten the status of, the men that they had lost, and to empower their own actions. The monument designed by father and son Hendrik (1565–1621) and Pieter de Keyser (c. 1595–1676) for the Nieuwekerk in Delft, where Willem was buried, quickly became a site attracting celebrity status, or perhaps a form

38  Claiming spaces

Figure 1.17 Willem Jacobsz. Delff, Portrait of Louise de Coligny, 1627, engraving, 419mm × 298mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, RP-P-1918-1726.

of quasi-pilgrimage. Commissioned by the States General in 1614 and completed in 1621, a seated bronze effigy of Willem was depicted in armour, while his white marble recumbent form was accompanied by the allegorical figures of Fame, Prudence, Religion, and Liberty.21 In this space, under his monument, most of Willem’s male and female descendants were laid to rest, and their individual identities subsumed into the narrative of Orange-Nassau sacrifice it established.22 The 1645 painting by Dirck van Delen (c. 1605–71) of an unknown family respectfully visiting the tomb demonstrates how the material commemoration of Orange-Nassau sacrifice could be interpreted in alternate, visual, forms for new political contexts (Figure 1.18). Allegiance to the Orange-Nassau cause could be fashioned by transforming material creation into more accessible visual forms, which could be either individually commissioned or purchased from mass-printed engravings. An initial phase of the House of Orange-Nassau’s rise to prominence may have been marked by military endeavours and political leadership that echoed long-held understandings of aristocratic male achievement. However, these

Propagating the Orange 39

Figure 1.18 Dirck van Delen, A Family beside the Tomb of Prince Willem I in the Nieuwe Kerk, Delft, 1645, oil on panel, 74cm × 110cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-2352.

actions were enhanced by a dynamic and vital engagement with material culture that fully asserted the right of the Orange-Nassau to predominance among the elite families of the region. The transition of material culture into other forms and spaces created new interpretations for their specific readers, audiences, viewers and visitors. Portraits of leading Orange-Nassau men, often depicted in unrealistic groups to symbolise the unity of the House, could be copied and distributed among family members or the European elite. The use of print media, however, enabled the mass distribution of these images to a much wider audience in the Dutch Republic and beyond. The award of precious membership to elite orders, such as the Order of the Garter, was symbolised by a specific medal, but was only visible to a select few. If Orange-Nassau men added this medal to their armour and the other symbols that marked their identity in oil portraits, then a far wider audience could witness this Orange performance of political power. Moreover, these transformations were not necessarily controlled by individuals directly associated with the House, but typically saw the alignment of those who stood to gain from heightened significance of Orange-Nassau identities in material, visual, or textual forms that could range from discrete to mass-produced objects. This utilisation of material culture was a strategy of power for the House of Orange-Nassau that had distinctly gendered elements. Men and women, indeed leaders and subordinates of both sexes, were visualised to promote the House’s interests, but in distinct ways and in unequal proportions. However, the focus on male

40  Claiming spaces achievement highlighted in this analysis should not suggest that women were not vital in commissioning, circulating, and advancing these presentations, as will be demonstrated in the following sections.

Generational renewal and familial alliances In this section, we explore the expansion of the House of Orange-Nassau’s networks through dynastic alliances created by marriage and generational renewal. In this work, new participants emerged from within and around the family to manage the formation of a series of alliances for the Orange-Nassau, in addition to the allegiances established through military engagement. These practices included the exchange of children within the wider Nassau dynasty to forge intra-dynastic networks of support, and marriage alliances with the broader international Protestant elite. These actions were undertaken both by leading men and dynastic subordinates whose interests such alliances served. Alliances were fostered through mechanisms such as letters, imagery, and gift exchange, all of which were tools that were accessible to a large proportion of dynastic members, including women and children. A further aspect of alliance creation during this phase of the activities of the House of Orange-Nassau was the development of marriage connections with other families who supported the Protestant movement. Willem’s brother Ludwig negotiated a marriage for Willem to Lutheran Anna von Sachsen, daughter of Moritz, the Elector of Saxony (1521–53), and Agnes von Hessen (1527–55), in 1561. This signalled his shift away from Catholicism (although he did not openly declare himself Calvinist until 1573), and his hope for support among the Protestant German elite.23 Likewise, Willem’s third marriage was to Charlotte de Bourbon (c. 1546–82), daughter of the Catholic Louis, Duke of Montpensier (1513–82), and Jacqueline de Longwy (before 1520–61), who had escaped from her position as an abbess of a convent at Jouarre and converted to Calvinism.24 His fourth marriage to Louise de Coligny continued a French connection, this time firmly forging a network with the French Calvinist aristocracy. The marriages of Willem’s children from the 1590s similarly emphasised the dynastic needs of this era. The marriages of Maria and Anna, both of whom had been cared for in the Dillenburg home of their uncle Johann VI, echoed their brother Maurits’s military alliances. Anna married her cousin Wilhelm Ludwig von Nassau-Dillenburg in 1587, while his half-sister Maria married Philipp von Hohenlohe-Neuenstein in 1595. Both men were crucial supporters of Maurits’s military campaigns against the Spanish. In the 1590s, Willem’s younger daughters came of marriageable age and it fell to their step-mother Louise de Coligny, along with their uncle Johann VI and half-brother Maurits, to arrange suitable matches. The marriage of his daughter, Louise Juliana, established a prestigious match with Friedrich IV, the Protestant Elector Palatine (1574–1610), and provided a stronger base among the German Protestant elite outside of the Nassau dynasty. For her sister, Elisabeth (1577–1642), an attractive alliance was forged with Henri de

Propagating the Orange 41 la Tour d’Auvergne, the Duke of Bouillon (1555–1623), one of the most powerful Calvinist noblemen in French-speaking territories. His cousin, Claude de La Trémoille, the Duke of Thouars (1566–1604), would be matched with Charlotte Brabantina (1580–1631). These marriages provided firm support for the House of Orange-Nassau from the most prestigious French Calvinist elite families. Louise de Coligny was instrumental in developing these ties among the French nobility through her natal connections and practice of correspondence, which cultivated strong emotional bonds with, and between, these men.25 Catharina Belgica (1578–1648), who had been raised as a Lutheran by Willem’s sister, Catharina von Schwarzburg (1543–1624), was wed to Calvinist Philipp Ludwig II von Hanau-Münzenberg (1576–1612). Philipp Ludwig II was under the guardianship of a series of German nobles, including Johann VI von Nassau-Dillenburg. His mother, Magdalena von Waldeck (1558–99), married Johann VII von Nassau-Siegen (1594–1636) in 1581 and Philipp Ludwig II and his brother came to reside at the Nassau-Dillenburg court. The match in 1596 with Catharina Belgica thus confirmed Philipp Ludwig’s ties of affinity to the broader Nassau dynasty, as well as reintegrating Catharina Belgica into the House’s Calvinist faith. In such ways, the first and second generations of the House used marriages strategically to open up their networks to new faith communities of which they were a part, and diversified support among the ruling elite of both German and French territories. The House’s earlier marriage alliances with the Protestant families of Germany would have unexpected consequences within a generation. As several of the German states fell to attack from Catholic forces, their leaders sought refuge among supportive kin. The secure position of the Calvinist Orange-Nassau in the United Provinces proved an attractive option. Louise Juliana’s son Friedrich V, who had accepted and lost the throne of Bohemia in rapid succession, injected The Hague with the cultural (if not economic) capital of his family, including the royal connections of his wife and the pomp of their courtly entourage. Friedrich was visually integrated among the Nassau princes in a number of prints (see Figure 1.13 above), and a commissioned portrait executed between 1624 and 1629 by van Mierevelt was added to a series that also included Willem, Filips Willem, Maurits, Frederik Hendrik, Wilhelm Ludwig, and Ernst Casimir, made for the town hall in Delft.26 Although relationships between these aristocratic dynasties were sometimes tense, the capacity of the Orange-Nassaus to provide refuge cemented their power to advance their reputation as stalwart defenders of Protestantism, and altered the House’s perceived place in the wider European hierarchy of elite families. In April 1625, Frederik Hendrik married twenty-two-year-old Amalia von Solms-Braunfels, who had arrived in The Hague among the retinue of Elizabeth Stuart (1596–1662).27 The reproductive success of the couple, producing a son, Willem (1626–50), and four daughters, Louise Henriëtte (1627–67), Albertine Agnes (1634–96), Henriëtte Catharina (1637–1708) and Maria (1642–88) who survived to adulthood, was celebrated in a large number of portraits that continued to support the development of immediate

42  Claiming spaces recognition for the family. The children were painted multiple times throughout their childhood, with and without their parents, and with cousins and illegitimate siblings, in portraits that formed part of a material strategy to expand the Orange-Nassau profile. In a c. 1647 portrait by van Honthorst of the prince and his wife, just their three youngest (and as yet unmarried) daughters were depicted (Figure 1.19). Amalia commissioned many portraits of her children, including the descendants of the illegitimate son of her husband and Margaretha Catharina Bruyns (c. 1595–c. 1624), Frederik van Nassau-Zuylestein (c. 1624–72), among them.28 Around 1665, Amalia commissioned from Jan Mijtens (c. 1614–70) a portrait of her youngest daughter with Frederik van Nassau-Zuylestein’s son, Hendrik (c. 1650–73), heer van Leerdam. His presence, performing a service role as he ties a ribbon on Maria’s costume, reflected Amalia’s intention to have him considered among the House’s progeny, albeit in a subordinate role. Illegitimate family members would later become important figures serving the House.29 Lodewijk van Nassau-Beverweerd (1602–65), one of Maurits’s sons by Margaretha van Mechelen (c. 1580–1662), for example, accompanied Amalia’s son Willem to England for his marriage to Mary Henrietta Stuart (1631–60) in 1641. These

Figure 1.19 Gerrit van Honthorst, Portrait of Frederik Hendrik (1584–1647), Prince of Orange, his Wife Amalia von Solms (1602–1675) and their Three Youngest Daughters Albertine Agnes (1634–1696), Henriëtte Catharina (1637–1708), and Maria (1642–1688), c. 1647. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-874.

Propagating the Orange 43 images were then copied and gifted in a conscious and tactical manner, which was continued by Frederik and Amalia’s daughters in the next generation, and by Amalia in commissions of her grandchildren. As befitted the rising international status of the House, Frederik Hendrik and Amalia planned high-profile, politically strategic matches for their children. The aim of the House of Orange-Nassau was to move to a higher international position through marriage alliances, including with the ruling houses of England and Brandenburg. Frederik Hendrik, who was invested with the Order of the Garter in 1628, sent Charles I (1600–49) companion portraits of himself and Amalia by Gerrit van Honthorst in 1631. The full-length image of Frederik Hendrik showed the prince wearing his Garter insignia on a blue ribbon over his breastplate.30 Not only the gift itself, but also the image depicted in it, presented a material reminder of the close ties between the OrangeNassau and the Stuarts, connections that the Orange-Nassau hoped to make yet stronger through the marriage of their children. After lengthy negotiations, during which Frederik Hendrik also sent his son Willem’s portrait, painted by Gerrit van Honthorst, as a gift to Charles I, Willem married Mary in May 1641.31 The Stuarts were a royal dynasty who expected to marry their eldest daughter to one of the other kingdoms of Europe rather than to the upstart Orange-Nassaus. Yet Charles’s sister Elizabeth had married the Elector Palatine, later King of Bohemia, who was a scion of the Nassau dynasty, and it was at Frederik Hendrik’s court that the family sought refuge. There were, thus, close personal and religious affiliations between the Stuarts and OrangeNassaus.32 On his arrival at the English court, Willem dutifully recorded the impressive gifts that he was to give the royal family in the diary he kept of his travels, including a string of emeralds for the queen Henrietta Maria (1609–69), a chain with a figure of St George in diamonds for Prince Charles (1630–85), a diamond-encrusted sword for the Duke of York (1633–1701) and boxes decorated with diamonds for the princesses.33 This marriage, of the princely Orange-Nassau to the royal Stuart dynasty, represented a prestigious rise for the Dutch family to international status, an alliance visualised in a portrait of the young couple by leading artist Anthony Van Dyck (1599–1641) (Figure 1.20). The portrait situated the simple wedding band on Mary’s hand, held by Willem, at the centre of the image. It also highlighted the gifts exchanged between the parties: Mary wears the jewelled brooch Willem had presented to her, while Willem wears a striking pink silk suit that was commissioned by the Prince of Wales’s London tailor to equip the sober Orange-Nassau groom in a manner considered suitable by the Stuarts for marriage to their daughter.34 The morning after the wedding, Willem presented further gifts to his bride, each carefully itemised in his diary, including a diamond ring and box and a chain of 400 pearls. Later, on his taking leave from the court, he was presented with a gilded sword encrusted with fourteen diamonds from the king, and a large diamond from the queen.35 As these examples suggest, gender shaped both the nature of the gifts given to men and women at the court, and what was considered appropriate to be given by elite individuals of different sexes.

44  Claiming spaces

Figure 1.20 Anthony Van Dyck, Willem II, Prince of Orange, and his Bride, Mary Henrietta Stuart, 1641, oil on canvas, 182.5cm × 142cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-102.

Soon after, in November 1641, Friedrich Wilhelm, the Elector of Branden­ burg (1620–88), arrived in The Hague to marry Frederik and Amalia’s eldest daughter, Louise Henriëtte.36 This union was popularly known as one that the bride had been for some time unwilling to support, which may explain the rigorous production of images that accompanied the event.37 These paintings celebrating the marriage represented the House in relation to other affiliates, and were displayed in key representational spaces within their palaces. Jan Mijtens depicted the wedding scene in his The marriage between the Great Elector and Louise Henriëtte of Orange on 7 December 1646 (27 November) (1647) as a magnificent event in the Great Hall of the Oude Hof (Paleis Noordeinde) in The Hague. Frederik Hendrik stands between the bride and bridegroom under the baldachin at the centre of the painting. Louise Henriëtte’s brother Willem wears an orange-coloured outfit bearing the star of the Order of the Garter, while Amalia and Elizabeth Stuart stand to the right.38 Gerrit van

Propagating the Orange 45 Honthorst’s 1647 full-length portrait of the couple (Figure 1.21) mapped the new international relations of the House of Orange-Nassau, a companion piece to his other portraits of Willem II and Mary (Figure 1.22) and Frederik Hendrik, Amalia, and the daughters who remained with them (Figure 1.19 discussed above). Amalia also commissioned Gerrit van Honthorst to create Allegory on the wedding of Louise Henriëtte and the Great Elector of Brandenburg (1649) to hang in the Oranjezaal of Huis ten Bosch.39 An etching by Frans van Beusekom (active 1642–65), Friedrich Wilhelm von Brandenburg and Louise Henriëtte von Oranien (1647), depicted the newly married couple standing on a balustrade surrounded by fruit garlands with Louise Henriëtte offering her husband a small orange branch bearing fruit.40 An allegory created by Thomas Willeboirts Boasschaert (1613–54) appeared to depict Friedrich Wilhelm as Mars and Louise Henriëtte as Venus at the forge of Vulcan (Figure 1.23). The Orange-Nassau’s ambitious marriage strategy saw both their eldest son and daughter linked to the principal ruling Protestant elites of Europe.

Figure 1.21 Gerrit van Honthorst, Portrait of Friedrich Wilhelm, Elector of Brandenburg, with his Wife Louise Henriëtte, Countess of Nassau, 1647, oil on canvas, 302cm × 194.3cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-873.

46  Claiming spaces

Figure 1.22 Gerrit van Honthorst, Portrait of Willem II (1626–1650), Prince of Orange, and his Wife Mary Henrietta Stuart (1631–1660), 1647, oil on canvas, 302cm × 194.3cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-871.

The lavish wedding ceremonies of Frederik Hendrik and Amalia’s younger daughters occurred in locations designed to signal the extent of Orange-Nassau reach. For Albertine Agnes, who was to marry Willem Frederik (1613–64) of the Nassau-Dietz branch of the dynasty in May 1652, the widowed Amalia refused Willem Frederik’s request to host the wedding in his own territories, and instead insisted that it take place in Cleves, territory belonging to the Elector of Brandenburg and administered by Johann Moritz von NassauSiegen (1604–79) (Figure 1.24). There, Johann Moritz, a man who would be highly influential in the Nassau dynasty’s overseas representation, hosted a remarkable visual and material feast for the international guests, including

Propagating the Orange 47

Figure 1.23 Thomas Willeboirts Bosschaert, Mars Receives the Weapons from Venus and Vulcan: Allegory, 1624–54, oil on canvas, 225cm × 238.5cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-C-400.

fireworks and a procession with exotic and classical characters.41 When Johann Georg II von Anhalt-Dessau (1627–93) asked that Henriëtte Catharina travel to marry him in 1659, Amalia again refused. Eventually, Groningen, a halfway location between the lands of the Orange-Nassau and the AnhaltDessau, was selected for the July 1659 wedding. However, Groningen was a city that belonged to Amalia’s son-in-law, Willem Frederik van NassauDietz, and there were further celebrations in Leeuwarden, Utrecht, Rijswijk, and Amsterdam – all of which were Orange or Dietz territories.42 This phase demonstrates new forms of dynastic strategy to those adopted during the period of conflict. Here, subordinate men and women, as well as the House’s leading men, emerged as key protagonists in forging alliances through care and marriage relationships. Indeed, almost all of Willem’s children in the second generation participated in this policy through their marriages, and in doing so, established alliances that integrated the House with the

48  Claiming spaces

Figure 1.24 Wybrand de Geest, Portrait of Willem Frederik, Count of NassauDietz, 1632, oil on panel, 29.8cm × 24cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-530.

needs and future of the Dutch States, and with the wider continental Protestant world. These strategies obliged their allies to provide financial, military, and moral support for the House, in the present and into the future. The alliances were sustained by mechanisms such as epistolary and gift-exchange cultures fostered among women and men, which created affective ties that could encourage action. These actions were crucial to the House’s advancement and sources of support into the future.43 Naturally, forging strong marriage alliances would remain a mainstay of dynastic policy for the family, but after this period the particular aims of their marriage politics would shift. Critical to this phase was the House’s reaching out across Europe’s aristocracy to create new ties among a shared-faith community who could not only render military and financial support, but also provide new spaces for the presentation of OrangeNassau power and status.

Male absence and female regents A different aspect of the House of Orange-Nassau’s rise in power and status over the early modern period, and one that utilised material culture as a key

Propagating the Orange 49 resource, was occasioned by the absence of an adult patriarch for the House. These circumstances, which occurred on several occasions during the period, forced usually subordinate members or affiliates of the House to undertake careful, strategic work to maintain the power and influence that the House had accrued, particularly in the northern Provinces. Their success ensured that the House emerged as more than elected stadtholders or hereditary princes by the first few decades of the nineteenth century; instead, the House of Orange-Nassau assumed royal status as monarchs of the United Kingdom of the Netherlands. In the early seventeenth century, the bachelor status of both Maurits and Frederik Hendrik proved a complex conundrum for the House, which looked set to have no direct male descendant of Willem, the founding father. Such a position made the House theoretically vulnerable to other elite dynasties aspiring to political leadership. Visual strategies proved an important component of shoring up Orange-Nassau power, coupled with ritualised practices that signalled the continued presence of the Orange, as well as wider Nassau, kin. Despite having no legitimate children, Maurits had eight children by six different women. Like Justinus before them, these children could not enjoy Orange-Nassau political leadership directly. However, Maurits employed portrait imagery of a number of his sons to render them politically potent. Around 1604, he commissioned a portrait of Lodewijk van Nassau-Beverweerd, his eighteenth-month-old son, one of three sons he had by Margaretha van Mechelen (Figure 1.25). In case the powerful kin connections of this child were in any doubt, Lodewijk was dressed in aristocratic finery, and stood in front of a vibrant orange fabric. Around his neck hung the heavy ceremonial gold chain bearing the medallion struck to commemorate Maurits’s capture of the city of Graves from Spanish control in 1602. The portrait depicted the side of the medallion bearing Maurits’s face in profile (the other side shows a common motif employed by Maurits, the pollarded tree with new shoots sprouting from it). In 1608, Lodewijk’s brother Willem (1601–27) was painted with a fashionable plumed hat on the table and a cane in his left hand, in a pose reminiscent of his father’s well-known portraits.44 These images, foregrounding his sons by Mechelen, seemed to hold open the potential for Maurits to legally adopt these sons, making them eligible as his heirs (although the brother of Lodewijk and Willem, Maurits [1604–17], died at the age of thirteen). Certainly, they were embedded in the Orange-Nassau visual narrative in ways that other children of Maurits were not, although his sons Carel (c. 1612–37) and Carel Maurits (c. 1616–46), by Jobghen van Alphen and Anna van de Kelder respectively, both served their paternal House’s interests through military service, and their siblings, Anna (d. 1673), Eleanora (c. 1620–1693/1703) and Elisabeth (b. 1611), Maurits’s daughters by Cornelia Jacobsdochter, Deliana de Backer and Ursula de Rijck, made matches that supported Orange-Nassau strategic interests in the Netherlands and Brandenburg.45 Frederik Hendrik’s marriage to Amalia, just before Maurits’s death in April 1625, removed the need to legitimate Maurits’s offspring, although his sons by Mechelen remained physically and visually present in the House’s narrative of the funeral procession and in the prints that were made of it for broader circulation.

50  Claiming spaces

Figure 1.25 Anonymous, Portrait of a Boy, possibly Lodewijk van Nassau, later Lord of Beverweerd, De Leck, Odijk and Lekkerkerk, Illegitimate Son of Maurits, Prince of Orange, and Margaretha van Mechelen, 1604, oil on panel, 90cm × 69cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-956.

When Frederik and Amalia’s son Willem II died unexpectedly in 1650, leaving his young widow Mary Henrietta Stuart pregnant with their first child, the House once again risked having no male heir. The young couple no longer represented the future of the House of Orange-Nassau. Eight days later, Willem III was born. The child would become the subject of divergent political and dynastic campaigns in visual form led by his grandmother, Amalia, and his mother, Mary.46 In commissioned portraits and the prints that were made from them, the progress of the young prince was documented for a wide audience.47 Those commissioned by the boy’s mother Mary emphasised her influence on him. A portrait by Gerrit van Honthorst in 1652 shows her entwined arm in

Propagating the Orange 51 arm with her young son.48 Mary also commissioned images of herself asserting her rights as Willem’s widow, as in a 1652 portrait by Bartholomeus der Helst (1613–70) in which she pointedly holds the orange (and the future of the House) in her hand (Figure 1.26). Amalia likewise commissioned a series of portraits of her grandson. In a significant portrait by Adriaen Hanneman (c. 1603–71) from 1654, the young Willem himself grasps an orange in his hand, while the thistle – the emblem of the Stuarts – is shown underfoot (Figure 1.27). However, Amalia did also make efforts to ensure that Willem remained in the orbit of his Stuart relatives. She commissioned Hanneman to make two further portraits of Willem III, which she sent to the court of James VI and I, one to hang in the apartment of his grandmother, Henrietta Maria, and the other in the rooms of his aunt Anne Hyde, the Countess of York (1637–71).49 Capturing Willem’s likeness was not always an easy task, as the boy could not always be made to sit still: Amalia wrote to her secretary Constantijn Huygens

Figure 1.26 Bartholomeus van der Helst, Mary Henrietta Stuart, Princess of Orange, as Widow of Willem II, 1652, oil on canvas, 199.5cm × 170cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-142.

52  Claiming spaces

Figure 1.27 Adriaen Hanneman, Portrait of Willem III, Prince of Orange, as a Child, 1654, oil on canvas, 135cm × 95cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-3889.

of one portrait of William, ‘As to the promised portrait, you know how difficult it is to make a child sit who can hardly stop’.50 Willem’s progress to adulthood was charted through such important images. In this anonymous copy made around 1658, the prince was shown on the transition to manly status. He was depicted in an orange coat or skirt, common to early childhood, rather than breeches, but with trappings of masculine authority and status such as the command baton, sword, and the ribbon of the Order of the Garter which he was awarded in 1653 (Figure 1.28). At the same time, Amalia drew upon the Orange-Nassau alliances to play key roles in Willem’s life. She was successful in securing a role for the Elector of Brandenburg as part of the prince’s guardianship. Willem’s image was made a present for Friedrich Wilhelm, who was his guardian, and Amalia’s son-in-law.51 From 1659 to 1666, Frederik van Nassau-Zuylestein served as

Propagating the Orange 53

Figure 1.28 Anon, Willem III (1650–1702), when Prince of Orange, oil on canvas, 127.7cm × 101.6cm. Royal Collection Trust/© Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 2015, RCIN 402684.

Willem’s governor. When Willem’s regency was transferred from Amalia to control by the States General, she immortalised her contribution (at the right of the 1661 image by Theodoor van Thulden [1606–69]) while also asserting her expectation of Willem’s future role as a governor in his own right, through the empty seat that he would one day fill. In the image, Willem himself was, in the meantime, helpfully supported by the goddess Minerva (Figure 1.29). Willem evidently learned much from his childhood experiences, for portraiture would continue to serve as a key tool in his repertoire. In a depiction of the young prince by Jan de Baen (1633–1702), similar to another image once held in the Potsdam collections and dated to 1667, Willem is shown in magnificent, classical Roman attire (Figure 1.30). Flagging his ambitions yet further, albeit in the background here, is a lake with a statue of Hercules and the Nemean lion, which would become a favoured emblem for Willem. In this year, Willem was admitted to the Council of State, and with the Peace of

54  Claiming spaces

Figure 1.29 Theodoor van Thulden, Allegory of the Farewell of Willem III from Amalia von Solms Following the Transfer of Regency to the States General, 1661, oil on canvas, 115cm × 97cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-4654.

Breda concluded, the end of war with England was signalled.52 Christopher White suggests that Baen’s compositions bears ‘striking points of contact’ with Velasquez’s portrait of Felipe IV of Spain (1605–65) in hunting costume in the Prado.53 Willem’s martial aspirations were signalled in a gift to his uncle, Charles II (1630–85), of a portrait in which Caspar Netscher (1639–84) showed Willem in full length, in a cuirass with the plumed helmet on the edge to his right, while a battle is conducted in the distance behind him.54 Through

Propagating the Orange 55 these images and gifts, Willem was locating himself in an international context of elite rule. Willem’s attention to his English relatives paid off, with marriage to his cousin Mary II Stuart (1662–94) in 1677 (Figure 1.31). It was through his wife that Willem III ultimately ascended to the thrones of England, Ireland, and Scotland, as William III, with Mary II, after 1688. Affiliates of the House could also flag their allegiance by their artistic commissions. Willem Frederik and his wife Albertine Agnes commissioned Pieter Nason (c. 1612–88/90) in 1663 to produce a historical representation of selected Orange-Nassau male kin: Willem, Maurits, Frederik Hendrik, and Albertine Agnes’s brother Willem II (Figure 1.32), using existing images by van Honthorst, Abraham Ragueneau (1623–after 1681) and van Mierevelt. Willem

Figure 1.30 Jan de Baen, Willem III when Prince of Orange (1650–1702), c. 1667, oil on canvas, 180.3cm × 133.1cm. Royal Collection Trust/© Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 2015, RCIN 404779.

56  Claiming spaces

Figure 1.31 Circle of Charles Boit, Portrait miniature of Mary II Stuart, wife of Willem III, copper, 3.2 cm × 2.7 cm, Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-4301.

III’s addition to the side of the image signalled the couple’s support for their nephew as the leader of the House. Several versions of this image exist. The version owned by Willem Frederik and Albertine Agnes depicts young Willem in a rhinegrave outfit, but another copy, once held in the home of Willem’s aunt Henriëtte Catharina in Dessau, showed the boy in armour appropriate for the aristocratic masculinity to which he was expected to aspire.55 Moreover, other producers of material culture beyond the direct control of the House of Orange-Nassau retained an important role in circulating and determining political allegiances at other social levels. Willem’s youthful visage graced glassware, such as a flute made during his minority and inscribed with expressions of support for the House: ‘Vive le Prince d’Orange’ and ‘Wilhemus Prin d’Orange’ (Figure 1.33). Blue and white delftware was used to promote the Orange-Nassau family in busts and figurines, and most importantly in plates that commemorated the births and weddings of OrangeNassau leaders.56 These items offered opportunities for an increasingly broad

Propagating the Orange 57

Figure 1.32 Pieter Nason, Four Generations of the Princes of Orange: Willem I, Maurits and Frederik Hendrik, Willem II and Willem III, c. 1660–62, oil on canvas, 229cm × 193cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-855.

population to access such events, and provided a marketing platform for the House that served the interests of both producers and the visualised subjects. Mass-produced Orange ceramics such as plates and teapots bore unsophisticated portraits of Orange rulers, their initials, and the House’s time-honoured symbols, particularly the fruit-bearing orange tree. During times of political crises, Dutch citizens showed their support for the House of Orange-Nassau on earthenware. For example, Pieter Jacobsz. Kabouter, a ship’s captain from Leiden, and his wife Catharina Jansz. de Klerck had themselves portrayed in 1675 on an earthenware tobacco jar from Delft along with the emblem of Willem III.57 Others had the portraits of the stadtholder and his family (for example, Frederik Hendrik and his daughters Henriëtte Catharina and Albertine Agnes) inserted as tableaux on faience tiles next to the chimney (Figure 1.34).58 The bust of Mary II Stuart produced in the 1680s by the prominent De Grieksche A factory (Figure 1.35) was not likely to have been

58  Claiming spaces

Figure 1.33 Diamond-engraved glass flute depicting Willem III. North Netherlands. c. 1665–72. Museum No. C.423-1936 © Victoria and Albert Museum, London.

commissioned by its depicted subject, although Mary would commission many products from the company for palaces in both the Netherlands and England. These products responded to the rise of Orangism, and were generated by printers and manufacturers who commercialised popular enthusiasm for the family well beyond the control of the House itself.59 In doing so, these objects came to do important work for the House, retaining prominence for their leadership in often politically fraught times. More than once, the future of the House was placed in peril. First in 1711, when Johan Willem Friso (1687–1711) (Figure 1.36), Willem III’s heir from the Nassau-Dietz branch, died, leaving a six-week-old child, Willem IV (1711–51), as his heir. Now it was the turn of his mother, twenty-threeyear-old Marie Louise von Hessen-Kassel (1688–1765), to take the public

Propagating the Orange 59

Figure 1.34 Tiles with blue and white portraits of (clockwise from top left) Henriëtte Catharina, Frederik Hendrik, Albertine Agnes and Frederik Hendrik [again], 1653–65, pottery, 12.5cm × 12.6cm × 1.0cm. Leeuwarden, Collectie Keramiekmuseum Princessenhof, OKS 1994–030.

reins of the House as his regent (Figure 1.37).60 It was to be a long regency, twenty years in fact, during which time Marie Louise carefully and economically steered the House via her modest court.61 However, continuation of the House’s patronage, collecting, and display strategies was crucial to the later Princes of Orange. Johan Willem Friso, Willem IV, and Marie Louise, Willem’s regent, were eager to stress their participation in long-held OrangeNassau traditions. The shift from the stadtholderly court of the Nassau-Dietz at Leeuwarden to the princely Orange-Nassau court at The Hague required careful transition management and the need to re-assert shared values, practices, and rituals.62 The 1725 portrait by Philip van Dijk (1683–1753) of Marie Louise with her two children, (Anna Charlotte) Amalia (1710–77) and Willem IV, echoed an earlier generation’s insistence on the power of images

60  Claiming spaces

Figure 1.35 De Grieksche A, Samuel van Eenhoorn, Bust of Mary II Stuart, c. 1680–90, 32.0cm × 17.0cm × 8.0cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, BK-1960-11.

to assure viewers of the firm future of the House (Figure 1.38). In 1734, Willem IV (Figure 1.39) married the English princess, Anne of Hanover (1709–59); the event was commemorated by a celebratory bowl (Figure 1.40). She would assume the regency for their three-year-old son, Willem V (1748–1806), after her husband’s death in 1751 until her own in 1759.63 Her 1753 portrait, attributed to Johann Valentin Tischbein (1715–68), signalled her continued claims to interest in the House by the orange fruit (representing her son Willem V) on the table to her right-hand side (Figure 1.41). Other objects also continued to foreground and link the key protagonists to the House of Orange-Nassau, for example a lidded glass goblet that displayed

Propagating the Orange 61

Figure 1.36 Johannes van Oosterwyk, Matthijs Pool, Portrait of Johann Willem Friso, Prince of Orange-Nassau, 1716, engraving, 146mm × 92mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, RP-P-OB-65.614.

the portraits and monograms of Anne of Hanover (A.P.V.O.), Willem V (W.P.V.O.) and Carolina van Nassau (C.P.O.) (1746–87) (Figure 1.42). After Anne’s death, Willem’s grandmother, Marie Louise, returned to the position of regent until her demise, leaving the regency to Willem’s elder sister, Carolina, who maintained it until Willem turned 18 in 1766.64 This series of women conducted vital political work in the Netherlands that has been little recognised in the wider analysis of the early modern period, partly because the women continued to strongly promote the male heirs in the House’s visual imagery, and also because historians have often misinterpreted the visual presence of female regents and their children as ‘private’ images rather than as politically motivated depictions of power.65

Figure 1.37 Johann Philipp Behr, Portrait of Marie Louise von Hessen-Kassel, Called Maaike-Meu. Widow of the Stadtholder of Friesland Johann Willem Friso, Prince of Orange-Nassau, c. 1720–56, oil on canvas, 84cm × 68cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-885.

Figure 1.38 Philip van Dijk, Portrait of Marie Louise von Hessen-Kassel, Princess of Orange (1688–1765), with her Children, Prince Willem IV and Princess Amalia, 1725, oil on canvas, 60cm × 72.5cm. The Netherlands, Apeldoorn, Paleis Het Loo, A3008.

Figure 1.39 Anonymous, Portrait of Willem IV, Prince of Orange, c. 1750, oil on canvas, 82.5cm × 70.5cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-887.

Figure 1.40 Bowl featuring Willem IV and Anne of Hanover, Chinese and Netherlandish porcelain, c. 1734. Leeuwarden, Collectie Keramiekmuseum Princessenhof, NO 1594.

64  Claiming spaces

Figure 1.41 Attributed to Johann Valentin Tischbein, Portrait of Anne of Hanover, Princess Royal and Princess of Orange, Consort of Prince Willem IV, 1753, oil on canvas, 48.5cm × 38cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-406.

During the political crises of 1785, which pitched the Orangist cause against the Patriots, it was Wilhelmine von Preußen (1751–1820), the daughter of Augustus Wilhelm von Preußen (1722–58) and Luise von Brauschweig-Wolftenbüttel (1722–80), and wife of Willem V, who was widely understood to be the head of the House’s party.66 Willem’s own portraiture continued the Orange-Nassau male tradition of representation with military attire and accoutrements such as the command staff (Figure 1.43), but Wilhelmine’s activities around the country to raise support for the House’s political objectives were also widely broadcast, by those both for and against the Orange cause, in prints. Willem’s weaknesses as a ruler were perhaps most brought to the fore in printed images of his wife on horseback, assuming quasi-command in postures that reflected the military representational styles of her high-profile and powerful male Prussian ancestors, such as in the engraving by printmaker Reinier Vinkeles (1741–1816) (Figure 1.44). Indeed, in a controversial manoeuvre in 1787, she called upon her brother Friedrich Wilhelm II (1744–97), the King of

Figure 1.42 Anonymous, lidded goblet with monograms and portraits of Anne of Hanover, Willem V and Carolina van Nassau, c. 1750–59, glass, 40.6cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, BK-15612.

66  Claiming spaces

Figure 1.43 Johann Georg Ziesenis, Portrait of Willem V, Prince of Orange-Nassau, 1763–76, oil on canvas, 92cm × 71cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-882.

Prussia, for military assistance to force her way back into The Hague, from which the family had been forced to leave.67 The 26,000 Prussian soldiers re-installed the Orange-Nassau back to the centre of Dutch political life. Wilhelmine’s actions were in part caused by the political difficulties for Willem of being seen raising the support of military forces against people in his lands. Wilhelmine’s meeting with her brother was rendered as a deeply emotional encounter in a printed drawing by Willem Joseph Laquy (1738–98), with Willem V likewise beseeching the help of the Prussian king (Figure 1.45). With less participation in political matters for the House’s leading men for substantial periods of the eighteenth century, and reduced finances at the courts of female regents, mass-produced ceramic works and prints now served a critical role in keeping Orange-Nassau faces familiar and their activities and rituals in public view. Ceramics, for example, acquired a

Figure 1.44 Reinier Vinkeles, Portrait of Wilhelmine von Preußen, on Horseback, 1779, etching, 429mm × 300mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, RP-P-OB-62.965.

68  Claiming spaces

Figure 1.45 Willem Joseph Laquy, Meeting of Princess Wilhelmine and her Brother King Friedrich Wilhelm II of Prussia, 1788, pen, 440mm × 593mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, RP-T-1967-74.

particular significance again as a propaganda media for the Orange-Nassau family in the Dutch Republic as the House moved into an increasingly difficult political period in which it was to lose power temporarily.68 The cream-coloured, and usually unpainted, earthenware used for supporting the Orange dynasty was cheaply imported from England.69 It was then decorated in the Netherlands, often in Delft, with the portraits of Willem V and Wilhelmine, and frequently also with the family’s symbol, the orange tree. With increasing political pressure on the Orange-Nassau dynasty from foreign tensions in France, and internally in the late eighteenth century with the emergence of a republican movement, cheaper earthenware became an effective propaganda tool. Large amounts of earthenware, in the form of single plates, cups, teapots, and the like (but not more expensive dinner sets or table pieces) were now decorated with portraits and occasionally also with inscriptions.70 For example, the couple’s unsophisticated likenesses were featured on a cream teapot that was produced in Leeds, and inscribed with PVOR (Prins van Oranje) (Figure 1.46). One plate from the period, similarly manufactured in Leeds, bore profile images of both Willem and Wilhelmine, accompanied by text insisting ‘as long as sun and moon rise, the orange colour will never perish’ (Figure 1.47).71 Sometimes they were

Propagating the Orange 69

Figure 1.46 Anonymous, teapot with portraits of Willem V and Wilhelmine von Preußen, c. 1780–90, 8.8cm × 15.5cm × 9cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, NG-NM-13202.

decorated with the Dutch flag, as, for example, on a particular plate that also carried the inscription ‘I don’t ask for France or Spain but for the prince of Orange’ (Figure 1.48).72Ordinary Dutch people were now encouraged to purchase and display plates, cups, ceramic tiles, and teapots to express their support for the dynasty. While previous generations of the Orange-Nassau family had won followers and admirers among other aristocratic families by displaying rare porcelain collections and expressly commissioned delftware, as we shall explore further in this book, these particular objects were aimed at winning the political support of other classes. Manufacturers with an eye for profit, and associated industries in the Netherlands and abroad, enabled political supporters of the House of Orange-Nassau to exploit porcelain and earthenware in a new way to support the House’s aims in a radically different political environment. The couple’s children showed themselves to be highly aware of the material culture of the Orangist cause (Figure 1.49). For example, fifteen-year-old Willem (Frederik) (1772–1843) documented for his father his assessments of popular support for the House based on his observations of those seen wearing the Orange cockade, orange ribbons, and the letter W in their hats.73 Willem and his younger brother, (Willem George) Frederik, or ‘Fritz’ followed in their predecessors’ footsteps from an early age, being visualised in a series of charming portraits with white-plumed hat, and jauntily posed with

Figure 1.47 Anonymous, plate with an orange tree and Portraits of Willem V and Wilhelmine von Preußen, c. 1780–95, plate, 2.7cm × 26.0cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, BK-1967-200.

Figure 1.48 Anonymous, creamware plate with Orange inscription, 1775–1800. Leeuwarden, Collectie Keramiekmuseum Princessenhof, BP 2010–034.

Figure 1.49 Pieter Lesage, Willem V (1748–1806), Prince of Orange-Nassau, with his Wife (Frederika Sophia) Wilhelmine von Preußen and their children (Frederica) Louise (Wilhelmina), Willem (Frederik) and (Willem George) Frederik, 1779, ivory, 17.2cm × 12.1cm × 0.8cm × 167.7cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-4335.

72  Claiming spaces

Figure 1.50 Anonymous, Portrait of Willem (Frederik), Prince of Orange-Nassau, later King Willem I, as a Child, c. 1775, oil on canvas, 46cm × 39cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-1476.

hand on hip or binoculars, representing the acknowledged scientific interests and pursuits of the male and female leaders of the House, who built extensive natural history and art collections during the eighteenth century (Figures 1.50 and 1.51 respectively). From her home in Germany, their sister (Frederica) Louise (Wilhelmina) (1770–1819) kept watch on the changing fortunes of the House, writing encouragingly to her parents in 1799: I’ve been shown a completely orange fan, bought at the fair in Haarlem where it’s all the rage, and everyone is wearing the colour with enthusiasm. It’s gone so far that a member of the Government made a diatribe against this ‘impudence’ and since then, the colour is no longer being called orange but sunrise.74 In 1802, Willem made his way to Paris to engage Napoléon Bonaparte (1769– 1821), who was then premier consul, in diplomatic negotiations. This entailed a discussion about Orange-Nassau portraits. Napoléon requested portraits to copy, but as Willem V wrote to his son:

Propagating the Orange 73

Figure 1.51 Anonymous, (Willem George) Frederik, Prince of Orange-Nassau, as a Child, c. 1775, oil on canvas, 46cm × 39cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-1477.

I’m quite badly supplied with portraits [. . .] I can truthfully say that I don’t have a decent one now of Willem I nor of Prince Maurits, but I am happy to be able to offer the First Consul one of King Willem – It’s a miniature that hung in my room and I include it in this packet.75 The gift of Orange-Nassau portraits, in this case for Napoléon to copy, continued a long tradition of the House, although now from a subordinated position. Biding its time until the collapse of the Republic in 1813, the House of Orange-Nassau returned to the Netherlands. In March 1815, the United Kingdom of the Netherlands, which joined southern and northern provinces, proclaimed the Orange-Nassau dynasty its hereditary rulers. Willem, Prince of Orange since the death of his father in 1806, became King Willem I (Figure 1.52). Where once Willem the Silent had proclaimed his fight for the people of the Low Countries and the House’s sacrifice on behalf of the nation, by the end of the early modern period, the Netherlands fought to reinstate the Orange-Nassau as national representatives and rulers. The new nation took the House’s symbols for its own: orange was now everyone’s colour.

74  Claiming spaces

Figure 1.52 Joseph Paelinck, Portrait of Willem I, King of the Netherlands,

1819, oil on canvas, 227cm × 155.5cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-C-1460.

Conclusions This chapter has explored the dynasty’s changing modes of acquiring and maintaining power through changing contexts that represented distinct phases of activities and contribution. Each necessitated different mechanisms and the participation of particular protagonists within and beyond the House. What is clear is that the achievement of the Orange-Nassau did not reside solely in the actions of the five Willems who were its patriarchs, although their

Propagating the Orange 75 contribution was important to the symbolic and actual power of the House. The Orange-Nassau hold on power was not even due solely to the work of those men and women who claimed dynastic blood. A wide range of secretaries, statesmen, diplomats, architects, artists, manufacturers, printmakers, and traders among others also made the Orange-Nassau narrative – quite literally in many cases – through their creation of material culture. They had vested interests in the House’s success and are thus part of the Orange-Nassau narrative of power. As such, the Orange-Nassau dynastic history over this 300-year period is not only presented through the texts of princes, military campaigns, and negotiations with the States but also with images, art, patronage, processions, marriages, and correspondence. Orange-Nassau women, especially as widows and regents, exercised considerable influence and power as patrons of the arts to promote their dynasty. In commissioning and giving portraits of the House’s next generation as gifts, such as Amalia’s commissioning of portraits of Willem III and his cousins, which often included even the illegitimate sons of Orange patriarchs, they made sure that material objects that represented Orange power continued to be produced and widely circulated, even in the absence of a male ruler. As regents, these women were less frequently depicted as formal rulers, but their portraits (often with their children) signalled their political presence without needing to display male material attributes of power – women’s familial connections were a key source of their power. As for the propaganda of male Orange power, these images were not limited to a single visual media such as oil paintings, but also appeared in objects of daily use or for decoration of houses, such as the ceramic tiles depicting Anne of Hanover and her children or the Delft faience bust of Mary II Stuart. Conceptualising dynastic power in these ways allows for new analysis and for a different, more inclusive, history of the Orange-Nassau family to be written. A range of individuals, male and female, governing, subordinate, or marginal, made a collective investment in the idea of a patriarch whose idealised and sometimes hollow form would serve their own needs. The House’s resulting representation was so successful that few historians have looked beyond the colourful curtain to see who was pulling the strings.

Notes   1 Marijke Bruggeman, Nassau en de macht van Oranje. De strijd van de Friese Nassaus voor de erkenning van hun rechten, 1702–1747 (Hilversum: Verloren, 2007); G. H. Janssen, Princely Power in the Dutch Republic: Patronage and William Frederick of Nassau (1613–64), trans. J. C. Grayson (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2008); Esther Mijtens and David Onnekink, eds, Redefining William III: The Impact of the King-Stadholder in International Context (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007); Olaf Mörke, ‘Stadtholder’ oder ‘Staetholder’? Die Funktion des Hauses Oranien und seines Hofes in der politischen Kultur der Republik der Vereinigten Niederlande im 17. Jahrhundert (Münster: Lit, 1997); Olaf Mörke, Wilhelm von Oranien (1533–1584). Fürst und ‘Vater’ der Republik

76  Claiming spaces (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2007); Olaf Mörke, ‘The Symbolism of Rulership’, in Princes and Princely Culture, 1450–1650. Vol. 1, ed. Martin Gosman, Alasdair Macdonald and Arjo Vanderjagt (Leiden: Brill, 2003), 31–49; Olaf Mörke, ‘Sovereignty and Authority: The Role of the Court in the Netherlands in the First Half of the Seventeenth Century’, in Princes, Patronage, and the Nobility: The Court at the Beginning of the Modern Age, ed. Ronald Asch and Adolf M. Birke (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991), 455–77; Olaf Mörke, ‘Het hof van Oranje als centrum van het politieke en maatschappelijke leven tijdens de Republiek’, in Vorstelijk Vertoon. Aan het hof van Frederik Hendrik en Amalia, ed. Marika Keblusek and Jori Zijlmans (The Hague: Haags Historisch Museum, 1997), 58–71; Horst Lademacher, ed., Oranien-Nassau, die Niederlande und das Reich. Beiträge zur Geschichte einer Dynastie (Münster: Lit, 1995). On Men in the Wider Nassau Dynasty, see H. R. Hoetink, ed., Zo wijd de wereld strekt (The Hague: Mauritshuis, 1979); E. van den Boogaart, H. R. Hoetink and P. J. P. Whitehead, eds, Johan Maurits van Nassau-Siegen, 1604–1679: Essays on the Occasion of the Tercentenary of his Death (The Hague: The Johan Maurits van Nassau Stichting, 1979); G. de Werd, ed., Soweit der Erdkreis reicht: Johann Moritz van Nassau-Siegen 1604–1679 (Kleve: Städtisches Museum Haus Koekkoek Kleve, 1979). For recent German scholarship, see I. Hantsche, ed., Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen (1604–1679) als Vermittler. Politik und Kultur am Niederrhrein im 17. Jahrhundert (Münster: Waxmann Verlag, 2005); Gerhard Brunn and Cornelius Neutsch, eds, Sein Feld war die Welt. Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen (1604–1679) (Münster: Waxmann Verlag, 2008); and, more recently, on such figures as the Friesian stadtholder Willem Frederick of Nassau-Dietz, Janssen, Princely Power in the Dutch Republic.   2 Jeroen Duindam, ‘Royal Courts in Dynastic States and Empires’, in Royal Courts in Dynastic States and Empires: A Global Perspective, ed. Jeroen Duindam, Tülay Artan and Metin Kunt (Leiden: Brill, 2011), 1–23; and Jeroen Duindam, Myths of Power: Norbert Elias and the Early Modern European Court (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1995).   3 This forms part of the key argument of our recent study, Susan Broomhall and Jacqueline Van Gent, Gender, Power and Identity in the Early Modern House of Orange-Nassau (Farnham: Ashgate, 2016).   4 See recent studies by E. M. Geevers, ‘Family Matters: William of Orange and the Habsburgs after the Abdication of Charles V (1555)’, Renaissance Quarterly 63 (2010): 459–90; E. M. Geevers, ‘Being Nassau: Nassau Family Histories and Dutch National Discourse from 1541 to 1616’, Dutch Crossing 35 (2011): 4–19.   5 Mörke has also argued that Willem relied on his brothers not only for military support but also in political negotiations, such as in his own marriage arrangements or the resolving of political issues such as the petition to Margaretha of Parma to resolve confessional conflicts between Lutherans, Catholics, and Calvinists, on which Willem worked closely with Ludwig in 1563–64. Mörke, Wilhelm von Oranien (1533–1584), 90. Sarah Verhaegen has argued similarly in her analysis of the importance of the Nassau brothers in producing and disseminating political propaganda for the dynasty, ‘Early Modern Noblemen and the Use of Paper Communication Media: The Media-Politics of the “Lesser” Nassau (c. 1570−1620)’, Dutch Crossing 36, no. 1 (2012): 35–49.   6 There is a substantial body of literature on the question of Maurits’s military innovation. See Olaf van Nimwegen, ‘Maurits van Nassau and Siege Warfare (1590–1597)’, in Exercise of Arms: Warfare in the Netherlands, 1568–1648, ed. Marco van der Hoeven (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 113–31; Kees Schulten, ‘Prins Maurits (1567–1625), legerhervormer en vernieuwer van de krijgskunde, of trendvolger?’, Bas Kist, ‘De erfenis van prins Maurits’, and Jan Piet Puype, ‘Het Staatse leger en prins Maurits, wegbereider van de moderne legers’, Armamentaria

Propagating the Orange 77 35 (2000): 7–22, 23–32, 33–44; Jan Piet Puype, ‘Las reformas del ejército Holandés del príncipe Mauricio de Nassau, 1590–1600: armas y tácticas de batalla’, in La imagen de la guerra en el arte de los antiguos Países Bajos, ed. Bernardo Garcia (Madrid: Editorial Complutense, 2006), 171–212; Olaf van Nimwegen, ‘Maurits, Willem Lodewijk en de tactische militaire revolutie bij de Staatse infanterie’, in Boeken met krijgshistorie: op verkenning in het oudste boekbezit, ed. Louis Ph. Sloos (Breda: Nederlandse Defensie Academie, 2010), 43–61; Erik Swart, ‘De mythe van Maurits en de moderniteit?: militair professionalisme en adelscultuur in de Noordelijke en Zuidelijke Nederlanden, circa 1590–1625’, in Het verdeelde huis: de Nederlandse adel tussen opstand en reconciliatie, ed. Luc Duerloo and Liesbeth De Frenne (Maastricht: Shaker Publishing, 2011), 101–18. More generally, see Horst Lademacher, ‘Die Statthalter und ihr Amt: zu den Wechselfällen einer politisch-militärischen Funktion’, and Bernhard Sicken, ‘Die oranische Heeresreform’, in Onder den Oranje boom: Textband: Dynastie in der Republik: das Haus Oranien-Nassau als Vermittler niederländischer Kultur in deutschen Territorien im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert, ed. Horst Lademacher (Munich: Hirmer Verlag, 1999), 43–72, 103–16.   7 S. P. Haak, ‘De Wording van het Conflict tussen Maurits en Oldenbarnevelt’, Bijdragen voor Vaderlandsche Geschiedenis en Oudheidkunde, series 5, no. 6 (1919): 97–207; no. 10 (1923): 177–226; Jan den Tex, Oldenbarnevelt, 2 vols (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973) vol. 1: 1547–1606 and vol. 2: 1606–19.   8 See Peter Sherlock, ‘Militant Masculinity and the Monuments of Westminster Abbey’ and Susie Protschky, ‘Between Corporate and Familial Responsibility: Johan Maurits van Nassau-Siegen and Masculine Governance in Europe and the Dutch Colonial World’, in Governing Masculinities in the Early Modern Period: Regulating Selves and Others, ed. Susan Broomhall and Jacqueline Van Gent (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2011), 108–20 and 131–52.   9 Maurits’s armour has not survived but Prince Henry’s is part of the collections of the Historic Royal Palaces. 10 Christi M. Klinkert, Nassau in het nieuws: nieuwsprenten van Maurits van Nassaus militaire ondernemingen uit de periode 1590–1600 (Zutphen: Walburg Pers, 2005); Ilja M. Veltman, ‘Maurice as the Nimrod of His Age: Political Propaganda Prints by Jan Saenredam’, Bulletin van het Rijksmuseum 58 (2010): 128–37. 11 Now held in the Museum Het Prinsenhof in Delft. See Johanneke Verhave and Anita Jansen, ‘De portretten van prins Maurits; het handelsmerk van het atelier’, in Anita Jansen, Rudi Ekkart and Johanneke Verhave, De Portretfabriek van Michiel van Mierevelt (1566–1641) (Delft: Museum het Prinsenhof, 2011), 109–26. 12 Verhave and Jansen, ‘De portretten van prins Maurits; het handelsmerk van het atelier’, 111. 13 Verhave and Jansen, ‘De portretten van prins Maurits; het handelsmerk van het atelier’, 111. 14 Verhave and Jansen, ‘De portretten van prins Maurits; het handelsmerk van het atelier’, 115. 15 Erik Swart, ‘Beproefde vriendschap: Willem van Oranje, Günther van Schwarz­ burg, Georg van Holle en de grenzen van de adellijke loyaliteit’, in Uit diverse bronnen gelicht: opstellen aangeboden aan Hans Smit ter gelegenheid van zijn vijfenzestigste verjaardag, ed. E. C. Dijkhof and M. J. Van Gent (The Hague: Instituut voor nederlandse Geschiedenis, 2007), 331–42. 16 Willem Jacobsz. Delff, Jan Pietersz. van de Venne, Equestrian procession of the six princes of the House of Orange-Nassau, 1621, engraving, 432mm × 570mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, RP-P-1898-A-20799X. Available at: https://www. rijksmuseum.nl/en/collection/RP-P-1898-A-20799X.

78  Claiming spaces 17 Christopher White, The Dutch Pictures in the Collection of Her Majesty the Queen (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), 59. 18 See image of the heraldic shield of Maurits displaying the device of the Order of the Garter, 1613–17: Amsterdam, Rijksmusem, NG-NM-10152. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10934/RM0001.COLLECT.297756. See also Kees Zandvliet, ed., Maurits prins van Oranje (Amsterdam: Rijksmuseum, 2000), 322; and W. Elisabeth van Braam, Eelco Elzenga and Janine P. A. E. van Zelm van EldikKuneman, Een kouseband voor Oranje: 1613–1690 (Apeldoorn: Rijksmuseum Paleis Het Loo, 1990). 19 Todd Jerome Magreta, ‘The Development of Orange-Nassau Princely Artistic Activity, 1618–1632’ (Unpublished PhD Dissertation, City University of New York, 2008), 87. 20 See Susan Broomhall and Jennifer Spinks, ‘Memorialising Grief in Familial and National Narratives of Dutch Identity’, in Susan Broomhall and Jennifer Spinks, Early Modern Women in the Low Countries: Feminizing Sources and Interpretations of the Past (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2011), 73–98. 21 Angela Vanhaelen, ‘Recomposing the Body Politic in Seventeenth-Century Delft’, Oxford Art Journal 31 (2008): 367. See also E. O. G. Haitsma Mulier, ‘Willem van Oranje in de historiografie van de zeventiende eeuw’, in Willem van Oranje in de historie, 1584–1984: vier eeuwen beeldvorming en geschiedschrijving, ed. E. O. G. Mulier and A. E. M. Janssen (Utrecht: HES, 1984), 32–62; and Henk van Nierop, ‘Oranje bowen: Willem van Oranje als zinnebeeld van de Natie’, in Willem van Oranje lezing 2001. Cultuur, samenleving en bestuur, ed. Henk van Nierop and Cynthia P. Schneider (Delft: NIVO, 2001), 7–25. 22 See Broomhall and Van Gent, Gender, Power and Identity, ch. 6. 23 See G. Wartenberg, ‘Eine Ehe im Dienste kursächsische Aussenpolitik. Zur unglückliche Ehe der Anna von Sachsen mit Wilhelm von Oranien’, in Sachsen und die Wettiner. Chancen und Realitäten, ed. Reiner Groß (Dresden: Kulturakademie des Bezirkes Dresden, 1990), 79–92. On his first marriage to Anna van Buren, see S. Groenveld, ‘Spiegel van de tijd: het huwelijk van Willem van Oranje en Anna van Egmont-Buren (1551), geplaatst in het kader van de Habsburgse adelspolitiek’, Jaarboek Oranje–Nassau Museum (2002): 7–23. 24 See Daniël van den Queborn, Portrait of Charlotte de Bourbon, c. 1579, oil on panel, 104cm × 73cm. The Hague, Historische Verzamelingen van het Huis Oranje-Nassau, acc. 175. For further details of Charlotte’s experiences before her marriage to Willem, see Susan Broomhall, Women and Religion in SixteenthCentury France (Houndmills: Palgrave, 2007), 28–39. 25 Jane Couchman, ‘“Give birth quickly and then send us your good husbands”: Informal Political Influence in the Letters of Louise de Coligny’, in Women’s Letters Across Europe, 1400–1700: Form and Persuasion, ed. Jane Couchman and Ann Crabb (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005), 163–84; Jane Couchman, ‘Lettres de Louise de Coligny aux membres de sa Famille’, in Lettres de Femmes: Texts inédits et oubliés du XVIe au XVIIIe siècle, ed. Elizabeth C. Goldsmith and Colette H. Winn (Paris: Honoré Champion, 2005), 89–99; Susan Broomhall, ‘Letters Make the Family: Nassau Family Correspondence at the Turn of the Seventeenth Century’, in Early Modern Women and Transnational Communities of Letters, ed. Julie D. Campbell and Anne R. Larsen (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2009), 25–44. 26 See ‘De Oranjeportretten van het stadhuis van Delft’, in Jansen, Ekkart and Verhave, De Portretfabriek van Michiel van Mierevelt, 139–53. 27 See Gerrit van Honthorst, Portrait of Amalia of Solms-Braunfels (1602–1675), 1630s, oil on canvas, 73.4cm × 60cm. The Hague, Historische Verzamelingen van het Huis Oranje-Nassau. 28 Bauer shows that this was commissioned by Amalia in Alexandra Nina Bauer, Jan Mijtens (1613/14–1670): Leben und Werk (Petersberg: Michael Imhof, 2006),

Propagating the Orange 79 171–2. See also Susan Broomhall and Jacqueline Van Gent, ‘Framing Childhood: Children through the Lens of Portraits in the Nassau Family Collections’, in Children’s Worlds in Europe c. 1400–1750, ed. Stephanie Tarbin and Philippa Maddern (Aldershot: Ashgate, forthcoming). 29 Jan Mijtens, Portrait of Maria of Orange (1642–1688), with Hendrik van Zuijlestein (d. 1673) and a Servant, c. 1665, oil on canvas, 150cm × 185cm. Now held in the Mauritshuis. Available at: http://www.mauritshuis.nl/en/explore/thecollection/artworks/portrait-of-maria-of-orange-16421688-with-hendrik-vanzuijlestein-d-1673-and-a-servant-114/. 30 White, The Dutch Pictures, 58. 31 White, The Dutch Pictures, 59. The emotional rhetoric of these negotiations is explored in Susan Broomhall and Jacqueline Van Gent, ‘Courting Nassau Affections: Performing Love in Orange-Nassau Marriage Negotiations’, in Performing Emotions in Early Europe, ed. Philippa Maddern, Joanne McEwan and Anne M. Scott (forthcoming). 32 Indeed, these would be seen throughout the period. See Pieter Geyl, Orange and Stuart, 1641–1672, trans. Arnold Pomerans (New York: Scribner, 1970). 33 4 May 1641. F. J. L. Krämer, ed., ‘Journalen van den Stadhouder Willem II uit de Jaren 1641–1650’, Bijdragen en Mededeelingen van het Historisch Genootschap 27 (1906): 418–19. See also Peter van der Ploeg, Carola Vermeeren and P. B. J. Broos, eds, Princely Patrons: The Collection of Frederick Henry of Orange and Amalia of Solms in The Hague (Zwolle: Waanders, 1997), 238 and 240 for designs for jewellery. 34 R. van Luttervelt, ‘Het portret van Willem II en Maria Stuart in het Rijksmuseum’, Oud Holland 68, no. 1 (4) (1953): 161. 35 13 May and 2 June 1641. Krämer, ed., ‘Journalen van den Stadhouder Willem II’, 420. 36 Constantijn Huygens to M. Mersenne, 26 November 1646, in Oeuvres complètes de Christiaan Huygens. Vol. 2: Correspondence, 1657–1659 (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1889), 552. 37 On the context of this match, see Broomhall and Van Gent, Gender, Power and Identity, ch. 4. 38 Claudia Sommer, ‘Niederländische Einflüsse auf die Landeskultivierung und Kunstentfaltung in Brandenburg von 1640 bis 1740’, in Onder den Oranje Boom: Niederländische Kunst und Kultur, ed. Schacht, Meiner and Lademacher, 209–10. 39 Katharina Bechler, Schloss Oranienbaum: Architektur und Kunstpolitik der Oranierinnen in der zweiten Hälfte des 17. Jahrhunderts (Halle: Mitteldeutscher Verlag, 2002), 43. 40 Sommer, ‘Niederländische Einflüsse’, 214–15. 41 A description of the pageant from the Hollandse Mercurius 3 (Haerlem, 1660): 28–31, is included in F. Gorissen, Conspectus Cliviae. Eine rheinische Residenzstadt in der niederländischen Kunst des 17. Jahrhunderts (Kleve: BossDruck und Verlag, 1964), 40–42. 42 Simon Groenveld, ‘Beiderseits der Grenze. Das Familiengeflecht bis zum Ende der ersten Oranisch-Nassauischen Dynastie, 1702’, in Lademacher, Onder den Oranje boom. Dynastie in der Republik. 150. For another example of Nassau dynasty festivities, see Hélène J. de Muij-Fleurke and Bernhard Woelderink, ‘Die Hochzeit von Heinrich Casimir II und Henriette Amalia im Jahre 1683 in Dessau und ihr festlicher Empfang in Friesland in 1684’, in Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje (Exhibition Catalogue), ed. Ingo Pfeifer and Wolfgang Savelsberg (Oranienbaum: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2003), 113–19. 43 See the key arguments and sources in Broomhall and Van Gent, Gender, Power and Identity. 44 Artist unknown. Held at the Binnenhof in The Hague.

80  Claiming spaces 45 For more on these children, see Broomhall and Van Gent, Gender, Power and Identity, ch. 2. 46 On Mary Henrietta Stuart’s court at The Hague, see Ann Hughes and Julie Sanders, ‘Gender, Exile and The Hague Courts of Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia and Mary, Princess of Orange in the 1650s’, in Monarchy and Exile: The Politics of Legitimacy from Marie de Médicis to Wilhelm II, ed. Philip Mansel and Torsten Riotte (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2011), 44–65; Nadine Akkerman, Courtly Rivals in The Hague: Elizabeth Stuart (1596–1662) and Amalia von Solms (1602–1675) (Venlo: Van Spijk/Rekafa, 2014). 47 Greg Alan Beaman, ‘Nature, Nurture, Mythology: A Cultural History of Dutch Orangism in the First Stadholderless Era, 1650–1672’ (Unpublished Masters Dissertation, Louisiana State University, 2004), 17. 48 Now held in Breda Town Hall. 49 Marieke E. Spliethoff, ‘Bilder von Glück und Unglück. Die Porträtmalerei am Hofe des Statthalters in den Haag 1625–1655’, in Pfeifer and Savelsberg, Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje, 139. 50 ‘Quant aux portraicts promis, vous sçavez combien il est difficile de faire asseoir un enfant qui n’a gueres d’arrest’, 15 May 1664, De Briefwisseling van Constantijn Huygens (1608–1687), ed. J. A. Worp, 6 vols (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1917), 6: 64. 51 Hugh Dunthorne, ‘William in Contemporary Portraits’, in Redefining William III: The Impact of the King-Stadholder in International Context, ed. Esther Mijtens and David Onnekink (Aldershot: Ashgate 2007), 266. 52 White, The Dutch Pictures, 16. See also A. Staring, ‘De Portretten van den KoningStadhouder’, Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 3, no. 1 (1950): 151–96. 53 White, The Dutch Pictures, 60. 54 White, The Dutch Pictures, 84. Now held in the Royal Collection, UK. 55 The latter version is now missing. See Alexandra Nina Bauer, ‘Die Porträtmalerei für das Haus Oranien-Nassau in der zweiten Hälfte des 17. Jahrhunderts’, in Pfeifer and Savelsberg, Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje, 147. See also Geert H. Janssen, ‘De kunst van het kopiëren: Opdrachten van stadhouder Willem Frederik van Nassau aan Peter Nason’, Jaarboek Oranje-Nassau Museum (2001): 36–47. 56 Max Hemelraad, ‘Delfter Fayence mit Oranierdarstellungen’, Oranienbaum Journal 1 (2007): 108–13. See also Jaap Jongstra, Oranjegoed! Vier eeuwen Oranje-Nassau op keramiek (Leeuwarden: Keramiekmuseum Princessehof, 2010). 57 See the delft pot from c. 1675 in the Museum Arnhem Collection, Nr AB 8282: http://www.delftsaardewerk.nl/items/view/23373/items/index/row/collection:16. 58 Jongstra, Oranjegoed!, 10, 17. 59 For exploration of the political movement of Orangism in the Netherlands and abroad in its literary and visual forms, and the anti-Orange opposition in the eighteenth century, see J. Stern, Orangism in the Dutch Republic in Word and Image, 1650–75 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2010); H. T. Colenbrander, De Patriottentijd. Hoofdzakelijk naar butenlandische bescheiden, 3 vols (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1897). 60 For general literature on Marie Louise von Hessen-Kassel, see S. Kalff, ‘MarijkeMeu’, in Karakters uit den pruikentijd, ed. S. Kalff (Rotterdam: B. van de Watering, 1902), 1–38; Theod Jorissen, ‘Marijken-Meu’, in Historische bladen, ed. Theod Jorissen, 4 vols (Haarlem: Tjeenk Willink, 1912), 1: 191–231; Marijke de Nes, Marijke Meu: Maria Louise van Hessen-Cassel (Hoorn: West-Friesland, 1951); Dieuwke Winsemius, Marijke Meu (Baambrugge: Grote Letter Bibliotheek, 1986); E. Heupers, ‘Marijke Meu, een “vergeten” ambachtsvrouwe van Soest’, Flehite 4 (1976): 57–62; G. J. Schutte, ‘Willem IV en Willem V’, in Nassau en Oranje in de

Propagating the Orange 81 Nederlandse geschiedenis, ed. C. A. Tamse (Alphen aan den Rijn: A.W. Sijthoff, 1979), 187–228; G. J. Schutte, ‘Marijke Meu. Marie Louise van Hessen-Kassel 1688–1765’, in Vrouwen in het landsbestuur. Van Adela van Thamaland tot en met koningin Juliana, ed. C. A. Tamse (The Hague: Staatsuitgeverij, 1982), 130–46; F. J. A. Jagtenberg, Marijke Meu 1688–1765 (Amsterdam: De Bataafsche Leeuw, 1994); Marijke Bruggeman, ‘Het hof van Maria Louise van Hessen-Kassel (1711–1731)’, It beaken: meidielingen fan de Fryske Akademy 60, no. 3–4 (1998): 293–304; Annemarth Sterringa, ‘Familierelaties van de Friese Nassaus’, It Beaken: Tydskrift fan de Fryske Akademy 60, no. 3–4 (1998): 305–25; G. J. Schutte, Oranje in de achttiende eeuw (Amsterdam: Buijten & Schipperheijn, 1999); M. J. G. A. Barthels, ‘Maria Louisa van Hessen-Kassel. Barones van Ijsselstein’, in Utrechtse biografieën. Tussen de Lek en de Hollandsche Ijssel (Utrecht: SPOU, 2003), 70–75; Bruggeman, Nassau en de macht van Oranje. 61 See Bruggeman, ‘Het hof van Maria Louise van Hessen-Kassel (1711–1731)’. 62 J. J. Huizinga with assistance from B. Bilker, eds, Van Leeuwarden naar Den Haag: rond de verplaatsing van het stadtholderlijk hof in 1747 (Franeker: Van Wijen, 1997). 63 Anne J. Cruz and Mihoko Suzuki, eds, The Rule of Women in Early Modern Europe (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2009); The Hague, Koninklijk Huisarchief (KHA), inv. nr A30 (Documents Concerning Anne of Hanover, 1751). For general literature on Anne of Hanover, see Leopold von Ranke, ed., Briefwechsel Friedrich des Grossen mit Wilhelm IV von Oranien und seiner Gemahlin Anna geborene princess Royal von England (Berlin: Vogt, 1869); Gijsbert Jan Hardenbroek and F. J. L. Krämer, eds, Gedenkschriften (1747–1787), 6 vols (Amsterdam: J. Müller, 1901), vol. 1; Pieter Geyl, ‘Engelsche correspondentie van prins Willem IV en prinses Anna (1734–1743)’, Bijdragen en Mededeelingen van het Historisch Genootschap 45 (1924): 89–140; Pieter Geyl, Willem IV en Engeland tot 1748 (vrede van Aken) (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1924); A. J. C. M. Gabriëls, De heren als dienaren en de dienaar als heer. Het stadhouderlijk stelsel in de tweede helft van de achttiende eeuw (The Hague: Stichting Hollandse Historische Reeks, 1990); Judith Koot, ‘Anna van Hannover: een beeldvorming op losse schroeven’, DinaMiek: vrouwengeschiedenis krant 11 (1994): 4–18; Veronica P. M. Baker-Smith, A Life of Anne of Hanover, Princess Royal (Leiden: Brill, 1995); J. J. Huizinga, ed., Van Leeuwarden naar Den Haag. Rond de verplaatsing van het stadhouderlijk hof in 1747 (Franeker: Van Wijnen, 1997); Schutte, Oranje in de achttiende eeuw, 47–65; Veronica P. M. Baker-Smith, ‘The Daughters of George II: Marriage and Dynastic Politics’, in Queenship in Britain 1660–1837: Royal Patronage, Court Culture and Dynastic Politics, ed. Clarissa Campbell Orr (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2002), 193–206; Richard G. King, ‘Anne of Hanover and Orange (1709–59) as Patron and Practitioner of the Arts’, in Campbell Orr, Queenship in Britain, 162–92. 64 KHA, inv. nrs A29 (Prince Willem IV), A30 (Princess Anne of Hanover), and A31 (Prince Willem V); Johanna W. A. Naber, Carolina van Oranje. Vorstin van Nassau-Weilburg, 1743–1787 (Haarlem: Tjeenk Willink, 1910); Johanna W. A. Naber, Prinsessen van Oranje in Duitsland (Haarlem: Tjeenk Willink, 1920); N. Japikse, De geschiedenis van het Huis van Oranje-Nassau, 2 vols (The Hague: Zuid-Hollandsche Uitgevers Maatschappij, 1938), vol. 2. Under Willem V, the display and exchange of family portraits continued but other aspects of the House’s material practice had changed – a sizeable proportion of Willem’s art collection was opened to public visitors. See C. Willemijn Fock and Beatrijs Brenninkmeijer-de Rooij, ‘De schilderijengalerij van Prins WIllem V op het Buitenhof te Den Haag’, pts 1 and 2, and ‘Catalogus van het Kabinet Schilderijen van Zijne Doorl. Hoogheid Den Heere Prince van Orange en Nassau enz. in ’s Gravenhage’, Antiek 11, no. 2 (1976): 113–37, 138–60, 161–76. Marieke

82  Claiming spaces Spliethoff, ‘Een afschiedscadeau van koninklijke gasten: een bijdrage tot de portreticonografie van Wilhelmina van Pruisen en haar dochter Louise’, Vereniging Oranje-Nassau Museum (1976): 22–35; Edwin van Meerkerk, ‘Vorstelijk mecenaat of cultuurbeleid?: stadhouder Willem V en Wilhelmina van Pruisen en de kunsten’, Virtus: bulletin van de Werkgroep Adelsgeschiedenis 16 (2009): 68–82. 65 See Broomhall and Van Gent, Gender, Power and Identity. 66 Simon Schama described Willem V in the following terms: ‘Bullied by his mother, subdued by Brunswick, and finally hectored by the wife who had been foisted on him – Princess Wilhelmina, the niece of both Frederick the Great and Louis of Brunswick, his was a classic case of inferiority complex’. Simon Schama, Patriots and Liberators: Revolution in the Netherlands, 1780–1813 (London: Harper Perennial, 2005), 56. See also, Edwin van Meerkerk, Willem V en Wilhelmina van Pruisen. De laatste stadhouders (Amsterdam: Atlas, 2009). 67 See W. A. Knoops and F. Ch. Meijer, Goejanverwellesluis. De aanhouding van de prinses van Oranje op 28 juni 1787 door het vrijkorps van Gouda (Amsterdam: Bataafsche Leeuw, 1987). See also, Annabella Meddens van Borselen, ‘“Ik zal dit in uwe ogen doen druipen”. De aanhouding van Wilhelmina van Pruisen door de Commissie van Defensie te Woerden in 1787’, Holland 19 (1987): 197–206; Arie Wilschut, Goejanverwellesluis. De strijd tussen patriotten en prinsgezinden, 1780–1787 (Hilversum: Verloren, 2000). 68 See, for example, Hemelraad, ‘Delfter Fayence mit Oranierdarstellungen’, 108–13; and Jongstra, Oranjegoed! 69 Jongstra, Oranjegoed!, 11. 70 The extensive collections at the Princessehof National Museum of Ceramics in Leeuwarden and the Drents-Museum in Assen include many examples of these forms. 71 The full Dutch text reads ‘Zoo lang als Zon en maan Zal Staan; Zal Nooijt de Oranje kleur vergaan; Dit Zag ik in dees middagstond; Juist in het Teken van’t verbond; met Eerbied daar ik god moest loven; Daar Zag ik doe Oranje boven’. 72 ‘Ik vrag niet om Vrankrijk nog om Spanje, maar om de prins van Oranje’, in Jongstra, Oranjegoed!, 11. 73 28 June 1787, in Johanna W. A. Naber, ed., Correspondentie van de Stadhouderlijke Familie, 1777–1820. Vol. 1: 1777–1793 (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1931), 10. 74 ‘On m’a montré un éventail tout Orange, acheté à la foire de Haarlem, où c’étoit la plus grande mode, et puis on se montroit la couleur avec enthousiasme. C’est allé si loin qu’un membre du Gouvernement a fait un diatribe contre cette impudence, et depuis ce tems on dit que la couleur n’est plus Orange mais Aurore.’ 16 August 1799, in Naber, Correspondentie van de Stadhouderlijke Familie, 1777–1820. Vol. 3, 289. On the leading personalities of the moment, see also Ruud Spruit, Kokarde. Patriotten en Oranjeklanten op weg naar 1813–1815 (Houten: Unieboek BV, 2012). 75 ‘Je suis très mal fourni de portraits de famille. [. . .] je puis dire même avec vérité que je n’ai pas un bon portrait maintenance de Guillaume I ni du prince Maurice, mais je suis charmé de pouvoir satisfaire aux désirs du Premier Consul en lui offrant un portrait du roi Guillaume. – C’est une miniature qui pendoit dans ma chambre, et je la joins à ce paquet.’ 14 March 1802, in Naber, Correspondentie van de Stadhouderlijke Familie, 1777–1820. Vol. 4, 85.

2 Planting the Orange The expansion of the House of OrangeNassau across Europe

In this chapter, we explore how individuals associated with the House of Orange-Nassau expanded their power into new territories through their use of physical spaces, and their organisation and practices of material culture within them. Here we explore a wide range of examples, including military installations, architecture, gardens, agriculture, religious patronage, and monuments that spread the power of the House from its base in the northern Netherlands to German lands, England, Scotland, Ireland, and Russia. We argue that new sites for the display of Orange-Nassau power and identity were not always explicitly directed by those leading the House, but instead involved many interlocutors who were making – sometimes literally – meaning for the House according to their own needs and views, through their actions, designs, and constructions in new geographical spaces.

Fortifying the faith Willem I spearheaded an ambitious expansion of power for his House. He guided a collection of disparate independent states in the Low Countries in their attempts to break away from Spanish overlordship towards the formation of the United Provinces. This required careful negotiations between Willem and the varied states in order to ensure their continued support for his activities. These were not individual and personal negotiations, but ones that involved a far wider pool of participants, from Willem’s brothers to his children. Some were commitments to support the House of Orange-Nassau that were inscribed on the bodies of Willem’s younger children, whose births in the late 1570s and 1580s coincided with these political machinations. The six daughters born to Willem and his third wife, Charlotte de Bourbon, for example, became sites through which the alliance between the states and the House of Orange-Nassau could be narrated, historicised for all time, in their names. Born in 1578, Catharina Belgica (or Belgia) was provided with an annuity of 3,000 florins by the States General of the Dutch Republic.1 As the States bestowed pensions upon the girls, in exchange they were given the names of States (not all of which eventually became part of the United Provinces). The following year, for example, the State of Flanders endowed

84  Claiming spaces Catharina’s younger sister, Flandrina (1579–1640), with 2,000 florins at her baptismal ceremony.2 Charlotte Brabantina, the fifth daughter of Willem and Charlotte de Bourbon, who was born in 1580, was provided with 2,000 florins by Brabant.3 Emilia Antwerpiana (1581–1657) was given 2,000 florins by the magistrates of Antwerp, the city in which she was born.4 This was notably a gendered practice: while Willem’s sons were given names that signalled their dynastic heritage and alliances, his daughters’ names were records of contemporary political manoeuvres. Through the birth of these daughters and the rituals of baptismal gift-giving, Willem and Charlotte had locked the House of Orange-Nassau permanently into a relationship with particular geographical spaces and political entities that reached well beyond dynastic holdings. If Willem’s own flesh and blood represented one way in which the House of Orange-Nassau was connected to towns and provinces beyond their dynastic lands, so too were his military and religious installations. In 1583, Willem had ordered the commencement of fortifications in a strategic location on the then border between the breakaway northern, and loyal Habsburg southern, territories, near the village of Ruigenhil, located in what is now North Brabant. This was near to where the northern forces had lost the Battle of Steenbergen in June of that year, bringing the town of Steenbergen into Habsburg hands. Willem’s plan was to strengthen Ruigenhil as a northern counterpoint. Maurits awarded the town a charter in 1585 and bestowed upon it the official name of Willemstad, after his father who had been assassinated the year before. Willemstad was designed as a central urban space surrounded by heptagonal fortifications, and seven bastions commissioned from the renowned surveyor and military engineer Adriaen Anthonisz (1541–1620).5 Under Maurits’s attention, the town became a significant military base. He expanded the town, but he also focused equally on establishing a capacity for Protestant worship. In 1586 he agreed to commit 600 guilders to build a Protestant church, but due to a lack of funds, the town hall, completed in 1587, temporarily served both the town’s municipal and spiritual needs. Between 1595 and 1607 the Koepelkerk was built, the first church in the northern provinces designed specifically for Calvinist worship. This adopted an octagonal design, allowing all to hear and see the pulpit, with no choir or chapels, as required by stipulations Maurits made when providing a substantial 7,000-guilder financial subsidy (partly from local taxes) for its construction.6 In 1773, Willem V would renew the House’s attention to this historically significant religious space by donating an organ. Maurits’s clear commitment to the new urban space was reinforced by the residence that he commissioned in 1615, which was constructed by 1623 and known initially as the Prinsenhof (it is now known as the Mauritshuis). Significantly, the connection between Willemstad and the House of Orange-Nassau was also reinforced in naming practices. The States of Holland awarded Willem the additional title of Heer van Willemstad in 1584, in recognition of his strategic fortification of the site. At the same time as Maurits was giving his attention to Willemstad, his elder brother Filips Willem, who remained attached to the Catholic Habsburg

Planting the Orange 85 south and the Brussels court of Isabella (1566–1633) and Albert (1559–1621), was progressing a, perhaps competitive, religio-military urban complex of his own. This was Scherpenheuvel, a town near Zichem-Diest in Brabant, which was located within the Orange-Nassau inheritance that Filips Willem enjoyed in the south of the Low Countries. Like Willemstad to the north, Scherpenheuvel’s new fortifications employed innovative design, in this case a unique concentric pattern.7 Moreover, as for his brother, this new urban site was not just a military display of Orange-Nassau power, but also a sign of his respective faith. Filips Willem vested considerable financial and spiritual energy in the site. In 1603, he donated the high altar, which displayed his coat of arms, for the stone chapel (built in 1604). This was moved to the sacristy in the newly enlarged building that was constructed on the site shortly afterwards.8 With the patronage of Isabella and Albert, Our Lady of Scherpenheuvel became the national shrine for the Spanish Netherlands.9 Koen Ottenheym argues persuasively that ‘Scherpenheuvel may be interpreted as a counter-reformative reaction against protestant Willemstad, strengthened by the rivalry between both Nassau-Orange brothers’.10 After Filips Willem’s death in 1618, the Zichem-Diest lands were eventually vested, with Habsburg support, to the closest Catholic heir in the wider Nassau dynasty. This was Johann VII von Nassau-Siegen (1594–1636), second son of Johann VI and his first wife Elisabeth von Leuchtenberg, who had converted to Catholicism in 1613. Unlike Filips Willem, he had actively pursued the Habsburg military offensive against his Protestant kin in the northern provinces and Nassau lands, including his father’s lands of Nassau-Siegen, to which he brought the Catholic Reformation in 1623.11 Not only did Johann complete the construction of Scherpenheuvel, but he also had the chapel of St Christopher in the Jesuit church in Brussels renovated in 1615 for use as a family mausoleum. In addition, he purchased the barony of Renaix (Ronse) and re-asserted Nassau (if not Orange-Nassau) influence in these lands, with a lavish new residence that he intended as an ancestral monument.12 Johann’s relative, Willem Frederik van Nassau-Dietz, recorded in his diary that Johann had invested much of his fortune in this architectural and horticultural project: ‘Count Johann did not leave much behind; he spent everything on buildings’.13 This suggests that the wider Nassau dynasty were well aware of the activities of their Catholic kin, and their political significance. Nor was Johann the dynasty’s only Catholic convert who would consciously patronise a religious building to signal his faith and re-align the dynasty along the lines of the Catholic Reformation. Johann Ludwig von Nassau-Hadamar (1590–1653), the youngest son of Johann VI and his third wife Johannetta von Sayn-Wittgenstein, also converted in 1629 while on a diplomatic mission to the Emperor Ferdinand III (1608–57) in Vienna.14 When he died in 1653, he requested that his heart be buried in the Jesuit church in Hadamar as ‘a token of love’, in a conscious re-enacting of the Jesuit theology of the Sacred Heart.15 His son Moritz Heinrich (1626–79) permitted the Jesuits to erect the Herzenbergkapelle in 1675 as a chapel on the Hirtzberg, just outside

86  Claiming spaces of Hadamar.16 Over time, Hirtzberg became known as Hertzberg as a result of the many hearts of Johann Ludwig’s male descendants that were buried there.17 The House and wider dynasty’s Catholic members renovated spaces within their control, and acquired new domains of territorial influence, to assert their political and confessional allegiances in direct contrast (or sometimes even parallel ways) to their powerful Protestant kin. Similarly, when dynastic members were able to take back Catholicised territories from their relatives, they set about a key programme of building work to re-order the space as Protestant. When Johann von Nassau-SaarbrückenIdstein (1603–77) regained his inheritance after the depredations of the Thirty Years’ War in the 1640s, and years spent in exile, he rebuilt the palace, carefully structured the gardens according to his own designs and reinstated agricultural stability (Figure 2.1). Johann was immensely proud of his

Figure 2.1 Johann Jakob Walther, Portrait of Johann von Nassau-Idstein, gouache on vellum. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France; Département des Estampes et photographie, Rés. JA-25-FOL, Plate 1. © Bibliothèque nationale de France.

Planting the Orange 87 achievements and commissioned the artist Johann Jakob Walther (c. 1604–76), who he had met during his exile in Strasbourg, to create several lavish manuscripts of his lands, palace, and garden, and the specific exotic plants and flowers that he had sourced for it. Walther depicted the count, his second wife, Anna von Leiningen-Dagsburg-Falkenburg (1625–68), and one of their young daughters in a bright orange dress, being presented with a basket of colourful flowers. The surrounding verse likened Johann to other famous lovers of flora, Alcides, Xerxes and Alcnous, and Cyrus (Figure 2.2). From 1651, Walther travelled at least eight times to document the developing garden and its botanical collection, over a period of more than twenty years.18 As can be seen in Walther’s illumination for one presentation copy, the count’s garden

Figure 2.2 Johann Jakob Walther, Simulacrum Scenographicum Celeberrimi Horti Itzsteinensis; the Idstein Florilegium, c. 1654–72, watercolour and gouache on vellum. London, Victoria and Albert Museum; Prints, Drawings and Paintings Collection, Inv. Nr 9174. © Victoria and Albert Museum, London.

88  Claiming spaces beds were idiosyncratic rather than influenced entirely by the latest fashions. He had asked for the central beds to be shaped as lemons, peaches, and figs, while at the edges were flora’s natural enemies, including caterpillars as well as more exotic creatures including crocodiles and even dragons.19 Included among his depicted rarities was a Prince of Orange tulip and exotics from the Americas such as tomatoes and melons. Johann also built two unusual grottos, showing the protection of the gods over his lands in ceiling paintings that were also by Walther, and another more fanciful grotto creation covered with exotic shells and curious fantastic creatures (see Figure 5.15). One manuscript also depicted idealised, flourishing agricultural and leisure scenes with the changing seasons around a peaceful, reconstructed Idstein and Mainz.20 Johann’s architectural, horticultural, and agricultural programmes were also undertaken in another context: just after he had regained his lands, his eldest son, Gustav Adolph (1632–64), announced his conversion to Catholicism.21 Johann responded quickly and publicly to this dynastic disaster, publishing a series of letters written to his son in 1653 and 1654.22 In these he expressed dismay at his son’s actions and reaffirmed to the reading public his own commitment to the Protestant faith. In later life, he left a political testament for his twelve-year-old son and heir, Georg August Samuel (1665–1721), and the boy’s regent, Johann Casimir von Leiningen-Falkenburg (1619–88), in which, among other things, he was careful to emphasise that his famous garden had been built without running up debts. Instead, both the garden and the beautifully decorated church at Idstein he had commissioned brought a great number of people to Idstein, whereas before it had been situated in obscuro.23 These material and spatial forms were investments in, and evidence of, Johann’s strong commitment to the Protestant faith, and examples that he passed to his son and heir. The case of Johann von Nassau-SaarbrückenIdstein shows how many of the same types of objects, installations, and ideas for aristocratic spaces could be pulled together in ways that had individual and local meanings appropriate to his own political context. They were not directly associated with the identity of his Orange-Nassau kin, although he shared their Protestant faith. The control of existing and new geographical spaces for Orange, and counter-Orange, objectives through the manipulation of built landscape is clearly seen in these new town developments as they played out on the border of these politically, and confessionally, divergent areas in the Low Countries and German lands. In each case, military sites also consciously accrued politically motivated spiritual installations as well as residences that signalled the respective male leaders’ relationship to, and intention to safeguard, their relative, military, spiritual, and dynastic interests. However, these were not the only means by which the House of Orange-Nassau expanded its geographical and political influence. The names that were bestowed on the House’s daughters gave these individuals a political and symbolic importance in the House’s strategic alliances that has been little recognised to date. Furthermore, the claiming of political territories via children was a strategy

Planting the Orange 89 that would be replicated by other descendants and affiliates of the House for political gain.

