(Antwerp 1581–1642)
Diana and her nymphs bathing, with a stag hunt in the background,
oil on copper, 50 x 66.5 cm, framed

On the reverse the marks of the city of Antwerp and of the panel maker Pieter Stas. We are grateful to Ursula Härting, who examined the present painting in the original, for cataloguing this lot, which comes with her certificate.

Härting writes: “The present painting by the hand of the important figure painter Frans Francken the Younger, which is known to me in the original, is a depiction unique in early seventeenth-century painting of the lunar goddess Diana as divine trinity associated with fertility, hunting, and witchcraft. This extraordinary nocturnal scene was painted in Antwerp around 1606.

The most important member of a dynasty of painters, Frans II, aided by his sons and brothers, headed a large studio in Antwerp. Small cabinet pictures populated by small figures such as the present composition were his speciality. Scenes painted on copper, which stood out for their chromatic intensity, already came to be coveted painted treasures in the late sixteenth century. In his early period around the year 1605, when he had established himself as an independent master, Frans II developed unusual and hitherto unprecedented iconographic solutions. In this context, it is particularly worth mentioning the interiors he depicted such as elegant ballroom scenes, kitchen scenes featuring monkeys or witches, witches’ Sabbaths, and, above all, gallery interiors. Francken’s closeness to the Habsburg governors in Brussels, Archduke Albrecht and Archduchess Isabelle, is documented by his Ball at the Archducal Court in Brussels from around 1610, which illustrates portraits of the regents and their guests (Mauritshuis, The Hague). Frans II is known to have been in contact with the Brussels court painters during the first decade of the seventeenth century, including Peter Paul Rubens and Jan Brueghel I, both of whom also lived in Antwerp.

The goddess Diana stands out in the present painting and she is rendered almost completely nude on the banks of a streamlet. She is identified by the crescent moon on her head and wears her long hair down which is unusual for the period. Her private parts are covered with a cloth. She is surrounded by bathing nymphs who were her traditional entourage. A luxuriously dressed woman is shown sitting next to her, her generous décolleté revealing her to be less prudish than she probably first appears to be, while musical instruments are scattered at her feet. Near the right margin, a young woman looks as if she is about to undress, following the example of another seated female figure behind her, who is already naked and in the process of stripping off her stockings. Another figure who is turning her back to us is about to rid herself of a white undergarment. From the opposite side on the left bank, this highly unusual scene is observed by two women in precious period costumes accompanied by their dogs. The table is opulently laid with dishes also cherished by Francken’s contemporaries, such as ring cakes decorated with flowers, various pastries, poultry, oysters, and sweetmeat. In the dense forest background, hunters and their hounds are chasing a stag. Above the figures near the streamlet, putti are shown sprinkling flowers.

In Italy, temples had been built as a tribute to the goddess Diana ever since antiquity. Votive offerings made to her were mostly connected with wishes associated with womanhood. In the visual arts, however, Diana predominantly appeared as the goddess of hunting, whereas over the centuries she had actually been connected with three areas, all of which Frans Francken the Younger sought to illustrate here. Diana resided in forests and groves that no man was allowed to enter. Hunting in her woods was her exclusive privilege. In the present picture she holds an arrow in her hand and is flanked by two hounds. Like the background foil of the forest, the river equally represents her element and that of her nymphs. According to Ovid’s Metamorphosis Diana was discovered by Actaeon while bathing, and she recklessly turned him into a stag who was subsequently mangled by his own dogs. This dark and uncurbed aspect of her character is alluded to by the crescent in her open air which is a symbol of the night. It was a common belief among Francken’s contemporaries that the night implicated mischief. Next to Diana appears a bare-breasted young woman clad in a low-necked, shimmering blue dress and high lace collar, with musical instruments as her attributes. In Francken’s day, melodies were thought to seduce men just as easily as revealing garments. The figure in question not only personifies seduction, but, being a succubus, a demon, also alludes to another theme of the painting.