Building opulence Willem’s sons, Filips Willem and Maurits, remain among the lesserdocumented patrons as Princes of Orange, but artistic and architectural commissions were also among their activities. For example, renovations to Vianden Castle, which sits atop Mount Oranienberg in present-day Luxembourg, were commenced under Filips Willem from 1604 to 1618, and finished by his halfbrother Maurits in 1621. This included a genealogy hall, where both brothers’ crests were displayed. Maurits also completed what is known as the Nassau mansion there between 1618 and 1621. These investments in power through cultural means echoed contemporary aristocratic behaviour more broadly.24 Maurits’s cultural patronage reflected contemporary aristocratic masculine (and military) interests in charts and maps, architecture, fortifications, and artwork, to a lesser extent.25 Younger brother Frederik Hendrik and his wife Amalia von SolmsBraunfels were able to invest time, attention, and considerable funds in a more extended cultural programme to glorify the House of Orange-Nassau. This programme has garnered much scholarly attention.26 It signalled the development of a new dimension to Orange-Nassau power, made possible by hauls of gold from captured Spanish ships and imports from Dutch global trade, which not only financed the Dutch Golden Age but also directly augmented the Orange-Nassau coffers. Their model followed the example of the notoriously extravagant court life of Friedrich V von der Pfalz, the so-called Winter King, in whose entourage Amalia had come to the Dutch court at The Hague.27 Amalia and her husband Frederik Hendrik represented the Orange-Nassau family at the height of its power, and during their reign they embarked upon a programme of strategic and costly self-representation in palaces, collections, courtly culture, and marriage alliances to mark and solidify their ascendancy as a dynasty of European influence.28 The couple’s campaign included the renewal and redevelopment of residential structures that signalled the new pre-eminent status of the House of Orange-Nassau.29 New palaces and country houses were commissioned at Huis Honselaarsdijk, Huis ter Nieuwburg and, specifically for Amalia, Huis ten Bosch. Noordeinde Palace in The Hague was renovated extensively. These became models for future generations to emulate in fashioning palaces and gardens that were intended to convey a distinctive Orange-Nassau style.30 Frederik Hendrik, who had been substantially influenced by the French style he witnessed on his travels as a young man, used the French connections of his mother Louise de Coligny to hire French Huguenot architects, artists, and gardeners (like the Mollet family) to lead and oversee his building projects. André Mollet (c. 1600–d. 1665), whose father Claude had designed the gardens of St Germain-en-Laye and Fontainebleau, became

90  Claiming spaces one of the most influential garden designers of the Orange family.31 In this way, the familial connections and religious identity of the Orange family not only shaped the personal taste of the stadtholders but also the choice of their architects and artists. Likewise, family networks were important not only for the creation of this ‘Dutch’ architecture, but also for its export to foreign countries. Amalia cannot be overlooked in these architectural developments. She emerged, most visibly during her twenty-eight years of widowhood, as an important patron of the arts in her own right. Her collecting practices, display mechanisms and locations, and her effective employment of gift exchanges were vital to the House of Orange-Nassau, particularly during a period in which it lacked a male leader.32 Her commission interests ranged from large architectural complexes such as the Oranjezaal at Huis ten Bosch (Figure 2.3) to portraits, porcelain, and furniture intended for more restricted

Figure 2.3 Pieter Post, etched by Jan Mathys, The Hall of Orange Built by H.R.H. Amalia, Dowager Princess of Orange, etc. (Amsterdam: F. de Witt, c. 1650). © The British Library Board, Asset No. Asset No 083444; Maps.C.9.e.8.(2).

Planting the Orange 91 spaces. It was thus not only large-scale architectural forms and expressions that were of political importance, but also the cultural messages inside them, as the widowed Amalia showed in her artistic programme at Huis ten Bosch. The design of Amalia’s rooms as an enfilade spatially signalled degrees of intimacy and access (or exclusion) through a series of antechambers, or small cabinets approaching the state bedroom. The colour scheme of her suite adopted the heraldic blue, gold, yellow, and orange associated with the House.33 There, particularly within the Oranjezaal commissioned after her husband’s death in 1647, paintings, statues, and objects glorified Frederik Hendrik and the House of Orange-Nassau dynasty more broadly.34 However, Saskia Beranek has recently argued that Amalia’s sophisticated vision of self-representation can also be seen in both restricted and more public spaces, and as much in these palace and garden complexes as in her portraits, rendering the Oranjezaaal specifically an embodiment of Amalia as the conduit between Orange-Nassau memory and future identity.35 Govert Flinck’s image of Amalia in mourning garb positions her in front of an impressive monument featuring a lifesize statue of her late husband, accompanied by statues representing Power and Justice. The monument, which did not exist in any physical space, bears some resemblance to the monument constructed for Frederik Hendrik’s father Willem, under which he lay buried. The painting by Govert Flinck (1615–60), which Amalia commissioned to hang in the ‘Grote Kabinet’ of Huis ten Bosch, claimed a particular space for Frederik Hendrik’s own memory, visualising a material site of his own (Figure 2.4). In the background, a phoenix signalled Amalia’s claim to the viewer that, although the House lacked a male heir at that moment, it would rise again in the future. In addition to architectural commissions and renovations of the existing palace complexes, ceremonial aspects of courtly life and lavish pageantry that reflected the House’s presentation as a ruling dynasty on par with the English, French or Spanish crown were not neglected. Highly visible rituals of birth, marriage, and death provided myriad opportunities to disseminate and lay claim to a tradition of Orange-Nassau power. These marked the northern provinces with a distinctly Orange presence, as its leading individuals staged the presentation of their House in urban performances to a broad audience, in person, art, and printed texts.36 For example, in the high-profile visit of Amalia and her daughters to Amsterdam in 1659, as they returned from the wedding of Henriëtte Catharina at Cleves, they staged an entrance that included sixteen horse-drawn carts, figuratively depicting a narrative of the Orange-Nassau contribution to Dutch history.37 At just the moment that the House of OrangeNassau was extending its links via marriage to new domains and dynasties in German lands, the House’s leading women renewed the dynasty’s claim to pre-eminence within Dutch cities and territories that were their first source of power. In addition, as Maurits and Filips Willem had been before him, Frederik Hendrik was involved in urban planning projects. As Rebecca Tucker has

92  Claiming spaces

Figure 2.4 Govert Flinck, Amalia von Solms in Mourning for her Husband, Prince Frederik Hendrik (Allegory of the Memory of Frederik Hendrik, Prince of Orange, with the Portrait of his Widow Amalia von Solms), 1654, oil on canvas, 307cm ×189cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-869.

argued, for example, twelve planning drawings show how the prince asserted his control over the Hague plein. The eventual outcome of Frederik Hendrik’s negotiations with the States over the site suggest not just his political acumen in demonstrating commitment to republican principles, in a public city space that was opened up to people of varied social classes, but also his keen eye for contemporary aesthetics.38 However, in the manuscript history composed by the prince’s secretary, Constantijn Huygens, for his sons, Huygens emphasised his own views and aspirations in the development of the area. This work suggests, albeit in a document evidently intended for Huygens’s

Planting the Orange 93 own family, how significant such affiliates of the House could be for OrangeNassau princely architectural and artistic decision-making.39 As members of the House of Orange-Nassau moved to new political environments beyond Nassau dynastic lands, their ability to impose the cultural power of their family necessarily altered. Individuals created new lands and spaces for the Orange-Nassau through their naming, building, and landscaping practices, as well as through the use of particular material objects within these sites. These activities were crucial for promoting and advancing the power of the dynasty, and operated in ways specific to the gender, status, and circumstances of their placement within these environments. Men and women were both able to effect Orange-Nassau dynastic expansion through the varied contexts in which they arrived in new lands. They served their individual and dynastic interests, applying familial conventions of visualising and materialising power within the particular circumstances of their status. In doing so, they expanded the environments over which the House of Orange-Nassau gained influence. Artists, garden designers, architects, and the courtiers who worked closely with them, collectively developed the public presentation of the House of Orange-Nassau across Europe, and were critically important to this dynastic colonising strategy. Frederik Hendrik and his children were pivotal in the replication of Willem’s marital strategy amongst a new generation of the Protestant European elite, expanding Orange-Nassau influence to England, new Dutch provinces, and particularly German lands. These marriages were of a strategic political nature; they were carefully arranged as alliances with Calvinist rulers in Anhalt-Dessau, the Palts, and Brandenburg. Significantly, after their marriages these Orange-Nassau princesses all engaged in significant building activities, symbolising their Orange family heritage. They applied these cultural strategies of power to new lands; lands which were not dynastic ones, but which fell within the Orange-Nassau sphere of influence. These women came to German and Dutch territories with far greater power in their marriages than had the children of the earlier Orange-Nassau generation. As a result, they were able to employ a high degree of economic and cultural dynastic display in these new environments. The daughters of Frederik and Amalia carried with them many of the same cultural strategies that their mother had used to promote the Orange-Nassau within the Netherlands. In a fascinating reversal of the naming of Orange-Nassau daughters after lands and States, it was married and widowed women of the House who were responsible for marking cities and castles in German lands as Orange in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Louise Henriëtte remodelled the town of Bötzow in the Dutch style, after her marriage to Friedrich Wilhelm I von Brandenburg, renaming it Oranienburg in 1653. Similarly, after her 1659 marriage to Johann Georg II von Anhalt-Dessau, Henriëtte Catharina commenced the park, palace, and town of Oranienbaum in Saxony-Anhalt, commissioning Dutch architects and artists to embellish its construction with symbols of the House of Orange-Nassau and the key role it had played in the creation of the

94  Claiming spaces resplendent Dutch Republic. Albertine Agnes, married to Willem Frederik van Nassau-Dietz, named her Friesland summer residence Oranjewoud in 1676,40 and built Oranienstein near Dietz as her widow’s retreat, where she lived from 1672 to 1681, and which was later extended under her daughter-in-law, Henriette Amalie. Her younger sister Maria, married to Ludwig Heinrich Moritz von Simmern-Lautern (1640–74), a grandchild of Maria’s aunt, Louise Juliana, followed a similar pattern. After her husband’s death in 1674, Maria had her widow’s retreat, named Oranienhof, built near Kreuznach. These particular lands were given to the Orange-Nassau women as gifts from their husbands, signalling the political importance of women’s marriage to the acculturation of new lands into the wider Nassau dynastic network. The House of Orange-Nassau profited culturally from this demonstration of power and superiority. Because the Orange-Nassau family was the financially dominant partner in each of these marriages, and was more politically influential in wider European circles, its visibility through these naming practices did not threaten their patriarchal position but rather stood to benefit the husbands of the Orange-Nassau women. Houses and gardens were an important part of the representative culture of the aristocracy, and the Orange-Nassau women carefully chose architectural ensembles, including houses, interior decorations, and gardens, as a cultural strategy to represent Orange-Nassau power. Louise Henriëtte was the first of her sisters to move into German territories, after she married Friedrich Wilhelm, Elector of Brandenburg, in 1646 (Figure 2.5).41 As the eldest of four

Figure 2.5 Cornelius Janssen or van Ceulen, Louise Henriëtte van Nassau, Electress of Brandenburg, oil on canvas, 83cm × 66cm. Verein der Freunde und Förderer des Siegerlandmuseums Siegen e.V.

Planting the Orange 95 daughters, she occupied not only the highest rank among the sisters, but also married the most advantageously. However, the impoverished Brandenburg had no financial or artistic resources, nor was there the same urban infrastructure as in the Dutch Republic. Yet the palaces and gardens of the Elector and Electress aspired to considerable representational value: they remodelled the Schloss and Lustgarten in Berlin, Oranienburg, Potsdam Schloss, and smaller places in Brandenburg such as Caputh. After the delayed arrival of Louise Henriëtte, she and her husband Friedrich Wilhelm oversaw the renovation of the Berlin palace, and especially the pleasure gardens, which showed strong Dutch influence.42 When Friedrich Wilhelm decided to make Potsdam his second seat of power, Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen wrote in 1664 with recommendations to make it glorious. It was to have pleasure gardens and orangeries, as well as a select Huguenot immigration program of Dutch, French, Swiss, and of Jewish people. Influenced by Dutch town landscaping ideas of tree-lined avenues and nurseries, the Potsdam Schloss was built by the architect Johann Gregor Memhardt, and was very similar in style and layout to Honselaarsdijk.43 Oranienburg, however, was solely Louise Henriëtte’s project. This palace complex was also built by architect Johann Gregor Memhardt (1607–78), who had been trained in the Dutch Republic (Figure 2.6).44 He was assisted by a ship’s carpenter from Breda and other craftsmen from the Netherlands.45 Louise Henriëtte had been given the town of Bötzow by her husband as a gift to remodel according to her own interests. She renamed the town Oranienburg in 1653 and embarked on systematically reworking

Figure 2.6 Exterior of Schloss Oranienburg © Jacqueline Van Gent, 2010.

96  Claiming spaces the place in name and character: constructing a palace, gardens, remaking the holdings into a productive manor, promoting her Dutch background and expertise,46 and promoting the status of the Orange dynasty. The naming of Oranienburg was a deliberate strategy of promoting her natal dynasty and one that was consciously echoed by her sisters. The founding of Oranienburg was depicted in 1655 in a painting by Dutch artist Willem van Honthorst (1594–1666), who worked regularly for the Orange-Nassau dynasty (as did his brother Gerrit), in which a magnificent castle is depicted with an agricultural scene behind Louise Henriëtte and Friedrich Wilhelm and their entourage in the foreground.47 Because she travelled frequently with the Elector, Louise Henriëtte did not spend much time in Oranienburg. However, she maintained close supervision over its planning and progress through her correspondence. She signalled her expectations and frustrations in letters to the First Minister in Brandenburg, Otto von Schwerin (1616–79). In 1662, she complained: As to Oranienburg, I beg you to hasten everything, and about the cabinet of porcelain, you tell me nothing at all. Mr Michel is a good man but he lies furiously, it should have been ready a year ago. I beg you to send me a picture of Oranienburg as it is at the moment, with the change to the gate and the basse-cour, and how it has progressed, and if the pump is done in the kitchen, so that they don’t have to go fetch water. M. Michel has taken all that upon himself, that the basse-cour is paved and the tower of the house, and send me where the carp ponds are, and how everything is in the garden. I beg you to send it to me, this will please me since I can’t see it myself. 48 Louise Henriëtte maintained firm control over Oranienburg, reflecting her belief that she was an absolutist ruler. Oranienburg was more than simply a palace, however. Louise Henriëtte embarked on an ambitious programme of economic renewal for the area, promoting the glass industry, encouraging Dutch settlers, and founding an orphanage in addition to the work of the palace and gardens. She wrote to Schwerin of how her heraldic arms were to be displayed in the orphanage and church (Figures 2.7 and 2.8).49 Her mother too was equally interested to know how the town was developing, writing to Schwerin in December 1657: ‘I am most pleased that you write of how Oranienburg is growing and what the houses are like in such a detailed way’.50 The town was also used for moments of the public ritual display of dynastic power, such as festive entries. In 1655, Louise Henriëtte’s entry into Oranienburg was arranged in such a way that she came through a tree-lined avenue and a triumphal archway, which was decorated with ‘Orange-apples’. The citizens of Oranienburg and Kremmen, with their guns, and farmers from neighbouring villages with orange-painted pikes, lined the streets on horseback.51 Oranienstein, near Dietz, was another important palace for asserting the power and influence of the House of Orange-Nassau. The work at Oranienstein

Planting the Orange 97

Figure 2.7 Orphanage established by Louise Henriëtte van Nassau, Oranienburg, Germany, photograph. © Susan Broomhall, 2010.

Figure 2.8 Crest of Louise Henriëtte at the orphanage in Oranienburg, Germany, photograph. © Jacqueline Van Gent, 2010.

commenced in 1671, but it was more than a decade until it was furnished and Albertine Agnes could move there from Leeuwarden in 1682. Albertine Agnes engaged the same builder who had worked for her sister Maria at Oranienhof.52 The sisters took a keen interest in the building progress of each

98  Claiming spaces other’s palaces, and in August 1672 Maria travelled to the Oranienstein building site so that she could report on its progress when she went to visit her sister in the Netherlands. In April 1674, Albertine Agnes herself spent two months in Dietz to supervise progress of the building work. Just four years later, in 1678, on her return trip to Kreuznach, Maria once again stopped over in Oranienstein to inspect the building progress.53 Apart from the palace Oranienstein, which was enlarged by Albertine Agnes’s daughter-in-law Henriette Amalie, Albertine Agnes also built and owned Oranjewoud in Friesland, which she had bought as a country seat in 1676.54 Oranjewoud was designed by Daniël Marot (1661–1752), who worked on several palaces for the Orange family, including Het Loo. Albertine Agnes managed the estate so that it was self-sufficient and could serve as a summer residence.55 In 1684, Oranjewoud was the place of reception for Albertine Agnes’s son, Hendrik Casimir II (1657–96), who had married his cousin Henriette Amalie (1666–1726) the previous year in Dessau. At the Oranjewoud reception Albertine Agnes was joined by her sisters Maria and Henriëtte Catharina.56 In 1689 Albertine Agnes moved permanently to Oranjewoud. Only a year later, in 1690, Oranjewoud was the site of the wedding of Albertine Agnes’s daughter Amalia (1655–95) to Johann Wilhelm III von Sachsen-Eisenach (1666–1729), and in the following year their son Wilhelm Heinrich (1691–1741) was born there.57 When Albertine Agnes died in 1697, all of her children had already passed away and Oranjewoud was inherited by her daughter-in-law, Henriette Amalie.58 Maria married the Calvinist German count Ludwig Heinrich Moritz von Simmern-Lautern in September 1666 at Johann Moritz’s palace in Cleves.59 Her husband died in 1674, and Maria remained a widow until her own death in 1688. They had no children. She built Oranienhof near Kreuznach as her widow’s retreat. It was built in Dutch baroque style with orangeries in the garden. Although Maria was neither a regent like Albertine Agnes, nor a mother to descendants who would carry on the Orange-Nassau line, she too, in her own way, promoted the Orange dynasty on her German estate, and participated in supporting the cultural projects of her sisters. However, it was to be Henriëtte Catharina (Figure 2.9) who created one of the largest series of architectural and horticultural promotion projects for the House of Orange-Nassau outside of the Netherlands. She had been given the village of Nischwitz in 1660 as a wedding gift from her husband, Johann Georg II, whom she married in 1659. Henriëtte Catharina renamed it Oranienbaum in 1673.60 She was already using her enormous dowry, and the money given to her by her father for her own private use, to reform the palace and its gardens in Dessau. A contemporary visitor, the architect Christoph Pitzler (1657–1707), visited Dessau and Oranienbaum in 1695, and observed that in the city of Dessau many houses were built in the Dutch style: ‘the houses are in the majority built of brick in the Dutch way [. . .] especially the five new ones in front of the palace’.61 These houses, named, for example, ‘House

Planting the Orange 99

Figure 2.9 Jan Mijtens, Henriëtte Catharina van Nassau, Princess of AnhaltDessau, oil on canvas, 105cm × 85cm. Verein der Freunde und Förderer des Siegerlandmuseums Siegen e.V.

of Orange’ and ‘House of Holland’, were paid for by Henriëtte Catharina for her courtiers and for visitors in Dessau. Henriëtte Catharina’s personal finances not only allowed her to fund these lavish projects but also paid for the building of her summer palace, Oranienbaum, and its gardens, as well as other urban social and economic reforms. Oranienbaum was first a summer palace and then became a widow’s retreat for Henriëtte Catharina in 1693. In architectural design and garden architecture, as well as the development of the urban and economic surroundings, Oranienbaum was a visible promotion of the Orange-Nassau, rather than Anhalt-Dessau. Orphanages were among the urban features introduced by the Orange princesses in German lands. In founding them, these women participated in a pattern that had been established in the previous generation by their aunt, Maria van Nassau. The institutions provided women in the House of Orange-Nassau with a distinctive form of urban intervention in the lands they controlled. Maria, the older half-sister of Frederik Hendrik, had remained unmarried until she was thirty-nine (Figure 2.10), and she and her husband, Philipp von

100  Claiming spaces

Figure 2.10 Adriaen Thomasz. Key, Portrait of Maria van Nassau (c.1580–90). 48cm × 34cm. Delft, Collection Museum Prinsenhof, Inv. Nr PDS 215.

Hohenlohe-Neuenstein, remained without children of their own. However, after her husband’s death in 1609, Maria developed a quasi-maternal identity that also promoted her Orange identity in lands that belonged to her, through her maternal Egmond heritage. In Buren, she founded an orphanage, investing some 32,000 guilders towards its establishment. This became a key site for Maria’s personal and dynastic representation, in the city in which she elected to be buried, near her mother. The site of the orphanage was the former Franciscan monastery of St Barbara, which had been destroyed by fire in 1575. The building was intended as an imposing monument; an elegant Renaissance-style edifice with ornamental pilasters, lattice stonework, and an impressive entrance with a pediment and inscription plate, and adorned with allegorical images of Faith, Hope, and Charity (Figures 2.11 and 2.12). At Maria’s death in 1616, however, the orphanage was still under construction. Thus, at the institution’s opening in 1619, having assumed oversight of the institution, Maurits limited the initial proposition to welcome twenty-four children – twelve of each sex – of good parentage from the regions that Maria

Planting the Orange 101

Figure 2.11 The exterior of the orphanage established by Maria van Nassau, Buren, the Netherlands, photograph. © Susan Broomhall, 2010.

had possessed, to just six of each. He made the reigning prince or princess the nominal regent of the orphanage, guaranteeing an ongoing Orange-Nassau connection, and stipulated that the children wear uniforms that bore an orange M. on the left sleeve, in memory of both Maria and the House to which she had belonged.62 One of the few known portraits of Maria still hangs inside the building. Maria’s niece, Louise Henriëtte, similarly established an orphanage on her lands at Oranienburg (see Figure 2.7 above). When it opened in 1665, it was the first such institution in German territories. In its design, promotion of the Orange name, and organisation it followed closely the example of the Buren orphanage.63 The orphanage cared for girls and boys from poor Protestant families with good moral backgrounds. The children’s uniforms were embroidered with the letter ‘N.’ for Nassau and ‘C.L.’ (for Churfürstin Luise) (see Figure 2.8 above).64 The orphanage’s finances and educational programme, and even the daily meal plan were prescribed in detail by Louise Henriëtte. The orphanage was built opposite the Oranienburg palace, marking a straight axis between the buildings. Louise Henriëtte’s sister, Henriëtte Catharina, would later adopt a similar urban establishment at the site which already contained her palace and the widow house, at Oranienbaum. In 1697, she too founded an orphanage.65 Both Orange-Nassau men and women engaged in extensive building activities that transformed built spaces in the Dutch Republic, as well as in other European regions, into a dynastic programme. Family members evidently

102  Claiming spaces

Figure 2.12 The gate at the orphanage established by Maria van Nassau, Buren, the Netherlands, photograph. © Susan Broomhall, 2010.

shared a pool of architects, artists, and head gardeners, and this strategy is in part responsible for similar aesthetic expressions in the building design, garden concepts, and interior decorations of the palaces connected to the House of Orange-Nassau, especially from the latter half of the seventeenth century. The daughters and grandchildren of Frederik Hendrik consciously styled their residences and the surrounding spaces of the associated towns to promote a ‘Dutch’ style associated with the Orange family. While men like Frederik Hendrik and Willem III pursued building programmes for much of their adult life when they achieved political power, women in the House found most of their opportunities at very specific and usually temporary moments in their life-cycles, particularly as widows (for Amalia, Albertine Agnes, Henriëtte Catharina, and Maria) and/or if acting as regents for their sons (Albertine Agnes, Henriëtte Catharina). Exceptionally, Louise Henriëtte built Oranienburg during the lifetime of her husband, Friedrich Wilhelm, but it was given to her by him, intended as a summer residency and possibly later as a widow’s retreat.

Orange gardens Gardens were a further part of the spatial representation of aristocratic status and power, and an integral component of architectural ensembles. By the seventeenth century, flowers had become status symbols as well as financial

Planting the Orange 103 investments. This was especially the case with bulbs, which had originally been imported from the Ottoman Empire but were soon grown for profit in the Netherlands.66 Gardens symbolised prestige, and members of the Dutch elite took an active interest in them, so it is not surprising that Frederik Hendrik, his daughters, and his grandson Willem III all engaged in the design and development of their gardens as part of their courtly representation.67 Vanessa Bezemer Sellers argues that the geometrical gardens of Frederik Hendrik and Amalia contributed to a ‘representative ambience of courtly residences’.68 This interest in gardens, and exotic and abundant flowers also found expression in the visual arts, as is suggested in a portrait by Gerrit van Honthorst, of Amalia as Flora with her two eldest children, Willem II and Louise Henriëtte (and their deceased sibling, Henriëtte Amalia, represented as the angel above crowning their mother with a floral wreath), which combined these interests with celebration of her reproductive success (Figure 2.13).69 As Bezemer Sellers has shown, this significant new garden architecture was most clearly

Figure 2.13 Gerrit van Honthorst, Amalia von Solms-Braunfels as Flora, c. 1629. 204cm × 157cm. Gotisches Haus Wörlitz, Kulturstiftung Dessau Wörlitz, Schloss Mosigkau. Photograph: Heinz Fräßdorf.

104  Claiming spaces developed at the family residences at Honselaarsdijk, and Ter Nieurburch, and around The Hague, such as the Oude Hof or Paleis Noordeinde and Huis ten Bosch. But gardens at Breda, Buren, Zuylesteyn, and Ysselsteyn were also redeveloped, and the gardens of later Orange-Nassau individuals residing in Germany and England show a remarkable Dutch influence. These Dutch gardens, a hallmark of Orange-Nassau landscaping beyond the Netherlands, were often symmetrical and were marked by thousands of trees, which were planted in alleys as a geometrical device. Baroque gardens conveyed political messages and must be read in the context of the specific political systems at the time. Michel Conan has suggested that in the age of absolutism the intention of the garden was to show princely control and power, and to ‘create intense emotions that would lead to universal deference to the prince’s will’.70 These were controlled spaces with plants, walkways, statues, grottos, and orangeries. Accordingly, Honselaarsdijk and other Orange-Nassau gardens in the northern provinces contained a grotto, an orangery, and extensive orchard and nut trees. Frederik Hendrik took a well-known personal interest in his lands at Honselaarsdijk; as Constantijn Huygens wrote to Amalia in June 1639, ‘[he] remained for a good two hours ordering the gardens and buildings of Honselaarsdijk’.71 As Tucker argues, the prince arranged the estate effectively as a political text, articulating his right to be stadtholder.72 Additionally, however, specific elements of Orange memory and celebration were displayed in gardens, especially in the orangeries and grottos. The first reference to the construction of an orangery in an Orange-Nassau garden dates from 1639 for the gardens of Ter Nieuburch. This orangery apparently also provided the setting for a shell-filled grotto (a model that Johann von Nassau-SaarbrückenIdstein and others would later follow) and for sweet orange trees that had been brought from Antwerp.73 For the Orange family, orangeries and oranges held, of course, special meaning, and they were frequently used as an iconographic tool to promote the family. In garden settings, they formed an important part of demonstrating luxury and wealth, and promoting the Orange name. For example, the 1713 inventory of Het Loo mentions ninety-two large and twenty-four small orange trees.74 Orangeries were included in all of the important Orange-Nassau gardens within and beyond the Netherlands, such as at Oranienburg, Oranienbaum, Oranienstein, Mosigkau, Oranjewoud, Hampton Court, and later Wörlitz. They were also keenly copied by those related to the Orange-Nassau, such as in Prussia (Berliner Lustgarten, Sanssoucie in Potsdam, and Charlottenburg), and also at the Château de Thouars in France, the home of Henri de La Trémoille (1598–1674) and his wife Marie de La Tour d’Auvergne (1601–65) (the son and daughter of Charlotte Brabantina and Elisabeth van Nassau respectively), which was seen as the model for the orangery at Versailles. Just as Frederik Hendrik and Amalia had, their daughters closely supervised the building of the gardens that formed an architectural and iconographic unity with their palaces, and fostered agriculture.75 Friedrich Wilhelm and Louise Henriëtte organised the rebuilding of Brandenburg from Cleves, where

Planting the Orange 105 they resided for a time until their castle in Berlin was ready. The plan was to include fruit and vegetable cultivation, intensive dairy farming, and was also to capitalise on Dutch technical knowledge for using waterways for transport, with Friedrich Wilhelm overseeing the completion of a canal connecting the rivers Oder and Spree in 1668. Louise Henriëtte transformed Bötzow into a model enterprise with dairy farming, sheep breeding, flower breeding, and vegetable growing. These water canals (also seen at Oranienbaum and Wörlitz) and forms of intensive agriculture and horticulture reflected life in the increasingly urbanised Netherlands. The Dutch had commenced largescale cultivation of flowers and fruit trees, and intensive dairy and sheep farming had been developed to serve the increasing demand from growing cities. The Berliner Lustgarten was rebuilt in 1647, and included an orangery (Pomerantzen Hauß), which was constructed in 1652–3. The plans for this orangery include details of plaques that were to be installed above the side entrance doors, displaying its year of foundation, 1652, and the names of Friedrich Wilhelm and Louise Henriëtte in gold letters.76 When Louise Henriëtte commenced the building of the Oranienburg gardens in the early 1650s, she likewise followed Dutch examples. The structure as well as the content of the garden was Dutch in nature. She planted the garden with fruit trees, including an orangery, and it also had grottos and a menagerie.77 Louise Henriëtte took an active interest in the gardens in Berlin and Oranienburg, as can be seen from her correspondence with Schwerin.78 She wrote repeatedly of the carp ponds, making sure that they were well stocked for spring, and that the carp and swans were given time to become accustomed to their new environment.79 She instructed Schwerin to make sure there were four to six swans living in the newly dug spaces, assuring herself ‘I think you will approve of my plan, for it seems to me that they are very good’.80 Louise Henriëtte was concerned to hear that the cows had fallen ill in 1663: I am very cross that the cows are in such a bad state, I cannot understand the reason for at Berlin in the menagerie they also have cows like this and they are very beautiful. It must be the fault of the people there, that they are not giving them enough to eat.81 She was most annoyed at the lack of progress with the grand alley, telling Schwerin in February 1663, ‘in autumn a row of trees must be planted on each side, for it is quite large and I would like them to be lime trees, you will have to find some’.82 In 1665, she had still not achieved this design, asking Schwerin again to find trees to plant in a row on each side of the grand alley, as she worried about the dimensions and spacing, and reiterated that they be lime trees ‘planted together as at Königsberg, where it seems to be me that they are very beautiful’.83 She also worried about the state of the parterres, asking for roses and small fruit trees in particular:84 ‘I beg you to make it so that my garden has fruit trees which are missing [at present] but they must be fruits of Holland that I beg you to bring here’.85 The gardens clearly caused Louise Henriëtte frustration but also gave her great enjoyment, as she excused

106  Claiming spaces her repeated demands to Schwerin with expressions of her pleasure: ‘I gain so much joy from my garden!’, ‘[it is] my distraction’.86 Henriëtte Catharina similarly took a personal interest in the design and management of the gardens at Oranienbaum. These were designed by the Dutch architect Cornelis Ryckwaert (1652–93), who also worked for Friedrich Wilhelm and Louise Henriëtte, and Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen. After Ryckwaert’s death in 1693, his son Adriaen Ryckwaert continued the design of the garden, which was executed by Jacob de Grande, complete with water ditches, a typical feature of Dutch gardens in the Netherlands.87 In her will in 1709, Henriëtte Catharina assigned seventy-six orange trees to her daughter Marie Eleanore, Duchess von Radziwiłł (1671–1756).88 The generous layout of Henriëtte Catharina’s gardens at Dessau and her menagerie there have been described above. Piztler described the Oranienbaum gardens in some detail, and emphasised the children’s sculptures, kitchen garden, pheasant menagerie, paved pathways, and terraces with flower vases as special features.89 Henriëtte Catharina, like her sisters Louise Henriëtte and Albertine Agnes, encouraged intensive dairy farming, the planting of fruit trees, tree alleys, and grottos of remembrance within gardens that were themselves one aspect of a larger architectural ensemble of both palace and town.90 Pitzler’s observations about the palace gardens in Dessau reflect some of the main features of other Orange gardens of this generation, such as its geometry, tree-lined alleys, extensive use of art such as vases, putti, and sculptures, as well as the orangery and grottos: Next to the palace is a small garden, a semicircle in shape, surrounded by a wall and a terrace under which there are chambers and above [garden rooms], there are many vases with flowers, and there stand various pictures of children. The building is made only from stone walls with a stone foundation and squared stones. The pleasure garden behind the stables is also very nicely arranged, with high espalier of hornbeams, and a very fine orangery with very beautiful trees.91 From the Dessau castle one could see Oranienbaum. A tree-lined avenue led straight from the palace garden through the menagerie to Oranienbaum, and thus connected the two ensembles visually: ‘Oranienbaum, which is the country retreat of the Duchess and situated two miles from Dessau, can be seen from the Dessau palace through the menagerie. It is very flat and surrounded by a water canal.’92 Moreover, Henriëtte Catharina colonised these new lands in other ways, by reforming the economic landscape of her territories and by initiating wider social reforms to improve her estate. As part of their economic stimuli in the war-torn German territories, the Orange princesses encouraged breweries, dairies, glass factories, and even a distillery for orange blossom liqueur.93 Henriëtte Catharina also founded an orphanage and a house for widows (Figure 2.14). These practices of social welfare were widely recognised as particular to the

Figure 2.14 House for widows established by Henriëtte Catharina van Nassau, Oranienbaum, Germany, photograph. © Jacqueline Van Gent, 2010.

108  Claiming spaces Netherlands at this time, and the Orange-Nassau both signalled their heritage as well as their social compact of duties and responsibilities with the new territories through such acts. The gardens at Oranienstein were begun under Albertine Agnes and continued under her daughter-in-law Henriëtte Amalie, who settled at Oranienstein and enlarged it significantly. In 1680, under Albertine Agnes, the apothecary and orangery had already been finished.94 As with the gardens of her parents and her sisters, Albertine Agnes immediately planted an alley with some 212 trees, another with 1,000 pear and apple trees,95 and a third with 1,783 trees. At Oranjewoud she started to build an orangery.96 From 1681 she also had a menagerie of local animals, mainly deer. Little information has survived about the gardens of Maria at Oranienhof, which were destroyed with the palace in 1690. Grottos were closely connected to the Orange dynastic culture of gardens and self-promotion; they had already been built in the 1630s in the gardens of Frederik Hendrik and Amalia.97 Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen began the construction of a grotto, designed by Jacques de Gheyn II (1565–1629), at Buitenhof between 1625 and 1630, which was later completed by Frederik Hendrik. Christiaan Huygens (1629–95) reported back to his brother Lodewijk (1631–99) that, after the wedding of Albertine Agnes and Willem Frederik in Cleves, he was taken ‘to see the plantations of Count Moritz, his gardens and grottos that he has added in such a lovely fashion in with so little costs, the situation being of itself so pleasant’.98 Later, when Johann Moritz was in need of financial support from Willem III’s favourite, Hans Willem Bentinck (1649–1709), he presented Bentinck with a grotto for his garden.99 Gardens were explicitly intended to glorify the House of Orange-Nassau, with the monograms ‘H.’ (Hendrik), ‘A.’ (Amalia) and ‘O.’ (Orange) found in an entwined manner in the garden terraces of Ter Nieuburch and Huis ten Bosch, and carved into the pulpit of the chapel of Honselaarsdijk, forming ‘the central ornamental motif in the Stadtholder’s palaces and gardens’.100 After the death of Frederik Hendrik, his widow Amalia used the building and garden programme at the stadtholder’s gardens to celebrate his memory and achievements. Grottos played an important part as the location for the performance of widow mourning. Vanessa Bezemer Sellers has suggested that a print of a grotto design, which shows the bust of Frederik Hendrik surrounded by columns, could have been intended for the grotto at Honselaarsdijk, or for Noordeinde, because it fitted the specific mourning programme designed by Amalia and instigated after Frederik Hendrik’s death; the columns flanking the bust of Frederik Hendrik had tears running down them.101 Sellers suggests that Amalia might have decorated other grottos in a similar way, for example, that belonging to her flower garden at Noordeinde.102 A print attributed to G. H. van Scheyndel and also intended as a design for a grotto, shows a grotto wall displaying the portraits of Willem and Maurits.103 This would form a logical extension of Amalia’s extensive mourning and promotion programme. Amalia’s daughters continued these sites of dynastic display at their own estates in very similar forms. The pleasure gardens in the Berliner Schloss,

Planting the Orange 109 renovated under the supervision of Friedrich Wilhelm and Louise Henriëtte, contained a grotto. Grottos as sites for female grief were well-developed ways of articulating the dynastic and individual identities of the Orange-Nassau princesses.104 At Oranienbaum, Henriëtte Catharina combined grief at the loss of her husband with a presentation of wider dynastic mourning for her father and brother. Her grotto contained busts of her husband Johann Georg II von Anhalt-Dessau, and also of her brother Willem II and father Frederik Hendrik, which were identical in style to drawings of the stadtholder’s bust in a niche intended for a grotto in the stadtholder’s garden at either Honselaarsdijk or Noordeinde.105 Louise Henriëtte’s Oranienburg also displayed three marble busts, of Frederik Hendrik, Willem II, and the Great Elector, which were probably housed in the grotto.106 Thus, in foreign territories, the four Orange-Nassau daughters of Frederik Hendrik and Amalia acted as ambassadors for their House, and used similar strategies as their mother to promote and advance Orange-Nassau identity and power. Amalia’s daughters, who all married into German lands (including Albertine Agnes through Dietz), promoted their natal dynasty through building programmes, palaces, and gardens. They further introduced new forms of cultivation and new industries into these impoverished German territories. These forms of dynastic colonialism reflected gendered spaces of power. None of the sisters could be stadtholders and thus hold direct political power like their father, brother, cousins, or husbands (in the case of Albertine Agnes’s husband, Willem Frederik), although both Albertine Agnes and Henriëtte Catharina acted as regents for certain periods of time. Their courts were physically removed from the centre of Orange-Nassau power in The Hague, and yet they strove to extend this identity and its power in cultural forms by following their parents’ examples of dynastic display through a unified ensemble of palaces and gardens. These Orange-Nassau princesses came to their marriages with substantial dowries, and their cultural promotion of Orange-Nassau power at the palaces, which served as their widow’s retreats (and to a lesser extent, in the central palaces of Berlin and Dessau), stood to benefit their husbands.

Hunting Orange-Nassau favour The ascendance of Willem III and Mary II to the thrones of England, Ireland, and Scotland in 1689 heralded a new development in the House’s rise to power. This was reflected in Orange-Nassau interactions with spaces, not only as they acquired new palace complexes and territories to mark in Britain, but also as they re-inscribed the traditional lands and sites possessed by the House in the Netherlands, both in terms of building programmes and the opportunities for male and female sociability that they offered. The active involvement of both Willem and Mary in such spaces produced ambiguous commentary from contemporaries that highlights how gender shaped the access of the sexes to such spatial power. A series of architects and designers were instrumental in fashioning royal status for Willem in these Dutch and English

110  Claiming spaces spaces that could rival Willem’s greatest male contemporary, Louis XIV and his widely publicised developments at Versailles. Indeed, Daniël Marot, a French Huguenot refugee who left France around 1684, imported aspects of French aesthetics into the new style that he developed and transmitted widely across the Orange-Nassau network in a steady flow of commissions. Willem renovated and expanded his favourite hunting lodge at Dieren, and created water gardens containing canals and innovative fountains there.107 The exchange of letters between Willem and Hans Willem Bentinck, Willem’s superintendent of palaces and gardens, who was later raised to an earldom, indicates the interest that Willem took in the new developments on these estates, and the ways in which correspondence about these building programmes could complement complex political and diplomatic work. Regarding Dieren, Bentinck wrote in frustration to Willem in 1690 of delays: I left for Dieren where I found I was needed more, given the damage that the overflow of water had made to the new dam and to the little labyrinth that was almost completely ruined, and then the terrible state that the garden was in, because of the drunkenness of the gardener who has not yet put his hand to anything, I sent him away and will start another tomorrow to fill his place. I hope to be able to render soon an account of it all to your Majesty in person very soon.108 When Bentinck attended the French court in 1698, he reported how the king had taken special care to personally show him all his fountains and gardens at Versailles, as well as the pump at Marly and other notable estates such as Vaux-le-Vicomte.109 Later, he had received the design of the château and gardens at Marly directly from Jules Hardouin-Mansart (1646–1708).110 In a letter of 1698, Louis’s building projects were compared unfavourably to Willem’s own. I am very sorry to learn what Your Majesty tells me about matters in England, but times there are changing, after the rain comes good weather [. . .] After all that, I will give Your Majesty an account of the gardens, houses and the hunting; the terrible weather is the reason why I have not rushed to see the first, because everything seems dead and dirty and the fountains aren’t working because of the long frost which prevents the machines from being able to draw the water to fill the reservoirs; the orangeries at Versailles are extremely beautiful and large in number, the stamens are beautiful and high, but the heads are not like those of Honselaarsdijk, those at Trianon are hardly anything compared to others, what’s extraordinary here is that all around here I find no fruit trees that I need, and I am obliged to send to Orléans to have any, and these thousands of flowers that Your Majesties have heard so much about that the parterres are full of through all seasons, I haven’t seen a single one, not even a snowdrop, and the gardens are in winter less tidy that ours. No

Planting the Orange 111 one puts a hand to it. The whole is magnificent at Versailles, gardens and buildings, even though one can find faults with the latter without being any more of an architect than I am; the expenditure for it is immense. Trianon is very agreeable and charming but Meudon surpasses everything in its situation and the air there is as at Windsor.111 Faced with the difficult political situation in England, Bentinck appeared to use his reports on the building projects and recreational activities at the French court to cheer the king up. The remodelling of English palaces during the reign of Willem and Mary, particularly at Hampton Court and Kensington Palace, frequently employed Dutch designers and craftsmen, including Daniël Marot, who had been chief architect at Het Loo and had designed interior spaces at Oranienburg, Oranienbaum, and Oranienstein. The Herculean lion that had been employed by earlier Princes of Orange, and was in the fountain at Het Loo, was incorporated as a lion skin adorning some of the windows at Hampton Court.112 Willem had embraced the classical reference of Hercules, much as Louis XIV, the Sun King, had done with Apollo, and it appeared even in his early portraits, such as that of de Baen from around 1670 (see Chapter 1, Figure 1.30). Moreover, Hampton Court displayed a magnificent collection of orange tree species, some of which were brought from the Netherlands. A sizeable payment of over seventy pounds is recorded in the accounts, made to one Herman Jansen Valck for ‘orrange trees’.113 Orangeries were a politically subtle tool for displaying a connection to the House of Orange-Nassau. It helped that they were already fashionable among elites in Europe. Mary too was involved in the building projects that were constructed on her return to England. Among the most notable was her Delftware-tiled dairy within the Water Gallery, modelled upon the summer kitchens of the daughters of Frederik Hendrik and Amalia.114 Christopher Wren (1632–1723), in his Parentalia, recorded that Mary was deeply engaged in these plans: [E]xamining and surveying the Drawings, Contrivances, and the whole Progress of the Works, and to give thereon her own Judgment, which was exquisite; for there were few Arts, or Sciences, in which her Majesty had not only an elegant Taste, but a Knowledge much superior to any of her Sex, in that, or (it may be) any former Age. This is not said as a Panegyrick, but a plain and well-known Truth, which the Surveyor had frequent Experience of, when [. . .] he had many Opportunities of a free Conversation with her Majesty.115 However, she professed deeply ambivalent feelings about her involvement in these works. Mary wrote, for example, that her eagerness to see work at Kensington and Hampton Court was checked when a series of accidents occurred.116 She reflected in a short manuscript of spiritual memoirs that this was a sign from God:

112  Claiming spaces I was so unsetled at Holland House, I could not do as I would. This made me go often to Kinsington to hasten the worckmen, and I was to impatient to beat that place, imagining to find more ease there. This I often reproved my self for and at last it pleased God to shew me the uncertainty of all things below; for part of the house which was new built fell down. The same accident happened at Hampton court. All this as much as it was the fault of the worckmen, humanly speaking, yet shewed me the hand of God plainly in it, and I was truly humbled.117 Mary also articulated her pleasure to be able to spend time at Kensington, the 23 of Dec: we came to Kinsington from Hollandhouse. Blessed be God who has at least after more than nine months being in England and never setled, brought me to a place where I hope to be more at leisure to serve my maker and to worck out my own salvation with fear and trembling.118 She enjoyed walking in the grounds of these complexes, as she wrote in a letter to the Electress Sophia of Hanover (1630–1714), imagining the possibility of fostering female sociability in such sites and activities: I was once a very great walker & have often heard when I was in Holland you wear so too. A thousand times I have wisht myself with you & why shoud I yet despaire of that satisfaction, at least let me please my self some times with such thoughts, you will easily belive I have vexing ons enow to fill my mind, to divert which I go some times to Hampton court, a place I don’t doubt but you have heard named, where the King has begun a great building & large garden, ‘tis at so convenient a distance from this place [Whitehall], I go it with ease in too hours time. Kensington I can walk too, that is about the same distance from heance.119 At the end of 1691, she considered her moral state in relation to her commissions for creature comforts: I confess I had to much in the convenience of my house and neatness of my furniture, and I was taught a second time the vanity of all such things by a fire the 9th of Nov. which burnt one side of the House at Kensington. The whole had not escaped but by the good providence of God, which kept every body from hurt, so that there was not the least accident that I could hear of. This has truly, I hope, weaned me from the vanities I was most fond of, that is ease and good lodgings.120 Mary responded by setting herself a moral programme of reading scripture and English history, writing, and meditation. The ambiguous merit of women’s pursuit of such large-scale projects was reflected not only in Mary’s own writing, but also at her death. Bishop Gilbert Burnet, in his 1705 Character of the Late Queen Mary, praised the queen for having given

Planting the Orange 113 her minutes of leisure with the greatest willingness to architecture and gardenage. [. . .] She knew that this drew an expense after it; she had no inclination besides this to any diversions that were expenseful, and since this employed many hands, she was pleased to say that she hoped it would be forgiven her.121 Shortly after Mary’s death, the Water Gallery was demolished, as it was considered to be interfering with the view of the river from the State Apartments.122 The concerns that Mary expressed about her participation in monumental architectural works (however much smaller these building elements were in the overall scheme compared to those of Willem) did not appear to be not ones voiced by, or for, Orange-Nassau men or their elite followers. A dedicated campaign of print-making supported the physical changes to the landscapes of Orange-Nassau properties, while at the same time depicting horticultural interests as long-held pursuits of the House. In a collection of plans printed in 1718, Frederik Hendrik was shown, from a bird’s eye view, entering his estate at Honselaarsdijk (Figure 2.15). These advanced Willem’s claims of being a monarch at the cutting edge of horticultural design and visibly

Figure 2.15 Depiction of the Home of the most August and Serene Prince Frederik Hendrik of Nassau, Prince of Orange, which is Honselaarsdijk (c. 1640). (Amsterdam, 1718) © The British Library Board, Asset No. 083457; Maps.C.9.e.8.(24).

114  Claiming spaces controlling the properties he possessed. Both of Willem’s favoured architects, Jacob Roman (1640–1716) and Marot, also produced prints in which they showcased the works they had created for their patrons and in the process also promoted their own talent (or perhaps the other way round). Indeed, the reach of Marot’s prints of a series of six vases he had designed for the gardens of Het Loo was extended further by the enterprising landscaper and engraver François Vivares (1709–80), who had the plates copied anonymously for his own publication of them.123 The twenty-seven volume atlas of the Netherlands that Amsterdam businessman Christoffel Beudeker (1675–1756) collated in the early eighteenth century included three volumes dedicated to Dutch royal and country estates, including the unique garden designs that were created in the period by maximising the watery landscape. Taking pride of place were Willem’s properties, chief among these Het Loo, which featured in brightly coloured plans by Isaac de Moucheron (1667–1744), engraved by Cornelis Danckaerts and printed in 1698 (Figure 2.16), and by Daniël Stoopendaal (1672–1726) from the same period (here in the re-issued version of c. 1710).124 Also depicted in print was the estate of Slot Ziest, which belonged to Willem Adriaan van Nassau-Odijk (c. 1632–1705), who was a descendant of Maurits’s illegitimate son, Lodewijk van Nasssau-Beverweerd (Figure 2.17). He had performed service in a range of diplomatic and political (sometimes

Figure 2.16 Isaac de Moucheron [engraved by Cornelis Danckaerts] General View in Perspective of the Mansion or Royal Pleasure House of His Majesty the King of Great Britain etc. at Loo (Amsterdam: Justus Danckaerts, 1698) © The British Library Board,. Asset no. 083418; Maps.C.9.e.7.(2).

Planting the Orange 115

Figure 2.17 Daniël Stoopendaal, View of Zeist House with its Gardens and Plantations Belonging to the Count of Nassau (Amsterdam: [N. Visscher], c. 1700), © The British Library Board, Asset No. 083604; Maps.C.9.e.9.(40).

unpopular) roles on behalf of the Orange-Nassau. He enjoyed a suite of rooms in the castle at Breda, as was demonstrated in its 1696/1712 inventory.125 Willem Adriaan in return probably introduced Willem to Marot. It was evidently Willem Adriaan who had first employed Marot after his departure from France, designing interiors for Zeist before Willem commissioned him for work at Het Loo.126 Thus far, we have largely analysed the behaviours of family members directly connected with the House of Orange-Nassau. However, a range of Dutch nobles in Willem’s immediate orbit began to model their properties on his style. In fact, in some cases it was Willem himself who helped to support the transfer of his Orange-Nassau aesthetics more broadly to the elite of the Netherlands. For example, Willem’s enthusiasm for the young Arnold Joost van Keppel (1670–1718) extended to purchasing former Keppel lands, including the castle of De Voorst in Gelderland, which he promptly rebuilt and re-landscaped for his friend, employing Roman and Marot to do so (Figure 2.18).127 Other members of Willem’s circle redeveloped their houses and gardens at their own expense. This was the case for Jan van Arnhem (1636–1716), whose shared passion for hunting ensured that his renovated property, Rosendael, had a notably large stable area to accommodate Willem’s horses as well as his own. The close friendship of his wife, and cousin, Janne Margriete (1635–1721), with Mary may likewise explain the outdoor ‘green cabinet’ garden modelling the queen’s at Het Loo. Arnhem commissioned Roman and Marot together to create Rosendael’s ‘koninzks huisje’, a garden house intended for Willem.128 Arnhem, who considered himself something of a literary figure,

116  Claiming spaces

Figure 2.18 Leonard Scherm, Pleasure House of His Excellency the Earl of Albemarle at Voorst, (1700) (Amsterdam, 1718) © The British Library Board, Asset No. 083428; Maps.C.9.e.7.(50).

left an image of himself and his estate in his 1707 publication of moral and religious poems, Gedagten en gedichten, geestelyke en zedelyke.129 Diederik van Velthuysen (1651–1716), a civil servant aspiring to Willem’s favour who was awarded special hunting privileges by him, developed Heemstede, the estate that he had purchased in 1680, explicitly in Orange-Nassau honour. Such hunting rights for what were largely bonding activities among elite men, while by no means unique practices of this House, made and re-made space as Orange-Nassau through the privilege of their access to it and its resources, as well as the favoured activities of the king that were permitted to be performed in it. The interiors were designed by Marot and a Hercules fountain here was combined with busts of Willem’s male ancestors, and both indoor and outdoor orangeries (Figure 2.19).130 Zorgvliet, the country estate of Bentinck, Earl of Portland, also referenced Willem and the House of Orange-Nassau through its Hercules fountain and orangery (Figure 2.20).131 Classical references informed the relationship between the two men; Bentinck, cupbearer to William III, had a grotto of Ganymede, the cupbearer to Jupiter.132 Those seeking favour from Bentinck

Planting the Orange 117

Figure 2.19 Daniël Stoopendaal after Isaac de Moucheron, Plan or View of Heemstede in the Province of Utrecht (Amsterdam: [N. Visscher], c. 1700), © The British Library Board, Asset No. 083602: Maps.C.9.e.9.(25).

knew to use his passionate interest in his estate as a hook, for example François de Neufville, Duke of Villery (1644–1730), Marshall of France and a member of Louis XIV’s intimate circle. His diplomatic overtures appealed to Bentinck when he wrote of his desire to visit him, ‘especially at Zorgvliet, more than in England, for it seems to me that that place is more peaceful, and one can promenade in your beautiful garden with more liberty than anywhere else’.133 Over the course of a series of letters, Villery drew Bentinck in through correspondence that linked their personal friendship with their shared interests in architecture and gardens: ‘I well remember the conversation that we had together in the garden of Versailles about the windows of M. Le Grand [Louis de Lorraine (1614–1718), the grand écuyer de France]’.134 Despite the rivalry between Louis XIV and Willem at this time, a shared passion for house and gardens also facilitated important international relations through opportunities for male sociability and discussion of ostensibly ‘neutral’ topics among their respective courtiers. In England, William Talman (1650–1719), Comptroller of the Royal Works, was the architect on a series of projects built for the elite circle surrounding Willem and Mary, including perhaps most notably, Chatsworth, but also Uppark, Dyrham Park, Petworth House, and Drayton House. He had worked with Marot on the Hampton Court Water Gallery and successfully

118  Claiming spaces

Figure 2.20 Jan vande Avelen, and Nicolaas Visscher, The Orangery in the Park of Zorgvliet, one of the most beautiful in Holland (Amsterdam: Johannes Covens and Cornelis Mortier, c. 1700), © The British Library Board, Asset No. 083427; Maps.C.9.e.7.(75).

integrated Marot’s distinctive style into his subsequent projects.135 Features of the design at Drayton House, for example, which was built for Mary Howard, the Duchess of Norfolk (c. 1659–1705), and her second husband, Sir John Germaine (c. 1650–1718), by Talman, bore distinct similarity to the style of Marot.136 Germaine, a courtier and soldier born in 1650, was widely reputed to be the illegitimate son of Willem II, making him Willem’s half-brother. He was among the group of men who accompanied Willem to England in 1688 and, in return for his service, Willem bestowed a series of appointments and titles upon him, including a baronetcy. It was presumably thus that, with Willem’s support, Germaine’s arms reflected his claims to proximity with the House of Orange-Nassau.137 In 1702, Anne Scott (1651–1732), the widow of the executed Duke of Monmouth, and of Charles Cornwallis, third Baron Cornwallis (1655–98) and first Duchess of Buccleuch in her own right, asked the Scottish architect James Smith (c. 1645–1731) to remodel her ancestral home, Dalkeith Palace, after Het Loo. Like Talman in England, Smith was responsible for renovations to a

Planting the Orange 119 number of homes belonging to Scottish peers seeking favour with Willem and Mary, including Melville House, the interior furnishing of which was modelled after Marot’s designs (see Chapter 4). The transfer of Orange-Nassau house and garden styles to other families of the elite in their circle was an indirect way of signalling the power of the House. But, in doing so, the aesthetic approaches of the monarchs became widespread through locations in which a series of intimate affiliates, and those aspiring to join them, flagged their allegiance in new geographic spaces that were not Orange-Nassau domains. It was primarily an elite male coterie on both sides of the Channel who had the funds to participate in these building activities, or had sufficient influence with Willem to gain his financial support. These were material culture and generally male ritualised activities such as hunting, in restricted spaces, that were politically resonant and meaningful. The suitability of Mary’s participation in these same activities was rendered more ambiguous in the records that remain of her interventions. Her letters, though, demonstrated shared ideas about an intimate culture of shared female bonding; in her case, by walking with female friends and relatives through her gardens. Moreover, the celebratory visualisation of these estates in prints not only brought attention to Willem and Mary’s style more broadly, but, in revealing an otherwise hidden world to an eager readership, also emphasised the intimate, closed, and gendered nature of the political and cultural capital they reflected.

Conclusions The House of Orange-Nassau enacted an effective building programme across their many sites of influence. Palaces and gardens in distinct Dutch styles promoted the power of the House in the Netherlands and across Europe in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. These building practices were driven particularly by Orange-Nassau women and their descendants. The examples of Oranienburg, Oranienbaum, and Oranienstein demonstrate how OrangeNassau princesses astutely laid claim to dynastic power in their cultural representations, through lavish palaces and gardens and their innovative designs and features, coupled with social and economic reforms within their local communities. However, women and men had notably different opportunities to engage in such work. The majority of women affiliated with the House achieved such activities in their widowhood, and the occupation of wives such as Mary II Stuart in architectural projects during the lifetime of their husbands was perceived ambivalently (and in Mary’s case was almost immediately destroyed by Willem after her death). Prints and paintings enabled the work of Orange-Nassau individuals to be re-told to new audiences across Europe, making their material and spatial claims in new ways. Moreover, they provided access to intimate sociability rituals and sites of political power performed in these spaces, from hunting to tea-drinking (as we shall explore in Chapter 5), yet ultimately they reinforced the exclusion of those who could never achieve more than a glance at the exclusive world of elite power.

120  Claiming spaces

Notes   1 Jules Delaborde, Charlotte de Bourbon, Princesse d’Orange (Paris: Fischbacher, 1888), 176.   2 Delaborde, Charlotte de Bourbon, 200.   3 Delaborde, Charlotte de Bourbon, 218.   4 Delaborde, Charlotte de Bourbon, 289.   5 Koen Ottenheym, ‘The Catholic Nassaus in Brussels and Their Buildings’, in Albert & Isabella, 1598–1621, ed. Werner Thomas and Luc Duerloo (Turnhout: Brepols, 1998), 186; G. C. A. Juten, ‘Bouwstoffen voor de geschiedenis van Willemstad’, Taxandria 39 (1932): 27–31.   6 Ottenheym, ‘The Catholic Nassaus in Brussels and Their Buildings’, 186. See also G. C. A. Juten, ‘De koepelkerk van Willemstad’, Taxandria 29 (1922): 11–25.   7 Piet Lombarde, ‘Dominating Space and Landscape: Ostend and Scherpenheuvel’, in Albert & Isabella, ed. Thomas and Duerloo, 177.   8 Ottenheym, ‘The Catholic Nassaus in Brussels and Their Buildings’, 185.   9 On the development of Scherpenheuvel under Isabella and Albert’s patronage, see Lombarde, ‘Dominating Space and Landscape’, 173–83; and Luc Duerloo and Marc Wingens, Scherpenheuvel. Het Jeruzalem van de Lage Landen (Leuven: Davidsfonds, 2002).   10 Ottenheym, ‘The Catholic Nassaus in Brussels and Their Buildings’, 186.   11 On Johann VII and other Nassau converts, see Susan Broomhall and Jacqueline Van Gent, Gender, Power and Identity in the Early Modern House of OrangeNassau (Farnham: Ashgate, 2016), ch. 6.   12 Ottenheym, ‘The Catholic Nassaus in Brussels and Their Buildings’, 187.   13 ‘Dat graaf Jan niet veel had nagelaten, had alles vertimmert’. Willem Frederik van Nassau-Dietz, Gloria Parendi: Dagboek van Willem Frederik, stadhouder van Friesland, Groningen en Drenthe, 1643–1649, 1651–1654, ed. J. Visser (The Hague: Nederlands Historisich Genootschap, 1995), 419. Cited in Ottenheym, ‘The Catholic Nassaus in Brussels and Their Buildings’, 188, quote on 190, n 8.   14 For a description of his journey to Vienna, see Hessisches Staatsarchiv Wiesbaden (hereafter HStAW), Abt. 171 Nr. Z 642, Reisetagebuch des Grafen Johann Ludwig von Nassau-Hadamar im Jahre 1629 nach Wien (travel journal of Johann Ludwig of his journey to Vienna).   15 Walter Michel, ‘Das Herz des Fürsten Johann Ludwig von Nassau-Hadamar gefunden’, Nassauische Annalen 76 (1965): 226–7.   16 Karl Josef Stahl, Hadamar Stadt und Schloss. Eine Heimatgeschichte (Hadamar: Magistrat der Stadt, 1974), 220.   17 Stahl, Hadamar Stadt und Schloss, 221. In the chapel behind two marble plates on each side of the altar are the hearts of Bernhard von Nassau-Hadamar (d. 1695), Franz Alexander von Nassau-Hadamar (d. 1711), Franz-Hugo von Nassau-Siegen (d. 1736), and Wilhelm Hyacinth von Nassau-Siegen und Nassau-Hadamar (d. 1743).   18 Gill Saunders, ‘Foreword’, in So Many Sweet Flowers: A Seventeenth-Century Florilegium – Paintings by Johann Walther 1654, ed. Jenny de Gex, (London: Pavilion Books, 1997), 12.   19 Saunders, So Many Sweet Flowers, 11.   20 See Johann Walther, The Nassau-Idstein Florilegium, ed. Laure BeaumontMaillet and trans. Gabrielle Townsend (Paris: Bibliotheque nationale de France, 2010), Harvest scene near Idstein (summer), 18–19, plate 5; Grape harvest (autumn), 20–21, plate 6; and A boar hunt (winter), 22–3, plate 7.   21 See discussion in Eric-Oliver Mader, ‘Conversion Concepts in Early Modern Germany: Protestant and Catholic’, in Conversion and the Politics of Religion in

Planting the Orange 121

  22

  23

  24   25

  26

  27   28

  29

  30

Early Modern Germany, ed. David M. Luebke, Jared Poley, Daniel C. Ryan and David Warren Sabean (New York: Berghahn Books, 2012), 31–48; and for Gustav Adolph, Christel Lentz, ‘Das kurze und dramatische Leben des Grafen Gustav Adolph von Nassau-Saarbrücken-Idstein (1632–1664): Erbgraf, Konvertit und Türkenkämpfer’, Nassauische Annalen 116 (2005): 281–300. Wahrhafftiger Abdruck Des von hochgebornem Grafen und Herrn Herrn Johanssen Grafen zu Nassaw zu Saarbrücken und Sarwerden. vom dato Itzstein den 19. Septembris 1653 an seinen zur Römisch. Päbstischen Religion getretenen Sohn Gustaven Adoplhum nacher Regensburg gethanen Schreibens . . . (n.p., 1653); Wahrhafftiger Abdruck Dehren von dem hochgebornem Grafen und Herrn Herrn Johanssen Grafen zu Nassaw Saarbrücken und Sarwerden [. . .] den 10. und 14. Octobris des 1653 Jahrs an seinen zur Röm. Päpstischen Religion getretenen Sohn Gustav Adolphum (n.p., 1654). ‘Seithero ich erst den garten, hernach die kirch, neben anderen raritäten gebawet undt zu wegen gebracht, kommen grosse anzahl leut deswegen anhero, da zuvor Itzstein in obscuro gelegen’, cited in Otto Meinardus, ‘Das politische Testament des Grafen Johannes von Idstein-Wiesbaden’, Annalen des Vereins für Nassauische Alterthumskunde und Geschichtsforschung 30 (1899): 76. On the church of Idstein, see also Rouven Pons, Für Kunst und Glauben. Die Ausmalung der Martinskirche in Idstein unter Graf Johannes von NassauIdstein (1603–1677) (Wiesbaden: Historische Kommission für Nassau, 2012). On Filips Willem, see also Ottenheym, ‘The Catholic Nassaus in Brussels and Their Buildings’, 185–90. Todd Jerome Magreta, ‘The Development of Orange-Nassau Princely Artistic Activity, 1618–1632’ (Unpublished PhD Dissertation, City University of New York, 2008), 86–7, 111; Kees Zandvliet, ‘De kaartenkamer van Maurits’, Annemie De Vos with the collaboration of Charles van den Heuvel and Koen Ottenheym, ‘Propaganda voor staat en huis: Maurits en de bouwkunst’, and Wouter Kloek, ‘Prins Maurits en de beeldende kunst’, in Maurits, Prins van Oranje, ed. Kees Zandvliet with contributions from Arthur Eyffinger (Amsterdam: Rijksmuseum, 2000), 76–91, 122–36, 138–59. Marika Keblusek and Jori Zijlmans, eds, Vorstelijk vertoon. Aan het hof van Frederik Hendrik en Amalia (Zwolle: Waanders, 1997), published in English as Princely Display: The Court of Frederik Hendrik of Orange and Amalia van Solms (The Hague: Waanders, 1997); Barbara Gaeghtens, ‘Amalia von Solms und die oranische Kunstpolitik’, in Onder den Oranje boom: Niederländische Kunst und Kultur (Exhibition Catalogue), ed. Marcus Schacht, Jörg Meiner and Horst Lademacher (Krefeld: Kaiser-Wilhelm-Museum; Schloß Oranienburg; Apeldoorn: Paleis Het Loo, 1999–2000), 265–85; Marieke Tiethoff-Spliethoff, ‘Representatie en Rollenspel. De Portretkunst aan het Hof van Frederik Hendrik en Amalia’, in Keblusek and Zijlmans, Vorstelijk vertoon, 161–200. See, for example, Peter van der Ploeg and Carola Vermeeren, eds, Vorstelijk verzameld. De kunstcollectie van Frederik Hendrik en Amalia (Zwolle: Waanders, 1997). Keblusek and Zijlmans, Vorstelijk vertoon; van der Ploeg and Vermeeren, Vorstelijk verzameld; Wies Erkelens, ‘Der stattalterliche Hof Friedrich Heinrichs und der Amalia von Solms’, in Onder den Oranje boom, ed. Schacht, Meiner and Lademacher, 107–30. The couple’s keen interest in the building programme is shown in Huygens’s correspondence. For one example, from Huygens to Tassin, De Briefwisseling van Constantijn Huygens (1608–1687), ed. J. A. Worp, 6 vols (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1917), 3: 369. Michel Conan, Baroque Garden Cultures: Emulation, Sublimation, Subversion (Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks, 2005); John Dixon Hunt, ed., The Dutch

122  Claiming spaces Garden in the Seventeenth Century (Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 1990); Vanessa Bezemer Sellers, Courtly Gardens in Holland, 1600–1650: The House of Orange and the Hortus Batavus (Amsterdam: Architectura & Natura Press, 2001).   31 D. F. Slothouwer, De Paleizen van Frederik Hendrik (Leiden: A.W. Sijthoff, 1945); Koen Ottenheym, ‘“Van bouw-lust soo beseten”: Frederik Hendrik en de bouwkunst’ and Vanessa Bezemer Sellers, ‘Condet aurea saecula: de tuinen van Frederik Hendrik’, in Vorstelijk vertoon, ed. Keblusek and Zijlmans, 105–25 and 126–42; Eelco Elzenga, ‘Statthalterliche Architektur und Gartenkunst’, in Onder den Oranje boom, ed. Schacht, Meiner and Lademacher, 131–53; Rebecca Tucker, ‘The Art of Living Nobly: The Patronage of Prince Frederik Hendrik (1584–1647) at the Palace of Honselaarsdijk during the Dutch Republic’ (Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Institute of Fine Arts, New York University, 2002).   32 Gaeghtens, ‘Amalia von Solms und die oranische Kunstpolitik’, 265–86; Virginia Treanor, ‘Amalia van Solms and the Formation of the Stadhouder’s Art Collection, 1625–1675’ (Unpublished PhD Dissertation, University of Maryland, 2012).   33 Cordula Bischoff, ‘Women Collectors and the Rise of the Porcelain Cabinet’, in Chinese and Japanese Porcelain for the Dutch Golden Age, ed. Jan van Campen and Titus Eliëns (Zwolle: Waanders, 2014), 172–3.   34 For contemporary perceptions of the impressive impact of the Oranjezaal, see Elmer Kolfin, ‘Overtuigen door overweldigen: buitenlandse reizigers over de beschilderingen in de Oranjezaal van Huis ten Bosch, 1650–1750’, in Propaganda en spektakel: vroegmoderne intochten en festiviteiten in de Nederlanden, ed. Joop W. Koopmans and Werner Thomas (Maastricht: Shaker Publishing 2010), 61–91; Margriet Eikema Hommes and Elmer Kolfin, De Oranjezaal in Huis ten Bosch. Een zaal uit loutere liefde (Zwolle: Waanders & de Kunst, 2013).   35 Saskia Beranek, ‘Power of the Portrait: Production, Consumption and Display of Portraits of Amalia van Solms in the Dutch Republic’ (Unpublished PhD Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 2013).   36 See John Landwehr, Splendid Ceremonies: State Entries and Royal Funerals in the Low Countries, 1515–1791 – A Bibliography (Leiden: A.W. Sijthoff, 1971); and Olaf Mörke, ‘De Hofcultuur van het Huis Oranje-Nassau in de Zeventiende Eeuw’, in Cultuur en maatschappij in Nederland 1500–1850. Een historisch-antropologisch perspectief, ed. Peter Burke and Willem Frijhoff (Amsterdam: Open universiteit, 1992), who discusses the courtly splendour, and in particular the funeral processions of Frederik Hendrik in 1651 and Amalia in 1675, 56–9.   37 See Suzanne van de Meerendonk, ‘“Amsterdamsche Vreugdtriomfe”: het bezoek van Amalia van Solms en haar dochters in 1659’, Amstelodamum 96 (2009): 99–111. See also the entry of Willem V and Wilhelmine to Amsterdam in 1768, analysed by Lotte van de Pol, ‘From Doorstep to Table: Negotiating Space in Ceremonies at the Dutch Court of the Second Half of the 18th Century’, in Räume des Selbst: Selbstzeugnisforschung transkulturell, ed. Andreas Bähr, Peter Burschel and Gabriele Jancke (Cologne: Böhlau Verlag, 2007): 81–2.   38 Rebecca Tucker, ‘Urban Planning and Politics in the City Center: Frederik Hendrik and The Hague Plein’, Journal of Historians of Netherlandish Art 5, no. 2 (2013): DOI:10.5092/jhna.2013.5.2.7.   39 J. K. van der Haagen, ‘Het Plein, Huygens en Frederik Hendrik’, Die Haghe Jaarboek (1928/29): 6–3; G. Kamphuis, ‘Constantijn Huygens, bouwheer of bouwmeester’, Oud Holland 77 (1962): 155–78; H. G. Bruin, ‘Het Plein en het Huis’, in Domus: Het huis van Constantijn Huygens in Den Haag, ed. F. R. E. Blom et al. (Zutphen: Walburg, 1999), 47–86.   40 R. C. P. Mulder-Radetzky and B. H. de Vries, Geschiedenis van Oranjewoud (Alphen aan den Rijn: Canaletto, 1989).

Planting the Orange 123   41 Elector Wilhelm Friedrich was the son of Georg Wilhelm von Brandenburg and Elisabeth Charlotte von der Pfalz, who was a daughter of Louise Juliana and Friedrich IV von der Pfalz. Elisabeth Charlotte and Willem Friedrich had been married in Heidelberg in 1616.   42 Gerd Bartoschek, Gemälde aus dem Schloß Oranienburg (Oranienburg: Kreismuseum Oranienburg, 1978); Gerd Bartoschek, ‘Ein Kurfürstliches Gemäldekabinett’, in FWC (1620–1688): Der Große Kurfürst; Sammler, Bauherr, Mäzen (Exhibition Catalogue) (Potsdam: Neues Paleis, 1988), 134–48; Konrad A. Ottenheym, ‘Fürsten, Architekten, und Lehrbücher: Wege der holländischen Baukunst nach Brandenburg im 17. Jahrhundert’, in Onder den Oranje boom, ed. Schacht, Meiner and Lademacher, 291–3.   43 Sellers, Courtly Gardens in Holland, 1600–1650.   44 Wilhelm Böck, Oranienburg: Geschichte eines Preussischen Königsschlosses (Berlin: Deutscher Verein für Kunstwissenschaft, 1938).   45 Ulrike Hammer, Kurfürstin Luise Henriette. Eine Oranierin als Mittlerin zwischen den Niederlanden und Brandenburg-Preuβen (Munster: Waxmann, 2001), 89–90. Because of the Dutch–English War, many craftsmen were prepared to go to Brandenburg for work.   46 Klaus Vetter, ‘Oranien, Nassau und die Hohenzollern im 17./18.Jahrhundert’, in Oranien-Nassau, die Niederlande und das Reich. Beiträge zur Geschichte einer Dynastie, ed. Horst Lademacher (Münster: Lit, 1995), 97–124.   47 Willem van Honthorst, Allegory of the Founding of Oranienburg, c. 1655, oil on canvas, 350cm × 400cm. Held in Oranienburg, Kreismuseum Oberhavel, IB00121300.   48 ‘Pour Oranienbourg je Vous prie de fuire hâter tout et pour le Cabinet de porcelaine, Vous ne m’en dites rien. M. Michel est, un bon homme mail il ment furieusement; il y a une année qui devait être prêt. Je Vous prie de m’envoyer Oranienbourg en peinture, comme il est à heure avec le changement de la porte et de la basse-cour, et combien il est avancé, et si la pompe est faite dans la cuisine; afin qu’on n’ait pas à faire aller quérir l’eau. Maitre Michel a pris, tout cela sur lui, que la basse-cour soit pavée et le tour de la maison, et de me mander ou sont les Karpfenteiche, et comme tout est dans le jardin. Je Vous prie de me l’envoyer, cela me divertit puisque je ne le saurais voir’, December 1662, in Geschichte des preussischen Staates im siebzehnten Jahrhundert: mit besonderer Beziehung auf das Leben Friedrich Wilhelms des Grossen Kurfürsten: aus archivalischen Quellen und aus vielen noch ungekannten Original-Handschriften, ed. Leopold von Orlich, 3 vols (Berlin: Dümmler, 1839), 3: 446.   49 ‘Touchant la vue de la maison d’Orphelins, jusqu’a sa maison, je souhaiterais bien qu’il fût fait, mais je le trouve assez cher. S’il Vous plaît donc de l’ordonner, comme aussi mes armes dans l’Eglise, comme Vous m’avez écrit, j’en serai bien aise’, 27 May 1666, in von Orlich, Geschichte des preussischen Staates im siebzehnten Jahrhundert, 3: 468.   50 ‘Je suis fort aise que Vous me mandez que la Ville d’Orangebourg es si fort aggrandie et que les maisons sont a la façon détaillée, mais je crois qu’elles sont fort transparentes’, 10 December 1657, in von Orlich, Geschichte des preussischen Staates im siebzehnten Jahrhundert, 3: 489.   51 Hammer, Kurfürstin Luise Henriette, 99 n 373. Hammer does not give the occasion.   52 Fred Storto, Oranienstein. Barockschloß an der Lahn (Koblenz: Görres-Verlag, 1934), 17.   53 Storto, Oranienstein, 24.   54 Mulder-Radetzky and de Vries, Geschiedenis van Oranjewoud.   55 Rita L. P. Mulder-Radetzky, ‘Lustschloss Oranjewoud. Schloss- GärtenHofhaltung’, in Nassau-Diez und die Niederlande. Dynastie und Oranierstadt

124  Claiming spaces Diez in der Neuzeit, ed. Simon Groenveld and Friedhelm Jürgensmeier (Wiesbaden: Historische Kommission für Nassau, 2012), 271–98.   56 Hélène J. de Muij-Fleurke and Bernhard Woelderink, ‘Die Hochzeit von Heinrich Casimir II und Henriëtte Amalia im Jahre 1683 in Dessau und ihr festlicher Empfang in Friesland in 1684’, in Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje, ed. Ingo Pfeifer and Wolfgang Savelsberg (Oranienbaum: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2003), 113–19.   57 In 1713, Wilhelm Heinrich married a granddaughter of Johann von NassauSaarbrücken-Idstein, Albertine Juliana von Nassau-Idstein, daughter of Georg August Samuel and his wife, Henriette Dorothea von Oettingen.   58 Mulder-Radetzky, ‘Lustschloss Oranjewoud’, 285.   59 There is little literature on Maria. See P. G. Schulte, ‘Maria von Simmern’, in Onder den Oranje Boom, ed. Schacht, Meiner and Lademacher, 369–76; G. van der Meer, ‘Houtsnijwerk door Maria van Oranje, hertogin van Simmern?’, Jaarboek Vereniging Oranje Nassau Museum (1995): 67–74. L. J. van der Klooster, C. A. Tamse and Marieke Tiethoff, ‘Maria van Oranje. Een bijna vergeten telg uit ons vorstenhuis’, Jaarboek Vereniging Oranje-Nassau Museum (1993): 6–21.   60 Theodor Jorissen, ‘Een vorstelijk engagement’, Historische bladen 1 (1895): 83–119; M. C. Nijland, ‘Een prinses van Oranje, vorstin van Anhalt’, Eigen Haard 49 (1896): 772–8 [reprinted in Historia (1936): 244–6]; M. W. Maclaine Pont, ‘Henriëtte Catharina van Nassau’, in Je maintiendrai. Een boek over Oranje en Nassau, ed. F. J. L. Krämer, E. W. Moes and P. Wagner, 2 vols (Leiden: Sijthoff, 1906), 2: 130–5; Johanna W. A. Naber, Onze vorstinnen uit het huis van OranjeNassau in het stadhouderlijk tijdperk (Haarlem: Tjeenk Willink, 1911), 13–20; A. M. H. Smeenge, Henriëtte Catharina van Nassau 1637–1708 (Amsterdam: Becht, 1932); Katharina Bechler and Wolfgang Savelsberg, ‘Henriëtte Catharina van Oranje-Nassau en het vorstendom Anhalt-Dessau’, in Onder den Oranje Boom, ed. Schacht, Meiner and Lademacher, 317–56; Katharina Bechler, Schloss Oranienbaum. Architektur und Kulturpolitik der Oranierinnen in der zweiten Hälfte des 17. Jahrhunderts (Halle: Mitteldeutscher Verlag, 2007); Pfeifer and Savelsberg, Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje; Wolfgang Savelsberg, ‘Henriette Catharina und Albertine Agnes. Eine Schwesternkoalition zur Bewahrung oranisher Interessen’, in Nassau-Diez und die Niederlande, ed. Groenveld and Jürgensmeier, 81–98.   61 ‘Die Häuser sind meistentheils mit Backsteinen uf holländ. art erbauet [. . .] absonderlich die 5. neuen Vor dem Schloß’. Christoph Pitzler, cited in Wilhelm van Kempen, ‘Das Reisetage- und Skizzenbuch des Architekten Christoph Pitzler, eine Quelle zur anhaltischen Kunstgeschichte des 17. und 18. Jahrhunderts’, Mitteilungen des Vereins für Anhaltische Geschichte und Altertumskunde 14, no. 1 (1920): 93.   62 See the regulations, Tiel, Regionaal Archief Rivierenland, 0696, Archive of the Orphanage at Buren, 1612–1952: ‘Vidimus door het stadsbestuur van Buren van de akte uit 1612, waarbij Vrouwe Maria van Oranje Nassau het weeshuis te Buren stichtte, 1619’ (221) and ‘Vidimus door het Stadsbestuur van Buren van een akte uit 1619, waarbij Prins Maurits van Oranje Nassau het reglement voor het beheer van het weeshuis instelde, 1619’ (243); P. J. Schipperus, Buren en Oranje. Geschiedkundig overzicht van het graafschap Buren, de stad en het kasteel en van het in 1612 door prinses Maria van Oranje-Nassau, gravin douairière van Hohenlo gestichte weeshuis (Buren: Het Graafschap Buren, 1962).   63 Reina van Ditzhuyzen, Oranje-Nassau: een biografisch woordenboek (Haarlem: Becht, 1992), 179 ff.; T. Coppens, Buren, Egmond en Oranje (Buren: Stichting Oud Buren, 1989), 186 ff.   64 For a description of orphanage in Oranienburg and Buren, see Hammer, Kurfürstin Luise Henriette, 100–9.

Planting the Orange 125   65 In 2014 the Palace of Oranienbaum hosted an exhibition on the tobacco cultivation and the so called ‘Tabakskollegium’. See also Erdmut Jost and Holger Zaunstöck, eds, Goldenes Zeitalter und Jahrhundert der Aufklärung. Kulturtransfer zwischen den Niederlanden und dem mitteldeutschen Raum im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert (Halle: Mitteldeutscher Verlag, 2012).   66 Anna Pavord, The Tulip (London: Bloomsbury, 1999).   67 Sellers, Courtly Gardens in Holland, 1600–1650, 58.   68 Sellers, Courtly Gardens in Holland, 1600–1650, 10.   69 This painting passed from the collections of Albertine Agnes at Oranienstein at her death in 1696 to those of her sister Henriëtte Catharina.   70 Conan, Baroque Garden Cultures, 14.   71 ‘Demeura bien deux heures à ordonner les jardins et bastiments de Honselardick’, 4 June 1639, in De Briefwisseling van Constantijn Huygens (1608–1687), 2: 456.   72 On Honselaarsdijk in particular, see Rebecca Tucker, ‘Inside the Dutch Garden: Prince Frederik Hendrik and Honselaarsdijk’, Studies in the History of Gardens and Designed Landscapes 26, no. 3 (2006): 231.   73 Sellers, Courtly Gardens in Holland, 1600–1650, 83–5.   74 Renny van Heuven van Nes and Ferry Staverman, Bloemen op het Loo, 2nd edn (Paleis Het Loo: Nationaal Museum, 2007), 5.   75 For a brief discussion of the Orange princesses Louise Henriëtte and Henriëtte Catharina and their garden politics, see Gerlinde Volland, ‘Louise Henriëtte und Henriëtte Catharina von Oranien als Gartenschöpferinnen’, in Schön und Nützlich. Aus Brandenburgs Kloster-, Schloss- und Küchengärten (Exhibition Catalogue), ed. Haus der Brandenburgisch-Preußischen Geschichte (Berlin: Henschel Verlag, 2004), 7–12.   76 Clemens Alexander Wimmer, ‘Orangerien am brandenburgisch- preußischen Hof’, in Schön und Nützlich, 108. A contemporary, Martin Friedrich Seidel, wrote that in the fire of 1655 the newly built ‘Oranien Haus’ (orangery) was also burned down.   77 Hammer, Kurfürstin Luise Henriette, 96–8.   78 Correspondence cited above and below. See also Hammer, Kurfürstin Luise Henriette, esp. 96–8. See Vetter, ‘Oranien, Nassau und die Hohenzollern im 17./18.Jahrhundert’, 100.   79 ‘Pour les Karpfenteiche, j’en suis ravi et je crois qu’alentour on y pourra planter des arbres; je Vous prie de faire mettre au printemps encore des carpes dans le grand étang; il n’y en a pas assez’, February 1663, and ‘Je suis si aise que Vous ayez aggrandi le fossée, on y pourrait mettre des Carpes et les accoutumer, et puis les Cygnes comme je Vous ai mande’, 1663, in von Orlich, Geschichte des preussischen Staates im siebzehnten Jahrhundert, 3: 449–50 and 452.   80 ‘Je pense que cela serait si beau si cette fosse dans le jardin fut vû au clair; je crois qu’on y pourrait faire entrer l’eau de la rivière. Je Vous supplie de le faire et aussi d’y faire mettre4 oder 6 Schwane qui pourraient touhours demeurer dans le fossé; le jardinier en aurait soin. Je crois que Vous approuverex mon dessein, car il me semble qu’il est fort bon’, April 1663 in von Orlich, Geschichte des preussischen Staates im siebzehnten Jahrhundert, 3: 454.   81 ‘Je suis bien fâchée que les vaches sont en si mauvais etait; he ne saurais comprendre la raison, car à Berlin au Thiergarten elles ont aussi comme cela, et sont fort belles. Il faut que cela soit la faute des gens, qu’ils n’ont assez à manger’, February 1663, in von Orlich, Geschichte des preussischen Staates im siebzehnten Jahrhundert, 3: 450.   82 ‘Il faudra à l’automne planter encore une raie d’arbres à chaque côté de l’allée, car elle est assez large, et je voudrais que ce fussent des tilleuls; il en faudra faire chercher’, 1663, in von Orlich, Geschichte des preussischen Staates im siebzehnten Jahrhundert, 3: 452.

126  Claiming spaces   83 ‘Je Vous supplie de commander à cette heure, qu’on cherche des Arbres pour planter dans la grande allée jusqu’au pilier à chaque coté une rangée d’arbres, elle est trop large et point assez épaisse, mais il ne faut pas que les arbres soint mis si près sur le centre que les autres et où est le pilier; je voudrais bien qu’on y plantât des tilleuls pour les tirer ensemble comme à Koenigsberg, il me semble que cela sera fort beau’, 1665, in von Orlich, Geschichte des preussischen Staates im siebzehnten Jahrhundert, 3: 465.   84 ‘Une partie de roses et les autres de petits arbres fruitiers’, 18 March 1667, in von Orlich, Geschichte des preussischen Staates im siebzehnten Jahrhundert, 3: 476.   85 ‘Vous priede faire en sorte que mon jardin ait des arbres fruitiers, qui lui manquent, mais il faut que ce soient des fruits de Hollande que je Vous prie de faire venir’, 1663, in von Orlich, Geschichte des preussischen Staates im siebzehnten Jahrhundert, 3: 454.   86 ‘Je me fait tant de joie pour mon jardin!’ ‘mon divertissement’, 1663, in von Orlich, Geschichte des preussischen Staates im siebzehnten Jahrhundert, 3: 462 and 452.   87 Ludwig Trauzettel, ‘Der Schlossgarten Oranienbaum und seine Entwicklung’, in Pfeifer and Savelsberg, Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje, 95–9.   88 See ‘Transkription der Teilungsakte der Verlassenschaft der Henriëtte Catharina 1709’, appended to Kristina Schlansky, ‘Fürstlich eingerichtet – zur Ausstattung des Oranienbaumer Schlosses der Henriette Catharina’, Oranienbaum Journal 1 (2007): 1–51.   89 ‘[. . .] in den kleinen garten wahr allerhand bindwerk weißangestrichen uf diese art in welchen Busti und Kinder stunden. Küchengaerten bey B. Fasan garten C. grüne Pläze die wege gepflastert D. ballustr. so mit vas. vor Bluhmen besetzt’. Christoph Pitzler, cited in van Kempen, ‘Das Reisetage- und Skizzenbuch des Architekten Christoph Pitzler’, 95.   90 For one of the few contemporary sources, see van Kempen, ‘Das Reisetage- und Skizzenbuch des Architekten Christoph Pitzler’, 93–9.   91 ‘An dem Schloß an ist ein kleiner garten so halb rund mit einer mauer umbgeben welches eine terasse unter welcher gewölbe oben kammern gehen, aber viel vasen mit Bluhmen stehen auch unterschiedl. Bildern von Kindern, den das gebäude ist nur mauerwerck mit pied. und quadern. Der lustgarten so hinder den Ställen is auch fein angelegt, mit hohem espal. von weißbuchen, in solchen ist eine feine orangerie mit sehr schönen Bäumen.’ Christoph Pitzler, cited in van Kempen, ‘Das Reisetage-und Skizzenbuch des Architekten Christoph Pitzler’, 94.   92 ‘Oranien Baum welches die Fürstin ihr Landhaus und 2. mäulen von Dessau gelegen, welches von dem Schloßdurch den thiergarten gesehen wird, lieget ganz gleich, mit einem Wassergraben umgeben.’ Christoph Pitzler, cited in van Kempen, ‘Das Reisetage- und Skizzenbuch des Architekten Christoph Pitzler’, 95.   93 Wiesbaden, Hessisches Hauptstaatsarchiv (HHStAW), Fürstentum NassauOranien, Korrespondenzen (170 III), Nr 1163, Correspondence, Albertine Agnes from Oranienstein, June 1686.   94 Storto, Oranienstein, 24.   95 Storto, Oraniensten, 13.   96 Mulder-Radetzky, ‘Lustschloss Oranjewoud’, 270.   97 Sellers, Courtly Gardens in Holland, 1600–1650, 85.   98 ‘Il nous mena encore voir les plantage du Comte Maurice ses gardins et grottes qu’il a ajuste d’une belle facon et à peu de frais, la situation estant de soymesme tresplaisante’, 24 May 1652, in Oeuvres complètes de Christiaan Huygens. Vol.1: Correspondence, 1638–1656 (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1888), 181. See also Willem Diedenhofen, ‘Johan Maurits and His Gardens’,

Planting the Orange 127 in Johan Maurits van Nassau-Siegen 1604–1679: Essays on the Occasion of the Tercentenary of His Death, ed. E. Boogaart (The Hague: The Johan Maurits van Nassau Stichting, 1979), 197–236; and Willem Diedenhofen, ‘“Belvedere”, or the Principle of Seeing and Looking in the Gardens of Johan Maurits van Nassau-Siegen at Cleves’, in Hunt, The Dutch Garden in the Seventeenth Century, 49–80.   99 Hanneke Ronnes, ‘The Architecture of William of Orange and the Culture of Friendship’, Archaeological Dialogues 11 (2004): 68. 100 Sellers, Courtly Gardens in Holland, 1600–1650, 88. 101 Sellers, Courtly Gardens in Holland, 1600–1650, 89. The anonymous print is held by the Rijksprentenkabinet, Rijksmuseum. It is reproduced in Sellers, Courtly Gardens in Holland, 1600–1650, 86, figure 68. 102 Sellers, Courtly Gardens in Holland, 1600–1650, 89. 103 Sellers, Courtly Gardens in Holland, 1600–1650, 86, figure 69. 104 See Broomhall and Van Gent, Gender, Power and Identity in the Early Modern House of Orange-Nassau (Farnham: Ashgate, 2016), chapter 6. 105 Sellers, Courtly Gardens in Holland, 1600–1650, 86, figure 68. 106 Sellers, Courtly Gardens in Holland, 1600–1650, 319 n 77. Source in S. W. A. Drossaers and Th. H. Lunsingh Scheurleer, eds, Inventarissen van de inboedels in de verblijven van de Oranjes en daarmede gelijk the stellen stukken 1567–1795, 3 vols (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1974–6), 1: 258, no. 607. 107 British Library, Online Gallery: Virtual Books, ‘Dutch Baroque Gardens – pages 10 and 11’. Available at: http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/ttp/dutchgardens/accessible/ pages10and11.html#conteco. 108 ‘Je suis parti pour Dieren où j’ a y trouvé que j’estois plus nécessaire, veu le dégast que le desbordement des eaus avoit fait à la nouvelle digue et au petit labirinthe qui est quasi tout désolé, et puis le méchant estât où estoit le jardin à cause de l’ivrognerie du jardinier qui n’avoit encore mis la main à rien; je l’ay chassé d’abort et feray partir demain un autre pour remplir sa place; j’espère d’en rendre compte bientost à Vostre Majte. de bouche’, 29 March 1690, in Correspondentie van Willem III en van Hans Willem Bentinck, 3 vols (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1932–7), 1: 157. 109 See letters of 4, 17 and 28 May 1698 in Correspondentie van Willem III en van Hans Willem Bentinck, 1: 299, 307–9, 326. 110 5 April 1699. See Correspondentie van Willem III en van Hans Willem Bentinck, 2: 381. 111 ‘Je suis très marri de ce que Vostre Mate me dit des affaires en Angleterre, mais le temps y est changant; après la pluye le beau temps; [. . .] Après tout cecy, je rendray compte à Vostre Mate des jardins, maisons et chasses; le vilain tems est cause que je ne me suis pressé de voir les premiers, puisque tout paroît mort et sale et que les fontaines ne vont pas à cause de la longue gelée qui a empêchée que les machines ne sauroit tirer de l’eau pour remplir les réservoirs; les orangers à Versailles sont extrêmement beaux et gros et grand en nombre, les tèges 2) belles et hauttes, mais les testes ne sont pas comme celles de Honslaerdick; ceux de Trianon sont peu de chose auprix (!) des autres; ce qu’il y a d’extraordinaire ici, c’est que tout autour d’ici je n’ay pas trouvé les arbres fruittiers qu’il me faut, et j’ay esté obligé d’envoyer à Orleans pour en avoir; de touts ces milliers de fleurs dont V. Mte a tant oui parler que les parterres estoit remplis durant toutes les saisons, je n’en ay pas veu une seule, pas seulement une perce neige, et les jardins sont en hiver moins propres que chez nous; l’on n’y met pas la main; le tout est magnifique à Versailles, jardins et bâtimens, quoyqu’à ce dernier l’on peut trouver des fauttes, sans estre plus architecte que je ne suis; les dépenses y sont immenses; Trianon est très

128  Claiming spaces agréable et charmant, mais Meudon surpasse le tout par sa situation et l’air y doit estre comme à Windsor’, 1 March 1698, in Correspondentie van Willem III en van Hans Willem Bentinck, 1: 240. 112 Ronnes, ‘The Architecture of William of Orange and the Culture of Friendship’, 61 and Sellers, Courtly Gardens in Holland, 1600–1650, 226. Ronnes also argues that William used space at Hampton Court to signal friendships and alliances, and elevated favourites such as Hans Willem Bentinck and Arnold Joost van Keppel so as to provide them with exclusive access through the proximity of their apartments (64–6). 113 Audit Office, Declared Accounts, Bundle 2482, Roll 298. Cited in Ernest Law, The History of Hampton Court Palace. Vol. 3: Orange and Guelph Times (London: George Bell and Sons, 1891), 35. 114 Lucy Worsley and David Souden, Hampton Court Palace: The Official Illustrated History (London: Merrell, 2005), 66. 115 Christopher Wren, Parentalia, or Memoires of the History of the Wrens (London: T. Osborn, 1750), 326. 116 See, among the accounts of the palace, funds provided to the widow in a previous accident on the site: ‘To Margaret Harrison, allowed her out of ye Office of the Workes, as charity, her husband (who was a labourer in these workes, being killed in June 1689, by the fall of an old brick wall), 40s’. Audit Office, Declared Accounts, Bundle 2482, Roll 295. Cited in Law, The History of Hampton Court Palace. Vol. 3: Orange and Guelph Times, 24. 117 R. Doebner, ed., Memoirs of Mary Queen of England, together with Her Letters, and those of James II and William III to the Electress Sophia of Hanover (London: David Nutt, 1886), 17. 118 Doebner, Memoirs of Mary Queen of England, 19. 119 19/9 June 1693, Doebner, Memoirs of Mary Queen of England, 102–3. 120 Doebner, Memoirs of Mary Queen of England, 43–4. 121 Cited in Law, The History of Hampton Court Palace. Vol. 3: Orange and Guelph Times, 35. 122 Law, The History of Hampton Court Palace. Vol. 3: Orange and Guelph Times, 128. 123 Anonymous engraver after Daniël Marot, Vase with a Round Body Decorated in Bas-Relief with the Figure of Britannia, c. 1703–1750, etching from a print published in Daniël Marot, Vasses de la Maison Royalle de L’oo (The Hague, c. 1703). Held in London at the Victoria and Albert Museum, Museum number 23107:5, available at: http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O643870/vasses-dela-maison-royalle-print-marot/. See Peter Fuhring, Ornament Prints in the Rijksmuseum II: The Seventeenth Century, 3 vols, (Rotterdam: Sound & Vision Publishers, 2004), 2: 7437–42. 124 British Library, Online Gallery: Virtual Books, ‘Dutch Baroque Gardens – pages 8 and 9’. Available at: http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/ttp/dutchgardens/accessible/ pages8and9.html#content 125 See Drossaers and Scheurleer, Inventarissen van de inboedels in de verblijven van de Oranjes en daarmede gelijk the stellen stukken 1567–1795, 1: 582. 126 Reinier Baarsen, ‘The Court Style in Holland’, in Reinier Baarsen, Phillip M. Johnston, Gervase Jackson-Stops, Elaine Evans Dee, Courts and Colonies: The William and Mary Style in Holland, England, and America (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1988), 15. 127 Baarsen, ‘The Court Style in Holland’, 15; Linda R. Shulsky, ‘Kensington and de Voorst’, Journal of the History of Collections 2, no. 1 (1990): 47–62. 128 British Library, Online Gallery: Virtual Books, ‘Dutch Baroque Gardens – pages 16 and 17’. Available at: http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/ttp/dutchgardens/ accessible/pages16and17.html#content.

Planting the Orange 129 129 Johan Baron van Arnhem, Gedagten en gedichten, geestelyke en zedelyke (Pieter Van Der Aa, 1707). Available at: https://books.google.com.au/books?id=QcETA AAAQAAJ&source=gbs_navlinks_s. 130 British Library, Online Gallery: Virtual Books, ‘Dutch Baroque Gardens – pages 78 and 79’. Available at: http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/ttp/dutchgardens/accessible/pages78and79.html; and ‘Dutch Baroque Gardens – pages 80 and 81’. Available at: http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/ttp/dutchgardens/accessible/pages80and81.html#content. 131 British Library, Online Gallery: Virtual Books, ‘Dutch Baroque Gardens – pages 20 and 21’. Available at: http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/ttp/dutchgardens/ accessible/pages20and21.html#content. 132 British Library, Online Gallery: Virtual Books, ‘Dutch Baroque Gardens – pages 18 and 19’. Available at: http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/ttp/dutchgardens/ accessible/pages18and19.html#content. 133 ‘Surtout à Zorphlit bien plustost qu’en Angleterre, car il me semble que le lieu est plus paisible, et qu’on se promèneroit dans vostre beau jardin avec plus de liberté que partout ailleurs’, 29 November 1698, Correspondentie van Willem III en van Hans Willem Bentinck, 2: 365. 134 ‘Je me souviens très bien de la conversation que nous humes ensemble dans le jardin de Versallye vis à vis les fenêtres de Mr. le Grand’, 9 October, 1699, Correspondentie van Willem III en van Hans Willem Bentinck, 2: 368. 135 Reino Liefkes and Patricia F. Ferguson, ‘Faïences de Delft dans les collections anglaises’, in Delft-Faïence, ed. Christine Lahaussois (Paris: Reunion des musees nationaux, 2008), 101. See also Baarsen, Johnston, Jackson-Stops and Dee, Courts and Colonies. 136 Gervaise Jackson-Stops, ‘The Court Style in Britain’, in Baarsen, Johnston, Jackson-Stops and Dee, Courts and Colonies, 39. Other houses with a possible Marot connection are listed on pages 39–40. 137 Stuart Handley, ‘Germain, Sir John, First Baronet (1650–1718)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography online edn (Oxford University Press, 2004), http://www.oxforddnb.com.ezproxy.library.uwa.edu.au/view/article/10567.

This Page is Intentionally Left Blank

3 Trading places Orange-Nassau involvement in Dutch colonial expansion

This chapter examines the involvement of the House of Orange-Nassau in overseas territories, primarily through relationships with the Dutch trading companies. How did this collaboration mutually benefit the House of OrangeNassau and the trading companies? Through these relationships, created not only by members of the House but also often by relatives, affiliates, and company officials, further spaces beyond Europe were able to be claimed for the House of Orange-Nassau, in material, textual, and visual forms as well as through political, economic, and military actions in foreign lands. The House, in turn, accrued power through these new spatial arrangements.

Princely leadership and the Dutch trading companies Perhaps an under-recognised aspect of Maurits’s dynastic work was his economic investment in overseas diplomacy and trade, activities that also assisted direct military campaigning by financially weakening his enemies. Apart from developing potential alliances with Muslim states, Maurits facilitated the activities of the VOC in its negotiations for trade with states in Asia, which sought a relationship not with a trading company but with a ruler. For example, Tokugawa Hidetada (1579–1632), Shogun of Japan, exchanged gifts of armour and addressed his correspondence directly to Maurits, the individual he understood as the ruler of the Dutch traders who were clamouring to create a trade relationship.1 It was later depicted by Jacob van Campen (1596–1657) in his paintings for the Oranjezaal at Huis ten Bosch, taking pride of place at the top of his work Goods from the East and West Indies.2 The VOC and the House of Orange-Nassau developed a mutually beneficial relationship that enabled the company to negotiate as a nation with others, with Maurits as a readily translatable figurehead, and this raised the status of the House at home and abroad. It was with the prince’s flag that the VOC instructions advised captains to claim lands that they encountered, and many territories were given Orange-Nassau names. Moreover, Maurits himself invested in the exploration of alternative trade routes that could challenge the Iberian global supremacy that had developed in the sixteenth century. Along with the States he contributed personal funds to the creation of the Nassau fleet, which sought to create

132  Claiming spaces a western route around the globe. For Maurits, investment in these overseas trading activities was a complement to military engagement, but one which would pay profound dividends for the dynasty by affirming its role at the head of the nation, and by promoting it visibly and permanently across the globe. From the first years of Dutch overseas exploration, Orange-Nassau men were involved. In April 1594 the first Dutch ships bound for East India, Mauritius, Hollandia, Amsterdam, and Duyfken sailed in search of spices (Figure 3.1). Already in these early years of Dutch exploration, before the existence of a formal East India Company, the nominal patriarch of the House, Maurits, was an active and necessary participant in such colonial engagements. These early contacts had to be formally established as diplomatic relations between sovereign states, so that trade could proceed and political alliances could be developed. For this, diplomatic protocols of official letter and gift exchange had to be carefully observed. Cornelis de Houtman (1565–99) was in charge of the first fleet. It was imperative that Maurits supported this project, providing Houtman with letters of recommendation and gifts to convey to foreign rulers in facilitating the establishment of diplomatic and mercantile contacts. Houtman arrived in Bantam in West Java in June 1596. His arrival represented the first contact between an Asian ruler and the Dutch, in July 1596,3 one that integrated the Orange-Nassau directly into the colonial enterprise. In 1598, a Dutch expedition to the Moluccas facilitated an exchange of letters between Maurits and the Sultan of Ternate, Said adDin Berkat Syah (r. 1583–1606), who also sought military alliances with the Dutch against the Portuguese.4 The sultan sent letters to Maurits via Wijbrand van Warwijck (1566/70–1615), who led the expedition, and also a sword and

Figure 3.1 Anonymous, Copy of the Original Title Picture for Houtman’s Journal of Dutch Ships Going to the East Indies, 1598, etching, 108mm × 222mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, RP-P-OB-75.310.

Trading places 133 shield.5 Maurits replied via Christiaen Adriaensz. Dorst in 1606, also sending presents to accompany this letter: We send you a Small Gift, as a sign of proper affection, and friendship, requesting that you may accept the same in a like spirit, we shall ever be ready to be of service to you, praying to the Almighty, that he protect you and grant you a long reign.6 Maurits was key to these initial diplomatic and trading endeavours because he provided a nominal figurehead for their negotiations, and his involvement likewise increased the prestige of the House of Orange-Nassau. The United Zeeland Company (1601–3) equally drew on the support of Maurits. In January 1601 four ships sailed to Aceh, carrying a letter by Maurits addressed to the Sultan of Aceh, Alauddin Riayat Shah ibn Firman Shah (r. 1589–1604), and presents valued at ‘a thousand gold pieces of eight, several gilded weapons, looking-glasses and so forth’ for the sultan and 450,000 Spanish reals. The purpose of the letter was to obtain the release of the Dutch prisoners (including Houtman’s brother, Frederik [1571–1627]), and to foster a friendship with the sultan.7 As Ingrid Mitrasing argues, Maurits subordinated his status in order to facilitate a beneficial outcome for the Dutch, ending his 1600 letter to the Sultan: ‘I kiss the hands of your Majesty. Your servant: Maurits de Nassau.’8 As a result of this successful diplomatic intervention, the Dutch prisoners were released and the sultan sent envoys with gifts for Maurits with the Dutch ship to Europe, where they stayed for some fifteen months.9 When the group arrived in Middelburg, Maurits was at a military camp laying siege to Grave, so the envoys travelled to his camp to be received. Maurits granted an audience to them in the presence of other Nassau men, such as Ernst-Casimir van Nassau-Dietz (1573–1632) and Ludwig Günther von Nassau-Katzenelnbogen (1575–1604), signalling the power and influence of the House of Orange-Nassau both within the dynastic hierarchy and to the Achinese envoys. The diplomatic group included an elderly cousin of the sultan, Abdul Hamid (d. 1602), who died shortly after their arrival in Middelburg. This provided an unexpected but beneficial opportunity to celebrate the international connections of the prince, the States, and the company in ritual and material forms. Hamid would be buried on 10 August 1602 in lavish style in the Oude St Pieterskerk, with his funeral attended by representatives of the States of Zeeland, the Company, and the local magistracy.10 Moreover, the story of this high-profile contact could be further documented in conventional European material forms. Hamid’s grave plaque was inscribed with details that importantly and particularly noted an Orange-Nassau connection, noting that ‘Abdul Zamat’, as the representative of the sultan, had been ‘sent to the illustrious Prince Maurits’.11 Hamid’s untimely death did not put an end to the political and cultural capital that could be gained from his visit to the United Provinces. Indeed, his death allowed not only for a group of men in a range of political roles to link

134  Claiming spaces themselves to an international network through funeral rituals, but also for a more permanent material marker to be created of these connections. In their dealings with Japan, VOC chief merchants promoted the status of the Prince of Orange as a ruler of equivalent standing to the shogun in order to facilitate trade negotiations. This achieved early results, and an exchange of letters and gifts ensued. In his letter of August 1609, Shogun Tokugawa Ieyasu (1543–1616) welcomed friendship with Maurits as an equal of the ‘Emperor and King of Japan’ who wished ‘the King of Holland, who sends me visitors from such distant lands, my greetings’.12 He reiterated promises of support as ‘friends and neighbours as we are’.13 On the other hand, the prince’s status could be conveniently altered when it suited their relationship. For example, when the Orange-Nassau negotiated a marriage for Willem II with the royal Stuarts, Japanese officials were nervous about its implications for their own alliances. In October 1644, the grand inquisitor, Inoue Chikugo no kami Masashige (1585–1661), arrived at Nagasaki to interview Jan van Elseracq, the VOC chief merchant at the Japan factory, and asked pointedly about the political structure of the Dutch and the positions of the ‘Dutch king’ and governor general in Batavia.14 In January 1645, the new chief merchant, Pieter Anthonisz. Overtwater (c. 1610–82), was likewise asked by Inoue to explain the relative status of the prince to other European royalty and the precise nature of the friendship that now existed between the English and Dutch as a result of the marriage treaty. Overtwater was required to explain the complex nature of how Orange-Nassau dynastic alliances reflected overall Dutch political policy, as well as that conducted by the VOC with Japan. Now talking up the role of the provinces in relation to the prince, Overtwater assured Inoue that Orange-Nassau dynastic connections did not require the two countries to likewise be friends and that there would be no change to the VOC-Japanese relationship.15 The princely status of the Orange-Nassau House in the Netherlands turned out to be conveniently ambiguous in these negotiations with foreign powers, able to be heightened or played down as situations required. The Dutch were competing with Portuguese and Spaniards already involved in the spice trade, and the conflict between the Dutch Republic and Portugal and Spain was pursued in the Indonesian Archipelago. The VOC Charter made no mention of offensive action, only the right to defend if attacked, but both the States and Maurits envisaged a more offensive role. This was reflected in Maurits’s commission to the fleet under Steven van der Hagen (1563–1621) in 1603, which addressed aggressive actions against the Portuguese.16 Islamic Asian rulers were allies of the Dutch against the Catholic Portuguese and Spanish (such as in Malacca, where the battles between the Dutch and Portuguese were decisive in controlling the spice market), and these alliances were likewise in the political interests of the House of Orange-Nassau against the Spanish Habsburgs. Concretely, Maurits received part of the profit of the spice trade which he used in the war against Spain. Therefore, he presented a petition to the States of Holland in 1601 asking to go to war against Spain in neutral territories at his own expense so he could

Trading places 135 occupy these territories. These overseas trading revenues were thus important to Orange-Nassau strategic manoeuvres in Europe. Maurits further requested permission to trade in ginger and pepper between Cape Verde and the Cape of Good Hope, effectively demanding a trading monopoly for himself in an area where Dutch ships were already trading, but the States were understandably cautious and evasive.17 With the establishment of the East India Company, the States decided to provide the stadtholder with money from the eastern trade, decreeing in April 1602 that the stadtholder should receive one-tenth of ‘all the booty seized on this side (to the north) of the Tropic of Cancer and one-thirtieth of all booty taken south of the Tropic of Cancer’. This money would in future support stadtholders in times of war.18 Thus, when the Zeeland Chambers of the VOC asked the Supreme Court how much money was due to Maurits after they captured the Spanish ship San Jago, the judgement from February 1604 confirmed the stipulation from 1602.19 Maurits’s participation and assumption of the role of a Dutch ‘monarch’ was necessary to enable appropriate diplomatic connections for the VOC with Asian rulers. He also became a figurehead for Dutch military activities abroad. After the conquest of Bahia in 1624, Dutch soldiers were reported to have removed images of Catholic martyrs in the town’s Jesuit convent to replace them with an effigy of the Prince of Orange.20 Maurits argued strongly for a more dynamic military intervention that resulted in the establishment of the Nassau fleet (1623–6). The five ships that comprised the fleet were assembled in 1623 by the States General. They were named in honour of the Nassau dynasty because of Maurits’s strong involvement, and were designed to divert the war against Spain away from the Netherlands and to beat them in the western parts of its empire in the Americas.21 The objective was also to hunt Spanish silver ships which came from Peru and to establish a settlement in Peru or Chile. Eventually, so Maurits hoped, the local population in Peru and Chile would rise against Spain and collaborate with the Dutch. Maurits inspected the fleet personally, and wrote ‘letters of alliance’ to give to Indians in Peru and Chile and also a ‘letter of credentials’ for Hendrik Brouwer (1581–1643), a former governor general in Batavia, for his own expedition.22 The Nassau fleet was unsuccessful in achieving its objectives, but contemporary reports depicted it as a Dutch success.23 The Nassau fleet demonstrated a union of interests between the Orange-Nassau stadtholders, its wider dynastic military strategy and Dutch national colonial interests in the Americas. Maurits’s initial efforts in the region went hand in hand with a wider Dutch national endeavour. The establishment of the West India Company in 1621 reiterated the close connection and mutual benefit for the House of Orange-Nassau and the trading companies. Maurits saw financial and military benefits to the Company, although the States General were hesitant to allow the Orange-Nassau an opportunity to increase their power.24 As it was established, commerce was subordinated to military and colonial enterprise in service to the Dutch nation. Its commanders swore an oath to the Company, the States General and to the stadtholder as captain general of the armed forces.25 Colonial territories remained a source of dynastic prestige and status

136  Claiming spaces for Frederik Hendrik. He retained a strong interest in the VOC operations in Asia and continued diplomatic exchange with rulers there, as Maurits had done before him. The VOC’s 1602 resolution, which saw a percentage of profit for the stadtholder, also applied to Frederik Hendrik, and it was in his period as Prince of Orange that these revenues were most visibly commandeered towards Orange-Nassau promotion in Europe. Frederik Hendrik supported both the East and West trading companies as if he were in a position of sovereign political power, and parts of their profits supported his military campaigns, but they also provided money, connections, and opportunities to further Orange-Nassau power at home and to finance the emerging Orange princely representation style. Furthermore, the trading companies soon provided a key position of status that advanced both Orange and wider Nassau interests abroad. In 1636, Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen, an experienced military campaigner for the Dutch cause, was appointed governor of the GWIC possessions in Brazil (Figure 3.2). This role came with a princely salary of 1,500 florins a month,

Figure 3.2 Michiel Jansz. van Mierevelt, Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen, ca 1636, 1637, 68cm × 58cm. Siegen, Verein der Freunde und Förderer des Siegerlandmuseums.

Trading places 137 payment of a personal chaplain, secretary, and physician, and two per cent of any monies gained in Brazil. At the same time, he retained his status as a colonel in the army of the States General along with its attendant salary.26 As we shall explore below, this represented a significant opportunity for Johann Moritz to raise his status internationally, as well as within the dynasty and with regard to the House of Orange-Nassau specifically. Despite the perceived success of his handling of military and political affairs in the region, however, the directors of the Company grew increasingly unwilling to support Johann Moritz’s lavish princely lifestyle. In October 1641 they requested that his expenses be curtailed, but both Frederik Hendrik and the States General delayed this initiative. When, in April 1643, they insisted directly to Johann Moritz on a change to their initial agreement, Johann Moritz used the tripartite authority to which he was beholden to question the directive. However, in May 1643, the States confirmed the directors’ position, albeit through the face-saving measure of recalling Johann Moritz to ‘do the nation further service here’.27 In the 1647 propaganda narrative composed by philosopher and theologian Caspar van Baerle (1584–1648) about Johann Moritz’s time in Brazil, Rerum per octennium in Brasilia et alibi nuper gestarum sub praefectura, Johann Moritz’s departure is presented as being at his own request. Any suggestion that the directors were concerned about his costly household was quickly dismissed.28 Van Baerle instead reproduces part of a letter Johann Moritz wrote to the governors of the provincial jurisdictions in Brazil: As you know, I have several times requested the States General, my kinsman the Prince of Orange, and the directors of the Company, to be relieved from my position. I have asked their permission to return to the United Provinces, the country to which I have long since swore my true allegiance.29 The appointment of Nassau men to key strategic positions within the trading companies offered opportunities to increase individual, House, and dynastic prestige both in Europe and abroad. Moreover, the structural organisation of authority within the Company allowed the dynasty to delay and occlude disadvantageous situations to its members. Under the young Prince of Orange, Willem II, the fortunes of Dutch trading company colonies, such as that in Brazil, were complicated by broader European foreign policy. Dutch trading activities had clashed with those of the Portuguese at a number of sites globally but Brazil became a particular flashpoint. During the 1640s, after the departure of Johann Moritz, the Dutch had lost almost total control of their Brazilian possessions to the Portuguese, supported by indigenous populations in the region. Willem supported the raising of a major military force to recapture the territories, perhaps eager to prove himself in the military arena as his male ancestors had done. However, his belligerence was in contrast to the mood of the largest and most powerful of the provinces, Holland, which was unwilling to commit funds to such a large financial undertaking and sought peace with other European nations, which would better support trade.

138  Claiming spaces Willem, aligned with Zeeland, persisted against Holland and even against his mother Amalia, who also favoured the peace party.30 In Europe, these colonial discussions were embedded in the wider negotiations among the provinces in preparation for their attendance at the Münster peace congress and, in the longer term, the Peace of Westphalia in January 1648. Here, Brazil remained one of the sticking points that prevented the provinces from agreeing on a united negotiating position. Zeeland only acquiesced to an agreed position after the other provinces accepted that the States General should fund a major military force to recapture the Brazilian colony.31 Willem’s diary throughout these years, not surprisingly, placed him as a major protagonist and key interlocutor in these negotiations. For example, he wrote about how a deputation from the States General sought his advice about Brazil: My advice was that they should send 3,000 men, which could be raised from the the deniers that the provinces had consented for the maintenance of the 6,000 men that had been sent there; above that, they had to oblige those of the company to send the rest of the 11,300 men that they had agreed to send, and that as for money, they should work so that the provinces consented in the petition of the Council of State to 400,000 livres and they also had to provide the funds from the other agreements.32 Willem met with deputies from the States to ‘give my advice about several points that had been put in the treaty that was being prepared with the ambassador of Portugal: I gave my advice’.33 In 1648 and 1649, however, the Dutch colony was to suffer successive defeats in the the first and second battles of Guararapes.34 Willem pushed for stronger military intervention from the Dutch in this arena. In one entry, Willem recorded the communication he received from Holland regarding ‘West Inde’, recommending that a defensive plan be put in place in Brazil with vessels guarding the coastline and an additional flotilla of thirty vessels prepared to attack if the king of Portugal did not accept the terms offered. Willem concluded his entry: ‘I concurred with their advice and at the same time asked them to consider if it would not be better to send a larger flotilla’.35 He was soon discussing with the States General the number of vessels and frigates preparing to depart; one vessel and frigate for each admiralty and two each for Amsterdam.36 This large-scale expedition was first offered to Johann Moritz who insisted that he could only accept if it were doubled in size.37 On occasion, it appeared – at least through the lens of Willem’s diary – that the deputies of the States General consulted him on matters of diplomacy and etiquette. In September 1650, for example, they asked his opinion on whether the newly arrived ambassador of Portugal ought to be received.38 Having lost real control of the Brazilian colonies to Portugal, the provinces were then negotiating a treaty. In 1654 a provisional truce was signed in the Treaty of Taborda, but with the signing of the Treaty of The Hague in 1661 the loss of the colony was rendered permanent, although they received in exchange a sizable indemnity and extensive trading rights in Portuguese possessions as a result.39

Trading places 139 However, Willem’s journal hints at signs of frustration about his actual role in leading these affairs, and his ability to assert himself in this context. In 1648, for example, Jan Wolfert Brederode (1599–1655), married to Anna Johanna von Nassau-Siegen (1594–1636), daughter of Johann VII and Magdalena von Waldeck (1558–99) but a staunch Republican, was sent along with deputies by the States of Holland to Amsterdam to induce its leaders to conform with the advice of the other towns in respect of Brazil. Willem lamented: ‘I seconded these deputies with a letter to those of the town, but it did nothing’.40 Willem’s journal, however, hinted that his power was perhaps not quite as great with the various States as he might have hoped. By November, Willem recorded, the States General had asked that ‘I write a letter to the admiralty of Amsterdam so that they would raise as many soldiers as they judged that their vessels, which are ready, can transport to Brazil [. . .] they responded, writing to me of several difficulties’.41 Willem’s poor capacity for negotiating with the States General and individual provinces generally did not assist his ambition to hold the Dutch colony to which the Nassau name was most strongly associated. A close political and dynastic relationship of the Orange-Nassau and the companies was once more in evidence when Willem III received a special allowance in 1672 from the VOC as a reward for his successful military campaigns against the army of Louis XIV. This amounted to 1/33 of the dividends of the Company. The Heeren’s decision reflected the very real threat that Louis XIV posed to the VOC; Louis had planned to build a trading fleet to undermine the commercial position of the Dutch and English.42 The dynamics of power between Company and dynasty were to shift again, however, with the establishment of a permanent stadtholder in 1748, when Willem IV became ‘Supreme Governor General of the Dutch East Indies’, as the formal head of State. As R. J. Barendse has demonstrated, the officials of the VOC now had to swear an oath of allegiance to the Prince of Orange and when political crises, such as the Chinese uprising in Batavia in 1740, or mismanagement within the VOC occurred, the Prince of Orange had the right to intervene.43 He also gained the right to appoint directors and other important officials of the VOC, which increased his opportunities for princely patronage through the Company.44 As hereditary stadtholders, therefore, the power relationship between the Orange-Nassau dynasty and the VOC changed considerably. This is reflected in the correspondence of the later princes of Orange, Willem IV and V, with the governors of the Company, as well as with rulers within Asia.45 Willem V’s archived correspondence includes letters from Indonesia/ Malacca, India/Ceylon, South Africa, Asia and with the GWIC, Surinam, Curaçao, Essequebo and Demerary, and St George d’Elmina.46 By the end of the eighteenth century, however, Dutch trading supremacy had been severely challenged by the English. After England declared war on the Dutch Republic in 1780 the VOC lost territories in Asia, and the Dutch Asian trade almost came to an end as Dutch ships were attacked by the English. In 1791 the GWIC was abolished and its territories were brought under the direct rule of the State. With the French occupation of the Netherlands, Willem V

140  Claiming spaces had to flee the country, and in January and February 1796 he dispatched the Kew Letters from his English exile, in which he advised the colonial governors to work with the English, surrendering the colonies to English ‘safekeeping’, in order to resist French forces abroad. As a result of Willem’s orders, the English took over strategic Dutch colonial locations in Asia. From the beginning to the end of this period, Orange-Nassau individuals were integral and influential to the Dutch colonial enterprise. The House and the trading companies formed a mutually beneficial relationship that increased both Dutch and dynastic economic, political, and social interests. The naming of locations after the dynasty and its leading men both reflected and forged powerful alliances between Orange-Nassau family members, the VOC, and foreign rulers. While it was particularly the princes of Orange who were the visible face of Orange-Nassau interactions with the Company, a subordinate individual such as Johann Moritz could also use formal appointments to advance both his own and dynastic concerns.

Flags and maps: visualising and materialising Orange-Nassau power The name of the Nassau dynasty, and the House of Orange-Nassau particularly, came to be linked with Dutch claims over diverse geographical territories, and thus with Dutch colonial expansion. A range of European powers were contending for commercial and territorial supremacy of coastal entrepôts in the southern hemisphere during the seventeenth century. The blend of Portuguese, Spanish, English, Dutch, and indigenous place names along the coastlines of Africa, South America, and Southeast Asia (as well as the variety of Dutch names along Australia’s coast) demonstrates how closely contested some of these sites were in the early modern period. Naming was an important strategy for signalling colonial ownership of foreign territory to rivals. It was also central to visual celebrations of expanding Dutch territorial power, as early modern maps regularly attest. In the Netherlands, illustrated maps and topographic paintings showing East and West India Company possessions were hung in civic, commercial, and patrician buildings – such as the Amsterdam Town Hall, the East India Company headquarters, and stadtholders’ palaces – to celebrate the extension of Dutch power abroad. The Nassau names visualised on these maps signalled the instrumental role of the House of Nassau-Orange in claiming political space for the Netherlands, while simultaneously emphasising the growing political power of the family itself in Europe.47 VOC documentation ritualised the presence of the Orange-Nassau in its considerable textual practice of internal circulation. Its communicative rituals functioned as part of a ritual of integaration, by reaffirming corporate principles that were renewed across generations of men across the globe who came to work for the company.48 In documentary forms that ranged from annual reports from Batavia and council minutes to the governor general to council instructions and ships’ logs, the Prince of Orange featured as a continual

Trading places 141 presence, a textual reminder of the hierarchy and purpose for which the Company functioned. These articulations rehearsed crucial narratives about the Company’s identity and culture. For example, skipper Jan Carstenzoon, who had navigated the region on the northern Australian coast in 1623 in the Pera, concluded his journal to be presented to his superiors thus: hereby bringing the voyage to a safe conclusion (by the mercy and safekeeping of the Lord) may He vouchsafe to grant prosperity and success in all their good undertakings to the High Mightinesses the States-General, to his Excellency the Prince of Orange etc., to the Lords Managers of the United East India Company and to the Worshipful Lord General and his Governors.49 These were formulaic statements but their repeated inclusion across documentary forms articulated important messages about the central place of the Orange-Nassau (as well as the States General) in the foundations and ongoing work of the Company. In addition to its presence in the Company’s documentation, the House also featured in the colonising practices of the VOC in material and mapped interactions with geographic spaces that Company men encountered. Instructions prepared by the council in Batavia for successive exploratory voyages to the as-then-unknown but long imagined South Lands (explorations that would encompass a region containing the islands of New Guinea, Australia, New Zealand, Tonga, Fiji, Indonesia, and the Solomons) demonstrated the pivotal importance of Orange-Nassau to the making of new Company spaces, in a mutually beneficial arrangement. The Prinsenflag became the material means by which lands could be claimed for the Company. In 1642, Abel Tasman (1603–59), for example, was directed to claim all continents and islands, which you shall discover, touch at and set foot on, [. . .] the which in uninhabited regions or in such countries as have no sovereign, may be done by erecting a memorial-stone or by planting our Prince-flag in sign of actual occupation, seeing that such lands justly belong to the discoverer and first occupier.50 Moreover, such instructions, and the material objects that they involved, helped to entrench the European assumption that political entities were arranged around a single male leader representing a people, such as the Prince of Orange. These directions were, it seems, duly followed by skippers in a series of encounters with the Australian continent. Tasman dutifully recorded in his log that when they landed at North Bay, on the east coast of what is now Tasmania, on 3 December 1642, we carried with us a pole with the Company’s mark carved into it, and a Prince-flag to be set up there, that those who shall come after us may

142  Claiming spaces become aware that we have been here, and have taken possession of the said land as our lawful property. [. . .] [we] ordered the carpenter to swim to the shore alone with the pole and the flag, and kept by the wind with our pinnace; we made him plant the said pole with the flag at top into the earth, about the centre of the bay near four tall trees easily recognisable and standing in the form of a crescent, exactly before the one standing lowest.51 Likewise, on these voyages, a series of place names bestowed upon ‘new’ territories emphasised the social networks and aspirations of their skippers. These ranged from those in the direct hierarchy of the Company to the men and House that were perceived to mark Dutch identity in global spaces. Thus, the present-day Nassau River in Cape York, Queensland, and Cape Frederick Hendrick in Tasmania were both named during Tasman’s voyages around the Australian continent. The House’s power contined to grow globally, subordinating other lands and peoples, through Orange-Nassau material culture planted in foreign soils, and was celebrated in the textual documentation of the VOC Company. Princely names were given to cities, fortresses and sometimes entire islands, throughout the East and West India Company territories. The Indian Ocean island of Mauritius, off the east coast of Africa, had been named after Maurits by Dutch seafarers in 1598. ‘Maurits’ was also applied to fortresses in Brazil and Makian in the Moluccas – the ‘spice islands’ of eastern Indonesia. In the seventeenth century, new buildings established by early traders and the companies in the Americas and Africa asserted dynastic supremacy, with Fort Nassau founded on the African gold coast in 1612 and Fort Orange near present-day Albany in 1614.52 Forts in Asia were also named Frederik or Frederik Hendrik in Solor (in Indonesia) and Ceylon (Sri Lanka). These forts were taken from the Portuguese in 1613 and 1639 respectively. When the Dutch captured Malacca (Malaysia) from the Portuguese in 1640, the forts and bastions were renamed to honour members of the Orange-Nassau family. For example, the bastion ‘Onge Mille Virgines’ was renamed ‘Louise Henriette’, ‘St. Iago’ became ‘Wilhelminus’, the ‘Hospital del Rey’ was changed to ‘Mauritius’, the fort ‘Courassa’ was renamed ‘Frederik Hendrik’, and the ‘Hospital de Povne’ became ‘Ernestus Casimir’.53 Likewise, ‘Willemstad’ was the name given to the settlement founded by the WIC in Curaçao in 1634. In 1639, the Company built Fort Oranje at Bonaire, after they had taken it from the Spanish in 1636. These naming and renaming strategies, to honour the Dutch stadtholder and his ancestors and House, were key to asserting Dutch sovereignty abroad and reinforced the growing power of the Nassau-Orange family in Europe. The relationship of Willem III to the VOC was largely financial. He had no direct influence on its policy, especially after his accession with Mary II Stuart to the English throne in 1689 given that the English East India Company was in direct competition with the Dutch. Nonetheless, the Orange-Nassau still held symbolic power abroad. The Castle of Good Hope in the VOC

Trading places 143 Cape colony, slowly constructed between 1666 and 1679, had its bastions named after titles held by Willem III: Orange, Nassau, Buren, Leerdam, and Katzenellenbogen. Elsewhere too, his name established colonial connections for the English. In 1699, Williamsburg became the capital of the Virginia colony and the Governor’s Palace, the official residence of the royal governor, reflected the style that William and Mary had developed in the Netherlands and brought to the British Isles.54 In the second half of the seventeenth century, princely names were applied to Dutch Company possessions with much less frequency. Instead, as in the example of the Castle of Good Hope, we observe that the dynastic names of ‘Nassau’ and ‘Orange’ appear to have been more regularly given to Dutch overseas possessions. ‘Nassau’ forts were concentrated in eastern Indonesia (Ternate, Sulawesi, and Banda), at St Eustatius (in the Netherlands Antilles), in the Americas (Guyana in South America, modern-day New Jersey in North America), and in Guinea on the west coast of Africa. ‘Orange’ forts were scattered between India’s Malabar coast, Senegal and Ghana (in West Africa), eastern Indonesia (at Ternate) and the Americas (Albany in the north, Brazil in the south). ‘Oranjestad’ was (and remains) the capital of St Eustatius in the Netherlands Antilles. As the Dutch East and West India companies gained more power and territory, the names of Company chambers (particularly the headquarters in Amsterdam) were also added to maps of colonial possessions. This change in naming practices during the latter half of the seventeenth century might be explained with reference to Dutch claims for autonomy and legitimacy in a European context, where noble families negotiated territorial and political power between and among themselves. In maps that named new West and East India Company possessions ‘Nassau’ and ‘Orange’, the weakness of the male line in the House of Orange during the latter half of the seventeenth century could be elided by abandoning the practice of giving specific princely names to forts and cities. Dynastic nomenclature continued to be important in a context where European hereditary titles and elite family networks structured political and territorial power. The application of general, dynastic titles to possessions abroad reinforced the notion that Dutch claims to territory were enabled not just by a trading company but also an aristocratic house, just like English, Spanish, and Portuguese possessions, and by the textual sites such as charts and maps that reiterated for European readers Orange-Nassau presence in these spaces. The Orange-Nassau connection would come to be felt even in places, through names and objects, with no eventual part of Dutch trading history.55

Princely aspirations: an Orange affiliate abroad Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen, second cousin of Frederik Hendrik, was the only Nassau ever to rule as a colonial governor, and thus to wield power directly in the colonial world on behalf of his dynasty. Indeed, he was one of few Nassau individuals to visit a Company possession in the early modern period, accompanied on this appointment by his younger brother Johann

144  Claiming spaces Ernst II (1618–39), and Carel van Nassau (c. 1612–37), Maurits’s illegitimate son. It was not until the nineteenth century, when the House of Orange had become monarchs of the Netherlands and the Dutch state had assumed direct responsibility for former Company settlements, that a Prince of Orange ventured to the colonies. This was Prince Henry (1820–79), the third son of King Willem II (1792–1849). Henry visited the Netherlands Indies (colonial Indonesia) in 1837.56 Johann Moritz served as governor of the West India Company settlements in Pernambuco and Olinda, or Dutch Brazil, between 1637 and 1644.57 The principal commercial interest of the West India Company, founded in 1621, was sugar, and it was in pursuit of this commodity that the Company rapidly expanded to claim territories and establish plantations in the West Indies and along the north-east coast of South America during the 1620s and 1630s. The Dutch succeeded in displacing the Portuguese at what became Mauritsstad (the island of Antonio Váz at the mouth of the Capibaribe River) in 1630, where they remained the dominant European power until 1654 (Figure 3.3). The Dutch subsequently lost Brazil to the Portugese again. Johann Moritz’s actions as a colonial governor provide important insights into how the Nassau dynasty represented themselves within a transnational, colonial context at the very time when the Dutch trading empire was at its

Figure 3.3 Jan van Brosterhuyzen and Johannes Willemszoon Blaeu, View of Mauritsstad, c. 1637, 1645–7, etching, 395mm × 508mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, BI-1892-3415-19.

Trading places 145 economic and political zenith.58 As governor, Johann Moritz embarked on a range of building projects that included repairing forts, creating defensive structures, land reclamation, bridges, and newly laid-out town spaces. He had also planned for a university but this did not eventuate.59 His new town, Mauritsstad, included houses with narrow frontages, that were two to three storeys high after the Dutch style, and made from bricks rather than the mud and stone that had been used previously.60 Johann Moritz’s experiences in the Dutch provinces were reflected in the design of Mauritsstad (Figure 3.4). These images of Mauritsstad from land and sea, made years after Johann Moritz and his artists had returned to Europe, continued to emphasise the presence of European buildings in the Dutch style. The Portuguese friar Manuel Calado (1584–1654) described, in his O Valeroso Lucideno e Triunfo da Liberdade na Restauração de Pernambuco (1648), how the Prince-Count of Nassau was so preoccupied with the construction of his new city [. . .] he himself went about very carefully plotting the measurements and laying out the streets, so that the town should look more beautiful. And by means of a dike or levee through the middle of it, he brought the water of the river Capivaribe from the entrance of the bar. Canoes, boats and barges entered by this dike for the use of the morardores, underneath wooden bridges which crossed over the dike in some places, as in Holland, so that the island was completely surrounded by water.61

Figure 3.4 Attributed to Frans Post, View of Mauritsstad from the Land, c. 1650, 144cm × 200cm. Neues Palais, Stiftung Preußische Schlösser und Gärten Berlin-Brandenburg, GKI 3760.

146  Claiming spaces Calado understood Johann Moritz’s models for modern town planning as stemming from the Netherlands, as did his notion of ‘improving’ the territories the Dutch had colonised. As Elizabeth Sutton has argued, early modern Dutch maps reflected contemporary ideas that land ownership was best asserted through building programmes, land cultivation, and developed use of waterways.62 Thus the proliferation of early modern maps reflected this need to show that the conquered territories were being ‘worked’ for Dutch benefits. Johann Moritz’s actions in Brazil and the commission of maps and texts that detailed his efforts likewise echoed these principles.63 During his governance of Brazil, Johann Moritz himself claimed territory and power for his family through strategic nomenclature. Although the nationalistic focus of such naming and mapping projects has been recognised in the scholarship,64 Johann Moritz applied a specifically dynastic naming practice, which replicated the one employed in Europe. It is usually assumed that Johann Moritz took the liberty of naming Mauritsstad, the capital of Dutch Brazil, after himself. This is certainly very likely, although it is possible that he intended to share the honour of claiming the colony with another male member of the Nassau dynasty, his cousin the stadtholder Maurits. The names of the princes of Orange were given to a series of locations and forts in the territories Johann Moritz governed. The garrison on the outskirts of Mauritsstad had already been named Fort Frederik Hendrik in 1630,65 while that on the Sao Francisco River was Fort Maurits, and in the Afogados stood Fort Prins Willem. Van Baerle notes the political importance of changing strategic names, such as the town on the Paraíba Capitania once known as Philippea after King Philip, which was changed under Dutch rule to Frederiksstad.66 Nor was dynastic identity ignored. On Itamaracá Island stood Fort Oranje, and Amazonian settlements made during his time in Brazil included Fort Nassau and Fort Oranje. On the other hand, van Baerle observed that the repaired Fort Santa Catharina near Cabo Dello in Paraíba was renamed Fort Margarethe, either after Johann Moritz’s sister (Sophie Margarethe (1610–65), or his mother, Margaretha von Holstein-Sonderburg (1583–1658).67 Fort Ernestus on the edge of Mauritsstad was possibly named after Johann Moritz’s younger brother, Johann Ernst II, who had died in Brazil in 1639. Johann Moritz’s choice of Mauritsstad and Fort Margarethe thus gave prominence to himself and his own family alongside the leading men of the House of Orange, the pre-eminent branch of the Nassau dynasty. To populate and work these newly Dutch colonies, Johann Moritz wrote to Frederik Hendrik and the Company directors to send out Protestant colonists from the German lands that were in turmoil from the Thirty Years’ War.68 These were not forthcoming, and slave labour from Africa consequently became a key participant in the Dutch Brazilian economy. At the same time, as the princes of Orange had done in the VOC’s negotiations with Asian rulers, Johann Moritz established diplomatic ties with local peoples, most successfully among the Tarairiu (formerly known as Tapuya) (Figure 3.5 and 3.6).69 Van Baerle describes his meeting with the envoys of their king, who

Figure 3.5 Albert Eckhout, Dance of the Tapuya Indians, c. 1640, oil on canvas, 172cm × 295cm. Copenhagen, National Museum of Denmark, Ethnographic Collections.

Figure 3.6 Albert Eckhout, Tupi Woman, c. 1641, oil on canvas, 271cm × 165cm. Copenhagen, National Museum of Denmark, Ethnographic Collections.

148  Claiming spaces is variously termed in the sources Jandui, Nhandui, and, by the Dutch, Jan de Wy, who brought bows and arrows, and the ostrich feathers that were worn in war. Johann Moritz formally accepted these gifts and entertained the envoys. In return, he supplied linen clothing, women’s garments, knives, bells, beads, hooks, nails, and tools.70 These acts of diplomatic gift exchange and envoys resulted in a powerful treaty of friendship for the Dutch, one that would have personal benefits for Johann Moritz both in the Americas and in Europe. Calado described how Johann Moritz had been so successful in gaining the support of the Tarairiu that he had a lifesize portrait painted among a group of them.71 When the Jesuit father, Antonio Viera (1608–97), travelled among the Indians of the Serra of Ibiapaba after 1654, he observed that the supply of Dutch gifts had drawn the local peoples to their side. Indeed, a horrified Viera described the region as nothing short of a little Geneva: ‘many of the inhabitants were as Calvinist and Lutheran as if they had been born in England or Germany’.72 Viera’s views are probably exaggerated, but they suggest that Johann Moritz had achieved co-operation and support using the tools of princely diplomacy that the VOC and the princes of Orange had employed elsewhere. Johann Moritz’s unsuccessful pleas for European colonisers led to the sustained employment of African slave labour and to his direct involvement in African colonisation. As seen above, the Nassau name was already inscribed on the African continent, but the desire of the Dutch to control the supply of this labour force to the colony in Brazil led to further interventions there. Whilst successively trying to destabilise the Portuguese base of Elmina on the west coast of Africa, the States had established an alternative Dutch base at Fort Nassau at Mouri in 1612, and further forts were created after the establishment of the GWIC.73 With the opportunity for support from indigenous African peoples, Elmina was taken for the Dutch by Cornelis Jol (1597–1641) in 1637, events to which van Baerle devotes a chapter of his work in arguing for Johann Moritz’s leadership in the conquest. This successful expedition for the Dutch, as van Baerle wrote, ‘planned by the Count and undertaken at his advice’, ‘gained the Count a great deal of prestige and protection, more profit and power for the Company, and more safety and protection for the merchants in that area’.74 Johann Moritz requested in correspondence to van Baerle that the author also promote the count’s role in the occupation of the fortification of the Castle of Axim, since it had been carried out as he had suggested. Johann Moritz insisted that the fortress of Archin should also be put in the book, as being occupied during my reign, that is to say, after the fortress of Mina. For our letters will show that we have called upon the Director of Guinea to make an attempt, on that occasion, to incorporate the fortress just mentioned – and so it has come to pass. [Added on the margin] However, do as you please.75

Trading places 149 After the victory at Elmina in 1637, ‘when Count Johann Moritz had gained possession of this part of Africa and reported this to the States General’, van Baerle wrote that he ‘tried to persuade them with forceful arguments that the government of the area should be joined to that of Brazil and subject to its rule’.76 In 1641, Johann Moritz had sent a fleet to Angola that successfully occupied the capital Sao Paulo de Loanda, giving him control of the supply of slaves to Brazil.77 It was thus that between 1641 and 1642, the military command of Angola and São Tomé fell to his supervision.78 Johann Moritz argued strongly that, as governor, he should oversee the African colonies, but the States wrote of their concerns to the directors. The Company organised a commission that reported in February 1644 that as the Brazilian colony itself was

Figure 3.7 Theodor Matham and Frans Jansz Post, Portrait of Johann Moritz van Nassau-Siegen, 1635–76, engraving, 510mm × 392mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, RP-P-OB-23.218.

150  Claiming spaces not self-sustaining but required the financial support of the directors, it was sensible that a similar oversight be maintained directly from the directors for the African acquisitions.79 Although the directors declined to take up Johann Moritz’s suggestion, his plans clearly focused on expanding his global influence as much as his motto Qua patet orbis suggested: ‘as wide as the world’s bounds’ (Figure 3.7). Johann Moritz’s standing in the Dutch colony was such that as Calado recalled in his O Valeroso Lucideno that he was termed there the ‘Prince of Nassau’: Because the Dutch styled and called him thus, and the Portuguese, in order to avoid incurring his displeasure, and to curry favour with him, would have given him even higher titles if he had accepted them, on account of their subjugation as captives, and he being their lord and master.80 In fact, Johann Moritz did not officially gain a princely title until Emperor Ferdinand III appointed him a prince of the Holy Roman Empire in 1652. Nonetheless, the count aspired to a princely lifestyle which included palaces, art, and scientific patronage.81 As van Baerle offered in his expansive narrative of Johann Moritz’s time in Brazil, ‘he believed that culture must follow closely on the conquest of empire’.82 These activities signalled his status in the colonial context, but also prepared an extensive exchange of strategic political gifts upon his return to the Netherlands. Johann Moritz employed a team of artists, including Albert Eckhout (c. 1610–65),83 Frans Post (1612–80),84 Caspar von Schmalkalden (1616–73),85 Georg Marcgraf (1610–44)86 and Zacharius Wagener (1614–68).87 He also sponsored artists and physicians to record, in paintings and texts, information on the landscapes, natural history, and peoples of Brazil. Examples of this include Eckhout’s illustrations in the four-volume manuscript Theatrum rerum naturalium brasiliae by Christian Mentzel (1622–1701) – who was the physician of Friedrich Wilhelm, Elector of Brandenburg – and Zacharius Wagener’s Thierbuch, which remained unpublished until the mid-twentieth century. His physician, Willem Piso (1611–78), with contributions from Marcgraf and Johannes de Laet (1581–1649), compiled a key study of tropical plants and medicine, Historia Naturalis Brasiliae (1648), which was dedicated to Johann Moritz.88 These artists and writers left an astounding legacy of images and texts that allowed for widespread knowledge of his exploits in Europe and provided the material objects to create opportunities for gift-giving; they have attracted a large amount of scholarship in recent years. This is particularly true of the artistic works of Eckhout and, to a lesser extent, Post and von Schmalkalden (Figure 3.8).89 Johann Moritz commissioned a series of building projects that reflected both his role as a governor and also his ‘princely’ status. As Rebecca Parker Brienen has argued, these included a palace, country estate, gardens, menagerie, and curiosity cabinet through which the count adopted ‘European forms

Trading places 151

Figure 3.8 Caspar von Schmalkalden, Brazilian Raven (Ara-Papagei), c. 1642, coloured pen drawing. Forschungsbibliothek Gotha, Chart. B 533, fol. 118r. © Universität Erfurt, Forschungsbibliothek Gotha.

of princely authority in order to make visible his claims to power’.90 In an account that continually likened Johann Moritz to Roman emperors of antiquity, van Baerle nonetheless sought to assuage his readers’ concerns, noting that the Vrijburg palace was ‘constructed at his expense for his own use and for the glory of the state’.91 As Maria Angélica da Silva and Melissa Mota Alcides point out, each of the four residences in which he lived in Recife included a garden (Figure 3.9).92 Those at his Vrijburg palace were considered particularly striking, for Johann Moritz had insisted upon the transportation and replanting of hundreds of mature trees to the site. Van Baerle describes one of Johann Moritz’s more spectacular initiatives, to transplant a huge number of seventy- to eighty-year-old coconut trees to surround the

152  Claiming spaces

Figure 3.9 Residence of Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen in Brazil in Zacharias Wagener, ‘Thierbuch’, Ca226/plate 107. Dresden, Staatliche Sammlungen, Kupferstichkabinett.

palace; against all expectations they grew sucessfully and bore fruit again soon after being planted.93 In a highly unusual piece of silk and parchment work, made in Brazil, the coconut palms, and some papaya, are visible on the right-hand side, as well as the gardener (Figure 3.10). Just as in the gardens of the Orange-Nassau family in the Dutch provinces and German lands, Johann Moritz included vast numbers of fruit trees: 252 orange trees were added to the 600 that, neatly lined up side by side, served as a hedge and with their brightly colored fruit, taste, and fragrance, were a delight to all the sense. There were fifty-eight lemon trees that bore large lemons, eighteen that had sweet-tasting fruit, eighty pomegranates, and sixty fig trees.94 To these were added many species of native fruit trees, that were cultivated for pleasure and medicinal purposes. Van Baerle backed Johann Moritz’s ambitious as a cultural leader, arguing that Vrijburg was ‘a pleasure and delight to the citizens and an everlasting momument to the magnanimity of the Count of Nassau in the New World’. Moreover, he implied that the count’s cultural labour held significant political meaning: ‘these building activities shook the confidence of the Portuguese, while increasing that of our people. In their opinion it reflected the positive status of our government, which the Count had strengthened by spending his own money.’95

Figure 3.10 Anonymous, Palace Vrijburg, Mauritsstad, Brazil, 1642–79, silk, 19cm × 62.5cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, NG-1053.

154  Claiming spaces Johann Moritz’s gardens at Vrijburg were designed along contemporary Orange-Nassau ideas of landscaping. Its garden, wrote the friar Calado, was likewise stocked with every kind of fruit-tree which grows in Brazil, as well as with many others brought from different parts; and by bringing in much other fruitful earth from outside [. . .] He planted in this garden two thousand coconut-trees bringing them there from other places [. . .] he made some long and beautiful avenues of them, like the Alameda of Aranjues, and in other places many trellised vine-arbours and garden-beds of vegetables and flowers.96 Calado was more disapproving of what he perceived as Johann Moritz’s replication of Dutch customs of leisure: ‘Hither came the ladies and his friends to pass the summer holidays, and to enjoy their convivial gatherings, picnics and drinking parties, as is the custom in Holland, to the sound of musical instruments’.97 He also noted the count’s keen interest in the unusual and exotic, noting that in his menagerie at Boa Vista, Johann Moritz had ‘brought thither every kind of bird and animal that he could find [. . .] in short there was not a curious thing in Brazil which he did not have’.98 Johann Moritz’s artists made many zoological studies and drawings of these animals,99 with Zacharias Wagener who documented many in his Thierbuch.100 Wagener’s illustrations, which included both local peoples and plants, played their part in locating colonised populations in terms of contemporary European ethnographic interests rather than individuals with political rights (Figures 3.11 and 3.12). Other

Figure 3.11 Pineapples, aquarelle, 21.4cm × 35.6cm, in Zacharias Wagener, ‘Thierbuch’, Ca226/plate 57. Dresden, Staatliche Sammlungen, Kupferstichkabinett.

Trading places 155

Figure 3.12 Tapyan dance, aquarelle, 21.4cm × 35.6cm, in Zacharias Wagener, ‘Thierbuch’, Ca226/plate 103. Dresden, Staatliche Sammlungen, Kupferstichkabinett.

depictions were of animals such as the macaques that could not survive the cold climate of the Netherlands and that could not thus be brought to Europe for display (Figure 3.13). Some were gifts presented to Johann Moritz – including a Tayimbugh101 that was gifted by a Portuguese man – which were textualised into the narrative of Johann Moritz’s triumphal ascendancy over the Portuguese colonists in the region (Figure 3.14). Johann Moritz himself

Figure 3.13 Maquaqua, aquarelle, 21.4cm × 35.6cm, in Zacharias Wagener, ‘Thierbuch’, Ca226/plate 69. Dresden, Staatliche Sammlungen, Kupferstichkabinett.

156  Claiming spaces

Figure 3.14 Tayimbagh, aquarelle, 21.4cm × 35.6cm, in Zacharias Wagener, ‘Thierbuch’, Ca226/plate 65. Dresden, Staatliche Sammlungen, Kupferstichkabinett.

commented briefly about the nature of some of the animals on the original drawings by Marcgraf.102 The landscaping of Boa Vista reflected a presentation of untouched nature, in sharp contrast to the manufactured and geometric layout at Vrijburg (Figure 3.15):103 ‘Here the Count relaxed and looked at what he had built, far removed from his own country and the land of counts and princes, so many of them his relatives’.104 Importantly, the Boa Vista residency also contained Johann Moritz’s ethnographic collections, which he was later to take back to the Netherlands. Calado observed that the ‘Prince liked everyone to come and see his rarities, and he himself delighted in showing and explaining them’.105 Van Baerle interpreted Johann Moritz’s museum as ‘his treasure house, to which ships coming from the Indies, Africa, and other regions brought foreign animals, plants, household goods, clothing, and weapons of barbarian tribes that formed a pleasant and unusal spectacle for the Count’.106 It was to play an important part in his individual and dynastic strategies on his return to Europe. Johann Moritz’s appointment as governor in Brazil built on earlier OrangeNassau involvement with the Dutch trading companies. His time in Brazil enabled him to further both his own and wider dynastic interests. These ambitions can be seen in his princely display through palaces, gardens, collections, and his menagerie, as well as in governing acts that showed his princely diplomacy and attention to territorial cultivation and construction projects in the Dutch lands under his control. He supported the ambitions of men in the wider dynasty by supporting the participation of his younger brother, Johann Ernst

Trading places 157

Figure 3.15 Jan van Brosterhuyzen, Salomon Savery, Johannes Willemszoon Blaeu, View of Boavista in Mauritsstad, ca. 1636–1644, c. 1645–7, etching, 395mm × 500mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, BI-1892-3415-44.

II, as well as Maurits’s illegitimate son, Carel, who commanded the count’s guards in Brazil and died at the Battle of Porto Calvo (1637).107 Brazilian sites and territories were named and re-named after the House of Orange and Nassau dynasty, as well as in his own familial and personal interest. Although he numbered among the German branches of the Nassau dynasty, Johann Moritz was widely perceived by his Portuguese adversaries as wholly representative of Dutch interests, and the Orange-Nassau House to which he had hitched his fortunes. As the Portuguese envoy, Francisco de Sousa Countinho, wrote to King João IV (1604–56) in January 1645, ‘even though he was not born in Holland, he was brought up among the Hollanders, and he has absorbed a great deal of their character’.108 Van Baerle, whose dedication to Johann Moritz linked his colonial work directly to the Orange-Nassau House, also highlighted this affiliation: ‘We [the Dutch people] have gone with you to a different world on the other side of the ocean, full of courage to conquer a region that Nature had saved for your honor and that of the House of Nassau’.109

Conclusions Orange-Nassau interests in Dutch overseas expansion existed before, during, and after the existence of Dutch trading companies. They could overlap,

158  Claiming spaces run parallel to, or sometimes contradict VOC and GWIC politics. However, the emerging Dutch trading companies continued to value the cooperation of the House of Orange-Nassau in diplomatic negotiations, even though the VOC and GWIC quickly grew into socially powerful agents in their own right. However, they still could not offer what foreign rulers demanded most: a head of state as a negotiating partner, and this void was eagerly filled by the princes. These were largely masculine enterprises: the trading companies and the Dutch colonial government were staffed by men. Male hierarchies were seemingly replicated in Dutch contacts with local indigenous rulers and groups and in diplomatic relations with other colonial groups in the colonies. For the Orange-Nassau, access to colonial expansion had significant advantages, not only for their coffers, but also for the construction of dynastic representations and patronage, and it gave them an advantage over other leading families who were not equally involved in colonial projects. Princely power depended on the socially approved and successful cultural display of political aspirations. Even in periods of weak political power such as the stadtholderate of Willem V, colonial projection remained strong. Dutch colonial expansion was thus fostered and used by the House for its own political ends. Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen’s position as governor of Dutch Brazil provided the opportunity to present a particularly close connection of the House with overseas territories, peoples, and artefacts. The artistic group Johann Moritz assembled around him, which was responsible for creating the material legacies of maps, paintings, collections, and descriptions, were likewise all-male affiliations. Finally, the overseas possessions of the Dutch East and West India companies were regularly claimed by applying Orange-Nassau names, with no consideration for the rights of the men and women who lived there. These generic names claimed colonial space for the House without recourse to a particular male heir; the same pattern that was followed in their European ‘colonisation’ of German lands. Colonial connections thus came to symbolise dynastic power.

Notes   1 On such gifts, see Ian Bottomley, ‘Diplomatic Gifts of Arms and Armour between Japan and Europe during the 16th and 17th Centuries’, Arms and Armour 1, no. 1 (2004): 5–23.   2 Jacob van Campen, Goods from the East and West Indies, c. 1648–9, oil on canvas, 380cm × 205cm. The Hague, Huis ten Bosch, Oranjezaal.   3 Rita Wassing-Visser, Royal Gifts from Indonesia: Historical Bonds with the House of Orange-Nassau, 1600–1938 (Zwolle: Waanders, 1995), 24.   4 Wassing-Visser, Royal Gifts from Indonesia, 26.   5 Wassing-Visser, Royal Gifts from Indonesia, 27.   6 Quoted in Wassing-Visser, Royal Gifts from Indonesia, 28.   7 Wassing-Visser, Royal Gifts from Indonesia, 31–2.   8 Cited in Ingrid Saroda Mitrasing, ‘The Age of Aceh and the Evolution of Kingship 1599–1641’ (Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Leiden University, 2011), 70, from W. S. Unger, ed., De oudste reizen van de Zeeuwen naar Oost-Indië 1598–1604

Trading places 159 (The Hague: M. Nijhoff, 1948), 134–5; The letter dated 11 December 1600 is published in J. E. Banck, Atchin’s verheffing en val: met historische bijlagen en een oud kaartje der reede van Atchin (Rotterdam: Nijgh & Van Ditmar, 1873), 23.   9 See Mitrasing, ‘The Age of Aceh and the Evolution of Kingship 1599–1641’. See also the Thai embassies to Maurits, in Huib Zuidervaart, ed. and Henk Zoomers, intro., Embassies of the King of Siam Sent to His Excellency Prince Maurits, Arrived in The Hague on 10 September 1608: An Early 17th Century Newsletter, Reporting both the Visit of the First Siamese Diplomatic Mission to Europe and the First Documented Demonstration of a Telescope Worldwide (Wassenaar: Louwman Collection of Historic Telescopes, 2008).   10 W. S. Unger ed., ‘De oudste reizen van de Zeeuwen naar Oost-Indië, 1598–1604’, Werken uitgegeven door de Linschoten-Vereeniging, 51 (1948): xlviii.   11 Unger, ‘De oudste reizen van de Zeeuwen naar Oost-Indië’, xlviii n 4.   12 ‘Ich, Kaiser und König von Japan, wünsche dem König von Holland, der mich aus so fernen Landen besuchen lässt, meine Grüsse’. For the German translation, see Oskar Nachod, Die Beziehungen der Niederländischen Ostindischen Kompagnie zu Japan im siebzehnten Jahrhundert (Leipzig: Friese, 1897), 505. Available online at http://digital.staatsbibliothek-berlin.de/dms/werkansicht/?PP N=PPN610630407&PHYSID=PHYS_0505.   13 ‘Dass wir Freunde und Nachbarn [geburen] sind’, in Nachod, Die Beziehungen der Niederländischen Ostindischen Kompagnie zu Japan im siebzehnten Jahrhundert, 507.   14 Leonard Blussé, ‘The Grand Inquisitor Inoue Chikugo no kami masashige, Spin doctor of the Tokogawa Bakufu’, Bulletin of Portuguese-Japanese Studies 7 (2003): 33.   15 Blussé, ‘The Grand Inquisitor Inoue Chikugo no kami masashige’, 35, 37.   16 Ernst van Veen, ‘VOC strategies in the Far East (1605–1640)’, Bulletin of Portuguese-Japanese Studies 3 (2001): 87. For further, and especially legal, detail, see Hendrik Hoogenberk’s study, De rechtsvoorschriften voor de vaart op Oost-Indië 1595–1620 (Utrecht: Kemink 1940); and on Maurits’s foreign policy generally, Jonathan Israel, ‘Maurits en de wording van buitenlandse politiek’, in Maurits, Prins van Oranje, ed. Kees Zandvliet with contributions from Arthur Eyffinger (Amsterdam: Rijksmuseum, 2000), 64–75.   17 Wassing-Visser, Royal Gifts from Indonesia, 30.   18 Wassing-Visser, Royal Gifts from Indonesia, 30.   19 Wassing-Visser, Royal Gifts from Indonesia, 37.   20 Michiel van Groesen, ‘Lessons Learned: The Second Dutch Conquest of Brazil and the Memory of the First’, Colonial Latin American Review 20, no. 2 (2011): 172.   21 See ‘Copie van’t accoort gemaeckt by de gedeputeerdens van Haar Ho.Mo. en Sijn Vorstelycke Genade, met d’ Oostindische Compagnie’, 12 July 1622, reproduced in Pieter van Dam, Beschryvinge van de Oostindische Compagnie. Boek 1, Deel 2, ed. F. W. Stapel (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1929), 526–8.   22 Benjamin Schmidt, Innocence Abroad: The Dutch Imagination and the New World, 1570–1670 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), 197–211; David F. Marley, Wars of the Americas: A Chronology of Armed Conflict in the Western Hemisphere, 1492 to the Present. Vol. 1: Discovery and Conquest to High Tide of Empire (Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, 2008), 164.   23 The original Iournael van de Nassausche vloot was published in 1626 in two issues by Hessel Gerritsz and Jacob Pietersz Wachter in Amsterdam. An augmented edition appeared in 1643 (Amsterdsam: Wachter) as the second part of the Journalen van drie voyagien.   24 James van der Veldt, ‘An Autograph Letter of John Maurits of Nassau, Governor of the Dutch Colony of Brazil (1636–1644), The Americas 3, no. 3 (1947): 311–18,

160  Claiming spaces 314. See also, Mark Meuwese, ‘The States General and the Stadtholder: Dutch Diplomatic Practices in the Atlantic World before the West India Company’, Journal of Early American History 3, no. 1 (2013): 43–58. On Johann Moritz as a proponent of free trade for Brazil, see Arthur Weststeijn, ‘Dutch Brazil and the Making of the Free Trade Ideology’, in The Legacy of Dutch Brazil, ed. Michiel van Groesen (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014), 187–206, esp. 193.   25 C. R. Boxer, The Dutch in Brazil, 1624–1654 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1957), 7–8.   26 Boxer, The Dutch in Brazil, 1624–1654, 68.   27 Boxer, The Dutch in Brazil, 1624–1654, 156.   28 Caspar van Baerle, The History of Brazil under the Governorship of Count Johann Moritz of Nassau, trans. Blanche T. van Berckel-Ebeling Koning (Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 2011), 278–9.   29 Van Baerle, The History of Brazil under the Governorship of Count Johann Moritz of Nassau, 277.   30 Derek Croxton Westphalia: The Last Christian Peace (Houndmills: Palgrave, 2013), 250 (on Holland) and 289 (on Amalia).   31 Croxton, Westphalia, 292.   32 ‘Mon advis fut que lon y devoit envoyer 3000 hommes, lesquels pouroit esttre levees des deniers que les provinces avoit consenti pour lentretement des 6000 hommes qui y avoit estte envoye; pardessus cela lon devoit obliger ceux de la compagnie di envoier le restte des 1300 hommes qu’ils avoit entrepris di envoyer, que pour de largent lon devoit travailler que les provinces consentaret dans la petition du conseil destat de 400.000 Livres et quils usset aussi a fournir largent des auttres consentemens.’ F. J. L. Krämer, ed., ‘Journalen van den Stadhouder Willem II uit de jaren 1641–1650’, Bijdragen en Mededeelingen van het Historisch Genootschap 27 (1906): 466.   33 ‘Pour donner mon advis sur quelque points que lon devoit mettre dans le traictte que l’on avoit dessain de faire avec lambassadeur de Portugal; je donnay mon advis’. Krämer, ‘Journalen van den Stadhouder Willem II’, 476.   34 See David F. Marley, ‘Holland’s “Great Design” (1613–1649)’, in David F. Marley, Wars of the Americas: A Chronology of Armed Conflict in the Western Hemisphere, 1492 to the Present, 2nd edn (Santa Barbara: ABC CLIO, 2008), 157–209.   35 ‘Me confirma a leur advis et a mesme tempts leur donne a pensché cy il ne valoit pas mieux que l’on y envoya unne flotte plus forte’. Krämer, ‘Journalen van den Stadhouder Willem II’, 486.   36 Krämer, ‘Journalen van den Stadhouder Willem II’, 490.   37 Marley, ‘Holland’s “Great Design”’, 206. On these preparations, see also Jonathan I. Israel, Conflicts of Empires: Spain, the Low Countries and the Struggle for World (London: The Hambledon Press, 1997), ch. 7.   38 Krämer, ‘Journalen van den Stadhouder Willem II’, 533.   39 See Evaldo Cabral de Mello, O Negócio do Brasil – Portugal, os Países Baixos e o Nordeste 1641–1669 (Rio de Janeiro: Topbooks, 1998) (Dutch edition: De Braziliaanse affaire – Portugal, de Republiek der Verenigde Nederlanden en Noord-Oost Brazilië, 1641–1669, trans. Catherine Barel (Zutphen: Walburg Press, 2005).   40 ‘J’ai seconde ces deputes avec unne lettre a ceux de la ville, mais ils nefectueret rien’. Krämer, ‘Journalen van den Stadhouder Willem II’, 476.   41 ‘Que j’ecrivisse unne lettre à l’admirautlé de Amsterdam affin qu’ils voulussent lever autant de soldats qu’ils jugeroit que les vaissaux de leur college, qui estoit prest, pouvoit transporter au Bresil [. . .] Ils ne repondirent et manderent quelques dificultes’. Krämer, ‘Journalen van den Stadhouder Willem II’, 493.

Trading places 161   42 Wassing-Visser, Royal Gifts from Indonesia, 40.   43 R. J. Barendse, Arabian Seas 1700–1763: The West Indian Ocean in the Eigh­ teenth Century (Leiden: Brill, 2009), 38–9.   44 Wassing-Visser, Royal Gifts from Indonesia, 41.   45 Van Imhoff was previously governor of Ceylon (1736–40).   46 B. Woelderink, ed., Inventaris van de archieven van stadhouder Willem V, 1745–1808, en de Hofcommissie van Willem IV en Willem V, 1732–1794 (The Hague: Koninklijk Huisarchief, 2005), 160–67; Kees Zandvliet, The Dutch Encounter with Asia, 1600–1950 (Zwolle: Waanders, 2002), 68.   47 For a general discussion of Dutch mapping and overseas expansion, see Kees Zandvliet, Mapping for Money: Maps, Plans, and Topographic Paintings and Their Role in Dutch Overseas Expansion during the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (Amsterdam: Batavian Lion International, 1998). Benjamin Schmidt, Inventing Exoticism: Geography, Globalism, and Europe’s Early Modern World (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2015); Benjamin Schmidt, ‘Mapping an Empire: Cartographic and Colonial Rivalry in SeventeenthCentury Dutch and English North America’, William and Mary Quarterly 54, no. 3 (1997): 549–78; Benjamin Schmidt, ‘Geography Unbound: Boundaries and the Exotic World in the Early Enlightenment’, in Boundaries and Their Meanings in the History of the Netherlands, ed. Benjamin Kaplan, Marybeth Carlson and Laura Cruz (Leiden: Brill, 2009), 35–61.   48 On the nature and importance of the VOC communicative forms at this period, see Susan Broomhall, ‘Shipwrecks, Sorrow, Shame, and the Great Southland: The Use of Emotions in Seventeenth-Century Dutch East India Company Communicative Ritual’, in Emotion, Ritual and Power in Pre-Modern Europe: Life-Cycles, ed. Merridee Bailey and Katie Barclay (Palgrave, forthcoming).   49 ‘Wesende daermode de vojiage (door de genadige bewaernisse Godts) volbrocht, Die de Ho. Mo. Heeren Staten Generael, Sijn Extie Prince van Orange etc. ende de Heeren Generael ende Sijne Gouverneurs, in alle haer goet voornemen, geluck ende heijl believe te verleenen.’ ‘Journael van Jan Carstensz. Op de ghedaene reyse van Nova Guinea’, in Twee togten naar de Golf van Carpentaria, ed. L. C. D. van Dijk (Amsterdam: J. H. Scheltema, 1859), 56; J. E. Heeres, Het Aandeel der Nederlanders in de Ontdeeking van Australië, 1606–1765 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1899), 44. Translated by C. Stoffel in J. E. Heeres, The Part Borne by the Dutch in the Discovery of Australia, 1606–1765, (London: Luzac, 1899), with additional translations by Elise Reynolds and Marianne Roobol. Available online at the Koninklijke Bibliotheek website: http://www.kb.nl/bladerboek/ barrenregions/carstens/browse/page_56.html.   50 Instructions, 13 August 1642, in Abel Janszoon Tasman’s Journal of His Discovery of Van Diemens Land and New Zealand in 1642, ed. and trans. J. E. Heeres and C. H. Cootes (Amsterdam, Frederik Muller and Co, 1898; repr., Los Angeles: N. A. Kovach, 1965), 136.   51 De Reizen van Abel Janszoon Tasman en Franchoys Jacobszoon Visscher ter nadere ontdekking van het Zuidland in 1642/3 en 1644, ed. R. Posthumus Meyjes (’S-Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff, 1919), 34. English translation from Abel Janszoon Tasman’s Journal, 15–16.   52 Boxer, The Dutch in Brazil, 5–6.   53 Balthasar Bort, ‘Report of Governor Balthasar Bort on Malacca 1678’, trans. M. J. Bremer, Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 5, no. 1 (1927): 16.   54 Phillip M. Johnston, ‘The William and Mary Style in America’, in Courts and Colonies: The William and Mary Style in Holland, England and America, ed. Reinier Baarsen, Philip M. Johnston, Gervase Jackson-Stops, Elaine Evans Dee (Washington, DC: University of Washington Press, 1988), 62.

162  Claiming spaces   55 See Susan Broomhall, ‘Dishes, Coins and Pipes: The Epistemological and Emotional Power of VOC Material Culture in Australia’, in The Global Lives of Things: Materials, Material Culture and Commodities in the First Global Age, ed. Anne Gerritsen and Giorgio Riello (London: Routledge, 2015); and Susan Broomhall, ‘Dirk Hartog’s Sea Chest: An Affective Archaeology of VOC Objects in Australia’, in Feeling Things, ed. Sarah Randles, Stephanie Downes and Sally Holloway (forthcoming).   56 See Susie Protschky, ‘Dutch Still Lifes and Colonial Visual Culture in the Netherlands Indies 1800–1949’, Art History 34, no. 3 (2011): 511–35.   57 The Hague, Koninklijk Huisarchief (KHA), Archief Nassau-Siegen A4, Inv. Nr 1450/51/52.   58 On his relation with Dutch military personnel abroad, see Michiel van Groesen, ‘Officers of the West India Company, Their Networks, and Their Personal Memories of Dutch Brazil’, in The Dutch Trading Companies as Knowledge Networks, ed. Siegfried Huigen, Jan L. De Jong and Elmar Kolfin (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 39–58.   59 Boxer, The Dutch in Brazil, 1624–1654, 112.   60 Maria Angélica da Silva and Melissa Mota Alcides, ‘Collecting and Framing the Wilderness: The Garden of Johann Maurits (1604–79) in North-East Brazil’, Garden History 30, no. 2 (2002): 153–5.   61 Cited in Boxer, The Dutch in Brazil, 1624–1654, 115.   62 Elizabeth Sutton, ‘Mapping Dutch Nationalism across the Atlantic’, ARTL@S Bulletin 2, no. 1 (2013): 8, and also n 9 for further references.   63 Sutton, ‘Mapping Dutch Nationalism across the Atlantic’; Elizabeth Sutton, Early Modern Dutch Prints of Africa (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2012).   64 Sutton, ‘Mapping Dutch Nationalism across the Atlantic’; Sutton, Early Modern Dutch Prints of Africa; Schmidt, ‘Mapping an Empire’, 549–78; Schmidt, ‘Geography Unbound’.   65 Fort Frederik Hendrick was christened thus in December 1630. See David F. Marley, Historic Cities of the Americas: An Illustrated Encyclopedia, 2 vols (Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, 2005), 1: 685.   66 Van Baerle, The History of Brazil under the Governorship of Count Johann Moritz of Nassau, 69.   67 Van Baerle, The History of Brazil under the Governorship of Count Johann Moritz of Nassau, 73.   68 Boxer, The Dutch in Brazil, 1624–1654, 71–2.   69 On the relation between the Dutch and indigenous people in Brazil, see Mark Meuwese, Brothers in Arms, Partners in Trade: Dutch-Indigenous Alliances in the Atlantic (Leiden: Brill, 2012), especially ch. 3 (125–90); and Mark Meuwese, ‘From Dutch Allies to Portuguese Vassals: Indigenous Peoples in the Aftermath of Dutch Brazil’, in van Groesen, The Legacy of Dutch Brazil, 59–76.   70 Van Baerle, The History of Brazil under the Governorship of Count Johann Moritz of Nassau, 72.   71 Boxer, The Dutch in Brazil, 1624–1654, 135–6.   72 Boxer, The Dutch in Brazil, 1624–1654, 137.   73 Sutton, Early Modern Dutch Prints of Africa, 62.   74 Van Baerle, The History of Brazil under the Governorship of Count Johann Moritz of Nassau, 55 and 54.   75 ‘Aengaende het Casteel van Archin moet mede in het boek comen, als geoccupeert wesende geduyrende mÿn gouvernement, te weten na het Casteel van Mina, Wante onse brieven sullen uÿtwÿsen, dat wÿ den Directeur in Guinea angemaent hebben, dat hÿ sou trachten by die gelegenheyt soude soecken het voorseÿde casteel te incorporeeren, gelyck ook geschied is.’ 16 March 1647, in van der Veldt, ‘An Autograph Letter of John Maurits of Nassau’, 311–12. ‘My reign’ is van der Veldt’s translation of ‘mÿn gouvernement’. This was overlooked

Trading places 163 or ignored, for there is no mention of Axim in the original Latin text, or in its later 1659 German translation.   76 Van Baerle, The History of Brazil under the Governorship of Count Johann Moritz of Nassau, 202.   77 Van der Veldt, ‘An Autograph Letter of John Maurits of Nassau’, 314.   78 Filipa Ribeiro da Silva, Dutch and Portuguese in Western Africa: Empires, Merchants and the Atlantic System, 1580–1674 (Leiden: Brill, 2011), 50.   79 6 February 1642, Ribeiro da Silva, Dutch and Portuguese in Western Africa, 33–4. See ‘Rapport de la commission formé par les XIX pour étudier le pro et le contre de la séparation de Loanda avec le Brésil’, L’ancien Congo et l’Angola, 1639–1655: d’après les archives, romaines, portugaises, néerlandaises et espagnoles, ed. Louis Jadin, 3 vols (Brussels/Rome: Institut Historique Belge de Rome, 1975), 1: 200–202, document 76.   80 Boxer, The Dutch in Brazil, 1624–1654, 115.   81 See Ernst van den Boogaart, ‘Brasilien hofieren – Johann Moritz’ politisches Projekt sichtbar gemacht’, in Sein Feld war die Welt: Johann Moritz von NassauSiegen (1604–1679): Von Siegen über die Niederlande und Brasilien nach Brandenburg, ed. Gerhard Brunn and Cornelius Neutsch (Münster: Waxmann, 2008), 73–92.   82 Van Baerle, The History of Brazil under the Governorship of Count Johann Moritz of Nassau, 313; on Jandui’s name see 335 n 39.   83 There exists a vast literature on Albert Eckhout. See, for example, Quentin Buvelot, ed., Albert Eckhout: A Dutch Artist in Brazil (The Hague: Royal Cabinet of Paintings Mauritshuis, 2004); Barbara Berlowicz, ed., Albert Eckhout Returns to Brazil 1644–2002 (Copenhagen: Nationalmuseet, 2002); Rebecca Parker Brienen, Visions of Savage Paradise: Albert Eckhout, Court Painter in Colonial Dutch Brazil (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2006). Earlier studies include Thomas Thomsen, Albert Eckhout. Ein niederländischer Maler und sein Gönner Moritz der Brasilianer. Ein Kulturbild aus dem 17. Jahrhundert (Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1938).   84 Peter Mark, ‘Portuguese’ Style and Luso-African Identity: Precolonial Senegambia, Sixteenth-Nineteenth Century (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2002), 67. See also Daniel de Souza Leão Vieira, ‘Topografia imaginárias: a paisagem politica do Brasil Holandés em Frans Post, 1637–1669’ (Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Leiden University, 2010); Pedro Corrêa do Logo and Bia Corrêa do Logo, eds, Frans Post (1612–1680): Catalogue Raisonné, rev. English edn (Milan: Five Continents Editions, 2007); Rebecca Parker Brienen, ‘Who Owns Frans Post? Collecting Frans Post’s Brazilian Landscapes’, in van Groesen, The Legacy of Dutch Brazil, 229–47.   85 Wolfgang Joost, ‘Nachwort’, in Die wundersamen Reisen des Caspar Schmalkalden nach West-und Ostindien 1642–1652, ed. Wolfgang Joost (Leipzig: Brockhaus Verlag, 1983), 161–76.   86 Rebecca Parker Brienen, ‘From Brazil to Europe: The Zoological Drawings of Albert Eckhout and George Marcgraf’, in Early Modern Zoology: The Construction of Animals in Science, Literature and the Visual Arts, ed. K. Enenkel and P. Smith (Leiden: Brill, 2007), 281; Rebecca Parker Brienen, ‘Georg Marcgraf (1610–c.1644): A German Cartographer, Astronomer and Naturalist-Illustrator in Colonial Dutch Brazil’, Itinerario 25, no. 1 (2001): 85–122. See also Rebecca Parker Brienen, ‘Albert Eckhout’s Paintings and the Vrijburg Palace in Dutch Brazil’, in Berlowicz, Albert Eckhout Returns to Brazil, 81–91.   87 Dresden, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Kupferstich-Kabinett, Ca. 226 a. M. (a) 7a, Thier Buch / darinnen / viel unterschiedener Arter der Fische vögel vierfüssigen Thiere Gewürm, Erd= und / Baumfrüchte, so hin undt wieder in

164  Claiming spaces

  88

  89

  90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99

Brasilischen bezirck, und gebiethe, Der Westindischen Com / pagnie zu schauwen undt anzutreffen ( . . . ) Alles selbst ( . . . ) bezeiget / In / Brasilien / Unter hochlöblicher Regierung des hochgebornen / Herren Johand Moritz Graffen von Nassau / Gubernator Capitain, und Admiral General / von / Zacharias Wagenern / von Dresden; Dresden, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, KupferstichKabinett, Ca. 226 b. M.(a) 7b, Kurtze Beschreibung / Der 35. Jährigen Reisen und Verrich= / tungen, welche Weyland / Herr / Zacharias Wagner / in Europa, Asia, Africa und America, / meistentheils zu Dienst der Ost= und West= / Indianischen Compagnie in Holland, / rühmlichst gethan und abgeleget, / gezogen aus des seelig= gehalte=nen eigenhändigen Journal. Zacharias Wagener, The ‘Thierbuch’ and ‘Autobiography’ of Zacharias Wagener, ed. Dante Martins Teixeira, trans. D. H. Treece and R. Trewinnard (Rio de Janeiro: Editora Index, 1997); Kees Zandvliet, The Dutch East India Company in the 17th century: Life and Work of Zacharias Wagenaer (1614–1668) (Nagasaki: Holland Village, 1987); Wolfgang Michel, ‘Zacharias Wagner und Japan (I) – Ein Auszug aus dem Journal des “Donnermanns”’, Studien zur deutschen und französischen Literatur 37 (1987): 53–102, available on the website of Kyushu University, Fukuoka: http://catalog.lib.kyushu-u.ac.jp/handle/2324/2907/28.pdf; Wolfgang Michel, ‘Hans Juriaen Hancke, Zacharias Wagener und Mukai Genshō: Aspekte einer “lehrreichen” Begegnung im 17. Jahrhundert’, Bulletin of the Graduate School of Social and Cultural Studies, Kyushu University 1 (1995): 109–11. Willem Piso, História natural e médica da India ocidental: em cinco livros (Rio de Janeiro: I.N.L., 1957); Daniel de Moulin, ‘Medizin und Naturwissenschaft in Brasilien zur Zeit der Verwaltung des Grafen Johann Moritz von NassauSiegen’, Medizinhistorisches Journal 11 (1976): 44–51; Francisco Guerra, ‘Medicine in Dutch Brazil, 1624–1654’, in Johann Moritz van Nassau-Siegen 1604–1679: A Humanist Prince in Europe and Brazil. Essays on the Occasion of the Tercentenary of his Death, ed. E. van den Boogaart, H. R. Hoetink and P. J. P. Whitehead (The Hague: The Johann Moritz van Nassau Stichting, 1979); Neil Safier, ‘Beyond Brazilian Nature: The Editorial Itineraries of Marcgraf and Piso’s Historia Naturalis Brasilae’, in van Groesen, The Legacy of Dutch Brazil, 168–88. This has been studied in great detail. See, for example, Leonardo Dantas Silva, ‘Images of Nassovian Brazil’, in Berlowicz, Albert Eckhout Returns to Brazil, 66–79; P. J. P. Whitehead and M. Boeseman, A Portrait of Dutch 17th Century Brazil: Animals, Plants and People by the Artists of Johann Moritz of Nassau (Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1989). Brienen, ‘From Brazil to Europe’, 281. See also Brienen ‘Albert Eckhout’s Paintings and the Vrijburg Palace in Dutch Brazil’. Van Baerle, The History of Brazil under the Governorship of Count Johann Moritz of Nassau, 42; see also Eveline Sint Nicolas, ‘Vrijburg, getekend en gesneden’, Bulletin van het Rijksmuseum 56, no. 1/2 (2008): 202–13. da Silva and Mota Alcides, ‘Collecting and Framing the Wilderness’, 155. Van Baerle, The History of Brazil under the Governorship of Count Johann Moritz of Nassau, 141. Van Baerle, The History of Brazil under the Governorship of Count Johann Moritz of Nassau, 142. Van Baerle, The History of Brazil under the Governorship of Count Johann Moritz of Nassau, 143. Calado, cited in Boxer, The Dutch in Brazil, 1624–1654, 115–16. Calado, cited in Boxer, The Dutch in Brazil, 1624–1654, 116. Calado, cited in Boxer, The Dutch in Brazil, 1624–1654, 116. Brienen, ‘From Brazil to Europe’, 281.

Trading places 165 100 Dresden, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Kupferstich-Kabinett, Ca. 226 a. M. (a) 7a, Thier Buch / darinnen / viel unterschiedener Arter der Fische vögel vierfüssigen Thiere Gewürm, Erd= und / Baumfrüchte, so hin undt wieder in Brasilischen bezirck, und gebiethe, Der Westindischen Com / pagnie zu schauwen undt anzutreffen ( . . . ) Alles selbst ( . . . ) bezeiget / In / Brasilien / Unter hochlöblicher Regierung des hochgebornen / Herren Johand Moritz Graffen von Nassau / Gubernator Capitain, und Admiral General / von / Zacharias Wagenern / von Dresden; Dresden, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Kupferstich-Kabinett Ca. 226 b. M.(a) 7b, Kurtze Beschreibung / Der 35. Jährigen Reisen und Verrich= / tungen, welche Weyland / Herr / Zacharias Wagner / in Europa, Asia, Africa und America, / meistentheils zu Dienst der Ost= und West= / Indianischen Compagnie in Holland, / rühmlichst gethan und abgeleget, / gezogen aus des seelig= gehalte=nen eigenhändigen Journal. 101 A small, furry animal. 102 Brienen, ‘From Brazil to Europe’, 285. 103 da Silva and Mota Alcides, ‘Collecting and Framing the Wilderness’. 104 Van Baerle, The History of Brazil under the Governorship of Count Johann Moritz of Nassau, 148. 105 Calado, cited in Boxer, The Dutch in Brazil, 1624–1654, 116. 106 Van Baerle, The History of Brazil under the Governorship of Count Johann Moritz of Nassau, 148. 107 Van Baerle, The History of Brazil under the Governorship of Count Johann Moritz of Nassau, 37. 108 16 January 1645, in Boxer, The Dutch in Brazil, 1624–1654, 261. 109 Van Baerle, The History of Brazil under the Governorship of Count Johann Moritz of Nassau, 1.