The chapter “Quaestio 15” of the so-called Catholic Encyclopaedia by the Jesuit Martin Delrio (1561–1608; first published in Leuven in 1599) extensively deals with the heretic manifestations of demons. Succubi and incubi were female and male witches who were said to rape sleepers in order procreate and caused their victims to abandon their Catholic faith and convert to Satanism and magic. Throughout Europe, ideas of what such female succubi looked like had been handed down since the Middle Ages. Delrio’s fundamental treatise on the rites and the persecution of witches, Disquisitionum Magicarum libri sex, which appeared in Francken’s lifetime, not only saw several editions, but also became the basis of a lasting belief in witches, particularly in Roman Catholic Belgium. Delrio assented to traditional religious ideas of Diana as a dea paganorum, a heretic deity who would be followed by countless women, multitudine mulierum. He also quoted canonical statements about nocturnal flights through which Diana gave her followers the ability to fly at night by applying an ointment on their backs.
From antiquity to the early modern age it was believed that there was evidence of a societas Dianae or sodality venerating the goddess. It was thought that only women belonged to these societies of satanic sisters, which according to the canon Episcopi were able to turn human hatred into love and vice versa. Delrio maintained that a person who did not believe in witches was not a Roman Catholic. In 1606, the ultra-Catholic regents Albrecht and Isabella passed a decree that enabled the persecution of witches.

With these sources in mind it is easy to decipher the present painting. Moreover, Frans II’s oeuvre was comprised of various demonic scenes involving witches that date from about the same time that the Catholic decree was passed. As these scenes were his own inventions, he repeatedly added “invenit” to his name when signing them. His painted “witches’ kitchens” often included figures undressing and stripping off legwear and old hags rubbing naked backs with flying ointment. A nocturnal scene set in a forest and populated by nude bathers is just as alluring as merry dance music and was believed to be conducive to sinful and unchaste love. The young ladies near the left margin, separated from the dark side of Diana by the streamlet and thus moved closer to the spectator, belong to a so-called “Diana Society”, which represents Diana’s positive side. They allude to desires particularly cherished by young women which they hoped Diana would fulfil, such as to have children, an easy child-birth, or a good marriage. These associations were traditionally referred to as “societies” or “sodalities” – names which in Antwerp also referred to societies of unmarried men, independent masters, Jesuits, or lay brothers, whose gatherings were marked by excessive dining and drinking. Here, Frans has reinterpreted the traditional literary concept of the societas Dianae in a contemporary context and has impressively translated it into his own reality. Frans II illustrates the competences associated with the lunar goddess Diana: she was not only a huntress and leader of the witches, but also the goddess of fertility.

The date 1606, which has been assigned to the present copper panel is partly based on the punch-mark that was used by the panel maker Pieter Stas until that year. A copper panel by Francken which is dated shortly after 1604/5 (now in a private collection) features a witch whose head posture and physiognomy are very similar to those of the bare-breasted succubus in the present painting. With its thickly applied white highlights, the London Witches’ Kitchen from 1606reveals a stylistic treatment of the physiognomies and garments that is comparable to that of the present female demon.

Today this nocturnal scene is as easily readable for connoisseurs of Francken’s depictions of witches as it was in the past. Even if witch-hunts were still common in Francken’s lifetime and were fuelled by the editions of Delrio’s writings in 1599 and 1604, the erotic appeal of a multitude of nude nymphs must have pleased spectators then in the same way as it will certainly please them now. The putti sprinkling flowers can obviously be assigned to a more harmonious level of meaning, although their iconography has so far eluded a final interpretation. It was the purpose of such erudite and, in the best sense of the word, inspiring compositions to stimulate discussion among connoisseurs.

It remains unresolved who commissioned this exceptional presentation of Diana. It seems to me that the person must have come from a scholarly background and might have been a theologian, especially from the circle of Antwerp Jesuits, or a personality at the Brussels court. This latter assumption is based on the fact that the court was known for its cultivated theatre performances and music recitals. Similar to the way in which Frans Francken II once documented an archducal ball at the Brussels court, the present painting, which is unique in its kind, may also capture such a performance, as is probably suggested by the conspicuous incorporation of musical instruments. The putti would thus have to be interpreted as a memorising, glorifying and visually summarising element of a musical theatre play at the court of Isabella, whose own wish to have children never came true.”