This Page is Intentionally Left Blank

Part 2

Materialising power

This Page is Intentionally Left Blank

4 Object Orange Material culture in the rise of the House of Orange-Nassau

In the first part of this book, we examined how members and affiliates of the House of Orange-Nassau claimed spaces in both Europe and abroad through their actions, their involvement with the trading companies, and their development of lavish architectural and horticultural complexes in territories that came under Orange-Nassau cultural or political influence. In Chapters 2 and 3 we examined the use of objects ranging from palaces and gardens to urban structures, new industries, and exotic plants insofar as they shaped space in ways that associated it with the innovative and global power of the House of Orange-Nassau. In Part 2, ‘Materialising power’, we turn to the material culture inside these exquisite palatial buildings and carefully organised landscapes, analysing how the employment, exchange, and display of objects, individually and in particular combinations within these spaces, made claims to Orange-Nassau identity and power. Here, we explore the production of material culture in Europe to support Orange-Nassau ambitions, and in the following chapter we examine how objects from overseas territories were made to exert power for the House as they were utilised in Europe. By the early seventeenth century, the Orange-Nassau family had become one of the most influential dynasties in northern Europe. However, in a political sense, their position did not rival that of other European rulers. The head of the dynasty was a prince, not a king, and the dynasty lacked clearly defined, recognised rule over the fledgling nation. The Bourbons and the Habsburgs held far more stable, secure and high-status political positions. Having acquired such security, dynastic promotion for them was less foregrounded in their cultural patronage than were the names of individuals such as Louis XIV or Charles II. By contrast, for the Orange-Nassau there was an explicit attempt to promote the dynastic name, and they became expert players in a cultural politics that used the exchange and display of objects in palaces, gardens, galleries, or menageries to generate status and power for themselves on a par with other European figureheads. Moreover, dynastic rulers such as the Bourbons and the Habsburgs were Catholic and invested in artistic works for the Church, which dissipated the directed focus on building the family name that was evident in the cultural strategies of Protestant Dutch rulers and English monarchs. The House of

170  Materialising power Orange-Nassau successfully used a wide range of objects, large and small, to represent their dynasty in a variety of ways and to create or strengthen their power networks. These objects included artworks (especially portraits) that were commissioned, distributed, copied, and passed on.1 Gardens, the architectural design of palaces, coins, porcelain and delftware, tiles, glassware and fireguards were all other forms through which the visibility of the dynasty – especially its orange tree motif – was projected for international audiences. Important to this dynastic material strategy was a network of artists, garden designers, and architects, including Pieter Nason, Daniel Mijtens the Younger, Gerrit van Honthorst, Adriaen Hanneman, and Antoine Pesne, who worked among Orange-Nassau family members, transmitting a consistent Orange-Nassau style far and wide. This strategy saw focused attention on gaining power for the House through cultural forms that carried high political significance. This cultural capital, as elaborated by Pierre Bourdieu, saw power increase through the accumulation of culture as capital, similar to financial capital.2 The Nassau used a form of cultural power, which we understand as ‘the ability to shape the preferences of others’ that rests ‘on the power of attraction’.3 The model of this power explains not only why cultural capital increases status and influence, but also why others try to imitate those who are successful. With the establishment of their own representational court, Frederik Hendrik and Amalia created a powerful space in which to promote the cultural capital of the Orange-Nassau.4 They embarked upon a programme of strategic and costly self-representation in palaces, collections, and courtly culture.5 As we explore in this chapter, the shared cultural repertoire of material forms, display techniques, and exchange practice that this created was internalised, projected, and adapted by subsequent generations to their own needs and local contexts.

Visualising networks As we have seen in previous chapters, artworks, especially portraits, were commissioned, then regularly distributed, copied, and passed on within House of Orange-Nassau networks.6 Michael Auwers has suggested that [g]ift-giving in early modern Europe indeed involved a transfer of identities: it exteriorised a ‘tie between souls’ and bore the identity of the exclusive relationship between recipient and giver. As such, gifts also conferred honour, providing tangible evidence of one’s status and legitimising one’s membership of a social community.7 The transfer of gifts, moreover, meant a transfer of honour and the creation of obligations.8 These obligations, or ‘friendships’, as Luuc Kooijmans has pointed out, could result in dependencies on the part of those who were not able to return the gift in an appropriate social manner.9 In this way, objects create, reflect, and sustain power relations. Scholars have pointed to the

Object Orange 171 importance of patronage relationships and the negotiation of relationships of trust, friendship, and loyalty in the early modern Republic.10 Portraits of family relatives had the additional affective dimension of symbolising the presence of those they depicted. Portraits were regularly commissioned to be copied so that distribution to several networks was possible.11 In 1634, after her marriage to James Stanley (1607–51), later Earl of Derby, Charlotte de la Trémoille (see Figure 4.40 below), daughter of Charlotte Brabantina van Nassau, had, for example, written to her cousin and sister-in-law Marie de La Tour d’Auvergne, daughter of Elisabeth van Nassau, asking for her portrait and those of her children: I have great displeasure to not have your portrait nor those of your children, which would be very agreeable in some form that pleases you, and I wait for them with impatience, but I beg you, dear sister, that the painter forgets nothing, for, in London, where I hope to show them, there are excellent painters.12 Portraits were thus gifts that were spoken of in highly emotive terms; likeness was a much discussed quality in family portraits. In 1637, Charlotte wrote to Marie, noting: ‘I have received the portraits of your children and I find them extremely handsome, especially the eldest. I do not think the little count of Laval is as great a likeness as his brother, the painting not being as good.’13 Through these images, family members traced resemblances to their forebears, making mental and emotional connections in such ways. Resemblance tied family together and was mentioned explicitly; thus, portraits that could convey these qualities were useful and important.14 The Orange princesses – Louise Henriëtte, Albertine Agnes, Henriëtte Catharina, and Maria – all prominently displayed portraits of their parents, their sisters with respective children and husbands, and their brother Willem II prominently in their palaces.15 Many of these portraits had been given already to each other as gifts during their lifetimes, but their wills demonstrated particularly well that the distribution of the family portraits in their possession was carefully planned. At Oranienburg, artworks were carefully selected and mounted to signal Louise Henriëtte’s Orange-Nassau family relationships. She thus instructed her first minister in Brandenburg, Otto von Schwerin, on the placement of portraits: ‘For the gallery, [. . .] near to my sister Marie, I expect the portrait of my nephew. If you could have my two children painted, there is still room at both ends where they would go well.’16 When Albertine Agnes died in 1696, all of her children had already passed away, and so her collection of paintings was divided between her son-in-law Johann Wilhelm III von Sachsen-Eisenach (1666–1729), her daughter in-law Henriette Amalie von Anhalt-Dessau (1666–1726), and her only surviving sister, Henriëtte Catharina. Most of the paintings intended for her sister came from Albertine Agnes’s palace at Oranjewoud and included, as the most valuable painting, ‘a large portrait of Willem II of Orange’, as well as a portrait

172  Materialising power of Amalia von Solms-Braunfels by Michiel Jansz. van Mierevelt, portraits of sisters Maria and Louise Henriëtte, a double portrait of Albertine Agnes and Henriëtte Catharina17 and another depicting Albertine Agnes, Henriëtte Catharina, and Maria together. Portraits of Albertine Agnes’s children, such as Amalia van Nassau-Dietz (1655–95), her grandchildren, including Albertine Johannetta von Sachsen-Eisenach (1693–1700) (Amalia’s daughter), and her nephews and nieces (for example, Johanna Charlotte [1682–1750], the youngest daughter of Henriëtte Catharina), form another important group of family portraits that Albertine Agnes wanted her sister to have.18 Such images held both affective and representational power for the Orange-Nassau. The sisters commissioned artists such as Jan Mijtens to paint portraits of each other, often as monumental group portraits, in addition to individual and family portraits. These practices continued long after the sisters married and had moved away from The Hague.19 Henriëtte Catharina and her sister Maria then also employed other painters, such as Jean Gericot and Jan de Baen, who were less expensive to employ, to reproduce Mijtens’s painting for wider distribution.20 In 1665, the fifteen-year-old Willem III even commissioned Mijtens to paint a portrait of him without informing his grandmother, Amalia, of his activities. Amalia promptly informed the painter that he must seek her permission for portraits of the prince in the future.21 Willem, as shown in Chapter 1, took to heart the traditions of portraiture to convey his developing measure of political power, in visual form, in portraits commissioned from Jan de Baen and Caspar Netscher. He sent these as gifts to senior male relatives – both reinforcing their familial alliance and impressing upon them his growing capacity for leadership. As an affectionate gesture that recalled their dynastic roots and the flourishing Orange-Nassau courtly culture, Louise Henriëtte and Henriëtte Catharina took small garden statues from their parents’ Ter Nieuburch palace gardens in the Netherlands to their own gardens in Oranienburg and Oranienbaum.22 These statues mirrored antique sculptures of Roman gods, goddesses, and emperors – a theme that was persistently alluded to in the gardens of Frederik Hendrik and of Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen, and also in Oranienbaum. Bartholomeus Eggers (c. 1637–92) was commissioned to produce twelve marble busts of Roman emperors for the grounds of Oranienburg in 1674. The models that Eggers made were later sold to a metal caster who made lead versions of them.23 Johann Moritz himself believed the Nassau family to be descendants of the Roman emperors.24 Moreover, the renovation of the Berlin palace of Friedrich Wilhelm and Louise Henriëtte ensured that a specific Orange-Nassau influence was visually present.25 Louise Henriëtte commissioned François Dieussart (c. 1600–61) to make a statue of her husband for the Lustgarten, while other Dutch artists such as Artus Quellinus (1609–68) and Eggers came to Berlin to complete high profile work for the couple.26 In 1652, the elector secured eight portrait busts by Dieussart, made around 1647, from the collection of Johann Moritz. These busts included self-portraits of the electoral couple, as well as Louise Henriëtte’s mother and father, Amalia

Object Orange 173 and Frederik Hendrik, Louise Henriëtte’s brother Willem II, his wife Mary Henrietta Stuart, and her uncles Filips Willem and Maurits.27 Louise Henriëtte discussed sculptures in her correspondence with Schwerin, economising by selling the models of statues she had commissioned, as would later occur with the 1674 Eggers’ commission.28 The princesses also had marble busts of their father Frederik Hendrik and their brother Willem II installed in the garden and grotto sections of their estates. The Orange memorial culture of these women was thus located not only in their commissioned paintings and palaces, but also in their gardens, and especially in grottos. The grotto, an independent building located in the garden, became a particularly female space of socialisation in bereavement and an important place for displaying porcelain and other imported luxuries. The grotto in Oranienbaum was created as a place of remembrance by the widowed Henriëtte Catharina while she was regent. It commemorated her husband, Johann Georg II von Anhalt-Dessau, but it also prominently displayed and commemorated OrangeNassau links by featuring busts of Frederik Hendrik and her brother Willem II, as well as a ceiling painting depicting her father and brother. A contemporary eye-witness recorded: On the left-hand side there is a precious grotto with black and white marble, also decorated with pillars and other things. There are also precious half-sized portraits, one of His Highness her father Prince Frederik Hendrik, one of her husband, and one of her brother Prince Willem. There is a fine prospect from the window to the orange garden in which these trees are displayed during summer.29 Recent restorations at Oranienbaum have revealed that a bust of Frederik Hendrik was originally located at the entry to the subterranean kitchen, reinforcing the commemorative nature of this room.30 Henriëtte Catharina, moreover, enacted an active remembrance policy, stipulating in her will that most of the objects were to remain in the grotto after her death. This remembrance was continued by Henriëtte Catharina’s great-grandson Leopold III von Anhalt-Dessau (1740–1817), who, when the grotto was demolished in 1795, rescued the busts and timber ceiling that depicted Orange-Nassau family members, and transferred it to his Gothic House on the Wörlitz estate. The model for these remembrance grottos was likely Amalia’s Oranjezaal, constructed in her widowhood and intent upon visualising the glories of Frederik Hendrik and the House of which he was part. While Frederik Hendrik was clearly the main subject of the composition, his (male) ancestors were by no means ignored. In a letter from one of the artists involved, Jacob Jordaens (1593–1678), to Constantijn Huygens in 1651, Jordaens outlined the programme. Frederik Hendrik, ‘like a Caesar or Alexander’, was to be placed in the company of the gods of antiquity with ‘on the one side, Neptune with his trident, as the admiral of the sea, who accompanies His Highness in his honour, and on the other, Mars who lies down his helmet and his sword at

174  Materialising power the feet of His Highness’.31 It visualised for posterity the House’s alliances, particularly with the House of Brandenburg. Frederik Hendrik’s forebears, his half-brother Maurits and father Willem, were raised on pedestals as bronzed figures, past which Frederik Hendrik was riding.32 Nor was the future of the dynasty ignored in such work. Willem II was to be shown suited as an army general on a rearing horse, ready to meet the challenges of the next generation (although Willem had already died by this point).33 In the same way, Henriëtte Catharina and Louise Henriëtte included their direct male ancestors and also visibly promoted their brother, Willem II. Gift exchanges of artworks did not simply extend to family images. A far broader array of precious art was transmitted across the networks of the House as gifts, and as they were willed to relatives. In 1696, Henriëtte Catharina wrote to her nephew, Willem III, indicating that she was distributing items according to the direction of her sister Albertine Agnes’s will. This included, for Willem: a crystal vase and two tableaux, one by Van Dyck, which represents charity, and the other of a virgin which is also by a very good master; I hope, Sire, that Your Majesty will happily receive these small testaments of her profound respect, and if I might dare to add of the perfect tenderness that she always held for the person of Your Majesty. Do not regard this gift then, please, Sire, by its value but as the best intentions of my very dear sister and as the last sign of a good heart that these are given to you.34 The Van Dyck painting had once been listed among the possessions of Albertine Agnes’s mother, Amalia, which indicates how it moved across Europe, through the circle of individuals connected by blood to the House. When diarist John Evelyn (1620–1706) visited the king’s apartments at Kensington in 1696, he was impressed by the ‘gallery furnished with the best pictures [from] all the houses, of Titian, Raphael, Correggio, Holbein, Julio Romano, Bassan, Vandyke, Tintoretto, and others’.35 Significantly, just a few days later, Henriëtte Catharina followed up with a second letter to Willem, this time asking whether he would pay Albertine Agnes’s outstanding debts, and in doing so demonstrating how gifts entailed obligations.36 Both women and men were engaged in the commissioning and gift-giving of Orange-Nassau images across their networks and over generations. These practices fostered connections to those more senior in the House hierarchy, announcing changes in status and demands for consideration, obliging more powerful relatives to assistance if and when required, and signalling in an explicit way the alliances that bound them together. However, gift-giving of such images could also operate across the network in a way that emphasised personal ties and feelings between particular individuals, as well as expectations and obligations. Moreover, the varied forms of these materialised and visualised links, in paintings and sculpture, provided a range of display environments, both in and out of doors, in which to emphasise Orange-Nassau

Object Orange 175 networks. And both media allowed for copies of casts and images to be produced by a range of artists in the network, a practice that extended the political value of the image yet further, and permitted individuals with less funds at their disposal – often women – to participate.

Brand Orange Orange branding was manifested in a diverse range of material forms, from high-level diplomatic gifts of orange marmalade and candied fruits, to the establishment of distilleries for orange liqueurs and the distillation of orange blossoms, all of which were discussed by the Orange-Nassau princesses, who opened up new territories to Orange influence through their marriages. Even in those territories in which the Protestant dynasty did not dominate the political environment, family members built orangeries and cultivated sweet orange varieties in palace gardens in England and France. Orange trees were widely used in the gardens as one of the elements of the House’s promotion, but they were perhaps more prominently displayed to a wider public as symbols. This form of Orange branding was regularly represented in paintings, and on medals, glassware, ceramics, coins, and fire screens in the palaces.37 In full bloom, in fruit, pollarded, or with fresh shoots, each version of the orange tree reflected different phases of the House’s identity, political context, and status, but all encapsulated the resilience of this branch of the Nassau dynasty. They visualised its triumph in overcoming the tragedy of Willem I’s assassination in 1584, and the hope that was embedded in the new shoots and fruit-bearing branches of his surviving children and descendants as they flourished in the Republic, pollinated across northern Europe’s leading Protestant families, and grafted on to new political and social environments as monarchs, princesses, or converts. Suggesting the success of this inculcation of symbols, ten-year-old Willem III scrawled the orange tree motif on a letter to his uncle Charles II in 1660, and had doodled the Nassau motto on his copy of a text on military fortifications.38 However, it was by no means only the House’s leading men and women who promoted this visual repertoire; their grandchildren and great-grandchildren also seized upon the symbols of their ancestry, making them meaningful to their own identities and political status, as this chapter explores. Orange tree motifs were reproduced in a wide range of material and visual forms. For example, in the inventory of Maria van Nassau’s belongings made after her death in 1619 was a ‘gilded wooden bedstead with a damask bedspread embroidered with oranges, above it the crest of my merciful lady the countess of Hohenlohe, estimated at 60 gilders’.39 The symbolism of joining the Orange and Hohenlohe motifs on a bedstead perhaps represented the hopes for future progeny who would join these Houses, but in Maria’s case, this was not to be fulfilled. Orange symbolism was often linked directly to the individuals who carried these dynastic hopes in visual forms. Orange-Nassau princesses and their children were often painted holding oranges or orange blossoms in their hands. In 1653, Pieter Hermansz. Verlest (c. 1618–c. 1678) portrayed Amalia’s

176  Materialising power

Figure 4.1 Pieter Hermansz Verlest, Lady with an Orange, c. 1653, oil on canvas, 207cm × 117cm. Stiftung Preußischer Schlösser und Gärten BerlinBrandenburg, GKI 3745.

daughter Louise Henriëtte holding an orange in her hand (Figure 4.1).40 Her sister Henriëtte Catharina was depicted around 1665 by an unidentified painter holding an orange branch with two oranges on it, while in the background there are flower urns holding fruit-bearing orange trees.41 Caspar Netscher’s portrait of Albertine Agnes and Henriëtte Catharina depicts one in an exquisitely embroidered orange dress while the other wears a luxurious orange sash and holds an orange in her hand.42 Netscher’s c. 1675 portrait of another sister Albertine Agnes shows her seated with an orange in her hand and an orange tree

Object Orange 177

Figure 4.2 Pieter Tanjé, Portrait of Prince Willem V and Princess Carolina of Orange-Nassau as Children, 1751, engraving, 369mm × 236mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, RP-P-OB-65.130.

in the background behind her. Another painting from around 1672–3, attributed to the workshop of Caspar Netscher, depicts Albertine Agnes, this time with her small children, Amalia and Hendrik Casimir II, holding an orange in her left hand. Behind her, a small orange tree can be seen in an urn.43 Of course, in times of crisis for the House, the visibility of the branch’s children coupled with these symbols, as demonstrations of the House’s vitality, was crucial. Van Dyck’s 1631 portrait of Willem II, now in Oranienbaum,

178  Materialising power

Figure 4.3 Jan Mijtens, Albertine Agnes of Orange, Duchess of Nassau-Dietz, c. 1660, oil on canvas, 103.5cm × 80cm. Siegen, Verein der Freunde und Förderer des Siegerlandmuseums.

wearing an orange, early childhood long dress had him standing in front of an orange tree. Adriaen Hanneman depicted the young Willem III in orangeyellow finery in 1654, standing against an orange tree with an orange in his right hand (see Figure 1.29).44 These were dynastic symbols with powerful meaning and lasting value to the House. When the future of the House lay in the hands of female regents, prints of Willem V as a three-year-old and his older sister, Carolina, illustrated the princess holding a sprig of the orange tree while the young prince wears a helmet that reflected the martial heritage and expectations of Orange-Nassau men (Figure 4.2). Such family portraits, especially of children, and the extensive copying of them so that they were available widely across the dynastic network and to audiences beyond, conveyed positive messages about the stability, and the expectations of mutual support between the intergenerational and horizontal network, of the House.

Object Orange 179 Orange flowers, and flowering orange branches, were another common device of visual branding for the dynasty. The orange tree, which could blossom and bear fruit at the same time, had already been employed as a symbol of fertility in the branding of the House to advertise the genealogical continuity of the family. Willem I had incorporated the orange into his heraldic device in 1550.45 The flowering orange branch was an equally suitable branding device, almost exclusively used in the depiction of Orange women and children. Amalia, painted by Van Dyck around 1631–2, is shown with orange blossoms in her right hand.46 Jan Mijtens’s depictions of Albertine Agnes and of her sister Maria each show the princesses in orange dresses, depicted as Diana (Figures 4.3 and 4.4).47 The House’s favoured painters, Mijtens, Netscher, and Abraham van der Tempel (1622–72), who worked for Amalia and her daughters, also used the motif of the flowering orange branch. Mijten’s 1666

Figure 4.4 Jan Mijtens, Maria van Nassau, Duchess of Pfalz-Simmern, n.d., oil on canvas, 103.5cm × 80cm. Siegen, Verein der Freunde und Förderer des Siegerlandmuseums.

180  Materialising power

Figure 4.5 Abraham van den Tempel, Albertine Agnes with her Children, 1668, oil on canvas, 141cm × 192cm, Leeuwarden, Fries Museum, on loan from Rijksdienst voor het cultureel erfgoed, Inv. 1948–47.

painting of Maria as a bride was presented in a wooden frame carved with orange flowers, orange fruit and the monogram ‘M.P.V.O.’ (Maria Princes von Oranje).48 Copies of this picture were sent to a number of the courts of her Orange-Nassau family members.49 Likewise, in 1668, van den Tempel painted Albertine Agnes with her children, with daughter Amalia holding a flowering orange branch (Figure 4.5).50 In this way, Orange branding was passed between individuals across the dynasty, not just by copying practices, but also through the circulation of talented cultural producers who carried what became an Orange-Nassau style in art, architecture, and garden design. Orange blossoms and fruit were also viable symbols for other women and children who were brought into the House’s networks, and they visualised connections to ever widening circles of the family’s influence. Netscher, for example, depicted Mary II Stuart in 1676 in a bright orange dress, next to a terracotta pot with orange flowers and an exotic parrot (see Figure 5.28). The following year, at the time of her marriage, Adriaen de Hennin (d. 1710) showed Mary pointing to orange blossoms in a large pot.51 The daughters of Frederik Hendrik and Amalia commissioned images to portray their growing families, branding these with their dynastic heritage via symbols of the flowering orange branch and its fruit. When at last Henriëtte Catharina’s son Leopold I (1676–1747) was born, he was soon added to a family portrait in

Object Orange 181 which Henriëtte Catharina is shown in an orange dress holding a flowering orange branch, surrounded by her children, with baby Leopold clad in an orange sash and holding an orange in his right hand.52 Even Wilhelm Heinrich von Brandenburg (1648–9), the son of Henriëtte Catharina’s sister Louise Henriëtte, who had died young, was visually integrated into wider House of Orange networks in a painting by Govert Flinck which showed the dead child and his Orange family with angels carrying a heraldic sign framed by orange branches.53 In the next generation, Hendrik Casimir II van Nassau-Dietz (1657–96) and his wife Henriette Amalie von Anhalt-Dessau (the children of Albertine Agnes and Henriëtte Catharina respectively) had their family painted by Constantijn Netscher (1668–1723) in 1691, with the youngest child seated on Henriette Amalie’s lap holding orange flowers and two oranges in the right-hand corner of the foreground.54 Buildings too could be sites of Orange display in these explicit forms. At Henriëtte Catharina’s palace of Oranienbaum, the painted window shutters were decorated with the orange tree. Early modern visitors recognised the meaning of the orange branches on the ground floor window shutters, as the architect Christoph Pitzler, who visited Oranienbaum in 1695, recorded: ‘internal window shutters, the ones in the lowest row are painted with “A” which stands for “Anhalt”, and with branches of oranges which stands for “Orange”.’55 The fireguards displayed the orange tree (Figure 4.6). At

Figure 4.6 Cast-iron fireplace plate in the Large Hall, Schloss Oranienbaum (with coat of arms of the Orange-Nassau dynasty and Anhalt, and an orange tree). Kulturstiftung Dessau Wörlitz. Photograph: Heinz Fräßdorf.

182  Materialising power Hampton Court, where obvious symbols of the House of Orange were generally substituted for impressive displays of other forms of cultural capital, there were nonetheless some examples of the conventional orange tree decorations. In the King’s Little Bedchamber ceiling painting, a site of limited access for such display, painted urns in the coving alternate the rose of the Stuarts with the fruiting orange tree of the House of Orange-Nassau. The political meaning of the colour to the House has been widely documented and was certainly understood by its leading men. For example, the Orange sash of Dutch military service intimately linked the House to a range of leaders, male relatives, and retainers in the Republic and across generations of men. Willem wrote to his father Willem V from Nijmegen, in June 1787, in the midst of the House’s most dire political struggles: ‘tomorrow morning the garrison as well as the bourgeoisie will wear the Orange cockade, at least all the officers have their cockade in their pocket and we work all night to colour ribbons white and orange.’ Nor were these simply associations made by Dutch military personnel, as Willem’s letter made clear. He continued: ‘a tailor and a wigmaker [. . .] went out this afternoon with an enormous cardboard W surrounded by orange ribbons on their hats.’56 Certainly, those hostile to the family understood these associations, with the Patriots determining that as orange was ‘the color of sedition’, pennants, banners, even carrots and the liberal use of saffron were considered to be provocative political statements.57 Friedrich II von Preußen also used the colour orange in the Order that he established for Prussia: the Order of the Black Eagle. In employing this colour, Friedrich, the eldest son of Louise Henriëtte, who established the order the day before he became king of Prussia in 1701, was making a direct political play for consideration in the contentious succession crisis that ensued after the death of Willem III without a direct heir. Both Friedrich and Johann Willem Friso von Nassau-Dietz insisted on claims to the title ‘Prince of Orange’. The insignia of the order included a badge that was to be worn from an orange ribbon. The striking sketch for a planned ceiling painting, glorifying Friedrich as Prince of Orange, by Samuel Theodor Gericke (1665–1730), took orange references to an extreme, with orange trees, flowers, fruit, and the crest featuring in his portrait (Figure 4.7). By the Treaty of Partition in 1732, Friedrich Wilhelm I von Preußen (1688–1740) and Willem IV, agreed to share the title. Orange tree symbolism was clearly used in ways that were distinct to men and women in the family. Women and girls were widely linked to the reproductive aspects of the tree – in fruit and flowering forms, while men were more commonly linked to the colour orange on military clothing such as sashes, plumed helmets, and insignia, or depicted with orange trees in their surrounds. These differentiated forms emphasised the kinds of activities and contributions that women and men could best undertake for the House: the guarantee of longevity, through children, for women, and the ideal of military service for its men.

Object Orange 183

Figure 4.7 Samuel Theodor Gericke, Glorifying Friedrich I as Prince of Orange (sketch for a ceiling painting), 1713, oil on canvas, 67.3cm × 86.2cm. Schloss Charlottenburg, Stiftung Preußische Schlösser und Gärten Berlin-Brandenburg, GKI 9009. Property of the House of Hohenzollern, HRH Georg Friedrich Prince of Prussia.

Accumulating Orange style Louise de Coligny, the wife of Willem I, had sponsored relatively small-scale investments in architecture, art, and luxury material objects.58 As a patron, her son Frederik Hendrik echoed the commissions of his elder brothers in architecture but also developed a broader portfolio of interests in the arts.59 Indeed, such interests were evident in Frederik Hendrik’s early collecting of artworks and tapestries before he became Prince of Orange.60 Rebecca Tucker argues that the broad range of subject matter, including religious and biblical themes, and his strong support for local artists from the Low Countries, may reflect elements of his political position for a united and tolerant Netherlands that could compete in the arts on the European stage.61 His wife, Amalia, and his secretary, Constantijn Huygens were persuasive influences on his collecting practices. The latter proved a vital mediator between Frederik Hendrik and the artistic community. He was a strong cultural interlocutor in his own right, and one whose personal interests as a conduit to the prince, and as a collector and patron stood to benefit from interactions in both directions.62

184  Materialising power

Figure 4.8 Willem de Rots, Cabinet of Amalia von Solms, c. 1652–7, oak (wood), 65cm × 104cm × 40cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, BK-2005-19.

The extensive inventory made after Amalia’s death in 1675 highlighted the range of luxury materials and furnishings in her collection, including precious stones and metals, amber, crystal, agatework, jasper, ebony, gold and silverwork, Asian porcelain and locally produced ceramics, paintings, and costly and imported Indian and Asian fabrics.63 The princely couple owned a wide range of ebony cabinets and boxes veneered in various exotic woods, and even tortoiseshell, with gilt fittings.64 An oak cabinet, veneered, with marquetry of tortoiseshell and ivory, which was commissioned by Amalia for Noordeinde from Willem de Rots (c. 1616–), showed how Orange symbolism could be

Object Orange 185 transmitted across this material form (Figure 4.8). As Reinier Baarsen demonstrates, the cabinet’s doors displayed a heart made of orange branches. In addition, it was accompanied by a political poem composed by Jan Zoet (1609–74), which marked the struggles that beset the House but also gave an optimistic outlook for the future, for the heart decoration reflected, according to Zoet, ‘Orange, rich in offspring’, ‘the heart of the fatherland’.65 The emblematic interior carried these messages further, combining the couple’s monogram and knotted ropes, indicative of Amalia’s widowhood.66 Baarsen suggests that Zoet’s poem, published in 1675 in his collected works, might have been printed as a broadsheet for Amalia. The object, which would be seen by very few, could be made far more widely available through its textual companion, which unlocked its exquisitely fashioned hidden political messages. Moreover, the cabinet’s maker, de Rots, was later employed by Amalia’s daughter, Maria, reflecting the House’s practice of employing the same artists and designers in a manner that would extend a singular OrangeNassau style far and wide across Europe.67 Both de Rots and his heir, Jacobus Wiltens, were part of a long line of Dutch artists, architects, and furnituremakers who supplied the Orange princesses with innovative design work for their new homes. In attending to the interior design of their palaces in Germany, the Orange princesses did not neglect opportunities to signal their House of origin. Louise Henriëtte made sure that the material aspects of the Oranienbaum’s furnishings reflected her dynastic claims. Fireguards displayed her heraldic symbols.68 Henriëtte Catharina spared little cost or effort to signal to her visitors at Oranienbaum the superiority of the Orange family. Pitzler noted that the interiors of the palace were well-appointed: ‘the house is only two levels high, well-furnished and with wallpapers.’69 These wallpapers were gold-printed leather, decorated with motifs that signalled Henriëtte Catharina’s aspirations: an orange tree surrounded by exotic animals, fruit, and flowers in spectacular colours (see Figure 5.2). In 1661 she ordered leather wall­paper for her palace in Dessau from The Hague, and the inventory from 1665 indicates that at least sixteen rooms were decorated with these luxurious imports. In 1669 a new order for these wall hangings was dispatched to Amsterdam. Similarly, her sister Louise Henriëtte had the rooms, including the porcelain cabinet, at her palace in Oranienburg decorated with gilded leather wall hangings. Both women continued here a tradition of their natal family, for in Frederik Hendrik and Amalia’s palace of Honselaarsdijk more than thirty-one rooms were decorated with leather wallpapers.70 As well as utilising explicit OrangeNassau symbols, the princesses continued to assert the pre-eminence of their natal roots in the United Provinces by using Dutch craftsmen and products. The subterranean tiled summer kitchens of the Orange princesses were likewise impressive in their display of Dutch style and dynastic wealth. Pitzler noted spacious rooms ‘with Dutch stones [tiles?]’ and an exclusive room ‘with porcelain [. . .] only for the Duchess’.71 These elaborately tiled

186  Materialising power halls were a trademark of the Orange-Nassau princesses, and were also to be found at Het Loo, Hampton Court, Oranienburg and Oranienstein.72 They were typically located on the side of the palace with a garden belonging to the princess, and could also be used for the display of flowers, especially exotics established in Europe from Dutch colonial enterprise. Delft tiles decorated these summerhouses from floor to ceiling. Such tiles were popular in rich Dutch households but, because they were expensive, only a few of the socalled ‘Biblical tiles’ were ever used in upper-class Dutch displays. In contrast, Henriëtte Catharina’s Oranienbaum was decorated with an enormous number of Delft tiles, about 5,000 white and 2,500 painted ones. The most common tiles here – with biblical motifs – were among the most expensive in the Netherlands. There were several thousand tiles with biblical motifs, as well as depictions of five Roman gods: Apollo, Mercury, Mars, Luna, and Venus. These echo the theme of Roman sculptures in the garden of Frederik Hendrik at Honselaarsdijk, and also the use of classical allegories in the decoration of the Oranjezaal at Huis ten Bosch.73 Among the most prominent, multi-talented artists working for the Orange-Nassau dynasty was the Huguenot emigré Daniël Marot. Marot, the nephew of a famous Dutch ébéniste, Pierre Gole (c. 1620–84), had been working for the French court but fled France around 1684, carrying north much of what he had seen in France. He first designed interiors at Slot Zeist for Willem Adriaan, count of Nassau-Odijk. From there, Marot began work for his cousin, Willem III, at Het Loo where he became chief architect.74 In the redecoration of Hampton Court, Mary created a private outbuilding, similar to the summer kitchens of other Orange princesses, known as the ‘dairy’ within the Water Gallery. It was re-tiled in Delftware that had been created to Daniël Marot’s designs by the famous Dutch Grieksche A factory. These tiles referenced Orange-Nassau individuals explicitly. In these examples, Willem III was depicted as a Roman emperor surrounded by birds and abundant baskets of flowers, and the crowned monograph ‘W. R.’ (William Rex) is shown in the standard hanging from the trumpet (Figures 4.9 and 4.10). Here Mary kept a range of blue and white innovative Grieksche A vases and milk pans, again designed by Marot (Figures 4.11).75 He was also known to have been involved with the design of the parterre at Hampton Court.76 His work was not confined solely to Willem and Mary, however, but was spread across the Orange-Nassau network. For example, a carved table, with gilded inlay displaying the initials of Henriette Amalie von Anhalt-Dessau, which is listed in her 1726 inventory at Oranienstein, was attributed to Marot.77 He also designed the porcelain cabinet shelving for Henriëtte Catharina at Oranienbaum and, more broadly, worked for the States General, decorating rooms at the Binnenhof in The Hague.78 Marot’s technique was to couple coordinated furnishings in a single space, designing the necessary items in his distinctive manner. John Evelyn’s diary

Object Orange 187

Figure 4.9 De Grieksche A, Adrianus Kocx, Two Plaques from a Column, c. 1690, tile, 125.3cm × 63.4cm × 5.2cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, BK-KOG-1681.

recorded the impression that this visual and material demonstration of the accumulation of wealth made on the minds of visitors. He admired especially a large cabinet, looking-glass frame and stands, all of amber, much of it white, with historical bas-reliefs and statues, with medals carved in them, esteemed worth £4,000, sent by the Duke of Brandenburgh, whose country, Prussia, abounds with amber, cast up by the sea; divers other China and Indian cabinets, screens, and hangings. In her library were many books in English, French, and Dutch, of all sorts; a cupboard of gold plate; a cabinet of silver filagree, which I think was our Queen Mary’s.79

188  Materialising power

Figure 4.10 De Grieksche A, Adrianus Kocx, Two Plaques from a Column, c. 1690, tile, 125.3cm × 63.4cm × 5.2cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, BK-KOG-2567.

A yellow and crimson silk damask was woven by the mercer John Johnson in 1700, for coordinated use across hangings, window curtains, and stools in Willem’s rooms at Hampton Court. Individually, each item of furnishing was crafted with careful attention to its political meanings – as this damask fabric demonstrates – featuring symbols of Willem’s personal achievements and war trophies, together with his political claims in both the Netherlands and British Isles: a royal crown, the Nassau motto, and the English royal motto.80 Coupled with the prolific volume and range of work that Marot produced for the Orange-Nassau, as well as their affiliates, was the production of a vast range of printed works that disseminated his style and, by extension, the aesthetic innovations enjoyed by his patrons.81 Marot produced a detailed series of images displaying intricate vases that he had designed for Het Loo in 1703, which the landscaper and publisher François Vivares later had anonymously

Object Orange 189

Figure 4.11 De Grieksche A, Adrianus Kocx, Vase designed after Daniël Marot the Elder, c. 1690, Delftware, 72.4cm. New York, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Acc. 1994.218a–c. Purchase, Bequest of Helen Hay Whitney and Gift of George D. Widener, by exchange, 1994. www. metmuseum.org.

engraved for his own profit (see Figure 2.16).82 Significantly, Marot’s father, Jean I, was an architect and engraver. Through him, Daniël must have been well aware of the power of print to disseminate his ideas and his highprofile patronage far and wide.83 In this textual practice, he was accompanied by

Figure 4.12 Daniël Marot, Ball in the Huis ten Bosch in Honour of the Birthday of the Prince of Orange, 1686, c. 1686–7, etching, 810mm × 560mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, RP-P-AO-12-157.

Object Orange 191

Figure 4.13 Romein de Hooghe and Pieter Persoy, Queen Mary II Stuart on her Deathbed, 1695, 1695, etching, 470mm × 591mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, RP-P-OB-67.728.

court artist Romeyn de Hooghe (1645–1708), the official chronicler of a series of important social events from baptisms to funerals, who included detailed depictions of the furnishings and interiors that were otherwise inaccessible to all but the most exclusive elite. An engraving by Marot, just a few years after he had entered the patronage of the House, depicts a ball hosted by Mary at Huis ten Bosch for her husband’s birthday in 1686 (Figure 4.12). De Hooghe and Pieter Persoy (1668–1702) also captured the tragic sorrow, as well as the luxurious interior furnishings, at Mary’s deathbed in 1695, with Willem visibly weeping to the left of the scene (Figure 4.13). Through these documentary forms, designed for different purposes, Orange-Nassau style became visible.84 Finally, products that were exclusively produced in the United Provinces were also used to fill the Orange-Nassau palaces in both the Netherlands and elsewhere. The distinctive blue and white ceramics known as Delftware were favoured by Henriëtte Catharina at Oranienbaum, as seen above, and by Mary II Stuart in a range of palaces such as Het Loo and Hampton Court. Likewise, the 1695 inventory of Oranienstein after Albertine Agnes’s death included 310

192  Materialising power

Figure 4.14 De Grieksche A, Adrianus Kocx, Two Flower Holders, c. 1690–1700, 47cm × 12cm × 9cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, BK-1956-10-B.

Delftware jam containers.85 While oriental porcelains provided a particular exotic prestige, and could be made to order, the women were able to commission specific and personal designs more easily from the Delftware factories to which they had direct access. This built the renown of manufactories such as Grieksche A, from which Mary commissioned a large number of items. The examples in Figure 4.14, made by the Grieksche A, are thought to have been among Mary’s collection. At Het Loo Mary appears to have used the basement kitchen, which directly adjoined the garden of the queen and was linked to her apartments on the first floor, for flower displays.86 A description from 1705 mentions this room also as ‘Her majesty’s tea room’.87 The 1713 inventory for Het Loo listed, for the ‘Little cellar of her majesty’, a Delft porcelain

Object Orange 193 bowl, ‘two Delft porcelain pyramids’, and ‘five small Delft porcelain flower pyramids’. For another separate cellar kitchen the inventory listed: ‘Six large Delft dishes’; ‘three large bowls’; ‘two pyramids’; and ‘thirteen flowerpots of different shape and size’.88 Designed by Marot, these items, made from relatively low cost ceramics, nonetheless accrued their own prestige by association to the family and to the innovative designs of their employees. Mary’s use of such Orange-Nassau symbols of power, rather than Stuart ones, was important in defining a place for herself as a newcomer to the dynasty and to the Dutch Republic. However, by importing many such pieces for her English residences, Mary carried the Orange-Nassau style abroad, as well as internationalising the company’s fame, although she also commissioned works from English manufactories.89 Through the ostentatious display of wealth and in material culture, OrangeNassau women and men signalled their clear political, cultural and financial superiority in the partnerships and places in the new lands into which the House had expanded, but their similar styling in all environments also made these display spaces a continuing political statement of their Orange-Nassau heritage. Moreover, this created a distinctive Orange-Nassau style – an accumulation of luxury objects presented in a coordinated ensemble, displayed in palaces and prints, and their practices of collectively employing Dutch and migrant French Huguenot craftspeople to assert to the superiority of products and design ideas from their lands of origin.

Syndicating Orange style The changing fashions of interior decoration among the elite in England, and to a lesser extent Scotland, after the arrival of Willem and Mary demonstrates how particular aesthetics and products came to be understood as reflecting the joint monarchs’ Dutch style. By adopting similar fashioning in their own renovations of castles, commissioning new products, and employing the House’s favoured designers, these individuals emphasised their political affiliations in material forms. Unsurprisingly, a series of Willem’s affiliates from the Low Countries not only modelled their palaces and gardens on the style of Orange-Nassau examples, but also their interior furnishings. Thus, the elaborate red and white fringed velvet upholstered side chair, complete with blue tassels, designed for the Kasteel Cannenburch in Gelderland followed very much the contemporary designs of Marot. Cannenburch was the home of Johan Hendrik van Isendoorn à Blois (1666–1703) and his wife, Margaretha van Reede Amerongen (1667–c. 1738), who numbered among the stadtholder’s circle.90 Similarly Ralph Montagu (1638–1709), master of the wardrobe to Willem III, acquired a magnificent bed for the State Bedchamber (completed between 1695 and 1697), at Boughton House, Northhamptonshire, in expectation of a royal visit that did not eventuate. It was described as a ‘Crimson gold flowerd damask bed gold fring all Round feet coopes &

194  Materialising power fethers to ye bed & all things belonging as a thick quilt a holond quilt a fether bed & a bolster 2 blankets’.91 This bore the hallmarks of Marot’s lavish style of bed, for which he produced illustrations, including a series of plates depicting the styling fit for a suite of apartments for the king (Figure 4.15). A French Catholic upholsterer, Francis Lapiere (1653–1714), appears to have made several examples for English stately homes at this period, including the Melville Bed made for the State Bedroom at Melville House in Fife in 1697, with its Italian velvet and Chinese silk linings, the design of which is attributed to Marot,92 the great state bed for William Cavendish (1640–1707), First Duke of Devonshire, at Chatsworth, and perhaps also those at Dyrham Park and Blair Castle, which Gervaise Jackson-Stops considers as also following Marot’s engravings closely.93 Boughton House notably also displayed a ceiling painting of the wedding of Hercules and Hebe, referencing the Hercules motif that Willem had adopted from his earliest depictions as Prince of Orange.94 Thus, the power of Orange-Nassau repertoire of material culture was extended as Willem and Mary’s political supporters incorporated it into their own sites of interpretation in England and Scotland.95 Connected by marriage to the House of Orange-Nassau, Mary had fully embraced its style and products of choice. Some objects were probably given as gifts, the display of which not only showcased Orange-Nassau style but also gave visible, material form to the political connections they represented.

Figure 4.15 Etching after Daniël Marot, title page from Livre d’Appartement Inventé par D. Marot Architect du Roy, c. 1712, etching, 27.6cm × 18.7cm. London, Victoria and Albert Museum, E.5914-1905. © Victoria and Albert Museum.

Object Orange 195 Reino Liefkes and Patricia F. Ferguson cite examples at Erddig in Wales and at Althorp, the home of the Spencers, which bear Willem’s arms, image, or initials and seem likely to have been presented as gifts.96 In addition, Delftware commissions among the English elite embraced and enhanced Mary’s own patronage of the Grieksche A factory. Large, tiered flower pyramids at the turn of the eighteenth century produced by the manufactory demonstrate Mary’s influence. Examples are seen in the Het Loo inventory, and also at Hampton Court, Chatsworth, and Dyrham Park (Figure 4.16).97 The latter was

Figure 4.16 A pair of Delftware pyramid flower vases that stand on either side of a small table at Dyrham Park, Gloucestershire, Image 94603. Photograph © National Trust Images/Andreas von Einsiedel.

196  Materialising power the home of William Blathwayt (1649–1717), Willem’s secretary of war. He had apartments at Het Loo and at Whitehall, and Liefkes and Ferguson suggest that he could have bought his Delftware directly from Dutch factories.98 Orange-Nassau architectural style also extended to English sites via the influence of Marot and his English associates. The architect, Willam Talman, worked with Marot on Mary’s Water Gallery and then progressed to a series of other projects for affiliates of Willem and Mary in England, including at Chatsworth, Uppark, Dyrham Park, and Drayton House.99 Gervaise JacksonStops argues that the courtyard façade of the latter, built for Mary Howard, Duchess of Norfolk and her second husband, Sir John Germaine, who was widely reputed to be Willem’s illegitimate brother, resembles Marot’s work.100 The adoption of the decorative schemes and furnishing styles of the new monarchs occurred among Willem and Mary’s affiliates in ways that were at times subtle and at others explicitly political. Willem’s circle of friends was well aware of the architectural and decorating projects of the king and queen. Their utilisation of the same designers and artists, or those who had trained with them, spread the aesthetics associated with the Orange-Nassau into English country houses, from where they filtered markers of the current trends and tastes of the court to a far wider audience across the country.

Echoing Orange-Nassau glory The daughters of Frederik Hendrik and Amalia were by no means the last generation to promote the Orange-Nassau dynasty in such cultural forms as they moved out of the Netherlands and into new lands. Many of their children, born into other allied dynasties, still found value in emphasising their OrangeNassau heritage in similar ways, often for their own distinctive, local, political contexts. In this section we explore how and why such strategies continued to be beneficial to subsequent generations, and also how, in some cases, these individuals applied new meanings to the Orange-Nassau repertoire of cultural display that suited their particular circumstances. In more explicit ways too, some of the grandchildren and greatgrandchildren of Frederik Hendrik and Amalia – that is, the descendants of Albertine Agnes, Henriëtte Catharina and Louise Henriëtte – continued to draw on their Orange-Nassau heritage to stake a claim to power, and their palace ensembles played an important role in visualising these ambitions. Henriette Amalie von Anhalt-Dessau, the daughter of Henriëtte Catharina and daughter-in-law of Albertine Agnes, was born at Johann Moritz’s palace in Cleves. In 1683, she married her cousin, Hendrik Casimir II van NassauDietz, in Dessau. Hendrik Casimir was stadtholder of Friesland, Groningen, and Drenthe. They had two sons and seven daughters, one of whom died young.101 When her husband died in 1696, Henriette Amalie, pregnant at the time, was left with eight young children. When Willem III died in 1702, his will named her son Johan Willem Friso as his successor and Prince of Orange. Other branches of the dynasty, however, including Louise Henriëtte’s son,

Object Orange 197 Friedrich I von Brandenburg, contested the will and Johan Willem Friso’s right to the principality and the title. Henriette Amalie, as regent, had two important political manoeuvres to negotiate: first, to convince the provinces that her son should be named stadtholder, as his father had been; and second, to secure him the title and principality of Orange. In 1709, Johan Willem Friso married Marie Louise von Hessen-Kassel, and in that year Henriette Amalie moved with her six unmarried daughters to Albertine Agnes’s widow’s retreat at Oranienstein. She began to expand the palace after plans prepared by Daniël Marot.102 The painter Jan van Dijk (c. 1690–1769) was employed for its decoration. Henriette Amalie spent lavishly on the palace; more in fact than she could afford. The main room, the Festsaal, repeated the blue and gold colour scheme that her mother, Henriëtte Catharina, had chosen for her porcelain room in Oranienbaum. Ceiling paintings, which were frequently important sites for staking claims to elite power, depicted the four continents on which the Dutch colonial enterprise, and by extension Orange-Nassau power, was present: Europe, America, Asia, and Africa.103 Oranienstein also housed a significant porcelain collection that had been commenced under Albertine Agnes (itself with pieces inherited from her mother, Amalia). This was extended under Henriette Amalie, whose own mother had possessed a beautiful porcelain cabinet in Oranienbaum. The promotion of Orange-Nassau links was also evident in the palace chapel, where the heraldic signs of the House of Orange and its genealogy were prominently displayed, as they were vital to the recognition of her son and his descendants at a moment when conflict over the Orange inheritance was still present.104 In July 1711 Johan Willem Friso drowned, leaving his wife pregnant with a longed-for heir to the Nassau-Dietz branch. Henriette Amalie erected a well to commemorate him outside the palace in the town of Dietz, where she was regent. It displayed the Nassau lion, the heraldic sign of Friso.105 When her grandson Willem IV was born shortly after in September 1711, Henriette Amalie was unable to secure guardianship of the child, which fell instead to his mother Marie Louise and her father Karel von Hessen-Kassel. The OrangeNassau family was thus removed from direct influence over Willem. However, Henriette Amalie sought to keep the memory of her son alive, just as Amalia had done for her husband, Frederik Hendrik, through cultural display at her palace at Oranienstein, and in Dietz. And as her mother and aunts had done before her, Henriette Amalie also engaged successfully in the wider economy of her estates and region, promoting economic and urban changes that reflected Dutch trends. This included encouraging Lutheran refugees to settle in Dietz, ordering market squares and a port for river transport by ship to be built, and implementing forestry reforms for the benefit of the community.106 The inventories of Henriette Amalie demonstrate how the collection, distribution, and representation of dynastic family portraits played a significant role in dynastic politics. For example, the inventory of the palace of Oranienstein in 1726 reveals the astonishing number of carefully displayed Orange-Nassau

198  Materialising power family portraits by a member of the dynasty who had clearly been sidelined in the family politics when her daughter-in-law Marie Louise succeeded against her in becoming regent for her under-age son (after Johan Willem Friso’s death in an accident).107 In her bedchamber at Oranienstein, for example, Henriette Amalie had ‘seven family portraits, six in golden frames, three of them by Volters’.108 On the ground floor, in the room next to the dining hall, there were life-size portraits of Hendrik Casimir, the Duke and Duchess of AnhaltDessau, and Willem IV and his sister (Anna Charlotta) Amalia (1710–77). In the main dining hall the portrait of ‘King William of England, seated with royal regalia’ hung above the fireplace, and the walls were adorned with lifesize portraits ‘of the complete princely family’, beginning with Ernst Casimir van Nassau-Dietz and his wife, Sophia Hedwig von Braunschweig-Lüneberg (1592–1642).109 In the hallway of Oranjewoud, which Henriette Amalie had also inherited from Albertine Agnes, the 1726 inventory listed ‘a large painting of the Nassau family’ for the hallway next to the bedchamber of Marie Louise.110 These documents show that all the major representational rooms included the most important dynastic portraits, as well as important collections of porcelain, and furniture and objects from the Dutch colonies. Moreover, the most numerous family portraits that Henriette Amalie received were those of her sisters and their children. The rooms of her own daughters, three of them named after her sisters Marie, Henriette, and Louise, all displayed family portraits. The success of these cultural strategies is attested by the use of these sites after Henriette Amalie’s death in 1726. She was buried in the Stiftskirche of Dietz. Oranienstein remained in Orange-Nassau possession and was used by the House at significant moments of celebration and crisis throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Henriette Amalie’s grandson, Willem IV, used Oranienstein for a festive entry into Dietz on the occasion of his marriage to Anne of Hanover in March 1734. Although Oranienstein was not his main residence, Willem spent time there in 1740 and 1745. The palace also gained importance during the political crises of the 1790s, when Willem V and his wife Wilhelmine were forced to flee the Netherlands and found temporary refuge in Oranienstein. Their son, Willem (Frederik) VI, regarded Oranienstein as sufficiently significant to commence renovating the court and the gardens when he moved there with his family in 1801. However, Napoleon soon dispossessed him in 1806, and in 1811 ordered all of the furnishings of Oranienstein to be sold at public auction. It was not until almost forty years later that a subordinated branch of the Nassau dynasty actively reclaimed the site, when Adelheid Marie von Anhalt-Dessau (1833–1916) and Adolph, Duke of Nassau and Grand Duke of Luxembourg (1817–1905) prepared Oranienstein for their family to move into in 1851. While Henriette Amalie’s efforts had employed Orange-Nassau material culture to maintain the presence of the dynasty within lands it already possessed, under Louise Henriëtte’s eldest son, Friedrich, these cultural forms were transmitted yet further across German lands. Among the most prominent

Object Orange 199 forms of dynastic display were those spearheaded by Friedrich, who became King of Prussia in 1701. Louise Henriëtte had left Oranienburg to Friedrich in her will. After her death in 1667, he began to renovate and expand the palace and gardens, taking care to continue the Orange representation strategies of his mother for his own ends: firstly, to position himself to gain the title of Prince of Orange, for which he was a contender; and then as a monarch. Friedrich added an inscription to the Corps de Logis which praised his mother as a Princess of Orange, and had her initials engraved on garden urns and on the ceiling in the garden grotto.111 In 1701, when Friedrich crowned himself King of Prussia in Königsberg, he commissioned the Oranier Hall with ceiling paintings depicting his OrangeNassau family, after the example of the Oranjezaal in Huis ten Bosch.112 Even elements of the interior design, such as ceiling paintings which give the impression of people looking over a balustrade into the room below, followed the model of the Dutch palaces of his grandparents in Honselaarsdijk and Ter Nieuburch. Oranienburg, like Oranienstein, became a location for the ceremonial display of powerful Orange-Nassau heritage under Friedrich. When his daughter Louise Dorothea married Friedrich von Hessen-Kassel (1676–1751) on 31 May 1700, he again used this space to assert the dominance of his heritage over that of his new son-in-law. At the same time, Friedrich also attended to the palace gardens as alternative sites for the articulation of his dynastic heritage. The orangeries at Oranienburg, Berlin and Charlottenburg were renovated.113 The orangery at Oranienburg was extended by Johann Friedrich Eosander von Göthe (1669–1728) around 1700, and the grotto was extended to contain bedrooms with fireplaces.114 As mentioned above, one of these rooms had a ceiling painting celebrating Louise Henriëtte through the display of her initials.115 The close connection of the grotto with the living quarters and the orangery was similar to the grotto-orangery complex at his aunt Henriëtte Catharina’s Oranienbaum. Indeed, Henriëtte Catharina’s son Leopold likewise expanded the collection of orange trees at Oranienbaum considerably, importing sixty orange trees from Florence in 1705 and another set of trees in 1714 from Hamburg, even before he erected an iron sculpture of an orange tree in the market square opposite the palace of Oranienbaum in 1719, to commemorate his mother and the House of Orange (Figure 4.17).116 Moreover, when Albertine Agnes’s daughter, Amalia van Nassau-Dietz, married Johann Wilhelm III von Sachsen-Eisenach she had an orangery built at their hunting lodge in Wilhelmsthal near Eisenach. After her early death, it was maintained and significantly enlarged with 300 orange trees in the 1740s.117 For some of the grandchildren of the Orange-Nassau princesses, their Dutch heritage still offered individuals a powerful identity outside the Netherlands. This was the case for Anna Wilhelmine von Anhalt-Dessau (1715–80), daughter of Leopold I, who remained unmarried all of her life. She received the manor of Mosigkau as a gift from her father, which enabled her to become economically independent. Anna Wilhelmine designed Mosigkau

200  Materialising power

Figure 4.17 Iron orange tree, erected in the Market Square in Oranienbaum in 1719, in memory of Henriëtte Catharina. Kulturstiftung Dessau Wörlitz. Photograph: Heinz Fräßdorf.

as her summer palace. It was built between 1752 and 1757 and showcased her Dutch heritage in both style and garden design (Figure 4.18).118 She had planned from the beginning to use this site to display her dynastic Orange heritage through a significant painting collection that she bought from the estate of her aunt Marie Eleanore, Duchess of Radziviłł, after her death in 1750. Some seventy-two paintings, a collection of furniture, wallpapers, and porcelain pieces stemmed from Amalia’s collection, which had been passed down through her daughters and granddaughters (Figure 4.19).119 Anna Wilhelmine herself willed that after her own death, the gallery and collection, displayed in the Festsaal, was not to be sold or altered (Figure 4.20). It thus survived intact as a Baroque display of Dutch paintings from the Orange inheritance, and includes the famous Van Dyck portrait of Willem II as a child with a wind chime (1630). Other portraits of the Orange family, which Anna Wilhelmine

Figure 4.18 Schloss Mosigkau, built 1752–7, view from the front. Kulturstiftung Dessau Wörlitz. Photograph: Heinz Fräßdorf.

Figure 4.19 Brown cabinet with fireplace wall, porcelain collection and Dutch flower painting [from the estate of Henriëtte Catharina van Nassau] at Schloss Mosigkau. Kulturstiftung Dessau Wörlitz. Photograph: Heinz Fräßdorf.

202  Materialising power

Figure 4.20 Banquet hall with collection of paintings from the Orange inheritance at Mosigkau. Kulturstiftung Dessau Wörlitz. Photograph: Heinz Fräßdorf.

had either inherited directly from her father Leopold I or had bought, included portraits by leading artists such as Van Dyck, Mijtens, and Hanneman of her various ancestors, such as Louise Henriëtte, Henriëtte Catharina, her aunts and uncles, and the brothers and sisters of her father, Leopold.120 A further reminder of her Orange heritage, and something that her grandmother in Oranienbaum had valued, was the so-called tea salon that existed in Mosigkau until 1775, when it was modernised into a Chinese room according to contemporary fashion. Anna Wilhelmine did not neglect the gardens at Mosigkau; she had two orangeries built in the 1750s, and bought sixty-six orange trees for Mosigkau in 1749.121 She carefully nurtured the memory of her Orange-Nassau ancestry in her palace at Mosigkau, as well as in painted portraits such as the c. 1745 image of her by Christian Friedrich Reinhold Lisiewski (1725–94) in a bright orange dress, standing next to an orange tree in a terracotta urn, in which her right hand rests upon an orange (Figure 4.21). The example of Anna Wilhelmine demonstrates how a never-married elite woman could selectively highlight her natal ancestry in order to create a powerful personal identity that signalled her independence. Furthermore, unlike other women linked to the House of Orange-Nassau who divided their material collections among their children, Anna Wilhelmine demanded that her own collection remained intact, significantly providing one of the few extant material sites of Orange-Nassau memorialisation by a woman. However, men too found that their Orange-Nassau heritage remained a beneficial identity in the eighteenth century. By the eighteenth century, Dutch

Object Orange 203

Figure 4.21 Christian Friedrich Reinhold Lisiewski, Portrait of Anna Wilhelmine von Anhalt-Dessau, Daughter of Leopold I, c. 1745, oil on canvas, 327.2cm × 455cm. Kulturstiftung Dessau Wörlitz, Schloss Mosigkau, Inv. Nr 579.

gardens were progressively being remodelled into the newer English style. After the grotto in Oranienbaum, which had been built by Henriëtte Catharina, was demolished in the late eighteenth century, her grandson Leopold III had the busts and ceiling painting, which echoed in a humble way the ceiling paintings in the Oranjezaal in Huis Ten Bosch and likewise celebrated Orange dynastic success, re-installed in the Gothic House on his estate in Wörlitz (Figure 4.22). Wörlitz also showcased numerous portraits of Orange family members such as Henriëtte Catharina, and the palace building contained a tiled summer kitchen. Friedrich II von Preußen was a generous art patron, and developed Sanssouci in Potsdam with significant orangeries, baroque gardens, and art collections.122 Orangeries were increasingly used in Prussia to grow other exotic fruit, including pineapples. Pineapples had been associated since the seventeenth century with Dutch overseas territories in Brazil. They were, for example, already depicted on the paintings by Albert Eckhout that had been given as gifts to the Great Elector of Brandenburg. Oranienburg’s court gardener, Bartsch, was experienced in cultivating pineapples, and was asked for advice when Friedrich II expanded his existing greenhouses. In Berlin,

204  Materialising power

Figure 4.22 Ceiling painting depicting Frederik Hendrik, originally at Oranienbaum. Wörlitz, Gotisches Haus, Kulturstiftung Dessau Wörlitz. Photograph: Heinz Fräßdorf.

Conrad Pleymer (1747–1817) built up a successful pineapple nursery. When Pleymer died, his successor was Johann Carl Jacobi (1770–1831), son-in-law of Bartsch, who had trained at Oranienburg in pineapple cultivation.123 These networks of horticultural expertise reinforced and reflected cultural ties in gardening, cultivation, and aesthetics, between elite individuals linked by their Orange-Nassau heritage. When Friedrich Wilhelm II (1744–97) expanded the gardens serving the Berliner Schloss in the 1780s, he developed greenhouses in order to grow pineapples.124 Friedrich II even had the pineapple motif prominently included in his porcelain design for the Prussian porcelain company, Königliche Porzellanmanufaktur (KPM). At the marriage of Wilhelmine

Object Orange 205 von Preußen to Willem V in 1767, they received a fine porcelain chandelier of pineapples produced by KPM from Wilhelmine’s uncle, Friedrich II (Figure 4.23). Orange branding offered far more than meaning in the internal politics of the Republic. It also conveyed religious and political stances far beyond. It was with this in mind that, in the mid-eighteenth century, James Murray, the

Figure 4.23 Königliche Porzellanmanufaktur (KPM), porcelain chandelier of pineapples, given to Wilhelmine von Preußen and Willem V, 1767. The Netherlands, Apeldoorn, Paleis Het Loo.

206  Materialising power second Duke of Atholl (1690–1764), refurbished his castle at Blair following the Jacobite rebellion in which his forebears had participated. Murray chose a different path, using images of his distant Orange-Nassau ancestry to signal his allegiance to the Hanoverian regime. He not only positioned his existing Orange portraits prominently in a selective narrative of his genealogy, but actively sourced more paintings from the continent, notably of Willem I and his third wife, Charlotte, from whose family he was descended.125 The mother of John Murray, the first Duke of Atholl (1660–1724), was Amelia Stanley (1633–1702/3), daughter of Charlotte de la Trémoille and James Stanley, the ill-fated Earl of Derby who was executed during the Civil War. Charlotte was the granddaughter of Willem, Prince of Orange, and Charlotte de Bourbon via her mother, Charlotte-Brabantine. In a portrait by Anthony Van Dyck, Charlotte and James’s young daughter is depicted wearing an orange dress (Figure 4.24). Amelia Stanley had married John Murray, then the second Earl of Atholl, in May 1659, before he became the Marquess of Atholl in 1676.126

Figure 4.24 Anthony Van Dyck, James, Seventh Earl of Derby, his Lady and Child, 1632–41, oil on canvas, 246.4cm × 213.7cm. New York, The Frick Collection, Acc. 1913.1.40.

Object Orange 207 When Amelia died in February 1703, followed by her husband in May the same year, the duke constructed an impressive monument in their honour in the chapter house of Dunkeld Cathedral. This lavish monument in black and white marble displayed a series of the heraldic motifs of both his mother and father.127 Both of the duke’s parents were memorialised in carved portraits of their faces, alongside sixteen heraldic crests conveying the ancestry of each, with those for Amelia noting her Derby, La Trémoille, and Orange heritage (Figure 4.25). Amelia’s English and continental ancestry was also emphasised in the memorial’s inscription: beside his ashes are also laid those of his most dearly beloved wife the Lady Amelia who was the daughter of James, Earl of Derby, and Charlotte de Tremoville, daughter of the Duke of Tremoville in the land of France, [. . .] a woman highly distinguished by her birth from famous parents.128

Figure 4.25 Funeral monument of John Murray, first Marquess and Amelia Stanley, Marchioness of Atholl. Dunkeld Cathedral. © Susan Broomhall.

208  Materialising power The duke’s son, James Murray, the second Duke of Atholl, found even more pressing political reasons to foreground his Orange-Nassau heritage. Atholl’s elder brother, William (1689–1746), had been attainted after his involvements in 1715 and 1719 at Glenshiels in support of Jacobitism. As a result, James, the second son, had gained the dukedom by a special act of parliament. In the late 1740s, Atholl began to develop plans to create a lavish picture staircase. Here, a selection of portraits highlighted his impressive forebears, arranged chronologically to trace a historical trajectory of the dynasty’s illustrious foundations.129 A particularly important line of the heritage that was visualised was that of the House of Orange-Nassau, stemming back to Willem I van Nassau.130 By 1756, an inventory listed the Picture Staircase as containing ‘A Tree of the Most Noble and Illustrious Families of Atholl and Tullibardine’, which then included portraits of ‘William the Great Prince of Orange’, his third wife Charlotte de Bourbon, their daughter Charlotte-Brabantine, her husband Claude de la Trémoille, their daughter Charlotte de la Trémoille, her husband James Stanley, Earl of Derby, and their daughter Amelia Stanley (Figure 4.26). These portraits appeared on the same wall of the staircase as the first Marquess, Atholl’s grandfather. A full-length image of Atholl, the creator of the visual display, looks on from the adjacent wall, on which the only other image is a second image of Willem van Nassau, Prince of Orange (Figure 4.27). These large-scale portraits, positioned in a prominent location connecting key stately rooms of the house, constructed a particular view of his dynasty’s past, emphasising his heritage to these particular ancestors who articulated his sense of belonging to the leading family of continental Protestantism, from which had also sprung forth the Hanoverian line of monarchs.131 Atholl’s personal oversight of the renovation and his decisions about the selection and placement of portraits is revealed in a number of memos and letters. A note of July 1749 identified specific portraits from Atholl’s collection that were to be hung on the staircase, including those of the Duke and Duchess of ‘Tramole’ (Claude de la Trémoille and Charlotte-Brabantine of Orange-Nassau) and their daughter and her husband, the Earl and Countess of Derby.132 Correspondence in March 1750 between the men responsible for enacting Atholl’s plan recommended that changes be suggested to the Duke on account of the size of the portraits and that of the available niches,133 which resulted in a revised layout, partly in Atholl’s own hand, being drawn up in the following month.134 Another revised list itemised individuals who could be dropped from the scheme if lack of space demanded, but also noted specifically that spaces were to be left available for portraits of the Prince and Princess of Orange.135 Some images were already held within the family collection, such as those of Charlotte-Brabantine of Orange-Nassau and Claude de la Trémoille, but others were specifically sourced for the scheme from the continent.136 An inventory of goods sent to Scotland during 1752 demonstrates that these, and the portrait of Charlotte de Bourbon, were sent in late August.137 The picture staircase was built directly after the Jacobite uprising

Object Orange 209

Figure 4.26 Portraits on the walls of the Picture Staircase. The full-length figure in Roman dress is John Murray, Marquess of Atholl. Below are the portraits of individuals from the Orange-Nassau, La Trémoille and Stanley families. © Country Life.

and provided a site through which Atholl could demonstrate his allegiance and affiliation to the Hanoverian regime. In addition, Atholl’s depiction of his ancestry particularly emphasised his connection to Willem van Nassau, Prince of Orange – a relative both he and the Hanoverian kings held in common. The second Duke of Atholl asked young John Murray (1729–74), the son of his brother Lord George Murray (1694–1760), to seek out portraits of Willem of Orange and Charlotte de Bourbon while on tour in Europe. Atholl, who had no male heir, had determined that this young man, if married to his daughter Charlotte (1731–1805), might become his heir. In 1751, therefore, Atholl proposed that Murray should continue his education on the continent, with a tour of key sites, introductions among his networks, and further study

210  Materialising power

Figure 4.27 The head of the Picture Staircase, showing a full-length portrait of the second Duke of Atholl facing a portrait of Willem van Nassau, Prince of Orange. © Country Life.

at Göttingen. Murray had an interested and engaged eye in all he saw and detailed the architecture, the decorative schemes of palaces, gardens, and grottos. The itinerary that Atholl had devised for him also gave his young protegé an opportunity to meet and mingle with an important range of European contacts. Among these was his distant relative, Willem IV, Prince of Orange. John Murray reported home to his uncle and cousin on a series of encounters at The Hague. He had observed the princely family first at the theatre: ‘The Princess Caroline came in pretty soon after – she is a very pretty fatt girl about 12 years old – they say very sensable.’138 Thereafter, he was able to kiss the hand of the princess, Anne of Hanover, and meet her children while

Object Orange 211 he attended a music concert: ‘The Princess is a great lover of musick and had a very fine concert of 15 performers. She sung two or three songs very prettily.’139 Anne, whose teacher had been none other than Georg Friedrich Handel, supported a flourishing music scene, and music formed an important element in her epistolary exchange of letters with Friedrich II.140 Murray’s European tour also included a vast range of visits to palace and garden complexes that connected him to his Orange-Nassau ancestors and provided ideas for their decorative and representational schemes. For example, Murray visited Delft, and described in his journal the tomb of Willem I, ‘my great great great Grandfather, who was assasinated by Belthaser Gerard, a Frenchman’.141 Murray clearly understood the dynastic significance of his itinerary. He likewise documented his visit to Huis ten Bosch, where he observed that the Chief thing to be seen here is the painting in the hall amongst other things representing the actions of Frederick Henry, prince of Orange. Most of the Pieces are by Tytan, Rube, Vandyke, Cjuiden and all the most famouse masters & are very fine. It was built by his widow.142 This itinerary suggested an intention to introduce young Murray to his distant dynastic relatives, who were connected by Protestantism and Orange-Nassau ancestry. The Duke of Atholl’s activities in the 1750s demonstrate how making a symbolic connection to a Nassau past could have important political consequences in his own context. The longue durée of these emphases on Orange-Nassau ancestry is a phenomenon that had important implications for the international prestige of the Orange-Nassau dynasty, giving it new visibility in ever-expanding locations. For subsequent generations, there were varied reasons for connecting with their Orange-Nassau heritage, and varied ways to do so. For some, such as the unmarried Anna Wilhelmine in Mosigkau, promotion of Orange-Nassau ancestry through her prominent display of material collections served to raise her own status as member of an illustrious lineage. For others, such as Friedrich and Henriette Amalie, the display of their Orange-Nassau links bolstered their claims for the title of Prince of Orange. For both men and women, however, symbols and practices that had once demonstrated Orange-Nassau power and glory came to signify elite grandeur more broadly, and were used to advance standing, particularly for individuals capable of being elevated to the status of monarchs, such as Willem III of England and Friedrich I von Preußen. Ironically then, the cultural practices of the princely Orange-Nassau were so successful that they were progressively employed and interpreted as evidence of royal status.

Conclusions The cultural colonising strategies of the House of Orange-Nassau were an important aspect of their expansion into other parts of Europe that became

212  Materialising power allied through the marriages of both women and men. This was a highly conspicuous strategy of dynastic promotion that became pronounced from the generations of Frederik Hendrik and Amalia and their children. The OrangeNassau policy expanded at that time from an earlier strategy of attachment to the States and the lands, to one of development and adaptation of new lands to their interests and aims, and even to their names, as the power of their House grew. These new lands were brought under the influence of Orange-Nassau interests through cultural persuasion, not warfare. In the new territories into which Orange-Nassau women married, the name of the dynasty, rather than specific male or female individuals, was prioritised. This offered a genderneutral solution to Orange-Nassau colonising practices that was diplomatic and did not infringe the patriarchal rights of the men they had married. The shared Orange-Nassau cultural repertoire of material forms, display techniques, and exchange practices made clear claims to the power of the House. Artists were circulated within the family and created a distinct look which made ‘brand recognition’, and consequently political association with the House, easier. A circulation or shared patronage of artists such as Mijtens and the Netschers was exercised within one generation, namely amongst the daughters of Amalia and Frederik Hendrik, and of other artists including Hanneman, Post, Pesne, and Marot between generations and wider cousin networks, as well as by affiliates of the dynasty. Artwork continually visualised a set of particular symbols associated with the House, its key individuals, and the connections between them and others across dynastic networks. Furthermore, the exchange of such works as gifts, and as inheritance, created obligations to support the House and dynasty, if and when required. By pursuing these practices, the individuals of the House modelled themselves on the behaviour of royal families, perhaps in part driven by their lessthan-secure position in the Netherlands and their relatively recent acquisition of princely but not royal status. The success of these cultural politics was such that other emerging dynasties also began to employ similar cultural forms and practices, to the point that Orange-Nassau identity itself ultimately became obscured by the new political elites and their mythologies, particularly in England and Prussia, and by a wider acculturation of these cultural tools as the display mechanisms and material artefacts of elite dynasties more broadly. It was thus only by male and female individuals with little political influence, such as the Anhalt-Dessau, that the Orange-Nassau heritage was consciously retained into the late eighteenth century at Leopold III’s estate at Wörlitz and Anna Wilhelmine’s at Mosigkau.

Notes   1 See, for example, Alexandra Nina Bauer, ‘Die Porträtmalerei für das Haus Oranien-Nassau in der zweiten Hälfte des 17. Jahrhunderts’, in Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje (Exhibition Catalogue), ed. Ingo Pfeifer and Wolfgang Savelsberg (Oranienbaum: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2003), 143–52; Gert H. Janssen, ‘De kunst van het kopiëren: Opdrachten van stadhouder Willem

Object Orange 213

  2

  3

  4

  5

  6

  7   8   9   10

  11

  12

Frederik van Nassau aan Pieter Nason’, Jaarboek Oranje–Nassau Museum (2001): 36–47. On the exchange of children’s portraits within the Nassau family, see Susan Broomhall and Jacqueline Van Gent, ‘Framing Childhood: Children through the Lens of Portraits in the Nassau Family Collections’, in Children’s Worlds in Medieval and Early Modern Europe c. 1400–1750, ed. Stephanie Tarbin and Philippa Maddern (Brepols, forthcoming). Pierre Bourdieu, Language and Symbolic Power, ed. John B. Thompson (Cambridge, MA: Polity Press, 1991). For a useful discussion of Bourdieu’s concept of symbolic power see David Swartz, The Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997), 65–95. Joseph S. Nye, Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics (New York: Public Affairs, 2004), 5. According to Nye, power in foreign politics comes from a country’s (or other non-state players’) attraction (in terms of culture and/or policies) to others. Marika Keblusek and Jori Zijlmans, eds, Vorstelijk vertoon. Aan het hof van Frederik Hendrik en Amalia (Zwolle: Waanders, 1997), published in English as Princely Display: The Court of Frederik Hendrik of Orange and Amalia van Solms (The Hague: Waanders, 1997); Peter van der Ploeg and Carola Vermeeren, eds, Vorstelijk verzameld. De kunstcollectie van Frederik Hendrik en Amalia (Zwolle: Waanders, 1997). Keblusek and Zijlmans, Vorstelijk vertoon; van der Ploeg and Vermeeren, Vorstelijk verzameld; Rebecca Joslyn Tucker, ‘The Art of Living Nobly: The Patronage of Prince Frederik Hendrik (1584–1647) at the Palace of Honselaarsdijk during the Dutch Republic’ (Unpublished PhD Dissertation, New York University, 2002); Wies Erkelens, ‘Der stattalterliche Hof Friedrich Heinrichs und der Amalia von Solms’, in Onder den Oranje Boom: Niederländische Kunst und Kultur im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert an deutschen Fürstenhöfen (Exhibition Catalogue), ed. Marcus Schacht, Jörg Meiner, and Horst Lademacher (Munich: Hirmer, 1999), 107–30. See, for example, Bauer, ‘Die Porträtmalerei für das Haus Oranien-Nassau in der zweiten Hälfte des 17. Jahrhunderts’, 143–52; Janssen, ‘De kunst van het kopiëren: Opdrachten van stadhouder Willem Frederik van Nassau aan Peter Nason’. On the exchange of children’s portraits within the Nassau family, see Broomhall and Van Gent, ‘Framing Childhood’. Michael Auwers, ‘The Gift of Rubens: Rethinking the Concept of Gift-Giving in Early Modern Diplomacy’, European History Quarterly 43, no. 3 (2013): 427. Auwers, ‘The Gift of Rubens’, 427. Luuc Kooijmans, Vriendschap: en de kunst van ht overladen in de zeventiende en achtiende eeuw (Amsterdam: Bert Bakker, 1997). Kooijmans, Vriendschap; Luuc Kooijmans, ‘Liefde in opdracht. Emotie en berekning in de dagboeken van Willem Frederik van Nassau’, Historisch Tijdskrift Holland, 30 no. 4/5 (1998): 231–55; Luuc Kooijmans, Liefde in opdracht. Het hofleven van Willem Frederik van Nassau (Amsterdam: Fryske Akademy, 2000); Irma Thoen, Strategic Affection? Gift Exchange in Seventeenth-Century Holland (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2007). Marieke E. Tiethoff-Spliethoff, ‘Bilder von Glück und Unglück. Die Porträt­ malerei am Hofe des Statthalters in den Haag 1625–1655’, in Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje, ed. Pfeifer and Savelsberg, 132–41; Marieke E. TiethoffSpliethoff, ‘Representatie en Rollenspel. De Portretkunst aan het Hof van Frederik Hendrik en Amalia’, in Vorstelijk vertoon, ed. Keblusek and Zijlmans, 161–200. ‘J’ay un déplesir très grens de n’avoir point en vostre portret, ny de Messieurs vos enfens, qui m’eusse esté très agréable de quelle forme il vous eut pleu et je les atenderay avec inpasience, mes je vous supplie, chère seur, que le pintre n’y

214  Materialising power oublie rien, car à Londres où j’espère de les montrer, il y a d’excelens pintre’, 9–19 June 1634, in ’Correspondance de Charlotte de La Trémoille, comtesse de Derby (1599–1664): Années 1606–1652’, ed. Jean-Luc Tulot, 72. Available at: http://jeanluc.tulot.pagesperso-orange.fr/Comtessedederby01.pdf.   13 ‘J’ay resçu les portrais de MM. vos enfans que je trouve extremems beaux et surtout l’aîné. Je ne croy pas que le petit conte de Laval soit sy bien resemblant que M. son frère. La pinture n’en n’étent pas sy bonne’, 7 June 1637, in Tulot, ‘Correspondance de Charlotte de La Trémoille’, 73.   14 On the development of the notion of likeness and family resemblance, and its importance within the dynasty, see Broomhall and Van Gent, ‘Framing Childhood’.   15 S. W. A. Drossaers, and Th. H. Lunsingh Scheurleer, eds, Inventarissen van de inboedels in de verblijven van de Oranjes en daarmede gelijk the stellen stukken 1567–1795, 3 vols (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1974–6).   16 ‘Pour la galerie [. . .] près de ma soeur Marie, j’attends le portrait de mon neveu. S’il Vous plaît de faire peindre mes deux enfants, il y a encore place aux deux bouts où il viendront fort bien’, in Leopold von Orlich, ed., Geschichte des preus­sischen Staates im siebzehnten Jahrhundert: mit besonderer Beziehung auf das Leben Friedrich Wilhelm’s des Grossen Kurfürsten: aus archivalischen Quellen und aus vielen noch ungekannten Original-Handschriften, 3 vols (Berlin: Dummler, 1838–9), 3: 449.   17 Gerrit van Honthorst, Albertine Agnes and Henriëtte Catharina, 1679. The Hague, Stichting Historische Verzamelingen van het Huis Oranje-Nassau.   18 ‘Lijst van schilderijen door Albertine Agnes nagelaten aan Henriëtte Catharina van Anhalt-Dessau 1696’, in Drossaers and Lunsingh Scheurleer, Inventarissen, 2: 222–4.   19 See the detailed discussion of the commissioning of paintings by Jan Mijtens in Alexandra Nina Bauer, Jan Mijtens (1613/14–1670): Leben und Werk (Petersberg: Michael Imhof, 2006), 95–6, also 114–20.   20 Bauer, Mijtens, 96–7.   21 Bauer, Mijtens, 118.   22 For example, Francois Dieussart’s sculpture ‘Sleeping Cupid Resting on a Shield’, now at Oranienbaum. Vanessa Bezemer Sellers, Courtly Gardens in Holland, 1600–1650: The House of Orange and the Hortus Batavus (Amsterdam: Architectura & Natura Press, 2001), 232.   23 See Bartholomeus Eggers, Aegidius Sadeler, Titus Flavius Domitianus, after 1674, marble bust, 94cm. Held at the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, BK-B-68-D. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10934/RM0001.COLLECT.24864.   24 Willem Diedenhofen, ‘“Belvedere”, or the Principle of Seeing and Looking in the Gardens of Johan Maurits van Nassau-Siegen at Cleves’, in The Dutch Garden in the Seventeenth Century, ed. John Dixon Hunt (Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 1990), 76.   25 Jacquelyn N. Coutré, ‘Decoration à l’Orange: Jan Lievens’ Mars and Venus in Context’, Journal of Historians of Netherlandish Art 5, no. 2 (2013). Available at: http://www.jhna.org/index.php/past-issues/volume-5-issue-2-2013/197jacquelyn-n-coutre.   26 Guido Hinterkeuser, ‘Visions of Power: Andreas Schlüter’s Monuments to the Great Elector and Friedrich III and I’, Sculpture Journal 22, no. 1 (2013): 21.   27 (1) Willem II, Prince of Orange, Count of Nassau, 1641; (2) Maria Stuart, Princess of England, Scotland, and Ireland, 1641; (3) Amalia von Solms-Braunfels, 1647; (4) Maurits, Prince of Orange, Count of Nassau, before 1647; (5) Frederik Hendrik, Prince of Orange, Count of Nassau, before 1647; (6) Elector Friedrich Wilhelm von Brandenburg, 1647; (7) Electress Louise Henriëtte, Princess of Orange, Countess of Nassau, 1647; (8) Filips Willem, Prince of Orange, Count

Object Orange 215

  28   29

  30   31

  32

  33   34

  35   36   37   38

of Nassau, Baron of Breda, before 1647. These are now at Sanssouci today as the so-called Oranierrondell. Von Orlich, Geschichte des preussischen Staates im siebzehnten Jahrhundert, 3: 456. ‘Man siehet auch noch an dem Ende zur Lincken Hand eine kostbahre Grotte/ mit Schwartz und weissen Marmel/ auch Seulen und anderen Stücken ausgezieret/ worden auch kostbahre Brust-Bilder/ davon das eine von Ihro Hoheit Herrn Vater Printz Friedrich Henrichen/das andere von Dero Herrn Gemahl/ das dritte von Dero Herrn Bruder Printz Wilhelmen zu sehen; Aus den Fenstern aber ein schöner Prospect in den Orange-Garten / in welchen diese Bäume zur Sommers-Zeit gesetzet werden.’ Johann Christoph Beckmann, Historie des Fürstenthums Anhalt, 3 vols (Zerbst: Zerbst Tietze, 1710), vol. 3, pt 3, 393, cited in Katharina Bechler, Schloss Oranienbaum. Architektur und Kulturpolitik der Oranierinnen in der zweiten Hälfte des 17. Jahrhunderts (Halle: Mitteldeutscher Verlag, 2007), 194. Fieldtrip to Oranienbaum, 2010. ‘De posture van Syn Hoocheijdt, die stelle ick, in plaetse dat hy by den heere van Campen maer half en diep in den wagen staet, soo stelle ick dien boven, oft geheel sittende oft staende, als eenen Cesar oft Alexander, hooch boven uit, ende voege in twee schetsen, daerby dese sinnebeelden, te weten: aen d‘een syde Neptunus, die syn Hoocheijdt, als admirael van de zee, met synen trident accompaingneert, sijnde qualiteijt van eeren; ende aen d’ander syde Mars, die synen helm en syn sweert voor syn Hoocheijts voeten nederleijdt.’ Jacob Jordaens to Constantijn Huygens, 23 April 1651, De Briefwisseling van Constantijn Huygens (1608–1687), ed. J. A. Worp, 6 vols (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1917), 5: 85. ‘De jonckvrouwen, by den heere van Campen gesteldt, stelle die, in de eene schetse, achter den jongen Prinse, midden in t geslachte, neffens de heeren van den bloede, representeerende soo de coonincklycke Alliancien, door de Trouwe ende Croone, alsmede de hertochlycke qualiteijt aen het doorluchtich Huijs van Brandenborch’; and ‘De statuen by U. Ed. genoteert, soo van Prinse Maurits als van Prinse Wilhelm, hoochloffelycke gedachtenisse, die stelle over wedersyden van het werck, op pedestaelen, in gebronste figueren van coper, den Prince daertusschen door rijdende’. Jacob Jordaens to Constantijn Huygens, 23 April 1651, in Worp, De Briefwisseling van Constantijn Huygens, 5: 85. ‘Unne vase de vristal et deux tablau, don l’eun est de Van Dijck qui représante la charité, et l’autre est d’eunne vierge qui est ausy d’eun très bon maitere; j’espère, Sire, que Vostre Majesté resevera agréableman ces foible témoinian de son profon respect, et scy j’oes se servire de se termine de la parfarfaite tanderesse qu’elle a toujour conservé pour la personne de Vostre Majesté, ne regarde don pas, il vous plait, Sire, à la valleur, amis à la bonne intansion de ma très chère soeur et réserves en les derneire marque d’aucy bon coeur, qu’il vous on est donné’, 30 June 1696, in Correspondentie van Willem III en van Hans Willem Bentinck, 3 vols (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1932–7), 1: 409. 23 April 1696. John Evelyn, The Diary of John Evelyn, ed. William Bray, 2 vols (London: Walter Dunne, 1901), 2: 337. Correspondentie van Willem III en van Hans Willem Bentinck, 1: 410–11. Eirwen E. C. Nicholson, ‘The Oak v. the Orange Tree: Emblematizing Dynastic Union and Conflict, 1600–1796’, in Anglo-Dutch Relations in the Field of the Emblem, ed. Bart Westerweel (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 227–52. Nicholson, ‘The Oak v. the Orange Tree’, 232–3. Reproduced in Pierpont Morgan Library Exhibition Catalogue: J. W. Nordholt, J. G. Van Gelder, A. W. Vliegenthart, William and Mary and Their House (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979), 88–9, no. 44.

216  Materialising power   39 ‘In de gulden camer’, Maria van Nassau had ‘een houten vergulde ledecant met een damast behangsel gebordueert met Orangien appelen, daerop gebordueert de waepenen van mijn genadighe vrouwe de gravinne van Hohenlo, saemen geëstimeert [. . .] 60 gl’. Drossaers, and Lunsingh Scheurleer, Inventarissen, 1: 170 n 14.   40 ‘Dame mit Orange’, Stiftung Preußischer Schlösser und Gärten BerlinBrandenburg. This image is now used for advertising the palace of Oranienburg. See http://www.spsg.de/index.php?id=129&sessionLanguage=en.   41 Reproduced in Pfeifer and Savelsberg, Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje, 178. The painting hangs today in the Gothic House at Wörlitz Park, not far from Oranienbaum.   42 The signed original painting is in the Royal Dutch Archives in The Hague. A copy, after Netscher, is held at Erddig in Wrexham, Wales. National Trust Inventory Number 1151308. See http://www.nationaltrustcollections.org.uk/ object/1151308.   43 Workshop of Caspar Netscher, Albertine Agnes van Nassau-Diez with Her Children Amalia und Hendrik Casimir II, c. 1672/3. The Hague, Stichting Historische Verzameligen van het Huis Oranje-Nassau, Huis ten Bosch.   44 Adriaen Hanneman, Portrait of William III, Prince of Orange, as a Child, 1654, oil on canvas, 135cm × 95cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-3889. Available at: https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/en/collection/SK-A-3889.   45 Oranges had already been used by the Medici family in the fifteenth century. Marina Heilmeyer, ‘Orangen für das Haus Oranien’, in Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje, ed. Pfeifer and Savelsberg, 100–103.   46 Now held in the Prado.   47 Kulturstiftung Wörlitz. Wolfgang Savelsberg, ed., Schloss Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje – Kulturstiftung Dessau Wörlitz: Schloss Oranienbaum (Heidelberg: Vernissage-Verl., 2003).   48 Schacht, Meiner and Lademacher, Onder den Oranje Boom, 372.   49 Schacht, Meiner and Lademacher, Onder den Oranje Boom, 370.   50 Leeuwarden, Fries Museum.   51 Adriaen de Hennin, Portrait of Princess Mary Stuart Wife of William of Orange, 1677. Sold at auction in 1986. See http://artsalesindex.artinfo.com/asi/ lots/1366209.   52 Henriëtte Catharina und Johann Georg II von Anhalt-Dessau mit ihrem Sohn Leopold, c. 1677. Dessau, Anhaltische Gemäldegalerie. Reproduced in Savelsberg, Schloss Oranienbaum, 281.   53 Govert Flinck, Allegorie auf Geburt und Tod des Kurprinzen Wilhelm Heinrich von Brandenburg, c. 1648/50. Potsdam, Stiftung Preußische Schlösser und Gärten – Neues Palais. Reproduced in Schacht, Meiner and Lademacher, Onder den Oranje Boom, 222.   54 Constantijn Netscher, Heinrich Kasimir II von Nassau-Diez und seine Gemahlin Henriette Amalie von Anhalt-Dessau mit ihren Kindern, c. 1691. The Hague, Stichting Historische Verzamelingen van het Huis Oranje-Nassau. On loan to Apeldoorn, Paleis Het Loo. Reproduced in Schacht, Meiner and Lademacher, Onder den Oranje Boom, 331.   55 ‘Inwendig fensterladen, uf die untersten gemahlet A so Anhalt bedeutet, und zweige von Pomeranzen, welches orange bedeutet’. Christoph Pitzler, cited in Wilhelm van Kempen, ‘Das Reisetage- und Skizzenbuch des Architekten Christoph Pitzler, eine Quelle zur anhaltischen Kunstgeschichte des 17. und 18. Jahrhunderts’, Mitteilungen des Vereins für Anhaltische Geschichte und Altertumskunde 14, no. 1 (1920): 95.   56 ‘Je crois que demain matin la garnison ainsi que la bourgeoisie arborera la cocarde Orange; du moins tous les officiers ont leur cocarde en poche et on travaille toute la nuit à teindre des rubans blancs en orange. Il y a deux bourgeois,

Object Orange 217 un tialleur et un perruquier, qui se sont promenés cet après-midi avec un énorme W de carton, entouré de rubans orange sur le chapeau’, 28 June 1787, in Johanna W. A. Naber, ed., Correspondentie van de stadhouderlijke familie 1777–1820. Vol. 1: 1777–1793 (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1931), 10.   57 Simon Schama, Patriots and Liberators: Revolution in the Netherlands, 1780–1813 (New York: Knopf, 1977), 105.   58 See A. M. L. E. Erkelens, ‘Delffs Porcelijn’ van koningin Mary II/ Queen Mary’s ‘Delft porcelain’. Ceramics at Het Loo from the time of William and Mary (Museum Catalogue) (Apeldoorn: Paleis Het Loo, 1996), 11. For a listing of Louise de Coligny’s porcelain, see the 1632 inventory ‘Inventaris van het Stadouderlijk Kwartier en het Huis in het Noordeinde (Oude Hof) 1632’, in Drossaers and Lunsingh Scheurleer, Inventarissen, 1: 203–6. The inventory lists specifically several hundred pieces of porcelain arranged in a special ‘het cabinet’ on three shelves and around the fireplace. Only a few pieces were identified as being Japanese porcelain, including position number 567, described as ‘Twee Jappaensche soutvaten’.   59 D. F. Slothouwer, De Paleizen van Frederik Hendrik (Leiden: A.W. Sijthoff, 1945); Koen Ottenheym, ‘“Van bouw-lust soo beseten”: Frederik Hendrik en de bouwkunst’ and Vanessa Bezemer Sellers, ‘Condet aurea saecula: de tuinen van Frederik Hendrik’, in Vorstelijk vertoon, ed. Keblusek and Zijlmans, 105–25 and 126–42; Eelco Elzenga, ‘Statthalterliche Architektur und Gartenkunst’, in Onder den Oranje boom, ed. Schacht, Meiner and Lademacher, 131–53; Rebecca Tucker, The Art of Living Nobly: The Patronage of Prince Frederik Hendrik (1584–1647) at the Palace of Honselaarsdijk during the Dutch Republic (Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Institute of Fine Arts, New York University, 2002).   60 Rebecca Tucker, ‘The Patronage of Rembrandt’s Passion Series: Art, Politics, and Princely Display at the Court of Orange in the Seventeenth Century’, The Seventeenth Century 25 (2010): 77.   61 Tucker, ‘The Patronage of Rembrandt’s Passion Series’, 100–101.   62 On the role of Huygens as a conduit to artists, see Rudolf Rasch, ‘Een raadsman voor de kunsten: Constantijn Huygens als adviseur van Frederik Hendrik’, Kunstenaars en opdrachtgevers, ed. Harald Hendrix and Jeroen Stumpel (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1996), 89–117; Pieter Vlaardingerbroek, ‘De stadhouder, zijn secretaris en de architectuur: Jacob van Campen als ontwerper van het Huygenshuis en de hofarchitectuur onder Frederik Hendrik’, Wooncultuur in de in Nederlanden 1500–1800, ed. J. de Jong et al. (Zwolle: Waanders Uitgevers, 2001), 61–82; Kerry Barrett, ‘Mijn heer: Letters from Pieter Soutman to Constantijn Huygens’, Oud-Holland 122 (2009): 155–63; Rebecca Tucker, ‘The Patronage of Rembrandt’s Passion Series’.   63 ‘Inventaris van kostbaarheden, meubelen, schilderijen van Amalia van Solms, ten dele in het Huis ten Bosch, het Huis in het Noordeinde, et het kasteel te turnhout’, in Drossaers and Lunsingh Scheurleer, Inventarissen, 1: 241–92.   64 Reinier Baarsen, ‘Wilhelm de Rots and Early Cabinet-Making in The Hague’, The Burlington Magazine 150, no. 263 (2008): 373.   65 Baarsen, ‘Wilhelm de Rots and Early Cabinet-Making in The Hague’, 373.   66 Baarsen, ‘Wilhelm de Rots and Early Cabinet-Making in The Hague’, 374.   67 Baarsen, ‘Wilhelm de Rots and Early Cabinet-Making in The Hague’, 379.   68 ‘Pour les plates dans les chéminées je les aimerais mieux de mes armes et ceux de Lse, mais si on n’en peut avoir il en faut prendre d’autre’, in von Orlich, Geschichte des preussischen Staates im siebzehnten Jahrhundert, 3: 456.   69 ‘Das Haus ist nur 2 Stock hoch, ist wohl meubliert, mit tapeten’. Christoph Pitzler, cited in van Kempen, ‘Das Reisetage- und Skizzenbuch des Architekten Christoph Pitzler’, 95.   70 Eloy F. Koldeweij, ‘Die Ledertapeten von Henriette Catharina von OranienNassau, Fürstin von Anhalt-Dessau’, in Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje, ed. Pfeifer and Savelsberg, 89–94.

218  Materialising power   71 ‘Unter dem corp. wahren feine magazine, ein Saal so mit Holländ. Steinen belegt, eine feine Küche so mit Engl. Zinn, eine Kammer so mit porzellan versehen und dieses ist nur vor die fürstin, die Hofküche ist bey a [this is a reference to the plan drawing which is included in the original on p. 415].’ Christoph Pitzler, cited in van Kempen, ‘Das Reisetage- und Skizzenbuch des Architekten Christoph Pitzler’, 95.   72 Willem Joliet, ‘Niederländische Fliesen in Schloss Oranienbaum’, in Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje, ed. Pfeifer and Savelsberg, 77–87.   73 Hanna Peter-Raupp, Die Ikonographie des Oranjezaal (Hildesheim: Olms, 1980), esp. 183–6.   74 Reinier Baarsen, ‘The Court Style in Holland’, in Courts and Colonies: The William and Mary Style in Holland, England and America, ed. Reinier Baarsen, Philip M. Johnston, Gervase Jackson-Stops, Elaine Evans Dee (Washington, DC: University of Washington Press, 1988), 15.   75 See also De Grieksche A, Adrianus Kocx, Milk Pan designed after Daniël Marot, c. 1694, Delftware, 12.1cm. Held by the Victoria and Albert Museum, London, C.57-1948. Available at: http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O77958/milk-panmarot-daniel/. Arthur Lane, ‘Daniel Marot: Designer of Delft Vases and of Gardens at Hampton Court’, The Connoisseur (1949): 19–24.   76 Ernest Law, The History of Hampton Court Palace. Vol. 3: Orange and Guelph Times (London: George Bell and Sons, 1891), 56.   77 ‘Zeer waarschijnlijk door Marot ontworpen gebeeldhouwde en vergulde tafel met op het blad de initialen van Henriette Amalia van Anhalt, duveele A, thans in het Mauritshuis’, in Drossaers and Lunsingh Scheurleer, Inventarissen, 2: 353.   78 Reinier Baarsen, ‘The Court Style in Holland’, 16.   79 13 July 1693, Evelyn, The Diary of John Evelyn, 2: 322.   80 Deborah Sampson Shinn, catalogue section, in Baarsen, Johnston, JacksonStops and Dee, Courts and Colonies, 182.   81 See Elaine Evans Dee, ‘Printed Sources for the William and Mary Style’, in Baarsen, Johnston, Jackson-Stops and Dee, Courts and Colonies, 80–85; Paul Hoftijzer and C. C. Barfoot, eds, Fabrics and Fabrications: The Myth and Making of William and Mary (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1990).   82 Originally published as Daniël Marot, Vasses de la Maison Royalle de L’oo (The Hague, c. 1703).   83 Dee, ‘Printed Sources for the William and Mary Style’, 82.   84 Dee, ‘Printed Sources for the William and Mary Style’, 83.   85 ‘310 Delfts porcelijne confiturschälches allerhand form, grosz und klein’. Drossaers and Lunsingh Scheurleer, Inventarissen, 2: 200, position number 1369.   86 Erkelens, ‘Delffs Porcelijn’, 23.   87 Description by Van Bolhuis, 1705, cited in Erkelens, ‘Delffs Porcelijn’, 22.   88 ‘Een Delfse porcelijne kom’, ‘Twee ditto pyramides’, ‘Vijf ditto bloempyramnidtjes’, ‘Ses groote Delfse Schotels’, ‘Drie groote Kommen’, ‘Twee piramiden’, ‘Dertien bloembotten van verscheyde sort en groote’. Inventory of the ‘Little cellar of her Majesty’ (‘Keldertje van Haer Majt’) and ‘Cellar Kitchen’ (‘Keuken-Keldertje’), Het Loo, 1713. See Drossaers and Lunsingh Scheurleer, Inventarissen, 1: 647–94, here 658–9 (position numbers 288, 289, 292, 293, 295, 298, 299).   89 Christine Lahaussois, ‘Le grand style et le goût oriental’, in Delft-Faïence, ed. Christine Lahaussois (Paris: Reunion des musees nationaux, 2008), 84; Wies Erkelens, ‘La porcelaine royale de Delft’, in Delft-Faïence, ed. Lahaussois, 88–97.   90 Deborah Sampson Shinn, catalogue section and commentary, in Baarsen, Johnston, Jackson-Stops and Dee, Courts and Colonies, 178.   91 Boughton Bed, c. 1670–97, Silk damask brocaded with gold thread, on a frame of oak and pine, with carved walnut feet painted black and finials of ostrich

Object Orange 219 and egret feathers. Held by the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, W.67:1 to 34, A to O-1916. Available at: http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O81989/ boughton-bed-bed/.   92 Daniël Marot, Francis Lapiere, The Melville Bed, c. 1700, Bedstock of oak; tester of pine; hangings of crimson Italian velvet with ivory Chinese silk linings, embroidered with crimson braid and fringe; some textile elements stiffened with linen; bed ticking of linen. Held by the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, W.35:1 to 72–1949. Available at: http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O10488/ the-melville-bed-bedstead-marot-daniel/.   93 Gervaise Jackson-Stops, ‘The Court Style in Britain’, in Baarsen, Johnston, Jackson-Stops and Dee, Courts and Colonies, 47. On Lapiere, see Geoffrey Beard and Annabel Westman, ‘A French Upholsterer in England: Francis Lapiere, 1653–1714’, The Burlington Magazine 135, no. 1085 (August, 1993): 515–52.   94 Jackson-Stops, ‘The Court Style in Britain’, 43.   95 The influence of Daniël Marot and other French Huguenots employed in the Orange-Nassau networks and affiliates in England is discussed in JacksonStops, ‘The Court Style in Britain’, 36–61.   96 Reino Liefkes and Patricia F. Ferguson, ‘Faïences de Delft dans les collections anglaises’, in Delft-Faïence, ed. Lahaussois, 102.   97 Deborah Sampson Shinn, catalogue section and commentary, in Baarsen, Johnston, Jackson-Stops and Dee, Courts and Colonies, 191.   98 Liefkes and Ferguson, ‘Faïences de Delft dans les collections anglaises’, 102.   99 Liefkes and Ferguson, ‘Faïences de Delft dans les collections anglaises’, 101. 100 Jackson-Stops, ‘The Court Style in Britain’, 39. 101 See Workshop of Constantijn Netscher, Heinrich Casimir II von Nassau-Diez (1657–1695) and Henriette Amalie von Anhalt-Dessau (1666–1726) with their Children, c. 1691, oil on canvas, 106cm × 81.5cm. The Hague, Stichting Historische Verzamelingen van het Huis Oranje-Nassau. On loan to Paleis Het Loo, Inv. Nr C/0385. 102 See Bechler, Schloss Oranienbaum, 62–4. 103 Storto, Oranienstein, 33. 104 Bechler, Schloss Oranienbaum, 154. 105 For a discussion of the Friso well, see Eduard Sebald, ‘Ein Brunnen als Memoria? Der Friso-Brunnen in Diez’, in Nassau-Diez und die Niederlande, ed. Simon Groenveld and Friedhelm Jürgensmeier (Wiesbaden; Historische Komm. für Nassau, 2012), 187–91. 106 Storto, Oranienstein, 30. 107 For a discussion of this power struggle, see Rouven Pons, ‘Territoriale Machtpolitik und dynastische Verwerfung. Streit um die Vormundschaft ab 1711’, in NassauDiez und die Niederlande, ed. Groenveld and Jürgensmeier, 152–70. 108 ‘Sieben familiencounterfait, sechs in vergulder rahmen, drey von Volters’. ‘Inventaris van de inboedel van het huis Oranienstein 1726’, in Drossaers and Lunsingh Scheurleer, Inventarissen, 2: 352–87, here 374, lot 385. 109 ‘Die Gantze fürstliche familie, jedes stuck in lebensgrösze, von Ernst Ludewig und hertzogin von Braunschweig in gleichen König William von Engellandt in ordens habit sitzend.’ ‘Inventaris van de inboedel van het huis Oranienstein 1726’, in Drossaers and Lunsingh Scheurleer, Inventarissen 2: 352–87, here 363, lot 182. 110 ‘Op de gank van haar hoogheyts slaapkamer: Een groot schilderij: de Nassauise familie’. ‘Inventaris van de inboedel van het huis Oranjewoud 1718/1728’, in Drossaers and Lunsingh Scheurleer, Inventarissen 2: 335–51, here 340, lot 140. 111 Gerhard Suppus, ‘Die Geschichte des Schlossparks Oranienburg- Schloss und Lustgarten wetteiferten im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert mit Potsdam und Charlottenburg’, in Bothzowia – Oranienburg 2 (‘Stadt und Kultur. Gartenkunst,

220  Materialising power Schlösser, Architekur und Wissenschaft’, ed. Bodo Becker, Christian Becker and Manuela Vehma (2009): 13–22. 112 Bechler, Schloss Oranienbaum, 164. 113 Schloss Charlottenburg was intended to have two orangeries on each side of the castle, but only the one on the western side was built, in 1712. 114 Bechler, Schloss Oranienbaum, 142; Peter-Michael Hahn, ‘Magnifizienz und dynastische Legitimation durch Übernahme kultureller Muster: Die Beziehungen der Hohenzollern zum Haus Oranien und den Niederlanden im 17. Jahrhundert’, in Formen der Visualisierung von Herrschaft. Studien zu Adel, Fürst und Schloßbau vom 16.bis 18. Jahrhundert, ed. Peter-Michael Hahn and Helmut Lorenz (Potsdam: Verlag für Berlin-Brandenburg, 1998), 42. 115 Bechler, Schloss Oranienbaum, 142. 116 Hansjörg Küster and Ansgar Hoppe, Das Gartenreich Dessau-Wörlitz. Landschaft und Geschichte (Munich: C.H. Beck, 2010), 78. 117 Christian Knobloch, Zu schön, um zu verstummen. Die Schloss- und Parkanalage Wilhelmsthal, 3rd edn (Meiningen: Resch, 2012). Many thanks to Anke Renner for this reference. 118 Astrid Wehser, Anna Wilhelmine von Anhalt und ihr Schloss in Mosigkau (Kiel: Ludwig, 2002). 119 Wehser, Anna Wilhelmine von Anhalt und ihr Schloss in Mosigkau, 134–5. 120 Bildnis Henriëtte van Zuilensteijn als Diana, c. 1666 (now lost). Another portrait of Henriëtte van Zuilenstein, c. 1665 (in front of her a small table with oranges and an orange branch; copy after Adriaen Hannemann, Portrait of Louise Henriëtte (holding in her right hand orange flowers above an orange tree), inherited from her father Leopold I in 1747; a small copy of Antony Van Dyck, The Five Children of Charles I, bought in 1756 from her aunt’s heiress. This painting had originally belonged to Amalia von Solms-Braunfels. It was first given to Albertine Agnes, then at her death in 1697 to Henriëtte Catharina who willed it to her daughter Marie Eleanore, then to her heiresses Amalia von Nassau-Dietz and her sisters, who sold it to Anna Wilhelmine in 1756. Jan Mijtens, Portrait of Catharina of Dohna (niece of Amalia von SolmsBraunfels); Jan Mijtens, Portrait of a Young Henriëtte Catharina, (ganzfigurig, vor Balustrade mit Mantel und Hut, c. 1652/3); W. L. Lange, Die fünf ältesten Kinder von Johann Georg II von Anhalt Dessau und Henriëtte Catharina von Nassau-Oranien (1681). Wehser, Anna Wilhelmine von Anhalt und ihr Schloss in Mosigkau, 134–5. 121 Wehser, Anna Wilhelmine von Anhalt und ihr Schloss in Mosigkau, 104. 122 Gerd Bartoschek, ‘Ein Kurfürstliches Gemäldekabinett’, in FWC (1620–1688): Der Große Kurfürst; Sammler, Bauherr, Mäzen (Exhibition Catalogue) (Potsdam: Neues Paleis, 1988), 134–48. 123 Gerd Schurig, ‘Ananas- eine königliche Frucht’, in Schön und Nützlich. Aus Brandenburgs Kloster-, Schloss- und Küchengärten (Exhibition Catalogue), ed. Haus der Brandenburgisch-Preußischen Geschichte (Berlin: Henschel Verlag, 2004), 162–5. 124 Schurig, ‘Ananas- eine königliche Frucht’. 125 This material forms part of a wider study in Susan Broomhall, ‘Renovating Affections: Reconstructing the Atholl Family in the Mid-Eighteenth Century’, in Spaces for Feeling: Emotions and Sociabilities in Britain, 1650–1850, ed. Susan Broomhall (London: Routledge, 2015), 52–78. 126 National Register of Archives of Scotland (NRAS), 234/ Atholl House Inventory, 1. We are grateful for the kind assistance of Jane Anderson, Archivist, Blair Castle. On Charlotte de la Trémoille, see Sonja Kmec, Across the Channel: Noblewomen in Seventeenth-Century France and England (Trier: Kliomedia, 2010).

Object Orange 221 127 Chronicles of the Atholl and Tullibardine Families, collected and arranged by John, seventh Duke of Atholl, 5 vols (Edinburgh: Ballantyne Press, 1908) 2: 45. The duke had commissioned Patrick Murray, a mason from Tulliemullie, to construct the monument in 1704. On funeral monuments in Scotland at this era, see Jonathan Finch, ‘“According to the Qualitie and Degree of the Person Deceased”: Funeral Monuments and the Construction of Social Identities, 1400–1750’, Scottish Archaeological Review 8 (1991): 105–14. 128 ‘Et juxta illius conduntur etiam cineres lectissimae conjugis ortu clarisque majoribus multum, virtute vero sanctimonia insigni charitate magis illustris d. Amiliae Stanley, Jacobis comitis Derbiensis et Charlotae de la Tremouille filiae Ducis de la Tremouille apud Gallos’ (translation into English provided onsite). Dunkeld, Dunkeld Cathedral, The Atholl Monument. 129 Chronicles of the Atholl and Tullibardine Families, 2: 9; on the fraught relationship between the Marquess of Atholl and William III, Prince of Orange, and the role of Amelia Stanley, see Nicola Cowmeadow, ‘Scottish Noblewomen, the Family and Scottish Politics, 1688–1707’ (Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Dundee University, 2012), 1–2. Available online at: http://discovery.dundee. ac.uk/portal/files/1271000/Cowmeadow_phd_2012.pdf; and P. W. J. Riley, King William and the Scottish Politicians (Edinburgh: John Donald, 1979), 11–13. For more on the renovations at Blair Castle at this period, see Broomhall, ‘Renovating Affections’. 130 NRAS, 234/ Atholl House Inventory, 1756. 131 On the narrative value of collection practices, see Mieke Bal, ‘Telling Objects: A Narrative Perspective on Collecting’, in The Cultures of Collecting: From Elvis to Antiques – Why do we Collect Things?, ed. John Elsner and Roger Cardinal (Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1994), 97–115. On early modern aristocratic practices of display and power, see Jeroen Duindam, Myths of Power: Norbert Elias and the Early Modern European Court (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1995); Joëlle Rollo-Koster, ed., Medieval and Early Modern Ritual: Formalized Behavior in Europe, China and Japan (Leiden: Brill, 2002); T. C. W. Blanning, The Culture of Power and the Power of Culture: Old Regime Europe, 1660–1789 (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2002); Laurie Postlewate and Wim Hüsken, eds, Acts and Texts: Performance and Ritual in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2007); Giora Sternberg, Status Interaction during the Reign of Louis XIV (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014). 132 NRAS, 234/ Box 40/ 4/ Document 45, 4 July 1749. 133 NRAS, 234/ 40/ 3/ 22, Dunkeld. Letter from Thomas Clayton, at Atholl House, to Humphrey Harrison, 31 March 1750. 134 NRAS, 234/ 40/ 4/ 56, 4 April 1750. 135 NRAS, 234/ 56A. Untitled and without date. Headed ‘A. James Duke of Atholl’. 136 Among the Atholl papers remain the original receipt of payments to one Isaac Collivoe in June 1752 for ‘a head of the Prince of Orange’ and its cleaning, and another portrait of the same. NRAS, 234/ 56A, 13 January 1752. 137 NRAS, 234/ 40/ I1 6, covering 1751–3 (these images were sent 21 August 1752). 138 NRAS, 234/ 71/I/A/4, Journal of a continental journey undertaken 1751–2 by John Murray, entry of 19/30 August 1751. 139 NRAS, 234/ 71/I/A/4, Journal, entry of 2 September (NS) 1751. Anne’s love of music is well documented. See Hans Algra, ‘Muziek aan het hof van Anna van Hannover en Willem Carel Hendrik Friso’, in Van Leeuwarden naar Den Haag: rond de verplaatsing van het stadtholderlijk hof in 1747, ed. J. J. Huizinga and B. Bilker (Franeker: Van Wijnen, 1997), 73–84; Jan Bank and Elizabeth Berkhof, Oranje en de muziek (Catalogue to the exhibition at the Koninklijk Paleis) (Amsterdam: n.p., 1999); L. J. van der Klooster, Mozart en Oranje en

222  Materialising power andere bijdragen over het Huis van Oranje in de 18e eeuw (Zutphen: Walburg Pers, 1992), see esp. ch. ‘Mozart en Oranje in Den Haag. “Hotel Weilbourg”. Het eerste Haags paleis van prinses Carolina en haar echtgenoot’, 7–13. 140 On Anne’s discussions with Friedrich II, see Briefwechsel Friedrich des Grossen mit dem Prinzen Wilhelm IV. von Oranien und mit dessen Gemahlin Anna, geb. Princess Royal von England, ed. Leopold von Ranke (Berlin: Buchdruckerei der Königl. Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1869). 141 NRAS, 234/ 71/I/A/4, Journal, entry of 19/30 August 1751. 142 NRAS, 234/ 71/I/A/4, Journal, entry of 1 September (NS) 1751. P. van der Ploeg, C. Vermeeren, and B. P. J. Broos, eds, Princely Patrons: The Collection of Frederick Henry of Orange and Amalia of Solms in The Hague (Zwolle: Waanders, 1997); Keblusek and Zijlmans, Vorstelijk Vertoon; Margriet van Eikema Hommes and Elmer Kolfin, De Oranjezaal in Huis ten Bosch: Een zaal uit loutere liefde (Zwolle: Uitgeverij Waanders & De Kunst, 2013).

5 Collecting the world Orange-Nassau global power on display in Europe

Benjamin Schmidt has recently suggested that the Dutch Republic became both the central entry point for exotic goods from the west and the east into Europe via its trading companies, and a central production point for distributing ‘geographical exoticism’ (including maps, books, paintings, and the like) from Dutch workshops to the rest of Europe.1 As Schmidt emphasises, this consumption of exotica created European identity. Building on his work, we argue here that this European identity-making reflected distinct gendered and dynastic features of power in the early modern period. The global aspirations of the House of Orange-Nassau were not only on display in Dutch-ruled territories abroad. In this chapter, we examine how dynastic power on the global stage was expressed in Europe, by both women and men associated with this transnational House. How did gender affect the practices of exotic gift exchange and the objects that were to be transferred and displayed, and to whom? What messages did objects sourced from around the globe convey as part of the collections of Orange-Nassau women and men? In both contexts, objects changed meanings and made new claims about the power of the House and its affiliates as they moved to, and between, sites across Europe, as part of the wider Dutch globalism and exotic consumption behaviours of the period. Dynastic status and claims to power beyond Europe were expressed through the governance of a wide range of material forms, from exotic animals and plants, to collections of non-animated material culture such as lacquer boxes and cabinets, porcelain, exotic garments, and textiles. They provided a myriad of, often gender-specific, sites for interpreting and projecting Orange-Nassau presentations of status and identity that, in some cases, became understood in their wake as behaviours of specific commodity consumption for the European elite more broadly.

Furnishing with global reach Exotic objects had formed part of the Orange-Nassau collections from the early days of contact with Asia. The inventory made after the death of Eleanor de Bourbon, widow of Filips Willem, revealed that the costly collection displayed in her rooms at the castle in Breda, which included Asian porcelain

224  Materialising power and imported fabrics such as the ‘satin Indian tablecloth’ in a cabinet, was of a sizeable value.2 Likewise, Louise de Coligny’s rooms at Noordeinde, inventoried in 1632, contained exotic furnishings including Japanese lacquer cabinets.3 Increasingly, Orange-Nassau leaders used their diplomatic influence with the VOC and GWIC to consciously enhance their own representation at home by ordering selected objects of prestige, which would demonstrate their dynastic power and their ability to procure such treasures to a European audience. Women actively engaged and identified with such colonial markers of status. Amalia von Solms-Braunfels and other Orange-Nassau women were keen to display precious objects such as the porcelain and furniture brought to them through VOC and GWIC connections. The inventories from 1645 of the palaces of Noordeinde and Huis ten Bosch show that several of Amalia’s rooms in her apartments were furnished with ‘Eastern’ artefacts: cabinets of Chinese and Japanese lacquer work, damask cloth from China and India, porcelain from China, silverwork from India or Sri Lanka, and ebony furniture. These furnishings often went hand in hand with her modes of display, such as at Huis ten Bosch where the cabinet next to her bedroom showcased porcelain, lacquerwork and other exotic items.4 We know from inventories of 1654–68, 1673 and 1676 that Amalia’s apartments contained a collection of porcelain but also lacquer works, pieces with ivory, mother of pearl, and tortoise shell, and objects generally described as ‘Indianisch werck’ (‘Indian things’). C. W. Fock has suggested that there was a marked increase in these colonial objects over the years.5 Amalia had at least sixty-five objects made of mother of pearl, including large and small bowls, boxes, and dishes.6 Objects made of mother of pearl were typical for cabinets of rare, exotic, and curious artefacts.7 Fock argues that these forms of porcelain cabinets, and their combination with cabinets for lacquer work, plus the use of mirrors in the porcelain cabinets had no precedent in Europe, and were spread by the Orange-Nassau family.8 She suggests that the display in Amalia’s rooms of mother of pearl and ‘Namban’ lacquer work was designed to impress visitors, as indeed, in 1677, two visitors from Bologna observed: ‘the nearby hall room is noble and splendid, it is completely covered with wood from China and painted in the manner of this country, nor is mother of pearl missing so that makes it all glittering.’9 This form of curiosity cabinet – the effective display of precious objects so as to claim princely prestige – was also practised by other women in the Orange-Nassau family. Through the inheritance of the personal property in Amalia’s estate in 1676, most of these artefacts went to her daughters in Germany.10 She also circulated them to other family members in her will (although she did not give them away in order to seek external patronage as did others in the Orange-Nassau network). Amalia’s daughters thus inherited her colonial objects, which they in turn displayed in their own palaces. They then increased the House’s collections through additional purchases, which they

Collecting the world 225 transmitted to their children or, if childless, to their sisters. Like her sisters, Henriëtte Catharina asserted her own identity as an Orange-Nassau princess in her new home, and between 1663 and 1687 luxury goods, including Asian porcelain, were sent from The Hague to decorate the palace in Dessau, and later her newly built palace at nearby Oranienbaum. The Dessau castle housed a considerable collection of Orange-Nassau family portraits and luxury objects of the kind that Amalia and her daughters loved to display in their palaces: Chinese and Japanese porcelain, mother of pearl objects, lacquer work, and figures made of soapstone from Japan (Figures 5.1 and 5.2).11 This material culture was a vital part of the display of dynastic power, which articulated the reach of the Orange-Nassau across the world. The architect Christoph Pitzler noted the high quality of furniture in both Dessau castle and in Oranienbaum, in particular the tiled stoves and ornate chairs and tables, used for the display of luxury eastern objects such as lacquer boxes, porcelain, and tea pots: one finds very fine small chests made of natural wood as well as lacquer work, several fully gilded chairs and tables, also guerdons. [They] have stoves which are tiled with small tiles and open fire places, which are usually in the corner.12

Figure 5.1 Soapstone oriental figures in Henriette Amalie von Anhalt-Dessau’s collection at Wörlitz, part of her inheritance from Henriëtte Catharina. Kulturstiftung Dessau Wörlitz. Photograph: Heinz Fräßdorf.

226  Materialising power

Figure 5.2 Porcelain from Henriëtte Catharina’s collection in front of her gilded leather wallpaper at Oranienbaum. Kulturstiftung Dessau Wörlitz. Photograph: Heinz Fräßdorf.

The English traveller William Brockman similarly noted the rich decoration of porcelain, paintings, Japanese lacquer work, and tapestries at the home of her sister, Albertine Agnes, at Oranjewoud, when he visited in 1684.13 Just before her death, around 1695, a special room panelled with Chinese-incised lacquer screens, known at the time as coromandel, was created for the apartments of Albertine Agnes in the Frisian Stadtholder’s residence at Leeuwarden. It survives and is now on display at the Rijksmuseum (Figure 5.3).

Collecting the world 227

Figure 5.3 Anonymous, Lacquer Room, before 1695, wood, 53cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, BK-16709.

Oranienhof, the home of Henriëtte Catharina and Albertine Agnes’s younger sister Maria, was destroyed by the French in 1690, but Maria’s will, which left her possessions to her surviving sisters Albertine Agnes and Henriëtte Catharina, reveals not only a substantial collection of porcelain including precious pieces inherited from her mother, Amalia, but also a significant collection of other exotic goods.14 All of the daughters, but it seems especially Maria, ordered overseas products from The Hague and paid for them with their own money (or used their credit). From her inventories and her will, it seems that Asian porcelain was used primarily for display, or for the consumption of other prestigious products from Dutch trading networks such as tea, coffee, and chocolate, and only the bedrooms of the family

228  Materialising power members displayed colonial objects such as tea tables, porcelain, Japanese lacquer work and the like. At Hampton Court, the refurbishments planned by William Talman for Willem III in 1699 included mention of ‘the King’s Chocolatt Kitchen’ in the palace, with a window looking out on to a small area known as the ‘chocolate court’.15 Chocolate was evidently a regular part of Willem’s diet, for a memorandum concerning the king’s diet while he was at Hampton Court in the summer of 1700 noted that ‘His breakfast was only a dish of chocolate, without any water in it’.16 Willem’s newly appointed rooms at Hampton Court were likewise swathed with such exotic materials, displayed porcelain, and fine silverwork.17 Among his precious items was an impressive pair of silver-gilt andirons, or fire-dogs, attributed to Andrew Moore in 1696–7. Each was shaped with scrolled pedestals, foliage, and Willem’s crowned monogram, surmounted by a putto bearing a basket of fruit.18 Willem had particular political reasons to showcase his access to silver. Silver, accessed from the Dutch trading relationship with Japan, was a commodity that the VOC circulated to its profit around the Asian region. South America provided further mines that enabled a flourishing Dutch silverwork industry. A prized material at the French court, regularly comprising its tableware, Louis XIV had reportedly melted his own precious metal down (and ordered the elite to do likewise) to assist in the war efforts against the allied English, Dutch, and Austrians in the War of Spanish Succession (1701–14).19 Andrew Moore’s fine silver and oak side table, made in 1698–9, probably following designs by Daniël Marot, displayed a fine example of a pineapple, native to South America. The limited access to such goods was celebrated in a range of visual and material forms.20 Willem’s distinctive furnishings equally conveyed political messages that coupled Orange-Nassau power with Dutch global reach. Lacquer work, Asian porcelain, and imported fabrics were displayed in the furnishing of Mary II Stuart’s personal spaces in both the Netherlands and England just as they had been by Orange-Nassau princesses of earlier generations. Her bed in the ‘Chamber of State’ at Windsor was described by traveller Celia Fiennes at the turn of the eighteenth century as covered with ‘Indian [Chinese] Embroidery on white Sattin being presented to her by ye Compy. On it Great Plumes of white ffeathers’.21 Daniel Defoe described Mary’s apartments at Hampton as ‘most exquisitely furnished; [with] particularly a fine chints bed, then a great curiosity’.22 Authentic imports from the trading outposts interacted with European artefacts modelled on their look and manufacturing processes, creating an even more plentiful style. Mary’s decorations employed imitation ‘jappanned’ works and Dutch- and English-produced ceramics to complement and extend the foreign look further. These could be complemented by the fashionable chinoisiere style of other furnishings. For example, the versatile Daniël Marot produced designs for a wallpaper around 1700 that combined pseudo-Oriental and European baroque motifs. Its panels envisaged foreign life much as Europe’s contemporary elite chose to enjoy it themselves, depicting exotic figures in curious landscape settings, under

Collecting the world 229 pineapples trees and at pagodas, with leopards, camels, cranes, and swans providing a faunal and floral backdrop to tea drinking, hunting, and fishing.23 Significantly, the use and display of exotic material culture in the hands of Orange-Nassau women and men produced markedly different assessments. In September 1685, Constantijn Huygens addressed a letter to Mary. Huygens, positioning himself as the voice of the people of China, begged Mary not to destroy the fine Chinese craftsmanship of an original lacquered screen, which he had heard was to be broken up and incorporated into a new cabinet. Huygens wondered how most ignorant, barbarous and malitious people, [. . .] should have so farre prevailled with Your Highn.s renowned sweet, mild and gracious disposition, as to persuade her to lett the same illustrious monument sawed, divided, cut, clift and slit asunder and reduced to a heap of monstrous shivers and splinters, and all this desolation to no higher purpose then to see the wals of some miserable cabinet decked and adorned forsooth with our unhappy ruines.24 He asked Mary to consider whether it was just to not recognise the careful workmanship of the original and asked how your High.s and your nation be loath to endure the same sort of scan­ dal, if a peece of your best – though in comparison of ours but poore and miserable European – pictures did fall in our hands, and we came to have the boldness to cut it in peeces and abuse and dispose of it in the like shamefull a manner as is said above.25 Huygens was not alone in decrying the use to which Mary put exotic imports for decorative and furnishing purposes in her palace. Later, Daniel Defoe would famously critique the ‘fatal excess’ of Mary’s exotic innovations in England: namely, (1.) the love of fine East-India calicoes, such as were then call’d masslapatan chints, atlases, and fine painted calicoes, which afterwards descended so much into the humours of the common people so much, as to make two acts at several times to restrain, and at last to prohibit the use of them: (2.) The Queen brought in the custom or humour, as I may call it, of furnishing houses with china-ware, which increased to a strange degree afterwards, piling their china upon the tops of cabinets, scrutores, and every chimney-piece, to the tops of the ceilings, and even setting up shelves for their china-ware, where they wanted such places, till it became a grievance in the expence of it, and even injurious to their families and estates. The good Queen far from designing any injury to the country where she was so entirely belov’d, little thought she was in either these laying foundation for such fatal excesses, and would no doubt have been the first to have reform’d them had she lived to see it.26

230  Materialising power Just as Mary’s involvement in architectural and horticultural projects had produced ambiguous remarks, so too did her conspicuous consumption of foreign goods. Deep-rooted concerns about the access of women to such luxury display items, and the access to power that it denoted, were articulated more and less explicitly in the commentaries of Huygens and Defoe on female excess and ignorance of style. They were in direct contrast to the praise heaped upon Orange-Nassau men (which we shall discuss below), even by these same two eyewitnesses, for their ambitious presentations of rule in spatial and material forms.

Brazilian exotica in Europe In the hands of men, even affiliates such as Johann Moritz, who was not a leading member of the Nassau dynasty nor a member of the House of Orange, the display and exchange of exotic material culture in Europe produced equally powerful, but far more positive, responses. After his return from Brazil, and with the wealth that its sugar plantations had brought him, his position both in the dynasty and in relation to his Orange-Nassau relatives increased. He returned with a large collection of exotic objects that both he and the wider dynasty were able to put to use in promoting their position and power. Johann Moritz’s exotica included ‘exotic human objects’; he had brought a group of Tarairiu from Brazil to the Dutch Republic when he returned in 1644. Friar Calado recorded that the king of the Tarairiu had sent twentyfour men to accompany Johann Moritz on his return to Europe, of whom Johann Moritz agreed to take six.27 Van Baerle, commissioned by Johann Moritz, described the many gifts that accompanied these men, signalling the close bonds of friendship and sense of protection that the Tarairiu felt under Johann Moritz’s governance.28 Indigenous people had been important allies of the Dutch against the Portuguese under Johann Moritz’s government in Brazil.29 Indeed, Calado suggested that Johann Moritz continue to exchange gifts with their leaders long after his return to Europe.30 On his return, Johann Moritz began not only to show visitors through his Mauritshuis in The Hague, which displayed paintings of Brazilian, Mestizo, and African peoples, but also apparently had Tupinamba (formerly known as Tupi) performing dances in his house. Constantijn Huygens wrote of these to Amalia von Solms-Braunfels: ‘Count Moritz brought savages back [from Brazil] who perform dances, at which they are completely naked. The ambassadors, who came with their wives to watch them, found this not proper.’31 When Johann Moritz hosted the wedding celebrations of Albertine Agnes and Willem Frederik at Cleves in 1652, a pageant of ‘Brazilian and African tribes’ was included as part of the festivities:32 There came a number of Moors and Tapoyer, 2 and 2, on foot. The first two had a parrot and a monkey [lit. baboon], the others were 22 Moors

Collecting the world 231 and Tapoyer, in their fashion with feathers on their heads, and all locked securely in chains. They carried big bowls and barrels filled with lemons, sugar, apples etc. The Tapoyer also carried woven baskets, full of human flesh, arms and legs [. . .] prepared in their Barbarian ways.33 Johann Moritz also commissioned a number of portraits with young male African slaves and indigenous people. He had already been painted in a lifesized portrait among Tupinamba men during his time in Brazil. A further 1666 portrait by Pieter Nason shows him as a Knight of the Order of Saint John of Jerusalem. To his right stands an African slave holding orange feathers and a map of the fortress of Schenkenschanz near Cleves, which had been claimed back from the Spanish by the Dutch under the leadership of Frederik Hendrik in 1635 (Figure 5.4).34 Moreover, Johann Moritz assiduously promoted his own narrative of his governance in Brazil through a series of publication projects on his return to Europe. Caspar van Baerle’s lavish Latin two-volume history of Johann Moritz’s time in the colony was published in 1647 under Johann Moritz’s

Figure 5.4 Pieter Nason, Prinz Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen, n.d., oil on canvas, 118cm × 100cm. Stiftung Preußische Schlösser und Gärten Berlin-Brandenburg, GKI 10777. Photograph: Wolfgang Pfauder.

232  Materialising power commission. Van Baerle had a history of supporting the House of OrangeNassau; he had previously written poems praising Maurits and Frederik Hendrick in their alliance with the French through Richelieu, as well as another welcoming home Johann Moritz on his return from Brazil.35 Johann Moritz had provided van Baerle with access to a large amount of his correspondence with the directors, States General, and Frederik Hendrick in order to formulate his history.36 However, Johann Moritz clearly had firm ideas about how this narrative was to be presented and about the quality of the strongly visualised publication that would showcase its presentation. He asked van Baerle in March 1647 that more copies be stipulated for, including the 20 destined for yourself. Besides, J. Blaeu should be notified that he ought to give the copies cheaper and also that he should promote further the translation in other languages. But, above all, it should be stipulated that he should furnish the plates for as many pictures as will be needed.37 The resultant text was published by Blaeu in two editions, one with coloured illustrations and another in monochrome.38 As Ernst van den Boogaart argues, Frans Post’s illustrations – which comprised the majority of the fifty-six plates created for the publication – showed an ethnically diverse but highly hierarchical society in which all groups worked harmoniously for the productivity and prosperity of the Dutch colony. In these images, slavery, an uncomfortable topic in the Netherlands, if less so for the colonies and companies where it was thoroughly exploited, was presented here as ‘endurable servitude’.39 Johann Moritz’s attention to the details of the publication suggest that the value of the text was not just in the interpretation that it provided, but also in the book itself as a material object, which could be utilised as part of his gift exchange strategies. The Mauritshuis in The Hague was completed during Johann Moritz’s governance in Brazil. Huygens oversaw the project (he lived next door) and corresponded with Johann Moritz about it. Pieter Post, whose brother Frans had accompanied Johann Moritz to Brazil and was to supply the illustrations for van Baerle’s account, was responsible for its design, together with Jacob van Campen, who would later be involved in the Oranjezaal at Huis ten Bosch, which Amalia dedicated to her husband after his death in 1647.40 Post was later also responsible for the design of the Prinzenhof at Cleves and for improvements to Swanenburg Castle. The staircase of the Mauritshuis was reputed to be ‘one of the finest and costliest of all Europe, because it is double, most large, and all built of a most rare Indian [Brazilian] wood’, according to Sir William Lower.41 Johann Moritz had shipped back to Europe various exotic materials that were used in decoration and furniture, including an ivory settee, chairs, stools and table, looking-glass and stands, and a cabinet that in 1652 was sold to Friedrich Wilhelm of Brandenburg.42 The frescoes next to the major staircase depicted scenes from Brazil, which were possibly Albert Eckhout’s work:43 ‘all the nations, painted from nature, pagan and barbaric (Negroes, Tapuias, Hottentots, and other savages)’.44 Johann

Collecting the world 233 Moritz’s paintings, furniture, and exotic objects were displayed here, making it instantly the most important curiosity cabinet in the Dutch Republic at this time, at the heart of Orange-Nassau power.45 As van Baerle enthused, He carried many exotic items which the Dutch would admire as rare and unknown, such as skins of quadrupeds, fish, and birds, utensils made by the barbarians, weapons, headbands, and caps. These were all transported to the United Provinces, not primarily for his own pleasure only, but for the use and delight of all. The proof is to be found in the Anatomical Theater in Leiden in Holland, where today, just as in the vaults under the Capitoline, the gift of the Count’s generosity can be seen. [. . .] once returned to the United Provinces, he displayed many of nature’s wonder and materials that are a help to scientists and physicians in the halls of learning. He also wanted representations of these materials by later generations, so that when these specimens had perished there would still be images revealing the marvels of the New World. These paintings and tapestries can be seen in the magnificent palace that he built in The Hague, near the entrance to The Court, together with many other admirable works of art made of ivory and elephants’ teeth.46 Among the paintings were the large-scale Eckhout images that were perhaps intended originally to hang in the Vrijburg, as they were cut smaller to make them fit at the Mauritshuis.47 Johann Moritz’s house in The Hague was an extravagant material and visual display of dynastic power: on the ground level, the large Brazil paintings were displayed, and moving up the Brazilian wood staircase one found full-length portraits of Orange-Nassau family members. Johann Moritz’s cultivation and collection of material culture provided far more than just personal benefits; it was transmitted through the family more broadly. For example, the team of artists who had documented his time in Brazil, both abroad and on their return, received commissions that enabled them to circulate throughout the wider dynasty. In May 1644, Johann Moritz wrote to Frederik Hendrik to ask him to commission Frans Post to execute a large work, Large View of the West Indies, for 800 florins, a substantial sum that would help Post to establish his career on his return to the Netherlands.48 Frederik Hendrik’s use of Dutch colonial expansion to enhance his own social status is evident in the decoration of his palaces. The inventory from 1632 of the Old Court in Noordeinde in The Hague shows that he possessed thirteen large paintings depicting VOC forts, including Nova Batavia, the city of Malacca, Fort Nassau, and Fort Frederik Hendrick on Solor.49 Records suggest that Frederik Hendrik was responsible for the commission of a number of paintings that hung in his apartments at Honselaarsdijk, as the 1758 inventory describes: ‘Above the door on the northern side hang seven paintings, all of them Dutch forts in the East Indies, which were painted after life on order of the late Prince Frederik Hendrik.’50 These images were complemented by other kinds of visual events. In February 1638, Amalia’s sister Louise Christina van Solms married Johan Wolfert van Brederode (1599–1655) (who

234  Materialising power later married Anna Johanna von Nassau-Siegen). As part of the festivities, a series of entertainments celebrating Dutch control ‘over the whole world’ took place.51 The diplomat Willem Boreel described these, in a letter to Huygens, as demonstrations of the territories over which the Dutch ‘keep possession and maintain [. . .] showing the reach of this government’.52 The House of Orange and affiliated dynasties clearly desired to be identified with Dutch overseas colonies, just as their naming in these locations already signalled an Orange-Nassau claim to power. The artists that had accompanied Johann Moritz clearly benefitted from his patronage and that of his wider network. In June 1648, Albert Eckhout notably christened his first daughter Maria Mauritia after his patron.53 Facilitated by Johann Moritz, Eckhout secured a position as court painter in Dresden at the court of Elector Johann Georg II in the years 1653 to 1663, and then returned to his native Groningen for the last few years of his life.54 This patronage through Johann Moritz’s wider family connections provided an opportunity to establish a unified visual and material presentation of dynastic images, in this case of the rare and exotic in the world beyond Europe that was within OrangeNassau reach. Frans Post likewise continued to work with Johann Moritz and his illustrations were included in van Baerle’s 1647 publication. An ‘Indian scene’ listed in the 1743 inventory of Oranienburg, now attributed to Post, depicts Pernambuco from the seaside, with visible evidence of Dutch colonial interventions on the landscape: on the left, Recife, in the middle, Mauritsstad and Vrijburg, and on the right, Castrum Waerdenburch (Figure 5.5).55 However, after the political failure of Dutch Brazil, Post’s work began to take on new qualities that connected less to memories of Dutch colonial glory and increasingly to a rather generalised exoticism that could appeal to a far wider community of wealthy European patrons, as suggested in works he produced during the later 1650s and 1660s (Figures 5.6 and 5.7). As Benjamin Schmidt has argued, Post’s work transformed, in the decades after his return from South America, into more generic ‘exotiscapes’.56 Indeed, Post’s later effacement of the Dutch (and Nassau) in Brazil was similar to that of Willem Piso. The later editions of his Historia naturalis Brasiliae (first published in 1648), after the defeat of the Dutch in Brazil, removed the preface that contained fulsome praise of his then patron, Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen.57 Johann Moritz’s Brazilian collection became a powerful marker of wealth and power for the Orange-Nassaus. The works of Albert Eckhout, who had accompanied Johann Moritz to Brazil, were used by Jacob van Campen for the Oranjezaal commissioned by Amalia to celebrate Frederik Hendrik and the House of Orange-Nassau.58 But other members and associates of the Orange dynasty were also eager to employ the Brazilian references after Johann Moritz’s return. For example, some of his feather objects were loaned to Mary Henrietta Stuart, wife of Willem II, for her masque in The Hague in 1655.59 She was posthumously portrayed with the cloak by Adriaen Hanneman around 1664 (Figure 5.8).60 This image maximised the representation strategies of Dutch colonial aspirations and power: she is shown in the feather cloak

Collecting the world 235

Figure 5.5 Frans Post (attributed), Pernambuco from the Seaside, on the Left, Recife, in the Middle, Mauritsstad and Vrijburg, and Right Castrum Waerdenburch, c. 1637–44, oil on parchment, 142cm × 217cm. Stiftung Preußische Schlösser und Gärten Berlin-Brandenburg, GK I 3761. Photo: Klaus Bergmann.

brought back from Brazil by Johann Moritz, with an African slave serving her by tying her bracelet on her right wrist. Apparently three more portraits of Mary with Brazilian feather ornaments existed, but are now lost.61 A similar Brazilian cloak is featured in the portrait of Sophie von der Pfalz (1644) by her sister Louise Hollandine.62 A miniature painted by Nathaniel Thach, which may depict Henrietta, the Duchess of Orleans, daughter of Charles I or one of the daughters of Friedrich V and Elizabeth Stuart, appears to show her wearing a similar feathered masque costume (Figure 5.9).63 The utilisation of Johann Moritz’s feather objects from Brazil in ritual display enhanced the House’s prestige on many occasions. Moreover, depictions of ‘exotic peoples’, perhaps stimulated by Johann Moritz’s images, were used as part of Orange-Nassau representational practices, which were then followed more widely by Dutch society. Slaves and indigenous people came from Dutch colonies in GWIC and VOC territories in several ways: as gifts from officials or merchants seeking patronage; as envoys from foreign rulers; or, as with Johann Moritz, in the entourage of returning Nassau men who had been governors.64 Slave servants from the colonial territories were seen as status symbols, and successful Dutch colonial expansion led to an intense production of paintings that depicted African slaves as servants in portraits of European burghers and aristocrats. This genre of portraits

Figure 5.6 Frans Post, A Brazilian Landscape, 1650, oil on wood, 61cm × 91.4cm. New York, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Acc. 1981.318. Purchase, Rogers Fund, special funds, James S. Deely Gift, and Gift of Edna H. Sachs and other gifts and bequests, by exchange, 1981. www. metmuseum.org.

Figure 5.7 Frans Post, Brazilian Landscape, c. 1660, oil on wood, 53cm × 64cm. Siegen, Siegerlandmuseum.

Collecting the world 237

Figure 5.8 Adriaen Hanneman, Posthumous Portrait of Mary Henrietta Stuart (1631–1660) with a Servant, c. 1664, oil on canvas, 129.5cm × 119.3cm. The Hague, Mauritshuis.

was nowhere as numerous as in the Low Countries.65 Several of the OrangeNassau palaces included wall paintings and ceiling decorations that depicted people from the colonies. For example, Asian men were depicted in the trompe d’oeil balcony scene on the main staircase of Het Loo and were an important part of the decorations in the Oranjezaal, as well as at the Mauritshuis and later Oranienbaum and Mosigkau, in chinoiserie fashion. While early depictions of non-Europeans in the Oranjezaal and the Mauritshuis in the seventeenth century showed indigenous people from Brazil as embodiments of the exotic, in the eighteenth-century palace decorations they were replaced by Chinese men and women in line with a more common European fashion.66 Moreover, individual portraits of members of the Orange dynasty depicted them as the masters of colonial subjects.67 In these portraits, young Africans were generally positioned lower down or in the background, visibly serving their masters, as for example in the portrait by Johann Heinrich Roos (1671) of Amalia van Nassau-Dietz (1655–95), daughter of Albertine Agnes who married Johann Wilhelm von Saxony-Eisenach. In portraits of European men, African slaves were given gendered attributes of European male power, such

238  Materialising power

Figure 5.9 Nathaniel Thach, A Woman in Masque Costume, probably a Daughter of Elizabeth of Bohemia, 1649, watercolour on vellum on pasteboard, 59mm × 48mm. London, Victoria and Albert Museum, P.2-1969. © Victoria and Albert Museum.

as their military outfits and helmets. In the 1666 portrait by Nason of Johann Moritz, after he became a knight of the Order of Saint John of Jerusalem, the African boy to his right holds a map of the palace designs and fortifications at Schenkenschanz to which he points with his other hand (see Figure 5.4 above). The king’s private dressing room at Hampton Court appears to have once contained a marble bust of a black boy.68 In portraits of Orange-Nassau women, on the other hand, African slaves tie pearl bracelets to the wrists of their mistress, or offer baskets with flowers, or bird cages containing parrots or other birds. In 1665 Jan Mijtens depicted Maria, Princess of Orange, as young woman, with an African slave dressed in orange in the background holding her horse.69 Johann Moritz’s colonial status was employed by the leaders of the Orange-Nassau dynasty in cultural terms for the benefit of the House and in return, Johann Moritz’s own prestige within the dynasty increased. Perhaps the most striking use of exotic bodies in the service of the prestige of the House of Orange-Nassau was the dramatic stage-managed performance

Collecting the world 239 of Willem III’s progress to London, after his triumph arrival in England on 5 November 1688. In the description by historian Thomas Babington Macaulay: Descriptions of the martial pageant were circulated all over the kingdom. They contained much that was well fitted to gratify the vulgar appetite for the marvellous. For the Dutch army [. . .] presented an aspect at once grotesque, gorgeous, and terrible to the islanders who had, in general, a very indistinct notion of foreign countries. First rode Macclesfield, at the head of two hundred gentlemen, mostly of English blood, glittering in helmets and cuirasses, and mounted on Flemish war horses. Each was attended by a negro, brought from the sugar plantations on the coast of Guiana. The citizens of Exeter, who had never seen so many specimens of the African race, gazed with wonder on the black faces, set off by embroidered turbans and white feathers.70 Here, bodies swathed in a mix of exotic apparel suggested the global scale of the colonial power that the Dutch dynasty was bringing to England upon the accession of Willem and Mary. While portraits with African servants were relatively common for the Orange-Nassau dynasty, the actual employment of African slaves at the Dutch court is only documented for Willem V. Two slaves from Curaçao, Guan A. Sedron or ‘Citron’ (meaning ‘lemon’) and W. F. Cupido (‘Cupid’), took elevated positions as valets at his court as prestigious ‘objects’, just as dwarfs did at other European courts. In this role, they accompanied Willem V and Wilhelmine when they left the Netherlands. It is not clear how they came into the service of Willem V: Sedron seems to have arrived in 1763 as an eight-year-old child, although he first appeared in documents in 1766.71 The two men were commonly referred to as the ‘two Moors’. Two aquarelles by I. L. La Fargue van Nieuwland from c. 1770 depict Sedron in a colourful costume, emphasising his status of servitude in clothing and in gesture.72 In one image he is shown holding a serving tray with a single porcelain cup, while in the other he holds an empty tray under his arm. Both Sedron and Cupido remained in Orange-Nassau service even after the dissolution of the Dutch Republic by the French in 1795, until their deaths.73 When the Orange-Nassau family fled to England, and later to Oranienstein, both servants accompanied them. Purchases for them included six scarves listed in the household’s 1796 expenses by the Hoofmester Opdenhof.74 Cupido was documented in 1799 as being at Oranienstein. Sedron followed Willem V to England, and from there to Oranienstein, where he died in 1802. When Willem V and Wilhelmine returned from England to Oranienstein in 1802, Cupido wrote to Willem to ask if he could be employed as a valet again.75 Cupido’s widow Catherine and their daughter, significantly named Wilhelmine, stayed at Oranienstein after Cupido’s death in 1806 and were supported at the instruction of Wilhelmine by the government of Dietz. In 1818 Sedron’s widow returned to The Hague,76 and two years later she and her daughter were still being supported by Wilhelmine.77 She died in 1833 and her daughter Catherine wrote to the royal household to ask for financial support for the funeral.78

240  Materialising power Furthermore, the promotion of Nassau dynastic power, as well as Johann Moritz’s personal interests, was aided by the gifting of objects procured from Dutch colonial territories and colonial governance. This is illustrated in the transferrence of Brazilian objects to European courts over an almost thirty-year period, from 1652 in Brandenburg, to 1654 in Copenhagen and 1679 in Paris.79 As Mariana Françozo has recently argued, the history of Johann Moritz’s collection is ‘not as a static set of objects but as the material embodiment of a history of relationships’.80 After Louise Henriëtte married Friedrich Wilhelm von Brandenburg in 1646, Johann Moritz became stadtholder of Cleves and an advisor on Friedrich Wilhelm’s expansion of palaces and gardens. Friedrich Wilhelm had no colonial territories, given that the Brandenburg Africa Company would not be established until 1682, but he desired to enhance his status with colonial objects, as his wife had done in Berlin and later at Oranienburg. Johann Moritz could provide him with the objects he required. Shortly after the wedding of Albertine Agnes in 1652 at Cleves, Friedrich Wilhelm, who had attended the wedding festivities and seen the Brazilian dancers, signed a contract with Johann Moritz for the purchase of the Brazilian ethnographica. Johann Moritz saw a possibility not only to receive land in Cleves (instead of the 50,000 reichsthaler at which his Brazilian paintings and objects were valued), but also to promote Orange-Nassau dynastic power by sending valuable artefacts, such as furniture from Brazil made of ivory and carved with his initials ‘J. M.’, and paintings and scientific studies of Brazil that testified to Orange-Nassau patronage. Surviving inventories of this transaction indicate that the gift included four busts of Orange family members, full-length paintings of Brazilian flora, fauna, and people, hundreds of drawings and a full-length portrait of Johann Moritz himself with Brazilian men, now lost.81 The attraction of these colonial objects was so strong that key images were later used by Johann Moritz to copy for valuable tapestries. For this purpose, thirteen of the Eckhout paintings which the Great Elector had received previously were sent to Cleves, never to be returned.82 Instead, Friedrich Wilhelm received the tapestries in 1668, and Johann Moritz kept a set for himself in Siegen.83 In May 1668, Friedrich Wilhelm reported to Johann Moritz that he had received the woven tapestries with great pleasure: ‘my tapestries which were made in The Hague, I find very beautiful, and it would have been a shame to have left them not done.’84 Tapestries had played an important part in earlier Nassau dynastic promotion. Earlier, in 1647, Jacob van Campen, who had been commissioned with the decoration of the Oranjezaal, had overseen the making of tapestries according to Johann Moritz’s Brazilian paintings. As Willem Frederik van Nassau-Dietz noted in his diary on 25 September 1647, after a visit to van Campen: ‘[I] saw the paintings which count Moritz had made of many things which are in the West Indies, to make tapestries accordingly.’85 These tapestries had been commissioned from one of the most famous Dutch weavers, Maximilian van der Grucht.86 Tapestries as dynastic chronicles had an older tradition in the Nassau family, who had commissioned their genealogies to be woven in the fifteenth century.

Collecting the world 241 Elector Friedrich Wilhelm also drew upon Johann Moritz’s Brazilian resources in the coming years in order to add exotic animals to his menagerie. In 1670 he had already asked Johann Moritz to send him ‘rare birds’, and in January 1678 he thanked him for a gift of birds although expressing his regret that the ‘Indian crow’, a Brazilian parrot, was missing. Friedrich Wilhelm wrote: ‘When I arrived back from Potsdam yesterday, I found here the beautiful geese that your Honour sent me, only the Indian crow I did not find, whether it died on the way here or was stolen, I don’t know.’87 Friedrich Wilhelm may not have received all of the exotic Brazilian birds from Johann Moritz that he had hoped for on this occasion, but their relationship of patronage and reciprocal gifts and favours was a long-term affair. Not long after Friedrich Wilhelm acquired a portion of Johann Moritz’s Brazilian artefacts, the Danish king, Frederik III, who had ambitions to demonstrate his power by establishing his own Wunderkammer, made contact with Johann Moritz. His older brother Heinrich had been employed by the Danish king as an agent to acquire objects for it.88 In 1654, the Danish admiral, Christoffer Lindenov, who had been in Brazil with Johann Moritz, suggested to him that the king would be pleased to receive some Brazilian paintings as a gift.89 Johann Moritz responded immediately, expanding his own patronage network, by sending twenty-six paintings, including the Eckhout images of indigenous and slave populations of Brazil, to Frederik III, accompanied by a personal letter.90 Morgens Bencard has suggested that Frederik III initiated this gift exchange because he was aware of the Brazilian paintings and objects in Berlin that Johann Moritz had sold to the Brandenburg Elector Friedrich Wilhelm. It was thus an honour for Johann Moritz to oblige the king. The Danish King had already, in 1649, made Johann Moritz and his brother Heinrich members of the Order of the Elephant, and in 1652 another brother, Georg Friedrich, was also made a member.91 Søren Mentz argues, however, that Johann Moritz had received his membership in 1649 via the intervention of Corfitz Ulfeldt, who had since lost favour at the Danish court.92 This made it even more important for Johann Moritz to secure patronage directly with Frederik III himself. Heinrich’s son was a godchild of the Danish queen and when Heinrich died, his widow asked the Danish king for financial support.93 Johann Moritz’s compliance with his request thus supported his NassauSiegen dynastic branch in their commitment to patronage from the Danish royal family. The accompanying letter of July 1654 that Johann Moritz sent emphasised the appreciation of Danish royal patronage towards the dynasty, and especially for his late brother Heinrich: with these few [gifts] in submission to kiss your hands and to offer to you my obedient and loyal services for which I am especially eager because of the geat honour which Your Royal Majesty has shown to my blessed brother Heinrich during his life time. And I would think myself happy if I too would be recognised as your obedient servant and if I were honoured with the same.94

242  Materialising power At the same time Johann Moritz hinted that the gift put the Danish king under an obligation to continue his patronage to the dynasty. In return for Johann Moritz’s gift, in 1656 Frederik sent six very valuable ‘Frederiksborg horses’, a special Danish breed.95 Johann Moritz had written a treatise on medical treatment for horses, another claim to princely power.96 Horses were an important marker of status for aristocratic men, and expressed exclusively gendered and high-ranking obligations between leading men as gifts and expressions of patronage.97 Elite men were commonly depicted in images with horses, and as groups of related men on horses. The Orange-Nassau princes were regularly portrayed with horses and in various ‘riding out’ scenes, for example the equestrian portraits of Maurits and Fredick Hendrik by Adriaen van de Venne riding out from the Binnenhof, De Hofvijver gezien vanf het Buitenhof, c. 1630.98 (See also Figure 1.13.) The gift of a Spanish warhorse, captured at the Battle of Nieuwpoort in 1600 by Ludwig Günther von Nassau-Siegen (1575–1604) and presented to Maurits, gained even greater power once it was the subject of an oil painting by Jacob II de Gheyn in 1603 that permanently marked this victory for the Dutch and the House (Figure 5.10). Horses of leading men could even feature in their

Figure 5.10 Jacob II de Gheyn, Spanish Warhorse Captured at the Battle of Nieuwpoort by Ludwig Günther von Nassau-Siegen from Archduke Albert of Austria, Given to Stadtholder Maurits, 1603, oil on canvas, 228cm × 269cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-4255.

Collecting the world 243 own portraits. In Protestant northern Europe in the seventeenth century, portraits of horses were commissioned by princes and kings and sometimes the dead horses of kings were preserved as sign of affection and as a memorial to their human master. For example, when Gustav Adolph died in battle in Lützen, his horse was returned to Sweden and preserved; it can still be seen today in the Livrustkammeren in Stockholm. Caring for and breeding horses, like the Frederiksborg horses given to Johann Moritz, was an aristocratic male privilege that he understood well; his uncle, Maurits of Orange-Nassau, had devoted a significant amount of energy to it himself. He kept a horse diary in which his steward Jan Evertsz was required to record the breeding details of Maurits’s horses. Maurits had also devoted significant time and energy into designing and constructing his horse stables in Rijswijk.99 In Denmark, Johann Moritz’s Brazilian collection formed an important part of the power display of the Danish royal house in the Wunderkammer, and today the National Danish Museum displays several of the images in one room.100 However, the collection was not immediately presented by Frederik III, which prompted Johann Moritz (then preparing a gift of further Brazilian paintings to the French king, Louis XIV, in 1679), to inquire of Danish king Christian IV, Frederik III’s successor, if he could have the images back, or have them copied. Johann Moritz wrote to Isaac Le Maire, the resident in Copenhagen, in July 1679: I live here in a quiet place to be away as much as possible from the worldly affairs of society, so that I can retire in my old age. And although this place is situated in the wilderness, I am having all the wild nations which I commanded in Brazil painted in my house here. I remembered those [paintings] we sent to His late Royal Majesty. I thought that if His Majesty no longer holds them in high esteem, I would like to ask your Honour to try to find out secretly if he would part with them and give them back to us.101 Shortly before his death in 1679, Johann Moritz assembled a large collection of paintings and artefacts for Louis XIV, just one year after the end of the Dutch–French war.102 Willem III had just defeated the French and Johann Moritz had been a marshall in the war until his retirement in 1676. Even at the time of peace with the Dutch in 1678, the French were still at war with the great elector of Brandenburg, Friedrich Wilhelm. Indeed, in March 1679 French troops plundered the county of Cleves, which belonged to the elector and was administered by Johann Moritz.103 It is possible that this gift had been devised by Johann Moritz between 1668 and 1671 when Marquis Simon Arnauld de Pomponne was the ambassador in The Hague.104 Once again, Johann Moritz’s gifts were accompanied by an explanatory letter that confirmed his intention to seek French patronage.105 However, Louis XIV was not obliged to reciprocate this gift as Johann Moritz died shortly afterwards.106 The Brazilian paintings were used as inspiration for a set of magnificient tapestries, produced this time in Paris.107 In fact, Johann Moritz had explicitly

244  Materialising power arranged the gift, and importantly its presentation, to the French king in such a way that the themes for future tapestries were immediately apparent.108 As he wrote to Pomponne, ‘These rarities represent the whole of Brazil in painting [. . .] all in realistic scale, as well as the places in that country, the cities and forts in perspective; with these portraits it is possible to design a tapestry for a large room or gallery’.109 In February 1679, Johann Moritz finally wrote directly to Louis XIV, observing in a postscript: ‘Cardinal Mazarin fell in love with these paintings, having asked me on several occasions to obtain them, but at the time I could not make a decision.’110 Indeed, ten years later, eight of the Eckhout paintings included in the gift were used to design the Anciennes Indes tapestry series at the Gobelins manufactory (Figures 5.11 and 5.12).111

Figure 5.11 Manufacture Royale des Gobelins, Albert Eckhout, Frans Jansz Post, Fishermen, c. 1692–1723, 358cm × 305cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, BK-1968-21.

Collecting the world 245

Figure 5.12 Baptiste Monnoyer, Jean-Baptiste Belin de Fontenay, René-Antoine Houasse, François Bonnemer, with later additions by AlexandreFrançois Desportes, Tapestry: le Cheval Rayé from Les Anciennes Indes Series, c. 1692–1730, wool and silk with modern cotton lining, 330.2cm × 574cm. Los Angeles, The J. Paul Getty Museum. Digital image courtesy of the Getty’s Open Content Program.

Although Johann Moritz’s motivations appeared to be personal glory and hopes of patronage, this gift, coming at the end of the Dutch–French war in which Willem III had defeated Louis XIV, might also be read as a sign of Orange-Nassau cultural superiority. A further landscape that has been attributed to Albert Eckhout appears in the British royal collections and in the collection of William Blathwayt, Willem III’s secretary of war. This image, unlike others known to have been made by Eckhout, depicts a landscape with farm buildings where cocoa beans are being dried on trays. In the foreground to the left a cocoa tree is depicted, covered in pods (Figure 5.13). The image in the royal collection appears to have entered the collection under Charles II, coupled with a number of other landscapes.112 These were a series of landscapes depicting aspects of Cleves, where Johann Moritz had undertaken extensive renovations to his palace and gardens. It seems likely therefore that the Brazilian and Cleves images were gifts from Johann Moritz to Charles. Johann Moritz had travelled to England in 1660 as part of a diplomatic group, who were, on behalf of Amalia von Solms, secretly, and ultimately unsuccessfully, seeking to secure the marriage of her youngest daughter, Maria, to the newly recognised monarch. (Amalia had previously rejected Charles’s request to marry another daughter, Henriëtte Catharina, at a period when his fortunes looked rather more doubtful.)113 Blathwayt’s acquisition of an almost identical image may be related

Figure 5.13 Albert Eckhout, A Cocoa Tree and Roasting Hut, c. 1641–4, oil on canvas, 203.5cm × 101cm. National Trust, Inv. Nr 453740. © National Trust.

Collecting the world 247 to his interests, not only in a range of material culture related to the OrangeNassau and sourced through Dutch contacts, but also his appointment as secretary to the Committee of Foreign Plantations.114 Although the transmission of this image from Brazil to England is less certain, both pathways point to Orange-Nassau connections between the men who became the owners of these works. Johann Moritz deployed his collection strategically, making gifts to increase patronage within and outside the House to Brandenburg, Denmark, France, and possibly England too.115 His patronage of intensive, almost feverish, collecting, describing, and painting of Brazilian exotica by a team of artists and scientists suggests that he knew that these colonial objects were a kind of insurance policy for securing improved status within European dynastic politics after his return from the colonies. Thus, Johann Moritz was able to use his temporary position as a GWIC governor in Brazil to improve the standing of his immediate Nassau-Siegen family, his own position in relation to the House of Orange-Nassau and his personal status among the European elite more broadly. However, to secure benefits from his material collection, Johann Moritz was obliged to break it up. Like Orange-Nassau women, subordinate men were less able to secure the longevity of their personal collections for posterity. Moreover, the House of Orange-Nassau in particular and its closest allies, such as the Brandenburg elector, were able to employ these symbols of colonial power to promote their own identity, through loans, images, and displays of Johann Moritz’s collections in portraits, plays, masquerades, and courtly festivities.

Gendered uses of porcelain Asian porcelain provided the House of Orange-Nassau with a striking demonstration of Dutch access to global markets and unique commodities that only certain European nations possessed in the sixteenth century. In doing so, it asserted the financial and cultural power that the House had attained within the United Provinces. This power for the nation, in a European context, and the House’s political ascendancy over other noble families in the United Provinces were, however, matters that required careful negotiation, and the celebration of them required particularly subtle and diplomatic mechanisms in which women played key roles.116 Louise de Coligny, fourth wife and widow of Willem the Silent, appears to have collected porcelain, with some 283 pieces displayed on shelves in her Noordeinde kunstkammer in a 1632 inventory.117 Moreover, she appears to have used her access and knowledge of this product to foster networks within her wider circle. When the Portuguese vessel Catharina was captured by the Dutch off Patani in 1604, its cargo of precious porcelain was sold at auction where Henri IV of France, on the advice of Louise, acquired ‘a fine porcelain service, of the best possible quality’.118 Eleanora of Bourbon (1587–1619), the wife of the next Prince of Orange, Filips Willem (1554–1618), may have

248  Materialising power developed her taste in relation to both Louise de Coligny and the Brussels court of Albert and Isabella at which she and her husband were resident. A 1619 inventory made at her death reveals that next to her bedchamber at Breda, Eleanora had a cabinet containing 165 porcelain pieces and other exotica.119 In northern Europe, porcelain circulated as a highly desirable and exotic commodity that was primarily exhibited as art pieces in the collections of both women and men. Both Frederik Hendrik and Amalia placed particular attention on patronising Dutch artists and architects, and celebrated products to which they, the Dutch, had for a long time almost exclusive monopoly over, especially Japanese porcelain after 1641, when other trading companies were refused access to Japan. Amalia’s model for her porcelain display may have been the kunstkammer of Rudolf II (1552–1612) in Prague, which she may have seen in 1619 as part of the retinue of Elizabeth Stuart (1596–1662) and the elector palatine, Friedrich V (1596–1632).120 It was as part of their entourage that Amalia had come to the Dutch court at The Hague. As Virginia Treanor argues, Amalia’s porcelain collection was an integral part of ‘her campaign to emphasize the central position of the House of Orange in Dutch society’.121 By 1673, Amalia had assembled an extensive collection for display, with over 1,200 pieces, including many that had been given to her as gifts by the VOC and European diplomats.122 Amalia had special locations in her palaces designed for porcelain display, expanding from a cabinet in 1632 to a gallery by 1634, and into a large and small porcelain cabinet at Noordeinde in her widowhood.123 Her rooms at Huis ten Bosch displayed some 398 pieces of porcelain in an intimate space next to her bedchamber, in a small cabinet room that employed exotic lacquer work and was painted in a blue, orange, yellow, and gold combination that reflected the Orange-Nassau heraldic colours.124 Amalia was the first member of this House to utilise porcelain specifically in a range of spatial and material settings, from highly visible galleries and cabinets to exclusive female areas, which linked porcelain to new forms of elite power. Already in this era, Amalia’s style of porcelain display was imitated by others. Frederik Hendrik’s elder sister, Catharina Belgica (1578–1648), who resided in the Stadtholder’s palace for over twenty years, displayed her porcelain on red and gilt stands.125 Gifts of exotic porcelain gave donors a persuasive means of political influence. Alert to the possibilities of porcelain’s political potential among female recipients, the Dutch East India Company (VOC) presented all manner of porcelain tableware to government and legal officials.126 In 1639, the directors in Amsterdam requested that the Zeeland chamber set aside some of their finest and most unusual pieces to give as a present to Amalia.127 Such gifts reflected her power as an informal channel of influence; in 1638, Cardinal Richelieu sent Amalia a pair of earrings from Louis XIV, a gift that was understood by contemporaries to refer to her influence on Frederik Hendrik.128 In formulating his letter, however, Richelieu explained the king was concerned that

Collecting the world 249 the shared enemies of this kingdom and the United Provinces being only able to do us evil through the ears, His Majesty chose them deliberately, not only to attest to you that he will never listen to anything to the prejudice of the common good, but also to let you know how much he is assured that Your Highness and the Prince of Orange will do likewise.129 Amalia responded in turn, reassuring Richlieu that her ears would ‘never be open’ to the gossip of their enemies.130 Amalia’s continuing influence concerned the leading men of Dutch and international politics, and her interventions in politics have traditionally been viewed negatively in the scholarly literature on the dynasty,131 but she emerged as a powerful advocate for the House into which she had married. The display of exotic Asian porcelain was an acknowledgement of a woman’s ability for political influence, as well as a signal of the readiness of the lands that the House of Orange-Nassau dominated to become a world power on par with Habsburg Spain and Portugal. Under Amalia’s daughter Louise Henriëtte, the first porcelain cabinet in Germany was installed at Oranienburg in 1662/3.132 Louise Henriëtte accrued what is seen by scholars today as the most important porcelain collection of the Hohenzollern.133 She sent Schwerin, her husband’s first minister in Brandenburg, repeated requests to advance the progress of the porcelain cabinet, such as ‘I beg you to tell me if the porcelain cabinet at Oranienburg will soon be finished’.134 The cabinet was located on the upper floor of the eastern wing, with the porcelain probably placed on gilded consoles in the same way as in the cabinet that was erected by her sister Henriëtte Catharina at Oranienbaum decades later.135 Louise Henriëtte asked Schwerin ‘to take care that a good gilder gilds my porcelain cabinet, for the other was worthless, he certainly merited your anger’.136 Henriëtte Catharina also asserted her own identity as an Orange-Nassau princess in her new home in Dessau, and between 1663 and 1687 Asian porcelain as well as Delftware was sent from The Hague to decorate her palace in Dessau and then her newly built palace, nearby Oranienbaum.137 About thirty pieces of Japanese Kraak porcelain came from the collection of her mother, but by her death, Henriëtte Catharina had amassed a collection of several hundred pieces of Delftware and imported porcelain.138 There she had a special porcelain cabinet designed by the French Huguenot designer Daniël Marot, in which she displayed her collection on special gilded wooden shelves. This porcelain cabinet was later also known as the tea salon, a reference to the consumption of imported luxury goods such as tea, sugar, and chocolate. In the so-called Festsaal, gilded shelves had been built exclusively to display her extensive porcelain collections, similar to the porcelain cabinet of her sister Louise Henriëtte at Oranienburg (Figure 5.14).139 The summer kitchens of the Orange-Nassau women pre-dated the wave of so-called pleasure dairies during the ancien régime in France. Although the first pleasure dairy was built for Catherine de Medici in the gardens belonging to Fontainebleau as early as 1560, not many more were built until the

250  Materialising power

Figure 5.14 Oranienburg Palace, porcelain cabinet, porcelain étagère. Stiftung Preußische Schlösser und Gärten Berlin-Brandenburg. Photograph: Wolfgang Pfauder.

1760s.140 In the late eighteenth century, these places were associated with a reform of aristocratic femininity into more domestic forms, signified by a strong association with rural life and especially with milk, fertility, and health. These pleasure dairies were not functional but they represented refined taste

Collecting the world 251 and aristocratic lifestyle with porcelain collections, sculptures, and marble interiors.141 The summer kitchens of the Orange-Nassau women, on the other hand, which were built much earlier in the late seventeenth century, were a promotion of their dynastic origins and their social and cultural superiority. They were associated with the products of the colonies, such as tea and sugar, rather than milk and rural life, and they were less a place for court festivals, as in the French examples, and more of a rather sombre display of cultural power and Orange lineage.142 The princesses employed these kitchens to prepare jam and candied fruits, such as orange peel, which were offered to guests at the end of entertainments and balls and were given as exclusive gifts.143 Similarly, grotto spaces constructed by the Orange-Nassau princesses to mourn and remember male family members also asserted female identity and power within the House, displaying imported luxury objects they had acquired such as porcelain and lacquer work cabinets, and by enabling consumption of products that were new to Europe such as tea.144 These were elaborate spaces, consisting of several rooms including a bedroom, a porcelain room, and the central grotto room. The walls of contemporary grottos were typically decorated with shells; at Oranienbaum the shells were made of porcelain. Johann von Nassau-Sararbrücken-Idstein installed two single-room grottos near the gardens of his palace complex. Featuring images of both spaces in his illuminated manuscripts, one showcased paintings by his favoured artist Johann Walther in an octagonal tower covered with black marble, tufa, and shells, while the other was even more dramatic, showing Mannerist influences in its depiction of exotic shells, fruit, and fantastic beasts, in ‘a kind of fantasy cabinet of curiosities’ (Figure 5.15).145 Henriëtte Catharina’s grotto, an independent building located in the garden, contained several rooms, including bedchambers and a bathroom, which all contained porcelain objects. One room in particular was specifically designed to display porcelain on four triangular porcelain stands or pyramids. Henriëtte Catharina used this space to assert her identity and power as a member of the House of Orange-Nassau through exotic commodities and novel consumption practices.146 It was not only sumptuously decorated with imported materials such as porcelain, lacquered cabinets, and Indian cloth, but also porcelain tea sets for the specific consumption of tea, coffee, chocolate, and sugar.147 The Dutch were the first to import tea into Europe and to develop tea drinking into an upper-class social habit. In 1679, Henriëtte Catharina bought a teapot, cups, and other earthenware vessels from a leading Delft workshop.148 Dutch artist Abraham Snaphaen (1651–91), in his painting Die Teegesellschaft (Figure 5.16), highlighted how Henriëtte Catharina and her daughters employed such objects, depicting the exclusive group taking tea from a porcelain set, and enjoying candied fruit laid out on a porcelain plate.149 The depicted objects echo the ‘six blue and brown small porcelain cups and saucers’, and the ‘Indian black lacquered small table with gilded legs’ that are mentioned in the inventory of the Oranienbaum grotto.150 The princesses of Orange asserted their House’s political ascendancy and dominant status using porcelain as well as Delft-manufactured pottery. This had

252  Materialising power

Figure 5.15 Johann Jakob Walther, The fantasy grotto at the castle of Idstein, gouache on vellum. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France; Département des Estampes et photographie, Rés. JA-25-FOL, Plate 10. © Bibliothèque nationale de France.

a direct impact on the economy of the Dutch Republic and its major trading company, the VOC, and increased the status of the House that led the fledging nation by making these luxury objects desirable to others both within and beyond the Netherlands. These women employed porcelain and pottery and

Collecting the world 253

Figure 5.16 Abraham Snaphaen, Die Teegesellschaft, c. 1690, oil on canvas. Kulturstiftung Dessau Wörlitz, Schloss Oranienbaum, Inv. Nr. M01/2002.

spaces of grief to advance presentations of their dynastic and individual identities that were, in these cases, aligned – ostensibly grieving for their husbands while asserting the superiority of their natal kin. Here (and also inside palaces and gardens and in subterranean kitchens), they displayed luxurious and exotic objects such as porcelain, to which access was exclusive and reflected the honour and prestige of those permitted to be present in these locations. Moreover, the porcelain and pottery of these women was typically tailored for conventional female-oriented activities, as tea and coffee sets, jam-pots, and vases. They were therefore ideal for showcasing the international reach of the House of Orange-Nassau, as accoutrements for consuming or storing the new products of the colonial world in Dutch control – tea, sugar, coffee, and exotic plants. Such intimate sites of loss and bereavement, and the objects and activities staged within them, could be key places of power for the Orange-Nassau,

254  Materialising power sites whose reknown spread evidence of Orange-Nassau power far and wide in the wake of daughters distributed across Europe. The collection of Frederik Hendrik’s elder sister, Catharina Belgica, was also distributed to her daughters. Amalia Elisabeth (1602–51), who married Wilhelm V, landgrave of Hessen-Kassel (1602–37), accrued a collection of over 1,000 pieces by her death while ruling as regent for her son, Wilhelm VI (1629–63).151 Her porcelain collection included pieces she had inherited from Catharina Belgica.152 The family’s alliances reflected the strong connections among the leading Protestant dynasties of northern Europe in the Orange-Nassau network. Wilhelm VI’s sisters, Charlotte (1627–86) and Amelia (1626–93), had married other Protestant Orange-Nassau descendants, respectively the elector palatine Karl I Ludwig (1617–80) (grandson of Louise Juliana van Nassau, daughter of Willem the Silent) and Henri Charles de la Trémoille (1620–72) (grandson of both Elisabeth and Charlotte Brabantina van Nassau, two more of Willem’s daughters), who had attended the court of Frederik Hendrik and Amalia and served in Frederik Hendrik’s army. Wilhelm VI’s daughter, Elisabeth Henriëtte (1661–83), was the first wife of Friedrich I von Preußen (1657–1713), the son of Louise Henriëtte. Another daughter, Charlotte Amalia (1650–1714), was the wife of Christian V of Denmark (1646–99). At her death she held a collection of some 663 porcelain pieces that were conspicuously displayed to create a massed effect at Rosenborg Castle, in the areas that she had redeveloped after the death of her father-in-law, Friedrich III (1609–70). As Cordula Bischoff notes, Friedrich had taken an interest in Asian exotica, demonstrated through lacquered objects and furnishing, but there was no evidence of porcelain among his collection.153 However, Charlotte Amalia’s son Friedrich IV (1671–1730), who had succeeded to the throne in 1699, and his wife Louise von Mecklenburg (1667–1721) displayed his mother’s bequest in a range of spaces and planned a new porcelain cabinet in 1709, shortly after visiting Berlin where Friedrich I had developed a series of extensive porcelain displays.154 The wife of Charlotte Amalia’s brother, Karl (1654–1730), who became landgrave in 1670, Maria Anna Amalia von Courland (1653–1711), expanded these porcelain practices further, collecting more than 2,600 pieces over her lifetime and mounting them in rooms that included a special display kitchen.155 Porcelain and pottery display mechanisms and practices that signalled ancestry through inherited material objects were introduced into these dynasties through female members, who were descendants of the Orange-Nassau dynasty. There was a typical matrilineal inheritance pattern for those created by Orange-Nassau women. This destroyed their integrity as collections (and thus often recognition of women as collectors on a par with male ‘scientific’ collectors of books, animals, or plants, or as art patrons). However, it did have the advantage of showcasing Orange-Nassau power far and wide. Both men and women continued to employ Asian porcelain (and Delftware) to signify their affiliation with the Orange-Nassau dynasty. They used pieces they inherited from Orange-Nassau ancestors, showing their direct descendency and close alliances at times when this mattered for their own political

Collecting the world 255 claims. Such inheritance practices often broke up the collections that women amassed, but in doing so these objects, displayed in similar ways and sites, became powerful advocates for the political objectives of such affiliates. Mary II Stuart (1662–94), who married Willem III, promoted Delftware and porcelain at most of the palaces with which she was associated in both the Netherlands and in England. At Honsellaarsdijk, most of the Asian porcelain could be found in Mary’s rooms, in the audience chamber, and in the ‘Indianse’ closet.156 The Swedish architect Nicodemus Tessin the Younger (1654–1728) visited in 1686 and described the Audience Chamber as ‘richly decorated with Chinese work and pictures. [. . .] The chimney-piece was full of precious porcelain, part standing half inside it, and so fitted together that one piece supported another’.157 Here, the intended effect of porcelain in impressing visitors had certainly been achieved. Mary created a dedicated series of ‘Porcelain Rooms’, five in total, in her apartments at Kensington Palace where the majority of her collection was displayed. The gallery alone contained some 154 pieces, situated over doors and fireplaces, and displayed on specially designed tiered stands.158 Daniel Defoe remembered the Water Gallery at Hampton Court as containing ‘a vast stock of fine China ware, the like whereof was not then to be seen in England; the long gallery, as above, was fill’d with this china, and every other place, where it could be plac’d, with advantage.’159 The density of Mary’s arrangements is evident in the 1697 inventory. The 193 pieces contained in the old bedchamber description of ‘China in this Roome’: Over the doore yt goes into the new bedchamber [. . .] on the next shelfe [. . .] on the next shelfe [. . .] on the bottom shelfe [. . .] over the doore that goes into the drawing Roome on the topp shelfe [. . .] on the next shelfe [. . .] on the next shelfe [. . .] on the bottome shelfe [. . .] over the doore goieng into the supping Roome on the topp shelfe [. . .] on the next shelfe [. . .] on the next shelfe [. . .] on the bottome shelfe [. . .] on the pedestalls in this roome on the topp row [. . .] on the next row [. . .] on the Low Row [. . .] under the table [. . .] Over the chimney in this Roome on the topp row [. . .] on the second row [. . .] on the third row [. . .] on the fourth shelfe [. . .] on the fift shelfe [. . .] on the bottom shelfe.160 Daniël Marot’s contemporary print suggested, for those beyond the palace, what Mary’s arrangements looked like (Figure 5.17). After her early death, the collection of 787 pieces at Kensington Palace were formally transferred to one of Willem’s favourites, Arnold Joost van Keppel, Earl of Albemarle (1669–1718), in 1699.161 It seems that Albemarle transferred the collection back to the Netherlands to be displayed at Huis de Voorst in Gelderland, where Daniël Marot was once again connected to interior decoration that included overdoor arrangements, porcelain brackets, and teatable displays similar to those utilised by the Orange-Nassau women (see Figure 2.18).162 Albemarle’s display of Mary’s collection clearly signalled his own powerful personal connections to Willem and his affiliation with the political fortunes of the Orange-Nassau.

256  Materialising power

Figure 5.17 Daniël Marot, Nouvelles Cheminée faitte en plusier en droits de la Hollande et autres Prouinces, c. 1703, etching, 24.1cm × 19.4cm. London, Victoria and Albert Museum, 13857:4. © Victoria and Albert Museum.

In England, early massed porcelain displays were considered a Dutch style, as is suggested by the extensions made at Tart Hall under Alatheia Talbot, Countess of Arundel (1585–1654), for her ‘Dutch Pranketing Room’.163 She had accompanied Friedrich V – son of Frederik Hendrik’s elder sister Louise Juliana (1576–1644) – and his bride Elizabeth Stuart to Heidelberg upon their marriage in 1613, and later lived in the Netherlands during the English Civil War. The significance of Mary’s important cultural politics was certainly understood by Willem’s allies in England.164 When the first Duke of Devonshire (given his title in 1694 in gratitude for helping Willem and Mary to the throne) rebuilt Chatsworth in the latest style, he had prepared it for a royal visit (which never came) and devoted an entire suite of rooms, the ‘State Apartments’, for the royal couple to use. These included a ‘china closet’

Collecting the world 257 displaying a collection of Asian and Dutch pottery.165 Likewise, Dyrham Park, the house of William Blathwayt, was a showcase for Delftware and porcelain, with pieces in most rooms (see Figure 4.16).166 Elizabeth Seymour, Duchess of Somerset (1667–1722), who would later be the chief mourner at Mary’s funeral, displayed an elaborate porcelain collection at Petworth House, including large Kangxi period vases with pedestals, as suggested by eighteenthcentury inventories.167 Elizabeth Berkeley, the second wife of Willem’s reputed half-brother, Sir John Germaine, also established a fine oriental collection at Drayton House.168 English courtiers who used the latest Dutch styles and products in the way the Orange-Nassau did in their own palaces lent support and credence to Willem’s status as a monarch, as well as signifying their own power and aspirations. That Orange-Nassau cultural colonialism had significant impact through its innovative aesthetic forms is affirmed by the fact that after the death of individuals linked by birth to the House, new partners continued their cultural and material displays in the same manner. A year after the death of Louise Henriëtte in 1667, Friedrich Wilhelm married Sophia Dorothea von SchleswigHolstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg (1636–89). He began to redevelop Caputh Palace, a small hunting lodge north of Berlin, with Sophia Dorothea. She had a porcelain cabinet installed, modelled after the porcelain cabinet in Louise Henriëtte’s Oranienburg. Moreover, Sophia Dorothea’s visual representations in portraiture, such as in Ottmar Ellinger’s portrait Electress Dorothea in Flower and Fruit Garland (c. 1670/75), also modelled the conventions established in earlier images of Louise Henriëtte and her sisters by Jan Mijtens, by depicting her in a distinctive oval frame of flowers.169 In such ways, OrangeNassau symbols of cultural display took on wider meanings among the elite as signs of power and luxury, and at the same time they confirmed the supremacy of the House of Orange as a powerful cultural force in the region. When Friedrich, the eldest son of Louise Henriëtte who became king of Prussia in 1701, enlarged Oranienburg, he directed special attention to the porcelain cabinet, giving it more space in an added wing. The cabinet, designed by German architect Johann Arnold Nering (1659–95) and executed around 1695, was located in the apartment of Friedrich, as the highlight of the newly added northwest pavilion. The architect Jean-Baptiste Broebes (1660–1733), who Friedrich had commissioned to rebuild Oranienburg, was a pupil of Jean Marot, Daniël Marot’s father.170 In 1697, Dutch artist Augustinus Terwesten (1649–1711) completed the ceiling painting The Triumph of Porcelain for the cabinet, an allegory on the introduction of porcelain to Europe (Figure 5.18).171 The porcelain held by Orania in her orange dress in this painting has been identified as belonging to Friedrich’s collection, some of which had come originally from the collections of his grandmother Amalia.172 The stucco surrounding this painting included the blue banner and the slogan of the English Order of the Garter, of which Friedrich, like other Orange-Nassau individuals before him, was a prominent member.173 A ceiling painting in Friedrich’s study showed three allegorical figures with a porcelain vase.174 The porcelain pavilion was depicted

258  Materialising power

Figure 5.18 Porcelain Chamber ceiling painting, Allegory of the Triumph of Porcelain (1697) by August Terwesten, at Oranienburg. Stiftung Preußische Schlösser und Gärten Berlin-Brandenburg.

in an etching by Broebes, Chambre de Porcelain du Palais d’Orangenburg, in 1733, which shows porcelain, as in the earlier porcelain cabinet of his mother Louise Henriëtte, displayed on eight étagères for maximum effect. Friedrich also commissioned an ensemble from the early Berliner Fayence Manufactory of the widow Anna Maria Molin with the inscription ‘F3C’ (Friedrich III Churfürst: Friedrich only became Friedrich I in 1701 when he crowned himself as king in Prussia). The Delft tableservice was decorated with the monogram and Order of the Black Eagle.175 Such exotic material culture was now being used in a new way, as a medium to state specific political messages. Friedrich’s porcelain consumption, aimed at emphasising his political allegiances to the House of Orange-Nassau demonstrates how material-culture practices previously associated with the dynasty’s women, including his mother, were now being developed to signal elite male power.

Collecting the world 259

Figure 5.19 Porcelain Cabinet at Charlottenburg Palace. Stiftung Preußische Schlösser und Gärten Berlin-Brandenburg. Photograph: photo: Jörg P. Anders.

However, Friedrich not only continued to expand sites associated with his mother to promote his Orange heritage, but also developed these same cultural displays in new sites associated with both his Prussian monarchy and Brandenburg heritage. For example, he was responsible for the commission of the enfilade in Charlottenburg Palace, designed by Johann Friedrich Eosander (1669–1728), which culminates in the elaborate Porcelain Cabinet (Figures 5.19 and 5.20). The Orange princesses’ signature practice of having special display rooms for Dutch and imported Chinese and Japanese porcelain was also copied at Caputh Palace, which had its own porcelain room, and where the practice of displaying porcelain above fireplaces was maintained. Caputh’s porcelain collection contained rare Japanese porcelain from the early seventeenth century that had originally been part of the collection of Amalia von Solms-Braunfels. Friedrich also added the Tile Room, or ‘Fliesensaal’, a low-ceilinged room used as a summer dining hall, which was completely tiled in over 7,500 Dutch blue and white tiles, that were made for Friedrich around 1720 (Figure 5.21). The tile motifs included iconography of ships, windmills, children’s games, and animals – all common motifs of Dutch tiling. Samuel Wittwer has argued that, with ‘all their political significance these rooms had far more than a simply fashionable and decorative purpose. This is what makes the Prussian porcelain “cabinets” almost unique.’176 We suggest,

Figure 5.20 Chinese Gallery at Charlottenburg Palace. Berlin, Stiftung Preußische Schlösser und Gärten Berlin-Brandenburg. Photograph: Fotostudio Bartsch.

Figure 5.21 Fliesensaal at Caputh Palace. Stiftung Preußische Schlösser und Gärten Berlin-Brandenburg. Photograph: Roland Handrick.

Collecting the world 261 by contrast, that Friedrich adopted and adapted porcelain display practices already employed by women for political purposes within the Orange-Nassau network and its affiliates. As at Oranienburg, Caputh boasted an imposing ceiling painting similar to The Triumph of Porcelain. It was added around 1690–1700 and is possibly by Jacques Vaillant or his workshop (Figure 5.22).177 In this image, Borussia (a personification of Brandenburg-Prussia), holding a precious Chinese porcelain bowl, floats on a cloud, with symbols of power and wealth at her feet. An African woman next to her, also holding a porcelain vessel, embodies Brandenburg’s aspirations for African colonies. Similarly, busts of Africans were displayed in the porcelain cabinet. The four corners of the ceiling each depict a magnificent Chinese blue-white porcelain vase painting. Borussia carries precious porcelain objects that have been identified as belonging to Friedrich’s collection, and similarly all four corners depict blue-white porcelain. The ceiling of the porcelain cabinet was likewise used

Figure 5.22 Ceiling painting in Porcelain Cabinet at Caputh Palace. Stiftung Preußische Schlösser und Gärten Berlin-Brandenburg. Photograph: Wolfgang Pfauder.

262  Materialising power to celebrate Brandenburg power, for it contained the painting by Samuel Theodor Gericke, The Meeting of Three Kings, 1709, which depicted a meeting in Potsdam between Friedrich I, Frederik IV of Denmark, and Augustus II of Poland, asserting Friedrich to be of like status to other contemporary monarchs. Caputh, like Oranienburg, embodied the aspirations of Friedrich for Prussia to become an overseas power like the Dutch, and the references to Dutch connections are numerous. In the Caputh tea cabinet, the ceiling painting aptly depicts a putto holding a tray with Chinese porcelain tea cups in the left hand while the right hand balances a porcelain tea pot. Another putto holds what could be a porcelain tea container in his hand (Figure 5.23).

Figure 5.23 Ceiling painting in Tea Cabinet at Caputh Palace. Stiftung Preußische Schlösser und Gärten Berlin-Brandenburg. Photograph: Roland Handrick.

Collecting the world 263 While the Oranienburg ceiling paintings showed the triumph of eastern porcelain in Europe, a signifier for Dutch trading power in the seventeenth century, Caputh’s ceiling paintings make more explicit reference to the overseas aspirations of Prussia. Thus, in Prussia, the cultural colonisation undertaken by the House of Orange-Nassau was transformed in meaning to convey the heights of power to which a dynasty, indeed a monarchy, could hope to aspire. The triumph of porcelain painting, in the heart of Prussia, was an apt metaphor for the ascendant political power of Prussia and the slow demise of Orange-Nassau dominance over northern European politics in the second half of the eighteenth century. When Friedrich Augustus I von Sachsen (1670–1733) became king of Poland as Augustus II the Strong, he converted to Catholicism and ceded his role as the leading German Protestant dynasty to the Brandenburg-Prussia-Orange family. Augustus was well known for the scale of his cultural display, having created a magnificent palace at Dresden and being renowned for his lavish art patronage. His small pleasure palace on the banks of the Elbe would eventually uncouple porcelain display from its Dutch Protestant origins and make it stand more broadly for elite power. Augustus had visited the palaces at Oranienburg, Caputh, and Charlottenburg in 1709, with the king of Denmark, as the guest of Friedrich I.178 In 1717, he purchased the Holländisches Palais to display his Asian porcelain acquisitions in ‘Dutch-style’ holdings. Augustus had gained precious porcelain objects, 154 pieces including twenty-two large vases, from the Prussian collections that year in return for sending a regiment of dragoons to Friedrich Wilhelm I von Preußen (1688–1740), who was not known for his excessive love of the arts but instead for his ambition to amass a large army.179 Ministers were also known to have acquired porcelain for Augustus when travelling in the Netherlands.180 Augustus’s collection included porcelain on a far grander scale than had been seen to date. A 1721 inventory demonstrates that he had amassed some 13,000 pieces of both Japanese and Chinese porcelain for what was now known as his Japanese Palace; the collection reached 21,000 pieces by 1727.181 Interestingly, not long after Augustus’s conversion (and before his lavish new porcelain display), Anton Ulrich, Duke of BrunswickWolfenbüttel (1633–1714), also converted to Catholicism in 1709. His Protestant wife, Elisabeth Juliana (1634–1705), had died some years earlier, leaving a porcelain room that had been described in 1690 as using bracketed mounts with silk wall-coverings. In the year of his conversion, Anton Ulrich created an impressive new display, housing over 2,000 porcelain objects and 600 pieces of Italian majolica in a single room.182 Porcelain had become an elite male tool; one that, in these cases of male converts to Catholicism, was (perhaps explicitly) being uncoupled from its link to Protestant dynasties. The lower floor of Augustus’s Japanese palace was dedicated to the Asian collection that he had gained through his careful acquisition strategy, while the upper floor celebrated his new contribution to the European earthenware market, Meissen. Augustus realised the economic power that the Dutch held through their importation of Asian porcelain and their local manufacture of Delftware. He sponsored the young alchemist Johann Friedrich Boettger

264  Materialising power (1682–1719), who created a hard-paste European ware, using local quartz feldspar. Augustus established a manufactory in Meissen in 1710 which would dominate European production until 1756.183 Meissen products became a leading competitor to Asian porcelain. Augustus celebrated his hard-paste ware by using them as gifts, in the same way that Asian porcelain had been used. Accordingly, Meissen began performing as a political vehicle that highlighted the advanced technology and industry of his realm. In a painting ceiling proposed for the Japanese Palace by Zacharius Longuelune (1669–1748) but never executed, Minerva was to be depicted selecting porcelain offered by Saxony and Asia, and presenting the crown of victory to Saxony while the Asian porcelain was taken back to the ships.184 This was intended as an explicit statement of the new global, aesthetic, economic, and political power that European hard-paste ware such as Meissen could represent. Determined to outdo Saxony, and recognising the power of material culture (which his father had not), Friedrich II (1712–86) at first attempted to access Asian porcelain directly. He set up the Prussian Asiatic Trading Company (1751–6) to trade with Canton.185 When this failed, he looked to develop his own porcelain manufactory, the Königliche Porzellanmanufaktur (KPM). In 1756, during the Seven Years’ War, Friedrich’s troops held Dresden and Friedrich used the opportunity to coax many artisans to Berlin. He took over a struggling Berlin hard-paste manufactory in 1763, became its main customer, and thus enabled its commercial survival. In 1765, for example, he ordered twenty-one extensive dinner sets for the court, more than anyone else owned at this time.186 For Friedrich, porcelain was almost an extension of his own identity; he took a personal interest in the design, and his favourite colours were reproduced on KPM porcelain. Like Meissen before it, diplomatic presents in the form of porcelain soon made KPM well known internationally.187 When Willem V married Wilhelmine, the favourite niece of Friedrich II, in 1767, they received a KPM porcelain dinner set from her uncle in Berlin. It was crafted with a pineapple on top, combining the celebrated exotic fruit (which required costly stoves and glazing to grow in European climates – including famously at Friedrich’s Sanssouci palace in Potsdam) with the luxury material of the period.188 Now it was the Orange-Nassau in the Netherlands who received high-quality earthenware gifts from Prussia. Clearly, Friedrich’s ambitions as Prussian king extended to the control and possession of porcelain as a cultural, economic, and political form of power. By the end of the period, however, the diplomatic potential of porcelain was not limited to rulers alone. The VOC, for example, commissioned a Meissen service for Willem V, which was made in 1772–5.189 The Dutch may have been obliged to go to German lands for the finest manufacturers, but they still regarded porcelain as a fitting gift for a prince. Each service showed principal seaports, towns, and key colonial locations in Java (Figure 5.24). This was rather unusual for a dinner and dessert service, especially in its depiction of real, colonial locations under VOC control, and its overt political message to Willem through the medium of porcelain. In 1791, Wilhelmine wrote to her

Collecting the world 265

Figure 5.24 Meissener Porzellan Manufaktur, seven plates from the service of Willem V, c. 1772–4, porcelain, 3cm × 24.2cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, BK-1964-5.

daughter Louise that she had been gifted a Chinese porcelain table dining service and table set for tea, coffee, and chocolate, consisting of 1,454 pieces that were emblazoned with their arms and edged in gold in the style of Sèvres, as well as lacquered objects and embroidered satin for furnishing Huis ten Bosch (Figure 5.25). This was a present for Wilhelmine from Ulrich Hemmingson (‘Mr Eminckson’), a Swedish former director of the VOC operation in Canton who intended to retire in the Netherlands.190 It was a private gift to Wilhelmine to access power rather than a formal presentation on behalf of the VOC, but the expectations of favour conveyed through this fine French-styled gift were clear to both donor and recipient. It openly acknowledged her political influence, and signified how important the politics of porcelain could be. The collection and display of porcelain that individuals within, and affiliated to, the House of Orange-Nassau had promoted would also filter down in

266  Materialising power

Figure 5.25 Anonymous, plate with the arms of Nassau and Prussia, 1789–90, porcelain, 25.4cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, AK-NM-13434.

transmuted form to other classes who could not afford to recreate their lavish accumulation. The trompe-l’oeil painting by Jansz. van Ruijven of a chimneypiece laden with exotic porcelains (and birds) not only follows closely designs publicised by Marot but provided another point of access to the elite trappings of the Orange-Nassau in visual form. This image appears to have been intended to hang over the mantel in just the way that actual porcelain would be mounted (Figure 5.26).191 As discussed in Chapter 4, European-made Delftware also supported these collections by providing replica artefacts modelled on oriental designs, which were often modified for European tastes and dining practices, and which sustained the elite power of Asian porcelain. In such ways, the transfer of the aesthetic trends of the Orange-Nassau courts not only occurred through their visualisation in prints but also in material means, in both European ceramics and paintings that served in the place of porcelain. Women and men associated with the House of Orange-Nassau first made porcelain a significant marker of dynastic power in the early modern period,

Collecting the world 267

Figure 5.26 Jansz. van Riujven, chimneypiece with Delftware, 1719. Amsterdam, Amsterdam Historical Museum. © Collection Amsterdam Museum.

but the impact of their efforts would eventually extend far beyond their own House. The rise and later the replacement of Asian products and Delftware by European porcelain from Saxony’s Meissen, Prussia’s KPM, and France’s Sèvres factories reflects the power shifts of the Orange-Nassau as an international political force.192 During the eighteenth century, the Netherlands slowly declined from being a leading generator and supplier of luxury objects, such as porcelain, to other countries in Europe (Germany, England, and even Russia), to being a recipient of exquisite goods from, and a subordinate of, Prussia, and later England – where Willem V eventually fled to as a refugee. These shifts in power can also be traced through some of the material objects of the period, which both reflected and produced cultural, economic, and political power in their own right. Moreover, women and men associated with the House of Orange-Nassau used porcelain objects differently, and in specific display sites to convey strong messages about the power of the Orange-Nassau and themselves as individuals. Certain kinds of porcelain functioned as social agents in

268  Materialising power the expansion of Nassau networks across Europe. These objects created gendered spaces, and their exchange shifted power relations within and beyond the Orange-Nassau family over the early modern period. There were also gendered patterns regarding the preservation of these collections. While the porcelain collections created by men were usually left intact after their deaths, the matrilineal inheritance patterns of Orange-Nassau women often destroyed the integrity of their collections, which are only recoverable now through inventories.

Collecting curiosities Menageries were part of a longer aristocratic tradition of representation and courtly culture. Most menageries associated with the House of Orange-Nassau were attached to the courts of Nassau men, and increasingly they included exotic animals that were brought, dead or alive, from Dutch colonial territories. Women acting as regents, such as Henriette Amalie in Oranienstein, saw it as their duty to enlarge existing menageries, but they were not responsible for their initial creation, as Orange-Nassau men were, and the women acquired mainly local species.193 Attached to his palace at Rijswijk, Maurits had, for example, a considerable menagerie stocked with exotic animals, especially birds, including the prized cassowary.194 The envoys sent to Maurits by the sultan of Aceh in 1602 arrived bearing one of the ‘two Malay-speaking parrots’ that had survived the long journey.195 Cassowaries, which live in New Guinea, northern Australia, and the Indonesian Archipelago, were traded by the VOC and used as presentation gifts. Zacharias Wagenaer, for example, gave a living cassowary in 1657 to the Japanese shogun when he went as a supercargo to Japan.196 Maurits’s birds were likewise given to him by VOC officials, such as Willem Jacobsz, who brought one from Batavia to the Netherlands in 1614 (Figure 5.27).197 Several years later, another governor of Batavia continued this form of giftgiving; in 1623, Jan Pietersz. Coen presented Maurits with a leopard. Maurits then inquired about the possibility of also securing an elephant and a cockatoo.198 After Maurits’s death, the menagerie was maintained by subsequent stadtholders. Maurits also had an aviary with other exotic birds, such as canaries, in his garden in the Buitenhof and at his palace in Breda.199 Exotic flora and fauna featured in the artwork of the Dutch Republic. Gerrit van Honthorst depicted a parrot among the revelling figures on the balcony in his trompe-l’oeil ceiling painted in 1622.200 At this period, Honthorst was commissioned by Frederik Hendrick to produce similar neoLatin and Illusionist style pieces, such as The Concert Group (1624), as part of his décor.201 The portrait of Mary II Stuart, painted by Caspar Netscher around 1683, shows Mary seated in front of a balustrade on which sits a parrot (Figure 5.28). Large, exotic birds were also shown on the balustrade of the coving in the King’s Little Bedchamber at Hampton Court, perched next to, and flying directly above, the potted orange tree of the House of Orange-Nassau.

Figure 5.27 Claes Jansz. Visscher II, Cassowary, Brought by Willem Jacobsz. from the East Indies and Donated to Maurits, 1614, etching, 307mm × 206mm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, RP-P-OB-79.498.

270  Materialising power

Figure 5.28 Caspar Netscher, Portrait of Mary II Stuart (1662–95), Wife of Prince William III, c. 1683, oil on canvas, 80.5cm × 23.5cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-C-195.

Mary’s husband, Willem III, was equally interested in the acquisition of colonial prestige objects. He sent a letter to Governor-General Maetsyker in Batavia to request nutmeg, cloves, white and black pepper, and ‘some small cinnamon trees, that we may furnish our courts here in this country with them’. The spices were sent to Pieter van Dam, the advocate of the Company.202 Interestingly, in contrast to Mary’s excesses, Defoe considered that Willem’s

Collecting the world 271

Figure 5.29 Melchior d’Hondecoeter, The Menagerie, c. 1690, oil on canvas, 135cm × 116.5cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, SK-A-173.

interest in gardening was a more beneficial introduction to England: ‘With the particular judgement of the King, all the gentlemen in England began to fall in; and in a few years fine gardens, and fine houses began to grow up in every corner.’203 In 1674, work began on Willem’s new hunting lodge, Soestdijk. Melchior d’Hondecoeter was commissioned to complete two impressive, large-scale hunting senes for the niches in the entrance hall. In A Hunter’s Bag on a Terrace, completed in 1678, d’Hondecoeter depicted the orange tree symbol of the House, as well as the kind of exotic menagerie including peacocks and turkeys that Willem delighted in.204 At Oude Loo Willem III created

272  Materialising power his own menagerie.205 Around 1680, d’Hondecoeter produced another image of water birds including a pelican, flamingo, crane, and cassowary for Willem and Mary’s palace at Het Loo.206 Around 1690, d’Hondecoeter’s painting of The Menagerie hung above the door of Willem III’s private apartment at Het Loo (Figure 5.32). This depicted two squirrel monkeys from central America, two sulphur-crested cockatoos from Australia, a grey parrot from Africa, and a purple-nap lorikeet on a chain from Indonesia in the lower-left corner of the painting. In 1699, Walter Harris provided A Description of the King’s Royal Palace and Gardens at Loo (1699) noting the ‘voliere, or Fowl-Garden’, which was entered through blue and gold-painted wrought iron gates. Inside were two summerhouses with aviaries containing ‘curious Foreign or Singing Birds’ amongst other exotic fauna.207 D’Hondecoeter’s paintings for Willem, as well as such visitor descriptions, were once again used to extend the reach and longevity of Willem’s collection of animals well beyond the lifetime they could possible enjoy in his gardens. Even those further afield without direct access to such exotic collections were able to make use of the visual materials prepared by those under Nassau dynastic patronage. Johann von Nassau-Saarbrücken-Idstein’s collecting interests were signalled in the portrait that prefaced the visually striking manuscripts documenting his palace and garden achievements, where porcelain and exotic shells were shown scattered about his study (see Figure 2.2). The illustrations of Johann’s exotic gardens, including many plants and fruits sourced from overseas, were interspersed by the artist – Walther – with exotic birds. Walther had previously compiled a manuscript Ornithographia, depicting a series of rare birds.208 However, notably, and in contrast to his Ornithographia, all the birds depicted in the Nassau-Saarbrücken-Idstein’s garden manuscripts appeared to be South American, such as the Brazilian hummingbird, blue dacnis, and various tanagers, as in a depiction of exotic melons, maize, and a Brazilian tanager among more common European fruits (Figure 5.30). It is possible that Walther benefitted from the illustrations of Brazilian species that had been made by artists such as Margraf and Wagenaer during Johann Moritz’s governance there. Willem IV’s new status as the ‘Supreme Governor General of the Dutch East Indies’ brought him into a new, and more powerful, relationship with the VOC. The Company marked this event with the special gift of a diploma box: ‘an agate box mounted in gold, with its lock and key in the same, where is the commission of His Highness as head of the Company of the Indies.’209 Inside was contained the formal document in which the Heeren Seventeen vested supremacy over the Company in Willem.210 Willem’s status was materialised both in the exquisite box itself and the ritual of the gift presentation that recognised Willem as the Company’s leader. Willem and his wife, Anne of Hanover, used their formal and informal positions of power even more strategically to encourage VOC officials to compile their natural history collections. In 1749 Willem IV wrote to van Imhoff, on behalf of the Academy in Leiden, to see that the directors of the different factories in Asia ‘collect and prepare all manner of insects, minerals, plants and curiosities and have

Collecting the world 273

Figure 5.30 Johann Jakob Walther, Apples, Pears, Quince, Pumpkin, Corn, Rosehip, Greenbean Pod, Fruit of the Opium Poppy, and Hazelnuts, Chestnuts and a Brazilian Tanager, gouache on vellum. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France; Département des Estampes et photographie, Rés. JA-25-FOL, Plate 101. × Bibliothèque nationale de France.

them sent, provided with relevant information’.211 The couple had already collected paintings, manuscripts, prints, coins, Greek and Roman antiques, minerals, stones, unusual seeds, fruits, and sea coral. Many of these had been brought to the Republic by commanders of the VOC ships.212 Their collection

274  Materialising power found a home in the ‘Cabinet for Natural and Artificial Curiosities’ at the Stadtholder’s residence in the Binnenhof until 1766. The cabinet was curated by Aernout Vosmaer, and housed a fine collection of weapons, ornaments, and costumes from India and Ceylon that had been assembled by Julius Valentijn Stein van Gollenesse, the governor of Ceylon from 1742–51, and presented to Anne.213 The collection contained three extensive sets of Gujurat jewellery, not with the intention that Anne would wear them, but rather, it seems, that the artefacts would form part of a collector’s cabinet (Figure 5.31).214 These jewels were listed, along with weapons, clothes, and figurines, in an inventory compiled in 1760 by Vosmaer as jewellery for a ‘Heathen’, for a ‘Moorish’ woman, and that could be worn by both.215 Willem’s father and mother had systematically sponsored and developed exotic collections through their relationship with the trading companies. In 1748, the year of Willem V’s birth, his father bought the country estates Kleine Loo and Grote Loo outside of The Hague. In the following year, he

Figure 5.31 Anonymous, necklace (candmala), c. 1750, gold, 16.6cm × 16.5cm. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum, AK-NM-7061.

Collecting the world 275 established a menagerie. While Anne acted as governess for her son, the menagerie was greatly extended. Anne had a strong interest in natural history, as did many other aristocratic and royal women in Europe who assembled significant natural history collections and employed natural scientists, such as the students of Carl of Linnaeus, to curate and order their collections.216 Anne used the collection she built up to promote not only herself but the wider Orange-Nassau dynasty, particularly her son, the Prince of Orange. In 1751 she had bought an insect collection from the collector Pierre Lyonnet, and this marked the beginning of the prince’s natural history cabinet,217 and his presentation as an elite scientific collector in keeping with contemporary Enlightenment ideals. In 1771, Vosmaer was appointed as the director of the prince’s natural history cabinet. The collection was first housed in five rooms in the Stadtholder’s quarters, but Vosmaer increased it considerably by buying at auctions and through shipments sent from Dutch colonies, which included rare living animals.218 Willem’s collections were modelled on the French example set by scientists like George-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon, who was patronised by the French monarch. Peter Simon Pallas, who later became a famous zoologist and was appointed to the Russian Academy of Sciences in St Petersburg by Catherine the Great, lived in The Hague between 1763 and 1767 and described the collection and menagerie in detail. Vosmaer also wrote several scientific publications based on the menagerie and the collections.219 This collection was open to the public three mornings per week.220 When, in 1777, a merchant from Suriname offered Willem a living orang-utan, Vosmaer jumped at the opportunity.221 The eighteenth century had a lively interest in apes, but in the Netherlands the obvious wordplay on orang-utan and Orange probably added greater interest. Evidently, it was not the first association between the OrangeNassau dynasty and orang-utans; another female had been given to Frederik Hendrik from Angola about 100 years previously.222 Willem’s orang-utan came from the island of Borneo and had its habits and intelligence carefully documented.223 Unfortunately, she did not survive her first winter, dying only six months after arriving in the Republic, but this did not provoke criticism about his use of living exotic imports. The body was stuffed and later joined the natural history museum in Paris as a prize exhibit. Willem commissioned Tethard Philipp Christian Haag, a court painter who had portrayed numerous members of the princely family, to paint the orang-utan. It is shown standing upright in front of the entry to the menagerie plucking fruit from a tree (Figure 5.32).224 The collection and display of exotic animals, such as the orang-utan, and menageries of the princes echoed the other visual motifs of the dynasty’s claim to colonial power, namely the display of slaves and indigenous people at their court. Willem’s interest in his collection was widely known, and merchants with experience in the Dutch colonial territories offered the prince opportunities to purchase artefacts.225 For example, in September 1765 the merchant van Marselis wrote to Vosmaer saying that his son Theodore had arrived from

Figure 5.32 Tethart Philip Christian Haag, Orang-Utan from the Zoo of Willem V, Picking an Apple, 1777, oil on canvas, 174cm × 110.5cm. The Hague, Mauritshuis, Inv. Nr 813.

Collecting the world 277 Suriname where he had spent several years, and had collected some curiosities that might be of interest to Willem.226 He had made a list, which he included with the letter. Some days later, van Marselis was sent a response via Willem’s cousellor De Larrey: The directors of the Cabinet of the Prince, having read the list have marked the articles that he would desire for the ornamentation and to augment the cabinet of the Prince with the sign ++ and those that he would also covet, for amateurs are insatiable, are marked thus +. However, the Prince and the Duke who had seen the list after the examination of Director Voomar [Vosmaer] found that he had marked far too many items and ordered me to make it known that he only wished for some of these animals and insects.227 Van Marselis wrote back that he would send the things marked on the list straightaway, and noted that a man who had accompanied his son from Suriname would attend the animals and provide details on their food and other maintenance requirements. He concluded by noting his happiness to be able to provide this service to the prince: ‘it was the sole goal for which they were brought to Europe.’228 In 1786, due to more challenging political circumstances, Willem sold his estate at Voorburg and the animals were moved from Loo near The Hague to Loo near Apeldoorn.229 This move proved to be especially difficult for the two young elephants that had been received as gifts from the East India Company.230 By the end of the eighteenth century, the fate of this significant collection, once a testament to the political aspirations of the Orange-Nassau family, fell victim to the French invasion and significant parts of it, including the two elephants, were taken to Paris as war booty.231 Indeed, about half of the collection was shipped to Paris: around 10,000 specimens of mineral, 3,872 botanical specimens, 5,000 insects, 9,800 shells, and 1,176 birds. At the end of the French occupation in 1815, the newly founded royal House of Orange charged Professor Sebald Justinius Bruggmann of Leiden University with the recovery of the collection.232 Collections of exotic flora and fauna were another, often dramatic, way in which the extent of the world within Dutch reach was demonstrated in Orange-Nassau sites. The Company and individuals who presented such gifts gained access and influence with individuals, both women and men, in the House, whose status was acknowledged or increased by holding and displaying such wonders. These collections, as physical sites such as menageries, as exhibitions open to the wider public, or when reproduced and exhibited in paintings and prints, made visible claims for Orange-Nassau power that were well understood by contemporaries.

278  Materialising power

Conclusions Exotic artefacts and peoples from around the globe were critical to the presentation of power for the House of Orange-Nassau in Europe and were key to the relationships created between individuals within and beyond the wider dynasty. However, the ways that Orange-Nassau men and women accessed, collected, displayed, and interacted with others through these objects differed in ways that reflected above all their gender, as well as their status in the dynasty. Moreover, the use to which exotic objects were put by OrangeNassau individuals was discussed, challenged, and praised by local commentators in Europe as they were integrated into museums, libraries, and gardens. Architecture and furnishings were also marked by assumptions about gender. How Orange-Nassau members employed these objects from afar as part of their self- and dynastic presentation could be highly praised or highly criticised, mainly on grounds that seem to relate to notions of the relationship between gender, consumption, and intellectualism. As this chapter has shown, women and subordinated men played an important role in the circulation of exotic materiality to promote Orange-Nassau power. They too capitalised on the wider Dutch access to imported colonial objects as well as the Dutch production of maps, books, and Delftware that referenced colonial power. As members or affiliates of the Orange-Nassau network, they also benefitted from the desire for patronage of trading company officials, and others who sought their friendship by offering gifts such as porcelain, exotic animals, or precious lacquerware that were displayed in the spaces of dynastic power: palaces, gardens, menageries, or in public processions and celebrations. And yet, there were important gendered differences. Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen was able to accompany an official GWIC positing as governor in Brazil where he used his time, resources, and clout as a Nassau man to accrue valuable ethnographic objects, animals, and even indigenous people, which he brought back to the Netherlands. The artists commissioned by him (Post, Eckhout, Wagenaer, and others) compiled important artistic collections that only materialised fully after their return to Europe. Johann Moritz’s valuable collection was used strategically by him to seek patronage with those male European leaders who were his social superiors. In this process, Johan Moritz had to break up his collection, yet it is still thought of today as an important legacy of Nassau power. This is very different to most of the women’s collecting and display strategies that were equally (if not more so) aimed at the promotion of the dynastic power of the House of Orange. Not only Amalia von Solms-Braunfels, but also her direct female (and some male) descendants, her daughter-in-law Mary Henrietta Stuart, her sisters-in-law such as Catharina Belgica and their descendants, strategically acquired Asian porcelain and took great care in displaying it in specifically designed rooms to great effect, often combined with other material indicators of colonial power: lacquerware, furniture, soapstone figures, leather wallpapers and the like. This ‘consumption’ was an important part of

Collecting the world 279 identity creation in German lands; tiled kitchens were known as ‘Dutch kitchens’ and when combined with explicit Orange symbols such as portraits and orange trees, they created a powerful marketing message of Orange dynastic power. These collections were equally divided up through inheritance practices which distributed mobile possessions – such as porcelain collections – to female kin. In this way porcelain once owned by Louise de Coligny and Amalia, their daughters and other female kin, spread geographically from The Hague to Heidelberg, Kassel, Oranienburg, Berlin, Dessau, Oranienbaum, Oranienstein, Oranienhof, London, Wörlitz, Mosigkau, and further; it also spread over several generations from the mid-seventeenth to the late eighteenth century. These porcelain objects were no mere obsessive accumulations of objects or frivolous consumption practices; they were political tools that harvested Dutch colonial expansion to promote Orange power.

Notes   1 Benjamin Schmidt, Inventing Exoticism: Geography, Globalism, and Europe’s Early Modern World (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2015), esp. 6; Benjamin Schmidt, ‘Accumulating the World: Collecting and Commodifying “Globalism” in Early Modern Europe’, in Centres and Cycles of Accumulation in and Around the Netherlands during the Early Modern Period, ed. Lissa Roberts (Berlin: Lit, 2011), 129–55.   2 ‘The Inventory of Kasteel te Breda, 1619’, in S. W. A. Drossaers and Th. H. Lunsingh Scheurleer, eds, Inventarissen van de inboedels in de verblijven van de Oranjes en daarmede gelijk the stellen stukken 1567–1795, 3 vols (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1974–6), 1: 161–2, item 840. ‘Indian’ was the adjective commonly attributed by contemporaries to a whole range of exotic objects that came from many parts of the globe.   3 Drossaers and Lunsingh Scheurleer, Inventarissen, 1: 204. There were also East India and Japanese lacquer cabinets. See 1: 533–4 for Louse de Coligny’s rooms.   4 Cordula Bischoff, ‘Women Collectors and the Rise of the Porcelain Cabinet’, in Chinese and Japanese Porcelain for the Dutch Golden Age, ed. Jan van Campen and Titus Eliëns (Zwolle: Waanders, 2014), 173.   5 C. Willemijn Fock, ‘Frederik Hendrik en Amalia’s appartementen: Vorstelijk vertoon naast de triomf van het porselein’, in Vorstelijk verzameld. De kunstcollectie van Frederik Hendrik en Amalia, ed. Peter van der Ploeg and Carola Vermeeren (Zwolle: Waanders, 1997), 76–84.   6 ‘Inventaris van kostbaarheden, meubelen, schilderijen van Amalia van Solms, ten dele in het Huis ten Bosch, het Huis in het Noordeinde en het kasteel te Tournhout 1654–1668’, in Inventarissen, 1: 262.   7 Fock, ‘Frederik Hendrik en Amalia’s appartmeneten’, 84.   8 Fock, ‘Frederik Hendrik en Amalia’s appartementen’, 84.   9 ‘Il gabinetto contiguo è nobile e magnifico, essendo tutto coperto di legno della China e dipinto alla foggia di quel paese, nè vi manca la madreperla che lo rende interamente sontuoso’. Cited in Fock, ‘Frederik Hendrik en Amalia’s appartmeneten: Vorselijk vertoon naaste de triomf van het porcelain’, 84. Original text on 256.   10 Rita Wassing-Visser, Royal Gifts from Indonesia: Historical Bonds with the House of Orange-Nassau, 1600–1938 (Zwolle: Waanders, 1995), 38.   11 Kulturstiftung Dessau Wörlitz, Schloss Wörlitz, Inv. Nr II-624. See Kristina Schlansky, ‘Fürstlich eingerichtet – zur Ausstattung des Oranienbaumer Schlosses der Henriette Catharina’, Oranienbaum Journal 1 (2007): 42.

280  Materialising power   12 ‘Man findet feine Kästlein so wohl von Natürlichem Holz als von laccirter arbeit, etl. ganz glanz vergüldet Stuhle und Tische auch gueridons, haben so wohl ofen [öfen] so meistenteils der quere stehen, und von kleinen Kacheln sind, als camine, so meistentheils in Ecken stehen’, Chrisyoph Pitzler, cited in Wilhelm van Kempen, ‘Das Reisetage- und Skizzenbuch des Architekten Christoph Pitzler, eine Quelle zur anhaltischen Kunstgeschichte des 17. und 18. Jahrhunderts’, Mitteilungen des Vereins für Anhaltische Geschichte und Altertumskunde 14, no. 1 (1920): 95.   13 Rita L. P. Mulder-Radetzky, ‘Lustschloss Oranjewoud. Schloss- Gärten- Hofhaltung’, in Nassau-Diez und die Niederlande. Dynastie und Oranierstadt Diez in der Neuzeit, ed. Simon Groenveld and Friedhelm Jürgensmeier (Wiesbaden: Historische Kom­ mission für Nassau, 2012), 277.   14 On the spread of Amalia’s collections to German lands through inheritance, see Helmut Börsch-Supan, ‘Die Gemälde aus dem Vermächtnis der Amalie van Solms und aus der Oranischen Erbschaft in den brandenburgischpreußischen Schlössern. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der hohenzollernschen Kunstsammlungen’, in Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte, ed. Margarete Kühn (Munich and Berlin: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 1967), 143–98.   15 Ernest Law, The History of Hampton Court Palace. Vol. 3: Orange and Guelph Times (London: George Bell and Sons, 1891), 98. Hampton Court has recently re-opened a Chocolate Kitchen, based on that of the Georgian monarchs who succeeded Willem. See http://www.hrp.org.uk/HamptonCourtPalace/stories/ palacehighlights/chocolate-kitchen.   16 Law, The History of Hampton Court Palace. Vol. 3: Orange and Guelph Times, 121.   17 Law, The History of Hampton Court Palace. Vol. 3: Orange and Guelph Times, 95.   18 See Andrew Moore, Pair of Fire-Dogs, 1696–7, silver gilt and slate, 45.7cm × 24.7cm × 9.5cm. London, Royal Collections Trust, RCIN 50273. Available at: https://www.royalcollection.org.uk/collection/50273/pair-of-fire-dogs.   19 As Elisabeth Charlotte, the Duchess of Orléans (1652–1722), (raised a Protestant, daughter of Charlotte von Hessen-Kassel and Elector Palatine Karl I Ludwig, she was thus a descendant of the House of Orange-Nassau through both of her parents) reported in 1709: ‘The king is so determined to continue the war that yesterday he gave up his gold service and now uses porcelain; he has sent every gold thing he has to the mint to be turned into coin.’ The Correspondence of Madame, Princess Palatine, Mother of the Regent (Boston: Hardy, Pratt & Co, 1899), 57. Régine de Plinval de Guillebon, ‘The Manufacture and Sale of Soft-Paste Porcelain in Paris in the Eighteenth Century’, in Discovering the Secrets of Soft-Paste Porcelain at the Saint-Cloud Manufactory, ca. 1690–1766 (Exhibition Catalogue), ed. Bertrand Rondot (New York: Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, 1999), 84.   20 Andrew Moore, Side Table, 1698–9, silver and oak, 85cm × 122cm × 75.5cm. London, Royal Collections Trust, RCIN 35301. Available at: https://www.roy alcollection.org.uk/collection/35301/side-table.   21 Celia Fiennes, Through England on a Side Saddle, in the Time of William and Mary (London: Field & Tuer, The Leadenhall Press, Simpkin, Marshall & Co, Hamilton, Adams, & Co, 1888), 238.   22 Daniel Defoe, A Tour Through the Whole Island of Great Britain, ed. G. D. H. Cole, 2 vols (London: Dent, [1926]), 1: 175.   23 Deborah Sampson Shinn, catalogue and commentary section, in Baarsen, Johnston, Jackson-Stops and Dee, Courts and Colonies, 200. On the ways in which Asian images were re-interepreted in the European environment, see Benjamin Schmidt, ‘The Spaces of Memory and Their Transmediations: On

Collecting the world 281 the Lives of Exotic Images and Their Material Evocations’, in Memory Before Modernity: Practices of Memory in Early Modern Europe, ed. Erika Kuijpers, Judith Pollmann, Johannes Müller and Jasper van der Steen (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 223–50.   24 J. A. Worp, ed., De Briefwisseling van Constantijn Huygens (1608–1687), 6 vols (The Hague: Martinus Njhoff, 1917), 6: 456.   25 Worp, De Briefwisseling van Constantijn Huygens, 6: 456.   26 Daniel Defoe, A Tour through the Whole Island of Great Britain, ed. P. N. Furbank, W. R. Owens and A. J. Coulson (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1991), 65.   27 Calado cited in C. R. Boxer, The Dutch in Brazil, 1624–1654 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1957), 135–6.   28 Caspar van Baerle, The History of Brazil under the Governorship of Count Johann Moritz of Nassau, trans. Blanche T. van Berckel-Ebeling Koning (Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 2011), 297.   29 See for a discussion, E. van den Boogaart, ‘Infernal Allies: The Dutch West India and the Tarairiu 1630–1654’, in Johann Moritz van Nassau-Siegen 1604–1679: A Humanist Prince in Europe and Brazil. Essays on the Occasion of the Tercentenary of his Death, ed. E. van den Boogaart, H. R. Hoetink and P. J. P. Whitehead (The Hague: The Johann Moritz van Nassau Stichting, 1979), 519–38; Lodewijk Hulsman, ‘Brazilian Indians in the Dutch Republic: The Remonstrances of Antonio Paraupaba to the States General in 1654 and 1656’, Itinerario 29, no. 1 (2005): 51–78; Mark Meuwese, ‘For the Peace and Wellbeing of the Country: Intercultural Mediators and Dutch-Indian relations in New Netherland and Dutch Brazil, 1600–1664’ (Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Notre Dame University, 2003).   30 Boxer, The Dutch in Brazil, 135–6.   31 ‘Graaf Maurits heft wilden meegenommen, die dansen uitvoeren, terwijl zij geheel naakt zijn. De dominées, die er met hunne vrouwen naar waren gaan kijken, vonden dat niets aardig’, in Worp, De Briefwisseling van Constantijn Huygens (1608–1687), 4: 52.   32 See R. Joppien, ‘The Dutch Vision of Brazil: Johann Moritz and His Artists’, in Johann Moritz van Nassau-Siegen, ed. van den Boogaart, Hoetink and Whitehead, 322.   33 ‘Doe quamen ettelijcke Morianen, 2 en 2, te voet: D’Eerste 2 hadden een Papegay en een Baviaen [Pavian?], d’andere waren 22 Morianen en Tapoyers, op hun wijse met gegorde Kleederen, en Veders op hunne Hoofden, voorsien, ende alle met Ketens vast gesloten. Dese droegen groote Beckens en Vaten, gevult mit Citroenen, Suycker, Appels, etc Soo droegen oock de Tapoyers gevlochten Korven, vol Mechsen-vlees, Armen en Beene, sommige waren bespickt, en elck op sijn frayst op de Barbarisse wijse toegemaeckt.’ Cited from the description of the pageant in the Hollandse Mercurius 3 (Haerlem, 1660): 28–31, in F. Gorissen, Conspectus Cliviae. Eine rheinische Residenzstadt in der niederländischen Kunst des 17. Jahrhunderts (Kleve: Boss-Druck und Verlag, 1964), 42.   34 The original of this portrait is now held at the National Museum in Warsaw, Poland. An additional copy to that in the Stiftung Preussische Schlösser und Gärten BerlinBrandenburg collection is at the Musée royauz des Beaux-Arts in Brussels.   35 E. van den Boogaart, ‘A Well-Governed Colony: Frans Post’s Illustrations in Caspar Barlaeus’s History of Dutch Brazil’, The Rijksmuseum Bulletin 59, no. 3 (2011): 237.   36 Van den Boogaart, ‘A Well-Governed Colony’, 237.   37 ‘Voor de reste sal lief wesen, dat volgens U. Ed. goetvinden meer exemplaren bedongen, en de 20 [?] van U. Ed. daerin begrepen, en voorts aen J. Blaeu vereert worden ten eynde hÿ de exemplaren wat beter coop geven, en mitsgaders de

282  Materialising power translatie in andere talen bevorderen moge. Maer voor allen moet mede gestipuleert worden, dat hÿ planten fourneert so veel printen als noodig wesen sal.’ 16 March 1647, in James van der Veldt, ‘An Autograph Letter of John Maurits of Nassau, Governor of the Dutch Colony of Brazil (1636–1644)’, The Americas 3, no. 3 (1947): 311–12. Question mark in the transcription of van der Veldt.   38 Van der Veldt, ‘An Autograph Letter of John Maurits of Nassau’, 313.   39 Van den Boogaart, ‘A Well-Governed Colony’, 258.   40 On the contact between Albert Eckhout and Jacob van Campen, who was responsible for the decoration of the Oranjezaal (1636–52), see Quentin Buvelot, ‘Albert Eckhout: A Dutch Painter in Brazil’, in Albert Eckhout: A Dutch Artist in Brazil, ed. Quentin Buvelot (The Hague: Royal Cabinet of Paintings Mauritshuis, 2004), 38–43.   41 Boxer, The Dutch in Brazil, 263.   42 Reinier Baarsen, ‘Wilhelm de Rots and Early Cabinet-Making in The Hague’, Burlington Magazine, 150, no. 263 (2008): 379. See also F. Liekes, ‘De ivoren meubelen van Maurits de Braziliaan’, Antiek 14 (1979–80): 381–400. Now held in Schloss Oranienburg, Potsdam.   43 Morgens Bencard, ‘Fürstliche Geschenke’, in Sein Feld war die Welt. Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen (1604–1679). Von Siegen über die Niederlande und Brasilien nach Brandenburg, ed. Gerhard Brunn and Cornelius Neutsch, (Münster: Waxmann, 2008), 171.   44 Quote from Jacob Hennin, De zijnrike gedachten toegeplast of de Vijf Sinnen van’s Menschen Verstand (The Hague: P. Mortier, 1681), cited in Joaquim de Sousa-Leão, Frans Post, 1612–1680 (Amsterdam: AL van Gendt, 1973).   45 See Mariana Françozo, ‘Global Connections: Johan Maurits of Nassau-Siegen’s Collection of Curiosities’, in The Legacy of Dutch Brazil, ed. Michiel van Groesen (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014), 105–23.   46 Van Baerle, The History of Brazil under the Governorship of Count Johann Moritz of Nassau, 298–9.   47 Rebecca Parker Brienen, Visions of Savage Paradise: Albert Eckhout, Court Painter in Colonial Dutch Brazil (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2006, 171–2.   48 This work is now lost. Pedro Corrêa do Lago and Bia Corrêa do Lago, eds, Frans Post (1612–1680): Catalogue Raisonné, rev. English edn (Milan: Five Continents Editions, 2007), 40.   49 Wassing-Visser, Royal Gifts from Indonesia, 37.   50 ‘Int portael No 32 boven ten noorden hangen: 7 schilderijen alle Hollandsche fortressen in Oost Indien[sic] door ordre van Prins Frederik Hendrik Hoogl. Memorie nat Leven laten afschildern’. ‘Inventarissen af Honselaarsdijk’, cited in Dirk Frederik Slothouwer, De paleizen van Frederik Hendrik (Leiden: Sijthoff, 1945), 281.   51 ‘Over de geheele weerelt’. Willem Boreel to Huygens in Worp, De Briefwisseling van Constantijn Huygens, 2: 349.   52 ‘Kenteeckenen overal in possessie houdt en mainteneert, die bij vertooninge van de titulen alleen connen strecken tot eere van dese regering’. Worp, De Briefwisseling van Constantijn Huygens, 3: 349. These would show ‘De 12 zeefeiten connen gerepresenteert werden 12 coronis navalibus, yder cum epigrapho suo. De possessien in Asia, Africa en America — exceptis regnis – te representeren yder apart solis epigraphis. De 6 regna Asiae, Brasil en Nieuw-Nederlandt met 8 coronis regijs vicem coniunctis.’   53 Dantas Silva, ‘Images of Nassovian Brazil’, 71.   54 Florike Egmond and Peter Mason, ‘Albert E(e)ckhout, Court Painter’, in Buvelot, Albert Eckhout: A Dutch Artist in Brazil, 111.   55 ‘Inventarium über Die Königl Meublen, so sich auf dem Schlosse zu Oranienburg Ano 1743 befunden’, fol. 97v, reproduced in Schloss Oranienburg: Ein Inventar

Collecting the world 283 aus dem Jahre 1743, ed. Christoph Martin Vogtherr (Berlin-Brandenburg: Stiftung Preußische Schlösser und Gärten, 2001), 126. It is suggested that this painting was created while Post was in Brazil or soon after (126 n7).   56 On Post’s shifting imagery, and occlusion of the short-lived Nassau presence in Brazil, over the course of his later career in Europe, see Benjamin Schmidt, ‘The “Dutch” “Atlantic” and the Dubious Case of Frans Post’, in Dutch Atlantic Connections, 1680–1800: Linking Empires, Bridging Borders, ed. Gert Oostindie and Jessica Roitman (Leiden: Brill, 2014), 257.   57 See Schmidt, Inventing Exoticism, 10.   58 On the contact between Albert Eckhout and Jacob van Campen, see Buvelot, ‘Albert Eckhout’, 38–43.   59 See Nadine Akkerman and Paul R. Sellin, ‘A Stuart Masque in Holland: Ballet de La Carmesse de La Haya (1655)’, Ben Jonson Journal 11 (2004): 207–58.   60 See Mariana Françozo, ‘“Dressed like an Amazon”: The Transatlantic Trajectory of a Red Feather Coat’, in Museums and Biographies: Stories, Objects, Identities, ed. Kate Hill (Suffolk: Boydell Press, 2012), 187–99; Akkerman and Sellin, ‘A Stuart Masque in Holland’; Ellinoor Bergvelt and Renée Kistemaker, eds, De Wereld binnen Handbereik. Nederlandse kunst- en rariteitenverzamelingen, 1585–1735 (Zwolle: Waanders, 1992).   61 Françozo, ‘“Dressed like an Amazon”’, 192.   62 Luise Hollandine von der Pfalz, ‘Sophie von der Pfalz als Indianerin’, after 1644. Held in Wasserburg-Anholt Castle in Isselburg, Germany.   63 For more on the identification of the sitter, see http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/ O1067927/a-woman-in-masque-costume-portrait-miniature-thach-nathaniel/.   64 For a general discussion of slave portraits in Dutch culture, see Allison Blakely, Blacks in the Dutch World: The Evolution of Racial Imagery in a Modern Society (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2000).   65 Blakely, Blacks in the Dutch World, 103.   66 For the Oranjezaal, see Hanna Peter-Raupp, Die Ikonographie des Oranjezaal (Hildesheim: Olms, 1980); Margriet van Eikema Hommes and Elmer Kolfin, De Oranjezaal in huis ten Bosch. En zaal uit loutere liefde (Zwolle: Waanders, 2013); For chinoisoire at Mosigkau, see Astrid Wehser, Anna Wilhelmine von Anhalt und ihr Schloss in Mosigkau (Kiel: Ludwig, 2002).   67 During the seventeenth century, leading family members of the Oranges had themselves portrayed with African servants (Mary I, Willem II, Willem III). See Blakely, Blacks in the Dutch World, 78–170.   68 John Grundy, in The Stranger’s Guide to Hampton Court Palace and Gardens (London: Bell and Daldy, 1857), suggests that it represents a favoured servant of Willem III (54). A series of marble sculptures of black boys were produced at this period by Jan Claudius de Cock. Examples can be found at the Victoria and Albert Museum and the Rijksmuseum. De Cock had close ties with the OrangeNassau. He undertook commissioned work for Willem at Breda (see http:// www.breda-museum.org/breda/upload_pdf/AanwinstJCdC.pdf), and produced sculptures of Maurits and Filips Willem (held at the Rijksmuseum).   69 Portrait of Maria of Orange (1642–1688), with Hendrik van Zuijlestein (d. 1673) and a Servant. The Hague, Mauritshuis, Inv. 114.   70 Thomas Babington Macauley, The History of England from the Accession of James II, 5 vols (Philadelphia: Porter & Coates, 1848), 2: 380.   71 Charlotte Eymael, ‘De geschiedenis achter een aquarel. Het verhaal van “twee moortjes”’, in Een vorstelijk archivaris: opstellen voor Bernard Woelderink, ed. J. R. ter Molen, E. A. G. van den Bent and B. Woelderink (Zwolle: Waanders, 2003), 126.   72 A. van Putten naar I. L. la Fargue, De moor Sedron, kamerdienaar van prins Willem V, c. 1770, aquarelle. The Hague, Koninklijke Verzamlingen. Reproduced, in Eymael, ‘De geschiedenis achter een aquarel’, 125, plate 9.

284  Materialising power   73 Eymael, ‘De geschiedenis achter een aquarel’, 124–8.   74 ‘6 halsdochen’ in accounts for November and December 1796. The Hague, Koninklijk Huisarchief (KHA), Archief Willem V, A31, Inv. Nr 139.   75 Eymael, ‘De geschiedenis achter een aquarel’, 127.   76 KHA, Archief Wilhelmina van Prussia, A32, Inv. Nr 391. Her son Willem I continued the support.   77 KHA, Bezittingen buiten Nederland (C28), Nagelaten archivalia van Geheimraad Chelius, Inv. Nr 20.   78 Eymael, ‘De geschiedenis achter een aquarel’.   79 Bencard, ‘Fürstliche Geschenke’.   80 Mariana Françozo, ‘Global Connections: Johan Maurits of Nassau-Siegen’s Collection of Curiosities’, in van Groesen, The Legacy of Dutch Brazil, 123.   81 Silke Herz, ‘Johann Moritz van Nassau-Siegen’, in Onder den Oranje Boom: Niederländische Kunst und Kultur im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert an deutschen Fürstenhöfen (Exhibition Catalogue), ed. Marcus Schacht, Jörg Meiner and Horst Lademacher (Krefeld: Kaiser-Wilhelm-Museum; Schloß Oranienburg; Apeldoorn: Paleis Het Loo, 1999–2000), 188. We know the contents of the gift from three surviving lists: one at KHA in The Hague and two lists in Geheimes Staatsarchiv, Berlin. The Berlin lists are almost identical, but in The Hague list not all ivory objects are listed and none of the paintings, although more books are. KHA, Archief Nassau-Siegen, A4, Inv. Nr 1478, fols 360–62; also in KHA, Archief, Nassau-Siegen A4, Inv. Nr 1483. KHA, Archief Nassau-Siegen A4, Inv. Nr 1454 and 1455; KHA, Archief Nassau-Siegen A4, Inv. Nr 1483; KHA, Archief Nassau-Siegen A4, Inv. Nr 1486; KHA, Archief Nassau-Siegen A4, Inv. Nr 1477, fol. 14. For a discussion of the gifts to Brandenburg, Copenhagen, and Paris, see Gerard Lemmens, ‘Die Schenkung an Ludwig XIV und die Auflösung der brasilianischen Sammlung des Johann Moritz 1652–1679’, in Soweit der Erdkreis Reicht. Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen, 1604–1679, ed. G. Werd (Kleve: Stadt Kleve, 1979), 265–93; Ludwig Driesen, Leben des Fürsten Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen (Berlin: Deckerschen Geheimen Ober-Hofbuchdruckerei, 1849), 356–9; Thomas Thomsen, Albert Eckhout. Ein niederländischer Maler und sein Gönner Moritz der Brasilianer. Ein Kulturbild aus dem 17. Jahrhundert (Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1938); Joppien, ‘The Dutch Vision of Brazil’, esp. 322–8; Herz, ‘Johann Moritz van Nassau-Siegen’, 188; Brienen, Visions of Savage Paradise, 204–7; Bencard, ‘Fürstliche Geschenke’; E. Larsen, ‘Some Seventeenth Century Paintings of Brazil’, Connoisseur (Oct 1970): 123–31; E. Larsen, Frans Post, Interprète du Brésil (Amsterdam: Colibris, 1962).   82 These are listed in ‘Specification der Indianischen Stucken so der Chur. Fürstl. Lustgärtner Michael Hanff in zweyen Kasten eingebackt mit nach Cleve genommen [. . .]’. KHA, Archief Nassau-Siegen, A4, Inv. Nr 1478, fol. 359; Berlin, Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preußischer Kulturbesitz, HA, I.Rep. No 39(a).   83 Lemmens, ‘Die Schenkung an Ludwig XIV und die Auflösung der brasilianischen Sammlung des Johann Moritz 1652–1679’, 271.   84 Great Elector to Johann Moritz, 19/29 May 1668: ‘meine Tapecereien so im Hage gemacht sein worden, befine ich sehr schon [sic], undt were schade gewessen, daßSie ungemacht liegen blieben weren.’ Otto Meinardus, ‘Eigenhändige Briefe des Grossen Kurfürsten an Johann Moritz von Nassau’, Forschungen zur brandenburgischen und preussischen Geschichte 19 (1888): 128.   85 ‘Sach de schilderijen die graf Mauritz liet maechen van allerley dat in West-Indien iss, om tapijten daaraf te maechen’. Gloria Parendi: Dagboek van Willem Frederik, stadhouder van Friesland, Groningen en Drenthe, 1643–1649, 1651–1654, ed. J. Visser (The Hague: Nederlands Historisich Genootschap, 1995), 436.   86 Joppien, ‘The Dutch Vision of Brazil’, 324.

Collecting the world 285   87 ‘Ich bin gestern von Potsdam wieder anhero gekommen, aldh Ich Dero schone Gense So Ew. Lden. Mir geschenck gesehen, den indianischen Raben aber hab Ich nicht alda gefunden, ob er unterwegs gestorben oder gestollen worden weis ich nicht.’ Great Elector to JM, 22 Jan/1 Feb 1678, in Meinardus, ‘Eigenhändige Briefe des Grossen Kurfürsten an Johann Moritz von Nassau’, 131. The ‘Indianisch Rabe’ is a Brazilian parrot. See Caspar Schmalkalden’s watercolour of a ‘Brasilianisch Trarara’ in his ‘Reise’. Original in Landesbibliothek Gotha, reproduced in P. J. P. Whitehead, ‘Georg Markgraf and Brazilian Zoology’, in Johann Moritz van Nassau-Siegen, ed. van den Boogaart, Hoetink and Whitehead, 462.   88 Bencard, ‘Fürstliche Geschenke’.   89 Thomsen, Albert Eckhout, 12.   90 This letter was published by Louis Bobé, ‘Museografiske Meddelelser, II’, in Danske Magasin 5, no. 6 (1909): 379. The original letter is held at Copenhagen, Rigsarkivet (RA), ‘Briefe des Hauses Nassau’, dated 13 July 1654 (from Cleve). For more on the history of the Eckhout paintings in Denmark, see Bente Gundestrup, ‘The Eckhout Paintings and the Royal Danish Kunstkammer, History of the Collection’ and Berete Due, ‘Brazilian Artefacts in the Royal Kunstkammer’, in Albert Eckhout Returns to Brazil, 1644–2002, ed. Barbara Berlowicz (Copenhagen: Nationalmuseet, 2002), 103–15 and 187–95.   91 Johann Moritz letter to the Danish king 15/25 July 1649. RA, ‘Briefe des Hauses Nassau’, in Bencard, ‘Fürstliche Geschenke’, 162.   92 Søren Mentz, ‘Art, Power and Politics: Denmark and the Netherlands, 1600– 1660’, in Berlowicz, Albert Eckhout Returns to Brazil, 100.   93 Bencard, ‘Fürstliche Geschenke’, 162–8.   94 ‘Mitt diesen wenigen in underthenigkeitt die hende zu küssen und deroselben meine gehorsamste undt treuw schultigste dienste zu offeriren, wozu mich den desto begiriger machett die hohe gnade, so e. kö. May. Meinen bruder graff Henrig selger in seinem leben haben bewiesen, undt würde ich mich glücklich achten, wen ich gleich fals, als dero gerhorsamer knecht könte erkennet undt mit dero gnedigsten ahnbefohlen geehret warden’, 13 July 1654, in Thomsen, Albert Eckhout, 11.   95 Bencard, ‘Fürstliche Geschenke’, 170. The accompanying letter, dated 26 April 1656, from the Danish king is now in Copenhagen at the RA, ‘Ausländisches Register’.   96 Rebecca Parker Brienen, ‘From Brazil to Europe: The Zoological Drawings of Albert Eckhout and George Marcgraf’, in Early Modern Zoology: The Construction of Animals in Science, Literature and the Visual Arts, ed. K. Enenkel and P. Smith (Leiden: Brill, 2007), 273–314.   97 Johann Moritz also received horses from other aristocratic men. See, for example, the Neapolitan horse sent by Philipp Wilhelm von Neuberg, discussed in correspondence in April–June 1675: Wiesbaden, Hessisches Hauptstaatsarchiv, Abt 170, Nr 1031 and Nr 1032.   98 Adriaen van de Venne, De Hofvijver gezien vanf het Buitenhof, c. 1630, canvas, oil and wood, 178cm × 122cm. The Hague, Haags Historische Museum, 18990004-SCH. Available at: http://www.haagshistorischmuseum.nl/collectie/dehofvijver-gezien-vanaf-het-buitenhof-1. See also Paul Rijkens, ‘Images of William of Orange and Philip II on Horseback: Same Message – Different Meaning’, De zeventiende eeuw: cultuur in de Nederlanden in interdisciplinair perspectief: tijdschrift van de Werkgroep Zeventiende Eeuw 25 (2009): 53–72.   99 Kees Zandvliet, ed., Maurits prins van Oranje (Amsterdam: Rijksmuseum, 2000), 305–14. 100 Inge Schjellerup, ‘Der Reiz exotischer Menschen im siebzehnten Jahrhundert – Albert Eckhouts Gemälde’, in Aufbruch in Neue Welten. Johann Moritz von

286  Materialising power Nassau-Siegen (1604–1679) der Brasilianer (Exhibition Catalogue), ed. Gerhard Brunn (Siegen: Siegerlandmuseum, 2004), 91–100. 101 ‘Wy woenen alhier in een solitaire plaets, om so weel mogelijk ons van der werelts affaires en den oorlogh, vermits onze hoge jaeren, te retireeren; En also dit plaetsie genuchsaem in eene wildernisse gelegen is, so zijn wij doende, alle de wilde natien, dewelcke wij in Brasil gecommandeert hebben, in ons huijs alhier te laeten schilderen, en worden wij indachtigh, dat voor dezen aen Sijn. Koninghl. Majesteit hooghsehl: memor: eenige stücken derselber natien gesonden hebben, indien deselve bij sijne tegenwordige Majesteit in gheene estime wesen mogten so versoeken Uw. Edt. de moeijten te willen nemen, onder de handt te sondeeren, of hoogst geseite Sijne Majesteit deselue genadigst wederom willen afstaen, en ons daermete begenaedigen’, 26 July 1679, in de Sousa-Leão, Frans Post, 1612–1680, 64. 102 Older valuable literature includes L. C. Panhuys, ‘Recherche de tableaux de la Bresil offerts par le Prince Jean Maurits de Nassau au Roi Louis XIV’, Congrès International des Américanistes. Compte-rendu de la XXIe session. Deuxième partie tenue a Göteborg en 1924 (Göteborg, 1925), 435–41; and Thomsen, Albert Eckhout, esp. 126–56. 103 Thomsen, Albert Eckhout, 135. 104 Thomsen, Albert Eckhout, 135. 105 Joppien, ‘The Dutch Vision of Brazil’, 326. 106 Lemmens, ‘Die Schenkung an Ludwig XIV und die Auflösung der brasilianischen Sammlung des Johann Moritz, 1652–1679’. 107 Herz, ‘Johann Moritz van Nassau-Siegen’, 188. See also, Panhuys, ‘Recherche de tableaux de la Bresil offerts par le Prince Jean Maurits de Nassau au Roi Louis XIV’; and Charissa Bremer-David, ‘Le Cheval Rayé: A French Tapestry Portraying Dutch Brazil’, The J. Paul Getty Museum Journal 22 (1994): 21–9. 108 Thomsen, Albert Eckhout, 133. On this correspondence, see Panhuys, ‘Recherche de tableaux de la Bresil offerts par le Prince Jean Maurits de Nassau au Roi Louis XIV’, 16–20. 109 ‘Les dites rarités représentent tout le Brésil en portrait [. . .] tout en grandeur en vif, aussi la sitation du dit ay, villes et forteresses en perspective, de quels portraits on peut former une tapisserie pour meubler une grande salle ou gallerie [. . .] il y a environ quarante tant grands que petits tableaux’. Cited in Corrêa do Lago, Frans Post (1612–1680), 31. 110 ‘Cardinal Mazarin a été fort amoureux des susdits tableaus m’en ayant fait parler plusieurs fois pour les avoir, mais en ce etemps-la, je ne pouvais me résoudre’. Cited in de Sousa-Leão, Frans Post, 1612–1680, 31. 111 Correâ do Lago, Frans Post (1612–1680), 51. 112 See A Landscape with a Farm Building in Brazil, c. 1656–64, oil on canvas, 277cm × 103.5cm. London, Royal Collections Trust, RCIN 406104. See Christopher White, The Dutch Pictures in the Collection of Her Majesty the Queen (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Cambridge, 1982), 53. 113 See Broomhall and Van Gent, Gender, Power and Identity, ch. 4. 114 John Evelyn, The Diary of John Evelyn, ed. William Bray, 2 vols (London: Walter Dunne, 1901), 2: 266. John Evelyn noted in his diary on 18 June 1687 that he dined with Blathwayt. He also noted the number of prominent positions that brought him substantial annual income, including this role. 115 Brunn and Neutsch, Sein Feld war die Welt; Buvelot, Albert Eckhout; Werd, Soweit der Erdkreis reicht; C. Molengraaff-Gerlings, Johann Moritz van Nassau en de korte bloeitijd van Hollandsch-Brazilie 1636–1644 (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1934); P. J. P. Whitehead and M. Boeseman, A Portrait of Dutch 17th Century Brazil: Animals, Plants and People by the Artists of Johan Maurits of Nassau

Collecting the world 287 (Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1989); Rebecca Parker Brienen, ‘Georg Marcgraf (1610–c.1644): A German Cartographer, Astronomer and Naturalist-Illustrator in Colonial Dutch Brazil’, Itinerario 25, no.1 (2001): 85–122; Brienen, Visions of Savage Paradise; Brienen, ‘From Brazil to Europe’; and, most recently, Rebecca Parker Brienen, ‘Albert Eckhout’s African Woman and Child (1641). Ethnographic Portraiture, Slavery and New World Subjects’, in Slave Portraiture in the Atlantic World, ed. Agnes Lugo-Ortiz and Angela Rosenthal (Cambridge: Cambridge Univeristy Press, 2013), 229–54. 116 Orange-Nassau porcelain in the wider European context is explored more fully in Susan Broomhall and Jacqueline Van Gent, ‘Material Culture as Power: Gendered Strategies of Power in an Early Modern Dynasty’, in Gender and Political Culture in Early Modern Europe, ed. James Daybell and Svante Norrhem (Aldershot: Ashgate, forthcoming). On women’s contribution to Orange-Nassau collections, see references throughout this chapter. 117 ‘In de camer daer mevrouwe de princesse hoochl. Mem. Plach te logeren’ in Drossaers and Lunsingh Scheurleer, Inventarissen, 1: 203. See also A. M. L. E. Erkelens, ‘Delffs Porcelijn’ van koningin Mary II/ Queen Mary’s ‘Delft porcelain’: Ceramics at Het Loo from the time of William and Mary (Museum Catalogue) (Apeldoorn: Paleis Het Loo, 1996), 11. For a listing of Louise de Coligny’s porcelain, see the 1632 inventory ‘Inventaris van het Stadouderlijk Kwartier en het Huis in het Noordeinde (Oude Hof) 1632’, in Drossaers and Lunsingh Scheurleer, Inventarissen, 1: 203–6. 118 H. E. van Gelder, ‘Gegevens omtrent den porceleinhandel der oost-indische compagnie’, Economisch – Historisch Jaarboek (1924): 166. 119 Bischoff, ‘Women Collectors and the Rise of the Porcelain Cabinet’, 171. 120 Virginia Treanor, ‘“Une abondance extra ordinaire”: The Porcelain Collection of Amalia von Solms’, Early Modern Women 9, no. 1 (2014): 149. 121 Treanor, ‘“Une abondance extra ordinaire”’, 145. 122 ‘Dispositieboek van Amalia van Solms 1673’, in Drossaers and Lunsingh Scheurleer, Inventarissen, 1: 307–11 (position numbers 341–511); Treanor, ‘“Une abondance extra ordinaire”’, 141–54. 123 Bischoff, ‘Women Collectors and the Rise of the Porcelain Cabinet’, 171; Treanor, ‘“Une abondance extra ordinaire”’, 148. 124 Bischoff, ‘Women Collectors and the Rise of the Porcelain Cabinet’, 173. 125 Bischoff, ‘Women Collectors and the Rise of the Porcelain Cabinet’, 171–2. 126 T. Volker, Porcelain and the Dutch East India Company (Leiden: Brill, 1954), 15. 127 Volker, Porcelain and the Dutch East India Company, 15. 128 Archives ou correspondance inédite de la maison d’Orange-Nassau, ed. G. Groen van Prinsterer, 2nd series, 5 vols (Utrecht: Kemink et fils, 1857–61), 3: 125. 129 ‘Les ennemis communs de ce royaume et des Provinces-Unies ne pouvant nous faire mal que par les oreilles, S. M. l’a choisi expressément tel qu’il est, non seulement pour vous tesmoigner qu’il n’escoutera jamais aucune chose qui puisse estre au préjudice du bien commun, mais aussi pour vous faire cognoistre qu’elle se tient asseurée que V. A. et monsieur le Prince d’Orange ferés le mesme de vostre part’, August 1638, in Groen van Prinsterer Archives ou correspondance inédite de la maison d’Orange-Nassau, 2nd series, 3: 125. 130 ‘Ne leur seront jamais ouvertes’, 10 September 1638, in Archives ou correspondance inédite de la maison d’Orange-Nassau, ed. Groen van Prinsterer, 2nd series, 3: 125. 131 See, for example, the view of the editor: ‘Ambitieuse et ardente à se mêler de politique, la Princesse d’Orange Amélie de Solms, par sa beauté et son esprit, exerçoit un grand empire sur Frédéric-Henri. [. . .] Ses sentiments envers la France varioient

288  Materialising power par des considérations égoistes et secondaires, et à Paris, pour la concilier, les cadeaux n’étoient pas réputés inutiles’, in Archives ou correspondance inédite de la maison d’Orange-Nassau, ed. Groen van Prinsterer, 2nd series, 3: xvi–xvii. 132 Leopold Reidemeister, ‘Die Porzellankabinette der BrandenburgischPreussischen Schlösser’, Jahrbuch der Preussischen Kunstsammlungen 54 (1933): 262–72. 133 Tania Solweig Shamy, ‘Frederick the Great’s Porcelain Diversion: The Chinese Tea House at Sanssouci’ (Unpublished PhD Dissertation, McGill University, 2009), 127–8. 134 ‘Je Vous prie mandez moi du Cabinet de porcelaine à Oranienbourg s’il sera bientôt fait’, in Leopold von Orlich, ed., Geschichte des preussischen Staates im siebzehnten Jahrhundert: mit besonderer Beziehung auf das Leben Friedrich Wilhelm’s des Grossen Kurfürsten: aus archivalischen Quellen und aus vielen noch ungekannten Original-Handschriften, 3 vols (Berlin: Dummler, 1838–9), 3: 229. 135 Reidemeister, ‘Die Porzellankabinette der Brandenburgisch-Preussischen Schlösser’, 262–72. 136 ‘Je Vous prie d’avoire soin qu’un bon doreur dore mon Cabinet de porcelaine, car l’autre ne vaut rien, il a bien mérité Votre colère’, 1663, in von Orlich, Geschichte des preussischen Staates im siebzehnten Jahrhundert, 3: 452. 137 Katharina Bechler, ‘“Ein fein und Delffsch Porcellain” – Einblicke in die ehemals reiche Porzellansammlung im Schloss Oranienbaum’, in Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje (Exhibition Catalogue), ed. Ingo Pfeifer and Wolfgang Savelsberg (Oranienbaum: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2003), 70–5; Katharina Bechler, Schloss Oranienbaum. Architektur und Kulturpolitik der Oranierinnen in der zweiten Hälfte des 17. Jahrhunderts, 2nd edn (Halle: Mitteldeutscher Verlag, 2007), 60–5; Wolfgang Savelsberg, ‘Vom Oranienbaumer Porzellankabintett zum “Ledertapetensaal”’, Oranienbaum Journal 1 (2007): 22–31. 138 Schlansky, ‘Fürstlich eingerichtet – zur Ausstattung des Oranienbaumer Schlosses der Henriette Catharina’, 40. 139 Bechler, ‘“Ein fein und Delffsch Porcellain”’, 60–5; Savelsberg, ‘Vom Oranien­ baumer Porzellankabintett zum “Ledertapetensaal”’, 22–31. 140 See Meredith Martin, Dairy Queens: The Politics of Pastoral Architecture from Catherine de’ Medici to Marie-Antoinette (Harvard: Harvard University Press, 2011). 141 Martin, Dairy Queens, 9; Meredith Martin, ‘Interiors and Interiority in the Ornamental Dairy’, Eighteenth Century Fiction 20, no. 3 (2008): 357–84. Martin includes a discussion of Mary II’s porcelain collection as an expression of femininity, restraint, and domestic virtues. 142 Peter-Michael Hahn, for example, notes that the porcelain cabinets at Oranienburg and Charlottenburg were ‘significant elements of courtly culture which point to the Netherlands as their country of origin’. Peter-Michael Hahn, ‘Magnifizienz und dynastische Legitimation durch Übernahme kultureller Muster: Die Beziehungen der Hohenzollern zum Haus Oranien und den Niederlanden im 17. Jahrhundert’, in Formen der Visualisierung von Herrschaft. Studien zu Adel, Fürst und Schloßbau vom 16.bis 18. Jahrhundert, ed. Peter-Michael Hahn and Helmut Lorenz (Potsdam: Verlag für Berlin-Brandenburg, 1998), 36. 143 Erkelens, ‘Delffs Porcelijn’ van koningin Mary II, 24. 144 Bechler, Schloss Oranienbaum, 96–101. For a listing of the objects in the Oranienbaum grotto of Henriëtte Catharina, see Oranienburg, Landesarchiv Oranienburg (LAO), A 7a, Nr 35, ‘Abteilung Oranienbaum’, 1709, fol. 87v. See also KHA, ‘Inventarium Henriëtte Catharina Oranienbaum’, 1709, fols 182–6. 145 Johann Walther, The Nassau-Idstein Florilegium, ed. Laure Beaumont-Maillet and trans. Gabrielle Townsend (Paris: Bibliotheque nationale de France, 2010), 32.

Collecting the world 289 146 Bechler, Schloss Oranienbaum, 96–101. For the inventory of the Oranienbaum grotto, see LAO, A 7a, Nr 35, ‘Abteilung Oranienbaum’, 1709, fol. 87v; KHA, ‘Inventarium Henriëtte Catharina Oranienbaum’, 1709, fols 182–6. 147 Bechler, Schloss Oranienbaum, 97. 148 Bechler, ‘Ein fein und Delffsch Porcellain’, 74. 149 Wolfgang Savelsberg, ‘Niederländische Bildniskunst im Auftrag der Henriëtte Catharina. Abraham Snaphaen, ein Leidener Maler in Anhaltischen Diensten’, in Pfeifer and Savelsberg, Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje, 164–73. 150 Bechler, Schloss Oranienbaum, 97. 151 Ekkehard Schmiedberger, ed., Porzellan aus China und Japan: die Porzell­an­ galerie der Landgrafen von Hessen-Kassel (Berlin, D. Reimer, 1990). 152 Gabriele Riemann-Wöhlbrandt, ‘Der Porzellanbesitz der Landgräfin Maria Amalia. Zur Rolle der Damen beim Entstehen der landgräflichen Porzellan­ sammlung’, in Porzellan aus China und Japan, ed. Schmiedberger, 51–63. 153 Bischoff, ‘Women Collectors and the Rise of the Porcelain Cabinet’, 173. 154 Morgens Bencard and Jørgen Hein, ‘Three Cabinets on Stands from the Seventeenth Century’, Furniture History 21 (1985): 148–9, 152 and 154. 155 Riemann-Wohbrandt, ‘Der Porzellanbesitz der Landgräfin Maria Amalia’, 51–3. 156 Erkelens, ‘Delffs Porcelijn’ van koningin Mary II, 27. 157 Oud Holland 2 (1905): 146. Cited in Joan Wilson, ‘A Phenomenon of Taste: The China Ware of Queen Mary II’, Apollo 96 (1972): 116–23. 158 Edward Impey, Kensington Palace: The Official Illustrated History (London: Merrell, 2003), 38. For the decoration of Kensington Palace, see Linda Rosenfeld Shulsky, ‘The Arrangement of the Porcelain and Delftware Collection of Queen Mary in Kensington Palace’, American Ceramic Circle Journal 8 (1990): 51–74; T. H. Lunsingh Scheurleer, ‘Documents on the Furnishing of Kensington House’, Walpole Society 38 (1960–62): 15–58; Oliver Impey and Johanna Marshner, ‘“China Mania”: A Reconstruction of Queen Mary II’s Display of East Asian Artefacts in Kensington Palace in 1693’, Orientations (November 1998): 60–61; Mark Hinton and Oliver Impey, eds, Kensington Palace and the Porcelain of Queen Mary II (London: Christies, 1998); E. Dillon, Catalogue of the Chinese and Japanese Porcelain and of the Delft Fayence at the Palaces of Hampton Court and St James (London: Royal Collection Trust, 1910). 159 Defoe, A Tour Through the Whole Island of Great Britain, vol. 1, 175. 160 Lunsingh Scheurleer, ‘Documents on the Furnishing of Kensington House’, 35–9. 161 Linda Rosenfeld Shulsky, ‘Kensington and de Voorst’, Journal of the History of Collections 2, no. 1 (1990): 47–62. 162 Shulsky, ‘Kensington and de Voorst’, 51; and Lunsignh Scheurleer, ‘The Dutch at the Tea-Table’, The Connoisseur 193 (1976): 85–93. De Voorst’s architect for these renovations was Willem’s favoured Jacob Roman. 163 Juliet Claxton, ‘The Countess of Arundel’s Dutch Pranketing Room’, Journal of the History of Collections 22, no. 2 (2010): 187–96. See also David Howarth, ‘The Patronage and Collecting of Aletheia, Countess of Arundel, 1606–54’, Journal of the History of Collections 10, no. 2 (1998): 125–37. 164 Historians have only very recently acknowledged that it was Mary II who brought to England the porcelain display rooms that had been created by the Orange–Nassau women in Europe, and that ‘set up a fashion for much of the next century’. See Roy Davids and Dominic Jellinek, Provenance: Collectors, Dealers and Scholars in the Field of Chinese Ceramics in Britain (Oxfordshire: Roy Davids, 2011), 8. See also Stefan van Raaij and Paul Spies, The Royal Progress of William and Mary, trans. A. P. K. Graafland (Amsterdam: D’Arts, 1988), 50.

290  Materialising power 165 Hannah Obee, ‘Baroque Exuberance: Delft Flower Vases at Chatsworth’, Apollo 167 (2008): 90–97. See also Hannah Obee, ‘The Golden Age Returns’, Apollo 167 (2008): 60–67. 166 On Blathwayt, see Lisa Jardine, Going Dutch: How England Plundered Holland’s Glory (London: Harper, 2008), 52 and 252. 167 Linda R Shulsky, catalogue and commentary section, in Baarsen, Johnston, Jackson-Stops and Dee, Courts and Colonies, 207. 168 Oliver R. Impey, ‘Collecting Oriental Porcelains in Britain in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries’, in The Burghley Porcelains: An Exhibition from The Burghley House Collection and based on the 1688 Inventory and the 1690 Devonshire Schedule, (New York: Japan Society, 1986), 40. 169 Now held in Caputh Palace. 170 Gordon Lang, ‘Oriental Porcelains: A European Enthusiasm’, in The Burghley Porcelains, 51. 171 Bechler, Schloss Oranienbaum, 139; Helmut Börsch-Supan, ‘Ein Deckenentwurf zur Verherrlichung des ersten preussischen Königs als Prinz von Oranien’, Nederlands kunsthistorisch Jaarboek, 31 (1980): 316–27; Claudia Sommer, ‘Niederländische Einflüsse auf die Landeskultivierung und Kunstentfaltung in Brandenburg von 1640 bis 1740’, in Onder den Oranje Boom, ed. Schacht, Meiner and Lademacher, 255–6. 172 Fock, ‘Frederik Hendrik en Amalia’s appartementen’, 84. 173 Bechler, Schloss Oranienbaum, 139. For further discussion on Terwesten’s ceiling painting, see Börsch-Supan, ‘Ein Deckenentwurf zur Verherrlichung des ersten preussischen Königs als Prinz von Oranien’, 316–27; Sommer, ‘Niederländische Einflüsse auf die Landeskultivierung und Kunstentfaltung in Brandenburg von 1640 bis 1740’, 255–6. 174 Sommer, ‘Niederländische Einflüsse auf die Landeskultivierung und Kunstent­ faltung in Brandenburg von 1640 bis 1740’, 255–6. 175 Sommer, ‘Niederländische Einflüsse auf die Landeskultivierung und Kunstent­ faltung in Brandenburg von 1640 bis 1740’, 280; Clare Le Corbeiller, China Trade Porcelain: Patterns of Exchange: Additions to the Helena Woolworth McCann Collection in the Metropolitan Museum of Art (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1974), 82. 176 Samuel Wittwer, ‘Fragile Splendour and Political Representation: Baroque Porcelain Rooms in Prussian and Saxony as Meaningful Treasures’, in Studies of Hizen Porcelain: On Research Issues in England and Germany (Fukuoka: Kakiemonstyle Ceramic Art Research Center, Kyushu Sangyo University, 2009), 55. 177 Field trip to Caputh, September 2013. 178 Wittwer, ‘Fragile Splendour’, 56. 179 Samuel Wittwer, ‘Liaisons Fragiles: Exchange of Gifts between Saxony and Prussia in the Early Eighteenth Century’, in Fragile Diplomacy: Meissen Porcelain for the European Courts ca 1710–63, ed. Maureen Cassidy-Geiger (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007), 87–110. 180 Friedrich Reichel, Early Japanese Porcelain, Arita Porcelain in the Dresden Collection (London: Orbis, 1981), 119, cited in J. V. G. Mallet, ‘European Ceramics and the Influence of Japan’, in Porcelain for Palaces: The Fashion for Japan in Europe, 1650–1750 (Exhibition Catalogue), ed. John Ayers, Oliver Impey and J. V. G. Mallet (London: Oriental Ceramic Society, 1990), 40–1. 181 Ingelore Menzhausen-Handt, ’Das erste Inventar der Dresdener Porzellan­ sammlung’, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden, Jahrbuch (1959): 104–9; Eva Ströber, ‘Dehua Porcelain in the Collection of Augustus the Strong in Dresden’, in Blanc de Chine: Porcelain from Dehua, ed. Rose Kerr and John Ayers (Chicago: Art Media Resources, 2002), 52.

Collecting the world 291 182 Eva Ströber, Ostasiatika: Catalogue of the Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum, Braunschweig (Brunswick: Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum, 2002), 9–24. 183 See also Maureen Cassidy-Geiger, ‘Meissen et la France avant et après la guerre de Sept Ans: artists, espionnage et commerce’, trans. Mary Siles, in Art francois et art allemand au XVIIIe Siècle, Regards Croisés, ed. Patrick Michel (Paris: Ecole de Louvre, 2008), 61–99. 184 Wittwer, ‘Fragile Splendour’, 57. 185 Florian Schui, ‘Prussia’s “Trans-Oceanic Moment”: The Creation of the Prussian Asiatic Trade Company in 1750’, Historical Journal 49, no. 1 (2006): 143–60. 186 Michaela Völkel, Die Porzellansammlung des Landes Berlin im Belvedere Charlottenburg (Munich: Dt. Kunstverl, 2010), 14. 187 Völkel, Die Porzellansammlung des Landes Berlin im Belvedere Charlottenburg, 15–16. 188 On the elite status of pineapple at the Prussian court, see Jocelyne Kolb, The Ambiguity of Taste: Freedom and Food in European Romanticism (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1995), 236–7. 189 Abraham L. den Blaauwen, The Meissen Services of Stadhouder Willem V (Zwolle: Waanders, 1993). 190 M. A. P. Meilink-Roelofsz, ‘Ulrich Gualtherus Hemmingson, VOC dienaar en verbindingsschakel tussen China en Nederland’, Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek, 31, 1980, 456–74; C. J. A. Jörg, Porcelain and the Dutch China Trade (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1982), 350. 191 Discussed by Deborah Sampson Shinn, catalogue section, in Baarsen, Johnston, Jackson-Stops and Dee, Courts and Colonies, 209. 192 For the use of Meissen porcelain as diplomatic gifts, see Cassidy-Geiger, Fragile Diplomacy. 193 Fred Storto, Oranienstein. Barockschloß an der Lahn (Koblenz: Görres-Verlag, 1934), 25. 194 Zandvliet, Maurits Prins van Oranje, 305. 195 Wassing-Visser, Royal Gifts from Indonesia, 28–35; and W. S. Unger, ed., De oudste reizen van de Zeeuwen naar Oost-Indië, 1598–1604 (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1948), xlv–l. See also Cynthia Viallé, ‘Camel Cups, Parrot Cups and other Chinese Kraak Porcelain Items in Dutch Trade Records, 1598–1623’, in Chinese and Japanese Porcelain for the Dutch Golden Age, ed. van Campen and Eliëns, 37–51, 254–6. 196 Zandvliet, Maurits Prins van Oranje, 316–17. 197 Zandvliet, Maurits Prins van Oranje, 318. 198 Zandvliet, Maurits Prins van Oranje, 319. 199 Zandvliet, Maurits Prins van Oranje, 319. 200 Gerrit van Honthorst, Musical Group on a Balcony, 1622, oil on panel 309.9cm × 216.4cm. Held in Los Angeles at the J. Paul Getty Museum. See http://www. getty.edu/art/collection/objects/560/gerrit-van-honthorst-musical-groupon-a-balcony-dutch-1622/. 201 Held in Paris at The Louvre, NV. 1364. See http://www.louvre.fr/en/oeuvrenotices/concert-balcony. 202 Cited in Wassing-Visser, Royal Gifts from Indonesia, 40–1. 203 Defoe, A Tour Through the Whole Island of Great Britain, 65. On Willem and Mary’s involvement in gardens, see David Jacques and Arend Jan van der Horst, The Gardens of William and Mary (London: Christopher Helm, 1988); the special issue on ‘The Anglo-Dutch Garden in the Age of William and Mary’, ed. John Dixon Hunt and Erik de Jong, The Journal of Garden History, 8, no. 2–3 (1998); and Wies Erkelens, ‘Kunst voor natuur: bloemenhouders met tuiten en Mary II Stuart (1662–1695), koningin van Groot-Brittanië, prinses van Oranje’,

292  Materialising power in Delfts aardewerk: geschiedenis van een nationaal product, ed. Marion S. van Aken-Fehmers (The Hague: Gemeentemuseum, 2007), 28–47. 204 See Melchior d’Hondecoeter, A Hunter’s Bag on a Terrace, c. 1678, oil on canvas, 211cm × 137cm. Held in Amsterdam at the Rijksmuseum, SK-A-171. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10934/RM0001.COLLECT.8739. 205 Florence F. J. M. Pieters, ‘Notes on the Menagerie and Zoological Cabinet of Stadholder William V of Holland, Directed by Aernout Vosmaer’, Journal of the Society for the Bibliography of Natural History 9, no. 4 (1980): 541. See also B. G. Sliggers and A. A. Wertheim, eds, Een vorstelijke diertuin: De menagerie van Willem V (Zutphen: Walberg Pers, 1994); L. C. Rookmaaker, The Zoological Exploration of Southern Africa, 1650–1790 (Rotterdam: Balkema, 1989). 206 See Melchior d’Hondecoeter, A Pelican and other Birds near a Pool, Known as ‘The Floating Feather’, c. 1680, oil on canvas, 159cm × 144cm. Held in Amsterdam at the Rijksmuseum, SK-A-175. Available at: http://hdl.handle. net/10934/RM0001.COLLECT.8740. 207 Cited by Deborah Sampson Shinn, catalogue section, in Baarsen, Johnston, Jackson-Stops and Dee, Courts and Colonies, 232. 208 One copy is held at the Albertina Museum in Vienna, and another at the Bibliothèque nationale de France in Paris. For the Albertina copy, see http:// sammlungenonline.albertina.at/?query=Inventarnummer=[15495]&showtype= record. 209 ‘Inventarissen van kleren en koostbaarheden van Willem IV, 1750 [Inventory of the clothes and valuables of Willem IV, 1750]’ in Drossaers and Lunsingh Scheurleer, Inventarissen, 2: 470, item 365. 210 See also Wassing-Visser, Royal Gifts from Indonesia, 42. 211 Wassing-Visser, Royal Gifts from Indonesia, 46. 212 Wassing-Visser, Royal Gifts from Indonesia, 46. 213 The ‘Surat Curiosities’, as they are called in an inventory of 25 July 1754, are now part of the collection of the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam. KHA, Archief Willem V, A31, Inv. Nr 173 includes a detailed ‘Memoire van Suratse Curiositeiten door den Directeur Generael Julius Valentin Stein van Gollenesse, aen den Heere van der Vorm, gezonden, en op den 25 July 1754, door den Zelven Heere van der Vorm aen Haere Koninklyke Hoogheid gepresententeert en overgegeeven’. This is reproduced in Pauline C. M. Lunsingh Scheurleer, ‘Rich Remains from Social Anthropological Fieldwork in Eighteenth-Century India’, Journal of the History of Collections 8, no. 1 (1996): 85–8. 214 Lunsingh Scheurleer, ‘Rich Remains from Social Anthropological Fieldwork in Eighteenth-Century India’, 84. 215 Lunsingh Scheurleer, ‘Rich Remains from Social Anthropological Fieldwork in Eighteenth-Century India’, 78. 216 Pieters, ‘Notes on the Menagerie and Zoological Cabinet of Stadholder William V of Holland’, 539. 217 Pieters, ‘Notes on the Menagerie and Zoological Cabinet of Stadholder William V of Holland’, 539. See also Edwin van Meerkerk, ‘Colonial Objects and the Display of Power: The Curious Case of the Cabinet of William V and the Dutch India Companies’, in The Dutch Trading Companies as Knowledge Networks, ed. Siegfried Huigen, Jan L. De Jong and Elmar Kolfin (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 415–36. See also Sliggers and Wertheim, Een vorstelijke dierentuin: de menagerie van Willem. 218 Pieters, ‘Notes on the Menagerie and Zoological Cabinet of Stadholder William V of Holland’, 539. 219 Arnout Vosmaer, Regnum Animale, (Amsterdam, 1766). For a discussion of Arnout’s publication and the menagerie of Willem V, see Sliggers and Wertheim, En vorstelijke dierentuin. De menagerie van Willem V.

Collecting the world 293 220 Pieters, ‘Notes on the Menagerie and Zoological Cabinet of Stadholder William V of Holland’, 540. 221 B. Woelderink, ed., Inventaris van de archieven van stadhouder Willem V, 1745–1808, en de Hofcommissie van Willem IV en Willem V, 1732–1794 (The Hague: Koninklijk Huisarchief, 2005), no. 208: ‘Dossier inzake de door van Marselis uit Amsterdam meegenomen dieren en curiosa uit Suriname omsteken ten behoeve van stadhouderlihk Kabinet van Natuurlijke Historie, 1765’; and no. 209: ‘Dossier over de orang-oetang in de menagerie van de prins, meet et brief van prinses Gallitzin, 1777’. See also Sliggers and Wertheim, Een vorstelijke dierentuin: de menagerie van Willem V. 222 KHA, Archief Willem V, A31, Inv. Nr 209. See also the engraving by J. V. Shley, ‘Singe D’Angola presenté a Frederic Henri Prince d’ Orange’, in Histoire générale des voyages: ou, Nouvelle collection de toutes les relations de voyages par mer et par terre. Volume 6, ed. Anne-Gabriel Meusnier de Querlon et al. (The Hague: Pieter de Hondt, 1748), 411. 223 See the extensive notes in KHA, Archief Willem V, A31, Inv. Nr 209. 224 The painting is still in possession of the Orange family, and is now on display at the Rijksmuseum Paleis Het Loo (on loan from Mauritshuis). 225 On this point, see van Meerkerk, ‘Colonial Objects and the Display of Power’, 420. 226 KHA, Archief Willem V, A31, Inv. Nr 208. 227 11 September 1765. KHA, Archief Willem V, A31, Inv. Nr 208. 228 KHA, Archief Willem V, A31, Inv. nr 208. Van Meerkerk documents a similar case in which Robert Jacob Gordon, employed in the VOC at the Cape, sent the skeleton and skin of a giraffe to Willem, arguing that the gift was a sign of his personal allegiance to the stadtholder. Van Meerkerk, ‘Colonial Objects and the Display of Power’, 420–21. 229 Pieters, ‘Notes on the Menagerie and Zoological Cabinet of Stadholder William V of Holland’, 541. 230 Pieters, ‘Notes on the Menagerie and Zoological Cabinet of Stadholder William V of Holland’, 541. 231 For older literature on the menagerie, see G. A. Evers, ‘De menagerie van Prins Willem V op het Loo’, Bijdr. Meded. Vereen ‘Gelre’ 17 (1914): 201–13, esp. 211 for elephants moving to Paris. 232 Pieters, ‘Notes on the Menagerie and Zoological Cabinet of Stadholder William V of Holland’, 542.

This Page is Intentionally Left Blank

Conclusions

In this book, we have aimed to demonstrate how the House of OrangeNassau’s domination of lands and spaces in material and cultural ways engendered political consequences, and operated as forms of behaviour that we have termed ’dynastic colonialism’. These objects, spaces, acts, displays, and practices extended the House’s sphere of influence both geographically and politically. In particular, we have focused on how women and men interacted with materiality; that is, how they created and circulated objects in material, textual, and visual forms, and organised specific spaces in order to perform particular meanings to advance their own interests, and in doing so, those of the House. By this, we do not mean to suggest that individual and dynastic interests were necessarily always aligned. Our focus in this work has been on a wide range of individuals, from those born and married into the House of Orange-Nassau, to dynastic affiliates and political supporters. It has also included manufacturers, printmakers, upholsterers, and other parties who, just as did family members, stood to benefit personally from extending the claims of the House. Benefits for the House accrued indirectly as a result of the commercial and personal ambitions of such individuals and their appropriations of Orange-Nassau material culture.

The power of materiality Analysing materiality as expressions of dynastic power and identity in these ways enables us to broaden the conceptualisation of elite political culture in early modern Europe. As our many examples demonstrate, power could take many forms and could be used to exert influence over a wide range of personal, familial, and House interests, which could extend from protection and propagation of the House to representing it, setting its agenda or subjecting others to its interests.1 Varied life stages and positions within the hierarchy of the House shaped the capacity of women and men to achieve such goals through material culture, the nature of the objects and spaces they could employ to produce meanings for the House, and the interpretation and impact that these material and spatial collaborations gained amongst their contemporaries.

296 Conclusions Ostentatious practices of material culture, including the building of impressive architectural and horticultural complexes, performing ritual ceremonies, and extensive gift-giving, as well as co-ordinating furnishings, displaying luxury objects, and acquiring exotic floral and faunal collections, were by no means the unique preserve of this dynasty or the House of Orange-Nassau in particular. These were behaviours shared with a number of elite transnational dynasties.2 However, there were specific contexts, related to their political position in the Low Countries, their dynastic situation of princely, rather than royal, origins, and the repeated female regencies for young princes, that made certain material forms desirable and strategic for the House of OrangeNassau. The House promoted a specific identity and consolidated its power through conscious Orange branding, in a materialised form that had national, dynastic, and individual consequences. This branding was a significant tool in moments of dynastic and political crisis – such as at the deaths of Willem I, Willem II, who left a pregnant widow, and Willem III who left no direct heir – or at specific times of political tension in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries when anti-Orangist parties emerged. It was utilised strategically by many individuals within the House, as well as by a wide variety of others beyond it, whose labours shaped the overarching trajectory and expansion of the House in the early modern period. The promotion of the colour orange – through the blue and gold, yellow and orange colours of the Orange-Nassau arms, the orange tree, fruit and blossoms and orange sashes and robes – as well as the naming of spaces worldwide after the House and its leading men, all assisted the House to claim status and promote its identity as one of the pre-eminent dynasties of Europe. This work functioned to signal the dominance of Orange over Nassau, and thus one branch over the wider dynasty. It participated in the creation of a kind of celebrity culture, where portraits, prints, tiles, and glassware created status and fostered visibility for the House, and its princes in particular, among different social groups. But so too did the House’s claims to power that extended from its access to, and display of, global commodities in Europe via the trading companies, whether in the form of slaves, sugar, parrots, orang-utans, or Asian porcelain and lacquerwork. Moreover, the value of these goods was heightened by the development in the Low Countries of products such as Delftware. These industries initially produced ceramics in imitation of imported porcelain, but gradually they gained prestige in themselves through their association with the courts of the Orange-Nassau. Prints similarly served to project the power of the House, circulating elite events and palace interiors and objects that few would ever see in person, to a much wider audience, and providing examples of material culture that could be modelled at other social levels. Some artists supported this culture by publishing examples of the work they had undertaken for the Orange-Nassau, as Daniël Marot did, or by producing cheaper copies of Orange-Nassau commissions and images that enhanced both their profile and profit, in the manner of Michiel Jansz. van Mierevelt. A variety

Conclusions 297 of retainers, dynastic relatives, courtiers, and cultural producers were also key to the creation of the Orange brand and its success. The exchange and employment of such individuals, from Frans Post and Marot to Constantijn Huygens and Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen, in commissions that ranged from artistic to military and trading company posts, was a means of bonding and an opportunity to achieve increased status. These people helped to create a more ‘streamlined look’ that made it easier to recognise the Orange identity. Thus, the designers who created the material culture for the House were frequently moved within and across generational lines, creating a relatively unified style that came to be associated with the Orange-Nassau and identified more broadly as ‘Dutch’. Additionally, leading courtiers signalled their allegiance by following the cultural trends set by the House of OrangeNassau. In these ways, particular objects, types of objects, artists and crafts­ people became even more influential statements of the power of the House as they were distributed, visualised, and textualised, extending their impact and reinforcing their importance at various social levels across Europe – and indeed well beyond the continent. The advancement of the House of Orange-Nassau was thus created and carried out by a wide range of people who were stakeholders and interested participants in the success of their endeavours. Certain individuals have been recognised in the existing scholarship as effecting this work, particularly the House’s leading men and some of its women. Our study, however, demonstrates how family members in both governing and subordinated positions – including Nassau women as well as men, and even those drawn from other Nassau branches such as Dietz and Siegen – implemented this branding as a political tool with which they perceived they would personally derive benefits. Gift-giving and the circulation and copying of artwork, for example, were strategies of alliance and expressions of kin affiliation that functioned as a form of honouring and expanding patronage, hierarchies, and identity statements within the family and beyond it. And, as we show here, the capacity of different individuals to employ these strategies was affected by a range of factors, not least of which were gender and status within the hierarchy of the House.

Gendering materiality In addition, the specific circumstances of the House of Orange-Nassau during the early modern period enable analysis of the gendered dimensions of such elite material interactions. At various times over these centuries, because of an absence of adult male leadership or in marriages in which Orange-Nassau princesses were politically and financially powerful partners, women’s employment of material culture in particular spaces for political means can be explored. We have thus considered how gender inflected material practice, shaping the kinds of objects that women and men employed, the nature of male and female representation for the House in visual, material, and textual forms or in spaces under the House’s direct or indirect control, the spaces

298 Conclusions they used for display, the networks in which goods were exchanged, the affiliates who helped to advise and support this cultural and political work, and how gender shaped lifestage, personal contexts, and position in the House. Furthermore, the conspicuous interactions of women and men with material culture were often perceived distinctly, as problematic or positive respectively, by their contemporaries and, we would argue, until very recently this has shaped the nature of the historiography of the House as a whole. We have demonstrated in this work that both women and men within the House, and as affiliates, employed material means as dynastically and politically strategic practices to bring new spaces and peoples under the sway of the House; that is, they enacted dynastic colonisation. One of the particular challenges for assessing both women and men’s achievements in this arena has been the relative invisibility of women’s material practice in many cases. Women’s collections, which were, as we have shown, no mere accumulations of goods, were frequently dispersed upon their death. This continued the House’s colonising project as they circulated goods associated with Orange-Nassau power further across European elite spaces, but at the same time it destroyed the integrity and visibility of individual women’s strategic and coordinated employment of cultural tools. A few women insisted that their collections remain intact or that certain spaces be left untouched, as did Henriëtte Catharina of her grotto or Anna Wilhelmine of her collection, but the spaces and collections of many more, including Louise Henriëtte and Mary II Stuart, were demolished, reconstructed, and recycled to make new meanings for the House in subsequent generations in new political and personal contexts. Early modern interactions with materiality had many implications with regard to the gender dynamics and access to power that we have sought to tease out for the House of Orange-Nassau in this book. We argue that in the early modern period, a transnational, dynastic family did not think of their material consumption and practices as private pleasures. They were social, collective forms of behaviour that were intended to signal to others their aspirations for power and, in many ways, their very real access to the finances, political structures, and territories that could provide these objects of desire. They contributed to the sustained, transnational effort of both women and men within successive generations of a dynastic group over the early modern period to colonise new lands and peoples for the House of Orange-Nassau.

Notes 1 See Susan Broomhall and Jacqueline Van Gent’s ‘Introduction’ in their Gender, Power and Identity in the Early Modern House of Orange-Nassau (Farnham: Ashgate, 2016) for further considerations on conceptualising power. 2 On the Habsburgs, for example, see Anne J. Cruz and Maria Galli Stampino, eds, Early Modern Habsburg Women: Transnational Contexts, Cultural Conflicts, Dynastic Continuities (Farnham: Ashgate, 2013); and on the Guise, Jessica Munns, Penny Richards and Jonathan Spangler, eds, Aspiration, Representation and Memory: The Guise in Europe 1506–1688 (Farnham: Ashgate, 2015).

Bibliography

Archival sources Regionaal Archief Rivierenland, Tiel Archive of the Orphanage at Buren, 1612–1952, 0696 Blair Castle, Atholl Estate Atholl Papers Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin HA, I. Rep. No 39(a) Hessisches Hauptstaatsarchiv (HHStAW), Wiesbaden Fürstentum Nassau-Oranien, Korrespondenzen, Abt. 170 III Reisetagebuch des Grafen Johann Ludwig von Nassau-Hadamar im Jahre 1629 nach Wien, Abt. 171 Nr. Z 642 Koninklijk Huisarchief (KHA), The Hague Archief Nassau-Siegen, A4 Archief Willem IV, A29 Archief Anne of Hanover, A30 Archief Willem V, A31 Archief Wilhelmina van Prussia, A32 Bezittingen buiten Nederland, C28 Inventarium Henriëtte Catharina Oranienbaum, 1709 Landeshauptarchiv Sachsen-Anhalt, Dessau (Landesarchiv Oranienbaum (LAO)) Abteilung Oranienbaum, 1709, A 7a, Nr 35 Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Dresden Kupferstich-Kabinett Ca. 226 b. M.(a) 7b Thierbuch

Printed primary sources Abel Janszoon Tasman’s Journal of his Discovery of Van Diemens Land and New Zealand in 1642, edited and translated by J. E. Heeres and C. H. Cootes. Amsterdam: Frederik Muller and Co, 1898. Reprinted Los Angeles: N. A. Kovach, 1965. Archives ou correspondance inédite de la maison d’Orange-Nassau, edited by G. Groen van Prinsterer, 2nd series, 5 volumes. Utrecht: Kemink et fils, 1857–61. Chronicles of the Atholl and Tullibardine Families, collected and arranged by John, seventh Duke of Atholl, 5 volumes. Edinburgh: Ballantyne Press, 1908. The Correspondence of Madame, Princess Palatine, Mother of the Regent. Boston: Hardy, Pratt & Co, 1899.

300 Bibliography Correspondentie van Willem III en van Hans Willem Bentinck, 3 volumes. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1932–7. De Reizen van Abel Janszoon Tasman en Franchoys Jacobszoon Visscher ter nadere ontdekking van het Zuidland in 1642/3 en 1644, edited by R. Posthumus Meyjes. ’S-Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff, 1919. ‘Dutch Baroque Gardens’. British Library, Online Gallery: Virtual Books, http:// www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/ttp/dutchgardens/accessible/introduction.html. Histoire générale des voyages: ou, Nouvelle collection de toutes les relations de voyages par mer et par terre, edited by Meusnier de Querlon, Anne-Gabriel, Alexandre Deleyre, Jacques-Philibert Rousselot de Surgy, J. P. J. Du Bois, John Green, Thomas Astley, vol. 6. The Hague: Pieter de Hondt, 1748. Inventarissen van de inboedels in de verblijven van de Oranjes en daarmede gelijk the stellen stukken 1567–1795, edited by S. W. A. Drossaers and Th. H. Lunsingh Scheurleer, 3 volumes. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1974–6. ‘Journael van Jan Carstensz. Op de ghedaene reyse van Nova Guinea’. In Twee togten naar de Golf van Carpentaria, edited by L. C. D. van Dijk. Amsterdam: J. H. Scheltema, 1859. ‘Rapport de la commission formé par les XIX pour étudier le pro et le contre de la séparation de Loanda avec le Brésil’. In L’ancien Congo et l’Angola, 1639–1655: d’après les archives, romaines, portugaises, néerlandaises et espagnoles, edited by Louis Jadin, 3 volumes. 1: 200–202, Document 76. Brussels/Rome: Institut Historique Belge de Rome, 1975. ‘Transkription der Teilungsakte der Verlassenschaft der Henriëtte Catharina 1709’. Appended to Kristina Schlansky, ‘Fürstlich eingerichtet – zur Ausstattung des Oranienbaumer Schlosses der Henriette Catharina’. Oranienbaum Journal 1 (2007): 1–51. Wahrhafftiger Abdruck Des von hochgebornem Grafen und Herrn Herrn Johanssen Grafen zu Nassaw zu Saarbrücken und Sarwerden. vom dato Itzstein den 19. Septembris 1653 an seinen zur Römisch. Päbstischen Religion getretenen Sohn Gustaven Adoplhum nacher Regensburg gethanen Schreibens . . . (n.p., 1653). Wahrhafftiger Abdruck Dehren von dem hochgebornem Grafen und Herrn Herrn Johanssen Grafen zu Nassaw Saarbrücken und Sarwerden . . . den 10. und 14. Octobris des 1653 Jahrs an seinen zur Röm. Päpstischen Religion getretenen Sohn Gustav Adolphum (n.p., 1654). Baerle, Caspar van. The History of Brazil under the Governorship of Count Johan Maurits of Nassau, translated by Blanche T. van Berckel-Ebeling Koning. Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 2011. Bort, Balthasar. ‘Report of Governor Balthasar Bort on Malacca 1678’, translated by M. J. Bremer, Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 5, no. 1 (1927): 1–234. Defoe, Daniel. A Tour through the Whole Island of Great Britain, edited by P. N. Furbank, W. R. Owens and A. J. Coulson. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1991. Evelyn, John. The Diary of John Evelyn, edited by William Bray, 2 volumes. London: Walter Dunne, 1901. Fiennes, Celia. Through England on a Side Saddle, in the Time of William and Mary. London: Field & Tuer, The Leadenhall Press, Simpkin, Marshall & Co, Hamilton, Adams, & Co, 1888. Heeres, J. E. Het Aandeel der Nederlanders in de Ontdeeking van Australië, 1606–1765, translated by C. Stoffel in J. E. Heeres, The Part Borne by the Dutch in the Discovery of Australia, 1606–1765 (London: Luzac, 1899), with additional translations

Bibliography 301 by Elise Reynolds and Marianne Roobol. Available online at the Koninklijke Bibliotheek website: http://www.kb.nl/bladerboek/barrenregions/carstens/browse/ page_56.html. Huygens, Christiaan. Oeuvres complètes de Christiaan Huygens. Volume 1: Corres­ pondence, 1638–1656. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1888. Huygens, Christiaan. Oeuvres complètes de Christiaan Huygens. Volume 2: Corres­ pondence, 1657–1659. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1889. Huygens, Constantijn. Briefwisseling van Constantijn Huygens (1608–1687), edited by J. A. Worp, 6 vols. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1911–17. Japikse, N., ed. De geschiedenis van het Huis van Oranje-Nassau, 2 volumes. The Hague: Zuid-Hollandsche Uitgevers Maatschappij, 1938. Johan Baron van Arnhem. Gedagten en gedichten, geestelyke en zedelyke. Pieter Van Der Aa, 1707. Available at: https://books.google.com.au/books?id=QcETAAAAQ AAJ&source=gbs_navlinks_s. La Trémoille, Charlotte de. ‘Correspondance de Charlotte de La Trémoille, Comtesse de Derby (1599–1664): Années 1606–1652’, edited by Jean-Luc Tulot. Available at: http://jeanluc.tulot.pagesperso-orange.fr/Comtessedederby01.pdf. Marot, Daniël. Vasses de la Maison Royalle de L’oo. The Hague, c. 1703. Naber, Johanna W.A., ed. Correspondentie van de stadhouderlijke familie, 1777–1820, 5 volumes. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1931–6. Nassau-Dietz, Willem Frederik van. Gloria Parendi: Dagboek van Willem Frederik, stadhouder van Friesland, Groningen en Drenthe, 1643–1649, 1651–1654, edited by J. Visser. The Hague: Nederlands Historisich Genootschap, 1995. Orlich, Leopold von, ed., Geschichte des preussischen Staates im siebzehnten Jahrhundert: mit besonderer Beziehung auf das Leben Friedrich Wilhelms des Grossen Kurfürsten: aus archivalischen Quellen und aus vielen noch ungekannten Original-Handschriften, 3 volumes. Berlin: Dummler, 1838–9. Piso, Willem. História natural e médica da India ocidental: em cinco livros. Rio de Janeiro: Ministério da Educação e Cultura/I.N.L., 1957. Ranke, Leopold von, ed., Briefwechsel Friedrich des Grossen mit Wilhelm IV von Oranien und seiner Gemahlin Anna geborene princess Royal von England. Berlin: Vogt, 1869. Mary II Stuart, Memoirs of Mary Queen of England (1689–1693) together with Her Letters and those of James II and William III to the Electress Sophia of Hanover, edited by R. Doebner. London: David Nutt, 1886. Vosmaer, Arnout. Regnum Animale. Amsterdam, 1766. Wagener, Zacharias. Dutch Brazil, Vol. 2: The ‘Thierbuch’ and ‘Autobiography’ of Zacharias Wagener, edited by Dante Martins Teixeira, translated by D. H. Treece and R. Trewinnard. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Index, 1997. Walther, Johann. The Nassau-Idstein Florilegium, edited by Laure Beaumont-Maillet and translated by Gabrielle Townsend. Paris: Bibliotheque nationale de France, 2010. Willem II. ‘Journalen van den Stadhouder Willem II uit de Jaren 1641–1650’, edited by F. J. L. Krämer. Bijdragen en Mededeelingen van het Historisch Genootschap 27 (1906). Woelderink, B., ed., Inventaris van de archieven van stadhouder Willem V 1745–1808 en de Hofcommissie van Willem IV en Willem V 1732–1794. The Hague: Koninklijk Huisarchief, 2005. Wren, Christopher. Parentalia, or Memoires of the History of the Wrens. London: T. Osborn, 1750.

302 Bibliography

Printed secondary sources Ahmed, Sara. ‘Open Forum Imaginary Prohibitions: Some Preliminary Remarks on the Founding Gestures of the “New Materialism”’. European Journal of Women’s Studies 15 (2008): 23–39. Akkerman, Nadine. Courtly Rivals in The Hague: Elizabeth Stuart (1596–1662) and Amalia von Solms (1602–1675). Venlo: Van Spijk/ Rekafa, 2014. Akkerman, Nadine and Paul R. Sellin. ‘A Stuart Masque in Holland: Ballet de La Carmesse de La Haya (1655)’. Ben Jonson Journal 11 (2004): 207–58. Algazi, Gadi, Valentin Groebner and Bernhard Jussen, eds. Negotiating the Gift: Pre-Modern Figurations of Exchange. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2003. Algra, Hans. ‘Muziek aan het hof van Anna van Hannover en Willem Carel Hendrik Friso’. In Van Leeuwarden naar Den Haag: rond de verplaatsing van het stadtholderlijk hof in 1747, edited by J. J. Huizinga and B. Bilker, 73–84. Franeker: Van Wijnen, 1997. Andaya, Barbara Watson. Perak, the Abode of Grace: A Study of an EighteenthCentury Malay State. New York: Oxford University Press, 1979. Andaya, L. Y. ‘The Kingdom of Johor, 1641–1728: A Study of Economic and Political Developments in the Straits of Malacca’. PhD diss., Cornell University, 1975. Anderson, Ben. ‘Affect and Emotion’. In The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Cultural Geography, edited by Nuala C. Johnson, Richard H. Scheine and Jamie Winders. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013. Anderson, Kay, and Susan Smith. ‘Editorial: Emotional Geographies’. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, n.s. 26, no. 1 (2001): 7–10. Appardurai, Arjun. The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. Arroyo, Félix Labrador. ‘From Castile to Burgundy: The Evolution of the Queens’ Households during the Sixteenth Century’. In Early Modern Habsburg Women: Transnational Contexts, Cultural Conflicts, Dynastic Continuities, edited by Anne J. Cruz and Maria Galli Stampino. 119–50. Farnham: Ashgate, 2013. Auwers, Michael. ‘The Gift of Rubens: Rethinking the Concept of Gift-Giving in Early Modern Diplomacy’. European History Quarterly 43, no. 3 (2013): 421–4. Auzépy, Marie-France and Joël Cornette, ‘Lieux de pouvoir, pouvoirs des lieux’. In Palais et pouvoir de Constantinpole à Versailles, edited by Marie-France Auzépy and Joël Cornette, 5–31. Saint Denis: Presses universitaires de Vincennes, 2003. Baarsen, Reinier. ‘The Court Style in Holland’. In Courts and Colonies: The William and Mary Style in Holland, England, and America, edited by Reinier Baarsen, Phillip M. Johnston, Gervase Jackson-Stops and Elaine Evans Dee, 12–35. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1988. Baarsen, Reinier. ‘Wilhelm de Rots and Early Cabinet-Making in The Hague’. The Burlington Magazine 150, no. 263 (2008): 372–80. Baker-Smith, Veronica P. M. ‘The Daughters of George II: Marriage and Dynastic Politics’. In Queenship in Britain 1660–1837: Royal Patronage, Court Culture and Dynastic Politics, edited by Clarissa Campbell Orr, 193–206. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2002. Baker-Smith, Veronica P. M. A Life of Anne of Hanover, Princess Royal. Leiden: Brill, 1995.

Bibliography 303 Bal, Mieke. ‘Telling Objects: A Narrative Perspective on Collecting’. In The Cultures of Collecting: From Elvis to Antiques – Why Do We Collect Things?, edited by John Elsner and Roger Cardinal, 97–115. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1994. Ballatyne, Tony and Antoinette Burton, eds. Bodies in Contact: Rethinking Colonial Encounters in World History. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2005. Banck, J. E. Atchin’s verheffing en val: met historische bijlagen en een oud kaartje der reede van Atchin. Rotterdam: Nijgh & Van Ditmar, 1873. Bank, Jan and Elizabeth Berkhof. Oranje en de muziek (catalogue to the exhibition at the Koninklijk Paleis). Amsterdam: n.p., 1999. Barendse, R. J. Arabian Seas 1700–1763:The Western Indian Ocean in the Eighteenth Century. Leiden: Brill, 2009. Barrett, Kerry. ‘Mijn heer: Letters from Pieter Soutman to Constantijn Huygens’. Oud-Holland 122 (2009): 155–63. Barthels, M. J. G. A. ‘Maria Louisa van Hessen-Kassel. Barones van Ijsselstein’. In Utrechtse biografieën. Tussen de Lek en de Hollandsche Ijssel, 70–75. Utrecht: SPOU, 2003. Bartoschek, Gerd. ‘Ein Kurfürstliches Gemäldekabinett’. In FWC (1620–1688): Der Große Kurfürst; Sammler, Bauherr, Mäzen (Exhibition Catalogue),134–48. Potsdam: Neues Paleis, 1988. Bartoschek, Gerd. Gemälde aus dem Schloß Oranienburg. Oranienburg: Kreismuseum Oranienburg, 1978. Bauer, Alexandra Nina. ‘Die Porträtmalerei für das Haus Oranien-Nassau in der zweiten Hälfte des 17. Jahrhunderts’. In Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Ingo Pfeifer and Wolfgang Savelsberg, 143–52. Oranienbaum: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2003. Bauer, Alexandra Nina. Jan Mijtens (1613/14–1670): Leben und Werk. Petersberg: Michael Imhof, 2006. Beaman, Greg Alan. ‘Nature, Nurture, Mythology: A Cultural History of Dutch Orangism in the First Stadholderless Era, 1650–1672’. Masters thesis, Louisiana State University, 2004. Beard, Geoffrey and Annabel Westman. ‘A French Upholsterer in England: Francis Lapiere, 1653–1714’. The Burlington Magazine 135, no. 1085 (1993): 515–52. Bechler, Katharina. ‘“Ein fein und Delffsch Porcellain” – Einblicke in die ehemals reiche Porzellansammlung im Schloss Oranienbaum’. In Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Ingo Pfeifer and Wolfgang Savelsberg, 70–75. Oranienbaum: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2003. Bechler, Katharina. Schloss Oranienbaum. Architektur und Kulturpolitik der Oranierinnen in der zweiten Hälfte des 17. Jahrhunderts, second edition. Halle: Mitteldeutscher Verlag, 2007. Bechler, Katharina and Wolfgang Savelsberg, ‘Henriëtte Catharina van Oranje-Nassau en het vorstendom Anhalt-Dessau’. In Onder den Oranje Boom: Niederländische Kunst und Kultur im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert an deutschen Fürstenhöfen (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Marcus Schacht, Jörg Meiner and Horst Lademacher, 317–56. Krefeld: Kaiser-Wilhelm-Museum; Schloß Oranienburg; Apeldoorn: Paleis Het Loo, 1999–2000. Belk, Russell W. Collecting in a Consumer Society. New York: Routledge, 1995. Ben-Amos, Ilana Krausman. The Culture of Giving: Informal Support and GiftExchange in Early Modern England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

304 Bibliography Bencard, Morgens. ‘Fürstliche Geschenke’. In Sein Feld war die Welt. Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen (1604–1679). Von Siegen über die Niederlande und Brasilien nach Brandenburg, edited by Gerhard Brunn and Cornelius Neutsch, 159–77. Münster: Waxmann, 2008. Bencard, Morgens and Jørgen Hein. ‘Three Cabinets on Stands from the Seventeenth Century’. Furniture History 21 (1985): 147–64. Bennett, Jane. Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2010. Beranek, Saskia. ‘Power of the Portrait: Production, Consumption and Display of Portraits of Amalia van Solms in the Dutch Republic’. PhD diss., University of Pittsburgh, 2013. Berg, Maxine. Luxury and Pleasure in Eighteenth-Century Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. Berg, Maxine and Helen Clifford, eds. Consumers and Luxury: Consumer Culture in Europe 1650–1850. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1999. Bergvelt, Ellinoor and Renée Kistemaker, eds. De Wereld binnen Handbereik. Nederlandse kunst- en rariteitenverzamelingen, 1585–1735. Zwolle: Waanders, 1992. Berlowicz, Barbara, ed. Albert Eckhout returns to Brazil 1644–2002. Copenhagen: Nationalmuseet, 2002. Bischoff, Cordula. ‘Women Collectors and the Rise of the Porcelain Cabinet’. In Chinese and Japanese Porcelain for the Dutch Golden Age, edited by Jan van Campen and Titus Eliëns, 171–89. Zwolle, Waanders, 2014. Blaauwen, Abraham L. den. The Meissen Services of Stadhouder Willem V. Zwolle: Waanders, 1993. Blakely, Allison. Blacks in the Dutch World: The Evolution of Racial Imagery in a Modern Society. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2000. Blanning, T. C. W. The Culture of Power and the Power of Culture: Old Regime Europe 1660–1789. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2002. Blok, L. ‘Wilhelm von Oranien und die Entstehung des Nordniederländischen Staates’. Jahrbuch für Geschichte des Feudalismus 10 (1986): 275–82. Blussé, Leonard. ‘The Grand Inquisitor Inoue Chikugo no kami masashige, Spin doctor of the Tokogawa Bakufu’. Bulletin of Portuguese-Japanese Studies 7 (2003): 23–43. Blussé, Leonard and F. S. Gaastra, Companies and Trade: Essays on Overseas Trading Companies during the Ancien Régime. Hingham, MA: Kluwer Boston, 1981. Böck, Wilhelm. Oranienburg: Geschichte eines Preussischen Königsschlosses, Berlin: Deutscher Verein für Kunstwissenschaft, 1938. Boogaart, Ernst van den. ‘Brasilien hofieren – Johann Moritz’ politisches Projekt sichtbar gemacht’. In Sein Feld war die Welt: Johann Moritz von NassauSiegen (1604–1679): Von Siegen über die Niederlande und Brasilien nach Brandenburg, edited by Gerhard Brunn and Cornelius Neutsch, 73–92. Münster: Waxmann, 2008. Boogaart, Ernst van den. ‘Infernal Allies: The Dutch West India and the Tarairiu 1630–1654’. In Johann Moritz van Nassau-Siegen 1604–1679: A Humanist Prince in Europe and Brazil. Essays on the Occasion of the Tercentenary of His Death, edited by E. van den Boogaart, H. R. Hoetink and P. J. P. Whitehead, 519–38. The Hague: The Johann Moritz van Nassau Stichting, 1979.

Bibliography 305 Boogaart, Ernst van den. ‘A Well-Governed Colony: Frans Post’s Illustrations in Caspar Barlaeus’s History of Dutch Brazil’. The Rijksmuseum Bulletin 59, no. 3 (2011): 236–71. Boogaart, Ernst van den, H. R. Hoetink and P. J. P. Whitehead, eds. Johan Maurits van Nassau-Siegen 1604–1679: A Humanist Prince in Europe and Brazil. Essays on the Occasion of the Tercentenary of His Death. The Hague: The Johan Maurits van Nassau Stichting, 1979. Börsch-Supan, Helmut. ‘Die Gemälde aus dem Vermächtnis der Amalie van Solms und aus der Oranischen Erbschaft in den brandenburgisch-preußischen Schlössern. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der hohenzollernschen Kunstsammlungen’. Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte, 143–98. Munich and Berlin: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 1967. Börsch-Supan, Helmut. ‘Ein Deckenentwurf zur Verherrlichung des ersten preussischen Königs als Prinz von Oranien’. Nederlands kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 31 (1980): 316–27. Borselen, Annabella Meddens van. ‘“Ik zal dit in uwe ogen doen druipen”. De aanhouding van Wilhelmina van Pruisen door de Commissie van Defensie te Woerden in 1787’. Holland 19 (1987): 197–206. Bottomley, Ian. ‘Diplomatic Gifts of Arms and Armour between Japan and Europe during the 16th and 17th centuries’. Arms & Armour 1, no. 1 (2004): 5–23. Bourdieu, Pierre. Language and Symbolic Power, edited by John B. Thompson. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press, 1991. Boxer, C. R. The Dutch in Brazil, 1624–1654. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1957. Braam, W. Elisabeth van, Eelco Elzenga and Janine P. A. E. van Zelm van EldikKuneman. Een kouseband voor Oranje: 1613–1690. Apeldoorn: Rijksmuseum Paleis Het Loo, 1990. Bremer-David, Charissa. ‘Le Cheval Rayé: A French Tapestry Portraying Dutch Brazil’. The J. Paul Getty Museum Journal 22 (1994): 21–9. Brienen, Rebecca Parker. ‘Albert Eckhout’s African Woman and Child (1641). Ethnographic Portraiture, Slavery and New World Subjects’. In Slave Portraiture in the Atlantic World, edited by Agnes Lugo-Ortiz and Angela Rosenthal, 229–54. Cambridge: Cambridge Univeristy Press, 2013. Brienen, Rebecca Parker. ‘Albert Eckhout’s Paintings and the Vrijburg Palace in Dutch Brazil’. In Albert Eckhout returns to Brazil 1644–2002, edited by Barbara Berlowicz, 81–91. Copenhagen: Nationalmuseet, 2002. Brienen, Rebecca Parker. ‘From Brazil to Europe: The Zoological Drawings of Albert Eckhout and George Marcgraf’. In Early Modern Zoology: The Construction of Animals in Science, Literature and the Visual Arts, edited by K. Enenkel and P. Smith, 273–314. Leiden: Brill, 2007. Brienen, Rebecca Parker. ‘Georg Marcgraf (1610–c.1644): A German Cartographer, Astronomer and Naturalist-Illustrator in Colonial Dutch Brazil’. Itinerario 25, no. 1 (2001): 85–122. Brienen, Rebecca Parker. Visions of Savage Paradise: Albert Eckhout, Court Painter in Colonial Dutch Brazil. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2006. Brienen, Rebecca Parker. ‘Who Owns Frans Post? Collecting Frans Post’s Brazilian Landscapes’. In The Legacy of Dutch Brazil, edited by Michiel van Groesen, 229–47. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014. Broomhall, Susan. ‘Dirk Hartog’s Sea Chest: An Affective Archaeology of VOC Objects in Australia’. In Feeling Things: Objects and Emotions through History, edited by Sarah Randles, Stephanie Downes and Sally Holloway. Forthcoming.

306 Bibliography Broomhall, Susan. ‘Dishes, Coins and Pipes: The Epistemological and Emotional Power of VOC Material Culture in Australia’. In The Global Lives of Things: Materials, Material Culture and Commodities in the First Global Age, edited by Anne Gerritsen and Giorgio Riello. London: Routledge, 2015. Broomhall, Susan. ‘Emotions in the Household’. In Emotions in the Household, 1200–1900, edited by Susan Broomhall, 1–37. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 2007. Broomhall, Susan. ‘Fire, Smoke and Ashes: Communications of Power and Emotions by Dutch East India Company Crews on the Australian Continent’. In Fire Stories, edited by Grace Moore. Brooklyn: Punctum Books, forthcoming. Broomhall, Susan. ‘Imagined Domesticities in Early Modern Dutch Dollhouses’. Parergon 24, no. 2 (2007): 47–67. Broomhall, Susan. ‘Letters Make the Family: Nassau Family Correspondence at the Turn of the Seventeenth Century’. In Early Modern Women and Transnational Communities of Letters, edited by Julie D. Campbell, Anne R. Larsen and Gabriella Eschrich, 25–44. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2009. Broomhall, Susan. ‘Renovating Affections: Reconstructing the Atholl Family in the Mid-Eighteenth Century’. In Spaces for Feeling: Emotions and Sociabilities in Britain, 1650–1850, edited by Susan Broomhall, 52–78. London: Routledge, 2015. Broomhall, Susan. ‘Shipwrecks, Sorrow, Shame, and the Great Southland: The Use of Emotions in Seventeenth-Century Dutch East India Company Communicative Ritual’. In Emotion, Ritual and Power in Pre-Modern Europe: Life-Cycles, edited by Merridee Bailey and Katie Barclay. Basingstoke: Palgrave, forthcoming. Broomhall, Susan, ed. Spaces for Feeling: Emotions and Sociabilities in Britain, 1650–1850. London: Routledge, 2015. Broomhall, Susan. Women and Religion in Sixteenth-Century France. Houndmills: Palgrave, 2007. Broomhall, Susan and Jennifer Spinks. ‘Memorializing Grief in Familial and National Narratives of Dutch Identity’. In Early Modern Women in the Low Countries: Feminizing Sources and Interpretations of the Past, edited by Susan Broomhall and Jennifer Spinks, 73–98. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2011. Broomhall, Susan and Jacqueline Van Gent. ‘Converted Relationships: ReNegotiating Family Status after Religious Conversion in the Nassau Dynasty’. Journal of Social History 47, no. 3 (2014): 647–72. Broomhall, Susan and Jacqueline Van Gent. ‘Corresponding Affections: Emotional Exchange among Siblings in the Nassau Family’. Journal of Family History 34, no. 2 (2009): 143–65. Broomhall, Susan and Jacqueline Van Gent. ‘Courting Nassau Affections: Performing Love in Orange-Nassau Marriage Negotiations’. In Emotions in the Premodern World, edited by Joanne McEwan, Anne M. Scott and Philippa Maddern. Turnhout: Brepols, forthcoming. Broomhall, Susan and Jacqueline Van Gent. ‘Framing Childhood: Children through the Lens of Portraits in the Nassau Family Collections’. In Material Worlds of Childhood in North-Western Europe c. 1350–1800, edited by Stephanie Tarbin and Philippa Maddern. Aldershot: Ashgate, forthcoming. Broomhall, Susan and Jacqueline Van Gent. Gender, Power and Identity in the Early Modern House of Orange-Nassau. Farnham: Ashgate, 2016. Broomhall, Susan and Jacqueline Van Gent. ‘The Gendered Political Agency of Porcelain among Early Modern European Dynasties’. In Gender and Political

Bibliography 307 Culture in Early Modern Europe, edited by James Daybell and Svante Norrhem. London: Routledge, forthcoming. Broomhall, Susan and Jacqueline Van Gent, eds. Governing Masculinities in the Early Modern Period: Regulating Selves and Others. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2013. Broomhall, Susan and Jacqueline Van Gent. ‘In the Name of the Father: Conceptualizing Pater Familias in the Letters of William the Silent’s Children’. Renaissance Quarterly 62, no. 4 (2009): 1130–66. Bruggeman, Marijke. ‘Het hof van Maria Louise van Hessen-Kassel (1711–1731)’. It beaken: meidielingen fan de Fryske Akademy 60, no. 3–4 (1998): 293–304. Bruggeman, Marijke. Nassau en de macht van Oranje. De strijd van de Friese Nassaus voor de erkenning van hun rechten, 1702–1747. Hilversum: Verloren, 2007. Bruin, H. G. ‘Het Plein en het Huis’. In Domus: Het huis van Constantijn Huygens in Den Haag, edited by F. R. E. Blom et al., 47–86. Zutphen: Walburg, 1999. Brunn, Gerhard and Cornelius Neutsch, eds. Sein Feld war die Welt. Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen (1604–1679). Von Siegen über die Niederlande und Brasilien nach Brandenburg. Münster: Waxmann Verlag, 2008. Buvelot, Quentin, ed. Albert Eckhout: A Dutch Artist in Brazil. The Hague: Royal Cabinet of Paintings Mauritshuis, 2004. Buvelot, Quentin. ‘Albert Eckhout. A Dutch Painter in Brazil’. In Albert Eckhout: A Dutch Artist in Brazil, edited by Quentin Buvelot, 38–43.The Hague: Royal Cabinet of Paintings Mauritshuis, 2004. Calvi, Giulia and Isabelle Chabot, eds. Moving Elites: Women and Cultural Transfers in the European Court System (EUI Working Papers HEC, 2) (2010). Carrió-Invernizzi, Diana. ‘Gift and Diplomacy in Seventeenth-Century Spanish Italy’. The Historical Journal 51, no. 4 (2008): 881–99. Carter, Erica, James Donald and Judith Squires, eds. Space and Place: Theories of Identity and Location. London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1994. Cassidy-Geiger, Maureen. ‘Meissen et la France avant et après la guerre de Sept Ans: artists, espionnage et commerce’. Translated by Mary Siles. In Art francois et art allemand au XVIIIe Siècle, Regards Croisés, edited by Patrick Michel, 61–99. Paris: Ecole de Louvre, 2008. Clancy-Smith, Julia and Frances Gouda, eds. Domesticating the Empire: Race, Gender, and Family Life in French and Dutch Colonialism. Charlottesville: The University Press of Virginia, 1998. Claxton, Juliet. ‘The Countess of Arundel’s Dutch Pranketing Room’. Journal of the History of Collections 22, no. 2 (2010): 187–96. Colenbrander, H. T. De Patriottentijd. Hoofdzakelijk naar butenlandische bescheiden, 3 volumes. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1897. Collet, Dominik. Die Welt in der Stube: Begegnungen mit Aussereuropa in Kunstkammern der Frühen Neuzeit. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2007. Collet, Dominik. ‘The Museum Predicament: Representing Cultural Encounter in Historical and Contemporary Collections’. In The Fuzzy Logic of Encounter: New Perspectives on Cultural Contact, edited by Süne Juterczenka and Gesa Mackenthun, 53–74. Munster: Waxman Verlag, 2009. Conan, Michel. Baroque Garden Cultures: Emulation, Sublimation, Subversion. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks, 2005. Cooper, F. and A. Stoler. ‘Introduction: Tensions of Empire: Colonial Control and Visions of Rule’. American Ethnologist 16, no. 4 (1989): 609–21.

308 Bibliography Cooper, F. and A. Stoler. Tensions of Empire: Colonial Cultures in a Bourgeois World. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997. Coppens, T. Buren, Egmond en Oranje. Buren: Stichting Oud Buren, 1989. Corrêa do Lago, Pedro and Bia, eds. Frans Post (1612–1680): Catalogue Raisonné, revised English trans. Milan: 5 Continents Editions, 2007. Couchman, Jane. ‘“Give birth quickly and then send us your good husbands”: Informal Political Influence in the Letters of Louise de Coligny’. In Women’s Letters across Europe, 1400–1700: Form and Persuasion, edited by Jane Couchman and Ann Crabb, 163–84. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005. Couchman, Jane. ‘Lettres de Louise de Coligny aux membres de sa Famille’. In Lettres de Femmes: Texts inédits et oubliés du XVIe au XVIIIe siècle, edited by Elizabeth C. Goldsmith and Colette H. Winn, 89–134. Paris: Honoré Champion, 2005. Coutré, Jacquelyn N. ‘Decoration à l’Orange: Jan Lievens’ mars and Venus in Context’. Journal of Historians of Netherlandish Art 5, no. 2 (2013): DOI:10.5092/ jhna.2013.5.2.14. Cowmeadow, Nicola. ‘Scottish Noblewomen, the Family and Scottish Politics, 1688–1707’. PhD Diss., Dundee University, 2012. Croxton, Derek. Westphalia: The Last Christian Peace. Houndmills: Palgrave, 2013. Cruz, Anne J. and Maria Galli Stampino, eds. Early Modern Habsburg Women: Transnational Contexts, Cultural Conflicts, Dynastic Continuities. Farnham: Ashgate, 2013. Cruz, Anne J. and Mihoko Suzuki, eds. The Rule of Women in Early Modern Europe. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2009. Dam, Pieter van. Beschryvinge van de Oostindische Compagnie, Book 1, vol. 2, edited by F. W. Stapel. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1929. Davids, Roy and Dominic Jellinek. Provenance: Collectors, Dealers and Scholars in the Field of Chinese Ceramics in Britain. Oxfordshire: Roy Davids, 2011. Davis, Natalie Zemon. The Gift in Sixteenth-Century France. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. De Bolla, Peter. The Education of the Eye: Painting, Landscape, and Architecture in Eighteenth-Century Britain. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2003. De Vos, Annemie, with the collaboration of Charles van den Heuvel and Koen Ottenheym, ‘Propaganda voor staat en huis: Maurits en de bouwkunst’. In Maurits, Prins van Oranje, edited by Kees Zandvliet with contributions from Arthur Eyffinger, 122–36. Amsterdam: Rijksmuseum, 2000. Dee, Elaine Evans. ‘Printed Sources for the William and Mary Style’. In Courts and Colonies: The William and Mary Style in Holland, England and America, edited by Reinier Baarsen, Philip M. Johnston, Gervase Jackson-Stops and Elaine Evans Dee, 80–85. Washington, DC: University of Washington Press, 1988. Dekker, Rudolf. Family, Culture and Society in the Diary of Constantijn Huygens Jr, Secretary to Stadholder-King William of Orange. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Delaborde, Jules. Charlotte de Bourbon, Princesse d’Orange. Paris: Fischbacher, 1888. Delaborde, Jules, ed. Louise de Coligny, Princesse d’Orange, 2 volumes. Paris, 1890; reprint Geneva: Slatkine, 1970. Deursen, Arie Th. van. Willem van Oranje; een biografisch portret. Amsterdam: Bet Bakker, 1995.

Bibliography 309 Diedenhofen, Willem. ‘“Belvedere”, or the Principle of Seeing and Looking in the Gardens of Johan Maurits van Nassau-Siegen at Cleves’. In The Dutch Garden in the Seventeenth Century, edited by John Dixon Hunt, 49–80. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 1990. Diedenhofen, Willem. ‘Johan Maurits and His Gardens’. In Johan Maurits van Nassau-Siegen 1604–1679: A Humanist Prince in Europe and Brazil. Essays on the Occasion of the Tercentenary of His Death, edited by E. van den Boogaart, H. R. Hoetink and P. J. P. Whitehead, 197–236. The Hague: The Johan Maurits van Nassau Stichting, 1979. Dijk, W. O. Seventeenth-Century Burma and the Dutch East India Company 1634–1680. Singapore: Singapore University Press, 2006. Dillon, E. Catalogue of the Chinese and Japanese Porcelain and of the Delft Fayence at the Palaces of Hampton Court and St James. London: Royal Collection Trust, 1910. Ditzhuyzen, R. E. van. Oranje-Nassau. Een Biografisch Woordenboek. Haarlem: Becht, 1992. Driesen, Ludwig. Leben des Fürsten Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen. Berlin: Deckerschen Geheimen Ober-Hofbuchdruckerei, 1849. Due, Berete. ‘Brazilian Artefacts in the Royal Kunstkammer’. In Albert Eckhout Returns to Brazil, 1644–2002, edited by Barbara Berlowicz, 103–15. Copenhagen: Nationalmuseet, 2002. Duerloo, Luc and Marc Wingens, Scherpenheuvel. Het Jeruzalem van de Lage Landen. Leuven: Davidsfonds, 2002. Duindam, Jeroen. Myths of Power: Norbert Elias and the Early Modern European Court. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1995. Duindam, Jeroen. ‘Royal Courts in Dynastic States and Empires’. In Royal Courts in Dynastic States and Empires: A Global Perspective, edited by Jeroen Duindam, Tülay Artan and Metin Kunt, 1–23, Leiden: Brill, 2011. Duke, A. C., Judith Pollmann and Andrew Spicer, eds. Public Opinion and Changing Identities in the Early Modern Netherlands: Essays in Honour of Alastair Duke. Leiden: Brill, 2007. Dunthorne, Hugh. ‘William in Contemporary Portraits’. In Redefining William III: The Impact of the King-Stadholder in International Context, edited by Esther Mijtens and David Onnekink, 263–76. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007. Elzenga, Eelco. ‘Statthalterliche Architektur und Gartenkunst’. In Onder den Oranje Boom: Niederländische Kunst und Kultur im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert an deutschen Fürstenhöfen (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Marcus Schacht, Jörg Meiner and Horst Lademacher, 131–53. Krefeld: Kaiser-Wilhelm-Museum; Schloß Oranienburg; Apeldoorn: Paleis Het Loo, 1999–2000. Erkelens, A. M. L. E. ‘Delffs Porcelijn’ van koningin Mary II/ Queen Mary’s ‘Delft porcelain’. Ceramics at Het Loo from the time of William and Mary. Apeldoorn: Paleis Het Loo, 1996. Erkelens, Wies. ‘Der stattalterliche Hof Friedrich Heinrichs und der Amalia von Solms’. In Onder den Oranje Boom: Niederländische Kunst und Kultur im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert an deutschen Fürstenhöfen (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Marcus Schacht, Jörg Meiner and Horst Lademacher, 107–30. Krefeld: KaiserWilhelm-Museum; Schloß Oranienburg; Apeldoorn: Paleis Het Loo, 1999–2000. Erkelens, Wies. ‘Kunst voor natuur: bloemenhouders met tuiten en Mary II Stuart (1662–1695), koningin van Groot-Brittanië, prinses van Oranje’. In Delfts

310 Bibliography aardewerk: geschiedenis van een nationaal product, edited by Marion S. van Aken-Fehmers, 28–47. The Hague: Gemeentemuseum, 2007. Erkelens, Wies. ‘La porcelaine royale de Delft’. In Delft-Faïence, edited by Christine Lahaussois, 88–97. Paris: Reunion des musees nationaux, 2008. Evers, G. A. ‘De menagerie van Prins Willem V op het Loo’. Bijdr. Meded. Vereen ‘Gelre’ 17 (1914): 201–13. Eymael, C. J. M. ‘De geschiedenis achter een aquarel. Het verhaal van “twee moortjes”’. In Een vorstelijk archivaris, edited by J. R. ter Molen, E. A. G. van den Bent and B. Woelderink, 124–8. Zwolle: Waanders, 2003. Finch, Jonathan. ‘“According to the Qualitie and Degree of the Person Deceased”: Funeral Monuments and the Construction of Social Identities, 1400–1750’. Scottish Archaeological Review 8 (1991): 105–14. Flather, Amanda. Gender and Space in Early Modern England. Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 2007. Fock, C. Willemijn. ‘Frederik Hendrik en Amalia’s appartementen: Vorstelijk vertoon naast de triomf van het porselein’. In Vorstelijk verzameld. De kunstcollectie van Frederik Hendrik en Amalia, edited by Peter van der Ploeg and Carola Vermeeren, 76–86. Zwolle: Waanders, 1997. Fock, C. Willemijn and Beatrijs Brenninkmeijer-de Rooij. ‘Catalogus van het Kabinet Schilderijen van Zijne Doorl. Hoogheid Den Heere Prince van Orange en Nassau enz. in ’s Gravenhage’. Antiek 11, no. 2 (1976): 161–76. Fock, C. Willemijn and Beatrijs Brenninkmeijer-de Rooij. ‘De schilderijengalerij van Prins Willem V op het Buitenhof te Den Haag’, pts 1 and 2. Antiek 11, no. 2 (1976): 113–37, 138–60. Françozo, Mariana. ‘“Dressed like an Amazon”: The Transatlantic Trajectory of a Red Feather Coat’. In Museums and Biographies: Stories, Objects, Identities, edited by Kate Hill, 187–99. Suffolk: Boydell Press, 2012. Françozo, Mariana. ‘Global Connections: Johan Maurits of Nassau-Siegen’s Collection of Curiosities’. In The Legacy of Dutch Brazil, edited by Michiel van Groesen, 105–23. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014. Fuhring, Peter. Ornament Prints in the Rijksmuseum II: The Seventeenth Century, 3 volumes. Rotterdam: Sound & Vision Publishers, 2004. Gaastra, F. S. De geschiedenis van de VOC. Haarlem: Fibula-Van Dishoeck, 1982. Gaastra, F. S. Bewind en beleid bij de VOC. De financiële en commerciële politiek van de bewindhebbers, 1672–1702. Zutphen: Walburg Pers, 1989. Gabriëls, A. J. C. M. De heren als dienaren en de dienaar als heer. Het stadhouderlijk stelsel in de tweede helft van de achttiende eeuw. The Hague: Stichting Hollandse Historische Reeks, 1990. Gaeghtens, Barbara. ‘Amalia von Solms und die oranische Kunstpolitik’. In Onder den Oranje boom: Niederländische Kunst und Kultur (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Marcus Schacht, Jörg Meiner and Horst Lademacher, 265–85. Krefeld: KaiserWilhelm-Museum; Schloß Oranienburg; Apeldoorn: Paleis Het Loo, 1999–2000. Gammerl, Benno. ‘Emotional Styles: Concepts and Challenges’. Rethinking History: The Journal of Theory and Practice 16, no. 2 (2012): 161–75. Geertz, Clifford. Local knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology. New York: Basic Books, 1983. Geertz, Clifford. Negara: The Theatre-States in Nineteenth-Century Bali. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1980. Geevers, Liesbeth. ‘Family Matters: William of Orange and the Habsburgs after the Abdication of Charles V (1555–67)’. Renaissance Quarterly 63 (2010): 459–90.

Bibliography 311 Geevers, Liesbeth. ‘Being Nassau: Nassau Family Histories and Dutch National Discourse from 1541 to 1616’. Dutch Crossing 35 (2011): 4–19. Gelder, H. E. van. ‘Gegevens omtrent den porceleinhandel der oost-indische compagnie’. Economisch – Historisch Jaarboek (1924): 165–8. Geyl, Pieter. ‘Engelsche correspondentie van prins Willem IV en prinses Anna (1734–1743)’. Bijdragen en Mededeelingen van het Historisch Genootschap 45 (1924): 89–140. Geyl, Pieter. Orange and Stuart, 1641–1672, translated by Arnold Pomerans. New York: Scribner, 1970. Geyl, Pieter. Willem IV en Engeland tot 1748 (vrede van Aken). The Hague: M. Nijhoff, 1924. Glamann, K. Dutch-Asiatic Trade, 1620–1740. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1958. Gorissen, F. Conspectus Cliviae. Eine rheinische Residenzstadt in der niederländischen Kunst des 17. Jahrhunderts. Kleve: Boss-Druck und Verlag, 1964. Groenveld, Simon. ‘Beiderseits der Grenze. Das Familiengeflecht bis Ende der ersten Oranisch-Nassauischen Dynastie, 1702’. In Onder den Oranje boom. Dynastie in der Republik. Das Haus Oranien-Nassau als Vermittler niederlaendischer Kultur in deutschen Territotrien im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert, Textband, edited by Horst Lademacher, 139–56. Munich: Hirmer, 1999. Groenveld, Simon. ‘Spiegel van de tijd: het huwelijk van Willem van Oranje en Anna van Egmont-Buren (1551), geplaatst in het kader van de Habsburgse adelspolitiek’. Jaarboek Oranje–Nassau Museum (2002): 7–23. Groesen, Michiel van. ‘Lessons Learned: The Second Dutch Conquest of Brazil and the Memory of the First’. Colonial Latin American Review 20, no. 2 (2011): 167–93. Groesen, Michiel van. ‘Officers of the West India Company, Their networks, and Their Personal Memories of Dutch Brazil’. In The Dutch Trading Companies as Knowledge Networks, edited by Siegfried Huigen, Jan L. De Jong and Elmar Kolfin, 39–58. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Grote Atlas van de Verenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie/Comprehensive Atlas of the Dutch United East India Company. Zeven delen van de hand van meerdere auteurs, 7 volumes. Voorburg: Atlas maior, 2006–2010. Grundy, John. The Stranger’s Guide to Hampton Court Palace and Gardens. London: Bell and Daldy, 1857. Guerra, Francisco. ‘Medicine in Dutch Brazil, 1624–1654’. Johan Maurits van Nassau-Siegen 1604–1679: A Humanist Prince in Europe and Brazil. Essays on the Occasion of the Tercentenary of his Death, edited by E. van den Boogaart, H. R. Hoetink and P. J. P. Whitehead. The Hague: The Johan Maurits van Nassau Stichting, 1979. Guillebon, Régine de Plinval de. ‘The Manufacture and Sale of Soft-Paste Porcelain in Paris in the Eighteenth Century’. In Discovering the Secrets of Soft-Paste Porcelain at the Saint-Cloud Manufactory, ca. 1690–1766 (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Bertrand Rondot. New York: Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, 1999. Gulik, W. R. van. ‘The House of Orange and Pre-Modern Japan’. In The Dutch Royal Collection: Oranda Oshitsu, edited by Stichting Historische Verzamelingen van het Huis Oranje-Nassau, 197–201. Tokyo: Mainichi Shinbunsha, 2000. Gundestrup, Bente. ‘The Eckhout Paintings and the Royal Danish Kunstkammer, History of the Collection’. In Albert Eckhout Returns to Brazil, 1644–2002, edited by Barbara Berlowicz, 187–95. Copenhagen: Nationalmuseet, 2002.

312 Bibliography Haak, S. P. ‘De Wording van het Conflict tussen Maurits en Oldenbarnevelt’. Bijdragen voor Vaderlandsche Geschiedenis en Oudheidkunde, series 5, 6 (1919): 97–207 and 10 (1923): 177–226. Haagen, J. K. van der. ‘Het Plein, Huygens en Frederik Hendrik’. Die Haghe Jaarboek (1928/29): 6–3. Hahn, Peter-Michael. ‘Magnifizienz und dynastische Legitimation durch Übernahme kultureller Muster: Die Beziehungen der Hohenzollern zum Haus Oranien und den Niederlanden im 17. Jahrhundert’. In Formen der Visualisierung von Herrschaft. Studien zu Adel, Fürst und Schloßbau vom 16.bis 18. Jahrhundert, edited by PeterMichael Hahn and Helmut Lorenz. Potsdam: Verlag für Berlin-Brandenburg, 1998. Hammer, Ulrike. Kurfürstin Luise Henriette. Eine Oranierin als Mittlerin zwischen den Niederlanden und Brandenburg-Preußen. Munster: Waxmann, 2001. Handley, Stuart. ‘Germain, Sir John, first baronet (1650–1718)’. Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, online edn. Oxford University Press, 2004. Hantsche, I., ed., Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen (1604–1679) als Vermittler. Politik und Kultur am Niederrhrein im 17. Jahrhundert. Münster: Waxmann Verlag, 2005. Hardenbroek, Gijsbert Jan and F. J. L. Krämer, eds. Gedenkschriften (1747–1787), 6 vols. Amsterdam: J. Müller, 1901. Harris, Barbara J. English Aristocratic Women, 1450–1550: Marriage and Family, Property and Careers. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. Harris, Barbara J. ‘Property, Power and Personal Relations: Elizabethan Mothers and Sons in Yorkist and Early Tudor England’. Signs 51, no. 3 (1990): 606–32. Harris, Barbara J. ‘Space, Time, and the Power of Aristocratic Wives in Yorkist and Early Tudor England, 1450–1550’. In Time, Space and Women’s Lives in Early Modern Europe, edited by Anne Jacobson Schutte, Thomas Kuehn and Silvana Seidel Menchi, 245–64. Kirksville: Truman State University Press, 2001. Heilmeyer, Marina. ‘Orangen für das Haus Oranien’. In Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Ingo Pfeifer and Wolfgang Savelsberg, 100–103. Oranienbaum: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2003. Hemelraad, Max. ‘Delfter Fayence mit Oranierdarstellungen’. Oranienbaum Journal 1 (2007): 108–13. Herbert, Amanda E. Female Alliances: Gender, Identity, and Friendship in Early Modern Britain. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2014. Herz, Silke. ‘Johan Maurits van Nassau-Siegen’. In Onder den Oranje Boom: Nieder­ ländische Kunst und Kultur im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert an deutschen Fürstenhöfen (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Marcus Schacht, Jörg Meiner and Horst Lademacher, 155–204. Krefeld: Kaiser-Wilhelm-Museum; Schloß Oranienburg; Apeldoorn: Paleis Het Loo, 1999–2000. Heupers, E. ‘Marijke Meu, een “vergeten” ambachtsvrouwe van Soest’. Flehite 4 (1976): 57–62. Hinterkeuser, Guido. ‘Visions of Power: Andreas Schlüter’s Monuments to the Great Elector and Friedrich III and I’. Sculpture Journal 22, no. 1 (2013): DOI: 10.3828/ sj.2013.3. Hinton, Mark and Oliver Impey, eds. Kensington Palace and the Porcelain of Queen Mary II. London: Christies, 1998. Hoetink, H. R., ed. Zo wijd de wereld strekt. The Hague: Mauritshuis, 1979. Hofman, Hendrik Arie. Constantijn Huygens (1596-1687): een christelijk-humanistisch bourgeois-gentilhomme in dienst van het Oranjehuis. Utrecht: Hes, 1983.

Bibliography 313 Hoftijzer, Paul and C. C. Barfoot, eds. Fabrics and Fabrications: The Myth and Making of William and Mary. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1990. Hommes, Margriet Eikema and Elmer Kolfin. De Oranjezaal in Huis ten Bosch. Een zaal uit loutere liefde. Zwolle: Waanders & de Kunst, 2013. Hoogenberk, Hendrik. De rechtsvoorschriften voor de vaart op Oost-Indië 1595–1620. Utrecht: Kemink 1940. Howarth, David. ‘The Patronage and Collecting of Aletheia, Countess of Arundel, 1606–54’. Journal of the History of Collections 10, no. 2 (1998): 125–37. Huang, A. T. Silk for Silver: Dutch-Vietnamese Relations, 1637–1700. Boston: Brill, 2007. Hughes, Ann and Julie Sanders. ‘Gender, Exile and The Hague Courts of Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia and Mary, Princess of Orange in the 1650s’. In Monarchy and Exile: The Politics of Legitimacy from Marie de Médicis to Wilhelm II, edited by Philip Mansel and Torsten Riotte, 44–65. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2011. Huizinga, J. J., ed. Van Leeuwarden naar Den Haag. Rond de verplaatsing van het stadhouderlijk hof in 1747. Franeker: Van Wijnen, 1997. Hulsman, Lodewijk. ‘Brazilian Indians in the Dutch Republic: The Remonstrances of Antonio Paraupaba to the States General in 1654 and 1656’. Itinerario 29, no. 1 (2005): 51–78. Hunt, John Dixon, ed. The Dutch Garden in the Seventeenth Century. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 1990. Hunt, Nancy R., Tessie P. Liu and Jean Quataert, eds. Gendered Colonialism in African History. Oxford: Blackwell, 1997. Impey, Edward. Kensington Palace: The Official Illustrated History. London: Merrell, 2003. Impey, Oliver R. ‘Collecting Oriental Porcelains in Britain in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries’. In The Burghley Porcelains: An Exhibition from The Burghley House Collection and based on the 1688 Inventory and the 1690 Devonshire Schedule, 36–43. New York: Japan Society, 1986. Impey, Oliver R. and Johanna Marshner, ‘“China Mania”: A Reconstruction of Queen Mary II’s Display of East Asian Artefacts in Kensington Palace in 1693’. Orientations (November 1998): 60–1. Israel, Jonathan. Conflicts of Empires: Spain, the Low Countries and the Struggle for World. London: The Hambledon Press, 1997. Israel, Jonathan. ‘Maurits en de wording van buitenlandse politiek’. In Maurits, Prins van Oranje, edited by Kees Zandvliet with contributions from Arthur Eyffinger, 64–75. Amsterdam: Rijksmuseum, 2000. Jackson-Stops, Gervaise. ‘The Court Style in Britain’. In Courts and Colonies: The William and Mary Style in Holland, England and America, edited by Reinier Baarsen, Philip M. Johnston, Gervase Jackson-Stops and Elaine Evans Dee, 36–91. Washington, DC: University of Washington Press, 1988. Jacobs, E. M. Koopman in Azië. De handel van de Verenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie tijdens de 18e eeuw. Zutphen: Walburg Pers, 2000. Jacques, David and Arend Jan van der Horst. The Gardens of William and Mary. London: Christopher Helm, 1988. Jagtenberg, F. J. A. Marijke Meu 1688–1765. Amsterdam: De Bataafsche Leeuw, 1994. Janssen, Geert H. ‘De kunst van het kopiëren: Opdrachten van stadhouder Willem Frederik van Nassau aan Peter Nason’. Jaarboek Oranje-Nassau Museum (2001): 36–47.

314 Bibliography Janssen, Geert H. Princely Power in the Dutch Republic: Patronage and William Frederick of Nassau (1613–64), translated by J. C. Grayson. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2008. Jansson, Maija. ‘Measured Reciprocity: English Ambassadorial Gift Exchange in the 17th and 18th Centuries’. Journal of Early Modern History 9, no. 3/4 (2005): 348–70. Jardine, Lisa. Going Dutch: How England Plundered Holland’s Glory. London: Harper, 2008. Jardine, Lisa. The Reputation of Sir Constantijn Huygens: Networker or Virtuoso? Wassenaar: NIAS, 2008. Johnston, Phillip M. ‘The William and Mary Style in America’. In Courts and Colonies: The William and Mary Style in Holland, England and America, edited by Reinier Baarsen, Philip M. Johnston, Gervase Jackson-Stops and Elaine Evans Dee, 62–79. Washington, DC: University of Washington Press, 1988. Joliet, Willem. ‘Niederländische Fliesen in Schloss Oranienbaum’. In Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Ingo Pfeifer and Wolfgang Savelsberg, 77–87. Oranienbaum: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2003. Jongstra, Jaap. Oranjegoed! Vier eeuwen Oranje-Nassau op keramiek. Leeuwarden: Keramiekmuseum Princessehof, 2010. Jonk, Eric. Reading the Book of Nature in the Dutch Golden Age, 1575–1715. Leiden: Brill 2010. Joost, Wolfgang. ‘Nachwort’. In Die wundersamen Reisen des Caspar Schmalkalden nach West-und Ostindien 1642–1652, edited by Wolfgang Joost, 161–76. Leipzig: Brockhaus Verlag, 1983. Joppien, R. ‘The Dutch Vision of Brazil. Johan Maurits and his artists’. In Johann Moritz van Nassau-Siegen 1604–1679: A Humanist Prince in Europe and Brazil. Essays on the Occasion of the Tercentenary of His Death, edited by E. van den Boogaart, H. R. Hoetink and P. J. P. Whitehead, 297–376. The Hague: The Johan Maurits van Nassau Stichting, 1979. Jörg, C. J. A. Porcelain and the Dutch China Trade. The Hague: Nijhoff, 1982. Jorissen, Theodor. ‘Een vorstelijk engagement’. Historische bladen, edited by Theodor Jorissen, 4 volumes. 1: 83–119. Haarlem: Tjeenk Willink, 1895. Jorissen, Theodor. ‘Marijken-Meu’. Historische bladen, edited by Theodor Jorissen, 4 volumes. 1: 191–231. Haarlem: Tjeenk Willink, 1912. Jost, Erdmut and Holger Zaunstöck, eds. Goldenes Zeitalter und Jahrhundert der Aufklärung. Kulturtransfer zwischen den Niederlanden und dem mitteldeutschen Raum im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert. Halle: Mitteldeutscher Verlag, 2012. Juten, G. C. A. ‘Bouwstoffen voor de geschiedenis van Willemstad’. Taxandria 39 (1932): 27–31. Juten, G. C. A. ‘De koepelkerk van Willemstad’. Taxandria 29 (1922): 11–25. Kalff, S. ‘Marijke-Meu’. In Karakters uit den pruikentijd, edited by S. Kalff, 1–38. Rotterdam: B. van de Watering, 1902. Kamphuis, G. ‘Constantijn Huygens, bouwheer of bouwmeester’. Oud Holland 77 (1962): 155–78. Keblusek, Marika. ‘The Bohemian Court in The Hague’. In Princely Display: The Court of Frederik Hendrik of Orange and Amalia van Solms, edited by Marika Keblusek and Jori Zijlmans. The Hague: Waanders, 1997. Keblusek, Marika, and Vera Noldes Badeloch, eds. Double Agents: Cultural and Political Brokerage in Early Modern Europe. Leiden: Brill, 2011. Keblusek, Marika and Jori Zijlmans, eds., Vorstelijk vertoon. Aan het hof van Frederik Hendrik en Amalia. Zwolle: Waanders, 1997. Published in English as Princely

Bibliography 315 Display: The Court of Frederik Hendrik of Orange and Amalia van Solms. The Hague: Waanders, 1997. Kempen, Wilhelm van. ‘Das Reisetage- und Skizzenbuch des Architekten Christoph Pitzler, eine Quelle zur anhaltischen Kunstgeschichte des 17. und 18. Jahrhunderts’. Mitteilungen des Vereins für Anhaltische Geschichte und Altertumskunde 14, no. 1 (1920): 93–9. Kikkert, J. G. Willem van Oranje. Soesterberg: Aspekt, 2006. King, Richard G. ‘Anne of Hanover and Orange (1709–59) as Patron and Practitioner of the Arts’. In Queenship in Britain 1660–1837: Royal Patronage, Court Culture and Dynastic Politics, edited by Clarissa Campbell Orr, 162–92. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2002. Kist, Bas. ‘De erfenis van prins Maurits’. Armamentaria 35 (2000): 23–32. Klink, Hubrecht. Opstand, politiek en religie bij Willem van Oranje. Een thematische biografie. Heerenveen: Groen en Zoon, 1998. Klinkert, Christi M. Nassau in het nieuws: nieuwsprenten van Maurits van Nassaus militaire ondernemingen uit de periode 1590–1600. Zutphen: Walburg Pers, 2005. Kloek, Wouter. ‘Prins Maurits en de beeldende kunst’. In Maurits, Prins van Oranje, edited by Kees Zandvliet with contributions from Arthur Eyffinger, 138–59. Amsterdam: Rijksmuseum, 2000. Klooster, L. J. van der. Mozart en Oranje en andere bijdragen over het Huis van Oranje in de 18e eeuw. Zutphen: Walburg Pers, 1992. Klooster, L. J. van der, C. A. Tamse and Marieke Tiethoff. ‘Maria van Oranje. Een bijna vergeten telg uit ons vorstenhuis’. Jaarboek Vereniging Oranje-Nassau Museum (1993): 6–21. Kmec, Sonja. Across the Channel, Noblewomen in Seventeenth-Century France and England. Trier: Kliomedia, 2010. Knaap, G. J. and H. A. Sutherland, eds. Monsoon Traders: Ships, Skippers and Commodities in Eighteenth-Century Makassar. Leiden: KITLV Press, 2004. Knobloch, Christian. Zu schön, um zu verstummen. Die Schloss- und Parkanalage Wilhelmsthal, 3rd edn. Meiningen: Resch, 2012. Knoops, W. A. and F. Ch. Meijer, Goejanverwellesluis. De aanhouding van de prinses van Oranje op 28 juni 1787 door het vrijkorps van Gouda. Amsterdam: Bataafsche Leeuw, 1987. Koenhein, Adrienne J. M., P. Brederoo, Chr. Will, J. Heniger, H. L. Ph. Leeuwenberg and P. T. Den Hertog. Johan Wolfert van Brederode, 1599–1655: een Hollands edelman tussen Nassau en Oranje. Zuytphen: Walburg, 1999. Kolb, Jocelyne. The Ambiguity of Taste: Freedom and Food in European Romanticism. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1995. Koldeweij, Eloy F. ‘Die Ledertapeten von Henriette Catharina von Oranien-Nassau, Fürstin von Anhalt-Dessau’. In Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Ingo Pfeifer and Wolfgang Savelsberg, 89–94. Oranienbaum: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2003. Kolfin, Elmer. ‘Overtuigen door overweldigen: buitenlandse reizigers over de beschilderingen in de Oranjezaal van Huis ten Bosch, 1650–1750’. In Propaganda en spektakel: vroegmoderne intochten en festiviteiten in de Nederlanden, edited by Joop W. Koopmans and Werner Thomas, 61–91. Maastricht: Shaker Publishing 2010. Kooijmans, Luuc. ‘Haagse dames en de dagboeken van Willem Frederik’. In Het hof van de Friese Nassaus (1548–1747), edited by W. Bergsma, 257–68. Leeuwarden: Fryske Akademy, 1998.

316 Bibliography Kooijmans, Luuc. ‘Liefde in opdracht. Emotie en berekning in de dagboeken van Willem Frederik van Nassau’. Historisch Tijdskrift Holland, 30 no. 4/5 (1998): 231–55. Kooijmans, Luuc. Liefde in opdracht: Het hofleven van Willem Frederik van Nassau. Amsterdam: Bert Bakker, 2000. Kooijmans, Luuc. Vriendschap: en de kunst van ht overladen in de zeventiende en achtiende eeuw. Amsterdam: Bert Bakker, 1997. Koot, Judith. ‘Anna van Hannover: een beeldvorming op losse schroeven’. Dina Miek: vrouwengeschiedenis krant 11 (1994): 4–18. Kowaleski-Wallace, Elizabeth. ‘Women, China, and Consumer Culture in EighteenthCentury England’. Eighteenth-Century Studies 29, no. 2 (Winter 1995/6): 153–67. Kuehn, Thomas J. ‘Understanding Gender Inequality in Renaissance Florence: Personhood and Gifts of Maternal Inheritance by Women’. Journal of Women’s History 8, no. 2 (1996): 58–80. Kuhlmann, Dörte. Gender Studies in Architecture: Space, Power and Difference. London: Routledge, 2013. Küster, Hansjörg and Ansgar Hoppe. Das Gartenreich Dessau-Wörlitz. Landschaft und Geschichte. Munich: C.H. Beck, 2010. Lademacher, Horst. ‘Die Statthalter und ihr Amt: zu den Wechselfällen einer politischmilitärischen Funktion’. In Onder den Oranje boom. Dynastie in der Republik. Das Haus Oranien-Nassau als Vermittler niederländischer Kultur in deutschen Territorien im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert, edited by Horst Lademacher, 43–72. Munich: Hirmer Verlag, 1999. Lademacher, Horst, ed. Onder den Oranje boom. Dynastien in der Republik. Das Haus Oranien-Nassau als Vermittler niederländischer Kultur in deutschen Territorien des 17. und 18. Jahrhundert, Text volume accompanying the exhibition at Kaiser Wilhelm Museum Krefeld, Schloss Oranienburg and Palais Het Loo. Munich: Hirmer, 1999. Lademacher, Horst, ed., Oranien-Nassau, die Niederlande und das Reich. Beiträge zur Geschichte einer Dynastie. Münster: Lit, 1995. Lahaussois, Christine. ‘Le grand style et le goût oriental’. In Delft-Faïence, edited by Christine Lahaussois. 84–7. Paris: Reunion des musees nationaux, 2008. Landwehr, John. Splendid Ceremonies: State Entries and Royal Funerals in the Low Countries, 1515–1791. A Bibliography. Leiden: A.W. Sijthoff, 1971. Lane, Arthur. ‘Daniel Marot: Designer of Delft Vases and of Gardens at Hampton Court’. The Connoisseur (1949): 19–24. Lang, Gordon. ‘Oriental Porcelains: A European Enthusiasm’. In The Burghley Porcelains: An Exhibition from The Burghley House Collection and based on the 1688 Inventory and the 1690 Devonshire Schedule, 44–51. New York: Japan Society, 1986. Larsen, E. Frans Post, Interprète du Brésil. Amsterdam: Colibris, 1962. Larsen, E. ‘Some Seventeenth Century Paintings of Brazil’. Connoisseur (Oct 1970): 123–31. Law, Ernest. The History of Hampton Court Palace. Vol 3: Orange and Guelph Times. London: George Bell and Sons, 1891. Le Corbeiller, Clare. China Trade Porcelain: Patterns of Exchange: Additions to the Helena Woolworth McCann Collection in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1974. Lefebvre, Henri. La production de l’espace. Paris: Editions Anthropos, 1974.

Bibliography 317 Lefebvre, Henri. State, Space, World: Selected Essays. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2009. Lemmens, Gerard. ‘Die Schenkung an Ludwig XIV und die Auflösung der brasilianischen Sammlung des Johann Moritz 1652–1679’. In Soweit der Erdkreis Reicht. Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen, 1604–1679, edited by G. Werd, 265–93. Kleve: Stadt Kleve, 1979. Lentz, Christel. ‘Das kurze und dramatische Leben des Grafen Gustav Adolph von Nassau-Saarbrücken-Idstein (1632–1664): Erbgraf, Konvertit und Türkenkämpfer’. Nassauische Annalen 116 (2005): 281–300. Liekes, F. ‘De ivoren meubelen van Maurits de Braziliaan’. Antiek 14 (1979–80): 381–400. Liefkes, Reino and Patricia F. Ferguson. ‘Faïences de Delft dans les collections anglaises’. In Delft-Faïence, edited by Christine Lahaussois. 98–105. Paris: Reunion des musees nationaux, 2008. Lombarde, Piet. ‘Dominating Space and Landscape: Ostend and Scherpenheuvel’. In Albert and Isabella, 1598–1621, edited by Werner Thomas and Luc Duerloo. Turnhout: Brepols, 1998. Lunsingh Scheurleer, Pauline C. M. ‘Rich Remains from Social Anthropological Fieldwork in Eighteenth-Century India’. Journal of the History of Collections 8, no. 1 (1996): 71–91. Lunsingh Scheurleer, T. H. ‘Documents on the Furnishing of Kensington House’. Walpole Society 38 (1960–1962): 15–58. Lunsignh Scheurleer, T. H. ‘The Dutch at the Tea-Table’. The Connoisseur 193 (1976): 85–93. Luttervelt, R. van. ‘Het portret van Willem II en Maria Stuart in het Rijksmuseum’. Oud Holland 68, 1, no. 4 (1953): 159–69. Macauley, Thomas Babington. The History of England from the Accession of James II, 5 volumes. Philadelphia: Porter & Coates, 1848. Mader, Eric-Oliver. ‘Conversion Concepts in Early Modern Germany: Protestant and Catholic’. In Conversion and the Politics of Religion in Early Modern Germany, edited by David M. Luebke, Jared Poley, Daniel C. Ryan and David Warren Sabean, 31–48. New York: Berghahn Books, 2012. Magreta, Todd Jerome. ‘The Development of Orange-Nassau Princely Artistic Activity, 1618–1632’. PhD diss. City University of New York, 2008. Mallet, J. V. G. ‘European Ceramics and the Influence of Japan’. In Porcelain for Palaces: The Fashion for Japan in Europe, 1650–1750 (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by John Ayers, Oliver Impey and J. V. G. Mallet, 35–55. London: Oriental Ceramic Society, 1990. Mark, Peter. ‘Portuguese’ Style and Luso-African Identity: Precolonial Senegambia, Sixteenth-Nineteenth Century. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2002. Marley, David F. Historic Cities of the Americas: An Illustrated Encyclopedia, volume 1. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2005. Marley, David F. Wars of the Americas: A Chronology of Armed Conflict in the Western Hemisphere, 1492 to the Present. Vol. 1: Discovery and Conquest to High Tide of Empire. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2008. Martin, Meredith. Dairy Queens: The Politics of Pastoral Architecture from Catherine de’ Medici to Marie-Antoinette. Harvard: Harvard University Press, 2011. Martin, Meredith. ‘Interiors and Interiority in the Ornamental Dairy’. Eighteenth Century Fiction 20, no. 3 (2008): 357–84.

318 Bibliography Massey, Doreen. Space, Place and Gender. Cambridge: Polity, 1994. Mauss, Marcel. The Gift: Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies. France, 1923–4; New York: W.W. Norton, 1954, 1990. Mazzola, Elizabeth. Women’s Wealth and Women’s Writing in Early Modern England: ‘Little Legacies’ and the Materials of Motherhood. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2009. McCloskey, Jason and Jgnacio Lopez Alemany. Signs of Power in Habsburg Spain and the New World. Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press, 2013. Meer, G. van der. ‘Houtsnijwerk door Maria van Oranje, hertogin van Simmern?’ Jaarboek Vereniging Oranje Nassau Museum (1995): 67–74. Meerendonk, Suzanne van de. ‘“Amsterdamsche Vreugdtriomfe”: het bezoek van Amalia van Solms en haar dochters in 1659’. Amstelodamum 96 (2009): 99–111. Meerkerk, Edwin van. ‘Colonial Objects and the Display of Power: The Curious Case of the Cabinet of William V and the Dutch India Companies’. In The Dutch Trading Companies as Knowledge Networks, edited by Siegfried Huigen, Jan L. De Jong and Elmar Kolfin, 415–36. Leiden: Brill 2010. Meerkerk, Edwin van. ‘Vorstelijk mecenaat of cultuurbeleid?: stadhouder Willem V en Wilhelmina van Pruisen en de kunsten’. Virtus: bulletin van de Werkgroep Adelsgeschiedenis 16 (2009): 68–82. Meerkerk, Edwin van. Willem V en Wilhelmina van Pruisen. De laatste stadhouders. Amsterdam: Atlas, 2009. Meilink-Roelofsz, M. A. P. ‘Ulrich Gualtherus Hemmingson, VOC dienaar en verbindingsschakel tussen China en Nederland’. Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 31 (1980): 456–74. Meinardus, Otto. ‘Das politische Testament des Grafen Johannes von IdsteinWiesbaden’. Annalen des Vereins für Nassauische Alterthumskunde und Geschichtsforschung 30 (1899): 55–108. Meinardus, Otto. ‘Eigenhändige Briefe des Grossen Kurfürsten an Johann Moritz von Nassau’. Forschungen zur brandenburgischen und preussischen Geschichte 19 (1906): 115–55.
 Mello, Evaldo Cabral de. O Negócio do Brasil – Portugal, os Países Baixos e o Nordeste 1641–1669. Rio de Janeiro: Topbooks, 1998 (Dutch edition: De Braziliaanse affaire – Portugal, de Republiek der Verenigde Nederlanden en Noord-Oost Brazilië, 1641–1669, translated by Catherine Barel. Zutphen: Walburg Press, 2005). Mentz, Søren. ‘Art, Power and Politics: Denmark and the Netherlands, 1600–1660’. In Albert Eckhout Returns to Brazil, 1644–2002, edited by Barbara Berlowicz, 93–100. Copenhagen: Nationalmuseet, 2002. Menzhausen-Handt, Ingelore. ‘Das erste Inventar der Dresdener Porzellansammlung’. Staatliche Kunstsammlungen Dresden, Jahrbuch (1959): 104–9. Meuwese, Mark. Brothers in Arms, Partners in Trade: Dutch-Indigenous Alliances in the Atlantic. Leiden: Brill, 2012. Meuwese, Mark. ‘For the Peace and Wellbeing of the Country: Intercultural Mediators and Dutch-Indian Relations in New Netherland and Dutch Brazil, 1600–1664’. PhD diss., Notre Dame University, 2003. Meuwese, Mark. ‘From Dutch Allies to Portuguese Vassals: Indigenous Peoples in the Aftermath of Dutch Brazil’. In The Legacy of Dutch Brazil, edited by Michiel van Groesen, 59–76. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014. Meuwese, Mark. ‘The States General and the Stadtholder: Dutch Diplomatic Practices in the Atlantic World before the West India Company’. Journal of Early American History 3, no.1 (2013): 43–58.

Bibliography 319 Michel, Walter. ‘Das Herz des Fürsten Johann Ludwig von Nassau-Hadamar gefunden’. Nassauische Annalen 76 (1965): 226–7. Michel, Wolfgang. ‘Hans Juriaen Hancke, Zacharias Wagener und Mukai Genshō: Aspekte einer “lehrreichen” Begegnung im 17. Jahrhundert’. Bulletin of the Graduate School of Social and Cultural Studies, Kyushu University 1 (1995): 109–11. Michel, Wolfgang. ‘Zacharias Wagner und Japan (I) – Ein Auszug aus dem Journal des “Donnermanns”’. Studien zur deutschen und französischen Literatur 37, (1987): 53–102. Mijtens, Esther, and David Onnekink, eds. Redefining William III: The Impact of the King-Stadholder in International Context. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007. Miller, Daniel, ed. Materiality. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2005. Miller, Daniel. Stuff. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2010. Mitrasing, Ingrid Saroda. ‘The Age of Aceh and the Evolution of Kingship 1599–1641’. PhD diss., Leiden University, 2011. Molengraaff-Gerlings, C. Johann Moritz van Nassau en de korte bloeitijd van Hollandsch-Brazilie 1636–1644. The Hague: Nijhoff, 1934. Mörke, Olaf. ‘De hofcultuur van het huis Oranje-Nassau in de zeventiende eeuw’. In Cultuur en maatschappij in Nederland 1500–1850. Een historisch-antropologisch perspectief, edited by Peter Burke and Willem Frijhoff, 39–77. Amsterdam: Open universiteit, 1992. Mörke, Olaf. ‘Het hof van Oranje als centrum van het politieke en maatschappelijke leven tijdens de Republiek’. in Vorstelijk Vertoon. Aan het hof van Frederik Hendrik en Amalia, edited by Marika Keblusek and Jori Zijlmans, 58–71. The Hague: Haags Historisch Museum, 1997. Mörke, Olaf. ‘“Oranje in ’t Hart Oder”: Wie man diskursiv den Diskurs austreibt. Überlegungen zur propagandistischen Instrumentalisierung von Öffentlichkeit in der niederländischen Republik im Krisenjahr 1672’. In Krisenbewußtsein und Krisenbewältigung in der Frühen Neuzeit – Crisis in Early Modern Europe: Festschrift für Hans-Christoph Rublack, edited by Monika Hagenmaier and Sabine Holtz, 277–90. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1992. Mörke, Olaf. ‘Sovereignty and Authority: The Role of the Court in the Netherlands in the First Half of the Seventeenth Century’. In Princes, Patronage, and the Nobility: The Court at the Beginning of the Modern Age, edited by Ronald Asch and Adolf M. Birke, 455–77. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991. Mörke, Olaf. ‘Stadtholder’ oder ‘Staetholder’? Die Funktion des Hauses Oranien und seines Hofes in der politischen Kultur der Republik der Vereinigten Niederlande im 17. Jahrhundert. Münster: Lit, 1997. Mörke, Olaf. ‘The Symbolism of Rulership’. in Princes and Princely Culture, 1450–1650. Vol. 1, edited by Martin Gosman, Alasdair Macdonald and Arjo Vanderjagt, 31–49. Leiden: Brill, 2003. Mörke, Olaf. Wilhelm von Oranien (1533–1584): Fürst und ‘Vater’ der Republik. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2007. Morse, S. ‘William the Silent: The First Tolerant Prince’. Historian 77 (2003): 13–21. Moulin, Daniel de. ‘Medizin und Naturwissenschaft in Brasilien zur Zeit der Verwaltung des Grafen Johan Moritz von Nassau-Siegen’. Medizinhistorisches Journal 11 (1976): 44–51. Muij-Fleurke, Hélène J. de and Bernhard Woelderink. ‘Die Hochzeit von Heinrich Casimir II und Henriette Amalia im Jahre 1683 in Dessau und ihr festlicher Empfang in Friesland in 1684’. In Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje (Exhibition Catalogue),

320 Bibliography edited by Ingo Pfeifer and Wolfgang Savelsberg, 113–19. Oranienbaum: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2003. Mulder-Radetzky, Rita L. P. ‘Lustschloss Oranjewoud. Schloss- Gärten- Hofhaltung’. In Nassau-Diez und die Niederlande. Dynastie und Oranierstadt Diez in der Neuzeit, edited by Simon Groenveld and Friedhelm Jürgensmeier, 271–98. Wiesbaden: Historische Kommission für Nassau, 2012. Mulder-Radetzky, Rita L. P. and B. H. de Vries. Geschiedenis van Oranjewoud. Alphen a.d. Rijn: Canaletto, 1989. Muldrew, Craig. The Economy of Obligation: The Culture of Credit and Social Relations in Early Modern England. Houndmills: Macmillan, 1998. Mulier, E. O. G. Haitsma. ‘Willem van Oranje in de historiografie van de zeventiende eeuw’. In Willem van Oranje in de historie, 1584–1984: vier eeuwen beeldvorming en geschiedschrijving, edited by E. O. G. Haitsma Mulier and A. E. M. Janssen, 32–62. Utrecht: HES, 1984. Munns, Jessica, Penny Richards and Jonathan Spangler, eds. Aspiration, Represen­tation and Memory: The Guise in Europe 1506–1688. Farnham: Ashgate, 2015. Naber, Johanna W. A. Carolina van Oranje. Vorstin van Nassau-Weilburg 1743–1787. Haarlem: Tjeenk Willink, 1910. Naber, Johanna W. A. Onze vorstinnen mit et Huis van Oranje-Nassau in het stadhouderlijke tijdperk, 2 volumes. Haarlem: Tjeenk Willink, 1911. Naber, Johanna W. A. Prinsessen van Oranje in Duitsland. Haarlem: Tjeenk Willink, 1920. Nachod, Oskar. Die Beziehungen der Niederländischen Ostindischen Kompagnie zu Japan im siebzehnten Jahrhundert. Leipzig: Friese, 1897. Available online at http://digital.staatsbibliothek-berlin.de/dms/werkansicht/?PPN=PPN610630407& PHYSID=PHYS_0505. Nes, Marijke de. Marijke Meu: Maria Louise van Hessen-Cassel. Hoorn: WestFriesland, 1951. Nes, Renny van Heuven van, and Ferry Staverman. Bloemen op het Loo, 2nd ed. Paleis Het Loo: Nationaal Museum, 2007. Nicholson, Eirwen E. C. ‘The Oak v. the Orange Tree: Emblematizing Dynastic Union and Conflict, 1600–1796’. In Anglo-Dutch Relations in the Field of the Emblem, edited by Bart Westerwee, 227–52. Leiden: Brill, 1997. Nicolas, Eveline Sint. ‘Vrijburg, getekend en gesneden’. Bulletin van het Rijksmuseum 56, no. 1/2 (2008): 202–13. Nierop, Henk van. ‘Oranje bowen: Willem van Oranje als zinnebeeld van de Natie’. In Willem van Oranje lezing 2001. Cultuur, samenleving en bestuur, edited by Henk van Nierop and Cynthia P. Schneider, 7–25. Delft: NIVO, 2001. Nijland, M. C. ‘Een prinses van Oranje, vorstin van Anhalt’. Eigen Haard 49 (1896): 772–8. (Reprinted in Historia (1936): 244–6.) Nimwegen, Olaf van. ‘Maurits van Nassau and siege warfare (1590–1597)’. In Exercise of Arms: Warfare in the Netherlands, 1568–1648, edited by Marco van der Hoeven, 113–31. Leiden: Brill, 1997. Nimwegen, Olaf van. ‘Maurits, Willem Lodewijk en de tactische militaire revolutie bij de Staatse infanterie’. In Boeken met krijgshistorie: op verkenning in het oudste boekbezit van Defensie, edited by Louis Ph. Sloos, 43–61. Breda: Nederlandse Defensie Academie, 2010. Nolde, D. and C. Opitz, eds. Grenzüberschreitende Familienbeziehungen. Akteure und Medien des Kulturtransfers in der Frühen Neuzeit. Cologne: Böhlau Verlag, 2008.

Bibliography 321 Nordholt, J. W., J. G. Van Gelder and A. W. Vliegenthart, eds. William and Mary and Their House. Pierpont Morgan Library exhibition catalogue. New York: Oxford University Press, 1979. Nye, Joseph S. Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. New York: Public Affairs, 2004. Obee, Hannah. ‘Baroque Exuberance: Delft Flower Vases at Chatsworth’. Apollo 167 (2008): 90–7. Obee, Hannah. ‘The Golden Age Returns’. Apollo 167 (2008): 60–7. Ottenheym, Koen. ‘The Catholic Nassaus in Brussels and Their Buildings’. In Albert and Isabella, 1598–1621: Essays, edited by Werner Thomas and Luc Duerloo, 185–90. Turnhout: Brepols, 1998. Ottenheym, Koen. ‘“Van bouw-lust soo beseten”: Frederik Hendrik en de bouwkunst’. In Vorstelijk vertoon. Aan het hof van Frederik Hendrik en Amalia, edited by Marika Keblusek and Jori Zijlmans, 105–25. Zwolle: Waanders, 1997. Ottenheym, Konrad A. ‘Fürsten, Architekten, und Lehrbücher: Wege der holländischen Baukunst nach Brandenburg im 17. Jahrhundert’. In Onder den Oranje Boom: Niederländische Kunst und Kultur im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert an deutschen Fürstenhöfen (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Marcus Schacht, Jörg Meiner and Horst Lademacher, 291–3. Krefeld: Kaiser-Wilhelm-Museum; Schloß Oranienburg; Apeldoorn: Paleis Het Loo, 1999–2000. Panhuys,C. ‘Recherche de tableaux de la Bresil offerts par le Prince Jean Maurits de Nassau au roi Louis XIV’, Congrès International des Américanistes. Compterendu de la XXIe session. Deuxième partie tenue à Göteborg en 1924 (Göteborg, 1925), 435–41. Pavord, Anna. The Tulip. London: Bloomsbury, 1999. Peter-Raupp, Hanna. Die Ikonographie des Oranjezaal. Hildesheim: Olms, 1980. Pfeifer, Ingo and Savelsberg, Wolfgang, eds. Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje (Exhibition Catalogue). Munich: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2003. Pierson, Ruth Roach and Chaudhuri Nupur, eds. Nation, Empire, Colony: Historicizing Gender and Race. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1998. Pieters, Florence F. J. M. ‘Notes on the Menagerie and Zoological Cabinet of Stadholder William V of Holland, Directed by Aernout Vosmaer’. Journal of the Society for the Bibliography of Natural History 9, no. 4 (1980): 539–63. Ploeg, Peter van der and Carola Vermeeren, eds. Vorstelijk verzameld. De kunstcollectie van Frederik Hendrik en Amalia. Zwolle: Waanders, 1997. Ploeg, Peter van der, Carola Vermeeren and P. B. J. Broos, eds. Princely Patrons: The Collection of Frederick Henry of Orange and Amalia of Solms in The Hague. Zwolle: Waanders, 1997. Pol, Lotte van de. ‘From Doorstep to Table: Negotiating Space in Ceremonies at the Dutch Court of the Second Half of the 18th Century’. In Raüme des Selbt: Selbstzeugnisforschung transkulturell, edited by Andreas Bähr, Peter Burschel and Gabriele Jancke 77–94. Cologne: Böhlau Verlag, 2007. Pons, Rouven. Für Kunst und Glauben. Die Ausmalung der Martinskirche in Idstein unter Graf Johannes von Nassau-Idstein (1603–1677). Wiesbaden: Historische Kommission für Nassau, 2012. Pons, Rouven. ‘Territoriale Machtpolitik und dynastische Verwerfung. Streit um die Vormundschaft ab 1711’. In Nassau-Diez und die Niederlande, edited by Simon Groenveld and Friedhelm Jürgensmeier, 152–70. Wiesbaden: Historische Komm. für Nassau 2012.

322 Bibliography Pont, M. W. Maclaine. ‘Henriëtte Catharina van Nassau’. In Je maintiendrai. Een boek over Oranje en Nassau, edited by F. J. L. Krämer, E. W. Moes and P. Wagner, volume 2. Leiden: Sijthoff, 1906. Postlewate, Laurie and Wim Husken, eds. Acts and Texts: Performance and Ritual in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2007. Protschky, Susie. ‘Between Corporate and Familial Responsibility: Johan Maurits van Nassau-Siegen and Masculine Governance in Europe and the Dutch Colonial World’. In Governing Masculinities in the Early Modern Period: Regulating Selves and Others, edited by Susan Broomhall and Jacqueline Van Gent, 153–72. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2011. Protschky, Susie. ‘Dutch Still Lifes and Colonial Visual Culture in the Netherlands Indies 1800–1949’. Art History 34, no. 3 (2011): 511–35. Protschky, Susie. ‘Race, Class and Gender: Debates over the Character of Social Hierarchies in the Netherlands Indies, circa 1600–1942’. Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde 167, no. 4 (2011): 543–56. Puype, Jan Piet. ‘Het Staatse leger en prins Maurits, wegbereider van de moderne legers’. Armamentaria 35 (2000): 33–44. Puype, Jan Piet. ‘Las reformas del ejército Holandés del príncipe Mauricio de Nassau, 1590–1600: armas y tácticas de batalla’. In La imagen de la guerra en el arte de los antiguos Países Bajos, edited by Bernardo Garcia, 171–212. Madrid: Editorial Complutense, 2006. Raaij, Stefan van and Paul Spies. The Royal Progress of William and Mary, translated by A. P. K. Graafland. Amsterdam: D’Arts, 1988. Rasch, Rudolf. ‘Een raadsman voor de kunsten: Constantijn Huygens als adviseur van Frederik Hendrik’. In Kunstenaars en opdrachtgevers, edited by Harald Hendrix and Jeroen Stumpel, 89–117. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1996. Reckwitz, Andreas. ‘Affective Spaces: A Praxeological Outlook’. Rethinking History: The Journal of Theory and Practice 16, no. 2 (2012): 241–58. Reidemeister, Leopold. ‘Die Porzellankabinette der Brandenburgisch-Preussischen Schlösser’. Jahrbuch der Preussischen Kunstsammlungen 54 (1933): 262–72. Remmelink, W. The Chinese War and the Collapse of the Javanese State, 1725–1743. Leiden: KITLV Press 1994. Riemann-Wöhlbrandt, Gabriele. ‘Der Porzellanbesitz der Landgräfin Maria Amalia. Zur Rolle der Damen beim Entstehen der landgräflichen Porzellansammlung’. In Porzellan aus China und Japan: die Porzellangalerie der Landgrafen von Hessen-Kassel, edited by Ekkehard Schmiedberger, 51–63. Berlin, D. Reimer, 1990. Rijkens, Paul. ‘Images of William of Orange and Philip II on Horseback: Same Message – Different Meaning’. De zeventiende eeuw: cultuur in de Nederlanden in interdisciplinair perspectief: tijdschrift van de Werkgroep Zeventiende Eeuw 25 (2009): 53–72. Riley, P. W. J. King William and the Scottish Politicians. Edinburgh: John Donald, 1979. Rollo-Koster, Joëlle, ed. Medieval and Early Modern Ritual: Formalized Behavior in Europe, China and Japan. Leiden: Brill, 2002. Ronnes, Hanneke. ‘The architecture of William of Orange and the culture of friendship’. Archaeological Dialogues, 11, (2004): 57–72. Rookmaaker, L. C. The Zoological Exploration of Southern Africa, 1650–1790. Rotterdam: Balkema, 1989.

Bibliography 323 Safier, Neil. ‘Beyond Brazilian Nature: The Editorial Itineraries of Marcgraf and Piso’s Historia Naturalis Brasilae’. In The Legacy of Dutch Brazil, edited by Michiel van Groesen, 168–88. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014. Saunders, Gill. ‘Foreword’. In So Many Sweet Flowers: A Seventeenth-Century Florilegium: Paintings by Johann Walther 1654, edited by Jenny de Gex. London: Pavilion Books, 1997. Savelsberg, Wolfgang. ‘Henriette Catharina und Albertine Agnes. Eine Schwestern­ koalition zur Bewahrung oranisher Interessen’. In Nassau-Diez und die Niederlande. Dynastie und Oranierstadt Diez in der Neuzeit, edited by Simon Groenveld and Friedhelm Jürgensmeier, 81–98. Wiesbaden: Historische Kommission für Nassau, 2012. Savelsberg, Wolfgang. ‘Niederländische Bildniskunst im Auftrag der Henriette Catharina. Abraham Snaphaen, ein Leidener Maler in Anhaltischen Diensten’. In Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Ingo Pfeifer and Wolfgang Savelsberg, 164–73. Munich: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2003. Savelsberg, Wolfgang, ed. Schloss Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje – Kulturstiftung Dessau Wörlitz: Schloss Oranienbaum. Heidelberg: Vernissage-Verl., 2003. Savelsberg, Wolfgang. ‘Vom Oranienbaumer Porzellankabintett zum “Lederta­ petensaal”’. Oranienbaum Journal 1 (2007): 22–31. Schacht, Markus, Jörg Meiner and Horst Lademacher, eds. Onder den Oranje boom. Dynastie in der Republik: das Haus Oranien-Nassau als Vermittler niederländischer Kultur in deutschen Territorien im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert (Exhibition Catalogue). Krefeld: Kaiser-Wilhelm-Museum; Schloß Oranienburg; Apeldoorn: Paleis Het Loo, 1999–2000. Schama, Simon. Patriots and Liberators: Revolution in the Netherlands, 1780–1813. New York: Knopf, 1977. 2nd edition, Harper Perennial, 2005. Schenk, M. G. Willem de Zwijger. Baarn: Kern, 1984. Schipperus, P. J. Buren en Oranje. Geschiedkundig onderzoek van het Graafschap Buren, de stad en het kasteel en van het in 1612 door prinses Maria van Oranje Nassau, gravin- douairiere van Hohenlo gestichte weeshuis. Buren: het Graafschap Buren, 1962. Schjellerup, Inge. ‘Der Reiz exotischer Menschen im siebzehnten Jahrhundert – Albert Eckhouts Gemälde’. In Aufbruch in Neue Welten. Johann Moritz von NassauSiegen (1604–1679) der Brasilianer (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Gerhard Brunn, 91–100. Siegen: Siegerlandmuseum, 2004. Schmidt, Benjamin. ‘Accumulating the World: Collecting and Commodifying “Globalism” in Early Modern Europe’. In Centres and Cycles of Accumulation in and around the Netherlands during the Early Modern Period, edited by Lissa Roberts, 129–55. Berlin: Lit, 2011. Schmidt, Benjamin. ‘Collecting Global Icons: The Case of the Exotic Parasol’. In Collecting across Cultures: Material Exchanges in the Early Modern Atlantic World, edited by Daniela Bleichmar and Peter C. Mancall, 31–57. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2011. Schmidt Benjamin. ‘The “Dutch” “Atlantic” and the Dubious Case of Frans Post’. In Dutch Atlantic Connections, 1680–1800: Linking Empires, Bridging Borders, edited by Gert Oostindie and Jessica Roitman, 249–72. Leiden: Brill, 2014. Schmidt, Benjamin. ‘The Dutch Atlantic: From Provincialism to Globalism’. In Atlantic History: A Critical Appraisal, edited by Jack P. Greene and Philip D. Morgan, 163–190. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.

324 Bibliography Schmidt, Benjamin. ‘Geography Unbound: Boundaries and the Exotic World in the Early Enlightenment’. In Boundaries and their Meanings in the History of the Netherlands, edited by Benjamin Kaplan, Marybeth Carlson and Laura Cruz. Leiden: Brill, 2009. Schmidt, Benjamin. Innocence Abroad: The Dutch Imagination and the New World, 1570–1670. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Schmidt, Benjamin. Inventing Exoticism: Geography, Globalism, and Europe’s Early Modern World. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2014. Schmidt, Benjamin. ‘The Limits of Language and the Challenges of Exotica: Pictures, Words, and Global Knowledge in Early Modern Europe’. In Translating Knowledge in the Early Modern Low Countries, edited by Harold J. Cook and Sven Dupré. Berlin: Lit, 2013. Schmidt, Benjamin. ‘Mapping an Empire: Cartographic and Colonial Rivalry in Seventeenth-Century Dutch and English North America’. William and Mary Quarterly 54, no. 3 (1997): 549–78. Schmidt, Benjamin. ‘The Spaces of Memory and Their Transmediations: On the Lives of Exotic Images and Their Material Evocations’. In Memory before Modernity: Practices of Memory in Early Modern Europe, edited by Erika Kuijpers, Judith Pollmann, Johannes Müller and Jasper van der Steen, 223–50. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Schmidt, Benjamin, and Pamela Smith, eds. Making Knowledge in Early Modern Europe: Practices, Objects, and Texts, 1400–1800. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008. Schmidt, Benjamin, A. Stott and J. Goodfriend, eds. Going Dutch: The Dutch Presence in America, 1609–2009. Boston: Brill, 2008. Schmiedberger, Ekkehard, ed. Porzellan aus China und Japan: die Porzellangalerie der Landgrafen von Hessen-Kassel. Berlin, D. Reimer, 1990. Schrikker, A. Dutch and British Colonial Intervention in Sri Lanka, 1780–1815: Expansion and Reform. Boston: Brill, 2007. Schui, Florian. ‘Prussia’s “Trans-Oceanic Moment”: The Creation of the Prussian Asiatic Trade Company in 1750’. Historical Journal 49, no. 1 (2006): 143–60. Schulte, P. G. ‘Maria von Simmern’. In Onder den Oranje Boom: Niederländische Kunst und Kultur im 17. Und 18. Jahrhundert an deutschen Fürstenhöfen (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Markus Schacht, Jörg Meiner and Horst Lademacher, 369–76. Krefeld: Kaiser-Wilhelm-Museum; Schloß Oranienburg; Apeldoorn: Paleis Het Loo, 1999–2000. Schulten, Kees. ‘Prins Maurits (1567–1625), legerhervormer en vernieuwer van de krijgskunde, of trendvolger?’ Armamentaria 35 (2000): 7–22. Schurig, Gerd. ‘Ananas – eine königliche Frucht’. In Schön und Nützlich. Aus Brandenburgs Kloster-, Schloss- und Küchengärten (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Haus der Brandenburgisch-Preußischen Geschichte 162–5. Berlin: Henschel Verlag, 2004. Schutte, G. J. ‘Marijke Meu. Marie Louise van Hessen-Kassel 1688–1765’. In Vrouwen in het landsbestuur. Van Adela van Thamaland tot en met koningin Juliana, edited by C. A. Tamse, 130–46. The Hague: Staatsuitgeverij, 1982. Schutte, G. J. Oranje in de achttiende eeuw. Amsterdam: Buijten & Schipperheijn, 1999. Schutte, G. J. ‘Willem IV en Willem V’. In Nassau en Oranje in de Nederlandse geschiedenis, edited by H. P. H. Jansen and C. A. Tamse. Alphen aan den Rijn: A.W. Sijthoff, 1979.

Bibliography 325 Sebald, Eduard. ‘Ein Brunnen als Memoria? Der Friso-Brunnen in Diez’. In NassauDiez und die Niederlande. Dynastie und Oranierstadt Diez in der Neuzeit, edited by Simon Groenveld and Friedhelm Jürgensmeier, 187–91. Wiesbaden: Historische Kommission für Nassau, 2012. Sellers, Vanessa Bezemer. ‘Condet aurea saecula: de tuinen van Frederik Hendrik’. In Vorstelijk vertoon. Aan het hof van Frederik Hendrik en Amalia, edited by Marika Keblusek and Jori Zijlmans, 126–42. Zwolle: Waanders, 1997. Sellers, Vanessa Bezemer. Courtly Gardens in Holland 1600–1650: The House of Orange and the Hortus Batavus. Amsterdam: Architectura & Natura Press, 2001. Shamy, Tania Solweig. ‘Frederick the Great’s Porcelain Diversion: The Chinese Tea House at Sanssouci’. PhD diss. McGill University, Montreal, 2009. Sherlock, Peter. ‘Militant Masculinity and the Monuments of Westminster Abbey’. In Governing Masculinities in the Early Modern Period: Regulating Selves and Others, edited by Susan Broomhall and Jacqueline Van Gent, 108–20. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2011. Shulsky, Linda R. ‘The Arrangement of the Porcelain and Delftware Collection of Queen Mary in Kensington Palace’. American Ceramic Circle Journal 8 (1990): 51–74. Shulsky, Linda R. ‘Kensington and de Voorst’. Journal of the History of Collections 2, no. 1 (1990): 47–62. Sicken, Bernhard. ‘Die oranische Heeresreform’. In Onder den Oranje boom. Dynastie in der Republik. Das Haus Oranien-Nassau als Vermittler niederländischer Kultur in deutschen Territorien im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert, ed. Horst Lademacher, 103–16. Munich: Hirmer Verlag, 1999. Silva, Filipa Ribeiro da. Dutch and Portuguese in Western Africa: Empires, Merchants and the Atlantic System, 1580–1674. Leiden: Brill, 2011. Silva, Leonardo Dantas. ‘Images of Nassovian Brazil’. In Albert Eckhout Returns to Brazil 1644–2002, edited by Barbara Berlowicz, 66–79. Copenhagen: National­ museet, 2002. Sliggers, B. G. and A. A. Wertheim, eds., Een vorstelijke diertuin: De menagerie van Willem V. Zuphtern: Walberg Pers, 1994. Silva, Maria Angélica da, and Melissa Mota Alcides. ‘Collecting and Framing the Wilderness: The Garden of Johann Maurits (1604–79) in North-East Brazil’. Garden History 30, no. 2 (2002): 153–5. Sloboda, Stacey. ‘Porcelain Bodies: Gender, Acquisitiveness, and Taste in EighteenthCentury England’. In Collecting Subjects: The Visual Pleasures and Meanings of Material Culture in Britain, edited by John Potvin and Alla Myzelev, 19–36. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2009. Sloboda, Stacey. ‘Displaying Materials: Porcelain and Natural History in the Duchess of Portland’s Museum’. Eighteenth-Century Studies 43, 4 (2010): 455–72. Slothouwer, Dirk Frederik. De paleizen van Frederik Hendrik. Leiden: Sijthoff, 1945. Smeenge, A. M. H. Henriëtte Catharina van Nassau 1637–1708. Amsterdam: Becht, 1932. Sommer, Claudia. ‘Niederländische Einflüsse auf die Landeskultivierung und Kunstentfaltung in Brandenburg von 1640 bis 1740’. In Onder den Oranje Boom: Niederländische Kunst und Kultur im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert an deutschen Fürstenhöfen (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Marcus Schacht, Jörg Meiner and Horst Lademacher, 205–316. Krefeld: Kaiser-Wilhelm-Museum; Schloß Oranienburg; Apeldoorn: Paleis Het Loo, 1999–2000.

326 Bibliography Sousa-Leão, Joaquim de. Frans Post, 1612–1680. Amsterdam: AL van Gendt, 1973. Spruit, Ruud. Kokarde. Patriotten en Oranjeklanten op weg naar 1813–1815. Houten: Unieboek BV, 2012. Stahl, Karl Josef. Hadamar Stadt und Schloss. Eine Heimatgeschichte. Hadamar: Magistrat der Stadt, 1974. Staring, A. ‘De Portretten van den Koning-Stadhouder’. Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 3, no. 1 (1950): 151–96. Stein, Robert, and Judith Pollmann, eds. Networks, Regions and Nations Shaping Identities in the Low Countries, 1300–1650. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Stern, J. Orangism in the Dutch Republic in Word and Image, 1650–75. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2010. Sternberg, Giora. Status Interaction during the Reign of Louis XIV. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Sterringa, Annemarth. ‘Familierelaties van de Friese Nassaus’. It Beaken: Tydskrift fan de Fryske Akademy 60, no. 3–4 (1998): 305–25. Storto, Fred. Oranienstein. Barockschloß an der Lahn. Koblenz: Görres-Verlag, 1934. Strengholt, Leendert. Constanter. Het leven van Constantijn Huygens. Amsterdam: Querido, 1987. Ströber, Eva. ‘Dehua Porcelain in the Collection of Augustus the Strong in Dresden’. In Blanc de Chine: Porcelain from Dehua, edited by Rose Kerr and John Ayers. Chicago: Art Media Resources, 2002. Ströber, Eva. Ostasiatika: Catalogue of the Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum, Braunschweig. Brunswick: Herzog Anton Ulrich-Museum, 2002. Suppus, Gerhard. ‘Die Geschichte des Schlossparks Oranienburg- Schloss und Lustgarten wetteiferten im 17. Und 18. Jahrhundert mit Potsdam und Charlottenburg’. In Bodo Becker, Christian Becker and Manuela Vehma, eds., Bothzowia – Oranienburg. Volume 2. Stadt und Kultur. Gartenkunst, Schlösser, Architekur und Wissenschaft (2009): 13–22. Sutton, Elizabeth. ‘Mapping Dutch Nationalism across the Atlantic’. ARTL@S Bulletin 2, no. 1 (2013): 7–13. Sutton, Elizabeth. Early Modern Dutch Prints of Africa. Farnham: Ashgate, 2012. Swart, Erik. ‘Beproefde vriendschap: Willem van Oranje, Günther van Schwarzburg, Georg van Holle en de grenzen van de adellijke loyaliteit’. In Uit diverse bronnen gelicht: opstellen aangeboden aan Hans Smit ter gelegenheid van zijn vijfenzestigste verjaardag, edited by E. C. Dijkhof and M. J. Van Gent, 331–42. The Hague: Instituut voor nederlandse Geschiedenis, 2007. Swart, Erik. ‘De mythe van Maurits en de moderniteit?: militair professionalisme en adelscultuur in de Noordelijke en Zuidelijke Nederlanden, circa 1590–1625’. In Het verdeelde huis: de Nederlandse adel tussen opstand en reconciliatie, edited by Luc Duerloo and Liesbeth De Frenne, 101–18. Maastricht: Shaker Publishing, 2011. Swart, K. W. Willem van Oranje en de Nederlandse Opstand 1572–1584. The Hague: SDU Uitgeverij Koninginnegracht, 1994. Swartz, David. The Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997. Tex, Jan den. Oldenbarnevelt, 2 volumes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973. Thoen, Irma. Strategic Affection? Gift Exchange in Seventeenth-Century Holland. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2007.

Bibliography 327 Thomsen, Thomas. Albert Eckhout. Ein niederländischer Maler und sein Gönner Moritz der Brasilianer. Ein Kulturbild aus dem 17. Jahrhundert. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1938. Tiethoff-Spliethoff, Marieke. ‘Bilder von Glück und Unglück. Die Porträtmalerei am Hofe des Statthalters in den Haag 1625–1655’. In Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Ingo Pfeifer and Wolfgang Savelsberg, 132–41. Munich: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2003. Tiethoff-Spliethoff, Marieke. ‘Een afschiedscadeau van koninklijke gasten: een bijdrage tot de portreticonografie van Wilhelmina van Pruisen en haar dochter Louise’. Vereniging Oranje-Nassau Museum (1976): 22–35. Tiethoff-Spliethoff, Marieke. ‘Representatie en Rollenspel. De Portretkunst aan het Hof van Frederik Hendrik en Amalia’. In Vorstelijk vertoon: aan het hof van Frederik Hendrik en Amalia, edited by Marika Keblusek and Jori Zijlmans, 161–200. Zwolle: Waanders, 1997. Tiethoff-Spliethoff, Marieke. ‘Stadhouderskinderen van 1519 tot 1650’. In Oranje in de wieg. Over geboorte en doop van vorstenkinderen (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Eelco Elzenga, 5–15. Apeldoorn: Paleis Het Loo Nationaal Museum, 2004. Trauzettel, Ludwig. ‘Der Schlossgarten Oranienbaum und seine Entwicklung’. In Oranienbaum – Huis van Oranje (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Ingo Pfeifer and Wolfgang Savelsberg, 95–9. Oranienbaum: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2003. Treanor, Virginia Clare. ‘Amalia van Solms and the Formation of the Stadhouder’s Art Collection, 1625–1675’. PhD diss., University of Maryland, 2012. Treanor, Virginia Clare. ‘“Une abondance extra ordinaire”: The Porcelain Collection of Amalia von Solms’. Early Modern Women 9, no. 1 (2014): 141–54. Tucker, Rebecca. ‘The Art of Living Nobly: The Patronage of Prince Frederik Hendrik (1584–1647) at the Palace of Honselaarsdijk during the Dutch Republic’. PhD diss., New York University, 2002. Tucker, Rebecca. ‘Inside the Dutch Garden: Prince Frederik Hendrik and Honselaarsdijk’. Studies in the History of Gardens and Designed Landscapes 26, no. 3 (2006): 209–36. Tucker, Rebecca. ‘The Patronage of Rembrandt’s Passion Series: Art, Politics, and Princely Display at the Court of Orange in the Seventeenth Century’. The Seventeenth Century 25 (2010): 75–116. Tucker, Rebecca. ‘Urban Planning and Politics in the City Center: Frederik Hendrik and The Hague Plein’. Journal of Historians of Netherlandish Art 5, no. 2 (2013): DOI:10.5092/jhna.2013.5.2.7. Unger, W. S., ed. De oudste reizen van de Zeeuwen naar Oost-Indië 1598–1604. The Hague: M. Nijhoff, 1948. Vanhaelen, Angela. ‘Recomposing the Body Politic in Seventeenth-Century Delft’. Oxford Art Journal 31 (2008): 361–81. Veen, Ernst van. ‘VOC Strategies in the Far East (1605–1640)’. Bulletin of PortugueseJapanese Studies 3 (2001): 85–105. Veldt, James van der. ‘An Autograph Letter of John Maurice of Nassau, Governor of the Dutch Colony of Brazil (1636–1644)’. The Americas 3, no. 3 (1947): 311–18. Veltman, Ilja M. ‘Maurice as the Nimrod of His Age: Political Propaganda Prints by Jan Saenredam’. Bulletin van het Rijksmuseum 58 (2010): 128–37. Verhaegen, Sarah. ‘Early Modern Noblemen and the Use of Paper Communication Media: The Media-Politics of the “Lesser” Nassau (c. 1570−1620)’. Dutch Crossing 36, no. 1 (2012): 35–49.

328 Bibliography Verhave, Johanneke and Anita Jansen. ‘De portretten van prins Maurits; het handelsmerk van het atelier’. In Anita Jansen, Rudi Ekkart and Johanneke Verhave, De Portretfabriek van Michiel van Mierevelt (1566–1641), 109–26. Delft: Museum het Prinsenhof, 2011. Vetter, Klaus. ‘Oranien, Nassau und die Hohenzollern im 17./18.Jahrhundert’. In Oranien-Nassau, die Niederlande und das Reich. Beiträge zur Geschichte einer Dynastie, edited by Horst Lademacher, 97–124. Münster: Lit, 1995. Viallé, Cynthia. ‘Camel Cups, Parrot Cups and other Chinese Kraak Porcelain Items in Dutch Trade Records, 1598–1623’. In Chinese and Japanese Porcelain for the Dutch Golden Age, edited by Jan van Campen and Titus Eliëns, 37–51. Zwolle: Waanders, 2014. Vieira, Daniel de Souza Leão. ‘Topografia imaginárias: a paisagem politica do Brasil Holandés em Frans Post, 1637–1669’. PhD diss., Leiden University, 2010. Vince, Natalya, Marie Rodet and Odile Goerg. ‘Introduction: Shifting Gendered and Colonial Spaces in Africa’. Stichproben. Wiener Zeitschrift für kritische Afrikastudien 12 (2007): 1–11. Vlaardingerbroek, Pieter. ‘De stadhouder, zijn secretaris en de architectuur: Jacob van Campen als ontwerper van het Huygenshuis en de hofarchitectuur onder Frederik Hendrik’. In Wooncultuur in de in Nederlanden 1500–1800, edited by J. de Jong, Bart Ramakers, Herman Roodenburg, Frits Scholten and Mariët Westermann, 61–82. Zwolle: Waanders Uitgevers, 2001. Völkel, Michaela. Die Porzellansammlung des Landes Berlin im Belvedere Charlottenburg. Munich: Dt. Kunstverl, 2010. Volker, T. Porcelain and the Dutch East India Company. Leiden: Brill, 1971. Volland, Gerlinde. ‘Louise Henriëtte und Henriëtte Catharina von Oranien als Gartenschöpferinnen’. In Schön und Nützlich. Aus Brandenburgs Kloster-, Schlossund Küchengärten (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Haus der BrandenburgischPreußischen Geschichte, 7–12. Berlin: Henschel Verlag, 2004. Wartenberg, G. ‘Eine Ehe im Dienste kursächsische Aussenpolitik. Zur unglückliche Ehe der Anna von Sachsen mit Wilhelm von Oranien’. In Sachsen und die Wettiner. Chancen und Realitäten, edited by Reiner Groß, 79–92. Dresden: Kulturakademie des Bezirkes Dresden 1990. Wassing-Visser, Rita. Royal Gifts from Indonesia: Historical Bonds with the House of Orange-Nassau 1600–1938. Zwolle: Waanders, 1995. Wedgewood, C. V. William the Silent: William of Nassau, Prince of Orange, 1533–1584. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1944. Wehser, Astrid. Anna Wilhelmine von Anhalt und ihr Schloss in Mosigkau. Kiel: Ludwig, 2002. Werd, G. De, ed., Soweit der Erdkreis reicht: Johann Moritz van Nassau-Siegen 1604–1679. Kleve: Städtisches Museum Haus Koekkoek Kleve, 1979. Weststeijn, Arthur. ‘Dutch Brazil and the Making of the Free Trade Ideology’. In The Legacy of Dutch Brazil, edited by Michiel van Groesen, 187–206. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014. White, Christopher. The Dutch Pictures in the Collection of Her Majesty the Queen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982. Whitehead, P. J. P. ‘Georg Markgraf and Brazilian Zoology’. In Johann Moritz van Nassau-Siegen 1604–1679: A Humanist Prince in Europe and Brazil. Essays on the Occasion of the Tercentenary of His Death, edited by E. van den Boogaart, H. R. Hoetink and P. J. P. Whitehead, 424–71. The Hague: The Johan Maurits van Nassau Stichting, 1979.

Bibliography 329 Whitehead, P. J. P. and M. Boeseman. A Portrait of Dutch 17th Century Brazil: Animals, Plants and People by the Artists of Johann Moritz of Nassau. Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1989. Wilschut, Arie. Goejanverwellesluis. De strijd tussen patriotten en prinsgezinden, 1780–1787. Hilversum: Verloren, 2000. Wilson, Joan. ‘A Phenomenon of Taste: The China Ware of Queen Mary II’. Apollo 96 (1972): 116–23. Wimmer, Clemens Alexander. ‘Orangerien am brandenburgisch-preußischen Hof’. In Schön und Nützlich. Aus Brandenburgs Kloster-, Schloss- und Küchengärten (Exhibition Catalogue), edited by Haus der Brandenburgisch-Preußischen Geschichte, 108–20. Berlin: Henschel Verlag, 2004. Windler, Christian. ‘Tributes and Presents in Franco-Tunisian Diplomacy’. Journal of Early Modern History 4, no. 2 (2000): 168–99. Winsemius, Dieuwke. Marijke Meu. Baambrugge: Grote Letter Bibliotheek, 1986. Wittwer, Samuel. ‘Fragile Splendour and Political Representation: Baroque Porcelain Rooms in Prussian and Saxony as Meaningful Treasures’. In Studies of Hizen Porcelain: On Research Issues in England and Germany, 52–9. Fukuoka: Kakiemon-style Ceramic Art Research Center, Kyushu Sangyo University, 2009. Wittwer, Samuel. ‘Liaisons Fragiles: Exchange of Gifts between Saxony and Prussia in the Early Eighteenth Century’. In Fragile Diplomacy: Meissen Porcelain for the European Courts ca 1710–63, edited by Maureen Cassidy-Geiger, 87–110. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007. Woodward, Wendy, Patricia Hayes and Gary Minkley, eds. Deep hiStories: Gender and Colonialism in Southern Africa. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2002. Worden, Nigel, ed. Contingent Lives: Social Identity and Material Culture in the VOC World. Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press, 2007. Worsley, Lucy and David Souden. Hampton Court Palace: The Official Illustrated History. London: Merrell, 2005. Zandvliet, Kees. ‘De kaartenkamer van Maurits’. In Maurits, Prins van Oranje, edited by Kees Zandvliet with contributions from Arthur Eyffinger, 76–91. Amsterdam: Rijksmuseum, 2000. Zandvliet, Kees. The Dutch East India Company in the 17th century. Life and Work of Zacharias Wagenaer (1614–1668). Nagasaki: Holland Village, 1987. Zandvliet, Kees. The Dutch Encounter with Asia 1600–1950. Zwolle: Waanders, 2002. Zandvliet, Kees. Mapping for Money: Maps, Plans, and Topographic Paintings and their Role in Dutch Overseas Expansion during the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries. Amsterdam: Batavian Lion International, 1998. Zandvliet, Kees. ed., Maurits prins van Oranje. Amsterdam: Rijksmuseum, 2000. Zoomers, Henk. ‘Introduction’. In Embassies of the King of Siam Sent to His Excellency Prince Maurits, Arrived in The Hague on 10 September 1608: An Early 17th Century Newsletter, Reporting both the Visit of the First Siamese Diplomatic Mission to Europe and the First Documented Demonstration of a Telescope Worldwide, edited by Huib Zuidervaart. Wassenaar: Louwman Collection of Historic Telescopes, 2008.

This Page is Intentionally Left Blank

Index

African colonisation 148 agency, of Orange-Nassau women 3 agents: artists as 6; cultural 2 Alauddin Ri’ayat Syah Sayyid al-Mukammal 133 Alcides, Melissa Mota 151 alliances see also relationships: and artworks 31–3, 174; dynastic 40–8, 134; and gift exchange 40, 43–4, 48, 241; and marriages 40, 43–7, 119 Alphen, Jobghen van 49 Althorp 195 Anhalt-Dessau, Adelheid Marie von 198 Anhalt-Dessau, Anna Wilhelmine von 199–200, 202, 203, 211, 212, 222n120, 298 Anhalt-Dessau, Henriette Amalie von 94, 98, 108, 171, 181, 186, 196–8, 211; Anhalt-Dessau, Henriette Amalie von 225 Anhalt-Dessau, Johann Georg II von 47, 93, 98, 109, 173 Anhalt-Dessau, Leopold I von 180–1, 199, 202, 220n120 Anhalt-Dessau, Leopold III von 173, 203, 212 Anhalt-Dessau, Marie Eleanore van 106, 220n120 Anthonisz, Adriaen 84 architectural design 84–165, 185–6; see also buildings: Dutch 90; and gardens 103; and power/identity 9 architectural style 196 Arnhem, Janne Margriete van 115 Arnhem, Jan van 115–116 Arroyo, Félix Labrador 8

artists: as diplomatic agents 6; importance of 185, 186, 212, 297; patronage of 233, 234, 248 art and architectural patronage 2, 7–8, 14n33, 28, 29, 32, 35, 36, 38, 41, 42–3, 45, 49, 50­–1, 55, 58, 69, 75, 84, 87–8, 89–91, 93, 110, 112, 115, 146, 150, 170, 171–4, 180–1, 183–4, 192, 193, 195, 199, 203, 221n127, 230–4, 240, 243, 257–9, 264, 268, 271, 275, 278, 283n68, 296–7 artworks: and alliances 31–3, 174; collection of 90; as gifts 6, 174; and power/status 170, 172–3, 212 Auwers, Michael 6, 170 Avelen, Jan vande 118 Baarsen, Reinier 185 Backer, Deliana de 49 Baen, Jan de 53, 172: Willem III when Prince of Orange (1650–1702) (portrait) 55 Baerle, Caspar van 137, 146, 148, 150, 151, 152, 156, 230, 231–2, 233, 234 Barendse, R. J. 139 Barendsz, Dirck, Portrait of Willem I Prince of Orange, Called Willem the Silent (painting) 22 Bartsch (gardener) 203, 204 Batavia 139, 141 Battle of Heiligerlee 23 Battle of Mookerheyde 23 Battle of Nieuwpoort 26, 242 Battle of Steenbergen 84

332 Index Behr, Johann Philipp, Portrait of Marie Louise von Hessen-Kassel, Called Maaike-Meu. Widow of the Stadtholder of Friesland Johann Willem Friso, Prince of Orange-Nassau (painting) 62 Bencard, Morgens 241 Bentinck, Hans Willem 108, 110–11, 116–17, 128n112 Beranek, Saskia 91 Berkeley, Elizabeth 257 Berliner Schloss 95, 105, 108–9, 172, 204 Berlin palace see Berliner Schloss Beudeker, Christoffel 114 Beusekom, Frans van, Friedrich Wilhelm of Brandenburg and Louise Henriëtte von Oranien (etching) 45 Bezemer Sellers, Vanessa 103–4 Binnenhof 186, 274 Bischoff, Cordula 254 Blaeu, Johannes Willemszoon: View of Mauritsstad, c. 1637 (etching) 144; View of Boavista in Mauritsstad, ca. 1636–1644, c. 157 Blair Castle 206, 208–9, 209, 210 Blathwayt, William 196, 245, 247, 257, 286n114 Boa Vista 154, 156, 157 Boettger, Johann Friedrich 263–4 Bolla, Peter de 5 Bonaparte, Napoléon 72–3, 198 Bonnemer, François 245 Boogaart, Ernst van den 232 Boreel, Willem 234 Bötzow 93, 95–6, 105 see also Oranienburg Boughton House 193, 194 Bourbon, Charlotte de 40, 83, 84 Bourbon, Eleanor de 223–4, 247–8 Bourbon, Henrietta Maria, Queen of England, Scotland, Ireland 43, 51 Bourbon, Henri IV of France 247 Bourbon, Louis de 40 Bourbon, Louis XIV of France 3, 117, 139, 228, 243–4, 245 Bourbon, House of 169 Bourdieu, Pierre 8, 170 Brandenburg 104–5 Brandenburg, House of 174

Brandenburg, Friedrich Wilhelm, Elector of 3, 44, 45, 47, 47, 52, 94, 104–5, 240, 241, 243, 257 Brandenburg, Wilhelm Heinrich von 181 Brauschweig-Wolftenbüttel 263 Brauschweig-Wolftenbüttel, Luise von 64 Brazil 136–7, 146, 149 Brazilian exotic objects 230–47 Breda 23–4, 35, 115, 223–4, 268 Brederode, Jan Wolfert 139, 233–4 Brienen, Rebecca Parker 150 Brockman, William 226 Broebes, Jean-Baptiste 257, 258 Brosterhuyzen, Jan van: View of Boavista in Mauritsstad, ca. 1636–1644 (etching) 157; View of Mauritsstad, c. 1637 (etching) 144 Brouwer, Hendrik 135 Bruggmann, Sebald Justinius 277 Bruyns, Margaretha Catharina 42 buildings see also architectural design: as display 181–2; and gender roles 8–9; and glorification of House of OrangeNassau 89, 119–20, 145, 150; and women 101–2, 113, 119–20 Buitenhof 268 Buren 100, 101, 102 Burnet, Gilbert 112 Calado, Manuel 145–5, 148, 150, 154, 156, 230; O Valeroso Lucideno e Triunfo da Liberdade na Restauração de Pernambuco 145 Campen, Jacob van 131, 232, 234, 240 canals 105 Cannenburch 193 Caputh Palace 95, 257, 259, 260–3 Carstenzoon, Jan 141 Castrum Waerdenburch 235 Catharina (ship) 247 Catholicism 40, 84–5, 263 Catholic Reformation 85 Cavendish, John 256 Cavendish, William 194 celebrity culture 26–8, 37–8, 296 ceramics see also porcelain: Delftware 191, 192–3, 195, 251, 255, 257, 266, 296; significance of 66, 68–70, 75

Index 333 Charlottenburg Palace 104, 183, 199, 220n113, 259–60, 263 Chatsworth 117, 194, 195, 196, 256–7 children: exchange of 40; naming practices of 88–9, 93 Chile 135 chocolate 227–8 Cleves 46, 98, 196, 230, 232, 240, 243, 245 Coen, Jan Pietersz. 268 Coligny, François 33 Coligny, Gaspard II de 23, 33 Coligny, Louise de 24, 37, 38, 40, 41, 89, 183, 224, 247–8, 279 Collet, Dominik 7 colonial expansion 2, 140, 158, 233; colonial power 239, 247, 278 colonisations, Africa 148 colonising practices: cultural colonialism 2, 8, 119, 211–12, 257, 263; and gender 2, 158; Orange-Nassau 1–4, 7, 119–20, 132, 144–5, 298; of VOC 141 commemorative objects 37–8, 56–7, 60 Conan, Michel 104 consumption: conspicuous 229–30; of exotica 223–30, 251, 278–9; material 298 Cooper, Frederick 3 Courland, Maria Anna Amalia von 254 cultural agents 2 cultural capital 41, 170, 182 cultural display 158, 197, 257, 259, 263 cultural politics 3, 5, 7, 8, 76, 89, 93, 94, 169–170, 198, 212, 251, 256 culture see also material culture: celebrity 26–8, 37–8, 296; of female bonding 119; memorial 173 Cupido, W. F. 239 curiosities, collection of 268–77 see also exotic objects Dalkeith Palace 118 Dam, Pieter van 270 Danckaerts, Cornelis 114 Defoe, Daniel 228, 229, 230, 255, 270–1 Delen, Dirck van: A Family beside the Tomb of Prince Willem I in the Nieuwe

Kerk, Delft 39; Portrait of Louise de Coligny (engraving) 38 Delff, Willem Jacobsz. 38 Delft 39 Delftware 191, 192–3, 195, 251, 255, 257, 266, 267, 296 see also porcelain Desportes, Alexandre-François 245 Dessau castle 56, 98, 99, 106, 109, 185, 225, 249, 279 De Voorst, castle 115 Dieren 110 Dietz 94, 96, 98, 109, 198, 239 Dieussart, François 172 Dijk, Jan van 197 Dijk, Philip van 59: Portrait of Marie Louise of Hessen-Kassel, Princess of Orange (1688–1765), with her Children, Prince Willem IV and Princess Amalia (painting) 62 diplomacy: cultural aspects of 7; with local peoples 146; overseas 131, 132, 158 diplomatic gift practices 7, 132, 148 display: buildings as 181–2; cultural 158, 197, 257, 259, 263; dynastic 76, 108; and elite power 248; exotic objects 224–5, 227, 253; and gender 278; princely 156 Dorst, Christiaen Adriaensz. 133 Drayton House 117, 118, 196, 257 Dudley, Robert 33 Duindam, J. P. J. 21 Dutch East India Company (VOC) see Vereenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie (VOC) Dutch West India Company (GWIC) see Geoctroyeerde Westindische Compagnie (GWIC) dynastic alliances 40–8, 134 dynastic display 76, 108 dynastic material strategy 170 dynastic power 8, 21, 37, 120, 158, 197–8, 224, 240, 266–7, 279 dynastic strategies 3–4, 47–8 dynastic symbols 175–80 Dyrham Park 117, 194, 195–6, 257

334 Index East India Company see Vereenigde OostIndische Compagnie (VOC) Eckhout, Albert, 150, 203, 232, 233, 234, 240, 241, 244, 245, 278: Cocoa Tree and Roasting Hut, A (painting) 246; Dance of the Tapuya Indians (painting) 147; Theatrum rerum naturalium brasiliae 150; Tupi Woman (painting) 147 economy, of the Dutch Republic 252 Eenhoorn, Samuel van 60 Eggers, Bartholomeus 172, 173 Egmont, Anna von 24 Elinckx, Eva 23 elites: European 41, 76; French Calvinist 40; male 35, 119, 242, 258, 263; Orange-Nassau predominance 39; power of 120, 197, 248, 258, 266; Protestant 31, 40, 45, 254; women 202 Ellinger, Ottmar, Electress Dorothea in Flower and Fruit Garland (painting) 257 Elseracq, Jan van 134 England, trading supremacy of 139 English East India Company 142 Erddig 195 etchings 28; Ball in the Huis ten Bosch in Honour of the Birthday of the Prince of Orange 190; Cassowary, Brought by Willem Jacobsz. from the East Indies and Donated to Prince Maurits 269; Chambre de Porcelain du Palais d’Orangenburg 258; Copy of the Original Title Picture for Houtman’sJournal of Dutch Ships Going to the East Indies 132; Friedrich Wilhelm of Brandenburg and Louise Henriëtte von Oranien (etching) 45; The Hall of Orange built by H.R.H. Amalia, Dowager Princess of Orange, etc. 90; Livre d’Appartement Inventé par D. Marot Architect du Roy (etching) 194; Maurits’s Investiture with the Order of the Garter, 1613 (etching) 37; Nouvelles Cheminée faitte en plusier en droits de la Hollande et autres Prouinces (etching) 256; Portrait of Wilhelmine of Prussia, on Horseback (etching) 67; Queen Mary II

Stuart on her Deathbed, 1695 (etching) 191; View of Boavista in Mauritsstad, ca. 1636–1644 (etching) 157; View of Mauritsstad, c. 1637 (etching) 144 ethnographic collections, of Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen 154–6 Evelyn, John 174, 186 exotica, consumption of 223–30, 251, 278–9 exotic bodies, use of 238–9 exotic objects: Brazilian 230–47; and display 224–5, 227, 253 exploration, Dutch 132 Fargue van Nieuwland, I. L. la 239 female bonding, culture of 119 female identity 202, 251 Ferguson, Patricia F. 195, 196 Fiennes, Celia 228 finances, Orange-Nassau 89, 135–6, 158 flags, and power 140–3 Flather, Amanda 8 fleet, Nassau 131–2, 135 Flinck, Govert 91, 181; Amalia von Solms in Mourning for her Husband, Prince Frederik Hendrik (Allegory of the Memory of Frederik Hendrik, Prince of Orange, with the Portrait of his Widow Amalia van Solms) (painting) 92 flora and fauna, exotic 268–9, 277 flowers, as status symbols 103 Fock, C.W. 224 Fontenay, Jean-Baptiste Belin de 245 Françozo, Mariana 240 French Huguenots 23–4, 40, 89 French occupation, of Netherlands 139 Frisius, Simon 28, 36: Maurits’s Investiture with the Order of the Garter, 1613 (etching) 37 furnishings, exotic objects 223–30 see also palaces; interior design gardens: importance of 94, 117, 119; introduction of 271; of Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen 151–2; of Johann von Nassau-Saarbrücken-Idstein 86–8; Orange-Nassau 89, 90–6, 98–100, 102–9, 110–11, 112–15, 119–20, 172, 199, 202, 203–4; Oranienbaum 99

Index 335 Geest, Wybrand de 31: Group Portrait of the Four Brothers of Willem I, Prince of Orange: The Counts of Nassau. Jan, Hendrik, Adolf, and Louis (painting) 23; Portrait of Willem Frederik, Count of Nassau-Dietz (painting) 48 gender: and colonialism 2, 158; and display 278; and dynastic power 21; and gift exchange 43; and materiality 297–8; and pensions 83–4; and power 8–9, 109; and use of porcelain 247–68, 279 generational renewal 40–8 Geoctroyeerde Westindische Compagnie (GWIC) 2, 135, 136, 139, 142, 143, 144, 148, 158, 224, 247, 278 Gericke, Samuel Theodor 182: Glorifying Friedrich I as Prince of Orange (painting) 183; Meeting of Three Kings, The (painting) 262 Gericot, Jean 172 Germaine, John 118, 196, 257 Gheyn, Jacob II de 108: Spanish Warhorse Captured at the Battle of Nieuwpoort by Lodewijk Günther of Nassau-Siegen from Archduke Albert of Austria, Given to Stadtholder Maurits of Orange (painting) 242 gift giving: and alliances 40, 43–4, 48, 241; and Amalia von SolmsBraunfels 90; artworks 6, 174; as colonial outreach 7; and colonisation 3; and diplomacy 7, 132, 148; exotic objects 240; and networks 174–5; and obligations 5–6, 170, 174, 212, 242; and patron–client relationships 6; political 150, 248; portraits 35, 39, 72–3, 75, 170; and power relations 170–1, 268; role of 297 glassware 30, 31, 58, 65 Gobelins manufactory 244–5 gold, from Spanish ships 89 Gollenesse, Julius Valentijn Stein van 274 Göthe, Johann Friedrich Eosander von 199 Grande, Jacob de 106 Grave 133 Grieksche A factory, De 57, 60, 186, 187, 188, 189, 192, 195

Grol 25 Grote Loo 275 grottos 106, 108–9, 173, 199, 251, 252 Grucht, Maximilian van der 240 Haag, Tethard Philipp Christian, OrangUtan from the Zoo of Stadholder Willem V, Picking an Apple (painting) 276 habitus theory 8 Habsburg, Albert VII, Archduke of Austria 85 Habsburg, Ferdinand III, Holy Roman Emperor 150 Habsburg, Isabella Clara Eugenia 85 Habsburg, Rudolf II, Holy Roman Emperor 248 Habsburg, the House of 169 Hagen, Steven van 134 Hague, The 225, 227; Binnenhof 186, 274; Mauritshuis 84, 230, 232–3, 237; Noordeinde Palace 89, 104, 108, 224, 233, 248 Hamid, Abdul 133 Hampton Court 111–12, 117, 128n112, 182, 186, 188, 228, 255 Hanau-Münzenberg, Amalia Elisabeth von 254 Hanau-Münzenberg, Philipp Ludwig II von 41 Handel, Georg Friedrich 211 Hanneman, Adriaen 51, 170, 178, 202, 212, 234, 237: Portrait of Willem III, Prince of Orange, as a Child (portrait) 52; Posthumous Portrait of Mary Henrietta Stuart (1631–1660) with a Servant (painting) 237 Hanover, Anne of 60, 61, 64, 65, 198, 210–11, 272–4, 275 Hardouin-Mansart, Jules 110 Harris, Walter 272 Heemstede 116, 117 Heiligerlee, Battle of 23 Helst, Bartholomeus der, Mary Stuart, Princess of Orange, as Widow of Willem II (painting) 51 Hemmingson, Ulrich 265 Hennin, Adriaen de 180 Hertogenbosch, Siege of ’s- 31

336 Index Herzenbergkapelle 85 Hessen-Kassel, Agnes von 40 Hessen-Kassel, Amelia 254 Hessen-Kassel, Charlotte 254 Hessen-Kassel, Charlotte Amalia 254 Hessen-Kassel, Elisabeth Henriëtte 254 Hessen-Kassel, Friedrich von 199 Hessen-Kassel, Karel von 197 Hessen-Kassel, Karl 254 Hessen-Kassel, Marie Louise von 58–9, 61–2, 62, 197, 198 Hessen-Kassel, Wilhelm V landgrave 254 Hessen-Kassel, Wilhelm VI landgrave 254 Het Loo 111, 114, 115, 186, 188, 192–3, 237, 272 Hillegaert, Pauwels van 31: Frederik Hendrik and Ernst Casimir of NassauDietz at the Siege of ’s Hertogenbosch (painting) 34 Hirtzberg (Hertzberg) 85–6 Historia Naturalis Brasiliae 150, 234 Hohenlohe-Neuenstein, Philipp von 30, 32, 33, 40, 99–100 Holländisches Palais 263 Hondecoeter, Melchior d’, The Menagerie (painting) 271–2 Honselaarsdijk 33, 89, 104, 108, 113, 185, 186, 233, 255 Honthorst, Gerrit van 35, 43, 44–5, 50, 55, 96, 268: Amalia von SolmsBraunfels as Flora (painting) 103; Portrait of Frederik Hendrik (1584–1647), Prince of Orange, his Wife Amalia van Solms (1602–1675) and their Three Youngest Daughters Albertine Agnes (1634–1696), Henriëtte Catharina (1637–1708), and Maria (1642–1688) (painting) 42; Portrait of Friedrich Wilhelm, Elector of Brandenburg, with his Wife Louise Henriëtte, Countess of Nassau (painting) 45; Portrait of Willem II (1626–1650), Prince of Orange, and his Wife Mary Henrietta Stuart (1631–1660) (painting) 46 Honthorst, Willem van 96

Hooghe, Romein de, Queen Mary II Stuart on her Deathbed, 1695 (etching) 191 horses, and elite men 115, 242–3, 285n97 horticultural design see also gardens: and House of Orange-Nassau 113; Oranienbaum 99; and power/status/ identity 9, 86–8 horticultural expertise 203–4 Houasse, René-Antoine 245 Houtman, Cornelis de 132 Howard, Mary 118, 196 Huguenot immigration program 95 Huis de Voorst 117, 255 Huis ten Bosch 89, 90–1, 104, 108, 131, 186, 211, 224, 232, 248, 265; Oranjezaal 90, 91, 173, 186, 232, 234, 237 Huis ter Nieuwburg 89 Hulst 25 human-material relationships 6 hunting 116, 119 Huygens, Christiaan 108 Huygens, Constantijn 2, 4, 51, 92, 104, 173, 183, 229, 230, 232 Huygens, Lodewijk 108 Hyde, Anne 51 identity(ies): and architectural and horticultural design 9; and colonial power 247; and consumption 279; European 223; Orange-Nassau 4–5, 39, 109, 175, 199, 212, 296, 297; and rituals 5; of women 202, 251 Idstein 86, 87, 88, 251, 252 illegitimate family members 24, 42, 49, 75, 114, 118, 144, 157, 196, imagery, and alliances 40 images, power of 59–60 indigenous peoples 146–8, 147, 155, 230–1, 235, 244 Inoue, Masashige 134 Isendoorn à Blois, Johan Hendrik van 193 Jackson-Stops, Gervaise 194, 196 Jacobi, Johann Carl 204 Jacobsdochter, Cornelia 49 Jacobsz, Willem 268 Janssen, Geert 6

Index 337 Janssen van Ceulen, Cornelius, Louise Henriette of Orange, Electress of Brandenburg (painting) 94 Japan 131, 134 Jardine, Lisa 1 Johnson, John 188 Jol, Cornelis 148 Jordaens, Jacob 173 Keblusek, Marika 6 Kensington Palace 111–12, 174, 228, 255 Keppel, Arnold Joost van 115, 128n112, 255 Key, Adriaen Thomasz., Portrait of Maria van Nassau (c.1580–90) 100 Keyser, Hendrick de 37 Keyser, Pieter de 37 Kleine Loo 274–5 Klinkert, Christi M. 27 knowledge, early modern 2–3 Kocx, Adrianus 189, 192 Königliche Porzellanmanufaktur (KPM) 204, 205, 264 Kooijmans, Luuc 170 Laet, Johannes de 150 land ownership/building, of women 93–102, 113, 119–20 Lapiere, Francis 194 Laquy, Willem Joseph 66; Meeting of Princess Wilhelmine and her Brother King Friedrich Wilhelm II of Prussia (painting) 68 La Tour d’Auvergne, Henri de 40–1 La Tour d’Auvergne, Marie de 104, 171 La Trémoille, Charlotte de 37, 171, 206, 208 La Trémoille, Claude de 41, 208 La Trémoille, Henri Charles de 254 La Trémoille, Henri de 104 Leeuwarden 47, 59, 97, 226 Lefebvre, Henri 8 Leiningen-Dagsburg-Falkenburg, Anna von 87 Leiningen-Falkenburg, Johann Casimir von 88 Le Maire, Isaac 243 Lesage, Pieter, Willem V (1748–1806), Prince of Orange-Nassau, with his Wife

Frederika Sophia Wilhelmine of Prussia and their Children Frederica Louisa Wilhelmine, Willem Frederik and Willem George Frederik (painting) 71 letters: and affiliation to the House of Orange-Nassau 21; and alliances 40, 41; as material culture 37 Leuchtenberg, Elisabeth von 24, 85 Liefkes, Reino 195, 196 Lindenov, Christoffer 241 Linnaeus, Carl 275 Lisiewski, Christian Friedrich Reinhold 202: Portrait of Anna Wilhelmine von Anhalt-Dessau, Daughter of Leopold I (painting) 203 Longuelune, Zacharius 264 Longwy, Jacqueline de 40 Lower, William 232 luxury objects, production of 267 Lyonnet, Pierre 275 Macaulay, Thomas Babington 239 Man, Cornelis de, The Gold Weigher (painting) 28, 29 maps, and power 140–3, 146 Marcgraf, Georg 150 Margaret of Parma 23, 76n5 Marly 110 Marot, Daniël 98, 110, 111, 114, 115, 116, 117, 119, 186–91, 193–4, 197, 228, 249, 255, 256, 296: Ball in the Huis ten Bosch in Honour of the Birthday of the Prince of Orange, 1686 (etching) 190; Livre d’Appartement Inventé par D. Marot Architect du Roy (etching) 194 Marot, Jean I 189 marriage politics 48, 76 marriages: and alliances 40, 43–7, 119; strategic 76, 175 material culture: commemorative 37–8; impact of 5–8; and male elites 258; martial 24–7; power of 264; and power/ status 295–7; producers of 56–7; as a resource 48–9, 66, 68–70, 233; as strategy of power 39, 194; and women 297–8 materiality: gendering of 297–8; power of 5–8, 295–7

338 Index material legacies 158 Matham, Theodor, Portrait of Johann Moritz van Nassau-Siegen (painting) 149 Mathys, Jan, The Hall of Orange built by H.R.H. Amalia, Dowager Princess of Orange, etc. (etching) 90 Mauritshuis 84, 230, 232–3, 237 Mauritsstad 144, 145, 157, 235 Mazarin, Cardinal 244 Mechelen, Margaretha van 42, 49 Mecklenburg, Louise von 254 Meissen 264 Meissener Porzellan Manufaktur 265 Melville House 119, 194 Memhardt, Johann Gregor 95 memorial culture 173 menageries 268, 271–2, 275 Mentzel, Christian 150 Mentz, Søren 241 Mierevelt, Michiel Jansz. van 25, 26–8, 33, 36, 41, 55, 172, 296: Frederik Henrik, Prince of Orange (painting) 27: Johann Moritz von Nassau Siegen, ca 1636 (painting) 136; Portrait of Count Wilhelm Ludwig of Nassau, Nicknamed Our Father in West Frisian (painting) 33; Portrait of Ernst Casimir I, Count of Nassau-Dietz (painting) 36; Portrait of Maurits, Prince of Orange (painting) 26; Portrait of Prince Filips Willem of Orange (painting) 28 Mijtens, Daniel, the Younger 170 Mijtens, Jan 42, 44, 172, 179, 202, 212, 238, 257: Albertine Agnes of Orange, Duchess of Nassau-Dietz (painting) 178; Henriëtte Catharina of Orange, Princess of Anhalt- Dessau (painting) 99; Maria of Orange, Duchess of Pfalz-Simmern (painting) 179 Miller, Daniel 6 Mitrasing, Ingrid 133 Mollet, André 89 Monnoyer, Baptiste 245 Montagu, Ralph 193 Mookerheyde, Battle of 23 Moore, Andrew 228

Mor, Antonis 24: Portrait of Willem I of Nassau, Prince of Orange and Stadtholder (1533–1584) (painting) 25 Mosigkau 199–200, 201–2, 237 Moucheron, Isaac de, General View in Perspective of the Mansion or Royal Pleasure House of His Majesty the King of Great Britain etc. at Loo (print) 114 mourning, performance of 108–9, 253 Mulder, Jan Harmensz. 28 Murray, James Second Duke of Atholl 205–6, 208–10 Murray, John First Duke of Atholl 206–7 Murray, John Third Duke of Atholl 209–11 Murray, William Marquess of Tullibardine 208 naming practices: of children 88–9, 93; of spaces/places 84, 131, 140, 142, 143, 146, 158; of towns/buildings 94, 95–6 narratives: creation of 231; OrangeNassau 38, 75, 91 Nason, Pieter 55, 170, 231, 238: Four Generations of the Princes of Orange: Willem I, Maurits and Frederik Hendrik, Willem II and Willem III (painting) 57; Prinz Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen (painting) 231 Nassau, Adolf van 23 Nassau, Adolph, van, Grand Duke of Luxembourg, 198 Nassau, Albertine Agnes van 41, 42, 46, 55, 56, 57, 59, 94, 97, 98, 102, 106, 108, 109, 125n69, 171, 172, 174, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 191, 196, 197, 198, 220n120, 226, 227, 230, 237, 240 Nassau, Anna van, daughter of Willem I, Prince of Orange 31, 40 Nassau, Anna van, daughter of Maurits, Prince of Orange 49 Nassau, Carel Maurits van 49 Nassau, Carel van 49, 144, 157 Nassau, Catharina van, sister of Willem I, Prince of Orange 41 Nassau, Catharina Belgica van 41, 83, 248, 254, 278

Index 339 Nassau, Charlotte Brabantina van 41, 84, 104, 171, 206, 208, 254 Nassau, Eleanora van 49 Nassau, Elisabeth van, daughter of Willem I, Prince of Orange 40–1, 104, 171, 254 Nassau, Elisabeth van, daughter of Maurits, Prince of Orange 49 Nassau, Emilia Antwerpiana van 84 Nassau, Filips Willem, Prince of Orange 24, 25, 25–6, 28, 29–30, 31, 32, 33, 35, 36, 41, 84–5, 89, 91, 173, 223, 247 Nassau, Flandrina van 84 Nassau, Frederik Hendrik van, Prince of Orange 3, 4, 7, 24, 25, 27, 29, 31–2, 32, 33, 34, 35, 41–3, 42, 44, 45, 46, 49, 55, 57, 59, 89, 91, 92, 93, 99, 102, 103, 104, 108, 109, 111, 113, 136–7, 146, 170, 172, 173, 174, 180, 183, 185, 186, 197, 204, 212, 231, 232, 233, 234, 248, 254, 268, 275 Nassau, Heinrich van 23 Nassau, Henriëtte Amalia van 103 Nassau, Henriëtte Catharina van 3, 41, 42, 47, 56, 57, 59, 91, 93, 98, 99, 101, 102, 106, 107, 109, 171, 172, 173, 174, 176, 180–1, 185, 186, 191, 196,197, 199, 202, 203, 220n120, 225, 226, 227, 245, 249, 251, 298 Nassau, Justinus van 24, 33, 35, 49 Nassau, Louise Henriëtte van 3, 41, 44, 45, 47, 93, 94, 94–7, 101, 102, 103, 104–6, 109, 171, 172–3, 174, 176, 181, 182, 185, 196, 198–9, 202, 240, 249, 257, 258, 298 Nassau, Louise Juliana van 32, 40, 41, 94 Nassau, Ludwig van 23–4, 40, 76n5 Nassau, Maria van, daughter of Willem I, Prince of Orange 30, 40, 99-100, 100, 101, 102, 175 Nassau, Maria van, daughter of Frederik Hendrik, Prince of Orange 41, 42, 94, 97, 98, 102, 108, 171, 172, 179, 180, 185, 227, 238, 245 Nassau, Maurits van 24, 26, 26–7, 28–9, 30, 31, 32, 34, 36, 37, 40, 41, 42, 49, 55, 57, 73, 84, 89, 100–1, 108, 131–3, 134, 135, 136, 142, 146, 173, 174, 232, 242, 243, 268

Nassau, Maurits van, son of Maurits, Prince of Orange 49 Nassau, Willem I van, Prince of Orange 1, 4, 22, 22–3, 24, 25, 29, 30, 31, 37–8, 39, 40, 41, 57, 73, 83, 84, 91, 93, 174, 175, 179, 206, 208, 209, 211, 296 Nassau, Willem II van, Prince of Orange 41, 42, 43, 44, 44, 46, 50, 55, 57, 109, 118, 134, 137–9, 171, 173, 174, 177, 200, 234, 296 Nassau, Willem III van, Prince of Orange 3, 50–3, 52, 53, 55, 57, 58, 58, 75, 102, 103, 109–10, 113, 114, 115–17, 118, 119, 139, 142–3, 172, 174, 175, 178, 182, 186, 187, 188, 193, 194, 195, 196, 211, 228, 239, 243, 245, 270–2, 296 Nassau-Beverweerd, Lodewijk van 42, 49, 50, 114 Nassau-Beverweerd, Willem 49 Nassau-Dietz, Amalia van 98, 199 Nassau-Dietz, Ernst Casimir van 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 133 Nassau-Dietz, Hendrik Casimir II van 80, 181, 196 Nassau-Dietz, Ludwig Günther van 32 Nassau-Dietz, Willem Frederik van 4, 6, 46, 47, 48, 85, 94, 230, 240 Nassau-Dillenburg, Johann VI van 23, 24, 30, 40, 41 Nassau-Dillenburg, Wilhelm Ludwig von 30–1, 32, 33, 40, 76n5 Nassau-Hadamar, Johann Ludwig von 85 Nassau-Hadamar, Moritz Heinrich von 85 Nassau-Idstein, Albertine Juliana von 124n57 Nassau-Katzenelnbogen, Ludwig Günther von 133 Nassau-Odijk, Willem Adriaan van 114, 115 Nassau-Saarbrücken-Idstein, Georg August Samuel 88 Nassau-Saarbrücken-Idstein, Gustav Adolph 88 Nassau-Saarbrücken-Idstein, Johann von 86, 86–7, 251, 272 Nassau-Siegen, Anna Johanna von 139 Nassau-Siegen, Georg Friedrich von 241 Nassau-Siegen, Heinrich von 241

340 Index Nassau-Siegen, Johann Ernst II von 146, 156–7 Nassau-Siegen, Johann Moritz von 2–3, 4, 6, 46, 95, 98, 106, 108, 136, 136, 137, 138, 140, 143–57, 149, 172, 196, 230–5, 231, 238–47, 272, 278, 297 Nassau-Siegen, Johann VII von 41, 85, 139 Nassau-Siegen, Ludwig Günther von 242 Nassau-Zuylestein, Frederik van 42, 52 Nassau-Zuylestein, Hendrik van 42 natural history collections 275 Nering, Johann Arnold 257 Netherlands, French occupation of 139 Netscher, Caspar 54, 176–7, 179, 180, 268, 270: Portrait of Mary Stuart (1662–95), Wife of Prince Willem III (painting) 56; Portrait of Mary II Stuart (1662–95), Wife of Prince William III (painting) 270 Netscher, Constantijn 181 networks 7, 40, 90, 171, 174–5, 178 see also alliances New Materialism 5 Nieuwpoort, Battle of 26 Nischwitz 98 Noordeinde Palace 89, 104, 108, 224, 233, 248 objects: as gendered sites of power 8; and material culture 6, 56–7; and power/ status 29, 60–1, 75, 170 Oldenbarnevelt, Jan van 24 Oldenburg, Christian IV of Denmark and Norway 243 Oldenburg, Christian V of Denmark and Norway 254 Oldenburg, Frederik III of Denmark and Norway 3, 241–2, 243, 254 Oldenburg, Friedrich IV of Denmark and Norway 254 Oosterwyk, Johannes van, Portrait of Johann Willem Friso, Prince of Orange-Nassau (engraving) 61 Orange: brand 175–83, 205, 212, 296, 297; colour 182, 296 Orange-Nassau, Amalia van 59 Orange-Nassau, Carolina van 61, 65, 177

Orange-Nassau, Henry, Prince of the Netherlands 144 Orange-Nassau, Johan Willem Friso 58, 59, 61, 182, 196–8 Orange-Nassau, Louisa van 71, 72 Orange- Nassau, Willem (Frederik) VI and Willem I, King of the Netherlands 69, 71, 72, 72, 73, 74, 182, 198 Orange-Nassau, Willem IV van 60–1, 63, 139, 182, 197, 198, 210, 272–4 Orange-Nassau, Willem V van 3, 60, 64, 65, 66, 71, 73, 82n66, 84, 139–40, 158, 177, 178, 182, 198, 239, 264, 265, 267, 274–7 Orange-Nassau, (Willem George) Frederik van 71 orangeries 104, 105, 111, 118, 152, 199, 202, 203 orange tree motifs 175–7, 179 Orangism 58 Oranienbaum 93, 98–9, 101, 104, 105, 106–7, 109, 119, 125n65, 172, 173, 177, 181, 185, 186, 191, 197, 199, 200, 203, 204, 225–6, 237, 249, 251, 279 Oranienburg 63, 93, 95–6, 97, 101, 102, 104, 105, 109, 111, 119, 171, 172, 185, 186, 199, 203, 204, 234, 240, 249, 250, 257, 258, 261, 262, 263, 279 Oranienhof 94, 97, 98, 108, 227, 279 Oranienstein 94, 96–7, 108, 186, 192, 197, 198, 239 Oranjewoud 94, 98, 108, 171, 198, 226 Oranjezaal 90, 91, 173, 186, 232, 234, 237 Order of the Black Eagle 182, 258 Order of the Garter 36, 39, 43, 44, 52, 257 Order of the Golden Fleece 35 orphanages 97, 99–101, 106–7 Ottenheym, Koen 85 Oude Hof 104 Oude Loo 271–2 overseas diplomacy 131, 132, 158 overseas expansion 157–8 Overtwater, Pieter Anthonisz. 134 Paelinck, Joseph, Portrait of Willem I, King of the Netherlands (painting) 74 palaces see also names of individual palaces; residences: Berliner

Index 341 Schloss 95, 105, 108–9, 172, 204; Caputh Palace 95, 257, 259, 260–3; Charlottenburg Palace 104, 183, 199, 220n113, 259–60, 263; English 111–12; Hampton Court 111–12, 117, 128n112, 182, 186, 188, 228, 255; Het Loo 111, 114, 115, 186, 188, 192–3, 237, 272; Honselaarsdijk 33, 89, 104, 108, 113, 185, 186, 233, 255; House of Orange-Nassau 89; Huis ten Bosch 89, 90–1, 104, 108, 131, 186, 211, 224, 232, 248, 265; interior design of 185, 191–4, 199, 237; Kensington Palace 111–12, 174, 228, 255; Mosigkau 199–200, 201–2, 237; Noordeinde Palace 89, 104, 108, 224, 233, 248; Oranienbaum 93, 98–9, 101, 104, 105, 106–7, 109, 119, 125n65, 172, 173, 177, 181, 185, 186, 191, 197, 199, 200, 203, 204, 225–6, 237, 249, 251, 279; Oranienburg 63, 93, 95–6, 97, 101, 102, 104, 105, 109, 111, 119, 171, 172, 185, 186, 199, 203, 204, 234, 240, 249, 250, 257, 258, 261, 262, 263, 279; Oranienhof 94, 97, 98, 108, 227, 279; Oranienstein 94, 96–7, 108, 186, 192, 197, 198, 239; Oranjewoud 94, 98, 108, 171, 198, 226; Oranjezaal 90, 91, 173, 186, 232, 234, 237; Ter Nieuburch 104, 108, 172; Vrijburg palace 150–1, 153 Pallas, Peter Simon 275 Parentalia 111 patronage relationships 6, 171, 233, 234, 241, 247, 248, 278, 297 patrons of the arts 2, 7–8, 90, 203, 278 Peace of Breda 53–4 pensions, on daughters 83–4 Pera (ship) 141 Pernambuco 235 Persoy, Pieter 191 Peru 135 Petworth House 257 Pfalz, Friedrich IV von der, Elector Palatine 40 Pfalz, Friedrich V von der, Elector Palatine 32, 34, 41, 43, 89, 248, 256 Pfalz, Karl Ludwig von der, Elector Palatine 254 Pfalz, Louise Hollandine von der 235

Pfalz, Sophie von der 112, 235 pineapples 154, 203–4, 205 Piso, Willem 150, 234 Pitzler, Christoph 106, 181, 185, 225 places, creating connections to 84–5 pleasure dairies 249–51 Pleymer, Conrad 204 political crises of 1785 64 political power 39, 263 political relationships 7 political territories, claiming of by children 88–9 politics: cultural 5, 169, 212, 256; demise of Orange-Nassau dominance in 263; dynastic 197–8; marriage 48, 76; and women 58–9, 61, 64, 66, 75, 249 Pomponne, Simon Arnauld de 243 Pool, Matthijs, Portrait of Johann Willem Friso, Prince of Orange-Nassau (engraving) 61 porcelain see also Delftware: collection of 226, 253–7; diplomatic potential of 264; gendered uses of 247–68, 279 portraits: gift exchange 35, 39, 72–3, 75, 170; role of 24–8, 41–2, 43, 49, 50–1, 73, 75, 170, 171–2, 178, 197–8 Portugal: colonies 137; conflict with 134, 137–8, 142, 144 Post, Frans, 150, 232, 234, 235, 244: Brazilian Landscape, A (painting) 236; Brazilian Landscape (painting) 236; Large View of the West Indies (painting) 233; Pernambuco from the Seaside, on the Left, Recife, in the Middle, Mauritsstad and Vrijburg, and Right Castrum Waerdenburch (painting) 235; Portrait of Johann Moritz van Nassau-Siegen (painting) 149; View of Mauritsstad from the Land (painting) 145 Post, Pieter 232 Potsdam Schloss 95 power: affective/representational 172; and architectural and horticultural design 9, 86–8; colonial 239, 247, 278; cultural 7, 89, 93, 170, 251; dynastic 8, 21, 37, 120, 158, 224, 240, 266–7, 279; elite 120, 197, 248, 258, 266; gendered 8–9, 109; of images 59–60; male 37,

342 Index 237–8, 258; of materiality 5–8, 295–7; material objects of 24; and objects 29, 60–1, 75, 170; Orange-Nassau 8, 74–5, 89, 142, 212, 234, 253–4, 267–8, 278, 297; and Orange-Nassau heritage 196; political 39, 263; princely 150, 158; of proximity to the Orange-Nassau 35; and religio-military building 85; representations of 94; and rituals 91; visualising/materialising 140–3; of women 8, 52–3, 75, 230, 251 power relations: and gift exchange 170–1, 268; House of Orange 6 Prinsenflag 141 Prinsenhof 84, 232 see also Mauritshuis print media 24, 26–7, 39, 113, 188–9, 296 propaganda media, ceramics as 68 propaganda, of male Orange power 75 Protestant elites 31, 40, 45, 254 Protestantism 41, 84 Preußen, Augustus Wilhelm von 64 Preußen, Friedrich I von, (Friedrich III, Elector of Brandenburg) 183, 197, 211, 254, 257–9, 261–2 Preußen, Friedrich II von 182, 198–9, 203, 205, 211, 257–8, 264 Preußen, Friedrich Wilhelm I von 182, 183, 263 Preußen, Friedrich Wilhelm II von 64, 68, 204 Preußen, Louise Dorothea von 199 Preußen, Wilhelmine von 64, 66, 67, 68, 68, 70, 71, 82n66, 198, 204–5, 239, 264–5 Prussia, cultural colonisation in 263 Prussian Asiatic Trading Company (1751–6) 264 Quellinus, Artus 172 Ravesteyn, Jan Antonisz. van: Portrait of Justinus van Nassau, Illegitimate Son of Prince Willem I and Eva Elinx (painting) 35; Portrait of Philip, Count of Hohenlohe-Neuenstein (painting) 32 Reede Amerongen, Margaretha van 193 regents, women 58–9, 178, 197, 254 relationships see also alliances: and artworks 31–3; diplomatic 7;

human-material 6; patronage 6, 171, 233, 234, 241, 247, 248, 278, 297 religio-military building 85 republican movement 68 residences: House of Orange-Nassau 89, 93–4, 106 see also names of individual residences; palaces Richelieu, Cardinal 248–9 Rijckervorsel, Jacob Woutersz. van 35 Rijck, Ursula de 49 rituals 5, 91, 140 Roman, Jacob 114, 115 Roos, Johann Heinrich 237 Rosenborg Castle 254 Rots, Willem de 184 royal status, of House of Orange-Nassau 49 Ruigenhil 84 Ruijven, Jansz. van 266, 267 Ryckwaert, Adriaen 106 Ryckwaert, Cornelis 106 Sachsen, Anna von 24, 40 Sachsen (Wettin Albertiner), August II von 263–4 Sachsen, Friedrich Augustus I von 263–4 Sachsen, Johann Georg II von, Elector 234 Sachsen, Moritz von 40 Sachsen-Eisenach, Johann Wilhelm III von 98, 171, 199 Sachsen-Eisenach, Wilhelm Heinrich 98, 124n57 sacrifice, of Orange-Nassau dynasty 38 Said ad-Din Berkat Syah 132 San Jago (ship) 135 Savery, Salomon 157 Sayn-Wittgenstein, Johannetta von 24, 85 Scherm, Leonard, Pleasure House of His Excellency the Earl of Albemarle at Voorst (print) 116 Scherpenheuvel 85 Scheyndel, G. H. van 108 Schleswig-Holstein-SonderburgGlücksburg, Sophia Dorothea von 257 Schleswig-Holstein-SonderborgNordborg, Elisabeth Juliana von 263 Schmalkalden, Caspar von 150: Brazilian Raven (drawing) 151

Index 343 Schmidt, Benjamin 223, 234 Schwerin, Otto von 96, 105, 171, 173, 249 Scott, Anne 118 Sedron, Guan A. 239 self-representation 91 Sellers, Vanessa Bezemer 108 Seven Years’ War 264 Seymour, Elizabeth 257 ships, Nassau 131–2, 135 Silva, Maria Angélica da 151 silver 228 Simmern, Kunigonde Jakobäa von 24 Simmern-Lautern, Ludwig Heinrich Moritz von 94, 98 slavery 146, 148, 231, 232, 235, 237–9 Smith, James 118–19 Snaphaen, Abraham Die Teegesellschaft (painting) 251, 253 socialisation, spaces of female 173 social obligation 6–7 see also obligations social processes, and material culture 5 social status, and colonial expansion 233 social welfare practices 106 see also orphanages Soestdijk 271 Solms-Braunfels, Amalia von 25, 37, 41–3, 42, 46, 49, 54, 89, 90–1, 92, 103, 103, 104, 108, 138, 170, 172, 183–4, 220n120, 224, 245, 248–9, 278 Solms, Louise Christina van 233–4 Sousa Countinho, Francisco de 157 spaces: control of built landscapes 88; creating connections to 84–5; of female socialisation 173; as gendered sites of power 8; reordered as Protestant 86 Spain, conflict with 134, 135 Spanish Netherlands 85 spice trade 134–5, 270 Spinola, Ambrosio 33 Stanley, Amelia 206, 207, 208 Stanley, James, Seventh Earl of Derby 171, 206 states, creating connections to 84 status: and objects 29, 60–1, 75, 170, 212; of the Orange-Nassau family 169 status interactions 5 Steenbergen 84

Steenbergen, Battle of 84 Sternberg, Giora 5 Stevin, Simon 24 Stoler, Ann Laura 3 Stoopendaal, Daniël 114, 117; View of Zeist House with its Gardens and Plantations Belonging to the Count of Nassau (print) 115 strategies: cultural 3, 76, 94, 169–70, 198; cultural colonising 2, 119, 211–12, 257, 263; dynastic 3–4, 47–8; of House of Orange-Nassau 6, 43, 69, 84, 88; marital 76, 175; of patronage, collecting, and display 59–60; visual 49, 75 Stuart, Charles I of Scotland, and England and Ireland 43 Stuart, Henry, Prince of Wales 26 Stuart, House of and the Orange-Nassaus 43 Stuart, Elizabeth (1596–1662) 41, 43, 248, 256 Stuart, James VI and I, of Scotland, and England and Ireland 36, 51 Stuart, James VII and II, of Scotland, and England and Ireland 43 Stuart, Mary Henrietta 42, 44, 46, 50–1, 51, 56, 237 Stuart, Mary II 57–8, 60, 109–13, 115, 119, 120, 180, 186, 191, 192, 194–5, 228–30, 234–5, 255, 256, 270 style: French 89; Orange-Nassau 89, 170, 183–93, 193–6, 297 Sultan of Aceh 133 Sultan of Ternate 132 summer kitchens 249–51, 279 Sutton, Elizabeth 146 Swanenburg Castle 232 symbolism, Orange-Nassau 175–80, 182, 184–5, 212, 257, 279 Talbot, Alatheia 256 Talman, William 117, 196, 228 Tanjé, Pieter, Portrait of Prince Willem V and Princess Carolina of OrangeNassau and Children (engraving) 177 tapestries 240: Fishermen 244; apestry: le Cheval Rayé from Les Anciennes Indes Series (tapestry) 244–5

344 Index Tarairiu people 146–8, 230 Tart Hall 256 Tasman, Abel 141 tea drinking 251 Tempel, Abraham van der 179–80: Albertine Agnes with her Children (painting) 180 Ter Nieuburch 104, 108, 172 Terwesten, Augustinus: Allegory of the Triumph of Porcelain (ceiling painting) 257, 258 Tessin, Nicodemus the Younger 255 Thach, Nathaniel 235: Woman in Masque Costume, probably a Daughter of Elizabeth of Bohemia, A (painting) 238 Thomasz, Adriaen 100 Thulden, Theodoor van 53: Allegory of the Farewell of Willem III from Amalia von Solms Following the Transfer of Regency to the States General (painting) 54 tiles, in Orange-Nassau palaces 59, 185–6, 187–8, 259 Tischbein, Johann Valentin 60: Portrait of Anne of Hanover, Princess Royal and Princess of Orange, Consort of Prince Willem IV (painting) 64 Tokugawa, Hidetada 131 Tokugawa, Ieyasu 134 trade, Dutch global 89 trading companies, Dutch 131–40, 157–8 see also Geoctroyeerde Westindische Compagnie (GWIC); Vereenigde OostIndische Compagnie (VOC) Treanor, Virginia 248 Treaty of Partition 1732 182 Treaty of Taborda 1654 138 Treaty of The Hague 1661 138 Tucker, Rebecca 91, 104, 183 Tupinamba people 230–1 Ulfeldt, Corfitz 241 Union of Utrecht 1579 23 United Kingdom of the Netherlands 49, 73 United Provinces cause 37 United Zeeland Company 133 urban planning projects 91–2, 95, 96, 99–100, 106, 145–6

Vaillant, Jacques 261 Van Dyck, Anthony 43, 174, 177, 179, 200: James, Seventh Earl of Derby, his Lady and Child (painting) 206; Willem II, Prince of Orange, and his Bride, Mary Henrietta Stuart (painting) 44 Velthuysen, Diederik van 116 Venne, Adriaen van de 32: De Hofvijver gezien vanf het Buitenhof (painting) 242; Prince Maurits Accompanied by his Two Brothers, Friedrich V, Elector Palatine, and Counts of Nassau on Horseback (painting) 34 Venne, Jan van de 32 Vere, Horace 33 Vereenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie (VOC) 2, 131, 134–6, 139–42, 143, 146, 148, 158, 224, 228, 248, 264, 265, 268, 272, 274, 277 Verlest, Pieter Hermansz: Lady with an Orange (painting) 175–6 Versailles 110–11 Vianden Castle 89 Viera, Antonio 148 Villery, François de Neufville 117 Vinkeles, Reinier 64: Portrait of Wilhelmine of Prussia, on Horseback (etching) 67 Visscher, Claes Jansz. II, Cassowary, Brought by Willem Jacobsz. from the East Indies and Donated to Prince Maurits (etching) 269 Visscher, Nicolaas 118 visual strategies 49, 75 Vivares, François 114, 188–9 in full first 197–8 and then (VOC) in brackets Voorburg 277 Voorst 116 Vosmaer, Aernout 274, 275 Vrijburg palace 150–1, 153, 235 Wagener, Zacharius 150, 154–6, 268: Maquaqua (illustration) 155; Pineapples (illustration) 154; Residence of Johann Moritz von Nassau-Siegen in Brazil (illustration) 152; Tapyan

Index 345 dance (illustration) 155; Tayimbagh (illustration) 156; Thierbuch 150, 152, 154, 156 Waldeck, Magdalena von 41, 139 Walther, Johann Jakob 86–7, 251, 252, 272: Apples, Pears, Quince, Pumpkin, Corn, Rosehip, Greenbean Pod, Fruit of the Opium Poppy,and Hazelnuts, Chestnuts and a Brazilian Tanager (painting) 273; Ornithographia 272; Portrait of Johann von NassauIdstein (painting) 86; Simulacrum Scenographicum Celeberrimi Horti Itzsteinensis; the Idstein Florilegium (painting) 87 War of Spanish Succession 1701–14 228 Warwijck, Wijbrand van 132 Wassing-Visser, Rita 7 West India Company see GWIC White, Christopher 54 Willeboirts Bosschaert, Thomas 45: Mars Receives the Weapons from Venus and Vulcan: Allegory (painting) 47

Willemstad 84, 85 Winter King see Pfalz, Friedrich V von der Pfalz, Friedrich V von der Wittwer, Samuel 259 women: agency of Orange-Nassau 3; and alliances 40; and dynastic power 224; elite 202; identities of 202, 251; land ownership of/building of 93–102, 113, 119–20; and material culture 297–8; and politics 58–9, 61, 64, 66, 75, 249; and porcelain collection 247–68, 279; power of 8, 52–3, 75, 230, 251; purchasing by 227, 230; regents 58–9, 178, 197, 254 Wörlitz estate 173, 203, 225 Wren, Christopher 111 Wy, Jan de 148 Zandvliet, Kees 7 Zeist 114, 115 Ziesenis, Johann Georg, Portrait of Willem V, Prince of Orange-Nassau (painting) 66 Zoet, Jan 185 Zorgvliet 116, 117, 118